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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot [[outline]] (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

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

_____________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

Plot [[outlines]] (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

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

_____________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Movie Nuttball's NOTE:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*Spoiler Alert*

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

*End Spoiler*

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

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

*Spoiler Alert*

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

*End Spoiler*

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This brief review may contain spoilers.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10 out of 10.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[[Director]]: Jonathan Frakes

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

5…4…3…2…1! Thunderbirds are [[GO]]!

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

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

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

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

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

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

[[Headmaster]]: Jonathan Frakes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

My Grade: [[F]]

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

My Grade: [[e]]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

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

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

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

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

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

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Human Body --- WoW.

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

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

Our days are limited...

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

Thanks and Regards.



Human Body --- WoW.

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

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

Our days are limited...

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

Thanks and Regards.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[[Where]] to [[begin]] my discussion of [[pain]]. For starters, there was a musical [[montage]] every five minutes. There was no character [[development]]. [[Every]] character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy [[foreign]] guy, etc. The [[script]] felt as if it were being written as the [[movie]] was being shot. The [[production]] [[value]] was so [[incredibly]] low that it [[felt]] like I was watching a junior [[high]] video [[presentation]]. [[Have]] the [[directors]], [[producers]], etc. ever [[even]] seen a [[movie]] before? Halestorm is getting worse and [[worse]] with every [[new]] [[entry]]. The [[concept]] for this [[movie]] [[sounded]] so funny. How could you go wrong with [[Gary]] Coleman and a handful of somewhat [[legitimate]] [[actors]]. But trust me when I say this, things went [[wrong]], [[VERY]] WRONG. [[All]] once in a long while a [[filmmaking]] will come along that will be so [[dire]] that I feel [[forced]] to [[alert]] people. [[Though]] I labor all my days and I can [[savings]] but one soul from [[staring]] this [[film]], how [[marvellous]] will be my [[pleasure]].

[[Wherever]] to [[startup]] my discussion of [[painless]]. For starters, there was a musical [[fitting]] every five minutes. There was no character [[evolution]]. [[Any]] character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy [[alien]] guy, etc. The [[hyphen]] felt as if it were being written as the [[filmmaking]] was being shot. The [[productivity]] [[valuing]] was so [[surprisingly]] low that it [[deemed]] like I was watching a junior [[highest]] video [[submissions]]. [[Has]] the [[administrators]], [[growers]], etc. ever [[yet]] seen a [[filmmaking]] before? Halestorm is getting worse and [[worst]] with every [[newest]] [[entries]]. The [[conception]] for this [[filmmaking]] [[rang]] so funny. How could you go wrong with [[Garry]] Coleman and a handful of somewhat [[justified]] [[protagonists]]. But trust me when I say this, things went [[flawed]], [[QUITE]] WRONG. --------------------------------------------- Result 228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked ! They took something from my childhood ,and raped it in an outhouse! This movie was so bad I wanted to go home and hold my "Dukes" dvds and cry in a corner. The cast was terrible ! It wasn't "The Dukes", it was Stiffler and Jackass driving a car. When was Boss Hogg evil? When was Rosco a tough guy? They never were ! Boss Hogg was greedy and Rosco was an idiot. When did Jesse smoke pot? He never did ! Now don't get me wrong,I'm very liberal and there's nothing wrong with a little chiba, but it had no place in this movie! The only thing good about this movie was the trailers before the movie and the end credits. It was a waste of money time and air. Avoid at all costs!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] First of all, the [[reason]] I'm giving this film 2 [[stars]] [[instead]] of 1 is because at [[least]] [[Peter]] Falk [[gave]] his usual [[fantastic]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[alone]] can get 10 [[stars]] for trying to save this otherwise utterly [[worthless]] [[attempt]] at making a [[movie]].

I was [[initially]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[comment]] that [[Andrew]] Stevens in this movie [[gave]] "the performance of his [[career]]." To me, it was the [[abysmal]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[ruined]] this movie, and so I was all prepared to hurl all sorts of insults at the person who [[made]] the aforementioned comment. Then I thought to myself, what else has Stevens done? So I [[checked]] and, you know, that person was absolutely right. In the 17 years since this Columbo movie was made, apparently every one of the 33 projects that Stevens has been in since then has been utter crap, so it is doubtful that anybody has even seen the rest of his career.

If you like Columbo, see every other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and save the worst for last. First of all, the [[cause]] I'm giving this film 2 [[celebrity]] [[however]] of 1 is because at [[lowest]] [[Petr]] Falk [[delivered]] his usual [[sumptuous]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[only]] can get 10 [[celebrity]] for trying to save this otherwise utterly [[fruitless]] [[endeavor]] at making a [[filmmaking]].

I was [[originally]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[comments]] that [[Andreu]] Stevens in this movie [[given]] "the performance of his [[professions]]." To me, it was the [[shocking]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[obliterated]] this movie, and so I was all prepared to hurl all sorts of insults at the person who [[introduced]] the aforementioned comment. Then I thought to myself, what else has Stevens done? So I [[audited]] and, you know, that person was absolutely right. In the 17 years since this Columbo movie was made, apparently every one of the 33 projects that Stevens has been in since then has been utter crap, so it is doubtful that anybody has even seen the rest of his career.

If you like Columbo, see every other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and save the worst for last. --------------------------------------------- Result 230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't understand how "2 of us" receive such a high rating... I thought that the first half dragged on and the second half didnt make sense, followed by an unresolved climax which was not worth the trouble. However, I did like Jared Harris' performance of John Lennon which was worth the wasted 2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or [[perhaps]] dogs. This is a pretty good ensemble piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're [[curious]] already), and first-time director Bishop gives them their chance, taking his time, [[letting]] the [[characters]] [[interact]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the [[return]] of "the [[big]] boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

[[For]] some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding [[film]] [[presence]]. And [[yes]], with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and [[Richard]] Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" [[reunion]] [[party]]! Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or [[potentially]] dogs. This is a pretty good ensemble piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're [[weird]] already), and first-time director Bishop gives them their chance, taking his time, [[leaving]] the [[features]] [[imparting]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the [[restitution]] of "the [[sizeable]] boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

[[During]] some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding [[kino]] [[attendance]]. And [[yea]], with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and [[Richards]] Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" [[reunite]] [[part]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Mark Frechette stars as [[Mark]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of [[killing]] a cop during a [[campus]] riot, and he flees all the way to the [[desert]]. He does so by stealing a [[small]] plane at the local [[airport]], and [[flies]] it himself.

Once out [[flying]] over the desert, [[Mark]] [[spots]] a [[car]] from the [[air]]. A [[young]] [[woman]] named Daria steps out, and sees [[Mark]] [[circling]] in the plane. [[Mark]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to [[duck]] or get hit. When he [[lands]], he [[becomes]] acquainted with Daria, who is [[strangely]] [[charmed]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for [[hours]], Mark and Daria get naked, and [[make]] [[love]] in the sand. But with [[Mark]] evading the [[law]], they realize that he needs to keep running. [[So]] [[Mark]] and Daria's brief tryst is [[quite]] [[poignant]], because it doesn't [[get]] to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. [[Both]] films have a rambling, vague quality, along with [[complicated]] meanings and [[characters]]. Frechette was as reckless in [[person]], as his [[character]] was in this [[film]]. A few years after [[making]] Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in [[real]] [[life]]. [[While]] serving his [[prison]] [[sentence]], [[Mark]] [[died]] an [[ignoble]] [[death]]. He was [[killed]] by a 150 [[lb]]. [[weight]], which [[fell]] on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[splendid]] cinematography, and special [[visual]] effects. The [[incredible]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a [[stroke]] of [[genius]]. Although not as ground-breaking a film as [[Easy]] [[Rider]] was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the [[early]] 70s counterculture. I [[recommend]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which [[showcase]] the [[upheaval]], of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. Mark Frechette stars as [[Brand]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of [[murdering]] a cop during a [[campuses]] riot, and he flees all the way to the [[deserts]]. He does so by stealing a [[minimal]] plane at the local [[airfield]], and [[flying]] it himself.

Once out [[hovering]] over the desert, [[Branded]] [[stains]] a [[vehicles]] from the [[airspace]]. A [[youths]] [[female]] named Daria steps out, and sees [[Marks]] [[circle]] in the plane. [[Branded]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to [[ducks]] or get hit. When he [[territory]], he [[becoming]] acquainted with Daria, who is [[suspiciously]] [[seduced]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for [[hour]], Mark and Daria get naked, and [[deliver]] [[loves]] in the sand. But with [[Brands]] evading the [[ley]], they realize that he needs to keep running. [[Consequently]] [[Branded]] and Daria's brief tryst is [[very]] [[heartbreaking]], because it doesn't [[obtain]] to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. [[Whether]] films have a rambling, vague quality, along with [[tricky]] meanings and [[hallmarks]]. Frechette was as reckless in [[persons]], as his [[characters]] was in this [[movie]]. A few years after [[doing]] Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in [[actual]] [[vie]]. [[Though]] serving his [[jail]] [[condemnation]], [[Branded]] [[dying]] an [[outrageous]] [[killings]]. He was [[killings]] by a 150 [[lbs]]. [[weights]], which [[declined]] on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[spectacular]] cinematography, and special [[optic]] effects. The [[unthinkable]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a [[apoplexy]] of [[engineering]]. Although not as ground-breaking a film as [[Easily]] [[Mustang]] was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the [[precocious]] 70s counterculture. I [[recommendation]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which [[demonstrate]] the [[ferment]], of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. --------------------------------------------- Result 233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the Germans all stand out in the open and get mowed down with a machine gun. the Good guys never die, unless its for dramatic purposes. the "plot" has so many holes its laughable. (Where did the German soldiers go once they rolled the fuel tank towards the train? Erik Estrada? Please!) And the whole idea, hijacking a train? How moronic is that! The Germans KNOW where you are going to go, its not like you can leave the track and drive away! What a waste. I would rather bonk myself on the head with a ball peen hammer 10 times then have to sit through that again. I mean, seriously, it FELT like it was made in the 60s, but it was produced in 88!! 1988!! the A-Team is more believable than this horrid excuse for a movie. Only watch it if you need a good laugh. This movie is to Tele Sevalas what Green Beret was to John Wayne. --------------------------------------------- Result 234 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] As far as I know, this [[show]] was never repeated on [[UK]] television after its original [[run]] in the late '60s / [[early]] '70s, and most [[episodes]] are now [[sadly]] "[[missing]] [[presumed]] [[wiped]]".

[[Series]] 6 from 1971 however [[still]] exists in its entirety, and I [[recently]] [[got]] the [[chance]] to watch it all, the [[best]] part of 4 decades on.

[[After]] [[rushing]] [[home]] from [[school]], Freewheelers was [[essential]] viewing for me and [[many]] of my contemporaries back in those halcyon [[days]] of [[flared]] [[trousers]], Slade and Chicory Tip. And watching it again [[brought]] a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally [[amusing]] [[fight]] scenes, plot holes [[wide]] enough to [[pilot]] a [[large]] ocean-going yacht through and the "[[frightfully]], [[frightfully]]" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a [[bygone]] (dare I say "golden") age of kids' TV drama, when the shows were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't take themselves so seriously. Before they became obsessed with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's screenwriters have their young protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, drugs, STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a modern audience" in these days of all-pervasive political correctness, the boss figure would be a black female, one of the young male heroes would be a Muslim, the other would be a white lad confused about his sexuality and the girl would be an all-action go-getter with an IQ off the scale, who'd be forever getting the lads out of [[scrapes]] and making them look foolish - in other words a million miles removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very much "of its time". But is that a [[bad]] [[thing]]? I for one don't [[think]] so. As far as I know, this [[exhibition]] was never repeated on [[BRITS]] television after its original [[executing]] in the late '60s / [[prematurely]] '70s, and most [[bouts]] are now [[woefully]] "[[lacks]] [[supposed]] [[obliterated]]".

[[Serials]] 6 from 1971 however [[however]] exists in its entirety, and I [[newly]] [[ai]] the [[likelihood]] to watch it all, the [[better]] part of 4 decades on.

[[Upon]] [[hurrying]] [[dwellings]] from [[tuition]], Freewheelers was [[key]] viewing for me and [[several]] of my contemporaries back in those halcyon [[jours]] of [[erupted]] [[panties]], Slade and Chicory Tip. And watching it again [[lodged]] a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally [[funny]] [[struggle]] scenes, plot holes [[large]] enough to [[experiment]] a [[sizable]] ocean-going yacht through and the "[[excruciatingly]], [[shockingly]]" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a [[bygones]] (dare I say "golden") age of kids' TV drama, when the shows were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't take themselves so seriously. Before they became obsessed with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's screenwriters have their young protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, drugs, STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a modern audience" in these days of all-pervasive political correctness, the boss figure would be a black female, one of the young male heroes would be a Muslim, the other would be a white lad confused about his sexuality and the girl would be an all-action go-getter with an IQ off the scale, who'd be forever getting the lads out of [[abrasions]] and making them look foolish - in other words a million miles removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very much "of its time". But is that a [[amiss]] [[stuff]]? I for one don't [[believe]] so. --------------------------------------------- Result 235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In 1594 in Brazil, the Tupinambas Indians are friends of the Frenches and their enemies are the Tupiniquins, friends of the Portugueses. A Frenchman (Arduíno Colassanti) is captured by the Tupinambás, and in spite of his trial to convince them that he is French, they believe he is Portuguese. The Frenchman becomes their slave, and maritally lives with Seboipepe (Ana Maria Magalhães). Later, he uses powder in the cannons that the Portuguese left behind to defeat the Tupiniquins in a battle. In order to celebrate the victory, the Indians decide to eat him.

"Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" is another great low budget movie of the great Brazilian director Nélson Pereira dos Santos. The screenplay is very original and the story is spoken in Tupi. The film is shot using natural light most of the time and is very realistic. The actors and actresses perform naked and Ana Maria Magalhães is magnificent, showing a wonderful body and giving a stunning performance. The sound is produced by the Brazilian musician Zé Rodrix. This movie shows the beginning of the exploitation of my country by Europeans, focusing in the Portuguese and French at that time, trading with the Indians and exchanging combs and mirrors by our natural resources. This movie was awarded in the national festivals, such as the 1971 Brazilian Cinema Festival of Brasília (Festival de Brazília do Cinema Brasileiro) with Best Screenplay (Nelson Pereira dos Santos), Best Dialog (Nelson Pereira dos Santos and Humberto Mauro) and Best Cenograph (Régis Monteiro); Art Critics Association of São Paulo (Associação Paulista dos Críticos de Arte), with best Revelation of the Year (Ana Maria Magalhães) and some other prizes. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" ("How Tasty Was My Frenchman") --------------------------------------------- Result 236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The sects that capitalise on this film are well known for their claim to take the 'message' of the bible without any alteration or extra-biblical influence. The existence of this film is solely due to the fact that there is no such thing.

If you want to know what the born-again branch of Christianity were harping on about in the seventies just look up the word 'rapture' in a dictionary of cults and sects. It's quicker than sitting through this waste of celluloid.

Poor acting, uneven sound quality and a script that could just as easily have been written by Jack T Chick (paranoid Christian conspiracy theorist for those not familiar with the Evangelical scene). You could not really put this into the 'so bad it's good' category so its only audience are either those with a pamphlet collection looking to branch out or the extremely paranoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although she is little known today, Deanna Durbin was one of the most popular stars of the 1930s, a pretty teenager with a perky personality and a much-admired operatic singing voice. This 1937 was her first major film, and it proved a box-office bonanza for beleaguered Universal Studios.

THREE SMART GIRLS concerns three daughters of a divorced couple who rush to their long-unseen father when their still-faithful mother reveals he may soon remarry--with the firm intention of undermining his gold-digger girlfriend and returning him to their mother. Although the story is slight, the script is witty and the expert cast plays it with a neat screwball touch. Durbin has a pleasing voice and appealing personality, and such enjoyable character actors as Charles Winninger, Alice Brady, Lucile Watson, and Mischa Auer round out the cast. A an ultra-light amusement for fans of 1930s film.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film about secret government mind experiments and the corrupt use of the citizenry by secretive and vile shadowy figures had the potential for being a really interesting movie. But for me, it failed. I won't elaborate much on the rather confusing plot line, but if you are looking for a detailed explanation, the comment by user "reluctantpopstar" gives a good description of it.

But it didn't work for me. I found it slow, which would be okay but for the fact that it seemed to go nowhere. The viewer is left in the dark about too many things to really be able to get a handle on this movie-in some films, one can argue that the filmmakers intended to provoke thought and left things ambiguous for that reason. I don't think that this is the case here.

As for the frequent long shots of two buildings that have been frequently mentioned by other users...I see that they do have a point-they give the viewer time to get another drink without missing any of the "action". And I suspect many viewers would welcome the opportunity to have several beverages on board to get through this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most boring horror films I have ever seen, as it's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time. All the characters are boring, and the story is terrible, plus I could see the two twists at the end coming miles away!. The great setting and the creepy house definitely would have helped if it wasn't so damn boring, and there isn't one character to root for either, plus I hope it makes it's way to the bottom 100, because it deserves to be there in my opinion. When John Carradine finally shows up at the end, it's a pretty good scene but it's already way too late, and the only other screen time he had was in flashbacks, plus the only really gory scene in the movie is when a character gets his face messed up by Bee's, as it was rather gory. I got this in a DVD Horror set called Back From The Grave and everyone really overacts in my opinion, plus it's lucky this was included in a set I bought otherwise I would have chucked this out the window!. This is one of the most boring Horror films I have ever seen, as It's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time, and I say avoid it like the plague!, you don't want to go through the torture. The Direction is absolutely terrible!. Carl Monson does an absolutely terrible! job here, making every thing look cheap, wasting his potential on making creepy atmosphere and just keeping the film at an incredibly dull pace. The Acting is just as bad. John Carradine is good in his scene, but other then that he's hardly in the film other then flashback scenes. (Carradine Ruled!!). Merry Anders overacts here terribly as Laura, as she didn't convince me at all. Ivy Bethune is OK, and somewhat creepy, but also overacted, she did have a creepy smile at the end though. Rest of the cast, I didn't pay enough attention too, as I had a lot of trouble getting through it, but they were all really bad. Overall please avoid this,It's not worth the agony!. BOMB out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Though I've yet to review the [[movie]] in about two years, I remember [[exactly]] what [[made]] my opinion [[go]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with mermaids as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. [[If]] you don't have the original [[director]] and [[actors]] [[handy]]...you're just looking to get your [[butt]] whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big [[issue]] was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same [[plan]] as her sister, the same [[minions]] (who, by the [[way]], did not scare [[anyone]]. I had a three [[year]] old on my lap when I [[watched]] this [[movie]], and she laughed hysterically.) She had no [[purpose]] being in there; I'd like to have [[seen]] [[Mom]] be the [[villain]]. I'm sure she would have [[done]] a [[better]] [[job]] than [[Little]] Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held [[none]] of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on [[Scuttle]], Sebastian and [[Flounder]]. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. Though I've yet to review the [[filmmaking]] in about two years, I remember [[precisely]] what [[effected]] my opinion [[going]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with mermaids as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. [[Unless]] you don't have the original [[headmaster]] and [[players]] [[convenient]]...you're just looking to get your [[ass]] whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big [[issuing]] was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same [[planning]] as her sister, the same [[lackeys]] (who, by the [[camino]], did not scare [[everyone]]. I had a three [[annum]] old on my lap when I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]], and she laughed hysterically.) She had no [[intents]] being in there; I'd like to have [[noticed]] [[Ammi]] be the [[hoodlum]]. I'm sure she would have [[effected]] a [[optimum]] [[jobs]] than [[Petite]] Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held [[nos]] of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on [[Sabotaged]], Sebastian and [[Flatfish]]. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] When I [[heard]] that Adrian Pasdar was in [[drag]] in this [[movie]], my [[expectations]] that I [[would]] watch the entire [[movie]] were low. The only reasons I gave it a [[chance]] were the magnificent [[Julie]] Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[thought]] [[would]] be a [[broad]] "[[Mrs]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[turned]] out to be a gentle and insightful comedy. Pasdar is [[entirely]] [[credible]] and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to [[release]] the female [[part]] of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He [[transmits]] these [[needs]] to the audience in a [[thoroughly]] [[believable]] fashion. [[Julie]] Walters is [[magnificent]], is as her habit, as the [[landlady]] who [[teaches]] him [[unconditional]] [[love]]. When I [[listened]] that Adrian Pasdar was in [[trawl]] in this [[cinematography]], my [[prospects]] that I [[should]] watch the entire [[flick]] were low. The only reasons I gave it a [[possibilities]] were the magnificent [[Jolly]] Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[figured]] [[could]] be a [[extensive]] "[[Ms]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[revolved]] out to be a gentle and insightful comedy. Pasdar is [[perfectly]] [[plausible]] and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to [[released]] the female [[portions]] of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He [[airs]] these [[require]] to the audience in a [[carefully]] [[credible]] fashion. [[Jolly]] Walters is [[wondrous]], is as her habit, as the [[janitor]] who [[learns]] him [[undivided]] [[iike]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a [[degree]] of verite and cinematic [[skill]] that disarms the viewer, and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The dialogue is [[minimal]], but the [[pauses]] and silence [[poignant]].

Story--The [[conflict]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is [[volatile]], as we [[saw]] recently jihad [[murders]] in the Netherlands and [[riots]] in France. [[While]] I harbor no [[love]] for [[Islam]], the departure from the West from Christian values [[holds]] no [[cause]] for [[celebration]].

The director of this [[film]] managed to mirror the two [[societies]] in a [[way]] that belabored neither, [[emphasizing]] the [[development]] of [[Aicha]] as an [[individual]] who [[became]] a [[champion]], not so much in the [[ring]], but to all those [[around]] her. [[Even]] her [[worst]] . . . I will stop here to avoid the [[spoiler]]. Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a [[degrees]] of verite and cinematic [[capacities]] that disarms the viewer, and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The dialogue is [[minuscule]], but the [[pausing]] and silence [[heartbreaking]].

Story--The [[dispute]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is [[shaky]], as we [[watched]] recently jihad [[killings]] in the Netherlands and [[disturbances]] in France. [[Although]] I harbor no [[amour]] for [[Islamist]], the departure from the West from Christian values [[possesses]] no [[reason]] for [[celebratory]].

The director of this [[movies]] managed to mirror the two [[company]] in a [[routing]] that belabored neither, [[emphasize]] the [[evolution]] of [[Ayse]] as an [[person]] who [[was]] a [[hotshot]], not so much in the [[rings]], but to all those [[about]] her. [[Yet]] her [[lousiest]] . . . I will stop here to avoid the [[deflector]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] For people interested in business and the corporate [[world]], this [[show]] is [[simply]] the best of the [[best]]. As one of the [[former]] [[contestants]] of the show [[wrote]] in his [[blog]] about this innovative [[show]]: People in [[business]] [[finally]] had an [[audience]]. The [[whole]] idea is [[perfect]]; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related [[tasks]], set in the best [[place]] in the world, New York [[City]]. Donald Trump is [[perfect]] as the [[boss]], even [[though]] his ego is bigger than the [[whole]] universe times infinity. He [[also]] makes a lot of [[questionable]] [[decisions]] about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: [[Great]] season [[overall]], the best season of the "[[normal]]" ones. This season was the one that was most about [[actual]] business [[skills]]. [[Later]] on the series [[almost]] [[drowned]] in marketing [[related]] [[tasks]] with [[way]] too many [[product]] placements. [[Great]] and interesting contestants [[overall]], with the most [[likable]] [[character]] ever in this [[series]]: [[Troy]]. I know I'm not the only [[person]] who suspect that the Trump [[World]] Tower-episode where he [[got]] fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick [[win]] this [[particular]] [[task]].

Season 2: [[Also]] a [[great]] season. The [[tasks]] were still [[pretty]] much [[OK]], and it had [[many]] interesting contestants. [[Jen]] M was [[terrible]] and should never had [[made]] it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the [[worst]] [[firing]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of [[book]] [[smarts]] [[vs]]. street [[smarts]], but the cast was so utterly terrible (it [[turned]] out that Trump [[hated]] the cast as well) that the [[whole]] season was a total disaster. [[Best]] moments was the second episode ([[motel]] [[renovation]]), with PM [[Brian]] fired, a [[guy]] who [[added]] [[nothing]] but [[huge]] [[amounts]] of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[excellent]] season, much because of the interesting and [[entertaining]] contestants this season ([[especially]] Randall, Alla, Marcus and the [[total]] [[disaster]] whose [[name]] was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this [[show]], [[ending]] with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I [[think]] we [[got]] [[robbed]] for the [[Randall]] [[vs]]. Alla [[final]]. I [[think]] Trump was [[afraid]] that she could have won, and prevented that from [[happening]].

Season 5: A boring season with [[really]] no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. For people interested in business and the corporate [[globe]], this [[illustrating]] is [[straightforward]] the best of the [[nicest]]. As one of the [[antigua]] [[contestant]] of the show [[texted]] in his [[blogger]] about this innovative [[demonstrate]]: People in [[businesses]] [[eventually]] had an [[viewers]]. The [[entire]] idea is [[faultless]]; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related [[mission]], set in the best [[placing]] in the world, New York [[Ville]]. Donald Trump is [[irreproachable]] as the [[chef]], even [[if]] his ego is bigger than the [[total]] universe times infinity. He [[similarly]] makes a lot of [[dodgy]] [[decision]] about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: [[Super]] season [[whole]], the best season of the "[[routine]]" ones. This season was the one that was most about [[real]] business [[jurisdiction]]. [[Then]] on the series [[practically]] [[drowning]] in marketing [[tied]] [[mission]] with [[manner]] too many [[merchandise]] placements. [[Grand]] and interesting contestants [[total]], with the most [[sympathetic]] [[nature]] ever in this [[serials]]: [[Trojan]]. I know I'm not the only [[individual]] who suspect that the Trump [[Worldwide]] Tower-episode where he [[did]] fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick [[wins]] this [[special]] [[chore]].

Season 2: [[Similarly]] a [[grand]] season. The [[functions]] were still [[quite]] much [[OKAY]], and it had [[multiple]] interesting contestants. [[Just]] M was [[awful]] and should never had [[accomplished]] it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the [[lousiest]] [[gunfire]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of [[books]] [[brainy]] [[versus]]. street [[brainy]], but the cast was so utterly terrible (it [[transformed]] out that Trump [[hate]] the cast as well) that the [[overall]] season was a total disaster. [[Finest]] moments was the second episode ([[hotel]] [[redevelopment]]), with PM [[Bryan]] fired, a [[pal]] who [[adds]] [[anything]] but [[hefty]] [[quantities]] of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[super]] season, much because of the interesting and [[amusing]] contestants this season ([[notably]] Randall, Alla, Marcus and the [[aggregate]] [[disasters]] whose [[naming]] was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this [[demonstrate]], [[terminated]] with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I [[believing]] we [[ai]] [[burgled]] for the [[Randal]] [[v]]. Alla [[definitive]]. I [[believing]] Trump was [[fearful]] that she could have won, and prevented that from [[occurring]].

Season 5: A boring season with [[truthfully]] no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. --------------------------------------------- Result 244 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Right, then, he's [[absolutely]] [[brilliant]]. But you [[must]] be intelligent and [[quick]] to [[understand]] his [[humor]]. He [[covers]] ([[attacks]]?) all [[sorts]] of [[topics]], such as the [[first]] moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr [[Doktor]] Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the fool.

Incidentally, I've watched his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[best]] [[work]]. He [[simply]] [[shines]].

What might go so far as to say he is Glorious. Right, then, he's [[fully]] [[wondrous]]. But you [[should]] be intelligent and [[timely]] to [[realise]] his [[mood]]. He [[cover]] ([[aggressions]]?) all [[kinds]] of [[items]], such as the [[frst]] moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr [[Doctor]] Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the fool.

Incidentally, I've watched his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[bestest]] [[cooperates]]. He [[merely]] [[glows]].

What might go so far as to say he is Glorious. --------------------------------------------- Result 245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] what a [[preposterous]] [[story]] ,murder blackmail,[[child]] [[sex]] [[allegations]] ,[[gays]] and the catholic church.....absolute [[tripe]]. How is it that most [[UK]] based [[TV]] dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[include]] the obligortory Gay,its [[really]] getting [[tiresome]] now. Everybody [[accepts]] that there are Gay people in [[society]] just has there are other minority [[groups]],but we don't [[want]] it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in every [[single]] show. [[Apart]] from the above, the [[drama]] went from what could have been an interesting [[little]] [[story]] into a pantomime,the [[priest]] was a [[paedophile]] and there are [[gays]] [[running]] about [[every]] where,oh yes just to be totally [[PC]] one of the [[gay]] [[couple]] was [[black]].i am surprised at c ecclestone for [[even]] [[contemplating]] this when he read the [[script]]. what a [[absurd]] [[tales]] ,murder blackmail,[[kid]] [[sexuality]] [[complaints]] ,[[queers]] and the catholic church.....absolute [[gut]]. How is it that most [[ENGLAND]] based [[TELEVISIONS]] dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[including]] the obligortory Gay,its [[genuinely]] getting [[dull]] now. Everybody [[accepting]] that there are Gay people in [[societies]] just has there are other minority [[panel]],but we don't [[wanna]] it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in every [[exclusive]] show. [[Irrespective]] from the above, the [[opera]] went from what could have been an interesting [[small]] [[tales]] into a pantomime,the [[preacher]] was a [[pedophile]] and there are [[queers]] [[executing]] about [[all]] where,oh yes just to be totally [[PCS]] one of the [[homosexual]] [[couples]] was [[negro]].i am surprised at c ecclestone for [[yet]] [[recital]] this when he read the [[scripts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[pieces]] of this [[work]] were [[really]] [[memorable]]. - [[Id]] love to [[see]] another more current [[example]] of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd [[love]] to be [[part]] of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this [[extra]] in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I [[mean]] really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the movie I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[smithereens]] of this [[cooperate]] were [[truthfully]] [[eventful]]. - [[Ids]] love to [[consults]] another more current [[cases]] of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd [[iove]] to be [[parties]] of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this [[additional]] in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I [[signify]] really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the movie I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] A [[lot]] of [[talk]] has been [[made]] about "psychological [[Westerns]]", but this is one of the very few that is [[truly]] in that [[genre]]. It has big name [[stars]] who [[perform]] very well, but it is the [[director]] who makes this such a good [[movie]]. [[Stewart]] Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to [[play]] a haggard retired buffalo [[hunter]] who is revered in the West as one of the best. [[Robert]] Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the [[usual]] young upstart, Taylor's [[character]] is [[middle]] aged, too), who [[wants]] to [[slaughter]] buffalo, and lures Granger into [[business]] with him. They [[hire]] two other big [[name]] [[actors]], Lloyd Nolan and [[Russ]] Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is [[haunted]] by the buffalo he has killed, [[knowing]] that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they [[become]] extinct, the [[Native]] American [[way]] of [[life]] will [[greatly]] [[suffer]]. Taylor [[soon]] [[reveals]] a [[sadistic]] side, but it is a [[realistic]] saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern [[film]], created by [[nerds]] and [[dorks]]. He is insecure, and [[needs]] human companionship. Still, he won't [[stop]] at [[murder]]. The end pits the two against each other, with a [[startling]] conclusion. The psychological [[effects]] of what they're doing are well depicted. A [[batch]] of [[schmooze]] has been [[brought]] about "psychological [[Westerners]]", but this is one of the very few that is [[really]] in that [[sort]]. It has big name [[superstar]] who [[performed]] very well, but it is the [[headmaster]] who makes this such a good [[movies]]. [[Steward]] Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to [[gaming]] a haggard retired buffalo [[bellboy]] who is revered in the West as one of the best. [[Roberto]] Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the [[routine]] young upstart, Taylor's [[characters]] is [[oriente]] aged, too), who [[wanting]] to [[slaughtered]] buffalo, and lures Granger into [[firms]] with him. They [[recruiting]] two other big [[denomination]] [[protagonists]], Lloyd Nolan and [[Rus]] Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is [[obsessed]] by the buffalo he has killed, [[realise]] that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they [[becomes]] extinct, the [[Indigenous]] American [[routes]] of [[living]] will [[severely]] [[suffering]]. Taylor [[shortly]] [[reveal]] a [[vicious]] side, but it is a [[practical]] saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern [[kino]], created by [[morons]] and [[fuckheads]]. He is insecure, and [[needed]] human companionship. Still, he won't [[halted]] at [[killings]]. The end pits the two against each other, with a [[uncanny]] conclusion. The psychological [[consequences]] of what they're doing are well depicted. --------------------------------------------- Result 248 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] From the [[first]] scene you are given clues as to what may be going on here. It becomes more and more obvious as the story [[rolls]] on. The acting is [[excellent]] throughout and these actors touch your soul. Even though I knew what was going to happen I was extremely puzzled by the motive. I'm still [[puzzled]] as to why [[Ben]] did what he did. We could see in his [[face]] "second [[thoughts]]", but the [[ultimate]] sacrifice seemed to go against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and [[touching]] story but it left me [[confused]]. [[Maybe]] that was the point of the film. I did like the [[film]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film [[choice]]. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! From the [[outset]] scene you are given clues as to what may be going on here. It becomes more and more obvious as the story [[spools]] on. The acting is [[wondrous]] throughout and these actors touch your soul. Even though I knew what was going to happen I was extremely puzzled by the motive. I'm still [[muddled]] as to why [[Bin]] did what he did. We could see in his [[confronts]] "second [[reflections]]", but the [[final]] sacrifice seemed to go against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and [[touches]] story but it left me [[muddled]]. [[Probably]] that was the point of the film. I did like the [[kino]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film [[wahl]]. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! --------------------------------------------- Result 249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I did not have too much interest in watching The Flock.Andrew Lau co-directed the masterpiece trilogy of Infernal Affairs but he had been fired from The Flock and he had been replaced by an emergency director called Niels Mueller.I had the feeling that Lau had made a good film but it had not satisfied the study,so they fired him and hired another director.This usually does not work well (let's remember The Invasion).But The Flock resulted to be better than what I expected.It's not a great film but it's an interesting and entertaining thriller.The character development is very well done and I could know the characters very well.Also,the relationship between the two main characters is natural and credible.Richard Gere and Claire Danes bring competent performances.Now,let's go to the negative points.One element which really bothered me (there was a moment in which it irritated me) was the excess of edition tricks to give the movie more "attitude" and style.That tricks feel out of place and their presence is arbitrary.Plus,I think the film should have been more ambitious.In spite of that,I recommend The Flock as a good thriller.It's not memorable at all,but it's entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ray Liotta and Tom Hulce shine in this sterling example of brotherly love and commitment. Hulce plays Dominick, (Nicky) a mildly mentally handicapped young man who is putting his 12 minutes younger, twin brother, Liotta, who plays Eugene, through medical school. It is set in Baltimore and deals with the issues of sibling rivalry, the unbreakable bond of twins, child abuse and good always winning out over evil. It is captivating, and filled with laughter and tears. If you have not yet seen this film, please rent it, I promise, you'll be amazed at how such a wonderful film could go un-noticed. --------------------------------------------- Result 251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bah. Another tired, desultory reworking of an out of copyright work never designed to be filmed.

On the plus side, Toni Collette is superb as always (being an actual actress, you see), and there are some nicely handled handover cuts between scenes. There are even a few genuinely funny lines, and the filmwork, score and editing is competent, apart from a bizarre lapse into voiceover and speaking to the camera towards the conclusion.

But, ah, but. Much of the cast seems to be on autopilot, and they are almost all very clearly too old (and in one case too young) for their declared ages. Worse, they are all speaking "Austinese", that peculiar falsetto self satisfied sing song that couldn't be further from the way people actually spoke in Austen's day (think Yosemite Sam, I kid you not). This is particularly sad, considering that we seem to finally be seeing the demise of the equally farcial "Fakespearan" that Olivier and his cronies were so fond of bellowing at the top of their lungs.

And worst of all is Gwyneth Paltrow. She's only ever played one character in her films, and she stays true to form here, running through her entire range (smirking to sulking) in the first ten minutes, then just repeating herself for the rest of the overlong film. There is absolutely no chemistry between herself and any of her admirers, nor any apparent reason why they would be interested in her apart.

In short, there is very little reason to watch Emma. It's an amiable enough adaptation, but if you're going to pack a film full of anacronisms (i.e. an appalingly thin lead who can't shoot a bow or handle a period accent) then you might as well do it properly, as with the vastly superior "Clueless". --------------------------------------------- Result 252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I can only [[believe]] that Garson Kanin [[must]] have been two people. The one who [[wrote]] the [[brilliant]] "A [[Double]] [[Life]]" and the [[funny]] "Born [[Yesterday]]" and co-wrote such excellent screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "[[Pat]] And [[Mike]]" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[tiresome]], sad [[drivel]] as "Bachelor [[Mother]]", "Some [[Kind]] Of A [[Nut]]", and this. The [[cast]] [[tries]], but the [[script]] is so [[tired]] and [[clichéd]] that even the [[efforts]] of the [[always]] [[wonderful]] [[Brenda]] Vaccaro are [[defeated]]. The [[script]] [[sinks]] to it's nadir in the [[truly]] offensive [[sequence]] in which Janssen's [[character]] [[tests]] Drivas's [[character]] to make [[sure]] he's not [[gay]]. An [[ugly]] [[sequence]], but [[sadly]] one which [[could]] [[easily]] [[play]] in a film today. "[[Ethnic]]" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" [[jokes]] are still "good, clean, [[family]] fun". I can only [[think]] that Garson Kanin [[should]] have been two people. The one who [[authored]] the [[beautiful]] "A [[Doubles]] [[Vie]]" and the [[comical]] "Born [[Thursday]]" and co-wrote such excellent screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "[[Patricia]] And [[Mick]]" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[boring]], sad [[whim]] as "Bachelor [[Mommy]]", "Some [[Genera]] Of A [[Nuts]]", and this. The [[casting]] [[strives]], but the [[screenplay]] is so [[mangy]] and [[cliché]] that even the [[action]] of the [[permanently]] [[sumptuous]] [[Cynthia]] Vaccaro are [[blanked]]. The [[screenplay]] [[drown]] to it's nadir in the [[really]] offensive [[sequences]] in which Janssen's [[trait]] [[test]] Drivas's [[nature]] to make [[convinced]] he's not [[gays]]. An [[horrendous]] [[sequences]], but [[regrettably]] one which [[did]] [[readily]] [[playing]] in a film today. "[[Ethnicity]]" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" [[gags]] are still "good, clean, [[familia]] fun". --------------------------------------------- Result 253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Frankly I'm rather incensed that on the basis of the dazzling reviews attributed to Steven Smith I wasted nearly two hours on his debut offering. Have they all been written by his pals? The action clunks along, the music is irritating and over used, the script is simply dire and the actors (with the exception of the gardener) mediocre at best. I do think we should support the efforts of a young filmmaker but saying it's brilliant when it's not will surely only encourage him to make the same mistakes again i.e. continuing to write his own scripts and using the same actors for another venture. Yes, it's his first film, low budget etc. - I get it, but it's also out there for members of the public to purchase and it's just not up to scratch. --------------------------------------------- Result 254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Burlinson and Thornton give an outstanding performance in this movie, along with Dennehy. Although it is at first thought to be only about love, it really goes down deeper than that. The beauty of nature captures this movie, placing among one of the best I have ever seen. The horse scenes are absolutely fantastic!! Any horse-lovers out there will love this movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] As I am no fan of [[almost]] any post-"[[Desperate]] Living" [[John]] Waters [[films]], I [[warmed]] to "[[Pecker]]". After he emerged from the [[underground]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his earlier works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[fans]] looked and tasted like watered down liqueur. "[[Pecker]]", which doesn't attempt to regurgitate early successes, is a slight, quiet, [[humble]] [[commentary]] on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. [[Waters]] clearly knows this subject well because he has also [[exhibited]] and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic [[style]] is at [[ease]] with the [[subject]]. As I am no fan of [[practically]] any post-"[[Distraught]] Living" [[Johannes]] Waters [[cinema]], I [[heated]] to "[[Prick]]". After he emerged from the [[subterranean]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his earlier works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[followers]] looked and tasted like watered down liqueur. "[[Dick]]", which doesn't attempt to regurgitate early successes, is a slight, quiet, [[modest]] [[comment]] on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. [[Aguas]] clearly knows this subject well because he has also [[display]] and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic [[styling]] is at [[lighten]] with the [[topic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This first installment of Crispin Glover's personal magnum opus asks you to think a little, and so can't be recommended for any viewer who doesn't want to sit and puzzle over Glover's imagery or follow the surprisingly simple—but weirdly obfuscated—thread of his narrative. To the more casual viewer, yes, it's probably going to come off as a confusing mish-mash of odd, startling, and disturbing imagery for imagery's sake.

You get the sense that Glover doesn't mind that this is the case, and he'll almost as gladly listen to why someone hated the film as to why they enjoyed it. Glover's innate eagerness for and about his work and how audiences interpret it is strongly communicated not only through the film itself, but also through the unusual question and answer sessions that he frequently conducts following showings; he clearly hopes that people will continue to think about what he has presented.

The easiest way to interpret and dismiss the film is to label it as Dada or nihilist, a juvenile attack on the modern movie industry from an actor who's worked both without and within. But there's a reason why Glover performs his slideshow before showing his movie, and it's not only to sell books; his books juxtapose and create a narrative from images and text that Glover pieced together, and What Is It? does similarly with imagery drawn from Western culture.

What Is It? is an endearing and compelling film in ways one hardly expects while viewing. Much has already been made about Glover's use of actors with Down's syndrome, and indeed that is one of the most initially striking aspects of the film. So jarring, in fact, that many seem to interpret it as some sort of far-reaching crusade to see a more realistic and/or dignified portrayal of the disabled in movies and television—or, on the absolute other end of the spectrum, as a kind of direct exploitation of the disabled. But it's not either, and maybe that's part of what makes this film so uncomfortable for many: the underlying agenda is not a political one or one of hatred, but one of looking beyond the mainstream culture into a kind of outsider ugliness. It's not a film about Down's syndrome, but it is a film that is owned by the actors with Down's syndrome who appear in it.

I'm the sort of person who is entirely gung-ho when it comes to ugliness and strangeness being portrayed so starkly that it is beautiful; happily for me, this is pretty much exactly how What Is It? presents itself to viewers. Glover uses the strange images of snails, death, and the disabled in part because he wants his audience to feel discomfort at either the sheer oddness of the imagery or the visceral reaction one has to the dying screams of an anthropomorphized snail. In some ways, the weirdly compelling (and occasionally downright grotesque) elements of What Is It? remind me of the work of the painter Francis Bacon… he of the infamous popes, yes, and the odd distortions of the human figure that inevitably make viewers cringe and want to look away. Like Bacon's paintings, Glover's film manages to be opulent and humble, grainy and polished, chaotic and well-realized… and the contradictions help to make it all the more disconcerting. But still this is not an entirely serious film, and it largely manages to sidestep the greatest pitfalls of pretension through the use of humor that, for the most part, derives from the use (and juxtaposition) of familiar items, images, and names of popular culture. And when What Is It? is funny, it is very funny.

Overall, What Is It? is an impressive first film from Glover as a director and writer, and his presence as an actor in the film proves not to be nearly the distraction one might expect it to be. Watching it is like being an observer in the kind of dream that isn't exactly good or bad, but just strange… and that leaves you feeling slightly grimy when you wake up. If that's the kind of art you enjoy, What Is It? is likely to exceed your expectations and be well-worth the effort of catching it in the theatre, along with The Big Slide Show and Glover himself. All in all, it's an experience you're unlikely to forget any time soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Some [[moron]] who read or saw some [[reference]] to angels coming to [[Earth]], decided to [[disregard]] what he'd [[heard]] about the [[offspring]] of [[humans]] and angels being [[larger]] than normal [[humans]]. Reinventing them as [[mythical]] giants that were 40 [[feet]] tall, is beyond [[ridiculous]]. There was some [[historical]] references to housing and furniture in parts of the world, that were [[much]] [[larger]] than [[would]] be [[needed]] for standard [[humans]]. These were [[supposedly]] [[built]] on a scale that would [[lend]] itself to a 10 to 14 [[foot]] human, somewhat [[supporting]] the "[[David]] and Goliath" [[tale]] from the [[bible]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or [[artifacts]] that would [[support]] the [[idea]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[If]] I was rating this [[movie]] on my own scale, it [[would]] have been a negative [[value]] [[instead]] of a one... Some [[doofus]] who read or saw some [[references]] to angels coming to [[Tierra]], decided to [[ignore]] what he'd [[overheard]] about the [[descent]] of [[beings]] and angels being [[broader]] than normal [[beings]]. Reinventing them as [[mythic]] giants that were 40 [[foot]] tall, is beyond [[foolish]]. There was some [[historic]] references to housing and furniture in parts of the world, that were [[very]] [[broader]] than [[should]] be [[require]] for standard [[beings]]. These were [[reportedly]] [[constructed]] on a scale that would [[render]] itself to a 10 to 14 [[feet]] human, somewhat [[succour]] the "[[Davide]] and Goliath" [[story]] from the [[biblical]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or [[artifact]] that would [[supports]] the [[concept]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[Though]] I was rating this [[filmmaking]] on my own scale, it [[could]] have been a negative [[values]] [[however]] of a one... --------------------------------------------- Result 258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I can't say I'm all that [[experienced]] in misty Mundae flicks having seen only a handful, but it's [[obvious]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[respectable]] that the filmmakers were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[obvious]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is definitely a [[good]] [[thing]] as there isn't [[nearly]] [[enough]] [[plot]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil [[Nazi]] scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn [[star]] playing a Nazi scientist ever [[could]]), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in [[toilet]] roll and Misty - this film's [[version]] of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much [[less]] time than Angelina [[Jolie]] did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its [[shortcomings]], this [[film]] [[could]] have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a [[start]], and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even [[hotter]] Darian Caine. The pair gets to [[engage]] in all the lesbian [[sex]] that you would [[expect]] from a Seduction [[Cinema]] film and this is at the [[expense]] of the nonexistent [[plot]], [[although]] that isn't [[really]] a [[bad]] [[thing]]. Obviously, this is a [[rubbish]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a [[bit]] of lesbian [[sex]], you could do worse. I can't say I'm all that [[endured]] in misty Mundae flicks having seen only a handful, but it's [[noticeable]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[reputable]] that the filmmakers were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[manifest]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is definitely a [[buena]] [[stuff]] as there isn't [[almost]] [[satisfactorily]] [[intrigue]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil [[Hitler]] scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn [[stars]] playing a Nazi scientist ever [[did]]), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in [[wc]] roll and Misty - this film's [[stepping]] of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much [[least]] time than Angelina [[Julie]] did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its [[drawbacks]], this [[filmmaking]] [[did]] have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a [[launching]], and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even [[hot]] Darian Caine. The pair gets to [[embark]] in all the lesbian [[sexuality]] that you would [[expecting]] from a Seduction [[Filmmaking]] film and this is at the [[spending]] of the nonexistent [[intrigue]], [[while]] that isn't [[genuinely]] a [[unfavourable]] [[stuff]]. Obviously, this is a [[trash]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a [[bite]] of lesbian [[sexuality]], you could do worse. --------------------------------------------- Result 259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All this talk about this being a bad movie is nonsense. As a matter of fact this is the best movie I've ever seen. It's an excellent story and the actors in the movie are some of the best. I would not give criticism to any of the actors. That movie is the best and it will always stay that way. --------------------------------------------- Result 260 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In what could have been an otherwise run of the mill, mediocre film about infidelity in the sixties (the subtle "free-love" period), the creators of this film pile on ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario and top it all off with a trite little cherry on top, happily ever after ending. At no time did I ever feel sympathy for Diane Lane or Anna Paquin in their troublesome middle-class care free life, nor did I feel for the emasculated Liev Shrieber. The story line plods along slowly to its predictable, pathetic conclusion and the only thing interesting and watchable about this film is the stunning Diane Lane topless. Here's a hint, it occurs about 30 minutes into the film. Fast forward to that part and skip the rest. --------------------------------------------- Result 261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] A [[lot]] of the [[comments]] people have made strike me as ([[sorry]]) [[missing]] the point. Kasdan [[wants]] to [[present]] life, simply, [[ordinary]] life. The conventionally structured [[story]], where [[characters]] have insights that [[change]] their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this [[much]] larger canvas. Several [[characters]] in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they [[move]] on. Sometimes they can [[hold]] [[onto]] their insights, [[sometimes]] they can't, and that's the way life [[really]] is. In other [[words]], Kasdan jettisons [[conventional]] [[dramatic]] [[structure]] in favor of an [[exploration]] of the the ongoingness of [[life]] – there is no [[happy]] ending, only an eventual [[ending]]; and everything before that is [[still]] in process, [[still]] [[always]] up for [[grabs]] – and, if you [[absolutely]] [[insist]] on a [[theme]], an [[exploration]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracle]]? Well, life itself, for a [[start]]. Then [[add]] in all the random incidents and cross-connections that make up a [[life]], or [[several]] interconnected lives, and you have miracles by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[theme]] [[lightly]], [[rather]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[various]] [[ways]], most memorably by the [[device]], right in the [[center]] of the [[film]], of having Mac and his [[wife]], lying in bed, each [[dreaming]] their own [[dreams]], but as well [[showing]], [[later]] on in the [[film]], how those dreams have the power, [[within]] the [[film]], to shape reality. This is not a [[film]] with an [[easy]] or [[obvious]] [[message]]. You just have to [[let]] it [[play]] out in [[front]] of you, and then [[let]] it [[sit]] in your mind for a few days, a [[month]], a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's [[best]] [[film]], his most [[mature]], his most [[humane]]. A [[major]] meditation on [[life]] from one of our most [[gifted]] [[writers]] and [[directors]]. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been [[allowed]] to [[work]] for a number of years now, [[mostly]] due to studio [[constraints]] [[around]] "Dreamcatcher." [[Hopefully]] we haven't [[heard]] the [[last]] from [[Larry]] Kasdan. A [[great]] [[film]] from a [[great]] [[artist]]. [[Keep]] in [[mind]] that art does not have to [[rationalize]] itself [[completely]] in order to [[succeed]]. A [[batch]] of the [[observations]] people have made strike me as ([[apologies]]) [[lacks]] the point. Kasdan [[wanting]] to [[presenting]] life, simply, [[banal]] life. The conventionally structured [[narratives]], where [[nature]] have insights that [[amendments]] their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this [[very]] larger canvas. Several [[character]] in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they [[budge]] on. Sometimes they can [[holds]] [[in]] their insights, [[sometime]] they can't, and that's the way life [[genuinely]] is. In other [[expression]], Kasdan jettisons [[classic]] [[noteworthy]] [[architecture]] in favor of an [[crawling]] of the the ongoingness of [[lifetime]] – there is no [[cheerful]] ending, only an eventual [[ended]]; and everything before that is [[nonetheless]] in process, [[however]] [[repeatedly]] up for [[grab]] – and, if you [[fully]] [[insists]] on a [[themes]], an [[crawling]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracles]]? Well, life itself, for a [[starts]]. Then [[adding]] in all the random incidents and cross-connections that make up a [[vida]], or [[many]] interconnected lives, and you have miracles by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[themes]] [[loosely]], [[fairly]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[dissimilar]] [[methods]], most memorably by the [[appliance]], right in the [[centres]] of the [[cinematography]], of having Mac and his [[women]], lying in bed, each [[dreamed]] their own [[daydream]], but as well [[proving]], [[then]] on in the [[cinema]], how those dreams have the power, [[inside]] the [[cinematography]], to shape reality. This is not a [[movie]] with an [[easier]] or [[glaring]] [[messages]]. You just have to [[leaving]] it [[gaming]] out in [[newsweek]] of you, and then [[leaving]] it [[sitting]] in your mind for a few days, a [[months]], a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's [[better]] [[cinema]], his most [[adulthood]], his most [[humanity]]. A [[principal]] meditation on [[living]] from one of our most [[prodigy]] [[authors]] and [[administrators]]. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been [[authorizing]] to [[working]] for a number of years now, [[basically]] due to studio [[hurdles]] [[about]] "Dreamcatcher." [[Luckily]] we haven't [[listened]] the [[final]] from [[Lar]] Kasdan. A [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] from a [[phenomenal]] [[painters]]. [[Conserve]] in [[esprit]] that art does not have to [[rationalized]] itself [[abundantly]] in order to [[succeeds]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] This was a [[horrible]] [[film]]! I [[gave]] it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the [[beautiful]] Porsche in the [[beginning]]... Other than that the [[story]] just [[plain]] sucked and [[cars]] racing through cities wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[probably]] what [[annoyed]] me the most, seldomly seen [[anything]] so [[constructed]]! This was a [[abysmal]] [[filmmaking]]! I [[handed]] it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the [[sumptuous]] Porsche in the [[initiate]]... Other than that the [[stories]] just [[ganges]] sucked and [[carriages]] racing through cities wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[undoubtedly]] what [[irritable]] me the most, seldomly seen [[algo]] so [[constructing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I've been watching a lot of [[cartoon]] or animated movies because I have a [[baby]] girl who likes to watch TV. I began to watch this [[movie]] to see if I would [[like]] my little one to watch it... and no. At the [[beginning]] I thought it was such a [[cute]] [[movie]] like the Bambi movie, but all the [[way]] it was like [[insinuating]] the ducky was a homosexual. The [[info]] said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at [[sports]], but that was not the [[case]]. It just seems like a [[movie]] [[made]] for [[kids]] to [[learn]] to be okay being [[gay]]. It was also very [[sad]], as far as the ducky's [[dad]] and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd [[like]] it, but I don't [[think]] I'm [[going]] to watch it again with my [[little]] one. I've been watching a lot of [[cartoons]] or animated movies because I have a [[babies]] girl who likes to watch TV. I began to watch this [[filmmaking]] to see if I would [[loves]] my little one to watch it... and no. At the [[launches]] I thought it was such a [[purty]] [[filmmaking]] like the Bambi movie, but all the [[ways]] it was like [[suggesting]] the ducky was a homosexual. The [[information]] said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at [[athletes]], but that was not the [[instances]]. It just seems like a [[filmmaking]] [[effected]] for [[kid]] to [[learning]] to be okay being [[gays]]. It was also very [[hapless]], as far as the ducky's [[papa]] and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd [[iike]] it, but I don't [[thinking]] I'm [[go]] to watch it again with my [[scant]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[If]] the very [[thought]] of Arthur Askey twists your [[guts]], don't [[worry]], you can [[still]] watch and [[love]] The [[Ghost]] Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room [[Boy]], it is a film that is simply too [[damn]] good to be [[sunk]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I love Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[rather]] than unreasonably [[expecting]] him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The Ghost Train is so [[intensely]] atmospheric that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it [[transports]] you to, it is immersive in a [[way]] that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers [[managed]] to be during the [[desperate]] early '40s and it's a [[film]] that I [[would]] [[imagine]] few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without [[exception]], [[extraordinarily]] good, [[perhaps]] [[Linden]] [[Travers]] [[lays]] it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a [[lonely]] railway station in wartime, she could hardly play a [[nutter]] and not stand out. The [[sad]] passing of the [[lovely]] [[Carole]] Lynne [[earlier]] this [[year]] [[broke]] the last [[link]] we had with this [[incredible]] [[film]] and now it really is in the [[past]], but [[waiting]] [[patiently]] for us to [[press]] play. [[Though]] the very [[idea]] of Arthur Askey twists your [[entrails]], don't [[disturb]], you can [[yet]] watch and [[likes]] The [[Spector]] Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room [[Laddie]], it is a film that is simply too [[goddamn]] good to be [[poured]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I love Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[fairly]] than unreasonably [[hoping]] him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The Ghost Train is so [[intently]] atmospheric that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it [[transporting]] you to, it is immersive in a [[pathways]] that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers [[administering]] to be during the [[hopeless]] early '40s and it's a [[movie]] that I [[could]] [[suppose]] few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without [[exemption]], [[terribly]] good, [[potentially]] [[Lyndon]] [[Through]] [[laying]] it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a [[single]] railway station in wartime, she could hardly play a [[wacko]] and not stand out. The [[deplorable]] passing of the [[charming]] [[Carol]] Lynne [[formerly]] this [[annum]] [[cracked]] the last [[lier]] we had with this [[unthinkable]] [[kino]] and now it really is in the [[former]], but [[waits]] [[painstakingly]] for us to [[pressing]] play. --------------------------------------------- Result 265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] 1st [[watched]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene [[Levy]]): [[Corny]] [[comedy]] murder mystery with very few [[laughs]]. The [[movie]] appears to be [[based]] on an [[earlier]] [[Italian]] [[movie]] [[according]] to the [[credits]] but was re-written by two fairly [[popular]] American romantic [[comedy]] [[writers]]. But this one by [[Charles]] Shyer & [[Nancy]] Meyers does not cut it [[compared]] to their other efforts. The [[story]] is about a [[couple]] of down-and-out traveling [[Americans]], [[played]] by [[Richard]] [[Lewis]] and [[Sean]] [[Young]], who stumble [[upon]] a lost [[dog]] and hope to make a fortune in [[reward]] [[money]] after [[seeing]] an ad in the paper for the dachsund's return. Upon [[trying]] to return it, they [[see]] a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's [[residence]] that they believe is attached to the rest of the [[dead]] [[body]] of the [[woman]] who is [[supposed]] to give them the money. They freak out and [[instead]] of contacting the [[police]] and [[telling]] them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[expecting]] to be framed for the [[murder]]. The other [[characters]] in the [[film]] are [[met]] on a [[train]] [[prior]] to this and hang [[around]] a Monte [[Carlo]] [[gambling]] resort doing [[various]] things to be [[pulled]] into the [[story]]. The other cast members [[include]] [[character]] [[actors]] [[John]] [[Candy]], James Belushi, Cybill [[Shepherd]], [[George]] Hamilton and others. After the police [[find]] out about the [[death]], they [[start]] [[questioning]] the main [[characters]] and, of course, they have to [[work]] thru their goofy [[lies]] to [[figure]] out what [[really]] [[happened]]. [[None]] of the [[character]] [[actors]] [[mentioned]] [[earlier]] can [[bring]] this [[movie]] out of it's mediocre state [[despite]] some [[funny]] moments mostly [[provided]] by the Belushi/Shepherd [[couple]]. This isn't a horrible [[movie]], it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average [[movies]] out there and this is just another one for the [[pile]]. Try it, [[maybe]] you'll like it, [[probably]] you won't. 1st [[seen]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene [[Levi]]): [[Dorky]] [[humor]] murder mystery with very few [[giggling]]. The [[filmmaking]] appears to be [[base]] on an [[ago]] [[Ltalian]] [[cinema]] [[depending]] to the [[credence]] but was re-written by two fairly [[fashionable]] American romantic [[humor]] [[authors]]. But this one by [[Charl]] Shyer & [[Juventus]] Meyers does not cut it [[comparing]] to their other efforts. The [[storytelling]] is about a [[match]] of down-and-out traveling [[America]], [[served]] by [[Richie]] [[Louis]] and [[Shawn]] [[Youths]], who stumble [[after]] a lost [[puppy]] and hope to make a fortune in [[rewards]] [[cash]] after [[see]] an ad in the paper for the dachsund's return. Upon [[tempting]] to return it, they [[behold]] a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's [[residential]] that they believe is attached to the rest of the [[died]] [[organ]] of the [[women]] who is [[suspected]] to give them the money. They freak out and [[however]] of contacting the [[policemen]] and [[saying]] them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[waiting]] to be framed for the [[murders]]. The other [[traits]] in the [[filmmaking]] are [[fulfilled]] on a [[forming]] [[ago]] to this and hang [[about]] a Monte [[Carla]] [[gaming]] resort doing [[many]] things to be [[pull]] into the [[stories]]. The other cast members [[incorporate]] [[traits]] [[players]] [[Jon]] [[Chocolate]], James Belushi, Cybill [[Pasteur]], [[Jorge]] Hamilton and others. After the police [[unearth]] out about the [[fatalities]], they [[startup]] [[questioned]] the main [[character]] and, of course, they have to [[works]] thru their goofy [[lying]] to [[silhouette]] out what [[truly]] [[arrived]]. [[Nil]] of the [[characters]] [[protagonists]] [[cited]] [[formerly]] can [[bringing]] this [[film]] out of it's mediocre state [[while]] some [[hilarious]] moments mostly [[gave]] by the Belushi/Shepherd [[pair]]. This isn't a horrible [[filmmaking]], it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average [[film]] out there and this is just another one for the [[piles]]. Try it, [[potentially]] you'll like it, [[possibly]] you won't. --------------------------------------------- Result 266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember watching this in the 1970s - then I have just recently borrowed a couple of episodes from our public library.

With a nearly 30 year hiatus, I have come to another conclusion. Most of the principals interviewed in this series - some at the center of power like Traudl Junge (Hitler's Secretary),Karl Doenitz (head of Germany's navy) Anthony Eden (UK) - are long gone but their first hand accounts will live on.From Generals and Admirals to Sergeants, Russian civilians, concentration camp survivors, all are on record here.

I can remember the Lord Mountbatten interview (killed in the 1970s)

This is truly a gem and I believe the producer of this series was knighted by Queen Elizabeth for this work - well deserved.

Seeing these few episodes from the library makes me want to buy the set.

This is the only "10" I have given any review but I have discovered like a fine bottle of wine, it is more appreciated with a little time... --------------------------------------------- Result 267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] WWE has produced some of the [[worst]] pay-per-views in its [[history]] over the [[past]] few [[months]]. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and [[December]] to Dismember were [[appalling]] to [[say]] the [[least]] and so it was relying on its B [[brand]] [[show]], Smackdown! to attempt to [[end]] the year on a [[high]] [[note]]. [[Armageddon]] had two [[major]] gimmick matches in the Last Ride and [[Inferno]] matches, three [[Championships]] were on the line and an interesting main [[event]] in the [[shape]] of a tag team [[war]] [[featuring]] [[Batista]] and [[John]] Cena against King [[Booker]] and Finlay. However, it was an [[amendment]] to one of those [[Championship]] [[matches]] that [[brought]] us not only the [[match]] of the [[night]] but [[also]] now a [[match]] of the year [[candidate]] when Teddy [[Long]] gave us [[fans]] an [[early]] [[Christmas]] present. T-Lo [[changed]] the WWE Tag Team [[Championship]] [[match]] from [[Champions]], London and Kendrick against to [[Regal]] and Taylor to a four team [[Ladder]] [[match]] [[including]] MNM and The [[Hardy]] Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this [[match]] too much as [[nothing]] I can [[say]] would be [[able]] to do it justice. This has to be [[seen]] to be believed. There were [[many]] [[high]] [[spots]] and [[many]] more [[brutal]] bumps and [[awkward]] landings. The one move I have to [[talk]] about [[however]] was the one that [[took]] Joey Mercury straight to the [[emergency]] [[room]] [[midway]] through the [[contest]]. [[Jeff]] [[Hardy]] [[jumped]] [[onto]] a [[ladder]] that was set up in the see [[saw]] [[position]] with Matt [[Hardy]] holding both [[members]] of MNM over the [[opposite]] end of it to [[take]] the full force. [[Unfortunately]] for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to [[protect]] his [[face]] and [[took]] the [[ladder]] full force in the nose and [[left]] [[eye]]. This was [[vicious]]. His [[face]] was instantly a mess for all to [[see]] and not [[surprisingly]] this [[ended]] Mercury's night [[early]]. We [[found]] out [[later]] he [[suffered]] a [[broken]] nose and cuts under his left [[eye]]. [[Be]] warned. This is not for the faint of [[heart]]. The [[ending]] to this roller-coaster of a [[match]] [[came]] after [[Paul]] London [[managed]] to grab both [[Championship]] [[belts]] for the [[victory]]. I have been watching wrestling for [[almost]] 15 years and it doesn't [[get]] any [[better]] than this match. [[Unbelievable]].

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. WWE has produced some of the [[worse]] pay-per-views in its [[historian]] over the [[former]] few [[month]]. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and [[Feb]] to Dismember were [[horrifying]] to [[told]] the [[lowest]] and so it was relying on its B [[trademark]] [[exhibition]], Smackdown! to attempt to [[terminate]] the year on a [[alto]] [[remark]]. [[Apocalypse]] had two [[significant]] gimmick matches in the Last Ride and [[Hell]] matches, three [[Championship]] were on the line and an interesting main [[incident]] in the [[form]] of a tag team [[wars]] [[featured]] [[Battista]] and [[Giovanni]] Cena against King [[Poker]] and Finlay. However, it was an [[modify]] to one of those [[Championships]] [[couples]] that [[lodged]] us not only the [[couple]] of the [[overnight]] but [[similarly]] now a [[matching]] of the year [[contestant]] when Teddy [[Lang]] gave us [[followers]] an [[swift]] [[Claus]] present. T-Lo [[modifying]] the WWE Tag Team [[Starring]] [[couple]] from [[Champion]], London and Kendrick against to [[Majestic]] and Taylor to a four team [[Stairway]] [[couple]] [[comprising]] MNM and The [[Robust]] Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this [[couple]] too much as [[anything]] I can [[tell]] would be [[capable]] to do it justice. This has to be [[watched]] to be believed. There were [[myriad]] [[alto]] [[commercials]] and [[numerous]] more [[brute]] bumps and [[clumsy]] landings. The one move I have to [[conversation]] about [[instead]] was the one that [[picked]] Joey Mercury straight to the [[urgency]] [[chamber]] [[halfway]] through the [[competitions]]. [[Geoffrey]] [[Robust]] [[soared]] [[in]] a [[staircase]] that was set up in the see [[watched]] [[posture]] with Matt [[Resilient]] holding both [[member]] of MNM over the [[inverse]] end of it to [[taking]] the full force. [[Sadly]] for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to [[protections]] his [[confront]] and [[taken]] the [[staircase]] full force in the nose and [[exited]] [[eyes]]. This was [[cruel]]. His [[facing]] was instantly a mess for all to [[seeing]] and not [[terribly]] this [[finished]] Mercury's night [[prematurely]]. We [[find]] out [[afterward]] he [[undergone]] a [[raped]] nose and cuts under his left [[eyes]]. [[Are]] warned. This is not for the faint of [[heartland]]. The [[terminated]] to this roller-coaster of a [[ballgame]] [[arrived]] after [[Paolo]] London [[administering]] to grab both [[Championships]] [[straps]] for the [[triumph]]. I have been watching wrestling for [[hardly]] 15 years and it doesn't [[obtain]] any [[improved]] than this match. [[Inconceivable]].

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. --------------------------------------------- Result 268 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After going for a bike ride that day, lying beside a lake in a nature reserve, spending half an hour feeding and talking to a donkey who lived in a beautiful field with a small wood in it, this film made absolute sense to me.

The imagery of the film was beautiful and that is all you need. Switch off the conscious control knob of the mind and job done.

Reminded me of Baraka (1992) but with the added lesson of my previous paragraph.

This comment requires a minimum of ten lines, ten lines is the minimum not 9 lines but ten. After finishing counting all the lines you realise that there are less than ten even though less than ten lines is all that is needed to make my comment. --------------------------------------------- Result 269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I admit that I am a vampire addict: I have seen so many vampire movies I have lost count and this one is definitely in the top ten. I was very impressed by the original John Carpenter's Vampires and when I descovered there was a sequel I went straight out and bought it. This movie does not obey quite the same rules as the first, and it is not quite so dark, but it is close enough and I felt that it built nicely on the original.

Jon Bon Jovi was very good as Derek Bliss: his performance was likeable and yet hard enough for the viewer to believe that he might actually be able to survive in the world in which he lives. One of my favourite parts was just after he meets Zoey and wanders into the bathroom of the diner to check to see if she is more than she seems. His comments are beautifully irreverant and yet emminently practical which contrast well with the rest of the scene as it unfolds.

The other cast members were also well chosen and they knitted nicely to produce an entertaining and original film. It is not simply a rehash of the first movie and it has grown in a similar way to the way Fright Night II grew out of Fright Night. There are different elements which make it a fresh movie with a similar theme.

If you like vampire movies I would recommend this one. If you prefer your films less bloody then choose something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 270 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[rare]] films that is completely under the radar, but is [[totally]] [[worthwhile]]. It really [[reminds]] me of the [[old]] serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to [[see]] follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical audience. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely [[superfluous]] sacrifice scene there two too many for a [[family]] audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a [[Harry]] Potter-style magicfest that [[kids]] would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very [[believable]]. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[seldom]] films that is completely under the radar, but is [[perfectly]] [[valid]]. It really [[reminded]] me of the [[elderly]] serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to [[behold]] follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical audience. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely [[worthless]] sacrifice scene there two too many for a [[familia]] audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a [[Hari]] Potter-style magicfest that [[brats]] would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very [[reliable]]. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. --------------------------------------------- Result 271 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Bug's Life is a very good animated feature. This movie is for younger children, but it is also a great movie for people my age. The story is about an ant named Flik. He brought havoc onto his colony when he destroyed the food that were for the superior grasshoppers. He gets banished and he must find bigger bugs to fix the mess. This movie is a classic because it is a good movie and it is a Pixar movie. The animation is brilliant especially for the late 90's. The story is good, but a little more detail would be suffice. The voice acting is good as with most animation movies. The music is nice to listen to. Nothing special, but it earned an nomination for one of the music categories. Overall, this movie struck me as awestruck. This is a good movie for all families. I rate this movie 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think this could've been a decent movie, and some of its parts are OK... but in whole it's a B movie. Same about the plot, parts are OK but it has several holes and oddities that doesn't quite add up. Acting is mostly OK, I've seen worse of this too. :)

The beginning sets the level, with cars driving in the desert, making "cool" but totally unnecessary jumps through some small dunes (In slow motion! Cool!), like the drivers had never seen sand before... It gets slightly better from there, but not much.

If you're gonna rent this, get another one too and use this one as a warm-up. Keep expectations low and it might work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] i can't believe that NONE of the [[official]] reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as [[though]] our culture [[accepts]] this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My [[biggest]] [[problem]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these [[assaults]] - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and [[pressured]] never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the [[movie]] is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both [[skilled]] fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more [[defined]] by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality [[must]] involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her [[attackers]]. She never even makes them apologize - [[rather]], SHE [[seems]] [[apologetic]]. Overall, a [[depressing]] and [[upsetting]] movie, with some great cinematography and some cool [[fight]] scenes, but not as good as [[Hero]] by a [[long]] shot. i can't believe that NONE of the [[functionary]] reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as [[albeit]] our culture [[concedes]] this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My [[strongest]] [[issues]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these [[aggressions]] - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and [[pressed]] never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the [[filmmaking]] is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both [[proficient]] fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more [[defining]] by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality [[needs]] involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her [[assailants]]. She never even makes them apologize - [[somewhat]], SHE [[looks]] [[repentant]]. Overall, a [[demoralizing]] and [[unnerving]] movie, with some great cinematography and some cool [[fights]] scenes, but not as good as [[Superhero]] by a [[longer]] shot. --------------------------------------------- Result 274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this movie quite a lot. I have always been a fan of Whoopi Goldberg and this movie only emphasizes it. She portrays a housewife in an African-American family which is moving up the social chain due to the husband's (Danny Glover) success as an attorney. She moves to an all white neighborhood where the people are friendly, yet a little awkward toward her. The various events that arise during the course of the movie make for SOME laughs but mostly appeal to the other emotions. This movie is not so much a comedy as a drama. I give it a strong 8/10. I highly recommend you catch it on TV or rent it soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Peter [[Sellers]] plays Dick Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cook]] for a pirate [[ship]] who takes over as [[captain]] after he [[murders]] the previous one. [[Although]] he's [[witnessed]] a treasure being [[buried]], he [[begins]] [[losing]] his [[memory]] and the [[treasure]] map he [[obtains]] becomes blank. [[Thus]], Dick is forced to find [[someone]] who can [[see]] and [[communicate]] with [[ghosts]] (do you place an [[ad]] for that?) and [[help]] lead a [[path]] to the [[treasure]]. It's mind boggling how [[anyone]] [[could]] have bankrolled this [[pointless]] [[film]]. Former [[Goon]] [[Spike]] Milligan replaced Medak as [[director]], and [[given]] Medak's [[talents]] in the film The Ruling [[Class]], you can [[probably]] [[guess]] which of the [[grainy]], poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's [[chair]]. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was [[bombing]] even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible [[unease]]:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll [[pay]] for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for [[free]].

And that's one of the [[GOOD]] jokes. It's [[amazing]] to me that much of [[Sellers]] prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was [[made]] available on VHS more than 15 years [[ago]]! How about [[someone]] stepping up to the plate and [[releasing]] in the [[US]] the well-received British [[TV]] [[program]] "A Show Called Fred" [[starring]] Sellers, Milligan, and [[directed]] by the [[great]] Richard Lester? Peter [[Retailers]] plays Dick Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cooke]] for a pirate [[battleship]] who takes over as [[skipper]] after he [[kill]] the previous one. [[While]] he's [[saw]] a treasure being [[interred]], he [[starts]] [[loses]] his [[memories]] and the [[darling]] map he [[attains]] becomes blank. [[So]], Dick is forced to find [[whoever]] who can [[behold]] and [[liaise]] with [[ghostbusters]] (do you place an [[advert]] for that?) and [[helps]] lead a [[road]] to the [[treasury]]. It's mind boggling how [[nobody]] [[did]] have bankrolled this [[fruitless]] [[flick]]. Former [[Enforcer]] [[Fortification]] Milligan replaced Medak as [[headmaster]], and [[gave]] Medak's [[talent]] in the film The Ruling [[Classes]], you can [[arguably]] [[suppose]] which of the [[foggy]], poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's [[presidents]]. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was [[bombed]] even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible [[anxiety]]:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll [[salary]] for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for [[libre]].

And that's one of the [[ALRIGHT]] jokes. It's [[awesome]] to me that much of [[Salesman]] prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was [[brought]] available on VHS more than 15 years [[earlier]]! How about [[everyone]] stepping up to the plate and [[liberation]] in the [[AMERICANS]] the well-received British [[TELEVISION]] [[programme]] "A Show Called Fred" [[championships]] Sellers, Milligan, and [[aimed]] by the [[whopping]] Richard Lester? --------------------------------------------- Result 276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It is [[obviously]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on stuff like this. How did they get away with [[making]] such a movie? This [[movie]] is all summed up in one word, [[SICK]]. Where do people get off [[making]], and [[watching]] these kinds of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't actually think they would allow this kid that is say maybe 12 if that actually sleep with this [[woman]]. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have [[rater]] not seen this. Where has the sanity of these people gone? Maybe the makers of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all types of sexual predators that pray upon children, [[yet]] film makers make these types of movies that do nothing but [[provoke]] this [[type]] of behavior. I noticed that on a previous comment someone asked if there was a version where it showed them naked. This is a kid here, and someone is [[asking]] something like this? What is wrong with this picture? It is [[definitely]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on stuff like this. How did they get away with [[doing]] such a movie? This [[filmmaking]] is all summed up in one word, [[INDISPOSED]]. Where do people get off [[doing]], and [[staring]] these kinds of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't actually think they would allow this kid that is say maybe 12 if that actually sleep with this [[mujer]]. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have [[assessor]] not seen this. Where has the sanity of these people gone? Maybe the makers of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all types of sexual predators that pray upon children, [[even]] film makers make these types of movies that do nothing but [[induce]] this [[genre]] of behavior. I noticed that on a previous comment someone asked if there was a version where it showed them naked. This is a kid here, and someone is [[wondering]] something like this? What is wrong with this picture? --------------------------------------------- Result 277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching about half of this I was ready to give up and turn it off, but I endured to the end. This is a movie that tries to be a romantic comedy and fails. The acting is poor---much worse than the acting in 80s T&A movies.

There are several attempts at humour that fail miserably and the movie is 100% predictable. Perhaps if you are a teenager this movie will hold some appeal, but for those that have seen many movies, you will know how the film turns out after the first 10 minutes. The rest of your time will be spent in agony waiting for the ending credits to roll.

Don't waste your time watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Must confess to having seen a few howlers in my time, but this one is up there with the worst of them. Plot troubling to follow. Sex and violence thrown in to disorient and distract from the really poorly put together film.

I can only imagine that the cast will look back on the end product and wish it to gather dust on a shelf not to be disturbed for a generation or two. Sadly, in my case, I have the DVD. It will sit on the shelf and look at me from time to time. --------------------------------------------- Result 279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] "[[After]] the atomic [[bombs]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[explode]] in the Arctic, the creature 'Gammera' is [[released]] from his [[hibernation]]. The [[giant]] prehistoric turtle [[proceeds]] on a [[path]] to [[Tokyo]] and destroys [[anything]] in his [[path]]. The military and the scientific community rush to [[find]] a means to [[stop]] this [[monster]] before Tokyo is laid to waste," [[according]] to the [[DVD]] sleeve's [[synopsis]].

The re-produced for American audiences version of this, the first [[film]] in the "Gamera" series, [[adds]] English language [[material]] that is even funnier than the regularly [[dubbed]] Japanese fare. [[Clearly]], the monster is following in the [[footsteps]] of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV [[series]], [[musician]] Wes Farrell's [[ludicrous]] [[theme]] song heightens the US version's [[camp]] appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) [[Sandy]] Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ [[Dick]] O'Neill, [[Brian]] Donlevy, Albert Dekker, [[John]] Baragrey "[[Afterwards]] the atomic [[blasts]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[blasting]] in the Arctic, the creature 'Gammera' is [[freed]] from his [[hibernate]]. The [[gigantic]] prehistoric turtle [[incomes]] on a [[pathways]] to [[Tokio]] and destroys [[nothing]] in his [[pathways]]. The military and the scientific community rush to [[found]] a means to [[cease]] this [[creature]] before Tokyo is laid to waste," [[depending]] to the [[DVDS]] sleeve's [[outline]].

The re-produced for American audiences version of this, the first [[filmmaking]] in the "Gamera" series, [[summing]] English language [[materials]] that is even funnier than the regularly [[nicknamed]] Japanese fare. [[Clara]], the monster is following in the [[traces]] of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV [[serial]], [[musicians]] Wes Farrell's [[stupid]] [[topics]] song heightens the US version's [[campground]] appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) [[Sandi]] Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ [[Pecker]] O'Neill, [[Bryan]] Donlevy, Albert Dekker, [[Giovanni]] Baragrey --------------------------------------------- Result 280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Father]] and son communicate very [[little]]. IN [[fact]] they [[speak]] [[different]] languages. BUt when the son drives his father 3000 [[miles]] for his pilgrimage's to Mecca, the conversations finally take place. they are difficult and growth is necessary on both parts.

This movie takes us into the hearts of these two [[travelers]], and it is [[indeed]] a [[grand]] [[voyage]] for the audience as well as the two principals. The [[imagery]] throughout is [[impressive]], especially the [[final]] scenes in Mecca. It underlines for me once again how much [[different]] the world can be, but [[also]] at the same time, how similar. The same was true for the father and son in this film.

See this movie. Tell your friends to see it. You'll be glad you did. [[Fathers]] and son communicate very [[tiny]]. IN [[facto]] they [[talking]] [[disparate]] languages. BUt when the son drives his father 3000 [[mile]] for his pilgrimage's to Mecca, the conversations finally take place. they are difficult and growth is necessary on both parts.

This movie takes us into the hearts of these two [[traveler]], and it is [[actually]] a [[huge]] [[touring]] for the audience as well as the two principals. The [[pictures]] throughout is [[wondrous]], especially the [[ultimate]] scenes in Mecca. It underlines for me once again how much [[several]] the world can be, but [[similarly]] at the same time, how similar. The same was true for the father and son in this film.

See this movie. Tell your friends to see it. You'll be glad you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I felt asleep, watching it!!! (and I had tickets for the midnight- premiere) Any questions? The most disturbing scene, as far as I can remember, was the techno-dance-i-dont-know-what-that-was-scene. By the way what an ending!? --------------------------------------------- Result 282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I know I've already added a comment but I just wanted to clarify something...

I'm not some old fogey from the Baby Boom generation that [[grew]] up glued to a [[flickering]] b/w picture of Phil Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 years [[old]] before I was [[born]] but I had the pleasure of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko courtesy of BBC2. I wonder if I [[would]] have [[enjoyed]] Steve Martin's travesty if I hadn't seen or heard of Phil Silvers - I don't know - maybe I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who think this [[movie]] is worthy of a '10' [[admit]] that they haven't seen the [[original]]. I can only [[urge]] you to [[spend]] 21 minutes of your life watching a single episode. If after watching the original Ernie, Colonel Hall, Ritzig & Emma, Duane [[Doberman]], Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, Mullin et al you still think that [[Steve]] Martin's film is woth anything above a '2' - I'll stand you a pint.... I know I've already added a comment but I just wanted to clarify something...

I'm not some old fogey from the Baby Boom generation that [[grow]] up glued to a [[wink]] b/w picture of Phil Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 years [[archaic]] before I was [[ould]] but I had the pleasure of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko courtesy of BBC2. I wonder if I [[could]] have [[adored]] Steve Martin's travesty if I hadn't seen or heard of Phil Silvers - I don't know - maybe I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who think this [[filmmaking]] is worthy of a '10' [[acknowledge]] that they haven't seen the [[preliminary]]. I can only [[invite]] you to [[outlay]] 21 minutes of your life watching a single episode. If after watching the original Ernie, Colonel Hall, Ritzig & Emma, Duane [[Pinscher]], Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, Mullin et al you still think that [[Stephens]] Martin's film is woth anything above a '2' - I'll stand you a pint.... --------------------------------------------- Result 283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Very]] different topic [[treated]] in this [[film]]. A straightforward and simple description of local [[Chinese]] customs, by [[looking]] at the daily [[operation]] of a public bath, run by the [[old]] [[owner]] and his [[retarded]] son, when older son [[returns]] home, [[wrongly]] [[believing]] his [[father]] has [[died]]. [[How]] [[every]] [[man]] in [[town]] makes his daily [[visit]] to [[chat]], [[play]] games, discuss personal [[matters]] and get honest [[advice]], besides the usual spa-like [[therapies]]. When [[old]] [[man]] [[dies]], [[strong]] and loyal [[family]] [[ties]] make [[older]] [[son]] take [[charge]], so [[public]] [[bath]] [[operation]] is not disrupted. And finally, the [[arrival]] of [[modernization]] to [[end]] this way of [[spending]] relaxed hours and getting along. The public [[bath]] has to be [[demolished]], making place for a commercial [[complex]] to be constructed. [[Quite]] different topic [[processed]] in this [[movies]]. A straightforward and simple description of local [[Chinaman]] customs, by [[researching]] at the daily [[operating]] of a public bath, run by the [[longtime]] [[proprietor]] and his [[moronic]] son, when older son [[returned]] home, [[falsely]] [[think]] his [[fathers]] has [[deaths]]. [[Mode]] [[any]] [[guy]] in [[ciudad]] makes his daily [[visits]] to [[schmooze]], [[playing]] games, discuss personal [[questions]] and get honest [[counsel]], besides the usual spa-like [[curative]]. When [[archaic]] [[guy]] [[dying]], [[forceful]] and loyal [[families]] [[relationship]] make [[elderly]] [[sons]] take [[charges]], so [[populace]] [[wallow]] [[operating]] is not disrupted. And finally, the [[incoming]] of [[update]] to [[termination]] this way of [[expense]] relaxed hours and getting along. The public [[bain]] has to be [[clobbered]], making place for a commercial [[tricky]] to be constructed. --------------------------------------------- Result 284 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Massacre]] is a [[film]] directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial [[Ground]]) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. [[Now]] with this [[mix]] of [[great]] [[talent]] you [[would]] [[think]] this movie [[would]] have been a [[true]] gore fest. This could not be further from that. [[Massacre]] [[falls]] right on its [[face]] as being one of the most [[boring]] slasher films I have [[seen]] come out of Italian [[cinema]]. I was actually [[struggling]] to [[stay]] [[awake]] during the film and I have never had that problem with [[Italian]] horror [[films]].

[[Massacre]] [[starts]] out with a [[hooker]] being slaughtered on the side of the [[road]] with an ax. This scene was [[used]] in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the [[movie]] as being an [[ax]] wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the [[next]] hour of the [[movie]] is SO [[boring]]. The [[movie]] goes on to a set of a [[horror]] [[film]] being [[filmed]] and there is a lot of [[character]] [[development]] during all these scenes but the [[characters]] in the [[movie]] are so dull and [[badly]] [[acted]] your interest [[starts]] to [[leak]] away. The last 30 minutes of the [[movie]] aren't so [[bad]] but [[still]] [[could]] have been [[much]] better. The [[gore]] in the [[movie]] was [[pathetic]] and [[since]] Fulci [[used]] most of the gore scenes in Nightmare [[Concert]] there was [[nothing]] new here. The end of the movie did [[leave]] a [[nice]] [[twist]] but there was [[still]] to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have [[since]] it is very rare. 4/10 stars [[Carnage]] is a [[filmmaking]] directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial [[Terra]]) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. [[Presently]] with this [[mixing]] of [[marvellous]] [[talents]] you [[could]] [[believing]] this movie [[could]] have been a [[veritable]] gore fest. This could not be further from that. [[Bloodbath]] [[tumble]] right on its [[encounter]] as being one of the most [[dull]] slasher films I have [[saw]] come out of Italian [[filmmaking]]. I was actually [[fight]] to [[sojourn]] [[woke]] during the film and I have never had that problem with [[Ltalian]] horror [[movies]].

[[Carnage]] [[launched]] out with a [[prostitute]] being slaughtered on the side of the [[chemin]] with an ax. This scene was [[using]] in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the [[flick]] as being an [[axe]] wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the [[future]] hour of the [[flick]] is SO [[dull]]. The [[filmmaking]] goes on to a set of a [[terror]] [[movie]] being [[shot]] and there is a lot of [[characters]] [[evolution]] during all these scenes but the [[trait]] in the [[filmmaking]] are so dull and [[sorely]] [[served]] your interest [[started]] to [[leaks]] away. The last 30 minutes of the [[filmmaking]] aren't so [[wicked]] but [[however]] [[did]] have been [[very]] better. The [[gora]] in the [[filmmaking]] was [[unhappy]] and [[because]] Fulci [[using]] most of the gore scenes in Nightmare [[Concerto]] there was [[none]] new here. The end of the movie did [[let]] a [[delightful]] [[twisting]] but there was [[again]] to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have [[because]] it is very rare. 4/10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is a [[great]] [[film]].

I [[agreed]] to watch a chick [[flick]] and some how [[ended]] up with this. I had never [[heard]] of it or [[anyone]] in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is [[great]]! [[Eva]], [[Lake]] and [[Paul]] give amazing performances. The [[humour]] is [[consistently]] dry and witty.

[[Paul]] Rudd pretty much plays the mike [[character]] from Friends (which [[works]] great). The other [[characters]] are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[characters]] are [[likable]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all [[work]] well.

[[In]] all a [[great]] feel-good film that really [[deserves]] a lot more credit than it [[gets]].

[[Everyone]] has their own tastes but I really don't [[understand]] the one star [[reviews]] for this. This is a [[wondrous]] [[flick]].

I [[consented]] to watch a chick [[film]] and some how [[finished]] up with this. I had never [[hear]] of it or [[person]] in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is [[large]]! [[Ewa]], [[Lakes]] and [[Paulus]] give amazing performances. The [[comedy]] is [[constantly]] dry and witty.

[[Paulo]] Rudd pretty much plays the mike [[personage]] from Friends (which [[work]] great). The other [[features]] are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[features]] are [[likeable]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all [[cooperates]] well.

[[During]] all a [[wondrous]] feel-good film that really [[deserved]] a lot more credit than it [[got]].

[[Someone]] has their own tastes but I really don't [[understands]] the one star [[inspecting]] for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too [[long]]; some of

the content [[could]] have been [[saved]] for the sequel, Barry McKenzie [[Holds]] His Own, which [[desperately]] [[needed]] some new stuff anyway. Granted, his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes [[annoying]] as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's [[songs]] are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too [[lange]]; some of

the content [[did]] have been [[rescued]] for the sequel, Barry McKenzie [[Hold]] His Own, which [[sorely]] [[requisite]] some new stuff anyway. Granted, his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes [[exasperating]] as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's [[melodies]] are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] this is the [[result]]. A [[piece]] of trash movie that doesn't [[deserve]] to [[even]] be classified as a [[movie]], it's just a bunch of [[stuff]] on a film reel, that makes no [[sense]] whatsoever. Well back to the actors, which from the [[get]] [[go]] [[seem]] to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would [[get]] a little [[amount]] of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[great]] [[horror]] film. Well it's a great horror anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the [[worse]] is the [[main]] guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a [[weakling]] to even sorta [[root]] for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST [[version]]. this is the [[findings]]. A [[slice]] of trash movie that doesn't [[deserved]] to [[yet]] be classified as a [[movies]], it's just a bunch of [[thing]] on a film reel, that makes no [[feeling]] whatsoever. Well back to the actors, which from the [[got]] [[going]] [[seems]] to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would [[got]] a little [[somme]] of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[grand]] [[abomination]] film. Well it's a great horror anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the [[pire]] is the [[primary]] guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a [[sissy]] to even sorta [[origins]] for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST [[stepping]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 288 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have only managed to see this classic for the first time a few weeks ago. Being made almost 30 years ago I thought the scary moments would be rather tame. Boy was I wrong. There are some great moments that sent shivers down my spine. Even the acting was great, Jamie Lee Curtis was fantastic and Donald Pleasance was superb.

On the downside it can be rather slow to start but once it gets going there is no stopping it. It makes all the copycats, e.g. Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream look very tame. I can't really say it is Carpenter's best because I have not seen many of his, the only one I can remember of his is Starman (I think he made it). Halloween is the crowning achievement of the horror genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This is a poor [[film]] by any standard. The story in [[Match]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[direction]] and [[writing]] a certain [[fascination]] (Woody Allen [[mixing]] his own [[culture]] with that of the [[classic]] [[English]] [[murder]] and [[exploring]] what can be [[done]] with it).

Scoop, however has [[none]] of this. It is poorly [[written]], the two leads are hopelessly [[wooden]] and the story itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs [[requires]] at least some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French [[horns]] in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. This is a poor [[filmmaking]] by any standard. The story in [[Couple]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[orientation]] and [[handwriting]] a certain [[passion]] (Woody Allen [[blending]] his own [[cropping]] with that of the [[typical]] [[Anglais]] [[manslaughter]] and [[explores]] what can be [[completed]] with it).

Scoop, however has [[nos]] of this. It is poorly [[handwritten]], the two leads are hopelessly [[lumber]] and the story itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs [[requiring]] at least some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French [[antlers]] in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] What a [[load]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies mutiny as brave and noble if it be for [[pacifist]] principles. The fairytale [[ends]] with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting [[promoted]] for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still [[payback]] for McCarthyism?

If I sound [[cynical]] it's because I am [[fed]] up with [[movies]] hawking a political agenda. The military [[brass]] in this [[movie]] are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war [[mongers]]. Sound familiar? Ever see a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson [[Tide]] stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, [[renounces]] his blood lust, [[suggests]] a promotion for the treasonous Ron [[Hunter]], and repents by retiring from the service. A [[guy]] [[mutinies]], takes command of your [[boat]], puts the U.S at grave [[risk]] of receiving a [[nuclear]] first-strike, and you [[promote]] him???? What [[hogwash]]! What a [[uploading]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies mutiny as brave and noble if it be for [[tranquil]] principles. The fairytale [[end]] with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting [[encouraged]] for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still [[vengeance]] for McCarthyism?

If I sound [[cynic]] it's because I am [[fueled]] up with [[kino]] hawking a political agenda. The military [[bronze]] in this [[filmmaking]] are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war [[monger]]. Sound familiar? Ever see a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson [[Tidal]] stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, [[renounce]] his blood lust, [[propose]] a promotion for the treasonous Ron [[Bellboy]], and repents by retiring from the service. A [[bloke]] [[uprisings]], takes command of your [[sailboat]], puts the U.S at grave [[peril]] of receiving a [[nuke]] first-strike, and you [[encouragement]] him???? What [[claptrap]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is a pure failure. I am a Steve Martin fan, but even he can't save the tired idea and swiss cheese script. Think "Police Academy 7" and apply it to a military parody. Yuck.

I DO NOT feel the other user comments reflected the poor rating this film received (and rightfully deserved!). It is extremely misleading. I have often seen this film marked down to $3.00 in the grocery store and now I certainly know why.

If only I could get my 90 minutes back... --------------------------------------------- Result 292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I waited and waited for this film to come out,the trailers seemed to be on for years, it was worth it. I'm not a big fan of watching films over and over again but i cant wait for this to come out for all to buy! Not a big fan of Jim but this suited him perfectly, there was so much to see and the 'feel good factor' is off the scale, perfect for Christmas. I think Ron did a fab job turning this into a film, If you haven't seen it then do so, if you have, watch it again, i know you want to! --------------------------------------------- Result 293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Who wrote this? Some [[guy]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[screenplay]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've told him you're [[supposed]] to [[write]] dialog that sounds like something someone actually might [[say]].

And who [[directed]] this? Scott [[Marshal]]? [[Son]] of [[Gerry]] [[Marshall]]. My the [[nut]] has [[fallen]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him know that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in [[New]] York, and it will [[look]] real, and you won't have to [[fake]] it with a blue screen for no [[reason]]. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't [[act]]. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only [[reason]] I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete [[opposite]] of a classic [[film]]. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[bad]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't [[pay]] to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't [[go]] on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater [[sooner]]. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The [[film]] starts out laughably [[bad]], and then goes to the point of being so bad it [[becomes]] a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first [[act]] is ending, you realize it'll only get [[worse]], and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. Who wrote this? Some [[guys]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[scenarios]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've told him you're [[suspected]] to [[handwriting]] dialog that sounds like something someone actually might [[tell]].

And who [[oriented]] this? Scott [[Marshall]]? [[Sons]] of [[Jerry]] [[Marshal]]. My the [[walnuts]] has [[decrease]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him know that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in [[Novel]] York, and it will [[gaze]] real, and you won't have to [[false]] it with a blue screen for no [[cause]]. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't [[legislation]]. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only [[cause]] I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete [[opus]] of a classic [[filmmaking]]. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[unfavourable]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't [[paid]] to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't [[going]] on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater [[beforehand]]. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The [[filmmaking]] starts out laughably [[negative]], and then goes to the point of being so bad it [[become]] a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first [[legislation]] is ending, you realize it'll only get [[worst]], and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Films such as Chocolat, [[Beau]] Travail, and others have propelled French director [[Claire]] [[Denis]] into the [[top]] echelon of the world's most [[unique]] and [[accomplished]] filmmakers and her 2004 [[film]] The Intruder (L'Intrus) [[adds]] to the depth of her portfolio. A cinematic poem that conveys a mood of abiding loneliness and loss, the [[film]] [[provides]] a glimpse into the [[psyche]] of a [[man]] who is deteriorating physically and mentally and who travels to [[various]] parts of the [[globe]] [[seeking]] redemption and [[peace]] but [[finds]] it hard to [[come]] by. [[Loosely]] [[based]] on Jean-Luc Nancy's memoir of a heart transplant, The Intruder is a film of such unrelenting opaqueness that even after two viewings it is [[difficult]] to [[describe]] it in other than subjective, impressionistic terms.

[[Louis]] Trebor ([[Michael]] Subor) is a man in his seventies who is likely [[dying]] of a heart condition and who, like the [[professor]] in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries, [[attempts]] to [[come]] to terms with the [[mistakes]] of his life while he has [[time]]. It is [[clear]] that he is physically rugged and very [[wealthy]] but [[seems]] [[emotionally]] drained and the look on his [[face]] is one of [[quiet]] [[resignation]]. [[Though]] we see only one episode of violence, where he [[gets]] out of bed in the middle of night to [[kill]] an intruder, there is a sinister sense about him. He might be an intelligence [[officer]], a [[foreign]] [[agent]], or a [[hit]] [[man]].

Whatever the [[case]], he [[apparently]] is under some [[kind]] of [[surveillance]] and [[acts]] like a [[man]] that has been involved in criminal wrongdoing and is only now [[able]] to see the [[consequences]]. Facial close-ups [[throughout]] the movie [[create]] a strong [[sense]] of [[isolation]]. He lives with his dogs in a cabin in the Jura Mountains [[near]] the French-Swiss border and has an estranged son [[Sidney]] (Gregoire [[Collin]]) whom he has long [[neglected]]. [[Sidney]] lives nearby with his wife Antoinette (Florence Loiret-Caille) and their two children. [[In]] one [[telling]] scene, he meets up with his [[father]] on the street and [[calls]] him a lunatic, but that does not [[prevent]] him from [[taking]] his money.

[[When]] the [[film]] [[opens]], we [[meet]] Antoinette, a Swiss border [[guard]], who [[boards]] a van with a [[trained]] [[dog]] to sniff out some [[contraband]]. When she [[comes]] [[home]], she is [[greeted]] by her husband who [[asks]] her with tongue-in-cheek if she has "anything to [[declare]]?" Other than these three individuals, the people and circumstances we see during the rest of the film may exist only in Louis' imagination. Louis has three women in his life and we meet them all in the film's first half hour: a pharmacist (Bambou) who prepares his medication, a neighbor (Béatrice Dalle) who is a dog breeder who refuses to care for his dogs when he goes away on a trip telling him that they are as crazy as he is, and a young Russian organ dealer (Katia Golubeva) who he tells he wants a "young man's heart".

Relentlessly, she stalks him throughout the film but it is apparently only in his mind. In the last section of the film, Louis travels to South Korea in search of a heart transplant and to Tahiti to deliver a gift to a different son, one whom he has not seen for many years or perhaps has never seen. His heart transplant, however, appears to be a metaphor for a man without a heart, a man whose life has been fascinating but ultimately directionless, intruding into other people's lives with little real empathy. The Intruder contains a haunting guitar soundtrack by Stuart Staples of the band Tindersticks, reminiscent of the guitar riff in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man, and gorgeous cinematography by Denis regular Agnes Godard.

Godard creates memorable images that convey a mood of longing and regret: a heart beating alone in the snow, an infant in a sling looking up at his father for a good two minutes, the baby's expression gradually turning from morose to a half smile, colored streamers blowing from a newly christened ship, a massage in a dark room by a mysterious Korean masseuse, and the vast expanse of ocean seen from a bobbing ship deck. While The Intruder can be frustrating because of its elliptical nature, Denis forces us to respond out of our own experience, to understand the images on the screen on a very personal level. If there is any theme, a hint might be found in the opening that tells us what is revealed piecemeal in the film - "your worst enemies are hiding, in the shadow, in your heart." Films such as Chocolat, [[Suitor]] Travail, and others have propelled French director [[Clara]] [[Denny]] into the [[topped]] echelon of the world's most [[particular]] and [[played]] filmmakers and her 2004 [[flick]] The Intruder (L'Intrus) [[added]] to the depth of her portfolio. A cinematic poem that conveys a mood of abiding loneliness and loss, the [[movie]] [[prescribes]] a glimpse into the [[psychology]] of a [[males]] who is deteriorating physically and mentally and who travels to [[several]] parts of the [[planet]] [[striving]] redemption and [[nonviolent]] but [[deems]] it hard to [[arrived]] by. [[Vaguely]] [[predicated]] on Jean-Luc Nancy's memoir of a heart transplant, The Intruder is a film of such unrelenting opaqueness that even after two viewings it is [[problematic]] to [[outline]] it in other than subjective, impressionistic terms.

[[Lewis]] Trebor ([[Micheal]] Subor) is a man in his seventies who is likely [[died]] of a heart condition and who, like the [[teachers]] in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries, [[endeavour]] to [[arrive]] to terms with the [[errors]] of his life while he has [[times]]. It is [[definite]] that he is physically rugged and very [[prosperous]] but [[appears]] [[excitedly]] drained and the look on his [[encounter]] is one of [[silent]] [[quits]]. [[If]] we see only one episode of violence, where he [[get]] out of bed in the middle of night to [[murdered]] an intruder, there is a sinister sense about him. He might be an intelligence [[officials]], a [[overseas]] [[officer]], or a [[knocked]] [[males]].

Whatever the [[lawsuit]], he [[supposedly]] is under some [[sort]] of [[supervising]] and [[act]] like a [[males]] that has been involved in criminal wrongdoing and is only now [[capable]] to see the [[effects]]. Facial close-ups [[across]] the movie [[creating]] a strong [[feeling]] of [[seclusion]]. He lives with his dogs in a cabin in the Jura Mountains [[nearby]] the French-Swiss border and has an estranged son [[Sid]] (Gregoire [[Colin]]) whom he has long [[omitted]]. [[Sid]] lives nearby with his wife Antoinette (Florence Loiret-Caille) and their two children. [[Throughout]] one [[saying]] scene, he meets up with his [[fathers]] on the street and [[requested]] him a lunatic, but that does not [[deter]] him from [[picked]] his money.

[[Whenever]] the [[kino]] [[opened]], we [[cater]] Antoinette, a Swiss border [[guards]], who [[councils]] a van with a [[qualified]] [[lapdog]] to sniff out some [[smuggle]]. When she [[arrives]] [[household]], she is [[saluted]] by her husband who [[petition]] her with tongue-in-cheek if she has "anything to [[declared]]?" Other than these three individuals, the people and circumstances we see during the rest of the film may exist only in Louis' imagination. Louis has three women in his life and we meet them all in the film's first half hour: a pharmacist (Bambou) who prepares his medication, a neighbor (Béatrice Dalle) who is a dog breeder who refuses to care for his dogs when he goes away on a trip telling him that they are as crazy as he is, and a young Russian organ dealer (Katia Golubeva) who he tells he wants a "young man's heart".

Relentlessly, she stalks him throughout the film but it is apparently only in his mind. In the last section of the film, Louis travels to South Korea in search of a heart transplant and to Tahiti to deliver a gift to a different son, one whom he has not seen for many years or perhaps has never seen. His heart transplant, however, appears to be a metaphor for a man without a heart, a man whose life has been fascinating but ultimately directionless, intruding into other people's lives with little real empathy. The Intruder contains a haunting guitar soundtrack by Stuart Staples of the band Tindersticks, reminiscent of the guitar riff in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man, and gorgeous cinematography by Denis regular Agnes Godard.

Godard creates memorable images that convey a mood of longing and regret: a heart beating alone in the snow, an infant in a sling looking up at his father for a good two minutes, the baby's expression gradually turning from morose to a half smile, colored streamers blowing from a newly christened ship, a massage in a dark room by a mysterious Korean masseuse, and the vast expanse of ocean seen from a bobbing ship deck. While The Intruder can be frustrating because of its elliptical nature, Denis forces us to respond out of our own experience, to understand the images on the screen on a very personal level. If there is any theme, a hint might be found in the opening that tells us what is revealed piecemeal in the film - "your worst enemies are hiding, in the shadow, in your heart." --------------------------------------------- Result 295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not exactly my genre, this straight-to-DVD street fight action is one I only encountered due to a friend putting it on whilst we had a few beers. I'm relatively open minded, and quite a fan of Eamonn Walker, so I sat back ready to enjoy myself.

Blood and Bone is the story of Isiah Bone, an ex-con who becomes a street fighter for unclear reasons which eventually unfold as the film progresses. Blah blah blah.

What a tedious film. I understand that films like this don't rely hugely on plot, but do they have to stuff in such a silly, predictable and entirely stupid storyline? It may not be important, but by golly gum does it annoy me. Better no plot and pure action than a clíche-ridden fleabag mongrel of a narrative. Infused with entirely unfounded and unachieving sentimental drivel, it is the cinematic equivalent of a thin-skinned turkey stuffed with rotten innards. I should probably at this point mention what is, of course, the film's drawing point: the fighting. Even in itself, the fighting is rather poor. Bone manages to take out well established tough-man street fighters in single punches (a large oaf or two is the filmmakers' laughworthy attempt to rectify this inconsistency); fighters who never seem to conclude that attacking one by one is a foolish ploy. Even this is repetitive and stupid, arms broken and faces kicked with a steady alacrity that we get to see time and time again.

A run of the mill, film-by-numbers movie which fully deserves its straight to DVD status, doing absolutely nothing new and everything we've seen time and time again. And not even particularly well. --------------------------------------------- Result 296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This movie [[surprised]] me! Not ever having [[heard]] of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this movie was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo [[style]]! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one [[John]] [[Woo]] and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it comes to action! The fact that "[[Moon]] Child" would feature a vampire convinced me [[even]] more! How can you go wrong with gun blazing vampires! Sounds promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It [[takes]] it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and [[loyalty]]! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very [[effective]] but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in [[plot]] this movie has an [[ambiance]] and slickness that makes it hard not to [[like]] this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[wonderful]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! This movie [[horrified]] me! Not ever having [[listened]] of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this movie was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo [[elegance]]! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one [[Johannes]] [[Wooo]] and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it comes to action! The fact that "[[Lune]] Child" would feature a vampire convinced me [[yet]] more! How can you go wrong with gun blazing vampires! Sounds promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It [[pick]] it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and [[fidelity]]! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very [[efficacious]] but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in [[intrigue]] this movie has an [[mood]] and slickness that makes it hard not to [[iike]] this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[wondrous]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! --------------------------------------------- Result 297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Rookie kept me smiling from beginning to end. Dennis Quaid played the role to perfection. The little boy that plays his son was fantastic. He made this a father-son movie to remember. The messages are good ones. Follow your dreams. Failing at the pursuit is alright as long as you try. The excitement is palpable. I believe this movie will be a classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was [[overshadowed]] by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. [[Where]] was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that [[instead]]. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage. I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was [[clouded]] by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. [[Hence]] was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that [[conversely]]. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Powers Boothe turns in a stellar performance as 1970's cult figure Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple. Jones physical likeness to Jones is uncanny and the story is acted out chillingly. The movie keeps you riveted and is a must see for anyone. check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a kid I thought this movie was great. It had animals, it had beautiful music, and it had my favorite actor: Michael J. Fox. Now, I still love this movie, for different reasons. It has well trained animals that are put through various stunts and scenes that look excellent on camera. It has beautiful, well-written musical that fits the scenes perfectly, with rousing fast-paced melodies and the heart wrenching main theme, that still makes me cry. Even when people hum it. And it has my favorite actor, Michael J. Fox.

Based on a book, this is the story of three house pets, an intelligent, overly-trusting and considerably paternal lab by the name of Shadow, a witty and vain - but still smart - cat with a fear of water named Sassy and a street-smart ridiculously curious and slightly neurotic bulldog, Chance. The three are taken to a friend's farm when their family goes away. Dismayed and worried, the pets break out and plan a trip across the Sierra mountains for the trip of their lives. A truly incredible journey. So what, maybe home IS just over that mountain. But what if it isn't?

I suggest Homeward Bound for people that like the three amazing actors providing the voices for the lead animal characters, and for anyone else that ... yeah, everyone go watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 301 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Modern]] [[viewers]] know this [[little]] [[film]] [[primarily]] as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Older]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of [[modifying]] perspectives, and with so [[many]] films [[today]] verily ulcerating with social and political [[commentary]], there is a natural [[curiosity]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[seemingly]] [[less]] provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only [[lightly]] [[softened]] by the coming of Levittowns and the like. [[Politics]] in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Loy]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to congresswoman [[Helen]] Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on communism (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a [[small]] role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his [[son]], Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the [[odd]] [[fellow]] out was Cary Grant, whose [[strident]] conservatism [[reflected]] a majority [[political]] sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: [[Communism]] was a real perceived [[threat]] and the blacklist was just [[around]] the [[corner]]. It [[would]] be another decade before [[political]] activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. [[Fashionable]] [[listeners]] know this [[petite]] [[cinematography]] [[basically]] as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Oldest]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of [[changed]] perspectives, and with so [[multiple]] films [[yesterday]] verily ulcerating with social and political [[comments]], there is a natural [[nosey]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[ostensibly]] [[lowest]] provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only [[casually]] [[soothed]] by the coming of Levittowns and the like. [[Politician]] in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Lui]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to congresswoman [[Helene]] Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on communism (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a [[petite]] role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his [[sons]], Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the [[bizarre]] [[colleagues]] out was Cary Grant, whose [[shrill]] conservatism [[manifested]] a majority [[politician]] sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: [[Communists]] was a real perceived [[hazard]] and the blacklist was just [[roundabout]] the [[nook]]. It [[ought]] be another decade before [[politician]] activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. --------------------------------------------- Result 302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst films i have ever seen. The events in it are completely random and make little or no sense. The fact that there is a sequel is so sickening i may come down with a case of cabin fever (I'M SO SORRY). I describe it as bug being smooshed to a newspaper because it seems to be different parts of things mixed together. e.g Kevin the pancake loving karate kid is just freakishly weird on its own, then there's the cop who is slightly weird and perverted, then the drug addict, then there's the fact that they attack some random guy who clearly needs help. then all of a sudden the main character is having sex with his friends girlfriend just because she says something stupid about a plane going down. then at the end some good old family racism followed by a rabbit operating on Kevin the karate kid. Its actually pretty despicable that they can use racism as a joke in this film. There is no reason for anyone to enjoy this film unless you love Eli Roth, even that did not make me like this film. Hate is a strong word but seeing as it is the only word i am permitted to use it will have to do. BOYCOTT CABIN FEVER 2!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' First [[time]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sidney]] Lumet) has concocted a melodrama that [[explores]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to [[unthinkable]] extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the gradual but nearly complete [[implosion]] of a family by a much used but, here, very [[sensible]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this [[rather]] [[harrowing]] tale, we see all the [[motivations]] of the [[players]] in this [[case]] of a robbery [[gone]] very wrong.

Andy Hanson ([[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]]) is a wealthy [[executive]], married to an [[emotionally]] [[needy]] Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an [[expensive]] [[drug]] habit. His [[life]] is [[beginning]] to [[crumble]] and he [[needs]] money. Andy's ne're-do well [[younger]] brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in [[ruins]] - he is divorced from his shrewish wife [[Martha]] (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child [[support]], and has [[borrowed]] all he can from his [[friends]], and he [[needs]] money. [[Andy]] [[proposes]] a low-key [[robbery]] of a [[small]] [[Mall]] mom-and-pop [[jewelry]] [[store]] that [[promises]] [[safe]], [[quick]] [[cash]] for both. The glitch is that the [[jewelry]] story belongs to the men's [[parents]] - [[Charles]] ([[Albert]] Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy [[advances]] Hank some [[cash]] and wrangles an [[agreement]] that Hank will do the actual [[robbery]], but [[though]] Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' [[plan]], he [[hires]] a [[friend]] to take on the actual [[job]] while Hank plans to be the [[driver]] of the [[getaway]] [[car]]. The [[robbery]] is [[horribly]] [[botched]] when Nanette, filing in for the [[regular]] [[clerk]], [[shoots]] the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The [[disaster]] [[unveils]] [[many]] [[secrets]] about the [[fragile]] [[relationships]] of the [[family]] and when Nanette [[dies]], [[Charles]] and [[Andy]] and Hank (and their respective [[partners]]) are [[driven]] to disastrous [[ends]] with [[surprises]] at [[every]] turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an [[easy]] film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' First [[period]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sydney]] Lumet) has concocted a melodrama that [[investigate]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to [[incomprehensible]] extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the gradual but nearly complete [[debacle]] of a family by a much used but, here, very [[judicious]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this [[fairly]] [[horrifying]] tale, we see all the [[motivation]] of the [[actors]] in this [[example]] of a robbery [[faded]] very wrong.

Andy Hanson ([[Felipe]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]]) is a wealthy [[management]], married to an [[excitedly]] [[poverty]] Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an [[pricey]] [[medication]] habit. His [[living]] is [[commencing]] to [[flop]] and he [[should]] money. Andy's ne're-do well [[youngest]] brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in [[wreck]] - he is divorced from his shrewish wife [[Marta]] (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child [[assistance]], and has [[loaned]] all he can from his [[freund]], and he [[required]] money. [[Andi]] [[proposed]] a low-key [[stealing]] of a [[minimal]] [[Supermarket]] mom-and-pop [[jewellery]] [[stores]] that [[pledged]] [[secure]], [[fast]] [[money]] for both. The glitch is that the [[jewellery]] story belongs to the men's [[parent]] - [[Karel]] ([[Hugh]] Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy [[advance]] Hank some [[money]] and wrangles an [[contract]] that Hank will do the actual [[stickup]], but [[despite]] Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' [[programmes]], he [[recruiting]] a [[boyfriend]] to take on the actual [[labour]] while Hank plans to be the [[drivers]] of the [[runoff]] [[vehicle]]. The [[stickup]] is [[awfully]] [[bungled]] when Nanette, filing in for the [[periodic]] [[clerks]], [[twigs]] the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The [[cataclysm]] [[divulge]] [[countless]] [[secrecy]] about the [[flimsy]] [[relationship]] of the [[families]] and when Nanette [[dying]], [[Karel]] and [[Indie]] and Hank (and their respective [[partner]]) are [[stimulated]] to disastrous [[end]] with [[stuns]] at [[any]] turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an [[easier]] film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 304 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Almost 30 [[years]] [[later]] I recall this original PBS film as [[almost]] unbearably tender. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever [[matched]] this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This [[wonderful]] [[film]] is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. Almost 30 [[olds]] [[then]] I recall this original PBS film as [[roughly]] unbearably tender. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever [[confronted]] this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I [[saw]] this piece of [[garbage]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it [[could]] be [[considered]] in any [[way]] an American Movie Classic. It was awful in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even [[consider]] doing this [[movie]]? I [[noticed]] this piece of [[trash]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it [[wo]] be [[deemed]] in any [[camino]] an American Movie Classic. It was awful in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even [[contemplating]] doing this [[filmmaking]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 306 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] This is [[full]] of major [[spoilers]], so beware.

"[[Prix]] [[de]] Beaute" [[always]] suffers in comparison to the two [[films]] [[Louise]] [[Brooks]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[ways]], "Prix" is the quintessential [[Brooks]] [[film]]. Here she has a chance to be [[charming]] without the [[dark]] side of her Pabst [[collaboration]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[films]] don't is music. [[In]] this early French [[film]], the [[whole]] Louise Brooks mystique is fleshed out [[powerfully]] with a [[conjunction]] of [[image]], song and music. The Charleston is what [[seems]] most associated with [[Brooks]] (she was the first to [[dance]] it in [[Europe]]), but the essence of the actress comes across more [[strongly]] in the tango. The tango [[also]] plays a plot point in "[[Prix]]," being the music she danced with on her short [[rise]] to [[stardom]] after becoming Miss Europe. [[Later]], when she has [[forsaken]] her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of [[jealous]] husband Andre, the [[longing]] for her forsaken fame [[becomes]] [[apparent]] when the same tango record is [[seen]] on her [[apartment]] record [[player]]. [[So]] appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to [[accompany]] the [[documentary]] about her [[life]], "Looking for Lulu," a [[film]] narrated by [[Shirley]] [[Maclaine]]. The [[brazen]] and [[forceful]] quality of the tango epitomizes [[Louise]] Brooks' strong-headed but [[elegant]] and erotic [[individuality]].

The [[song]], "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," [[adds]] an [[immense]] [[amount]] of [[pathos]] to what is not a [[great]] [[film]] (but a very good one). By the way, Brooks' [[voice]] was not [[dubbed]] for the [[film]] by Edith Piaf as some have [[claimed]]. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't [[discovered]] until 1935. The song, [[however]], is what Brooks' [[character]], Lucienne, [[sings]] to Andre at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she [[sings]] for her screen [[test]], which she [[views]] with the [[producers]] and [[managers]] who [[intend]] to shape her [[career]]. It [[continues]] on screen after husband [[Andre]], who has followed her to the screening [[room]], [[shoots]] and [[kills]] her. [[In]] a [[single]] shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. This is [[fullest]] of major [[troublemakers]], so beware.

"[[Awards]] [[of]] Beaute" [[steadily]] suffers in comparison to the two [[kino]] [[Luiz]] [[Creek]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[methods]], "Prix" is the quintessential [[Creek]] [[kino]]. Here she has a chance to be [[enchanting]] without the [[dusky]] side of her Pabst [[collaborate]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[cinematography]] don't is music. [[Onto]] this early French [[movie]], the [[entire]] Louise Brooks mystique is fleshed out [[fervently]] with a [[collaborate]] of [[photo]], song and music. The Charleston is what [[looks]] most associated with [[Creek]] (she was the first to [[choreography]] it in [[Eu]]), but the essence of the actress comes across more [[harshly]] in the tango. The tango [[further]] plays a plot point in "[[Prize]]," being the music she danced with on her short [[surge]] to [[glory]] after becoming Miss Europe. [[Subsequently]], when she has [[forsworn]] her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of [[jealousy]] husband Andre, the [[yearning]] for her forsaken fame [[becoming]] [[obvious]] when the same tango record is [[noticed]] on her [[condo]] record [[protagonist]]. [[Accordingly]] appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to [[escort]] the [[literature]] about her [[vie]], "Looking for Lulu," a [[movie]] narrated by [[Sylvie]] [[Mclean]]. The [[cocky]] and [[powerful]] quality of the tango epitomizes [[Louie]] Brooks' strong-headed but [[stylish]] and erotic [[peculiarity]].

The [[chanson]], "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," [[adding]] an [[gargantuan]] [[sums]] of [[ducks]] to what is not a [[remarkable]] [[kino]] (but a very good one). By the way, Brooks' [[vocal]] was not [[nicknamed]] for the [[cinematography]] by Edith Piaf as some have [[asserted]]. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't [[detected]] until 1935. The song, [[instead]], is what Brooks' [[nature]], Lucienne, [[sing]] to Andre at the [[startup]] of the [[cinematography]] to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she [[sung]] for her screen [[tests]], which she [[opinions]] with the [[manufacturer]] and [[directors]] who [[aimed]] to shape her [[quarries]]. It [[continued]] on screen after husband [[Andrej]], who has followed her to the screening [[rooms]], [[canes]] and [[killed]] her. [[Among]] a [[lonely]] shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. --------------------------------------------- Result 307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The year is 1964. Ernesto "Che" Guevara, having been a Cuban citizen for the last five years,disappears from the face of the Earth,leaving a glum Fidel Castro to announce that he is probably dead,when in truth, he has left Cuba to move to Bolivia to live an assumed identity. Whilst living in La Paz,Guevara undertakes an idea to overthrow the corrupt,bourgeois government there. Once again,Steven Soderberg takes up where 'Che:Part One' leaves off (only better this time). The pacing is more on target,the job of acting is ever so fine (including a turn by a sickly looking Benecio Del Toro,as Che Guevara). Suffice it to say,it's probably best if you see both films,to get the true story of Guevara & what kind of a man he was (I had the rare open window of opportunity to see both films at one screening----talk about a long haul!). As with 'Che-Part 1:The Argentine',this film has no MPAA rating, but contains enough salty language & violence to easily snag it an 'R'. --------------------------------------------- Result 308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I think I should [[start]] this in saying that nearly any style of work can be [[entertaining]] in parts. The [[true]] [[test]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I [[gave]] the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who enjoy reading many blogs--that blogs can't compare with good novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with [[good]] film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a poor [[example]] of [[independent]] filmography. From [[start]] to [[finish]], FEM feels like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[even]] MySpace [[gets]] some [[pimping]].) [[If]] I [[wanted]] to [[see]] an [[hour]] of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[certainly]] grittier than the bubble [[gum]] atmosphere of the aforementioned [[media]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[story]]. It's like watching the mundaneness of [[life]], which I [[think]] most [[would]] agree is very [[naturally]] boring. And yet the creators of FEM [[want]] us to applaud it, their very postmodern [[film]] about making a [[film]]. Cue my [[yawn]].

Ultimately, I [[come]] away not [[caring]] the [[least]] bit about any of it. I'm [[shocked]] that I'm [[actually]] interested in [[taking]] [[time]] out to [[write]] this [[review]], even. It's not that FEM is [[downright]] [[bad]], because it isn't; it has a few [[moments]] where I [[crack]] a [[smile]] or [[think]] that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[happen]]. It's rather that it's just downright...mediocre. I feel so [[indifferent]] about it that it's [[almost]] [[fitting]] of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I [[hope]] the creators/"[[actors]]" in the [[film]] [[get]] out of debt from their [[efforts]]. They'll [[probably]] [[need]] it for when one of them [[moves]] out and moves on with [[life]].

[[See]] this [[movie]] if you've got [[time]] to waste and [[nothing]] much you want to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[worry]] that you've missed some [[great]], [[undiscovered]] talent. You really haven't. I think I should [[lancer]] this in saying that nearly any style of work can be [[entertain]] in parts. The [[veritable]] [[essays]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I [[yielded]] the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who enjoy reading many blogs--that blogs can't compare with good novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with [[buena]] film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a poor [[instances]] of [[autonomous]] filmography. From [[begin]] to [[conclude]], FEM feels like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[yet]] MySpace [[got]] some [[pandering]].) [[Unless]] I [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] an [[hora]] of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[definitely]] grittier than the bubble [[eraser]] atmosphere of the aforementioned [[medium]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[histories]]. It's like watching the mundaneness of [[iife]], which I [[reckon]] most [[ought]] agree is very [[evidently]] boring. And yet the creators of FEM [[wants]] us to applaud it, their very postmodern [[flick]] about making a [[filmmaking]]. Cue my [[yawns]].

Ultimately, I [[coming]] away not [[care]] the [[less]] bit about any of it. I'm [[surprised]] that I'm [[indeed]] interested in [[adopting]] [[period]] out to [[writing]] this [[examine]], even. It's not that FEM is [[absolutely]] [[unfavourable]], because it isn't; it has a few [[times]] where I [[crevasse]] a [[smiles]] or [[believe]] that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[occur]]. It's rather that it's just downright...mediocre. I feel so [[impassive]] about it that it's [[roughly]] [[montage]] of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I [[hopes]] the creators/"[[protagonists]]" in the [[filmmaking]] [[obtains]] out of debt from their [[initiatives]]. They'll [[certainly]] [[gotta]] it for when one of them [[shift]] out and moves on with [[lives]].

[[Behold]] this [[flick]] if you've got [[moment]] to waste and [[anything]] much you want to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[anxiety]] that you've missed some [[sublime]], [[unfamiliar]] talent. You really haven't. --------------------------------------------- Result 309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Leave it to geniuses like Ventura Pons, the Spanish director, to convince the higher ups in his country to subsidize this misguided attempt of a film. The sad state of the film industry in that country is a product of trying to make a film out of such thin material. Most of the pictures that are made in Spain fall under two categories: those about the Spanish Civil War, that love to present past history as the writers deem fit. The other type of films show the viewer with a lot of gratuitous sex because the 'creators' don't have anything interest to say.

As the film opens we get to watch Pere's penis as he attempts to cut it off and place it in one of the platters at a party. Later on, Sandra will show all she has been given for the audience to admire. The story of Pere's attraction to Sandra, a married woman that seems to be happily married, is false from the start.

Our only interest in watching the film centered on an earlier, better made picture by Mr. Pons, "Amic/Amat", but alas, it has nothing to do with the mess we are punished to watch in this venture. As far as the comments submitted in IMDb, all the negative votes come from Spanish viewers, which speaks volumes coming from them! --------------------------------------------- Result 310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I was so [[eager]] to see this one of my favorite [[TV]] [[shows]].I [[saw]] Universal [[trademark]] followed with a [[newly]] [[acquainted]] title and [[theme]] song which still impress me.[[Computer]] animation on some [[scenery]] [[like]] a solid title [[name]]"The Jetsons" or a dimension [[view]] of a [[spaceship]] [[approaching]] an [[amusement]] [[park]] and more [[made]] this version [[splendid]] and [[fantastic]].Shortly after that till the [[end]]...I couldn't [[believe]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[forget]] all I had seen.Just [[songs]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. I was so [[enthusiastic]] to see this one of my favorite [[TVS]] [[show]].I [[watched]] Universal [[trademarks]] followed with a [[recently]] [[abreast]] title and [[themes]] song which still impress me.[[Computers]] animation on some [[panorama]] [[iike]] a solid title [[denomination]]"The Jetsons" or a dimension [[opinions]] of a [[starship]] [[approaches]] an [[entertainment]] [[playpen]] and more [[effected]] this version [[resplendent]] and [[sumptuous]].Shortly after that till the [[ceases]]...I couldn't [[reckon]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[overlook]] all I had seen.Just [[anthems]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[first]] Cruel [[Intentions]], the [[original]], is my [[favorite]] [[movie]] of all [[time]]. It was an [[absolute]] masterpiece. [[So]] how on [[earth]] [[could]] they [[make]] a sequel so [[downright]] [[bad]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. In this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan [[Phillipe]]. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the [[first]] one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. The [[fiirst]] Cruel [[Intents]], the [[initial]], is my [[preferable]] [[filmmaking]] of all [[times]]. It was an [[unmitigated]] masterpiece. [[Therefore]] how on [[terrestrial]] [[did]] they [[deliver]] a sequel so [[fully]] [[unfavourable]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. In this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan [[Phillippe]]. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the [[fiirst]] one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] American film makers decided to make a film they think is Japanese. The characters all badly represented, the actors are not even Japanese and the set is cheap, unreal and definitely doesn't represent Kyoto in Early 20ties and 30ties. Who ever read the book understand that the script writers didn't add any extra value to differentiate the movie from the script. Worse, they even changed the original plot line with a few goofs. Rob Marshall is using for his two main characters two well known Chinese actors who joined before in crouching tiger hidden dragon. Marshall probably saw one Chinese movie and tho they represent Japanese culture. Seeing those two actors together again even makes the movies more ridiculous. Quentine Tarantino's last scene in Kill Bill #1 is ten times more Japanese made than that of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Joe Don's [[opening]] line [[says]] everything about this [[movie]]. It takes place on the [[island]] of [[Malta]] (the [[island]] of [[pathetic]] [[men]]) and involves [[Joe]] Don Baker [[tracking]] down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named Geronimo (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get [[arrested]] over and over agin. Everyone in the movie [[hates]] him, just like [[everyone]] hates Greydon Clark. I [[liked]] an [[earlier]] Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen [[year]] old boys. [[Avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]]!! Joe Don's [[opens]] line [[say]] everything about this [[movies]]. It takes place on the [[isola]] of [[Maltese]] (the [[isola]] of [[unlucky]] [[man]]) and involves [[Evel]] Don Baker [[tracks]] down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named Geronimo (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get [[apprehended]] over and over agin. Everyone in the movie [[abhors]] him, just like [[everybody]] hates Greydon Clark. I [[wished]] an [[formerly]] Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen [[annum]] old boys. [[Shirk]] this [[filmmaking]] at all [[charges]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the first movie I ever saw Ashley Judd in and the first film of Victor Nunez' that I ever say, and boy am I glad I did. Its' quiet tone, its' relaxed pace, its' realistic depiction of a young woman just starting out in life, its' fine depiction of the struggles she has to go through to make her mark in life, the decisions she makes based on real things, the people she meets - there is nothing wrong with this movie. It is as close to movie magic as I have ever seen outside of the " Star Wars " movies, and, given what those films are like, that means this film deserves a high rating indeed. Ashley Judds' acting, Mr. Nunez'writing, and its' great simple worthwhile story make this a fine coming-of-age story and a wonderful movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I [[saw]] the [[movie]] with two grown [[children]]. [[Although]] it was not as [[clever]] as Shrek, I [[thought]] it was [[rather]] good. [[In]] a [[movie]] [[theatre]] surrounded by [[children]] who were on [[spring]] break, there was not a sound so I know the [[children]] all liked it. There parents also [[seemed]] [[engaged]]. The [[death]] and [[apparent]] [[death]] of characters [[brought]] about the [[appropriate]] gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[realize]] this [[movie]] was [[made]] for [[kids]]. As such, it was successful although I liked it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! I [[noticed]] the [[kino]] with two grown [[kiddies]]. [[Nonetheless]] it was not as [[skilful]] as Shrek, I [[brainchild]] it was [[somewhat]] good. [[Throughout]] a [[flick]] [[theaters]] surrounded by [[kids]] who were on [[printemps]] break, there was not a sound so I know the [[kids]] all liked it. There parents also [[appeared]] [[incurred]]. The [[mortality]] and [[obvious]] [[decease]] of characters [[lodged]] about the [[proper]] gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[realise]] this [[film]] was [[introduced]] for [[brats]]. As such, it was successful although I liked it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! --------------------------------------------- Result 316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] After being hugely entertained by [[Mr]]. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically [[anticipated]] this film. I was [[hugely]] [[disappointed]]. It is a script reading not a [[film]], [[vulgar]] for the sake of being vulgar, bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is [[rich]] and [[satisfying]]. [[Blame]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the [[theater]] waiting for the "[[good]] part;" it never [[came]]. I [[neither]] [[laughed]] nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? [[Hardly]]. After being hugely entertained by [[Olli]]. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically [[anticipate]] this film. I was [[remarkably]] [[disappoint]]. It is a script reading not a [[filmmaking]], [[trashy]] for the sake of being vulgar, bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is [[rika]] and [[agreeable]]. [[Culpability]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the [[theaters]] waiting for the "[[well]] part;" it never [[became]]. I [[or]] [[giggled]] nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? [[Practically]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a pleasant film, even if the premise is silly. It was sort of a guilty pleasure to watch. Meg Ryan seems to be able to pull off roles in this kind of film (another example is Joe vs. the Volcano). That's what makes her a star, in part. Walter Matthau, of course, had that ability, too, and he really puts himself into the role, making an amusing, good-hearted Einstein. I suppose you could say they're both good at portraying loveable characters, though loveable in different ways (loveable young women vs. loveable curmudgeon). --------------------------------------------- Result 318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Panic is a [[sneaky]] [[little]] gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to realize, with [[great]] [[pleasure]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/[[director]] than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[quietly]] [[devastating]] scene after another, all enacted [[perfectly]] by [[William]] H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, [[Tracey]] Ullman, [[John]] [[Ritter]], and the most [[remarkable]] child actor I've [[seen]] in a [[long]] [[time]], David Dorfman, as Macy's [[son]], who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. [[Rich]] and [[rewarding]], this [[film]] will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. Panic is a [[duplicitous]] [[small]] gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to realize, with [[excellent]] [[gladness]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/[[headmaster]] than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[stealthily]] [[ravaging]] scene after another, all enacted [[entirely]] by [[Guillaume]] H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, [[Tracy]] Ullman, [[Jon]] [[Knight]], and the most [[wondrous]] child actor I've [[saw]] in a [[protracted]] [[moment]], David Dorfman, as Macy's [[yarns]], who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. [[Rika]] and [[reward]], this [[movies]] will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. --------------------------------------------- Result 319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] With the advent of the IMDb, this overlooked movie can now find an interested audience. Why? Because users here who do a search on two-time Academy Award winner Glenda Jackson can find 'The Return of The Soldier' among her credits. So can those checking out Oscar winner Julie Christie. Fans of Ann-Margret can give the title a click, as will those looking into the career of the great Alan Bates. Not to mention the added bonus of a movie with supporting heavyweights Ian Holm and Frank Finlay. Any movie with so many notables in it is rewarded by the IMDb, given all the cross-referencing that goes on here. So, why isn't this movie out on DVD? Don't the Producers realize the Internet Movie Database is a marketing gift for such a film? And 'The Return of The Soldier' is definitely a gem waiting to be discovered. Get with it, people. --------------------------------------------- Result 320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I wouldn't [[call]] "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" [[simply]] a kiddie version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the [[former]], it [[calls]] into [[question]] the [[security]] of bringing [[beings]] from one era into ours. But it [[really]] [[opens]] my [[eyes]] when I see who provided the voices: [[John]] Goodman, Rhea Perlman, [[Jay]] Leno, [[Walter]] Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a [[given]] actor, the "[[Cheers]]" woman, the "[[Tonight]] Show" host, the Most Trusted Name In News, a famous chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had [[something]] for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural [[history]]). True, it's [[escapism]], but the [[perceptive]] [[kind]]. I would actually [[say]] that [[John]] Goodman doing Rex's [[voice]] here is sort of a [[precursor]] to his [[voice]] [[work]] in "Monsters [[Inc]]". Worth seeing. I wouldn't [[calling]] "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" [[merely]] a kiddie version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the [[old]], it [[requests]] into [[issue]] the [[assurance]] of bringing [[humans]] from one era into ours. But it [[genuinely]] [[opened]] my [[eye]] when I see who provided the voices: [[Giovanni]] Goodman, Rhea Perlman, [[Jae]] Leno, [[Walters]] Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a [[gave]] actor, the "[[Cheering]]" woman, the "[[Sunday]] Show" host, the Most Trusted Name In News, a famous chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had [[anything]] for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural [[histories]]). True, it's [[escapist]], but the [[canny]] [[sorting]]. I would actually [[tell]] that [[Johannes]] Goodman doing Rex's [[vowel]] here is sort of a [[harbinger]] to his [[vocals]] [[jobs]] in "Monsters [[Serv]]". Worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 321 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This is the kind of movie that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not [[bloody]] [[true]]. I only watch it once in a while to make [[sure]] that it's as [[bad]] as I first thought it was.

Some [[kind]] of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having [[Boeing]] hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[airplane]] goes down in the Bermuda [[triangle]] and sinks pressurized to the [[bottoms]], a kind of post-facto [[submarine]].

It has one of those all-star [[casts]], the stars either falling or [[barely]] above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack [[Lemon]]. He is so right. Except for [[George]] Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie [[instead]]. Oh, not "[[Airport]]" the original. That's no good [[either]]. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." This is the kind of movie that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not [[homicidal]] [[real]]. I only watch it once in a while to make [[persuaded]] that it's as [[unfavourable]] as I first thought it was.

Some [[types]] of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having [[Lockheed]] hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[aviation]] goes down in the Bermuda [[triangular]] and sinks pressurized to the [[soles]], a kind of post-facto [[undersea]].

It has one of those all-star [[castings]], the stars either falling or [[hardly]] above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack [[Citrus]]. He is so right. Except for [[Georgi]] Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie [[conversely]]. Oh, not "[[Airfields]]" the original. That's no good [[nor]]. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." --------------------------------------------- Result 322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I saw this [[movie]] again as an [[assignment]] for my [[management]] [[class]]. [[Were]] to [[mainly]] [[comment]] on the [[different]] [[management]] [[styles]] and [[ideas]] on quality(of the [[product]]). I did [[rent]] this one back in the eighties and I [[remember]] it to be good(but not [[great]])[[movie]]. I've [[always]] liked [[Michael]] Keaton's [[style]] and delivery. He was a [[perfect]] fit for the [[movie]].

I am surprised to [[see]] some of the low [[ratings]] for this movie. I grant you [[yes]] it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle [[comedy]] [[rather]] than a all-out [[comedy]] [[farce]]. I also find some of those that [[felt]] this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the [[dealers]](meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a [[study]] of automakers during and before the time [[period]] that this movie [[covers]]. Parts are [[bit]] [[dry]] but I [[think]] you'll find that it backs up [[much]] the [[movie]] also. I saw this [[cinematography]] again as an [[allocation]] for my [[governance]] [[homeroom]]. [[Was]] to [[essentially]] [[observing]] on the [[distinct]] [[governance]] [[style]] and [[brainchild]] on quality(of the [[merchandise]]). I did [[rented]] this one back in the eighties and I [[remembering]] it to be good(but not [[resplendent]])[[kino]]. I've [[unceasingly]] liked [[Michele]] Keaton's [[styles]] and delivery. He was a [[perfected]] fit for the [[flick]].

I am surprised to [[behold]] some of the low [[rating]] for this movie. I grant you [[yep]] it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle [[comedian]] [[somewhat]] than a all-out [[parody]] [[mockery]]. I also find some of those that [[smelled]] this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the [[vendors]](meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a [[examine]] of automakers during and before the time [[deadline]] that this movie [[covering]]. Parts are [[bite]] [[desiccated]] but I [[thinks]] you'll find that it backs up [[very]] the [[cinema]] also. --------------------------------------------- Result 323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most amazing, spiritually uplifting movie about the restoration of the gospel. Far better than any other film, or movie made about the restoration thus far. If you haven't seen it, hop on a plane to Salt Lake and see it now. You won't regret it! You truly get a sense of what the first saints had to struggle through, putting complete and total faith in there prophet Joseph Smith. You finally get some sort of comprehension of the things the prophet had to fight through and the persecutions he and his people faced. If you have any questions about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-days Saints and our humble beginnings just watch this movie, it will make complete and total sense afterward. --------------------------------------------- Result 324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was disgusting. Their should be a warning that some sadistic nasty writer is attempting to make a name for herself before being held hostage for an hour and a half watching garbage. What is garbage? The misuse of peoples time, the misuse of energy, and the waste of whatever type of educational system that taught her how to read and write. Talia you are a sick demented loser. Your psychiatrist needs to prescribe stronger medications for your problem.

The acting and plot gave me no choice but to fast forward through the middle of the garbage. I ended up at a scene that was uncalled for. If you want to learn how to shock people watch a Larry Clark movie. I lost all respect for the entire cast of this movie "no more support from me." How could actors or actresses sit on a set while such gross depictions of human behavior is manifested from the mind of a psycho? I feel sorry for all actors that took part in that scene. I think the devil now knows who the writer of this movie is; congratulations you won his attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I had known this movie was filmed in the exasperating and quease-inducing Dogme 95 style, I would never have rented it. Nevertheless, I took a dramamine for the seasickness and gave it a shot. I lasted a very, very, very long forty minutes before giving up. It's just boring, pretentious twaddle.

The last French movie I saw was "Romance" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)

--------------------------------------------- Result 326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was [[going]] to bed with my gf last night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[channels]] until I [[came]] across this Chinese [[movie]] called the King of Masks. [[At]] [[first]] I thought it was [[going]] to be a Kung [[Fu]] [[movie]], so I started [[watching]] it, and then it [[immediately]] [[captured]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The [[little]] girl in the movie was absolutely adorble. She was such a [[great]] [[actor]] for being so [[little]]. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the [[English]] was dubbed made it [[harder]] for me to [[tell]]...but she really seemed to be in [[character]] [[perfectly]]. I [[felt]] so [[bad]] for the [[girl]] as she [[kept]] [[trying]] to please her "[[boss]]" but everything just turned out [[rotten]]. lol. Even when she [[brings]] him another [[grandson]], just so he can pass on his [[art]]...it [[turns]] out that kid was [[kidnapped]], so he [[gets]] arrested and has 5 days to live. [[lol]]...whatever she touches in an [[effort]] to be [[nice]] to her grandpa, just backfires.

[[In]] the end, he [[sees]] how much [[love]] is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

[[Definitely]] a gem, and [[totally]] [[original]].

Scott I was [[gonna]] to bed with my gf last night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[canals]] until I [[became]] across this Chinese [[cinematic]] called the King of Masks. [[During]] [[fiirst]] I thought it was [[gonna]] to be a Kung [[Foo]] [[kino]], so I started [[staring]] it, and then it [[rightaway]] [[apprehended]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The [[petite]] girl in the movie was absolutely adorble. She was such a [[wondrous]] [[protagonist]] for being so [[petit]]. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the [[Brits]] was dubbed made it [[tighter]] for me to [[telling]]...but she really seemed to be in [[traits]] [[altogether]]. I [[deemed]] so [[inclement]] for the [[chick]] as she [[retained]] [[tempting]] to please her "[[chef]]" but everything just turned out [[lousy]]. lol. Even when she [[bring]] him another [[granddaughter]], just so he can pass on his [[artistry]]...it [[revolves]] out that kid was [[abducted]], so he [[got]] arrested and has 5 days to live. [[jk]]...whatever she touches in an [[endeavor]] to be [[pleasurable]] to her grandpa, just backfires.

[[At]] the end, he [[believes]] how much [[loves]] is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

[[Obviously]] a gem, and [[perfectly]] [[initial]].

Scott --------------------------------------------- Result 327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Ulysses]] as a film should in no [[way]] be [[compared]] with the novel, for they are two [[entirely]] [[different]] [[entities]]. However, that being [[said]], the film [[still]] manages to [[maintain]] [[many]] of the [[elements]] that [[made]] the [[book]] [[work]], but [[since]] it is a [[visual]] [[medium]], it is more [[difficult]] to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I [[think]] this is the [[best]] [[film]] they could have made with the [[material]]... and this is from [[someone]] that [[routinely]] [[rants]] about [[films]] not being like their literary counterparts. I [[recommend]] the book, but the movie is [[still]] entertaining. [[Ulises]] as a film should in no [[manner]] be [[comparison]] with the novel, for they are two [[abundantly]] [[assorted]] [[organizations]]. However, that being [[say]], the film [[nonetheless]] manages to [[sustaining]] [[innumerable]] of the [[facets]] that [[accomplished]] the [[workbook]] [[jobs]], but [[because]] it is a [[optic]] [[average]], it is more [[cumbersome]] to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I [[believe]] this is the [[bestest]] [[cinema]] they could have made with the [[materials]]... and this is from [[somebody]] that [[systematically]] [[protesting]] about [[kino]] not being like their literary counterparts. I [[recommended]] the book, but the movie is [[yet]] entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I absolutely adore Isabelle Blais!!! She was so cute in this movie, and far different from her role in "Quebec-Montreal" where she was more like a man-eater. I think she should have been nominated for a Jutra. I mean, Syvlie Moreau was good, but Isabelle was far superior, IMO. Pelletier has done fine work for his first time out, and I noticed he snuck in a couple of his buddies from Rock et Belles Oreilles, Guy A. LePage & Andre Ducharme. It was fun to see them in this, I didn't know they were going to appear.

I don't think I've seen a romantic comedy from Quebec that I didn't like, and this one is as good as any I've had the pleasure to see. And if you're in the states and wondering how you can get a copy of the DVD, www.archambault.ca delivered it to me in less than a week. --------------------------------------------- Result 329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is a real [[eye]] candy. A [[world]] made of floating [[islands]] and [[flying]] ancient cities. Huge monsters [[whose]] preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their opponents... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in [[search]] of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we [[heard]] that song before. But You will [[forget]] that while looking at the [[spectacular]] scenery.

This movie is fun to watch while it lasts. But after [[leaving]] the cinema You'll be longing for a [[little]] bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What [[drove]] the [[knight]] [[crazy]]? Who built all these [[fabulous]] monuments, castles and [[cities]]... and why are they [[falling]] [[apart]]? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? [[Really]], this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]. This is a real [[eyes]] candy. A [[monde]] made of floating [[archipelago]] and [[fly]] ancient cities. Huge monsters [[who]] preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their opponents... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in [[browsing]] of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we [[audition]] that song before. But You will [[overlook]] that while looking at the [[wondrous]] scenery.

This movie is fun to watch while it lasts. But after [[abandoning]] the cinema You'll be longing for a [[petit]] bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What [[steered]] the [[trooper]] [[lunatic]]? Who built all these [[impressive]] monuments, castles and [[towns]]... and why are they [[receding]] [[additionally]]? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? [[Truthfully]], this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no [[God]] of the [[Piercings]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd [[growing]] up in school. [[If]] you [[liked]] this movie, then I would [[suggest]] you watch Valentine. I just found out [[today]] that the guy who played Marty(Simon) [[killed]] himself a little after the [[movie]] was [[released]] which is a shame since he did a good [[job]]. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when [[Carol]] [[tricks]] him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was [[changing]] in the showers, Carols popular [[friends]] snuck into the [[bathroom]] and got everything ready, camera, [[electric]] shock, [[pole]]. When [[Marty]] open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab [[Marty]] and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They [[picked]] him up, dunked his [[head]] in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like [[cocaine]] but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd [[widening]] up in school. [[Unless]] you [[loved]] this movie, then I would [[insinuate]] you watch Valentine. I just found out [[hoy]] that the guy who played Marty(Simon) [[murdering]] himself a little after the [[kino]] was [[publicized]] which is a shame since he did a good [[workplace]]. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when [[Carroll]] [[stratagems]] him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was [[modified]] in the showers, Carols popular [[homies]] snuck into the [[shitter]] and got everything ready, camera, [[electrical]] shock, [[totem]]. When [[Martyn]] open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab [[Martyn]] and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They [[opting]] him up, dunked his [[leiter]] in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like [[coca]] but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. --------------------------------------------- Result 331 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of [[movie]] v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's [[focus]] on the [[movie]] and the message.

I have rated this [[movie]] 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 [[years]], and for a [[family]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/[[rock]] [[music]], i'm 45. I know of [[Britney]] [[Spears]] but never realised she [[actually]] sang [[Stronger]] until i read the [[credits]] and these [[reviews]]. I didn't [[recognise]] her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch [[movies]] to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the [[movie]] and does it [[entertain]] me.

I watched this movie for the [[message]]. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a [[whole]] other [[story]]) so [[watched]] with the message in mind, as that is an [[area]] of interest. The [[movie]] is light, bright and breezy, [[great]] for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a [[great]] family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of [[cinema]] v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's [[concentrations]] on the [[cinematographic]] and the message.

I have rated this [[flick]] 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 [[olds]], and for a [[families]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/[[boulder]] [[musica]], i'm 45. I know of [[Rihanna]] [[Spurs]] but never realised she [[indeed]] sang [[Bigger]] until i read the [[appropriations]] and these [[assessment]]. I didn't [[confess]] her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch [[movie]] to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the [[films]] and does it [[distract]] me.

I watched this movie for the [[messages]]. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a [[total]] other [[saga]]) so [[observed]] with the message in mind, as that is an [[zoning]] of interest. The [[cinematography]] is light, bright and breezy, [[huge]] for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a [[wondrous]] family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. --------------------------------------------- Result 332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Fonda brilliantly captures what we have long believed Abraham Lincoln was like. It is a fooler. Through Fonda's performance we are led to believe (on the surface) that Abraham Lincoln was a country bumpkin. But, through his confrontation with the lynch mob and especially during the court proceedings, you can see that beneath the exterior posturings is a brilliant man who has a very good command of what is going on around him and how to influence the people around him.

In this movie Henry Fonda shows that he has a very good grasp of how to present humor. It is an aspect of him that has been lost over the years. When he is telling stories and jokes he has the timing down perfect. There is a sequence in the trial that had me laughing quite hard. He shows this gift again in The Lady Eve in 1940.

The ending by John Ford is absolutely brilliant with Henry Fonda going to the top of a hill and in the distance a tremendous storm symbolic of the Civil War. He goes forward into history. The movie is fiction but the insight into Lincoln is tremendous. Definitely worth seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Hollow]] [[Man]] starts as [[brilliant]] but flawed [[scientist]] Dr. [[Sebastian]] Caine ([[Kevin]] [[Bacon]]) [[finally]] [[works]] out how to make [[things]] visible again after having been [[turned]] invisible by his own serum. They [[test]] the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it [[works]] [[perfectly]], Caine & his team of assistant's [[celebrate]] but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine [[wants]] to be the first [[invisible]] [[human]]. He [[manages]] to [[persuade]] his team to [[help]] him & the procedure [[works]] well & Caine [[becomes]] invisible, however when they [[try]] to bring him back the [[serum]] fails & he [[remain]] invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but [[nothing]] works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather [[liked]] Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man [[delivers]] for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. [[Empty]] [[Dawg]] starts as [[sparkly]] but flawed [[researchers]] Dr. [[Sebastien]] Caine ([[Kev]] [[Lard]]) [[ultimately]] [[cooperates]] out how to make [[items]] visible again after having been [[transformed]] invisible by his own serum. They [[testing]] the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it [[cooperated]] [[absolutely]], Caine & his team of assistant's [[commemorates]] but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine [[wanting]] to be the first [[unseen]] [[mankind]]. He [[administered]] to [[convincing]] his team to [[assisting]] him & the procedure [[collaborating]] well & Caine [[becoming]] invisible, however when they [[endeavour]] to bring him back the [[sera]] fails & he [[stay]] invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but [[anything]] works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather [[wished]] Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man [[furnishes]] for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As [[someone]] [[else]] [[mentioned]], it [[begins]] with a [[bizarre]] prologue about a little blond girl [[killing]] a cat. Then the [[main]] [[story]]: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer ([[Shepard]]) [[meet]] by [[chance]] and [[take]] a [[trip]] into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with [[increasing]] [[irritation]] to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a [[kindly]] old lady who seems overly hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, [[anyone]]?) What [[happens]] [[next]] I will [[leave]] for the [[bold]] viewer to sort out because I most [[assuredly]] couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had [[made]] some [[attempt]] at [[logical]] story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and [[intriguing]] [[location]] for [[mysterious]] and occult [[occurrences]]. The verdant peaks could easily [[obscure]] [[supernatural]] forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. [[Just]] [[wish]] the whole thing [[made]] sense. You can view this film at archive.org. As [[somebody]] [[elsewhere]] [[cited]], it [[starting]] with a [[weird]] prologue about a little blond girl [[assassinate]] a cat. Then the [[primary]] [[conte]]: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer ([[Shephard]]) [[satisfy]] by [[opportunity]] and [[taking]] a [[journey]] into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with [[rose]] [[annoyance]] to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a [[nicely]] old lady who seems overly hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, [[anybody]]?) What [[occurs]] [[imminent]] I will [[leaving]] for the [[audacious]] viewer to sort out because I most [[admittedly]] couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had [[brought]] some [[tries]] at [[sane]] story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and [[enigmatic]] [[placements]] for [[enigmatic]] and occult [[incidents]]. The verdant peaks could easily [[blurred]] [[uncanny]] forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. [[Merely]] [[want]] the whole thing [[effected]] sense. You can view this film at archive.org. --------------------------------------------- Result 335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I've long heard that to [[get]] their [[start]] in 'legitimate' [[films]], [[many]] behind-the-camera [[types]] [[work]] on porno [[films]].

The people who produced and [[directed]] this [[monstrosity]] stayed too [[long]].

Poorly paced, [[staged]] and [[written]], it [[uses]] a lot of [[perfectly]] [[good]] [[talent]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[badly]].

Much sexual [[activity]] is teasingly [[implied]] here by the brassiere-popping [[host]] to the [[alien]] [[creature]], but it never [[crosses]] the [[line]]...

You'll [[still]] [[want]] to [[shower]] afterwards, though. I've long heard that to [[obtain]] their [[initiates]] in 'legitimate' [[kino]], [[innumerable]] behind-the-camera [[genre]] [[cooperates]] on porno [[movies]].

The people who produced and [[oriented]] this [[horror]] stayed too [[protracted]].

Poorly paced, [[orchestrated]] and [[handwritten]], it [[utilise]] a lot of [[abundantly]] [[buena]] [[talents]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[sorely]].

Much sexual [[actions]] is teasingly [[unspoken]] here by the brassiere-popping [[receiving]] to the [[foreign]] [[ogre]], but it never [[intersects]] the [[bloodline]]...

You'll [[however]] [[wanting]] to [[bathroom]] afterwards, though. --------------------------------------------- Result 336 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My family has watched Arthur Bach stumble and stammer since the movie first came out. We have most lines memorized. I watched it two weeks ago and still get tickled at the simple humor and view-at-life that Dudley Moore portrays. Liza Minelli did a wonderful job as the side kick - though I'm not her biggest fan. This movie makes me just enjoy watching movies. My favorite scene is when Arthur is visiting his fiancée's house. His conversation with the butler and Susan's father is side-spitting. The line from the butler, "Would you care to wait in the Library" followed by Arthur's reply, "Yes I would, the bathroom is out of the question", is my NEWMAIL notification on my computer. "Arthur is truly "funny stuff"! --------------------------------------------- Result 337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I read the reviews before i watched this movie, and i didn't believe them. I love crap movies and i expected this one to be average. It wasn't. This film makes Camp Blood 1 and 2 look like greats. The film contains bad acting, poor sound, poor confusing storyline, bad makeup- and it bored me so much i turned it off. even the nudity was rubbish! Did they even have a budget for this film? I don't think they did. You can tell if your gonna like this film or not in the first 5 minutes. if u want a good cheesy gory film go watch toxic avenger 4 or even camp blood. Avoid this trash - I watched it on TV and felt riped off, so don't spend anything on it. The best part is probably the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I read the [[novel]] some [[years]] ago and I [[liked]] it a [[lot]]. when I [[saw]] the [[movie]] I couldn't [[believe]] it... They [[changed]] everything I liked about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabel]] Allende ([[author]]) [[say]] about the [[movie]], but I [[think]] it [[sucks]]!!! I read the [[newer]] some [[ages]] ago and I [[wished]] it a [[batches]]. when I [[sawthe]] the [[movies]] I couldn't [[reckon]] it... They [[amend]] everything I liked about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabelle]] Allende ([[auteur]]) [[said]] about the [[filmmaking]], but I [[ideas]] it [[stinks]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 339 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I work at a [[Blockbuster]] store and [[every]] [[week]] we have [[movies]] that [[come]] in with just a few copies, these are the [[kind]] of movies that the Sci-Fi [[channel]] [[shows]]. The [[kind]] of movie that [[nobody]] ever [[wants]], and only that [[idiots]] [[rent]], when they [[bring]] it back I ask them "was it any good?", they [[say]] "no we turned it off after 15 minutes!" [[Movies]] with terrible computer [[generated]], [[super]] imposed monsters and such like, very [[unappealing]].

This is the same [[type]] of [[movie]] that [[Grendel]] is, and [[absolute]] [[waste]] of [[time]], if you [[want]] a reasonably (and only reasonably) good Beowulf [[based]] [[movie]] then [[try]] Beowulf & Grendel , [[starring]] Gerard Butler, who is also [[starring]] in the [[eagerly]] [[anticipated]] 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, [[later]] this year we have another Beowulf [[movie]], with a [[star]] studded cast [[ranging]] from [[Anthony]] Hopkins and [[Brendan]] Gleeson, to Angelina Jolie and [[John]] Malkovich.

But don't [[let]] that [[get]] your [[hopes]] up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[big]] [[disappointment]].

And regarding rentals, here is my [[rule]] of thumb: If there is only one or two copies, don't [[rent]] it because its a [[load]] of [[crap]].( This is [[true]] 99.9% of the time, [[usually]] not [[true]] if the title is [[foreign]], or a documentary.) I work at a [[Blockbusters]] store and [[all]] [[weeks]] we have [[movie]] that [[arrived]] in with just a few copies, these are the [[genre]] of movies that the Sci-Fi [[channels]] [[showing]]. The [[genre]] of movie that [[anyone]] ever [[wanting]], and only that [[idiot]] [[leases]], when they [[brings]] it back I ask them "was it any good?", they [[said]] "no we turned it off after 15 minutes!" [[Films]] with terrible computer [[caused]], [[marvellous]] imposed monsters and such like, very [[unattractive]].

This is the same [[genre]] of [[film]] that [[Carnival]] is, and [[utter]] [[squander]] of [[times]], if you [[wanted]] a reasonably (and only reasonably) good Beowulf [[founded]] [[filmmaking]] then [[tries]] Beowulf & Grendel , [[championships]] Gerard Butler, who is also [[featuring]] in the [[enthusiastically]] [[waited]] 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, [[thereafter]] this year we have another Beowulf [[filmmaking]], with a [[superstar]] studded cast [[ranges]] from [[Antoine]] Hopkins and [[Conor]] Gleeson, to Angelina Jolie and [[Giovanni]] Malkovich.

But don't [[letting]] that [[gets]] your [[aspirations]] up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[prodigious]] [[displeasure]].

And regarding rentals, here is my [[rules]] of thumb: If there is only one or two copies, don't [[rental]] it because its a [[burden]] of [[shit]].( This is [[veritable]] 99.9% of the time, [[fluently]] not [[veritable]] if the title is [[external]], or a documentary.) --------------------------------------------- Result 340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is one [[movie]] that will take [[time]] to get out of your head once you have [[seen]] it. The dialogs are close to [[perfect]], which was to be [[expected]] as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[simply]] giving their best, the story is [[simple]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure [[bliss]]!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is [[still]] the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[excellent]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb [[friend]] who is always blundering when you expect it least.

[[Thumbs]] up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[excellent]] play, and all the [[best]] for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. This is one [[films]] that will take [[moment]] to get out of your head once you have [[watched]] it. The dialogs are close to [[faultless]], which was to be [[waited]] as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[merely]] giving their best, the story is [[mere]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure [[rapture]]!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is [[however]] the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[great]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb [[boyfriend]] who is always blundering when you expect it least.

[[Inches]] up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[wondrous]] play, and all the [[better]] for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. --------------------------------------------- Result 341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] An [[excellent]] [[movie]]. [[Superb]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young Irene Cara. Tony King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This movie was one of the last predominately "all black" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this movie actually had a plot, and was very well done. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. An [[wondrous]] [[film]]. [[Funky]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young Irene Cara. Tony King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This movie was one of the last predominately "all black" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this movie actually had a plot, and was very well done. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MINOR SPOILERS!

Well i just sat up late and watched this film, mainly because i enjoyed and rated some of Singleton's earlier work like "Boyz n the hood". However, i have to say this was a major disappointment and is everything i hate about contrived, clichéd, so-called "message" movies.

The acting is mainly poor,(pop stars and models do NOT necessarily make good actors...take note), the situations hard to swallow, (rape victim becomes overnight lesbian?...please!), but worst of all it reinforces every screwed up stereotype you can think of. By the second half of the film it has become cartoon like in its characterisation, making you lose any shred of empathy you may have had for its one-dimensional players.

Not once is any valid point made about the inherent causes of racism and cultural, sexual and political ignorance. As a result it merely ends up sensationalising the results of these problems. It's message is contradictory, resulting in a sense of confusion and a general lack of plot cohesion. As for the films conclusion i found it predictable, embarrassing, exploitative and mildly offensive. For a film called "Higher Learning" i have to say all i learned is to avoid seeing this ever again.

If you want a true comment on some of the themes that this film completely fails to elaborate upon then go hire "American History X"....unless you were just watching it for Tyra Banks then go hire a life. --------------------------------------------- Result 343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An absurdly hilarious and strikingly human tale of the jealousies and infidelities surrounding a beetle marriage, Russian animation pioneer Wladyslaw Starewicz's "Mest kinematograficheskogo operatora" ("The Cameraman's Revenge", or "The Revenge of a Kinematograph Cameraman") is a delight of early animation, brimming with highly-effective stop-motion puppetry and no shortage of imagination.

Mr. and Mrs. Beetle have a completely uneventful marriage, and both yearn for more excitement in their lives. Mr. Beetle's desires can only be satisfied by the beautiful exotic dancer at the "Gay Dragonfly" night club, whom he visits whenever he takes a "business trip" to the city. She is the only one who understands him. A fellow admirer of this dancer, an aggressive grasshopper, is jealous that Mr. Beetle has stolen his lady and, as fate would have it, he is also a movie cameraman. The devious grasshopper follows Mr. Beetle and his acquaintance to a hotel room, where he films their exploits through the keyhole.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Beetle has, likewise, acquired a friend to add excitement to her life. He is an artist, and he brings her a painting for a present, before they both settle down on the couch for some intimacy. At that moment, however, Mr. Beetle returns home and witnesses the entire spectacle. As Mr. Beetle bashes through the front door, the artist friend clambers up the chimney, but he doesn't escape without Mr. Beetle first venting his anger and frustration upon him.

There is a certain irony in the statement that follows: "Mr. Beetle is generous. He forgives his wife and takes her to a movie." He is generous enough to forgive her, and yet he had been equally unfaithful just minutes earlier. At this point in time, however, we still haven't forgotten the jealous movie cameraman who had been plotting his revenge, and it is no surprise when he turns out to be the projectionist for the film Mr. and Mrs. Beetle are attending. Suddenly intercut into the film they are enjoying is the footage of Mr. Beetle's disloyalty, and the angry wife hits him across the head with an umbrella, before the frightened and angry husband dives through the theatre screen in search of the grasshopper.

In the final scene, both Mr. and Mrs. Beetle, now somewhat more appreciative of each other, are serving time in prison for the fire that broke out when Mr. Beetle sought his final revenge. We do, indeed, hope that "the home life of the Beetles will be less exciting in the future…" This film may appear to be a mere story of the comings-and-goings of a miniscule insect species, but Starewicz is communicating so much more than that. This isn't a story about beetles – it is a story about us. And it's startlingly accurate, isn't it?! --------------------------------------------- Result 344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There is a [[story]] ([[possibly]] apocryphal) about an [[exchange]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the [[start]] of [[Twelve]] [[Monkeys]]. Gilliam ([[allegedly]]) [[produced]] a long [[list]] (think about the [[aircraft]] one from the Fifth [[Element]]) and [[handed]] it to [[Butch]] Bruce. It was [[entitled]] "[[Things]] Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It [[ended]] with a [[simple]] [[message]] [[saying]]: "please don't do any of the above in my [[movie]]".

There is a [[fact]] about this [[movie]] ([[definitely]] true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I [[would]] contend that these two factors [[played]] a [[huge]] role in [[creating]] the [[extraordinary]] (if not [[commercial]]) [[success]] that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve [[Monkeys]] is all that we have rightly [[come]] to expect from a Gilliam [[film]]. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and [[general]] (but [[magnificent]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his [[audience]]. [[Although]] the [[ending]] of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows [[heavily]] from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless [[movement]] of the [[characters]] towards their fate. It is this [[journey]], and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all [[tend]] to suffer from the same [[weakness]]. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no [[denying]] that The Twelve Monkey's is a [[breath]] of fresh [[air]] in the tight-plotting department. Style, [[substance]] and form seem to merge in a [[way]] not usually seen from the ex-Python.

[[Whatever]] the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam [[also]] manages to get a [[first]] [[rate]] (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is [[excellent]] in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a [[suitably]] bonkers - and very [[scary]] - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this [[film]] was [[released]]. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered [[perspectives]] and the [[absurd]] one-way [[journey]] through [[time]] that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. There is a [[narratives]] ([[potentially]] apocryphal) about an [[exchanged]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the [[starter]] of [[Dozen]] [[Chimpanzee]]. Gilliam ([[seemingly]]) [[generated]] a long [[listing]] (think about the [[airplane]] one from the Fifth [[Ingredients]]) and [[delivered]] it to [[Dyke]] Bruce. It was [[titled]] "[[Aspects]] Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It [[terminated]] with a [[mere]] [[messaging]] [[arguing]]: "please don't do any of the above in my [[cinematography]]".

There is a [[facto]] about this [[cinema]] ([[surely]] true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I [[ought]] contend that these two factors [[served]] a [[sizable]] role in [[establish]] the [[unbelievable]] (if not [[mercantile]]) [[avail]] that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve [[Apes]] is all that we have rightly [[coming]] to expect from a Gilliam [[cinematography]]. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and [[overall]] (but [[wondrous]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his [[audiences]]. [[Despite]] the [[terminated]] of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows [[extensively]] from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless [[movements]] of the [[features]] towards their fate. It is this [[voyage]], and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all [[tending]] to suffer from the same [[ineptitude]]. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no [[refusing]] that The Twelve Monkey's is a [[murmur]] of fresh [[airline]] in the tight-plotting department. Style, [[substances]] and form seem to merge in a [[paths]] not usually seen from the ex-Python.

[[Whichever]] the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam [[apart]] manages to get a [[frst]] [[rates]] (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is [[wondrous]] in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a [[sufficiently]] bonkers - and very [[horrible]] - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this [[cinema]] was [[emitted]]. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered [[outlook]] and the [[counterintuitive]] one-way [[itinerary]] through [[moment]] that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm sure this is a [[show]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is [[almost]] [[close]] to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the [[location]], [[style]] of the directing and its [[publicity]] – [[shows]] [[women]] [[walking]] [[around]] on the [[beach]] and all that. [[No]] wonder people have [[misconception]] and [[decide]] not to watch it.

It was [[wrong]] of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the show, there are actually more thing going on, [[real]] juicy [[story]] and [[conflict]], [[turn]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the [[hotel]] [[clerks]], the [[manager]], the [[owner]] and their complicated love [[life]]. [[Also]] [[enter]] the troublesome hotel's [[visitor]] and [[powerful]] [[man]] trying to [[steal]] the [[hotel]]. It actually more exciting than it [[sounds]] here.

I won't [[deny]] that the acting [[suck]] but it ain't that [[bad]] that you'll [[look]] away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is [[fitting]] pretty well with the [[scenario]] and the [[action]] is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is [[actually]] [[anything]] [[happen]] solidly so be patience.

[[Recommendation]]: I [[Really]] Do [[Enjoy]] Watching This. [[Zillion]] [[Times]] [[Better]] Than [[Expected]].

[[Rating]]: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. I'm sure this is a [[exhibitions]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is [[practically]] [[nearer]] to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the [[locations]], [[styling]] of the directing and its [[propaganda]] – [[showings]] [[femmes]] [[marching]] [[roughly]] on the [[beaches]] and all that. [[None]] wonder people have [[misinterpretation]] and [[decides]] not to watch it.

It was [[amiss]] of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the show, there are actually more thing going on, [[actual]] juicy [[stories]] and [[dispute]], [[turning]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the [[guesthouse]] [[clerk]], the [[administrator]], the [[proprietor]] and their complicated love [[vida]]. [[Moreover]] [[entering]] the troublesome hotel's [[visitors]] and [[forceful]] [[guy]] trying to [[fly]] the [[motel]]. It actually more exciting than it [[noises]] here.

I won't [[denying]] that the acting [[sucking]] but it ain't that [[negative]] that you'll [[gaze]] away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is [[fitted]] pretty well with the [[scenarios]] and the [[activity]] is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is [[genuinely]] [[nothing]] [[emerge]] solidly so be patience.

[[Suggestions]]: I [[Genuinely]] Do [[Enjoying]] Watching This. [[Mln]] [[Period]] [[Best]] Than [[Waited]].

[[Scoring]]: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. --------------------------------------------- Result 346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I [[hate]] how this [[movie]] has [[absolutely]] no creative [[input]]. I know they're going for [[realism]], but to be frank I just don't want [[realism]]. Realism is boring. [[If]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[deal]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[least]] [[work]] in some good [[ideas]]. The [[direction]] only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking around a bit, but [[obviously]] I'm supposed to dig that because it makes stuff so [[much]] more [[realistic]]. Hitchcock [[used]] to [[say]] [[drama]] was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to [[see]] Rosetta walking to [[someplace]], Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta [[eating]] a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that [[entertaining]]. There isn't really a deeper [[meaning]] [[either]]. I got so [[bored]] I started looking for some reflections on life in this [[movie]] but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm [[supposed]] to love this, but come on, there's [[nothing]] in there. I [[dislikes]] how this [[filmmaking]] has [[totally]] no creative [[entry]]. I know they're going for [[reality]], but to be frank I just don't want [[reality]]. Realism is boring. [[Unless]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[treating]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[lowest]] [[works]] in some good [[thoughts]]. The [[directorate]] only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking around a bit, but [[patently]] I'm supposed to dig that because it makes stuff so [[very]] more [[hardheaded]]. Hitchcock [[utilized]] to [[told]] [[theater]] was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to [[seeing]] Rosetta walking to [[somehow]], Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta [[nourishment]] a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that [[amusing]]. There isn't really a deeper [[mean]] [[neither]]. I got so [[boring]] I started looking for some reflections on life in this [[filmmaking]] but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm [[presumed]] to love this, but come on, there's [[nada]] in there. --------------------------------------------- Result 347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] On October of 1945, the American German descendant Leopold Kessler (Jean-Marc Barr) arrives in a post-war Frankfurt and his bitter Uncle Kessler (Ernst-Hugo Järegård) gets a job for him in the Zentropa train line as a sleeping car conductor. While traveling in the train learning his profession, he sees the destructed occupied Germany and meets Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the daughter of the former powerful entrepreneur of transport business and owner of Zentropa, Max Hartmann (Jørgen Reenberg). Leopold stays neutral between the allied forces and the Germans, and becomes aware that there is a terrorist group called "Werewolves" killing the sympathizers of the allied and conducting subversive actions against the allied forces. He falls in love for Katharina, and sooner she discloses that she was a "Werewolf". When Max commits suicide, Leopold is also pressed by the "Werewolves" and need to take a position and a decision.

"Europa" is an impressive and anguishing Kafkanian story of the great Danish director Lars von Trier. Using an expressionist style that recalls Fritz Lang and alternating a magnificent black & white cinematography with some colored details, this movie discloses a difficult period of Germany and some of the problems this great nation had to face after being defeated in the war. Very impressive the action of the occupation forces destroying resources that could permit a faster reconstruction of a destroyed country, and the corruption with the Jew that should identify Max. Jean-Marc Barr has an stunning performance in the role of man that wants to stay neutral but is manipulated everywhere by everybody. The hypnotic narration of Max Von Sydow is another touch of class in this awarded film. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Europa" --------------------------------------------- Result 348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the [[manager]] of the [[New]] York's longest- [[established]] floating craps [[game]], and he [[needs]] $1000 to [[secure]] a [[new]] [[location]]. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't [[woo]] uptight missionary [[Sarah]] Brown (Jean Simmons). '[[Guys]] and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[great]] musical because it [[deftly]] blends the [[contrasting]] styles of film and [[stage]]. During a [[dazzling]] opening sequence, crowds of pedestrians move in [[rhythm]], stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's [[New]] York City is a [[glittering]] flurry of art deco [[colour]] and [[movement]], a fantasy [[world]] so [[completely]] [[removed]] from [[reality]] that even the [[business]] of [[underground]] gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I [[write]] this review, I've just [[received]] word that Jean Simmons has [[passed]] away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the [[first]] [[time]] I'd seen her in a film, [[yet]] she [[dazzled]] me from the [[beginning]]. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed [[Sarah]] comes out of her [[shell]] following an alcohol [[binge]] in [[Havana]], [[letting]] loose with an adorably [[playful]] [[rendition]] of "If I [[Were]] A [[Bell]]." Even [[though]] both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn [[decided]] not to dub their vocals, contending that "[[maybe]] you don't sound so [[good]], but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the [[administrator]] of the [[Nouveau]] York's longest- [[developed]] floating craps [[games]], and he [[must]] $1000 to [[ensure]] a [[novel]] [[locations]]. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't [[hu]] uptight missionary [[Baroness]] Brown (Jean Simmons). '[[Guy]] and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[wondrous]] musical because it [[cleverly]] blends the [[contradictory]] styles of film and [[stages]]. During a [[amazing]] opening sequence, crowds of pedestrians move in [[pace]], stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's [[Novel]] York City is a [[glowing]] flurry of art deco [[dye]] and [[movements]], a fantasy [[monde]] so [[utterly]] [[scrapped]] from [[realism]] that even the [[enterprise]] of [[subterranean]] gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I [[handwriting]] this review, I've just [[benefited]] word that Jean Simmons has [[adopted]] away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the [[outset]] [[times]] I'd seen her in a film, [[again]] she [[blind]] me from the [[starting]]. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed [[Sara]] comes out of her [[eggshell]] following an alcohol [[orgy]] in [[Habana]], [[let]] loose with an adorably [[mischievous]] [[extradition]] of "If I [[Was]] A [[Doorbell]]." Even [[if]] both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn [[decides]] not to dub their vocals, contending that "[[potentially]] you don't sound so [[alright]], but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. --------------------------------------------- Result 349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Because 'cruel' would be the only word in existence to describe the intentions of these film makers. Where do you even begin? In a spout of b*tchiness, I'm going to start with the awful acting of nearly everybody in this movie. Scratch that. Nearly does not belong in that sentence. I can't think of even one character who was portrayed well. Although, in all fairness, it would be nearly impossible to portray these zero dimensional characters in a successful way. Still, the girl who played Katherine (whose name I purposefully don't include - I'm pretending she doesn't exist) remains one of the worst actors I've ever seen, only eclipsed by the guy who played Sebastian. The story was God awful. It attempted to mirror the brilliance that was the first one but failed in so many ways. Pretty much every part of it was pointless - though I will admit (grudgingly) that the plot twist was quite good it its surprise. And the ending was at least slightly humorous. But this film is up there with the worst I've seen. Don't watch it. Just don't. There is absolutely no value in watching it. None. It only takes away the enjoyment of the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Well the previews looked funny and I [[usually]] don't [[go]] to movies on opening night [[especially]] with my [[kids]] because ......well you never know. Here is a [[movie]] that doesn't [[appeal]] either to children or adults as the [[jokes]] are too perverse for [[children]] and falls completely flat for entertainment [[purposes]] for [[adults]]. I was actually [[embarrassed]] to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T [[spells]]. Essentially what happens here is a [[total]] [[twisting]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her [[money]]. [[If]] that was a subplot, then [[maybe]] that [[would]] have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the [[whole]] [[movie]] and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the [[mom]] for who he really is. Take my advice and read the [[book]] and pass on the [[movie]]. Well the previews looked funny and I [[often]] don't [[going]] to movies on opening night [[notably]] with my [[youths]] because ......well you never know. Here is a [[filmmaking]] that doesn't [[appeals]] either to children or adults as the [[pranks]] are too perverse for [[kids]] and falls completely flat for entertainment [[intentions]] for [[adult]]. I was actually [[ashamed]] to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T [[episodes]]. Essentially what happens here is a [[unmitigated]] [[twist]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her [[cash]]. [[Though]] that was a subplot, then [[potentially]] that [[could]] have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the [[mummy]] for who he really is. Take my advice and read the [[ledger]] and pass on the [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 351 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd like to think myself as a fairly open minded guy and it takes a lot(!) for me to dislike a movie but this one is without a doubt one of the suckiest, crappiest movie I've ever seen!

I have no idea what's wrong with the people who gave it such a good rating here (imdb is usually pretty reliable when it comes to ratings)... the only thing I can imagine is that people must've voted during one or more conditions:

1. While being shitfaced / stoned out of their minds 2. They've received hard cash for the votes 3. Under gunpoint

I can't believe I wasted a good 1 h 45 min of my life for this pathetic excuse for a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After a day at [[work]], I sat down to [[relax]] and [[turned]] on the [[movie]] [[channels]]. The [[movie]] [[came]] up on the [[guide]] and [[sounded]] interesting so I tuned in just before it [[started]]. The [[first]] 30 [[minutes]] were enough to [[make]] me interested, but the [[lack]] of acting [[ability]] in [[Jamie]] [[Foxx]] and the [[slow]] [[plot]] movement made me [[want]] to [[get]] up and [[find]] [[food]] during the [[movie]]. If there is any [[credit]] to be given for acting in this [[movie]] it should go to David Morse who at [[least]] tries to make the [[movie]] interesting. [[All]] in all, don't [[plan]] on impressing your [[friends]] by [[picking]] this one as a [[renter]] for a [[movie]] [[night]]. After a day at [[cooperation]], I sat down to [[mellow]] and [[revolved]] on the [[filmmaking]] [[channel]]. The [[flick]] [[arrived]] up on the [[guides]] and [[seemed]] interesting so I tuned in just before it [[opened]]. The [[frst]] 30 [[mins]] were enough to [[deliver]] me interested, but the [[shortfall]] of acting [[capacity]] in [[Jaime]] [[Fox]] and the [[slower]] [[intrigue]] movement made me [[wanting]] to [[obtain]] up and [[found]] [[eating]] during the [[filmmaking]]. If there is any [[credits]] to be given for acting in this [[film]] it should go to David Morse who at [[fewer]] tries to make the [[filmmaking]] interesting. [[Everything]] in all, don't [[schemes]] on impressing your [[homeys]] by [[selecting]] this one as a [[tenants]] for a [[filmmaking]] [[overnight]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terry Gilliam traveled again to the future (he had already done it in "Brazil") to tell this story about a virus that's destroying the human race.

The script is totally crazy with some easy tricks on it but it's quite entertaining and Gilliam proves that he's got imagination (the futuristic scenes are just great). As for the cast, Bruce Willis and the beautiful Madeleine Stowe (whatever happened to her??) are just OK, but Brad Pitt is so annoying, whenever he plays roles that are out of his hand he results so forced and he's not credible at all. He should just play good-looking successful young men.

*My rate: 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This whirling movie looks more like a combination of music-clips at MTV than as a real movie. There is no real story and as the movie goes on you ask yourself: "What is going to happen?"; but nothing happens. The story around Eric Cloeck, the frustrated writer, is the only good thing. The other persons seem to have nothing in common: then why bring them together in a movie. With music you can make watchable the worst movie. When I open the tap and there comes water out with the music of Bach then most people will like to look at it but this is not a movie. The director should learn how to write a script for a movie of 100 minutes or more before starting to direct a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Oh [[dear]], this movie was [[bad]] for [[various]] reasons. I was expecting to [[see]] a very low [[score]] for this [[film]] and was a bit surprised by the over-all [[score]].Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[idea]], the movie drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[minutes]]. The credits sequence at the [[start]] was so annoying too![[In]] the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, [[wow]], that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not [[seem]] to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! Oh [[beloved]], this movie was [[unfavourable]] for [[sundry]] reasons. I was expecting to [[seeing]] a very low [[punctuation]] for this [[filmmaking]] and was a bit surprised by the over-all [[punctuation]].Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[notions]], the movie drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[mins]]. The credits sequence at the [[initiation]] was so annoying too![[Among]] the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, [[whoa]], that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not [[appears]] to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! --------------------------------------------- Result 356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] NOTHING (3+ [[outta]] 5 [[stars]]) Another [[weird]] premise from the director of the [[movie]] "Cube". This time [[around]] there are two [[main]] [[characters]] who [[find]] themselves and their home [[transported]] to a [[mysterious]] white [[void]]. There is literally [[NOTHING]] outside of their [[small]] two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I thought the comedic tone [[established]] for this [[movie]] from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There [[needs]] to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[problem]] with the [[humour]] that was [[eventually]] derived from the plight of our two heroes (their [[final]] "[[showdown]]" was [[definitely]] a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[believable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) NOTHING (3+ [[outa]] 5 [[superstar]]) Another [[bizarre]] premise from the director of the [[cinematography]] "Cube". This time [[throughout]] there are two [[principal]] [[personages]] who [[unearthed]] themselves and their home [[hauled]] to a [[opaque]] white [[null]]. There is literally [[NONE]] outside of their [[petite]] two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I thought the comedic tone [[formulated]] for this [[cinematography]] from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There [[should]] to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[trouble]] with the [[humor]] that was [[lastly]] derived from the plight of our two heroes (their [[latter]] "[[confrontation]]" was [[clearly]] a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[reliable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) --------------------------------------------- Result 357 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i [[needed]] a no-brainer in the summer heat, and the [[cover]] [[looked]] [[cool]].

Of course I should've known better. This is a really, really [[bad]] movie. And it gets embarasing when the [[makers]] know it's bad, and [[try]] [[cover]] it up by adding some sexy/beautiful [[women]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you [[WOULD]] like a cool movie about a big [[reptile]] that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i [[requisite]] a no-brainer in the summer heat, and the [[covers]] [[seemed]] [[refrigerate]].

Of course I should've known better. This is a really, really [[unfavourable]] movie. And it gets embarasing when the [[industrialists]] know it's bad, and [[attempting]] [[covers]] it up by adding some sexy/beautiful [[mujer]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you [[COULD]] like a cool movie about a big [[amphibians]] that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) --------------------------------------------- Result 358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Drew Barrymore was [[excellent]] in this film. This role is the [[type]] of role you don't [[normally]] see [[Drew]] [[play]]. Her [[typical]] role is as a [[woman]] looking for [[love]]. The storyline is [[also]] [[great]].

When Holly is [[implicated]] in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a [[guy]] who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a [[mental]] [[prison]] [[hospital]] for what they [[believe]] is [[murder]] is [[almost]] [[killed]] she is [[wrongfully]] accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has [[Multiple]] [[Personality]] [[Disorder]]. After that another [[woman]] [[becomes]] paranoid when she's [[around]] her. [[In]] the [[end]] though, they [[find]] out the truth. Drew Barrymore was [[wonderful]] in this film. This role is the [[kind]] of role you don't [[usually]] see [[Called]] [[gaming]]. Her [[classic]] role is as a [[girls]] looking for [[likes]]. The storyline is [[apart]] [[wondrous]].

When Holly is [[engaged]] in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a [[buddy]] who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a [[spiritual]] [[incarceration]] [[hospitals]] for what they [[think]] is [[murders]] is [[hardly]] [[massacred]] she is [[inappropriately]] accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has [[Several]] [[Subjectivity]] [[Commotion]]. After that another [[femmes]] [[becoming]] paranoid when she's [[roundabout]] her. [[At]] the [[termination]] though, they [[found]] out the truth. --------------------------------------------- Result 359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Another Aussie masterpiece, this delves into the world of the unknown and the supernatural, and it does very well. It doesn't resort to the big special effects overkill like American flicks, it focuses more on emotional impact. A relatively simple plot that Rebecca Gibney & Co. bring to life. It follows the story of a couple who buy an old house that was supposedly home to a very old woman who never went outside, and whose husband disappeared in mysterious circumstances a century ago. Strange things begin to happen in the house, and John Adam begins to turn into the man who disappeared, who was actually a mass murderer. Highly recommended. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The [[premise]] of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Though]] very little dialog is provided [[throughout]] the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone [[made]] the film [[quite]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods [[conveys]] a feeling of loneliness, which [[complements]] the [[quietness]] of the characters themselves. We can [[also]] sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the [[police]] of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of [[hopelessness]], [[helplessness]], and irrationality. This film successfully [[addresses]] these [[elements]] by visuals alone, [[rather]] than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad [[horror]] films use when the narrative is [[weak]].

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this [[film]] provides viewers the experience of [[true]] atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this [[film]] a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. The [[supposition]] of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Nonetheless]] very little dialog is provided [[across]] the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone [[accomplished]] the film [[rather]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods [[airs]] a feeling of loneliness, which [[supplements]] the [[placid]] of the characters themselves. We can [[further]] sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the [[constabulary]] of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of [[helplessness]], [[weakness]], and irrationality. This film successfully [[treats]] these [[components]] by visuals alone, [[fairly]] than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad [[monstrosity]] films use when the narrative is [[flimsy]].

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this [[cinema]] provides viewers the experience of [[real]] atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this [[cinematography]] a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I can give you four reasons to [[see]] this [[movie]]:

1. Four of the best filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[surprisingly]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest trouble in this country (and many others).

(POSSIBLE [[SPOILERS]])

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... I can give you four reasons to [[seeing]] this [[kino]]:

1. Four of the best filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[impossibly]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest trouble in this country (and many others).

(POSSIBLE [[VANDALS]])

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... --------------------------------------------- Result 362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the second entry in the regular Columbo series, and it holds up well today. As I am able to look at it closely now on DVD and see how it is constructed, I am very impressed with the direction of Bernard L. Kowalski (who directed the fine MACHO CALLAHAN as well as countless TV episodes)--watch how the post-murder actions of the killer are shown on a split-screen effect on his two eyeglasses, watch how the murder itself is shown in montage fashion, watch the point-of-view shot from the perspective of the corpse. Also, the wild but impressive avant-garde musical score from noted jazzman Gil Melle was incredible and helped so much to create atmosphere. And the supporting performance of Brett Halsey as the golf pro was wonderful--such subtlety and complexity in a role that nine out of ten times would be a one-dimensional cutout. The "formula" had not yet been set when this episode was filmed, so there are still some surprises in Columbo's methods. Of course, Falk, Robert Culp, and Ray Milland are the highest-quality actors and it's a pleasure to see them work--all men are familiar from many other roles yet lose themselves in their characters here. In all, this entry in the Columbo series--and MANY of the others--are as well-crafted as a very good feature film. --------------------------------------------- Result 363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] There [[seems]] to be a surprisingly [[high]] number of 8-10 [[star]] reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may draw your own conclusions.

This is a very [[bad]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concept]] was kind of [[cute]], and I was pleased to see the [[actresses]] who played Eve and [[Harmony]] on Angel getting [[work]], but it didn't [[take]] long for the sheer awfulness of this film to [[make]] itself known.

Acting: The [[leads]] [[seemed]] [[competent]] enough, but everyone [[else]]? [[Terrible]].

Plot: Chock full of holes [[big]] enough to [[drive]] a truck through.

[[Direction]]: Non-existent.

[[Humour]]: [[Did]] they really think people were [[going]] to [[laugh]]? [[Oh]] boy.

[[Eye]] Candy: [[OK]]. there were some [[really]] [[beautiful]] [[women]] in this [[film]]. [[Not]] just the three main female [[characters]], but right [[across]] the board. It was as if the producers [[hoped]] the [[scenery]] [[would]] [[keep]] [[male]] [[viewers]] so [[distracted]] they wouldn't notice how terrible everything [[else]] was. If so, they [[failed]] [[miserably]].

In the right hands this could have been cute but darkly [[funny]] camp classic. It wasn't even close. There [[appears]] to be a surprisingly [[highest]] number of 8-10 [[stars]] reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may draw your own conclusions.

This is a very [[unfavourable]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concepts]] was kind of [[purty]], and I was pleased to see the [[actors]] who played Eve and [[Concord]] on Angel getting [[cooperation]], but it didn't [[taking]] long for the sheer awfulness of this film to [[deliver]] itself known.

Acting: The [[leeds]] [[looked]] [[proficient]] enough, but everyone [[further]]? [[Frightful]].

Plot: Chock full of holes [[prodigious]] enough to [[driving]] a truck through.

[[Directorate]]: Non-existent.

[[Humor]]: [[Got]] they really think people were [[go]] to [[chuckles]]? [[Ah]] boy.

[[Ojo]] Candy: [[ALRIGHT]]. there were some [[genuinely]] [[sumptuous]] [[females]] in this [[filmmaking]]. [[No]] just the three main female [[hallmarks]], but right [[throughout]] the board. It was as if the producers [[desired]] the [[panorama]] [[could]] [[keeping]] [[men]] [[audiences]] so [[entertained]] they wouldn't notice how terrible everything [[elsewhere]] was. If so, they [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]].

In the right hands this could have been cute but darkly [[comical]] camp classic. It wasn't even close. --------------------------------------------- Result 364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not sure it was the language or the poor acting, but everything about this movie feels and looks cheap and fake.

After seeing Der Untergang this is a huge disappointment. There's no connection between different scenes, and the acting is so incredibly poor I couldn't even believe people could make such a mess of something that had great potential.

And above all, everyone in Germany speaks English. Big mistake. The German language has a certain sound to it, and especially Hitler himself only sounds like Hitler when he's speaking/yelling German.

The way the story is told made me believe it was improvised on the spot, the characters were empty and the movie seems to be a collection of random events that could have happened.

Whether it's the English or the fact that I've already seen Der Untergang, everything about this movie was fake and ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The part where Meg [[visits]] the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" ([[implying]] [[poor]] sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[hilarious]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[wonderful]] movie. [[Very]] [[lovable]] and very intelligent too. Her innocent [[indignant]] expressions have you wishing she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psyche]]? The puzzle [[round]] in [[front]] of the press and [[audience]] was [[done]] well. It's awfully [[underrated]] and [[deserves]] [[accolades]] and [[attempts]] at a [[revival]]. It loses out one vote for [[including]] the [[highly]] improbable far fetched theory being [[bought]] by the [[US]] Govt. I don't [[see]] why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of [[approval]] on it! The part where Meg [[visiting]] the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" ([[suggesting]] [[poorest]] sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[humorous]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[wondrous]] movie. [[Much]] [[adorable]] and very intelligent too. Her innocent [[annoyed]] expressions have you wishing she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psychology]]? The puzzle [[ronda]] in [[newsweek]] of the press and [[spectators]] was [[doing]] well. It's awfully [[underestimated]] and [[merit]] [[laude]] and [[tries]] at a [[rejuvenation]]. It loses out one vote for [[include]] the [[tremendously]] improbable far fetched theory being [[acquired]] by the [[USA]] Govt. I don't [[seeing]] why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of [[ratification]] on it! --------------------------------------------- Result 366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This [[movie]] was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't [[add]] up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a [[little]] [[strange]]. [[Stick]] to the [[first]] "[[Vampires]]", it's a good [[movie]]. "[[Vampires]]: Los Muetos" wasn't a good [[attempt]] of a sequel.

4/10 This [[filmmaking]] was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't [[summing]] up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a [[scant]] [[freaky]]. [[Wand]] to the [[frst]] "[[Bloodsuckers]]", it's a good [[filmmaking]]. "[[Bloodsuckers]]: Los Muetos" wasn't a good [[tried]] of a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] So we compromised. This was a fairly [[charming]] [[film]], I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not bad to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a [[great]] film to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. So we compromised. This was a fairly [[lovable]] [[cinematography]], I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not bad to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a [[wondrous]] film to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Phantom of the Mall is a [[film]] that fits best in the "easily forgotten" category. It's a pretty [[lousy]] [[variant]] on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad [[idea]] to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to [[turn]] over in his grave just yet. It [[could]] have been a lot worse.

Phantom of the Mall has too many useless flashbacks in it and way too many boring sequences to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his girl who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot [[gets]] thickened by lots of [[pointless]] elements and [[annoying]] conspiracy theories. [[While]] it should just be an entertaining horror movie, it [[desperately]] [[tries]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few innovative killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who want to see a relaxing horror movie. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too [[serious]].

I'll try to finish with a few [[positive]] aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will [[certainly]] [[recognize]] him as [[Peter]] for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[unnecessary]]...it was good to [[see]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... Phantom of the Mall is a [[filmmaking]] that fits best in the "easily forgotten" category. It's a pretty [[rotten]] [[variations]] on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad [[thoughts]] to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to [[transforming]] over in his grave just yet. It [[wo]] have been a lot worse.

Phantom of the Mall has too many useless flashbacks in it and way too many boring sequences to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his girl who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot [[got]] thickened by lots of [[unnecessary]] elements and [[irritating]] conspiracy theories. [[Albeit]] it should just be an entertaining horror movie, it [[sorely]] [[strives]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few innovative killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who want to see a relaxing horror movie. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too [[severe]].

I'll try to finish with a few [[favorable]] aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will [[definitely]] [[recognizing]] him as [[Pete]] for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[superfluous]]...it was good to [[seeing]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... --------------------------------------------- Result 369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man With the Gun is pretty much forgotten now, but caused a minor storm of media interest back in 1955 when Robert Mitchum turned down both Jett Rink in Giant (which had actually been written for him and which was subsequently substantially reworked) and Charles Laughton's intended version of The Naked and the Dead to make it instead. Despite some obvious production problems and some harsh lighting that occasionally renders both Mitch and Jan Sterling in unflattering tones, it's a terrific dark western that more than stands comparison with his earlier Blood on the Moon as his 'town tamer' sets to work on a town that never had the chance to grow up before getting run down by the local badmen before turning out to – possibly – be almost as bad as the men he dispatches. Certainly his way of dealing with news of a death in the family – burning a saloon to the ground and goading its manager into trying to kill him – doesn't inspire much confidence in his stability. As well as a good script and a surprisingly good supporting turn from the usually irritating but here well cast Henry Hull, it also boasts a strikingly good early Alex North score, which even includes an early workout for one of his tormented emotional cues that would later turn up in Spartacus. --------------------------------------------- Result 370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Documentary [[starts]] in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[drag]] queens [[hold]] "balls". That's where they [[dress]] up [[however]] they like, strut their [[stuff]] in [[front]] of an [[audience]] and are [[voted]] on. We [[get]] to know many of the [[members]] and [[see]] how they all [[hold]] [[together]] and [[support]] each other. As one [[man]] [[says]] to another--"You have three [[strikes]] against you--you're black, [[gay]] and a drag queen". These are people who ([[sadly]]) are not [[accepted]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[want]] and be [[accepted]]. Then the [[film]] cuts to three years later (1989) and you [[see]] how [[things]] have [[changed]] (tragically for some).

[[Sounds]] depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are [[actually]] very [[funny]] and [[get]] a lot of [[humor]] out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and [[accept]] it with humor--just as they should. We [[find]] out they all [[live]] in "[[houses]]" run by [[various]] "mothers" and all help each other out. The [[sense]] of [[community]] in this [[film]] is [[fascinating]].

When this [[film]] [[came]] out in 1990 it was controversial--and a [[big]] [[hit]]. It won [[Best]] Documentary [[Awards]] at [[numerous]] festivals--but was never even [[nominated]] for an Academy [[Award]]. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? [[Homophobia]] and racism all together.

[[Seen]] today it's [[still]] a [[great]] film--and a [[period]] piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they [[show]] no longer exists. The balls are [[still]] held but not in the spirit we see here. [[Also]] [[drag]] has [[become]] more "[[accepted]]" in society (for better or [[worse]]). And I've [[heard]] the [[houses]] are gone too. That's [[kind]] of sad. I [[WOULD]] like to know where these [[characters]] are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no [[idea]] about the others. And what [[DID]] [[happen]] to that 13 [[year]] old and 15 year old [[shown]]?

[[Still]], it a one of a [[kind]] documentary--fascinating, [[funny]] and riveting. A must see all the way! A [[definite]] 10. Where's the DVD??? Documentary [[initiates]] in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[dragging]] queens [[held]] "balls". That's where they [[costume]] up [[instead]] they like, strut their [[thing]] in [[newsweek]] of an [[audiences]] and are [[voting]] on. We [[obtain]] to know many of the [[member]] and [[behold]] how they all [[held]] [[jointly]] and [[supporting]] each other. As one [[dude]] [[tells]] to another--"You have three [[attacks]] against you--you're black, [[homo]] and a drag queen". These are people who ([[unfortunately]]) are not [[recognised]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[wanna]] and be [[recognised]]. Then the [[cinematography]] cuts to three years later (1989) and you [[behold]] how [[items]] have [[amend]] (tragically for some).

[[Noises]] depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are [[indeed]] very [[fun]] and [[got]] a lot of [[humour]] out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and [[accepted]] it with humor--just as they should. We [[found]] out they all [[vivo]] in "[[house]]" run by [[multiple]] "mothers" and all help each other out. The [[feeling]] of [[communities]] in this [[cinema]] is [[exciting]].

When this [[cinematography]] [[arrived]] out in 1990 it was controversial--and a [[massive]] [[strike]]. It won [[Better]] Documentary [[Scholarship]] at [[many]] festivals--but was never even [[nominate]] for an Academy [[Awards]]. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? [[Homophobic]] and racism all together.

[[Saw]] today it's [[however]] a [[phenomenal]] film--and a [[times]] piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they [[displays]] no longer exists. The balls are [[again]] held but not in the spirit we see here. [[Similarly]] [[dragging]] has [[gotten]] more "[[recognise]]" in society (for better or [[worst]]). And I've [[overheard]] the [[house]] are gone too. That's [[type]] of sad. I [[COULD]] like to know where these [[attribute]] are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no [[thought]] about the others. And what [[COULD]] [[emerge]] to that 13 [[annum]] old and 15 year old [[indicated]]?

[[However]], it a one of a [[sorts]] documentary--fascinating, [[amusing]] and riveting. A must see all the way! A [[concrete]] 10. Where's the DVD??? --------------------------------------------- Result 371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Peter Falk is a diverse and accomplished actor. The movie is well written and the acting seems like real life. For all lovers of Columbo this is a superior piece of work. Because it shows what a talent Peter Falk is. He doesn't play a detective he plays a retired carpet salesman. By the time the credits begin to role you already want to watch it again. The interesting part of the movie is that the message will apply to every person that watches it; the depth of its' pertinence will be the only thing that varies. It is a shame that the liberals in Hollywood only promote smut and skin because this is the type of movie that the people in the business should be proud of. This would be a great movie to turn into a live stage play. --------------------------------------------- Result 372 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I thought that for a [[first]] episode of a [[first]] series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was brilliant. I think it is a crime for [[anyone]] to [[say]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people say that it wasn't historically correct because it is [[supposed]] to be a [[Saturday]] night entertainment show not a boring [[history]] documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[brilliant]] start and i am going to love what will [[come]] next!! I have spoken to [[many]] people at my school and they love the [[show]]! we all [[think]] that it is brilliant entertainment and it has [[great]] stories to go with it. I thought that for a [[outset]] episode of a [[firstly]] series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was brilliant. I think it is a crime for [[someone]] to [[tell]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people say that it wasn't historically correct because it is [[alleged]] to be a [[Monday]] night entertainment show not a boring [[tale]] documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[wondrous]] start and i am going to love what will [[arriving]] next!! I have spoken to [[various]] people at my school and they love the [[exhibit]]! we all [[thinking]] that it is brilliant entertainment and it has [[wondrous]] stories to go with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Worst Bob Hope comedy ever(and that includes some heavy competition). Hope, on an island with sailors, dreams aloud of being in a bathtub with a geisha girl "steering his ship". Somebody certainly steered this Hope-hackery over the cliff, as it features Phyllis Diller and Gina Lollobrigida and still can't work up any laughs or excitement. Where's Bing Crosby when you really need him? --------------------------------------------- Result 374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a veteran of many, many pretentious French films I thought I'd taken the worst the industry had to offer and was able to stomach anything. But not this. Pointless, relentless, violent, unpleasant, meaningless ... The film has nothing to offer and is random hatred and aggression dressed up as pretentious art. Avoid at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Let me start out by saying that I used to really like Betty Grable, particularly from "Down Argentine Way", but by the time she got around to this disaster, she had also got "round" and frankly the whole film was an embarrassment. Costarred with Douglas Fairbanks JNr (who must have been fairly desperate) the story was bad, the colours good, and the film far too long. It had some of the old standbys in it like Harry Davenport and Reginald Gardiner to try and stimulate interest but with no success. The music score was woeful, and I have to say not one tune was memorable in any way....as I was such a fan of Miss Grable, I always wish I had never seen this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Extremely thin 'plot' of satanic rituals or some such mumbo-jumbo provides the hokey excuse to thread copious amounts of sex scenes together. Straight vanilla sex, masturbation, lesbianism, S&M, bestiality, incest, and a few other sexual proliferation's all get their time in the spotlight here. The problem is the storyline is so dull that the rampant sexuality gets pretty tedious after awhile. Who knew that a film with an intimate goat/ girl encounter could be so damn boring? Well now I do.

Eye Candy: Venessa Hidalgo shows all; Helga Line provides T&A (both on display quite frequently); women viewers get the occasional penis.

My Grade: D+

Region 1 DVD Extras: Trailers for "Pick Up", "Legend of Eight Samurai", "Don't Answer the Phone", "Prime Evil", & "Sister Street Fighter" (also the same DVD holds a second feature movie "Evil Eye") --------------------------------------------- Result 377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it [[created]] a generation of wannabe [[computer]] [[hackers]]. The [[idea]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was [[novel]] and [[thrilling]]. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an [[annoying]] flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it [[engendered]] a generation of wannabe [[computers]] [[trespassers]]. The [[think]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was [[new]] and [[enthralling]]. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an [[exasperating]] flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. --------------------------------------------- Result 378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Here's a real weirdo for you. It [[starts]] out with another take-off on the [[PSYCHO]] shower scene, on [[campus]], then [[gets]] crazier when [[several]] coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The [[trouble]] starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the [[college]] cuties wanders into the [[woods]], witnesses a [[murder]] by the sheriff and has her [[head]] blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, [[traps]] and slaughters the [[witless]] witnesses one by one. Tony [[March]] is on-target as the [[evil]], shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's [[overall]] tone is [[truly]] [[disturbing]]. The [[ending]] is so [[abrupt]] you [[almost]] [[think]] the director ran out of [[film]]; it's [[also]] a [[study]] in [[despair]]. [[SHALLOW]] [[GRAVE]] is a [[must]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the [[world]] over. Here's a real weirdo for you. It [[initiates]] out with another take-off on the [[MADMAN]] shower scene, on [[universities]], then [[get]] crazier when [[dissimilar]] coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The [[problem]] starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the [[academia]] cuties wanders into the [[forest]], witnesses a [[assassinations]] by the sheriff and has her [[leader]] blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, [[trap]] and slaughters the [[daft]] witnesses one by one. Tony [[Marci]] is on-target as the [[satanic]], shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's [[entire]] tone is [[honestly]] [[nagging]]. The [[terminated]] is so [[steep]] you [[practically]] [[reckon]] the director ran out of [[kino]]; it's [[apart]] a [[scrutinize]] in [[despondency]]. [[SUPERFICIAL]] [[GRAVEYARD]] is a [[should]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the [[monde]] over. --------------------------------------------- Result 379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There have been several films about Zorro, some even made in Europe, e.g. Alain Delon. This role has also been played by outstanding actors, such as Tyrone Power and Anthony Hopkins, but to me the best of all times has always been Reed Hadley. This serial gives you the opportunity to see an interesting western, where you will only discover the real villain, Don del Oro, at its end. The serial also has good performance of various actors of movies B like Ed Cobb, ex- Tarzan Jim Pierce, C. Montague Shaw, eternal villains like John Merton and Charles King, and a very good performance of Hadley as Zorro. He was quick, smart, used well his whip and sword, and his voice was the best for any Zorro. --------------------------------------------- Result 380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Since [[Educating]] Rita, [[Julie]] Walters has been one of my role [[models]], and her performance in this as a [[woman]] who [[helps]] the [[man]] she loves get in [[synch]] with his feminine side is [[magnificent]]. I [[would]] never have believed her character in the hands of a [[lesser]] actress, but Walters [[pulls]] it off with gusto and [[panache]]. Adrian Pasdar [[gives]] his [[best]] performance to-date in the [[male]] lead. Since [[Educate]] Rita, [[Juli]] Walters has been one of my role [[modeling]], and her performance in this as a [[girls]] who [[helped]] the [[guy]] she loves get in [[sync]] with his feminine side is [[wondrous]]. I [[should]] never have believed her character in the hands of a [[smaller]] actress, but Walters [[pulled]] it off with gusto and [[plume]]. Adrian Pasdar [[delivers]] his [[better]] performance to-date in the [[macho]] lead. --------------------------------------------- Result 381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[Godfather]] [[Part]] I was a [[stunning]] look inside the [[fictional]] Corleone [[family]] and how an innocent [[young]] man was all but forced into [[circumstances]] he never [[wanted]] to have a [[part]] of. The [[Godfather]] [[Part]] II [[shows]] that young man's acceptance of his [[new]] role, his desensitization of [[character]], as well as his [[complete]] loss of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[first]] two parts of this saga of this [[transformation]] of [[Michael]] Corleone make for one of the [[greatest]] tragedies in [[cinematic]] history.

Then, along [[came]] The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex [[character]] that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather [[Part]] II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the [[unbelievably]] tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and [[abandoning]] the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the [[meaning]] of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible [[mess]] of a [[film]] that never should have been made. The only [[solution]] to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather [[movies]] is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's [[shockingly]] horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. The [[Nominating]] [[Parties]] I was a [[staggering]] look inside the [[imaginary]] Corleone [[families]] and how an innocent [[youthful]] man was all but forced into [[situations]] he never [[wanting]] to have a [[parte]] of. The [[Nominating]] [[Portion]] II [[showings]] that young man's acceptance of his [[nouveau]] role, his desensitization of [[personage]], as well as his [[finishing]] loss of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[fiirst]] two parts of this saga of this [[transform]] of [[Michel]] Corleone make for one of the [[widest]] tragedies in [[cinematographic]] history.

Then, along [[arrived]] The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex [[nature]] that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather [[Parties]] II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the [[unimaginably]] tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and [[abandon]] the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the [[mean]] of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible [[chaos]] of a [[filmmaking]] that never should have been made. The only [[solving]] to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather [[filmmaking]] is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's [[marvellously]] horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. --------------------------------------------- Result 382 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[different]] [[story]].

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[multiple]] [[storytelling]].

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. --------------------------------------------- Result 383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I think the [[biggest]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the end, I [[expected]] the acting [[instructors]] of the cast to break in and apologize for how poor the acting was. When you [[consider]] the [[powerful]] subject, the [[brilliant]] scenery and the effort made in creating a [[wonderful]] set and [[spectacular]] images, it is a shame that little [[attention]] was given to acting.

I think the [[bigger]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the end, I [[prophesied]] the acting [[tutors]] of the cast to break in and apologize for how poor the acting was. When you [[scrutinize]] the [[emphatic]] subject, the [[sumptuous]] scenery and the effort made in creating a [[sumptuous]] set and [[marvellous]] images, it is a shame that little [[beware]] was given to acting.

--------------------------------------------- Result 384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[film]] was absolutely...ugh i can't [[find]] the word oh [[wait]]... [[crap]]! I mean when it [[started]] i was like [[yeah]] this [[looks]] good and then after it was so boring. I [[nearly]] fell asleep and it had nothing to do with the [[fact]] that i [[caught]] a late [[showing]] because it was [[utter]] [[filth]]. Ram Gopal Varma has tried his best but the cast [[could]] never [[live]] up to the cast of the [[original]] Sholay i mean what was he [[thinking]] doing a [[remake]]. What was he [[trying]] to do? [[Be]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[win]] all the [[awards]] next year like he did for [[Black]]? Ajay and that other guy were good [[especially]] the other guy who played raj because out of all of them he was the one to look at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[destroying]] his own dignity by doing all these stupid [[films]]. First Nishabd then Cheeni [[Kum]] then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes got to [[gather]] a [[bit]] of his money and [[move]] as far away from Bollywood as [[possible]] before he loses all his [[respect]] and I'm telling you he's already [[past]] half his [[way]]. I mean all this is [[really]] good for the other actors like Shah Rukh Khan who's [[getting]] a really good name now because of the recent downfall of Amitabh. I never really liked him because he [[thinks]] he's [[God]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[going]] to be in that [[movie]].

[[If]] you [[want]] to [[save]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[something]] [[good]] go watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[movie]] ever and it's number one in the [[charts]]! This [[filmmaking]] was absolutely...ugh i can't [[finds]] the word oh [[expecting]]... [[shit]]! I mean when it [[launched]] i was like [[yep]] this [[seems]] good and then after it was so boring. I [[approximately]] fell asleep and it had nothing to do with the [[facto]] that i [[grabbed]] a late [[show]] because it was [[total]] [[dirt]]. Ram Gopal Varma has tried his best but the cast [[did]] never [[vivo]] up to the cast of the [[initial]] Sholay i mean what was he [[thought]] doing a [[redo]]. What was he [[try]] to do? [[Are]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[winning]] all the [[prize]] next year like he did for [[Negro]]? Ajay and that other guy were good [[mainly]] the other guy who played raj because out of all of them he was the one to look at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[demolishing]] his own dignity by doing all these stupid [[filmmaking]]. First Nishabd then Cheeni [[Kam]] then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes got to [[muster]] a [[bitten]] of his money and [[budge]] as far away from Bollywood as [[probable]] before he loses all his [[respecting]] and I'm telling you he's already [[previous]] half his [[pathways]]. I mean all this is [[truthfully]] good for the other actors like Shah Rukh Khan who's [[obtain]] a really good name now because of the recent downfall of Amitabh. I never really liked him because he [[feels]] he's [[Jeez]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[gonna]] to be in that [[film]].

[[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[saved]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[somethin]] [[alright]] go watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[kino]] ever and it's number one in the [[graphics]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much about love & life can be learned from watching the folks at THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER.

Ernst Lubitsch had another quiet triumph added to his credit with this lovely film. With sparkling dialogue (courtesy of his longtime collaborator Samson Raphaelson) and wonderful performances from a cast of abundantly talented performers, he created a truly memorable movie. Always believing in playing up to the intelligence of his viewers, and favoring sophistication over slapstick, the director concocted a scintillating cinematic repast seasoned with that elusive, enigmatic quality known as the ‘Lubitsch touch.'

Although the story is set in Budapest (and there is a jumble of accents among the players) this is of no consequence. The beautiful simplicity of the plot is that any great American city or small town could easily be the locus for the action.

Jimmy Stewart & Margaret Sullavan are wonderful as the clerks in love with romance and then with each other - without knowing it. Their dialogue - so adeptly handled as to seem utterly natural - perfectly conveys their confusion & quiet desperation as they seek for soul mates. Theirs is one of the classic love stories of the cinema.

Cherubic Frank Morgan has a more serious role than usual, that of a man whose transient importance in his little world is shattered when he finds himself to be a cuckold. An accomplished scene stealer, he allows no emotion to escape unvented. Additionally, Morgan provides the film with its most joyous few moments - near the end - when he determines that his store's newest employee, an impoverished youth, enjoys a memorable Christmas Eve.

Joseph Schildkraut adds another vivid depiction to his roster of screen portrayals, this time that of a toadying, sycophantic Lothario who thoroughly deserves the punishment eventually meted out to him. Gentle Felix Bressart has his finest film role as a family man who really can not afford to become involved in shop intrigues, yet remains a steadfast friend to Stewart.

Sara Haden graces the small role of a sales clerk. William Tracy is hilarious as the ambitious errand boy who takes advantage of unforeseen developments to leverage himself onto the sales force.

In tiny roles, Charles Halton plays a no-nonsense detective and Edwin Maxwell appears as a pompous doctor. Movie mavens will recognize Mary Carr & Mabel Colcord - both uncredited - in their single scene as Miss Sullavan's grandmother & aunt. --------------------------------------------- Result 386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the novel, though I understand that this is somewhat different from it; the fact that I rather enjoyed this, coupled with the fact that this really is not my genre, leads me to the decision of not pursuing reading the book. Having not read a single word of Austen's writing, I really can't compare this to any of her work. What I can say is that almost every line of dialog in this is clever, witty, and well-delivered, as well as the biggest source of comedy in this. This made me laugh out loud a lot, with perfect British and verbal material. Every acting performance is spot-on, and Paltrow completely nails the role of a kind matchmaker. The characters are well-written, credible and consistent. I did find a couple of them extremely irritating, however, and while I think that at least some of that was meant to be funny, it tended to get repeated excessively, and it honestly wasn't amusing the first time they appeared. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and everything looks utterly gorgeous. Plot and pacing are great, you're never bored. It does end in a *really* obvious manner, but maybe that's what the audience of these prefer. I can't claim that this did not entertain me, it did from start to finish, and I'd watch it again. There is brief language in this. I recommend this to any fan of romance stories. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Guy [[walking]] around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[movie]] was completely [[senseless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the [[funeral]] of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not [[recommend]] the [[movie]] [[even]] to leave on while sleeping... Guy [[walks]] around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[filmmaking]] was completely [[mindless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the [[mortuary]] of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not [[recommendations]] the [[movies]] [[yet]] to leave on while sleeping... --------------------------------------------- Result 388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jean-Claude Van Damme plays twin brothers Alex and Chad, both whom are martial arts expert who team up to take down the mobsters responsible for the murder of the parents in this empty headed martial arts actioner which doesn't have a plot that would make better use of the gimmick of having two Jean-Claude Van Dammes. Some okay actionscenes, but this is not one of Van Damme's best. --------------------------------------------- Result 389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I [[thought]] this was a [[quiet]] good movie. It was [[fun]] to watch it. What I [[liked]] [[best]] where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[GREAT]]. I [[brainchild]] this was a [[hush]] good movie. It was [[amusing]] to watch it. What I [[enjoyed]] [[bestest]] where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[WONDROUS]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 390 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The performances in this movie were fantastic. The dialogue was great. Jason Patric delivered a fantastic performance as "Kid" Collins in this wonderful adaptation of the Jim Thompson novel. Far superior to "The Grifters", which was a good movie, this film really stayed true to the pulp fiction/film noir roots from which the story came. I recommend this movie to all film noir fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen my fair share of comedy and standup movies but this one is so original, so fresh, it will make you wonder why you always walked right pass it in the video store. Murphy has some pretty raunchy jokes but this is just too funny to pass. If only every movie could be this funny. it should be called "107 minutes of the most incredible comedy" Murphy is a comic genius in this film and will make you say "this is the guy that did dr. doulittle!" He talkes about the ice cream man, shoe throwing mothers, his aunt with a mustache, racism, and everything else you could possibly think of and the ones you couldnt. Please if you ever see one comedy in your life this is it, if only all movies could be Delirious. --------------------------------------------- Result 392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[remembered]] by most [[today]] as one of the [[finest]] [[directors]] in Hollywood [[history]], but this [[film]] [[proves]] that he is. Already a success by doing sophisticated American [[dramas]] such as A Letter to Three [[Wives]] and All About Eve as well as successfully [[adapting]] Shakespeare to life in Julius Caesar, Mankiewicz does a [[marvelous]] [[job]] of bringing this hit Broadway play to [[film]] and does it with [[style]]. Marlon Brando is [[perfect]] as [[Sky]] Masterson, [[even]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only [[actor]] who [[could]] pull it off [[perfectly]] wit his [[sheer]] [[coolness]] and [[clarity]]. [[Frank]] Sinatra is a [[wonderful]] singer, as expected, and does a good [[job]] of acting as [[Nathan]] Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[also]] very good as Sarah Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[great]] [[chemistry]]. All [[supporting]] [[actors]] do their [[part]], [[especially]] Sheldon Leonard as [[Harry]] the Horse in a very [[funny]] bit. [[Still]], Mankiewicz should be [[given]] most of the [[credit]] for [[bringing]] a [[fine]] musical in its own [[right]] to the screen in such a [[way]] that it feels authentic in [[many]] scenes but is [[still]] a [[story]] in its own [[world]]. [[All]] in all, [[Guys]] and Dolls is a [[great]] musical and [[works]] on [[many]] [[levels]] it [[normally]] should not have. Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[reminded]] by most [[hoy]] as one of the [[meanest]] [[managers]] in Hollywood [[historic]], but this [[movie]] [[testify]] that he is. Already a success by doing sophisticated American [[theatrical]] such as A Letter to Three [[Handcuffs]] and All About Eve as well as successfully [[adjusted]] Shakespeare to life in Julius Caesar, Mankiewicz does a [[wondrous]] [[labour]] of bringing this hit Broadway play to [[movie]] and does it with [[styles]]. Marlon Brando is [[faultless]] as [[Heavenly]] Masterson, [[yet]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only [[protagonist]] who [[did]] pull it off [[fully]] wit his [[pur]] [[coldness]] and [[lucidity]]. [[Franck]] Sinatra is a [[magnifique]] singer, as expected, and does a good [[employment]] of acting as [[Nate]] Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[furthermore]] very good as Sarah Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[huge]] [[chemist]]. All [[aiding]] [[actresses]] do their [[parties]], [[notably]] Sheldon Leonard as [[Hari]] the Horse in a very [[amusing]] bit. [[However]], Mankiewicz should be [[afforded]] most of the [[credits]] for [[bring]] a [[fined]] musical in its own [[rights]] to the screen in such a [[ways]] that it feels authentic in [[countless]] scenes but is [[however]] a [[conte]] in its own [[worldwide]]. [[Totality]] in all, [[Buddies]] and Dolls is a [[wondrous]] musical and [[worked]] on [[innumerable]] [[grades]] it [[fluently]] should not have. --------------------------------------------- Result 393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] What [[keeps]] us [[going]] - or at least what I feel the writer wanted us to keep us [[glued]] at an early point is our desire to [[know]] whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we discover that this is the [[story]] of Martinaud's [[imperfections]] and his difficulty in [[coping]]. When there is the revelation - we [[begin]] to [[sympathize]] and [[pity]] him because as the story progresses we are made to think he is the sick, perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the [[distant]] gap he and his wife have even [[though]] they [[live]] on the same [[roof]]. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's [[shocking]] finale.

This [[movie]] [[demands]] your [[patience]] and it has [[certainly]] tried those of [[restless]] teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. [[Although]] there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we [[realize]] that Gallien isn't as [[clever]] as we are [[made]] to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 What [[retains]] us [[gonna]] - or at least what I feel the writer wanted us to keep us [[pasted]] at an early point is our desire to [[savoir]] whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we discover that this is the [[conte]] of Martinaud's [[inadequacies]] and his difficulty in [[adapting]]. When there is the revelation - we [[embark]] to [[commiserate]] and [[shame]] him because as the story progresses we are made to think he is the sick, perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the [[remote]] gap he and his wife have even [[albeit]] they [[vivo]] on the same [[ceiling]]. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's [[appalling]] finale.

This [[cinematography]] [[demanding]] your [[sabra]] and it has [[probably]] tried those of [[agitated]] teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. [[Though]] there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we [[realizing]] that Gallien isn't as [[shrewd]] as we are [[accomplished]] to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 --------------------------------------------- Result 394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Thanks to a dull, dimensionless [[screenplay]] by Neil Simon, and lackluster [[direction]] from [[Robert]] Moore, Chapter Two becomes a [[shrill]] showcase for Marsha Mason who received her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two [[giving]] the same performance here that she [[gave]] in Cinnderella [[Liberty]](73), The Goodbye [[Girl]](77), Audrey [[Rose]](78) and Only When I [[Laugh]](81);only this time she doesn't have a [[child]] to [[drag]] around. Chapter Two is the third and [[last]] feature film for Moore having previously [[directed]] [[Neil]] Simon's The [[Cheap]] Detective(78) and [[Murder]] By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the [[characters]] are mono-dimensional, the [[dialog]] is [[overly]] analytical, and there's virtually no [[establishing]] [[detail]]. The first half is a less-than-captivating, [[meet]] [[cute]], coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the [[dreary]] second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at [[least]] they provide some welcome distraction. And [[last]] and least, there's an [[awful]] song played during the credits. Thanks to a dull, dimensionless [[scenario]] by Neil Simon, and lackluster [[orientation]] from [[Roberta]] Moore, Chapter Two becomes a [[strident]] showcase for Marsha Mason who received her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two [[conferring]] the same performance here that she [[delivered]] in Cinnderella [[Freedom]](73), The Goodbye [[Giri]](77), Audrey [[Rises]](78) and Only When I [[Laughs]](81);only this time she doesn't have a [[infantile]] to [[dragging]] around. Chapter Two is the third and [[latter]] feature film for Moore having previously [[oriented]] [[Neal]] Simon's The [[Inexpensive]] Detective(78) and [[Assassinations]] By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the [[trait]] are mono-dimensional, the [[dialogue]] is [[exceedingly]] analytical, and there's virtually no [[establish]] [[details]]. The first half is a less-than-captivating, [[satisfy]] [[lovable]], coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the [[depressing]] second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at [[minus]] they provide some welcome distraction. And [[final]] and least, there's an [[shocking]] song played during the credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[terrible]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[scary]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! --------------------------------------------- Result 396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie, even though is about one of the most favorite topics of Mexican producers producers: the extreme life in our cities, has a funny way to put it on the screen.

Four of the more important Mexican directors, of the last times, approach histories of our city framed in diverse literary sorts as it can be the farce or the satire, which gives us a film with a over exposed topic in our country, but narrated in a very different way which gives a freshness tone him.

With actors little known, but that interprets of excellent way their paper, each one of the directors reflect in the stories the capacity by we have been identified anywhere in the world, that capacity of laugh the pains and to make celebration of the sadness. Perhaps to many people in our country the film not have pleased, but I consider that people of other countries could find attractive and share the surrealism of the Mexican. --------------------------------------------- Result 397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film, in my opinion, is, despite it's flaws (which I maintain are *few*), an utter masterpiece and a great and glorious piece of art.

What Mr. Bakshi has done here is to create an utterly beautiful film and has shown his immense talent and versatility as a director of animated films. He does not receive 1/100th of the credit he deserves for literally saving the art of animation for an adult audience. If it were not for Mr. Bakshi, I don't believe animation would have survived the Disney onslaught. What is more, with The Lord of the Rings, he has not only created a beautiful animated film, but he has created an entirely new art form - unfortunately one that never quite made it off the ground.

Most people will complain about the use of rotoscoping in the film (the use of live action images which are used as background images and often animated over using various techniques from what appears to be small amounts of tinting to full blown animation). But I feel that the people who complain about it simply cannot accept an art form which is out of the norm. No, this is not Disney animation. No it's not live action. No, it's not "cheating" - what it is is a new, fascinating, and absolutely wonderful art form. Something so fresh, and so new that it feels completely at home in such a fantastic tale as "The Lord of the Rings". Bakshi's pioneering use of this technique brings the subtleties of Middle Earth to life is a very dark and mysterious way, in particular, the darker of Tolkien's creatures, particularly the Nazgul, are realized in a way that traditional animation or live action have not been able to accomplish.

Peter S. Beagle's screenplay (based very little, as I understand it, on an early draft by Chris Conkling) is a very loyal adaptation of Tolkien's works. Where possible he uses dialogue directly out of the novel and it feels at home in the world which Bakshi has created. There are many cuts that were made to fit the first book and 3/4 into a single 2 hour 15 minute film, but there are very few changes to the storyline. There are a few holes which it would have been nice to have filled: The reforging of Narsil, the gifts of Galadriel, the Huorns at the battle of the Hornburg, but, again, with the time limitations he had (already the longest animated feature in history), these are certainly understandable (though it makes one wonder how they could have been explained in a sequel).

Also there is the delightful (one of my favorites) score by Leonard Rosenman (who also scored Barry Lyndon and Star Trek IV (the score for which is clearly based on his LotR work)). It is bombastic and audacious and, dare I say, perfect. It stands on it's own as an orchestral triumph, but when coupled with the images of the film, it enters a whole new world of symphonic perfection. So far from the typical Hollywoodland fare that it turns many people off.

The voice actors are wonderful. Of particular note is John Hurt as Aragorn who just oozes the essence of Strider.

The character design is also wonderfully unique, though not often to everyone's taste. But remember that it is the duty of the director of an adaptation to show you what he/she imagines, not what you might have imagined, and so Aragorn is realized with a distinctive Native American feel and Boromir appears in Viking inspired garb. This is perhaps not what you imagined, but I can only applaud Mr. Bakshi for showing us what he "saw". It also might be noted that he spent a significant amount of time with Priscilla Tolkien in developing the character outfits for the film.

One farther word - the Flight to the Ford sequence, in my opinion, is one of the most subtlety beautiful sequences ever to be caught on celluloid. Bakshi is not afraid to slow down the pace for a moment, and his mastery is clearly shown by the incredible tension is able to build. Bakshi's artistic ability and Tolkien's incredible work fuse in this sequence to a glorious peak which has yet to be equaled.

The recent DVD release (2001) by Warner Brothers, is sorely lacking. While we can offer our eternal thanks that the film is finally available in widescreen format, the package is woefully short of extras. How glorious it would have been to have had a director's commentary, been able to see the 20 minutes of extra footage that were removed for the theatrical release. Another delightful addition could have been the assembled the live action footage which was later animated over. Also present in the DVD release is the utterly horrible voiceover at the end of the film which is a departure from the simple voiceover which occurred in the very final frames of the film. This version is plastered and poorly rendered right over the musical climax of the score.

Of course, the greatest tragedy of all is that the sequel was never made. We will never be able to see Bakshi's interpretation of Gondor, of Shelob, of Faramir, of the Cracks of Doom, of Eowyn's battle with the Witch King or Gandalf's confrontation with him. We will never be graced with Bakshi's image of Denethor or the Palatir or the Paths of the Dead. It is a shame beyond all shames that we will, in the end, have to accept Peter Jackson's glitz and glitter Hollywood, action film version of these later events in Tolkien's masterpiece, but, I suppose even that is better than having no cinematic version at all.

David --------------------------------------------- Result 398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Any [[film]] which begins with a cowhand [[shagging]] a female calf can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 [[yrs]] ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. OK every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like [[youngsters]] raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't show the whole kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we say - naughty traits. Each kibbutz had its own problems, but hardly any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Israel]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). [[Yes]], and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[wrong]] portrayal - probably on purpose too. Any [[filmmaking]] which begins with a cowhand [[kissing]] a female calf can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 [[years]] ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. OK every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like [[adolescence]] raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't show the whole kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we say - naughty traits. Each kibbutz had its own problems, but hardly any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Lsrael]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). [[Oui]], and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[misguided]] portrayal - probably on purpose too. --------------------------------------------- Result 399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Date]]." Super [[clever]] title and interesting premise, but I don't [[think]] it [[delivered]]. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more [[likely]], it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has lived his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now [[start]] [[worrying]]. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[supporting]] characters in the [[film]] didn't [[seem]] to have needs that [[blended]] into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did [[love]] the shots of Seattle, [[cinematography]] was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Dates]]." Super [[malin]] title and interesting premise, but I don't [[believing]] it [[gave]]. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more [[apt]], it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has lived his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now [[began]] [[disconcerting]]. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[helping]] characters in the [[filmmaking]] didn't [[looks]] to have needs that [[mixing]] into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did [[iike]] the shots of Seattle, [[film]] was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. --------------------------------------------- Result 400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Hollywood [[North]]" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a [[civilized]] city like Toronto, in this [[case]], [[later]] in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the [[director]], probably [[saw]] a [[lot]] of the invaders from California that this movie [[seems]] to be the right way to [[deal]] with the arriving personalities trying to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Needless]] to [[say]], "[[Moon]] [[Lantern]]", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "[[Flight]] to Bogota", which has [[nothing]] to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are [[transformed]] into a [[cohesive]] movie at [[last]].

The filming process is [[hilarious]], and the acting, in general, is good. "Hollywood [[Nordic]]" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a [[civilised]] city like Toronto, in this [[example]], [[then]] in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the [[superintendent]], probably [[observed]] a [[batch]] of the invaders from California that this movie [[looks]] to be the right way to [[address]] with the arriving personalities trying to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Futile]] to [[tell]], "[[Luna]] [[Flashlight]]", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "[[Airplane]] to Bogota", which has [[anything]] to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are [[convert]] into a [[coherent]] movie at [[final]].

The filming process is [[funny]], and the acting, in general, is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Made]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[seen]] and [[enjoyed]] more often.

We open on a [[quiet]] [[little]] French village, scanning the [[roofs]] of the [[sleeping]] [[citizens]]. Then we [[hear]] [[something]] that sounds like a [[party]]. [[Upon]] [[investigating]] the uproar, two [[neighboring]] [[men]] are told the story of two [[men]], [[supposedly]] [[friends]], who [[picked]] two numbers for the [[lottery]].

Our star of the picture has his number and his [[friend]] his. When he [[asks]] his [[friend]], [[would]] he [[share]] half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his [[friend]] promptly [[says]] no. In fact, H.[[E]]. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so [[upset]] over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! [[Introduced]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[noticed]] and [[liked]] more often.

We open on a [[hush]] [[petite]] French village, scanning the [[ceiling]] of the [[sleep]] [[citizen]]. Then we [[heed]] [[somethings]] that sounds like a [[parties]]. [[After]] [[exploring]] the uproar, two [[adjoining]] [[male]] are told the story of two [[male]], [[presumably]] [[buddies]], who [[selects]] two numbers for the [[bingo]].

Our star of the picture has his number and his [[boyfriend]] his. When he [[demands]] his [[boyfriend]], [[should]] he [[shares]] half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his [[boyfriend]] promptly [[tells]] no. In fact, H.[[f]]. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so [[disgusted]] over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! --------------------------------------------- Result 402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] What is it with Americans and their hang-up with [[religious]] gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling novel is [[incredible]], but to pull it off as a [[movie]] you really [[need]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good [[actors]] have [[gone]] to [[heaven]] and we're [[left]] with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type [[journalist]](!) trying to [[discover]] why a lot of people have simply disappeared. [[Oh]] yeah, there's a subplot about an [[evil]] [[world]] conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so [[cheaply]], and with such inane [[dialogue]], that it has [[sheer]] [[entertainment]] [[value]] in all of its [[unintended]] laughs. Not [[recommended]] for [[anyone]] with a 3-digit IQ. What is it with Americans and their hang-up with [[ecclesiastical]] gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling novel is [[unbelievable]], but to pull it off as a [[filmmaking]] you really [[requisite]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good [[protagonists]] have [[missing]] to [[sky]] and we're [[exited]] with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type [[columnist]](!) trying to [[discovering]] why a lot of people have simply disappeared. [[Ohh]] yeah, there's a subplot about an [[malicious]] [[globe]] conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so [[cheap]], and with such inane [[conversations]], that it has [[unadulterated]] [[entertainments]] [[values]] in all of its [[unexpected]] laughs. Not [[suggested]] for [[nobody]] with a 3-digit IQ. --------------------------------------------- Result 403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is SOOOO funny!!! The acting is WONDERFUL, the Ramones are sexy, the jokes are subtle, and the plot is just what every high schooler dreams of doing to his/her school. I absolutely loved the soundtrack as well as the carefully placed cynicism. If you like monty python, You will love this film. This movie is a tad bit "grease"esk (without all the annoying songs). The songs that are sung are likable; you might even find yourself singing these songs once the movie is through. This musical ranks number two in musicals to me (second next to the blues brothers). But please, do not think of it as a musical per say; seeing as how the songs are so likable, it is hard to tell a carefully choreographed scene is taking place. I think of this movie as more of a comedy with undertones of romance. You will be reminded of what it was like to be a rebellious teenager; needless to say, you will be reminiscing of your old high school days after seeing this film. Highly recommended for both the family (since it is a very youthful but also for adults since there are many jokes that are funnier with age and experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[originally]] [[saw]] this [[movie]] as a [[boy]] at the [[old]] Rialto [[Theatre]] as part of a Saturday [[afternoon]] matinée triple [[bill]] which [[also]] [[featured]] Vincent Price's "Last [[Man]] on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week [[afterwards]]! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies [[would]] prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so scared! [[Though]] all three films frightened me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most profound [[impact]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and [[missed]] the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), [[Gothic]] set design, strong acting, and suspense ([[especially]] the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and [[made]] a [[lasting]] impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a [[movie]] that [[showed]] up on the late [[show]] in Winnipeg. I couldn't [[quite]] [[remember]] the title ([[remember]] I didn't [[get]] to [[seen]] the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] and was scared [[witless]]), and to [[make]] [[matters]] worse, the [[film]] had been [[released]] under literally a dozen [[different]] [[movie]] titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of [[Terror]], [[Castle]] of Terror, [[Long]] [[Night]] of Terror, etc...) and the [[USA]]/[[UK]] [[working]] title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, [[similar]] to [[dozens]] of other "b" horror and suspense [[films]], [[making]] it illusive. But thanks to the internet and [[perseverance]], I [[found]] it at [[last]]! What a [[treat]] to [[finally]] watch the [[film]] in its entirety after so [[many]] years! It [[may]] not have had quite the sheer emotional [[impact]] that it did when I was a [[boy]], but as haunted [[house]] [[movies]] go, it's [[stands]] up well and [[compares]] favourably to [[similar]] [[iconic]] [[films]] of the [[period]] such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black [[Sunday]]," The [[film]] is a [[fine]] [[early]] effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It [[stars]] 60's [[scream]] queen [[icon]] Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada I [[initially]] [[sawthe]] this [[kino]] as a [[guy]] at the [[former]] Rialto [[Cinema]] as part of a Saturday [[evening]] matinée triple [[billing]] which [[moreover]] [[characteristics]] Vincent Price's "Last [[Guy]] on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week [[upon]]! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies [[ought]] prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so scared! [[If]] all three films frightened me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most profound [[consequences]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and [[flunked]] the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), [[Goth]] set design, strong acting, and suspense ([[specifically]] the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and [[brought]] a [[permanent]] impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a [[cinema]] that [[displays]] up on the late [[displaying]] in Winnipeg. I couldn't [[very]] [[reminisce]] the title ([[remembering]] I didn't [[got]] to [[watched]] the [[initiate]] of the [[cinematography]] and was scared [[dopey]]), and to [[deliver]] [[things]] worse, the [[cinematography]] had been [[liberated]] under literally a dozen [[multiple]] [[cinema]] titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of [[Horror]], [[Castillo]] of Terror, [[Lange]] [[Nocturnal]] of Terror, etc...) and the [[US]]/[[BRITAIN]] [[worked]] title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, [[identical]] to [[tens]] of other "b" horror and suspense [[cinematography]], [[doing]] it illusive. But thanks to the internet and [[stubbornness]], I [[uncovered]] it at [[final]]! What a [[deal]] to [[ultimately]] watch the [[cinema]] in its entirety after so [[several]] years! It [[maggio]] not have had quite the sheer emotional [[impacts]] that it did when I was a [[bloke]], but as haunted [[households]] [[film]] go, it's [[standing]] up well and [[compare]] favourably to [[identical]] [[emblematic]] [[movie]] of the [[deadline]] such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black [[Yesterday]]," The [[cinematography]] is a [[fined]] [[precocious]] effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It [[superstar]] 60's [[yells]] queen [[icons]] Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada --------------------------------------------- Result 405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Orson Welles' "The Lady From Shanghai" does not have the brilliant screenplay of "Citizen Kane," e.g., but Charles Lawton, Jr.'s cinematography, the unforgettable set pieces (such as the scene in the aquarium, the seagoing scene featuring a stunning, blonde-tressed Rita Hayworth singing "Please Don't Love Me," and the truly amazing Hall of Mirrors climax), and the wonderful cast (Everett Sloane in his greatest performance, Welles in a beautifully under-played role, the afore-mentioned Miss Hayworth--Welles' wife at the time--at her most gorgeous) make for a very memorable filmgoing experience. The bizarre murder mystery plot is fun and compelling, not inscrutable at all. The viewer is surprised by the twists and turns, and Welles' closing line is an unheralded classic. "The Lady From Shanghai" gets four stars from this impartial arbiter. --------------------------------------------- Result 406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I regret that I've seen this movie. Can't believe that the creator of Best Intentions and Pelle the Conqueror could make such a bleak and boring film. What a waste! --------------------------------------------- Result 407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Antwone Fisher" tells of a young black U.S. Navy enlisted man and product of childhood abuse and neglect (Luke) whose hostility toward others gets him a stint with the base shrink (Washington) leading to introspection, self appraisal, and a return to his roots. Pat, sanitized, and sentimental, "Antwone Fisher" is a solid feel-good flick about the reconciliation of past regrets and closure. Good old Hollywood style entertainment family values entertainment with just a hint of corn. (B) --------------------------------------------- Result 408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow, I loved this film. It may not have had the funding and advertising that the latest hollywood blockbusters get but it packs twice the emotional punch. The tale revolves around this one family from Utah and it's the connections between the people in the family that provide the film with its punch. The main lead (Giovanni Ribisi) plays his part very well, at no time does he leave you to believe that he's acting all his feelings. It's his brother (Elias Koteas) who stole the show for me though. When the two were in scenes together they bounded their lines off of each other, giving fantastic performances. Great cast, great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 409 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was eager to see "Mr. Fix It" because I'm a huge David Boreanaz fan. What I got, though, was a 1-1/2 hour nap. The premise seemed enjoyable: Boreanaz is Lance Valenteen, proprietor of a business called "Mr. Fix It", where dumped men enlist his help to get their girlfriends to take them back.

Among the problems with this movie are the editing, script, and acting. Although I've found Boreanaz delightful in his other film roles (with the exception of that "Crow" movie he did), this was disappointing. At times, his character was interesting and others, flat. The supporting cast reminded me of soap opera day players. I realize it wasn't a big-budget film, but some of the scene cuts and music just didn't seem right.

My advice: watch at your own risk. --------------------------------------------- Result 410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found this film the first time when I was searching for some works in witch Stéphane Rideau had participate, still in an extraordinary ravishment caused by the astonishingly beautiful «Les roseaux sauvages» (in Portuguese, Juncos Silvestres), by André Téchiné. I was searching for similar movies, in the come of age line. I found then «Presque Rien», a movie where the director Sébastien Lifshitz deliciously amazes us, earning a nomination by the Cannes festival in 2000. The story is about two guys, the kind «boy next door», Mathieu (Jérémie Elkaïm) and Cédric (Stéphane Rideau), who meet during the summer vacations. In a land far from where he lives, Mathieu spends is days at the beach with his sister. There he meets Cédric, a local, with whom he starts this estival and revealing relationship, much by means of the sensual and seducer personality that Stéphane Rideau gives his characters, (in «Les roseaux sauvages», 6 years younger, he still preserves the innocence of the sweet seducer, witch matures here in experience). Exemplar in directing, in the amorous sequence, in the intimate and confessing description that is made about a boys first facing his (still ambiguous) sexuality and great love. The first love, in its terrible progression ecstasy-despair. The best of the film is the best of France: the fervent passion, the hot and excited rationalism, the brownish beauty, the simple and natural acceptance made by the families, although not without surprise and first anger. Still, there is the beach, the luminosity, the lightness e simplicity of summer, the freshness of breeze, the surge’s melody, and the expressive eyes of an introverted Elkaïm (hesitant, hurt, puzzled, passionate). The sex is not avoided nor exploited, it is treated as it is, with no exhibitionist intention. In virtue of pure talent, this is a work of drama of uncommon quality, without cheap sentimentalism, showing an inevitably real image of two homosexual in their prime youth as any ordinary person, although with a social fear of rejection and shame. It is well worthy being seen, especially by those who adore French movies (although the DVD front cover is very lame, with the two actors in between tens of stars, greased with brilliantine). A movie witch, in my opinion, deserves an 8-9! --------------------------------------------- Result 411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1st watched 8/3/2003 - 2 out of 10(Dir-Brad Sykes): Mindless 3-D movie about flesh-eating zombies in a 3 story within a movie chronicle. And yes, we get to see zombies eating human flesh parts in 3D!! Wow, not!! That has been done time and time again in 2D in a zombie movie but what usually makes a zombie movie better is the underlying story not the actual flesh-eating. That's what made the original zombie classics good. The flesh-eating was just thrown in as an extra. We're actually bored throughout most of this 3-part chronicle because of the lame(twilight-zone like) easily understood and slow-pacingly revealed finale's. The last story is actually the story the movie started with(having a reporter investigating a so-called ghost town) and of course we get to see flesh eating zombie's in that one as well. Well, I think I've said enough. Watch the classics, not this 3D bore-feast. --------------------------------------------- Result 412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[William]] Wyler was to have directed this [[adaptation]] of Moss Hart's [[hit]] Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most [[unlikely]] helmsman: [[George]] Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[touch]] on the [[many]] documentary-like sequences of [[Air]] Corps training, and he [[invests]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanity]] than the [[genre]] generally [[allowed]], [[particularly]] in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and [[entirely]] white, [[save]] for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of [[newbies]] are nicer and more [[wholesome]] than in [[real]] [[life]], and the speechifying about [[home]] and Mom and the wife and [[kid]] [[gets]] pretty thick, but it's [[efficient]] propaganda and [[undeniably]] [[stirring]]. [[Notable]], too, for the all-military [[male]] cast, [[several]] of whom didn't reemerge for [[years]]: [[Lon]] McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, [[Martin]] Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, Gary Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Also]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't show up till an hour and a half into the picture but has some good little sequences as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn [[spouse]]. Too bad its [[rights]] are in a [[tangle]] and the only [[print]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox released it (to considerable success), the [[rights]] [[reverted]] to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[disingenuous]] and corny in [[spots]], but it [[also]] [[captures]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it [[deserves]] to be more widely seen. [[Williams]] Wyler was to have directed this [[adjustments]] of Moss Hart's [[slugged]] Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most [[improbable]] helmsman: [[Giorgi]] Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[toque]] on the [[various]] documentary-like sequences of [[Airline]] Corps training, and he [[invested]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanist]] than the [[gender]] generally [[authorizing]], [[especially]] in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and [[altogether]] white, [[savings]] for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of [[beginners]] are nicer and more [[healthy]] than in [[reales]] [[living]], and the speechifying about [[abode]] and Mom and the wife and [[kids]] [[got]] pretty thick, but it's [[effective]] propaganda and [[surely]] [[agitating]]. [[Cannot]], too, for the all-military [[macho]] cast, [[many]] of whom didn't reemerge for [[olds]]: [[Ldn]] McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, [[Martins]] Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, Gary Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Moreover]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't show up till an hour and a half into the picture but has some good little sequences as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn [[spousal]]. Too bad its [[right]] are in a [[muddle]] and the only [[fingerprint]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox released it (to considerable success), the [[right]] [[reverting]] to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[untruthful]] and corny in [[sunspots]], but it [[apart]] [[apprehended]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it [[deserved]] to be more widely seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This [[movie]] sucked [[plain]] and [[simple]]. [[Okay]] so it's [[basically]] about a [[girl]] that [[gets]] [[raped]], and to get revenge she [[gets]] another [[guy]] to [[rape]] the [[rapist]]. The [[rapist]] is a [[douche]], but the [[girl]] victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the [[mood]] and [[start]] [[kissing]] and stuff, but when the [[rapist]] tries to have sex with her, she doesn't [[allow]] it so the [[rapist]] [[rapes]] her. And the [[thing]] is the rape scene for the [[girl]] is very [[short]] and it doesn't [[really]] [[expose]] or [[show]] anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting [[raped]], it's a pretty long [[rape]] scene. There is [[basically]] [[nothing]] in the [[story]] that is worth [[watching]].

3.2/10 This [[filmmaking]] sucked [[lowlands]] and [[easy]]. [[Verywell]] so it's [[fundamentally]] about a [[chick]] that [[got]] [[broken]], and to get revenge she [[got]] another [[guys]] to [[violating]] the [[violator]]. The [[violator]] is a [[knucklehead]], but the [[chick]] victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the [[humour]] and [[started]] [[screwing]] and stuff, but when the [[violator]] tries to have sex with her, she doesn't [[allowed]] it so the [[offender]] [[raping]] her. And the [[stuff]] is the rape scene for the [[chick]] is very [[terse]] and it doesn't [[genuinely]] [[unmask]] or [[illustrates]] anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting [[infringed]], it's a pretty long [[rapes]] scene. There is [[predominantly]] [[anything]] in the [[history]] that is worth [[staring]].

3.2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 414 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Broadway and film actor-turned-director [[John]] Cassavetes (from Rosemary's [[Baby]])[[creates]] a [[masterpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, [[Ben]] Gazzara, Joan Blondell, [[Paul]] [[Stewart]], Zohra Lampert, Laura [[Johnson]] and there is a cameo by [[Peter]] Falk. The [[premise]] of the film: An aging [[stage]] and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan [[dies]] in a [[car]] [[accident]] trying to [[get]] her [[autograph]]. The [[movie]] has a slow [[pace]] and a dark, [[moody]], frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's [[Baby]] without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones [[every]] successful actress has- she is [[getting]] old and she will become [[useless]] in her [[career]]. [[Furthermore]], she feels she has [[lived]] a [[life]] that [[lacks]] any [[true]] spirituality, [[humanity]] and merit. She has [[lived]] only for her career- she has no [[children]], doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The [[gradual]] [[disintegration]] of her personality is the meat of this [[film]]. She is [[falling]] apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands [[really]] [[gets]] into the character's [[tormented]] psyche and acts the [[part]] [[quite]] well. She is a [[terrific]] [[actress]] and this 70's [[film]] is a refreshing [[contrast]] to the [[often]] [[violent]] films of the [[period]] and or the disaster [[movies]] or adventure [[thrillers]]. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, [[cynical]] feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream [[movies]] and [[actors]] of the 70's [[generation]]. [[Either]] that or this [[movie]] is a product of the 70's which was itself [[cynical]] in [[many]] aspects- Nixon's [[deception]], Watergate, [[Vietnam]], etc. [[Although]] the [[production]] [[values]] are not [[great]], and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting [[film]] with haunting [[moods]]. Kudos to the underrated and [[late]] director Cassavetes who [[died]] in the late 80's. Broadway and film actor-turned-director [[Johannes]] Cassavetes (from Rosemary's [[Babies]])[[begets]] a [[centerpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, [[Bin]] Gazzara, Joan Blondell, [[Paulo]] [[Stuart]], Zohra Lampert, Laura [[Johnston]] and there is a cameo by [[Pieter]] Falk. The [[assumption]] of the film: An aging [[stages]] and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan [[deaths]] in a [[cars]] [[accidents]] trying to [[obtain]] her [[manuscript]]. The [[films]] has a slow [[tempo]] and a dark, [[quirky]], frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's [[Honey]] without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones [[each]] successful actress has- she is [[obtain]] old and she will become [[futile]] in her [[quarries]]. [[Besides]], she feels she has [[resided]] a [[lifetime]] that [[lacked]] any [[authentic]] spirituality, [[humanitarian]] and merit. She has [[resided]] only for her career- she has no [[child]], doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The [[phased]] [[decay]] of her personality is the meat of this [[cinematography]]. She is [[tumbling]] apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands [[genuinely]] [[get]] into the character's [[disturbed]] psyche and acts the [[portion]] [[rather]] well. She is a [[spectacular]] [[actor]] and this 70's [[movies]] is a refreshing [[contrasts]] to the [[normally]] [[ferocious]] films of the [[deadline]] and or the disaster [[movie]] or adventure [[thriller]]. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, [[cynic]] feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream [[theater]] and [[actresses]] of the 70's [[jill]]. [[Neither]] that or this [[flick]] is a product of the 70's which was itself [[sarcastic]] in [[multiple]] aspects- Nixon's [[hoax]], Watergate, [[Viet]], etc. [[Though]] the [[productivity]] [[value]] are not [[fantastic]], and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting [[kino]] with haunting [[feelings]]. Kudos to the underrated and [[tardy]] director Cassavetes who [[dead]] in the late 80's. --------------------------------------------- Result 415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] High heels are tricksy things. They can elevate women (or cross-dressing [[men]]) to newfound [[heights]], put forward a [[sharp]] [[statement]] of [[style]] and [[bring]] a [[touch]] of [[fragile]] [[elegance]]. Alternatively, they can be a [[perilous]] foot pain that will [[inevitably]] lead to [[trips]], falls and [[ultimate]] tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a [[disappointment]] [[trip]] than a stylish high [[riser]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is stylish for sure, but in terms of [[plot]] it's a tongue-tied and [[tedious]] affair full of [[confusing]], complex characters that never fully engage or make [[sense]]. A few [[moments]] of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The [[best]] bit comes at the beginning in a marvellously macabre case of [[manslaughter]] orchestrated by a [[child]]. From this brilliant bit of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid [[enough]] acting performances and there's some stylish, arty direction that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, [[fractured]] mother-daughter [[relationship]] and a [[character]] who is [[alternately]] a [[judge]], a transvestite and a police [[informer]] this [[could]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[Instead]] it's [[poor]]. [[High]] Heels stumbles for sure. High heels are tricksy things. They can elevate women (or cross-dressing [[mens]]) to newfound [[highlands]], put forward a [[abrupt]] [[declarations]] of [[styles]] and [[brings]] a [[toque]] of [[precarious]] [[style]]. Alternatively, they can be a [[precarious]] foot pain that will [[unavoidably]] lead to [[voyages]], falls and [[final]] tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a [[dissatisfaction]] [[travel]] than a stylish high [[escalator]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is stylish for sure, but in terms of [[intrigue]] it's a tongue-tied and [[monotonous]] affair full of [[disconcerting]], complex characters that never fully engage or make [[feeling]]. A few [[times]] of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The [[better]] bit comes at the beginning in a marvellously macabre case of [[homicidal]] orchestrated by a [[enfants]]. From this brilliant bit of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid [[satisfactorily]] acting performances and there's some stylish, arty direction that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, [[broken]] mother-daughter [[ties]] and a [[traits]] who is [[otherwise]] a [[magistrate]], a transvestite and a police [[insider]] this [[did]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[However]] it's [[deficient]]. [[Highest]] Heels stumbles for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Anyone who has [[studied]] any physics or cognitive science will walk out disgusted after 40 [[min]]., as my [[wife]] and I did. The ignorant masses might be entertained by the hand-waiving arguments and the absurd "[[conclusions]]" [[drawn]] (without even an [[attempt]] at a [[logical]] [[reason]]) from [[real]] science. I'm offended by such [[nonsense]] [[presented]] under the guise of "science". I can only conclude that the [[writers]] [[picked]] up a quantum physics [[book]], didn't [[understand]] a word of it, then watched The Matrix about a thousand times, and proceeded to [[write]] this [[movie]].

For example, the Washington DC [[crime]] [[experiment]] was [[done]] by The [[Transcendental]] [[Meditation]] Program. A [[brief]] [[search]] will [[reveal]] the science of their [[methods]]. (http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/t/[[tm]]/dissenter.htm)

[[Save]] your money. Anyone who has [[analysed]] any physics or cognitive science will walk out disgusted after 40 [[mn]]., as my [[mujer]] and I did. The ignorant masses might be entertained by the hand-waiving arguments and the absurd "[[finding]]" [[lured]] (without even an [[attempts]] at a [[sane]] [[rationale]]) from [[true]] science. I'm offended by such [[absurdity]] [[tabled]] under the guise of "science". I can only conclude that the [[authors]] [[chosen]] up a quantum physics [[books]], didn't [[realise]] a word of it, then watched The Matrix about a thousand times, and proceeded to [[writing]] this [[filmmaking]].

For example, the Washington DC [[misdemeanors]] [[experiences]] was [[effected]] by The [[Momentous]] [[Meditative]] Program. A [[succinct]] [[quest]] will [[unveil]] the science of their [[modes]]. (http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/t/[[mt]]/dissenter.htm)

[[Savings]] your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 2002's undeservedly popular "I Love the 80's" is an inane, idiotic, offensive and downright disgusting pop-culture mess of a show that was the first in a long-line of horrid television programming that ultimately spelled out the end of VH1, which was at one time the only real music-oriented channel left on TV! I used to practically live on VH1 up until the spring or winter, I forget which one now, of 2002 when garbage like this started to appear for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Out of sheer morbid curiosity (I'd guess that's what you'd call it) I had decided that I would go ahead and give it a look-see anyhow the first night it came on even though the advertisements looked like complete crap. At least I can honestly say that I wasn't a bit disappointed by it because my expectations were obviously bottom basement-level to begin with. The emphasis of this show I found out within the first 5 minutes was less on each year of the 1980's and what was and wasn't culturally significant or popular (which is what I was expecting to see), but instead more of an impromptu platform for a whole slew of really god-awful no-name comedians to display what they more than likely think is their comedic skills *rolls eyes*...more like lack-thereof if you ask me! It's pretty easy now to see why no one had ever heard of any of these idiots before they appeared on this show because they are all so terribly unfunny and pathetic in their attempts at so-called "humor" that I swear I could feel my intestines knot up with each and every rancid one-liner they shot off one after another! Altogether, I have no problem in saying that "I Love the 80's" was/is trash of the lowest denominator, and one of the main reasons why I almost never watch VH1 anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 418 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A wonderful early musical film from Rene Clair, as fun and witty as his silent "The Italian Straw Hat". Using sound in a expressive way and not just for dialogue and effects, Clair influenced early musicals in America (the opera scene from A Night at the Opera is strongly influenced by Le Million, for example). Should (but won't) be seen by all cinephiles, and the DVD from Criterion is exactly as good as you'd expect. There's not a ton of extras, but most DVD extras I've seen are useless fluff, and the Clair interview on disc is one I hadn't ever seen. Get it while it's still around. --------------------------------------------- Result 419 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of [[Rowan]] Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it [[seems]] that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their work, something that [[allows]] them to [[identify]] with audience members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. [[A]] Bug's [[Life]] has that same charm, it has a connection with [[real]] life that allows us to easily [[suspend]] disbelief and [[accept]] a [[lot]] of talking [[insects]], because [[even]] though they talk, they [[still]] ACT just like [[real]] bugs. It's like the team that [[made]] the [[movie]] [[found]] a [[way]] to bring us into the mind of a [[child]] and [[allow]] us to [[think]] like them, to imagine [[bugs]] the [[way]] a [[young]] mind does.

[[Honey]], I Shrunk The [[Kids]] was one of my [[favorite]] [[films]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's [[Life]] is like a more [[realistic]] [[version]] of that [[movie]], if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this [[style]] of story-telling just opens up so [[many]] more [[narrative]] [[possibilities]]. I try not to [[compare]] it to [[something]] like [[Toy]] [[Story]] (which I [[still]] [[maintain]] is the [[best]] computer animated [[film]] ever made), because the [[story]] of A Bug's Life is not [[quite]] as good as [[Toy]] Story's, but then again, [[almost]] nothing is. The [[important]] [[thing]] is that it is [[still]] [[wonderful]] fun.

The [[story]] [[concerns]] a [[colony]] of [[hard]] [[working]] bugs who have an [[impressively]] [[developed]] [[society]], [[mostly]] [[geared]] [[around]] [[building]] a harvest of [[food]], most of which will [[go]] to the [[tyrannical]] [[grasshoppers]], vastly superior in [[strength]] and [[general]] meanness, and hopefully still leave [[enough]] left over for the bugs to [[make]] it through the [[winter]]. We are [[treated]] to some [[visits]] from the grasshoppers, who [[make]] it clear that if the [[bugs]] [[provide]] an unsatisfactory [[quantity]] of [[food]], the [[consequences]] will be [[dire]]. And [[incidentally]], the similarities between this crippling [[level]] of [[food]] [[extraction]] is [[strikingly]] [[similar]] to [[Mao]] Tse-tung's [[vicious]] [[forcing]] of [[food]] from his own people during the "[[Great]] Leap Forward…"

The [[fun]] and [[excitement]] [[begins]] when Flik, the [[main]] character, sets off on a quest to [[find]] a gang of [[appropriate]] warrior [[bugs]] to [[come]] back and [[help]] [[defend]] the colony against the grasshoppers. You see, he spilled all of the amassed food and placed everyone in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of [[Rouen]] Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it [[looks]] that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their work, something that [[allowed]] them to [[detect]] with audience members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. [[una]] Bug's [[Iife]] has that same charm, it has a connection with [[actual]] life that allows us to easily [[suspended]] disbelief and [[accepting]] a [[batch]] of talking [[beetles]], because [[yet]] though they talk, they [[again]] ACT just like [[actual]] bugs. It's like the team that [[accomplished]] the [[film]] [[find]] a [[ways]] to bring us into the mind of a [[kids]] and [[permit]] us to [[believe]] like them, to imagine [[beetles]] the [[pathways]] a [[youthful]] mind does.

[[Dear]], I Shrunk The [[Child]] was one of my [[preferred]] [[cinematography]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's [[Vida]] is like a more [[practical]] [[stepping]] of that [[cinematography]], if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this [[styles]] of story-telling just opens up so [[numerous]] more [[narration]] [[chances]]. I try not to [[comparative]] it to [[anything]] like [[Plaything]] [[History]] (which I [[however]] [[maintaining]] is the [[bestest]] computer animated [[movies]] ever made), because the [[tale]] of A Bug's Life is not [[pretty]] as good as [[Pawn]] Story's, but then again, [[practically]] nothing is. The [[principal]] [[stuff]] is that it is [[however]] [[magnifique]] fun.

The [[saga]] [[concerned]] a [[colonies]] of [[stiff]] [[worked]] bugs who have an [[exponentially]] [[devised]] [[societal]], [[basically]] [[aimed]] [[about]] [[constructing]] a harvest of [[meal]], most of which will [[going]] to the [[despotic]] [[locusts]], vastly superior in [[kraft]] and [[overall]] meanness, and hopefully still leave [[adequate]] left over for the bugs to [[deliver]] it through the [[wintertime]]. We are [[processed]] to some [[tours]] from the grasshoppers, who [[deliver]] it clear that if the [[beetles]] [[render]] an unsatisfactory [[quantities]] of [[meals]], the [[impact]] will be [[baleful]]. And [[coincidentally]], the similarities between this crippling [[plano]] of [[meals]] [[extract]] is [[unbelievably]] [[akin]] to [[Maa]] Tse-tung's [[sadistic]] [[prompting]] of [[nutrition]] from his own people during the "[[Awesome]] Leap Forward…"

The [[funny]] and [[restlessness]] [[commences]] when Flik, the [[principal]] character, sets off on a quest to [[found]] a gang of [[suitable]] warrior [[cockroaches]] to [[coming]] back and [[supporting]] [[defender]] the colony against the grasshoppers. You see, he spilled all of the amassed food and placed everyone in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! --------------------------------------------- Result 420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Telemundo should definitely consider making a DVD collection of the novela Xica! I know tons of people including myself who would like to be able to purchase the novela Xica! It is a very entertaining novela which is set in Brazil. The costumes worn by the actors are beautiful and the town in which the novela takes place is beautiful. Xica contains a lot of history of that time period. I wish Telemundo would televise it again even if it was a 2 in the morning. I would highly recommend watching Xica if it is ever shown again on Telemundo. I've e-mailed Telemundo a million times already to show the novela again but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears. The only cautionary statement about Xica is that it occasionally contains some harsh scenes therefore I would recommend that children under 14 do not watch Xica. Overall Xica merits a 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this movie about 6 times now. And each time I view it, I'm more impressed by the story and the acting. Its like watching a train wreck being set in motion. Its subtle in its approach, but very effective in reaching its goal.

Spoilers-> At the center of the story is a very nice dichotomy. On the one hand we have Deputy major, Eddy Calhoun (Cusack) unknowingly tearing at the old boys network that forms the hart of major of New York's Administration and on the other hand we have the mob boss Zappati who's deliberately trying to maintain the status quo through all means necessary. This situation nicely culminates in the end when Zappati orders Alselmo to make it easy on himself by killing himself and Calhoun ordering Pappas to do the same, politically speaking.

The movie also contains some really great one-liners such as (a personal weakness of mine): - You don't sum up a man's life in one moment - The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know

All in all, a great movie that deserves a much higher rating. --------------------------------------------- Result 422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This [[film]] caught me off [[guard]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[ways]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to [[Kill]],",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a [[different]] film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture [[TOGETHER]]! This [[cinematography]] caught me off [[warder]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[method]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to [[Killings]],",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a [[several]] film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture [[TOTALITY]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stefan is an x-con that five years ago got married to Marie. Their marriage has been stable until Stefan past catch up with them and he's offered to do a courier job. Stefan's job is a heroin delivery from Germany to Sweden which should go easily.

In Germany Stefan meet Elli, a girl from Bosnia that has been sold to a stripclub owner. Stefan dislikes what he sees and decide to help Elli out of her misery. Due to the fact that Elli's father during the war fleed to Sweden Elli now goes with Stefan to Sweden. To make up with the past Stefan promises Elli to help her find her father, no matter what it takes. Finally back in Sweden the whole situation seems to be more complicated than Stefan ever thought of..

This movie doesn't seem to fit in the ordinary class of swedish movies due to the fact that it's been americanized alot. Regina Lund and Cecilia Bergqvist makes it all average, the effects makes the movie a little too much though. See it and jugde for yourself.

--------------------------------------------- Result 424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The [[past]] few months I have collected [[Voyager]] seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my [[favourite]] [[character]]) and have just [[reached]] the [[end]]. I [[saw]] them when they were [[originally]] [[shown]] on [[TV]] here in the UK but had [[forgotten]] most of it. Am I [[satisfied]] with the [[ending]]? I think I am. Naturally as I fan I would have liked to have [[seen]] more about what happened to the [[characters]] when they got [[home]] but that's left to our imagination. [[In]] many [[ways]] "[[Endgame]]" is similar to Next Gen's "[[All]] Good [[Things]]…" The [[involvement]] of the crew in the future, but [[mainly]] the [[captain]]. A [[new]] romance [[starting]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and [[Seven]] of [[Nine]] and Chakotay here), which [[results]] in [[death]] in the [[future]]. I [[truly]] [[loved]] "Endgame," fair to all [[characters]], Neelix appears [[although]] he [[left]] the [[ship]] two [[episodes]] earlier. B'elanna [[gives]] birth to her daughter with loving husband [[Tom]]. Tuvok is [[ill]] but [[returning]] [[home]] [[means]] he can be [[cured]]. [[Harry]] has always been the most [[anxious]] and determined but admits the [[journey]] is [[important]]. The [[Doctor]], in the [[future]], is well respected by all and [[finally]] [[chooses]] the [[name]] Joe! But of course the Captain has the [[largest]] role, [[meeting]] her [[future]] self who wants to get the crew [[home]] [[earlier]] to prevent casualties. The Borg are [[involved]], as they have [[played]] a [[massive]] part in this period of [[Voyager]]. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again [[fantastically]], just her [[voice]] and acting method are [[magnificent]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen [[replaced]] by the movie Borg queen. [[Maybe]] she wasn't [[available]] though. The special effects are [[fantastic]], the Borg sub space [[hub]] and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[wonderful]] idea to get inside a Borg [[sphere]] for protection, on the DVD special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Voyager]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! The [[elapsed]] few months I have collected [[Travel]] seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my [[preferential]] [[personages]]) and have just [[totaled]] the [[ceases]]. I [[watched]] them when they were [[initially]] [[evidenced]] on [[TELEVISION]] here in the UK but had [[forget]] most of it. Am I [[persuaded]] with the [[terminated]]? I think I am. Naturally as I fan I would have liked to have [[watched]] more about what happened to the [[features]] when they got [[households]] but that's left to our imagination. [[Throughout]] many [[method]] "[[Prom]]" is similar to Next Gen's "[[Entire]] Good [[Items]]…" The [[attendance]] of the crew in the future, but [[basically]] the [[capitan]]. A [[newer]] romance [[induction]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and [[Vii]] of [[Ix]] and Chakotay here), which [[consequences]] in [[killings]] in the [[impending]]. I [[honestly]] [[cared]] "Endgame," fair to all [[hallmarks]], Neelix appears [[while]] he [[exited]] the [[starship]] two [[bouts]] earlier. B'elanna [[provides]] birth to her daughter with loving husband [[Tum]]. Tuvok is [[sick]] but [[returned]] [[households]] [[method]] he can be [[straightened]]. [[Hari]] has always been the most [[worried]] and determined but admits the [[itinerary]] is [[sizable]]. The [[Physician]], in the [[futuristic]], is well respected by all and [[eventually]] [[elected]] the [[names]] Joe! But of course the Captain has the [[bigger]] role, [[meetings]] her [[forthcoming]] self who wants to get the crew [[house]] [[prior]] to prevent casualties. The Borg are [[implicated]], as they have [[served]] a [[considerable]] part in this period of [[Travelling]]. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again [[insanely]], just her [[vowel]] and acting method are [[noteworthy]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen [[substituted]] by the movie Borg queen. [[Potentially]] she wasn't [[accessible]] though. The special effects are [[unbelievable]], the Borg sub space [[concentrator]] and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[super]] idea to get inside a Borg [[scopes]] for protection, on the DVD special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Voyage]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! --------------------------------------------- Result 425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] As I've noticed with a [[lot]] of IMDb [[comments]], certain reviewers [[seem]] to [[demand]] that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. [[If]] I watch an action film, I [[want]] to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. [[If]] I watch a comedy, I want to have [[tears]] of [[laughter]] in my eyes. You [[get]] the idea. Therefore watching a [[horror]] film, I [[primarily]] [[want]] to be scared. The [[Grudge]] is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I [[also]] think is a [[great]] film). As I've noticed with a [[batch]] of IMDb [[feedback]], certain reviewers [[looks]] to [[wondering]] that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. [[Though]] I watch an action film, I [[wish]] to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. [[Though]] I watch a comedy, I want to have [[crying]] of [[laughs]] in my eyes. You [[obtain]] the idea. Therefore watching a [[abomination]] film, I [[predominantly]] [[wanted]] to be scared. The [[Dent]] is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I [[apart]] think is a [[wondrous]] film). --------------------------------------------- Result 426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Although]] Cinderella isn't the [[obvious]] [[choice]] for a sequel I love Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the [[mice]] [[writing]] a [[book]] for Cinderella was an inspired one. I [[enjoy]] [[writing]] [[stories]] myself and hope children will be [[encouraged]] by this. The three stories are [[cute]] & amusing, [[although]] the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I [[also]] enjoyed seeing Lucifer, [[Bruno]], the [[Mice]] Chorus and all the rest. [[Pom]] [[Pom]] [[proved]] the [[perfect]] [[companion]] for [[Lucifer]] and I liked the [[Governess]]. A sequel [[done]] right for a [[change]]. My rating 8/10. [[Though]] Cinderella isn't the [[unmistakable]] [[wahl]] for a sequel I love Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the [[mouse]] [[writes]] a [[cookbook]] for Cinderella was an inspired one. I [[enjoys]] [[writes]] [[histories]] myself and hope children will be [[encourages]] by this. The three stories are [[purty]] & amusing, [[though]] the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I [[apart]] enjoyed seeing Lucifer, [[Bruni]], the [[Mouse]] Chorus and all the rest. [[Boum]] [[Boum]] [[evidenced]] the [[faultless]] [[flanking]] for [[Satan]] and I liked the [[Tutor]]. A sequel [[played]] right for a [[adjustments]]. My rating 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The only [[way]] this is a family [[drama]] is if parents [[explain]] everything [[wrong]] with its [[message]].

SPOILER: they [[feed]] a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after [[killing]] its [[mother]] and at first pontificating about taking [[responsibility]] for their actions. They [[blame]] bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. The only [[routing]] this is a family [[opera]] is if parents [[clarify]] everything [[erroneous]] with its [[messages]].

SPOILER: they [[foraging]] a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after [[murdered]] its [[mama]] and at first pontificating about taking [[duty]] for their actions. They [[culpability]] bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. --------------------------------------------- Result 428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dripping with symbolism and filled with marvelous cinematography, Extase is so much more than the erotic drama we've all come to expect. This is almost a silent film, with what dialogue there is in German, and highly simplified German at that. Perhaps the filmmakers intended the film to reach the widest possible European audience, as anyone with even a little high school level Deutsch can easily dispense with the subtitles. The story is of little importance anyway, with the film succeeding on a cinematic level, not a narrative one. Symbols of fecundity and the power of nature overwhelm the human characters--there are even scenes where flowers obscure the face of supposed star Hedy Lamarr--and there are moments here that will remind viewers of the works of Dreyer, Vertov, and Riefenstahl. If the film has any message to convey, I think it's a political one: bourgeois man is timid and impotent; working class man is a happy, productive creature; and woman is the creator, destined to be unfulfilled until she has borne a child. This blend of Soviet socialist realism and National Socialist dogma doesn't overwhelm the film by any means--it's a beauty to watch from beginning to end--but it does place it in a very distinct artistic era. And, oh yeah, Hedy does get her kit off. --------------------------------------------- Result 429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This Italian [[movie]] is basically a soap [[opera]] with [[skin]].

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the [[actual]] tape [[inside]] [[said]] it was "X." The [[latter]] makes a lot more sense because there is a [[short]] scene [[near]] the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you [[could]] see [[Dutch]] actress Marishcka Detmers [[performing]] all [[sex]] on this guy - and, [[yes]], you could [[see]] his [[penis]] in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline [[actress]]" had [[done]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the movie is ugly....a [[real]] waste of time and certainly not [[recommended]] despite Detmers' looks. This Italian [[filmmaking]] is basically a soap [[drama]] with [[epidermis]].

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the [[real]] tape [[within]] [[stated]] it was "X." The [[latest]] makes a lot more sense because there is a [[succinct]] scene [[nearby]] the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you [[would]] see [[Antilles]] actress Marishcka Detmers [[fulfil]] all [[sexuality]] on this guy - and, [[yep]], you could [[behold]] his [[pecker]] in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline [[actor]]" had [[played]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the movie is ugly....a [[veritable]] waste of time and certainly not [[suggested]] despite Detmers' looks. --------------------------------------------- Result 430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You know a [[movie]] will not go well when [[John]] Carradine [[narrates]] (a.k.a. reads the [[script]] & plot synopsis) over his character's funeral procession, a mere 5 [[minutes]] into the [[movie]]. The [[narration]] is his character's [[last]] will & testament. It stipulates that his estate be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a [[reality]] show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by John Carradine you expect this [[movie]] will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and [[pointless]]. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus [[music]], bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and [[heaps]] of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be [[happy]] to still be [[alive]], but the pain might be too great to [[bear]] alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab You know a [[filmmaking]] will not go well when [[Giovanni]] Carradine [[tells]] (a.k.a. reads the [[hyphen]] & plot synopsis) over his character's funeral procession, a mere 5 [[mins]] into the [[kino]]. The [[storytelling]] is his character's [[final]] will & testament. It stipulates that his estate be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a [[realism]] show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by John Carradine you expect this [[filmmaking]] will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and [[senseless]]. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus [[musicians]], bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and [[piling]] of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be [[jubilant]] to still be [[vivid]], but the pain might be too great to [[xiong]] alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab --------------------------------------------- Result 431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] it's amazing that so many people that i know haven't seen this little gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[GREAT]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 monkeys and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this film as a psycho is unnerving, [[dark]] and right on [[target]].

[[everyone]] else in the film gives [[excellent]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing [[greatly]] enhance the [[proceedings]]. the sense of dread for the characters keeps increasing as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[flaw]] i could find in this cult [[classic]].

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 it's amazing that so many people that i know haven't seen this little gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[WONDROUS]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 monkeys and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this film as a psycho is unnerving, [[darkness]] and right on [[purposes]].

[[someone]] else in the film gives [[wondrous]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing [[radically]] enhance the [[lawsuits]]. the sense of dread for the characters keeps increasing as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[inadequacy]] i could find in this cult [[typical]].

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 --------------------------------------------- Result 432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Not knowing what this [[film]] was about, I [[checked]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I enjoyed it. [[Little]] [[seen]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Great]] story and characters. As a fan of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[exception]] for this [[film]] was the [[ending]]. However, it is worth the rent. Not knowing what this [[films]] was about, I [[check]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I enjoyed it. [[Kiddo]] [[watched]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Wondrous]] story and characters. As a fan of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[immunities]] for this [[movie]] was the [[ended]]. However, it is worth the rent. --------------------------------------------- Result 433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there was a 0 stars rating i would gladly hand it out to this absolutely horrid pile of waste. The fact that the actual summary is perfectly fine and that if it had been made different it could have been brilliant only makes it worse. The basic task of locking up a group of people in an experiment chamber is fine, but WHERES THE EXPERIMENT? All i see is a bunch of unintelligent surfers and blondes chatting about music and culture i don't know or want to know about... The challenges are pathetic and silly. The whole point of reality TV is to show REALITY. If you set a 'challenge' don't make them play with exaggerated props of food and stereotypical cultural elements in 'friday night games'. make them do an actual challenge. And as for 'earning' prize money, thats fine, if they actually earnt it! These people are nuts. If only they would make the show better, the actual idea would be glorious. But that ain't gonna happen! --------------------------------------------- Result 434 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This [[series]] is set a year after the [[mission]] to Abydos in the [[movie]] [[Stargate]]. It explains a lot of the stuff that the [[movie]] [[neglected]] to [[mention]]. Such as, how was the [[Stargate]] activated without a human [[computer]]? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? [[How]] [[many]] are there?

The first episode has a retired [[Jack]] O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) [[recalled]] to active duty by General [[George]] Hammond due to an [[attack]] by the [[shut]] down [[Stargate]] from Apophis, a [[powerful]] Goa'uld who [[killed]] four [[men]] and [[kidnapped]] one [[woman]]. We [[meet]] Samantha Carter, a [[brilliant]] [[scientist]] who [[claims]] that she should have [[gone]] through the [[Stargate]] the first [[time]], and is determined to [[go]] through now. We [[find]] out that [[Daniel]] got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of [[Gate]] [[addresses]] that they can [[dial]]. Then Daniel's [[wife]] [[gets]] [[captured]] by Apophis and [[becomes]] his [[new]] queen.

It [[continues]] in the second episode where General Hammond [[announces]] the [[formation]] of the SGC which [[includes]] nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which [[consists]] of [[Jack]], Samantha and [[Daniel]]. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to [[rescue]] Daniel's [[wife]] and another one [[captured]] at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get [[captured]], and just as Apophis [[gives]] the [[order]] to [[kill]] them and [[many]] other [[prisoners]], a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, [[saves]] them and goes to [[Earth]] with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the [[beginning]] of the [[adventure]]. [[In]] the course of the [[show]] they have [[gone]] to the past and [[future]], gotten [[transported]] to alternate [[realities]], [[swapped]] [[bodies]], [[grown]] [[old]], met [[alien]] [[races]] which [[include]] a [[rebel]] alliance of Goa'uld [[called]] the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's [[Dad]] [[becomes]] a [[member]], the Asgard, a [[cute]] [[little]] [[race]] in which we see Thor most [[often]] (he's Jack's [[buddy]]),and [[avoid]] [[global]] [[disaster]] by the skin of their teeth countless [[times]].

The [[show]] was [[recently]] [[canceled]], but lasted ten seasons. [[In]] season nine, a [[new]] [[enemy]] called the [[Ori]] [[came]] in flaunting [[brand]] new powers, [[new]] dangers and bringing to light [[new]] [[mysteries]] surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! This [[serial]] is set a year after the [[delegations]] to Abydos in the [[cinematography]] [[Door]]. It explains a lot of the stuff that the [[flick]] [[unheeded]] to [[cite]]. Such as, how was the [[Porte]] activated without a human [[computers]]? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? [[Mode]] [[numerous]] are there?

The first episode has a retired [[Jacques]] O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) [[recalling]] to active duty by General [[Georges]] Hammond due to an [[attacking]] by the [[closure]] down [[Door]] from Apophis, a [[influential]] Goa'uld who [[murders]] four [[males]] and [[abducted]] one [[wife]]. We [[respond]] Samantha Carter, a [[excellent]] [[scientists]] who [[claim]] that she should have [[disappeared]] through the [[Door]] the first [[period]], and is determined to [[going]] through now. We [[unearthed]] out that [[Daniela]] got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of [[Puerta]] [[treats]] that they can [[dialed]]. Then Daniel's [[women]] [[got]] [[catching]] by Apophis and [[become]] his [[novel]] queen.

It [[continued]] in the second episode where General Hammond [[advertisement]] the [[establishment]] of the SGC which [[involves]] nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which [[involves]] of [[Jacque]], Samantha and [[Danielle]]. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to [[salvage]] Daniel's [[women]] and another one [[captures]] at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get [[apprehended]], and just as Apophis [[delivers]] the [[decree]] to [[killings]] them and [[several]] other [[detainees]], a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, [[savings]] them and goes to [[Earthly]] with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the [[commences]] of the [[fling]]. [[Onto]] the course of the [[shows]] they have [[faded]] to the past and [[futuristic]], gotten [[hauled]] to alternate [[reality]], [[shuffled]] [[organisations]], [[cultivated]] [[antique]], met [[foreigners]] [[careers]] which [[incorporate]] a [[insurgents]] alliance of Goa'uld [[telephoned]] the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's [[Daddy]] [[become]] a [[lawmakers]], the Asgard, a [[purty]] [[tiny]] [[racing]] in which we see Thor most [[traditionally]] (he's Jack's [[boyfriend]]),and [[evade]] [[worldwide]] [[catastrophe]] by the skin of their teeth countless [[dates]].

The [[exhibitions]] was [[lately]] [[countermanded]], but lasted ten seasons. [[Onto]] season nine, a [[newer]] [[enemies]] called the [[Uri]] [[became]] in flaunting [[brands]] new powers, [[novo]] dangers and bringing to light [[novel]] [[riddles]] surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Not only is this movie a great film for basic [[cinematography]] ([[screenplay]], acting, setting, etc.) but [[also]] for it's [[realism]]. This movie [[could]] [[take]] place in any [[farm]] or [[rural]] setting. It makes no [[difference]] if the [[movie]] takes place in Louisiana or if it [[would]] [[take]] place in Kansas. The story and the [[messages]] it [[includes]] would remain the same. This [[movie]] [[shows]] family values and connections for an [[older]] audience, while at the same time it [[shows]] [[youthful]] [[behavior]] for the younger [[viewers]]. [[Everyone]] who watches this will walk away with something having [[touched]] them personally, I know I did. The ending hits [[way]] too close to [[home]] for me not to [[burst]] into [[tears]] [[every]] [[time]] I watch it. The [[ending]] [[stresses]] the importance of [[farm]] safety, and [[everyone]] who has ever [[worked]] on a farm [[needs]] to see this [[film]]. Not [[paying]] attention and [[carelessness]] [[gets]] you into [[dangerous]] [[situations]].

Not only is this movie a great film for basic [[films]] ([[script]], acting, setting, etc.) but [[apart]] for it's [[pragmatism]]. This movie [[did]] [[taking]] place in any [[farmhouse]] or [[agrarian]] setting. It makes no [[differences]] if the [[cinematography]] takes place in Louisiana or if it [[should]] [[taking]] place in Kansas. The story and the [[message]] it [[involves]] would remain the same. This [[cinematography]] [[denotes]] family values and connections for an [[aging]] audience, while at the same time it [[displayed]] [[juvenile]] [[attitudes]] for the younger [[listeners]]. [[Someone]] who watches this will walk away with something having [[poked]] them personally, I know I did. The ending hits [[routes]] too close to [[habitation]] for me not to [[blasting]] into [[sobs]] [[all]] [[moment]] I watch it. The [[ceasing]] [[stressing]] the importance of [[farmhouse]] safety, and [[somebody]] who has ever [[acted]] on a farm [[needed]] to see this [[kino]]. Not [[remuneration]] attention and [[negligent]] [[got]] you into [[dicey]] [[instances]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never commented on IMDb before, but I feel I have to after watching The Batman animation. Its absolute rubbish! Warner Brothers had the perfect animation series in Batman in the early 90s so what the hell are they doing trying to mess with the winning formula? I feel like writing a complaint letter to WB. The original animation was dark and brooding, exactly the way Batman was intended to be. WB had to mess this up with some tripe Batman of the Future. Now they produce this drivel. The Joker doesn't remotely resemble the Joker from DC comics. DC should sue. I urge everyone who agrees with me to email or write to WB and use people power to get back the original formula --------------------------------------------- Result 437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] [[Utterly]] [[tactical]], [[strange]] (watch for the [[kinky]] moment of a drop-dead [[gorgeous]] [[blonde]] acting as pull-string doll for some [[rich]] folks), pointless but [[undoubtedly]] [[compelling]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a [[stew]] of perplexedly unfocused [[ideas]] and [[random]] plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if [[somewhat]] anti-heroes) [[Alain]] Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't [[get]] to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. [[Acutely]] [[tactic]], [[nosy]] (watch for the [[perv]] moment of a drop-dead [[wondrous]] [[blonds]] acting as pull-string doll for some [[storied]] folks), pointless but [[probably]] [[persuasive]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a [[simmer]] of perplexedly unfocused [[conceptions]] and [[haphazard]] plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if [[rather]] anti-heroes) [[Alan]] Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't [[obtain]] to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. --------------------------------------------- Result 438 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[film]] is just a [[shame]]. Orlando, Florida seems to becoming a more [[recognized]] filmmaking [[area]] (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was [[shot]] in Central [[Florida]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across [[Africa]] and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will try to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect place to film The Brothers. It had the [[potential]] to [[give]] a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. [[After]] all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this [[area]]. But, The Brothers [[falls]] short probably because of a weak [[script]]. Both lead [[characters]] are flat with almost no [[development]] (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit [[boring]]). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also [[hope]] the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

This [[filmmaking]] is just a [[pity]]. Orlando, Florida seems to becoming a more [[acknowledgment]] filmmaking [[zone]] (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was [[offed]] in Central [[Fl]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across [[Continents]] and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will try to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect place to film The Brothers. It had the [[prospective]] to [[lend]] a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. [[Upon]] all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this [[realms]]. But, The Brothers [[autumn]] short probably because of a weak [[hyphen]]. Both lead [[features]] are flat with almost no [[developments]] (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit [[dull]]). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also [[esperanza]] the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

--------------------------------------------- Result 439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I [[admit]] I had no idea what to [[expect]] before [[viewing]] this [[highly]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common [[cold]] for all I [[knew]]. It began with [[great]] visuals, [[little]] snippets to grab your [[attention]] and cause your [[imagination]] to [[run]] [[wild]]. As it [[continued]] I [[learned]] [[quickly]] through voice overs what was taking place. A nice [[little]] neo [[noir]] [[story]] that I felt was not a [[waist]] of a few minutes of my time. The little clues given to the audience through visuals at the [[beginning]] give them a sense of [[accomplishment]] as they piece [[together]] the plot. Along with a nice twist at the end its a cool [[package]] overall. The score, [[though]] not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[felt]] a little dated, not adding anything to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt overly dramatic but fit perfectly with the feel of the overall piece. I walk away from this very satisfied. I was given a lot of information in a short period of time but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[rushed]] or pushed. [[Great]] job! I [[accepted]] I had no idea what to [[hopes]] before [[visualizing]] this [[heavily]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common [[frigid]] for all I [[knowed]]. It began with [[wondrous]] visuals, [[petite]] snippets to grab your [[beware]] and cause your [[creativity]] to [[running]] [[wilde]]. As it [[uninterrupted]] I [[learning]] [[fast]] through voice overs what was taking place. A nice [[small]] neo [[negro]] [[fairytales]] that I felt was not a [[sizes]] of a few minutes of my time. The little clues given to the audience through visuals at the [[starting]] give them a sense of [[materialization]] as they piece [[jointly]] the plot. Along with a nice twist at the end its a cool [[packaging]] overall. The score, [[if]] not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[smelled]] a little dated, not adding anything to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt overly dramatic but fit perfectly with the feel of the overall piece. I walk away from this very satisfied. I was given a lot of information in a short period of time but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[hastened]] or pushed. [[Grand]] job! --------------------------------------------- Result 440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I only [[recently]] [[found]] out that [[Madeleine]] L'Engle's [[novel]] had been [[turned]] into a TV [[movie]] by [[Disney]] and [[ordered]] the [[DVD]]. The [[book]] was a [[favorite]] of [[mine]] when I was a [[child]] and I read it [[several]] times.

Despite some of the [[child]] actors not resembling the [[characters]] as described in the novel, the Murry [[family]] is well [[cast]], with a likable (if too [[pretty]]) Meg at the [[center]] and a [[Charles]] Wallace who is [[convincing]] as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The [[first]] half hour is promising [[enough]], doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan [[face]] is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special [[effects]] and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a [[disaster]], presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but [[also]] because the design work [[lacks]] imagination and good [[judgement]].

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. I only [[lately]] [[detected]] out that [[Maddalena]] L'Engle's [[newer]] had been [[transformed]] into a TV [[filmmaking]] by [[Disneyland]] and [[decreed]] the [[DVDS]]. The [[ledger]] was a [[prefer]] of [[mines]] when I was a [[kid]] and I read it [[myriad]] times.

Despite some of the [[kid]] actors not resembling the [[trait]] as described in the novel, the Murry [[families]] is well [[casting]], with a likable (if too [[belle]]) Meg at the [[centering]] and a [[Karel]] Wallace who is [[compelling]] as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The [[fiirst]] half hour is promising [[adequately]], doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan [[confront]] is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special [[influence]] and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a [[disasters]], presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but [[similarly]] because the design work [[lacked]] imagination and good [[rulings]].

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the [[film]] again this [[year]] as I am teaching the novel and [[find]] the changes in the [[film]] annoying - there is no appearance of the little [[boy]] in the novel and the ending has been [[changed]]. They kill him off in the [[film]] but the [[whole]] point is that he is [[haunted]] by the [[events]] at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the [[events]] [[behind]] him. Mr. Bentley is a far more [[sympathetic]] [[character]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a [[film]] which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. [[Have]] I just imagined this? Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the [[cinematographic]] again this [[annum]] as I am teaching the novel and [[unearth]] the changes in the [[kino]] annoying - there is no appearance of the little [[bloke]] in the novel and the ending has been [[modified]]. They kill him off in the [[kino]] but the [[entire]] point is that he is [[obsessed]] by the [[event]] at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the [[happenings]] [[backside]] him. Mr. Bentley is a far more [[congenial]] [[nature]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a [[filmmaking]] which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. [[Ha]] I just imagined this? --------------------------------------------- Result 442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm watching the series again now that it's out on DVD (yay!) It's striking me as fresh, as relevant and as intriguing as when it first aired.

The central performances are gripping, the scripts are layered.

I'll stick my neck out and put it up there with The Prisoner as a show that'll be winning new fans and still be watched come 2035.

I've been asked to write some more line (it seems IMDb is as user unfriendly and anally retentively coded as ever! Pithy and to the point is clearly not the IMDb way.)

Well, unlike IMDb's submissions editors, American Gothic understands that simplicity is everything.

In 22 episodes, the show covers more character development than many shows do in seven seasons. On top of which it questions personal ethics and strength of character in a way which challenges the viewer at every turn to ask themselves what they would choose and what they would think in a given situation.

When the show first aired, I was still grieving for Twin Peaks and thought it would be a cheap knock off. Personally I'm starting to rate it more highly and suspect it will stand up better over the years. Reckon it don't get more controversial than that! --------------------------------------------- Result 443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your [[life]] watching this [[movie]] - just don't. [[Especially]] if [[someone]] is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I [[waited]] for [[something]] to [[happen]] - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I [[always]] have to see it through to the end. What a [[huge]] [[mistake]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to [[see]] it through to the end. What a [[huge]] [[mistake]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more [[entertaining]]. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your [[lifetime]] watching this [[filmmaking]] - just don't. [[Specifically]] if [[person]] is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I [[anticipated]] for [[anything]] to [[emerge]] - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I [[permanently]] have to see it through to the end. What a [[whopping]] [[mistaken]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to [[behold]] it through to the end. What a [[prodigious]] [[awry]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Allen goes to the country (somewhere he hates going in real life) and has a weekend with his friends - which are the usual successful white middle-class bellyaching types that feature in many of his films.

I usually find something to amuse in Woody Allen comedies, but here he really falls totally flat on his face. Even the one-liners seem to have deserted him. The really is no plot (bar bits and pieces of cod Shakespeare) - but Allen seems to use the location to allow a semi-mystical air, which just makes the thing even more witless and half-baked.

It just doesn't work at any level and is just a giant bore. The best thing about this film (apart from the end credits coming up) is that the bad reviews seem to get him to wake up and realise that simply throwing together a slapdash script and casting your mates in it doesn't make for entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Beat]] a path to this [[important]] [[documentary]] that looks like an attractive feature. [[Forbidden]] [[Lie]]$(2007) is [[simply]] a better ([[cinematic]]) [[version]] of [[Norma]] Khouri's [[book]] [[Forbidden]] [[Love]], and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty [[woman]], [[Lie]]$ is the very best in editorialised reality TV.

[[Cleverly]] edited and [[colourful]], Broinowski's [[storytelling]] is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagree]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one [[slight]] problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded [[testimonials]]. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and [[totally]] engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The [[apparent]] con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her [[disillusionment]] in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in [[spoilers]]. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by [[Sydney]] Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was [[tempted]] back to the director to supposedly [[clear]] her name. She [[absconded]] supposedly because a) she's either [[terrified]] of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) [[Beats]] a path to this [[sizeable]] [[documentation]] that looks like an attractive feature. [[Banished]] [[Lying]]$(2007) is [[exclusively]] a better ([[films]]) [[stepping]] of [[Norm]] Khouri's [[books]] [[Prohibiting]] [[Likes]], and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty [[wife]], [[Lying]]$ is the very best in editorialised reality TV.

[[Deftly]] edited and [[scenic]], Broinowski's [[narration]] is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagreement]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one [[lightweight]] problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded [[testimonial]]. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and [[utterly]] engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The [[noticeable]] con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her [[disappointment]] in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in [[vandals]]. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by [[Sidney]] Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was [[attempted]] back to the director to supposedly [[unmistakable]] her name. She [[fled]] supposedly because a) she's either [[horrified]] of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pathetic... worse than a bad made-for-TV movie. I can't believe that Spacey and Freeman were in this flick. For some reason Morgan Freeman's character is constantly talking about and saying "pussy" when referring to NSync boy's girlfriend. Morgan Freeman calling women "pussy" is just awkward... What the hell were the people behind this film thinking? Too many plot holes to imagine combined with the horrid acting, confusing camera angles, a lame script and cheap background music made this movie absolutely unbearable.

I rented this flop with low expectations.... but... well... it really sucked. --------------------------------------------- Result 447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not even worth watching this tacky spoiler ruins everything about 'Annie'. The characters seem almost cheapened by the poorly written storyline and they low quality feeling to the production. It was very clearly made for TV, yet if I found it on my television, I would flick it straight over. The children in the film do an alright job, yet the adults acting is unbelievable and so the movie fails to really draw you in. This film lacked the music/dance numbers thats made the original brilliant and truly does take the shine of the Annie we all love. Johnson, as Annie is at times annoying and over acted..you cannot convince yourself that she truly is Annie. The differences in character appearance continued to irritate me throughout the duration of the film. Sad to say this sequel was a total flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] John Travolta, the biggest honkeytonk in the world, and a mechanical bull...what more can you ask for! Yeah, you're probably not going to get many surprises or deep meaning in this one. Yet, I have always found it fairly enjoyable to watch this redneck romance. Bud (Travolta) and Sissy (Debra Winger) meet at Gilley's and fall in love. They have all the difficulties you might expect a hardcore redneck couple to have. The honkeytonk scenes are fun with dancing, mechanical bull riding, and -of course- the required brawls. It has a good, 1980 country soundtrack, featuring "Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places", "The Devil Went Down to Georgia", and "Hello Texas" by my favorite Jimmy Buffett. Break out your cowboy boots and have a boot-scootin' boogie!

*** (Out of 4) --------------------------------------------- Result 449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I'm not going to criticize the [[movie]]. There isn't that much to [[talk]] about. It has good animal [[actions]] scenes which were [[probably]] pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's [[OK]]. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. I'm not going to criticize the [[filmmaking]]. There isn't that much to [[talking]] about. It has good animal [[measurements]] scenes which were [[undeniably]] pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's [[ALLRIGHT]]. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I thought it was not the [[best]] re-cap episode I've [[every]] seen (though my [[viewing]] partner handed me a [[tissue]] in anticipation of the Brendan [[Fraser]] moment...*sigh*). It was nice to see Cox outside of the incessantly brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for [[brief]] [[moments]]. I [[also]] enjoyed [[trying]] to place the episodes included by the [[length]] of the character's [[hair]] (or [[height]], in [[case]] of [[JD]]) and the [[youthfulness]] of the [[earliest]] episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very [[Chevy]] [[Chase]]/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical [[slide]] (already [[acknowledged]] on Conan). A [[little]] side [[note]], the song (now [[stuck]] in my [[head]]) from the janitor-induced [[dance]] [[montage]] was "[[Diner]]" by Martin Sexton. I thought it was not the [[nicest]] re-cap episode I've [[each]] seen (though my [[visualization]] partner handed me a [[kleenex]] in anticipation of the Brendan [[Frazer]] moment...*sigh*). It was nice to see Cox outside of the incessantly brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for [[succinct]] [[times]]. I [[similarly]] enjoyed [[seeking]] to place the episodes included by the [[duration]] of the character's [[headgear]] (or [[pinnacle]], in [[example]] of [[JOD]]) and the [[youthful]] of the [[tightest]] episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very [[Camaro]] [[Hunting]]/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical [[slider]] (already [[concede]] on Conan). A [[scant]] side [[remark]], the song (now [[prude]] in my [[chief]]) from the janitor-induced [[dancer]] [[fitting]] was "[[Cafeteria]]" by Martin Sexton. --------------------------------------------- Result 451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] SPOILERS. [[Strange]] people with generous [[tastes]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Script]]: [[Dreadful]]. As Tom and [[Dan]] are "getting to know each other," bantering about [[films]], the [[talk]] is [[clearly]] that of one [[person]], and I [[suspect]] it was the [[director]], who [[carefully]] worked his words to [[sound]] intelligent. [[At]] one point, Dan [[asks]], "Have you [[heard]] of the HIV [[virus]]?" and it [[sounds]] about as natural as asking, "Have you [[communicated]] with the nine [[alien]] [[races]]?"

Acting: [[White]] teeth do and a chiseled [[face]] do not a sensitive [[performer]] make. Speedman did well [[enough]] with what he was [[given]], I [[suppose]], but Marsden was [[terrible]] -- [[unsympathetic]], [[unbelievable]], and downright smug and smarmy [[throughout]] his [[captivity]]. There is an [[emptiness]] to his performances ([[also]] see Interstate 60).

[[Plot]]: Spare me! The [[moments]] of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and [[weak]]. [[Recall]] Marsden [[pretending]] to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't [[work]], [[man]]!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are [[initiated]] with some schlocky [[sound]] [[taken]] from CSI and other [[crime]] dramas.

Most [[important]] of all, most dangerous, [[evil]], and offensive, is the [[homophobia]] (external or internal, you decide) in a [[film]] in which HIV is [[considered]] a weapon. Tom [[says]] that [[Dan]] may have [[taken]] off the condom or not [[used]] it at all -- [[excuse]] me, where was [[Tom]] while they were having [[sex]]? There is some villainizing of the [[inserting]] partner which [[comes]] off as a villainizing of the [[gay]] [[man]] in general.

In sum: [[Beware]]! SPOILERS. [[Unusual]] people with generous [[flavors]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Screenplay]]: [[Abhorrent]]. As Tom and [[Dana]] are "getting to know each other," bantering about [[movie]], the [[chat]] is [[notoriously]] that of one [[persona]], and I [[suspicious]] it was the [[superintendent]], who [[thoroughly]] worked his words to [[sounds]] intelligent. [[During]] one point, Dan [[asked]], "Have you [[hear]] of the HIV [[viruses]]?" and it [[sound]] about as natural as asking, "Have you [[submitted]] with the nine [[strangers]] [[careers]]?"

Acting: [[Blanc]] teeth do and a chiseled [[encounter]] do not a sensitive [[artists]] make. Speedman did well [[satisfactorily]] with what he was [[afforded]], I [[imagining]], but Marsden was [[scary]] -- [[insensitive]], [[fabulous]], and downright smug and smarmy [[during]] his [[imprisonment]]. There is an [[vacuum]] to his performances ([[additionally]] see Interstate 60).

[[Intrigue]]: Spare me! The [[times]] of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and [[vulnerable]]. [[Remember]] Marsden [[pretend]] to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't [[working]], [[males]]!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are [[inaugurated]] with some schlocky [[sounds]] [[picked]] from CSI and other [[misdemeanour]] dramas.

Most [[essential]] of all, most dangerous, [[malign]], and offensive, is the [[homophobic]] (external or internal, you decide) in a [[filmmaking]] in which HIV is [[regarded]] a weapon. Tom [[tells]] that [[Dana]] may have [[picked]] off the condom or not [[utilizing]] it at all -- [[apologies]] me, where was [[Thom]] while they were having [[sexuality]]? There is some villainizing of the [[inserts]] partner which [[occurs]] off as a villainizing of the [[homosexuals]] [[fella]] in general.

In sum: [[Attention]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen many horror shows over the years, like Nightstalker, that dealt with the Wendigo legend, so I was looking forward to an angry spirit causing mayhem to add flavor to the Halloween season. Man was I mistaken. The whole movie creates this sense of events about to happen that will be scary and creepy, but then delivers a very simplistic tale of revenge and murder over the loss of some property. Ve-ery scary - not! This movie has a lot in common with Cold Creek Manor, another total loser.

It's getting harder and harder to believe anything Hollywood puts forward about scary movies, since they rarely come through with anything original and spooky anymore. What idiots pay for such a bogus movie to be made? Go back to the drawing board fellas, and do something useful with those millions of greenbacks you have to throw around. --------------------------------------------- Result 453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wonder how much this movie actually has got to do with the 1984 movie "Bachelor Party", starring Tom Hanks. Is this movie even an official sequel? This movie is lacking in every department and you're obviously better off not watching it.

For a comedy this movie simply isn't good or funny enough. It relies mostly on the character's their stereotypical assessments, rather then the movie actually features some good, original and funny moments.

Of course there also is very little story present and the movie nude breast than script pages. You just keep waiting for things to finally start off. There is a main plot line in it somewhere but that one is so terribly unoriginal and gets executed so poorly in the movie that it feels more as if it's something non-existent. I guess there even is a message and moral story in it somewhere but this again is so terribly unoriginal and poorly done in the movie that it simply does not work out.

It's basically a typical teenage comedy, with lots of sex jokes and nudity, only without the teenage main characters, which makes the story all the more sad and tasteless. The movie makes some really wrong jokes, that are misplaced for any type of movie.

I regret ever watching this.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Whoa]] nelly! I've [[heard]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore horror [[reviewers]] really found it to be disappointing. [[Man]] was he right on the nose! This movie was acted by pure [[amateurs]]. They HAD to have [[done]] one take, [[maybe]] two on each scene, the [[movie]] [[seemed]] soooo rushed. The [[script]] was [[also]] poor....they had lines that tried to be unique but failed. [[Miserably]]. "[[Get]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Oh]] [[man]], I hate it when movies try to do that. It [[happens]] all the time with comedies...but, with a [[horror]] movie and with below average actors....the [[results]] are [[incredibly]] [[pathetic]]. The lines and [[scenarios]] were all very predictable. But what [[made]] me feel so [[negative]] towards this [[movie]] was, again, the [[damn]] acting. It was [[awful]]. Besides by the little [[Asian]] [[guy]] who [[worked]] the [[booth]]. I thought he was great.

The [[movie]] is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t [[tourist]] who are on a vacation in Asia. They [[end]] up at the [[wrong]] place and [[fall]] into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughterhouse]]. Sounds like a cool [[story]]. But watching [[someone]] with a bad case of diarrhea is [[probably]] more [[fun]] and intense to watch. The only [[reason]] this is [[considered]] horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a [[trace]] of [[suspense]].

I [[like]] [[many]] other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little [[mitts]] on this. But [[unfortunately]] with a [[HUGE]] capital U, the [[movie]] was [[incredibly]] disappointing. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were [[also]] so so.

Everything about this [[movie]] [[screams]] [[amateur]]. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a [[sick]] sense of [[humor]] and taste for horror. I pray his [[next]] [[movie]] doesn't play out like another B [[horror]] flick...unless he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[disappointment]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've [[seen]] of him, he's a [[true]], [[dedicated]] man to the [[genre]]. [[Good]] [[luck]] [[next]] time, because this was [[bad]] news. [[Wow]] nelly! I've [[hear]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore horror [[reviewer]] really found it to be disappointing. [[Guy]] was he right on the nose! This movie was acted by pure [[amateur]]. They HAD to have [[doing]] one take, [[potentially]] two on each scene, the [[filmmaking]] [[sounded]] soooo rushed. The [[scripts]] was [[similarly]] poor....they had lines that tried to be unique but failed. [[Spectacularly]]. "[[Gets]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Ah]] [[guy]], I hate it when movies try to do that. It [[arrives]] all the time with comedies...but, with a [[terror]] movie and with below average actors....the [[findings]] are [[madly]] [[unlucky]]. The lines and [[scenario]] were all very predictable. But what [[introduced]] me feel so [[adverse]] towards this [[filmmaking]] was, again, the [[fucking]] acting. It was [[horrific]]. Besides by the little [[Asiatic]] [[guys]] who [[cooperate]] the [[booths]]. I thought he was great.

The [[filmmaking]] is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t [[tourism]] who are on a vacation in Asia. They [[terminate]] up at the [[flawed]] place and [[declines]] into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughter]]. Sounds like a cool [[saga]]. But watching [[everyone]] with a bad case of diarrhea is [[certainly]] more [[entertaining]] and intense to watch. The only [[motif]] this is [[deemed]] horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a [[traces]] of [[wait]].

I [[likes]] [[numerous]] other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little [[gloves]] on this. But [[sadly]] with a [[MASSIVE]] capital U, the [[filmmaking]] was [[remarkably]] disappointing. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were [[additionally]] so so.

Everything about this [[film]] [[shrieks]] [[enthusiast]]. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a [[ill]] sense of [[mood]] and taste for horror. I pray his [[forthcoming]] [[filmmaking]] doesn't play out like another B [[terror]] flick...unless he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[displeasure]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've [[watched]] of him, he's a [[veritable]], [[specialised]] man to the [[sort]]. [[Buena]] [[chance]] [[future]] time, because this was [[unfavourable]] news. --------------------------------------------- Result 455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This may be the only [[film]] that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable [[world]] of the American college experience of the [[late]] 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retrospective]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with [[subtlety]] and [[nuance]] where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

[[All]] in all, a [[classic]] of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? This may be the only [[kino]] that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable [[globe]] of the American college experience of the [[tardy]] 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retroactive]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with [[sophistication]] and [[hue]] where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

[[Every]] in all, a [[typical]] of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? --------------------------------------------- Result 456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm only rating this [[film]] as a 3 out of [[pity]] because it [[attempts]] to be [[worthwhile]]. I [[love]] to [[praise]] a [[great]] [[movie]] and I'm not biased [[toward]] "[[male]]" [[movies]]. Legally blonde was an excellent [[film]]. Georgia [[Rule]] on the other hand, was a [[disorganized]], [[weak]], poorly [[written]], unrealistic example of [[movie]] making at its [[worst]]. by the [[end]] of the film I didn't care who was [[lying]] or if [[anything]] was [[resolved]].

The most [[important]] thing in a [[film]] is a good STORY. This story is [[weak]] and never develops (just because the subject [[matter]] is [[deep]], doesn't [[mean]] the [[story]] is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia [[Rule]], the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple [[hours]] in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly [[written]] [[story]], and the [[litter]] of [[weak]] dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. [[Every]] character was a [[mess]]. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you [[want]] to [[remind]] yourself what [[good]] [[movie]] making is NOT! I'm only rating this [[filmmaking]] as a 3 out of [[shame]] because it [[endeavor]] to be [[valuable]]. I [[adored]] to [[eulogy]] a [[tremendous]] [[filmmaking]] and I'm not biased [[into]] "[[macho]]" [[films]]. Legally blonde was an excellent [[filmmaking]]. Georgia [[Stipulations]] on the other hand, was a [[chaotic]], [[feeble]], poorly [[handwritten]], unrealistic example of [[movies]] making at its [[meanest]]. by the [[terminate]] of the film I didn't care who was [[lied]] or if [[nothing]] was [[liquidated]].

The most [[substantial]] thing in a [[filmmaking]] is a good STORY. This story is [[breakable]] and never develops (just because the subject [[issue]] is [[deepest]], doesn't [[meaning]] the [[narratives]] is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia [[Stipulations]], the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple [[hour]] in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly [[wrote]] [[histories]], and the [[rubbish]] of [[vulnerable]] dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. [[Any]] character was a [[chaos]]. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you [[wanna]] to [[reminds]] yourself what [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] making is NOT! --------------------------------------------- Result 457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[guess]] when "[[Beat]] Street" [[made]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" [[came]] at the same [[time]]. The [[problem]] with "Flashdance" is that there was only one [[break]] dancing scene and the [[rest]] was jazz [[dance]] and [[ballet]]. That was one of the [[reasons]] why "[[Beat]] Street" was [[better]]. The only [[movie]] that could [[rival]] "[[Beat]] Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies [[focused]] on how [[dance]] had been used by people to express their [[utmost]] [[feelings]].

The break-dance scenes in "[[Beat]] Street" [[come]] just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I [[loved]] all of them. [[Almost]] all of the [[break]] tricks were [[featured]] in the [[break]] jam scenes: the jackhammer, the [[flares]], the [[head]] spins, the suicide sit, the [[crazy]] [[legs]], the mortal, the [[forward]] flip, the figure four---almost everything.

[[Like]] "The [[Warriors]]", "[[Beat]] Street" does have violence [[related]] to the gang [[life]] in the [[hip]] [[hop]] [[world]]...but in a much less violent [[way]] than the [[former]]. The only [[major]] fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti [[artist]] Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] [[subway]] [[tracks]].....[[fighting]] each other on the third [[rail]] and both dying by electrocution on that rail. [[Well]], [[although]] that chase scene [[ended]] [[tragically]], it was [[better]] that they [[died]] that [[way]] than having blood [[exploding]] from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the [[flick]] was graffiti [[related]] to the hip-hop [[culture]], and [[rap]] [[music]]. A lot of rap music [[appeared]] in the [[flick]], because hip-hop members [[used]] rap [[music]] as a [[diversion]] to the [[negative]] aspects of gang [[life]]. Even the theme song of the [[movie]], which [[closed]] the curtain to the [[flick]], was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the [[death]] of Ramon.

By the way, during the [[dance]] scene [[called]] 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female [[drummer]] in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn [[Chong]] was Sheila E. [[making]] a cameo appearance. I [[guessing]] when "[[Beats]] Street" [[accomplished]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" [[arrived]] at the same [[moment]]. The [[problems]] with "Flashdance" is that there was only one [[breaks]] dancing scene and the [[resting]] was jazz [[choreography]] and [[dances]]. That was one of the [[motif]] why "[[Defeats]] Street" was [[nicer]]. The only [[cinematic]] that could [[contenders]] "[[Defeating]] Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies [[centered]] on how [[dancers]] had been used by people to express their [[extreme]] [[affections]].

The break-dance scenes in "[[Overpowering]] Street" [[arriving]] just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I [[cared]] all of them. [[Hardly]] all of the [[blackout]] tricks were [[featuring]] in the [[blackout]] jam scenes: the jackhammer, the [[torches]], the [[leader]] spins, the suicide sit, the [[lunatic]] [[paws]], the mortal, the [[forwards]] flip, the figure four---almost everything.

[[Iike]] "The [[Militants]]", "[[Beats]] Street" does have violence [[tied]] to the gang [[vida]] in the [[hips]] [[jumping]] [[monde]]...but in a much less violent [[pathways]] than the [[previous]]. The only [[important]] fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti [[entertainer]] Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] [[mtr]] [[runways]].....[[combat]] each other on the third [[railing]] and both dying by electrocution on that rail. [[Good]], [[despite]] that chase scene [[finished]] [[regretfully]], it was [[best]] that they [[succumbed]] that [[manner]] than having blood [[blasting]] from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the [[gesture]] was graffiti [[tied]] to the hip-hop [[civilisations]], and [[rapper]] [[musicians]]. A lot of rap music [[seemed]] in the [[film]], because hip-hop members [[uses]] rap [[musician]] as a [[alcatraz]] to the [[detrimental]] aspects of gang [[lifetime]]. Even the theme song of the [[cinematography]], which [[closing]] the curtain to the [[movie]], was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the [[dying]] of Ramon.

By the way, during the [[choreography]] scene [[phoned]] 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female [[drumming]] in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn [[Zhuang]] was Sheila E. [[doing]] a cameo appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It felt like I watched this movie thousand times before.It was absolutely predictable.Every time the story tried to get a bit twisted,every time I awaited something interesting to happen, I saw nothing but what I expected. Like "The bread factory opened up another facility,because there was not enough bread". In two words:Flat story,that has become a cliché,bad acting,bad special effects...Only the dumb Russian cop,Vlad, was a bit funny while punishing around the bad guys.The pile of muscles was so incredibly STUPID,that it made me laugh at him for a moment. I wonder why i waste my time spitting on that shame-of-a-movie... It won't get worse (because it is not possible) :D --------------------------------------------- Result 459 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like this movie. Bozz is an ultra-cool, not to be intimidated soldier who does not want to go to war. His persona is similar in a way to Yossarian in Catch-22, Joseph Heller's classic novel about men and war. This film, however, is not set in a war zone, but in a pre-war combat prep training. This wonderful film is all about the sickening realization that the Vietnam war was a mistake and those men who were pegged to be sacrificed for a losing cause.

Colin Farrell is brilliant as Bozz, a soldier who showed as much genuine love and compassion for his fellow soldier as he did disdain and irreverence for the establishment that was trying to kill him. Bozz is totally cool and non-plussed, testing and tweaking his military superiors, getting their goat at every opportunity. He is a Jesus Christ figure with a psychology degree, "saving" his fellow soldiers and showing the ones in genuine need, the way out of this man's army.

The acting and action is crisp and believable and as a "Sleeper", Tigerland goes down with Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket as one of the top three Vietnam films in my opinion.

FIVE STARS, a top pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] hello. i just watched this movie earlier today for the 14th time in 3 days. i am a history teacher that has wayyyyy too much time on my hands. i need a life. i found the movie containing a striking resemblance to broke back mountain. i also found that i look a lot like jean Lafitte if he were white. also, my favorite line in the entire movie was from Mr. Petey--"this baby can shoot a chipmunk's eye from 300 yards!!" oh, and my favorite scene in the movie was when the British were coming in, and the one drummer who was so devoted to his work, and he drummed till the death, as if that drum would end the war altogether....but it wouldn't. well, thats all i would like to say about this movie. OH, one more thing..bonnie brown is an insane physco bipolar mood swinging BEEYOTCH. that is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 461 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] OK, the [[portrayal]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[WRONG]]. I do agree that Elvis [[looks]] rather [[good]] here, but [[yeah]], his skin color does [[seem]] to [[change]] during the [[movie]]. I was [[thinking]], OK,...he was never THAT [[tan]] in [[real]] [[life]]. It's some of the most [[obvious]] [[brown]] 'indian' [[makeup]] that I have ever [[seen]]. It's as [[bad]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the [[old]] Hollywood westerns who were [[played]] by Jewish and Italian American [[actors]] and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but [[typically]] lame [[story]] and [[mediocre]] [[songs]], like in all of Elvis' later [[films]]. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him [[tied]] down to long term [[movie]] contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep [[thinking]] '[[thank]] God' that Elvis [[stopped]] [[making]] movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character [[actors]] Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this [[movie]], though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is [[absolutely]] [[AWFUL]]. It's The [[worst]] of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was [[Mr]]. Meredith doing this one just for the [[money]] or what? I do [[love]] certain Elvis [[movies]], [[though]]. For [[example]]: '[[Love]] Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', '[[Viva]] [[Las]] Vegas'. I can even [[stand]] to watch his [[movie]] with [[future]] TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'[[Change]] Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

[[Oh]] well, at [[least]] [[Elvis]] made a [[FEW]] good [[films]], but the mediocre and [[bad]] ones overwhelm the decent and [[good]] ones.

I'll [[always]] love ELVIS! [[Thank]] you, Thank you very much! OK, the [[depiction]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[MISGUIDED]]. I do agree that Elvis [[seem]] rather [[alright]] here, but [[yep]], his skin color does [[seems]] to [[changed]] during the [[filmmaking]]. I was [[thought]], OK,...he was never THAT [[beige]] in [[actual]] [[vida]]. It's some of the most [[noticeable]] [[brownish]] 'indian' [[composition]] that I have ever [[noticed]]. It's as [[unfavourable]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the [[archaic]] Hollywood westerns who were [[done]] by Jewish and Italian American [[players]] and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but [[often]] lame [[history]] and [[lackluster]] [[ballads]], like in all of Elvis' later [[filmmaking]]. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him [[tying]] down to long term [[flick]] contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep [[think]] '[[appreciation]] God' that Elvis [[halted]] [[doing]] movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character [[players]] Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this [[filmmaking]], though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is [[totally]] [[SHOCKING]]. It's The [[meanest]] of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was [[Mister]]. Meredith doing this one just for the [[cash]] or what? I do [[adored]] certain Elvis [[movie]], [[while]]. For [[case]]: '[[Amour]] Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', '[[Vivo]] [[La]] Vegas'. I can even [[stands]] to watch his [[flick]] with [[futuristic]] TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'[[Adjustments]] Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

[[Ah]] well, at [[less]] [[Presley]] made a [[SCARCE]] good [[cinematic]], but the mediocre and [[negative]] ones overwhelm the decent and [[alright]] ones.

I'll [[continuously]] love ELVIS! [[Gratitude]] you, Thank you very much! --------------------------------------------- Result 462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Though the story is essentially routine, and the "surprise" ending is nothing but a bad joke on the audience, you can see what attracted these good actors to the project - it offers them the kind of roles in which good actors can shine, and shine they do. The film is impeccably made - for its time. It was remade in 2000 as "Under Suspicion" and if you only want to see one version of the story (that's all it deserves, really), I recommend the latter one, with Hopkins' up-to-date direction and the more explicit references to plot points that the original could only hint at. The ending, however, still blows. (**1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best true-crime movies ever made and very faithful to Truman Capote's book which invented the true-crime novel genre. Haunting Quincy Jones musical score and terrific acting by Scott Wilson and Robert Blake as Dick and Perry, the killers. Why Wilson didn't go on to be a big star after this movie is a mystery to me.

The black and white cinematography and editing in this movie are top notch. The re-creation of the murders is frightening and since it leaves the actual murders to your imagination, even more scary than if they had shown the shotgun going off. The movie was filmed in the actual Clutter house which had been sold to another person after the murders. The movie has a very documentary feel---besides the scenes at the actual Clutter home other scenes were filmed at the gas stations and stores the killers actually went to. Nancy Clutter's beloved horse, Babe, is even in the movie. Will Geer has a great turn as the prosecutor in the short trial scene which is not only filmed in the actual courtroom but has several of the real Clutter murder jurors portraying themselves as the jury for the movie.

This is a solid movie, scary every time you see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] I agree with the above comment, I love the [[realism]] in this, and in [[many]] movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers [[seem]] to [[forget]] that. They take an every day [[problem]] and [[create]] a [[hugely]] dramatic scene and then come the end of the movie everything is [[perfect]] again, which I [[dislike]] because its not reality. Not [[meaning]] to say things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and [[come]] the [[end]] of the [[movie]] everything is [[perfect]] again. [[When]] people have [[eating]] [[disorders]] people don't just [[admit]] it and [[want]] to [[get]] [[better]], and then [[life]] is [[peachy]], it takes [[time]], and I like how in this [[movie]] we [[grow]] with the [[characters]], we go through the difficulties with them, [[getting]] better and worse, because it is a very [[important]] [[part]] of the [[movie]]. It gets into the minds of people with eating [[disorders]], and [[shows]] the [[complications]] and [[pain]], in a very [[realistic]] [[way]], and I [[loved]] that. I [[also]] [[love]] how it [[shows]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from [[eating]] [[disorders]], it is [[scary]] to [[see]] how people react when they [[find]] out, [[especially]] if they [[approve]] of it. I thought this [[movie]] was very [[touching]] and beautiful and well told, and [[defiantly]] one of my [[favourites]]. I agree with the above comment, I love the [[realist]] in this, and in [[various]] movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers [[looks]] to [[forgotten]] that. They take an every day [[difficulty]] and [[creating]] a [[vastly]] dramatic scene and then come the end of the movie everything is [[irreproachable]] again, which I [[disgust]] because its not reality. Not [[sens]] to say things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and [[arrived]] the [[ends]] of the [[kino]] everything is [[irreproachable]] again. [[Whenever]] people have [[dining]] [[troubles]] people don't just [[acknowledged]] it and [[wants]] to [[obtain]] [[best]], and then [[lifetime]] is [[super]], it takes [[period]], and I like how in this [[film]] we [[raising]] with the [[trait]], we go through the difficulties with them, [[obtaining]] better and worse, because it is a very [[sizable]] [[parte]] of the [[cinematography]]. It gets into the minds of people with eating [[disturbances]], and [[showings]] the [[complication]] and [[pains]], in a very [[practical]] [[routing]], and I [[love]] that. I [[further]] [[amour]] how it [[exposition]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from [[feeding]] [[disturbances]], it is [[awful]] to [[consults]] how people react when they [[unearth]] out, [[mostly]] if they [[approving]] of it. I thought this [[cinema]] was very [[touch]] and beautiful and well told, and [[fearlessly]] one of my [[favourite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] this movie had a lot of [[blood]] in it when the sabretooth attack it [[also]] i loved it when that [[guy]] and the [[women]] were having some [[good]] time and then the sabretooth [[attacked]] the [[women]] and [[ate]] her [[stomach]] and took the [[liver]] out. that was the [[best]] and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its front [[legs]] [[hilarious]] to make this [[movie]] [[better]] more [[action]] and less talking if you know what i mean and also [[please]] please people who made this movie don't make anothwer [[movie]] like this [[movies]] [[ending]] cause it was [[terrible]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that [[women]] in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending [[always]] there's 1 enemy [[left]]! OK [[damn]] it this movie sucks i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya this movie had a lot of [[chrissake]] in it when the sabretooth attack it [[apart]] i loved it when that [[boy]] and the [[mujer]] were having some [[alright]] time and then the sabretooth [[slammed]] the [[woman]] and [[consumed]] her [[belly]] and took the [[livers]] out. that was the [[finest]] and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its front [[paws]] [[comic]] to make this [[filmmaking]] [[nicer]] more [[activities]] and less talking if you know what i mean and also [[invites]] please people who made this movie don't make anothwer [[filmmaking]] like this [[theater]] [[terminated]] cause it was [[frightful]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that [[woman]] in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending [[invariably]] there's 1 enemy [[exited]]! OK [[darn]] it this movie sucks i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya --------------------------------------------- Result 466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I remembered seeing this movie when i was a kid one day on the [[wonderful]] [[world]] of Disney. This [[movie]] has been in my [[memory]] for over 30 [[years]] and I have been [[looking]] for it. I [[would]] have to [[say]] that out of all the [[kids]] [[movies]] I [[saw]] back then,, this one [[stuck]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The [[story]] and [[images]] of this [[movie]] have been [[burned]] into my memory. To this day, I never did [[see]] it after that day back in the 70s, in fact, I never [[remembered]] the title until an [[internet]] [[search]] [[earlier]] [[today]] [[disclosed]] it to me. I loved it and [[want]] my kids to [[see]] it.Does [[anybody]] [[know]] where I can [[find]] it? I remembered seeing this movie when i was a kid one day on the [[wondrous]] [[monde]] of Disney. This [[cinematography]] has been in my [[memoir]] for over 30 [[yr]] and I have been [[researching]] for it. I [[could]] have to [[tell]] that out of all the [[brats]] [[theater]] I [[watched]] back then,, this one [[jammed]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The [[storytelling]] and [[photographs]] of this [[cinematography]] have been [[incinerated]] into my memory. To this day, I never did [[seeing]] it after that day back in the 70s, in fact, I never [[recalls]] the title until an [[cyber]] [[quest]] [[formerly]] [[yesterday]] [[reveal]] it to me. I loved it and [[wants]] my kids to [[consults]] it.Does [[somebody]] [[savoir]] where I can [[unearth]] it? --------------------------------------------- Result 467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never seen anything as awful as this movie for quite some time. The movie was boring, long long and awful plot. The special effects sucks like hell - It's like watching a movie back in 1999. It's a total waste of an hour and a half of my time. Matthew Settle's performance was quite bad. I saw him in Band of Brothers playing Lt.Speirs, he wasn't THAT bad. In fact not bad at all. But in this film, his acting wasn't convincing enough, it was quite bad and there wasn't any chemistry between the rest of the crew either. Plus, his eyes seems empty like he's not feeling it. It surprised me, really, because he was good in Band of Brothers.

Anyway, don't even bother to watch this movie. It's a big big BIG waste of time. Even if you had to kill an hour or two, get something else to do besides watching this movie. Trust me, you'll regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Robin]] [[Williams]] and Kurt [[Russell]] [[play]] [[guys]] in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[jeopardy]] by [[deciding]] ([[Russell]] [[somewhat]] reluctantly) to [[replay]] their heartbreaking [[tie]] with [[rival]] Bakersfield [[years]] after the fact. Williams is [[ok]], but Russell is flat-out [[great]] as [[legendary]] Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could [[live]] without this rematch. [[Film]] is worth [[watching]] just to see the [[famed]] Remo in [[action]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. [[Robben]] [[William]] and Kurt [[Russel]] [[playing]] [[lads]] in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[endangerment]] by [[decided]] ([[Russel]] [[rather]] reluctantly) to [[reproducing]] their heartbreaking [[necktie]] with [[challenger]] Bakersfield [[yr]] after the fact. Williams is [[alright]], but Russell is flat-out [[wondrous]] as [[mythical]] Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could [[viva]] without this rematch. [[Flick]] is worth [[staring]] just to see the [[commemorated]] Remo in [[actions]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Such great actors such a disappointment. Marlon Brando plays and awful character, the movie is not funny at all, a subconscious message can be seen "IT IS A DAMN CRAP!!!", "IT SUUCKS SO BADLY!!", "THROW YOUR TV THROUGH WINDOW", and so on. It is simply disgusting and irksome. In addition to foolish plot, sense of humor, there is something else. The way the rooms are decorated, the colors. It makes me sick, everything is so colourful that it might cause epilepsy. Usually I do not care about the decoration in movie but this from "Free Money" made me angry. Avoid at all costs! "Free Money" - probably for Charlie Sheen, Sutherland and Brando, but a viewer gets nothing! One watches it at cost of sanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Late one night on a desolate road, in an [[empty]] saloon [[Martin]] Sheen [[spins]] a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola [[May]] have [[incurred]] the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film [[featuring]] their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[glad]] he did it! [[No]] character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I [[thought]] it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic [[programmers]] of the thirties and forties. [[Though]] guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it [[hard]] for me to [[dislike]].

The whole production is a bit [[odd]] though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more [[palatable]]. Late one night on a desolate road, in an [[hollow]] saloon [[Martine]] Sheen [[rotates]] a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola [[Maggio]] have [[engaged]] the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film [[starring]] their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[happier]] he did it! [[Nos]] character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I [[thinks]] it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic [[programmer]] of the thirties and forties. [[Nevertheless]] guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it [[arduous]] for me to [[disgust]].

The whole production is a bit [[curious]] though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more [[acceptable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): [[Well]] [[told]] [[account]] of farmers in China and their [[rise]] to prominence and [[struggles]] with what [[Mother]] nature throws at them. This movie is [[based]] on an [[award]] [[winning]] novel and chronicles a [[family]] [[starting]] with the son's [[arranged]] marriage to a slave [[girl]]. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest [[despite]] a [[somewhat]] hammy performance by the lead played by [[Paul]] Muni. It chronicles , [[Wong]] Long(the [[character]] played by [[Muni]]) and how he works the land, buys more [[land]], eventually becomes very rich but then [[returns]] to the [[land]] where he [[originally]] [[started]]. The [[relationship]] between him and his wife, [[played]] by [[Luise]] [[Rainer]], is the [[main]] [[thread]] of the story([[besides]] the [[land]] itself) and [[despite]] the [[obvious]] non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good [[job]] of [[displaying]] the country and it's people. It's [[obvious]] that MGM [[used]] it's money to create a really good [[epic]] with this one in an [[era]] where they could [[probably]] afford it. The scene with the [[locusts]] is done [[exceedingly]] well and the rest of th [[movie]] really [[looks]] good warranting the Best [[Cinematography]] [[award]] at the [[Oscars]] in that year. The [[definitive]] [[definition]] of an [[epic]] is what this [[story]] is and it's pulled off pretty well. 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): [[Good]] [[said]] [[accounting]] of farmers in China and their [[risen]] to prominence and [[fighting]] with what [[Mommy]] nature throws at them. This movie is [[founded]] on an [[scholarship]] [[earning]] novel and chronicles a [[families]] [[initiating]] with the son's [[organised]] marriage to a slave [[daughter]]. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest [[although]] a [[rather]] hammy performance by the lead played by [[Paulo]] Muni. It chronicles , [[Huang]] Long(the [[characters]] played by [[Mooney]]) and how he works the land, buys more [[lands]], eventually becomes very rich but then [[reverted]] to the [[overland]] where he [[initially]] [[initiating]]. The [[relations]] between him and his wife, [[done]] by [[Luiz]] [[Rainier]], is the [[primary]] [[threading]] of the story([[moreover]] the [[overland]] itself) and [[though]] the [[blatant]] non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good [[labour]] of [[demonstrating]] the country and it's people. It's [[manifest]] that MGM [[using]] it's money to create a really good [[manas]] with this one in an [[epoch]] where they could [[indubitably]] afford it. The scene with the [[grasshoppers]] is done [[overly]] well and the rest of th [[film]] really [[seems]] good warranting the Best [[Film]] [[prix]] at the [[Academy]] in that year. The [[final]] [[definitions]] of an [[manas]] is what this [[history]] is and it's pulled off pretty well. --------------------------------------------- Result 472 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] There's no getting [[around]] it-- this movie is [[terrible]]. I've [[seen]] the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial [[origins]], but it's still just godawful. [[However]], Peter Sellers' genius still shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. There's no getting [[roundabout]] it-- this movie is [[frightful]]. I've [[noticed]] the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial [[wellspring]], but it's still just godawful. [[Still]], Peter Sellers' genius still shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] This is a [[great]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are excellent too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks This is a [[wondrous]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are excellent too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks --------------------------------------------- Result 474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[world]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New [[York]] City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. Overpopulation, air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this particular food stuff really made of? That [[question]] is at the [[heart]] of this admittedly [[somewhat]] dated but still [[intriguing]] [[film]], based on [[Harry]] Harrison's 1966 novel "Make [[Room]]! Make [[Room]]!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly cantankerous but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the world used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that [[part]] has become immortalized into cinematic [[history]].

[[Under]] the very professional [[guiding]] hand of director Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[FANTASTIC]] VOYAGE), SOYLENT [[GREEN]] is a fairly [[grim]] but thought-provoking [[look]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for filming as far back as 1968, after he had [[struck]] gold in the sci-fi genre with [[PLANET]] OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. The [[globe]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New [[Yorke]] City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. Overpopulation, air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this particular food stuff really made of? That [[issue]] is at the [[nub]] of this admittedly [[rather]] dated but still [[riveting]] [[kino]], based on [[Hari]] Harrison's 1966 novel "Make [[Salle]]! Make [[Chamber]]!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly cantankerous but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the world used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that [[parties]] has become immortalized into cinematic [[histories]].

[[Beneath]] the very professional [[guide]] hand of director Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[EXCELLENT]] VOYAGE), SOYLENT [[ARCHER]] is a fairly [[morose]] but thought-provoking [[glance]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for filming as far back as 1968, after he had [[pummeled]] gold in the sci-fi genre with [[PLANETARY]] OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. --------------------------------------------- Result 475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When Ritchie first burst on to movie scene his films were hailed as funny, witty, well directed and original. If one could compare the hype he had generated with his first two attempts and the almost universal loathing his last two outings have created one should consider - has Ritchie been found out? Is he really that talented? Does he really have any genuine original ideas? Or is he simply a pretentious and egotistical director who really wants to be Fincher, Tarantino and Leone all rolled into one colossal and disorganised heap? After watching Revolver one could be excused for thinking were did it all go wrong? What happened to his great sense of humour? Where did he get all these mixed and convoluted ideas from? Revolver tries to be clever, philosophical and succinct, it tries to be an intelligent psychoanalysis, it tries to be an intricate and complicated thriller. Ritchie does make a gargantuan effort to fulfil all these many objectives and invests great chunks of a script into existential musings and numerous plot twists. However, in the end all it serves is to construct a severely disjointed, unstructured and ultimately unfriendly film to the audience. Its plagiarism is so sinful and blatant that although Ritchie does at least attempt to give his own spin he should be punished for even trying to pass it off as his own work. So what the audience gets ultimately is a terrible screenplay intertwined with many pretentious oneliners and clumsy setpieces.

Revolver is ultimately an unoriginal and bland movie that has stolen countless themes from masterpieces like Fight Club, Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction. It aims high, but inevitably shots blanks aplenty.

Revolver deserves to be lambasted, it is a truly poor film masquerading as a wannabe masterpiece from a wannabe auteur. However, it falls flat on its farcical face and just fails at everything it wants to be and achieve. --------------------------------------------- Result 476 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'How To Lose Friends & Alienate People' is a superb film. A hilarious film from start to end. A lovely entertainer. Enjoyed it. Thumps Up!

Performances: Jason is fantastic. He's a treat to watch him from start to end. Jeff Bridges is excellent as the boss. He's a Legend. Megan Fox looks amazingly hot, and deliver a good performance. but dude, She's so hot man! Anderson is delightful. She doesn't look old at all, still hot indeed. Kristan Dunst looks lovely and does a pretty good job. Others are also pretty good.

'How To Lose Friends & Alienate People' is a excellent entertainer. Don't miss this flick! --------------------------------------------- Result 477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just [[recently]] [[watched]] this 1954 movie starring [[Vincent]] Price for the first time on Turner Classic Movies. [[Price]] portrays [[Don]] Gallico, a magician/inventor who is [[driven]] to murder when his [[boss]] steals several of his [[magical]] inventions (and [[also]] his [[wife]], [[portrayed]] in a [[brief]] role by the [[lovely]] Eva Gabor). Even though [[Price]] is a [[murderer]], I [[actually]] found myself rooting for him, he is a [[sympathetic]] [[character]] who is [[driven]] [[mad]] by the greedy people [[around]] him who [[keep]] taking advantage of him.

[[Although]] this [[movie]] doesn't have the "[[horror]]" factor of some of his more famous roles (such as my favorite, "[[House]] of Wax") it [[nonetheless]] has [[enough]] going for it to [[keep]] the [[viewers]] interest.

This is a [[must]] for Vincent Price [[fans]]. I just [[freshly]] [[observed]] this 1954 movie starring [[Vicente]] Price for the first time on Turner Classic Movies. [[Prizes]] portrays [[Donate]] Gallico, a magician/inventor who is [[spurred]] to murder when his [[chef]] steals several of his [[quadrant]] inventions (and [[further]] his [[women]], [[depicted]] in a [[writ]] role by the [[nice]] Eva Gabor). Even though [[Prices]] is a [[slayer]], I [[genuinely]] found myself rooting for him, he is a [[empathy]] [[traits]] who is [[stimulated]] [[lunatic]] by the greedy people [[about]] him who [[preserve]] taking advantage of him.

[[Despite]] this [[kino]] doesn't have the "[[terror]]" factor of some of his more famous roles (such as my favorite, "[[Dwellings]] of Wax") it [[yet]] has [[sufficient]] going for it to [[conserve]] the [[listeners]] interest.

This is a [[should]] for Vincent Price [[stalkers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Nintendo!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[How]] [[could]] you do this to me? I can't believe it...this [[movie]] is actually [[worse]] than the first one. I went to [[see]] this at the theatre with my brother because my [[mother]] [[forced]] me to [[tag]] along....oh [[God]]...where do I [[even]] [[begin]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The [[ending]] [[REALLY]] SUCKED. [[If]] you liked this movie, YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[said]] this was the [[greatest]] [[movie]] ever, you are a TOOL, [[PLAIN]] AND [[SIMPLE]]. This isn't a movie for [[anyone]] but crack-addled ten-year [[olds]] with Game [[Boys]] who [[think]] Pikachu is [[God]]. I'm [[still]] cry to this day [[thinking]] about that [[horrible]] [[turd]] of a [[movie]]....and then there was Pikachu's [[Adventure]]...don't [[even]] [[get]] me [[started]] on that [[horrible]] [[mess]] of a [[film]]. It is, in all truth, one of the most [[boring]] experiences of my entire [[life]]. Don't [[go]] watch this at any [[costs]].

Bottom Line: Go out, [[find]] [[every]] [[copy]] of this [[movie]] that you can, and burn it. [[Burn]] them all, and then proceed to [[rent]] a GOOD [[movie]], like [[Aliens]]...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the [[Future]]! Nintendo!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[Mode]] [[did]] you do this to me? I can't believe it...this [[filmmaking]] is actually [[pire]] than the first one. I went to [[seeing]] this at the theatre with my brother because my [[mommy]] [[obliged]] me to [[labeling]] along....oh [[Seigneur]]...where do I [[yet]] [[lancer]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The [[terminating]] [[TRUTHFULLY]] SUCKED. [[Though]] you liked this movie, YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[avowed]] this was the [[biggest]] [[filmmaking]] ever, you are a TOOL, [[LOWLANDS]] AND [[UNCOMPLICATED]]. This isn't a movie for [[everyone]] but crack-addled ten-year [[yr]] with Game [[Guy]] who [[thought]] Pikachu is [[Deus]]. I'm [[however]] cry to this day [[thought]] about that [[scary]] [[poo]] of a [[movies]]....and then there was Pikachu's [[Fling]]...don't [[yet]] [[gets]] me [[begins]] on that [[scary]] [[chaos]] of a [[filmmaking]]. It is, in all truth, one of the most [[dull]] experiences of my entire [[living]]. Don't [[going]] watch this at any [[pricing]].

Bottom Line: Go out, [[finds]] [[any]] [[copies]] of this [[filmmaking]] that you can, and burn it. [[Combustion]] them all, and then proceed to [[tenancy]] a GOOD [[films]], like [[Extraterrestrials]]...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the [[Impending]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[If]] I had just [[seen]] the pilot of this [[show]] I would have rated it a 10. I was [[immediately]] [[hooked]] on this [[gorgeous]] [[new]] world. [[Subsequent]] [[episodes]] have not [[completely]] lived up to the [[promise]], but I will keep [[watching]] and hope that it [[keeps]] [[getting]] better. The production [[values]] are incredible and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[mind]] that it doesn't seem to [[align]] [[perfectly]] with BSG because I am so [[intrigued]] by the premise and let's face it, they are two [[different]] [[shows]]. I'm [[thrilled]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[life]] (if only weekly) as I've [[missed]] them both. This is a show that requires a bit of [[thought]] from its audience and that is [[always]] a good thing. You kind of have to [[wrap]] your head [[around]] certain [[aspects]] of the [[show]]; [[things]] are not [[always]] as they seem and [[certainly]] there are [[shades]] of [[gray]], both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, characters and, of course, the [[various]] virtual [[worlds]]. We all know how it ends, but the [[journey]] is looking to be [[quite]] a ride. [[Unless]] I had just [[watched]] the pilot of this [[display]] I would have rated it a 10. I was [[rightaway]] [[hook]] on this [[wondrous]] [[newer]] world. [[Resultant]] [[spells]] have not [[downright]] lived up to the [[promising]], but I will keep [[staring]] and hope that it [[retains]] [[obtaining]] better. The production [[value]] are incredible and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[intellect]] that it doesn't seem to [[aligning]] [[fully]] with BSG because I am so [[puzzled]] by the premise and let's face it, they are two [[assorted]] [[exposition]]. I'm [[excited]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[vie]] (if only weekly) as I've [[mistook]] them both. This is a show that requires a bit of [[idea]] from its audience and that is [[continuously]] a good thing. You kind of have to [[wrapping]] your head [[about]] certain [[things]] of the [[showing]]; [[items]] are not [[incessantly]] as they seem and [[definitely]] there are [[hues]] of [[grey]], both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, characters and, of course, the [[multiple]] virtual [[universe]]. We all know how it ends, but the [[itinerary]] is looking to be [[rather]] a ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Red [[Eye]] is a good little thriller to watch on a Saturday [[night]]. [[Intense]] acting, [[great]] villain and [[unexpected]] action.

Some might not want to [[see]] this [[movie]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the [[movie]] is on a [[plane]] and just talking. Don't [[worry]] they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 [[movie]] seems to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But [[surely]] [[enough]] he has [[fit]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those [[actors]] the film [[would]] have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 [[days]] [[Later]]. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was [[great]]. Just when your thinking its going to [[get]] [[boring]] they throw a [[twist]] at you. Luckily this isn't a [[long]] [[movie]] and doesn't feel [[like]] it either. Much better then the other [[flight]] [[movie]] [[Flight]] [[Plan]].

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I [[recommend]]. Not too [[long]] and not too shabby.

8/10 Red [[Ojo]] is a good little thriller to watch on a Saturday [[soir]]. [[Intensive]] acting, [[huge]] villain and [[unintended]] action.

Some might not want to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the [[movies]] is on a [[airplanes]] and just talking. Don't [[disturb]] they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 [[cinematography]] seems to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But [[arguably]] [[sufficiently]] he has [[suited]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those [[protagonists]] the film [[ought]] have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 [[jours]] [[Thereafter]]. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was [[wondrous]]. Just when your thinking its going to [[gets]] [[bored]] they throw a [[twisting]] at you. Luckily this isn't a [[lang]] [[flick]] and doesn't feel [[fond]] it either. Much better then the other [[flights]] [[cinematography]] [[Flights]] [[Plans]].

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I [[recommendation]]. Not too [[longer]] and not too shabby.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Sometimes]] laughter in the [[middle]] of a [[horror]] film is a [[signal]] of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of [[Satan]] coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 [[cult]] classic The Wicker [[Man]] [[however]], it [[made]] me think that this [[new]] Wickerman is about as scary as the [[South]] Park [[character]], Scuzzlebut, the [[friendly]] forest monster with TV's [[Patrick]] Duffy for a leg and a [[celery]] [[stalk]] for an arm who's [[favorite]] [[hobby]] is [[weaving]] wicker baskets.

3 years [[ago]] a [[friend]] of [[mine]] in Hollywood told me that he [[heard]] that [[Nicolas]] Cage was [[going]] to do a remake of the [[film]]. I [[started]] laughing and my friend (Keith) got [[mad]] at me touting [[Nicolas]] Cage as a [[great]] actor. I just didn't [[think]] that he [[could]] [[pull]] it off and [[unfortunately]] for [[moviegoers]] I was right. [[Gone]] is the realness, the outstanding [[original]] music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. [[Instead]] we have horror movie [[clichés]], [[affected]] acting and changes to the storyline that [[make]] any believability [[fall]] [[apart]]. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been [[inundated]] with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. [[Occasionally]] laughter in the [[milieu]] of a [[monstrosity]] film is a [[signals]] of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of [[Lucifer]] coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 [[cults]] classic The Wicker [[Males]] [[still]], it [[introduced]] me think that this [[novel]] Wickerman is about as scary as the [[Southward]] Park [[characteristics]], Scuzzlebut, the [[amiable]] forest monster with TV's [[Patricio]] Duffy for a leg and a [[onion]] [[stem]] for an arm who's [[favourite]] [[leisure]] is [[knitting]] wicker baskets.

3 years [[previously]] a [[buddies]] of [[landmine]] in Hollywood told me that he [[audition]] that [[Nikola]] Cage was [[go]] to do a remake of the [[filmmaking]]. I [[starting]] laughing and my friend (Keith) got [[crazy]] at me touting [[Nicholas]] Cage as a [[large]] actor. I just didn't [[thought]] that he [[wo]] [[pulled]] it off and [[sadly]] for [[spectators]] I was right. [[Disappeared]] is the realness, the outstanding [[preliminary]] music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. [[However]] we have horror movie [[cliché]], [[influenced]] acting and changes to the storyline that [[deliver]] any believability [[decrease]] [[moreover]]. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been [[overwhelmed]] with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. --------------------------------------------- Result 482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This should be a [[great]] [[film]]... [[Meryl]] [[Streep]] and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two [[newspaper]] writers. Mike Nichols directing. [[Uh]] [[uh]]. It's dull dull dull! [[Pointless]] and [[predictable]]! [[Slow]] and unfocused!

It's a cookie cutter '[[boy]] meets [[girl]], boy [[marries]] [[girl]], boy has [[affair]], girl leaves boy' [[story]]. Now [[theres]] an original [[concept]]! After [[squirming]] through two [[hours]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a comedy, a romance, a [[tragedy]] or a soap [[opera]]. It was [[done]] in 1986. I'm sure all of us did [[things]] sixteen [[years]] [[ago]] that we [[rather]] would [[forget]]. I hope the [[damage]] to the reputations of Streep et al is [[beginning]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is [[beginning]] to fade. It's not that it's such a [[bad]] [[picture]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. This should be a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]]... [[Merrill]] [[Meryl]] and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two [[diaries]] writers. Mike Nichols directing. [[Um]] [[um]]. It's dull dull dull! [[Unhelpful]] and [[foreseeable]]! [[Slower]] and unfocused!

It's a cookie cutter '[[kiddo]] meets [[dame]], boy [[weddings]] [[dame]], boy has [[fling]], girl leaves boy' [[stories]]. Now [[actualy]] an original [[notions]]! After [[wiggling]] through two [[hour]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a comedy, a romance, a [[drama]] or a soap [[drama]]. It was [[completed]] in 1986. I'm sure all of us did [[aspects]] sixteen [[ages]] [[previously]] that we [[somewhat]] would [[forgot]]. I hope the [[harm]] to the reputations of Streep et al is [[initiating]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is [[onset]] to fade. It's not that it's such a [[wicked]] [[imagery]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. --------------------------------------------- Result 483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Harold Pinter rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a [[man]] going to [[visit]] the husband of his lover and having it all [[go]] sideways. The [[original]] [[film]] starred [[Laurence]] [[Olivier]] and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this [[version]] and he's [[paired]] with Jude Law. Here the [[film]] is directed by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. [[Both]] Caine and [[Law]] are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the [[chemistry]] and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and [[enough]] of a [[reason]] to watch when the script's [[direction]] goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is [[crisp]] and [[sharp]] and [[often]] very witty and I [[understand]] why he was [[chosen]] to [[rewrite]] the [[play]] (which is [[updated]] to make [[use]] of [[surveillance]] cameras and the like).The [[problem]] is that how the script [[moves]] the [[characters]] around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his [[odd]] [[modern]] [[house]] with sliding doors and [[panels]] for no really [[good]] [[reason]]. [[Conversations]] happen [[repeatedly]] in [[different]] [[locations]]. I know Pinter has [[done]] that in his plays, but in this case it becomes [[tedious]]. Why do we [[need]] to have the [[pair]] go over and over and over the [[fact]] that [[Law]] is sleeping with Caine's wife? It [[would]] be okay if at some point [[Law]] [[said]] enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each [[time]] is the first time. The [[script]] also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of [[Law]] all that well. To [[begin]] with he's blindly [[angry]] to [[start]] so he has no [[chance]] to [[turn]] around and [[scare]] us.(Never mind a late in the [[game]] revelation that makes you wonder why he [[bothered]]) [[In]] the [[original]] we never [[suspected]] what was up. here we do and while it [[gives]] an edge it also somehow feels false since its so [[clear]] we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't [[see]] he's being set up. There are a few other [[instances]] but to [[say]] more [[would]] give away too much.

Thinking about the [[film]] in retrospect I [[think]] its a [[film]] of missed opportunities and missteps. The [[opportunities]] [[squandered]] are the [[chance]] to have [[better]] fireworks between Caine and [[Law]]. Missteps in that the [[choice]] of a [[garish]] [[setting]] and [[odd]] [[shifts]] in plot [[take]] away from the [[creation]] of a [[tension]] and a believable thriller. [[Instead]] we [[get]] some [[smart]] [[dialog]] and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work Harold Pinter rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a [[bloke]] going to [[visiting]] the husband of his lover and having it all [[going]] sideways. The [[preliminary]] [[cinematography]] starred [[Lawrence]] [[Olivia]] and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this [[stepping]] and he's [[coupled]] with Jude Law. Here the [[filmmaking]] is directed by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. [[Whether]] Caine and [[Act]] are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the [[chemicals]] and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and [[satisfactorily]] of a [[motif]] to watch when the script's [[directions]] goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is [[sharpness]] and [[abrupt]] and [[generally]] very witty and I [[fathom]] why he was [[selected]] to [[rewriting]] the [[gaming]] (which is [[modernized]] to make [[utilizes]] of [[supervise]] cameras and the like).The [[difficulty]] is that how the script [[shift]] the [[character]] around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his [[weird]] [[trendy]] [[households]] with sliding doors and [[groupings]] for no really [[buena]] [[motif]]. [[Dialogue]] happen [[routinely]] in [[several]] [[places]]. I know Pinter has [[doing]] that in his plays, but in this case it becomes [[monotonous]]. Why do we [[required]] to have the [[torque]] go over and over and over the [[facto]] that [[Lois]] is sleeping with Caine's wife? It [[could]] be okay if at some point [[Ley]] [[says]] enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each [[moment]] is the first time. The [[screenplay]] also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of [[Legislation]] all that well. To [[starting]] with he's blindly [[furious]] to [[initiating]] so he has no [[opportunities]] to [[turning]] around and [[freaked]] us.(Never mind a late in the [[games]] revelation that makes you wonder why he [[disturbed]]) [[At]] the [[preliminary]] we never [[suspect]] what was up. here we do and while it [[delivers]] an edge it also somehow feels false since its so [[clara]] we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't [[seeing]] he's being set up. There are a few other [[situations]] but to [[says]] more [[could]] give away too much.

Thinking about the [[filmmaking]] in retrospect I [[thought]] its a [[movie]] of missed opportunities and missteps. The [[opportunity]] [[wasted]] are the [[luck]] to have [[best]] fireworks between Caine and [[Lois]]. Missteps in that the [[picks]] of a [[coarse]] [[configured]] and [[weird]] [[changes]] in plot [[taking]] away from the [[inception]] of a [[tensions]] and a believable thriller. [[However]] we [[obtain]] some [[ingenious]] [[dialogue]] and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work --------------------------------------------- Result 484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] First things [[first]]: I'm not a conservative. And [[even]] [[though]] I [[would]] never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was [[opposed]] to the war in [[Iraq]] from day one. I [[think]] it's safe to [[say]] John Cusack and I would [[probably]] see eye-to-eye on [[politics]], in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to talking about how [[great]] Adam Curtis' BBC [[docs]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a [[part]] of the [[choir]] Cusack is [[preaching]] to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the [[tailoring]] is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the [[road]] to hell is paved with [[good]] intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every [[intention]] of [[making]] an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as [[Robert]] Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the [[viewer]], they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as [[Michael]] Moore's [[Canadian]] Bacon.

The current state of US [[politics]], [[foreign]] [[policy]] and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a [[result]], tragic, [[pathetic]] and, [[regrettably]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as [[funny]] as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a [[hurry]]. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized [[Grosse]] Pointe Blank (one of his best [[films]]), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the [[collected]] [[works]] of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so [[obnoxious]] is none of the [[jokes]] or [[gags]] or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ First things [[firstly]]: I'm not a conservative. And [[yet]] [[albeit]] I [[should]] never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was [[bucked]] to the war in [[Bagdad]] from day one. I [[thoughts]] it's safe to [[tell]] John Cusack and I would [[undeniably]] see eye-to-eye on [[policy]], in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to talking about how [[huge]] Adam Curtis' BBC [[doc]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a [[portions]] of the [[chorus]] Cusack is [[soapbox]] to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the [[adapts]] is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the [[routing]] to hell is paved with [[alright]] intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every [[intents]] of [[doing]] an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as [[Roberto]] Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the [[onlooker]], they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as [[Micheal]] Moore's [[Canadiens]] Bacon.

The current state of US [[policies]], [[alien]] [[policies]] and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a [[results]], tragic, [[unhappy]] and, [[woefully]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as [[hilarious]] as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a [[faster]]. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized [[Grands]] Pointe Blank (one of his best [[filmmaking]]), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the [[collecting]] [[cooperated]] of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so [[outrageous]] is none of the [[pranks]] or [[jaws]] or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------- Result 485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[At]] first [[glance]], this [[film]] looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[focus]] on a plot to [[assassinate]] the [[President]] of the [[United]] States, a race against [[time]], and plenty of [[Secret]] Service [[agents]], the agency under the [[spotlight]] in The [[Sentinel]].

But [[wait]], the protagonist turns out to be Michael Douglas' [[character]] Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS [[agents]] are [[specially]] trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them special - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to [[run]] for his [[life]] while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First [[Lady]] (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's [[In]] the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical [[reference]], who [[took]] the bullet in their respective [[tours]] of [[duty]]. [[While]] Eastwood's movie has a more [[enigmatic]] villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its [[lack]] of a central strong villain, preferring to [[share]] the [[assassination]] [[responsibility]] amongst [[many]] forgettable ex-KGB [[villains]], and the mole [[within]] the [[Presidential]] Detail. With Douglas on the run from the [[law]], he becomes [[similar]] to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the [[proverbial]] one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his [[smarts]] to [[outwit]] fellow agents, which turned out to be [[quite]] interesting to watch - despite slick [[processes]], it [[still]] boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of [[today]] from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. [[During]] first [[vista]], this [[cinema]] looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[accent]] on a plot to [[murdering]] the [[Chairperson]] of the [[Unified]] States, a race against [[times]], and plenty of [[Secretly]] Service [[officers]], the agency under the [[focusing]] in The [[Sentry]].

But [[suspense]], the protagonist turns out to be Michael Douglas' [[nature]] Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS [[officer]] are [[notably]] trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them special - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to [[executing]] for his [[vida]] while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First [[Ladies]] (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's [[Throughout]] the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical [[references]], who [[picked]] the bullet in their respective [[trip]] of [[accountability]]. [[Despite]] Eastwood's movie has a more [[intriguing]] villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its [[misses]] of a central strong villain, preferring to [[exchanges]] the [[killings]] [[liability]] amongst [[myriad]] forgettable ex-KGB [[thugs]], and the mole [[inside]] the [[Presidency]] Detail. With Douglas on the run from the [[act]], he becomes [[analogue]] to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the [[famed]] one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his [[smarter]] to [[outsmart]] fellow agents, which turned out to be [[rather]] interesting to watch - despite slick [[process]], it [[again]] boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of [[hoy]] from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. --------------------------------------------- Result 486 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is the [[kind]] of [[movie]] which [[shows]] the paucity of French cinema when it comes to [[making]] thrillers.The director's [[desire]] to "[[sound]] [[American]]" is so [[glaring]] that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[horrible]] murders,a [[plot]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[worst]] ever filmed.Add a steamy [[love]] scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to [[attract]] the [[huge]] [[adolescent]] [[audience]].A violent and [[absurd]] [[conclusion]],followed by a silent epilogue who [[could]] [[make]] a [[nice]] commercial for the côte d'azur,it's [[really]] the silence of the lame. This is the [[genre]] of [[cinematographic]] which [[showings]] the paucity of French cinema when it comes to [[doing]] thrillers.The director's [[willingness]] to "[[sounds]] [[Americana]]" is so [[observable]] that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[abhorrent]] murders,a [[intrigue]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[meanest]] ever filmed.Add a steamy [[likes]] scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to [[attraction]] the [[prodigious]] [[adolescence]] [[audiences]].A violent and [[farcical]] [[finding]],followed by a silent epilogue who [[wo]] [[deliver]] a [[handsome]] commercial for the côte d'azur,it's [[truly]] the silence of the lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original release back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a [[little]]. The movie about Joe Buck ([[Jon]] Voight) [[coming]] from Texas to New York [[City]] to [[become]] a [[hustler]] is sometimes a little disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[tries]] to [[live]] as a [[hustler]], making [[money]] by the act of [[love]]. It does not [[work]] out as he [[planned]]. After a [[guy]] named [[Rico]] 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) [[first]] pulled a [[trick]] on him and [[stole]] some [[money]] they [[become]] friends. They [[live]] in an empty and very [[filthy]] [[apartment]]. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to [[try]] to make some money.

The movie was [[probably]] rated X for the main [[subject]] but on the [[way]] we see some [[strange]] things. The [[editing]] in this [[movie]] is [[great]]. We see [[dream]] [[sequences]] from Joe and Ratso [[interrupted]] by the [[real]] world in a nice and [[sometimes]] funny [[way]]. Dustin Hoffman, [[Jon]] Voight and the supporting [[actors]] give [[great]] performances. [[Especially]] Hoffman [[delivers]] some fine [[famous]] lines. The [[score]] is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[great]] movie that won the [[Best]] Picture [[Oscar]] for a good [[reason]]. 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original release back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a [[tiny]]. The movie about Joe Buck ([[John]] Voight) [[forthcoming]] from Texas to New York [[Town]] to [[becomes]] a [[trickster]] is sometimes a little disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[attempting]] to [[inhabit]] as a [[trickster]], making [[cash]] by the act of [[loves]]. It does not [[cooperating]] out as he [[envisioned]]. After a [[man]] named [[Rican]] 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) [[firstly]] pulled a [[ruse]] on him and [[stolen]] some [[cash]] they [[gotten]] friends. They [[inhabit]] in an empty and very [[disgusting]] [[condo]]. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to [[strive]] to make some money.

The movie was [[certainly]] rated X for the main [[topic]] but on the [[path]] we see some [[odd]] things. The [[editorial]] in this [[cinematography]] is [[wondrous]]. We see [[daydream]] [[sequence]] from Joe and Ratso [[discontinued]] by the [[true]] world in a nice and [[occasionally]] funny [[camino]]. Dustin Hoffman, [[John]] Voight and the supporting [[protagonists]] give [[wondrous]] performances. [[Concretely]] Hoffman [[offerings]] some fine [[proverbial]] lines. The [[notation]] is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[wondrous]] movie that won the [[Finest]] Picture [[Oskar]] for a good [[justification]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 488 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] This movie is so [[bad]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first citing the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. This movie is so [[unfavourable]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first citing the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. --------------------------------------------- Result 489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore [[grew]] up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a movie about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was excited.

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[different]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[beautiful]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a [[child]], with the exception of one of her [[brothers]]. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from [[school]] you'd find out that she was [[truly]] [[wounded]] before she even set foot in an [[institution]], she was [[always]] [[defensive]] and what [[would]] [[seem]] [[like]] an unwillingness to [[learn]] in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was [[unable]] to.

Marlene did not [[deserve]] the [[life]] she was given, with the [[lack]] of [[help]] she [[desperately]] [[needed]] to [[receive]]. It was the government and the people [[around]] her that [[aided]] further in her death by not [[attempting]] to [[understand]] her [[needs]] and why she did what she did. I still [[find]] myself angered that she was put in [[jail]] for self-defense from a [[man]] who [[tried]] to rape her. As her brother once [[said]], "They didn't know what to do with her so they [[locked]] her away and it [[killed]] her." I [[believe]] in that with all my [[heart]].

Rest in [[peace]] Marlene, you [[deserve]] it so much. Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore [[raising]] up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a movie about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was excited.

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[several]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[delightful]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a [[children]], with the exception of one of her [[brethren]]. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from [[tuition]] you'd find out that she was [[genuinely]] [[wounds]] before she even set foot in an [[creation]], she was [[steadily]] [[protective]] and what [[should]] [[appears]] [[iike]] an unwillingness to [[learned]] in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was [[incompetent]] to.

Marlene did not [[merits]] the [[vie]] she was given, with the [[inadequacy]] of [[assistance]] she [[sorely]] [[requisite]] to [[recieve]]. It was the government and the people [[throughout]] her that [[aiding]] further in her death by not [[endeavour]] to [[understands]] her [[requirements]] and why she did what she did. I still [[unearthed]] myself angered that she was put in [[imprisonment]] for self-defense from a [[mec]] who [[attempts]] to rape her. As her brother once [[stated]], "They didn't know what to do with her so they [[lock]] her away and it [[murdering]] her." I [[think]] in that with all my [[heartland]].

Rest in [[pacification]] Marlene, you [[deserved]] it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] It's sad to [[view]] this [[film]] now that we know how the [[ANC]] got [[shafted]] by international capitalism. Biko died for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, outright apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority whites, leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Klein]] [[writes]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a twofold strategy. First drawing on the [[ascendant]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly [[impartial]] experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much [[change]] accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. [[Viewing]] [[Cry]] [[Freedom]] in this [[light]] is [[deeply]] [[ironic]] --- actually [[tragic]]. The ANC has transformed itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. It's sad to [[vista]] this [[cinematography]] now that we know how the [[NAPA]] got [[humped]] by international capitalism. Biko died for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, outright apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority whites, leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Kline]] [[written]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a twofold strategy. First drawing on the [[upward]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly [[unbiased]] experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much [[shift]] accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. [[Vista]] [[Wept]] [[Freedoms]] in this [[lighting]] is [[seriously]] [[sarcastic]] --- actually [[dire]]. The ANC has transformed itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. --------------------------------------------- Result 491 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Dieter Bohlen, Germany's [[notorious]] [[composer]] and [[producer]] of slightly trashy [[pop]] hits like "You're my [[heart]], you're my soul" [[felt]] the [[need]] to [[tell]] his [[story]] - and gracefully he decided to [[hire]] a [[ghost]] [[writer]]. The [[result]] was a [[funny]] [[book]] about his [[life]]. [[Well]], more or less a [[fuzzy]] [[image]] of it. He didn't [[deny]] that he is a selfish [[asshole]] but the [[whole]] [[story]] was twisted to [[fit]] his [[image]] of himself. [[No]] word that he has [[probably]] beaten up his former [[wife]] and she [[ended]] up in hospital. [[However]] it was written in a [[funny]] [[style]] and a [[huge]] [[success]] after his appearance as jury [[member]] of the German version of "American [[Idol]]" - [[especially]] his unforgettable [[comments]].

This should be the [[end]] of the [[story]] - [[really]]. [[In]] the [[hype]] of the [[mentioned]] "[[Idol]]" TV [[show]] called "Deutschland sucht den [[Superstar]]" ([[abbreviated]] DSDS) somebody [[must]] have [[come]] up with the [[terrible]] [[idea]] to make a [[movie]] out of the [[book]]. The [[result]] is "[[Dieter]] - [[der]] [[Film]]"

I have [[rarely]] [[seen]] a [[movie]] which tries so [[desperately]] to be funny and [[fails]] so [[completely]]. [[None]] of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's [[voice]] should have [[done]] that more. [[Obvious]], [[childish]], predictable and [[lengthy]] gags [[destroy]] any [[motivation]] to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They [[could]] have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a [[satire]], but they [[failed]]. The story is totally uninteresting and the [[fact]] that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has [[nothing]] satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 Dieter Bohlen, Germany's [[prestigious]] [[composers]] and [[industrialists]] of slightly trashy [[papa]] hits like "You're my [[coeur]], you're my soul" [[deemed]] the [[needs]] to [[say]] his [[storytelling]] - and gracefully he decided to [[recruitment]] a [[ghostbusters]] [[scriptwriter]]. The [[consequence]] was a [[hilarious]] [[workbook]] about his [[vie]]. [[Good]], more or less a [[hazy]] [[picture]] of it. He didn't [[rejecting]] that he is a selfish [[prick]] but the [[ensemble]] [[tales]] was twisted to [[suited]] his [[picture]] of himself. [[Nope]] word that he has [[surely]] beaten up his former [[femme]] and she [[ending]] up in hospital. [[Still]] it was written in a [[hilarious]] [[styles]] and a [[formidable]] [[avail]] after his appearance as jury [[members]] of the German version of "American [[Heroine]]" - [[concretely]] his unforgettable [[observations]].

This should be the [[ends]] of the [[tales]] - [[truly]]. [[Among]] the [[fanfare]] of the [[cited]] "[[Heroine]]" TV [[shows]] called "Deutschland sucht den [[Stars]]" ([[shortened]] DSDS) somebody [[owes]] have [[coming]] up with the [[scary]] [[inkling]] to make a [[cinema]] out of the [[workbook]]. The [[findings]] is "[[Sauer]] - [[monastery]] [[Filmmaking]]"

I have [[seldom]] [[saw]] a [[filmmaking]] which tries so [[frantically]] to be funny and [[fail]] so [[absolutely]]. [[Nos]] of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's [[vowel]] should have [[played]] that more. [[Flagrant]], [[boyish]], predictable and [[lang]] gags [[raze]] any [[motivates]] to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They [[did]] have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a [[sarcasm]], but they [[faulted]]. The story is totally uninteresting and the [[facto]] that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has [[anything]] satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Pretty]] poor Firestarter [[clone]] that seems more like a [[bad]] TV movie than a bad feature [[film]]. [[How]] disappointing for this to [[come]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiment]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The [[boy]] [[born]] to the [[couple]] from the experiment [[constantly]] runs a fever of 100 [[degrees]], and when he's an [[adult]], people in his [[life]] [[start]] [[spontaneously]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on fire are well [[done]], but when they [[get]] to the point that they are well [[done]] in another sense, they're [[obviously]] [[changed]] to [[dummies]]. When [[jets]] of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it [[looks]] silly [[rather]] than [[alarming]] the [[way]] it should. Also [[ridiculous]] is fire that [[evidently]] [[travels]] through phone lines and [[erupts]] in [[huge]] [[jets]] from the receiver's [[earpiece]]. How is that [[supposed]] to [[happen]], [[exactly]]?

Something else that [[struck]] me as silly about the [[movie]] is when a [[character]] has [[visions]] of his late [[parents]]. We [[later]] [[see]] the [[exact]] same shots from those [[visions]] in [[home]] [[movies]]. [[Belle]] poor Firestarter [[clooney]] that seems more like a [[unfavorable]] TV movie than a bad feature [[movie]]. [[Mode]] disappointing for this to [[coming]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiences]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The [[laddie]] [[birthed]] to the [[pair]] from the experiment [[always]] runs a fever of 100 [[degree]], and when he's an [[grownup]], people in his [[lives]] [[outset]] [[voluntarily]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on fire are well [[effected]], but when they [[gets]] to the point that they are well [[effected]] in another sense, they're [[patently]] [[altering]] to [[mannequins]]. When [[airplanes]] of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it [[seems]] silly [[somewhat]] than [[scary]] the [[routes]] it should. Also [[nonsense]] is fire that [[naturally]] [[travel]] through phone lines and [[erupt]] in [[prodigious]] [[airplanes]] from the receiver's [[handset]]. How is that [[alleged]] to [[occur]], [[accurately]]?

Something else that [[hitting]] me as silly about the [[flick]] is when a [[characters]] has [[perceptions]] of his late [[relatives]]. We [[subsequently]] [[behold]] the [[correct]] same shots from those [[ideas]] in [[household]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this film in shire joy.

This is possibly one of the best films of all time. It has a timeless value, you can get so much out of it it's amazing. There are parts that are moving, funny, and just great.

All aspect are spot on, the portrayal of the story is perfect, every detail is 100% genuine, even small Irish subtleties have been covered.

The use of low and high shots gives two great views on Cristy (look out for that).

Daniel Day-Lewis's performance is incredible. I've never seen an actor do that, ever. It really is amazing.

And it's so great to watch, it flows so well, it's probably the closest thing yo can get to real life experience. I love it.

If you haven't seen it, you should see it. Don't have any doubts on it, there is something there for all. --------------------------------------------- Result 494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This really is the worst film I have ever seen. Ever. Period. I actually paid £3.50 to watch this steaming turd of a movie. Incredibly dull, poorly acted, dire script, often incoherent and too many scenes that don't seem to have any relevance to the overall film (like when Heath Ledger's priest partner get's nailed to a wall by a ghost...what was the point in that scene? answers on a postcard please...)

I should have got a medal for sticking with this film for it's entire running time. I would rather take a strong kick to the groin than sit through this film again.

This should be cast into IMDb's bottom 100. Hopefully my vote of 1/10 will help it on it's way. --------------------------------------------- Result 495 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Only]] the most [[ardent]] DORIS DAY [[fan]] could find this one [[even]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the [[wealth]] of material available for a [[story]] about [[New]] York City's most famous blackout, a [[film]] that [[could]] have [[dealt]] with [[numerous]] real-life [[stories]] of what people had to [[cope]] with, this [[scrapes]] the bottom of the barrel for [[lack]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is [[indignant]] because she [[suspects]] she may have been [[compromised]] on the [[night]] of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut [[lodgings]], [[took]] a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a [[man]] who had [[done]] the same, [[wandering]] into the house by [[mistake]].

Nobody is able to [[salvage]] this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As [[directed]] by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. [[Purely]] the most [[keen]] DORIS DAY [[admirer]] could find this one [[yet]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the [[riches]] of material available for a [[saga]] about [[Novo]] York City's most famous blackout, a [[filmmaking]] that [[did]] have [[treated]] with [[various]] real-life [[history]] of what people had to [[coping]] with, this [[scratches]] the bottom of the barrel for [[scarcity]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is [[angry]] because she [[accused]] she may have been [[endangered]] on the [[nocturne]] of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut [[domicile]], [[taken]] a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a [[bloke]] who had [[accomplished]] the same, [[roaming]] into the house by [[blunder]].

Nobody is able to [[rescue]] this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As [[aimed]] by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This entry is certainly interesting for series fans (like myself), but yet it is mostly [[incomprehensible]]. The plot is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking effects, to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

Try to see the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the gore that was cut to be re-rated "R". This entry is certainly interesting for series fans (like myself), but yet it is mostly [[unimaginable]]. The plot is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking effects, to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

Try to see the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the gore that was cut to be re-rated "R". --------------------------------------------- Result 497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. [[However]], if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[impressive]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. [[Instead]], if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[wondrous]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. --------------------------------------------- Result 498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While the British produced some hilarious and slick sitcoms in the 1990s - Ab Fab, Men Behaving Badly, One Foot in the Grave, etc. - the 70s were the real golden age.

In the 1970s there were whole new territories to explore, including the sexual revolution, feminism, and the slowly evolving awareness of a need for "sensitivity" that would, twenty years later, become Political Correctness. Attempts to grapple with the confusion of this thoroughly modern world were the subtle and not-so-subtle themes in everything from the skits of Monty Python's Flying Circus to sitcoms like Man About the House. (By the late 70s this "grappling" resulted in more meditative and bitter-sweet sitcoms such as the masterpiece Butterflies.)

Man About the House is a perfect example of the good Britcoms of the time - slightly genteel, cheeky, fresh, ingenuous, sometimes outrageous, with some well made observations on contemporary life. Compare it to a cynical 90s show such as Ab Fab, and it is hard to believe the two were created in the same country.

Man About the House is one of the great Britcoms of the 70s, right up there with Good Neighbors (The Good Life), and About the House's spin off George and Mildred. Its quality is attested to by the fact that - as with Good Neighbors - its creators, writers, and many of its cast have had continued success in British television. --------------------------------------------- Result 499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[daughter]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early promise as a [[painter]]. [[Taught]] by her father, Artemisia was born in an era that [[denied]] [[talented]] women the [[right]] to have their [[work]] [[seen]] side by side art created by [[men]]. Her [[tragic]] life is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Agnes]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The [[Passion]] of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[made]] us investigate more into the [[life]] of this [[woman]], her [[work]], and her [[legacy]]. We [[also]] read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a [[must]] read [[book]] by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" [[presents]] the fictionalized facts we have read about [[showing]] the [[early]] [[life]] of the young [[woman]] as she [[starts]] to [[paint]]. She was [[clearly]] influenced by the [[work]] of her [[father]], by Caravaggio, [[Agostino]] Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her [[relationship]] and [[love]] affair with Tassi is the [[basis]] of the [[film]]. Artemisia, [[unfortunately]] couldn't [[go]] as far as she [[could]] have because of the [[prejudice]] against [[women]] in the arts. It didn't help [[either]] she [[caused]] a scandal where she is [[accused]] of being [[raped]] by Tassi. She had to [[go]] to [[Rome]] in [[order]] to distance herself from that [[unhappy]] [[time]] of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a [[beautiful]] Artemisia. She is a [[gorgeous]] [[creature]] who awakened passion in men. [[Michel]] Serrault plays Orazio, her father. [[Miki]] Maojlovic is [[seen]] as Tassi, the [[man]] who [[wanted]] Artemisia, but [[ended]] up in [[jail]]. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The film has a [[glossy]] [[finish]] that the camera [[work]] of Benoit Delhomme [[captures]] in all its [[splendor]]. The scenic locales of the [[film]] [[offer]] an idea of what inspired that [[school]] of painting to show in their canvases. The [[music]] by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with [[sure]] hand [[showing]] a [[visual]] [[style]] of her own. Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[giri]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early promise as a [[painting]]. [[Teach]] by her father, Artemisia was born in an era that [[deny]] [[gifted]] women the [[rights]] to have their [[cooperation]] [[saw]] side by side art created by [[male]]. Her [[disastrous]] life is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Felicity]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The [[Enthusiasm]] of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[accomplished]] us investigate more into the [[living]] of this [[wife]], her [[jobs]], and her [[heirloom]]. We [[similarly]] read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a [[should]] read [[workbook]] by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" [[presented]] the fictionalized facts we have read about [[demonstrating]] the [[prematurely]] [[vie]] of the young [[women]] as she [[initiating]] to [[painted]]. She was [[apparently]] influenced by the [[works]] of her [[pere]], by Caravaggio, [[Katharine]] Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her [[nexus]] and [[loves]] affair with Tassi is the [[base]] of the [[movie]]. Artemisia, [[sadly]] couldn't [[going]] as far as she [[would]] have because of the [[harm]] against [[female]] in the arts. It didn't help [[nor]] she [[aroused]] a scandal where she is [[accusing]] of being [[violated]] by Tassi. She had to [[going]] to [[Rom]] in [[edict]] to distance herself from that [[pathetic]] [[moment]] of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a [[handsome]] Artemisia. She is a [[brilliant]] [[monster]] who awakened passion in men. [[Michelle]] Serrault plays Orazio, her father. [[Micky]] Maojlovic is [[watched]] as Tassi, the [[guy]] who [[wanna]] Artemisia, but [[finished]] up in [[brig]]. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The film has a [[bright]] [[conclude]] that the camera [[collaborating]] of Benoit Delhomme [[caught]] in all its [[brilliance]]. The scenic locales of the [[movie]] [[offered]] an idea of what inspired that [[tuition]] of painting to show in their canvases. The [[musician]] by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with [[persuaded]] hand [[proving]] a [[optic]] [[styles]] of her own. --------------------------------------------- Result 500 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Bugs life is a [[good]] [[film]]. But to me, it doesn't really [[compare]] to [[movies]] like Toy [[story]] and stuff. Don't get me [[wrong]], I liked this [[movie]], but it wasn't as [[good]] as [[Toy]] story. The [[film]] has the [[visuals]], the [[laughs]], and others that [[Toy]] [[story]] had. But the [[film]] didn't feel [[quite]] as... I don't know, but I [[thought]] it was [[still]] a [[pretty]] good [[film]].

A bugs [[life]]... I don't [[want]] to say this, is a [[film]] that I don't [[remember]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen [[Toy]] [[story]] in years, but I [[still]] remember it. I shouldn't have [[reviewed]] this [[film]], but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the [[best]] [[work]] Pixar has [[done]].

A bug's [[life]]:***/**** Bugs life is a [[buena]] [[movie]]. But to me, it doesn't really [[comparison]] to [[films]] like Toy [[tale]] and stuff. Don't get me [[amiss]], I liked this [[movies]], but it wasn't as [[alright]] as [[Pawn]] story. The [[movie]] has the [[photographs]], the [[giggling]], and others that [[Toys]] [[histories]] had. But the [[kino]] didn't feel [[pretty]] as... I don't know, but I [[brainchild]] it was [[however]] a [[quite]] good [[cinematography]].

A bugs [[living]]... I don't [[wish]] to say this, is a [[movie]] that I don't [[recall]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen [[Pawn]] [[history]] in years, but I [[yet]] remember it. I shouldn't have [[revisiting]] this [[kino]], but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the [[better]] [[collaborating]] Pixar has [[completed]].

A bug's [[iife]]:***/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can only assume that the other reviewers of this "film" are stockholders in the production company, as this was quite possibly the worst movie I've seen in the last five years. From the opening shot of a Rabbi laughing uncontrollably for no apparent reason, it was clear that the actors in this film would kill to be considered "B-Level." Both my wife and I were in a great mood before starting this film, and we were genuinely looking forward to a funny popcorn movie. We knew we hadn't rented Citizen Kane, and we weren't expecting to see the most amazing movie ever. However, after 40 minutes of enduring the most painfully unfunny bit of garbage I've ever seen, we shut it off instead of wasting another minutes of our lives.

If a "comedy" with no laughs, terrible acting, thin plot and annoying characters are your thing, then this film is for you. Honestly, Troll 2 is better--at least I laughed at the popcorn sex scene.

I cannot justify writing a longer review of this picture because I've already wasted almost an hour trying to find one joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[like]] British [[humor]], I believe it's one of the best in the world. I [[like]] [[almost]] [[every]] British sitcom ([[okay]]... [[maybe]] not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were [[great]], but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of [[Gentlemen]] is just something good to make you [[sick]]. This [[show]] was good in some [[way]]; it [[helped]] me lost some [[weight]] because watching this [[piece]] of [[garbage]] [[make]] me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[even]] [[funny]] TV show and I wonder who is [[actually]] [[laughing]] at this stuff. I [[watched]] it for about 10 minutes and [[turned]] it off. It was so disgusting, [[watching]] [[men]] [[dressed]] in the [[woman]] with yellow teeth and urinating on the [[car]]... I [[mean]]... what's so [[funny]] about that??? It makes me wanna [[puke]]. No [[humor]], just [[disturbing]] [[images]] and [[cheap]], [[toilet]] [[laughs]]... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you [[go]] ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people [[watching]] and [[enjoying]] this must have some [[emotional]] [[problems]]. [[Garbage]]. I [[adores]] British [[mood]], I believe it's one of the best in the world. I [[iike]] [[around]] [[all]] British sitcom ([[ok]]... [[presumably]] not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were [[wondrous]], but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of [[Gentleman]] is just something good to make you [[indisposed]]. This [[exhibition]] was good in some [[ways]]; it [[help]] me lost some [[weigh]] because watching this [[slice]] of [[trash]] [[deliver]] me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[yet]] [[hilarious]] TV show and I wonder who is [[indeed]] [[giggling]] at this stuff. I [[saw]] it for about 10 minutes and [[transformed]] it off. It was so disgusting, [[staring]] [[man]] [[clothed]] in the [[girl]] with yellow teeth and urinating on the [[auto]]... I [[imply]]... what's so [[fun]] about that??? It makes me wanna [[vomiting]]. No [[mood]], just [[disconcerting]] [[picture]] and [[cheaper]], [[toilettes]] [[laughing]]... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you [[going]] ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people [[staring]] and [[enjoy]] this must have some [[affective]] [[difficulty]]. [[Trash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie has a [[great]] written [[genre]] story. It [[features]] all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The way Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good [[relieving]] [[humor]], [[mostly]] involving the Columbo character. It's all written despite the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[concept]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel [[writer]] had been [[done]] more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an [[extremely]] well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some [[truly]] [[great]] and [[memorable]] [[sequences]].

It's one of the slower moving Columbo [[movies]], despite not having a too [[long]] [[running]] [[time]]. This style and approach doesn't always [[work]] out well for a Columbo movie but in this [[movie]] it does, which is [[perhaps]] not in the [[least]] [[thanks]] to the acting performances of the [[movie]].

[[Most]] Columbo movie [[either]] starred a [[big]] well known star or a star from the [[early]] days of film-making, as the [[movie]] its murderer. This [[movie]] [[stars]] the [[rather]] [[unknown]] 81 year old [[Ruth]] Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is [[still]] well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a [[realistic]] and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like [[though]]. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations [[throughout]] her career, [[prior]] to her [[win]] for "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", in 1969. She has some great [[interaction]] as well with Peter Falk in their [[sequences]] [[together]].

The [[movie]] also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even [[better]] than usual Columbo movie [[entry]].

8/10 The movie has a [[wondrous]] written [[type]] story. It [[attribute]] all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The way Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good [[mitigating]] [[comedy]], [[essentially]] involving the Columbo character. It's all written despite the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[notions]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel [[novelist]] had been [[completed]] more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an [[unbelievably]] well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some [[really]] [[huge]] and [[landmark]] [[sequence]].

It's one of the slower moving Columbo [[film]], despite not having a too [[lange]] [[implementing]] [[moment]]. This style and approach doesn't always [[working]] out well for a Columbo movie but in this [[cinematography]] it does, which is [[probably]] not in the [[slightest]] [[appreciation]] to the acting performances of the [[cinematography]].

[[More]] Columbo movie [[neither]] starred a [[grand]] well known star or a star from the [[prematurely]] days of film-making, as the [[cinematography]] its murderer. This [[cinematography]] [[star]] the [[fairly]] [[anonymous]] 81 year old [[Roth]] Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is [[yet]] well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a [[practical]] and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like [[albeit]]. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations [[across]] her career, [[formerly]] to her [[wins]] for "Rosemary's [[Babies]]", in 1969. She has some great [[interact]] as well with Peter Falk in their [[sequencing]] [[jointly]].

The [[cinematographic]] also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even [[nicer]] than usual Columbo movie [[inlet]].

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The [[Minion]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Satan]] and whose goal is to get the [[key]] that will unlock the [[door]] where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will [[possess]] another. Anyone who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker rage. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a [[secret]] order of Templars, who is tasked to [[keep]] the [[key]] away from the [[minion]]. The movie begins a thousand years [[ago]], in the [[Middle]] [[East]] where a couple of [[knight]] templars [[flee]] from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[key]] winds up [[somewhere]] [[underground]] in [[New]] York. An archeologist is [[assigned]] to [[study]]/dig the [[place]] where the [[key]] was found. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[key]], and the [[movie]] [[becomes]] a [[long]] [[winded]] chase scene between the minion and [[Lukas]] and archeologist.

The [[movie]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie lacks energy, and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which willfully [[takes]] [[ideas]] from previous movies ([[especially]] The Terminator [[films]]). The [[fight]] scenes with the minion is troublesome, in that you never [[get]] the [[sense]] of how [[good]] or how [[bad]] a warrior this [[demon]] is. It "[[skillfully]]" becomes a one-man army when [[fighting]] a squad of templars but sucks when it [[comes]] to one-on one. And it's [[supposed]] to be [[around]] for a long time. All this goes to show that any [[sense]] of logic is just thrown down the [[drain]] for convenience. The whole idea of a [[secret]] [[order]] of Templars, a [[door]] to [[hell]], and the key isn't well [[explained]]. We are [[merely]] to accept that they just [[exist]]. The movie seems to have been [[made]] with the [[feeling]] there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few [[bucks]]. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were [[somewhere]] else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. The [[Servant]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Lucifer]] and whose goal is to get the [[imperative]] that will unlock the [[stargate]] where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will [[owning]] another. Anyone who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker rage. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a [[confidential]] order of Templars, who is tasked to [[conserving]] the [[imperative]] away from the [[servant]]. The movie begins a thousand years [[formerly]], in the [[Milieu]] [[Easterly]] where a couple of [[ritter]] templars [[escape]] from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[imperative]] winds up [[nowhere]] [[metro]] in [[Novo]] York. An archeologist is [[earmarked]] to [[studied]]/dig the [[placing]] where the [[indispensable]] was found. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[pivotal]], and the [[filmmaking]] [[becoming]] a [[protracted]] [[overtired]] chase scene between the minion and [[Lucas]] and archeologist.

The [[filmmaking]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie lacks energy, and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which willfully [[pick]] [[reflections]] from previous movies ([[mostly]] The Terminator [[filmmaking]]). The [[struggles]] scenes with the minion is troublesome, in that you never [[gets]] the [[sensing]] of how [[alright]] or how [[negative]] a warrior this [[daemon]] is. It "[[skilfully]]" becomes a one-man army when [[struggles]] a squad of templars but sucks when it [[happens]] to one-on one. And it's [[alleged]] to be [[approximately]] for a long time. All this goes to show that any [[feeling]] of logic is just thrown down the [[siphon]] for convenience. The whole idea of a [[secrecy]] [[decree]] of Templars, a [[stargate]] to [[brothel]], and the key isn't well [[explains]]. We are [[only]] to accept that they just [[existent]]. The movie seems to have been [[accomplished]] with the [[sensation]] there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few [[dollars]]. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were [[somehow]] else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This seemed to be a [[good]] [[movie]], I thought it would be a good [[movie]], and throughout the [[movie]] I was hoping it [[would]] be a meaningful [[use]] of my [[time]], and yes, I have to admit that the acting [[talent]] of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where [[truly]] [[commendable]], but [[despite]] the [[best]] [[effort]] this movie [[falls]] short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it [[seemed]] was what Somnath Sen is [[trying]] to do. The [[final]] point comes short and the ending seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but [[movies]] unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American [[characters]] - they all seem to be carved out of the same [[block]]. [[Seems]] to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put [[together]] they make for a [[disappointing]] [[story]]. This seemed to be a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], I thought it would be a good [[filmmaking]], and throughout the [[filmmaking]] I was hoping it [[should]] be a meaningful [[utilizing]] of my [[times]], and yes, I have to admit that the acting [[talents]] of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where [[honestly]] [[creditable]], but [[while]] the [[optimum]] [[endeavor]] this movie [[autumn]] short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it [[appeared]] was what Somnath Sen is [[seeking]] to do. The [[last]] point comes short and the ending seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but [[cinematography]] unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American [[nature]] - they all seem to be carved out of the same [[bloc]]. [[Looks]] to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put [[jointly]] they make for a [[depressing]] [[history]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] . . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably [[give]] this eponymous [[film]] a rating of "10." After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the [[elements]] conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today. . . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably [[confer]] this eponymous [[kino]] a rating of "10." After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the [[component]] conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Taped this late night movie when I was in grade 11, watched it on fast forward. I sugest you do the same. I though it would be and action film, but went to a cort tv type movie. In the end it fits in with the early 70's social activest type films. Glad I missed that era. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Simply]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Rise]] to [[Evil]], should tell you that this isn't going to [[attempt]] to be anything [[deep]] or do [[much]] with Hitler's character. [[Rather]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[see]] [[baby]] [[Hitler]] looking [[evil]] with [[evil]] [[music]] playing the [[background]], we are given a view of Hitler that [[presents]] his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Saturday]] morning TV [[show]]. The [[film]] [[REALLY]] [[wants]] to make its [[case]] that Hitler was [[evil]] but does [[anyone]] [[need]] a [[movie]] to convince them that Hitler was [[evil]]? [[Ultimately]], making him such a one-dimensionally [[evil]] character is both [[boring]] and [[confusing]] (one [[must]] [[ask]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the [[film]] cold ever [[persuade]] a [[nation]] to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This [[film]] had a great [[opportunity]] to [[take]] a figure who has [[committed]] some of the most [[horrible]] [[acts]] in the 20th century, and try to delve into his mind. [[Instead]], it [[basically]] just [[says]], "[[Hey]]! [[Hitler]] was [[evil]]! Just [[thought]] you [[might]] [[like]] to know..." over and over again. The [[great]] [[irony]] is that the [[film]] [[still]] was [[attacked]] for presenting too [[sympathetic]] a [[view]] of the [[character]]. Give me a [[break]]. [[Simple]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Hike]] to [[Demonic]], should tell you that this isn't going to [[seek]] to be anything [[deepest]] or do [[very]] with Hitler's character. [[Somewhat]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[seeing]] [[babe]] [[Nazi]] looking [[malicious]] with [[maleficent]] [[musica]] playing the [[context]], we are given a view of Hitler that [[present]] his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Saturdays]] morning TV [[shows]]. The [[filmmaking]] [[TRULY]] [[want]] to make its [[lawsuits]] that Hitler was [[viciousness]] but does [[nobody]] [[needs]] a [[filmmaking]] to convince them that Hitler was [[malicious]]? [[Eventually]], making him such a one-dimensionally [[demonic]] character is both [[dull]] and [[disconcerting]] (one [[needs]] [[requests]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the [[movie]] cold ever [[convincing]] a [[nationals]] to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This [[flick]] had a great [[opportunities]] to [[taking]] a figure who has [[perpetrate]] some of the most [[excruciating]] [[act]] in the 20th century, and try to delve into his mind. [[Alternatively]], it [[virtually]] just [[say]], "[[Hello]]! [[Nazi]] was [[viciousness]]! Just [[ideology]] you [[conceivably]] [[likes]] to know..." over and over again. The [[marvellous]] [[satire]] is that the [[flick]] [[however]] was [[mugged]] for presenting too [[congenial]] a [[viewing]] of the [[characters]]. Give me a [[breaks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was but a [[babe]] in arms when George Lucas was wowing the world with his out of this world Saga chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the notorious Darth Vadar but even [[today]] 20 years on I can appreciate the [[genius]] that is [[Lucas]] and the [[incredible]] [[imagination]] he's been [[blessed]] with. [[In]] A [[New]] Hope Lucas showed a [[new]] [[way]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such [[memorable]] [[characters]] as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[best]] [[loved]] of [[villains]], the sinister Darth Vadar. [[In]] The Empire [[Strikes]] Back he went all out to [[show]] us Special Effects can [[add]] to a [[tale]] and [[managed]] to [[something]] no-one [[thought]] you [[could]] do on screen. He made a [[film]] with no [[specific]] end or beginning and it went down a [[treat]]. [[Return]] of the Jedi is a [[fitting]] [[end]] to a [[Saga]] that will [[stand]] the [[test]] of [[time]].

[[When]] The [[Empire]] Srtikes Back [[ended]] with encasing of the lovable [[Rouge]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be delivered to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[discovery]] of a [[terrible]] truth about his Father we were [[left]] with the [[feeling]] that things were going from [[bad]] to [[worse]]. Vadar it [[seemed]] had won the day. How we [[asked]] [[could]] the [[rebels]] ever [[recover]] from this blow? In Lucas [[stunning]] and captivating [[final]] [[chapter]] we are [[kept]] on the edges of our seats from Han's daring [[rescue]] from Jabba's palace to the the [[final]] climactic [[battle]] on the [[Death]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke [[struggles]] between [[fulfilling]] his [[duties]] as a Jedi and rebel fighter and [[attempting]] to reawaken the good he [[believes]] is [[still]] in his Father's soul.

[[Old]] friends like the smooth [[talking]] Lando Calrissian and the ever lovable Chewbacca [[reunite]] for one [[final]] [[battle]] to [[end]] all [[battles]] as a [[new]] darker more [[dangerous]] [[enemy]] [[emerges]] in the [[form]] of the Emperor himself ( [[played]] by the [[brilliant]] Ian McDiarmiud.How he missed out on an Oscar is a mystery.) desperate to [[turn]] Luke to the [[Dark]] Side [[even]] if it means betraying his apprentice Darth Vadar.All in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[truly]] is a terrifying [[addition]] to the story and is the undisputed Master of the [[events]] that unfold. His new and improved [[Death]] Star spells [[disaster]] for the [[rebels]] but the brave group launch one last [[desperate]] attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as Han and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on inside Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. I was but a [[darling]] in arms when George Lucas was wowing the world with his out of this world Saga chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the notorious Darth Vadar but even [[yesterday]] 20 years on I can appreciate the [[prodigy]] that is [[Lukas]] and the [[fantastic]] [[novelty]] he's been [[sanctified]] with. [[For]] A [[Novel]] Hope Lucas showed a [[newer]] [[camino]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such [[landmark]] [[personages]] as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[better]] [[worshiped]] of [[thugs]], the sinister Darth Vadar. [[Onto]] The Empire [[Strike]] Back he went all out to [[showing]] us Special Effects can [[added]] to a [[stories]] and [[managing]] to [[anything]] no-one [[thinks]] you [[would]] do on screen. He made a [[movie]] with no [[special]] end or beginning and it went down a [[processed]]. [[Returning]] of the Jedi is a [[fixture]] [[ceases]] to a [[Epic]] that will [[standing]] the [[proof]] of [[period]].

[[Whenever]] The [[Reich]] Srtikes Back [[finished]] with encasing of the lovable [[Khmer]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be delivered to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[discoveries]] of a [[awful]] truth about his Father we were [[exited]] with the [[impression]] that things were going from [[negative]] to [[worst]]. Vadar it [[appeared]] had won the day. How we [[requested]] [[wo]] the [[rebellion]] ever [[retrieve]] from this blow? In Lucas [[striking]] and captivating [[latter]] [[sections]] we are [[preserved]] on the edges of our seats from Han's daring [[salvage]] from Jabba's palace to the the [[last]] climactic [[warfare]] on the [[Dying]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke [[battles]] between [[fulfill]] his [[roles]] as a Jedi and rebel fighter and [[tried]] to reawaken the good he [[thinks]] is [[however]] in his Father's soul.

[[Ancient]] friends like the smooth [[spoke]] Lando Calrissian and the ever lovable Chewbacca [[reunification]] for one [[latter]] [[warfare]] to [[terminate]] all [[fighting]] as a [[newer]] darker more [[unsafe]] [[enemies]] [[appears]] in the [[shape]] of the Emperor himself ( [[done]] by the [[excellent]] Ian McDiarmiud.How he missed out on an Oscar is a mystery.) desperate to [[converting]] Luke to the [[Darkness]] Side [[yet]] if it means betraying his apprentice Darth Vadar.All in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[honestly]] is a terrifying [[addendum]] to the story and is the undisputed Master of the [[phenomena]] that unfold. His new and improved [[Muerte]] Star spells [[catastrophes]] for the [[mutineers]] but the brave group launch one last [[despondent]] attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as Han and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on inside Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. --------------------------------------------- Result 510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Disappearance]] is set in the Mojave [[desert]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Susan]] Dey) plus their two [[kids]] [[Katie]] (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan ([[Jamie]] Croft) a [[friend]] of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted [[mining]] [[town]] on the [[map]] called Weaver. No-one [[claims]] to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some [[pictures]]. Once at the [[town]] they take some pictures & have a look around but when it [[comes]] [[time]] to [[leave]] their [[car]] won't start & they have to spend the [[night]] there. [[While]] [[looking]] [[around]] they find a camcorder videotape which they [[play]] only to discover footage of a [[scared]] [[woman]] saying all her [[friends]] have [[disappeared]], the [[next]] morning & their [[car]] has [[disappeared]] as things [[take]] a very [[sinister]] [[turn]]. What is Weaver's [[secret]]? [[Will]] the Henley's ever leave there [[alive]]...

Written, co-executive [[produced]] & [[directed]] by [[Walter]] Klenhard I have to [[say]] that [[Disappearance]] is one of the most [[frustrating]] [[films]] I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty [[good]] mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the [[single]] [[worst]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[script]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was [[sitting]] there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families [[car]] mysterious disappearing, the four [[recent]] graves, the thing in the abandoned [[mines]], the [[supernatural]] [[sandstorm]], the sudden & [[unexplained]] disappearance of Ethan & his just as [[unexplained]] reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron [[bomb]] being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know [[could]] have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most [[ambiguous]], strange, surreal & downright [[frustrating]] ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these [[great]] [[ideas]] but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. [[Disappeared]] is set in the Mojave [[deserts]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Suzanne]] Dey) plus their two [[child]] [[Katy]] (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan ([[Jaime]] Croft) a [[friends]] of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted [[mine]] [[city]] on the [[charting]] called Weaver. No-one [[claim]] to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some [[images]]. Once at the [[ciudad]] they take some pictures & have a look around but when it [[happens]] [[times]] to [[letting]] their [[cars]] won't start & they have to spend the [[overnight]] there. [[Despite]] [[researching]] [[throughout]] they find a camcorder videotape which they [[playing]] only to discover footage of a [[fear]] [[girl]] saying all her [[friendships]] have [[disappear]], the [[imminent]] morning & their [[auto]] has [[faded]] as things [[taking]] a very [[ominous]] [[transforming]]. What is Weaver's [[secrets]]? [[Willingness]] the Henley's ever leave there [[vivo]]...

Written, co-executive [[generated]] & [[geared]] by [[Walters]] Klenhard I have to [[tell]] that [[Disappeared]] is one of the most [[discouraging]] [[filmmaking]] I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty [[alright]] mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the [[exclusive]] [[gravest]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[scripts]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was [[seated]] there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families [[cars]] mysterious disappearing, the four [[latest]] graves, the thing in the abandoned [[mine]], the [[uncanny]] [[sand]], the sudden & [[unfathomable]] disappearance of Ethan & his just as [[inexplicable]] reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron [[bombings]] being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know [[wo]] have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most [[fuzzy]], strange, surreal & downright [[depressing]] ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these [[marvellous]] [[conceptions]] but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. --------------------------------------------- Result 511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As [[someone]] who has read the [[book]], I can say that this is [[vastly]] inferior to the [[big]] American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are [[various]] [[reasons]] for this. [[Firstly]], Emma is too unpleasant. [[Yes]], she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to [[like]] - but the [[viewer]] shouldn't downright [[start]] to despise her. Secondly, [[Mr]] Knightly is miscast. His brooding and melancholy in this [[version]] are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the [[mood]] of the [[whole]] [[affair]] "off". Thirdly, Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is [[supposed]] to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as [[utterly]] baffling because this [[narrative]] hasn't been [[adequately]] shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American [[actress]] [[trying]] to suppress her own accent at the [[beginning]], to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. [[Finally]], this dragged at the [[end]]. The [[book]] and the [[big]] film version end with the [[wedding]] of [[Emma]] and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the [[announcement]] of the [[wedding]] without actually showing us the [[ceremony]].

[[All]] in all, a rather [[haphazard]] attempt. Read the [[book]] or [[rent]] the Paltrow version [[instead]] As [[everybody]] who has read the [[books]], I can say that this is [[noticeably]] inferior to the [[overwhelming]] American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are [[many]] [[motifs]] for this. [[Initially]], Emma is too unpleasant. [[Yep]], she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to [[fond]] - but the [[onlooker]] shouldn't downright [[embark]] to despise her. Secondly, [[Bernd]] Knightly is miscast. His brooding and melancholy in this [[stepping]] are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the [[ambiance]] of the [[overall]] [[fling]] "off". Thirdly, Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is [[suspected]] to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as [[quite]] baffling because this [[descriptive]] hasn't been [[duly]] shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American [[actor]] [[tempting]] to suppress her own accent at the [[commencement]], to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. [[Lastly]], this dragged at the [[terminates]]. The [[ledger]] and the [[prodigious]] film version end with the [[married]] of [[Emmy]] and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the [[advertisements]] of the [[marriage]] without actually showing us the [[rite]].

[[Entire]] in all, a rather [[random]] attempt. Read the [[ledger]] or [[rentals]] the Paltrow version [[however]] --------------------------------------------- Result 512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] First off, this really is my [[favorite]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally [[obsessed]] with this practically bloodless, [[cheesy]], lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The [[director]] (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a [[FREDDY]]/[[JASON]] type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....[[CHECK]] THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. First off, this really is my [[preferred]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally [[fixated]] with this practically bloodless, [[dorky]], lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The [[superintendent]] (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a [[FREDDIE]]/[[JAS]] type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....[[AUDITS]] THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. --------------------------------------------- Result 513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was made by a bunch of white guys that went to school together. Well there's nothing wrong with that, except it looks like it was made by a bunch of white guys that went to school together. 90 percent of the cast are white males about same age. It's almost like watching a bunch of guys at boys camp who turned the camera on themselves. The movie has no plot. It simply repeats the same action of blood bath after blood bath. There are some funny scenes and comedic bits. But they don't redeem the flat monotony.

The graphic cartoon scenes are used to cover the stuff that was obviously beyond their budget or resources to do, and not done very well at that. Anything that can't be done with white guys running around on the beach covered in blood is done with cheap animation.

I went to see this film after seeing the trailer, which makes it look like a Tarrentino piece. Well, the trailer scenes are as good as they ever get. Ther rest of it just repeats the same kind of mundane, inane comedy. It works at times, but it gets boring after the same stuff comes at you over and over. It's more like a string of Satuday Night Live skits than a movie. It's a hit-you-over-the-head-with-it kind of comedy. I can see where the story idea is intriguing. But, in this film post apocalyptic America is much like Medevil England. In fact Wheatlry says the story ideas came from that era. He plans to make a Part 2. I guess he thinks he's Tarrentino or maybe doing a parody thing.

At the opening in LA, Wheatley mentioned he will bring back pretty much the same cast in part 2. He was asked if he might consider a more diverse cast in the next one, to which he replied, well yea, sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[expect]] credibility with [[action]] [[movies]] where the [[superhero]] has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but [[recovering]] at lightning speed, and transforming [[innocuous]] gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no [[exception]]. But the movie has [[numerous]] [[assets]] : [[breathtaking]] scenery gorgeously photographed, [[stunning]] [[special]] and visual effects ( the first five [[minutes]] are gripping and give the tone of the film ), [[excellent]] musical score, welcome [[attempts]] at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a [[solid]] cast : two heroes ( Stallone, [[star]] and cowriter, has the lion's [[share]] of the footage, but the [[excellent]] Michael [[Rooker]] more than [[stands]] his [[ground]] ), a [[charming]] heroin ( Janine [[Turner]] ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless [[John]] Lithgow and deceivingly feminine [[Caroline]] Goodall, but [[also]] Rex Linn - in a longer than [[usual]] [[part]] and who makes the most of it, [[Leon]], Craig Fairbrass ) [[Good]], solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert [[wrote]] ( about another [[film]] )"It's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] you can [[sit]] back and enjoy as long as you don't [[make]] the [[mistake]] of thinking too much."

FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[waits]] credibility with [[activity]] [[theater]] where the [[hero]] has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but [[retrieved]] at lightning speed, and transforming [[harmless]] gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no [[immunities]]. But the movie has [[several]] [[possessions]] : [[exciting]] scenery gorgeously photographed, [[breathtaking]] [[specific]] and visual effects ( the first five [[mins]] are gripping and give the tone of the film ), [[wondrous]] musical score, welcome [[strives]] at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a [[solids]] cast : two heroes ( Stallone, [[superstar]] and cowriter, has the lion's [[exchanging]] of the footage, but the [[super]] Michael [[Brooker]] more than [[standing]] his [[overland]] ), a [[ravishing]] heroin ( Janine [[Latour]] ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless [[Giovanni]] Lithgow and deceivingly feminine [[Carolyn]] Goodall, but [[apart]] Rex Linn - in a longer than [[routine]] [[parte]] and who makes the most of it, [[Lyon]], Craig Fairbrass ) [[Well]], solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert [[written]] ( about another [[movie]] )"It's the [[genre]] of [[films]] you can [[assis]] back and enjoy as long as you don't [[deliver]] the [[wrong]] of thinking too much."

--------------------------------------------- Result 515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Whatever his name is (the writer and director) should be locked away in hopes garbage like this is never made again. This one is in a battle with some of the most awful movies of all time. Sometimes movies are bad in a way that they're actually sort of good. Not this one. This was so bad I got angry. Seriously. A drunken 10 year old could have come up with a better script. What a waste. ALL the actors were completely uninspired to work at all, the CGI was barely acceptable, the sequences of scenes were completely retarded and hurt the little bit of story there was, it's like he just decided, "I want this to happen and this to happen, but I don't care how we got there, just shoot it and put it in. Whatever, I'm going back to my trailer to pick my nose, if anyone calls for me, I'm not here." Shame on you whatever your name is. Shame on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] There was [[something]] here with the female [[lead]] having this perfect life she's [[always]] [[wanted]] after the [[worst]] [[life]] possible, [[beginning]] as a child prostitute and winding up with Eric [[Roberts]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trust]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[destroys]] it in the end. It sounds [[weird]], but I [[like]] the position Dean Cain was in at the end and the choice he [[made]]. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time [[frame]] makes it clear it's his [[child]] and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's [[done]], sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was [[pretty]] much one [[way]]) and then being [[part]] of his [[death]]. In better hands this [[would]] have been a better [[movie]], but for something I caught on late [[night]] [[cable]], it's not bad. There was [[somethings]] here with the female [[culminate]] having this perfect life she's [[permanently]] [[wanting]] after the [[hardest]] [[lifetime]] possible, [[initiates]] as a child prostitute and winding up with Eric [[Stevens]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trusting]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[obliterating]] it in the end. It sounds [[bizarre]], but I [[fond]] the position Dean Cain was in at the end and the choice he [[accomplished]]. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time [[framework]] makes it clear it's his [[enfant]] and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's [[played]], sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was [[belle]] much one [[pathway]]) and then being [[party]] of his [[deaths]]. In better hands this [[should]] have been a better [[filmmaking]], but for something I caught on late [[overnight]] [[wire]], it's not bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "[[Land]] of Plenty" is not a [[film]]. It is a [[tombstone]] for the directorial career of German [[Director]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The [[Million]] Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it [[perfectly]] [[clear]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's [[actually]] turned into a BAD director, creating [[horribly]] [[weak]] and superficial [[stories]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is extreme. It's as if he completely forget everything he [[knew]] about [[cinema]] and started all over again - only to get sloppish [[results]].

[[In]] a few [[words]], this [[film]] does not [[deserve]] your [[time]]. "[[Overland]] of Plenty" is not a [[filmmaking]]. It is a [[gravestone]] for the directorial career of German [[Superintendent]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The [[Zillion]] Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it [[altogether]] [[unmistakable]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's [[indeed]] turned into a BAD director, creating [[awfully]] [[tenuous]] and superficial [[history]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is extreme. It's as if he completely forget everything he [[overheard]] about [[filmmaking]] and started all over again - only to get sloppish [[result]].

[[During]] a few [[phrase]], this [[filmmaking]] does not [[merited]] your [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 518 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This quasi J-horror film followed a young [[woman]] as she returns to her childhood village on the [[island]] of Shikoku to [[sell]] the [[family]] [[house]] and meet up with [[old]] [[friends]]. She finds that one, the [[daughter]] of the [[village]] [[priestess]], [[drowned]] [[several]] [[years]] [[earlier]]. She and Fumiko (another [[childhood]] friend) then [[learn]] that Sayori's [[mother]] is trying to [[bring]] her back to [[life]] with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and [[living]] are [[getting]] [[weak]] and the [[friends]] and villagers are seeing [[ghosts]]. [[Nothing]] was exceptional or even very [[good]] about this [[movie]]. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies This quasi J-horror film followed a young [[girl]] as she returns to her childhood village on the [[isla]] of Shikoku to [[sold]] the [[families]] [[households]] and meet up with [[former]] [[friendships]]. She finds that one, the [[maid]] of the [[villages]] [[shaman]], [[drowning]] [[various]] [[ages]] [[formerly]]. She and Fumiko (another [[children]] friend) then [[learning]] that Sayori's [[mama]] is trying to [[brings]] her back to [[lives]] with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and [[life]] are [[obtain]] [[vulnerable]] and the [[friendships]] and villagers are seeing [[phantoms]]. [[Nada]] was exceptional or even very [[buena]] about this [[filmmaking]]. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] And how many [[actors]] can he get to stand in for his own neurotic, compulsive uber-New Yorker [[persona]]? [[In]] this [[film]] Woody is [[played]] by [[Will]] Ferrell in what is mercifully [[less]] a direct [[impersonation]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Celebrity]]." It's an annoyingly [[repetitive]] story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, everyone constantly patronizes expensive, exclusive restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to diseases, and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his lust for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[tired]] formula, and [[proof]] that Allen isn't really a [[great]] film [[artist]] at all. He just seems like a dirty old man with the libido and emotions of a 20-year-old who is intent upon [[telling]] the same boring old [[stories]] again and again. And how many [[protagonists]] can he get to stand in for his own neurotic, compulsive uber-New Yorker [[personality]]? [[For]] this [[filmmaking]] Woody is [[effected]] by [[Willingness]] Ferrell in what is mercifully [[minimum]] a direct [[mimicry]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Famous]]." It's an annoyingly [[repetitious]] story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, everyone constantly patronizes expensive, exclusive restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to diseases, and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his lust for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[jaded]] formula, and [[test]] that Allen isn't really a [[prodigious]] film [[entertainers]] at all. He just seems like a dirty old man with the libido and emotions of a 20-year-old who is intent upon [[eloquent]] the same boring old [[history]] again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Lion King 1 1/2 is a very fun and addictive sequel. Don't expect the production values of a theatrical release, but do expect the highest quality of direct to video release.

It is set up as Timon & Pumba begin watching the original Lion King in a darkened theater and abruptly switch tracks and begin narrating their own story. This is done with frequent comedic interruptions. For example, during one particular tense moment a home shopping commercial pops on and a chagrined Pumba realizes he has sat on the remote. These little moments pepper the movie, and whether you find them entertaining or not will greatly depend on your sense of humor. If you are particularly bothered by movies that deliberately remind the viewer is watching a movie, than this may not be your cup of tea.

Animation is the best they've invested in the Disney DTV line, and is integrated almost seamlessly with the original material. The newer, independent material uses a lot of the artistic style of the original. The voice talents are all well performed, though I couldn't help thinking of Marge Simpson every time I heard Julie Kavner.

Many of the jokes in the movie will be well recognized by viewers as recycled over the generations, but are presented more with the familiarity of comfortable quirks of old friends than annoyingly repetitive.

The music has made me realize how much I enjoyed and miss a good musical integrated with a Disney feature. The toe-tapping opening feature of 'Dig A Tunnel' is well choreographed and hilarious. Timon and Pumba's take on the Lion King's opening sequence and their introduction to paradise are also amusing. The only problem was the reprise of the 'Dig A Tunnel' at the end of the movie, switching its lyrics and tune from defeatist to uplifting.

Story line is pretty well done, and the integration of new plot elements is done almost perfectly, though the final bit during the hyena chased stretched the storyline credibility a little. The new story doesn't seem to handle saccharine or emotionally charged moments to well, and does better when it is resorting to full comedy.

Overall, worth purchasing. If you like all the bonus features that come with a typical 2-disc set, then go for it. For the penny pincher who still is willing to invest on a good flick, wait until it drops four or more dollars and go rent it right away.

Damion Crowley. --------------------------------------------- Result 521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The word 'classic' is thrown around too loosely nowadays, but this movie well deserves the appelation. The combination of Neil Simon, Walter Matthau (possibly the world's best living comic actor), and the late lamented George Burns make for a comic masterpiece. It is interesting to contemplate what the movie would have been like had not death prevented Jack Benny from playing George Burns' part, as had been planned. As it is, the reunion scene in Matthau's apartment is not likely to be surpassed as a sidesplitter. Definitely one of my desert island films.

"Enter!!!!!!!!!" --------------------------------------------- Result 522 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] A [[man]] and his [[wife]] get in a [[horrible]] [[car]] [[accident]]. [[When]] the wife is left in a [[persistent]] vegetative state, the man [[must]] [[choose]] between pulling the plug and [[letting]] her live. The [[decision]] is made even harder when he [[realizes]] her ghost wants to [[extract]] revenge on him and those [[around]] him.

This [[comes]] to us from [[director]] Rob Schmidt, who [[made]] "[[Wrong]] Turn" (a [[film]] I have not [[seen]]). With only one horror [[film]] under his [[belt]], and not a particularly notorious one at that, I was a bit [[reluctant]] to watch this episode, [[expecting]] Schmidt to be a "[[Master]] of [[Horror]]" in only the most liberal [[sense]]. My [[apologies]] to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the [[best]] one [[yet]].

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme [[abundance]]! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a [[second]] [[time]], but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! A [[guy]] and his [[woman]] get in a [[scary]] [[motors]] [[casualty]]. [[Whenever]] the wife is left in a [[ongoing]] vegetative state, the man [[ought]] [[selected]] between pulling the plug and [[allowing]] her live. The [[decisions]] is made even harder when he [[recognizes]] her ghost wants to [[extracts]] revenge on him and those [[about]] him.

This [[occurs]] to us from [[superintendent]] Rob Schmidt, who [[accomplished]] "[[Incorrectly]] Turn" (a [[movies]] I have not [[noticed]]). With only one horror [[cinema]] under his [[strap]], and not a particularly notorious one at that, I was a bit [[loath]] to watch this episode, [[waiting]] Schmidt to be a "[[Maitre]] of [[Terror]]" in only the most liberal [[sensing]]. My [[sorry]] to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the [[nicest]] one [[however]].

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme [[profusion]]! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a [[secondly]] [[moment]], but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! --------------------------------------------- Result 523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Steve Carell once again stars in a [[light]] romantic movie about [[choices]], family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the movie I was [[expecting]] a flat-out comedy, [[lots]] of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[guess]] I was wrong. [[Sure]] the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a [[light]] Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a [[great]] performance. The movie itself really tackles [[true]] [[observations]] and that was a strong [[element]] I [[found]]. But, the [[ending]] [[felt]] a [[little]] [[bit]] rushed and [[predictable]]. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was great and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very [[important]]. Though, it [[came]] down to [[old]], flat and predictable [[ending]]. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. [[Still]] a fun movie. Steve Carell once again stars in a [[lighting]] romantic movie about [[picks]], family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the movie I was [[expect]] a flat-out comedy, [[batch]] of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[imagine]] I was wrong. [[Convinced]] the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a [[lighting]] Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a [[wondrous]] performance. The movie itself really tackles [[real]] [[sightings]] and that was a strong [[ingredients]] I [[unearthed]]. But, the [[ended]] [[smelled]] a [[kiddo]] [[bite]] rushed and [[foreseeable]]. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was great and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very [[sizable]]. Though, it [[arrived]] down to [[former]], flat and predictable [[ended]]. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. [[However]] a fun movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in [[France]] [[lately]] and [[came]] across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[movie]] was amazing, to say the least. A creative and [[unique]] film, the [[different]] directors each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[attempt]] to [[fit]] each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, [[however]], [[renders]] the magic of each individual segment [[obsolete]]. When [[taken]] at [[face]] [[value]], with each of the short segments taken as its own individual film, the love stories [[together]] tell a [[beautiful]] [[message]].

The film is strikingly bizarre at [[times]] -- [[often]] to the point of [[confusion]] -- and each individual segment can be [[hard]] to follow. Still, to a watcher who [[pays]] close attention to each of the segments, the short plot lines [[become]] clear after a short time. The [[confusion]] is [[almost]] [[intriguing]]; it keeps you on the edge of your [[seat]] waiting for what will come next. It leaves the [[viewer]] [[wondering]] "[[Did]] that [[really]] just happen?" [[yet]] [[also]] [[leaves]] them [[satisfied]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the kind of movie where the viewer, [[upon]] leaving the [[theater]], can't actually [[decide]] whether they [[loved]] it or they [[hated]] it. The initial [[reaction]] is to [[go]] and watch it again and again, just to [[see]] these individual [[lives]] [[blend]] together into a [[cinematic]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to make the [[movie]] multilingual [[adds]] [[something]] to the [[spectrum]] of people who can [[relate]]. It [[adds]] to the reality of the [[film]] -- here, the American [[tourists]] [[speak]] English, the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[film]] encompasses leads to an [[understanding]] of the [[international]] [[language]] of [[love]].

From sickness to the supernatural, the [[love]] of parents to the [[love]] of husbands, this [[film]] [[covers]] all the [[bases]] of romantic [[storytelling]]. [[In]] its [[beautiful]] and [[quirky]] [[way]], each [[unique]] [[event]] somehow [[falls]] into place to [[tell]] a story: that of all [[types]], sizes, nationalities, and [[shapes]] of love. [[Despite]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in [[Francia]] [[newly]] and [[became]] across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[cinematic]] was amazing, to say the least. A creative and [[sole]] film, the [[assorted]] directors each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[trying]] to [[fitted]] each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, [[yet]], [[emits]] the magic of each individual segment [[rancid]]. When [[took]] at [[confronts]] [[values]], with each of the short segments taken as its own individual film, the love stories [[jointly]] tell a [[brilliant]] [[messages]].

The film is strikingly bizarre at [[time]] -- [[generally]] to the point of [[muddle]] -- and each individual segment can be [[harsh]] to follow. Still, to a watcher who [[paid]] close attention to each of the segments, the short plot lines [[becoming]] clear after a short time. The [[mess]] is [[hardly]] [[thrilling]]; it keeps you on the edge of your [[seats]] waiting for what will come next. It leaves the [[onlooker]] [[ask]] "[[Got]] that [[genuinely]] just happen?" [[again]] [[furthermore]] [[sheets]] them [[persuaded]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the kind of movie where the viewer, [[after]] leaving the [[drama]], can't actually [[deciding]] whether they [[enjoyed]] it or they [[hates]] it. The initial [[answered]] is to [[going]] and watch it again and again, just to [[seeing]] these individual [[life]] [[amalgam]] together into a [[films]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to make the [[cinema]] multilingual [[adding]] [[anything]] to the [[spectral]] of people who can [[pertaining]]. It [[adding]] to the reality of the [[cinematography]] -- here, the American [[passengers]] [[talking]] English, the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[kino]] encompasses leads to an [[comprehend]] of the [[globally]] [[linguistic]] of [[loves]].

From sickness to the supernatural, the [[loves]] of parents to the [[loves]] of husbands, this [[cinema]] [[cover]] all the [[basis]] of romantic [[narration]]. [[Across]] its [[belle]] and [[lunatic]] [[pathway]], each [[sole]] [[incident]] somehow [[slumps]] into place to [[say]] a story: that of all [[kinds]], sizes, nationalities, and [[ways]] of love. --------------------------------------------- Result 525 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct [[lack]] of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[appalling]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[clumsy]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very [[wooden]], her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct [[shortfall]] of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[alarming]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[cumbersome]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very [[wood]], her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The [[Comeback]] starts off looking promising, with a [[brutal]] [[death]] scene by a mask [[wearing]] killer. The mask itself is pretty cool too, and [[looks]] [[almost]] identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher [[film]] "Granny". From then on the film is [[mostly]] boring. We get a few more [[deaths]], which again are good, but there's not enough of them. The [[reason]] the [[deaths]] are so [[good]] is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story behind the [[film]] is [[actually]] [[rather]] interesting and [[would]] have [[worked]] very well had it not been so boring for the most [[part]].

I [[would]] [[avoid]] this [[unless]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not [[enough]] here to [[even]] make it an average slasher flick. The [[Reverted]] starts off looking promising, with a [[cruel]] [[die]] scene by a mask [[wears]] killer. The mask itself is pretty cool too, and [[seems]] [[around]] identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher [[cinema]] "Granny". From then on the film is [[basically]] boring. We get a few more [[dies]], which again are good, but there's not enough of them. The [[reasons]] the [[decease]] are so [[alright]] is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story behind the [[filmmaking]] is [[genuinely]] [[quite]] interesting and [[could]] have [[cooperating]] very well had it not been so boring for the most [[portions]].

I [[should]] [[preventing]] this [[if]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not [[sufficiently]] here to [[yet]] make it an average slasher flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie was exactly what I [[expected]] it to be when i first read the [[casting]]. I probably [[could]] have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[pack]] of Howler Monkeys. [[Alberto]] Tomba was [[surely]] a [[good]] skier but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[actor]] skills to earn his living. He can't [[play]], he can't [[talk]], he can't [[even]] move very good on mainland without his skis... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty [[blonde]] girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in [[dramatic]] roles but most probably for her nice legs. [[Nevertheless]] I must admit that she [[could]] be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's [[funny]], especially considering that she isn't [[italian]]. I laughed all the time, watching this [[movie]]. I [[found]] it so [[ridiculous]] and [[meaningless]] that it actually made me laugh, [[loud]], very [[loud]]. This movie was exactly what I [[scheduled]] it to be when i first read the [[pouring]]. I probably [[wo]] have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[packaging]] of Howler Monkeys. [[Albert]] Tomba was [[definitely]] a [[alright]] skier but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[protagonist]] skills to earn his living. He can't [[gaming]], he can't [[discussions]], he can't [[yet]] move very good on mainland without his skis... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty [[lager]] girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in [[phenomenal]] roles but most probably for her nice legs. [[Albeit]] I must admit that she [[wo]] be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's [[comical]], especially considering that she isn't [[ltalian]]. I laughed all the time, watching this [[filmmaking]]. I [[find]] it so [[absurd]] and [[senseless]] that it actually made me laugh, [[rowdy]], very [[vocal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just after I saw the movie, the true magic feeling of the Walt Disney movies came up in me and I realized me that it was a long time ago that I saw the 'real' magic in a movie.

The combination of the right music, speeches and magical effects brings the Disney feeling again into your body. Very special things I saw where the not-knowing effects in the movie, started with the disney logo transforming into the Cinderella castle and ended as an old-story telling fairytale with your grandparents.

The magic has returned in me. I rate this movie 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, [[pfft]] more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[guy]] has as much acting ability as Bill Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]] even [[worse]]. [[Crazed]] Hillbilles YEP! [[needless]] tit shot (with a real weird [[scar]]) YEP! [[crappy]] soundtrack YEP! I wish i [[could]] give the [[movie]] -10 stars but 1 is as low as it goes. [[Seriously]] i [[think]] [[someone]] was [[playing]] a [[joke]] on me when i [[saw]] this it cant be [[real]]...... the [[worse]] thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER [[MOVIES]]!...... [[guess]] its in demand. WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, [[pffft]] more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[buddy]] has as much acting ability as Bill Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] [[kino]] even [[worst]]. [[Loca]] Hillbilles YEP! [[superfluous]] tit shot (with a real weird [[scarface]]) YEP! [[shite]] soundtrack YEP! I wish i [[did]] give the [[flick]] -10 stars but 1 is as low as it goes. [[Conscientiously]] i [[reckon]] [[everybody]] was [[play]] a [[jest]] on me when i [[observed]] this it cant be [[veritable]]...... the [[worst]] thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER [[FILMMAKING]]!...... [[guessing]] its in demand. --------------------------------------------- Result 530 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first time I saw this movie, I fell in love with it. The atmosphere was what caught my attention first and foremost. I expected a gore fest, but instead got to watch a highly intelligent killer mess with my head to a chilling soundtrack (it's actually my ringer at the moment :P). The fact that I couldn't predict when he'd kill and when he'd disappear was a major plus in my book. Predictable horror movies bore me. Now, I know the storyline had some discrepancies, but, if you're like me, you don't even notice them until long after the movie's over and you're laying in bed mauling over the fact that you just witnessed a masterpiece in motion. Finally, as I mentioned, the soundtrack is timeless. It's one of my all time favorite theatrical scores, so I was very happy to hear that Rob Zombie is leaving it untouched in his remake. Speaking of the remake, I read a very comprehensive article on it and, now that I know that Mr. Zombie reveres John Carpenter, I have high hopes for his take on this classic. This movie is great for any time you have a craving for a spine tingling, but it's the perfect addition, opener, finale, you name it for an All Hallow's Eve movie marathon. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't think this is too bad of a show under the right conditions. I tolerated the [[first]] season.

[[Unfortunately]], this is a [[show]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God [[forbid]] anybody [[actually]] go to law school based on these [[shows]], which I had heard was the [[case]] when I [[watched]] some [[interviews]] of the show. It just made me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[supposed]] to be the [[stars]] of the [[show]], are the most [[annoying]]. While this might be a [[compliment]] in some situations, it's [[certainly]] not here. Their [[constantly]] harassing the [[women]] on the [[show]] is [[funny]] at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've [[realized]] that this is as [[deep]] as the show is [[going]] to [[get]]. [[Trying]] to intersperse some [[serious]], [[dramatic]], and [[even]] tear-jerking [[moments]] in the [[middle]] of this [[mockery]] of a [[real]] show [[fails]] to [[compensate]] for the [[progressive]] loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to [[enjoy]] the [[show]].

[[Alan]] Shore's flamboyant and [[gratuitous]] "public [[service]] announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. [[Denny]] Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's [[speech]] [[wearing]] a colonial [[outfit]].

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I [[thought]] the show's [[attempts]] to [[deal]] with some contemporary issues were [[done]] with [[care]].

I think the show's writers [[became]] [[aware]] that the sexual [[harassment]] [[displayed]] by [[Denny]] and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more [[inviting]] of them from the [[start]]. The thing is, I don't [[care]] if the sexual [[harassment]] [[treatment]] in the show is [[done]] well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the [[hopes]] that my libido will [[keep]] me coming back for more. I'm not a [[teenager]] [[anymore]], and I [[think]] this show is promising if its [[goal]] wasn't to [[cater]] to the [[lowest]] common denominator to [[get]] ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I [[realized]] that it's [[really]] not gonna get [[much]] [[better]] than this. It's a [[shame]] because it's one of those shows I'd [[love]] to love. I don't think this is too bad of a show under the right conditions. I tolerated the [[frst]] season.

[[Unluckily]], this is a [[exposition]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God [[barred]] anybody [[genuinely]] go to law school based on these [[denotes]], which I had heard was the [[instances]] when I [[observed]] some [[discussion]] of the show. It just made me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[suspected]] to be the [[celebrity]] of the [[illustrating]], are the most [[exasperating]]. While this might be a [[commend]] in some situations, it's [[arguably]] not here. Their [[always]] harassing the [[female]] on the [[illustrating]] is [[hilarious]] at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've [[performed]] that this is as [[profound]] as the show is [[gonna]] to [[gets]]. [[Attempt]] to intersperse some [[severe]], [[formidable]], and [[yet]] tear-jerking [[times]] in the [[mid]] of this [[parody]] of a [[true]] show [[fail]] to [[offset]] for the [[gradual]] loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to [[enjoying]] the [[illustrating]].

[[Alain]] Shore's flamboyant and [[baseless]] "public [[servicing]] announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. [[Dennis]] Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's [[discourse]] [[wears]] a colonial [[attire]].

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I [[thoughts]] the show's [[try]] to [[treat]] with some contemporary issues were [[performed]] with [[healthcare]].

I think the show's writers [[was]] [[conscious]] that the sexual [[intimidation]] [[shown]] by [[Denis]] and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more [[invites]] of them from the [[induction]]. The thing is, I don't [[caring]] if the sexual [[stalking]] [[cure]] in the show is [[doing]] well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the [[hope]] that my libido will [[maintain]] me coming back for more. I'm not a [[adolescence]] [[most]], and I [[reckon]] this show is promising if its [[objectives]] wasn't to [[satisfy]] to the [[weaker]] common denominator to [[gets]] ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I [[performed]] that it's [[truthfully]] not gonna get [[very]] [[optimum]] than this. It's a [[pity]] because it's one of those shows I'd [[adored]] to love. --------------------------------------------- Result 532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not only did they get the characters all wrong, not only do the voices suck, not only do the writers seriously need to get girlfriends, not only are the drawings really crude, but it seems like it was mainly created for ages 1-6. The only episode I've ever seen of this show that kept me watching, was "A Mattter Of Family", because I liked the Robin character. And sometimes I think it's just a general copy of Batman The Animated Series. Example: In BTAS, Bruce is friends with Harvey Dent, yeah? Over a two episode story, he transforms into the unlikely villain, TwoFace. In the "Show" Bruce is Friends with that Ethan guy, and over a two episode story, he Transforms into the unlikely villain ClayFace. That was just a small example (That may not even be true), but in short, this is the WORST attempt on a Batman series. And That's saying something. --------------------------------------------- Result 533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not only was this the most expensive Canadian film ever shot in BC, but easily the worst, never seeing the light of day. The director is not even Canadian, but British, and boy does it show. We are all made out to be a bunch of over-sexed dope fiends and morons. The spirit of what it means to be Canadian is absent, and this is supposed to be the reason we fund this bunk. Of course the British character is normal. The rest are a crop of sitcom stereotype - can you say "Norm!!"? The cinematography ranges from pretty postcard images to murky indoor silhouettes. The actors always seem to be fidgetting. Are they as bored as the viewer, or is this the directors idea of cinema? Avoid this mess and check out some of Bruce Mcdonalds films. A true Canadian boy with something original to say cinematically. You won't be compelled to walk out on HIS films after 10 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[romantic]] [[adventure]] must have seemed [[shockingly]] subversive in its day. A wealthy [[upper]] [[class]] [[English]] [[woman]] [[schemes]], plots and manipulates [[everyone]] [[around]] her for her own [[satisfaction]]. She [[uses]] her privileged position to [[embark]] on [[secret]] [[activities]] of a [[decidedly]] anti-social [[kind]]. There's a [[clever]] sex-role [[reversal]] as her [[activities]] [[prove]] her more [[daring]] and dashing than most of the [[male]] [[characters]]. But [[naturally]] there's a tall, [[dark]] and [[handsome]] [[stranger]] to keep up the [[love]] interest, and this [[wicked]] lady is not backward in [[coming]] forward when she meets the right man.

The wishy-washy [[weakness]] and gullibility of [[every]] other [[character]] make the plot [[unconvincing]] in the extreme, but those who [[thirst]] for [[Romance]] will [[overlook]] that. This [[sentimental]] [[fling]] must have seemed [[curiously]] subversive in its day. A wealthy [[superior]] [[classroom]] [[Frenchman]] [[daughters]] [[plans]], plots and manipulates [[someone]] [[throughout]] her for her own [[gratification]]. She [[utilized]] her privileged position to [[begins]] on [[undercover]] [[efforts]] of a [[strongly]] anti-social [[sorts]]. There's a [[skillful]] sex-role [[inversion]] as her [[action]] [[demonstrate]] her more [[temerity]] and dashing than most of the [[virile]] [[features]]. But [[evidently]] there's a tall, [[gloom]] and [[sumptuous]] [[alien]] to keep up the [[iike]] interest, and this [[evil]] lady is not backward in [[forthcoming]] forward when she meets the right man.

The wishy-washy [[defect]] and gullibility of [[each]] other [[personages]] make the plot [[inconclusive]] in the extreme, but those who [[craving]] for [[Romanticism]] will [[ignore]] that. --------------------------------------------- Result 535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This is by far one of the most [[boring]] and [[horribly]] acted accounts of the early days of [[Adolf]] [[Hitler]] that I have ever watched. Robert [[Carlyle]] is a [[wonderful]] [[actor]], but to cast him as Hitler is just [[plain]] wrong. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[longtime]] friend and [[aid]], Haefengstal must have [[emitted]] [[cries]] of despair and anguish from the [[Simon]] Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W playing a Nazi supporter, [[bad]] bad bad [[casting]]. This was not an [[enjoyable]] [[family]] film with a [[good]] historical [[background]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is [[insulting]] to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid [[though]], she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

[[If]] you would like a tremendously [[fantastic]] and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, [[rent]] "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this [[baloney]].

As a [[historical]] [[researcher]] of the Third Reich I can [[honestly]] [[tell]] you, this had me [[reaching]] for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. This is by far one of the most [[dull]] and [[shockingly]] acted accounts of the early days of [[Rudolf]] [[Nazi]] that I have ever watched. Robert [[Carlisle]] is a [[sumptuous]] [[protagonist]], but to cast him as Hitler is just [[lowland]] wrong. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[old]] friend and [[aids]], Haefengstal must have [[freed]] [[shouting]] of despair and anguish from the [[Simeon]] Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W playing a Nazi supporter, [[negative]] bad bad [[foundry]]. This was not an [[nice]] [[families]] film with a [[buena]] historical [[backdrop]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is [[demeaning]] to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid [[despite]], she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

[[Though]] you would like a tremendously [[sumptuous]] and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, [[lease]] "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this [[crock]].

As a [[historic]] [[searchers]] of the Third Reich I can [[genuinely]] [[say]] you, this had me [[achieve]] for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. --------------------------------------------- Result 536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] This is a [[baffling]] [[film]].

The beauty in sexual relations between [[men]] and [[women]] is [[shown]] [[degraded]] by a set of [[men]] and [[women]] who can only be [[described]] as a [[collection]] of [[oddballs]] and misfits.

Greenaway [[acknowledges]] his inspiration to Fellini's [[film]] "8 1/2" but [[whereas]] Fellini is a [[titan]] of world [[cinema]], Greenaway is not.

He has [[none]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his [[ability]] to [[convey]] [[feelings]] and [[emotions]] with a deftness of [[clarity]].

He is [[pretentious]], the [[film]] being [[divided]] into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the [[written]] notices only [[stay]] on screen for a few seconds, not [[long]] enough to be read by the [[audience]] with the [[result]] that they are [[mostly]] [[ignored]].

As for the [[women]], only two can be [[described]] as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by [[Natacha]] [[Amal]]. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the [[men]] [[retreat]] from the [[harsh]] light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway [[obviously]] [[wants]] to [[make]] the point that sexual [[fantasy]] does not lead to [[happiness]]. The women themselves are depressing [[since]] they render their services in exchange for [[money]]. [[Relations]] between [[men]] and [[women]] are debased into a [[commercial]] transaction.

There is no [[sense]] of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are [[several]] scenes that are [[deeply]] [[unpleasant]] :

The [[suggestion]] of an incestuous [[relationship]] between [[father]] and son, [[Philip]] and [[Storey]] Emmental played respectively by [[John]] [[Standing]] and [[Matthew]] Delamere. The [[callous]] [[disregard]] of both [[men]] that Giaconda is [[carrying]] their [[child]], she in fact, [[gets]] [[pregnant]] [[twice]], the first [[foetus]] being [[aborted]] and the second [[time]], she is [[sent]] away to a [[destination]] [[chosen]] by the [[men]] from a flight [[book]]. Both [[men]] having sex with a [[woman]] who has no legs, (the half [[woman]] in the title). The beastiality that [[exists]] between Beryl, [[played]] by [[Amanda]] Plummer, with a [[pig]] named Hortense. [[Father]] and son [[sharing]] [[women]] between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. This is a [[disconcerting]] [[filmmaking]].

The beauty in sexual relations between [[man]] and [[daughters]] is [[exhibited]] [[decayed]] by a set of [[males]] and [[daughters]] who can only be [[outlining]] as a [[collect]] of [[eccentrics]] and misfits.

Greenaway [[concedes]] his inspiration to Fellini's [[cinema]] "8 1/2" but [[whilst]] Fellini is a [[giant]] of world [[cine]], Greenaway is not.

He has [[nothing]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his [[capacity]] to [[transmit]] [[sensations]] and [[passions]] with a deftness of [[lucidity]].

He is [[cocky]], the [[movie]] being [[split]] into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the [[wrote]] notices only [[remain]] on screen for a few seconds, not [[lange]] enough to be read by the [[viewers]] with the [[results]] that they are [[especially]] [[overlooked]].

As for the [[girl]], only two can be [[outlines]] as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by [[Natascha]] [[Hope]]. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the [[males]] [[retire]] from the [[stiff]] light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway [[naturally]] [[wanting]] to [[deliver]] the point that sexual [[utopia]] does not lead to [[bonheur]]. The women themselves are depressing [[because]] they render their services in exchange for [[cash]]. [[Ties]] between [[males]] and [[female]] are debased into a [[commerce]] transaction.

There is no [[sensing]] of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are [[many]] scenes that are [[radically]] [[disagreeable]] :

The [[suggestions]] of an incestuous [[relationships]] between [[fathers]] and son, [[Philips]] and [[Flooring]] Emmental played respectively by [[Johannes]] [[Stands]] and [[Mathieu]] Delamere. The [[unforgiving]] [[ignore]] of both [[males]] that Giaconda is [[transporting]] their [[kid]], she in fact, [[got]] [[expectant]] [[doubly]], the first [[fetus]] being [[foiled]] and the second [[period]], she is [[transmitted]] away to a [[fates]] [[elected]] by the [[males]] from a flight [[ledger]]. Both [[males]] having sex with a [[femme]] who has no legs, (the half [[female]] in the title). The beastiality that [[existed]] between Beryl, [[effected]] by [[Remy]] Plummer, with a [[pigs]] named Hortense. [[Pere]] and son [[shared]] [[mujer]] between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. --------------------------------------------- Result 537 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] When a [[comedy]] movie boasts its [[marvelous]] soundtrack on the back [[cover]] you know your not dealing with a [[top]] notch movie. I rented this movie with [[friends]] expecting to get some [[chuckles]] but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[chosen]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been alright with a few changes. First off, the comedy was [[painful]]. Physical gags were poorly [[performed]] and placed. The [[fat]] kid in the movie made us [[want]] to [[kill]] ourselves, bless him for [[trying]] scene in and scene out but he was like a puppy [[begging]] for [[love]]. [[If]] he had been [[pulled]] from the [[movie]] everything might have been bearable. There were some [[funny]] jokes, I believe one was when the [[group]] of [[boys]] steal one of the parent's porn [[movies]] and it [[turns]] out to be [[gay]] porn. But to [[best]] sum up the [[comedy]] I will [[simply]] tell the opening gag for the [[fat]] kid. He [[wears]] a [[puke]] [[stained]] shirt and [[talks]] about not knowing when [[something]] is [[done]].

To [[finish]] off, the editor of the [[movie]] [[could]] have [[saved]] the [[movie]] by [[removing]] the [[fat]] kid, [[cutting]] out 20 [[minutes]] of the school scenes and [[making]] an ending that is longer than [[thirty]] [[seconds]] of [[random]] [[bickering]].

[[OH]], BTW, there are two [[good]] [[elements]] that the [[movie]] [[possesses]]. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and performs his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming [[element]] to the [[movie]] is the [[beautiful]] [[Mrs]]. Ali Landry. Her [[character]] is [[ignored]] most of the [[movie]] which is a shame.

Don't waste your [[time]] [[even]] renting this one. It didn't [[appeal]] to me and I was [[part]] of the [[target]] audience (18 male). When a [[humor]] movie boasts its [[sumptuous]] soundtrack on the back [[covers]] you know your not dealing with a [[supreme]] notch movie. I rented this movie with [[freund]] expecting to get some [[giggles]] but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[pick]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been alright with a few changes. First off, the comedy was [[hurtful]]. Physical gags were poorly [[achieved]] and placed. The [[greasy]] kid in the movie made us [[wanted]] to [[murder]] ourselves, bless him for [[tempting]] scene in and scene out but he was like a puppy [[beg]] for [[loves]]. [[Though]] he had been [[pulling]] from the [[films]] everything might have been bearable. There were some [[hilarious]] jokes, I believe one was when the [[groups]] of [[guys]] steal one of the parent's porn [[cinematography]] and it [[revolves]] out to be [[homosexual]] porn. But to [[finest]] sum up the [[humor]] I will [[exclusively]] tell the opening gag for the [[greasy]] kid. He [[wearing]] a [[barf]] [[coloured]] shirt and [[dialogue]] about not knowing when [[somethin]] is [[played]].

To [[completes]] off, the editor of the [[flick]] [[wo]] have [[rescue]] the [[flick]] by [[eliminate]] the [[fatty]] kid, [[chopped]] out 20 [[mins]] of the school scenes and [[doing]] an ending that is longer than [[thirtieth]] [[second]] of [[indiscriminate]] [[wrangling]].

[[AH]], BTW, there are two [[alright]] [[ingredient]] that the [[filmmaking]] [[owns]]. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and performs his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming [[components]] to the [[filmmaking]] is the [[sumptuous]] [[Dagmar]]. Ali Landry. Her [[characters]] is [[overlooked]] most of the [[filmmaking]] which is a shame.

Don't waste your [[period]] [[yet]] renting this one. It didn't [[appellate]] to me and I was [[parte]] of the [[purposes]] audience (18 male). --------------------------------------------- Result 538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After "Beau travail", everybody was waiting for Claire Denis to make a follow-up masterpiece that never arrived. Now it has. Denis makes a quantum leap in this film, an orgy of gorgeous cinematography, elliptical editing and willfully obscure narrative events that feels strange and acts even stranger. There's a nominal plot (derived partly from the Jean-Luc Nancy book of the same name) about a mature man in need of a heart transplant and who seeks a Tahitian son he abandoned long ago; but mostly it's an exploration of the idea of intrusions personal and cultural. It takes a couple of viewings to fully comprehend, and has pacing problems close to the end, but it's still more advanced and gripping than anything else I've seen this year. Miss it at your peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] [[Salvage]] is the [[worst]] so [[called]] horror film I've ever [[seen]]. There is nothing remotely [[horrific]] about it. It doesn't [[deserve]] to be in a genre so fine. [[First]] of all i don't see how so [[many]] people can [[think]] this piece of [[crap]] such a [[great]] [[movie]]. [[If]] I [[wrote]] something as boring and [[utterly]] ridiculous as this i would be [[laughed]] at and too embarrassed to subject others to the [[stupidity]] of it. Second: the acting is [[terrible]] and the lead [[actress]] is [[excruciatingly]] ugly. Third: the [[story]] sucks, its been [[used]] before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no [[excuse]]. Read the summery on the back of the [[case]], it [[reveals]] the [[whole]] [[story]]. I do not [[recommend]] that you watch this [[movie]] [[unless]] you have 80 [[minutes]] to waste on something that will [[leave]] you regretting that you [[watched]] it. I feel [[really]] [[bad]] for those [[Crooks]] and the irony of their [[name]]. All hail [[Anthony]] Perkins!!!!!!!!! [[Bailout]] is the [[meanest]] so [[drew]] horror film I've ever [[watched]]. There is nothing remotely [[spooky]] about it. It doesn't [[deserved]] to be in a genre so fine. [[Firstly]] of all i don't see how so [[countless]] people can [[believing]] this piece of [[shitty]] such a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Though]] I [[texted]] something as boring and [[totally]] ridiculous as this i would be [[giggled]] at and too embarrassed to subject others to the [[absurdity]] of it. Second: the acting is [[spooky]] and the lead [[actor]] is [[awfully]] ugly. Third: the [[tales]] sucks, its been [[using]] before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no [[apologies]]. Read the summery on the back of the [[example]], it [[unveils]] the [[overall]] [[storytelling]]. I do not [[recommendations]] that you watch this [[filmmaking]] [[if]] you have 80 [[mins]] to waste on something that will [[let]] you regretting that you [[seen]] it. I feel [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] for those [[Culprits]] and the irony of their [[names]]. All hail [[Antoni]] Perkins!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[absurdly]] loutish. Hysterical if [[viewed]] through the eyes of [[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theatre]] 3000, which I [[rate]] as a 10. I mean, the sight of this [[obese]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[enough]] to [[send]] you to the vomitory, if you [[make]] it that far into the [[film]]. This [[ugly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[likes]] of "Booty [[Call]]", "Pumpkinhead", "[[Swarm]]", and "The Smurfs [[Go]] To [[Bangladesh]]". A -gulp- [[film]] [[like]] this proves that sometimes actors, [[writers]], [[producers]], etc. [[get]] behind on their [[mortgage]], or [[get]] stoned to the point of [[insanity]]. It [[begs]] the [[question]] "who was so stupid to [[finance]] such a [[whale]]?" But then, had good [[judgment]] prevailed and "[[Final]] Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the [[delightful]] spoof voice-over in "[[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theatre]] 3000"! Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[ridiculously]] loutish. Hysterical if [[visualized]] through the eyes of [[Puzzle]] [[Scientifically]] [[Theater]] 3000, which I [[rates]] as a 10. I mean, the sight of this [[feta]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[satisfactorily]] to [[consignment]] you to the vomitory, if you [[deliver]] it that far into the [[cinematographic]]. This [[ghastly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[adores]] of "Booty [[Calling]]", "Pumpkinhead", "[[Hive]]", and "The Smurfs [[Going]] To [[Bengal]]". A -gulp- [[filmmaking]] [[iike]] this proves that sometimes actors, [[authors]], [[growers]], etc. [[gets]] behind on their [[subprime]], or [[gets]] stoned to the point of [[craziness]]. It [[evokes]] the [[issue]] "who was so stupid to [[hacienda]] such a [[pyle]]?" But then, had good [[judgement]] prevailed and "[[Latter]] Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the [[sumptuous]] spoof voice-over in "[[Conundrum]] [[Veda]] [[Teatro]] 3000"! --------------------------------------------- Result 541 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw his movie in [[Dallas]], Texas when it [[came]] out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to [[see]] the movie. After [[seeing]] the [[movie]] I can see why. The [[movie]] was not [[bad]], nor was it great. The problem with this movie was that it [[tried]] to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to [[wrap]] it around the Masters Saga. My biggest [[complaint]] is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They [[even]] [[used]] the same scenes from the [[Master]] [[Saga]] but with different dialogue. As a [[kid]], I [[loved]] the [[movie]]. But unfortunately I haven't [[seen]] it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I [[love]] Robotech and can't [[wait]] for The [[Shadows]] Chronicles. I saw his movie in [[Wallace]], Texas when it [[became]] out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to [[behold]] the movie. After [[see]] the [[kino]] I can see why. The [[cinematographic]] was not [[unfavourable]], nor was it great. The problem with this movie was that it [[attempts]] to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to [[adjusting]] it around the Masters Saga. My biggest [[grievance]] is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They [[yet]] [[utilise]] the same scenes from the [[Maestro]] [[Historian]] but with different dialogue. As a [[petit]], I [[enjoyed]] the [[cinematography]]. But unfortunately I haven't [[watched]] it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I [[amour]] Robotech and can't [[suspense]] for The [[Shade]] Chronicles. --------------------------------------------- Result 542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The wife of a stage [[producer]] in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling [[fashions]] in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already [[met]] on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a [[wedding]] [[ring]] should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger [[Rogers]] musical is eventually dragged back down to the [[earth]] by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[idiotic]] [[script]], which is full of [[juvenile]] [[behavior]]. [[Astaire]] and [[Rogers]] don't just '[[meet]] cute'--they meet [[ridiculously]] (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she [[complains]]). Audiences of 1935 [[probably]] didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with [[flowers]] (after [[telling]] his friend he [[wants]] to remain "fancy free" in the [[love]] department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a [[little]] [[dancing]] couldn't [[cure]]! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately [[unreal]] as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** The wife of a stage [[growers]] in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling [[fads]] in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already [[fulfilled]] on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a [[weddings]] [[ringing]] should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger [[Rutgers]] musical is eventually dragged back down to the [[land]] by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[stupid]] [[scripts]], which is full of [[youthful]] [[demeanor]]. [[Esther]] and [[Rodgers]] don't just '[[satisfy]] cute'--they meet [[shockingly]] (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she [[gripes]]). Audiences of 1935 [[potentially]] didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with [[flores]] (after [[saying]] his friend he [[want]] to remain "fancy free" in the [[likes]] department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a [[small]] [[choreography]] couldn't [[therapy]]! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately [[surrealistic]] as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[wonderful]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hooked]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[wondrous]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hook]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had been [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] this [[film]] for a [[long]] time, after [[seeing]] "Return to [[Paradise]]," which I found to be gritty. I was so [[disappointed]]. The most [[realistic]] [[thing]] about it was the unpredictable [[ending]] which I [[think]] was [[partly]] [[stolen]] from "Return to [[Paradise]]."

[[Maybe]] I was expecting too much.

[[On]] the positive side [[Danes]], Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I [[didnt]] like Danes's [[character]] and first and [[found]] her very [[annoying]].

I couldnt see [[anything]] realistic about the film. It [[could]] of been done so much better, for example there [[could]] of been more [[emphasis]] on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be [[realistic]]. There [[could]] also of been more [[action]] and [[tension]]

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 I had been [[searching]] forward to [[see]] this [[filmmaking]] for a [[longer]] time, after [[witnessing]] "Return to [[Havens]]," which I found to be gritty. I was so [[disappointing]]. The most [[realism]] [[stuff]] about it was the unpredictable [[terminated]] which I [[thought]] was [[partially]] [[stealing]] from "Return to [[Paradiso]]."

[[Might]] I was expecting too much.

[[Onto]] the positive side [[Danish]], Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I [[couldnt]] like Danes's [[nature]] and first and [[discoveries]] her very [[troublesome]].

I couldnt see [[somethings]] realistic about the film. It [[did]] of been done so much better, for example there [[did]] of been more [[focuses]] on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be [[pragmatic]]. There [[wo]] also of been more [[activities]] and [[tensions]]

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It's possible that A Man [[Called]] Sledge might have been [[done]] [[irreparable]] damage on the [[cutting]] room floor. [[Maybe]] [[someone]] will [[demand]] a director's cut one day, but I seriously doubt it.

James Garner decided to [[cash]] in on the [[spaghetti]] western [[market]] and in doing so [[brought]] a [[whole]] lot of [[Americans]] over to [[fill]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, [[John]] Marley. And of course we have Vic Morrow who both [[wrote]] and [[directed]] this [[film]].

Garner [[always]] gets cast as [[likable]] rogues because he's so [[darn]] good at playing them. But he has [[played]] serious and [[done]] it well in [[films]] like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has [[broken]] away from his usual [[stereotyped]] [[part]] successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sledge]] notorious outlaw with a [[big]] price on his head. [[After]] partner Tony [[Young]] gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by [[John]] Marley.

Marley's spent time in the [[nearby]] territorial prison and it [[seems]] as though gold shipments are put under [[lock]] and [[key]] there on a rest [[stop]] for the folks [[transporting]] the [[stuff]] on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a [[heist]].

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. [[Usually]] [[heist]] [[films]] [[show]] the [[protagonists]] [[going]] into a [[lot]] of methodical planning. [[Certainly]] that was the [[case]] in The [[War]] [[Wagon]] which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner [[decides]] to [[break]] into the [[prison]] as a [[prisoner]] of [[fake]] [[US]] Marshal [[Dennis]] Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which [[time]] the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If [[taking]] the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian [[westerns]], during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the whole film has [[lost]] a [[lot]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. It's possible that A Man [[Drew]] Sledge might have been [[played]] [[incurable]] damage on the [[cuts]] room floor. [[Might]] [[everybody]] will [[asks]] a director's cut one day, but I seriously doubt it.

James Garner decided to [[money]] in on the [[sandwiches]] western [[markets]] and in doing so [[introduced]] a [[overall]] lot of [[Us]] over to [[filling]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, [[Jon]] Marley. And of course we have Vic Morrow who both [[texted]] and [[oriented]] this [[cinematography]].

Garner [[constantly]] gets cast as [[congenial]] rogues because he's so [[damn]] good at playing them. But he has [[accomplished]] serious and [[completed]] it well in [[film]] like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has [[fractured]] away from his usual [[stereotypical]] [[party]] successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sled]] notorious outlaw with a [[grande]] price on his head. [[Upon]] partner Tony [[Youthful]] gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by [[Jon]] Marley.

Marley's spent time in the [[contiguous]] territorial prison and it [[looks]] as though gold shipments are put under [[latch]] and [[essential]] there on a rest [[stopping]] for the folks [[transported]] the [[thing]] on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a [[holdup]].

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. [[Typically]] [[holdup]] [[film]] [[shows]] the [[players]] [[go]] into a [[batch]] of methodical planning. [[Arguably]] that was the [[example]] in The [[Wars]] [[Trolley]] which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner [[decide]] to [[breaks]] into the [[prisons]] as a [[inmates]] of [[forged]] [[USA]] Marshal [[Denis]] Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which [[period]] the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If [[pick]] the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian [[westerners]], during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the whole film has [[outof]] a [[lots]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. --------------------------------------------- Result 546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of those el cheapo action adventures of the early 1980s that used to fill video rental stores solely to be taken out by adolescent boys in the hope of a cheap thrill.

Woeful down market attempt to cash in on the Death Wish phenomenon by substituting a moderately attractive woman for the visually challenging Bronson. Acting is terrible, sets are cheap, the baddies are, well, bad. Identification with any of the characters is unlikely.

Only redeeming feature is modest amount of gratuitous female nudity, a smattering of which is full frontal. Other than that, you can leave it... --------------------------------------------- Result 547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A tragically wonderful movie... brings us to a Japan that does not exist anymore. Despite Hollywood's technical expertise, I have yet to see a (hollywood) movie that can match the authenticity of the atmosphere in this small town by the river near the sea... Tom Cruise's The Last Samurai looked liked the last installment of the Lord of The Rings in trying to capture rural Old Japan.

If you like serene but intense story lines, this is a must see film. It will be a respite from hollow flashy films much like the last 1000 blockbusters you saw. I think this is one of Kurosawa's better stories.

Even if it's a movie about geishas and brothels and the complicated rules that govern life in such settings, it did not turn into a skin flick. The characters are full of depth and act with much intensity. --------------------------------------------- Result 548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Plainsman is an entertaining western, no doubt a classic, which is actual even today. Gary Cooper is Wild Bill Hickok, ideal for the role, together with John Wayne and James Stewart, they were the best actors that played western heroes in their generation. Jean Arthur is great as Calamity Jane, nobody that I know played it better than her. Even if might not be historically accurate, the film manages to capture the most important about Hickok and about the time it takes place. Sometimes you have to sacrifice History to make your point and that is what DeMille does here. The friendship of Hickok with Buffalo Bill, the selling of rifles to the Indians by a great manufacturer to compensate for the losses he would have because of the end of the civil war, Custer and Little Big Horn, the uneasy relationship between Buffalo Bill's wife, a religious woman, with Hickok a man who had killed plenty, also the unusual love affair between Hickok and Calamity all this makes 'The Plainsman' a non conventional and interesting film. Anthony Quinn has a very short appearance, that already shows what a great actor he was going to become. A lot of care was taken to show the original guns of that time. --------------------------------------------- Result 549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I had pleasure to watch the short [[film]] "The [[Cure]]", by [[first]] [[time]] [[director]] Ryan Jafri. What [[really]] impress me are the camera [[work]] and music.

I think [[many]] [[young]] [[filmmakers]] (as I myself am one of them) [[would]] [[experience]] [[hard]] time with [[cinematography]] when just [[start]] [[making]] of an [[indie]]. We [[see]] the output are not [[exactly]] what we imaged or below our [[ambitions]]. But this film, directorial debut from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[color]], [[lighting]], compositing all [[contribute]] to the [[story]] and emotion of the [[film]].

And [[music]], as a [[key]] [[element]] of [[film]] [[language]], [[helps]] a [[great]] deal too.

It's hard to [[portray]] a woman's heart, her [[desire]], her [[fear]], [[especially]] in a short. But still, I have to [[admit]] I am not a fan of v/o (narration), [[especially]] when the [[film]] is [[advanced]] by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal [[feeling]] to some of the [[narrative]] [[part]] is, my [[guess]] was the [[narrator]] [[tried]] a [[bit]] too hard. [[So]] the energy pushes [[audience]] back from the emotion of the [[film]].

[[Overall]], it's a short [[film]] [[nicely]] [[done]], I could see the [[input]] from a director. Way to go, Ryan! [[Greeting]] from [[China]], [[looking]] forward to your [[next]].

tim I had pleasure to watch the short [[films]] "The [[Therapeutic]]", by [[outset]] [[moment]] [[headmaster]] Ryan Jafri. What [[genuinely]] impress me are the camera [[collaborate]] and music.

I think [[innumerable]] [[youthful]] [[cinematographers]] (as I myself am one of them) [[could]] [[enjoying]] [[laborious]] time with [[movie]] when just [[launches]] [[doing]] of an [[andy]]. We [[seeing]] the output are not [[precisely]] what we imaged or below our [[targets]]. But this film, directorial debut from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[dye]], [[lit]], compositing all [[contributes]] to the [[conte]] and emotion of the [[movie]].

And [[musician]], as a [[crucial]] [[component]] of [[films]] [[parlance]], [[helped]] a [[excellent]] deal too.

It's hard to [[depict]] a woman's heart, her [[willingness]], her [[scare]], [[concretely]] in a short. But still, I have to [[recognise]] I am not a fan of v/o (narration), [[principally]] when the [[flick]] is [[advance]] by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal [[sense]] to some of the [[descriptive]] [[parties]] is, my [[guessing]] was the [[storyteller]] [[attempting]] a [[bite]] too hard. [[Therefore]] the energy pushes [[spectators]] back from the emotion of the [[cinematography]].

[[Totals]], it's a short [[kino]] [[politely]] [[played]], I could see the [[entrances]] from a director. Way to go, Ryan! [[Saluting]] from [[Wa]], [[searching]] forward to your [[imminent]].

tim --------------------------------------------- Result 550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a true Elvis fan, this movie is a total embarrasment and the script is a disaster. The movie opens with the beautiful son "Stay Away" and the scenery of the Grand Canyon gives the viewer hope of something special. Elvis gets in the picture and his talent is wasted big time, especially on the rest of the featured songs. I sat through this movie twice, just to make sure it is a piece of junk!!! 1 out of 10!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dear Friends and Family,

I guess if one teen wants to become biblical with another teen, then that's their eternal damnation - just remember kids, "birth control" doesn't mean "oral sex", I don't care what the honor student says. On the other hand, even if the senator's aid quotes himself as a "bit of a romantic guy", he's still only hitting on a high school girl. If she was my sister, I'd eat this guys kneecaps.

Other than that I found out that Mongolians don't kiss the same way the French do and that baseball players named Zoo like delicate undergarments.

I think I'd almost rather watch Richie Rich one more time than suffer the indignity of this slip, slap, slop. Thank you, and good night. --------------------------------------------- Result 552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I like [[films]] that don't [[provide]] the [[typical]] "happy [[ending]]," and that's my main [[reason]] for my [[liking]] of this movie. [[Alice]] Marano ([[Danes]]) and her [[best]] [[friend]] Darlene (Beckinsale) are [[arrested]] in Thailand for narcotics smuggling after a [[tip]] anonymously phoned in to the Thai [[authorities]]. The film does a [[solid]] job of [[keeping]] [[viewers]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[girls]] was [[involved]], and Bill Pullman is perfect as their [[sleazy]] lawyer. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[terrific]] performance as his more [[kind]], [[magnanimous]] wife, [[Yon]], who is [[also]] an [[attorney]]. I wish the [[girls]] had been abused more in the [[prison]], as another commenter has [[suggested]], as I've [[heard]] that Thai [[prisons]] can be [[quite]] [[brutal]]. Where this [[film]] [[grabs]] me, [[however]], is its ending. [[Alice]] [[subjects]] herself to a sentence of 96 [[years]] in total so that [[Darlene]] can be pardoned, and we (the [[viewers]]) [[realize]] that they are both innocent. [[Any]] [[film]] that [[defies]] my expectation of the ending [[wins]] [[extra]] [[points]] with me, and this well-acted [[drama]] is [[certainly]] deserving. I like [[kino]] that don't [[delivering]] the [[characteristic]] "happy [[ended]]," and that's my main [[motives]] for my [[gusto]] of this movie. [[Altar]] Marano ([[Denmark]]) and her [[better]] [[boyfriend]] Darlene (Beckinsale) are [[detained]] in Thailand for narcotics smuggling after a [[tipping]] anonymously phoned in to the Thai [[governments]]. The film does a [[solids]] job of [[preserving]] [[audience]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[daughter]] was [[engaged]], and Bill Pullman is perfect as their [[squalid]] lawyer. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[wondrous]] performance as his more [[genre]], [[generous]] wife, [[Youn]], who is [[additionally]] an [[lawyer]]. I wish the [[dame]] had been abused more in the [[correctional]], as another commenter has [[proposing]], as I've [[listened]] that Thai [[penitentiaries]] can be [[pretty]] [[savage]]. Where this [[movie]] [[grab]] me, [[instead]], is its ending. [[Altar]] [[questions]] herself to a sentence of 96 [[ages]] in total so that [[Dolly]] can be pardoned, and we (the [[audience]]) [[reaching]] that they are both innocent. [[Every]] [[cinematography]] that [[challenge]] my expectation of the ending [[earn]] [[extras]] [[dots]] with me, and this well-acted [[theater]] is [[definitively]] deserving. --------------------------------------------- Result 553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[think]] this [[film]] has been somewhat overrated here. There are some [[things]] to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a science fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and cinematography are good, and the ideas are interesting [[enough]] (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[wooden]] performances from the lead [[actors]], and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither likable nor unlikable. I [[realize]] that part of the [[story]] dictates that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) [[cipher]], but I was [[utterly]] [[unable]] to [[work]] up any [[empathy]] for a character that just seemed like a [[boring]], [[anonymous]] schlub of a [[man]]. What character [[transformation]] there is for this [[sad]] sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in [[conveying]] that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but [[fails]] at [[inspiring]] any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no [[real]] [[personality]] of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the [[biggest]] disappointments of this [[movie]] is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the [[worst]] kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big [[explosions]] and [[special]] [[effects]]. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly [[done]], and at the [[end]] the [[characters]] seem even less [[likable]] than they did before some of the film's main plot [[threads]] were [[resolved]].

The movie's not all bad, [[though]]. It does [[manage]] to [[maintain]] a certain low [[level]] of [[tension]] [[throughout]] most of it, despite the [[slow]] pacing ([[although]] I [[think]] I have a [[higher]] than average tolerance for slow-paced [[movies]]). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. I [[ideas]] this [[filmmaking]] has been somewhat overrated here. There are some [[matters]] to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a science fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and cinematography are good, and the ideas are interesting [[satisfactorily]] (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[timber]] performances from the lead [[protagonists]], and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither likable nor unlikable. I [[attain]] that part of the [[conte]] dictates that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) [[coding]], but I was [[fully]] [[incompetent]] to [[works]] up any [[caring]] for a character that just seemed like a [[dull]], [[unnamed]] schlub of a [[guy]]. What character [[transforms]] there is for this [[unfortunate]] sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in [[transmitted]] that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but [[fail]] at [[stimulating]] any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no [[true]] [[persona]] of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the [[strongest]] disappointments of this [[filmmaking]] is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the [[worse]] kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big [[blast]] and [[peculiar]] [[repercussions]]. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly [[performed]], and at the [[ends]] the [[attribute]] seem even less [[congenial]] than they did before some of the film's main plot [[fil]] were [[solved]].

The movie's not all bad, [[nevertheless]]. It does [[managed]] to [[retaining]] a certain low [[levels]] of [[voltage]] [[in]] most of it, despite the [[slower]] pacing ([[albeit]] I [[ideas]] I have a [[superior]] than average tolerance for slow-paced [[filmmaking]]). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. --------------------------------------------- Result 554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] [[Sharp]], well-made [[documentary]] [[focusing]] on Mardi Gras beads. I have [[always]] liked this approach to film-making - [[communicate]] [[ideas]] about a [[larger]], more complex, and often inscrutable [[phenomenon]] by [[breaking]] the issue down into something familiar and close to [[home]].

I am sure most people have [[heard]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic [[motives]] behind [[profit]] and capitalism, and globalism's [[effect]] on poorer nations ([[however]] people feel about it). [[Rather]] than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's [[anything]] [[wrong]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

[[Outstanding]] and [[highly]] [[recommended]]. Need to [[see]] more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those [[involved]] in the making of this [[film]]. [[Steep]], well-made [[literature]] [[concentrated]] on Mardi Gras beads. I have [[unceasingly]] liked this approach to film-making - [[submit]] [[conceptions]] about a [[largest]], more complex, and often inscrutable [[phenomena]] by [[violating]] the issue down into something familiar and close to [[house]].

I am sure most people have [[hear]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic [[reasons]] behind [[gains]] and capitalism, and globalism's [[implications]] on poorer nations ([[conversely]] people feel about it). [[Fairly]] than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's [[something]] [[erroneous]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

[[Unresolved]] and [[inordinately]] [[suggested]]. Need to [[behold]] more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those [[implicated]] in the making of this [[cinema]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I always enjoy this movie when it shows up on TV.

The one scene that always stands out, for me that is, is the one with the Myrna Loy and the painters foreman, where she gives him very explicit instructions on the colours and as soon as she goes away he turns the his guys and says "Did you get that, that's yellow, blue, green and white" --------------------------------------------- Result 556 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Justin]] goes [[home]] to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre [[tenants]] [[residing]] in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged [[drinking]] and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that [[nearly]] all the other [[reviewers]] on here saw??? Clever, compelling, [[original]], intense, [[clever]], genius????!!? I witnessed [[none]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, [[trite]], extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tension]] in the [[least]] bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD [[Extras]]: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" [[Justine]] goes [[houses]] to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre [[occupiers]] [[staying]] in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged [[alcohol]] and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that [[nigh]] all the other [[raters]] on here saw??? Clever, compelling, [[upfront]], intense, [[canny]], genius????!!? I witnessed [[nothingness]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, [[corny]], extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tensions]] in the [[less]] bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD [[Goodies]]: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" --------------------------------------------- Result 557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] tries to be funny and fails miserably. The animation is just terrible, looks like a 2 year old threw it together in his sleep. Plot is dull and cliched. IF you have a young child, maybe rent it. but don't waste hard earned money to pay to see it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Good [[lord]], whoever [[made]] this turkey needs to be [[buried]] alive. I'm sorry, but the other [[reviewer]] must not have seen this movie, he [[must]] be watching [[something]] [[else]], or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[saying]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the [[Wind]]? [[Unintentionally]] funny, [[massively]] [[unbelievable]] characters, [[absurd]] situations, looks [[like]] it was shot in [[Griffith]] Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in [[Griffith]] Park), [[crappy]] [[script]], just about everything that could [[possibly]] be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. [[Should]] be [[required]] viewing for all prospective [[film]] [[makers]] as an [[example]] of how a [[movie]] could be horribly wrong. It [[reminds]] me of [[something]] a USC [[student]] may [[make]] for a film [[class]].

Give this one a pass [[unless]] you do [[drugs]] and are into [[high]] camp. Good [[senor]], whoever [[brought]] this turkey needs to be [[interred]] alive. I'm sorry, but the other [[reviewers]] must not have seen this movie, he [[owes]] be watching [[anything]] [[otherwise]], or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[telling]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the [[Windmill]]? [[Unknowingly]] funny, [[greatly]] [[unimaginable]] characters, [[irrational]] situations, looks [[iike]] it was shot in [[Griffin]] Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in [[Griffiths]] Park), [[shite]] [[hyphen]], just about everything that could [[maybe]] be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. [[Needs]] be [[need]] viewing for all prospective [[flick]] [[maker]] as an [[cases]] of how a [[filmmaking]] could be horribly wrong. It [[remembered]] me of [[anything]] a USC [[learners]] may [[deliver]] for a film [[classroom]].

Give this one a pass [[if]] you do [[medicines]] and are into [[highest]] camp. --------------------------------------------- Result 559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Gender Bender sexes things up a bit for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a good [[story]], but an ending that is [[wanting]]. Gender Bender is [[also]] the x-files debut for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays [[Michael]], a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[see]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular beginning. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they [[become]] turned onto him/her. [[However]], when Andrew [[seduces]] Scully, she only because [[disoriented]] and groggy, and does not [[become]] [[attracted]] to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode [[reminds]] me of why it would [[sometimes]] be [[miserable]] to [[film]] up in [[British]] [[Columbia]]. [[Throughout]] the episode it is so [[wet]], soggy, and muddy, it [[could]] not have been that much fun. [[Despite]] the [[disappointing]] ending, [[Gender]] Bender is [[still]] a decent episode to [[view]]. Gender Bender sexes things up a bit for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a good [[fairytales]], but an ending that is [[desiring]]. Gender Bender is [[apart]] the x-files debut for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays [[Michaela]], a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[consults]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular beginning. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they [[becomes]] turned onto him/her. [[Still]], when Andrew [[seducing]] Scully, she only because [[disorientated]] and groggy, and does not [[becomes]] [[lured]] to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode [[reminded]] me of why it would [[sometime]] be [[deplorable]] to [[movies]] up in [[Britain]] [[Colombia]]. [[Across]] the episode it is so [[crapped]], soggy, and muddy, it [[wo]] not have been that much fun. [[Though]] the [[disappointed]] ending, [[Sexes]] Bender is [[yet]] a decent episode to [[visualise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I was expecting a very [[funny]] movie. [[Instead]], I got a movie with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[work]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was [[confusing]]. It would have been more [[funny]] if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[funny]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not [[even]] McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather [[confusing]] movie with a poor [[script]]. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. I was expecting a very [[hilarious]] movie. [[However]], I got a movie with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[cooperates]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was [[disconcerting]]. It would have been more [[comical]] if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[amusing]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not [[yet]] McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather [[puzzling]] movie with a poor [[hyphen]]. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. --------------------------------------------- Result 561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you liked the Grinch movie... go watch that again, because this was no where near as good a Seussian movie translation. Mike Myers' Cat is probably the most annoying character to "grace" the screen in recent times. His voice/accent is terrible and he laughs at his own jokes with an awful weasing sound, which is about the only laughing I heard at the theater. Not even the kids liked this one folks, and kids laugh at anything now. Save your money and go see Looney Tunes: Back in Action if you're really looking for a fun holiday family movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As far as horror flicks go, this one is pretty darn good. While it may not be a classic tale of horror and suspense, it does provide many quality chuckles that make this movie a must see if you're into the horror/comedy genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I have no [[idea]] what idiots gave this [[movie]] a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes Film [[Festival]] because it was [[atrocious]]! I [[actually]] [[watched]] the [[entire]] [[thing]] [[simply]] because I couldn't [[believe]] that [[someone]] would make such a [[worthless]] [[film]]. There is [[nothing]] interesting about the plot, the [[characters]] are devoid of [[depth]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[sort]] of [[ambiance]] with [[music]] or sound [[effects]]. [[Also]], if you do decide to waste 2 [[hours]] of your [[life]] by watching this [[film]], be sure to [[bring]] [[something]] to throw up in because the [[cinematography]] is [[simply]] [[someone]] [[running]] [[around]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the [[time]] you can't even see the main [[subjects]]. This [[style]] has been used [[much]] more [[successfully]] in [[movies]] such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. [[In]] [[Rosetta]], there is no plot and no [[suspense]] to which that [[style]] would [[lend]] [[anything]]. I should have known [[better]] when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was [[going]] to be horrible. I have no [[thinks]] what idiots gave this [[flick]] a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes Film [[Fest]] because it was [[horrible]]! I [[genuinely]] [[observed]] the [[overall]] [[stuff]] [[exclusively]] because I couldn't [[think]] that [[everybody]] would make such a [[meaningless]] [[filmmaking]]. There is [[anything]] interesting about the plot, the [[nature]] are devoid of [[depths]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[genre]] of [[ambience]] with [[musica]] or sound [[consequences]]. [[Further]], if you do decide to waste 2 [[hour]] of your [[vida]] by watching this [[filmmaking]], be sure to [[brings]] [[anything]] to throw up in because the [[filmmaking]] is [[exclusively]] [[anyone]] [[executes]] [[almost]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the [[period]] you can't even see the main [[themes]]. This [[elegance]] has been used [[very]] more [[satisfactorily]] in [[kino]] such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. [[Across]] [[Rachid]], there is no plot and no [[sufferance]] to which that [[styles]] would [[give]] [[somethings]]. I should have known [[nicer]] when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was [[go]] to be horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 564 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is one of the most hilariously [[bad]] movies I have ever had the privilege to [[see]].

I [[watched]] this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly [[incompetent]] team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun [[betting]] on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek [[entertainment]] it's a roaring success. This is one of the most hilariously [[naughty]] movies I have ever had the privilege to [[consults]].

I [[seen]] this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly [[inept]] team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun [[gaming]] on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek [[amusement]] it's a roaring success. --------------------------------------------- Result 565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have nothing against religious movies. Religious people need something to watch on a Saturday night, I guess. But what really ticks me off is when the write-up on the DVD box does not indicate this fact to the potential viewer. Passing off religious propaganda as entertainment is NOT cool, bro.

And even if I was a religious person, I would have to agree with most of the other posters here, this movie was a mess. Poorly directed, poorly acted, poorly edited, and the attempt at a soundtrack was hilarious. The fake accents were terrible, the characters were mainly stereotypes, and continuity was out the window. The only reason we sat through this lame waste of time was that it was too late to watch another movie instead. Should have just gone to bed.

Absolutely no redeeming qualities to this movie, unless you are the religious type who will immediately endorse anything that will preach your beliefs to the unbelievers, even if it's a pile of garbage. If you aren't, avoid this at all costs. Do not be deceived by the box write-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a film that makes you say 2 things... 1) I can do much better than this( acting,writing and directing) 2) this is so bad I must leave a review and warn others...

Looks as if it was shot with my flip video. I have too believe my friend who told me to watch this has a vendetta against me. I have noticed that there are some positive posts for this home video; Must have been left by crew members or people with something to do with this film. One of the worst 3 movies I have ever seen. hopefully the writers and director leave the business. not even talented enough to do commercials!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Rather [[nasty]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I [[actually]] liked this movie as a bit of a guilty [[pleasure]]. Lugosi is [[great]] here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite [[nasty]] in some [[places]] which makes it all most watchable. A [[fun]] [[little]] [[view]]. Rather [[soiled]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I [[genuinely]] liked this movie as a bit of a guilty [[gladness]]. Lugosi is [[wondrous]] here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite [[squalid]] in some [[sites]] which makes it all most watchable. A [[funny]] [[petite]] [[opinion]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best movie I've ever seen!

Maybe it's because I live just a few miles from the village were the story take place, and I know how things work out in this area in Sweden. The movie tells the truth, believe me! It both criticizes and honors the lifestyle of Dalarna, and the producer wants people who watch the movie to be more opened minded and care more for your closest friends and relatives.

But if you live in another small village anywhere in Sweden (or another country) you will probably also recognize much from this movie.

Thank you Maria Blom! --------------------------------------------- Result 569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she wants to burst out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The [[film]] is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is [[dismal]]. Which is rather [[odd]] as Lilia stoops to [[jiggle]] around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she wants to burst out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The [[filmmaking]] is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is [[sombre]]. Which is rather [[freaky]] as Lilia stoops to [[jiggling]] around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male --------------------------------------------- Result 570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I did not like the [[idea]] of the female turtle at all since 1987 we knew the TMNT to be four [[brothers]] with their [[teacher]] [[Splinter]] and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[great]] artists name like Leonardo , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Venus]] here doesn't have any [[meaning]] or [[playing]] any [[important]] [[part]] and I believe that the [[old]] TMNT series was [[much]] more [[better]] than that new one which contains [[Venus]] As a [[female]] turtle will not [[add]] any [[action]] to the [[story]] we [[like]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have new [[enemies]] in [[every]] part is a [[good]] point to have some [[action]] but to have a [[female]] turtle is a very [[weak]] point to have some [[action]], we [[wish]] to [[see]] more new of TMNT series but just as the same characters we [[knew]] in 1987 without that female turtle. I did not like the [[think]] of the female turtle at all since 1987 we knew the TMNT to be four [[siblings]] with their [[educator]] [[Breakaway]] and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[awesome]] artists name like Leonardo , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Zahra]] here doesn't have any [[mean]] or [[replay]] any [[critical]] [[parties]] and I believe that the [[former]] TMNT series was [[very]] more [[improved]] than that new one which contains [[Zahra]] As a [[girls]] turtle will not [[adds]] any [[efforts]] to the [[saga]] we [[adores]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have new [[nemesis]] in [[all]] part is a [[buena]] point to have some [[activities]] but to have a [[girl]] turtle is a very [[feeble]] point to have some [[activities]], we [[wants]] to [[consults]] more new of TMNT series but just as the same characters we [[knowed]] in 1987 without that female turtle. --------------------------------------------- Result 571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The penultimate [[collaboration]] between director [[Anthony]] Mann and [[star]] James [[Stewart]] ([[excluding]] the few days Mann [[worked]] on Night [[Passage]] before parting [[company]] with the star under less than amicable [[circumstances]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream [[look]] to offer another [[portrait]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[redemption]], fighting it [[every]] step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no [[great]] [[surprise]] which way [[Stewart]] turns at the [[end]], he's a [[surprisingly]] callous critter along the [[way]], even [[using]] his [[desire]] to just be [[left]] [[alone]] to excuse not warning a [[group]] of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the [[chance]] because it's not his problem. [[For]] most of the film there's really only a hair's [[breadth]] between him and McIntire, [[something]] the [[judge]] recognises [[immediately]], revelling in the [[company]] of a kindred [[spirit]] [[even]] as he's genially planning to lynch him. [[In]] many [[ways]] the townspeople who put their [[faith]] in him [[probably]] [[recognise]] it too - [[despite]] their [[appeals]] to his dead-and-buried better [[nature]], there's an [[unspoken]] acknowledgement that the only [[person]] who can [[stand]] up to the [[judge]] is [[someone]] [[almost]] as bad as he is.

As [[usual]] with Mann there's an [[exceptional]] use of high [[country]] locations, [[though]] for once the [[final]] [[showdown]] takes place on level [[ground]], and the [[film]] is [[almost]] [[perfectly]] cast with strong [[support]] from [[Walter]] Brennan, [[Harry]] Morgan and [[Ruth]] Roman ([[though]] Corinne Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the great cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD transfer, with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. The penultimate [[cooperates]] between director [[Antony]] Mann and [[superstar]] James [[Steward]] ([[excludes]] the few days Mann [[acted]] on Night [[Crossing]] before parting [[businesses]] with the star under less than amicable [[situations]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream [[glance]] to offer another [[depiction]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[buyout]], fighting it [[any]] step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no [[excellent]] [[surprises]] which way [[Steward]] turns at the [[ends]], he's a [[unbelievably]] callous critter along the [[manner]], even [[usage]] his [[willingness]] to just be [[exited]] [[merely]] to excuse not warning a [[panel]] of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the [[probability]] because it's not his problem. [[During]] most of the film there's really only a hair's [[width]] between him and McIntire, [[anything]] the [[magistrate]] recognises [[promptly]], revelling in the [[societies]] of a kindred [[wits]] [[yet]] as he's genially planning to lynch him. [[At]] many [[way]] the townspeople who put their [[fe]] in him [[maybe]] [[acknowledged]] it too - [[though]] their [[appeal]] to his dead-and-buried better [[characters]], there's an [[implied]] acknowledgement that the only [[persons]] who can [[standing]] up to the [[magistrate]] is [[person]] [[virtually]] as bad as he is.

As [[normal]] with Mann there's an [[unusual]] use of high [[nations]] locations, [[if]] for once the [[last]] [[confrontation]] takes place on level [[terra]], and the [[cinematography]] is [[hardly]] [[altogether]] cast with strong [[assistance]] from [[Walther]] Brennan, [[Hare]] Morgan and [[Roth]] Roman ([[while]] Corinne Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the great cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD transfer, with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. --------------------------------------------- Result 572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Your [[mind]] will not be [[satisfied]] by this no—[[budget]] doomsday thriller; but, [[pray]], who's will? [[A]] youngish [[couple]] [[spends]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens [[masquerading]] as [[Church]] people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the [[ingenuity]] and the [[lack]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar [[movies]]. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but [[convent]] creeps as well. The villain of the movie is a well—known character actor.

This wholly [[shameless]] slapdash seems a piece of convent—[[exploitation]], that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly outdated. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! Your [[intellect]] will not be [[pleased]] by this no—[[budgets]] doomsday thriller; but, [[prayed]], who's will? [[una]] youngish [[couples]] [[spend]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens [[posing]] as [[Basilica]] people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the [[resourcefulness]] and the [[lacked]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar [[filmmaking]]. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but [[abbey]] creeps as well. The villain of the movie is a well—known character actor.

This wholly [[brazen]] slapdash seems a piece of convent—[[operate]], that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly outdated. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! --------------------------------------------- Result 573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Penny]] [[Princess]] finds American [[working]] [[girl]] [[Yolande]] Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that [[lies]] in that [[triangle]] where France, Italy, and [[Switzerland]] meet called Lampidorra. It [[seems]] as [[though]] the Lampidorrans owe bills all over [[Europe]] and the [[main]] occupation of the [[country]] is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? [[Especially]] [[since]] Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

[[Anyway]] Penny Princess is a [[delightful]] [[blend]] of British farce and romantic comedy. [[Yolande]] Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I [[found]] a reason to be grateful for insomnia. [[Benny]] [[Princesses]] finds American [[worked]] [[chica]] [[Yolanda]] Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that [[resides]] in that [[delta]] where France, Italy, and [[Swiss]] meet called Lampidorra. It [[appears]] as [[although]] the Lampidorrans owe bills all over [[Eu]] and the [[primary]] occupation of the [[countries]] is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? [[Namely]] [[because]] Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

[[Writ]] Penny Princess is a [[wondrous]] [[mixes]] of British farce and romantic comedy. [[Yolanda]] Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I [[find]] a reason to be grateful for insomnia. --------------------------------------------- Result 574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Criticism]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[may]] have discouraged [[many]] viewers from giving the film a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the entire production was over-hyped, etc. For this viewer, seeing the [[film]] on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are [[woven]] together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 [[years]] later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[delicate]] mood piece and the [[script]] by Minot and Cunningham is [[rich]] in atmosphere and subtle [[life]] lessons. [[Yes]], there are [[gaps]] in the [[story]] that could have [[used]] more [[explanation]], but in order to maintain the aura of [[nostalgia]] of a dying lady's [[words]], such 'holes' are [[understandable]]. The film is [[graced]] by the presence of not only Redgrave, [[Richardson]] (Redgrave's [[true]] [[daughter]]), [[Collette]], Gummer (Streep's [[true]] [[daughter]]), [[Meryl]] [[Streep]], Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn [[Close]], Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but [[also]] with an [[ensemble]] [[cast]] of [[brief]] but very [[solid]] performances. The setting is [[gorgeous]] ([[cinematography]] by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan [[A]].P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("[[Being]] Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady [[Harp]] [[Critic]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[maggio]] have discouraged [[innumerable]] viewers from giving the film a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the entire production was over-hyped, etc. For this viewer, seeing the [[cinematography]] on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are [[tissues]] together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 [[olds]] later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[fragile]] mood piece and the [[hyphen]] by Minot and Cunningham is [[wealthy]] in atmosphere and subtle [[living]] lessons. [[Yea]], there are [[inadequacies]] in the [[stories]] that could have [[employs]] more [[explanations]], but in order to maintain the aura of [[longing]] of a dying lady's [[phrase]], such 'holes' are [[comprehensible]]. The film is [[flattered]] by the presence of not only Redgrave, [[Roberts]] (Redgrave's [[authentic]] [[daughters]]), [[Colette]], Gummer (Streep's [[authentic]] [[giri]]), [[Merrill]] [[Meryl]], Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn [[Shutting]], Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but [[apart]] with an [[whole]] [[casting]] of [[writ]] but very [[solids]] performances. The setting is [[wondrous]] ([[movies]] by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan [[una]].P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("[[Ongoing]] Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady [[Greenland]] --------------------------------------------- Result 575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've [[seen]] [[many]] of [[Guy]] Maddin's [[films]], and [[liked]] most of them, but this one literally [[gave]] me a headache. [[John]] Gurdebeke's [[editing]] is [[way]] too [[frenetic]], and, [[apart]] from a tour-de-force [[sequence]] showing a line of heads snapping to [[look]] at one object, does nothing but interfere with the actors' [[ability]] to [[communicate]] with the [[audience]].

Another [[thing]] I [[disliked]] about this film was that it [[seemed]] more [[brutal]] than Maddin's earlier works--though his [[films]] have [[always]] had dark [[elements]], his [[sympathy]] for the characters [[gave]] the [[movies]] an overriding [[feeling]] of humanity. This one [[seemed]] more like [[harshness]] for harshness' sake.

As I'm [[required]] to [[add]] more lines of text before IMDb will [[accept]] my [[review]], I will [[mention]] that the actor playing "[[Guy]] Maddin" does [[manage]] to [[ape]] his facial [[expressions]] [[pretty]] well. I've [[saw]] [[various]] of [[Man]] Maddin's [[filmmaking]], and [[loved]] most of them, but this one literally [[given]] me a headache. [[Giovanni]] Gurdebeke's [[edition]] is [[routes]] too [[furious]], and, [[regardless]] from a tour-de-force [[sequences]] showing a line of heads snapping to [[glance]] at one object, does nothing but interfere with the actors' [[dexterity]] to [[interact]] with the [[viewers]].

Another [[stuff]] I [[proscribed]] about this film was that it [[appeared]] more [[brute]] than Maddin's earlier works--though his [[cinema]] have [[steadily]] had dark [[ingredient]], his [[compassion]] for the characters [[delivered]] the [[films]] an overriding [[sense]] of humanity. This one [[appeared]] more like [[toughness]] for harshness' sake.

As I'm [[require]] to [[summing]] more lines of text before IMDb will [[accepts]] my [[revisions]], I will [[mentioned]] that the actor playing "[[Man]] Maddin" does [[managed]] to [[apes]] his facial [[phrase]] [[quite]] well. --------------------------------------------- Result 576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this with my whole family as a 9 year old in 1964 on our black and white TV. I remember my father remarking that "this is how it could have happened - Adam and Eve." I vividly remember the scene when Adam finds Eve, her eyes were blackened. I asked my father why were her eyes blackened and he told because she was tired and hungry. Having not seen this episode in 45 years, I still remember it vividly - the TV transmissions back and forth with the home planet, scenes of bombs shaking the headquarters, with the final scene of the two walking off, Adam carrying his pack and Eve following. It may not have been a theatrical work of art, but it certainly left an impression on me all these years. --------------------------------------------- Result 577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The acting- [[fantastic]]. The story- amazing. The script- wonderful.

[[Just]] a few ways to [[describe]] this [[movie]]. Yes, it's [[slow]] and it has [[mostly]] talking, but the [[whole]] [[story]] of all of their [[lives]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[thrown]] in and out makes you want to [[listen]] to [[every]] [[little]] [[thing]] to [[learn]] more about this haunting and [[tragic]] [[story]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is based off of and it has shown me even more [[light]] into this [[story]] and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the [[movie]]. I'm [[also]] to read the Exectioner's [[Song]], which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore [[story]]. This [[movie]] [[made]] me [[think]] so much about the [[phrase]] "piering into the other side of the [[looking]] [[glass]]". You [[hear]] a [[song]] in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a [[punk]] band that [[wrote]] a [[song]] about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the [[things]] Gary [[gave]] as a transplant when he [[died]]) and as you [[listen]] to it, which is after the last [[time]] Mikal ever [[sees]] [[Gary]], you [[look]] at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the [[song]] itself. This movie opened my [[eyes]] in that [[way]] and in [[many]] [[others]]. I [[recommend]] this movie(and the book) very very much. The acting- [[wonderful]]. The story- amazing. The script- wonderful.

[[Virtuous]] a few ways to [[depict]] this [[film]]. Yes, it's [[slowing]] and it has [[predominantly]] talking, but the [[entire]] [[fairytales]] of all of their [[life]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[tossed]] in and out makes you want to [[listens]] to [[any]] [[petit]] [[stuff]] to [[learns]] more about this haunting and [[dire]] [[stories]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is based off of and it has shown me even more [[lighting]] into this [[conte]] and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the [[flick]]. I'm [[furthermore]] to read the Exectioner's [[Chanson]], which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore [[saga]]. This [[cinematography]] [[brought]] me [[thinking]] so much about the [[words]] "piering into the other side of the [[searching]] [[glassware]]". You [[heed]] a [[chanson]] in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a [[dipshit]] band that [[authored]] a [[chanson]] about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the [[items]] Gary [[supplied]] as a transplant when he [[perished]]) and as you [[listening]] to it, which is after the last [[times]] Mikal ever [[believes]] [[Gari]], you [[gaze]] at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the [[chanson]] itself. This movie opened my [[eye]] in that [[route]] and in [[several]] [[alia]]. I [[recommending]] this movie(and the book) very very much. --------------------------------------------- Result 578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Without being one of my [[favorites]], this is [[good]] for being a [[change]] of pace... [[even]] if only for a few minutes.

It all [[starts]] with a [[big]] [[fight]] between [[Tom]], Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[suddenly]] [[Spike]] makes a heroic and [[admirable]] [[decision]]: he stops the [[fight]] and [[suggests]] that they all should be [[friends]]. So, all of them sign a [[peace]] treaty and [[become]] [[friends]]... which isn't going to last for long.

Meanwhile, the three [[become]] affectionate, [[patient]] and [[kind]] to each other. They [[even]] [[save]] each other when one of them is in [[danger]] of [[life]]. The [[relationship]] goes [[nothing]] but [[excellent]], until a very [[big]] [[steak]] appears and they all [[become]] greedy. The three are guilty to [[return]] to their usual [[fights]] and rivalries.

But [[still]]... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as [[friends]] is [[truly]] a [[delightful]] and [[grateful]] experience, [[even]] if only for a while.

[[Oh]], by the way, as a [[curious]] fact, two [[songs]] from "The [[Wizard]] of [[Oz]]" are [[played]] here in [[instrumental]] versions: "We're off to [[see]] the [[Wizard]]" and "Somewhere over the [[rainbow]]". Without being one of my [[favourites]], this is [[alright]] for being a [[alterations]] of pace... [[yet]] if only for a few minutes.

It all [[commenced]] with a [[substantial]] [[combats]] between [[Tum]], Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[abruptly]] [[Fortification]] makes a heroic and [[wondrous]] [[rulings]]: he stops the [[fought]] and [[proposing]] that they all should be [[homies]]. So, all of them sign a [[pacific]] treaty and [[becomes]] [[freund]]... which isn't going to last for long.

Meanwhile, the three [[becomes]] affectionate, [[ill]] and [[types]] to each other. They [[yet]] [[economize]] each other when one of them is in [[menace]] of [[iife]]. The [[relations]] goes [[anything]] but [[noteworthy]], until a very [[major]] [[steaks]] appears and they all [[gotten]] greedy. The three are guilty to [[homecoming]] to their usual [[battle]] and rivalries.

But [[again]]... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as [[boyfriends]] is [[genuinely]] a [[wondrous]] and [[glad]] experience, [[yet]] if only for a while.

[[Oooh]], by the way, as a [[weird]] fact, two [[hymns]] from "The [[Warlock]] of [[Ounces]]" are [[served]] here in [[helpful]] versions: "We're off to [[consults]] the [[Conjurer]]" and "Somewhere over the [[rayed]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Gung Ho is one of those [[movies]] that you will [[want]] to [[see]] over and over again. [[Michael]] Keaton is put in [[charge]] of [[wooing]] a Japanese [[car]] [[company]] to come to his [[town]] [[thus]] [[creating]] [[jobs]] for the [[residents]] of Hadleyville. What [[happens]] after that is one [[hilarious]] [[moment]] after another. The two [[cultures]] clash and it is up to Keaton to [[hold]] [[things]] [[together]]. Look for [[great]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[George]] Wendt, [[Mimi]] [[Rogers]], John Turturro, [[Soh]] Yamamura and Sab Shimomo. [[All]] are [[perfectly]] cast. Don't be [[fooled]] by the low number [[rating]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[book]]. It is interesting to note that the [[town]] name of Hadleyville was also used in High Noon. [[Yes]], there is a real Hadleyville but in Oregon. Gung Ho is one of those [[movie]] that you will [[wants]] to [[behold]] over and over again. [[Michele]] Keaton is put in [[charging]] of [[courting]] a Japanese [[vehicles]] [[enterprises]] to come to his [[municipality]] [[accordingly]] [[create]] [[labour]] for the [[locals]] of Hadleyville. What [[comes]] after that is one [[comical]] [[time]] after another. The two [[crop]] clash and it is up to Keaton to [[held]] [[aspects]] [[jointly]]. Look for [[wondrous]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[Georgi]] Wendt, [[Moaning]] [[Rutgers]], John Turturro, [[Hos]] Yamamura and Sab Shimomo. [[Entire]] are [[altogether]] cast. Don't be [[hoodwinked]] by the low number [[valuation]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[books]]. It is interesting to note that the [[ville]] name of Hadleyville was also used in High Noon. [[Yeah]], there is a real Hadleyville but in Oregon. --------------------------------------------- Result 580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Unless [[somebody]] enlightens me, I [[really]] have no [[idea]] what this movie is about. It [[looks]] like a [[picture]] with a message but it´s far from it. This [[movie]] tells [[pointless]] [[story]] of a New [[York]] [[press]] [[agent]] and about his [[problems]]. And, that´s [[basically]] all. When that [[agent]] is played by [[Pacino]], one must think that it [[must]] be something [[important]]. But it [[takes]] no [[hard]] [[thinking]] to figure out how meaningless and [[dull]] this [[movie]] is. To one of the best [[actors]] in the world, Al [[Pacino]], this is the second movie of the year (the other is "Simone") that [[deserves]] the title "the most boring and the most [[pointless]] [[motion]] [[picture]] of the year". [[So]], what´s [[going]] on, Al? Unless [[person]] enlightens me, I [[truthfully]] have no [[thinks]] what this movie is about. It [[seems]] like a [[photo]] with a message but it´s far from it. This [[flick]] tells [[futile]] [[history]] of a New [[Yorke]] [[pressing]] [[patrolman]] and about his [[difficulty]]. And, that´s [[mostly]] all. When that [[officer]] is played by [[Deniro]], one must think that it [[gotta]] be something [[major]]. But it [[pick]] no [[harsh]] [[ideas]] to figure out how meaningless and [[boring]] this [[filmmaking]] is. To one of the best [[players]] in the world, Al [[Deniro]], this is the second movie of the year (the other is "Simone") that [[merit]] the title "the most boring and the most [[superfluous]] [[motions]] [[photographing]] of the year". [[Thus]], what´s [[go]] on, Al? --------------------------------------------- Result 581 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] My husband and I went to [[see]] this [[movie]], being the [[horror]] [[movie]] [[buffs]] that we are. Two hours later I found myself [[wanting]] both my [[money]] and time back. I was so [[disappointed]]. The teasers for this [[film]] basically [[contained]] the best points of the film. There was nothing very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[comical]] than [[anything]]. [[After]] viewing other movies [[based]] on the works of Japanese writers, I have to conclude that what is [[deemed]] frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My [[advice]]: [[If]] you are a fan of true horror [[movies]], [[save]] yourself the [[pain]] of [[sitting]] through this one. I can't really say that I [[would]] recommend renting it either, [[unless]] you have a free [[rental]] coming to you. My husband and I went to [[behold]] this [[kino]], being the [[monstrosity]] [[flick]] [[stalkers]] that we are. Two hours later I found myself [[wishing]] both my [[cash]] and time back. I was so [[disappointing]]. The teasers for this [[kino]] basically [[contain]] the best points of the film. There was nothing very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[hilarious]] than [[nothing]]. [[Upon]] viewing other movies [[predicated]] on the works of Japanese writers, I have to conclude that what is [[considered]] frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My [[counsel]]: [[Though]] you are a fan of true horror [[movie]], [[rescuing]] yourself the [[heartache]] of [[seated]] through this one. I can't really say that I [[ought]] recommend renting it either, [[if]] you have a free [[tenancy]] coming to you. --------------------------------------------- Result 582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is only a [[response]] to the yahoo who [[says]] this [[movie]] is more realistic than the [[classic]], [[genre]] defining MASTERPIECE, [[Jaws]]. [[Yes]], brainiac, [[great]] whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, tiger)have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. [[Humans]] don't [[often]] make it onto that menu, [[granted]], but the shark in the film was [[repeatedly]] pointed out to be [[exhibiting]] abnormal behavior. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer [[whale]] [[destroying]] nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, [[sinking]] [[several]] dozen thick hulled North Atlantic [[fishing]] [[boats]] and knowing when certain people, all [[friends]] of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to [[reach]], are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this [[turd]] of a Jaws knock-off. Laughable. Great white [[sharks]] are [[also]] known to [[frequently]] chew on [[boats]], protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the [[size]] of [[Bruce]](if you don't know, look it up)[[would]] be more than [[capable]] of [[sinking]] a boat like The [[Orca]]([[hey]]! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it [[would]] [[weigh]] [[upwards]] of 6,000 [[lbs]]. I [[could]] go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing([[better]] acting, better [[effects]], better music, better [[writing]]), Orca is [[crap]]([[BLATANT]] rip-off of Jaws, lousy writing, [[abominable]] effects, most [[ridiculous]] [[plot]] this side of an [[Olson]] Twins flick). It doesn't take a [[masters]] from Columbia [[University]] to [[see]] that. Watch better movies. This is only a [[reaction]] to the yahoo who [[tells]] this [[filmmaking]] is more realistic than the [[traditional]], [[genres]] defining MASTERPIECE, [[Gags]]. [[Yup]], brainiac, [[super]] whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, tiger)have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. [[Human]] don't [[frequently]] make it onto that menu, [[attributed]], but the shark in the film was [[always]] pointed out to be [[proving]] abnormal behavior. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer [[pyle]] [[destroys]] nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, [[sink]] [[many]] dozen thick hulled North Atlantic [[peach]] [[boat]] and knowing when certain people, all [[friendships]] of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to [[achieving]], are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this [[poo]] of a Jaws knock-off. Laughable. Great white [[shark]] are [[additionally]] known to [[often]] chew on [[ship]], protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the [[sizes]] of [[Bros]](if you don't know, look it up)[[should]] be more than [[able]] of [[drowning]] a boat like The [[Orc]]([[yo]]! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it [[could]] [[weighted]] [[upside]] of 6,000 [[pound]]. I [[would]] go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing([[best]] acting, better [[impact]], better music, better [[handwriting]]), Orca is [[shit]]([[SEEMING]] rip-off of Jaws, lousy writing, [[infamous]] effects, most [[absurd]] [[intrigue]] this side of an [[Olsen]] Twins flick). It doesn't take a [[master]] from Columbia [[Campuses]] to [[seeing]] that. Watch better movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[In]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, [[Scooter]], Camillia, Dr. Teeth, [[Floyd]], Animal, [[Janice]], and Zoot are college graduates who decide to [[bring]] their successful college musical, Manhattan [[Melodies]], to Broadway. [[Unfortunately]], no [[producer]] will even [[meet]] with the [[Muppets]]. [[After]] being denied by too many producers, [[Scooter]] suggests that the [[Muppets]] [[decide]] to [[move]] on on their own. [[However]], Kermit [[still]] believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he [[finally]] does and let's everybody know that he sold the [[show]], Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[great]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding [[sequence]] [[filled]] with Muppets, including the Sesame [[Street]] cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only [[complaint]] is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The [[Electric]] Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys [[dog]] Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this [[movie]], and he wasn't very well-known at the [[time]]). [[Among]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, [[Motorbike]], Camillia, Dr. Teeth, [[Freud]], Animal, [[Janis]], and Zoot are college graduates who decide to [[bringing]] their successful college musical, Manhattan [[Hymns]], to Broadway. [[Alack]], no [[manufacturer]] will even [[cater]] with the [[Marionettes]]. [[Upon]] being denied by too many producers, [[Sidecar]] suggests that the [[Puppets]] [[deciding]] to [[budge]] on on their own. [[Instead]], Kermit [[nonetheless]] believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he [[lastly]] does and let's everybody know that he sold the [[spectacle]], Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[wondrous]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding [[sequencing]] [[filling]] with Muppets, including the Sesame [[Thoroughfare]] cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only [[grievance]] is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The [[Electricity]] Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys [[lapdog]] Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this [[kino]], and he wasn't very well-known at the [[moment]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 584 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is the third parody of the [[scary]] [[movies]] and [[hopefully]] the [[last]]. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, [[Signs]] and 8 Mile for some weird [[reason]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]] this movie was very [[pointless]] and [[unnecessary]] and not even funny. I [[laughed]] [[maybe]] three [[times]] and that is not enough for a [[comedy]]. I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] the [[first]] two but this one was just plain [[dumb]]. [[If]] your [[jokes]] consist of [[corpses]] [[getting]] [[beat]] up and people [[constantly]] [[throwing]] [[stuff]] at each other then this [[movie]] is for you. In my [[opinion]], if your smart [[enough]] [[stay]] at [[home]] and [[save]] your [[money]] and [[please]] stop [[making]] these [[kind]] of movies, they just [[keep]] getting [[worse]] 3/10. This is the third parody of the [[fearful]] [[filmmaking]] and [[luckily]] the [[final]]. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, [[Signalling]] and 8 Mile for some weird [[grounds]]. [[At]] my [[visualizing]] this movie was very [[superfluous]] and [[superfluous]] and not even funny. I [[laughs]] [[probably]] three [[dates]] and that is not enough for a [[farce]]. I [[genuinely]] [[adored]] the [[frst]] two but this one was just plain [[witless]]. [[Though]] your [[gags]] consist of [[cadavers]] [[obtain]] [[defeats]] up and people [[always]] [[pelting]] [[thing]] at each other then this [[filmmaking]] is for you. In my [[views]], if your smart [[adequate]] [[stays]] at [[house]] and [[economize]] your [[cash]] and [[invites]] stop [[doing]] these [[kinds]] of movies, they just [[preserving]] getting [[lousiest]] 3/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Reviewed]] at the [[World]] [[Premiere]] screening [[Sept]]. 9, 2006 at the [[Isabel]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto [[International]] Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting premise but [[seemed]] to go on too long with too many [[shots]] of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The [[bits]] of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were [[especially]] [[striking]]. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was [[quite]] something as well. Scenes of the [[activity]] at the Three Gorges Dam project were [[also]] a [[complement]] to the Jia Khang-je [[films]] at TIFF (the [[feature]] [[Still]] Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were [[also]] built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, [[Producer]] Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on [[stage]] for a Q&[[A]] after the [[world]] [[premiere]]. Producer Noah Weinzweig was [[introduced]] from the [[audience]] and was [[thanked]] as the most [[key]] [[person]] that [[assisted]] in the on the ground access in [[China]] itself. [[Reconsidered]] at the [[Worldwide]] [[Debut]] screening [[Sep]]. 9, 2006 at the [[Isabelle]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto [[Globally]] Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting premise but [[sounded]] to go on too long with too many [[punches]] of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The [[tib]] of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were [[concretely]] [[breathtaking]]. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was [[rather]] something as well. Scenes of the [[operations]] at the Three Gorges Dam project were [[apart]] a [[addendum]] to the Jia Khang-je [[movies]] at TIFF (the [[features]] [[However]] Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were [[apart]] built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, [[Producers]] Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on [[phases]] for a Q&[[una]] after the [[worldwide]] [[debut]]. Producer Noah Weinzweig was [[tabled]] from the [[audiences]] and was [[gratitude]] as the most [[principal]] [[someone]] that [[assisting]] in the on the ground access in [[Hua]] itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Ascension is actually a [[step]] up in terms of what the [[original]] movie was in [[story]] and in special [[effects]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire [[hunter]] looking for the [[count]] himself (if you [[remember]] him, he was from the [[movie]] Dragon, The [[Bruce]] Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the [[kid]] who [[helps]] the [[woman]] he [[loves]] from a far steal Dracula's body from the [[slab]]. [[Diane]] [[Neal]] Is good as the [[woman]] who steals Dracula's body in order to [[finds]] a [[cure]] for her dying [[boyfriend]], And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. [[Giving]] a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the [[rest]] of the cast in this [[movie]], and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. Ascension is actually a [[stride]] up in terms of what the [[upfront]] movie was in [[tales]] and in special [[impact]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire [[hunting]] looking for the [[counts]] himself (if you [[recalling]] him, he was from the [[movies]] Dragon, The [[Bros]] Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the [[petit]] who [[contribute]] the [[dame]] he [[likes]] from a far steal Dracula's body from the [[plaque]]. [[Dejan]] [[Neil]] Is good as the [[dame]] who steals Dracula's body in order to [[find]] a [[healing]] for her dying [[buddy]], And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. [[Confer]] a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the [[stays]] of the cast in this [[filmmaking]], and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. --------------------------------------------- Result 587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[great]] film this, and a shame that it will receive [[little]] attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on [[Channel]] Four.

The plot is a [[simple]] one but [[works]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like [[fantasy]] and hard-hitting [[nightmare]] is very well [[blurred]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the [[credit]] of those involved it doesn't show too [[often]]. It also hasn't dated that much either.

I was [[lucky]] [[enough]] to [[tape]] this off the telly when it was on a few years [[ago]], and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; [[though]] as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to [[cinema]] would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is [[also]] very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the [[context]] of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that [[lightly]]) [[disturbing]] moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out [[tensions]]. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly [[recommended]].

9/10

A [[wondrous]] film this, and a shame that it will receive [[petit]] attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on [[Canals]] Four.

The plot is a [[uncomplicated]] one but [[cooperate]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like [[chimera]] and hard-hitting [[cabos]] is very well [[grainy]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the [[credits]] of those involved it doesn't show too [[generally]]. It also hasn't dated that much either.

I was [[fortunate]] [[adequately]] to [[cassettes]] this off the telly when it was on a few years [[prior]], and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; [[if]] as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to [[kino]] would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is [[apart]] very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the [[backdrop]] of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that [[casually]]) [[disquieting]] moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out [[strain]]. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly [[suggested]].

9/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] From the Star of "[[MITCHELL]]", From the director of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would [[normally]] keep me from seeing this movie. And the worst part is that all the above [[mentioned]] statements are [[true]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Don]] Baker eats every other five [[minutes]] in this film. It's like a [[bad]] [[remake]] of "Coogan's Bluff" From the Star of "[[MICHEL]]", From the director of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would [[traditionally]] keep me from seeing this movie. And the worst part is that all the above [[alluded]] statements are [[veritable]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Donated]] Baker eats every other five [[mins]] in this film. It's like a [[unfavorable]] [[redo]] of "Coogan's Bluff" --------------------------------------------- Result 589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WOW!

I just was given this film from a friend of mine, who bought it for 1.98 at Walmart, and he felt that he got taken! It is beyond boring, most of the scenes are filmed in front of a green screen, the acting is somewhat improvised, almost as if they didn't have a script. The Martians are CGI, which look like they were done by a novice, or a Fan produced movie. I cannot stress just how bad this DVD really is!

Example: In one of the scenes, the martians are torturing a local female captive. She goes from a woman in front of a green screen, to a CGI copy of that woman. The change is totally noticeable, and when she is killed, you can see that it is a computer figure, looking like something from a game back in 1990!

If at all possible, avoid this movie like the plague! You can download two trailers from their site, and see how god-awful it really is! --------------------------------------------- Result 590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Spectacular]] Horror [[movie]] that will give you the chills once you get settled with it. The atmosphere is very creepy and stylish, the [[score]] is chilling, but the best about the movie is it's performances. It's [[rare]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[important]] part in the [[scare]] factor.

The [[story]] is very interesting and gets your attention [[since]] the first minutes. [[Though]] the [[woman]] in black does not have much screen [[time]], she makes the [[necessary]] appearances to chill the audience in some [[brilliant]] scenes. The dialogs are very [[descriptive]] and make your imagination [[work]] and that's when it [[becomes]] really scary.

[[If]] you have the chance, watch this on theater it's a totally [[different]] experience but as [[scary]] as this [[movie]].

This is one of the [[best]] [[Ghost]] [[movies]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get scared. [[Wondrous]] Horror [[movies]] that will give you the chills once you get settled with it. The atmosphere is very creepy and stylish, the [[scoring]] is chilling, but the best about the movie is it's performances. It's [[uncommon]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[principal]] part in the [[shitless]] factor.

The [[tale]] is very interesting and gets your attention [[because]] the first minutes. [[If]] the [[female]] in black does not have much screen [[moment]], she makes the [[needed]] appearances to chill the audience in some [[sparkly]] scenes. The dialogs are very [[narrative]] and make your imagination [[jobs]] and that's when it [[become]] really scary.

[[Unless]] you have the chance, watch this on theater it's a totally [[several]] experience but as [[terrible]] as this [[cinematography]].

This is one of the [[nicest]] [[Phantoms]] [[theater]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get scared. --------------------------------------------- Result 591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Heather Graham couldn't play a convincing lesbian if her life depended on it. Who do the producers of the movie think they are? the ABSOLUTE WORST, most UNREALISTIC movie i've seen in as long as i can remember. This movie is so bad that i felt compelled to sign-up on IMDb and make sure the rating of this "film" drops.

omg i'm Heather Graham, i just kissed a drunk chick, so while she's passed out i'm REALLY going to pace around my room for HOURS asking myself frantically "WHAT HAVE I DONE?!".. Jesus heather, get over it and grow up... and i'd like to forward that same sentiment to the idiot producers... and while i'm at it, instead of this movie being all about an pathetic excuse for a coming out story, perhaps it would have been more suitable to focus the plot onto a character who's mentally unstable... like your so-called "lesbian" character... after all, i know the first time i had gay sex, when i left the next morning i jumped to the sky in excitement in the middle of the street... honestly b*tch, get a grip...

WHAT A JOKE! and please note there are many many many more flaws and appallingly stupid aspects to this lame flick, but i'm so sick of even thinking about it anymore. bottom line, if you're a smart person you'll hate this movie, and if you're not a smart person, then you'll love it... it's as simple as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have not [[yet]] decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Worst]] [[Film]] I [[Have]] Ever [[Seen]]".

Even if you [[ignore]] the [[dodgy]] accents, low production [[values]] and [[appalling]] camera [[work]] this film has [[absolutely]] nothing [[going]] for it. I only went to [[see]] it as I had read the [[book]] and wanted to see how they [[would]] [[work]] the [[complicated]] plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters [[appear]] with [[little]] to no [[explanation]] as to who they are and then [[proceed]] to [[play]] no [[valuable]] [[part]] in the narrative. Even the main characters act without [[reason]] so that by the time the [[film]] reaches it's climax you don't [[care]] what [[happens]] to any of them.

I can [[accept]] that [[books]] [[occasionally]] need to be rewritten to [[fit]] into [[films]] and that it is [[perhaps]] unfair to [[judge]] this [[film]] against the book it was [[adapted]] from. But after my [[friends]] and I [[came]] out of the [[cinema]] I had to spend most of the [[journey]] [[home]] [[explaining]] what was [[supposed]] to have happened.

They even change the true [[meaning]] of the books title "[[Rancid]] [[Aluminium]]" by squeezing it into [[yet]] another piece of [[pointless]] [[voice]] over just so they can [[allow]] the film to have a cool title.

A real [[mess]] of a film from [[start]] to [[finish]]. I have not [[however]] decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Pire]] [[Filmmaking]] I [[Has]] Ever [[Saw]]".

Even if you [[omit]] the [[untrustworthy]] accents, low production [[valuing]] and [[spooky]] camera [[jobs]] this film has [[abundantly]] nothing [[go]] for it. I only went to [[consults]] it as I had read the [[ledger]] and wanted to see how they [[could]] [[cooperated]] the [[tortuous]] plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters [[arise]] with [[small]] to no [[explanations]] as to who they are and then [[proceeding]] to [[playing]] no [[precious]] [[parties]] in the narrative. Even the main characters act without [[cause]] so that by the time the [[filmmaking]] reaches it's climax you don't [[healthcare]] what [[occurs]] to any of them.

I can [[admit]] that [[ledgers]] [[sometimes]] need to be rewritten to [[fitted]] into [[filmmaking]] and that it is [[probably]] unfair to [[richter]] this [[filmmaking]] against the book it was [[adjusted]] from. But after my [[friend]] and I [[arrived]] out of the [[theaters]] I had to spend most of the [[trips]] [[habitation]] [[explains]] what was [[suspected]] to have happened.

They even change the true [[mean]] of the books title "[[Antiquated]] [[Aluminum]]" by squeezing it into [[even]] another piece of [[dispensable]] [[vowel]] over just so they can [[enables]] the film to have a cool title.

A real [[jumble]] of a film from [[embark]] to [[finalize]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When someone remakes a [[classic]] [[movie]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compared]] to the [[original]]. [[Also]], there's a [[chance]] that the remake is so [[radically]] different that it is just too [[unfamiliar]] to [[audiences]].

Well, the 1973 [[TV]] version of "[[Double]] Indemnity" has almost identical scenes and dialogue as the 1944 original. The main [[difference]] is that the [[remake]] just seems to have no [[energy]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering insurance agent Walter Neff in the original; Richard Crenna just seems world-weary and [[tired]]. [[Edward]] G. Robinson brought [[great]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton Keys; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[actor]], [[appears]] almost [[bored]] with the [[proceedings]]. Samantha Eggar is all [[wrong]] as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while Barbara Stanwyck was just superb in this [[wicked]] role, Eggar is [[overly]] polite and mannered and just [[seems]] [[way]] out of place.

[[Robert]] [[Webber]], in the [[old]] [[Richard]] [[Gaines]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and John Fiedler taking the Porter Hall role as the [[crucial]] [[witness]], bring some life to the movie. In particular, Webber recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

However, after the [[movie]] [[starts]], the [[whole]] [[thing]] just [[sort]] of [[lies]] there, without any [[life]] or electricity. This is one [[film]] that never should have been remade. When someone remakes a [[typical]] [[movies]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compare]] to the [[initial]]. [[Moreover]], there's a [[luck]] that the remake is so [[profoundly]] different that it is just too [[anonymous]] to [[viewers]].

Well, the 1973 [[TELEVISION]] version of "[[Twice]] Indemnity" has almost identical scenes and dialogue as the 1944 original. The main [[dispute]] is that the [[redo]] just seems to have no [[energies]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering insurance agent Walter Neff in the original; Richard Crenna just seems world-weary and [[weary]]. [[Edwards]] G. Robinson brought [[super]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton Keys; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[protagonist]], [[appearing]] almost [[drilled]] with the [[trials]]. Samantha Eggar is all [[inaccurate]] as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while Barbara Stanwyck was just superb in this [[maleficent]] role, Eggar is [[exceedingly]] polite and mannered and just [[looks]] [[ways]] out of place.

[[Roberta]] [[Weber]], in the [[former]] [[Ritchie]] [[Holsters]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and John Fiedler taking the Porter Hall role as the [[indispensable]] [[testimonial]], bring some life to the movie. In particular, Webber recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

However, after the [[filmmaking]] [[initiated]], the [[together]] [[stuff]] just [[genre]] of [[resides]] there, without any [[living]] or electricity. This is one [[filmmaking]] that never should have been remade. --------------------------------------------- Result 594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was good for it's time. If you like Eddie Murpy this is a must have to add to your collection. Eddie was young and funny with his 80's haircut. Charlotte Lewis, Eddie's costar is hot. This was one of her first movies and she was not bad. The graphics were good for the 80's. A lot of the actors went on to do other good movies you should check them out through IMDb. Other must have from Eddie is "Coming to America" and "48 hours". Another actor "Victor Wong" has a small part in this movie. Check out some of his older movies like "Big trouble in little china". If you liked the action movies from the 80's this is your movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 595 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I, like many other Bachchan fans, having been eagerly awaiting the remake of Sholay. This movie was not it. Thank god they didn't let them use the name "Sholay" in the movie title. Ram Gopal's remake is not worthy of the title. The camera work, the locations, the costumes, the totally out-of-place dancing, the dialogue all combined to make the worst movie I have ever seen. You wonder if the cast of actors agreed to make this movie because they needed money and Ram Gopal was paying a lot of money for the cast. The only non-paid actor, the ant, was the only resemblance to the first movie. Abishek's role was totally ridiculous, did he need money to pay for the wedding to Ash? Save your money, your mind and your time, don't bother with this movie or the DVD when that comes out. --------------------------------------------- Result 596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ... and yet, we were told, there was another hour and 20 minutes left to go.

Why, oh, why wasn't there an editor to tell the writer/director to snip, snip, snip? Apparently that writer/director has previously done shorts; as a short, this would have been okay. But the lack of dialogue starts to grate after twenty minutes. The lack of much music glares. The background noises (talking, traffic, and especially a ubiquitous helicopter) get old really fast. But the worst failure is in story. There is precious little beyond a short.

After an hour we saw variations of the same scene over and over again. I nearly screamed at the screen, "We get it, we get it!!!!!" It's amazing that after that left the theatre, we could drive home, watch the Daily Show and parts of the Colbert Report, get ready for bed,and know that the audience was STILL trapped in the theatre.

It's not enough to indulge your vision. You have to give the audience enough to share your vision. --------------------------------------------- Result 597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And thats about all that is. This thing is slow. The actors have ability, they just don't seem motivated to put forth the effort. The plot isn't that great and is hampered further by the aforementioned slowness of it all. The accents, when there are any, are British. Uh, lots of these folks are supposed to be Danes. OK, OK, accents aren't that important. But language is. I don't think they used words like "yeah" and "OK" in Beowulf's day. And that supposedly way cool weapon his king gave him? Did he ever reload that thing? Did he ever sight it in? Or was Beowulf just that bad an aim? Well, his aim did at least match the computer graphics used in generating the monsters. Those were rather off too. Bad special effects. Bright spot? Just one that I can think of. Marina Sirtis has held up well over the years. --------------------------------------------- Result 598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the most recent addition to a new wave of educational documentaries like "The Corporation" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." Its commentary is clear and unwavering as is the breathtaking cinematic style of this well crafted feature. The film manages to impose a powerful sense of how unsteady our world is as we rush toward an environmentally unsustainable future at lightning speed - while showing us the terrifying beauty in our pursuit of progress.

Truly a remarkable accomplishment which must be seen by all who care about the world we leave to our children. Bravo!

NB - this is also the only film (of 8) at Varsity theaters (Toronto) boasting a stick-on tag which reads... "To arrange group viewings please contact...." ... a further testament to the popularity and importance of this gem.

My bet... an academy award nomination for best documentary.

OB101 --------------------------------------------- Result 599 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "The [[Grudge]]" is a [[remake]] of Shimizu's own [[series]] of popular Japanese horror films. Shimizu knows he is not dealing with anything new, so he does what any [[intelligent]] person would have done in his place: he forgets logic and concentrates in giving viewers a fun ride. He uses commonly known [[clichés]] associated with ghost [[stories]] but Shimizu plays with these [[elements]] in an [[imaginative]] [[manner]]. The nonlinear [[narrative]] is not a [[mere]] [[gimmick]] but an interesting way to present sequences from [[different]] perspectives. At the [[end]], all I can [[say]] is that if the only purpose of a horror film is to scare the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a theater with an audience and it was fun to see viewers go wild over this one. It [[probably]] doesn't play as well in your [[living]] [[room]]. "The [[Dent]]" is a [[redo]] of Shimizu's own [[serials]] of popular Japanese horror films. Shimizu knows he is not dealing with anything new, so he does what any [[smarter]] person would have done in his place: he forgets logic and concentrates in giving viewers a fun ride. He uses commonly known [[cliché]] associated with ghost [[history]] but Shimizu plays with these [[ingredients]] in an [[creative]] [[method]]. The nonlinear [[narration]] is not a [[simple]] [[ruse]] but an interesting way to present sequences from [[dissimilar]] perspectives. At the [[termination]], all I can [[said]] is that if the only purpose of a horror film is to scare the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a theater with an audience and it was fun to see viewers go wild over this one. It [[indubitably]] doesn't play as well in your [[life]] [[chambre]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forget]] this strange and [[bleak]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one [[unconventional]] aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was [[unforgettable]]. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forgets]] this strange and [[morose]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one [[unorthodox]] aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was [[eventful]]. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) --------------------------------------------- Result 601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has lost her [[mother]] and [[finds]] it [[hard]] to communicate with her [[father]], until one day in the [[basement]] of her [[apartment]] she [[finds]] a [[secret]] [[magic]] [[elevator]] which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she meets two other [[children]] who have lost their father and [[face]] [[poverty]]...

I was clicking through the channels and [[found]] this..I read the synopsis and [[suddenly]] [[saw]] Elisha Cuthbert...I [[thought]] okay....and watched the [[movie]].. i didn't [[realise]] Elisha had [[done]] [[films]] before....'The [[Girl]] Next Door and 24' Elisha provides a satisfactory performance, the plot is a little cheesy but the film [[works]]...Its amazing how this young girl went on to become the Hottest babe in Hollywood! Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has lost her [[mummy]] and [[found]] it [[laborious]] to communicate with her [[pere]], until one day in the [[cellar]] of her [[apartments]] she [[deems]] a [[clandestine]] [[hallucinogenic]] [[shiloh]] which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she meets two other [[kiddies]] who have lost their father and [[encounter]] [[squalor]]...

I was clicking through the channels and [[uncovered]] this..I read the synopsis and [[abruptly]] [[watched]] Elisha Cuthbert...I [[ideas]] okay....and watched the [[kino]].. i didn't [[understand]] Elisha had [[accomplished]] [[cinematography]] before....'The [[Female]] Next Door and 24' Elisha provides a satisfactory performance, the plot is a little cheesy but the film [[collaborated]]...Its amazing how this young girl went on to become the Hottest babe in Hollywood! --------------------------------------------- Result 602 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very close and sharp discription of the bubbling and dynamic emotional world of specialy one 18year old guy, that makes his first experiences in his gay love to an other boy, during an vacation with a part of his family.

I liked this film because of his extremly clear and surrogated storytelling , with all this "Sound-close-ups" and quiet moments wich had been full of intensive moods.

--------------------------------------------- Result 603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This is a [[terrible]] [[movie]], [[terrible]] [[script]], bad [[direction]] and [[nonsensical]] ending. [[Also]], [[bad]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this [[movie]] was purgatory--you do it to unload enough bad movie [[karma]] to [[actually]] [[see]] a [[good]] one further down the line.

The [[movie]] [[presents]] a father and son who look like they couldn't [[every]] possibly have been [[related]]. The [[part]] of the male lead is not well [[written]] and [[seems]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[see]] the plot [[points]] a [[mile]] away. The [[actions]] of the [[female]] lead and that of her brother, the cop, [[also]] [[make]] no [[sense]]. [[So]], a [[major]] action on her part at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] makes no sense script-wise. This is a [[shocking]] [[filmmaking]], [[scary]] [[scripts]], bad [[directions]] and [[laughable]] ending. [[Moreover]], [[unfavourable]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this [[filmmaking]] was purgatory--you do it to unload enough bad movie [[mojo]] to [[indeed]] [[behold]] a [[alright]] one further down the line.

The [[film]] [[exposes]] a father and son who look like they couldn't [[all]] possibly have been [[pertaining]]. The [[portion]] of the male lead is not well [[wrote]] and [[appears]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[behold]] the plot [[dots]] a [[miles]] away. The [[action]] of the [[girl]] lead and that of her brother, the cop, [[additionally]] [[deliver]] no [[feeling]]. [[Thus]], a [[grandes]] action on her part at the [[ends]] of the [[filmmaking]] makes no sense script-wise. --------------------------------------------- Result 604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All the world said that the film Tashan would be a good movie with great pleasure, but this is not the case. Vijay Krishna Acharya made a serious mistake to take as an actress Kareena Kapoor. She was unbearable throughout the film. Her tom-boy look does not really goes well. Even the film the story of the film is not making sense at all. Everyone said that the Quetin Taratino of India is Vijay but its not at all Quetin. The talent Anil Kapoor was involved in this stupid movie. Anil is an actor of large caliber and this film is not. Akshay Kumar has also been a victim of this film as all is Saif. The Style and the Phoormola is not really good in this film i was disappointed --------------------------------------------- Result 605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] ANTWONE FISHER is the [[story]] of a young [[emotionally]] [[troubled]] U.S. [[Navy]] [[seaman]]. [[His]] [[problems]] lead him to [[Jerome]] Davenport, a [[psychiatrist]] who [[helps]] him [[realize]] that his [[troubles]] stem from his [[childhood]] upbringing.

[[Get]] ready to shed a [[tear]] or two. The [[movie]] [[could]] [[thaw]] the [[coldest]] [[heart]]. I [[loved]] the story, which turns from [[something]] so very awful to [[happen]] to [[anyone]] into a [[positive]] [[ending]]. ANTWONE FISHER is a [[powerful]] movie, most importantly about [[forgiveness]]. Other [[important]] issues that [[get]] you [[thinking]] are child abuse, adoption, and [[foster]] care.

Oscar [[winner]], Denzel Washington does an [[impressive]] [[job]] in his directorial debut. There were [[many]] scenes which I enjoyed watching. They [[included]] the [[beginning]] ([[dreams]] of a [[little]] [[boy]] – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending ([[dreams]] turned into reality), which [[beautifully]] [[tied]] the story together.

Another [[wonderful]] scene [[occurred]] when the [[doctor]] [[encouraged]] Antwone to search for his family to [[find]] [[answers]] to his questions about his [[family]] that [[abandoned]] him.

My [[favorite]] scene [[happened]] when the young [[man]] finally [[confronted]] his [[mother]] and her [[reaction]] [[towards]] him. [[Priceless]].

All the [[actors]] [[represented]] their parts well.

[[In]] addition to directorial [[responsibilities]], [[Mr]]. Washington [[continues]] to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting [[roles]]. He had a strong [[presence]] in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke [[demonstrated]] why he was so right for the [[part]] of Antwone [[Fisher]]. He portrayed very [[real]] and heart-tugging [[work]].

[[Joy]] Bryant who played the [[part]] of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The [[chemistry]] [[flowed]] well between the romantic [[characters]].

Novella Nelson who [[played]] the [[part]] of [[Mrs]]. Tate, a [[despicable]] [[character]], deserves [[special]] mention.

[[Although]] we only [[see]] her for a few minutes, the actress who [[played]] Fisher's [[mother]] [[gave]] an [[outstanding]] performance.

[[Everyone]] should see ANTWONE [[FISHER]]. ANTWONE FISHER is the [[storytelling]] of a young [[excitedly]] [[tumultuous]] U.S. [[Marina]] [[marine]]. [[Her]] [[hassles]] lead him to [[Dominguez]] Davenport, a [[psychologist]] who [[assists]] him [[realizing]] that his [[disorders]] stem from his [[infantile]] upbringing.

[[Got]] ready to shed a [[tears]] or two. The [[cinematic]] [[wo]] [[thawing]] the [[coolest]] [[nub]]. I [[enjoyed]] the story, which turns from [[anything]] so very awful to [[arise]] to [[nobody]] into a [[supportive]] [[terminated]]. ANTWONE FISHER is a [[influential]] movie, most importantly about [[amnesty]]. Other [[sizeable]] issues that [[got]] you [[thought]] are child abuse, adoption, and [[promote]] care.

Oscar [[winners]], Denzel Washington does an [[awesome]] [[jobs]] in his directorial debut. There were [[innumerable]] scenes which I enjoyed watching. They [[inscribed]] the [[launching]] ([[dreaming]] of a [[tiny]] [[guy]] – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending ([[dreaming]] turned into reality), which [[amazingly]] [[associated]] the story together.

Another [[wondrous]] scene [[occured]] when the [[doctors]] [[encourages]] Antwone to search for his family to [[found]] [[reactions]] to his questions about his [[families]] that [[waived]] him.

My [[favored]] scene [[sweated]] when the young [[males]] finally [[matched]] his [[ammi]] and her [[responses]] [[into]] him. [[Inestimable]].

All the [[actresses]] [[constituted]] their parts well.

[[During]] addition to directorial [[liability]], [[Mister]]. Washington [[continual]] to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting [[duties]]. He had a strong [[involvements]] in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke [[protested]] why he was so right for the [[portion]] of Antwone [[Fishermen]]. He portrayed very [[genuine]] and heart-tugging [[collaborate]].

[[Jubilation]] Bryant who played the [[parte]] of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The [[chemist]] [[rushed]] well between the romantic [[character]].

Novella Nelson who [[accomplished]] the [[parte]] of [[Margot]]. Tate, a [[loathsome]] [[characters]], deserves [[particular]] mention.

[[Though]] we only [[consults]] her for a few minutes, the actress who [[done]] Fisher's [[mummy]] [[given]] an [[unresolved]] performance.

[[Someone]] should see ANTWONE [[FISHERMEN]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the [[unity]] of two heroes from two [[great]] seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite [[bad]]. The [[great]] one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The [[bad]] one is [[truly]] [[bad]], in fact it's the [[worst]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark [[Hamill]], [[aka]] "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a [[kid]] who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a [[whole]] [[lot]] of adventures, [[eventually]] [[recovers]] it. (Since he's into fixing cars I [[guess]] you can [[call]] him "Lube [[Skywalker]]"). Along the [[way]] he [[meets]] a [[hooker]] with a heart of gold, and ends up [[facing]] off with a [[character]] [[played]] by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult [[film]] "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at [[earlier]], the worst sci-fi [[film]] ever [[made]]. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also [[must]] say that this is one of the best/[[worst]] movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this [[muddled]] gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the [[cohesion]] of two heroes from two [[super]] seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite [[negative]]. The [[prodigious]] one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The [[unfavorable]] one is [[really]] [[unfavourable]], in fact it's the [[meanest]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark [[Hummel]], [[alias]] "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a [[child]] who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a [[ensemble]] [[batch]] of adventures, [[lastly]] [[regains]] it. (Since he's into fixing cars I [[guessing]] you can [[calling]] him "Lube [[Anakin]]"). Along the [[routes]] he [[conforms]] a [[prostitute]] with a heart of gold, and ends up [[confronting]] off with a [[trait]] [[accomplished]] by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult [[cinematography]] "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at [[prior]], the worst sci-fi [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also [[should]] say that this is one of the best/[[meanest]] movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this [[disconcerted]] gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. --------------------------------------------- Result 607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] I saw this movie in 1976, my [[first]] year of living in New [[York]]. I went on to [[live]] there for the next 26 [[years]],but never saw anything as [[delicate]] and beautiful again as this small [[TV]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[forgotten]] it.

There are no [[sex]] scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[moving]], [[extraordinarily]] [[touching]] [[moments]] [[full]] of [[tension]] and excitement, all set [[within]] a conservative, Boston (I [[think]]), [[World]] War 1 [[environment]] where [[women]] played the role of [[devoted]] [[wife]] [[awaiting]] the [[return]] of husband from the war, and did not [[seek]] out a [[career]] and financial [[independence]]. [[Frances]] Lee McCain is [[superb]] in the role of [[career]] photographer and I have [[spent]] the next 30 [[odd]] years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no [[avail]].

There has to be a [[video]] of this [[movie]]? [[Sure]] it should be on DVD but [[surely]] at [[least]] a [[video]]? I saw this movie in 1976, my [[fiirst]] year of living in New [[Yorke]]. I went on to [[vive]] there for the next 26 [[yrs]],but never saw anything as [[fragile]] and beautiful again as this small [[TELEVISION]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[omitted]] it.

There are no [[sexuality]] scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[shifting]], [[impossibly]] [[affects]] [[times]] [[fullest]] of [[tensions]] and excitement, all set [[inside]] a conservative, Boston (I [[thoughts]]), [[Monde]] War 1 [[surroundings]] where [[female]] played the role of [[dedicated]] [[women]] [[awaited]] the [[returnee]] of husband from the war, and did not [[seeks]] out a [[quarries]] and financial [[autonomy]]. [[Francis]] Lee McCain is [[stunning]] in the role of [[quarry]] photographer and I have [[expenditures]] the next 30 [[freaky]] years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no [[success]].

There has to be a [[videotaping]] of this [[cinematography]]? [[Persuaded]] it should be on DVD but [[unquestionably]] at [[fewer]] a [[videotaped]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[yet]] [[falls]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as [[suspense]]. There have been other attempts to [[make]] an [[engaging]] [[film]] about [[computers]], such as [[Hackers]] and The Net. They all [[fall]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust [[seem]] to be nearly [[identical]]. These [[movie]] endings suffer from one [[huge]] [[error]] in perception: People in the [[PC]] [[business]] having this over-indulgent self ego that [[assumes]] the [[general]] population lives it's [[life]] [[waiting]] to [[hear]] the [[latest]] news about PC's and software. I have [[worked]] for [[many]] [[companies]] and [[industries]], and they all [[seem]] to [[suffer]] from an expanded [[view]] of their own self-importance, as does this [[film]].

The way they introduced plot lines was [[pathetic]]. [[Showing]] Milo, who is deathly [[allergic]] to Sesame [[Seeds]], [[almost]] ingest one from a [[restaurant]] breadbasket [[crossed]] the line of [[stupidity]]. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure [[death]]. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as [[long]] as he did, [[braving]] the [[perils]] of [[Big]] Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and [[Big]] Mac buns.

Antitrust [[also]] doesn't provide much [[suspense]]. The patterned and predictable plot twists are [[easily]] [[figured]] out long before they are [[revealed]] (come on, was [[anyone]] REALLY [[stunned]] when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), [[thereby]] destroying any real [[shock]] [[value]]. And here again we have [[yet]] another [[film]]/[[story]] where at the [[end]], the bad guys are chasing the [[good]] [[guys]] to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple [[Simon]] plot line for about 20 [[years]]. [[Still]], I [[pressed]] on. [[Maybe]] the [[ending]] would be the payoff, but no. The completely [[ridiculous]] ending where we have the [[head]] of [[company]] [[security]], another [[supposed]] evil guy, turn around and be the [[good]] [[guy]] that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was [[laughable]]. And of course, the news [[coverage]] of the arrest of Gary Winston is more [[fevered]] than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim [[Robbins]], is a cardboard [[cutout]] of the same character [[Robbins]] [[played]] in Arlington [[Road]]. But that [[fits]] perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the [[years]] to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF [[channel]]. Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[nonetheless]] [[autumn]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as [[sufferance]]. There have been other attempts to [[deliver]] an [[participate]] [[movie]] about [[machines]], such as [[Infiltrators]] and The Net. They all [[decrease]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust [[seems]] to be nearly [[same]]. These [[movies]] endings suffer from one [[prodigious]] [[mistaken]] in perception: People in the [[PCS]] [[corporations]] having this over-indulgent self ego that [[implies]] the [[overall]] population lives it's [[vida]] [[expecting]] to [[overheard]] the [[latter]] news about PC's and software. I have [[working]] for [[various]] [[business]] and [[industry]], and they all [[appears]] to [[suffering]] from an expanded [[viewing]] of their own self-importance, as does this [[films]].

The way they introduced plot lines was [[regrettable]]. [[Shows]] Milo, who is deathly [[allergy]] to Sesame [[Seed]], [[approximately]] ingest one from a [[diner]] breadbasket [[cross]] the line of [[craziness]]. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure [[killings]]. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as [[longer]] as he did, [[defying]] the [[menaces]] of [[Overwhelming]] Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and [[Grand]] Mac buns.

Antitrust [[apart]] doesn't provide much [[sufferance]]. The patterned and predictable plot twists are [[comfortably]] [[imagined]] out long before they are [[proved]] (come on, was [[everyone]] REALLY [[amazed]] when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), [[so]] destroying any real [[shocks]] [[values]]. And here again we have [[still]] another [[filmmaking]]/[[history]] where at the [[terminate]], the bad guys are chasing the [[alright]] [[guy]] to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple [[Simeon]] plot line for about 20 [[ages]]. [[However]], I [[pressured]] on. [[Potentially]] the [[ended]] would be the payoff, but no. The completely [[farcical]] ending where we have the [[leader]] of [[firms]] [[insurance]], another [[suspected]] evil guy, turn around and be the [[alright]] [[buddy]] that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was [[ridiculous]]. And of course, the news [[hedging]] of the arrest of Gary Winston is more [[frenetic]] than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim [[Robins]], is a cardboard [[cutback]] of the same character [[Robins]] [[accomplished]] in Arlington [[Chemin]]. But that [[adjusts]] perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the [[ages]] to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF [[canal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I guess you have to give some points for the sheer courage of writing a musical around a history lesson but how about some decent music?

Is the cartoonish acting of Howard DeSilva meant to pique the interest of otherwise jaded children?

Is William Daniels' campy contemporary (for the time) acting style meant to appeal to a 1960s/70s demographic?

Do we need all the "in-jokes" about NY & NJ? (I can hear the blue-haired Broadway audience guffawing on cue.)

Sorry, I find the whole piece dated, boring & the acting far too strident for the screen --------------------------------------------- Result 610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is the [[best]] series of its [[type]] I've [[seen]] all [[year]]. I can't [[help]] thinking it's just my [[luck]] - a series I [[love]] [[gets]] 6 [[episodes]] (and more [[next]] [[year]]) and the [[constant]] [[stream]] of cookie-cutter cop [[shows]] get never [[ending]] [[episodes]].

I [[think]] the reasons New [[Tricks]] [[succeeds]] are [[many]]. The [[scripts]] are good, and the [[mix]] of characters [[superb]], The acting is top [[flight]], and the [[blend]] of comedy and [[drama]] [[works]] a [[treat]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[reason]] I watch [[shows]] like this one.

The theme song is a [[favourite]], and we were [[disappointed]] to find it isn't [[available]] in any [[published]] [[edition]]. [[Great]] stuff, BBC- a [[triumph]] of [[sense]] over sex-appeal ([[aside]] from the young [[constable]] nobody's there as eye-lolly, and [[even]] if he IS, he can [[still]] act!). This is the [[bestest]] series of its [[genera]] I've [[watched]] all [[annum]]. I can't [[support]] thinking it's just my [[chances]] - a series I [[amour]] [[receives]] 6 [[bouts]] (and more [[impending]] [[annum]]) and the [[continual]] [[streams]] of cookie-cutter cop [[exhibited]] get never [[end]] [[bouts]].

I [[thoughts]] the reasons New [[Gimmicks]] [[succeeding]] are [[various]]. The [[script]] are good, and the [[mixing]] of characters [[wondrous]], The acting is top [[flights]], and the [[mixing]] of comedy and [[theater]] [[worked]] a [[deal]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[motive]] I watch [[demonstrate]] like this one.

The theme song is a [[favorite]], and we were [[disillusioned]] to find it isn't [[approachable]] in any [[publicized]] [[editing]]. [[Huge]] stuff, BBC- a [[clockwork]] of [[feeling]] over sex-appeal ([[sideways]] from the young [[constabulary]] nobody's there as eye-lolly, and [[yet]] if he IS, he can [[yet]] act!). --------------------------------------------- Result 611 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Some of the [[best]] [[movies]] that are [[categorized]] as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and [[drama]]. "The [[Graduate]]" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are [[perfect]] examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or [[dramas]] with a lot of humor? [[In]] many respects, "The [[Odd]] [[Couple]]" falls into this same [[category]] of being both comedy [[yet]] [[highly]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human [[nature]]. Much of what [[happens]] may be funny to the [[audience]] but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV [[show]] of the 1970's, the original "[[Odd]] [[Couple]]" is not [[merely]] about a neat [[guy]] and [[messy]] [[guy]] who are [[forced]] to [[live]] [[together]] because of their [[marital]] situation. It's [[really]] about two opposites who [[must]] [[face]] why their [[marriages]] [[fell]] apart and how their [[detrimental]] idiosyncrasies [[reveal]] themselves outside of their [[marriage]]. Neatness, the [[characteristic]] of [[Felix]] Ungar ([[Jack]] [[Lemon]] [[perfectly]] [[cast]]) and messiness, the [[characteristic]] of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than [[simply]] neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned [[probably]] when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. Some of the [[better]] [[kino]] that are [[sorted]] as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and [[dramas]]. "The [[Graduating]]" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are [[faultless]] examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or [[opera]] with a lot of humor? [[For]] many respects, "The [[Nosy]] [[Couples]]" falls into this same [[classes]] of being both comedy [[again]] [[heavily]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human [[trait]]. Much of what [[occurs]] may be funny to the [[viewers]] but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV [[showing]] of the 1970's, the original "[[Weird]] [[Matches]]" is not [[only]] about a neat [[buddy]] and [[chaotic]] [[buddy]] who are [[coerced]] to [[inhabit]] [[jointly]] because of their [[matrimonial]] situation. It's [[genuinely]] about two opposites who [[needs]] [[facing]] why their [[wedding]] [[drop]] apart and how their [[adverse]] idiosyncrasies [[uncover]] themselves outside of their [[wedding]]. Neatness, the [[features]] of [[Rodriguez]] Ungar ([[Jacques]] [[Citrus]] [[abundantly]] [[casting]]) and messiness, the [[traits]] of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than [[exclusively]] neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned [[undeniably]] when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. --------------------------------------------- Result 612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a [[crappy]] movie. To put it [[bluntly]], it's as if a [[dung]] monster defecated, ate the [[result]], and then [[vomited]]. The [[final]] product [[would]] still outshine this [[movie]].

[[Seemingly]] based on an [[ancient]] (!) Atari video [[game]], the [[movie]] has something or other to do with a [[portal]] to the [[bowels]] of the [[earth]], the unleashing of [[demons]], and [[ancient]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization [[opened]] the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, conveniently enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty convoluted and [[incomprehensible]]. [[In]] similar [[movies]], one might [[see]] the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are [[mentally]] with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much [[fun]].

The acting is [[dreadful]], save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a [[shit]] movie. To put it [[openly]], it's as if a [[manure]] monster defecated, ate the [[resulting]], and then [[puked]]. The [[latter]] product [[could]] still outshine this [[filmmaking]].

[[Ostensibly]] based on an [[antigua]] (!) Atari video [[games]], the [[filmmaking]] has something or other to do with a [[portals]] to the [[entrails]] of the [[tierra]], the unleashing of [[minions]], and [[immemorial]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization [[open]] the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, conveniently enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty convoluted and [[unimaginable]]. [[Among]] similar [[movie]], one might [[behold]] the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are [[psychologically]] with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much [[droll]].

The acting is [[scary]], save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. --------------------------------------------- Result 613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[CRY]] FREEDOM is an [[excellent]] primer for those wanting an overview of apartheid's [[cruelty]] in just a [[couple]] of hours. [[Famed]] director Richard Attenborough (GANDHI) is [[certainly]] no stranger to the genre, and the [[collaboration]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Mrs]]. [[Woods]], the [[main]] white [[characters]] in their [[book]] and in this [[film]], lends further authenticity to [[CRY]] FREEDOM. The video now in release actually runs a [[little]] over 2 and a half hours since 23 minutes of extra footage was inserted to make it a two [[part]] TV miniseries after the film's [[initial]] theatrical release. [[While]] the added [[length]] serves to [[heighten]] the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible [[flaw]] (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the [[African]] ones) may [[work]] out as a [[strength]]. Viewing [[CRYING]] [[FREEDOM]] as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger [[generation]] may now need to see it on film for full impact. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, hopefully driving them to change. Now twelve [[years]] after the movie's production, [[CRY]] FREEDOM is in [[many]] [[ways]] a more interesting film to watch. [[Almost]] ten [[years]] after [[black]] majority [[rule]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It [[therefore]] remains as [[imperative]] as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only [[heard]] of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In [[total]] contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, coloured, Indian or Black!). And yes I did miss another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also highly [[recommended]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney Poitier, who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. [[WEPT]] FREEDOM is an [[wondrous]] primer for those wanting an overview of apartheid's [[savagery]] in just a [[pair]] of hours. [[Commemorated]] director Richard Attenborough (GANDHI) is [[obviously]] no stranger to the genre, and the [[works]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Dagmar]]. [[Lumber]], the [[principal]] white [[characteristic]] in their [[cookbook]] and in this [[kino]], lends further authenticity to [[WEEP]] FREEDOM. The video now in release actually runs a [[small]] over 2 and a half hours since 23 minutes of extra footage was inserted to make it a two [[parties]] TV miniseries after the film's [[original]] theatrical release. [[Despite]] the added [[duration]] serves to [[intensify]] the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible [[failure]] (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the [[Africans]] ones) may [[working]] out as a [[kraft]]. Viewing [[MOURNING]] [[LIBERTY]] as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger [[jill]] may now need to see it on film for full impact. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, hopefully driving them to change. Now twelve [[olds]] after the movie's production, [[WEEPING]] FREEDOM is in [[countless]] [[shapes]] a more interesting film to watch. [[Near]] ten [[olds]] after [[negro]] majority [[regulations]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It [[consequently]] remains as [[necessary]] as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only [[listened]] of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In [[entire]] contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, coloured, Indian or Black!). And yes I did miss another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also highly [[recommend]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney Poitier, who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. --------------------------------------------- Result 614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this [[movie]] as a [[child]] and it broke my heart! [[No]] other story had such a unfinished ending... I grew up on [[many]] [[great]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so unusual - a [[story]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and choices that can't be undone, and the need for others. Chirin is [[made]] [[alone]] when the [[Wolf]] [[kills]] his [[mother]], but the [[Wolf]] is alone, too, when Chirin follows him into the [[mountain]]. The [[Wolf]] doesn't [[kill]] the [[lamb]], even though each [[night]] he [[says]] "[[maybe]] I'll eat you tomorrow." The [[tape]] of it I have is [[broken]] and degraded from age and [[use]]. I will [[repair]] it and watch the [[movie]] again [[someday]] and [[cry]] just as [[hard]] as I did as a [[child]]. [[Stories]] like this, with this depth and [[feeling]], and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[rare]]. It is a [[sad]] [[story]], but I've never [[encountered]] any catharsis more [[beautifully]] [[made]]. I am [[glad]] I have [[seen]] this [[movie]], and I'm glad I [[saw]] it as a [[child]]. I saw this [[movies]] as a [[kiddies]] and it broke my heart! [[Nos]] other story had such a unfinished ending... I grew up on [[several]] [[terrific]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so unusual - a [[stories]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and choices that can't be undone, and the need for others. Chirin is [[accomplished]] [[exclusively]] when the [[Wulf]] [[assassinate]] his [[mom]], but the [[Wolves]] is alone, too, when Chirin follows him into the [[mountainside]]. The [[Wulf]] doesn't [[assassinate]] the [[mouton]], even though each [[overnight]] he [[said]] "[[probably]] I'll eat you tomorrow." The [[taping]] of it I have is [[broke]] and degraded from age and [[utilizing]]. I will [[remedy]] it and watch the [[kino]] again [[sometime]] and [[crying]] just as [[stiff]] as I did as a [[kid]]. [[Storytelling]] like this, with this depth and [[impression]], and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[scarce]]. It is a [[unlucky]] [[tale]], but I've never [[confronted]] any catharsis more [[wonderfully]] [[introduced]]. I am [[happy]] I have [[noticed]] this [[kino]], and I'm glad I [[noticed]] it as a [[kiddies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have loved this movie since I first saw it in 1979. I'm still amazed at how accurately Kurt Russell portrays Elvis, right down to how he moves and the expressions on his face. Sometimes its scary how much he looks, acts, and talks like the real Elvis. Thankfully this is being released on DVD, so all of us that have been waiting can finally have an excellent quality version of the full length film. I have heard the detractors, who say that there are some inaccuracies, or some things left out, but I think that keeping in mind that John Carpenter only had about 2 1/2 hours to work with, and that this was being shown on television (just two years after Elvis's death!) that he did a fine job with this. In fact I haven't seen another Elvis movie that even comes close to this one. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There were good performances by Robin Williams and others but the movie was dull overall and very disappointing compared to the positive reviews.

I thought Sy might become a serial killer who bores people to death: a forlorn guy in ugly clothes trails his victims around food courts, quoting Oprah and reciting his medical history until they beg him to shoot them.

I think the movie mostly appeals to egomaniacs who think strangers are interested in their photos. I expect most retail workers want a break from the customers. --------------------------------------------- Result 617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Film]] [[starts]] in 1840 Japan in which a [[man]] slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequence]]. Then it jumps to present day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted ([[Edward]] Albert), wife Laura ([[Susan]] [[George]]) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the [[house]] where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the makeup is hysterically bad) and make life [[hell]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's really [[hopeless]]. There's a bloody [[opening]] and ending and [[NOTHING]] happens in between. There is an [[attack]] by [[giant]] [[crabs]] which is just uproarious! They look so fake--I swear I [[saw]] the [[strings]] [[pulling]] one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex [[sequence]] in the first 20 minutes ([[probably]] just to show off George's [[body]]), another one about 40 minutes [[later]] (but that was [[necessary]] to the plot) and a [[really]] [[silly]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between [[Albert]] and Doug McClure must be [[seen]] to be [[believed]].

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was [[pretty]] good as a family [[friend]]. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[lousy]] film. She [[gives]] this film a [[much]] [[needed]] lift--but can't [[save]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory [[opening]] and [[closing]]. That [[aside]], this is a very [[boring]] [[film]]. [[Flick]] [[startup]] in 1840 Japan in which a [[bloke]] slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequences]]. Then it jumps to present day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted ([[Edouard]] Albert), wife Laura ([[Suzanne]] [[Georges]]) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the [[maison]] where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the makeup is hysterically bad) and make life [[inferno]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's really [[incorrigible]]. There's a bloody [[introductory]] and ending and [[NONE]] happens in between. There is an [[attacks]] by [[colossal]] [[shrimp]] which is just uproarious! They look so fake--I swear I [[witnessed]] the [[ropes]] [[pulls]] one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex [[sequences]] in the first 20 minutes ([[certainly]] just to show off George's [[agency]]), another one about 40 minutes [[afterward]] (but that was [[imperative]] to the plot) and a [[genuinely]] [[beast]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between [[Alberto]] and Doug McClure must be [[noticed]] to be [[felt]].

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was [[belle]] good as a family [[boyfriend]]. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[pathetic]] film. She [[delivers]] this film a [[very]] [[needs]] lift--but can't [[economize]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory [[introductory]] and [[closure]]. That [[sideways]], this is a very [[dull]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 618 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the last great musicals of the 60s. I was 7 years old the first time I saw this movie, and it's always been a favorite since then. The musical numbers are all memorable. In the 60s the people who were cast in musicals actually had musical talent (unlike a CERTAIN Academy Award nominated current musical based in a large midwestern city). All of the main roles were beautifully cast...Ron Moody shines as Fagin, as does Shani Wallis as Nancy. Oliver Reed was a menacing Bill Sikes (who thankfully has no musical numbers, lol), and Mark Lester as Oliver and Jack Wild as the Dodger were great too. Mark Lester comes across as an innocent waif, which was what Dickens intended when he wrote the book! Then, of course there are the dozens of dancers who perform in "consider yourself," "I'd Do Anything" "Who Will Buy" and "be Back Soon," many who were children! This is a great show for the whole family. --------------------------------------------- Result 619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] the [[writing]] of the [[journalists]] and the [[required]] over [[eager]] reckless press officer and [[sobbing]] [[grandma]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I [[cant]] blame the [[actors]], but [[surely]] [[someone]] must have [[said]] "are you [[joking]] I [[cant]] [[say]] this!"

This episode had a [[press]] [[perspective]] and [[police]] perspective, while the [[police]] perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly [[unbelievable]].

I [[notice]] that this was an HBO co production, if so then [[perhaps]] the [[sledgehammer]] stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was [[completely]] [[cringing]] during the [[press]] [[conference]] scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely [[ring]] [[true]]. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am [[still]] [[waiting]] for the [[suspense]].

Skip [[Five]] Daysthis. the 2008/9 [[production]] with these characters is far [[better]] and more suspenseful even if the [[crime]] is over the [[top]].

This [[story]] had unforgivable moments which can only be described as [[staggeringly]] [[unbelievable]].

[[For]] a press [[officer]] to [[start]] a press conference without an investigating officer present to [[take]] press [[questions]].

so unbelievable it [[felt]] like amateur [[hour]].

I then [[began]] [[looking]] for Journalists [[called]] "[[Scoop]]" and for Perry [[White]] to make an appearance.

I [[saw]] the 2009 [[Hunter]] before "five days"[[made]] it to [[Australia]], not realizing it was a prequel and was [[looking]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[around]] again.

Head shakingly [[awful]]. the [[writes]] of the [[correspondents]] and the [[obliged]] over [[avid]] reckless press officer and [[crying]] [[gran]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I [[thats]] blame the [[players]], but [[arguably]] [[everybody]] must have [[told]] "are you [[giggle]] I [[didnt]] [[told]] this!"

This episode had a [[pressing]] [[viewpoint]] and [[cops]] perspective, while the [[cops]] perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly [[fabulous]].

I [[notices]] that this was an HBO co production, if so then [[maybe]] the [[harness]] stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was [[absolutely]] [[wincing]] during the [[journalism]] [[conferences]] scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely [[ringing]] [[real]]. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am [[nevertheless]] [[suspense]] for the [[wait]].

Skip [[Fifth]] Daysthis. the 2008/9 [[productivity]] with these characters is far [[optimum]] and more suspenseful even if the [[felony]] is over the [[topped]].

This [[storytelling]] had unforgivable moments which can only be described as [[splendidly]] [[awesome]].

[[At]] a press [[officers]] to [[started]] a press conference without an investigating officer present to [[taking]] press [[issues]].

so unbelievable it [[believed]] like amateur [[hours]].

I then [[launching]] [[researching]] for Journalists [[termed]] "[[Spoon]]" and for Perry [[Blanca]] to make an appearance.

I [[sawthe]] the 2009 [[Hunting]] before "five days"[[introduced]] it to [[Australian]], not realizing it was a prequel and was [[researching]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[almost]] again.

Head shakingly [[frightful]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie the other day in a film school class, and I hadn't seen an Almodovar movie before but went in expecting it to be good. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a pointless film with only a couple of laughs mixed in with two hours of sheer boredom. High Heels is just a collection of random scenes that might have worked in their own separate movies but together don't add up to any kind of meaningful whole at all.

Or so I thought. Then, the next day, my film professor spent the entire class period explaining all of the movie's hidden little details, like how the mural depicting stereotypical flamenco dancers in the background of the drag queen scene is some kind of commentary on the lack of identity that Spain as a nation has developed under fascist rule. Apparently, the whole movie is chock full of clever little visual tricks and references like this.

Great, but you know what? It's still a bad movie. It takes more than depth and complexity to make a good film--you still need to give the audience a reason to keep paying attention, something to interest the viewer enough to actually care about all the subtle tricks. High Heels gives us strange, off-beat characters but keeps them in mostly mundane situations recycled from other movies, and Almodovar doesn't seem to be using them to make any kind of point. What is the significance, for example, of the Hitchcockian surprise character revelation that occurs towards the end of the film? Why is that even in there? Just to surprise us?

There is one funny scene that has to do with a news broadcast. And that's it, that's the only entertaining moment. The rest of the movie is just nonsensical filmic references and visual cues that apparently exist only for the sake of showing us how smart Pedro Almodovar is. But no matter what my film professor says, it takes more than self-indulgent trickery for a movie to be good. --------------------------------------------- Result 621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I gotta [[say]], Clive Barker's Undying is by far the [[best]] [[horror]] [[game]] to have ever been made. I've [[played]] Resident Evil, Silent Hill and the Evil Dead and Castlevania [[games]] but none of them have [[captured]] the [[pure]] glee with which this [[game]] tackles its [[horrific]] [[elements]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[world]], and it shows as his hand is clearly everywhere in this game. Heck, even his voice is in the game as one of the main characters. Full of lush visuals and enough atmosphere to [[shake]] a stick at, Undying is the game to [[beat]] in my books as the [[best]] [[horror]] title. I just wish that this had [[made]] it to a [[console]] system but alas [[poor]] [[PC]] [[sales]] nipped that one in the bud. I gotta [[said]], Clive Barker's Undying is by far the [[better]] [[abomination]] [[jeu]] to have ever been made. I've [[served]] Resident Evil, Silent Hill and the Evil Dead and Castlevania [[jeux]] but none of them have [[catch]] the [[pur]] glee with which this [[gaming]] tackles its [[odious]] [[ingredients]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[monde]], and it shows as his hand is clearly everywhere in this game. Heck, even his voice is in the game as one of the main characters. Full of lush visuals and enough atmosphere to [[shaking]] a stick at, Undying is the game to [[defeat]] in my books as the [[better]] [[abomination]] title. I just wish that this had [[effected]] it to a [[consoles]] system but alas [[pauper]] [[PCS]] [[sale]] nipped that one in the bud. --------------------------------------------- Result 622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I would never have thought I would almost cry viewing one minute excerpted from a 1920 black and white movie without sound. Thanks to Martin Scorsese I did (the movie was from F. Borzage). You will start to understand (if it's not already the case), what makes a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I knew about this as a [[similar]] programme as [[Jackass]], and I [[saw]] one or two [[episodes]] on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British [[bloke]] were [[brought]] [[together]] by [[love]] of skateboarding, and a [[complete]] [[disregard]]/masochistic [[pleasure]] to [[harm]] themselves and their [[health]] and safety. They have had puking, [[eating]] pubes-covered pizza, [[jumping]] in [[stinging]] nettles, naked [[paint]] balling, jokes on the smaller [[guy]] while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.[[g]]. army, [[cowboys]], and [[many]] more [[insane]] stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. [[Starring]] Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical [[stuff]] and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho ([[Mike]] [[Locke]]) who does a [[lot]], but is more popular for being [[short]], [[fat]] and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Greatest]] [[Funny]] [[Moments]]. [[Very]] good! I knew about this as a [[identical]] programme as [[Asshole]], and I [[noticed]] one or two [[bouts]] on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British [[guys]] were [[tabled]] [[jointly]] by [[loves]] of skateboarding, and a [[finish]] [[defiance]]/masochistic [[gladness]] to [[damage]] themselves and their [[gesundheit]] and safety. They have had puking, [[feeding]] pubes-covered pizza, [[hopping]] in [[damning]] nettles, naked [[paintings]] balling, jokes on the smaller [[guys]] while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.[[grams]]. army, [[buccaneers]], and [[various]] more [[demented]] stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. [[Featuring]] Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical [[thing]] and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho ([[Mich]] [[Luc]]) who does a [[batches]], but is more popular for being [[succinct]], [[blubber]] and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Larger]] [[Amusing]] [[Times]]. [[Quite]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a disappointment! Piper Perabo is adorable, Tyra Banks is beautiful but pitiful as an actor and the talented and beautiful Maria Bello is wasted! Bello must have been embarrassed by some of the lines! The plot, script and premise is a joke!

I'm not against silly movies, I think that Something About Mary is a masterpiece, but Coyote Ugly is a waste of 90 minutes........ --------------------------------------------- Result 625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply [[stick]] to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, [[came]] the two killer blows - plot and sentiment. Who really [[cared]] what happened to the [[tiger]] or whether Eddie [[Murphy]] made up with his [[daughter]]? Not me, that's for [[sure]]. Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply [[wand]] to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, [[became]] the two killer blows - plot and sentiment. Who really [[adored]] what happened to the [[tigre]] or whether Eddie [[Murph]] made up with his [[girlie]]? Not me, that's for [[persuaded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was [[going]] to [[give]] it an 8, but [[since]] you people [[made]] 6.5 out of a [[lot]] better [[votes]], I had to up my [[contribution]]. The river Styx was [[pure]] [[genius]]. Sure, Woody was his [[perennial]] stuff, but at least his role was [[appropriate]]. The first half hour was [[really]] [[hilarious]], and then the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] was [[easy]] to watch. The [[dialog]] was [[clever]] enough, and Woody's card [[tricks]] at the [[parties]], along with the [[reaction]] from the [[upper]] [[crust]], were [[fun]] to watch. This was much better than the [[newspaper]] [[critics]] [[made]] it sound out to be. And a plus, a [[little]] Sorcerer's [[Apprentice]] to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that [[Johansen]] is getting a bit frumpy? Charles [[Dance]] is [[always]] entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. I was [[go]] to [[lend]] it an 8, but [[because]] you people [[brought]] 6.5 out of a [[batches]] better [[voting]], I had to up my [[contributions]]. The river Styx was [[pur]] [[prodigy]]. Sure, Woody was his [[permanent]] stuff, but at least his role was [[suitable]]. The first half hour was [[truthfully]] [[amusing]], and then the [[repose]] of the [[film]] was [[effortless]] to watch. The [[dialogues]] was [[smarter]] enough, and Woody's card [[gimmicks]] at the [[party]], along with the [[answers]] from the [[superior]] [[rind]], were [[funny]] to watch. This was much better than the [[newsprint]] [[detractors]] [[brought]] it sound out to be. And a plus, a [[tiny]] Sorcerer's [[Intern]] to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that [[Johanson]] is getting a bit frumpy? Charles [[Dancing]] is [[repeatedly]] entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. Unfortunately, these [[poor]] [[men]] were forced to [[carry]] a pretty [[dumb]] movie. I [[liked]] the [[idea]] that Dracula is [[actually]] a [[reincarnation]] of [[Judas]] Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things [[Christian]], but there was so much camp that this [[idea]] was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to [[pay]] his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remind]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special [[features]] on the DVD more than the movie itself. I [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]] for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. Unfortunately, these [[poorest]] [[mens]] were forced to [[bears]] a pretty [[witless]] movie. I [[loved]] the [[thought]] that Dracula is [[genuinely]] a [[redemption]] of [[Yehuda]] Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things [[Kristen]], but there was so much camp that this [[ideals]] was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to [[paying]] his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remember]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special [[featuring]] on the DVD more than the movie itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man the ending of this film is so terribly unwatchable and dated that my entire film aesthetics class laughed like crazy. Now most of the rest of the film was okay. It had a few unintentionally funny scenes but had a few real good camera shots and editing. Yes Alderich is a great director who made FLight Of The Phoenix and Whatever Happened TO Baby Jane among others. The problem isn't with direction, acting or anything technical. The movie is just destroyed in the third act. Why? The murders, twists, turns and characters have all been revolving around NUCLEAR MATERIAL? What the heck was the writer smoking when he came up with that? The way it just comes out of nowhere may have been the biggest Deus Ex Machina in history. For all the complaints about Burton's Planet of the Apes, THe life of David Gale or Notorious I think THIS is the worst ending ever. What a let down. --------------------------------------------- Result 629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ah, Bait. How do I hate thee? Let me count the ways. 1. You try to be funny, but are corny and unenjoyable; every joke is predictable and expected, and when it comes, does not inspire laughter. Instead, I want to hurl. 2. You try to be dramatic, but are unbelievable; the woman overacts to a terrible degree, and the "bad guy" looks like Bill Gates, and is about as scary as...well, Bill Gates. (Just try to imagine Bill Gates trying to intimidate somebody with a gun. Doesn't work, does it? A lawyer, maybe, but not a gun. Doesn't fit.) As for Jamie Foxx, well, just watching him try to deliver a dramatic and heartfelt dialogue is ludicrous, and makes me want to hurl. 3. You try to be action-packed, but instead are dull and dragging too many times. And when the action heats up, the tripod for the camera must have been lost, for the scenes wobble more than those in The Blair Witch Project, and I find myself nauseated, and once again I want to hurl. 4. You try to be a good movie, but you failed, you FAILED, YOU FAILED! I would rather walk barefoot across the Sahara with a pack full of beef jerky and no water, no sunscreen, and only Meryl Streep for company. This hell would be lovelier than a single minute more spent watching everyone in Bait overact their way through an idiotically written story with Bill Gates for a bad guy, and let's not even talk about the massive bomb that goes off in a car that Jamie Foxx's character has just driven OFF A CLIFF, but somehow manages to escape...just kill me now, or do the right thing and promise me that somehow I'll never have to watch a movie that is this bad, ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I went into this movie perhaps a bit jaded by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I [[surprised]]. This little [[treasure]] was [[pleasantly]] paced with a [[somber]], dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[limited]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[movies]], this one leaves [[something]] to the imagination, and Bill Paxton did a superb job at directing. Scenes shot inside the car as are well done and, after watching the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to see that some of the subtle, yet [[wonderful]] [[things]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[movie]], [[filled]] with grimness. Still, for the [[dark]] subject, a [[considerable]] [[portion]] of it is filmed in daylight, [[even]] some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is [[exceptional]] (Okay, I've [[always]] been a fan of Powers [[Booth]]), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which [[works]] [[extremely]] well for this [[type]] of [[film]]. If there is any one [[area]] where this film lacks, it is in the [[ending]], which seems just a [[bit]] too contrived, but still [[works]] on a simpler [[level]] without [[destroying]] the [[mood]] or the message of the [[movie]]. What is the [[message]]? It's [[something]] that each [[individual]] [[decides]] for themself. [[Overall]], on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the [[southern]] gothic [[genre]] (ie: "Body [[Heat]]" or "Midnight in the Garden of [[Good]] and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. I went into this movie perhaps a bit jaded by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I [[horrified]]. This little [[hoard]] was [[cheerfully]] paced with a [[depressing]], dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[constrained]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[movie]], this one leaves [[anything]] to the imagination, and Bill Paxton did a superb job at directing. Scenes shot inside the car as are well done and, after watching the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to see that some of the subtle, yet [[excellent]] [[aspects]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[cinema]], [[filling]] with grimness. Still, for the [[gloom]] subject, a [[sizable]] [[fraction]] of it is filmed in daylight, [[yet]] some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is [[wondrous]] (Okay, I've [[continually]] been a fan of Powers [[Booths]]), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which [[worked]] [[critically]] well for this [[typing]] of [[films]]. If there is any one [[zoning]] where this film lacks, it is in the [[terminated]], which seems just a [[bite]] too contrived, but still [[collaborate]] on a simpler [[grades]] without [[demolishing]] the [[humour]] or the message of the [[films]]. What is the [[messages]]? It's [[anything]] that each [[person]] [[decided]] for themself. [[General]], on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the [[southerly]] gothic [[kinds]] (ie: "Body [[Heating]]" or "Midnight in the Garden of [[Well]] and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] An MGM MINIATURE [[Short]] [[Subject]].

The [[editor]] of the [[Cole]] County [[Clarion]] [[must]] decide what is the [[real]] [[IMPORTANT]] NEWS for his readers: an impending [[frost]] which may spell [[disaster]] to their [[crops]], or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious [[gangster]] on their small [[town]] [[main]] street.

This is an [[enjoyable]] [[little]] one-reeler, [[featuring]] a good performance by [[comic]] Charles `Chic' [[Sale]]. Today's [[viewers]] will [[perhaps]] be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & [[somewhat]] goofy, [[Stewart]] [[shows]] many of the attributes which would make him a [[huge]] star in a very short [[time]].

[[Often]] overlooked or [[neglected]] [[today]], the one and two-reel short [[subjects]] were [[useful]] to the Studios as [[important]] training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for [[creating]] a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. [[Economical]] to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the [[perfect]] complement to the Studios' feature films. An MGM MINIATURE [[Concise]] [[Subjected]].

The [[editorial]] of the [[Kohl]] County [[Bugler]] [[should]] decide what is the [[actual]] [[NOTABLE]] NEWS for his readers: an impending [[gel]] which may spell [[catastrophe]] to their [[cultivation]], or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious [[thug]] on their small [[towns]] [[principal]] street.

This is an [[nice]] [[petite]] one-reeler, [[featured]] a good performance by [[comedian]] Charles `Chic' [[Selling]]. Today's [[bystanders]] will [[conceivably]] be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & [[rather]] goofy, [[Steward]] [[showing]] many of the attributes which would make him a [[big]] star in a very short [[moment]].

[[Usually]] overlooked or [[ignored]] [[yesterday]], the one and two-reel short [[item]] were [[handy]] to the Studios as [[substantial]] training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for [[establish]] a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. [[Thrifty]] to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the [[faultless]] complement to the Studios' feature films. --------------------------------------------- Result 632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a [[character]], was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and [[ended]] up nearly [[sacrificing]] her [[humanity]] in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant [[reminders]] of this struggle of the [[old]] and [[new]], and the [[carnage]] (so to speak) along the way.

[[While]] the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it [[missed]] the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a [[personages]], was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and [[finalised]] up nearly [[compromising]] her [[mankind]] in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant [[reminder]] of this struggle of the [[former]] and [[novo]], and the [[butchery]] (so to speak) along the way.

[[Though]] the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it [[miss]] the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Ain't it hilarious when an average schmo leading a [[pathetic]] [[life]] suddenly has something [[outrageously]] [[magical]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to [[learn]] a few [[valuable]] lessons along the way? That formula never gets [[old]], does it? It's such a [[sure]] fire [[way]] to make a [[classic]] [[film]]! [[Just]] [[look]] at major hits like Liar Liar and [[Big]]!... This must have been Rob Schneider's line of [[thinking]] when he [[made]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo and followed it with The [[Animal]]. [[Since]] I've already traced the plot through [[sarcasm]], allow me to [[color]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser [[cop]] who's [[suddenly]] [[involved]] in a [[tragic]] [[accident]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[loopy]] [[veterinarian]] who [[loads]] him up with animal parts, causing him to whinny like a horse at [[inappropriate]] [[times]], run like a cheetah, etc. This movie is [[slightly]] more [[likable]] than other Schneider-starring [[flicks]] (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it almost feels like they [[want]] [[audiences]] to hate it by [[casting]] a [[reality]] TV [[star]] as the [[romantic]] lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[inserting]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not exist. Sorry - [[nothing]] memorably good except the production value. I just want to end this review by [[saying]] that slight references to other [[movies]] in a movie can be [[okay]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[cheap]]." Ain't it hilarious when an average schmo leading a [[hapless]] [[vida]] suddenly has something [[appallingly]] [[quadrant]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to [[learned]] a few [[precious]] lessons along the way? That formula never gets [[archaic]], does it? It's such a [[persuaded]] fire [[manner]] to make a [[classical]] [[filmmaking]]! [[Mere]] [[peek]] at major hits like Liar Liar and [[Sizeable]]!... This must have been Rob Schneider's line of [[ideas]] when he [[brought]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo and followed it with The [[Zoo]]. [[Because]] I've already traced the plot through [[satire]], allow me to [[coloring]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser [[cops]] who's [[unexpectedly]] [[engaged]] in a [[disastrous]] [[incident]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[potty]] [[vets]] who [[burden]] him up with animal parts, causing him to whinny like a horse at [[unsuitable]] [[period]], run like a cheetah, etc. This movie is [[moderately]] more [[congenial]] than other Schneider-starring [[gestures]] (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it almost feels like they [[wanna]] [[viewers]] to hate it by [[cast]] a [[realism]] TV [[superstar]] as the [[sentimental]] lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[added]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not exist. Sorry - [[none]] memorably good except the production value. I just want to end this review by [[arguing]] that slight references to other [[filmmaking]] in a movie can be [[allright]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[cheaply]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Like many people on this site, I saw this [[movie]] only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an [[overall]] feeling of [[disquiet]] is how I remember being [[affected]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever made available for home video.

Possible spoiler: I wonder if anyone else would agree that the basic plot setup and characters might have been derived from a 1960 British movie, originally titled City of the Dead, retitled Horror Hotel for the American release? There are some similarities also to a later British film The Wicker Man.

One detail remains with me years after seeing the film. It's a small but significant moment near the beginning of the film. As I recall, a minister and his wife have stopped to aid some people by the side of the road, circa 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming Ray Milland introduces himself and his ( daughter?), Yvette Mimieux, a beautiful young mute woman. While the preacher is helping Ray Milland with the wagon, a [[rattlesnake]] slithers into view and coils menacingly, unobserved by any of the characters except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look scared at all, but stares at the snake with silent concentration, until it goes away. With this strange little moment, we already realize there's something highly unusual about these seemingly normal folks, though the possible danger to the minister and his wife remains vague and uncertain for a long time.

That one little scene stays with me vividly after all these years, along with many others. The film has a haunting quality about it that won't [[let]] go, and it's not surprising that people remember it so vividly. Someone ought to make this available for home video! Like many people on this site, I saw this [[kino]] only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an [[comprehensive]] feeling of [[malaise]] is how I remember being [[stricken]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever made available for home video.

Possible spoiler: I wonder if anyone else would agree that the basic plot setup and characters might have been derived from a 1960 British movie, originally titled City of the Dead, retitled Horror Hotel for the American release? There are some similarities also to a later British film The Wicker Man.

One detail remains with me years after seeing the film. It's a small but significant moment near the beginning of the film. As I recall, a minister and his wife have stopped to aid some people by the side of the road, circa 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming Ray Milland introduces himself and his ( daughter?), Yvette Mimieux, a beautiful young mute woman. While the preacher is helping Ray Milland with the wagon, a [[snake]] slithers into view and coils menacingly, unobserved by any of the characters except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look scared at all, but stares at the snake with silent concentration, until it goes away. With this strange little moment, we already realize there's something highly unusual about these seemingly normal folks, though the possible danger to the minister and his wife remains vague and uncertain for a long time.

That one little scene stays with me vividly after all these years, along with many others. The film has a haunting quality about it that won't [[allowing]] go, and it's not surprising that people remember it so vividly. Someone ought to make this available for home video! --------------------------------------------- Result 635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This [[kind]] of "inspirational" saccharine is [[enough]] to make you [[sick]]. It telegraphs its sentiments [[like]] the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[removes]] from the [[audience]] its own interpretation and [[feeling]] by [[making]] the [[choices]] for it. The [[big]] finish is [[swimming]] in [[weeping]] orchestration that must [[supposed]] to [[work]] like jumper cables on a [[dead]] car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid [[enough]] to watch a [[film]] as simple-minded and sappy as this. [[Streep]] [[glows]] and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on [[display]] or if it's just that---a [[display]], [[switched]] on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she [[could]] [[possibly]] find [[life]] in such a dud of [[film]]. Even [[though]] it's [[based]] on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances [[play]] like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. This [[genre]] of "inspirational" saccharine is [[adequate]] to make you [[indisposed]]. It telegraphs its sentiments [[iike]] the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[clears]] from the [[viewers]] its own interpretation and [[sensation]] by [[doing]] the [[pick]] for it. The [[prodigious]] finish is [[swim]] in [[sobbing]] orchestration that must [[suspected]] to [[worked]] like jumper cables on a [[dies]] car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid [[suitably]] to watch a [[filmmaking]] as simple-minded and sappy as this. [[Meryl]] [[shines]] and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on [[shows]] or if it's just that---a [[shows]], [[swapped]] on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she [[did]] [[arguably]] find [[iife]] in such a dud of [[kino]]. Even [[despite]] it's [[predicated]] on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances [[gaming]] like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is a [[cute]] and sad [[little]] [[story]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a [[beautiful]] Japanese [[woman]] who has [[run]] to California to [[escape]] from a failed [[relationship]] in [[Japan]]. [[Ken]] is a Japanese American manual [[laborer]] with aspirations of [[rock]] and roll stardom but little concrete to [[offer]] a potential [[partner]]. Kyoko "[[marries]]" [[Ken]] in [[order]] to be [[able]] to [[stay]] [[permanently]] in the U.S., with the [[understanding]] that [[although]] they will [[live]] together until she [[gets]] a "green card" the [[marriage]] will be in [[name]] only. It soon develops that the [[parties]] are not on the same [[wavelength]] - or [[perhaps]] in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration [[attorney]] I have [[seen]] such "[[arrangements]]" [[take]] on a [[life]] of their own, so I was [[pleased]] to see how well the filmmaker [[developed]] the [[dramatic]] [[possibilities]] of this situation. This is a [[mignon]] and sad [[tiny]] [[histories]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a [[wondrous]] Japanese [[female]] who has [[executing]] to California to [[fleeing]] from a failed [[relationships]] in [[Japans]]. [[Keane]] is a Japanese American manual [[worker]] with aspirations of [[rocks]] and roll stardom but little concrete to [[offering]] a potential [[partners]]. Kyoko "[[wedding]]" [[Keane]] in [[decree]] to be [[capable]] to [[remain]] [[invariably]] in the U.S., with the [[understood]] that [[albeit]] they will [[vive]] together until she [[get]] a "green card" the [[marries]] will be in [[names]] only. It soon develops that the [[part]] are not on the same [[wave]] - or [[potentially]] in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration [[prosecutors]] I have [[watched]] such "[[accords]]" [[taking]] on a [[iife]] of their own, so I was [[glad]] to see how well the filmmaker [[worded]] the [[impressive]] [[chances]] of this situation. --------------------------------------------- Result 637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[While]] [[visiting]] [[Romania]] with his CIA dad, [[Tony]]([[Adam]] Arkin), [[quite]] a talented [[high]] school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team [[finally]] to a victory over rival [[Simpson]], is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not [[allowed]] many books, so she took up [[palm]] reading)that he [[would]] be [[bitten]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[would]] have thunk it..[[Tony]] is in fact bitten and his [[life]] would be [[forever]] [[changed]]. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his [[bomb]] [[shelter]](!)under odd [[circumstances]](firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the [[room]] and bounces around like a pinball [[gone]] berserk), Tony travels the land through [[endless]] [[years]], until he's tired of packing, and [[returns]] decades(..and [[many]] US Presidents)[[later]] to hopefully lead his [[football]] team to a win over [[Simpson]]..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, [[think]] Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My [[favorite]] sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psychiatrist]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. [[Whereas]] [[visited]] [[Romanians]] with his CIA dad, [[Tonny]]([[Adem]] Arkin), [[perfectly]] a talented [[supreme]] school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team [[lastly]] to a victory over rival [[Simpsons]], is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not [[permitted]] many books, so she took up [[palma]] reading)that he [[could]] be [[hunk]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[ought]] have thunk it..[[Toni]] is in fact bitten and his [[iife]] would be [[indefinitely]] [[amended]]. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his [[bombings]] [[shelters]](!)under odd [[situations]](firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the [[bedroom]] and bounces around like a pinball [[faded]] berserk), Tony travels the land through [[countless]] [[ages]], until he's tired of packing, and [[comeback]] decades(..and [[various]] US Presidents)[[then]] to hopefully lead his [[soccer]] team to a win over [[Simpsons]]..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, [[ideas]] Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My [[prefers]] sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psych]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. --------------------------------------------- Result 638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I have no idea why they [[made]] this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with [[Amanda]] [[Root]] and Ciaran Hinds. I [[suppose]] that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alas]], what ended up on the cutting-room [[floor]] was all the lovely wit and humour, [[leaving]] a [[film]] that was mere melodrama rather than an [[amusing]] exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the [[characters]] were shallow and uninteresting. They had [[poor]] Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is [[NOT]] cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have [[said]] they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very [[idea]] of such a [[corruption]] of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. I have no idea why they [[brought]] this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with [[Remy]] [[Origin]] and Ciaran Hinds. I [[presuming]] that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alack]], what ended up on the cutting-room [[flooring]] was all the lovely wit and humour, [[abandoning]] a [[filmmaking]] that was mere melodrama rather than an [[hilarious]] exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the [[trait]] were shallow and uninteresting. They had [[poorest]] Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is [[NOPE]] cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have [[stated]] they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very [[ideals]] of such a [[graft]] of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. --------------------------------------------- Result 639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I saw this movie last month at a free sneak preview and I walked out. It was pretty [[horrible]]. In the [[process]] of trying too [[hard]], they over acted and made a horrible movie. I was disappointed since I felt all the actors had made [[respectable]] [[choices]] in the [[past]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[hoping]] they would give out a [[survey]] at the end of the [[movie]] so I [[could]] [[tell]] them not to release this [[movie]]. I was [[lured]] in by the free aspect of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[waste]] of my time--and, [[usually]], I'm very [[easily]] amused. It tried to be [[innovative]] and [[creative]] with the [[shots]], [[ideas]] and [[filming]], but because they threw together so [[many]] [[ideas]] at once, it [[failed]]. I'm not [[usually]] [[picky]] about [[movies]] and I [[usually]] don't feel the [[need]] to [[display]] my [[opinions]] about [[movies]], but I had to [[warn]] everyone not to watch it. I [[registered]] on IMDb just to [[tell]] all of you [[guys]] I saw this movie last month at a free sneak preview and I walked out. It was pretty [[scary]]. In the [[treated]] of trying too [[harsh]], they over acted and made a horrible movie. I was disappointed since I felt all the actors had made [[reputable]] [[opt]] in the [[yesteryear]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[expecting]] they would give out a [[probes]] at the end of the [[filmmaking]] so I [[did]] [[told]] them not to release this [[filmmaking]]. I was [[drawn]] in by the free aspect of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[wastes]] of my time--and, [[fluently]], I'm very [[comfortably]] amused. It tried to be [[imaginative]] and [[inventive]] with the [[beatings]], [[thoughts]] and [[photographing]], but because they threw together so [[various]] [[insights]] at once, it [[faulted]]. I'm not [[habitually]] [[choosy]] about [[movie]] and I [[habitually]] don't feel the [[gotta]] to [[shows]] my [[view]] about [[theater]], but I had to [[cautionary]] everyone not to watch it. I [[inscription]] on IMDb just to [[say]] all of you [[guy]] --------------------------------------------- Result 640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Man, I [[really]] find it [[hard]] to [[believe]] that the [[wonderful]] Alan [[Ball]] had anything to do with this [[mess]]. Having seen the first two episodes [[thus]] far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must [[see]] list. It's just got so many things [[working]] against it.

[[None]] of the [[actors]] cast are [[particularly]] good. Anna Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[awful]]. I remember her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much [[fun]] to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is [[marginally]] better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and [[aloof]]. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are [[given]] it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like [[nails]] on a [[chalkboard]] bad. [[Almost]] as [[awful]] is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of [[genius]] casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story [[seems]] to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. [[Out]] of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO [[shows]] but here at least they [[prolonged]] rough sex scenes [[involving]] Jason Stackhouse seem a [[bit]] over the [[top]] and [[pointless]].

About the only nice thing I can [[really]] think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. Man, I [[truly]] find it [[laborious]] to [[believing]] that the [[sumptuous]] Alan [[Ballon]] had anything to do with this [[chaos]]. Having seen the first two episodes [[then]] far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must [[behold]] list. It's just got so many things [[cooperating]] against it.

[[Nil]] of the [[protagonists]] cast are [[peculiarly]] good. Anna Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[frightful]]. I remember her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much [[droll]] to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is [[slightly]] better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and [[faraway]]. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are [[awarded]] it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like [[fingernails]] on a [[blackboard]] bad. [[Around]] as [[scary]] is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of [[engineers]] casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story [[appears]] to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. [[Outward]] of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO [[showings]] but here at least they [[lengthened]] rough sex scenes [[encompassing]] Jason Stackhouse seem a [[bite]] over the [[superior]] and [[superfluous]].

About the only nice thing I can [[genuinely]] think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. --------------------------------------------- Result 641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] "Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

[[Overall]], the movie is [[nothing]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

"Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

[[Holistic]], the movie is [[anything]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

--------------------------------------------- Result 642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's such a shame that because of it's title this film will be avoided by people who hate football. Bend it Like Beckham is much more than a cheesy sports flick. The story line is touching and intelligent without being soppy, the jokes were laugh out loud funny, and the characters are well acted. Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley are brilliant as teenagers Jess and Jules, putting in great performances both on and off the pitch. Anupam Kher is wonderful as Jess' worried father, and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, who was so amazingly evil in 'Ride with the Devil,' comes across so well as the nice guy for once, making full use of his gorgeous Irish accent! Even if you don't like football, go see this film. If anything it'll make you smile. --------------------------------------------- Result 643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Reign Over Me is a [[success]] due to the [[powerful]] [[work]] by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. [[While]] comedic [[actors]] [[going]] dramatic has been [[seen]] as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. Most of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a [[vulnerability]] that can burst at any [[moment]]. He [[might]] even be typecast for [[characters]] with such [[hidden]] [[anger]] [[problems]]. However, this performance has some [[considerable]] dramatic weight, unlike his [[roles]] in [[less]] [[comedic]] [[fare]] [[like]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

[[In]] the film, [[Alan]] Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his [[old]] college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't [[seen]] in several years. Five [[years]] before, Charlie suffered the [[overwhelming]] loss of his wife and three daughters in a [[plane]] [[crash]]. Charlie barely [[even]] [[recognizes]] Cheadle's [[character]] due to the [[repression]] of his [[memories]] and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until [[Alan]] persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually [[enabling]] him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has [[suppressed]] on his own terms.

[[Though]] writer-director [[Mike]] Binder doesn't [[show]] much sense of an [[individual]] [[style]] and some of his shots and [[transitions]] are a bit [[awkward]], he does have a knack of getting decent to [[great]] performances from his [[actors]] while being a talented and funny writer. He [[shot]] this [[film]] with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing [[today]], [[enabling]] the crew to shoot the [[night]] scenes with [[limited]] lighting. This kept the [[colorful]] [[backgrounds]] of New York [[City]] in [[focus]], but resulted in [[creating]] frequent digital [[grain]], which resembles blue specks [[scattered]] and [[moving]] on the screen.

[[Almost]] every main character in Reign Over Me gives a [[great]] performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and [[especially]] Liv [[Tyler]] are [[memorable]] in their respective roles as a [[frustrated]] [[wife]] to Cheadle's [[character]] and a [[psychiatrist]]. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their [[finest]] work to date. They completely [[owned]] this [[movie]]. Sandler actually plays a [[character]] that doesn't [[outwardly]] [[resemble]] or act like himself at all, partially credited to his [[Bob]] Dylan-esquire wig. [[Though]] Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. Reign Over Me is a [[accomplishments]] due to the [[influential]] [[works]] by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. [[Despite]] comedic [[actresses]] [[gonna]] dramatic has been [[noticed]] as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. Most of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a [[frailty]] that can burst at any [[time]]. He [[probability]] even be typecast for [[features]] with such [[covert]] [[fury]] [[disorders]]. However, this performance has some [[significant]] dramatic weight, unlike his [[functions]] in [[lowest]] [[slapstick]] [[tariffs]] [[iike]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

[[For]] the film, [[Alana]] Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his [[elderly]] college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't [[watched]] in several years. Five [[olds]] before, Charlie suffered the [[sizable]] loss of his wife and three daughters in a [[aircraft]] [[crashes]]. Charlie barely [[yet]] [[recognize]] Cheadle's [[characters]] due to the [[suppression]] of his [[memorials]] and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until [[Alain]] persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually [[allow]] him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has [[stifled]] on his own terms.

[[If]] writer-director [[Mick]] Binder doesn't [[display]] much sense of an [[personally]] [[styles]] and some of his shots and [[transition]] are a bit [[clumsy]], he does have a knack of getting decent to [[excellent]] performances from his [[players]] while being a talented and funny writer. He [[offed]] this [[cinematography]] with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing [[hoy]], [[permitting]] the crew to shoot the [[nuit]] scenes with [[constrained]] lighting. This kept the [[colourful]] [[provenance]] of New York [[Ville]] in [[spotlight]], but resulted in [[establishing]] frequent digital [[grains]], which resembles blue specks [[littered]] and [[shifting]] on the screen.

[[Circa]] every main character in Reign Over Me gives a [[wondrous]] performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and [[concretely]] Liv [[Ty]] are [[eventful]] in their respective roles as a [[disillusioned]] [[woman]] to Cheadle's [[personages]] and a [[psychoanalyst]]. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their [[meanest]] work to date. They completely [[belonged]] this [[kino]]. Sandler actually plays a [[trait]] that doesn't [[externally]] [[resembling]] or act like himself at all, partially credited to his [[Spongebob]] Dylan-esquire wig. [[Whilst]] Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Those [[individuals]] familiar with Asian [[cinema]], as a [[whole]], are [[aware]] that Japan is renowned, or [[notorious]], for it's hyper-violent [[films]] and [[Korea]] is now garnering a reputation for viciously [[brutal]] films. [[Dog]] Bites [[Dog]], while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike [[film]], nor is it as unapologetically [[brutal]] as some Koreas more ambitious [[efforts]], it is a [[perfect]] in between with its own [[brand]] of [[brutality]] all it's own. The greatest [[strength]] this [[film]] has though, like the [[greatest]] of the [[Japanese]] or Korean [[efforts]], is that the [[brutality]], [[rather]] than detracting from the [[film]], [[actually]] [[develops]] the [[characters]], if not, [[pushing]] the [[story]] forward. The two [[main]] characters are both [[incredibly]] vicious [[individuals]] with their own motivations and [[emotional]] underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[character]], for [[instance]], is on the edge from the very [[start]] and slowly and [[surely]], amidst [[various]] [[encounters]] with Chang's [[character]], it is [[revealed]] why he is. Without spoiling this [[part]] of the [[story]] too much, it involves the morally [[ambiguous]] [[nature]] of his [[father]]. Chang's [[character]], on the other hand, has his most [[primal]] instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[brutal]] efficiency. [[Surprisingly]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[human]] side, actually [[reveals]] a side to our animal [[nature]] which [[many]] forget about which is the natural [[ability]] to [[recognize]] a [[fellow]] [[broken]] animal (and no I am not [[talking]] about Sam [[Lee]], rather Pei Pei's [[garbage]] [[dump]] [[girl]] [[character]]). Ultimately [[however]], for the first 80 minutes or so, it is a, more or [[less]], straight forward cat and [[mouse]], or Dog [[chase]] Dog, [[film]] in which every [[encounter]] ends in at [[least]] one [[death]] ([[seriously]], once Sam Lee and [[Chang]] Square off, some one will [[die]]) and the [[fun]] part of movie is you never know who hands will commit the act. [[Which]] brings us to the film's one weakness. Unforunatley to [[delve]] into it would be [[yet]] another [[spoiler]] but, to put it simply, it is guilty of pushing one of the main points of the [[film]] [[since]], [[rather]] then [[letting]] the point be [[made]] as is 80 minutes into the [[film]], the [[film]] goes on for another 20 minutes or so to further [[emphasize]] it. Don't get me [[wrong]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute [[mark]] to the climax and if the final [[act]] wasn't filled with [[sweet]] [[music]] (in fact if it, like the majority of the film, kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh air from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. Those [[persons]] familiar with Asian [[movies]], as a [[together]], are [[conscious]] that Japan is renowned, or [[prestigious]], for it's hyper-violent [[cinematography]] and [[Korean]] is now garnering a reputation for viciously [[ferocious]] films. [[Hound]] Bites [[Canine]], while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike [[cinematography]], nor is it as unapologetically [[ferocious]] as some Koreas more ambitious [[activities]], it is a [[impeccable]] in between with its own [[mark]] of [[cruelty]] all it's own. The greatest [[kraft]] this [[movies]] has though, like the [[biggest]] of the [[Japs]] or Korean [[effort]], is that the [[barbarian]], [[quite]] than detracting from the [[cinema]], [[genuinely]] [[develop]] the [[features]], if not, [[prompting]] the [[narratives]] forward. The two [[leading]] characters are both [[terribly]] vicious [[person]] with their own motivations and [[sentimental]] underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[nature]], for [[lawsuit]], is on the edge from the very [[launches]] and slowly and [[obviously]], amidst [[multiple]] [[clashes]] with Chang's [[nature]], it is [[shown]] why he is. Without spoiling this [[parties]] of the [[tale]] too much, it involves the morally [[obscure]] [[character]] of his [[fathers]]. Chang's [[nature]], on the other hand, has his most [[primitive]] instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[cruel]] efficiency. [[Terribly]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[humanity]] side, actually [[reveal]] a side to our animal [[characters]] which [[numerous]] forget about which is the natural [[competence]] to [[acknowledging]] a [[colleagues]] [[raped]] animal (and no I am not [[talk]] about Sam [[Rhee]], rather Pei Pei's [[junk]] [[shithole]] [[daughters]] [[characteristics]]). Ultimately [[instead]], for the first 80 minutes or so, it is a, more or [[lesser]], straight forward cat and [[smile]], or Dog [[chases]] Dog, [[cinema]] in which every [[confrontation]] ends in at [[less]] one [[muerte]] ([[severely]], once Sam Lee and [[Jang]] Square off, some one will [[killed]]) and the [[funny]] part of movie is you never know who hands will commit the act. [[Whom]] brings us to the film's one weakness. Unforunatley to [[diving]] into it would be [[even]] another [[deflector]] but, to put it simply, it is guilty of pushing one of the main points of the [[kino]] [[because]], [[comparatively]] then [[allowing]] the point be [[introduced]] as is 80 minutes into the [[movie]], the [[movie]] goes on for another 20 minutes or so to further [[stressing]] it. Don't get me [[amiss]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute [[brands]] to the climax and if the final [[ley]] wasn't filled with [[sugary]] [[musicians]] (in fact if it, like the majority of the film, kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh air from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. --------------------------------------------- Result 645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has beautiful scenery. Unfortunately it has no plot. In order to have a plot there must be a conflict. This movie had none. It spent two hours painting a beautifule scene and failed to ever place any activity in it. The picture trys to be artistic but fails to pay attentions to the fundamentals of story telling.

If you love Montana scenery and fly fishing you will find some value in this film just don't expect a story. There isn't one. --------------------------------------------- Result 646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Before the [[regular]] [[comments]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LOVE]] SONG is that while there's a running [[time]] listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring [[Media]] in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[input]] on this is [[appreciated]]!

Two friends with very rough [[lives]] [[take]] on the road for an adventure. What they [[wind]] up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two escaping by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the film is [[complicated]] by the the daft and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may [[dislike]] the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and [[continue]] a [[friendship]], due to Glenaan's [[great]] performance. After all, there are [[many]] [[many]] reasons during their [[run]] that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to [[save]] himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a [[protective]] older brother to [[Spike]], and the [[loyalty]] between the two is [[hard]] to [[break]] -- until things get too [[desperate]].

[[While]] some of the cinematography is [[indeed]] artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful [[landscapes]], rain, and vast gray skies offer a [[somber]] tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

Before the [[routine]] [[remarks]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LOVED]] SONG is that while there's a running [[moment]] listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring [[Medium]] in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[inlet]] on this is [[enjoyed]]!

Two friends with very rough [[vie]] [[taking]] on the road for an adventure. What they [[windmill]] up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two escaping by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the film is [[complicate]] by the the daft and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may [[aversion]] the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and [[uninterrupted]] a [[goodwill]], due to Glenaan's [[huge]] performance. After all, there are [[innumerable]] [[innumerable]] reasons during their [[execute]] that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to [[economize]] himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a [[defensive]] older brother to [[Fortification]], and the [[allegiance]] between the two is [[laborious]] to [[outage]] -- until things get too [[despondent]].

[[Although]] some of the cinematography is [[admittedly]] artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful [[scenery]], rain, and vast gray skies offer a [[dark]] tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

--------------------------------------------- Result 647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so little actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[pointless]]. I can't really see what the [[motivation]] or "point" of this [[film]] is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film [[basically]] chronicles the last few [[years]] of Bettie's [[career]] in bondage modeling. [[Almost]] the entire [[film]] is [[comprised]] of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "[[famous]]" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the [[films]] run-time, and give virtually no [[insight]] into Bettie as a [[person]]. The [[film]] touches briefly on her short-lived [[legitimate]] acting pursuits, and her [[subsequent]] decision to [[leave]] the "[[business]]" and [[become]] religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of [[showing]] [[long]] and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a [[horrible]] [[film]] - there's just no [[substance]] to it. The other problem is that the [[actress]] that plays Bettie only really [[resembles]] her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other [[thing]] that [[irritated]] me, is that [[although]] Bettie did [[several]] [[topless]] modeling shoots - the only nudity in the [[film]] was a short segment shot in a [[zoo]] during the [[end]] credits. The film itself is [[obviously]] [[extremely]] low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's [[limitations]] - so no [[gripes]] from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from [[everyone]] involved. In fact - the most [[memorable]] [[thing]] about the [[whole]] [[film]] for me, was noticing during the [[end]] credits that the [[actor]] who [[played]] Irving Klaw's [[real]] [[name]] is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - [[check]] the cast [[list]]. Can't [[say]] that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and [[must]] own [[anything]] [[relating]] to her. And if you are that [[bad]] off - then you need to [[seek]] [[treatment]] [[anyway]]...4/10 I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so little actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[meaningless]]. I can't really see what the [[motif]] or "point" of this [[filmmaking]] is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film [[mainly]] chronicles the last few [[aged]] of Bettie's [[professions]] in bondage modeling. [[Virtually]] the entire [[filmmaking]] is [[composed]] of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "[[notorious]]" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the [[film]] run-time, and give virtually no [[eyesight]] into Bettie as a [[persons]]. The [[filmmaking]] touches briefly on her short-lived [[lawful]] acting pursuits, and her [[later]] decision to [[letting]] the "[[businesses]]" and [[gotten]] religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of [[demonstrating]] [[longer]] and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a [[scary]] [[filmmaking]] - there's just no [[substances]] to it. The other problem is that the [[actor]] that plays Bettie only really [[reminds]] her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other [[stuff]] that [[outraged]] me, is that [[while]] Bettie did [[various]] [[bikini]] modeling shoots - the only nudity in the [[filmmaking]] was a short segment shot in a [[animals]] during the [[ends]] credits. The film itself is [[definitely]] [[terribly]] low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's [[limits]] - so no [[complains]] from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from [[someone]] involved. In fact - the most [[unforgettable]] [[stuff]] about the [[ensemble]] [[filmmaking]] for me, was noticing during the [[terminate]] credits that the [[protagonist]] who [[served]] Irving Klaw's [[true]] [[designation]] is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - [[inspections]] the cast [[listing]]. Can't [[tell]] that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and [[owes]] own [[something]] [[pertaining]] to her. And if you are that [[unfavorable]] off - then you need to [[striving]] [[cure]] [[anyhow]]...4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] It [[could]] have been a better film. It does drag at points, and the central story shifts from Boyer completing his mission to [[Boyer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham [[Greene]] is an author who is really [[hard]] to spoil. His [[stories]] are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, [[guilt]] and innocence (very relative terms in his [[world]] [[view]]), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Luis]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has [[sided]] with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts [[turns]] out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house keeper, and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. [[Blimp]] type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in showing his dislike for foreigners in general.

The one ray of hope is Lauren Bacall (Rose [[Cullen]]), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an [[aristocrat]] - the [[daughter]] of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to [[say]]) [[almost]] sank her [[long]] career. She does act well, but the [[spark]] she [[showed]] in her [[first]] [[film]] was due to the [[dual]] [[effect]] of [[starring]] with [[Humphrey]] Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden [[foes]] all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. It [[would]] have been a better film. It does drag at points, and the central story shifts from Boyer completing his mission to [[Boer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham [[Archer]] is an author who is really [[dur]] to spoil. His [[fairytales]] are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, [[culpa]] and innocence (very relative terms in his [[globe]] [[avis]]), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Louise]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has [[cara]] with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts [[revolves]] out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house keeper, and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. [[Dirigible]] type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in showing his dislike for foreigners in general.

The one ray of hope is Lauren Bacall (Rose [[Keren]]), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an [[nobleman]] - the [[maid]] of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to [[tell]]) [[practically]] sank her [[longer]] career. She does act well, but the [[ignites]] she [[indicated]] in her [[frst]] [[cinematographic]] was due to the [[twofold]] [[implications]] of [[featuring]] with [[Humphreys]] Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden [[adversaries]] all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. --------------------------------------------- Result 649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Well when watching this film late one night I was simple [[amazed]] by it's [[greatness]]. [[Fantastic]] [[script]], [[great]] acting, [[costumes]] and special effects, and the plot twists, [[wow]]!! In [[fact]] if you can [[see]] the [[ending]] [[coming]] you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I [[would]] recommend this [[film]] to [[anyone]], [[especially]] if I don;t like them much.

[[Terrific]] Well when watching this film late one night I was simple [[flabbergasted]] by it's [[size]]. [[Excellent]] [[hyphen]], [[wondrous]] acting, [[clothes]] and special effects, and the plot twists, [[whoa]]!! In [[facto]] if you can [[consults]] the [[ceasing]] [[arriving]] you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I [[should]] recommend this [[kino]] to [[somebody]], [[mainly]] if I don;t like them much.

[[Funky]] --------------------------------------------- Result 650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Sunday [[would]] not be Sunday without an [[action]] [[movie]], and when you [[want]] [[intense]] [[combat]], you turn to [[Tom]] Berenger (Platoon).

Here he plays a [[sniper]] in the jungle going after rebels and [[drug]] lords. Life's a [[bitch]], so he [[gets]] a green office [[type]] (Billy Zane) to [[help]] on the [[mission]].

The [[film]] is in the hands of [[Luis]] Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the [[movie]] worthwhile.

Sure, it [[may]] be a [[little]] [[long]] - who [[wants]] to [[see]] a [[lot]] of walking through the jungle, but is is [[good]], tense [[action]] when the time is right. Sunday [[could]] not be Sunday without an [[efforts]] [[film]], and when you [[wantto]] [[vehement]] [[counter]], you turn to [[Tum]] Berenger (Platoon).

Here he plays a [[shooter]] in the jungle going after rebels and [[pharmaceuticals]] lords. Life's a [[motherfucker]], so he [[got]] a green office [[genre]] (Billy Zane) to [[succour]] on the [[delegations]].

The [[films]] is in the hands of [[Lewis]] Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the [[films]] worthwhile.

Sure, it [[maggio]] be a [[tiny]] [[protracted]] - who [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] a [[batch]] of walking through the jungle, but is is [[alright]], tense [[efforts]] when the time is right. --------------------------------------------- Result 651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Something very [[strange]] [[happens]] when you [[talk]] about [[Global]] [[Warming]]: science goes out the [[window]] and "[[belief]]" and "[[consensus]]" [[becomes]] the [[topic]] of [[discussion]].

It's because of that fact that I [[give]] a [[failing]] [[mark]] to Al Gore's documentary.

Instead of promoting [[intelligent]] discussion, he kept the debate at the level of "belief" and "consensus".

Of [[course]], when you're trying to [[sell]] the world into spending trillions of dollars to "stop [[Global]] [[Warming]]" you may thing it's a [[problem]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the [[current]] warming was caused by [[humans]]. [[Maybe]] [[none]] of it, [[maybe]] some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the [[next]] Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have [[boiled]] the [[planet]].

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[asked]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "[[consensus]]" is [[ostracized]]. Never mind that scientific [[inquiry]] is about [[straying]] from the [[consensus]]. Einstein didn't "[[believe]]" in the [[consensus]], neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much [[scorn]] placed on those very [[researchers]] who [[would]] [[advance]] the [[field]] by asking the tough questions? If Global [[Warming]] is so [[incontrovertible]], [[surely]] a few people [[testing]] that theory can't be so [[threatening]].

What is going on here? That's the [[movie]] I was [[hoping]] Al [[Gore]] [[would]] have [[made]]. Istead, he [[chose]] to shore up his [[support]] with the [[true]] "[[believers]]" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. Something very [[odd]] [[arises]] when you [[talking]] about [[International]] [[Heat]]: science goes out the [[luna]] and "[[creed]]" and "[[unanimity]]" [[become]] the [[themes]] of [[debates]].

It's because of that fact that I [[confer]] a [[omitting]] [[brands]] to Al Gore's documentary.

Instead of promoting [[smarter]] discussion, he kept the debate at the level of "belief" and "consensus".

Of [[cours]], when you're trying to [[sold]] the world into spending trillions of dollars to "stop [[International]] [[Warm]]" you may thing it's a [[issues]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the [[contemporary]] warming was caused by [[beings]]. [[Possibly]] [[nos]] of it, [[potentially]] some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the [[upcoming]] Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have [[cooked]] the [[globe]].

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[requested]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "[[unanimity]]" is [[marginalized]]. Never mind that scientific [[survey]] is about [[strayed]] from the [[unanimity]]. Einstein didn't "[[think]]" in the [[unanimity]], neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much [[derision]] placed on those very [[investigators]] who [[should]] [[headway]] the [[campo]] by asking the tough questions? If Global [[Warm]] is so [[unquestionable]], [[undoubtedly]] a few people [[test]] that theory can't be so [[threaten]].

What is going on here? That's the [[filmmaking]] I was [[awaiting]] Al [[Gora]] [[could]] have [[effected]]. Istead, he [[picks]] to shore up his [[helps]] with the [[veritable]] "[[followers]]" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. --------------------------------------------- Result 652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] for its two [[hours]] and have [[absolutely]] no [[idea]] what it's about. [[Somebody]] got [[murdered]] or [[maybe]] they didn't and maybe [[somebody]] did it or maybe they didn't. This [[brought]] back [[memories]] of the [[good]] [[old]] days ([[bad]] [[old]] days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. [[Lately]] stinkers have been the exception but this [[confused]] hodge podge of trendy feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[mumbled]] [[dialogue]] makes up for lost [[time]]. I've never [[found]] [[Margaret]] Atwood's books [[easy]] to read. This [[movie]] continues that [[fine]] Canadian [[tradition]]. It isn't easy to watch. [[Maybe]] the [[trendy]] folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail [[parties]] will [[pretend]] they [[liked]] it. Us folks in the boonies are a [[little]] less [[pretentious]]. I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] for its two [[hour]] and have [[totally]] no [[thoughts]] what it's about. [[Everyone]] got [[kiiled]] or [[probably]] they didn't and maybe [[everyone]] did it or maybe they didn't. This [[introduced]] back [[reminiscences]] of the [[alright]] [[former]] days ([[negative]] [[longtime]] days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. [[Recently]] stinkers have been the exception but this [[perplexed]] hodge podge of trendy feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[sighed]] [[talks]] makes up for lost [[times]]. I've never [[uncovered]] [[Margarita]] Atwood's books [[easier]] to read. This [[filmmaking]] continues that [[alright]] Canadian [[traditions]]. It isn't easy to watch. [[Possibly]] the [[modern]] folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail [[party]] will [[faking]] they [[loved]] it. Us folks in the boonies are a [[small]] less [[cocky]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines.

But then in the third episode he says that when the Europeans in South Africa got too far north they ran into Zulu people and other tribes that *herded cattle and planted crops*. So what explains their lack of technological, economic, and artistic achievement if they had the key things the author claims are needed for success?

Diamond also claims germs in the form of smallpox (brought to North America by black slaves) were our biggest weapon. Well, if 150 Europeans can defeat 20,000 native warriors and 400 non-military South Africans can defeat 10,000 Zulus *without a single casualty* in either case, then I think you have to conclude that germs are irrelevant. With or without germs, we were going to succeed.

He says Malaria stopped Europeans from colonizing further North, killing "thousands" of Europeans while not affecting Africans. (I'd like to know real numbers but he doesn't say.) Then at the end he says today Malaria is killing thousands of Africans and that is why they can't catch up with us. So which is it, Jared? Did Malaria help the Africans by halting Eurpeans or hurt them? And how come Europe did okay despite massive plagues throughout our history?

He also seems far too eager to say that the reasons Europeans succeeded was because of dumb luck. At times when the evidence threatens to overwhelm his rickety theories he's reluctant to admit that maybe Europeans were successful because they worked for it. It's sad watch this obvious neo-Marxist contort reality to try to prove his point. --------------------------------------------- Result 654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the very worst films Clark Gable made. Only PARNELL was obviously worse. It is just so painfully clichéd and the dialog is so lousy that it is something neither Gable nor Jean Harlow should have been proud of making.

Gable is a heel whose illegal activities result in his girl going' to the slammer (like the gangster talk?). She holds out hope that he'll do the right thing but he just leaves her there--unknown to either of them, gosh, that she's "in the family way". Eventually, the rogue returns to do the right thing and somehow they tie this all together into a happy ending! They seemed to have forgotten about Gable's needing to take the rap and spend several years in the hoosegow. Leonard Maltin says "the stars are at their best here". By what standard? Best at producing unintended chuckles? Gimme a break!

PS--after saying this, my wife thinks Leonard Maltin is going to find me and kick my butt. Hmmm. However, despite my comment, I think Mr. Maltin is the finest reviewer and human being on the planet (I hope that appeased him).

UPDATE--2/2/08. Because I disliked this film so much the first time (especially the ridiculous ending), I decided to watch it once again. After all, sometimes when I watch a film again I like it much more and realize that I was a bit too harsh. While that has been the case with several films in recent months, I still disliked this film--even the second time. Most of it was not because of the first half of the film. In the first half, Harlow's character was amazingly stupid but at least it was believable. But when she was sent to prison, it was all clichés until the final ridiculous marriage scene occurred. The bottom line is that this sequence is embarrassingly dumb--it just makes no sense at all and is akin to turning the movie into some wacky fairy tale instead of a love story about two cons. I stand by my original review (despite all the "NOT HELPFULS") and think that aside from PARNELL and possibly POLLY AT THE CIRCUS, it might just be the worst Gable film. --------------------------------------------- Result 655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Zentropa has much in common with The Third Man, another noir-like film set among the rubble of postwar Europe. Like TTM, there is much inventive camera work. There is an innocent American who gets emotionally involved with a woman he doesn't really understand, and whose naivety is all the more striking in contrast with the natives.

But I'd have to say that The Third Man has a more well-crafted storyline. Zentropa is a bit disjointed in this respect. Perhaps this is intentional: it is presented as a dream/nightmare, and making it too coherent would spoil the effect.

This movie is unrelentingly grim--"noir" in more than one sense; one never sees the sun shine. Grim, but intriguing, and frightening. --------------------------------------------- Result 656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I think this movie was supposed to be [[shocking]]. But the only [[way]] in which it is [[indeed]] [[shocking]] is how shocking [[badly]] it's been [[made]] ...and [[simply]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hour]] of [[torment]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the characters in the [[movie]] (the five girls).

Sure the main characters get their [[bloody]] [[piece]] in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies per se. [[However]] all the violence in this [[film]] serves no end whatsoever. It's no [[spectacle]] other than that it's [[simply]] [[grotesque]]. It's so lame it even gets [[boring]], and really quick too.

The [[worst]] thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to copy the Blair Whitch Project, by filming with cheap hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) serves no end whatsoever. In the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an explanation, namely they are their with a camera looking for the blair witch. In this film, there's no other explanation than: "Hey ya'll we wanted this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is also something to get depressed about. The girls are screaming so hysterically that many a time you can't make out what they're saying. Also, no effort has been made to make anything any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than finally, there's the soundtrack, which is just as bad as the rest, and varies from [[cheap]] euro-house to the [[worst]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[advise]]: Don't watch this under ANY circumstances. I think this movie was supposed to be [[frightening]]. But the only [[routing]] in which it is [[actually]] [[terrifying]] is how shocking [[desperately]] it's been [[introduced]] ...and [[purely]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hours]] of [[haunt]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the characters in the [[movies]] (the five girls).

Sure the main characters get their [[murderous]] [[slice]] in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies per se. [[Conversely]] all the violence in this [[filmmaking]] serves no end whatsoever. It's no [[show]] other than that it's [[exclusively]] [[farcical]]. It's so lame it even gets [[bore]], and really quick too.

The [[meanest]] thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to copy the Blair Whitch Project, by filming with cheap hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) serves no end whatsoever. In the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an explanation, namely they are their with a camera looking for the blair witch. In this film, there's no other explanation than: "Hey ya'll we wanted this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is also something to get depressed about. The girls are screaming so hysterically that many a time you can't make out what they're saying. Also, no effort has been made to make anything any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than finally, there's the soundtrack, which is just as bad as the rest, and varies from [[cheaper]] euro-house to the [[worse]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[counselor]]: Don't watch this under ANY circumstances. --------------------------------------------- Result 657 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I guess every time I see one of these old movies from the 80's it puts me back at a simpler time, no matter how corny they may seem today. This movie is a good one. I remember seeing it as a small kid and thinking it was the greatest movie ever. It has all the heroistic characters that a young cowboy wants to be. Now as an adult, I can look back and laugh and still feel sad, but this time I actually know what's going on. I did find one thing weird. How many people can move to Houston and hook up with Sissy,get married,move into a trailer,have a falling out,cheat, have an uncle die,then get back together, all in the course of a month? Only in America. --------------------------------------------- Result 658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A killer, cannibal rapist is killed by a crazed cop on the scene of his latest murder. At his grave a cult have gathered with plans to resurrect him by peeing onto the grave. This of course works and he awakes ripping the guys penis off and he is back into his old killing ways with an all new zombie look. The two cops one of who is going a little crazy about the scum of the city and has a drug problem, are back on the case. Two of the original cult member also tries to stop the killer by resurrecting some other kind of dead thing. Thinking they have filed they leave but out from the grave comes a plastic baby doll that was used in the original resurrection. Sounds a bit confusing really but no its just rubbish.

The acting is terrible and one of the cops is the same guy that plays Dr Vincent van Gore in the faces of gore series and he is just as terrible as the annoying cop in this film. The other cop just about struggles to get his terrible lines out. Now I'm all for low budget cinema but this film is just terrible. If it wasn't for the very easy on the eye ladies and their nakedness I would probably have fallen asleep. There is a bit of gore but it's never more than some animal guts placed on the stomach of the victims. The zombie makeup on the other hand looks great and his foot long penis that he uses to rape his victims with is kind of funny at times. There is also a half decent scene where the killer falls in love with a sex doll. The doll with the chipmunks voice is the stupidest thing I have ever seen in a film. It is just a plastic toy on a fishing line.

The ending is extremely bad. You would expect the killer to put up much more of a fight than he does. God knows how they made enough money to make a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This isn't the [[best]] Bigfoot ever [[made]], but by the [[recent]] standards of [[Nature]] [[gone]] [[awry]] [[movies]], mostly [[showing]] on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality stuff. It has some [[action]], some [[humor]], decent F/X and Bigfoot. CG is used, but so are some [[practical]] F/X, which I [[like]].

[[Overall]] this [[movie]] is worth a watch if you are a fan of B horror/sci-fi and [[need]] a fix. It's better than the [[movie]] [[Sasquatch]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be fooled.

The acting is better than you may expect to find in a [[movie]] like this and the directing is more than adequate. [[Expect]] a [[bit]] of a lul as the [[characters]] are "[[developed]]", but know that [[things]] will [[pick]] up. If you are watching a DVD you may [[want]] to skip a [[chapter]] or two. This isn't the [[nicest]] Bigfoot ever [[accomplished]], but by the [[latest]] standards of [[Character]] [[faded]] [[amiss]] [[film]], mostly [[proving]] on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality stuff. It has some [[efforts]], some [[comedy]], decent F/X and Bigfoot. CG is used, but so are some [[concrete]] F/X, which I [[fond]].

[[Whole]] this [[films]] is worth a watch if you are a fan of B horror/sci-fi and [[required]] a fix. It's better than the [[film]] [[Bigfoot]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be fooled.

The acting is better than you may expect to find in a [[films]] like this and the directing is more than adequate. [[Waits]] a [[bite]] of a lul as the [[features]] are "[[devised]]", but know that [[items]] will [[selects]] up. If you are watching a DVD you may [[desiring]] to skip a [[sections]] or two. --------------------------------------------- Result 660 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is lame and not funny at all. The plot doesn't even make sense. Some scientist who works on the fringes of science opens a doorway to another dimension (maybe hell???) and his daughter gets sucked through it or something, then one day for no apparent reason she comes back and now she has big breasts and wears a skimpy outfit (I guess the demons in the other dimension made it for her?) The main character is a guy who wants to marry his girlfriend but she is gay so obviously she's more interested in her new girlfriend, and they stumble upon this witch spell book (they want to be witches or something???) and the evil spell ends up getting read again which is how the evil demon comes to earth which only the bikini top girl and the spurned guy in love can stop apparently. There is topless scenes for no reason and a guy in it who my boyfriend says is a well known wrestler but his part is completely unnecessary, obviously they made something up just to put him in it because then maybe wrestling fans will actually watch this pointless movie. I'm sure the topless girls doesn't hurt there either. The extra features on the DVD were even more confusing than the rest of the movie, I thought it might help explain what was going on but it actually just made things more confusing. Who are these people and what are they doing? Basically this is a go-camping-to-make-out-then-fight-a-monster movie but there are a bunch of things (like the other dimension and book seller) than make it confusing. I didn't like the movie but it was only like five bucks so big deal. I don't recommend watching it though it was just too stupid, I can't think of any part of the movie that was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] [[In]] the colonies we're not all that familiar with [[Arthur]] Askey, so I [[nearly]] skipped this [[film]] (which had its TCM preview [[recently]]) on [[account]] of the [[negative]] [[comments]] here on his appearance in "[[Ghost]] [[Train]]" -- which I [[expected]] to be [[thoroughly]] annoying. Instead I was [[pleasantly]] surprised to [[find]] myself [[laughing]] audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's [[comedy]] and his [[timing]] when [[delivering]] a line suggest what you'd [[get]] if [[Charlie]] [[Chaplin]] and Woody Allen had a [[baby]]. There is no [[comparing]] him to Bud [[Abbott]] or any of the other [[usual]] purveyors of comic relief who [[turn]] up in [[films]] of this [[genre]]. One can feel, [[moreover]], the thread [[connecting]] Askey to British [[comedy]] 30 years [[later]]; at [[least]] it is [[clear]] from an American point of [[view]] that he has more in common with the [[Monty]] Python troupe than with any of his [[counterparts]] over here. As for the [[rest]] of the [[film]] -- the more [[movies]] you've [[seen]], the more [[likely]] you'll [[guess]] at the ending, but it is [[still]] [[quite]] entertaining and [[atmospheric]] and worth [[waiting]] for its [[next]] appearance. [[For]] the colonies we're not all that familiar with [[Artur]] Askey, so I [[practically]] skipped this [[kino]] (which had its TCM preview [[freshly]]) on [[accountancy]] of the [[injurious]] [[observations]] here on his appearance in "[[Spector]] [[Forming]]" -- which I [[waited]] to be [[carefully]] annoying. Instead I was [[cheerfully]] surprised to [[found]] myself [[kidding]] audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's [[charade]] and his [[timeframe]] when [[offering]] a line suggest what you'd [[got]] if [[Vietcong]] [[Chapin]] and Woody Allen had a [[bebe]]. There is no [[compared]] him to Bud [[Abbot]] or any of the other [[habitual]] purveyors of comic relief who [[converting]] up in [[cinematography]] of this [[gender]]. One can feel, [[apart]], the thread [[linking]] Askey to British [[parody]] 30 years [[then]]; at [[lowest]] it is [[definite]] from an American point of [[opinion]] that he has more in common with the [[Python]] Python troupe than with any of his [[counterpart]] over here. As for the [[roosting]] of the [[movie]] -- the more [[theater]] you've [[saw]], the more [[probable]] you'll [[reckon]] at the ending, but it is [[however]] [[rather]] entertaining and [[atmosphere]] and worth [[hoping]] for its [[forthcoming]] appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I knew this [[movie]] wasn't [[going]] to be [[amazing]], but I [[thought]] I would [[give]] it a [[chance]]. I am a [[fan]] of [[Luke]] Wilson so I [[thought]] it had [[potential]]. [[Unfortunately]], a lot of the movie's [[dialog]] was very [[fake]] sounding and [[cheesy]]. I [[think]] that Aquafresh [[gave]] some [[money]] towards the production of the [[film]] because they were seriously [[dropping]] some hints [[throughout]]. There is a [[shot]] where the Aquafresh sign [[sticks]] out at you that you can't [[help]] but [[notice]] it. Maybe they should have [[focused]] on writing and acting more than how [[many]] [[times]] can we drop Aquafresh [[products]] in the [[movie]] without people getting [[annoyed]]. The [[movie]] had its moments, but I'm [[glad]] I didn't [[spend]] $9.50 to see it in the [[theater]]. I knew this [[filmmaking]] wasn't [[gonna]] to be [[surprising]], but I [[figured]] I would [[confer]] it a [[luck]]. I am a [[breather]] of [[Matty]] Wilson so I [[thoughts]] it had [[prospective]]. [[Sadly]], a lot of the movie's [[dialogues]] was very [[faked]] sounding and [[dorky]]. I [[thought]] that Aquafresh [[handed]] some [[moneys]] towards the production of the [[filmmaking]] because they were seriously [[falling]] some hints [[in]]. There is a [[offed]] where the Aquafresh sign [[baguettes]] out at you that you can't [[assisting]] but [[advices]] it. Maybe they should have [[concentrated]] on writing and acting more than how [[various]] [[moments]] can we drop Aquafresh [[merchandise]] in the [[filmmaking]] without people getting [[enraged]]. The [[film]] had its moments, but I'm [[thrilled]] I didn't [[outlay]] $9.50 to see it in the [[theatres]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Robert Taylor [[definitely]] showed himself to be a [[fine]] dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[Nonetheless]], this picture was far from [[great]] as [[shortly]] after this, Taylor [[fled]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

[[Stuart]] Granger [[hid]] his British accent and [[turned]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a [[bigot]] here and his [[hatred]] for the [[Indians]] really [[shows]].

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre [[Madre]] in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The [[writing]] in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? Robert Taylor [[unquestionably]] showed himself to be a [[fined]] dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[However]], this picture was far from [[marvellous]] as [[soon]] after this, Taylor [[absconded]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

[[Sylvain]] Granger [[disguising]] his British accent and [[revolved]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a [[bigots]] here and his [[animus]] for the [[Indian]] really [[demonstrates]].

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre [[Moms]] in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The [[literary]] in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? --------------------------------------------- Result 664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I go out to the video store to rent a flick I usually trust IMDb's views on a film and, until this one, had never seen a flick rated 7.0 or above on the site I did not enjoy.

Sidney Lumet, a legendary director of some of the best films of the 20th century, really misstepped here by making one of the biggest mistakes a filmmaker can: filling a film's cast with thoroughly unlikeable characters with no real redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I like films with flawed characters, but no matter how dark someone's personality is we all have a bit of light in there too, we're all shades of gray with some darker or brighter than others. Mr. Lumet crossed this line by filling this movie with totally unsympathetic and almost masochistic pitch-black characters.

Ethan Hawke's Hank is a 30-something whining, immature, irresponsible man-child divorced from a marriage with a wife that hates him and a daughter who thinks he's a loser, which he very much is. His indecisiveness and willingness to let others do the dirty work for him because he's too cowardly to do it himself leads directly to their bank robbery plan falling apart and mother getting killed. By the time he stands up to his older brother at the end of the film, it's more pathetic than uplifting. Ethan Hawke plays his character well, but isn't given much to work with as he is portrayed as someone with a boot perpetually stamped on their face and he doesn't' particularly care that it's there.

Speaking of which his character's wife is equally as bad. Just about every single shot of the film she's in is her verbally berating him for rent and child support money and further grinding in his already non-existent self-esteem with insults. Seriously, that's just about all the character does. Her harpy-like behavior borders on malevolent.

Albert Finney plays their father Charles, and while Mr. Finney has been a great actor for many decades, he spends about 90% of this film with the same mouth open half-grimace on his face like he's suffering from the world's worst bout of constipation. For someone who's been an actor as long as Mr. Finney, you think he'd be more apt at emoting. Even though he doesn't show it much, his character is supposedly grief stricken and anger-filled. And when he smothers Andy at the film's conclusion it's akin to Dr. Frankenstein putting the monster he helped create out of it's own misery.

Marisa Tomei isn't given much to do with her character. Stuck in an unhappy marriage with Andy and having an affair with his brother for some unfathomable reason. When Andy's world begins to spiral out of control she logically jumps ship, but it really doesn't make her any less selfish or self-serving than any other character in the film, but probably the one with the most common sense at least.

And finally we come to Andy, played by the always good Philip Seymour Hoffman, is the only reason I rated this film a 3 instead of a 1. His performance of the heroin-addicted, embezzling financial executive who's "perfect crime" of robbing his parent's insured jewelry store goes awry is mesmerizing. His descent from calm master planner of a flawed scheme to unstable, deranged homicidal maniac is believable and tragic. Hoffman's character ends up being the film's chief villain, but it's hard to root against him given the alternatives are an emotionally castrated little brother and a father who's self-admitted poor early parenting led to his son's eventual psychosis and indirect, unintentional murder of his mother.

Ultimately this film is really only worth watching for PSH's great performance and it's family train wreck nature. Just don't expect there to be any characters worth cheering for, because there really aren't. --------------------------------------------- Result 665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A question for you : A [[family]] [[go]] to a [[new]] house and [[get]] stalked by demonic forces . [[Which]] [[film]] am I talking about ? [[Every]] horror [[film]] you`ve [[seen]] ? Yes that`s [[true]] but that`s not the [[answer]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by [[saying]] there`s a lot of [[teen]] angst scenes . Doesn`t [[help]] ? [[Well]] there`s [[lots]] of [[bits]] where the [[characters]] are stalked by a [[creature]] and you see the [[characters]] through the creature`s POV . No futher forward ? Okay there`s a dream sequence involving [[lots]] of blood ? [[Could]] still be any [[horror]] [[film]] you [[say]] . Oh gawd this [[could]] take [[weeks]] so I`ll say the film I`m [[talking]] about [[features]] [[loads]] of Aussies [[many]] of whom have [[appeared]] in [[NEIGHBOURS]] and [[HOME]] AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[aka]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[understand]] what the above [[exercise]] is about ? It`s about me pointing out how THE [[THIRD]] CIRCLE is [[absolutely]] no [[different]] from any horror [[film]] that`s been [[made]] A question for you : A [[families]] [[going]] to a [[newest]] house and [[gets]] stalked by demonic forces . [[Whom]] [[movies]] am I talking about ? [[Everything]] horror [[films]] you`ve [[noticed]] ? Yes that`s [[veritable]] but that`s not the [[respond]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by [[telling]] there`s a lot of [[adolescent]] angst scenes . Doesn`t [[aids]] ? [[Good]] there`s [[batch]] of [[tib]] where the [[personages]] are stalked by a [[monster]] and you see the [[nature]] through the creature`s POV . No futher forward ? Okay there`s a dream sequence involving [[batches]] of blood ? [[Wo]] still be any [[terror]] [[filmmaking]] you [[says]] . Oh gawd this [[did]] take [[chow]] so I`ll say the film I`m [[chitchat]] about [[characters]] [[burden]] of Aussies [[various]] of whom have [[seemed]] in [[NEIGHBORING]] and [[ABODE]] AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[nickname]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[understands]] what the above [[wield]] is about ? It`s about me pointing out how THE [[THIRDS]] CIRCLE is [[wholly]] no [[diversified]] from any horror [[filmmaking]] that`s been [[effected]] --------------------------------------------- Result 666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] How do you spell washed up fat Italian who can barely pull off a martial arts move without needing some heart medication? In this movie we see Steven Seagal at his [[lowest]] level of accomplishment- since his [[career]] [[started]] it has been a [[steady]] [[decline]] into [[pathetic]] over [[indulgent]] [[behavior]] that has scuttled his [[career]]. [[In]] this [[movie]] it [[looks]] like most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his [[restaurant]] every day.

He is fat, [[slow]] and very [[old]] looking in this [[movie]], hardly a martial arts action [[hero]], more like a [[laughing]] [[stock]] clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of [[reasons]] why.

Plot: fat Italian [[guy]] with a big [[reputation]] on the force gets [[wind]] that a [[crime]] [[group]] may be playing around with a drug [[designed]] by the military to create the ultimate warrior [[response]]. This pretense, although pathetic and [[laughable]], gives [[opportunity]] for some over the top [[fight]] scenes that include blasting through walls like a [[comic]] book.

Did I [[mention]] this [[movie]] totally [[sucks]] and Steven Seagal is a complete [[joke]]? yeah. I did. How do you spell washed up fat Italian who can barely pull off a martial arts move without needing some heart medication? In this movie we see Steven Seagal at his [[less]] level of accomplishment- since his [[professions]] [[launched]] it has been a [[ongoing]] [[decrease]] into [[unhappy]] over [[permissive]] [[behaviours]] that has scuttled his [[occupations]]. [[Across]] this [[film]] it [[seem]] like most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his [[diner]] every day.

He is fat, [[slower]] and very [[antique]] looking in this [[filmmaking]], hardly a martial arts action [[heroin]], more like a [[giggling]] [[stocks]] clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of [[motifs]] why.

Plot: fat Italian [[guys]] with a big [[notoriety]] on the force gets [[windmill]] that a [[criminality]] [[groupings]] may be playing around with a drug [[styled]] by the military to create the ultimate warrior [[reaction]]. This pretense, although pathetic and [[ridicule]], gives [[likelihood]] for some over the top [[struggles]] scenes that include blasting through walls like a [[hilarious]] book.

Did I [[mentioning]] this [[filmmaking]] totally [[stinks]] and Steven Seagal is a complete [[farce]]? yeah. I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Cillian [[Murphy]] and Rachel McAdams star in this [[action]]/thriller [[written]] and [[directed]] by the master of [[suspense]], Wes Craven, himself. The [[whole]] movie [[starts]] with some trouble at The Lux Atlantic, a hotel in Miami. The problem is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the manager of the [[hotel]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the [[trouble]] begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be [[called]] Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the plane, and [[crazy]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her [[house]] to see if her [[father]] is [[okay]], and [[crazily]] enough, Rippner is already there. There is [[nearly]] twelve minutes of violence and [[strong]] intensity throughout that entire scene. In [[total]], about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[great]] plot to it. Like I [[said]], I will not [[give]] [[anything]] away because it's so [[shocking]] and [[thrilling]] and somewhat [[disturbing]]/frightening. And the acting from [[every]] [[single]] [[character]] in the movie, [[even]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch perfect. It was [[incredible]]. [[Everything]] was [[awesome]] in this [[movie]]! The acting, the music, the [[effects]], the make-up, the directing, the [[editing]], the writing, everything was [[wonderful]]! Wes Craven is [[definitely]] The Master of [[Suspense]]. Red [[Eye]] is [[definitely]] a must-see and is [[definitely]] worth [[spending]] your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it [[would]] never ever [[get]] [[boring]].

Red [[Eye]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[stars]].

Original MPAA [[rating]]: PG-13: Some [[Intense]] [[Sequences]] of Violence, and [[Language]]

My MPAA [[rating]]: PG-13: Some [[Very]] Intense [[Sequences]] of Violence, and [[Language]]

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, [[Disturbing]] Content Cillian [[Murph]] and Rachel McAdams star in this [[efforts]]/thriller [[typed]] and [[aimed]] by the master of [[wait]], Wes Craven, himself. The [[ensemble]] movie [[initiated]] with some trouble at The Lux Atlantic, a hotel in Miami. The problem is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the manager of the [[motel]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the [[problems]] begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be [[termed]] Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the plane, and [[lunatic]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her [[dwelling]] to see if her [[pere]] is [[ok]], and [[deliriously]] enough, Rippner is already there. There is [[practically]] twelve minutes of violence and [[forceful]] intensity throughout that entire scene. In [[utter]], about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[huge]] plot to it. Like I [[say]], I will not [[lend]] [[something]] away because it's so [[awful]] and [[exciting]] and somewhat [[worrying]]/frightening. And the acting from [[any]] [[sole]] [[trait]] in the movie, [[yet]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch perfect. It was [[unthinkable]]. [[Any]] was [[magnifique]] in this [[kino]]! The acting, the music, the [[repercussions]], the make-up, the directing, the [[edited]], the writing, everything was [[wondrous]]! Wes Craven is [[unmistakably]] The Master of [[Sufferance]]. Red [[Eyeball]] is [[obviously]] a must-see and is [[categorically]] worth [[expenditure]] your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it [[ought]] never ever [[got]] [[bored]].

Red [[Ojo]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[celebrity]].

Original MPAA [[evaluation]]: PG-13: Some [[Intensive]] [[Sequence]] of Violence, and [[Linguistic]]

My MPAA [[evaluation]]: PG-13: Some [[Much]] Intense [[Sequencing]] of Violence, and [[Parlance]]

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, [[Unnerving]] Content --------------------------------------------- Result 668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am not a very good writer, so I'll keep this short. World at War is the best WWII documentary that I've seen. I've seen different WWII documentaries (not only English/North American) and this documentary seems to be the most complete WWII documentary that I've seen. I think it could talk a bit more about the Great Depression and why/how Hitler got to power, but it does a very good job at covering the war. It seems to be complete and objective/fair to everyone. It does not exaggerate or diminish roles of different nations. It has a lot of original footage, including color footage and many eye witnesses (it was made in 70's when a lot more were alive). It has great music and narrator. All-in-All I gave this one 10/10, because it's that good. (I haven't seen specials in DVD version so I cannot comment on those) --------------------------------------------- Result 669 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't remember many films where a bumbling idiot of a hero was so funny throughout. Leslie Cheung is such the antithesis of a hero that he's too dense to be seduced by a gorgeous vampire... I had the good luck to see it on a big screen, and to find a video to watch again and again. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was glad to watch this [[movie]] free of charge as I am [[working]] in the [[hotel]] [[industry]] and this [[movie]] [[came]] [[lately]] to our movie library. [[Nothing]] against low [[budget]] [[movies]], but this movie has [[horrible]] acting and directing. How can a [[movie]] as this one ever be [[made]]. The director should be blacklisted, and for all the poor [[actors]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[awful]]. There are just a few more movies out there which [[deserve]] to be [[called]] the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who [[make]] [[money]] with this movie should give it to [[charity]], so at [[least]] it [[serves]] for a [[good]] [[reason]].

[[In]] this [[case]] I [[would]] watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). I was glad to watch this [[movies]] free of charge as I am [[worked]] in the [[guesthouse]] [[industries]] and this [[filmmaking]] [[became]] [[recently]] to our movie library. [[None]] against low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]], but this movie has [[frightful]] acting and directing. How can a [[flick]] as this one ever be [[introduced]]. The director should be blacklisted, and for all the poor [[actresses]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[scary]]. There are just a few more movies out there which [[merit]] to be [[drew]] the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who [[deliver]] [[moneys]] with this movie should give it to [[philanthropy]], so at [[fewer]] it [[serve]] for a [[alright]] [[raison]].

[[Onto]] this [[instances]] I [[could]] watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). --------------------------------------------- Result 671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't remember many details about the show, but i remember how passionate i was about it and how i was determined not to miss any episodes. Unfortunately at the time we had no VCR, so i haven't ever seen the series again. However i can remember strongly how i felt while watching it and how thrilled i was every time it came on. Sam Waterstone was my favorite actor these days (i think i was almost in love) and he remains one of my favorite actors to the day, mostly due to his appearance in the series. I would gladly buy/steal/download this series, i think i would go to great lengths in order to see it again and revisit a childhood long gone... Any ideas? Does anybody knows of a site devoted to the series or has the episodes on tape from their first airing? --------------------------------------------- Result 672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] They're not jawing [[journalists]] Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or [[witty]] detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett [[Johansson]] are [[surprisingly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post [[Depression]], Allen's writing filled with [[ironic]] self deprecation and plain old [[New]] York [[angst]]. [[Shades]] of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." [[Johansson]], fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't [[hide]] his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not [[great]] but amusing, at [[times]] brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen [[humor]]. [[While]] there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not [[lost]] his touch of class. They're not jawing [[reporters]] Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or [[spiritual]] detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett [[Johansen]] are [[terribly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post [[Doldrums]], Allen's writing filled with [[ironical]] self deprecation and plain old [[Novo]] York [[anguish]]. [[Hues]] of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." [[Johanson]], fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't [[disguised]] his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not [[remarkable]] but amusing, at [[moments]] brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen [[mood]]. [[Though]] there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not [[outof]] his touch of class. --------------------------------------------- Result 673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This wasn't what i wanted to [[see]]. I bought this on DVD and under the movie i [[found]] myself [[irritated]] and [[turned]] off the [[movie]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were [[shooting]] at the father

2 The [[tribes]] was really annoying

3 the dinosaurs (mostly)[[looked]] to [[faked]]

4 The bad scientist well he was annoying

5 The [[picture]] quality on the [[DVD]] was really [[bad]]

What i DID like:

1 The [[music]] by Jerry Goldsmith. This music is [[really]] great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this [[movie]]. Sadly the [[sound]] quality is not good, but its [[OK]] for its time.

2 The first [[time]] we [[see]] the [[dinosaurs]] they inspire a [[sort]] of [[awe]].

3 [[Baby]] is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The [[children]] who [[sees]] this [[film]] would [[hopefully]] [[learn]] that [[evil]] [[always]] loses. This wasn't what i wanted to [[consults]]. I bought this on DVD and under the movie i [[discovered]] myself [[irritable]] and [[revolved]] off the [[filmmaking]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were [[gunshot]] at the father

2 The [[tribesmen]] was really annoying

3 the dinosaurs (mostly)[[seemed]] to [[false]]

4 The bad scientist well he was annoying

5 The [[image]] quality on the [[DVDS]] was really [[negative]]

What i DID like:

1 The [[musicians]] by Jerry Goldsmith. This music is [[genuinely]] great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this [[film]]. Sadly the [[sounds]] quality is not good, but its [[ALLRIGHT]] for its time.

2 The first [[times]] we [[seeing]] the [[dinosaur]] they inspire a [[kind]] of [[admiration]].

3 [[Bebe]] is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The [[childhood]] who [[believes]] this [[filmmaking]] would [[luckily]] [[learns]] that [[nefarious]] [[constantly]] loses. --------------------------------------------- Result 674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Boy]] what a dud this [[mess]] was.But it only lasts an [[hour]] and I only [[paid]] a buck for it so I'll live....unlike the entire cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[starts]] having [[bodies]] turning up that have been [[drained]] of all their blood.The local yokels [[start]] [[talking]] about vampires ,of course,and a [[little]] more loudly after each [[body]] is [[found]].The [[town]] sheriff or constable or [[whatever]] he is,played by [[awesome]] [[actor]] Melvyn Douglas,[[tries]] to [[tell]] them otherwise.[[When]] he mentions the fact that the dead have one [[large]] [[hole]] on each side of the neck,instead of two holes close together, the [[locals]] simply then [[say]] it's a [[giant]] vampire bat.The constable insists that vampires do not [[exist]] and it must be a human culprit doing the killings.

But Melvyn doesn't [[seem]] too bothered either [[way]].He [[spends]] most of his time trying to [[get]] into the pantaloons of his [[sweetie]],[[played]] by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mix]] is the town simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[always]] [[seemed]] to have played the same role in every [[movie]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by catching [[bats]] and [[drinking]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the town doctor who seemingly is [[trying]] to [[help]] the constable [[solve]] the [[crimes]].And boy does he ever [[stink]] as an [[actor]].Atwill is as [[close]] to cardboard in this role as he [[could]] [[get]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[also]] in this thing....lots of [[big]] [[names]] to be such a [[pile]] of guano.

Other than the [[terrible]] mis-title this [[movie]] has,the [[alternate]] [[name]],"The Blood Sucker" is [[much]] better,this [[movie]] is also [[dull]] and plodding and just silly.

For me the [[high]] point of the [[movie]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[freaky]] [[town]] weirdo but other than him this [[movie]] didn't [[offer]] [[much]].And then when you [[find]] out the [[reason]] for the [[strange]] [[deaths]] and [[see]] the special [[effect]] thing that [[required]] all this blood you'll really be [[let]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[awful]] [[pictures]] but at [[least]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Think]] of this [[movie]] as a [[really]] [[bad]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. [[Laddie]] what a dud this [[chaos]] was.But it only lasts an [[hours]] and I only [[pays]] a buck for it so I'll live....unlike the entire cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[begins]] having [[agencies]] turning up that have been [[emptied]] of all their blood.The local yokels [[launching]] [[schmooze]] about vampires ,of course,and a [[petite]] more loudly after each [[agency]] is [[finds]].The [[ville]] sheriff or constable or [[whichever]] he is,played by [[sumptuous]] [[protagonist]] Melvyn Douglas,[[attempting]] to [[say]] them otherwise.[[Whenever]] he mentions the fact that the dead have one [[immense]] [[hellhole]] on each side of the neck,instead of two holes close together, the [[residents]] simply then [[tell]] it's a [[monumental]] vampire bat.The constable insists that vampires do not [[existent]] and it must be a human culprit doing the killings.

But Melvyn doesn't [[appears]] too bothered either [[paths]].He [[spent]] most of his time trying to [[gets]] into the pantaloons of his [[pumpkin]],[[accomplished]] by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mixes]] is the town simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[incessantly]] [[appeared]] to have played the same role in every [[film]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by catching [[bates]] and [[drinkable]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the town doctor who seemingly is [[attempting]] to [[aids]] the constable [[address]] the [[offense]].And boy does he ever [[smelling]] as an [[actress]].Atwill is as [[nearer]] to cardboard in this role as he [[did]] [[gets]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[further]] in this thing....lots of [[large]] [[naming]] to be such a [[battery]] of guano.

Other than the [[horrendous]] mis-title this [[filmmaking]] has,the [[alternating]] [[designation]],"The Blood Sucker" is [[very]] better,this [[filmmaking]] is also [[boring]] and plodding and just silly.

For me the [[supreme]] point of the [[filmmaking]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[loopy]] [[city]] weirdo but other than him this [[film]] didn't [[delivering]] [[very]].And then when you [[found]] out the [[motives]] for the [[weird]] [[fatalities]] and [[seeing]] the special [[consequences]] thing that [[requirement]] all this blood you'll really be [[allowing]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[horrific]] [[photographing]] but at [[lowest]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Thinking]] of this [[filmmaking]] as a [[truthfully]] [[wicked]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought Hedy Burress (who managed to escape from the watery grave of part one) was going to be in part 2 Guess not. I just think they should of killed her off like in Friday The 13th Part 2 (you know what I mean).

This movie like Scream 3, and Urban Legend 2 followed movies within a movie.

This was PURE CRAP! The whole Movie within a Movie crap.

BAD STAY AWAY! --------------------------------------------- Result 676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far one of the worst movies i have ever seen, the poor special effects along with the poor acting are just a few of the things wrong with this film. I am fan of the first two major leagues but this one is lame! --------------------------------------------- Result 677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a VERY entertaining movie. A few of the reviews that I have read on this forum have been written by people who, apparently, think that the film was an effort at serious drama. IT WAS NOT MADE THAT WAY....It is an extremely enjoyable film, performed in a tongue in cheek manner. All of the actors are obviously having fun while entertaining us. The fight sequences are lively, brisk and, above all, not gratuitous. The so-called "Green Death", utilized on a couple of occasions, is not, as I read in one review, "gruesome". A couple of reviewers were very critical of the martial arts fight between Doc and Seas near the end of the film. Hey, lighten up... Again, I remind one and all that this is a fun film. Each phase of this "fight" was captioned, which added to the fun aspect. The actors were not trying to emulate Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan. This is NOT one of those martial arts films. Ron Ely looks great in this film and is the perfect choice to play Doc. Another nice touch is the unique manner in which the ultimate fate of the "bad guy" (Seas) is dealt with. I promise you that if you don't try to take this film very seriously and simply watch it for the entertainment value, you will spend 100 minutes in a most enjoyable manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Only reason I have [[seen]] 101 Dalmatians was its [[nominations]] for [[original]] song and [[costume]] [[design]] for the Oscars. I [[must]] admit that I was [[less]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella [[DeVil]](by the [[way]] [[Glen]] Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only [[wait]] until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and [[tries]] to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I [[found]] all cast quite [[silly]] but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** Only reason I have [[noticed]] 101 Dalmatians was its [[nominating]] for [[preliminary]] song and [[attire]] [[conceive]] for the Oscars. I [[should]] admit that I was [[lowest]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella [[devils]](by the [[camino]] [[Glyn]] Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only [[hoping]] until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and [[strives]] to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I [[unearthed]] all cast quite [[beast]] but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have just recently purchased [[collection]] one of this [[awesome]] series and even after just watching three episodes, I still am [[mesmerized]] by sleek styling of the animation and the slow, [[yet]] [[thoughtful]] [[actions]] of the story-telling. I am still a fan.....with some [[minor]] pains.

Though this installment into the Gundam saga is very cool and has what the [[previous]] series had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[wrongs]] of war and not [[letting]] [[go]] of the [[need]] to have [[control]] or power over everything([[sound]] familiar?), I have to [[say]] that this one gets a [[bit]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the [[lives]] of the [[main]] [[characters]] and their [[incessant]] [[need]] to belly-ache about [[every]] [[thing]] that [[happens]] and what they [[need]] to do to [[stop]] the OZ [[group]] from succeeding in their [[plans]]([[especially]] the character [[called]] Wufei...I mean he whines more than an [[American]] [[character]] on a soap opera. Get a [[counselor]],will ya?)

Besides for the over-exaggerated drama(I [[think]] that [[mostly]] comes from the dubbing of the English [[voice]] actors), this [[series]] is [[still]] very [[exciting]] and will [[still]] [[captivate]] me once again. I [[mean]] it can [[always]] be worse. It [[could]] be like the [[recent]] [[installment]], [[SEED]]......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll [[chat]] about that one [[later]]. I have just recently purchased [[collate]] one of this [[wondrous]] series and even after just watching three episodes, I still am [[hypnotised]] by sleek styling of the animation and the slow, [[again]] [[pensive]] [[activities]] of the story-telling. I am still a fan.....with some [[smaller]] pains.

Though this installment into the Gundam saga is very cool and has what the [[anterior]] series had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[evils]] of war and not [[leave]] [[going]] of the [[gotta]] to have [[monitors]] or power over everything([[sounds]] familiar?), I have to [[told]] that this one gets a [[bite]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the [[life]] of the [[principal]] [[character]] and their [[unceasing]] [[needs]] to belly-ache about [[each]] [[stuff]] that [[comes]] and what they [[needed]] to do to [[discontinue]] the OZ [[panels]] from succeeding in their [[scheme]]([[namely]] the character [[termed]] Wufei...I mean he whines more than an [[Americas]] [[characters]] on a soap opera. Get a [[counsellors]],will ya?)

Besides for the over-exaggerated drama(I [[ideas]] that [[basically]] comes from the dubbing of the English [[vocals]] actors), this [[serial]] is [[again]] very [[excite]] and will [[again]] [[fascinate]] me once again. I [[signify]] it can [[constantly]] be worse. It [[wo]] be like the [[latest]] [[installments]], [[SEEDS]]......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll [[talk]] about that one [[trailing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone [[think]] this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from great) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be [[fair]].. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky [[teenagers]]! [[TERRIBLE]]. also, just what we understand about the house.. it [[apparently]] needs to [[use]] its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally [[bothered]] me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was [[better]] than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone [[believe]] this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from great) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be [[impartiality]].. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky [[teen]]! [[TERRIFYING]]. also, just what we understand about the house.. it [[visibly]] needs to [[usage]] its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally [[disturbed]] me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was [[optimum]] than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. --------------------------------------------- Result 681 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Actor Paxton made his directorial debut with this chilling, dark, and competently made thriller about a widowed mechanic (Paxton himself) who ropes his two sons into participating in savage ax murders, claiming that the victims are not human beings at all but "demons", and that they have been selected by God to destroy these "demons". This is all told in flashback by one of the sons, now grown up (Matthew McConaughey) to skeptical FBI agent (Powers Boothe).

Hard to automatically forget this film; better than most serial killer features, it's a twisty and unsettling tale told in straightforward fashion with a bare minimum of cinema gimmicks. Paxton, commendably, barely shows any blood at all until near the end. Well acted by all, especially the two child actors (Jeremy Sumpter of the recent "Peter Pan" and Matt O'Leary of "Spy Kids 2" and "Domestic Disturbance"). The only reason I deducted any points at all is because I can understand that some people may find all of this hard to stomach. In any event, it's an atypical thriller with a decent script.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[really]] enjoyed the performances of the main [[cast]]. Emma Lung is [[courageous]] and interesting. The director has [[developed]] performances where the [[characters]] are not one [[dimensional]]. A [[complex]] [[story]] with the [[changing]] between eras. Also appreciated the underlying story of the unions [[losing]] power and the [[effect]] of a [[large]] employer [[closing]] on a [[small]] [[town]]. I do not agree with the [[comment]] that the [[older]] [[man]] has to be attractive. There have be [[many]] relationships with [[older]] [[men]] and younger [[women]] - without the [[male]] being [[good]] [[looking]]. Depth of [[character]] can be [[appealing]] to the not so shallow. The [[film]] has a good look and the [[cinematography]] is [[also]] good. I [[genuinely]] enjoyed the performances of the main [[casting]]. Emma Lung is [[brave]] and interesting. The director has [[devised]] performances where the [[features]] are not one [[dimensions]]. A [[complicate]] [[storytelling]] with the [[shifting]] between eras. Also appreciated the underlying story of the unions [[loses]] power and the [[consequences]] of a [[substantial]] employer [[closes]] on a [[minor]] [[towns]]. I do not agree with the [[commentary]] that the [[elderly]] [[men]] has to be attractive. There have be [[multiple]] relationships with [[elderly]] [[male]] and younger [[girl]] - without the [[macho]] being [[alright]] [[researching]]. Depth of [[personage]] can be [[tempting]] to the not so shallow. The [[kino]] has a good look and the [[film]] is [[apart]] good. --------------------------------------------- Result 683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] the 60's, having as the background the rehearsal and recording of "Sympathy for the Devil" in the [[classic]] album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – [[Mick]] Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus Marianne Faithful, Godard [[discloses]] other [[contemporary]] [[revolutionary]] and ideological movements – the Black Power through the [[Black]] [[Panthers]], the feminism, the communism, the fascism - [[entwined]] with the reading of a [[cheap]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another [[pretentious]] and boring [[mess]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the [[Stones]] and "Sympathy for the [[Devil]]" and it is [[nice]] to [[see]] them in the [[beginning]] of their [[careers]]; [[otherwise]] this documentary would be unbearable. My [[vote]] is three.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "[[Sympathy]] for the [[Devil]]" [[Into]] the 60's, having as the background the rehearsal and recording of "Sympathy for the Devil" in the [[conventional]] album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – [[Mikey]] Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus Marianne Faithful, Godard [[uncovers]] other [[current]] [[groundbreaking]] and ideological movements – the Black Power through the [[Negro]] [[Cougars]], the feminism, the communism, the fascism - [[interconnected]] with the reading of a [[inexpensive]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another [[presumptuous]] and boring [[chaos]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the [[Cobbles]] and "Sympathy for the [[Heck]]" and it is [[pleasurable]] to [[seeing]] them in the [[initiate]] of their [[career]]; [[alternately]] this documentary would be unbearable. My [[voting]] is three.

Title ([[Brasil]]): "[[Empathy]] for the [[Demons]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For me,this is one of the best movies i ever saw.Overcoming racism,struggling through life and proving himself he isn't just an ordinary "cookie" ,Carl Brashear is an amazing character to play ,who puts Cuba in his best light,best performance in his life.De Niro,who is a living legend gives THAT SOMETHING to the movie.Hated his character in movie,but he gives so much good acting to this film,great performance.And appearance of beautiful Charlize was and as always is a big plus for every movie. So if you haven't seen this movie i highly recommended for those who love bravery,greatness who seek inspiration.You must look this great drama. My Vote 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the guy who wrote, directed and stared in this shocking piece of trash should really consider a carer change. Yes Rob Stefaniuk, i mean you! Seriously, who funded this crap? there are so many talented writers out there whom money could be better spent on. I think the idea is great but the acting, script and directing is just plain awful! The jokes are so not funny, I understand that they are supposed to be taking the mickey. BUT do it with style, this movie is screaming 1995 Saturday night live skits. Why, I say again why do studios give money to hacks like Rob Stefaniuk - NEVER GIVE A COMEDIAN THE Opportunity TO WRITE DIRECT AND STAR IN HIS OWN MOVIE. DUH! --------------------------------------------- Result 686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If The Man in the White Suit had been done in America, can't you see either Danny Kaye or Jerry Lewis trying on Alec Guinness's Sidney Stratton on for size?

This is one of the best of Alec Guinness's films and certainly one of the best that Ealing Studios in the United Kingdom ever turned out. It's so perfectly fits within the time frame of the new Labour government and the society it was trying to build. It's amazing how in times of crisis capital and labor can agree.

Alec Guinness this meek little schnook of a man is obsessed with the idea that he can invent clothing that will never need cleaning, that in fact repels all kinds of foreign matter the minute it touches the garment.

He's a persistent cuss and he does succeed. Of course the implications haven't really been thought through about the kind of impact clothing like that will have on society. In the end everyone is chasing him down like they would a fugitive, almost like Peter Lorre from M or Orson Welles in The Stranger or even Robert Newton in Oliver Twist.

It's the mark of a great comedy film that a potentially serious situation like that chase as described in some of the serious films I've mentioned can be played for laughs. Poor Guinness's suit is not only white and stain repellent, but it glows like a neon sign.

Other than Guinness the best performances are from Cecil Parker as yet another pompous oaf, Joan Greenwood as his siren daughter and Ernest Thesiger the biggest clothing manufacturer in the UK>

Come to think of it, did Paramount borrow that suit from Ealing and give it to John Travolta for Saturday Night Fever? --------------------------------------------- Result 687 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is a scene in Dan in Real Life where the family is competing to see which sex can finish the crossword puzzle first. The answer to one of the clues is Murphy's Law: anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. This is exactly the case for Dan Burns (Steve Carell, the Office) a columnist for the local newspaper. Dan is an expert at giving advice for everyday life, yet he comes to realize that things aren't so picture perfect in his own. Dan in Real Life is amazing at capturing these ironies of everyday life and is successful at embracing the comedy, tragedy, and beauty of them all. Besides that this movie is pretty damn hilarious.

The death of his wife forces Dan to raise his three daughters all on his own... each daughter in their own pivotal stages in life: the first one anxious to try out her drivers license, the middle one well into her teenage angst phase, and the youngest one drifting away from early childhood. Things take a turn for Dan when he goes to Rhode Island for a family reunion and stumbles across an intriguing woman in a bookstore.

Her name is Marie (Juliette Binoche, Chocolat) and she is looking for a book to help her avoid awkward situations... which is precisely whats in store when they get thrown into the Burns Family household.

If you've seen Steve Carell in The Office or Little Miss Sunshine, you'd know that he is incomparable with comedic timing and a tremendously dynamic actor as well. Steve Carell is awesome at capturing all the emotions that come with family life: the frustration and sincere compassion. The family as well as the house itself provides a warm environment for the movie that contrasts the inner turmoil that builds throughout the movie and finally bursts out in a pretty suspenseful climax. The movie only falls short in some of the predictable outcomes, yet at the same time life is made up of both irony and predictability: which is an irony within itself.

Dan in Real Life is definitely worth seeing, for the sole enjoyment of watching all the funny subtleties we often miss in everyday life, and I'll most likely enjoy it a second time, or even a third. Just "put it on my tab." --------------------------------------------- Result 688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] No, this wasn't one of the ten [[worst]] [[films]] of the 1980's, but it [[certainly]] skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks like it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else [[would]] you explain special [[effects]] pre-dating "An American [[Werewolf]] in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? [[While]] we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one [[woman]] who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, [[great]] Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to [[death]] and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she [[retains]] her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also [[looks]] much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I [[like]] Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen [[Wolf]]" was better than this. "[[Teen]] [[Wolf]] Too" was [[better]] than this, and that wasn't even so good.

No, this wasn't one of the ten [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] of the 1980's, but it [[definitively]] skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks like it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else [[could]] you explain special [[implications]] pre-dating "An American [[Werewolves]] in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? [[Although]] we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one [[femme]] who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, [[fabulous]] Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to [[fatalities]] and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she [[retaining]] her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also [[seem]] much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I [[adores]] Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen [[Woolf]]" was better than this. "[[Youths]] [[Lupo]] Too" was [[optimum]] than this, and that wasn't even so good.

--------------------------------------------- Result 689 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My [[kids]] recently started watching the [[reruns]] of this [[show]] - both the early episodes on the N, and the [[later]] ones on ABC Family - and they [[love]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what [[prompted]] all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "[[highly]] publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the [[web]] have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early [[episodes]] were so much better than the [[later]] [[episodes]]. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and [[themes]] remain largely the same throughout - but they do [[lose]] some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some [[light]] on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen ([[Mr]]. turner being another character who left) Oh well - [[maybe]] there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just [[glad]] to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't [[cut]] it for me) My [[brats]] recently started watching the [[repetitions]] of this [[display]] - both the early episodes on the N, and the [[afterward]] ones on ABC Family - and they [[loved]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what [[drove]] all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "[[eminently]] publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the [[internet]] have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early [[spells]] were so much better than the [[afterward]] [[bouts]]. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and [[topic]] remain largely the same throughout - but they do [[wasting]] some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some [[lighting]] on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen ([[Monsieur]]. turner being another character who left) Oh well - [[conceivably]] there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just [[happy]] to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't [[chopping]] it for me) --------------------------------------------- Result 690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Ever [[wanted]] to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the [[Hayes]] Code was officially put into [[effect]]? [[Well]], [[unfortunately]] "Convention City" is lost, so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His [[Mate]]" to find out. [[For]] 1934, there is a [[remarkable]] [[amount]] of sexual [[innuendo]] and [[even]] exposed flesh. [[Just]] [[look]] at Jane's nude [[swim]]. [[While]] Tarzan is [[often]] [[thought]] of as b-adventure [[films]] [[made]] for [[young]] boys and no one else, this [[picture]] [[proves]] that the [[series]] was originally very adult. Over [[seventy]] [[years]] later, it is [[still]] as sexy as it was when it came out.

[[In]] addition to the envelope [[pushing]] taboo [[nature]], it is a superb and exciting [[adventure]] [[story]]. I've always [[enjoyed]] the jungle [[films]] that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the [[genre]] I'd [[call]] [[great]] [[films]]. "Tarzan and His Mate" is by far the [[best]] [[film]] from this [[long]] [[gone]] subgenre. The [[sequences]] of the [[attacks]] on the safari by either [[apes]] or natives [[still]] manage to [[create]] [[tension]] today. Also, the [[animals]] are all too cool (espescially the [[apes]] throwing [[boulders]]). The acting won't [[win]] any [[major]] [[awards]] [[soon]], but is [[certainly]] more than [[adequate]] for this [[type]] of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the [[smartest]] [[monkey]] in the jungle. One of the most [[entertaining]] [[examples]] of pre-code Hollywood out there. Ever [[wanting]] to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the [[Hays]] Code was officially put into [[consequences]]? [[Good]], [[sadly]] "Convention City" is lost, so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His [[Comrade]]" to find out. [[Onto]] 1934, there is a [[tremendous]] [[sums]] of sexual [[insinuation]] and [[yet]] exposed flesh. [[Jen]] [[glance]] at Jane's nude [[bath]]. [[Although]] Tarzan is [[habitually]] [[figured]] of as b-adventure [[movie]] [[introduced]] for [[youthful]] boys and no one else, this [[photos]] [[demonstrating]] that the [[serials]] was originally very adult. Over [[seventies]] [[olds]] later, it is [[however]] as sexy as it was when it came out.

[[During]] addition to the envelope [[prompting]] taboo [[trait]], it is a superb and exciting [[adventurer]] [[tale]]. I've always [[appreciated]] the jungle [[cinema]] that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the [[sort]] I'd [[invitation]] [[wonderful]] [[kino]]. "Tarzan and His Mate" is by far the [[better]] [[cinematographic]] from this [[lengthy]] [[faded]] subgenre. The [[sequence]] of the [[attack]] on the safari by either [[monkeys]] or natives [[yet]] manage to [[creating]] [[tensions]] today. Also, the [[animal]] are all too cool (espescially the [[chimpanzees]] throwing [[cobbles]]). The acting won't [[earning]] any [[important]] [[prize]] [[promptly]], but is [[obviously]] more than [[appropriate]] for this [[typing]] of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the [[cleverest]] [[monkeys]] in the jungle. One of the most [[amusing]] [[instances]] of pre-code Hollywood out there. --------------------------------------------- Result 691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who doesn't like this film is one who is afraid to explore his or her own demons. This film does make the viewer a little uncomfortable at times, but that is its intention. It asks you to look at your own life and confront the obstacles head on like Lou eventually does. It asks you to overcome the fear of perception and become who you are meant to be. Bret Carr holds up a mirror unlike any filmmaker has. The intention and the message is clear and profound. People's apprehension about this film stems only from their own insecurities. An open-minded viewer takes this inspirational message and runs with it. Sometimes a life- changing realization DOES come in a flash -- a light bulb going on. This story is real and changes the lives if its viewers in a real way. --------------------------------------------- Result 692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There aren't many overcoming-the-odds stories quite like that of Christy Brown. Born with cerebral palsy in 1930s Dublin, his parents thought his handicap was mental as well as physical. Though eventually properly diagnosed, Brown, in a lower working-class family with nearly 20 children, had to push himself just to be appreciated by his family. Through the use of his only fully-functioning limb, his left leg, he taught himself to write and paint, both skills he developed expertly.

But what makes the film version of Brown's autobiography "My Left Foot" such a great retelling is its humility. Both director/writer Jim Sheridan and star Daniel Day-Lewis have managed to tell this story in a way that doesn't scream for attention and resort to melodrama. Cheesy struggles and scenes of frustration as well as glorious moments of minute victory are easy pitfalls of a story so miraculous, yet "My Left Foot" stays real and intrinsically inspired.

Day-Lewis is the easiest to highlight. Playing anyone with such serious physical impairments has to be a demanding task. Not only does Day-Lewis give us a very complete picture of Christy, but he also manages to chronicle the growth, improvement and inner change of the character in different stages of his life. He plays Christy at 17 when he had limited language capability and was emotionally volatile just as crisply as he does the intellectually learned Christy who struggles to cope with why he can't find non-platonic love. The latter theme is the film's strongest and it would've been nice for Sheridan and co-adapter Shane Connaughton to really flesh that out. Regardless, Day-Lewis gets us to understand and sympathize with all those elements, giving a performance that's so believable you often don't have time to think "wow, he's such a great actor." Those are the most commendable performances.

Equally important but through more subtle means is Sheridan's work on the film. This story is about day-to-day life and struggles. Although Christy has such a unique set of circumstances hampering his life, his struggles are not unlike our own and Sheridan grasps that concept completely. Christy struggles with love, parental attention, questions of self- worth and capability. His struggles are just more physically manifested (literally and figuratively) than ours.

Sheridan gives us moments that capture the spirit of the large Brown family and Christy's unique place in it. The drama evolves naturally when tensions are highest and the humor comes in much the same way. The dinner scene when Christy learns that his doctor/teacher -- the woman he loves -- is going to marry his brother Peter is the film's finest example of both Day-Lewis and Sheridan's efforts. It's built up to so well by Sheridan that it comes out when we're ready and Day-Lewis takes us from there with his stunning work.

The other strong component of the film is Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown. I did not know she'd won the Oscar, but there was something about her performances as Christy's loving and wise mother that just screamed Oscar-worthy. Her love for Christy and constant fighting for him just seems so convincing and heartfelt and she earns a lot of sympathy given her situation.

The emotional punch of the film given the story is surprisingly minimal. Perhaps that was part of the sacrifice of trying to create a film that feels organically human. The two should be reconcilable, but I imagine it's challenging to tell a story that feels true-to-life and one that provides enough dramatic moments to take our emotions on a roller coaster. The choice to downplay the latter was definitely the wise one for "My Left Foot." Brown's circumstances speak for themselves -- they don't need to be squeezed for weightier dramatic impact.

~Steven C

Visit my site moviemusereviews.com for more --------------------------------------------- Result 693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] [[Live]]! Yes, but not [[kicking]].

[[True]] story: Some time ago, a Dutch [[TV]] station made an [[announcement]] that they were [[going]] to [[air]] a [[new]] [[reality]] [[show]]. A contest [[rather]]. The main [[participant]] in this show would be a [[woman]] who was [[dying]] of something terrible and she would be [[donating]] her [[kidneys]] to one lucky person with [[progressive]] kidney failure. [[For]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[turd]], saying it was [[appalling]], [[immoral]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. [[Leaving]] everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. [[Viva]]! Yes, but not [[kick]].

[[Veritable]] story: Some time ago, a Dutch [[TELEVISION]] station made an [[ad]] that they were [[go]] to [[airplane]] a [[nuevo]] [[realism]] [[exhibitions]]. A contest [[quite]]. The main [[attendees]] in this show would be a [[girl]] who was [[died]] of something terrible and she would be [[gift]] her [[kidney]] to one lucky person with [[progressively]] kidney failure. [[During]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[crap]], saying it was [[frightening]], [[amoral]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. [[Exiting]] everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I'm a big [[fan]] of B5, having [[caught]] on only at the [[end]] of season three. I faithfully [[watched]] all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, [[concluding]] that it was one of the most well-thought out [[story]] arcs to ever [[hit]] [[television]]. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well [[produced]] and as entertaining as anything to hit the [[theaters]].

[[Which]] brings us to '[[River]] of Souls'. Naturally, after [[seeing]] everything else, I had high [[expectations]]. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it [[suffers]] obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the [[total]] [[absence]] of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[worst]] of the episodes. I'm a big [[breather]] of B5, having [[grabbed]] on only at the [[ends]] of season three. I faithfully [[seen]] all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, [[concluded]] that it was one of the most well-thought out [[narratives]] arcs to ever [[strike]] [[tv]]. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well [[generated]] and as entertaining as anything to hit the [[cinema]].

[[Whose]] brings us to '[[Rivers]] of Souls'. Naturally, after [[see]] everything else, I had high [[forecasting]]. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it [[undergoes]] obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the [[unmitigated]] [[lacking]] of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[meanest]] of the episodes. --------------------------------------------- Result 695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[love]] this movie [[like]] no other. Another [[time]] I will [[try]] to [[explain]] its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[remarkable]] dialogue, which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, [[bastards]], or worse, and [[England]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television [[interview]] on an "arty [[program]]"): Mr [[Mackenzie]] what artists have [[impressed]] you most [[since]] you've been in [[England]]? (Barry's [[response]])Flamin' bull-artists!

(while [[chatting]] up a [[naive]] young [[pom]] [[girl]]): Mr [[Mackenzie]], I [[suppose]] you have hordes of [[Aboriginal]] [[servants]] back in Australia? (Barry's [[response]]) Abos? I've never [[seen]] an [[Abo]] in me life. [[Mum]] does most of the solid yacca (ie [[hard]] [[work]]) [[round]] our place.

This is just a [[taste]] of the [[hilarious]] [[farce]] of this bonser Aussie flick. [[If]] you can [[get]] a copy of it, watch and enjoy. I [[iove]] this movie [[iike]] no other. Another [[times]] I will [[endeavour]] to [[clarifying]] its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[wondrous]] dialogue, which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, [[motherfuckers]], or worse, and [[Brits]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television [[interrogation]] on an "arty [[programmes]]"): Mr [[Mckenzie]] what artists have [[surprising]] you most [[because]] you've been in [[Uk]]? (Barry's [[answers]])Flamin' bull-artists!

(while [[drooling]] up a [[unsuspecting]] young [[baum]] [[girls]]): Mr [[Mckenzie]], I [[guess]] you have hordes of [[Natives]] [[employees]] back in Australia? (Barry's [[answers]]) Abos? I've never [[watched]] an [[Abou]] in me life. [[Mommy]] does most of the solid yacca (ie [[stiff]] [[jobs]]) [[rounded]] our place.

This is just a [[aftertaste]] of the [[funny]] [[joke]] of this bonser Aussie flick. [[Unless]] you can [[got]] a copy of it, watch and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Any child old enough to sit up in front of a screen will be absolutely captivated by the beautifully drawn images and wonderful music in this heartfelt and humorous re-write of the Grimms' fairytale. They'll be singing 'Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo' before they can even formulate a complete sentence and will continue singing it till their dying days. It is a classic for all children, especially those adults who are young at heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] ***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, [[James]] Coburn, had spent the last 11 [[years]] on a [[chain]] gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then [[freedom]] is to [[even]] the [[score]] with the [[man]] who [[captured]] him and in the [[process]], during a wild [[shootout]], killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima [[County]] sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.

Making his [[escape]] after [[killing]] two [[prison]] [[guards]] Provo makes his [[way]] [[towards]] Yuma [[knowing]] that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young [[daughter]] Susan, [[Barbara]] Hershey,[[resides]] as well. [[Using]] his [[fellow]] escaped convicts to [[lure]] Burgade into the [[vast]] [[Arizona]] Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold [[coins]] that he [[buried]] there, Provo plans to [[exact]] his bloody [[vengeance]] on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being [[brutally]] [[raped]] by his fellow [[convicts]] or are, in not being with a [[woman]] for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!

Brutal and very [[effective]] western that [[updates]] the John Wayne 1956 [[classic]] "The Searchers" in a father [[searching]] through [[dangerous]] Indian territory for his [[kidnapped]] daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow [[responsible]] for [[killing]] Provo's wife and then having to [[face]] the fact that the same thing can very well [[happen]] to his [[daughter]] Susan is [[perfect]] in the role of the [[aging]] and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed [[Zach]] Provo is [[also]] at his best as the obsessed with hatred and [[murder]] [[escaped]] convict.

The [[man]] who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the [[territory]] like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the [[thought]] of them having their [[way]] with [[Susan]], when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold [[coins]] that [[keeps]] them from [[breaking]] up and [[going]] their own [[way]].

[[Also]] [[going]] along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who [[proves]] in the [[end]] that he's as good as Burgade is, who [[felt]] that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.

***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good! ***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, [[Jacques]] Coburn, had spent the last 11 [[olds]] on a [[strings]] gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then [[freedoms]] is to [[yet]] the [[notation]] with the [[guy]] who [[caught]] him and in the [[processes]], during a wild [[shooting]], killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima [[Prefecture]] sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.

Making his [[fleeing]] after [[murdering]] two [[prisons]] [[warders]] Provo makes his [[camino]] [[vers]] Yuma [[conscious]] that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young [[girls]] Susan, [[Barbarian]] Hershey,[[lies]] as well. [[Utilizing]] his [[colleagues]] escaped convicts to [[bait]] Burgade into the [[sizable]] [[Az]] Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold [[coinage]] that he [[bury]] there, Provo plans to [[precise]] his bloody [[revenge]] on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being [[savagely]] [[infringed]] by his fellow [[convict]] or are, in not being with a [[female]] for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!

Brutal and very [[efficacious]] western that [[modernization]] the John Wayne 1956 [[classical]] "The Searchers" in a father [[searches]] through [[unsafe]] Indian territory for his [[abducted]] daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow [[liable]] for [[slaying]] Provo's wife and then having to [[confront]] the fact that the same thing can very well [[occur]] to his [[daughters]] Susan is [[faultless]] in the role of the [[age]] and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed [[Zac]] Provo is [[apart]] at his best as the obsessed with hatred and [[killings]] [[fled]] convict.

The [[guy]] who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the [[land]] like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the [[ideas]] of them having their [[routing]] with [[Suzan]], when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold [[coin]] that [[retains]] them from [[violating]] up and [[go]] their own [[camino]].

[[Moreover]] [[gonna]] along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who [[proving]] in the [[termination]] that he's as good as Burgade is, who [[smelled]] that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.

***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good! --------------------------------------------- Result 698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] From the pen of [[Richard]] Condon (The Manchurian [[Candidate]] 1962) [[comes]] this [[muddled]] [[tale]] of [[political]] [[intrigue]] and assassination. The [[story]], [[told]] in almost comic [[book]] fashion is [[difficult]] to swallow. All-star [[cast]] [[considered]], this poor effort is not [[entirely]] the fault of the [[cast]] and crew: the [[novel]] was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[though]] at times the [[story]] is [[actually]] mocking the more [[sincere]] [[effort]] put forth in "Manchurian Candidate." A [[disappointment]] on all [[counts]]. From the pen of [[Richie]] Condon (The Manchurian [[Nominee]] 1962) [[arrives]] this [[disconcerted]] [[storytelling]] of [[politician]] [[plot]] and assassination. The [[saga]], [[said]] in almost comic [[ledger]] fashion is [[laborious]] to swallow. All-star [[casting]] [[judged]], this poor effort is not [[downright]] the fault of the [[casting]] and crew: the [[newer]] was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[whilst]] at times the [[saga]] is [[genuinely]] mocking the more [[earnest]] [[endeavour]] put forth in "Manchurian Candidate." A [[displeasure]] on all [[count]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this show!

Every time i watch an episode i repeat that line and remind myself how good of a show this is. I am a huge sci-fi fan and this show has grounds to be the most important science (fiction?) show in the history of film/TV. There are so many theories in this show about the universe i could start a religion. Its amazing, season after season the show gets better and better.

I've been a fan of MacGyver since i was 5 (19 now) and i find it so ironic that my 2 favorite TV shows of all time star Richard Dean Anderson. Its also interesting how each character is practically the opposite of the other.

Back when i first saw Stargate the movie, i instantly liked it and considered it one of my favorite sci-fi flicks, then hearing a TV show would spin from it i got really excited, but didn't get showtime till the fifth season was almost over.

Though, I'm disappointed to hear that Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin wanted to do a trilogy of movies but the studio optioned the series instead.

Id say though that it turned out just fine. Maybe even better.

This show is amazing, and i hope it never dies. Atlantis here we come! --------------------------------------------- Result 700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Veteran [[sleazeball]] [[Bruno]] Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that [[clearly]] echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[movie]] on a minuscule budget - so that it already looks obscure when it's [[newly]] released.

After her daughter [[gets]] [[abducted]], a [[mother]] enters the [[dark]] world of underground [[pornography]], because the kidnappers belong to an international organization that direct snuff films as long as the exclusive [[clients]] pay well. The search for her [[daughter]] does not only lead the mother [[across]] [[Europe]], but also into [[prostitution]]. She goes to bed with some guys to [[get]] her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization [[lead]] by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's [[getting]] into great [[danger]] herself.

There is not [[much]] good to say about this one, even though it [[starts]] promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might [[expect]] from the [[director]] who [[made]] films like BLADE [[VIOLENT]]. SNUFF [[TRAP]] (which was [[first]] [[released]] in [[Russia]]!) is neither gory [[enough]] nor does it [[contain]] the [[amount]] of nudity and [[sex]] to really [[keep]] the viewer's attention. The [[plot]] isn't that special [[either]], except maybe for the [[surprisingly]] many [[different]] [[locations]] [[throughout]] Europe. The ending is [[hugely]] [[disappointing]]. The acting isn't [[really]] [[remarkable]] [[either]], except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She [[looks]] and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of [[Bruno]] Mattei's films. But it's good to [[see]] the man back on the [[helm]] again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. Veteran [[slimeball]] [[Bruni]] Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that [[definitely]] echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[filmmaking]] on a minuscule budget - so that it already looks obscure when it's [[lately]] released.

After her daughter [[got]] [[kidnapped]], a [[madre]] enters the [[somber]] world of underground [[porn]], because the kidnappers belong to an international organization that direct snuff films as long as the exclusive [[consumers]] pay well. The search for her [[fille]] does not only lead the mother [[throughout]] [[Europa]], but also into [[prostitute]]. She goes to bed with some guys to [[obtains]] her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization [[culminate]] by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's [[obtain]] into great [[hazard]] herself.

There is not [[very]] good to say about this one, even though it [[initiate]] promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might [[waits]] from the [[superintendent]] who [[accomplished]] films like BLADE [[FIERCE]]. SNUFF [[TRAPS]] (which was [[firstly]] [[emitted]] in [[Russian]]!) is neither gory [[sufficiently]] nor does it [[containing]] the [[somme]] of nudity and [[sexuality]] to really [[retaining]] the viewer's attention. The [[intrigue]] isn't that special [[neither]], except maybe for the [[unbelievably]] many [[diverse]] [[sites]] [[during]] Europe. The ending is [[remarkably]] [[depressing]]. The acting isn't [[truthfully]] [[sumptuous]] [[nor]], except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She [[seems]] and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of [[Bruni]] Mattei's films. But it's good to [[seeing]] the man back on the [[rudder]] again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. --------------------------------------------- Result 701 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? [[Are]] you tripping of your [[head]] on [[Ecstasy]] [[pipes]]? There were so many of you. [[Did]] you do it for a dare? Is this some [[kind]] of cult? [[Or]] did [[Guy]] [[Richie]] himself sign up 788 [[times]] under different [[names]]?

Before I say [[anything]] else, I'll say this. Just because you don't [[understand]] a [[film]] doesn't mean that it's not great. Maybe you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[film]] after you had a row with your [[wife]] and then weren't in the mood. [[Maybe]] there's a more fundamental [[stumbling]] block- like you just don't have the mental [[capacity]] or a [[highly]] [[enough]] developed philosophical sense to engage with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[end]] all buts.

PLEASE don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and please don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[think]] you are pretty smart. You may even think of yourself as somewhat of a [[romantic]] figure: an independent [[thinker]] championing a masterpiece against a [[chorus]] of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're [[embarrassing]] yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's [[time]]. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd [[recognise]] it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the [[crew]], a waste of the caterers, and [[definitely]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[get]] them back you know) of anyone [[unlucky]] [[enough]] to [[sit]] through this unutterable, [[wretched]] [[mess]].

"No - [[wait]]," [[comes]] a [[voice]] in the darkness. "You just don't [[understand]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[means]] the story doesn't go in a STRAIGHT LINE. This is actually the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an [[AUTEUR]]. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you hear? -Because they couldn't deal with the COMPLEXITY. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? [[Be]] you tripping of your [[leader]] on [[Bliss]] [[tubes]]? There were so many of you. [[Got]] you do it for a dare? Is this some [[genre]] of cult? [[Nor]] did [[Buddy]] [[Ritchie]] himself sign up 788 [[moments]] under different [[name]]?

Before I say [[nothing]] else, I'll say this. Just because you don't [[understanding]] a [[filmmaking]] doesn't mean that it's not great. Maybe you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[filmmaking]] after you had a row with your [[woman]] and then weren't in the mood. [[Likely]] there's a more fundamental [[stumble]] block- like you just don't have the mental [[abilities]] or a [[heavily]] [[adequate]] developed philosophical sense to engage with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[ending]] all buts.

PLEASE don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and please don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[believe]] you are pretty smart. You may even think of yourself as somewhat of a [[sentimental]] figure: an independent [[philosopher]] championing a masterpiece against a [[verse]] of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're [[ashamed]] yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's [[times]]. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd [[recognizing]] it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the [[crewman]], a waste of the caterers, and [[obviously]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[got]] them back you know) of anyone [[unhappy]] [[sufficiently]] to [[seated]] through this unutterable, [[unfortunate]] [[chaos]].

"No - [[sufferance]]," [[arises]] a [[vocals]] in the darkness. "You just don't [[understanding]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[methods]] the story doesn't go in a STRAIGHT LINE. This is actually the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an [[AUTHOR]]. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you hear? -Because they couldn't deal with the COMPLEXITY. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Passing stones definitely one of the best comedy independent films ever. You must have a sense of humor to fully enjoy this one. This film for some reason hasn't received its credit due. First, lets start with the story line everyone loves a good treasure hunt. When a dead father leaves letters behind advising of a hidden treasure it not only brings two families together but starts a whirlwind adventure. Mix in a polish translator, a comatose mother, a crack-head with turrets syndrome, a twisted homosexual hypnotist, and one drag queen, money not only makes the world go round but can turn family into enemies. My favorite character in this film would have to be the sister/crack addict with turret's syndrome,her sudden out burst will have you crying and mimicking for weeks. --------------------------------------------- Result 703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The 63 year reign of [[Queen]] Victoria is [[perhaps]] one of the most [[documented]] and popularly [[known]] historical [[reigns]] in British [[history]]. On the one hand, her [[story]] lacks the theatrics of [[earlier]] royals [[thanks]] to a [[change]] in [[social]] [[climate]] and [[attitudes]], and on the other her [[story]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[notably]] [[human]]. Taking on the [[earlier]] years of her [[life]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince Albert was [[taking]] forefront, director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until [[recently]] [[remained]] in the [[unbeknownst]] shadows of the [[industry]] here takes Victoria's [[story]] and [[captures]] that human [[element]] so vital to her [[legacy]]. It's a story that feels [[extremely]] [[humble]] considering its exuberant [[background]], and [[yet]] that's [[partly]] what [[gives]] it a [[distinct]] edge here that separates it from the [[usual]] fare.

[[Taking]] a very direct and [[focused]] [[approach]] that centres in on a brief five or so year [[period]] between her ascension and [[marriage]] to Albert, The Young Victoria does what so [[little]] period pieces of this [[nature]] [[offer]]. Instead of [[attempting]] a [[sprawling]] encapsulation of such a figure's [[entire]] [[life]], Vallée [[instead]] opts to [[show]] one of the [[lesser]] known [[intricacies]] of Victoria's early years which are [[easily]] [[overlooked]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The [[result]] is a [[feature]] that [[may]] disgruntle historians [[thanks]] to its relatively [[flippant]] regards to facts and the like, [[yet]] never to let document [[get]] in the [[way]] of [[extracting]] a [[compelling]] [[story]], [[writer]] Julian Fellowes sticks to his [[guns]] and [[delivers]] a [[slightly]] romanticised [[yet]] [[convincing]] [[portrayal]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to [[fully]] capitalise on those [[elements]] with enough [[restraint]] to [[maintain]] integrity in regards to both the [[history]] [[involved]] and the viewer watching.

A major [[part]] in the joy of [[watching]] The Young Victoria [[play]] out [[however]] [[simply]] [[lies]] in the production values [[granted]] here that [[bring]] early 1800's [[Regal]] [[Britain]] to [[life]] with a [[vigorous]] [[realism]] so rarely achieved [[quite]] so [[strikingly]] by genre films. [[Everything]] from the costume [[designs]], sets, hair [[styles]], lighting and photography accentuates the [[grandiose]] background inherent to Victoria's [[story]] without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[watching]] Vallée's [[interpretation]] [[come]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that [[permeates]] the visual [[element]]; and then there's the film's [[score]] [[also]] which [[works]] tremendously to further the very elegant yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all [[involved]] which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of [[affection]] within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) The 63 year reign of [[Reine]] Victoria is [[potentially]] one of the most [[researched]] and popularly [[renowned]] historical [[kingdoms]] in British [[stories]]. On the one hand, her [[storytelling]] lacks the theatrics of [[formerly]] royals [[appreciation]] to a [[amendments]] in [[societal]] [[climates]] and [[behaviours]], and on the other her [[stories]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[primarily]] [[mankind]]. Taking on the [[prior]] years of her [[lifetime]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince Albert was [[adopting]] forefront, director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until [[lately]] [[persisted]] in the [[unexplored]] shadows of the [[industries]] here takes Victoria's [[saga]] and [[catching]] that human [[ingredient]] so vital to her [[inheritance]]. It's a story that feels [[terribly]] [[lowly]] considering its exuberant [[backdrop]], and [[even]] that's [[partially]] what [[offers]] it a [[separate]] edge here that separates it from the [[ordinary]] fare.

[[Adopting]] a very direct and [[focus]] [[approaches]] that centres in on a brief five or so year [[timetable]] between her ascension and [[wedding]] to Albert, The Young Victoria does what so [[petit]] period pieces of this [[characters]] [[supplying]]. Instead of [[trying]] a [[complicated]] encapsulation of such a figure's [[whole]] [[living]], Vallée [[however]] opts to [[demonstrate]] one of the [[minimum]] known [[complexities]] of Victoria's early years which are [[comfortably]] [[ignored]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The [[conclusions]] is a [[features]] that [[maggio]] disgruntle historians [[appreciation]] to its relatively [[breezy]] regards to facts and the like, [[even]] never to let document [[got]] in the [[path]] of [[removing]] a [[persuasive]] [[stories]], [[scriptwriter]] Julian Fellowes sticks to his [[handguns]] and [[offerings]] a [[marginally]] romanticised [[even]] [[persuade]] [[depiction]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to [[altogether]] capitalise on those [[ingredients]] with enough [[restrictions]] to [[conserve]] integrity in regards to both the [[story]] [[implicated]] and the viewer watching.

A major [[parties]] in the joy of [[staring]] The Young Victoria [[playing]] out [[instead]] [[merely]] [[lurks]] in the production values [[accorded]] here that [[bringing]] early 1800's [[Royal]] [[Briton]] to [[lives]] with a [[strong]] [[pragmatism]] so rarely achieved [[utterly]] so [[interestingly]] by genre films. [[Any]] from the costume [[design]], sets, hair [[style]], lighting and photography accentuates the [[presumptuous]] background inherent to Victoria's [[saga]] without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[staring]] Vallée's [[explanations]] [[arrive]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that [[pervades]] the visual [[ingredients]]; and then there's the film's [[punctuation]] [[additionally]] which [[collaborate]] tremendously to further the very elegant yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all [[embroiled]] which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of [[ailment]] within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) --------------------------------------------- Result 704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Have you ever in your [[life]], gone out for a sport's [[activity]], tried your best, and then [[found]] yourself in an [[important]] segment of it, where for a [[brief]] [[moment]], you were [[given]] a [[chance]] to be a [[hero]] and a champion and . . . [[failed]]? I believe many of us have had that [[moment]] in our [[lives]]. This is the premise of the [[movie]], "The [[Best]] of Times." In this story a [[middle]] age banker, named Jack Dundee ([[Robin]] Williams) [[suffers]] from the [[deep]] [[melancholy]] of a football [[mistake]], which happened [[years]] [[ago]], is inspired to re-play the [[game]] . . again. [[In]] [[order]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[great]] football quarterback, Reno Hightower ([[Kurt]] [[Russell]]) to [[make]] a [[comeback]]. [[For]] Reno, who is satisfied with his present [[lot]] in [[life]], see's no [[need]] to [[change]] the [[past]] [[record]], which get's better as he ages. Added to both their problem is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their [[marriages]] are floundering and in [[need]] of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) [[habitually]] [[reminds]] him of the [[biggest]] [[drop]]. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to [[try]] and correct the [[greatest]] [[blunder]] of his [[life]]. [[Great]] [[fun]] for [[anyone]] [[wishing]] to [[enjoy]] their youth again. *** Have you ever in your [[iife]], gone out for a sport's [[activities]], tried your best, and then [[unearthed]] yourself in an [[sizable]] segment of it, where for a [[writ]] [[time]], you were [[bestowed]] a [[probability]] to be a [[heroin]] and a champion and . . . [[faulted]]? I believe many of us have had that [[time]] in our [[life]]. This is the premise of the [[kino]], "The [[Better]] of Times." In this story a [[mid]] age banker, named Jack Dundee ([[Robyn]] Williams) [[undergoes]] from the [[deepest]] [[wistful]] of a football [[error]], which happened [[ages]] [[prior]], is inspired to re-play the [[gaming]] . . again. [[During]] [[decree]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[awesome]] football quarterback, Reno Hightower ([[Curt]] [[Russel]]) to [[deliver]] a [[returning]]. [[During]] Reno, who is satisfied with his present [[lots]] in [[vida]], see's no [[requisite]] to [[modified]] the [[preceding]] [[records]], which get's better as he ages. Added to both their problem is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their [[married]] are floundering and in [[require]] of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) [[fluently]] [[remembered]] him of the [[largest]] [[autumn]]. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to [[trying]] and correct the [[widest]] [[miscalculation]] of his [[lives]]. [[Wondrous]] [[funny]] for [[nobody]] [[desire]] to [[enjoying]] their youth again. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 705 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[lot]] has already been said on this movie and I' d like to [[join]] those who praised it. It's a highly [[unique]] film which [[uses]] elements of different [[genres]]: [[drama]], comedy, [[gangster]] [[film]] without making a mess of it. At [[points]] you just laugh out loud, at other [[points]] you feel for the characters [[whose]] [[mistakes]] and failures you watch. Sabu's [[genius]] can be [[shown]] with regard to some [[sequences]] of the [[movie]]. One is that where all three men [[chasing]] one another have an erotic day dream about a [[young]] [[woman]] that they just [[passed]] by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and [[illustrates]] the [[characters]] of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same [[time]]. Another example of Sabu's genius is the [[part]] of the film where the runners [[get]] tired. First one of them, the [[typical]] loser [[among]] the three guys, hallucinates that the [[woman]] that [[left]] him for someone else is back again and you [[see]] them [[dancing]] with one another and in the [[next]] shot him dancing with himself which is [[deeply]] [[moving]]. All of the runners get to this point where they [[think]] that have something back they lost or are on [[track]] again. And at one [[part]] of the movie they [[stop]] [[chasing]] each other, running in [[line]], just laughing.So here is it all the [[beauty]] and the ludicrousness of what we [[call]] life which Sabu [[manages]] to [[show]] [[throughout]] the [[film]]. His [[characters]] fail (do they at the [[end]]?) but he doesn't [[rob]] them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

A [[batches]] has already been said on this movie and I' d like to [[joining]] those who praised it. It's a highly [[unequalled]] film which [[using]] elements of different [[genera]]: [[teatro]], comedy, [[mobster]] [[cinematographic]] without making a mess of it. At [[dot]] you just laugh out loud, at other [[dot]] you feel for the characters [[who]] [[malfunctions]] and failures you watch. Sabu's [[engineers]] can be [[indicated]] with regard to some [[sequence]] of the [[kino]]. One is that where all three men [[hunts]] one another have an erotic day dream about a [[youths]] [[wife]] that they just [[adopted]] by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and [[proves]] the [[characteristic]] of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same [[period]]. Another example of Sabu's genius is the [[party]] of the film where the runners [[gets]] tired. First one of them, the [[characteristic]] loser [[between]] the three guys, hallucinates that the [[women]] that [[exited]] him for someone else is back again and you [[behold]] them [[danced]] with one another and in the [[impending]] shot him dancing with himself which is [[crucially]] [[shifting]]. All of the runners get to this point where they [[believing]] that have something back they lost or are on [[trajectory]] again. And at one [[portion]] of the movie they [[stops]] [[hunting]] each other, running in [[bloodline]], just laughing.So here is it all the [[beaut]] and the ludicrousness of what we [[calling]] life which Sabu [[administering]] to [[displaying]] [[during]] the [[movie]]. His [[features]] fail (do they at the [[ceases]]?) but he doesn't [[stealing]] them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

--------------------------------------------- Result 706 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I actually liked this [[movie]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and [[pretty]] [[unlikely]] but [[still]] it kept my [[attention]] on a [[rainy]] afternoon. Until the end, that is. [[For]] her final performance at the [[prestigious]] [[classical]] conservatory where she has [[struggled]] to catch-up to the other classically [[trained]] [[students]], what does the main character do? [[Wow]] them with her grasp and [[execution]] of this time [[honored]] musical tradition? [[No]]. She [[tortures]] and [[butchers]] the [[great]] [[sensuous]] Habanera from Carmen and [[turns]] it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe [[pop]] song. My ears [[bled]]! And, in the [[supreme]] [[moment]] of [[horror]], her [[teachers]] [[gave]] her a standing ovation! Any [[teacher]] not in a Spears-induced [[fantasy]] [[would]] have [[failed]] her on the spot. [[Save]] your time, [[save]] your [[ears]] - [[skip]] this [[movie]]! I actually liked this [[film]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and [[quite]] [[implausible]] but [[yet]] it kept my [[beware]] on a [[wettest]] afternoon. Until the end, that is. [[During]] her final performance at the [[notorious]] [[classic]] conservatory where she has [[fought]] to catch-up to the other classically [[qualified]] [[student]], what does the main character do? [[Ruff]] them with her grasp and [[executes]] of this time [[flattered]] musical tradition? [[Nos]]. She [[torturing]] and [[tormentors]] the [[gorgeous]] [[sensual]] Habanera from Carmen and [[revolves]] it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe [[pops]] song. My ears [[persecuted]]! And, in the [[highest]] [[time]] of [[terror]], her [[prof]] [[provided]] her a standing ovation! Any [[educator]] not in a Spears-induced [[fantasia]] [[should]] have [[faulted]] her on the spot. [[Rescues]] your time, [[saved]] your [[eardrums]] - [[jumping]] this [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[great]] directors of [[Italy]] of the 40s and 50s were [[men]] who understood the [[medium]], but it was Luchino Visconti, a [[man]] of [[vision]], who dared to bring a film like to [[show]] what he was capable of doing. He [[clearly]] [[shows]] his genius early on in his [[distinguished]] [[career]] with "Ossessione", a [[film]] based on [[James]] Cain's "The Postman [[Always]] [[Ring]] [[Twice]]", which was [[later]] [[made]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[comparison]] with what Visconti [[achieved]] in the [[movie]]. Luchino Visconti and his [[collaborators]] on the screen [[included]] an uncredited [[Alberto]] Moravia, a [[man]] who knew about the [[effect]] of [[passion]] on [[human]] [[beings]].

The [[film]] has been well [[preserved]] in the DVD format we [[watched]] [[recently]]. The [[film]] is a [[must]] for all serious [[movie]] [[fans]] because we can [[see]] how Visconti's [[vision]] translated the text into a [[movie]] that [[rings]] true in a plausible [[way]], something the American [[version]] [[lacked]].

What comes across [[watching]] the [[movie]], is the intensity which the [[director]] [[got]] from his [[key]] players. The [[magnificent]] [[Clara]] Calamai does an [[amazing]] [[job]] as Giovanna, the [[woman]] who has [[married]] an [[older]] [[man]], but when Gino [[appears]] in her [[life]], all she [[wants]] to do is rid herself of the [[kind]] [[man]] who [[gave]] her an [[opportunity]] in [[life]]. Giovanna is one of the [[best]] [[creations]] in [[Ms]]. Calamai's [[achievements]] in the Italian [[cinema]]. The last sequence of the [[film]] [[shows]] [[Ms]]. Calamai at her [[best]] in the ironic twist that [[serves]] as the moral [[redemption]] for the [[monstrous]] [[crime]] that was [[committed]].

[[Equally]] [[excellent]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[best]] [[actors]] of his [[generation]] who [[appears]] as Gino, the hunky [[man]] that [[awakens]] the [[obsessive]] [[passion]] in [[Giovanna]]. Gino is the [[perfect]] [[man]] for Giovanna, [[something]] that Mr. Girotti [[projects]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. Mr. Girotti makes the [[man]] [[come]] alive in a performance that seems so [[easy]], [[yet]] with another [[actor]] it [[might]] not have been so [[apparent]]. Juan DeLanda is [[seen]] as Giuseppe, the [[older]] [[man]] who [[fell]] in [[love]] with Giovanna. [[In]] [[fact]], his [[character]] [[rings]] truer than his [[counterpart]] in the [[American]] [[film]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, also includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[awesome]] directors of [[Italia]] of the 40s and 50s were [[man]] who understood the [[midst]], but it was Luchino Visconti, a [[men]] of [[conception]], who dared to bring a film like to [[display]] what he was capable of doing. He [[apparently]] [[displayed]] his genius early on in his [[illustrious]] [[quarry]] with "Ossessione", a [[cinematography]] based on [[Jacques]] Cain's "The Postman [[Continually]] [[Rings]] [[Double]]", which was [[then]] [[brought]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[compare]] with what Visconti [[obtained]] in the [[cinema]]. Luchino Visconti and his [[collaborator]] on the screen [[inscribed]] an uncredited [[Albert]] Moravia, a [[guy]] who knew about the [[effects]] of [[enthusiasm]] on [[mankind]] [[humans]].

The [[cinema]] has been well [[stored]] in the DVD format we [[observed]] [[freshly]]. The [[cinematography]] is a [[should]] for all serious [[cinema]] [[amateurs]] because we can [[behold]] how Visconti's [[conception]] translated the text into a [[film]] that [[ring]] true in a plausible [[routing]], something the American [[stepping]] [[lacks]].

What comes across [[staring]] the [[film]], is the intensity which the [[superintendent]] [[gets]] from his [[keys]] players. The [[great]] [[Clearly]] Calamai does an [[striking]] [[labour]] as Giovanna, the [[girls]] who has [[wedding]] an [[elderly]] [[men]], but when Gino [[emerges]] in her [[vida]], all she [[desires]] to do is rid herself of the [[sorts]] [[guy]] who [[supplied]] her an [[luck]] in [[living]]. Giovanna is one of the [[nicest]] [[establishment]] in [[Mrs]]. Calamai's [[accomplishments]] in the Italian [[cinemas]]. The last sequence of the [[cinematography]] [[showing]] [[Mrs]]. Calamai at her [[nicest]] in the ironic twist that [[serve]] as the moral [[buyout]] for the [[hideous]] [[offense]] that was [[commit]].

[[Alike]] [[magnifique]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[better]] [[actresses]] of his [[jill]] who [[emerges]] as Gino, the hunky [[dude]] that [[provokes]] the [[obsessed]] [[enthusiasm]] in [[Astrid]]. Gino is the [[faultless]] [[dude]] for Giovanna, [[anything]] that Mr. Girotti [[project]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. Mr. Girotti makes the [[males]] [[arrived]] alive in a performance that seems so [[simpler]], [[however]] with another [[actress]] it [[probability]] not have been so [[flagrant]]. Juan DeLanda is [[saw]] as Giuseppe, the [[elderly]] [[fella]] who [[fallen]] in [[loves]] with Giovanna. [[Among]] [[facto]], his [[nature]] [[piercings]] truer than his [[contra]] in the [[Americans]] [[kino]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, also includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. --------------------------------------------- Result 708 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[great]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I [[thought]] that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already thought that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[surprised]] at how fantastic he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his [[purposefully]] sudden and [[unexpected]] monologue. What's [[amazing]] about his role is that it's a [[character]] it's hard to say we've seen before. We've [[seen]] many [[emotionally]] scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his [[character]] is [[truly]] [[unpredictable]] and [[completely]] individual. It's a [[joy]] for the audience to be [[drawn]] in [[emotionally]] by him and be [[tugged]] [[every]] which [[way]] by someone whose [[problems]], [[mindset]], and provocations are [[completely]] [[different]] from most [[characters]] like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a [[completely]] different [[level]]. He is [[every]] man. He is the most [[normal]] [[possible]] [[person]] in the [[world]], so [[much]] so that you will hardly find many [[characters]] like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is [[brilliant]] in that he is funny, jolting, [[smart]], and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite [[brilliant]] because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the [[mere]] style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[wondrous]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I [[ideas]] that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already thought that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[dumbfounded]] at how fantastic he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his [[intentionally]] sudden and [[unintended]] monologue. What's [[striking]] about his role is that it's a [[personages]] it's hard to say we've seen before. We've [[watched]] many [[excitedly]] scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his [[trait]] is [[honestly]] [[erratic]] and [[altogether]] individual. It's a [[glee]] for the audience to be [[lured]] in [[excitedly]] by him and be [[tugging]] [[all]] which [[route]] by someone whose [[disorders]], [[psyche]], and provocations are [[entirely]] [[several]] from most [[features]] like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a [[perfectly]] different [[grades]]. He is [[any]] man. He is the most [[ordinary]] [[feasible]] [[somebody]] in the [[monde]], so [[very]] so that you will hardly find many [[traits]] like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is [[wonderful]] in that he is funny, jolting, [[artful]], and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite [[wondrous]] because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the [[only]] style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. --------------------------------------------- Result 709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is one of my very favorites. It's hard to explain why. Maybe it's the innocence of Corin Nemec and his awkwardness paired with the boldness of Cheryl Pollak, but it definitely has something to do with the soundtrack. Also, some of the characters have little lines or movements or moments that are amusing in and of themselves. Finally, the story is one that always tugs at my heartstrings, and the last scene is so bittersweet. All in all, I love this movie; it's perfect for a gooey, sentimental girls' night. --------------------------------------------- Result 710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I'm a pretty old dude, old enough to remember the taste of [[Oreos]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years ago, when every taste for a kid was fresh. I wish I have [[somehow]] set some aside then is some magical [[suspended]] locker, so that I could [[taste]] those things [[today]]. This [[magical]] locker might [[even]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've [[drifted]], physically and [[otherwise]], a [[sort]] of dynamic [[chemistry]] of expectations. Over the half century, they [[would]] have had to adjust [[quite]] a bit, because you see I would have [[known]] that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a [[celebration]] of self and past, and story, and [[sense]] that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something [[almost]] as good. In the seventies, I [[really]] tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic [[pleasure]] — you know, [[movies]] smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the [[last]] to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I [[deferred]] until I [[thought]] I [[would]] be [[big]] [[enough]] to [[deserve]] it. Over the years, I would [[test]] myself, my [[ability]] to [[surround]] [[beauty]] and delineate it without occupying it. There [[probably]] are few [[Poles]] who have [[worked]] at this, [[practicing]] to deserve Chopin. [[Working]] to deserve womanness when I [[see]] it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

[[Recently]], I [[achieved]] [[something]] like [[assurance]] that it was [[time]] to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the [[time]] when this would [[work]] optimally, because I had already [[seen]] and [[understood]] "9th [[Gate]]."

If you do not know this, it is about a [[man]] who [[innocently]] [[rents]] a room in which the [[previous]] tenant (about whom the [[story]] is named) [[jumped]] out the window, to [[die]] [[later]] after this [[man]] ([[played]] by Polanski) [[visits]]. What happens is that [[time]] folds and he [[becomes]] this [[woman]]. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the [[body]] that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. I'm a pretty old dude, old enough to remember the taste of [[Oreo]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years ago, when every taste for a kid was fresh. I wish I have [[someplace]] set some aside then is some magical [[ceased]] locker, so that I could [[liking]] those things [[yesterday]]. This [[quadrant]] locker might [[yet]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've [[derivatives]], physically and [[alternatively]], a [[genre]] of dynamic [[chemist]] of expectations. Over the half century, they [[ought]] have had to adjust [[pretty]] a bit, because you see I would have [[renowned]] that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a [[commemorating]] of self and past, and story, and [[feeling]] that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something [[hardly]] as good. In the seventies, I [[genuinely]] tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic [[gladness]] — you know, [[movie]] smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the [[final]] to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I [[delayed]] until I [[figured]] I [[ought]] be [[major]] [[adequately]] to [[merit]] it. Over the years, I would [[testing]] myself, my [[capabilities]] to [[surrounds]] [[beaut]] and delineate it without occupying it. There [[surely]] are few [[Columns]] who have [[acted]] at this, [[practising]] to deserve Chopin. [[Collaborated]] to deserve womanness when I [[seeing]] it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

[[Lately]], I [[performed]] [[anything]] like [[security]] that it was [[period]] to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the [[moment]] when this would [[worked]] optimally, because I had already [[watched]] and [[understand]] "9th [[Wears]]."

If you do not know this, it is about a [[dude]] who [[nonchalantly]] [[leases]] a room in which the [[former]] tenant (about whom the [[saga]] is named) [[bumped]] out the window, to [[killed]] [[then]] after this [[guy]] ([[served]] by Polanski) [[tours]]. What happens is that [[period]] folds and he [[become]] this [[wife]]. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the [[agencies]] that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. --------------------------------------------- Result 711 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This [[scary]] and [[rather]] [[gory]] [[adaptation]] of Stephen King's great novel features [[outstanding]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really gruesome gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but genuinely unnerving.The depiction of the zombie child Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "New Nightmare")is equally [[noteworthy]],as what could easily have been a laughable character is made [[menacing]] and spooky.As for the people,who think that this one isn't scary-watch it alone in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I guarantee you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror movies like this one or "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" shouldn't be watched in group.Recommended for horror fans! This [[awful]] and [[comparatively]] [[gori]] [[adapting]] of Stephen King's great novel features [[unresolved]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really gruesome gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but genuinely unnerving.The depiction of the zombie child Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "New Nightmare")is equally [[wondrous]],as what could easily have been a laughable character is made [[endangering]] and spooky.As for the people,who think that this one isn't scary-watch it alone in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I guarantee you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror movies like this one or "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" shouldn't be watched in group.Recommended for horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'll be [[honest]],I [[finally]] [[checked]] this [[movie]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and compelling,particularly the three leads--or [[even]] the compelling [[story]] of a [[breach]] in the [[Presidential]] [[Secret]] Service(something,I've been informed through the [[DVD]] [[extras]] of this [[show]],has [[yet]] to ever [[happen]].Assuming that's true,that's [[remarkable]]!). I [[got]] it because it was directed and has a [[choice]] cameo by [[none]] other than [[Detective]] Meldrick [[Lewis]]!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the [[Street]]" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone [[remember]] "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,[[almost]] still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents([[Martin]] Donovan and the foxy,[[somewhat]] [[hard]] to [[buy]] as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign [[characters]] and you have a [[fairly]] [[standard]] political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary [[line]] is about the [[best]] way to describe how this [[show]] plays out without [[giving]] spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the [[film]] itself was [[entertaining]] [[enough]] to keep most (myself included) interested. I'll be [[truthful]],I [[eventually]] [[ticked]] this [[movies]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and compelling,particularly the three leads--or [[yet]] the compelling [[tale]] of a [[violate]] in the [[Presidency]] [[Clandestine]] Service(something,I've been informed through the [[DVDS]] [[supplemental]] of this [[exposition]],has [[even]] to ever [[emerge]].Assuming that's true,that's [[dramatic]]!). I [[get]] it because it was directed and has a [[elects]] cameo by [[nothingness]] other than [[Pinkerton]] Meldrick [[Louie]]!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the [[Thoroughfare]]" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone [[remembering]] "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,[[hardly]] still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents([[Martins]] Donovan and the foxy,[[slightly]] [[arduous]] to [[acquire]] as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign [[nature]] and you have a [[comparatively]] [[norms]] political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary [[bloodline]] is about the [[bestest]] way to describe how this [[showing]] plays out without [[conferring]] spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the [[kino]] itself was [[amusing]] [[adequately]] to keep most (myself included) interested. --------------------------------------------- Result 713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I am [[currently]] doing film studies at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we [[watched]] and in my [[opinion]] it is a film with a very [[simple]] storyline but a [[complex]] back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"[[sounds]] [[quite]] [[exiting]]".

[[However]] you need to dig deeper to [[uncover]] the [[true]] [[feeling]] of the [[true]] genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trust]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for [[example]] the [[way]] Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this [[untouched]] [[love]] affair in our faces.

[[Overall]] this film is a good example of why British [[films]] should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low [[budget]].

A Good [[film]] with an [[intricate]] story line, however it is [[definitely]] an [[acquired]] [[taste]] and is [[possibly]] not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. I am [[now]] doing film studies at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we [[observed]] and in my [[visualise]] it is a film with a very [[uncomplicated]] storyline but a [[thorny]] back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"[[noises]] [[perfectly]] [[leaving]]".

[[Instead]] you need to dig deeper to [[unmask]] the [[genuine]] [[impression]] of the [[real]] genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trusts]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for [[case]] the [[pathways]] Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this [[uninjured]] [[iove]] affair in our faces.

[[Entire]] this film is a good example of why British [[kino]] should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low [[budgets]].

A Good [[cinematography]] with an [[complicated]] story line, however it is [[surely]] an [[acquiring]] [[aftertaste]] and is [[potentially]] not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. --------------------------------------------- Result 714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As an animated film from 1978, this is pretty good--generally well above the standard of the days when Disney hadn't done anything good in years (and Tolkien cared little for Disney anyway). It gets major points for innovative and careful camera work, applying cinematic techniques with relative success. The much-maligned rotoscoping actually works pretty well, especially with the Ringwraiths, and the opening narration. However, it is so drastically overused--possibly as a money-saving technique--that it detracts from the overall effect. The same technique that makes wraiths spooky and otherworldly doesn't fare so well in the Prancing Pony.

As for the adaptation of the story, it's actually quite good. We lose little bits here and there, minor details such as the Old Forest and Tom Bombadil, the Gaffer and the Sackville-Bagginses. We compress a few characters, such as revising Legolas as one of Elrond's household and an old friend of Aragorn's, but that's a rather wise decision for film. In books you have room to include the references to the larger world of the Elves and Middle-Earth's vast history. In film, you trade that for visuals and sound that convey the same elements in a different way. Nothing critical is truly lost here, and although I have minor quibbles about some of the changes, I'm generally pretty happy with it.

If only the dratted writers had managed to remember Saruman's name--he's frequently referred to as Aruman, a decision probably made to make him more distinct from similarly-named Sauron; it took me a second viewing before I was certain I hadn't misheard it. It's also annoying that Boromir is a bloody stage viking, and irritable from the start. However, Gandalf is excellent, and most of the rest of the voicework is excellent. If only John Hurt weren't too old to play Aragorn; I love his voice.

Of course, with the film ending at the midpoint of the story, there's a vast disappointment built in. What makes it far, far worse is the altogether miserable job done by the Rankin & Bass crew on the sequel. That they were permitted to do Return of the King after butchering The Hobbit remains a huge mystery; they seem more interested in bad songs than in proper storytelling. For all its faults, this film's heart is solidly in place and it tries very hard to accomplish a nearly impossible task. I can only hope that the upcoming series of films keeps as true to its vision... --------------------------------------------- Result 715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Okay, that was a pretty [[damn]] [[good]] episode. [[Much]] better than the [[credit]] it [[receives]].

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I love that final shot. The [[atmosphere]] is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that [[many]] [[things]] that are left [[unexplained]]. why does it [[change]] sex? what's the [[purpose]]? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the [[later]] mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my [[favorites]] yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. Okay, that was a pretty [[frakking]] [[buena]] episode. [[Very]] better than the [[credence]] it [[gets]].

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I love that final shot. The [[atmospheric]] is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that [[multiple]] [[items]] that are left [[incomprehensible]]. why does it [[amend]] sex? what's the [[targeting]]? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the [[subsequent]] mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my [[favourites]] yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 10 out of 10, this brilliant, super documentary is a must see, with film clips from the war which people did not seen for years, untill this was screened in 1974. The film clips in this documentary from the war doesn't miss out anything, some of the clips left me dumbstuck. The whole series is over 20 episodes long, and Sir Lawrence Olivier is the narrator and tells a stunning story of war. Simply this is still probably the best documentary of war still, and now over 25 years old still is able to pack a tremendous punch. You must watch this at some time, even if it's a few episodes, even at that you will still be blown away at the impact this documentary means to those who have been there suffered and died in the name of WAR, in a WORLD AT WAR.. --------------------------------------------- Result 717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1st watched 2/28/2006 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Sydney Pollack):-DVD version I watched titled "3 Days of the Condor"- So so CIA drama full of laid-back performances making for a very laid-back movie. The premise of the story revolves around 7 out of 8 members of a CIA research group being killed with Robert Redford's character, codename = Condor, being the one that was left. Who killed them and why? That's what Redford tries to find out while trying to not be the 8th victim at the same time. Along the way, he gets Faye Dunaway's character involved involved, originally because he needs a place to hide, and then she eventually helps him out after a little lovey-dovey time. This is one of a handful of innocent guy on the run stories but this one doesn't have a lot of suspense. The flat performances don't help and the finish doesn't seal the deal for the audience enough either. Despite having a good director in Sydney Pollack and a group of classic performers, the story and the performances are not what they should be and therefore the movie is not what it should be. --------------------------------------------- Result 718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[see]] this [[movie]] for a very long [[time]] only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and [[charming]] [[smiling]] that [[way]]? I'm in [[love]] with that woman! I [[got]] what I [[expected]]...but only half. This [[film]] should deliver expectations for those who enjoy all [[kinds]] of romantic comedies or [[stories]] involving [[intelligent]] [[humor]] and light [[dramatic]] situations.

[[While]] I don't agree with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[movie]] is overrated; I [[must]] [[admit]] that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of [[flaws]].

My main problem with the [[film]] is the lack of on screen chemistry between the [[main]] characters. There isn't a [[single]] scene [[previous]] to the [[climax]] that [[shows]] the main [[characters]] [[sharing]] a [[moment]] "of romance" or even a clue to [[suggest]] that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a [[moment]] is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the [[audience]] [[understand]] about a [[possible]] love interest. I didn't [[buy]] the [[dinner]] sequence.

[[Still]], the [[movie]] [[delivers]] very funny [[moments]] and has a strong dialogs that [[support]] such an ingenuous premise. I [[mean]] with [[ingenuous]] that it would be very [[difficult]] to [[execute]] such a farse by a 43 year old [[man]] in these days.

I understand it's a [[movie]] and that's why I [[accept]] it as a [[funny]] situation. Plus, the [[humor]] is versatile. There are [[moments]] [[involving]] S&M, funny lines with Chabat's best [[friend]], some lesbian [[references]], funny [[situations]] [[involving]] the [[family]] [[women]], and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is [[top]] notch and she's by far the [[reason]] to watch the [[movie]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and fine, and [[demonstrates]] she's a versatile and [[talented]] [[actress]] who can pull out a comedic and dramatic performance in sheer brilliance.

[[Alain]] Chabat is a [[fine]] actor and gives a very decent performance. I [[think]] the [[supporting]] cast do what they can.

The score, art [[direction]], and other technical [[aspects]] are [[really]] good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]] for a very long [[moment]] only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and [[enchanting]] [[grinning]] that [[paths]]? I'm in [[amour]] with that woman! I [[ai]] what I [[hoped]]...but only half. This [[kino]] should deliver expectations for those who enjoy all [[sorts]] of romantic comedies or [[fairytales]] involving [[termite]] [[comedy]] and light [[noteworthy]] situations.

[[Though]] I don't agree with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[cinematography]] is overrated; I [[gotta]] [[accepted]] that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of [[gaps]].

My main problem with the [[movie]] is the lack of on screen chemistry between the [[principal]] characters. There isn't a [[sole]] scene [[former]] to the [[pinnacle]] that [[demonstrating]] the main [[attribute]] [[exchange]] a [[time]] "of romance" or even a clue to [[proposing]] that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a [[time]] is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the [[viewers]] [[comprehend]] about a [[feasible]] love interest. I didn't [[buying]] the [[luncheon]] sequence.

[[However]], the [[cinematography]] [[offering]] very funny [[times]] and has a strong dialogs that [[help]] such an ingenuous premise. I [[meaning]] with [[gullible]] that it would be very [[problematic]] to [[implement]] such a farse by a 43 year old [[dude]] in these days.

I understand it's a [[film]] and that's why I [[countenance]] it as a [[amusing]] situation. Plus, the [[mood]] is versatile. There are [[times]] [[involve]] S&M, funny lines with Chabat's best [[buddies]], some lesbian [[referencing]], funny [[instances]] [[involve]] the [[families]] [[girl]], and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is [[superior]] notch and she's by far the [[justification]] to watch the [[kino]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and fine, and [[demonstrating]] she's a versatile and [[gifted]] [[actor]] who can pull out a comedic and dramatic performance in sheer brilliance.

[[Alan]] Chabat is a [[fined]] actor and gives a very decent performance. I [[thought]] the [[helping]] cast do what they can.

The score, art [[directorate]], and other technical [[facets]] are [[genuinely]] good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Others have already commented on the "decline" of director Tobe Hooper, but what about Brad Dourif? He was perfectly capable of selecting good projects (as he proved by starring in the same year's "Exorcist III"), so why did he agree to appear in this? Sure, he gives a suitably demented performance, and the film is not outright bad; it's just uninvolving, uninteresting and unappealing. That's three "un-"s too many. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I sincerely consider this movie as another poor effort of Dominican Movie Industry. The first 30 minutes of the movie are a little funny but then when they switch their role in the society (men doing what women usually do and women doing what men usually do) the movie falls. Becoming boring and not funny at all. They let many things without explanation and the end of the movie is predictable. I didn't like the way as a Roberto Angel played his character and his little either. I went to the movies theater hoping to see a good work but I went out really disappointed.

I don't recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "[[Death]] [[Wish]]" and "Chato's Land", but he is [[equally]] [[gifted]] as a director of occult [[Horror]] [[cinema]], as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[proves]]. "The Sentinel", which is [[based]] on a novel by John Konvitz, who also [[wrote]] the [[screenplay]], is a [[clever]] and [[immensely]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult [[Horror]] should [[consider]] [[missing]]. The [[film]] is [[obviously]] inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am [[concerned]], it is [[also]] [[easily]] as [[unsettling]] as these more [[widely]] [[acclaimed]] [[films]], and [[probably]] even creepier.

[[Allison]] [[Parker]] ([[Christina]] Raines) is a [[beautiful]] young [[New]] York model. Traumatized by [[events]] in her her [[past]] and not [[yet]] willing to [[marry]] her [[lawyer]] boyfriend ([[Chris]] Sarandon), [[Allison]] is in search for an [[apartment]], and [[finds]] a [[big]], [[incredibly]] nice one, which is [[also]] [[affordable]], in an [[old]] [[mansion]] in Brooklyn. The [[new]] apartment, [[however]], [[comes]] along with a bunch of very [[strange]] other tenants. And the sinister [[new]] [[neighbors]] [[soon]] [[become]] more than a [[little]] [[bothersome]] to Alice... This may not be an [[adequate]] plot [[synopsis]], but I [[would]] [[hate]] to [[spoil]] any of this film's [[great]] moments, so I will not [[give]] any further plot [[description]]. What I will [[say]], however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very [[creepy]] and [[effective]] [[film]] that [[profits]] from a [[great]] [[cast]] as well as an [[often]] [[bizarre]] and [[constantly]] [[uncanny]] atmosphere. The fact that director [[Michael]] [[Winner]] and [[writer]] [[John]] Konnvitz [[also]] [[acted]] as [[producers]] here [[certainly]] had its [[influence]] on the [[outcome]]. The [[film]] is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn [[mansion]] is a [[fantastic]] [[setting]] for this [[kind]] of [[film]]. As [[mentioned]] above, the [[atmosphere]] is obscure and [[creepy]], and the [[film]] [[also]] [[includes]] several shock-moments and [[genuine]] scares. The [[film]] features [[many]] sinister and eccentric [[characters]], and the cast is [[superb]]. [[Beautiful]] Christina Raines is [[great]] in her role of [[Allison]] [[Parker]], [[lovable]] and [[yet]] on the cusp to [[losing]] her [[mind]]. [[Chris]] Sarandon is [[also]] very good as her boyfriend, a successful [[lawyer]], and the [[supporting]] cast [[includes]] [[many]] big names, such as Christopher Walken, [[Jeff]] Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also [[includes]] stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director [[Michael]] Winner for a [[long]] time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "[[Deaths]] [[Wanna]]" and "Chato's Land", but he is [[alike]] [[talented]] as a director of occult [[Terror]] [[cinemas]], as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[demonstrating]]. "The Sentinel", which is [[founded]] on a novel by John Konvitz, who also [[authored]] the [[scenarios]], is a [[smarter]] and [[terribly]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult [[Terror]] should [[examine]] [[gone]]. The [[films]] is [[apparently]] inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's [[Babies]]", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am [[worried]], it is [[similarly]] [[readily]] as [[worrisome]] as these more [[heavily]] [[hailed]] [[cinema]], and [[maybe]] even creepier.

[[Ellison]] [[Barker]] ([[Kristina]] Raines) is a [[awesome]] young [[Nuevo]] York model. Traumatized by [[phenomena]] in her her [[preceding]] and not [[however]] willing to [[marriages]] her [[lawyers]] boyfriend ([[Kris]] Sarandon), [[Ellison]] is in search for an [[condo]], and [[find]] a [[grand]], [[terribly]] nice one, which is [[similarly]] [[inexpensive]], in an [[former]] [[manor]] in Brooklyn. The [[nuevo]] apartment, [[yet]], [[arrives]] along with a bunch of very [[odd]] other tenants. And the sinister [[nuevo]] [[neighbourhood]] [[rapidly]] [[becomes]] more than a [[petit]] [[annoying]] to Alice... This may not be an [[suitable]] plot [[summary]], but I [[ought]] [[hatred]] to [[ruin]] any of this film's [[excellent]] moments, so I will not [[lend]] any further plot [[descriptions]]. What I will [[said]], however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very [[spooky]] and [[effectiveness]] [[films]] that [[profit]] from a [[huge]] [[casting]] as well as an [[usually]] [[outlandish]] and [[repeatedly]] [[supernatural]] atmosphere. The fact that director [[Micheal]] [[Winning]] and [[screenwriter]] [[Johannes]] Konnvitz [[apart]] [[behaved]] as [[manufacturers]] here [[probably]] had its [[implications]] on the [[findings]]. The [[films]] is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn [[castel]] is a [[brilliant]] [[settings]] for this [[sorting]] of [[films]]. As [[referenced]] above, the [[atmospheric]] is obscure and [[frightening]], and the [[films]] [[apart]] [[involves]] several shock-moments and [[true]] scares. The [[cinema]] features [[several]] sinister and eccentric [[attribute]], and the cast is [[excellent]]. [[Belle]] Christina Raines is [[grand]] in her role of [[Ellison]] [[Barker]], [[loveable]] and [[however]] on the cusp to [[wasting]] her [[esprit]]. [[Chrissy]] Sarandon is [[apart]] very good as her boyfriend, a successful [[lawyers]], and the [[assisting]] cast [[involves]] [[several]] big names, such as Christopher Walken, [[Geoffrey]] Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also [[comprises]] stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director [[Michaela]] Winner for a [[lang]] time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Poor Whoopi Goldberg. Imagine her at a friend's dinner party, and she adds a [[comment]] to the in-depth political [[discussion]] going on. People just look at her and say, "Oh what would YOU [[know]], you were the star of 'Theodore Rex'". How [[could]] anyone take her seriously after she lowered herself to be the star of this [[appalling]] piece of [[crap]]? Even [[little]] kids would be cringing in horror at this Thing. It [[reminded]] me of a [[particularly]] [[bad]] episode of 'Sigmund And The [[Sea]] Monsters'. Actually, come to think of it, 'Sigmund' was vastly superior to this.

And however did it get made? By plying the producer with an illegal substance before telling him about it? Watch this [[hideous]] [[abomination]] at your own [[peril]]. Poor Whoopi Goldberg. Imagine her at a friend's dinner party, and she adds a [[observation]] to the in-depth political [[deliberation]] going on. People just look at her and say, "Oh what would YOU [[savoir]], you were the star of 'Theodore Rex'". How [[wo]] anyone take her seriously after she lowered herself to be the star of this [[frightening]] piece of [[baloney]]? Even [[small]] kids would be cringing in horror at this Thing. It [[recalls]] me of a [[especially]] [[rotten]] episode of 'Sigmund And The [[Seas]] Monsters'. Actually, come to think of it, 'Sigmund' was vastly superior to this.

And however did it get made? By plying the producer with an illegal substance before telling him about it? Watch this [[despicable]] [[monstrosity]] at your own [[endangerment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was one of the most ridiculous and badly directed movies I've seen in a very long time. I've never liked Spike Lee, but thought I'd give this one a try: bad mistake. The movie is supposed to show how the Son of Sam real life murders affected a neighborhood in the summer of 1977; what it really did was center around the most boring characters that I doubt anyone cared for as far as their drug problems, marriage problems, and so on, etc. The scenes that depict the murders are just that, and nothing more; a shooting and then it's back to Saturday Night Fever! What's even more ridiculous is Spike Lee's choice to show up as a reporter in the movie: Spike, trust me, you're no Hitchcock, stay out of the movies, it makes them even worse off. The most silly scene had to be the dog speaking in a goofy voice, which was depicted in a scene before it where it was supposed to have been shot??? Spike, what were you thinking when you made this film? Not thinking at all is my guess. People who think they'll see a crime drama, take my advice and do not waste your time or money on this loser. You're better off watching Jerry Springer in this case! Waste of film, I gave it a 1 out of 10: awful dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It is very [[hard]] to [[rate]] this [[film]]. As entertainment value for 21st century [[viewers]], it fails [[miserably]]. However, for the [[student]] of early sound [[films]] and [[history]], it is a [[jewel]]. "Show of [[Shows]]" was a revue filmed to [[compete]] with MGM's successful "Hollywood [[Revue]] of 1929", which still survives [[intact]] [[complete]] with its Technicolor scenes.

The [[purpose]] of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and [[show]] that they could make the transition. [[However]], Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice [[Lillie]], and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their [[biggest]] talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone [[shorts]] strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is [[really]] [[enjoyable]] with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "[[Singin]] in the [[Bathtub]]", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna [[Loy]]. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it [[really]] is quite [[attractive]]. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. It is very [[difficult]] to [[rates]] this [[cinematography]]. As entertainment value for 21st century [[spectators]], it fails [[spectacularly]]. However, for the [[learners]] of early sound [[cinematography]] and [[stories]], it is a [[jewelry]]. "Show of [[Showings]]" was a revue filmed to [[rival]] with MGM's successful "Hollywood [[Magazine]] of 1929", which still survives [[uninjured]] [[finish]] with its Technicolor scenes.

The [[targeting]] of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and [[displayed]] that they could make the transition. [[Still]], Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice [[Mildred]], and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their [[strongest]] talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone [[underclothes]] strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is [[genuinely]] [[nice]] with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "[[Playin]] in the [[Bathhouse]]", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna [[Lui]]. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it [[genuinely]] is quite [[tempting]]. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. --------------------------------------------- Result 725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sundown - featuring the weakest, dorkiest vampires ever seen, accompanied by one of the most unfitting, pretentious scores ever written - and with Shane the vampire, who's every move and spoken word was so ridiculous that I burst out laughing half the times and rolled my eyes the rest.

The vampires don't seem to have any special powers at all - except for strength (sometimes), being able to switch off a lamp with their mind (one time) and... that's it, really. Ever imagine count Dracula worriedly recoiling from a fight 'cause he ran out of bullets? Neither did I. Practically any other movie-Dracula would eat this one for breakfast, skin his followers and use their bones as toothpicks.

The main plot of the movie is that a human family of four gets caught up in a vampire gang fight - Dracula's vs. some old geezer's. It could have been some good old B-flick fun, but the overly dramatic music was clearly written by someone who took this movie a bit too seriously, and ends up ruining the remaining part of the movie not already ruined by clay bats, mediocre acting and the laughable screenplay.

In the end it's just too silly to be funny. Sure, it has some amusing moments, but they're few, and far apart. --------------------------------------------- Result 726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Basically]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[daughters]] deal with [[infidelity]]. The [[premise]] is interesting, the acting is [[good]], and the music, although [[sometimes]] abrupt and without direction, is pretty cool.

The [[problem]] is the plot. The [[husband]] dentist [[drops]] his [[wife]] off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a [[minor]] role) and then [[walks]] back in to [[give]] her [[something]], but sees her with another man. The rest of the movie deals with his angst about this episode, his visual [[hallucinations]] and a macho alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former [[patient]] of his) and his [[fear]] in confronting his [[wife]] lest he will have to "do [[something]] about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes [[nowhere]] and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are [[missing]]: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't [[say]]. Who's she doing it with? Don't [[expect]] any answers on that either. Why does he [[want]] to keep the [[marriage]] going in [[spite]] of all this? [[Who]] knows. What purpose does all the kids [[vomiting]] serve? [[Where]] is this film [[going]]? Good performances by Campbell Scott and [[Hope]] Davis (and Denis Leary as [[comic]] relief)are [[completely]] wasted by this stilted [[nonsense]] which doesn't know if it [[wants]] to be American [[Beauty]] or a [[family]] film. A [[root]] [[canal]] is more interesting. [[Avoid]] it. [[Fundamentally]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[girl]] deal with [[disloyalty]]. The [[hypothesis]] is interesting, the acting is [[buena]], and the music, although [[intermittently]] abrupt and without direction, is pretty cool.

The [[troubles]] is the plot. The [[hubby]] dentist [[descartes]] his [[femme]] off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a [[small]] role) and then [[walking]] back in to [[confer]] her [[somethin]], but sees her with another man. The rest of the movie deals with his angst about this episode, his visual [[daydreams]] and a macho alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former [[ailing]] of his) and his [[fright]] in confronting his [[woman]] lest he will have to "do [[anything]] about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes [[somewhere]] and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are [[faded]]: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't [[tell]]. Who's she doing it with? Don't [[waits]] any answers on that either. Why does he [[wish]] to keep the [[marry]] going in [[sadness]] of all this? [[Whose]] knows. What purpose does all the kids [[barf]] serve? [[Whenever]] is this film [[go]]? Good performances by Campbell Scott and [[Hopes]] Davis (and Denis Leary as [[humorous]] relief)are [[absolutely]] wasted by this stilted [[claptrap]] which doesn't know if it [[wanting]] to be American [[Beaut]] or a [[families]] film. A [[racine]] [[channels]] is more interesting. [[Forestall]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Steve Carell has [[made]] a career out of portraying the [[slightly]] [[odd]] straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various [[supporting]] roles. In Virgin, Carell has [[found]] a [[clever]] and [[hilarious]] script that [[perfectly]] capitalizes on his [[strengths]]. Carell plays Andy Stitzer, a middle aged [[man]] [[living]] a [[quiet]], [[lonely]] life. Andy is a [[little]] [[odd]], but in an awkward [[nice]] guy [[sort]] of [[way]]. One [[night]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first time, Andy [[accidentally]] [[reveals]] that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David ([[Paul]] [[Rudd]]), [[Jay]] ([[Romany]] Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease Andy about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent [[human]] being that [[Andy]] is, and they [[resolve]] to [[help]] him out by [[assisting]] him in ending his virginity. And so [[begins]] Andy's quest into [[adulthood]]. [[Andy]] is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[humor]] derives from his naiveté to the [[situations]] he [[finds]] himself in [[throughout]] the film. Some of the [[humor]] is [[crude]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well [[done]] [[intelligent]] [[comedy]]. [[In]] [[addition]], I [[found]] some parts of the [[film]] actually pretty [[touching]] as [[Andy]] finds himself [[developing]] both romantic [[relationships]] and [[friendships]] [[perhaps]] for the first time in his [[life]]. I'm not [[trying]] to portray the movie as a love story or a [[drama]]; it's a [[rolling]] in your seats [[comedy]]. [[Still]], [[every]] good [[comedy]] I have ever seen contains enough [[heart]] for you to [[care]] about the [[characters]]. A good comparison would be 'The [[Wedding]] Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a [[similar]] [[humor]], but is [[perhaps]] a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I [[particularly]] [[loved]] the [[ending]] of the [[film]], which I [[thought]] was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of '[[Something]] About Mary'. [[Very]] light and fun; it [[leaves]] you [[laughing]] and [[smiling]], which is [[exactly]] how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I [[would]] [[highly]] [[recommend]]. Steve Carell has [[brought]] a career out of portraying the [[moderately]] [[unusual]] straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various [[aiding]] roles. In Virgin, Carell has [[find]] a [[smarter]] and [[funny]] script that [[entirely]] capitalizes on his [[fortresses]]. Carell plays Andy Stitzer, a middle aged [[dude]] [[residing]] a [[silent]], [[alone]] life. Andy is a [[petit]] [[unusual]], but in an awkward [[enjoyable]] guy [[genre]] of [[pathway]]. One [[nocturne]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first time, Andy [[inadvertently]] [[illustrates]] that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David ([[Paulo]] [[Rode]]), [[Jae]] ([[Pikey]] Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease Andy about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent [[mankind]] being that [[Indie]] is, and they [[solve]] to [[helps]] him out by [[helps]] him in ending his virginity. And so [[beginning]] Andy's quest into [[mature]]. [[Indie]] is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[comedy]] derives from his naiveté to the [[instances]] he [[discoveries]] himself in [[in]] the film. Some of the [[humour]] is [[rough]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well [[doing]] [[smart]] [[comedian]]. [[During]] [[supplement]], I [[find]] some parts of the [[films]] actually pretty [[affects]] as [[Indie]] finds himself [[drafting]] both romantic [[ties]] and [[friends]] [[presumably]] for the first time in his [[lifetime]]. I'm not [[attempting]] to portray the movie as a love story or a [[theater]]; it's a [[roll]] in your seats [[comedian]]. [[However]], [[any]] good [[parody]] I have ever seen contains enough [[heartland]] for you to [[healthcare]] about the [[features]]. A good comparison would be 'The [[Wed]] Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a [[analogous]] [[comedy]], but is [[presumably]] a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I [[principally]] [[cared]] the [[ended]] of the [[cinematography]], which I [[ideology]] was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of '[[Anything]] About Mary'. [[Quite]] light and fun; it [[departs]] you [[kidding]] and [[grinning]], which is [[accurately]] how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I [[could]] [[hugely]] [[recommends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I give it a 2 is that filmography is so stylized these days such that it has at least something to comment on.

This film is asinine. It's like so many other 21st century grind house fodder. The gore is gratuitous and simply revolting. I didn't care about any of the characters, but I did care that some cretin bothered to pen this crap: I'd complain about the money I spent, but my date and I wisely left after 40 minutes and went to an adjoining theater to watch the adventurous and entertaining "Live Free or Die Hard," which probably got a much higher rating from me simply because I endured the utter poop of "Captivity" for 40 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Have you seen The Graduate? It was hailed as the movie of its generation. But A River Runs Through It is the story about all generations. Long before Dustin Hoffman's character got all wrapped up in the traps of modern suburbia, Norman Maclean and his brother Paul were facing the same crushing pressures of growing up as they tried to find their place in the world. But how could a place like post WW1 Montana be a showcase for the American family, at a time when the Wild West still was not completely gone? Just what has Maclean tapped into that strikes so deeply at who we all are and what we have to go through to find ourselves? As the movie opens, Norman is an old man, flyfishing beside a rushing river, trying to understand the course his own life has taken. The movie is literally a journey up through his own stream of consciousness, against time's current and back to when he was a boy. He and his younger brother Paul were the sons of a Presbyterian minister and devoted mother. The parents fit snugly into their roles. Mom takes care of house and home. Dad does the work of the Lord. The boys ponder what they will be when they grow up. Norm has it narrowed down to a boxer or a minister like his dad. Given the choice, little Paul would be the boxer, since he's told his first choice of pro flyfisherman doesn't even exist. The boys grow up and get into trouble with their pranks, fight to see who is tougher and do the things brothers do, all the while attending church and taking part in all other spiritual matters like flyfishing. They are at similar points in their lives before college. But when Norm returns from his six years at Dartmouth, things are very different. Paul is at the top of his game. Master flyfisherman. Grad of a nearby college and newspaper reporter who knows every cop on the beat and every judge on the bench. Norman is stunningly well educated for his day but has little idea what to do with his life, even as his father grills him about what he intends to do. You're left feeling that at least to Pops, God will call you to your life's work. But you have to stay open and ready to receive it -- all your life. Father has always taken his boys to reflect by the side of the river and contemplate God's eternal words. "Listen," their father urges. It's both Zen and Quakerly. Pretty radical for a stoic clergyman. But with all the beauty and contemplation, and even though the Macleans are truly a God-fearing, scripture-heeding household, how is it that Rev. Maclean's family is unraveling? Paul is true perfection as he fishes the river, but he's feeling the pull of gambling and boozing, while his family doesn't know how to keep him from winding up where he seems to be headed. Mom, Dad and Brother all seem to have the same quiet desperation of not knowing what they should be doing and why they can't seem to help. Pauly just waves it all off with a grin and his irresistible charm. But the junior brother is losing his grip. Norman starts getting his life on track, finding love and career, but Paul continues to slide. The family that loves him watches helplessly. Mother, Father, Brother flounder in their own ways trying to help, but none very effectively. How can a family that loves each other so much be so ill-equipped to handle this? How can someone be so artful and full of grace when out in God's nature, yet be somehow unfit or unwilling to fit into the constructs of society that God's peoples have made for themselves? These are all questions Norman will ponder his entire life. The eternal words beneath the smooth stones of the river forever haunt him, yet keep their secrets. The movie is beautiful to watch. This is certainly God's country, and filming it won an Oscar. Director Robert Redford plays with the story from the book and teases the narration a bit to follow the emotional pattern he's presenting, and it works well. But do go back and read the book, too. You'll see Norman made connections with his old man even deeper than the movie can suggest -- and you'll see the places where the storyteller's very words gurgle and sing right off the page with an exuberance of a river running through it, leading into the unknown. --------------------------------------------- Result 730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Omen 4: The Awakening' is a made-for-television sequel to the original 'The Omen' film. Instead of Satan possessing the body of a little boy, he possesses the body of a little girl adopted by rich parents, who is bullied at school and who ends up getting revenge against those who do her wrong. The film seems to struggle with any horror factor, and a lot of the events that happen are simply silly rather than particularly frightening, and it is difficult to believe that this little girl is Satan, even with all of the events that surround it. I just did not find this film very suspenseful or frightening, particularly when compared to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[City]] Hall takes on the politics of a city rather than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[shines]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[still]] goes for a smaller scale and [[puts]] the microscope on a few key players in a [[city]] [[wide]] scandal stumbled on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very familiar with [[elements]] of the thriller having done Mercury [[Rising]], [[Malice]], and [[Domestic]] [[Disturbance]] and I [[think]] in [[many]] [[ways]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[genre]] that its [[almost]] to a fault. I [[mean]] [[City]] Hall is [[meant]] to be a [[political]] [[drama]], not a thriller but [[instead]] when all is [[said]] and [[done]] and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[film]] it [[feels]] and [[looks]] like a thriller but a decent one at that with very [[important]] [[part]] of the [[recipe]] that [[immediately]] makes it [[stand]] out...what else...or rather who else...Al Pacino. The [[film]] begins by giving you a really good [[look]] at [[life]] in the mayoral office and the [[inner]] workings of the [[city]]. As the [[film]] [[continues]] it broadens its [[political]] [[spectrum]] to [[include]] a [[democratic]] [[boss]], and his [[connections]] and then we are [[introduced]] to some of the goings on [[within]] the [[city]]. As [[events]] unfold a mystery begins and the political aspect is [[kind]] of left in the [[background]] but it [[still]] has a brilliant set up.

I [[absolutely]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I [[mean]] [[even]] if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[could]] I ever [[say]] it? The [[man]] is acting [[royalty]]. There is just [[something]] [[brilliant]] about his entire [[demeanor]]. [[In]] [[City]] [[Hall]] Pacino plays the [[New]] York [[City]] mayor. He has a sense of [[duty]] and honor and immediately appears to be a very upstanding politician. He also delivers one of the most [[powerful]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[seen]] at the 'James Bone' [[Funeral]]. I re-watched that [[speech]] four [[times]] and the [[first]] [[time]] I watched Pacino give it, my mouth gaped open and I [[almost]] wanted to stand up and [[applaud]]. Its [[brilliantly]] [[written]] and brilliantly delivered by [[Pacino]]. [[John]] Cusack, who I really do enjoy as an actor, turns in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 [[Ville]] Hall takes on the politics of a city rather than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[glows]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[nevertheless]] goes for a smaller scale and [[begs]] the microscope on a few key players in a [[town]] [[broad]] scandal stumbled on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very familiar with [[components]] of the thriller having done Mercury [[Rises]], [[Mischief]], and [[Internally]] [[Unrest]] and I [[reckon]] in [[various]] [[modes]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[type]] that its [[nearly]] to a fault. I [[meaning]] [[Ville]] Hall is [[intended]] to be a [[politician]] [[theatrical]], not a thriller but [[however]] when all is [[told]] and [[performed]] and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[cinematography]] it [[believes]] and [[seem]] like a thriller but a decent one at that with very [[momentous]] [[parties]] of the [[recipes]] that [[promptly]] makes it [[standing]] out...what else...or rather who else...Al Pacino. The [[cinematography]] begins by giving you a really good [[glance]] at [[lifetime]] in the mayoral office and the [[internally]] workings of the [[ville]]. As the [[movie]] [[persisted]] it broadens its [[politician]] [[spectral]] to [[containing]] a [[congo]] [[chef]], and his [[connector]] and then we are [[lodged]] to some of the goings on [[inside]] the [[town]]. As [[event]] unfold a mystery begins and the political aspect is [[genera]] of left in the [[backdrop]] but it [[yet]] has a brilliant set up.

I [[fully]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I [[meaning]] [[yet]] if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[would]] I ever [[told]] it? The [[men]] is acting [[royalties]]. There is just [[anything]] [[wondrous]] about his entire [[behaviour]]. [[At]] [[Town]] [[Salle]] Pacino plays the [[Nuevo]] York [[Ville]] mayor. He has a sense of [[duties]] and honor and immediately appears to be a very upstanding politician. He also delivers one of the most [[forceful]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[noticed]] at the 'James Bone' [[Burials]]. I re-watched that [[sermons]] four [[moments]] and the [[outset]] [[period]] I watched Pacino give it, my mouth gaped open and I [[hardly]] wanted to stand up and [[praising]]. Its [[brightly]] [[wrote]] and brilliantly delivered by [[Deniro]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack, who I really do enjoy as an actor, turns in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The emotional powers and characters of Dominick and Eugene are the things that Hollywood doesn't make anymore. This is one of the most emotional, sensitive, and heart-felt movies that I have ever seen! Roy Liotta, Tom Hulce, and supporting actress Jamie Lee Curtis, deliver Oscar Winning caliber performances! There are not enough words to express how great this movie is. Sure, people who are not into sentimental movies may not care as much as the rest of us about Dominick and Eugene, but for the rest of us, this movie goes right to the heart and sole of compassion and humanity. You will never forget this film, EVER!

*****SPOILERS BELOW*****

The simple yet eloquent story is masterfully told. Eugene is a med-school intern who faces long hours and a demanding work load at the hospital. His fraternal twin brother Dominick (born 12 minutes earlier) is a little slow and awkward because of brain damage due to a victim of abuse by their father. (A heartbreaking moment when this is found out in the film that will leave you in tears!) Eugene (a.k.a "Geno") faces a painful dilemma. He must decide whether to finish medical school, which would mean accepting his residency in another city and leave Dominick (a.k.a "Nicky") behind, or forfeit the rest of his education to take care of him. Nicky helps pay his brother's med-school tuition by working as a trash collector.

The questions of ethics, morals, and responsibilities are masterfully blended in this landmark movie. Just when Gino thinks Nicky might be making progress toward independence, Dominick turns around and winds up doing things like helping out a drug dealer, or tying to use a faulty cord that he finds at the dump on an electrical appliance.

Larry, is "The Character" and Nicky's partner on his garbage route who fills gullible Dominick's head with all kinds of stories like Geno and Jennifer (his girlfriend, whom he is tutoring in Clinical Pharmacology) going to Atlantic City and gambling away all their money. But deep down, you can see that Larry cares for him. On their rounds, Nicky also befriends a little boy, whom we find out has also been beaten by his father. An end result is also tragic and the pain that you see on Nicky's face when it happens, speaks volumes.

The sensitivity that the two brothers share for each other can not be overstated enough. All Nicky wants to do is be loved and look for acceptance in anyway he can. (i.e he goes to church, loves Hulk Hogan) Geno loves Nicky more than anything in the world. But can his brother become independent enough so that Geno can pursue his dream of becoming a doctor? A brilliant film that should have gotten tons more recognition than it deserved, but unfortunately came out around the same time as Rain Man, which dealt with a similar issue. However, I like Dominick and Eugene better because it has a far stronger emotional component. Be forewarned that this movie is aimed right at the tear-ducts, so have Kleenex handy! What a film!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] SPOILER [[WARNING]]: There are some [[minor]] spoilers in this review. Don't read it beyond the first paragraph if you [[plan]] on seeing the [[film]].

The [[Disney]] [[Channel]] currently has a [[policy]] to make [[loads]] of [[movies]] and [[show]] one a [[month]] on the [[cable]] [[channel]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few good [[elements]] but [[still]] being a [[disappointment]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From [[Planet]] Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[something]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a [[real]] [[stinker]]. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and [[worse]] acting. [[Apparently]], `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the [[holiday]], because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV [[Guide]], so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The [[plot]] was more far-fetched than [[normal]]. I [[usually]] [[let]] that slide, but here it just goes too far. [[Matthew]] Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his [[dad]] is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where [[kids]] all [[around]] the world can find and send him a [[dollar]] to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole [[concept]] is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, [[Matthew]] opens his own company's [[bank]] [[account]] and buys up most of his dad's business's [[stock]]. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his [[dad]], but instead [[presents]] himself at board [[meetings]] as a cartoon [[image]] through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. SPOILER [[ALERT]]: There are some [[smaller]] spoilers in this review. Don't read it beyond the first paragraph if you [[plans]] on seeing the [[filmmaking]].

The [[Disneyland]] [[Canals]] currently has a [[policies]] to make [[burden]] of [[movie]] and [[illustrating]] one a [[months]] on the [[cables]] [[channels]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few good [[facets]] but [[however]] being a [[displeasure]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From [[Planetary]] Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[somethings]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a [[veritable]] [[tosser]]. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and [[lousiest]] acting. [[Visibly]], `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the [[vacations]], because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV [[Guides]], so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The [[intrigue]] was more far-fetched than [[ordinary]]. I [[fluently]] [[leave]] that slide, but here it just goes too far. [[Mathew]] Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his [[daddy]] is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where [[children]] all [[throughout]] the world can find and send him a [[usd]] to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole [[conception]] is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, [[Mathieu]] opens his own company's [[banque]] [[accounting]] and buys up most of his dad's business's [[stocks]]. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his [[poppa]], but instead [[exposes]] himself at board [[meeting]] as a cartoon [[photo]] through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the last of four swashbucklers from France I've scheduled for viewing during this Christmas season: the others (in order of viewing) were the uninspired THE BLACK TULIP (1964; from the same director as this one but not nearly as good), the surprisingly effective LADY Oscar (1979; which had originated as a Japanese manga!) and the splendid CARTOUCHE (1962). Actually, I had watched this one not too long ago on late-night Italian TV and recall not being especially bowled over by it, so that I was genuinely surprised by how much I enjoyed it this time around (also bearing in mind the baffling lack of enthusiasm shown towards the film here and elsewhere when it was first announced as an upcoming DVD release from Criterion).

Incidentally, FANFAN LA TULIPE has quite a bit in common with the afore-mentioned CARTOUCHE: not just cast and crew members (producers Georges Dancigers and Alexandre Mnouchkine, cinematographer Christian Matras, actor Noel Roquevert) but plot-wise as well – in fact, the hero is a womanizing soldier (Jean-Paul Belmondo's Cartouche had also had a brief military spell) who's loved by a fiery girl (in this case, gypsy Gina Lollobrigida) while he's himself obsessed by an impossible love (here, it's none other than the king's daughter)! As in the later film, too, Fanfan (an ideally cast Gerard Philipe who, ironically, is so full of life here that one finds it hard to believe that he would be stricken down by cancer within 7 years' time) is flanked by two fun-loving yet cowardly men (one of them is actually his superior officer and the heroine's own father) and opposed by an unscrupulous figure within his own ranks (the ageing Roquevert, with whom the hero eventually engages in a rooftop duel since he too has amorous designs on the gypsy girl)!; for the record, Lollobrigida will rejoin Philippe in her next film, Rene Clair's delightful romantic fantasy LES BELLES DE NUIT (1952).

FANFAN proved to be a big box-office hit on its home-ground and even copped a surprising (but well-deserved) Best Direction award at Cannes over more renowned films like AN American IN Paris (1951), DETECTIVE STORY (1951), OTHELLO, UMBERTO D. and VIVA ZAPATA! In fact, its popularity ensured its re-release in a computer-colored version (presumably for the benefit of viewers who wouldn't touch a black-and-white product with a ten-foot pole) and the Criterion DVD itself contains a sample from this variant; being obviously a foreign-language title, there's also the dubious choice of an English-dubbed soundtrack but, even if these proved not especially painful to sit through considering, when all is said and done, there's simply no substitute for the original!

FANFAN LA TULIPE (a nickname given the hero by a young Genevieve Page as the celebrated Madame De Pompadour) contains about as much comedy as (the expected) action and romance; while some may find this overwhelming, I don't agree myself as I enjoyed the sharply satirical narration and, on the whole, this combination is comparable with Jerzy Skolimowski's equally droll THE ADVENTURES OF GERARD (1970). That said, the swordfights here are remarkably forceful for an essentially lighthearted enterprise (particularly a scuffle in the woods and the ambush at a convent) and the film itself rather adult at times (with numerous allusions to sexuality as well as coarse language adopted throughout) when viewed back-to-back with vintage Hollywood fare as I did now; the climax, then is quite ingenious: the enemy forces (who, amusingly, are made to speak in speeded-up gibberish!) are depleted by our heroic trio alone, much to the king's amazement who, as portrayed by Marcel Herrand – best-known for his role of leader of the Parisian underworld in Marcel Carne''s CHILDREN OF PARADISE (1945) – is himself something of a lecher.

P.S. An Italian TV channel has been threatening to screen Christian-Jaque's promising CHAMPAGNE FOR SAVAGES (1964) for months now but, despite programming it three times already (with a tentative fourth one slated for next week), they have yet to show it; even so, I do have three more films of his in my unwatched VHS pile (equally culled from late-night Italian TV screenings): the three-hour epic LA CHARTREUSE DE PARME (1948; also starring Gerard Philippe), THE SECOND TWIN (1967) and THE LEGEND OF FRENCHIE KING (1971; with Brigitte Bardot and Claudia Cardinale). --------------------------------------------- Result 735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Even]] in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[dangerous]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five years ago, it was not uncommon for [[women]] to die during [[childbirth]]. That is the [[theme]] of "[[Life]] [[Begins]]": a [[look]] at the "[[difficult]] cases" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Young]] plays the lead, a [[woman]] [[brought]] here from [[prison]] (what [[crime]] she committed is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's [[conflicted]] about the fact she's going to have to [[give]] her [[baby]] up after birth. She's in a ward with [[several]] other women, who [[share]] their [[joys]] and [[pain]] with each other.

[[Although]] Loretta Young is the lead, the [[outstanding]] performance, as [[usual]], is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" [[women]] in the 1930s, [[showing]] up [[quite]] a bit in [[supporting]] roles, and [[sometimes]] [[getting]] the lead in B [[movies]] (Farrell played Torchy Blane in [[several]] installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant [[mother]] who doesn't want her [[children]], [[since]] they'll only [[get]] in the [[way]]. She does everything she can to get in the [[way]] of the [[nurses]], [[including]] [[smuggling]] [[liquor]] into the ward (this of course during the [[Prohibition]] [[days]]), and [[drinking]] like a fish -- [[apparently]] they'd never [[heard]] of fetal [[alcohol]] syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most [[movie]] of the [[early]] 1930s, it's not the [[women]] being bumbling idiots [[getting]] in the [[way]] of the [[heroic]] men -- that situation is [[reversed]], with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran [[character]] [[actor]] Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "[[Life]] [[Begins]]", being an early talkie, [[treats]] the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's [[quite]] a [[charming]] [[little]] [[movie]]. Turner [[Classic]] [[show]] it, [[albeit]] infrequently; I've only seen it show up on a few days [[honoring]] Loretta [[Young]]. But it's [[highly]] [[recommended]] viewing when it does show up. [[Yet]] in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[risky]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five years ago, it was not uncommon for [[femmes]] to die during [[pregnancy]]. That is the [[topic]] of "[[Vie]] [[Launch]]": a [[gaze]] at the "[[laborious]] cases" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Jeune]] plays the lead, a [[women]] [[lodged]] here from [[incarceration]] (what [[offence]] she committed is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's [[contested]] about the fact she's going to have to [[lend]] her [[babies]] up after birth. She's in a ward with [[multiple]] other women, who [[exchanges]] their [[pleasures]] and [[pains]] with each other.

[[Despite]] Loretta Young is the lead, the [[unresolved]] performance, as [[ordinary]], is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" [[daughters]] in the 1930s, [[shows]] up [[utterly]] a bit in [[assisting]] roles, and [[occasionally]] [[obtain]] the lead in B [[films]] (Farrell played Torchy Blane in [[numerous]] installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant [[mothers]] who doesn't want her [[infant]], [[because]] they'll only [[obtain]] in the [[routes]]. She does everything she can to get in the [[route]] of the [[nursing]], [[comprising]] [[trafficking]] [[spirits]] into the ward (this of course during the [[Prohibit]] [[jours]]), and [[beverage]] like a fish -- [[clearly]] they'd never [[listened]] of fetal [[ethanol]] syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most [[films]] of the [[swift]] 1930s, it's not the [[females]] being bumbling idiots [[obtain]] in the [[manner]] of the [[heroes]] men -- that situation is [[reversal]], with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran [[nature]] [[actress]] Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "[[Vida]] [[Outset]]", being an early talkie, [[discusses]] the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's [[rather]] a [[cute]] [[tiny]] [[movies]]. Turner [[Conventional]] [[showing]] it, [[whereas]] infrequently; I've only seen it show up on a few days [[honoured]] Loretta [[Youth]]. But it's [[heavily]] [[suggested]] viewing when it does show up. --------------------------------------------- Result 736 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie. It's wacky, funny, violent, surreal, played out in a madman's head, and definitely not your usual comedy.

If you don't find the film amusing then I guess it's just not for your tastes, so this is a tough one to write a review for.

For reference, some other comedies I love are The Big Lebowski, The Princess Bride, and Zoolander (that one only got me the second time around). There are others, but my taste is definitely for the unusual, and I am willing to accept that most people just don't tend to like that kind of thing. I make no apologies for having an unusual sense of humour - at least I have one.

The scenes and characters of this particular movie are well put together, the verbal humour is hilarious, the situations are intriguing, the acting is very good (as you would expect of the cast), though the acting demands made of the cast by the script are not particularly high. The overall package makes for fun, funny, watchable yet violent entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have been a Hindi movie buff since the age of 4 but never in my life have a watched such a moving and impacting movie, especially as a Hindi film. In the past several years, I had stopped watching contemporary Hindi movies and reverted to watching the classics (Teesri Kasam, Mere Huzoor, Madhumati, Mother India, Sholay, etc.) But this movie changed everything. It is one of the best movies I have ever seen. I found it not only to be moving but also found it to be very educational for someone who is a first generation Indian woman growing up in America. It helped me to understand my own family history, which was always something very abstract to me. But, to "see" it, feel it and understand it helped me to sympathize with the generations before me and the struggle that Indian people endured. The film helped to put many things into perspective for me, especially considering the current world events. I never thought that a movie could change the way I think like this before... it did. The plot is fantastic, the acting superb and the direction is flawless. Two thumbs up! --------------------------------------------- Result 738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[feature]] as director, and he [[shows]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his [[previous]] movies were heavy [[dramas]]. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can [[tell]] it is a pre [[code]] [[movie]], and [[nothing]] like it was [[made]] in the US for [[quite]] a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would [[see]] - no widescreen [[shots]] or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have [[mentioned]] the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however [[provides]] a bit of [[spark]].

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and [[faked]] - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[characteristics]] as director, and he [[exposition]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his [[anterior]] movies were heavy [[drama]]. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can [[telling]] it is a pre [[cipher]] [[cinematography]], and [[anything]] like it was [[introduced]] in the US for [[altogether]] a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would [[seeing]] - no widescreen [[punches]] or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have [[talked]] the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however [[gives]] a bit of [[ignites]].

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and [[falsified]] - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. --------------------------------------------- Result 739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just a few words.... This movie really sucks. It's like those TV Movies with bad cast and plot. It's amazing how they could make this sequel worse than the III. Don't waste your time watching this crap, even if you like the tremors movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[saw]] it at the [[Legacy]] [[Theater]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in [[Salt]] Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will [[largely]] be [[based]] on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that [[aside]] it was very well made, well acted, and had a nice [[score]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[must]] to see it in the [[Legacy]] Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as [[picture]] quality, sound quality and [[ambiance]] in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would [[let]] me watch Batman [[Begins]] there! Being that I'm LDS and regard [[Joseph]] as a prophet, I was [[touched]] in several [[places]] and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie [[started]]! [[Anyway]], I'm told that this [[film]] is available in [[several]] LDS Visitor Centers around the [[globe]], if you have 70 minutes [[check]] it out because whether you believe [[Joseph]] Smith or not, he [[tells]] a [[fascinating]] [[story]]. I [[noticed]] it at the [[Inherit]] [[Theatrical]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in [[Saline]] Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will [[substantially]] be [[predicated]] on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that [[sideways]] it was very well made, well acted, and had a nice [[scoring]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[should]] to see it in the [[Inheritance]] Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as [[image]] quality, sound quality and [[ambience]] in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would [[letting]] me watch Batman [[Beginning]] there! Being that I'm LDS and regard [[Jozef]] as a prophet, I was [[poked]] in several [[spaces]] and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie [[starts]]! [[Writ]], I'm told that this [[cinematography]] is available in [[myriad]] LDS Visitor Centers around the [[orb]], if you have 70 minutes [[verify]] it out because whether you believe [[Jozef]] Smith or not, he [[narrates]] a [[riveting]] [[histories]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This could be [[looked]] at in [[many]] [[different]] ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just [[plain]] weird. The third one [[probably]] explains this [[movie]] best. It has [[strange]] [[themes]] and just has a [[strange]] [[plot]]. So who else but [[Christopher]] Walken would [[play]] in this no [[matter]] how [[bad]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would [[expect]] especially out of [[Ben]] Stiller. Jack Black I have always [[liked]] so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[somewhat]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not completely horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. This could be [[seemed]] at in [[various]] [[various]] ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just [[lowlands]] weird. The third one [[assuredly]] explains this [[filmmaking]] best. It has [[unusual]] [[matters]] and just has a [[weird]] [[intrigue]]. So who else but [[Cristobal]] Walken would [[gaming]] in this no [[issue]] how [[unfavorable]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would [[awaited]] especially out of [[Bin]] Stiller. Jack Black I have always [[enjoyed]] so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[rather]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not completely horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] There's something [[compelling]] and [[strangely]] [[believable]] about this episode. From the very [[beginning]], an [[atmosphere]] of tension is [[created]] by the [[knowledge]] that a certain [[planet]] is going to [[explode]] [[within]] a few [[hours]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evacuate]] the [[inhabitants]], all of whom [[seem]] to have left already for parts [[unknown]], except for an [[elderly]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic [[advice]] about where all the citizens have gone to is interrupted by a [[crisis]] in which all three [[Enterprise]] crew members [[find]] themselves [[unexpectedly]] hurled into [[different]] eras of the planet's past. [[Kirk]] [[finds]] himself in a [[time]] [[period]] [[resembling]] 17th Century [[England]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[stories]], and the [[different]] [[hazardous]] situations the [[men]] [[find]] themselves in is [[superbly]] [[handled]], with return to the present an [[unknown]] [[chance]], while the minutes are [[counting]] down to the planet's [[explosion]].

[[Imaginative]] [[writing]] and fine acting [[characterize]] this episode, with a [[touching]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[woman]] [[exiled]] to the Ice Age, and Ian [[Wolfe]] as the urbane Librarian. Somewhat [[reminiscent]] of the classic episode [[City]] On The Edge of [[Forever]], this time [[travel]] [[story]] is a [[rich]] and [[compelling]] finale to the [[series]], which [[concluded]] one episode [[later]]. This has to be one of the [[best]] of the whole [[series]], [[especially]] [[remarkable]] [[given]] the [[generally]] [[lesser]] quality of the [[third]] season overall. There's something [[convincing]] and [[suspiciously]] [[credible]] about this episode. From the very [[starts]], an [[atmospheric]] of tension is [[established]] by the [[acquaintance]] that a certain [[planetary]] is going to [[explosion]] [[inside]] a few [[hour]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evicted]] the [[villagers]], all of whom [[appears]] to have left already for parts [[unidentified]], except for an [[ancient]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic [[councils]] about where all the citizens have gone to is interrupted by a [[crises]] in which all three [[Company]] crew members [[finds]] themselves [[suddenly]] hurled into [[assorted]] eras of the planet's past. [[Kirky]] [[deems]] himself in a [[period]] [[timeline]] [[resembled]] 17th Century [[Britain]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[narratives]], and the [[several]] [[unsafe]] situations the [[males]] [[unearthed]] themselves in is [[remarkably]] [[manipulated]], with return to the present an [[unrecognized]] [[possibilities]], while the minutes are [[count]] down to the planet's [[explosions]].

[[Creativity]] [[writes]] and fine acting [[characterization]] this episode, with a [[touch]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[wife]] [[exiles]] to the Ice Age, and Ian [[Wolves]] as the urbane Librarian. Somewhat [[evocative]] of the classic episode [[Ville]] On The Edge of [[Indefinitely]], this time [[voyager]] [[conte]] is a [[wealthy]] and [[conclusive]] finale to the [[serial]], which [[concludes]] one episode [[then]]. This has to be one of the [[better]] of the whole [[serials]], [[specially]] [[dramatic]] [[yielded]] the [[routinely]] [[lowest]] quality of the [[thirdly]] season overall. --------------------------------------------- Result 743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] By 1976 the [[western]] was an exhausted [[genre]] and the makers of this film clearly knew it. Still, instead of shelving the project and [[saving]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it [[anyway]]. Apparently in need of an interesting [[thread]] to get the [[audiences]] to come and see the film, they decided to make it as [[blatantly]] violent and [[unpleasant]] as [[possible]]. Hell, it worked for The [[Wild]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[work]] here? Of course, The Wild Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired [[lawman]] who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a [[bloodthirsty]] [[film]] [[indeed]] in which [[every]] [[time]] someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's [[tremendously]] [[disappointing]] really, because the [[star]] [[pairing]] [[sounds]] like a mouth-watering [[prospect]]. There's no [[sense]] of [[pace]] or [[urgency]] in the [[film]] either. It takes an [[eternity]] to get going, but when the [[action]] finally does come it is [[marred]] by the emphasis on nastiness. [[All]] in all, this might be the very [[worst]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his [[illustrious]] CV. By 1976 the [[ouest]] was an exhausted [[kind]] and the makers of this film clearly knew it. Still, instead of shelving the project and [[saved]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it [[anyhow]]. Apparently in need of an interesting [[threading]] to get the [[viewers]] to come and see the film, they decided to make it as [[notoriously]] violent and [[nasty]] as [[doable]]. Hell, it worked for The [[Sauvage]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[cooperating]] here? Of course, The Wild Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired [[sheriff]] who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a [[murderous]] [[filmmaking]] [[admittedly]] in which [[any]] [[period]] someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's [[extraordinarily]] [[depressing]] really, because the [[superstar]] [[matches]] [[sound]] like a mouth-watering [[prospecting]]. There's no [[feeling]] of [[tempo]] or [[emergency]] in the [[filmmaking]] either. It takes an [[virginity]] to get going, but when the [[actions]] finally does come it is [[tainted]] by the emphasis on nastiness. [[Entire]] in all, this might be the very [[meanest]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his [[glamorous]] CV. --------------------------------------------- Result 744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The memory of the "The Last Hunt" has stuck with me since I saw it in 1956 when I was 13. It is a movie that was far ahead of others at the time in that it addressed the treatment of the natives, the environment, and the ever present contrast between the short and long term effects of greed. It is as relevant today as in 1956, a cinemagraphic discussion of utmost depth and relevance. To top it off the setting is beautiful and the cinematography excellent. The memory of this movie will be with me to the end of my days. --------------------------------------------- Result 745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the dumbest films, I've ever seen. It rips off nearly ever type of thriller and manages to make a mess of them all.

There's not a single good line or character in the whole mess. If there was a plot, it was an afterthought and as far as acting goes, there's nothing good to say so Ill say nothing. I honestly cant understand how this type of nonsense gets produced and actually released, does somebody somewhere not at some stage think, 'Oh my god this really is a load of shite' and call it a day. Its crap like this that has people downloading illegally, the trailer looks like a completely different film, at least if you have download it, you haven't wasted your time or money Don't waste your time, this is painful. --------------------------------------------- Result 746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having never seen the original Dirty Harry, I judged this movie on a clean slate. And I must say, I quite enjoyed it. Sure, some of the acting by Sondre Locke made me a little squeemish - but hey, it was the 80's. But even if you can't get past her (and I almost couldn't) or her revenge killings (which seemed a little.. overdone ;P), it's worth it just for Dirty Harry. Or at the very least, the bull dog he affectionately names 'MeatHead' :P

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 747 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[winning]] film in the [[spirit]] of cutting, dark [[comedy]]. [[Shot]] on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the [[early]] Coen brother's film Blood [[Simple]] ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to [[boot]]! Needs to [[seen]] more than once to [[appreciate]] all the [[elements]] that [[carry]] one scene to the [[next]]. [[Expect]] more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[earn]] film in the [[wits]] of cutting, dark [[charade]]. [[Offed]] on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the [[precocious]] Coen brother's film Blood [[Simpler]] ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to [[startup]]! Needs to [[saw]] more than once to [[thankful]] all the [[ingredients]] that [[bears]] one scene to the [[imminent]]. [[Waits]] more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. --------------------------------------------- Result 748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Was]] there a [[single]] positive to this film? Critics who knew nothing of [[video]] games [[could]] spot the gaming errors [[made]]. No damage taken with damage [[clearly]] [[visible]] towards the [[beginning]] being a primary [[example]].

And I may have missed [[something]], but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 [[suppose]] to be a [[game]] that had never [[played]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and [[even]] the [[girl]], [[know]] so much about the game already? We're [[talking]] [[things]] that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Nothing]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more [[experienced]]. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their [[strongest]] points. The [[characters]] are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the [[youngest]] [[child]]) is a very [[silent]], completely dry child cliché of a little [[kid]] who [[almost]] never [[talks]] because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even [[begin]] to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only [[value]] that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. [[If]] you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But [[unless]] you loved it as a [[kid]] there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very [[little]] that will [[prevent]] you from turning it off.

No [[sir]], I didn't like it. [[Became]] there a [[exclusive]] positive to this film? Critics who knew nothing of [[videos]] games [[wo]] spot the gaming errors [[introduced]]. No damage taken with damage [[plainly]] [[apparent]] towards the [[startup]] being a primary [[examples]].

And I may have missed [[somethin]], but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 [[imagine]] to be a [[gaming]] that had never [[done]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and [[yet]] the [[girls]], [[savoir]] so much about the game already? We're [[debates]] [[items]] that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Anything]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more [[undergone]]. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their [[stronger]] points. The [[trait]] are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the [[younger]] [[kid]]) is a very [[quiet]], completely dry child cliché of a little [[child]] who [[practically]] never [[negotiations]] because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even [[embark]] to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only [[valued]] that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. [[Though]] you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But [[if]] you loved it as a [[child]] there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very [[petit]] that will [[avoiding]] you from turning it off.

No [[monsieur]], I didn't like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Yes, the [[first]] "[[Howling]]" was a classic. A [[rather]] good werewolf [[movie]] that I [[admit]] started slowly, but gained momentum along the [[way]] to have a rather good finish then the [[anchorwoman]] [[changed]] into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on camera. [[Yes]] that made for an [[entertaining]] [[horror]] [[movie]] to be sure...well [[forget]] all of that as this movie has nothing to do with that [[film]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anchor]] woman is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they go from the little cozy [[retreat]] from the first [[movie]] to Transylvania or somewhere here where they must battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[world]] Christopher Lee was doing in this movie, however I read the [[trivia]] here where it says he had never been in a werewolf movie before, but still read the script before you [[take]] a role. Maybe you could have gotten into "An American Werewolf in London" hell that could have been [[possible]]. It was set in London after all. Heck, werewolves do not seem to figure much into this movie except for a rather bizarre and [[prolonged]] sex scene. [[In]] fact, the most [[memorable]] [[death]] in this movie for me was when the one gal started talking loudly and this one dude's ear's started bleeding. Yes, the [[fiirst]] "[[Yelling]]" was a classic. A [[quite]] good werewolf [[movies]] that I [[recognise]] started slowly, but gained momentum along the [[manner]] to have a rather good finish then the [[newscaster]] [[amended]] into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on camera. [[Yep]] that made for an [[entertain]] [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] to be sure...well [[forgotten]] all of that as this movie has nothing to do with that [[films]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anchorage]] woman is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they go from the little cozy [[backtrack]] from the first [[filmmaking]] to Transylvania or somewhere here where they must battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[globe]] Christopher Lee was doing in this movie, however I read the [[anecdotes]] here where it says he had never been in a werewolf movie before, but still read the script before you [[taking]] a role. Maybe you could have gotten into "An American Werewolf in London" hell that could have been [[reachable]]. It was set in London after all. Heck, werewolves do not seem to figure much into this movie except for a rather bizarre and [[lengthy]] sex scene. [[Among]] fact, the most [[unforgettable]] [[muerte]] in this movie for me was when the one gal started talking loudly and this one dude's ear's started bleeding. --------------------------------------------- Result 750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house [[crowd]] had the time of their [[cinematic]] [[lives]]. It's tasteless, [[groovy]] and very [[funny]] in a sixties kind of way. The [[Kraft]] [[Kitchen]] recipe [[sketch]] had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed [[bag]], but the highs [[definitely]] beat the lows. By the [[way]], [[whatever]] happened to Ken Shapiro?? We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house [[multitude]] had the time of their [[cinematographic]] [[iife]]. It's tasteless, [[peachy]] and very [[comical]] in a sixties kind of way. The [[Vigour]] [[Cooks]] recipe [[sketching]] had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed [[knapsack]], but the highs [[doubtless]] beat the lows. By the [[routes]], [[whichever]] happened to Ken Shapiro?? --------------------------------------------- Result 751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[great]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[wondrous]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. --------------------------------------------- Result 752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the single worst movie I have ever seen. Let me say that again: THIS IS THE SINGLE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN.

It had all of the ear-marks of a bad movie: continuity errors, bad writing, bad acting, bad production value, bad music. I thought that there were a couple points to horror movies. The first is that it is supposed to be suspenseful enough to scare you. This movie gets and F in this category. The second point is that when a character dies, or something bad happens to them, we are supposed to care. This movie gets an F in this regard as well.

The first story, a woman gets mauled by wolves after being afraid that this would happen to her. The next story, an OCD guy dies from not being careful and talks to a dead friend of his. Oh, and then there is the horrific, nail-biting story of a bad roommate. Come on, could you pick topics a little more interesting and a little less common than being alone in a house, being anal-retentive, and having a roommate? Turns out all of these stories where hallucinations, virtual reality induced by a Doctor who in turn uses it himself. Wow, stupid.

Let me explain something, I enjoy watching bad horror movies and laughing at how bad they are. I couldn't do that with this one. It was utter pain to sit and watch. Do not under any circumstance watch this movie. You WILL regret it. --------------------------------------------- Result 753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching the trailer I was surprised this movie never made it into theaters, so I ordered the BluRay. I had a great time watching it and have to say that this movie is better than some major animation movies out there. Of course, it has its flaws but I can still really recommend it. The animation is well done, very entertaining and unique and the story kept me watching it all the way to the end. Some of the backdrops are just drop-dead gorgeous and you can see the French talent behind it. I thought that Forest Whitaker's performance feels a bit lifeless but that is how the character Lian-Chu is depicted in this movie. So overall, thumbs up, I liked it a lot and I hope it is successful enough for all the studios involved to continue making great movies like this. I would recommend to give it a chance and be surprised how great a movie can be with such a small budget. Hektor alone is worth watching the movie since some of his moments are Stitch-like hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 754 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A story of amazing disinterest kills "The Psychic" over and over again. The characters and plot are completely uninteresting (as is Fulci's mad camera work, which is usually a redeeming factor in his films), and any grasp of suspense is nowhere to be found. It's padded out to an insufferable degree--by the end, you won't be clamoring with excitement but stricken with boredom (and, like me, maybe an uncontrollable urge to fall asleep). Jennifer O'Neill's performance deserves occupancy in a better movie. Fulci gorehounds beware--there's just not much going on in "The Psychic."

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched Grendel the other night and am compelled to put together a Public Service Announcement.

Grendel is another version of Beowulf, the thousand-year-old Anglo-Saxon epic poem. The SciFi channel has a growing catalog of inoffensive and uninteresting movies, and the previews promised an inauthentic low-budget mini-epic, but this one refused to let me switch channels. It was staggeringly, overwhelmingly, bad. I watched in fascination and horror at the train wreck you couldn't tear your eyes away from. I reached for a notepad and managed to capture part of what I was seeing. The following may contain spoilers or might just save your sanity. You've been warned.

- Just to get it over with, Beowulf's warriors wore horned helmets. Trivial issue compared to what came after. It also appears that the helmets were in a bin and handed to whichever actor wandered by next. Fit, appearance and function were apparently irrelevant.

- Marina Sirtis had obviously been blackmailed into doing the movie by the Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey circus. She managed to avoid a red rubber nose, but the clowns had already done the rest of her makeup.

- Ben Cross pretended not to be embarrassed as the king. His character, Hrothgar, must have become king of the Danes only minutes before the film opened and hadn't had a chance to get the crown resized to fit him yet.

- To facilitate the actors' return to their day jobs waiting tables, none were required to change their hairstyles at all. The variety of hair included cornrows, sideburns, buzz cuts and a mullet and at least served to distract from the dialog. To prove it was a multi-national cast, all were encouraged to retain whatever accent they chose.

- As is typical with this type of movie (at least since Mad Max), leather armor was a requirement. In this case it was odd-shaped, ill-fitting and brand-new.

- The female love interest, Ingrid, played by Alexis Peters, followed a long-standing tradition of hotties who should be watched with the volume turned completely down.

- The unintended focus of the movie was a repeating, compound crossbow with exploding bolts. It never needed to be loaded and even had a recoil when fired. It managed to shred the laws of physics, the integrity of the original legend, historical fact and plot suspense all by itself.

- Hrothgar's palace, Heorot, rather than being a Norse long hall, apparently was designed and constructed by artisans who sank with Atlantis.

- Beowulf arrived at the Danes' homeland in a two-masted stern-castled ship that originally was part of a set, the other two being the Santa Maria and the Pinta.

- Prince Unferth observed Beowulf's ship's approach using a telescope. Before you could recover from that astounding innovation, you got to see the ship from his point of view. Judging from the angle, the prince was in an aircraft of some sort.

- Fun fact 1: In Bulgaria, fire (as from a fireplace) creates light without heat. This explains why you could see the actors' breath whether indoors or out.

- Fun fact 2: Dark Age dancing in Denmark looks like slow dances I went to in the 8th grade.

- Fun fact 3: You, too, can make a catapult with a timed-release air-burst explosive. But, don't expect it to actually harm anything. Incidentally, Beowulf was apparently a veteran of World War II, yelling "Incoming!" to shred any remaining suspension of disbelief.

- Grendel was so upset and always in a snit because as a completely CGI creation he couldn't leave footprints. Even in snow.

- Grendel's mom ("Hag") was in a foul mood because she was a single mother and junior hadn't inherited her wings. Recessive gene, I suppose. By the way, we can now make an educated guess that Grendel's pop was probably Swamp Thing.

- Grendel and mom chose to randomly kill, fly away with or drag away their prey based only on a close reading of the next few pages of the script.

- Fun medical fact: Being slammed by a mythical beast hard enough to be thrown fifty feet against stone causes slight facial scratches that don't bleed much.

- The sword of legend Beowulf used to dispatch the Hag was as long as he was tall and would have contained enough steel to put a second deck on the Golden Gate Bridge. Luckily the wobbling dispelled any concerns over its weight.

- Best line of the movie: Prince Unferth had just been impaled by Hag and spit a quart of blood roughly six feet. Princess Ingrid cradled him gently and said, "You're going to be okay, my prince." So much for that job at the triage clinic.

I feel better now. --------------------------------------------- Result 756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This [[movie]] is [[supposed]] to be a "lighthearted" [[tale]] about Santa [[Claus]] and his "magical and [[mystical]]" [[wonders]]. But [[instead]] it comes off as being downright [[creepy]]. Two [[things]] in this [[movie]] that stand out in my [[mind]] as [[horrifying]] are 1) the way Santa [[looks]].- Have you ever [[seen]] a more [[horrible]] looking Santa [[Claus]]? and 2) the "evil rep. of [[Satan]]" Pitch's just plain [[odd]] [[dances]] are just [[sickening]] to watch. [[Only]] watch this [[movie]] if it [[happens]] to be the MSTed version or if you [[like]] a very [[good]] [[laugh]]. I can't [[believe]] this is a children's [[movie]]. This [[filmmaking]] is [[presumed]] to be a "lighthearted" [[saga]] about Santa [[Xmas]] and his "magical and [[mystique]]" [[honeys]]. But [[alternatively]] it comes off as being downright [[freaky]]. Two [[aspects]] in this [[film]] that stand out in my [[intellect]] as [[appalling]] are 1) the way Santa [[seems]].- Have you ever [[saw]] a more [[horrifying]] looking Santa [[Christmas]]? and 2) the "evil rep. of [[Lucifer]]" Pitch's just plain [[peculiar]] [[ballet]] are just [[disgusting]] to watch. [[Exclusively]] watch this [[filmmaking]] if it [[occurs]] to be the MSTed version or if you [[iike]] a very [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. I can't [[believing]] this is a children's [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Here we are: two travelers from a distant futuristic world arrive on earth... one is on a desperate mission to preserve a life, another is an inhuman killing machine determined to eliminate the woman who will give birth to the saviour of an entire race.

So what could we call this killing machine? It's almost like he's some kind of destroyer, or eradicator... sort of like an exterminator or something. What's the word I'm looking for... something that -terminates- things? Hmmmm....

Anyway, the protector (who swiftly doffs the white tunic he stole from Luke Skywalker in favour of local clothing) finds the young woman first and impregnates her with a future-born hero-to-be. The evil uhhhh... "exterminator" kills some rednecks and steals their guns and clothes, then attempts to locate the woman by visiting her workplace and asking around by looking menacingly into people's eyes and repeating her name threateningly.

Then begins a desperate race for survival as the seemingly deathless and unstoppable "exterminator" pursues the couple across the countryside. At some point he may acquire boots and a motorcycle, but I'm not sure.

Perhaps, in an exciting finale, he will attempt to crush them under the wheels of an enormous tanker truck full of... acid. Then the truck will crash. They will be saved... but no! He will then re-emerge, as strong as ever. He will kill the protector and pursue the girl into a meat packing plant, where in a terrifying finish, he is pushed into a large piece of industrial chopping machinery, and destroyed once and for all.

But maybe I'm extrapolating too much... after all, I did stop watching this movie after Mr. Protector magically impregnates Sean Young by kissing her at a bar, then tells her the child will be born in 3 days.

The costumes and effects are great in this movie... I loved them the first time I saw them on Star Trek: Next Generation too! Sean Young does another great turn as an unemotive Replicant, and career sweat-hog Stephen Baldwin is also on board as Young's Fat Cop Boyfriend. Not sure where he fits into the plot though... maybe he's an import from a different James Cameron movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A hilarious Neil Simon comedy that evokes laughs from beginning to end. The late Walter Matthau is the grouchy ex-comedian who is persuaded to join together with his ex-partner (the late Oscar-winner George Burns) for a final reunion show on stage.

Benjamin Martin is Matthau's agent and nephew, and the two have just as much chemistry as Matthau and Burns. I love Matthau's grumpy character--he's just the same as he always is, and yet also very different.

Burns, as the absent-minded old man, is just as funny as Matthau.

Matthau: Want some crackers? I've got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: How about a plain cracker?

Matthau: I don't got plain. I got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: Okay

Matthau: They're in the cupboard in the kitchen.

Burns: Maybe later.

Or how about this:

Matthau: When I did black, the whites knew what I was saying!

You've got to see it in the movie to understand it!

All in all, a refreshingly hilarious, sweet, heartfelt, warm, belivable character comedy with a heart and some of the most memorable quotes of all time.

They just don't make them like this anymore! In a time when all the newest comedies are crude, juvenile and stupid, this leans back towards the tender core of what comedy really is--funny characters, smart and funny dialogue, and grand entertainment.

One of the best buddy comedies of all time, right up there with "Planes, Trains and Automobiles," "Lethal Weapon," and "The Hard Way."

You may have a hard time finding this for rent or on TV, but trust me, it will be worth your time!

4.5/5 stars.

- John Ulmer --------------------------------------------- Result 759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[would]] firstly [[say]] that [[somehow]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this [[movie]] in my [[early]] childhood, I couldn't read the [[subtitles]] and I [[thought]] Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not able to at least [[partially]] [[suspend]] your adult scepticism and [[embrace]] your [[inner]] seven your old you may [[want]] to [[avoid]] this [[movie]]. That said, having just [[watched]] the restored 137 minute version on DVD I have to say I [[enjoyed]] it, [[though]] not as much as when I was seven ( I [[remembered]] the ending ).

There are aspects of the movie that are worthy of [[criticism]] , the first 15 minutes and [[final]] 15 minutes both have some [[really]] comic moments, my [[favourite]] being the contrast between scenes acted out in the final 10 minutes and the [[curious]] [[choice]] of backing music ( listen to the lyrics ).

[[For]] an action [[film]] there is a [[great]] [[deal]] of [[focus]] on the [[personal]] [[stories]] of certain [[soldiers]] and the social dynamics of the squad as the strain of their [[time]] [[travel]] [[takes]] its toll. By the [[ending]] of the [[movie]] I had [[decided]] that this was a good thing, when seven I [[though]] the 'relationship' [[guff]] was a [[bad]] [[thing]].

[[For]] an [[action]] [[film]] there is [[also]] plenty of [[gratifying]] [[gory]] [[action]], [[especially]] a [[couple]] of epic [[battle]] scenes between the platoon and [[hordes]] of [[Shogun]] era warriors. The [[makers]] of the [[movie]] have [[ensured]] that as [[many]] [[deaths]] as [[possible]] are bloody and, lets face it, [[humorous]]. I [[thought]] this was a [[splendid]] [[aspect]] of the [[movie]] when I was a [[kid]], and I am not ashamed to [[say]] that I [[still]] do.

I [[also]] like the fact that the modern day [[soldiers]] in general don't spend the [[movie]] walking on [[egg]] [[shells]] [[trying]] to avoid [[altering]] the space [[time]] continuum, they've [[got]] heavy calibre machine [[guns]], mortars, rocket [[launchers]], a tank and a [[helicopter]] and they're [[hell]] bent on making feudal Japan theirs. [[Which]] is what I'd like to [[think]] any [[vigorous]] IMDb user would do in their boots.

[[In]] short the [[movies]] worth [[watching]], it makes the viewer [[regret]] that there are not more [[movies]] [[made]] with a [[similar]] premise, and at the same [[time]] [[offers]] some [[hefty]] [[hints]] as to why a [[movie]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unique]]. I [[ought]] firstly [[tell]] that [[someplace]] I [[remembering]] [[witnessing]] this [[kino]] in my [[precocious]] childhood, I couldn't read the [[caption]] and I [[ideology]] Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not able to at least [[partly]] [[halt]] your adult scepticism and [[embracing]] your [[inside]] seven your old you may [[wanna]] to [[avoidance]] this [[films]]. That said, having just [[observed]] the restored 137 minute version on DVD I have to say I [[liked]] it, [[however]] not as much as when I was seven ( I [[recalls]] the ending ).

There are aspects of the movie that are worthy of [[critique]] , the first 15 minutes and [[ultimate]] 15 minutes both have some [[genuinely]] comic moments, my [[preferred]] being the contrast between scenes acted out in the final 10 minutes and the [[bizarre]] [[chose]] of backing music ( listen to the lyrics ).

[[At]] an action [[films]] there is a [[fantastic]] [[deals]] of [[focuses]] on the [[personally]] [[history]] of certain [[troops]] and the social dynamics of the squad as the strain of their [[times]] [[voyage]] [[pick]] its toll. By the [[terminated]] of the [[films]] I had [[deciding]] that this was a good thing, when seven I [[despite]] the 'relationship' [[twaddle]] was a [[rotten]] [[stuff]].

[[In]] an [[efforts]] [[cinema]] there is [[additionally]] plenty of [[pleasing]] [[gori]] [[measures]], [[mostly]] a [[pair]] of epic [[struggle]] scenes between the platoon and [[flocks]] of [[Shogunate]] era warriors. The [[manufacturer]] of the [[film]] have [[insured]] that as [[various]] [[killings]] as [[probable]] are bloody and, lets face it, [[funny]]. I [[figured]] this was a [[wondrous]] [[element]] of the [[film]] when I was a [[kiddo]], and I am not ashamed to [[tell]] that I [[yet]] do.

I [[apart]] like the fact that the modern day [[servicemen]] in general don't spend the [[cinema]] walking on [[eggs]] [[missiles]] [[attempt]] to avoid [[modify]] the space [[period]] continuum, they've [[did]] heavy calibre machine [[handguns]], mortars, rocket [[bowlers]], a tank and a [[helo]] and they're [[dammit]] bent on making feudal Japan theirs. [[Whom]] is what I'd like to [[thought]] any [[forceful]] IMDb user would do in their boots.

[[For]] short the [[kino]] worth [[staring]], it makes the viewer [[sorrow]] that there are not more [[kino]] [[accomplished]] with a [[identical]] premise, and at the same [[period]] [[tender]] some [[gargantuan]] [[suggestions]] as to why a [[flick]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unequalled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 760 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This film is [[beautiful]] to look at, but is like [[watching]] [[really]] [[bad]] experimental theater. The [[plot]] (if there was one) doesn't make any [[sense]]. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed [[actors]] [[wrestling]] and [[looking]] [[deep]] into each other's eyes. [[Lots]] of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. [[Mumbling]] and people [[wandering]] wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and [[bodies]]. By the time you get to the threesome on the [[roof]] with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a [[bottle]] of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. This film is [[sumptuous]] to look at, but is like [[staring]] [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] experimental theater. The [[intrigue]] (if there was one) doesn't make any [[feeling]]. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed [[players]] [[grappling]] and [[researching]] [[deepest]] into each other's eyes. [[Lot]] of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. [[Muttering]] and people [[roaming]] wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and [[institutions]]. By the time you get to the threesome on the [[roofs]] with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a [[pints]] of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I was the [[Production]] [[Accountant]] on this movie, and I [[also]] [[got]] to do some voice-over [[work]] on it, so I'm not [[entirely]] unbiased, but if it were [[awful]], I [[would]] say so. I [[thought]] it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any [[means]], but there were plenty of [[laughs]] along the [[way]]. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't [[yet]] [[reached]] their [[peak]] at the [[time]] we [[made]] this film. Susan Sarandon, of [[course]], is one who has since [[gone]] on to much [[greater]] [[fame]]. [[Melanie]] Mayron was [[seen]] on TV on a weekly [[basis]] as a [[photographer]] in the "Thirty-Something" TV [[drama]] series. Robert Englund [[later]] [[became]] known as [[Freddie]] [[Krueger]], [[still]] haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[favorite]] actors on this [[show]] was Dub Taylor, who [[played]] the sheriff. He was an [[excellent]] comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere [[person]]. We all had [[fun]] [[working]] on this [[show]], and I [[think]] that [[fun]] [[comes]] through. I was the [[Productivity]] [[Accounting]] on this movie, and I [[moreover]] [[ai]] to do some voice-over [[cooperation]] on it, so I'm not [[downright]] unbiased, but if it were [[odious]], I [[should]] say so. I [[brainchild]] it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any [[methods]], but there were plenty of [[giggles]] along the [[route]]. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't [[even]] [[achieved]] their [[pinnacle]] at the [[times]] we [[effected]] this film. Susan Sarandon, of [[cours]], is one who has since [[vanished]] on to much [[larger]] [[reputation]]. [[Jackie]] Mayron was [[noticed]] on TV on a weekly [[foundation]] as a [[cinematographer]] in the "Thirty-Something" TV [[tragedy]] series. Robert Englund [[then]] [[was]] known as [[Frederic]] [[Kruger]], [[again]] haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[preferred]] actors on this [[demonstrating]] was Dub Taylor, who [[accomplished]] the sheriff. He was an [[awesome]] comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere [[anyone]]. We all had [[amusing]] [[worked]] on this [[demonstrating]], and I [[believing]] that [[funny]] [[happens]] through. --------------------------------------------- Result 762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I have to admit that I stuck this one out thinking something [[would]] have to [[happen]], besides the [[dead]] [[body]] in the first scenes... and her [[disposal]] of him. I was [[wrong]]. It was a [[cinema]] verite of [[Betty]] hits the [[Beach]] [[encased]] for the first part by Mordant Morven. I really don't [[care]] what young lassies from [[Scotland]] do these days, who thy screw, what [[drugs]] they take. Visually, the [[stroll]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was [[pleasant]] and [[surely]] the [[high]] point for me. The nadir was the [[chop]] [[shop]] for her [[dead]] [[boyfriend]]. As the [[movie]] [[came]] to a close I had two [[thoughts]]... 1. That's all there is? 2. [[Now]] I [[see]] why her [[boyfriend]] [[killed]] himself. Rename it. "[[Bare]] Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my [[trip]] to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these [[things]] out. I have to admit that I stuck this one out thinking something [[should]] have to [[occur]], besides the [[died]] [[bodies]] in the first scenes... and her [[disposition]] of him. I was [[incorrect]]. It was a [[filmmaking]] verite of [[Beatty]] hits the [[Beaches]] [[enveloped]] for the first part by Mordant Morven. I really don't [[healthcare]] what young lassies from [[Scots]] do these days, who thy screw, what [[medicine]] they take. Visually, the [[ballad]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was [[congenial]] and [[undeniably]] the [[highest]] point for me. The nadir was the [[severing]] [[shopping]] for her [[deceased]] [[buddy]]. As the [[filmmaking]] [[became]] to a close I had two [[reflections]]... 1. That's all there is? 2. [[Presently]] I [[seeing]] why her [[buddy]] [[kiiled]] himself. Rename it. "[[Nus]] Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my [[touring]] to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these [[matters]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was never so bored in my life. Hours of pretentious, self-obsessed heroin-addicted basket cases lounging around whining about their problems. It's like watching lizards molt. Even the sex scenes will induce a serious case of narcolepsy. If you have insomnia, rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] One [[reason]] Pixar has [[endured]] so well, and been so successful, is that while their [[films]] [[remain]] technical marvels and [[visual]] mosaics, they have a story to [[match]] their [[style]]. And [[often]] very moving [[style]] at that: [[affecting]], charming and cross-generational. That a lot Anime (speaking in [[broad]] terms) and a [[great]] [[many]] other animations fail to [[match]] their technical virtuosity with real substance is, I [[think]] (and I might be wrong) partly because either the makers aren't bothered with [[character]] and plot and [[focus]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer effort that goes into making some animations is so enormous, so enervating that they don't have the energy to create a [[really]] engaging story.

That same cannot be said of Renaissance. There are flaws in its plot, but I'll get to that later. Those same flaws, however, are not reflected in the visuals - Renaissance is nowt short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[images]] (sometimes so high-contrast that is nothing but one face or one beam of light visible) and [[incredible]] detail are always [[impressive]], always a [[joy]] to [[behold]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the grim offspring of Blade Runner and [[Brave]] [[New]] World; dark, murky, [[quite]] affluent and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, obsessed with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the squalor and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of monumental, sophisticated architecture.

It's a [[compelling]] environment, not [[entirely]] [[original]], but [[great]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' technology and [[incredible]] attention to human and design minutiae [[result]] in [[images]] a black-and-white [[photographer]] [[would]] [[die]] for. Not that the [[detail]] [[prevents]] [[entertainment]], because Christian Volckman [[crafts]] some [[superb]] action [[sequences]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[couple]] of [[gruesome]](ly imaginative) [[murders]], [[several]] tussles in the dark and a [[nasty]] dust-up in a [[gloomy]] apartment. The [[locations]] are [[great]], too (I want to visit the nightclub). While the central character of [[Karas]] is your [[regular]] off-the-shelf maverick cop, the other two female [[characters]] (who are [[sisters]]) are the [[real]] [[motors]] of the movie. Coming from war-torn Eastern Europe, products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own [[past]]).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the shenanigans of high-rolling Avalon CEO Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. One [[justification]] Pixar has [[suffered]] so well, and been so successful, is that while their [[movies]] [[stay]] technical marvels and [[optic]] mosaics, they have a story to [[couple]] their [[elegance]]. And [[normally]] very moving [[stylistic]] at that: [[influenced]], charming and cross-generational. That a lot Anime (speaking in [[wide]] terms) and a [[marvellous]] [[several]] other animations fail to [[equalize]] their technical virtuosity with real substance is, I [[thought]] (and I might be wrong) partly because either the makers aren't bothered with [[trait]] and plot and [[focuses]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer effort that goes into making some animations is so enormous, so enervating that they don't have the energy to create a [[genuinely]] engaging story.

That same cannot be said of Renaissance. There are flaws in its plot, but I'll get to that later. Those same flaws, however, are not reflected in the visuals - Renaissance is nowt short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[photo]] (sometimes so high-contrast that is nothing but one face or one beam of light visible) and [[stunning]] detail are always [[wondrous]], always a [[gladness]] to [[see]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the grim offspring of Blade Runner and [[Adventurous]] [[Newer]] World; dark, murky, [[rather]] affluent and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, obsessed with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the squalor and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of monumental, sophisticated architecture.

It's a [[cogent]] environment, not [[fully]] [[initial]], but [[huge]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' technology and [[phenomenal]] attention to human and design minutiae [[findings]] in [[photograph]] a black-and-white [[photograph]] [[should]] [[dying]] for. Not that the [[details]] [[precludes]] [[amusement]], because Christian Volckman [[artisans]] some [[wondrous]] action [[sequence]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[pair]] of [[horrendous]](ly imaginative) [[assassinations]], [[many]] tussles in the dark and a [[nauseating]] dust-up in a [[morose]] apartment. The [[placements]] are [[wondrous]], too (I want to visit the nightclub). While the central character of [[Karras]] is your [[routine]] off-the-shelf maverick cop, the other two female [[personages]] (who are [[sister]]) are the [[actual]] [[automobiles]] of the movie. Coming from war-torn Eastern Europe, products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own [[bygone]]).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the shenanigans of high-rolling Avalon CEO Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. --------------------------------------------- Result 765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[updates]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. [[Rewriting]] a [[movie]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can [[Wait]]" only [[shows]] that Rock's [[eye]] was on the box-office (this was [[strictly]] a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not [[strive]] for [[something]] loftier or more memorable than a [[silly]] reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific [[supporting]] cast ([[including]] the usually-reliable Regina King, the [[wonderful]] [[Mark]] Addy, Wanda Sykes, [[Eugene]] [[Levy]], and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but [[Rock]] seems [[awkward]] and [[unsure]] of himself [[throughout]]. *1/2 from **** Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[refreshed]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. [[Rewrite]] a [[filmmaking]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can [[Awaits]]" only [[exhibitions]] that Rock's [[ojo]] was on the box-office (this was [[tightly]] a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not [[try]] for [[anything]] loftier or more memorable than a [[asinine]] reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific [[assists]] cast ([[encompassing]] the usually-reliable Regina King, the [[sumptuous]] [[Marks]] Addy, Wanda Sykes, [[Nunez]] [[Levi]], and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but [[Boulder]] seems [[tricky]] and [[insecure]] of himself [[during]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 766 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearer]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this [[movie]] too much. And I own all the [[discs]] of "Planet Earth" I had [[seen]] the rating for this movie very high , and read good [[reviews]] about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alas]], I went to the theater and the movie [[started]] , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and [[Discovery]]. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The [[movie]] [[continued]] and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet [[Earth]]".

We were very very [[disappointed]] , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't [[recognize]]. I have a feeling that I simply didn't [[remember]] them.

So finally what this [[movie]] really is , is a [[compilation]] of [[different]] footages from the [[different]] [[discs]] of "Planet [[Earth]]" , with a [[narration]] [[aimed]] at kids. Yes, the [[narration]] is [[quite]] kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearest]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this [[flick]] too much. And I own all the [[disc]] of "Planet Earth" I had [[noticed]] the rating for this movie very high , and read good [[scrutinize]] about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alack]], I went to the theater and the movie [[commences]] , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and [[Discover]]. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The [[filmmaking]] [[continues]] and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet [[Land]]".

We were very very [[frustrating]] , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't [[accepted]]. I have a feeling that I simply didn't [[remind]] them.

So finally what this [[filmmaking]] really is , is a [[collecting]] of [[divergent]] footages from the [[diverse]] [[disc]] of "Planet [[Land]]" , with a [[storytelling]] [[geared]] at kids. Yes, the [[narrative]] is [[rather]] kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! --------------------------------------------- Result 767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Actually my vote is a 7.5. Anyway, the movie was good, it has those funny parts that make it deserve to see it, don't misunderstand me, is not the funniest movie of the world, and its not even original because its a idea that we have seen before in other movies, but this one has its own taste, a friend of mine told me that this was a film for boyfriends... I think that not exactly but who cares? Also there is another movie that show us almost the same topic, Chris Rock appears in it, the name is Down to Earth, men, that one its a very funny movie, see both if you want and I know that you will agree that Mr. Rock won with his movie. I would liked that the protagonist male character were given to Ashton Kutcher, however, the film is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is entertaining [[enough]] due to an excellent performance by [[Virginia]] Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[lovely]]. [[However]] the reason the movie is so [[predictable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the book A Mother's Gift but I hope for Britney and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[Unless]] you consider ending a movie with what is essentially a music video an original [[idea]], the entire [[movie]] [[brings]] to mind the word plagiarized. This movie is entertaining [[satisfactorily]] due to an excellent performance by [[Virginie]] Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[loverly]]. [[Yet]] the reason the movie is so [[foreseeable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the book A Mother's Gift but I hope for Britney and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[If]] you consider ending a movie with what is essentially a music video an original [[concept]], the entire [[filmmaking]] [[puts]] to mind the word plagiarized. --------------------------------------------- Result 769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] as a habit i always like to read through the '[[hated]] it' [[reviews]] of any [[given]] movie. especially one that i'd [[want]] to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint [[sorta]] deal; i just like to [[see]] what people [[say]] on the flipside.

however, i do want to address one [[thing]]. many people that [[hated]] it called it, to paraphrase, '[[beautiful]], but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman [[maclean]], a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. as a habit i always like to read through the '[[loathed]] it' [[inspecting]] of any [[gave]] movie. especially one that i'd [[desiring]] to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint [[kinda]] deal; i just like to [[consults]] what people [[tell]] on the flipside.

however, i do want to address one [[stuff]]. many people that [[hates]] it called it, to paraphrase, '[[wondrous]], but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman [[mcclain]], a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After becoming completely addicted to Six Feet Under, I didn't think there would ever be another show that would come close to being as good as this show. Well, I was wrong! Lost is spellbinding!! I absolutely love this show and cannot turn it off. The richness of the characters, the intricacies of the plot, the beautiful setting are all amazing. I am totally and completely hooked. I don't know how the creators do it, but each character touches me very deeply. I feel their joy, their pain, everything, right down to my core!!! I don't have cable so I've been renting the series on Netflix. When I put it on I watch all the episodes at once and feel sad when it is over. I can't wait for the next disc to arrive at my house. This is probably the best TV show I have ever seen!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has great style, fantastic visuals and hot sex scenes with a beautiful woman. It falters at the end as the story twists get a little bit extreme.. but all in all, I would recommend this movie just because it has that good old Russian feel to it.. big, impressive, powerful, bleak and brutal and at the same time beautiful in the old tradition of tragic beauty.

PLOT: A guy who can make a blade shoot out of his hand at will (not a spoiler since they show it in the trailer) when he is REALLY mad at you tries to have a girlfriend.. he discovers that after you kill one person with your sword hand, it's kind of hard to keep a stable relationship....

Sword boy is on the planet for a reason.. he just doesn't know what it is.. YET.

Lots of dark street fights with guys unexpectedly getting filleted creatively.

RUSSAIN w ENG subtitles.. slick worth a watch.. --------------------------------------------- Result 772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Murders are occurring in a Texas desert town. Who is responsible? Slight novelties of mystery and racial tensions (the latter really doesn't fit), but otherwise strictly for slasher fans, who will appreciate the gore and nudity, which are two conventional elements for these films.

Dana Kimmell (of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 3 infamy) stars as the bratty quasi-detective teen.

*1/2 out of ****

MPAA: Rated R for violence and gore, nudity, and some language. --------------------------------------------- Result 773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh dear god. This was horrible. There is bad, then there was this. This movie makes no sense at all. It runs all over the map and isn't clear about what its saying at all. The music seemed like it was trying to be like Batman. The fact that 'Edison' isn't a real city, takes away. Since I live in Vancouver, watching this movie and recognizing all these places made it unbearable. Why didn't they make it a real city? The only writing that was decent was'Tilman' in which John Heard did a fantastic job. He was the only actor who played his role realistically and not over the top and campy. It was actually a shame to see John Heard play such a great bad guy with a lot of screen time, and the movie be a washout. Too bad. Hopefully someone important will see it, and at least give John Heard credit where credit is due, and hire him as lead bad guy again, which is where he should be. on the A List. --------------------------------------------- Result 774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Have you ever wished that you could escape your [[dull]] and stressful [[life]] at [[school]] or [[work]] and [[go]] on a [[magical]] adventure of your own, with one of your [[closest]] [[friends]] at your side, [[facing]] all [[sorts]] of [[dangers]] and [[villains]], and unraveling the [[mystery]] of a lost [[civilization]] that's just [[waiting]] for [[someone]] to [[discover]] all its secrets? [[Even]] if you're not [[quite]] that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could [[simply]] experience what it's like to be a [[kid]] again, and not have a care in the world, for just a [[couple]] of [[hours]]?

This is [[exactly]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Sky]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[young]] but very [[brave]] and ambitious [[engineer]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[town]] until one day, a [[girl]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[sky]] like an [[angel]] and takes him on a [[journey]] to a place far beyond the clouds, while all the while they have [[pirates]] and military units [[hot]] on their trail. [[Simply]] put, it is just the [[incredible]] adventure that [[every]] [[kid]] dreams of at one point or another, and I can't [[help]] but feel my [[worries]] [[melt]] away [[every]] [[time]] I [[see]] it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[works]] and takes much place in the [[everyday]] world, the [[film]] is not as visually [[spectacular]] or deep in its storyline as [[Spirited]] Away, Howl's [[Moving]] Castle, or [[even]] Princess Mononoke. Still, I [[find]] it [[difficult]] to [[say]] that any of these [[films]] are [[superior]] over the other, because all three of those [[films]] are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being [[enigmatic]], if not perplexing, [[especially]] for the [[youngest]] of [[viewers]].

"[[Castle]] in the [[Sky]]", on the other hand, doesn't [[try]] so much to be an allegory of any [[kind]], and it's not a coming-of-age [[story]] [[either]]; it is [[instead]] [[quite]] possibly one of the [[best]] [[depictions]] of the [[inside]] of a child's mind I've ever [[seen]]. Not only is the artwork [[beautiful]], but the [[use]] of [[perspective]] from the kids' [[eyes]] is just [[amazing]]; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to [[see]] the [[enormous]] [[trees]] or clouds overhead, or the [[incredible]] sense of [[height]] from [[looking]] down at the [[ground]] or [[ocean]] while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't [[help]] but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a [[kid]] in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the [[film]], when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. Have you ever wished that you could escape your [[uninspiring]] and stressful [[lifetime]] at [[tuition]] or [[collaborate]] and [[going]] on a [[quadrant]] adventure of your own, with one of your [[near]] [[mates]] at your side, [[encountering]] all [[genre]] of [[menace]] and [[punks]], and unraveling the [[riddle]] of a lost [[civilizations]] that's just [[hoping]] for [[everybody]] to [[detected]] all its secrets? [[Yet]] if you're not [[rather]] that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could [[merely]] experience what it's like to be a [[petit]] again, and not have a care in the world, for just a [[matching]] of [[hour]]?

This is [[accurately]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Heavens]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[youthful]] but very [[heroic]] and ambitious [[engineering]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[towns]] until one day, a [[girls]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[heavens]] like an [[angels]] and takes him on a [[voyager]] to a place far beyond the clouds, while all the while they have [[pirate]] and military units [[sexy]] on their trail. [[Simple]] put, it is just the [[unthinkable]] adventure that [[all]] [[petit]] dreams of at one point or another, and I can't [[supporting]] but feel my [[disturbs]] [[molten]] away [[each]] [[period]] I [[seeing]] it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[work]] and takes much place in the [[ordinary]] world, the [[movie]] is not as visually [[noteworthy]] or deep in its storyline as [[Lively]] Away, Howl's [[Relocating]] Castle, or [[yet]] Princess Mononoke. Still, I [[found]] it [[cumbersome]] to [[told]] that any of these [[movie]] are [[higher]] over the other, because all three of those [[movie]] are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being [[mysterious]], if not perplexing, [[mostly]] for the [[younger]] of [[moviegoers]].

"[[Castillo]] in the [[Heaven]]", on the other hand, doesn't [[trying]] so much to be an allegory of any [[sorts]], and it's not a coming-of-age [[history]] [[nor]]; it is [[alternatively]] [[rather]] possibly one of the [[nicest]] [[representations]] of the [[interiors]] of a child's mind I've ever [[noticed]]. Not only is the artwork [[excellent]], but the [[usage]] of [[views]] from the kids' [[eye]] is just [[astonishing]]; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to [[behold]] the [[considerable]] [[tree]] or clouds overhead, or the [[unthinkable]] sense of [[pinnacle]] from [[researching]] down at the [[terra]] or [[marine]] while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't [[aid]] but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a [[child]] in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the [[cinema]], when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie was so [[terrible]] it was [[almost]] [[good]]... [[almost]]. We [[love]] musicals, but not this one. Even with the [[terrible]] sound quality, poor [[cinematography]], and [[many]] actors who can't sing or dance, Anthony Rapp actually managed to give a good performance (especially [[toward]] the [[end]]). The character Marjorie, a drunk lady, was enjoyable to watch, too.

The plot is very [[unexpected]] and [[could]] have been [[funny]] without [[terrible]] [[singing]] and cheezy piano [[music]]. Admittadly, some of the [[songs]] (fantabulous) are pretty catchy (but not in a [[good]] way).

[[Open]] House is a funny movie to watch simply because it is awful! We think it might be a good stage musical (with excellent actors). This movie was so [[frightful]] it was [[nigh]] [[alright]]... [[hardly]]. We [[likes]] musicals, but not this one. Even with the [[dreaded]] sound quality, poor [[movies]], and [[various]] actors who can't sing or dance, Anthony Rapp actually managed to give a good performance (especially [[into]] the [[terminates]]). The character Marjorie, a drunk lady, was enjoyable to watch, too.

The plot is very [[unforeseeable]] and [[did]] have been [[fun]] without [[abysmal]] [[singer]] and cheezy piano [[musician]]. Admittadly, some of the [[anthems]] (fantabulous) are pretty catchy (but not in a [[alright]] way).

[[Openings]] House is a funny movie to watch simply because it is awful! We think it might be a good stage musical (with excellent actors). --------------------------------------------- Result 776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] Netflix should [[mention]] this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. [[Superior]] in [[every]] [[way]] to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk [[Stockings]] turned out to be a [[big]] disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[lovely]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Very]] glad that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. Netflix should [[referenced]] this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. [[Superiors]] in [[any]] [[pathways]] to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk [[Tights]] turned out to be a [[hefty]] disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[wondrous]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Much]] glad that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. --------------------------------------------- Result 777 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched [[Lion]] king more [[times]] that all my [[friends]] put togther. Having a baby [[sister]].. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like [[ok]] well [[let]] me [[see]]... the second one was significantly [[weaker]]... then i [[saw]] an [[ad]] for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like [[ok]] there we go again. [[After]] watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my expectations (for repetitevness) were [[broken]]. A [[truly]] [[lovely]] and original [[plot]] keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. I watched [[Iion]] king more [[moments]] that all my [[boyfriends]] put togther. Having a baby [[sisters]].. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like [[allright]] well [[leave]] me [[consults]]... the second one was significantly [[lowest]]... then i [[watched]] an [[advertisement]] for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like [[okay]] there we go again. [[Upon]] watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my expectations (for repetitevness) were [[broke]]. A [[genuinely]] [[loverly]] and original [[intrigue]] keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. --------------------------------------------- Result 778 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I vaguely remember Ben from my Sci-Fi fandom days of the '60s, I was doing several interviews & bios of obscure actors/actresses, most notably Ben, actress Fay Spain, and Jody Fair, who played Angela in 1961's The Young Savages. Ben was one of the people at a low-key Sci-Fi con in Chicago, about 1970, when I had a nice chat with him and his "career" and life. All these were published in some now-long-forgotten fanzine of the day. Wish I still had copies of those interviews, but time marches on, and any of those people surely wouldn't' remember me at all so many years later. Ben was a really nice fellow, ekeing out a living (The cons of those days didn't even pay their guest, unless, of course they were big-name stars, and even then the pay was a couple hundred dollars, at most! Good to know Ben's still alive & kicking! How 'bout a remake of Creature, but 50 years older! Ugly then, uglier now! --------------------------------------------- Result 779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A long [[time]] ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the original "[[Star]] Wars" film was released. He doesn't [[remember]] first [[seeing]] the movie, but he [[also]] doesn't [[remember]] life before it. He does [[remember]] the first "Star Wars" themed gift he [[got]]...a shoebox full of action figures from the [[original]] set. He was too [[young]] to [[fully]] [[appreciate]] how special that [[gift]] [[would]] be. But [[years]] later, he would [[get]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[best]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of [[action]] figures, ten of the [[final]] twelve he [[needed]] to [[complete]] his [[collection]]. It's now [[legendary]] in this boy's [[family]] how the last [[action]] figure he [[needed]], [[Anakin]] Skywalker, [[stopped]] being [[produced]] and carried in [[stores]], and how this [[boy]] went for about ten [[years]] (until he [[got]] into [[college]]) [[trying]] to [[track]] one down and [[finally]] [[bought]] it from [[someone]] on his [[dorm]] floor for a [[bag]] of beer nuggets (don't [[ask]]...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't [[review]] "Star Wars" as a [[movie]]. It represents [[absolutely]] everything good, [[fun]] and magical about my [[childhood]]. There's no separating it in my mind from [[Christmases]], birthdays, summers and [[winters]] growing up. [[In]] the winter, my [[friends]] and I would [[build]] [[snow]] forts and [[pretend]] we were on Hoth (I was [[always]] [[Han]] [[Solo]]). My friends' [[dad]] built them a kick-ass tree [[house]], and that served as the Ewok village. They [[also]] had a huge [[pine]] tree whose bottom branches were [[high]] enough to [[create]] a [[sort]] of cave [[underneath]] it, and this made a [[great]] [[spot]] to pretend we were in Yoda's [[home]]. I am unabashedly dorky when it [[comes]] to "Star [[Wars]]" and I [[think]] people either just understand that or they don't. I don't [[get]] the appeal of "Lord of the [[Rings]]" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no [[need]] to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ A long [[times]] ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the original "[[Superstar]] Wars" film was released. He doesn't [[remind]] first [[witnessing]] the movie, but he [[further]] doesn't [[recalling]] life before it. He does [[remembers]] the first "Star Wars" themed gift he [[ai]]...a shoebox full of action figures from the [[preliminary]] set. He was too [[youth]] to [[totally]] [[grateful]] how special that [[donation]] [[should]] be. But [[olds]] later, he would [[got]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[bestest]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of [[activities]] figures, ten of the [[ultimate]] twelve he [[requirement]] to [[completes]] his [[collections]]. It's now [[mythical]] in this boy's [[families]] how the last [[actions]] figure he [[needs]], [[Skywalker]] Skywalker, [[stop]] being [[generated]] and carried in [[shop]], and how this [[guy]] went for about ten [[olds]] (until he [[gets]] into [[academics]]) [[tempting]] to [[rails]] one down and [[ultimately]] [[acquire]] it from [[somebody]] on his [[roost]] floor for a [[backpack]] of beer nuggets (don't [[requesting]]...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't [[reviewed]] "Star Wars" as a [[films]]. It represents [[entirely]] everything good, [[funny]] and magical about my [[preschool]]. There's no separating it in my mind from [[Xmas]], birthdays, summers and [[winter]] growing up. [[Onto]] the winter, my [[friend]] and I would [[constructing]] [[snowy]] forts and [[pretending]] we were on Hoth (I was [[continuously]] [[Ambrose]] [[Alone]]). My friends' [[pope]] built them a kick-ass tree [[maison]], and that served as the Ewok village. They [[similarly]] had a huge [[pines]] tree whose bottom branches were [[highest]] enough to [[creating]] a [[sorting]] of cave [[beneath]] it, and this made a [[wondrous]] [[blemish]] to pretend we were in Yoda's [[house]]. I am unabashedly dorky when it [[arrives]] to "Star [[War]]" and I [[ideas]] people either just understand that or they don't. I don't [[got]] the appeal of "Lord of the [[Piercings]]" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no [[requisite]] to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 780 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] This [[movie]] is pretty cheesy, but I do give it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's principles. There are some [[great]] moments in the film and the [[dialogue]] has some [[great]] moments as well.

The aerial assault sequence is [[perhaps]] the [[best]] part of the movie.

I guess I really like the idea of what lengths a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. Sure it's not all that well done, but the [[premise]] is not at all [[bad]].

Tom This [[kino]] is pretty cheesy, but I do give it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's principles. There are some [[huge]] moments in the film and the [[talks]] has some [[wondrous]] moments as well.

The aerial assault sequence is [[presumably]] the [[better]] part of the movie.

I guess I really like the idea of what lengths a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. Sure it's not all that well done, but the [[prerequisite]] is not at all [[horrid]].

Tom --------------------------------------------- Result 781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is just horrible, really horrible trash. Yes, we've got beautiful naked women dancing and having sex. But while this may work in the mechanism of a porn movie – may have even been a hit as a porn movie – this tries to mask itself as a "film" with actual things to say, with real emotion and struggle. It isn't. It's an excuse to get some girls naked and have a fun time. I'm sure all of these women (and men) in this particular movie could have faired decently in the porn movie business of the 1970s . . . but not in the actual movie business.

The acting was hackneyed, so bad, I mean real terrible. The writing was even worse. I can't lay all blame on these actors – they had nothing to work with. The very broad structure or plot of the movie could possibly be done and done well with good writers and competent actors. The very broad structure or plot is that of a psychotic man who spends his time shooting people from afar, as a sniper. These shootings were motivated from men not respecting their women enough. If there was more writing - better writing, much better writing - and less gratuitous sexual imagery we might have something to work with.

This movie should have been shot, made and marketed a hardcore porn movie all along; it would have made more money. It practically is a hardcore porn film already, and it remains the only non-porn movie I've seen that shows a male erect penis. --------------------------------------------- Result 782 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A good cast and they do their best with what they're given, but the story makes no sense, the characters' actions are inexplicable, and there are too many moments of unintentional humor, as when a man is killed by being pierced with pieces of a phonograph record or when they get the witch drunk to a hip hop beat and then hit her over the head with a bottle and she grabs her hostage and pouts off. The scene when the two witch and her victim (played by the same actress) are in the house together sets up like a 3 Stooges routine, and the plot begs the question: if the witch wants to possess this other woman's soul, why doesn't she just do it instead of leading these people on this elaborate chase? Not to be missed is Christopher Walkin's eyeglasses and his automotive explanation of the afterlife (paraphrased): "The ancient Egyptianas - they wee materialists. They expected the body to last through eternity, like a used car that you souped up. But the Druids, they knew you couldn't drive in the afterlife. You had to get out and walk." Huh? The ending is absolutely indecipherable. Seems like they just ran out of film. --------------------------------------------- Result 783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this movie today at the Seattle International Film Festival, and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Great writing and direction, excellent and believable interaction among the cast, and great comic timing as well.

This movie touches on themes that are universal-family and separation. As a result, I can see European, Asian, and American audiences all finding points of similarity between this film and their own lives.

If all that wasn't enough, this has the potential to be the best underground date movie of the year...somebody distribute this in the USA, please!

Finally: thank you Maria Flom! It really is a great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 784 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[film]] actually works from a fairly original [[idea]] - I've never [[seen]] nymphs that were thrown out of [[heaven]] in a horror [[movie]] before anyway. [[However]], the [[way]] that it [[executes]] this [[idea]] isn't [[original]] in the [[slightest]]; we follow a bunch of [[kids]] that, for some reason decide to [[go]] on a trip into the forest. The [[fact]] that the forest is [[inhabited]] by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/[[nutcases]]/[[zombies]] etc; but [[really]], the [[monsters]] are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real [[asset]] that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror [[setting]]. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct [[lack]] of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only [[real]] [[highlight]] the [[film]] has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's [[nothing]] to [[recommend]] this [[film]] for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties [[woodland]] flicks, you [[might]] find some enjoyment here. This [[cinema]] actually works from a fairly original [[thoughts]] - I've never [[noticed]] nymphs that were thrown out of [[sky]] in a horror [[films]] before anyway. [[Instead]], the [[ways]] that it [[run]] this [[ideals]] isn't [[upfront]] in the [[teeniest]]; we follow a bunch of [[infantile]] that, for some reason decide to [[going]] on a trip into the forest. The [[facto]] that the forest is [[resided]] by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/[[nitwits]]/[[walkers]] etc; but [[genuinely]], the [[freaks]] are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real [[assets]] that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror [[configured]]. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct [[scarcity]] of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only [[actual]] [[stresses]] the [[filmmaking]] has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's [[none]] to [[recommendations]] this [[filmmaking]] for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties [[wooded]] flicks, you [[apt]] find some enjoyment here. --------------------------------------------- Result 785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[brilliant]] chess player [[attends]] a tournament and falls in love with a [[woman]] he [[meets]] there. On itself this would be a pretty [[bad]] angle on a [[story]]. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[also]] completely alienated from the [[world]] because of his brilliance at the [[game]] and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament tension to historic [[events]] that [[shaped]] the chess [[player]] and [[works]] [[quite]] nicely. It's easy to [[grow]] attached to the two [[main]] [[characters]] and [[easy]] to [[believe]] they might [[hit]] it off together like the [[way]] they do in this [[film]]. The [[added]] effect of the tournament is very good too and creates a nice [[tension]] [[setting]].

I have no [[idea]] of the strength of the chess [[players]] as I don't play the [[game]] myself but it looks [[nice]] and believable. [[All]] in all, most of the [[film]] goes down very [[easily]]. It is [[also]] forgotten again very [[easily]] though. [[So]] it's nice to watch but [[nothing]] more than that.

7 out of 10 [[chess]] players [[caught]] between a rook and a [[hard]] [[place]] A [[gorgeous]] chess player [[attend]] a tournament and falls in love with a [[female]] he [[satisfies]] there. On itself this would be a pretty [[rotten]] angle on a [[storytelling]]. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[furthermore]] completely alienated from the [[monde]] because of his brilliance at the [[gaming]] and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament tension to historic [[incidents]] that [[modeled]] the chess [[protagonist]] and [[worked]] [[rather]] nicely. It's easy to [[risen]] attached to the two [[principal]] [[character]] and [[easier]] to [[think]] they might [[strike]] it off together like the [[manner]] they do in this [[cinematography]]. The [[add]] effect of the tournament is very good too and creates a nice [[tensile]] [[configured]].

I have no [[thinking]] of the strength of the chess [[actors]] as I don't play the [[gaming]] myself but it looks [[pleasant]] and believable. [[Everything]] in all, most of the [[kino]] goes down very [[conveniently]]. It is [[furthermore]] forgotten again very [[readily]] though. [[Hence]] it's nice to watch but [[anything]] more than that.

7 out of 10 [[chessboard]] players [[grabbed]] between a rook and a [[stiff]] [[placing]] --------------------------------------------- Result 786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have [[seen]] several comments here about Brando [[using]] a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. When this movie was [[made]], racism and discrimination were very strong in the [[South]]. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. [[Could]] this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in [[love]] with a woman of another race? The same [[way]] MASH was a [[subtle]] criticism of the Viet Nam war? [[Any]] [[thoughts]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "[[cold]]". [[Anyone]] who has been in Japan would [[understand]]. The Japanese people, at [[least]] in my [[experience]], did not [[tend]] to show emotion in front of [[strangers]]. There were [[strict]] social [[rules]], [[especially]] for men meeting [[single]] [[women]]. [[Americans]] in Japan were totally foreign to this [[culture]], and the blunt [[attempts]] to [[meet]] [[women]] were [[shocking]] to the [[ladies]]. One [[trait]] of the [[Japanese]] was to [[smile]] when embarrassed or [[uncomfortable]], which [[many]] American [[servicemen]] [[took]] as a sign that their [[advances]] were [[welcomed]]. [[Also]] remember that at the [[time]] [[represented]] in the movie, Japan had just been [[defeated]], and the occupying [[forces]] were [[treated]] with [[reluctant]] acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very [[credible]] performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her [[interaction]] with the American actors brought back [[several]] [[memories]] of my own experiences in the country. I was able to [[meet]] a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. I have [[watched]] several comments here about Brando [[use]] a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. When this movie was [[accomplished]], racism and discrimination were very strong in the [[Southern]]. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. [[Wo]] this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in [[likes]] with a woman of another race? The same [[pathways]] MASH was a [[perceptive]] criticism of the Viet Nam war? [[Every]] [[thinking]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "[[frigid]]". [[Nobody]] who has been in Japan would [[comprehend]]. The Japanese people, at [[fewer]] in my [[experiences]], did not [[tended]] to show emotion in front of [[alien]]. There were [[harsh]] social [[ordinance]], [[namely]] for men meeting [[alone]] [[females]]. [[American]] in Japan were totally foreign to this [[civilisations]], and the blunt [[endeavor]] to [[cater]] [[woman]] were [[frightening]] to the [[dame]]. One [[idiosyncrasies]] of the [[Japs]] was to [[grinning]] when embarrassed or [[uneasy]], which [[multiple]] American [[soldiers]] [[taken]] as a sign that their [[advance]] were [[praised]]. [[Similarly]] remember that at the [[period]] [[representing]] in the movie, Japan had just been [[conquered]], and the occupying [[troops]] were [[addressed]] with [[loath]] acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very [[plausible]] performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her [[interactive]] with the American actors brought back [[numerous]] [[memoirs]] of my own experiences in the country. I was able to [[cater]] a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. --------------------------------------------- Result 787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this dolph lundgren vehicle is a fun die hard throwback action flick, it isn't going to win any awards and its not very original but it delivers the goods you would want to see from a dolph lundgren movie. our man dolph is an ex soldier who is now a teacher at a tough inner city high school and when it gets taken over by terrorists its up to him to save the day. sure the script isn't going to win any Oscars its good fun and it has its fair share eplosive action. dolph lundgren gives a good enough performance but he comes alive more in the action scenes, and the rest of the cast are not the best actors but they hold it well. all in all detention is an enjoyable action flick, but youv'e seen it a million times before. --------------------------------------------- Result 788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Religious bigotry is rampant [[everywhere]]. [[Australia]] is not immune to it.

A dingo [[snatched]] a baby and the mother was [[tried]] and sent to [[prison]] for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before [[getting]] knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a prison.

[[Buy]] or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[moving]] [[motion]] picture with a [[terrific]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her [[famous]] [[Aussie]] [[accent]]) and Sam Neill, whose [[accent]] is his native-born pronunciation, are [[outstanding]]. Those with supporting [[roles]] are [[also]] [[quite]] good.

You will [[remember]] this [[movie]] for [[many]] years.

See it! Religious bigotry is rampant [[anywhere]]. [[Australians]] is not immune to it.

A dingo [[abducted]] a baby and the mother was [[attempting]] and sent to [[jail]] for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before [[obtaining]] knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a prison.

[[Buys]] or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[shifting]] [[motions]] picture with a [[wondrous]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her [[notorious]] [[Australia]] [[emphasis]]) and Sam Neill, whose [[emphasis]] is his native-born pronunciation, are [[wondrous]]. Those with supporting [[duties]] are [[apart]] [[altogether]] good.

You will [[remind]] this [[films]] for [[several]] years.

See it! --------------------------------------------- Result 789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This movie is a [[remake]] of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was great, I suggest you see that one. This one is not so great. The [[last]] [[third]] of the [[movie]] is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to [[show]] some of the comic [[fun]] that got him to where he is [[today]]. However, I don't [[know]] what [[happened]] to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all [[seems]] real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. This movie is a [[redo]] of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was great, I suggest you see that one. This one is not so great. The [[lastly]] [[thirdly]] of the [[cinematographic]] is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to [[illustrating]] some of the comic [[funny]] that got him to where he is [[yesterday]]. However, I don't [[savoir]] what [[transpired]] to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all [[looks]] real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. --------------------------------------------- Result 790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I'm tired of people [[judging]] [[films]] on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[fantastic]] films that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the [[greatest]] actors of our time. I'm tired of people [[verdict]] [[movie]] on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[wondrous]] films that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the [[higher]] actors of our time. --------------------------------------------- Result 791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Jeopardy]] has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only [[star]] is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a star, of [[course]].

Stanwyck is a [[tough]] lady once again as she runs into an [[escaped]] [[convict]] while [[seeking]] [[help]] for her [[trapped]] husband in the [[Mexican]] desert. The majority of the movie is [[focused]] on how she [[deals]] with her [[captor]], who wants her to [[submit]] to him in exchange for his [[help]]. Some psychological [[battling]] there.

It's a [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] little [[movie]] - its [[short]] [[length]] makes it [[taut]], and that Stanwyck is [[great]] should go without mention (but I'll [[still]] [[praise]] her [[every]] [[time]]). [[Threat]] has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only [[superstar]] is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a star, of [[cours]].

Stanwyck is a [[stiff]] lady once again as she runs into an [[eloped]] [[convicts]] while [[trying]] [[pomoc]] for her [[stuck]] husband in the [[Wetback]] desert. The majority of the movie is [[concentrating]] on how she [[deal]] with her [[kidnapper]], who wants her to [[communicate]] to him in exchange for his [[pomoc]]. Some psychological [[struggling]] there.

It's a [[unbelievably]] [[efficiency]] little [[flick]] - its [[terse]] [[duration]] makes it [[tense]], and that Stanwyck is [[gorgeous]] should go without mention (but I'll [[yet]] [[praised]] her [[any]] [[times]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 792 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surprisingly good. The acting was fun, the screenplay was fun, the music was cheesie fun, the plot was stupendously fun. This was a fun movie to watch and to give your brain some rest. Parts of the plot and quotes I found to be very creative. 7 out of 10. Actually for what it was, it would deserve a 10 out of 10. You are not supposed to compare this to an arthouse film or to a bloody slasher film. --------------------------------------------- Result 793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hawked as THE MOST OFFENSIVE MOVIE EVER, GUARANTEED TO OFFEND EVERYONE- Guess what? It worked, I'm offended that we shelled out money to rent this. Two friends and I were bored and decided to see if all that bull about the movie that we saw on TV was true. Curse Comedy Central and all the other networks that pushed this garbage on us! It was by far the worst movie I've seen since Hollow Man. I generally avoid the crappy ones, but got sucked into this one. We have since beaten the prick who suggest we rent it, and his movie picking privileges have been revoked. There is nothing remotely funny about this movie...even the "adventures of dickman" scene was sophomoric at best.. Color me p***ed. Thought maybe the production value was crap for some important reason...no..it just sucked. NEVER WATCH THIS! for any reason whatsoever. Not even with copious amounts of illegal substance would this movie be funny. That's saying ALOT. Please for the love of all that is holy, if you cherish your sanity- never view this movie. It's many things- stupid, pointless, and worthless to name a few. But the main thing it was aiming for: offensively funny- it failed miserably. Crash and burn.... --------------------------------------------- Result 794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] starts out with a certain [[amount]] of [[promise]]; but, in my view, [[begins]] to [[lose]] it when the [[protagonist]] [[kidnaps]] the good Samaritan who comes to his [[aid]] when his [[car]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[stranger]] begins to [[fix]] his [[car]] while he is away [[making]] a [[phone]] [[call]] is implausible [[enough]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[country]] who can [[help]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence beginning [[writers]] are warned against [[using]] in their stories.

I found this [[movie]] average at best. [[Art]] direction [[could]] have been much better, as [[could]] have been [[cinematography]]. The acting was good, and so was Eva van [[der]] Gucht's singing. This [[filmmaking]] starts out with a certain [[sums]] of [[promises]]; but, in my view, [[outset]] to [[wasting]] it when the [[player]] [[snatches]] the good Samaritan who comes to his [[helps]] when his [[automobiles]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[foreigner]] begins to [[remedy]] his [[motors]] while he is away [[doing]] a [[phones]] [[invitation]] is implausible [[adequately]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[nationals]] who can [[aids]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence beginning [[authors]] are warned against [[utilizing]] in their stories.

I found this [[film]] average at best. [[Artistry]] direction [[wo]] have been much better, as [[wo]] have been [[filmmaking]]. The acting was good, and so was Eva van [[monastery]] Gucht's singing. --------------------------------------------- Result 795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[think]] you [[would]] have to be from the [[USA]] to get a lot of the jokes. But if you [[liked]] [[Princess]] Bride and Forest Gump, You would [[like]] this [[movie]]. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of [[course]], but having the cameraman trip was [[obviously]] [[done]] on purpose. Killer [[Tomatoes]] is a hundred [[times]] better than Nepolean Dynamite. [[Just]] my [[opinion]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I [[know]] what I [[like]]. I couldn't stop laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. I [[thought]] you [[ought]] have to be from the [[US]] to get a lot of the jokes. But if you [[loved]] [[Princesa]] Bride and Forest Gump, You would [[loves]] this [[films]]. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of [[cours]], but having the cameraman trip was [[apparently]] [[doing]] on purpose. Killer [[Zucchini]] is a hundred [[period]] better than Nepolean Dynamite. [[Virtuous]] my [[view]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I [[savoir]] what I [[fond]]. I couldn't stop laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of nine [[dollars]] that I've [[spent]] in a very, very [[long]] time. [[If]] you [[knew]] how [[often]] I went to the [[movies]] you'd probably [[say]], that's hard to [[imagine]], but never-the-less, it's [[true]]! After [[seeing]] the [[trailer]] for this [[movie]], I knew that I had to [[see]] it! If you're a [[fan]] of [[horror]], mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[trailer]] is nothing less than [[intriguing]] and [[exciting]]; [[unfortunately]], the movie is none of these.

From the [[cinematography]], to the script, to the acting, this movie is a [[complete]] flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie [[expecting]] some thrills, [[mystery]], [[action]], horror, or [[anything]] other than a [[waste]] of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so [[bad]]," you might be [[asking]] yourself. [[Let]] me [[tell]] you. The movie was [[neither]] [[mysterious]] nor suspenseful. [[Nothing]] about the [[movie]] made me the least [[bit]] "on edge," [[frightened]], or curious. The [[script]] was at [[best]] [[laughable]]. There were [[numerous]] times [[throughout]] the [[film]] where the [[dialogue]] was just so [[ridiculous]] I [[began]] to [[write]] it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds [[later]] that it wasn't. The acting was [[absolutely]] [[dreadful]]. I [[like]] Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, [[every]] performance in this [[movie]] was [[incredibly]] below [[average]]. The [[cinematography]] was [[awful]] with not one [[moment]] of suspense or mystique. [[Finally]], the [[story]] is [[completely]] transparent. You can [[see]] the [[end]] of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not [[usually]] a very [[harsh]] critic. Frankly, when I go to [[see]] a [[comedy]] I [[want]] to [[laugh]] and when I go to see a mystery/[[suspense]]/[[horror]], I just [[want]] to be surprised. This [[movie]] was boring, poorly acted, poorly [[written]], and an [[overwhelming]] disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see [[something]] else. This [[filmmaking]] is the [[widest]] [[squander]] of nine [[usd]] that I've [[expenditure]] in a very, very [[longer]] time. [[Though]] you [[overheard]] how [[frequently]] I went to the [[filmmaking]] you'd probably [[told]], that's hard to [[guess]], but never-the-less, it's [[authentic]]! After [[witnessing]] the [[trailers]] for this [[filmmaking]], I knew that I had to [[behold]] it! If you're a [[breather]] of [[terror]], mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[camper]] is nothing less than [[thrilling]] and [[breathtaking]]; [[sadly]], the movie is none of these.

From the [[filmmaking]], to the script, to the acting, this movie is a [[finishing]] flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie [[waits]] some thrills, [[riddle]], [[measures]], horror, or [[something]] other than a [[wastes]] of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so [[negative]]," you might be [[requesting]] yourself. [[Leaving]] me [[say]] you. The movie was [[ni]] [[shadowy]] nor suspenseful. [[Anything]] about the [[flick]] made me the least [[bitten]] "on edge," [[freaked]], or curious. The [[screenplay]] was at [[better]] [[ridiculous]]. There were [[several]] times [[during]] the [[flick]] where the [[discussions]] was just so [[foolish]] I [[launches]] to [[writing]] it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds [[afterward]] that it wasn't. The acting was [[totally]] [[scary]]. I [[fond]] Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, [[all]] performance in this [[filmmaking]] was [[madly]] below [[averaging]]. The [[movie]] was [[horrific]] with not one [[time]] of suspense or mystique. [[Lastly]], the [[history]] is [[totally]] transparent. You can [[seeing]] the [[termination]] of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not [[routinely]] a very [[tough]] critic. Frankly, when I go to [[behold]] a [[parody]] I [[wanted]] to [[giggling]] and when I go to see a mystery/[[wait]]/[[terror]], I just [[wanted]] to be surprised. This [[movies]] was boring, poorly acted, poorly [[authored]], and an [[prodigious]] disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see [[somethings]] else. --------------------------------------------- Result 797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I missed the [[beginning]] of this [[film]], which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've [[studied]] the fall of the [[Roman]] republic for years so I know the story. [[Then]] again, that might also be the reason why I [[disliked]] this film.

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[extras]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't think they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which [[case]] it can be [[forgiven]]. The [[odd]] thing is that they sometimes go to great lengths to be historically [[accurate]] that it [[ends]] up getting [[confusing]]. Like throwing in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes [[later]]. Why even bring it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never even seen? And like calling Antonius by his [[actual]] [[name]] ([[Marcus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[strange]] English [[name]] [[Mark]] Antony in other scenes.

[[Though]] historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[could]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[ounce]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and completely [[lacking]] control of herself. Instead of being a clever and composed queen Cleopatra turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad case of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is also from poor script writing. Far too many stupid dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. I missed the [[initiating]] of this [[filmmaking]], which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've [[investigated]] the fall of the [[Romain]] republic for years so I know the story. [[Thereafter]] again, that might also be the reason why I [[proscribed]] this film.

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[goodies]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't think they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which [[cases]] it can be [[pardon]]. The [[unusual]] thing is that they sometimes go to great lengths to be historically [[meticulous]] that it [[terminates]] up getting [[confounding]]. Like throwing in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes [[thereafter]]. Why even bring it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never even seen? And like calling Antonius by his [[real]] [[naming]] ([[Markus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[peculiar]] English [[names]] [[Dialed]] Antony in other scenes.

[[Albeit]] historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[did]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[jot]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and completely [[missing]] control of herself. Instead of being a clever and composed queen Cleopatra turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad case of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is also from poor script writing. Far too many stupid dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. --------------------------------------------- Result 798 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was initially dubious about this movie (merely because of the subject), but the richly drawn characters, the fabulous scenes of the buffalo hunt, and the dramatic conclusion make it well-worth watching. I initially had trouble distinguishing between the two buffalo hunters but as the movie progressed they increasingly distinguished themselves. I am still haunted by the final scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I've [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[adaptation]] of "Emma".I have seen it [[many]] [[times]] and am [[always]] looking forward to seeing it again.[[Though]] it only lasts 107 minutes, most of the [[novel]] plot and sub-plots were [[developed]] in a [[satisfactory]] [[way]]. All the [[characters]] are well-portrayed. [[Most]] of the [[dialogues]] come directly from the novel with no [[silly]] jokes added as in Emma Thompson's Sense and [[Sensibility]].

As a [[foreigner]], I [[particularly]] appreciate the [[perfect]] diction of the actors. The [[setting]] and costumes were [[beautiful]]. I [[find]] this version [[quite]] on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and [[Prejudice]]" but then the [[producer]] and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really [[good]] job [[portraying]] "Emma" of whom [[Jane]] Austen said she [[would]] create a heroin no-one but her [[would]] [[love]]. She is snobbish but has just [[enough]] [[youth]] and inexperience to be [[still]] likable. Mark [[Strong]] was [[also]] very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an [[easy]] part, I think, though he has not the charisma [[shown]] by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in [[Pride]] and [[Prejudice]]. Even the [[end]] scene (the [[harvest]] [[festival]]) which does not happen in the [[novel]] [[provides]] a [[fitting]] [[end]] except for when it [[shows]] [[Emma]] being cold and [[almost]] unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly [[reconciled]] with him, even telling him that she would have [[enjoyed]] the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange [[departure]] from the faithfulness otherwise [[shown]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more [[beautiful]] and [[elaborate]] than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. I've [[genuinely]] [[liked]] this [[coping]] of "Emma".I have seen it [[several]] [[moments]] and am [[steadily]] looking forward to seeing it again.[[Despite]] it only lasts 107 minutes, most of the [[newer]] plot and sub-plots were [[devised]] in a [[acceptable]] [[manner]]. All the [[features]] are well-portrayed. [[Anymore]] of the [[conversations]] come directly from the novel with no [[ridiculous]] jokes added as in Emma Thompson's Sense and [[Sensitivity]].

As a [[aliens]], I [[notably]] appreciate the [[flawless]] diction of the actors. The [[settings]] and costumes were [[wondrous]]. I [[found]] this version [[pretty]] on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and [[Harm]]" but then the [[manufacturers]] and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really [[alright]] job [[illustrating]] "Emma" of whom [[Janie]] Austen said she [[ought]] create a heroin no-one but her [[should]] [[likes]]. She is snobbish but has just [[suitably]] [[jugend]] and inexperience to be [[yet]] likable. Mark [[Forceful]] was [[apart]] very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an [[effortless]] part, I think, though he has not the charisma [[displayed]] by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in [[Stolz]] and [[Prejudices]]. Even the [[termination]] scene (the [[reaping]] [[feast]]) which does not happen in the [[newer]] [[delivers]] a [[montage]] [[ceases]] except for when it [[showing]] [[Emmy]] being cold and [[hardly]] unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly [[reconciling]] with him, even telling him that she would have [[appreciated]] the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange [[departing]] from the faithfulness otherwise [[showed]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more [[wondrous]] and [[formulate]] than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. --------------------------------------------- Result 800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[best]] movie ever made... But it is [[better]] than [[many]] of you have [[said]]. I still haven't [[seen]] a homo-themed [[movie]] better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narrative]] [[movies]], with a clear [[beginning]], development and [[outcome]]. But European [[movies]] are less [[narrative]], but makes you [[think]] much and feel.

[[Many]] of you didn't understand the [[sense]] of the [[movie]].. The purpose of this one is not show us a [[simple]] "summer loving [[movie]]", with commercial [[characters]] who "[[fall]] in [[love]] and live [[happy]] [[forever]]". Summer [[Holidays]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[every]] young [[boy]] who may feel identified with those [[boys]].

[[Maybe]] some of you didn't [[understand]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, [[showed]] as flashbacks. These 3 [[moments]] are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they [[meet]] and [[love]]. - After a [[year]] and half [[living]] [[together]] in [[Nantes]], [[Mathieu]] doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to [[suicide]] [[taking]] [[something]], and [[Cedric]] [[brings]] him to hospital. [[Later]], he appears talking with a [[psychiatrist]] to [[find]] the [[reason]] about he [[done]] that. - The last [[part]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, [[alone]].. to [[think]] about how his [[life]] have [[changed]], how his life [[become]] to be, and [[trying]] to [[find]] himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I [[said]] before... this is not a funny movie. [[If]] what [[someone]] [[want]] to see is meat, for that, we have Belami [[movies]].

Presque Rien, what [[want]] to [[show]] us, is how [[cruel]] can be the [[life]], for a young [[boy]] who is not sure about his [[feelings]] and not sure about what to do in [[life]]. [[Mathieu]] only [[wants]] to [[go]] away from [[home]], and [[try]] to live the [[kind]] of life that he [[thought]] [[could]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed perfect at the [[beginning]].. [[later]] is not as good as he thought, and he [[become]] [[troubled]], and feel that he has [[lost]] the [[way]] of his [[life]]. He is [[lost]] and doesn't [[know]] what he [[really]] wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about [[feelings]]... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, [[depression]], loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[nicest]] movie ever made... But it is [[nicer]] than [[innumerable]] of you have [[say]]. I still haven't [[watched]] a homo-themed [[kino]] better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narration]] [[theater]], with a clear [[start]], development and [[conclusions]]. But European [[theater]] are less [[narration]], but makes you [[thought]] much and feel.

[[Innumerable]] of you didn't understand the [[feeling]] of the [[films]].. The purpose of this one is not show us a [[uncomplicated]] "summer loving [[flick]]", with commercial [[features]] who "[[dipped]] in [[loves]] and live [[pleased]] [[indefinitely]]". Summer [[Holiday]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[each]] young [[guy]] who may feel identified with those [[guys]].

[[Might]] some of you didn't [[understood]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, [[demonstrated]] as flashbacks. These 3 [[times]] are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they [[respond]] and [[amore]]. - After a [[annum]] and half [[life]] [[jointly]] in [[Portsmouth]], [[Matthew]] doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to [[suicidal]] [[take]] [[anything]], and [[Jerome]] [[bring]] him to hospital. [[Thereafter]], he appears talking with a [[shrug]] to [[unearthed]] the [[justification]] about he [[doing]] that. - The last [[portions]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, [[only]].. to [[believe]] about how his [[vie]] have [[modify]], how his life [[becomes]] to be, and [[tempting]] to [[unearthed]] himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I [[stated]] before... this is not a funny movie. [[Unless]] what [[person]] [[wanting]] to see is meat, for that, we have Belami [[theater]].

Presque Rien, what [[wanna]] to [[exhibit]] us, is how [[vicious]] can be the [[vida]], for a young [[kiddo]] who is not sure about his [[sentiments]] and not sure about what to do in [[vida]]. [[Matthew]] only [[desires]] to [[going]] away from [[housing]], and [[tried]] to live the [[sort]] of life that he [[brainchild]] [[did]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed perfect at the [[launch]].. [[subsequently]] is not as good as he thought, and he [[becomes]] [[flustered]], and feel that he has [[forfeited]] the [[routing]] of his [[iife]]. He is [[forfeited]] and doesn't [[savoir]] what he [[genuinely]] wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about [[affections]]... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, [[doldrums]], loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[loved]] this [[film]]. Not being a swooning Ed [[Wood]] Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "[[boundless]] enthusiasm" and [[acknowledge]] his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal [[story]] is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to [[find]], that this film would be about understanding his [[turbulent]] life, rather than [[simply]] heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a [[mythology]], leaving the cast and the [[viewer]] [[unexpectedly]] [[connected]] to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed [[Wood]] the best talking about him from all [[perspectives]], [[positive]] and [[negative]], and [[showing]] us their [[character]] as much as Ed's. We get [[insight]] into Ed's personal and [[professional]] [[life]]: from his romances, to his [[drinking]], to his [[sexuality]], to his friends, to his enemies, and [[even]] to his [[film]] making.

The film itself is [[shot]] in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of [[humor]] and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the [[surprisingly]] engaging and interconnected [[story]].

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. I [[cared]] this [[movies]]. Not being a swooning Ed [[Wooden]] Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "[[endless]] enthusiasm" and [[recognize]] his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal [[storytelling]] is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to [[finds]], that this film would be about understanding his [[choppy]] life, rather than [[merely]] heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a [[myth]], leaving the cast and the [[bystander]] [[abruptly]] [[linked]] to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed [[Timber]] the best talking about him from all [[prospects]], [[affirmative]] and [[harmful]], and [[display]] us their [[nature]] as much as Ed's. We get [[vision]] into Ed's personal and [[occupational]] [[iife]]: from his romances, to his [[alcohol]], to his [[sex]], to his friends, to his enemies, and [[yet]] to his [[movies]] making.

The film itself is [[kiiled]] in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of [[comedy]] and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the [[terribly]] engaging and interconnected [[narratives]].

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. --------------------------------------------- Result 802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am an avid fan of violent exploitation cinema, who would never attack a film for being violent or disturbing. I consider "Cannibal Holocaust" a masterpiece and will always defend controversial films like "Day Of The Woman" or "Last House on the Left" as genuine classics. Anyone who browses through my other user comments will notice that I am actually very pro-violence/gore when it comes to films. However, I do think that there should be at least some point to the violence. This piece of crap doesn't have any point whatsoever. The first film in the notorious "Guinea Pig" series, "The Devil's Experiment" (1985) is widely controversial, but, as opposed to many other controversial films, this stinker has nothing at all to be recommended for. I must say that, before seeing any of the Guniea-Pig films, I already had a feeling that I would hate this one, knowing what it was about. Due to its status as one of the most controversial films around, however, I decided I had to see it. I am very glad I didn't waste any money on this pile of crap, and I sure wish I hadn't wasted my time with it either.

This thing's story (I don't even want to call it a 'film'): It doesn't have one. Three scumbags torture a woman to death for some excruciating 40 minutes. That's it. There is no artistic value, no 'shocking' story, no suspense; nothing. Simply the disbelief that a film that shows NOTHING except for a woman being tortured for no reason enjoys an enormous cult-following. It IS disturbing, I give it that. Of course it is disturbing to watch a torture video for 40 minutes. What is more disturbing, however, is the fact that many people actually seem to regard this pile of garbage as some kind of masterpiece. I really cannot figure why. The fact that the gore effects look realistic cannot be the reason, I hope. The girl who plays the victim isn't a very good actor, and reacts very calm to all the torture. That makes the film look less realistic, which is, in this single case, a good thing. This is a film that is sickening; not for its gore, but for its redundancy, its existence for the sole purpose of showing 40 minutes of torture.

I strongly oppose any form of censorship. Since this is 100% fake and nobody got hurt during its production, it IS legitimate to make such a film. However, I cannot think of a single reason why anyone would like this, other than the morbid desire to watch suffering and the enjoyment of torture. This film's sequel "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" gained notoriety when actor Charlie Sheen mistook it for an actual snuff film and informed the FBI. Fortuneately, the film turned out to be fake. Overall, "The Devil's Experiment" is a fake torture/snuff film that seems to have the sole purpose of looking as close to a real snuff film as possible.

"The Devil's Experiment" is one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune of sitting through. Don't torture yourself by giving this piece of crap a try for its controversial status. Do yourself a favor and avoid it. Zero stars out of 10, I wish there was a negative scale in order to appropriately rate this pile of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Five passengers at a bus depot tell each other their scary dreams while waiting to be picked up. But is there more to these nightmares than meets the eye?

Lucky me, five bad movies for the price of one! Each segment features the very worst in acting, special effects, make up and music. And these were supposed to be scary? Hmm.. I think I've been more freaked out during an episode of Teletubbies. I swear, you'll sit there like I was, bored to tears waiting in vain for something interesting to happen. Don't bother. It never does. In fact, I even stopped fast forwarding the commercials, as they were a good deal more entertaining than the main feature. AND the ending is the ultimate cop-out. Yep, none of this actually ever happened. If only the same could be said for the day I set my VCR to record this cobblers.. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Being a fan of the [[first]] Lion King, I was [[definitely]] looking forward to this [[movie]], but I [[knew]] there was [[really]] no way it [[could]] be as good as the original. I [[know]] that [[many]] Disney fans are [[wary]] of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed [[feelings]] of them as well.

[[While]] watching The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was [[regarding]] this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accept]] this movie as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) Being a fan of the [[fiirst]] Lion King, I was [[unmistakably]] looking forward to this [[kino]], but I [[overheard]] there was [[truly]] no way it [[did]] be as good as the original. I [[savoir]] that [[several]] Disney fans are [[careful]] of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed [[sensations]] of them as well.

[[Despite]] watching The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was [[relating]] this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accepting]] this movie as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) --------------------------------------------- Result 805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Frailty is a non-gory horror [[film]] that [[achieves]] its [[chills]] by following the logic and [[impact]] of a man's delusion/[[obsession]] straight into [[depravity]]. [[Dad]] (we never [[learn]] his [[name]]) is a [[gentle]] [[man]] and loving father who's [[raising]] his [[sons]] [[alone]] after [[Mom]] died giving birth to the [[youngest]] son, Adam. The family's [[world]] flips upside down late one [[night]] when [[Dad]] rushes into the boys' [[room]] and [[tells]] them [[God]] has [[given]] him a [[vision]]. And what a [[vision]] – the [[entire]] family's [[job]] is to [[destroy]] [[demons]], who, of course, are [[disguised]] in human [[form]].

Proceeding from this [[premise]], the movie is unflinching in following it. [[Dad]] [[kidnaps]] people/[[demons]] whom [[God]] has [[told]] him to [[destroy]], binds them, [[lays]] his hand on them to [[see]] a [[vision]] of their [[evil]], then [[kills]] them – while making his young [[sons]] watch. Fenton, the [[older]] [[boy]], is [[horrified]], [[seeing]] only a father who's [[turned]] into a [[crazed]] murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that [[Dad]] is following God's will. [[Eventually]], Dad [[takes]] his [[sons]] on [[missions]] to [[abduct]] the "[[demons]]" that [[God]] has put on Dad's [[list]], and finally, [[invites]] them to [[fully]] [[participate]] in God's mission for the [[family]].

This is not, you [[understand]], an [[abusive]] father. He loves his children. He is only following God's [[instructions]]: "This is our [[job]] now, son. We've [[got]] to do this." When Fenton, [[terrified]] and convinced his [[father]] has [[gone]] [[mad]], [[says]] he'll report him to the police, his [[father]] [[explains]], "If you do that, son, I'll [[die]]. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the [[children]] are under is unbearable and [[tragic]], and warps their [[entire]] lives.(1) The movie's structure is [[similar]] to the one used in The [[Usual]] [[Suspects]]: a [[story]] in flashback, [[told]] in a police station to a FBI agent. The [[moody]] lighting, the [[stormy]] weather, and the [[eerie]] [[calm]] in the [[present]] day [[add]] to the [[menace]] of the backstory. I wanted to believe the [[unfolding]] horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her [[children]] by [[drowning]] them. Even then, I wanted to [[believe]] that I was watching a human tragedy, rather than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the end about the veracity of Dad's vision. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a problem for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 Frailty is a non-gory horror [[movie]] that [[attains]] its [[willies]] by following the logic and [[influences]] of a man's delusion/[[mania]] straight into [[perversion]]. [[Daddy]] (we never [[learns]] his [[naming]]) is a [[temperate]] [[dude]] and loving father who's [[augmented]] his [[son]] [[solely]] after [[Mummy]] died giving birth to the [[younger]] son, Adam. The family's [[globe]] flips upside down late one [[overnight]] when [[Pope]] rushes into the boys' [[salle]] and [[narrates]] them [[Christ]] has [[granted]] him a [[conception]]. And what a [[eyesight]] – the [[whole]] family's [[employment]] is to [[raze]] [[minions]], who, of course, are [[occult]] in human [[shape]].

Proceeding from this [[hypothesis]], the movie is unflinching in following it. [[Pope]] [[kidnappings]] people/[[devils]] whom [[Christ]] has [[said]] him to [[annihilate]], binds them, [[laying]] his hand on them to [[behold]] a [[eyesight]] of their [[malicious]], then [[murdering]] them – while making his young [[son]] watch. Fenton, the [[elderly]] [[guy]], is [[appalled]], [[witnessing]] only a father who's [[transformed]] into a [[madman]] murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that [[Dada]] is following God's will. [[Lastly]], Dad [[pick]] his [[son]] on [[tasks]] to [[kidnap]] the "[[minions]]" that [[Christ]] has put on Dad's [[listings]], and finally, [[calls]] them to [[perfectly]] [[involvement]] in God's mission for the [[families]].

This is not, you [[understood]], an [[unseemly]] father. He loves his children. He is only following God's [[guidance]]: "This is our [[employment]] now, son. We've [[did]] to do this." When Fenton, [[freaked]] and convinced his [[fathers]] has [[disappeared]] [[madman]], [[say]] he'll report him to the police, his [[fathers]] [[explaining]], "If you do that, son, I'll [[deaths]]. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the [[kids]] are under is unbearable and [[disastrous]], and warps their [[overall]] lives.(1) The movie's structure is [[identical]] to the one used in The [[Routine]] [[Defendants]]: a [[histories]] in flashback, [[tell]] in a police station to a FBI agent. The [[quirky]] lighting, the [[turbulent]] weather, and the [[freaky]] [[serena]] in the [[presented]] day [[inserting]] to the [[threats]] of the backstory. I wanted to believe the [[unfolded]] horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her [[kids]] by [[sunk]] them. Even then, I wanted to [[believing]] that I was watching a human tragedy, rather than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the end about the veracity of Dad's vision. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a problem for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 --------------------------------------------- Result 806 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Based on one of the books by Gabriel Marquez and it might be brilliant literature, this cinema-adaption really sucks as it's more like fighting against sleep rather than enjoying some cinematographic delices. The story is about an old couple whose son died and living a life that is heavily dominated by poverty, and wherein the main character is a cock that hopefully one day brings some money for a forthcoming cockfight. I am in no mood to spill more words on this useless pretentious piece, just perhaps that you can see Salma Hayek in here, but sitting 90 minutes in front of your screen for just that? No gracias..... --------------------------------------------- Result 807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very slow-paced, but intricately structured and ultimately very touching. A nice, very true-to-life look at a small Florida beach town in the dead of winter -- I've been there, and this is absolutely accurate.

It's also the debut feature of actress Ashley Judd, and she makes a big impression here. It's hard to believe this film is 12 years old -- I remember seeing it in theaters, and I recently rented "Ruby" again. Except for the 80's looking clothes, it has held up very nicely. Ashely is so radiant and touching here, that it's hard to think of her subsequent career without wincing. Boy, talk about failing to fulfill your early promise! Anyone seeing Ashley here in "Ruby In Paradise" would assume this elegant, natural beauty went on to all kinds of interesting art films and serious acting -- instead she has become the "go to" girl for dumb action films and slasher movies! Very disappointing, but at least we have this lovely performance preserved to showcase her early promise.

As some other commenter's say, this is not for everyone as it's very slow paced. This is not an action film, nor is it really a romance. The director (Victor Nunez, "Ulees Gold", another excellent character study) treats this ordinary young woman's life with deep respect, allowing her story to build slowly and with a lot of detail. In that way, I think this is one of the most moving and respectful coming-of-age stories about young women that I can recall -- it's not about Ruby's sexual awakening or "how she lost her virginity", but about her life choices and her growing maturity.

A lovely film, if you take the time to watch it...I think it would be a really excellent film to show teens and young girls (or boys for that matter) and give them a chance to think about and discuss it.

Particular kudos to director Nunez, who also wrote the script, which is so realistic and nicely detailed that I assumed all through the movie that it was based on a female-written novel or memoir, but in fact it's Mr. Nunez's original work. Rated 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] [[Definitely]] a very good idea,screenplay was just OK.Could have been [[better]],The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an [[adventure]] lover,A [[new]] [[idea]] about the [[lost]] world of Atlantis.[[Negatives]] are that I personally feel that this [[idea]] had so [[much]] more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better adventure than this.It wasn't bad at all but it would have been much better with some more runtime.Enjoyed it a lot [[though]],[[Cant]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This [[movie]] is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy [[ending]]. [[Surely]] a very good idea,screenplay was just OK.Could have been [[optimum]],The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an [[adventurer]] lover,A [[novo]] [[brainchild]] about the [[forfeited]] world of Atlantis.[[Unfavorable]] are that I personally feel that this [[brainchild]] had so [[very]] more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better adventure than this.It wasn't bad at all but it would have been much better with some more runtime.Enjoyed it a lot [[if]],[[Havent]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This [[cinematography]] is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had [[heard]] good things about this film and was, you guessed it, a bit disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite [[solid]], in their simple 50s American setting. The reason I didn't [[rate]] this [[film]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pulled]] me out of the film a bit. [[Perhaps]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the [[film]] [[needed]] to be a bit longer. Maureen's [[character]] is [[quite]] underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and [[angry]], but why is her sister shown to be more [[upset]]? [[Because]] she's a few years older? Hasn't the [[end]] [[rather]] undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the [[movie]] makes it seem that Maureen and [[Court]] have only just [[met]], when he [[gets]] tractored ([[warning]]: this scene is [[surprisingly]] brutal, in retrospect it [[seems]] like it might have been trying to shock a [[bit]]. well it [[works]]!). It depends what you [[want]] - if you [[want]] the girls' [[happy]] [[story]] of young [[love]] that it [[seems]] like you're [[going]] to [[get]], you're in for a surprise. [[Man]] in the Moon is both quaint and dreamy and a [[harsh]] [[coming]] of age [[film]] – a [[rather]] awkward [[combination]]? I liked the [[character]] of Court though, I can see what [[girls]] [[watching]] this might be watching. And I [[loved]] that they had the [[courage]] to both let him [[hurt]] the [[younger]] sister (most [[men]] would, most films wouldn't) and get killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings scale. [[For]] some [[reason]] I found Jason London on a [[tractor]] [[funny]]. I had [[listened]] good things about this film and was, you guessed it, a bit disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite [[robust]], in their simple 50s American setting. The reason I didn't [[rates]] this [[cinematography]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pull]] me out of the film a bit. [[Potentially]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the [[cinematographic]] [[required]] to be a bit longer. Maureen's [[traits]] is [[altogether]] underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and [[furious]], but why is her sister shown to be more [[annoyed]]? [[Since]] she's a few years older? Hasn't the [[terminates]] [[quite]] undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the [[cinematography]] makes it seem that Maureen and [[Tribunal]] have only just [[fulfilled]], when he [[receives]] tractored ([[warnings]]: this scene is [[terribly]] brutal, in retrospect it [[looks]] like it might have been trying to shock a [[bite]]. well it [[cooperation]]!). It depends what you [[wanted]] - if you [[wish]] the girls' [[cheerful]] [[histories]] of young [[adored]] that it [[looks]] like you're [[go]] to [[obtain]], you're in for a surprise. [[Males]] in the Moon is both quaint and dreamy and a [[stringent]] [[arriving]] of age [[movies]] – a [[quite]] awkward [[jumpsuit]]? I liked the [[trait]] of Court though, I can see what [[daughter]] [[staring]] this might be watching. And I [[cared]] that they had the [[gallantry]] to both let him [[harmed]] the [[youngest]] sister (most [[males]] would, most films wouldn't) and get killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings scale. [[Onto]] some [[rationale]] I found Jason London on a [[towing]] [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I picked this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his [[exhaustive]] DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a truly bad [[film]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[bad]].

Solar Crisis is [[bad]], but it doesn't reach that [[sweet]] spot of absolute pain that some [[movies]] are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sun]] is about to unleash a [[huge]] solar flare towards the [[earth]] that will [[essentially]] [[destroy]] it. [[In]] [[order]] to counter-act this [[imminent]] [[threat]], humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew [[whose]] [[duty]] it is to fire an antimatter [[bomb]] (which the [[opening]] describes as "the [[biggest]] explosive ever") into the [[sun]], which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a [[different]] [[angle]], [[leaving]] [[earth]] unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you [[sounds]] like a bad episode of the [[original]] [[Star]] [[Trek]]. Even with an [[ensemble]] cast (Charlton Heston, [[Peter]] Boyle, and [[Jack]] Palance), Solar [[Crisis]] can [[barely]] [[manage]] that [[level]] of mediocrity, thanks to a plot that [[starts]] [[simple]], [[yet]] becomes [[increasingly]] [[nonsensical]] as [[time]] [[wears]] on.

The crowning [[achievement]] of this [[debacle]] of a [[movie]] is the [[addition]] of a villain [[character]] (played by Boyle) who insists on sabotaging the [[mission]]. Through means that are never [[explained]], he sends an evil minion with an [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] [[haircut]] to [[exercise]] some [[sort]] of [[vague]] electronic mind [[control]] over the space crew's genetically engineered [[scientist]], played by female lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he sabotaging the mission? [[Because]] by his [[moronic]] [[viewpoint]], he [[believes]] the flare won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become [[fabulously]] [[wealthy]] because he has [[dug]] his evil claws into the stock market. [[In]] [[effect]], you have a villain with the most absurdly [[stupid]] [[motivation]] [[imaginable]].

The film's [[plot]] becomes amazingly [[convoluted]] and develops very [[slowly]], in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character [[risking]] an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid [[answer]] as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- I picked this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his [[comprehensive]] DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a truly bad [[filmmaking]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[naughty]].

Solar Crisis is [[unfavourable]], but it doesn't reach that [[sugary]] spot of absolute pain that some [[filmmaking]] are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sunshine]] is about to unleash a [[great]] solar flare towards the [[terra]] that will [[basically]] [[ruining]] it. [[During]] [[edict]] to counter-act this [[upcoming]] [[jeopardy]], humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew [[who]] [[liability]] it is to fire an antimatter [[explodes]] (which the [[opens]] describes as "the [[bigger]] explosive ever") into the [[sunshine]], which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a [[various]] [[angles]], [[letting]] [[terra]] unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you [[noises]] like a bad episode of the [[initial]] [[Superstar]] [[Hiking]]. Even with an [[whole]] cast (Charlton Heston, [[Pete]] Boyle, and [[Jacques]] Palance), Solar [[Crises]] can [[hardly]] [[administered]] that [[echelon]] of mediocrity, thanks to a plot that [[launched]] [[easy]], [[however]] becomes [[gradually]] [[counterintuitive]] as [[times]] [[gate]] on.

The crowning [[achievements]] of this [[breakup]] of a [[filmmaking]] is the [[supplement]] of a villain [[trait]] (played by Boyle) who insists on sabotaging the [[missions]]. Through means that are never [[explains]], he sends an evil minion with an [[grossly]] [[naughty]] [[coupe]] to [[exerting]] some [[genre]] of [[fuzzy]] electronic mind [[oversight]] over the space crew's genetically engineered [[investigators]], played by female lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he sabotaging the mission? [[Since]] by his [[dumb]] [[views]], he [[sees]] the flare won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become [[fantastically]] [[rich]] because he has [[dig]] his evil claws into the stock market. [[During]] [[repercussions]], you have a villain with the most absurdly [[witless]] [[reasons]] [[unimaginable]].

The film's [[intrigue]] becomes amazingly [[complicated]] and develops very [[softly]], in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character [[compromising]] an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid [[answering]] as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- --------------------------------------------- Result 811 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[think]] the [[deal]] with this movie is that it has about 2 minutes of really, really [[funny]] [[moments]] and it makes a very good trailer and a [[lot]] of people [[came]] in with expectations from the [[trailer]] and this [[time]] the movie doesn't live up to the [[trailer]]. It's a little more sluggish and drags a [[little]] slowly for such an exciting premise, and i think i'm [[seeing]] from the comments people having a love/[[hate]] relationship with this movie.

[[However]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[considering]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so [[giddy]] and [[carefree]] that set among the [[conformity]] of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an [[excellent]] job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles [[stand]] out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, [[despite]] a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I [[found]] a rather [[intelligent]] [[film]]. The themes of [[conformity]] and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone [[conforms]], or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a [[screwball]] comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. I [[believe]] the [[addresses]] with this movie is that it has about 2 minutes of really, really [[amusing]] [[times]] and it makes a very good trailer and a [[batch]] of people [[arrived]] in with expectations from the [[trailers]] and this [[moment]] the movie doesn't live up to the [[camper]]. It's a little more sluggish and drags a [[petite]] slowly for such an exciting premise, and i think i'm [[witnessing]] from the comments people having a love/[[loathe]] relationship with this movie.

[[Instead]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[consider]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so [[dazed]] and [[careless]] that set among the [[accordance]] of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an [[wondrous]] job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles [[standing]] out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, [[while]] a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I [[discovered]] a rather [[smart]] [[films]]. The themes of [[compliant]] and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone [[meets]], or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a [[kooky]] comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] i wasn't a fan of [[seeing]] this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing [[eva]] longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[overall]] it was actually [[better]] then i [[expected]] but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was [[enough]] to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. i wasn't a fan of [[witnessing]] this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing [[ewa]] longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[entire]] it was actually [[nicer]] then i [[waited]] but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was [[adequately]] to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 813 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is quite possibly THE worst movie I have ever seen. Again I made the mistake of buying the movie because the synapse on the back sounded cool and the front cover looked pretty cool too (After buying this and the movie "Malevolence" which I reviewed on here as well, I have learned my lesson). I love horror movies that take place in the woods or in the desert or on a farm. This supposedly takes place in the woods of Texas but was probably filmed in the director's backyard. The production was probably the worst I ever seen. The actors were absolutely the WORST. The story didn't have anything to do with what the back cover said. I even tried to sell it to F.Y.E and some other "mom and pop" store that buys used DVDs and neither would take it. Thats how awful this poor miserable excuse for a movie was. I have seen some bad movies before (Troll 2 for example) but this definitely takes the cake. I didn't think there was a worse movie than "Troll 2". Boy was I wrong! Do not buy this movie unless someone hands it to you for free but even than your stuck with it unless you throw it out which is what I am about to do!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I must admit I am a big fan of South Park and was expecting Basketball to be funny but nowhere near as good as it turned out to be! I think this is what happens when you mix David Zucker, Matt Stone, and Trey Parker together. This movie has so much replay value and at no point bothers to take itself seriously. The slap stick style humor mixed with Stone and Parker just works flawlessly. The kind of humor present in Basketball was not popular upon the time of it's release and had it come out today it would be a hit. Don't bother trying to be critical, just leave your brain at the door and expect endless laughs to come. Recommended to anyone with a good sense of humor. --------------------------------------------- Result 815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] [[Where]] do you [[begin]] with a [[movie]] as [[bad]] as this?

[[Do]] you [[mention]] the [[cast]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[dreadful]] [[script]]?

No. You just say that [[anyone]] who [[pays]] [[money]] to [[see]] a [[film]] as poor as this [[needs]] their head [[looking]] at. I know I do. I [[respect]] those poor guys who [[saw]] it with little or no [[advance]] word from [[mags]] like [[Empire]] ([[usually]] a [[bad]] sign if a preview copy isn't [[available]] to the quality [[movie]] mags). However, cinemas [[really]] should [[start]] thinking about giving out [[refunds]] if the [[customer]] isn't happy with the [[finished]] [[product]].

I went three days after it [[opened]] with two other mates. The only other [[person]] in the [[cinema]] was one [[bloke]] on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the [[country]] of just what a [[stinker]] this is.

Not [[since]] the days of The Avengers (1998) have I [[felt]] so short [[changed]] since watching a [[movie]]. [[If]] a [[mate]] [[comes]] [[round]] with this on video in a few months make sure he [[pays]] your electricity bill while [[watching]] it.

Tara Fitzgerald [[deserves]] an [[award]] for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen [[retains]] some dignity amid the cinematic [[carnage]]; Barry [[Foster]] should have been arrested on the set for his performance, [[Rhys]] Ifans does his career no [[favours]] after the [[success]] of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty [[secretary]].

[[Mind]] you, [[considering]] she [[used]] to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting [[ability]] had to be pretty low to [[begin]] with.

The [[production]] [[values]] aren't bad [[considering]] the [[obviously]] [[limited]] [[budget]] but that [[script]] is [[atrocious]]. [[If]] you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable [[characters]] [[say]] "Fak!" for a [[couple]] of hours then this should be right up your street.

[[Otherwise]], bargepoles [[required]].

[[Everytime]] do you [[initiation]] with a [[filmmaking]] as [[unfavourable]] as this?

[[Doing]] you [[cite]] the [[casting]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[scary]] [[scripts]]?

No. You just say that [[everyone]] who [[paying]] [[cash]] to [[behold]] a [[filmmaking]] as poor as this [[needed]] their head [[searching]] at. I know I do. I [[respecting]] those poor guys who [[watched]] it with little or no [[progression]] word from [[chargers]] like [[Reich]] ([[commonly]] a [[negative]] sign if a preview copy isn't [[accessible]] to the quality [[filmmaking]] mags). However, cinemas [[genuinely]] should [[begins]] thinking about giving out [[repay]] if the [[consumers]] isn't happy with the [[complete]] [[merchandise]].

I went three days after it [[inaugurated]] with two other mates. The only other [[anyone]] in the [[filmmaking]] was one [[blokes]] on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the [[nations]] of just what a [[tosser]] this is.

Not [[because]] the days of The Avengers (1998) have I [[deemed]] so short [[altering]] since watching a [[filmmaking]]. [[Unless]] a [[buddy]] [[happens]] [[redondo]] with this on video in a few months make sure he [[wages]] your electricity bill while [[staring]] it.

Tara Fitzgerald [[deserve]] an [[prix]] for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen [[keeps]] some dignity amid the cinematic [[slaughtering]]; Barry [[Promote]] should have been arrested on the set for his performance, [[Reyes]] Ifans does his career no [[encourages]] after the [[succeeded]] of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty [[secretaries]].

[[Intellect]] you, [[consideration]] she [[uses]] to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting [[skill]] had to be pretty low to [[starts]] with.

The [[productivity]] [[valuing]] aren't bad [[reviewing]] the [[apparently]] [[restrained]] [[budgets]] but that [[hyphen]] is [[awful]]. [[Though]] you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable [[traits]] [[said]] "Fak!" for a [[couples]] of hours then this should be right up your street.

[[Alternately]], bargepoles [[need]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 816 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the [[concept]] work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost obligated to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the [[worst]] role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the [[notion]] work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost obligated to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the [[gravest]] role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. --------------------------------------------- Result 817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[regret]] the time and [[money]] I spent with it. There are no love [[stories]] between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional [[meetings]] and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't [[work]] out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[deplore]] the time and [[moneys]] I spent with it. There are no love [[fairytales]] between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional [[reunions]] and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't [[cooperates]] out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? --------------------------------------------- Result 818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was just as good as some of the other westerns made by Anthony Mann and James Stewart like Winchester '73 and The Naked Spur, and much better than Thunder Bay and Bend Of The River. This film starts out like a run of the mill western but gets more complex as it goes along. It starts out with Jimmy Stewart and Walter Brennan arriving in Seattle and Stewart is charged with murder. He is found innocent but is cattle is stolen by a corrupt judge. Stewart then agrees to lead something but i forget what it is but Stewart only cares about getting his cattle back. As the movie goes along it's like Stewart only cares about himself just like his character in the Naked Spur. It gets much better at the halfway point after they arrive in Alaska. This is one of Stewart's better westerns. --------------------------------------------- Result 819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is stale, and misses the mark. It is far off compared to the 89 Batman that it tries to coppy. That women singer whats her name can not act, and we see why her film carrier died. Notice how this film died in the box office no one see this film on tv either. My uncle and dad were expecting Batman, and the films impression is more like Cop Rock. Not worth renting 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Mysterious]] [[murders]] in a European village [[seem]] the result of THE VAMPIRE [[BAT]] horde [[plaguing]] the [[terrified]] [[community]].

This [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] [[little]] [[thriller]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's Poverty Row studios. The [[sparse]] production [[values]] and rough [[editing]] actually add to its [[eerie]] atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the [[viewer]] the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[dream]], which is [[appropriate]] for a thriller of this sort.

Even though the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite ludicrous and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his [[typically]] fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than [[look]] lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's [[terrified]] burgermeister. And [[little]] Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his [[weird]] roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most [[effective]] as a bat-loving lunatic. [[Cryptic]] [[slain]] in a European village [[seems]] the result of THE VAMPIRE [[WALLOP]] horde [[ravaging]] the [[terrorised]] [[communities]].

This [[unbelievably]] [[efficacious]] [[tiny]] [[thrillers]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's Poverty Row studios. The [[dispersed]] production [[valuing]] and rough [[edition]] actually add to its [[freaky]] atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the [[onlooker]] the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[daydreaming]], which is [[adequate]] for a thriller of this sort.

Even though the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite ludicrous and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his [[normally]] fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than [[gaze]] lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's [[horrified]] burgermeister. And [[tiny]] Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his [[squirrelly]] roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most [[efficacious]] as a bat-loving lunatic. --------------------------------------------- Result 821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This first two seasons of this comedy series were very strange and they weren't very funny and had a drama element where Bill (the mother) was struggling with all the usual problems in life but that element was a bit depressing and didn't mix well with th comedy elements which is probably why it was dropped. After that it soon became one of the funniest comedy series the BBC have ever made! The chemistry between Bill and Ben's character's were very funny and there was always so many brilliant and memorable sketches in each series. The Christmas specials were hilarious and a real treat for Christmas.

The show came to a stop when the main actor Gary Olsen playing Bill passed away which was very sad because he was a brilliant actor in films such as Up 'n' Under and a very funny man RIP

This underrated show has sadly disappeared from our television screens and doesn't to be repeated that often - Though it does appear on UKTV Gold once in a while but it should be repeated on BBC one or two to show this brilliant Comedy to a new audience --------------------------------------------- Result 822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Remade today, this film [[would]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[comedy]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

[[Vastly]] [[disturbing]]; I haven't been able to look at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

Remade today, this film [[could]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[humor]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

[[Eminently]] [[disconcerting]]; I haven't been able to look at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

--------------------------------------------- Result 823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[movie]] is awesome for three [[main]] reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I absolutely [[loved]] that. There is a bold [[color]] [[theme]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]] with [[extraordinary]] costumes and [[picturesque]] sets. A [[photography]] which [[looks]] very [[costly]] (and [[probably]] was not) [[completes]] the [[look]] . I always enjoy those stories about [[groups]] of misfits/loners [[coming]] together and [[becoming]] a family . Sometimes they [[fall]] into [[clichés]] but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[flawed]], yet [[extremely]] [[likable]] characters. Alan Larkin is the [[best]] (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my [[favorite]] [[movie]] of last year [[Little]] Miss [[Sunshine]]…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their [[tricks]] are very [[funny]]. There is a mix of [[humor]] and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a [[lot]]. And of course it is all about the Magician [[theme]] . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. This [[kino]] is awesome for three [[primary]] reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I absolutely [[cared]] that. There is a bold [[colour]] [[topics]] [[across]] the [[film]] with [[wondrous]] costumes and [[scenic]] sets. A [[photographer]] which [[seems]] very [[burdensome]] (and [[conceivably]] was not) [[finishes]] the [[gaze]] . I always enjoy those stories about [[panels]] of misfits/loners [[come]] together and [[become]] a family . Sometimes they [[dipped]] into [[cliché]] but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[misguided]], yet [[unbelievably]] [[sympathetic]] characters. Alan Larkin is the [[better]] (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my [[favourite]] [[cinematographic]] of last year [[Tiny]] Miss [[Sunlight]]…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their [[stratagems]] are very [[comical]]. There is a mix of [[mood]] and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a [[lots]]. And of course it is all about the Magician [[thematic]] . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. --------------------------------------------- Result 824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I [[first]] [[heard]] about the title, I thought of 'The Simpsons', just like so [[many]] other reviewers, but when I saw the cast, I was completely stunned, that so [[many]] [[great]] character-actors would actually be in this! [[First]] of all, we have [[Christopher]] Walken (Deer [[Hunter]], Pulp Fiction), who plays the title [[character]], McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, [[Predator]] 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos [[fails]] the mission, [[Christina]] goes to McBain for [[help]].

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token [[tough]] black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous [[movie]], "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I [[think]] not. There is [[also]] a [[lot]] of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most [[notable]] one being that McBain himself [[wears]] a welders-mask when Christina [[sees]] him for the [[first]] [[time]], when he is [[working]] on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other [[guys]] in the Vietnam-pack are: The [[rich]] guy who can afford all [[sorts]] of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce ([[Michael]] Ironside, Total [[Recall]], Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by [[Jay]] [[Patterson]], who doesn't look [[like]] the [[guy]] the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't [[seen]] him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! When I [[fiirst]] [[listened]] about the title, I thought of 'The Simpsons', just like so [[numerous]] other reviewers, but when I saw the cast, I was completely stunned, that so [[numerous]] [[wondrous]] character-actors would actually be in this! [[Firstly]] of all, we have [[Christophe]] Walken (Deer [[Hunting]], Pulp Fiction), who plays the title [[characters]], McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, [[Predatory]] 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos [[fail]] the mission, [[Kristina]] goes to McBain for [[aids]].

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token [[stiff]] black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous [[movies]], "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I [[thought]] not. There is [[apart]] a [[batch]] of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most [[cannot]] one being that McBain himself [[wearing]] a welders-mask when Christina [[believes]] him for the [[fiirst]] [[moment]], when he is [[collaborated]] on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other [[fellas]] in the Vietnam-pack are: The [[storied]] guy who can afford all [[kind]] of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce ([[Michel]] Ironside, Total [[Recalled]], Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by [[Jae]] [[Paterson]], who doesn't look [[iike]] the [[blokes]] the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't [[watched]] him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! --------------------------------------------- Result 825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Billy Crystal co-wrote, co-produced and stars in this extremely safe and comfy comedy-drama about fathers and sons, adult irresponsibility, and growing old. Billy plays a heart surgeon who has a heart attack (ha ha) which causes him to seek out his estranged father (Alan King), a movie-extra who fancies himself a big star. The script is sub-Neil Simon nonsense with one-liners galore, a flat, inexpressive direction by Henry Winkler (stuck in sitcom mode), and family-conflict at the ready. Crystal and King try their best, but King is over-eager and frequently over-the-top. JoBeth Williams has another one of her thankless roles, but manages to bring her innate, down-home class to the proverbial girlfriend character. It's a comedy, I guess, but one that blinks back the tears...shamefully. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Just]] watched this early Bugs Bunny (first [[time]] he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as [[linked]] from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' [[first]] [[time]] directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a [[result]], Bugs has a [[different]] [[voice]] [[provided]] by Mel [[Blanc]] than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. [[In]] fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy [[boy]]" [[type]] [[personality]] of that [[time]]). Anyway, after Elmer [[buys]] his pet, [[Bugs]] goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio [[real]] loud, pretending to [[die]] after his master [[repeatedly]] [[throws]] him out of his shower, and [[saying]] "Turn off those lights!" [[whenever]] Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the [[different]] voice, [[Bugs]] is [[definitely]] his [[mischievous]] self and I [[laughed]] myself [[blue]] the [[whole]] [[time]]! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the [[house]] to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental [[breakdown]] at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I [[highly]] [[recommend]] Elmer's Pet Rabbit. [[Mere]] watched this early Bugs Bunny (first [[moment]] he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as [[associated]] from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' [[fiirst]] [[period]] directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a [[findings]], Bugs has a [[several]] [[vocals]] [[gave]] by Mel [[White]] than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. [[During]] fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy [[guys]]" [[genre]] [[subjectivity]] of that [[period]]). Anyway, after Elmer [[purchased]] his pet, [[Insects]] goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio [[actual]] loud, pretending to [[killed]] after his master [[perpetually]] [[castings]] him out of his shower, and [[telling]] "Turn off those lights!" [[where]] Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the [[several]] voice, [[Insects]] is [[surely]] his [[malicious]] self and I [[smiled]] myself [[bleu]] the [[entire]] [[moment]]! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the [[housing]] to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental [[breakthrough]] at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I [[vastly]] [[recommends]] Elmer's Pet Rabbit. --------------------------------------------- Result 827 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the town of Royston Vasey is a weird, but wonderful place. The characters would be just wrong and too disturbing but the fantastically brilliant writing means that it works, and it works very well. Most people will know others with a touch of some characters, but hopefully no one knows people with extremes of personalities such as Tubbs and Edward, the stranger-hating owners of the local shop, or the pen-obsessed Pauline who treats "dole scum" with much contempt.That was only a few of the strange inhabitants. The TV works consists of 3 series and a Christmas special. There are references to many horror films, such as the wicker man. A more recent addition to the range of works is a film, the league of gentlemens apocalypse, of which I will not say much but highly recommend. All in all the league of gentlemen is a hilarious comedy show with genius writing and brilliantly bonkers characters. I would definitely say that it is worth watching as you wont regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Schlocky '70s [[horror]] films...ya gotta [[love]] 'em. [[In]] contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do something [[scary]] and do not resort to a [[tired]] formula.

This is a B movie about the making of a B [[movie]]...that went [[horribly]] wrong. [[Faith]] Domergue (This Island [[Earth]]) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen [[making]] a [[movie]] about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight [[schedule]]. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the [[director]].

The [[horror]] [[builds]] slowly; a dead [[cat]] here, [[John]] Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, [[yes]] seven murders. (At least there's truth in [[advertising]].) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was [[poor]] [[Faith]] to know that those [[darn]] Tibetian [[chants]] would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. Schlocky '70s [[monstrosity]] films...ya gotta [[amore]] 'em. [[Among]] contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do something [[horrifying]] and do not resort to a [[weary]] formula.

This is a B movie about the making of a B [[kino]]...that went [[awfully]] wrong. [[Creed]] Domergue (This Island [[Land]]) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen [[doing]] a [[filmmaking]] about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight [[timeline]]. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the [[headmaster]].

The [[terror]] [[constructing]] slowly; a dead [[kitten]] here, [[Jon]] Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, [[yep]] seven murders. (At least there's truth in [[ad]].) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was [[deficient]] [[Creed]] to know that those [[geez]] Tibetian [[shouts]] would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. --------------------------------------------- Result 829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Despite]] some [[reviews]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I found the story [[totally]] engrossing and even if some critics have [[described]] the love [[story]] as 'Mills and Boon', so what? It is good to [[see]] a warm, touching [[story]] of [[real]] love in these cynical [[times]]. Many in the audience were sniffing and [[surreptitiously]] dabbing their eyes. You [[really]] believe that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, even though, for political [[reasons]], it was an arranged marriage. I did feel [[though]] that [[Sir]] John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is [[perhaps]] [[played]] too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the [[real]] [[father]] of Victoria (as a [[result]] of an [[affair]] with her [[mother]] The [[Duchess]] of Kent) it would have been interesting to [[explore]] this [[theory]]. [[Emily]] Blunt is [[totally]] [[convincing]] as the young Princess, trapped in the [[stifling]] palace with courtiers and [[politicians]] out to manipulate her. She [[brilliantly]] [[portrays]] the strength of [[character]] and determination that eventually made Victoria a [[great]] Queen of [[England]], which [[prospered]] as never before, under her [[long]] reign. I believe word of mouth [[recommendations]] will [[ensure]] [[great]] success for this most [[enjoyable]] and [[wonderful]] looking [[movie]]. [[Although]] some [[review]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I found the story [[absolutely]] engrossing and even if some critics have [[outlining]] the love [[stories]] as 'Mills and Boon', so what? It is good to [[consults]] a warm, touching [[stories]] of [[true]] love in these cynical [[dates]]. Many in the audience were sniffing and [[stealthily]] dabbing their eyes. You [[truthfully]] believe that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, even though, for political [[grounds]], it was an arranged marriage. I did feel [[if]] that [[Sirs]] John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is [[potentially]] [[served]] too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the [[actual]] [[pere]] of Victoria (as a [[outcomes]] of an [[fling]] with her [[mommy]] The [[Duchesse]] of Kent) it would have been interesting to [[explores]] this [[doctrine]]. [[Amelie]] Blunt is [[perfectly]] [[persuade]] as the young Princess, trapped in the [[smothering]] palace with courtiers and [[politician]] out to manipulate her. She [[brightly]] [[describes]] the strength of [[nature]] and determination that eventually made Victoria a [[awesome]] Queen of [[Britain]], which [[thrived]] as never before, under her [[longue]] reign. I believe word of mouth [[propose]] will [[guaranteeing]] [[awesome]] success for this most [[nice]] and [[wondrous]] looking [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know how and where do the Iranian directors get their inspiration in coming up with a plot like this. In fact, it's a very simple plot that many directors could come up with --- but may not be able to project it onto a movie the way Jafar Panahi did.

The film is like 2 worlds revolving at the same time, one connected to the other - the football match and the battle between sexes that's going on behind the walls of the stadium.

It makes you feel like you are in the movie and you're one of the characters, and while watching the movie, as if you also would like to have a glimpse of the football match. You will feel exactly the same excitement and sentiments as those female actors in the movie. It's gripping in a way that you wanted to see the ending, you will want to find out the verdict, you'll be dying to see what will happen to the girls.

I like the intermittent conversations between the smoking girl and one of the military trainee. It's like venus VS mars, it really shows the difference in the thinking of men and women and the struggle of women to get equal rights and opportunity especially in a very patriarchal society like Iran.

This is the second movie of Jafar Panahi that I have seen (the first being Crimson Gold) and am looking forward to watching some more.

Am already hooked with Iranian movies and this one is a must-see! --------------------------------------------- Result 831 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I remember this [[show]] being on the television when I was a [[kid]] back in the early 1990s, and there was this rage about kids with goofy leotards doing kung [[fu]] on one another and riding [[around]] in plastic [[dinosaurs]]. It was called power [[rangers]]. I [[remember]] that [[little]] [[kids]] [[would]] [[go]] around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the [[show]] was [[banned]] in many [[school]] [[districts]] all over the [[country]] because this show [[taught]] kids how to [[fight]] each other in [[solving]] their [[differences]].

I never really [[thought]] of this as a [[show]], [[especially]] when better [[shows]] [[like]] The Tick were playing on Fox [[Kids]]. [[Most]] [[older]] teens [[always]] looked at power rangers in a ridiculous and [[scornful]] [[manner]], and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at [[best]]. The colored rangers [[costumes]] look like stuff you would [[work]] out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic [[nonsense]]. Then you [[get]] into the acting, and of course those really laughable haircuts. All the guys run [[around]] with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always [[wear]] the same [[clothes]] everyday, and then [[change]] into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[toys]] are [[especially]] [[ridiculous]] as well, and was the joke of [[many]] late [[night]] talk show hosts. And of course two of the worst movies ever [[made]], and I do mean two of the worst [[movies]] ever made were based on this show with [[nearly]] every critic trashing both the films, and the [[shows]] it was based on.

Power [[rangers]] is nothing more than a bad television commericial for [[especially]] [[bad]] toy [[merchandising]]. As an adult, I don't look at it [[fondly]], but [[rather]] as another [[embarrassment]] of 1990s kids [[shows]], fashion and guys' earrings. I remember this [[exhibitions]] being on the television when I was a [[children]] back in the early 1990s, and there was this rage about kids with goofy leotards doing kung [[foo]] on one another and riding [[almost]] in plastic [[dinosaur]]. It was called power [[ringers]]. I [[remembers]] that [[tiny]] [[children]] [[could]] [[going]] around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the [[exhibition]] was [[outlawed]] in many [[tuition]] [[neighbourhoods]] all over the [[nationals]] because this show [[lectured]] kids how to [[struggle]] each other in [[addressing]] their [[difference]].

I never really [[think]] of this as a [[exhibition]], [[mainly]] when better [[exposition]] [[iike]] The Tick were playing on Fox [[Juvenile]]. [[Anymore]] [[aged]] teens [[consistently]] looked at power rangers in a ridiculous and [[disdainful]] [[modes]], and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at [[nicest]]. The colored rangers [[costume]] look like stuff you would [[cooperate]] out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic [[bullshit]]. Then you [[got]] into the acting, and of course those really laughable haircuts. All the guys run [[nearly]] with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always [[wearing]] the same [[costumes]] everyday, and then [[amended]] into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[toy]] are [[particularly]] [[absurd]] as well, and was the joke of [[innumerable]] late [[nighttime]] talk show hosts. And of course two of the worst movies ever [[brought]], and I do mean two of the worst [[filmmaking]] ever made were based on this show with [[roughly]] every critic trashing both the films, and the [[denotes]] it was based on.

Power [[ringers]] is nothing more than a bad television commericial for [[specifically]] [[negative]] toy [[marketing]]. As an adult, I don't look at it [[affectionately]], but [[somewhat]] as another [[shame]] of 1990s kids [[show]], fashion and guys' earrings. --------------------------------------------- Result 832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] First of all I would like to point out that this film has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] to see with the Dutch folklore story of the ghost [[ship]] that is [[also]] called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this [[film]], you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not [[see]] sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[exciting]]. It is not the [[story]] of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[thought]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very [[bad]] in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It [[seems]] to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in [[feces]] at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch [[director]], you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. First of all I would like to point out that this film has [[wholly]] [[none]] to see with the Dutch folklore story of the ghost [[vessels]] that is [[further]] called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this [[filmmaking]], you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not [[behold]] sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[enthralling]]. It is not the [[conte]] of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[thinking]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very [[unfavourable]] in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It [[seem]] to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in [[saddles]] at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch [[headmaster]], you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. --------------------------------------------- Result 833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Before this made for TV [[movie]] [[began]], I had relatively low expectations. That's because it was made after the final episode of the series had aired and many of the series [[originals]] were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant appearance. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely [[handicapped]].

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of spooky mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty [[silly]] and [[pointless]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I [[felt]] like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was [[fluff]], but it did provide a few laughs--something the other [[dreary]] [[plot]] was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. Before this made for TV [[filmmaking]] [[launches]], I had relatively low expectations. That's because it was made after the final episode of the series had aired and many of the series [[foreground]] were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant appearance. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely [[disabled]].

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of spooky mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty [[witless]] and [[senseless]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I [[believed]] like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was [[grope]], but it did provide a few laughs--something the other [[dismal]] [[intrigue]] was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. --------------------------------------------- Result 834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Jewish [[newspaper]] [[reporter]] [[Justin]] Timberlake (as [[Joshua]] "[[Josh]]" Pollack) is puzzled when a [[courtroom]] defendant whispers "[[Thank]] you" to testifying officer LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he [[leaves]] the witness [[stand]]. [[In]] the [[opening]] sequences of this [[film]], you are [[given]] the explanation. You will [[see]] [[Mr]]. [[Cool]] J's [[devilish]] [[detective]] [[partner]] [[Dylan]] McDermott (as [[Frances]] "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NOT]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as [[Isaiah]] [[Charles]]). The [[cops]] in the city of "Edison" are so corrupt they shoot their [[suspects]], [[steal]] their money, and [[snort]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his [[girlfriend]] (herein, [[called]] "[[Pussy]]") or [[win]] a Pulitzer, the city's [[corruption]] does [[NOT]] [[sit]] well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake decides to [[investigate]] the [[corruption]], which [[reaches]] both [[unexpected]] scope and life-threatening [[levels]] of [[danger]]. [[Writer]]/[[director]] David J. Burke [[keeps]] the [[film]] above water, but just barely. LL Cool J beats Timberlake in the "[[pop]] star to [[movie]] [[star]]" sweepstakes ([[aka]] the "[[rapper]] to [[actor]]" [[progression]]). [[Mr]]. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely [[supporting]] [[actors]] Morgan Freeman (as [[Moses]] Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.[[T]]. means [[First]] [[Response]] [[Assault]] and [[Tactical]], but it's more [[important]] to know that "Edison (Force)" stars [[Justin]] Timberlake and LL [[Cool]] J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. [[Burke]] ~ [[Justin]] Timberlake, LL [[Cool]] J, Morgan Freeman, [[Dylan]] McDermott Jewish [[dailies]] [[reporters]] [[Justine]] Timberlake (as [[Jeremiah]] "[[Joshi]]" Pollack) is puzzled when a [[salle]] defendant whispers "[[Appreciation]] you" to testifying officer LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he [[sheets]] the witness [[standing]]. [[At]] the [[initiation]] sequences of this [[filmmaking]], you are [[granted]] the explanation. You will [[seeing]] [[Bernd]]. [[Cooling]] J's [[diabolic]] [[inspector]] [[partners]] [[Dillon]] McDermott (as [[Francis]] "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NAH]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as [[Jeremiah]] [[Karel]]). The [[nypd]] in the city of "Edison" are so corrupt they shoot their [[accuser]], [[larceny]] their money, and [[sniff]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his [[amie]] (herein, [[termed]] "[[Weakling]]") or [[victorious]] a Pulitzer, the city's [[bribery]] does [[NOPE]] [[assis]] well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake decides to [[inquiry]] the [[bribery]], which [[achieves]] both [[unintended]] scope and life-threatening [[tier]] of [[menace]]. [[Novelist]]/[[headmaster]] David J. Burke [[retains]] the [[filmmaking]] above water, but just barely. LL Cool J beats Timberlake in the "[[dad]] star to [[movies]] [[stars]]" sweepstakes ([[nickname]] the "[[rappers]] to [[protagonist]]" [[promotions]]). [[Olli]]. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely [[helping]] [[players]] Morgan Freeman (as [[Musa]] Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.[[ton]]. means [[Firstly]] [[Replied]] [[Onslaught]] and [[Tactic]], but it's more [[major]] to know that "Edison (Force)" stars [[Justine]] Timberlake and LL [[Cooling]] J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. [[Burqa]] ~ [[Justine]] Timberlake, LL [[Cooling]] J, Morgan Freeman, [[Dillon]] McDermott --------------------------------------------- Result 835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck ([[Jon]] Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one [[degrading]] experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin [[Hoffman]]). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very dark, [[disturbing]] yet [[fascinating]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you [[disoriented]] and off center--but I couldn't [[stop]] watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A [[great]] film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck ([[John]] Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one [[derogatory]] experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin [[Hoffmann]]). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very dark, [[troubling]] yet [[enthralling]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you [[muddled]] and off center--but I couldn't [[ceasing]] watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A [[wondrous]] film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. --------------------------------------------- Result 836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Someone, some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in [[horror]] films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a [[spooky]] house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. [[So]] I was looking forward to this [[thriller]] where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good [[start]] for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. Someone, some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in [[monstrosity]] films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a [[appalling]] house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. [[Accordingly]] I was looking forward to this [[thrillers]] where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good [[launches]] for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. --------------------------------------------- Result 837 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was [[eager]] to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. Nothing [[left]]. The [[movie]] had big [[holes]] and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the [[journalist]] by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, [[killing]] the [[action]] and viewers patience, [[nothing]] happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a [[poor]] [[movie]], which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was [[enthusiastic]] to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. Nothing [[gauche]]. The [[filmmaking]] had big [[orifices]] and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the [[journalism]] by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, [[assassinate]] the [[measures]] and viewers patience, [[anything]] happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a [[poorest]] [[filmmaking]], which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. --------------------------------------------- Result 838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film had a great cast going for it: Christopher Lee, Dean Jagger, Macdonald Carey, Lew Ayres -- solid b-movie actors all. But this downer of a movie didn't use any of them to any sort of advantage, with none of their characters even meeting on screen (though Christopher Lee does get to play opposite himself in several scenes).

The motivations for the aliens in this movie seem to change at the drop of a hat. First, they just want to repair their ship and leave, then they turn on the main character by killing most of his friends and not releasing his wife after he gets them the crucial part they need. Then, out of nowhere, this "peaceful" race decides they have to destroy the planet because it causes too many "diseases" (though they do offer the main character and his wife a spot in their society).

Most of the film is spent watching the man and wife drive or walk or stand around or sit at desks doing nothing. You almost wish they had gotten taken out with the rest of the planet at the end, just in vengeance for boring us to death.

Unless you really like Chris Lee or seventies low-budget sci-fi, I'd give this one a miss. It falls into that narrow range of wasted celluloid between Star Odyssey and UFO: Target Earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Well, my goodness, am I [[disappointed]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[company]] will not ruin a film, who's [[original]] was a [[fantastic]] and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, [[subtlety]], where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is [[wonderfully]] [[photographed]]; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script [[puts]] it's fine actors to the test..asking them to [[deliver]] the kind of stilted [[dialogue]] that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual [[effects]] come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric [[mess]]...but things had [[gone]] [[terribly]] wrong long before that.

[[Everything]] in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this [[old]] haunted [[house]] monstrosity...only [[groans]]. Check out the [[original]] [[instead]].

Well, my goodness, am I [[disappoint]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[enterprise]] will not ruin a film, who's [[preliminary]] was a [[sumptuous]] and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, [[finesse]], where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is [[delightfully]] [[pictured]]; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script [[brings]] it's fine actors to the test..asking them to [[make]] the kind of stilted [[discussions]] that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual [[influences]] come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric [[chaos]]...but things had [[faded]] [[remarkably]] wrong long before that.

[[Entire]] in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this [[longtime]] haunted [[home]] monstrosity...only [[moans]]. Check out the [[preliminary]] [[however]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 840 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] SPOILERS

A [[buddy]] of mine [[said]] NEXT [[MOVIE]] was the [[best]] Cheech & Chong flick and went out of his [[way]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[BROTHERS]]. NEXT [[MOVIE]] has no plot, has no pacing, really has no anything of what [[defines]] a movie ... but it is [[funny]]. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Chong]] [[show]] some heart.

Well, in this [[little]] [[paragraph]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[movie]], [[nothing]] happens that [[would]] [[usually]] [[start]] a story. I will just [[say]] that Cheech 's [[cousin]] [[shows]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Chong]] [[made]] Cheech [[drink]] the [[pee]] twice? What about the [[rooster]]? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's first [[movie]] appearance? You [[would]] have to watch the [[movie]] yourself to [[enjoy]] it. I don't [[think]] NEXT MOVIE has strong [[enough]] balls to [[make]] it [[awesome]], but the [[movie]] has heart and hey, my [[buddy]] [[let]] me borrow it so it [[gets]] a 7. SPOILERS

A [[copulate]] of mine [[told]] NEXT [[CINEMATOGRAPHIC]] was the [[optimum]] Cheech & Chong flick and went out of his [[ways]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[SIBLING]]. NEXT [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] has no plot, has no pacing, really has no anything of what [[identifies]] a movie ... but it is [[comical]]. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Chung]] [[spectacle]] some heart.

Well, in this [[tiny]] [[paragraphs]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[flick]], [[anything]] happens that [[should]] [[normally]] [[cranking]] a story. I will just [[tell]] that Cheech 's [[cousins]] [[displaying]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Chung]] [[brought]] Cheech [[drinkin]] the [[peed]] twice? What about the [[dick]]? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's first [[film]] appearance? You [[ought]] have to watch the [[flick]] yourself to [[enjoys]] it. I don't [[believing]] NEXT MOVIE has strong [[adequate]] balls to [[deliver]] it [[noteworthy]], but the [[filmmaking]] has heart and hey, my [[boyfriend]] [[letting]] me borrow it so it [[get]] a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Uncompromising look at a suburb in 21st century Vienna mixing the stories of six groups of characters by former documentary maker U.Seidl is a provocative, minimalistic and intense piece of observation cinema.

After the world-wide spread of Big Brother reality shows, Hundstage takes modern voyeurism to an unsettling, profound level. Hard to like but unignorable piece of European art-cinema might seem cruel and seedy, yet manages to convey the nihilistic alienated feeling of modern society in a praiseworthy manner.

A must for lovers of world cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This self proclaimed "very talented artist" have directed easily the worst Spanish film of the 21st century. Lack of emotion, coherence, rhythm, skills, humor... it repeats the same situation over and over again. It shows no character development. It does not even show any violent and/or sexual content, and it does not add anything new to the psycho-killer sub genre. So lame it should be shown at film schools as an example of "what not to do" in a first movie.

BTW where the hell is the "talent"? there are scenes which have been shot almost identically; there are scenes which have two or more master shots and it is quite awful to see the action jumping from one master shot to another without a reason. The camera almost never moves, as if the "very talented artist" was afraid of showing his lack of visual skills. The actors playing the main roles act like amateurs, and the supporting cast is hardly believable. There are more holes than plot in the script (if ever there was one)...

A really disheartening movie, and a whatsoever talented director. --------------------------------------------- Result 843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found the film quite expressive , the way the main character was lost but at the same much more clear about certain things in life than people who mocked him ( his flatmate for example ) .

he was tortured and you loved to watch him being tortured ! it had this perverted side which was frightening but we were all happy to see him come out of the misery again .

it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we love to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him survive ...

. --------------------------------------------- Result 844 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie gets it right. As a former USAF Aviation Cadet, I can tell you this movie has it all. The tedium of the application process. The waiting for word. The joy of acceptance. The worry about making it through the course. The sorrow of watching one's buddies (perhaps the best of them)wash out. The anguish of paying the ultimate price - the death of fllow student airmen. The glory of graduation. Always the flying, the flying, the flying. Many are called but few are chosen. We did for pay what we would have eagerly paid to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How can the viewer rating for this movie be just 5.4?! Just the lovely young Alisan Porter should automatically start you at 6 when you decide your rating. James Belushi is good in this too, his first good serious role, I hadn't liked him in anything but About Last Night until this. He was pretty good in Gang Related with Tupac also. Kelly Lynch, you gotta love her. Well, I do. I'm only wondering what happened to Miss Porter?

i gave Curly Sue a 7 --------------------------------------------- Result 846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Joan Fontaine stars as the villain in this Victorian era film. She convincingly plays the married woman who has a lover on the side and also sets her sights on a wealthy man, Miles Rushworth who is played by Herbert Marshall. Mr. Marshall is quite good as Miles. Miss Fontaine acted her part to perfection--she was at the same time cunning, calculating, innocent looking, frightened and charming. It takes an actress with extraordinary talent to pull that off. Joan Fontaine looked absolutely gorgeous in the elegant costumes by Travis Banton. Also in the film is Joan's mother, Lillian Fontaine as Lady Flora. I highly recommend this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[really]] [[liked]] this Summerslam due to the [[look]] of the arena, the curtains and just the [[look]] [[overall]] was interesting to me for some [[reason]]. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the [[main]] event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a [[huge]] [[fat]] [[man]] [[vs]] a [[strong]] [[man]] but I'm [[glad]] [[times]] have [[changed]]. It was a [[terrible]] [[main]] [[event]] just like [[every]] match Luger is in is [[terrible]]. Other [[matches]] on the [[card]] were Razor Ramon [[vs]] Ted Dibiase, [[Steiner]] [[Brothers]] [[vs]] [[Heavenly]] [[Bodies]], [[Shawn]] Michaels [[vs]] [[Curt]] Hening, this was the [[event]] where Shawn named his [[big]] [[monster]] of a [[body]] guard Diesel, IRS [[vs]] 1-2-3 [[Kid]], Bret Hart first [[takes]] on Doink then [[takes]] on [[Jerry]] Lawler and [[stuff]] with the Harts and Lawler was [[always]] very interesting, then Ludvig Borga [[destroyed]] Marty Jannetty, [[Undertaker]] [[took]] on [[Giant]] [[Gonzalez]] in another [[terrible]] [[match]], The [[Smoking]] Gunns and Tatanka [[took]] on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna [[defended]] the [[world]] title against Lex Luger this [[match]] was [[boring]] and it has a [[terrible]] ending. [[However]] it [[deserves]] 8/10 I [[genuinely]] [[wished]] this Summerslam due to the [[peek]] of the arena, the curtains and just the [[glance]] [[entire]] was interesting to me for some [[justification]]. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the [[principal]] event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a [[monumental]] [[greasy]] [[males]] [[v]] a [[vigorous]] [[men]] but I'm [[satisfied]] [[dates]] have [[altered]]. It was a [[hideous]] [[leading]] [[events]] just like [[all]] match Luger is in is [[awful]]. Other [[couple]] on the [[postcard]] were Razor Ramon [[v]] Ted Dibiase, [[Stainer]] [[Plymouth]] [[v]] [[Godlike]] [[Institutions]], [[Sean]] Michaels [[versus]] [[Kurt]] Hening, this was the [[incidents]] where Shawn named his [[prodigious]] [[monsters]] of a [[organs]] guard Diesel, IRS [[v]] 1-2-3 [[Enfant]], Bret Hart first [[pick]] on Doink then [[pick]] on [[Jiri]] Lawler and [[thing]] with the Harts and Lawler was [[invariably]] very interesting, then Ludvig Borga [[obliterated]] Marty Jannetty, [[Mortuary]] [[taken]] on [[Monumental]] [[Melendez]] in another [[awful]] [[matches]], The [[Smokes]] Gunns and Tatanka [[picked]] on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna [[championed]] the [[monde]] title against Lex Luger this [[matchmaking]] was [[bored]] and it has a [[horrid]] ending. [[Instead]] it [[deserved]] 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Don't [[get]] me wrong, I'm a huge fan of many of Woody's [[movies]], [[obviously]] his late 70's masterpieces ([[Annie]] [[Hall]],[[Interiors]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's dramas ([[Hannah]], Crimes and Misdemeaners,Husbands and Wives) in fact I even [[liked]] some of his more [[recent]] [[efforts]] (Melinda, Anything Else, Small Time Crooks) but this was abysmal, I though it couldn't [[possibly]] be any worse than [[last]] [[years]] [[Match]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily [[plotted]] - [[basically]] a [[cross]] between [[Match]] Point, Manhattan [[Murder]] [[Mystery]] and Small Time [[Crooks]],with all the jokes taken out - Woody [[seems]] to be on the [[way]] out as well, slurring most of his lines and [[delivering]] 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I [[mean]] that with all due [[respect]]...' over and over until the blandness of it all [[becomes]] to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to [[work]] with him but they should at least read the [[script]] first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so [[much]] [[better]] than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 [[miles]] behind it.

It wouldn't be so [[tragic]] if we didn't have so [[many]] great Woody [[films]] to [[compare]] this to - but it is [[clear]] that his [[best]] days are behind him and [[judging]] by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he [[becomes]] an industry joke.

[[Embarrassingly]] bad Don't [[gets]] me wrong, I'm a huge fan of many of Woody's [[movie]], [[naturally]] his late 70's masterpieces ([[Annette]] [[Salle]],[[Indoor]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's dramas ([[Hanna]], Crimes and Misdemeaners,Husbands and Wives) in fact I even [[loved]] some of his more [[latest]] [[activities]] (Melinda, Anything Else, Small Time Crooks) but this was abysmal, I though it couldn't [[perhaps]] be any worse than [[latter]] [[ages]] [[Coupling]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily [[masterminded]] - [[mostly]] a [[traverse]] between [[Matches]] Point, Manhattan [[Homicide]] [[Riddle]] and Small Time [[Cheats]],with all the jokes taken out - Woody [[seem]] to be on the [[pathway]] out as well, slurring most of his lines and [[deliver]] 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I [[imply]] that with all due [[respecting]]...' over and over until the blandness of it all [[becoming]] to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to [[collaborated]] with him but they should at least read the [[screenplay]] first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so [[very]] [[optimum]] than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 [[kilometer]] behind it.

It wouldn't be so [[cataclysmic]] if we didn't have so [[various]] great Woody [[kino]] to [[comparative]] this to - but it is [[clara]] that his [[optimum]] days are behind him and [[verdict]] by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he [[becoming]] an industry joke.

[[Crudely]] bad --------------------------------------------- Result 849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] just below the [[surface]] [[lies]] what? a simply [[awful]] [[movie]] is what.

as other viewers have justifiably commented, the [[storm]] [[sequences]] are just [[plain]] ridiculous. chopping already sodden firewood in the pouring [[rain]]? now that's [[smart]]. menace? foreboding? sexual [[tension]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & [[overly]] contrived.

i want to [[say]] thank [[god]] for mia sara's [[shower]] scene but in [[retrospect]] i think the producers of the [[film]], having seen the completed [[mess]] [[realised]] that they had to put [[something]] in to make it half [[way]] worthwhile at all. so it just [[becomes]] [[yet]] another [[contrivance]]. do yourself a [[favour]] and give this a [[miss]]. just below the [[surfaces]] [[lurks]] what? a simply [[horrific]] [[filmmaking]] is what.

as other viewers have justifiably commented, the [[rainstorm]] [[sequencing]] are just [[lowlands]] ridiculous. chopping already sodden firewood in the pouring [[rainstorm]]? now that's [[ingenious]]. menace? foreboding? sexual [[voltage]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & [[disproportionately]] contrived.

i want to [[tell]] thank [[lord]] for mia sara's [[bathroom]] scene but in [[retrospective]] i think the producers of the [[filmmaking]], having seen the completed [[disarray]] [[realized]] that they had to put [[somethings]] in to make it half [[ways]] worthwhile at all. so it just [[becoming]] [[however]] another [[invention]]. do yourself a [[favouring]] and give this a [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is a lyrical and romantic memoir told through the eyes an eleven year old boy living in a rural Cuban town the year of the Castro revolution. It is an obviously genuine worthy labor of love.

The names CUBA LIBRE and CUBAN BLOOD are merely attempts to wrongly market this as an action film. DREAMING OF JULIA makes much more sense. It has more in common with European cinema than with RAMBO and the revolution is merely an inconvenience to people's daily lives and pursuits. That fact alone makes the film more honest than most works dealing with this time period in Cuban history.

The excessive use of the voice-over narrator does undermine the story but the film makes up for it with unqualified clips from Hollywood films that say so much more visually than the narrator could.

The comparisons to CINEMA PARADISO and are fair game as the film does wax melancholy about movies, but there is an underlying pain at the loss of a lifestyle that surpasses lost love.

The revolution, like the film JULIE, never seems to have an ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie is not good.the first one almost sucked,but had that unreal ending to make it worth watching.this one has nothing.there's zero scare,zero tension or suspense.this isn't really a horror movie.most of the kills don't show anything.there's no gore to speak of.this could almost be a TV,except for a bit of nudity and a bit of violence.the acting is not very good,either.and don't get me started on the dialogue.as for the surprise ending,surprise,there isn't one.i suppose it could have been worse,although i don't see how.but then again,it is less than 80 minutes long,so i guess that's a good thing.although it felt a lot longer. apparently this is the cut version of the film.i found it for a very cheap price,but it still not worth it.if you want the uncut more graphic version,check out the Anchor Bay edition.anyway,this version of Sleepaway Camp II:Unhappy Campers gets a big fat 1/10 from me. p.s.if you watch this movie,you will probably be a bored and unhappy camper.if you are a real fan,you might want to pick up Anchor Bay's Sleepaway Camp(with survival kit) three disc collection containing the first three movies uncut and with special features --------------------------------------------- Result 852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Airwolf The [[Movie]], A [[variation]] on the original 2 part [[pilot]], Yet the [[movie]] [[although]] [[shorter]], does contain extra footage [[Unseen]] in the 2 [[hour]] pilot The pilot is [[much]] more of a pilot than the movie [[Where]] as a [[pilot]] [[movie]] is [[normally]] the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and cuts there.

Worth a [[look]], even if you have the season 1 [[DVD]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust [[online]] shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was [[truly]] 1 of the 80's most under rated [[shows]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress [[pictures]] are over at http://Airwolf.[[org]] [[Also]] with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's [[finally]] here to [[stay]] :) Airwolf The [[Kino]], A [[variant]] on the original 2 part [[experimental]], Yet the [[cinematography]] [[despite]] [[shortest]], does contain extra footage [[Inconspicuous]] in the 2 [[hours]] pilot The pilot is [[very]] more of a pilot than the movie [[Hence]] as a [[piloting]] [[cinematographic]] is [[fluently]] the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and cuts there.

Worth a [[glance]], even if you have the season 1 [[DVDS]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust [[onscreen]] shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was [[truthfully]] 1 of the 80's most under rated [[display]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress [[photographing]] are over at http://Airwolf.[[organizational]] [[Moreover]] with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's [[eventually]] here to [[sojourn]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Haunted [[Boat]] [[sells]] itself as 'The Fog' meets '[[Open]] Water'. In [[many]] ways this is [[accurate]]. There are scares and [[weird]] looking people to [[keep]] you interested.

However the acting [[ability]] is poor at [[best]]. [[Showing]] [[clear]] [[signs]] that this is [[merely]] a bunch of [[friends]] [[making]] a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the best of their [[ability]]. When you [[accept]] the low [[budget]] makes it very difficult for special effects, with the [[ghosts]] [[looking]] [[pretty]] much like [[men]] with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and [[strange]]. But it [[suffers]] for [[using]] too [[many]] [[twists]] and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you [[bored]] and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. [[Ignoring]] the [[irrelevant]] [[twisting]] every 5 [[seconds]] near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the [[climax]].

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an [[evening]] in [[front]] of the T.V. Haunted [[Ship]] [[sell]] itself as 'The Fog' meets '[[Openings]] Water'. In [[myriad]] ways this is [[meticulous]]. There are scares and [[strange]] looking people to [[keeping]] you interested.

However the acting [[capacity]] is poor at [[optimum]]. [[Proving]] [[lucid]] [[signalling]] that this is [[alone]] a bunch of [[freund]] [[doing]] a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the best of their [[competency]]. When you [[admit]] the low [[budgets]] makes it very difficult for special effects, with the [[phantoms]] [[researching]] [[quite]] much like [[man]] with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and [[peculiar]]. But it [[undergoes]] for [[utilizing]] too [[myriad]] [[spins]] and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you [[drilled]] and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. [[Ignores]] the [[inconsequential]] [[twist]] every 5 [[secs]] near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the [[pinnacle]].

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an [[tonight]] in [[newsweek]] of the T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Being]] a fan of [[cheesy]] [[horror]] [[movies]], I [[saw]] this in my video [[shop]] and [[thought]] I would give it a [[try]]. Now that I've seen it I [[wish]] it [[upon]] no [[living]] [[soul]] on the [[planet]]. I get my movie [[rentals]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my [[moneys]] worth. I've [[seen]] some bad cheesy horror movies in my [[time]], hell I'm a [[fan]] of them, but this was just an [[insult]]. [[Ongoing]] a fan of [[dorky]] [[terror]] [[film]], I [[seen]] this in my video [[stores]] and [[thinking]] I would give it a [[seek]]. Now that I've seen it I [[desire]] it [[after]] no [[inhabit]] [[alma]] on the [[globe]]. I get my movie [[tenancy]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my [[monies]] worth. I've [[watched]] some bad cheesy horror movies in my [[moment]], hell I'm a [[groupie]] of them, but this was just an [[offend]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a [[definitely]] [[incorrect]] [[assumption]]. This is an [[adaptation]] of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a [[certainly]] [[misguided]] [[assumptions]]. This is an [[tailoring]] of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is the best sci-fi that I have seen in my 29 years of watching sci-fi. I also believe that Dark Angel will become a cult favorite. The action is great but Jessica Alba is the best and most gorgeous star on TV today. --------------------------------------------- Result 857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When you compare what Brian De Palma was doing in the 80's to what passes for entertainment today, his films keep looking better and better. "Dressed To Kill, "Blow Out", "Body Double", "Scarface" and "Carlito's Way" are all superb works of a cinematic craftsman at the peak of his powers. The guy had a long run of better than average films. This is pure Hitchcock with an 80's dash of lurid perversion, an affectionately told tale of lust and murder with plenty of twists, huge helpings of style, a stunning Pino Donaggio score, and a trashy, giallo-inspired plot. De Palma's love of complex camera-work and luscious, blood-smudged visuals helps overcome the logical holes while the terrific performances of Dennis Franz, Keith Gordon (a good director in his own right), Nancy Allen (De Palma's wife at the time) and Michael Caine make every scene special. Let the virtuoso take you on a surreal, scary, erotically charged odyssey and you'll enjoy every frame of "Dressed To Kill". --------------------------------------------- Result 858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[saw]] this in the [[theater]] when it [[came]] out, and just [[yesterday]] I saw it again on [[cable]]. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the [[feeling]] of just how [[revolting]] this film is. The [[whole]] bunch of [[characters]] are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to [[celebrate]] people "finding themselves". The [[nice]] [[guys]] finish last, the jerky [[guys]] make out great, the jerkiest [[guys]] do best. The [[girls]] are all boy toy pushovers. [[Only]] one [[character]] ("Wendy") is seen doing [[anything]] remotely [[useful]] to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved [[virginity]] in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're [[supposed]] to think is [[romantic]]. What this really is is Hollywood's [[concept]] of [[young]] America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. I [[witnessed]] this in the [[theatres]] when it [[became]] out, and just [[today]] I saw it again on [[wire]]. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the [[sentiment]] of just how [[disgusting]] this film is. The [[total]] bunch of [[nature]] are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to [[celebrating]] people "finding themselves". The [[delightful]] [[buddies]] finish last, the jerky [[boy]] make out great, the jerkiest [[boys]] do best. The [[daughter]] are all boy toy pushovers. [[Exclusively]] one [[traits]] ("Wendy") is seen doing [[somethings]] remotely [[handy]] to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved [[eternity]] in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're [[presumed]] to think is [[sentimental]]. What this really is is Hollywood's [[conceptions]] of [[youthful]] America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. --------------------------------------------- Result 859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Her]] [[Deadly]] [[Rival]] (1995): Starring [[Harry]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Roma]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Anderson]], [[William]] Blair, Sean [[Bridges]], [[Robin]] Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa [[Suzanne]] McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, [[Jeff]] Sumerel, [[Daria]] Sanford....Director James [[Hayman]], Screenplay [[Dan]] Vining.

[[Actor]] [[Harry]] Hamlin (of LA [[Law]] [[fame]], Clash of The Titans and other [[films]]) [[seems]] [[perfectly]] cast in this "[[Lifetime]]" [[type]] film directed by James Hayman and [[released]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna [[would]] [[later]] [[work]] on a [[film]] about [[sex]] [[addiction]]. "Her [[Deadly]] [[Rival]]" is, at first glance, [[similar]] to the better known Hollywood box-office [[hit]] "[[Fatal]] [[Attraction]]". In "[[Rival]]", [[happily]] [[married]] couple Jim and [[Kris]] Lanford [[move]] into a [[new]] [[home]] in the [[typically]] [[beautiful]] suburbs. They have the seemingly [[perfect]] marriage- they are [[deeply]] in love, [[despite]] a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[admirer]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her [[identity]] is never [[revealed]], [[despite]] an [[attempt]] by Jim and [[even]] [[investigators]] to [[discover]] who she is. She [[constantly]] harasses Jim through [[phone]] [[calls]] and letters. His marriage [[nearly]] flounders as his [[wife]] [[begins]] to [[think]] he's having an [[affair]] and trying to [[cover]] it up. [[While]] [[Harry]] Hamlin, [[Annie]] Potts and the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Roma]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Anderson]], [[William]] Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[drama]] and has its good moments. There is a twist at the [[end]]. Spoiler [[Alert]]. [[All]] I have to say is "her [[deadly]] rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[marriage]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Especially]] [[moving]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. [[His]] [[Lethal]] [[Compete]] (1995): Starring [[Hari]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Rom]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Andersson]], [[Guillaume]] Blair, Sean [[Pont]], [[Robyn]] Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa [[Susan]] McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, [[Geoff]] Sumerel, [[Darya]] Sanford....Director James [[Hyman]], Screenplay [[Dana]] Vining.

[[Protagonist]] [[Hare]] Hamlin (of LA [[Lois]] [[reputation]], Clash of The Titans and other [[film]]) [[appears]] [[entirely]] cast in this "[[Lifespan]]" [[typing]] film directed by James Hayman and [[liberated]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna [[should]] [[then]] [[working]] on a [[flick]] about [[sexuality]] [[dependence]]. "Her [[Lethal]] [[Compete]]" is, at first glance, [[identical]] to the better known Hollywood box-office [[slapped]] "[[Murderous]] [[Lure]]". In "[[Competitors]]", [[fortunately]] [[wedding]] couple Jim and [[Chris]] Lanford [[budge]] into a [[newer]] [[dwellings]] in the [[normally]] [[awesome]] suburbs. They have the seemingly [[flawless]] marriage- they are [[seriously]] in love, [[albeit]] a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[fan]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her [[identities]] is never [[demonstrated]], [[while]] an [[endeavour]] by Jim and [[yet]] [[researchers]] to [[detecting]] who she is. She [[systematically]] harasses Jim through [[phones]] [[asks]] and letters. His marriage [[roughly]] flounders as his [[woman]] [[starts]] to [[ideas]] he's having an [[fling]] and trying to [[covering]] it up. [[Although]] [[Hari]] Hamlin, [[Annette]] Potts and the [[remaining]] of the [[casting]] - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Romani]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Andersson]], [[Williams]] Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[tragedy]] and has its good moments. There is a twist at the [[terminate]]. Spoiler [[Warnings]]. [[Everything]] I have to say is "her [[fatal]] rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[wedlock]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Mostly]] [[shifting]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll be honest. The only reason I watched this one on TV is that it's in the IMDb bottom 100. And right now, I'm wondering if the hour and a half of my life really was worth another 'check' on that same list.

Van Damme is Luc Deveraux, who finds himself on a huge fight with the Universal Soldiers after the main computer pulled a 'HAL' to defend itself. And yes, after all the obligate explosions, shoot-outs and chases he is the last one standing. Combined with terrible acting and a bit of a boring set-up it makes sure it's place in the infamous list is just.

Only for the idiots like me who want to watch that full list. 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 861 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] "A Bug's [[Life]]" is like a favorite candy [[bar]] -- it's chock-full of [[great]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[character]] has a nice "[[arc]]" (a [[growth]] or [[change]]). By [[comparison]], the only characters in "[[Toy]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learns]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who [[overcomes]] his [[resentment]] of [[Buzz]]. There are [[tons]] of [[laughs]] and [[cute]] [[moments]] in "A Bug's Life". [[All]] of the actors turn in [[great]] voice [[work]], and the [[animation]], both the motion and [[detail]], is [[superb]].

This serious movie buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie [[certainly]] [[deserves]] the "10" I [[gave]] it. "A Bug's [[Living]]" is like a favorite candy [[solicitors]] -- it's chock-full of [[wondrous]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[nature]] has a nice "[[archangel]]" (a [[grows]] or [[alter]]). By [[comparative]], the only characters in "[[Toys]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learn]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who [[expires]] his [[disgust]] of [[Humming]]. There are [[shitloads]] of [[giggling]] and [[lovable]] [[times]] in "A Bug's Life". [[Totality]] of the actors turn in [[wondrous]] voice [[jobs]], and the [[animate]], both the motion and [[clarification]], is [[wondrous]].

This serious movie buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie [[probably]] [[deserved]] the "10" I [[supplied]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Starfucker (which reads Starstruck on my box) was the most amazing movie I have ever seen. I thought that it was one of the best movies I have ever seen. So why not a 10? Nothing is perfect. Jamie Kennedy proves why he is one of my favorite actors in this very interesting look at a darker side of Hollywood. I have forced a few others to watch the movie and they all agreed that it was an outstanding flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I have [[heard]] a [[lot]] about this [[film]], with people writing me telling me I should [[see]] it, as I am a [[fan]] of [[extremely]] bloody, gory [[movies]]. I [[got]] my hands on it [[almost]] right away, but one thing or another [[always]] kept me from watching it- until now. I [[would]] have been better off not remembering I [[even]] had it.

This [[movie]] was [[atrocious]]. The worst thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and [[utterly]] [[disappointed]].

The film [[begins]] [[good]] enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The [[first]] scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any [[used]] in this [[film]]!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets [[worse]] and [[worse]]. I [[found]] myself pointing out mistake after [[mistake]]. There's just too much. [[Add]] that to the fact that what [[could]] have and should have been a [[great]] serial-killer [[movie]] turns into some demonic/[[supernatural]]/monster [[movie]] at the [[end]]...no [[thank]] you! It should have been kept as a creepy [[guy]] butchering people in the subway- OK, with a [[conspiracy]] theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? [[Plausible]], [[doable]]...and a lot better I [[think]] than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. I have [[hear]] a [[lots]] about this [[flick]], with people writing me telling me I should [[seeing]] it, as I am a [[breather]] of [[immeasurably]] bloody, gory [[filmmaking]]. I [[ai]] my hands on it [[roughly]] right away, but one thing or another [[continuously]] kept me from watching it- until now. I [[could]] have been better off not remembering I [[yet]] had it.

This [[filmmaking]] was [[abhorrent]]. The worst thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and [[completely]] [[disappointing]].

The film [[initiating]] [[alright]] enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The [[outset]] scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any [[employs]] in this [[filmmaking]]!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets [[worst]] and [[worst]]. I [[find]] myself pointing out mistake after [[blunder]]. There's just too much. [[Adds]] that to the fact that what [[did]] have and should have been a [[whopping]] serial-killer [[filmmaking]] turns into some demonic/[[uncanny]]/monster [[movies]] at the [[terminate]]...no [[thanks]] you! It should have been kept as a creepy [[dawg]] butchering people in the subway- OK, with a [[complicity]] theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? [[Credible]], [[workable]]...and a lot better I [[thinking]] than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. --------------------------------------------- Result 864 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always been a huge James Bond fanatic! I have seen almost all of the films except for Die Another Day, and The World Is Not Enough. The graphic's for Everything Or Nothing are breathtaking! The voice talents......... WOW! I LOVE PIERCE BROSNAN! He is finally Bond in a video game! HE IS BOND! I enjoyed the past Bond games: Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, Agent Under Fire, and Nightfire. This one is definitely the best! Finally, Mr. Brosnan, (may I call him Mr. Brosnan as a sign of respect? Yes I can!) He was phenomenally exciting to hear in a video game....... AT LONG LAST! DUH! I've seen him perform with Robin Williams, and let me tell you, they make a great team. Pierce Brosnan is funny, wickedly handsome ( I mean to say wickedly in a good way,) and just one of those actor's who you would want to walk up to and wrap your arms around and hug, saying: "Pierce Brosnan, thank you for being James Bond," "If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't know who James Bond is." He's a great actor! I am a huge fan of Willem Dafoe even though I've seen him in a couple of movies. His role as Nikolai Diavalo was brilliant. (Did I spell the character's name right?) LOL!!!! He does a great job with an accent. Sometimes I can't even hear an accent. I have seen Willem, I mean Mr. Dafoe, perform in two movies: Finding Nemo, and Spider-Man with my favorite actress: KIRSTEN DUNST! SHE ROCKS! Anyway, He never ceases to amaze. And Richard Kiel, wow, he's definitely got the part of Jaw's nailed. I've seen him in the movie's and he's awesome! As a matter of fact, my Grandparent's have met Mr. Kiel, and I was jealous when they told me. But, Kirsten Dunst is at the top of my list of Celebritie's that I want to meet. John Cleese was breathtaking. I have never seen a better person play as the wisecracking, and gadget creating Q! Mr. Cleese was hilarious! I've seen him work with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. He's awesome! John Cleese's most recent project is Shrek 2 starring Mike Myer's, Cameron Diaz, Julie Andrew's and Eddie Murphy. ( Shrek 2 is now in theatre's!) GOOD LUCK 007! Oh, yeah, and as Q alway's says: "Grow up 007!" --------------------------------------------- Result 865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Are you kidding me?! A show highlighting someone who opens cans and envelopes for a meal? How talented do you have to be to do this? She MAY be able to cook but it is NOT portrayed in this half-hour stomach churning painful production. I know she has a Martha-Stewart-esquire empire. So does Warren Buffett but I don't see him with fake knockers opening cans of cream corn and Alpo.

She has a nephew named...Brycer. Brycer? Stop talking about anyone a name that stupid.

More time is spent on "table-scapes" than actual cooking. Who has that kind of time?! Silicon should be on your spatula, not on my TV. This show should be on Cartoon Network, NOT Food Network. --------------------------------------------- Result 866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] 9/10- 30 minutes of [[pure]] [[holiday]] [[terror]]. [[Okay]], so it's not that [[scary]]. But it sure is [[fun]].

The [[Crypt]] [[Keeper]] ([[John]] Kassir) [[tales]] a [[tale]] of holiday [[FEAR]], [[giving]] us all [[Christmas]] [[Goose]]... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should [[really]] be [[careful]] what you [[AXE]] Santa for. [[Have]] a [[Scary]] [[Christmas]] and a Happy [[New]] [[Fear]]. [[Okay]] I'll stop.

[[Okay]], so in the [[story]], a [[greedy]] wife ([[Best]] [[screamer]] in the [[world]], [[Mary]] [[Ellen]] Trainor) [[kills]] her husband ([[Marshall]] Bell, the [[coach]] who [[gets]] towel [[whipped]] to [[death]] in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her [[plan]] is [[ruined]] when a [[crazy]] [[killer]] [[dressed]] in a Santa suit (Larry "[[Dr]]. Giggles" [[Drake]]) [[comes]] her [[way]].

If you [[look]] it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third [[viewing]]). But if you haven't seen it, I [[suggest]] you do. 9/10- 30 minutes of [[pur]] [[vacations]] [[horror]]. [[Alrighty]], so it's not that [[terrible]]. But it sure is [[hilarious]].

The [[Vault]] [[Keepers]] ([[Johannes]] Kassir) [[stories]] a [[conte]] of holiday [[AFFRAID]], [[confer]] us all [[Claus]] [[Geese]]... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should [[truthfully]] be [[conscientious]] what you [[AX]] Santa for. [[Ha]] a [[Awful]] [[Claus]] and a Happy [[Novo]] [[Affraid]]. [[Verywell]] I'll stop.

[[Verywell]], so in the [[conte]], a [[miserly]] wife ([[Better]] [[loudmouth]] in the [[monde]], [[Maryam]] [[Eileen]] Trainor) [[mata]] her husband ([[Marshal]] Bell, the [[coaching]] who [[attains]] towel [[horsewhipped]] to [[deaths]] in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her [[plans]] is [[destroyed]] when a [[lunatic]] [[murderer]] [[clothed]] in a Santa suit (Larry "[[Doktor]]. Giggles" [[Gregg]]) [[arrives]] her [[path]].

If you [[gaze]] it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third [[view]]). But if you haven't seen it, I [[insinuate]] you do. --------------------------------------------- Result 867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] When I was in school I made a [[film]] about a [[couple]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I [[realized]] [[halfway]] through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian [[cinema]]: sodden lyricism [[married]] to [[vacant]], metaphor-burdened stabs at [[social]] [[commentary]]. But whatever my own film's [[failings]] I feel [[much]] better after seeing this...this...[[thing]]. [[For]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[minutes]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[every]] [[pointless]] [[bit]] of [[business]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[relentless]] minutes. The male lead is just incredible, a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[given]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical [[insights]] culled from the U of T pub, and he is [[given]] lots and [[lots]] of space to make us [[hate]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[act]] would make even [[less]] [[sense]], as a [[couple]] snarky dudes show up to [[provide]] distant and [[thoroughly]] unhelpful echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any [[easier]] to watch the caged creep whimper "please" in closeup until the magazine runs out. I [[take]] back what I said about AUTUMN BORN, which at least had the [[courage]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematic]] [[crater]] is and will [[remain]] the very [[worst]] Canadian [[movie]] of all time. At [[least]], I really really hope so. When I was in school I made a [[filmmaking]] about a [[couples]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I [[performed]] [[midway]] through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian [[cinemas]]: sodden lyricism [[wedding]] to [[vacancy]], metaphor-burdened stabs at [[societal]] [[comments]]. But whatever my own film's [[vulnerabilities]] I feel [[very]] better after seeing this...this...[[stuff]]. [[In]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[mins]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[any]] [[dispensable]] [[bitten]] of [[firms]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[unforgiving]] minutes. The male lead is just incredible, a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[conferred]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical [[ideas]] culled from the U of T pub, and he is [[awarded]] lots and [[batch]] of space to make us [[hatred]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[law]] would make even [[fewest]] [[feeling]], as a [[couples]] snarky dudes show up to [[furnish]] distant and [[meticulously]] unhelpful echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any [[easy]] to watch the caged creep whimper "please" in closeup until the magazine runs out. I [[taking]] back what I said about AUTUMN BORN, which at least had the [[valor]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematographic]] [[craters]] is and will [[stay]] the very [[pire]] Canadian [[cinematographic]] of all time. At [[lowest]], I really really hope so. --------------------------------------------- Result 868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[God]], I was [[bored]] out of my head as I [[watched]] this pilot. I had been expecting a lot from it, as I'm a [[huge]] [[fan]] of James Cameron (and not just [[since]] "Titanic", I [[might]] add), and his [[name]] in the [[credits]] I [[thought]] would be a [[guarantee]] of quality ([[Then]] again, he [[also]] [[wrote]] the leaden [[Strange]] Days..). But the thing [[failed]] [[miserably]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of [[duration]]. [[In]] all that time, it barely went beyond its two line synopsis, and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of [[coherent]] plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! [[Deus]], I was [[boring]] out of my head as I [[seen]] this pilot. I had been expecting a lot from it, as I'm a [[whopping]] [[breather]] of James Cameron (and not just [[because]] "Titanic", I [[probability]] add), and his [[denomination]] in the [[appropriations]] I [[figured]] would be a [[collateral]] of quality ([[Thus]] again, he [[similarly]] [[texted]] the leaden [[Odd]] Days..). But the thing [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of [[length]]. [[For]] all that time, it barely went beyond its two line synopsis, and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of [[cohesion]] plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! --------------------------------------------- Result 869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Do you [[guys]] wanna know a [[secret]]?. This [[movie]] [[sucks]]. Well [[actually]] i don't know because if you [[allow]] yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original [[movies]], then [[perhaps]] you may find this movie astounding (this [[movie]] being a plagiarised [[copy]] of i [[know]] what you did [[last]] summer). The [[first]] 30 minutes of the movie is [[based]] on a typical story [[setting]]; a bunch of so-called cool [[teenagers]] relishing their vacation in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the [[juveniles]] they are. The only [[insight]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a [[pretentious]] sense of [[adolescent]] decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near [[unprecedented]] [[killings]]. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a [[mystery]] to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did [[however]] amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the [[director]] and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. Do you [[dudes]] wanna know a [[disguised]]?. This [[filmmaking]] [[stinks]]. Well [[genuinely]] i don't know because if you [[permit]] yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original [[filmmaking]], then [[maybe]] you may find this movie astounding (this [[kino]] being a plagiarised [[photocopy]] of i [[savoir]] what you did [[final]] summer). The [[fiirst]] 30 minutes of the movie is [[groundwork]] on a typical story [[configured]]; a bunch of so-called cool [[adolescence]] relishing their vacation in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the [[miners]] they are. The only [[eyesight]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a [[presumptuous]] sense of [[schoolgirl]] decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near [[unequaled]] [[murder]]. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a [[conundrum]] to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did [[still]] amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the [[headmaster]] and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. --------------------------------------------- Result 870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's one line that makes it worth to [[rent]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[else]]: this is just a very [[bad]] horror flick. The female [[characters]] are typical horror movies [[females]]. They are [[wooden]], annoying and dumb. You are [[glad]] when they are [[killed]] off. Long live the strong female [[character]] in a horror [[movie]]!! There's one line that makes it worth to [[rental]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[elsewhere]]: this is just a very [[unfavourable]] horror flick. The female [[personage]] are typical horror movies [[girls]]. They are [[lumber]], annoying and dumb. You are [[happier]] when they are [[assassinating]] off. Long live the strong female [[trait]] in a horror [[filmmaking]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] The coming attractions to "The [[Order]]" make it seem like a decent horror [[mystery]]/thriller, but what we [[get]] is a plot that has potential to be [[excellent]] all [[thrown]] together to [[form]] a [[pile]] of garbage.

First off the [[whole]] [[movie]] consists of [[terrible]] dialogue and [[god]] [[awful]] special affects. The acting was also nothing to be [[proud]] of, but Keath Ledger (I [[think]] I [[spelled]] that right.) saved the [[movie]] in this [[category]].

[[For]] heaven's sake: DON'T [[SEE]] THIS [[MOVIE]]! The coming attractions to "The [[Edict]]" make it seem like a decent horror [[enigma]]/thriller, but what we [[gets]] is a plot that has potential to be [[resplendent]] all [[tossed]] together to [[forms]] a [[piles]] of garbage.

First off the [[overall]] [[movies]] consists of [[abysmal]] dialogue and [[christ]] [[frightful]] special affects. The acting was also nothing to be [[prideful]] of, but Keath Ledger (I [[believing]] I [[spelt]] that right.) saved the [[flick]] in this [[class]].

[[At]] heaven's sake: DON'T [[BEHOLD]] THIS [[FILMMAKING]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 872 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Guy Thing" may not be a classic, but it sure is a good, funny comedy. The plot focuses on Paul (Jason Lee), who wakes up the morning after his bachelor party with no memory and Becky (Julia Stiles) lying naked in his bed. Before he can figure out what happened, he rushes Becky out of his apartment because his fiance Karen (Selma Blair) is coming. After that, as you could imagine, chaos ensues.

Almost every single scene in "A Guy Thing" delivers loud laughs. The funniest moments come from when Paul imagines what could happen if he tells Karen. Selma Blair is a truly talented comedian, and the worst thing about this film is that she goes underused. Although, she turns out to be more funny than Stiles' character, who actually isn't that interesting. Of course, not every comedy is perfect.

As I said, "A Guy Thing" is no classic, but it's not bad either, 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Despite]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) [[important]] and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[mercifully]] [[quickly]]. The [[script]] makes [[little]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[trite]], and [[John]] Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of [[music]]. His performance is one-note and [[irritating]].

The only [[positive]] thing to be said is that Harvey Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. [[While]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) [[notable]] and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[gaily]] [[punctually]]. The [[scripts]] makes [[scant]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[commonplace]], and [[Jon]] Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of [[musica]]. His performance is one-note and [[exasperating]].

The only [[propitious]] thing to be said is that Harvey Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. --------------------------------------------- Result 874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[love]] this one. It's a stream of [[consciousness]] 70's Sci-fi [[spectacular]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[amour]] this one. It's a stream of [[awareness]] 70's Sci-fi [[wondrous]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! --------------------------------------------- Result 875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Murphy Delirious is undoubtedly the funniest thing I have ever seen in my life. When I saw it for the first time about 2 years ago I was in stitches for weeks after it. To date I have seen it a further 17 times and i still laugh my ass off each time. For those who dont know Eddie Murphy was a brilliant stand up comedian before he was a Hollywood superstar. There is not one dull spot in this piece of genius unlike Eddie Murphy Raw which was released in 1987 which goes flat during the middle. If you are not the sort of person who can't stand swearing then I wouldn't advise you to see it as you will probably hear swearing of some form every 5-10 seconds. I gave this a 10 out of 10 because it displays the greatest comic genius of them all at his best. --------------------------------------------- Result 876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a [[puzzle]]: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses seriously, with sardonic intent or operates in complete [[oblivion]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[brilliant]] visuals in the world (and this has some [[outstanding]] ones) cannot hide a [[negligence]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to [[deliver]] [[inane]] [[dialogue]], embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in [[preponderance]] and disbelief has to be truly [[suspended]]. Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a [[enigma]]: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses seriously, with sardonic intent or operates in complete [[wayside]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[sumptuous]] visuals in the world (and this has some [[terrific]] ones) cannot hide a [[neglect]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to [[make]] [[negligible]] [[dialog]], embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in [[dominance]] and disbelief has to be truly [[interrupted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 877 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've never been a [[huge]] [[fan]] of Mormon films. [[Being]] a Mormon, I've always [[felt]] that the [[humor]] was too [[exclusive]] to the LDS community and [[made]] us seem like a bunch of [[obsessive]] [[wackos]]. I was [[hoping]] this would be the breath of fresh [[air]], the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list [[talent]] like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, [[Andrew]] Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this [[would]] have to be at [[least]] a [[little]] [[funny]]. And besides, church basketball is [[ripe]] with [[potential]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I [[must]] [[say]], [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[movie]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. [[Every]] [[joke]] [[fell]] flat, and [[every]] [[opportunity]] for a [[genuinely]] funny gag went [[ignored]]. The [[dialogue]] was bland, and the [[film]] had some of the [[worst]] [[character]] [[development]] I have ever [[seen]]. [[Every]] [[single]] [[character]] but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's [[hard]] to believe that after nine re-writes the [[film]] was still as mind-numbingly [[stale]] as the train [[wreck]] I witnessed. I can't put into words the [[rage]] I [[felt]] [[sitting]] through this. My [[friends]] and I were extras in the [[final]] game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. [[Kurt]] [[Hale]], the director, was there, and I [[must]] [[say]], I [[avoided]] all contact with him after the [[show]]. He [[waited]] at the door, [[seemingly]] ready for [[feedback]]. I couldn't bring myself to [[tell]] him that his [[film]] not only [[ripped]] away a [[good]] [[hour]] and a half of my life, but it left a [[nasty]], painful scar that I will never [[forget]].

Here are a few [[specific]] [[problems]] I had: There was a [[minor]] [[love]] [[story]] subplot between the [[janitor]] and the chubby piano player, but these two [[characters]] came out of [[nowhere]], and were [[impossible]] to [[care]] about, so my [[friends]] and I were [[left]] [[constantly]] [[wondering]] why we were [[supposed]] to [[care]] about these two lame, uninteresting [[characters]]. There were many subplots that [[popped]] up [[every]] now and then, each promising the [[audience]] the [[chance]] for [[laughs]], but each one [[came]] and went in a puff of [[smoke]], [[ending]] before you could even [[start]] caring. This was [[pretty]] much how the [[whole]] [[movie]] felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the [[first]] REAL funny [[Mormon]] movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through I've never been a [[mammoth]] [[groupie]] of Mormon films. [[Ongoing]] a Mormon, I've always [[deemed]] that the [[humour]] was too [[sole]] to the LDS community and [[introduced]] us seem like a bunch of [[obsessed]] [[loonies]]. I was [[expecting]] this would be the breath of fresh [[aeronautics]], the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list [[talents]] like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, [[Andrews]] Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this [[should]] have to be at [[lowest]] a [[small]] [[hilarious]]. And besides, church basketball is [[ripen]] with [[prospective]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I [[needs]] [[says]], [[around]] the [[overall]] [[film]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. [[Any]] [[prank]] [[fallen]] flat, and [[all]] [[opportunities]] for a [[truthfully]] funny gag went [[neglected]]. The [[discussions]] was bland, and the [[filmmaking]] had some of the [[meanest]] [[characteristics]] [[developments]] I have ever [[watched]]. [[Everything]] [[exclusive]] [[nature]] but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's [[harsh]] to believe that after nine re-writes the [[filmmaking]] was still as mind-numbingly [[rancid]] as the train [[ruining]] I witnessed. I can't put into words the [[ire]] I [[believed]] [[seated]] through this. My [[friendships]] and I were extras in the [[latter]] game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. [[Curt]] [[Hill]], the director, was there, and I [[owe]] [[told]], I [[dodged]] all contact with him after the [[shows]]. He [[anticipated]] at the door, [[reportedly]] ready for [[comments]]. I couldn't bring myself to [[say]] him that his [[films]] not only [[tore]] away a [[alright]] [[hora]] and a half of my life, but it left a [[dirty]], painful scar that I will never [[forgets]].

Here are a few [[especial]] [[disorders]] I had: There was a [[smaller]] [[amore]] [[history]] subplot between the [[doorman]] and the chubby piano player, but these two [[character]] came out of [[everywhere]], and were [[unable]] to [[healthcare]] about, so my [[friend]] and I were [[exited]] [[always]] [[asks]] why we were [[alleged]] to [[healthcare]] about these two lame, uninteresting [[character]]. There were many subplots that [[tore]] up [[any]] now and then, each promising the [[audiences]] the [[opportunities]] for [[smiles]], but each one [[became]] and went in a puff of [[tobacco]], [[ended]] before you could even [[starts]] caring. This was [[quite]] much how the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the [[fiirst]] REAL funny [[Mormons]] movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through --------------------------------------------- Result 878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a [[straight]] to video-movie. It's the story about a man who [[believes]] his [[daughter]] [[could]] be a [[star]]. The only thing he [[needs]] is to [[get]] her on [[stage]], surrounded by [[cameras]] and [[reporters]]. A [[simple]] [[plan]] for which he has to [[kidnap]] and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[movie]] is not the basic plot, but how it is [[made]]. Everything is supposed to be [[funny]], but it isn't. It is [[trivial]] and [[clumsy]], the [[characters]] are [[shallow]], and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The [[last]] [[sequence]] is [[probably]] the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[pathetic]] the whole set-up is. 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a [[successive]] to video-movie. It's the story about a man who [[feels]] his [[giri]] [[did]] be a [[stars]]. The only thing he [[needed]] is to [[gets]] her on [[phase]], surrounded by [[camera]] and [[correspondent]]. A [[uncomplicated]] [[schemes]] for which he has to [[kidnapped]] and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[filmmaking]] is not the basic plot, but how it is [[effected]]. Everything is supposed to be [[comical]], but it isn't. It is [[immaterial]] and [[awkward]], the [[trait]] are [[superficial]], and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The [[latter]] [[sequences]] is [[arguably]] the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[unfortunate]] the whole set-up is. --------------------------------------------- Result 879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen just about all of Miyazaki's films, and they are all beautiful and captivating. But this one rises above the rest. This movie totally impressed me!

I fell in love with Pazu and Sheeta, and their sweet, caring friendship. They were what made the movie for me. Of course, the animation is also superb and the music captures the feelings in the film perfectly. But the characters are the shining point in this movie: they are so well developed and full of personality.

Now, let me clarify: I'm really talking about the Japanese version of the movie (with English subs). While the English dub is good (mostly), it simply pales in comparison to the original language version. The voices are better, the dialogue, everything. So I suggest seeing (and hearing) the movie the way it originally was. --------------------------------------------- Result 880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There are a couple of [[prior]] comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of [[clichés]] throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about [[Elizabeth]] Berkly's [[awful]] performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never seen - and her performance here, while not [[awful]], is [[barely]] up to the standards of Lifetime's worse [[fare]]. There was not a hint of depth to her [[character]], but then there [[probably]] shouldn't have been. If so, it [[would]] have placed the [[film]] completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or [[charisma]] - not a [[trace]] - in any one character, [[performer]], or [[portrayal]].

The principal's [[handling]] of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had [[kissed]] her in the hall was [[laughable]]. Her husband's initial reaction and [[advice]] were [[likewise]] (Forrest [[Gump]], [[attacking]] Jenny's [[boyfriend]] in his [[car]] [[provided]] a more realistic, [[intelligent]] action, and, [[hell]], he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous [[lawyer]] (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student [[actually]] [[performed]] [[something]] [[probably]] worthy of praise in his performance: he was both [[laughable]] and thoroughly [[annoying]] at the same [[time]], no mean feat. Her [[attorney]] was more of an [[insensitive]] nerd, [[also]] not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[rather]] enjoyed this [[part]]), the [[police]] were such a [[collection]] of [[insensitive]] oafs, that you'd [[rather]] depend [[upon]] Barney Fife, without [[Andy]], to handle all [[law]] [[enforcement]] and [[investigation]] in your community. I know that most real-like [[cops]] [[fall]] a bit short of the sharpness, [[intelligence]] and [[empathy]] of the level [[displayed]] by most [[characters]] on the "[[Law]] and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level [[seem]] to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." There are a couple of [[anterior]] comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of [[clichéd]] throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about [[Elisabetta]] Berkly's [[abhorrent]] performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never seen - and her performance here, while not [[horrific]], is [[hardly]] up to the standards of Lifetime's worse [[tariffs]]. There was not a hint of depth to her [[traits]], but then there [[presumably]] shouldn't have been. If so, it [[could]] have placed the [[flick]] completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or [[seduction]] - not a [[tracing]] - in any one character, [[performers]], or [[portrait]].

The principal's [[treating]] of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had [[kissing]] her in the hall was [[absurd]]. Her husband's initial reaction and [[counsel]] were [[also]] (Forrest [[Gimp]], [[onslaught]] Jenny's [[pal]] in his [[motors]] [[gave]] a more realistic, [[smart]] action, and, [[brothel]], he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous [[attorneys]] (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student [[genuinely]] [[perform]] [[somethin]] [[arguably]] worthy of praise in his performance: he was both [[farcical]] and thoroughly [[irritating]] at the same [[period]], no mean feat. Her [[prosecutor]] was more of an [[unmoved]] nerd, [[further]] not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[quite]] enjoyed this [[party]]), the [[constabulary]] were such a [[collects]] of [[oblivious]] oafs, that you'd [[quite]] depend [[after]] Barney Fife, without [[Indy]], to handle all [[act]] [[implementation]] and [[survey]] in your community. I know that most real-like [[policing]] [[fell]] a bit short of the sharpness, [[intellect]] and [[sympathy]] of the level [[showed]] by most [[characteristics]] on the "[[Act]] and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level [[seems]] to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." --------------------------------------------- Result 881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[David]] Burton([[Richard]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate [[taxation]](..and suffers from [[unusual]] dreams which bother him seeing this aboriginal man [[shrouded]] in darkness), who is [[called]] on to take a [[case]] concerning a group of aboriginals [[charged]] with the [[murder]] of one of their own named Billy..we [[see]] that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his [[heart]]. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down [[polluted]] dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "[[deformed]]" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David [[pursues]] the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic [[drama]] [[builds]] it's story [[methodically]] and is completely [[original]] and unpredictable. With [[Peter]] [[Weir]] in [[charge]], the film is visually [[arresting]] as we see these very [[overwhelming]] [[images]] of [[possible]] doom towards civilization, but the film's most [[compelling]] angle is [[certainly]] David's [[journey]] to find that [[monumental]] truth that [[plagues]] him as he questions Charlie and [[Chris]] countlessly, at first to help his [[men]] [[get]] off from a [[crime]] they didn't commit, and [[ultimately]] to find out what he has to do with [[anything]] [[catastrophic]] that is [[occurring]] or might [[occur]] [[later]]. [[Davids]] Burton([[Richie]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate [[taxes]](..and suffers from [[curious]] dreams which bother him seeing this aboriginal man [[wrapped]] in darkness), who is [[termed]] on to take a [[examples]] concerning a group of aboriginals [[blamed]] with the [[murdering]] of one of their own named Billy..we [[behold]] that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his [[heartland]]. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down [[polluting]] dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "[[misshapen]]" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David [[chasing]] the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic [[tragedy]] [[built]] it's story [[systematically]] and is completely [[initial]] and unpredictable. With [[Petra]] [[Spillway]] in [[charges]], the film is visually [[arrested]] as we see these very [[jumbo]] [[image]] of [[feasible]] doom towards civilization, but the film's most [[convincing]] angle is [[surely]] David's [[travel]] to find that [[vast]] truth that [[curses]] him as he questions Charlie and [[Kris]] countlessly, at first to help his [[males]] [[got]] off from a [[offence]] they didn't commit, and [[finally]] to find out what he has to do with [[nothing]] [[destructive]] that is [[happening]] or might [[arise]] [[thereafter]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is probably my favorite movie of all time. Miriam Flynn is excellent as Bunny Packard. Zane Buzby as Delores is comic genius. The rest of the cast is amazing, and the film is really really funny. A definite satire of horror films, with a zany twist. If you enjoy a fun, comedy filled evening, then go and rent this classic. You'll laugh all the way through! --------------------------------------------- Result 883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The funny sound that you may hear when you eyeball this execrable version of Jules Verne's classic "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is Verne spinning in his grave. The only thing about this 80 minute opus that has anything to do with "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is the title. Otherwise, everything else in this lackluster production is new and not worth watching. In fact, the director has written here at IMDb.COM that he directed only eight minutes of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" and the studio tacked on part of "Dollman" helmer Albert Pyun's sequel to his own "Alien from L.A." with Kathy Ireland. Evidently, the producers ran out of money and to satisfy overseas contractual obligations, they grafted Pyun's sequel onto director Rusty Lemorande's movie. Please, don't rent or buy this wretched piece of garbage.

Unlike director Henry Levin's period piece "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (1959) with James Mason and Pat Boone, Lemorande's "Journey to the Center of the Earth" takes place in contemporary times in Hawaii. Two fellows, a British nanny, and a dog are brought together for the adventure of a lifetime purely by coincidence. Richard (Paul Carafotes of "Blind Date") and his comic book obsessed brother Bryan (Ilan Mitchell-Smith of "Weird Science") are going out to explore a cave. The heroine, Crystina (Nicola Cowper of "Underworld"), works for a domestic service called 'Nannies R Us.' Being a nanny has been Crystina's life-long dream, but she has made a less of all five of her nanny jobs. Nevertheless, her sympathetic supervisor, Ms. Ferry (Lynda Marshall of "Africa Express"), sends her to Hawaii. Crystina's new client, rock star Billy Foul (Jeremy Crutchley of "Doomsday") who is scheduling one last concert to revive his flagging career, has a dog named Bernard. Foul wants Crystina to take Bernard to a doggie day spa. Crystina is waiting on the arrival of her taxi when a careless motel attendant accidentally puts the basket that conceals Bernard in Richard's jeep. You see, Foul has hidden his canine in a basket because motel management strictly prohibits pets on their premises. Foul has disguised the dog as a human baby. Anyway, Crystina catches a cab and tells the driver follow Richard.

After she catches up with them to get her dog, the cabbie cruises away and abandons her. Crystina demands that Richard drive her back to town, but he has other plans. Unhappily, Crystina joins the guys and they get lost, and then find themselves in the lost city of Atlantis, a police state ruled by a dictator, at the center of the Earth. The rulers of Atlantis repeatedly notify their citizens that life on the surface does not exist. Our heroes and heroine stumble onto Atlantis quite by accident. Atlantis resembles a disco and everybody looks like they are straight out of a punk rock opera. The ruler of Atlantis, General Rykov (Janet Du Plessis of "Operation Hit Squad"), is orchestrating a raid on the surface with clones of the first human, Wanda Saknussemm (Kathy Ireland of "Necessary Roughness"), to visit Atlantis. Predictably, General Rykov machinations to rule Atlantis and overthrow the Earth fails, and our heroes and heroine save the day.

"Journey to the Center of the Earth" is an abomination. The movie seems to be a comedy despite its superficial satire about dictatorships. Albert Pyun is one of my favorite low budget action directors, but he blew it on this lightweight shambles of a science fiction saga. --------------------------------------------- Result 884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Come on, what is the deal with this show, Power Rangers anyways? I always felt that the show, which was originally brought over from Japan in a better form, took what was great in Japan, and turned into one of the most ridiculous and pointless excuses in toy merchandising history! There is absolutely no point with this show whatsoever.

The bad haircuts, bad costumes, earrings, etc, all show what was ridiculous back in the 1990s From the two idiots, Bulk and Skull, to the "duhs", of the main cast, Jason, Trini, Tommy, Kimberly, Billy and Zack, I just want to say one thing: GIVE ME A BREAK!

Saban brought this from Japan, and then Disney bought the rights to this show around five years ago.

Now the public has to endure reruns of this show on the Disney channel and such.

All I can say once again is give me a break! --------------------------------------------- Result 885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Oh [[Geez]]... There are so many other films I [[want]] to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he [[wanted]] - [[Yeah]]...

I used to watch this show when I was in college...it was [[mindless]], kinda [[fun]], and [[somewhat]] action-oriented. The [[show]] had a good [[heart]] [[tho]]...and the [[characters]] were [[cute]]; no one ever got killed or [[even]] hurt [[badly]]... it was like a [[cartoon]] come to life. [[Cut]] to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[work]]. As others have [[said]], there [[simply]] isn't a [[cohesive]] [[story]] and the performances are weird...almost [[annoying]] - [[definitely]] not [[faithful]] to the [[original]] [[characters]]...the [[whole]] [[thing]] is a like a [[Mad]] TV [[skit]] and it [[lasts]] over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED [[watching]] a [[film]]. What were they [[thinking]]? As [[best]] I can [[tell]], must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can [[say]] is, let this one die a [[quick]] death. It makes the [[original]] Dukes of Hazzard [[seem]] like [[Masterpiece]] [[Theater]]...

I [[think]] the only [[remake]] left to do from TV is Gilligan's [[Island]]... Good Luck! Oh [[Goddammit]]... There are so many other films I [[wish]] to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he [[wants]] - [[Yup]]...

I used to watch this show when I was in college...it was [[irrational]], kinda [[droll]], and [[slightly]] action-oriented. The [[showings]] had a good [[crux]] [[shou]]...and the [[personage]] were [[purty]]; no one ever got killed or [[yet]] hurt [[sorely]]... it was like a [[cartoons]] come to life. [[Slice]] to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[collaborate]]. As others have [[say]], there [[exclusively]] isn't a [[uniformity]] [[histories]] and the performances are weird...almost [[exasperating]] - [[unquestionably]] not [[loyal]] to the [[initial]] [[attribute]]...the [[together]] [[stuff]] is a like a [[Crazy]] TV [[sketch]] and it [[extends]] over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED [[staring]] a [[cinema]]. What were they [[ideology]]? As [[optimum]] I can [[say]], must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can [[said]] is, let this one die a [[rapids]] death. It makes the [[preliminary]] Dukes of Hazzard [[seems]] like [[Centerpiece]] [[Drama]]...

I [[thought]] the only [[redo]] left to do from TV is Gilligan's [[Lsland]]... Good Luck! --------------------------------------------- Result 886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] There is great detail in A Bug's [[Life]]. Everything is [[covered]]. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the bad [[guys]] in this film actually [[seemed]] bad. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. [[Check]] this one out. There is great detail in A Bug's [[Iife]]. Everything is [[covers]]. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the bad [[lads]] in this film actually [[looked]] bad. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. [[Audit]] this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Goodnight, Mister Tom begins in an [[impossibly]] exquisite village in the south of England where the sun always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a [[load]] of sentimental [[claptrap]] it is. In fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy formula. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my [[wife]] enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I [[disliked]] it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

Goodnight, Mister Tom begins in an [[appallingly]] exquisite village in the south of England where the sun always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a [[loads]] of sentimental [[fiddlesticks]] it is. In fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy formula. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my [[femme]] enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I [[proscribed]] it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

--------------------------------------------- Result 888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a fan of Paris Je'Taime, I went to see New York, I Love You with very high expectations. I gladly walked out with all my expectations met. It was funny, sweet, fast-paced, and entertaining. The film starts out with two cab hoppers (Bradley Cooper & Justin Bartha) trying to get to the same area but arguing which way to go. That was funny, and then the film goes into some of the best skits I have ever seen anywhere. There were four amazing ones out of all the good ones. Those four I will start talking about. One features Shia LaBeouf as a bellhop at a hotel who finds love in an old lady. The next one features Orlando Bloom as a music maker who is doing business with a woman played by Christina Ricci. Another one features Anton Yelchin and Olivia Thirbly as two people going to prom, Thirbly's character being handicapped. The best one features Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman as a bickering old couple. I will bring to your attention that Nataile Portman makes an impressive directorial debut directing, and writing a skit about a caretaker, and Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q are excellent as a flirting man and a hooker. New York, I Love You is definitely as good, if not better than the 2006 Paris Je'Taime. The skits are well-paced, and the film shows how indie films should really be. The film, however, does not have as many famous directors as Paris Je'Taime, which is why it was fantastic to live up to its excellence. If you want to laugh, see some great dramatic effects, see an amazing amount of great performances, and just plain be entertained then definitely go see New York, I Love You. --------------------------------------------- Result 889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Horrible]] acting, [[Bad]] [[story]] line, [[cheesy]] [[makeup]], and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have never [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[movie]] in my [[life]], 5 minutes in I [[decided]] to fast [[forward]] to see if [[anything]] [[redeeming]] [[would]] happen... It didn't. (Aside from a [[nice]] breast [[shot]]) The [[movie]] [[apparently]] was filmed in some furniture [[warehouse]], and the same [[warehouse]] was [[used]] for at [[least]] 90% of the sets. You [[even]] see this same red chair in [[several]] [[different]] "[[locations]]" [[If]] you are [[going]] to make a [[film]] at [[least]] rent an office [[building]] and an apartment, not some [[warehouse]] which will echo all your actor's dialog.. ([[Note]] to producers) [[Renting]] a [[small]] office space and an apartment for a month is much cheaper than an [[entire]] warehouse, and both are [[quite]] a [[bit]] more versatile and [[believable]]) If you [[spend]] your [[money]] to [[rent]] this people I hope you got it with a [[return]] guarantee... You will be demanding your [[money]] back... I only spent $2.99 to [[rent]] this [[tonight]] and I feel ripped off. [[Abhorrent]] acting, [[Naughty]] [[conte]] line, [[corny]] [[composition]], and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have never [[watched]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]] in my [[living]], 5 minutes in I [[opted]] to fast [[forwards]] to see if [[nothing]] [[redeem]] [[could]] happen... It didn't. (Aside from a [[handsome]] breast [[filmed]]) The [[filmmaking]] [[reportedly]] was filmed in some furniture [[stockroom]], and the same [[warehouses]] was [[utilized]] for at [[less]] 90% of the sets. You [[yet]] see this same red chair in [[many]] [[several]] "[[sites]]" [[Though]] you are [[go]] to make a [[filmmaking]] at [[less]] rent an office [[architectural]] and an apartment, not some [[stockroom]] which will echo all your actor's dialog.. ([[Remark]] to producers) [[Rentals]] a [[minimal]] office space and an apartment for a month is much cheaper than an [[overall]] warehouse, and both are [[pretty]] a [[bitten]] more versatile and [[dependable]]) If you [[outlay]] your [[cash]] to [[tenancy]] this people I hope you got it with a [[returnee]] guarantee... You will be demanding your [[cash]] back... I only spent $2.99 to [[rents]] this [[monday]] and I feel ripped off. --------------------------------------------- Result 890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[fell]] in [[love]] with this silent [[action]] [[drama]]. Kurt [[Russell]] and only Kurt Russell [[could]] have [[played]] this so well. Raised from [[childhood]] to [[know]] [[nothing]] but war and [[fighting]], Todd (Kurt Russell) is [[dumped]] on a [[planet]] after being [[made]] obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The stage is set and another classic [[icon]] of [[action]] [[movies]] was [[born]] - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not [[Bruce]] Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and [[made]] it [[entirely]] his - [[original]], [[daring]], and all too human. I miss the [[fact]] that sequels were never [[made]].

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.[[com]]/ny5/jbc33/ I [[decreased]] in [[amour]] with this silent [[efforts]] [[tragedy]]. Kurt [[Russel]] and only Kurt Russell [[wo]] have [[effected]] this so well. Raised from [[children]] to [[savoir]] [[none]] but war and [[battling]], Todd (Kurt Russell) is [[dump]] on a [[globe]] after being [[introduced]] obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The stage is set and another classic [[icons]] of [[measures]] [[cinematography]] was [[birthed]] - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not [[Bros]] Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and [[introduced]] it [[perfectly]] his - [[initial]], [[bold]], and all too human. I miss the [[facto]] that sequels were never [[introduced]].

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.[[coms]]/ny5/jbc33/ --------------------------------------------- Result 891 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] A chemist [[develops]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[delightful]] Ealing Studios comedy, Guinness is [[marvelous]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While [[telling]] an engaging [[story]], the film [[also]] raises some [[intriguing]] [[questions]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who [[would]] go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. A chemist [[develop]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[wondrous]] Ealing Studios comedy, Guinness is [[beautiful]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While [[saying]] an engaging [[conte]], the film [[further]] raises some [[exciting]] [[matters]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who [[ought]] go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. --------------------------------------------- Result 892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A [[surprising]] misfire from the [[usually]] reliable Larry Cohen ([[God]] Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full [[Moon]] [[High]] tries so [[hard]] to be [[funny]] and fails [[miserably]], [[even]] with [[decent]] [[turns]] by [[Ed]] McMahon(!) and Kenneth [[Mars]]. [[Alan]] Arkin looks embarrassed [[throughout]] his performance and son [[Adam]] [[simply]] [[looks]] numb. This makes [[Teen]] Wolf look [[like]] a [[comedy]] classic. A [[impressed]] misfire from the [[generally]] reliable Larry Cohen ([[Lord]] Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full [[Luna]] [[Higher]] tries so [[harsh]] to be [[humorous]] and fails [[spectacularly]], [[yet]] with [[presentable]] [[revolves]] by [[Comp]] McMahon(!) and Kenneth [[Mar]]. [[Alana]] Arkin looks embarrassed [[during]] his performance and son [[Adem]] [[mere]] [[seem]] numb. This makes [[Teenage]] Wolf look [[iike]] a [[humour]] classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Greenaway's films pose as [[clever]], erudite and [[innovative]]. [[Yet]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of [[films]] [[made]] in the [[World]] [[War]] 1 era of film-making: the [[frame]] composition, [[use]] of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream [[movies]] with this [[style]] but it is not [[new]]. [[Perhaps]] like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the [[past]] than in [[looking]] forward as an authentic innovator would or [[could]].

[[Yet]] Greenaway's [[biggest]] [[failing]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is [[mechanical]] and logical but without the [[vitality]] of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is [[tedium]]: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his [[actors]] over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a [[bored]], smug [[air]] like [[narcissistic]] adolescents.

This film, despite its design and [[lighting]], is meretricious. Greenaway's films pose as [[shrewd]], erudite and [[revolutionary]]. [[Nonetheless]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of [[film]] [[effected]] in the [[Monde]] [[Warfare]] 1 era of film-making: the [[framework]] composition, [[utilise]] of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream [[filmmaking]] with this [[elegance]] but it is not [[novel]]. [[Maybe]] like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the [[bygone]] than in [[researching]] forward as an authentic innovator would or [[wo]].

[[Though]] Greenaway's [[bigger]] [[weakness]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is [[mechanistic]] and logical but without the [[dynamism]] of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is [[drudgery]]: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his [[protagonists]] over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a [[drilled]], smug [[airline]] like [[narcissist]] adolescents.

This film, despite its design and [[light]], is meretricious. --------------------------------------------- Result 894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie was 100% boring, i [[swear]] i [[almost]] [[died]] from boredom at the [[theater]]. It [[wasnt]] [[funny]] and didnt really hve that much [[action]] in it [[either]], it was BORING and i hope whoever out there that liked this [[movie]], [[god]] be with you in the future when you [[find]] out what this movie was [[really]] like and [[try]] to jump off a bridge or [[something]] like that This movie was 100% boring, i [[cuss]] i [[hardly]] [[perished]] from boredom at the [[theaters]]. It [[actualy]] [[hilarious]] and didnt really hve that much [[measures]] in it [[nor]], it was BORING and i hope whoever out there that liked this [[filmmaking]], [[seigneur]] be with you in the future when you [[found]] out what this movie was [[truly]] like and [[tried]] to jump off a bridge or [[somethin]] like that --------------------------------------------- Result 895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Mean-spirited, ugly, [[nasty]] retro-action [[thriller]], about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[desire]] to [[apologize]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and [[see]] this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a [[powerful]] example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and [[effective]]. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to [[ignore]]. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a [[great]] performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. Mean-spirited, ugly, [[squalid]] retro-action [[thrillers]], about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[wishing]] to [[apology]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and [[seeing]] this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a [[forceful]] example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and [[efficacious]]. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to [[flout]]. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a [[wondrous]] performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is [[pathetic]] and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my [[book]] as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[bad]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are [[bored]] and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is [[regrettable]] and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my [[ledger]] as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[unfavourable]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are [[boring]] and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It's really [[rare]] that you get an inside [[view]] at a media [[deception]] that has been so [[widely]] [[reported]] as [[official]] "truth" and [[caught]] so [[many]] "news" [[agencies]] with their pants down. This movie, in my view, deserves [[every]] [[price]] there is in [[journalism]] - it's objective (yes!), [[courageous]] and a [[real]] "[[scoop]]". It can do without comment, [[fake]] scenes or leading [[questions]] - [[everyone]], including [[Chavez]] equally [[gets]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. It's really [[uncommon]] that you get an inside [[opinion]] at a media [[misrepresentation]] that has been so [[broadly]] [[stated]] as [[servant]] "truth" and [[capturing]] so [[various]] "news" [[organs]] with their pants down. This movie, in my view, deserves [[any]] [[cost]] there is in [[columnist]] - it's objective (yes!), [[bold]] and a [[actual]] "[[spoon]]". It can do without comment, [[fakes]] scenes or leading [[subjects]] - [[anybody]], including [[Guzman]] equally [[obtains]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. --------------------------------------------- Result 898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] What a [[wonderful]], fanciful [[movie]] "[[Stardust]]" is.

I could easily end it with that one statement and [[suffice]] to say, one could take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "Stardust" makes us remember why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike [[glee]] we all long for.

"Stardust" is [[full]] of all the [[characters]] we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. What a [[wondrous]], fanciful [[kino]] "[[Dust]]" is.

I could easily end it with that one statement and [[adequate]] to say, one could take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "Stardust" makes us remember why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike [[gladness]] we all long for.

"Stardust" is [[fullest]] of all the [[nature]] we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. --------------------------------------------- Result 899 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is possibly the best short crime drama I've ever seen. The acting is superb especially Amanda Burton who's character goes from scary to sweet to disturbing to sad and then some...She does an amazing job balancing Rachels/Carlas feelings and acting out the pain of someone who's lost a child, its so believable that it feels more like a real life story then a drama. The other actors are of course great too which they usually are in British TV/Film. The ending,which I'm not going to give away,is fantastic mainly because you don't really get one... (you'll get what I mean after you've seen it) This is well worth buying and seeing over and over again and if you're not touched by this you're one cold hearted person. --------------------------------------------- Result 900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] In 1692 [[Salem]], a [[devious]] child's [[lies]] about a slave's [[involvement]] in [[witchcraft]] [[sends]] an [[entire]] community into an uproar. [[Costume]] [[drama]] [[starring]] Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, [[though]] [[neither]] is it a [[vivid]] depiction of [[contagious]] [[hysteria]]. [[Worked]] on by three [[writers]] ([[Walter]] Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and [[Bradley]] [[King]]), the [[story]] [[elements]] are [[rather]] interesting (especially [[coming]] out of Hollywood in 1937), [[though]] to [[anyone]] who has since read [[Arthur]] Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on [[display]] here won't be tolerated for very long. [[Biggest]] [[problem]] with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** In 1692 [[Salim]], a [[duplicitous]] child's [[lying]] about a slave's [[involvements]] in [[sorcery]] [[dispatch]] an [[whole]] community into an uproar. [[Standup]] [[tragedy]] [[featuring]] Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, [[although]] [[either]] is it a [[lifelike]] depiction of [[infectious]] [[frenzy]]. [[Functioned]] on by three [[screenwriters]] ([[Walters]] Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and [[Bernardo]] [[Emperor]]), the [[fairytales]] [[components]] are [[quite]] interesting (especially [[incoming]] out of Hollywood in 1937), [[while]] to [[everyone]] who has since read [[Artur]] Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on [[visualize]] here won't be tolerated for very long. [[Wider]] [[issues]] with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 901 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bored Londoners Henry Kendall and Joan Barry (as Fred and Emily Hill) receive an advance on an inheritance. They use the money go traveling. Their lives become more exciting as they begin relationships with exotic Betty Amann (for Mr. Kendall) and lonely Percy Marmont (for Ms. Barry). But, they remain as boring as they were before. Arguably bored director Alfred Hitchcock tries to liven up the well-titled (as quoted in the film, from Shakespeare's "The Tempest") "Rich and Strange" by ordering up some camera trickery. An opening homage to King Vidor's "The Crowd" is the highlight. The low point may be the couple dining on Chinese prepared cat.

*** Rich and Strange (12/10/31) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Henry Kendall, Joan Barry, Percy Marmont, Elsie Randolph --------------------------------------------- Result 902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] [[Greetings]] again from the [[darkness]]. What ever [[happened]] to the [[great]] Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favorites]] in "Avalon" and "[[Diner]]". He had some fine [[movies]] as well ("Rainman"), but [[always]] [[provided]] [[something]] of interest ... until now. I [[believe]] the [[worst]] thing you can ever say about a [[comedy]] is that it is boring. "[[Envy]]" is the definition of boring. Never of [[big]] [[fan]] of pure slap stick ("[[Dumb]] and [[Dumber]]"), I was just [[stunned]] at how god-awful this [[movie]] is. There are [[maybe]] 2 chuckles in the [[whole]] thing - if you can [[pay]] attention that long. The [[best]] [[part]] of the [[film]] is the [[running]] gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[If]] the [[film]] had been [[written]] as well as the song, it would have been [[tolerable]]. Rachel Weisz is a [[wonderful]] actress and I [[realize]] they all [[want]] to do [[comedy]] (even Julianne Moore), but the [[real]] [[world]] [[exposes]] one [[weaknesses]]. SNL cast [[member]] Amy Poehler is her [[usual]] over the top in her role as [[trailer]] park [[trash]] [[turned]] princess. The [[disaster]] of the [[film]] is Jack [[Black]] and Ben Stiller. The first [[work]] commute together [[flashes]] some [[promise]], but after that their [[chemistry]] disappears due to the poor [[script]]. This [[script]] is like most of Jack Black's character's [[ideas]] - not a [[bad]] [[thought]], but no [[hope]] for [[success]]. [[Hi]] again from the [[dark]]. What ever [[transpired]] to the [[huge]] Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favorite]] in "Avalon" and "[[Restaurant]]". He had some fine [[theater]] as well ("Rainman"), but [[constantly]] [[gave]] [[somethin]] of interest ... until now. I [[believing]] the [[hardest]] thing you can ever say about a [[comic]] is that it is boring. "[[Jealous]]" is the definition of boring. Never of [[huge]] [[breather]] of pure slap stick ("[[Stupid]] and [[Stupider]]"), I was just [[surprised]] at how god-awful this [[filmmaking]] is. There are [[probably]] 2 chuckles in the [[together]] thing - if you can [[salaries]] attention that long. The [[optimum]] [[party]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the [[implementing]] gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[Though]] the [[cinematic]] had been [[wrote]] as well as the song, it would have been [[allowable]]. Rachel Weisz is a [[sumptuous]] actress and I [[realizing]] they all [[wish]] to do [[farce]] (even Julianne Moore), but the [[veritable]] [[monde]] [[depicts]] one [[demerits]]. SNL cast [[members]] Amy Poehler is her [[normal]] over the top in her role as [[trailers]] park [[litter]] [[transformed]] princess. The [[calamity]] of the [[flick]] is Jack [[Calico]] and Ben Stiller. The first [[collaborate]] commute together [[flashing]] some [[promising]], but after that their [[chemicals]] disappears due to the poor [[hyphen]]. This [[screenplay]] is like most of Jack Black's character's [[insights]] - not a [[negative]] [[thinking]], but no [[amal]] for [[avail]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A team of [[archaeologists]] uncover a [[real]] [[treasure]] – the [[Crown]] of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via [[steamship]] to San Francisco. But it won't be an [[easy]] [[journey]]. There are plenty of would-be [[thieves]] who would love to [[get]] their hands on the priceless [[jewels]] [[contained]] in the crown. [[Fortunately]] for all [[involved]], [[Mr]]. [[Moto]] is on hand to [[guard]] the crown on its [[journey]]. However, that doesn't [[mean]] [[someone]] won't [[try]] to [[get]] their hands on the treasure.

After the [[disappointment]] of Mr. Moto's [[Gamble]], I went into [[Mr]]. Moto [[Takes]] a Vacation hoping for the [[best]], but, [[admittedly]], fearing the [[worst]]. But [[within]] the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that [[features]] anything to do with [[archaeological]] digs in Egypt. And [[seeing]] Moto disguised as a German archaeologist ([[Imagine]] that, [[Peter]] Lorre [[playing]] a German?), the beginning scenes [[really]] [[drew]] me in. [[While]] the [[movie]] may have [[quickly]] [[shifted]] to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[enjoyable]]. Dark, sinister [[characters]] lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; [[sophisticated]] and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of [[elements]] found in a [[lot]] of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[love]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's [[got]] 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the [[always]] [[enjoyable]] Lionel Atwill in a nice [[little]] role, [[comic]] [[relief]] from [[G]].P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a [[return]] to [[form]] for [[Mr]]. Moto. I've already [[mentioned]] his [[disguise]] in the movie's [[opening]] scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out [[near]] the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't [[even]] [[mentioned]] the [[wonderful]] performance [[turned]] in by Lorre. Any [[way]] you [[look]] at it, Mr. Moto [[Takes]] a [[Vacation]] is a [[winner]].

As much as I [[hate]] that the [[Mr]]. Moto [[series]] had to end after this [[installment]], it's understandable when you [[think]] about it. WWII was just [[around]] the [[corner]]. And after [[Pearl]] Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. A team of [[archeologists]] uncover a [[actual]] [[tesoro]] – the [[Krone]] of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via [[steamboat]] to San Francisco. But it won't be an [[simple]] [[travelling]]. There are plenty of would-be [[bandits]] who would love to [[gets]] their hands on the priceless [[gems]] [[contain]] in the crown. [[Hopefully]] for all [[participating]], [[Mister]]. [[Motorcycle]] is on hand to [[guards]] the crown on its [[travelling]]. However, that doesn't [[imply]] [[person]] won't [[trying]] to [[gets]] their hands on the treasure.

After the [[frustration]] of Mr. Moto's [[Bets]], I went into [[Mister]]. Moto [[Pick]] a Vacation hoping for the [[better]], but, [[assuredly]], fearing the [[gravest]]. But [[inside]] the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that [[traits]] anything to do with [[archeological]] digs in Egypt. And [[see]] Moto disguised as a German archaeologist ([[Imagining]] that, [[Pieter]] Lorre [[play]] a German?), the beginning scenes [[truthfully]] [[called]] me in. [[Though]] the [[cinema]] may have [[immediately]] [[changed]] to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[nice]]. Dark, sinister [[attribute]] lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; [[complicated]] and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of [[components]] found in a [[lots]] of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[amour]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's [[did]] 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the [[continually]] [[nice]] Lionel Atwill in a nice [[small]] role, [[comedian]] [[succour]] from [[gs]].P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a [[returning]] to [[forma]] for [[Mister]]. Moto. I've already [[quoted]] his [[disguises]] in the movie's [[commencement]] scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out [[nearer]] the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't [[yet]] [[talked]] the [[noteworthy]] performance [[transformed]] in by Lorre. Any [[paths]] you [[peek]] at it, Mr. Moto [[Pick]] a [[Holiday]] is a [[winners]].

As much as I [[hated]] that the [[Mister]]. Moto [[serial]] had to end after this [[instalment]], it's understandable when you [[ideas]] about it. WWII was just [[roundabout]] the [[nook]]. And after [[Perl]] Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. --------------------------------------------- Result 904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] After having [[seen]] Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I started [[watching]] this movie nothing really [[seemed]] unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the [[brutality]] and edge of this film is [[truly]] [[visible]]. As I watched [[Drew]](Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a [[seemingly]] retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very [[believable]] and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and [[suspense]] I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally [[excellent]]. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the [[great]] cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest [[thing]] of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. After having [[noticed]] Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I started [[staring]] this movie nothing really [[appeared]] unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the [[cruelty]] and edge of this film is [[honestly]] [[overt]]. As I watched [[Phoned]](Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a [[allegedly]] retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very [[reliable]] and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and [[wait]] I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally [[funky]]. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the [[wondrous]] cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest [[stuff]] of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 905 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Sudden [[Impact]] was [[overall]] better than The Enforcer in my [[opinion]]. It was [[building]] up to be a great [[movie]], but then I [[saw]] the villain(s) and was [[disappointed]].

[[Sudden]] [[Impact]] was [[different]] than the [[previous]] installments. The plot went a different direction in this [[movie]], as Dirty Harry doesn't [[take]] as much of a police approach this [[time]] [[around]]. We also don't [[see]] the villain(s) until [[later]], which means [[less]] screen [[time]] for them, which is better for us all.

Clint [[Eastwood]] once again steals the [[show]] as [[Dirty]] [[Harry]], [[enough]] [[said]]. Pat Hingle was [[enjoyable]] as Chief Jannings, Harry's [[new]] [[assigned]] boss. Bradford Dillman [[seemed]] to [[change]] his [[name]] to [[Captain]] Briggs here, either [[way]], he wasn't any different. [[Michael]] Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying [[superior]]. I personally [[enjoyed]] Kevyn [[Major]] Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a [[vendetta]] against [[Harry]]. [[Albert]] Popwell was [[excellent]] as Horace, Harry's [[buddy]]. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a [[famous]] lesbian [[around]] town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a [[pervert]]. Now for the really bad part. [[Sandra]] [[Locke]], Eastwood's long-time lover was [[horribly]] miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul [[Drake]] was just horrible as [[Mick]].

The movie [[would]] have been so much better if not for better [[writing]] and acting on some parts.

8/10. Sudden [[Impacted]] was [[holistic]] better than The Enforcer in my [[vista]]. It was [[constructing]] up to be a great [[cinematography]], but then I [[noticed]] the villain(s) and was [[disenchanted]].

[[Abrupt]] [[Influenced]] was [[dissimilar]] than the [[former]] installments. The plot went a different direction in this [[cinematography]], as Dirty Harry doesn't [[taking]] as much of a police approach this [[moment]] [[about]]. We also don't [[behold]] the villain(s) until [[thereafter]], which means [[minimum]] screen [[moment]] for them, which is better for us all.

Clint [[Nolan]] once again steals the [[showings]] as [[Filthy]] [[Harri]], [[adequately]] [[say]]. Pat Hingle was [[nice]] as Chief Jannings, Harry's [[newest]] [[allocated]] boss. Bradford Dillman [[sounded]] to [[amendments]] his [[behalf]] to [[Commander]] Briggs here, either [[manner]], he wasn't any different. [[Michaela]] Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying [[upper]]. I personally [[liked]] Kevyn [[Principal]] Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a [[revengeful]] against [[Hari]]. [[Alberto]] Popwell was [[super]] as Horace, Harry's [[boyfriend]]. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a [[celebrated]] lesbian [[about]] town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a [[kinky]]. Now for the really bad part. [[Sondra]] [[Luc]], Eastwood's long-time lover was [[terribly]] miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul [[Gregg]] was just horrible as [[Mike]].

The movie [[could]] have been so much better if not for better [[handwriting]] and acting on some parts.

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If only Eddie [[Murphy]] were born 10 [[years]] [[later]]. Then we'd all [[remember]] it. But [[even]] I was only 4 when it came out. [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] it [[yet]], rent Dr. Dolittle, [[Showtime]], I [[spy]], Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family [[comedy]] [[movies]] - then watch this. Hands down, you'll [[laugh]] 90% of the [[time]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the [[tears]] from your [[eyes]].

It [[really]] [[needs]] to be watched more then once to [[understand]] all the jokes. From crude [[humor]] to a [[joke]] for [[kids]]!(if you've [[seen]] it you'll laugh here) - you'll [[love]] his [[stuff]]. If you can, (or are a [[big]] fan) [[try]] to [[download]] clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the [[shows]] are [[different]] as you'd [[imagine]] and he has [[even]] more funny jokes.

But this is like the "[[best]] of" [[Eddie]] [[Murphy]] 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can [[say]] is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like [[comedy]], don't have a [[sense]] of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[great]] Eddie Murphy [[classic]] and [[possibly]] [[make]] [[someone]] [[miss]] out on it.

If you [[wanna]] know how [[Eddie]] [[got]] Beverly [[Hills]] [[Cop]] and [[got]] [[famous]] from it- [[Delirious]] is it. If only Eddie [[Murph]] were born 10 [[ages]] [[subsequently]]. Then we'd all [[rember]] it. But [[yet]] I was only 4 when it came out. [[Unless]] you haven't [[watched]] it [[even]], rent Dr. Dolittle, [[Sharpish]], I [[spying]], Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family [[parody]] [[cinematography]] - then watch this. Hands down, you'll [[laughter]] 90% of the [[moment]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the [[rip]] from your [[eye]].

It [[truthfully]] [[needed]] to be watched more then once to [[understood]] all the jokes. From crude [[comedy]] to a [[kidding]] for [[brats]]!(if you've [[watched]] it you'll laugh here) - you'll [[loves]] his [[thing]]. If you can, (or are a [[substantial]] fan) [[endeavour]] to [[downloads]] clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the [[showing]] are [[dissimilar]] as you'd [[guess]] and he has [[yet]] more funny jokes.

But this is like the "[[better]] of" [[Eddy]] [[Murph]] 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can [[said]] is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like [[parody]], don't have a [[sensing]] of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[wondrous]] Eddie Murphy [[conventional]] and [[potentially]] [[deliver]] [[person]] [[mademoiselle]] out on it.

If you [[desiring]] know how [[Eddy]] [[gets]] Beverly [[Foothills]] [[Policemen]] and [[did]] [[notorious]] from it- [[Delusional]] is it. --------------------------------------------- Result 907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Clint [[Eastwood]] reprises his role as [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] who this [[time]] is on the [[case]] of a [[vigilante]] (Sondra Locke)who is [[killing]] the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival [[many]] years [[ago]]. [[Eastwood]] makes the role his and the [[movie]] is [[mainly]] more action then [[talk]], not that I'm [[complaining]]. [[Sudden]] [[Impact]] is indeed [[enjoyable]] entertainment. Clint [[Nolan]] reprises his role as [[Nasty]] [[Hare]] who this [[period]] is on the [[examples]] of a [[militiaman]] (Sondra Locke)who is [[murdered]] the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival [[several]] years [[earlier]]. [[Nolan]] makes the role his and the [[kino]] is [[essentially]] more action then [[conversation]], not that I'm [[lamenting]]. [[Brusque]] [[Influenced]] is indeed [[nice]] entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "The [[Garden]] of Allah" is a prime [[example]] of "popular women's literature", [[turn]] of the XXth century [[style]], combining all the power of [[unbridled]] erotic and [[exotic]] reveries with the [[stimulating]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic [[bite]] of Catholic guilt. [[Just]] as Jane Eyre couldn't really be happy until her castle [[burned]] down [[around]] her and her lover was [[permanently]] [[maimed]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't [[find]] [[true]] fulfillment in her [[marriage]] until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his [[first]] wife (and her castle [[burned]] down [[around]] her), or [[poor]] [[Psyche]] couldn't [[leave]] well [[enough]] [[alone]] and had to [[extract]] Cupid's [[secret]] at all costs, Domini, the devout [[Catholic]] [[heroine]] of this piece of tripe, can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently [[marrying]] a man who has renounced his sacred religious vows. [[Like]] all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[vapours]], this one relies on the [[oldest]] [[tricks]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any [[ultimate]] sexual ecstasy can be [[indulged]] in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a [[high]] enough [[price]] for it in atonement in the [[last]] [[act]]. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[salon]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[could]] have been much [[worse]] and it [[often]] was...

Without the religious overtones, the film's plot is that of your basic porn [[flick]]: Oversexed monk [[driven]] [[mad]] by [[abstinence]] [[escapes]] to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic [[heiress]] before reintegrating his [[monastery]], all [[passion]] [[spent]], leaving her to [[clean]] up his mess. And I really resent another commentator's [[comparison]] with Anatole France's "Thais", a [[sophisticated]] novel [[whose]] [[intention]] was to [[make]] [[fun]] of the [[whole]] concept of Catholic sexual [[repression]], some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same [[name]], [[thankfully]].

But what makes this [[picture]] [[unique]] in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the [[enormous]] constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this [[cinematic]] [[wet]] [[dream]] come to [[shimmering]], [[vibrant]] life. [[Imperishable]] Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. "The [[Huerta]] of Allah" is a prime [[instances]] of "popular women's literature", [[converting]] of the XXth century [[styles]], combining all the power of [[unfettered]] erotic and [[aliens]] reveries with the [[boosting]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic [[mouthful]] of Catholic guilt. [[Righteous]] as Jane Eyre couldn't really be happy until her castle [[burnt]] down [[about]] her and her lover was [[steadily]] [[mutilated]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't [[found]] [[real]] fulfillment in her [[wedding]] until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his [[firstly]] wife (and her castle [[burnt]] down [[about]] her), or [[pauper]] [[Psychology]] couldn't [[letting]] well [[adequately]] [[only]] and had to [[retrieved]] Cupid's [[covert]] at all costs, Domini, the devout [[Catholicism]] [[heroin]] of this piece of tripe, can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently [[wedlock]] a man who has renounced his sacred religious vows. [[Iike]] all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[vapors]], this one relies on the [[eldest]] [[gimmicks]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any [[final]] sexual ecstasy can be [[indulging]] in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a [[alto]] enough [[pricing]] for it in atonement in the [[final]] [[ley]]. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[lounge]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[wo]] have been much [[lousiest]] and it [[normally]] was...

Without the religious overtones, the film's plot is that of your basic porn [[movie]]: Oversexed monk [[fueled]] [[madman]] by [[sobriety]] [[flees]] to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic [[heir]] before reintegrating his [[der]], all [[fascination]] [[expenditures]], leaving her to [[cleanse]] up his mess. And I really resent another commentator's [[comparative]] with Anatole France's "Thais", a [[complex]] novel [[who]] [[intend]] was to [[deliver]] [[droll]] of the [[ensemble]] concept of Catholic sexual [[suppression]], some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same [[naming]], [[mercifully]].

But what makes this [[photo]] [[sole]] in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the [[gargantuan]] constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this [[cinematographic]] [[damp]] [[daydream]] come to [[shimmer]], [[alive]] life. [[Incorruptible]] Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. --------------------------------------------- Result 909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is a [[clever]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic [[rather]] than [[strange]] or [[tragic]]. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 [[America]], [[works]] in a laboratory. He is constantly [[griping]] about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - [[autos]] haven't [[appeared]] yet). [[Griping]] to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in [[modern]] America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on [[CANDID]] CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. This is a [[artful]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic [[somewhat]] than [[weird]] or [[cataclysmic]]. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 [[Latina]], [[collaborated]] in a laboratory. He is constantly [[mooning]] about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - [[automobile]] haven't [[seemed]] yet). [[Bitching]] to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in [[fashionable]] America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on [[FRANK]] CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. --------------------------------------------- Result 910 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The small California town of Diablo is plagued with mysterious deaths after sheriff Robert Lopez unearths an ancient box.Legend has it that the box holds the sixteenth-century Mexican demon named Azar.FBI agent Gil Vega is sent to investigate the murders and joins forces with the sheriff's daughters,Dominique and Mary to fight with evil and bloodthirsty demon."The Legend of Diablo" is an absolute garbage.The film lacks scares and gore,the acting is amateurish and the direction is bad.The animation is the only one aspect of the film I enjoyed.I'm a big fan of indie horror flicks,for example I loved "Torched","Live Feed","Bone Sickness" or "Neighborhood Watch",unfortunately "The Legend of Diablo" is a huge misfire.Definitely one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies that's trying to be moody and tense, and instead, ends up tripping all over itself. Having seen it at a queer film festival, I was intrigued by the "young college threesome gone wrong" write-up, however, over-all ended up quite disappointed.

It's hard to critique a "true story" since there's not much that can be done about the plot - but I found this disjointed, melodramatic and wholly depressing. It's dark and almost sinister, painting a darn creepy flash of the seventies with imposing music and jerky close-ups. It just doesn't work - some scenes where so cheesy that instead of hushed awe, my audience was supressing snickers and rolling eyes.

The story has an interesting premise, but this just spins downward into a dark, miserable spiral. --------------------------------------------- Result 912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Apparently Shakespeare equals [[high]] [[brow]] which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[something]] for what it [[really]] is. [[At]] one point in this film, [[someone]] (I believe Pacino's [[producer]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses [[think]] about [[Shakespeare]] through the [[vehicle]] of RICHARD III. Instead he [[decides]] to shoot a [[chopped]] up play with random [[comments]] [[sprinkled]] [[throughout]]. Some scenes seemed to be [[included]] as [[home]] [[movies]] for Al (was there [[really]] [[ANY]] [[reason]] for the [[quick]] visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[laugh]] about something unexpected which [[happens]] there?), and, before the film has [[really]] [[even]] [[begun]], we are treated to [[seeing]] Al prance around and [[act]] cute and [[funny]] for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but [[apparently]] it's how Al really behaves in person.

Enough rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't even make it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of actors and has witnessed this [[kind]] of thing from the [[outside]], it's [[unbearable]]. "[[Look]] at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a screeching halt, which it never recovers from. She has [[nothing]] to [[add]] in the [[discussion]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to bring in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[dreadful]], to [[boot]]. 3) the only [[things]] you really [[learn]] from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that Pacino shouldn't be directing films (or doing Richard in the first place). I'd rather watch BOBBY DEERFIELD than this.

Lastly, read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. In 1997 I saw the play performed at the University of Washington Ethnic Cultural Theater, and it made what we see in this film seem like high school drama (except for the gratuitous throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nada. Apparently Shakespeare equals [[higher]] [[brows]] which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[algo]] for what it [[truly]] is. [[In]] one point in this film, [[everyone]] (I believe Pacino's [[manufacturers]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses [[thinking]] about [[Shakespearean]] through the [[car]] of RICHARD III. Instead he [[decided]] to shoot a [[dissected]] up play with random [[observations]] [[sprinkle]] [[in]]. Some scenes seemed to be [[inscribed]] as [[household]] [[filmmaking]] for Al (was there [[truly]] [[EVERYTHING]] [[cause]] for the [[speedy]] visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[chuckles]] about something unexpected which [[occurs]] there?), and, before the film has [[truly]] [[yet]] [[began]], we are treated to [[witnessing]] Al prance around and [[ley]] cute and [[comical]] for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but [[seemingly]] it's how Al really behaves in person.

Enough rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't even make it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of actors and has witnessed this [[genre]] of thing from the [[outdoor]], it's [[unsustainable]]. "[[Peek]] at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a screeching halt, which it never recovers from. She has [[none]] to [[added]] in the [[interviews]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to bring in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[abhorrent]], to [[starter]]. 3) the only [[matters]] you really [[learning]] from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that Pacino shouldn't be directing films (or doing Richard in the first place). I'd rather watch BOBBY DEERFIELD than this.

Lastly, read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. In 1997 I saw the play performed at the University of Washington Ethnic Cultural Theater, and it made what we see in this film seem like high school drama (except for the gratuitous throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nada. --------------------------------------------- Result 913 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably the finest fantasy film ever made. Sumptuous colour, spectacular sets, incredible, spot-on Miklos Rosza musical score that is perfect for each scene and mood. Acting is superb as well in what could have been stiff and pretentious in lesser hands, but here the poetic dialog is deftly, sensitively spoken (the humour is subtle and delightful as well).

Doubtless Spielberg and Lucas were enthralled by this one. Along with "The Four Feathers" (1939), one of the two finest motion pictures released by Alexander Korda and London Films---and one of the finest motion pictures ever made.

A true, compelling classic! --------------------------------------------- Result 914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[mildly]] [[entertaining]] British [[movie]] about a German [[police]] commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish [[comedian]] that he [[killed]] 15 years [[earlier]] while serving under [[Hitler]] in the SS. The ghost comes back and [[wants]] his [[killer]] to [[live]] as a [[Jew]] to atone for the [[murders]] he committed.

Otto, the German [[policeman]] [[actually]] knows this ghost's [[name]] because, the [[last]] thing he did before he [[died]] was [[said]], in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The [[policeman]] didn't speak Yiddish, so he [[asked]] around until he [[found]] the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an [[impression]] that [[everybody]] [[involved]] with that killing learned and [[remembered]] the comedian's [[name]], Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of [[men]] who are [[murdered]] in the jurisdiction of the [[police]] commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The [[men]] are [[murdered]] with a set of knives that are [[missing]] from the local butcher. The butcher [[announces]] that his [[knives]] are [[missing]] while the commissioner is in the [[store]] to [[get]] a liver and [[onion]] sandwich, so the [[commissioner]] is a suspect. The first [[man]] is [[killed]] while making [[love]] to the butcher's [[wife]], so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher [[maintains]] that he would be very busy if he [[killed]] every [[man]] that [[slept]] with his [[wife]]. All the [[men]] are [[killed]] immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I [[think]] I [[might]] be a bit angrier than the [[ghost]] of Genghis Cohn if I was [[killed]] like he was. He [[seems]] to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British [[movie]] and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very [[funny]].

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just [[kind]] of goofy. I [[thought]] it should have been a [[little]] more [[serious]] than it was. The [[movie]] [[turns]] out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The [[movie]] gave me a [[tiny]] [[look]] into [[Jewish]] [[culture]], but was only skin-deep. Do all [[Jews]] [[love]] liver and [[onion]] sandwiches? Do they all [[say]] `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[gently]] [[fun]] British [[filmmaking]] about a German [[nypd]] commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish [[comic]] that he [[murdering]] 15 years [[formerly]] while serving under [[Nazi]] in the SS. The ghost comes back and [[wanna]] his [[assassin]] to [[vivo]] as a [[Jude]] to atone for the [[killings]] he committed.

Otto, the German [[gendarme]] [[genuinely]] knows this ghost's [[behalf]] because, the [[final]] thing he did before he [[deaths]] was [[stated]], in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The [[police]] didn't speak Yiddish, so he [[wondered]] around until he [[finds]] the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an [[printing]] that [[somebody]] [[implicated]] with that killing learned and [[reminds]] the comedian's [[behalf]], Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of [[man]] who are [[kill]] in the jurisdiction of the [[cop]] commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The [[man]] are [[slain]] with a set of knives that are [[gone]] from the local butcher. The butcher [[announced]] that his [[daggers]] are [[gone]] while the commissioner is in the [[shop]] to [[gets]] a liver and [[tomatoes]] sandwich, so the [[commissioners]] is a suspect. The first [[guy]] is [[murder]] while making [[likes]] to the butcher's [[femme]], so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher [[argues]] that he would be very busy if he [[murder]] every [[guy]] that [[sleep]] with his [[women]]. All the [[man]] are [[murdered]] immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I [[ideas]] I [[apt]] be a bit angrier than the [[phantom]] of Genghis Cohn if I was [[kill]] like he was. He [[seem]] to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British [[filmmaking]] and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very [[fun]].

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just [[sort]] of goofy. I [[figured]] it should have been a [[petite]] more [[weighty]] than it was. The [[filmmaking]] [[revolves]] out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The [[filmmaking]] gave me a [[minimal]] [[glance]] into [[Jews]] [[cultivation]], but was only skin-deep. Do all [[Jude]] [[loves]] liver and [[tomatoes]] sandwiches? Do they all [[tell]] `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. --------------------------------------------- Result 915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a straight-to-video movie, so it should go without saying that it's not going to rival the first Lion King, but that said, this was downright good.

My kids loved this, but that's a given, they love anything that's a cartoon. The big shock was that *I* liked it too, it was laugh out loud funny at some parts (even the fart jokes*), had lots of rather creative tie-ins with the first movie, and even some jokes that you had to be older to understand (but without being risqué like in Shrek ["do you think he's compensating for something?"]).

A special note on the fart jokes, I was surprised to find that none of the jokes were just toilet noises (in fact there were almost no noises/imagery at all, the references were actually rather subtle), they actually had a setup/punchline/etc, and were almost in good taste. I'd like my kids to think that there's more to humor than going to the bathroom, and this movie is fine in those regards.

Hmm what else? The music was so-so, not nearly as creative as in the first or second movie, but plenty of fun for the kids. No painfully corny moments, which was a blessing for me. A little action but nothing too scary (the Secret of NIMH gave my kids nightmares, not sure a G rating was appropriate for that one...)

All in all I'd say this is a great movie for kids of any age, one that's 100% safe to let them watch (I try not to be overly sensitive but I've had to jump up and turn off the TV during a few movies that were less kid-appropriate than expected) - but you're safe to leave the room during this one. I'd say stick around anyway though, you might find that you enjoy it too :) --------------------------------------------- Result 916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have only [[recently]] been able to catch up with the [[films]] of [[Marilyn]] [[Miller]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[UK]].I have been much intrigued over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some [[stars]] of this era like Jolson some of the magic still shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her dancing seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[singing]] somewhat [[limited]] and as an [[actress]] she makes [[Ruby]] Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[film]] as the public had [[grown]] [[tired]] of musicals virtually all of the musical [[numbers]] have been [[deleted]].So we are left with a [[comedy]] of that period with [[little]] real appeal.She was being [[paid]] $500000 for this![[So]] i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I [[think]] that the [[truth]] is [[nearer]] the [[later]] than the [[former]]. I have only [[lately]] been able to catch up with the [[filmmaking]] of [[Marlin]] [[Meunier]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[BRITANNICA]].I have been much intrigued over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some [[superstar]] of this era like Jolson some of the magic still shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her dancing seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[sing]] somewhat [[restrained]] and as an [[actor]] she makes [[Turquoise]] Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[filmmaking]] as the public had [[grew]] [[knackered]] of musicals virtually all of the musical [[digit]] have been [[discontinued]].So we are left with a [[farce]] of that period with [[scant]] real appeal.She was being [[credited]] $500000 for this![[Accordingly]] i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I [[thinks]] that the [[veracity]] is [[tightest]] the [[subsequently]] than the [[previous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I saw this movie on the film festival of Rotterdam (jan '06) and followed the discussion between director and public afterwards. Many people reacted shocked and protesting. He will get a lot of negative critics. But: the world is cruel like this, and it's not funny. People don't like it. That itself doesn't mean that the movie is bad. I can see that difference. Don't shoot the messenger that shows us the world outside our 'hubble'! Nevertheless I think this a [[bad]] movie. Film-technically it's a good one. Nice shots and script, most good fitting music, great actors. The director pretends to make a psychological movie, - the psychology however is of poor quality. Describing such a powerful violence itself is not the art. The art would be a powerful description of the psychological process behind that violence. How does a shy boy come to such a cruelty? The director pretends to describe that, - but is not good in that.

The director used several times the word the 'selfishness' of people, mentioning for instance the teacher. Only: this teacher wasn't selfish,- just someone in several roles, caring for his pupils, ánd worried about his script. I think it's a simplification to call him selfish. The atmosphere in the village is creepy, and the mother made awful mistakes ('you terribly let me down…') but it doesn't become believable for me, that there is caused súch a lot of pain, that the shyest boy comes to such terrible things. In fact, reality is far more complex than the way, this film describes – and it needs far better descriptions. The interesting thing would be: how does it work? Describe that process for me please, so that we understand.

With the written phrase on the end, the director said to point to an alternative way of life. It was the other extreme, and confirmed for me that director and scriptwriter are bad psychologists, promoting black/white-thinking. The connection between violence in films and in society has been proved. Use such a violence gives the responsibility to use it right. There are enough black/white-thinkers in the world, causing lots of war and misery. I hope, this movie won't be successful. I saw this movie on the film festival of Rotterdam (jan '06) and followed the discussion between director and public afterwards. Many people reacted shocked and protesting. He will get a lot of negative critics. But: the world is cruel like this, and it's not funny. People don't like it. That itself doesn't mean that the movie is bad. I can see that difference. Don't shoot the messenger that shows us the world outside our 'hubble'! Nevertheless I think this a [[unfavourable]] movie. Film-technically it's a good one. Nice shots and script, most good fitting music, great actors. The director pretends to make a psychological movie, - the psychology however is of poor quality. Describing such a powerful violence itself is not the art. The art would be a powerful description of the psychological process behind that violence. How does a shy boy come to such a cruelty? The director pretends to describe that, - but is not good in that.

The director used several times the word the 'selfishness' of people, mentioning for instance the teacher. Only: this teacher wasn't selfish,- just someone in several roles, caring for his pupils, ánd worried about his script. I think it's a simplification to call him selfish. The atmosphere in the village is creepy, and the mother made awful mistakes ('you terribly let me down…') but it doesn't become believable for me, that there is caused súch a lot of pain, that the shyest boy comes to such terrible things. In fact, reality is far more complex than the way, this film describes – and it needs far better descriptions. The interesting thing would be: how does it work? Describe that process for me please, so that we understand.

With the written phrase on the end, the director said to point to an alternative way of life. It was the other extreme, and confirmed for me that director and scriptwriter are bad psychologists, promoting black/white-thinking. The connection between violence in films and in society has been proved. Use such a violence gives the responsibility to use it right. There are enough black/white-thinkers in the world, causing lots of war and misery. I hope, this movie won't be successful. --------------------------------------------- Result 918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Like]] most comments I [[saw]] this film under the name of The Witching which is the reissue title. [[Apparently]] Necromancy which is the original is better but I doubt it.

[[Most]] scenes of the witching still include most necromancy scenes and these are [[still]] [[bad]]. In many ways I [[think]] the [[added]] nudity of the witching at [[least]] [[added]] some entertainment [[value]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[standing]] [[around]] [[variety]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This [[movie]] is so [[inherently]] [[awful]] it's [[difficult]] to know what to criticise [[first]]. The [[dialogue]] is awful and straight out of the Troma [[locker]]. [[At]] [[least]] Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the [[possessed]] [[kid]] in The Innocents [[would]] you [[believe]]!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy [[voice]]. Welles [[seems]] [[merely]] waiting for his pay [[cheque]]. The other [[female]] lead has a [[creepy]] face so I don't know why Pamela thought she [[could]] [[trust]] her in the [[film]]! And the doctor is pretty [[bad]] too. He also [[looks]] worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes [[changing]] for no [[reason]] and [[editing]] is choppy. This is because the witching is a [[copy]] and paste [[job]] and not a [[subtle]] one at that. [[Only]] the [[lighting]] is OK. The [[sound]] is also [[dreadful]] and it's difficult to [[hear]] with the [[appalling]] [[new]] soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' [[mother]] is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously bad at acting that at [[least]] it [[provides]] some unintentional [[laughs]].

[[Really]] this film (the witching at [[least]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[many]] sane [[fans]] as it's pretty unwatchable and I [[actually]] [[found]] it mind-numbingly [[dull]]!

The best bit was when the credits rolled - [[enough]] [[said]] so [[simply]] [[better]] to this poor [[excuse]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! [[Iike]] most comments I [[seen]] this film under the name of The Witching which is the reissue title. [[Obviously]] Necromancy which is the original is better but I doubt it.

[[More]] scenes of the witching still include most necromancy scenes and these are [[however]] [[negative]]. In many ways I [[thoughts]] the [[add]] nudity of the witching at [[lowest]] [[adding]] some entertainment [[values]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[permanent]] [[throughout]] [[diversity]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This [[filmmaking]] is so [[fundamentally]] [[horrific]] it's [[hard]] to know what to criticise [[firstly]]. The [[conversation]] is awful and straight out of the Troma [[cloakroom]]. [[In]] [[lowest]] Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the [[owned]] [[kiddo]] in The Innocents [[ought]] you [[think]]!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy [[vowel]]. Welles [[looks]] [[just]] waiting for his pay [[cheques]]. The other [[girl]] lead has a [[spooky]] face so I don't know why Pamela thought she [[did]] [[trusting]] her in the [[filmmaking]]! And the doctor is pretty [[negative]] too. He also [[seems]] worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes [[altered]] for no [[motif]] and [[edition]] is choppy. This is because the witching is a [[copies]] and paste [[workplace]] and not a [[nuanced]] one at that. [[Purely]] the [[illumination]] is OK. The [[sounds]] is also [[horrible]] and it's difficult to [[listen]] with the [[alarming]] [[newest]] soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' [[mommy]] is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously bad at acting that at [[lowest]] it [[gives]] some unintentional [[giggles]].

[[Genuinely]] this film (the witching at [[fewer]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[various]] sane [[lovers]] as it's pretty unwatchable and I [[indeed]] [[find]] it mind-numbingly [[tiresome]]!

The best bit was when the credits rolled - [[satisfactorily]] [[told]] so [[solely]] [[optimum]] to this poor [[alibis]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! --------------------------------------------- Result 919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This is unlike any other movie, the [[closest]] thing I can [[compare]] it to is a Woody Allen film... But where as Woody Allen is [[constantly]] fathoming human [[foibles]] Bret Carr [[appears]] to be trying to [[figure]] out a way to [[get]] to grips with that one [[crippling]] insecurity that tends to [[define]] us for better or worse. [[In]] the [[Case]] of [[Lou]], it is the [[root]] cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a [[singular]] [[child]] hood trauma that is [[revealed]] through flash backs.

There are so [[many]] [[strangely]] neurotic people in the [[world]] and I [[believe]] they all [[deserve]] a chance for redemption, [[although]] diversity of human [[character]] is after all what makes the [[world]] such an [[intriguing]] place, so [[maybe]] we shouldn't [[fix]] our [[neurosis]] [[anymore]] than we should [[fix]] our noses or [[Breasts]].

This is an [[indie]] [[film]] shot on a [[long]] shoestring, but the production values are [[tremendous]] as is the scope of the [[film]]. I feel like its a [[quirky]] Gem for the self-help market. I [[really]] [[look]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[could]] [[imagine]] a [[career]] along the lines of Woody Allen or [[Albert]] [[Brooks]], [[although]] [[usually]] when a [[guy]] like this [[breaks]] through, he goes off and makes " X [[MEN]]" and his humble [[quirky]] [[origins]] are [[soon]] [[forgotten]] or are they.... X [[Men]] is aout a bunch of [[freaks]] if i [[remember]] [[correctly]] :) This is unlike any other movie, the [[earliest]] thing I can [[comparative]] it to is a Woody Allen film... But where as Woody Allen is [[unceasingly]] fathoming human [[demerits]] Bret Carr [[transpires]] to be trying to [[silhouette]] out a way to [[got]] to grips with that one [[cripple]] insecurity that tends to [[defined]] us for better or worse. [[During]] the [[Instances]] of [[Lew]], it is the [[origin]] cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a [[particular]] [[kid]] hood trauma that is [[demonstrated]] through flash backs.

There are so [[innumerable]] [[suspiciously]] neurotic people in the [[worldwide]] and I [[think]] they all [[merit]] a chance for redemption, [[though]] diversity of human [[personage]] is after all what makes the [[worldwide]] such an [[exciting]] place, so [[potentially]] we shouldn't [[repairing]] our [[neuroses]] [[longer]] than we should [[mend]] our noses or [[Tits]].

This is an [[andi]] [[movies]] shot on a [[lengthy]] shoestring, but the production values are [[considerable]] as is the scope of the [[films]]. I feel like its a [[lunatic]] Gem for the self-help market. I [[truthfully]] [[peek]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[did]] [[presume]] a [[carrera]] along the lines of Woody Allen or [[Hugh]] [[Creek]], [[albeit]] [[fluently]] when a [[blokes]] like this [[interrupts]] through, he goes off and makes " X [[MALE]]" and his humble [[fickle]] [[wellspring]] are [[promptly]] [[ignored]] or are they.... X [[Male]] is aout a bunch of [[monsters]] if i [[reminisce]] [[adequately]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] E! TV is a great channel and [[Talk]] Soup is so funny,in a [[flash]] you can view the [[episodes]] change. We want more [[funny]] writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron [[Saint]] of the [[mindless]] masses... He is a [[truly]] [[talented]], [[gifted]] writer, actor, [[comic]], [[producer]],[[director]], and [[creative]] [[consultant]].[[Anna]] Nicole [[loved]] him , but he was not a $$$$[[Billionaire]] so he [[left]] him for a [[Billionaire]]. [[Many]] super [[stars]] [[wanted]] to [[make]] [[films]] with the actor [[Stan]] Evans, who has a "[[Humphrey]] Bogart" {Clark [[Gable]]}acting [[style]]. He should make [[many]] more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. [[Elvis]] has left the building!!!!! E! TV is a great channel and [[Schmooze]] Soup is so funny,in a [[flashback]] you can view the [[spells]] change. We want more [[fun]] writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron [[Saintly]] of the [[wanton]] masses... He is a [[really]] [[gifted]], [[talented]] writer, actor, [[comedian]], [[maker]],[[headmaster]], and [[inventive]] [[consulting]].[[Annas]] Nicole [[love]] him , but he was not a $$$$[[Millionaire]] so he [[exited]] him for a [[Millionaire]]. [[Myriad]] super [[celebrity]] [[wanting]] to [[deliver]] [[movie]] with the actor [[Stanley]] Evans, who has a "[[Humphreys]] Bogart" {Clark [[Bobble]]}acting [[styles]]. He should make [[innumerable]] more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. [[Alves]] has left the building!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 921 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first time I saw this film, I was in shock for days afterwards. Its painstaking and absorbing treatment of the subject holds the attention, helped by good acting and some really intriguing music. The ending, quite simply, had me gasping. First rate! --------------------------------------------- Result 922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The plot has already been [[described]] by other reviewers, so I will [[simply]] [[add]] that my [[reason]] for [[wanting]] to see this film was to [[see]] [[Gabrielle]] [[Drake]] in all her [[undoubted]] glory.

Miss [[Drake]] has to be one of the [[sexiest]], [[prettiest]] examples of "[[posh]] totty" to have been committed to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally [[exquisite]] [[Jane]] Asher comes close. What was it about actresses with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired Gabrielle, her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very cheaply made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. The plot has already been [[describe]] by other reviewers, so I will [[merely]] [[adds]] that my [[motif]] for [[wanted]] to see this film was to [[seeing]] [[Gabriel]] [[Gregg]] in all her [[undeniable]] glory.

Miss [[Gregg]] has to be one of the [[hot]], [[purest]] examples of "[[luxury]] totty" to have been committed to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally [[sumptuous]] [[Jeanne]] Asher comes close. What was it about actresses with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired Gabrielle, her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very cheaply made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. --------------------------------------------- Result 923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is so awful, it is hard to find the right words to describe it!

At first the story is so ridiculous.A narrow-minded human can write a better plot! The actors are boring and untalented, perhaps they were compelled to play in this cheesy Film.

The camera receptions of the National Forest are the only good in this whole movie. I should feel ashame, because I paid for this lousy Picture.

Hopefully nobody makes a sequel or make a similar film with such a worse storyline :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[However]], I was [[eager]] to [[get]] the heck out of the [[seats]] as soon as Big Rig ended. Big Rig is comprised of [[several]] "[[big]] rig" drivers who set out to [[deliver]] [[goods]] driven across the United States. The characters are all [[wonderful]] people, [[however]] the filmmakers never [[dug]] deep into the [[complexity]] of them as people. Instead, the [[story]] meanders as [[much]] as the [[maps]] in the [[film]] are [[meant]] to [[guide]], but never do. [[At]] most, we get lost. We - the [[audience]] - end up going [[nowhere]] and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The [[storytelling]] is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through [[propaganda]] that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[Still]], I was [[anxious]] to [[got]] the heck out of the [[seating]] as soon as Big Rig ended. Big Rig is comprised of [[different]] "[[major]] rig" drivers who set out to [[make]] [[wares]] driven across the United States. The characters are all [[sumptuous]] people, [[instead]] the filmmakers never [[dig]] deep into the [[complication]] of them as people. Instead, the [[narratives]] meanders as [[very]] as the [[cartes]] in the [[filmmaking]] are [[intended]] to [[guided]], but never do. [[For]] most, we get lost. We - the [[spectators]] - end up going [[everywhere]] and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The [[conte]] is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through [[publicity]] that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. --------------------------------------------- Result 925 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] (spoilers)The one truly memorable [[part]] of this otherwise rather dull and tepid bit of British [[cuisine]] is Steiner's henna [[rinse]], one of the [[worst]] dye jobs ever. That, and the [[magnificent]] caterpillar eyebrows on the [[old]] evil [[dude]] who was [[trying]] to [[steal]] Steiner's [[invention]]. MST3K does an admirable job of [[making]] a wretchedly boring and [[grey]] [[film]] funny.I [[particularly]] like it when [[Crow]] [[kills]] [[Mike]] with his '[[touch]] of death', and when he [[revives]] him in the theatre, Mike [[cries]] "[[Guys]], I died, I [[saw]] [[eternal]] truth and beauty! oh, it's this [[movie]]..." That [[would]] be a letdown, having to [[come]] back from the afterlife to watch the [[rest]] of The [[Projected]] [[Man]]. The [[film]] [[could]] make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the [[film]] were [[wicked]]: [[police]] inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"[[Shocking]], isn't it?" [[police]] inspector-"That's [[LOwe]], all right" [[Tom]] Servo-"[[Very]] low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I [[get]] on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but [[knock]] yourself out" MST3K is [[definitely]] the only [[way]] to watch this snoozer. (spoilers)The one truly memorable [[party]] of this otherwise rather dull and tepid bit of British [[kitchen]] is Steiner's henna [[backwash]], one of the [[worse]] dye jobs ever. That, and the [[sumptuous]] caterpillar eyebrows on the [[archaic]] evil [[guy]] who was [[tempting]] to [[stole]] Steiner's [[contrivance]]. MST3K does an admirable job of [[doing]] a wretchedly boring and [[grays]] [[kino]] funny.I [[specifically]] like it when [[Corneille]] [[slain]] [[Mick]] with his '[[touches]] of death', and when he [[greets]] him in the theatre, Mike [[screaming]] "[[Guy]], I died, I [[observed]] [[permanent]] truth and beauty! oh, it's this [[filmmaking]]..." That [[could]] be a letdown, having to [[coming]] back from the afterlife to watch the [[roosting]] of The [[Prediction]] [[Dawg]]. The [[flick]] [[did]] make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the [[movie]] were [[naughty]]: [[policemen]] inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"[[Gruesome]], isn't it?" [[nypd]] inspector-"That's [[laotian]], all right" [[Tum]] Servo-"[[Enormously]] low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I [[got]] on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but [[knocking]] yourself out" MST3K is [[undoubtedly]] the only [[camino]] to watch this snoozer. --------------------------------------------- Result 926 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful [[Red]] [[Queen]] figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[disappointment]], but surprise, surprise, I [[loved]] it. Convoluted [[nonsense]] of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, [[let]] alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a [[dream]]. Fabulous [[ladies]] in fabulous outfits in [[wonderful]] settings and the whole thing [[constantly]] on the move and [[accompanied]] by a [[wonderful]] Bruno Nicolai [[score]]. He may not be [[Morricone]] but in these lighter [[pieces]] he might as well be so. Really [[enjoyable]] with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful [[Reid]] [[Reine]] figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[disillusionment]], but surprise, surprise, I [[cared]] it. Convoluted [[stupidity]] of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, [[allowing]] alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a [[nightmares]]. Fabulous [[madams]] in fabulous outfits in [[funky]] settings and the whole thing [[systematically]] on the move and [[escorted]] by a [[wondrous]] Bruno Nicolai [[punctuation]]. He may not be [[Ennio]] but in these lighter [[smithereens]] he might as well be so. Really [[pleasant]] with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. --------------------------------------------- Result 927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] By God, it's been a [[long]] time [[since]] I saw this. [[Probably]] about 18 years [[ago]]?

The [[movie]] [[tells]] us ([[kids]]) all about human blood and the circulatory system. [[Very]] professionally put together--Disney-style [[animation]], plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

Kind of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." By God, it's been a [[lengthy]] time [[because]] I saw this. [[Presumably]] about 18 years [[beforehand]]?

The [[kino]] [[says]] us ([[brats]]) all about human blood and the circulatory system. [[Vitally]] professionally put together--Disney-style [[animate]], plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

Kind of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." --------------------------------------------- Result 928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked. It really was a waste of my life. The acting was atrocious, the plot completely implausible. Long, long story short, these people get "terrorized" by this pathetic "crazed killer", but completely fail to fight back in any manner. And this is after they take a raft on a camping trip, with no gear, and show up at a campsite that is already assembled and completely stocked with food and clothes and the daughters headphones. Additionally, after their boat goes missing, they panic that they're stuck in the woods, but then the daughters boyfriend just shows up and they apparently never consider that they could just hike out of the woods like he did to get to them. Like I said, this movie sucks. A complete joke. Don't let your girlfriend talk you into watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anna (Ursula Andress) is brought in as an official R.N. by ex-lover Benito Varotto (Duilio Del Prete), ostensibly to nurse an aging widower, Count Leonida Bottacin (Mario Piso), back to health after a heart attack. But Benito is actually leading a group of heirs and businessmen, including American entrepreneur Mr. Kitch (Jack Palance), with ulterior motives, reflected by what Anna hopefully will actually accomplish with the Count. He has a history of, well, liking women, and would be actually a bit more "vulnerable" as he is cured. The bad guys get derailed as Anna does not go along and grows closer to the Count. The ending might be said to be ironic, but it is probably better described as predictable.

But so much for plot--this film is totally an erotic comedy, from start to finish, and oh how good. There are many nude scenes, including ones of Anna and Jole, one of the malevolent heiresses, played by Luciana Paluzzi. Both Ursula and Luciana are noteworthy continental ex-Bond women, and thus fulfill the fantasies of male viewers. As she did in Thunderball (remember Fiona Volpe), Luciana plays a femme fatale, sort of, although less elegantly.

Perhaps the best scene is Anna's (slow) complete strip and jump in bed with the young Adone, the "other patient" (who incredibly is resisting), in an attempt to find out what he knows about the plot. But even at this point she is already two-faced (for the better), for she has decided not to go along. However, Benito is more than a two-timer with women, having had lengthy flings in the past with both Anna and Jole, and the rival best erotic scene follows an invective-filled (to put it mildly) argument between him and Jole. This is a standing-up encounter in which Luciana is down to black panties only. Another nice one is Ursula swimming fully naked in the estate's pool. The Count is free, as the client, to put his hands wherever he wants to on Ursula, and he takes advantage. Hey, somehow I've gone back to the actresses' names in my descriptions. Erotic scenes involving other women include an amusing naked wine cellar chase. "The Sensuous Nurse" is compact, 77 minutes, but it doesn't need to be--it is enjoyable without interruption, start to finish. Definitely recommended.

--------------------------------------------- Result 930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] there is a story, but more essentially, the [[world]] of this [[film]] begins in [[chaos]] and [[comes]] to [[order]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[celebration]] of life and an [[optimistic]] [[assertion]] of [[objective]] truth and good. representing along an [[axis]] [[unexplored]] in previous cinema, this [[film]] should be taught in [[every]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* there is a story, but more essentially, the [[monde]] of this [[kino]] begins in [[muddle]] and [[occurs]] to [[orders]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[festivities]] of life and an [[hopeful]] [[contention]] of [[purpose]] truth and good. representing along an [[shaft]] [[unrecognized]] in previous cinema, this [[movie]] should be taught in [[each]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* --------------------------------------------- Result 931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Just]] in [[time]] to capitalize on the long-awaited [[movie]] version of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD release of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly black cast and a story revolving around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the [[resemblance]] [[basically]] [[ends]]. [[Written]] by Joel Schumacher well before he [[became]] a big-league [[director]] of mainstream studio [[product]] ("Batman Forever", "The [[Phantom]] of the [[Opera]]"), this [[movie]] [[seems]] grittier on the surface. [[True]] to form, however, Schumacher [[weakens]] the storyline and [[character]] [[development]] by injecting an [[abundance]] of [[clichés]] and eye-rolling one-liners. With [[little]] affinity for staging musical [[numbers]], Sam O'Steen, a [[highly]] regarded [[film]] [[editor]] but neophyte [[director]], helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic [[structure]].

The [[story]] follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet [[Sparkle]] - as they [[sing]] in the church [[choir]], [[meet]] smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then [[find]] their first [[taste]] of [[success]] as a [[singing]] [[group]] - first as a sweater-wearing quintet [[called]] the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio [[known]] as [[Sister]] and the Sisters. But naturally there are [[problems]] [[beyond]] the silly [[name]] for the [[group]] - [[Sister]] gets involved with [[nasty]] drug [[dealer]] Satin Struthers who [[beats]] her and turns her into a cocaine [[junkie]]; Levi goes to [[prison]] for [[getting]] caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix [[gets]] frustrated by [[failure]] and [[unwisely]] turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial [[help]]; Delores just gets plain [[fed]] up; and poor [[little]] [[Sparkle]] has to [[decide]] what kind of [[future]] she [[wants]]. A [[big]] plus is that [[R]]&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into [[Your]] Heart", a real [[winner]].

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted [[plot]] turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". [[Only]] in [[times]] to capitalize on the long-awaited [[film]] version of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD release of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly black cast and a story revolving around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the [[similarity]] [[broadly]] [[end]]. [[Authored]] by Joel Schumacher well before he [[came]] a big-league [[superintendent]] of mainstream studio [[products]] ("Batman Forever", "The [[Ghost]] of the [[Drama]]"), this [[film]] [[appears]] grittier on the surface. [[Veritable]] to form, however, Schumacher [[undermines]] the storyline and [[nature]] [[developments]] by injecting an [[abundant]] of [[cliché]] and eye-rolling one-liners. With [[small]] affinity for staging musical [[digit]], Sam O'Steen, a [[incredibly]] regarded [[movies]] [[editorial]] but neophyte [[headmaster]], helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic [[structures]].

The [[tales]] follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet [[Spark]] - as they [[singing]] in the church [[choral]], [[respond]] smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then [[found]] their first [[liking]] of [[avail]] as a [[sings]] [[panels]] - first as a sweater-wearing quintet [[drew]] the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio [[renowned]] as [[Sisters]] and the Sisters. But naturally there are [[troubles]] [[afterlife]] the silly [[naming]] for the [[panels]] - [[Sisters]] gets involved with [[vile]] drug [[dealers]] Satin Struthers who [[beat]] her and turns her into a cocaine [[addict]]; Levi goes to [[prisons]] for [[obtain]] caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix [[got]] frustrated by [[deficit]] and [[recklessly]] turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial [[aids]]; Delores just gets plain [[fueled]] up; and poor [[small]] [[Spark]] has to [[decided]] what kind of [[next]] she [[wish]]. A [[wide]] plus is that [[rs]]&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into [[Ton]] Heart", a real [[winning]].

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted [[intrigue]] turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". --------------------------------------------- Result 932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For die-hard Judy Garland fans only. There are two (2) numbers that are really good -- one where she does a number with an older cleaning lady (you've all seen the pics), and a pretty good number at the very end. There are a couple of scenes where the lines are funny. But, basically, the script is so bad and the movie so dated that it's hard not to cringe at the awfulness throughout. But it's worth the 2.50 to rent the movie -- just be prepared to fast-forward it. --------------------------------------------- Result 933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely [[understand]] how you can be [[dragged]] into a film because you [[relate]] to the [[subject]] ( and you have). This film is terrible, the [[main]] [[character]] would [[give]] any [[charlie]] brown subtitler a [[run]] for his money he just [[constantly]] [[mumbles]] which is always a laugh, most scenes just feel awkward with [[characters]] more [[often]] than not [[gazing]] [[across]] to another with a [[look]] of...its your line now, then i will [[react]]. Best British comedy? Please [[buddy]], have a strong word with your [[bad]] [[bad]] self...at the end of the day ...the [[sun]] goes down...and this film is [[Awful]]. I [[mean]] well [[done]] to the people [[involved]]...they have [[made]] a [[film]]...and [[maybe]] [[motorbike]] [[enthusiasts]] may be into it but people that [[still]] [[live]] here on [[earth]] with an [[actual]] sense of humour will [[struggle]] with this more than smiling at the [[Christmas]] present they're nan [[bought]] them...was that [[overly]] [[harsh]]? i do apologise... But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely [[fathom]] how you can be [[languished]] into a film because you [[pertain]] to the [[topic]] ( and you have). This film is terrible, the [[principal]] [[trait]] would [[confer]] any [[vietcong]] brown subtitler a [[running]] for his money he just [[unceasingly]] [[mutters]] which is always a laugh, most scenes just feel awkward with [[personages]] more [[ordinarily]] than not [[gazed]] [[during]] to another with a [[peek]] of...its your line now, then i will [[responding]]. Best British comedy? Please [[dawg]], have a strong word with your [[amiss]] [[naughty]] self...at the end of the day ...the [[suen]] goes down...and this film is [[Odious]]. I [[meaning]] well [[doing]] to the people [[involvement]]...they have [[introduced]] a [[cinematography]]...and [[conceivably]] [[scooter]] [[followers]] may be into it but people that [[however]] [[vive]] here on [[land]] with an [[real]] sense of humour will [[tussle]] with this more than smiling at the [[Kringle]] present they're nan [[procured]] them...was that [[excessively]] [[hard]]? i do apologise... --------------------------------------------- Result 934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I haven't read this book, but all through the movie I was awestruck with only one thought in my head: This is so Vonnegut. I have never seen an author, all of the intelligence and life behind the workings of a novel, translated so well to film. This movie had the same complexities found in Vonnegut's novels: the jokes were often meaningful and symbolic, and the dramatic events and symbols were often also jokes.

Campbell was also a very Vonnegut character, portrayed perfectly by Nick Nolte. He had all of the earmarks of a Vonnegut "hero": lack of concern for political boundaries, ironic dark humor giving way to dumb inactivity in response to stress, and an unwillingness to push his version of reality on those around him.

Overall, I was constantly surprised and impressed as I watched this movie. It was the same feeling I had reading "Cat's Cradle," my first Vonnegut novel, as if the most perfectly oddball thing that could happen, he thought of THAT, and he made it real and important. Yes, he has nothing but army surplus "White Christmas" albums. So it goes! --------------------------------------------- Result 935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I show this film to university students in speech and media law because its lessons are timeless: Why speaking out against injustice is important and can bring about the changes sought by the oppressed. Why freedom of the press and freedom of speech are essential to democracy. This is a must-see story of how apartheid was brought to the attention of the world through the activism of Steven Biko and the journalism of Donald Woods. It also gives an important lesson of free speech: "You can blow out a candle, but you can't blow out a fire. Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher." (From Biko by Peter Gabriel, on Shaking the Tree). --------------------------------------------- Result 936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] SEVEN [[POUNDS]]: EMOTIONALLY FLAT, [[ILLOGICAL]], MORALLY [[DISTURBING]]

The [[movie]] was distributed in Italy as "[[Seven]] Souls". I was [[curious]] about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "[[pound]]" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, [[aimed]] at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed [[incident]], to which Ben yields, but [[incapable]] of [[conveying]] true [[emotional]] [[involvement]]. I really didn't like the [[idea]] at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however [[devoured]] by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being [[improbable]], it makes no [[sense]]. I would have [[liked]], and I think it would have been more [[positive]] if, in the end, Ben had [[decided]] to [[abandon]] the [[idea]] of committing suicide and go on living, [[thus]] [[helping]] those same people, and [[maybe]] [[many]] more, just standing near them, and [[helping]] them through his presence. He wouldn't have [[saved]] their lives [[miraculously]], of course: this [[would]] have probably caused more suffering, but I think it [[could]] have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are [[many]] [[illogical]] and [[disturbing]] [[things]]: the [[initial]] [[reference]] to God's [[creation]] in seven days (which, by the [[way]], [[according]] to the [[Bible]], are six!): what does it [[mean]]? And what about a [[woman]] [[suffering]] from heart-disease which [[prevents]] her from [[running]] and [[even]] from singing without feeling bad, who can have [[normal]] sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure [[nonsense]], not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and [[emotional]] one. SEVEN [[POUND]]: EMOTIONALLY FLAT, [[SENSELESS]], MORALLY [[DISCONCERTING]]

The [[filmmaking]] was distributed in Italy as "[[Sept]] Souls". I was [[nosy]] about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "[[lbs]]" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, [[destined]] at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed [[accidents]], to which Ben yields, but [[unable]] of [[transmitting]] true [[sentimental]] [[engagement]]. I really didn't like the [[ideals]] at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however [[tasted]] by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being [[unlikely]], it makes no [[sensing]]. I would have [[loved]], and I think it would have been more [[favorable]] if, in the end, Ben had [[decide]] to [[abandoning]] the [[think]] of committing suicide and go on living, [[accordingly]] [[contribute]] those same people, and [[perhaps]] [[various]] more, just standing near them, and [[helps]] them through his presence. He wouldn't have [[rescue]] their lives [[narrowly]], of course: this [[should]] have probably caused more suffering, but I think it [[did]] have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are [[numerous]] [[irrational]] and [[disconcerting]] [[aspects]]: the [[upfront]] [[referencing]] to God's [[establishment]] in seven days (which, by the [[camino]], [[depending]] to the [[Bibles]], are six!): what does it [[imply]]? And what about a [[wife]] [[suffers]] from heart-disease which [[hinders]] her from [[executing]] and [[yet]] from singing without feeling bad, who can have [[habitual]] sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure [[absurdity]], not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and [[affective]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I was [[really]] impressed with this [[film]]. The writing was fantastic, and the [[characters]] were all [[rich]], and [[simple]]. It's very [[easy]] to [[get]] [[emotionally]] attached to all of them. The creators of this movie [[really]] hit the nail [[right]] on the head when it [[comes]] to [[creating]] [[real]] life [[characters]], and getting the [[viewer]] sucked right into their world. Further, the music is [[terrific]]. They employed some independents to do the [[score]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[fantastic]] [[job]] [[adding]] to the movie. [[If]] you have a [[chance]] to [[catch]] this movie in a [[small]] [[theater]] or at a [[film]] [[festival]] (like I did), I [[highly]] recommend that you go see it. [[Also]], on a personal [[note]], Paget Brewster is [[beautiful]] in this [[movie]]. That's [[reason]] [[enough]] to [[go]] [[check]] it out. I was [[truthfully]] impressed with this [[movies]]. The writing was fantastic, and the [[features]] were all [[wealthy]], and [[simpler]]. It's very [[simpler]] to [[gets]] [[romantically]] attached to all of them. The creators of this movie [[truthfully]] hit the nail [[rights]] on the head when it [[arrives]] to [[establishment]] [[actual]] life [[features]], and getting the [[beholder]] sucked right into their world. Further, the music is [[wondrous]]. They employed some independents to do the [[punctuation]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[wondrous]] [[labor]] [[added]] to the movie. [[Unless]] you have a [[luck]] to [[capture]] this movie in a [[tiny]] [[cinemas]] or at a [[movie]] [[celebratory]] (like I did), I [[vastly]] recommend that you go see it. [[Furthermore]], on a personal [[remark]], Paget Brewster is [[wondrous]] in this [[cinematography]]. That's [[justification]] [[suffice]] to [[going]] [[auditing]] it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A really great movie and true story. Dan Jansen the Greatest skater ever. A touching and beautiful movie the whole family can enjoy. The story of Jane Jansens battle with cancer and Dan Jansen love for his sister. Of a important promise made by Jansen to win a gold medal to prove his sister Jane was right to believe in his talent in speed skating was justified. This picture is well worth the time. I wish they would make more films of this quality. Thank you for a great film with excellent actors and an excellent story. It is a very touching story about a beautiful family support and faith for their children and a special dream for their youngest son and his sister. --------------------------------------------- Result 939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Cornel [[Wilde]] and three dumbbells search for [[sunken]] treasure in the [[south]] Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a [[group]] of territorial sharks with cute [[little]] sneers on their hungry faces. [[Wilde]] and his merry [[men]] [[must]] [[find]] a [[way]] to [[take]] themselves off the menu so they can [[begin]] [[excavating]] an [[old]] Spanish galleon filled with gold [[bullion]].

[[After]] the crew [[engages]] in a [[small]] eternity of pushing, shoving, [[arguing]], and [[listening]] to Wilde's [[annoying]] health tips, 5 crazy convicts board the [[boat]] and [[complicate]] things. [[Now]] it is a [[battle]] of [[wits]] as to who [[gets]] the [[treasure]] and who [[gets]] to [[see]] what the [[inside]] of a shark's [[stomach]] [[looks]] like.

At [[least]] [[Wilde]] is in shape wearing [[exactly]] the same [[thing]] he wore in 'The [[Naked]] Prey' 10 [[years]] earlier and he has [[remained]] in [[excellent]] condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. Cornel [[Feral]] and three dumbbells search for [[drowned]] treasure in the [[southern]] Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a [[grouped]] of territorial sharks with cute [[small]] sneers on their hungry faces. [[Wild]] and his merry [[males]] [[gotta]] [[found]] a [[manner]] to [[taking]] themselves off the menu so they can [[launching]] [[digging]] an [[archaic]] Spanish galleon filled with gold [[ingot]].

[[Upon]] the crew [[participates]] in a [[tiny]] eternity of pushing, shoving, [[claiming]], and [[listen]] to Wilde's [[galling]] health tips, 5 crazy convicts board the [[battleship]] and [[intricate]] things. [[Presently]] it is a [[combat]] of [[spirit]] as to who [[receives]] the [[tesoro]] and who [[receives]] to [[behold]] what the [[inland]] of a shark's [[abdomen]] [[seem]] like.

At [[lowest]] [[Sauvage]] is in shape wearing [[precisely]] the same [[stuff]] he wore in 'The [[Barefoot]] Prey' 10 [[ages]] earlier and he has [[persisted]] in [[sumptuous]] condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. --------------------------------------------- Result 940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The script for this Columbo film seemed to be pulled right out of a sappy 1980's soap opera. Deeply character-driven films are great, but only if the characters are compelling. And in this film the only thing compelling was my desire to change the channel. The villain's dialog sounds as if it were written by a romance novelist. The great Lt. Columbo himself is no where near his famous, lovable, self-effacing, crumpled self; and the bride/kidnap victim is a whimpering, one-dimensional damsel-in-distress (she cowers in fear from a tiny scalpel held flimsily in the hand of her abductor - come on!!! I could have knocked the scalpel out of his hand and kicked him in the you-know-what in 2 seconds). In any sense of reality, this character would have at least TRIED to struggle or fight back at least a little. And speaking of reality....the story revolves around a kidnapping which is worked and solved by the police. The POLICE?? Give me a break. Everyone knows the FBI takes over EVERY kidnapping case. This was NO Columbo, just a shallow and totally predictable crime drama with our familiar Lt. Columbo written in and stretched to 2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This had a good [[story]]...it had a nice [[pace]] and all characters are [[developed]] cool.

I've watched a [[whole]] bunch of [[movies]] in the last two [[weeks]] and this had to be the [[best]] one I've [[seen]] in the two [[weeks]].

Jason Bigg's [[character]] was the best though.

[[Even]] [[though]] it was [[small]], it was cleverly [[crafted]] from the very [[beginning]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, direction, performing, sound, [[design]] overall in all [[capacity]] just was [[really]] [[thought]] out [[pretty]] cool.

This [[film]] scored [[pretty]] [[high]] out of all the movie's I've [[seen]] [[lately]] - and the [[rest]] were [[big]] budget or better [[publicized]].

[[Good]] [[job]] in writing. This had a good [[narratives]]...it had a nice [[tempo]] and all characters are [[worded]] cool.

I've watched a [[total]] bunch of [[cinema]] in the last two [[zhou]] and this had to be the [[bestest]] one I've [[noticed]] in the two [[chow]].

Jason Bigg's [[nature]] was the best though.

[[Yet]] [[if]] it was [[scant]], it was cleverly [[elaborated]] from the very [[starts]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, direction, performing, sound, [[designs]] overall in all [[capability]] just was [[truly]] [[thoughts]] out [[quite]] cool.

This [[cinematography]] scored [[quite]] [[alto]] out of all the movie's I've [[watched]] [[newly]] - and the [[stays]] were [[overwhelming]] budget or better [[advertised]].

[[Well]] [[labour]] in writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Indian Summer is a warm, multi-character film, that would make a fine afternoon film (with a bit of editing).

The film begins in the past with a group of children being shown a moose, which sets the tone perfectly before cutting into the present, when a group of adults from the "golden age" of the camp are invited back again to spend a few weeks holiday by the head of the camp, Uncle Lou. The film then allows the viewer to spend time with these characters as they remember their times at the camp, and form new memories in their latest stay.

The film succeeds in the great way it brings across its characters in this gorgeous setting, and allows them room to develop without having to worry about plot developments. Watching these people reminisce, and their relationships with each other is what the film is all about and why it works so well. It never goes to over the top and melodramatic, always keeping its warmth, charm and realism. I've never seen a film where nostalgia is captured so well, and found myself getting drawn in despite never having been to one of these camps as a child myself.

For a warm, nostalgic character movie, I sincerely recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie probably had a $750 budget, and still managed to surpass Titanic. i rented this the day i crashed my mom's car, and it was the only thing that cheered me up beyond belief! it has to be tied with 'The Assult of the Killer Bimbos'. Things to look for are: 1. The drive in blow job chinese girl scene 2. The bleach blonde in the sassoon shirt who never changes 3. The Flinstone-like screech out driving 4. The clashing ensemble worn by the redhead right before she gets killed (don't worry, i'm not ruining any surprises, for it's soooo predictable) 5. The guy who finds it necessary to howl. 6. The mental patient who plays a convincing job of being insane by poking out the eyes of a maniquen. 7. The hour long chase at the end involving the teacher and the priest. 8. the womman writing grafitti on the bathroom wall. 9. last, but not least, the wonderful special effects--especially the stab in the boob that made a... heaven help me... popping noise.

enjoy!

--------------------------------------------- Result 944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] out by saying i will [[try]] not to put too [[many]] spoilers in this. [[Normally]] I enjoy [[Robin]] [[Williams]] movies, [[however]] this gem was not one of them. It was [[billed]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was [[anything]] but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theater]] opening day, 2 walked out, for [[good]] [[reason]]. The [[movie]] was in my [[opinion]] poorly [[written]] and [[directed]]. The acting was alright but again there wasn't [[anything]] to [[work]] with. The [[movie]] is about A storyteller who reads a [[good]] book by a dying [[kid]]. However *insert spooky here* no one can [[verify]] the kids existence. So Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[try]] and [[find]] the author, [[however]] all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[boys]] caretaker. There thats it, thats all. You [[wait]] for about an [[hour]] and a half and [[movie]] ends. It had as many thrills and [[chills]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[really]] nothing to do with the [[story]], and the [[movie]] had a little [[profanity]] but it [[seemed]] to be [[thrown]] in there for [[absolutely]] no [[reason]] and [[made]] [[little]] [[sense]]. [[In]] [[conclusion]] i [[really]] can't [[write]] a [[decent]] [[review]] on this [[film]] because there was [[nothing]] to it, it was as captivating as [[watching]] [[paint]] dry. I [[gave]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was alright and it wasn't [[directed]] by Uwe Boll. [[Allowing]] me [[beginning]] out by saying i will [[strive]] not to put too [[countless]] spoilers in this. [[Habitually]] I enjoy [[Robben]] [[William]] movies, [[conversely]] this gem was not one of them. It was [[billing]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was [[something]] but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theatres]] opening day, 2 walked out, for [[alright]] [[reasons]]. The [[filmmaking]] was in my [[view]] poorly [[wrote]] and [[aimed]]. The acting was alright but again there wasn't [[algo]] to [[collaborated]] with. The [[filmmaking]] is about A storyteller who reads a [[alright]] book by a dying [[child]]. However *insert spooky here* no one can [[checks]] the kids existence. So Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[strive]] and [[finds]] the author, [[conversely]] all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[boy]] caretaker. There thats it, thats all. You [[awaited]] for about an [[hours]] and a half and [[film]] ends. It had as many thrills and [[shivers]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[genuinely]] nothing to do with the [[histories]], and the [[filmmaking]] had a little [[rudeness]] but it [[appeared]] to be [[threw]] in there for [[perfectly]] no [[cause]] and [[introduced]] [[small]] [[sensing]]. [[For]] [[conclusions]] i [[genuinely]] can't [[handwriting]] a [[dignified]] [[reviews]] on this [[filmmaking]] because there was [[none]] to it, it was as captivating as [[staring]] [[paintings]] dry. I [[provided]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was alright and it wasn't [[oriented]] by Uwe Boll. --------------------------------------------- Result 945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] [[film]] for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[someone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. This was a [[depressing]] [[filmmaking]] for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[everyone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I was a kid we always used to be babysat, and we always used to rent a film or see a film at the cinema. This is one of the films we watched. This is one of the stupidest films I've ever seen, I think it might even be a Walt Disney Pictures film! A martian is dropped on earth, turns into a human, befriends a human, and is trying everything he can to get back home. But he is distracted by the wonders of the Earth. The only good comment I can give is the choice of actors, Back to the Future's Christopher Lloyd as the martian, Uncle Martin, Dumb and Dumber's Jeff Daniels as Tim O'Hara, Elizabeth Hurley as Brace Channing and Daryl Hannah as Lizzie. But apart from that it's complete crap. Poor! --------------------------------------------- Result 947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Where the Sidewalk [[Ends]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another [[Begins]]

This is a prototypical [[film]] [[noir]], and as such, pretty [[flawless]], from both [[style]] and content points of [[view]]. The [[photography]] and [[night]] settings are first rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[ooze]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on [[faces]] pure expressionism. I can watch this [[kind]] of [[film]] for the visuals alone, [[even]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[first]] rate here, and the plot [[features]] what I [[consider]] the [[core]] of most [[noir]] [[films]], the alienated male lead (representing the [[many]] [[men]] returning home to a [[changed]] United States after the [[war]] and [[feeling]] lost themselves). [[In]] fact, not only is Dana Andrews really [[convincing]] as the [[troubled]], [[loner]] detective, he has a [[small]] but [[important]] counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an [[decorated]] ex-GI [[fallen]] [[onto]] [[hard]] [[times]] and booze. The [[fact]] the one [[man]] [[kills]] the other might be of [[monumental]] [[significance]], overall-- the [[regular]] [[guy]] [[struggling]] through his [[inner]] [[problems]] to success while the medal-wearing [[soldier]] [[slips]] into an accidental death with a silver [[plate]] in his [[head]]. The [[woman]] transitions from one to the other--we [[assume]] they [[marry]] and have [[children]] as [[suggested]] earlier in the [[movie]]. Even if this is pushing an [[interpretation]] [[onto]] it after the [[fact]], we can [[still]] see the [[path]] of one [[man]] with some psychological [[baggage]] careening through a crisis to the [[highest]] [[kind]] of moral order--turning himself in for a [[small]] [[crime]] just at the point he has actually [[gotten]] away with it.

This [[movie]] belongs to [[Andrews]]. He plays a far more [[restrained]] and [[moving]] [[type]] than Kirk Douglas plays in a [[similar]] role in [[William]] Wyler's Detective [[Story]] [[made]] just one year [[later]], and [[Andrews]] certainly is less theatrical. You could easily [[see]] both [[movies]] side by side for a textbook [[compare]] and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally [[struggling]] through it all, and Douglas as [[Detective]] [[McLeod]] is not, might [[explain]] why one [[man]] gets his [[girl]] and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney [[pulls]] off a [[hugely]] sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "[[pretty]]" [[type]] of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you [[want]] [[Dixon]] to [[actually]] [[marry]].

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. Where the Sidewalk [[End]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another [[Embark]]

This is a prototypical [[cinema]] [[negro]], and as such, pretty [[perfecting]], from both [[elegance]] and content points of [[views]]. The [[photographed]] and [[nuit]] settings are first rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[muck]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on [[confronting]] pure expressionism. I can watch this [[genus]] of [[movie]] for the visuals alone, [[yet]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[frst]] rate here, and the plot [[featuring]] what I [[considering]] the [[nuclei]] of most [[negro]] [[movie]], the alienated male lead (representing the [[multiple]] [[males]] returning home to a [[amended]] United States after the [[warfare]] and [[impression]] lost themselves). [[Among]] fact, not only is Dana Andrews really [[persuade]] as the [[tormented]], [[hermit]] detective, he has a [[minimal]] but [[principal]] counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an [[ornate]] ex-GI [[dropped]] [[on]] [[stiff]] [[moments]] and booze. The [[facto]] the one [[guy]] [[murdering]] the other might be of [[enormous]] [[importance]], overall-- the [[regularly]] [[boys]] [[battling]] through his [[interiors]] [[difficulty]] to success while the medal-wearing [[servicemen]] [[slip]] into an accidental death with a silver [[slab]] in his [[chief]]. The [[wife]] transitions from one to the other--we [[suppose]] they [[married]] and have [[kids]] as [[proposed]] earlier in the [[films]]. Even if this is pushing an [[explanations]] [[for]] it after the [[facto]], we can [[yet]] see the [[way]] of one [[dude]] with some psychological [[bag]] careening through a crisis to the [[higher]] [[genre]] of moral order--turning himself in for a [[petite]] [[offence]] just at the point he has actually [[become]] away with it.

This [[film]] belongs to [[Andrew]]. He plays a far more [[limited]] and [[transferring]] [[genus]] than Kirk Douglas plays in a [[analogue]] role in [[Guillaume]] Wyler's Detective [[Tale]] [[introduced]] just one year [[then]], and [[Andrew]] certainly is less theatrical. You could easily [[seeing]] both [[film]] side by side for a textbook [[comparisons]] and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally [[tussle]] through it all, and Douglas as [[Inspector]] [[macleod]] is not, might [[explained]] why one [[guy]] gets his [[girls]] and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney [[pulled]] off a [[unbelievably]] sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "[[belle]]" [[genre]] of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you [[wish]] [[Dickson]] to [[genuinely]] [[matrimony]].

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. --------------------------------------------- Result 948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and [[reproduce]] themselves. [[So]] far for the horror-elements this [[movie]] has. All the [[rest]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[like]] a [[really]] [[retarded]] [[comedy]] that's so [[stupid]] you won't [[find]] it [[funny]] anymore after about 15 minutes. I can [[imagine]] [[little]] [[kids]] [[cheering]] for these [[little]] boogers, but adults will be left with only those [[supposedly]] "[[smart]]" [[references]] [[translating]] to on-screen stuff like [[Capt]]. Kirk's [[log]] [[entries]] from [[STAR]] [[TREK]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a [[blatant]] statement from the filmmakers [[going]] "[[Look]]! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' [[success]] here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint [[Eastwood]] [[telling]] us... what about his [[western]] [[movies]] [[exactly]]? That [[last]] one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves [[seems]] to be a bad [[thing]]. Don't know where they got that [[idea]] from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable [[film]] to [[sit]] through, for that [[matter]]. It's just really, [[really]] dumb. And if you [[manage]] to crack a [[smile]] while watching it, you'll [[probably]] feel as dumb yourself for having [[done]] that after the film's [[finished]].

[[Good]] Badness? [[Yes]], but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're [[looking]] for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and [[replay]] themselves. [[Therefore]] far for the horror-elements this [[filmmaking]] has. All the [[resting]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[iike]] a [[genuinely]] [[nutcase]] [[humor]] that's so [[dumb]] you won't [[found]] it [[hilarious]] anymore after about 15 minutes. I can [[reckon]] [[petit]] [[brats]] [[chanting]] for these [[tiny]] boogers, but adults will be left with only those [[reportedly]] "[[smarter]]" [[reference]] [[convert]] to on-screen stuff like [[Captain]]. Kirk's [[registers]] [[entrances]] from [[STARS]] [[HIKING]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a [[gross]] statement from the filmmakers [[go]] "[[Peek]]! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' [[accomplishments]] here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint [[Nolan]] [[tell]] us... what about his [[west]] [[movie]] [[accurately]]? That [[latter]] one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves [[appears]] to be a bad [[stuff]]. Don't know where they got that [[ideas]] from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable [[filmmaking]] to [[seated]] through, for that [[topic]]. It's just really, [[genuinely]] dumb. And if you [[managerial]] to crack a [[grin]] while watching it, you'll [[undoubtedly]] feel as dumb yourself for having [[played]] that after the film's [[finishing]].

[[Alright]] Badness? [[Yep]], but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're [[researching]] for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Any movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European [[Vacation]]" is unlikely to [[rectify]] that situation. The [[appalling]] Griswalds are just that - [[appalling]].They are not [[funny]]. [[Clearly]] [[Mr]] [[Chevy]] [[Chase]] thinks he's funny, after all [[Miss]] B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's [[getting]] paid for it and didn't have to [[fork]] out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same [[old]] same [[old]] TV [[performers]], [[Messrs]] [[Idle]],Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same [[old]] same [[old]] [[tired]] clichés,[[Mr]] [[Chase]] [[gets]] lost in the hotel [[corridor]]....[[yawn]],yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham [[Palace]],[[Big]] Ben......I feel [[cheated]] that we never [[saw]] bobbies on [[bicycles]] two-by-two.........rosie red [[cheeks]] on the [[little]] chil - dren,[[need]] I go on? The [[English]] are buffoons,the French [[vicious]] - tongued Yank-haters.The [[Germans]] pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,[[Clark]]),and the [[Italians]] lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to [[death]],Mr [[Chase]] gurns [[desperately]],Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]]. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never [[lose]] money by underestimating public [[taste]]. Any movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European [[Holiday]]" is unlikely to [[redress]] that situation. The [[terrible]] Griswalds are just that - [[shocking]].They are not [[hilarious]]. [[Clara]] [[Herr]] [[Chevrolet]] [[Hunting]] thinks he's funny, after all [[Mademoiselle]] B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's [[obtain]] paid for it and didn't have to [[pitchfork]] out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same [[longtime]] same [[former]] TV [[performer]], [[Yannick]] [[Inactive]],Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same [[longtime]] same [[former]] [[knackered]] clichés,[[Herr]] [[Hunts]] [[got]] lost in the hotel [[aisle]]....[[yawns]],yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham [[Mansions]],[[Overwhelming]] Ben......I feel [[fooled]] that we never [[noticed]] bobbies on [[motorcycle]] two-by-two.........rosie red [[cheekbones]] on the [[small]] chil - dren,[[needs]] I go on? The [[Englishman]] are buffoons,the French [[ferocious]] - tongued Yank-haters.The [[Germany]] pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,[[Clarke]]),and the [[Italia]] lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to [[fatalities]],Mr [[Chasing]] gurns [[frantically]],Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are [[painfully]] [[unfavourable]]. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never [[losing]] money by underestimating public [[tasting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] 'The Last Wave' is far more than the sum of its parts. It's not merely a disaster film, not [[simply]] an [[exploration]] into Australian Aboriginal spirituality, and [[certainly]] more than a [[simple]] [[court]] [[drama]]. [[Writer]]/Director Peter [[Weir]] [[manages]] to take these elements to the [[next]] [[level]] to [[produce]] a [[truly]] [[effective]] and thought-provoking film with the same eerie [[atmosphere]] he gave to 'Picnic [[At]] Hanging Rock' two years earlier, that you will continue to [[remember]] [[years]] later.

When lawyer David Burton (Chamberlain) is [[called]] to [[defend]] Chris Lee (Gulpilil) over the death of an Aboriginal for which he may or may not be directly responsible, he [[finds]] himself not merely struggling to [[get]] the truth from Lee, but [[making]] [[sense]] of what he hears when it does [[come]]. As with the [[Aboriginal]] [[belief]] that there are two [[worlds]] - the [[everyday]] and the Dreamtime, the truth exists on two completely [[different]] [[levels]], with ramifications more disastrous than Burton [[could]] ever have imagined.

No doubt the [[reason]] why '[[Picnic]] [[At]] [[Hanging]] Rock' is better [[remembered]] is because of its enduring [[mystery]]. We are [[led]] along the same [[path]] but [[forced]] to [[find]] [[answers]] for ourselves. [[In]] 'The Last Wave', we can piece everything together by the [[end]] of the [[film]]. [[However]], [[even]] with all the [[information]], we have to [[choose]] how much of it we [[want]] to [[believe]], because the [[film]] takes us [[beyond]] the [[borders]] of our normal [[realities]].

[[On]] the production side, Weir [[uses]] his budget to [[great]] [[effect]], [[progressively]] [[building]] a sense of doom in everything from soft lighting, to heavy [[rain]], to good [[use]] of sound. The incidental music is unobtrusive, never [[trying]] to be [[grandiose]]. [[Richard]] Chamberlain [[manages]] to convey the bafflement the audience [[would]] doubtless feel as he [[tries]] to [[unravel]] the mystery. David Gulpilil [[excellently]] [[portrays]] a [[man]] [[trapped]] between two worlds, [[wanting]] to do the right [[thing]], but [[afraid]] because he already knows the [[ending]].

Put all these things together, and you have a [[perfect]] [[example]] of why David Weir is a [[familiar]] [[name]] in [[cinema]] thirty [[years]] on. [[Strongly]] [[recommended]]. 'The Last Wave' is far more than the sum of its parts. It's not merely a disaster film, not [[solely]] an [[crawling]] into Australian Aboriginal spirituality, and [[probably]] more than a [[mere]] [[courthouse]] [[tragedy]]. [[Novelist]]/Director Peter [[Spillway]] [[runs]] to take these elements to the [[imminent]] [[echelon]] to [[producing]] a [[honestly]] [[efficient]] and thought-provoking film with the same eerie [[atmospheric]] he gave to 'Picnic [[During]] Hanging Rock' two years earlier, that you will continue to [[remind]] [[olds]] later.

When lawyer David Burton (Chamberlain) is [[drew]] to [[defence]] Chris Lee (Gulpilil) over the death of an Aboriginal for which he may or may not be directly responsible, he [[found]] himself not merely struggling to [[gets]] the truth from Lee, but [[doing]] [[sensing]] of what he hears when it does [[arrived]]. As with the [[Natives]] [[beliefs]] that there are two [[universe]] - the [[ordinary]] and the Dreamtime, the truth exists on two completely [[disparate]] [[grades]], with ramifications more disastrous than Burton [[would]] ever have imagined.

No doubt the [[justification]] why '[[Barbecue]] [[Under]] [[Dangling]] Rock' is better [[recalled]] is because of its enduring [[riddle]]. We are [[headed]] along the same [[route]] but [[obligated]] to [[found]] [[answer]] for ourselves. [[For]] 'The Last Wave', we can piece everything together by the [[termination]] of the [[kino]]. [[Instead]], [[yet]] with all the [[info]], we have to [[elected]] how much of it we [[wants]] to [[believing]], because the [[movie]] takes us [[afterlife]] the [[confines]] of our normal [[truths]].

[[Onto]] the production side, Weir [[used]] his budget to [[huge]] [[consequences]], [[gradually]] [[constructing]] a sense of doom in everything from soft lighting, to heavy [[acids]], to good [[employs]] of sound. The incidental music is unobtrusive, never [[attempting]] to be [[resplendent]]. [[Richards]] Chamberlain [[runs]] to convey the bafflement the audience [[should]] doubtless feel as he [[endeavour]] to [[decipher]] the mystery. David Gulpilil [[divinely]] [[denotes]] a [[males]] [[ambushed]] between two worlds, [[wants]] to do the right [[stuff]], but [[worried]] because he already knows the [[terminated]].

Put all these things together, and you have a [[perfecting]] [[instance]] of why David Weir is a [[known]] [[names]] in [[cinemas]] thirty [[yrs]] on. [[Flatly]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am amazed at the [[amount]] of [[praise]] that is heaped on this movie by other [[commentators]]. To me it was rather a [[disappointment]], especially the [[combination]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[work]] at all (in Vonnegut's [[book]] [[Slaughterhouse]] [[Five]] and [[even]] in George Roy Hill's [[adaptation]] for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I [[miss]] some central [[points]]? Or did I fail to spot the lines that [[supposedly]] connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. I am amazed at the [[somme]] of [[applaud]] that is heaped on this movie by other [[analysts]]. To me it was rather a [[displeasure]], especially the [[jumpsuit]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[cooperated]] at all (in Vonnegut's [[ledger]] [[Abattoir]] [[Cinq]] and [[yet]] in George Roy Hill's [[adjust]] for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I [[mademoiselle]] some central [[dots]]? Or did I fail to spot the lines that [[allegedly]] connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 952 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is absolutely the worst trash I have ever seen. When I saw it in the theater (arghhh!), it took 15 full minutes before I realized that what I was seeing was the feature, not a sick joke! --------------------------------------------- Result 953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I stumbled across rerun syndication of this show several years ago, and fell in love with it. It features Téa Leoni and Holland Taylor and kept me laughing, one episode after the next. I guess it didn't make it so big, and was cancelled after a few seasons, but I believe it was a good run, and would suggest watching it...if the opportunity arises. --------------------------------------------- Result 954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Undoubtedly]] the [[best]] heavy metal [[horror]] [[item]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[admittedly]] doesn't sound like much [[considering]] how utterly [[abysmal]] many other entries in this [[odd]] [[little]] fright film sub-genre like "Hard [[Rock]] Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Terror]] on [[Tour]]," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the excessive splatter and [[needlessly]] flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a [[hilarious]] bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy [[metal]] aficionado who's [[constantly]] picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with [[painfully]] [[credible]] [[accuracy]]). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his [[rock]] star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out [[portrayal]] by [[Tony]] Fields) perishes in a [[hotel]] [[fire]]. [[Hip]] local [[disc]] jockey Nuke ([[KISS]] front-man [[Gene]] Simmons in a cool cameo) hooks Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when [[played]] backwards resurrects Curr's [[malevolent]] spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile [[scumbags]] who [[make]] [[poor]] Eddie's life the proverbial [[living]] [[hell]], only to have [[meek]] [[Eddie]] prove to be a most [[reluctant]] would-be [[accomplice]]. It's up to Eddie, [[assisted]] by token nice [[girl]] [[Leslie]] Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

[[Ably]] directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing [[said]] fellow does to qualify for that special status. [[Surely]] the [[better]] heavy metal [[abomination]] [[subjects]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[surely]] doesn't sound like much [[scrutinize]] how utterly [[appalling]] many other entries in this [[inquisitive]] [[small]] fright film sub-genre like "Hard [[Rocks]] Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Horror]] on [[Voyage]]," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the excessive splatter and [[uselessly]] flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a [[amusing]] bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy [[metals]] aficionado who's [[systematically]] picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with [[embarrassingly]] [[plausible]] [[accurate]]). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his [[boulder]] star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out [[depiction]] by [[Toni]] Fields) perishes in a [[motel]] [[wildfire]]. [[Hips]] local [[disks]] jockey Nuke ([[SCREWING]] front-man [[Genetics]] Simmons in a cool cameo) hooks Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when [[served]] backwards resurrects Curr's [[baleful]] spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile [[dipshits]] who [[deliver]] [[poorest]] Eddie's life the proverbial [[residing]] [[dammit]], only to have [[mick]] [[Eddy]] prove to be a most [[hesitant]] would-be [[complicit]]. It's up to Eddie, [[helped]] by token nice [[woman]] [[Lesley]] Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

[[Expertly]] directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing [[asserted]] fellow does to qualify for that special status. --------------------------------------------- Result 955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll start by apologizing to filmmakers everywhere for using the terms "filmmaker", "film", or "movie" in connection with this, but "criminal" and "crime against humanity" seem a bit harsh.

The writing: pathetic.

The directing: pathetic.

The acting: pathetic.

The cinematography: too inept for words.

The technical skills used to assemble this atrocity: NONE WHATSOEVER.

This lump of waste could hardly be called cinema. The majority of family home movies come closer to earning that distinction than Revenge Quest. No, this is just a 10 car pile-up caught on video.

We'll skip the plot in this review, because there are far too many holes to be covered at once. Let's just say that it stinks worse than the rest of this movie. To call the acting one-dimensional would be giving them credit. What little there is, is atrocious to begin with, and made much worse by the terrible video and editing.

The worst part of this atrocity, though, apart from the plot, would have to be the effects... or rather the disturbing lack thereof. There are no blanks in the guns, no flashpots, and what few sound effects existed were either stock "gun" sounds, or they were generated by mouth (yeah, you read that right). The filmmaker actually had the audacity to record a "shh" sound for the elevator doors; I guess he felt it made them sound more futuristic. This is supposed to be set in the year 2031, after all. That doesn't explain the sounds he created by mouth for the fist-fight scenes, however.

If it wasn't bad enough that the sound quality is terrible (he just used the microphone that was mounted on the video camera, and it shows), the use of stock gun sounds was almost worse than not using any sounds at all. The sound effects stand out from the rest of the soundtrack like a drunken yak in a herd of sheep, and they're just as clumsy. Picture this: The bad guy enters an office building searching for his prey. A lady starts to run in fear. He raises his gun (an uzi), and shakes it. We hear a sound that is clearly not an uzi. The woman runs away from camera, and suddenly a single blood pack (only 1) explodes on her back (looked like she was hit by a paintball), and she falls flat on her face.

Bear in mind that my description does far too much justice to the ineptitude of the actual sequence.

In another sequence, one which almost- but not quite- makes the movie funny enough to watch, takes place in a stairwell. The bad guy chases the good guy and the lady he's protecting down the stairs, shaking his plastic uzi all the way. You may wish to duck; there are badly timed sound effects flying all over the place.

I supposed Alan DeHerrera can't be locked away for conceiving of this train wreck, but he did follow through all the way to editing and releasing it. If there's any justice, there's bound to be some karma out there with his name on it.

Should you decide to watch this lump of industrial waste- and I would strongly advise against it- be sure to watch for the entire scenes lifted nearly verbatim from Bladerunner, and the AM radio that doubles as a walkie-talkie. Try not to focus too hard on the plot; it will only hurt you more if you do.

0 stars of 10. And that's being generous. --------------------------------------------- Result 956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow! So much fun! Probably a bit much for normal American kids, and really it's a stretch to call this a kid's film, this movie reminded me a quite a bit of Time Bandits - very Terry Gilliam all the way through. While the overall narrative is pretty much straight forward, Miike still throws in A LOT of surreal and Bunuel-esquire moments. The whole first act violently juxtaposes from scene to scene the normal family life of the main kid/hero, with the spirit world and the evil than is ensuing therein. And while the ending does have a bit of an ambiguous aspect that are common of Miike's work, the layers of meaning and metaphor, particularly the anti-war / anti-revenge message of human folly, is pretty damn poignant. As manic and imaginatively fun as other great Miike films, only instead of over the top torture and gore, he gives us an endless amount of monsters and yokai from Japanese folk-lore creatively conceived via CG and puppetry wrapped into an imaginative multi-faceted adventure. F'n rad, and one of Miike's best! --------------------------------------------- Result 957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] *May contain spoilers*

I [[bent]] over backwards to be [[fair]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I knew it lasted a [[whole]] [[week]] in [[theaters]]. I [[knew]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't [[expecting]] a deep and thoughtful examination of [[class]], [[culture]] and sexuality [[like]] we [[got]] in the Italian original. The [[benefit]] of the [[doubt]] lasted a [[whole]] ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, [[pretentious]], nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant [[friends]] (the brunette [[woman]] is as [[bad]] as Madonna, [[exhibiting]] some [[really]] dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character [[delights]] in humiliating and treating like dirt in [[every]] scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? [[Simply]] because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them [[get]] marooned on a [[deserted]] Mediterranean [[island]] the [[tables]] will be turned and he will [[teach]] her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they [[fall]] in love [[despite]] having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the [[movie]].

"Swept Away" is a [[silly]], simplistic, [[superficial]] [[movie]] from [[beginning]] to [[end]]. Madonna [[gives]] a typically [[wooden]] performance. There are [[many]] dumb scenes: Madonna [[singing]] and [[dancing]] [[atrociously]] at the [[demand]] of Giannini, a [[fantasy]] scene with Madonna and a [[lot]] of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the [[butt]]. [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]] does his "[[stylish]]" [[editing]] which is [[laughable]] here. The [[film]] [[contains]] some of the [[worst]] dialog I've [[heard]] in a [[major]] [[movie]] in [[several]] [[years]]. The ending is [[sappy]] and [[implausible]]. It's [[basically]] "The [[Blue]] [[Lagoon]]" [[meets]] "Overboard" minus the nudity of the [[former]] and the [[sense]] of humor of the [[latter]].

Maybe Madonna's ego is so [[big]] that she [[insists]] on [[continuing]] to [[prove]] herself as a [[competent]] [[actress]]. [[Please]] [[give]] it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[worst]] [[movie]] [[though]]. That distinction [[still]] [[belongs]] to "Shanghai [[Surprise]]". She hasn't made [[anything]] [[worse]] than that...[[yet]]. *May contain spoilers*

I [[warped]] over backwards to be [[justo]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I knew it lasted a [[ensemble]] [[zhou]] in [[theatres]]. I [[overheard]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't [[expects]] a deep and thoughtful examination of [[kinds]], [[cultivation]] and sexuality [[iike]] we [[gets]] in the Italian original. The [[benefits]] of the [[duda]] lasted a [[ensemble]] ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, [[presumptuous]], nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant [[friendships]] (the brunette [[girl]] is as [[naughty]] as Madonna, [[proving]] some [[truly]] dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character [[pleasures]] in humiliating and treating like dirt in [[each]] scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? [[Simple]] because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them [[gets]] marooned on a [[uninhabited]] Mediterranean [[isla]] the [[table]] will be turned and he will [[lectured]] her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they [[dips]] in love [[while]] having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the [[filmmaking]].

"Swept Away" is a [[dumb]], simplistic, [[shallow]] [[filmmaking]] from [[started]] to [[terminate]]. Madonna [[donne]] a typically [[wood]] performance. There are [[several]] dumb scenes: Madonna [[sings]] and [[danced]] [[appallingly]] at the [[asks]] of Giannini, a [[fantasia]] scene with Madonna and a [[batch]] of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the [[ass]]. [[Buddy]] [[Ricci]] does his "[[sleek]]" [[editorial]] which is [[nonsensical]] here. The [[movies]] [[therein]] some of the [[meanest]] dialog I've [[audition]] in a [[large]] [[cinematic]] in [[dissimilar]] [[olds]]. The ending is [[gooey]] and [[improbable]]. It's [[fundamentally]] "The [[Bleu]] [[Laguna]]" [[satisfies]] "Overboard" minus the nudity of the [[old]] and the [[feeling]] of humor of the [[latest]].

Maybe Madonna's ego is so [[prodigious]] that she [[insist]] on [[lingering]] to [[proves]] herself as a [[proficient]] [[actor]]. [[Invite]] [[lend]] it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] [[although]]. That distinction [[nevertheless]] [[owns]] to "Shanghai [[Surprising]]". She hasn't made [[nada]] [[worst]] than that...[[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. If the ranking had a zero, this movie would get it. The dinosaurs were awful. The storyline was ridiculous. The acting really doesn't qualify to be called acting. The only reason I even remember the name of the movie so well is because my family still talks about how BAD it really was. --------------------------------------------- Result 959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual themes of truth and perception of reality and opts for a depressing take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a style that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this movie is a [[rare]] dud in this auteur body of [[excellent]] [[work]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of earlier Kurosawa pictures.

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual themes of truth and perception of reality and opts for a depressing take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a style that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this movie is a [[scarce]] dud in this auteur body of [[wondrous]] [[collaborate]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of earlier Kurosawa pictures.

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. --------------------------------------------- Result 960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Claire [[Denis]] has [[demonstrated]] repeatedly that film does not [[need]] to tell a story, that it is [[sufficient]] to create an [[experience]] that [[allows]] the [[viewer]] to take the ingredients and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea within the framework of a most non-linear film is the [[older]] man living on the French-Swiss border, a man devoted to his dogs, who still has a lover, but whose cardiac status increasingly threatens his life. He has a son with a little family who infrequently [[meet]] with him, but when he [[discovers]] he is in need of a heart transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtain]] a heart transplant on the black market and to [[rekindle]] a long lost [[relationship]] with a son he had [[form]] a Tahitian women [[years]] [[ago]].

What [[Denis]] does with this outline of a story is use her camera to [[explore]] the loneliness of the [[soul]], the vastness of nature, man's [[interaction]] with people [[vs]] [[animals]], etc. Much of the [[time]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we try too hard to [[connect]] all the [[dots]] laid out before us in [[beautiful]] [[pictures]]. [[Life]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[integrate]], process, and make of it what we will.

[[In]] using this form of [[film]] [[making]] (much as she did in the [[strangely]] [[beautiful]] 'Beau Travail') [[Claire]] [[Denis]] has [[developed]] a [[signature]] technique. Whether or not the viewer [[finds]] the finished [[product]] [[rewarding]] has much to do with our individual [[methods]] of [[processing]] [[visual]] and [[conceptual]] information. This is an interesting and visually [[captivating]] [[film]], but [[many]] [[viewers]] will find it an overly long discourse about very [[little]]. [[Perhaps]] [[watching]] again will [[change]] that. Grady Harp Claire [[Denny]] has [[protested]] repeatedly that film does not [[needs]] to tell a story, that it is [[suffice]] to create an [[experiences]] that [[enable]] the [[viewfinder]] to take the ingredients and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea within the framework of a most non-linear film is the [[elderly]] man living on the French-Swiss border, a man devoted to his dogs, who still has a lover, but whose cardiac status increasingly threatens his life. He has a son with a little family who infrequently [[satisfy]] with him, but when he [[detect]] he is in need of a heart transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtaining]] a heart transplant on the black market and to [[revitalize]] a long lost [[relations]] with a son he had [[forms]] a Tahitian women [[ages]] [[formerly]].

What [[Dennis]] does with this outline of a story is use her camera to [[investigating]] the loneliness of the [[alma]], the vastness of nature, man's [[interactions]] with people [[v]] [[beasts]], etc. Much of the [[moment]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we try too hard to [[linking]] all the [[points]] laid out before us in [[excellent]] [[image]]. [[Vida]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[incorporate]], process, and make of it what we will.

[[During]] using this form of [[movie]] [[doing]] (much as she did in the [[suspiciously]] [[belle]] 'Beau Travail') [[Clara]] [[Denny]] has [[devised]] a [[signing]] technique. Whether or not the viewer [[found]] the finished [[merchandise]] [[reward]] has much to do with our individual [[procedures]] of [[treating]] [[optic]] and [[theoretical]] information. This is an interesting and visually [[riveting]] [[movies]], but [[multiple]] [[listeners]] will find it an overly long discourse about very [[kiddo]]. [[Conceivably]] [[staring]] again will [[alteration]] that. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This animation TV series is simply the best way for children to learn how the human body works. Yes, this is biology but they will never tell it is.

I truly think this is the best part of this stream of "educational cartoons". I do remember you can find little books and a plastic body in several parts: skin, skeleton, and of course: organs.

In the same stream, you'll find: "Il était une fois l'homme" which relate the human History from the big bang to the 20th century. There is: "Il était une fois l'espace" as well (about the space and its exploration) but that one is more a fiction than a description of the reality since it takes place in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[While]] the acting and directing [[could]] be argued as having some [[merit]] - the storyline is a very poor wannabe Vietnam movie with the country name [[simply]] changed.

At the very [[least]], for a movie to hold some credibility, try and have some semblance of accuracy in equipment, weapons and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[misrepresentation]] of the behaviour of the troops as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[use]] as silly propaganda about the South African Defence Force, it serves [[little]] purpose - [[definitely]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[movie]] [[makers]] - this is how not to make a war [[movie]]. Do some research, and have some pride in your product. [[Whereas]] the acting and directing [[did]] be argued as having some [[merits]] - the storyline is a very poor wannabe Vietnam movie with the country name [[straightforward]] changed.

At the very [[fewer]], for a movie to hold some credibility, try and have some semblance of accuracy in equipment, weapons and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[deception]] of the behaviour of the troops as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[usage]] as silly propaganda about the South African Defence Force, it serves [[scant]] purpose - [[unquestionably]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[flick]] [[strategists]] - this is how not to make a war [[filmmaking]]. Do some research, and have some pride in your product. --------------------------------------------- Result 963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is some of the worst crap I have ever seen. I literally got a sharp pain in my head while watching this movie. The CGI was awful, and the story was just a waste of ink. Dean Cain's character was Mr-Super-Intuitive-I-can-figure-out-anything, except he can't seem to work his own helicopter correctly. The biggest problem was the split screen camera work. I felt like I was watching the Brady Bunch or something, only it wasn't different people in the boxes, just close ups and different views of the same thing. I can only figure that the actors really needed the money, because this movie wasn't worth the film it was shot on. --------------------------------------------- Result 964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Cheezy action movie starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the [[neighborhood]] and the [[student]] body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while watching over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a fight to the [[death]]. [[Jaw]] [[dropping]] throw back to the exploitation [[films]] of the late grindhouse era where bad [[guys]] dressed as punks and some of the [[bad]] women had day glow hair. What a [[stupid]] [[movie]]. Watchable in a I can?t believe people [[made]] this [[sort]] of [[way]], this is an [[action]] film that was [[probably]] doomed from the [[get]] go before the low budget, [[fake]] [[breakaway]] sets and poor [[action]] [[direction]] were [[even]] a twinkle in a [[producers]] [[eye]]. Watch how late in the [[film]] as [[cars]] drive through the [[school]] (don?t ask) they [[crash]] into the [[security]] turret (don?t [[ask]] [[since]] it [[looks]] more like a [[prison]] then a high [[school]]) and smash its barely [[constructed]] [[form]] [[apart]](it doesn't look like it did in [[earlier]] [[shots]]). What [[hath]] the [[gods]] of [[bad]] [[movies]] wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was directed (?) by [[Sydney]] J Furie, a really [[good]] director who [[made]] [[films]] like The [[Boys]] in [[Company]] C. [[Has]] his [[ability]] failed him, or was this [[hopeless]] from the get go and he didn't even bother? It?s a [[turkey]]. A watchable one but a [[turkey]] [[none]] the less. Cheezy action movie starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the [[barrio]] and the [[students]] body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while watching over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a fight to the [[fatalities]]. [[Chin]] [[downed]] throw back to the exploitation [[filmmaking]] of the late grindhouse era where bad [[blokes]] dressed as punks and some of the [[negative]] women had day glow hair. What a [[dumb]] [[filmmaking]]. Watchable in a I can?t believe people [[introduced]] this [[genre]] of [[ways]], this is an [[activity]] film that was [[potentially]] doomed from the [[got]] go before the low budget, [[forged]] [[dissident]] sets and poor [[actions]] [[directions]] were [[yet]] a twinkle in a [[maker]] [[eyes]]. Watch how late in the [[filmmaking]] as [[auto]] drive through the [[teaching]] (don?t ask) they [[accident]] into the [[insurance]] turret (don?t [[requests]] [[because]] it [[seems]] more like a [[imprisonment]] then a high [[schooling]]) and smash its barely [[constructing]] [[forms]] [[furthermore]](it doesn't look like it did in [[previously]] [[punches]]). What [[doth]] the [[lords]] of [[faulty]] [[film]] wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was directed (?) by [[Sidney]] J Furie, a really [[alright]] director who [[introduced]] [[film]] like The [[Guys]] in [[Enterprise]] C. [[Have]] his [[capacities]] failed him, or was this [[desperate]] from the get go and he didn't even bother? It?s a [[ankara]]. A watchable one but a [[turk]] [[nothing]] the less. --------------------------------------------- Result 965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i was kinda interested in this movie as a trashy cannibal flick. i was thoroughly disappointed. it was the same kind of disappointment i felt watching 'friday the 13th: jason takes manhattan'. so much potential wasted!

the opening scene is a decent attention grabber. then it grinds to a halt. copious breasts and egregious 80s fashion cannot help this movie. the only things eating near this island of cannibal monks are the piranha! i'm not asking for 'cannibal holocaust' level of gore, but i was looking for cheap over-the-top exploitative gore. i got none of that.

i found a couple parts of the fight scenes somewhat intriguing, hence the 2 stars. i don't think its really worth the time it takes to watch it, though. i could see showing it at a party where nobody cares about what is going on and you just want something on in the background. but i would not tell anyone, "oh, dude, you GOTTA see this movie." it is neither good enough nor bad enough to warrant much attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 966 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Back in 2004 I [[saw]] "True", Tom Tykwer's [[contribution]] to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me [[appreciate]] the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the [[whole]] film, and I [[would]] even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[finally]] saw it, courtesy of the [[internet]].

First of all I [[must]] say that it looks AWESOME. The photography is BEAUTIFUL in every short and shot, at the [[worst]] being nothing special - but [[still]] [[brilliant]] and clear. [[Later]] I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K [[gives]] more justice to all the DP's [[work]]. My special [[favorites]] are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that [[sunlight]]!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de [[la]] Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I [[like]] them all: "[[True]]" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" [[still]] makes me nervous with those [[brilliant]] [[colours]] (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. [[Beautiful]].

[[Yes]], these are some [[BEAUTIFUL]] short [[films]].

Now let's get [[onto]] the content. I very much (and I mean [[VERY]] MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully [[felt]]. You never have have the same [[themes]] or treatment between two [[shorts]], and I [[think]] the formula is restrictive enough to let all these [[artists]] [[explore]] [[beautiful]] and deepening [[things]] inside the [[shorts]]. I [[loved]] [[coming]] from a [[simple]] love [[story]] into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social [[commentary]] into a terror comedy into a [[humble]] monologue. I [[love]] [[surprises]]! And this [[film]] has them! It's [[great]] they [[took]] a [[chance]] to let all these director's flesh out [[things]] that are not [[usual]] in mainstream [[cinema]] (which I have [[come]] to [[heavily]] despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can [[breath]] the [[breathing]] space these people had.

I like the [[small]] [[time]] and I love the acting. I love the [[simplicity]] and I [[love]] the love. I like the [[simple]] [[feelings]] and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! Back in 2004 I [[watched]] "True", Tom Tykwer's [[contributions]] to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me [[thankful]] the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the [[total]] film, and I [[should]] even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[eventually]] saw it, courtesy of the [[cyber]].

First of all I [[ought]] say that it looks AWESOME. The photography is BEAUTIFUL in every short and shot, at the [[lousiest]] being nothing special - but [[again]] [[wondrous]] and clear. [[Trailing]] I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K [[provides]] more justice to all the DP's [[jobs]]. My special [[favorite]] are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that [[sunshine]]!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de [[angeles]] Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I [[fond]] them all: "[[Real]]" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" [[again]] makes me nervous with those [[beautiful]] [[color]] (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. [[Belle]].

[[Yeah]], these are some [[LEGGY]] short [[cinematography]].

Now let's get [[during]] the content. I very much (and I mean [[MUCH]] MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully [[deemed]]. You never have have the same [[item]] or treatment between two [[panties]], and I [[thought]] the formula is restrictive enough to let all these [[artist]] [[examining]] [[handsome]] and deepening [[aspects]] inside the [[pants]]. I [[cared]] [[forthcoming]] from a [[mere]] love [[tale]] into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social [[comments]] into a terror comedy into a [[lowly]] monologue. I [[amour]] [[astonishment]]! And this [[cinematic]] has them! It's [[remarkable]] they [[picked]] a [[chances]] to let all these director's flesh out [[items]] that are not [[normal]] in mainstream [[theater]] (which I have [[arrived]] to [[massively]] despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can [[murmur]] the [[inhalation]] space these people had.

I like the [[minimal]] [[period]] and I love the acting. I love the [[simpler]] and I [[amour]] the love. I like the [[mere]] [[passions]] and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! --------------------------------------------- Result 967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A bondage, humiliation, S&M show, and not much else. The plot is flat, really just a banal setup for the stylishly depraved set-pieces. The host of the aforementioned show, a silly little man who spouts drivel while prancing around the stage in dresses, was almost as painfully distracting as the attempts at artful editing. The dream-like ending felt tacked on. To the film's credit though, Aya Sugimoto was fairly convincing as the tortured lead. Flower and Snake has been compared with Eyes Wide Shut but aside from some minor surface similarities, Kubrick's is easily the more layered, artistic, and atmospheric picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I had never heard of this [[film]] [[prior]] to [[seeing]] it, I wondered if it was an [[independent]] [[film]], and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[decided]] to chance it. Basically [[drifter]] Michael Williams ([[Nicolas]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, [[looking]] for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne [[Brown]] (Pleasantville's J.T. [[Walsh]]) he is [[given]] a [[large]] sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has [[hired]] to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[correct]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he [[decides]] he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he [[chases]] Michael [[shooting]] a big gun, until he [[gets]] in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But [[things]] get complicated when Michael [[realises]] Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, [[apart]] from maybe a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got [[quite]] a good film [[noir]] feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Very]] good! I had never heard of this [[movies]] [[ago]] to [[witnessing]] it, I wondered if it was an [[independant]] [[kino]], and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[deciding]] to chance it. Basically [[hobo]] Michael Williams ([[Nicola]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, [[researching]] for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne [[Brownish]] (Pleasantville's J.T. [[Welch]]) he is [[yielded]] a [[substantial]] sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has [[engaged]] to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[accurate]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he [[decide]] he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he [[pursues]] Michael [[gunfire]] a big gun, until he [[get]] in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But [[matters]] get complicated when Michael [[understands]] Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, [[additionally]] from maybe a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got [[rather]] a good film [[negro]] feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Much]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Honestly]], when I saw this movie [[years]] [[ago]] I immediately [[wanted]] to [[turn]] it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I [[realized]] that the actor playing Navin [[stole]] the [[show]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me [[shake]] my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing [[going]] for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[taking]] [[nothing]] away from Marty. The [[movie]] really shocked me by how close it was to the [[original]] Jerk, but then again, it was [[SO]] [[MUCH]] MORE. I really think that if this movie was released [[first]], and I saw the Steve [[Martin]] [[movie]] 2nd, I'd [[think]] the 2nd was a [[cheap]] rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD [[statement]], but it's true. I [[actually]] like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I [[wish]] I could get a [[copy]] of it for my [[collection]]. I [[urge]] you to see it if you can find it. [[Sincerely]], when I saw this movie [[yrs]] [[previously]] I immediately [[wished]] to [[converting]] it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I [[realised]] that the actor playing Navin [[shoplift]] the [[displays]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me [[quiver]] my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing [[go]] for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[adopting]] [[anything]] away from Marty. The [[kino]] really shocked me by how close it was to the [[upfront]] Jerk, but then again, it was [[THEREBY]] [[VERY]] MORE. I really think that if this movie was released [[frst]], and I saw the Steve [[Martine]] [[movies]] 2nd, I'd [[reckon]] the 2nd was a [[cheaper]] rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD [[statements]], but it's true. I [[genuinely]] like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I [[desiring]] I could get a [[photocopies]] of it for my [[collating]]. I [[exhort]] you to see it if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it continued to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was [[amazed]]..."Before [[Sunrise]]" is one of the few [[films]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it continued to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was [[appalled]]..."Before [[Sunup]]" is one of the few [[kino]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] You talking' to Me? (1987) is a pretty [[bad]] movie starring some dude who I have never [[seen]] before or since [[starring]] as a [[guy]] from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[tries]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he [[learns]] the [[hard]] [[facts]] of [[life]], he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he [[scores]] with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a [[real]] lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx You talking' to Me? (1987) is a pretty [[unfavourable]] movie starring some dude who I have never [[noticed]] before or since [[featuring]] as a [[buddy]] from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[try]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he [[learned]] the [[difficult]] [[truths]] of [[vida]], he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he [[dozens]] with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a [[veritable]] lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx --------------------------------------------- Result 972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[In]] a year of [[pretentious]] [[muck]] like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of [[Charlie]] Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly [[hard]] to watch but about three [[times]] as [[important]]. "Frownland" is a [[labor]] of [[love]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over [[years]] by [[friends]]. It [[traces]] a man who cannot [[communicate]] through his thoroughly [[authentic]], [[REAL]] Brooklyn world. The people that you [[see]] are a [[step]] beyond [[even]] the stylization of the "mumblecore" [[movement]]. They are [[real]] people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to [[change]], [[unable]]. The [[real]] [[world]] to them is their own set of [[delusions]] and because this is a film about people who are so [[profoundly]] out of [[touch]], it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without [[proper]] light, money or any of the other factors that [[would]] [[make]] a [[film]] "slick", but its [[honesty]] can not be [[understated]], a fact that [[would]] cause a [[room]] full of people to [[dismiss]] it and for [[Richard]] Linklater to [[give]] it an [[award]] as he did at SXSW. This does [[remind]] of [[films]] like "[[Naked]]" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a [[film]] that is not for everyone, but one that [[challenges]] you to watch and [[grows]] on you the longer you [[think]] about it. [[Into]] a year of [[ostentatious]] [[mud]] like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of [[Chas]] Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly [[strenuous]] to watch but about three [[time]] as [[principal]]. "Frownland" is a [[workforce]] of [[likes]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over [[yrs]] by [[boyfriends]]. It [[vestiges]] a man who cannot [[liaise]] through his thoroughly [[true]], [[REALES]] Brooklyn world. The people that you [[behold]] are a [[steps]] beyond [[yet]] the stylization of the "mumblecore" [[movements]]. They are [[actual]] people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to [[amended]], [[incapable]]. The [[authentic]] [[monde]] to them is their own set of [[ravings]] and because this is a film about people who are so [[seriously]] out of [[touches]], it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without [[appropriate]] light, money or any of the other factors that [[should]] [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]] "slick", but its [[sincerity]] can not be [[underrated]], a fact that [[ought]] cause a [[rooms]] full of people to [[refuse]] it and for [[Richards]] Linklater to [[lend]] it an [[scholarship]] as he did at SXSW. This does [[reminded]] of [[movie]] like "[[Barefoot]]" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a [[cinematography]] that is not for everyone, but one that [[defies]] you to watch and [[heighten]] on you the longer you [[thought]] about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Take [[young]], pretty people, put them in an [[exotic]] locale, [[stick]] in a few [[bad]] guys, have the two lead characters [[find]] romance after a [[couple]] of [[heavy]] [[breathing]] scenes, [[create]] the flimsiest of plots, then [[work]] out a [[happy]] [[ending]] for everybody (other than the three or four who [[get]] murdered, of [[course]]) That's the [[classic]] (and successful) [[format]] of the Harlequin Romance. It's not very good but then it's not very bad either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the [[location]] stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't [[use]] the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. Take [[youthful]], pretty people, put them in an [[alien]] locale, [[wand]] in a few [[negative]] guys, have the two lead characters [[found]] romance after a [[coupling]] of [[ponderous]] [[inhaling]] scenes, [[creating]] the flimsiest of plots, then [[cooperating]] out a [[gratified]] [[ended]] for everybody (other than the three or four who [[obtain]] murdered, of [[cours]]) That's the [[typical]] (and successful) [[formats]] of the Harlequin Romance. It's not very good but then it's not very bad either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the [[placements]] stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't [[utilizes]] the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. --------------------------------------------- Result 974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] THIS POST MAY CONTAIN [[SPOILERS]] :

Although it was 5 [[years]] after the [[series]] [[ended]] and WB was [[currently]] working on Justice League, this [[animated]] movie is a [[welcome]] [[addition]] to the video [[library]]. Why? Well, if [[Mask]] of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 [[episodes]] of Batman: The [[Animated]] Series and SubZero compliments the 15 [[episodes]] of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then Mystery of the Batwoman compliments the [[final]] 24 [[episodes]] of the Gotham [[Knights]] version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again [[delivers]] a voice over performance that is [[nothing]] short of excellence and [[perfection]]. I [[admit]] I was a bit leery when I [[heard]] about Batwoman and all I could [[think]] about were the [[old]] 50's comics of Batman. But I was [[blown]] away by the Batwoman [[character]], her look, her [[costume]] (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the [[costume]] on Batman [[Beyond]])and the fact that this [[movie]] keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you [[want]] to know who Batwoman is, then [[buy]] or [[rent]] the [[DVD]]. [[Barbara]] Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I [[think]] the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and [[Barbara]] had [[something]] going on between them like they did in Batman [[Beyond]]. Tim [[Drake]] [[appears]] as [[Robin]], but his role is a [[small]] one and [[sadly]], there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which [[leads]] me to believe he has [[established]] himself in Bludhaven (his [[city]] in the [[comics]]).

Of the three [[suspects]] for Batwoman, my [[favorite]] is [[Kathy]] Duquesne, who looks an [[awful]] [[lot]] like Halle Berry. [[Kelly]] Ripa did a [[great]] [[job]] as one of the other [[suspects]]. When it [[comes]] to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they [[replaced]] [[Paul]] Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. [[Same]] thing goes for [[Robin]]. The [[new]] [[guy]] did [[okay]], but just as I was [[starting]] to [[get]] [[used]] to Matt Valencia, they [[replaced]] him. It's interesting to [[note]] that Kevin Michael [[Richardson]], who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the [[voice]] of the [[Joker]] in "The Batman" [[series]]. And we [[finally]] see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped [[since]] he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. THIS POST MAY CONTAIN [[VANDALS]] :

Although it was 5 [[olds]] after the [[serial]] [[completed]] and WB was [[now]] working on Justice League, this [[animate]] movie is a [[greet]] [[extra]] to the video [[librarian]]. Why? Well, if [[Masks]] of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 [[spells]] of Batman: The [[Animation]] Series and SubZero compliments the 15 [[spells]] of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then Mystery of the Batwoman compliments the [[latter]] 24 [[spells]] of the Gotham [[Thanes]] version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again [[offerings]] a voice over performance that is [[anything]] short of excellence and [[consummate]]. I [[accept]] I was a bit leery when I [[audition]] about Batwoman and all I could [[ideas]] about were the [[antigua]] 50's comics of Batman. But I was [[melted]] away by the Batwoman [[nature]], her look, her [[dress]] (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the [[outfits]] on Batman [[Afterlife]])and the fact that this [[cinematography]] keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you [[wish]] to know who Batwoman is, then [[purchased]] or [[leased]] the [[DVDS]]. [[Barbarian]] Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I [[thinking]] the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and [[Barbarian]] had [[anything]] going on between them like they did in Batman [[Afterlife]]. Tim [[Gregg]] [[emerges]] as [[Robyn]], but his role is a [[petit]] one and [[unfortunately]], there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which [[leeds]] me to believe he has [[formulated]] himself in Bludhaven (his [[town]] in the [[cartoons]]).

Of the three [[accuser]] for Batwoman, my [[prefer]] is [[Catherine]] Duquesne, who looks an [[horrible]] [[batch]] like Halle Berry. [[Kiley]] Ripa did a [[wondrous]] [[labour]] as one of the other [[accuser]]. When it [[arises]] to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they [[substitution]] [[Paulo]] Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. [[Identical]] thing goes for [[Rubin]]. The [[nuevo]] [[blokes]] did [[alright]], but just as I was [[startup]] to [[obtain]] [[using]] to Matt Valencia, they [[superseded]] him. It's interesting to [[remark]] that Kevin Michael [[Roberts]], who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the [[vocals]] of the [[Clown]] in "The Batman" [[serials]]. And we [[eventually]] see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped [[because]] he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. --------------------------------------------- Result 975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I am normally a [[Spike]] Lee fan. It takes some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, Lee is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or [[Bamboozled]] (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear [[story]] in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd reason Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the [[decay]] of the [[film]]. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** I am normally a [[Fortification]] Lee fan. It takes some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, Lee is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or [[Hoodwinked]] (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear [[fairytales]] in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd reason Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the [[decomposing]] of the [[filmmaking]]. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jodie Foster, Cherie Currie (the former lead singer of the seminal all-girl rock group the Runaways in her remarkably able acting debut), Marilyn Kagan, and Kandice Stroh are uniformly believable, splendid and touching as the titular quartet, who are a tight-knit clique of troubled, fiercely loyal adolescent girls with negligent, uncaring, self-absorbed parents who do their best to grow up and fend for themselves in the affluent San Fernando Valley, California suburbs. The girls are forced to make serious decisions about sex, drugs, alcohol, commitment, and so on at a tender young age when they're not fully prepared to completely own up to the potentially harmful consequences of said decisions. Foster, giving one of her most perceptive, affecting and underrated performances to date, is basically the group's den mother who presides over the well-being of both herself and the others; she's especially concerned about the good-hearted, but reckless and self-destructive Currie, whose carelessly hedonistic lifestyle makes her likely to meet an untimely end.

This picture offers a poignant, insightful, often devastatingly credible and thoroughly absorbing examination of broken, dysfunctional families which exist directly underneath suburbia's neatly manicured surface and the tragic net result of such families: tough, resilient, but unhappy and vulnerable kids who have to confront the trials and tribulations of growing up on their own because their parents are either too inconsiderate or even nonexistent. Adrian ("Fatal Attraction," "Jacob's Ladder") Lyne's direction is both sturdy and observant while Gerald Ayres' script is somewhat messy and rambling, but overall still accurate in its frank, gritty, unsentimental depiction of your average latchkey kid's nerve-wrackingly chaotic, capricious and unpredictable everyday life. Leon Bijou's soft, dewy, almost pastoral cinematography properly suggests a delicate and easily breakable sense of tranquility and innocence. Giorgio Moroder arranged the excellent score, which makes particularly effective use of Donna Summer's elegiac "On the Radio." The top-notch cast includes Sally Kellerman as Foster's neurotic, insecure, peevish mother, Scott Baio as a sweet skateboarder dude, Randy Quaid as Kagan's rich older boyfriend, British 60's pop singer Adam Faith as Foster's feckless, absentee rock promoter father, and Lois Smith as Kagan's smothering, overprotective mother. Appearing in brief bits are Robert Romanus (Mike Damone "Fast Times at Richmont High") as one of Foster's morose ex-boyfriends and a gawky, braces-wearing Laura Dern as an obnoxious party crasher. Achingly authentic, engrossing and deeply moving (Currie's grim ultimate fate is very heart-breaking), "Foxes" is quite simply one of the most unsung and under-appreciated teen movies made about early 80's adolescence. --------------------------------------------- Result 977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to go down as almost one of the worst movies of all time. Awful acting, awful script... and they were the good points! One to Definitely miss! The jokes, if you could call them that, were so predictable as to be pathetic. Pamela Anderson is still relying on her body to detract from the fact that her acting is just as plastic! I sat willing to give it a chance, hoping that it was going to improve which, alas, it didn't! If it was a choice between this and a book, I suggest you settle down for a good read! I like Denise Richards, which is why I gave this movie a go, but why she has let her self be cast in this movie is beyond me! --------------------------------------------- Result 978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unexpected]] boredom. [[First]], I was [[wondering]] how it is [[possible]] to [[produce]] something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was [[convincing]] myself that it's only a few more [[minutes]], and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[kinda]] proud of as I consider [[watching]] this [[movie]] as a great test for human's patience and [[crap]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? [[Well]], as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a [[try]] and if you're strong willed enough, you may even [[last]] to the [[end]]... The [[movie]] [[lacks]] [[coherence]] and [[characters]] seem to have no common [[sense]] at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw [[somewhere]] before, and they [[seem]] to be put in this [[movie]] just to [[fill]] the [[film]] reel. These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unplanned]] boredom. [[Fiirst]], I was [[request]] how it is [[probable]] to [[engender]] something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was [[compelling]] myself that it's only a few more [[mins]], and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[sorta]] proud of as I consider [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] as a great test for human's patience and [[damnit]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? [[Good]], as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a [[seeks]] and if you're strong willed enough, you may even [[final]] to the [[ends]]... The [[filmmaking]] [[missing]] [[uniformity]] and [[nature]] seem to have no common [[feeling]] at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw [[nowhere]] before, and they [[appears]] to be put in this [[filmmaking]] just to [[populate]] the [[filmmaking]] reel. --------------------------------------------- Result 979 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow, a movie about NYC politics seemingly written by someone who has never set foot in NYC. You know there's a problem when at one moment you expect the credits to roll and the movie continues on for another half hour. The characters are boring, John Cusack's accent is laughable, and the plotline teeters between boring and laughable. A horrible movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The problem with "The [[Killer]] Elite" is that just by [[seeking]] this [[film]] out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[effort]] into the experience than many of its [[principals]] did, particularly [[director]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at least one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with cocaine. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell [[apart]].

It's a [[shame]], because the [[concept]] behind the [[film]] is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise [[much]]. [[Mike]] Locken (James Caan) and [[George]] [[Hansen]] (Robert Duvall) are private [[contractors]] who do a lot of dirty [[work]] for the CIA. They move [[quick]], [[live]] well, and [[seem]] like the [[best]] of [[friends]] - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An [[opening]] scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's [[murky]] [[motivation]]. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they [[work]] for ComTeg, then [[adds]] with [[obvious]] tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might [[employ]] such an [[organization]] for any [[purpose]] is, of course, [[preposterous]]." That's a pretty clever [[way]] of [[letting]] the [[audience]] know all [[bets]] are off.

Add to that a [[traditionally]] strong Peckinpah backup [[cast]], [[including]] Burt [[Young]], Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular [[Bo]] Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, [[including]] the [[celebrated]] Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and [[bad]] chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. The problem with "The [[Assassin]] Elite" is that just by [[searching]] this [[flick]] out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[endeavours]] into the experience than many of its [[chiefs]] did, particularly [[headmaster]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at least one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with cocaine. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell [[also]].

It's a [[pity]], because the [[concepts]] behind the [[filmmaking]] is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise [[very]]. [[Mick]] Locken (James Caan) and [[Giorgi]] [[Hanssen]] (Robert Duvall) are private [[entrepreneur]] who do a lot of dirty [[works]] for the CIA. They move [[promptly]], [[living]] well, and [[seems]] like the [[better]] of [[buddies]] - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An [[initiation]] scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's [[shadowy]] [[motivations]]. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they [[cooperation]] for ComTeg, then [[add]] with [[manifest]] tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might [[hiring]] such an [[organizations]] for any [[intent]] is, of course, [[stupid]]." That's a pretty clever [[routing]] of [[allowing]] the [[spectators]] know all [[betting]] are off.

Add to that a [[generally]] strong Peckinpah backup [[casting]], [[encompassing]] Burt [[Youths]], Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular [[Pu]] Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, [[consisting]] the [[notorious]] Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and [[unfavourable]] chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. --------------------------------------------- Result 981 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Lost is the [[best]] TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very [[controversial]] issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[highly]] complex.For [[instance]],who is [[Jacob]]?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A [[lot]] of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is [[undeniably]] the [[greatest]] TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. Lost is the [[better]] TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very [[contentious]] issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[inordinately]] complex.For [[lawsuit]],who is [[Jakob]]?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A [[batch]] of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is [[admittedly]] the [[higher]] TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I just viewed the [[film]] two days [[ago]], and I was filled with [[anticipation]], being that [[Paris]] is my [[second]] [[favorite]] city in [[Europe]] and I [[spent]] a very [[romantic]] 18 [[months]] there in the '80's. I was [[somewhat]] disappointed that most of this [[group]] of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not [[capture]] the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Nor]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much [[darkness]], not only literally but [[figuratively]]. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The [[uplifting]], good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. I just viewed the [[kino]] two days [[formerly]], and I was filled with [[expectation]], being that [[Parisien]] is my [[secondly]] [[preferable]] city in [[Eu]] and I [[expenditures]] a very [[romance]] 18 [[month]] there in the '80's. I was [[rather]] disappointed that most of this [[clusters]] of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not [[catch]] the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Oder]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much [[obscurity]], not only literally but [[metaphorically]]. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The [[uplift]], good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. --------------------------------------------- Result 983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Had]] this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[fine]] movie but [[overly]] long with a tedious subplot, i.[[e]]., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. [[Has]] this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[fined]] movie but [[disproportionately]] long with a tedious subplot, i.[[f]]., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 984 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe I waste my time watching this garbage! I did because Leonard Maltin gave it an "AA" rating, and for TV movies this is usually a reliable indicator of some quality entertainment.

The acting was OK, but whoever wrote it should be forever denied access to any medium of communication. The plot is ludicrous, the motivations of the "bad guys" totally absent, and the various family interactions silly and shallow. For example, Dad preaches that violent reaction to aggression is BAD, but he turns out to be an "admirable" person NOT because of his "ignore the idiots" philosophy, but because he's pretty good with his fists...

The ONLY message I was able to glean from this pap was that the nuclear family is Good and alternate living arrangements are Bad. Oh, and Bad people happen to Good people. --------------------------------------------- Result 985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have to [[admit]] that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 [[film]] was a [[huge]] [[disappointment]]. Specially when taken into [[consideration]] that this is a Tim Burton [[film]]. He is defenetly one of the most [[original]] and, might I say, cool [[directors]] Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a [[great]] [[fan]] of his work, but something [[obviously]] went wrong with his [[latest]] [[flick]], The [[Planet]] of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[original]] film. When it first [[came]] out people expected just another cheezie 70's [[science]] fiction [[film]], but a very [[surprise]] anding totally [[proved]] that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An [[obvious]] anti-war message. Fear of the cold [[war]], where it was [[taking]] the world and fear of the [[use]] of nuclear [[weapons]] played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film [[rise]] above all expectations and it [[became]] a [[instant]] classic. Although, the [[new]] [[film]], the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. [[No]] message, no [[ideals]] behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and [[creepy]] settings were excellent and of [[course]] the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not [[enough]] to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[badly]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It [[looks]] like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no [[reasonable]] [[answers]] to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet ([[given]] that there were only chimps in the space [[ship]] that crash-landed on the [[planet]]) [[Where]] the [[hell]] did all of those humans come from? [[How]] were a few [[chimps]] able to [[evolve]] into a [[huge]] [[raise]] of all [[kinds]] of [[monkeys]] in only a few thousands [[years]]. (I mean it took a few [[million]] [[years]] for us to [[evolve]] from [[monkey]] to man!)

And finally, the bad [[surprise]] ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. I have to [[recognised]] that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 [[filmmaking]] was a [[sizable]] [[displeasure]]. Specially when taken into [[exam]] that this is a Tim Burton [[films]]. He is defenetly one of the most [[preliminary]] and, might I say, cool [[managers]] Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a [[whopping]] [[breather]] of his work, but something [[undoubtedly]] went wrong with his [[recent]] [[gesture]], The [[Planets]] of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[upfront]] film. When it first [[arrived]] out people expected just another cheezie 70's [[veda]] fiction [[cinematography]], but a very [[surprising]] anding totally [[evidenced]] that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An [[overt]] anti-war message. Fear of the cold [[wars]], where it was [[adopting]] the world and fear of the [[employs]] of nuclear [[weaponry]] played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film [[hikes]] above all expectations and it [[came]] a [[immediate]] classic. Although, the [[nuevo]] [[flick]], the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. [[None]] message, no [[ideal]] behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and [[freaky]] settings were excellent and of [[cours]] the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not [[sufficiently]] to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[sorely]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It [[seem]] like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no [[logical]] [[reactions]] to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet ([[afforded]] that there were only chimps in the space [[starship]] that crash-landed on the [[planetary]]) [[Whenever]] the [[bordello]] did all of those humans come from? [[Mode]] were a few [[chimp]] able to [[evolution]] into a [[whopping]] [[augment]] of all [[genre]] of [[apes]] in only a few thousands [[ages]]. (I mean it took a few [[trillion]] [[olds]] for us to [[evolution]] from [[ape]] to man!)

And finally, the bad [[amaze]] ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[problem]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those [[pesky]] Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[troubles]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those [[troublesome]] Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. --------------------------------------------- Result 987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Roman]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[rents]] an apartment in France.The [[previous]] [[tenant]] is in a [[hospital]] after a suicide [[attempt]].He goes to [[see]] her there where he also [[meets]] Stella ([[Isabelle]] Adjani), the friend of Simone.He and Stella become pretty close.[[Later]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[begins]] to [[think]] the [[landlord]] and the [[neighbors]] are trying to change him into Simone so that [[eventually]] he [[would]] [[also]] [[jump]] out of the [[window]].[[Le]] Locataire (The Tenant) from 1976 is the last film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[previous]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[also]] [[superb]].[[Isabelle]] Adjani with her [[big]] [[glasses]] is [[wonderful]].The [[landlord]], [[Monsieur]] Zy is [[played]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays [[Madame]] Dioz.The [[fantastic]] Shelley [[Winters]] is The Concierge.The [[Tenant]] is [[something]] very [[scary]] from [[time]] to [[time]].It [[gives]] a lot of that [[psychological]] scare.This [[film]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so [[fascinating]]. [[Romans]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[renting]] an apartment in France.The [[anterior]] [[boarder]] is in a [[clinic]] after a suicide [[endeavor]].He goes to [[seeing]] her there where he also [[satisfies]] Stella ([[Isabel]] Adjani), the friend of Simone.He and Stella become pretty close.[[Subsequently]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[launched]] to [[thinking]] the [[landowners]] and the [[voisin]] are trying to change him into Simone so that [[lastly]] he [[should]] [[further]] [[leaping]] out of the [[windowsill]].[[Lai]] Locataire (The Tenant) from 1976 is the last film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[ago]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[similarly]] [[wondrous]].[[Isadora]] Adjani with her [[major]] [[glass]] is [[magnifique]].The [[landowner]], [[Sirs]] Zy is [[done]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays [[Senora]] Dioz.The [[brilliant]] Shelley [[Winter]] is The Concierge.The [[Renter]] is [[anything]] very [[awful]] from [[moment]] to [[period]].It [[delivers]] a lot of that [[psychiatric]] scare.This [[cinematography]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so [[riveting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But [[sentiment]] at the [[expense]] of [[narrative]] honesty? [[Nobody]] should [[love]] that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the [[Deep]] South during the [[early]] 1900s, and [[tells]] the [[story]] of Celie and [[Nettie]], two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple [[flowers]], an idyllic haven which is [[promptly]] shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This [[motif]] – innocence [[interrupted]] by men – permeates the entire [[film]].

The [[film]] then [[launches]] into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice [[impregnated]] by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, [[incongruous]] comedy and overly [[exuberant]] camera work. The [[cumulative]] effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused [[Stanley]] Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of [[misplaced]] [[comedy]] inserted to make him look like a bumbling [[fool]]. A [[film]] in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But [[feeling]] at the [[spending]] of [[descriptive]] honesty? [[Anyone]] should [[likes]] that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the [[Profound]] South during the [[swift]] 1900s, and [[told]] the [[histories]] of Celie and [[Lillie]], two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple [[bloom]], an idyllic haven which is [[faster]] shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This [[motivations]] – innocence [[ceased]] by men – permeates the entire [[filmmaking]].

The [[filmmaking]] then [[initiate]] into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice [[soaked]] by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, [[absurd]] comedy and overly [[luxuriant]] camera work. The [[accumulate]] effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused [[Stan]] Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of [[mislaid]] [[travesty]] inserted to make him look like a bumbling [[twit]]. A [[filmmaking]] in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. --------------------------------------------- Result 989 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is [[basically]] about some girls in a Catholic school that [[end]] up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[act]] they decide to take off to [[Florida]] for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some [[guys]] in a local diner and decide that they would both [[meet]] up with each other in another [[location]] later on. The [[girls]] [[end]] up on a road side near the [[woods]] and [[stop]] for awhile and while one of the girls decides to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the [[killer]]. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this [[movie]] who just can't put two and two together much less some [[lousy]] detective [[work]] at that. The best [[part]] was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this [[man]] and the bare [[chest]] scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie reminds me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same [[motive]] just a different [[character]] part. It's not a movie worth [[renting]] not [[even]] for an 80's low-budget [[movie]] and the [[ending]] was the [[worst]] ending I have ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]] and it left me [[wanting]] my money back! This movie is [[broadly]] about some girls in a Catholic school that [[terminate]] up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[law]] they decide to take off to [[Fl]] for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some [[lads]] in a local diner and decide that they would both [[respond]] up with each other in another [[positioning]] later on. The [[daughters]] [[ceases]] up on a road side near the [[bois]] and [[ceasing]] for awhile and while one of the girls decides to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the [[slayer]]. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this [[filmmaking]] who just can't put two and two together much less some [[squalid]] detective [[cooperate]] at that. The best [[parties]] was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this [[bloke]] and the bare [[torso]] scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie reminds me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same [[reason]] just a different [[characteristics]] part. It's not a movie worth [[rented]] not [[yet]] for an 80's low-budget [[filmmaking]] and the [[terminated]] was the [[meanest]] ending I have ever [[noticed]] in a [[filmmaking]] and it left me [[wishing]] my money back! --------------------------------------------- Result 990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ** Warning - this post may contain spoilers **

I only got a Gamecube in September 2005, and the first two games I bought were James Bond games, the decent Agent Under Fire and the dull Goldeneye Rogue Agent. The next game I planned to get was Everything or Nothing, because my friend told me that it was better than the two games I already had. I have to say, he was right.

I bought this for a tenner in HMV, and when I got home, I slammed it in to my Cube and played it for hours on end. It was much better than my other two games, and there was a much better and more interesting storyline. Graphics were some of the best I have seen (but now that the XBOX 360 has come out, Farcry Instincts Predator has some of the best graphics known to man). The storyline was clever; mad man (Willem Dafoe, named as Nikolai Diavolo) and beautiful henchwoman (Heidi Klum, named as Katya Nadanova), try to destroy the world with tiny nanobots, which at the start of the game, you, James Bond, have to destroy on a train. The bad thing is that one of them is hidden in Katya's boobs. You then have to thwart their plans and save the world.

The great thing about this game is that it actually has actors voicing the characters, such as Cleese voicing Q. There are 27 levels, some of them short and some of them pretty long and tricky.

Gameplay - 10/10 Graphics - 9/10 Sound - 9/10 Replay value - 7/10 Multiplayer - 8/10

I give this game a grand total of 90% --------------------------------------------- Result 991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Certain [[elements]] of this [[film]] are [[dated]], of course. An all white [[male]] crew, for [[instance]]. And like most Pre-Star [[Wars]] [[Science]] Fiction, it [[tends]] to [[take]] too [[long]] admiring itself.

But, [[still]], no [[movie]] has ever [[capture]] the [[flavor]] of [[Golden]] [[Age]] Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to [[provide]] the musical [[score]]. [[Robbie]] the [[Robot]] epitomized the Asimov [[robots]], and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The [[Tempest]]". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who [[finds]] his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated [[Science]] Fiction as an [[adult]] genre, [[perhaps]] the first. Certain [[ingredient]] of this [[films]] are [[dating]], of course. An all white [[macho]] crew, for [[lawsuits]]. And like most Pre-Star [[War]] [[Sciences]] Fiction, it [[strives]] to [[taking]] too [[longer]] admiring itself.

But, [[nevertheless]], no [[kino]] has ever [[captures]] the [[aroma]] of [[Dore]] [[Aged]] Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to [[provides]] the musical [[punctuation]]. [[Bobbie]] the [[Robotics]] epitomized the Asimov [[bots]], and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The [[Cyclone]]". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who [[discovers]] his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated [[Scientifically]] Fiction as an [[grownups]] genre, [[presumably]] the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love the munna bhai MBBS but "Lagge raho..." SUX really SUX. I have never seen such a boring movie in my whole life. And these high ratings really astonished me that wat happened to the taste of Indian cinema viewers ??

**MAY BE SPOILER**

An educated girl needs an advice from a Bhai, people discussing their personal prob. on phones come on man from which part of the world u r ??? I agree that films should be fictitious but these things are really indigestible.

2 out of 10. (2 stars is for 15 mins good starting) --------------------------------------------- Result 993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[show]] [[made]] me feel [[physically]] sick, and [[totally]] [[detached]] from British society as a [[whole]]. It was [[programmes]] such as this and [[Blue]] [[Peter]] that [[pretended]] that there were/are no [[class]] divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may [[find]] this.." or "[[Go]] into your back [[garden]] [[tonight]] and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class [[kids]] who never never had a "loft", and a "back [[garden]]" which was nothing more than a 1 meter [[square]] of [[balcony]] on the 14th floor of a [[council]] [[block]]? Public [[service]] [[broadcasting]] - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to [[see]] those stupid, [[middle]] class, up-their-own-backside kids [[mess]] about with [[bits]] of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a [[favour]], and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me [[sick]] This [[exhibit]] [[introduced]] me feel [[materially]] sick, and [[fully]] [[separated]] from British society as a [[together]]. It was [[programme]] such as this and [[Bleu]] [[Pieter]] that [[confounded]] that there were/are no [[kinds]] divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may [[found]] this.." or "[[Going]] into your back [[gardens]] [[mondays]] and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class [[enfants]] who never never had a "loft", and a "back [[gardens]]" which was nothing more than a 1 meter [[squares]] of [[terrace]] on the 14th floor of a [[governments]] [[bloc]]? Public [[servicing]] [[broadcasted]] - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to [[seeing]] those stupid, [[mid]] class, up-their-own-backside kids [[chaos]] about with [[tib]] of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a [[favouring]], and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me [[sickly]] --------------------------------------------- Result 994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] A female [[executioner]] (played by the [[sexy]] Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun [[job]] of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a [[way]] to go. [[Lucky]] this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[starts]] out real [[slow]]. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[gets]] better as it moves along. And [[ends]] with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. A female [[butcher]] (played by the [[scorching]] Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun [[labour]] of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a [[camino]] to go. [[Luck]] this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[launches]] out real [[sluggish]]. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[attains]] better as it moves along. And [[terminates]] with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. --------------------------------------------- Result 995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Boasting an all-star cast so [[impressive]] that it [[almost]] [[seems]] like the "[[Mad]] Mad [[Mad]] Mad [[World]]" of [[horror]] [[pictures]], "The [[Sentinel]]" (1977) is nevertheless an [[effectively]] [[creepy]] [[film]] [[centering]] on the [[relatively]] [[unknown]] actress Cristina Raines. [[In]] this one, she plays a fashion [[model]], [[Alison]] [[Parker]], who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't [[think]] I'm [[giving]] away too much at this [[late]] [[date]]) very [[close]] to the gateway of Hell. And as a [[tenant]] in this [[building]], she [[suffers]] far [[worse]] conditions than [[leaky]] [[plumbing]] and the occasional water bug, to put it [[mildly]]! [[Indeed]], the scene in which [[Alison]] [[encounters]] her noisy upstairs [[neighbor]] is [[truly]] [[terrifying]], and should [[certainly]] send the ice water coursing down the [[spines]] of most [[viewers]]. [[Despite]] [[many]] critics' [[complaints]] [[regarding]] Raines' acting [[ability]], I thought she was just fine, more than [[ably]] holding her own in scenes with Ava [[Gardner]], Burgess Meredith, Arthur [[Kennedy]], Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The [[picture]] [[builds]] to an effectively [[eerie]] [[conclusion]], and [[although]] some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as [[topless]] cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and [[although]] shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this [[house]] really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn [[Queens]] [[Expressway]]. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! Boasting an all-star cast so [[unbelievable]] that it [[practically]] [[looks]] like the "[[Madman]] Mad [[Madman]] Mad [[Globe]]" of [[monstrosity]] [[pictured]], "The [[Sentry]]" (1977) is nevertheless an [[efficiently]] [[frightening]] [[movie]] [[centered]] on the [[comparatively]] [[undisclosed]] actress Cristina Raines. [[At]] this one, she plays a fashion [[paragon]], [[Ellison]] [[Barker]], who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't [[believe]] I'm [[confer]] away too much at this [[tardy]] [[dates]]) very [[nearer]] to the gateway of Hell. And as a [[renters]] in this [[construction]], she [[suffering]] far [[lousiest]] conditions than [[porous]] [[plumber]] and the occasional water bug, to put it [[gently]]! [[Actually]], the scene in which [[Ellison]] [[confrontations]] her noisy upstairs [[nearby]] is [[honestly]] [[atrocious]], and should [[probably]] send the ice water coursing down the [[thorns]] of most [[listeners]]. [[Though]] [[countless]] critics' [[grievance]] [[relating]] Raines' acting [[competency]], I thought she was just fine, more than [[cleverly]] holding her own in scenes with Ava [[Gartner]], Burgess Meredith, Arthur [[Jfk]], Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The [[photography]] [[constructing]] to an effectively [[freaky]] [[conclude]], and [[though]] some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as [[bikini]] cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and [[though]] shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this [[dwellings]] really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn [[Fags]] [[Motorway]]. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! --------------------------------------------- Result 996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Sure, it's a 50's drive-in [[special]], but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[touches]] with [[unexpected]] dollops of [[humor]]. Catch the [[redoubtable]] Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the bucks to film in color, a wise decision, since the [[blob]] would not show up well in b&w. [[Yes]], the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a [[lot]] of [[fun]], drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. Sure, it's a 50's drive-in [[especial]], but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[touch]] with [[unplanned]] dollops of [[mood]]. Catch the [[formidable]] Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the bucks to film in color, a wise decision, since the [[smudge]] would not show up well in b&w. [[Yeah]], the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a [[batches]] of [[funny]], drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. --------------------------------------------- Result 997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this [[Documentary]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a small 200-seat Cinema at the top of the main building at the Cannes [[Film]] Festival.

I [[absolutely]] was into it. I [[love]] the [[mix]] of awesomely made [[fictional]] scenes. It is [[amazing]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were filmed in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[music]] is so nice.

I rate this experience 9/10.

* [[spoilers]] ahead *

The [[Documentary]] tells about [[awesome]] Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the [[black]] [[man]] [[playing]] the guitar and [[singing]]. It is [[really]] [[amazing]]. But this also [[mixes]] in new bands and that is [[maybe]] one [[thing]] I [[might]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant [[use]] of links to modern rock-bands [[playing]] those Blues songs in a modern [[way]]. I didn't [[really]] appreciate their trashed [[way]] of playing such [[awesome]] Blues [[songs]]. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical [[taste]] I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista [[Social]] Club.

The [[Documentary]] was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the [[little]] [[cinema]], that the [[next]] day this [[Documentary]] was [[shown]] for [[everyone]] and [[normal]] tourists on the [[beach]] of the Croisette at the open-air [[cinema]]. [[Though]] the sand, the quality of the [[projection]] and the bad quality of the sound probably made it a difficult [[experience]] to enjoy for the thousands of people who were [[sitting]] in the [[sand]] that night. I saw this [[Literature]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a small 200-seat Cinema at the top of the main building at the Cannes [[Films]] Festival.

I [[totally]] was into it. I [[amour]] the [[amalgam]] of awesomely made [[fictitious]] scenes. It is [[wonderful]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were filmed in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[musician]] is so nice.

I rate this experience 9/10.

* [[troublemakers]] ahead *

The [[Literature]] tells about [[marvelous]] Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the [[negro]] [[men]] [[playback]] the guitar and [[sing]]. It is [[truthfully]] [[unbelievable]]. But this also [[mixing]] in new bands and that is [[probably]] one [[stuff]] I [[apt]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant [[utilise]] of links to modern rock-bands [[replay]] those Blues songs in a modern [[camino]]. I didn't [[truly]] appreciate their trashed [[paths]] of playing such [[wondrous]] Blues [[lyrics]]. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical [[aftertaste]] I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista [[Societal]] Club.

The [[Literature]] was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the [[small]] [[theatre]], that the [[forthcoming]] day this [[Literature]] was [[displayed]] for [[someone]] and [[customary]] tourists on the [[beaches]] of the Croisette at the open-air [[theatre]]. [[Although]] the sand, the quality of the [[projections]] and the bad quality of the sound probably made it a difficult [[experiences]] to enjoy for the thousands of people who were [[seated]] in the [[sandstorm]] that night. --------------------------------------------- Result 998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Must]] have been hanging out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", WAY too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why [[bother]] to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Ought]] have been hanging out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", WAY too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why [[disturb]] to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Larry Fessenden has been [[thrashed]] by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[mistake]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people expecting anything that will be gory and instantly [[satisfying]].

"Wendigo" is basically a film that seems to be [[told]] from the mind of the [[young]] Miles. Things that are not [[readily]] understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and [[ultimately]] [[dominate]] their fears and the menacing [[world]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the [[mother]], is a [[psychologist]], but she has no clue to what is [[going]] on in the [[mind]] of her son. This is [[also]] a [[story]] of alienation. It's clear that the father, [[George]], is a [[distant]] [[figure]], [[perhaps]] a workaholic, who [[seems]] to be [[living]] in a [[different]] [[world]].

Miles' [[fears]] [[reach]] a point of crisis during the [[week]] [[end]] in the [[country]]. That [[part]] of [[New]] [[York]] state, with its winter [[landscape]], [[barren]] trees, [[play]] [[havoc]] on the [[little]] boy's [[imagination]]. It doesn't [[help]] that he [[encounters]] a [[strange]] [[figure]] in [[town]], it [[creates]] even more doubts in his [[young]] mind. Ultimately, Miles' [[world]] comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even [[evoking]] the Wendigo spirit.

The [[film]] is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is [[excellent]], no matter where [[movie]] she is in. Jake Weber is [[perfect]] as the distant father who has an [[opportunity]] to come closer to a [[son]] he doesn't understand. [[Erik]] Per Sullivan, as Miles, [[conveys]] the [[inner]] [[turmoil]] [[within]] him. I [[thought]] he was [[extremely]] [[effective]] since the [[whole]] [[movie]] is Miles own take on what's going on around him. [[Finally]], [[John]] Spredakos is [[perfect]] as the [[menacing]] Otis, a [[man]] who resents the world for the [[way]] he has turned out.

[[Instead]] of putting this [[movie]] down, [[future]] [[viewers]] should approach it with a open [[mind]]. Larry Fessenden has been [[ruined]] by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[blunder]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people expecting anything that will be gory and instantly [[pleasing]].

"Wendigo" is basically a film that seems to be [[said]] from the mind of the [[youthful]] Miles. Things that are not [[easily]] understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and [[finally]] [[overpower]] their fears and the menacing [[worldwide]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the [[mummy]], is a [[shrug]], but she has no clue to what is [[gonna]] on in the [[intellect]] of her son. This is [[furthermore]] a [[history]] of alienation. It's clear that the father, [[Jorge]], is a [[outlying]] [[silhouette]], [[maybe]] a workaholic, who [[looks]] to be [[vie]] in a [[multiple]] [[worldwide]].

Miles' [[worries]] [[accomplish]] a point of crisis during the [[weeks]] [[terminating]] in the [[nations]]. That [[parties]] of [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] state, with its winter [[landscaping]], [[sterile]] trees, [[playing]] [[mayhem]] on the [[tiny]] boy's [[novelty]]. It doesn't [[assistance]] that he [[confrontation]] a [[peculiar]] [[silhouette]] in [[ciudad]], it [[engenders]] even more doubts in his [[youthful]] mind. Ultimately, Miles' [[worldwide]] comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even [[invocation]] the Wendigo spirit.

The [[cinema]] is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is [[beautiful]], no matter where [[kino]] she is in. Jake Weber is [[faultless]] as the distant father who has an [[likelihood]] to come closer to a [[sons]] he doesn't understand. [[Arik]] Per Sullivan, as Miles, [[transmits]] the [[indoor]] [[disturbance]] [[inside]] him. I [[ideology]] he was [[very]] [[efficacy]] since the [[ensemble]] [[cinema]] is Miles own take on what's going on around him. [[Eventually]], [[Jon]] Spredakos is [[faultless]] as the [[threat]] Otis, a [[dude]] who resents the world for the [[path]] he has turned out.

[[However]] of putting this [[kino]] down, [[next]] [[audience]] should approach it with a open [[esprit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This is [[certainly]] one of the most [[bizarre]] films ever made - [[even]] for Fellini. About the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual [[challenge]]. Sutherland makes a curiously [[unappealing]] Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to [[engage]] the viewer. The art [[direction]] and costume design are [[however]] OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the [[disjointed]], pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This [[viewer]] was grateful. This is [[assuredly]] one of the most [[surreal]] films ever made - [[yet]] for Fellini. About the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual [[challenging]]. Sutherland makes a curiously [[unattractive]] Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to [[embark]] the viewer. The art [[directorate]] and costume design are [[still]] OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the [[unconnected]], pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This [[beholder]] was grateful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This movie is a [[great]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this girl comes to [[destroy]] the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she [[listens]] to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." This movie is a [[wondrous]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this girl comes to [[annihilate]] the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she [[listen]] to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." --------------------------------------------- Result 1002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I could go back, even as an adult and relive the days of my Summer's spent at camp...I would be there so fast. The Camps I went to weren't even this great. They were in Texas where the mosquitoes actually carry people off but we had horses and fishing. The movie cinematography was astounding, the characters funny and believable especially Perkins, Pollack and Arkin. Sam Raimi's character and sub-antics were priceless. So who ever thought this movie was lame...I have deep pity for because they can't suspend their disbelief long enough to imagine camp life again as an adult or they never went as kids. The whole point was that these people had an opportunity to regress and become juvenile again and so they did at every opportunity. I wish I could. It was funny, intelligent, beautifully scripted, brilliantly cast and the artistry takes me back so I want to watch it over and over just for the scenery even. Sorta like Dances with Wolves and LadyHawk...good movies but the wilderness becomes a character as much as the actors. Rent it, see it, buy it and watch it over and over and over...never gets old. ;0) --------------------------------------------- Result 1003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Farewell Friend aka Adieu L'Ami/Honour Among Thieves isn't perfect but it is a neat and entertaining thriller that sees mismatched demobbed French Algerian War veterans Alain Delon and Charles Bronson trapped in the same basement vault, one to return stolen bonds, the other to clean out the two million in wages sitting there over the Christmas weekend. Naturally things aren't quite that simple even after they open the vault, leading to some neat twists and turns. On the debit side, there's a very bizarre striptease scene in a car park, Bronson has a very irritating Fonzie-like catchphrase he uses at the most inopportune moments, Brigitte Fossey, sporting perhaps the most hideously misconceived hairstyle of the 60s (it makes her look like a bald woman whose wig is blown back off the top of her head by a high wind), is something of a liability – her "I'll cook spaghetti! I'll learn to make love well! I'll read Shakespeare!" speech is hysterical in all the wrong ways – and it's a shame about the horrible last line/shot, but otherwise this is a surprisingly entertaining and unpretentious number that's worth checking out if you can find a decent print.

Cinema Club's UK DVD only offers the English soundtrack, but since Delon voices himself and the rest of the cast are fairly well dubbed that's no great problem, especially since the widescreen transfer is pretty good quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jackie Chan name is synonomus to stunts. This movie never let you down.The opening best chase scene and last roll down scene from the pole is so risky than one wonder ,if he knows the meaning of fear.This movie comes very close to Jackie's best which is PROJECT A.But the main difference being that PROJECT A contains three stars where as in this movie Jackie carries the film entirely on his shoulders.This is perhaps the main reason that this movie made jackie an biggest martial arts star followed by Bruce Lee.The film has nice comic touches too. What makes this film work is Jakie's ability to show his venerable side which his in contract to the typical martial arts action hero.This movie was followed by a sequel which was good but was quite tame in comparison to its predecessor. --------------------------------------------- Result 1005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Lynn]] Hollister, a small-town [[lawyer]], [[travels]] to the [[nearby]] [[big]] [[city]] on [[business]] [[connected]] with the death of his friend [[Johnny]]. ([[Yes]], Lynn is a man [[despite]] the feminine-sounding [[Christian]] [[name]]. [[Were]] the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that [[John]] Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's [[death]] to have been an [[accident]], but soon realises that Johnny was [[murdered]]. Further investigations reveal a web of [[corruption]], criminality and election rigging [[connected]] to [[Boss]] Cameron, the [[leading]] light in city 's [[political]] machine.

That [[sounds]] like the plot of a gritty [[crime]] thriller, possibly made in the film [[noir]] [[style]] which was [[starting]] to [[become]] [[popular]] in 1941. It isn't. "A [[Man]] Betrayed", [[despite]] its [[theme]], is more like a light [[romantic]] comedy than a [[crime]] drama. Hollister falls in [[love]] with Cameron's [[attractive]] [[daughter]] Sabra, and the [[film]] then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This [[film]] might just have [[worked]] if it had been [[made]] as a straightforward [[serious]] drama. One reviewer states that [[John]] Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't [[play]] a [[cowboy]] in every [[movie]], and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised [[crime]] would [[probably]] have been well [[within]] his compass. Where I do agree with that [[reviewer]] is when he [[says]] that Wayne was no [[Cary]] [[Grant]] impersonator. [[Romantic]] [[comedy]] just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that [[actors]] [[could]] be [[required]] to [[play]] any [[part]] their bosses [[demanded]] of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few [[major]] [[stars]] working for Republic [[Pictures]] they doubtless wanted to [[get]] as much mileage out of him as they [[could]].

That [[said]], not even Cary [[Grant]] himself [[could]] have made "A [[Man]] Betrayed" [[work]] as a [[comedy]]. That's not a [[reflection]] on his [[comic]] talents; it's a [[reflection]] on the [[total]] [[lack]] of [[amusing]] material in this [[film]]. I doubt if [[anyone]], no [[matter]] how well [[developed]] their [[sense]] of [[humour]] might be, could find [[anything]] to [[laugh]] at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful [[comedy]]; it just [[prevents]] it from being [[taken]] [[seriously]] as [[anything]] [[else]]. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 [[Lyn]] Hollister, a small-town [[lawyers]], [[trip]] to the [[contiguous]] [[prodigious]] [[town]] on [[enterprise]] [[tied]] with the death of his friend [[Jonny]]. ([[Yep]], Lynn is a man [[though]] the feminine-sounding [[Cristian]] [[naming]]. [[Was]] the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that [[Jon]] Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's [[mortality]] to have been an [[casualty]], but soon realises that Johnny was [[killed]]. Further investigations reveal a web of [[bribery]], criminality and election rigging [[tied]] to [[Chef]] Cameron, the [[culminating]] light in city 's [[politician]] machine.

That [[sound]] like the plot of a gritty [[crimes]] thriller, possibly made in the film [[negro]] [[styles]] which was [[onset]] to [[becoming]] [[fashionable]] in 1941. It isn't. "A [[Men]] Betrayed", [[although]] its [[subject]], is more like a light [[sentimental]] comedy than a [[crimes]] drama. Hollister falls in [[adore]] with Cameron's [[seductive]] [[maid]] Sabra, and the [[filmmaking]] then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This [[filmmaking]] might just have [[collaborated]] if it had been [[introduced]] as a straightforward [[severe]] drama. One reviewer states that [[Jon]] Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't [[gaming]] a [[denim]] in every [[cinematic]], and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised [[felony]] would [[maybe]] have been well [[inside]] his compass. Where I do agree with that [[examiner]] is when he [[said]] that Wayne was no [[Carey]] [[Subsidies]] impersonator. [[Sentimental]] [[humor]] just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that [[protagonists]] [[did]] be [[require]] to [[gaming]] any [[party]] their bosses [[asked]] of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few [[big]] [[celebrity]] working for Republic [[Photographed]] they doubtless wanted to [[gets]] as much mileage out of him as they [[wo]].

That [[say]], not even Cary [[Awarding]] himself [[wo]] have made "A [[Guy]] Betrayed" [[jobs]] as a [[humor]]. That's not a [[meditation]] on his [[comical]] talents; it's a [[meditation]] on the [[whole]] [[scarcity]] of [[entertaining]] material in this [[filmmaking]]. I doubt if [[nobody]], no [[topic]] how well [[crafted]] their [[feeling]] of [[comedy]] might be, could find [[something]] to [[laughter]] at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful [[farce]]; it just [[prevented]] it from being [[picked]] [[conscientiously]] as [[algo]] [[elsewhere]]. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie once as a kid on the late-late show and fell in love with it.

It took 30+ years, but I recently did find it on DVD - it wasn't cheap, either - in a catalog that specialized in war movies. We watched it last night for the first time. The audio was good, however it was grainy and had the trailers between reels. Even so, it was better than I remembered it. I was also impressed at how true it was to the play.

The catalog is around here someplace. If you're sincere in finding it, fire me a missive and I'll see if I can get you the info. cartwrightbride@yahoo.com --------------------------------------------- Result 1007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Another horror [[flick]] in which a goof-ball [[teenager]] [[battles]] a [[madman]] and his [[supernatural]] [[sidekick]] who [[want]] to [[take]] over?! Yes, but the fact that this one was from Canada [[gives]] it a [[slightly]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome [[teenager]] Jim Majelewski getting put into a [[treatment]] whose [[leader]] [[turns]] out to be a cult [[leader]] aided by a big [[ugly]] "brain". Can Jim [[stop]] him? I [[guess]] that since our [[northern]] [[neighbor]] has [[accomplished]] all that they have [[accomplished]], they're [[entitled]] to make at [[least]] one [[ridiculous]] horror [[movie]]. But [[still]], they'll [[probably]] [[want]] to be [[known]] for having national [[health]] [[care]] and all.

The [[bad]] guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who [[made]] this movie? Another horror [[film]] in which a goof-ball [[adolescence]] [[struggles]] a [[psycho]] and his [[uncanny]] [[henchman]] who [[wantto]] to [[taking]] over?! Yes, but the fact that this one was from Canada [[donne]] it a [[modestly]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome [[adolescence]] Jim Majelewski getting put into a [[treat]] whose [[fuhrer]] [[revolves]] out to be a cult [[fuhrer]] aided by a big [[grisly]] "brain". Can Jim [[discontinue]] him? I [[reckon]] that since our [[norden]] [[neighbourhood]] has [[performed]] all that they have [[effected]], they're [[titled]] to make at [[less]] one [[farcical]] horror [[filmmaking]]. But [[nevertheless]], they'll [[arguably]] [[wanted]] to be [[renowned]] for having national [[gesundheit]] [[caring]] and all.

The [[rotten]] guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who [[accomplished]] this movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 1008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the greatest movies ever maybe even the greatest movie ever. I had forgotten about the movie for about 12 years. Until I saw an add on TV for ADGTH and it brought back fond memories of me watching it when I was a little kid. And when I watched it a few nights ago I became addicted to the movie. Usually I don't like animated family movies but this one is special it is the perfect family movie.

The ending of the movie always touches my heart and saddens me very much but that is what makes this movie amazing better than all of the garbage that is coming out for kid movies today. I mean the movie is G rated and it is about 2 dogs who are involved with gambling, there is a lot of smoking, drinking, murder, death and hell depicted in the movie. Which I Believe makes the movie from good to great. I mean movies today don't bring reality to kids and in this movie they did.

RIP Judith Barsi & Dom DeLuise --------------------------------------------- Result 1009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] What is this ? A low budget [[sex]] [[comedy]] ? Anyway it [[describes]] [[perfectly]] the people in Spain. They [[could]] [[come]] up with a [[better]] [[idea]], I [[mean]] they do this [[kind]] of [[movies]] since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[teen]] [[comedy]] nor a [[family]] one (you can't [[let]] your 12 year [[old]] watch 2 [[guys]] in [[bed]] [[kissing]], he'll never [[want]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[R]]", because only people 35+ [[seem]] to laugh [[watching]] :S I'm [[truly]] [[disappointed]], maybe I don't like [[gays]] (which is quite an [[important]] [[part]] of the [[movie]]).

[[Foreign]] [[humor]] is [[awful]] in [[films]] (except Kusturica), [[stick]] with doing dramas! If you [[want]] a [[new]] comedy try Talladega [[Nights]] What is this ? A low budget [[sexuality]] [[humor]] ? Anyway it [[portray]] [[fully]] the people in Spain. They [[would]] [[arrived]] up with a [[best]] [[ideals]], I [[imply]] they do this [[type]] of [[cinema]] since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[adolescents]] [[charade]] nor a [[families]] one (you can't [[leave]] your 12 year [[longtime]] watch 2 [[boys]] in [[bedside]] [[kissed]], he'll never [[wanna]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[rs]]", because only people 35+ [[seems]] to laugh [[staring]] :S I'm [[genuinely]] [[frustrating]], maybe I don't like [[queers]] (which is quite an [[notable]] [[portions]] of the [[filmmaking]]).

[[Exterior]] [[mood]] is [[abysmal]] in [[kino]] (except Kusturica), [[twig]] with doing dramas! If you [[wish]] a [[newest]] comedy try Talladega [[Evenings]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this film because I had do (my job includes seeing movies of all kinds). I couldn't stop thinking "who gave money to make such an awful film and also submit it to Cannes Festival!" It wasn't only boring, the actors were awful as well. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1011 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I am [[surprised]] at IMDb's low [[rating]] of this movie. With all due [[respect]], its low [[rating]] is representative of the IQ [[level]] of those who rated it so poor. They would rather [[see]] a movie with cheap thrills, a [[bigger]] budget, and more [[gore]].

The first [[misconception]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film [[mislead]] you into [[believing]] it is one. It is a [[psychological]] thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual [[experience]] when [[watching]] a [[movie]]. [[Reel]].com's [[review]] is the perfect example of how I feel about this [[movie]]. All the other [[negative]] [[reviews]] doesn't make much sense. It's [[almost]] as if [[trying]] to make an [[original]] [[movie]] for a change- very [[rare]] these days- is [[something]] [[bad]] and not worth it.

I will [[reveal]] some [[spoilers]] for the [[morons]] who [[said]] it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and [[performing]] experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she [[really]] was an [[evil]] [[Nazi]] who [[would]] [[kill]] without [[warning]]. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at [[first]] viewing, we [[sympathize]] with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the [[movie]] is a [[testament]] to the film's direction and [[writing]].

I [[definitely]] feel that this [[movie]] should at [[least]] be rated in the 6's [[range]] on originality [[alone]]. I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] for the people on the other [[end]] of the [[IQ]] scale- [[aka]] smart people- [[since]] this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch [[Scream]] or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. [[For]] such a low budget film, you are [[amazed]] that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be [[fooled]] by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I [[actually]] [[recommend]] [[buying]] the film since a first [[viewing]] on a [[rent]] will not do this justice. I am [[horrified]] at IMDb's low [[assessing]] of this movie. With all due [[respecting]], its low [[assessing]] is representative of the IQ [[tier]] of those who rated it so poor. They would rather [[behold]] a movie with cheap thrills, a [[greatest]] budget, and more [[gora]].

The first [[fallacy]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film [[deceptive]] you into [[think]] it is one. It is a [[psychiatric]] thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual [[enjoying]] when [[staring]] a [[film]]. [[Coil]].com's [[exam]] is the perfect example of how I feel about this [[films]]. All the other [[injurious]] [[scrutinize]] doesn't make much sense. It's [[hardly]] as if [[tempting]] to make an [[upfront]] [[film]] for a change- very [[rarity]] these days- is [[anything]] [[amiss]] and not worth it.

I will [[disclose]] some [[troublemakers]] for the [[fools]] who [[told]] it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and [[fulfilling]] experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she [[genuinely]] was an [[malicious]] [[Hitler]] who [[ought]] [[killings]] without [[alerted]]. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at [[outset]] viewing, we [[commiserate]] with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the [[flick]] is a [[wills]] to the film's direction and [[writes]].

I [[obviously]] feel that this [[films]] should at [[fewer]] be rated in the 6's [[ranges]] on originality [[lonely]]. I [[recommendation]] this [[cinematic]] for the people on the other [[termination]] of the [[QI]] scale- [[pseudonym]] smart people- [[because]] this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch [[Howling]] or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. [[Onto]] such a low budget film, you are [[appalled]] that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be [[hoodwinked]] by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I [[indeed]] [[recommended]] [[acquiring]] the film since a first [[opinion]] on a [[rental]] will not do this justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't stand it when people go see a movie when they know they won't like it. My mom likes violent movies, so why did she see it? She rated it just to bring down the rating. So I know that's why it didn't have a higher rating. I give it a 6/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Story starts slow and nothing funny happens for a while. All the action is in the end, but you won't have to laugh because the movie is funny, but because the story is pathetic.

The funniest part is when Harvey 'I'm not Paranoia' Keitel really loses it and the judge starts a massacre. Oscars for this guy! --------------------------------------------- Result 1014 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[exciting]] movie ive seen in recent years. It [[transcends]] all expectations and is [[truly]] a [[work]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and [[story]] of [[divine]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[viewers]] with its [[majesty]]. This movie is wonderously crafted through the use of high tech cgi which [[allows]] fans of the [[fantasy]] [[genre]] to [[see]] their [[visions]] [[come]] to life. The acting is [[perfect]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I would think you'd [[keep]] more to yourself.

Unlike the [[comments]] of many, the plot is actually [[quite]] [[EASY]] to follow while maintaining a [[quick]] pace that [[adds]] a sense of [[urgency]]. [[Anyone]] that [[cannot]] keep track of the [[different]] characters simply must not be paying attention since or are [[used]] to such [[levels]] of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and [[layered]] with themes so epic that they will [[leave]] you gasping for [[air]]. Legend of Zu is on a [[level]] of [[greatness]] so [[high]] that [[perhaps]] [[many]] people are put off by its [[grandeur]]. [[Allow]] yourself to be [[completely]] [[engulfed]] [[within]] its fantastical [[vision]] and you will [[grow]] to [[love]] this [[movie]]. Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[excite]] movie ive seen in recent years. It [[exceeds]] all expectations and is [[honestly]] a [[cooperate]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and [[narratives]] of [[godlike]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[audiences]] with its [[empress]]. This movie is wonderously crafted through the use of high tech cgi which [[allowed]] fans of the [[chimera]] [[genera]] to [[consults]] their [[conceptions]] [[arrive]] to life. The acting is [[faultless]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I would think you'd [[preserving]] more to yourself.

Unlike the [[comment]] of many, the plot is actually [[rather]] [[UNCOMPLICATED]] to follow while maintaining a [[faster]] pace that [[adding]] a sense of [[emergency]]. [[Whoever]] that [[significant]] keep track of the [[multiple]] characters simply must not be paying attention since or are [[using]] to such [[echelons]] of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and [[laminated]] with themes so epic that they will [[let]] you gasping for [[airline]]. Legend of Zu is on a [[echelon]] of [[size]] so [[supremo]] that [[presumably]] [[multiple]] people are put off by its [[greatness]]. [[Allowed]] yourself to be [[entirely]] [[plunged]] [[inside]] its fantastical [[eyesight]] and you will [[raising]] to [[loves]] this [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Shinjuku [[Triad]] Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film [[festivals]]. Why? Could your censors stomach a [[film]] where [[policemen]] anally [[rape]] [[male]] and female [[suspects]] to [[get]] them to [[talk]] (and the victims [[enjoy]] it) or see an [[old]] lady have her [[eye]] [[torn]] out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[shocks]] in [[store]] for [[viewers]] of this ultraviolent [[cops]] and [[gangsters]] [[story]]. It makes [[Clockwork]] Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

[[Should]] you [[see]] this film? YES It is [[fantastic]] and [[essential]] [[viewing]] for fans of Asian cinema. The shocking [[moments]] are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[characters]]. If you like this make sure you catch Dead or Alive which is very [[similar]] ([[barring]] the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a [[talent]] like Miike working at the same [[time]] as [[Takeshi]] [[Kitano]]. The best chance of [[seeing]] this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off [[try]] hunting for a Hong [[Kong]] version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. Shinjuku [[Triads]] Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film [[festivities]]. Why? Could your censors stomach a [[cinematography]] where [[cop]] anally [[violating]] [[men]] and female [[accuser]] to [[got]] them to [[chat]] (and the victims [[enjoying]] it) or see an [[ancient]] lady have her [[eyes]] [[buzzed]] out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[convulsions]] in [[storage]] for [[moviegoers]] of this ultraviolent [[constabulary]] and [[bandits]] [[history]]. It makes [[Triumph]] Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

[[Oughta]] you [[seeing]] this film? YES It is [[wondrous]] and [[critical]] [[opinion]] for fans of Asian cinema. The shocking [[times]] are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[attribute]]. If you like this make sure you catch Dead or Alive which is very [[analogue]] ([[forbidding]] the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a [[talents]] like Miike working at the same [[period]] as [[Takeuchi]] [[Veloso]]. The best chance of [[witnessing]] this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off [[trying]] hunting for a Hong [[Hong]] version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. --------------------------------------------- Result 1016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's been so long since I've seen this movie (at least 15 years) and yet it still haunts me with a vivid image of the horrific consequences that prisoners of war can face despite the terms of the Geneva Convention.

A unit of Australian underwater demolitions experts are captured in an archipelago near Japan following a successful mission to set mines in a Japanese harbor.

Once in prison these men expect the same treatment as any other POWs but to their dismay soon learn from a friendly Japanese prison guard that they are being tried as spies since they were out of uniform when captured. The consequences of such an infraction, by Japanese martial code, is execution by beheading.

Despite their pleas, and the pleas of the sympathetic prison guard, the day of reckoning approaches like a ticking time bomb. The tension is so high you will actually hear the ticking, though it may just be your chest pounding with the percussion of a marching execution squad.

The ending is actually too painful to reenact in my head much less write it here. But I can promise you-- you'll never forget it. Good luck finding the video in the U.S. --------------------------------------------- Result 1017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was saved before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was forced to watch it in a youth group at my church. This movie was highly [[disturbing]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was saved before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was forced to watch it in a youth group at my church. This movie was highly [[disconcerting]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Amicus made close to a good half dozen of these horror anthologies in the 70's, and this, from leading horror scribe Robert Bloch, is one of their best efforts. There are four stories, all worthwhile, but two -- "Sweets For The Sweet" and "Method For Murder" -- distinguish themselves as highly effective journeys into fear.

In "Sweets", Christopher Lee plays an impatient widower whose lovely daughter (Chloe Franks) becomes resentful of his neglect and brutish intolerance, so she sculpts a voodoo doll with which she expresses her distaste for his methods. Franks is a beautiful figure of mischievous evil and delivers one of the greatest child performances in a horror film since Martin Stephens in "The Innocents". This installment is directed with great subtlety and the final outrage, occurring off-screen, is a moment of purest horror.

"Method of Murder" is about a horror novelist (Denholm Elliott) who is menaced by one of his own creations, the creepy Dominic. This episode is striking for its simplicity and stark terror. Dominic may or may not be real, so director Peter Duffell has a great time playing with our expectations. The brief shots of Dominic reflected in a pond or seen as a fleeting phantasm in a meadow are truly haunting.

The original poster art, featuring a skeletal figure clasping a tray holding Peter Cushing's severed head, was a rich enticement for punters fixed on fear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] OK, I know that a lot of people will [[probably]] resent this [[review]] as Watership Down is a "[[classic]]" and a standard part of most people's [[childhood]], but [[seeing]] this film for the first time at the [[tender]] age of 18, I [[must]] admit: I really [[hated]] it.

We watched this film because my sister had read the book and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an exception. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly dull. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic [[story]] about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the [[characters]] were uninspiring, annoying, [[dull]] and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. OK, I know that a lot of people will [[undeniably]] resent this [[scrutinize]] as Watership Down is a "[[classical]]" and a standard part of most people's [[infant]], but [[see]] this film for the first time at the [[tenders]] age of 18, I [[gotta]] admit: I really [[abhor]] it.

We watched this film because my sister had read the book and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an exception. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly dull. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic [[histories]] about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the [[trait]] were uninspiring, annoying, [[boring]] and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining [[dialogue]]? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought kids such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders [[shines]] "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my [[delight]], the [[rest]] of the [[episodes]] were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the [[characters]]. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but [[still]] fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen [[angst]] and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most [[entertaining]] engineer [[since]] Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some [[depth]] that most [[child]] [[characters]] don't have, and of course in the [[middle]] of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's [[trouble]], Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: [[James]] Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here [[either]]. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining [[discussions]]? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought kids such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders [[glows]] "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my [[gladness]], the [[resting]] of the [[spells]] were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the [[nature]]. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but [[again]] fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen [[anxiety]] and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most [[amusing]] engineer [[because]] Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some [[depths]] that most [[kid]] [[nature]] don't have, and of course in the [[oriente]] of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's [[difficulty]], Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: [[Jacobo]] Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here [[neither]]. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! --------------------------------------------- Result 1021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is definitely an [[appropriate]] [[update]] for the original, except that "[[party]] on the left is now party on the right." [[Like]] the original, this movie rails against a federal [[government]] which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how [[tenuous]] our [[political]] liberties are in an era of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal government. Kowalski [[serves]] as a [[metaphor]] for Waco and [[Ruby]] [[Ridge]], where the US [[government]], with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw [[around]] [[words]] [[like]] "[[white]] [[supremacist]]" and "right wing [[extremists]] as well as trumped-up [[drug]] [[charges]] to abridge the most [[fundamental]] of its' [[citizens]] rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film [[could]] be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and [[countless]] others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he [[brilliantly]] [[portrays]] "the voice," and that sums up the [[dangerous]] (to some) message of this film.

This is definitely an [[adequate]] [[modernize]] for the original, except that "[[part]] on the left is now party on the right." [[Iike]] the original, this movie rails against a federal [[council]] which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how [[flimsy]] our [[politically]] liberties are in an era of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal government. Kowalski [[contributes]] as a [[analogy]] for Waco and [[Robbie]] [[Leng]], where the US [[council]], with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw [[roundabout]] [[expression]] [[iike]] "[[branca]] [[supremacists]]" and "right wing [[extremist]] as well as trumped-up [[medicines]] [[accusations]] to abridge the most [[critical]] of its' [[citizen]] rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film [[wo]] be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and [[multiple]] others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he [[brightly]] [[depicts]] "the voice," and that sums up the [[perilous]] (to some) message of this film.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I Am [[Curious]] is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of [[Lena]] and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of Lena and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[bizarre]] mixture of political/war rallies, [[Dr]]. King, serious political interviews, flopping breasts, and pubic hair. The [[film]] [[feels]] more [[like]] a [[fictional]] [[documentary]] than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be [[bored]] [[dry]] watching this film. Unlike [[many]] other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overdone]] for what it is. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] [[real]] porn, I'm sure there are [[better]] [[choices]]. The pervasive nudity is a [[major]] distraction from whatever plot there is. I [[think]] the cast did a fine job [[however]]. They [[played]] their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to [[seeing]] in the American [[films]] during this time. I Am [[Outlandish]] is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of [[Lina]] and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of Lena and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[outlandish]] mixture of political/war rallies, [[Doktor]]. King, serious political interviews, flopping breasts, and pubic hair. The [[filmmaking]] [[deems]] more [[iike]] a [[notional]] [[literature]] than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be [[boring]] [[driest]] watching this film. Unlike [[innumerable]] other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overkill]] for what it is. [[Though]] you [[wants]] to [[consults]] [[genuine]] porn, I'm sure there are [[optimum]] [[selects]]. The pervasive nudity is a [[grandes]] distraction from whatever plot there is. I [[thought]] the cast did a fine job [[still]]. They [[effected]] their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to [[witnessing]] in the American [[filmmaking]] during this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In Budapest, Margaret Sullavan (as Klara Novak) gets a job as clerk in a gift shop; there, she bickers with co-worker James Stewart (as Alfred Kralik). The two don't get along on the job because each has fallen in love with a unseen pen pal. Watching Ernst Lubitsch direct these stars through the inevitable is predictably satisfying.

Even better is a sub-plot involving shop owner Frank Morgan (as Hugo Matuschek), who suspects his wife is having an affair. Hiring a private detective, Mr. Morgan confirms his wife of 22 years is having sex with one of his younger employees. Morgan, painfully realizing, "She just didn't want to grow old with me," and the supporting characters are what keeps this film from getting old.

********* The Shop Around the Corner (1/12/40) Ernst Lubitsch ~ James Stewart, Margaret Sullavan, Frank Morgan, Joseph Schildkraut --------------------------------------------- Result 1024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but [[actually]] I don't [[understand]] the [[reason]] of all the fuss.

I liked many points of the movie, some of the quotes really [[cheered]] me up, but the stereotyped [[characters]] are present again, like in every Hungarian [[film]], and the [[story]] is also pretty [[dull]]. I liked the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[film]] just BORING.

[[Rudolf]] Péter is good as always, Reviczky is [[brilliant]] also, but the others are just there... doing [[nothing]].

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but [[genuinely]] I don't [[understands]] the [[grounds]] of all the fuss.

I liked many points of the movie, some of the quotes really [[yelled]] me up, but the stereotyped [[personages]] are present again, like in every Hungarian [[filmmaking]], and the [[tales]] is also pretty [[monotonous]]. I liked the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[filmmaking]] just BORING.

[[Rodolphe]] Péter is good as always, Reviczky is [[sumptuous]] also, but the others are just there... doing [[none]].

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? --------------------------------------------- Result 1025 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The Treasure [[Island]] DVD should be [[required]] viewing in any [[film]] [[production]] course! It's a [[textbook]] [[example]] of how NOT to [[make]] a [[movie]]. Watching the [[movie]] and then [[listening]] to the [[writer]]/director's commentary [[demonstrates]] graphically the vast [[chasm]] between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his [[audience]] about them. [[Call]] me old-fashioned, but I think of [[movies]] as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the [[hell]] the [[director]] is [[talking]] about. The director's avowed [[purpose]] is to make a movie [[void]] of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, [[alas]], is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing [[premise]], rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. [[Someone]] with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling [[could]] create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. The Treasure [[Lsland]] DVD should be [[obliged]] viewing in any [[movie]] [[productivity]] course! It's a [[schoolbooks]] [[examples]] of how NOT to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]]. Watching the [[flick]] and then [[listen]] to the [[novelist]]/director's commentary [[illustrates]] graphically the vast [[gulf]] between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his [[spectators]] about them. [[Calling]] me old-fashioned, but I think of [[film]] as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the [[brothel]] the [[superintendent]] is [[chitchat]] about. The director's avowed [[targets]] is to make a movie [[vacuum]] of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, [[alack]], is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing [[assumption]], rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. [[Person]] with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling [[wo]] create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. --------------------------------------------- Result 1026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Greetings from this Portuguese guy :)

I believe The Sopranos are one of the best production ever, it has reality and fiction mixed in such a way, that it's hard to see the difference. It has the same quality as GodFather! James Gandolfini fits at the paper as a glove! I would love The Sopranos would never finish at all. It's perfect! It should be a subject in school :) I saw Sopranos when I was a kid, but I was too young to stay waked until the episode ends, so now I bought the all Episodes in DVD format and I am watching all episodes at home before and after dinner and I am getting addicted, like I did with Prison Break. In my opinion Prison Break and The Sopranos are the best-ever series made for television. The argument of both are splendid and the actors are perfect. Congratulations for such a work.

Sorry about my English. Thanks for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 1027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yet another example of what British cinema can achieve: a simple story, told and acted well. Brenda Blethyn gives a layered and warming performance as the recently widowed and financially straitened Grace, ably assisted by a solid supporting cast. The "quirky small town" card gets played to the hilt, similar to many TV series and films that have come from the British Isles in recent years (Ballykissangel, Hamish Macbeth and others come to mind). Like the forementioned, this film makes use of some ravishingly beautiful rural scenery, in this case the wet and wild Cornish coast.

Some viewers might find wholesale acceptance of cannabis use a bit challenging, others might find the ending just a little too cute and safe. But it's an enjoyable spliff, to be sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[saw]] this film [[first]] in the [[Soviet]] Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[incredibly]] [[unwise]] - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and [[find]] themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and [[fundamentally]] severe ladies. The [[men]] now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of [[extremely]] silly clichés follow - sex-drive, [[constant]] masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots [[certainly]] they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here [[wooden]] and [[strangely]] bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and [[repeats]] on saying [[phrases]] like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't [[done]] [[anything]] to her!". This was [[intended]] to be a [[comedy]], instead, it turned out to be a vapid [[farce]], full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your [[time]] on it - this is just [[bad]]. I [[seen]] this film [[fiirst]] in the [[Ussr]] Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[surprisingly]] [[foolhardy]] - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and [[finds]] themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and [[predominantly]] severe ladies. The [[man]] now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of [[exceptionally]] silly clichés follow - sex-drive, [[perpetual]] masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots [[definitely]] they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here [[timber]] and [[surprisingly]] bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and [[rehearsals]] on saying [[expression]] like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't [[accomplished]] [[algo]] to her!". This was [[meant]] to be a [[parody]], instead, it turned out to be a vapid [[giggle]], full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your [[moment]] on it - this is just [[unfavourable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Incredibly]] [[intriguing]] and captivating, I found it impossible to [[turn]] away once I [[began]] to watch. I am [[usually]] one of the [[harshest]] [[critics]] but to me this [[film]] was just [[brilliant]], [[strange]] as this may sound I [[could]] [[almost]] [[smell]] the air and feel the textures of the [[locations]].

From a cinematographic I thought there was [[great]] [[use]] of [[light]] and [[texture]]. From the orange glow of the summer [[light]], down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a [[distinct]] [[air]] of [[realism]] to me.

From a [[character]] perspective I thought the [[notion]] of Victor Vargas as [[almost]] the [[glue]] that connects the [[story]] was [[quite]] inspired, each of the other [[members]] of the family having a more [[complete]] [[background]] simply caused [[greater]] intrigue in the [[main]] [[character]] himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the [[grandmother]] and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly [[realistic]]. The [[awkwardness]], the [[accent]], the [[cooking]] and even down to the comments made felt so [[authentic]] to me.

I [[think]] this [[film]] [[worked]] for me because I [[began]] to watch it with no [[expectations]] and [[found]] it [[completely]] immersing and [[brought]] back [[memories]] of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. [[Strikingly]] [[exciting]] and captivating, I found it impossible to [[converting]] away once I [[starts]] to watch. I am [[routinely]] one of the [[trickiest]] [[detractors]] but to me this [[cinematography]] was just [[wondrous]], [[unusual]] as this may sound I [[did]] [[hardly]] [[perfume]] the air and feel the textures of the [[location]].

From a cinematographic I thought there was [[wondrous]] [[usage]] of [[lighting]] and [[fabric]]. From the orange glow of the summer [[lighting]], down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a [[separate]] [[aerial]] of [[pragmatism]] to me.

From a [[characters]] perspective I thought the [[concept]] of Victor Vargas as [[hardly]] the [[paste]] that connects the [[tale]] was [[rather]] inspired, each of the other [[member]] of the family having a more [[finish]] [[backdrop]] simply caused [[largest]] intrigue in the [[principal]] [[characters]] himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the [[granny]] and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly [[practical]]. The [[embarrassment]], the [[focus]], the [[galley]] and even down to the comments made felt so [[vera]] to me.

I [[believe]] this [[cinematography]] [[functioned]] for me because I [[begun]] to watch it with no [[outlook]] and [[uncovered]] it [[entirely]] immersing and [[lodged]] back [[memorabilia]] of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] *** Spoilers*

My dad had taped this movie for me when I was 3. By age 5, I had watched it over 400 times. I just watched it and watched it. And I still do today! It has a grim storyline, a lamb's mother is killed by a wolf--a very emotional scene--and wants to become a wolf, like him. After years of training, the lamb is made into a really REALLY evil looking thing. He and the wolf travel to his old barn, but he cannot kill the lambs, no matter how much he wishes to. He ends up killing the wolf, but is no longer seen as a lamb by his former friends, and can't return to his previous way of life.

The art is beautiful, the songs are..well, okay, and the voice acting is better than some things today.

All in all, you just *have* to see this movie, it is a great masterpiece. Although, it's very hard to find today.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very sad movie. Really. Nothing happens in this movie. The Script is bad!!! I guess they've just copy-paste the first 15 pages to 90 pages. The Producers must have thought let's create a Hollywood movie here in Belgium. They didn't succeed. Now in the third week it is only running in Antwerp and Brussels at 22h45 or something. In the past we have had really good movies in Belgium, like Daens. Shades is a waste of your time. Maybe you could sneak in the theater after you've seen a real movie. If you've seen 10 minutes of Shades, you've seen it all. It was advertised to death on local radio and TV. I hope it will disappear in the Shades soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Matador" stars Pierce Brosnan as a burned out assassin. He's James Bond gone to seed, in too-tight, garish clothes, gold chains, and an ugly haircut. Our struggling assassin, Julian Noble, is in Mexico, trying to regain his nerve. Staying at the same hotel is a likable, down-on-his luck businessman Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear), also trying to regain his equilibrium. Danny is desperate to close a deal and return to his wife in Denver (Hope Davis) with good news.

Noble and Wright unexpectedly become friends. Wright convinces Noble to reveal certain techniques, which he demonstrates at a bullfight. Noble is eventually targeted by his employers and shows up in Denver.

Writer and director Richard Shepard did the Q&A after this delightful movie at the Austin Film Festival. Shepard was also down on his luck. After suffering the loss of his agent and rejection of recent scripts, he decided to write a story no one would buy and create a character no one would want to play. Then Pierce Brosnan called. Brosnan regains his equilibrium in this movie. (There is life after Bond!) He has a wonderful flair for self-deprecating comedy. Don't miss it.

Stay for the closing credits to read what the filmmakers say about bullfighting. I look forward to more of Richard Shepard's projects. --------------------------------------------- Result 1033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[WARNING]]: REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five [[films]] in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. However, just two years on and I find I can't [[remember]] enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[recall]], some of the sequels – [[Dream]] Warriors in particular – weren't as bad as is often made out, though even the original was no [[classic]]. Generally, the predictability of the [[premise]] (if people [[fall]] asleep they get murdered in their [[dreams]]) doesn't [[lend]] itself to narrative [[tension]]. But while I cannot recall much of the first five [[films]], I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's [[Dead]].

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be [[judged]] by the fact that the film was [[promoted]] [[solely]] on the character's [[demise]]. The fact that the movie's [[conclusion]] is not even [[hidden]], but in fact the entire [[purpose]] for the film's being goes to [[illustrate]] how [[vacant]], soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's mockery of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[tripe]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is garbage – but you're paying to [[see]] it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[insensitive]] depiction of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so rudimentary? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

[[ALERT]]: REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five [[filmmaking]] in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. However, just two years on and I find I can't [[reminisce]] enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[remembered]], some of the sequels – [[Nightmares]] Warriors in particular – weren't as bad as is often made out, though even the original was no [[typical]]. Generally, the predictability of the [[prerequisite]] (if people [[tumbles]] asleep they get murdered in their [[daydreaming]]) doesn't [[give]] itself to narrative [[tensions]]. But while I cannot recall much of the first five [[filmmaking]], I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's [[Death]].

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be [[considered]] by the fact that the film was [[emboldened]] [[exclusively]] on the character's [[downfall]]. The fact that the movie's [[finding]] is not even [[disguising]], but in fact the entire [[intents]] for the film's being goes to [[depict]] how [[unoccupied]], soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's mockery of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[gut]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is garbage – but you're paying to [[consults]] it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[indelicate]] depiction of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so rudimentary? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Bizarre [[take]] on the Cinderella tale. [[Terribly]] poor [[script]], but Kathleen Turner [[turns]] in a pretty decent [[evil]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The [[period]] costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. [[Fast]] forward until you see something interesting and [[save]] yourself the [[full]] 90 minutes of [[drivel]].

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". Bizarre [[taking]] on the Cinderella tale. [[Extraordinarily]] poor [[hyphen]], but Kathleen Turner [[revolves]] in a pretty decent [[malevolent]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The [[timeline]] costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. [[Speedily]] forward until you see something interesting and [[rescuing]] yourself the [[fullest]] 90 minutes of [[whim]].

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". --------------------------------------------- Result 1035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'd have to say that this was a little [[embarrassing]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; [[made]] in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a [[starring]] role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of [[muddled]], with missed [[opportunities]] for what [[could]] have been an [[entertaining]] hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for [[example]], which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel [[gimmick]] that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? I'd have to say that this was a little [[distracting]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; [[effected]] in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a [[championships]] role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of [[puzzled]], with missed [[chances]] for what [[did]] have been an [[entertain]] hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for [[case]], which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel [[ploy]] that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? --------------------------------------------- Result 1036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I was [[surprised]] at just how much I [[enjoyed]] this most thoughtfully [[delivered]] [[drama]], which owing to its [[rather]] unimpressive 6.6 [[rating]], I nearly [[missed]]; as I rarely give the time of day to any movie rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so glad I [[gave]] Stone Angel the viewing it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[increasingly]] [[rare]] sensitive, soulful and [[thoughtful]] [[sorts]] of person left on this earth in living [[form]].

I must say that in [[many]] [[ways]] ([[though]] not all), viz. its themes, execution, style, production etc., Stone Angel very [[much]] reminded me of the much [[praised]] "The Notebook". I am so [[surprised]] that other [[commentators]] didn't [[pick]] up on the [[many]] similarities which repeatedly struck me [[throughout]] this movie, so I can only [[assume]] that those who've [[written]] [[comments]] have [[yet]] to [[see]] the Notebook. They may not share any Alzheimer's theme, [[yet]] I can confidently [[say]] that if you very [[much]] [[enjoyed]] "The [[Notebook]]" you will [[certainly]] find much to [[engage]] your time most fruitfully with "The Stone Angel". But [[even]] If you've not seen The Notebook, nor read the book on which this move is based, (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should definitely find much to hold your attention firmly - as long as your favourite genres don't include fast paced action thrillers. This is a movie for thinkers and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life changes as the years pass, and what might have happened in one's life as one gazes back through the years.

This bizarrely [[underrated]] yet [[great]] movie [[really]] deserves a [[rating]] of [[approximately]] 8/10. I can only blame its current lowish rating of 6.6/10 on the 11% of [[idiots]] who [[gave]] it 1/10. After all it has attracted [[less]] than 300 votes at the [[time]] of my writing this comment. Nonetheless, if those 11% who [[gave]] it the lowest ranking [[possible]] were really [[expecting]] [[car]] [[chases]] and [[explosions]] why didn't they [[look]]... for even a few seconds at the movie's [[premise]] and promotional lines? Oh dear... [[Whatever]] the [[world]] is [[coming]] to, don't [[miss]] this most underrated gem of a [[movie]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[ten]] doesn't [[include]] Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). I was [[horrified]] at just how much I [[appreciated]] this most thoughtfully [[handed]] [[tragedy]], which owing to its [[quite]] unimpressive 6.6 [[scoring]], I nearly [[mistook]]; as I rarely give the time of day to any movie rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so glad I [[given]] Stone Angel the viewing it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[gradually]] [[rarity]] sensitive, soulful and [[pensive]] [[type]] of person left on this earth in living [[shape]].

I must say that in [[myriad]] [[method]] ([[if]] not all), viz. its themes, execution, style, production etc., Stone Angel very [[very]] reminded me of the much [[commended]] "The Notebook". I am so [[horrified]] that other [[analysts]] didn't [[opted]] up on the [[several]] similarities which repeatedly struck me [[during]] this movie, so I can only [[assumes]] that those who've [[typed]] [[commentaries]] have [[even]] to [[seeing]] the Notebook. They may not share any Alzheimer's theme, [[again]] I can confidently [[said]] that if you very [[very]] [[appreciated]] "The [[Laptop]]" you will [[arguably]] find much to [[embark]] your time most fruitfully with "The Stone Angel". But [[yet]] If you've not seen The Notebook, nor read the book on which this move is based, (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should definitely find much to hold your attention firmly - as long as your favourite genres don't include fast paced action thrillers. This is a movie for thinkers and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life changes as the years pass, and what might have happened in one's life as one gazes back through the years.

This bizarrely [[underestimated]] yet [[huge]] movie [[truthfully]] deserves a [[punctuation]] of [[roughly]] 8/10. I can only blame its current lowish rating of 6.6/10 on the 11% of [[morons]] who [[delivered]] it 1/10. After all it has attracted [[lesser]] than 300 votes at the [[times]] of my writing this comment. Nonetheless, if those 11% who [[handed]] it the lowest ranking [[feasible]] were really [[waiting]] [[motor]] [[chase]] and [[bombs]] why didn't they [[peek]]... for even a few seconds at the movie's [[assumption]] and promotional lines? Oh dear... [[Whichever]] the [[worldwide]] is [[upcoming]] to, don't [[missed]] this most underrated gem of a [[movies]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[dix]] doesn't [[containing]] Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). --------------------------------------------- Result 1037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is really films outside (not in a motel room). With real costumes (not only strings and swimsuits). You have to see this movie. it's the only porn movie I know that is worth watching between the sex scenes.

Bon Cinema

Laurent --------------------------------------------- Result 1038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There are few [[films]] or [[movies]] I [[consider]] favorites over the [[years]]. The Gospel [[road]] was one of them. I [[watched]] this as a young [[teen]] and [[would]] [[like]] the [[opportunity]] to watch it again. My [[favorite]] parts were the [[fact]] that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[supper]] was a [[huge]] [[meal]],

3/ he [[liked]] playing with the [[children]],

4/His [[death]] was for all people and for all time.

The [[movie]] may not have been theologically [[sound]] or high quality acting, but it touched my [[heart]] at that [[time]]. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a [[brave]] venture. If it ever [[comes]] out on DVD, I will [[purchase]] it [[purely]] for [[sentimental]] [[reasons]]. There are few [[movie]] or [[kino]] I [[considering]] favorites over the [[yrs]]. The Gospel [[chemin]] was one of them. I [[observed]] this as a young [[teenagers]] and [[should]] [[loves]] the [[luck]] to watch it again. My [[prefer]] parts were the [[facto]] that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[meals]] was a [[gigantic]] [[diet]],

3/ he [[loved]] playing with the [[kiddies]],

4/His [[decease]] was for all people and for all time.

The [[movies]] may not have been theologically [[audible]] or high quality acting, but it touched my [[crux]] at that [[period]]. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a [[adventurous]] venture. If it ever [[happens]] out on DVD, I will [[procurement]] it [[solely]] for [[romantic]] [[justification]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was shown on the biography channel and was about as informative as a children's comic! I gave it 2 out of 10 for it's attention to detail because for the most part it had a 70s feel to it and the three ladies that played the original three angels looked like them so the make-up was good.

This was supposed to be a biography on the biography channel but it was void of everything that is normally / usually seen in one of their biographies. No interviews with surviving cast members, crew members, production team members etc., or their friends, families, and any biographers of those people. In fact I know just as much now about the programme as I did before I watched this film that was based on the (supposedly) biographical book. As for actually learning something that no-one knew about the program and wasn't common knowledge well that never happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 1040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Well, it was [[funny]] in [[spots]]. This [[film]] is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a [[film]] that [[sits]] on the [[video]] [[shelf]] and gathers [[dust]]. [[Rent]] this one after you seen everything else. [[Beats]] boredom, but not by that much. My [[wife]] like like this [[film]] better then I do, [[maybe]] its not that [[bad]]. Well, it was [[hilarious]] in [[speckles]]. This [[filmmaking]] is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a [[filmmaking]] that [[headquarters]] on the [[videotape]] [[bookshelf]] and gathers [[stardust]]. [[Renting]] this one after you seen everything else. [[Defeats]] boredom, but not by that much. My [[woman]] like like this [[flick]] better then I do, [[probably]] its not that [[negative]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I'd have given this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Lifetime]]" [[presentation]] actually filmed in the location represented in the [[story]] - here, New York City. [[Most]] on this [[channel]], whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the top rating - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]], in many [[variations]], with several very [[similar]] to this [[specific]] one. It's [[also]] been done pretty [[often]] on the [[big]] screen, with mega-stars, [[past]] and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, [[Tom]] Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and [[many]] more. I can [[think]] of at [[least]] 10-12 more, just as [[prominent]], past to present, off the [[top]] of my head, who [[could]] be [[added]] now, and there are [[probably]] [[many]] others which could be brought to [[mind]].

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my [[opinion]], this is by far one of the [[best]] of this [[genre]] I've [[seen]]. I [[caught]] it by [[chance]] on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was [[taking]] a couple of [[hours]] following a [[particularly]] [[hectic]] [[week]]. I'd never run [[across]] this [[flick]] in the 8 [[years]] since it was [[made]]. And, while the two leads have [[done]] [[enough]] to be known to most, they were [[completely]] unknown to me. The only two actors I [[knew]] were Phyllis [[Newman]] (Anna's mother) whom I'd [[seen]] in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli ([[Henry]], Charlie's best [[friend]]) who was [[outstanding]] as "Gramma," the [[menacing]] juice [[loan]], [[tough]], street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and [[coupling]] between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all [[later]], is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no [[difference]] to the enjoyment here (in fact, it [[enhances]] it).

Checking some other comments, I agree [[completely]] with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination [[presented]], and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. I'd have given this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Lifetimes]]" [[introductions]] actually filmed in the location represented in the [[narratives]] - here, New York City. [[Plus]] on this [[canals]], whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the top rating - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been [[doing]] [[multiple]] [[period]], in many [[variant]], with several very [[identical]] to this [[particular]] one. It's [[similarly]] been done pretty [[usually]] on the [[huge]] screen, with mega-stars, [[previous]] and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, [[Thom]] Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and [[various]] more. I can [[believing]] of at [[less]] 10-12 more, just as [[conspicuous]], past to present, off the [[supreme]] of my head, who [[would]] be [[add]] now, and there are [[maybe]] [[multiple]] others which could be brought to [[intellect]].

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my [[visualise]], this is by far one of the [[bestest]] of this [[gender]] I've [[saw]]. I [[catch]] it by [[possibilities]] on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was [[take]] a couple of [[hour]] following a [[namely]] [[feverish]] [[chow]]. I'd never run [[during]] this [[film]] in the 8 [[olds]] since it was [[accomplished]]. And, while the two leads have [[accomplished]] [[adequate]] to be known to most, they were [[utterly]] unknown to me. The only two actors I [[overheard]] were Phyllis [[Neumann]] (Anna's mother) whom I'd [[watched]] in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli ([[Gregg]], Charlie's best [[boyfriend]]) who was [[wondrous]] as "Gramma," the [[threatens]] juice [[loans]], [[stiff]], street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and [[couple]] between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all [[subsequently]], is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no [[divergence]] to the enjoyment here (in fact, it [[reinforces]] it).

Checking some other comments, I agree [[absolutely]] with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination [[lodged]], and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A 14 year old girl develops her first serious crush on the 17 year old boy that lives near by, while simultaneously trying to overcome her feelings of inadequacy in comparison to her older sister. That is the simple premise of this beautiful, poetic coming of age film from Director Robert Mulligan. Mulligan is famous for previously directing Summer of '42 in 1971 and To Kill A Mockingbird in 1962, two giants of the coming of age genre. Here he directs newcomers in the principal roles: Reese Witherspoon, in her film debut, as the 14 year old girl; Emily Warfield, as the older sister; Jason London, as Court, the 17 year old boy. Reese Witherspoon is astonishingly good in her film debut, displaying every emotion that a 14 year old girl feels in experiencing young love and hurt, never striking a false note. Warfield and London are both equally good as well. The film accurately depicts each adolescent's thoughts or feelings in regard to love with heartfelt sensitivity, never crossing over into maudlin excess even once. Kudos to the autobiographical screenplay from Jenny Wingfield; this is one of the very few films about young love that is honest and consistent in tone without being emotionally dishonest or sensationalist. The music is wonderfully simple, accentuating the tone and mood from scene to scene, but never becoming intrusive. The beautiful cinematography is by famed horror director Freddie Francis, who was in his 70's when this was shot. Tess Harper and Sam Waterston play the girls' parents with dead aim accuracy for 1957, caring, strict, and emotionally simple. Gail Strickland is good also as the boy's mother. There are feelings to sort out, lessons to learn, and truths to face in this sweet-natured film that packs an emotional wallop. To date, this is Robert Mulligan's last film. This is one of the very best films of 1991. **** of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Chang Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" might very well be the highwater mark of the Shaw Brothers martial arts film cycle. This rousing kung fu epic boasts an amazing cast - a veritable who's who of the Shaw stable. Though the plot is fairly standard and the fight choreography is superb as usual, it is Cheh's handling of the subject matter that makes this film remarkable and enjoyable. The sense of reverence displayed for the history and traditions of the Shaolin Temple is palpable in every frame. Not unlike William Keighley's paean to the fabled Fighting 69th in that same self titled film or John Ford's salute to West Point in "The Long Gray Line," Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" is a lovingly crafted ode in that same style.

The cultural correlation I am tempted to make, is to compare the Shaolin Temple to the Alamo. Watching this film will give the same admiring and nostalgic feelings that you experienced many years ago in grade school history when you learned of the courage and sacrifice of those doomed heroes of the Alamo. At the end of the film, you too might be tempted to call out, Remember the Shaolin Temple! --------------------------------------------- Result 1044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In fact, it never was. I'm not sure why Billy Crystal wanted to recreate a 1940s screwball comedy. What a vacuous shambles! None of these people come close to a Cary Grant, Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn, etc, and anyway, today's audience isn't as receptive to this facile muck. Writing is trivial. The hackneyed plot is razor thin and obvious. The chemistry between the leading characters is non-existent. It's interesting that Julia Roberts seems to think she's a reincarnation of some big star from the "golden age of Hollywood", whenever that may be. It's an effect she tries and fails to attain yet again with Richard Gere in Runaway Bride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hilariously obvious "drama" about a bunch of high school (I think) kids who enjoy non-stop hip-hop, break dancing, graffiti and trying to become a dj at the Roxy--or something. To be totally honest I was so bored I forgot! Even people who love the music agree this movie is terribly acted and--as a drama--failed dismally. We're supposed to find this kids likable and nice. I found them bland and boring. The one that I REALLY hated was Ramon. He does graffiti on subway trains and this is looked upon as great. Excuse me? He's defacing public property that isn't his to begin with. Also these "great" kids tap into the city's electricity so they can hold a big dance party at an abandoned building. Uh huh. So we're supposed to find a bunch of law breakers lovable and fun.

I could forgive all that if the music was good but I can't stand hip hop. The songs were--at best--mediocre and they were nonstop! They're ALWAYS playing! It got to the point that I was fast-forwarding through the many endless music numbers. (Cut out the music and you haver a 30 minute movie--maybe) There are a few imaginative numbers--the subway dance fight, a truly funny Santa number and the climatic Roxy show. If you love hip hop here's your movie. But it you're looking for good drama mixed in--forget it. Also HOW did this get a PG rating? There's an incredible amount of swearing in this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Julia ([[Kristina]] Copeland) [[travels]] with her husband [[Steven]] Harris ([[Steven]] [[Man]]) and their baby son [[Alex]] to [[spend]] a [[couple]] of days with her family in [[Savage]] [[Island]], an island of their own. The [[couple]] [[expects]] to [[resolve]] their issues along the [[weekend]] in the remote [[island]]. [[While]] waiting for the [[boat]], Julia and [[Steven]] meet two weird [[men]] in the harbor, and when her brother [[Peter]] (Brendan Beiser) [[arrives]], he explains that a family of [[hillbilly]] squatters is [[living]] in the [[island]]. The reckless [[Peter]] smoke [[pot]] while [[driving]] the truck in the [[night]] and turns the headlight off to [[show]] off; however, he accidentally [[runs]] over the [[young]] [[son]] of the Savage's family, but in the [[dark]] he [[believes]] he has [[hit]] an animal. [[Later]], the [[Savage]] family [[claims]] Alex as a compensation for their lost [[son]]. The [[Young]] family does not [[accept]] the trade, and they [[initiate]] a [[deadly]] [[war]] between families.

"[[Savage]] [[Island]]" is a very low-budget [[movie]], with a stupid [[screenplay]], amateurish [[cinematography]] but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[absurd]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The logical procedure would be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many [[flaws]] in this flick that I could spend many lines [[writing]] about this subject. I [[believe]] this [[film]] was filmed with a [[home]] [[video]] [[camera]] so [[awful]] the [[images]] are. The [[good]] cast [[deserved]] a better material to [[work]]. My [[vote]] is four.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "Ilha de Sangue" ("[[Island]] of [[Blood]]") Julia ([[Christina]] Copeland) [[traveling]] with her husband [[Stevens]] Harris ([[Stefan]] [[Guy]]) and their baby son [[Allie]] to [[spends]] a [[matching]] of days with her family in [[Ferocious]] [[Isle]], an island of their own. The [[match]] [[waits]] to [[resolutions]] their issues along the [[weekends]] in the remote [[isla]]. [[Although]] waiting for the [[ships]], Julia and [[Stephane]] meet two weird [[man]] in the harbor, and when her brother [[Pete]] (Brendan Beiser) [[arrived]], he explains that a family of [[backwoods]] squatters is [[residing]] in the [[isla]]. The reckless [[Pete]] smoke [[herb]] while [[drives]] the truck in the [[nighttime]] and turns the headlight off to [[exposition]] off; however, he accidentally [[manages]] over the [[youthful]] [[sons]] of the Savage's family, but in the [[somber]] he [[feels]] he has [[knocked]] an animal. [[Subsequent]], the [[Cruel]] family [[claim]] Alex as a compensation for their lost [[sons]]. The [[Youth]] family does not [[accepted]] the trade, and they [[inaugurated]] a [[mortal]] [[wars]] between families.

"[[Feral]] [[Isla]]" is a very low-budget [[filmmaking]], with a stupid [[scenarios]], amateurish [[movies]] but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[senseless]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The logical procedure would be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many [[defect]] in this flick that I could spend many lines [[handwriting]] about this subject. I [[reckon]] this [[filmmaking]] was filmed with a [[houses]] [[videos]] [[cameras]] so [[scary]] the [[image]] are. The [[buena]] cast [[deserves]] a better material to [[cooperating]]. My [[votes]] is four.

Title ([[Brasilia]]): "Ilha de Sangue" ("[[Isola]] of [[Chrissakes]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 1047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I [[may]] have this wrong, but a [[chair]] had something to do with the [[death]] of this woman's father. That [[movie]] was [[terrible]]! This is not a movie for those who love a good suspense movie. Bad suspense [[movie]]! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big fan of [[lifetime]] [[movies]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I [[maggio]] have this wrong, but a [[president]] had something to do with the [[died]] of this woman's father. That [[filmmaking]] was [[scary]]! This is not a movie for those who love a good suspense movie. Bad suspense [[movies]]! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big fan of [[lifespan]] [[cinema]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1048 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Bo [[Derek]] might have had a [[career]] had she not let her late husband, [[John]], [[take]] over as her [[director]]. It's a real [[shame]], no really, with the right [[direction]] and the right [[part]] (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't [[win]] any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has [[made]] it [[big]] in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[problem]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her [[appearance]] in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the [[sex]] [[symbol]] of the 1980s." [[Problem]] is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's [[time]]. Maybe he knew her limitations as an [[actress]], [[perhaps]] that is why he [[fashioned]] [[movies]] for her that [[concentrated]] on her [[body]], not her acting [[skills]]. But it [[got]] [[old]] [[real]] [[quick]]. It didn't [[help]] [[matters]] any that the [[films]] of [[John]] and Bo [[Derek]] are (let's be honest) really, [[really]] [[bad]]. And [[bad]] [[sums]] up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the [[Apes]].

You know what's worst? This [[film]] is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not [[even]] Bo's stunning looks and [[figure]] can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) [[hams]] it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid [[career]] as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic [[actor]], he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book [[though]]. She stood by [[John]] until his dying day, has a [[true]] [[love]] of animals and [[nature]] and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the [[dumb]] blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? Bo [[Derrick]] might have had a [[quarries]] had she not let her late husband, [[Giovanni]], [[taking]] over as her [[superintendent]]. It's a real [[pity]], no really, with the right [[directions]] and the right [[party]] (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't [[won]] any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has [[accomplished]] it [[wide]] in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[difficulty]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her [[apparition]] in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the [[sexuality]] [[icons]] of the 1980s." [[Troubles]] is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's [[times]]. Maybe he knew her limitations as an [[actor]], [[maybe]] that is why he [[shaped]] [[film]] for her that [[focusing]] on her [[agency]], not her acting [[dexterity]]. But it [[did]] [[antigua]] [[veritable]] [[faster]]. It didn't [[assists]] [[questions]] any that the [[cinematographic]] of [[Jon]] and Bo [[Derrick]] are (let's be honest) really, [[genuinely]] [[negative]]. And [[naughty]] [[amounts]] up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the [[Baboons]].

You know what's worst? This [[filmmaking]] is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not [[yet]] Bo's stunning looks and [[silhouette]] can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) [[hamas]] it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid [[carrera]] as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic [[protagonist]], he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book [[albeit]]. She stood by [[Giovanni]] until his dying day, has a [[authentic]] [[adore]] of animals and [[character]] and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the [[foolish]] blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? --------------------------------------------- Result 1049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty [[probably]] won't wear off on the [[first]], second or third [[viewing]], but you?ll be [[drawn]] in by the [[characters]] which are so simple [[yet]] [[intriguing]], that you may [[find]] yourself [[actually]] [[caring]] for them in an [[unexpected]] way, which may or may not make you feel a little childish due to the [[medium]].

Disney continues to firmly hold the title of "[[Greatest]] Animation in the [[World]]", with "A Bug?s [[Life]]" standing as one of their [[greatest]] [[achievements]]. One of the [[innovative]] attachments being the [[delightful]] "out-takes" [[added]] to the [[end]] of the [[film]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m told the VHS cassette has one [[alternating]] version per tape. The DVD [[also]] [[features]] "[[Gerry]]?s [[Game]]" which is a [[delightful]] little PIXAR short that was [[also]] [[shown]] [[prior]] to the [[film]] in [[theaters]].

This is by far the [[superior]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[pretty]] good, but lacks [[something]] in the animation and in the [[story]] development and [[characters]]. If you [[look]] at the [[star]] voices of both [[films]], "Antz" is [[largely]] cast with [[big]] [[name]] "[[movie]]" [[stars]] with a few [[familiar]] "TV" [[star]] voices, where "A Bug?s [[Life]]" is just the [[opposite]], loaded with "TV" [[stars]] with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[exception]]. But the difference in quality is [[distinct]] and [[obvious]].

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go [[head]] to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[kind]] of film that [[almost]] makes me wish I had children to [[share]] it with. [[Don]]?t [[think]] for a second that this is just a [[movie]] for [[kids]], [[though]]. You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty [[surely]] won't wear off on the [[outset]], second or third [[opinion]], but you?ll be [[lured]] in by the [[nature]] which are so simple [[still]] [[exciting]], that you may [[unearth]] yourself [[indeed]] [[care]] for them in an [[unintended]] way, which may or may not make you feel a little childish due to the [[mid]].

Disney continues to firmly hold the title of "[[Bigger]] Animation in the [[Monde]]", with "A Bug?s [[Vie]]" standing as one of their [[bigger]] [[accomplishment]]. One of the [[imaginative]] attachments being the [[excellent]] "out-takes" [[adding]] to the [[termination]] of the [[kino]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m told the VHS cassette has one [[substitutes]] version per tape. The DVD [[additionally]] [[featuring]] "[[Jerry]]?s [[Games]]" which is a [[wondrous]] little PIXAR short that was [[apart]] [[indicated]] [[previously]] to the [[cinematographic]] in [[cinema]].

This is by far the [[upper]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[belle]] good, but lacks [[anything]] in the animation and in the [[history]] development and [[traits]]. If you [[gaze]] at the [[superstar]] voices of both [[movies]], "Antz" is [[fundamentally]] cast with [[overwhelming]] [[names]] "[[cinema]]" [[superstar]] with a few [[accustomed]] "TV" [[superstar]] voices, where "A Bug?s [[Living]]" is just the [[converse]], loaded with "TV" [[celebrity]] with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[immunities]]. But the difference in quality is [[seperate]] and [[overt]].

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go [[jefe]] to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[sorting]] of film that [[hardly]] makes me wish I had children to [[exchanges]] it with. [[Donated]]?t [[idea]] for a second that this is just a [[films]] for [[brats]], [[despite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Any one who saw the original would have to go out and destroy this dreadful remake. [[Alex]] Baldwin trying to [[imitate]] the late Steve Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[work]]. [[While]] Baldwin has done some [[admirable]] work this is a [[flop]] from [[start]] to [[finish]]. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for [[Kim]] in the role of Ali McGraw [[enough]] [[said]]. McQueen looked [[dangerous]], menacing and believable as Doc, the film had [[excitement]] and suspense,Baldwin and [[company]] [[made]] this into a [[comedy]],I laughed the one and only time I [[saw]] this [[miserable]] film. And that [[dreadful]] hairstyle for [[Michael]] Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! [[Did]] the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you [[wish]] to see movie-making the [[way]] it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! Any one who saw the original would have to go out and destroy this dreadful remake. [[Xander]] Baldwin trying to [[replicate]] the late Steve Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[cooperation]]. [[Although]] Baldwin has done some [[sumptuous]] work this is a [[implosion]] from [[commences]] to [[iend]]. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for [[Kima]] in the role of Ali McGraw [[satisfactorily]] [[asserted]]. McQueen looked [[unsafe]], menacing and believable as Doc, the film had [[exhilaration]] and suspense,Baldwin and [[corporation]] [[effected]] this into a [[humour]],I laughed the one and only time I [[seen]] this [[ratty]] film. And that [[scary]] hairstyle for [[Michele]] Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! [[Wo]] the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you [[wanna]] to see movie-making the [[route]] it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! --------------------------------------------- Result 1051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] the 1930s studios [[would]] [[use]] [[short]] [[films]] like this one [[sort]] of as testing [[grounds]] for [[new]] actors, given their [[relative]] ease of [[production]] in comparison with full [[length]] [[feature]] [[films]], so it's interesting that this one should star Shirley Temple, who had long [[since]] [[established]] herself as The [[Most]] Famous [[Child]] [[Star]] of [[All]] [[Time]]. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would [[imagine]] that would have been [[Frank]] Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother [[Sonny]] in the [[movie]] and delivered a [[comparatively]] [[less]] [[impressive]] performance. [[Then]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was [[probably]] not an [[easy]] act to [[accompany]].

The film [[opens]] with an unimpressive sight gag [[involving]] a leaky ceiling, which I [[suppose]] was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, [[illustrate]] the [[working]] class status of the family in the movie, and [[provide]] a [[clean]] [[transition]] into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie [[illustrates]] what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor [[guy]] as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. [[Into]] the 1930s studios [[could]] [[utilizes]] [[succinct]] [[movies]] like this one [[genre]] of as testing [[justification]] for [[newest]] actors, given their [[pertaining]] ease of [[productivity]] in comparison with full [[lifespan]] [[attribute]] [[cinematography]], so it's interesting that this one should star Shirley Temple, who had long [[because]] [[elaborated]] herself as The [[Biggest]] Famous [[Enfant]] [[Superstar]] of [[Entire]] [[Period]]. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would [[imagining]] that would have been [[Candid]] Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother [[Crockett]] in the [[kino]] and delivered a [[fairly]] [[fewer]] [[wondrous]] performance. [[Thereafter]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was [[presumably]] not an [[easier]] act to [[escort]].

The film [[inaugurated]] with an unimpressive sight gag [[encompassing]] a leaky ceiling, which I [[supposing]] was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, [[showcase]] the [[collaborating]] class status of the family in the movie, and [[furnishes]] a [[pur]] [[changeover]] into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie [[proves]] what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor [[mec]] as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[bought]] this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in [[almost]] mint [[condition]], and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't believe my luck. You go through the whole [[realm]] of [[emotions]] and it attempts to get over a [[complex]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist [[stance]] of the Mandela [[Party]], undoubtedly. Despite its [[enormous]] length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a [[book]] one couldn't put down. [[Perhaps]] the songs are not all that memorable, but the [[spirit]] of the [[thing]] glows on [[forever]]. I cannot [[understand]] [[comments]] that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the [[book]] too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[treasure]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

I [[buying]] this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in [[hardly]] mint [[stipulation]], and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't believe my luck. You go through the whole [[domain]] of [[sentiments]] and it attempts to get over a [[sprawling]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist [[posture]] of the Mandela [[Part]], undoubtedly. Despite its [[jumbo]] length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a [[cookbook]] one couldn't put down. [[Conceivably]] the songs are not all that memorable, but the [[geist]] of the [[stuff]] glows on [[siempre]]. I cannot [[realise]] [[remark]] that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the [[workbook]] too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[hoard]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay, I've tried and I've tried, but I STILL DON'T GET this Guy Maddin thing. Tales From the Gimli Hospital left me cold, that movie about the Austrian villagers and the one about the Ice Nymph were pretty to look but lacking in the story department...and this nudie movie about abortion and hockey is just boring. I'm glad Maddin has an appreciation for silent film, but I dislike his films for the same reason I dislike the films of Quentin Tarantino: they're empty homages to better, more imaginative films--films that advanced the art form or broke new ground--and are all style and no substance. No amount of jump cuts and odd camera angles can disguise the fact that Maddin is an unoriginal David Lynch wannabe, though he DOES have one advantage over Tarantino: he generally doesn't write embarrassing dialogue, because most of his films rely on intertitles. The bottom line is, Maddin's schtick is clever clever film-making for aspiring film majors. --------------------------------------------- Result 1054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Another [[comedy]] about a [[plucky]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the [[forties]]) global [[world]] with only [[native]] wit and pluck to [[guide]] them, this is a [[fine]] [[entry]] in the Ealing [[cannon]]. Terry-Thomas [[sparkles]] as usual in the lead, as a [[feckless]] ministry [[man]] led to the [[brink]] of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of [[starts]] attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a [[great]] romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John [[Le]] Mesurier plays against [[type]] as a [[rugged]] revolutionary leader. Lots of [[fun]] is had by all, [[especially]] the [[viewer]]; [[perhaps]] not in the very [[top]] [[echelon]] of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. Another [[comedian]] about a [[brave]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the [[fifties]]) global [[worldwide]] with only [[indigenous]] wit and pluck to [[manual]] them, this is a [[fined]] [[inlet]] in the Ealing [[barrel]]. Terry-Thomas [[sparklers]] as usual in the lead, as a [[irresponsible]] ministry [[dawg]] led to the [[rand]] of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of [[launch]] attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a [[huge]] romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John [[Lai]] Mesurier plays against [[genera]] as a [[rough]] revolutionary leader. Lots of [[amusing]] is had by all, [[concretely]] the [[viewfinder]]; [[presumably]] not in the very [[topped]] [[level]] of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say? I think I have to write "Spoiler alert" and then "reveal" they used the F-word a LOT in this movie - like in every two sentences. I did not like this movie at all - too much hints on sexual perversions, sidesteps and cheating. And that swearing was totally out the window. I gave this movie "3" and two of those points are for Mira Sorvino's sexy movements on the dance floor. --------------------------------------------- Result 1056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I grew up watching this movie ,and I still love it just as much today as when i was a kid. Don't listen to the critic reviews. They are not accurate on this film.Eddie Murphy really shines in his roll.You can sit down with your whole family and everybody will enjoy it.I recommend this movie to everybody to see. It is a comedy with a touch of fantasy.With demons ,dragons,and a little bald kid with God like powers.This movie takes you from L.A. to Tibet , of into the amazing view of the wondrous temples of the mountains in Tibet.Just a beautiful view! So go do your self a favor and snatch this one up! You wont regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is only the second time I stopped a video/DVD part way through.

I was willing to give this film the benefit of the doubt at first, even though it managed to be both shallow, clichéd and stupid.. AND joyless, plodding and pretentious.

It was like an After School Special directed by that weird grade nine kid who thinks nobody understands him... creepy and sad, with voice-over narration that only the most deluded adolescent would consider poetry... and some singing, and... no, really, the poor child's suffering...

Enough, already, especially when it morphed into a brazen, clumsy, and insulting Clockwork Orange ripoff. And did I mention the singing?

This isn't the worst film I've ever seen, but certainly the one I've felt least compelled to sit through. I don't recommend it to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Back when I was a [[kid]] and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 movies and we watched the [[hell]] out of all of them.

I was at a [[yard]] sale the other day and I [[saw]] this VHS copy of BLOOD [[LEGACY]] and I [[buy]] any [[horror]] [[movie]] I don't have and I knew this [[movie]] [[looked]] familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had [[bought]]. She had sold it years [[ago]] in a yard [[sale]] I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I [[bought]] it and it [[refreshed]] my [[memory]] because of a few scenes. I am not [[sure]] how I felt about it as a [[kid]] but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and [[enjoy]] anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain [[requirements]] in [[order]] for me to consider it "good" and this one [[fell]] very short. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death [[types]]. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. Back when I was a [[petit]] and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 movies and we watched the [[inferno]] out of all of them.

I was at a [[backyard]] sale the other day and I [[noticed]] this VHS copy of BLOOD [[BEQUEST]] and I [[purchase]] any [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] I don't have and I knew this [[filmmaking]] [[seemed]] familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had [[acquired]]. She had sold it years [[beforehand]] in a yard [[sales]] I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I [[acquiring]] it and it [[modernized]] my [[memories]] because of a few scenes. I am not [[persuaded]] how I felt about it as a [[enfant]] but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and [[enjoying]] anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain [[requirement]] in [[orders]] for me to consider it "good" and this one [[declined]] very short. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death [[genera]]. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The opening scene of this film sets the pace for the [[entirety]] of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[television]] [[movie]] quality. The snow drenched [[scenery]] is [[gorgeous]], [[yet]] the characters held with in it have a [[similar]] quality to that of looking at a [[photograph]] of such [[scenery]], the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[little]] bearing on 'real' [[conversations]] at all seemingly. Any [[emotional]] [[insight]] is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the [[way]] in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a [[incomprehensible]] situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious [[lack]] of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is [[particularly]] [[unrealistic]]. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[underdeveloped]]. The main characters are empty [[husks]] of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly [[void]] of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. The opening scene of this film sets the pace for the [[totality]] of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[tv]] [[filmmaking]] quality. The snow drenched [[panorama]] is [[sumptuous]], [[even]] the characters held with in it have a [[identical]] quality to that of looking at a [[pictures]] of such [[landscape]], the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[scant]] bearing on 'real' [[debate]] at all seemingly. Any [[sentimental]] [[vision]] is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the [[ways]] in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a [[unexplained]] situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious [[shortfall]] of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is [[principally]] [[unreal]]. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[undeveloped]]. The main characters are empty [[dregs]] of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly [[emptiness]] of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This film is [[amazing]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the [[idea]] [[jumps]] and the [[surrealistic]] [[dreams]]... Really [[great]]! People who love cult [[movies]] or very dark thrillers will [[find]] this [[fantastic]]. It seems a little to the films of David [[Lynch]]: the [[strange]] [[story]], the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains [[almost]] no plot. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[drawback]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I [[would]] [[give]] it a 10 out of 10. But that's [[missing]], and that's why I [[gave]] the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth [[watching]]. [[Search]] that DVD and you'll be rewarded! This film is [[wondrous]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the [[concept]] [[soars]] and the [[unreal]] [[nightmares]]... Really [[huge]]! People who love cult [[cinematography]] or very dark thrillers will [[finds]] this [[unbelievable]]. It seems a little to the films of David [[Bastien]]: the [[curious]] [[saga]], the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains [[approximately]] no plot. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[inadequacy]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I [[ought]] [[lend]] it a 10 out of 10. But that's [[extinct]], and that's why I [[provided]] the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth [[staring]]. [[Frisk]] that DVD and you'll be rewarded! --------------------------------------------- Result 1061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is horrible! It rivals "Ishtar" in the number of embarrassingly bad moments. I would have rated it lower than a 3, save for a couple of funny lines; but, overall, this film was crap! It looked like they made it over a weekend at some bankrupt resort somewhere. Joe Roth should join Elaine May on the directing sidelines forever! --------------------------------------------- Result 1062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Love is overwhelming... In all it's manifestations... Gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous... Tudor Chirila, Maria Popistasu and Ioana Barbu, one truly dramatic story about love in all it's shapes, a story about the undecipherable ways of young hearts, about life and lost innocence all directed by the skillful eye of Tudor Giurgiu. With a magnificent soundtrack featuring Faultline & Chris Martin and Vama Veche it surprises in every way leaving behind the sour taste of misunderstanding love... Truly remarkable... Is it me or is Romanian cinematography slowly but surely advancing and gaining respect? This is a brilliant film... Two thumbs up to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] I was fooled to rent this movie by its [[impressive]] [[cover]]. [[Alas]]. It is easily one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. Judging by the acting of the [[film]] [[characters]], it's more a [[comedy]] than a [[horror]] [[film]]. No [[surprise]] why no one else has [[written]] [[comments]] on the imdb. [[Avoid]] it. I was fooled to rent this movie by its [[marvellous]] [[covering]]. [[Alack]]. It is easily one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Judging by the acting of the [[movie]] [[trait]], it's more a [[farce]] than a [[terror]] [[movie]]. No [[amaze]] why no one else has [[authored]] [[sightings]] on the imdb. [[Shirk]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This picture was banned from American movies houses in the 1930 because of nudity by Hedy Lamarr, (Eva Hermann) which caused all kinds of problems among the ladies in the 1930's but not so much for the male population. This story concerns a young woman named Eva Hermann who gets married to an older man and is carried over the threshold on the wedding night and the husband never consummates the marriage and worries about all kinds of very petty things like his shoes and killing bugs. Eva leaves her husband's house and lives with her father and tries to explain her situation. On a hot Summer day Eva takes a ride on her horse and decides to go for a swim naked in a lake in the woods. Her horse runs off and she runs after him and is observed by a young man who finds her clothes and returns them to Eva. These two people become very acquainted and there is a romance that starts to bloom. There are many more interesting problems that arise as you view this film to its very end. Enjoy a great Classic film which was a Shocker Film in 1933. Enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I believe that The Sopranos is an awesome show because of all the supporting characters in it. i have bought every video so far and am waiting for the rest to be released. In all 42 episodes so far, the best one is definitely episode #3, Denial, Anger, Acceptance. This episode deals with my most favorite character of all time in The Sopranos. His name was Brendan Filone. He was killed for hijacking the wrong truck and accidentally killing a truck driver. Brendan was awesome because he was actually one of the few characters who actually stood against Tony and his gang. In the end, he ended up getting shot through the eye while taking a bath, and that's my most favorite scene ever in the history of The Sopranos. Brendan Filone is # 1 for me. And my # 2 most favorite character ever was Matthew Bevilaqua, who was killed after attempting to murder Christopher Moltisanti. Tony and Pussy shoot him in Hucklebarney park after they catch and torture him. My # 3 most favorite character is Sean Gismonte, who was killed right after shooting Christopher. And finally, my # 4 most favorite character is Chucky Signore, one of Uncle Junior's henchmen. He was killed on a boat by Tony. All the awesome characters are dead. That's the only bad thing about the Sopranos. All the cool guys always get killed. You know what would be great to change about the Sopranos? They should have a whole episode where they show all the dead supporting characters in hell and they are all trying to torture Chris, Tony, Uncle Junior, Silvio, and Paulie, because they need to get their revenge. Brendan Filone shall strike back!!!!!!!!!1 --------------------------------------------- Result 1066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not sure why it doesn't play in Peoria, apparently, but this is a very funny, clever British comedy. It's set at the end of the "swinging sixties". Peter Sellars is fantastic as the rich, forty-something serial womaniser. The perfectly delectable Goldie Hawn, playing a 19 year American girl in London, is, initially, Sellars' "catch of the day". But the urbane TV food critic can't stop himself from falling for the dizzy American blond.

Humour, pathos, great script, strong performances from the leads and supporting caste.

It's a great film, and the best gag is the very last line.

Try it, you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1067 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Considering its popularity, I found this movie a [[huge]] disappointment. Maybe I was expecting too [[much]] from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial arts [[films]] of the 1970s, but I [[could]] never figure out why. The [[story]] is uninteresting. It is also a very talky movie with [[sporadic]] action sequences. My [[biggest]] problem with the [[movie]] was that the [[story]] does not [[offer]] a [[character]] that I [[could]] root for, since the [[intended]] hero is an [[idiot]]. Director Chang has no sense of [[style]], and he is unable to [[hide]] the [[glaring]] [[imperfections]] found in the [[narrative]]. I know this is not supposed to be high art, but I [[found]] the movie boring. [[Definitely]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status escapes me. I [[recommend]] you to [[skip]] it. Considering its popularity, I found this movie a [[whopping]] disappointment. Maybe I was expecting too [[very]] from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial arts [[filmmaking]] of the 1970s, but I [[did]] never figure out why. The [[conte]] is uninteresting. It is also a very talky movie with [[casual]] action sequences. My [[strongest]] problem with the [[filmmaking]] was that the [[tales]] does not [[offering]] a [[trait]] that I [[did]] root for, since the [[conceived]] hero is an [[goofball]]. Director Chang has no sense of [[styles]], and he is unable to [[hiding]] the [[seeming]] [[drawbacks]] found in the [[descriptive]]. I know this is not supposed to be high art, but I [[find]] the movie boring. [[Admittedly]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status escapes me. I [[recommending]] you to [[jumping]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1068 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] We [[first]] watched this [[film]] as part of a [[festival]] of new [[Argentine]] films in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Although]] we liked it, we didn't think it was [[extraordinary]]. Watching it for a [[second]] [[time]], we [[found]] a [[different]] [[meaning]] in this [[look]] at life in [[Buenos]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua administration was ending. The country was in turmoil after the economy, which had flourished earlier in the 1990s, under the artificially [[climate]] [[President]] Menen created. It was a time when bank accounts in dollars were frozen and people got themselves living a nightmare.

The story begins just as Santamarina, a bank employee, is fired because the collapse of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his wife, she locks him out of the apartment and he, for all practical purposes, becomes a homeless man. He takes to the streets trying to make ends meet.

The other story introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's almost a miracle he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a small restaurant in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to worse, when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, comes to help father and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she realizes the unhappy circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his trips through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the meaning of an innocent life in their lives will cement their love.

Ariel, who has met the gorgeous Laura at work, begins a turbulent and heavy sexual affair with his beautiful co-worker, who unknown to him, is involved in a lesbian affair. Ariel who free lances by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a passion for Laura, but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the nuances of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the turmoil of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. We [[frst]] watched this [[cinematography]] as part of a [[celebratory]] of new [[Argentinean]] films in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Despite]] we liked it, we didn't think it was [[noteworthy]]. Watching it for a [[secondly]] [[period]], we [[detected]] a [[several]] [[mean]] in this [[peek]] at life in [[Beyonce]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua administration was ending. The country was in turmoil after the economy, which had flourished earlier in the 1990s, under the artificially [[climactic]] [[Chairperson]] Menen created. It was a time when bank accounts in dollars were frozen and people got themselves living a nightmare.

The story begins just as Santamarina, a bank employee, is fired because the collapse of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his wife, she locks him out of the apartment and he, for all practical purposes, becomes a homeless man. He takes to the streets trying to make ends meet.

The other story introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's almost a miracle he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a small restaurant in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to worse, when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, comes to help father and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she realizes the unhappy circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his trips through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the meaning of an innocent life in their lives will cement their love.

Ariel, who has met the gorgeous Laura at work, begins a turbulent and heavy sexual affair with his beautiful co-worker, who unknown to him, is involved in a lesbian affair. Ariel who free lances by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a passion for Laura, but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the nuances of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the turmoil of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When i finally had the [[opportunity]] to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in [[Europe]])on an import [[Region]] 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this [[zombie]] [[epic]] is.The [[transfer]] is just about [[immaculate]],as good as it's ever going to [[look]] [[unless]] [[Anchor]] Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The [[sound]] is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),[[intestinal]] munching,zombie [[babies]] and so much more i [[lost]] track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,[[especially]] of the Italian kind.There is some [[excellent]] set pieces and cinematography to be found,i [[think]] people don't give it enough credit,if you [[see]] a clean [[print]],and not some [[horrendous]] [[pirate]] [[copy]],it's a whole other [[experience]] entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i [[realize]] it's [[inconsistent]] plotwise,the dubbing is [[horrible]],the acting is [[stiff]],and it's sense of irreverence is [[celebrated]] in [[grand]] [[fashion]],but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best [[horror]] films ever made,you can't make a [[film]] this [[bad]],so [[good]],on purpose.It's [[accidental]] genius of the [[highest]] order.[[If]] they [[played]] it for [[laughs]] it would have been a [[disaster]],but they played it straight as an [[arrow]] and the [[result]] is a terrific [[cult]] classic that thumbs it's [[nose]] at any and all [[traditional]] moviemaking standards.

[[Tons]] of action sequences,exotic locales,[[excellent]] set [[design]],good,[[sometimes]] great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and [[inconsistent]] but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. When i finally had the [[luck]] to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in [[Eu]])on an import [[Regions]] 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this [[ghoul]] [[saga]] is.The [[transferring]] is just about [[spotless]],as good as it's ever going to [[gaze]] [[if]] [[Anchorage]] Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The [[sounds]] is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),[[digestive]] munching,zombie [[babe]] and so much more i [[outof]] track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,[[mainly]] of the Italian kind.There is some [[exquisite]] set pieces and cinematography to be found,i [[believing]] people don't give it enough credit,if you [[behold]] a clean [[fingerprints]],and not some [[fearsome]] [[piracy]] [[copies]],it's a whole other [[experiences]] entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i [[attain]] it's [[incongruous]] plotwise,the dubbing is [[scary]],the acting is [[tough]],and it's sense of irreverence is [[celebrating]] in [[prodigious]] [[manner]],but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best [[monstrosity]] films ever made,you can't make a [[cinematographic]] this [[unfavorable]],so [[buena]],on purpose.It's [[involuntary]] genius of the [[greatest]] order.[[Unless]] they [[effected]] it for [[laughed]] it would have been a [[cataclysm]],but they played it straight as an [[spits]] and the [[consequence]] is a terrific [[worship]] classic that thumbs it's [[nosedive]] at any and all [[classic]] moviemaking standards.

[[Ton]] of action sequences,exotic locales,[[sumptuous]] set [[designs]],good,[[intermittently]] great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and [[incoherent]] but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Fantastically]] [[putrid]]. I don't mean to imply above that only a few people should avoid "Doc Savage." Almost every demographic group would be [[bored]] by this [[trivial]], TV-movie-quality [[production]]. It's a [[little]] [[like]] the 60's "Batman" [[TV]] series, except it's not [[funny]]. Even [[accidentally]]. You're [[better]] off taking a [[nap]]. [[Marvellously]] [[fetid]]. I don't mean to imply above that only a few people should avoid "Doc Savage." Almost every demographic group would be [[drilled]] by this [[immaterial]], TV-movie-quality [[productivity]]. It's a [[small]] [[iike]] the 60's "Batman" [[TELEVISION]] series, except it's not [[hilarious]]. Even [[unwittingly]]. You're [[best]] off taking a [[naps]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like Miikes movies about Yakuza, this one I saw about 2 years ago and it really fu**ed my head. Never before seen such a sick and twisted thing. The Story is good and the actors do their thing very well. I haven't seen the UK or Japan version, but I have to say that I believe that the German DVD is a bit censored. If you haven't seen the movie already and live in Germany maybe you better look out for a DVD from the Nederlands or Austria. The I-ON DVD contains a lot of very hard and nasty scenes, but at the showdown I felt that something was missing, about one or two very short scenes.

All in all a good perverted movie with crazy characters and a high level of violence, that's what I like Miike for!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] [[would]] [[usually]] [[classify]] as the [[worst]] [[movie]] production ever. Ever. But in my [[opinion]] it is [[possibly]] the funniest. The [[horrifying]] direction and screenplay makes this [[film]] priceless. I [[bought]] the movie whilst sifting through the [[bargain]] DVD's at my local [[pound]] [[shop]]. Me and some [[friends]] then watched it, [[admittedly]] [[whilst]] [[rather]] drunk. It [[soon]] occurred that this wasn't any [[normal]] [[film]]. Instead a [[priceless]] [[relic]] of what will [[probably]] be James Cahill's last [[film]]. [[At]] first we were confused and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but [[thankfully]] in our [[abnormal]] state no-one could be [[bothered]]. [[Instead]] we watched the film right through. At the end we soon realised we had [[found]] any wasters [[dream]], [[something]] that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, whilst laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon showed all our other [[friends]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[abysmal]] film. This was a [[film]] that you can [[truly]] [[wet]] yourself laughing at. This was a [[film]] that anyone can enjoy. This was [[genius]]. This [[kino]] [[should]] [[fluently]] [[rank]] as the [[worse]] [[films]] production ever. Ever. But in my [[views]] it is [[potentially]] the funniest. The [[excruciating]] direction and screenplay makes this [[movies]] priceless. I [[buys]] the movie whilst sifting through the [[bargaining]] DVD's at my local [[lbs]] [[store]]. Me and some [[friend]] then watched it, [[definitely]] [[whereas]] [[quite]] drunk. It [[rapidly]] occurred that this wasn't any [[habitual]] [[cinema]]. Instead a [[precious]] [[hangover]] of what will [[potentially]] be James Cahill's last [[flick]]. [[Under]] first we were confused and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but [[hopefully]] in our [[unnatural]] state no-one could be [[disturbed]]. [[Alternatively]] we watched the film right through. At the end we soon realised we had [[discovered]] any wasters [[dreaming]], [[anything]] that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, whilst laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon showed all our other [[friend]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[horrible]] film. This was a [[cinema]] that you can [[honestly]] [[damp]] yourself laughing at. This was a [[cinema]] that anyone can enjoy. This was [[engineering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Now what's wrong with the actors that took part in that crap? Michael Dorn should stick to the Star Treck merchandise. John Diehl, does anyone remember him in Miami Vice? Liked him there... Well, whatever - what can one expect from a movie with one of the lifeguards from baywatch in the lead? Nothing, and that's what we get. None of the characters is even likable, the special effects are hilarious (but not funny). The story is a (very bad) joke. There is no logic whatsoever for what's happening. I got the feeling that the film makers were trying some kind of "Attack of the killer tomatoes" kind of thing. Especially in the scene where all the important people were discussing national security in some kind of a closet...

If you happen to see it on TV, switch channels - your TV set will be ever thankful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The Danes character [[finally]] let's [[Buddy]] have the [[awful]] truth. ""Leave me alone, kiss men if you [[want]] to," she [[screams]] self-righteously in front of everyone, thus [[destroying]] the man who has been in love with her for so [[long]]. Nice [[girl]]. This might be the place to [[reconsider]] all of the giggly charm that Danes pours into this character. Great reason to feel [[sympathy]] for her lying in bed and dying, but [[hey]], remember, there are no [[mistakes]], except, maybe, [[seeing]] this [[film]].

Wait a minute. This [[irony]] is intended! This is actually a [[masterpiece]] of [[ironic]] wit, [[yes]]! But somehow I [[doubt]] that's what the creators of this [[film]] had in [[mind]], [[sadly]]. [[Maybe]] there are a few [[mistakes]], after all. The Danes character [[ultimately]] let's [[Mate]] have the [[hideous]] truth. ""Leave me alone, kiss men if you [[wish]] to," she [[cries]] self-righteously in front of everyone, thus [[destroy]] the man who has been in love with her for so [[longer]]. Nice [[women]]. This might be the place to [[rethink]] all of the giggly charm that Danes pours into this character. Great reason to feel [[compassion]] for her lying in bed and dying, but [[hello]], remember, there are no [[wrongs]], except, maybe, [[see]] this [[movies]].

Wait a minute. This [[mockery]] is intended! This is actually a [[centerpiece]] of [[ironical]] wit, [[yea]]! But somehow I [[duda]] that's what the creators of this [[cinematography]] had in [[esprit]], [[regrettably]]. [[Perhaps]] there are a few [[error]], after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] VIVAH in my opinion is the best movie of 2006, coming from a director that has proved successful throughout his career. I am not too keen in romantic movies these days, because i see them as "old wine in a new bottle" and so predictable. However, i have watched this movie three times now...and believe me it's an awesome movie.

VIVAH goes back to the traditional route, displaying simple characters into a sensible and realistic story of the journey between engagement and marriage. The movie entertains in all manners as it can be reflected to what we do (or would do) when it comes to marriage. In that sense Sooraj R. Barjatya has done his homework well and has depicted a very realistic story into a well-made highly entertaining movie.

Several sequences in this movie catch your interest immediately:

* When Shahid Kapoor comes to see the bride (Amrita Rao) - the way he tries to look at her without making it too obvious in front of his and her family. The song 'Do Anjaane Ajnabi' goes well with the mood of this scene.

* The first conversation between Shahid and Amrita, when he comes to see her - i.e. a shy Shahid not knowing exactly what to talk about but pulling of a decent conversation. Also Amrita's naive nature, limited eye-contact, shy characteristics and answering softly to Shahid's questions.

* The emotional breakdown of Amrita and her uncle (Alok Nath) when she feeds him at Shahid's party in the form of another's daughter-in-law rather than her uncle's beloved niece.

Clearly the movie belongs to Amrita Rao all the way. The actress portrays the role of Poonam with such conviction that you cannot imagine anybody else replacing her. She looks beautiful throughout the whole movie, and portrays an innocent and shy traditional girl perfectly.

Shahid Kapoor performs brilliantly too. He delivers a promising performance and shows that he is no less than Salman Khan when it comes to acting in a Sooraj R. Barjatya film. In fact Shahid and Amrita make a cute on-screen couple, without a shadow of doubt. Other characters - Alok Nath (Excellent), Anupam Kher (Brilliant), Mohan Joshi (Very good).

On the whole, VIVAH delivers what it promised, a well made and realistic story of two families. The movie has top-notch performances, excellent story and great music to suit the film, as well as being directed by the fabulous Sooraj R. Barjatya. It's a must see! --------------------------------------------- Result 1076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of [[late]] 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[pretty]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is [[unmistakably]] an extremely low-budget venture! [[While]] not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of [[unintentional]] laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of [[iate]] 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[belle]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is [[explicitly]] an extremely low-budget venture! [[Though]] not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of [[coincidental]] laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! --------------------------------------------- Result 1077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]], and at times, I was unnerved [[believing]] this [[movie]] '[[saw]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[come]]. Re-watch Star Wars, Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[responsible]] [[parent]] (I'm [[speaking]] to those who are [[parents]] now), I (you) [[would]] not [[let]] my (your) [[child]] ever partake of this video [[festival]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[satanic]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a [[chilled]] 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[alien]], rodential, and wholly [[malevolent]] - like the Bogey man [[made]] flesh, invisible to adults, [[tempting]] children with lifestyles they [[could]] never afford (without the [[income]] made possible by years of self denial and [[prudent]] stewardship). He is a peddler of easy [[answers]], and [[false]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I pray (I mean this literally and figuratively, with an emphasis on the [[former]]) that this [[movie]] has not made the format [[jump]] to DVD. It is my hope that this type of 'yellow [[film]] making' [[died]] an un-mourned death in the [[cold]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also loves [[pizza]]. I forgot to mention that. It comes up a lot. I [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]], and at times, I was unnerved [[think]] this [[filmmaking]] '[[observed]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[arrive]]. Re-watch Star Wars, Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[answerable]] [[parents]] (I'm [[discussing]] to those who are [[parent]] now), I (you) [[ought]] not [[allowing]] my (your) [[children]] ever partake of this video [[celebratory]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[unholy]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a [[coolant]] 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[exotic]], rodential, and wholly [[satanic]] - like the Bogey man [[introduced]] flesh, invisible to adults, [[attractive]] children with lifestyles they [[wo]] never afford (without the [[revenue]] made possible by years of self denial and [[judicious]] stewardship). He is a peddler of easy [[answering]], and [[untruthful]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I pray (I mean this literally and figuratively, with an emphasis on the [[previous]]) that this [[filmmaking]] has not made the format [[jumps]] to DVD. It is my hope that this type of 'yellow [[kino]] making' [[perished]] an un-mourned death in the [[chilly]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also loves [[pizzeria]]. I forgot to mention that. It comes up a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 1078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Now I had the [[best]] [[intentions]] when watching this one. I [[like]] some of Tony Scott's [[work]], also a [[friend]] of [[mine]] told me it was a [[great]] movie, even [[though]] I [[heard]] [[otherwise]] from other people. But this was [[simply]] [[hopeless]].

[[In]] my [[humble]] opinion, Tony Scott was [[trying]] too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[elaborate]].

[[Miss]] Knightley was overacting, and not in a good way. The people who did [[perform]] well, were [[Mickey]] Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and [[Christopher]] Walken, but their screen [[time]] just wasn't able to [[save]] the [[movie]].

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, [[yet]] [[somehow]] it [[felt]] like they were [[written]] by [[someone]] other than the [[main]] writer. A certain [[tune]] was [[used]] around 4 [[times]], which [[really]] [[started]] to [[bug]] after the second [[time]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[using]] the same [[tune]] more than once.

Also, the editing [[really]] went out on this one, as the cutting rate is rather [[high]]. [[Oh]], and the [[repetitive]] echoing of some of Keira's lines [[simply]] [[sounded]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

[[Basically]], my [[opinion]] is that if you [[want]] to [[see]] an action-flick that is high-paced and "[[somewhat]]" [[funny]], and you don't [[care]] about everything I [[mentioned]] above, you [[might]] [[like]] it.

([[On]] a side [[note]]: I'm not a Keira Knightley [[fan]].) Now I had the [[optimum]] [[purposes]] when watching this one. I [[fond]] some of Tony Scott's [[cooperation]], also a [[friends]] of [[mines]] told me it was a [[whopping]] movie, even [[despite]] I [[listened]] [[else]] from other people. But this was [[exclusively]] [[incorrigible]].

[[Among]] my [[modest]] opinion, Tony Scott was [[attempting]] too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[elaborated]].

[[Mademoiselle]] Knightley was overacting, and not in a good way. The people who did [[fulfilling]] well, were [[Mikey]] Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and [[Christophe]] Walken, but their screen [[moment]] just wasn't able to [[saves]] the [[filmmaking]].

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, [[even]] [[someplace]] it [[smelled]] like they were [[authored]] by [[everyone]] other than the [[primary]] writer. A certain [[tuning]] was [[utilized]] around 4 [[dates]], which [[truly]] [[inaugurated]] to [[insect]] after the second [[period]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[used]] the same [[melody]] more than once.

Also, the editing [[genuinely]] went out on this one, as the cutting rate is rather [[supreme]]. [[Ah]], and the [[repeated]] echoing of some of Keira's lines [[mere]] [[rang]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

[[Mostly]], my [[opinions]] is that if you [[wants]] to [[behold]] an action-flick that is high-paced and "[[slightly]]" [[comical]], and you don't [[healthcare]] about everything I [[talked]] above, you [[presumably]] [[loves]] it.

([[Onto]] a side [[memo]]: I'm not a Keira Knightley [[admirer]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 1079 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Don't be [[deceived]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews quoted on the DVD box. "Wildly [[entertaining]].", "a seriously [[scary]] freakout.", and the worst of all, "ON PAR WITH [[JAWS]]." This [[movie]] is [[none]] of the above.

[[Normally]] I don't bother with [[writing]] [[bad]] [[reviews]] for [[films]] but I can't believe this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[deserve]] it.

After a so-so [[opening]] daylight [[attack]] by a monster created by, what [[else]], chemicals [[dumped]] by lazy scientists, this [[movie]] goes absolutely [[nowhere]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Basically]] and improbably, a girl is snagged by the monster (I'll give them points for a [[good]] [[creature]] [[design]] but this ain't no WETA [[creation]]) and her semi-comical [[family]] spend an hour-and-a-half [[tracking]] her down...in the [[sewers]] [[surrounding]] the Han river. Their [[search]] [[lacks]] any suspense-again, someone called this on par with [[Jaws]]?-and by the [[time]] they find her you [[realize]] it was all [[pretty]] much [[pointless]]. Other than that, a [[big]] bulk of the movie is [[committed]] to a [[government]] quarantine that culminates in one [[funny]] scene [[involving]] a [[guy]] spitting in a gutter in front of a crowded bus [[stop]].

Blech. This was [[bad]]. I'm not kidding. You want to [[see]] a [[rotten]] monster movie? Rent Deep [[Rising]]. [[At]] [[least]] you'll [[save]] 30 minutes of your life. Don't be [[duped]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews quoted on the DVD box. "Wildly [[amusing]].", "a seriously [[fearful]] freakout.", and the worst of all, "ON PAR WITH [[GAGS]]." This [[filmmaking]] is [[nothing]] of the above.

[[Ordinarily]] I don't bother with [[handwriting]] [[unfavorable]] [[review]] for [[movie]] but I can't believe this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[deserved]] it.

After a so-so [[opens]] daylight [[attacks]] by a monster created by, what [[elsewhere]], chemicals [[dump]] by lazy scientists, this [[filmmaking]] goes absolutely [[wherever]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Mostly]] and improbably, a girl is snagged by the monster (I'll give them points for a [[well]] [[creatures]] [[designs]] but this ain't no WETA [[creations]]) and her semi-comical [[families]] spend an hour-and-a-half [[tracks]] her down...in the [[sewer]] [[surrounds]] the Han river. Their [[frisk]] [[missing]] any suspense-again, someone called this on par with [[Gags]]?-and by the [[times]] they find her you [[realizing]] it was all [[belle]] much [[dispensable]]. Other than that, a [[prodigious]] bulk of the movie is [[commit]] to a [[councils]] quarantine that culminates in one [[hilarious]] scene [[encompassing]] a [[buddy]] spitting in a gutter in front of a crowded bus [[cease]].

Blech. This was [[unfavourable]]. I'm not kidding. You want to [[behold]] a [[naughty]] monster movie? Rent Deep [[Climbs]]. [[Under]] [[slightest]] you'll [[rescued]] 30 minutes of your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part II". The original [[script]] for "[[First]] Blood" had [[John]] Rambo committing suicide at the end of the [[film]], but this was changed to allow him to [[live]], not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone [[obviously]] thought that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the [[hero]] of two more films in the eighties, plus the [[recently]] released fourth instalment.

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part [[II]]", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", [[although]] this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. [[Unfortunately]] for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[hellish]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] is more or less one long [[battle]] between Rambo and a few allies ([[including]] a [[beautiful]] Vietnamese [[girl]]) and the evil [[commie]] soldiers and their Russian [[allies]]. Most of the evil commies, of course, [[end]] up [[dead]], [[although]] I was surprised to [[learn]] from your "trivia" section that the [[total]] death toll was as low as 67. At times it [[seemed]] as [[though]] Rambo was [[trying]] to wipe out the [[entire]] Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part II". The original [[scripts]] for "[[Outset]] Blood" had [[Giovanni]] Rambo committing suicide at the end of the [[filmmaking]], but this was changed to allow him to [[vivo]], not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone [[evidently]] thought that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the [[superhero]] of two more films in the eighties, plus the [[freshly]] released fourth instalment.

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part [[SECONDLY]]", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", [[while]] this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. [[Sadly]] for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[infernal]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] is more or less one long [[battaglia]] between Rambo and a few allies ([[encompassing]] a [[sumptuous]] Vietnamese [[women]]) and the evil [[communist]] soldiers and their Russian [[ally]]. Most of the evil commies, of course, [[termination]] up [[die]], [[while]] I was surprised to [[learning]] from your "trivia" section that the [[unmitigated]] death toll was as low as 67. At times it [[appeared]] as [[while]] Rambo was [[seeking]] to wipe out the [[total]] Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid [[foundation]] for what "could have been" a [[good]] all-original film.

[[Unfortunately]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules [[White]] decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, [[giving]] us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid [[cornerstone]] for what "could have been" a [[alright]] all-original film.

[[Unluckily]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules [[Bianchi]] decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, [[conferring]] us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[saw]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[bad]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[cringe]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen [[would]] have [[worked]] wonders with the [[outlandish]] plot, and Baldwin's [[part]] [[could]] have been [[played]] with gusto by Leslie [[Nelson]].it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few [[minutes]] i watched was for the [[lovely]] [[Nicole]] she was so hot [[around]] 93, has Baldwin ever made a [[good]] [[movie]]? Pullman played his stock in [[trade]] "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his [[mouth]] when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. I [[noticed]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[rotten]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[shudder]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen [[could]] have [[collaborated]] wonders with the [[odd]] plot, and Baldwin's [[parties]] [[did]] have been [[effected]] with gusto by Leslie [[Nielsen]].it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few [[mins]] i watched was for the [[sumptuous]] [[Nichol]] she was so hot [[about]] 93, has Baldwin ever made a [[well]] [[filmmaking]]? Pullman played his stock in [[trading]] "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his [[kisser]] when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. --------------------------------------------- Result 1083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pakeezah is in my mind the greatest achievement of Indian cinema. The film is visually overwhelming but also emotionally breathtaking. The music, the songs, the sets, the costumes, the cinematography, in fact every creative element is worthy of superlatives. --------------------------------------------- Result 1084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The [[movie]] had a good concept, but the [[execution]] just didn't [[live]] up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[M]]". A [[child]] killer has begun terrorizing a city. The lead detectives ([[Dennis]] Hopper and Frederic [[Forest]]) have never dealt with a serial killer before. The Mayor and the [[Police]] Chief, in desperation, secretly hire the local mob to speed things up...to go places and do things that the [[police]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bring]] an end to this [[mess]] as [[soon]] as possible.

To be fair, this [[film]] DOES genuinely have some good things to [[offer]].

Besides the concept, I liked the look of the killer's hideout. Norman Bates has his basement. This guy has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. Dennis Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual investigation process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how [[bad]] this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually liked were two pick-pockets you meet about half-way through the movie. Considering that they're minor characters, I'd call that a bad sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante movie or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie elements too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. The [[filmmaking]] had a good concept, but the [[enforcement]] just didn't [[vivo]] up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[meters]]". A [[enfants]] killer has begun terrorizing a city. The lead detectives ([[Denys]] Hopper and Frederic [[Woods]]) have never dealt with a serial killer before. The Mayor and the [[Nypd]] Chief, in desperation, secretly hire the local mob to speed things up...to go places and do things that the [[policemen]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bringing]] an end to this [[chaos]] as [[speedily]] as possible.

To be fair, this [[filmmaking]] DOES genuinely have some good things to [[offering]].

Besides the concept, I liked the look of the killer's hideout. Norman Bates has his basement. This guy has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. Dennis Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual investigation process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how [[naughty]] this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually liked were two pick-pockets you meet about half-way through the movie. Considering that they're minor characters, I'd call that a bad sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante movie or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie elements too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 1085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This so-called "documentary" tries to tell that USA faked the moon-landing. Year right.

All those who have actually studied the case knows different.

First of all: there is definitely proof. When the astronauts was on the moon, they brought back MANY pounds of rock from the moon - for geological studies. These where spread around the world to hundreds of labs, who tested them. And they all concluded that they came from the same planet, not earth: because the inner isotopes of the basic elements are different from those found on earth, but similar to those calculated to be on the moon. I.E. the conspiracy theorists never studies anything: they only take the thing that fit into their theory and ignores the rest.

Another wrongful claim from them is that their was wind in the hangar where they shot the moon landing, I.E. the flag moves. There is a logical explanation: the astronaut moved it with his hand, so it moved. And what proves this: well, if the conspiracy theorists even studied the footage, they would see that the flag NEVER moves after the astronaut have let it be, I.E. the conspiracy theorists are bad-scientists, they cant study a subject properly, or only studies it until they have what they came for, so that they can make a lie from that, and make a profit (I.E. this so-called "documentary").

A claim says that it cant possible have been filmed on the moon because all the shadows come from different places, because there are different light-sources, the artificial lighting from the studio. Once again the conspiracy theorists are wrong (as usual), the same would happen in an earth desert at night, with no light-sources. But i doubt that any Conspiracy theorists have ever been outside their grandmothers basement for more than how many days a Star Treck-convention is held over.

The Conspiracy theorists are in denial, BIG TIME. They only see what they want to see. So they make up all these lies to seem important - that is a fact. --------------------------------------------- Result 1086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. [[Simply]] put, the movie was spectacularly average. It's not [[bad]], but it's really not very good. The [[editing]] is good; the [[film]] is well-paced. The direction is competent and [[assured]]. The [[story]] is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, [[Bloom]], and the [[normally]] [[great]] Watts and [[Rush]]. The accents are [[impenetrable]] if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the [[end]] of the [[film]], I was [[neither]] bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. [[Simple]] put, the movie was spectacularly average. It's not [[inclement]], but it's really not very good. The [[edition]] is good; the [[flick]] is well-paced. The direction is competent and [[ensured]]. The [[history]] is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, [[Flowers]], and the [[ordinarily]] [[whopping]] Watts and [[Scramble]]. The accents are [[incomprehensible]] if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the [[terminates]] of the [[kino]], I was [[either]] bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 1087 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[Welcome]] to Our Town, [[welcome]] to your [[town]]? As we are introduced into the worlds of its [[townsfolk]] of 1901 [[America]], this three act play is [[opened]] before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular [[families]]; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely [[middle]] [[America]] at the turn of the century, and the progressive [[way]] of life of the American [[Dream]] and its saccharine [[overtones]] that can [[seem]] a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the [[anxieties]] and [[woes]] of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this [[predicament]] that the dead, as they return to [[revisit]] and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and [[squandered]].

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also [[seems]] more apparent too, [[feeling]] more of a [[propaganda]] [[stunt]] on the moral [[lecturing]] on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" [[town]], this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native [[American]] and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can [[live]] up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took [[part]] in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town [[starts]] off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more [[important]] than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. [[Congratulated]] to Our Town, [[rejoice]] to your [[ville]]? As we are introduced into the worlds of its [[townspeople]] of 1901 [[Latina]], this three act play is [[inaugurated]] before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular [[family]]; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely [[milieu]] [[Latina]] at the turn of the century, and the progressive [[camino]] of life of the American [[Daydream]] and its saccharine [[connotations]] that can [[looks]] a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the [[worries]] and [[ills]] of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this [[plight]] that the dead, as they return to [[revoir]] and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and [[wasted]].

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also [[appears]] more apparent too, [[sense]] more of a [[advocacy]] [[understudy]] on the moral [[lecture]] on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" [[ville]], this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native [[Americas]] and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can [[iive]] up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took [[parte]] in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town [[began]] off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more [[critical]] than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I was [[hoping]] for some [[sort]] of in-depth [[background]] [[information]] on the [[Apollo]] 11 [[mission]] and what I got was some [[decent]] [[interview]] [[material]] with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people [[involved]] in the mission, [[linked]] by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[worst]] tradition of TV production.

[[If]] you [[could]] cut out the voice-over and [[change]] the [[spin]] of the [[program]] to a [[positive]] [[testament]] of how people can [[overcome]] setbacks to [[achieve]] a [[goal]] out of the [[ordinary]] then this could've been [[great]] - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[life]] whilst watching a 60 minute [[programme]]. I [[want]] those minutes back. I was [[expecting]] for some [[kinds]] of in-depth [[backgrounds]] [[informational]] on the [[Adonis]] 11 [[missions]] and what I got was some [[presentable]] [[interrogation]] [[materials]] with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people [[implicated]] in the mission, [[related]] by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[meanest]] tradition of TV production.

[[Though]] you [[would]] cut out the voice-over and [[shifting]] the [[revolve]] of the [[agendas]] to a [[positively]] [[wills]] of how people can [[overcoming]] setbacks to [[accomplishing]] a [[intents]] out of the [[everyday]] then this could've been [[resplendent]] - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[iife]] whilst watching a 60 minute [[program]]. I [[wish]] those minutes back. --------------------------------------------- Result 1089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] With the release of [[Peter]] Jackson's famed "Lord of the [[Rings]]" [[trilogy]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the [[Rings]] [[film]] as [[inferior]]. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film [[adaptation]] of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[prevent]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering effort. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's [[film]] and there are some clear similarities between their [[adaptations]].

The film's [[colorful]] picturesque backdrops are [[excellent]] and the [[score]] is [[memorable]]. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the [[characters]]. The pairs of [[Pippin]] and [[Merry]] and Eowyn and Galadriel are [[mostly]] [[indistinguishable]] from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these [[points]] didn't bother me very much. [[However]], the Nazgul are [[aptly]] drawn and made [[sufficiently]] eerie. The only [[character]] representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to [[look]] unbecomingly silly.

This [[film]] is [[novel]] for its animation [[techniques]]. [[In]] [[addition]] to hand-drawn [[characters]], [[live]] actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite [[apparent]] which [[characters]] are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the [[less]] I [[found]] that the film's style was a novelty. The [[use]] of rotoscoped live [[actors]] for the [[battle]] scenes was a good [[decision]] and [[helped]] these scenes [[turn]] out well.

The [[voice]] acting was [[generally]] of [[high]] quality. [[Particularly]] good was John [[Hurt]], who [[provided]] an [[authoritative]] [[voice]] for [[Aragorn]]. [[Aragorn]] isn't a [[favorite]] [[character]] of [[mine]] from the [[stories]], but [[backed]] by [[John]] Hurt's [[voice]] he was my [[favorite]] [[character]] in this [[adaptation]]. My other [[favorite]] was William Squire, whose [[voice]] is [[appropriately]] strong for Gandalf. The only actor who [[seemed]] [[inappropriate]] was [[Michael]] Scholes as Sam, whose [[voice]] acting was irritating and added to Sam's [[unfortunately]] silly image. The only other [[bothersome]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of [[character]] and place names. Particularly [[strange]] was the [[decision]] to [[frequently]] have Saruman [[referred]] to as "Aruman".

[[In]] [[producing]] this [[film]], [[Ralph]] Bakshi [[expected]] to have the [[ability]] to produce two [[films]]. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to [[breeze]] through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were [[tremendous]].

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. With the release of [[Peters]] Jackson's famed "Lord of the [[Piercings]]" [[triad]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the [[Piercings]] [[flick]] as [[shoddy]]. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film [[adapt]] of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[prevented]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering effort. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's [[cinematography]] and there are some clear similarities between their [[modifications]].

The film's [[scenic]] picturesque backdrops are [[noteworthy]] and the [[notation]] is [[landmark]]. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the [[attribute]]. The pairs of [[Smiley]] and [[Jolly]] and Eowyn and Galadriel are [[basically]] [[indistinct]] from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these [[dots]] didn't bother me very much. [[Still]], the Nazgul are [[justly]] drawn and made [[properly]] eerie. The only [[characters]] representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to [[gaze]] unbecomingly silly.

This [[cinematography]] is [[newer]] for its animation [[technologies]]. [[For]] [[addendum]] to hand-drawn [[nature]], [[living]] actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite [[conspicuous]] which [[nature]] are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the [[least]] I [[unearthed]] that the film's style was a novelty. The [[usage]] of rotoscoped live [[players]] for the [[warfare]] scenes was a good [[rulings]] and [[supporting]] these scenes [[converting]] out well.

The [[vowel]] acting was [[normally]] of [[supremo]] quality. [[Principally]] good was John [[Harmed]], who [[gave]] an [[bossy]] [[voices]] for [[Legolas]]. [[Legolas]] isn't a [[prefer]] [[characteristics]] of [[mining]] from the [[tale]], but [[supported]] by [[Giovanni]] Hurt's [[vowel]] he was my [[preferred]] [[nature]] in this [[readjust]]. My other [[prefer]] was William Squire, whose [[vowel]] is [[correctly]] strong for Gandalf. The only actor who [[sounded]] [[unfit]] was [[Michel]] Scholes as Sam, whose [[vocals]] acting was irritating and added to Sam's [[sadly]] silly image. The only other [[pesky]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of [[characteristics]] and place names. Particularly [[nosy]] was the [[decisions]] to [[periodically]] have Saruman [[mentioned]] to as "Aruman".

[[At]] [[generating]] this [[cinematography]], [[Ralf]] Bakshi [[predicted]] to have the [[proficiency]] to produce two [[kino]]. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to [[nasim]] through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were [[awesome]].

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1090 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THE MAN IN THE MOON is a warm and moving coming of age drama centering around a farming family in the 1950's. The main story follows a 14-year old girl (Reese Witherspoon) who develops a crush on a 17-year old neighbor (Jason London) who ends up falling for her older sister (Emily Warfield) and how an unexpected tragedy alters this family's dynamics forever. The 1950's are lovingly evoked here and the screenplay gives you characters you come to care about almost immediately. Witherspoon already begins to show the Oscar-winning talent she would develop in this early role and London makes a charming leading man. Warfield lends a quiet maturity to the role of the older sister that is effective as well. Kudos to Sam Waterston and Tess Harper who play the girls' parents and Gail Strickland, who plays London's mom. I was unexpectedly moved by this quiet and affecting drama that stirs up strong emotions and gives deeper meaning to the phrase "family ties." --------------------------------------------- Result 1091 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie. It is great film that combines English and Indian cultures with feminist-type issues, such as girls wanting to play sports that were previously reserved for men. It shows the struggles of both an Indian person wanting to break outside her cultural barriers and women wanting to break outside the gender restrictions found in sports, especially in England at the time. I feel that the cultural struggles are more emphasized than the other issues.

In contrast to the other comment, I do not think this movie is anything like Dirty Dancing or any other such chick flick. This move is loved by many types of people, men and women, young and old alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 1092 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the silliest movies I have ever had the misfortune to watch! I should have expected it, after seeing the first two, but I keep getting suckered into these types of movies with the idea of "Maybe they did it right this time". Nope - not even close.

Where do I begin? How about with the special effects... To give you an idea of what passes for SFX in this movie, at one point a soldier is shooting at a "Raptor" as it runs down a hallway. Even with less than a second of screen time, the viewer can easily see that it is just a man with a tail apparently taped to him running around. Bad bad bad bad.

How about the acting? If that's what you can call it. There is one character who, I suppose, is supposed to be from the south. However, after living in the south for six years now, I have never heard this way of talking. Perhaps he has some sort of weird disability - the inability to talk normally. I find it fascinating that the character does nothing that requires him to have that accent - therefore there was no reason for the actor to try to do one.

How about the plot? It's pretty basic - Raptors escape, people with guns must hunt them down. I'm starting to wonder why the dinosaurs in these movies always seem to run into the nearest system of tunnels... wouldn't they stay outside to hunt prey? Oh well, at least they have the good sense to appear very very little in the movie which supposedly revolves around them.

Other things - Let's say you are in a building and you know that there are man eating raptors running around in it. Would you decide to take time out to have an argument about who is better - Army or Marine? And then decide to have an arm wrestling contest to settle it? How about the idiotic idea that they have to track down the raptors - Split up into groups of two. Didn't they ever watch any horror movies (Or at least an episode of Scooby Doo)? In short, this is one of the dumber movies out there. Miss it unless you want to groan your way through a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] There are some great philosophical [[questions]]. What is the [[purpose]] of [[life]]? What [[happens]] when we die? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[BAD]]??? The premise is [[absurd]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The special [[effects]] are overdone. And the movie is one [[unending]] [[gun]] battle [[among]] some of the [[lousiest]] shots Hollywood ever [[produced]]. But then, if they had been [[good]] [[shots]], everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no movie. Too bad it didn't happen that way. [[Tempted]] to turn it off several times, I stuck with it to see just how [[bad]] it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the [[last]] line is the crowning [[stupidity]] of the whole dopey, [[dismal]] scenario.It is not [[even]] [[worthy]] of second [[feature]] status at a [[third]] [[rate]] drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the [[film]], I [[worry]] deeply about its impact on young [[audiences]]. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[banal]] [[cinema]] on a Brobdingnagian [[scale]]! There are some great philosophical [[issues]]. What is the [[aimed]] of [[lives]]? What [[occurs]] when we die? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[NEGATIVE]]??? The premise is [[ridiculous]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The special [[consequences]] are overdone. And the movie is one [[undying]] [[gunpoint]] battle [[in]] some of the [[trickiest]] shots Hollywood ever [[generated]]. But then, if they had been [[buena]] [[punches]], everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no movie. Too bad it didn't happen that way. [[Attempted]] to turn it off several times, I stuck with it to see just how [[rotten]] it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the [[final]] line is the crowning [[madness]] of the whole dopey, [[dusky]] scenario.It is not [[yet]] [[meritorious]] of second [[traits]] status at a [[thirds]] [[rates]] drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the [[filmmaking]], I [[disturb]] deeply about its impact on young [[viewers]]. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[commonplace]] [[filmmaking]] on a Brobdingnagian [[amplitude]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] by Dane [[Youssef]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[indictment]] of blaxploitation [[films]] and [[negative]] black stereotypes, as well as a [[look]] at [[life]] black in [[modern]] America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[dropped]] it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi [[film]], controversial, [[thrilling]], and a must-see [[almost]] by [[definition]] [[alone]]. Not just another [[random]] "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by [[Ralph]] Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but [[actually]] seems to show love, [[beauty]] and [[heart]] in the strangest [[places]].

"Coonskin" [[tells]] a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world [[alone]] makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates [[tells]] a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian [[mob]] is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, [[hip]], deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs [[extremism]]. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or [[minority]] of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef by Dane [[Yusef]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[prosecution]] of blaxploitation [[film]] and [[bad]] black stereotypes, as well as a [[glance]] at [[lives]] black in [[fashionable]] America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[slid]] it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi [[films]], controversial, [[exciting]], and a must-see [[virtually]] by [[define]] [[lonely]]. Not just another [[haphazard]] "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by [[Ralf]] Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but [[indeed]] seems to show love, [[beaut]] and [[nub]] in the strangest [[locations]].

"Coonskin" [[narrates]] a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world [[only]] makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates [[narrates]] a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian [[rabble]] is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, [[hips]], deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs [[fundamentalism]]. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or [[minorities]] of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef --------------------------------------------- Result 1095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This [[could]] have been the gay [[counterpart]] to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a [[huge]] [[chain]] of empty [[episodes]] in which [[absolutely]] nothing [[occurs]]. The [[characters]] are uni-dimensional and have no other [[development]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting [[aesthetic]] proposition like having [[almost]] no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in [[examining]] the [[psychology]] of its characters with some dignity, and [[achieving]] true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" [[film]] by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if [[someone]] can identify with its heavy [[banality]], I guess that's fine. This [[did]] have been the gay [[counterparts]] to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a [[prodigious]] [[chaining]] of empty [[bouts]] in which [[perfectly]] nothing [[transpires]]. The [[personages]] are uni-dimensional and have no other [[developments]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting [[cosmetic]] proposition like having [[nearly]] no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in [[scrutinized]] the [[psychiatric]] of its characters with some dignity, and [[realize]] true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" [[filmmaking]] by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if [[everybody]] can identify with its heavy [[triviality]], I guess that's fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 1096 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a physics student, I've become aware of many idiot professors, and other so-called experts, in the field. As I continue with my studies, I learn more and more about real physics experiments going on, and about the people who are doing things right.

Then, my friends tell me of this "physics movie" they want to see. Knowing nothing of it, I'm excited, hoping that the information will be presented well.

I've done REAL quantum mechanics; this wasn't it.

This movie starts with the basic assumption that anything that occurs to a subatomic particle can, and will, occur to you, if you just open your eyes. Let's think about that, for just a moment.

Our bodies are composed of somewhere around 10^30 such subatomic particles. That is a million billion billion billion particles! The more "mysterious" quantum effects of just two particles can have a 50% probability of cancelling each other out completely. As you add more and more particles into the mix, it becomes almost impossible to have a large net quantum result. To tell us to believe that this is a valid assumption, with no rationality behind it...it's just stupid.

My friend, also in physics, and I counted 3 facts during the course of this movie. But they were presented in the most misleading manner I've EVER SEEN.

I cannot say as much for the neural portion of the movie, as I have not had any kind of medical training. It seemed as though it might have had a slight bit more truth to it, remembering my days in biology, but I cannot say.

At least this film had a redeeming quality: the dancing peptides (or whatever they actually were) scene. Not to ruin the invaluable plot that drives this movie, but the main character goes to a wedding, where she sees all different types of personalities "driven" by their peptides*, and then the film cuts to the dance floor, where we are spliced between people dancing, sometimes surrounded by CG peptides, and a fully CG scene, filled with dancing peptides. The film, at that point, was trying to tell us how we're "addicted to emotions," so we're treated to the full song of that smash hit, "Addicted to Love."

This scene was redeeming, because anyone who could go through THAT scene, and still take this movie seriously...well, you are the ones that need to "open your eyes." --------------------------------------------- Result 1097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[CITY]] HALL is a somewhat mixed [[bag]]. [[Part]] vignettes of NYC political life, and [[part]] moralizing tale. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple times when he [[chews]] the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he shines. [[John]] Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[flawless]] performance, without [[going]] into [[caricature]] of a New [[Orleans]] [[dialect]], or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is [[also]] very good. I [[love]] showtunes, too.

The major problem with [[CITY]] HALL, and it is a good [[movie]] in [[many]] [[ways]], is the [[general]] [[feeling]] of a lack of momentum. It [[comes]] off more like a [[documentary]], than a [[motion]] [[picture]]. We [[see]] the [[action]] or follow the [[story]] from a detached [[perspective]], and naturally, the viewer doesn't [[become]] [[involved]]. When the [[viewer]] doesn't [[get]] [[involved]] to a certain [[degree]], they [[become]] apathetic [[towards]] the characters, and [[eventually]], the plot.

This [[tends]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, [[detail]] divulging finale, came off as a "[[Hmmm]]...[[uh]]...[[okay]]." They [[say]] you "Can't fight [[city]] [[hall]]," as the tread worn [[cliche]] goes. Yet, it [[still]] can't [[stop]] you from thinking what might have been, if they had just [[tightened]] up the [[screenplay]] and pacing of this [[movie]]. [[VILLE]] HALL is a somewhat mixed [[satchel]]. [[Portion]] vignettes of NYC political life, and [[portions]] moralizing tale. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple times when he [[timbers]] the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he shines. [[Johannes]] Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[faultless]] performance, without [[go]] into [[parody]] of a New [[Nola]] [[dialects]], or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is [[apart]] very good. I [[amour]] showtunes, too.

The major problem with [[VILLE]] HALL, and it is a good [[kino]] in [[countless]] [[pathways]], is the [[overall]] [[sense]] of a lack of momentum. It [[occurs]] off more like a [[literature]], than a [[petition]] [[photo]]. We [[behold]] the [[activities]] or follow the [[storytelling]] from a detached [[perspectives]], and naturally, the viewer doesn't [[becoming]] [[engaged]]. When the [[viewfinder]] doesn't [[obtain]] [[embroiled]] to a certain [[diploma]], they [[becomes]] apathetic [[toward]] the characters, and [[finally]], the plot.

This [[strives]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, [[details]] divulging finale, came off as a "[[Uh]]...[[eh]]...[[ok]]." They [[says]] you "Can't fight [[town]] [[salle]]," as the tread worn [[cliches]] goes. Yet, it [[again]] can't [[parada]] you from thinking what might have been, if they had just [[toughened]] up the [[script]] and pacing of this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] They [[screwed]] up this [[story]]! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[love]] the [[original]] [[movie]], I read the [[book]] and I love it! The reason why the [[original]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no [[gore]]. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I [[hate]] this damn remake! They [[shafted]] up this [[fairytales]]! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[amore]] the [[upfront]] [[kino]], I read the [[ledger]] and I love it! The reason why the [[upfront]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no [[gora]]. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I [[detest]] this damn remake! --------------------------------------------- Result 1099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jim Belushi is having a mid life crisis, nothing is going right, when his car goes out on him..he goes into an empty bar where Michael Caine shows him what life wouldve been like if one event in high school had come out differently.. A good premise with some moments..but mostly flat and uninteresting. on a scale of one to ten..3 --------------------------------------------- Result 1100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] That is the only thing I can positive to say about this [[movie]]. Cleveland is the [[star]], I've been there and never saw the city [[look]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This [[movie]] moves ahead at such a [[pace]] they hope you won't [[notice]] the lack of real world relevance. People running [[around]] and shooting guns without any [[consequence]]. For [[example]], there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the [[cops]] don't show up there till much later in the [[movie]]. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. That is the only thing I can positive to say about this [[filmmaking]]. Cleveland is the [[superstar]], I've been there and never saw the city [[gaze]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This [[film]] moves ahead at such a [[rhythm]] they hope you won't [[noticing]] the lack of real world relevance. People running [[approximately]] and shooting guns without any [[consequences]]. For [[cases]], there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the [[nypd]] don't show up there till much later in the [[filmmaking]]. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I found this a bit [[hard]] to follow to the [[extent]] that it [[seemed]] to [[dip]] in the [[middle]] while I [[tried]] to [[make]] [[head]] or [[tail]] of who was [[fighting]] who and why. One of the [[problems]] is the cultural/[[language]] one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[problem]] of which we [[know]] [[little]] and because we are [[simply]] reading English [[subtitles]] [[inevitably]] [[loose]] some of the [[subtleties]]. Another [[problem]] is that there seem to be just too [[many]] only half explained [[twists]] and coincidences. [[Nevertheless]], it [[seems]] [[unlikely]] that there is a [[wholly]] [[bad]] Miiki [[film]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[stylish]] and [[bone]] crunching violence, a [[window]] [[upon]] some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a decent ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. I found this a bit [[stiff]] to follow to the [[magnitude]] that it [[looked]] to [[dipped]] in the [[medium]] while I [[strived]] to [[deliver]] [[leader]] or [[dick]] of who was [[struggling]] who and why. One of the [[difficulty]] is the cultural/[[linguistics]] one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[difficulty]] of which we [[savoir]] [[tiny]] and because we are [[solely]] reading English [[subtitle]] [[unavoidably]] [[slack]] some of the [[niceties]]. Another [[problems]] is that there seem to be just too [[various]] only half explained [[kinks]] and coincidences. [[Nonetheless]], it [[appears]] [[improbable]] that there is a [[perfectly]] [[amiss]] Miiki [[kino]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[sleek]] and [[bony]] crunching violence, a [[luna]] [[after]] some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a decent ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is the Columbo that [[got]] directed by Steven Spielberg at an early point in his [[career]]. It's [[nothing]] sensational but some small hint of [[great]] things to [[come]] for Spielberg can be [[seen]] in this movie. The movie is basically in the same [[style]] as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tend]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo [[character]] alone. The kind of [[character]] quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't [[call]] this movie the work of- and [[fine]] [[example]] of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This movie [[began]] really well and very promising but after it's [[fine]] opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie became [[sort]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's [[mostly]] a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not [[dull]] because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[quite]] [[ingenious]] and the [[concept]] of having a [[crime]] [[story]] [[writer]] murdering his writing partner [[showed]] some [[great]] and interesting potential. The story however didn't really [[explored]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a good one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of [[Jack]] Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then Columbo, due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible [[hints]], leading away from himself. But of course [[Columbo]] knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a good [[overall]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fine]] and [[perfectly]] watchable Columbo [[movie]] but don't [[let]] the name of Spielberg attached to it rise your expectations for it too [[highly]].

7/10 This is the Columbo that [[gets]] directed by Steven Spielberg at an early point in his [[quarry]]. It's [[anything]] sensational but some small hint of [[wondrous]] things to [[arrive]] for Spielberg can be [[watched]] in this movie. The movie is basically in the same [[styles]] as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tending]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo [[characteristics]] alone. The kind of [[trait]] quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't [[invitation]] this movie the work of- and [[fined]] [[cases]] of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This movie [[initiating]] really well and very promising but after it's [[alright]] opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie became [[sorts]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's [[especially]] a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not [[uninspiring]] because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[abundantly]] [[clever]] and the [[notions]] of having a [[offence]] [[history]] [[novelist]] murdering his writing partner [[indicated]] some [[huge]] and interesting potential. The story however didn't really [[scrutinize]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a good one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of [[Jacques]] Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then Columbo, due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible [[suggestions]], leading away from himself. But of course [[Colombo]] knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a good [[general]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fined]] and [[totally]] watchable Columbo [[flick]] but don't [[leaving]] the name of Spielberg attached to it rise your expectations for it too [[enormously]].

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[guess]] this [[movie]] will only [[work]] on people who were all turned off by the giant [[hype]] of [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]. [[Well]], so I was. And so I [[really]] [[love]] this [[movie]]. [[Especially]] I [[like]] all those [[flawless]] superheroes from LotR being so [[perfectly]] and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[brilliantly]] is the [[counterpart]] of Gandalf (the [[brave]] and wise and [[completely]] humorless know-it-all [[wizard]]): Almghandi, the [[cowardice]] and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a [[simply]] [[bucket]] with [[eye]] [[holes]] as a helmet. Aragorns [[alter]] ego is [[yet]] another [[accident]] prone idiot who [[tries]] to [[fix]] his [[broken]] sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with [[scotch]] tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) [[indeed]] has some strong [[resemblance]] with [[Brad]] Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh I [[imagine]] this [[kino]] will only [[collaborate]] on people who were all turned off by the giant [[threshing]] of [[God]] of the [[Piercings]]. [[Good]], so I was. And so I [[truthfully]] [[iove]] this [[movies]]. [[Namely]] I [[fond]] all those [[impeccable]] superheroes from LotR being so [[utterly]] and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[admirably]] is the [[counterparts]] of Gandalf (the [[heroic]] and wise and [[totally]] humorless know-it-all [[magician]]): Almghandi, the [[gutless]] and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a [[solely]] [[pail]] with [[eyes]] [[orifices]] as a helmet. Aragorns [[modification]] ego is [[again]] another [[misadventure]] prone idiot who [[endeavours]] to [[remedy]] his [[raped]] sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with [[whiskies]] tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) [[admittedly]] has some strong [[analogy]] with [[Rad]] Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh --------------------------------------------- Result 1104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I agree [[totally]] with the last commenter this could be the [[worst]] movie ever [[made]] .I too had to [[fast]] forward through most of this [[movie]]. Michael Madsen must have [[done]] this [[movie]] as a favor to [[someone]].The [[picture]] quality is [[grainy]] all the [[way]] through .And what [[little]] plot there is,is just plain stupid .I [[give]] this [[movie]] a 1 out of 10 if I [[could]] give it a [[lower]] [[score]] I [[would]] .Don't [[waste]] your [[time]] on this [[movie]] or you'll [[regret]] it. I agree [[absolutely]] with the last commenter this could be the [[meanest]] movie ever [[introduced]] .I too had to [[prompt]] forward through most of this [[filmmaking]]. Michael Madsen must have [[effected]] this [[filmmaking]] as a favor to [[everyone]].The [[pictures]] quality is [[hazy]] all the [[pathway]] through .And what [[scant]] plot there is,is just plain stupid .I [[confer]] this [[flick]] a 1 out of 10 if I [[did]] give it a [[downsized]] [[punctuation]] I [[should]] .Don't [[squandering]] your [[period]] on this [[filmmaking]] or you'll [[sorrow]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] This [[movie]] is about a [[young]] [[scientist]] who creates a serum that re-animates the [[dead]]. He first uses it on his [[brother]] when he is shot dead in a [[drive]] by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very [[slowly]] and in other scenes they [[run]] pretty [[fast]] which makes [[little]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the [[story]] doesn't [[help]] the film. The [[makeup]] [[consists]] of [[blood]] on the [[face]] of the zombies. The [[budget]] for this [[film]] I'm sure was very [[limited]]. I believe the [[film]] [[could]] have been better made had the [[story]] been more [[original]] and with a [[better]] budget. [[If]] you wan't to [[see]] a good zombie flick don't see this one. This [[filmmaking]] is about a [[youthful]] [[investigator]] who creates a serum that re-animates the [[death]]. He first uses it on his [[sibling]] when he is shot dead in a [[drives]] by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very [[softly]] and in other scenes they [[executing]] pretty [[quickly]] which makes [[scant]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the [[conte]] doesn't [[helped]] the film. The [[composition]] [[involves]] of [[transfusion]] on the [[confronts]] of the zombies. The [[budgets]] for this [[filmmaking]] I'm sure was very [[narrow]]. I believe the [[filmmaking]] [[would]] have been better made had the [[narratives]] been more [[initial]] and with a [[improved]] budget. [[Unless]] you wan't to [[seeing]] a good zombie flick don't see this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This film is like marmite. You either [[love]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film [[expecting]] a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film [[expecting]] a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this film expecting to see one of the most [[deranged]] [[characters]] ever put to film in the form of Harry [[Russo]] you will [[love]] it. John Giancaspro is [[absolutely]] [[brilliant]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the [[best]] thing [[since]] sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. This film is like marmite. You either [[iove]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film [[awaits]] a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film [[awaits]] a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this film expecting to see one of the most [[unhinged]] [[features]] ever put to film in the form of Harry [[Rousseau]] you will [[iove]] it. John Giancaspro is [[abundantly]] [[wondrous]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the [[better]] thing [[because]] sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[excellent]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[wondrous]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1108 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shot in the Heart is wonderful. It brilliantly illustrates the plight of Gary Gimore, a convicted murder who requested death. Shot in the Heart shows the ordeal that Gilmore's family, torn up by hatred, went through. This movie is an incredible psychological study, and is wonderfully depressing and uplifting. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] One of Boris Karloff's [[real]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff (looking about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a dull mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. One of Boris Karloff's [[veritable]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff (looking about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a dull mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As a [[cinema]] fan [[White]] [[Noise]] was an [[utter]] [[disappointment]], as a filmmaker the [[cinematography]] was pretty good, nicely [[lit]], good camera [[work]], [[reasonable]] [[direction]]. But as a [[film]] it just seamed as predictable as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the [[market]] has recently been [[flooded]] with. [[Although]] it did have a [[little]] bit of the 'chill factor' the [[whole]] [[concept]] of the [[E]].[[V]].O ([[Electronic]] Voice [[Phenomena]]) did'not [[seem]] believable. This [[movie]] did not [[explain]] the reasonings for certain [[occurrences]] but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the [[main]] character [[portrayed]] no emotion, like many [[recent]] thriller/horror [[movies]].

Definitely not a [[movie]] I will be [[buying]] on DVD and [[would]] not [[recommend]] [[anyone]] rushes out to [[see]] it. As a [[theaters]] fan [[Blanc]] [[Audible]] was an [[absolute]] [[dissatisfaction]], as a filmmaker the [[movie]] was pretty good, nicely [[illuminated]], good camera [[cooperation]], [[logical]] [[directorate]]. But as a [[films]] it just seamed as predictable as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the [[marketplace]] has recently been [[submerged]] with. [[While]] it did have a [[petit]] bit of the 'chill factor' the [[overall]] [[notions]] of the [[f]].[[vs]].O ([[Electron]] Voice [[Phenomenon]]) did'not [[looks]] believable. This [[filmmaking]] did not [[explaining]] the reasonings for certain [[phenomena]] but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the [[primary]] character [[depicted]] no emotion, like many [[newer]] thriller/horror [[cinematography]].

Definitely not a [[cinematography]] I will be [[acquiring]] on DVD and [[should]] not [[recommendations]] [[nobody]] rushes out to [[behold]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoy quality crapness, and this ranks up there with some of the finest. the cg is out of this world, or at least pre-dates our world, and the insanity of a 6 foot bloke in a rat outfit chasing after people is laughably bad. I quite enjoyed some of this, but the acting is so goddamn awful, and even the obligatory nude scene doesn't really have any baps out in it. just a complete waste of time if ever i saw one. I don't know who wasted more time, me watching this, or the poor saps who got dragged into making it in the faint hope that this will launch their acting careers. I can assure you, it wont. However, on a brighter note, I have managed to successfully do the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon from this movie, so I think it was almost worthwhile watching the 91 minutes of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I grew up with H.R. Pufnstuff and the dashingly talented Jack Wild and now my daughters are adoring fans of Jack Wild too. This movie is exactly what movies should be: fun and entertaining. This movie is not limited to children either. A lot of the dialogue is directed to adults and Witchiepoo's performance is something you do not want to miss. The music in this movie suited Jack Wild and Mama Cass beautifully. And as a Jack Wild fan, I would never miss the chance to watch him dance or hear him sing. Knowing the hard life that Jack had now makes this movie even more wonderful especially when he sings the opening song "If I Could". It makes me pause in loving adoration for him for giving me wonderful childhood memories that I am now passing on to my children. Let's all go to Living Island where there is friendship and fun! And keep Jack Wild's memory alive by passing Pufnstuff on to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] the [[costumes]], the dialog, historical accuracy are [[terrible]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was [[accurate]] ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not [[strangle]] the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor [[editing]] - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. the [[attire]], the dialog, historical accuracy are [[abysmal]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was [[meticulous]] ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not [[muffle]] the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor [[edition]] - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film earlier today, and I was amazed at how accurate the dialog is for the main characters. It didn't feel like a film - it felt more like a documentary (the part I liked best). The leading ladies in this film seemed as real to me as any fifteen year-old girls I know.

All in all, a very enjoyable film for those who enjoy independent films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[enough]], this [[movie]] shows cows being butchered graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five minutes while the [[protagonist]] is narrating her [[early]] [[life]] as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at [[work]] says he would have gone with him if he was a girl. Is this person a psycho, a masochist, just a doomed [[queen]] who takes things too far? And what [[sort]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Just]] that he didn't [[get]] [[adopted]] and had to [[live]] it out with nuns who at [[first]] [[loved]] him and then [[later]] [[hated]] him because he was [[unruly]]. He [[tries]] to [[explain]] to us the [[reasons]] he did what he did, but it's [[really]] [[really]] so [[hard]] to empathize. Such sad and [[unusual]] self [[destruction]]. Was it [[supposed]] to be [[funny]]? What was it all about really? As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[suitably]], this [[filmmaking]] shows cows being butchered graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five minutes while the [[player]] is narrating her [[prematurely]] [[lives]] as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at [[cooperate]] says he would have gone with him if he was a girl. Is this person a psycho, a masochist, just a doomed [[quinn]] who takes things too far? And what [[kind]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Mere]] that he didn't [[obtain]] [[passed]] and had to [[vivo]] it out with nuns who at [[fiirst]] [[loves]] him and then [[subsequently]] [[disliked]] him because he was [[disorderly]]. He [[try]] to [[explains]] to us the [[motive]] he did what he did, but it's [[truthfully]] [[truly]] so [[laborious]] to empathize. Such sad and [[curious]] self [[obliterating]]. Was it [[presumed]] to be [[comical]]? What was it all about really? --------------------------------------------- Result 1116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I've never been impressed by JD anyway, and Final Justice (which I hadn't [[seen]] [[prior]] to its MST3k airing) [[proves]] to be no [[exception]]. It's not that the [[character]] is any less [[likeable]] than [[Mitchell]]: it's just that there's less that [[Geronimo]] ("Call me 'Heronimo') to dislike.

[[In]] fact, one suspects that [[Mitchell]] and Final Justice were all [[schemes]] of a revenge-seeking agent of Joe Don's trying to [[get]] the "star" [[killed]] by inducing a heart [[attack]].

[[Joe]] Don must have [[found]] a [[new]] agent, [[since]] he's now graduated to "[[comic]] relief" in James Bond movies. The [[problem]] is, it's [[hard]] to [[tell]] the difference between his [[comedy]] [[characters]] there, and his "[[serious]]" [[characters]] in his action-movies [[like]] this one.

As for the plot...[[umm]], what plot? They [[repeat]] the same set [[pieces]] so [[repeatedly]] you'll think you were watching Groundhog's Day 2. [[Presumably]], the [[fact]] they [[keep]] [[using]] the same scene of Geronimo getting out of [[jail]] is [[supposed]] to be [[comic]] relief of some sort. [[Ummm]], yeah, whatever.

On the plus side, the Malta [[scenery]] is [[pretty]] gorgeous, so that [[kicked]] it up to a 2 for me. One suspects this [[flick]] set Maltese tourism back a [[couple]] of decades, [[though]]. I've never been impressed by JD anyway, and Final Justice (which I hadn't [[watched]] [[formerly]] to its MST3k airing) [[testifies]] to be no [[exceptions]]. It's not that the [[traits]] is any less [[likable]] than [[Michel]]: it's just that there's less that [[Banzai]] ("Call me 'Heronimo') to dislike.

[[During]] fact, one suspects that [[Michel]] and Final Justice were all [[scheme]] of a revenge-seeking agent of Joe Don's trying to [[obtain]] the "star" [[murdered]] by inducing a heart [[onslaught]].

[[Evel]] Don must have [[detected]] a [[novo]] agent, [[because]] he's now graduated to "[[comedian]] relief" in James Bond movies. The [[difficulty]] is, it's [[difficult]] to [[telling]] the difference between his [[humour]] [[trait]] there, and his "[[severe]]" [[nature]] in his action-movies [[iike]] this one.

As for the plot...[[um]], what plot? They [[repetition]] the same set [[slices]] so [[regularly]] you'll think you were watching Groundhog's Day 2. [[Probably]], the [[facto]] they [[retaining]] [[used]] the same scene of Geronimo getting out of [[slammer]] is [[suspected]] to be [[comedian]] relief of some sort. [[Uhh]], yeah, whatever.

On the plus side, the Malta [[panorama]] is [[quite]] gorgeous, so that [[knocked]] it up to a 2 for me. One suspects this [[gesture]] set Maltese tourism back a [[coupling]] of decades, [[albeit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to [[rapper]] EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[listened]] to [[rap]] this movie was boring and there was no point in the movie where i [[said]] thats interesting or i didn't know that. another thing that [[bugged]] me was it [[made]] it [[look]] like anything in his [[life]] he did was very easy there was no [[struggle]] he made jail [[look]] [[easy]], selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[realistic]]. i [[think]] if the [[movie]] where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an [[impact]] [[maybe]]!!! good rap [[movies]] hustle and [[flow]], get [[rich]] or die [[trying]] not [[notorious]] if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to [[rap]] EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[overheard]] to [[rapper]] this movie was boring and there was no point in the movie where i [[avowed]] thats interesting or i didn't know that. another thing that [[tapped]] me was it [[introduced]] it [[gaze]] like anything in his [[lives]] he did was very easy there was no [[battles]] he made jail [[peek]] [[simple]], selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[practical]]. i [[reckon]] if the [[filmmaking]] where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an [[consequences]] [[conceivably]]!!! good rap [[film]] hustle and [[flows]], get [[richest]] or die [[seeking]] not [[infamous]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] With all this stuff going down at the moment with [[MJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. [[Maybe]] i just want to [[get]] a certain [[insight]] into this guy who i [[thought]] was really cool in the eighties just to [[maybe]] [[make]] up my [[mind]] whether he is [[guilty]] or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biography]], [[part]] [[feature]] [[film]] which i [[remember]] going to see at the cinema when it was originally [[released]]. Some of it has subtle [[messages]] about MJ's [[feeling]] [[towards]] the [[press]] and also the obvious message of [[drugs]] are bad m'kay.

Visually [[impressive]] but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so [[unless]] you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an [[egotist]] for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is [[convincing]] as a psychopathic all powerful [[drug]] lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying [[drugs]] etc so i dunno, [[maybe]] he just hates MJ's music.

[[Lots]] of [[cool]] [[things]] in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad [[sequence]] as [[usually]] directors [[hate]] working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom [[line]], this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a [[wholesome]] [[message]] and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. With all this stuff going down at the moment with [[DJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. [[Potentially]] i just want to [[obtain]] a certain [[vision]] into this guy who i [[figured]] was really cool in the eighties just to [[potentially]] [[deliver]] up my [[intellect]] whether he is [[guilt]] or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biographies]], [[parties]] [[idiosyncratic]] [[cinematography]] which i [[remind]] going to see at the cinema when it was originally [[publicized]]. Some of it has subtle [[message]] about MJ's [[sentiment]] [[toward]] the [[pressing]] and also the obvious message of [[medication]] are bad m'kay.

Visually [[unbelievable]] but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so [[if]] you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an [[egoist]] for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is [[persuade]] as a psychopathic all powerful [[medications]] lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying [[medication]] etc so i dunno, [[probably]] he just hates MJ's music.

[[Batch]] of [[refrigerate]] [[matters]] in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad [[sequencing]] as [[traditionally]] directors [[loathed]] working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom [[linea]], this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a [[salubrious]] [[messages]] and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1119 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The movie starts off in a [[classroom]] setting where not surprisingly, our main actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Later]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[answer]] was [[simple]] for a child she is; [[coz]] she's already [[known]] the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may thought of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much [[critics]] and [[go]] for it, you'll notice the typical elements of Malaysia. The [[movie]] basically [[focuses]] on 10 year old Orked who [[met]] 12 year [[old]] Mukhsin in a game of which many [[would]] [[think]] of it as a boy's game. Running out of [[players]], Mukhsin (who was new in that [[village]]) was [[forced]] to allow Orked into the game, in which she [[eagerly]] [[showed]] the male side of her. Orked is no such [[ordinary]] [[girl]] as she [[depicts]] more of the [[male]] behavior as you will [[see]] in the movie, [[defending]] Mukhsin from much violent [[encounter]] with her school-bullies, [[throwing]] one of the bully's [[bag]] out from the school bus window, throwing [[punches]] and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were [[awesome]] buddies, and stick [[closer]] than that, but with a [[slightest]] of misunderstanding in which most of us [[would]] all [[respond]] to in the same [[way]], parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin [[left]] [[town]].

Now the [[movie]] [[depicts]] the first [[love]] between Orked and Mukhsin, they [[started]] out as [[friends]], but [[slowly]] evolving into [[somewhat]] more of a [[closer]] [[relationship]] and then towards BGR. You [[would]] notice, the [[changes]] [[Yasmin]] [[made]] in the [[movies]] for each of the [[main]] [[actor]] and the [[actress]] when they go through [[love]]. The [[different]] character was [[portrayed]] with [[eagerness]] and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[random]] but it depicted so much [[reality]] in it that you'd be stuck on the screen for a [[long]] [[time]]. You will [[love]] the [[movie]] for what it is, and not because that you want to be patriotic to the local scenes, coz it means much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. The movie starts off in a [[classrooms]] setting where not surprisingly, our main actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Subsequent]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[answering]] was [[easy]] for a child she is; [[cuz]] she's already [[renowned]] the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may thought of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much [[detractors]] and [[going]] for it, you'll notice the typical elements of Malaysia. The [[films]] basically [[focusing]] on 10 year old Orked who [[complied]] 12 year [[former]] Mukhsin in a game of which many [[ought]] [[thinking]] of it as a boy's game. Running out of [[protagonists]], Mukhsin (who was new in that [[villages]]) was [[obliged]] to allow Orked into the game, in which she [[impatiently]] [[proved]] the male side of her. Orked is no such [[mundane]] [[chick]] as she [[describe]] more of the [[masculine]] behavior as you will [[behold]] in the movie, [[defend]] Mukhsin from much violent [[face]] with her school-bullies, [[hurling]] one of the bully's [[backpack]] out from the school bus window, throwing [[shots]] and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were [[wonderful]] buddies, and stick [[nearest]] than that, but with a [[lowest]] of misunderstanding in which most of us [[ought]] all [[cater]] to in the same [[route]], parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin [[exited]] [[municipality]].

Now the [[kino]] [[exposes]] the first [[amore]] between Orked and Mukhsin, they [[launches]] out as [[mates]], but [[softly]] evolving into [[slightly]] more of a [[nearer]] [[relations]] and then towards BGR. You [[ought]] notice, the [[amendment]] [[Yasmine]] [[brought]] in the [[theater]] for each of the [[principal]] [[protagonist]] and the [[actor]] when they go through [[loves]]. The [[several]] character was [[depicted]] with [[enthusiasm]] and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[haphazard]] but it depicted so much [[actuality]] in it that you'd be stuck on the screen for a [[lengthy]] [[moment]]. You will [[amour]] the [[kino]] for what it is, and not because that you want to be patriotic to the local scenes, coz it means much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] First off [[let]] me [[say]] that this has to be on the [[top]] of my list of boring [[movies]]. [[Nothing]], and I [[mean]] nothing in this [[movie]] is even remotely [[thrilling]]. Most of it is very [[confusing]] and as it [[progresses]] you just [[wish]] it [[would]] [[end]]!! Some people [[want]] a movie that makes them "[[think]]" through the entire thing, to which I [[say]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. Which [[brings]] me back to this [[stinker]], [[entertainment]] it is not. This [[movie]] is stupid and a [[complete]] [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[Seems]] that most here agree also. Most of this didn't make any [[sense]], and by the [[time]] you [[think]] you have one scene [[figured]] out another lame scene [[comes]] [[around]] and....well I [[guess]] you [[see]] where this is going. [[Avoid]], this one sucks....[[bad]]!! First off [[letting]] me [[said]] that this has to be on the [[topped]] of my list of boring [[movie]]. [[None]], and I [[imply]] nothing in this [[filmmaking]] is even remotely [[enthralling]]. Most of it is very [[disconcerting]] and as it [[evolves]] you just [[want]] it [[could]] [[terminate]]!! Some people [[wanting]] a movie that makes them "[[thinking]]" through the entire thing, to which I [[said]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. Which [[puts]] me back to this [[tosser]], [[amusement]] it is not. This [[filmmaking]] is stupid and a [[finish]] [[wastes]] of [[times]]. [[Seem]] that most here agree also. Most of this didn't make any [[feeling]], and by the [[moment]] you [[believing]] you have one scene [[thought]] out another lame scene [[happens]] [[roundabout]] and....well I [[imagine]] you [[seeing]] where this is going. [[Forestall]], this one sucks....[[negative]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[At]] [[first]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really [[pull]] off a funny [[Christmas]] [[movie]],, [[boy]] was i [[wrong]], my daughter invited me to watch this with her and i was not [[disappointed]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really liked [[Christina]] Appelagate, and [[Catherine]] O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really sold me,, i mean,, too put up with family,, at the [[table]] for people you only [[hardly]] see but once or twice a year,, and [[probably]] don't get along with [[anyway]],, you really do need as much alcohol as you're system can [[stand]] to [[deal]] with [[Christmas]],, so i [[thought]] that the [[premise]] was good there, [[buying]] the family with 250000 [[dollars]], was a little on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to [[work]] [[pretty]] good for me,, cause it was a [[riot]] all the [[way]] through, it [[shows]] the [[class]] [[struggle]] of the [[different]] families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[including]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[teenage]] [[boy]]. all in all i [[loved]] this movie and will watch it again [[next]] [[Christmas]] or [[sooner]] if my [[daughter]] [[wants]] too. [[During]] [[frst]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really [[pulled]] off a funny [[Kringle]] [[cinematography]],, [[guy]] was i [[amiss]], my daughter invited me to watch this with her and i was not [[frustrated]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really liked [[Kristina]] Appelagate, and [[Kathrin]] O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really sold me,, i mean,, too put up with family,, at the [[tables]] for people you only [[practically]] see but once or twice a year,, and [[arguably]] don't get along with [[writ]],, you really do need as much alcohol as you're system can [[stands]] to [[dealing]] with [[Claus]],, so i [[think]] that the [[hypothesis]] was good there, [[procurement]] the family with 250000 [[usd]], was a little on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to [[cooperate]] [[belle]] good for me,, cause it was a [[mutiny]] all the [[ways]] through, it [[showing]] the [[categories]] [[struggling]] of the [[varied]] families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[containing]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[teenagers]] [[guy]]. all in all i [[cared]] this movie and will watch it again [[imminent]] [[Claus]] or [[earlier]] if my [[girl]] [[wish]] too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a [[long]] time.I am asking the writer to please [[write]] a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the [[movie]] [[needs]] to [[continue]] for a [[long]] time. I would love to [[see]] Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a [[longue]] time.I am asking the writer to please [[writes]] a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the [[cinematography]] [[required]] to [[persevere]] for a [[protracted]] time. I would love to [[seeing]] Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign films I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of action" as [[many]] of the [[best]] [[international]] films do not [[live]] up to the Western Hollywood [[model]] of [[cinematic]] storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the [[foreign]] film arena. I [[enjoy]] that [[many]] foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular [[film]] offered no redemptive [[value]] for the time I wasted watching it. [[No]] meaningful [[character]] development, no engaging [[story]] arc, no [[way]] to get emotionally involved with any of the [[characters]] on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their [[slaves]], and a little [[girl]] gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

[[While]] the above paragraph is poignant and [[dramatic]], this movie will [[bore]] you while [[playing]] out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to [[finish]] it, and I wouldn't have [[even]] done that were it not for the positive [[ratings]].

[[Unless]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly [[suggest]] steering [[clear]] of this one. I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign films I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of action" as [[various]] of the [[optimum]] [[global]] films do not [[inhabit]] up to the Western Hollywood [[modeling]] of [[cinematographic]] storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the [[external]] film arena. I [[enjoying]] that [[numerous]] foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular [[filmmaking]] offered no redemptive [[valuing]] for the time I wasted watching it. [[Nos]] meaningful [[personages]] development, no engaging [[histories]] arc, no [[camino]] to get emotionally involved with any of the [[nature]] on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their [[slavic]], and a little [[chica]] gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

[[Despite]] the above paragraph is poignant and [[prodigious]], this movie will [[bored]] you while [[gaming]] out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to [[finis]] it, and I wouldn't have [[yet]] done that were it not for the positive [[assessments]].

[[If]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly [[proposes]] steering [[clara]] of this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've been going through the AFI's list of the top 100 comedies, and I must say that this is truly one of the worst. Not just of the 90 movies on the list I've seen, but of any movie I've ever seen. Drunks are funny sometimes, Dudley isn't. Liza almost made it worthwhile, but alas... just go watch Arrested Development if you want to see her in something good. Seriously, Dudley laughing and drinking is supposed to be funny? I would highly recommend almost ANY other movie on the AFI's top 100 comedies for more laughs than this. If you want to see a funnier "drunk", try The Thin Man. Funnier movie in general, any Marx Brothers movie will kill (especially if you're as drunk as Arthur). --------------------------------------------- Result 1125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The film begins with a bunch of [[kids]] in [[reform]] school and [[focuses]] on a kid named 'Gabe', who has [[apparently]] [[worked]] hard to [[earn]] his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new [[neighborhood]] to [[make]] a fresh [[start]] and [[soon]] Gabe meets up with the [[Dead]] [[End]] Kids. The [[Kids]] in this film are [[little]] [[punks]], but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other [[previous]] [[films]] and down deep, they are well-meaning [[punks]]. [[However]], in this [[neighborhood]] there are [[also]] some [[criminals]] who are perpetrating [[insurance]] [[fraud]] through arson and [[see]] Gabe as a [[convenient]] scapegoat--after all, he'd been to [[reform]] school and no one [[would]] [[believe]] he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be [[sent]] back to "The Big House", it's up to the [[rest]] of the gang to save him and [[expose]] the [[real]] [[crooks]].

The "[[Dead]] [[End]] [[Kids]]" appeared in [[several]] [[Warner]] Brothers [[films]] in the late 1930s and the [[films]] were [[generally]] very [[good]] ([[particularly]] ANGELS WITH [[DIRTY]] FACES). [[However]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the [[films]], to put it charitably, were very [[weak]] and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the [[whole]] [[show]] and the [[group]] being renamed "The Bowery [[Boys]]". Because [[ANGELS]] WASH THEIR [[FACES]] had the [[excellent]] [[writing]] and production [[values]] [[AND]] Hall and Gorcey were not [[constantly]] mugging for the camera, it's a pretty good film--and [[almost]] earns a score of 7 (it's [[REAL]] [[close]]). [[In]] fact, while this isn't a [[great]] [[film]] aesthetically, it's [[sure]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will give it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly towards the [[end]] when the [[kids]] take the [[law]] into their own hands and [[Reagan]] ignores the [[Bill]] of Rights--but it was also [[quite]] [[entertaining]]. The Dead [[End]] [[Kids]] are doing their [[best]] performances and [[Ronald]] [[Reagan]] and Ann Sheridan [[provided]] excellent [[support]]. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but [[somehow]] it was [[still]] [[funny]] and rather charming--so if you can [[suspend]] [[disbelief]], it [[works]] well. The film begins with a bunch of [[brats]] in [[reformation]] school and [[concentrations]] on a kid named 'Gabe', who has [[allegedly]] [[working]] hard to [[winning]] his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new [[neighbourhood]] to [[deliver]] a fresh [[startup]] and [[promptly]] Gabe meets up with the [[Deceased]] [[Terminates]] Kids. The [[Kid]] in this film are [[petite]] [[bullies]], but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other [[anterior]] [[movie]] and down deep, they are well-meaning [[bullies]]. [[Instead]], in this [[vicinity]] there are [[similarly]] some [[perpetrators]] who are perpetrating [[security]] [[deception]] through arson and [[seeing]] Gabe as a [[handy]] scapegoat--after all, he'd been to [[reformation]] school and no one [[should]] [[think]] he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be [[dispatched]] back to "The Big House", it's up to the [[stays]] of the gang to save him and [[reveal]] the [[actual]] [[frauds]].

The "[[Deceased]] [[Terminating]] [[Kid]]" appeared in [[dissimilar]] [[Werner]] Brothers [[film]] in the late 1930s and the [[cinema]] were [[usually]] very [[alright]] ([[namely]] ANGELS WITH [[FILTHY]] FACES). [[Instead]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the [[cinematography]], to put it charitably, were very [[flimsy]] and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the [[total]] [[demonstrating]] and the [[cluster]] being renamed "The Bowery [[Guy]]". Because [[ANGEL]] WASH THEIR [[FACE]] had the [[impressive]] [[write]] and production [[value]] [[UND]] Hall and Gorcey were not [[steadily]] mugging for the camera, it's a pretty good film--and [[hardly]] earns a score of 7 (it's [[TRUE]] [[closing]]). [[During]] fact, while this isn't a [[awesome]] [[movie]] aesthetically, it's [[persuaded]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will give it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly towards the [[ends]] when the [[youths]] take the [[ley]] into their own hands and [[Regan]] ignores the [[Billing]] of Rights--but it was also [[pretty]] [[amusing]]. The Dead [[Ending]] [[Youths]] are doing their [[better]] performances and [[Hsia]] [[Regan]] and Ann Sheridan [[gave]] excellent [[assists]]. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but [[somewhere]] it was [[yet]] [[fun]] and rather charming--so if you can [[suspending]] [[atheism]], it [[worked]] well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A squashy slapstick mess posing as a comedy. Elvis Presley plays an Indian bull-riding champ who leaves the rodeo for a stay at home on his folks' desert-spread in Arizona, where government suits have just invested in the family's herd of cattle (which is in dire need of a stud). What director Peter Tewksbury is in dire need of is some narrative skills, though what he lacks in assessment he makes up for in sloppy comedic montages (his social commentary isn't exactly pointed, but Tewksbury does have a satiric bend to his outlandishness and there are some funny scenes). Despite colorful supporting turns by Katy Jurado and Joan Blondell, the general wackiness gets way out of hand, and there's too much hoopin' and hollerin' to sustain much interest. As for Elvis, he's loose and frisky throughout--and while it's nice to see him having fun on-screen, one has to wonder if he had just given up on movies at this point. This shambles of a picture has a distinct what-the-hell feel to it, and though spirits are high, the returns are mostly low. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[doubt]] the best film [[Rainer]] Werner Fassbinder ever [[made]] and even with the [[marvelous]] script the film is [[enhanced]] by a great performance by Hanna Schygulla. [[Film]] [[starts]] out with [[Maria]] (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister [[must]] [[scrape]] by to survive. Maria decides to [[get]] a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named [[Bill]] (Greg Eagles) and they [[start]] to see one another on a [[steady]] [[basis]]. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the [[war]] so she [[gets]] very [[serious]] with [[Bill]]. But one day while getting intimate with [[Bill]] they [[see]] Hermann at the [[door]]. He hasn't [[died]] and when he enters the [[room]] a scuffle [[occurs]] and Maria [[breaks]] a [[bottle]] over Bill's head and he [[dies]]. Hermann takes the blame and he is [[sentenced]] to a [[long]] term in [[jail]] so [[Maria]] [[tells]] him that she will succeed at something and [[get]] him out. The war has [[ended]] and [[Germany]] [[must]] [[rebuild]] and one day on a [[train]] Maria [[meets]] [[Karl]] Oswald ([[Ivan]] Desny) who is a successful [[businessman]] in textiles and she [[uses]] her [[charms]] to [[get]] a [[job]]. Maria is determined to do well and [[climbs]] the corporate [[ladder]] and [[becomes]] Karl's mistress. She [[tells]] him that she will never [[marry]] him but he is in [[love]] with her. Hermann [[gets]] out of [[jail]] but goes to Canada to [[try]] and [[get]] over everything that Maria has [[done]] [[since]] he has been [[locked]] up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day [[Karl]] [[dies]] and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria [[buys]] her own [[house]]. Then Hermann [[finally]] comes [[home]] to his wife and they are both [[ready]] to [[start]] they're [[marriage]] even [[though]] they have been married for some [[time]] now. But Maria [[leaves]] the [[gas]] on the stove and the [[house]] explodes with both of them [[still]] in it.

There are so [[many]] interesting things in this [[film]] that its one of those [[movies]] that can be [[studied]] and [[talked]] about to [[great]] lengths. Like in all Fassbinder [[films]] the use of [[color]] is [[used]] in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[duda]] the best film [[Rainier]] Werner Fassbinder ever [[brought]] and even with the [[wondrous]] script the film is [[improve]] by a great performance by Hanna Schygulla. [[Kino]] [[launch]] out with [[Mario]] (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister [[owe]] [[scratching]] by to survive. Maria decides to [[got]] a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named [[Billings]] (Greg Eagles) and they [[launch]] to see one another on a [[stables]] [[foundations]]. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the [[wars]] so she [[get]] very [[grave]] with [[Billing]]. But one day while getting intimate with [[Billings]] they [[behold]] Hermann at the [[wears]]. He hasn't [[dying]] and when he enters the [[bedroom]] a scuffle [[transpires]] and Maria [[break]] a [[vial]] over Bill's head and he [[died]]. Hermann takes the blame and he is [[condemned]] to a [[lang]] term in [[imprisonment]] so [[Marija]] [[narrates]] him that she will succeed at something and [[gets]] him out. The war has [[terminated]] and [[Germans]] [[owes]] [[rebuilding]] and one day on a [[forming]] Maria [[conforms]] [[Carl]] Oswald ([[Evan]] Desny) who is a successful [[businessmen]] in textiles and she [[used]] her [[psalms]] to [[got]] a [[labor]]. Maria is determined to do well and [[climbed]] the corporate [[stairway]] and [[become]] Karl's mistress. She [[narrates]] him that she will never [[wedding]] him but he is in [[likes]] with her. Hermann [[get]] out of [[imprisonment]] but goes to Canada to [[endeavour]] and [[got]] over everything that Maria has [[accomplished]] [[because]] he has been [[bolted]] up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day [[Carl]] [[dying]] and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria [[purchased]] her own [[dwellings]]. Then Hermann [[eventually]] comes [[dwellings]] to his wife and they are both [[prepared]] to [[launch]] they're [[marriages]] even [[if]] they have been married for some [[period]] now. But Maria [[sheets]] the [[petrol]] on the stove and the [[households]] explodes with both of them [[yet]] in it.

There are so [[multiple]] interesting things in this [[flick]] that its one of those [[cinema]] that can be [[examined]] and [[mentioned]] about to [[wondrous]] lengths. Like in all Fassbinder [[movie]] the use of [[dye]] is [[utilised]] in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[In]] 1958, Clarksberg was a [[famous]] [[speed]] [[trap]] [[town]]. Much [[revenue]] was [[generated]] by the Sheriff's Department [[catching]] speeders. The ones who [[tried]] to outrun the Sheriff? [[Well]], that [[gave]] the Sheriff a [[chance]] to push them off the Clarksberg [[Curve]] with his [[Plymouth]] cruiser. [[For]] example, in the [[beginning]] of the movie, a couple of [[servicemen]] on [[leave]] [[trying]] to [[get]] back to [[base]] on time are [[pushed]] off to their [[deaths]], if I [[recall]] correctly. [[Then]] one day, a [[stranger]] drove into town. [[Possibly]] the [[coolest]] hot rodder in the [[world]]. Michael McCord. Even his [[name]] is a [[car]] [[name]], as in McCord gaskets. [[In]] [[possibly]] the [[ultimate]] hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford [[coupe]]. The [[colors]] of death, [[evil]] and [[hellfire]]. He [[gets]] [[picked]] up for [[speeding]] by the Sheriff on [[purpose]]. He [[checks]] out the lay of the [[land]]. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg [[government]] is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": [[recreate]] the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. [[Into]] 1958, Clarksberg was a [[celebrated]] [[rapidity]] [[trapping]] [[municipality]]. Much [[earnings]] was [[produced]] by the Sheriff's Department [[capturing]] speeders. The ones who [[try]] to outrun the Sheriff? [[Good]], that [[delivered]] the Sheriff a [[possibilities]] to push them off the Clarksberg [[Curved]] with his [[Siblings]] cruiser. [[At]] example, in the [[startup]] of the movie, a couple of [[soldiers]] on [[leaving]] [[try]] to [[got]] back to [[based]] on time are [[shoved]] off to their [[dying]], if I [[remember]] correctly. [[Subsequently]] one day, a [[alien]] drove into town. [[Presumably]] the [[coldest]] hot rodder in the [[monde]]. Michael McCord. Even his [[naming]] is a [[motor]] [[naming]], as in McCord gaskets. [[For]] [[conceivably]] the [[final]] hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford [[haircut]]. The [[coloured]] of death, [[baleful]] and [[hell]]. He [[obtains]] [[taken]] up for [[accelerates]] by the Sheriff on [[intents]]. He [[inspected]] out the lay of the [[territory]]. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg [[council]] is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": [[reconstitute]] the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. --------------------------------------------- Result 1129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It is [[noteworthy]] that [[mine]] is only the third review of this film, [[whereas]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World [[War]], has to date attracted [[nearly]] a hundred [[comments]]. Like a [[previous]] reviewer, I am intrigued by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One [[difference]] between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, concentrating on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' [[covers]] not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, [[thoughtful]] [[bent]], [[comparable]] to the liberal intellectuals he [[played]] in some of his other films. At [[times]], he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

[[Whereas]] Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the [[criticism]] has been [[made]] that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's [[less]] attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a [[fair]] one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. It is [[dramatic]] that [[mining]] is only the third review of this film, [[although]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World [[Warfare]], has to date attracted [[practically]] a hundred [[commentaries]]. Like a [[former]] reviewer, I am intrigued by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One [[dispute]] between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, concentrating on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' [[covering]] not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, [[pensive]] [[bend]], [[analogous]] to the liberal intellectuals he [[effected]] in some of his other films. At [[period]], he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

[[Whilst]] Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the [[criticizing]] has been [[effected]] that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's [[least]] attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a [[justo]] one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. --------------------------------------------- Result 1130 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Visually [[stunning]] and full of [[Eastern]] Philosophy, this [[amazing]] martial arts [[fantasy]] is [[brought]] to you by master [[director]] [[Tsui]] Hark, the [[man]] [[behind]] some of the [[best]] [[films]] [[Hong]] Kong [[cinema]] has produced. The special effects are [[beautiful]] and [[imaginative]]. The [[plot]] is a [[bit]] on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[change]] from [[films]] that [[treat]] their [[audience]] as if they were morons. [[If]] [[thinking]] is not your forte, [[however]], this may not be your [[movie]]. [[Maybe]] you should [[go]] [[see]] the [[latest]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are [[looking]] for [[something]] more, he's where you will [[find]] it. Visually [[unbelievable]] and full of [[Timor]] Philosophy, this [[wondrous]] martial arts [[utopia]] is [[tabled]] to you by master [[headmaster]] [[Choi]] Hark, the [[men]] [[backside]] some of the [[better]] [[cinema]] [[Kong]] Kong [[film]] has produced. The special effects are [[belle]] and [[creative]]. The [[intrigue]] is a [[bitten]] on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[amendment]] from [[cinematography]] that [[processed]] their [[spectators]] as if they were morons. [[Unless]] [[thoughts]] is not your forte, [[still]], this may not be your [[cinematography]]. [[Likely]] you should [[going]] [[behold]] the [[recent]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are [[researching]] for [[somethings]] more, he's where you will [[unearth]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] [[Amazing]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? [[Wondrous]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? --------------------------------------------- Result 1132 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] This is a movie that should be [[seen]] by everyone if you [[want]] to [[see]] [[great]] acting. [[Mr]]. [[Torn]] and Ms Farrel do an [[outstanding]] [[job]]. I think they should have it on TV again so a [[new]] [[audience]] can [[enjoy]] it. [[Wonderful]] performances.

It [[gives]] you a [[real]] feel of what the [[pioneers]] had to [[go]] through both physically and [[emotionally]]. [[Great]] unheard of movie.

It was [[done]] when Ms. Farrel was very young. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[certainly]] is not a [[comedy]] and she is just [[wonderful]]. There is very little dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[real]]. [[Mr]]. [[Torn]] as [[always]] is a [[great]] [[presence]] and just his [[breathing]] has [[great]] [[feeling]]. I [[must]] [[see]] movie. This is a movie that should be [[noticed]] by everyone if you [[wanted]] to [[consults]] [[wondrous]] acting. [[Mister]]. [[Buzzed]] and Ms Farrel do an [[unpaid]] [[workplace]]. I think they should have it on TV again so a [[newer]] [[viewers]] can [[enjoying]] it. [[Wondrous]] performances.

It [[donne]] you a [[genuine]] feel of what the [[pioneer]] had to [[going]] through both physically and [[romantically]]. [[Terrific]] unheard of movie.

It was [[played]] when Ms. Farrel was very young. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[obviously]] is not a [[comedian]] and she is just [[wondrous]]. There is very little dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[actual]]. [[Hannes]]. [[Ripped]] as [[unceasingly]] is a [[wondrous]] [[attendance]] and just his [[respiration]] has [[wondrous]] [[impression]]. I [[gotta]] [[consults]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You could stage a version of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" with sock puppets and I'll probably watch it. Ever since I was a child, this has been one of my favorite stories. Maybe it's the idea that there is good in everyone, and that therefore no one is beyond redemption, that appeals to me, but for whatever reason I never miss an opportunity to watch one of the many screen adaptations of this timeless classic when they're on TV as they inevitably are this time of year.

What makes this version really stand out is the somber gravitas that the cast bring to their respective roles. Lines we've heard dozens of times in the past take on a whole new intensity, and each character becomes more real and believable in the hands of this wonderful ensemble.

George C. Scott was nominated for an Emmy in 1985 for this role. It is to his everlasting credit that rather than sleepwalking through this oft-portrayed role of Scrooge, he instead gave it a fresh interpretation that was, in my opinion, one of his finest performances ever. He wisely did not attempt a British accent, instead delivering his lines in that famous gravelly voice. His Scrooge is not merely a cranky old man (as he is so often portrayed), but a man who harbors a profound anger against the world. As he is visited in turn by each of the Three Spirits, we understand how this anger took root, grew, and ultimately strangled his soul. As he is forced to review his life, we see him alternately softening, and then relapsing again into unrepentant obstinacy. And in the great dramatic scene when he, kneeling and weeping at his own grave, begs for mercy as he attempts to convince the third spirit of his repentance and desire to alter his life, we see a man who has been utterly broken and brought to his knees literally and figuratively. Scott has made Scrooge utterly believable and painfully human.

Impressive as Scott's performance is, the ensemble of supporting actors contributes significantly the this version's dark beauty. Fred Holywell, Scrooge's nephew, is an excellent example of this. Often portrayed as an affable buffoon, here he is played by Roger Rees with an emotional intensity missing from earlier portrayals. When he implores Scrooge, "I ask nothing of you. I want nothing from you. Why can't we be friends?", we see in his face not only his frustration, but his pain at Scrooge's self-imposed separation from his only living relative. It is a moving performance, and one of the movie's most dramatic scenes.

Even more magnificent is the performance given by the wonderful English actor Frank Finlay as Scrooge's late partner, Jacob Marley. In most versions of this tale, the scene with Marley tends to be a bit of a low point in the film, simply because it's difficult to portray a dead man convincingly, and the results are usually just plain silly (ooooh, look, it's a scary ghost.......not!) In this version, it is perhaps the most riveting scene in the whole movie. Marley's entrance, as the locks on Scrooge's door fly open of their own accord and the sound of chains rattling echo throughout the house, is wonderfully creepy. But Finlay's Marley is no ethereal spirit. He is a tortured soul, inspiring both horror and pity. Marley may be a ghost, but his rage and regret over a life wasted on the pursuit of wealth, and his despair at his realization that his sins are now beyond redress, are still very human. As portrayed by Finlay, we have no problem believing that even the flinty Scrooge would be shaken by this nightmarish apparition. Finlay really steals the scene here, something not easy to do when you're opposite George C. Scott.

And it just goes on and on, one remarkable performance after another, making it seem like you're experiencing this story for the first time. Edward Woodward (remember him from the Equalizer?) is by turns both jovial and menacing as the Ghost of Christmas Present. When he delivers the famous line, "it may well be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than MILLIONS like this poor man's child" he is no longer a jolly Santa Claus surrogate, but an avenging angel who gives Scrooge a much needed verbal spanking.

Susannah York is a wonderfully tart tongued Mrs. Cratchit, and David Warner brings marvelous depth to the long suffering Bob Cratchit, a man who goes through life bearing the triple crosses of poverty, a sick child, and an insufferable boss. His face alternately shows his cheerful courage, and also, at times, his weariness, in the face of intolerable circumstances. Later, in the scene in which Scrooge is shown by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come the Cratchit family after the death of Tiny Tim, Warner's performance, while hardly uttering a word, will move you to tears. --------------------------------------------- Result 1134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Im not a big Tim Matheson fan but i have to admit i liked this film.It was dark and a small bit disturbing with some scenes a bit edgy,i don't know were to classify this film its a bit SF and a bit horror slash thriller.I saw this at about 2.00am or so on my local channel there was nothing else on so i decided to watch it.If you have not seen this film id recommend it its not really that bad,the characters are interesting enough but not really explored to their full potential which could have made this film even more better.I don,t know if this film went to the cinema but it felt like it was made for TV or went straight to video,i for one would buy this if it,s on DVD it fits well with my type of film and has a small bit of the X-FILES story attached to it.Government undertakings or shifty corporations involved in dodgy shadowy dealings.Overall a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Would have better strengthened considerably by making it as a

50 minute episode of the Outer Limits. Too much superfluous material and stuff like the chief bad guy looking like he'd escaped from The Phantom of the Opera didn't help. The whole 'Night of the Living Dead' sequence was extremely silly and quite unnecessary. After all, if the dead were to punish anyone for their sins, now remind me exactly who was killing everyone again? --------------------------------------------- Result 1136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ****SPOILERS**** Powerhouse movie that shows how men in desperate situations can go so far as sacrifice their best friends and family members and not realize what monsters that they are by doing it. Until like in the case of bull-like Gypo Noland, Victor Mclaglen, it's too much too late.

It's 1922 and the hight of the Black & Tan Irish revolt against the mighty British Empire with the Tans, British occupying troops, on the lookout for wanted Irish Republican rebel Frankie McPhillip, Wallace Ford, wanted for the killing of a Briish soldier. Gypo a good, really the best, friend of the fugitive McPhillip is down on his luck not having a job with his girlfriend Katie, Margot Grahame, forced to turn tricks in the Dublin red-light district in order to pay her rent.

After an outraged Gypo worked over a potential John who want's to spend a few hours with Katie, for a shilling or two, an angry Katie tells the not so bright Gyro that he's preventing her for supporting herself with the only bankable asset she has , her body. Katie also tells Gypo that he should wake up to reality and realize what a desperate situation that she's in. Telling the mind-numbed Gypo that it would only cost ten pound sterling for her to go to America, and get out of the poverty of Ireland, Gypo suddenly remembers a poster of his good friend Frankie McPhillip that he just saw announcing a reward of 20 pound sterling. Thats enough money for both him and Kaite to travel to America.

Gypo going to a local Dublin flop house and soup kitchen to get a free meal is startled to run into his friend Frankie McPhillip. Frankie tells him that he snuck into Dublin to see both his mother Mrs. McPhillip and sister Mary, Una O'Connor & Heather Angel, and if he can make sure that everything is safe for him to go home and later leave for his Irish Republican unit outside the city.

All Gypo can see in Frankie's face is the 20 pound sterling reward for him being turned into the police! Without as much of a second thought, after he assured Frankie that everything is all right, Gypo secretly goes to the police and informs on his friend who's later shot and killed in a police and Tan shootout in his moms house.

With the deed done the chief of police hands over the 20 pound sterling, much like thirty pieces of silver, to an almost emotionless Gypo who takes it and sneaks out the back door of the police station so that one one can see him. You can see in the police chief's face and actions that he has nothing but utter contempt for Gypo's betrayal of his friend Frankie McPhillip. Even though he was wanted for murder and an enemy of the British Empire. That's how low traitors or informers are held even by those whom they secretly work for.

Gypo turns out to be his own worst enemy after his betrayal of Frankie as his conscience takes control of his mind. Gypo sees and hears everyone, including his unsuspecting girlfriend Katie, pointing a finger and implicating him in Frankie's betrayal and death at the hands of the British authorities. Gypo's guilty mind has him getting himself royally and gloriously drunk, on the reward money, that by the time he's forced to to admit his crime to his Irish Republican Army colleagues, who had the almost dead drunk and slobbering Gypo on trial, the money was just about gone in his partying drinking and whoring.

Whatever good feelings, if that's possible, that you had for the weak minded and strong shouldered Gypo was completely demolished when in an act of total desperation, in order to keep from getting shot, he falsely implicate an innocent man Mulligan, Donald Meek, in his crime of informing on his friend Frankie McPhillip. Which is quickly exposed as a total fabrication by non other then the guilt-ridden Gypo himself. The dye is then cast as straws are drawn for who would be the one to put a bullet in Gypo's head for the final gut spilling chapter of this heart wrenching and unforgettable Crime & Punishment classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 1137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just the ultimate masterpiece in my opinion. Every line, every phrase, every picture is exactly in place and Lindsay Crouse and Joe Mantegna are just THE cool shrink and the sleazy con-man, so well cast. 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The [[Education]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[could]] have been. [[Little]] Tree's education is about things [[like]] the [[circle]] of [[life]] and how you should [[look]] at a [[star]] to [[help]] you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the [[idiot]] back [[talks]] the [[teacher]] at the boarding [[school]] [[place]] he starts crying and [[talking]] to the [[sky]]. [[Oh]] my gosh. Sure, the [[lady]] was a [[little]] harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the [[audience]] [[thinking]] that [[Little]] Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! [[Talking]] to a star is not [[going]] to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring [[guardians]] are not [[always]] right. The [[Tuition]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[did]] have been. [[Small]] Tree's education is about things [[iike]] the [[circling]] of [[lives]] and how you should [[peek]] at a [[superstar]] to [[aids]] you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the [[jackass]] back [[talking]] the [[professors]] at the boarding [[tuition]] [[placing]] he starts crying and [[talk]] to the [[skye]]. [[Ah]] my gosh. Sure, the [[dame]] was a [[petit]] harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the [[spectators]] [[thoughts]] that [[Small]] Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! [[Speaking]] to a star is not [[go]] to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring [[keepers]] are not [[perpetually]] right. --------------------------------------------- Result 1139 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This incredibly overrated anime [[television]] series (26 episodes, 25 minutes each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his [[girl]] classmates) who pilots a [[giant]] robot to [[defend]] Japan against invading beings called [[Angels]]. There is very little explanation [[given]] to the Angels or why their [[numbers]] have [[increased]] in [[recent]] times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no [[apparent]] [[reason]] (why not [[attack]] all at once [[instead]] of at spaced out [[intervals]] that are convenient for the [[humans]] you're attempting to [[destroy]]?). The [[robot]] [[fight]] scenes attempt to [[employ]] a [[variety]] of [[obstacles]], but the [[action]] itself is poorly [[executed]] and boring to watch. [[Almost]] [[every]] episode [[seems]] like a [[waste]] of space where [[nothing]] of interest [[occurs]].

Some might be [[intrigued]] by [[fans]] who [[mention]] the (very few) [[symbolic]] [[references]] herein, but that's all they are - [[shallow]] one-liners to [[religious]] or philosophical [[concepts]] that are randomly [[tossed]] in with zero [[craftsmanship]]. As a [[whole]] the [[series]] is [[incredibly]] [[tedious]] due to the superficiality of the [[characters]], who are [[really]] nothing more than self-pitying [[crybabies]]. The [[psychology]] is [[pathetic]], with [[hopelessly]] [[simplistic]] [[conflicts]] like "I [[hate]] my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no [[progression]] beyond their face [[value]]. It's no understatement to [[say]] that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing [[garbage]] during the [[final]] [[episodes]] with their [[endless]], angst-ridden diatribes of [[excessively]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is [[totally]] [[meaningless]]).

I'm not [[kidding]] when I [[say]] that this series just [[got]] [[worse]] and worse as it [[progressed]]. [[Every]] day I'd [[look]] at the DVD set sitting on my [[living]] room [[table]] and [[say]] to myself, "[[Damn]], I've gotta watch the [[next]] episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The [[real]] kicker was that the [[episodes]] were only 25 minutes [[long]], [[yet]] they were somehow able to digress into a [[completely]] uninteresting borefest within the [[opening]] 10 minutes. This is [[coming]] from a guy who will happily [[sit]] through 150-minute [[films]] with [[glacial]] pacing, so my [[criticism]] of this [[series]] is most [[damning]] [[indeed]].

Never in my entire life have I [[despised]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already [[purchased]] it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of pure, unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. This incredibly overrated anime [[televisions]] series (26 episodes, 25 minutes each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his [[girls]] classmates) who pilots a [[monumental]] robot to [[defending]] Japan against invading beings called [[Angel]]. There is very little explanation [[bestowed]] to the Angels or why their [[digit]] have [[widen]] in [[freshly]] times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no [[overt]] [[reasons]] (why not [[attacks]] all at once [[however]] of at spaced out [[ranges]] that are convenient for the [[beings]] you're attempting to [[destruction]]?). The [[robots]] [[combat]] scenes attempt to [[employing]] a [[multiple]] of [[obstacle]], but the [[measures]] itself is poorly [[conducted]] and boring to watch. [[Circa]] [[each]] episode [[seem]] like a [[wastes]] of space where [[nothin]] of interest [[happens]].

Some might be [[puzzled]] by [[enthusiasts]] who [[mentioning]] the (very few) [[emblematic]] [[reference]] herein, but that's all they are - [[superficial]] one-liners to [[religion]] or philosophical [[conceptions]] that are randomly [[thrown]] in with zero [[workmanship]]. As a [[entire]] the [[serial]] is [[inordinately]] [[tiresome]] due to the superficiality of the [[attribute]], who are [[truly]] nothing more than self-pitying [[whiners]]. The [[psyche]] is [[unhappy]], with [[irretrievably]] [[facile]] [[squabbles]] like "I [[hates]] my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no [[promotions]] beyond their face [[values]]. It's no understatement to [[told]] that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing [[refuse]] during the [[last]] [[bouts]] with their [[countless]], angst-ridden diatribes of [[exceedingly]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is [[entirely]] [[unnecessary]]).

I'm not [[mocking]] when I [[told]] that this series just [[did]] [[worst]] and worse as it [[advances]]. [[Everything]] day I'd [[peek]] at the DVD set sitting on my [[iife]] room [[chalkboard]] and [[says]] to myself, "[[Fuck]], I've gotta watch the [[forthcoming]] episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The [[veritable]] kicker was that the [[bouts]] were only 25 minutes [[longer]], [[again]] they were somehow able to digress into a [[perfectly]] uninteresting borefest within the [[opens]] 10 minutes. This is [[forthcoming]] from a guy who will happily [[seated]] through 150-minute [[film]] with [[glacier]] pacing, so my [[critic]] of this [[serials]] is most [[stinging]] [[actually]].

Never in my entire life have I [[despise]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already [[acquire]] it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of pure, unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I would of given this film a zero out of [[ten]], but i will give it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I [[Love]] Rani very much and have a respect that she is a great actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie [[kissing]] [[Kamal]], but its no big [[deal]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this [[film]] [[noticeable]], lets actually talk about this film. Is it good or [[bad]], I think its a [[completely]] [[rubbish]] movie that [[made]] me [[yawn]]. Me being a [[Fantastic]] [[critic]], you can [[see]] my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The [[movie]] is not [[entertaining]] is one thing and if this is [[suppose]] to be hard hitting [[cinema]], why is there no [[morale]] in this movie. Its a biased movie [[thats]] not a [[true]] [[story]] and it [[stinks]]. Watching Kamal [[kissing]] these actresses makes me sick, Man [[cant]] kiss properly anyway. I would of given this film a zero out of [[dix]], but i will give it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I [[Amore]] Rani very much and have a respect that she is a great actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie [[hugging]] [[Kemal]], but its no big [[treat]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this [[filmmaking]] [[notable]], lets actually talk about this film. Is it good or [[unfavourable]], I think its a [[fully]] [[trash]] movie that [[accomplished]] me [[yawns]]. Me being a [[Exquisite]] [[criticisms]], you can [[seeing]] my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The [[cinematographic]] is not [[entertain]] is one thing and if this is [[presume]] to be hard hitting [[film]], why is there no [[morals]] in this movie. Its a biased movie [[aint]] not a [[veritable]] [[conte]] and it [[reeks]]. Watching Kamal [[kissed]] these actresses makes me sick, Man [[isnt]] kiss properly anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you hate redneck accents, you'll hate this movie. And to make it worse, you see Patrick Swayze, a has been trying to be a redneck. I really can't stand redneck accents. I like Billy Bob Thornton, he was good in Slingblade, but he was annoying in this movie. And what kind of name is Lonnie Earl? How much more hickish can this movie get? The storyline was stupid. I'm usually not this judgemental of movies, but I couldn't stand this movie. If you want a good Billy Bob Thornton movie, go see Slingblade.

My mom found this movie for $5.95 at Wal Mart...figures...I think I'll wrap it up and give it to my Grandma for Christmas. It could just be that I can't stand redneck accents usually, or that I can't stand Patrick Swayze. Maybe if Patrick Swayze wasn't in it. I didn't laugh once in the movie. I laugh at anything stupid usually. If they had shown someones fingers getting smashed, I might have laughed. people's fingers getting smashed by accident always makes me laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's very sad that Lucian Pintilie does not stop making movies. They get worse every time. Niki and Flo (2003) is a depressing stab at the camera. It's unfortunate that from the many movies that are made yearly in Romania , the worst of them get to be sent abroad ( e.g. Chicago International Film Festival). This movie without a plot , acting or script is a waste of time and money. Score: 0.02 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[really]] [[liked]] this version of '[[Vanishing]] Point' as [[opposed]] to the 1971 [[version]]. I [[found]] the 1971 version [[quite]] [[boring]]. [[If]] I can get up in the middle of a movie a few [[times]](as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that [[great]]. Of course, this [[could]] be due to the [[fact]] that I was only nine at the [[time]] the 1971 [[version]] was [[brought]] out. [[However]], I have [[seen]] [[many]] remakes, where I have [[liked]] the original and older one better. I found that the [[plot]] of the 1997 [[version]] was more [[understandable]] and had [[basically]] kept [[true]] to the original without [[undermining]] the [[meaning]] of the 1971 [[version]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]], I [[felt]] the 1997 [[version]] had more [[excitement]] and wasn't so "blase".([[Boring]]) I [[truthfully]] [[loved]] this version of '[[Disappearing]] Point' as [[opposing]] to the 1971 [[stepping]]. I [[uncovered]] the 1971 version [[pretty]] [[bored]]. [[Though]] I can get up in the middle of a movie a few [[moments]](as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that [[fantastic]]. Of course, this [[wo]] be due to the [[facto]] that I was only nine at the [[times]] the 1971 [[stepping]] was [[lodged]] out. [[Still]], I have [[watched]] [[innumerable]] remakes, where I have [[enjoyed]] the original and older one better. I found that the [[intrigue]] of the 1997 [[stepping]] was more [[comprehensible]] and had [[essentially]] kept [[authentic]] to the original without [[eroding]] the [[sens]] of the 1971 [[stepping]]. [[For]] my [[vista]], I [[deemed]] the 1997 [[stepping]] had more [[ferment]] and wasn't so "blase".([[Bored]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 1144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The short that [[starts]] this [[film]] is the [[true]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken [[randomly]] in the parking lot of a television station where [[Gary]] works in the [[town]] of [[Beaver]]. [[Gary]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Lo]] and [[behold]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[staggering]] performace as Olivia Newton [[Dawn]]. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[story]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. [[When]] it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the [[real]] Gary and all his [[shining]] [[idiocy]]. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. The short that [[launch]] this [[movie]] is the [[real]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken [[indiscriminately]] in the parking lot of a television station where [[Gari]] works in the [[urban]] of [[Beavers]]. [[Garry]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Oscillator]] and [[admire]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[dazzling]] performace as Olivia Newton [[Aurore]]. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[history]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. [[Whenever]] it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the [[actual]] Gary and all his [[glittering]] [[ineptitude]]. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 1145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] yes i have a copy of it on VHS uncut in great condition that i transfered to DVD and if anyone one wants to bring back the memories of a Christmas classic please emil me at dmd2222@verizon.net.i searched everywhere and i found nothing on this and i thought that i cant be the only one on this planet that has this classic on tape there has to be other people and if they do i fit in with them being that very very few that has this classic so i consider myself lucky and i have all of the muppets Christmas except one that john denver did with the muppets again i thinks its called a smokey mountain holiday im not to sure but its close. --------------------------------------------- Result 1146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[unusual]] as God than [[George]] Burns? This [[film]] sure was better than that bore, "[[Oh]], [[God]]". I was [[totally]] [[engrossed]] and LMAO all the way through. Carrey was [[perfect]] as the out of [[sorts]] anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the [[frustrated]] girlfriend in her [[usual]] well played performance. I, for one, don't [[consider]] her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my [[favorite]] scene was when [[Carrey]] [[opened]] up the [[file]] [[cabinet]] [[thinking]] it could never hold his [[life]] [[history]]. See if you can [[spot]] the [[file]] in the [[cabinet]] that holds the [[events]] of his [[bathroom]] [[humor]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Well]] [[written]] and even [[better]] [[played]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's best. Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[exceptional]] as God than [[Georges]] Burns? This [[cinematography]] sure was better than that bore, "[[Ohhh]], [[Christ]]". I was [[downright]] [[absorbed]] and LMAO all the way through. Carrey was [[irreproachable]] as the out of [[genus]] anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the [[disappointed]] girlfriend in her [[ordinary]] well played performance. I, for one, don't [[examining]] her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my [[preferred]] scene was when [[Cary]] [[started]] up the [[filing]] [[ministers]] [[think]] it could never hold his [[lives]] [[story]]. See if you can [[blemish]] the [[dossiers]] in the [[ministers]] that holds the [[happenings]] of his [[crapper]] [[comedy]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Good]] [[writes]] and even [[best]] [[served]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's best. --------------------------------------------- Result 1147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The main problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't really saying what it thinks it's saying.

[[In]] an audacious - I hesitate to use the word "inspired" - [[act]] of street [[theater]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two [[student]] filmmakers from the [[Czech]] Republic, pulled off a [[major]] corporate hoax to serve as the [[basis]] for their [[movie]]: they [[deliberately]] [[fabricated]] a [[phony]] "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart [[Super]] [[Store]]), built an [[entire]] ad [[campaign]] around it - replete with billboards, [[radio]] and TV [[spots]], an [[official]] logo, a catchy [[theme]] song and [[photos]] of fake [[merchandise]] - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" [[would]] show up to their [[creation]] on [[opening]] day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually [[existed]].

One might well [[ask]], "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[question]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that [[satisfying]] a one. Essentially, we're [[told]] that the [[purpose]] of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of [[advertising]]. And the [[movie]] makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. [[higher]]) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the [[advertisements]] [[encouraging]] them to [[join]] the [[European]] Union. Fair enough - [[especially]] when one [[considers]] that the actual [[advertisers]] who agree to [[go]] along with the stunt declaim against the [[unethical]] nature of [[lying]] to customers, all the while [[justifying]] their [[collaboration]] in the [[deception]] by claiming it to be a [[form]] of "[[research]]" into what does and does not [[work]] in [[advertising]]. In a [[way]], by [[allowing]] themselves to be [[caught]] on camera making these [[comments]], these ad [[men]] and [[women]] are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor [[unsuspecting]] people who are the [[primary]] target of the [[ruse]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not [[hit]] its [[intended]] target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who [[ultimately]] come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they proceed to make fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. The main problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't really saying what it thinks it's saying.

[[For]] an audacious - I hesitate to use the word "inspired" - [[acts]] of street [[cinema]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two [[pupils]] filmmakers from the [[Czechoslovak]] Republic, pulled off a [[principal]] corporate hoax to serve as the [[foundations]] for their [[filmmaking]]: they [[advisedly]] [[manufactured]] a [[fraudulent]] "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart [[Gorgeous]] [[Storing]]), built an [[whole]] ad [[campaigns]] around it - replete with billboards, [[radios]] and TV [[commercials]], an [[formal]] logo, a catchy [[thematic]] song and [[pictures]] of fake [[commodities]] - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" [[ought]] show up to their [[formation]] on [[opened]] day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually [[prevailed]].

One might well [[calls]], "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[issue]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that [[pleasing]] a one. Essentially, we're [[say]] that the [[goal]] of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of [[advertisement]]. And the [[filmmaking]] makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. [[supreme]]) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the [[advertising]] [[stimulating]] them to [[participates]] the [[Europe]] Union. Fair enough - [[specially]] when one [[believes]] that the actual [[publicists]] who agree to [[going]] along with the stunt declaim against the [[immoral]] nature of [[lied]] to customers, all the while [[justify]] their [[cooperating]] in the [[cheating]] by claiming it to be a [[shape]] of "[[investigate]]" into what does and does not [[works]] in [[advertisement]]. In a [[routing]], by [[enables]] themselves to be [[captured]] on camera making these [[observations]], these ad [[man]] and [[woman]] are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor [[naive]] people who are the [[elemental]] target of the [[trick]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not [[slugged]] its [[destined]] target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who [[eventually]] come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they proceed to make fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Perfectly Stupid Weapon. I think the guys dancing at the beginning of one of Steven Segal's movies was intented to mock Jeff doing his forms to dance music at the beginning of this stupid movie. The plot is predictable, the fights were fair and Jeff acts about as well as the sofa he beats with some sort of weapon in one scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 1149 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Remember]] [[Ralph]] Bakshi? The guy that was an animator on Terrytoons, then on Paramount Cartoon Studios, after that, he was a director on Fritz the Cat 1 & 2 and [[Heavy]] Traffic? [[Well]], this is Coonskin. And it's actually pretty [[good]]. Racist, but good. The movie takes place in Harlem [[Nights]] (No, duh, it was a working title.) but with a twist that becomes a lampoon of a Disney movie, Song of the South.

It's about [[Sampson]] ([[Barry]] White) and the Preacherman (Charles Gordone) [[rush]] to help their friend, Randy (Philip Michael Thomas) [[escape]] from prison, but are stopped by a roadblock and wind up in a shootout with the police. While waiting for them, Randy unwillingly listens to fellow escapee Pappy (Scatman Crothers), as he begins to tell Randy a story about "three guys, I [[used]] to know, just like you and your [[friends]]". Pappy's [[story]] is [[told]] in animation set against live-action background photos and footage.

Brother Rabbit (voice of Thomas), Brother Bear (voice of White), and [[Preacher]] Fox (voice of Gordone) decide to pack up and leave their Southern settings after the bank mortgages their [[home]] and [[sells]] it to a man who turns it into a brothel. [[Arriving]] in Harlem, Rabbit, Bear, and Fox find that it isn't all that it's made out to be. They encounter a con man named Simple Savior, a phony revolutionary leader who purports to be the "cousin" of Black Jesus, and that he gives his followers "the strength to kill whites". [[In]] a flashy stage performance in his "[[church]]", Savior acts out being brutalized by symbols of black oppression—represented by images of John Wayne, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon, before asking his parishioners for "donations".

Rabbit first goes up against Madigan, a virulently racist and homophobic white [[police]] officer and the [[bag]] [[man]] for the [[Mafia]], who [[demonstrates]] his contempt for African [[Americans]] in [[various]] [[ways]], [[including]] a [[refusal]] to [[bathe]] before an [[anticipated]] encounter with them (he [[believes]] they're not worth it). When Madigan [[finds]] out that [[Rabbit]] has been [[taking]] his payoffs, he and his cohorts, [[Ruby]] and [[Bobby]], are [[led]] to a nightclub called "The Cottontail".

A black stripper distracts him while an LSD sugar cube is dropped into his drink. Madigan, while under the influence of his spiked drink, is then maneuvered into a sexual liaison with a stereotypically effeminate gay man, and then shoved into clothes that women were representative of the racist archetype, adorned in something racist, and finally shoved out the back of the club where he discovers that Ruby and Bobby are dead.

Then, while recovering from his delirium of being drugged, [[shoots]] his gun around [[randomly]], and is shot to death by the police after shooting one of them.

Rabbit, Bear, Fox and the opponent boxer rush out of the boxing arena as it blows up. The live-action story ends with Randy and Pappy escaping while being shot at by various white cops, but managing to make it out alive.

This movie was controversial at that time of release, and was re-edited by the director several times under the title, Street Fight, which is obvious, since Street Fight is a 2005 documentary about racism in the streets. In fact, this movie has the same subject as the documentary.

That caused Bryanston Pictures, the distributor of this film and the original Tobe Hopper classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to go out of business. Because Paramount wanted to produce and distribute this film, but due to racism, Bryanston took over Bakshi's production.

Despite the controversy, it was worth the entertainment. The animation was awesome at that time, the plot makes sense, and it's actually funny too.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10 [[Rember]] [[Raph]] Bakshi? The guy that was an animator on Terrytoons, then on Paramount Cartoon Studios, after that, he was a director on Fritz the Cat 1 & 2 and [[Hefty]] Traffic? [[Good]], this is Coonskin. And it's actually pretty [[alright]]. Racist, but good. The movie takes place in Harlem [[Noches]] (No, duh, it was a working title.) but with a twist that becomes a lampoon of a Disney movie, Song of the South.

It's about [[Samson]] ([[Bari]] White) and the Preacherman (Charles Gordone) [[haste]] to help their friend, Randy (Philip Michael Thomas) [[flee]] from prison, but are stopped by a roadblock and wind up in a shootout with the police. While waiting for them, Randy unwillingly listens to fellow escapee Pappy (Scatman Crothers), as he begins to tell Randy a story about "three guys, I [[employs]] to know, just like you and your [[mates]]". Pappy's [[narratives]] is [[said]] in animation set against live-action background photos and footage.

Brother Rabbit (voice of Thomas), Brother Bear (voice of White), and [[Reverend]] Fox (voice of Gordone) decide to pack up and leave their Southern settings after the bank mortgages their [[homes]] and [[selling]] it to a man who turns it into a brothel. [[Come]] in Harlem, Rabbit, Bear, and Fox find that it isn't all that it's made out to be. They encounter a con man named Simple Savior, a phony revolutionary leader who purports to be the "cousin" of Black Jesus, and that he gives his followers "the strength to kill whites". [[Among]] a flashy stage performance in his "[[basilica]]", Savior acts out being brutalized by symbols of black oppression—represented by images of John Wayne, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon, before asking his parishioners for "donations".

Rabbit first goes up against Madigan, a virulently racist and homophobic white [[policemen]] officer and the [[backpack]] [[guy]] for the [[Shay]], who [[testify]] his contempt for African [[American]] in [[disparate]] [[shapes]], [[containing]] a [[repudiate]] to [[bath]] before an [[awaited]] encounter with them (he [[considers]] they're not worth it). When Madigan [[find]] out that [[Cottontail]] has been [[picked]] his payoffs, he and his cohorts, [[Robbie]] and [[Robbie]], are [[drove]] to a nightclub called "The Cottontail".

A black stripper distracts him while an LSD sugar cube is dropped into his drink. Madigan, while under the influence of his spiked drink, is then maneuvered into a sexual liaison with a stereotypically effeminate gay man, and then shoved into clothes that women were representative of the racist archetype, adorned in something racist, and finally shoved out the back of the club where he discovers that Ruby and Bobby are dead.

Then, while recovering from his delirium of being drugged, [[canes]] his gun around [[arbitrarily]], and is shot to death by the police after shooting one of them.

Rabbit, Bear, Fox and the opponent boxer rush out of the boxing arena as it blows up. The live-action story ends with Randy and Pappy escaping while being shot at by various white cops, but managing to make it out alive.

This movie was controversial at that time of release, and was re-edited by the director several times under the title, Street Fight, which is obvious, since Street Fight is a 2005 documentary about racism in the streets. In fact, this movie has the same subject as the documentary.

That caused Bryanston Pictures, the distributor of this film and the original Tobe Hopper classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to go out of business. Because Paramount wanted to produce and distribute this film, but due to racism, Bryanston took over Bakshi's production.

Despite the controversy, it was worth the entertainment. The animation was awesome at that time, the plot makes sense, and it's actually funny too.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What a [[shame]] that a [[really]] [[competent]] director like [[Andre]] de Toth who [[specialized]] in slippery, [[shifting]] alliances didn't get hold of this [[concept]] [[first]]. He [[could]] have [[helped]] [[bring]] out the [[real]] [[potential]], [[especially]] with the interesting [[character]] [[played]] by [[William]] [[Bishop]]. As the movie [[stands]], it's pretty much of a [[mess]] (as [[asserted]] by reviewer Chipe). The main problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[script]]. The strength lies in an excellent [[cast]] and an interesting [[general]] concept-- characters [[pulled]] in different [[directions]] by [[conflicting]] [[forces]]. What was needed was [[someone]] with vision enough to [[pull]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[script]] into some [[kind]] of [[coherent]] [[whole]], instead of the [[sprawling]], awkward [[mess]] that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting [[location]] and studio shots, and gotten the [[locations]] out of the all-too-obvious LA [[outskirts]]. The real [[shame]] lies in a [[waste]] of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[lowly]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, [[could]] have been so much more. What a [[pity]] that a [[truthfully]] [[proficient]] director like [[Andrey]] de Toth who [[specializing]] in slippery, [[changing]] alliances didn't get hold of this [[notions]] [[firstly]]. He [[did]] have [[assisted]] [[brings]] out the [[veritable]] [[prospective]], [[concretely]] with the interesting [[trait]] [[accomplished]] by [[Guillaume]] [[Monseigneur]]. As the movie [[stand]], it's pretty much of a [[disarray]] (as [[argued]] by reviewer Chipe). The main problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[hyphen]]. The strength lies in an excellent [[casting]] and an interesting [[overall]] concept-- characters [[pulling]] in different [[guideline]] by [[contrasting]] [[troop]]. What was needed was [[everyone]] with vision enough to [[pulls]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[screenplay]] into some [[genus]] of [[cohesive]] [[total]], instead of the [[complicated]], awkward [[chaos]] that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting [[locations]] and studio shots, and gotten the [[places]] out of the all-too-obvious LA [[environs]]. The real [[pity]] lies in a [[squandering]] of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[modest]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, [[wo]] have been so much more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1151 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Action & Adventure.Billie Clark is twenty years old, very pretty, and without a care in the world,until a brutal street gang violates her life, and she turns into an ALLEY CAT bent on revenge! When the gang attacks her grandparents house and her car, Billie uses her black belt prowess to fight them off. But at the same time she earns their hatred, and she and her grandparents are marked for vengence.When her grandparents lose their lives to the brutal thugs. Billie becomes like a cat stalking her prey-and no prison,police force,boyfriend,or crooked judge can get in the way of her avenging claws. She's a one-woman vigilante squad,a martial arts queen,a crack shot with no mercy. She's the ALLEY CAT.Watch for the dramatic ending versus the Gang leader! Rated R for Nudity & Violence, Other Films with Karin Mani: Actress - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) .... Janie Soon Lee , "From Here to Eternity" (1979) (mini) TV Series .... Tawny, Filmography as: Actress, Stunts - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) (stunts)P.S. She should have been Catwoman in the Batman Movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best love stories I have ever seen. It is a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion, but lovely nonetheless... Big Edie and Little Edie seem a bit like family members after watching this movie repeatedly, and are infinitely quotable: "It's a goddamned beautiful day, now will you just shut up?" The opening explanation of Little Edie's costume only promises that the movie will live on forever, and so will Big Edie "The World Famous Singer" and Little Edie " The World Famous Dancer." --------------------------------------------- Result 1153 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a [[film]] evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was [[extremely]] awful. After [[watching]] [[less]] than half a minute we decided to [[fast]] forward only [[stopping]] at some [[laughable]] "[[highlights]]" or should i [[say]] "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this [[film]] was [[produced]] here in my [[homeland]] [[Denmark]]...that must have been the [[biggest]] [[mistake]] this country ever made. Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a [[movies]] evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was [[critically]] awful. After [[staring]] [[lowest]] than half a minute we decided to [[faster]] forward only [[stopped]] at some [[silly]] "[[emphasizes]]" or should i [[told]] "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this [[filmmaking]] was [[generated]] here in my [[patria]] [[Danes]]...that must have been the [[greatest]] [[mistaken]] this country ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It SURPRISINGLY had a plot! ;) I've seen [[movies]] with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[cheap]] [[movie]] like this, and [[also]] the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no [[real]] [[reason]] for most things people do and the way they [[react]] to what happens. [[Although]] I do think that about a [[lot]] of [[movies]], in this case it was [[horrible]], of course.

It [[ripped]] off some movies [[SO]] badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've [[seen]] worse. The movie was [[bad]] but I've [[seen]] [[worse]]. [[Watching]] this film is an [[experience]] between boredom, laughing fits, [[death]] wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low [[level]].

So if you [[like]] gory movies with [[stupid]] plots this one is the right [[film]] for you.

I [[gave]] it 3/10, because it CAN be [[entertaining]] if you don't [[expect]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[movie]] and you're in the right [[mood]]. It SURPRISINGLY had a plot! ;) I've seen [[film]] with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[cheaply]] [[filmmaking]] like this, and [[similarly]] the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no [[actual]] [[grounds]] for most things people do and the way they [[responding]] to what happens. [[While]] I do think that about a [[lots]] of [[movie]], in this case it was [[abysmal]], of course.

It [[buzzed]] off some movies [[CONSEQUENTLY]] badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've [[watched]] worse. The movie was [[negative]] but I've [[saw]] [[worst]]. [[Staring]] this film is an [[experiences]] between boredom, laughing fits, [[mortality]] wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low [[tier]].

So if you [[fond]] gory movies with [[silly]] plots this one is the right [[filmmaking]] for you.

I [[supplied]] it 3/10, because it CAN be [[amusing]] if you don't [[awaited]] to [[behold]] a [[buena]] [[film]] and you're in the right [[ambiance]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] My [[husband]] and I [[enjoy]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 [[month]] old [[baby]] does. We have [[bought]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and [[listen]] to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They [[encourage]] children to be active, [[share]] and [[care]]. They always have a [[positive]] [[message]] along with fun [[entertainment]]. [[Every]] [[time]] our [[son]] [[hears]] the theme [[song]] he [[quickly]] turns his [[head]] toward the television and [[starts]] bouncing up and down in [[excitement]]. Dee Dee is a [[wonderful]] singer, she has a [[great]] voice. [[Moe]] is a [[great]] [[dancer]]. I [[would]] [[recommend]] The DoodleBops to [[anyone]] with [[children]]. Our [[favorite]] song is The Bird [[Song]]. You just can not help but [[smile]] and [[want]] to [[dance]] when you [[hear]] it. My [[hubby]] and I [[enjoys]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 [[months]] old [[babies]] does. We have [[buying]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and [[listens]] to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They [[foster]] children to be active, [[sharing]] and [[healthcare]]. They always have a [[supportive]] [[messaging]] along with fun [[amusement]]. [[Entire]] [[period]] our [[yarns]] [[listens]] the theme [[chanson]] he [[swiftly]] turns his [[jefe]] toward the television and [[began]] bouncing up and down in [[restlessness]]. Dee Dee is a [[wondrous]] singer, she has a [[wondrous]] voice. [[Ome]] is a [[wondrous]] [[dancing]]. I [[should]] [[recommended]] The DoodleBops to [[somebody]] with [[kids]]. Our [[preferable]] song is The Bird [[Chanson]]. You just can not help but [[smirk]] and [[wanted]] to [[dancing]] when you [[overheard]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I am writing this [[review]] having [[watched]] it [[several]] months [[ago]]....the trailer looked promising enough for me to [[buy]] this lame excuse for a [[movie]]. It is a [[complete]] [[joke]]....and literally a spit in the [[face]] of [[real]] classics of the early [[generation]] of [[horror]] like Texas [[Chainsaw]] Massacre (1974) which they even had the gall to compare itself to on the back of the [[cover]] art. The [[producer]] who [[played]] Brandon should go flip burgers and serve up [[greasy]] [[hamburgers]]....[[hell]] he might not even be good at that [[either]]! The lighting was [[bad]] [[bad]] bad and a [[big]] annoyance through out the [[film]] you couldn't even [[see]] the actor's [[faces]] sometimes. I don't even [[remember]] the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] members which is [[sad]] really, [[bad]] they never do [[anything]] to impress you to [[make]] them [[memorable]]. That's all the time I will waste on this review PLEASE stay as far away as you can from this pile of [[junk]] even if you get it for 25 cents don't do it [[buy]] s piece of gum at [[least]] IT would keep you entertained!

If you [[want]] [[good]] quality low budget [[fun]], far better than this... then [[check]] out a Jeff Hayes film....because it takes [[talent]] to make it in horror and the [[kid]] has it!

I [[gave]] this 1 [[star]] just for the [[cover]] art....[[thats]] the only [[thing]] worth liking abut this so [[called]] "[[film]]"

-Rick Blalock I am writing this [[examine]] having [[saw]] it [[various]] months [[before]]....the trailer looked promising enough for me to [[acquire]] this lame excuse for a [[flick]]. It is a [[finished]] [[farce]]....and literally a spit in the [[confronting]] of [[veritable]] classics of the early [[jill]] of [[terror]] like Texas [[Sawing]] Massacre (1974) which they even had the gall to compare itself to on the back of the [[covered]] art. The [[producers]] who [[done]] Brandon should go flip burgers and serve up [[fat]] [[burgers]]....[[brothel]] he might not even be good at that [[nor]]! The lighting was [[naughty]] [[naughty]] bad and a [[hefty]] annoyance through out the [[movies]] you couldn't even [[seeing]] the actor's [[confronting]] sometimes. I don't even [[recall]] the [[remaining]] of the [[casting]] members which is [[deplorable]] really, [[negative]] they never do [[somethings]] to impress you to [[deliver]] them [[unforgettable]]. That's all the time I will waste on this review PLEASE stay as far away as you can from this pile of [[trash]] even if you get it for 25 cents don't do it [[bought]] s piece of gum at [[slightest]] IT would keep you entertained!

If you [[wanting]] [[alright]] quality low budget [[funny]], far better than this... then [[inspecting]] out a Jeff Hayes film....because it takes [[talents]] to make it in horror and the [[kids]] has it!

I [[supplied]] this 1 [[superstar]] just for the [[covered]] art....[[aint]] the only [[stuff]] worth liking abut this so [[drew]] "[[kino]]"

-Rick Blalock --------------------------------------------- Result 1157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the good [[points]] of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of [[course]], I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly [[debated]] [[elsewhere]].

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - [[A]] strong [[ecological]] concern - Anti-militarist positions - [[Fascinating]] [[insights]] about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A [[killer]] scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the good [[dots]] of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of [[cours]], I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly [[discussing]] [[else]].

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - [[una]] strong [[environmental]] concern - Anti-militarist positions - [[Intriguing]] [[ideas]] about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A [[callin]] scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. --------------------------------------------- Result 1158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was the best movie I have ever seen. Being LDS I highly recommend this movie because you are able to feel a more understanding about the life of Joseph Smith. Although the movie was not made with highly acclaimed actors it is a remarkable and life changing movie that can be enjoyed and appreciated by everyone. I saw this movie with my family and I can bear witness that we have all had a change of heart. This movie allows people to really understand how hard the life was for the prophet and how much tribulation he was faced with. After I saw this movie,there was not a single dry eye in the entire room. Everyone was touched by what they saw and I have not been the same since I have seen it. I highly recommend this movie for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as [[blasphemous]], circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. [[Sex]] this up a bit with some [[overt]] [[supernatural]] mojo, let the [[concept]] [[wander]] where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "[[Stigmata]]"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious [[intrigue]], dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as [[sacrilegious]], circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. [[Sexuality]] this up a bit with some [[palpable]] [[uncanny]] mojo, let the [[conceptions]] [[roam]] where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "[[Stigma]]"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious [[plot]], dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had to see this gem twice to really appreciate all of it. When a widowed father of two interrupts his two sons' sleep with a shocking revelation, they are torn between believing him and not. As the horrifying events of this tale unfold, we learn a lot about the father, about his two sons, and about their destinies. With shocking twist after shocking twist, this film never allows for a lull in the plot. Bill Paxton plays the father, but the most notable performances are that of his older son, Fenton, played by Matthew O'Leary and his younger son, Adam, played by Jeremy Sumpter. This is one of the best thrillers that I have seen in a while, and you will want to watch this a few times to appreciate every intricate aspect of the plot. I give this film a 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very [[opening]] credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a [[movie]] that [[simply]] [[requires]] multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very [[open]] credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a [[filmmaking]] that [[exclusively]] [[requiring]] multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? --------------------------------------------- Result 1162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "ASTONISHING" Screams the LA Times from the front of the DVD box. They must have been referring to the fact that such a sorry piece of crap was ever released. The film revolves around a bunch of girls who have a disease which forces them to become cannibals, and murder innocent people just to stay alive. Their skin peels off throughout the film, we also see severed legs, heads etc that are about as convincing as a Halloween Fuzzy Felt set. There is an awful lot of talking b*ll**ks, a bit of human cuisine and some weird zombie hunter chap who imprisons the sufferers of said skin illness in his closet strapped to a chair, before stabbing them in the head, chopping them into bits...

You get the picture. Considering there is no acting talent on display at all, and the gore is laughably unrealistic, what is the point of this whole farrago? Again looking at the video box, the guy responsible for it is an "underground cult director". Would that be like those weird religious cults where they brainwash you into thinking one way when clearly the opposite is true? Because that's the only possible reason I can think of for anyone to derive pleasure by watching this tax write-off. Then, on the same paragraph he compares himself to Mike Leigh, Ken Loach and George Romero. HAHAHAHAHA oh stop it. Now you're just being silly.

Do you enjoy this film? Are you offended by the above opinion? If so, you must be a member of said cult. Do they pocket your wages? Do they let you see other family members? Do they force you to watch Andrew Parkinson films till you think he's the best director since A.Hitchcock? Do tell... this sounds like a Panorama special brewing to me. And say hello to the critic of the LA times when you return to your colony, will you? 0/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i was hoping this was going to be good as a fan of timothy dalton's james bond and although it wasn't his deserved '3rd bond outing' it was a laugh. Belushi brought some good humour to his part and dalton hammed it up nicely, but was probably underused. his part was liked a camped up version of jack nicholson in a few good men. the other brit in it was a bit shocking, but overal it was a laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I thought The Beach was bad, with the difference that this movie has one of the greatest actors of our time, Nicolas Cage. Don't blame him for the awful script, if any one can make any sense of what the hell was the point of that movie, give your self a pat on the back. Its a cross between The Village and a crappier script. Its starts off kinda catching your eye, and then as it goes further into the plot, it just makes no sense, and don't get me started about the ending!!!! What was that? The only thing that makes this movie exist is Nicolas Cage usual great humor, and his ability to be funny in the weirdest situations. If you go to a blockbuster and this is the only movie to watch, save yourself five bucks and just go back home and turn put some thing on fire and when some ones asks you why, just say the stupidest thing that comes into your mind, and there you go! --------------------------------------------- Result 1165 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] "A trio of treasure hunters is [[searching]] the [[West]] [[Indies]] for a hidden fortune. The [[lure]] of gold makes for a [[rise]] in tension as the [[men]] [[come]] closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea [[divers]] [[hope]] to track down the gold, but [[find]] that greed and hatred [[leads]] to murder," [[according]] to the [[DVD]] sleeve's [[synopsis]]. "Manfish" is the [[name]] of their [[boat]], not a monster. The [[skeleton]] who gives muscular [[Captain]] [[John]] Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the [[treasure]] [[map]] is very [[good]]. [[Old]] [[salt]] [[Victor]] Jory (as [[Professor]]) provides the other half of the [[map]]. First [[mate]] [[Lon]] [[Chaney]] Jr. (as Swede) plays [[dumb]], and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) [[guards]] the rum (not very well, [[obviously]]). Serious editing and continuity problems mar the [[picture]], which [[otherwise]] might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. [[Lee]] Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. "A trio of treasure hunters is [[looking]] the [[Ouest]] [[Andean]] for a hidden fortune. The [[attraction]] of gold makes for a [[augmentation]] in tension as the [[man]] [[coming]] closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea [[diver]] [[expectancy]] to track down the gold, but [[finds]] that greed and hatred [[leeds]] to murder," [[depending]] to the [[DVDS]] sleeve's [[outline]]. "Manfish" is the [[denomination]] of their [[ship]], not a monster. The [[skeletal]] who gives muscular [[Capitaine]] [[Johannes]] Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the [[darling]] [[charting]] is very [[buena]]. [[Archaic]] [[salty]] [[Viktor]] Jory (as [[Educator]]) provides the other half of the [[maps]]. First [[comrade]] [[Ldn]] [[Cheney]] Jr. (as Swede) plays [[daft]], and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) [[custodians]] the rum (not very well, [[naturally]]). Serious editing and continuity problems mar the [[imaging]], which [[else]] might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. [[Rhee]] Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 1166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I got this [[movie]] out of [[Blockbuster]] in one of those racks were you can [[get]] like 5 [[movies]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to say I [[got]] my money's worth on this one. I had [[expected]] [[horrible]] [[dialogue]], crappy monsters, and shaky [[cameras]]. Well, as Meatloaf [[said]], two [[outta]] three ain't [[bad]].

The acting is [[bad]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[seen]]. [[Or]] maybe I've [[watched]] so [[many]] low [[budget]] [[movies]] recently I've lost perspective. There are some bits were the acting is downright [[terrible]], but for the most part it's of at [[least]] [[High]] [[School]] [[Play]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this movie is probably the second-worst [[part]]. The first thing I [[thought]] when I [[saw]] it (and I [[noticed]] another [[reviewer]] [[agreed]] with me) was that a [[man]] in an [[ape]] suit [[would]] have been [[better]]. Clunky stop-motion animation [[would]] have [[looked]] better.

[[So]] you may be asking why I [[call]] the CG the second-worst [[part]]. That's because the very worst [[part]] of the [[movie]] is the [[sound]] effects. They are [[loud]], [[annoying]], and [[constant]]. I've been camping, I know what [[insects]] sound like in the [[woods]] at [[night]], and while they can be loud, they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[movie]]. [[Usually]] when the "[[background]]" sounds [[drown]] out the movie's [[dialogue]], it's a bad [[thing]], but from what I [[caught]] of the [[dialogue]] of this [[film]], I wasn't missing much.

The action was infrequent and [[boring]]. The [[tension]] was non-existent, as was any [[sense]] of [[empathy]] with the [[characters]]. Speaking of the [[characters]], they were all cookie-cutter and bland. The only [[mildly]] engaging byplay was between...actually, I can't think of anything. There was a line or two that made me [[crack]] a [[wan]] [[smile]], but that was about it.

The [[cinematography]] was decent, a [[step]] or two above what you'd normally see in a movie like this. However, it still had that "[[home]] [[movie]]" quality to it that you get with [[movies]] [[made]] on pocket [[change]] and a prayer.

[[If]] you're like me and [[get]] a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, [[think]] about grabbing it. Otherwise, stay away at all costs. I got this [[film]] out of [[Blockbusters]] in one of those racks were you can [[gets]] like 5 [[cinematography]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to say I [[did]] my money's worth on this one. I had [[predicted]] [[scary]] [[discussions]], crappy monsters, and shaky [[camera]]. Well, as Meatloaf [[indicated]], two [[outa]] three ain't [[unfavorable]].

The acting is [[unfavourable]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[saw]]. [[Nor]] maybe I've [[observed]] so [[several]] low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]] recently I've lost perspective. There are some bits were the acting is downright [[horrible]], but for the most part it's of at [[lowest]] [[Higher]] [[Scholastic]] [[Gaming]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this movie is probably the second-worst [[parties]]. The first thing I [[think]] when I [[sawthe]] it (and I [[remarked]] another [[reviewers]] [[accepted]] with me) was that a [[dude]] in an [[monkey]] suit [[ought]] have been [[best]]. Clunky stop-motion animation [[should]] have [[seemed]] better.

[[Therefore]] you may be asking why I [[calling]] the CG the second-worst [[parte]]. That's because the very worst [[parties]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the [[audible]] effects. They are [[vocal]], [[exasperating]], and [[steady]]. I've been camping, I know what [[bugs]] sound like in the [[bois]] at [[nuit]], and while they can be loud, they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[filmmaking]]. [[Traditionally]] when the "[[context]]" sounds [[drowns]] out the movie's [[discussions]], it's a bad [[stuff]], but from what I [[apprehended]] of the [[dialog]] of this [[filmmaking]], I wasn't missing much.

The action was infrequent and [[dull]]. The [[tensions]] was non-existent, as was any [[feeling]] of [[compassion]] with the [[personages]]. Speaking of the [[hallmarks]], they were all cookie-cutter and bland. The only [[slightly]] engaging byplay was between...actually, I can't think of anything. There was a line or two that made me [[cracks]] a [[cove]] [[smirk]], but that was about it.

The [[filmmaking]] was decent, a [[stride]] or two above what you'd normally see in a movie like this. However, it still had that "[[habitation]] [[flick]]" quality to it that you get with [[cinema]] [[effected]] on pocket [[modifying]] and a prayer.

[[Though]] you're like me and [[gets]] a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, [[believe]] about grabbing it. Otherwise, stay away at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I've [[seen]] this movie today for the first time and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[poor]] [[message]].

First of all, the [[directing]] itself is [[quite]] [[good]], the [[actors]] played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[alone]] doesn't make a [[movie]]. [[No]] [[story]] at all, no [[message]] behind beautiful [[exploited]] [[talents]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a [[director]] is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's [[missing]] the whole 7 [[minutes]].

There for a [[simple]] 4 [[rating]]. I've [[watched]] this movie today for the first time and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[poorest]] [[messages]].

First of all, the [[instructing]] itself is [[altogether]] [[buena]], the [[players]] played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[jen]] doesn't make a [[filmmaking]]. [[Nos]] [[conte]] at all, no [[messages]] behind beautiful [[utilized]] [[talent]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a [[headmaster]] is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's [[faded]] the whole 7 [[mins]].

There for a [[mere]] 4 [[assessment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was one film i [[wanted]] to watch always when it released The promos were [[eye]] [[catching]] and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the film isn't that good

It has lot of [[flaws]]

The [[start]] is good and till the [[murder]] everything goes well but the [[film]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the [[songs]] that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in [[love]] leaves more doubts and [[flaws]] and then How come Govinda turns into a [[rich]] criminal from a poor villager?

The [[last]] [[flashback]] too is [[prolonged]] and also the [[entire]] clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is [[okay]], Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda [[tries]] a [[negative]] role and does very well in it [[though]] he overdoes it too [[much]] at times Karisma is good but [[irritates]] at times with her [[cries]] Tabu is [[okay]] Nirmal Pandey [[still]] doesn't know the [[difference]] between [[loud]] [[screaming]] and acting [[rest]] are [[okay]] This was one film i [[wanna]] to watch always when it released The promos were [[eyes]] [[captures]] and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the film isn't that good

It has lot of [[faults]]

The [[induction]] is good and till the [[kill]] everything goes well but the [[filmmaking]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the [[melodies]] that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in [[amore]] leaves more doubts and [[defect]] and then How come Govinda turns into a [[richest]] criminal from a poor villager?

The [[latter]] [[flash]] too is [[lengthy]] and also the [[overall]] clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is [[alright]], Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda [[strive]] a [[inauspicious]] role and does very well in it [[despite]] he overdoes it too [[very]] at times Karisma is good but [[disturbs]] at times with her [[shrieks]] Tabu is [[alrighty]] Nirmal Pandey [[yet]] doesn't know the [[divergence]] between [[vocal]] [[shout]] and acting [[remainder]] are [[ok]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] What a gem of a [[movie]], so [[good]] that they [[made]] a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire [[movies]], we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't [[want]] to be in this [[film]], but may be that's just all part of the [[decadent]] [[ambiance]].

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must [[track]] it down.

[[When]] I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? What a gem of a [[films]], so [[buena]] that they [[accomplished]] a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire [[cinematography]], we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't [[desiring]] to be in this [[cinematography]], but may be that's just all part of the [[sleazebag]] [[mood]].

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must [[trajectory]] it down.

[[Whenever]] I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? --------------------------------------------- Result 1170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Recently]] when i was [[shopping]], i [[saw]] the box-set of Americian [[Gothic]], and i thought 'I remember that!' I used to set my alarm to [[get]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remember]] it mostly because it was really scary and [[weird]], no [[person]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[annoyed]] me [[though]] was they did the same thing to the box-set as when on TV. [[Episodes]] in funny [[order]], I kept [[thinking]] when does [[Dr]] Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - [[Just]] look at [[shows]] like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To [[finish]] - If you've not [[seen]] this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = [[YOU]] MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. [[Newly]] when i was [[buying]], i [[sawthe]] the box-set of Americian [[Goth]], and i thought 'I remember that!' I used to set my alarm to [[gets]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remembering]] it mostly because it was really scary and [[nosy]], no [[individuals]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[angered]] me [[if]] was they did the same thing to the box-set as when on TV. [[Bouts]] in funny [[ordering]], I kept [[thought]] when does [[Doktor]] Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - [[Mere]] look at [[exhibition]] like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To [[finalise]] - If you've not [[saw]] this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = [[DOYOU]] MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying [[indie]] movie for 14 year [[olds]].Do I have to [[write]] eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the [[rather]] forward and rude advances of [[Jack]] [[Black]].This movie is a PG 13 [[version]] of an indie [[film]].I really like a movie that has the courage to [[explore]] Mexican culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[choke]] on its cultural [[rudeness]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying [[andy]] movie for 14 year [[years]].Do I have to [[writing]] eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the [[somewhat]] forward and rude advances of [[Jacques]] [[Negro]].This movie is a PG 13 [[stepping]] of an indie [[filmmaking]].I really like a movie that has the courage to [[investigate]] Mexican culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[muffle]] on its cultural [[impudence]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] [[Absolutely]] one of my favorite movies of all time. I have [[seen]] it at [[least]] a hundred times and I can't [[go]] through it without crying. I [[defy]] [[anyone]] to watch the [[reunion]] of Celie and [[Nettie]], or Shug and father and not feel your eyes [[getting]] misty. Whoopie [[Goldberg]] should have one an [[award]] for [[amazing]] [[portrayal]]. And for the [[person]] who [[said]] you can't [[love]] the [[movie]] if you [[loved]] the [[book]], [[wrong]]! Im a testament to that. [[Altogether]] one of my favorite movies of all time. I have [[watched]] it at [[fewest]] a hundred times and I can't [[going]] through it without crying. I [[defying]] [[somebody]] to watch the [[grouping]] of Celie and [[Nannie]], or Shug and father and not feel your eyes [[obtaining]] misty. Whoopie [[Tucker]] should have one an [[scholarship]] for [[dazzling]] [[portrait]]. And for the [[someone]] who [[indicated]] you can't [[loved]] the [[cinema]] if you [[worshipped]] the [[books]], [[amiss]]! Im a testament to that. --------------------------------------------- Result 1173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The film is a bit [[tedious]]. It's mostly a [[silent]] [[film]], with the bulk o the story provided through a series of voice-overs. While [[making]] a [[silent]] film like this is not such a [[bad]] [[idea]], this is one of those films where the [[lack]] of [[dialog]] and the repetitive early scenes make it [[simply]] tedious. You don't [[understand]] the [[reason]] for the [[tedium]] until well into the picture, and by then it's too late. The first 40 minutes of [[film]] is something of a slow piece of Mexican soft porn, and unimaginative soft porn at that. [[Later]] in the [[film]] the [[style]] of the first 40 minutes [[starts]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the [[audience]] is lost. There is some [[nice]] [[location]] shooting at the National [[Autonomous]] [[University]] of Mexico. I've [[often]] [[wondered]] why more [[films]] aren't shot there. The [[campus]] is [[built]] on the edge of lava [[fields]] that lend the [[campus]] a very otherworldly feel. My [[biggest]] [[problem]] with the [[film]] is that the director/[[writer]] has [[made]] the film the way he [[wanted]] to [[see]] it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[story]] will view it. You can't [[ignore]] the [[audience]] when you tell a story. The film is a bit [[monotonous]]. It's mostly a [[quiet]] [[filmmaking]], with the bulk o the story provided through a series of voice-overs. While [[doing]] a [[quiet]] film like this is not such a [[wicked]] [[thoughts]], this is one of those films where the [[failure]] of [[dialogue]] and the repetitive early scenes make it [[straightforward]] tedious. You don't [[understands]] the [[reasons]] for the [[drudgery]] until well into the picture, and by then it's too late. The first 40 minutes of [[filmmaking]] is something of a slow piece of Mexican soft porn, and unimaginative soft porn at that. [[Subsequent]] in the [[movies]] the [[styles]] of the first 40 minutes [[initiated]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the [[audiences]] is lost. There is some [[pleasurable]] [[positioning]] shooting at the National [[Independent]] [[Academies]] of Mexico. I've [[routinely]] [[questioned]] why more [[cinema]] aren't shot there. The [[campuses]] is [[builds]] on the edge of lava [[realms]] that lend the [[college]] a very otherworldly feel. My [[highest]] [[difficulty]] with the [[flick]] is that the director/[[screenwriter]] has [[effected]] the film the way he [[desired]] to [[seeing]] it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[fairytales]] will view it. You can't [[ignoring]] the [[audiences]] when you tell a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is ironic that during the '50s, when Douglas Sirk was at his most successful in terms of audience appeal, he was virtually ignored by the critics… He is now seen, however, as a director of formidable intellect who achieved his best work in melodrama…

"Written on the Wind" is about the downfall of a Texan oil dynasty surrounded by worthless reputation, alcoholism, and nymphomania… It is about the twisted, fatal connections between sex, power, and money...

Stack draws a compelling portrait of a tormented drunken destroyed by frustration, arrogance, jealousy, insanity, and some deep insecurities…

Dorothy Malone succeeds as an attractive woman with an excessive sexual appetites, degrading herself for Hudson and to other fellows in town… Her best line: "I'm filthy." In one frantic scene, we see her shaking, quivering and sweating to a provocative mambo… In another weeping alone over a model oil-derrick at her father's desk—symbol of excessive wealth and masculine tyranny…

The frenetic atmosphere is both made palatable and intensified by Sirk's magnificent use of colors, lights, and careful use of mirrors… --------------------------------------------- Result 1175 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It seems to me that [[Stephen]] King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited [[stuff]] that he [[wanted]] to [[write]] without 'contaminating' his '[[brand]] name'. [[If]] you [[look]] back at the "Bachman [[Books]]" ([[Running]] [[Man]], The [[Long]] [[Walk]], Roadwork, [[Thinner]]) you [[notice]] they have a sealed-in [[feeling]] of airlessness and [[hopelessness]] about them that is distinct from mainstream [[King]]. I realize that we are [[talking]] about the [[guy]] [[whose]] first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled [[teenage]] girl [[slaughtering]] everyone at her [[high]] [[school]] [[prom]]...but mainstream King [[always]] at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the [[proceedings]] a bit, and mostly have endings that [[offer]] at [[least]] a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and [[always]] [[end]] [[badly]]. (BTW, "[[Pet]] Semetary" [[could]] have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't [[revealed]] the [[alias]] by then. And "The [[Dark]] Half" seems to be at [[least]] [[partially]] about his "Bachman" persona.)

"[[Thinner]]" was the last Bachman [[book]], and [[man]], with its themes of class [[warfare]], [[revenge]], and [[death]] by [[starvation]], it is nasty. So it should be no [[surprise]] that the [[movie]] follows suit.

What is a [[surprise]] is that the [[adaptation]] seems to be [[filmed]] at a "TV [[Movie]] Of the Week" [[level]] of talent [[instead]] of something worthy of a theatrical [[release]]. (These days, something like this would [[probably]] go [[directly]] to DVD or cable). The [[makeup]] [[work]] and the [[striking]] [[motif]] ([[starving]] to [[death]] in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished [[American]] middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you watching this misfire.

What went [[wrong]]? My first [[thought]] is that the [[director]] was going for the [[nasty]] Bachman [[vibe]], but he also [[somehow]] sucked all the interest out of the [[movie]] with poor [[casting]] [[choices]] - the [[actors]] here (with the [[exception]] of Joe Monetegna) [[simply]] can't carry the [[movie]]. And then he [[squished]] the warmth and life out of the [[rest]] of the movie with [[awkward]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't [[leave]] the plot [[alone]], and his changes don't really help. The [[script]] and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the [[theme]] and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. It seems to me that [[Stephane]] King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited [[thing]] that he [[wanting]] to [[writing]] without 'contaminating' his '[[brands]] name'. [[Though]] you [[gaze]] back at the "Bachman [[Ledgers]]" ([[Executing]] [[Men]], The [[Prolonged]] [[Stroll]], Roadwork, [[Finer]]) you [[notification]] they have a sealed-in [[sense]] of airlessness and [[impotence]] about them that is distinct from mainstream [[Emperor]]. I realize that we are [[chat]] about the [[man]] [[whom]] first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled [[teens]] girl [[culled]] everyone at her [[alto]] [[schooling]] [[promo]]...but mainstream King [[consistently]] at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the [[lawsuits]] a bit, and mostly have endings that [[offers]] at [[less]] a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and [[constantly]] [[terminate]] [[desperately]]. (BTW, "[[Pets]] Semetary" [[did]] have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't [[shown]] the [[nickname]] by then. And "The [[Darkness]] Half" seems to be at [[lowest]] [[partly]] about his "Bachman" persona.)

"[[Finer]]" was the last Bachman [[books]], and [[dude]], with its themes of class [[battlefield]], [[retaliation]], and [[dies]] by [[famine]], it is nasty. So it should be no [[surprises]] that the [[filmmaking]] follows suit.

What is a [[astonishment]] is that the [[adjust]] seems to be [[shot]] at a "TV [[Film]] Of the Week" [[levels]] of talent [[conversely]] of something worthy of a theatrical [[freeing]]. (These days, something like this would [[certainly]] go [[immediately]] to DVD or cable). The [[composition]] [[works]] and the [[staggering]] [[grounds]] ([[starved]] to [[mortality]] in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished [[America]] middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you watching this misfire.

What went [[awry]]? My first [[ideology]] is that the [[headmaster]] was going for the [[sordid]] Bachman [[ambience]], but he also [[someplace]] sucked all the interest out of the [[filmmaking]] with poor [[pouring]] [[pick]] - the [[protagonists]] here (with the [[immunities]] of Joe Monetegna) [[exclusively]] can't carry the [[filmmaking]]. And then he [[smushed]] the warmth and life out of the [[roosting]] of the movie with [[tricky]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't [[leaving]] the plot [[lonely]], and his changes don't really help. The [[hyphen]] and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the [[subject]] and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Jamie Foxx is fun but this [[movie]] has been [[done]] before. The [[bad]] [[guy]] plays a "malkovichian" [[character]] from "[[In]] the Line of [[Fire]]". The [[cops]] will do anything to find the [[bad]] [[guy]] - and of [[course]] the good guy has two sets of bad [[guys]] and one set of [[cops]] after him - all the while he is just [[trying]] to turn over a new [[leaf]]... Jamie Foxx is fun but this [[filmmaking]] has been [[performed]] before. The [[naughty]] [[man]] plays a "malkovichian" [[trait]] from "[[Across]] the Line of [[Wildfire]]". The [[nypd]] will do anything to find the [[naughty]] [[dude]] - and of [[cours]] the good guy has two sets of bad [[boy]] and one set of [[nypd]] after him - all the while he is just [[attempting]] to turn over a new [[sheeting]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 1177 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is truly boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but simply because the movie is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love movies from Chen Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am disappointed such a poor movie could come out of China. It totally seems to ignore the audience and the director seems to have made the movie for himself. The shots of a person standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The cinematography and video quality are unbelievably bad. I looked this film up on the Net and it seems like people actually like this film. The only explanation i have for this is that some film buffs think that if a film is not in English it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would like this. this is not an art film it's of waste of celluloid.(That's if they actually shot it on film , which they didn't) --------------------------------------------- Result 1178 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the absolute worst movie I have ever seen!! There was absolutely nothing good to say about this movie. I have seen some bad movies but this one takes it. There is no plot and most of the movie you are either fast forwarding the movie to get it done faster or you are wondering what the hell is going on because you can't seriously think that someone thought of this movie and you are watching it. I feel sorry for anyone who has to sit through this painful hour and a half. Please take my advice and DO NOT WATCH this movie for I know you will think it is the biggest waste of time you have ever spent in your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was [[incredibly]] [[different]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was [[unbelievably]] [[several]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[Eye]] in the [[Labyrinth]] is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it [[really]] is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[despite]] some [[problems]], this is [[certainly]] a very interesting [[little]] [[film]]. I'm [[hesitant]] to call it a Giallo because the [[film]] doesn't feature most of the things that [[make]] these [[films]] what they are; but [[many]] genre [[entries]] [[break]] the [[mould]], and this would [[seem]] to be one of them. The [[film]] doesn't feature any [[brutal]] murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[made]] up for with a [[surreal]] atmosphere and a plot just about confusing enough to remain interesting for the [[duration]]. The plot [[seems]] [[simple]] enough in that it [[focuses]] on a [[doctor]] who is [[murdered]] by Julie, his [[patient]] who, for some [[reason]], she [[sees]] him as her lover and father and is [[offended]] when he [[walks]] out on her. We then [[relocate]] to a [[big]] [[house]] lived in by a number of people, but nothing is [[really]] what it [[seems]] as there are a number of [[secrets]] [[surrounding]] [[various]] [[events]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The [[film]] [[seems]] to be professing [[something]] about how the [[mind]] is like a [[labyrinth]]. This never [[really]] [[comes]] off, and I [[preferred]] to just [[sit]] back and [[enjoy]] what was going on rather than [[worrying]] about what point (if any) the [[film]] is [[trying]] to make. Eye in the [[Labyrinth]] is directed by [[Mario]] Caiano, the [[director]] behind the [[excellent]] Night of the Doomed some [[years]] earlier. He doesn't [[create]] the [[atmosphere]] as well in this [[film]] as he did in the earlier one; but the [[surreal]] aspects of the [[story]] [[come]] off well, and the [[mystery]] is [[always]] kept up which stops the film from [[becoming]] boring. The [[film]] [[stars]] Rosemary [[Dexter]], who [[provides]] [[eye]] candy [[throughout]] and [[also]] [[delivers]] a good performance. Most of the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] aren't really worth mentioning, with the exceptions of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the [[villain]] of the piece and Alida [[Valli]], whom cult [[fans]] will remember from a [[whole]] host of [[excellent]] [[cult]] flicks. The [[film]] does explain itself at the [[end]]; which is [[lucky]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[little]] [[confused]] by then! [[Overall]], this may not be classic [[stuff]]; but its [[good]] [[enough]] and worth seeing. [[Eyeball]] in the [[Daedalus]] is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it [[genuinely]] is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[although]] some [[trouble]], this is [[probably]] a very interesting [[tiny]] [[cinematography]]. I'm [[loath]] to call it a Giallo because the [[flick]] doesn't feature most of the things that [[deliver]] these [[movies]] what they are; but [[myriad]] genre [[entrances]] [[interruption]] the [[mussel]], and this would [[appears]] to be one of them. The [[movies]] doesn't feature any [[cruel]] murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[accomplished]] up for with a [[bizarre]] atmosphere and a plot just about confusing enough to remain interesting for the [[length]]. The plot [[appears]] [[mere]] enough in that it [[focused]] on a [[doctors]] who is [[murdering]] by Julie, his [[ill]] who, for some [[justification]], she [[believes]] him as her lover and father and is [[slighted]] when he [[walking]] out on her. We then [[resettlement]] to a [[major]] [[dwellings]] lived in by a number of people, but nothing is [[genuinely]] what it [[appears]] as there are a number of [[clandestine]] [[neighboring]] [[varied]] [[phenomena]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The [[flick]] [[seem]] to be professing [[anything]] about how the [[intellect]] is like a [[maze]]. This never [[truly]] [[occurs]] off, and I [[favored]] to just [[sits]] back and [[enjoying]] what was going on rather than [[disturbing]] about what point (if any) the [[flick]] is [[tempting]] to make. Eye in the [[Maze]] is directed by [[Maria]] Caiano, the [[superintendent]] behind the [[super]] Night of the Doomed some [[olds]] earlier. He doesn't [[creating]] the [[mood]] as well in this [[movie]] as he did in the earlier one; but the [[bizarre]] aspects of the [[narratives]] [[coming]] off well, and the [[riddle]] is [[steadily]] kept up which stops the film from [[become]] boring. The [[kino]] [[superstar]] Rosemary [[Dex]], who [[provide]] [[eyes]] candy [[during]] and [[additionally]] [[offer]] a good performance. Most of the [[remainder]] of the [[casting]] aren't really worth mentioning, with the exceptions of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the [[rascal]] of the piece and Alida [[Valle]], whom cult [[buffs]] will remember from a [[overall]] host of [[noteworthy]] [[heresy]] flicks. The [[flick]] does explain itself at the [[ceases]]; which is [[fortunate]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[petite]] [[muddled]] by then! [[Aggregate]], this may not be classic [[thing]]; but its [[alright]] [[sufficiently]] and worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] According to IMDb Takashi Miike's Master of Horror-segment, [[Imprint]], was banned in the US. So I figured I'd [[translate]] the Swedish [[review]] I just [[wrote]] for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[expectations]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Takashi]] Miike's episode in the Masters of [[Horror]] [[series]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Imprint]] did in deed look very promising.

The story mostly takes place in a remote Japanese [[bordello]], some time during the 19th century, and it tells the tale of a [[journalist]] [[searching]] for Komomo, the woman he [[left]] behind and whom he promised to return for. Tired and dejected he [[arrives]] at the bordello, [[hoping]] that this will be the [[end]] of his very [[long]] [[journey]]. It turns out that one of the [[prostitutes]], a deformed and quiet girl, know about Komomo, and the desperate man makes her tell him where she is and what has happened to her [[since]] he left. The story she tells him is as deplorable as it is hard to swallow...

The first thing that hit me about the episode was how unnatural it seemed that the Japanese [[cast]] for the most [[part]] spoke [[fluent]] American-English. But I will [[leave]] it at that, it's not that big a deal. What IS a [[big]] [[deal]] [[however]] is how [[miserable]] the [[rest]] of it was. Miike's [[tale]] [[moves]] at such a [[slow]] [[pace]] that I couldn't [[help]] looking at my watch several times during the 63 minutes. The extended torure-scene, that takes place [[somewhere]] in the middle of the [[movie]], [[felt]] so unmotivated - and pornographically [[intrusive]] - that not [[even]] THAT scene became interesting. I [[felt]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no sense of [[style]] or purpose. The only scenes that [[provoked]] any kind of emotion out of me were the images of bloody [[fetuses]] rolling along the bottom of the swiftly flowing water...and, in all honesty, the only [[emotions]] they [[provoked]] were feelings of disgust.

The journalist seeking the love he left behind is played by Billy Drago, for me most memorable as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad assassin in Brian De [[Palmas]] The Untouchables (1987). I've always found Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of Red Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! According to IMDb Takashi Miike's Master of Horror-segment, [[Imprints]], was banned in the US. So I figured I'd [[translated]] the Swedish [[inspecting]] I just [[texted]] for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[prognosis]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Hau]] Miike's episode in the Masters of [[Abomination]] [[serials]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Imprints]] did in deed look very promising.

The story mostly takes place in a remote Japanese [[cathouse]], some time during the 19th century, and it tells the tale of a [[correspondents]] [[seeking]] for Komomo, the woman he [[exited]] behind and whom he promised to return for. Tired and dejected he [[comes]] at the bordello, [[waits]] that this will be the [[terminate]] of his very [[lang]] [[voyager]]. It turns out that one of the [[harlots]], a deformed and quiet girl, know about Komomo, and the desperate man makes her tell him where she is and what has happened to her [[because]] he left. The story she tells him is as deplorable as it is hard to swallow...

The first thing that hit me about the episode was how unnatural it seemed that the Japanese [[casting]] for the most [[portions]] spoke [[fluids]] American-English. But I will [[letting]] it at that, it's not that big a deal. What IS a [[prodigious]] [[treat]] [[nevertheless]] is how [[regrettable]] the [[repose]] of it was. Miike's [[fable]] [[shift]] at such a [[slower]] [[rhythm]] that I couldn't [[helps]] looking at my watch several times during the 63 minutes. The extended torure-scene, that takes place [[nowhere]] in the middle of the [[filmmaking]], [[deemed]] so unmotivated - and pornographically [[invasive]] - that not [[yet]] THAT scene became interesting. I [[believed]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no sense of [[styles]] or purpose. The only scenes that [[induced]] any kind of emotion out of me were the images of bloody [[fetus]] rolling along the bottom of the swiftly flowing water...and, in all honesty, the only [[passions]] they [[caused]] were feelings of disgust.

The journalist seeking the love he left behind is played by Billy Drago, for me most memorable as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad assassin in Brian De [[Palma]] The Untouchables (1987). I've always found Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of Red Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! --------------------------------------------- Result 1182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For anyone with a moderate sensibility, a moderate feeling of the human and humane condition, for anyone capable of getting above the Hollywood ilk, for anyone who is satisfied seeing cinema which does not have a series of Seagals/Willis/Van Dammes blasting the brains out of anybody or seeing who gets into bed with whom, for anyone whose intellectual level reaches a capacity to grasp, sympathise with, comprehend, laugh WITH, cry WITH natural tender heart-warming hilarious compassionate HUMAN BEINGS, `Le Huitième Jour' is waiting for you. Jaco van Dormael has not achieved simply a masterpiece, that would have been too simplistic; he has achieved one of those rare monumental works of art in the cinematographic world which defies any kind of encapsuling. Is it a drama? Is it a comedy? No: it is the story of Georges, a wonderful funny pitiful laughable loving frightened beautiful personality, a sufferer of the Downes Syndrome. It is a story which has you laughing through your tears, but this is not one of those classic tear-jerkers; this film moves through a world that has you at once mixing your feelings of compassion or pity or even shame with those of admiration, warmth and even love. A successful banking salesman, Harry, bumps into Georges: they were both going in opposite directions with absolutely opposing ideas, problems and priorities; skillfully van Dormael melts these two unlikely men into a warm friendship, but which is so much more than the good buddy friendship of those having a beer down the road. This is a relationship which develops into a profound needing by both for the other. The cuasi-surrealist scenes fit in perfectly: Georges recalls (or invents) past scenes of his life while either day-dreaming or sleeping; even the almost phantasmagorical final scene is totally correct. The only scene which might be considered a little out of place is when they steal a bus and drive it out of the show-rooms. However, this does not detract from the whole. This film is a monument. Even if your French is not up to much, please bear seeing it with sub-titles. `Le Huitième Jour' is worth the trouble. As for anything else, well, just read the following commentaries – I go along with all of them. This film is a joy, it is majestic, it is unique. If you have seen `Rain Man' which I consider an excellent film, you must see this one: it is far superior because it has not the superficial veneer of famous Hollywood-produced world-renowned actors; it has Pascal Duquenne and Daniel Auteuil – TEN oscars for these two, and three more for Jaco van Dormael. Who cares…………? Yes: 11 out of 10 if the IMDb rating doesn't break down under the strain.

Magnifique! Chapeau! --------------------------------------------- Result 1183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Fot the most [[part]], this [[movie]] feels [[like]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The direction is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Denise]] Crosby, [[particularly]], [[delivers]] her lines [[like]] she's [[cold]] reading them off a cue card. [[Only]] one [[thing]] makes this film worth [[watching]], and that is once Gage [[comes]] back from the "Semetary." There is [[something]] [[disturbing]] about watching a [[small]] [[child]] [[murder]] [[someone]], and this [[movie]] might be more than some can handle just for that [[reason]]. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This [[film]] only does one [[thing]] [[right]], but it knocks that one thing [[right]] out of the park. Worth [[seeing]] just for the [[last]] 10 minutes or so. Fot the most [[parties]], this [[filmmaking]] feels [[iike]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The direction is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Denis]] Crosby, [[notably]], [[gives]] her lines [[iike]] she's [[colder]] reading them off a cue card. [[Exclusively]] one [[stuff]] makes this film worth [[staring]], and that is once Gage [[occurs]] back from the "Semetary." There is [[anything]] [[worrying]] about watching a [[tiny]] [[children]] [[kills]] [[everyone]], and this [[filmmaking]] might be more than some can handle just for that [[motif]]. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This [[flick]] only does one [[stuff]] [[rights]], but it knocks that one thing [[rights]] out of the park. Worth [[see]] just for the [[latter]] 10 minutes or so. --------------------------------------------- Result 1184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Bugs Life is a great film that is not just for kids but for adults too. The story is set around a colony of ants and their struggle against the evil Grasshoppers who come back every year and steal their food ( A Mirror of the Magnifiscent seven). There is some wonderfull computer animation and the voices are great too. You will love it!! 8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Fascinating]] [[yet]] [[unsettling]] [[look]] at [[Edith]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter ([[Little]] [[Edie]]) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent [[infested]], rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the [[city]]. It becomes quite clear very [[quickly]] that these two are well past eccentric. Little Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mindset]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the conversations were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is [[perfect]] and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big [[Edie]] actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very [[captivating]] [[yet]] one gets the [[feeling]] that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the [[world]] has simply past these two by. Their hopes and [[dreams]] as decayed as the mansion they [[live]] in. Despite their bickering these two [[need]] each other more than ever. [[For]] without the other there [[would]] be no [[refuge]] from the loneliness. Most [[amazing]] [[line]] comes from Big [[Edie]] [[whose]] [[many]] cats [[relieve]] themselves [[throughout]] her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply [[unbelievable]]. [[Exciting]] [[again]] [[ominous]] [[gaze]] at [[Gertrude]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter ([[Tiny]] [[Caballero]]) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent [[infected]], rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the [[town]]. It becomes quite clear very [[promptly]] that these two are well past eccentric. Little Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mentality]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the conversations were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is [[irreproachable]] and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big [[Caballero]] actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very [[fascinating]] [[again]] one gets the [[impression]] that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the [[globe]] has simply past these two by. Their hopes and [[daydream]] as decayed as the mansion they [[vive]] in. Despite their bickering these two [[requisite]] each other more than ever. [[At]] without the other there [[ought]] be no [[sanctuary]] from the loneliness. Most [[wondrous]] [[bloodline]] comes from Big [[Caballero]] [[who]] [[myriad]] cats [[relieving]] themselves [[around]] her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply [[inconceivable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie is one of the most [[provocative]] Jesus movies I have ever [[seen]]. It does not [[seek]] to [[tell]] the [[whole]] [[story]], but only to portray an interpretive [[expression]] of the [[last]] day of Jesus [[Christ]]. It is darkly witty, playful and [[seriously]] [[faithful]] to [[elements]] of the Jewish tradition and to [[modern]] scriptural [[interpretation]]. [[Judas]] is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister [[evil]] that we sometimes [[imagine]], but a grossly mistaken [[man]], horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is [[playful]] and [[serious]], [[faithful]] and committed--very human while [[also]] [[divine]]. The final [[dialog]] is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of [[small]] [[talk]] that two [[powerful]] men might do when they have just [[committed]] an atrocity. I would watch this [[movie]] again and [[recommend]] it to others. This movie is one of the most [[inflammatory]] Jesus movies I have ever [[saw]]. It does not [[trying]] to [[told]] the [[overall]] [[tale]], but only to portray an interpretive [[phrase]] of the [[latter]] day of Jesus [[Jeez]]. It is darkly witty, playful and [[gravely]] [[trusty]] to [[ingredients]] of the Jewish tradition and to [[modernity]] scriptural [[interpreting]]. [[Judea]] is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister [[wicked]] that we sometimes [[imagining]], but a grossly mistaken [[bloke]], horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is [[mischievous]] and [[gravest]], [[fiel]] and committed--very human while [[furthermore]] [[godlike]]. The final [[dialogues]] is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of [[petite]] [[schmooze]] that two [[forceful]] men might do when they have just [[commit]] an atrocity. I would watch this [[cinematography]] again and [[recommendation]] it to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] IQ is a cute romantic comedy featuring two great actors that seem to click well on screen. Plot is a typical guy wrong for girl, guy gets girl format, but makes the solid point that one must love with the heart and not the the mind. Addition of Albert Einstein and his band of geniuses provides excellent comic relief. Overall, a good movie. Not great, but good --------------------------------------------- Result 1188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was terrible. The plot sucked, the acting was bad, the editing was inept and this movie makes me want to poke my eyes out. I wish I had the time I spent watching this movie back. The balloon scene was stupid, the Mormon jokes are really old, the soundtrack sucked, I saw no chemistry between the two leads, it's full of stereotypes, stupid local "celeb" cameo's..most noted was Del "I'm going to drive as fast as I want to.." computer idiot. What is worst is that these actors had to play themselves on the spiritual side and even they screwed that up. This movie help create a long line of lackluster efforts to mainstream LDS beliefs into Hollywood. I.E. The RM, Church ball, etc. etc. I would forgo watching this movie and instead run head first into a brick wall. You will be more entertained than watching this poor excuse for a show. --------------------------------------------- Result 1189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What a [[wonderful]] movie, eligible for so many [[labels]] it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely [[use]] polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, [[charm]], pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. What a [[wondrous]] movie, eligible for so many [[stickers]] it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely [[utilised]] polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, [[amulet]], pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] What an [[overlooked]] 80's soundtrack. I [[imagine]] [[John]] Travolta sang some of the [[songs]] but in [[watching]] the movie it did [[seem]] to personify everything that was 80s cheese. [[Clearly]] [[movies]] that rely on mechanical bulls, [[bartenders]] and immature [[relationships]] were in [[style]]. The best was his [[lousy]] Texas accent. [[Compare]] that to [[Friday]] Night Lights.I suggest [[watching]] Cocktail and Stir [[Crazy]] to [[start]] [[really]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Made]] in America with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Goldberg]] is an awesomely [[bad]] [[movie]]. I was so [[shocked]] to [[realize]] I had never [[watched]] it. One more [[weird]] [[movie]] of this genre [[would]] have to [[include]] Cadilac [[Man]] with [[Robin]] [[Williams]]. [[Just]] remember all of these [[BIG]] stars [[played]] big roles in these [[CHEESY]] movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin Williams and John Travolta What an [[omitted]] 80's soundtrack. I [[imagining]] [[Johannes]] Travolta sang some of the [[melodies]] but in [[staring]] the movie it did [[looks]] to personify everything that was 80s cheese. [[Definitely]] [[films]] that rely on mechanical bulls, [[waitresses]] and immature [[relations]] were in [[styles]]. The best was his [[pathetic]] Texas accent. [[Comparative]] that to [[Tuesday]] Night Lights.I suggest [[staring]] Cocktail and Stir [[Lunatic]] to [[embark]] [[genuinely]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Accomplished]] in America with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Tucker]] is an awesomely [[amiss]] [[films]]. I was so [[aghast]] to [[accomplishing]] I had never [[seen]] it. One more [[bizarre]] [[film]] of this genre [[ought]] have to [[incorporate]] Cadilac [[Males]] with [[Reuben]] [[William]]. [[Only]] remember all of these [[GRAND]] stars [[accomplished]] big roles in these [[CORNY]] movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin Williams and John Travolta --------------------------------------------- Result 1191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What can I say about Cruel [[intentions]] 2? Well, I can [[say]] in all honesty, I will only watch this [[film]] again if I am fastened to a [[chair]] and have my eyes [[opened]] clockwork-orange-style.

The [[film]] 'stars' [[Robin]] [[Dunne]] (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[awful]] [[impression]] of Ryan [[Phillipe]] made me [[cringe]] [[throughout]]. [[In]] a [[case]] of terrible casting, Dunne attempts (and fails) to [[carry]] off [[playing]] a [[handsome]] charismatic, [[charmer]]. Since the [[actor]] is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the [[character]] is left [[wholly]] [[unbelievable]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one [[time]]), [[tries]] to [[pick]] up where [[Sarah]] Michelle Gellar left off and [[bring]] scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[lacking]] in any real emotion, [[often]] she looked like she was reading cue cards just off [[camera]]. There were two good actors in the [[film]] [[however]], Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and [[Mimi]] [[Rogers]] ([[Mrs]] Kensington in Austion Powers), [[made]] very [[good]] and entertaining performances as the [[parents]] of Sebastian and [[Katherine]] and are the only [[reason]] why I rated the [[film]] as a 2, not a 1.

The [[film]] itself is a [[poor]] version of the [[original]], with such lows as [[carbon]] copy's of [[dialogue]] and mimicked scenes which [[lacked]] the originality of the [[previous]] [[film]].

I [[think]] that as a [[TV]] show, it might have [[worked]], but if it had been recasted with people who [[could]] actually [[act]] in the [[main]] parts. What can I say about Cruel [[intent]] 2? Well, I can [[tell]] in all honesty, I will only watch this [[filmmaking]] again if I am fastened to a [[wheelchair]] and have my eyes [[started]] clockwork-orange-style.

The [[movie]] 'stars' [[Robben]] [[Dunn]] (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[scary]] [[printout]] of Ryan [[Philip]] made me [[shudder]] [[during]]. [[During]] a [[lawsuit]] of terrible casting, Dunne attempts (and fails) to [[transporting]] off [[gaming]] a [[sumptuous]] charismatic, [[charming]]. Since the [[protagonist]] is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the [[personages]] is left [[totally]] [[unimaginable]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one [[times]]), [[attempted]] to [[opted]] up where [[Sara]] Michelle Gellar left off and [[brings]] scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[missing]] in any real emotion, [[normally]] she looked like she was reading cue cards just off [[cameras]]. There were two good actors in the [[flick]] [[instead]], Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and [[Myrtle]] [[Rutgers]] ([[Margot]] Kensington in Austion Powers), [[brought]] very [[buena]] and entertaining performances as the [[relatives]] of Sebastian and [[Katie]] and are the only [[cause]] why I rated the [[filmmaking]] as a 2, not a 1.

The [[kino]] itself is a [[poorest]] version of the [[initial]], with such lows as [[coal]] copy's of [[talks]] and mimicked scenes which [[lack]] the originality of the [[former]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[believe]] that as a [[TELEVISION]] show, it might have [[collaborating]], but if it had been recasted with people who [[did]] actually [[ley]] in the [[leading]] parts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] Man, what the hell were the people who [[made]] this [[film]] on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' [[transformation]], folks. We're talking some of the [[worst]] makeup ever [[captured]] on film here. I can just imagine some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to roll in fur. That's how [[bad]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[better]]. Minutes are wasted as the scenery chewing male actors waffle on about [[Daniela]] and her condition or something (I can't [[remember]], but the [[dialogue]] is so [[bad]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cry]]).

The [[funny]] thing is Daniela isn't even a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[mental]] whenever there is a [[man]] around ([[understandable]], as she was [[raped]] as a [[child]]) so she [[thinks]] she [[becomes]] a werewolf like her ancestor (the [[opening]] scene). She can't [[help]] but [[tear]] out the throat of every [[man]] she meets, and she only [[wants]] to be [[loved]]! Things [[start]] [[looking]] up for Daniela as she meets and falls in [[love]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. Check out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[see]] (laughing and [[hugging]] after diving headfirst through a [[window]]).

Daniela's [[luck]] doesn't [[hold]] out as the [[film]] takes a brutal [[turn]], she is [[suddenly]] [[viciously]] beaten and [[raped]] by a [[group]] of [[thugs]] who [[kill]] the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your [[grave]]", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But [[hey]], that's the game you [[play]] when you're a film geek. Man, what the hell were the people who [[effected]] this [[filmmaking]] on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' [[conversion]], folks. We're talking some of the [[gravest]] makeup ever [[apprehended]] on film here. I can just imagine some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to roll in fur. That's how [[unfavourable]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[best]]. Minutes are wasted as the scenery chewing male actors waffle on about [[Daniel]] and her condition or something (I can't [[recalling]], but the [[discussions]] is so [[naughty]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cries]]).

The [[hilarious]] thing is Daniela isn't even a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[psychological]] whenever there is a [[guy]] around ([[readable]], as she was [[broken]] as a [[kids]]) so she [[feels]] she [[become]] a werewolf like her ancestor (the [[initiation]] scene). She can't [[helps]] but [[tears]] out the throat of every [[males]] she meets, and she only [[wanted]] to be [[enjoyed]]! Things [[startup]] [[researching]] up for Daniela as she meets and falls in [[amore]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. Check out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[behold]] (laughing and [[kiss]] after diving headfirst through a [[windows]]).

Daniela's [[chances]] doesn't [[held]] out as the [[filmmaking]] takes a brutal [[converting]], she is [[unexpectedly]] [[brutally]] beaten and [[broken]] by a [[groups]] of [[bandits]] who [[murder]] the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your [[tombs]]", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But [[hiya]], that's the game you [[playing]] when you're a film geek. --------------------------------------------- Result 1193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Okay, we've [[got]] extreme Verhoeven violence ([[Although]] not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've [[got]] plenty of sex and nudity, but [[something]] is [[missing]]...Oh, yes, it's missing the intelligence that [[Paul]] Verhoeven is [[known]] for in his sci-fi movies. I admire the [[way]] Verhoeven [[introduces]] the characters and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven films, the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to [[fall]] into the comedy [[genre]]. The acting [[overall]] was above [[average]] [[compared]] to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow [[Man]] a good [[movie]] is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the [[amazing]] special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make [[Hollow]] [[Man]] an [[entertaining]] [[movie]]. Grade: B Okay, we've [[did]] extreme Verhoeven violence ([[Despite]] not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've [[did]] plenty of sex and nudity, but [[somethin]] is [[gone]]...Oh, yes, it's missing the intelligence that [[Paolo]] Verhoeven is [[renowned]] for in his sci-fi movies. I admire the [[camino]] Verhoeven [[presents]] the characters and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven films, the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to [[autumn]] into the comedy [[sorts]]. The acting [[totals]] was above [[medium]] [[comparing]] to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow [[Fella]] a good [[filmmaking]] is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the [[wondrous]] special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make [[Empty]] [[Males]] an [[amusing]] [[movies]]. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Astaire and Rogers at the [[height]] of their [[popularity]]. [[In]] 1936 Americans thought of the [[Navy]] as a [[place]] for song and [[dance]]. WWII was [[still]] a few years away. Fred and [[Ginger]] [[dance]] up the town.

The plot is decent, but who cares... By the [[way]], notice the cameo [[roles]] for Betty Grable and a [[glamorous]] Lucile Ball.

A [[load]] of Irving [[Berlin]] [[songs]], [[including]] the [[famous]] "Let's [[Face]] the [[Music]] and [[Dance]]". [[In]] that scene, Ginger's [[heavy]] swooping [[dress]] smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[almost]] knocks him unconscious. Fred [[insisted]] on [[keeping]] the take as the [[dancing]] was [[superb]] [[nonetheless]].

Ginger once [[commented]] that she was a [[better]] [[dancer]] than Fred, since she had to do all the same moves, in [[step]], and [[backwards]]...

Come to [[think]] of it, Fred's [[voice]] was nice too. The [[man]] was [[effortless]] in [[motion]].

Here's a [[movie]] to cozy up on the [[couch]] with a loved-one, [[kick]] off the shoes, and enjoy the [[entertainment]]. Astaire and Rogers at the [[elevation]] of their [[vogue]]. [[Onto]] 1936 Americans thought of the [[Armada]] as a [[placing]] for song and [[dancers]]. WWII was [[however]] a few years away. Fred and [[Kang]] [[danced]] up the town.

The plot is decent, but who cares... By the [[path]], notice the cameo [[duties]] for Betty Grable and a [[beautiful]] Lucile Ball.

A [[burdening]] of Irving [[Berliner]] [[tunes]], [[include]] the [[acclaimed]] "Let's [[Faces]] the [[Musical]] and [[Choreography]]". [[For]] that scene, Ginger's [[onerous]] swooping [[garments]] smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[virtually]] knocks him unconscious. Fred [[stressed]] on [[preserving]] the take as the [[choreography]] was [[wondrous]] [[still]].

Ginger once [[remarked]] that she was a [[improved]] [[dancers]] than Fred, since she had to do all the same moves, in [[steps]], and [[backward]]...

Come to [[believe]] of it, Fred's [[vowel]] was nice too. The [[males]] was [[easier]] in [[petition]].

Here's a [[film]] to cozy up on the [[sofa]] with a loved-one, [[whoop]] off the shoes, and enjoy the [[amusement]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Most Stoogephiles consider this to be the best Stooges short bar none, and they're right. Curly is a scream dressed up in drag as "Senorita Cucaracha", and Moe and Larry are in top form as "Senor Mucho" and "Senor Gusto", respectively. Christine McIntyre's beautiful operatic voice is given full rein--she actually was a trained opera singer--and it's wonderful. The great Gino Corrado is hilarious as a pompous Italian singer terrorized by the Stooges at a society party. Some truly funny gags, good direction and very tight editing make this rise to the very top of the Stooges' prolific output. What's even more amazing is that Curly was having severe health problems at the time, and in several of the shorts he made during this period, you can see that he is obviously ill; his timing is way off, he speaks very slowly and haltingly, and has trouble getting around. Fortunately, his health was in an upswing when he made this film, and it shows. Classic Stooge comedy, and enjoyed by even non-Stooge fans (I had a girlfriend who couldn't stand the Stooges, but even she laughed at this one). A must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Flat, ordinary thriller about a conniving woman who deceives all those she supposedly loves in order to boost her bank account. Nicole Kidman plays the deceptive Tracey, married to the doting Andy (Bill Pullman). When an old school friend of Andy's named Jed Hill (Alec Baldwin) turns up as the resident surgeon, trouble is not far behind him.

Script fails in that it does not carefully develop the promising premise into an effective, tantalising thriller, and the severe lack of character motivation, background and development leaves the whole show reaching. None of the cast are able to generate interest in their shallow characters, especially Bill Pullman, whose own inexplicably curious Andy is impossible to believe.

Poor director Harold Becker is left trying to resurrect an impossibly dead project, and is unable to make entertainment from any of it. By the time the 'secret' of the plot is revealed, you just won't care.

At least the cinematography has Massachusetts looking good. Also stars George C. Scott, Peter Gallagher and Josef Sommer.

Sunday, February 25, 1996 - T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 1197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just got back from this free screening, and this "Osama Witch Project" is the hands-down worst film I've seen this year, worse than even "Catwoman" - which had the decency to at least pass itself off as fiction.

In "September Tapes," a "film crew" of "documentary journalists" heads to Afghanistan - despite being thoroughly unprepared for the trip, the conditions and, oh yeah, the psychotic and ridiculous vendetta of their filmmaker leader to avenge his wife's death on Sept. 11 - to track down Osama bin Laden.

They "made" eight tapes on their journey, which now "document" their travels and, of course, their attempts to kill the terrorist leader. (The eight tapes, thankfully, all end at points significant in the narrative, which is convenient for a "documentary.")

The psychotic, idiotic protagonist - who is given to long, significant speeches that he probably learned watching "MacGyver" - cares nothing for his own life or the life of his innocent crew as he gets them further and further into danger through a series of completely dumb mishaps. I don't know why he didn't just wear a sign on his back that said "Shoot me."

The crew's translator, supposedly their sensible voice-of-reason, does little more than whine and gets baffled as the idiot hero leads them into doom.

You wish they'd brought along someone on their trip to call them all morons.

Around "Tape 4," I began rooting for the terrorists to shoot the film crew. --------------------------------------------- Result 1198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Avoid this one, unless you want to watch an expensive but badly made movie. Example? The sound is good but the dialogue is not clear - a cardinal sin in a French film.

This film attempts to combine western, drug intrigue and ancien regime costume epic. What? Well, consider this. The cowboy music is hilarious during sword fights. Or how about the woman in her underwear, holding a knife and jumping up and down on the bed?

Someone should do a 'What's Up Tiger Lily' on this bomb. Rewrite the script and then either dub or subtitle it. Heck, it's almost that now. (BTW, Gerard Depardieu and Carole Bouquet, both known to American audiences, have roles.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] First of all I [[saw]] this movie without knowing [[anything]] about it I just knew that [[Joel]] Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A [[friend]] and I went to [[see]] it at a Danish film festival called the night-film [[festival]] which is a lot of [[different]] movies [[shown]] after hours the festival [[pretty]] much specializes in [[showing]] [[movies]] that wouldn't otherwise be [[shown]] in Danish [[theaters]].

[[Anyway]] My [[friend]] and I went to [[see]] it and we were [[astonished]] at how [[real]] it [[seemed]] and that it really [[struck]] a [[cord]] with our [[feelings]], we really [[got]] caught up in the [[plot]] without being [[able]] to figure out the ending which is a [[great]] [[plus]] in our [[book]].

The [[film]] is [[recorded]] in a [[style]] that [[reminds]] me of the Danish [[initiative]] "[[dogma]] 95" which was [[started]] by 4 Danish [[directors]] [[including]] [[Lars]] [[Von]] Trier ([[Dancer]] [[In]] the [[Dark]]).

In [[conclusion]] the [[movie]] is [[really]] worth [[seeing]] it [[gives]] a [[different]] [[perspective]] on how [[things]] were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being [[expected]] to [[serve]] their [[country]] in [[battle]] a [[long]] [[way]] from [[home]].

[[Also]] [[Colin]] Farrell is [[exceptional]] in this movie I haven't [[seen]] him before but I can't [[wait]] to [[see]] more of him.

[[Lars]] P. Helvard First of all I [[watched]] this movie without knowing [[something]] about it I just knew that [[Yoel]] Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A [[boyfriend]] and I went to [[consults]] it at a Danish film festival called the night-film [[feast]] which is a lot of [[various]] movies [[indicated]] after hours the festival [[quite]] much specializes in [[proving]] [[cinematography]] that wouldn't otherwise be [[demonstrated]] in Danish [[cinema]].

[[Writ]] My [[freund]] and I went to [[seeing]] it and we were [[horrified]] at how [[authentic]] it [[appeared]] and that it really [[slugged]] a [[cords]] with our [[sentiments]], we really [[get]] caught up in the [[intrigue]] without being [[capable]] to figure out the ending which is a [[remarkable]] [[anymore]] in our [[workbook]].

The [[cinematographic]] is [[taped]] in a [[styles]] that [[reminded]] me of the Danish [[efforts]] "[[doctrine]] 95" which was [[begun]] by 4 Danish [[administrators]] [[consisting]] [[Bjorn]] [[Fon]] Trier ([[Ballerina]] [[For]] the [[Darkness]]).

In [[conclusions]] the [[kino]] is [[truthfully]] worth [[see]] it [[delivers]] a [[dissimilar]] [[viewpoint]] on how [[items]] were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being [[prophesied]] to [[serving]] their [[nations]] in [[combats]] a [[prolonged]] [[manner]] from [[dwellings]].

[[Moreover]] [[Collin]] Farrell is [[wondrous]] in this movie I haven't [[watched]] him before but I can't [[hoping]] to [[seeing]] more of him.

[[Bjorn]] P. Helvard --------------------------------------------- Result 1200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The fluttering of butterfly wings in the Atlantic can unleash a hurricane in the Pacific. According to this theory (somehow related to the Chaos Theory, I'm not sure exactly how), every action, no matter how small or insignificant, will start a chain reaction that can lead to big events. This small jewel of a film shows us a series of seemingly-unrelated characters, most of them in Paris, whose actions will affect each others' lives. (The six-degrees-of-separation theory can be applied as well.) Each story is a facet of the jewel that is this film. The acting is finely-tuned and nuanced (Audrey Tautou is luminous), the stories mesh plausibly, the humor is just right, and the viewer leaves the theatre nodding in agreement. --------------------------------------------- Result 1201 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] When DEATHTRAP was [[first]] released, the poster--reproduced on the [[cover]] of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[appropriate]] [[image]]: originally [[written]] for the [[stage]] by Ira [[Levin]], who authored such memorable [[works]] as ROSEMARY'S [[BABY]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[direction]] it translates to the screen [[extremely]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[films]] that it is very [[difficult]] to [[discuss]], for to do so in any detail [[gives]] away the very plot for which it is [[famous]]. But the [[opening]] premise is [[extremely]] [[clever]]: [[Sidney]] Bruhl ([[Michael]] Caine) is the [[famous]] author of mystery plays, but these days he [[seems]] to have lost his touch. After a [[particularly]] [[brutal]] opening night, an [[old]] student named Clifford [[Anderson]] (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has [[written]]. It is called "Deathtrap," and [[Sidney]] [[recognizes]] it as a surefire hit. [[Just]] the [[sort]] of [[hit]] that [[would]] revive his [[career]]... [[indeed]], a [[hit]] to [[die]] for. And when Clifford visits to [[discuss]] the [[play]], events [[suddenly]] [[begin]] to [[twist]] in the most [[unexpected]] [[manner]] possible.

Like [[Anthony]] Shaffer's [[equally]] twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is [[really]] a [[story]] more at [[home]] on the [[stage]] than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance [[offers]]. Still, under the [[expert]] [[guidance]] of [[director]] [[Sidney]] Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. [[Much]] of this is due to the cast, which is [[remarkably]] fine. Michael Caine gives a truly [[brilliant]] performance, Dyan Cannon is [[funny]] and endearing as Sidney's [[relentlessly]] [[anxious]] wife, and Christopher Reeve [[gives]] what might be the single [[finest]] performance in his regrettably short acting [[career]]. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary [[F]]. Taylor, aka GFT, [[Amazon]] [[Reviewer]] When DEATHTRAP was [[firstly]] released, the poster--reproduced on the [[covered]] of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[adequate]] [[photo]]: originally [[writes]] for the [[phases]] by Ira [[Levine]], who authored such memorable [[cooperating]] as ROSEMARY'S [[BABIES]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[directions]] it translates to the screen [[critically]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[cinematography]] that it is very [[troublesome]] to [[discussing]], for to do so in any detail [[provides]] away the very plot for which it is [[notorious]]. But the [[opens]] premise is [[critically]] [[smart]]: [[Sydney]] Bruhl ([[Michel]] Caine) is the [[acclaimed]] author of mystery plays, but these days he [[looks]] to have lost his touch. After a [[specifically]] [[brute]] opening night, an [[elderly]] student named Clifford [[Andersen]] (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has [[writes]]. It is called "Deathtrap," and [[Sydney]] [[admits]] it as a surefire hit. [[Jen]] the [[sorting]] of [[slapped]] that [[could]] revive his [[careers]]... [[actually]], a [[struck]] to [[died]] for. And when Clifford visits to [[discusses]] the [[playing]], events [[abruptly]] [[starts]] to [[twisting]] in the most [[unplanned]] [[way]] possible.

Like [[Anton]] Shaffer's [[similarly]] twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is [[genuinely]] a [[histories]] more at [[housing]] on the [[stages]] than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance [[offerings]]. Still, under the [[specialised]] [[advice]] of [[headmaster]] [[Sid]] Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. [[Very]] of this is due to the cast, which is [[impossibly]] fine. Michael Caine gives a truly [[wondrous]] performance, Dyan Cannon is [[comical]] and endearing as Sidney's [[ruthlessly]] [[eager]] wife, and Christopher Reeve [[offers]] what might be the single [[meanest]] performance in his regrettably short acting [[quarry]]. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary [[e]]. Taylor, aka GFT, [[Amazonian]] [[Rater]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The rating is only a 5 because it's a movie that could have used better acting and direction (or at least music!). However, for the achievements of Walt Whitman, it deserves a 10. A previous poster calls the movie cheesy, however, I think it's a simple case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The film makers were apparently more interested in getting the story out there than to have a Hollywood shiny feature film. And for this, I applaud them - the fact it is non-mainstream reflects the life of Whitman as well. This film is more documentary than for the sake of acting. To be fascinated with a story such as this, when you rarely hear of these types of stories that shape current day mental health, is the most important thing. I found it a highly enjoyable look at history. --------------------------------------------- Result 1203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full [[text]] of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has [[going]] for it, lacking in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[dreadful]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally [[lacks]] passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge [[mistake]] that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is [[unable]] to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't [[empathize]] with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as [[bad]] as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full [[texts]] of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has [[gonna]] for it, lacking in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[abysmal]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally [[missing]] passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge [[mistaken]] that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is [[impossible]] to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't [[commiserate]] with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as [[naughty]] as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1204 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] One piece of [[trivia]] that is [[often]] [[forgotten]] about this [[family]] [[film]] is one of [[business]].

At the [[time]], in 1994, this [[movie]] held the [[record]] for the biggest movie premiere in motion [[picture]] history (and may continue to hold). It was held in [[Pittsburgh]], Pennsylvania - no [[doubt]] in honor of the original film's "[[Angels]]" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this [[remake]] they "[[haunt]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the [[long]] [[gone]] Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the [[Pittsburgh]] [[Pirates]] and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at [[Heinz]] Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 [[fans]]. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. One piece of [[trifles]] that is [[ordinarily]] [[overlooked]] about this [[families]] [[cinematography]] is one of [[corporations]].

At the [[times]], in 1994, this [[cinema]] held the [[recordings]] for the biggest movie premiere in motion [[imagery]] history (and may continue to hold). It was held in [[Cincinnati]], Pennsylvania - no [[duda]] in honor of the original film's "[[Angel]]" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this [[redo]] they "[[torments]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the [[protracted]] [[faded]] Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the [[Cincinnati]] [[Pirate]] and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at [[Hynes]] Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 [[stalkers]]. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How they got Al Pacino to play in this movie is beyond me. This movie is absolutely terrible. I discovered, after reading some of the other reviews, that a couple of people actually enjoyed this film, which deeply puzzles me, because I do not see how anyone in their right mind could possibly enjoy a movie as awful as Revolution. It's not just that it's a bad movie, with a lame plot and overall strangeness that is extremely unpleasant, but it seems as if the filmmakers were either mentally retarded (which is a very possible explanation as to why this movie sucks like it does, though it probably still sucks even compared to other films made by retards) or deliberately made every illogical decision to make this movie suck as much as possible. For example, we see Donald Sutherland running around with a huge, fat ugly mole on his face. He does not normally have a mole. The mole does not add to his character. It is extremely ugly and distracting. It's not like Robert De Niro's mole; it's much worse. Why the hell has he got that mole? It's as if the filmmakers just said, "Let's see, how could we make this movie even worse than it already is? I know, let's give Mr. Sutherland a giant, ugly-ass mole right on his face."

Another example of the filmmakers' stupidity is the character Ned. We see, for the first three-quarters of the movie, young Ned. At one point, "six months later" appears on the screen. We see Ned again, and it is, of course, the same actor playing the boy. Five minutes later, "three weeks later" appears on the screen, and all of a sudden we've got a different actor playing as the now older Ned. What, do they think we're idiots? Good God! Again, it's like the filmmakers are saying, "How can we possibly make it any worse? I don't think we can...Oh wait! I just had a terrible idea!" I know a kid doesn't grow much in half a year, which is fine, but he at least grows more than he does in three weeks. Just don't get another actor to play Ned, or at least get him to play the five minutes when he's three weeks younger. Furthermore, the kid who plays the "older" Ned does not look any older than "young" Ned. As a matter of fact, he just looks completely different, much skinnier, and no taller or older than the original actor, which is very confusing, as I, like any rational human being, thought at first that it was a new and different character.

What, did the first kid die while they were filming the movie? Because he was in it for the first hour and a half, and then all of a sudden, three weeks later, the guy from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is playing Ned for the last five minutes of the movie. And even if the original actor did die, the filmmakers should have at least gotten an actor who looks like him to play the remainder of his role, and re-shoot the measly five minutes of "six months later" scenes. Better yet, just scrap the movie completely, never finish it and never release, never even tell anybody about it, because by that point they should have realized that their movie sucks and in finishing it they would only waste more money and time and succeed in making one of the worst movies of all time.

I'm not saying that this movie is so bad you shouldn't watch it; it's so bad that you SHOULD watch it, just to see how badly it sucks. It's terrible, terrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 1206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The autobiography on which this movie is based remains one of the most heart-rending books I have ever read. It tells the amazing stories of two sisters, both who earned devotion and respect working well into their 70's as a teacher and a dentist, then lived another 30 years with dignity. Ruby Dee steals the film with her perfectly nuanced performance as the rebellious "blacker" Bessie, the dentist. She not only expresses her anger, angst, and wisdom well; she lets you know exactly where they've come from using an economy of words. Diahnn Carroll has the feel of the older sister, the teacher, down perfectly, but I'm afraid she never makes me believe that she's over 100. No matter -- the stories are well worth telling. Amy Madigan is a bit too extreme and intrusive in acting overwhelmed and insecure in the first half of the movie as the Caucasian NY Times reporter. This, too, is only a minor distraction. The stories, all true, are the attraction and although two or three get slightly damaged in the translation, most of them make it through just fine.

I recommend the book as essential reading to all people I recommend any books to. I cannot quite but this TV-movie in that rarefied air, but it certainly captures enough of the flavor to be highly worthwhile in its own right. --------------------------------------------- Result 1207 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I expected a bad [[movie]], and got a [[bad]] movie. But I couldn't really [[imagine]] in my [[worst]] [[fantasy]] how [[bad]] this movie was. I don't even [[want]] to [[try]] to explain what [[Blood]] Surf is about. Is not about blood [[surfing]], but a [[big]] a$$ [[crocodile]]. They are [[complaining]] about the fake shark in [[Jaws]], but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the [[end]]. Here the crocodile is [[shown]] a lot of times, and it's the [[worst]] fake [[crocodile]] I have ever [[seen]], and they don't [[try]] to [[hide]] it. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[fake]] [[crocodile]] watch [[Lake]] [[Placid]].

The [[director]] had an [[opportunity]] to make a decent [[surf]]/shark movie, but he had to [[make]] a [[bad]] b-monster [[movie]]. He had the [[chance]] to [[make]] an [[original]] [[surf]] movie, but he [[wanted]] to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it [[got]] some nudity, and a [[sex]] scene that is [[taken]] straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half [[bad]] [[either]], and Kate Fischer looks good. Too [[bad]] she doesn't take her [[top]] off. The lead actors aren't [[bad]] either. They had some [[potential]]. The [[location]] was beautiful and the [[movie]] [[start]] good with some [[nice]] [[surf]] scenes. The [[blame]] is on the untalented [[writer]] and [[director]]. The dialogue is some of the [[worst]] I have ever [[seen]], and the script is really badly [[written]], and the [[director]] [[got]] no talent what so ever, and not much of a [[fantasy]] [[either]].

Don't watch it. [[Even]] if you [[want]] to watch the [[beautiful]] Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate [[nude]], and watch [[Lake]] Placid if you want some good [[crocodile]] action.

3/10 because I'm in a [[good]] [[mood]], and Maureen Larrazabal [[looks]] [[good]] [[naked]], and [[Kate]] [[looks]] good (but is [[bad]] actress,)and [[Dex]] [[Miller]], Joel [[West]] and Matt Borlenghi did a good [[job]] with the [[piece]] of sh#t they had to [[work]] with. I expected a bad [[filmmaking]], and got a [[rotten]] movie. But I couldn't really [[presume]] in my [[meanest]] [[utopia]] how [[unfavourable]] this movie was. I don't even [[wanting]] to [[attempt]] to explain what [[Chrissake]] Surf is about. Is not about blood [[surfer]], but a [[prodigious]] a$$ [[alligator]]. They are [[whining]] about the fake shark in [[Gags]], but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the [[terminating]]. Here the crocodile is [[illustrated]] a lot of times, and it's the [[meanest]] fake [[alligator]] I have ever [[noticed]], and they don't [[attempt]] to [[disguising]] it. [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[behold]] a [[alright]] [[faux]] [[alligator]] watch [[Lakes]] [[Tranquil]].

The [[headmaster]] had an [[luck]] to make a decent [[surfer]]/shark movie, but he had to [[deliver]] a [[rotten]] b-monster [[filmmaking]]. He had the [[luck]] to [[deliver]] an [[initial]] [[surfer]] movie, but he [[wished]] to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it [[did]] some nudity, and a [[sexuality]] scene that is [[picked]] straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half [[negative]] [[nor]], and Kate Fischer looks good. Too [[negative]] she doesn't take her [[superior]] off. The lead actors aren't [[unhealthy]] either. They had some [[prospective]]. The [[placements]] was beautiful and the [[cinematography]] [[outset]] good with some [[enjoyable]] [[surfer]] scenes. The [[culpa]] is on the untalented [[novelist]] and [[headmaster]]. The dialogue is some of the [[worse]] I have ever [[noticed]], and the script is really badly [[writes]], and the [[headmaster]] [[get]] no talent what so ever, and not much of a [[fantasia]] [[nor]].

Don't watch it. [[Yet]] if you [[wants]] to watch the [[sumptuous]] Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate [[naked]], and watch [[Lakes]] Placid if you want some good [[alligator]] action.

3/10 because I'm in a [[alright]] [[humor]], and Maureen Larrazabal [[seem]] [[alright]] [[barefoot]], and [[Cate]] [[seems]] good (but is [[negative]] actress,)and [[Dexter]] [[Meunier]], Joel [[Occidental]] and Matt Borlenghi did a good [[workplace]] with the [[slice]] of sh#t they had to [[cooperate]] with. --------------------------------------------- Result 1208 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I watched this film for 45 minutes and [[counted]] 9 mullets. That's a mullet every 5 minutes. [[Seriously]] [[though]], this film is living proof that formula [[works]]. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[heroine]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. [[Pure]] [[magic]]. I watched this film for 45 minutes and [[accounted]] 9 mullets. That's a mullet every 5 minutes. [[Profoundly]] [[although]], this film is living proof that formula [[cooperated]]. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[heroin]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. [[Sheer]] [[magical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[absolutely]] fail to see what is [[funny]] in this [[film]]. The [[humor]] [[seems]] to be destined for [[corpses]]. It's [[slow]]. The [[story]] is too simple to be [[true]]. The [[characters]] do not [[raise]] [[much]] sympathy, a few non-important [[characters]] aside. Nothing [[surprising]] [[happens]]. What did the writers of this [[script]] [[think]]? "[[Oooo]] [[funny]]! Let's [[make]] some [[old]] lady's high on [[pot]]! Let's [[make]] them.... giggle! Let's [[make]] them... behave like [[little]] [[children]]!! Oooo, yes, that's [[absolutely]] brilliant and original!"

This [[film]] has [[irritated]] me most from all the [[films]] I've [[seen]] in the [[last]] five [[years]]. I [[totally]] fail to see what is [[hilarious]] in this [[flick]]. The [[humour]] [[looks]] to be destined for [[cadavers]]. It's [[sluggish]]. The [[conte]] is too simple to be [[veritable]]. The [[hallmarks]] do not [[hikes]] [[very]] sympathy, a few non-important [[traits]] aside. Nothing [[breathtaking]] [[occurs]]. What did the writers of this [[screenplay]] [[thought]]? "[[Ohhh]] [[amusing]]! Let's [[deliver]] some [[former]] lady's high on [[teapot]]! Let's [[deliver]] them.... giggle! Let's [[deliver]] them... behave like [[petit]] [[kiddies]]!! Oooo, yes, that's [[altogether]] brilliant and original!"

This [[filmmaking]] has [[outraged]] me most from all the [[kino]] I've [[saw]] in the [[final]] five [[ages]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I must say that I am fairly [[disappointed]] by this "horror" movie. I did not get scared even once while watching it. It also is not very suspenseful either.... I was able to [[guess]] the ending half way through the movie... So.. what's left?

"The Ring" is a [[trully]] scary [[movie]]... I wish other movies [[would]] stop [[copying]] from it ([[e]].g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please give me some originality.

Will not [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. I must say that I am fairly [[disappoint]] by this "horror" movie. I did not get scared even once while watching it. It also is not very suspenseful either.... I was able to [[imagines]] the ending half way through the movie... So.. what's left?

"The Ring" is a [[truely]] scary [[filmmaking]]... I wish other movies [[should]] stop [[copies]] from it ([[f]].g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please give me some originality.

Will not [[recommendation]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh Dear Lord, How on Earth was any part of this film ever approved by anyone? It reeks of cheese from start to finish, but it's not even good cheese. It's the scummiest, moldiest, most tasteless cheese there is, and I cannot believe there is anyone out there who actually, truly enjoyed it. Yes, if you saw it with a load of drunk/stoned buddies then some bits might be funny in a sad kind of way, but for the rest of the audience the only entertaining parts are when said group of buddies are throwing popcorn and abusive insults at each other and the screen. I watched it with an up-for-a-few-laughs guy, having had a few beers in preparation to chuckle away at the film's expected crapness. We got the crapness (plenty of it), but not the chuckles. It doesn't even qualify as a so-bad-it's-good movie. It's just plain bad. Very, very bad. Here's why (look away if you're spoilerphobic): The movie starts out with a guy beating another guy to death. OK, I was a few minutes late in so not sure why this was, but I think I grasped the 'this guy is a bit of a badass who you don't want to mess with' message behind the ingenious scene. Oh, and a guy witnesses it. So, we already have our ultra-evil bad guy, and wussy but cute (apparently) good guy. Cue Hero. Big Sam steps on the scene in the usual fashion, saving good guy in the usual inane way that only poor action films can accomplish, i.e. Hero is immune to bullets, everyone else falls over rather clumsily. Cue first plot hole. How the bloody hell did Sammy know where this guy was, or that he'd watched the murder. Perhaps this, and the answers to all my plot-hole related questions, was explained in the 2 minutes before I got into the cinema, but I doubt it. In fact, I'm going to stop poking holes in the plot right here, lest I turn the movie into something resembling swiss cheese (which we all know is good cheese). So, the 'plot' (a very generous word to use). Good guy must get to LA, evil guy would rather he didn't, Hero Sam stands between the two. Cue scenery for the next vomit-inducing hour - the passenger plane. As I said, no more poking at plot holes, I'll just leave it there. Passenger plane. Next, the vital ingredient up until now missing from this gem of a movie, and what makes it everything it is - Snakes. Yay! Oh, pause. First we have the introduction to all the obligatory characters that a lame movie must have. Hot, horny couple (see if you can guess how they die), dead-before-any-snakes-even-appear British guy (those pesky Brits, eh?), cute kids, and Jo Brand. For all you Americans that's an English comic famous for her size and unattractiveness. Now that we've met the cast, let's watch all of them die (except of course the cute kids). Don't expect anything original, it's just snake bites on various and ever-increasingly hilarious (really not) parts of the body. Use your imagination, since the film-makers obviously didn't use theirs.

So, that's most of the film wrapped up, so now for the best bit, the ending. As expected, everything is just so happy as the plane lands that everyone in sight starts sucking face. Yep, Ice-cool Sammy included. But wait, we're not all off the plane yet! The last guy to get off is good guy, but just as he does he gets bitten by a (you guessed it) snake (of all things). Clearly this one had been hiding in Mr. Jackson's hair the whole time, since it somehow managed to resist the air pressure trick that the good old hero had employed a few minutes earlier, despite the 200ft constrictor (the one that ate that pesky British bugger) being unable to. So, Sam shoots him and the snake in one fell swoop. At this point I prayed that the movie was about to make a much-needed U-turn and reveal that all along the hero was actually a traitor of some sort. But no. In a kind of icing on the cake way (but with stale cheese, remember), it is revealed that the climax of the film was involving a bullet proof vest. How anyone can think that an audience 10 years ago, let alone in 2006 would be impressed by their ingenuity is beyond me, but it did well in summing up the film.

Actually, we're not quite done yet. After everyone has sucked face (Uncle Sam with leading actress, good guy with Tiffany, token Black guy with token White girl, and the hot couple in a heart warming bout of necrophilia), it's time for good guy and hero to get it on....In Bali!!! Nope, it wasn't at all exciting, the exclamation marks were just there to represent my utter joy at seeing the credits roll. Yes, the final shot of the film is a celebratory surfing trip to convey the message that a bit of male bonding has occurred, and a chance for any morons that actually enjoyed the movie to whoop a few times. That's it. This is the first time I've ever posted a movie review, but I felt so strongly that somebody must speak out against this scourge of cinematography. If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L.Jackson, air hostesses, bad guys, surfing, dogs in bags or English people, then please, please don't see this movie. It will pollute your opinion of all of the above so far that you'll never want to come into contact with any of them ever again. Go see United 93 instead. THAT was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1212 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The title says it all. "Tail Gunner Joe" was a [[tag]] [[given]] to the Senator which [[relied]] upon the ignorance of the [[public]] about World War II [[aircraft]]. The rear facing [[moving]] [[guns]] [[relied]] [[upon]] a [[latch]] that [[would]] [[prevent]] the rear gunner from [[shooting]] off the tail of the [[airplane]] by [[preventing]] the [[gun]] from firing when it [[pointed]] at the tail. When the Senator was [[practicing]] on the [[ground]] one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[airplane]]. He couldn't have [[done]] that if the [[gun]] had been [[properly]] aligned. The [[gunnery]] [[officer]] responsible for that [[admitted]], in public, before a camera, that he was [[responsible]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senator]]. The fact that the [[film]] did not report that fact, [[shows]] how one-sided it is. This [[film]] was [[designed]] to do one [[thing]], [[destroy]] the [[reputation]] of a [[complex]] person.

A much better program was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary [[disadvantages]] to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public [[likes]] simple [[stories]], one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. The title says it all. "Tail Gunner Joe" was a [[label]] [[conferred]] to the Senator which [[rested]] upon the ignorance of the [[populace]] about World War II [[planes]]. The rear facing [[relocating]] [[firearms]] [[rested]] [[after]] a [[closure]] that [[could]] [[deter]] the rear gunner from [[gunshot]] off the tail of the [[flight]] by [[avoid]] the [[firearm]] from firing when it [[noted]] at the tail. When the Senator was [[practiced]] on the [[terrain]] one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[planes]]. He couldn't have [[accomplished]] that if the [[handgun]] had been [[sufficiently]] aligned. The [[tir]] [[officials]] responsible for that [[conceded]], in public, before a camera, that he was [[liable]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senators]]. The fact that the [[filmmaking]] did not report that fact, [[showcase]] how one-sided it is. This [[filmmaking]] was [[conceived]] to do one [[stuff]], [[destroying]] the [[repute]] of a [[difficult]] person.

A much better program was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary [[handicaps]] to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public [[adores]] simple [[story]], one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. --------------------------------------------- Result 1213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Randall "Memphis" Raines is a retired master car thief who is forced back into the "game" when his younger brother faces death for not filling an order for British crime boss Raymond Calitri. The job involves "lifting" 50 cars in 24 hours or Calitri will enact his punishment. So Raines quickly assembles a crew he can trust and sets about the task to hand. But the police are on to him and some of the cars on the list are not easy takes. It would seem a near impossible job to complete.

It's got quite a cast has Gone In 60 Seconds, Nicolas Cage, Angelina Jolie, Robert Duvall, Will Patton, Delroy Lindo, Vinnie Jones, Giovanni Ribisi, Christopher Ecclestone, Scott Caan & Timothy Olyphant. All of whom deserve better. Enough acting horsepower there to propel a Porsche 998 Turbo. Trouble is, is that this is very much a case of too many cars overstocking the car park, mucho characters, not enough zest. From the off we are in no doubt that this is a Bruckheimer/Simpson production, bonkers script laced with loud noises and lashings of cheese, scattergun editing, and directed with sledgehammer subtly by Dominic Sena. It's essentially a big budget remake of H.B. Halicki's 1974 indie movie of the same name, with the premise offering up the potential for an adrenalin fuelled car based movie. Potential that sadly is never realised. There's one or two high impact moments, daft for sure, but enjoyable none the less. But if you pardon the pun, the film never gets out of first gear, it's more content to labour with its ream of characters who mope about trying to make the boorish screenplay {Scott Rosenberg} work.

Car fans will get something from it {the cars are ace on the eye}, as will fans of unintentional comedy movies {check out Ecclestone's carpenter grief moment}. But no, it's really rather poor all told. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have enjoyed Criminal Intent [[series]] of [[Law]] and [[Order]] for a [[long]] time. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is [[rather]] hard and [[seems]] a bit bitter in the Criminal [[Intent]] Series. See her other side in this [[movie]].

This [[movie]] shows the [[marvelous]] [[soft]] side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal [[Intent]] fan this [[movie]] is a [[revelry]] in her acting and you [[get]] a [[pretty]] darn good [[yarn]] of family [[hardships]] in the South.

I did not like Albert Finneys role in this [[movie]] because he did such a convincing acting [[job]] of the [[older]] [[Southern]] [[fellow]] that is [[hard]] [[headed]] and intolerant and unaccepting of [[change]]. He [[reminds]] me of so [[many]] [[men]] from my youth and the [[portrayal]] is [[divine]], but you will likely [[find]] him [[hard]] to [[like]] in this [[movie]].

Katryn Erbe is [[easy]] to like in this [[movie]] and why I [[recommend]] it as a 10 star for Criminal [[Intent]], [[law]] and [[order]] [[fans]]. I have enjoyed Criminal Intent [[serial]] of [[Legislation]] and [[Ordering]] for a [[lengthy]] time. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is [[fairly]] hard and [[looks]] a bit bitter in the Criminal [[Goal]] Series. See her other side in this [[movies]].

This [[cinematography]] shows the [[wondrous]] [[mild]] side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal [[Targeting]] fan this [[film]] is a [[merriment]] in her acting and you [[obtain]] a [[belle]] darn good [[fil]] of family [[sufferings]] in the South.

I did not like Albert Finneys role in this [[films]] because he did such a convincing acting [[jobs]] of the [[aged]] [[Southerly]] [[coworkers]] that is [[stiff]] [[led]] and intolerant and unaccepting of [[modify]]. He [[remembered]] me of so [[several]] [[man]] from my youth and the [[depiction]] is [[godlike]], but you will likely [[finds]] him [[difficult]] to [[fond]] in this [[cinematography]].

Katryn Erbe is [[easier]] to like in this [[film]] and why I [[recommended]] it as a 10 star for Criminal [[Purposes]], [[lois]] and [[orders]] [[amateurs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Let]] me [[give]] a quick summery of the film: A [[rotten]], rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he [[grants]] 3 wishes but, being good natured, [[also]] [[helps]] Max with his personal life, as he has to [[deal]] with bullies and a father mixed up in [[organized]] [[crime]]. [[During]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's dismal rap skills).

This [[movie]] proves what we all [[know]]: [[Athletes]] [[need]] to [[stick]] to sports. I [[admit]] that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but [[EVERYTHING]] about this waste of [[film]] is horrible. The [[characters]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[even]] worth mentioning, the [[dialog]] is a [[joke]], and [[Shaq]] is only a quarter of the [[problem]]. [[Hell]], even if Denzel Washington [[played]] Kazaam this [[movie]] would [[still]] be a [[joke]]. I know that the [[movie]] only [[drew]] [[ANYBODY]] was because Shaq was so [[big]] (no pun intended) at the [[time]]. I [[honestly]] cannot [[think]] of a [[single]] [[positive]] [[thing]] to [[say]] about this waste of [[time]]. Shaq should have put the [[time]] had [[used]] to make this [[movie]] [[toward]] practicing free throws. [[Letting]] me [[confer]] a quick summery of the film: A [[naughty]], rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he [[subsidy]] 3 wishes but, being good natured, [[apart]] [[contributes]] Max with his personal life, as he has to [[dealing]] with bullies and a father mixed up in [[organising]] [[offences]]. [[Onto]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's dismal rap skills).

This [[film]] proves what we all [[savoir]]: [[Sport]] [[required]] to [[wand]] to sports. I [[confess]] that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but [[ENTIRE]] about this waste of [[filmmaking]] is horrible. The [[personage]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[yet]] worth mentioning, the [[dialogue]] is a [[kidding]], and [[Chak]] is only a quarter of the [[issues]]. [[Brothel]], even if Denzel Washington [[done]] Kazaam this [[filmmaking]] would [[however]] be a [[joking]]. I know that the [[movies]] only [[called]] [[EVERYBODY]] was because Shaq was so [[overwhelming]] (no pun intended) at the [[period]]. I [[sincerely]] cannot [[thinking]] of a [[lonely]] [[favorable]] [[stuff]] to [[told]] about this waste of [[times]]. Shaq should have put the [[period]] had [[utilized]] to make this [[filmmaking]] [[about]] practicing free throws. --------------------------------------------- Result 1216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I am [[sad]] that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be [[made]] into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was [[barely]] [[shown]] in the film , probably the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and [[Bloody]] Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[script]]. Instead we were [[forced]] to watch fictitious [[characters]] that never developed into anyone we cared about. how [[sad]]. The costumes were [[wonderful]] however, as was the [[location]] shooting in [[Missouri]]. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and [[try]] again, or some other [[film]] maker will [[look]] into the tremendous wealth of material to [[write]] a screen [[play]] on . I am [[regretful]] that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be [[effected]] into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was [[hardly]] [[revealed]] in the film , probably the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and [[Murderous]] Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[hyphen]]. Instead we were [[coerced]] to watch fictitious [[hallmarks]] that never developed into anyone we cared about. how [[unfortunate]]. The costumes were [[sumptuous]] however, as was the [[placements]] shooting in [[Mo]]. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and [[attempting]] again, or some other [[filmmaking]] maker will [[gaze]] into the tremendous wealth of material to [[writing]] a screen [[playing]] on . --------------------------------------------- Result 1217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Women]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's film Piedras. [[Although]] editor's [[cut]] here and there might [[help]] the film, it is exciting and [[enjoyable]] with an [[intense]] [[mark]] from [[Pedro]] Almodovar's [[latest]] [[films]]. 5 [[different]] [[women]] are [[coping]] with their male partners and [[families]]. [[Beginning]] with several [[different]] [[stories]] bound to [[meet]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[portraits]] his women [[characters]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society [[lady]] with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[house]] [[madam]] taking [[care]] of her disabled [[daughter]], a drug addict [[dancer]] obsessed with her [[former]] boyfriend and a taxi-driver taking [[care]] of her late husband's disturbed [[kids]], all [[roaming]] the streets of Madrid in well [[designed]] scenes. [[Using]] some of Almodovar's familiar actresses, the director [[succeeds]] in it's [[first]] [[film]] to give depth to all the [[characters]] [[sharing]] the [[film]], and to [[create]] [[genuine]] sympathy with each of them. The women [[controls]] the plot line, and the men are bound to be [[left]] with each other, [[eventually]]... [[Surprisingly]] good for a first [[film]], and worth the [[time]] in any [[standard]]. It is [[noticeable]] that Salazar [[hesitated]] in some needed guidelines to the actresses, but an impressible [[act]] is [[shown]] anyway on the screen, [[especially]] by Monica Cervera, which played in his [[former]] short [[film]].

A [[must]] to all Almodovar's [[fans]], and [[enjoyable]] to all. [[Girl]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's film Piedras. [[While]] editor's [[slice]] here and there might [[aid]] the film, it is exciting and [[nice]] with an [[intensive]] [[brands]] from [[Peter]] Almodovar's [[newer]] [[movie]]. 5 [[several]] [[girl]] are [[adapting]] with their male partners and [[family]]. [[Starts]] with several [[various]] [[story]] bound to [[cater]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[sketches]] his women [[features]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society [[dame]] with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[housing]] [[madame]] taking [[caring]] of her disabled [[girls]], a drug addict [[dancers]] obsessed with her [[old]] boyfriend and a taxi-driver taking [[caring]] of her late husband's disturbed [[children]], all [[wandering]] the streets of Madrid in well [[destined]] scenes. [[Uses]] some of Almodovar's familiar actresses, the director [[succeeding]] in it's [[firstly]] [[movie]] to give depth to all the [[nature]] [[exchange]] the [[movie]], and to [[creating]] [[real]] sympathy with each of them. The women [[audit]] the plot line, and the men are bound to be [[exited]] with each other, [[finally]]... [[Terribly]] good for a first [[movies]], and worth the [[times]] in any [[standards]]. It is [[obvious]] that Salazar [[grinned]] in some needed guidelines to the actresses, but an impressible [[legislation]] is [[indicated]] anyway on the screen, [[namely]] by Monica Cervera, which played in his [[old]] short [[flick]].

A [[ought]] to all Almodovar's [[stalkers]], and [[nice]] to all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[Party]] [[Girl]]" capitalizes on the [[tremendous]] [[charm]] of Parker [[Posey]]. [[In]] fact, at [[times]], the [[movie]] [[seems]] to be a [[vehicle]] in which Ms. Posey is [[allow]] to play herself, as she [[normally]] is in [[real]] [[life]].

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treat]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. [[Von]] Scherler Mayer takes us on a [[wild]] trip into lower Manhattan to [[show]] us this aimless soul whose [[life]] is [[dedicated]] to have fun in the [[different]] clubs she [[constantly]] frequents. This is an era that still was more [[naive]] than what that [[area]] and the [[adjacent]] Meat Market [[districts]] [[became]]. [[At]] least, there are no [[pretensions]] in the films and we [[see]] down to earth people going about their [[lives]] in a [[normal]] [[way]], if we can call it that [[way]].

Parker Posey makes an [[amazing]] Mary. It's because of [[Parker]] Posey we [[enjoy]] the movie more than if another [[actress]] [[would]] have [[played]] Mary. She is the [[whole]] picture. The [[rest]] of the cast is good. "[[Part]] [[Chick]]" capitalizes on the [[awesome]] [[glamour]] of Parker [[Posse]]. [[At]] fact, at [[period]], the [[cinema]] [[looks]] to be a [[autos]] in which Ms. Posey is [[enable]] to play herself, as she [[ordinarily]] is in [[actual]] [[lifetime]].

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treatment]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. [[Fon]] Scherler Mayer takes us on a [[wilde]] trip into lower Manhattan to [[spectacle]] us this aimless soul whose [[iife]] is [[specialised]] to have fun in the [[assorted]] clubs she [[systematically]] frequents. This is an era that still was more [[gullible]] than what that [[region]] and the [[contiguous]] Meat Market [[region]] [[was]]. [[Under]] least, there are no [[pretexts]] in the films and we [[behold]] down to earth people going about their [[iife]] in a [[ordinary]] [[manner]], if we can call it that [[path]].

Parker Posey makes an [[wondrous]] Mary. It's because of [[Barker]] Posey we [[enjoys]] the movie more than if another [[actor]] [[ought]] have [[served]] Mary. She is the [[entire]] picture. The [[remaining]] of the cast is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

I have [[seen]] this [[movie]] [[many]] [[times]]. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not recently. [[However]], [[Etched]] in my memory never to [[leave]] me is a scene in which Mickey [[Rooney]], -"[[Killer]] Mears" knows that he is to be [[executed]] and it's [[getting]] close to the [[moment]] of truth, He dances, and [[cries]], and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the [[gambit]] of ever emotion. Never have I [[seen]] such a [[brilliant]] performance by any actor [[living]] or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey [[Rooney]], yes, "[[Andy]] Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my [[opinion]] to myself for years thinking, surely I [[must]] be alone in this [[viewpoint]]. [[About]] 15 years or so after I saw this [[film]] for the [[last]] [[time]] on [[television]], I chanced to read the [[old]] Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The [[question]] was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the [[question]] was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the [[greatest]] [[actors]] of all [[time]], whom then do YOU [[consider]] to be among the [[greatest]] [[actors]]?" [[His]] [[answer]] was, "[[Peter]] Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I [[immediatly]] flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with [[Mikey]] Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot [[remember]] a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I [[gave]] it a 10 just on the face of his performance.

I have [[watched]] this [[cinematography]] [[various]] [[moments]]. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not recently. [[Instead]], [[Engraved]] in my memory never to [[let]] me is a scene in which Mickey [[Ronnie]], -"[[Murderer]] Mears" knows that he is to be [[conducted]] and it's [[obtaining]] close to the [[time]] of truth, He dances, and [[mourns]], and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the [[masterstroke]] of ever emotion. Never have I [[noticed]] such a [[wondrous]] performance by any actor [[life]] or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey [[Roni]], yes, "[[Indie]] Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my [[opinions]] to myself for years thinking, surely I [[ought]] be alone in this [[perspective]]. [[Around]] 15 years or so after I saw this [[cinematography]] for the [[final]] [[period]] on [[tv]], I chanced to read the [[archaic]] Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The [[issue]] was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the [[issue]] was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the [[biggest]] [[actresses]] of all [[times]], whom then do YOU [[examining]] to be among the [[biggest]] [[players]]?" [[Her]] [[replied]] was, "[[Petra]] Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I [[swiftly]] flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with [[Mickey]] Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot [[recollect]] a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I [[given]] it a 10 just on the face of his performance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are some extremely talented black directors Spike Lee,Carl Franklin,Billy Dukes,Denzel and a host of others who bring well deserved credit to the film industry . Then there are the Wayans Brothers who at one time(15,years ago) had an extremely funny television show'In Living Colour' that launched the career of Jim Carrey amongst others . Now we have stupidity substituting for humour and gross out gags(toilet humour) as the standard operating procedure . People are not as stupid as those portrayed in 'Little Man' they couldn't possibly be . A baby with a full set of teeth and a tattoo is accepted as being only months old ? Baby comes with a five o'clock shadow that he shaves off . It is intimated that the baby has sex with his foster mother behind her husbands,Darryl's, back .Oh, yea that is just hilarious . As a master criminal 'Little Man' is the stupidest on planet earth . He stashes a stolen rock that is just huge in a woman's purse and then has to pursue her . Co-star Chazz Palminteri,why Chazz, offers the best line: "I'm surrounded by morons." Based, without credit, on a Chuck Jones cartoon, Baby Buggy Bunny . This is far too stupid to be even remotely funny . A clue as to how bad this film is Damon Wayans appeared on Jay Leno the other night,prior to the BAT awards and he did not,even mention this dreadful movie . When will Hollywood stop green lighting trash from the Wayans Brothers . When they get over their white mans guilt in all likelihood . --------------------------------------------- Result 1221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] *SPOILERS*

This is only the second pay-per-view I've given a perfect 10, the first being the 1991 Royal Rumble. It was full of exciting matches that weren't memorable, just disposable fun. And that's why I love it.

The opening match between Razor and DiBiase, as well as Ludvig Borga vs. Marty Jannetty were the only low points. They were OK matches, but DiBiase deserved better in his final pay per view match. These days, a match like this would have run-ins and a bigger climax for Razor's first major babyface push. And Jannetty, fresh off a Intercontinental title run, could have had a better match with Borga. But I don't think anyone really cared. They just needed a Borga push on pay per view television.

IRS and The Kid were great, as were Michaels and Perfect. I wish Perfect could have won, but Michaels lies down for no one. Notice how right after this, he left the WWF so he wouldn't have to job to Razor. Bret Hart had two great brawls with Doink (notice how everyone's best match is against the Hit-man) and then Lawler. Their rivalry was a classic; that's why that year's Feud of the Year was a no-brainer. How often do you see two legends win Feud of the Year this late in their careers?

The Steiners-Heavenly Bodies match was one of the best of the year. Who knew the Bodies could hold their own against one of the best teams ever?

Many say that the Undertaker-Giant Gonzalez match was a waste of time. But I loved it. Remember, what made the old WWF (as in, pre-WWE) great was the mix of athleticism and freak show. Is there a soul out there who didn't like Akeem?

The main event wasn't bad, although nowhere near match of the year status. They put Lex Luger over well, but made a wise choice in having Yokozuna keep the belt. He was the first heel since Superstar Graham to hold the belt for more than two months. Nowadays, heels are champions all the time. But from the beginning of the WWWF through the WWF of the 90s, if you blinked, you missed a heel title reign.

As an old school wrestling fan, this one and SummerSlam '88 are my favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I was aware of Rohmer's [[admiration]] for the late works of the ones he considered like [[great]] cineasts, and that [[normal]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very [[last]] movies ; yes, the "politique des auteurs" [[also]] has its [[dark]] side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself wanted, for what may be his [[last]] [[movie]], to perpetuate this tradition of great [[directors]], who [[made]] a last senile [[movie]], by [[adapting]] Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[ridiculous]] [[aesthetic]] [[codes]], witch just [[look]] like a [[parody]] of Rosselini's [[last]] [[movies]] (the ones he [[made]] for TV from Descartes or Marx's [[lives]]).

[[In]] his [[version]] of "Perceval", Rohmer [[refused]] to film [[real]] landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age [[classical]] representation of [[things]]. The director [[apparently]] [[changed]] his [[mind]] when the XVII century is involved, and films [[actors]], [[dressed]] like 1600's peasants [[reciting]] their antic [[text]] surrounded by [[contemporary]] [[trees]] and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more [[ridiculous]] than Luchini and its [[fake]] [[trees]]. It's not that the story itself is [[stupid]], but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices [[seems]] so [[childish]] and amateurism that it [[rapidly]] becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not [[even]] [[talking]] about the irritating pronunciation of the [[actors]], the [[annoying]] and sad humorist [[tries]] by [[Rodolphe]] [[Pauly]], the [[ridiculous]] soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the [[strange]] [[fascination]] for trasvestisment!).

The [[radical]] aesthetic of the [[film]] [[ultimately]] makes it [[looks]] like a [[joke]], which [[mixes]] a soft-erotic [[movie]] [[made]] for TV with [[theological]] scholastic [[discussions]] (sic !). [[At]] the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]], Rohmer teaches us that the [[original]] french [[region]] of the [[story]] is now [[disfigured]] by [[modernity]], and that's why he had to [[film]] "L'Astrée" in other parts of the [[country]]. However, I'm [[sure]] the [[movie]] would have [[look]] more modern and interesting, if Rohmer [[would]] have [[actually]] [[still]] filmed the same [[story]] in a modern area with same [[narrative]] [[codes]] and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. I was aware of Rohmer's [[awe]] for the late works of the ones he considered like [[wondrous]] cineasts, and that [[habitual]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very [[latter]] movies ; yes, the "politique des auteurs" [[additionally]] has its [[darkened]] side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself wanted, for what may be his [[latter]] [[filmmaking]], to perpetuate this tradition of great [[managers]], who [[accomplished]] a last senile [[filmmaking]], by [[adjusting]] Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[absurd]] [[cosmetic]] [[code]], witch just [[peek]] like a [[comedy]] of Rosselini's [[final]] [[cinematography]] (the ones he [[introduced]] for TV from Descartes or Marx's [[vie]]).

[[Throughout]] his [[stepping]] of "Perceval", Rohmer [[refuses]] to film [[actual]] landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age [[conventional]] representation of [[aspects]]. The director [[visibly]] [[altering]] his [[intellect]] when the XVII century is involved, and films [[players]], [[clothed]] like 1600's peasants [[recite]] their antic [[texts]] surrounded by [[current]] [[tree]] and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more [[farcical]] than Luchini and its [[pseudo]] [[tree]]. It's not that the story itself is [[dumb]], but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices [[seem]] so [[boyish]] and amateurism that it [[timely]] becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not [[yet]] [[debates]] about the irritating pronunciation of the [[protagonists]], the [[irritating]] and sad humorist [[seeks]] by [[Rudolf]] [[Paulo]], the [[farcical]] soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the [[peculiar]] [[passion]] for trasvestisment!).

The [[extremist]] aesthetic of the [[filmmaking]] [[finally]] makes it [[seem]] like a [[farce]], which [[mixture]] a soft-erotic [[filmmaking]] [[accomplished]] for TV with [[theologian]] scholastic [[deliberations]] (sic !). [[Into]] the [[initiation]] of the [[movies]], Rohmer teaches us that the [[initial]] french [[zoning]] of the [[stories]] is now [[scarred]] by [[modernization]], and that's why he had to [[films]] "L'Astrée" in other parts of the [[nationals]]. However, I'm [[persuaded]] the [[kino]] would have [[peek]] more modern and interesting, if Rohmer [[should]] have [[genuinely]] [[however]] filmed the same [[history]] in a modern area with same [[descriptive]] [[code]] and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After the success of the second instalment, Richard Curtis and Ben Elton decided that Blackadder should have a third appearance. This time instead of Tudor times or Elizabethan times, Edmund Blackadder (BAFTA nominated Rowan Atkinson) is living in the time of the French Revolution. Accompanied by the now stupid but lovable Baldrick (Tony Robinson) Blackadder is the "faithful" butler to George, the Prince Regent of Wales (Hugh Laurie). Throughout this third series to the wonderfully written sitcom Blackadder tries everything he can to get rich and powerful. He tries electing a lord for a rotten borough, tries to sell a book, tries to win a bet about The Scarlet Pimpernel, tries to be a highway man and finally poses as the Prince. This is a very good instalment to the popular comedy. Includes appearances from Robbie Coltrane, Tim McInnerny, Miranda Richardson and Stephen Fry. It won the BAFTA for Best Comedy Series, and it was nominated for Best Design and Best Make Up. Rowan Atkinson was number 18 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 24 on The Comedians' Comedian, and he was number 8 on Britain's Favourite Comedian, Edmund Blackadder was number 3 on The 100 Greatest TV Characters, and he was number 3 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and Blackadder (all four series) was number 2 on Britain's Best Sitcom. Outstanding! --------------------------------------------- Result 1224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] In the same vein as Natural Born [[Killers]], another movie that was not so popular with critics because of its excessive violence but that I also [[loved]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[clearly]] glamorizes violence, but I [[like]] to think that it turns that around in the [[final]] [[act]]. [[Kind]] of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[drugs]] at first, but shows the [[bad]] side by the [[end]] of the [[movie]], which is far worse than the [[good]] side is good. [[David]] Duchovny plays Brian Kessler, an artistic yuppie with an even more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[understand]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and Michelle Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners (Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, sees the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to deal with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a [[curious]] ability to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to [[clichés]] or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is [[fascinated]] with Early's status as an outlaw, as [[seen]] in the scene where Brian shoots Early's gun. Never having fired a gun before, he's as fascinated as a little kid. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele reveals such things in her childlike way as the fact that Early "broke her" of smoking and that she's not allowed to drink (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it seems a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder sites and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. In the same vein as Natural Born [[Assassins]], another movie that was not so popular with critics because of its excessive violence but that I also [[cared]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[apparently]] glamorizes violence, but I [[iike]] to think that it turns that around in the [[ultimate]] [[law]]. [[Sorting]] of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[medicine]] at first, but shows the [[amiss]] side by the [[ceases]] of the [[kino]], which is far worse than the [[buena]] side is good. [[Davids]] Duchovny plays Brian Kessler, an artistic yuppie with an even more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[comprehend]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and Michelle Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners (Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, sees the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to deal with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a [[bizarre]] ability to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to [[clichéd]] or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is [[preoccupied]] with Early's status as an outlaw, as [[watched]] in the scene where Brian shoots Early's gun. Never having fired a gun before, he's as fascinated as a little kid. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele reveals such things in her childlike way as the fact that Early "broke her" of smoking and that she's not allowed to drink (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it seems a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder sites and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1225 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is without a doubt one of the [[worst]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER [[made]]. What´s worse, my [[old]] [[hero]] Dolph is in it and he´s [[starring]] it. [[Jesus]]... The [[story]] is [[actually]] [[quite]] good but the [[way]] it´s carried out [[made]] even my body hurt. The [[fighting]] scenes for starters are about as well choreographed as a [[fight]] between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[actors]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks also, [[perform]] so [[badly]] you can´t [[help]] but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all [[friends]] of the [[director]], who by the [[way]] [[must]] have been [[absent]] most, if not all, of the [[time]]. This is §12 million [[spent]] in an unimaginable [[way]], because by the [[look]] of the [[effects]] and [[scenery]], the [[cost]] can´t be a cent above §1000. This is without a doubt one of the [[meanest]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER [[introduced]]. What´s worse, my [[former]] [[heroin]] Dolph is in it and he´s [[featuring]] it. [[Damn]]... The [[tales]] is [[indeed]] [[perfectly]] good but the [[ways]] it´s carried out [[effected]] even my body hurt. The [[battles]] scenes for starters are about as well choreographed as a [[battles]] between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[players]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks also, [[fulfilling]] so [[desperately]] you can´t [[helps]] but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all [[amigos]] of the [[superintendent]], who by the [[camino]] [[owe]] have been [[nonexistent]] most, if not all, of the [[period]]. This is §12 million [[spending]] in an unimaginable [[camino]], because by the [[peek]] of the [[impact]] and [[landscaping]], the [[prices]] can´t be a cent above §1000. --------------------------------------------- Result 1226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The [[effects]] of [[job]] related [[stress]] and the [[pressures]] [[born]] of a [[moral]] dilemma that pits conscience against the [[obligations]] of a [[family]] [[business]] (albeit a [[unique]] one) all [[brought]] to a [[head]] by-- or perhaps the catalyst of-- a midlife [[crisis]], are [[examined]] in the [[dark]] and absorbing drama, `Panic,' [[written]] and [[directed]] by [[Henry]] Bromell, and starring William H. [[Macy]] and Donald Sutherland. It's a telling [[look]] at how [[indecision]] and denial can [[bring]] about the [[internal]] strife and misery that ultimately leads to apathy and that [[moment]] of truth when the conflict [[must]], of [[necessity]], at last be resolved.

Alex (Macy) is tired; he has a loving wife, [[Martha]] ([[Tracey]] Ullman), a precocious six-year-old son, [[Sammy]] (David Dorfman), a mail [[order]] [[business]] he [[runs]] out of the [[house]], as well as his [[main]] [[source]] of [[income]], the `family' [[business]] he [[shares]] with his father, [[Michael]] (Sutherland), and his [[mother]], [[Deidre]] ([[Barbara]] Bain). But he's [[empty]]; [[years]] of plying this [[particular]] [[trade]] have [[left]] him numb and detached, putting him in a [[mental]] state that has [[driven]] him to [[see]] a [[psychologist]], Dr. Josh Parks ([[John]] [[Ritter]]). And to make [[matters]] worse (or [[maybe]] better, [[depending]] upon [[perspective]]), in Dr. Parks' [[waiting]] room he meets a [[young]] [[woman]], [[Sarah]] Cassidy (Neve Campbell), [[whose]] presence [[alone]] makes him feel alive for the first time since he can [[remember]]. She quickly [[becomes]] another brick in the wall of the moral conflict his job has [[visited]] upon him, as in the days after their meeting he [[simply]] cannot [[stop]] thinking about her. His [[whole]] [[life]], it [[seems]], has become a `situation'-- one from which he is [[seemingly]] [[unable]] to successfully extirpate himself without hurting the ones he [[loves]]. He can [[deny]] his [[age]] and the fact that he has, indeed, [[slipped]] into a genuine [[midlife]] crisis, but he is about to [[discover]] that the [[problems]] he is [[facing]] are simply not [[going]] to [[go]] away on their own. He's at a [[crossroads]], and he's going to have to [[decide]] which [[way]] to [[go]]. And he's going to have to do it very [[soon]].

From a concept that is [[intrinsically]] interesting, Bromell has fashioned an [[engrossing]] [[character]] [[study]] that is [[insightful]] and incisive, and he presents it is a way that [[allows]] for moments of [[reflection]] that enable the audience to empathize and understand what Alex is going through. He makes it very clear that there are no simple answers, that in real life there is no easy way out. His characters are well defined and very real people who represent the diversity found in life and, moreover, within any given family unit. The film resoundingly implies that the sins of the father are irrefutably passed on to the progeny, with irrevocable consequences and effects. When you're growing up, you accept your personal environment as being that of the world at large; and often it is years into adulthood that one may begin to realize and understand that there are actually moral parameters established by every individual who walks upon the planet, and that the ones set by the father may not be conducive to the tenets of the son. And it is at that point that Alex finds himself as the story unfolds; ergo, the midlife crisis, or more specifically, the crisis of conscience from which he cannot escape. It's a powerful message, succinctly and subtly conveyed by Bromell, with the help of some outstanding performances from his actors.

For some time, William H. Macy has been one of the premiere character actors in the business, creating such diverse characters as Quiz Kid Donnie Smith in `Magnolia,' The Shoveler in `Mystery Men' and Jerry Lundegaard in `Fargo.' And that's just a sampling of his many achievements. At one point in this film, Sarah mentions Alex's `sad eyes,' and it's a very telling comment, as therein lies the strength of Macy's performance here, his ability to convey very real emotion in an understated, believable way that expresses all of the inner turmoil he is experiencing. Consider the scene in which he is lying awake in bed, staring off into the darkness; in that one restless moment it is clear that he is grappling, not only with his immediate situation, but with everything in his life that has brought him, finally, to this point. In that scene you find the sum total of a life of guilt, confusion and uncertainty, all of which have been successfully suppressed until now; all the things that have always been at the core of Alex's life, only now gradually breaking through his defense mechanisms and finally surfacing, demanding confrontation and [[resolution]]. It's a [[complex]] character created and delivered by Macy with an absolute precision that makes Alex truly memorable. It's a character to whom anyone who has ever faced a situation of seemingly insurmountable odds will be able to relate. It's a terrific piece of work by one of the finest actors around.

Sutherland is extremely effective, as well; his Michael is despicably sinister in a way that is so real it's chilling. It's frightening, in fact, to consider that there are such people actually walking the earth. This is not some pulp fiction or James Bond type villain, but a true personification of evil, hiding behind an outward appearance that is so normal he could be the guy next door, which is what makes it all the more disconcerting. And Sutherland brings it all to life brilliantly, with a great performance.

Neve Campbell looks the part of Sarah, but her performance (as is the usual case with her) seems somewhat pretentious, although her affected demeanor here just happens to fit the character and is actually a positive aspect of the film. If only she would occasionally turn her energies inward, it would make a tremendous difference in the way she presents her characters. `Panic,' however, is one of her best efforts; a powerful film that, in the end, is a journey well worth taking. 9/10.

The [[effect]] of [[jobs]] related [[stressing]] and the [[presses]] [[birthed]] of a [[ethical]] dilemma that pits conscience against the [[commitments]] of a [[familia]] [[companies]] (albeit a [[especial]] one) all [[made]] to a [[chief]] by-- or perhaps the catalyst of-- a midlife [[crises]], are [[reviewing]] in the [[murky]] and absorbing drama, `Panic,' [[wrote]] and [[aimed]] by [[Gregg]] Bromell, and starring William H. [[Tragedies]] and Donald Sutherland. It's a telling [[gaze]] at how [[timidity]] and denial can [[bringing]] about the [[inside]] strife and misery that ultimately leads to apathy and that [[time]] of truth when the conflict [[should]], of [[need]], at last be resolved.

Alex (Macy) is tired; he has a loving wife, [[Tasha]] ([[Tracy]] Ullman), a precocious six-year-old son, [[Sami]] (David Dorfman), a mail [[orders]] [[companies]] he [[manages]] out of the [[households]], as well as his [[primary]] [[backgrounds]] of [[incomes]], the `family' [[companies]] he [[exchange]] with his father, [[Michel]] (Sutherland), and his [[mam]], [[Deej]] ([[Barbarian]] Bain). But he's [[hollow]]; [[olds]] of plying this [[specific]] [[trading]] have [[exited]] him numb and detached, putting him in a [[psychological]] state that has [[propelled]] him to [[behold]] a [[analyst]], Dr. Josh Parks ([[Johannes]] [[Knight]]). And to make [[themes]] worse (or [[potentially]] better, [[relying]] upon [[perspectives]]), in Dr. Parks' [[hoping]] room he meets a [[youths]] [[women]], [[Baroness]] Cassidy (Neve Campbell), [[who]] presence [[merely]] makes him feel alive for the first time since he can [[remind]]. She quickly [[becoming]] another brick in the wall of the moral conflict his job has [[toured]] upon him, as in the days after their meeting he [[merely]] cannot [[ceasing]] thinking about her. His [[ensemble]] [[living]], it [[seem]], has become a `situation'-- one from which he is [[allegedly]] [[incapable]] to successfully extirpate himself without hurting the ones he [[likes]]. He can [[reject]] his [[older]] and the fact that he has, indeed, [[stumbled]] into a genuine [[quarantine]] crisis, but he is about to [[uncovering]] that the [[problem]] he is [[confronting]] are simply not [[go]] to [[going]] away on their own. He's at a [[juncture]], and he's going to have to [[decided]] which [[manner]] to [[going]]. And he's going to have to do it very [[speedily]].

From a concept that is [[inherently]] interesting, Bromell has fashioned an [[captivating]] [[nature]] [[studies]] that is [[shrewd]] and incisive, and he presents it is a way that [[allow]] for moments of [[contemplation]] that enable the audience to empathize and understand what Alex is going through. He makes it very clear that there are no simple answers, that in real life there is no easy way out. His characters are well defined and very real people who represent the diversity found in life and, moreover, within any given family unit. The film resoundingly implies that the sins of the father are irrefutably passed on to the progeny, with irrevocable consequences and effects. When you're growing up, you accept your personal environment as being that of the world at large; and often it is years into adulthood that one may begin to realize and understand that there are actually moral parameters established by every individual who walks upon the planet, and that the ones set by the father may not be conducive to the tenets of the son. And it is at that point that Alex finds himself as the story unfolds; ergo, the midlife crisis, or more specifically, the crisis of conscience from which he cannot escape. It's a powerful message, succinctly and subtly conveyed by Bromell, with the help of some outstanding performances from his actors.

For some time, William H. Macy has been one of the premiere character actors in the business, creating such diverse characters as Quiz Kid Donnie Smith in `Magnolia,' The Shoveler in `Mystery Men' and Jerry Lundegaard in `Fargo.' And that's just a sampling of his many achievements. At one point in this film, Sarah mentions Alex's `sad eyes,' and it's a very telling comment, as therein lies the strength of Macy's performance here, his ability to convey very real emotion in an understated, believable way that expresses all of the inner turmoil he is experiencing. Consider the scene in which he is lying awake in bed, staring off into the darkness; in that one restless moment it is clear that he is grappling, not only with his immediate situation, but with everything in his life that has brought him, finally, to this point. In that scene you find the sum total of a life of guilt, confusion and uncertainty, all of which have been successfully suppressed until now; all the things that have always been at the core of Alex's life, only now gradually breaking through his defense mechanisms and finally surfacing, demanding confrontation and [[resolutions]]. It's a [[complicated]] character created and delivered by Macy with an absolute precision that makes Alex truly memorable. It's a character to whom anyone who has ever faced a situation of seemingly insurmountable odds will be able to relate. It's a terrific piece of work by one of the finest actors around.

Sutherland is extremely effective, as well; his Michael is despicably sinister in a way that is so real it's chilling. It's frightening, in fact, to consider that there are such people actually walking the earth. This is not some pulp fiction or James Bond type villain, but a true personification of evil, hiding behind an outward appearance that is so normal he could be the guy next door, which is what makes it all the more disconcerting. And Sutherland brings it all to life brilliantly, with a great performance.

Neve Campbell looks the part of Sarah, but her performance (as is the usual case with her) seems somewhat pretentious, although her affected demeanor here just happens to fit the character and is actually a positive aspect of the film. If only she would occasionally turn her energies inward, it would make a tremendous difference in the way she presents her characters. `Panic,' however, is one of her best efforts; a powerful film that, in the end, is a journey well worth taking. 9/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "I have looked into the [[eye]] of this [[island]], and what I [[saw]] was [[beautiful]]," proclaims one of the main characters in ABC's award winning [[television]] show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of [[plane]] crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the show a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[large]] group of [[characters]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation [[becomes]] more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[ordinary]] island, [[either]] - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the [[lack]] of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[execution]] is [[superb]]. The island is a character all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the time of writing this review, only the first two seasons have aired, and they're filled with strong [[episodes]]. My only mild [[criticism]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then fortunately comes back in admirable shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "Lost" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. "I have looked into the [[eyeball]] of this [[insular]], and what I [[noticed]] was [[wondrous]]," proclaims one of the main characters in ABC's award winning [[tv]] show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of [[airplanes]] crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the show a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[big]] group of [[characteristic]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation [[becoming]] more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[banal]] island, [[neither]] - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the [[inadequacy]] of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[executions]] is [[extraordinaire]]. The island is a character all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the time of writing this review, only the first two seasons have aired, and they're filled with strong [[bouts]]. My only mild [[critique]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then fortunately comes back in admirable shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "Lost" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] OK, I [[kinda]] like the [[idea]] of this [[movie]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I kinda identify with some of the [[stories]]. Even the sometimes tacky and [[meaningless]] [[dialogue]] [[seems]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[movie]] would have been forgivable.

I'm trying as hard as [[possible]] not to trash this [[movie]] like the [[others]] did, but it's not that [[easy]] when the [[filmmakers]] weren't [[trying]] at all.

The editing in this [[movie]] is [[terrible]]! [[Possibly]] the [[worst]] editing I've ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]! There are things that you don't have to [[go]] to [[film]] school to [[learn]], leaning [[good]] [[editing]] is not one of them, but [[identifying]] a [[bad]] one is.

Also, the shot... [[Oh]] my [[God]] the shots, just [[awful]]! I can't even go into the [[details]], but we sometimes just see random [[things]] popping up, and that, in [[conjunction]] with the [[editing]] will [[give]] you the most painful [[film]] viewing [[experience]].

This [[movie]] being [[made]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[excuse]] also. I've seen short [[films]] on youtube with a [[lot]] more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this [[movie]] is [[nothing]] but a [[masturbation]] of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! [[In]] [[conclusion]], this [[movie]] is like what a [[really]] lazy amateur porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[lousy]] sex scenes [[separated]] by long [[boring]] [[conversations]] and one disgusting [[masturbation]] scene. If that's not your [[kind]] of [[thing]], [[avoid]] this at all [[cost]]! OK, I [[sorta]] like the [[thinking]] of this [[cinematography]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I kinda identify with some of the [[story]]. Even the sometimes tacky and [[unnecessary]] [[conversations]] [[appears]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[filmmaking]] would have been forgivable.

I'm trying as hard as [[probable]] not to trash this [[filmmaking]] like the [[alia]] did, but it's not that [[easier]] when the [[cinematographers]] weren't [[try]] at all.

The editing in this [[filmmaking]] is [[horrific]]! [[Maybe]] the [[worse]] editing I've ever [[noticed]] in a [[filmmaking]]! There are things that you don't have to [[going]] to [[movie]] school to [[learns]], leaning [[alright]] [[edition]] is not one of them, but [[detecting]] a [[rotten]] one is.

Also, the shot... [[Ahh]] my [[Goodness]] the shots, just [[scary]]! I can't even go into the [[particulars]], but we sometimes just see random [[aspects]] popping up, and that, in [[cooperates]] with the [[edition]] will [[confer]] you the most painful [[movie]] viewing [[experiences]].

This [[filmmaking]] being [[introduced]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[apologies]] also. I've seen short [[film]] on youtube with a [[lots]] more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this [[filmmaking]] is [[anything]] but a [[masturbate]] of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! [[For]] [[conclude]], this [[filmmaking]] is like what a [[truly]] lazy amateur porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[squalid]] sex scenes [[segregated]] by long [[dull]] [[debate]] and one disgusting [[masturbate]] scene. If that's not your [[type]] of [[stuff]], [[forestall]] this at all [[expenses]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After perusing the large amount of [[comments]] on this [[movie]] it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, [[extremely]] [[literate]], and [[intelligent]]. They know the [[history]] of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can [[reach]] in the hands of a [[gifted]] author. For many [[years]] science fiction languished in the [[basement]] of literature. Considered my most [[critic]] to be [[little]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this [[history]], and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, [[Bradbury]], and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are [[extremely]] uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, [[weak]] premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains [[little]] of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this [[movie]] isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. After perusing the large amount of [[feedback]] on this [[film]] it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, [[terribly]] [[schooled]], and [[smart]]. They know the [[histories]] of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can [[attaining]] in the hands of a [[talented]] author. For many [[yrs]] science fiction languished in the [[cava]] of literature. Considered my most [[critique]] to be [[scant]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this [[historic]], and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, [[Baek]], and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are [[eminently]] uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, [[breakable]] premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains [[scant]] of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this [[filmmaking]] isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Though]] derivative, "[[Labyrinth]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old [[show]]. [[Finally]] a [[story]] allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not [[easy]] playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American [[way]]" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[permitting]] him to [[show]] how one might [[react]] if he/she discovers that all that he [[knew]] may be a [[lie]], was [[quite]] [[believable]].

Welling rose to the occasion [[marvelously]].

As [[always]], Michael Rosenbaum, as the "[[handicapped]]" Lex, [[delivered]], as did [[Kristen]] Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed [[Lana]]. [[Allison]] Mack, the ever-present Chloe, [[also]] scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background [[added]] to the tone of the [[installment]] and [[made]] for an [[engaging]] [[drama]]. [[While]] derivative, "[[Maze]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old [[exposition]]. [[Eventually]] a [[narratives]] allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not [[simple]] playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American [[routes]]" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[letting]] him to [[illustrates]] how one might [[responds]] if he/she discovers that all that he [[overheard]] may be a [[lying]], was [[rather]] [[credible]].

Welling rose to the occasion [[divinely]].

As [[unceasingly]], Michael Rosenbaum, as the "[[disabled]]" Lex, [[gave]], as did [[Christians]] Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed [[Wool]]. [[Ellison]] Mack, the ever-present Chloe, [[apart]] scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background [[adding]] to the tone of the [[instalments]] and [[introduced]] for an [[participate]] [[tragedy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I bought this while I was playing chess in Hastings. I am from Denmark though. It is very good. Definitely with an understanding of the horror genre. The monster towards the end is very scary. People who criticise this on IMDB should recall that it was a huge succes among serious horror critics.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A nice Shirely Temple short. Child actors screaming their lines seemed to be the norm for that day and time. Perhaps being "seen and not heard" needed to be made up for. Aside from that this is fun. Given the films era there are certain aspects of the thing, from a social viewpoint, that strike me as both very progressive and liberal. I won't go into those here, I'd rather not spoil it for you but let you watch it for yourself and see if you spot those elements. As early on as it was its easy to see from this short the fascination that was already developing for Temple. That makes it worth watching if you're a Temple fan. For others its a cool way to kill ten minutes while you're waiting for your good night glass of milk to warm up on the stove. --------------------------------------------- Result 1233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I should have figured that any movie with the Poltergeist lady in it isn't going to be good. It actually starts out okay, but during the first murder scene you find out that the movie you're watching is a movie inside of a movie. There's people sitting in a movie theatre watching that movie. One girl in the audience is so annoying that I would have turned around and strangled her. A bit strange, but far from good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] From everything I'd read about the [[movie]], I was excited to [[support]] a [[film]] with a [[Christian]] [[theme]]. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally [[done]]. [[Especially]] the [[writing]]! Without good writing a [[movie]] doesn't have a [[chance]]. The writer/director [[said]] in an interview that he didn't [[want]] to [[give]] away how the title [[relates]] to the [[story]]. [[Believe]] me, it was [[NO]] big surprise. I [[kept]] [[waiting]] for the [[teenage]]/young [[adult]] back-story to [[unfold]], but it never did. As [[someone]] who has [[gone]] through a [[divorce]], I was very [[disappointed]]. This [[movie]] would have been [[NO]] [[comfort]] to me when I first went through the emotional [[turmoil]] that [[divorce]] can [[bring]] to your [[life]] as a [[Christian]]! From everything I'd read about the [[filmmaking]], I was excited to [[helps]] a [[filmmaking]] with a [[Cristian]] [[themes]]. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally [[played]]. [[Mostly]] the [[writes]]! Without good writing a [[cinematography]] doesn't have a [[opportunities]]. The writer/director [[asserted]] in an interview that he didn't [[wanting]] to [[lend]] away how the title [[pertains]] to the [[storytelling]]. [[Reckon]] me, it was [[NOS]] big surprise. I [[maintained]] [[expects]] for the [[schoolgirl]]/young [[grownups]] back-story to [[unfolding]], but it never did. As [[everybody]] who has [[vanished]] through a [[divorcing]], I was very [[frustrated]]. This [[filmmaking]] would have been [[NOPE]] [[consolation]] to me when I first went through the emotional [[uproar]] that [[divorces]] can [[brings]] to your [[iife]] as a [[Cristian]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[At]] last! A decent British [[comedy]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a [[TV]] series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive [[tale]] of [[discovery]], dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are [[gentle]] [[fools]] with a penchant for [[failure]] and each at a turning point in their [[lives]], giving a [[sensitive]], [[emotional]] trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous [[comedy]] together. The chemistry between the three amigos is [[palpable]] and makes for a [[touching]] companionship with [[hilarious]] [[dialogue]] and some [[classic]] comedic moments. It [[feels]] [[part]] Withnail and I, part American [[Werewolf]] in London, and [[part]] Quadraphenia (but only because of the [[bike]] gangs, and [[Phil]] Daniels). [[In]] [[fact]], [[Phil]] Daniels' [[lovable]] rogue [[reminds]] you of Danny the [[dealer]] in Withnail and I, with his scholarly [[approach]] and scientific [[commitment]] to [[drugs]]. This is a [[great]] [[film]], [[particularly]] for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the [[past]], who will relate to [[many]] [[moments]] in the [[film]]. A personal favourite is the [[brilliant]] scene in the [[Welsh]] corner [[shop]], [[buying]] [[munchies]] while tripping on 'shrooms. This [[gentle]] [[comedy]] will warm the [[cockles]] of your heart and have you [[laughing]] out loud. And you don't have to ride [[bikes]] or even like them to [[enjoy]] it. But it'll [[add]] to it if you do. [[Brilliant]]. [[In]] last! A decent British [[comic]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a [[TELEVISION]] series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive [[story]] of [[detect]], dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are [[mild]] [[idiots]] with a penchant for [[insufficiency]] and each at a turning point in their [[vie]], giving a [[touchy]], [[sentimental]] trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous [[comedian]] together. The chemistry between the three amigos is [[overt]] and makes for a [[touch]] companionship with [[funny]] [[discussions]] and some [[conventional]] comedic moments. It [[thinks]] [[portion]] Withnail and I, part American [[Werewolves]] in London, and [[portions]] Quadraphenia (but only because of the [[bicycling]] gangs, and [[Elephant]] Daniels). [[Among]] [[facto]], [[Elephant]] Daniels' [[adorable]] rogue [[remembered]] you of Danny the [[distributors]] in Withnail and I, with his scholarly [[approaching]] and scientific [[pledge]] to [[drug]]. This is a [[wondrous]] [[movies]], [[notably]] for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the [[yesteryear]], who will relate to [[several]] [[times]] in the [[cinematography]]. A personal favourite is the [[sparkly]] scene in the [[Welch]] corner [[storage]], [[buys]] [[crocs]] while tripping on 'shrooms. This [[mild]] [[humor]] will warm the [[hulls]] of your heart and have you [[giggling]] out loud. And you don't have to ride [[bicycles]] or even like them to [[enjoys]] it. But it'll [[inserting]] to it if you do. [[Sparkly]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Rather then long [[dance]] sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[would]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[dynamic]] and [[IMPORTANT]] rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri [[made]] the movie [[lack]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the [[book]] you [[would]] not really understand why Sayuri [[loved]] the [[Chairman]] and why Mameha [[became]] her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate [[script]] they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. Rather then long [[ballet]] sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[could]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[energetic]] and [[SIZABLE]] rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri [[effected]] the movie [[imperfection]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the [[cookbook]] you [[could]] not really understand why Sayuri [[worshipped]] the [[Preside]] and why Mameha [[was]] her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate [[screenplay]] they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] does anyone think that this [[show]] actually [[helps]] some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[channels]] and come upon this [[show]] i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his viewers are like him or if they are [[good]] people and think they will have a [[better]] life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[little]] [[consequence]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no [[longer]] has the same affects as it once did (thank [[god]]). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. does anyone think that this [[exposition]] actually [[aids]] some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[canal]] and come upon this [[exhibition]] i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his viewers are like him or if they are [[buena]] people and think they will have a [[best]] life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[scant]] [[effect]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no [[most]] has the same affects as it once did (thank [[deus]]). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1238 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] This [[movie]] is [[funny]] and [[suitable]] for any age. It is [[definitely]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[fine]] [[job]] playing folks in the mid-western [[town]] of [[Big]] [[Bean]], Illinois. [[Where]] we [[must]] [[assume]] [[nothing]] ever [[happens]] [[since]] the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the [[Interstate]]. The [[location]] [[appeals]] as suitably [[boring]] and [[totally]] unlikely for the invasion of [[earth]] by Martians. But these Martians are [[totally]] inept, [[despite]] being well-equipped with an arsenal of [[suitably]] [[ghastly]] and [[deadly]] [[weapons]]... [[including]] one set on [[eradicating]] the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to [[make]] us the [[viewers]] and the locals [[wish]] to [[help]] them... leave [[earth]]. J. J. [[Anderson]] playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just [[great]] lines. Watch this [[movie]] for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[enjoyable]] it is. This [[cinema]] is [[comical]] and [[adequate]] for any age. It is [[surely]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[fined]] [[labour]] playing folks in the mid-western [[cities]] of [[Large]] [[Beans]], Illinois. [[Hence]] we [[gotta]] [[suppose]] [[anything]] ever [[comes]] [[because]] the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the [[Motorway]]. The [[locations]] [[appellate]] as suitably [[bored]] and [[altogether]] unlikely for the invasion of [[land]] by Martians. But these Martians are [[altogether]] inept, [[although]] being well-equipped with an arsenal of [[adequately]] [[ugly]] and [[fatal]] [[firearms]]... [[consisting]] one set on [[deleting]] the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to [[deliver]] us the [[audience]] and the locals [[wants]] to [[aids]] them... leave [[overland]]. J. J. [[Andersen]] playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just [[wondrous]] lines. Watch this [[films]] for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[nice]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1239 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. [[Renting]] Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[missed]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[surprise]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are [[powerfully]] [[presented]] when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they [[get]] it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is [[top]] notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a [[master]] stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a [[brilliant]] choice! And Lucy [[Liu]] is [[also]] just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch [[movies]] several [[times]] within [[days]] - this is one of them. Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. [[Leased]] Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[flunked]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[amaze]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are [[severely]] [[tabled]] when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they [[obtains]] it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is [[topped]] notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a [[padrone]] stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a [[wondrous]] choice! And Lucy [[Lio]] is [[apart]] just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch [[cinematography]] several [[moments]] within [[jours]] - this is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As a [[big]] fan of the original [[film]], it's hard to watch this show. The garish set decor and harshly lighted sets rob any [[style]] from this remake. The mood is never there. Instead, it has the look and feel of so many [[television]] [[movies]] of the [[Seventies]]. Crenna is not a bad choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy [[wardrobe]] and "[[swank]]" apartment don't fit the [[mood]] of the [[original]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to [[make]] it [[work]] but Samantha Egger is a [[really]] [[bad]] choice. The [[English]] accent and California [[looks]] can't [[hold]] a candle to [[Barbara]] Stanwick's velvet [[voice]] and [[sex]] appeal. Lee J.Cobb [[tries]] [[mightily]] to fashion Barton Keyes,but [[even]] his performance is just gruff, without [[style]].

It feels [[like]] the [[TV]] [[movie]] it was and again reminds me of what a remarkable film the original still is. As a [[mammoth]] fan of the original [[filmmaking]], it's hard to watch this show. The garish set decor and harshly lighted sets rob any [[styling]] from this remake. The mood is never there. Instead, it has the look and feel of so many [[tv]] [[filmmaking]] of the [[Seventy]]. Crenna is not a bad choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy [[closet]] and "[[chic]]" apartment don't fit the [[ambiance]] of the [[initial]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to [[deliver]] it [[collaborated]] but Samantha Egger is a [[truly]] [[unfavourable]] choice. The [[Francais]] accent and California [[seem]] can't [[held]] a candle to [[Barbarian]] Stanwick's velvet [[voices]] and [[sexuality]] appeal. Lee J.Cobb [[attempts]] [[forcefully]] to fashion Barton Keyes,but [[yet]] his performance is just gruff, without [[styles]].

It feels [[fond]] the [[TVS]] [[flick]] it was and again reminds me of what a remarkable film the original still is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Rarely do I [[see]] a [[film]] that I am totally [[engrossed]] with; this was one of them. It had good acting, [[dialogue]], plot, and the scenery was [[beautiful]]. I laughed out loud [[many]] times, [[especially]] the scene [[dealing]] with the [[kitchen]] [[raid]]. The slapstick [[comedy]] [[performed]] by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I admit that I am a sucker for slapstick. The [[story]] dealt with a [[group]] of people in their 30's [[coming]] back to a summer [[camp]] that they had attended 20 [[years]] [[previously]]. It was a [[farewell]] [[week]] of camping, as the place [[would]] be [[closed]] down [[permanently]] at the end of the season. As [[adults]] the camp looked [[different]], and they felt differently about it and each other. I [[recommend]] this funny, [[moving]] [[movie]] to all.

Rarely do I [[consults]] a [[kino]] that I am totally [[absorbed]] with; this was one of them. It had good acting, [[conversations]], plot, and the scenery was [[wondrous]]. I laughed out loud [[various]] times, [[concretely]] the scene [[addressing]] with the [[cuisine]] [[raided]]. The slapstick [[travesty]] [[done]] by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I admit that I am a sucker for slapstick. The [[history]] dealt with a [[groupings]] of people in their 30's [[come]] back to a summer [[encampment]] that they had attended 20 [[ages]] [[formerly]]. It was a [[bye]] [[chou]] of camping, as the place [[ought]] be [[shutting]] down [[steadily]] at the end of the season. As [[grownups]] the camp looked [[diversified]], and they felt differently about it and each other. I [[recommendation]] this funny, [[relocating]] [[kino]] to all.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watch a [[lot]] of films, good, bad and [[indifferent]]; there is [[usually]] something of interest to fixate upon, [[even]] if it is only set design, or the [[reliable]] [[labor]] of a [[good]] character actor, or the [[fortuitous]] laughter that [[emerges]] from watching [[ineptitude]] [[captured]] [[forever]].

[[However]], I was [[quite]] pleasantly [[surprised]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham [[Greene]] has been [[translated]] into [[film]] [[many]] times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential [[Agent]]" is one of those [[lesser]] vehicles, [[yet]] it manages to get me [[somewhere]] anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's [[depictions]] as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost [[complete]] non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to [[work]] in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. [[Yet]] I found that plodding [[accentuated]] rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was [[compelled]] to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The [[film]] does not rise to the [[level]] of art, and thus cannot [[hope]] to [[answer]] such [[questions]], but it is much more than [[mere]] entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly [[drawn]]. The lack of glitz, of "[[bubble]]," of narrative "bounce" help to [[make]] this [[movie]] very [[worthwhile]].

And there is no [[happy]] ending, for [[history]] wrote the [[ending]]. I watch a [[batch]] of films, good, bad and [[oblivious]]; there is [[traditionally]] something of interest to fixate upon, [[yet]] if it is only set design, or the [[credible]] [[jobs]] of a [[alright]] character actor, or the [[unintended]] laughter that [[arises]] from watching [[inability]] [[caught]] [[permanently]].

[[Instead]], I was [[utterly]] pleasantly [[horrified]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham [[Archer]] has been [[translating]] into [[cinematography]] [[countless]] times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential [[Officers]]" is one of those [[lowest]] vehicles, [[still]] it manages to get me [[nowhere]] anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's [[representations]] as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost [[finish]] non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to [[cooperating]] in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. [[Though]] I found that plodding [[compounded]] rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was [[obligated]] to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The [[cinematographic]] does not rise to the [[levels]] of art, and thus cannot [[esperanza]] to [[replying]] such [[issues]], but it is much more than [[simple]] entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly [[draws]]. The lack of glitz, of "[[moniker]]," of narrative "bounce" help to [[deliver]] this [[cinematography]] very [[actionable]].

And there is no [[pleased]] ending, for [[stories]] wrote the [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This is another one of those 'humans vs insects/eco-horror' [[features]]; a theme that was [[popular]] in the late 70's. Only you can't really [[call]] it horror. There's zero [[suspense]] and no gruesome [[events]]. [[In]] other words: this movie is [[pretty]] lame. It's not that it's really bad or something; it's just very boring. A construction site near a [[hotel]] uncovers a big nest of [[ants]]. [[Later]] on we learn that, [[probably]] due to [[different]] [[sorts]] of pesticides [[used]] in the [[past]], their [[bite]] [[became]] [[poisonous]]. Some people get bitten and rushed to the hospital and it takes [[ages]] for the residents of the hospital to figure out what's [[going]] on. [[Robert]] Foxworth figures it out first and then you can see him [[go]] berserk with a [[digging]] [[machine]] for what [[seems]] like [[several]] [[hours]]. [[Then]] they [[flee]] in the [[house]], [[waiting]] to [[get]] [[rescued]]. And, [[man]], you should [[see]] all the [[efforts]] they make for [[rescuing]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they even use a [[big]] [[helicopter]]. All the [[time]] when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all got shoes on. [[Just]] [[run]] out of the building. I'm sure a bunch of ants won't catch up with you." It's all [[pretty]] [[ridiculous]].

Of course, [[lots]] of close-ups of [[crawling]] ants are [[shown]] [[throughout]] the whole [[movie]]. Ants in the garden. Ants in the [[garbage]]. Ants in the [[kitchen]]. Ants on the [[roof]]. Ants in the [[bedroom]]. Ants in the [[sink]]. And the [[best]] [[part]]: Ants crawling on people's [[faces]] while the actors are [[breathing]] through [[straws]]. But when you [[see]] [[groups]] of ants in wider shots, they [[indeed]] look like black rice the set designers glued to the wall.

One [[small]] surprise [[came]] near the end. No, it has nothing to do with a [[twist]] in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy [[made]] an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[say]]? This [[movie]] is called IT [[HAPPENED]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD [[MANOR]] but the box-art of my [[copy]] read ANTS and the title during the opening [[credits]] was [[PANIC]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD [[MANOR]]. There you have it. [[Now]], [[since]] this is a made-for-TV [[movie]] from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely [[mild]] in my [[final]] [[rating]]. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, shocks and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an annoying itch. This is another one of those 'humans vs insects/eco-horror' [[traits]]; a theme that was [[fashionable]] in the late 70's. Only you can't really [[invitation]] it horror. There's zero [[sufferance]] and no gruesome [[incidents]]. [[During]] other words: this movie is [[belle]] lame. It's not that it's really bad or something; it's just very boring. A construction site near a [[guesthouse]] uncovers a big nest of [[mules]]. [[Then]] on we learn that, [[certainly]] due to [[several]] [[sorting]] of pesticides [[utilise]] in the [[yesteryear]], their [[bit]] [[came]] [[prejudicial]]. Some people get bitten and rushed to the hospital and it takes [[years]] for the residents of the hospital to figure out what's [[go]] on. [[Roberto]] Foxworth figures it out first and then you can see him [[going]] berserk with a [[dig]] [[machines]] for what [[seem]] like [[different]] [[hour]]. [[Later]] they [[fled]] in the [[maison]], [[hoping]] to [[gets]] [[saved]]. And, [[guy]], you should [[behold]] all the [[activities]] they make for [[saved]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they even use a [[huge]] [[chopper]]. All the [[moment]] when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all got shoes on. [[Jen]] [[running]] out of the building. I'm sure a bunch of ants won't catch up with you." It's all [[quite]] [[silly]].

Of course, [[lot]] of close-ups of [[creeping]] ants are [[illustrated]] [[in]] the whole [[filmmaking]]. Ants in the garden. Ants in the [[junk]]. Ants in the [[cuisine]]. Ants on the [[ceilings]]. Ants in the [[room]]. Ants in the [[sinking]]. And the [[optimum]] [[party]]: Ants crawling on people's [[facing]] while the actors are [[breathe]] through [[twigs]]. But when you [[seeing]] [[panel]] of ants in wider shots, they [[actually]] look like black rice the set designers glued to the wall.

One [[little]] surprise [[arrived]] near the end. No, it has nothing to do with a [[twisting]] in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy [[effected]] an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[says]]? This [[filmmaking]] is called IT [[ARRIVED]] [[INTO]] LAKEWOOD [[MANSION]] but the box-art of my [[copies]] read ANTS and the title during the opening [[credit]] was [[SCARE]] [[DURING]] LAKEWOOD [[MANSION]]. There you have it. [[Presently]], [[because]] this is a made-for-TV [[movies]] from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely [[gentle]] in my [[definitive]] [[scoring]]. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, shocks and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an annoying itch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such [[weapons]] as flamethrowers, you [[would]] think they would have been caught before [[someone]] [[writing]] for a weekly [[coupon]] newspaper overheard someone [[saying]] 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish minutes back. [[Life]] is too [[precious]] to [[rent]] this movie.

I feel [[bad]] for the big named [[actors]] that made the [[mistake]] of making this movie.

[[If]] you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this [[movie]]. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young [[girls]], who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such [[firearms]] as flamethrowers, you [[could]] think they would have been caught before [[person]] [[literary]] for a weekly [[voucher]] newspaper overheard someone [[arguing]] 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish minutes back. [[Iife]] is too [[treasured]] to [[lease]] this movie.

I feel [[negative]] for the big named [[players]] that made the [[mistaken]] of making this movie.

[[Though]] you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this [[filmmaking]]. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young [[woman]], who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[Even]] by 1942 [[standards]] of movie-making the setup which HER [[CARDBOARD]] LOVER presents was [[dated]] to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[done]] much better in [[classics]] such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these [[movies]] [[features]] [[women]] with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the [[worst]] part of it is Shearer herself. For an [[actress]] used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon [[seems]] to put her into throes of [[complete]] over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a [[part]] of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only [[fuels]] the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. [[Yet]] by 1942 [[norms]] of movie-making the setup which HER [[CARTON]] LOVER presents was [[dating]] to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[completed]] much better in [[masterpieces]] such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these [[kino]] [[idiosyncrasies]] [[femmes]] with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the [[pire]] part of it is Shearer herself. For an [[actor]] used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon [[seem]] to put her into throes of [[finished]] over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a [[party]] of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only [[flammable]] the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. --------------------------------------------- Result 1246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] OK, here is my personal list of top Nicktoons [[shows]] as in [[today]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[show]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a [[simple]] but [[great]] animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - [[brings]] the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The [[stories]] are [[enjoyable]] (fans' [[episodes]] [[would]] be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the [[humor]] is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. OK, here is my personal list of top Nicktoons [[showcase]] as in [[hoy]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[display]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a [[mere]] but [[awesome]] animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - [[poses]] the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The [[tale]] are [[nice]] (fans' [[spells]] [[should]] be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the [[mood]] is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. --------------------------------------------- Result 1247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] I have yet to read a negative [[professional]] [[review]] of this [[movie]]. I [[guess]] I must have missed something. The [[beginning]] is [[intriguing]], the three [[main]] [[characters]] meet late at [[night]] in an otherwise empty [[bar]] and [[entertain]] each other with invented [[stories]]. That's the best part. After the three go their separate [[ways]], the [[film]] splits into three [[threads]]. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an [[eye]] [[opening]] curiosity. Unfortunately, the [[director]] beat this one to death, even [[injecting]] a wild plot [[line]] that [[leads]] [[nowhere]] in [[particular]]. Bottom line: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from [[insomnia]], [[view]] it in [[bed]] and you will have a [[good]] [[night]] sleep. I have yet to read a negative [[occupational]] [[reviews]] of this [[filmmaking]]. I [[suppose]] I must have missed something. The [[launches]] is [[captivating]], the three [[primary]] [[characteristics]] meet late at [[nighttime]] in an otherwise empty [[solicitors]] and [[distract]] each other with invented [[histories]]. That's the best part. After the three go their separate [[shapes]], the [[flick]] splits into three [[cords]]. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an [[eyeball]] [[opened]] curiosity. Unfortunately, the [[superintendent]] beat this one to death, even [[injection]] a wild plot [[linea]] that [[leeds]] [[everywhere]] in [[special]]. Bottom line: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from [[drowsiness]], [[visualise]] it in [[bedside]] and you will have a [[alright]] [[nighttime]] sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 1248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[love]] John Saxon in [[anything]] he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a [[movie]] that should have more aptly been been [[titled]] "[[Please]] Do Not Watch This [[Movie]] Called: Zombie [[Death]] [[House]]". The $1000 [[dollar]] Shock Insurance Certificate is [[dear]] Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you [[spend]] 14 [[dollars]] on a [[filmed]] dump churned out by a [[major]] 70's cheese legend. [[Ray]] being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco [[ceilings]] on a Ford Falcon. [[Just]] plain [[bad]] now, the both of them- and [[boring]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this [[old]] stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the [[dollar]] video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE [[ONLY]] [[WAY]] TO DO SERVICE TO THIS [[TRIPE]] IS TO [[RELEASE]] IT ON THE DOLLAR [[MARKET]] FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black [[Christmas]], Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] or The [[Glove]]. I [[iike]] John Saxon in [[something]] he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a [[filmmaking]] that should have more aptly been been [[entitled]] "[[Invite]] Do Not Watch This [[Filmmaking]] Called: Zombie [[Mortality]] [[Households]]". The $1000 [[usd]] Shock Insurance Certificate is [[sweetie]] Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you [[expended]] 14 [[usd]] on a [[shot]] dump churned out by a [[big]] 70's cheese legend. [[Gleam]] being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco [[ceiling]] on a Ford Falcon. [[Jen]] plain [[unfavourable]] now, the both of them- and [[dull]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this [[former]] stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the [[greenback]] video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE [[JEN]] [[CAMINO]] TO DO SERVICE TO THIS [[GUT]] IS TO [[LIBERATED]] IT ON THE DOLLAR [[MERCADO]] FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black [[Navidad]], Nightmare on Elm [[Thoroughfare]] or The [[Gant]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Prix]] de Beauté was [[made]] on the cusp of the [[changeover]] from [[silence]] to [[sound]], which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally [[conceived]] as a [[silent]], it was [[released]] with a [[dubbed]] soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[speaking]] Louise Brooks' lines, but was [[released]] as a [[silent]] in Italy and other parts of [[Europe]]. I was [[lucky]] [[enough]] to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[flawless]] [[new]] [[restoration]] of an Italian silent [[print]] at the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]]. I haven't [[seen]] the talkie version yet, but I [[think]] it's safe to [[assume]] the silent version is much more [[satisfying]], since by all reports the dubbing is poorly [[done]] ([[Louise]] [[Brooks]] is [[clearly]] [[speaking]] English, so there's no [[way]] her lips could be matched.) [[Also]], the [[film]] is made entirely in the [[silent]] style, with few titles and little [[need]] for [[dialogue]]. [[Prix]] [[de]] Beauté [[tells]] its [[story]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The [[opening]] is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splashing]] at a public beach. [[Throughout]] the [[film]] there is an [[emphasis]] on visual [[detail]], on [[clothing]], [[machinery]], [[decoration]], and symbolic [[images]] such as a caged bird, a heap of [[torn]] [[photographs]], a diamond [[bracelet]]. This is [[silent]] [[film]] [[technique]] at its pinnacle.

[[Louise]] Brooks, of course, is [[responsible]] for [[saving]] the [[film]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[heartbreaking]] to reflect that this was her last starring role. Lustrously [[beautiful]], she [[dominates]] the [[film]] with her charisma and [[also]] [[gives]] a [[perfectly]] natural [[yet]] [[highly]] [[charged]] performance. [[Her]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[films]] for which she's best known, is a [[woman]] we can fully [[understand]] and sympathize with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typist]] with a possessive [[fiancé]], who [[yearns]] to [[get]] more out of [[life]] and secretly enters a beauty [[contest]], with immediate [[success]]. She is then torn between the excitement of her [[glamorous]] [[new]] [[life]] and her [[love]] for the [[man]] who insists she [[give]] it all up or [[lose]] him. All of the [[characters]] are drawn with [[nuance]]. The [[fiancé]] [[inspires]] pity and is not merely a brute: he [[loves]] Lucienne, but is a limited man who can't cope with her having a life [[apart]] from him or attracting the attentions of other [[men]]. Even the "other [[man]]" in the [[story]] is not the [[simple]] slimeball we first take him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted audience members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. [[Price]] de Beauté was [[introduced]] on the cusp of the [[transition]] from [[silencer]] to [[audible]], which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally [[destined]] as a [[silencer]], it was [[liberated]] with a [[nicknamed]] soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[talking]] Louise Brooks' lines, but was [[liberated]] as a [[speechless]] in Italy and other parts of [[Europa]]. I was [[fortunate]] [[adequately]] to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[faultless]] [[nouveau]] [[renovations]] of an Italian silent [[printouts]] at the Tribeca [[Movie]] [[Fest]]. I haven't [[noticed]] the talkie version yet, but I [[thought]] it's safe to [[assumes]] the silent version is much more [[satisfactory]], since by all reports the dubbing is poorly [[accomplished]] ([[Lewis]] [[Creeks]] is [[plainly]] [[talking]] English, so there's no [[ways]] her lips could be matched.) [[Additionally]], the [[movies]] is made entirely in the [[speechless]] style, with few titles and little [[gotta]] for [[dialogues]]. [[Prices]] [[of]] Beauté [[told]] its [[narratives]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The [[commencement]] is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splash]] at a public beach. [[Across]] the [[movie]] there is an [[concentrate]] on visual [[details]], on [[dresses]], [[machines]], [[decorations]], and symbolic [[photographing]] such as a caged bird, a heap of [[ripped]] [[visuals]], a diamond [[wrist]]. This is [[mute]] [[movies]] [[tech]] at its pinnacle.

[[Lewis]] Brooks, of course, is [[liable]] for [[save]] the [[cinematography]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[upsetting]] to reflect that this was her last starring role. Lustrously [[handsome]], she [[dominate]] the [[movies]] with her charisma and [[additionally]] [[donne]] a [[fully]] natural [[however]] [[incredibly]] [[blamed]] performance. [[His]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[movie]] for which she's best known, is a [[women]] we can fully [[understood]] and sympathize with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typewritten]] with a possessive [[fiancée]], who [[longs]] to [[obtain]] more out of [[vie]] and secretly enters a beauty [[competitions]], with immediate [[accomplishments]]. She is then torn between the excitement of her [[admirable]] [[novel]] [[vie]] and her [[loves]] for the [[hombre]] who insists she [[lend]] it all up or [[wasting]] him. All of the [[features]] are drawn with [[undertone]]. The [[fiancée]] [[inspiring]] pity and is not merely a brute: he [[likes]] Lucienne, but is a limited man who can't cope with her having a life [[additionally]] from him or attracting the attentions of other [[males]]. Even the "other [[guy]]" in the [[storytelling]] is not the [[easy]] slimeball we first take him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted audience members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. --------------------------------------------- Result 1250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Even though this was a disaster in the box office, It is my favorite film. It gives a powerful message of family. It has a lot of violence and has one song with a bunch of girls in bikinis. Compared to other bollywood films, the action scenes in this movie are more realistic. It is an incredible combination of Akshay Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan. If you want to see the Indian Godfather, Amitabh portrays that in this film. Don't read reviews by critic, they're just ignorant. This movie has good mix of comedy, romance, drama, and especially action. So if you want to see action more realistic than Main Hoon Na(still good movie), this is the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have [[absolutely]] no [[knowledge]] of [[author]] Phillipa [[Pearce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[GARDEN]] is [[typical]] of her work I probably would have had little interest in her [[books]] as a [[child]] . When I was a child I wasn`t [[really]] interested in litreture unless it had [[soldiers]] fighting [[monsters]] complete with a [[high]] [[body]] count

Judging by this film version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle [[class]] kids since much of the [[story]] of revolves around protagonist Tom [[Long]] moving to a [[house]] with no garden then suddenly [[finding]] a metaphysical one . Having a [[garden]] of your own was no doubt something that [[working]] [[class]] people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden [[subtext]] there [[somewhere]] . There`s also a romance [[involving]] a [[young]] [[girl]] called [[Hattie]] but again are cynical kids amoured by [[love]] [[stories]] ? [[Perhaps]] the [[worst]] [[criticism]] is that very [[little]] in the [[way]] of excitement or adventure happens within the [[narrative]]

This is a childrens film that seems dated by its [[source]] . It`s [[inoffensive]] but I`m surprised by its high [[rating]] by the IMDB [[voters]] . I wonder how many of them would have given it so [[many]] high marks if they were 10 [[year]] [[olds]] who`d just [[seen]] the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? I have [[wholly]] no [[acquaintances]] of [[auteur]] Phillipa [[Pierce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[GARDENS]] is [[classic]] of her work I probably would have had little interest in her [[ledger]] as a [[kid]] . When I was a child I wasn`t [[truly]] interested in litreture unless it had [[servicemen]] fighting [[monster]] complete with a [[highest]] [[agencies]] count

Judging by this film version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle [[kinds]] kids since much of the [[histories]] of revolves around protagonist Tom [[Protracted]] moving to a [[homes]] with no garden then suddenly [[conclusion]] a metaphysical one . Having a [[gardens]] of your own was no doubt something that [[work]] [[sorts]] people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden [[connotation]] there [[somehow]] . There`s also a romance [[encompassing]] a [[youthful]] [[daughters]] called [[Bessie]] but again are cynical kids amoured by [[amore]] [[storytelling]] ? [[Presumably]] the [[meanest]] [[critic]] is that very [[small]] in the [[routing]] of excitement or adventure happens within the [[descriptive]]

This is a childrens film that seems dated by its [[origin]] . It`s [[benign]] but I`m surprised by its high [[scoring]] by the IMDB [[constituents]] . I wonder how many of them would have given it so [[countless]] high marks if they were 10 [[annum]] [[years]] who`d just [[noticed]] the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? --------------------------------------------- Result 1252 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surely one of the best British films ever made, if not one of the best films ever made anywhere. Script, cinematography, direction and acting in a class on their own. This film works on so many levels. So why is it completely unavailable on tape, DVD. Never shown on TV? Why is it hidden away when it is regularly shown at the National Film Theatre in London to packed houses? --------------------------------------------- Result 1253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Shock Corridor (1963)' was my first film from Samuel Fuller, and there I was impressed with the director's astute blending of B-movie and big-budget aesthetics, even if the story itself was pure schlock. 'Pickup on South Street (1953)' was released a decade earlier in Fuller's career, obviously produced on a larger budget from a big-name studio, Twentieth Century-Fox. Nevertheless, the visuals are still notable in that there's a somewhat raw, naturalistic element to the photography, not unlike Dassin's 'The Night and the City (1950)' and Kazan's 'Panic in the Streets (1950)' {the latter was also shot by cinematographer Joe McDonald}. In some scenes, Fuller shoves the camera so close to his actors' faces that they're out of focus, bluntly registering the intimate thoughts, emotions and brief inflections that are communicated through that most revealing of facial features, the eye. Though (unexpectedly) prone to melodrama, and with just a hint of anti-Communist propaganda, 'Pickup on South Street' is a strong film noir that succeeds most outstandingly in its evocation of setting – the underground of New York City.

When just-out-of-prison pickpocket Skip McCoy (Richard Widmark) snags the purse of a woman on the subway (Jean Peters), he pockets more than he'd originally bargained for. The woman, Candy, and her cowardly ex-boyfriend Joey (Richard Kiley) had been smuggling top-secret information to the Communists, and McKoy has unexpectedly retrieved an important roll of micro-film. Will he turn in the MacGuffin to the proper authorities, or sell it to the highest bidder? If 'Pickup on South Street' has a flaw, it's that the story seems designed solely to bolster an anti-Communist agenda, reeking of propaganda like nothing since WWII {Dwight Taylor, who supplied the story, also notably wrote 'The Thin Man Goes Home (1944),' the only propagandistic movie of the series}. For no apparent reason, every identifiable character – even the smugly self-serving Skip McCoy – eventually becomes a self-sacrificing patriot, the transformation predictable from the outset. In traditional film noir, the unapologetic criminal always gets his comeuppance, the rational punishment for his sins, but apparently not when they've served their country; patriotism wipes the slate clean.

Richard Widmark, an actor who I'm really beginning to like, plays the haughty pickpocket with composure, though always with that hint of ill-ease that suggests he's biting off more than he can chew. The opening scene on the train is the film's finest, as McCoy breathlessly and silently fishes around in his victim's hand bag, recalling Bresson's 'Pickpocket (1959).' Thelma Ritter is terrific as a tired street-woman who'll peddle information to anybody willing to pay for it (though, of course, she draws the line at Commies). Jean Peters is well-cast as the trashy dame passing information to the other side, playing the role almost completely devoid of glamour; Fuller reportedly cast the actress on the observation that she had the slightly bow-legged strut of a prostitute. Nevertheless, Peters must suffer a contrived love affair with Widmark that really brings down the film's attempts at realism. Fascinatingly, upon its release, 'Pickup on South Street' was promptly condemned as Communist propaganda by the FBI, and the Communist Party condemned it for being the exact opposite. Go figure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very entertaining flick, considering the budget and its length. The storyline is hardly ever touched on in the movie world so it also brought a sense of novelty. The acting was great (P'z to Dom) and the cinematography was also very well done. I recommend this movie for anyone who's into thrillers, it will not disappoint you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Actress]] [[Ruth]] Roman's real-life [[philanthropic]] gesture to help entertain troops arriving from and leaving for the Korean [[War]] at an air [[base]] near [[San]] [[Francisco]] jump-started this all-star [[Warner]] Bros. [[salute]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[make]] [[guest]] appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully green and [[skinny]] Air Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who [[looks]] like he should be delivering newspapers from his bicycle). Seems the [[Corporal]] has [[fooled]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when [[actually]] he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and [[plucky]] song numbers are most pleasant. [[Roman]] is also here, [[looking]] glamorous, while James Cagney pokes [[fun]] at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae [[sings]] in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a [[hospital]] bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[causing]] one to wonder, "Did they [[run]] out of sets?" [[For]] undemanding [[viewers]], an interesting flashback to another time and place. [[Still]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[aspects]] [[render]] "Starlift" strictly a second-biller. *1/2 from **** [[Actor]] [[Roth]] Roman's real-life [[charities]] gesture to help entertain troops arriving from and leaving for the Korean [[Warfare]] at an air [[foundations]] near [[Saint]] [[Francesco]] jump-started this all-star [[Werner]] Bros. [[applaud]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[deliver]] [[invited]] appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully green and [[delgado]] Air Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who [[seems]] like he should be delivering newspapers from his bicycle). Seems the [[Physical]] has [[tricked]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when [[genuinely]] he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and [[gallant]] song numbers are most pleasant. [[Romans]] is also here, [[researching]] glamorous, while James Cagney pokes [[funny]] at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae [[sung]] in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a [[hospitals]] bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[provoking]] one to wonder, "Did they [[execute]] out of sets?" [[During]] undemanding [[spectators]], an interesting flashback to another time and place. [[However]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[things]] [[rendered]] "Starlift" strictly a second-biller. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I have seen the freebird movie and [[think]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they [[reminded]] me of some good times i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the film director getting in on the acting, well [[done]] [[jon]] ! [[At]] the [[end]] a new [[crop]] gets [[mentioned]], in [[Ireland]] is this the [[foundation]] for a 2nd film? [[hope]] so keep them coming. Great film , well written, realistic characters ! I have seen the freebird movie and [[thinking]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they [[recalled]] me of some good times i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the film director getting in on the acting, well [[played]] [[john]] ! [[In]] the [[termination]] a new [[cultivation]] gets [[talked]], in [[Norte]] is this the [[groundwork]] for a 2nd film? [[amal]] so keep them coming. Great film , well written, realistic characters ! --------------------------------------------- Result 1257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] With these people faking so many shots, using old footage, and gassing animals to get them out, not to mention that some of the scenes were filmed on a created set with actors, what's to believe? Old film of countries is nice, but the animal abuse and degradation of natives is painful to watch in these films. I know, racism is OK in these old films, but there is more to that to make this couple lose credibility. Portrayed as fliers, they never flew their planes, Martin Johnson was an ex-vaudevillian, used friends like Jack London for financial gain while stiffing them of royalties, denying his wife's apparent depression, using her as a cute prop, all this makes these films unbearable. They were by no means the first to travel to these lands, or the first to write about them. He was OK as a filmmaker and photographer, but that's about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the most excellent movies ever produced in Russia and certainly the best one made during the decline of the USSR. Incredibly clever, hilarious and dramatic at the same time. Superb acting. Overall a masterpiece. Score it 10/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Banned]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the UK, Unhinged has [[naturally]] gained [[quite]] a bit of [[notoriety]]. However, the most [[shocking]] [[thing]] I [[found]] about the [[film]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The bloodletting I [[could]] handle: the [[terrible]] acting, shoddy editing, [[awful]] direction, lousy [[script]] and [[abysmal]] soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three [[girls]] on their [[way]] to a [[music]] [[festival]] [[crash]] into a [[ravine]] during a [[storm]]. They are rescued by a [[friendly]] stranger who [[takes]] them to a [[nearby]] [[house]]. The owner of the [[house]], a batty [[old]] [[lady]], and her spinster [[daughter]], welcome the girls in, [[allowing]] them to stay for a few days in [[order]] to recuperate. However, [[someone]] doesn't [[want]] the [[girls]] to [[leave]]—ever! One by one they [[fall]] victim to an [[unseen]] assailant.

Taking a long [[time]] to get going and [[featuring]] some of the [[worst]] performances ever in a horror [[film]] (and that takes some doing), Unhinged is a [[truly]] [[awful]] film. The [[music]] is a [[total]] [[mess]] (it [[sounds]] like a three year [[old]] has been [[let]] [[loose]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the movie [[perfectly]]. [[Only]] a [[couple]] of [[bloody]] scenes [[towards]] the [[end]] and a [[bit]] of gratuitous nudity save Unhinged from getting the lowest [[possible]] score.

[[If]] you are a horror completist (and [[unfortunately]], I am), you will want to [[see]] this in [[order]] to tick it off the [[Video]] Nasty watch-list. But be [[warned]]—it is really, [[really]] [[bad]]. [[Banished]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the UK, Unhinged has [[understandably]] gained [[pretty]] a bit of [[reputation]]. However, the most [[outrageous]] [[stuff]] I [[unearthed]] about the [[filmmaking]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The bloodletting I [[did]] handle: the [[scary]] acting, shoddy editing, [[terrible]] direction, lousy [[hyphen]] and [[gruesome]] soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three [[dame]] on their [[routing]] to a [[musicians]] [[feast]] [[crashes]] into a [[cliff]] during a [[tempest]]. They are rescued by a [[friendship]] stranger who [[pick]] them to a [[neighbour]] [[maison]]. The owner of the [[household]], a batty [[former]] [[ladies]], and her spinster [[girl]], welcome the girls in, [[let]] them to stay for a few days in [[edict]] to recuperate. However, [[anybody]] doesn't [[wanna]] the [[girl]] to [[walkout]]—ever! One by one they [[fell]] victim to an [[invisible]] assailant.

Taking a long [[times]] to get going and [[starring]] some of the [[hardest]] performances ever in a horror [[filmmaking]] (and that takes some doing), Unhinged is a [[honestly]] [[shocking]] film. The [[musica]] is a [[unmitigated]] [[disarray]] (it [[noises]] like a three year [[former]] has been [[leave]] [[slack]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the movie [[fully]]. [[Purely]] a [[coupling]] of [[homicidal]] scenes [[into]] the [[terminate]] and a [[bitten]] of gratuitous nudity save Unhinged from getting the lowest [[probable]] score.

[[Though]] you are a horror completist (and [[regretfully]], I am), you will want to [[consults]] this in [[edict]] to tick it off the [[Videos]] Nasty watch-list. But be [[alerted]]—it is really, [[truly]] [[wicked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's really unfortunate that most people outside of Canada think that the only things that Canada produces are snow, mounties and hockey players. This film is the second superlative Canadian film I have seen within the past few weeks (the first was "The Red Violin"), far better than all but the best Hollywood efforts.

Gustad Noble is anything but that; he is a middle-aged Parsi bank employee in Bombay in the 1970s. This film sensitively explores various things that happen to him concerning his family, his friends and his work, and their effect on him. At the same time, it is a fascinating, and, I would assume, accurate, portrayal of middle-class, urban life in India at the time.

However, I was somewhat prepared for this, having read Rohinton Mistry's book a few years ago. The film, as might be expected, cannot capture all the complexities of the book, but, if you want to read a really good book, and see a really good film, read and see "Such a Long Journey". --------------------------------------------- Result 1261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A so common horror story about a luxury building at Brooklyn which [[hides]] the [[gates]] to [[hell]]. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the [[movie]] of the polish filmmaker in any aspect [[possible]]. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more [[surprising]] from this film is the cast: it is full of [[great]] [[names]] of American [[cinema]] (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: barely [[entertaining]].

*My rate: 4/10 A so common horror story about a luxury building at Brooklyn which [[concealment]] the [[floodgates]] to [[bordello]]. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the [[cinematographic]] of the polish filmmaker in any aspect [[conceivable]]. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more [[staggering]] from this film is the cast: it is full of [[resplendent]] [[naming]] of American [[filmmaking]] (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: barely [[droll]].

*My rate: 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1262 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm one of those people who usually watch programs and keep my feelings about a show private. However, Pushing Daisies is my exception. I became curious about the program from the commercials that aired which gave glimpses of the premise of the show. I was skeptical about it at first, especially after the finale of Six Feet Under was still in my head. Here we go again, I thought. I watched the first, second, third and all the other episodes. Wow! First of all, I thought it took the subject of death and presented in a way that was palatable without being morbid. The characters were engaging and I like the thought of Ned the main character not being able to literally touch the love of his life, Chuck without the consequences of her dying.

Most of the characters have a longing for things they can't have. Besides Ned and Chuck, Olive longs for Ned. Lily and Vivian longs for their niece Chuck and Emerson is always longing for the monetary rewards from the mysterious deaths they solve. I think the characters are picture perfect and believable. I like how Emerson who is black plays off of the rest of the characters since as an African American; I like the subtle cultural humor that sometimes comes from him.

All in all, this visual fairytale is one of the most valuable pieces of entertainment that I've seen out of the 2007 season. I think the show has enough romance for the romantics and enough who-done-it for the mystery buffs. I just wish the writers would get back to work, so that the show can continue to evolve. --------------------------------------------- Result 1263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I even watched this was because I found it at my local library (and will berate them mercilessly for having wasted public monies on it), and despite the plethora of tits and ass, it didn't take long to realize that the fast-forward button was my friend. Terrible direction, pedestrian camera work, sporadically bad-to-nearly-passable acting, chintzy effects, and one of the worst screenplays I've had the displeasure of seeing brought to life (such as it was, horribly crippled and mutilated) in a long, long time. Best laughs actually come from the "Making of..." featurette, in which the poor saps involved with this HDV mess attempt to justify their lame efforts as if they had been working on something special, instead of something that won't be utterly forgotten next week. Wait! Except for the fact that somehow someone lured Tippi "The Birds" Hedren, of all people, into doing a bit part, along with Kane "Friday the 13th" Hodder! How this came to pass, I'll never know, and to be honest, I don't really care. Watch at your own risk, and don't say you haven't been warned. This is film-making at its pretentious, craven worst. It only gets a 2 from me for having some good-looking naked women, and even then, just barely. --------------------------------------------- Result 1264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Wow this was a [[great]] [[Italian]] "[[ZOMBIE]]" movie by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio started this movie and was [[ill]] so the great Bruno [[took]] over and it turned out [[surprisingly]] better than I expected it to turn out so if you have [[seen]] "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[must]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[great]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! Wow this was a [[wondrous]] [[Ltalian]] "[[GHOUL]]" movie by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio started this movie and was [[indisposed]] so the great Bruno [[taken]] over and it turned out [[unbelievably]] better than I expected it to turn out so if you have [[watched]] "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[ought]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[wondrous]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold [[Case]] since its premiered ([[especially]] now that it [[immediately]] follows The [[Amazing]] [[Race]], but this was one of the [[best]] [[instances]] of writing and acting I've [[seen]] from the [[house]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[especially]] of the [[younger]] [[officers]], was [[spot]] on, and the script and [[editing]], the soundtrack, and the acting made this episode a [[tour]] d'force. [[If]] I were the [[producers]] I would submit this episode for Emmy consideration. It amazing how [[complete]] a [[portrait]] was made of Coop and [[Jimmy]] [[within]] the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a lot of talented people doing their [[best]]. I [[hope]] there's is [[advance]] [[warning]] of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll [[notice]] a [[lot]] that I did not [[notice]] the [[first]] [[time]] [[around]]. I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold [[Lawsuit]] since its premiered ([[specially]] now that it [[directly]] follows The [[Wondrous]] [[Racing]], but this was one of the [[bestest]] [[situations]] of writing and acting I've [[watched]] from the [[housing]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[mostly]] of the [[youngest]] [[officer]], was [[staining]] on, and the script and [[edited]], the soundtrack, and the acting made this episode a [[trip]] d'force. [[Unless]] I were the [[manufacturers]] I would submit this episode for Emmy consideration. It amazing how [[finish]] a [[depiction]] was made of Coop and [[Jimbo]] [[inside]] the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a lot of talented people doing their [[bestest]]. I [[hopes]] there's is [[advancement]] [[warnings]] of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll [[notification]] a [[batch]] that I did not [[avis]] the [[fiirst]] [[moment]] [[about]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This [[movie]] [[features]] a [[gorgeous]] [[brunette]] named [[Danielle]] [[Petty]]. She has [[stunning]] green [[eyes]], and is in the first few scenes and the [[last]] scene. She is the only thing about this [[movie]] that is not repulsive. She may not have a [[future]] as an [[actress]], because this [[kind]] of [[movie]] is the kind of [[offensive]] [[disaster]] that kills [[careers]].

The [[movie]] itself has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] to [[recommend]] it. It is not a good horror [[film]], or a good [[fake]] journalistic [[report]], or remotely well done. There is no [[skill]] [[apparent]] in it's production. It is like a [[bad]] student film. The story's horrific elements do not make you [[sick]], it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I would [[give]] this [[movie]] [[ZERO]] stars if I [[could]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[idiosyncrasies]] a [[sumptuous]] [[chestnut]] named [[Daniel]] [[Inconsequential]]. She has [[astounding]] green [[eye]], and is in the first few scenes and the [[final]] scene. She is the only thing about this [[film]] that is not repulsive. She may not have a [[futur]] as an [[actor]], because this [[genre]] of [[filmmaking]] is the kind of [[insulting]] [[disasters]] that kills [[carrera]].

The [[film]] itself has [[fully]] [[anything]] to [[recommendations]] it. It is not a good horror [[filmmaking]], or a good [[fakes]] journalistic [[reports]], or remotely well done. There is no [[aptitude]] [[blatant]] in it's production. It is like a [[negative]] student film. The story's horrific elements do not make you [[unwell]], it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I would [[confer]] this [[film]] [[ZILCH]] stars if I [[would]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Hal Hartley's Henry [[Fool]] was an independent [[film]] masterpiece and [[certainly]] his [[best]] [[work]]. It has [[immense]] [[character]] depth, subtle, complicated [[dialogue]], and an [[excellent]], emotional ending which captivates. I [[remember]] pausing it [[several]] [[times]] during my [[first]] [[viewing]] to absorb what I was [[seeing]] and feeling. Henry [[Fool]] was a [[complete]] [[movie]] from [[start]] to [[finish]], and [[needed]] no sequel.

[[Thus]] I was [[surprised]] when I heard about Fay Grim. Fay was not one of the main characters of the first [[film]] and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world [[vanity]] and [[ignorance]] for her brother [[Simon]] to be forced to [[deal]] with as he [[matures]]. In her own [[movie]], Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very [[different]] road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult [[journey]] as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie [[contains]] several [[fondly]] remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a [[harsh]], boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through [[contrast]] unearths the [[inner]] wise woman which had not been [[previously]] developed or [[nurtured]] by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's struggle and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to soften only just enough to regain Henry. At [[first]], fans of [[Henry]] [[Fool]] may [[find]] themselves [[wondering]] how the [[movie]] can [[even]] be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intense]] [[film]] with spy game antics and [[physical]] [[comedy]]. But this is where the subtlety of Fay [[Grim]] lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative [[chaos]] in staid order. Parker Posey is an [[excellent]] actress who [[captures]] Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. Hal Hartley's Henry [[Schmuck]] was an independent [[cinematography]] masterpiece and [[surely]] his [[better]] [[collaborate]]. It has [[considerable]] [[traits]] depth, subtle, complicated [[discussions]], and an [[brilliant]], emotional ending which captivates. I [[recalling]] pausing it [[diverse]] [[moments]] during my [[frst]] [[opinion]] to absorb what I was [[witnessing]] and feeling. Henry [[Butthead]] was a [[finished]] [[cinematography]] from [[begin]] to [[conclude]], and [[needs]] no sequel.

[[Thereby]] I was [[horrified]] when I heard about Fay Grim. Fay was not one of the main characters of the first [[movie]] and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world [[courtesy]] and [[ignorant]] for her brother [[Simeon]] to be forced to [[address]] with as he [[evolves]]. In her own [[cinema]], Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very [[multiple]] road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult [[voyages]] as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie [[therein]] several [[affectionately]] remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a [[stiff]], boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through [[rematch]] unearths the [[interior]] wise woman which had not been [[beforehand]] developed or [[cultivating]] by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's struggle and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to soften only just enough to regain Henry. At [[outset]], fans of [[Gregg]] [[Butthead]] may [[unearthed]] themselves [[demand]] how the [[cinematic]] can [[yet]] be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intensive]] [[cinematography]] with spy game antics and [[bodily]] [[charade]]. But this is where the subtlety of Fay [[Dismal]] lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative [[disarray]] in staid order. Parker Posey is an [[magnifique]] actress who [[apprehended]] Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I should preface this by stating that I am a Dolph Lundgren fan. The man turns out some of the funniest action clichés imaginable and Detention is probably my personal favorite. *Spoiler* even though there is no such thing as a Dolph spoiler since the scripts are so absurd to begin with: a chase scene with a handicapped kid carrying a pistol versus a guy on a Harley with a sub-machine gun, through a high school hallway and the kid wins? Good game, the Oscar goes to Detention. Dolph, if you're reading this, thanks for the laughs, old friend.

In summary: Terrific movie that is a guaranteed laugh. I recommend inviting some friends over for this and forcing them to sit through it. Hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 1269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film has great acting, great photography and a very strong story line that really makes you think about who you are, how you define yourself, how you fit in, whether you accept to play a role or break free... There already are excellent comments dealing with these aspects. I want to comment on the formal setting of the film. Basically, it's two people on a roof. There is unity of place and time, with 2 protagonists, and the radio acting as the choir. Many directors have turned Greek tragedies into film, many directors have filmed contemporary stories as if they were a Greek tragedy, but no director, in my opinion, has succeeded as admirably as Ettore Scola in approaching the purity and force of the great Greek tragedies both in story line and formal setting. A masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Slow]] and nice [[images]] changed one another, with sometimes [[annoying]] [[music]] (you know Bjork) in background, for the first 75% of the movie. [[If]] you did not have enough sleep, that's a good [[time]].

But, in the [[last]] 20% of the movie director decides to [[bring]] idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M [[images]]: "[[spiritual]] lovers" are cutting each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much [[disturbing]] and actually changed general impression of blend of [[abstract]] [[art]] and images of [[modern]] Japanese [[mystery]].

Operator and [[director]] are [[great]], but weird.

[[Did]] not [[enjoy]] it at all. [[Lento]] and nice [[picture]] changed one another, with sometimes [[vexing]] [[musicians]] (you know Bjork) in background, for the first 75% of the movie. [[Though]] you did not have enough sleep, that's a good [[times]].

But, in the [[latter]] 20% of the movie director decides to [[brings]] idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M [[photograph]]: "[[mental]] lovers" are cutting each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much [[disconcerting]] and actually changed general impression of blend of [[succinct]] [[artistry]] and images of [[contemporary]] Japanese [[conundrum]].

Operator and [[headmaster]] are [[resplendent]], but weird.

[[Ai]] not [[enjoys]] it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] the gong [[show]] [[TV]] series then you won't like this [[movie]] much at all, not that [[knowing]] the [[series]] makes this a [[great]] [[movie]].

I [[give]] it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[things]] make it kind of amusing that help make up for its [[obvious]] [[problems]].

1) It's a funny [[snapshot]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You [[get]] a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) [[Though]] you haven't [[noticed]] the gong [[exhibitions]] [[TELEVISION]] series then you won't like this [[filmmaking]] much at all, not that [[mindful]] the [[serials]] makes this a [[super]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[confer]] it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[matters]] make it kind of amusing that help make up for its [[noticeable]] [[difficulty]].

1) It's a funny [[instantaneous]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You [[gets]] a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 1272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "[[wow]], finally, some [[entertainment]]." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to [[face]] it, these news [[reporters]] (if one can [[even]] [[call]] them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "[[playing]] around" [[time]].

[[At]] first, I [[thought]] Jillian was a [[breathe]] of fresh air. But [[seriously]], this woman has got not the least [[bit]] of [[journalist]] in her. She is very unprofessional. She keeps on [[interrupting]] [[Steve]] when he [[starts]] [[informing]] the viewers about a certain news [[report]]. It's just really [[become]] [[annoying]] to the point that I can't watch it [[anymore]].

[[Jillian]] is [[NOT]] a good [[journalist]]. [[Hell]], she's more of a [[celebrity]] who [[loves]] being a celebrity. [[Hence]], she instantly [[transforms]] into a [[celebrity]] [[around]] celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and [[quite]] [[possibly]] [[perceives]] her [[relationship]] with celebrities more [[important]] than being a [[rightfully]] insatiable journalist- and that's all I can [[say]] about her.

[[Also]] (disappointingly), this [[show]] has more entertainment news than [[necessary]] news reports about the [[world]], the [[government]], the [[US]], or [[something]] that will benefit and/or [[serve]] the public's [[best]] interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they [[talk]] about comes off as a [[commercial]] [[product]]. On the other hand, their [[field]] [[reporters]] are [[interestingly]] tolerable...

I [[believe]] "Good Day [[LA]]" is for [[young]] [[teenagers]] and [[celebrities]], and it is [[definitely]] not for people who actually [[CARE]] about the news.

SIDE [[NOTE]]: (I'd [[really]] [[rather]] watch KTLA. [[However]], they [[try]] so hard to be [[entertaining]] sometimes. They're [[still]] a bit [[dull]] [[though]]. Oh well, I'll [[stick]] to NBC's "[[Today]]." ABC's "Good Morning [[America]]" is [[also]] [[okay]]... as [[long]] as Diane Sawyer doesn't [[become]] [[way]] too [[serious]].) When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "[[whoa]], finally, some [[amusement]]." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to [[encounter]] it, these news [[journalists]] (if one can [[yet]] [[calls]] them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "[[play]] around" [[times]].

[[In]] first, I [[think]] Jillian was a [[breathing]] of fresh air. But [[conscientiously]], this woman has got not the least [[bitten]] of [[newspaperman]] in her. She is very unprofessional. She keeps on [[disrupting]] [[Steph]] when he [[initiated]] [[enlighten]] the viewers about a certain news [[reports]]. It's just really [[gotten]] [[exasperating]] to the point that I can't watch it [[longer]].

[[Gillian]] is [[NOPE]] a good [[journalists]]. [[Brothel]], she's more of a [[celebrities]] who [[likes]] being a celebrity. [[Thus]], she instantly [[transformed]] into a [[celebrities]] [[throughout]] celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and [[rather]] [[maybe]] [[receives]] her [[relationships]] with celebrities more [[significant]] than being a [[deservedly]] insatiable journalist- and that's all I can [[told]] about her.

[[Moreover]] (disappointingly), this [[exhibit]] has more entertainment news than [[necessity]] news reports about the [[monde]], the [[council]], the [[AMERICANS]], or [[anything]] that will benefit and/or [[serves]] the public's [[nicest]] interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they [[discussion]] about comes off as a [[mercantile]] [[commodity]]. On the other hand, their [[campo]] [[reporter]] are [[amazingly]] tolerable...

I [[believing]] "Good Day [[LAS]]" is for [[youthful]] [[adolescence]] and [[celebrity]], and it is [[decidedly]] not for people who actually [[HEALTHCARE]] about the news.

SIDE [[NOTING]]: (I'd [[truly]] [[quite]] watch KTLA. [[Still]], they [[strive]] so hard to be [[amusing]] sometimes. They're [[however]] a bit [[boring]] [[while]]. Oh well, I'll [[wand]] to NBC's "[[Nowadays]]." ABC's "Good Morning [[American]]" is [[additionally]] [[alright]]... as [[longer]] as Diane Sawyer doesn't [[gotten]] [[pathways]] too [[weighty]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 1273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'm a fan of arty [[movies]], but regretfully I have to [[report]] this [[movie]] to be [[pretentious]] drivel. Agonisingly [[slow]] to [[develop]] a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. [[Even]] after [[bad]] [[movies]] I feel that I [[learn]] [[something]], or [[enjoyed]] some [[aspect]], but there there was [[nothing]] to [[appreciate]]. The [[premise]] was not uninteresting, but the [[movie]] [[starts]] and ends there. The acting was OK, [[though]] the characters were [[utterly]] boring. For the protagonist to [[aim]] at such an audacious [[goal]], she is [[mightily]] [[empty]]. [[Pity]]. I [[usually]] enjoy [[movies]] that are unformulaic, but [[lack]] of formula should not be [[confused]] with zero content. I'm a fan of arty [[filmmaking]], but regretfully I have to [[reporting]] this [[filmmaking]] to be [[presumptuous]] drivel. Agonisingly [[slower]] to [[developing]] a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. [[Yet]] after [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] I feel that I [[learning]] [[somethings]], or [[adored]] some [[element]], but there there was [[nada]] to [[appreciative]]. The [[prerequisite]] was not uninteresting, but the [[filmmaking]] [[commenced]] and ends there. The acting was OK, [[despite]] the characters were [[quite]] boring. For the protagonist to [[targeted]] at such an audacious [[objective]], she is [[powerfully]] [[emptiness]]. [[Compassion]]. I [[habitually]] enjoy [[movie]] that are unformulaic, but [[shortages]] of formula should not be [[perplexed]] with zero content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Raggedy Ann & Andy is the first movie I ever saw in the theaters. My dad took my sister and I, and the funny thing is - when we got home, dad asked us "what do you want to do now?" and we said we want to watch Raggedy Ann & Andy again! lol, and my dad actually took us back to the theatre to watch it again -- at least that's how I remember it. I was five years old at the time.

This movie was pretty scary for a five year old. The scene with the giant ocean of sweets, and the hypnotic camel scene.. i don't remember a lot from this film, naturally, the beginning was magical, and a few scenes -- I wish I could find it again, and will likely seek it out now.

I remember I loved Raggedy Ann & Andy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As a community [[theater]] actor who [[works]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too seriously, I'm [[always]] amused by those who treat it as Great Art. This [[movie]] skewers the "Actor's Craft" mercilessly while dishing up a lot of good [[laughs]].

A ham actor on location for a movie [[bears]] a resemblance to the dictator. [[When]] the dictator dies of a [[heart]] attack from too much drink and food, the [[actor]] is [[kidnapped]] and forced to play "the part of a [[lifetime]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the [[secret]] service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[fall]] in love with him and vice [[versa]], and turns the tables on his [[captors]] [[beautifully]].

Lots of [[great]] shtick by the [[leads]], lots of good [[work]] by some [[unknown]] [[supporting]] actors, particularly the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan [[Winters]] plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[exceptional]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of [[beautiful]] locations (in [[Brazil]]), a [[humorous]] [[script]], and good actors doing their [[thing]] and looking like they're [[actually]] having fun and not [[going]] through the usual existential [[angst]] about what is only play-acting! As a community [[theaters]] actor who [[worked]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too seriously, I'm [[consistently]] amused by those who treat it as Great Art. This [[kino]] skewers the "Actor's Craft" mercilessly while dishing up a lot of good [[giggling]].

A ham actor on location for a movie [[carry]] a resemblance to the dictator. [[Whenever]] the dictator dies of a [[heartland]] attack from too much drink and food, the [[actress]] is [[abducted]] and forced to play "the part of a [[life]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the [[concealed]] service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[falls]] in love with him and vice [[reversal]], and turns the tables on his [[kidnappers]] [[strikingly]].

Lots of [[huge]] shtick by the [[leeds]], lots of good [[jobs]] by some [[unidentified]] [[helps]] actors, particularly the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan [[Winter]] plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[wondrous]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of [[wondrous]] locations (in [[Brasilia]]), a [[amusing]] [[hyphen]], and good actors doing their [[stuff]] and looking like they're [[genuinely]] having fun and not [[go]] through the usual existential [[trepidation]] about what is only play-acting! --------------------------------------------- Result 1276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] You believe in God or you don't. You believe in Jesus or you don't. You believe He is the Son of God or you don't. The choice is up to you.

[[Director]] Denys Arcand has really [[done]] everything he could to bring back Jesus to a mere historic figure, social worker, son of two humans, [[instead]] of the Son of God the Holy Spirit and Mary, Who opened Heaven again for us. Encouraging the Big Bang, a world come from evolution, [[instead]] of seeing the beauty of creation. The [[film]] [[depicts]] a theologian bringing some "modern findings" to the actor who plays Jesus in the Passion Play, who happily incorporates them in his play.

The depicted priest who runs the sanctuary where the Passion Play is performed in Montreal has a sexual relation with one of the female players of the Passion Play instead of showing his love for God through celibacy. More often than not the director's abhorrence of the Church is clearly visible.

The director has tried to make a parallel between Jesus' life and the Passion Play actor's life. This is an admirable attempt, but depicting the Resurrection with the transplantation of the Passion Play actor's organs in other bodies signifies how the director thinks about Jesus.

My opinion is not important, God's opinion is, but I wouldn't want to stand in the shoes of the director and actors when standing before Jesus' throne. You believe in God or you don't. You believe in Jesus or you don't. You believe He is the Son of God or you don't. The choice is up to you.

[[Superintendent]] Denys Arcand has really [[effected]] everything he could to bring back Jesus to a mere historic figure, social worker, son of two humans, [[conversely]] of the Son of God the Holy Spirit and Mary, Who opened Heaven again for us. Encouraging the Big Bang, a world come from evolution, [[conversely]] of seeing the beauty of creation. The [[filmmaking]] [[describe]] a theologian bringing some "modern findings" to the actor who plays Jesus in the Passion Play, who happily incorporates them in his play.

The depicted priest who runs the sanctuary where the Passion Play is performed in Montreal has a sexual relation with one of the female players of the Passion Play instead of showing his love for God through celibacy. More often than not the director's abhorrence of the Church is clearly visible.

The director has tried to make a parallel between Jesus' life and the Passion Play actor's life. This is an admirable attempt, but depicting the Resurrection with the transplantation of the Passion Play actor's organs in other bodies signifies how the director thinks about Jesus.

My opinion is not important, God's opinion is, but I wouldn't want to stand in the shoes of the director and actors when standing before Jesus' throne. --------------------------------------------- Result 1277 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] **** Includes [[Spoilers]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've [[seen]] all the great ones another pops up to [[surprise]] me. I had never seen this film before. It was a [[treat]], off the [[beaten]] path too...not just the [[path]] to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror [[film]] [[made]] in the 1940s that dared to [[try]] [[something]] VERY different. The pretty girl is (gulp) [[fearless]] for a change and saves the [[men]], [[including]] the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This [[girl]] was the [[complete]] [[opposite]] of most [[women]] in [[films]] of that [[time]], no [[screaming]] at her own [[shadow]], no fainting from [[fright]], no tripping over a [[leaf]] as she runs. This gal wasn't [[afraid]] to [[live]] [[alone]] in a secluded [[hut]] far away from the [[rest]] of the [[villagers]]. Not only that but the [[place]] was on a [[foggy]] [[swamp]] rumored to be [[haunted]]. Heck she [[even]] [[takes]] [[naps]] on the swamp [[grass]] [[outdoors]]...like a [[regular]] 1940s version of Ripley. [[No]] snake, gator or ghostly strangler [[would]] dare bother this gal. Books on early [[feminist]] [[films]] should be sure to include this [[overlooked]] [[work]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those [[wonderfully]] [[atmospheric]] classic B/W [[horror]] [[films]] they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to [[wear]] your cast [[iron]] turtle [[neck]] for [[protection]]. **** Includes [[Vandals]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've [[noticed]] all the great ones another pops up to [[surprises]] me. I had never seen this film before. It was a [[processing]], off the [[bested]] path too...not just the [[route]] to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror [[cinematography]] [[brought]] in the 1940s that dared to [[endeavour]] [[anything]] VERY different. The pretty girl is (gulp) [[gutsy]] for a change and saves the [[male]], [[containing]] the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This [[chick]] was the [[finalise]] [[contrary]] of most [[wife]] in [[cinematography]] of that [[period]], no [[shout]] at her own [[shade]], no fainting from [[fearful]], no tripping over a [[sheet]] as she runs. This gal wasn't [[affraid]] to [[viva]] [[mere]] in a secluded [[shack]] far away from the [[remainder]] of the [[dwellers]]. Not only that but the [[placing]] was on a [[hazy]] [[wetlands]] rumored to be [[obsessed]]. Heck she [[yet]] [[pick]] [[nap]] on the swamp [[herb]] [[exterior]]...like a [[routine]] 1940s version of Ripley. [[Nope]] snake, gator or ghostly strangler [[should]] dare bother this gal. Books on early [[feminism]] [[kino]] should be sure to include this [[neglected]] [[jobs]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those [[admirably]] [[barometric]] classic B/W [[terror]] [[movies]] they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to [[worn]] your cast [[railroad]] turtle [[collier]] for [[defensive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Deliverance is the fascinating, haunting and sometimes even disturbing tale by James Dickey, turned into a brilliant movie by John Boorman. It's about four businessmen, driven by manhood and macho-behavior, who're spending a canoeing weekend high up in the mountains. Up there, they're faced with every darkest side of man and every worst form of human misery...poverty, buggery and even physical harassment! These four men intended to travel down the river for adventure and excitement but their trip soon changes into an odyssey through a violent and lurking mountain-land, completely estranged from all forms of civilisation. All these elements actually make Deliverance one of the most nightmarish films I've ever seen. Just about everything that happens to these men, you pray that you'll never find yourself to be in a similar situation. Pure talking cinema, Deliverance is a very important movie as well. John Boorman's best (closely followed by Zardoz and Excalibur) was - and still is - a very influential film and it contains several memorable scenes that already featured in numberless other movies. Just think about the terrific "Duelling banjos" musical score and, of course, the unforgettable homosexual "squeal like a pig" rape scene. All the actors deliver (haha) perfect acting performances. Especially Jon Voight. A must see motion picture!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1279 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is such a great movie to watch with young children. I'm always looking for an excuse to watch it over & over. Gena was good, Cheech was fun,the Russian was good, Maria was adorable & of course Paulie was the best! --------------------------------------------- Result 1280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Race car drivers [[say]] that 100 mph [[seems]] fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian [[Dog]] seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've [[seen]] the works of C. [[Frederic]] Hobbs. [[Race]] fans, there is NOTHING in all the world of film like the works of C. [[Frederic]] Hobbs.

Alabama's [[Ghost]] [[comes]] as close as any of his [[films]] to having a [[coherent]] plot, and it only involves hippies, rock [[concerts]], voodoo, ghosts, [[vampires]], robots, magicians, corrupt multinational [[corporations]], elephants and [[Mystery]] [[Gas]]. And the [[Fabulous]] Woodmobile, [[cruising]] the Sunset [[District]] in [[San]] Francisco, of course.

What's really [[startling]] is that somebody gave him a [[LOT]] of [[money]] to [[make]] Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, [[lighting]], hundreds of extras, costumes, [[lots]] and [[lots]] of [[effects]]. [[Somehow]] that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some [[awful]] cheeseball like [[Night]] of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at [[least]] some [[part]] of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously [[making]] the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? Race car drivers [[said]] that 100 mph [[seem]] fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian [[Puppy]] seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've [[saw]] the works of C. [[Frederick]] Hobbs. [[Carrera]] fans, there is NOTHING in all the world of film like the works of C. [[Frederik]] Hobbs.

Alabama's [[Phantoms]] [[happens]] as close as any of his [[filmmaking]] to having a [[cohesion]] plot, and it only involves hippies, rock [[gigs]], voodoo, ghosts, [[bloodsuckers]], robots, magicians, corrupt multinational [[undertakings]], elephants and [[Puzzle]] [[Gases]]. And the [[Sumptuous]] Woodmobile, [[cruise]] the Sunset [[Borough]] in [[Saint]] Francisco, of course.

What's really [[dazzling]] is that somebody gave him a [[LOTS]] of [[cash]] to [[deliver]] Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, [[light]], hundreds of extras, costumes, [[batches]] and [[lot]] of [[effect]]. [[Somewhere]] that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some [[scary]] cheeseball like [[Nuit]] of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at [[lowest]] some [[parties]] of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously [[doing]] the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? --------------------------------------------- Result 1281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Don't waste 90 minutes of your time on "Fast Food, Fast Women." It's annoyingly episodic script with three story lines patched together is laughably bad due to predictable writing, horrific acting, and even bad music. I found the anorexic main character upsetting to watch every time she was on screen. SHE needs the fast food.

Spend the 90 minutes you'd devote to this turkey doing something more exciting...like trimming your toenails. You'd have more entertainment value.

The only redeeming thing about this film is Louise Lasser, but she deserves much better than this tired script. It's as impotent as the elder guy she courts in the movie.

VIEWER BEWARE! --------------------------------------------- Result 1282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From around the time Europe began fighting World War II, until the war's end, Hollywood (with significant prodding from the government) made tons of movies which were designed to try and get young men to enlist in the Army, by making the life of a serviceman appear "cool." This is by far the sloppiest, implying that the life of a soldier is devoid of work, you get the best food, and you get to lie around all day listening to Ann Miller on the radio. I am far too young to have participated in WWII, but I think that there was more to it than that. There is the barest cat's whisker of a plot, and a bunch of musical numbers featuring some of the day's leading acts.

I think that by 1943, even the most naive of civvies knew that there was more going on overseas than the wacky hijinks portrayed in this movie. While I am sure that it was meant to be viewed as escapist entertainment, I can't help but wonder if the family and loved ones of men fighting in the war, were amused or repulsed by this trivialization of their loved ones' sacrifice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[rented]] this film in DVD form without knowing [[anything]] at all about it, part of a [[winter]] marathon of [[watching]] a [[film]] [[every]] night. [[After]] [[several]] [[awful]] American action adventure [[films]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Life]]) [[Zhu]] Warriors [[struck]] me as [[brilliantly]] [[original]] [[filmmaking]]. The story is complete [[nonsense]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete lack of irony refreshing, and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and [[directness]] of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are [[astonishingly]] [[beautiful]]. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are [[believable]].

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the [[beautiful]] simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

I [[leasing]] this film in DVD form without knowing [[something]] at all about it, part of a [[winters]] marathon of [[staring]] a [[cinematography]] [[all]] night. [[Upon]] [[numerous]] [[heinous]] American action adventure [[movies]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Living]]) [[Joo]] Warriors [[knocked]] me as [[brightly]] [[initial]] [[cinematographic]]. The story is complete [[grotesque]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete lack of irony refreshing, and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and [[bluntness]] of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are [[unbelievably]] [[wondrous]]. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are [[reliable]].

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the [[leggy]] simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am and was very entertained by the movie. It was my all time favorite movie of 1976. Being raised in the 70's , I was so in love with Kris Kristoffersons look and demeanor,of course I am no movie critic,but for the time era,I think it was very good. I very much like the combo of Streisand and Kristofferson. I thought they worked very well together. I have seen the movie many times and still love the two of them as Esther and John Norman. I am a very huge fan of Kris and see him in concert when I can. What a talented singer song writer,not to mention,actor. I have seen him in many movies,but still think back to A star is Born. --------------------------------------------- Result 1285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MacArthur is a great movie with a great story about a great man…General Douglas MacArthur. This is of course, the story of one of America's great military figures, and a figure made familiar to me from the earliest moments of my memory. Though there is a continuity issue (there may be others) e.g. MacArthur's speech portrayed in the film as his 1962 address to the U.S. Military Academy on accepting the Thayer award did not contain the phrase "old soldiers never die; they just fade away." (That was in his speech to Congress upon his dismissal by President Truman) in 1951 for his alleged insubordination (these two did not see eye to eye!) Gregory Peck is im-Peck-able as the general who vowed he would return to the Philippines in World War II. The film moves quickly and easily with the General, his family and his staff from the beginning of the Second World War to the end of his service career. This film would be of much greater significance to one familiar with both WW II and the Korean War. Nevertheless, Peck's portrayal of this great man who fought the twin evils of fascism and communism and who hated war as only a soldier can is a memorable one indeed. "In war there is no substitute for victory." --------------------------------------------- Result 1286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] House of Games is a wonderful [[movie]] at [[multiple]] [[levels]]. It is a [[fine]] mystery and a [[shocking]] thriller. It is blessed with [[marvelous]] performances by [[Lindsay]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a strong, strong cast of [[supporting]] [[players]], and it introduces Ricky [[Jay]], [[card]] sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and [[historian]] of [[magic]]. Its dialogue, [[written]] by David Mamet, is [[spoken]] as if in a play of manners and gives the movie (in which [[reality]] is [[often]] in [[question]]) an [[extra]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, House of Games is a convincing glimpse into the [[unknown]] [[world]] of [[cheats]] and con [[men]], diametrically [[different]] from The Sting, which was played merely for [[glamour]] and yuks. [[At]] this level it does succeed admirably.

[[However]], you cannot [[escape]] the [[examination]] at a [[deeper]] [[level]] of the odyssey of a [[woman]] from complacent [[professional]] [[competence]] to [[incredible]] strength and self [[realization]]. The only [[movie]] I know of which [[treats]] the [[theme]] of [[emergence]] of personal strength in a [[woman]] in as worthy a [[way]] is the underrated Private Benjamin. That thoroughly enjoyable [[movie]] unfortunately diffuses its focus, hopping [[among]] several themes and exploiting the [[fine]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[easy]] laughs. [[House]] of [[Games]] sticks to its [[business]]. As Poe once [[said]] of a good short [[story]], it [[drives]] [[relentlessly]] to its [[conclusion]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Louise]], a [[big]] [[budget]] commercial money [[maker]] with the [[despicable]] [[theme]] that women are doomed, whether or not they [[realize]] their [[inner]] strengths. What tripe.

As [[usual]] you [[really]] ought to see this [[film]] in a [[movie]] [[theater]]. It should be a natural for film [[festivals]]. [[Nominate]] it for one near you if you [[get]] the [[chance]].

I [[bought]] the original version of [[House]] of [[Games]] and [[gave]] it to my 23 year old [[daughter]]. Better she should see it on a TV than not at all. House of Games is a wonderful [[flick]] at [[several]] [[grades]]. It is a [[fined]] mystery and a [[terrifying]] thriller. It is blessed with [[glorious]] performances by [[Lindsey]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a strong, strong cast of [[helping]] [[actors]], and it introduces Ricky [[Jae]], [[cards]] sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and [[history]] of [[witchcraft]]. Its dialogue, [[wrote]] by David Mamet, is [[talked]] as if in a play of manners and gives the movie (in which [[realities]] is [[commonly]] in [[issue]]) an [[additional]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, House of Games is a convincing glimpse into the [[unnamed]] [[globe]] of [[crooks]] and con [[males]], diametrically [[various]] from The Sting, which was played merely for [[fascination]] and yuks. [[In]] this level it does succeed admirably.

[[Still]], you cannot [[fleeing]] the [[exams]] at a [[closer]] [[grades]] of the odyssey of a [[girls]] from complacent [[occupational]] [[jurisdiction]] to [[fantastic]] strength and self [[fulfillment]]. The only [[films]] I know of which [[addresses]] the [[topics]] of [[onset]] of personal strength in a [[girls]] in as worthy a [[paths]] is the underrated Private Benjamin. That thoroughly enjoyable [[film]] unfortunately diffuses its focus, hopping [[in]] several themes and exploiting the [[fined]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[simple]] laughs. [[Households]] of [[Game]] sticks to its [[corporations]]. As Poe once [[asserted]] of a good short [[narratives]], it [[drive]] [[ceaselessly]] to its [[conclusions]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Lewis]], a [[massive]] [[budgets]] commercial money [[producers]] with the [[obnoxious]] [[themes]] that women are doomed, whether or not they [[attain]] their [[internally]] strengths. What tripe.

As [[habitual]] you [[genuinely]] ought to see this [[cinema]] in a [[cinematography]] [[drama]]. It should be a natural for film [[holidays]]. [[Appointing]] it for one near you if you [[obtain]] the [[luck]].

I [[buys]] the original version of [[Homes]] of [[Game]] and [[supplied]] it to my 23 year old [[maid]]. Better she should see it on a TV than not at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't see how anyone who even likes Van Damne [[could]] like this movie.

The movie actually [[starts]] out with some promise. I would say the [[action]] scenes at the beginning of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[However]], the [[film]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the [[director]] could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain [[ridiculous]]. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most [[disappointing]] endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. I don't see how anyone who even likes Van Damne [[wo]] like this movie.

The movie actually [[induction]] out with some promise. I would say the [[efforts]] scenes at the beginning of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[Conversely]], the [[filmmaking]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the [[headmaster]] could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain [[farcical]]. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most [[discouraging]] endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[bad]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[played]] the first crewmember infected, who dies from terminal depression. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[caused]] the depression. This [[movie]] is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming character in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony wife, or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[cinematography]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special effects, many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to simulate hordes of bats flying. Not the worst film I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom ranks, definitely. (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[rotten]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[effected]] the first crewmember infected, who dies from terminal depression. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[wreaked]] the depression. This [[filmmaking]] is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming character in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony wife, or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[films]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special effects, many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to simulate hordes of bats flying. Not the worst film I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom ranks, definitely. --------------------------------------------- Result 1289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] End of the World is an uneventful [[movie]], which is odd [[since]] it is supposed to be about the total [[destruction]] of the [[earth]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) facility guarded by four security men. His first job is monitoring transmissions to and from space (although this actually seems more like a hobby he does when not working on job #2). Job #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the scientist brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to [[decipher]]; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the [[movie]] goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher [[Lee]] is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, Lee gives a [[lackluster]] performance along the lines of his [[appearance]] in [[Howling]] II. This [[movie]] is boring, but it has enough stupid [[elements]] that you [[might]] want to [[suffer]] through it once if you [[like]] [[Christopher]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[stock]] footage of the earth being destroyed. End of the World is an uneventful [[filmmaking]], which is odd [[because]] it is supposed to be about the total [[obliterating]] of the [[tierra]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) facility guarded by four security men. His first job is monitoring transmissions to and from space (although this actually seems more like a hobby he does when not working on job #2). Job #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the scientist brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to [[unravel]]; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the [[filmmaking]] goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher [[Rhee]] is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, Lee gives a [[mediocre]] performance along the lines of his [[apparition]] in [[Holler]] II. This [[filmmaking]] is boring, but it has enough stupid [[ingredient]] that you [[probability]] want to [[undergo]] through it once if you [[iike]] [[Christophe]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[inventories]] footage of the earth being destroyed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I loved watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in [[grammar]] [[school]] and would [[get]] [[home]] do my homework and by 4:30 would be ready to watch ''Sea [[Hunt]] '' and Mike Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[loved]] it ! He took to you a place not very [[accessible]] at that [[time]] , under the [[great]] [[blue]] sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or [[even]] before [[Cousteau]] [[became]] common , there was Mike Nelson sparking the imagination of [[kids]] .I'd be willing to [[wager]] that more than a few kids [[developed]] their [[passion]] for oceanography or biology or one of the sciences from watching this [[show]] .Underwater photography [[also]] progressed , the fascination for [[exploration]] is [[easily]] [[stimulated]] thru watching this [[show]] . Watch and [[enjoy]] !!! I loved watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in [[grammatical]] [[teaching]] and would [[got]] [[households]] do my homework and by 4:30 would be ready to watch ''Sea [[Hunts]] '' and Mike Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[enjoyed]] it ! He took to you a place not very [[affordable]] at that [[moment]] , under the [[wondrous]] [[azul]] sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or [[yet]] before [[Smith]] [[came]] common , there was Mike Nelson sparking the imagination of [[brats]] .I'd be willing to [[wagering]] that more than a few kids [[devised]] their [[enthusiasm]] for oceanography or biology or one of the sciences from watching this [[spectacle]] .Underwater photography [[similarly]] progressed , the fascination for [[browsing]] is [[conveniently]] [[encouraged]] thru watching this [[spectacle]] . Watch and [[enjoying]] !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[During]] the [[Civil]] War, there were [[many]] [[cases]] of [[divided]] loyalties; [[obviously]], [[many]] occurred "[[In]] the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young [[father]] [[Owen]] Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter [[Gladys]] Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan [[Across]] the [[Civilians]] War, there were [[multiple]] [[example]] of [[divides]] loyalties; [[patently]], [[innumerable]] occurred "[[Throughout]] the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young [[fathers]] [[Owens]] Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter [[Bessie]] Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan --------------------------------------------- Result 1292 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A dreary, hopelessly predictable film set in a most unpleasant setting (lower Coachella Valley). Acting is as amateurish as any I've seen. Looks like a screenwriting 101 script. However, it does function as a great sedative. --------------------------------------------- Result 1293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Curse of Frankenstein' sticks faithfully to Mary Shelley's story for one word of the title, which wouldn't be so bad if the changes were any good at all. The tragedy of the creature destroying Frankenstein's family has been completely excised and replaced with... nothing. The heart and moral centre of the story is gone. It doesn't help that this Frankenstein is a conniving, devious murderer; he deserves everything he gets. The plot is basically a shallow checklist of Frankenstein clichés. Even taken on its own terms, this is rubbish: a bland, rambling film featuring a shite-looking creature with a pudding bowl haircut. As it's the first of Hammer's horror films, directed by Terence Fisher and starring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, its place in horror history is secure. But it's crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1294 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The plot is plausible but banal, i.e., beautiful and neglected wife of wealthy and powerful man has a fling with a psychotic hunk, then tries to cover it up as the psycho stalks and blackmails her. But, what develops from there is stupefyingly illogical. Despite the resources that are available to the usual couple who has money and influence, our privileged hero and heroine appear to have only one domestic, their attorney and local police (who say they can do nothing) at their disposal while they grapple with suspense and terror. They have no private security staff (only a fancy security system that they mishandle), household or grounds staff, chauffeurs, etc. Not even, apparently, the funds to hire private round-the-clock nurses to care for the hero when he suffers life-threatening injuries, leaving man and wife alone and vulnerable in their mansion. Our heroine is portrayed as having the brains of a doorknob and our hero, a tycoon, behaves in the most unlikely and irrational manner. The production is an insult to viewers who wasted their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the talents of veteran actors Oliva Hussey and Don Murray (what were they thinking?). And, shame on Lifetime TV for insulting the intelligence of its audience for this insipid offering. --------------------------------------------- Result 1295 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] "The Godfather", "Citizen Kane", "Star Wars", "Goodfellas" [[None]] of the above compare to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every [[character]] has [[layers]] upon layers of [[absolute]] verity, [[completely]] and utterly three dimensional. We [[care]] about Tony Soprano [[wholeheartedly]], despite the fact that in the simplest [[model]] of good [[vs]]. [[evil]], he is evil. Soprano is the most [[provocative]], [[intricate]], and fascinating protagonist ever [[created]] to this point in history. If you're in the mood to be overtly challenged as a viewer, and to be [[forever]] altered on your feelings toward entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defy]] [[anybody]] to sit down and watch the very [[first]] episode of Season 1, and not want to continue with the [[series]]. Each season is [[completely]] [[brilliant]] in its own [[way]]. DVDs are [[essential]] to anybody's [[collection]] **** of out 4 "The Godfather", "Citizen Kane", "Star Wars", "Goodfellas" [[Nos]] of the above compare to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every [[characteristics]] has [[nappies]] upon layers of [[utter]] verity, [[utterly]] and utterly three dimensional. We [[healthcare]] about Tony Soprano [[fervently]], despite the fact that in the simplest [[paragon]] of good [[versus]]. [[satanic]], he is evil. Soprano is the most [[inflammatory]], [[complicate]], and fascinating protagonist ever [[established]] to this point in history. If you're in the mood to be overtly challenged as a viewer, and to be [[indefinitely]] altered on your feelings toward entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defiance]] [[person]] to sit down and watch the very [[fiirst]] episode of Season 1, and not want to continue with the [[serials]]. Each season is [[altogether]] [[wondrous]] in its own [[manner]]. DVDs are [[critical]] to anybody's [[collections]] **** of out 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 1296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I haven't seen all of Jess Franco's movies, I have seen 5, I think, and there are more than 180 of them. So maybe it's a bit early to say so but "Necronomicon Geträumte Sünden" (better known as 'Succubus', but that is the cut version) is according to me if not the best, certainly on of Franco's best. Franco is best known (although 'known' might be slightly exaggerated) for "Vampiros Lesbos", a weird cultish movie that got more acclaim in the mid 90's when people found out Jess Franco was also an interesting composer. Through the soundtrack a happy few discovered the man and found out what was to be expected after seeing the video clip of 'The lion and the cucumber' ('Vampyros Lesbos OST'): Jess Franco is an overwhelming director. When the phone rang during 'Vampiros', I let it ring. I just wanted to see more of the movie. Since that moment Franco never could grip me that much. But then I stumbled on this movie. It is even better than "Vampiros Lesbos", I think. Franco is looking for what he can do with a story and a camera. We find out he can do a lot. I certainly didn't expect to find "Necronomicon" that great: its beginning didn't impress me at all. Remember, I had seen "Vampiros Lesbos" before (although chronologically that came only three years later) and both movies kinda start the same. But then the story went on, puzzling and gripping, beautiful camera work and the stuff you would like to see Godard do if he weren't so occupied with spreading his political messages. Later on in the movie I heard a dialogue about which art was or wasn't old-fashioned. The man says that all movies have to be old-fashioned because it takes weeks before the audience sees what got filmed. But the girl replies that "Bunuel, Fritz Lang and Godard yesterday made movies for tomorrow". Janine Reynaud is an interesting lead actress and of course Howard Vernon, a Franco regular, is also there. Luckily the acting is good (something that can spoil a lot of Franco movies for you, but not this one). But certainly watch out for the dummy scene. The erotic tension, the wild directing and the fact that it's a yesterday's movie for tomorrow make it a movie a lot of people should see. The fact that it is a bit more accessible than "Vampiros Lesbos" certainly helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Although I'm [[grateful]] this obscure gem of 70's Italian exploitation cinema features in the [[recently]] released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[although]] it's [[also]] [[available]] on disc under the [[misleading]] and [[stupid]] [[alternate]] title "Escape from Death Row", I [[honestly]] think it deserves a [[proper]] and [[luxurious]] DVD [[edition]], [[completely]] in its originally spoken languages with [[subtitle]] options (the [[dubbing]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special [[bonus]] features! [[Heck]], I don't even need the [[restored]] picture quality and bonus features if only we [[could]] watch the film in its [[original]] [[language]]. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced [[mafia]]/crime flick with a lot of violence, [[comedy]] (which, [[admittedly]], doesn't [[always]] work), feminine beauty and two [[witty]] [[main]] [[characters]]. Tony Lo [[Bianco]] is [[terrific]] as the [[small]] thug pretending to be the city's biggest [[Don]]. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in [[town]], he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony [[helps]] Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected [[crime]] gem funnily alters [[gritty]] action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual [[killings]] are sadistic and [[merciless]], which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just [[appears]] in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the [[men]] [[behind]] the [[camera]], responsible for the [[superb]] cinematography, was no less then [[Joe]] D'Amato. [[Great]] [[film]], [[highly]] [[recommended]] to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. Although I'm [[thankful]] this obscure gem of 70's Italian exploitation cinema features in the [[newly]] released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[while]] it's [[similarly]] [[accessible]] on disc under the [[fraudulent]] and [[idiot]] [[substitute]] title "Escape from Death Row", I [[plainly]] think it deserves a [[suitable]] and [[deluxe]] DVD [[publishing]], [[entirely]] in its originally spoken languages with [[subtitles]] options (the [[copying]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special [[freebie]] features! [[Devil]], I don't even need the [[rehabilitated]] picture quality and bonus features if only we [[wo]] watch the film in its [[preliminary]] [[linguistics]]. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced [[shay]]/crime flick with a lot of violence, [[comedian]] (which, [[assuredly]], doesn't [[permanently]] work), feminine beauty and two [[spiritual]] [[principal]] [[traits]]. Tony Lo [[Bianca]] is [[super]] as the [[minor]] thug pretending to be the city's biggest [[Donation]]. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in [[towns]], he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony [[supporting]] Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected [[misdemeanour]] gem funnily alters [[sandstone]] action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual [[kills]] are sadistic and [[pitiless]], which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just [[seems]] in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the [[males]] [[backside]] the [[cameras]], responsible for the [[magnifique]] cinematography, was no less then [[Kawa]] D'Amato. [[Wondrous]] [[cinematography]], [[inordinately]] [[suggested]] to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. --------------------------------------------- Result 1298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is not a [[bad]] [[film]]. It is not wildly funny, but it is interesting and

[[entertaining]]. It has a few funny [[moments]]. [[Cher]] gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance [[alone]] is worth the watch. [[If]] this [[movie]] had [[come]] out

[[today]] it [[would]] not have been [[nominated]], but by '80s standards it

was [[excellent]]. This is not a [[horrid]] [[movie]]. It is not wildly funny, but it is interesting and

[[amusing]]. It has a few funny [[times]]. [[Sher]] gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance [[only]] is worth the watch. [[Unless]] this [[flick]] had [[coming]] out

[[hoy]] it [[could]] not have been [[appointing]], but by '80s standards it

was [[wondrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not to mention easily Pierce Brosnon's best performance. Of course Greg Kinnear is always great. Really, when has he really been bad? I think this film is incredibly underrated! The use of colors in this movie is something very different in today's film world where every other movie has the Payback blue filter. I also love the way they used the song by Asia. Proving that even what was once thought of as kinda cheesy can be really cool placed correctly.

I was making my first feature when this came out. Being that my film was a hit-man movie, I had to check out anything in the genre that was released. After seeing it, I'm sure it had some effect on me through the process. It was pretty cool when my film got on the IMDb that it would recommend this film if you liked mine. How any of the others relate I have no idea, making an even more interesting coincidence.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337580/ --------------------------------------------- Result 1300 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Wow]]. I read about this movie and it [[sounded]] so [[awful]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can smell it in St Louis. Where do I [[start]]? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the success of [[Animal]] [[House]], but they completely missed the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't [[carry]] this sorry short flop for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York bimbos (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The [[idea]] was actually [[somewhat]] clever, but the director stunk. The [[characters]] all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry [[Boon]], your [[legacy]] was [[tarnished]] with this [[flop]].

Short Film #2

[[MORE]] [[SPOILERS]]

Enter [[Dominique]] Corsaire. Pretty [[girl]], recently [[finished]] college, not sure what to do with her [[life]]. So she becomes a [[slut]], starts sleeping around with some [[mega]] rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she [[beds]] the most [[powerful]] man in the [[world]], Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the [[president]] of the United States). Once again, it [[could]] have been funny, and [[though]] I was [[happy]] that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does [[anything]]. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. [[Ruff]]. I read about this movie and it [[seemed]] so [[appalling]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can smell it in St Louis. Where do I [[embark]]? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the success of [[Zoo]] [[Housing]], but they completely missed the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't [[transporting]] this sorry short flop for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York bimbos (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The [[notions]] was actually [[rather]] clever, but the director stunk. The [[attribute]] all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry [[Boone]], your [[inheritance]] was [[tinted]] with this [[collapse]].

Short Film #2

[[GREATER]] [[TROUBLEMAKERS]]

Enter [[Dominic]] Corsaire. Pretty [[giri]], recently [[finis]] college, not sure what to do with her [[iife]]. So she becomes a [[tramp]], starts sleeping around with some [[super]] rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she [[cots]] the most [[emphatic]] man in the [[worldwide]], Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the [[chairing]] of the United States). Once again, it [[did]] have been funny, and [[although]] I was [[joyous]] that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does [[nothing]]. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is pretty poor. The acting is [[abysmal]] and completely [[forced]]. Furthermore, by [[shooting]] the film as a docudrama doesn't [[necessarily]] make it more [[believable]], you can't get out of it that easily Mr Dir. Don't let my comments mislead you [[however]], as i [[would]] [[recommend]] you watch this [[film]], as it does [[shed]] some light on the [[psychology]] or non existent [[psychology]] behind the [[perpetrators]] of such crimes. However, the [[climax]] of the film is absolutely [[rubbish]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and [[simply]] [[fails]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not [[translate]] to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No [[instead]] it leaves you with jaw [[dropping]] "[[Was]] that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for [[yet]] another [[film]] that started with [[potential]], but ended up falling flat on its [[face]] at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz This film is pretty poor. The acting is [[horrific]] and completely [[obliged]]. Furthermore, by [[gunshot]] the film as a docudrama doesn't [[invariably]] make it more [[dependable]], you can't get out of it that easily Mr Dir. Don't let my comments mislead you [[instead]], as i [[could]] [[recommendations]] you watch this [[filmmaking]], as it does [[boathouse]] some light on the [[psyche]] or non existent [[psyche]] behind the [[violators]] of such crimes. However, the [[orgasm]] of the film is absolutely [[litter]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and [[merely]] [[fail]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not [[converting]] to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No [[alternatively]] it leaves you with jaw [[downing]] "[[Were]] that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for [[however]] another [[filmmaking]] that started with [[prospective]], but ended up falling flat on its [[encounter]] at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz --------------------------------------------- Result 1302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Oh my [[GOD]]. I [[bought]] this movie and...I...[[watched]]...the...[[whole]]...[[thing]]. . . [[Okay]], it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hope]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was [[going]] to eat something after the [[movie]] but I just can't [[seem]] to get up the [[courage]] to [[try]] and hold any food down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. [[Very]] BAD. BAD [[BAD]] BAD BAD [[BAD]]. Wait, bad doesn't seem to [[get]] the message [[across]] in [[quite]] the right [[way]]. [[Hmm]]... There isn't a word to [[describe]] just how [[awful]].... not awful... [[Hmm]] disgustingly [[horribly]] casted/acted/[[filmed]]/[[directed]]/[[written]]. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. [[Possibly]] burn it I wouldn't [[want]] it to [[end]] up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand [[years]] from now. The [[worst]] [[movie]] ever [[since]] "[[Hey]] [[Happy]]" Oh my [[DEUS]]. I [[acquiring]] this movie and...I...[[seen]]...the...[[overall]]...[[stuff]]. . . [[Ok]], it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hopes]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was [[go]] to eat something after the [[filmmaking]] but I just can't [[appears]] to get up the [[gallantry]] to [[trying]] and hold any food down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. [[Extremely]] BAD. BAD [[ROTTEN]] BAD BAD [[ROTTEN]]. Wait, bad doesn't seem to [[gets]] the message [[throughout]] in [[utterly]] the right [[camino]]. [[Ahem]]... There isn't a word to [[describing]] just how [[horrific]].... not awful... [[Hum]] disgustingly [[unimaginably]] casted/acted/[[shot]]/[[geared]]/[[typed]]. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. [[Conceivably]] burn it I wouldn't [[wanna]] it to [[ending]] up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand [[yr]] from now. The [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[because]] "[[Bye]] [[Joyous]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 1303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Throughly enjoy all the musical numbers each time I see this movie. Never seem to tire of it. Fred and Ginger are always a pleasure to watch. Seeing "Lucy" and Betty Grable before they hit the big time, is fun to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Phantasm ....[[Class]]. Phantasm II.....[[awesome]]. Phantasm III.....erm.....[[terrible]].

Even [[though]] i [[would]] [[love]] to stick up for this [[film]], i [[quite]] [[simply]] can't. The movie seems to have "sold out". First bad signs come when the video has trailers for other [[films]] at the [[start]] (something the others did not). Also too [[many]] [[pointless]] characters, prime examples the kid (who is a crack shot, funny initially but soon you want him dead), the woman who uses karate to fight off the balls (erm not gonna work, or rather shouldn't) and the blooming zombies (what the hell are they doing there, there no link to them in the other Phatasms). Also there is a severe lack of midgets running about.

The only good bits are the cracking [[start]] and, of course, Reggie B.

(Possible SPOILER coming Up)

To me this film seems like a filler between II and IV as extra characters just leave at the end so can [[continue]] with main 4 in IV.

[[Overall]] very, [[VERY]] [[disappointing]]. 3 / 10 Phantasm ....[[Category]]. Phantasm II.....[[sumptuous]]. Phantasm III.....erm.....[[scary]].

Even [[if]] i [[ought]] [[amour]] to stick up for this [[filmmaking]], i [[rather]] [[solely]] can't. The movie seems to have "sold out". First bad signs come when the video has trailers for other [[cinematographic]] at the [[startup]] (something the others did not). Also too [[myriad]] [[superfluous]] characters, prime examples the kid (who is a crack shot, funny initially but soon you want him dead), the woman who uses karate to fight off the balls (erm not gonna work, or rather shouldn't) and the blooming zombies (what the hell are they doing there, there no link to them in the other Phatasms). Also there is a severe lack of midgets running about.

The only good bits are the cracking [[starter]] and, of course, Reggie B.

(Possible SPOILER coming Up)

To me this film seems like a filler between II and IV as extra characters just leave at the end so can [[continuing]] with main 4 in IV.

[[Total]] very, [[QUITE]] [[frustrating]]. 3 / 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very rarely does Denzil Washington make a bad movie and come to think of it that goes for Kevin Kline and in this case , this must count as one of their best films. It is more about of film about how strong friendship can more than the story of Steve Biko although we do get an insight into what the man was like and how far the reporter and friend Donald Woods went to preserve the mans name and let the world know what a corrupt , putrid society South Africa was. The Direction is outstanding from David Attenborough as it was for Gandhi although if there is any critisism to be aimed it could be at the length of the film. Two and a half hours is a long time to sit through a historic movie .What is amazing is how he manages to control all the extras. Thousands of people in both films. This film really does open your eyes to what happened before the break up of Aparthiet and you cannot fail to moved by it. 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Some [[guy]] gets [[whacked]]. Right out in [[plain]] sight this other guy [[shoots]] him. He's got some bodyguards and they whack the [[killer]], but a [[reporter]] gets interested. She goes to the [[hospital]] where they [[took]] the [[guy]] who [[got]] whacked. She [[walks]] in, and corners one [[bodyguard]], but he doesn't feel [[like]] talking. I can't figure out why. It's not like anyone else is interested. She's the only [[reporter]] there. Anyway, her [[editor]] discourages her from [[working]] on this lame [[story]]. But hey, she does anyway. She goes to see the killer's sister & mom. A few minutes after she leaves they get whacked big time-- somebody blows up their trailer-- huge ball of fire. Then she searches out the bodyguard from the hospital. She finds him hungover on his boat, but a minute later they're both underwater sucking on a scuba tank 'cause three guys are trying to whack them (and have blown up the boat big time-- huge ball of fire). The reporter and the bodyguard whack two of the guys who are trying to whack them.

In the course of the next hour another guy gets whacked crossing the street, there's a shootout with several stiffs in a warehouse, some car chases with wreckage & death, a fake suicide, etc. etc. Lotsa stiffs, all kindsa carnage.

Great stuff, but what the [[reporter]] and the bodyguard can't [[figure]] is: why in hell the original [[guy]] [[got]] whacked. What's the motivation? Of course, it [[might]] [[help]] us to [[figure]] out why the reporter's even interested. Through almost all of this she's the only [[reporter]] on the [[story]]. Nobody else in the media cares. Not even with all the big fireballs and dead [[bodies]]. [[True]], the original guy who [[got]] whacked wasn't exactly a [[celebrity]]. His [[job]] was a [[little]] bit dull. He was just the [[President]]. [[Yeah]], the one who lives in the White [[House]]. [[Oh]], and the bodyguard is a Secret [[Service]] [[agent]].

Is that the spoiler?

It should be. [[After]] all there are no TV cameras, no other [[print]] [[reporters]], no bloggers... just another one of those police blotter [[crimes]]...

So what's the spoiler?

Lemme think...

No! Wait! The spoiler is that his wife did it! Yeah... the First Lady. She was p---ed because the President was fooling around. And she gets away with it. She's really sharp, huh? But how the hell could anybody ever figure that out? Why would anyone bother? After all, only one reporter is even interested.

I give this move a "1". It was so dumb I just had to keep watching. And it only got dumber! That's the real spoiler! But even though I've told you, you've got to see it to believe it! Some [[blokes]] gets [[jacked]]. Right out in [[plains]] sight this other guy [[twigs]] him. He's got some bodyguards and they whack the [[callin]], but a [[reporters]] gets interested. She goes to the [[clinic]] where they [[taken]] the [[blokes]] who [[ai]] whacked. She [[strolls]] in, and corners one [[goon]], but he doesn't feel [[iike]] talking. I can't figure out why. It's not like anyone else is interested. She's the only [[reporters]] there. Anyway, her [[editorial]] discourages her from [[cooperated]] on this lame [[fairytales]]. But hey, she does anyway. She goes to see the killer's sister & mom. A few minutes after she leaves they get whacked big time-- somebody blows up their trailer-- huge ball of fire. Then she searches out the bodyguard from the hospital. She finds him hungover on his boat, but a minute later they're both underwater sucking on a scuba tank 'cause three guys are trying to whack them (and have blown up the boat big time-- huge ball of fire). The reporter and the bodyguard whack two of the guys who are trying to whack them.

In the course of the next hour another guy gets whacked crossing the street, there's a shootout with several stiffs in a warehouse, some car chases with wreckage & death, a fake suicide, etc. etc. Lotsa stiffs, all kindsa carnage.

Great stuff, but what the [[journalist]] and the bodyguard can't [[silhouette]] is: why in hell the original [[guys]] [[gets]] whacked. What's the motivation? Of course, it [[apt]] [[assists]] us to [[silhouette]] out why the reporter's even interested. Through almost all of this she's the only [[journalist]] on the [[conte]]. Nobody else in the media cares. Not even with all the big fireballs and dead [[institutions]]. [[Veritable]], the original guy who [[get]] whacked wasn't exactly a [[stars]]. His [[labor]] was a [[small]] bit dull. He was just the [[Preside]]. [[Yup]], the one who lives in the White [[Home]]. [[Ohhh]], and the bodyguard is a Secret [[Servicing]] [[patrolman]].

Is that the spoiler?

It should be. [[Upon]] all there are no TV cameras, no other [[fingerprints]] [[correspondents]], no bloggers... just another one of those police blotter [[infractions]]...

So what's the spoiler?

Lemme think...

No! Wait! The spoiler is that his wife did it! Yeah... the First Lady. She was p---ed because the President was fooling around. And she gets away with it. She's really sharp, huh? But how the hell could anybody ever figure that out? Why would anyone bother? After all, only one reporter is even interested.

I give this move a "1". It was so dumb I just had to keep watching. And it only got dumber! That's the real spoiler! But even though I've told you, you've got to see it to believe it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen many, many films from China - and Hong Kong. This is the worst. No, the worst one was 'Unknown Pleasures'. I watched 'Platform' yesterday evening and thought that Jia Zhang Ke's other two films must be better. This evening I was disappointed again. I will not be watching 'Xiao Wu' tomorrow evening because I have just placed all three films in the bin! Whoever gave this film, 'Platform' ten out of ten, needs to watch more cinema! The photography was very poor: it was very difficult to differentiate between some of the characters because of the lack of close-up work. The storyline was so disjointed that I fast-forwarded it towards the end out of pure frustration. I would not recommend this film to anyone. Give me Zhang Yimou or Chen Kage any day. These are true masters of Chinese cinema, not pretentious con men! --------------------------------------------- Result 1308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This su*k! Why do they have to make movies that they must know su*k from the beginning? I mean, look at Alien from 1977. If the movie you´r about to make is not better than anything made billions of years before, why make it? I had problems with the plot and who the main character was. That's not good either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best films I have seen in years! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is excellent as Emma Woodhouse. Alan Cumming is superb as Reverand Elton, and Emma Thompson's sister, Sophie, is hysterical as Miss Bates. And check out the gorgeous Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a gentleman! Whoever said you need sex and violence in a movie to make it good has never seen Emma. I think that is what separates it from so many others--it's classy.

If you're looking for a film that you can watch with the whole family, or looking for a romance for yourself, look no further. Emma is that movie. With a beautiful setting, wonderful costumes, and an outstanding cast (have I mentioned the gorgeous Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a perfect ten! --------------------------------------------- Result 1310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would finally have a decent movie about World War I as experienced by American soldiers. Unfortunately this is not it.

It should have been a good movie about WWI. Even though it was made for television it is obvious that a real effort was made to use appropriate equipment and props. But the writing and directing are badly lacking, even though the makers of this movie obviously borrowed freely from quite a few well made war movies. War movie clichés abound such as the arrogant general who apparently does not care a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average grunt experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be "Paths of Glory" with American uniforms. Except that "Paths of Glory" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from "Gettysburg" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from "The Thin Red Line". But in "The Thin Red Line" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a ring forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.

If this movie used a military adviser they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what made storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.

Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service. --------------------------------------------- Result 1311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is a well directed film from [[John]] Cromwell who was not a [[great]] [[director]] but who did [[make]] some fine [[films]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[could]] [[manage]], atmospheric but nothing [[like]] the [[real]] thing, it is a story of [[obsession]] and [[thwarted]] [[love]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was looking forward to seeing it on [[DVD]] as I had never seen it before and being a [[great]] admirer of [[Bette]] [[Davis]] [[wanted]] to see her in a role [[considered]] one of her early [[great]] ones. So I [[bought]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm [[sorry]] to say her London cockney [[accent]] just made me laugh. [[Bette]] [[Davis]] was one of the [[greatest]] [[film]] [[actors]], make no mistake, but here she did [[make]] one. It was impossible to [[take]] her [[character]] seriously. It wasn't as [[gruesome]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but [[close]].

[[In]] the other [[major]] role was [[Leslie]] Howard and he did it [[superbly]]. He was a [[subtle]] and [[intelligent]] [[actor]] The [[supporting]] [[actors]] acquit themselves well. Worth [[watching]] despite [[Ms]] Davis' vocal gymnastics. This is a well directed film from [[Johannes]] Cromwell who was not a [[large]] [[headmaster]] but who did [[deliver]] some fine [[kino]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[would]] [[managing]], atmospheric but nothing [[iike]] the [[actual]] thing, it is a story of [[mania]] and [[frustrated]] [[loves]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was looking forward to seeing it on [[DVDS]] as I had never seen it before and being a [[fantastic]] admirer of [[Midler]] [[Davies]] [[wished]] to see her in a role [[regarded]] one of her early [[remarkable]] ones. So I [[buying]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm [[desolated]] to say her London cockney [[emphasis]] just made me laugh. [[Midler]] [[Davies]] was one of the [[larger]] [[kino]] [[players]], make no mistake, but here she did [[deliver]] one. It was impossible to [[taking]] her [[characters]] seriously. It wasn't as [[terrible]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but [[shut]].

[[Throughout]] the other [[principal]] role was [[Lesley]] Howard and he did it [[remarkably]]. He was a [[perceptive]] and [[termite]] [[protagonist]] The [[assisting]] [[players]] acquit themselves well. Worth [[staring]] despite [[Mrs]] Davis' vocal gymnastics. --------------------------------------------- Result 1312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was [[trying]] to be a Hitchcock rip off or a [[modernized]] Edgar Allen Poe [[tribute]]. These days, [[someone]] [[would]] have chopped it up a bit and [[presented]] it as one of those [[TV]] anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an [[extensive]] rewrite.

The [[sad]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the [[rubble]] of this [[movie]], and the actors are [[obviously]] doing the best they can with both their [[talent]] and the material they have to [[work]] with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a [[dramatic]] scene; the special effects [[simply]] didn't [[work]]; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so [[plainly]] that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I [[suppose]] someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was [[try]] to be a Hitchcock rip off or a [[updates]] Edgar Allen Poe [[accolades]]. These days, [[anybody]] [[could]] have chopped it up a bit and [[lodged]] it as one of those [[TVS]] anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an [[wide]] rewrite.

The [[unfortunate]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the [[vandalize]] of this [[filmmaking]], and the actors are [[definitely]] doing the best they can with both their [[talents]] and the material they have to [[working]] with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a [[whopping]] scene; the special effects [[exclusively]] didn't [[collaborated]]; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so [[frankly]] that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I [[imagining]] someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") --------------------------------------------- Result 1313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[sat]] through this [[movie]] [[expecting]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[film]]. But instead was given some of the [[least]] thought out [[arguments]] against the Christian faith [[imaginable]]. [[For]] instance, in an effort to prove that Christianity is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the bible without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is quoted as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This [[film]] also [[attempts]] to [[use]] the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his [[mockery]] of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the [[film]] were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they [[said]] it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then [[gives]] the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the [[origins]] of their own faith?" and [[proceeds]] to explain that the apostle [[Paul]] [[started]] Christianity after being [[stopped]] on the [[road]] to Damascus. The [[poor]] [[chap]] seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before [[Acts]] 2. [[More]] [[deception]]? Or is this [[simply]] ignorance? He also [[throws]] around [[nonsense]] that Paul didn't [[believe]] [[Jesus]] was a [[real]] [[person]]. Are you [[kidding]] me? 1 Corinthians 15 [[describes]] [[Jesus]] [[death]] and [[resurrection]] being [[witnessed]] by people (whom [[Paul]] names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other [[examples]] of how [[full]] of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his [[upbringing]] in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. I [[oin]] through this [[filmmaking]] [[wait]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[cinematographic]]. But instead was given some of the [[less]] thought out [[controversies]] against the Christian faith [[unimaginable]]. [[At]] instance, in an effort to prove that Christianity is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the bible without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is quoted as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This [[filmmaking]] also [[strives]] to [[utilizing]] the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his [[parody]] of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the [[filmmaking]] were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they [[says]] it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then [[provides]] the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the [[root]] of their own faith?" and [[revenues]] to explain that the apostle [[Paolo]] [[launches]] Christianity after being [[stopping]] on the [[estrada]] to Damascus. The [[poorest]] [[lad]] seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before [[Act]] 2. [[Most]] [[cheating]]? Or is this [[purely]] ignorance? He also [[sheds]] around [[farcical]] that Paul didn't [[believing]] [[Christ]] was a [[veritable]] [[anybody]]. Are you [[mocking]] me? 1 Corinthians 15 [[portray]] [[Damn]] [[killings]] and [[reanimation]] being [[saw]] by people (whom [[Paulo]] names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other [[case]] of how [[fullest]] of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his [[education]] in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my fourth Joe McDoakes short that I've seen and so far the funniest one. In this one, Joe takes voice lessons from a record impersonating Charles Boyer and Ronald Colman. When he goes to Warner Bros. Studio (the company behind this series, incidentally), he asks Jack Carson for directions which gets both confused. Then he encounters actor George O'Hanlon (who's also McDoakes) who speaks in his more normal voice that's not too far from his later Geroge Jetson and gets to the set where he automatically upsets the director. I'll stop there and just say how funny I found the whole thing and was fascinated by the movie star cameos provided near the end. The final scene was especially a hoot so on that note, go to YouTube if you want to watch So You Want to Be in Picutres! --------------------------------------------- Result 1315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently purchased the complete American Gothic series on DVD and it lived up to my memories of it. I was very grateful to be able to view for the first time episodes that were never televised. I loved "Ring of Fire" in particular of the stories I hadn't seen the first time around.

Gary Cole is fantastic as "evil, sexy" Lucas Buck. Lucas Black as Caleb is also a superb player. I thought Brenda Bakke as Selena Coombs was also superb in her portrayal. In fact, the whole cast was fantastically talented and had great chemistry with each other.

It's a shame the series was screwed by the network (in collusion with a burgeoning group of censors) because it was truly designed for adult viewing. A mixture of comedy, tragedy, farce, satire, Gothic romance and horror genres, it offered brilliant characterizations supported by acting at the genius level.

I had the most tremendous lust for the devil for once in my life. Long live Gary Cole (Sheriff Lucas Buck), the most luscious "fallen angel" ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1316 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Personally, this is one of my favorites of all time! no, i'm not 10.. i'm 30! i own an old, original VHS of this that i bought from a rental store. i've watched it countless times..

while it's an amusing movie for kids, it's an intriguing movie for adults. i once saw this movie whiile i was.. not sober. my eyes were opened to things i had never noticed before. i saw morals being strongly encouraged, both overtly and somewhat subliminally.. i wish i could remember all the things i noticed in particular, but it's been a very long time since then. rest assured, there are TONS of things that are alluded to throughout the movie. if you get the chance to view it.. not sober.. do so, you won't be disappointed.. as a matter of fact, you will probably feel rather happy and warm.

unique and wonderful! --------------------------------------------- Result 1317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Outside of the fact that [[George]] Lopez is a [[pretentious]] [[jerk]], his [[show]] is [[terrible]].

Nothing about Lopez has ever been [[funny]]. I have [[watched]] his stand-up and have never uttered any [[resemblance]] to a [[laugh]].

His stuff comes [[across]] as [[vindictive]] and his [[animosity]] towards white people [[oozes]] out of [[every]] [[single]] [[pore]] of his [[body]].

I have [[laughed]] at [[white]] people jokes from [[many]] a [[comedian]] and [[love]] [[many]] of them.

This [[guy]] has a [[grudge]] that won't [[end]].

I feel [[bad]] for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are [[always]] cookie cutter with an Hispanic [[accent]].

Canned [[laugh]] at the [[dumbest]] [[comments]] and scenes.

[[Might]] be why this show is always on at 2AM in [[replay]]. Outside of the fact that [[Giorgi]] Lopez is a [[cocky]] [[idiot]], his [[demonstrating]] is [[horrible]].

Nothing about Lopez has ever been [[hilarious]]. I have [[observed]] his stand-up and have never uttered any [[analogy]] to a [[chuckles]].

His stuff comes [[during]] as [[spiteful]] and his [[hostility]] towards white people [[oozing]] out of [[all]] [[exclusive]] [[pores]] of his [[agencies]].

I have [[laughs]] at [[blanca]] people jokes from [[innumerable]] a [[comic]] and [[adores]] [[various]] of them.

This [[guys]] has a [[dent]] that won't [[terminate]].

I feel [[negative]] for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are [[invariably]] cookie cutter with an Hispanic [[focusing]].

Canned [[chuckles]] at the [[stupidest]] [[sightings]] and scenes.

[[Apt]] be why this show is always on at 2AM in [[playback]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Over the [[past]] year, Uwe Boll has shown [[marginal]] improvement as a filmmaker, [[cranking]] out the [[competent]] "[[In]] the [[Name]] of the [[King]]" (a "[[Lord]] of the Rings" [[clone]]) and the proudly [[vulgar]], post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then [[came]] "Seed," and the counter was [[reset]] to [[Zero]], keeping his [[bid]] for legitimacy and respect that much further out of [[reach]]. And I'm a [[fan]] of the [[guy]]–his [[films]] [[exhibit]] a uniquely [[screwball]] vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally [[boring]] victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching [[pointless]] stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. Over the [[preceding]] year, Uwe Boll has shown [[minor]] improvement as a filmmaker, [[starting]] out the [[proficient]] "[[At]] the [[Designation]] of the [[Emperor]]" (a "[[Gods]] of the Rings" [[clooney]]) and the proudly [[uncivilised]], post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then [[became]] "Seed," and the counter was [[resumed]] to [[Null]], keeping his [[tender]] for legitimacy and respect that much further out of [[attain]]. And I'm a [[breather]] of the [[man]]–his [[movie]] [[exposition]] a uniquely [[wacky]] vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally [[bored]] victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching [[dispensable]] stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is a [[candidate]] for the single most [[disappointing]] movie [[experience]] of my [[lifetime]]. Cool title, excellent [[director]] (I [[saw]] "To [[Die]] For" and "[[Drugstore]] Cowboy" before this), and [[hey]] - [[Uma]] Thurman in the cast. How can you [[go]] wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[temples]] for [[hours]] after I [[watched]] this [[turkey]].

[[Disjointed]] and unfunny in an [[attempt]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a movie that should be [[avoided]] at all [[costs]]. Its [[critical]] lambasting was well [[deserved]]. You have here one of those rare [[films]] that does not contain a single [[redeeming]] quality. [[Zero]] out of ****. This is a [[nominee]] for the single most [[discouraging]] movie [[enjoying]] of my [[vie]]. Cool title, excellent [[headmaster]] (I [[seen]] "To [[Deaths]] For" and "[[Pharmacy]] Cowboy" before this), and [[salut]] - [[Amu]] Thurman in the cast. How can you [[going]] wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[synagogues]] for [[hour]] after I [[saw]] this [[turk]].

[[Unconnected]] and unfunny in an [[strives]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a movie that should be [[shunned]] at all [[pricing]]. Its [[indispensable]] lambasting was well [[merited]]. You have here one of those rare [[kino]] that does not contain a single [[redeem]] quality. [[Zeroed]] out of ****. --------------------------------------------- Result 1320 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well well well. As good as John Carpenter's season 1 outing in "Masters of Horror" was, this is the complete opposite. He certainly proved he was still a master of horror with "Cigarette Burns" but "Pro-Life" is perhaps the worst I have seen from him.

It's stupid, totally devoid of creepy atmosphere and tension and it overstays it's welcome, despite the less-than-an-hour running time. The script is nonsense, the characters are irritable and un-appealing and the conclusion is beyond absurd.

And for those suckers who actually bought the DVD (one of them being me); did you see how Carpenter describes the film? He's actually proud of it and he talks about it as his best work for a long time, and he praises the script. And in the commentary track, where he notices an obvious screw up that made it to the final cut, he just says he didn't feel it essential to rectify the mistake and he just let it be there. I fear the old master has completely lost his touch. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong.

I want to leave on a positive note and mention that the creature effects are awesome, though. Technically speaking, this film is top notch, with effective lighting schemes and make up effects. --------------------------------------------- Result 1321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Imagine]] the plight of [[Richard]], a painter, [[whose]] real [[passion]] is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his [[home]] made wings. He has ripped his [[canvases]] and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police [[contraption]], he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a [[judge]] who orders him to do [[community]] service. [[Richard]], whose [[relationship]] with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built [[plane]] for the thrill of her life, [[something]] that [[brings]] them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass [[directed]] this [[quirky]] [[film]] which [[presents]] an [[unusual]] situation. [[Jane]] is [[clearly]] not the [[romantic]] heroine in mainstream [[films]], and [[yet]], she has such a sweet aura about her that is [[hard]] not to feel for her and what she is [[trying]] to accomplish. [[Mr]]. Greengrass [[shows]] an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he [[wrote]] for the [[film]]. The [[movie]] doesn't [[try]] to be [[cute]] or [[give]] a rosy [[picture]] of a young [[woman]] afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. [[Suppose]] the plight of [[Richards]], a painter, [[who]] real [[fervour]] is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his [[dwelling]] made wings. He has ripped his [[canvasses]] and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police [[gizmo]], he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a [[richter]] who orders him to do [[communities]] service. [[Ritchie]], whose [[relation]] with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built [[airline]] for the thrill of her life, [[anything]] that [[bring]] them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass [[aimed]] this [[fickle]] [[kino]] which [[presented]] an [[odd]] situation. [[Jin]] is [[blatantly]] not the [[sentimental]] heroine in mainstream [[kino]], and [[even]], she has such a sweet aura about her that is [[stiff]] not to feel for her and what she is [[tempting]] to accomplish. [[Hannes]]. Greengrass [[showing]] an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he [[written]] for the [[kino]]. The [[kino]] doesn't [[endeavour]] to be [[adorable]] or [[lend]] a rosy [[pictures]] of a young [[femmes]] afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. --------------------------------------------- Result 1322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this on cable back in the early 90's and loved it. Never saw it again until it showed up on cable again recently. Still find it a great Vietnam movie. Not sure why its not higher rated. I found everything about this film compelling. As a vet (not from Vietnam) I can relate to the situations brought by both Harris and De Niro. I can only imagine this film being more poignant now with our situation in Iraq. I wish this would be offered on cable more often for people to see. The human toll on our soldiers isn't left on the battlefield. Its brought home for the rest of there lives. And this film is one of many that brings that home in a very hard way. Excellent film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Now]], it would be some [[sort]] of cliché if i [[began]] with the [[bit]] about the title, so i'll [[wait]] on that. First, this movie [[made]] me wonder why [[kids]] do stupid [[things]] like wander [[around]] in [[labs]] and [[break]] [[bottles]]. [[Then]] i realized it, this is a [[movie]] with a message, that message is [[beat]] [[kids]] and [[things]] like this won't happen. Things like what you [[ask]]? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of [[mayhem]] before [[dying]] in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue [[Monkey]]... has [[nothing]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/[[idiot]]/thing on the front chasing some screaming [[nurses]]. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half [[drunk]] on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the [[mood]] for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you [[like]] snow boarding apes or blue [[things]] this movie is not for you. If you [[like]] bugs and [[good]] [[reasons]] to hit [[kids]], rent this. [[Currently]], it would be some [[genre]] of cliché if i [[starts]] with the [[bite]] about the title, so i'll [[expectation]] on that. First, this movie [[accomplished]] me wonder why [[juvenile]] do stupid [[aspects]] like wander [[throughout]] in [[lab]] and [[breaks]] [[jars]]. [[Subsequently]] i realized it, this is a [[films]] with a message, that message is [[overpowered]] [[juvenile]] and [[aspects]] like this won't happen. Things like what you [[wondering]]? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of [[havoc]] before [[died]] in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue [[Silvana]]... has [[none]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/[[silly]]/thing on the front chasing some screaming [[nursing]]. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half [[drunken]] on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the [[ambiance]] for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you [[likes]] snow boarding apes or blue [[matters]] this movie is not for you. If you [[likes]] bugs and [[alright]] [[motivations]] to hit [[kiddies]], rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[Hong]] [[Kong]] filmed potboiler [[packs]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The [[Young]] & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' [[trilogy]]([[especially]] '[[Goodbye]] Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. [[Chai]] Lee(Emy [[Wong]])undergoes a [[stunning]] [[transformation]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. [[Future]] [[Italian]] [[porn]] [[star]]/politician, Illona Staller, who [[would]] [[later]] [[go]] by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV [[positive]] [[John]] Holmes) plays Emy's competition. [[Exotic]] locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. [[Recommended]] for [[fans]] of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! This [[Hk]] [[Hk]] filmed potboiler [[packages]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The [[Youngsters]] & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' [[triad]]([[concretely]] '[[Cheerio]] Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. [[Takao]] Lee(Emy [[Hwang]])undergoes a [[breathless]] [[transformed]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. [[Next]] [[Italy]] [[pornographic]] [[stars]]/politician, Illona Staller, who [[should]] [[then]] [[going]] by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV [[beneficial]] [[Johannes]] Holmes) plays Emy's competition. [[Extraterrestrials]] locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. [[Suggested]] for [[stalkers]] of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1325 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After Chicago, I was beginning to lose all respect for Richard Gere and then along came The Flock. There's just so far a nice smile and a couple of stock facial gestures can get you, but he proved to me that he's finally gotten hold of his craft and can act with the best of them. Clare Danes was also super as his "trainee/replacement". Some have suggested there was too much unnecessary violence, but I don't see it that way. Nothing I saw detracted from the power of this film. I was really shocked I hadn't heard of it being released in theaters and came across it at Blockbuster instead. Really an exceptional film with just the right blend of action, suspense, thrills, and social consciousness. As good as 7even? Well, maybe. And you'll see better acting out of Gere than anyone's ever gotten out of Pitt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely the very first film that scared me to death. I happened catch it when my older brother(r.i.p.) was watching it. It was on a black and white TV and not really a good picture but it got me interested. Shortly after, my folks bought a color set and, as luck would have it, The Million Dollar Movie was showing it one Sunday.

I had forgotten most of the plot, but it did not take long to catch up...and I got so scared I had a hard time sleeping that night! I mean sure it was just a movie but it involved a creature that not only came from space, but you could not hear it, or see it...and once it got hold of you it was too late. Even now, after all this time it still sends a shiver up my spine. A true classic, and even better a classic that I have seen scare the pants off a new generation!

Long live The Blob! --------------------------------------------- Result 1327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[First]] let me say that I am not a Dukes fan, but after this [[movie]] the series looked like Law and Order. The [[worst]] thing was the casting of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worse]] was [[M]].C. Gainey as Roscoe, If they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a [[hard]] [[ass]] cop. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he played in this movie.

The [[movie]] is [[loaded]] with the [[usual]] errors, cars getting [[torn]] up, and [[continues]] like [[nothing]] happened. The worst [[example]] of this is when the the General gets [[together]] with [[Billy]] Prickett, and the [[General]] is ran into a dirt [[hill]] [[obviously]] [[slowing]] to a [[near]] [[stop]], but goes on to [[win]] the race. [[Outset]] let me say that I am not a Dukes fan, but after this [[movies]] the series looked like Law and Order. The [[hardest]] thing was the casting of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worst]] was [[meters]].C. Gainey as Roscoe, If they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a [[harsh]] [[butt]] cop. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he played in this movie.

The [[filmmaking]] is [[onus]] with the [[normal]] errors, cars getting [[ripped]] up, and [[persisted]] like [[nothin]] happened. The worst [[cases]] of this is when the the General gets [[jointly]] with [[Billie]] Prickett, and the [[Generals]] is ran into a dirt [[hil]] [[naturally]] [[slows]] to a [[close]] [[stops]], but goes on to [[triomphe]] the race. --------------------------------------------- Result 1328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The movie was gripping from start to finish and its b/w photography of the American heartland is stunning. We feel we are right there with them as they cross the big sky country and then into Mexico and back to America again. Near the end of the movie, the reflection of the rain on Robert Blake looks like small rivers of sweat and tears rolling down his face. In the end, we follow them up the stairway to their final moment.

The two criminals, performed by Robert Blake and Scott Wilson, as Perry Smith and Dick Hickock could be seen on any street in any town. Hickock is a smiling boy next door and Smith, the guy with stars in his eyes from the wrong side of town. This point is made in the movie and it always surprises us that criminals are no different in appearance than anyone else. Evil, even the most vile, is part of the human condition. These two delusional men kill an entire family, looking for a safe that isn't there. Once on the run, they start writing bad cheques, carving out a trail for the authorities.

There are many fine supporting actors. I like John Forsyth as the detective on the case, Alvin Dewey. Also, Will Geer shines in a brief but excellent scene as the prosecuting attorney.

I have often wanted to see this movie all the way through, having only caught it in short snatches; I did finally get to it after buying the DVD. The result is the finest classic crime movie I have ever seen.

Don't miss this brilliant movie. To me, this is what great film-making is all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Spanish films are into a, if not [[Golden]], definitely a Silver [[Age]]. Piédras is another example of a movie that takes people and their [[conflicts]] seriously. Although the [[feelings]] are strong or [[nearly]] at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[happen]].

There are [[different]] [[stories]] here, which [[become]] [[connected]]. One is about the retarded [[girl]], who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next [[block]]. One is about the middle-aged woman who [[finds]] the lover of her life in a [[foot]] fetischist. Another is about the girl with [[drug]] [[problems]] who's lover [[leaves]] her. [[Still]] another one is about the [[madame]] of a brothel who (almost) [[finds]] true [[love]].

[[Definitely]] worth seeing. It's in [[Spain]] the moviemakers take [[women]] [[seriously]]. Spanish films are into a, if not [[Dore]], definitely a Silver [[Ageing]]. Piédras is another example of a movie that takes people and their [[squabbles]] seriously. Although the [[affections]] are strong or [[approximately]] at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[emerge]].

There are [[assorted]] [[story]] here, which [[gotten]] [[tied]]. One is about the retarded [[girls]], who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next [[obstruct]]. One is about the middle-aged woman who [[found]] the lover of her life in a [[feet]] fetischist. Another is about the girl with [[narcotics]] [[trouble]] who's lover [[sheets]] her. [[However]] another one is about the [[mme]] of a brothel who (almost) [[found]] true [[loves]].

[[Unmistakably]] worth seeing. It's in [[Spanish]] the moviemakers take [[wife]] [[conscientiously]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bar some of the questionable acting (there musicians at the end of the day), this in the words of Quentin Tarrinno is "The best rock movie ever made...period"

Think 8 Mile, but without the rapping - a young musician, trying to prove himself to the local community, whilst struggling to cope with a broken home and a rival band. Throw in the sex interest and the truly exceptional performances, this is the real 8 mile.

Prince provides a solid performance, as does Morris Day and Jerome Benton. Decent script, good direction, great plot, and spectacular performances. Not forgetting the some of the best rock/pop/funk music you will ever hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've tried to watch this so-called comedy, but it's very hard to bear. This is a bad, narrow-minded, cliché-ridden movie. Definitively not funny, but very much boring and annoying, indeed. Bad script, bad acting. It's a complete waste of time - and there remains nothing more to say, I'm afraid.

1 out of 10 points. --------------------------------------------- Result 1332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I first saw this at a [[foreign]] film [[festival]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to [[relieve]] the Estonian [[treasury]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[captures]] the [[atmosphere]] of the [[newly]] emancipated Baltic states [[beautifully]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[lot]] [[less]] grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[lot]] of [[humor]] and some romance, too. I don't want to [[spoil]] a number of [[startling]] [[yet]] [[logical]] [[surprises]], so I'll just say this heist [[film]] [[starts]] from a [[great]] script, and the directing and performances are [[top]] notch. DARKNESS [[IN]] TALLIN is simply the fastest and most nerve-racking [[example]] of its [[genre]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, [[though]] (deliberately) not as [[glossy]]. [[RENT]] OR [[BUY]] IT NOW. I first saw this at a [[exterior]] film [[celebratory]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to [[easing]] the Estonian [[exchequer]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[capture]] the [[ambiance]] of the [[lately]] emancipated Baltic states [[strikingly]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[batch]] [[lowest]] grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[batches]] of [[comedy]] and some romance, too. I don't want to [[ruin]] a number of [[striking]] [[even]] [[reasonable]] [[astonishment]], so I'll just say this heist [[movies]] [[commencing]] from a [[wondrous]] script, and the directing and performances are [[superior]] notch. DARKNESS [[AT]] TALLIN is simply the fastest and most nerve-racking [[instances]] of its [[genera]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, [[despite]] (deliberately) not as [[shiny]]. [[LEASES]] OR [[PROCURING]] IT NOW. --------------------------------------------- Result 1333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had my doubts about another love story wherein disabled individuals find meaning and redemption through honest communication. And it's still not at the top of my list. But the performances from Helena Bonham Carter and Kenneth Branagh and exemplary, almost stunning, and rescue this from being just another tear-jerker. Carter's depiction of an ALS victim is strong, perhaps even overdone at times (sometimes her dialog dissolves into undistinguishable mutterings). But the overall effect is commendable and rewarding. Branagh may be the perfect compliment to her performance.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] has successfully [[proved]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[players]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not even [[begin]] to [[describe]] how [[bad]] this movie truly is. [[First]] of all, is it just me, or is that the [[ugliest]] kid you have ever [[seen]]? I mean, his [[teeth]] [[could]] be [[used]] as a can-opener. Secondly, why would a [[genie]] want to [[pursue]] a career in the [[music]] [[industry]] when, even [[though]] he has magical powers, he sucks horribly at [[making]] music? [[Third]], I have read the [[Bible]]. [[In]] no [[way]] shape or [[form]] did it say that [[Jesus]] made [[genies]]. Fourth, what was the [[deal]] with all the [[crappy]] special effects? I [[assure]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[teenager]] with a [[computer]] [[could]] make [[better]] [[effects]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ending]] suck so badly? And what the hell is a djin? And finally, [[whoever]] [[created]] the nightmare known as Kazaam needs to be [[thrown]] off of a plane and onto the Eiffel Tower, because this movie take the word "suck" to an entirely [[new]] level. This [[cinematographic]] has successfully [[revealed]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[actors]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not even [[starts]] to [[depicts]] how [[unfavourable]] this movie truly is. [[Outset]] of all, is it just me, or is that the [[meanest]] kid you have ever [[noticed]]? I mean, his [[dental]] [[wo]] be [[using]] as a can-opener. Secondly, why would a [[genius]] want to [[pursuing]] a career in the [[musicians]] [[industries]] when, even [[despite]] he has magical powers, he sucks horribly at [[doing]] music? [[Thirds]], I have read the [[Biblical]]. [[During]] no [[ways]] shape or [[forms]] did it say that [[Damn]] made [[geniuses]]. Fourth, what was the [[deals]] with all the [[shitty]] special effects? I [[ensuring]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[schoolgirl]] with a [[computers]] [[did]] make [[optimum]] [[impact]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ended]] suck so badly? And what the hell is a djin? And finally, [[whosoever]] [[engendered]] the nightmare known as Kazaam needs to be [[threw]] off of a plane and onto the Eiffel Tower, because this movie take the word "suck" to an entirely [[nuevo]] level. --------------------------------------------- Result 1335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's very funny. It has a great cast who each give great performances. Especially Sally Field and Kevin Kline. It's a well written screenplay by Andrew Bergman (Honeymoon In Vegas). I don't like soap operas, even though I never watch them. But I do love this film because it's so crazy and off the wall, that it beats the hell out of any stupid soap that they have on daytime television. In my opinion, it's the best film of 1991. --------------------------------------------- Result 1336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] It's not the most well [[made]] slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's pretty [[amusing]]. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the [[bands]] that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I [[knew]] someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the poor quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! It's not the most well [[effected]] slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's pretty [[droll]]. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the [[strips]] that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I [[knowed]] someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the poor quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! --------------------------------------------- Result 1337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[saw]] this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[great]] [[telling]] of the [[many]] [[possible]] stories about the immigrant farmworker population that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My grandparents were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala [[plantation]] (Big Island) at the time setting of the movie. I moved to the Big [[Island]] over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[surprised]] to see that many of the former cane growing lands are still undeveloped, with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie [[helps]] to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a [[review]] like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an [[incredible]] job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other excellent foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another [[great]] [[film]] about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. I [[sawthe]] this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[huge]] [[saying]] of the [[several]] [[doable]] stories about the immigrant farmworker population that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My grandparents were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala [[plantations]] (Big Island) at the time setting of the movie. I moved to the Big [[Isla]] over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[horrified]] to see that many of the former cane growing lands are still undeveloped, with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie [[supporting]] to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a [[exam]] like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an [[striking]] job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other excellent foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another [[wondrous]] [[movie]] about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. --------------------------------------------- Result 1338 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Road Rovers was a great show about canine superheroes chosen by the Master to fight crime around the world. The show was hilarious to say the least. Simple and complex jokes that could appeal to all ages. Running jokes throughout the series that could spawn a drinking game. The action was mesmerizing, and cleverly set up. The characters were very original, each with a very different personality. But what made me enjoy the show the most was the depth of the characters. Each of them have struggles and emotional difficulties that are never expressed, but implied in subtext. Hopefully, one day, there'll be some way to watch the Rovers in action again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a bit easy. That's about it.

The graphics are clean and realistic, except for the fact that some of the fences are 2d, but that's forgiveable. The rest of the graphics are cleaner than GoldenEye and many other N64 games. The sounds are magnificant. Everything from the speaking to the SFX are pleasant and realistic.

The camera angle is a bit frustrating at times, but it's the same for every platform game, like Banjo-Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.

I got this game as a Christmas present in 1997, and since then, I have dutifully gotten 120 stars over 10 times. --------------------------------------------- Result 1340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shot on an impossible schedule and no budget to speak of, the movie turned out a lot better than you would expect, certainly much more true to the Peter O'Donnell books and comic strip than the previous two films. You can read the strip currently in the reprints from Titan Books, or in Comics Revue monthly. It is one of the greatest adventure comic strips of all time. The movie isn't great, but unlike most low budget films it makes the most of what its got, and it holds your interest. On the DVD extras, the interview with Quentin Tarentino, who is obviously stoned, is a gas. Some people have faulted Tarentino for associating his name with the film, but without him it would never have been made. He is a Modesty Blaise fan, and picked a good writer and director. All things considered, worth 8 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[usually]] [[enjoy]] [[films]] like this. It's shot documentary [[style]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[wooden]] and [[stiff]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a [[good]] way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from [[relatives]] of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[might]] [[manage]] a couple of [[laughs]], as it's [[always]] [[funny]] [[seeing]] your [[relatives]]/friends make a [[movie]]. [[Well]], in a way, I [[guess]] this gives hope to all up and [[coming]] writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. I [[generally]] [[enjoying]] [[film]] like this. It's shot documentary [[styles]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[timber]] and [[stringent]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a [[well]] way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from [[parents]] of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[apt]] [[administer]] a couple of [[giggles]], as it's [[incessantly]] [[hilarious]] [[see]] your [[parents]]/friends make a [[filmmaking]]. [[Good]], in a way, I [[imagine]] this gives hope to all up and [[forthcoming]] writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 1342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The scene where Sally Field and Whoopi Goldberg go to the mall to revive Sally's flagging spirits is enough reason alone to enjoy this movie, but wait! There's more! This is a crackling good sendup of daytime TV, movie stars on the way down, (and up) and the horrors of love. Robert Downey Jr shows the lighter side of his genius, and Cathy Moriarty is splendid. The dialogue is witty, and the physical humor done with consummate skill. This is a movie that will appeal to those who really enjoy the arts of acting, directing, and writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

It's a generic coming-of-age [[story]] -- [[think]] "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," [[even]] "Little [[Women]]" -- and there are [[moments]] where Mulligan might have [[omitted]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or [[played]] down the golden-lit [[prettiness]] of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[rare]] [[emotional]] perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[forced]], [[every]] line has [[feeling]], and the pacing is just right. [[Even]] the below-A-list casting [[helps]]: Bigger movie [[stars]] with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In [[particular]], Witherspoon is [[excellent]]: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is [[also]] very fine, [[even]] if he has to [[spend]] much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were [[aware]] of its unpromising commercial [[prospects]] -- no [[big]] stars, no [[big]] [[car]] crashes, no [[special]] [[effects]] -- and [[consciously]] decided to make the [[best]] [[possible]] movie, [[box]] office be [[damned]]. It's intimate and [[honest]], and it sticks to the ribs. If you [[find]] yourself misting up at the [[end]], you don't have to feel you've been [[duped]].

It's a generic coming-of-age [[stories]] -- [[thinking]] "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," [[yet]] "Little [[Wife]]" -- and there are [[times]] where Mulligan might have [[overlooked]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or [[accomplished]] down the golden-lit [[loveliness]] of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[few]] [[affective]] perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[compelled]], [[any]] line has [[sentiment]], and the pacing is just right. [[Yet]] the below-A-list casting [[assisting]]: Bigger movie [[star]] with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In [[peculiar]], Witherspoon is [[handsome]]: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is [[apart]] very fine, [[yet]] if he has to [[expenditures]] much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were [[conscious]] of its unpromising commercial [[prospect]] -- no [[overwhelming]] stars, no [[huge]] [[vehicle]] crashes, no [[particular]] [[impact]] -- and [[purposely]] decided to make the [[better]] [[feasible]] movie, [[shoebox]] office be [[motherfucking]]. It's intimate and [[truthful]], and it sticks to the ribs. If you [[finds]] yourself misting up at the [[ceases]], you don't have to feel you've been [[tricked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] What I [[expected]]: A [[rather]] lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I [[got]]: An even-handed [[story]] where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

[[Sounds]] sappy but with the nonstop humor and [[terrific]] performances this story [[works]]! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[perfect]] [[blend]] of sweet, [[strong]], and adorable. We expect that from her and she delivered.

But Fallon is the nice [[surprise]] in this film. He brings to the role the [[perfect]] blend of sports nut combined with the appreciation for the normal things in life, like caring about kids and his girlfriend. Fallon delivers his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the field for me!") and in the same breath be obliviously blinded by his love for the Red Sox ("How did the [[grass]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this movie marks the beginning of a better film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top [[sophomoric]] humor typical of SNL alums (i.e. Will Ferrell).

In short, a movie that [[could]] have fallen victim to stereotypical male vs. female characters rose above that limitation and provided nonstop spot-on humorous lines, most delivered with brilliant subtlety by Fallon.

Hey, I saw this with my wife -- not a baseball fan -- and she loved it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Guy]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[terrific]] make-you-laugh flick. Go [[see]] it! What I [[waited]]: A [[quite]] lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I [[did]]: An even-handed [[saga]] where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

[[Sound]] sappy but with the nonstop humor and [[wondrous]] performances this story [[worked]]! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[faultless]] [[amalgam]] of sweet, [[vigorous]], and adorable. We expect that from her and she delivered.

But Fallon is the nice [[surprises]] in this film. He brings to the role the [[flawless]] blend of sports nut combined with the appreciation for the normal things in life, like caring about kids and his girlfriend. Fallon delivers his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the field for me!") and in the same breath be obliviously blinded by his love for the Red Sox ("How did the [[sod]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this movie marks the beginning of a better film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top [[fatuous]] humor typical of SNL alums (i.e. Will Ferrell).

In short, a movie that [[would]] have fallen victim to stereotypical male vs. female characters rose above that limitation and provided nonstop spot-on humorous lines, most delivered with brilliant subtlety by Fallon.

Hey, I saw this with my wife -- not a baseball fan -- and she loved it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Mec]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[magnifique]] make-you-laugh flick. Go [[seeing]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This, for lack of a better term, movie is lousy. Where do I start......

Cinemaphotography - This was, perhaps, the worst I've seen this year. It looked like the camera was being tossed from camera man to camera man. Maybe they only had one camera. It gives you the sensation of being a volleyball.

There are a bunch of scenes, haphazardly, thrown in with no continuity at all. When they did the 'split screen', it was absurd. Everything was squished flat, it looked ridiculous.

The color tones were way off. These people need to learn how to balance a camera. This 'movie' is poorly made, and poorly done.

The plot - You got to be kidding. If I was an SS agent, I'd sue the producers. looked like the Marks Brothers with radios and guns. Sutherland was in his '24' mode - I can see this for free. Eva Longoria would have been better with a little less on, and a lot more showing. As an action bimbo she wasn't much.

I couldn't see a real plot, other than Douglas boinking the Presidents wife. Never did say why the mercenaries were trying to kill the pres. I just don't see the President of the United States running for his life in the utility tunnels of a building, like a rat in a maze. p-l-e-a-s-e.

Hollywood is dead. This movie is the proof. I like 'the big screen'. Have since I was a kid. Many more 'movies' like this and I'll quit going. Whats the matter Hollywood, made so many chick flicks, forget how to make a real movie? If I owned a theater, I'd start running the old movies. The one with real actors, good story lines - and good Cinemaphotography.

This 'movie' is a dog. Don't waste your time or money on it. I rate this 'movie' a zero! Douglas isn't suited for this role. I can over look his age, but his just is to much of a wimp to carry this off. --------------------------------------------- Result 1346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I saw Insomniac's [[Nightmare]] not to long ago for the first [[time]] and I have to say, I really [[found]] it to be [[quite]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place [[inside]] his [[mind]] -or does it? The acting from everyone else is a little rushed and shaky and some of the scenes [[could]] be cut down but it [[works]] out in the [[end]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[great]] as the [[film]], if not [[greater]] for those [[Dom]] fans. It has tons of [[candid]] [[moments]] from the set, outtakes and a [[great]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an [[independent]] film will love to watch [[Tess]] (the director), Dom and [[everyone]] else on the very small [[close]] personal set try to bang out this little trippy [[creepy]] film. It was pretty [[enjoyable]] and I'm [[glad]] to have it in my [[collection]]. I saw Insomniac's [[Cabos]] not to long ago for the first [[moment]] and I have to say, I really [[find]] it to be [[rather]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place [[within]] his [[esprit]] -or does it? The acting from everyone else is a little rushed and shaky and some of the scenes [[did]] be cut down but it [[collaborated]] out in the [[ends]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[wondrous]] as the [[movies]], if not [[most]] for those [[Stupidly]] fans. It has tons of [[frank]] [[times]] from the set, outtakes and a [[wondrous]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an [[independant]] film will love to watch [[Benedict]] (the director), Dom and [[someone]] else on the very small [[nearing]] personal set try to bang out this little trippy [[frightening]] film. It was pretty [[nice]] and I'm [[grateful]] to have it in my [[collating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] so, being a fairly [[deep]] [[fan]] of horror [[movies]], it's been a while since i've [[seen]] one that [[really]] made me jump (or fidget [[nervously]].)

[[definitely]] [[going]] to get this on DVD when it [[comes]] out... a [[hell]] of a lot [[better]] than the [[ring]]. the [[thing]] that i don't get is that so [[many]] people that we talkd with after the [[movie]] [[thought]] that it was horrible, well, if that's what you [[think]], then so be it... i [[know]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to get me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth [[watching]].

now, you might be disappointed in the story if you need everything in a neat and tidy line, because the plot goes back an forth a little bit to help build the story (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it would have ruined the whole thing.)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[little]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will [[realize]] that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. so, being a fairly [[profound]] [[ventilator]] of horror [[kino]], it's been a while since i've [[noticed]] one that [[truthfully]] made me jump (or fidget [[awkwardly]].)

[[clearly]] [[gonna]] to get this on DVD when it [[arrives]] out... a [[dammit]] of a lot [[best]] than the [[ringing]]. the [[stuff]] that i don't get is that so [[multiple]] people that we talkd with after the [[film]] [[thinks]] that it was horrible, well, if that's what you [[ideas]], then so be it... i [[savoir]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to get me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth [[staring]].

now, you might be disappointed in the story if you need everything in a neat and tidy line, because the plot goes back an forth a little bit to help build the story (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it would have ruined the whole thing.)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[petite]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will [[reaching]] that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It has been 16 [[years]] [[since]] it's [[original]] [[run]], I [[would]] have [[hoped]] by now some "marketing [[wizard]]" [[would]] have [[promoted]] a [[live]] [[actor]] version of this [[classic]] by now, or at [[least]] [[sought]] to re-release the [[original]] 65 [[episodes]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[network]] haven't [[snapped]] this up. Galaxy Rangers [[actually]] had well [[thought]] out plots, and [[even]] better scripts.The [[animation]] was above average quality for it's [[time]], and excellent when compared to the [[talking]] slide show Japanese [[animation]] of [[today]]. It predated the heavy toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if [[available]]. It has been 16 [[olds]] [[because]] it's [[preliminary]] [[executes]], I [[could]] have [[desired]] by now some "marketing [[sorcerer]]" [[should]] have [[emboldened]] a [[iive]] [[actress]] version of this [[conventional]] by now, or at [[lowest]] [[striven]] to re-release the [[preliminary]] 65 [[spells]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[grids]] haven't [[caved]] this up. Galaxy Rangers [[genuinely]] had well [[brainchild]] out plots, and [[yet]] better scripts.The [[animate]] was above average quality for it's [[moment]], and excellent when compared to the [[speaking]] slide show Japanese [[animate]] of [[hoy]]. It predated the heavy toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if [[approachable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Farrah Fawcett is superb in this powerful 1986 drama, where she plays Marjorie, a woman who manages to escape the clutches of a would-be rapist. Well done to Farrah for being a Golden Globe 'Best Actress' nominee.

When her rapist Joe (terrifically played by James Russo) comes into her home, which she shares with her two roommates (who are conveniently out!), Marjorie has to play along with Joe's frightening demands. It does make for some disturbing and shocking images!

When her roommates come home, they are astounded (to say the least) by Marjorie's actions, and a great performance by Alfre Woodard who desperately tries to convince Marjorie to do the right thing and turn him into the police, makes the film even more nail-biting.

I do find Diana Scarwid quite irritating, but when Joe finally admits that he came there to kill them all, it makes the film a very emotional piece of drama indeed.

Overall, Extremities is a brilliantly thought-out and well-acted movie and I must have watched it hundreds of time by now! Well done to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Tripping Over. I [[must]] [[say]] at first I was a little [[disappointed]] in the first few [[episodes]], but having [[faith]] in the [[show]], and Abe Forsythe's [[unquestionable]] [[talent]], I [[continued]] to watch. I can [[safely]] [[say]] I'm now [[glad]] that I did. The story did develop [[quite]] well, and all the [[characters]] have a strong [[base]], and most don't have any information [[missing]].

The only thing I can fault in this [[production]] is the [[somewhat]] [[annoying]] [[voice]] and pronunciation [[possessed]] by the character Lizzie.

Some good acting [[coupled]] with a stellar [[plot]] really [[gets]] this [[show]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! Tripping Over. I [[owes]] [[says]] at first I was a little [[frustrated]] in the first few [[spells]], but having [[fe]] in the [[displayed]], and Abe Forsythe's [[undeniable]] [[talents]], I [[perpetual]] to watch. I can [[securely]] [[says]] I'm now [[thrilled]] that I did. The story did develop [[rather]] well, and all the [[features]] have a strong [[basis]], and most don't have any information [[gone]].

The only thing I can fault in this [[productivity]] is the [[rather]] [[tiresome]] [[voices]] and pronunciation [[owned]] by the character Lizzie.

Some good acting [[matched]] with a stellar [[intrigue]] really [[got]] this [[showing]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! --------------------------------------------- Result 1351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i think the team behind this film did a very good job with the limitations they had. only £300,000 and 7 weeks to write, film and edit the whole thing which i think is an achievement in itself. although this film is not for the masses (as a young innocent teenage girl is killed and there is homo-eroticism involved in the story) i think that this film is a heart wrenching tragedy and the more deeply involved you get in the story, the more sadness you feel. more so towards Heaton because of the love he feels but is not returned.

this is one of my favourite British films that i enjoyed very much and would watch again. i think that it's a shame that is film is not very well heard of at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] No artful writeup here because it doesn't deserve one. Not an art film. Not even one of those 'hidden' gems. You know, like those movies you hear about through a friend who saw this amazing movie downtown where they show all the good independents and art films.

Just pack it into the christmas boxes, and dispose of quickly. --------------------------------------------- Result 1353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[IN]] COLD BLOOD is [[masterfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's [[also]] so bent on being [[realistic]], it's sometimes more [[clinical]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal killing of a Midwest family, author Truman [[Capote]] focused on minutia, wrapping himself and the reader up in the subject [[AND]] subjects! Brooks departs [[wildly]] from that approach in favor of something closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved [[imbeciles]], which surely they were. They're not [[seen]] as misunderstood souls (as in the [[Capote]] book) and the [[savagery]] of their act is horrifyingly blunt. Scott Wilson and Robert Blake are [[excellent]] as the killers as is the [[supporting]] cast, including John Forsythe and Paul Stewart as the reporter (the [[Capote]] "character?") The landmark [[photography]] is by the [[great]] [[Conrad]] Hall. [[THROUGHOUT]] COLD BLOOD is [[skilfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's [[apart]] so bent on being [[practical]], it's sometimes more [[clinique]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal killing of a Midwest family, author Truman [[Condom]] focused on minutia, wrapping himself and the reader up in the subject [[UND]] subjects! Brooks departs [[savagely]] from that approach in favor of something closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved [[geeks]], which surely they were. They're not [[noticed]] as misunderstood souls (as in the [[Condom]] book) and the [[inhumanity]] of their act is horrifyingly blunt. Scott Wilson and Robert Blake are [[wondrous]] as the killers as is the [[assisting]] cast, including John Forsythe and Paul Stewart as the reporter (the [[Condom]] "character?") The landmark [[photographer]] is by the [[grand]] [[Konrad]] Hall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] **SPOILERS** Redicules slasher film that makes no sense at all with a killer running around dressed in a black robe and wearing what looks like a pull-over Peter Lorre rubber mask. Were told early in the movie, almost the very first scene, that young Beth Morgan was in rehab due to heavy drug use after her boyfriend was murdered in Tennyson Collage about a year ago.

It's also brought out that FBI Agent Sacker's (Jeff Conaway), who's obsessed in catching the killer,daughter was also murdered in Tennyson around the same time. By the time the movie "Do You Wanna Know A Secret" is over it's never explained just what those two killings back in Connecticute has to do with the slaughter in Florida of some half dozen collage students a year later? other that the killer, at least in the murder of Beth's boyfriend, wore the same silly Halloween outfit.

At spring break in the Sunshine State the six students spend their vacation at a beach house and before you know it they start getting knocked off one at a time. Starting with computer geek Brad Clyton, Chad Allen, the killing even spill over into town with a number of people who have nothing to do with the targeted student including the police chief Gavin, Jack McGee, getting sliced open.

The masked killer saves Beth for last in this weird ceremony at a deserted church, in what looks like the Florida Everglades. He then finally reveals who his is and what he intentions are which make as much sense as the movie does, none. Trying to scare it's audience all the movie does is confuse and bewilder it with a number of not-too convincing slasher scenes. The most effective ones having the victim Oz Washington, Tom Jay Jones, survive at least three attempts on his life and ending up, together with Agent Sacker, the hero in the film.

Oz also had a vicious cut on is foot from a large splinter of glass that almost cut it in half and crippled him but later he miraculously recovered, after getting arrested for a murder he didn't commit, in fact he had it out two more time with the killer with him not as much as having a slight limp in his walk! It also made no sense at all why Oz and Beth went on their own to tack down and catch the killer instead of calling the police, with a cellphone that Oz had, instead?

Beth's boyfriend, who loses his head over her, in the movie Hank Ford, Joseph Lawrence, is also very unconvincing as well as the two girls at the beach house.They together with with Beth Oz end up being the killers victims and then somehow disappearing from sight! for a moment you didn't know if they were really killed at all or if it was some kind of hallucination on Oz's or the local police part. Until the off-the-wall final scene where they popped up in the church.

We also get an insight on a previous relationship between Tina and Hank with her, drunk and acting obnoxious, trying to get it on with Hank as Beth walks in without Hank and Tina even noticing her. That seemed to have upset Beth even more then her boyfriend being murdered at the beginning of the movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Lion King 1 1/2 is a very cute story to go along with The Lion King. It basically follows the original story of The Lion King but with a couple of twists. In the movie,e vents are explained by a different characters point of view. This story is still an original plot.

As far as sequels go, Disney isn't all that great at making worthwhile ones. This one, being the third part to The Lion King (Simba's Pride is the second.) actually has an original idea to it while still involving the fun of the first. Timon and Pumbaa travel along looking for the ideal place to live. After searching far and wide, they find the place of "Hakuna Matata". They then meet a small lion named Simba, and go through many things that parents today go through.

I think this is a very good movie, and I'm happy to add it to my collection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have read over 100 of the Nancy Drew books, and if you are not bright enough to catch on yet, Nancy Drew the movie was of a YOUNGER Nancy Drew, not the 18-year-old that doesn't go to school that all of the books are about. This was when she was sixteen. So naturally, she would of not as been as smart as the one in the book considering she is only in the 10th grade. Other than that, I thought the movie was very cute. It was clean and appropriate for everyone. It was funny at times. I thought Emma Roberts did a great job. She was articulate, in character, and cute. I liked the awkwardness that Nancy and Ned had around each other because they obviously were not old enough to be in a serious relationship like they have in the books. It was a cute, PG movie that I throughly enjoyed because I, unlike most people my age, enjoy movies without sex, drugs, or profanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Hanson brothers - Andy (apparently has his act together) and Hank (clearly doesn't have his act together) need money. Andy comes up with a scheme to get some dough that will have consequences for the whole Hanson family.

This film delivers. This is a layered, full-blooded roller coaster ride that knows exactly what it is doing. As a crime drama / thriller I would happily compare it to 'No Country For Old Men.' While both films have have an ample supply of character drama and thrills, 'Devil' is more on the thriller side because of its fast pace. 'No Country' is a colder and bleaker film that you can really admire, while 'Devil' is a bit more enjoyable. There is definitely less violence in 'Devil' than 'No Country.' The acting delivers as well. Ethan Hawke, sometimes wooden in the past, brings the jitters, sweating and the deer-in-the-headlights-look to the besieged Hank. Philip Seymour Hoffman, as Andy, has the film's hardest scenes and is fast becoming the actor, who you believe can do anything.

There's really not much wrong with this film. It jumps back and forth without being confusing. Events spiral out of control, but the film never does - the writing (from first timer Kelly Masterson), directing (veteran Sidney Lumet) and the editing stay as tight as a drum. In many categories, this is award caliber stuff, though maybe films like 'The Departed' and 'No Country' squeezed this one out of the limelight. If you liked those, you'll like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] BABY [[FACE]] is a [[fast]] paced, wise cracking, knowing [[smirk]] of a [[film]] that

[[lasts]] only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[smart]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that [[covers]] so much ground [[could]] be told in such a

short time puts most of today's [[movie]] makers to shame. Screenwriters of

[[today]] should study the economy of BABY [[FACE]] and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their [[films]].

The [[story]] is no [[nonsense]]. An [[amoral]] woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production [[code]] loused it up with a redeeming, happy [[ending]],

but it isn't hard to see in which the [[direction]] the writers [[wanted]] to

go, so [[enjoy]] what's there and use your imagination for the [[rest]]. Stanwyck is [[terrific]] as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless [[suitor]]. Not a [[great]] film but [[certainly]] an [[enjoyable]] one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. BABY [[CONFRONTS]] is a [[expeditiously]] paced, wise cracking, knowing [[grins]] of a [[kino]] that

[[extends]] only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[artful]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that [[covered]] so much ground [[would]] be told in such a

short time puts most of today's [[film]] makers to shame. Screenwriters of

[[hoy]] should study the economy of BABY [[CONFRONTS]] and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their [[film]].

The [[tale]] is no [[senseless]]. An [[immoral]] woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production [[cipher]] loused it up with a redeeming, happy [[ended]],

but it isn't hard to see in which the [[orientation]] the writers [[wanting]] to

go, so [[enjoys]] what's there and use your imagination for the [[resting]]. Stanwyck is [[beautiful]] as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless [[beau]]. Not a [[excellent]] film but [[obviously]] an [[nice]] one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a bad, bad movie! I tried watching without fast forwarding...That failed. After about 30 minutes I stopped the movie, went on-line to see how many minutes this disaster was. (Only 84 minutes, Whew!) It was a confusing, boring movie. I don't think anyone can get knocked down by getting hit with a fluorescent bulb much less gutted by one!! The one funny thing is that I watched "The Killer Cut" version of the movie. The box boldly states "More Blood!" "More Sex!" "More Terror than the theatrical release!" Yikes! If this movie was horrible with all those claims I wonder just how lame the "UN-Killer Cut" was??? If you want to see a great movie about the world of the living & the world of the dead watch any of The Night of the Living Dead series!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Fabulous film! Rented the DVD recently and was floored by this stunning piece of work. Douglas Sirk was a filmmaking genius and he gets performances out of Rock Hudson, Dorothy Malone (Oscar winner), Robert Stack (Oscar nominated), and Lauren Bacall that words cannot describe. Paul Verhoeven brilliantly payed homage to this film by having Dorothy Malone play Sharon Stone's murdering inspirational guru in his Basic Instinct. What a great joke!

By turns the film is hilarious, riveting, campy, biting, trashy, compelling, and eye rolling! It's definately the grandaddy of every tawdry big-and-little screen soap opera but none have had the dazzling style like you'll see here: the camera work is smooth and polished, the use of color is breathtaking, the opening montage set to the title song is beyond memorable, the one dimensional characters are unforgettable, and the final image will have you scratching your head as to how the censors back then let it make the final cut!

While most older, highly regarded films can sometimes be a boring chore to sit through, Written on the Wind contains so much and goes by so fast that it's actually a shame when it ends. Thank you to Mr. Sirk for crafting -and Todd Haynes for drawing attention to- what has now become one of my favorite films of all time! SEE THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well...i was going to [[wait]] till this came out on video to see it, and i [[wish]] i had, I actually [[caught]] [[scary]] [[movie]] 2 on cable the other day, and it made me yearn for more of the same, what i [[got]] was [[AIRPLANE]] on [[CRACK]]... i mean if you [[like]] Airplane or any other Leslie nielsen vehicles, then you'll probably be in heaven, but if your used to the [[usually]] WAYANS COMEDY, then you will be dissapointed, there was [[alot]] more Eye candy in this one which will keep young [[hormone]] raged teenage boys happy, which is probably why it was a box office hit the first week it came out. I enjoyed scary movie 2 ten times more then this [[fodder]], and part one 5 times as much. Odd that the better of the 3 is part 2, but then again i always liked Halloween 2 better then the original as well..maybe its just me. The funniest part of the movie has to be the way the Aliens Say Goodbye. But that wasnt worth the 11 dollars i spent to catch a matinee of this with my fiance. Save yourself cash and catch part 2 again on cable till this is released on Video tape, and then Rent it, dont buy it. Well...i was going to [[awaits]] till this came out on video to see it, and i [[desire]] i had, I actually [[apprehended]] [[appalling]] [[films]] 2 on cable the other day, and it made me yearn for more of the same, what i [[ai]] was [[AIRPLANES]] on [[CREVASSE]]... i mean if you [[iike]] Airplane or any other Leslie nielsen vehicles, then you'll probably be in heaven, but if your used to the [[often]] WAYANS COMEDY, then you will be dissapointed, there was [[lots]] more Eye candy in this one which will keep young [[hormones]] raged teenage boys happy, which is probably why it was a box office hit the first week it came out. I enjoyed scary movie 2 ten times more then this [[foraging]], and part one 5 times as much. Odd that the better of the 3 is part 2, but then again i always liked Halloween 2 better then the original as well..maybe its just me. The funniest part of the movie has to be the way the Aliens Say Goodbye. But that wasnt worth the 11 dollars i spent to catch a matinee of this with my fiance. Save yourself cash and catch part 2 again on cable till this is released on Video tape, and then Rent it, dont buy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Some movies you just know you're going to [[love]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. [[Tracing]] it's [[roots]] back to "[[Double]] Indemnity," and "The Postman [[Always]] [[Rings]] [[Twice]]" in the 40's - this was a [[great]] example of Modern Film [[Noir]] in the 90's. [[Nick]] Cage plays the "down on his luck" main [[character]] who [[gets]] [[entangled]] in a husband-wife [[murder]] plot - and his [[luck]] goes from [[bad]] to worse to even worse as he [[tries]] and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and [[threat]] of [[Red]] Rock [[West]]. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and [[Walsh]], an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real [[joy]]. [[Favorite]] Line: When Cage [[looks]] at the empty [[gas]] gauge in the get-away [[car]], shakes his head and [[says]]: "F***in' [[story]] of my [[life]]." Some movies you just know you're going to [[iove]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. [[Trace]] it's [[origin]] back to "[[Twin]] Indemnity," and "The Postman [[Continuously]] [[Ring]] [[Double]]" in the 40's - this was a [[huge]] example of Modern Film [[Negro]] in the 90's. [[Nicky]] Cage plays the "down on his luck" main [[traits]] who [[got]] [[involved]] in a husband-wife [[kills]] plot - and his [[likelihood]] goes from [[amiss]] to worse to even worse as he [[endeavour]] and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and [[menacing]] of [[Reid]] Rock [[Western]]. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and [[Welch]], an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real [[gladness]]. [[Preferred]] Line: When Cage [[seem]] at the empty [[petrol]] gauge in the get-away [[vehicles]], shakes his head and [[contends]]: "F***in' [[stories]] of my [[living]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 1363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I never much liked the Myra [[movie]], tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. [[Certainly]] [[Miss]] Welch's costume became an [[iconic]] [[image]], [[though]] I have to wonder if [[many]] people who [[recognize]] the image [[really]] [[saw]] the film and know what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't [[think]] it had aged any better thru the [[years]]. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon [[History]] comic books, where it's given [[proper]] [[credit]] for putting such [[big]] stars in what was then an outrageous [[production]]. However, IMHO, the [[movie]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[trying]] to shock that it fails to inform, engage, OR entertain --- I never much liked the Myra [[filmmaking]], tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. [[Doubtless]] [[Mademoiselle]] Welch's costume became an [[symbolic]] [[images]], [[while]] I have to wonder if [[multiple]] people who [[acknowledges]] the image [[truly]] [[sawthe]] the film and know what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't [[thinking]] it had aged any better thru the [[olds]]. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon [[Tale]] comic books, where it's given [[appropriate]] [[credence]] for putting such [[grande]] stars in what was then an outrageous [[productivity]]. However, IMHO, the [[filmmaking]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[striving]] to shock that it fails to inform, engage, OR entertain --- --------------------------------------------- Result 1364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Oh [[man]]. If you want to give your internal [[Crow]] [[T]]. Robot a real workout, this is the [[movie]] to pop into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[endless]].

([[Minor]] spoilers ahead. Hey, do you really care if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[girl]] with a problem. Psychology has developed [[names]] for it when a [[child]] [[develops]] a sexual crush on the opposite-sex [[parent]]. But this [[girl]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't think there's a term for that. It might be because her mother [[Dana]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, whose [[cute]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious figure makes me forgive her any number of [[bad]] [[movies]] or [[unsympathetic]] [[characters]]. Here [[Dana]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she seems to be competing for the gold [[medal]] in the [[Olympic]] Indulgent [[Mother]] [[competition]].

It's [[possible]] that [[Dana]] misses Traci's [[murderous]] streak because truth be [[told]], Traci [[seems]] to have the criminal [[skills]] of a hamster. It's only because the script dictates so that she manages to [[pull]] off any [[kind]] of a [[body]] count.

A particularly hilarious note in this [[movie]] is the [[character]] of Carmen, a [[Mexican]] maid who is [[described]] by [[Dana]] as [[around]] so [[long]] she's like one of the family [[although]] she [[dresses]] in what the director thought [[would]] [[say]], "I just [[fell]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also [[wear]] a sign [[saying]], "[[Hey]], I'm the [[Next]] Victim!" [[Sure]] [[enough]], Traci confronts Carmen as Carmen is making her [[way]] back from Mass, and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[car]] [[manufacturers]] put next to your spare as a [[bad]] [[joke]]. I rather suspect than in [[real]] [[life]] those [[things]] are as [[useless]] as a murder [[weapon]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[In]] another [[sequence]], Arquette wears a [[flimsy]] [[dress]] to a vineyard, under cloudy [[skies]], [[talking]] to the [[owner]]. [[Cut]] to her in another [[flimsy]] dress under sunny skies, [[talking]] to the owner's [[brother]]. Then [[cut]] to her wearing the first dress, in the first location, under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash wallow, 8. For anybody else, 1/2. Oh [[dude]]. If you want to give your internal [[Corneille]] [[ton]]. Robot a real workout, this is the [[filmmaking]] to pop into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[limitless]].

([[Lesser]] spoilers ahead. Hey, do you really care if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[fille]] with a problem. Psychology has developed [[surnames]] for it when a [[infantile]] [[develop]] a sexual crush on the opposite-sex [[parents]]. But this [[daughter]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't think there's a term for that. It might be because her mother [[Dan]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, whose [[adorable]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious figure makes me forgive her any number of [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] or [[unmoved]] [[nature]]. Here [[Dan]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she seems to be competing for the gold [[ornaments]] in the [[Olympiad]] Indulgent [[Momma]] [[contest]].

It's [[probable]] that [[Dan]] misses Traci's [[lethal]] streak because truth be [[say]], Traci [[seem]] to have the criminal [[jurisdiction]] of a hamster. It's only because the script dictates so that she manages to [[pulled]] off any [[sorting]] of a [[agency]] count.

A particularly hilarious note in this [[filmmaking]] is the [[characters]] of Carmen, a [[Mexico]] maid who is [[outline]] by [[Dan]] as [[throughout]] so [[lengthy]] she's like one of the family [[despite]] she [[robes]] in what the director thought [[could]] [[tell]], "I just [[slipped]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also [[worn]] a sign [[arguing]], "[[Bye]], I'm the [[Future]] Victim!" [[Convinced]] [[adequate]], Traci confronts Carmen as Carmen is making her [[pathways]] back from Mass, and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[motor]] [[maker]] put next to your spare as a [[negative]] [[travesty]]. I rather suspect than in [[veritable]] [[lives]] those [[aspects]] are as [[unnecessary]] as a murder [[gun]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[Throughout]] another [[sequences]], Arquette wears a [[fragile]] [[garb]] to a vineyard, under cloudy [[sky]], [[debates]] to the [[holders]]. [[Slice]] to her in another [[frail]] dress under sunny skies, [[chat]] to the owner's [[brah]]. Then [[cutting]] to her wearing the first dress, in the first location, under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash wallow, 8. For anybody else, 1/2. --------------------------------------------- Result 1365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Gingerbread Man is the first thriller I've ever done!" – Robert Altman

In 1955 Charles Laughton directed "The Night of the Hunter", a spooky slice of Southern Gothic in which Robert Mitchum plays a scary serial killer. One of the film's more famous sequences consists of two kids escaping from Mitchum on a rowboat, the kids frantically paddling whilst Mitchum wades after them like a monster.

Seven years later Mitchum played an equally spooky killer in "Cape Fear", another film set in the American South. That film featured a local attorney trying to protect his family and likewise ended with Mitchum terrorising folks on a boat. In 1991 Martin Scorsese, trying to branch out and tackle something more mainstream, remade "Cape Fear", boat scene and all.

Now we have Robert Altman's "The Gingerbread Man", another slice of small town Southern Gothic. Altman says he consulted "The Night of the Hunter" for inspiration and tackled such a mainstream film purely because he wanted to "spread his wings and try a popcorn picture", but what he's secretly attempting to do here is deconstruct the canonical films of the Southern Gothic genre.

So instead of a showdown on small boat, we get a showdown on a giant ship. Instead of two kids being kidnapped, we get two kids being safely returned to the police. Instead of money being hidden, we have money being readily given via a last will and testament. Instead of the righteous attorney of the 1961 film and the deplorable attorney of the 1991 remake, we get a rather three-dimensional lawyer in Kenneth Branagh. Instead of the monster chasing the family we get the hero chasing the bad guys. Instead of the monster breaking into the family's house boat, we have the hero hunting the monster on board the monster's "house ship". Similarly, instead of a murderous serial killer we get an innocent weirdo played by Robert Duvall. . .etc etc etc.

Altman goes on and on, reversing everything just a little slightly, pulling at the edges and doing his own thing. His touch is most apparent during the film's first half-hour, the film existing in an uneasy space between conventional plot-driven movie storytelling and Altman's fondness for overlapping dialogue, casual narratives, prowling camera movement and the way that characters aren't so much introduced as they are simply part of what's going on.

Still, despite Altman's best intentions, the film never rises above mediocrity. Altman's too bound to the conventions of the "thriller format" to do much damage, his style is too lethargic to generate tension and the film is simply not radical enough to counterpoint other canonical films in the genre. "Gingerbread Man" is thus too mainstream to work as a more pure Altman film and too Altman to work as a mainstream thriller.

The film's not a complete waste, though. Robert Downey Junior, Kenneth Branagh and the usually intolerable Daryl Hannah, all turn in juicy performances. The film also has a nice atmosphere, set against a approaching hurricane, and the final act contains some interesting twists and turns. While it's not the complete disaster that Scorsese's "Cape Fear" was, the film still never amounts to anything special.

7/10 – In the late 90s Altman made 3 successive films set in the American South: "Kansas City", "Gingerbread Man" and "Cookie's Fortune". Unlike "Gingerbread Man", both "Kansas City" and "Cookie's Fortune" tackle the genre on the broader, more looser canvases that Altman was most comfortable with.

"Kansas City" is the more important of these two films, its hierarchies of class, politics and crime, and its desire to break radically away from typical gangster genre frameworks, would prove influential on all serious 21st century film crime writers (see, for example, "The Wire"). That said, "Cookie's Fortune", while a much slighter tale, is perhaps the better picture.

Note: Altman claims that this is his first thriller, but he directed "Images", an art house thriller, in 1972.

Worth one viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] MY BROTHER TOM

[[Aspect]] ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) [[forms]] a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. [[Unfortunately]], Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more [[dangerous]]...

Dour drama, [[sparked]] by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of [[nature]] after being [[traumatized]] by their experiences in the 'real world'. [[Unfortunately]], their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an [[inevitable]] [[tragedy]]. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and [[sloppy]] hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. MY BROTHER TOM

[[Facet]] ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) [[formulas]] a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. [[Sadly]], Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more [[dicey]]...

Dour drama, [[unleashed]] by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of [[characters]] after being [[scarred]] by their experiences in the 'real world'. [[Sadly]], their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an [[inescapable]] [[drama]]. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and [[neglectful]] hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 1367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] 12 year [[old]] Arnald Hillerman [[accidentally]] [[kills]] his [[older]] [[brother]] [[Eugene]]. His [[feelings]] are arrested by the [[fact]] that his [[family]] can not [[interact]] with him (or feel it is not the right [[thing]] to do). His [[ONLY]] [[refuge]] is his [[grandfather]], who is the ONLY one who [[seems]] to have [[compassion]] on him. The [[Realism]] will [[captivate]] "true-2-life" [[movie]] lovers, but will not [[satisfy]] those that [[desire]] [[action]] & thrills. 12 year [[former]] Arnald Hillerman [[mistakenly]] [[assassinating]] his [[elders]] [[hermano]] [[Horvath]]. His [[sentiments]] are arrested by the [[facto]] that his [[familial]] can not [[imparting]] with him (or feel it is not the right [[stuff]] to do). His [[MERE]] [[sanctuary]] is his [[grandad]], who is the ONLY one who [[looks]] to have [[sympathies]] on him. The [[Reality]] will [[fascinate]] "true-2-life" [[cinema]] lovers, but will not [[comply]] those that [[desired]] [[efforts]] & thrills. --------------------------------------------- Result 1368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale and great humor, however other then that it's nothing special. All the characters are pretty cool, and the film is entertaining throughout, plus Jackie Chan is simply amazing in this!. Jackie and Wai-Man Chan had fantastic chemistry together, and are both very funny!, and i thought the main opponent looked really menacing!, however the dubbing was simply terrible!. The character development is above average for this sort of thing!, and the main fight is simply fantastic!, plus some of the bumps Jackie takes in this one are harsh!. There is a lot of really silly and goofy humor in this, but it amused me, and the ending is hilarious!, plus all the characters are quite likable. It's pretty cheap looking but generally very well made, and while it does not have the amount of fighting you would expect from a Jackie Chan flick, it does enough to keep you watching, plus one of my favorite moments in this film is when Jackie (Dragon) and Wai-Man Chan(Tiger), are playing around with a rifle and it goes off!. This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale, and great humor, however other then that it's nothing great, still it's well worth the watch!. The Direction is good. Jackie Chan does a good job here with solid camera work, fantastic angles and keeping the film at a fast pace for the most part. The Acting is very good!. Jackie Chan is amazing as always, and is amazing here, he is extremely likable, hilarious, as usual does some crazy stunts, had fantastic chemistry with Wai-Man Chan, kicked that ass, and played this wonderful cocky character, he was amazing!, i just wished they would stop dubbing him!. (Jackie Rules!!!!!). Wai-Man Chan is funny as Jackie's best friend, i really liked him, he is also a very good martial artist. Rest of the cast do OK i guess. Overall well worth the watch!. *** out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 1369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[If]] you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first [[boy]]/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this [[film]] is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oscar]] [[BUT]] as a [[Dominican]] I [[loved]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just [[go]] right over your [[head]] if you are not part of the [[culture]]...the [[kids]] being [[raised]] by a [[grandma]] who's both mother and father, the [[youngest]] [[son]] being babied and bathed with a [[Cafe]] Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being [[harassed]] by the [[neighborhood]] [[men]], going to church and [[lighting]] a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a [[pull]] out all the [[works]] cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't [[meant]] to be [[NOR]] was it [[meant]] to be an [[educational]] tool for those wanting to [[learn]] about Latin [[culture]] ( tip: make [[new]] [[friends]] instead). [[More]] of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it [[real]] without [[taking]] itself too [[seriously]]. As in the tradition of "Y Tu [[Mama]] Tambien" this was [[simply]] one boy's coming of age [[tale]]. I [[recommend]] it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) [[Unless]] you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first [[guys]]/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this [[cinematography]] is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oskar]] [[ALTHOUGH]] as a [[Dominicans]] I [[cared]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just [[going]] right over your [[leader]] if you are not part of the [[civilisations]]...the [[brats]] being [[risen]] by a [[granny]] who's both mother and father, the [[younger]] [[sons]] being babied and bathed with a [[Coffee]] Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being [[stalked]] by the [[vicinity]] [[males]], going to church and [[illumination]] a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a [[pulls]] out all the [[work]] cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't [[intend]] to be [[EITHER]] was it [[intended]] to be an [[schooling]] tool for those wanting to [[learning]] about Latin [[cultures]] ( tip: make [[novel]] [[buddies]] instead). [[Most]] of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it [[true]] without [[adopting]] itself too [[conscientiously]]. As in the tradition of "Y Tu [[Mum]] Tambien" this was [[merely]] one boy's coming of age [[saga]]. I [[recommending]] it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Since I [[first]] saw Anchors Aweigh in 1945, [[viewing]] it on videotape holds a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was [[easy]] for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. [[Now]] I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Though]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[negligible]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first major film appearance. As another viewer [[noted]], this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, [[observing]] his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and [[go]] on to play [[many]] roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. [[Though]] Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this [[film]], his winsome performance did not suggest that he [[would]] [[become]] a major creative force, [[almost]] the [[iconic]] figure, for MGM musicals, where he [[developed]] a style of [[dance]] [[complementary]] to that of Fred [[Astaire]]. Finally, it was [[strange]] to [[see]] the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and [[remember]] that he would [[later]] [[play]] a "thrill" [[killer]] in [[Compulsion]], based on the Leopold-Loeb [[murder]] from the 1920s. An [[additional]] [[note]]: One reviewer [[praised]] the performance of [[Betty]] Garrett as Sinatra's [[love]] interest. She [[later]] [[played]] [[opposite]] him in On the [[Town]], but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. Since I [[firstly]] saw Anchors Aweigh in 1945, [[visualizing]] it on videotape holds a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was [[easier]] for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. [[Presently]] I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Nonetheless]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[trivial]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first major film appearance. As another viewer [[pointed]], this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, [[observation]] his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and [[going]] on to play [[innumerable]] roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. [[Notwithstanding]] Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this [[cinema]], his winsome performance did not suggest that he [[could]] [[becoming]] a major creative force, [[hardly]] the [[symbolic]] figure, for MGM musicals, where he [[worded]] a style of [[dancers]] [[supplementary]] to that of Fred [[Esther]]. Finally, it was [[bizarre]] to [[consults]] the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and [[remembering]] that he would [[then]] [[gaming]] a "thrill" [[shooter]] in [[Constraint]], based on the Leopold-Loeb [[assassinations]] from the 1920s. An [[extras]] [[notes]]: One reviewer [[commended]] the performance of [[Beatty]] Garrett as Sinatra's [[amour]] interest. She [[then]] [[done]] [[opus]] him in On the [[Urban]], but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First ever viewing: July 21, 2008

Very impressive screenplay and comedic acting and timing in this film. Now 40 years old, it has lost none of it's power. Neil Simon displays excellent insight into human nature and relationships as well as how to create genuine comedy from unusual situations. Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau give great comedic performances. Neil Simon was inspired by actual events in his own life to write the play this film is based on.

One of the best written and acted Hollywood comedies of all time!

Surprisingly, only nominated for 2 Academy Awards: "Best Adapted Screenplay" and "Best Film Editing". Hollywood rarely awards comedies, no matter how well they are made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] One of the most [[disgusting]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an [[incite]] on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. One of the most [[abhorrent]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an [[instigate]] on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1373 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I used to watch this show when I was a little [[girl]]. Although I don't [[remember]] much about it, I [[must]] say that it was a [[pretty]] good [[show]]. [[Also]], I don't think I've [[seen]] every episode. However, if you [[ask]] me, it was still a good [[show]]. I vaguely [[remember]] the theme song. [[Everyone]] was ideally [[cast]], the [[costume]] design was [[great]]. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[brings]] this series back one day so that I'll be [[able]] to see [[every]] episode. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this [[show]] in my memory forever, [[even]] though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in [[conclusion]], when and if this show is ever [[brought]] back on the air, I [[hope]] that you [[catch]] it one day before it goes off the [[air]] for good. I used to watch this show when I was a little [[chick]]. Although I don't [[remind]] much about it, I [[needs]] say that it was a [[quite]] good [[showing]]. [[Similarly]], I don't think I've [[watched]] every episode. However, if you [[poser]] me, it was still a good [[showings]]. I vaguely [[reminisce]] the theme song. [[Somebody]] was ideally [[casting]], the [[getup]] design was [[wondrous]]. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[poses]] this series back one day so that I'll be [[capable]] to see [[any]] episode. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this [[demonstrating]] in my memory forever, [[yet]] though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in [[conclusions]], when and if this show is ever [[tabled]] back on the air, I [[expectancy]] that you [[catches]] it one day before it goes off the [[airline]] for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty [[times]] by now. I must really [[love]] it, right? Well, not really.

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and [[thus]] I am a sucker for the thing. But I [[definitely]] have some bones to [[pick]] with it. (Peralta, you [[listening]]?).

[[First]], the movie has too [[little]] faith in its [[subject]] matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are [[sort]] of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a [[jarring]] montage of clips with an equally [[jarring]] soundtrack. I can understand the [[effect]] Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in [[frigid]] open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At [[times]], the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

[[Second]], have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty [[dates]] by now. I must really [[amour]] it, right? Well, not really.

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and [[then]] I am a sucker for the thing. But I [[undoubtedly]] have some bones to [[opted]] with it. (Peralta, you [[listen]]?).

[[Fiirst]], the movie has too [[petit]] faith in its [[subjected]] matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are [[sorts]] of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a [[dissenting]] montage of clips with an equally [[mismatched]] soundtrack. I can understand the [[impacts]] Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in [[glacial]] open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At [[time]], the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

[[Seconds]], have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... --------------------------------------------- Result 1375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I had read many [[good]] things about this adaptation of my [[favorite]] [[novel]]...so invariably my [[expectations]] were crushed. But they were crushed more than should be expected. The [[movie]] [[would]] have been a [[decent]] [[movie]] if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps ruined it for me.

In any event, for some reason they [[changed]] the [[labor]] camp at Toulon to a [[ship]] full of [[galley]] [[slaves]]. The scene at [[Bishop]] Myriel's was fine. [[In]] [[fact]], other than the galleys, things [[survived]] up until the dismissal of Fantine. Because we do not want to have bad things happen to a good woman, she does not cut her hair, [[sell]] her [[teeth]], or [[become]] a prostitute. The [[worst]] she does is [[run]] into the mayor's office and spit on his [[face]]. Bamatabois is [[entirely]] eliminated. Because having [[children]] out of wedlock should also not be [[talked]] about, Tholomyes is Fantine's [[dead]] [[husband]], rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[change]]. [[Then]] comes the convent, which is a pretty difficult scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[saved]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, however, the [[movie]] again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me [[screaming]] at the [[TV]] set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his [[grave]]. [[OF]] COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[dumb]] [[screenwriters]]! It's a [[historical]] FACT that there was an [[insurrection]] against the [[government]] in 1832.

[[At]] one point Cosette goes to give [[Marius]] a [[donation]] from her [[father]] for the [[reform]] [[movement]] and [[meets]] Eponine. Except...not Eponine. [[Or]] at [[least]] not the Eponine of the book. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girl]] working for the [[prison]] [[reformers]] (who are [[working]] out of the Cafe Universal as opposed to the [[Cafe]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the movie is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. I had read many [[alright]] things about this adaptation of my [[preferential]] [[newer]]...so invariably my [[predictions]] were crushed. But they were crushed more than should be expected. The [[filmmaking]] [[should]] have been a [[dignified]] [[filmmaking]] if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps ruined it for me.

In any event, for some reason they [[shifted]] the [[manpower]] camp at Toulon to a [[boats]] full of [[kitchen]] [[slav]]. The scene at [[Monsignor]] Myriel's was fine. [[During]] [[facto]], other than the galleys, things [[outlived]] up until the dismissal of Fantine. Because we do not want to have bad things happen to a good woman, she does not cut her hair, [[sells]] her [[dental]], or [[becoming]] a prostitute. The [[hardest]] she does is [[executing]] into the mayor's office and spit on his [[confronts]]. Bamatabois is [[fully]] eliminated. Because having [[enfants]] out of wedlock should also not be [[mentioned]] about, Tholomyes is Fantine's [[die]] [[hubby]], rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[alter]]. [[Subsequently]] comes the convent, which is a pretty difficult scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[rescuing]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, however, the [[filmmaking]] again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me [[shouts]] at the [[TELEVISION]] set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his [[graves]]. [[DE]] COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[twit]] [[writers]]! It's a [[historic]] FACT that there was an [[uprising]] against the [[goverment]] in 1832.

[[During]] one point Cosette goes to give [[Constantin]] a [[knack]] from her [[pere]] for the [[reforming]] [[movements]] and [[satisfies]] Eponine. Except...not Eponine. [[Oder]] at [[fewer]] not the Eponine of the book. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girls]] working for the [[incarceration]] [[reformer]] (who are [[cooperated]] out of the Cafe Universal as opposed to the [[Coffee]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the movie is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. --------------------------------------------- Result 1376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Brando plays the ace jet pilot, just back from shooting MiGs down in the Korean War. On leave, he discovers his Madame Butterfly, falls in love. The lovers both see the folly of racism and the cruelty which conservative cultural norms can bring to human relations.

This film is an excellent romance with a nice twist which rejects the racist, conservative standards, dominant at the time it was made in 1957. "Sayonara" will make you laugh and cry. Beware though, sometimes the musical background will make you wish it was not there, although, Irving Berlin's title song will entice your memory for a very long time after your theatre lights come on again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Such a Long Journey" is a well crafted film, a good shoot, and a showcase for some good performances. However, the story is such a jumble of subplots and peculiar characters that it becomes a sort of Jack of all plots and master of none. Also, Western audiences will likely find the esoterics of the rather obscure Parsee culture a little much to get their arms around in 1.7 hours. Recommended for those with an interest in India. --------------------------------------------- Result 1378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I agree that Capital [[City]] should be on [[DVD]]. I watched this [[show]] only by [[accident]] in 1994 and [[fell]] in [[love]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to [[see]] [[Americans]] who [[work]] [[abroad]] in London in the financial industry for a [[change]]. I [[loved]] [[Rolf]] in this role and [[loved]] [[every]] other role that he has been in. I can't believe the [[show]] only lasted 13 episodes. I [[liked]] William Armstrong as Hudson's [[flamboyant]] charming [[friend]] in the series. When they [[aired]] this [[show]] in the [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] area, it was [[always]] [[late]] at night or at off times. The [[show]] is [[less]] than an [[hour]] long. I [[felt]] this show should have gone on [[longer]] but the [[casting]] [[changes]] in the second season [[really]] made the [[show]] a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but [[missed]] the actress, [[Julia]] Phillips-Lane in the [[previous]] season. I felt this [[show]] [[took]] [[chances]] and [[often]] it [[worked]]. It [[showed]] [[Americans]] who [[loved]] and [[chose]] to [[live]] in London. The American [[characters]] were not [[arrogant]] or tried to [[outdo]] their British counterparts. I [[also]] [[liked]] the fact that they had [[tried]] to internationalize the cast [[rather]] than [[make]] them all British. I [[liked]] watching [[Julia]] Ormond in an [[early]] role. I [[felt]] this show should have lasted longer. I [[felt]] at [[times]] that the previews lasted as long as the [[show]] in [[less]] than an hour. They could have [[transferred]] the cast to [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] and it [[would]] have been a [[hit]] in [[America]]. I agree that Capital [[Town]] should be on [[DVDS]]. I watched this [[displays]] only by [[incident]] in 1994 and [[fallen]] in [[amore]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to [[behold]] [[America]] who [[worked]] [[overseas]] in London in the financial industry for a [[alterations]]. I [[love]] [[Rolfe]] in this role and [[cared]] [[any]] other role that he has been in. I can't believe the [[demonstrate]] only lasted 13 episodes. I [[loved]] William Armstrong as Hudson's [[excessive]] charming [[boyfriend]] in the series. When they [[distributed]] this [[demonstrate]] in the [[Novo]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] area, it was [[continuously]] [[tard]] at night or at off times. The [[illustrating]] is [[lesser]] than an [[hours]] long. I [[believed]] this show should have gone on [[most]] but the [[cast]] [[adjustments]] in the second season [[genuinely]] made the [[demonstrate]] a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but [[flunked]] the actress, [[Yulia]] Phillips-Lane in the [[past]] season. I felt this [[shows]] [[taken]] [[probabilities]] and [[routinely]] it [[acted]]. It [[evidenced]] [[Us]] who [[worshipped]] and [[opted]] to [[vive]] in London. The American [[hallmarks]] were not [[presumptuous]] or tried to [[surpass]] their British counterparts. I [[apart]] [[enjoyed]] the fact that they had [[strived]] to internationalize the cast [[quite]] than [[deliver]] them all British. I [[loved]] watching [[Yulia]] Ormond in an [[precocious]] role. I [[deemed]] this show should have lasted longer. I [[deemed]] at [[time]] that the previews lasted as long as the [[exhibitions]] in [[fewest]] than an hour. They could have [[transfered]] the cast to [[Nuevo]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] and it [[could]] have been a [[hitting]] in [[Latina]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] you have a [[strong]] [[stomach]]. Holden was [[actually]] 55 years [[old]] at [[filming]] but [[looked]] near 70 and he only lived another 8 [[years]]. [[At]] one point Holden said, "I am over [[twice]] your age." [[Okay]], [[try]] triple [[grandpa]]! The "[[old]] enough to be your father" [[theme]] they were [[shooting]] for didn't [[work]]. [[Granted]] [[senior]] [[citizens]] [[sometimes]] wind up with legal [[teens]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[mean]] I [[want]] to watch it. It's not a [[matter]] of [[judgment]] but the [[digestive]] track. I like my [[food]] where it [[belongs]]. Lenz is [[fun]] to watch and the 70s [[cars]], [[clothes]], furniture, etc. make it worth it if it [[comes]] on [[cable]] late at [[night]] and you [[want]] to watch [[something]] to wind down for bed. It would have been [[nice]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her [[guitar]], [[get]] more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this chick? I'm [[going]] to try and find out. you have a [[vigorous]] [[tummy]]. Holden was [[genuinely]] 55 years [[ancient]] at [[photographing]] but [[seemed]] near 70 and he only lived another 8 [[yr]]. [[For]] one point Holden said, "I am over [[doubly]] your age." [[Allright]], [[attempt]] triple [[grandfather]]! The "[[former]] enough to be your father" [[topic]] they were [[gunshot]] for didn't [[cooperates]]. [[Given]] [[eldest]] [[citizen]] [[intermittently]] wind up with legal [[teen]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[meaning]] I [[desiring]] to watch it. It's not a [[topic]] of [[stoppage]] but the [[gut]] track. I like my [[eating]] where it [[belonging]]. Lenz is [[hilarious]] to watch and the 70s [[wagon]], [[outfits]], furniture, etc. make it worth it if it [[arrives]] on [[telegram]] late at [[nighttime]] and you [[desiring]] to watch [[anything]] to wind down for bed. It would have been [[delightful]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her [[guitarist]], [[gets]] more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this chick? I'm [[go]] to try and find out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good except for the ending which was a huge disappointment.

The script was very good as was the acting. The visuals were often very grainy but this in a way added to the film as the snowy features were in good places that helped create a mood towards the film. This affect was ruined by the extremely unbelievable ending.

I was going to give this film an 8 out of ten but the ending knocked it down a point to 7 because it seemed to depart radically from the first 75 minutes of the movie and seemed quite forced at the end to make the film makers look clever.

This movie though was much better than films with quite a lot larger budgets and seemed to be filmed like a home movie with some extra equipment. Not much in the way of special effects as these go but for suspense it was very good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once big action star who fell off the face of the earth ends up in a small town with a problem with drug dealers and a dead body of a federal agent. Reuniting with some former co-stars to clean up the town.

Low key, often to the point of blandness, "action" comedy mostly just doesn't work. Part of the problem is the casting Chris Klien as a former action hero. he's not bad, but he's really not believable as some one who was taken to be a tough guy. As I said he's not bad, he's just just miscast for what his back story is. The real problem here is the combination of the script, which really isn't funny and seems artificial at times, and the direction which is pedestrian to the port of dullness. There is no life in the way things are set up. Its as if the director had a list of shots and went by that list. It makes for an un-engaging film. And yet the film occasionally springs to life, such as the in the final show down that ends the film. That sequence works, but because the earlier parts of the film floundered its drained of much of its power.

I can't really recommend the film. Its worth a shot if you're a fan of the actors or are a huge fan of independent cinema in all its forms, but otherwise this is just a disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 1382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sure deep in the recesses of Jack Blacks mind the character of Nacho Libre is absolutely hilarious but no it isn't. You can tell ol Jacks having a whale of a time hammin it up playing a smarmy, slimy Mexican friar with dreams of becoming a wrestler but this movie is a total misfire in just about every single department.

I just sat there through most of the movie thinking "Is this supposed to be funny" and "This is the guy from Tenacious D right?". The truth is this film has NOTHING to offer. AT ALL! It's a lousy script with crappy characters and really naff acting and direction. You'll watch endless moments where you think something funny is surely about to happen but it just doesn't. I was bored stupid about 10 minutes in but though it would surely pick up. It didn't. 90 minutes later I'd barely managed to stave off an aneurism it was that painful.

It's like, remember years ago when you'd see anything with your fave actor in it, even some of their really early pap from before they were famous, and you'd be really embarrassed that said actor was actually in such a load of plop. Yeah it's like that.

I've enjoyed some of Jack Black's earlier movies like Shallow Hall and I'm really looking forward to seeing Pick of Destiny but come on man. If you do this to us again Jack I'm gonna have to come round there and hammer your kneecaps or something. At the least give you a serious talking to.

I know it's a cliché but this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen and for so many reasons.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A film I expected very little from, and only watched to pass a quiet hour - but what an hour it turned out to be. Roll is an excellent if none-too-serious little story of 'country-boy-lost-in-the-big-city-makes-good', it is funny throughout, the characters are endearing and the pace is just right.

Toby Malone is the true star of the film with his endearing portrayal of Matt, said country boy and local Aussie Rules football hero come to the big city to try out for one of the big teams. He is supported superbly by John Batchelor as local gangster Tiny. Watch out for these two.

Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It's a [[really]] [[cheesy]] [[parody]] of [[Tomb]] [[Raider]] and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a [[soft]] [[core]] movie, which is [[expected]] and doesn't [[matter]] because what you really [[want]] is the [[sex]]. Which [[gets]] me to the [[biggest]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TV]] at 3 am and the independent [[movies]] are playing and the one that is on was made by some [[college]] kid that's [[going]] nowhere in that [[industry]]. You're left a very long time waiting for an [[actual]] [[sex]] scene, a [[lot]] of [[times]] you are thinking [[something]] is [[going]] to happen, then just [[left]] hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes somewhere is very pleasing [[though]]. I personally can't [[recommend]] this [[unless]] you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a [[good]] soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. It's a [[truly]] [[dorky]] [[comedy]] of [[Graveyard]] [[Ryder]] and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a [[gentle]] [[crux]] movie, which is [[awaited]] and doesn't [[question]] because what you really [[desiring]] is the [[sexuality]]. Which [[get]] me to the [[strongest]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TELEVISION]] at 3 am and the independent [[filmmaking]] are playing and the one that is on was made by some [[academies]] kid that's [[go]] nowhere in that [[industries]]. You're left a very long time waiting for an [[real]] [[sexuality]] scene, a [[batch]] of [[time]] you are thinking [[algo]] is [[gonna]] to happen, then just [[exited]] hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes somewhere is very pleasing [[despite]]. I personally can't [[recommends]] this [[if]] you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a [[buena]] soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i really liked the first 2 seasons. because a lot of good characters disappeared later on. like most shows are kinda slow at first then get better in later seasons, but this is the absolute reverse. jenny from the 1st season and Valarie from the 2nd season were Sabrina's friends, i really didn't care for the others, jenny and Valarie were her coolest friends. i think for some reason, the producers wanted us to not like her college friends for some reason, they were so cruel to Sabrina. but my favorite episode from season 1 is cat showdown and my favorite episode from season 2 is witch trash, that is the funniest episode. i also thought it was funny how Libby was popular but she was always jealous of Sabrina, and never seemed to have a real boyfriend but was always wanting to be with Harvey. i just wished they could have made more better ones. i also liked how the first 2 seasons, during the opening credits Sabrina would say a few words while wearing a costume, like in the pilot episode where she's in the witch costume, i liked how she said "this is so not me" and later on she kept trying to change herself to something else is what i think, but this is a really cool show. it is kinda like the andy griffith show in a way because it good at first but once it turned color and barney fife left, it was longer good. but i still like to watch it, but the only reason i watch later seasons is because of sabrina. what i meant about the opening sequence is: the opening titles of seasons 1-3 shows Sabrina in front of a mirror posing with several different costumes and outfits as the cast members' names quickly flash on the bottom of the screen. At the end, Sabrina would say some sort of pun that related to the outfit she is wearing, then disappear. the opening sequence of season four includes the characters in bubbles. the opening credits of seasons 5-7 features Sabrina at various locations around Boston --------------------------------------------- Result 1386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is mostly chase scenes and special effects. It is very weak on plot. Most of the computer talk was just mumbo-jumbo. I watched this because I was a big fan of the original War Games movie which was based mostly on computer fact and real computer terminology. This movie had none of that. Most of the computer scenes were not only impossible and highly unrealistic of real computers and networks, but just lame. It is like it was written by somebody who has no comprehension of real computers.

The ripley game was lame and was essentially just an arcade game. No real hacking, so what was the point? Movie was boring. Lame sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Peter]] Fonda is so [[intentionally]] enervated as an actor that his lachrymose line-readings [[cancel]] out any [[irony]] or [[humor]] in the [[dialogue]]. He [[trades]] sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with [[Brooke]] [[Shields]] as if he were a [[wooden]] [[block]] with receding hair; even his smaller [[touches]] (like fingering a non-existent mustache on his grizzled [[face]]) don't [[reveal]] a character so much as an [[unsure]] [[actor]] being [[directed]] by himself, an [[unsure]] filmmaker. In the [[Southwest]] circa 1950, a poor [[gambler]] (not above a [[little]] [[cheating]]) [[wins]] an orphaned, would-be [[teen]] [[Lolita]] in a botched poker [[game]]; after [[getting]] [[hold]] of a [[treasure]] map promising gold in the [[Grand]] Canyon, the [[bickering]] twosome [[become]] [[prospectors]]. Some lovely [[vistas]], and an [[odd]] but interesting cameo by [[Henry]] Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[sole]] compensations in [[fatigued]] comedy-drama, with the two [[leads]] being trailed by cartoonish [[killers]] who will [[stop]] at nothing until they [[get]] their hands on that [[map]]. Shields is very pretty, but--although the [[camera]] [[loves]] her pouty, [[glossy]] beauty--she has no screen [[presence]] (and her tinny [[voice]] has no [[range]] whatsoever); [[every]] [[time]] she [[opens]] her mouth, one is inclined to [[either]] [[cringe]] or [[duck]]. *1/2 from **** [[Petr]] Fonda is so [[consciously]] enervated as an actor that his lachrymose line-readings [[countermand]] out any [[paradox]] or [[comedy]] in the [[conversation]]. He [[crafts]] sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with [[Brook]] [[Shield]] as if he were a [[lumber]] [[bloc]] with receding hair; even his smaller [[affects]] (like fingering a non-existent mustache on his grizzled [[confronts]]) don't [[divulge]] a character so much as an [[insecure]] [[protagonist]] being [[aimed]] by himself, an [[unsafe]] filmmaker. In the [[Northwestern]] circa 1950, a poor [[gamblers]] (not above a [[petite]] [[cheat]]) [[won]] an orphaned, would-be [[youths]] [[Loli]] in a botched poker [[gaming]]; after [[obtain]] [[held]] of a [[treasury]] map promising gold in the [[Tremendous]] Canyon, the [[wrangle]] twosome [[gotten]] [[prospector]]. Some lovely [[perspective]], and an [[unusual]] but interesting cameo by [[Henrik]] Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[unique]] compensations in [[jaded]] comedy-drama, with the two [[leeds]] being trailed by cartoonish [[cutthroats]] who will [[cease]] at nothing until they [[gets]] their hands on that [[maps]]. Shields is very pretty, but--although the [[cameras]] [[adores]] her pouty, [[lustrous]] beauty--she has no screen [[attendance]] (and her tinny [[vowel]] has no [[ranges]] whatsoever); [[all]] [[moment]] she [[open]] her mouth, one is inclined to [[neither]] [[shudder]] or [[duckling]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1388 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best made-for-TV movie of all-time! Am I saying this because I'm a huge Silverstone fan? Partially, but even without her, I'd still see it. I'm a fan of serial killer genre films, and believe this to be a great entry in that category. Also, Mary Giordano easily ranks among Alicia's top five character creations. Totally memorable - like she really exists. I'd have her on my side, too, if there was a mystery to be solved. She plays the character, like she does with her real life, with complete confidence in everything she does. Seems sweet, honest, nice...just like she is in real life. So is that acting? Yes, indeed, she's sort of a rebel once again. This time she's not bad, she's too good and a bit afraid to do things that seem above the law. But she doesn't do things the normal teenager would do. Instead, she spends her time reading detective mags and solves crimes. A cliche abounds: she's sort of avenging her father's death, in a different way than vigilante-style. At the time, Alicia seemed to be playing the same characters: rebellious, seductive, without a parent, a loner. This happens here, too, but she's a bit nerdy this time around. That doesn't matter; she's still cool as a nerd. Check this out soon, or else Giordano will be investigating why you haven't... --------------------------------------------- Result 1389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm surprised at the comments from posters stating that [[Jane]] Powell made the same type of [[films]] Deanna Durbin did. [[Although]] they were both young sopranos [[whose]] film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this [[film]] is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART [[GIRLS]], Durbin plays an impulsive "[[Little]] Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to [[reunite]] her divorced [[parents]], in its' semi-remake, THREE [[DARING]] [[DAUGHTERS]], [[Jane]] Powell [[almost]] destroys the [[marriage]] between her screen [[Mom]] Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather [[Jose]] Iturbi when she [[refuses]] to accept him and strong arms her [[younger]] siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've [[seen]], I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in [[THREE]] [[SMART]] [[GIRLS]], I find it [[completely]] [[winning]], and most [[impressive]]. Although it's [[clear]] from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early [[film]] for Deanna, [[watching]] the self-confident, [[knowing]] and [[naturally]] effervescent [[manner]] in which she [[delivers]] her lines and [[performs]] [[overall]], and the subdued and [[tender]] [[manner]] she projects the more [[serious]] scenes, you'd never guess that this was the [[FIRST]] [[film]] role of a 14 year-old [[girl]] [[whose]] [[prior]] professional experience [[consisted]] [[almost]] [[exclusively]] of two [[years]] of [[vocal]] instruction.

[[Given]] that this [[film]], and Durbin herself, were [[much]] [[publicized]] at the [[time]] as "Universal's last [[chance]]," the production [[must]] have been an impossibly stressful situation for a [[film]] novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the [[ease]] and [[assurance]] Durbin [[displays]] on screen. Although she's [[clearly]] still developing her acting [[style]] and [[demeanor]] before the camera (this was [[equally]] true of the [[early]] performances of much more experienced contemporaries [[like]] [[Garland]], [[Rooney]], O'Connor and [[Jane]] Powell), Durbin projects an [[extraordinary]] [[presence]] and warmth on [[camera]] that is [[absolutely]] [[unique]] to her, and, [[even]] here, in her first [[film]], she [[manages]] to remain [[immensely]] likable despite the [[often]] quick-tempered impulsiveness of her [[character]], and [[though]] she's occasionally shrill, she never for a [[second]] projects the coy and [[arch]] qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her [[success]].

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious [[instrument]], the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. I'm surprised at the comments from posters stating that [[Jin]] Powell made the same type of [[cinematography]] Deanna Durbin did. [[Though]] they were both young sopranos [[who]] film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this [[movie]] is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART [[FEMALE]], Durbin plays an impulsive "[[Tiny]] Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to [[reunion]] her divorced [[parenting]], in its' semi-remake, THREE [[BOLD]] [[FEMALES]], [[Janie]] Powell [[practically]] destroys the [[marrying]] between her screen [[Momma]] Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather [[Sanchez]] Iturbi when she [[denies]] to accept him and strong arms her [[cadet]] siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've [[noticed]], I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in [[TRE]] [[CUNNING]] [[WOMAN]], I find it [[entirely]] [[wins]], and most [[wondrous]]. Although it's [[unmistakable]] from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early [[movie]] for Deanna, [[staring]] the self-confident, [[realise]] and [[evidently]] effervescent [[fashion]] in which she [[offerings]] her lines and [[conducts]] [[entire]], and the subdued and [[offerings]] [[fashion]] she projects the more [[grave]] scenes, you'd never guess that this was the [[FIRSTLY]] [[cinema]] role of a 14 year-old [[female]] [[who]] [[formerly]] professional experience [[composed]] [[approximately]] [[solely]] of two [[aged]] of [[loud]] instruction.

[[Gave]] that this [[movies]], and Durbin herself, were [[very]] [[advertised]] at the [[moment]] as "Universal's last [[possibilities]]," the production [[ought]] have been an impossibly stressful situation for a [[movies]] novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the [[easing]] and [[security]] Durbin [[exposition]] on screen. Although she's [[apparently]] still developing her acting [[elegance]] and [[behaviour]] before the camera (this was [[similarly]] true of the [[prematurely]] performances of much more experienced contemporaries [[iike]] [[Coronet]], [[Ronnie]], O'Connor and [[Jin]] Powell), Durbin projects an [[excellent]] [[attendance]] and warmth on [[cameras]] that is [[totally]] [[unequalled]] to her, and, [[yet]] here, in her first [[movie]], she [[runs]] to remain [[unbelievably]] likable despite the [[normally]] quick-tempered impulsiveness of her [[characters]], and [[if]] she's occasionally shrill, she never for a [[seconds]] projects the coy and [[archie]] qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her [[accomplishments]].

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious [[devices]], the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Underground Comedy movie is perhaps one of the worst comedies I've ever seen. I should have known it was going to be bad when the box had the phrase "guaranteed to offend" written on it... meaning that the filmmakers were going to focus more on grossing you out than making you laugh.

This movie is an amateurish jumble of childish skits, bad characters, and worse jokes... from the pathetic Bat-Man sketch to the painfully unfunny Arnold Shvollenpecker skit, they just aren't funny. The few skits that are a little funny are few and far between - watching Micheal Clark Duncan play a gay virgin, for example - but even they go on too long and get ruined from Vince Offer's ineptness at comedy.

Keep The Underground Comedy Movie underground... bury it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A stuttering plot, uninteresting characters and sub-par (to say the least) dialogue plagues this TV production that could hardly have been interesting even with a billion dollar production budget.

The characters aren't believable, in their motives, actions or their professed occupations. The plot reads like a bad Dungeons and Dragons(TM) hack but with plasma rifles and force fields. There are severe continuity issues and the degree of pointless interaction between the characters has this author, at least, wincing.

Avoid it like the plague. Watch any episode of Dark Angel and you will have better acting, dialogue and plot. Yuck. --------------------------------------------- Result 1392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Williams family live on a ranch located in the middle of the remote desert. They find themselves in considerable peril when the place is suddenly thrust into a time vortex where the past, present and future collide in a wildly chaotic and unpredictable manner. Director John "Bud" Cardos begins the film on a compellingly mysterious note and gradually allows things to get stranger, crazier and more exciting as the loopy story unfolds. Moreover, Cardos fills the screen with plenty of dazzling visuals and does a nice job of creating a genuine sense of awe and wonder. The admirably sincere acting from a game cast qualifies as another major plus: Jim Davis as hearty patriarch Grant Williams, Dorothy Malone as his cheery wife Ana, Christopher Mitchum as the concerned Richard, Marcy Lafferty as his lovely wife Beth, Natasha Ryan as sweet little girl Jenny, and Scott C. Kolden as the gutsy Steve. The funky special effects offer an inspired combo of gnarly miniatures, neat stop-motion animation monsters (said creatures include a tiny spindly hairless guy, a big, lumpy, fanged beast, and a scrawny lizard dude), and nifty matte paintings. Richard Band's rousing full-bore orchestral score really hits the stirring spot. John Arthur Morrill's crisp, sunny cinematography likewise does the trick. A fun flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 1393 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night [[horror]] show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Name]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. Anyways this movie really has very [[little]] value other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad Effects, Bad Dialog, just [[bad]] movie [[making]]. [[Avoid]] this unless you want to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other movies that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty decent movies with good plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night [[terror]] show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Denomination]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. Anyways this movie really has very [[scant]] value other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad Effects, Bad Dialog, just [[unfavourable]] movie [[doing]]. [[Shirk]] this unless you want to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other movies that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty decent movies with good plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Our Song is a marvelous example of passionate, movie making at its aesthetic best. It is, in fact, a genuine wonder of a movie; a penetrating and insightful work of art that chronicles the lives of three young inner city (Crown Heights, Brooklyn) girls during a particular summer in their lives when the perplexities of their approaching adulthood will compel each of them to make a number of difficult, life altering choices that will likely re-define who each of them is, as well as how they will continue to relate to one another in years to come.

Jim McKay's writing/direction is graceful and uncluttered. There is no sappy, gratuitous sentimentality nor are there cliché ridden solutions in this film. What we see here seems, at times, to be heart breakingly real. There is a naturalism - a credibility, if you will - in Our Song that surpasses that of other giants in this genre, including American Graffiti and Cooley High.

Much of the credit for the film's spirit goes to its principle actors. The combined presence of Melisa Martinez (Maria), Kerry Washington (Lanisha), and Anna Simpson (Joycelyn) is dazzlingly powerful. It would be easy - and, of course, blatantly obtuse - to dismiss, as some apparently have, the performances of these three as apathetic or unemotional. In fact, their quiet charm, their instinctive sense of dignity and their raw, sometimes unconventional intelligence, throughout the film, are absolutely riveting. One would have to be completely "out of touch" with, or completely indifferent to, the behavior of teenagers to miss the resounding authenticity in what these three young ladies bring to the screen. Likewise, the supporting cast, particularly Marlene Forte as Lanisha's mother, compliments the work of the three girls as well as the overall tone of the film.

Our Song is a film not to be missed - by anyone of any age. --------------------------------------------- Result 1395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I spied this short on a [[DVD]] of [[best]] [[new]] Zealand [[shorts]], all great but The french Doors was amazing. It [[starts]] off [[slow]] and you wonder if there is [[anything]] going to [[happen]]. Just as you [[relax]] into the hum [[drum]] of [[home]] renovation, the most spookiest thing [[happens]].

EEEEkkk, I wanted to [[stop]] watching, but I was [[glued]].

The films [[dips]] into the [[primal]] fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It [[chills]] you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't [[seen]] in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a [[great]] feature, alas it [[finishes]] after ten minutes or so. Never the less a [[great]] ending that begs you to [[want]] to know more.

[[Loved]] it and well [[done]] and thanks for the ride. These [[New]] [[Zealanders]] are [[really]] turning out the [[talent]].

A [[new]] fan. I spied this short on a [[DVDS]] of [[better]] [[nuevo]] Zealand [[britches]], all great but The french Doors was amazing. It [[commences]] off [[sluggish]] and you wonder if there is [[something]] going to [[arise]]. Just as you [[relaxing]] into the hum [[drummers]] of [[household]] renovation, the most spookiest thing [[comes]].

EEEEkkk, I wanted to [[ceasing]] watching, but I was [[pasted]].

The films [[slumps]] into the [[primitive]] fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It [[willies]] you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't [[watched]] in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a [[huge]] feature, alas it [[finishing]] after ten minutes or so. Never the less a [[huge]] ending that begs you to [[wants]] to know more.

[[Loves]] it and well [[played]] and thanks for the ride. These [[Novel]] [[Kiwis]] are [[genuinely]] turning out the [[talents]].

A [[newer]] fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good drama about a young girl who attempts to unravel a series of horrible crimes. She enlists the aid of a police cadet, and they begin running down a series of clues which lead to a traveling carny worker with a long police record. An ending which is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat. --------------------------------------------- Result 1397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[If]] you want to [[remember]] MJ, this is a good place to start. This movie features sweet [[tunes]], MJ as robot, and a [[crazy]], messed-up plot. I recall, [[many]] a [[night]], [[passing]] out to this [[fine]] feature [[film]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to [[green]] light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is [[much]] more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. [[Unless]] you want to [[reminisce]] MJ, this is a good place to start. This movie features sweet [[anthems]], MJ as robot, and a [[lunatic]], messed-up plot. I recall, [[various]] a [[nuit]], [[passerby]] out to this [[alright]] feature [[kino]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to [[archer]] light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is [[very]] more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. --------------------------------------------- Result 1398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A new creative team emerged in 1950 when [[brilliant]] actor [[James]] Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant [[director]] [[Anthony]] Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that [[genre]] for the [[future]]. Until that [[time]] [[Stewart]] was [[mainly]] noted for an aw..aw..aw [[approach]] to [[family]] [[oriented]] comedies, [[dramas]], and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[best]] screen performances ever and one of the [[best]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a [[sarcastic]] [[writer]] for a scandal rag in "The [[Philadelphia]] [[Story]]." He had even done westerns before. His [[portrayal]] of [[gun]] shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men [[combined]] their resources to produce some of the [[greatest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the [[best]] but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful [[director]] of A films as a [[result]] going on to direct what some critics believe to be the [[greatest]] western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." [[Stewart]] became [[fabulously]] wealthy as a [[result]] of the partnership because he [[signed]] for [[part]] of the royalties in return for a [[fraction]] of the [[salary]] he was [[usually]] paid, a wise [[move]] [[indeed]] followed by [[many]] other [[actors]] from then on.

Winchester '73 was [[also]] one of the first [[films]], [[maybe]] the [[first]], to [[tell]] a story from the [[standpoint]] of a [[traveling]] [[gun]]. Each [[owner]] is part of the [[tale]] being [[told]] and it all comes [[together]] in the [[exciting]] showdown at the end of the movie, which [[also]] [[holds]] a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). A new creative team emerged in 1950 when [[wondrous]] actor [[Jacques]] Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant [[superintendent]] [[Antony]] Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that [[genus]] for the [[forthcoming]]. Until that [[moment]] [[Stuart]] was [[mostly]] noted for an aw..aw..aw [[approaches]] to [[families]] [[aimed]] comedies, [[drama]], and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[better]] screen performances ever and one of the [[better]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a [[satirical]] [[screenwriter]] for a scandal rag in "The [[Philly]] [[Fairytales]]." He had even done westerns before. His [[portrait]] of [[handgun]] shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men [[combo]] their resources to produce some of the [[largest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the [[better]] but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful [[superintendent]] of A films as a [[findings]] going on to direct what some critics believe to be the [[largest]] western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." [[Stuart]] became [[fantastically]] wealthy as a [[findings]] of the partnership because he [[signing]] for [[parties]] of the royalties in return for a [[proportion]] of the [[pay]] he was [[popularly]] paid, a wise [[budge]] [[actually]] followed by [[several]] other [[actresses]] from then on.

Winchester '73 was [[similarly]] one of the first [[movie]], [[presumably]] the [[firstly]], to [[say]] a story from the [[viewpoints]] of a [[travelling]] [[handgun]]. Each [[landowner]] is part of the [[narratives]] being [[say]] and it all comes [[jointly]] in the [[excite]] showdown at the end of the movie, which [[apart]] [[held]] a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). --------------------------------------------- Result 1399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] [[Corny]]! I [[love]] it! [[Corny]] - just as the [[TV]] [[show]] was about 40 years [[ago]]! Adam and Burt [[rekindle]] the same on-screen [[chemistry]] that never seems to have left! They re-live old [[memories]], plus the [[actors]] that play them from the 1960s [[show]] some behind-the-scenes [[things]] which are [[quite]] interesting to know. 1960s [[TV]] was [[corny]] escapism for so [[many]] of us back then, and this DVD is no [[exception]], if you are [[familiar]] with the original [[TV]] [[show]]. The [[fight]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or whatever is [[fantastic]]!! The [[movie]] theater scene [[shows]] clips of the [[villains]] who passed away. At the [[end]] Frank Gorshin makes an [[appearance]]. He passed away not too long after this DVD was [[made]], I [[believe]], so it is to his [[great]] [[credit]] that he [[came]] back to again play a villain to Adam and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robin]] so [[many]] [[years]] ago. He didn't [[lose]] his touch! [[Thanks]] to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[also]]. In [[conclusion]] I [[think]] that this DVD is for [[great]] [[memories]], and I [[wish]] to [[thank]] both [[Adam]] and Burt for [[coming]] back and recreating these [[memories]] for those of us who [[remember]] the original-!!! [[Thanks]], [[Guys]]!!! [[Trite]]! I [[amour]] it! [[Mundane]] - just as the [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrate]] was about 40 years [[earlier]]! Adam and Burt [[reanimate]] the same on-screen [[chemicals]] that never seems to have left! They re-live old [[memorabilia]], plus the [[players]] that play them from the 1960s [[display]] some behind-the-scenes [[items]] which are [[rather]] interesting to know. 1960s [[TELEVISION]] was [[banal]] escapism for so [[numerous]] of us back then, and this DVD is no [[exemption]], if you are [[familiarize]] with the original [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrating]]. The [[wrestling]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or whatever is [[noteworthy]]!! The [[films]] theater scene [[demonstrates]] clips of the [[thugs]] who passed away. At the [[termination]] Frank Gorshin makes an [[semblance]]. He passed away not too long after this DVD was [[effected]], I [[believing]], so it is to his [[huge]] [[credence]] that he [[arrived]] back to again play a villain to Adam and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robyn]] so [[countless]] [[yrs]] ago. He didn't [[wasting]] his touch! [[Appreciation]] to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[apart]]. In [[conclusions]] I [[ideas]] that this DVD is for [[wondrous]] [[memorabilia]], and I [[desiring]] to [[thanking]] both [[Adem]] and Burt for [[forthcoming]] back and recreating these [[remembrances]] for those of us who [[recall]] the original-!!! [[Thanking]], [[Fellers]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Overall]], I [[enjoyed]] this [[film]] and [[would]] recommend it to indie [[film]] [[lovers]].

[[However]], I really [[want]] to [[note]] the [[similarities]] between parts of this [[film]] and Nichols' [[Closer]]. One scene [[especially]] where Adrian Grenier's [[character]] is [[questioning]] Rosario Dawson's about her sex [[life]] while he was away is [[remarkably]] similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's [[character]] is [[questioning]] Julia Roberts, [[although]] it is acted with [[less]] [[harshness]] and intensity in "[[Love]]." [[Also]] [[note]] that "Anna" is the [[name]] of both Dawson's and Roberts' [[character]]. Can't be coincidence. Now [[Closer]] is [[based]] on [[Patrick]] Marber's [[play]] and supposedly this [[film]] is [[loosely]] [[based]] on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this [[connection]] [[formed]].

[[Anyone]] have an [[idea]]? [[Whole]], I [[liked]] this [[kino]] and [[ought]] recommend it to indie [[films]] [[enthusiasts]].

[[Still]], I really [[wanting]] to [[memo]] the [[parallels]] between parts of this [[cinematography]] and Nichols' [[Tighter]]. One scene [[mainly]] where Adrian Grenier's [[traits]] is [[doubting]] Rosario Dawson's about her sex [[lifetime]] while he was away is [[unbelievably]] similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's [[nature]] is [[interviewed]] Julia Roberts, [[nevertheless]] it is acted with [[least]] [[cruelty]] and intensity in "[[Likes]]." [[Moreover]] [[memo]] that "Anna" is the [[naming]] of both Dawson's and Roberts' [[nature]]. Can't be coincidence. Now [[Tighter]] is [[groundwork]] on [[Patricio]] Marber's [[playing]] and supposedly this [[films]] is [[vaguely]] [[founded]] on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this [[connecting]] [[trained]].

[[Nobody]] have an [[ideas]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 1401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Charles McDougall's resume [[includes]] directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[comes]] with all the credentials to make the TV film version of Meg Wolitzer's novel SURRENDER, DOROTHY a success. And for the most part he [[manages]] to keep this [[potentially]] sappy story about sudden death of a [[loved]] one and than [[manner]] in which the people in her life [[react]] afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a [[beautiful]] unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer [[vacation]]. The [[group]] seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active [[social]] life but intrusively calls here daughter [[constantly]] with the [[mutual]] [[greeting]] 'Surrender, Dorothy', is [[playing]] it up elsewhere: when she [[receives]] the [[phone]] call that [[Sara]] is [[dead]] she [[immediately]] comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and [[grief]] create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but [[surely]] Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, [[thriving]] on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her [[best]] in these [[roles]] that [[walk]] the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit [[heavy]] and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp Charles McDougall's resume [[encompasses]] directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[occurs]] with all the credentials to make the TV film version of Meg Wolitzer's novel SURRENDER, DOROTHY a success. And for the most part he [[runs]] to keep this [[probably]] sappy story about sudden death of a [[adored]] one and than [[method]] in which the people in her life [[behaves]] afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a [[wondrous]] unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer [[holiday]]. The [[panel]] seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active [[societal]] life but intrusively calls here daughter [[unceasingly]] with the [[bilateral]] [[salute]] 'Surrender, Dorothy', is [[play]] it up elsewhere: when she [[recieve]] the [[tel]] call that [[Sarah]] is [[decedent]] she [[immediatly]] comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and [[bereavement]] create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but [[indubitably]] Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, [[prospering]] on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her [[nicest]] in these [[duties]] that [[marche]] the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit [[onerous]] and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As [[many]] others have stated, this is a [[terrible]] [[movie]], from [[every]] aspect of [[movie]] making. How they ever [[got]] some known [[name]] [[actors]] to [[take]] on this project is [[amazing]].

Many people have complained that it was shot on 'cheap' [[video]] cameras. [[Yes]], it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What made it bad was the [[lighting]], white balancing, [[shooting]] [[technique]] and [[editing]].

There were so [[many]] [[different]] [[shooting]] and [[editing]] techniques [[used]] that it was a production [[mess]]. [[Harsh]], inconsistent lighting, over [[use]] of hand [[held]] shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[editing]] (another Allen technique), but poorly [[done]], without [[real]] purpose.

The [[lack]] of white [[balance]] in the [[restaurant]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The simulated sex scenes had no acting [[value]] at any [[level]].

How this [[video]] ever [[made]] it to print is [[beyond]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[amazed]] at how [[bad]] it is. As [[several]] others have stated, this is a [[scary]] [[filmmaking]], from [[each]] aspect of [[flick]] making. How they ever [[gets]] some known [[behalf]] [[players]] to [[taking]] on this project is [[marvellous]].

Many people have complained that it was shot on 'cheap' [[videos]] cameras. [[Yeah]], it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What made it bad was the [[lit]], white balancing, [[gunshot]] [[tech]] and [[edited]].

There were so [[countless]] [[several]] [[shootout]] and [[edited]] techniques [[usage]] that it was a production [[chaos]]. [[Tough]], inconsistent lighting, over [[usage]] of hand [[holds]] shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[edited]] (another Allen technique), but poorly [[played]], without [[actual]] purpose.

The [[failure]] of white [[balancing]] in the [[dining]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The simulated sex scenes had no acting [[valuing]] at any [[grades]].

How this [[videos]] ever [[brought]] it to print is [[afterlife]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[surprised]] at how [[rotten]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1403 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] David Lynch's [[crude]] and crudely drawn [[take]] on South Park [[presents]] us with a [[nightmare]] of [[disturbing]] [[clichés]] about suburban middle [[class]] families. The father is a hideous [[monster]] with three teeth and a disproportionately [[large]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[uttered]] the most [[horrendous]] guttural noises, the son and mother are [[permanently]] horrified, [[incoherent]] [[creatures]] for whom terror is a [[way]] of [[life]]. A number of equally [[absurd]] [[characters]] are [[introduced]] throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[famous]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[aspects]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not [[particularly]] fond of comedies in [[general]]. However, there were a [[couple]] of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some [[clever]] bits of animated [[cinematography]] - where [[Lynch]] conveys wide [[ranges]] of [[reaction]] in his [[characters]] through a syntactical [[arrangement]] of [[shots]] as [[opposed]] to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his [[audience]] a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated [[comedy]] here. Interestingly, he chose to follow in the [[footsteps]] of the [[recent]] wave of ultra-low-brow [[humor]] (i.[[e]]. most Will Farrell films) while [[adding]] [[elements]] of [[vicious]] [[social]] [[critique]] and [[classic]] [[cartoon]] violence and gross-out [[humor]]. While the [[blend]] doesn't really [[work]] very well here, it is [[nothing]] if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch [[fans]]. David Lynch's [[rough]] and crudely drawn [[taking]] on South Park [[introduces]] us with a [[cabos]] of [[disconcerting]] [[clichéd]] about suburban middle [[classes]] families. The father is a hideous [[monsters]] with three teeth and a disproportionately [[sizable]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[pronounced]] the most [[disgusting]] guttural noises, the son and mother are [[invariably]] horrified, [[inconsistent]] [[creature]] for whom terror is a [[routing]] of [[vida]]. A number of equally [[grotesque]] [[traits]] are [[instituted]] throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[illustrious]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[facets]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not [[specially]] fond of comedies in [[overall]]. However, there were a [[pair]] of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some [[skilful]] bits of animated [[filmmaking]] - where [[Bastien]] conveys wide [[fluctuates]] of [[reactions]] in his [[nature]] through a syntactical [[arrangements]] of [[punches]] as [[opposing]] to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his [[spectators]] a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated [[humor]] here. Interestingly, he chose to follow in the [[traces]] of the [[newer]] wave of ultra-low-brow [[mood]] (i.[[f]]. most Will Farrell films) while [[summing]] [[component]] of [[sadistic]] [[societal]] [[criticize]] and [[typical]] [[caricatures]] violence and gross-out [[mood]]. While the [[amalgam]] doesn't really [[cooperating]] very well here, it is [[anything]] if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch [[enthusiasts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Enjoyable in spite of [[Leslie]] Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays [[Philip]] as a flat, uninteresting [[character]]. One is [[supposed]] to feel sorry for this [[man]]; [[however]], I find myself [[cheering]] Bette Davis' [[Mildred]]. [[Ms]]. [[Davis]] gives one her [[finest]] performances (she received an [[Academy]] Award [[nomination]]). [[Thanks]] to her performance she [[brings]] this rather dull [[movie]] to [[life]]. **Be sure not to [[miss]] when [[Mildred]] tells [[Philip]] [[exactly]] how she [[feels]] about him. Enjoyable in spite of [[Lesley]] Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays [[Philipp]] as a flat, uninteresting [[personages]]. One is [[suspected]] to feel sorry for this [[bloke]]; [[still]], I find myself [[chanting]] Bette Davis' [[Mabel]]. [[Mme]]. [[Davies]] gives one her [[meanest]] performances (she received an [[Oscars]] Award [[nominations]]). [[Merci]] to her performance she [[puts]] this rather dull [[films]] to [[lives]]. **Be sure not to [[mademoiselle]] when [[Hattie]] tells [[Filipe]] [[accurately]] how she [[deems]] about him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1405 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This doesn't quite plumb the [[depths]] of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The [[Twilight]] [[Zone]] (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would [[build]] up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[None]] of the characters are [[particularly]] [[sympathetic]] or interesting until the [[last]] segment.

[[Framing]] story: [[Adam]] West is... well, himself. He doesn't [[go]] the [[Bruce]] Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he [[rarely]] does. He [[simply]] plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "[[Jay]]" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. [[Terror]], Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy [[statements]].

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso [[wife]] is introduced to no [[purpose]], but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but [[basically]] [[incoherent]].

Nex's [[Diner]]: Reminiscent of [[various]] Serling [[time]] [[travel]] [[stories]], [[mixed]] with [[Steve]] Allen's "A Meeting of [[Minds]]." [[Most]] of the [[actors]] aren't too bad (except for [[Josh]] Astin as Cassius, who [[manages]] to [[walk]], [[talk]] and [[even]] [[breathe]] [[awkwardly]]), and the [[idea]] is [[mildly]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go [[anywhere]]. The main character raises some relatively [[reasonable]] [[questions]], bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear [[wasteland]].

Life Replay: Not a bad [[little]] piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it [[says]] something that people are fascinated by the [[magical]] properties of [[remote]] [[controls]]. The main [[character]] is [[mildly]] sympathetic. Nothing substantially [[innovative]] here, but it's okay.

[[Fighting]] Spirit: You [[see]] the twist coming a [[mile]] away but like the main [[character]], it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or [[Monsters]]. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. This doesn't quite plumb the [[depth]] of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The [[Dusk]] [[Zones]] (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would [[constructions]] up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[Nos]] of the characters are [[specially]] [[empathy]] or interesting until the [[latter]] segment.

[[Frames]] story: [[Adams]] West is... well, himself. He doesn't [[going]] the [[Bros]] Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he [[seldom]] does. He [[exclusively]] plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "[[Jae]]" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. [[Panic]], Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy [[statement]].

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso [[femme]] is introduced to no [[intent]], but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but [[mostly]] [[counterintuitive]].

Nex's [[Restaurant]]: Reminiscent of [[varied]] Serling [[moment]] [[journey]] [[story]], [[blended]] with [[Steven]] Allen's "A Meeting of [[Spirits]]." [[Greatest]] of the [[protagonists]] aren't too bad (except for [[Joshi]] Astin as Cassius, who [[administered]] to [[stroll]], [[discussions]] and [[yet]] [[breath]] [[nervously]]), and the [[ideas]] is [[gently]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go [[nowhere]]. The main character raises some relatively [[sensible]] [[issues]], bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear [[sandlot]].

Life Replay: Not a bad [[petite]] piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it [[tells]] something that people are fascinated by the [[magic]] properties of [[distant]] [[controlling]]. The main [[trait]] is [[gently]] sympathetic. Nothing substantially [[pioneering]] here, but it's okay.

[[Struggling]] Spirit: You [[seeing]] the twist coming a [[miles]] away but like the main [[characters]], it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or [[Freaks]]. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1406 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout hit 'Basic Instinct' is a stylish and [[shocking]] neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making [[somewhat]] sleazy [[trash]] [[films]], both in his native [[Holland]] and in [[America]] and this [[film]] is one of the reasons why. The Fourth [[Man]] follows the [[strange]] [[story]] of Gerard Reve ([[played]] by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[alcoholic]] and [[slightly]] [[mad]] [[writer]] who goes to Vlissingen to give a [[talk]] on the [[stories]] he [[writes]]. [[While]] there, he meets the [[seductive]] [[Christine]] Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her [[house]] where he [[discovers]] a [[handsome]] [[picture]] of one of her [[lovers]] and proclaims that he will [[meet]] him, [[even]] if it [[kills]] him.

[[Paul]] Verhoeven twists the truth [[many]] [[times]] in this [[film]], and that [[ensures]] that you never [[quite]] know where you are with it. [[Many]] of the [[occurrences]] in The Fourth [[Man]] [[could]] be what they [[appear]] to be, but they could [[easily]] be interpreted as [[something]] [[else]] [[entirely]] and this [[keeps]] the audience on the edge of their [[seats]] for the duration, and [[also]] makes the [[film]] [[work]] as this [[narrative]] is what it [[thrives]] on. [[Paul]] Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that [[feels]] he has to [[restrain]] himself, and that is one of [[things]] I [[like]] [[best]] about him. This [[film]] [[features]] a very [[shocking]] scene that made me feel ill for [[hours]] afterwards (and that doesn't [[happen]] very [[often]]!). I [[wont]] [[spoil]] it because it [[needs]] the [[surprise]] [[element]] to [[work]]...but you'll see what I mean when you see the [[film]] (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is [[also]] a number of other macabre scenes that are [[less]] [[shocking]] than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely [[nonetheless]]; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a [[pipe]] [[sent]] through his skull, a [[boat]] is smashed in half...[[lovely]].

The acting in The Fourth [[Man]] isn't anything to write [[home]] about, but it's solid [[throughout]]. Jeroen Krabbé [[holds]] the audience's attention and [[looks]] the [[part]] as the drunken [[writer]]. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what [[Sharon]] Stone [[would]] [[imitate]] [[nine]] years [[later]] with Basic [[Instinct]], but the [[original]] fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. [[Paolo]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout hit 'Basic Instinct' is a stylish and [[frightening]] neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making [[rather]] sleazy [[garbage]] [[film]], both in his native [[Dutch]] and in [[Americans]] and this [[movies]] is one of the reasons why. The Fourth [[Mec]] follows the [[bizarre]] [[storytelling]] of Gerard Reve ([[served]] by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[beverages]] and [[mildly]] [[pissed]] [[screenwriter]] who goes to Vlissingen to give a [[chatter]] on the [[storytelling]] he [[written]]. [[Whereas]] there, he meets the [[attractive]] [[Kristin]] Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her [[dwelling]] where he [[discoveries]] a [[excellent]] [[visuals]] of one of her [[enthusiasts]] and proclaims that he will [[satisfy]] him, [[yet]] if it [[mata]] him.

[[Paulo]] Verhoeven twists the truth [[several]] [[moments]] in this [[cinematography]], and that [[ensure]] that you never [[pretty]] know where you are with it. [[Several]] of the [[phenomena]] in The Fourth [[Guy]] [[would]] be what they [[arise]] to be, but they could [[readily]] be interpreted as [[anything]] [[further]] [[altogether]] and this [[retains]] the audience on the edge of their [[seat]] for the duration, and [[apart]] makes the [[movie]] [[jobs]] as this [[narration]] is what it [[flourishes]] on. [[Pablo]] Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that [[thinks]] he has to [[restraining]] himself, and that is one of [[matters]] I [[fond]] [[finest]] about him. This [[films]] [[trait]] a very [[horrible]] scene that made me feel ill for [[hour]] afterwards (and that doesn't [[arise]] very [[typically]]!). I [[habit]] [[ruin]] it because it [[require]] the [[astonishment]] [[components]] to [[worked]]...but you'll see what I mean when you see the [[cinematography]] (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is [[apart]] a number of other macabre scenes that are [[least]] [[terrifying]] than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely [[however]]; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a [[pipeline]] [[conveyed]] through his skull, a [[vessels]] is smashed in half...[[nice]].

The acting in The Fourth [[Mec]] isn't anything to write [[house]] about, but it's solid [[around]]. Jeroen Krabbé [[held]] the audience's attention and [[seems]] the [[party]] as the drunken [[screenwriter]]. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what [[Charon]] Stone [[should]] [[emulate]] [[ix]] years [[then]] with Basic [[Gut]], but the [[initial]] fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 1407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Would that more romantic comedies were as deftly executed as this one? I never thought anything as mundane as the simple sale of a music box could leave me catching my breath with excitement. Margaret Sullavan makes a marvellous saleswoman, and she and James Stewart always brought out the best in each other. This movie sports what I think is Frank Morgan's most winning performance, and with "The Wizard of Oz" and "Tortilla Flat" under his belt, that is saying a lot. The way he finds a Christmas dinner partner left me giddy with joy. Director Ernst Lubitsch might have thought "Trouble In Paradise" his favorite, but this one he must surely consider a triumph. With some of the wittiest dialogue American movies of the 30's has to offer. --------------------------------------------- Result 1408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Intelligent]], wry, and [[thrilling]], "The Invisible [[Man]]" stood out in 2000 [[among]] Sci-Fi's [[usual]] lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and [[sometimes]] [[melodramatic]] [[script]] with [[gritty]], [[cynical]] plots and [[modern]] [[noir]] dialogue. The show sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no denying the fact that "I-Man"'s characters went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability like the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted [[elegantly]], made [[even]] more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such [[taut]] pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. [[Smarter]], wry, and [[excite]], "The Invisible [[Guy]]" stood out in 2000 [[in]] Sci-Fi's [[ordinary]] lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and [[sometime]] [[operatic]] [[scripts]] with [[sandstone]], [[cynic]] plots and [[trendy]] [[negro]] dialogue. The show sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no denying the fact that "I-Man"'s characters went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability like the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted [[stylishly]], made [[yet]] more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such [[strained]] pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. --------------------------------------------- Result 1409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Otto Preminger's Dana Andrews cycle of films noirs are among the (largely) unsung jewels of the genre. Because they lack paranoia, misogyny or hysteria, they may have seemed out of place at the time, but the clear-eyed imagery, the complex play with identity, masculinity and representation, the subversion of traditional psychological tenets, the austere, geometrical style all seem startlingly modern today, and very similar to Melville. The lucid ironies of this film are so loaded, brutal and ironic that the 'happy' ending is one of the cruellest in Hollywood history. Brilliant on the level of entertaining thriller as well, tense, and packed with double-edged dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 1410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita [[Rao]] seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But sadly, the plot of this [[new]] film comes off looking way too [[outdated]], even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just [[seems]] like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving [[grace]] is the fact that it [[oozes]] sincerity from [[start]] to [[finish]], you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's [[previous]] films and by closely examining this [[new]] one you can [[safely]] [[declare]] that Barjatya [[believes]] in a perfect world, he [[believes]] in his good-as-gold characters, he [[believes]] that large [[families]] can live together happily under the same roof without the [[slightest]] bumps.But alas, he's [[unable]] to translate his [[vision]] to the screen. It's [[difficult]] to [[overlook]] how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both [[virtuous]] and virginal – I mean, [[think]] about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita [[Rua]] seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But sadly, the plot of this [[nuevo]] film comes off looking way too [[outmoded]], even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just [[looks]] like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving [[gracia]] is the fact that it [[exudes]] sincerity from [[starter]] to [[finis]], you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's [[anterior]] films and by closely examining this [[nuevo]] one you can [[securely]] [[proclaim]] that Barjatya [[sees]] in a perfect world, he [[deems]] in his good-as-gold characters, he [[deems]] that large [[family]] can live together happily under the same roof without the [[tiniest]] bumps.But alas, he's [[impossible]] to translate his [[eyesight]] to the screen. It's [[tough]] to [[ignoring]] how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both [[righteous]] and virginal – I mean, [[reckon]] about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! --------------------------------------------- Result 1411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I find I [[enjoy]] this show, but the [[format]] needs some work. First off, the good attributes. I [[like]] how this [[show]] will take us through the day-to-day [[life]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the [[addict]] to [[show]] us how bad they've [[allowed]] their [[lives]] to [[become]]. This is followed by an [[intervention]] which is then followed by an [[outcome]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat [[things]] and sometimes the outcome ([[often]] short term due to the [[constraints]] of time between filming and airing) is a [[negative]] [[outcome]]. This makes the positive outcomes all the [[better]].

Another [[thing]] I [[like]] about the [[show]] is the quality of the camera work. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze [[anywhere]] and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[surprisingly]] good and [[stable]]. It's [[actually]] [[superior]] to scripted [[shows]] like "The [[Shield]]" where the [[photography]] is so [[bad]] it can induce nausea.

Now for the [[bad]]. An episode will [[sometimes]] [[contain]] two [[completely]] [[different]] and unrelated [[cases]] that will be mixed together during the [[show]]. You'll get caught up in the [[story]] of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the [[story]] of another. [[Get]] [[caught]] up in that [[story]] then suddenly you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[forgotten]] which [[case]] the [[individual]] currently on screen belong to. This [[constant]] flip-flopping between [[addicts]] really gets disruptive during the [[intervention]] scenes because the [[show]] will [[even]] [[mix]] together the two completely unrelated [[interventions]]! I once [[heard]] the marketing B.S. [[reason]] for this [[poor]] design: "The show can [[get]] so [[intense]] that switching to another addict [[allows]] the viewer time to absorb what they're [[watching]]." [[Oh]] please. Clearly the [[reason]] this is [[done]] is because they have two [[cases]] that aren't [[big]] enough for an [[hour]] show so they mix two [[together]]. By mixing them [[instead]] of giving each a half hour [[block]], like they should, it forces the [[viewer]] to watch the [[entire]] thing (and the [[commercials]]) if they are interested in one case but not the other.

I [[used]] to find these "blender" episodes so [[annoying]] that I'd only tell my TiVo to [[record]] [[episodes]] [[containing]] one [[addict]], but then it [[became]] [[easier]] just to [[record]] all of them. I find I [[enjoys]] this show, but the [[layout]] needs some work. First off, the good attributes. I [[adores]] how this [[showing]] will take us through the day-to-day [[lifetime]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the [[junkie]] to [[demonstrating]] us how bad they've [[authorized]] their [[life]] to [[becoming]]. This is followed by an [[interfering]] which is then followed by an [[findings]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat [[items]] and sometimes the outcome ([[generally]] short term due to the [[barrier]] of time between filming and airing) is a [[inclement]] [[result]]. This makes the positive outcomes all the [[improved]].

Another [[stuff]] I [[iike]] about the [[illustrates]] is the quality of the camera work. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze [[somewhere]] and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[unexpectedly]] good and [[stabilized]]. It's [[genuinely]] [[superiors]] to scripted [[displayed]] like "The [[Shielding]]" where the [[photographs]] is so [[wicked]] it can induce nausea.

Now for the [[amiss]]. An episode will [[occasionally]] [[contained]] two [[totally]] [[varied]] and unrelated [[examples]] that will be mixed together during the [[exhibitions]]. You'll get caught up in the [[tales]] of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the [[tales]] of another. [[Gets]] [[catch]] up in that [[history]] then suddenly you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[ignored]] which [[lawsuits]] the [[person]] currently on screen belong to. This [[continual]] flip-flopping between [[zealots]] really gets disruptive during the [[interfering]] scenes because the [[demonstrating]] will [[yet]] [[mingling]] together the two completely unrelated [[intervention]]! I once [[listened]] the marketing B.S. [[motive]] for this [[poorest]] design: "The show can [[obtains]] so [[vehement]] that switching to another addict [[authorizes]] the viewer time to absorb what they're [[staring]]." [[Aw]] please. Clearly the [[justification]] this is [[completed]] is because they have two [[examples]] that aren't [[massive]] enough for an [[hours]] show so they mix two [[jointly]]. By mixing them [[alternatively]] of giving each a half hour [[obstruct]], like they should, it forces the [[bystander]] to watch the [[whole]] thing (and the [[spots]]) if they are interested in one case but not the other.

I [[using]] to find these "blender" episodes so [[galling]] that I'd only tell my TiVo to [[registering]] [[spells]] [[consisting]] one [[junkie]], but then it [[came]] [[effortless]] just to [[docket]] all of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So this was an HBO "Made for TV Movie" eh? Is that an excuse for such a pathetic plot and terrible acting? Such a shame to see Jim Belushi reduced to a role so repetitive (shot at, survived, lies, beaten up, survives, shot at, lies and so ad infinitum. Call that a script? As for the Brits, embarrassing to see Timothy Dalton's pathetic (or was he just taking the p***, depends how much he was paid I guess?) attempt at a Southern Sheriff). As for that other Brit, the bleached blond one, what a w***er! There is a trend towards glorifying these "English speaking" (sic) super-violent thugs lately, perhaps thanks to Mr. Madonna's two movies succeed in entertaining and justify the violence by skillful use of irony and humour, like Pulp Fiction does. However, this movie discredits and devalues the genre. definately one to miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Kareena Kapoor in a bikini hmmmmmmmm.

Akshay Kumar...

Anil Kapoor....

[[Maybe]] Saif....

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Good Banner..

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Not one good reason not to [[see]] this movie....

[[Or]] so i [[thought]] ........[[Didnt]] these people make JBJ...

Why o Why did i forget that.

[[For]] all the [[criticism]] the first half of the [[movie]] isn't that bad...

There is some intrigue and YOU FEEL A [[SORT]] [[OF]] IRRITATION MIXED WITH EXCITEMENT THAT I FELT WHEN [[SEEING]] [[GUY]] [[RITCHIE]] [[MOVIES]] LIKE LOCK [[STOCK]] AND SNATCH.

Kareena Kapoor is sizzling in a very [[skinny]] [[model]] sort of way.

Akshay Kumar is Akshay Kumar as only he can be.

Anil Kapoor is [[annoying]] but [[kind]] of [[funny]], YOU [[ALMOST]] FORGET THAT [[MOST]] OF THE [[TIME]] YOU CANNOT [[UNDERSTAND]] [[HIM]].

Saif is sidey ala Main Khiladi.. once again.

There is the [[occasional]] [[laugh]] and a few chuckles, and a few [[goosebumps]] during the kareena-saif [[love]] [[story]] (kareena in the [[rain]], behind me on my [[bike]] hmmmmmmm).

BUT MOSTLY THIS HALF [[PROMISES]] MORE THAN IT [[DELIVERS]].....

[[WHICH]] MAKES THE [[SECOND]] HALF [[ALL]] THE MORE [[UNBEARABLE]]....

There was almost a cheer when the interval came not only because because of the [[wet]] kareena because of what people [[thought]] were the [[things]] to come.

INSTEAD [[WE]] WERE [[TREATED]] [[TO]] [[MIND]] NUMBING [[TORTURE]] WHICH IS [[DIFFICULT]] TO PUT [[IN]] [[WORDS]].

Saif suddenly seam like a comic sidekick...

SUDDENLY THE SEXY KAREENA LOOKS ANOREXIC, YOU REALISE THAT THE SECOND LAST FLOOR IS NOW EMPTY AND HER FACE LOOKS TO BIG FOR HER BODY ( only girls can notice this and make other guys notice the second last floor was my observation).

ANIL KAPOOR AND HIS SIDEKICKS GET ON YOUR NERVES.

Akshay Kumar is the only one who carries off the madness to some extent but even he become intolerable after a while.

ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE SUBJECTED TO ONE ABSURDITY AFTER THE OTHER.

WHY??!! WHAT??!!! WHEN?!!! WHERE?!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE TO DESERVE THIS...

A collective gasp went trough the audience before every song in the second half, which were ordinary even without the movie around it.

Cannot relieve the trauma anymore....

CONCLUSION.

THIS MOVIE STARTS OF AS A BUZZ WHICH YOU FEEL COULD EVEN TURN OUT TO A HIGH BUT ENDS UP SLOWLY MOVING TOWARDS A HEADACHE AND THEN RAPIDLY TURNS INTO A FULL BLOWN MIGRAINE ATTACK.

Please don't watch this movie for any reason other than academic interest.

+s Cast, Akshay Kumar, first half.

+/-s what, when, how, who to much confusion.(need a book to fill this).

+s cast, the whole second half (need many pages to fill this).

total 3/10 (im trying to avoid the 1s and 2s too not seem to extreme but make no mistake this movie is unwatchable no matter how decent the first half is). Kareena Kapoor in a bikini hmmmmmmmm.

Akshay Kumar...

Anil Kapoor....

[[Potentially]] Saif....

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Good Banner..

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Not one good reason not to [[consults]] this movie....

[[Oder]] so i [[think]] ........[[Wouldnt]] these people make JBJ...

Why o Why did i forget that.

[[In]] all the [[criticisms]] the first half of the [[filmmaking]] isn't that bad...

There is some intrigue and YOU FEEL A [[SORTS]] [[TO]] IRRITATION MIXED WITH EXCITEMENT THAT I FELT WHEN [[WITNESSING]] [[BUDDY]] [[RICHIE]] [[FILMMAKING]] LIKE LOCK [[STOCKS]] AND SNATCH.

Kareena Kapoor is sizzling in a very [[scrawny]] [[models]] sort of way.

Akshay Kumar is Akshay Kumar as only he can be.

Anil Kapoor is [[vexing]] but [[kinds]] of [[fun]], YOU [[HARDLY]] FORGET THAT [[ANYMORE]] OF THE [[MOMENT]] YOU CANNOT [[UNDERSTANDING]] [[HE]].

Saif is sidey ala Main Khiladi.. once again.

There is the [[casual]] [[chuckles]] and a few chuckles, and a few [[shivers]] during the kareena-saif [[amore]] [[saga]] (kareena in the [[acids]], behind me on my [[motorcycle]] hmmmmmmm).

BUT MOSTLY THIS HALF [[VOWED]] MORE THAN IT [[FURNISHES]].....

[[WHOM]] MAKES THE [[SECONDLY]] HALF [[EVERY]] THE MORE [[UNSUSTAINABLE]]....

There was almost a cheer when the interval came not only because because of the [[moist]] kareena because of what people [[brainchild]] were the [[items]] to come.

INSTEAD [[OURS]] WERE [[ADDRESSED]] [[POUR]] [[ESPRIT]] NUMBING [[TORTURED]] WHICH IS [[TRICKY]] TO PUT [[ONTO]] [[MOTS]].

Saif suddenly seam like a comic sidekick...

SUDDENLY THE SEXY KAREENA LOOKS ANOREXIC, YOU REALISE THAT THE SECOND LAST FLOOR IS NOW EMPTY AND HER FACE LOOKS TO BIG FOR HER BODY ( only girls can notice this and make other guys notice the second last floor was my observation).

ANIL KAPOOR AND HIS SIDEKICKS GET ON YOUR NERVES.

Akshay Kumar is the only one who carries off the madness to some extent but even he become intolerable after a while.

ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE SUBJECTED TO ONE ABSURDITY AFTER THE OTHER.

WHY??!! WHAT??!!! WHEN?!!! WHERE?!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE TO DESERVE THIS...

A collective gasp went trough the audience before every song in the second half, which were ordinary even without the movie around it.

Cannot relieve the trauma anymore....

CONCLUSION.

THIS MOVIE STARTS OF AS A BUZZ WHICH YOU FEEL COULD EVEN TURN OUT TO A HIGH BUT ENDS UP SLOWLY MOVING TOWARDS A HEADACHE AND THEN RAPIDLY TURNS INTO A FULL BLOWN MIGRAINE ATTACK.

Please don't watch this movie for any reason other than academic interest.

+s Cast, Akshay Kumar, first half.

+/-s what, when, how, who to much confusion.(need a book to fill this).

+s cast, the whole second half (need many pages to fill this).

total 3/10 (im trying to avoid the 1s and 2s too not seem to extreme but make no mistake this movie is unwatchable no matter how decent the first half is). --------------------------------------------- Result 1414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] when discussing a movie titled 'snakes on a plane', we should point out early that the snakes are pretty darn important to the plot.

what we have here are very bad cgi snakes that neither look nor move like real snakes. snakes are scary because they appear to be slimy, they crawl they slither. these snakes do nothing of the sort. they glide along like they would in a video game. they are cartoon snakes. i would go as far to say that even someone that had a major phobia against real snakes would not find these ones scary

why on earth then would you want to include extreme close ups of these cgi failures? why not rely on suspense.. the whole 'less is more' ethic. or better still, why not just make them look good in the first place? and then maybe still use them sparingly

take one look at john carpenters 'the thing'. here we have real slime, and gore of eerie proportions. 20 years go by and we get this pile of stinking sfx crap 'snakes on a plane'. when are these people going to wake up and smell the coffee? special effects are going backwards!

sure you could say.. but the movie is a joke, get it? sure i'm with that idea, but do it well! in addition to the above, this movie has crap dialogue. and the music and sound effects are not creepy or memorable in any way.

i could handle every other actor being part of this movie, except for jackson. what was he doing there? the man who starred in pulp fiction 10 years ago. is this career progression? are you offering people value for money? no. i'd like to know what Tarantino thought when he was half way through this stinker of a movie

the current generation seem to have very low expectations. and Hollywood seems to be offering them just what they want. on leaving the cinema i saw a number of advertisements for some truly horrendous looking future releases including... DOA: dead or alive, (another) cgi animal film called 'flushed away', and another crap looking comedy named 'click'. in addition to that i saw some awful trailers, including one for (another) crap British horror/comedy. i've truly not seen the movie industry in a mess like this for a long time

expect to see this movie for sale in the DVD bargain section for £1 in 6 months time. and if you're expecting to see a black comedy with tonnes of great looking snakes, and some bad ass cool dialogue coming from samuel l jacksons lips. forget it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] The Good Earth is not a great film by any [[means]], it is way to [[ordinary]]. [[Maybe]] it was [[different]] in the 1930's but who [[would]] want to [[see]] the life of a farmer. It is not very interesting to me. [[Yes]], Luis Rainer and [[Paul]] Muni do an [[excellent]] job acting but the [[film]] dragged on way too long. I [[could]] have [[told]] you the [[ending]] of this [[movie]] by the [[first]] [[act]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not [[want]] to be like his own father turns out [[exactly]] like him. Both falling in love with their [[wives]] just as they are on their [[death]] beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[good]] [[character]] actors or [[funny]] moments, it just was [[depressing]] stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[time]] of [[crisis]]. The Good Earth is not a great film by any [[modes]], it is way to [[normal]]. [[Conceivably]] it was [[dissimilar]] in the 1930's but who [[could]] want to [[consults]] the life of a farmer. It is not very interesting to me. [[Oui]], Luis Rainer and [[Pablo]] Muni do an [[sumptuous]] job acting but the [[filmmaking]] dragged on way too long. I [[did]] have [[said]] you the [[terminated]] of this [[filmmaking]] by the [[fiirst]] [[legislation]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not [[wanting]] to be like his own father turns out [[precisely]] like him. Both falling in love with their [[handcuffs]] just as they are on their [[muerte]] beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[alright]] [[characteristics]] actors or [[humorous]] moments, it just was [[demoralizing]] stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[times]] of [[crises]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Enter the Fat Dragon" is one of the funniest martial art movies I had the opportunity to see. Sammo Hung portrays a Chinese farm boy that comes to visit a city friend. Just like Tang Lung of "Way of the Dragon." Wherever Sammo goes, trouble starts, therefore he has to rely on his martial art skills to solve the differences. Luckily, Sammo's character learns martial arts by imitating and mimicking his idol, Bruce Lee. He even strokes his nose with his thumb exactly the way Bruce Lee does and also releases his screeching yell. He also uses nunchucks in a scene. It was like watching a fat Bruce Lee. There's a great showdown near the end of the movie which consists of foreign fighters. Sammo has to encounter each opponent one by one. Sort of like "The Game of Death", where each fighter possesses a different martial art discipline from one another.

This is one of the films I really enjoyed watching and also the very first Sammo Hung movies I've seen. Excellent fight scenes and a lot of laughs. A rare classic Sammo Hung film I highly recommend for all you martial art fans out there. 8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have [[seen]] this film what it is, an intelligent well [[acted]] prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge [[budget]] BUT it is still very well [[done]] and had me hooked for the full [[duration]].

An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do..

all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!

P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...

Peace out!! Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have [[noticed]] this film what it is, an intelligent well [[behaved]] prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge [[budgets]] BUT it is still very well [[effected]] and had me hooked for the full [[lifespan]].

An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do..

all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!

P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...

Peace out!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. [[Look]] at it a month later and you [[might]] see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically [[remarkable]] that went unnoticed at first. After [[sitting]] through The Great Ecstasy of [[Robert]] Carmichael at its [[UK]] premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[found]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the [[film]] itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defence]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the [[plot]] was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and [[pretentious]] film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and [[sloppy]] (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not [[entirely]] without [[merit]]. The audience is left to [[decide]] how [[Robert]] [[got]] that [[way]]: was it the [[influence]] of his peers? Why did all the [[good]] influences and [[concern]] from [[parents]] and [[teachers]] not [[manage]] to [[include]] him in a [[better]] approach to [[life]]? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction [[seems]] to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. [[Glance]] at it a month later and you [[apt]] see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically [[sumptuous]] that went unnoticed at first. After [[seated]] through The Great Ecstasy of [[Roberta]] Carmichael at its [[BRITONS]] premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[discoveries]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the [[movies]] itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defending]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the [[intrigue]] was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and [[presumptuous]] film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and [[remiss]] (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not [[downright]] without [[merits]]. The audience is left to [[decided]] how [[Roberta]] [[gets]] that [[pathways]]: was it the [[affecting]] of his peers? Why did all the [[alright]] influences and [[preoccupation]] from [[relatives]] and [[schoolteachers]] not [[administering]] to [[encompass]] him in a [[optimum]] approach to [[lives]]? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction [[appears]] to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] IF you are planning to see this movie, please reconsider. I don't usually post my comments about something I've seen on television, but this one was such a waste of my life that I needed to do something productive to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Critiquing this movie would take far too long as there are so many things wrong with it. I will just simply say, please do not ever see this movie. It was a complete waste of my time and it WILL be a waste of yours. Anyone that wrote a positive review of this movie is one of two things; utterly inept, or working for the company that produced it. Again, I guarantee that you will indeed regret seeing this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In ten words or less to describe this film, Barbara Stanwyck is too appealing and it is great! The film is wonderful, except for the perhaps tacked-on ending, but I love happy endings anyway. Barbara Stanwyck, however, as the platinum-blonde gold-digger is amazing. She knows what she wants and goes after it! This film is sexy and excellent! --------------------------------------------- Result 1421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] BABY FACE is one of the better of the "forgotten" films before the code. It was shown last night after the 1931 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE on the TURNER CLASSIC NETWORK, so I was able to watch the film as it is now with four plus minutes of it restored.

Stanwyck is living in East St. Louis (where she may have known the drunken parents of "Myra" - Mae Clarke - in WATERLOO BRIDGE). Her father is Robert Barrett. She has lived with him since the death of her mother, and (in the restored dialog) he has been pimping her since she was 14 years old. Now she is resident waitress and part-time whore in his speakeasy, her closest friend being Chico (Theresa Harris), the African-American servant who Barrett keeps bullying. It is one of the two good points of Stanwyck's personality that she keeps standing up to her father about Harris, threatening to leave if Harris is fired (and since it is the grubby workers like Nat Pendleton, who enjoy seeing Stanwyck serve them, rather than the flavor of the hooch he serves that brings them in, Barrett has to obey her).

The one guy who comes to the speakeasy regularly whom Stanwyck likes is the shoemaker and intellectual Adolf Cragg (Alphonse Ethier), who sees great potential in the spirited girl if she will just leave her forsaken home. He is also pushing the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzche, and the idea of the will to power. More about this later.

After she knocks out the local political bigwig (Arthur Hohl), and has an argument with Barrett about this, a still explosion kills Barrett, and enables Stanwyck to leave her home town. She and Harris head to New York City, managing to get free transport by a railroad freight car by sleeping with a brakeman (James Murray). They reach New York, and after walking about they see the Gotham Trust Company (established 1873), and the friendly guard tells her where the personnel office is.

We slowly watch Stanwyck ascend the corporate ladder to the top, similar (but sleazier) than Robert Morse dared in HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING. But Morse was a man in a man dominated company. Stanwyck knows her sexual allure is her weapon. She goes through John Wayne, Douglas Dumbrille (a section of the film that I always felt was the most shocking - curiously enough - when I watched it), Douglas Wood, Henry Kolker, and finally George Brent. Each ends up falling for her, and either being pushed aside when no longer useful, or destroyed by her. Brent, the new President of the Bank his grandfather founded, eventually marries her - and the crisis of the film is when the bank's economic situation is shaken (especially after Brent buys her a fortune in jewels and gives her valuable bonds). Brent is indicted. Will she stick up for him?

SPOILER COMING UP:

The one thing about these films that is not admitted is that the theatrical and moral conventions of the time still dictated endings. The original ending had Stanwyck boarding a ship for Europe abandoning Brent to his fate, but realizing she can't do it to him, returning to their apartment house, and finding he's shot himself. She is riding with him to the hospital as it ends. Now before the rediscovered footage was found, the film ended with them apparently giving up all their money to the bank to save it, and retiring back to East St. Louis, to live happily if poor.

Neither of these are good endings. Stanwyck should continue on her destructive course, with Brent the last of her victims. But even without the Breen office the script writers (one is Darryl Zanuck, by the way) saw fit to have her find a moral center. She has none - at least none for powerful men (whom she hates). I don't think that a depression audience would have tolerated that type of conclusion.

There are other problems, due to the changing styles of public opinion and changes in society. It was a man's world in the corporate world in 1933, so Stanwyck has her work cut out for her. Wood (when she is going to be fired for an indiscretion with him) admits that he did not want her to work.

But in 2006, Stanwyck would have been finding woman all over the place. In the film there are nasty, catty remarks (obviously some based on jealousy) towards Stanwyck from other secretaries and female employees at her rapid rise. In 2006, she'd be frequently confronting women superiors, and she would find them cutting her off at the legs very quickly. Of course, if she finds one or two are lesbians she might try that road but it is doubtful. And she also never seems to meet any men who are gay. They do have gay male executives in business, who wouldn't give a damn about her legs or breasts.

Then there is her mentor, Mr Cragg. Cragg is remade in the "bowdlerized" version into trying to make her seek a moral center. In reality he pushes Nieztsche, but the way (in a broader sense) the Nazis pushed Nieztsche - find your way to power and push it. While Nieztsche did stress power sometimes, it wasn't the be-all and end-all of his theories. Otherwise nobody would read him today in college courses. Cragg is obviously self-educated, but only half-educated. In short if somebody who thoroughly studied Nieztsche confronted Cragg he'd make him look like a half-educated fool. And this is Stanwyck's mentor! A good film, and for it's day worth a 10...but seriously flawed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1422 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I am not sure why I like Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[anyone]] who [[works]] [[hard]] can succeed [[regardless]] of talent. That is a [[good]] [[feeling]] for all of us who [[lack]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how [[dumb]] [[Detention]] is, but many [[neglect]] to point out the positives.

Any movie where at least one annoying [[teenager]] [[gets]] [[killed]] can't be all bad. Why do so many movies that have a cast of teens always [[need]] to [[include]] the stereotypical [[teens]]? Aren't there any other [[kind]] of [[teens]]? Does every [[group]] of [[teens]] have one angry black [[guy]]? One [[genius]] [[nerd]] that nobody [[likes]]? One [[slutty]] girl who is very [[friendly]] and (in this [[movie]]) pregnant? One [[disturbed]] anti-social white [[kid]] from a broken [[home]] who [[everyone]] agrees is [[talented]] (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black [[kid]] who is in [[tune]] with the [[Universe]] and so cool that all the other neurotic [[kids]] trust him. [[Then]] [[add]] a [[couple]] of generic expendable [[teens]] of any [[color]]. They don't [[say]] [[much]] but [[get]] shot at some point.

[[Detention]] would have been [[better]] if the [[bad]] [[guys]] had [[gotten]] to blow up the school. Preferably with the [[writers]] inside. The [[dialogue]] is [[bad]], and the plot is [[worse]]. When the bad guys (and girl) [[finally]] hijack a van full of drugs, then they [[sit]] inside the van making out. They [[drive]] the van to the [[school]] because they [[want]] to re-paint the van at the school's [[paint]] [[shop]], but they never [[get]] [[around]] to re-painting the van. By the [[way]], it [[would]] have been [[easier]] to just put all the [[drugs]] in another car or two [[cars]] or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They [[also]] never move the [[drugs]] or [[sell]] them or do [[anything]] [[else]] with the [[big]] [[score]].

[[For]] some [[reason]], they [[decide]] they have to [[kill]] the [[kids]] and the [[teacher]] (Dolph Lundgren) [[even]] [[though]] when the villains take over the [[school]] nobody is remotely [[aware]] of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people [[still]] in the [[school]] have nothing to do with [[painting]] [[vehicles]], so why [[go]] after them?

Anyhow, the [[best]] [[part]] of this [[movie]] is that the villains are all armed with [[numerous]] [[machine]] [[guns]], and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. I am not sure why I like Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[everyone]] who [[collaborated]] [[difficult]] can succeed [[independently]] of talent. That is a [[alright]] [[impression]] for all of us who [[imperfection]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how [[silly]] [[Imprisonment]] is, but many [[overlook]] to point out the positives.

Any movie where at least one annoying [[teen]] [[got]] [[assassinated]] can't be all bad. Why do so many movies that have a cast of teens always [[gotta]] to [[encompass]] the stereotypical [[teen]]? Aren't there any other [[genre]] of [[adolescence]]? Does every [[groups]] of [[adolescence]] have one angry black [[boy]]? One [[genie]] [[geek]] that nobody [[love]]? One [[vixen]] girl who is very [[friendship]] and (in this [[filmmaking]]) pregnant? One [[troubled]] anti-social white [[petit]] from a broken [[house]] who [[anybody]] agrees is [[gifted]] (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black [[petit]] who is in [[melody]] with the [[Cosmos]] and so cool that all the other neurotic [[juvenile]] trust him. [[Later]] [[adding]] a [[match]] of generic expendable [[adolescence]] of any [[hue]]. They don't [[told]] [[very]] but [[gets]] shot at some point.

[[Arrests]] would have been [[best]] if the [[negative]] [[boy]] had [[become]] to blow up the school. Preferably with the [[authors]] inside. The [[talks]] is [[naughty]], and the plot is [[lousiest]]. When the bad guys (and girl) [[eventually]] hijack a van full of drugs, then they [[sitting]] inside the van making out. They [[drives]] the van to the [[teaching]] because they [[wanted]] to re-paint the van at the school's [[paintings]] [[storage]], but they never [[gets]] [[throughout]] to re-painting the van. By the [[ways]], it [[could]] have been [[easy]] to just put all the [[drug]] in another car or two [[car]] or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They [[similarly]] never move the [[medicine]] or [[sells]] them or do [[nothing]] [[elsewhere]] with the [[enormous]] [[scoring]].

[[In]] some [[reasons]], they [[decides]] they have to [[killings]] the [[children]] and the [[professor]] (Dolph Lundgren) [[yet]] [[while]] when the villains take over the [[teaching]] nobody is remotely [[conscious]] of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people [[again]] in the [[teaching]] have nothing to do with [[paintings]] [[autos]], so why [[going]] after them?

Anyhow, the [[optimum]] [[portions]] of this [[filmmaking]] is that the villains are all armed with [[assorted]] [[appliance]] [[pistols]], and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to say this is one of the worst films I've ever seen. They had a pretty good storyline to go on, but than the messed it up so badly. First of all the cast is all wrong, where did that van peeble(crap actor btw) and puff daddy come from??? It looks like Carlito has come from the hood, and used to hang about with some real idiots. This film doesn't do "Carlitos Way" any justice. Im so happy that the sequel "Carlito's Way" came out first, if I had seen this rubbish first, I would have never given the pacino version a chance. And anyway, pacino is supposed to have read this story, thought it's crap and did the sequel instead. Carlito's Way: Rise to Power - 1 out of 10. Carlito's Way - 9 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I just viewed Detention last [[night]] and i liked what i [[saw]]. It was a cool fun [[movie]].Dolph [[looked]] superbly cool on the [[Bike]].He [[also]] looked good in this [[movie]] as [[compared]] to his other [[recent]] [[movies]].He is now in a pretty good shape.The story was [[ok]] and the other actors were [[also]] passable.I wouldn't call this [[movie]] his [[best]] but its [[still]] a good movie.

But it [[also]] had its [[share]] of Problems. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and [[even]] when they were being [[fired]] at point blank [[range]] they [[missed]] the [[target]].They should've had [[shown]] the ppl [[escaping]] the bullets in a better way. Another [[problem]] which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can [[swear]] in [[front]] of their [[teacher]] and even in the [[classroom]]. The third problem was that the [[bad]] [[guys]] were very few in numbers. There should've been more [[bad]] guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the [[small]] budget. [[Overall]] the movie was a [[good]] Movie.I [[enjoyed]] it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u [[r]] a [[DEAD]] beat [[cop]]. (Some One-liners were [[also]] [[cool]])

I just viewed Detention last [[nighttime]] and i liked what i [[watched]]. It was a cool fun [[films]].Dolph [[seemed]] superbly cool on the [[Biking]].He [[apart]] looked good in this [[flick]] as [[likened]] to his other [[latest]] [[theater]].He is now in a pretty good shape.The story was [[okay]] and the other actors were [[moreover]] passable.I wouldn't call this [[film]] his [[better]] but its [[however]] a good movie.

But it [[further]] had its [[exchanged]] of Problems. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and [[yet]] when they were being [[sacked]] at point blank [[assortment]] they [[miss]] the [[goal]].They should've had [[displayed]] the ppl [[fleeing]] the bullets in a better way. Another [[difficulties]] which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can [[swearing]] in [[newsweek]] of their [[educators]] and even in the [[classrooms]]. The third problem was that the [[wicked]] [[guy]] were very few in numbers. There should've been more [[horrid]] guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the [[tiny]] budget. [[Entire]] the movie was a [[well]] Movie.I [[appreciated]] it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u [[rs]] a [[DYING]] beat [[cops]]. (Some One-liners were [[apart]] [[groovy]])

--------------------------------------------- Result 1425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This thing is really awfull. There´s no charachter with weight, they´re all floating around in the BG´s. The Motion Capture is a fine toy, but this movie demostrates that you really need people who knows animation to do an animated film. THE MACHINE CAN´T DO ANYTHING WELL BY ITSELF. If you see it as a bizarre film, you´ll have fun finding mistakes of continuity... IN A 3D MOVIE!!! It´s funny to watch the princess dress move around like a thing with diferent phisics. You need animators and 3D animators, not data-entries whom know 3D programs. Note the junctions, like the elbows, how they lost volume and get deformed. The person who made the charachter design (a very good one) sufered for sure when he/she watched them move, ´cos you can´t say they come to life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow! I loved this movie and LOVE Judy Marte!! This girl isn't just an awesome pretty face, she's funny and really really talented!! She made me laugh many times just by being very naturally rough with Victor who was desperately hitting on her! We'll be seeing her a lot in the next coming years... and probably also from director Peter Sollett and co-star Victor Rasuk!

Raising Victor Vargas is one of the best film I saw in a long time! Very refreshing! It's true, nice, funny, well filmed, it got it all : good story, good actors, good film direction!

If you like simple, slow paced, real life, urban movies, like maybe Jersey Girl from Kevin Smith, you'll love Victor Vargas! It's better! --------------------------------------------- Result 1427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I don't [[know]] what it is with this movies. But movies about [[history]] or religion are always [[criticised]] by their [[accuracy]]. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's difficult to make 100% accurate films [[nowadays]] when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I [[rather]] like to [[judge]] a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

So I start by saying that I liked this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The [[series]] should have been a three [[part]] [[story]], his [[childhood]] being the [[first]] [[part]]. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real [[problem]] I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a [[history]] book [[way]]. Especially the second part which is just a [[sum]] of events that [[happened]]. I [[rather]] [[would]] have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I [[think]]. [[Nevertheless]] I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. [[Just]] to [[remember]] more [[vividly]] what happened and see Carlyle [[giving]] his [[best]]. 7.5/10 I don't [[savoir]] what it is with this movies. But movies about [[stories]] or religion are always [[denounced]] by their [[accurate]]. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's difficult to make 100% accurate films [[today]] when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I [[fairly]] like to [[magistrates]] a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

So I start by saying that I liked this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The [[serials]] should have been a three [[parties]] [[history]], his [[children]] being the [[outset]] [[party]]. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real [[trouble]] I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a [[histories]] book [[pathway]]. Especially the second part which is just a [[somme]] of events that [[arrived]]. I [[fairly]] [[ought]] have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I [[reckon]]. [[However]] I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. [[Mere]] to [[remind]] more [[strikingly]] what happened and see Carlyle [[conferring]] his [[nicest]]. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film has a powerful [[philosophical]] ending. But that [[ending]] has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

[[Youth]] alienation in the [[late]] 1960's, from the viewpoint of a [[young]] man and a young [[woman]], is the obvious [[theme]] of "Zabriskie Point". [[Neither]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a [[fact]] that actually [[enhances]] the film's message. Having [[untrained]] actors [[conveys]] a [[sense]] of [[realism]], as both [[players]] seem [[emotionally]] detached from the [[turmoil]] [[around]] them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with [[stunning]] [[cinematography]]. The [[beautiful]] naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and [[perfectly]] in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I [[would]] have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this [[film]]. It's different; it's [[unique]]; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the [[years]] go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a [[bohemian]] sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically [[mesmerizing]]. This film has a powerful [[philosophic]] ending. But that [[ceases]] has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

[[Jugend]] alienation in the [[tardy]] 1960's, from the viewpoint of a [[youths]] man and a young [[daughters]], is the obvious [[subject]] of "Zabriskie Point". [[Ni]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a [[facto]] that actually [[reinforces]] the film's message. Having [[unskilled]] actors [[airs]] a [[feeling]] of [[pragmatism]], as both [[gamers]] seem [[excitedly]] detached from the [[restlessness]] [[roundabout]] them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with [[unbelievable]] [[films]]. The [[fantastic]] naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and [[quite]] in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I [[should]] have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this [[kino]]. It's different; it's [[sole]]; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the [[olds]] go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a [[boheme]] sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically [[beguiling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Read My Lips" tells of a strange symbiosis which develops between a plain, socially maladroit female office worker (Devos) and her workplace trainee, a crude excon (Casel). As the film fleshes out this unlikely duo down to their ids they become embroiled in a chilling merging of the minds, each using the other for their own selfish reasons with an extraordinary outcome. Good stuff for anyone into character-driven films with strong psychodramatic undercurrents. In French with easy to read subtitles and good translation. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] A truly [[frightening]] [[film]]. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who wanted to show that gays are good, [[normal]], mainstream-aspiring people. [[Retrograde]] to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. [[Wow]]! [[Who]] [[knew]]? The supporting [[characters]] are [[caricatures]] of [[gay]] [[stereotypes]] (the effeminate [[buffoon]], the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main [[characters]] are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow [[clones]], of [[little]] interest.

As far as the [[romantic]] & ideological struggles of the main [[couple]] are concerned, there's not much to say: we've [[seen]] it all before, and [[done]] [[much]] better. A truly [[scary]] [[movies]]. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who wanted to show that gays are good, [[usual]], mainstream-aspiring people. [[Aft]] to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. [[Ruff]]! [[Whose]] [[knowed]]? The supporting [[characteristic]] are [[cartoons]] of [[gays]] [[stereotype]] (the effeminate [[butthead]], the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main [[traits]] are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow [[clooney]], of [[scant]] interest.

As far as the [[sentimental]] & ideological struggles of the main [[matching]] are concerned, there's not much to say: we've [[watched]] it all before, and [[effected]] [[very]] better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1431 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are really two sections of this film. Firstly there's the laughable prologue to the film which is so hysterical and cornball that it would almost feel appropriate that the 'The Simpsons' Troy McClure should be doing the narration.

Then the rest of the film begins (starting off with a title song which really doesn't fit in with the rest of the film) which, while technically OK, is killed by a vague, inconsistent and unconvincing plot and not just uninteresting characters, but characters that make no sense.

This is especially so with Mickey Rooney's Spiventa, who was supposedly in on the plot and part of the 'organisation' the whole time yet what would have happened had Hackman made the seemingly arbitrary decision to take him along when breaking out? In that case he would've been a totally superfluous and unnecessary character, which in the end he still is.

The overall problem of the film is that it's totally unwilling to put any detail on who or what is behind this conspiracy. It's as if the filmmakers didn't have the courage to imply that a particular section of society would be capable of creating such an organisation and instead settled on the hope that a lack of explanation would suffice and the audience would form their own conclusions.

Put simply, the film fails on all levels. --------------------------------------------- Result 1432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Enchanted April is a tone poem, an impressionist painting, a masterpiece of conveying a message with few words. It has been one of my 10 favorite films since it came out. I continue to wait, albeit less patiently, for the film to come out in DVD format. Apparently, I am not alone.

If parent company Amazon's listings are correct, there are many people who want this title in DVD format. Many people want to go to Italy with this cast and this script. Many people want to keep a permanent copy of this film in their libraries. The cast is spectacular, the cinematography and direction impeccable. The film is a definite keeper. Many have already asked. Please add our names to the list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How has this piece of crap stayed on TV this long? It's terrible. It makes me want to shoot someone. It's so fake that it is actually worse than a 1940s sci-fi movie. I'd rather have a stroke than watch this nonsense. I remember watching it when it first came out. I thought, hey this could be interesting, then I found out how absolutely, insanely, ridiculously stupid it really was. It was so bad that I actually took out my pocket knife and stuck my hand to the table.

Please people, stop watching this and all other reality shows, they're the trash that is jamming the networks and canceling quality programming that requires some thought to create. --------------------------------------------- Result 1434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Deathstalker is [[directed]] by [[John]] Watson and it [[stars]] Rick [[Hill]], who is some [[kind]] of body builder and [[famous]] of that, if I have [[understood]] right? The plot follows as Deathstalker ([[Hill]]) [[tries]] to [[get]] [[something]] back from the [[evil]] lord, and he has to [[travel]] to the lord's cave. He meets [[many]] [[dwarfs]] and [[monsters]] during his [[journey]], and the [[settings]] are very [[close]] to Tolkien, and of course Conan the [[Barbarian]]. This is a rip off of [[huge]] [[success]] of Conan, and even [[though]] this is very [[stupid]] [[film]], it has [[many]] [[nice]] [[trash]] merits and is recommended for [[trash]] fans and tolerating [[film]] [[junkies]]!

There are no [[many]] cinematic [[merits]] in this film. [[Couple]] of scenes are [[almost]] atmospheric and [[fascinating]], but what Deathstalker concentrates to [[show]], are [[nude]] females and [[huge]] muscles of Hill. [[Females]] are [[usually]] helpless [[victims]] and very [[stupid]], too, so this is very [[macho]] [[film]] and thus may not [[please]] many [[feminists]]! The fight scenes are nothing [[special]] and [[pretty]] dull, and the [[monsters]] are not either [[anything]] [[special]]. And all the other aspects of the [[film]] are [[also]] very amateurish and badly [[done]], but what did you [[expect]] from low budget [[effort]] like this? This [[tries]] to be as [[great]] as Conan but fails [[pretty]] miserably. As I [[said]], this can please fans of [[turkey]] [[cinema]] but no one [[else]]. This [[belongs]] to the [[category]] it's so bad it's great!

Deathstalker is [[still]] not as near as bad as it [[could]] be, and as a [[turkey]] [[film]], I [[appreciate]] this [[almost]] as much as other turkeys, [[enjoyable]] ones of course! If bad [[films]] are your cup of [[tea]], then try this and have [[fun]], but if you don't [[understand]] "enjoyably [[bad]] [[films]]" then [[stay]] away. And if [[somebody]] can't [[stand]] [[large]] amount of nudity, then [[stay]] away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the [[film]] has an [[R]] [[rating]]. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 Deathstalker is [[geared]] by [[Jon]] Watson and it [[superstar]] Rick [[Shan]], who is some [[kinds]] of body builder and [[illustrious]] of that, if I have [[understanding]] right? The plot follows as Deathstalker ([[Shan]]) [[attempting]] to [[obtain]] [[somethings]] back from the [[demonic]] lord, and he has to [[voyager]] to the lord's cave. He meets [[various]] [[dwarves]] and [[freaks]] during his [[voyager]], and the [[setting]] are very [[shut]] to Tolkien, and of course Conan the [[Brutality]]. This is a rip off of [[mammoth]] [[successes]] of Conan, and even [[while]] this is very [[dumb]] [[movies]], it has [[various]] [[pleasurable]] [[junk]] merits and is recommended for [[junk]] fans and tolerating [[films]] [[addicts]]!

There are no [[several]] cinematic [[deserves]] in this film. [[Matching]] of scenes are [[approximately]] atmospheric and [[mesmerizing]], but what Deathstalker concentrates to [[illustrating]], are [[bare]] females and [[prodigious]] muscles of Hill. [[Female]] are [[typically]] helpless [[fatalities]] and very [[dumb]], too, so this is very [[virile]] [[flick]] and thus may not [[invites]] many [[feminism]]! The fight scenes are nothing [[peculiar]] and [[belle]] dull, and the [[monster]] are not either [[nothing]] [[particular]]. And all the other aspects of the [[filmmaking]] are [[furthermore]] very amateurish and badly [[played]], but what did you [[expecting]] from low budget [[efforts]] like this? This [[attempted]] to be as [[super]] as Conan but fails [[quite]] miserably. As I [[stated]], this can please fans of [[turk]] [[film]] but no one [[further]]. This [[owns]] to the [[categories]] it's so bad it's great!

Deathstalker is [[however]] not as near as bad as it [[did]] be, and as a [[ankara]] [[movie]], I [[appreciative]] this [[nearly]] as much as other turkeys, [[pleasurable]] ones of course! If bad [[filmmaking]] are your cup of [[shai]], then try this and have [[droll]], but if you don't [[understanding]] "enjoyably [[negative]] [[film]]" then [[staying]] away. And if [[person]] can't [[standing]] [[grande]] amount of nudity, then [[staying]] away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the [[filmmaking]] has an [[rs]] [[assessment]]. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1435 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was [[intrigued]] to see how this adaptation measured up. Unfortunately, the [[movie]] didn't even come close to creating the [[ambiance]] or developing the characters that Orwell so [[masterfully]] did in his book. The [[director]] seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[book]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. [[John]] [[Hurt]], the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the [[end]]. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the [[fact]] that those are [[missing]] is the [[greatest]] [[shortcoming]] of this [[film]]. Besides that, [[John]] Hurt was a [[terrible]] casting choice, looking about 15 years [[older]] than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the [[cast]] was well [[chosen]]. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[horribly]] [[adapted]] [[film]] with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was [[puzzled]] to see how this adaptation measured up. Unfortunately, the [[filmmaking]] didn't even come close to creating the [[vibe]] or developing the characters that Orwell so [[artfully]] did in his book. The [[superintendent]] seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[ledger]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. [[Jon]] [[Harmed]], the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the [[terminate]]. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the [[facto]] that those are [[lacking]] is the [[finest]] [[weakness]] of this [[flick]]. Besides that, [[Giovanni]] Hurt was a [[abysmal]] casting choice, looking about 15 years [[elder]] than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the [[casting]] was well [[selecting]]. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[unimaginably]] [[adjusting]] [[filmmaking]] with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. --------------------------------------------- Result 1436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think [[Joe]] [[Don]] Baker can be good or [[even]] [[great]] with the right material and the right [[director]] (the "[[Cape]] [[Fear]]" [[remake]], a [[small]] role in "Goldeneye", "[[Walking]] Tall"). And I even liked [[Baker]] in "Mitchell", because he was [[playing]] an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yes]], MST3K's [[coverage]] was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't [[deserve]] - to keep [[things]] lively and entertaining - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is [[quite]] a bit [[weaker]] than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's [[character]], as written, is an [[idiot]]. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have [[gotten]] the drop on them and [[forced]] them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a [[bush]] league hot [[dog]] and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are [[supposed]] to admire?

The whole [[movie]] is [[basically]] like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think [[Evel]] [[Donated]] Baker can be good or [[yet]] [[sublime]] with the right material and the right [[superintendent]] (the "[[Cabo]] [[Affraid]]" [[redo]], a [[minor]] role in "Goldeneye", "[[Walk]] Tall"). And I even liked [[Becker]] in "Mitchell", because he was [[playback]] an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yeah]], MST3K's [[blanket]] was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't [[deserved]] - to keep [[matters]] lively and entertaining - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is [[rather]] a bit [[lowest]] than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's [[trait]], as written, is an [[asinine]]. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have [[become]] the drop on them and [[compelled]] them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a [[busch]] league hot [[doggie]] and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are [[presumed]] to admire?

The whole [[filmmaking]] is [[broadly]] like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1437 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the worst movies I've ever seen. Acting was terrible, both for the kids and the adults. Most to all characters showed no, little or not enough emotion. The lighting was terrible, and there were too many mess ups about the time of the day the film was shot (In the river scene where they just get their boat destroyed, there's 4 shots; The sheriff and Dad in the evening on their boat, Jillian and Molly in the evening swimming, the rest of the kids in the daytime *when it's supposed to in the evening* at the river bank, and the doctor, Beatrice, and Simonton at night but not in the evening getting off their boat.) The best acting in the movie was probably from the sheriff, Cappy (Although, there's a slip of character when the pulse detector *Whatever that thing is when people die, it beeps* shows Cappy has died, he still moves while it can still be heard beeping, and while the nurse extra checks his pulse manually, then it shows the pulse again, and THEN he finally dies.) I guess it's not going to be perfect, since it's an independent movie, but it still could be better. Not worth watching, honestly, even for kids. Might as well watch something good, like The Lion King or Toy Story if you're going to see anything you'll remember. --------------------------------------------- Result 1438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like Star Wars/Trek, come see where they got all their ideas and cinematic devices. It's my top 2 favorite movies of all times, other-worldly-futuristic and psycho-thriller. The intensity of the root material (Shakespeare's "The Tempest") is not overshadowed by whizbang gimmickry (a la later Lucas). And just because it was made in 1956, don't assume you can 'see the strings' holding the flying saucer up. This was the first movie where you COULDN'T. Miracle it was made at "A-movie" scale, economics and tastes at the time were stacked heavily against it. And director Wilcox's previous 'hit' was "Lassie Come Home". Until I looked him up, I assumed 'Fred Wilcox' was a pseudonym for a director who was already or later became famous, but at the time didn't want to be associated with sci-fi, which was strictly a "B" genre back then. This was either a very VERY visionary production, or a very fortuitous 'mistake' on the part of the folks who bankroll Hollywood.

There are the massive-scale mattes with live action almost microscopically inserted that Lucas used extensively. There are intelligent machines that transcend the stereotypical 'user interface'; "computers", as they've come to be portrayed much less futuristically in later works. Star Trek's 'transporter' is there, visually, almost unaltered by Roddenberry 10 years later. And if the Trek/Wars technobabble turns you off, FP's scientific references are not overdone and are all accurate, even today. The "ship" set is comprehensive, sparklingly realistic, as good as anything you've seen since, and more convincing than anything 'Trek' has done, for TV or film. We didn't get to spend as much time there as I would have liked.

If you ever wondered how movies got into space so competently, watching FP will explain all that. It's definitely not 'Wagontrain to the Stars'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[Come]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[lot]] of [[opinions]] [[among]] the contributors to this [[forum]]. Granted, it's a [[film]] that promises a take on gay life, as most [[viewers]] [[expect]] and [[somehow]], it [[gets]] away from that promise into an introspective [[view]] at a young man's soul. The [[film]] has a [[way]] of staying with us even when it has [[ended]]. It is a [[character]] study about how a [[young]] [[man]] [[gets]] [[involved]] into a love affair with someone so much [[different]] than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mathieu]] confused, [[hurt]] and depressed when [[things]] don't go [[according]] to what he [[hoped]] the [[relationship]] would be.

If you haven't [[seen]] the [[film]], [[perhaps]] you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the [[director]] of the [[film]], has told his [[story]] from Mathieu's [[viewpoint]]. Most [[viewers]] [[appear]] to be disoriented by the [[different]] times [[within]] the [[film]], but there are [[hints]] that are not [[obvious]], as one can [[see]], in retrospect. The [[story]] is told in flashbacks that might add to the [[way]] some people will [[view]] the [[film]]. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu [[felt]] for [[Cedric]] and the [[ultimate]] [[breakdown]] of their [[life]] [[together]].

[[First]] of all, Cedric, the [[handsome]] young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu [[feels]] the [[attraction]] for [[Cedric]] too. We [[realize]] how [[different]] both young [[men]] are by the [[way]] [[Cedric]] tells Mathieu's [[family]] how he [[feels]] [[school]] is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, [[finds]] beauty in the [[abandoned]] place where [[Cedric]] has [[taken]] him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the [[guide]] [[book]], [[wants]] Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she [[wisely]] tells him about the importance of continuing his [[career]]. She [[also]] [[points]] out about what future both of them [[would]] have [[together]], which proves to be true. [[Mathieu]] appears to have [[learned]] his lesson, the [[hard]] way. He goes on to an [[uncertain]] [[life]] with Cedric and attempts to take his own [[life]]. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a [[psychiatrist]] that has [[treated]] his [[wounded]] [[soul]].

The [[ending]] might be [[confusing]] for most [[viewers]], but there is a [[moment]] in the film when Mathieu goes to [[work]] in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. [[Yet]], we have seen the [[way]] Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. "[[Arrive]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[batches]] of [[views]] [[in]] the contributors to this [[fora]]. Granted, it's a [[movie]] that promises a take on gay life, as most [[onlookers]] [[expects]] and [[someplace]], it [[got]] away from that promise into an introspective [[opinion]] at a young man's soul. The [[kino]] has a [[route]] of staying with us even when it has [[finalised]]. It is a [[nature]] study about how a [[youths]] [[dude]] [[got]] [[engaged]] into a love affair with someone so much [[multiple]] than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mads]] confused, [[injure]] and depressed when [[aspects]] don't go [[depending]] to what he [[desired]] the [[nexus]] would be.

If you haven't [[watched]] the [[movie]], [[presumably]] you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the [[headmaster]] of the [[movie]], has told his [[saga]] from Mathieu's [[perspective]]. Most [[audiences]] [[arise]] to be disoriented by the [[several]] times [[inside]] the [[movie]], but there are [[suggestions]] that are not [[conspicuous]], as one can [[behold]], in retrospect. The [[saga]] is told in flashbacks that might add to the [[route]] some people will [[vista]] the [[cinematography]]. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu [[deemed]] for [[Jerome]] and the [[final]] [[breakup]] of their [[living]] [[jointly]].

[[Firstly]] of all, Cedric, the [[nice]] young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu [[thinks]] the [[attract]] for [[Jerome]] too. We [[attaining]] how [[several]] both young [[males]] are by the [[routes]] [[Jerome]] tells Mathieu's [[families]] how he [[believes]] [[tuition]] is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, [[find]] beauty in the [[waived]] place where [[Jerome]] has [[took]] him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the [[handbook]] [[books]], [[wanted]] Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she [[shrewdly]] tells him about the importance of continuing his [[professions]]. She [[apart]] [[dotted]] out about what future both of them [[should]] have [[jointly]], which proves to be true. [[Matthew]] appears to have [[learnt]] his lesson, the [[dur]] way. He goes on to an [[unsure]] [[iife]] with Cedric and attempts to take his own [[iife]]. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a [[psychologist]] that has [[addressed]] his [[injured]] [[alma]].

The [[terminated]] might be [[bewildering]] for most [[onlookers]], but there is a [[time]] in the film when Mathieu goes to [[collaborate]] in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. [[Even]], we have seen the [[camino]] Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[ROLL]] is a [[wonderful]] little [[film]]. Toby Malone plays an 18 year [[old]] [[kid]] (very well [[acted]], by the way) who is into soccer. Malone's cousin takes him out the night before his [[big]] game on an [[adventure]] with [[many]] [[twists]] and turns involving two gym bags, a drug [[lord]], some [[tough]] [[bikers]], some [[cops]], and some prostitutes ... and the movie [[keeps]] us guessing as to which characters are on which side of the law, what the contents of either gym bag is, and even what gender a key biker is. Parts of it reminded me of [[LOCK]] STOCK AND TWO SMOKING Barrels.

For me, [[ROLL]] [[reinforced]] three opinions that I already [[held]] before seeing [[ROLL]]. Those opinions are: 1. I [[really]] [[want]] to [[visit]] Australia one day. The [[country]] and cities are [[beautiful]] and it [[looks]] like such a cool [[place]] for a [[vacation]].

2. Some of the [[best]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The cinematography in ROLL was [[especially]] [[impressive]]. I loved the [[stylized]] [[colors]] and lighting in [[many]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[women]] are [[HOT]]! [[ROLLING]] is a [[wondrous]] little [[movie]]. Toby Malone plays an 18 year [[longtime]] [[children]] (very well [[served]], by the way) who is into soccer. Malone's cousin takes him out the night before his [[large]] game on an [[adventurer]] with [[several]] [[spins]] and turns involving two gym bags, a drug [[gods]], some [[difficult]] [[cyclists]], some [[police]], and some prostitutes ... and the movie [[retains]] us guessing as to which characters are on which side of the law, what the contents of either gym bag is, and even what gender a key biker is. Parts of it reminded me of [[BLOCKADE]] STOCK AND TWO SMOKING Barrels.

For me, [[ROLLING]] [[reinforcement]] three opinions that I already [[hold]] before seeing [[ROLLING]]. Those opinions are: 1. I [[genuinely]] [[wanna]] to [[visited]] Australia one day. The [[countries]] and cities are [[awesome]] and it [[seem]] like such a cool [[placing]] for a [[holiday]].

2. Some of the [[better]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The cinematography in ROLL was [[predominantly]] [[dramatic]]. I loved the [[stylish]] [[dye]] and lighting in [[several]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[wife]] are [[SEXIER]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Return To The 3th Chamber is the comedic sequel to the epic 36th Chamber Of Shaolin, in which Gordon Liu played Shan Te, a young man who became a monk and awesome fighter. In this sequel Liu plays a hapless loser who has to learn kung fu after causing his friends to be beaten. He imitates the original Shan Te, tries all manner of tricks to get into Shaolin Temple to learn and eventually gets some unique skills to fight some bullying bosses. Its a classic light hearted martial arts tale, with the ace production values of the Shaw Brothers and the sure footed direction of Lui Chia Liang. The choreography is fantastic throughout, whether for fighting or slapstick comedy and Gordon Liu's performance, as are the others, particularly the sympathetic monk work perfectly for the material. The film is less epic or profound than some of the stars other work and there are certainly grander, more violent and sweeping Shaw Brothers films. But few have such a magical blend of slapstick, unique training and fighting, with a subtle yet warming tale of a useless guy making good. Full of light hearted joy, its impossible not to give this the highest score. --------------------------------------------- Result 1442 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I'm not to [[keen]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[slow]] at the times. As the [[movie]] goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[nothing]] [[brilliant]]. I really like [[David]] Schwimmer and I [[think]] he's good here. I'm not a [[massive]] Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[okay]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly [[recommended]] [[movie]], but if you [[like]] the [[leads]] then you [[might]] enjoy it. I'm not to [[fervent]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[sluggish]] at the times. As the [[filmmaking]] goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[none]] [[sublime]]. I really like [[Davids]] Schwimmer and I [[thought]] he's good here. I'm not a [[tremendous]] Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[aight]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly [[suggested]] [[filmmaking]], but if you [[iike]] the [[leeds]] then you [[apt]] enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Neil Simon has quite a body of work, but it is the Odd Couple that carried him to fame. This film really works. Jack Lemmon & Walter Matthaw have a great chemistry. The supporting cast for this film is stellar as well.

It is about 2 men living together who are from opposite planets. The script bristles with humor from this situation. This had been done in some forms previously. This is the one that brings it all together in a very good package.

Simon has done some other decent work, but this one is really his best work which made the rest of his work possible. It is hard to imagine Simon ever topping this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] How is it [[possible]] that no [[journalist]] or [[critic]] [[reminded]] us of the [[resemblance]] with that other [[better]] Flemish [[movie]] "[[Congo]] [[Express]] (1986)"? There are [[also]] some [[characters]] in [[congo]] Express put [[together]] without having [[really]] a [[relation]] to each other: Jean, ([[de]] Congolees), the [[workman]], the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, [[Roger]], [[Guy]], Lucienne and Gilbert. Of [[course]], Tom Barman is a [[star]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a [[reason]] to [[pardon]] the [[flaws]] in the [[script]] (if there is a [[script]]) of Anyway the wind blows. The [[joke]] (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a [[movie]] that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed [[chance]] for Flemish Cinema. How is it [[conceivable]] that no [[reporters]] or [[critiques]] [[remembered]] us of the [[likeness]] with that other [[improved]] Flemish [[filmmaking]] "[[Democratic]] [[Expressing]] (1986)"? There are [[similarly]] some [[traits]] in [[democracy]] Express put [[jointly]] without having [[truthfully]] a [[relationship]] to each other: Jean, ([[of]] Congolees), the [[carver]], the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, [[Roget]], [[Fella]], Lucienne and Gilbert. Of [[cours]], Tom Barman is a [[superstar]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a [[cause]] to [[amnesty]] the [[gaps]] in the [[screenplay]] (if there is a [[hyphen]]) of Anyway the wind blows. The [[travesty]] (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a [[filmmaking]] that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed [[possibility]] for Flemish Cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Excellent movie, a realistic picture of contemporary Finland, touching and profound. One of the best Finnish films ever made. Captures marvelously the everyday life in a Central Finland small town, people's desires and weaknesses, joys and sorrows. The bright early fall sunshine creates a cool atmosphere to this lucid examination of people in a welfare society. Lampela is indeed one of the most promising Finnish filmmakers. He shows that it is possible to make gripping movies without machine guns and bloodshed. His next film Eila is also worth seeing although the story of cleaning women fighting for their jobs is not quite as universally appealing as the destinies in Joki. --------------------------------------------- Result 1446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Lets]] put it this [[way]]. I actually [[get]] this [[movie]]. I get what the [[writer]]/directer was [[trying]] to do. I [[understand]] that the [[dialog]] was meant to be dry and emotionless. I [[understand]] that the plot was supposed to be non-climactic and [[stale]]. That was what the [[writer]]/director was [[going]] for. A very very very [[dry]] [[humor]]/[[comedy]]. With all that understanding, I still think the [[movie]] sucked. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same [[features]]. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, [[let]] me rephrase that. Its only [[purpose]] is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't [[work]]. [[Allows]] put it this [[ways]]. I actually [[obtain]] this [[film]]. I get what the [[screenwriter]]/directer was [[seeking]] to do. I [[realise]] that the [[dialogue]] was meant to be dry and emotionless. I [[realise]] that the plot was supposed to be non-climactic and [[obsolete]]. That was what the [[scriptwriter]]/director was [[go]] for. A very very very [[driest]] [[humour]]/[[humour]]. With all that understanding, I still think the [[filmmaking]] sucked. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same [[trait]]. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, [[leaving]] me rephrase that. Its only [[targets]] is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't [[collaborate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Picture]] the scene: a [[mountainous]] [[alien]] [[landscape]]. [[Twin]] moons illuminate the blood red [[sky]]. The Tardis [[lands]], and out steps the [[Doctor]], a middle-aged [[man]] in a Victorian frock coat, and [[Rose]], his [[companion]] from [[Earth]]. A flicker of [[recognition]] crosses his [[face]]. "Well, I never! Its the [[planet]] Saurious-7. [[Where]] I [[fought]] the [[warlike]] Kraggartians. They [[tried]] to [[use]] [[giant]] Skinkons to take over the [[planet]].". The girl sniffs the [[air]]. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[place]]. I [[keep]] thinking we're being [[watched]].". The [[Doctor]] wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, [[girl]]. I wonder if the King and [[Queen]] of Cordaraby [[City]] remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He [[strides]] off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. [[Unfairly]] derided at the [[time]] of its original U.K. [[broadcast]], 'Rose' can now safely be [[regarded]] as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it [[belonged]], as one of the B.B.C.'s [[flagship]] [[programmes]]. The [[mistakes]] [[made]] by the McGann [[T]].V. [[movie]] were well [[learnt]]. [[Instead]] of [[trying]] to shoehorn the [[new]] 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh [[start]] for the series, [[beginning]] with [[shop]] [[girl]] Rose Tyler ( [[Billie]] Piper ) going about her daily [[routine]]. One day she goes to the basement to [[find]] a [[man]] named Wilson, and then the [[trouble]] begins. [[Mannequins]] [[come]] to life and [[attack]] her. It is only through the intervention of a [[mysterious]] [[stranger]] ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[story]], slight [[though]] it may be, is more than [[adequate]] as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the [[famous]] scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when [[shop]] [[window]] dummies sprang to [[life]]. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an [[added]] emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! [[Photography]] the scene: a [[undulating]] [[aliens]] [[scenery]]. [[Double]] moons illuminate the blood red [[skye]]. The Tardis [[tierra]], and out steps the [[Medical]], a middle-aged [[dude]] in a Victorian frock coat, and [[Soared]], his [[comrade]] from [[Land]]. A flicker of [[recognise]] crosses his [[confront]]. "Well, I never! Its the [[globe]] Saurious-7. [[Wherein]] I [[fight]] the [[belligerent]] Kraggartians. They [[attempts]] to [[utilise]] [[colossal]] Skinkons to take over the [[globe]].". The girl sniffs the [[airplane]]. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[placing]]. I [[sustain]] thinking we're being [[seen]].". The [[Medical]] wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, [[chick]]. I wonder if the King and [[Reine]] of Cordaraby [[Town]] remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He [[advances]] off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. [[Improperly]] derided at the [[moment]] of its original U.K. [[telecast]], 'Rose' can now safely be [[considered]] as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it [[owned]], as one of the B.B.C.'s [[lighthouse]] [[programmed]]. The [[error]] [[accomplished]] by the McGann [[ton]].V. [[movies]] were well [[learn]]. [[However]] of [[tempting]] to shoehorn the [[novel]] 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh [[lancer]] for the series, [[begins]] with [[storage]] [[daughter]] Rose Tyler ( [[Billy]] Piper ) going about her daily [[regular]]. One day she goes to the basement to [[unearth]] a [[dude]] named Wilson, and then the [[problem]] begins. [[Dummies]] [[arriving]] to life and [[assault]] her. It is only through the intervention of a [[cryptic]] [[alien]] ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[saga]], slight [[if]] it may be, is more than [[proper]] as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the [[notorious]] scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when [[boutique]] [[luna]] dummies sprang to [[living]]. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an [[add]] emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! --------------------------------------------- Result 1448 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I loved this [[movie]], I'll [[admit]] it. This has to be the best (straight to?) [[video]] [[movie]] I've seen. Well... me and my friend decided just for shits n' giggles that we'd rent this movie. We knew what to expect and we got exactly what we expected, plus more. [[When]] that [[red]] neck gets [[slammed]] up against the tree by the Sasquatch, we literally watched that part about three to four times, it was that amazing (hysterically, of course). And why? Oh why does the main character have to roll that much? Like honestly, we know that you're in danger, rolling that much isn't gonna help all that much. But really, if this movie is in you're local video store RENT IT. It is worth the money and it's not even that bad, like it's bad, but not incredibly bad. Overall, complete amazing will be in store for you if you rent this movie. I loved this [[filmmaking]], I'll [[recognise]] it. This has to be the best (straight to?) [[videos]] [[kino]] I've seen. Well... me and my friend decided just for shits n' giggles that we'd rent this movie. We knew what to expect and we got exactly what we expected, plus more. [[Whenever]] that [[rojas]] neck gets [[criticized]] up against the tree by the Sasquatch, we literally watched that part about three to four times, it was that amazing (hysterically, of course). And why? Oh why does the main character have to roll that much? Like honestly, we know that you're in danger, rolling that much isn't gonna help all that much. But really, if this movie is in you're local video store RENT IT. It is worth the money and it's not even that bad, like it's bad, but not incredibly bad. Overall, complete amazing will be in store for you if you rent this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1449 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is the [[best]] movie I`ve ever [[seen]] !!! [[Thomas]] [[Beckett]] & Richard Miller -two mankinds who [[want]] to [[survive]] in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one [[killed]] !!? You must [[kill]], if you [[getting]] doubt about [[something]], YOU MUST [[SURVIVE]] !!

P.P.- I appologise of my [[bad]] / worst/ English !!! This is the [[nicest]] movie I`ve ever [[noticed]] !!! [[Passaic]] [[Becket]] & Richard Miller -two mankinds who [[wants]] to [[outlive]] in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one [[kills]] !!? You must [[assassinated]], if you [[obtain]] doubt about [[anything]], YOU MUST [[OUTLIVE]] !!

P.P.- I appologise of my [[amiss]] / worst/ English !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] At the end of this episode Holmes asks Watson not to record the case for posterity.For a good reason! The super sleuth left his little grey cells(sorry Agatha)at home for this tale. There is no deductive reasoning,no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. Holmes bumbles along fifty yards behind the plot. The dastardly CAM is finally dealt to by an old frail-in a manner that would have made Charles Bronson's heart swell with pride-six bullets in the breadbasket.In an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of Watson's shoes.Mercifully the writer didn't decide to tack on the story of Cinderella to lengthen the film.The murderess,Holmes and Watson,escape scot free. Oh well,it is a bit of a change of pace in late Victorian London.A bit of sixgun law:-) --------------------------------------------- Result 1451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[In]] 1914, [[Charlie]] [[Chaplin]] began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "[[Keystone]] Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[little]] structure and were [[completely]] ad libbed. As a result, the [[films]], [[though]] popular in their day, were just [[awful]] by today's [[standards]]. [[Many]] of them [[bear]] a strong [[similarity]] to home movies [[featuring]] [[obnoxious]] relatives [[mugging]] for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but [[inexplicably]], Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the [[film]] [[lacks]] coherence and just isn't [[particularly]] funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. [[Into]] 1914, [[Vietcong]] [[Chapin]] began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "[[Geometry]] Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[scant]] structure and were [[totally]] ad libbed. As a result, the [[filmmaking]], [[if]] popular in their day, were just [[scary]] by today's [[norms]]. [[Innumerable]] of them [[bears]] a strong [[resemblance]] to home movies [[feature]] [[despicable]] relatives [[storming]] for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but [[inextricably]], Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the [[filmmaking]] [[missing]] coherence and just isn't [[principally]] funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This should be required viewing for all young people. This is documentary at its best, from the haunting music and terrific narration by Olivier to its unflinching and penetrating analyses, The World at War is unforgettable and irreplaceable for anyone who wants to know about humanity's sorry experience at the nadir of the 20th century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This Academy Award [[winning]] short film can [[rank]] among the [[greatest]] of the [[genre]]. Told [[completely]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[treat]] about a [[young]] boy who [[buys]] a gold fish, lovingly [[places]] him in a bowl then goes off to school, [[leaving]] the gold fish unprotected and a [[window]] carelessly open. After a while, a [[neighboring]] orange tabby [[comes]] poking around, comes in through the [[window]] and [[heads]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[apparently]] knows something is [[going]] on and becomes very [[excited]]. As the cat comes very near to the bowl, the [[fish]] [[jumps]] out. The cat catches the fish, drops him back in the bowl and exits through the [[window]] he [[came]] in just as the [[boy]], not knowing what has [[happened]], [[gets]] back. This was [[amazingly]] filmed with [[real]] [[animals]]; how [[Cousteau]] [[got]] these [[animals]] to behave in this manner is [[remarkable]]. I only [[wish]] this [[film]] were [[available]] now for people to [[see]]; I only [[saw]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[originally]] [[released]], but it has [[remained]] [[unforgettable]]. This Academy Award [[wins]] short film can [[grades]] among the [[most]] of the [[genus]]. Told [[entirely]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[dealing]] about a [[youths]] boy who [[purchased]] a gold fish, lovingly [[locations]] him in a bowl then goes off to school, [[departing]] the gold fish unprotected and a [[luna]] carelessly open. After a while, a [[contiguous]] orange tabby [[occurs]] poking around, comes in through the [[luna]] and [[leiter]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[allegedly]] knows something is [[go]] on and becomes very [[agitated]]. As the cat comes very near to the bowl, the [[fishes]] [[rises]] out. The cat catches the fish, drops him back in the bowl and exits through the [[luna]] he [[arrived]] in just as the [[guys]], not knowing what has [[arrived]], [[got]] back. This was [[terribly]] filmed with [[actual]] [[beasts]]; how [[Smith]] [[did]] these [[animal]] to behave in this manner is [[wondrous]]. I only [[wants]] this [[cinematography]] were [[approachable]] now for people to [[behold]]; I only [[watched]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[initially]] [[release]], but it has [[persisted]] [[memorable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1454 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debut with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a [[psychiatrist]] is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is [[somewhat]] [[discontented]] with her own personal [[life]]; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it [[primes]] her [[vulnerability]]. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before [[enticing]] her into his [[world]]. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy [[claimed]] he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred [[dollars]]. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card [[game]] he has going on in the back [[room]]. In the middle of a [[big]] hand, Mike is going to [[leave]] the room for a few minutes; while he is [[gone]], her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the [[audience]], as well, is hooked. The [[dialogue]], and Mamet's [[unique]] style and the precise cadence with which his [[actors]] [[deliver]] their lines, is [[mesmerizing]]. As Mike leads Margaret through his [[compelling]], surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the [[intricacies]] of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the [[stunning]] climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debut with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a [[psychoanalyst]] is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is [[rather]] [[disgruntled]] with her own personal [[iife]]; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it [[premiums]] her [[frailty]]. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before [[alluring]] her into his [[monde]]. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy [[asserted]] he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred [[bucks]]. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card [[gaming]] he has going on in the back [[chamber]]. In the middle of a [[enormous]] hand, Mike is going to [[letting]] the room for a few minutes; while he is [[vanished]], her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the [[spectators]], as well, is hooked. The [[conversations]], and Mamet's [[sole]] style and the precise cadence with which his [[protagonists]] [[delivering]] their lines, is [[intriguing]]. As Mike leads Margaret through his [[conclusive]], surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the [[niceties]] of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the [[spectacular]] climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] American movies about war and Nazis simply cannot be good. They can not refrain from becoming idiot and following an agenda. All Nazis are bad, crazy, too proud, and Americans are so modest yet so capable and sensible and human. Come on, stop this bullshit. The main character says something like "by this trial, we have to make aggressive war a crime". Is America a peaceful nation with its world #1 $420 billion "defense" budget (#2 China with just $51b)? Is it simply spent in this without any... ROI? Why portray America as a peaceful nation when it isn't? I deeply dislike movies with an agenda - they throw art to hell and try to persuade us into believing something. Hollywood should put a label on movies, just as record companies have that "parental advisory" label. We should have a "bullshit advisory", "propaganda advisory" or a "politically correct advisory" label on some movies. This is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1456 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This [[movie]] for what it is, may be one of the most [[amazing]] indie films of recent day. [[Made]] on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the [[current]] films! IF you have a [[chance]] watch it! This [[cinematography]] for what it is, may be one of the most [[wondrous]] indie films of recent day. [[Effected]] on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the [[ongoing]] films! IF you have a [[chances]] watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Considering 'A Star is Born' had been made twice already by the time the 1976 film came into production, the latest remake has a freshness about it that can be attributed to the fantastic chemistry between the entire acting ensemble. A viewer could be forgiven for believing that Kris Kristofferson & Barbara Streisand were a couple off screen as well as on, with their incredible displays of pure affection towards one another.

The film has been described in the past as a 'Barbara Streisand concert on film, set to a soap opera storyline' however for anyone that enjoys watching a film that takes you beyond the living room into a world where the characters seem truly alive - A Star is Born is well worth the hiring price.

With its incredible soundtrack, flawless acting and touching reality in regards to human emotions and the true frailty of life; A Star is Born is a film that draws you into the world of Esther Hoffman & the love of her life John Norman Howard.

A film for anyone that sees the beauty in real love - the kind that keeps you devoted to a person even as they break your heart... --------------------------------------------- Result 1458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Follows the [[usual]] [[formula]] in putting a [[new]] [[recruit]] -- this [[time]] the first African-American ([[Cuba]] Gooding) after [[President]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea diver training [[program]] that is [[run]] by a [[racist]] [[zealot]] ([[Robert]] [[DeNiro]]). [[If]] the program weren't [[bad]] enough, it's got to be located in Bayonne, [[New]] Jersey.

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Robert]] De Niro [[activates]] his Southern accent and shouts gibberish [[effectively]]. Cuba Gooding, [[raised]] by a stern [[father]] as a poor [[black]] [[farm]] [[boy]] in the [[South]], is the expectable [[paragon]] of rectitude. The [[girls]] -- one [[could]] [[hardly]] [[call]] them [[women]] -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[minor]] [[roles]] and are [[mostly]] there to [[argue]] that their [[men]] should [[exercise]] common sense. Other decent [[performers]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[even]] more perfunctory [[roles]].

That's about it. [[Almost]] everything [[else]] [[could]] have been assembled by a [[computer]]. A [[ship]] is [[called]] a [[boat]]. [[Robert]] De Niro [[salutes]] [[indoors]], [[uncovered]]. [[After]] a [[brutal]] [[assault]] on [[hospital]] [[personnel]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[instead]] of being busted. [[Somebody]] [[shouts]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. (Maybe it was a common [[expression]] at the [[time]]. If so, "my [[bad]].") People [[address]] each other by [[rank]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Mate]]," "[[Commander]]," as they do in the Army, [[whereas]] in the [[Navy]] they are [[simple]] "[[Mister]]" (if an [[officer]]) or [[addressed]] by their [[last]] [[name]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[check]] if there was a [[rank]] [[called]] "Senior [[Master]] Chief" in 1950.

[[Cuba]] Gooding has a [[tough]] row to hoe. [[Everyone]] in the Navy, it seems, [[hates]] [[Negroes]] except for one [[guy]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[held]] in [[contempt]] by the others in his [[class]]. It's [[like]] the scene in "[[Animal]] [[House]]", in which the applicant to a [[tony]] [[fraternity]] is asked to [[wait]] in a [[room]] with a Sikh, a [[black]] [[man]], and a [[blind]] [[kid]].

Gooding is an enlisted [[man]], a [[second]] [[class]] [[petty]] [[officer]]. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. Cheap as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical [[details]] are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. Follows the [[normal]] [[formulas]] in putting a [[nouveau]] [[conscription]] -- this [[moment]] the first African-American ([[Cuban]] Gooding) after [[Chairs]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea diver training [[agenda]] that is [[execute]] by a [[racism]] [[fanaticism]] ([[Roberto]] [[pacino]]). [[Unless]] the program weren't [[negative]] enough, it's got to be located in Bayonne, [[Novo]] Jersey.

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Roberta]] De Niro [[activist]] his Southern accent and shouts gibberish [[efficiently]]. Cuba Gooding, [[risen]] by a stern [[fathers]] as a poor [[negro]] [[farmhouse]] [[dude]] in the [[Southern]], is the expectable [[model]] of rectitude. The [[females]] -- one [[did]] [[almost]] [[calling]] them [[females]] -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[marginal]] [[duties]] and are [[especially]] there to [[plead]] that their [[males]] should [[practicing]] common sense. Other decent [[artists]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[yet]] more perfunctory [[duties]].

That's about it. [[Virtually]] everything [[otherwise]] [[would]] have been assembled by a [[computers]]. A [[battleship]] is [[termed]] a [[freighter]]. [[Roberto]] De Niro [[applauds]] [[interiors]], [[revealed]]. [[Upon]] a [[ferocious]] [[onslaught]] on [[hospitals]] [[employee]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[conversely]] of being busted. [[Everyone]] [[screaming]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. (Maybe it was a common [[phrases]] at the [[times]]. If so, "my [[negative]].") People [[treat]] each other by [[classifications]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Mating]]," "[[Commandant]]," as they do in the Army, [[albeit]] in the [[Armada]] they are [[mere]] "[[Gentleman]]" (if an [[agents]]) or [[treated]] by their [[final]] [[behalf]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[checking]] if there was a [[categorized]] [[drew]] "Senior [[Masters]] Chief" in 1950.

[[Cuban]] Gooding has a [[challenging]] row to hoe. [[Everybody]] in the Navy, it seems, [[hated]] [[Blacks]] except for one [[pal]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[holds]] in [[defiance]] by the others in his [[kinds]]. It's [[iike]] the scene in "[[Beasts]] [[Maison]]", in which the applicant to a [[toni]] [[brotherhood]] is asked to [[suspense]] in a [[bedroom]] with a Sikh, a [[negro]] [[dude]], and a [[blinded]] [[petit]].

Gooding is an enlisted [[dude]], a [[secondly]] [[kinds]] [[trite]] [[agent]]. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. Cheap as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical [[clarification]] are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. --------------------------------------------- Result 1459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Forbidden Siren is based upon the Siren 2 Playstation 2 (so many 2s) game. Like most video game turned movies, I would say the majority don't translate into a different medium really well. And that goes for this one too, painfully.

There's a pretty long prologue which explains and sets the premise for the story, and the mysterious island on which a writer (Leo Morimoto) and his children, daughter Yuki (Yui Ichikawa) and son Hideo (Jun Nishiyama) come to move into. The villagers don't look all too friendly, and soon enough, sound advice is given about the siren on the island, to stay indoors once the siren starts wailing.

Naturally and slowly, things start to go bump, and our siblings go on a mission beating around the bush to discover exactly what is happening on this unfriendly island with its strange inhabitants. But in truth, you will not bother with what's going on, as folklore and fairy tales get thrown in to convolute the plot even more. What was really pushing it into the realm of bad comedy are its unwittingly ill-placed-out-of-the-norm moments which just drew pitiful giggles at its sheer stupidity, until it's explained much later. It's one thing trying to come up and present something smart, but another thing doing it convincingly and with loopholes covered.

Despite it clocking in under 90 minutes - I think it's a horror movie phenomenon to have that as a runtime benchmark - it gives that almost two hour feel with its slow buildup to tell what it wants to. Things begin to pick up toward the last 20 minutes, but it's a classic case of too little too late.

What saves the movie is how it changes tack and its revelation at the end. Again this is a common device used to try and elevate a seemingly simple horror movie into something a little bit extra in the hope of wowing an audience. It turned out rather satisfactorily, but leaves a bad aftertaste as you'll feel cheated somewhat. There are two ways a twist will make you feel - it either elevates the movie to a memorable level, or provides you with that hokey feeling. Unfortunately Forbidden Siren belonged more to the latter.

The saving grace will be its cinematography with its use of light, shadows and mirrors, but I will be that explicit - it's still not worth the time, so better to avoid this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Scott Henderson, the engineer that employs Carol Richman, as his assistant, makes a point to call her "Kansas", whenever he speaks to her. It shows us that Carol, effectively played by Ella Raines, is supposed to be a babe in the woods, as far as the Manhattan of the 40s was concerned. Only a woman, from out of town, would follow the shady bartender to a solitary elevated subway. Even then, only a naive girl could undertake such an adventure.

Robert Siodmak directed this film noir very well. He shows a flair for infusing the story with a lot of raw sex that was surprising for those days. How else could we justify the way the drummer in the orchestra of the musical, where Scott takes the mysterious woman with an unusual hat, makes such an overt pass at a lady on a date? The drummer played with high voltage by Elisha Cook Jr. doesn't hide his desires for any of the ladies who sat in the front row of the hit musical where he plays. It was a real explicit invitation, first to the "phantom woman" of the story, Fay Helm; afterward, Cliff the drummer, insinuates himself very openly to Ella Raines who goes to the theater disguised as the mystery dame her boss had taken originally.

This is a film that will hook any viewer from the beginning. There are things not explained in it, but it holds the one's interest throughout. The killer is not revealed until the end.

Ella Raines with her expressive eyes was an under estimated actress. She holds her own against much more experienced actors. Franchot Tone, a New York stage actor, working in Hollywood, never found in this medium the fame he deserved. He is effective as the accused man's best friend. On the other hand, Alan Curtis, comes across as a man, who when framed, accepts his fate and is saved only by the tenacity of the woman who secretly loved him. Thomas Gomez, as the inspector Burgess, is an asset to the film as a detective who has his doubts the police had caught the man who committed the crime.

This movie will not disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] The [[question]] is, can a [[movie]] this entertaining really be [[considered]] a "[[bad]]" [[movie]]? My husband and I [[picked]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of win as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: [[Grange]], this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a [[surprisingly]] [[awesome]] soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's [[definitely]] worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. The [[matter]] is, can a [[kino]] this entertaining really be [[judged]] a "[[inclement]]" [[kino]]? My husband and I [[opted]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of win as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: [[Barn]], this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a [[terribly]] [[wondrous]] soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's [[surely]] worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1462 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and [[unbiased]] portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters [[living]] sad lives, but it [[hardly]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a [[useless]] role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A [[failure]]. Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and [[dispassionate]] portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters [[vida]] sad lives, but it [[nigh]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a [[superfluous]] role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A [[defect]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1463 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] in this [[movie]], joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[rest]] of the [[script]] is [[equally]] not believable.

pesci is a [[funny]] guy, which [[saves]] this film from [[sinking]] int the absolute back of the cellar, but the other roles were pretty [[bad]]. the father was a greedy [[businessman]] who [[valued]] money more than people, which wasn't even well-played. instead of the man being an archetypal villain, he [[seemed]] more like an amoral [[android]] programmed to make money at all [[costs]]. then there's the token piece that is [[assigned]] to pesci as a girlfriend or something...i don't even [[remember]]...she was that forgettable.

[[anyone]] who rates this [[movie]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[paid]] [[member]] of some [[sort]] of film studio trying to up the [[reputation]] of this sunken [[film]], or at [[least]] one of those millions of media [[minions]] who can't [[critique]] [[efficiently]] (you know, the people who feel [[bad]] if they [[give]] [[anything]] a [[mark]] below 6).

stay away...far away. and [[shame]] on [[comedy]] central, where i [[saw]] this [[film]]. they [[usually]] [[pick]] [[better]]. in this [[filmmaking]], joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[stays]] of the [[screenplay]] is [[similarly]] not believable.

pesci is a [[comical]] guy, which [[rescue]] this film from [[drowning]] int the absolute back of the cellar, but the other roles were pretty [[negative]]. the father was a greedy [[trader]] who [[valuing]] money more than people, which wasn't even well-played. instead of the man being an archetypal villain, he [[looked]] more like an amoral [[droid]] programmed to make money at all [[prices]]. then there's the token piece that is [[attributed]] to pesci as a girlfriend or something...i don't even [[recalling]]...she was that forgettable.

[[everybody]] who rates this [[filmmaking]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[salary]] [[lawmakers]] of some [[kinds]] of film studio trying to up the [[notoriety]] of this sunken [[filmmaking]], or at [[slightest]] one of those millions of media [[devils]] who can't [[criticised]] [[effectively]] (you know, the people who feel [[negative]] if they [[confer]] [[nothing]] a [[markup]] below 6).

stay away...far away. and [[dishonour]] on [[parody]] central, where i [[noticed]] this [[cinema]]. they [[often]] [[picks]] [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] I must [[admit]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit skeptical. "Steamy"? [[In]] a movie from 1968?? I was [[prepared]] for [[disappointment]]. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[knew]] my erotic hopes were dashed.

Boy, was I [[wrong]]! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was downright erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its [[time]]. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. I must [[concede]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit skeptical. "Steamy"? [[For]] a movie from 1968?? I was [[devised]] for [[disillusionment]]. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[overheard]] my erotic hopes were dashed.

Boy, was I [[amiss]]! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was downright erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its [[moment]]. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1465 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this movie in my plays & playwrights course at Tulane. I was awed at how beautiful and raw this documentary was. It is a sincere look into the unedited reality of a life of solitude. The family is fascinating and I thought it really showed Little Edie at her core. **As a side note My professor even told me that throughout the filming, Little Edie became infatuated with one of the camera men.** The beauty, I find, comes from the naturalness of the family's dysfunction. It is evident in the relationship between mother and daughter that neither could function in society alone and you begin to wish for Little Edie's rehabilitation to society. In all, the film is gripping in its aesthetic quality and it's portrayal of surprising beauty. Two thumbs way up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] In what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[comedy]], [[Manuel]] [[Gomez]] Pereira made this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[discovery]], by [[many]] [[voice]] you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs somewhat from the [[norm]] in the Spanish cinema. The [[downside]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly [[combined]], and while some points are not well developed, others are out of place. A day in the [[lives]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge ([[Eduard]] Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, [[despite]] load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things [[change]]. Only this explains his commitment to a [[minor]] [[could]] mean a [[turning]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge [[says]] [[things]] like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to [[change]] my [[luck]]. " Of course it [[finds]] it, [[begins]] to play '[[Today]] could be a [[great]] day' (Hoy puede ser un [[gran]] dia)by Joan [[Manuel]] Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[woman]] [[entry]] [[age]], divorced and a little [[lonely]]. Take valeriana for sleeping, [[organizes]] birthday parties as an exemplary [[mother]], said her [[belief]] in [[God]] and leads to a [[speed]] of homicidal [[mother]]. Hortensia is a [[woman]] of [[many]] contradictions in his [[behavior]], [[life]] was going in his [[head]] driving data as "70% of people [[fall]] in [[love]] only once in a lifetime" and [[said]] although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[preclude]] the [[possibility]] that it is a "sadistic" [[sleeping]] in his shoulder in the [[cinema]] at the [[earliest]] opportunity. [[Later]] [[came]] a communion, a [[dance]] in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a [[car]] and other [[things]] that [[players]] [[seem]] to [[live]] [[unique]] [[experiences]] like that but [[end]] up doing [[quite]] heavy for the viewer. 'Things that [[make]] [[life]] worthwhile' debate between us is the [[drama]] of two adult [[persons]] who have no other that leads them to see where their [[strange]] [[relationship]] and, conversely, [[make]] us [[take]] the [[case]] as a comedy, focusing on [[things]] like a Chinese [[singing]] at a [[wedding]] (which [[seem]] to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. In what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[farce]], [[Textbook]] [[Fernandez]] Pereira made this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[detecting]], by [[myriad]] [[vowel]] you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs somewhat from the [[norma]] in the Spanish cinema. The [[disadvantage]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly [[combining]], and while some points are not well developed, others are out of place. A day in the [[iife]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge ([[Edwards]] Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, [[while]] load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things [[amendments]]. Only this explains his commitment to a [[minors]] [[did]] mean a [[turn]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge [[said]] [[items]] like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to [[amend]] my [[opportunity]]. " Of course it [[found]] it, [[launch]] to play '[[Thursday]] could be a [[wonderful]] day' (Hoy puede ser un [[grandma]] dia)by Joan [[Textbook]] Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[wife]] [[entrance]] [[older]], divorced and a little [[single]]. Take valeriana for sleeping, [[organise]] birthday parties as an exemplary [[mom]], said her [[faith]] in [[Christ]] and leads to a [[speeding]] of homicidal [[mothers]]. Hortensia is a [[female]] of [[numerous]] contradictions in his [[behaviour]], [[vida]] was going in his [[chief]] driving data as "70% of people [[declining]] in [[loves]] only once in a lifetime" and [[stated]] although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[excludes]] the [[potential]] that it is a "sadistic" [[sleeper]] in his shoulder in the [[movie]] at the [[nearest]] opportunity. [[Then]] [[arrived]] a communion, a [[dancer]] in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a [[automobile]] and other [[items]] that [[actors]] [[seems]] to [[viva]] [[peculiar]] [[experiments]] like that but [[terminate]] up doing [[pretty]] heavy for the viewer. 'Things that [[deliver]] [[lives]] worthwhile' debate between us is the [[tragedy]] of two adult [[person]] who have no other that leads them to see where their [[odd]] [[relation]] and, conversely, [[deliver]] us [[taking]] the [[lawsuit]] as a comedy, focusing on [[aspects]] like a Chinese [[singer]] at a [[marry]] (which [[appears]] to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I seriously do not understand what the other reviewers have [[seen]] in this [[appalling]] train-crash of a [[film]]. It was only through [[morbid]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[see]] what [[bizarre]] or inept decision the director would make [[next]].

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. [[In]] [[fact]], I [[think]] the [[real]] [[reason]] lies with the studio bosses, who [[must]] have been [[horrified]] when they saw what he had [[done]] with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I seriously do not understand what the other reviewers have [[saw]] in this [[horrific]] train-crash of a [[films]]. It was only through [[disease]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[seeing]] what [[outlandish]] or inept decision the director would make [[imminent]].

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. [[Throughout]] [[facto]], I [[thinks]] the [[veritable]] [[motif]] lies with the studio bosses, who [[owes]] have been [[dismayed]] when they saw what he had [[effected]] with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. --------------------------------------------- Result 1468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] A [[kid]] with [[ideals]] who [[tries]] to [[change]] [[things]] [[around]] him. A [[boy]] who is [[forced]] to become a [[man]], because of the system. A system who [[hides]] the truth, and who is violating the rights of existence. A [[boy]] who, inspired by Martin [[Luther]] [[King]], stands up, and [[tells]] the truth. A family who is [[falling]] [[apart]], and [[fighting]] against it. A movie you can't [[hide]] from. You see things, and you [[hear]] things, and you feel things, that you till the day you [[die]] will hope have never happened for [[real]]. Violence, [[frustration]], abuse of power, [[parents]] who can't do anything, and a [[boy]] with, I am sorry, balls, a [[boy]] who will not [[accept]] [[things]], who will not [[let]] [[anything]] [[happen]] to him, a [[kid]] with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never [[done]] [[anything]] [[else]], he caries this [[movie]] to the [[end]], and [[anyone]] who [[wants]] to [[see]] how [[abuse]] [[found]] place back in the 60'ies. A [[children]] with [[idea]] who [[endeavour]] to [[modify]] [[aspects]] [[about]] him. A [[boys]] who is [[compelled]] to become a [[guy]], because of the system. A system who [[disguised]] the truth, and who is violating the rights of existence. A [[bloke]] who, inspired by Martin [[Lutheran]] [[Emperor]], stands up, and [[says]] the truth. A family who is [[tumbling]] [[moreover]], and [[struggles]] against it. A movie you can't [[masked]] from. You see things, and you [[listened]] things, and you feel things, that you till the day you [[killed]] will hope have never happened for [[authentic]]. Violence, [[disappointment]], abuse of power, [[parent]] who can't do anything, and a [[boys]] with, I am sorry, balls, a [[guy]] who will not [[agreeing]] [[aspects]], who will not [[leave]] [[nothing]] [[arise]] to him, a [[children]] with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never [[doing]] [[something]] [[further]], he caries this [[film]] to the [[ceases]], and [[whoever]] who [[wanted]] to [[consults]] how [[misuse]] [[discovered]] place back in the 60'ies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I didn't really expect much from "The Night Listener" and I actually never heard of it until I saw the cover in the videostore. However, the movie is very effective when it comes to building up [[suspension]] and tension. On occasion it drags a little, but it actually helps to keep you wondering what's going to happen and more importantly: when. As the movie progresses, the character played by Robin Williams gets dragged into some kind of "cat and mouse" spiel to the point where he becomes obsessed with finding out the truth and existence about a 14 year old abused kid that no-one seemed to have ever seen in person. The Night Listener is an interesting story, which is great in building up the suspense throughout the movie and you're pretty much kept in the dark of who is lying and what's real. However, in the end it kind of disappoints and doesn't live up to the potential it could have had. It doesn't really give you a detailed or plausible explanation about the other main character, which would have been helpful and interesting. I didn't really expect much from "The Night Listener" and I actually never heard of it until I saw the cover in the videostore. However, the movie is very effective when it comes to building up [[suspend]] and tension. On occasion it drags a little, but it actually helps to keep you wondering what's going to happen and more importantly: when. As the movie progresses, the character played by Robin Williams gets dragged into some kind of "cat and mouse" spiel to the point where he becomes obsessed with finding out the truth and existence about a 14 year old abused kid that no-one seemed to have ever seen in person. The Night Listener is an interesting story, which is great in building up the suspense throughout the movie and you're pretty much kept in the dark of who is lying and what's real. However, in the end it kind of disappoints and doesn't live up to the potential it could have had. It doesn't really give you a detailed or plausible explanation about the other main character, which would have been helpful and interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 1470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] A pale [[shadow]] of a great musical, this movie suffers from the [[fact]] that the [[director]], Richard Attenborough, [[completely]] [[misses]] the point of the musical, needlessly "[[opens]]" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The [[show]] is about a [[group]] of dancers [[auditioning]] for a [[job]] in a B'way musical and examines their [[drive]] & desire to [[work]] in this [[demanding]] and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of [[hopefuls]], assuming that they are [[trying]] to get their "[[big]] break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the [[size]] of the original [[audition]] and the [[true]] [[scale]] of [[shrinkage]] down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived [[film]]. A pale [[shade]] of a great musical, this movie suffers from the [[facto]] that the [[headmaster]], Richard Attenborough, [[wholly]] [[lack]] the point of the musical, needlessly "[[opening]]" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The [[exhibition]] is about a [[grouping]] of dancers [[auditioned]] for a [[jobs]] in a B'way musical and examines their [[drives]] & desire to [[works]] in this [[demands]] and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of [[contestants]], assuming that they are [[striving]] to get their "[[gargantuan]] break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the [[calibre]] of the original [[auditions]] and the [[veritable]] [[greatness]] of [[reductions]] down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1471 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wouldn't say this is a *bad* movie. Unfortunately for me, I get the feeling that the more you know about fencing, the worse it gets simply due to the fact that it becomes totally unrealistic. I've been fencing since i was 14 years old, and this movie portrays it very poorly. F. Murray Abraham is good (and appears to have some fencing background), but most of the other actors--especially the students--just seem to be lost. --------------------------------------------- Result 1472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The third and last part of the Bourne trilogy (duh), is lacking a bit in the story department, but covers it with extensive action scenes! Twi in particular take up quite some of the running time and make this movie better.

The director and star (Damon) themselves agreed that it was difficult to find a story for the last part, because the end of the second movie was quite ... advanced story-wise. How they got around that? The action scenes, for once, but they did another thing too, which I can't reveal, because that would be a spoiler. But if you watch the movie, than you'll notice it! Funnily enough I read, that this adaptation of the Bourne books is the least accurate of all three films .. if that means anything to you :o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1473 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This [[film]] has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[worst]] movies ever [[made]]. [[True]], most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond [[bad]] into the realm of [[horrible]]. There is not one scary moment in it [[unless]] you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King [[garbage]] -- [[myths]] twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[scares]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at [[least]], is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. This [[filmmaking]] has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[meanest]] movies ever [[introduced]]. [[Real]], most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond [[negative]] into the realm of [[scary]]. There is not one scary moment in it [[if]] you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King [[trash]] -- [[myth]] twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[terrifies]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at [[lowest]], is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1474 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[sat]] through this film and i have to [[say]] it only just [[managed]] to [[keep]] my attention. The [[film]] [[would]] have been a [[bit]] more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[awful]] CGI, for [[future]] reference to the [[industry]] if your going to [[use]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[avoid]].

Apparently this is [[supposed]] to be a graphic [[novel]] for the screen but all i [[saw]] was a [[bad]] [[movie]] which bears no [[resemblance]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. I [[oin]] through this film and i have to [[says]] it only just [[administered]] to [[maintain]] my attention. The [[filmmaking]] [[ought]] have been a [[bitten]] more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[abysmal]] CGI, for [[futuristic]] reference to the [[industries]] if your going to [[usage]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[preventing]].

Apparently this is [[presumed]] to be a graphic [[newer]] for the screen but all i [[sawthe]] was a [[unfavourable]] [[flick]] which bears no [[analogy]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Why, oh, why won't they [[learn]]? [[When]] you've [[got]] a [[nice]], juicy [[exploitation]] gimmick, use it! Don't [[go]] messing around [[trying]] to get all [[deep]] and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking [[foolish]].

Christmas Evil is the story of [[Harry]] Stadling, who [[saw]] a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a [[kid]]. [[So]], of course, Harry grows up [[obsessed]] with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple [[enough]], and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. Why, oh, why won't they [[learning]]? [[Whenever]] you've [[get]] a [[lovely]], juicy [[operate]] gimmick, use it! Don't [[going]] messing around [[try]] to get all [[deepest]] and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking [[asinine]].

Christmas Evil is the story of [[Hare]] Stadling, who [[noticed]] a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a [[petit]]. [[Accordingly]], of course, Harry grows up [[haunted]] with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple [[satisfactorily]], and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[loved]] the Batman [[tv]] [[series]] and was really [[looking]] forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the [[story]] of [[Adam]] West and Burt Ward [[trying]] to [[recover]] the batmobile was [[beyond]] me. I don't [[want]] to [[knock]] Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 [[years]] since they [[appeared]] at Batman and [[Robin]], but to see them [[dressed]] in [[dress]] [[suits]] and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I [[would]] [[rather]] of just seen the ex-stars do [[commentary]]. The batmobile side [[story]] was stupid.

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my [[opinion]]. I'd like more [[background]]. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to [[tell]] the same stuff I already [[knew]]. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the [[book]]. I am sure it has more in it that this [[showed]]. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 [[Mister]] Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister [[Freeze]], King Tut, etc. the [[List]] goes on. Like I [[said]] even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

Very disappointing. And really corny. I [[enjoyed]] the Batman [[televisions]] [[serial]] and was really [[researching]] forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the [[saga]] of [[Adama]] West and Burt Ward [[attempts]] to [[recoup]] the batmobile was [[afterlife]] me. I don't [[desiring]] to [[patting]] Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 [[yr]] since they [[emerged]] at Batman and [[Rubin]], but to see them [[clothed]] in [[garb]] [[outfits]] and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I [[could]] [[somewhat]] of just seen the ex-stars do [[feedback]]. The batmobile side [[stories]] was stupid.

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my [[opinions]]. I'd like more [[backgrounds]]. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to [[say]] the same stuff I already [[overheard]]. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the [[workbook]]. I am sure it has more in it that this [[shown]]. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 [[Mr]] Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister [[Frost]], King Tut, etc. the [[Listed]] goes on. Like I [[told]] even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

Very disappointing. And really corny. --------------------------------------------- Result 1477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] Mary Poppins is [[definitely]] much better, but this is a [[lovely]] film [[nonetheless]]. Angela Lansbury is [[splendidly]] dotty as Engletine [[Price]], and David Tomlinson has [[great]] fun as Mr. Brown. Their [[chemistry]] was just [[brilliant]] as well. The [[children]], [[however]] just lacked the same sparkle, [[though]] Paul is very [[funny]] and cute. The songs were [[actually]] not as [[bad]] as some people [[say]], "[[Beautiful]] Briny [[Sea]]" is the [[best]], in fact all the [[songs]] are [[outstanding]]. The special effects were [[wonderful]], that had plenty of [[magic]], and the story is [[original]] enough. The [[highlights]], though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was [[beautiful]], but my [[favourite]] was the football [[match]], which was [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. The only other [[criticism]] was that I didn't [[quite]] [[get]] the [[ending]] when I [[first]] [[saw]] it. [[All]] in all, a [[lovely]] [[film]], that is [[hardly]] ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox Mary Poppins is [[certainly]] much better, but this is a [[wondrous]] film [[however]]. Angela Lansbury is [[brilliantly]] dotty as Engletine [[Pricing]], and David Tomlinson has [[wonderful]] fun as Mr. Brown. Their [[chemist]] was just [[beautiful]] as well. The [[infant]], [[nevertheless]] just lacked the same sparkle, [[despite]] Paul is very [[fun]] and cute. The songs were [[genuinely]] not as [[amiss]] as some people [[told]], "[[Wondrous]] Briny [[Hai]]" is the [[finest]], in fact all the [[hymns]] are [[unpaid]]. The special effects were [[extraordinary]], that had plenty of [[quadrant]], and the story is [[initial]] enough. The [[illustrates]], though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was [[awesome]], but my [[favorite]] was the football [[equalize]], which was [[downright]] [[comical]]. The only other [[critique]] was that I didn't [[perfectly]] [[obtain]] the [[ended]] when I [[firstly]] [[watched]] it. [[Everything]] in all, a [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]], that is [[barely]] ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox --------------------------------------------- Result 1478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Okay, I [[seriously]] CAN'T think of [[anything]] worse than the PR [[series]]. There are many [[bad]] things in [[life]]...[[traitors]], liars, etc. But seriously, Power [[Rangers]] has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[list]]. Can you [[think]] of [[anything]] more [[stupid]] than five-six [[teenagers]] (who don't even [[act]] like a [[normal]] teen) dancing [[around]] in [[identical]] suits WITH [[DIFFERENT]] COLORS [[SO]] THAT [[YOU]] CAN [[TELL]] THEM [[APART]]? Fans, have you ever come [[across]] a [[real]] person who [[gets]] flung against a [[mental]] wall and gets up [[almost]] immediately and [[continues]] to fight without getting [[injured]]? Power [[Rangers]] are for five-year [[old]] [[boys]], and [[believe]] me, I never liked this show [[even]] when I was five.

I [[guess]] you can [[say]] Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens [[actually]] [[ACT]] like teens, and [[Tommy]] Oliver actually [[acts]] like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, [[though]] the [[fighting]] is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

[[Many]] people say Power Rangers are [[crap]], but I wouldn't. It [[would]] be an [[insult]] to [[crap]]. [[So]] face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is [[rubbish]]. Okay, I [[profoundly]] CAN'T think of [[algo]] worse than the PR [[serials]]. There are many [[mala]] things in [[lives]]...[[renegades]], liars, etc. But seriously, Power [[Ringers]] has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[listings]]. Can you [[thinking]] of [[somethings]] more [[dumb]] than five-six [[teens]] (who don't even [[ley]] like a [[ordinary]] teen) dancing [[almost]] in [[same]] suits WITH [[DISSIMILAR]] COLORS [[THEREBY]] THAT [[DOYOU]] CAN [[SAY]] THEM [[ALSO]]? Fans, have you ever come [[throughout]] a [[veritable]] person who [[attains]] flung against a [[psychological]] wall and gets up [[virtually]] immediately and [[continue]] to fight without getting [[wound]]? Power [[Ringers]] are for five-year [[longtime]] [[guy]], and [[think]] me, I never liked this show [[yet]] when I was five.

I [[imagine]] you can [[says]] Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens [[genuinely]] [[LEGISLATION]] like teens, and [[Izzi]] Oliver actually [[act]] like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, [[if]] the [[hostilities]] is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

[[Multiple]] people say Power Rangers are [[shitty]], but I wouldn't. It [[could]] be an [[affront]] to [[shitty]]. [[Consequently]] face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is [[trash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt compelled to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets [[feelings]] in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a great start for all Americans to begin the [[healing]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . [[Incredibly]] emotional movie. I would [[highly]] recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" [[Great]] DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt compelled to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets [[affections]] in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a great start for all Americans to begin the [[curative]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . [[Unbelievably]] emotional movie. I would [[inordinately]] recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" [[Grand]] DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides --------------------------------------------- Result 1480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] If ever there were an inspiring story that [[could]] [[move]] [[anyone]], disabled or not, to persevere [[despite]] the odds and make it (even when "[[make]] it" as an [[expression]], proper, can have a [[wide]] berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY [[LEFT]] FOOT is it. It's a hard [[film]] to watch at times: seeing the less [[placid]] aspects of [[Christy]] Brown's [[personality]] [[emerge]] in two [[key]] scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get [[married]] while his [[father]] has a bad reaction, and at a dinner [[table]] when the woman who's reached out to him, [[made]] him [[able]] to [[communicate]] [[effectively]], now has announced at a [[key]] moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to [[marry]] another [[man]] -- is tough. Very, very [[tough]]. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these [[events]] and can only [[express]] himself in the only [[way]] he knows how: via [[screams]], shrieks, and profanities [[aimed]] at hurting himself. [[However]], this is not a [[story]] of heartache and family dysfunction [[even]] when there is quite a [[bit]] of it furnishing the autobiographical [[account]], but that of a [[man]] overcoming his [[severe]] [[disability]], becoming a [[functioning]] human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art [[world]]. [[Daniel]] Day [[Lewis]] won an Oscar for his [[powerful]], [[unforgettable]] performance as the [[flawed]] but [[tenacious]] [[Christy]] Brown, and [[Brenda]] Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's [[solid]] [[mother]]. If ever there were an inspiring story that [[would]] [[budge]] [[somebody]], disabled or not, to persevere [[although]] the odds and make it (even when "[[deliver]] it" as an [[words]], proper, can have a [[big]] berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY [[EXITED]] FOOT is it. It's a hard [[cinematography]] to watch at times: seeing the less [[peaceable]] aspects of [[Kristy]] Brown's [[persona]] [[happen]] in two [[important]] scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get [[wedding]] while his [[pere]] has a bad reaction, and at a dinner [[tables]] when the woman who's reached out to him, [[brought]] him [[capable]] to [[communicating]] [[efficiently]], now has announced at a [[important]] moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to [[wedding]] another [[males]] -- is tough. Very, very [[stiff]]. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these [[phenomena]] and can only [[expressed]] himself in the only [[manner]] he knows how: via [[cree]], shrieks, and profanities [[geared]] at hurting himself. [[Still]], this is not a [[history]] of heartache and family dysfunction [[yet]] when there is quite a [[bite]] of it furnishing the autobiographical [[accounting]], but that of a [[males]] overcoming his [[extreme]] [[disabilities]], becoming a [[operative]] human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art [[globe]]. [[Danielle]] Day [[Luis]] won an Oscar for his [[influential]], [[landmark]] performance as the [[incorrect]] but [[stubborn]] [[Christie]] Brown, and [[Cindy]] Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's [[robust]] [[mum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[great]] [[combination]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. [[Picking]] up [[exactly]] where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, [[though]] that doesn't last; for better or worse), this installation in the franchise [[seems]] somewhat more bent on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one long stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very [[diverse]] and pretty eccentric. [[Both]] qualities [[show]] in this. The plot [[continues]] its [[excellence]], now giving a few [[regular]] [[characters]] that were [[minor]] [[players]] in the [[previous]] four [[episodes]] more attention. Basically [[every]] [[character]] from the first [[returns]], at [[least]] as far as the main [[roles]] go. The pacing isn't as [[sharp]] as in the [[first]] [[part]], and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any [[kind]] of [[way]] to [[say]] that this didn't involve me, [[though]]... I [[still]] [[found]] myself [[constantly]] [[watching]], and at [[several]] points [[reacting]] [[strongly]], [[often]] out loud, to what was going on([[extremely]] [[unusual]] [[behavior]] for me, as I am an incredibly silent [[person]]), as I [[also]] was during the first. Like the first, this [[also]] [[brings]] up some loaded [[ethical]] [[questions]]. [[Building]] on the [[foundation]] from the first, this [[brings]] the [[story]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[also]] bigger. [[Grander]]. More [[spirits]], more bizarre occurrences, more subplots. The strong [[graphic]] material of the first also returns, and it's been [[kicked]] up a notch. The [[characters]] are [[developed]] further. The acting is [[amazing]], as that of the first. Udo Kier solidifies his [[immense]] talent, to [[anyone]] who doubted it. [[Playing]] a very [[difficult]] [[character]]([[anyone]] who has [[seen]] the first [[series]] can most likely figure out what I mean) *and* acting in a [[language]] he didn't [[speak]](he was [[later]] [[dubbed]])... and [[still]] handing in such a [[strong]] performance. The cinematography remains [[great]], and is [[still]] very hand-held, with [[rapid]] zooms and the [[occasional]] long [[take]]. The editing is [[sharp]], with a few direct cuts in [[sound]]([[though]] these were more [[prominent]] in the first). Now, with all that [[said]], I would [[really]] like to be able to rate this a [[perfect]] 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't [[regret]] it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first [[part]] had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are [[basically]] copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... [[definitely]] enjoyable, [[compelling]], powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[wondrous]] [[jumpsuit]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. [[Selecting]] up [[accurately]] where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, [[if]] that doesn't last; for better or worse), this installation in the franchise [[looks]] somewhat more bent on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one long stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very [[several]] and pretty eccentric. [[Whether]] qualities [[demonstrate]] in this. The plot [[persisted]] its [[excellencies]], now giving a few [[routine]] [[features]] that were [[smaller]] [[actors]] in the [[former]] four [[spells]] more attention. Basically [[each]] [[nature]] from the first [[return]], at [[fewer]] as far as the main [[duties]] go. The pacing isn't as [[steep]] as in the [[fiirst]] [[portion]], and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any [[sorts]] of [[pathway]] to [[told]] that this didn't involve me, [[despite]]... I [[again]] [[discovered]] myself [[continually]] [[staring]], and at [[dissimilar]] points [[responding]] [[flatly]], [[normally]] out loud, to what was going on([[inordinately]] [[odd]] [[behaviour]] for me, as I am an incredibly silent [[persons]]), as I [[similarly]] was during the first. Like the first, this [[similarly]] [[puts]] up some loaded [[moral]] [[issues]]. [[Constructing]] on the [[bases]] from the first, this [[puts]] the [[fairytales]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[apart]] bigger. [[Fatter]]. More [[wits]], more bizarre occurrences, more subplots. The strong [[diagram]] material of the first also returns, and it's been [[knocked]] up a notch. The [[characteristic]] are [[devised]] further. The acting is [[wondrous]], as that of the first. Udo Kier solidifies his [[sizable]] talent, to [[someone]] who doubted it. [[Play]] a very [[problematic]] [[characters]]([[someone]] who has [[watched]] the first [[serial]] can most likely figure out what I mean) *and* acting in a [[linguistics]] he didn't [[talk]](he was [[subsequently]] [[nicknamed]])... and [[however]] handing in such a [[vigorous]] performance. The cinematography remains [[wondrous]], and is [[again]] very hand-held, with [[fast]] zooms and the [[sporadic]] long [[taking]]. The editing is [[steep]], with a few direct cuts in [[audible]]([[whilst]] these were more [[conspicuous]] in the first). Now, with all that [[indicated]], I would [[genuinely]] like to be able to rate this a [[faultless]] 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't [[deplore]] it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first [[parte]] had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are [[broadly]] copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... [[admittedly]] enjoyable, [[convincing]], powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can't come up with [[appropriate]] enough [[words]] to describe the horror I felt [[sitting]] in that [[cinema]] watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[attempt]] to [[pay]] [[tribute]] to that classic Bollywood [[western]], Sholay. The biggest problem with Varma's [[remake]] is that he doesn't even [[try]] to make a [[credible]] [[film]]. It's [[evident]] in every [[single]] [[frame]] of this [[movie]] that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[gimmick]] on the [[part]] of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[see]] what little regard he actually [[shows]] for a [[film]] he claims he's been a fan of all his [[life]].I've [[seen]] [[several]] [[bad]] [[films]] over the [[years]], but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to [[sit]] through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the [[entire]] [[film]], because it tests your patience like few [[films]] have before.Varma may borrow his plot and [[characters]] from the [[original]] [[film]], but his version is [[trite]] and [[hollow]] and doesn't have any of the [[spirit]] and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is [[actually]] a [[mockery]] of that timeless gem because it [[turns]] out to be everything that the original [[film]] was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and [[entirely]] mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you [[want]] to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru [[climbs]] up the watertank and [[threatens]] to jump down to his death is turned [[around]] in this [[film]] with Ajay Devgan [[playing]] Hero, [[pulling]] a pistol to his [[head]] threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd [[pulled]] the trigger and spared us all the [[agony]].Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[bad]] effort [[even]] as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging [[background]] score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[terrible]] crime of bringing this [[ridiculous]] film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. I can't come up with [[opportune]] enough [[phrase]] to describe the horror I felt [[seated]] in that [[theaters]] watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[endeavours]] to [[salary]] [[compliments]] to that classic Bollywood [[west]], Sholay. The biggest problem with Varma's [[redo]] is that he doesn't even [[attempted]] to make a [[plausible]] [[flick]]. It's [[glaring]] in every [[exclusive]] [[fabric]] of this [[filmmaking]] that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[stratagem]] on the [[party]] of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[consults]] what little regard he actually [[showcase]] for a [[filmmaking]] he claims he's been a fan of all his [[lives]].I've [[noticed]] [[multiple]] [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] over the [[olds]], but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to [[seated]] through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the [[overall]] [[movie]], because it tests your patience like few [[kino]] have before.Varma may borrow his plot and [[attribute]] from the [[initial]] [[movie]], but his version is [[corny]] and [[empty]] and doesn't have any of the [[geist]] and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is [[genuinely]] a [[travesty]] of that timeless gem because it [[revolves]] out to be everything that the original [[filmmaking]] was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and [[fully]] mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you [[wish]] to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru [[climbing]] up the watertank and [[endangering]] to jump down to his death is turned [[approximately]] in this [[filmmaking]] with Ajay Devgan [[gaming]] Hero, [[pulls]] a pistol to his [[chief]] threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd [[pulls]] the trigger and spared us all the [[heartbreak]].Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[unfavourable]] effort [[yet]] as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging [[context]] score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[scary]] crime of bringing this [[farcical]] film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. --------------------------------------------- Result 1483 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is an [[almost]] action-less film following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

[[Dominic]] Monaghan, as [[Jack]], is [[truly]] [[believable]]. Confused, and [[scared]] but [[lethargic]] and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, [[mind]] boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. This is an [[approximately]] action-less film following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

[[Dominique]] Monaghan, as [[Jacques]], is [[honestly]] [[reliable]]. Confused, and [[shitless]] but [[listless]] and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, [[esprit]] boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Arg. The shuffling dinosaurs are back to take another bite out of our sanity in this all-awful third film. This time, European terrorists(Irish I'd say) hi-jack an army convoy supposed to be transporting uranium. They pull into a shipyard, open the truck and discover our old friends the carnosaurs. Pandemonium comes visiting then when the rubber dinos chomp the terrorists, the cops and some marines. The whole film seems to be (again) largely inspired from Alien(as Carnosaur 2 was) with the pathetic marines going through the "claustrophobic" shipyard? guns at the ready. This third opus is probably the driest and ungoriest film of the lot, with only one spurt of blood when a rubber dino rips a marine's head off. The dinos are stiff, shuffling creatures as usual and the T-Rex sounds like an enraged elephant when it roars(it also appears to have no eyes). One of the goofiest scenes of the film is when the coppers arrive on the scene: they enter the building where the hijacked truck is kept and hear some weird noise coming from another truck. On opening it, surprise! The Rubber Reptile Gang burst out and devour them. Why were the dinos locked up in the second truck after escaping from the first? How did they get locked in as the truck door could only be locked from the outside? What was the point of filming this scene???? Oh bother, who cares? Both thumbs down for the Over-sized Rubber Iguanas. --------------------------------------------- Result 1485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the [[patient]] (Angie Dickinson) of a [[prominent]] [[doctor]] ([[Michael]] Caine) and then pursues the high-priced [[prostitute]] ([[Nancy]] Allen) who [[caught]] a glimpse of Bobbi in the [[elevator]]. Liz (Allen) [[comes]] under [[suspicion]] of the [[crime]] and teams up with the patient's [[son]] (Keith Gordon) to [[catch]] the [[killer]].

It can be summed up in a couple of [[words]]: it's very [[sexy]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very [[bloody]] - with the [[kind]] of gore [[usually]] [[reserved]] for splatter [[movies]], and [[boy]] is it well [[crafted]]. [[Writer]] / [[director]] De Palma's script is OK but it [[really]] takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is [[highly]] successful on a visceral [[level]] and I [[actually]] [[get]] [[involved]] / interested with these [[characters]]. I can notice the standard De [[Palma]] homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at [[least]] from one of the Master's [[pictures]].

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife [[Nancy]] Allen (after "Carrie" and "[[Home]] [[Movies]]".)

By the [[way]], dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production [[assistants]]. There's a [[bit]] of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller [[could]] be classy and bloody at the same time but this [[picture]] [[pulls]] it off.

One of the [[best]] [[things]] about it is a [[typically]] [[striking]] Pino Donaggio [[music]] [[score]].

8/10 Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the [[patients]] (Angie Dickinson) of a [[eminent]] [[physician]] ([[Michel]] Caine) and then pursues the high-priced [[hooker]] ([[Juventus]] Allen) who [[grabbed]] a glimpse of Bobbi in the [[elevators]]. Liz (Allen) [[arises]] under [[mistrust]] of the [[offence]] and teams up with the patient's [[sons]] (Keith Gordon) to [[captured]] the [[callin]].

It can be summed up in a couple of [[phrase]]: it's very [[hot]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very [[murderous]] - with the [[genera]] of gore [[popularly]] [[reserve]] for splatter [[cinematography]], and [[guy]] is it well [[drafted]]. [[Novelist]] / [[superintendent]] De Palma's script is OK but it [[truly]] takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is [[heavily]] successful on a visceral [[grades]] and I [[genuinely]] [[got]] [[implicated]] / interested with these [[nature]]. I can notice the standard De [[Parma]] homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at [[fewer]] from one of the Master's [[photographed]].

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife [[Juventus]] Allen (after "Carrie" and "[[Dwellings]] [[Theater]]".)

By the [[pathway]], dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production [[assistant]]. There's a [[bitten]] of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller [[would]] be classy and bloody at the same time but this [[photo]] [[pulled]] it off.

One of the [[nicest]] [[matters]] about it is a [[traditionally]] [[dramatic]] Pino Donaggio [[musicians]] [[notation]].

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Yes it was a [[little]] low budget, but this [[movie]] [[shows]] [[love]]! The only [[bad]] things about it was that you can tell the budget on this [[film]] [[would]] not [[compare]] to "Waterworld" and [[though]] the plot was good, the film never really tapped into it's full potential! Strong performances from [[everyone]] and the [[suspense]] makes it [[worthwhile]] to watch on a rainy [[night]]. Yes it was a [[scant]] low budget, but this [[film]] [[illustrates]] [[likes]]! The only [[naughty]] things about it was that you can tell the budget on this [[cinematic]] [[ought]] not [[comparison]] to "Waterworld" and [[despite]] the plot was good, the film never really tapped into it's full potential! Strong performances from [[someone]] and the [[wait]] makes it [[useful]] to watch on a rainy [[nocturne]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1487 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a fairly creepy [[movie]]; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three [[problems]] with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. [[All]] in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite. This was a fairly creepy [[filmmaking]]; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three [[disorders]] with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. [[Entire]] in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When an actor has to play the role of an actor, fictional or factual, the task becomes much more difficult than playing a role. In A Double Life,Ronald Coleman surpassed himself as Anthony John, the tortured double personality. He put into that character all his talent and sincerity. The facial expressions, mannerisms,gait and stance spoke eloquently of what Anthony John was going through while playing Othello on stage. Coleman also did extremely well as a Shakespearean actor in those short scenes as Othello that were part of this gem of a movie. Closups of Coleman's face as Othello tortured by doubts about the fidelity of Desdemona were in themselves scenes worth watching.Add to that, his character's off stage desperation and only someone with Coleman's depth of acting perception can achieve. It was like watching Spenser Tracy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, except this double role was much more profound and poignant. Shelly Winters looked so sweet, vulnerable and gorgeous at the same time and added her talent to the movie. It is believed that Ronald Coleman liked his role in this film above all others he played and went on to win the Oscar for Best Actor in 1947. I would see this movie repeatedly and never feel bored. --------------------------------------------- Result 1489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Panic In The Streets opens in high noir style, a view along a dark street followed by a camera tilt upwards to a window, behind which is playing out a sleazy card game - an opening flourish which, along with some of the location shooting, anticipates some of the atmosphere Welles brought a decade later in Touch Of Evil. One of the players throws open the window; it's an appropriate action, serving as an introduction to the events within as well as literally opening up our first view of the underworld.

Shot in high contrast black and white, Panic In The Streets benefits immensely from a strong cast as well as some fine location shooting in New Orleans. Scenes set in such places as the mortuary, the crowded shipping office or amidst the peeling paint of 'Frank's Place' offer a unique, and sometimes claustrophobic atmosphere, impossible to recreate in the studio. With these elements, Kazan's film shows the influence of Dassin's groundbreaking Naked City of two years earlier, which established the gritty, almost documentary style within the noir cycle. In fact, Widmark's previous role had been in Dassin's even finer Night And The City, a film in which a sense of rising panic was even more prevalent. Joe MacDonald, a favourite with the director, photographed Panic In The Streets' detailed environment. MacDonald also worked on Kazan's Pinky and Viva Zapata!, and went on to shoot Widmark again three years later in Fuller's masterpiece Pick Up On South Street.

As others have noticed, in a manner typical of some noir films, Kazan's work offers a contrast between the confusion, sickness and immorality of the streets with the modest, calm home life of the Reeds. But whereas (for instance) in Lang's The Big Heat (1953) the home life of the hero is destroyed by elements of vice surrounding the embattled central character - ultimately sending him back to work with an increased vigilance and sense of vengeance - Panic In The Streets places Reed's rising anxiousness within the confines of what amounts to just another working 'day'. Despite all the danger, ultimately he returns back to the bosom of his family justified and satisfied. The implication being that social balance has been restored, at least for the moment by his professionalism and curative skills.

That imbalance of course, has been created by crime and disease. The two are closely associated in this film. It reminds one of the tagline from the much cruder Cobra (1986) - where "Crime is the disease. Meet the cure," a neat analogy in context, if one which rings too uncomfortably of social reductionism. At its climax, as Blackie attempts to flee aboard ship, the visuals specifically allude to rats as being similar to criminals, both posing a menace to society's health. As (the presumably infected) Blackie prowls round the cheap rooms and the docks with his cronies, in search of something he suspects everyone is after, if without knowing exactly what it is, 'plague' and 'Blackie' resonate together in the audiences mind, adding further to connected associations. Ironically Blackie's hunch about Poldi's unfortunate cousin, that "he brought something in" of note is correct - even if, finally, its nothing he can sell or steal. Blackie's logical assumption that the police would not normally bother with the murder of some anonymous illegal immigrant has a ring of truth about it, and his so confusion is understandable.

Dr Reed, although home-loving, and on the side of society, is a true noir hero. Familiar to the genre is the chief protagonist as a man who walks alone, forced to travel beyond the limits of the law. In his way, Reed is forced to take morality into his own hands for the sake of society at large - a dimension of the film that is particularly apposite, given director Kazan's controversial personal history. The director testified before the infamous HUAC, naming suspected communists and fellow travellers. His film depicts suspects being hauled in for questioning, and the manhandling of the press, on the grounds that the overriding public good justified the means. These actions perhaps echo the director's sentiments at the time, presumably accepting the McCarthyite witch hunt and the suppression of civil rights it entailed in the light of presumed communist infiltration of the entertainment industry. In these times of terrorist threats and state response, such issues as they appear in the film are strikingly modern.

Standout scenes in the film include a notable scene where Blackie interrogates the dying Poldi as to the precise nature of his cousin's presumed contraband. Cat like, Blackie stalks his victim across the room, eventually preying over the doomed man's sick bed, holding Poldi's feverish head in his hands - a striking, evil cradling. It's a gesture emphasising the intimate nature of corruption, whether moral or physical. Apparently, the actors did many or all of their own stunts, which leads to some other, very dramatic scenes at the end, as the police and health authorities close in on the villains under the wharfs. Half crawling, half scrambling over the slippery timbers at the edge of the dock pool must have been an experience very uncomfortable for Palance, but it is sequence that adds immensely to the immediacy of it all.

Occasionally less convincing elements distract the viewer. Apparently Dr Reed is left to fight a potential national emergency little government backup. Perhaps just as astonishingly, he never inoculates himself - inviting a dramatic turn which never materialises. At the end of the film, too, the potential epidemic has been halted, all contactees located, a little too neatly. But these weaknesses are more than outweighed by the other satisfactions of a film that still makes for compulsive and relevant viewing today. --------------------------------------------- Result 1490 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I watched half of this movie and I didn't like it.

First reason: Boring. Barely anything happens, the women sit around and discuss how terrible their lives are and how they have no hope, they smoke weed, read magazines, care for their sick friend, and cut up the occasional dead body. BORING!!!!

Second reason: There are too many things left unexplained. Many scenes are dedicated to a zombie hunter who kidnaps random men, restrains them in a chair and interrogates them. Who are these men? How do they know anything about illegal activity concerning the diseased flesh eaters? Why does he kill one and let another one go?

Also there is this dude who at first I thought also had the flesh eating disease but he puts his fist through a wall with superhuman strength suggesting he's not quite what we originally thought-never explained! How frustrating is that?

Conclusion: I found the women annoying, the story uninteresting, the duologue tedious, and the action non-existent. Also the cover art is misleading since it makes you believe this movie is going to be cool when it clearly isn't. I rented this movie based on some of the reviews made by other people on this website, and although I respect the fact that some people might have enjoyed this flick, I will from now on make sure I read more than two reviews deep into a movie so as to avoid renting another movie I regret seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I was a kid I watched this many times over, and I remember whistling the "Happy Cat" song quite often. All the songs are great, and actually memorable, unlike many children's musicals, where the songs are just stuck in for no real reason. The scenes and costumes are lavish, and the acting is very well-done, which isn't surprising, considering the cast. Christopher Walken is very catlike, and doesn't need stupid make-up, or a cat costume for the viewer to believe he's a cat transformed to a human. And Jason Connery's so cute, as the shy and awkward miller's son, Corin, who falls in love with beautiful and the bold Princess Vera. This is a really fun, enjoyable, feature-length movie, where unlike most fairytales, the characters are given personalities. Some of my favourite parts are when Puss makes Corin pretend he's drowning; at the ball when everybody starts dancing a country dance, as it's "all the rage abroad"; when Walken is in the kitchen, dancing on the table (he's a pretty good dancer, too!); and when Vera tells Corin all the things she used to do when she was young, like pretending she was a miller's daughter. I'd recommend this film to children and parents alike, who love magic and fairytales. And it actually IS a movie you can watch together, as it won't drive adults up the wall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a [[movie]]: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a [[broken]] fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. [[Imagine]] stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the [[idea]] of [[Broken]], though there's no detectives in this [[movie]], I'm just using it as a [[visual]] [[example]]. But, the intense looking [[woman]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect [[choice]] for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded [[individual]] who can find enjoyment out of all [[kinds]] of [[artistic]] [[expressions]] and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It [[would]] be really cool if I can [[frame]] one of the scene from this [[movie]] and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the [[problem]] of this [[movie]]. Beyond the [[mood]], there's not much [[anything]] [[else]] here. The director basically took an obsession of an [[idea]] and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't [[consider]] it to be a spoiler if I [[say]] the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this [[singular]] idea is all over the [[bloody]] place and that's all the [[director]] got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art [[since]] I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a [[piece]] of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good [[story]] and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making [[cheating]]. It is [[irresponsible]] and [[cheap]] and a [[waste]] of the [[medium]]. We [[gave]] [[movies]] 2 hours running film [[time]] for a [[good]] [[reason]]. [[Therefore]], we should [[judge]] it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a [[filmmaking]]: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a [[broke]] fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. [[Guess]] stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the [[brainchild]] of [[Ruptured]], though there's no detectives in this [[film]], I'm just using it as a [[optic]] [[instance]]. But, the intense looking [[mujer]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect [[selection]] for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded [[person]] who can find enjoyment out of all [[class]] of [[artsy]] [[phrase]] and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It [[could]] be really cool if I can [[fabric]] one of the scene from this [[filmmaking]] and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the [[difficulty]] of this [[kino]]. Beyond the [[ambiance]], there's not much [[nada]] [[elsewhere]] here. The director basically took an obsession of an [[inkling]] and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't [[considering]] it to be a spoiler if I [[said]] the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this [[exclusive]] idea is all over the [[bloodstained]] place and that's all the [[superintendent]] got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art [[because]] I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a [[slice]] of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good [[storytelling]] and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making [[swindling]]. It is [[feckless]] and [[inexpensive]] and a [[wastes]] of the [[milieu]]. We [[delivered]] [[cinematography]] 2 hours running film [[times]] for a [[alright]] [[reasons]]. [[So]], we should [[magistrate]] it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. --------------------------------------------- Result 1493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked it but then I think I might have been ironing at the same time. This reworking of Cyrano de Bergerac/Roxanne is an utterly undemanding, formulaic romcom rescued from straight-to-video ignominy on its release by the sharp turn of Janeane Garofalo. Playing the Frasier of Pets, she finds herself caught in a love trap when insecurity leads her to pass her best friend (Uma Thurman) off as herself when a caller comes a-courtin'.

This is an interesting film in the fascinating career of Ben Chaplin. An average British actor, he gave the Hollywood treadmill a shot with this film. He is unremarkable and his anonymity in studio productions is unsurprising on the basis of it, although he has appeared in substantial cameos in both the later Terence Malick films. Uma Thurman does a ditzy turn on autopilot and Michael Lehmann packages it all together competently. Icky phone sex though. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] SYNOPSIS The [[future]] as [[seen]] from 1939 England. As war loomed over [[Europe]], the salvation of mankind will not be [[found]] in the [[politics]] of the [[past]]. It is up to the [[brave]] [[new]] world of science to overcome man's past [[mistakes]].

CONCEPT [[IN]] [[RELATION]] [[TO]] THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. [[Thinking]] [[outside]] the box can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will [[always]] be [[descent]] and [[fear]], and [[learning]] to [[overcome]] it is our only hope.

PROS AND [[CONS]] I had seen this [[film]] long ago and [[recently]] [[downloaded]] it off of the internet (it is in the public [[domain]]). This is a [[fascinating]] [[work]] on [[numerous]] [[levels]]. Since it is a [[story]] about the [[future]] as [[seen]] from 1939, it has [[obvious]] flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[whimsical]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very good as is the story line. The acting suffers a bit in the British theatrical sense, in that it can lean a bit toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying themes of the film is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not always true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a curse of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of almost all later science fiction movies can be seen in this film. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of technology in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the [[lush]] landscapes / cityscapes of "Star Wars" owe some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the viewer a bit perplexed. While it is optimistic in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This films vision of the future while interesting is [[also]] a bit humorous by todays standards. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next logical step.

Many great British actors are in this film as young men. Cedric Hardwicke and Ralph Richardson are the most recognized and their oratory skills are evident here. Raymond Massey is a curious choice to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. SYNOPSIS The [[upcoming]] as [[noticed]] from 1939 England. As war loomed over [[Eu]], the salvation of mankind will not be [[find]] in the [[politically]] of the [[former]]. It is up to the [[adventurous]] [[novel]] world of science to overcome man's past [[error]].

CONCEPT [[AT]] [[RELATING]] [[AUX]] THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. [[Think]] [[outdoor]] the box can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will [[incessantly]] be [[progeny]] and [[scare]], and [[taught]] to [[overcoming]] it is our only hope.

PROS AND [[SCHMUCKS]] I had seen this [[movie]] long ago and [[freshly]] [[offload]] it off of the internet (it is in the public [[realm]]). This is a [[exciting]] [[collaboration]] on [[many]] [[grades]]. Since it is a [[history]] about the [[forthcoming]] as [[watched]] from 1939, it has [[unmistakable]] flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[temperamental]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very good as is the story line. The acting suffers a bit in the British theatrical sense, in that it can lean a bit toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying themes of the film is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not always true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a curse of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of almost all later science fiction movies can be seen in this film. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of technology in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the [[opulent]] landscapes / cityscapes of "Star Wars" owe some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the viewer a bit perplexed. While it is optimistic in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This films vision of the future while interesting is [[apart]] a bit humorous by todays standards. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next logical step.

Many great British actors are in this film as young men. Cedric Hardwicke and Ralph Richardson are the most recognized and their oratory skills are evident here. Raymond Massey is a curious choice to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 1495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Making a [[book]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye [[opus]] is [[different]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're [[always]] [[going]] to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

[[Although]] it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many [[moments]] of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled [[onto]] the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have [[music]] video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a [[horror]] movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), [[working]] from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and [[probably]] one of his [[better]] ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost [[perfect]], except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. Making a [[ledger]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye [[contrary]] is [[multiple]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're [[permanently]] [[go]] to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

[[While]] it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many [[times]] of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled [[for]] the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have [[musicians]] video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a [[abomination]] movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), [[collaborating]] from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and [[presumably]] one of his [[improved]] ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost [[perfecting]], except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. --------------------------------------------- Result 1496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] How can a movie that features the singing of [[Curtis]] Mayfield be [[bad]]? It can't! The Groove [[Tube]] is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of [[anything]] from 2001 to the olympics. The [[highs]], (Koko the [[clown]], the [[easy]] lube [[recipe]]) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The [[Dealers]]"), but [[even]] the lows are funny. [[Best]] of all is [[Ken]] Shapiro's [[manic]] [[dance]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat [[King]] [[Cole]] [[singing]] [[Just]] You, Just Me). Definitely [[dated]] now, but at the [[time]] The [[Groove]] Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. [[Ken]] Shapiro made this [[minor]] [[cult]] hit, then 7 years [[later]] [[made]] the [[Christmas]] day opening [[bomb]], [[Modern]] [[Problems]] ([[though]] I [[enjoyed]] it} and since then, [[unfortunately]], nothing.(He [[could]] [[possibly]] be playing drums in a [[jazz]] [[group]]) The [[Groove]] [[Tube]] remains to me an [[unending]] [[burst]] of [[positive]] [[energy]], a movie that 26 [[years]] after my [[initial]] [[viewing]], still [[brings]] me [[real]] [[joy]]! How can a movie that features the singing of [[Curtiss]] Mayfield be [[horrid]]? It can't! The Groove [[Tubing]] is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of [[nada]] from 2001 to the olympics. The [[altitudes]], (Koko the [[jester]], the [[uncomplicated]] lube [[recipes]]) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The [[Vendors]]"), but [[yet]] the lows are funny. [[Better]] of all is [[Keene]] Shapiro's [[fussy]] [[dancers]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat [[Emperor]] [[Uss]] [[sing]] [[Jen]] You, Just Me). Definitely [[dating]] now, but at the [[times]] The [[Slit]] Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. [[Kent]] Shapiro made this [[smaller]] [[worship]] hit, then 7 years [[then]] [[accomplished]] the [[Kringle]] day opening [[explodes]], [[Contemporary]] [[Problem]] ([[if]] I [[liked]] it} and since then, [[regrettably]], nothing.(He [[would]] [[potentially]] be playing drums in a [[jaz]] [[cluster]]) The [[Slot]] [[Duct]] remains to me an [[endless]] [[blasting]] of [[supportive]] [[energies]], a movie that 26 [[olds]] after my [[preliminary]] [[opinion]], still [[bring]] me [[actual]] [[gladness]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this [[film]].Now a [[lot]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't [[even]] [[bother]] [[watching]] it.Very [[unfair]] to [[say]] the [[least]].[[David]] [[made]] his name on the x-files and is a decent [[actor]]. Dr [[Eugene]] Sands(Duchovny)is a drug addicted [[doctor]] [[struck]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[accident]] he becomes a [[private]] doctor for criminal [[millionaire]] Raymond [[Blossom]].[[However]] the FBI [[take]] an interest in [[using]] Eugene to snare [[Blossom]]. Angelina Jolie is cast in the supporting role of clare-the gangsters moll.She puts in a solid performance. Timothy Hutton [[playing]] Blossom is [[superb]] and [[immersed]] himself [[deeply]] into his character. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as [[many]] people [[would]] [[think]] and in the [[end]] i would [[rate]] his performance his [[credible]].[[His]] familiar [[monotonous]] tone and [[straight]] [[face]] is present but dosen't [[detract]] too much from the [[film]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this [[cinematography]].Now a [[batch]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't [[yet]] [[irritate]] [[staring]] it.Very [[unjust]] to [[says]] the [[fewer]].[[Davids]] [[introduced]] his name on the x-files and is a decent [[protagonist]]. Dr [[Kessler]] Sands(Duchovny)is a drug addicted [[physicians]] [[knocked]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[incident]] he becomes a [[privy]] doctor for criminal [[billionaire]] Raymond [[Flowering]].[[Still]] the FBI [[taking]] an interest in [[utilizing]] Eugene to snare [[Lotus]]. Angelina Jolie is cast in the supporting role of clare-the gangsters moll.She puts in a solid performance. Timothy Hutton [[gaming]] Blossom is [[handsome]] and [[inundated]] himself [[crucially]] into his character. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as [[several]] people [[could]] [[believing]] and in the [[termination]] i would [[rates]] his performance his [[plausible]].[[Her]] familiar [[tedious]] tone and [[successive]] [[confront]] is present but dosen't [[divert]] too much from the [[cinematography]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[wonderful]] film.

I have often thought that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[wondrous]] film.

I have often thought that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 1499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I just [[thought]] it was [[excellent]] and I [[still]] do. I'm [[grateful]] we're [[still]] [[able]] to [[see]] [[different]] [[stuff]] from what Hollywood [[almost]] floods us with. Saving Grace is [[smart]] and [[enjoyable]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana [[thing]] better go [[see]] the America's [[bride]] [[sort]] of [[movie]].

[[Saving]] Grace also [[shows]] that a funny [[movie]] doesn't have to be [[stupid]]. I was laughing my [[ass]] off during most of it but [[also]] pondering questions about what was the female lead [[character]] [[supposed]] to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

[[In]] a nutshell - a [[witty]] storyline with typical [[English]] [[humour]] and good acting and directing. You couldn't [[ask]] for more.

7/10. I just [[ideology]] it was [[remarkable]] and I [[however]] do. I'm [[thankful]] we're [[however]] [[capable]] to [[behold]] [[diversified]] [[thing]] from what Hollywood [[approximately]] floods us with. Saving Grace is [[artful]] and [[nice]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana [[stuff]] better go [[behold]] the America's [[fiance]] [[kinds]] of [[cinematography]].

[[Rescuing]] Grace also [[exhibition]] that a funny [[movies]] doesn't have to be [[dolt]]. I was laughing my [[backside]] off during most of it but [[further]] pondering questions about what was the female lead [[nature]] [[alleged]] to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

[[During]] a nutshell - a [[spiritual]] storyline with typical [[Francais]] [[comedy]] and good acting and directing. You couldn't [[asked]] for more.

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Until now, the [[worst]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should [[check]] the reviews for that [[movie]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this [[movie]] have been skewed [[positive]] through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people [[involved]] in [[making]] it, evidence for which is fairly easy to [[uncover]] online. At least the people who made Ben & [[Arthur]] were [[honorable]] enough to let it stand on its own [[shaky]] legs, instead of unscrupulously [[promoting]] it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[terrible]], the [[script]], the [[story]], the [[casting]], the acting, the [[direction]], the [[photography]], the editing, the music... what else goes into a [[movie]]? [[Whatever]] it is, here it's as [[bad]] as it gets. If it weren't so [[unpleasant]] it [[would]] be [[ridiculous]]. I [[kept]] watching it [[thinking]] it must get better, because I hadn't [[yet]] [[discovered]] that [[none]] of the [[positive]] [[reviews]] for it are [[reliable]].

It does not [[take]] a [[lot]] of [[money]] to [[make]] a [[great]] [[movie]], nor does a low budget [[mean]] a [[movie]] has to be [[bad]]. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget [[masterpiece]] is Gus Van Sant's [[amazing]] Mala Noche, but there are [[many]] others. Sideline Secrets—Director's [[Cut]] or [[original]]—is [[bad]] not because the people who [[made]] it had no [[money]], but because they had [[gigantic]] egos and no talent for [[anything]] at all except self-promotion. Until now, the [[meanest]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should [[cheques]] the reviews for that [[movies]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this [[filmmaking]] have been skewed [[affirmative]] through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people [[implicated]] in [[doing]] it, evidence for which is fairly easy to [[unmask]] online. At least the people who made Ben & [[Arturo]] were [[honourable]] enough to let it stand on its own [[volatile]] legs, instead of unscrupulously [[boosting]] it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[scary]], the [[screenplay]], the [[tales]], the [[pouring]], the acting, the [[directions]], the [[pictures]], the editing, the music... what else goes into a [[filmmaking]]? [[Whichever]] it is, here it's as [[unfavourable]] as it gets. If it weren't so [[nasty]] it [[could]] be [[grotesque]]. I [[maintained]] watching it [[think]] it must get better, because I hadn't [[again]] [[detected]] that [[nothingness]] of the [[conducive]] [[exams]] for it are [[trustworthy]].

It does not [[taking]] a [[lots]] of [[cash]] to [[deliver]] a [[prodigious]] [[film]], nor does a low budget [[imply]] a [[filmmaking]] has to be [[inclement]]. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget [[centerpiece]] is Gus Van Sant's [[startling]] Mala Noche, but there are [[countless]] others. Sideline Secrets—Director's [[Chopped]] or [[initial]]—is [[unfavourable]] not because the people who [[introduced]] it had no [[cash]], but because they had [[prodigious]] egos and no talent for [[somethings]] at all except self-promotion. --------------------------------------------- Result 1501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant [[show]] for its first four or five years and I [[bet]] I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a [[young]] adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[pathetic]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had [[deteriorated]] so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant [[exhibition]] for its first four or five years and I [[wagered]] I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a [[youthful]] adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[deplorable]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had [[worsening]] so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite --------------------------------------------- Result 1502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This movie commits what I [[would]] call an emotional [[rape]] on the viewer. The [[movie]] [[supposedly]] [[caused]] quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[pathetic]] [[attempt]] for a newbie [[director]] to get himself [[noticed]]. [[Hardly]] a [[voice]] in the [[discussion]] on the issue of violence, [[drug]] abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but [[troubled]] boy to the [[vicious]] rapist is [[virtually]] nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated [[version]] of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I [[refuse]] to comment on its [[aesthetic]] values. There are some things an [[artist]] should not do to [[try]] and [[achieve]] his/her [[goal]]. [[At]] [[least]] in my [[opinion]].

To [[wrap]] it up: [[shockingly]] brutal, [[revolting]] and [[NOT]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" [[instead]]. This movie commits what I [[could]] call an emotional [[violating]] on the viewer. The [[filmmaking]] [[reportedly]] [[provoked]] quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[unfortunate]] [[try]] for a newbie [[superintendent]] to get himself [[observed]]. [[Practically]] a [[vocal]] in the [[debate]] on the issue of violence, [[medications]] abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but [[restless]] boy to the [[cruel]] rapist is [[almost]] nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated [[stepping]] of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I [[dismiss]] to comment on its [[cosmetic]] values. There are some things an [[painters]] should not do to [[tries]] and [[attain]] his/her [[intention]]. [[During]] [[lowest]] in my [[viewing]].

To [[adjusting]] it up: [[marvellously]] brutal, [[abhorrent]] and [[NOPE]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" [[conversely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1503 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[saw]] this recently and I [[must]] [[say]], I was moved by the factual [[basis]] of the [[story]]. [[However]], "[[Holly]]" as a [[movie]] did not quite [[work]]. I am however, [[looking]] forward to watching the documentary which the producers who [[organised]] this project had [[made]] because I think that would be a [[much]] more [[compelling]] [[work]] than this film.

The international [[cast]] was [[composed]] of B-class [[actors]] but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[mention]] for the young [[actress]] who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most [[challenging]] part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and [[intention]], but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. I [[noticed]] this recently and I [[gotta]] [[tell]], I was moved by the factual [[fundamentals]] of the [[conte]]. [[Instead]], "[[Hol]]" as a [[filmmaking]] did not quite [[jobs]]. I am however, [[researching]] forward to watching the documentary which the producers who [[arrange]] this project had [[effected]] because I think that would be a [[very]] more [[cogent]] [[jobs]] than this film.

The international [[casting]] was [[encompassing]] of B-class [[protagonists]] but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[referenced]] for the young [[actor]] who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most [[tough]] part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and [[ambition]], but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This foolish, implausible tale is redeemed only by the opening scene in which a hard-boiled police detective delivers some nearly-audible lines confirming our greatest fears: He is dead. Perhaps the film would have been saved had the director forgone the dazzling star power of A. Martinez in favor of this sadly-anonymous actor who filled the screen for a brief moment. That a no-name hack-tor off the street could salvage such a dishwater film is no less likely than a villain committing murder by dropping stones into a quarry for an unsuspecting diver. His moment is brief; his promise is immense. Perhaps we will be treated to more screen time by this obscure thespian if there is ever a sequel to this ill-advised film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Unless]] you are already familiar with the pop stars who star in this [[film]], [[save]] yourself the [[time]] and stop reading this review after you've [[reached]] the end of the next [[sentence]].

[[FORGET]] [[YOU]] EVER STUMBLED [[UPON]] THIS [[FILM]] AND GO WATCH [[SOMETHING]] [[ELSE]].

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[vehicle]] for Japanese teen [[idol]] pretty-boys featuring [[nonsensical]], convoluted "plot" that drags out for an insufferable [[amount]] of time until you're ready to [[scream]].

[[Nothing]] in this [[film]] makes sense. It's an [[endless]] series of people expressing [[various]] emotions, from [[joy]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, [[FOR]] [[NO]] [[GOOD]] [[REASON]]. We can [[obviously]] [[see]] something incredibly "[[dramatic]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[CRAP]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the time this [[film]] is over, you will be sick and tired of these stupid, lanky, girly stars' [[faces]]. You'll be [[revolted]] at having [[spent]] all this [[time]] watching them [[smile]], sneer, cry, look [[mysterious]], be "[[serious]]," and any other [[pointless]] [[expression]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[moron]] [[would]] ever [[go]] so far as to refer to this [[piece]] of [[insipid]] trash as being the "soul" of any of its "[[actors]]" should [[prove]] to you beyond the [[shadow]] of a doubt what the [[trailer]] and countless adoring [[comments]] on this site will not [[tell]] you:

[[Only]] the "[[converted]]," mindless [[minions]] will [[like]] this [[film]], the majority of them [[teenage]] [[girls]] with a pathological adoration for [[anything]] androgynous. [[Freud]] [[would]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[mindless]] "[[fans]]," [[stay]] the hell away from this [[abomination]]. [[If]] you are already familiar with the pop stars who star in this [[filmmaking]], [[rescuing]] yourself the [[moment]] and stop reading this review after you've [[attained]] the end of the next [[condemnation]].

[[FORGOTTEN]] [[TOI]] EVER STUMBLED [[AFTERWARD]] THIS [[FILMMAKING]] AND GO WATCH [[ANYTHING]] [[OTHERWISE]].

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[autos]] for Japanese teen [[heroine]] pretty-boys featuring [[farcical]], convoluted "plot" that drags out for an insufferable [[somme]] of time until you're ready to [[cris]].

[[Nada]] in this [[filmmaking]] makes sense. It's an [[infinite]] series of people expressing [[different]] emotions, from [[delight]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, [[ONTO]] [[NONE]] [[WELL]] [[REASONS]]. We can [[definitely]] [[seeing]] something incredibly "[[tremendous]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[BULLSHIT]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the time this [[filmmaking]] is over, you will be sick and tired of these stupid, lanky, girly stars' [[facing]]. You'll be [[rebelled]] at having [[spending]] all this [[times]] watching them [[grin]], sneer, cry, look [[opaque]], be "[[severe]]," and any other [[vain]] [[phrase]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[witless]] [[should]] ever [[going]] so far as to refer to this [[slice]] of [[tacky]] trash as being the "soul" of any of its "[[players]]" should [[proves]] to you beyond the [[shade]] of a doubt what the [[trailers]] and countless adoring [[commentaries]] on this site will not [[told]] you:

[[Exclusively]] the "[[transformed]]," mindless [[daemons]] will [[adores]] this [[flick]], the majority of them [[schoolgirl]] [[females]] with a pathological adoration for [[something]] androgynous. [[Floyd]] [[should]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[reckless]] "[[amateurs]]," [[staying]] the hell away from this [[monstrosity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first "Home Alone" was one of the funniest movies of the 90's. The second was just as funny with the same cast and jokes! Now comes "Home Alone 3". I was curious how they could continue with the same story considering Kevin would've been 17 by 1997. He could take care of himself, right? So, what does the director decide to do? He takes a child just as annoying and makes him sick. The kid is like 6 years old and the mother leaves him alone in the house? What kind of team of burgerlers are these idiots? I don't really want to get too into detail if you want to sadly see this movie. But please, I'd recommend that you'd stay away from it. It's not worth your precious time. Go fold a piece of paper, do chores, balance a pencil on your nose, or take a nap! It's better to do then to watch "Home Alone 3"!

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] A typical 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good [[music]], but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, poor and at [[times]] [[confused]] storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with poor [[dialogue]], nice ambiance.

The reason it is still ([[relatively]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[nude]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy ([[Eva]] Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story [[revolves]] round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her [[discovery]] of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not [[evolve]] to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain [[young]] girl who is already [[aware]] of her sexual [[charms]], but [[ultimately]] is just used and [[ends]] the [[film]] [[crying]] like the [[little]] girl she really still is. The [[boy]] is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and [[weak]] victim. A typical 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good [[musica]], but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, poor and at [[period]] [[disconcerted]] storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with poor [[conversation]], nice ambiance.

The reason it is still ([[comparatively]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[naked]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy ([[Evy]] Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story [[turns]] round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her [[uncovering]] of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not [[evolving]] to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain [[youthful]] girl who is already [[mindful]] of her sexual [[psalms]], but [[eventually]] is just used and [[end]] the [[films]] [[mourning]] like the [[petite]] girl she really still is. The [[dude]] is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and [[vulnerable]] victim. --------------------------------------------- Result 1508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Some of the filmmakers who are participating in this series have made some really great films but they sure as heck are not showing much skill with this series. Particularly the writing. OK, the first season was somewhat better but these new episodes they are creating just stink. I'm a huge fan of horror and in my opinion the vast majority of these episodes are total garbage. Nothing new or genuinely interesting. Few of them are visually creative. It's just typical fabricated Hollywood crap, uninteresting, childish, poorly conceived and in some cases, flat out laughable. Much like Tales from the Crypt the only good thing this series has been offering is great nudity! Other then that this series blows hard. I get the impression sometimes that they hired a bunch of eighth-graders to write the episodes. Maybe they did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "GEORGE LOPEZ," in my opinion, is an absolute ABC classic! I haven't seen every episode, but I still enjoy it. There are many episodes that I enjoyed. One of them was where Amy (Sandra Bullock) walked into a moving piece of machinery. If you want to know why, you'll have to have seen it for yourself. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though new episodes can currently be seen, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1510 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Hilarious]] [[film]]. I saw this film at the 2002 [[Sydney]] [[Gay]] and Lesbian Mardi [[Gras]] Film Festival, and laughed from [[start]] to [[finish]]. The acting was [[subtle]] but very [[funny]]. I'm not [[entirely]] certain about "The [[Real]] [[World]]" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[film]] [[holds]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B [[steals]] [[every]] scene she appears in, most [[notably]] when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. Highly [[recommended]]. I'd love to [[see]] this released on Video/DVD some time in the [[future]]. [[Comical]] [[cinematography]]. I saw this film at the 2002 [[Sidney]] [[Homo]] and Lesbian Mardi [[Fats]] Film Festival, and laughed from [[launches]] to [[conclude]]. The acting was [[perceptive]] but very [[amusing]]. I'm not [[utterly]] certain about "The [[Reales]] [[Global]]" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[kino]] [[hold]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B [[itches]] [[each]] scene she appears in, most [[principally]] when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. Highly [[suggested]]. I'd love to [[seeing]] this released on Video/DVD some time in the [[futur]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Keanu Reeves stars as a friend of a popular high school student who suddenly commits suicide...he and his friends go through emotional turmoil and share their reactions to this horrible incident...Good acting by Reeves and a young Jennifer Rubin..but on the whole is a little too much.. 4 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've [[seen]] this film more than once now, and there's [[always]] someone [[complaining]] about the "[[obvious]] construction" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the [[rules]] of [[genre]].

It's very nice, how the [[highly]] [[improbable]] [[story]] of how the two [[girls]] (Timoteo/[[Hummer]]) [[meet]], is again mirrored in another, [[even]] more improbable [[story]], that the [[girls]] make up for a casting. This [[film]] is a [[journey]] between [[fact]] and fiction, it's more about potentials, [[things]] that [[might]] have [[happened]] in the past or might be happening in the [[future]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[sorts]] of - so [[apt]] enough there are a lot of [[motives]], Freud might have [[found]] interesting for his [[dream]] [[analysis]], like all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

Also, I [[think]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[watched]] in comparison to [[current]] Asian [[cinema]] of the [[uncanny]]: Petzold's [[everyday]] urban [[architecture]] [[also]] feels [[haunted]] in an unobtrusive, [[strangely]] [[familiar]] [[way]]. This [[film]] is not about the [[obvious]]. To [[describe]] it as the [[story]] of two girls who [[meet]] and [[eventually]] [[become]] [[friends]] and [[lovers]], or as the story of an orphaned [[mother]], who [[searches]] [[Europe]] for her lost daughter, [[clearly]] doesn't [[say]] much about the [[nature]] of "Gespenster" at all. I've [[watched]] this film more than once now, and there's [[permanently]] someone [[mooning]] about the "[[flagrant]] construction" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the [[regs]] of [[genera]].

It's very nice, how the [[exceptionally]] [[implausible]] [[tale]] of how the two [[daughter]] (Timoteo/[[Suv]]) [[cater]], is again mirrored in another, [[yet]] more improbable [[tale]], that the [[dame]] make up for a casting. This [[cinematography]] is a [[tour]] between [[facto]] and fiction, it's more about potentials, [[items]] that [[probable]] have [[arrived]] in the past or might be happening in the [[forthcoming]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[kind]] of - so [[probability]] enough there are a lot of [[motivation]], Freud might have [[unearthed]] interesting for his [[nightmares]] [[analyze]], like all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

Also, I [[believe]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[observed]] in comparison to [[underway]] Asian [[films]] of the [[supernatural]]: Petzold's [[daily]] urban [[structure]] [[further]] feels [[tormented]] in an unobtrusive, [[bizarrely]] [[colloquial]] [[camino]]. This [[kino]] is not about the [[observable]]. To [[outline]] it as the [[narratives]] of two girls who [[cater]] and [[ultimately]] [[gotten]] [[boyfriends]] and [[fans]], or as the story of an orphaned [[mothers]], who [[search]] [[Eu]] for her lost daughter, [[patently]] doesn't [[told]] much about the [[characters]] of "Gespenster" at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1513 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is an extremely funny and heartwarming story about an orphanage that is in financial trouble. When the director goes on vacation, his dad agrees to step in temporarily to run things.

This is positively the best work that Leslie Nielson has ever done. His idea in the film to rent out children is immediately innovative, and his sales techniques will definitely make you laugh.

The little girl in this movie is so sweet and charming that I know I will never forget her. Just make sure that you don't miss the first five minutes of the movie!

Such great family entertainment is so rare these days. If you go for slightly corny pictures with happy endings,go for this one! I could watch this over and over, and I often do! My only complaint about this movie is that it is so difficult to find a copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1514 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I disagree with much that has been [[written]] and [[said]] about this [[supposed]] "masterpiece" of the German [[New]] [[Wave]]:

1) There are major flaws in simple [[exposition]], in the [[basic]] [[communication]] of [[critical]] plot points, as [[relating]] to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many [[viewers]] [[understood]] that the husband [[agreed]], in [[exchange]] for [[substantial]] financial [[remuneration]], not to [[return]] to and [[reclaim]] his wife until Oswald was [[dead]]?

2) The ending is [[highly]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and [[accidental]]. The original [[screenplay]] [[called]] for [[Maria]] to [[commit]] suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in [[effect]] sold their [[marriage]] to Oswald. [[In]] the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet [[across]] her [[wrist]] in a [[gesture]] of suicide. Maria is then summarily [[blown]] up, [[rather]] than having to [[confront]] and [[live]] with the [[consequences]] of her self-delusion and [[moral]] compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to [[forcibly]] superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "[[experts]]" [[assert]], I don't [[think]] it [[works]]. [[Merely]] [[intruding]] historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German [[reconstruction]] in the soundtrack on the dramatic [[events]] of the movie does not make those [[historical]] [[events]] [[integral]] to the [[drama]].

The [[selfish]] [[ambition]] of Maria's [[rise]] from [[poverty]] to [[prosperity]] is [[meant]] to [[parallel]] the so-called economic miracle of postwar [[Germany]]. [[Maria]] is [[thus]] [[intended]] to be a [[woman]] [[specific]] to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of [[inexcusable]] sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. [[Unknown]] people talk off screen without ever being [[seen]]; [[music]] is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically [[substitutes]] for acting.

[[Strangely]], for a [[movie]] [[condemning]] a [[country]] for [[willful]] collective amnesia of the [[holocaust]], it itself never mentions it once. I disagree with much that has been [[wrote]] and [[says]] about this [[presumed]] "masterpiece" of the German [[Newer]] [[Waves]]:

1) There are major flaws in simple [[exhibitions]], in the [[fundamental]] [[interact]] of [[imperative]] plot points, as [[regarding]] to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many [[spectators]] [[comprehend]] that the husband [[accepted]], in [[exchanges]] for [[massive]] financial [[salary]], not to [[comeback]] to and [[reclaiming]] his wife until Oswald was [[deaths]]?

2) The ending is [[heavily]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and [[coincidental]]. The original [[scenarios]] [[termed]] for [[Mario]] to [[committed]] suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in [[effects]] sold their [[matrimony]] to Oswald. [[At]] the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet [[during]] her [[bracelet]] in a [[flick]] of suicide. Maria is then summarily [[melted]] up, [[quite]] than having to [[faces]] and [[vivo]] with the [[implications]] of her self-delusion and [[ethical]] compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to [[forcefully]] superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "[[specialists]]" [[argue]], I don't [[thought]] it [[collaborated]]. [[Only]] [[intrude]] historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German [[rebuild]] in the soundtrack on the dramatic [[event]] of the movie does not make those [[historic]] [[event]] [[inalienable]] to the [[opera]].

The [[egocentric]] [[aspiration]] of Maria's [[surge]] from [[destitution]] to [[affluence]] is [[signified]] to [[randomness]] the so-called economic miracle of postwar [[Deutschland]]. [[Mario]] is [[thereby]] [[designed]] to be a [[mujer]] [[concrete]] to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of [[unforgivable]] sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. [[Unbeknownst]] people talk off screen without ever being [[watched]]; [[musica]] is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically [[alternating]] for acting.

[[Surprisingly]], for a [[filmmaking]] [[denounced]] a [[nation]] for [[wilful]] collective amnesia of the [[shoah]], it itself never mentions it once. --------------------------------------------- Result 1515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Dear me... Peter [[Sellers]] was one of the most oddly [[talented]] actors there has been. But his [[choice]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[unfortunate]]. He didn't [[seem]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[seen]].

That said, the Boultings and Sellers had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor [[film]] and a [[dire]] choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter [[Sellers]] [[trying]] to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not [[convince]], [[try]] as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very [[artificial]] seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. [[Sellers]] has a very [[grating]] [[way]] of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no [[depth]], and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the [[magnificence]] of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they [[leave]] little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, [[misguided]] and lightly dull films I have ever [[seen]]. A nonentity of a "[[vehicle]]" for Sellers' [[undisputed]] talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** Dear me... Peter [[Distributor]] was one of the most oddly [[prodigy]] actors there has been. But his [[opt]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[hapless]]. He didn't [[looks]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[noticed]].

That said, the Boultings and Sellers had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor [[filmmaking]] and a [[tragic]] choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter [[Dealer]] [[seek]] to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not [[persuade]], [[seek]] as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very [[manmade]] seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. [[Dealer]] has a very [[grill]] [[manner]] of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no [[depths]], and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the [[grandeur]] of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they [[let]] little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, [[misspelled]] and lightly dull films I have ever [[noticed]]. A nonentity of a "[[auto]]" for Sellers' [[incontrovertible]] talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[watched]] this film not [[really]] expecting much, I got it in a pack of 5 films, all of which were [[pretty]] [[terrible]] in their own way for under a fiver so what could I [[expect]]? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this [[movie]] has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting points, the occasional camcorder view is a [[nice]] [[touch]], the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e [[damned]] annoying and, well thats about it [[actually]], the [[problem]] is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of [[nothing]] happens and when it does its utterly [[tedious]] (I had my thumb on the [[fast]] forward button, ready to [[press]] for most of the movie, but [[gave]] it a go) and seriously is the lead [[singer]] of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only [[reason]] to watch this and with the [[exception]] of London (who was actually [[quite]] [[funny]]) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've [[certainly]] seen a lot worse, but I've also [[seen]] a lot better. Best [[avoid]] unless your bored of watching paint [[dry]]. I [[saw]] this film not [[genuinely]] expecting much, I got it in a pack of 5 films, all of which were [[belle]] [[scary]] in their own way for under a fiver so what could I [[awaited]]? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this [[filmmaking]] has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting points, the occasional camcorder view is a [[enjoyable]] [[toque]], the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e [[cursed]] annoying and, well thats about it [[indeed]], the [[trouble]] is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of [[none]] happens and when it does its utterly [[monotonous]] (I had my thumb on the [[faster]] forward button, ready to [[pressing]] for most of the movie, but [[given]] it a go) and seriously is the lead [[singing]] of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only [[motif]] to watch this and with the [[exemptions]] of London (who was actually [[altogether]] [[hilarious]]) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've [[definitely]] seen a lot worse, but I've also [[watched]] a lot better. Best [[avert]] unless your bored of watching paint [[driest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite the mysteriously positive reviews and high rating, this is an awful movie. Awful enough, that l feel obligated to warn you how bad it is.

The movie is set in the final period of the Raj, during the time of India's fight for independence. What follows in the ridiculous plot just fills me with disbelief. What the characters do and how they behave just does not persuade me that the characters exist in that era.

For instance, would the young married Hindu housemaid from the local village have an affair with her married Englishman Master, knowing full well that discovery of the affair would likely mean utter social ostracization and shame if not mortal punishment? Unlikely, but still maybe. However, would the same young Hindu housemaid, in the conservative society of India of that era carry on like a half naked Britney Spears in heat, partake in hot outdoor sex during daylight in open view where they might be discovered at any moment? That is not only bloody unlikely, that is a retarded plot line.

Such idiocies combined with the poor acting, drove me to leave the cinema an hour into the movie, so i did not watch the second half of the movie. One could only hope the ending is of more intelligence than what i saw in the first half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is all about subtlety and the difficulty of navigating the ever-shifting limits of mores, race relations and desire. Granted, it is not a movie for everyone. There are no car chases, no buildings exploding, no murders. The drama lies in the tension suggested by glances, minimal gestures, spatial boundaries, lighting and things left -- sometimes very ostensibly -- unsaid. It's about identity, memory, community, belonging. The different parts of the movie work together to reinforce the leitmotifs of self and other, identity, desire, limits and loss. It will reward the attentive and sensitive viewer. It will displease those whose palates require explosive, massive, spicy action. It is a beautifully filmed human story. That is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1519 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] William Powell is Philo Vance in "The Kennel Murder Case," a 1933 film also starring Mary Astor, Paul Cavanagh, Eugene Palette, Helen Vinson and Ralph Morgan. A dog show in which Philo has entered his Scottish terrier Captain serves as the background for a locked room mystery with too many suspects. The mystery is very clever and the denouement both complicated and interesting. Since the talkies are still quite young, the camera work is a little static, but Michael Curtiz does a good job directing the action.

The supporting cast is excellent; the entire cast brings the film up a notch. Lots of actors have played Philo Vance, including Paul Lukas, Basil Rathbone, Wilford Hyde-White, Edmund Lowe, James Stephenson, Alan Curtis, Warren William and others. Powell played it the most (five times) and is the best fit for the role - very relaxed but serious at the same time. This was made before "The Thin Man" catapulted him to big stardom - he had spent about 12 years in film by then, beginning his career on stage in 1912 at the age of 20. A remarkable man, a remarkable screen presence and a remarkable actor who lived to be nearly 92. We're so lucky to have his films available on DVD and on TCM today. "The Kennel Murder Case" is a great story and a fun film - don't miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen! The acting, the dialog, the manuscript, the sound, the lighting, the plot line. I actually can't say anything positive about this, although I enjoy Swedish movies. The fighting scenes are so ridiculous that it's impossible to take it seriously. And when the lead character just happens to loose his shirt, while dodging bullets in a strip bar, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke, or if someone really thinks these are ingredients in a good film?! Regina Lund is the only half descent actor, but she disappears in a flood of laughable pronunciations and unbelievable reactions. It leaves you horrified that someone actually spent time and money on something like this... --------------------------------------------- Result 1521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Definitely]] at the top five of best [[John]] Garfield movies has to be Pride of the Marines. It's the [[true]] [[story]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the [[cost]] of his own sight, while wounded [[held]] off a horde of [[storming]] Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The story [[nicely]] [[segments]] in three parts, Al Schmid's [[home]] [[life]] where he's a [[simple]] working [[stiff]] who's just getting serious with a woman and who likes [[nothing]] better than his [[bowling]] night. Pearl [[Harbor]] is bombed and he's off to [[war]] as [[millions]] of others were.

The second [[part]] is at Guadalcanal and we see part of the action where he's in an [[isolated]] machine [[gun]] nest, holding off Japanese [[troops]]. [[His]] [[action]] prevented [[Marine]] positions from being overrun, but a [[grenade]] does in his eyesight.

And of course the third part is his painful [[adjustment]] to civilian [[life]] and to [[reassure]] himself that people aren't just [[caring]] for him out of [[pity]], most of all that girl he was seeing Eleanor Parker.

This film was broadcast on TCM on [[John]] Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a documentary on Garfield [[hosted]] by his daughter. One of the people interviewed said that Garfield was the actor most [[believable]] in working class roles in having and holding a union card.

In that respect he was lucky in that he did land with Warner Brothers in Hollywood. [[Though]] he kept getting typecast in [[gangster]] roles in the tradition of that studio, Garfield was [[terrific]] in these parts because of his [[background]], because he [[came]] from the [[kind]] of life Al Schmid had, with the [[exception]] of Garfield's Jewish [[background]].

[[In]] that [[respect]] he was [[perfect]] to [[play]] the part of a working [[class]] hero like Al Schmid who [[accepted]] the [[responsibility]] of defending his [[country]]. [[No]] [[super]] heroics here, just a [[guy]] who'd rather have been back in [[Philadelphia]], but doing a [[job]] that had to be done.

It's a great [[part]] for Garfield. It's a [[film]] one shouldn't miss. I do wonder [[though]] whatever happened to the [[real]] Al Schmid. [[Indubitably]] at the top five of best [[Johannes]] Garfield movies has to be Pride of the Marines. It's the [[real]] [[fairytales]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the [[fees]] of his own sight, while wounded [[holds]] off a horde of [[raiding]] Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The story [[politely]] [[slices]] in three parts, Al Schmid's [[houses]] [[vida]] where he's a [[mere]] working [[tough]] who's just getting serious with a woman and who likes [[anything]] better than his [[snooker]] night. Pearl [[Harbours]] is bombed and he's off to [[wars]] as [[billions]] of others were.

The second [[parties]] is at Guadalcanal and we see part of the action where he's in an [[segregated]] machine [[guns]] nest, holding off Japanese [[soldiers]]. [[Her]] [[efforts]] prevented [[Marina]] positions from being overrun, but a [[grenada]] does in his eyesight.

And of course the third part is his painful [[adaptation]] to civilian [[lifetime]] and to [[soothe]] himself that people aren't just [[care]] for him out of [[shame]], most of all that girl he was seeing Eleanor Parker.

This film was broadcast on TCM on [[Johannes]] Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a documentary on Garfield [[greeted]] by his daughter. One of the people interviewed said that Garfield was the actor most [[credible]] in working class roles in having and holding a union card.

In that respect he was lucky in that he did land with Warner Brothers in Hollywood. [[If]] he kept getting typecast in [[mobster]] roles in the tradition of that studio, Garfield was [[handsome]] in these parts because of his [[backdrop]], because he [[became]] from the [[sort]] of life Al Schmid had, with the [[exceptions]] of Garfield's Jewish [[backdrop]].

[[Across]] that [[respecting]] he was [[irreproachable]] to [[gaming]] the part of a working [[category]] hero like Al Schmid who [[consented]] the [[liability]] of defending his [[countries]]. [[Nope]] [[peachy]] heroics here, just a [[fella]] who'd rather have been back in [[Philly]], but doing a [[labour]] that had to be done.

It's a great [[portion]] for Garfield. It's a [[cinematography]] one shouldn't miss. I do wonder [[if]] whatever happened to the [[actual]] Al Schmid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Being a slasher film [[aficionado]], I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. While channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp [[II]] [[happened]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I [[wanted]] to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not [[seen]] the original, my [[criticism]] should [[probably]] not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is [[wrong]] with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm [[assuming]] that the [[franchise]] of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a [[joke]] on itself. [[Hell]], even the [[name]] comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for [[wanting]] to just put [[together]] [[something]] for pure camp [[horror]] [[value]], but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original [[Friday]] the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires [[bad]] acting, but [[come]] on. Pamela Springsteen as the [[evil]] out-of-touch-with-reality [[killer]] did a [[better]] job of killing off my interest than she did [[killing]] off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC [[II]] is pretty boring, and I [[really]] did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can [[barely]] [[appreciate]] them. If you're [[looking]] for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your [[channel]] surfing takes you [[across]] this one, check and see what else is on. Being a slasher film [[connoisseur]], I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. While channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp [[SECONDLY]] [[arrived]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I [[want]] to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not [[saw]] the original, my [[criticisms]] should [[arguably]] not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is [[improper]] with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm [[presuming]] that the [[franchises]] of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a [[giggle]] on itself. [[Whorehouse]], even the [[behalf]] comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for [[wants]] to just put [[whole]] [[somethin]] for pure camp [[terror]] [[values]], but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original [[Wednesday]] the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires [[unfavorable]] acting, but [[coming]] on. Pamela Springsteen as the [[demonic]] out-of-touch-with-reality [[slayer]] did a [[optimum]] job of killing off my interest than she did [[homicide]] off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC [[SECONDLY]] is pretty boring, and I [[genuinely]] did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can [[hardly]] [[thankful]] them. If you're [[researching]] for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your [[chanel]] surfing takes you [[in]] this one, check and see what else is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Cliffhanger is what [[appears]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[last]] [[action]] [[movie]] before he [[became]] such an underrated [[actor]]. It's about a mountain [[climber]] that [[must]] [[help]] his [[friend]] after being held hostage by [[mercenaries]] that [[want]] them to [[find]] three [[suitcases]] [[carrying]] money over 100 [[million]] [[dollars]]. It has great action sequence's, edge of your [[seat]] [[fun]] and a [[great]] [[time]] at the [[movies]]. Cliffhanger is what [[emerges]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[latter]] [[measures]] [[kino]] before he [[came]] such an underrated [[protagonist]]. It's about a mountain [[mountaineer]] that [[gotta]] [[helping]] his [[boyfriend]] after being held hostage by [[mercs]] that [[wants]] them to [[found]] three [[luggage]] [[carries]] money over 100 [[billion]] [[dollar]]. It has great action sequence's, edge of your [[seats]] [[amusing]] and a [[wondrous]] [[period]] at the [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1524 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Actually, the [[movie]] is neither horror nor Sci-Fi. With a very [[strong]] [[Christian]] [[religious]] [[theme]], this movie delivers [[minimal]] content and no [[suspense]]. Second-tier [[actors]] do half-decent [[jobs]] of reading their [[boring]] roles. The only good performance is by Sydney Penny who plays a role of a [[mother]] of ... I won't [[spoil]] the [[movie]], it's [[either]] [[Christ]] or Anti-Christ. [[Avoid]] watching this [[movie]] [[unless]] you a [[Christian]] religious [[fanatic]] obsessed with apocalypse.

[[Being]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this [[movie]] just because I wanted to [[write]] this [[review]]. It's a [[pity]] that Sci-Fi [[channel]] had to [[air]] this [[movie]] at the peak [[evening]] [[time]]. Actually, the [[filmmaking]] is neither horror nor Sci-Fi. With a very [[forceful]] [[Kristen]] [[ecclesiastical]] [[thematic]], this movie delivers [[small]] content and no [[wait]]. Second-tier [[actresses]] do half-decent [[workplace]] of reading their [[dull]] roles. The only good performance is by Sydney Penny who plays a role of a [[mommy]] of ... I won't [[ruin]] the [[flick]], it's [[neither]] [[God]] or Anti-Christ. [[Shirk]] watching this [[filmmaking]] [[if]] you a [[Cristian]] religious [[fanaticism]] obsessed with apocalypse.

[[Ongoing]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this [[filmmaking]] just because I wanted to [[writing]] this [[scrutinize]]. It's a [[compassion]] that Sci-Fi [[canals]] had to [[airforce]] this [[filmmaking]] at the peak [[tonight]] [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[like]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I saw this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that bad, it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[impressive]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I [[found]] it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott [[gave]] the [[best]] performance as a [[homicidal]] [[cop]]. [[Truly]] believable and [[really]] in [[character]], he [[freaked]] me out a [[couple]] of [[times]].

I was really [[expecting]] a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified [[action]] sequences, stuff like that, but it was [[surprisingly]] well [[done]] and I didn't find any of that. [[Every]] shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty [[solid]] [[really]].

[[overall]], [[amazing]] cast, decent [[story]] that [[kept]] me interested and just [[enough]] [[action]] to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't [[appear]] in [[theatres]], it was [[better]] than some [[garbage]] I've [[seen]] on the [[big]] screen. I [[would]] [[say]] it's worth seeing. First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[loves]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I saw this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that bad, it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[wondrous]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I [[uncovered]] it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott [[given]] the [[better]] performance as a [[manslaughter]] [[policeman]]. [[Truthfully]] believable and [[truly]] in [[characters]], he [[affraid]] me out a [[pair]] of [[period]].

I was really [[waiting]] a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified [[actions]] sequences, stuff like that, but it was [[unbelievably]] well [[completed]] and I didn't find any of that. [[Everything]] shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty [[robust]] [[truly]].

[[total]], [[wondrous]] cast, decent [[conte]] that [[preserved]] me interested and just [[adequate]] [[efforts]] to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't [[appearing]] in [[theatre]], it was [[best]] than some [[junk]] I've [[watched]] on the [[gargantuan]] screen. I [[should]] [[told]] it's worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1526 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This show is totally worth watching. It has the best cast of talent I have seen in a very long time. The premise of the show is unique and fresh ( I guess the executives at ABC are not used too that, as it was not another reality show). However this show was believable with likable characters and marvelous story lines. I am probably not in the age group they expect to like the show, as I am in my forty's, but a lot of my friends also loved it (Late 30's - mid 40's) and are dying for quality shows with talented cast members. I do not think this show was given enough time to gain an audience. I believe that given more time this show would have done very well. Once again ABC is not giving a show with real potential a real chance. With so many shows given chance after chance and not nearly worth it! They need to give quality shows a real chance and the time to really click and gain an audience. I really loved the characters and looked forward to watching each episode. I have been watching the episodes on ABC videos and the show keeps getting better and better. Although I think they owe us one more episode (Number 13?). We want to watch what we can! Bombard ABC with emails and letters and see if its possible to save this show from extinction. It certainly worked for Jerico. Some things are just worth saving and this show is definitely one of them. SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION TO ABC AT: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gh1215/petition.html --------------------------------------------- Result 1527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This is the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. I was going to [[get]] up and [[leave]] at [[Tape]] 4 but I [[stuck]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghanistan]]? [[Come]] on [[guys]]! Who's the [[idiot]] who [[forgot]] to [[hide]] the Sanskrit [[billboards]]? I [[thought]] the lead actor([[George]] Calil) was [[particularly]] [[inept]]. Apart from the [[bad]] acting and over [[zealous]] camera shake, I thought [[using]] the events of 9/11 as a reason to make "[[Larson]] the [[Lunatic]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[disgraceful]] and irreverent to the [[victims]] of 9/11. [[Using]] a [[phone]] [[call]] from Larson's [[wife]], [[Sarah]], [[supposedly]] from one of the terrorist [[held]] [[planes]] on that day, was [[appalling]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that cold hearted [[stunt]] did. This is the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I have ever [[noticed]]. I was going to [[obtain]] up and [[let]] at [[Cassettes]] 4 but I [[prude]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghans]]? [[Coming]] on [[buddies]]! Who's the [[dumb]] who [[forget]] to [[hides]] the Sanskrit [[billboard]]? I [[ideology]] the lead actor([[Georgy]] Calil) was [[peculiarly]] [[incompetent]]. Apart from the [[negative]] acting and over [[officious]] camera shake, I thought [[utilize]] the events of 9/11 as a reason to make "[[Larsen]] the [[Quirky]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[shameful]] and irreverent to the [[victim]] of 9/11. [[Utilizing]] a [[phones]] [[invitation]] from Larson's [[femme]], [[Sara]], [[seemingly]] from one of the terrorist [[hold]] [[airplane]] on that day, was [[shocking]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that cold hearted [[understudy]] did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1528 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[STAR]] [[RATING]]: ***** The Works **** [[Just]] Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** [[Lagging]] Behind * The Pits

[[In]] this [[debut]] effort for [[Nick]] Park's beloved man and [[dog]], they are forced to fly to the [[moon]] when good old Wallace [[runs]] out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest feature at just 22 [[minutes]], this W/G adventure is [[also]] the earliest and it kinda shows. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been [[hugely]] into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really [[enjoyed]] is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the [[hugely]] successful [[recent]] [[film]] adaptation.

As [[technically]] impressive as the first two (all [[things]] [[considered]]!) this one [[lacks]] the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's [[fairly]] good fun as a first try and [[certainly]] set the [[standard]] for [[greater]] [[things]] to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** [[SUPERSTAR]] [[RATINGS]]: ***** The Works **** [[Righteous]] Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** [[Backwards]] Behind * The Pits

[[During]] this [[infancy]] effort for [[Nicky]] Park's beloved man and [[canine]], they are forced to fly to the [[lune]] when good old Wallace [[manages]] out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest feature at just 22 [[mins]], this W/G adventure is [[additionally]] the earliest and it kinda shows. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been [[unimaginably]] into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really [[loved]] is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the [[supremely]] successful [[latest]] [[flick]] adaptation.

As [[technologically]] impressive as the first two (all [[aspects]] [[judged]]!) this one [[lacked]] the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's [[rather]] good fun as a first try and [[definitely]] set the [[standards]] for [[enhanced]] [[items]] to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 1529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've just finished listening to the director's commentary for this film, and I think the one big thing I got from it that I agree with is that this film, like Mann's The Insider, is completely subjective. It's from Howard's POV. So, any review or attempt at contemplating a set of comments about it, as Ebert did, is really about Nolte's character actually. If you feel, as he did, that the film "does not work", then you're saying, I think, that Howard does not work. And, to be frank, you might be right. Howard's reasoning and personality really wouldn't stand up to professional mental treatments and analysis.

But, hey, that's the nature of people.

Andrew. --------------------------------------------- Result 1530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Before I [[begin]], you [[need]] to know that I am a [[huge]] [[fan]] of [[many]] of Sonny Chiba's films. His [[biographical]] [[series]] of the [[life]] of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and [[among]] the best martial [[arts]] [[films]] ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was [[practically]] non-stop and with the [[possible]] exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[practitioner]] on [[film]] during the 1970s. [[Because]] they are so [[good]], I've [[seen]] at least 15 of his films and recently [[bought]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am [[NOT]] a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a bad film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie fan trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem would still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is simply atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out like it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the [[editing]] is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[bad]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was [[annoying]], distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the choreography would have improved things a bit. Instead of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! Before I [[commencement]], you [[required]] to know that I am a [[monumental]] [[breather]] of [[various]] of Sonny Chiba's films. His [[sketch]] [[serials]] of the [[lives]] of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and [[in]] the best martial [[humanities]] [[cinema]] ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was [[hardly]] non-stop and with the [[feasible]] exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[practitioners]] on [[movies]] during the 1970s. [[Since]] they are so [[buena]], I've [[noticed]] at least 15 of his films and recently [[acquiring]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am [[NAH]] a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a bad film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie fan trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem would still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is simply atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out like it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the [[edition]] is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[unfavourable]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was [[exasperating]], distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the choreography would have improved things a bit. Instead of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! --------------------------------------------- Result 1531 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] First than anything, I'm not going to [[praise]] Iñarritu's short film, even I'm Mexican and [[proud]] of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

[[In]] another hand, I see most of the [[reviews]] [[focuses]] on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a subtle bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm [[talking]] about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on [[September]] 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is [[remarkable]] that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much [[irony]] in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the [[Ken]] Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more [[clearly]] and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin [[Americans]]) suffered at a similar date something worst, and [[nobody]] remembers our [[grief]] as the whole world has [[done]] to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have [[become]] victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time [[ago]]; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. First than anything, I'm not going to [[commend]] Iñarritu's short film, even I'm Mexican and [[prideful]] of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

[[Among]] another hand, I see most of the [[scrutinize]] [[spotlight]] on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a subtle bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm [[debating]] about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on [[Janvier]] 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is [[wondrous]] that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much [[mockery]] in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the [[Keane]] Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more [[overtly]] and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin [[Us]]) suffered at a similar date something worst, and [[anyone]] remembers our [[woe]] as the whole world has [[doing]] to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have [[becomes]] victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time [[beforehand]]; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. --------------------------------------------- Result 1532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is not as good as all the movies of Christ I've ever [[seen]]. And I'm [[quite]] [[amazed]] that in this story Pilate [[wants]] to finish [[Jesus]], when the Scriptures (as well the other [[movies]]) state differently. It [[lacks]] also a very [[important]] issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians [[lies]] in this very [[event]]. As Paul says in one of his letters "[[If]] [[Christ]] did not rise from the [[dead]], our [[faith]] is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this [[movie]] was [[seeing]] on the streets the [[remains]] of the palms that were [[used]] when [[Jesus]] entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, [[Jesus]] WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. This [[cinematographic]] is not as good as all the movies of Christ I've ever [[noticed]]. And I'm [[rather]] [[surprised]] that in this story Pilate [[wanted]] to finish [[Goddammit]], when the Scriptures (as well the other [[cinema]]) state differently. It [[shortage]] also a very [[essential]] issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians [[lurks]] in this very [[events]]. As Paul says in one of his letters "[[Though]] [[Goodness]] did not rise from the [[died]], our [[fe]] is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this [[filmmaking]] was [[see]] on the streets the [[leftovers]] of the palms that were [[utilizing]] when [[Jeez]] entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, [[Christ]] WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I'm sorry, I had [[high]] [[hopes]] for this [[movie]]. Unfortunately, it was too long, too thin and too [[weak]] to hold my attention. When I realized the [[whole]] [[movie]] was indeed only about an [[older]] [[guy]] reliving his [[dream]], I [[felt]] [[cheated]]. [[Surely]] it [[could]] have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more [[meaningful]].

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest [[room]]. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. I'm sorry, I had [[alto]] [[waits]] for this [[filmmaking]]. Unfortunately, it was too long, too thin and too [[feeble]] to hold my attention. When I realized the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] was indeed only about an [[aged]] [[man]] reliving his [[dreamed]], I [[believed]] [[hoodwinked]]. [[Admittedly]] it [[did]] have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more [[valid]].

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest [[sala]]. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am a big movie fan. I like movies of all types. This is arguably the worst movie I've ever seen.

I get that it follows the book closely, which raises the point that not everything should be made into a movie. Especially since the authenticity of the experiences in the book have been called into question more than once.

These characters are not quirky, they are mentally ill. The things that happen are not funny, they are disturbing; especially considering they are supposed to be true.

This movie had the feel of The Royal Tenenbaums, another movie I hated, only Running With Scissors was even more dysfunctional and less funny.

I will never get those hours back. I wanted to wash my brain after watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[If]] you're going to [[look]] after a [[child]], [[make]] sure they don't [[live]] anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said [[kid]] has a habit of drawing gory [[pictures]] and [[disappears]] at [[night]] [[among]] the [[tombstones]] to [[see]] her 'friends'. But, our long [[haired]] heroine, oblivious to all the [[signs]], shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a [[dullard]] older brother who becomes a love interest for our [[budding]] babysitter. Even more [[spooky]] than the zombie gang outside is the cast's tendency to [[talk]] even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[match]] the [[movement]] of their mouths. But [[enough]] of that.. domestic [[animals]] are being sacrificed, [[old]] ladies are having [[eyeballs]] torn out and the [[orchestra]] won't [[shut]] up during any scene, [[even]] the quiet ones. Oh, and the [[editor]] is having a day off going by the [[way]] the [[film]] drones on.

[[In]] fact, it would been [[better]] if [[everybody]] [[involved]] had [[taken]] a [[breather]], smelt what they'd signed up for and [[gone]] AWOL. [[Yes]], I know it's hard to [[get]] into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd [[want]]. If [[would]] be [[like]] a [[trainee]] [[farm]] [[labourer]] having a [[conviction]] for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[worst]] lead performances ever by the [[shrill]] Laurel [[Barnett]], and another [[almost]] [[equally]] as [[bad]] by the charisma-free [[child]] actress Rosalie [[Cole]] (The [[next]] Dakota Fanning she ain't) the [[film]] meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a [[climax]].

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[useless]] heroine in a shed, while her [[bit]] of [[rough]] fends off these [[ghouls]] with a plank of [[wood]], a one shell [[shotgun]] and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the [[car]], and they [[accidentally]] [[discovered]] that the [[creatures]] found the [[noise]] of the [[horn]] so [[repellent]] they [[shuffled]] off at the [[sound]] of it. [[So]] do they [[stay]] where they are [[safe]]? [[No]] of course not, they [[run]] off to this [[abandoned]] [[building]] in the [[middle]] of [[nowhere]], so the [[bloke]] can [[prove]] what a hardnut he is the [[girl]] can [[act]] like she's having a [[nervous]] breakdown.

Finally, the film closes. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake blood, as if nothing horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has [[happened]]. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, [[boring]] horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to [[spend]] a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 [[Though]] you're going to [[peek]] after a [[enfant]], [[deliver]] sure they don't [[iive]] anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said [[petit]] has a habit of drawing gory [[photographing]] and [[fades]] at [[nighttime]] [[between]] the [[tombs]] to [[seeing]] her 'friends'. But, our long [[redhead]] heroine, oblivious to all the [[signalling]], shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a [[halfwit]] older brother who becomes a love interest for our [[emergent]] babysitter. Even more [[frightful]] than the zombie gang outside is the cast's tendency to [[chat]] even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[matches]] the [[movements]] of their mouths. But [[adequate]] of that.. domestic [[beasts]] are being sacrificed, [[former]] ladies are having [[globes]] torn out and the [[philharmonic]] won't [[close]] up during any scene, [[yet]] the quiet ones. Oh, and the [[editorial]] is having a day off going by the [[manner]] the [[filmmaking]] drones on.

[[Among]] fact, it would been [[best]] if [[everyone]] [[implicated]] had [[took]] a [[suction]], smelt what they'd signed up for and [[faded]] AWOL. [[Yep]], I know it's hard to [[obtain]] into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd [[wish]]. If [[could]] be [[iike]] a [[apprentice]] [[farmhouse]] [[laborer]] having a [[convictions]] for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[meanest]] lead performances ever by the [[strident]] Laurel [[Barnet]], and another [[hardly]] [[alike]] as [[negative]] by the charisma-free [[kid]] actress Rosalie [[Uss]] (The [[forthcoming]] Dakota Fanning she ain't) the [[filmmaking]] meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a [[pinnacle]].

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[superfluous]] heroine in a shed, while her [[bite]] of [[rugged]] fends off these [[vultures]] with a plank of [[bois]], a one shell [[pistol]] and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the [[automobiles]], and they [[coincidentally]] [[discover]] that the [[creature]] found the [[sonora]] of the [[trumpet]] so [[repulsive]] they [[switched]] off at the [[sounds]] of it. [[Thus]] do they [[stays]] where they are [[safest]]? [[Nos]] of course not, they [[execute]] off to this [[relinquished]] [[build]] in the [[medium]] of [[everywhere]], so the [[boy]] can [[proven]] what a hardnut he is the [[women]] can [[acts]] like she's having a [[twitchy]] breakdown.

Finally, the film closes. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake blood, as if nothing horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has [[arrived]]. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, [[bored]] horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to [[dedicate]] a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this trailer and thought to myself my god is this movie for real, who would want to see this movie and at the same time i thought that, my girl friend turned to me and said "we have to go see this movie"...enough said so i saw this about 5 minutes go and I tried to put on a brave face and enjoy the cheap scares but there weren't even any of those. It has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen the director has no influence no perspective the same shots were used again and again he did not build up suspense the cast probably were simply told scream cry run fall. I would love to see the script as the first 40 mins was mostly annoying girly giggles and bad music, there was absolutely no character development.

The plot is just...well there was no plot it was basically I know we will terrorize a high school group on their prom night with a stalker serial killer, That's brilliant! hmmm The acting was what you expect in a Australian soap opera hopeless, that main character the Blondie god dam she annoyed me. her longest line must have been half a sentence, and every time she was on camera she was just pulling another rude facial expression.

Please listen to me if you have any taste in movies don't go see this, and if your like me and don't have a choice well then I wish you good luck, maybe smuggle in an ipod or magazine. Can't believe this film got made! --------------------------------------------- Result 1537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WOW, finally Jim Carrey has returned from the died. This movie had me laughing and crying. It also sends a message that we should all know and learn from. Jeniffer Aniston was great, she will finally have a hit movie under her belt. If you liked liar liar you will love this movie. I give it 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I never seem to write a review on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how good, or how bad, a movie is. This film falls into the first category. [[Every]] [[year]], I [[try]] to see all the nominees for Best Foreign Film at the [[Oscars]], even those that I know I won't like. "As It Is In Heaven" seems to fit the bill. The plot [[sounds]] [[sugary]] and [[sentimental]] and slow....[[For]] my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". [[After]] a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare [[film]] where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The [[characters]] in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a [[likable]] bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela [[Olsson]], as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is [[beautiful]], and the main song, sung by [[Gabriella]], is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the [[feisty]] 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in [[words]], it all makes [[sense]] as the movies comes to a fitting [[crescendo]]. **** out of *****. [[Probably]] the [[strongest]] Swedish [[movie]] I've ever seen. I never seem to write a review on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how good, or how bad, a movie is. This film falls into the first category. [[Everything]] [[annum]], I [[attempted]] to see all the nominees for Best Foreign Film at the [[Academy]], even those that I know I won't like. "As It Is In Heaven" seems to fit the bill. The plot [[noises]] [[sugared]] and [[emotional]] and slow....[[During]] my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". [[Upon]] a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare [[films]] where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The [[attribute]] in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a [[sympathetic]] bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela [[Olson]], as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is [[leggy]], and the main song, sung by [[Gabriel]], is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the [[brash]] 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in [[expression]], it all makes [[feeling]] as the movies comes to a fitting [[crescendos]]. **** out of *****. [[Maybe]] the [[strictest]] Swedish [[cinematography]] I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1539 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There may be [[spoilers]]!

[[Charlie]] Fineman ([[Adam]] Sandler), who [[lost]] his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of [[Sept]]. 11), [[still]] grieves over their [[deaths]]. He runs into his [[former]] [[college]] [[roommate]], [[Alan]] [[Johnson]] ([[Don]] Cheadle), and the two rekindle their friendship. Alan vows to help his [[old]] [[friend]] come to terms with the terrible loss. This is a simplification of the [[basic]] [[story]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[movie]] is, however, a [[story]] of how fate intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[powerless]] do any [[thing]] about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no longer fulfilling. He [[feels]] friendless and out of touch with his own [[reality]]. He is unable to [[communicate]] with his wife and his associates at [[work]]. He can't [[express]] his [[feelings]] and as a [[result]] [[feels]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his [[job]]. Eventually he meets and [[discovers]] that Charlie, (who [[originally]] does not remember [[Alan]]), is [[living]] in a [[false]] [[reality]] of his own. Charlie has [[gone]] back to a time in his [[life]] when he had no family. He lives as if he were [[still]] a student [[playing]] in a [[rock]] band, collecting vinyl [[records]] of the 60s and 70s [[bands]], and playing video games. He has [[escaped]] to a better and safer time in his [[life]] where there are no [[bad]] [[guys]] and he has a [[lot]] [[less]] to [[lose]]. [[Everyone]] in this [[movie]] is [[affected]] in some [[way]] by the tragedy that has affected [[Charlie]] and his remission to a [[formerly]] different and [[better]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[great]] enabler. His in-laws are [[subtracted]] from his [[life]] because they [[would]] [[take]] him back to the reality that his [[family]] is now gone from his [[life]]. And [[Alan]] is most [[affected]] by him because Alan wants to, (in at first a [[selfish]] [[desire]] to [[escape]] from his own reality) to be with [[Charlie]] as a [[means]] to subtract himself from his own [[stifled]] reality and then he wants to [[find]] a [[way]] to [[help]] Charlie [[begin]] to [[recover]] from his self-induced guilt and [[denial]] of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is [[Charlie]] able to [[begin]] to [[heal]] himself but that Alan, in fact, [[learns]] to [[communicate]] and sate his [[true]] [[desires]] with his associates at work and, [[eventually]], is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern [[judge]], (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. There may be [[vandals]]!

[[Vietcong]] Fineman ([[Adams]] Sandler), who [[forfeited]] his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of [[Sep]]. 11), [[yet]] grieves over their [[fatality]]. He runs into his [[antigua]] [[university]] [[roomie]], [[Alana]] [[Johnston]] ([[Donate]] Cheadle), and the two rekindle their friendship. Alan vows to help his [[longtime]] [[boyfriend]] come to terms with the terrible loss. This is a simplification of the [[baseline]] [[saga]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[film]] is, however, a [[histories]] of how fate intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[defenceless]] do any [[stuff]] about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no longer fulfilling. He [[thinks]] friendless and out of touch with his own [[realistic]]. He is unable to [[communicating]] with his wife and his associates at [[jobs]]. He can't [[expresses]] his [[passions]] and as a [[conclusions]] [[believes]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his [[labour]]. Eventually he meets and [[discoveries]] that Charlie, (who [[initially]] does not remember [[Allan]]), is [[vida]] in a [[fraudulent]] [[realistic]] of his own. Charlie has [[extinct]] back to a time in his [[vida]] when he had no family. He lives as if he were [[nonetheless]] a student [[gaming]] in a [[boulder]] band, collecting vinyl [[registering]] of the 60s and 70s [[band]], and playing video games. He has [[fled]] to a better and safer time in his [[living]] where there are no [[wicked]] [[lads]] and he has a [[batch]] [[lesser]] to [[wasting]]. [[Someone]] in this [[movies]] is [[stricken]] in some [[routing]] by the tragedy that has affected [[Charley]] and his remission to a [[before]] different and [[improved]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[grand]] enabler. His in-laws are [[deduced]] from his [[lives]] because they [[could]] [[taking]] him back to the reality that his [[familia]] is now gone from his [[iife]]. And [[Allan]] is most [[stricken]] by him because Alan wants to, (in at first a [[ungenerous]] [[wanting]] to [[elope]] from his own reality) to be with [[Chas]] as a [[method]] to subtract himself from his own [[strangled]] reality and then he wants to [[unearthed]] a [[routing]] to [[assist]] Charlie [[launches]] to [[retrieving]] from his self-induced guilt and [[deniability]] of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is [[Charley]] able to [[starts]] to [[cure]] himself but that Alan, in fact, [[learnt]] to [[imparting]] and sate his [[real]] [[wishes]] with his associates at work and, [[finally]], is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern [[judges]], (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 1540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This may or may not be the worst movie that Steve Martin has ever made, but it certainly was far from his best. Obviously, he did this crap for the pay check. Dreck like this certainly does nothing to enhance his reputation as a funny man. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that when people go to see a Steve Martin movie, they expect to be entertained, not bored to tears. It's sad that he dragged Dan Aykroyd and Phil Hartman down with him. I don't understand why talented people can't get a grip on the fact that people don't want to see them in lousy movies. If you're going to call a movie a comedy, then it should be funny. This wasn't. Shame on the US military for allowing itself to be associated with this pabulum, too. Full Metal Jacket had more laughs than this miserable excuse for a "service comedy." Surely, Phil Silvers is rolling over in his grave. --------------------------------------------- Result 1541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[saw]] the [[original]] "[[Chorus]] Line" on Broadway [[God]] knows how [[many]] times and [[felt]] the passion, [[despair]] and [[joy]] [[come]] from this [[live]] [[experience]] in the [[theater]]. [[Michael]] [[Bennett]] knew he [[would]] have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but [[could]] never [[figure]] out how to do it. [[If]] the [[man]] who [[came]] up with the [[show]] is stumped - that should [[answer]] your question. There are some [[shows]] that are simply [[made]] to be seen live - with an [[audience]]. [[However]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical [[work]] of "[[Ghandi]]" and dancing with animals in "[[Doctor]] Doolittle" [[ended]] up directing this [[film]] which bore [[little]] to no [[resemblance]] to the [[stage]] [[show]]. [[Horrible]] songs were [[added]] (Surprise! Surprise!), great [[songs]] were [[dropped]] or given to other [[characters]] (which didn't make [[sense]]). [[Michael]] Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't [[dance]] tried to [[act]] and there was the [[sexy]] "Landers" [[woman]] who couldn't [[sing]], [[act]], or [[dance]] - I guess she had just [[finished]] being Ghandi's [[wife]]. The [[dances]] by [[Jeffrey]] Hornaday [[look]] like [[nothing]] more than schlock from "Flashdance" [[rejects]] and nothing [[works]]. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[If]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - [[see]] it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. I [[witnessed]] the [[initial]] "[[Verse]] Line" on Broadway [[Lord]] knows how [[several]] times and [[smelled]] the passion, [[desperation]] and [[pleasure]] [[coming]] from this [[vivo]] [[enjoying]] in the [[drama]]. [[Michel]] [[Bennet]] knew he [[could]] have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but [[wo]] never [[silhouette]] out how to do it. [[Though]] the [[guy]] who [[became]] up with the [[exposition]] is stumped - that should [[replied]] your question. There are some [[exposition]] that are simply [[brought]] to be seen live - with an [[audiences]]. [[Still]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical [[cooperation]] of "[[Gandhi]]" and dancing with animals in "[[Doktor]] Doolittle" [[finalized]] up directing this [[filmmaking]] which bore [[small]] to no [[analogy]] to the [[phases]] [[exhibition]]. [[Scary]] songs were [[adding]] (Surprise! Surprise!), great [[ballads]] were [[fell]] or given to other [[nature]] (which didn't make [[feeling]]). [[Michele]] Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't [[danced]] tried to [[ley]] and there was the [[hot]] "Landers" [[femmes]] who couldn't [[singing]], [[law]], or [[dancers]] - I guess she had just [[finalized]] being Ghandi's [[woman]]. The [[dancing]] by [[Jeff]] Hornaday [[gaze]] like [[none]] more than schlock from "Flashdance" [[deny]] and nothing [[cooperate]]. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[Though]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - [[seeing]] it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] First off, this is an [[excellent]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the [[first]] adventure of 007, Dr. [[No]] (1962) being the second, while in Golden [[Eye]], the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "[[M]]" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before [[Bond]] became a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[license]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a bit if we wish to be entertained. No, the new Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[primitive]] electronics of the original [[series]] from nearly half a century ago. [[In]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we call them cell phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you think 400 years from now, they would have perfected Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's give the producers some leeway.

But to try and make things a bit consistent, [[let]] us just ponder about the Cylons [[creation]] just 60 years prior to the [[end]] of Battlestar Galactica. If that is the [[case]], where did all the Cylons that populated the original earth [[come]] from? We know that the technology [[exists]] for spontaneous [[jumps]] through space. Well, what happened if one of the Cyclon [[ships]] at [[war]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ship]], [[loaded]] with human-looking Cylons, [[wound]] up not only [[jumping]] through space, but through [[time]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[years]] with a crippled [[ship]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[found]] out they could repopulate it and [[eventually]] [[destroyed]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sent]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[search]] for the legendary Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to become the [[humans]], who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! First off, this is an [[wondrous]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the [[fiirst]] adventure of 007, Dr. [[None]] (1962) being the second, while in Golden [[Eyes]], the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "[[meters]]" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before [[Bonding]] became a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[licenses]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a bit if we wish to be entertained. No, the new Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[primal]] electronics of the original [[serials]] from nearly half a century ago. [[Among]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we call them cell phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you think 400 years from now, they would have perfected Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's give the producers some leeway.

But to try and make things a bit consistent, [[leaving]] us just ponder about the Cylons [[inception]] just 60 years prior to the [[terminating]] of Battlestar Galactica. If that is the [[example]], where did all the Cylons that populated the original earth [[arriving]] from? We know that the technology [[existed]] for spontaneous [[rises]] through space. Well, what happened if one of the Cyclon [[vessel]] at [[warfare]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ships]], [[loads]] with human-looking Cylons, [[wounded]] up not only [[skipping]] through space, but through [[times]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[ages]] with a crippled [[vessels]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[find]] out they could repopulate it and [[ultimately]] [[demolition]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sending]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[researching]] for the legendary Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to become the [[mankind]], who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! --------------------------------------------- Result 1543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] i [[actually]] thought this is a comedy and sat [[watching]] it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[clear]] this is no [[comedy]], or at least not a 'Jim [[Carrey]] type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, [[enjoyed]] the story and don't [[mind]] i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie [[shows]] how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love i [[genuinely]] thought this is a comedy and sat [[staring]] it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[unequivocal]] this is no [[humour]], or at least not a 'Jim [[Cary]] type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, [[liked]] the story and don't [[esprit]] i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie [[demonstrating]] how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love --------------------------------------------- Result 1544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] [[Sidney]] [[Young]] (Pegg) moves from [[England]] to [[New]] York to [[work]] for the popular [[magazine]] Sharpe's in a hope to [[live]] his dream lifestyle but struggles to [[make]] a [[lasting]] [[impression]].

[[Based]] on Toby Young's book about survival in American [[business]], this comedy [[drama]] received [[mixed]] [[views]] from [[critiques]]. [[Labelled]] as inconsistently [[funny]] but with charm by the actors, how to [[lose]] [[friends]] [[seemed]] as a [[run]] of the [[mill]] fish out of the pond make fun at another [[culture]] comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[works]] on account of its actors and the simple [[yet]] [[sharp]] story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too [[likable]] for [[words]]. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor [[brings]] a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are [[unforgivable]], [[simply]] [[breathtaking]] stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he [[pulls]] it off [[splendidly]].

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the [[stereotypical]] magazine bosses where Dunst fits in [[nicely]] to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny [[hyperbole]] of a [[stereotype]] film star. The [[fact]] that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a [[dog]], and Pegg rounds that off in [[true]] Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. [[Sid]] [[Youngsters]] (Pegg) moves from [[Uk]] to [[Nuevo]] York to [[collaborated]] for the popular [[revue]] Sharpe's in a hope to [[viva]] his dream lifestyle but struggles to [[deliver]] a [[enduring]] [[feeling]].

[[Founded]] on Toby Young's book about survival in American [[companies]], this comedy [[teatro]] received [[blended]] [[visualise]] from [[critique]]. [[Tagged]] as inconsistently [[humorous]] but with charm by the actors, how to [[wasting]] [[friend]] [[appeared]] as a [[executing]] of the [[moulins]] fish out of the pond make fun at another [[cultivation]] comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[collaborating]] on account of its actors and the simple [[however]] [[abrupt]] story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too [[sympathetic]] for [[expression]]. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor [[bring]] a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are [[unpardonable]], [[merely]] [[astounding]] stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he [[pulling]] it off [[amazingly]].

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the [[stereotyped]] magazine bosses where Dunst fits in [[politely]] to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny [[overstatement]] of a [[stereotypes]] film star. The [[facto]] that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a [[hound]], and Pegg rounds that off in [[authentic]] Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they call Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[clever]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[imagination]]. Well, [[damn]], was I [[misled]]. At [[least]] I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, [[purify]] all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll [[start]] with what I liked. I [[liked]] the [[opening]] scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we [[could]] actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all [[falls]] apart.

This set-up leads [[nowhere]]. The movie does what almost every remake does. It [[adds]] more of everything except [[character]], atmosphere, and [[story]]. It's noisier, (in some [[sense]]) bloodier, and more [[full]] of main [[characters]] who appear only to die in [[nonsensical]] subplots. The [[setting]], the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is [[gone]] here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they call Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[shrewd]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[creativity]]. Well, [[fuck]], was I [[deluded]]. At [[less]] I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, [[purification]] all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll [[launch]] with what I liked. I [[wished]] the [[initiation]] scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we [[did]] actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all [[fall]] apart.

This set-up leads [[everywhere]]. The movie does what almost every remake does. It [[summing]] more of everything except [[personage]], atmosphere, and [[saga]]. It's noisier, (in some [[sensing]]) bloodier, and more [[fullest]] of main [[traits]] who appear only to die in [[mindless]] subplots. The [[configured]], the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is [[missing]] here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Think Pierce Brosnan and you think suave, dapper, intelligent James Bond. In this movie, Brosnan plays against type - and has lots of fun doing so (as does the audience). This is a film about a hired assassin who befriends a harried businessman... and it works!

This is a fun movie, with very good scenes (a riveting, on-the-edge Brosnan and a good, compliant "off"-the-edge Kinnear have some good lines). My only cavil is that Hope Davis, playing the oh-so-tolerant wife ("Can I see your gun?") doesn't appear more often: she could have been a marvellous foil to these men.

This movie is like a matador: it plays with the audience, while "going for a kill". The ending is awesome because a storyline (with a positive moral!) emerges: this is a frenetic, frantic and fun movie, which does deserve a wide audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The horse is indeed a fine [[animal]]. [[Picturesque]] depictions of [[wild]] horses and their [[grace]] [[could]] never have been more majestic in an animation [[flick]].

The animation is [[simply]] stupendous. The [[fine]] [[animation]] forms the [[backbone]] of the [[beauty]] that the [[horses]] embolden [[across]] the flick. More so when the [[stallion]] traverses [[diverse]] [[terrain]], jumps across [[cliffs]] and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[wonderful]] instrumental music [[lures]] you to appreciate the movie.

"They [[say]] the story of the [[west]] was [[written]] from the [[saddle]] of a [[horse]] . " [[huh]]? [[Well]] ,The [[story]] of a [[fine]] [[horse]] sure was written from the [[saddle]] of the west .

[[All]] in all, this [[movie]] is [[clearly]] up there with the [[best]] .It is one of the [[best]] animation [[flicks]] i have [[watched]]. Would be a very [[fine]] [[choice]] on a [[lonely]] [[night]]. An [[easy]] 9/10. The horse is indeed a fine [[wildlife]]. [[Scenic]] depictions of [[feral]] horses and their [[gracia]] [[would]] never have been more majestic in an animation [[film]].

The animation is [[merely]] stupendous. The [[fined]] [[animate]] forms the [[pillar]] of the [[beaut]] that the [[horse]] embolden [[throughout]] the flick. More so when the [[stud]] traverses [[assorted]] [[ground]], jumps across [[bluffs]] and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[wondrous]] instrumental music [[decoys]] you to appreciate the movie.

"They [[tell]] the story of the [[western]] was [[authored]] from the [[stool]] of a [[steed]] . " [[haah]]? [[Good]] ,The [[narratives]] of a [[fined]] [[racehorse]] sure was written from the [[stool]] of the west .

[[Totality]] in all, this [[film]] is [[apparently]] up there with the [[better]] .It is one of the [[better]] animation [[gestures]] i have [[observed]]. Would be a very [[alright]] [[choices]] on a [[single]] [[nuit]]. An [[easier]] 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I give this movie 8/10 stars, and not 10, is because 1) Sinatra is awful and 2) the love interest of Kelly's character leaves much to be desired, (IMHO). Do love that Dean Stockwell, Quantum Leap - Al, is the little boy. The dance sequence with Jerry Mouse is one of the most entertaining and amazing dance sequences I have ever seen. Tom and Jerry is still a personal favorite of mine and my daughter's. I'm 28 and she's 4, so while the character is less iconic than Mickey, he is still a favorite of many children and adults today. Kelly is as always captivating, his eyes full of fun and excitement. In every movie I have ever seen him in, he always steals the show. One of the best dancers of the 20th century. It is no wonder Paula Abdul "sampled" Kelly's moves. I would also list Gene Kelly as one of the most beautiful people of the 20th century. If you were to watch only one part, don't miss Kelly's dance with Jerry Mouse. You will NOT be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] One of Cary Grant's most [[enduring]] comedies is Mr. Blandings [[Builds]] His [[Dream]] House. [[Although]] [[judging]] by the size of it the dwelling [[would]] be a dream [[mansion]] [[today]]. [[Still]] [[Cary]] was making a good [[living]] in the [[advertising]] [[field]] even though he was having a [[devil]] of a time [[trying]] to [[come]] up with a [[slogan]] for ham with the [[brand]] [[name]] of Wham.

What [[made]] this [[film]] so [[popular]] was the [[housing]] [[shortage]] of the post [[World]] War II [[years]]. Returning veterans from the [[war]] were [[claiming]] their entitlements under the GI [[Bill]] of Rights which [[included]] [[home]] [[loans]]. The problem was there literally were not enough [[houses]] to [[satisfy]] the [[demand]]. Around the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the film were so popular [[Congress]] [[passed]] and [[President]] Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner [[Housing]] law which put the [[government]] for the first time in the home building business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like [[Cary]] [[Grant]] and Myrna Loy they had two [[daughters]] and were looking to get out of inner [[city]] Rochester. Their place wasn't [[quite]] as grand as a [[house]] in Connecticut with eighteen [[rooms]], still they lived there the rest of their [[lives]] the [[way]] Cary and Myrna most [[likely]] did.

Of course it was [[expensive]] and the costs just keep adding up and up, [[threatening]] to [[send]] [[Cary]] to the [[cleaners]]. [[Cary]] and Myrna [[also]] have Melvyn Douglas [[around]] to [[offer]] [[counsel]], [[usually]] too late. Truth be [[told]] he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is [[simply]] an extension of Nora Charles. [[If]] you can [[imagine]] the Charles's moving to the country and William Powell having the headaches Cary Grant does, the film would [[still]] [[work]] just fine.

[[Mr]]. Blandings [[Builds]] His Dream House [[still]] [[works]] well as [[comedy]] because the [[situations]] are universal. And this review is [[dedicated]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who lived in their dream house together for over 40 years. One of Cary Grant's most [[persistent]] comedies is Mr. Blandings [[Build]] His [[Daydreaming]] House. [[Despite]] [[judgement]] by the size of it the dwelling [[ought]] be a dream [[manor]] [[nowadays]]. [[However]] [[Carey]] was making a good [[life]] in the [[announcement]] [[campo]] even though he was having a [[daemon]] of a time [[attempts]] to [[coming]] up with a [[catchphrase]] for ham with the [[trademark]] [[designation]] of Wham.

What [[introduced]] this [[kino]] so [[fashionable]] was the [[homes]] [[rarity]] of the post [[Monde]] War II [[olds]]. Returning veterans from the [[wars]] were [[claim]] their entitlements under the GI [[Billing]] of Rights which [[inscribed]] [[households]] [[loan]]. The problem was there literally were not enough [[house]] to [[respond]] the [[wondering]]. Around the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the film were so popular [[Capitol]] [[voted]] and [[Presidents]] Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner [[Houses]] law which put the [[council]] for the first time in the home building business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like [[Carey]] [[Grants]] and Myrna Loy they had two [[daughter]] and were looking to get out of inner [[town]] Rochester. Their place wasn't [[rather]] as grand as a [[home]] in Connecticut with eighteen [[chambers]], still they lived there the rest of their [[life]] the [[pathways]] Cary and Myrna most [[possibly]] did.

Of course it was [[costly]] and the costs just keep adding up and up, [[menacing]] to [[expedition]] [[Kari]] to the [[detergents]]. [[Kari]] and Myrna [[apart]] have Melvyn Douglas [[throughout]] to [[supplying]] [[consultant]], [[generally]] too late. Truth be [[said]] he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is [[merely]] an extension of Nora Charles. [[Though]] you can [[guess]] the Charles's moving to the country and William Powell having the headaches Cary Grant does, the film would [[yet]] [[worked]] just fine.

[[Herr]]. Blandings [[Build]] His Dream House [[yet]] [[collaborated]] well as [[parody]] because the [[instances]] are universal. And this review is [[specialised]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who lived in their dream house together for over 40 years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A gave it a "2" instead of a "1" (awful) because there is no denying that many of the visuals were stunning, a lot of talent went into the special effects and artwork. But that wasn't enough to save it.

The "sepia" toned, washed out colors sort of thing has been done before many times in other movies. Nothing new there. I can see there were some hat-tips to other old, classic movies. OK. No problem with that.

But a movie has got to be entertaining and interesting, not something that would put you to sleep.

The story line and the script of this movie WAS awful, the characters two dimensional. Slow moving. Some of the scenes were pretty to look at, but ultimately, as a whole, it was quite boring, I couldn't recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I found out about this [[film]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from Game On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and star in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very simple romantic comedy with Janeane Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[bad]] for so many [[reasons]]. The plot is [[unbelievably]] predictable from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to note her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this travesty of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. I found out about this [[filmmaking]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from Game On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and star in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very simple romantic comedy with Janeane Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[unfavourable]] for so many [[motivation]]. The plot is [[surprisingly]] predictable from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to note her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this travesty of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 1552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] The [[first]] 50 minutes of this [[movie]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 minutes were [[excellent]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are [[excellent]]. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a compelling role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. The [[fiirst]] 50 minutes of this [[kino]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 minutes were [[wondrous]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are [[wondrous]]. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a compelling role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Like the characters in this [[show]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[nailed]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban [[teenager]] in the 70s. The 70s fashions, [[cars]], home furnishings, foods, and [[fads]], are all very authentic in this [[show]].

The show boasts a very talented [[ensemble]] cast, who all mesh [[together]] very well on [[camera]]. I really like the [[unique]], psychedelic-style [[film]] sequences. No other [[show]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge [[film]] [[sequences]], really [[help]] to convey the campy hipness, that [[characterized]] the 70s era.

[[Overall]] this is a very [[funny]] sitcom. The one [[thing]] that [[bothers]] me about this [[show]], is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate [[laughs]]. [[In]] this [[way]], I think that this [[show]] tries to be too much like Married With [[Children]]. While [[Married]] with [[Children]] is a [[great]] sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to [[imitate]] it.

I do [[recommend]] That 70s [[Show]], [[mainly]] due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on [[witty]] dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. Like the characters in this [[display]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[pinched]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban [[teenagers]] in the 70s. The 70s fashions, [[auto]], home furnishings, foods, and [[fashions]], are all very authentic in this [[demonstrating]].

The show boasts a very talented [[whole]] cast, who all mesh [[jointly]] very well on [[cameras]]. I really like the [[exclusive]], psychedelic-style [[films]] sequences. No other [[exposition]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge [[movies]] [[sequence]], really [[supporting]] to convey the campy hipness, that [[characterization]] the 70s era.

[[Entire]] this is a very [[comical]] sitcom. The one [[stuff]] that [[upsets]] me about this [[showing]], is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate [[giggling]]. [[Onto]] this [[routing]], I think that this [[exhibition]] tries to be too much like Married With [[Infant]]. While [[Wedding]] with [[Infant]] is a [[huge]] sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to [[simulating]] it.

I do [[recommendation]] That 70s [[Exposition]], [[essentially]] due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on [[spiritual]] dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most succinct way to describe Ride With The Devil is with but one word: authenticity. I will not rehash what has already been said about this wonderous film, but I would like to say how much the historical research and painstaking attention to detail the crew no doubt went through was appreciated by this filmgoer.

As a student of history familiar with the period and setting of this film, I must say that this production is one of the most accurate fictional films regarding "bleeding Kansas". Yes there were liberties taken on the actual events, as all fiction is apt to do. But the overall feel of the film is genuine. Authentic costumes, authentic attitudes (no PC hindsight here) even the actors look authentic.Even Jewel Kilcher (who has a small part in the film) looked like she stepped form a mid 19th century photograph.

A few viewers I talked with have expressed their incredulity at the stylized dialog. They cannot believe that 19th century farmers would "talk like poets".

What they don't realize is that in this age of verbal slobbishness, the American public public of the 19th century was a surprisingly literate and eloquent bunch. These people were raised on Shakespeare and the King James version of the Bible. The screenwriters reconstructed the most likely verbal styles of these people, judging from documentation of the time. The stylized dialog just adds to the magical atmosphere of the film.

But in addition to a historical document, this film works on a visceral level as well. Beautifully photographed and performed, it harkens back to the days of the great western epics. The raid on Lawrence, Kansas, done so many times before in so many other, lesser films is portrayed with a sense of urgency that puts the viewer right in the midst of the action.

Romance, adventure, moral and ethical conflict.This film has everything a discerning moviegoer could want.

In a year that was dominated by overhyped garbage like American Beauty, this great artwork was buried by an indifferent studio system. But I am certain that Ride With The Devil will be given it's due in the coming years. Please rent this film. You will not be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an excellent documentary, packed with racing action beautiful pictures and a great story. The IMAX Cameras give you a very wide perspective, as a DVD movie it is perfect. Your hear every speaker working almost all the time, The film is not speeded up and just gives you the natural feel of 230mph. Of course there are some sound effects added but i think they are good, they give a depth to the driving scenes... --------------------------------------------- Result 1556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Aileen Gonsalves, my girlfriend, is in this film playing a secretary at the main character's bank. She has a lovely scene with Roshan Seth in a restaurant. There's more information on her website at >Having stated my personal interest in the film, I have to say that I think it is a beautiful movie - moving, funny and beautifully filmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1557 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A friend of mine recommended this movie, citing my vocal and inflective similarities with Des Howl, the movie's main character. I guess to an extent I can see that and perhaps a bit more, I'm not very sure whether or not that's flattering portrayal.

This is a pretty unique work, the only movie to which this might have more than a glancing similarity would be True Romance, not for the content or the style of filming or for the pace of dialogue (Whale Music is just so much more, well, relaxed.) But instead that they both represent modern love stories.

In general I'm a big fan of Canadian movies about music and musicians (for example I highly recommend Hard Core Logo) and this film in particular. It has an innocent charm, Des is not always the most likeably guy, but there's something about him that draws a sterling sort of empathy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1558 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] William Powell is a doctor dealing with a murder and an ex-wife in "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford," also starring Jean Arthur, Eric Blore, and James Gleason. It seems that Powell had chemistry going with just about any woman with whom he was teamed. Though he and Myrna Loy were the perfect screen couple, the actor made a couple of other "Thin Man" type movies, one with Ginger Rogers and this one with Arthur, both to very good effect.

Somehow one never gets tired of seeing Powell as a witty, debonair professional and "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" is no exception. The ex-Mrs. B has Mr. B served with a subpoena for back alimony and then moves back in to help him solve a mystery that she's dragged him into. And this isn't the first time she's done that! It almost seems as though there was a "Bradford" film before this one or that this was intended to be the first of a series of films - Mr. B complains that his mystery-writer ex is constantly bringing him into cases. This time, a jockey riding the favorite horse in a raise mysteriously falls off the horse and dies right before the finish line.

The solution of the case is kind of outlandish but it's beside the point. The point is the banter between the couple and the interference of the ex-Mrs. B. Jean Arthur is quite glamorous in her role and very funny. However, with an actress who comes off as brainy as Arthur does, the humor seems intentional rather than featherbrained. I suspect the writer had something else in mind - say, the wacky side of Carole Lombard. When Arthur hears that the police have arrived, she says, "Ah, it's probably about my alimony. I've been waiting for the police to take a hand in it," it's more of a rib to Powell rather than a serious statement. It still works well, and it shows how a good actress can make a part her own.

Definitely worth watching, as William Powell and Jean Arthur always were. --------------------------------------------- Result 1559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best of Shelley Duvall's high-quality "Faerie Tale Theatre" series. The ugly stepsisters are broadway-quality comedy relief, and Eve Arden is the personification of wicked stepmotherhood. Jennifer Beals does an excellent job as a straight Cinderella, especially in the garden scene with Matthew Broderick's Prince Charming. Jean Stapleton plays the fairy godmother well, although I'm not sure I liked the "southern lady" characterization with some of the lines. Steve Martin's comedy relief as the Royal Orchestra Conductor is quintessential Martin, but a tiny bit misplaced in the show's flow.

As is customary with the series, there are several wry comments thrown in for the older children (ages 15 and up). With a couple of small bumps, the show flows well, and they live happily ever after. Children up to age 8 will continue to watch it after the parents finally get tired of it -- I found 3 times in one day to be a little too much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1560 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] One of my [[favourite]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most [[wonderful]] '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and [[Ozzy]] as the preacher ([[surely]] he exists in America?). Then there are the [[boys]] ([[rich]], vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My [[favourite]] scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then [[check]] this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. One of my [[preferred]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most [[wondrous]] '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and [[Uzi]] as the preacher ([[undoubtedly]] he exists in America?). Then there are the [[guy]] ([[storied]], vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My [[preferable]] scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then [[inspecting]] this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[For]] a [[movie]] that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable [[quotes]] listed for this gem. Imagine a [[movie]] where Joe Piscopo is actually [[funny]]! [[Maureen]] Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[character]] is an [[absolute]] [[scream]]. Watch for [[Alan]] "The [[Skipper]]" Hale jr. as a [[police]] [[Sgt]]. [[Per]] a [[flick]] that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable [[citation]] listed for this gem. Imagine a [[kino]] where Joe Piscopo is actually [[fun]]! [[Morin]] Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[nature]] is an [[utter]] [[holler]]. Watch for [[Alain]] "The [[Captain]]" Hale jr. as a [[policeman]] [[Sergeant]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is te cartoon that should have won instead of Country Cousin. Visually well-done and much more entertaining and memorable. Worth watching just for the music alone! Although there are elements that undoubtably will bruise the sensibilities of some these days, the cartoon has to be given a bit of perspective. It's over sixty years old and it is, after all, just a cartoon. I'm disabled and if I were as hyper-sensitive as the folks who look at things like this cartoon and take umbrage, I would have long since curled up in a fetal position and faded away. Sometimes you need to lighten up, put your head back and float! Caricatures of celebrities in cartoons were common in the 1930s and 1940s and were almost never terribly flattering. Bing Crosby reportedly hated it when he was used on more than one occasion. *SIGH* --------------------------------------------- Result 1563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man on Fire was hot. I love a classic tale of good ol' revenge, and what better cause for revenge than the kidnapping of an innocent little girl.

The writers did an excellent job in this movie of building the relationship between Creasy (Denzel Washington) and Pita (Dakota Fanning) so that the viewer would understand and actually feel the drive Creasy had to rescue Pita. It was also good that Creasy wasn't a choir boy type trying to rescue Pita through the "proper" channels, but instead used torture tactics and street smarts. Some may say, "Torture is wrong regardless," and you may be right, but when you see the pain Creasy goes through due to the loss of Pita and the sheer passion he has for getting her back, you can't help but side with Creasy and pull for him to be even more merciless. There would be no progress if Creasy used diplomacy to deal with the different nefarious gangsters and criminals and he knew that.

Creasy's quest ended with the return of Pita to her mother and Creasy dying in the vehicle of the bad guys. But Creasy's death did not diminish the effectiveness of the movie, it in fact enhanced it by showing that Creasy was willing to die to get Pita back. His death was noble in fact.

Denzel does an excellent job as do the writers. This movie deserves good marks because it definitely was a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The zenith of two brilliant careers. David Lynch, better known for less accessible material, crafts a delicate and exquisite story around the most unlikely premise. A man travels to see his estranged brother. Having no other means of transportation, his journey takes him over six weeks on a lawn mower. Richard Farnsworth, in his last film, delivers a stunningly layered and nuanced performance in the starring role. Achingly beautiful in its exultation of small things, Straight Story is a classic cinema experience that must not be missed. Sissy Spacek is notable as Farnsworth's daughter, an impaired middle-aged woman living with the loss of her children. --------------------------------------------- Result 1565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Mary Pickford ("Born on the Fourth of July" as Angela Moore) is "The Little American" (of French heritage); she falls in love with Jack Holt (as Karl Von Austreim), who had moved to America with his German father and American mother. French-American Raymond Hatton (as Count Jules de Destin of the "Fighting Destins") has fallen in love with Ms. Pickford. The love triangled threesome eventually wind up in France, with the Great War (World War I, in hindsight) complicating their lives considerably.

A mostly entertaining, if propagandistically flawed, Cecil B. DeMille film. The torpedoing, and sinking, of a ship carrying Pickford is "Titanic"-like. The war intrigue gets dramatic as Pickford slowly becomes an undercover spy for France, while the Germans occupy her ancestral home. Of course, German lover Holt arrives. It was difficult to believe they took so long to recognize each other as he moved in for the rape, but it was dark; and, prior events had them believe each other dead. The film goes WAY over-the-top in its symbolism. Pickford was, by the way, Canadian - though, few could deny she wasn't a "Little American", for all intents and purposes.

FUN to spot "extras" who later became major stars include Wallace Beery, Colleen Moore, and Ramon Novarro - especially, watch for Mr. Novarro exhibiting "star" quality during one of the film's more memorable sequences: Pickford and the wounded soldier saluting each other as he is taken by her on a stretcher. Novarro even gets Mary Pickford to write a letter for him; obviously, he's got a future in pictures. Also future-bound is Ben Alexander, who plays the boy "Bobby"; he becomes a dependable child actor, and grows up to become a Jack Webb partner on "Dragnet".

******* The Little American (7/12/17) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Mary Pickford, Jack Holt, Raymond Hatton --------------------------------------------- Result 1566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The cliché of the shell-shocked soldier home from the war is here given dull treatment. Pity a splendid cast, acting to the limits of their high talents, can't redeem 'The Return of the Soldier' from its stiff-collared inability to move the viewer to emotional involvement. Best moments, as another reviewer noted, come when Glenda Jackson is on screen; but even Jackson's crackling good cinematic power can't pull this film's chestnuts from its cold, never warmed hearth. Ann-Margret, she of sex-kitten repute and too often accused of lacking acting ability, finds her actual and rather profound abilities wasted here - despite her speaking with a nigh-flawless Middlesex accent. The hackneyed score, redolent of many lackluster TV miniseries' slathered-on saccharine emotionalism, is at irritating odds with the emotional remoteness of the script, blocking, and overbaked formalism of the direction; except for its score and corseted script and direction, 'The Return of the Soldier' has all the right bits but it fails to make them work together. --------------------------------------------- Result 1567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the only time I ever walked out on a movie. Years later, I saw it in the cable listings and thought, "Maybe I should give it another try." Suffice to say that I was right the first time. This ranks second only to Godzilla 1998 as the worst movie I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1568 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[thought]] I was [[going]] to watch a [[scary]] [[movie]].. and ended up laughing all the way [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. [[In]] the scene where the [[human]] transformed to a [[werewolf]] I [[thought]] they was [[kidding]]. Todays [[computer]] games have ten [[times]] better animations. Low [[budget]], is a [[fitting]] [[comment]]. I [[would]] [[recommend]] [[Wolf]] (1994) with [[Jack]] Nicholson for a [[good]] werewolf movie. It has good special [[effects]] as they should be (human transforming to [[werewolf]]). Unless you [[wish]] to have good [[laugh]] I would not [[recommend]] you to watch this movie. This [[movie]] is a joke. I [[ideology]] I was [[go]] to watch a [[spooky]] [[movies]].. and ended up laughing all the way [[around]] the [[filmmaking]]. [[Onto]] the scene where the [[humanity]] transformed to a [[werewolves]] I [[thinks]] they was [[laughing]]. Todays [[computers]] games have ten [[time]] better animations. Low [[budgetary]], is a [[fit]] [[commentary]]. I [[ought]] [[recommendations]] [[Lair]] (1994) with [[Jacque]] Nicholson for a [[alright]] werewolf movie. It has good special [[repercussions]] as they should be (human transforming to [[werewolves]]). Unless you [[wanting]] to have good [[chuckles]] I would not [[recommendations]] you to watch this movie. This [[filmmaking]] is a joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 1569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had to be the worst horror movie I have ever seen. The acting was terrible, Horrible and cheesy and talk about a predictable plot! I will never watch this movie again nor will I recommend this movie to anyone. What a waste of time! First, as soon as the movie began I realized what I got myself into. All they did for this movie was copy scenes from many other horror movies out there and bunched them all into this one movie. The prank phone calls, halloween night, a psycho, and one knife! Its absolutely ridiculous. I was not scared at all during the movie, which I thought horror movies were supposed to do. As for the making of the movie, its pretty hilarious how they all talk about how this movie was so great and so scary. I mean how do you not realize that the movies is a cheap rip off of "Scary Movie" for example. At least get some good actors in there and then maybe it would have been pulled off as a good horror movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll start with what I liked.

I really liked the songs, everything about them was great, the costumes, music, lyrics (as long as the translation was good :) ), choreography, everything.

I loved the crab scene and the cooking scene.

But that's about it.

I get it, arty cinema, blablabla, but too much is too much. Too much silence (it was interesting for an hour, but two hours of hearing steps and moaning from time to time, really...), too much boredom (no movie should ever be boring, no matter how deep it was to be!), too much porn-like scenes (I do get it really, I get that they were filming a porn movie there, but really, REALLY, really that is too much) I truly think, that cinema should be for watching and this one is definitely not watchable in no way.

3 stars for the songs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1571 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I only watched this film from beginning to end because I promised a friend I would. It lacks even unintentional entertainment value that many bad films have. It may be the worst film I have ever seen. I'm surprised a distributor put their name on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Another Pokemon movie has hit the theaters, and again, I'm [[hearing]] the same [[old]], "Pokemon is dead, blah blah blah." The franchise's [[detractors]] couldn't be more [[wrong]]. [[Kids]] are [[still]] playing the [[trading]] [[card]] [[game]], they're [[still]] watching the [[TV]] [[series]], they're waiting for the [[Game]] [[Boy]] [[Advance]] [[games]], and they want to [[see]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That [[said]], "Pokemon The 4th [[Movie]]" [[introduces]] us to two more "[[legendary]]" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi [[transports]] itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a [[great]] moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent [[aptly]] named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the [[picture]]? [[Will]] Jessie, [[James]], and Meowth have [[bigger]] parts in this [[movie]] than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the [[first]] 3 [[movies]], if you go into the movie [[deciding]] that you're automatically [[going]] to [[hate]] it no matter what [[simply]] because it's [[Pokemon]] (or just because your [[child]]/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[cetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're [[going]] to [[hate]] it because you've decided that you want to [[hate]] it. That may be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can enjoy this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. Another Pokemon movie has hit the theaters, and again, I'm [[hearings]] the same [[former]], "Pokemon is dead, blah blah blah." The franchise's [[adversaries]] couldn't be more [[amiss]]. [[Brats]] are [[nonetheless]] playing the [[commerce]] [[cards]] [[games]], they're [[again]] watching the [[TELEVISIONS]] [[serials]], they're waiting for the [[Gaming]] [[Guy]] [[Advancements]] [[game]], and they want to [[behold]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That [[avowed]], "Pokemon The 4th [[Cinematographic]]" [[presents]] us to two more "[[proverbial]]" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi [[hauling]] itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a [[wondrous]] moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent [[justly]] named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the [[photographing]]? [[Willingness]] Jessie, [[Jacques]], and Meowth have [[greater]] parts in this [[movies]] than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the [[fiirst]] 3 [[cinematography]], if you go into the movie [[decided]] that you're automatically [[go]] to [[hating]] it no matter what [[merely]] because it's [[Pokémon]] (or just because your [[kiddies]]/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[etcetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're [[go]] to [[loathes]] it because you've decided that you want to [[loathes]] it. That may be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can enjoy this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more expensive and hyped [[films]] fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the best of the [[genre]], it [[keeps]] the [[viewer]] involved in all that's going on.

This is [[clearly]] a B type movie. [[In]] [[fact]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed [[Stranger]]" is the opportunity to take a [[peek]] at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear [[cinematography]] by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a [[great]] detective team. Patricia Barry is [[perfect]] as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more expensive and hyped [[movie]] fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the best of the [[genus]], it [[retains]] the [[viewfinder]] involved in all that's going on.

This is [[blatantly]] a B type movie. [[During]] [[facto]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed [[Alien]]" is the opportunity to take a [[glance]] at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear [[films]] by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a [[super]] detective team. Patricia Barry is [[consummate]] as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Go immediately and rent this movie. It will be be on a bottom shelf in your local video store and will be covered in dust. No one will have touched it in years. It may even be a $.50 special! It's worth ten bucks, I swear! Buy it! There aren't very many films than can compare with this - the celluloid version of that goo that forms at the bottom of a trash can after a few years. Yes, I gave it a '1,' but it really deserves much lower. 1-10 scales were not designed with stuff like this in mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 1575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A question for all you girls out there : [[If]] a man you`ve never met before [[accidentally]] [[phoned]] you up on [[purpose]] and continued to do so at the most indiscreet [[moments]] would you be [[intrigued]] by him or so freaked out you`d [[phone]] the police ? [[Yeah]] that`s what I thought so I couldn`t swallow the [[idea]] of [[Marti]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD SPOILERS *****

This is a really dumb story . Connor Hill`s wife is [[murdered]] and the plot revolves around the question is [[Connor]] [[phoning]] [[Marti]] so he can have an [[alibi]] ? But there`s a [[massive]] [[gap]] in logic here , couldn`t Connor have [[employed]] a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any [[forensics]] at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning [[Marti]] at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as [[predictable]] as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who [[made]] the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a [[really]] [[crap]] downhill skier A question for all you girls out there : [[Unless]] a man you`ve never met before [[unwittingly]] [[drew]] you up on [[intents]] and continued to do so at the most indiscreet [[times]] would you be [[puzzled]] by him or so freaked out you`d [[tel]] the police ? [[Yep]] that`s what I thought so I couldn`t swallow the [[inkling]] of [[Marty]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD SPOILERS *****

This is a really dumb story . Connor Hill`s wife is [[killing]] and the plot revolves around the question is [[Conor]] [[contacting]] [[Marty]] so he can have an [[excuse]] ? But there`s a [[big]] [[variance]] in logic here , couldn`t Connor have [[employing]] a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any [[forensic]] at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning [[Marty]] at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as [[foreseeable]] as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who [[effected]] the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a [[truthfully]] [[bollocks]] downhill skier --------------------------------------------- Result 1576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kusturika made it again. Another masterpiece. A coral comedy full of his own landmarks, with a frenetic rhythm and many glorious moments, we laughed and laughed, what a party! The music is everywhere, and also the shooting, the animals, the crazy bastards, sex and amazing gadgets and inventions, everything colorfully visual to entertain only. Pure cinema in essence. A wonderful experience to watch. And one is specially grateful since good comedies are so rare, and so wonderful. Well, this is one, and if you enjoyed Kusturica's previous films, you'll love this, although, as in all comedies, it is about a chemical reaction, and you have to be in the mood for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full House is a great show. I am still today growing up on it. I started watching it when i was 8 and now i am 12 and still watching it. i fell in love with all of the characters, especially Stephanie. she is my favorite. she had such a sense of humor. in case there are people on this sight that hardly watch the show, you should because you will get hooked on it. i became hooked on it after the first show i saw, which just happened to be the first episode, in 2002. it really is a good show. i really think that this show should go down to many generations in families. and it's great too because it is an appropriate show for all ages. and for all parents, it teaches kids lessons on how to go on with their life. nothing terrible happens, like violence or swearing. it is just a really great sit-com. i give it 5 out of 5 stars. what do you think? OH and the best time to watch it is when you are home sick from school or even the old office. It will make you feel a lot better. Trust me i am hardly home sick but i still know that it will make you feel better. and to everybody that thinks the show is stupid, well that's too bad for you because you won't get as far in life even if you are happy with your life. you really should watch it and you will get hooked on it. i am just telling you what happened to me and everybody else that started watching this awesome show. well i need must go to have some lunch. remember you must start watching full house and soon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I'm [[allowed]] to [[write]] 1000 [[words]] about this [[film]], but one word [[could]] [[suffice]]: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't [[laugh]] so much as gawk at this [[truly]] [[dreadful]] [[movie]]. We kept [[looking]] at each other with our [[best]] "What the...?" [[expressions]]. There is no way to [[adequately]] [[describe]] this movie. Killer [[tomatoes]] were funny, but this is just sick. What [[kind]] of mind [[produces]] [[images]] like these and then [[puts]] them on [[film]] for others to [[see]]? What [[kind]] of [[mind]] includes innocent [[children]] in this weird, weird [[movie]] and then [[packages]] it as if it is appropriate for [[children]]? [[Parents]], whatever you do, if your [[child]] [[still]] [[believes]] in Santa, don't [[let]] him/her [[see]] this [[movie]]. Preteens can watch it -- [[probably]] with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. [[If]] you [[decide]] to [[inflict]] this [[movie]] on others, you [[might]] [[want]] to [[spike]] their eggnog.

[[Quite]] [[possibly]] the [[worst]] [[film]] ever [[made]]. I'm [[permitting]] to [[writing]] 1000 [[mots]] about this [[flick]], but one word [[wo]] [[sufficient]]: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't [[laughter]] so much as gawk at this [[genuinely]] [[scary]] [[filmmaking]]. We kept [[researching]] at each other with our [[optimum]] "What the...?" [[expression]]. There is no way to [[correctly]] [[depicts]] this movie. Killer [[tomato]] were funny, but this is just sick. What [[genre]] of mind [[generates]] [[photography]] like these and then [[brings]] them on [[movies]] for others to [[behold]]? What [[genus]] of [[intellect]] includes innocent [[childhood]] in this weird, weird [[cinematic]] and then [[packs]] it as if it is appropriate for [[childhood]]? [[Parent]], whatever you do, if your [[kids]] [[yet]] [[deems]] in Santa, don't [[leaving]] him/her [[behold]] this [[flick]]. Preteens can watch it -- [[arguably]] with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. [[Though]] you [[decides]] to [[impose]] this [[filmmaking]] on others, you [[apt]] [[wish]] to [[fortification]] their eggnog.

[[Rather]] [[potentially]] the [[meanest]] [[movie]] ever [[accomplished]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] You spend most of this two-hour [[film]] wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you [[knew]] [[something]] [[dramatic]] was going to be revealed. Until then, [[Smith]], plays it [[mysterious]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the [[typical]] action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a [[great]] job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. You spend most of this two-hour [[kino]] wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you [[overheard]] [[somethings]] [[phenomenal]] was going to be revealed. Until then, [[Tremblay]], plays it [[cryptic]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the [[classic]] action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a [[wondrous]] job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 1580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] I always look forward to this movie when its on [[TV]]. Have to [[get]] the DVD I guess. The [[range]] of [[different]] [[types]] of people is [[great]]. It [[says]] to me that [[anyone]] can be a [[dancer]] if they [[try]] hard enough. My favorite character [[must]] be Mr.[[Aoki]]. He is so [[quirky]] but so full of [[emotions]]. It is a perfect [[movie]] with [[wonderful]] dancing. Unfortunately we never [[get]] the [[chance]] to [[see]] them go to [[Blackpool]]. [[Would]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it [[leaves]] it to your imagination to what [[could]] of happened.

A very [[simple]] and [[innocent]] [[story]]. He [[stays]] loyal to his [[wife]] and [[daughter]].

I haven't [[seen]] the Hollywood [[remake]]. Not [[sure]] if I [[want]] to. I don't really enjoy [[Jennifer]] Lopez. I [[think]] [[Richard]] Gere more matches the [[original]] than [[Lopez]]. I have a [[feeling]] that the [[remake]] is not as [[simple]] and innocent. I always look forward to this movie when its on [[TELEVISION]]. Have to [[gets]] the DVD I guess. The [[ranging]] of [[multiple]] [[typing]] of people is [[wondrous]]. It [[contends]] to me that [[everyone]] can be a [[ballerina]] if they [[tries]] hard enough. My favorite character [[should]] be Mr.[[Oki]]. He is so [[lunatic]] but so full of [[passions]]. It is a perfect [[kino]] with [[wondrous]] dancing. Unfortunately we never [[gets]] the [[probability]] to [[behold]] them go to [[Vegas]]. [[Could]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it [[departs]] it to your imagination to what [[would]] of happened.

A very [[mere]] and [[blameless]] [[conte]]. He [[resting]] loyal to his [[mujer]] and [[daughters]].

I haven't [[noticed]] the Hollywood [[redo]]. Not [[convinced]] if I [[wanted]] to. I don't really enjoy [[Jessica]] Lopez. I [[reckon]] [[Richards]] Gere more matches the [[initial]] than [[Lopes]]. I have a [[impression]] that the [[redo]] is not as [[mere]] and innocent. --------------------------------------------- Result 1581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] the winter of 1931, [[supposedly]] 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as [[Michael]] Sullivan Jr.) wonders what his mobster father [[Tom]] Hanks ([[Michael]] "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[living]]. [[Young]] Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "[[work]]" one [[evening]], and witnesses him [[blasting]] away some rival [[gangsters]]. This leads - in a [[VERY]] roundabout [[way]] - to "Godfather"-[[type]] [[Paul]] [[Newman]] (as [[John]] Rooney) [[hiring]] [[independent]] hit-man Jude [[Law]] (as Harlen [[Maguire]]) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks [[thinks]] they will be safe with a relative, which is puzzling when you consider the characters' line of [[work]].

[[Looking]] uncannily like Paul [[Peterson]] ("The Donna [[Reed]] [[Show]]"), Hoechlin does a [[terrific]] job for director Sam [[Mendes]]; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the luckiest young [[actor]] of 2002. But, the most [[striking]] [[thing]] about "[[Road]] to Perdition" is the [[stunning]] [[cinematography]] of [[Conrad]] L. [[Hall]], which [[deservedly]] won a [[career]] capping "Academy [[Award]]" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[work]] is [[truly]] superlative. This [[helps]] make up for the [[overall]] [[impression]] of a measured, [[contrived]] staginess to both the narrative and [[visuals]]. The deviating [[end]] is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated dog is an [[example]] of the [[aforementioned]] staginess).

******** [[Road]] to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam [[Mendes]] ~ [[Tom]] Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, [[Paul]] Newman, Jude [[Law]] [[Into]] the winter of 1931, [[presumably]] 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as [[Michele]] Sullivan Jr.) wonders what his mobster father [[Thom]] Hanks ([[Micheal]] "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[vida]]. [[Youth]] Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "[[cooperation]]" one [[afternoon]], and witnesses him [[blasts]] away some rival [[muggers]]. This leads - in a [[MUCH]] roundabout [[routes]] - to "Godfather"-[[genera]] [[Pablo]] [[Neumann]] (as [[Johannes]] Rooney) [[hire]] [[autonomous]] hit-man Jude [[Lois]] (as Harlen [[Mcguire]]) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks [[believes]] they will be safe with a relative, which is puzzling when you consider the characters' line of [[jobs]].

[[Researching]] uncannily like Paul [[Petersen]] ("The Donna [[Reid]] [[Displayed]]"), Hoechlin does a [[super]] job for director Sam [[Mendez]]; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the luckiest young [[protagonist]] of 2002. But, the most [[noteworthy]] [[stuff]] about "[[Route]] to Perdition" is the [[fabulous]] [[films]] of [[Konrad]] L. [[Salle]], which [[legitimately]] won a [[quarry]] capping "Academy [[Scholarship]]" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[jobs]] is [[genuinely]] superlative. This [[helped]] make up for the [[total]] [[printing]] of a measured, [[artificial]] staginess to both the narrative and [[picture]]. The deviating [[termination]] is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated dog is an [[cases]] of the [[above]] staginess).

******** [[Chemin]] to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam [[Mendez]] ~ [[Thom]] Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, [[Paulo]] Newman, Jude [[Legislation]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This 1997 film-blanc classic [[tale]] of [[smoldering]] passion has [[achieved]] its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The [[pervasive]], ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant [[screenplay]] dangles this [[embryonic]] affair-to-be in front of the [[enraptured]] audience, [[sitting]] transfixed as the [[abstract]], almost-expressionist [[cinematography]] deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can [[cut]] the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings [[seems]] just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern [[cinema]]? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . '[[Runaway]] Car' should have its catchword as well. [[Perhaps]] the [[film]] [[could]] have [[opened]] with an extreme closeup of [[Judge]] Reinhold saying [[something]] such as "A [[car]] is an [[extension]] of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline [[could]] then be [[dedicated]] to parsing [[every]] syllable, subtlety and nuance of that [[phrase]]. [[Had]] that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. This 1997 film-blanc classic [[storytelling]] of [[burning]] passion has [[accomplished]] its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The [[generalized]], ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant [[scenarios]] dangles this [[embryos]] affair-to-be in front of the [[mesmerised]] audience, [[seated]] transfixed as the [[condensed]], almost-expressionist [[film]] deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can [[chop]] the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings [[seem]] just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern [[movie]]? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . '[[Runoff]] Car' should have its catchword as well. [[Maybe]] the [[filmmaking]] [[wo]] have [[opening]] with an extreme closeup of [[Justices]] Reinhold saying [[anything]] such as "A [[motorcars]] is an [[prolonging]] of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline [[did]] then be [[devoted]] to parsing [[all]] syllable, subtlety and nuance of that [[expressions]]. [[Has]] that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. --------------------------------------------- Result 1583 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This low-grade Universal chiller has just been [[announced]] as an upcoming DVD release but, [[intended]] as part of a collection of similar [[movies]] that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that [[legitimate]] release. Which is just as well, since the end [[result]] was not anything particularly [[special]] (if decently [[atmospheric]] at that): for starters, the [[plot]] is pretty [[weak]] – even [[though]] in a way it anticipates the [[Vincent]] Price [[vehicle]] [[THEATRE]] [[OF]] BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see [[sharing]] his measly [[plate]] of [[cheese]] with his pet [[cat]]! – who, [[upon]] finding himself on the receiving [[end]] of [[art]] critic [[Alan]] Napier's vitriolic pen one time too [[many]], decides to [[end]] it all by [[hurling]] himself into the [[nearby]] river. [[However]], while [[contemplating]] just that action, he is [[anticipated]] by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally [[enough]], saves the poor guy's [[life]] with the [[intention]] of having the latter do all the dirty [[work]] for him in [[gratitude]]! Although it is [[supposedly]] set in the art circles of [[New]] York, all we [[really]] see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter [[Robert]] Lowery (who keeps [[painting]] the same statuesque [[blonde]] [[girl]] Joan Shawlee over and over in [[banal]] [[poses]] – how is that for art?) who, conveniently [[enough]], is [[engaged]] to a [[rival]] art critic (Virginia [[Grey]]) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is [[discovered]] with his [[spine]] broken and Lowery is suspected; but then [[investigating]] detective Bill Goodwin gets the [[bright]] [[idea]] of engaging another [[critic]] to [[publish]] a scathing [[review]] of Lowery's [[work]] (I did not know that [[publicity]] sketches [[got]] [[reviewed]]!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is [[going]] to be! [[In]] the [[meantime]], Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by [[sculpting]] Hatton's [[uniquely]] craggy – and [[recognizable]] – visage which, [[needless]] to [[say]], attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to [[believe]] that she [[lacks]] material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and [[model]]. Bafflingly, [[although]] The Creeper is [[fully]] [[aware]] of how Grey looks ([[thanks]] to her [[aforementioned]] haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! This low-grade Universal chiller has just been [[declares]] as an upcoming DVD release but, [[conceived]] as part of a collection of similar [[filmmaking]] that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that [[defensible]] release. Which is just as well, since the end [[upshot]] was not anything particularly [[peculiar]] (if decently [[barometric]] at that): for starters, the [[intrigue]] is pretty [[feeble]] – even [[while]] in a way it anticipates the [[Tome]] Price [[vehicles]] [[THEATRES]] [[DU]] BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see [[exchanged]] his measly [[plaque]] of [[queso]] with his pet [[kitten]]! – who, [[after]] finding himself on the receiving [[ends]] of [[artistry]] critic [[Alana]] Napier's vitriolic pen one time too [[innumerable]], decides to [[ends]] it all by [[pelting]] himself into the [[neighboring]] river. [[Still]], while [[considering]] just that action, he is [[prophesied]] by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally [[adequate]], saves the poor guy's [[vida]] with the [[ambition]] of having the latter do all the dirty [[collaboration]] for him in [[acknowledgment]]! Although it is [[allegedly]] set in the art circles of [[Novo]] York, all we [[truly]] see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter [[Roberto]] Lowery (who keeps [[paintings]] the same statuesque [[blonds]] [[women]] Joan Shawlee over and over in [[ordinary]] [[brings]] – how is that for art?) who, conveniently [[satisfactorily]], is [[implicated]] to a [[adversary]] art critic (Virginia [[Greys]]) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is [[found]] with his [[linchpin]] broken and Lowery is suspected; but then [[exploring]] detective Bill Goodwin gets the [[lustrous]] [[ideals]] of engaging another [[criticisms]] to [[publications]] a scathing [[exam]] of Lowery's [[collaboration]] (I did not know that [[advocacy]] sketches [[ai]] [[revisited]]!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is [[gonna]] to be! [[During]] the [[meanwhile]], Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by [[engraving]] Hatton's [[singularly]] craggy – and [[identifiable]] – visage which, [[redundant]] to [[said]], attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to [[think]] that she [[absence]] material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and [[models]]. Bafflingly, [[despite]] The Creeper is [[abundantly]] [[cognizant]] of how Grey looks ([[appreciation]] to her [[supra]] haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! --------------------------------------------- Result 1584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is without doubt the best documentary ever produced giving an accurate and epic depiction of World War 2 from the invasion of Poland in 1939 to the end of the war in 1945.

Honest and to the point, this documentary presents views from both sides of the conflict giving a very human face to the war. At the same time tactics and the importance of Battles are not overlooked, much work has been put into the giving a detailed picture of the war and in particularly the high, low and turning points in the allies fortunes. Being a British produced documentary this 26 part series focus is mainly on Britain, but Russia and America's contribution are not skimmed over this is but one such advantage of a series of such length.

Another worthy mention is the score, the music and the whole feel of the documentary is one of turmoil, struggle and perseverance. Like a film this series leaves the viewer in no doubt of the hardship faced by the allies and the Germans during the war, its build to a climax at the end of every episode, which serves to layer the coarse of the second world war. After watching all 26 the viewer is left with an extensive knowledge about the war and astonished at just how much we owe to the members of the previous generation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] An ultra-nervous [[old]] [[man]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[terrorized]] by the news that a gang is stalking the [[city]] and [[prominent]] [[citizens]] are [[disappearing]], [[really]] panics when [[someone]] [[throws]] a [[rock]] through his [[window]] with a [[message]] [[tied]] to it, [[saying]] "You will be [[next]]!"

He [[calls]] the detective [[agency]] [[wondering]] where are the [[guys]] he [[asked]] for [[earlier]]. Of course, it's the Stooges, who couldn't [[respond]] because had [[come]] into the office, robbed them and [[tied]] them up. Some detectives! The [[moment]] poor [[Mr]]. Goodrich hangs up the [[phone]] and [[says]], "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "[[Nico]]" [[appears]] out of a [[secret]] [[panel]] in the [[room]] and chokes him unconscious. We [[next]] [[find]] out that his trusted [[employees]] are anything but that. Now these [[crooks]] have to [[deal]] with the "detectives" that are [[coming]] by the [[house]] for [[Mr]]. Goodrich.

Some of the [[gags]], like Moe and Larry's [[wrinkles]], are [[getting]] a bit [[old]], but some of them will [[provoke]] [[laughs]] if I [[see]] them 100 [[times]]. I [[always]] [[laugh]] at Shemp [[trying]] to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a [[classic]] [[routine]] with a [[long]], accordion-like camera lens. The [[act]] he [[puts]] on when he's poisoned is [[always]] funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was [[taking]] the [[great]] Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were [[always]] [[great]] in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this [[film]], An ultra-nervous [[elderly]] [[males]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[frightened]] by the news that a gang is stalking the [[ville]] and [[conspicuous]] [[citizen]] are [[vanished]], [[truthfully]] panics when [[whoever]] [[casts]] a [[boulder]] through his [[luna]] with a [[messages]] [[associated]] to it, [[arguing]] "You will be [[imminent]]!"

He [[invited]] the detective [[organisations]] [[asking]] where are the [[boys]] he [[inquired]] for [[previous]]. Of course, it's the Stooges, who couldn't [[cater]] because had [[arrived]] into the office, robbed them and [[linked]] them up. Some detectives! The [[time]] poor [[Herr]]. Goodrich hangs up the [[tel]] and [[asserts]], "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "[[Nikko]]" [[appearing]] out of a [[covert]] [[panels]] in the [[chamber]] and chokes him unconscious. We [[imminent]] [[unearthed]] out that his trusted [[personnel]] are anything but that. Now these [[frauds]] have to [[treating]] with the "detectives" that are [[forthcoming]] by the [[residential]] for [[Herr]]. Goodrich.

Some of the [[jokes]], like Moe and Larry's [[ripples]], are [[obtain]] a bit [[longtime]], but some of them will [[induce]] [[grin]] if I [[seeing]] them 100 [[dates]]. I [[repeatedly]] [[laughing]] at Shemp [[tempting]] to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a [[conventional]] [[habitual]] with a [[lengthy]], accordion-like camera lens. The [[legislation]] he [[raises]] on when he's poisoned is [[repeatedly]] funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was [[pick]] the [[large]] Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were [[continually]] [[wondrous]] in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this [[kino]], --------------------------------------------- Result 1586 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] My parents [[took]] me to this movie when I was nine years [[old]]. I have never [[forgotten]] it. I had never before seen [[anything]] as [[beautiful]] as [[Elizabeth]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she [[made]] Elephant Walk) [[Remember]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[see]] anything else on the screen. I just wanted to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has [[begun]] to [[show]] her age, (She's [[almost]] seventy-four) but I still [[believe]] her to be one of the most [[beautiful]] and breathtaking women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several [[times]] since, and it is a sappy melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, [[magnificent]] scenery, the very [[impressive]] elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human [[arrogance]] in the [[face]] of nature.

[[All]] in all, a well-spent [[couple]] of [[hours]] [[watching]] the [[movie]] channel or a rented video. My parents [[taken]] me to this movie when I was nine years [[ancient]]. I have never [[forget]] it. I had never before seen [[algo]] as [[wondrous]] as [[Elise]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she [[introduced]] Elephant Walk) [[Reminisce]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[seeing]] anything else on the screen. I just wanted to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has [[launching]] to [[exhibitions]] her age, (She's [[roughly]] seventy-four) but I still [[believing]] her to be one of the most [[handsome]] and breathtaking women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several [[time]] since, and it is a sappy melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, [[super]] scenery, the very [[amazing]] elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human [[swagger]] in the [[encounter]] of nature.

[[Everything]] in all, a well-spent [[pair]] of [[hour]] [[staring]] the [[film]] channel or a rented video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably the most boring, worse and useless film I have seen last year. The plot that was meant to have some philosophical aspects emerged to me as a very bad hollow copy of the matrix, with plenty of clichés: the lone wolf cop, good looking, psychologically disturbed, sleeping with his gun... + nice hard worker and shy, but good looking she-scientist, you add a 2 cent plot and you have I, Robot! I was terribly disturbed by the obvious advertising of brands like FedEx,Audi,converse etc. This movie stinks the commercialization and tend to be more a poor ad spot that unfortunately will not end after 30 sec. I wouldn't recommend this to my worse enemy, if you have some spare time, watch a good TV program instead or better read a nice book. --------------------------------------------- Result 1588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] because I [[like]] [[Nicolas]] Cage and well, I [[found]] it [[strange]] and [[completely]] [[pointless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copy]] of it. Wow. what a [[difference]]. The [[original]] one was way better. I'd [[like]] you all to know it did originally actually make a [[statement]], it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the [[Christian]] public [[expressing]] their fear of paganism. [[If]] you dig [[deeper]] into it it also makes [[comments]] on [[life]] but I don't want to go into [[details]], just, [[simply]] put, if you were [[disappointed]] and you'd like to know what it [[SHOULD]] look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a [[little]] dated, but A [[lot]] better. I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] because I [[likes]] [[Nikolaus]] Cage and well, I [[discoveries]] it [[inquisitive]] and [[wholly]] [[meaningless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copying]] of it. Wow. what a [[divergence]]. The [[upfront]] one was way better. I'd [[iike]] you all to know it did originally actually make a [[declaration]], it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the [[Cristian]] public [[expressed]] their fear of paganism. [[Though]] you dig [[closer]] into it it also makes [[feedback]] on [[living]] but I don't want to go into [[clarification]], just, [[straightforward]] put, if you were [[frustrating]] and you'd like to know what it [[NEEDS]] look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a [[petite]] dated, but A [[batches]] better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I [[really]] have [[problems]] rating this movie. It is [[directed]] brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of [[money]] in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), [[editing]] and [[cinematography]] are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[sick]] [[movies]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... I [[truthfully]] have [[disorders]] rating this movie. It is [[geared]] brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of [[cash]] in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), [[edited]] and [[movie]] are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[indisposed]] [[filmmaking]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... --------------------------------------------- Result 1590 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can't for the [[life]] of me remember why--I must have had a [[free]] ticket or something--but I [[saw]] this movie in the [[theater]] when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[travesty]] someone dared to call a [[film]], and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. [[Unfortunately]] I stuck it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the [[worst]] mistakes of my life [[thus]] far. My [[offense]] became pure [[horror]] when just before the [[closing]] [[credits]] the smarmy [[demon]] child sticks his head out from behind a sign and [[says]] "Look for [[Problem]] [[Child]] 2, coming [[soon]]!" That was hands-down THE most [[terrifying]] [[moment]] ever [[recorded]] on [[film]].

The plot, if I [[recall]] correctly, [[involved]] [[John]] [[Ritter]] and [[perhaps]] his [[wife]] ([[Lord]], how I've tried without [[success]] to [[block]] this film out of my mind) [[adopting]] a "[[problem]] [[child]]." Maybe they [[think]] they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their [[intent]], they fail miserably because from first [[frame]] to last this child [[remains]] the brattiest, rudest, most [[horrid]] demon-spawn ever to [[hit]] the big screen. [[Forget]] Damian, forget Rosemary's [[Baby]]. This kid takes the cake. The only [[difference]] is, we are [[supposed]] to feel sorry for him because he's a "[[problem]] child." However, this is impossible since this child is [[quite]] likely the most [[unsympathetic]] [[character]] ever portrayed. You [[want]] to [[kill]] him through the entire [[film]], and when (SPOILER, like [[anyone]] cares) John Ritter decides to keep the [[vile]] hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in [[shocked]] [[disgust]] (like several of the people at the [[theater]] where I saw it did).

This is only the second [[movie]] I have [[given]] a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by [[God]] I couldn't [[tell]] you which was worse. John Ritter had a [[quote]] in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! I can't for the [[lives]] of me remember why--I must have had a [[libre]] ticket or something--but I [[noticed]] this movie in the [[drama]] when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[masquerade]] someone dared to call a [[filmmaking]], and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. [[Sadly]] I stuck it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the [[hardest]] mistakes of my life [[then]] far. My [[crimes]] became pure [[terror]] when just before the [[closure]] [[appropriations]] the smarmy [[devil]] child sticks his head out from behind a sign and [[say]] "Look for [[Problems]] [[Kids]] 2, coming [[quickly]]!" That was hands-down THE most [[creepy]] [[time]] ever [[inscribed]] on [[flick]].

The plot, if I [[remember]] correctly, [[implicated]] [[Jon]] [[Knight]] and [[possibly]] his [[femme]] ([[God]], how I've tried without [[successes]] to [[blocking]] this film out of my mind) [[taking]] a "[[problems]] [[kids]]." Maybe they [[reckon]] they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their [[intentions]], they fail miserably because from first [[framework]] to last this child [[stays]] the brattiest, rudest, most [[frightful]] demon-spawn ever to [[knocked]] the big screen. [[Forgot]] Damian, forget Rosemary's [[Honey]]. This kid takes the cake. The only [[dispute]] is, we are [[suspected]] to feel sorry for him because he's a "[[trouble]] child." However, this is impossible since this child is [[rather]] likely the most [[insensitive]] [[traits]] ever portrayed. You [[wants]] to [[murder]] him through the entire [[filmmaking]], and when (SPOILER, like [[everybody]] cares) John Ritter decides to keep the [[hateful]] hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in [[surprised]] [[antipathy]] (like several of the people at the [[movies]] where I saw it did).

This is only the second [[filmmaking]] I have [[gave]] a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by [[Goodness]] I couldn't [[telling]] you which was worse. John Ritter had a [[quoting]] in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! --------------------------------------------- Result 1591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This "[[film]]" is a [[travesty]]. No, wait--an [[abomination]]. NO, WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[WORST]] film ever [[made]] featuring [[beloved]] characters created and [[established]] by other actors.

I thought "Inspector Clouseau" with [[Alan]] Arkin (!) instead of [[Peter]] Sellers was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but even daring to "remake" Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy is asinine and [[money]] grubbing.

Mr. Laurel and Mr. Hardy have been dead, respectively, since 1957 and 1965. Why anyone would even begin to imagine that suitable updates for L & H would be in the persona of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is beyond me. I tuned in fully expecting to be horrified and embarrassed and I certainly wasn't disappointed. Everyone involved in this pathetic, [[moronic]], [[disgrace]] should be blackballed from anything and everything associated with Hollywood and film-making. [[AVOID]] THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED. This "[[filmmaking]]" is a [[farce]]. No, wait--an [[monstrosity]]. NO, WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[PIRE]] film ever [[accomplished]] featuring [[sweetie]] characters created and [[crafted]] by other actors.

I thought "Inspector Clouseau" with [[Alain]] Arkin (!) instead of [[Pete]] Sellers was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but even daring to "remake" Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy is asinine and [[cash]] grubbing.

Mr. Laurel and Mr. Hardy have been dead, respectively, since 1957 and 1965. Why anyone would even begin to imagine that suitable updates for L & H would be in the persona of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is beyond me. I tuned in fully expecting to be horrified and embarrassed and I certainly wasn't disappointed. Everyone involved in this pathetic, [[dumb]], [[shaming]] should be blackballed from anything and everything associated with Hollywood and film-making. [[AVERTED]] THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED. --------------------------------------------- Result 1592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] OK its not the best [[film]] I've ever seen but at the same [[time]] I've been able to [[sit]] and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the [[first]] [[part]] of the first short [[story]] i [[wondered]] what the [[hell]] i was [[watching]] but at the same time it was so [[awful]] i loved it [[cheap]] laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. OK its not the best [[filmmaking]] I've ever seen but at the same [[times]] I've been able to [[seated]] and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the [[firstly]] [[parties]] of the first short [[histories]] i [[questioned]] what the [[inferno]] i was [[staring]] but at the same time it was so [[shocking]] i loved it [[inexpensive]] laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1593 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Presenting Lily Mars may have provided Judy Garland with one of the easier roles she had while at MGM because Lily Mars is definitely a character she could identify with. A young girl with talent enough for ten, she knows she has what it takes to make it in the theater no matter how much producer Van Heflin from her home town discourages her.

I really liked Judy in this one as the girl determined to make it in the theater. Because it is Judy Garland with the talent of Judy Garland you in the audience know she has the right stuff even if it takes Van Heflin nearly the whole movie to be convinced.

Both Judy and Heflin hail from the same small town, Heflin's dad was the town doctor who delivered her and Heflin while he may have moved away and become a big producer on Broadway, their respective moms, Fay Bainter and Spring Byington have kept in touch. That's her entrée, but Heflin's constantly barraged with stagestruck kids, but never anyone quite like Lily Mars.

No real big song hits came out of Presenting Lily Mars for Garland, though she sings all her numbers. The best in the film is a revival of that gaslight era chestnut, Every Little Movement Has A Meaning All Its Own. Judy sings it with Connie Gilchrist playing the cleaning lady in a Broadway theater where Heflin's show is being produced. Gilchrist was a star back in the days of the FloraDora Girls and she and Judy deliver the song in grand style with Connie. It's the best scene in the film as Gilchrist encourages Judy to keep at it. Composer Karl Hoschna had died a long time ago, but lyricist Otto Harbach was still alive and I'm betting he liked what he heard.

European musical star Marta Eggerth is in Presenting Lily Mars as the show's star who's at first bemused, then angry and finally, understanding of Garland and Heflin. She did a couple of films with MGM and then went back to Europe for more work on the continent. I'm betting MGM didn't quite know what to do with her and her thick Hungarian accent, though Louis B. Mayer never met a soprano he didn't like.

Van Heflin does well as the patient producer who puts up with a lot from Garland and Eggerth. Heflin was just coming off his Oscar for Johnny Eager the previous year and he and Garland wouldn't appear to be an ideal screen team, but they're not bad together.

Presenting Lily Mars is a fine showcase for the talents of Judy Garland. And she didn't have to share the screen in another backstage film with Mickey Rooney. --------------------------------------------- Result 1594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[killed]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[comedy]], but it's um. [[squalid]]. The [[plot]] is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so [[petty]] and disturbed and [[conveniently]] contrived I [[ultimately]] found it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an [[uneven]], goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[killings]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[humour]], but it's um. [[filthy]]. The [[intrigue]] is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so [[inconsequential]] and disturbed and [[easily]] contrived I [[eventually]] found it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an [[lopsided]], goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] How can [[someone]] [[NOT]] like this [[movie]]??? This [[movie]] is so good, that the first [[week]] I [[saw]] it on the shelf at the [[video]] [[store]] it was [[stolen]]....[[BEST]] [[Horror]] Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know [[HAHAHA]]..[[How]] is that [[NOT]] funny? The only [[movie]] that [[comes]] [[close]] to [[touching]] this is Bride of Chucky and that was just [[great]]!! How can [[person]] [[NOPE]] like this [[cinematography]]??? This [[cinematographic]] is so good, that the first [[chow]] I [[watched]] it on the shelf at the [[videotape]] [[boutique]] it was [[stealing]]....[[BETTER]] [[Abomination]] Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know [[HAHAHAHA]]..[[Mode]] is that [[NO]] funny? The only [[kino]] that [[arrives]] [[nearer]] to [[touches]] this is Bride of Chucky and that was just [[wondrous]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the first Tom Hanks movie I have gotten the privilege of seeing in the theater, although he is my favorite. When I heard he was going to play a hit-man, I was a little stunned thinking "can Mr. Hanks pull this one off"? And he did in high fashion. This 1930's depression era film is a about loyalty, redemption, and one path that you don't want your children stumbling down. Tom Hanks leads a stellar cast as Michael Sullivan. Being the family man, and the secret life of the contract killer for the Oscar nominated Paul Newman. This movie Tom Hanks relies more on reaction and gaze rather than dialogue, which he delivers a knockout performance.

On one night of one of his jobs, Michael's son Michael Jr., played by newcomer Tyler Hoechlin, witnesses the hit. And Michael Sr.'s partner in crime, fellow stage actor Daniel Craig can't have that information out. So he wacks out the son and wife of Michael Sr., except Michael Jr. So the two head for Chicago to get Conner Rooney(son of Paul Newman's Mr. Rooney).

The drama and intense plot really thickens from their as father trys to set things right, even though son is along for the ride. While on this deadly journey, someone has hired a hit for Michael Sr. The assassin would be the photographer of the deceased Harlen Maguire, played by a stain-teethed Jude Law.

The movie will have you feeling the old days. And with Thomas Newman's beautiful and haunting Oscar nominated score to go along with it, you can't help but appreciate this film from Oscar winning director Sam Mendes. So sit back, and enjoy the wild ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I [[give]] 3 stars only for the [[beautiful]] [[pictures]] of Africa. The [[rest]] was... well [[pretty]] boring. For about 50min we have the [[outline]] of the plot... [[In]] [[War]] of the worlds, the [[introductory]] [[part]] lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real action! This is something like:"Let's [[take]] a walk in the [[savanna]] and gasp at the [[beautiful]] sunsets!". And maybe [[deliver]] a [[message]], like "Don't [[kill]] elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[new]]" [[Steven]] Segal [[movie]], not from this... The leading actress makes me [[think]] about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much [[foundation]]! And I didn't [[see]] one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century [[woman]]! And in the [[bar]], where they [[seek]] up our hero, Swayze makes a [[comment]] about the commander that he [[looks]] like Dracula. [[Hmmm]], Bram Stoker [[wrote]] his [[book]] and [[published]] it in 1896, and it [[became]] [[famous]] in the [[next]] [[years]]. [[Livingstone]] and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. [[So]] [[unless]] the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I [[would]] cuddle with a [[nut]], but you [[get]] the point. He really manages to have that beaten [[puppy]] look on his [[face]] on [[several]] occasions. The [[movie]] stank. Way too long and increasingly [[boring]]. don't watch it! Don't [[buy]] it! It's a [[waste]] of your [[money]]! I [[confer]] 3 stars only for the [[sumptuous]] [[picture]] of Africa. The [[roosting]] was... well [[quite]] boring. For about 50min we have the [[described]] of the plot... [[Among]] [[Wars]] of the worlds, the [[preliminary]] [[parties]] lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real action! This is something like:"Let's [[taking]] a walk in the [[savannah]] and gasp at the [[sumptuous]] sunsets!". And maybe [[provide]] a [[messaging]], like "Don't [[mata]] elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[newer]]" [[Stephane]] Segal [[cinematography]], not from this... The leading actress makes me [[thought]] about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much [[basics]]! And I didn't [[seeing]] one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century [[girls]]! And in the [[barrister]], where they [[trying]] up our hero, Swayze makes a [[comments]] about the commander that he [[seem]] like Dracula. [[Ahem]], Bram Stoker [[texted]] his [[books]] and [[publicized]] it in 1896, and it [[came]] [[illustrious]] in the [[imminent]] [[olds]]. [[Livingston]] and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. [[Accordingly]] [[if]] the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I [[should]] cuddle with a [[nuts]], but you [[gets]] the point. He really manages to have that beaten [[terrier]] look on his [[confronts]] on [[assorted]] occasions. The [[movies]] stank. Way too long and increasingly [[monotonous]]. don't watch it! Don't [[procured]] it! It's a [[wastes]] of your [[moneys]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Don't [[even]] [[bother]] with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a [[classic]]) it's down right [[awful]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 [[movie]] is bad when compared to the [[book]]. This is [[silly]], movies should never be [[judged]] against the [[books]] they are [[taken]] from. They are 2 completely different [[art]] [[forms]] (as if this [[needed]] to be pointed out but apparently it does). [[If]] you [[used]] this [[criteria]] for all movies then "2001" would suck and so [[would]] "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". Don't [[yet]] [[irritate]] with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a [[typical]]) it's down right [[scary]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 [[filmmaking]] is bad when compared to the [[workbook]]. This is [[brainless]], movies should never be [[deemed]] against the [[livres]] they are [[took]] from. They are 2 completely different [[artistry]] [[shapes]] (as if this [[needs]] to be pointed out but apparently it does). [[Though]] you [[using]] this [[criterion]] for all movies then "2001" would suck and so [[should]] "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". --------------------------------------------- Result 1599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***SPOILERS*** Like some evil Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance double-play combination we have in "Omen IV" the evil seed of the deceased AntiChrist Damien Thorn come back. Terrorizing his parents his schoolmates his neighbors and finally the entire world as a she named Delia York, Asia Vieila. After being given to a "deserving" couple the Yorks Karen & Gene, Fay Grant & Michael Woods,by the Catholic Church's St. Francis orphanage.

Little Delia didn't waste any time making her peasants felt by scratching her mom at a house party. Later Delia almost get killed by a runaway truck only to have herself saved by this "Devil Dog" named Ryder. Going to school Delia takes care of the local bully by getting the big guy to wet himself in front of all his classmates. Later when his father threatens the Yorks with a law suit she has his head sliced off in a self-induced traffic accident! Delia is someone that you never mess with if you know what's good for you.

Meanwhile Dalia's dad Gene becomes a big man in town on his own, or so he thinks, by getting elected to the congress as a champion of the clean air and green trees crowd instead of letting the smog and concrete boys take over the neighborhood with his eye now on he White House itself! Did his bratty and strange daughter Delia have anything to do with Gene York's sudden good fortune?

It's only later when Jo, Ann Hearen, is hired as Delia's nanny that the truth's comes out about her strange and evil powers. Jo a New Age type realizes that Delia is a bit weird, after turning all her white crystals black, and calls her New Age Guru Noah, Jim Byrnes, to come over and check her out. Noah is so upset by what he sees in Delia Kirilian color vibrations ,all black and blue with a little pinch of red, that it flips him out so bad that he almost crashed into Delia's moms car.

Taken on a trip to a psychic festival by Jo Delia turns the entire event into an inferno setting the place, through mental telepathy, on fire and heaving everyone there run for cover including poor Noah who was at the festival and ended up with his leg broken. The and shaken and battered Guru was so shook up by the whole experience that he later checked out of the country to become a hermit in the Tibetan wilderness.

Jo herself is later thrown out, with the help of the sweet and cuddly family pet Ryder, of a second floor window to her death because she knew and talked too much. It's when Karen is again pregnant that she decides, finally, to find out the truth about the real parents of Delia. That's when she,and we in the audience, come face to face with the truth. She's not only the feared AntiChrist of Revelations she's his twin sister! Her brother the AntiChrist himself is about to come on the scene as her kid brother the sill unborn Alexander York!

Three times were more then enough for the AntiChrist coming back to earth to bring about Armageddon. The movie going public were already getting a little tired of of him and his evil adventures. With a fourth really not necessary since Daimen Thorn, the original AntiChrist, had been dead and buried for years. Were put through the usual ringer with no one believing that little Delia is "Thee" AntiChrist until it was almost too late to stop her in her deadly rounds of destroying the entire human race. The movie as bad as it is is also far too long, 97 minutes, for a horror flick that could well have told it's story is as little as 80 minutes.

Having a private eye Earl Knight, Mchael Learner,and later a former Catholic nun sister Yvonne,Megan Lehch,and now faith healer Felichy in the film only to be killed off didn't help the plot either. It only prolonged the suffering of those of us watching the movie. You could see the surprise ending coming almost as soon as the film "Omen IV" began with the bases being cleared for Delia's eventual takeover of the civilized as well as uncivilized world. What was a bit of a surprise was Delia doing it with a little help from friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Another [[demonstration]] of Kurosawa's genius, his first [[colour]] film is a darkly [[surreal]] look into the [[tragic]] [[lives]] of Tokyo [[slum]] [[dwellers]], essentially a series of interweaving vignettes [[depicting]] [[several]] groups of people eking out a [[perilous]] existence in a harsh and [[uncaring]] post-war [[shanty]] [[town]]. Swinging from [[comedy]] to tragedy and back, this [[film]] shows how people [[deal]] with the worst [[kind]] of life each in their own [[way]], [[mostly]] retreating into themselves and [[living]] in the fantasy [[worlds]] of their own [[heads]], [[withdrawing]] [[emotionally]] from those [[around]] them or drowning themselves in alcohol. [[Mixing]] kitchen-sink [[realism]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa [[toys]] [[expertly]] with the [[emotions]] of his audience, drawing [[tears]] and [[laughter]] with equal deftness. A [[wonderful]], draining experience. Another [[protest]] of Kurosawa's genius, his first [[coloring]] film is a darkly [[bizarre]] look into the [[dire]] [[vie]] of Tokyo [[squatter]] [[resident]], essentially a series of interweaving vignettes [[illustrating]] [[multiple]] groups of people eking out a [[precarious]] existence in a harsh and [[unsympathetic]] post-war [[hovel]] [[ciudad]]. Swinging from [[parody]] to tragedy and back, this [[movie]] shows how people [[addresses]] with the worst [[genre]] of life each in their own [[camino]], [[basically]] retreating into themselves and [[residing]] in the fantasy [[universes]] of their own [[leiter]], [[withdrawal]] [[psychologically]] from those [[roundabout]] them or drowning themselves in alcohol. [[Amalgam]] kitchen-sink [[realist]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa [[plaything]] [[ably]] with the [[passions]] of his audience, drawing [[crying]] and [[risa]] with equal deftness. A [[wondrous]], draining experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]]

Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[first]] Royal [[Premiere]] after WWII.

[[Remarkably]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund [[Freud]] [[Psychology]], the Founding fathers of [[America]] and [[various]] others up the [[long]] stairs (special effects in its [[infancy]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[losing]] any of its integrity.

[[Although]] [[sounding]] absurd, this [[clever]] script leads and [[dances]] the [[viewer]] between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a [[presents]] a charming [[ease]] rarely matched in cinema [[since]].

[[Be]] prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love [[story]]. Roger Livesey acts like a [[man]] possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those [[early]] post war years.



Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[fiirst]] Royal [[Debut]] after WWII.

[[Terribly]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund [[Floyd]] [[Psychiatric]], the Founding fathers of [[Latina]] and [[several]] others up the [[longer]] stairs (special effects in its [[debut]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[loses]] any of its integrity.

[[Though]] [[probing]] absurd, this [[smarter]] script leads and [[dancers]] the [[bystander]] between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a [[introduces]] a charming [[lighten]] rarely matched in cinema [[because]].

[[Are]] prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love [[conte]]. Roger Livesey acts like a [[dawg]] possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those [[prematurely]] post war years.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Need a lesson in pure, abject failure?? Look no further than "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom", an abysmal, dirt-poor, disgrace of a flick. As we all know, decent moovies tend to sprout horrible, horrible offspring: "Halloween" begat many, many bad 80's slasher flicks; "Mad Max" begat many, many bad 80's "futuristic wasteland fantasy" flicks; and "Conan the Barbarian" begat a whole slew of terrible, horrible, incredibly bad 80's sword-and-sorcery flicks. "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom" scrapes the bottom of that 80's barrel, in a way that's truly insulting to barrels. A young runt named Simon recaptured his "good kingdom" from an evil sorcerer with the help of a mangy rug, a garden gnome, a topless bimbo mermaid, and a tired-looking, pudgy Bo Svenson. Svenson("North Dallas Forty", "Inglorious Bastards", "Delta Force"), a long-time b-moovie muscleman, looks barely able to swing his aluminum foil sword. However, he manages to defeat the forces of evil, which consist of the evil sorcerer, "Shurka", and his army of badly costumed monsters, giants, and midgets. At one point, a paper mache bat on a string attacks, but is eaten by a 1/2 hidden sock puppet, pitifully presented as some sort of dragon. The beginning of the film consists of what can only politely be described as bits of scenes scooped up from the cutting-room floor of udder bad moovies, stitched together in the vain hope of setting the scene for the film, and over-earnestly narrated by some guy who never appears again. Words cannot properly convey the jaw-dropping cheapness of this film; the producers probably spent moore moolah feeding Svenson's ever expanding gullet than on the cheesy fx of this flick. And we're talkin' Brie here, folks... :=8P Director Hector Olivera("Barbarian Queen") presents this mish-mash in a hopelessly confused, confuddled, and cliched manner, destroying any possible hint of clear, linear storytelling. The acting is dreadful, the production levels below shoe-string, and the plot is one tired cliche after another paraded before our weary eyes. That they actually made a sequel(!!!) makes the MooCow's brain whirl. James Horner's("Braveheart", "Titanic","The Rock") cheesy moosic from "Battle Beyond the Stars" was lifted, screaming and kicking, and mercilessly grafted onto this turkey - bet this one doesn't pop up on his resume. Folks, you gotta see this to believe it. The MooCow says as a cheapo rent when there is NOTHING else to watch, well, it's moore fun than watching dust bunnies mate. Barely. :=8P --------------------------------------------- Result 1603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't really know where to start. The acting in this movie was really terrible, I can't remember seeing so many 'actors' in one film that weren't able to act. Not only the acting was bad, the characters were incredibly stupid as well.

Then there's the action. I believe that even children know that when someone gets shot, there's blood involved. But when someone gets shot in Snitch'd for ten (!!) times, there's no blood at all. Well, I guess that's just me.

To make a long story short (because believe me, I can go on for hours about this film), this is without a doubt the worst film I ever saw. This film should be number 1 in the bottom 100 without a doubt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Uta]] Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard [[textbook]] in many college theater courses. In the [[book]], Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. [[In]] the Presentational approach, the [[actor]] [[focuses]] on [[realizing]] the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. [[In]] the Representational approach, the [[actor]] [[tries]] to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational [[approach]] to acting was still partially in vogue when this Hamlet was [[made]]. British theater has a [[long]] [[history]] of this [[style]] of acting, and Olivier [[could]] be [[said]] to be the ultimate [[king]] of the Representational [[school]].

[[Time]] has not been [[kind]] to this school of acting, or to this [[movie]]. Nearly every [[working]] actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern [[eye]], Olivier's [[highly]] enunciated, [[stylized]] delivery is stodgy, [[stiff]] and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that [[would]] have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the [[movie]] creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[unintentionally]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of [[note]] in this [[Hamlet]], putting in a [[good]] essay at the [[Queen]], despite the painfully [[obvious]] age [[differences]] (he was 41; she was 26). The other [[actors]] in this [[movie]] have no [[chance]] to get [[anything]] [[else]] of [[significance]] [[done]], given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the [[camera]]! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the [[insecurity]] of the Shakespearean [[stage]] actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." [[Otta]] Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard [[manuel]] in many college theater courses. In the [[ledger]], Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. [[Across]] the Presentational approach, the [[actress]] [[spotlight]] on [[accomplishing]] the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. [[Across]] the Representational approach, the [[protagonist]] [[seeks]] to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational [[approaching]] to acting was still partially in vogue when this Hamlet was [[accomplished]]. British theater has a [[lang]] [[tale]] of this [[elegance]] of acting, and Olivier [[wo]] be [[say]] to be the ultimate [[emperor]] of the Representational [[teaching]].

[[Times]] has not been [[types]] to this school of acting, or to this [[kino]]. Nearly every [[collaboration]] actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern [[ojo]], Olivier's [[greatly]] enunciated, [[stylish]] delivery is stodgy, [[tough]] and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that [[should]] have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the [[filmmaking]] creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[involuntarily]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of [[observes]] in this [[Hamlets]], putting in a [[alright]] essay at the [[Quinn]], despite the painfully [[noticeable]] age [[variance]] (he was 41; she was 26). The other [[actresses]] in this [[filmmaking]] have no [[opportunities]] to get [[something]] [[elsewhere]] of [[importance]] [[doing]], given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the [[cameras]]! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the [[insecure]] of the Shakespearean [[ballpark]] actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." --------------------------------------------- Result 1605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] All you [[need]] to know about this [[film]] [[happens]] in the first five minutes: it looks cool, it has a [[solid]] [[original]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[period]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[get]] that message, you [[may]] as well switch to another [[film]].

Davies's [[protagonist]] [[ignores]] his [[beautiful]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[life]] who cares about him. [[Then]] by the [[time]] he [[takes]] her [[advice]] to [[join]] her in the [[real]] world--instead of living a fantasy [[film]] of which he's the [[imagined]] director--he does so by [[pushing]] her aside and [[pairing]] up with an [[actress]] he's idealized beyond [[reason]]. A [[couple]] [[laughs]] and some thoughtful art [[direction]] are the only things worth watching here.

The [[film]] is [[also]] interesting as [[documentation]] of Jason Schwartzman's fall from Mount Rushmore. [[In]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's annoying brattiness was something to be [[overcome]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's family connection [[clearly]] landed him in this role; here's hoping his [[choices]] [[improve]]. All you [[gotta]] to know about this [[filmmaking]] [[comes]] in the first five minutes: it looks cool, it has a [[robust]] [[upfront]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[times]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[obtain]] that message, you [[maggio]] as well switch to another [[flick]].

Davies's [[player]] [[ignoring]] his [[sumptuous]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[living]] who cares about him. [[Later]] by the [[moment]] he [[pick]] her [[tips]] to [[participates]] her in the [[veritable]] world--instead of living a fantasy [[filmmaking]] of which he's the [[figured]] director--he does so by [[prompting]] her aside and [[matches]] up with an [[actor]] he's idealized beyond [[motif]]. A [[match]] [[giggles]] and some thoughtful art [[directions]] are the only things worth watching here.

The [[cinema]] is [[similarly]] interesting as [[papers]] of Jason Schwartzman's fall from Mount Rushmore. [[Among]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's annoying brattiness was something to be [[overcoming]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's family connection [[definitely]] landed him in this role; here's hoping his [[select]] [[enhanced]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1606 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Of [[life]] in (some) colleges. Of course there were artistic [[licenses]] [[taken]], but some of what you saw in this film [[go]] on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the [[races]] pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are [[schools]] that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when class lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for [[class]], they (students) [[seem]] to just [[hang]] around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not [[really]]. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? [[Exaggerated]]? [[Maybe]]. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just [[hang]] around with their own DOES happen. [[Minus]] the Hollywood exaggerations, the race [[thing]] [[hit]] pretty close to [[home]] for me. Of [[iife]] in (some) colleges. Of course there were artistic [[authorisation]] [[picked]], but some of what you saw in this film [[going]] on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the [[careers]] pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are [[institutes]] that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when class lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for [[categories]], they (students) [[appears]] to just [[heng]] around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not [[truthfully]]. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? [[Overblown]]? [[Presumably]]. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just [[heng]] around with their own DOES happen. [[Least]] the Hollywood exaggerations, the race [[stuff]] [[knocked]] pretty close to [[lodgings]] for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a [[confused]] and [[incoherent]] mess of [[interminable]] scenes of boring [[dialogues]] and monologues. That is no exaggeration: you have to make a tremendous effort to [[even]] try to become involved with it.

I sincerely thought Fassbinder would make [[something]] interesting in [[order]] to tell why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in every scene [[somebody]] is trying to explain: "when he was [[young]], this happened..." and "he just came back from Casablanca and [[ordered]] to [[cut]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a [[slaughter]] house talking with a friend prostitute ([[certainly]] a [[slaughter]] house is the [[best]] place for a [[pleasant]] little [[chat]]), and while [[telling]] her the [[story]] of Elvira's [[life]], Fassbinder shows the killing of one cow after the other. It is difficult to [[choose]] between giving attention to the [[disturbing]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very forced and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to die".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- [[indulgence]]. This is a [[disconcerted]] and [[unconnected]] mess of [[infinite]] scenes of boring [[discussions]] and monologues. That is no exaggeration: you have to make a tremendous effort to [[yet]] try to become involved with it.

I sincerely thought Fassbinder would make [[somethings]] interesting in [[orders]] to tell why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in every scene [[everyone]] is trying to explain: "when he was [[youthful]], this happened..." and "he just came back from Casablanca and [[decreed]] to [[slice]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a [[cull]] house talking with a friend prostitute ([[definitely]] a [[carnage]] house is the [[optimum]] place for a [[pleasurable]] little [[chatter]]), and while [[tell]] her the [[fairytales]] of Elvira's [[vie]], Fassbinder shows the killing of one cow after the other. It is difficult to [[elects]] between giving attention to the [[worrying]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very forced and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to die".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- [[leniency]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] "Radiofreccia" is still a good [[surprise]] in [[Italian]] [[cinema]]. The [[film]] is [[based]] on a book of Italian songwriter Luciano Ligabue, who [[also]] directs the [[movie]] and writes the music [[score]] -of course.

The [[film]] is a [[portrait]] of [[north]] Italian province [[life]], in the Emilia Romagna [[region]]. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radios]] -one of the boys of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Youth]] wishes, [[friendship]], [[love]], sex, individual [[dramas]] and unemployment are among the [[themes]], but the film [[speaks]] [[also]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of heroin slavery.

Without being [[boring]] and moralist, the [[story]] flows very well; the spontaneity of [[actors]] is strong and the [[way]] of directing as well. [[Obviously]] Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[neither]] Fellini nor a movie [[professional]], first of all he's a [[musician]]. But he [[succeeds]] in making a [[good]] [[product]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the [[success]] with his [[second]] [[movie]] "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[In]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only [[star]] is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most [[popular]] young [[Italian]] [[actors]]. See in a [[small]] role another [[Italian]] songwriter -[[Francesco]] Guccini, he's the [[nice]] communist barman and football [[trainer]]! "Radiofreccia" is still a good [[amaze]] in [[Ltalian]] [[theaters]]. The [[films]] is [[founded]] on a book of Italian songwriter Luciano Ligabue, who [[apart]] directs the [[movies]] and writes the music [[scoring]] -of course.

The [[kino]] is a [[depiction]] of [[norte]] Italian province [[vida]], in the Emilia Romagna [[area]]. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radio]] -one of the boys of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Teenage]] wishes, [[friendliness]], [[adored]], sex, individual [[drama]] and unemployment are among the [[item]], but the film [[talk]] [[apart]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of heroin slavery.

Without being [[tiresome]] and moralist, the [[histories]] flows very well; the spontaneity of [[players]] is strong and the [[pathway]] of directing as well. [[Certainly]] Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[either]] Fellini nor a movie [[occupational]], first of all he's a [[music]]. But he [[succeeding]] in making a [[alright]] [[merchandise]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the [[avail]] with his [[secondly]] [[cinematography]] "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[At]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only [[stars]] is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most [[folk]] young [[Ltalian]] [[actresses]]. See in a [[teeny]] role another [[Ltalian]] songwriter -[[Francisco]] Guccini, he's the [[delightful]] communist barman and football [[instructors]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the first regular filmed Columbo movie episode but yet it aired as the second, after Steven Spielberg's "Columbo: Murder by the Book". It's also at the same time among one of the better ones!

Bernard L. Kowalski was one great creative director! No wonder that they later asked him to direct three more Columbo movies. The movie has some real creative and innovative shot sequences and the movie as a whole is also clearly made with style, passion and eye for detail. Every shot connects and is a reason why this movie is better and also better looking just any other average made for TV movie. It's definitely one of the better directed Columbo movies.

It's a quit original Columbo entry for a couple of reasons. The murder is more or less an accident and was an impulsive act. So the killer this time doesn't have any time to plan out the 'perfect murder' in advance and his to clean up any of the traces afterward and has to dispose the body. The killer in this movie is not only being handled as the man who committed the crime but more as the man who helps out Lieutenant Columbo to solve the murder. It makes the character a more interesting and layered one as well and also helps to make the way Columbo solves the whole crime seem way more interesting as well because of that. Of course Columbo starts to suspect him pretty early on and as always he comes to solution by making himself vulnerable and look more stupid than he of course truly is and by gaining the killer's trust. This is obviously no spoiler since this is the way every Columbo movie gets set-up. I liked the story of the movie and how it progressed.

It also helps the movie that it has such a fine cast. At the time of this movie Peter Falk had really made the Columbo character his own and the character at this was already fully developed. Robert Culp is truly great as the short tempered Brimmer. Funny thing is that he would later star in three different Columbo movies again and one "Mrs. Columbo" episode, only in totally different roles. He even played the murderer in a couple of those movies as well again. He by the way was not the only actor that did this in other later Columbo movies. Also the great Ray Milland makes an appearance in this movie, as the husband of the victim.

All in all, a real great early Columbo movie and among the better ones out of the long running series of movies.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[House]] Of [[Games]]" is definitely not without its flaws- plot [[holes]], stiff acting, final scenes- but they do little to [[detract]] from the [[fun]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your head. "[[House]] Of Games" does almost everything a good thriller is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a [[huge]] feat given the [[fact]] that we're dealing with the the [[world]] of confidence men and the [[cons]] they perpetrate. So it [[stands]] to reason that we never really know what's going on, even [[though]] we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[film]] [[worthwhile]] for those who are game; a [[film]] for which repeated viewings are indulgences [[instead]] if necessities.

It has a [[definite]] Hitchcock [[slant]] to it. The [[film]] draws on some similar [[themes]] [[found]] his 1964 [[effort]] "Marnie", [[considered]] a misfire when [[released]] but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking [[works]]. One could [[easily]] consider the [[idea]] of [[Lindsay]] Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten [[year]] [[later]] [[perhaps]]. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive [[behaviors]] which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's [[repressed]], up-tight [[character]] [[says]], "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality [[Check]] on a low [[setting]] and [[enjoy]] swimming with the sharks! "[[Domicile]] Of [[Gaming]]" is definitely not without its flaws- plot [[keyholes]], stiff acting, final scenes- but they do little to [[divert]] from the [[droll]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your head. "[[Households]] Of Games" does almost everything a good thriller is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a [[sizable]] feat given the [[facto]] that we're dealing with the the [[globe]] of confidence men and the [[jerks]] they perpetrate. So it [[standing]] to reason that we never really know what's going on, even [[nonetheless]] we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[movie]] [[meaningful]] for those who are game; a [[movie]] for which repeated viewings are indulgences [[however]] if necessities.

It has a [[concrete]] Hitchcock [[sloping]] to it. The [[cinematography]] draws on some similar [[item]] [[unearthed]] his 1964 [[endeavors]] "Marnie", [[regarded]] a misfire when [[emitted]] but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking [[cooperating]]. One could [[conveniently]] consider the [[concept]] of [[Lindsey]] Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten [[annum]] [[afterward]] [[presumably]]. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive [[behavior]] which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's [[stifled]], up-tight [[personage]] [[said]], "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality [[Verify]] on a low [[settings]] and [[enjoys]] swimming with the sharks! --------------------------------------------- Result 1611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Stan]] [[Laurel]] and Oliver Hardy had [[extensive]] (separate) film [[careers]] before they were [[eventually]] teamed. For many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Babe]] Hardy ... and throughout his [[adult]] life, [[Hardy]] was known to his friends as 'Babe'. [[While]] touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall [[act]] for Bernard Delfont, [[Hardy]] [[gave]] an interview to [[journalist]] John McCabe in which he [[explained]] the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a [[shave]] from a gay [[hairdresser]] who [[squeezed]] Hardy's plump [[cheeks]] (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

[[Although]] much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very [[dire]] indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and [[Runt]]: [[names]] which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. [[Seen]] here, [[Hardy]] [[looks]] much as he does in his early Hal Roach [[films]] with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and [[Runt]] [[epic]], is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this [[film]] has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. [[Stanley]] [[Laurier]] and Oliver Hardy had [[vast]] (separate) film [[races]] before they were [[lastly]] teamed. For many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Baby]] Hardy ... and throughout his [[adults]] life, [[Sturdy]] was known to his friends as 'Babe'. [[Although]] touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall [[law]] for Bernard Delfont, [[Resilient]] [[yielded]] an interview to [[columnist]] John McCabe in which he [[clarified]] the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a [[beard]] from a gay [[stylist]] who [[hugged]] Hardy's plump [[cheekbones]] (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

[[Despite]] much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very [[calamitous]] indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and [[Midget]]: [[name]] which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. [[Noticed]] here, [[Sturdy]] [[seems]] much as he does in his early Hal Roach [[movies]] with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and [[Midget]] [[saga]], is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this [[filmmaking]] has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. --------------------------------------------- Result 1612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I have watched quite a few Cold [[Case]] episodes over the [[years]], [[beginning]] with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[particular]] episode was not only the [[best]] of the [[best]], but has few [[rivals]] in the [[Emmy]] [[categories]]. [[Though]] some may not agree with the [[story]] content (i.[[e]]. the male-to-male romantic [[relationship]]), I doubt that anyone could watch this without being [[deeply]] moved within their [[spirit]].

The story is essentially about a [[case]] that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. [[Examples]] [[include]] their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's [[wife]] watched Coop and Jimmy drink, [[fight]], and then [[kiss]] each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only [[selected]] items were [[colored]] in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One [[key]] emotional scene was when Coop was [[confronted]] by his [[father]] after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. [[In]] this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a [[respected]] fellow officer on the force, [[confronts]] [[Coop]] about the [[rumors]] [[surrounding]] Coop's [[relationship]] with [[Jimmy]]. One can feel sorry for [[Coop]], at this point, as the [[shame]] and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped [[upon]] [[Coop]] - "You are not going to [[disgrace]] our [[family]]...and you're not my [[son]], either." - [[clearly]] indicative of the [[hostile]] [[views]] of same-sex [[relationships]] of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. I have watched quite a few Cold [[Instances]] episodes over the [[yrs]], [[starting]] with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[specific]] episode was not only the [[bestest]] of the [[nicest]], but has few [[contenders]] in the [[Emma]] [[class]]. [[If]] some may not agree with the [[histories]] content (i.[[f]]. the male-to-male romantic [[relation]]), I doubt that anyone could watch this without being [[critically]] moved within their [[wits]].

The story is essentially about a [[examples]] that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. [[Case]] [[containing]] their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's [[woman]] watched Coop and Jimmy drink, [[battles]], and then [[fucked]] each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only [[chosen]] items were [[stained]] in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One [[fundamental]] emotional scene was when Coop was [[face]] by his [[pere]] after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. [[Across]] this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a [[reputable]] fellow officer on the force, [[tackle]] [[Henhouse]] about the [[rumours]] [[neighboring]] Coop's [[rapport]] with [[Jimbo]]. One can feel sorry for [[Henhouse]], at this point, as the [[dishonor]] and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped [[after]] [[Henhouse]] - "You are not going to [[shaming]] our [[familia]]...and you're not my [[yarns]], either." - [[obviously]] indicative of the [[unfriendly]] [[opinion]] of same-sex [[ties]] of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] It is not an [[easy]] film to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[entirely]] of [[conversations]]. Yet it is so [[incredibly]] [[compelling]] and [[ruthlessly]] observational of the human [[character]], that it is, in my humble [[opinion]], one of the very [[greatest]] films of all [[time]].

The [[film]] is [[depressing]], cynical and cruel. (If you [[want]] something [[uplifting]], see [[Jacques]] Rivette's [[fantastic]] Céline and [[Julie]] [[Go]] Boating, which was made [[around]] the same [[time]]). It [[shows]] the [[idealism]] of the late 1960s to be [[nothing]] different from the [[society]] that it was [[trying]] to [[change]].

It [[involves]] a [[supposedly]] [[liberated]] ménage-à-trois between [[Alexandre]] ([[played]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), [[Marie]] ([[Bernadette]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Yet]] [[Alexandre]] is [[shown]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealous]] as any other [[man]]. The [[women]] are exposed as being willingly [[subservient]] and [[defining]] their femininity through the [[male]] gaze.

The [[film]] is an [[extremely]] [[icy]] [[end]] to the [[highly]] revolutionary French [[New]] [[Wave]]. This movement was one of the most [[significant]] movements in film [[history]] and had a [[profound]] [[effect]] on [[cinema]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[key]] [[actors]] of the [[New]] [[Wave]], having starred ([[among]] other [[films]]) in the [[influential]] Les Quatres [[Cent]] [[Coups]] (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebellious]] [[teenager]]. Director Jean Eustache is not as well known as other [[directors]] from the New [[Wave]], but he should be.

There is no improvisation (unlike in [[John]] Cassavetes's [[similar]] [[films]] [[made]] in the [[US]]) and the [[dialogue]] [[comes]] from real-life [[conversations]]. The [[film]] is resonant with Eustache's personal [[experiences]]. [[For]] [[example]], [[Francoise]] Lebrun was a [[former]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[committed]] [[suicide]] in 1981 and the real-life person that the [[character]] [[Marie]] was based on, did too. The [[anger]] and [[bitterness]] all culminate in a [[harrowing]] [[monologue]] by [[Veronika]] [[delivered]] [[directly]] to the audience, [[breaking]] down the [[coldly]] objective [[nature]] of the rest of the [[film]]. This [[mesmerising]], personal, and [[honest]] filmic statement [[remains]] one of the most [[revealing]] [[films]] of [[human]] nature around. It is not an [[easier]] film to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[absolutely]] of [[dialogues]]. Yet it is so [[remarkably]] [[convincing]] and [[cruelly]] observational of the human [[nature]], that it is, in my humble [[views]], one of the very [[larger]] films of all [[period]].

The [[movie]] is [[disheartening]], cynical and cruel. (If you [[wanting]] something [[uplift]], see [[Terence]] Rivette's [[gorgeous]] Céline and [[Jolly]] [[Going]] Boating, which was made [[throughout]] the same [[period]]). It [[displayed]] the [[ideals]] of the late 1960s to be [[anything]] different from the [[societal]] that it was [[tempting]] to [[modify]].

It [[implies]] a [[allegedly]] [[freeing]] ménage-à-trois between [[Aleksandr]] ([[served]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), [[Marries]] ([[Dominguez]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Though]] [[Alexandra]] is [[indicated]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealousy]] as any other [[males]]. The [[wife]] are exposed as being willingly [[servile]] and [[determining]] their femininity through the [[men]] gaze.

The [[movies]] is an [[terribly]] [[frozen]] [[termination]] to the [[vastly]] revolutionary French [[Novel]] [[Wavelength]]. This movement was one of the most [[cannot]] movements in film [[histories]] and had a [[deep]] [[consequences]] on [[theaters]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[principal]] [[players]] of the [[Newer]] [[Wavelength]], having starred ([[amongst]] other [[movie]]) in the [[forceful]] Les Quatres [[Cents]] [[Blows]] (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebels]] [[adolescents]]. Director Jean Eustache is not as well known as other [[administrators]] from the New [[Wavelength]], but he should be.

There is no improvisation (unlike in [[Johannes]] Cassavetes's [[analogous]] [[movies]] [[effected]] in the [[USA]]) and the [[dialog]] [[arises]] from real-life [[interviews]]. The [[cinematic]] is resonant with Eustache's personal [[experiment]]. [[At]] [[case]], [[Francois]] Lebrun was a [[antigua]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[commited]] [[suicidal]] in 1981 and the real-life person that the [[characters]] [[Marries]] was based on, did too. The [[wrath]] and [[resentment]] all culminate in a [[spooky]] [[monologues]] by [[Veronica]] [[handed]] [[immediately]] to the audience, [[violating]] down the [[coolly]] objective [[trait]] of the rest of the [[movie]]. This [[entrancing]], personal, and [[truthful]] filmic statement [[leftovers]] one of the most [[reveal]] [[kino]] of [[mankind]] nature around. --------------------------------------------- Result 1614 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies you see in the video store that you just HAVE to get because it just looks so horribly bad. And indeed, we couldn't take most of it. There was a lot of fast-forwarding going on.

But then we came across a scene where Robert Englund seduces the female protagonist (her name somehow slips my mind at this time). CRIPES. I've never watched a single scene from a film so many times (I'm estimating forty or so). And I've never laughed so hard in my life. You see, Englund has this thing for showing off his loins. I last saw the film a couple months ago, but I can't stop laughing as I type. Anyway, the scene is a montage of shots-- Englund ripping off the lingerie of the girl, Englund riding a horse naked, and some mysterious woman fellating a snake's head. This is absolute genius. You've got to see it for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I expected alot from this movie. Kinda like Lee as a Naustradamous like caracter but instead all I got was a waste of time and a boring movie. I can't even explain this movie. It had wooden acting, terrible script from pieces from the Bible like hurricanes, tidal waves and earthquakes. But that was at the end! The rest of it I had to wait and hope that something meaningfull would happen but it didn't. This movie is about a couple that tries to find out the changes going on in the world like places in China where there was an earthquake and end up at a convent run by eight nuns and a priest. The convent end up being the key to the misshappenings. The whole movie is missleading and boring. One of Lees worst. --------------------------------------------- Result 1616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the only scenes wich made me laugh where the ones with christopher walken in it(the crazy filmdirector)the rest of the movie was just boring.in the first hour or so nothing really happens.jokes which supposed to be funny aren't and zeta jones douglas is really overacting.julia roberts does a routine job of the former ugly duck (yeah right!) into the girl next door (where did i see this before?) who gets the guy.for short.i really didn't care what would happen with the main characters.if cusack really fell of the building in a suicide attempt the movie could have been more interresting to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] No doubt, when Madonna and [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]] married, it was because they both thought it would [[help]] their movie [[careers]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that level it was a match [[made]] in [[hell]]. [[After]] [[nearly]] 20 [[years]] of trying to become a respected [[actress]] (or "octress" as she [[might]] have [[pronounced]] it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't [[get]] out of herself long enough to [[turn]] in a performance that [[anyone]] with [[taste]] [[could]] even [[call]] decent. And that's the thing that makes people [[dislike]] her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her [[audience]]. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. No doubt, when Madonna and [[Bloke]] [[Ricci]] married, it was because they both thought it would [[aids]] their movie [[carrera]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that level it was a match [[effected]] in [[bordello]]. [[Upon]] [[almost]] 20 [[aged]] of trying to become a respected [[actor]] (or "octress" as she [[apt]] have [[uttered]] it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't [[obtain]] out of herself long enough to [[transforming]] in a performance that [[everyone]] with [[liking]] [[wo]] even [[invitation]] decent. And that's the thing that makes people [[antipathy]] her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her [[viewers]]. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had suspicions the movie was going to be bad. I'm a Duke's fan from way back. Have three years of the TV series on DVD. Well I was right. Took the family to see it. I really wanted to see the General jump again and some of the chase jump scenes were good. But to sum it up, the movie was a dumbed down tarted up version of the TV show.

Jessica Simpson was pathetic. While I can honestly say that the original Daisy's outfits were just as revealing, Jessica Simpson's interpretation of Daisy was simply awful. Sorrel Booke and Denver Pyle must be rolling in their graves as well.

Don't waste your money. If you are an old tried and true Dukes fan like me and my three kids are you will be very disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] David Mamet's [[film]] [[debut]] has been hailed by many as a [[real]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the [[first]] time recently and couldn't [[understand]] what was [[supposed]] to be so [[great]] about it.

The movie is about a [[female]] [[psychologist]] named Margaret who is [[also]] a best-selling author. [[Margaret]] has become [[disillusioned]] by her [[profession]] and her inability to really [[help]] anyone. She tries to [[rectify]] this by [[helping]] [[settle]] her patient's gambling debt to a [[shark]] named [[Mike]] (played by Joe Mantegna, who is the only [[reason]] to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a [[scam]] he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his [[cronies]] to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

[[First]] of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[predictable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird [[line]] reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main [[character]]) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, [[Margaret]] is [[supposedly]] an intelligent [[psychologist]] who is an [[expert]] at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. David Mamet's [[movie]] [[premiere]] has been hailed by many as a [[actual]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the [[firstly]] time recently and couldn't [[understood]] what was [[suspected]] to be so [[large]] about it.

The movie is about a [[girl]] [[psychiatry]] named Margaret who is [[apart]] a best-selling author. [[Marguerite]] has become [[frustrated]] by her [[occupations]] and her inability to really [[succour]] anyone. She tries to [[remedy]] this by [[helped]] [[settling]] her patient's gambling debt to a [[mako]] named [[Mick]] (played by Joe Mantegna, who is the only [[cause]] to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a [[hustle]] he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his [[pals]] to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

[[Firstly]] of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[foreseeable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird [[bloodline]] reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main [[traits]]) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, [[Marguerite]] is [[ostensibly]] an intelligent [[psychiatry]] who is an [[specialists]] at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. --------------------------------------------- Result 1620 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This [[movie]] is goofy as [[hell]]! I [[think]] it was [[written]] as a serious [[film]], but then when it came time to [[film]], Michael Cooney [[said]] "[[Hey]], let's [[throw]] in some [[humor]] and [[spice]] it up!" The [[characters]] are [[actually]] slightly [[developed]], too. Oh, and the [[death]] sequences are the [[best]]. One thing I [[hate]], [[though]], was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? This [[cinematography]] is goofy as [[dammit]]! I [[thinks]] it was [[wrote]] as a serious [[cinema]], but then when it came time to [[movie]], Michael Cooney [[say]] "[[Hello]], let's [[toss]] in some [[comedy]] and [[gravy]] it up!" The [[character]] are [[genuinely]] slightly [[devised]], too. Oh, and the [[dies]] sequences are the [[bestest]]. One thing I [[loathed]], [[if]], was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? --------------------------------------------- Result 1621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I bought my Toy Story tape when it came out to Video after being released in theaters I saw a trailer for this that said from the creators of Toy Story. As soon as I saw that I knew this was gonna be a good feature! I was right! A Bug's Life like Toy Story is great story, great characters and great animation. My favorite characters are Dim the rhino Beetle voiced by Brad Garrett and Hemlich the Caterpillar voiced by the late Pixar Storyman Joe Ranft. My favorite scene is when Slim the walking stick (David Hyde Pierce) lifts up Hemlich trying to distract the Bird and Hemlich's like You hoo Mr. Early Bird. How about a nice tasting worm on a stick and Slim's like I'm going to snap! I'm going to snap! I just died laughing at that scene. Being a big fan of insects I think A Bug's Life is my favorite Pixar even though I know a lot of people consider it the worst Pixar film ever! I don't know how you could hate a Pixar film! I think they're all pretty good films! Good job PIXAR! --------------------------------------------- Result 1622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I came across An Insomniac's Nightmare while [[looking]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NOT]] [[disappoint]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[excellent]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to agree hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I think her performance stole the [[show]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this short together. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. SO well [[written]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! I came across An Insomniac's Nightmare while [[researching]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NAH]] [[defraud]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[wondrous]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to agree hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I think her performance stole the [[exhibit]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this short together. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. SO well [[typed]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this about 2 or 3 times and haven't regretted it. Homeward bound is not just a typical animal movie. Its unique, fun and bursting with adventure. The things that make it a fun movie are the animals (obvious)who are wonderfully trained. A very good effort.

8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This a fascinatingly [[awful]] movie. It make so [[little]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. This a fascinatingly [[abysmal]] movie. It make so [[scant]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 1625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Yes, [[Marie]] Dresler drinks prune [[juice]] that she thinks is [[poison]] and she exits [[running]].

Dresler is good. Never my cup of [[tea]] but she is a solid [[performer]] who [[surely]] [[holds]] the screen.

I [[watched]] this for [[Polly]] Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has [[sunk]] into nearly [[total]] oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. Yes, [[Marry]] Dresler drinks prune [[juices]] that she thinks is [[toxicity]] and she exits [[implementing]].

Dresler is good. Never my cup of [[shai]] but she is a solid [[entertainer]] who [[definitively]] [[hold]] the screen.

I [[saw]] this for [[Polje]] Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has [[shipwrecked]] into nearly [[aggregate]] oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The acting in the film is really well [[done]] [[honestly]], but the movie is so slow and so [[boring]], as [[soon]] as it gets interesting everything [[slows]] to a major [[halt]]. I am glad to [[see]] Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great job, so did the other actors as I mentioned but man... this is one of the [[worst]] [[dragged]] out films I have ever [[seen]]. Now maybe in a short [[film]] [[form]] this [[movie]] [[would]] be good, but other than that, [[avoid]] it. This [[film]] has so much [[filler]] it makes a Twinkie [[cake]] [[jealous]].

I never, ever, [[walk]] out on [[films]], but [[watching]] this one at [[home]] with family, I walked out. [[Yeah]], it was that boring. [[Apparently]] my [[comment]] doesn't have enough lines to [[post]], so here's some more [[filler]]. I [[guess]] I was inspired by the [[movie]] I just [[watched]]. The acting in the film is really well [[effected]] [[frankly]], but the movie is so slow and so [[dull]], as [[promptly]] as it gets interesting everything [[slowing]] to a major [[stopped]]. I am glad to [[seeing]] Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great job, so did the other actors as I mentioned but man... this is one of the [[gravest]] [[languished]] out films I have ever [[watched]]. Now maybe in a short [[films]] [[forma]] this [[filmmaking]] [[could]] be good, but other than that, [[avoided]] it. This [[filmmaking]] has so much [[refill]] it makes a Twinkie [[cupcake]] [[envious]].

I never, ever, [[stroll]] out on [[cinematographic]], but [[staring]] this one at [[housing]] with family, I walked out. [[Yes]], it was that boring. [[Reportedly]] my [[commentaries]] doesn't have enough lines to [[posting]], so here's some more [[filling]]. I [[reckon]] I was inspired by the [[flick]] I just [[observed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow...I can't believe just how bad ZOMBIE DOOM (aka VIOLENT SH!T 3) really is. I'd heard the rumors, read the reviews - but had to make my mind up for myself. Well, let me tell ya - IT BLOWS!!! The worst acting of any film ever made, dubbing that must have been done while everyone involved was completely wasted, inept and laughable gore FX, no discernible plot, "cinematography" that looks like my grandma filmed it with her camcorder, weapons props that are no joke - made out of tin-foil - the list goes on and on...

Three guys get stranded on an island where a bunch of weirdos run around with plastic and tin-foil swords. Two of the captives are freed along with a rebel of the island freaks, and are given a day's head start before they are hunted down by the rest of the "tribe"...that's pretty much it...

Honestly - this is one of THE WORST films I've ever had the misfortune to subject myself too. The budget had to be about $200 and was spent entirely on the gore FX (which actually may not have been a bad idea...). There is NOTHING to ZOMBIE DOOM other than strung-together ridiculous looking gore scenes with lots of HORRIBLY dubbed dialog. This film makes other no-budget outings like PREMUTOS: LORD OF THE LIVING DEAD look like TITANIC. Some may rank ZD in the "so-bad-it's-good" category - and I guess if you're REALLY drunk or high and watching it with a few friends MST3K-style - I guess it could be looked at that way. But not by me. I hated pretty much everything about it. If ZOMBIE DOOM or ZOMBIE 90 (which is equally appalling and is included as a "bonus" on the Shock-O-Rama release of ZD) is indicative of Andreas Schnaas' other works - then he should be banned from ever having anything to do with making a film ever again under penalty of death. There is one amusing kung-fu battle in the latter half of the film, and a lot of blood - so I'll grant this one a VERY generous 3/10 - Do yourself a favor and skip this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[saw]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the family [[programming]] [[channel]] of HBO. [[At]] first I was [[drawn]] in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I [[found]] myself [[searching]] for the remote, so I [[could]] [[find]] the '[[INFO]] BUTTON', to [[find]] out what in the [[world]] was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoy]] him in [[many]] of his films, but one thing he is not, is a voice-over artist. Sure he has one of the more [[unique]] voices in Hollywood, but it [[works]] only as a part of a [[bigger]] visual package. Attaching his [[voice]] to a [[cute]] duck [[made]] watching somewhat [[difficult]]. As for the [[rest]] of the cast, [[uninspired]]. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, weak voice talent, strong animation...who was this film targeting? Gay adolescent ducks? I don't get it. Is there really such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must resort to animated ducks? Cute [[story]], and like the title, this movie I [[found]] hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. I [[watched]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the family [[programme]] [[canal]] of HBO. [[In]] first I was [[draws]] in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I [[unearthed]] myself [[browsing]] for the remote, so I [[did]] [[found]] the '[[INFORMATION]] BUTTON', to [[found]] out what in the [[globe]] was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoying]] him in [[several]] of his films, but one thing he is not, is a voice-over artist. Sure he has one of the more [[sole]] voices in Hollywood, but it [[cooperating]] only as a part of a [[greatest]] visual package. Attaching his [[voices]] to a [[lovely]] duck [[accomplished]] watching somewhat [[complex]]. As for the [[stays]] of the cast, [[unimaginative]]. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, weak voice talent, strong animation...who was this film targeting? Gay adolescent ducks? I don't get it. Is there really such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must resort to animated ducks? Cute [[storytelling]], and like the title, this movie I [[discoveries]] hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. --------------------------------------------- Result 1629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had a really hard time making it through this move. It was extermly slow and at times wondered when the plot of the movie would actually come to life.

This movie seemed to flow to slow and I kept on wondering when it was going to end. I am normally a person who likes a good indie file every once in a while but this did not satisfy what I was looking for.

It seemed they tried to make to much out of this movie. At one point it seemed to turn political which I am not a big fan of in movies. If you are looking for a slow moving movie with little to no plot then this is the right movie for you. As for me I felt I wasted 2 hours when I could of been doing something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1630 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] This [[movie]] was [[definitely]] not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's [[best]] movies. I [[really]] didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[movie]]. For some [[reason]], it seemed like it was a [[movie]] that they put [[together]] [[really]] [[fast]]. [[In]] some parts, it [[got]] so [[boring]] that I had to fast [[forward]] it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[exciting]] parts like their other [[movies]]. This [[flick]] was [[admittedly]] not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's [[optimum]] movies. I [[truthfully]] didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[filmmaking]]. For some [[cause]], it seemed like it was a [[flick]] that they put [[jointly]] [[truthfully]] [[rapids]]. [[For]] some parts, it [[did]] so [[dull]] that I had to fast [[forwards]] it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[breathtaking]] parts like their other [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was recently on AMC's vibrant movie classics and I had to laugh. I had high hopes for this adventure that follows in the vein of "Voyage to the Earth's Core" and "Mysterious Island". I was sorely disappointed not only in the acting credentials but in the silly story line that reads from a five year old's comic book. Be sure to catch sight of the wires that are holding on to the Pterdactyl's wings when they grasp "Ogar" a half idiot pre-modern man who befriends the lost adventurers. The ending left it open for further rehashing of the same effects in "People that Time Forgot". Don't waste your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I know that some [[films]] (I mean: European films), that are very bad [[films]], are being [[regarded]] as [[great]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being [[selected]] for certain [[big]] [[festivals]]. Don't let this fool you! Unless you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it [[great]] art afterwards, [[skip]] it! The [[film]] contains one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, [[film]] popped into my [[mind]], the [[terrible]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one [[surprise]] (this has been done endless times before, connecting [[several]] storylines: SHORT [[CUTS]], MAGNOLIA, [[PLAYING]] BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like [[daughter]]), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that [[made]] the public at the preview screening laugh at so much [[incompetence]], well... This is an [[insult]] to [[cinema]], and only receives [[high]] [[ratings]] because it happens to be in "another" [[language]], in this [[case]] Spanish. Strange world we [[live]] in...3/10 I know that some [[filmmaking]] (I mean: European films), that are very bad [[cinematography]], are being [[considered]] as [[large]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being [[choosing]] for certain [[immense]] [[celebration]]. Don't let this fool you! Unless you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it [[resplendent]] art afterwards, [[skipped]] it! The [[filmmaking]] contains one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, [[filmmaking]] popped into my [[intellect]], the [[scary]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one [[amaze]] (this has been done endless times before, connecting [[many]] storylines: SHORT [[CUTTING]], MAGNOLIA, [[PLAY]] BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like [[maid]]), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that [[accomplished]] the public at the preview screening laugh at so much [[impotence]], well... This is an [[offend]] to [[cinemas]], and only receives [[highest]] [[assessments]] because it happens to be in "another" [[linguistics]], in this [[example]] Spanish. Strange world we [[vivo]] in...3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] There are no [[words]] to [[explain]] how [[bad]] NIGHTMARE [[WEEKEND]] is. It [[simply]] defies description. [[Something]] about a computer that can [[change]] personal [[objects]] into silver [[balls]] that enter the victims' [[mouth]], which [[kills]] them or turns them into zombies. The [[whole]] thing is so wonky that it's [[stunning]]. There's also a [[girl]] with personal computer in her [[room]] and the computer [[talks]] via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this [[stuff]] up. The [[computer]] [[also]] [[controls]] things like [[cars]], [[even]] [[though]] there's [[nothing]] [[linking]] the [[computer]] with the [[vehicle]].

The "[[film]]" is [[total]] trash. Surreal [[bad]] trash. [[Spectacularly]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a [[lot]] of sex scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very hot or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[woman]] [[seemingly]] makes [[love]] or [[wants]] to French [[kiss]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the floor.

[[Definitely]] one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. Up there with the [[equally]] [[wretched]] direct-to-home video BOARDINGHOUSE, or BOOGEYMAN [[II]] (both [[NIGHTMARE]] [[WEEKEND]] and BOOGEYMAN II have scenes with a killer [[toothbrush]]!). [[At]] [[least]] it's [[fun]] to watch it and try to make sense of whatever is [[going]] on. There are no [[phrase]] to [[clarified]] how [[unfavourable]] NIGHTMARE [[WEEKENDS]] is. It [[purely]] defies description. [[Anything]] about a computer that can [[alteration]] personal [[object]] into silver [[testicles]] that enter the victims' [[kisser]], which [[homicide]] them or turns them into zombies. The [[overall]] thing is so wonky that it's [[dazzling]]. There's also a [[chica]] with personal computer in her [[chambre]] and the computer [[discussions]] via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this [[thing]] up. The [[computers]] [[apart]] [[control]] things like [[automobiles]], [[yet]] [[despite]] there's [[none]] [[connecting]] the [[computers]] with the [[vehicles]].

The "[[filmmaking]]" is [[whole]] trash. Surreal [[negative]] trash. [[Impressively]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a [[lots]] of sex scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very hot or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[girl]] [[allegedly]] makes [[amour]] or [[wish]] to French [[shag]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the floor.

[[Doubtless]] one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Up there with the [[similarly]] [[unfortunate]] direct-to-home video BOARDINGHOUSE, or BOOGEYMAN [[SECONDLY]] (both [[CABOS]] [[WEEKENDS]] and BOOGEYMAN II have scenes with a killer [[brush]]!). [[During]] [[lowest]] it's [[droll]] to watch it and try to make sense of whatever is [[go]] on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight [[months]] has passed... The Rocky [[Mountain]] [[Rescue]] [[receive]] a distress call set by a [[brilliant]] terrorist mastermind [[Eric]] Quaien ([[John]] Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[large]] [[cases]] that has [[millions]] of [[dollars]] inside. Two [[experienced]] [[climbers]] Walker ([[Sylvester]] Stallone) and [[Tucker]] (Micheal [[Rooker]]) and a [[helicopter]] pilot ([[Janine]] Turner) are to the [[rescue]] but they are set by a [[trap]] by Quaien and his [[men]]. Now the two climbers and [[pilot]] are [[forced]] to [[play]] a [[deadly]] [[game]] of [[hide]] and seek. [[While]] Quaien is [[trying]] to [[find]] the [[millions]] of [[dollars]] and he [[kidnapped]] Tucker to [[find]] the money. Once Tucker finds the money, Tucker will be dead. Against explosive firepower, bitter [[cold]] and dizzying [[heights]]. Walker [[must]] [[outwit]] Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] 4:The Dream Master) made an [[entertaining]] non-stop [[action]] [[picture]]. This [[film]] is a [[spectacular]], [[exciting]], visually exciting [[action]] [[picture]] with plenty of dark [[humour]] as well. This was one of the [[biggest]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best [[film]]. Lithgow is a [[terrific]] [[entertaining]] villain. Stallone [[certainly]] made an short [[comeback]] of this [[sharp]] thriller. This is [[probably]] Harlin's [[best]] [[work]] as a filmmaker.

[[DVD]] has an [[sharp]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby [[Digital]] 5.1 [[Surround]] [[Sound]]. DVD has an [[running]] commentary track by the [[director]] with [[comments]] by Stallone. DVD [[also]] has [[technical]] crew [[commentary]] as well. DVD has behind the scenes featurette, two [[deleted]] scenes with [[introduction]] by the director and more. [[Do]] not [[miss]] this [[great]] action [[film]]. [[Screenplay]] by Micheal France ([[Fantastic]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The [[Rocky]] Series). Based on a [[premise]] by [[John]] [[Long]]. [[Excellent]] Cinematography by [[Alex]] Thomson, B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Demolition]] [[Man]], Legend). Oscar [[Nominated]] for [[Best]] Sound, [[Best]] Sound [[Editing]] and Best [[Visual]] Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight [[month]] has passed... The Rocky [[Mountainous]] [[Rescuing]] [[perceive]] a distress call set by a [[awesome]] terrorist mastermind [[Erik]] Quaien ([[Jon]] Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[major]] [[example]] that has [[mln]] of [[bucks]] inside. Two [[underwent]] [[hikers]] Walker ([[Silvestre]] Stallone) and [[Goldberg]] (Micheal [[Brooker]]) and a [[helicopters]] pilot ([[Jeannine]] Turner) are to the [[save]] but they are set by a [[trapping]] by Quaien and his [[males]]. Now the two climbers and [[experimental]] are [[obliged]] to [[playing]] a [[fatal]] [[jeu]] of [[camouflage]] and seek. [[Despite]] Quaien is [[attempting]] to [[finds]] the [[billions]] of [[usd]] and he [[abducted]] Tucker to [[finds]] the money. Once Tucker finds the money, Tucker will be dead. Against explosive firepower, bitter [[colder]] and dizzying [[altitudes]]. Walker [[should]] [[frustrate]] Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] 4:The Dream Master) made an [[amusing]] non-stop [[efforts]] [[photographs]]. This [[cinematic]] is a [[dramatic]], [[excite]], visually exciting [[efforts]] [[image]] with plenty of dark [[comedy]] as well. This was one of the [[bigger]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best [[flick]]. Lithgow is a [[brilliant]] [[entertain]] villain. Stallone [[probably]] made an short [[restitution]] of this [[sharpe]] thriller. This is [[maybe]] Harlin's [[finest]] [[cooperation]] as a filmmaker.

[[DVDS]] has an [[sharpe]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby [[Digitally]] 5.1 [[Surrounds]] [[Audible]]. DVD has an [[execute]] commentary track by the [[headmaster]] with [[observations]] by Stallone. DVD [[similarly]] has [[technological]] crew [[remarks]] as well. DVD has behind the scenes featurette, two [[abolish]] scenes with [[intro]] by the director and more. [[Doing]] not [[mademoiselle]] this [[wondrous]] action [[cinematography]]. [[Script]] by Micheal France ([[Astounding]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The [[Rocko]] Series). Based on a [[assumption]] by [[Johannes]] [[Lengthy]]. [[Magnifique]] Cinematography by [[Xander]] Thomson, B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Obliterating]] [[Dawg]], Legend). Oscar [[Appointing]] for [[Better]] Sound, [[Better]] Sound [[Edition]] and Best [[Optic]] Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). --------------------------------------------- Result 1635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although some may call it a "Cuban Cinema Paradiso", the movie is closer to a How Green Was My Valley, a memory film mourning for a lost innocence. The film smartly avoids falling into a political trap of taking sides (pro-Castro? anti-Castro?, focusing instead in the human frailty of the characters and the importance of family. Filled with good acting, in particular from Mexican actress Diana Bracho, who plays Keitel's wife. A masterpiece, filled with references to classic movies, from CASABLANCA to Chaplin's CITY LIGHTS. Gael Garcia Bernal plays a small role which is critical for the dramatic payoff of the story. TV director Georg Stanford Brown, in a rare return to acting (remember THE ROOKIES?), plays a homeless bum who acts as Greek chorus, superbly. It is a pity that this movie, originally titled DREAMING OF JULIA, has been released in the States by THINKfilm with the atrocious title of CUBAN BLOOD, which has nothing to do with the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Now]] I've [[always]] been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there better projects. Yes, you [[heard]] me. The story works wonderful, the atmosphere really works and the actors do a first [[rate]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN [[NATION]] THE [[SERIES]] and STAR [[TREK]] [[ENTERPRISE]] [[shows]] that he can be an action star who [[kicks]] ass and takes name. The [[stop]] motion effects could have been a [[tiny]] [[bit]] better. The color was wrong, they [[look]] plastic to me instead of the [[metal]] they were [[suppose]] to be. But that is a [[minor]] complaint [[compared]] to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this [[movie]]. 9 STARS [[OUT]] OF 10. [[Currently]] I've [[unceasingly]] been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there better projects. Yes, you [[audition]] me. The story works wonderful, the atmosphere really works and the actors do a first [[rates]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN [[NATIONS]] THE [[SERIAL]] and STAR [[HIKING]] [[VENTURES]] [[denotes]] that he can be an action star who [[karate]] ass and takes name. The [[discontinue]] motion effects could have been a [[little]] [[bite]] better. The color was wrong, they [[gaze]] plastic to me instead of the [[minerals]] they were [[reckon]] to be. But that is a [[minimal]] complaint [[comparing]] to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this [[cinematography]]. 9 STARS [[OUTWARD]] OF 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] The lead [[characters]] in this movie [[fall]] into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Simple]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his [[buddy]] Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very [[impressed]] with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The [[best]] Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the [[absolute]] best of Czech cinema. The lead [[attribute]] in this movie [[decline]] into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Uncomplicated]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his [[dawg]] Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very [[surprising]] with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The [[bestest]] Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the [[utter]] best of Czech cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] was [[extremely]] boring. It should [[least]] not more than 15 [[minutes]]. The [[images]] of [[child]] and [[animal]] being killed were [[little]] bit [[disturbing]].

[[Usually]] I don't write comments but this one was so [[bad]] having so many good and excellent [[comments]]. I think in this [[case]] we are one step closer to honest [[assessment]] of this title.

What more can I [[say]]? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 [[hours]] long [[sleeping]] [[period]]. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. This [[filmmaking]] was [[remarkably]] boring. It should [[fewer]] not more than 15 [[mins]]. The [[pictures]] of [[kid]] and [[beasts]] being killed were [[small]] bit [[disconcerting]].

[[Popularly]] I don't write comments but this one was so [[rotten]] having so many good and excellent [[observations]]. I think in this [[example]] we are one step closer to honest [[estimation]] of this title.

What more can I [[tell]]? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 [[hour]] long [[asleep]] [[times]]. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Though this movie has a first rate roster of fine actors, special effects that are excellent, and a story line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[picked]] up for studio distribution and went directly to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks [[released]] during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens [[missed]] the opportunity, [[fortunately]] the new concept of [[releasing]] direct to DVD [[allows]] us to [[enjoy]] it.

The theme is old: rookie reporter [[uncovers]] an [[inner]] circle of [[cops]] that are [[corrupt]] - in this [[case]] the [[F]].R.A.T. ([[First]] [[Response]] [[Assault]] and [[Tactical]]) team, a [[group]] of well [[trained]] [[policeman]] created to clean up the [[mythical]] [[city]] of Edison from its low point of [[crime]], [[drugs]], prostitution etc. Working undercover the temptation of pocketing the [[confiscated]] goods and money proves too much of an [[opportunity]] and now, 15 years after its [[formation]], [[FRAT]] is responsible for [[murder]], [[drug]] [[trafficking]], terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead [[dog]] is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a [[terrifyingly]] [[real]] [[gangster]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cool]] J, even more buff than [[usual]] and [[proving]] he can be a [[sensitive]] actor). Reporter [[Pollack]] (Justin Timberlake) catches wind of a '[[bad]] mistake' and reports his [[theory]] of [[fraud]] and [[corruption]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[always]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack [[convinces]] Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, [[also]] a [[consistently]] fine [[character]] actor) and they [[aid]] Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad incidents happen and the story runs pall mall toward a series of [[unexpected]] [[results]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carry]] the lead, [[especially]] in the company of such [[seasoned]] actors. But LL Cool J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott keep the well-oiled machine of a movie rolling to the very [[end]]. No, it is not a [[great]] [[movie]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the seat [[action]] flick with a [[message]]. Grady Harp Though this movie has a first rate roster of fine actors, special effects that are excellent, and a story line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[pick]] up for studio distribution and went directly to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks [[emitted]] during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens [[miss]] the opportunity, [[hopefully]] the new concept of [[freeing]] direct to DVD [[allowed]] us to [[enjoying]] it.

The theme is old: rookie reporter [[reveals]] an [[inside]] circle of [[police]] that are [[corrupted]] - in this [[lawsuits]] the [[e]].R.A.T. ([[Frst]] [[Answering]] [[Attack]] and [[Tactic]]) team, a [[clustered]] of well [[qualified]] [[constabulary]] created to clean up the [[myth]] [[ville]] of Edison from its low point of [[offenses]], [[medicines]], prostitution etc. Working undercover the temptation of pocketing the [[seized]] goods and money proves too much of an [[luck]] and now, 15 years after its [[creation]], [[BROTHERHOOD]] is responsible for [[killings]], [[narcotics]] [[smuggling]], terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead [[canine]] is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a [[awfully]] [[actual]] [[thug]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cooling]] J, even more buff than [[normal]] and [[proves]] he can be a [[delicate]] actor). Reporter [[Pollock]] (Justin Timberlake) catches wind of a '[[rotten]] mistake' and reports his [[theories]] of [[deception]] and [[bribery]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[invariably]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack [[persuades]] Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, [[apart]] a [[unceasingly]] fine [[traits]] actor) and they [[assisting]] Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad incidents happen and the story runs pall mall toward a series of [[unintended]] [[outcomes]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carrying]] the lead, [[namely]] in the company of such [[skilled]] actors. But LL Cool J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott keep the well-oiled machine of a movie rolling to the very [[terminate]]. No, it is not a [[excellent]] [[kino]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the seat [[efforts]] flick with a [[messages]]. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If the Lion [[King]] was a Disney [[version]] of Hamlet, then the Lion [[King]] 3: Hakuna Matata is a Disney version of Guildenstern and [[Rosencrantz]] are Dead. [[Just]] like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[film]], we [[get]] to [[view]] the action from the point of [[view]] of two of the [[minor]] [[characters]] from the original: Timon, the meerkat with a [[penchant]] for [[breaking]] into song at the [[drop]] of a [[hat]], and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence issues. By following their [[story]] - rather than Simba's - we [[get]] to see why all the animals bowed down as Simba was presented from [[Pride]] Rock. We find out what made Timon and Pumbaa decide to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[oust]] Scar. And we find out how they [[dealt]] with the hyena's once and for all. Nathan Lane as Timon [[gets]] most of the [[best]] jokes, but he is [[ably]] [[supported]] by Ernie Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[also]] good to hear Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Goldberg]] reprising their roles. Julie Kavner and [[Jerry]] Stiller [[lend]] their [[distinctive]] voices to two new [[characters]]: Timon's mother and uncle. The only downside is the constant stop-start-rewind-fast-forward device which doesn't always help to [[progress]] the story. Having said that, there is a [[brilliant]] zoom near the beginning of the [[movie]]. With more [[laughs]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[movie]], [[Hakuna]] Matata is worth [[watching]] - if only for the [[hot]] [[tub]] scene which is [[still]] funny [[despite]] being a [[little]] bit [[predictable]]. If the Lion [[Emperor]] was a Disney [[stepping]] of Hamlet, then the Lion [[Emperor]] 3: Hakuna Matata is a Disney version of Guildenstern and [[Guildenstern]] are Dead. [[Jen]] like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[films]], we [[obtains]] to [[opinions]] the action from the point of [[visualize]] of two of the [[lesser]] [[features]] from the original: Timon, the meerkat with a [[tendency]] for [[violating]] into song at the [[dipped]] of a [[hats]], and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence issues. By following their [[tale]] - rather than Simba's - we [[obtains]] to see why all the animals bowed down as Simba was presented from [[Stolz]] Rock. We find out what made Timon and Pumbaa decide to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[unseat]] Scar. And we find out how they [[addressed]] with the hyena's once and for all. Nathan Lane as Timon [[got]] most of the [[better]] jokes, but he is [[cleverly]] [[backed]] by Ernie Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[apart]] good to hear Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Tucker]] reprising their roles. Julie Kavner and [[Jiri]] Stiller [[give]] their [[attribute]] voices to two new [[features]]: Timon's mother and uncle. The only downside is the constant stop-start-rewind-fast-forward device which doesn't always help to [[advances]] the story. Having said that, there is a [[shiny]] zoom near the beginning of the [[kino]]. With more [[grin]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[movies]], [[Matata]] Matata is worth [[staring]] - if only for the [[sexier]] [[bath]] scene which is [[yet]] funny [[albeit]] being a [[petite]] bit [[foreseeable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just didn't get this movie...Was it a musical? no..but there were choreographed songs and dancing in it...

Was it a serious drama....no the acting was not good enough for that.

Is Whoopi Goldberg a quality serious Actor..Definently not.

I had difficulty staying awake through this disjointed movie. The message on apartheid and the "tribute" to the students who died during a student uprosing is noted. But as entertainment this was very poor and as a documentary style movie it was worse.

See for yourself, but in fairness I hated it --------------------------------------------- Result 1642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A quiet, sweet and beutifully nostalgic movie on how it is to be confronted with old friends and surroundings from your youth with all that memories and the problems and sorrows of the present with you. A movie that makes you feel good. All the ingredients are here: old jelousy, rivalry, friendship and loyalty. Mischief, nightly fridge-raids and all the other fun stuff that we all remember from our summer camps. All the characters get the opportunity for a week to experience this again as the old camp-leader now is retiring and want to meet the children from the golden years of the camp. All of them are now in their thirties and in the middle of their careers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The writers of this [[story]] knew these men very well. The [[actors]], likewise, [[portrayed]] them very well. The result is that by the end of the film you feel like you're actually watching John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The expected tensions are there, especially in the awkward first moments. But as the two begin to [[loosen]] up, the old camaraderie that made the Beatles work so well begins to show through. The bitterness is [[still]] there, and [[interrupts]] at [[times]], but by the [[time]] John gets the [[idea]] to [[take]] Lorne Michaels up on his [[offer]] to [[pay]] the Beatles the gag [[sum]] of $3000 to [[appear]] on "Saturday [[Night]] Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that [[terrorized]] [[Liverpool]] [[together]] as [[teens]], and survived [[playing]] the [[rough]] [[nightclubs]] of [[Hamburg]] to [[rise]] to Superstardom. But in the [[end]], this [[wonderful]] [[fantasy]] [[grounds]] us [[gently]]. We are [[reminded]] why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[possible]] even before Lennon's [[assassination]]: The two [[driving]] [[forces]] of the [[group]] outgrew each other. *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The writers of this [[histories]] knew these men very well. The [[protagonists]], likewise, [[depicted]] them very well. The result is that by the end of the film you feel like you're actually watching John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The expected tensions are there, especially in the awkward first moments. But as the two begin to [[unscrew]] up, the old camaraderie that made the Beatles work so well begins to show through. The bitterness is [[nevertheless]] there, and [[blackouts]] at [[period]], but by the [[period]] John gets the [[concept]] to [[taking]] Lorne Michaels up on his [[offers]] to [[salaries]] the Beatles the gag [[somme]] of $3000 to [[arise]] on "Saturday [[Nightly]] Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that [[terrorised]] [[Manchester]] [[jointly]] as [[youth]], and survived [[playback]] the [[coarse]] [[clubs]] of [[Warsaw]] to [[climbing]] to Superstardom. But in the [[ceases]], this [[wondrous]] [[chimera]] [[motivations]] us [[mildly]]. We are [[recalling]] why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[probable]] even before Lennon's [[slain]]: The two [[drives]] [[troop]] of the [[panels]] outgrew each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 1644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Another silent [[love]] [[triangle]] [[film]] from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[boxer]] Bob Corby ([[Ian]] Hunter) recruits [[circus]] boxer "One [[Round]]" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to [[keep]] the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[nearby]]. There are lots of [[character]] actors and grotesques—at Jack and Mabel's [[wedding]] the [[verger]], [[standing]] in the [[aisle]] of the [[church]], registers [[shock]] at the sight of the very tall and the very short [[men]], the [[fat]] [[lady]], the conjoined [[twins]] who, of course, [[argue]] about which side of the aisle to sit, and the [[wedding]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[losing]] [[Mabel]] and [[boxing]] his [[way]] back to her heart, or [[something]] like that. It was another era altogether, with the [[audience]] in evening dress, and the [[boxers]] dressing up, too, when out of the [[ring]]. The camera [[angles]], the [[pace]], the [[use]] of [[symbols]], the [[cutting]]—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and [[editing]] of the [[last]] boxing [[match]] is very gripping. Brisson's good [[looks]] are well-used in this one; his [[smiling]] is not so [[oblivious]] of what's going on [[around]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[annoying]]. But can [[boxers]] have such dimples? Another silent [[adores]] [[delta]] [[movies]] from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[wrestler]] Bob Corby ([[Iain]] Hunter) recruits [[carnival]] boxer "One [[Rounded]]" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to [[sustain]] the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[near]]. There are lots of [[characteristics]] actors and grotesques—at Jack and Mabel's [[marry]] the [[orchard]], [[stands]] in the [[hallway]] of the [[basilica]], registers [[shocked]] at the sight of the very tall and the very short [[males]], the [[greasy]] [[dame]], the conjoined [[binoculars]] who, of course, [[assert]] about which side of the aisle to sit, and the [[marry]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[wasting]] [[Bessie]] and [[boxer]] his [[manner]] back to her heart, or [[anything]] like that. It was another era altogether, with the [[viewers]] in evening dress, and the [[shorts]] dressing up, too, when out of the [[ringing]]. The camera [[nooks]], the [[rhythm]], the [[utilise]] of [[icons]], the [[slitting]]—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and [[edition]] of the [[latter]] boxing [[matching]] is very gripping. Brisson's good [[seem]] are well-used in this one; his [[laughs]] is not so [[indifferent]] of what's going on [[about]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[exasperating]]. But can [[underpants]] have such dimples? --------------------------------------------- Result 1645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Here is one of those [[movies]] spoiled by the studio's [[insistence]] on a [[happy]] ending. [[Conflicts]] which have stretched out for years are [[settled]] in a few minutes. It would have been far more interesting to [[inject]] a tone of [[ambiguity]]. The talented [[Barbara]] Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from [[independent]] and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her [[life]]. Brent, as [[usual]], is well over his head and then there is the [[ludicrous]] situation of Gig Young [[playing]] a character named Gig [[Young]]. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the [[actor]]! Worth seeing though far below what it [[could]] have been. Here is one of those [[theater]] spoiled by the studio's [[tenacity]] on a [[joyful]] ending. [[Clashes]] which have stretched out for years are [[settling]] in a few minutes. It would have been far more interesting to [[infuse]] a tone of [[ambivalence]]. The talented [[Barbarian]] Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from [[independant]] and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her [[living]]. Brent, as [[normal]], is well over his head and then there is the [[senseless]] situation of Gig Young [[replay]] a character named Gig [[Youngsters]]. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the [[protagonist]]! Worth seeing though far below what it [[would]] have been. --------------------------------------------- Result 1646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I used to watch this on either HBO or Showtime or Cinemax during the one summer in the mid 90's that my parents subscribed to those channels. I came across it several times in various parts and always found it dark, bizarre and fascinating. I was young then, in my early teens; and now years later after having discovered the great Arliss Howard and being blown away by "Big Bad Love" I bought the DVD of "Wilder Napalm" and re-watched it with my girlfriend for the first time in many years. I absolutely loved it! I was really impressed and affected by it. There are so many dynamic fluid complexities and cleverness within the camera movements and cinematography; all of which perfectly gel with the intelligent, intense and immediate chemistry between the three leads, their story, the music and all the other actors as well. It's truly "Cinematic". I love Arliss Howard's subtle intensity, ambivalent strength and hidden intelligence, I'm a big fan of anything he does; and his interplay with Debra Winger's manic glee (they are of course married) has that magic charming reality to it that goes past the camera. (I wonder if they watch this on wedding anniversaries?......."Big Bad Love" should be the next stop for anyone who has not seen it; it's brilliant.) And, Dennis Quaid in full clown make-up, sneakily introduced, angled, hidden and displayed by the shot selection and full bloomed delivery is of the kind of pure dark movie magic you don't see very often. Quaid has always had a sinister quality to him for me anyways, with that huge slit mouth span, hiding behind his flicker eyes lying in wait to unleash itself as either mischievous charm or diabolical weirdness (here as both). Both Howard and Quaid have the insane fire behind the eyes to pull off their wonderful intense internal gunslinger square-offs in darkly cool fashion. In fact the whole film has a darkly cool energy and hip intensity. It's really a fantastic film, put together by intelligence, imagination, agility and chemistry by all parties involved. I really cannot imagine how this got funded, and it looks pretty expensive to me, by such a conventional, imagination-less system, but I thank God films like this slip through the system every once in awhile. In a great way, with all of its day-glo bright carnival colors, hip intelligence, darkly warped truthful humor and enthralling chemistry it reminds me of one of my favorite films of all time: "Grosse Pointe Blank".......now that's a compliment in my book! --------------------------------------------- Result 1647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film on TV many years ago and I saw this film when I got this on tape. I thought that this was reasonably well done. It was not the best of all movies, but it was good enough. The movie has enough talent to inspire many people, especially younger kids. The acting was good, with Danny Glover leading the cast. The plot line was not very believable, but the script was well written. This movie can also be the interest of avid baseball fans. It does not directly apply to a action-packed sports movie. It directly applies to a nice film that you can watch with your family and learn some messages that are hidden in this film. Overall, the film was good, but not great. I give this a movie a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I [[miss]] [[Dark]] [[Angel]]!..

I [[understand]] not ever one [[likes]] it, but as far as I'm [[concerned]] the [[show]] should not have been [[canceled]], [[especially]] for another [[space]] [[show]] mock up...

I'm reading the [[books]] now. they are doing a [[pretty]] [[good]] job of [[explaining]] [[somethings]], but I still [[think]] we should get a [[TV]] [[movie]] or [[something]].

THE FREAK NATION [[LIVES]]!!!!!!!! I [[missed]] [[Darkness]] [[Angels]]!..

I [[understands]] not ever one [[adores]] it, but as far as I'm [[worried]] the [[showings]] should not have been [[overturned]], [[concretely]] for another [[spacing]] [[display]] mock up...

I'm reading the [[book]] now. they are doing a [[quite]] [[alright]] job of [[indicating]] [[anything]], but I still [[thinking]] we should get a [[TELEVISIONS]] [[cinematography]] or [[anything]].

THE FREAK NATION [[IIFE]]!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] i didn't [[even]] [[bother]] [[finishing]] the [[movie]] because i was so [[bored]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that [[movie]] again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[told]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". i didn't [[yet]] [[disturb]] [[completing]] the [[filmmaking]] because i was so [[drilled]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that [[films]] again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[tells]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". --------------------------------------------- Result 1650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A woman asks for advice on the road to reach a mysterious town, and hears two ghoulish stories from the local weirdo, both zombie related. But perhaps fate has something nasty in store for her too...

The Zombie Chronicles is absolutely one of the worst films I have ever seen. In fact I must confess, so bad was it I fast forwarded through most of the garbage. And there was a lot of that, believe me. It runs for just 69 minutes, and there is still tons of filler. You get some skinhead doing a lot of push ups, plenty of dull kissy-kissy scenes between goofy teens (that rhymed, tee hee) and some fine examples of why some people should never become actors.

As for the title characters, they barely even have a footnote in the film. Why, you get more undead action in the intro than you do the preceding feature! Though, considering how pathetic the eyes bursting out of sockets and the eating of brains sequences are (amongst other 'delights'), maybe that's a blessing in disguise.

And to top it all off, it looks likes it's been filmed on someone's mobile phone for broadcast on Youtube. Jerky camera-work, scratches on the print, flickering lights... I had to rub my eyes when I realised it was made in 2001, and not 1971. Even the clothes and fashioned look about three decades out of date!

If you think I'm not qualified to do a review of Chronicles having not seen the whole film, then go ahead. YOU try sitting through it, I betcha you won't even make it to the first appearance of the blue-smartie coloured freaks before making your excuses and leaving. It is truly laughable that anyone chose to release it, and honestly you'll get far more fun resting your drink on the disc than actually torturing your DVD player with this gigglesome excuse for horror. In fact, don't for surprised if it packs it's bags and leaves in the morning, leaving you doomed to watch VHS tapes for the rest of your life. You have been warned... 0/10

P.S What kind of 18-rated horror has the woman keep a massive sports bra on during the obligatory sex scene?! See, the movie can't even get that part right... --------------------------------------------- Result 1651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would [[separate]] it from most dull and overly [[crafted]] mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would [[seperated]] it from most dull and overly [[worded]] mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). --------------------------------------------- Result 1652 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] But how can you stand to mange a baseball team that can't win. For George Knox, it is not easy. As the movie opens, Roger Beaumont (Joseph-Gordon-Levitt) and his best friend J.P (Milton Davis Jr.) are riding on thier bikes around the angels' stadium. When they return to thier foster mother's home, Roger is suprised to have a visit from his dad (Dermot Mulroney). His mom is dead! And when he asks his father when they going to be a family again, he father jokes "I say when the angels win the division championship" So later on, Roger and J.P hide in a tree to watch the angels play baseball. When the manger George Knox (Danny Glover) take out his pitcher, the pitcher gets mad and gets into a fight with him, and soon the angels team get into the fightm that gets Knox ejected from the game. That night Roger makes a prayer, for the angles win the championship. When his foster mother Maggie Nelson (Brenda Ficker) agrees that Roger and J.P go to a basball, Roger sees real angles come on the field and helps the left fielder (Matthew McConaughey) makes a catch, that leaves the manger and the play-by-play man (Jay. O Sanders) how did he to that. Roger learns from the head angel (Christopher Lloyd) that only he can see the angles, because he was the only that prayed for help.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1653 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WHO'S GOT THE GOLD? is (unfortunately) the last of the HANZO THE RAZOR films, starring Shintaro Katsu as the title character - the multi-weapon proficient, authority-bucking samurai officer with the "unique" technique of raping confessions out of unwilling female informants until they "spill the beans" and beg for more...

This entry starts with Hanzo "uncovering" a woman who poses as a ghost to guard a lake that's filled with bamboo trunks filled with gold stolen from the Treasury. This leads to Hanzo discovering a loan-sharking scheme and an orgy ring run by a blind monk. The requisite swordplay and rape/interrogation ensue - finalizing in a decent ending for this strange trilogy of films.

Not quite as strong and enjoyable as THE SNARE (part 2 of the series...), but still great for fans of samurai sleaze and Japanese pinky-style films. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Gerard is a writer with a somewhat [[overactive]] [[imagination]]. He is also homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic [[guilt]] and [[something]] of a clairvoyant, or so it [[seems]]. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by [[Christine]]. When he [[discovers]] that Christine's [[new]] boyfriend is the bit of [[rough]] trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to [[stick]] around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. [[Then]] he [[realizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, [[going]] to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's [[overheated]], over-egged melodrama is a [[delicious]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[lot]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a [[dream]] and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's [[imagination]]. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to [[say]] Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. [[Super]] performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and [[easily]] Verhoeven's [[best]] [[film]] up to his [[wonderfully]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". Gerard is a writer with a somewhat [[hyper]] [[novelty]]. He is also homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic [[blame]] and [[anything]] of a clairvoyant, or so it [[looks]]. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by [[Kristin]]. When he [[discoveries]] that Christine's [[novel]] boyfriend is the bit of [[crude]] trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to [[wand]] around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. [[Thereafter]] he [[recognizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, [[go]] to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's [[overheating]], over-egged melodrama is a [[tasty]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[batch]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a [[nightmares]] and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's [[creativity]]. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to [[said]] Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. [[Peachy]] performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and [[readily]] Verhoeven's [[better]] [[movies]] up to his [[stunningly]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". --------------------------------------------- Result 1655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Jude]] Law [[gives]] his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which [[offers]] [[little]] else of [[value]]. Completely [[lacking]] in eroticism, excitement, or [[leading]] ladies with appeal. One decent fight, a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide detective, well played by Timothy Spall. But [[despite]] their [[best]] [[efforts]], both [[actors]] are staked to the [[cross]] of the film's [[banality]].

With a lesser [[actor]] in the lead role -- and without the [[benefit]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Crocodiles]] [[would]] blend into the [[sea]] of low-budget [[vampire]] quickies. [[Judd]] Law [[delivers]] his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which [[provides]] [[scant]] else of [[values]]. Completely [[missing]] in eroticism, excitement, or [[culminating]] ladies with appeal. One decent fight, a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide detective, well played by Timothy Spall. But [[while]] their [[optimum]] [[action]], both [[protagonists]] are staked to the [[crossing]] of the film's [[triviality]].

With a lesser [[protagonist]] in the lead role -- and without the [[interests]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Gators]] [[could]] blend into the [[seas]] of low-budget [[vamp]] quickies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1656 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was particularly moved by the understated courage and integrity of l'Anglaise, in this beautifully acted, intellectually and visually compelling film. Thank you so much, Monsieur le directeur Rohmer. --------------------------------------------- Result 1657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Witchcraft/Witchery/La Casa 4/ and whatever else you wish to call it. How about..Crud.

A gathering of people at a Massachusetts island resort are besieged by the black magic powers of an evil witch killing each individual using cruel, torturous methods. Photographer Gary(David Hasselhoff)is taking pictures for Linda(Catherine Hickland whose voice and demeanor resemble EE-YOR of the Winnie the Poo cartoon), a virgin studying witchcraft, on the island resort without permission. Rose Brooks(Annie Ross, portraying an incredibly rude bitch)is interested in perhaps purchasing the resort and, along with husband Freddie(Robert Champagne, who is always ogling other women much younger than him), pregnant daughter Jane(Linda Blair)and grandson Tommy(Michael Manchester, who just looks bored throughout, probably wanting to watch Sesame Street instead of starring in this rubbish), go by boat to the resort being treated to a look at the property by Realtor Tony Giordano's son Jerry(Rick Farnsworth), obviously a pup in the business getting his feet wet. Along with these folks is architect Leslie(Leslie Cumming, whose character is a nympho)who might help Rose re-design the resort. The boat's captain is killed by The Lady in Black(Hildegard Knef, wearing her make-up and lip-stick extra thick)and a storm is brewing. The boat drives off by itself(..guided by the invisible power of The Lady in Black, I guess)with everyone stuck in the decrepit resort, which is in dire need of repairs. Most of the victims, before meeting their grisly fates are carried through a type of red wormhole whose vortex leads to another dimension(..perhaps a type of hell or something)where they are tortured by these fiends dressed in raggedy clothes with a crummy visage. One victim has her mouth sown before being hung upside down in a chimney, roasted as the others light the fireplace. One poor soul is tortured by harsh twistings of rope wrapped tightly around her flesh before being found hanging from the snout of a swordfish penetrating through her neck. One fellow is slowly suffocating as his veins bulge(..and bleed) and neck's blood vessels burst squirting in Hasselhoff's face! One fellow is crucified with nails hammered into his hands before being hung upside down over an open flame. Blair's pregnant victim becomes possessed with her hair standing on end speaking in another woman's voice. One is raped by this demonic man with a "diseased" mouth as the hellish hobos stand nearby gleefully cheering. The film, despite it's excesses, is mostly dull fodder for those who really wish to see the lowest point in the careers of Hasselhoff and Blair, who deserve better than this. Almost unbearable at times, building little-to-no suspense. Clumsy execution of the death sequences which look cheap and laughable. Sure some gore is okay, but most of the film shows victims after they've been run through the ringer. We do get a chance to see pregnant women(..who look exactly like stuntmen in costume with bad wigs) jumping out three story windows. Oh, and The Lady in Black's reflected face often pops up on inanimate objects for characters to see. Tommy has a little Sesame Street recorder which tapes The Lady in Black's mumbo jumbo chants, obviously used for later. For some reason, The Lady in Black likes to visit little Tommy. He's not at all scared of her, for Tommy's just too bored to show any expression on his face, much less fear. Need I say more? This one's a real stinker. Ugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I just watched this [[movie]] on Showtime. Quite by [[accident]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[seen]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've [[missed]] a lot.

That's the way this [[movie]] is. It's almost [[playing]] on the Kevin Bacon [[effect]]. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever [[character]] is [[intertwined]] in some [[way]] or another. Action, [[reaction]], interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[wonderful]]. I'm going to have to [[find]] a [[copy]] to [[buy]]. I just watched this [[cinematic]] on Showtime. Quite by [[casualty]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[watched]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've [[miss]] a lot.

That's the way this [[cinematography]] is. It's almost [[gaming]] on the Kevin Bacon [[effects]]. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever [[trait]] is [[interlocked]] in some [[route]] or another. Action, [[reply]], interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[wondrous]]. I'm going to have to [[found]] a [[copier]] to [[purchase]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1659 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The problems with this film are many, but I will try to mention the most glaring and bothersome ones. First of all, while the theme suggests a number of vignettes about Manhattan life, the reality was that everything, as usual in movies and TV, was about something bizarre, usually of a sexual nature. The story lines were thin or nonexistent, and virtually every scene, camera shot, line of dialog, and expressed emotion was absolutely, and totally fake. It finally reached a point after an hour of so of mind numbing garbage that I walked out (something no uncommon for me in recent years.) I would have guessed the fi9lm was directed by some wannabe auteur drop outs from some 3rd rate film studies program, but I believe the (at one time, pre-Amelia, talented)director Mira Nair took part in this disgusting travesty, so perhaps the directorial talent in America has descended en masse into the cesspool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] this is a great movie. I love the series on tv and so I loved the movie. One of the best things in the movie is that Helga finally admits her deepest darkest secret to Arnold!!! that was great. i loved it it was pretty funny too. It's a great movie! Doy!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Usually I don't really like Emma Roberts so much, but after watching Nancy Drew it kind of changed my mind. The actors in the movies made the whole thing exciting and funny. Most of the time when you watch a mystery movie you can solve it before the middle of the show, but in this movie it's like you are actually there. The clues have to all fit together until you can finally understand the whole crime. I am still amazed how she found it out. The whole movie was really clever and the people who watched it with me loved the movie too. The clothes were my favorite part of the movie, it was so cute. I don't think there will be another movie like this until the sequel comes out. I give it a nine because the popular girls didn't really seem to have the part just right, but they still make me laugh. It was a really great movie and a great mystery. I definitely recommend watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] i checked this one out on DVD for a [[dollar]] so I [[could]] [[easily]] [[smile]] as this [[dreadful]] movie unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any worse, it [[inevitably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold [[vengeance]]" in the [[US]] DVD [[version]] has [[absolutely]] nothing to do with the script. The [[action]] scenes are so [[obviously]] [[taken]] in their [[first]] take. There are [[lots]] of mistakes during [[dialogues]] indicating that there is just no [[intend]] to do another take to at least try to [[make]] this [[movie]] bearable. I cannot [[remember]] having [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[movie]] and I do [[occasionally]] [[get]] [[bad]] ones--well, except for [[unstoppable]] with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a [[bad]] one, [[Unstoppable]] deserves Best [[Picture]] [[awards]] at the Oscars when compared to this piece of [[crap]]. i checked this one out on DVD for a [[dollars]] so I [[did]] [[comfortably]] [[grinning]] as this [[scary]] movie unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any worse, it [[unavoidably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold [[avenge]]" in the [[USA]] DVD [[stepping]] has [[totally]] nothing to do with the script. The [[actions]] scenes are so [[definitely]] [[took]] in their [[frst]] take. There are [[lot]] of mistakes during [[talks]] indicating that there is just no [[intent]] to do another take to at least try to [[deliver]] this [[filmmaking]] bearable. I cannot [[remembering]] having [[saw]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]] and I do [[intermittently]] [[gets]] [[rotten]] ones--well, except for [[invulnerable]] with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a [[rotten]] one, [[Invincible]] deserves Best [[Imagery]] [[prix]] at the Oscars when compared to this piece of [[shit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This movie was a [[major]] disappointment on [[direction]], intellectual niveau, plot and in the [[way]] it dealt with its subject, [[painting]]. It is a [[slow]] [[moving]] [[film]] set like an episode of Wonder Years, with [[appalling]] [[lack]] of depth though. It also fails to deliver its [[message]] in a [[convincing]] [[manner]].

The [[approach]] to the subject of [[painting]] is very elite, [[limited]] to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the [[makers]] of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style [[kitschy]] [[landscape]] [[paintings]]. [[Good]] art [[according]] to this [[film]] can be achieved by applying [[basic]] (like, [[primary]] [[school]] [[level]]) [[color]] theory and lots of sentiment. [[In]] parts the [[movie]] is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated ([[rather]], [[celebrated]] by dancing on [[tables]]) that [[mentally]] [[handicapped]] people are not [[capable]] of having [[emotions]] or [[expressing]] them through [[painting]], their [[works]] by [[definition]] being [[worthless]] 'bullshit' ([[quote]]).

I do not [[understand]] how the [[movie]] [[could]] [[get]] such [[high]] [[rating]], then again, so far not [[many]] people rated it, and they chose for only very [[high]] or very low [[grades]]. This movie was a [[important]] disappointment on [[directions]], intellectual niveau, plot and in the [[camino]] it dealt with its subject, [[lacquer]]. It is a [[slower]] [[transferring]] [[movies]] set like an episode of Wonder Years, with [[alarming]] [[lacking]] of depth though. It also fails to deliver its [[messages]] in a [[compelling]] [[ways]].

The [[approaching]] to the subject of [[paint]] is very elite, [[restrained]] to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the [[strategists]] of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style [[kitsch]] [[landscaping]] [[paints]]. [[Alright]] art [[conforming]] to this [[filmmaking]] can be achieved by applying [[fundamental]] (like, [[main]] [[tuition]] [[tier]]) [[coloration]] theory and lots of sentiment. [[For]] parts the [[filmmaking]] is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated ([[somewhat]], [[famed]] by dancing on [[table]]) that [[psychologically]] [[handicap]] people are not [[able]] of having [[sentiments]] or [[express]] them through [[painted]], their [[cooperating]] by [[definitions]] being [[dispensable]] 'bullshit' ([[quotes]]).

I do not [[understands]] how the [[filmmaking]] [[did]] [[gets]] such [[highest]] [[ratings]], then again, so far not [[numerous]] people rated it, and they chose for only very [[supreme]] or very low [[grading]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[After]] watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good [[film]] but sadly The [[film]] is a joke and actually [[trying]] [[hard]] to introduce Aryeman Afterall his [[father]] Keshu is the producer

RKS [[spoke]] so [[highly]] about the [[film]] during [[promotions]], saying the [[film]] has meat unlike [[films]] [[released]] that [[time]], I wonder which films was he [[talking]] about

The [[film]] is [[actually]] a typical Masala film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[kidnap]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids [[kidnapping]] Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay [[Upon]] watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good [[filmmaking]] but sadly The [[filmmaking]] is a joke and actually [[try]] [[stiff]] to introduce Aryeman Afterall his [[fathers]] Keshu is the producer

RKS [[chatted]] so [[incredibly]] about the [[flick]] during [[advancement]], saying the [[filmmaking]] has meat unlike [[movie]] [[freed]] that [[times]], I wonder which films was he [[debating]] about

The [[filmmaking]] is [[genuinely]] a typical Masala film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[hijack]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids [[abducted]] Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay --------------------------------------------- Result 1665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] In the [[opening]] scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I [[could]] see. [[However]], Bette [[Davis]](Daisey Appleby),"The [[Whales]] of [[August]]",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[best]] [[roles]] in a [[long]] [[career]] in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her [[yacht]] with [[George]] Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral [[Staircase]]",'46. Daisey even [[proposed]] [[marriage]] to [[Johnny]] in a Ferris [[Wheel]] upside down and even [[got]] a black eye. Davis and Brent [[made]] a [[great]] [[couple]], one [[suppose]] to be very [[rich]] and the other a very [[poor]] [[reporter]]. [[Off]] [[stage]], Davis and [[Brent]] were having a [[real]] torrid love [[affair]], which is good [[reason]] why there was [[sparks]] when these two [[appeared]] in this film. If you [[liked]] Bette Davis and [[George]] Brent, this is the [[film]] for you! In the [[commencement]] scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I [[did]] see. [[Instead]], Bette [[Davies]](Daisey Appleby),"The [[Whale]] of [[Augustus]]",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[better]] [[duties]] in a [[lang]] [[quarry]] in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her [[sailing]] with [[Giorgi]] Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral [[Ladder]]",'46. Daisey even [[recommendation]] [[matrimony]] to [[Jonny]] in a Ferris [[Wheeled]] upside down and even [[did]] a black eye. Davis and Brent [[brought]] a [[wondrous]] [[pair]], one [[supposing]] to be very [[richest]] and the other a very [[pauper]] [[reporters]]. [[Deactivate]] [[phase]], Davis and [[Burnett]] were having a [[actual]] torrid love [[fling]], which is good [[justification]] why there was [[ignites]] when these two [[seemed]] in this film. If you [[loved]] Bette Davis and [[Georgie]] Brent, this is the [[cinema]] for you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So far Nightmares and Dreamscapes has been erratic and disappointing. The first segment, directed by Brian Henson, may have offered little in the way of groundbreaking storytelling or real scares, but at least it was well-directed, suspenseful, and visually interesting, with solid acting by William Hurt and very impressive special effects for a mini-series.

However, the second story in the series was just dreadful, and not in the good way. The screenplay is bad, requiring the shallow, unlikable protagonists to act illogically in order to move the plot, and having characters ramble on endlessly for the purposes of clunky, unnecessary exposition. The acting is overdone and unconvincing, and I felt far more empathy for a cold-blooded killer in the first story than for the newlywed couple in the second. The director used a million tricks to try to make the narrative spooky, but with the amateurish acting and writing, the end result looks like a freshman-year film school project, with camera moves for their own sake, and little in the way of plot or tension.

If the rest of the series continues like this, I'll be sorely let down. I look forward to William H. Macy's installment, and hope he gets a decent director and screenwriter for his segment. So far the quality is far too inconsistent to predict either way. --------------------------------------------- Result 1667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I saw this [[show]] about 3-4 [[years]] [[ago]]. It was dam [[Funny]]! When i [[first]] [[time]] i [[saw]] it was playing on ETV([[Estonian]] [[Television]]) And i [[started]] to like it. Too [[bad]] that that show is on bad [[time]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who [[likes]] to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[ideas]]. He [[got]] these glasses which h are brown. I like it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . I saw this [[display]] about 3-4 [[olds]] [[before]]. It was dam [[Amusing]]! When i [[firstly]] [[period]] i [[watched]] it was playing on ETV([[Estonia]] [[Tv]]) And i [[initiated]] to like it. Too [[negative]] that that show is on bad [[period]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who [[loves]] to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[thinking]]. He [[get]] these glasses which h are brown. I like it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . --------------------------------------------- Result 1668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I'm a [[fan]] of C&C, going back to their [[records]], and [[liked]] this [[movie]], but at one point in the mid-1980's on [[cable]] [[television]] in San [[Jose]] California, it was aired with an [[alternate]] plot [[line]] that [[destroyed]] the [[entire]] point of the movie. [[All]] references to marijuana were [[replaced]] with "[[diamonds]]". The bag that "[[Red]]" [[drops]] to [[Chong]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the [[conversation]] still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. I'm a [[groupie]] of C&C, going back to their [[register]], and [[enjoyed]] this [[movies]], but at one point in the mid-1980's on [[wire]] [[tv]] in San [[Bermudez]] California, it was aired with an [[surrogate]] plot [[iine]] that [[vandalized]] the [[whole]] point of the movie. [[Every]] references to marijuana were [[superseded]] with "[[diamond]]". The bag that "[[Rojas]]" [[falls]] to [[Zheng]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the [[schmooze]] still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Here are the matches . . . (adv. = [[advantage]])

The Warriors (Ultimate Warrior, Texas [[Tornado]] and Legion of Doom) [[v]] The Perfect Team ([[Mr]] Perfect, [[Ax]], Smash and Crush of Demolition): [[Ax]] is the first to [[go]] in seconds when Warrior [[splashes]] him for the pin (4-3 adv. [[Warriors]]). I knew Ax wasn't a healthy [[man]] but if he was that [[unhealthy]] why bother have him on the card? This [[would]] be his [[last]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Demolition]] [[job]] out cheaply via [[double]] disqualification (2-1 adv. Warriors). [[Perfect]] [[applies]] the [[Perfect]] Plex on Texas Tornado for the pin. He then [[attempts]] the same on Warrior but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior [[comes]] back with a splash to [[pin]] Perfect and [[become]] the [[sole]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart Foundation [[v]] Million Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, Mystery Partner and Rhythm and Blues): The [[mystery]] [[partner]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact disposing of Koko straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still [[manages]] to [[say]] his correct [[height]], weight and finishing move while pretending not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams Honky for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls [[victim]] to Dibiase with help from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top rope but doesn't [[leave]] [[quietly]] attacking Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[legal]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). [[Almost]] straight after, [[Greg]] gets [[caught]] in a cradle by Hart [[trying]] to put the figure four leg-lock on him and [[gets]] pinned. It [[comes]] down to Hart [[v]] Dibiase and after a few minutes of [[nice]] wrestling, Bret [[gets]] his body-cross [[reversed]] by Dibiase for the pin. Dibiase is the [[sole]] survivor. [[At]] [[least]] Hart is put to good [[use]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Roberts]], 'Superfly' [[Jimmy]] Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the big boot and leg drop for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and [[would]] be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). [[Despite]] Slaughter getting in the ring against four [[men]], he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. Here are the matches . . . (adv. = [[advantages]])

The Warriors (Ultimate Warrior, Texas [[Typhoon]] and Legion of Doom) [[vs]] The Perfect Team ([[Mister]] Perfect, [[Machete]], Smash and Crush of Demolition): [[Hatchet]] is the first to [[going]] in seconds when Warrior [[splashed]] him for the pin (4-3 adv. [[Combatants]]). I knew Ax wasn't a healthy [[guy]] but if he was that [[bad]] why bother have him on the card? This [[could]] be his [[latter]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Razing]] [[employment]] out cheaply via [[dual]] disqualification (2-1 adv. Warriors). [[Flawless]] [[applying]] the [[Flawless]] Plex on Texas Tornado for the pin. He then [[attempted]] the same on Warrior but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior [[happens]] back with a splash to [[pinned]] Perfect and [[gotten]] the [[exclusive]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart Foundation [[vs]] Million Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, Mystery Partner and Rhythm and Blues): The [[puzzle]] [[partners]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact disposing of Koko straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still [[administered]] to [[says]] his correct [[pinnacle]], weight and finishing move while pretending not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams Honky for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls [[victims]] to Dibiase with help from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top rope but doesn't [[leaving]] [[discretely]] attacking Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[judiciary]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). [[Hardly]] straight after, [[Gregg]] gets [[apprehended]] in a cradle by Hart [[attempting]] to put the figure four leg-lock on him and [[got]] pinned. It [[arrives]] down to Hart [[vs]] Dibiase and after a few minutes of [[pleasurable]] wrestling, Bret [[got]] his body-cross [[flipped]] by Dibiase for the pin. Dibiase is the [[unique]] survivor. [[In]] [[minus]] Hart is put to good [[usage]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Stevens]], 'Superfly' [[Jimmie]] Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the big boot and leg drop for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and [[could]] be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). [[Although]] Slaughter getting in the ring against four [[hombre]], he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] My wife and I [[found]] this [[film]] to be [[highly]] unsatisfying. While the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too [[many]] loose ends that make no [[sense]] at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, [[enormously]] wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW [[II]] deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He [[meticulously]] found [[time]] somehow to do an [[exhausting]] search of bank records to [[unearth]] this one [[curious]] [[fact]]. All the while dealing with a red hot [[hostage]] situation and [[bank]] [[robbers]] [[threatening]] to [[start]] [[executing]] them momentarily. Wow! Talk about [[super]] powers for a detective.

The bank [[robbers]] [[leave]] behind [[millions]] of [[dollars]] in loose currency in the vault they have [[opened]]. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, [[ostensibly]] for the [[purpose]] of blackmailing the [[bank]] [[president]]. This defies any [[rational]] attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his [[henchmen]] with [[lesser]] brains.

[[Jodie]] [[Foster]], using her [[political]] [[connections]] with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), [[Denzel]] Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster [[movie]] I saw, "Flight [[Plan]]", was also riddled with holes that made no [[sense]] at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF [[MONEY]], AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine [[actors]], lousy [[script]] writing. My wife and I [[unearthed]] this [[filmmaking]] to be [[extraordinarily]] unsatisfying. While the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too [[myriad]] loose ends that make no [[sensing]] at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, [[terribly]] wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW [[SECONDLY]] deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He [[painstakingly]] found [[moment]] somehow to do an [[tiring]] search of bank records to [[find]] this one [[unusual]] [[facto]]. All the while dealing with a red hot [[hostages]] situation and [[banco]] [[bandits]] [[menace]] to [[induction]] [[execute]] them momentarily. Wow! Talk about [[marvellous]] powers for a detective.

The bank [[bandits]] [[letting]] behind [[millionth]] of [[bucks]] in loose currency in the vault they have [[inaugurated]]. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, [[visibly]] for the [[intending]] of blackmailing the [[banco]] [[chair]]. This defies any [[logical]] attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his [[henchman]] with [[lowest]] brains.

[[Jodi]] [[Encourages]], using her [[politician]] [[connector]] with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), [[Denzil]] Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster [[kino]] I saw, "Flight [[Systems]]", was also riddled with holes that made no [[sensing]] at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF [[CASH]], AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine [[players]], lousy [[hyphen]] writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I learned of Sir Alec Guinness' death, this was the first of his many films I thought of re-seeing. What a wonderful droll commentary the film provides even after all these years. And Guinness helps to weave the charm into every frame. His eyes and face are as luminous as that white suit he wears. Both he and the film have to be considered lifetime favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1672 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Just]] PPV'd this. I don't want to waste too much [[time]] on this as most of the posters here put it better than I ever [[could]], but I did want to [[say]] a few [[things]].

I didn't know which was funnier: Redgrave chasing tiny [[moths]] and tripping over her [[nurse]]; Close wailing that her "precious" boy (whom she and the Mr. had decided was a drunken loser) has been turned into roadkill; that the tone-deaf Ann schmoozed with Peggy Lee; or the [[horrid]] CGI of [[Crypt]] [[Keeper]] Annie [[gazing]] at her [[younger]] self!

I never [[bought]] Danes as the younger Redgrave. I didn't [[buy]] Richardson and Collette as [[sisters]], [[either]]. If Meryl Streep's [[daughter]] [[wants]] to be an actress, she [[better]] [[get]] [[Mama]] to give her a few lessons! I had zero [[idea]] why any [[girl]] (or [[Buddy]]) [[would]] make [[fools]] of themselves over vapid stud du jour Harris! Ann's [[daughters]] are as whiny and [[thoughtless]] as she, [[Luc]] is a [[retarded]] slacker on crack, and I didn't give a rot about any of them! Evening gives Chick Flicks a [[bad]] [[name]]! [[Only]] PPV'd this. I don't want to waste too much [[moment]] on this as most of the posters here put it better than I ever [[would]], but I did want to [[told]] a few [[aspects]].

I didn't know which was funnier: Redgrave chasing tiny [[moth]] and tripping over her [[medic]]; Close wailing that her "precious" boy (whom she and the Mr. had decided was a drunken loser) has been turned into roadkill; that the tone-deaf Ann schmoozed with Peggy Lee; or the [[gruesome]] CGI of [[Vault]] [[Guardian]] Annie [[gazes]] at her [[youngest]] self!

I never [[procured]] Danes as the younger Redgrave. I didn't [[acquiring]] Richardson and Collette as [[siblings]], [[neither]]. If Meryl Streep's [[girls]] [[wanted]] to be an actress, she [[optimum]] [[obtain]] [[Mommy]] to give her a few lessons! I had zero [[ideals]] why any [[women]] (or [[Dude]]) [[could]] make [[pigeons]] of themselves over vapid stud du jour Harris! Ann's [[daughter]] are as whiny and [[mindless]] as she, [[Locke]] is a [[nutcase]] slacker on crack, and I didn't give a rot about any of them! Evening gives Chick Flicks a [[unfavourable]] [[behalf]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1673 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] i [[thought]] it was [[pretty]] interesting my [[social]] [[studies]]/[[language]] arts [[teacher]] was the [[police]] chief [[guy]] that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he always get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[thats]] so stupid -_- i [[think]] I'm done never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is [[fun]] i love my friends i [[brainchild]] it was [[quite]] interesting my [[societal]] [[researches]]/[[linguistics]] arts [[maestro]] was the [[policing]] chief [[blokes]] that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he always get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[arent]] so stupid -_- i [[thought]] I'm done never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is [[funny]] i love my friends --------------------------------------------- Result 1674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[gave]] it a 10, [[since]] [[everyone]] else [[seemed]] to like it and it would have been churlish not to. The reason I'm troubling you is to [[add]] a personal [[observation]] on Castle's work.

I've [[seen]] "[[Homicidal]]" and "The Tingler" (the [[version]] with the [[clever]] [[colour]] [[sequence]] where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few [[times]] and "The [[House]] On Haunted [[Hill]]" [[many]] [[times]].

Even I am not [[old]] [[enough]] to have [[seen]] them when [[Castle]] was up to his showman tricks, [[thus]] I can [[appreciate]] them for their own [[merit]]. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I [[believe]] they do him a disservice.

The [[end]] sequence of "[[Homicidal]]" is [[GENUINELY]] [[shocking]] and [[works]] [[today]] - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted [[Hill]]" was a [[TRIUMPH]]. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright [[house]] as its exterior, the [[great]] [[Vincent]] [[Price]] and a solid cast, plus a good [[score]] and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the [[late]] Sixties, it produced an audience [[reaction]] I'd not [[seen]] before and have not [[seen]] [[since]].

It was the bit where the [[heroine]] is [[alone]] in the basement (if you've not [[seen]] the [[film]], [[stop]] reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the [[hero]] on the other side of the wall.

With [[NO]] telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the [[AUDIENCE]] to [[switch]] their [[gaze]] to... I'm [[saying]] no more (my "[[spoiler]]" declaration above only [[covers]] THIS movie).

The point is, I [[believe]] this ploy was [[DELIBERATE]] - not [[accidental]] - and when it happened, the WHOLE [[AUDIENCE]] SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is [[superior]] film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. I [[provided]] it a 10, [[because]] [[everybody]] else [[sounded]] to like it and it would have been churlish not to. The reason I'm troubling you is to [[inserting]] a personal [[sighting]] on Castle's work.

I've [[watched]] "[[Murderous]]" and "The Tingler" (the [[stepping]] with the [[smarter]] [[coloring]] [[sequences]] where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few [[period]] and "The [[Residential]] On Haunted [[Shan]]" [[several]] [[period]].

Even I am not [[ancient]] [[adequately]] to have [[watched]] them when [[Castillo]] was up to his showman tricks, [[then]] I can [[thankful]] them for their own [[deserve]]. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I [[reckon]] they do him a disservice.

The [[ends]] sequence of "[[Murderer]]" is [[ACTUALLY]] [[frightening]] and [[work]] [[thursday]] - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted [[Hillside]]" was a [[VICTORY]]. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright [[home]] as its exterior, the [[grand]] [[Vicente]] [[Costs]] and a solid cast, plus a good [[scoring]] and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the [[tardy]] Sixties, it produced an audience [[reply]] I'd not [[noticed]] before and have not [[noticed]] [[because]].

It was the bit where the [[heroin]] is [[mere]] in the basement (if you've not [[watched]] the [[cinematography]], [[stopping]] reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the [[heroin]] on the other side of the wall.

With [[NOS]] telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the [[SPECTATORS]] to [[switches]] their [[look]] to... I'm [[arguing]] no more (my "[[baffle]]" declaration above only [[cover]] THIS movie).

The point is, I [[reckon]] this ploy was [[DELIBERATELY]] - not [[fortuitous]] - and when it happened, the WHOLE [[VIEWERS]] SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is [[upper]] film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] 96 [[minutes]] of this is [[cruel]]..and I [[love]] the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the [[helm]] of this was not a [[fan]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great [[pause]]) that I wonder if it's an [[old]] Starsky & Hutch episode. I [[lost]] count of the number of times I noticed that [[makeup]] had missed a spot near the collar. [[Refusing]] to acknowledge that any [[time]] had passed since the mid-60's ([[ludicrous]]) the producers [[simply]] replace Marilyn & Eddie with [[younger]] [[actors]]. Why not let them [[grow]] and age? The [[addition]] of an Addam's [[Family]] style [[reunion]] does not [[add]] to the [[flavor]] of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few [[hours]] ([[preposterous]].) [[Sid]] Ceaser is the most, [[yes]] the most unbelievable character (I am including the [[bad]] robots) since he babbles an unwild [[combination]] of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an [[ancient]] [[Arabic]] ruler. And yes, it looks like the [[laugh]] [[track]] is [[missing]]. [[In]] fact, there are [[several]] spots where there is [[dead]] [[air]], as if the [[laugh]] [[track]] was to be inserted [[later]]. The actors [[seem]] to [[wait]] on the [[faux]] [[audience]]. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of [[touch]] the writers and [[producers]] were. Marilyn [[says]] [[something]] like: "Where [[could]] Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an [[accident]]. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle [[Herman]] will be here if he has to drag himself off the train [[track]]." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's [[husband]] was a [[stuntman]] in the early 60's and lost a leg and was [[nearly]] [[killed]] in a train stunt. He never [[recovered]] and this financially [[devastated]] her [[family]]. ([[check]] out Biography's [[fantastic]] [[review]] of her [[life]] and career) This line [[could]] have been [[easily]] [[changed]] to be more [[sensitive]] to her.

[[If]] you are a [[real]] [[fan]] of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this [[mess]]. It illustrates how some [[things]] are [[better]] [[left]] [[alone]]. Even with the (nearly) original [[cast]], this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. 96 [[mins]] of this is [[ferocious]]..and I [[adores]] the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the [[tiller]] of this was not a [[breather]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great [[pauses]]) that I wonder if it's an [[longtime]] Starsky & Hutch episode. I [[outof]] count of the number of times I noticed that [[composition]] had missed a spot near the collar. [[Dismissing]] to acknowledge that any [[times]] had passed since the mid-60's ([[stupid]]) the producers [[exclusively]] replace Marilyn & Eddie with [[youngest]] [[players]]. Why not let them [[heightened]] and age? The [[extra]] of an Addam's [[Families]] style [[reunification]] does not [[inserting]] to the [[smell]] of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few [[hour]] ([[farcical]].) [[Sidney]] Ceaser is the most, [[yup]] the most unbelievable character (I am including the [[wicked]] robots) since he babbles an unwild [[conjunction]] of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an [[old]] [[Arab]] ruler. And yes, it looks like the [[laughed]] [[tracks]] is [[disappeared]]. [[Among]] fact, there are [[dissimilar]] spots where there is [[died]] [[airplane]], as if the [[laughter]] [[tracks]] was to be inserted [[then]]. The actors [[appears]] to [[waiting]] on the [[fictitious]] [[viewers]]. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of [[toque]] the writers and [[maker]] were. Marilyn [[say]] [[somethin]] like: "Where [[wo]] Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an [[misadventure]]. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle [[Hermann]] will be here if he has to drag himself off the train [[rails]]." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's [[hubby]] was a [[lining]] in the early 60's and lost a leg and was [[about]] [[assassinated]] in a train stunt. He never [[salvaged]] and this financially [[ravaged]] her [[families]]. ([[inspected]] out Biography's [[sumptuous]] [[reviewing]] of her [[lifetime]] and career) This line [[wo]] have been [[comfortably]] [[modify]] to be more [[delicate]] to her.

[[Though]] you are a [[veritable]] [[admirer]] of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this [[chaos]]. It illustrates how some [[aspects]] are [[best]] [[gauche]] [[lonely]]. Even with the (nearly) original [[casting]], this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 1676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[In]] [[order]] to [[hold]] the public's [[attention]] for three hours, we were [[treated]] not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 [[years]] of Hungarian [[history]], as to [[sexual]] [[liaisons]] with a [[sister]], a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[also]] a [[totally]] [[gratuitous]] [[rape]]. Having [[said]] all this, the [[first]] story of the [[relationship]] among the [[children]] of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensual]] - [[thanks]] to Jennifer Ehle. [[Across]] [[decree]] to [[holds]] the public's [[beware]] for three hours, we were [[processed]] not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 [[aged]] of Hungarian [[histories]], as to [[nationality]] [[ties]] with a [[sisters]], a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[apart]] a [[fully]] [[unprovoked]] [[rapes]]. Having [[stated]] all this, the [[fiirst]] story of the [[ties]] among the [[kiddies]] of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensuous]] - [[gratitude]] to Jennifer Ehle. --------------------------------------------- Result 1677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I've seen all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[worst]] one [[yet]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The [[directors]] and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's [[Abiding]] Joy." The only thing about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the characters ([[Willie]], Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and Cookie). The names/ages/[[genders]] of the children are wrong. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[produce]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The [[music]] is too [[loud]]. The [[actors]] are not convincing - they [[lack]] [[emotions]].

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last [[movie]] from this series, but I doubt it. [[If]] there are more [[movies]] made, I wish [[Michael]] Landon, Jr and others would stick [[closer]] to the original plot and story lines. The [[books]] are [[excellent]] and, if [[closely]] followed, [[would]] make [[excellent]] [[movies]]! I've seen all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[gravest]] one [[however]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The [[managers]] and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's [[Steadfast]] Joy." The only thing about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the characters ([[Willy]], Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and Cookie). The names/ages/[[gender]] of the children are wrong. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[generating]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The [[musician]] is too [[vocal]]. The [[protagonists]] are not convincing - they [[shortages]] [[feelings]].

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last [[filmmaking]] from this series, but I doubt it. [[Unless]] there are more [[theater]] made, I wish [[Michel]] Landon, Jr and others would stick [[deeper]] to the original plot and story lines. The [[livres]] are [[sumptuous]] and, if [[inextricably]] followed, [[ought]] make [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] how [[many]] [[minutes]] does it [[take]] to paint a [[poem]]? in this film much too [[long]].

it tells the [[story]] about the impact of a first [[love]] between two schoolboys.

the [[boys]] can't withhold touching each other and making [[love]]. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a [[sensual]] [[guy]] in the [[disco]] and that [[raises]] doubt: exploration, [[fantasy]], [[longing]], [[lust]] and [[feelings]] of loosing grip on your [[love]] are [[themes]] that are all [[extensively]] painted with music, close-ups and [[silent]] scenes like [[telling]] a poem. but it really [[takes]] too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising how [[various]] [[mins]] does it [[taking]] to paint a [[poetry]]? in this film much too [[longue]].

it tells the [[stories]] about the impact of a first [[likes]] between two schoolboys.

the [[guys]] can't withhold touching each other and making [[iike]]. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a [[sensuous]] [[buddy]] in the [[nightclub]] and that [[evokes]] doubt: exploration, [[fantasia]], [[yearning]], [[craving]] and [[sentiments]] of loosing grip on your [[iove]] are [[topic]] that are all [[amply]] painted with music, close-ups and [[quiet]] scenes like [[saying]] a poem. but it really [[pick]] too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising --------------------------------------------- Result 1679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ida Lupino was one of the few women to break through the directorial glass ceiling in Hollywood under the studio system. Not surprisingly, she also tackled proto-feminist themes that, when touched at all, were approached in so gingerly a manner that it was seldom quite clear what was being talked about. In Outrage, she treats rape and its aftermath, and though throughout the short movie it's referred to as `criminal assault,' she leaves, for once, no doubt about what happened.

Mala Powers (in her official debut) plays a secretary-bookkeeper at a big industrial plant; she lives with her parents but is engaged to a swell guy (Robert Clarke), who just got a raise and now makes $90 a week. Leaving the plant after working late one night, she finds herself being stalked. In the ensuing scene – the best in the movie – she tries to escape her pursuer in a forbidding maze of buildings and alleys but fails.

When she returns home, disheveled and in shock, the police can't get much out of her; she claims she never saw her attacker (who manned a snack truck outside the factory). Trying to pretend that nothing happened, she returns to her job but falls apart, thinking that everybody is staring at her, judging her. She goes into a fugue state, running away to Los Angeles on a bus but stumbling off at a rest stop.

Waking up in a strange ranch house, she learns that she's been rescued by Tod Andrews, a young minister in a California agricultural town. She lies about her identity and takes a job packing oranges. The two fall vaguely in love, but it's clear to Andrews that Powers is keeping dire secrets. When, at a company picnic, she seizes a wrench and cracks the skull of Jerry Paris, who was trying to steal a kiss, the truth about her past comes out....

It was a courageous movie to come out in 1950, and that may explain and excuse some of its shortcomings. Lupino never recaptures the verve of the early assault scene, and the movie wanders off into the bucolic and sentimental, ending up talky and didactic. Yes, Lupino had important information to impart, but she didn't trust the narrative to speak for itself. Her cast, pleasant but bland and generic, weren't much help, either, reverting to melodramatic postures or homespun reassurance. But Outrage was a breakthrough, blazing a trail for later discourse on what the crime of rape really is, and what it really means to its victims. --------------------------------------------- Result 1680 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Short synopsis

This film opens with soldiers being released from the [[company]] of men. One of them pursues another with a weird [[scheme]] the other [[repeatedly]] [[refuses]]. [[Later]] they both get [[trapped]] in an office building in which they want to [[crack]] a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility [[turns]] into [[playful]] banter and then into a desperate [[fight]] for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really [[serious]]). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[hole]] into a wall and [[finally]] manage to [[escape]] – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last [[encounter]], a last light for a [[cigarette]], [[adieu]] l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to [[see]] closet [[homosexuals]] in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of [[women]] is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern [[glass]] and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall [[coverings]] around. The wardrobe is [[also]] very good. The ultra [[stylish]] Citroen DS ([[maybe]] the most modern and elegant car of all times) features [[large]] in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can [[recommend]] this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a [[manner]] that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he [[really]] acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is [[highly]] [[recommended]]). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. [[Also]] very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. Short synopsis

This film opens with soldiers being released from the [[corporation]] of men. One of them pursues another with a weird [[systems]] the other [[systematically]] [[refuse]]. [[Afterwards]] they both get [[ambushed]] in an office building in which they want to [[slit]] a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility [[revolves]] into [[mischievous]] banter and then into a desperate [[struggling]] for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really [[gravest]]). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[hellhole]] into a wall and [[eventually]] manage to [[flee]] – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last [[face]], a last light for a [[smoking]], [[ciao]] l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to [[consults]] closet [[gay]] in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of [[female]] is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern [[luna]] and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall [[cover]] around. The wardrobe is [[apart]] very good. The ultra [[sleek]] Citroen DS ([[presumably]] the most modern and elegant car of all times) features [[sizable]] in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can [[recommendations]] this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a [[forma]] that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he [[truthfully]] acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is [[heavily]] [[suggested]]). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. [[Further]] very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. --------------------------------------------- Result 1681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Years have gone by since [[Don]] Wilson used his martial arts [[expertise]] to [[take]] down a robot who was [[programmed]] to destroy him, he's [[also]] married to the blonde [[reporter]] (Stacie [[Foster]]) who [[led]] the [[rebellion]] in the first [[film]], now a [[new]] conspiracy is in the [[works]], one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two [[heroes]], and a corporation [[looking]] to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and Cyber [[Tracker]] 2 [[becomes]] a virtual [[replay]] of the first [[movie]]. I admit that I have [[bought]] [[DVDs]] from the [[bargain]] [[bin]] that were [[made]] by PM, PM was a [[company]] that [[specialized]] in cheap-jack [[action]] flicks (like this) which had tons of [[explosions]], [[little]] [[story]] and [[overall]] [[nothing]] but [[mean]] edged [[action]]. Some of these titles have been (mildly) [[enjoyable]] (Last [[Man]] [[Standing]] and The Sweeper) [[however]] Cyber Tracker 2 is [[stuck]] with the casting of the charisma-less [[Don]] Wilson. When comparing the [[protagonists]] of [[similar]] PM [[efforts]] both [[Jeff]] Wincott and C. Thomas Howell are [[Oscar]] nominees when compared to Don Wilson. Another [[telling]] sign is that this was [[directed]] by [[Richard]] [[Pepin]] who has [[none]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[seems]] to have in crafting [[action]] sequences that feel [[much]] more [[expensive]] than their [[budgets]]. Then again though both C. [[Thomas]] and Wincott are [[probably]] more [[expensive]] to [[obtain]]. Cyber Tracker 2 is a [[rip]] off with a [[capitol]] [[R]], there are so [[many]] steals from better movies (Robocop, Terminator, Universal Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[almost]] as if [[Richard]] Pepin is [[trying]] to [[infuse]] a [[sense]] of [[identity]] to the pedestrian [[material]] [[yet]] without the [[intelligent]] [[ideas]] or at [[least]] the mindless zip of great [[action]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[borrowed]] from a [[better]] movie and the [[supporting]] cast [[overact]]. The only exception [[comes]] from Tony Burton who is miles better than the [[material]]. Also Stacie [[Foster]] [[looks]] like she [[could]] be better with far better material. However Cyber Tracker 2 comes off [[mainly]] as [[noisy]], bland and [[lackluster]] as its leading man, however with no real martial arts sequences to fall back on, all there is, is lots of cars tipping over and that [[alone]] is no [[substitute]] for the [[bankruptcy]] of ambition expressed here.

*1/2 out of 4-(Poor) Years have gone by since [[Gifts]] Wilson used his martial arts [[knowledge]] to [[taking]] down a robot who was [[planning]] to destroy him, he's [[apart]] married to the blonde [[correspondent]] (Stacie [[Encourages]]) who [[culminated]] the [[mutiny]] in the first [[flick]], now a [[nuevo]] conspiracy is in the [[cooperation]], one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two [[heroic]], and a corporation [[searching]] to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and Cyber [[Sniffer]] 2 [[become]] a virtual [[replication]] of the first [[filmmaking]]. I admit that I have [[acquired]] [[dvd]] from the [[negotiation]] [[ibn]] that were [[introduced]] by PM, PM was a [[businesses]] that [[specializing]] in cheap-jack [[measures]] flicks (like this) which had tons of [[explodes]], [[small]] [[fairytales]] and [[general]] [[nada]] but [[imply]] edged [[actions]]. Some of these titles have been (mildly) [[congenial]] (Last [[Men]] [[Stand]] and The Sweeper) [[conversely]] Cyber Tracker 2 is [[jammed]] with the casting of the charisma-less [[Donate]] Wilson. When comparing the [[players]] of [[analogue]] PM [[initiative]] both [[Jeffrey]] Wincott and C. Thomas Howell are [[Oskar]] nominees when compared to Don Wilson. Another [[saying]] sign is that this was [[oriented]] by [[Richie]] [[Appleseed]] who has [[nos]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[appears]] to have in crafting [[measures]] sequences that feel [[very]] more [[costly]] than their [[budget]]. Then again though both C. [[Tomas]] and Wincott are [[arguably]] more [[costly]] to [[obtaining]]. Cyber Tracker 2 is a [[tears]] off with a [[congress]] [[rs]], there are so [[myriad]] steals from better movies (Robocop, Terminator, Universal Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[around]] as if [[Richie]] Pepin is [[tempting]] to [[instil]] a [[feeling]] of [[identities]] to the pedestrian [[materials]] [[however]] without the [[smart]] [[reflections]] or at [[lowest]] the mindless zip of great [[actions]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[loaned]] from a [[improved]] movie and the [[aiding]] cast [[overdo]]. The only exception [[arrives]] from Tony Burton who is miles better than the [[materials]]. Also Stacie [[Encourages]] [[seem]] like she [[did]] be better with far better material. However Cyber Tracker 2 comes off [[predominantly]] as [[loud]], bland and [[mediocre]] as its leading man, however with no real martial arts sequences to fall back on, all there is, is lots of cars tipping over and that [[exclusively]] is no [[substitutions]] for the [[flop]] of ambition expressed here.

*1/2 out of 4-(Poor) --------------------------------------------- Result 1682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have been a fan of Pushing [[Daisies]] since the very beginning. It is [[wonderfully]] thought up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[remarkable]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much [[TV]] has been needing a creative, original show like Pushing [[Daisies]]. It is a huge relief to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[similarities]], and it does get tedious at [[moments]] to [[see]] [[shows]] so [[close]] in [[identity]].

With a [[magnificent]] cast, [[wonderful]] script, and [[hilarity]] in [[every]] episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[remarkable]] shows on your [[television]]. I have been a fan of Pushing [[Mums]] since the very beginning. It is [[stunningly]] thought up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[notable]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much [[TVS]] has been needing a creative, original show like Pushing [[Mommies]]. It is a huge relief to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[analogies]], and it does get tedious at [[times]] to [[seeing]] [[showcase]] so [[shut]] in [[identities]].

With a [[super]] cast, [[wondrous]] script, and [[silliness]] in [[any]] episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[wondrous]] shows on your [[televisions]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having watched both the Lion King and Lion King II and enjoyed both thoroughly. I thought Lion King 1.5 might be worth watching. What a disappointment ! Disney must be getting desperate for revenues.

Especially now that they lost the deal with pixar.

Basically, they just picked up some bits of footage that were left on the editor's floor (or garbage can) and glued them together to make a

quick buck. Unlike LK I & II, both of which had strong story lines.

This movie hardly has a story at all. While the characters and animation are always fun to look at, there is simply not enough material here for a movie. Some of the bits could have been good 2nd disk fillers on the original offerings.

Disney - Shame on you for putting this trash out to make a quick buck!

Next time take the time and effort and put our an enduring work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage [[dump]] where the characters [[live]]. The [[film]] is based on a series of [[stories]] by Shugoro Yamamoto and [[tells]] the [[story]] of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[sadness]].

[[First]] [[color]] film [[made]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[long]] [[time]]. Weirdly it was [[often]] listed as being only [[available]] in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[run]] [[time]] in some [[promotional]] material. I was holding out for the full version, waiting to [[see]] what Kurasowa [[wanted]] us to see, only to [[find]] out on the recent [[release]] by Criterion that the 140 minute [[version]] is the full version.

[[Finally]] sitting down to [[see]] the film last night I'm of [[mixed]] [[emotions]] about the [[film]]. [[First]] and foremost its visually [[linked]] to every [[film]] that followed. You can see [[every]] other of Kurasowals [[remaining]] six [[films]] [[reflected]] in this movie, down to the [[painted]] [[sunsets]]. Its a [[striking]] [[film]] in its use of color and you can [[understand]] why it [[took]] him so long to a film stock he [[would]] he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[work]] of art.([[Though]] be warned if you're going to [[see]] this on your widescreen TV this was [[shot]] 1.33 so will [[appear]] in [[normal]] [[TV]] ratio.) The rest of the [[film]] is a mixed [[bag]]. [[Part]] of the problem is that the [[lives]] of all of these people don't [[quite]] [[come]] together. As [[separate]] [[tales]] they all [[work]] well but as a filmic [[whole]] they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa [[since]] one can't [[always]] [[hit]] [[things]] out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort [[occasionally]] bombed himself.

This isn't to [[say]] that there aren't [[reasons]] to [[see]] the [[film]]. As will all Kurasowa [[films]] there are [[always]] [[reasons]] to [[see]] his [[films]], whether they [[work]] or not. The first [[trip]] of the "[[trolley]]" is one of the [[best]] [[things]] Kurasowa ever did and is worth the [[price]] of a rental. Its one of the most [[magical]] [[moments]] in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage [[shithole]] where the characters [[vivo]]. The [[cinematic]] is based on a series of [[tales]] by Shugoro Yamamoto and [[narrates]] the [[storytelling]] of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[woe]].

[[Firstly]] [[dye]] film [[accomplished]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[longue]] [[period]]. Weirdly it was [[ordinarily]] listed as being only [[accessible]] in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[execute]] [[period]] in some [[propaganda]] material. I was holding out for the full version, waiting to [[behold]] what Kurasowa [[want]] us to see, only to [[unearthed]] out on the recent [[freed]] by Criterion that the 140 minute [[stepping]] is the full version.

[[Lastly]] sitting down to [[seeing]] the film last night I'm of [[blended]] [[sentiments]] about the [[movies]]. [[Outset]] and foremost its visually [[associated]] to every [[films]] that followed. You can see [[any]] other of Kurasowals [[rest]] six [[cinematography]] [[manifested]] in this movie, down to the [[painting]] [[sunrises]]. Its a [[noteworthy]] [[cinematographic]] in its use of color and you can [[realise]] why it [[taken]] him so long to a film stock he [[ought]] he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[jobs]] of art.([[Notwithstanding]] be warned if you're going to [[behold]] this on your widescreen TV this was [[offed]] 1.33 so will [[appearing]] in [[routine]] [[TELEVISIONS]] ratio.) The rest of the [[movies]] is a mixed [[saddlebag]]. [[Portions]] of the problem is that the [[iife]] of all of these people don't [[abundantly]] [[coming]] together. As [[distinct]] [[stories]] they all [[collaborating]] well but as a filmic [[total]] they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa [[because]] one can't [[unceasingly]] [[slapped]] [[aspects]] out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort [[intermittently]] bombed himself.

This isn't to [[tell]] that there aren't [[rationale]] to [[behold]] the [[cinematography]]. As will all Kurasowa [[cinematography]] there are [[unceasingly]] [[motivations]] to [[behold]] his [[movie]], whether they [[cooperating]] or not. The first [[touring]] of the "[[wagon]]" is one of the [[nicest]] [[matters]] Kurasowa ever did and is worth the [[costing]] of a rental. Its one of the most [[quadrant]] [[times]] in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. --------------------------------------------- Result 1685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] After [[Chaplin]] made one of his best films: [[Dough]] & Dynamite, he [[made]] one of his [[worst]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. [[Many]] of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very [[little]] else to [[recommend]] this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. After [[Chapin]] made one of his best films: [[Batter]] & Dynamite, he [[brought]] one of his [[meanest]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. [[Myriad]] of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very [[scant]] else to [[recommends]] this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1686 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[After]] two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally [[joke]] free, we start the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[TUBE]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid [[frat]] boys who [[still]] mainline [[JACKASS]] or Tom [[Green]] will [[find]] the idea of [[fecal]] [[matter]] coming out of the some [[tube]], SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a [[clown]] who [[basically]] does the "not very endearing clown" [[bit]] I [[think]] I've [[seen]] approxiately ninety times now will [[eat]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a [[model]] for the [[many]] [[infinitely]] funnier [[movies]] like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW [[FOR]] SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. [[Upon]] two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally [[farce]] free, we start the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[PIPES]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid [[sisterhood]] boys who [[however]] mainline [[DOUCHE]] or Tom [[Greene]] will [[finds]] the idea of [[stool]] [[topic]] coming out of the some [[tubes]], SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a [[joker]] who [[virtually]] does the "not very endearing clown" [[bitten]] I [[ideas]] I've [[noticed]] approxiately ninety times now will [[ate]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a [[modeling]] for the [[various]] [[immensely]] funnier [[theater]] like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW [[IN]] SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's been a [[vogue]] for the [[past]] few [[years]] for often-as-not [[ironic]] zombie-related [[films]], as well as other [[media]] incarnations of the flesh- [[eating]] [[resurrected]] dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an [[attempt]] to cash in on that, simply a [[manifestation]] of it, or both -- and it [[falls]] [[squarely]] into the category of ironic zombies. The [[joke]] here is that we get to [[see]] the walking dead in the [[contrasting]] context of a broadly [[stereotyped]], squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a [[great]] Zombie [[War]], and the [[creatures]] are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s [[suburb]].

It's a [[moderately]] [[funny]] [[concept]] on its own, and [[enough]] [[perhaps]] for a five-minute [[comedy]] sketch, but it can't [[hold]] up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this [[idealized]] version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and [[loses]] all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a [[cheap]] attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but [[irritate]] me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any [[resemblance]] to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is [[bragging]] emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this [[bad]] writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" [[actually]] imparts [[character]] and [[sympathy]] to a lumbering green [[monster]] who cannot [[speak]].

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to [[commodity]] fetishism, racism, classism, [[war]] paranoia, et [[cetera]], but none of it really works on a [[comprehensive]] level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. There's been a [[popularity]] for the [[previous]] few [[ages]] for often-as-not [[sarcastic]] zombie-related [[filmmaking]], as well as other [[medium]] incarnations of the flesh- [[feeding]] [[revived]] dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an [[seek]] to cash in on that, simply a [[demonstrations]] of it, or both -- and it [[dip]] [[directly]] into the category of ironic zombies. The [[farce]] here is that we get to [[seeing]] the walking dead in the [[opposing]] context of a broadly [[stereotypical]], squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a [[large]] Zombie [[Warfare]], and the [[creature]] are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s [[commuter]].

It's a [[slightly]] [[humorous]] [[conception]] on its own, and [[sufficient]] [[probably]] for a five-minute [[parody]] sketch, but it can't [[held]] up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this [[modelled]] version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and [[losing]] all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a [[cheaper]] attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but [[disturb]] me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any [[likeness]] to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is [[brag]] emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this [[unfavourable]] writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" [[indeed]] imparts [[characteristics]] and [[sympathies]] to a lumbering green [[creature]] who cannot [[speaking]].

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to [[commodities]] fetishism, racism, classism, [[warfare]] paranoia, et [[etcetera]], but none of it really works on a [[exhaustive]] level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I just got through watching this DVD at home. We love Westerns, so my husband rented it. He started apologizing to me half way through. The [[saddles]], costumes, accents--everything was off. The [[part]] that made me so mad is where the [[guy]] didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[excuse]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the [[way]] through, and, as someone [[else]] said...too many [[bad]] things to [[single]] out any one [[reason]] why it [[sucked]]. I [[mean]], the fact that the boy [[happened]] to snatch the [[evil]] stone from the collector on the same [[month]] and day it was [[found]], what's the point of that? And why were there a [[grave]] yard where [[everyone]] died on April 25 but the people [[whose]] [[souls]] were [[taken]] by the collector were still up [[walking]] [[around]]? If you [[want]] a [[movie]] to make fun of after a few [[beers]], this may be your [[movie]]. However, if you want a real Western, you will [[hate]] this [[movie]]. I just got through watching this DVD at home. We love Westerns, so my husband rented it. He started apologizing to me half way through. The [[feces]], costumes, accents--everything was off. The [[party]] that made me so mad is where the [[guys]] didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[apologies]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the [[camino]] through, and, as someone [[further]] said...too many [[negative]] things to [[exclusive]] out any one [[rationale]] why it [[aspired]]. I [[meaning]], the fact that the boy [[arrived]] to snatch the [[malicious]] stone from the collector on the same [[mois]] and day it was [[uncovered]], what's the point of that? And why were there a [[graves]] yard where [[everybody]] died on April 25 but the people [[who]] [[ames]] were [[picked]] by the collector were still up [[walk]] [[roundabout]]? If you [[wanting]] a [[filmmaking]] to make fun of after a few [[cervezas]], this may be your [[film]]. However, if you want a real Western, you will [[dislikes]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I just loved watching it [[though]] and having fun with it's total badness of a [[film]]. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[chance]]. [[Seriously]], folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special [[effects]], and plot in [[general]] is very cheesy and [[unrealistic]]. "Doesn't she [[need]] lungs" [[said]] [[Crow]] noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[body]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "[[cat]] [[fight]]" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. [[So]], in some ways this was a fun movie. I [[think]] for horror fans, you'll [[probably]] enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll [[get]] a great [[laugh]].

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would [[die]]: 1/10 I just loved watching it [[despite]] and having fun with it's total badness of a [[filmmaking]]. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[probability]]. [[Gravely]], folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special [[influences]], and plot in [[overall]] is very cheesy and [[utopian]]. "Doesn't she [[gotta]] lungs" [[says]] [[Corneille]] noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[agency]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "[[pussycat]] [[wrestling]]" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. [[Hence]], in some ways this was a fun movie. I [[thoughts]] for horror fans, you'll [[indubitably]] enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll [[obtains]] a great [[giggling]].

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would [[died]]: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has an all star cast, John Candy, Richard Lewis, Ornella Mutti, Cybill Shepard, and Jim Belushi to name a few, run amuck in Monte Carlo, as well as some other beautiful European locations, and is very funny. The trouble that everyone gets in when they lie to protect themselves is great, and I highly recommend that you see this movie, it is well worth it! John Candy is in top form in Once Upon A Crime, as is everyone else! If you and your family are looking for a great family film, this is your ticket. Everyone gives stellar performances, great acting, great comedy, and great timing, which is rare in movies these days. Great plot, great mystery, (which I love anyways) and overall, well worth the money you spend on it. So get the kids, grab some popcorn, juice, or tea, or sodas, and enjoy the show!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] after [[seeing]] it on Broadway. I [[love]] the Broadway musical and I [[love]] the [[movie]]. I [[watched]] the movie like it was not [[related]] to the Broadway [[show]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[happens]] to most books when they are turned into [[movies]], so I [[developed]] a philosophy really early. [[Assume]] that the movie is going to be based on the [[book]] ( or musical in this [[case]]) but that while the story line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[different]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[years]] before I had to [[make]] a [[choice]]. I was a good [[dancer]]( [[picking]] up chorus work in local productions as a [[child]] etc) but I wasn't [[super]] talented.I was [[however]] [[super]] talented as a show [[rider]]. I was [[told]] by my [[dance]] instructor and my [[trainer]] ( who i [[spent]] several months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to [[make]] a [[choice]] when I [[turned]] 14. That I [[needed]] to [[move]] up from [[dancing]] two hours four-five days a week and riding 3 hours a day 7 days a [[week]].. and dedicate to one or the other. So I dearly love [[dancing]] and I love this [[movie]] and a lot of the other [[ballet]] and [[dance]] [[movies]]. I just [[chose]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[great]] movie about [[raw]] emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of [[anticipation]] and [[heartbreak]] when you [[work]] really [[hard]] to get [[something]] you want and you just do not [[get]] it. I love the [[movie]]. I [[love]] the Broadway musical. I [[saw]] this [[kino]] after [[see]] it on Broadway. I [[likes]] the Broadway musical and I [[amour]] the [[cinema]]. I [[saw]] the movie like it was not [[relating]] to the Broadway [[demonstrating]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[occurs]] to most books when they are turned into [[theater]], so I [[formulated]] a philosophy really early. [[Suppose]] that the movie is going to be based on the [[ledger]] ( or musical in this [[lawsuits]]) but that while the story line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[multiple]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[olds]] before I had to [[deliver]] a [[elects]]. I was a good [[dances]]( [[gathering]] up chorus work in local productions as a [[children]] etc) but I wasn't [[wondrous]] talented.I was [[conversely]] [[mega]] talented as a show [[mustang]]. I was [[tells]] by my [[choreography]] instructor and my [[instructor]] ( who i [[spends]] several months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to [[deliver]] a [[chose]] when I [[transformed]] 14. That I [[needs]] to [[budge]] up from [[danced]] two hours four-five days a week and riding 3 hours a day 7 days a [[zhou]].. and dedicate to one or the other. So I dearly love [[dancers]] and I love this [[movies]] and a lot of the other [[dancers]] and [[choreography]] [[movie]]. I just [[opted]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[wondrous]] movie about [[untreated]] emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of [[expectation]] and [[agony]] when you [[collaborate]] really [[stiff]] to get [[somethings]] you want and you just do not [[got]] it. I love the [[movies]]. I [[loved]] the Broadway musical. --------------------------------------------- Result 1692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[classic]] on [[film]] about a [[love]] obsessed young [[man]] who's abused hurt and [[humiliated]] by the object of his obsession to the point of losing everything he has only to find true [[love]] in the end under the most [[unusual]] circumstances.

[[Leslie]] Howard plays the role of [[Philip]] [[Carey]] a [[sensitive]] young artiest in Paris [[trying]] to [[make]] a [[living]] by [[selling]] his [[paintings]]. [[Told]] by a local art [[expert]] that his [[work]] is not at all good [[enough]] to be [[sold]] to the art going public [[Philip]] [[decides]] to [[go]] back to his [[native]] [[England]] and [[study]] [[medicine]] and become a [[physician]] in [[order]] to [[help]] others.

[[Philip]] being born with a club [[foot]] is very hypersensitive about his [[awkward]] condition and makes up for that by being a very [[pleasant]] and friendly [[person]]. One [[afternoon]] [[Philip]] is at a local café with a fellow medical [[student]] and spots pretty [[waitress]] [[Mildred]] [[Rogers]], Bette [[Davis]], and [[immediately]] falls in love with her. [[Mildred]] at [[first]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Philip]] but [[later]] [[realizing]] just what a sap he is takes advantage of his [[feelings]] for her. [[Mildred]] has him [[spend]] himself into poverty [[buying]] her [[gifts]] and taking her out to the [[theater]] [[every]] [[time]] she off from [[work]]. Phlip [[also]] [[falls]] behind on his [[studies]], by [[paying]] so much attention [[towards]] Mildred, at the [[medical]] [[university]] and fails his [[final]] [[exams]].

Going into hock [[buying]] an engagement ring for [[Mildred]] in an [[attempt]] to [[ask]] for her hand in [[marriage]] the [[cold]] hearted Mildred [[tells]] the [[startled]] [[Philip]] that she's already [[engaged]] to be married to Emil Miller, [[Alan]] Hale. It turns out that he's one of the [[customers]] at the café that she's [[always]] flirting with.

[[Philip]] [[broke]] and heart-sick slowly [[get]] his [[life]] back together and [[later]] retakes his [[medical]] [[exam]] and passes it and at the same time [[finds]] a [[new]] [[love]] in Nora, Fay Johnson, a [[writer]] for a local [[love]] [[magazine]]. [[Later]] to Philip's shock and [[surprise]] [[Mildred]] walks back into his [[life]].

[[Mildred]] [[telling]] [[Philip]] that her husband Emil, who's [[child]] she's carrying, [[threw]] her out of the [[house]] has the [[kind]] and [[understanding]] [[Philip]] take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in love with him. It [[later]] [[turns]] out that [[Mildred]] wasn't married to Emil but had a [[child]] out of [[wedlock]] by having an [[illicit]] affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[conventional]] on [[movies]] about a [[loved]] obsessed young [[dude]] who's abused hurt and [[ashamed]] by the object of his obsession to the point of losing everything he has only to find true [[likes]] in the end under the most [[strange]] circumstances.

[[Lesley]] Howard plays the role of [[Philippe]] [[Cary]] a [[delicate]] young artiest in Paris [[tempting]] to [[deliver]] a [[iife]] by [[sold]] his [[paints]]. [[Said]] by a local art [[specialist]] that his [[cooperation]] is not at all good [[adequately]] to be [[selling]] to the art going public [[Philips]] [[decided]] to [[going]] back to his [[aboriginal]] [[Uk]] and [[studying]] [[medications]] and become a [[practitioner]] in [[decree]] to [[assistance]] others.

[[Phillip]] being born with a club [[footing]] is very hypersensitive about his [[clumsy]] condition and makes up for that by being a very [[nice]] and friendly [[somebody]]. One [[evening]] [[Philips]] is at a local café with a fellow medical [[pupils]] and spots pretty [[hostess]] [[Gertrude]] [[Rodgers]], Bette [[Davies]], and [[promptly]] falls in love with her. [[Gertrude]] at [[outset]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Phillip]] but [[subsequently]] [[realise]] just what a sap he is takes advantage of his [[sensations]] for her. [[Gertrude]] has him [[expenditure]] himself into poverty [[purchasing]] her [[donation]] and taking her out to the [[movies]] [[all]] [[times]] she off from [[collaboration]]. Phlip [[further]] [[autumn]] behind on his [[researches]], by [[paid]] so much attention [[vers]] Mildred, at the [[medicinal]] [[college]] and fails his [[definitive]] [[review]].

Going into hock [[bought]] an engagement ring for [[Elsie]] in an [[endeavour]] to [[inquired]] for her hand in [[marry]] the [[icy]] hearted Mildred [[told]] the [[horrified]] [[Philips]] that she's already [[incurred]] to be married to Emil Miller, [[Alana]] Hale. It turns out that he's one of the [[users]] at the café that she's [[repeatedly]] flirting with.

[[Philips]] [[cracked]] and heart-sick slowly [[got]] his [[living]] back together and [[subsequently]] retakes his [[physician]] [[examinations]] and passes it and at the same time [[found]] a [[newer]] [[iike]] in Nora, Fay Johnson, a [[novelist]] for a local [[amore]] [[revue]]. [[Subsequent]] to Philip's shock and [[astonishment]] [[Elsie]] walks back into his [[iife]].

[[Mabel]] [[saying]] [[Philips]] that her husband Emil, who's [[enfants]] she's carrying, [[ditched]] her out of the [[home]] has the [[genera]] and [[understand]] [[Philipp]] take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in love with him. It [[subsequently]] [[revolves]] out that [[Elsie]] wasn't married to Emil but had a [[kiddies]] out of [[marries]] by having an [[unlawful]] affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A top notch Columbo from beginning to end. I particularly like the interaction between Columbo and the killer, Ruth Gordon.

As an avid Columbo fan, I can't recall another one in which he doesn't set up the killer at the end as he does in other episodes. In this one, as he's trying to determine the correct sequence of the boxes and the "message" that the nephew left behind, it finally dawns on him.

The music in this episode is very good as well, as it is in many of other ones. --------------------------------------------- Result 1694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I absolutely love this game to death. Ever since I was 9 years old (I am now 15). It has great graphics, characters, magic, weapons, additions, and don't forget the ultimately awesome dragoon forms! I am still waiting for a remake, prequel, or a sequel to this spectacular video game.

You play as Dart, a young swordsman who has the potential to be quite the hero. On this adventure you encounter wondrous creatures and boss fights. You also encounter some friends on the way who have their own special element. Such as Fire, Darkness, Water/Ice, Thunder/Lightning, Earth, Light, and Wind. There are also items known as dragoon spirits, which allow you to transform into magical creatures of legend. Dragons, wizards, creatures called winglies and evil creatures you'll have to face on this adventure of action-packed thrills and excitement. One of my all time favorite games, The Legend of Dragoon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1695 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Easily the best known of all the [[Shakespeare]] plays, it has been [[seriously]] [[let]] down here. Shoddy [[direction]], stagnant studio [[work]] and [[erratic]] performances [[spoil]] a fine tragedy.

[[In]] the [[town]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[centuries]] but tragedy is [[imminent]] when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[love]] with [[Juliet]] ([[Rebecca]] Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, [[especially]] in [[daytime]] scenes, [[seriously]] stagnates the energy of the play. It's a [[story]] that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot [[outdoors]]. [[Coupled]] with this the [[costumes]] are [[hideous]], with too [[many]] tights and ludicrous codpieces. The [[stage]] [[fighting]] [[looks]] [[horrendous]], with far too much [[stretching]] and running [[around]] to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a [[truly]] [[effective]] Romeo. He [[manages]] the character's intensity when the plot gets [[going]] but his stately [[accent]] and bland, [[often]] inexpressive [[eyes]] [[limit]] his range. It is very [[hard]] for the [[audience]] to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too [[youthful]] to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's [[naiveté]] but a [[little]] more sassiness [[would]] have been [[welcome]].

The [[supporting]] roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar [[Laurence]] is fine but too [[many]] of his [[best]] lines have been [[cut]]. [[Anthony]] Andrews' Mercutio [[belongs]] on stage and not on [[camera]]. He gurns and gesticulates [[excessively]] and [[looks]] [[rather]] [[ridiculous]] as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has [[virtually]] no [[presence]] as Tybalt. He did [[develop]] an edge and intensity to [[deliver]] some fine screen performances in [[later]] years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor [[Lawrence]] Naismith fails to give the [[part]] any authority on [[camera]]. [[Only]] [[Micheal]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, [[comes]] out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

[[See]] one of the other versions of this [[story]] [[instead]]. Easily the best known of all the [[Shakespearean]] plays, it has been [[harshly]] [[leave]] down here. Shoddy [[directions]], stagnant studio [[cooperation]] and [[unpredictable]] performances [[ruin]] a fine tragedy.

[[Among]] the [[urban]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[ages]] but tragedy is [[next]] when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[likes]] with [[Jules]] ([[Rebekah]] Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, [[particularly]] in [[daylight]] scenes, [[conscientiously]] stagnates the energy of the play. It's a [[history]] that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot [[outdoor]]. [[Matched]] with this the [[suits]] are [[outrageous]], with too [[myriad]] tights and ludicrous codpieces. The [[phase]] [[gunfight]] [[seems]] [[terrible]], with far too much [[stretch]] and running [[about]] to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a [[honestly]] [[effectiveness]] Romeo. He [[runs]] the character's intensity when the plot gets [[go]] but his stately [[focusing]] and bland, [[normally]] inexpressive [[eye]] [[limits]] his range. It is very [[difficult]] for the [[viewers]] to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too [[young]] to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's [[naïveté]] but a [[petite]] more sassiness [[should]] have been [[greet]].

The [[aiding]] roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar [[Laurent]] is fine but too [[several]] of his [[optimum]] lines have been [[cutting]]. [[Anton]] Andrews' Mercutio [[belonging]] on stage and not on [[cameras]]. He gurns and gesticulates [[overly]] and [[seem]] [[somewhat]] [[absurd]] as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has [[almost]] no [[participation]] as Tybalt. He did [[developing]] an edge and intensity to [[delivering]] some fine screen performances in [[subsequent]] years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor [[Laurence]] Naismith fails to give the [[portions]] any authority on [[cameras]]. [[Merely]] [[Michelle]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, [[arises]] out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

[[Behold]] one of the other versions of this [[histories]] [[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Michael Is King. This film contains some of the best stuff Mike has ever done. Smooth Criminal is pure genius. The cameos are wonderful, but as always, the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Lars]] von Trier's Europa is a [[worthy]] echo of The Third [[Man]], about an American coming to post-World [[War]] II [[Europe]] and finds himself [[entangled]] in a [[dangerous]] mystery.

Jean-Marc Barr plays Leopold [[Kessler]], a German-American who [[refused]] to join the US Army during the [[war]], [[arrives]] in Frankfurt as soon as the war is over to work with his uncle as a [[sleeping]] car conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the war is [[still]] secretly going on with an underground [[terrorist]] group called the Werewolves who target American [[allies]]. Leopold is strongly against taking any sides, but is [[drawn]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the [[owner]] of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is [[pardoned]] by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German [[transportation]] system up and running again. The colonel [[soon]] enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an [[adventure]] by being involved with both sides of the [[conflict]] in a mysterious and film noir-ish [[way]], where [[everyone]] and everything is not what it [[seems]]. Its [[amazing]] to watch the naive Leopold [[deal]] with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying [[passengers]], his [[disgruntled]] uncle, [[even]] the [[railway]] company's [[officials]] who come to [[examine]] his work [[ethic]]) before he [[finally]] boils over and humorously and [[violently]] takes [[control]]. The [[film]] is endlessly [[unpredictable]].

The film [[stylishly]] [[shot]], it [[always]] [[takes]] place at night during the winter with [[lots]] of [[falling]] snow. Its shot in black and [[white]] with [[shots]] of [[color]] randomly [[appearing]] [[throughout]]. Also, background screens [[displaying]] [[images]] that counter [[act]] with the [[images]] up front. [[Add]] [[Max]] von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europa]] [[becomes]] a dreamlike place that's out of this world.

This is now a personal [[favorite]] [[film]] of [[mine]]. [[Jorgen]] von Trier's Europa is a [[creditable]] echo of The Third [[Males]], about an American coming to post-World [[Warfare]] II [[Eu]] and finds himself [[embroiled]] in a [[risky]] mystery.

Jean-Marc Barr plays Leopold [[Cordova]], a German-American who [[dismiss]] to join the US Army during the [[wars]], [[comes]] in Frankfurt as soon as the war is over to work with his uncle as a [[slept]] car conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the war is [[however]] secretly going on with an underground [[terrorism]] group called the Werewolves who target American [[ally]]. Leopold is strongly against taking any sides, but is [[lured]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the [[owning]] of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is [[forgiven]] by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German [[transport]] system up and running again. The colonel [[swiftly]] enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an [[fling]] by being involved with both sides of the [[dispute]] in a mysterious and film noir-ish [[routes]], where [[anybody]] and everything is not what it [[seem]]. Its [[wondrous]] to watch the naive Leopold [[address]] with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying [[tourists]], his [[dissatisfied]] uncle, [[yet]] the [[railways]] company's [[officer]] who come to [[investigated]] his work [[morally]]) before he [[lastly]] boils over and humorously and [[forcibly]] takes [[monitored]]. The [[cinematic]] is endlessly [[erratic]].

The film [[neatly]] [[offed]], it [[continually]] [[pick]] place at night during the winter with [[batch]] of [[diminishing]] snow. Its shot in black and [[branca]] with [[beatings]] of [[dye]] randomly [[appears]] [[in]]. Also, background screens [[displayed]] [[pictures]] that counter [[law]] with the [[picture]] up front. [[Adding]] [[Maxie]] von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europe]] [[becoming]] a dreamlike place that's out of this world.

This is now a personal [[prefers]] [[movies]] of [[mining]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1698 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This, "Prodigal Son" and "Eastern Condors" are my favourite Sammo Hung films. The Fat Dragon is fatter in this outing than he was in "Condors", but he's no less sure-footed as director or actor. He is, in fact, at the top of his form and delivers a devastating, brutal actioner that boasts half a dozen amazing sequences and manages to tell a compassionate, sweet love story also. Love and romance are not the director's priorities here, but they serve as curious adjuncts to the action, and insure that viewers don't hit the fast-forward button between the physical clashes.

The opening scene, which features a funny light sabre duel, sets a solid but deceptive tone. A sequence in which Sammo's pedicab is chased by a car is beautifully staged and sweetened with a sharp, comic tone. The fast and furious stick fight between Sammo and Lau Kar Leung is a model of dazzling choreography and sharp, superb direction, and easily one of the best ever of its type. The film's violence escalates slowly until, finally, when the climactic showdown comes, we are subjected to some of the most brutal altercations ever seen in a Sammo production. The director/actor's assault on Billy Chow and a house filled with angry, menacing opponents is a bone-cracking, physically punishing delight.

Terrific on every level and one of the best martial arts movies ever made.

Great score, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is one of those nostalgia things with me and I never REALLY expect anyone else to "get it" but am pleased when I recommend it and somebody DOES enjoy it. My late father HATED Arthur Askey but this film was one he really enjoyed and his consistent enthusiasm for "The Ghost Train" and "Old Ted 'Olmes" transferred to me as a child. Years later, I watch it every now and again, enjoying the familiarity. I always wonder if it will not be quite the same but I am never disappointed in it. There is much to enjoy. The sequence on the train is truly inspired when Askey and Murdoch proceed to annoy the arrogant male passenger. Then the whole section in the station is amazing with so much going on you have to keep up. Yes, it is dated and full of wartime Britishness in accents and plot (based on the original play by Arnold Ridley of Dad's Army fame!) but full of wonderful character performances - including Kathleen Harrison as a dotty spinster. The atmosphere is truly as near sinister as an Arthur Askey vehicle could get. This is available cheap as chips in the UK on DVD so treat yourself. It is a perfect Saturday/Sunday morning or any day lazy afternoon lightweight piece of entertainment. I Thank You....

OLD MOVIES CAN BE GOOD MOVIES! --------------------------------------------- Result 1700 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this. I got it thinking it was going to be a documentary, but it revealed itself as a good piece of tongue in cheek fun.

I think this has been well done, pretty much an extended TV show into a film, but due to the characters or rather original actors willingness to have fun and be made fun off helps this work in a great old style Innocent way.

If you are a fan of the original TV series then i am sure you will enjoy this.

Q --------------------------------------------- Result 1701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Welcome to Collinwood is one of the most delightful films I have ever seen. A superb ensemble cast, tight editing and wonderful direction. A caper movie that doesn't get bogged down in the standard tricks.

Not much can be said about this film without spoiling it. The tag line says it all - 5 guys. 1 Safe. No Brains.

William H Macy and Sam Rockwell lead an amazing cast. George Clooney should be congratulated for producing this gem.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] In her first nonaquatic role, Esther Williams plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, proving she could be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[finest]] performance. And he is so [[handsome]] it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward [[Andrews]] as his overly-protective father who is the standout.

Bathed in [[glorious]] Technicolor, The Unguarded Moment is irresistible hokum and at times [[compelling]] [[drama]]. In her first nonaquatic role, Esther Williams plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, proving she could be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[meanest]] performance. And he is so [[wondrous]] it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward [[Andrew]] as his overly-protective father who is the standout.

Bathed in [[wondrous]] Technicolor, The Unguarded Moment is irresistible hokum and at times [[convincing]] [[tragedy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I'm a fan of [[Crash]] and Blade [[Runner]] and this movie [[explores]] some of those [[highway]] [[death]] and 80s [[film]] [[noir]] themes that I like to [[see]], so I enjoyed it.

In general [[though]], the [[essential]] [[stupidity]] of the film [[noir]] [[protagonist]] is not [[pulled]] off well by the female lead and her [[hero]] is [[nearly]] a neanderthal, [[hence]] the kitch [[warning]]. I'm a fan of [[Accidents]] and Blade [[Racer]] and this movie [[studying]] some of those [[expressway]] [[deaths]] and 80s [[cinematography]] [[negro]] themes that I like to [[seeing]], so I enjoyed it.

In general [[nevertheless]], the [[vital]] [[foolishness]] of the film [[negro]] [[player]] is not [[pulling]] off well by the female lead and her [[heroin]] is [[practically]] a neanderthal, [[thereby]] the kitch [[alerting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sandra Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Nothing]], the [[movie]] released in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway [[stage]] [[production]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[movie]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[show]]."

There were [[several]] changes in [[monologues]] and one-liners, and the [[movie]] version visually re-vamps the [[story]], taking [[Sandra]] from a [[fabulous]] existence as a successful [[stage]] [[performer]] in New York, during what she [[calls]] her "superstar summer," to an illusory, [[almost]] [[desperate]] existence back in her [[home]] in Los Angeles - her fictional manager in the film refers to it as getting Sandra back "to her [[roots]], to ... upscale [[supper]] clubs like the Parisian [[Room]]."

There's a point to be made here. Sandra tries to appeal her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[harsh]] critique of American [[pop]] [[culture]] to an audience that doesn't [[completely]] [[see]] it. [[In]] L.A. she's [[playing]] to a [[predominantly]] black [[audience]], [[trying]] to relate her [[ideas]] when all these people [[seem]] to want is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike stripper. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resemble]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[said]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[show]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[movie]] is dryer than a [[bone]]. A funny scene to [[catch]] is of a rotund [[man]] from the audience [[helping]] Shashonna out of her [[pants]].

But, if she's [[going]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[style]] and force, [[conveying]] everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[right]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[yet]] somehow [[still]] swimming in the pool of her own transparent stardom. Her depictions of [[interactions]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry Lewis, [[Bianca]] Jagger, Ralph [[Lauren]] and (what we're lead to [[believe]] is) Warren Beatty are fictional and [[hilarious]].

[[Sandra]] begins her show in her most awkward moment, performing a [[quiet]] but [[mystifying]] rendition of Nina Simone's song "Four [[Women]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[garb]], singing lines such as "my skin is black," "my [[hair]] is wooly," and "they [[call]] me [[Sweet]] Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the [[night]], does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of songs written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a [[beautiful]] black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores [[emotions]] and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. Sandra Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Anything]], the [[cinematography]] released in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway [[stages]] [[productivity]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[cinematography]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[demonstrating]]."

There were [[many]] changes in [[monologue]] and one-liners, and the [[movies]] version visually re-vamps the [[tale]], taking [[Xander]] from a [[fantastic]] existence as a successful [[stages]] [[entertainer]] in New York, during what she [[invites]] her "superstar summer," to an illusory, [[around]] [[hopeless]] existence back in her [[household]] in Los Angeles - her fictional manager in the film refers to it as getting Sandra back "to her [[sources]], to ... upscale [[lunch]] clubs like the Parisian [[Rooms]]."

There's a point to be made here. Sandra tries to appeal her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[severe]] critique of American [[pops]] [[cultures]] to an audience that doesn't [[entirely]] [[seeing]] it. [[For]] L.A. she's [[play]] to a [[principally]] black [[audiences]], [[tempting]] to relate her [[insights]] when all these people [[looks]] to want is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike stripper. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resembling]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[say]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[display]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[cinematography]] is dryer than a [[bony]]. A funny scene to [[captured]] is of a rotund [[guy]] from the audience [[supporting]] Shashonna out of her [[panties]].

But, if she's [[gonna]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[styles]] and force, [[transmitted]] everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[rights]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[still]] somehow [[yet]] swimming in the pool of her own transparent stardom. Her depictions of [[interaction]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry Lewis, [[White]] Jagger, Ralph [[Lorraine]] and (what we're lead to [[reckon]] is) Warren Beatty are fictional and [[amusing]].

[[Sondra]] begins her show in her most awkward moment, performing a [[silent]] but [[baffling]] rendition of Nina Simone's song "Four [[Female]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[dresses]], singing lines such as "my skin is black," "my [[hairdresser]] is wooly," and "they [[calling]] me [[Sugary]] Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the [[nighttime]], does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of songs written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a [[admirable]] black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores [[feelings]] and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] [[If]] you've seen other movies like this, they're [[probably]] better. The Omega Man [[comes]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they avoided the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[premise]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING [[else]]! I get [[tired]] of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, [[ineffective]], arrogant [[characters]] in a movie. That pretty much [[describes]] everyone in the movie at some point. I [[rented]] it, and found myself [[yelling]] at the TV [[repeatedly]], "no, don't do that!", "why are you so [[stupid]]", "[[look]] out!", etcetera. A [[true]] [[lack]] of [[character]] [[development]] is [[evident]] about [[halfway]] in. A [[movie]] [[SHOULD]] give you a [[strong]] personal [[connection]] with at [[least]] some of the [[characters]] so that you [[actually]] [[care]] what [[happens]] to them. This one does not. [[Also]],there should have been a [[longer]], more involving end to the [[movie]] as well. [[Though]] you've seen other movies like this, they're [[undeniably]] better. The Omega Man [[arrives]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they avoided the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[prerequisite]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING [[further]]! I get [[jaded]] of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, [[ineffectual]], arrogant [[personages]] in a movie. That pretty much [[portray]] everyone in the movie at some point. I [[leases]] it, and found myself [[shrieking]] at the TV [[constantly]], "no, don't do that!", "why are you so [[dumb]]", "[[peek]] out!", etcetera. A [[veritable]] [[lacked]] of [[traits]] [[evolution]] is [[visible]] about [[midway]] in. A [[filmmaking]] [[NEEDS]] give you a [[forceful]] personal [[connecting]] with at [[lowest]] some of the [[personages]] so that you [[genuinely]] [[caring]] what [[arrives]] to them. This one does not. [[Moreover]],there should have been a [[most]], more involving end to the [[film]] as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] one of the funnest mario's i've ever played. the levels are creative, there are fluid controls, and good graphics for its time. there's also a multitude of crazy bosses and enemies to fight. Sometimes the levels get frustrating, and if you leave out some of the hard levels and still, need to get more accomplished to fight a boss, it can be annoying. another complaint is the camera angle; though it works fairly well most of the time, it can be a pain in certain situations. if your a big time mario fan; this ones for you. even if your not a huge fan of him, i'd still recommend this one. its a big game, and getting what you need can take a while, but it's very satisfying. good for playing in short bursts of time. it will almost certainly hold your interest; it sure does hold mine! --------------------------------------------- Result 1707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This is my first comment! This is a fantastic movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[amazing]] product this was.

I suggested to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. This is my first comment! This is a fantastic movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[wondrous]] product this was.

I suggested to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of [[foreign]] [[movies]] that [[fall]] flat on their [[face]], but here is the [[flip]] side!!! This is an [[awful]] re-make of the U.S. movie "[[Wide]] Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "Liam" on the other hand is just [[strange]]. I [[must]] give [[credit]] to "[[Liam]]" for one [[thing]], and that is making it clear that I [[made]] the right choice in [[changing]] my [[religion]]! It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of [[overseas]] [[filmmaking]] that [[declined]] flat on their [[encounter]], but here is the [[leafy]] side!!! This is an [[abhorrent]] re-make of the U.S. movie "[[Grands]] Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "Liam" on the other hand is just [[unusual]]. I [[owe]] give [[credits]] to "[[Llam]]" for one [[stuff]], and that is making it clear that I [[effected]] the right choice in [[modifying]] my [[cults]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I [[picked]] up this [[movie]] with the [[intention]] of getting a [[bad]] zombie [[movie]]. But I had no [[Idea]] what I was [[getting]] myself into.

I [[started]] the [[movie]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of [[pain]] and [[visual]] [[torture]].

I finally know what [[hell]] is like. It's this [[movie]]. [[For]] eternity. This [[movie]] has no [[value]]. It didn't [[even]] [[really]] have a [[plot]]. There was [[stuff]] going on in each scene but no [[overall]] [[explanation]] why [[anything]] happens.

[[Instead]] of watching this [[movie]] I [[suggest]] that you line the [[nearest]] blender with [[oil]] and [[try]] and [[stuff]] as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the [[outcome]] to be far more [[pleasant]] than this [[movie]].

Don't even watch it. Not [[even]] to see how [[bad]] it is. I [[beg]] you. If you watch it, then it means they [[win]]. I [[selected]] up this [[filmmaking]] with the [[intents]] of getting a [[negative]] zombie [[flick]]. But I had no [[Thoughts]] what I was [[obtain]] myself into.

I [[initiated]] the [[filmmaking]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of [[painless]] and [[optic]] [[tortures]].

I finally know what [[brothel]] is like. It's this [[filmmaking]]. [[During]] eternity. This [[filmmaking]] has no [[values]]. It didn't [[yet]] [[truly]] have a [[intrigue]]. There was [[thing]] going on in each scene but no [[general]] [[explanations]] why [[something]] happens.

[[However]] of watching this [[filmmaking]] I [[suggests]] that you line the [[near]] blender with [[oils]] and [[attempts]] and [[thing]] as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the [[result]] to be far more [[enjoyable]] than this [[film]].

Don't even watch it. Not [[yet]] to see how [[naughty]] it is. I [[implore]] you. If you watch it, then it means they [[triumphed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] ~~I was able to see this movie yesterday morning on a early viewing pass~~

I am a mom of 2 children, who range from 11 down to 6. So I'm sure plenty of parents can relate to having to [[see]] many many "kids" [[movies]]. This was refreshing for me. I haven't read this particular book, so I don't know if it stayed true to the book or not. But it sure took the grossness factor to a [[high]] [[level]]. This is the [[story]] of the "new" [[kid]] in town and it just so happens that there are a [[group]] of [[boys]] who have formed a club of sorts and love to [[pick]] on [[kids]] ....[[sound]] familiar? Haven't we all suffered this one [[time]] or another. He has the little brother who he [[cant]] [[stand]] and [[parents]] that he is [[embarrassed]] about. What I [[enjoyed]] most of all was [[seeing]] how each [[character]] was [[totally]] [[different]] from another they all [[stood]] out. The bully (why do they [[always]] make the bully a red head? My daughter has red hair! and she is no bully!..lol) is well a [[great]] bully, who finds himself being yelled at by his own [[big]] brother. It took [[twists]] and turns and well you [[fall]] in [[love]] with all of them and [[really]] [[find]] yourself routing for all the [[characters]]! Even the parents, [[great]] connection between father and son. [[All]] around [[enjoyable]], sweet,funny, gross etc......Take your [[kids]]!!! You will [[enjoy]] it as much as they do! ~~I was able to see this movie yesterday morning on a early viewing pass~~

I am a mom of 2 children, who range from 11 down to 6. So I'm sure plenty of parents can relate to having to [[behold]] many many "kids" [[movie]]. This was refreshing for me. I haven't read this particular book, so I don't know if it stayed true to the book or not. But it sure took the grossness factor to a [[supreme]] [[levels]]. This is the [[conte]] of the "new" [[children]] in town and it just so happens that there are a [[panel]] of [[guy]] who have formed a club of sorts and love to [[selected]] on [[children]] ....[[sounds]] familiar? Haven't we all suffered this one [[times]] or another. He has the little brother who he [[couldnt]] [[stands]] and [[parenting]] that he is [[ashamed]] about. What I [[appreciated]] most of all was [[see]] how each [[nature]] was [[altogether]] [[several]] from another they all [[amounted]] out. The bully (why do they [[permanently]] make the bully a red head? My daughter has red hair! and she is no bully!..lol) is well a [[huge]] bully, who finds himself being yelled at by his own [[enormous]] brother. It took [[spins]] and turns and well you [[decline]] in [[amore]] with all of them and [[genuinely]] [[finds]] yourself routing for all the [[features]]! Even the parents, [[wondrous]] connection between father and son. [[Entire]] around [[nice]], sweet,funny, gross etc......Take your [[brats]]!!! You will [[enjoys]] it as much as they do! --------------------------------------------- Result 1711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] the only word i can think of to describe this [[movie]] is: Ordinary.

The plot line about Gary sinise's [[character]] [[attempting]] suicide is a [[ridiculous]] [[premise]] and c'mon..[[living]] as some [[sort]] Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[ocean]] because he couldn't handle life in the lucrative pro/am golf community? cry me a river. I wish these were my [[problems]]. I do enjoy [[Dylan]] [[Baker]] and Sinise but this movie was clearly a [[bad]] choice or a [[pay]] check for Sinise. The scene in which [[little]] Timmy Price [[gets]] [[verbally]] [[abused]] by the other club [[member]] in [[front]] of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it the only word i can think of to describe this [[filmmaking]] is: Ordinary.

The plot line about Gary sinise's [[trait]] [[tried]] suicide is a [[silly]] [[supposition]] and c'mon..[[live]] as some [[sorts]] Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[maritime]] because he couldn't handle life in the lucrative pro/am golf community? cry me a river. I wish these were my [[difficulty]]. I do enjoy [[Dillon]] [[Boulanger]] and Sinise but this movie was clearly a [[negative]] choice or a [[wages]] check for Sinise. The scene in which [[small]] Timmy Price [[got]] [[orally]] [[misused]] by the other club [[members]] in [[newsweek]] of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it --------------------------------------------- Result 1712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bedknobs & Broomsticks is another one of Disney's masterpieces. It was filmed with sequences of animation and the actors and actresses interacting with the animations. (A similar concept was used in Mary Poppins when the children and Mary disappear into the sidewalk art.) I am mainly rating this film through child's eyes because I have not seen it in years. Back then, it was one of my favourite films. It was magical and mystical, and the last scenes (the conflict beginning with the ghostly armour walking into battle) were my favourites. There was also a lot of stop-animation used with the spells (ie, people turning into rabbits), which may be a little dated and silly now. (Also, I believe that the film starts off slowly.) Through the eyes of a child, this is a fun film and it is easy for children to put themselves into the places of the children in the film. It is an imaginative film which is sadly largely-forgotten today. --------------------------------------------- Result 1713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Michelle Rodrigez was [[made]] for this movie, when I [[first]] [[saw]] her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[fear]] and is [[tough]] like she should be in this [[movie]]. She is more a bad [[girl]] and that's what I [[like]] about her. This movie is about a [[troubled]] girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her [[love]] to fight and asks her [[brothers]] [[trainer]] to [[train]] her. Even though they don't [[think]] she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I [[think]] this [[movie]] was a [[little]] slow at the ending, but was well [[done]]. It [[shows]], that people can do anything [[even]] if they don't think you have the potential. I [[recommend]] it to be seen. Michelle Rodrigez was [[accomplished]] for this movie, when I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[angst]] and is [[stiff]] like she should be in this [[flick]]. She is more a bad [[female]] and that's what I [[likes]] about her. This movie is about a [[concussed]] girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her [[iove]] to fight and asks her [[plymouth]] [[coach]] to [[forming]] her. Even though they don't [[reckon]] she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I [[thought]] this [[kino]] was a [[kiddo]] slow at the ending, but was well [[played]]. It [[displaying]], that people can do anything [[yet]] if they don't think you have the potential. I [[recommending]] it to be seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] What [[happened]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[premise]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the [[movie]] loses it. Actually, it never [[really]] got going. There was a [[little]] excitement when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. [[Steve]] [[Martin]], who is a very talented person and usually brings a [[lot]] to a movie, was [[dreadful]] and his entire character was not even close to being [[important]] to this movie, other than to make it longer. I really would have [[liked]] to see more interactions between the main characters, Kate and Angie, and [[maybe]] [[try]] not for a pure comedy, which unfortunately it was not, but [[maybe]] a drama with comedic elements. I think if the [[movie]] did this it [[could]] have been very funny [[since]] both [[actresses]] are quite funny in their own ways and [[sitting]] here I can [[think]] of [[numerous]] scenarios that would have been a riot. What [[transpired]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[supposition]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the [[filmmaking]] loses it. Actually, it never [[truly]] got going. There was a [[petite]] excitement when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. [[Stephens]] [[Martins]], who is a very talented person and usually brings a [[batches]] to a movie, was [[abhorrent]] and his entire character was not even close to being [[principal]] to this movie, other than to make it longer. I really would have [[enjoyed]] to see more interactions between the main characters, Kate and Angie, and [[conceivably]] [[endeavour]] not for a pure comedy, which unfortunately it was not, but [[presumably]] a drama with comedic elements. I think if the [[filmmaking]] did this it [[did]] have been very funny [[because]] both [[actors]] are quite funny in their own ways and [[seated]] here I can [[reckon]] of [[many]] scenarios that would have been a riot. --------------------------------------------- Result 1715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] By some happy coincidence the same year that Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak made Alfred Hitchcock's haunting masterpiece "Vertigo", they also made this light comedy. Perhaps the two actors needed to do it after undergoing the heaviness of the Hitchcock film . At any rate this a great companion piece to "Vertigo" as it again explores a very un-likely but powerful romance. In fact the film can be seen as the flip side of "Vertigo" with it's happy ending. Here again Novak undergoes a transformation, in Vertigo she essentially plays two women and here she 'transforms' from witch to mortal. Stewart is again bewitched and for awhile tormented by his love for her. Unlike Vertigo the two come together in "Bell Book and Candle" , a perfect antidote for the Hitcock movie. Again the dynamics of love and attraction are examined but in an altogether different vein. The cast is terrific. Lemmon hilarious as Novak's warlock brother and Elsa Lancaster giving a classic performance as the Aunt. Ernie Kovacs as the alcoholic cult writer and of course Hermoine Gingold playing Novak's competitor are all great. The scene with Stewart drinking the potion is comedy at it's best. Anyone who has seen Vertigo or even if you haven't should see this memorable light comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Having heard quite positive [[reviews]] and having [[seen]] the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it [[delivered]]. [[Overall]], the movie is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[classic]]. SPOILER [[At]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[fantastic]]. This is just as good as the scene in The [[Big]] Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[barricade]] his door, but [[forgets]] the door [[turns]] outward! END SPOILER Just go [[see]] this [[movie]], you won't be [[disappointed]]. Having heard quite positive [[inspects]] and having [[watched]] the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it [[handed]]. [[Entire]], the movie is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[conventional]]. SPOILER [[During]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[wondrous]]. This is just as good as the scene in The [[Major]] Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[roadblock]] his door, but [[neglects]] the door [[revolves]] outward! END SPOILER Just go [[seeing]] this [[cinematography]], you won't be [[disillusioned]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know Anime. I've been into it long before it became a national phenomenon; i loved Ranma before most people knew what Dragonball Z even was. And just so you know I'm not bragging about my, let me say this: out of all the animes I've seen, Castle in the Sky is by far one of the best. It's obvious people say Spirited Away is the best, but I really disagree. Most people only know that movie because it one an Acedmy Award; this isn't an exaggeration - I've shown Princess Mononoke and Castle in the Sky to people who'd only ever seen Spirited Away, and they agree that the latter two are the superior of the three. Personally, I'd never thought that anything could compare to Princess Mononoke, until I finally saw Castle in the Sky. I still think that the prior is the better of the two, but Castle in the Sky is easily on par with it; in many ways, Castle has major elements that Mononoke was missing. In either case, if you've only seen Spirited Away, and think that that is Miyazaki's best film, be prepared to have your earth shaken. --------------------------------------------- Result 1718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] It's [[nothing]] [[brilliant]], [[groundbreaking]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an [[extremely]] [[fascinating]] [[character]] study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of heroin, but not [[really]]. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[disturbing]], [[yet]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these characters do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic film offers no [[conclusion]] or [[revelation]] at the [[end]], we just see the [[lives]] of these [[sordid]] individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B It's [[anything]] [[resplendent]], [[revolutionary]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an [[unbelievably]] [[riveting]] [[personages]] study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of heroin, but not [[genuinely]]. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[troubling]], [[even]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these characters do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic film offers no [[conclusions]] or [[epiphany]] at the [[ceases]], we just see the [[iife]] of these [[squalid]] individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[bad]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[unfavorable]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shame on Julia Roberts and John Cusack. They are so talented and should not have had any part in this movie. The storyline was dumb and predictable. The jokes were not funny. The romance was not really romance. I was all too happy when this movie ended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I love these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[today]] and it is [[rich]] in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was [[made]] to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[kids]] to "act" I'll never [[know]]. I [[think]] they are [[precious]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this movie as it shows the naiveté that existed in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were [[made]] to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a [[different]] time with a totally [[different]] [[mind]] set. I love these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[hoy]] and it is [[wealthy]] in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was [[introduced]] to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[brats]] to "act" I'll never [[savoir]]. I [[ideas]] they are [[cherish]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this movie as it shows the naiveté that existed in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were [[brought]] to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a [[differing]] time with a totally [[various]] [[esprit]] set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I had heard some [[bad]] things about Cabin Fever [[almost]] as much as I [[heard]] the cultish [[hype]]. As it [[turns]] out, the first film from the [[new]] impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so [[effort]] with the [[IQ]] [[points]] [[dropping]] as the film progresses. There are [[worse]] [[movies]] out there, and [[surely]] more [[gory]] ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so [[high]] on the blood-count for [[Hostel]], there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either [[though]]: kids [[go]] to a cabin for a [[week]] of partying, only to come [[across]] a very sick [[man]], covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that [[feeds]] the [[reservoir]], and [[soon]] the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one [[way]] or another. The characters, either the lead [[college]] kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they [[meet]] their [[fates]], the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly [[thrown]] together without the many [[laughs]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and [[maybe]] might have been funnier in another [[movie]] or by itself, but in the [[context]] of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[work]]. There's also a [[young]] [[police]] character who is even dumber and less [[convincing]] than the others. And the [[family]] that goes after DiBello following an [[incident]] has some [[possibilities]] that aren't realized. But all the while, [[Roth]] [[pumps]] up his script with common sense out the [[window]] and [[sudden]] scares and frights with people [[hacking]] up blood on one another and a killer [[dog]] rambling [[around]]. Which isn't all for not [[either]]. Now, unlike [[lesser]] Troma horror [[movies]] or even [[lesser]] ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure Roth is a die-hard fan- he doesn't make it unwatchable. It's also [[smart]] to not have any [[explanation]] for where the virus comes from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't really have a fine [[idea]] of what makes for [[great]] campy-horror [[times]]. His [[film]] [[tries]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red [[tint]] on the [[lens]] or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a lot of illogical scenarios and choices made ([[shave]] your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- I had heard some [[negative]] things about Cabin Fever [[hardly]] as much as I [[listened]] the cultish [[fanfare]]. As it [[revolves]] out, the first film from the [[newest]] impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so [[efforts]] with the [[QI]] [[dot]] [[downed]] as the film progresses. There are [[pire]] [[film]] out there, and [[definitely]] more [[gori]] ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so [[supreme]] on the blood-count for [[Dormitory]], there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either [[notwithstanding]]: kids [[going]] to a cabin for a [[chow]] of partying, only to come [[throughout]] a very sick [[guy]], covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that [[eats]] the [[tank]], and [[shortly]] the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one [[ways]] or another. The characters, either the lead [[academia]] kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they [[respond]] their [[destinations]], the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly [[threw]] together without the many [[smiles]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and [[potentially]] might have been funnier in another [[filmmaking]] or by itself, but in the [[backgrounds]] of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[collaboration]]. There's also a [[youthful]] [[cop]] character who is even dumber and less [[persuading]] than the others. And the [[familia]] that goes after DiBello following an [[misadventure]] has some [[chances]] that aren't realized. But all the while, [[Ruth]] [[pump]] up his script with common sense out the [[luna]] and [[abrupt]] scares and frights with people [[piracy]] up blood on one another and a killer [[canine]] rambling [[throughout]]. Which isn't all for not [[neither]]. Now, unlike [[minor]] Troma horror [[filmmaking]] or even [[minor]] ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure Roth is a die-hard fan- he doesn't make it unwatchable. It's also [[shrewd]] to not have any [[explanations]] for where the virus comes from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't really have a fine [[concept]] of what makes for [[awesome]] campy-horror [[moments]]. His [[movie]] [[strive]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red [[coloration]] on the [[lenses]] or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a lot of illogical scenarios and choices made ([[shaving]] your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- --------------------------------------------- Result 1723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My, how the mighty have fallen. Kim Basinger is a great actress but she was definitely slumming when she took this role. This movie is bad for one reason in particular: lapses in logic. Its looks like one of those movies that would have been passable with all its plot holes if it had came out in the 80s and 90s but in 2008 it just looks real stupid. This is the worst thriller I've ever seen and I've seen The Bone Collector and Twisted.

The story details Della(Kim Basinger)is just getting from buying gifts in a mall an is harassed by a gang of thugs that end up killing a cop that came to her aid. From then on she is chased by these idiotic goons through an abandoned street and she gets rid of them one by one with a toolbox full of tools.

So many things are wrong with this movie. As I said this movie leaps over logic at every turn and with the exception of Kim Basinger, the acting is made-for-TV bad. Hell, this pseudo thriller is made-for-TV bad. The way she kills each of these politically correct thugs(1 Caucasian, 1 Hispanic, 1 Asian and 1 African American all coming together to stalk a Caucasian woman. Don't you just love America?)is laughable to a fault. The way she killed the Hispanic guy made me laugh hysterically. The sex scene with the main hoodlum was so out in left field that it make you shake your head in shame. I only recommend this to lovers of bad films and no one else. Anybody else especially Kim Basinger fans would do well not to own this flick. You don't want see an actress you respect in a film this bad now do you? Of course not. You were warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 1724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is really special. It's a very beautiful movie. Which starts with three orphans, Sho, his brother Shinji and their friend Toshi, They're poor children's, living on the street, but one day they succeeded to steal a bag full of money, and then their able to live on, to buy a house, and their life seems to become much better. They're making new friend, life-friends. But something went wrong and they're becoming enemies and it all ends up with them killing each other.

I was negative about this movie in the beginning, because when singers (Gackt - Solo, ex-singer in Malice Mizer, Hyde - Solo, singer in L'Arc~en~Ciel, both very famous in Japan and Wang Lee-Hom - Taiwanese singer) trying to become actors, but this isn't like the other singers-going-actors-movies. They're doing a great job, and with no earlier experience in movies (except for Lee-Hom, who had been in two movies before).

This is absolutely one of my favorite movies. Maybe that's a little because I'm a very big fan of Hyde, but - it was this movie who made me discover him.

Well, Gackt (playing the main character - the orphan Sho) was a part of the group who wrote the script, and it was he who insisted that Hyde should play Sho's friend, the vampire Kei. At that time they didn't know each other, at least not like friends. But after the movie they became really good friend, and that shows us too that they really worked hard on this movie and that they had good cooperation.

The movie have many different feelings running trough the story, Love, Hate, Sadness, Pain, Loneliness, Happiness and so on. I think the first hour are the best, it's so beautiful. After that people are dying, Kei's leaving and it all changes so much. But still it's a great movie, it's the only movie who has ever made me cry, it ends up so sad, but still beautiful.

So if you haven't seen this movie, you really should. Because it's wonderful, but sad. You won't regret it. ^^ --------------------------------------------- Result 1725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] The [[film]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[problems]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite [[simply]] [[incredibly]] boring because it really is just one small episode [[blown]] up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really [[convincing]] as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. The [[filmmaking]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[hassles]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite [[purely]] [[extraordinarily]] boring because it really is just one small episode [[melted]] up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really [[persuade]] as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. --------------------------------------------- Result 1726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Allow]] me to just get to the bottom [[line]] here: I've got 3 [[kids]], ages 5 to 10. I consider a [[trip]] to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me [[support]] the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* [[Permitted]] me to just get to the bottom [[iine]] here: I've got 3 [[brats]], ages 5 to 10. I consider a [[touring]] to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me [[assists]] the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* --------------------------------------------- Result 1727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I can [[understand]] those who [[dislike]] this [[movie]] cause of a [[lack]] of [[knowledge]].

[[First]] of all, those [[girls]] are not Geisha, but [[brothel]] [[tenants]], and one that don't know the [[difference]] will not [[understand]] half of the movie, and [[certainly]] not the end. This is a [[complete]] art work about the women's life and needs in this era. Everything is [[important]], and certainly the [[way]] they dress, all over the movie means more than [[words]]. To those who [[thought]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director [[understood]] the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual [[range]]. I can [[fathom]] those who [[antipathy]] this [[film]] cause of a [[inadequacy]] of [[expertise]].

[[Firstly]] of all, those [[dame]] are not Geisha, but [[bordello]] [[occupants]], and one that don't know the [[dispute]] will not [[realise]] half of the movie, and [[assuredly]] not the end. This is a [[finish]] art work about the women's life and needs in this era. Everything is [[sizable]], and certainly the [[routes]] they dress, all over the movie means more than [[phrase]]. To those who [[brainchild]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director [[fathom]] the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual [[assortment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This [[movie]] was o.k. but it [[could]] have been [[much]] better. There are some [[spooky]] [[moments]] but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[want]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you [[could]] [[fast]] forward through & not [[miss]] anything. The [[biggest]] [[flaw]] is that it is so [[predictable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[anything]] [[great]]. This [[filmmaking]] was o.k. but it [[did]] have been [[very]] better. There are some [[shocking]] [[times]] but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[wanted]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you [[wo]] [[swifter]] forward through & not [[mademoiselle]] anything. The [[strongest]] [[faults]] is that it is so [[foreseeable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[something]] [[tremendous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is one of the [[worst]] movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was [[extremely]] [[disappointed]]. The [[director]] knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a [[drama]], but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the [[movie]] [[took]] itself waaay too [[seriously]]. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just [[absurd]]. The soundtrack was [[excellent]], [[however]], and was [[probably]] the best [[part]] of the [[movie]]. Unless you're one of those [[crazy]], rabid [[Dominic]] Monaghan fans, don't [[bother]] with this one. This is one of the [[meanest]] movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was [[critically]] [[disappointing]]. The [[headmaster]] knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a [[dramas]], but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the [[filmmaking]] [[taken]] itself waaay too [[harshly]]. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just [[claptrap]]. The soundtrack was [[sumptuous]], [[nonetheless]], and was [[undeniably]] the best [[party]] of the [[flick]]. Unless you're one of those [[craziness]], rabid [[Dominik]] Monaghan fans, don't [[annoy]] with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1730 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Rather]] annoying that [[reviewers]] keep [[comparing]] this to Planet [[Earth]]... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. [[Earth]] is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is [[inevitably]] inferior and simplified. But that is not [[comparing]] like with like.

As a feature-length [[documentary]] (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[surpasses]] pretty much [[anything]] you will see in your [[entire]] [[life]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[everyone]] in the UK - very much including me - [[adores]] David Attenborough, and there's [[little]] [[excuse]] for him not to be narrating here, but that [[hardly]] deserves [[knocking]] down a star or three. He wasn't a [[presenter]] on [[Planet]] [[Earth]], just a [[narrator]], and I'm sure he's modest and [[gracious]] [[enough]] to [[realise]] that [[anything]] that [[gets]] more [[viewers]] in is a Good [[Thing]].

[[Anyone]] who [[sees]] this will be [[overwhelmed]] by its awe, [[majesty]] and [[glory]]. All [[reviewers]] agree on that. Those who [[love]] it ([[ie]]. [[everyone]]) will/should go on to [[see]] an [[buy]] [[Planet]] [[Earth]]. [[So]] three cheers for its cinematic [[release]], and a [[big]] boooo for [[anyone]] [[cheap]] [[enough]] to [[buy]] this on DVD [[rather]] than the Planet [[Earth]] box-set. But as [[works]] of art they're not in [[competition]] here people.

The Earth is big [[enough]] for both. [[Fairly]] annoying that [[testers]] keep [[compares]] this to Planet [[Land]]... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. [[Land]] is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is [[invariably]] inferior and simplified. But that is not [[compared]] like with like.

As a feature-length [[documentation]] (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[outweighs]] pretty much [[something]] you will see in your [[whole]] [[iife]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[someone]] in the UK - very much including me - [[iove]] David Attenborough, and there's [[small]] [[alibi]] for him not to be narrating here, but that [[barely]] deserves [[hitting]] down a star or three. He wasn't a [[announcer]] on [[Planetary]] [[Land]], just a [[announcer]], and I'm sure he's modest and [[courteous]] [[sufficiently]] to [[knowing]] that [[something]] that [[get]] more [[spectators]] in is a Good [[Stuff]].

[[Someone]] who [[deems]] this will be [[overburdened]] by its awe, [[empress]] and [[gloria]]. All [[testers]] agree on that. Those who [[amour]] it ([[ci]]. [[somebody]]) will/should go on to [[seeing]] an [[purchasing]] [[Planetary]] [[Terrestrial]]. [[Hence]] three cheers for its cinematic [[releases]], and a [[major]] boooo for [[nobody]] [[cheaper]] [[sufficiently]] to [[buys]] this on DVD [[fairly]] than the Planet [[Land]] box-set. But as [[work]] of art they're not in [[contest]] here people.

The Earth is big [[sufficiently]] for both. --------------------------------------------- Result 1731 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Look, there's nothing [[spectacularly]] offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[typical]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no [[sense]] of movement, you feel as though you [[could]] [[get]] up and [[walk]] away at any moment. The [[production]] of the [[movie]] also has the feel of a debut [[movie]] [[made]] about fifteen years [[ago]]. I'd [[recommend]] re-watching a [[classic]] movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this [[shallow]] imitation. Oh, one other [[BIG]] [[problem]]...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously [[disappointed]] with the way they've made him look here. Look, there's nothing [[miserably]] offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[classic]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no [[feeling]] of movement, you feel as though you [[did]] [[got]] up and [[marche]] away at any moment. The [[productivity]] of the [[filmmaking]] also has the feel of a debut [[flick]] [[brought]] about fifteen years [[formerly]]. I'd [[recommends]] re-watching a [[traditional]] movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this [[superficial]] imitation. Oh, one other [[PRODIGIOUS]] [[troubles]]...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously [[disappointing]] with the way they've made him look here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This movie is [[wonderful]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be [[killed]]. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the [[blob]] gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time favorite 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? This movie is [[wondrous]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be [[assassinating]]. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the [[smudge]] gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time favorite 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? --------------------------------------------- Result 1733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is indeed a [[god]] [[adaptation]] of [[Jane]] Austen's [[novel]]. [[Compared]] with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to resemble as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[awful]]. [[Besides]] [[Kate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other [[actors]] were trying too hard. [[Mark]] Strong was not the "[[gentleman]]" he was [[supposed]] to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no [[feeling]] whatsoever, and [[throughout]] the [[entire]] film you [[could]] not see his [[love]] "growing" for [[Emma]] at all. This had a [[terrible]] [[effect]] on [[Kate]] Beckinsale, who [[seemed]] to be trying to "resque" her [[leading]] role as well as her partner's. [[Moreover]], there was no [[chemistry]] between the [[entire]] [[cast]]. Hariett [[Smith]], played by Samantha Morton, [[seemed]] to have no real attachment to Mr. [[Elton]], [[played]] by [[Dominic]] Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was [[portrayed]] in the book. The [[settings]] of the [[film]] are [[also]] too poor. The [[costumes]] are [[even]] more so. I [[would]] have [[imagined]] [[Emma]] Woodhouse to [[dress]] in a more fashionable and elegant [[way]] that she does here. The ending is also too [[long]]. It is [[good]] that it [[resembles]] the book's [[ending]], but it is a killer ending for a film. And again, I can see no [[feeling]] of [[happiness]] in the [[face]] of [[Mr]].Knightley. To [[conclude]], I [[believed]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[book]], but with poor [[actors]]. It [[seemed]] as if the [[film]] was [[made]] without any [[budget]] at all. I [[would]] [[prefer]] to [[see]] the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was [[made]] to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these [[actors]] ([[excepting]] the good Olivia Williams and the [[better]] Kate Beckinsale) [[ruin]] the [[entire]] [[script]]. This is indeed a [[goodness]] [[tailoring]] of [[Jin]] Austen's [[newer]]. [[Comparison]] with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to resemble as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[scary]]. [[Furthermore]] [[Cate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other [[protagonists]] were trying too hard. [[Dialed]] Strong was not the "[[mister]]" he was [[alleged]] to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no [[sentiment]] whatsoever, and [[around]] the [[whole]] film you [[wo]] not see his [[adore]] "growing" for [[Emmy]] at all. This had a [[appalling]] [[impacts]] on [[Cate]] Beckinsale, who [[looked]] to be trying to "resque" her [[main]] role as well as her partner's. [[Also]], there was no [[chemist]] between the [[whole]] [[casting]]. Hariett [[Smiths]], played by Samantha Morton, [[appeared]] to have no real attachment to Mr. [[Alton]], [[accomplished]] by [[Dominique]] Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was [[depicted]] in the book. The [[setting]] of the [[cinematographic]] are [[apart]] too poor. The [[outfits]] are [[yet]] more so. I [[could]] have [[conjured]] [[Emmy]] Woodhouse to [[outfits]] in a more fashionable and elegant [[route]] that she does here. The ending is also too [[lange]]. It is [[buena]] that it [[reminds]] the book's [[ceases]], but it is a killer ending for a film. And again, I can see no [[sensation]] of [[bonheur]] in the [[confronts]] of [[Olli]].Knightley. To [[finish]], I [[felt]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[workbook]], but with poor [[protagonists]]. It [[appeared]] as if the [[filmmaking]] was [[introduced]] without any [[budgets]] at all. I [[could]] [[favorite]] to [[seeing]] the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was [[introduced]] to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these [[players]] ([[barring]] the good Olivia Williams and the [[optimum]] Kate Beckinsale) [[downfall]] the [[whole]] [[screenplay]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It is [[cheese]]. [[If]] all you [[want]] is a [[video]] [[game]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for [[action]] the [[film]] was too cheap to actually make [[special]] effects for, this is it. My [[friend]] and I [[actually]] had a [[great]] time seeing it, [[since]] the [[theatre]] was mostly [[empty]] and we [[could]] heckle a bit. This movie REALLY requires heckling.

[[Plot]]? There was a plot? [[OK]], some [[stupid]] [[college]] or later [[types]] get [[invited]] to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the [[San]] [[Juan]] [[Islands]] ("If they'd only stayed back in [[Seattle]], they [[would]] have survived." - direct [[quote]], or [[nearly]].) to attend. They get there and [[everyone]] is [[gone]], and the [[site]] is [[somewhat]] [[wrecked]] (but [[hey]], the keg is still full!). With the [[help]] of a crusty [[old]] [[captain]] and a [[coast]] [[guard]] [[woman]] (who acted only slightly [[less]] tough - and slightly less well - than [[Cynthia]] Rothrock), they fight [[lots]] of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky [[legends]], and [[mostly]] [[get]] killed. That's about it.

It's not [[quite]] as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still [[better]] than [[Severed]] (they are [[sort]] of my own personal [[alpha]] and omega for [[bad]] [[movies]] - the [[former]] is [[bad]] but [[fun]] to heckle, and the latter is just too [[freaking]] [[bad]] to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're [[expecting]] a video [[game]] [[movie]] as [[excellent]] as Resident Evil, [[run]] away!!! [[run]] away now!!!

[[OK]], some [[real]] [[big]] questions (without too [[many]] [[spoilers]]): Since when did Spanish [[ships]] of the 18th century venture into the [[Pacific]] Northwest????? Why is [[anyone]] in the [[Pacific]] Northwest [[smuggling]] [[guns]], and to whom - CANADA, for [[crying]] out loud??? Why is a rave on an [[unnamed]] (oh, [[excuse]] me, it's called "[[isla]] del muerto", shya, right) San [[Juan]] [[Island]] - and outdoors, [[still]] [[keeping]] in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in [[attendance]] - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

[[Lucky]] [[thing]] there's [[lots]] of hatchets [[around]]. [[Lots]] of them. [[Everyone]] has them. Must be a [[hatchet]] sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I [[Know]] What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory [[comments]] (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. It is [[queso]]. [[Unless]] all you [[wanted]] is a [[videos]] [[games]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for [[actions]] the [[filmmaking]] was too cheap to actually make [[specific]] effects for, this is it. My [[buddies]] and I [[genuinely]] had a [[whopping]] time seeing it, [[because]] the [[theaters]] was mostly [[hollow]] and we [[did]] heckle a bit. This movie REALLY requires heckling.

[[Intrigue]]? There was a plot? [[ALRIGHT]], some [[dumb]] [[academies]] or later [[kinds]] get [[urged]] to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the [[Saint]] [[Nguyen]] [[Isles]] ("If they'd only stayed back in [[Portland]], they [[should]] have survived." - direct [[quotes]], or [[roughly]].) to attend. They get there and [[someone]] is [[missing]], and the [[venue]] is [[slightly]] [[shattered]] (but [[bye]], the keg is still full!). With the [[assisting]] of a crusty [[former]] [[capt]] and a [[coasts]] [[guards]] [[girls]] (who acted only slightly [[fewer]] tough - and slightly less well - than [[Brenda]] Rothrock), they fight [[batch]] of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky [[myths]], and [[principally]] [[obtains]] killed. That's about it.

It's not [[utterly]] as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still [[optimum]] than [[Clipped]] (they are [[kinds]] of my own personal [[alfa]] and omega for [[naughty]] [[movie]] - the [[previous]] is [[negative]] but [[droll]] to heckle, and the latter is just too [[fucking]] [[rotten]] to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're [[expect]] a video [[ballgame]] [[cinema]] as [[awesome]] as Resident Evil, [[execute]] away!!! [[running]] away now!!!

[[ALLRIGHT]], some [[veritable]] [[mammoth]] questions (without too [[various]] [[vandals]]): Since when did Spanish [[vessel]] of the 18th century venture into the [[Peaceful]] Northwest????? Why is [[everybody]] in the [[Peaceful]] Northwest [[smuggled]] [[shotgun]], and to whom - CANADA, for [[weeping]] out loud??? Why is a rave on an [[undisclosed]] (oh, [[alibi]] me, it's called "[[isle]] del muerto", shya, right) San [[Joanne]] [[Isla]] - and outdoors, [[again]] [[keep]] in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in [[involvement]] - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

[[Fortunate]] [[stuff]] there's [[batch]] of hatchets [[about]]. [[Batch]] of them. [[Anybody]] has them. Must be a [[ax]] sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I [[Savoir]] What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory [[comment]] (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was incredible, meaning that it was hard to believe, that the "forgotten tribe" would make this astounding migration twice a year, and that the filmmakers, Cooper and Schoedsack, didn't stage some of the scenes and shots. But what shots they are! The cinematography, under mostly extreme conditions, is brilliant, and the score of Iranian music added to the video release give this memorable documentary an added richness.

I had the pleasure of seeing this and "Kon Tiki" on the same weekend, which was a thrill and certainly made me see how tough and hardy and brave people can be, whether for primitive survival or the need for adventure or in the name of science. --------------------------------------------- Result 1736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be [[glad]] to show you.

If you are used to [[seeing]] what made for a good [[Star]] Trek show, do [[NOT]] watch this.

The [[writing]] is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[characters]] [[weak]], and most of all, the [[design]] [[work]] is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Forget]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only [[good]] thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I [[wept]] openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be [[happy]] to show you.

If you are used to [[witnessing]] what made for a good [[Stars]] Trek show, do [[NAH]] watch this.

The [[write]] is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[traits]] [[feeble]], and most of all, the [[conceiving]] [[cooperating]] is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Overlook]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only [[alright]] thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I [[cry]] openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd even say some shades of Hitchcock...this is clearly better than MMM, which is seen as a guilty pleasure by some if not most Woody fans. By the way, did you know that Annie Hall was first conceived as a murder mystery? Anyhow, Woody reclaims some relevance in film comedy with this one. The plot turns are nice and tight. I will say that in the first 20 minutes or so, some of the actors are a little too hasty at delivering their lines, but stick around. Scarlett Johansson proves well-cast in the Diane Keaton-type role, and at no time is there any uncomfortable moments between her and the much older Woody. No one could imagine a more perfect actor for the role of Peter Lyman than Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 1738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Three]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[first]] attempt at a full length comedy [[feature]]. The only similarities to [[Intolerance]] are the [[opening]] "[[book]]" scene and the fact that similar stories through the [[ages]] are edited together into a [[complete]] film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't [[succeed]] as a [[feature]] [[film]], it [[could]] be [[reduced]] to three two-reelers. [[Fortunately]], The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a [[comedy]] and [[contains]] some of the funniest routines I've [[seen]] in any of Keaton's [[film]]. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are [[simple]] boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the [[period]] satires are riotous and set the [[standard]] for [[future]] works by Mel [[Brooks]] and all films of this [[genre]]. [[However]], I don't [[believe]] that [[anyone]] has ever [[topped]] this comedy. No one can play the [[lovable]] goof [[like]] Keaton and the stunts in this [[film]] are some of his [[best]]. [[In]] addition, [[Wallace]] Beery's [[appearance]] as Keaton's rival [[adds]] to this film's [[appeal]]. [[Anyone]] who [[thinks]] that [[comedy]] from the 1920's cannot be [[appreciated]] by [[modern]] [[audiences]] [[needs]] to [[see]] this [[movie]]. Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Tres]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[fiirst]] attempt at a full length comedy [[characteristics]]. The only similarities to [[Fanaticism]] are the [[opened]] "[[ledger]]" scene and the fact that similar stories through the [[years]] are edited together into a [[finish]] film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't [[succeeds]] as a [[characteristics]] [[cinematography]], it [[did]] be [[lowering]] to three two-reelers. [[Mercifully]], The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a [[parody]] and [[involves]] some of the funniest routines I've [[noticed]] in any of Keaton's [[cinematography]]. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are [[simpler]] boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the [[deadlines]] satires are riotous and set the [[norms]] for [[next]] works by Mel [[Creek]] and all films of this [[sort]]. [[Yet]], I don't [[think]] that [[someone]] has ever [[tops]] this comedy. No one can play the [[loveable]] goof [[iike]] Keaton and the stunts in this [[flick]] are some of his [[nicest]]. [[Onto]] addition, [[Dallas]] Beery's [[semblance]] as Keaton's rival [[added]] to this film's [[appellate]]. [[Nobody]] who [[ideas]] that [[farce]] from the 1920's cannot be [[enjoyed]] by [[fashionable]] [[spectators]] [[needed]] to [[seeing]] this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real [[culprit]]. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a cheap programmer, never achieving anything [[special]]. It is [[pleasant]] enough but then, at some point, it [[stops]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone [[could]] have [[sank]] the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good [[either]]. Vincent is a wimpy [[heroine]] and Duryea was never very good at playing good [[guys]]. I [[love]] film noirs, but this one was a [[real]] disappointment. "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real [[perpetrator]]. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a cheap programmer, never achieving anything [[peculiar]]. It is [[nice]] enough but then, at some point, it [[halted]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone [[did]] have [[plunged]] the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good [[nor]]. Vincent is a wimpy [[idol]] and Duryea was never very good at playing good [[boys]]. I [[adored]] film noirs, but this one was a [[veritable]] disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 1740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you are under 13 or above 13 and pretty intoxicated, you'll enjoy D-war. If you are a seriously dedicated fan of all kinds of brainless action films, you'll enjoy D-war. Otherwise, don't bother! I saw the movie today with my nephews and 3 of their friends. They really loved it and that made me feel good. After the movie was over, all the kids(my nephews and their friends)could not stop thanking me for taking them to the theater.

The CG is good. Acting and directing are horrible. Storyline is extremely simple. But, since the half of the audience was kids, they were screaming, shouting and cheering every time the dragons appeared on the screen. This made the viewing experience far more exciting than it should have been.

It's a good movie to take your kids to, but except for the final battle sequence, D-War is disappointing. I give this film 7 out of 10 mainly because the kids loved it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Wow]], the spookiest [[thing]] about this episode was the price of [[houses]] 40 [[years]] ago. I'll preface by [[saying]] I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. [[If]] the [[story]]/[[actors]]/etc. are worth their [[salt]], they should be able to convey the [[bulk]] of the [[narrative]] without having to read it out, [[reminded]] me of personages who can't [[think]] off the [[cuff]] but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was [[tedious]] and boring, but some enjoy that [[kind]] of [[thing]], it's just not my cup O [[tea]]. They [[could]] have kept the narrative but at [[least]] made it much more [[believable]] and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a [[singular]] half circle driveway, [[yet]] he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's [[nowhere]] to be seen on the road or on the property. [[Sloppy]] [[editing]], as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you [[see]] at 24m30s walking towards the [[car]] as she [[pulls]] into the [[driveway]] of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also [[overdone]], like some Jr. High [[drama]] student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I [[could]] [[keep]] picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It [[kept]] [[dragging]] on and the [[true]] [[purpose]] seemed to be to [[use]] absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully [[expected]] to [[see]] the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over [[told]] us all about the 8 track [[player]], automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, [[abruptly]]. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or [[terminated]]. Not that [[many]] would [[notice]], I [[suspect]] most had already changed the [[channel]] or dozed off by the [[end]]. [[Whoo]], the spookiest [[stuff]] about this episode was the price of [[habitation]] 40 [[ages]] ago. I'll preface by [[telling]] I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. [[Though]] the [[stories]]/[[protagonists]]/etc. are worth their [[saline]], they should be able to convey the [[wholesale]] of the [[narratives]] without having to read it out, [[reminding]] me of personages who can't [[thinking]] off the [[bracelet]] but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was [[monotonous]] and boring, but some enjoy that [[type]] of [[stuff]], it's just not my cup O [[shai]]. They [[would]] have kept the narrative but at [[lowest]] made it much more [[dependable]] and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a [[unique]] half circle driveway, [[even]] he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's [[anywhere]] to be seen on the road or on the property. [[Remiss]] [[edit]], as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you [[seeing]] at 24m30s walking towards the [[automobile]] as she [[pull]] into the [[alley]] of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also [[overblown]], like some Jr. High [[dramas]] student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I [[did]] [[maintain]] picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It [[retained]] [[dredging]] on and the [[veritable]] [[targeting]] seemed to be to [[utilized]] absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully [[projected]] to [[seeing]] the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over [[tell]] us all about the 8 track [[protagonist]], automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, [[suddenly]]. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or [[discontinued]]. Not that [[several]] would [[noticing]], I [[suspected]] most had already changed the [[channels]] or dozed off by the [[ends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] But this is a great martial arts film. Liu Chia Liang ranks second to none as a fight choreographer, only Sammo Hung at his best compares. This is immediately clear from his proud exhibition of technique -rather than flashy camera angles etc. - during fights. The direction is tightly controlled to not only excite the viewer by the speed and movement but to awe her with the precise skill displayed. This film benefits also from Liu's participation in front of the camera. Liu's performance at the banquet scene with which the film opens is one of the high points in kung fu movie history. Liu is supported by the beautiful and talented Hui Ying Hung (of My Young Auntie fame) and 'Hsiao Hou' whose acrobatics are breathtaking, and preferable to any amount of wirework As for the plot , this film follows the not uncommon theme of revenge, but with character and moral development along the way, and a most fitting resolution. The humour in this is also of the best. If you only watch one kung fu film ever, this would be a good choice- it has it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1743 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[best]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[true]] classic. It's a [[perfect]] [[album]], it starts out with Let's Go [[Crazy]]([[appropriate]] for the [[beginning]] as it's a [[great]] [[party]] song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun [[pop]] song...), The [[Beautiful]] Ones(a [[cheerful]] ballad, [[probably]] the [[closest]] thing to R&B on this [[whole]] [[album]]), Computer [[Blue]](a [[somewhat]] [[angry]] anthem towards Appolonia), [[Darling]] [[Nikki]](one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves [[Cry]](the climax to this [[masterpiece]]), I [[Would]] [[Die]] 4 U, [[Baby]] I'm A [[Star]], and, of course, [[Purple]] [[Rain]](a [[true]] classic, a very [[appropriate]] [[ending]] for this [[classic]] [[album]]) The [[movie]] and the [[album]] are both very good. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] them! The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[better]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[real]] classic. It's a [[irreproachable]] [[albums]], it starts out with Let's Go [[Insane]]([[adequate]] for the [[startup]] as it's a [[excellent]] [[parties]] song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun [[pappy]] song...), The [[Awesome]] Ones(a [[happy]] ballad, [[potentially]] the [[nearest]] thing to R&B on this [[total]] [[scrapbook]]), Computer [[Bleu]](a [[slightly]] [[outraged]] anthem towards Appolonia), [[Hon]] [[Nick]](one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves [[Outcry]](the climax to this [[centerpiece]]), I [[Should]] [[Deaths]] 4 U, [[Babies]] I'm A [[Superstar]], and, of course, [[Violet]] [[Rainfall]](a [[real]] classic, a very [[adequate]] [[ended]] for this [[typical]] [[scrapbooks]]) The [[film]] and the [[scrapbooks]] are both very good. I [[hugely]] [[recommendation]] them! --------------------------------------------- Result 1744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This early Sirk melodrama, shot in black and white, is a minor film, [[yet]] showcases the flair of the German director in [[enhancing]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is [[nothing]] new but Sirk sets himself apart by [[creating]] [[meaningful]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided [[immeasurably]] by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a [[crisp]] 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. This early Sirk melodrama, shot in black and white, is a minor film, [[even]] showcases the flair of the German director in [[strengthened]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is [[anything]] new but Sirk sets himself apart by [[establish]] [[valid]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided [[substantially]] by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a [[sharpness]] 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. --------------------------------------------- Result 1745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy [[psychological]] [[thriller]], and one that has [[improved]] with time. [[Compared]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no [[character]] [[development]] here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[seeing]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[guess]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. Unfortunately, the effects are [[laughable]]. Mewing cherubs, stretchy doors, [[irritating]] [[dead]] children that can't speak [[plainly]] ... and an idiotically sappy ending that does it's darnedest to give you a [[new]] age enema of butterflies and rainbows. Ill take my Skittles [[orally]], thank you. [[Bruce]] Dern, I've liked you since "The Cowboys". [[Stop]] it. The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy [[mental]] [[thrillers]], and one that has [[improves]] with time. [[Likened]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no [[personage]] [[evolution]] here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[see]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[imagines]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. Unfortunately, the effects are [[ridicule]]. Mewing cherubs, stretchy doors, [[troublesome]] [[die]] children that can't speak [[honestly]] ... and an idiotically sappy ending that does it's darnedest to give you a [[nuevo]] age enema of butterflies and rainbows. Ill take my Skittles [[verbally]], thank you. [[Bros]] Dern, I've liked you since "The Cowboys". [[Ceasing]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The first episode [[immediately]] gave a good impression what to expect from the series! [[Mysteries]] waiting to be solved and a lot of good [[drama]]! I love the [[fact]] that they [[gradually]] [[reveal]] the stories concerning the [[characters]]! [[Explaining]] just enough to stay excited! Of course this show has some flaws! [[In]] the [[first]] two series there are some characters who for some [[reason]] don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a [[decent]] [[sent]] off but some of them just aren't there! Like [[Rose]] and her husband! [[Where]] the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later [[episodes]]! But it is a little [[inconsistent]]! That being [[said]] "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode([[especially]] the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on [[character]] [[development]] than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a [[bad]] thing! It even [[saves]] some episodes from [[getting]] [[boring]]! One of the elements that can be [[considered]] the [[strength]] of this [[show]] are the [[wonderful]] characters! You will [[grow]] to [[love]] these [[characters]]! [[Good]] or [[bad]]! But eventually I will want to [[see]] some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The [[danger]] of "[[Lost]]" getting [[canceled]] due to [[declining]] ratings is near! And that [[would]] be [[devastating]]! The first episode [[expeditiously]] gave a good impression what to expect from the series! [[Riddles]] waiting to be solved and a lot of good [[dramas]]! I love the [[facto]] that they [[progressively]] [[discloses]] the stories concerning the [[features]]! [[Indicating]] just enough to stay excited! Of course this show has some flaws! [[Into]] the [[frst]] two series there are some characters who for some [[motif]] don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a [[presentable]] [[expedition]] off but some of them just aren't there! Like [[Hiked]] and her husband! [[Whenever]] the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later [[spells]]! But it is a little [[incoherent]]! That being [[indicated]] "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode([[specifically]] the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on [[nature]] [[developments]] than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a [[amiss]] thing! It even [[savings]] some episodes from [[obtaining]] [[bored]]! One of the elements that can be [[regarded]] the [[kraft]] of this [[demonstrating]] are the [[wondrous]] characters! You will [[grew]] to [[loved]] these [[nature]]! [[Buena]] or [[amiss]]! But eventually I will want to [[behold]] some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The [[perils]] of "[[Outof]]" getting [[quashed]] due to [[dwindling]] ratings is near! And that [[ought]] be [[ravaging]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The script was VERY [[weak]] w/o [[enough]] character arcs to make you [[care]] one [[bit]] about the characters or what happens to them. The [[script]] is way too talky and not [[enough]] gore or [[action]] to [[even]] call it slow paced. The [[story]] [[gets]] to the point that you just want everyone to [[shut]] up and [[die]] as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[muted]], [[stiff]] dialogue. [[On]] a technical [[note]], the [[music]] mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. [[Then]] again, this could be called a [[blessing]]. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well [[done]] indeed. The script was VERY [[feeble]] w/o [[adequate]] character arcs to make you [[healthcare]] one [[bitten]] about the characters or what happens to them. The [[scripts]] is way too talky and not [[adequately]] gore or [[actions]] to [[yet]] call it slow paced. The [[tales]] [[attains]] to the point that you just want everyone to [[close]] up and [[decease]] as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[silencer]], [[tough]] dialogue. [[Onto]] a technical [[remark]], the [[musica]] mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. [[Upon]] again, this could be called a [[boon]]. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well [[effected]] indeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I [[saw]] it, and which I could erase my memory and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[wonderful]]! It reminded me very much of Fried Green Tomatoes At The Whistlestop Cafe.

The story goes back in [[time]] and at the end of the movie we [[see]] what the [[connections]] are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by Disney and many characters are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The [[story]] is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just ordered the book from amazon, can't [[wait]]! I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I [[sawthe]] it, and which I could erase my memory and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[wondrous]]! It reminded me very much of Fried Green Tomatoes At The Whistlestop Cafe.

The story goes back in [[moment]] and at the end of the movie we [[consults]] what the [[connector]] are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by Disney and many characters are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The [[narratives]] is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just ordered the book from amazon, can't [[suspense]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Feeding The Masses was just another movie trying to make a little money off of the zombie craze that is going around, mostly due to the popularity of movies such as Land Of The Dead and the Resident Evil series.

It starts at a television station, which is guarded by the military, and are reporting that The Lazarus Virus (zombies) are close to containment and the city will soon be free to do their business again. The problem is, this is totally false. Zombies are running rampantly and only a small minority of people are aware. Among them are Torch (William Garberina), the camera man, Sherry (Rachael Morris), the lead anchor woman (who for some reason is listed as playing Shelly on this website) and Roger (Patrick Cohen), their military escort. Torch and Sherry are against lying to the people but the station is being run by secret service (or some other government agency) and they are heavily censored.

This movie gives itself a pat on the back on the box-cover saying "We hold FEEDING THE MASSES on a higher level than any o the three 'of the Dead' films by George A. Rombero." The source of that quote has lost ALL credibility with me.

Let me just say that this movie is BAD. I don't mean bad like I was expecting more (I obviously was, though) but I mean bad in that I could not find any redeeming qualities in the film, whatsoever. The acting in all parts are either over done or too wooden. Did anybody remember their lines or are they reading off of cue cards? I can't even think of what the best part of the movie was or the best actor/actress. There really was not one. If I had to give a nod to someone, I would say Roger, the military escort was probably the most interesting character but that is really not saying much.

I would have to recommend to pass on this movie, despite the box-cover looking pretty good (It's what originally drew me to the movie). 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Warning]]: [[contains]] a [[spoiler]]. [[Corny]] plot and in [[many]] [[cases]] terrible acting. Fontaine is [[great]], but some others, [[particularly]] [[Richard]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are [[exceedingly]] [[wooden]]. Ney lies in bed, [[dying]] of arsenical poisoning, with [[every]] [[hair]] in place. Yet the [[movie]] is so [[juicy]] and so suspenseful. More [[faithful]] to the book than most [[movies]] of its [[era]]. [[Casting]] [[Joan]] [[Fontaine]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[shocking]] then - I'm not kidding, [[kids]]) was a masterful stroke. She's just her [[usual]] [[Joan]] Fontainey self. As [[murderers]] were [[supposed]] to, she dies by [[falling]] "[[feet]] foremost through the floor into an [[empty]] space." [[Alerting]]: [[consists]] a [[deflectors]]. [[Banal]] plot and in [[multiple]] [[examples]] terrible acting. Fontaine is [[large]], but some others, [[concretely]] [[Richards]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are [[immeasurably]] [[wood]]. Ney lies in bed, [[dies]] of arsenical poisoning, with [[any]] [[hairdresser]] in place. Yet the [[kino]] is so [[earner]] and so suspenseful. More [[loyal]] to the book than most [[film]] of its [[epoch]]. [[Foundry]] [[Juana]] [[Fountain]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[staggering]] then - I'm not kidding, [[brats]]) was a masterful stroke. She's just her [[routine]] [[Juana]] Fontainey self. As [[assassins]] were [[presumed]] to, she dies by [[receding]] "[[magpies]] foremost through the floor into an [[hollow]] space." --------------------------------------------- Result 1751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched the trailer on the DVD after seeing the film, and I think anyone who saw it before watching the film would be very surprised and possibly disappointed. It made much of the fact that the film was "by the director of Cube" and made it look like a horror film, when in fact it is an Absurdist comedy (IMDB's spell checker doesn't seem to think that Absurdist is a word, but it is), reminiscent of Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are Dead.

I love the way the story builds up slowly at first, then gradually escalates. I also enjoy the fact that no explanation is given for what happens in the film. That and the fact that the story plays out mainly in just the one set are the only respects in which this film is similar to Cube. I recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The film is [[bad]]. There is no other way to say it. The [[story]] is weak and [[outdated]], [[especially]] for this [[country]]. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really [[care]]. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The [[subject]] was just not [[believable]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I think this rang [[true]] for everyone else who watched it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't [[work]]. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. The film is [[unfavourable]]. There is no other way to say it. The [[tales]] is weak and [[antiquated]], [[principally]] for this [[countries]]. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really [[healthcare]]. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The [[topic]] was just not [[trustworthy]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I think this rang [[veritable]] for everyone else who watched it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't [[collaborated]]. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] A young solicitor in sent to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made less than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not [[liked]]. To speed [[things]] up he [[decides]] to move from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is [[usually]] fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a [[woman]] in black, is she real or [[imaginary]],he is [[also]] subjected to the blood curdling [[cries]] of a woamn and [[child]] apparently drowning in the [[marshes]], these [[events]] [[take]] their [[toll]] on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. [[Atmospheric]] [[TV]] adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a little underwhelmed. A young solicitor in sent to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made less than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not [[wished]]. To speed [[items]] up he [[decided]] to move from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is [[traditionally]] fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a [[female]] in black, is she real or [[fictional]],he is [[further]] subjected to the blood curdling [[cree]] of a woamn and [[kid]] apparently drowning in the [[swamps]], these [[phenomena]] [[taking]] their [[tolling]] on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. [[Barometric]] [[TVS]] adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a little underwhelmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Clean [[family]] [[oriented]] [[movie]]. I laughed, I [[cried]]...I [[loved]] it. I was [[worried]] I wouldn't be [[able]] to [[see]] [[Steve]] Carrell as [[anything]] but goofy Michael from The Office. [[Boy]], was I [[wrong]]. He should [[win]] an Oscar for his performance. I will [[definitely]] [[buy]] this on DVD when it [[comes]] out. My [[husband]] [[enjoyed]] it and he isn't into [[movies]] of this "[[type]]". I [[saw]] it with 2 other couples in the 30 [[year]] old [[range]] and we all [[agreed]] it was the best [[movie]] we had [[seen]] in a LONG [[time]] and [[certainly]] the [[cleanest]]. [[Only]] 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I [[would]] [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to [[anyone]] who [[likes]] [[comedy]], [[drama]], romance and more! Clean [[families]] [[targeted]] [[film]]. I laughed, I [[screamed]]...I [[cared]] it. I was [[alarmed]] I wouldn't be [[capable]] to [[seeing]] [[Steven]] Carrell as [[algo]] but goofy Michael from The Office. [[Dude]], was I [[amiss]]. He should [[triumph]] an Oscar for his performance. I will [[undoubtedly]] [[buys]] this on DVD when it [[occurs]] out. My [[hubby]] [[loved]] it and he isn't into [[film]] of this "[[typing]]". I [[witnessed]] it with 2 other couples in the 30 [[annum]] old [[ranges]] and we all [[countersigned]] it was the best [[kino]] we had [[watched]] in a LONG [[period]] and [[probably]] the [[cleaner]]. [[Just]] 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I [[should]] [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] this [[films]] to [[someone]] who [[love]] [[farce]], [[tragedy]], romance and more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has everything a fantasy movie should have, romance, clever witticisms, great acting and a fair dose of magic.

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and was drawn to its original plot (based on the Neil Gaiman novel which I am now looking to read) and colorful characters.

One of the most striking things to me actually was how self contained the story is. Unlike so many sci-fi fantasy movies out there right now which leave open-endings and such this was a pure fairy-tale, satisfying in and of itself with no need for a sequel.

Original. Fun. Feel-good Fantasy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We rented five movies for New Year's Eve weekend and watched this one first. All I can say is that there was no place to go but up after watching this one. It was pointless and vulgar. Harvey Keitel's script must have been easy to write -- just make two out every three words a curse word. Andie McDowell is surprisingly good in a character roll, but the movie has nothing else to recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Fred]] Gwynne, Al Lewis, Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[funny]], [[funny]] movie. The late Fred Gwynne is truly [[wonderful]] as [[Herman]] Munster who lives with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is [[hilarious]] as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the [[wax]] figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to terrorize the town [[everyone]] [[blames]] the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too [[late]]. You'll [[laugh]] out loud just like I did. [[Freda]] Gwynne, Al Lewis, Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[comical]], [[comical]] movie. The late Fred Gwynne is truly [[wondrous]] as [[Hermann]] Munster who lives with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is [[comic]] as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the [[waxy]] figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to terrorize the town [[somebody]] [[accuses]] the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too [[iate]]. You'll [[laughter]] out loud just like I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[night]] and [[thought]] it was o.k., but [[missing]] something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the [[labored]] line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't [[get]] Durante's song out of my head, I [[kept]] trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and [[physical]] comedy. The next night I watched a scene with Thelma [[Todd]] as a conniving chorus [[girl]] trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors [[excellent]], their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, [[appreciating]] Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's [[Sensational]]! It's [[Sublime]]! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[nocturne]] and [[thinking]] it was o.k., but [[lacks]] something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the [[laboured]] line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't [[obtain]] Durante's song out of my head, I [[maintained]] trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and [[physique]] comedy. The next night I watched a scene with Thelma [[Thad]] as a conniving chorus [[women]] trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors [[wondrous]], their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, [[acknowledging]] Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's [[Tabloid]]! It's [[Wondrous]]! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently saw I.Q. and even though I'm not a romantic comedy type of gal, I think that it was just a nice and sweet movie to watch. So many movies in my opinion lack honesty. You know that feeling when you're watching a movie and you just feel robbed because it's taking something from the story and it was like the director just threw it together like it was trash? The story between the scientists is a sweet and funny one. How they stuck together and they tried to help Tim Robbins character become smart. I liked the love story between Tim and Meg because it was simple and brought up a good point when it comes to love, "nothing is what it seems". I would recommend this for a Sunday morning.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] With [[films]] like "Wallace & Gromit" and "[[Chicken]] Run" under their [[belt]], the good people from the other side of the [[pond]], Aardman Animation, are now [[introducing]] us to a bit of their [[twisted]] [[humor]] in the form of "Creature [[Comforts]]".

Derived from a short [[done]] [[early]] in their careers, "Creature [[Comforts]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went [[across]] the [[country]] interviewing people with [[innocuous]] questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then [[speed]] [[things]] up a [[bit]] asking about their [[sex]] lives.

The [[answers]], while [[seeming]] to be boring and mundane, are [[actually]] [[quite]] funny, when you understand the dialogs come [[first]] and the [[animals]] are [[added]] [[later]].

How [[many]] of these [[animals]] [[look]] like the [[person]] making the [[statements]]? One of the characters [[discussing]] what he [[looks]] for in a [[woman]], "I [[like]] them [[kind]] of thin." is an insect, the [[Walking]] [[Stick]].

There are two [[dogs]] [[discussing]] [[odors]] and [[smells]], while sniffing the [[behind]] of a poodle, as they talk about the [[different]] [[smells]] of a [[woman]].

There are two [[birds]] in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her [[health]], her long suffering husband stands by her, [[saying]] nothing.

[[While]] it [[might]] take some time for "Creature [[Comforts]]" to [[find]] it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the [[ordinary]]. [[While]] there are more reality [[shows]] than Carter has liver [[pills]], "[[Creature]] [[Comforts]]" is one of a kind and [[definitely]] worth watching.

Some of the [[humor]] might [[seem]] a little racy, it's the claymation that [[catches]] the attention of the [[children]] (like the [[old]] Batman [[series]] of the 60's, the jokes are subtle [[enough]] the [[kids]] won't [[get]] them) and it's the [[jokes]] that are there for the [[adults]]. With [[film]] like "Wallace & Gromit" and "[[Pollo]] Run" under their [[strap]], the good people from the other side of the [[lagoon]], Aardman Animation, are now [[presenting]] us to a bit of their [[distorted]] [[comedy]] in the form of "Creature [[Conveniences]]".

Derived from a short [[performed]] [[prematurely]] in their careers, "Creature [[Amenities]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went [[throughout]] the [[nationals]] interviewing people with [[harmless]] questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then [[accelerated]] [[matters]] up a [[bitten]] asking about their [[sexually]] lives.

The [[reply]], while [[glaring]] to be boring and mundane, are [[genuinely]] [[rather]] funny, when you understand the dialogs come [[frst]] and the [[animal]] are [[adding]] [[then]].

How [[various]] of these [[beasts]] [[peek]] like the [[somebody]] making the [[statement]]? One of the characters [[speaking]] what he [[seem]] for in a [[women]], "I [[loves]] them [[sort]] of thin." is an insect, the [[Marche]] [[Wand]].

There are two [[hounds]] [[talk]] [[fragrances]] and [[smell]], while sniffing the [[posterior]] of a poodle, as they talk about the [[multiple]] [[fragrance]] of a [[daughters]].

There are two [[poultry]] in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her [[hygiene]], her long suffering husband stands by her, [[telling]] nothing.

[[Despite]] it [[probability]] take some time for "Creature [[Amenities]]" to [[unearthed]] it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the [[normal]]. [[Although]] there are more reality [[showcase]] than Carter has liver [[pill]], "[[Monster]] [[Conveniences]]" is one of a kind and [[unmistakably]] worth watching.

Some of the [[comedy]] might [[seems]] a little racy, it's the claymation that [[catch]] the attention of the [[kid]] (like the [[elderly]] Batman [[serials]] of the 60's, the jokes are subtle [[adequately]] the [[enfant]] won't [[obtains]] them) and it's the [[pranks]] that are there for the [[adult]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This was a [[delightful]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well [[played]] by the [[animation]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish [[superiority]] and innocent wonder. The [[quote]] (or scene) I [[recall]] [[vividly]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and threatens to storm out, the Scientist [[answers]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[splendid]] [[blend]] of entertainment and information make this a [[classic]] as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. This was a [[wondrous]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well [[served]] by the [[animate]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish [[primacy]] and innocent wonder. The [[quoting]] (or scene) I [[rappel]] [[eloquently]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and threatens to storm out, the Scientist [[answering]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[noteworthy]] [[mixing]] of entertainment and information make this a [[traditional]] as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1762 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I went into The Straight Story [[expecting]] a [[sad]]/[[happy]] [[type]] drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[got]]. What I wasn't [[expecting]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. [[Leave]] it to [[Lynch]] to take a simple [[story]] about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and [[turn]] it into a [[microcosm]] for the human condition.

If you didn't [[notice]], watch it again, [[paying]] [[attention]] to the [[ages]] of the people Alvin meets, the [[terrain]] he's driving through, the [[reactions]] people [[give]] him, the [[kinds]] of discussions he has (one of the first is about [[pregnancy]] and children, one of the last is outside of a [[cemetery]]). The [[last]] [[road]] he [[drives]] down is particulary haunting in this [[context]], as it narrows and his [[fear]] and nervousness [[mount]]. The [[last]] mechanical [[failure]] [[could]] be [[seen]] as a [[death]], and the miraculous [[rebirth]] of his [[engine]] [[relating]] to an afterlife, in which he [[achieves]] the [[desired]] [[reunion]].

I only [[hope]] some of the people who [[branded]] this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more [[holistic]] attention. I went into The Straight Story [[wait]] a [[unlucky]]/[[pleased]] [[genre]] drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[ai]]. What I wasn't [[awaited]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. [[Leaving]] it to [[Bastien]] to take a simple [[saga]] about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and [[converting]] it into a [[miniature]] for the human condition.

If you didn't [[notification]], watch it again, [[salaries]] [[beware]] to the [[centuries]] of the people Alvin meets, the [[topography]] he's driving through, the [[reply]] people [[lend]] him, the [[sort]] of discussions he has (one of the first is about [[childbirth]] and children, one of the last is outside of a [[graveyard]]). The [[latter]] [[route]] he [[driving]] down is particulary haunting in this [[background]], as it narrows and his [[affraid]] and nervousness [[mounting]]. The [[latter]] mechanical [[impossibility]] [[did]] be [[saw]] as a [[fatality]], and the miraculous [[resurrection]] of his [[engines]] [[related]] to an afterlife, in which he [[accomplishes]] the [[hoped]] [[reunite]].

I only [[hopes]] some of the people who [[trademarks]] this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more [[overall]] attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 1763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this bomb when it hit theaters. I laughed the whole time. Why? Because the stupidity of it seemed to have made me go insane. I look back on it and realize there was not ONE funny thing in the whole movie. At leat nothing intentional. It IS awfully funny that Lizzie cn chew a piece of Nurplex and become a gigantic, carnivorous demon...yet her itty-bitty little dress is perfectly intact, despite the fact that she is now hundreds of times larger than she was when she first put it on. Or the kind of movie in which a man can be shocked with a defibulator and only fall unconcious, and return to conciousness without ANY medical attention. And don't let me get started on the ridiculous fate of the "villain" that they decided they needed to create "conflict." Uh huh.

To the person complaining about Disney only targetting kids-The raunchy parts of this film seems to disprove that statement. Do we really need Daryl Hannah accusing Jeff Bridges of having kinky video tapes? You do if you're Disney and you're out of ideas for making the movie appeal to the above-8 crowd without writing a more intelligent script! I am thoroughly convinced that Disney pays off the ratings board so it's movies can get away with murder and still get family-friendly ratings.

What a waste of the DVD format. --------------------------------------------- Result 1764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my [[introduction]] to the [[series]]. I saw this film for the [[first]] time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which [[often]] pulls obscure [[gems]] like this out of cold [[storage]] for new generations. I made it a point to watch the [[entire]] Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. [[Looking]] back, I still [[rate]] The House That Dripped Blood as my favorite, followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the [[elements]] that make this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style [[cinematography]], creepy to [[kooky]], far-fetched [[tales]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came together better here than any of the others [[overall]]. The [[movie]] centers around a very old English country [[house]] and the [[misfortune]] that [[befalls]] all that dwell within.

The [[first]] story [[involves]] a [[horror]] [[writer]] and his [[wife]], who [[moved]] into this secluded place to get a break from the [[city]] so he [[could]] [[concentrate]] on his [[passion]]. He [[creates]] a [[murderous]] [[character]] [[called]] Dominic and [[soon]] [[starts]] [[experiencing]] [[great]] [[difficulty]] telling [[reality]] from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[torment]] that I found amusing yet creepy. Oh and those [[horrible]] [[prop]] teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The second [[story]] is the [[tale]] of a [[lonely]] old [[man]] ([[Peter]] Cushing) that has [[moved]] here to [[escape]] his loneliness, [[yet]] it only worsens as he is [[haunted]] by lost [[love]]. He seems to have [[found]] [[possible]] salvation at a local (very creepy) wax [[museum]], but it turns out he [[would]] have been [[much]] better off [[alone]].......

The [[third]] story [[includes]] the [[great]] Christopher Lee (my fav British [[horror]] [[actor]]) as a [[single]] [[father]] with a rather [[disturbed]] and thoroughly creepy young [[daughter]]. He is [[constantly]] [[wary]] of her [[getting]] into [[things]] she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural [[talent]] for it, with good [[reason]]. Lee is [[superb]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that [[man]] has a [[true]] [[talent]] for playing [[characters]] that are [[absolutely]] devoid of warmth!! But despite his best [[efforts]], the little [[troublemaker]] does in fact learn forbidden [[knowledge]] and [[bad]] [[things]] follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my [[introductions]] to the [[serials]]. I saw this film for the [[fiirst]] time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which [[ordinarily]] pulls obscure [[jewelry]] like this out of cold [[storehouse]] for new generations. I made it a point to watch the [[total]] Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. [[Search]] back, I still [[rates]] The House That Dripped Blood as my favorite, followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the [[ingredient]] that make this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style [[movie]], creepy to [[insane]], far-fetched [[narratives]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came together better here than any of the others [[comprehensive]]. The [[cinematography]] centers around a very old English country [[lodgings]] and the [[woe]] that [[befell]] all that dwell within.

The [[outset]] story [[consists]] a [[terror]] [[screenwriter]] and his [[women]], who [[relocated]] into this secluded place to get a break from the [[town]] so he [[did]] [[spotlight]] on his [[enthusiasm]]. He [[generates]] a [[bloody]] [[characters]] [[drew]] Dominic and [[rapidly]] [[launches]] [[undergoing]] [[huge]] [[trouble]] telling [[realism]] from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[agony]] that I found amusing yet creepy. Oh and those [[hideous]] [[helix]] teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The second [[histories]] is the [[saga]] of a [[single]] old [[dude]] ([[Peters]] Cushing) that has [[shifted]] here to [[escaping]] his loneliness, [[still]] it only worsens as he is [[tormented]] by lost [[likes]]. He seems to have [[detected]] [[feasible]] salvation at a local (very creepy) wax [[museums]], but it turns out he [[ought]] have been [[very]] better off [[single]].......

The [[thirdly]] story [[consists]] the [[grand]] Christopher Lee (my fav British [[terror]] [[actress]]) as a [[sole]] [[pere]] with a rather [[flustered]] and thoroughly creepy young [[girls]]. He is [[systematically]] [[mistrustful]] of her [[obtaining]] into [[aspects]] she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural [[talents]] for it, with good [[justification]]. Lee is [[magnifique]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that [[dude]] has a [[real]] [[talents]] for playing [[features]] that are [[altogether]] devoid of warmth!! But despite his best [[effort]], the little [[shaker]] does in fact learn forbidden [[expertise]] and [[amiss]] [[items]] follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Wicker Man, starring [[Nicolas]] Cage, is by no [[means]] a good [[movie]], but I can't really say it's one I [[regret]] [[watching]]. I [[could]] [[go]] on and on about the [[negative]] [[aspects]] of the movie, like the [[terrible]] acting and the [[lengthy]] scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it [[comes]] to a movie like this. [[Instead]], here's five reasons why you [[SHOULD]] watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its [[cheesy]], unintentionally funny [[execution]]. If [[nothing]] else, this is a movie that may [[inspire]] you to see the [[original]] 1973 [[film]], or [[even]] read the short [[story]] on which it is based.

4. [[For]] a cheesy [[horror]]/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's [[pretty]] obvious that it was filmed on [[location]] instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we [[get]] to [[see]] some very [[great]] [[scenery]]. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very [[good]] looking movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by [[watching]] him in any [[movie]] he does. Whether [[Nicolas]] Cage is [[great]] or [[terrible]], he [[always]] [[brings]] his [[unique]] energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker [[Man]], but in the most [[wonderful]] [[kind]] of way.

2. A [[student]] could probably [[write]] a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. The Wicker Man, starring [[Nikola]] Cage, is by no [[mode]] a good [[filmmaking]], but I can't really say it's one I [[sadness]] [[staring]]. I [[did]] [[going]] on and on about the [[counterproductive]] [[things]] of the movie, like the [[scary]] acting and the [[long]] scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it [[happens]] to a movie like this. [[However]], here's five reasons why you [[GOTTA]] watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its [[dorky]], unintentionally funny [[execute]]. If [[anything]] else, this is a movie that may [[motivate]] you to see the [[initial]] 1973 [[cinematic]], or [[yet]] read the short [[fairytales]] on which it is based.

4. [[In]] a cheesy [[abomination]]/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's [[quite]] obvious that it was filmed on [[locations]] instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we [[got]] to [[seeing]] some very [[prodigious]] [[panorama]]. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very [[buena]] looking movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by [[staring]] him in any [[cinema]] he does. Whether [[Nikolaus]] Cage is [[sublime]] or [[dreadful]], he [[permanently]] [[poses]] his [[singular]] energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker [[Mec]], but in the most [[sumptuous]] [[sort]] of way.

2. A [[schoolchildren]] could probably [[handwriting]] a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. --------------------------------------------- Result 1766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Over the years, we've seen a lot of [[preposterous]] things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, [[keeping]] "8 Simple Rules" going after John [[Ritter]] died comes to mind, but this is probably the first [[time]] I cared. The [[idea]] of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser [[extent]] Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the [[gimmick]] that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. Over the years, we've seen a lot of [[nutty]] things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, [[maintain]] "8 Simple Rules" going after John [[Knight]] died comes to mind, but this is probably the first [[period]] I cared. The [[thinking]] of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser [[amplitude]] Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the [[trick]] that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. --------------------------------------------- Result 1767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] [[Part]] Two [[picks]] up... not where the [[last]] [[film]] left off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of Steven Soderbergh's [[epic]] 4+ hour [[event]], Che's two stories are told as [[classic]] "Rise" and "[[Fall]]" [[scenarios]]. In [[Part]] Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing [[mentioned]] in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. [[Things]] don't go quite as well [[planned]], at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the [[enclosing]], larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic [[character]]. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the [[sequence]] where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, [[marks]] as one of the most [[memorable]] and [[satisfying]] of any [[film]] this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, [[slightly]] [[sluggish]] (understandable due to the [[big]] running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd ([[Matt]] Damon?), but these are [[minor]] [[liabilities]]. Going this time for the [[straight]] [[color]] camera approach, this is [[almost]] like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the [[group]], as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 [[Party]] Two [[selected]] up... not where the [[final]] [[kino]] left off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of Steven Soderbergh's [[manas]] 4+ hour [[incident]], Che's two stories are told as [[conventional]] "Rise" and "[[Dipped]]" [[scripts]]. In [[Party]] Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing [[talked]] in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. [[Matters]] don't go quite as well [[envisaged]], at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the [[besieging]], larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic [[characters]]. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the [[sequencing]] where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, [[branded]] as one of the most [[eventful]] and [[gratifying]] of any [[cinema]] this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, [[mildly]] [[anemic]] (understandable due to the [[sizeable]] running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd ([[Mattie]] Damon?), but these are [[marginal]] [[accountability]]. Going this time for the [[successive]] [[dye]] camera approach, this is [[nearly]] like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the [[panel]], as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The real story (took place in Kansas in 1959) of a murder (Perry and Dick, two ex-convicts who broke into a remote house on a rainy night to steal and kill everyone they met). Richard Brooks directed the chilling and disturbing Capote's book about the reasons that drove these kids to the crime (Are they Natural Born Killers ?). The crime scenes are very brutal and haunting because of the lack of senses and reasons for what we witnessed. Stunning black & white cinematography from Conrand Hall, excellent country - road music score from Quincy Jones, amazing performances in two principal roles from Robert Blake and Scott Wilson and first time in a movie a sad comment about capital punishment at the last moments before their deaths. Jones, Hall and Brooks (as director and as writer for adapted screenplay) are Academy Award nominees. Gripping, superbly directed and frightening, one of the best films of this decade --------------------------------------------- Result 1769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Stewart]] is a distinguished [[bachelor]] and a successful executive who is about to [[marry]] his fiancée Janice Rule but instead [[gets]] [[involved]] with a capricious, sensual art dealer (Kim Novak) who turns out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[desires]] [[earnestly]] and [[intensely]] to [[love]], but is [[unable]] to feel it...

Stewart slowly [[falls]] in [[love]] with her, and [[looks]] for a [[way]] to [[free]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[cat]], Pyewacket... Still, Stewart [[continues]] in his [[attempts]] to [[change]] her into a loving, feeling [[woman]] as he [[aspires]] to [[marry]] her...

[[Also]] [[blocking]] his [[way]] are such talented supporting actors as Novak's brother ([[Jack]] Lemmon), a silly, [[charming]] [[sorcerer]] who can [[walk]] nonchalantly through walls; a [[terrible]] author who is writing a book about [[witchcraft]]; and the [[Head]] of the [[Association]] of Manhattan Witches, none other than the [[incredible]] Hermione Gingold...

Novak's [[Aunt]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other [[relatives]], is a [[tender]] witch who [[accepts]] that [[nothing]] should [[prevent]] the course of true love... She [[aids]] and [[stimulates]] them in turning Novak into the [[woman]] of Stewart's dreams, for a happy [[ending]]...

[[If]] you like to [[see]] a [[lightweight]] [[comedy]] about [[magic]], [[fantasy]] and love; [[beautiful]] [[cinematography]]; [[stunning]] [[use]] of [[color]]; and with an [[exceptional]] cast; don't [[miss]] this [[enjoyable]] and amusing [[movie]]… [[Steward]] is a distinguished [[diploma]] and a successful executive who is about to [[wedding]] his fiancée Janice Rule but instead [[got]] [[engaged]] with a capricious, sensual art dealer (Kim Novak) who turns out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[wants]] [[seriously]] and [[intently]] to [[loved]], but is [[incompetent]] to feel it...

Stewart slowly [[drops]] in [[iike]] with her, and [[seem]] for a [[routes]] to [[libre]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[kitten]], Pyewacket... Still, Stewart [[continued]] in his [[attempting]] to [[modifying]] her into a loving, feeling [[women]] as he [[seeks]] to [[wedding]] her...

[[Additionally]] [[obstructing]] his [[manner]] are such talented supporting actors as Novak's brother ([[Gato]] Lemmon), a silly, [[loveable]] [[wizard]] who can [[walking]] nonchalantly through walls; a [[horrible]] author who is writing a book about [[magic]]; and the [[Leader]] of the [[Associations]] of Manhattan Witches, none other than the [[fabulous]] Hermione Gingold...

Novak's [[Auntie]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other [[parents]], is a [[bids]] witch who [[accepted]] that [[anything]] should [[deter]] the course of true love... She [[aid]] and [[encourages]] them in turning Novak into the [[girl]] of Stewart's dreams, for a happy [[ended]]...

[[Unless]] you like to [[seeing]] a [[slight]] [[humor]] about [[magical]], [[imagination]] and love; [[brilliant]] [[movies]]; [[striking]] [[uses]] of [[dye]]; and with an [[wondrous]] cast; don't [[mademoiselle]] this [[nice]] and amusing [[movies]]… --------------------------------------------- Result 1770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pathetic. This is what happens when director comes to work just because someone is paying him to.

The intentions were good, great locations and settings for a film of epic proportions. But the performance, damn! I swear, in some shots you can see extras on the background staring in the camera, or looking at the actors because no one told them what they should do when they hear "Action!". The battle scenes are so bad you wonder - are these people for real? They could've done more damage just by hugging each other. In the slow-mo scenes you can see people on battle field walking around or just standing, waving their hands.

Only action in the foreground is somehow emphasized. But for what? The story is so illogical and discontinuous, it seems like random situations in chronological order, sometimes not even that. The dialogs are dumb, the love plot is more embarrassing and ridiculous than in Hong Kong action movies.

With a budget of 40 million, and you can see every dollar invested on the screen, in best case scenario, the final result of all this enormous effort is a shiny round laser disk in the thin cover placed on the shelf in video store. --------------------------------------------- Result 1771 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As [[someone]] who [[lived]] through,and still remembers that decade [[vividly]],if the actual '70s had been half this [[funny]] and (semi)normal,they would have been so much more [[enjoyable]].[[Actual]] kids in that era did not [[act]] or behave [[anything]] close to as bright-eyed and normal as these [[kids]] did.The country's [[youth]] was still under the [[influence]] of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s [[rebellion]] that it spawned,[[especially]] in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the [[childishness]],the unreasonableness of them - [[none]] of the [[characters]] exhibit any of that.

[[Someone]] compared to "[[Happy]] Days",and I can [[see]] why:They were both [[sitcoms]] that take place 20 years before the [[current]] time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't [[born]] then,[[trust]] me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the [[actual]] '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately [[portray]] [[life]] at a [[US]] Army [[medical]] base during the Korean [[War]],etc. As [[person]] who [[resided]] through,and still remembers that decade [[eloquently]],if the actual '70s had been half this [[hilarious]] and (semi)normal,they would have been so much more [[gratifying]].[[Real]] kids in that era did not [[ley]] or behave [[somethings]] close to as bright-eyed and normal as these [[enfants]] did.The country's [[jugend]] was still under the [[influenced]] of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s [[intifada]] that it spawned,[[peculiarly]] in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the [[immaturity]],the unreasonableness of them - [[nothingness]] of the [[hallmarks]] exhibit any of that.

[[Everybody]] compared to "[[Jubilant]] Days",and I can [[consults]] why:They were both [[sitcom]] that take place 20 years before the [[underway]] time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't [[ould]] then,[[trusting]] me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the [[real]] '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately [[describes]] [[lives]] at a [[AMERICANS]] Army [[medicinal]] base during the Korean [[Warfare]],etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 1772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Suffice to say that - despite the odd ludicrous panegyric to his soi disant "abilities" posted here - the director of this inept, odious tosh hasn't made a film since. Well that is excellent news as far as I'm concerned.

Dead Babies has all of the bile of its creator, but lacks the wit and technical proficiency that make Martin Amis the novelist readable.

When will the British film industry wake up and realise that if it wants to regain the status it once had it should stop producing rubbish like this and make something real people will actually want to watch?

Avoid like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 1773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all [[screwed]] up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Where]] was the [[story]]? I [[made]] myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all [[shafted]] up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Everytime]] was the [[conte]]? I [[accomplished]] myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. --------------------------------------------- Result 1774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[In]] this [[excellent]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[labyrinth]] of [[despair]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny [[humanity]] in [[bleak]] expressionist symbolism.

A prostitute has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy [[ring]] will go to any lengths to recover it. Two [[parallel]] [[investigations]] unfold as both spies and cops hunt down the [[precious]] information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[assurance]] by [[Richard]] Widmark. He knows the [[cops]] to be his moral equals and [[intellectual]] inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a [[charge]]. [[Throw]] me in. You've [[done]] it before." [[In]] this pitiless world, the [[cops]] are just one more gang on the streets. Just as [[Candy]] the hooker bribes Lightning [[Louie]] to [[get]] a lead, so the police are busy paying stool [[pigeons]] for information.

It is hard to [[believe]] that when Widmark made this [[film]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old [[star]], coming to the [[end]] of his [[contract]] with Fox, plays the upstart [[Skip]] McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a [[teenager]]. [[Today]] it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to [[punch]] his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing [[beer]] in her face, but by the mores of the [[period]] it [[signified]] [[toughness]] - and Candy, after all, is a [[fallen]] [[woman]].

Jean [[Peters]] is [[radiant]] as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year [[burst]] of B-movie [[fame]], she is [[beautiful]] and engaging as the [[whore]] with the [[golden]] heart. She is the story's victim, a [[martyr]] to her [[beauty]] as much as [[anything]] else. She [[means]] well, but is [[constantly]] being manipulated by [[cynical]] [[men]] - [[Joey]], [[Skip]] and the [[cops]].

The [[real]] star of this [[movie]] is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering [[subway]] stations [[offer]] a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, [[malevolent]] force. Like [[maggots]] in a [[rotting]] cheese, human [[figures]] scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt [[humanity]]. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. [[Richard]] Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. [[Onto]] this [[wondrous]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[maze]] of [[despondency]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny [[humanist]] in [[dim]] expressionist symbolism.

A prostitute has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy [[rings]] will go to any lengths to recover it. Two [[randomness]] [[probe]] unfold as both spies and cops hunt down the [[priceless]] information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[security]] by [[Richards]] Widmark. He knows the [[police]] to be his moral equals and [[intelligentsia]] inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a [[fees]]. [[Toss]] me in. You've [[doing]] it before." [[Across]] this pitiless world, the [[police]] are just one more gang on the streets. Just as [[Chocolate]] the hooker bribes Lightning [[Luis]] to [[got]] a lead, so the police are busy paying stool [[fools]] for information.

It is hard to [[reckon]] that when Widmark made this [[movie]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old [[stars]], coming to the [[terminating]] of his [[agreements]] with Fox, plays the upstart [[Skipped]] McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a [[teenagers]]. [[Hoy]] it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to [[punching]] his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing [[casket]] in her face, but by the mores of the [[timetable]] it [[intentioned]] [[harshness]] - and Candy, after all, is a [[slumped]] [[dame]].

Jean [[Petr]] is [[lustrous]] as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year [[blasting]] of B-movie [[repute]], she is [[leggy]] and engaging as the [[hooker]] with the [[gilded]] heart. She is the story's victim, a [[shahid]] to her [[beaut]] as much as [[nada]] else. She [[signifies]] well, but is [[endlessly]] being manipulated by [[sarcastic]] [[man]] - [[Jojo]], [[Skipped]] and the [[police]].

The [[actual]] star of this [[movies]] is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering [[mtr]] stations [[offered]] a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, [[satanic]] force. Like [[worms]] in a [[dripping]] cheese, human [[digits]] scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt [[humane]]. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. [[Richards]] Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is pure, distilled, unadulterated boredom. I knew nothing of it before I entered the dark room, took my seat. I was seduced by the "mysterious and suspenseful" blurb on the poster I suppose. Also, Lena Headey is nice and unconventionally sexy, and Richard Jenkins is always a reliable guy to have around, so the cast seemed reasonable. It may have been his name above the title that convinced me to go with this instead of whatever else was on. I should've gone to see Valkyrie for the second time instead.

The thin plot revolves around Headley's Gina McVey, her boyfriend, her father, her sister and her sister's husband who for some reason are being stalked, in a very louche and unenthusiastic manner, by their evil doppelgangers who emerge from mirrors that mysteriously smash. There could be a great film behind this idea (not exactly an original idea, mind you, but still...) and in fact, if the filmmakers had shorn away all the supporting cast and simply stuck to Headey's character's story, The Broken could've made a reasonable 20-minute short. As it is, it is desperately unmotivated and boring, and terribly inconsistent.

For instance, in one scene, a mirror smashes on its own in a room housing all the main characters; they look puzzled but quickly forget about it. In another scene, a mirror smashes in an empty room, and a doppelganger is visible as she "steps out" of the shards left hanging on the wall. So why did the first mirror smash if no creepy crawly was to come crawling out? Just for a little thrill? There are far too many scenes of the characters in the dimly-lit London flats, peering around corners cos they thought they heard something, but seeing nothing there and moving on. We begin to wonder, why doesn't this malevolent doppelgang actually ever want to try to scare them? Scare the characters and you have a chance of scaring the audience. But we, the audience, will need to start threatening each other, in the darkness of the theater, if we want to have any thrills during The Broken. By the way, once we've spent time with these evil doubles, we are totally bemused as to why anyone should be expected to be frightened of them - they just stand around, blank looks on their faces, perhaps totally harmless after killing their others.

There are some nice moods and touches throughout, and I dare say director Sean Ellis could fashion a genuinely stylish and suspenseful mystery movie if he was to hire an imaginative screenwriter next time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Moon [[Child]] was one of the more [[symbolic]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]]. What I really liked about it was the illustration on immorality/[[mortality]],and the [[obstacles]] and guidances through [[life]]. The [[movie]] [[depicts]] a [[great]] [[deal]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[advantages]] to it. Whether if it is having supernatural abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[usually]] wish for. Moon [[Child]] [[shows]] the [[pain]] and [[disadvantages]] of being immortal, since the [[feelings]] [[towards]] loss [[impacts]] [[almost]] all the [[characters]] [[especially]] to the [[main]] [[characters]] Sho and Kei. The [[meaning]] of the title '[[Moon]] Child' [[reveals]] as the [[film]] comes [[close]] to the [[end]] where it [[clearly]] [[shows]] that [[everyone]] is a [[moon]] which [[shines]] other people's [[way]], giving [[guidance]]. I personality [[quite]] like that moral the movie depicted on. The [[weaknesses]] of the [[film]] lies in some parts of the acting and [[special]] [[effects]] [[since]] it [[made]] the film [[less]] authentic. The scene where [[character]] Toshi [[dies]] could have been more [[powerful]] and [[realistic]] if more authentic [[emotions]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[special]] [[effects]] like the [[gun]] shots [[also]] [[could]] have been more [[authentic]] without making it seem too much like an [[action]] [[video]] [[game]]. The [[sparks]] that came out of the guns [[appeared]] too [[fake]] and I [[think]] that [[could]] have been [[eliminated]] or fixed. [[Nevertheless]], I [[think]] Moon [[Child]] should be a [[movie]] [[everyone]] should [[consider]] watching. The symbolic [[ideas]] and [[images]] the [[movie]] [[brings]] out [[would]] be easily [[accepted]] by [[everyone]] and may interest [[many]] [[viewers]]. It is [[quite]] a [[thoughtful]] [[film]] and [[also]] [[entertaining]] to watch. Moon [[Kid]] was one of the more [[emblematic]] [[cinematography]] I've [[noticed]]. What I really liked about it was the illustration on immorality/[[death]],and the [[hindrance]] and guidances through [[lifetime]]. The [[kino]] [[describes]] a [[huge]] [[addresses]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[benefits]] to it. Whether if it is having supernatural abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[ordinarily]] wish for. Moon [[Kids]] [[demonstrates]] the [[painless]] and [[handicaps]] of being immortal, since the [[passions]] [[vers]] loss [[influenced]] [[hardly]] all the [[attribute]] [[namely]] to the [[primary]] [[characteristics]] Sho and Kei. The [[mean]] of the title '[[Luna]] Child' [[reveal]] as the [[movies]] comes [[shut]] to the [[termination]] where it [[blatantly]] [[showings]] that [[someone]] is a [[lune]] which [[glitters]] other people's [[pathway]], giving [[instructions]]. I personality [[pretty]] like that moral the movie depicted on. The [[deficiency]] of the [[cinema]] lies in some parts of the acting and [[specific]] [[impact]] [[because]] it [[accomplished]] the film [[lesser]] authentic. The scene where [[characteristics]] Toshi [[deaths]] could have been more [[mighty]] and [[practical]] if more authentic [[feelings]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[particular]] [[impacts]] like the [[howitzer]] shots [[similarly]] [[would]] have been more [[real]] without making it seem too much like an [[measures]] [[videos]] [[games]]. The [[sparkle]] that came out of the guns [[emerged]] too [[falsify]] and I [[believing]] that [[wo]] have been [[eliminating]] or fixed. [[However]], I [[thought]] Moon [[Children]] should be a [[film]] [[somebody]] should [[reviewing]] watching. The symbolic [[brainchild]] and [[photographs]] the [[kino]] [[puts]] out [[could]] be easily [[recognize]] by [[anybody]] and may interest [[several]] [[audience]]. It is [[rather]] a [[pensive]] [[movies]] and [[apart]] [[amusing]] to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***SPOILER*** Do not read this, if you think about watching that movie, although it would be a waste of time. (By the way: The plot is so predictable that it does not make any difference if you read this or not anyway)

If you are wondering whether to see "Coyote Ugly" or not: don't! It's not worth either the money for the ticket or the VHS / DVD. A typical "Chick-Feel-Good-Flick", one could say. The plot itself is as shallow as it can be, a ridiculous and uncritical version of the American Dream. The young good-looking girl from a small town becoming a big success in New York. The few desperate attempts of giving the movie any depth fail, such as the "tragic" accident of the father, the "difficulties" of Violet's relationship with her boyfriend, and so on. McNally (Director) tries to arouse the audience's pity and sadness put does not have any chance to succeed in this attempt due to the bad script and the shallow acting. Especially Piper Perabo completely fails in convincing one of "Jersey's" fear of singing in front of an audience. The only good (and quite funny thing) about "Coyote Ugly" is John Goodman, who represents the small ray of hope of this movie.

I was very astonished, that Jerry Bruckheimer produced this movie. First "Gone In 60 Seconds" and now this... what happened to great movies like "The Rock" and "Con Air"? THAT was true Bruckheimer stuff.

If you are looking for a superficial movie with good looking women just to have a relaxed evening, you should better go and see "Charlie's Angels" (it's much more funny, entertaining and self-ironic) instead of this flick.

Two thumbs down (3 out of 10). --------------------------------------------- Result 1778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This review owes its existence entirely to a [[review]]. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and [[duly]] [[decide]] what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is [[allocated]] a 1-5 star [[rating]]. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Excellent]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst [[insult]] imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We [[watched]] it, and my wife and I were [[glad]] we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We [[liked]] the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) This review owes its existence entirely to a [[revisions]]. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and [[suitably]] [[decides]] what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is [[allocate]] a 1-5 star [[punctuation]]. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Wondrous]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst [[slur]] imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We [[seen]] it, and my wife and I were [[happier]] we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We [[wished]] the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) --------------------------------------------- Result 1779 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The original [[book]] of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV [[series]] because most people watch for the 1930s [[style]]. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can [[play]] at that [[game]] too. Hanging the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[feeble]] but the 50s version had students who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose [[making]] them think about the [[poverty]] of the marchers is much the same [[thing]]. All the [[stuff]] about Japp having to [[cater]] for himself was [[weak]] too but they had to put [[something]] in to [[fill]] the [[time]]. This would have made a [[decent]] half [[hour]] [[show]] or they [[could]] have [[filmed]] the [[book]] and [[made]] it a better [[long]] [[show]]. It is [[obvious]] this episode is a victim of [[style]] over content. The original [[cookbook]] of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV [[serials]] because most people watch for the 1930s [[styles]]. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can [[playing]] at that [[ballgame]] too. Hanging the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[puny]] but the 50s version had students who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose [[doing]] them think about the [[indigent]] of the marchers is much the same [[stuff]]. All the [[thing]] about Japp having to [[respond]] for himself was [[feeble]] too but they had to put [[somethings]] in to [[fills]] the [[moment]]. This would have made a [[dignified]] half [[hours]] [[exhibition]] or they [[would]] have [[videotaped]] the [[cookbook]] and [[effected]] it a better [[prolonged]] [[exposition]]. It is [[noticeable]] this episode is a victim of [[elegance]] over content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie made me feel as if I had missed some important scenes from the very beginning. There were continuity errors and plots that stopped as abruptly as they started. I was very disappointed because I love Whoopi Goldberg & Danny Glover, in addition to that have always trusted & respected Danny Glovers taste in his choice of roles, "Grand Canyon" for example. I just could not finish this movie, after what seemed an eternity, but was probably just a little over an hour; we had to turn it off. There was no comedy, there was nothing about the characters to make you empathize or sympathize with them, there was no evoking of emotion at all regarding this movie and the clips of their past were poorly edited, confusing, and unnecessary. What could have been a great idea for a movie, even as a drama & not a comedy (although I think a comedy in this situation would have been better, because I love to watch white people freak out & start acting like complete idiots, it makes me laugh) became a waste of my $1 credit at the video store. --------------------------------------------- Result 1781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This movie is simply [[incredible]]! I had [[expected]] something quite different [[form]] the film that I actually [[saw]]. However, it is very insightful in that it [[shows]] the aggressive nature of human [[sexuality]] and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest seeing this [[rare]] work of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual [[spirit]] of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go [[see]] it! It´s worth your money and time! This movie is simply [[unthinkable]]! I had [[projected]] something quite different [[shape]] the film that I actually [[watched]]. However, it is very insightful in that it [[exhibited]] the aggressive nature of human [[sex]] and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest seeing this [[scarce]] work of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual [[geist]] of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go [[seeing]] it! It´s worth your money and time! --------------------------------------------- Result 1782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV show. And I [[really]] enjoyed this flick. I [[enjoyed]] myself here a [[lot]] more than I did with other summer [[blockbusters]].

It's [[funny]] [[hearing]] people [[rail]] against this [[movie]] with [[excuses]] like "lame plot" and "it's [[much]] cruder than the show." Does [[ANYONE]] [[remember]] the crudeness of the humor in the pilot episode? [[Daisy]] makes incest jokes and [[Bo]] [[says]] that [[Luke]] had [[probably]] fathered half the kids in the [[orphanage]]. The only [[reason]] it was cleaned up is because it [[changed]] to and [[earlier]] [[time]] [[slot]].

And as far as the plot goes. It was the [[perfect]] Dukes plot. [[In]] fact as a remake it probably [[stays]] truer to the source material than any [[TV]] [[show]] that has [[migrated]] to the [[big]] screen.

[[While]] Sean William Scott and Johnny [[Knoxville]] aren't [[EXACTLY]] like their [[small]] screen versions, they do a [[great]] job and work very well [[together]]. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little [[bit]] more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. [[In]] the movie Roscoe is a [[little]]... [[scary]].

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the [[General]] [[Lee]] is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back [[roads]] of Hazzard?

Folks, [[allow]] yourself to [[enjoy]] a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[great]] dumb [[movie]]! I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV show. And I [[truthfully]] enjoyed this flick. I [[liked]] myself here a [[batches]] more than I did with other summer [[blockbuster]].

It's [[hilarious]] [[auditions]] people [[riel]] against this [[kino]] with [[pretences]] like "lame plot" and "it's [[very]] cruder than the show." Does [[PERSON]] [[recalling]] the crudeness of the humor in the pilot episode? [[Margarita]] makes incest jokes and [[Pu]] [[alleges]] that [[Matty]] had [[possibly]] fathered half the kids in the [[orphanages]]. The only [[justification]] it was cleaned up is because it [[changing]] to and [[sooner]] [[moment]] [[slots]].

And as far as the plot goes. It was the [[faultless]] Dukes plot. [[At]] fact as a remake it probably [[stay]] truer to the source material than any [[TELEVISION]] [[exhibition]] that has [[immigrated]] to the [[vast]] screen.

[[Though]] Sean William Scott and Johnny [[Chattanooga]] aren't [[PRECISELY]] like their [[little]] screen versions, they do a [[grand]] job and work very well [[jointly]]. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little [[bite]] more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. [[Onto]] the movie Roscoe is a [[petit]]... [[terrible]].

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the [[Generals]] [[Rhee]] is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back [[highways]] of Hazzard?

Folks, [[permits]] yourself to [[enjoys]] a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[huge]] dumb [[cinematic]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1783 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] his 1966 [[film]] "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question [[truth]] against a [[backdrop]] of [[British]] [[youth]] protesters. By [[setting]] such [[questions]] against a [[fabric]] of hippie [[youth]] movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a [[cause]] when what you [[think]] is [[true]] may [[actually]] be a lie? On the [[flip]] side, the film said that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be [[deceiving]] us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most tacky parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with [[bad]] metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. [[Into]] his 1966 [[cinematographic]] "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question [[veracity]] against a [[context]] of [[Britannica]] [[adolescence]] protesters. By [[configured]] such [[subjects]] against a [[texture]] of hippie [[teens]] movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a [[reason]] when what you [[ideas]] is [[veritable]] may [[genuinely]] be a lie? On the [[leafy]] side, the film said that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be [[fooling]] us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most tacky parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with [[unfavourable]] metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I bought Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[prepared]] me for how [[brilliant]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much since Firefly (also and amazing show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some [[amazing]] episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[great]]. I've [[heard]] some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. I bought Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[prepare]] me for how [[wondrous]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much since Firefly (also and amazing show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some [[wondrous]] episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[wondrous]]. I've [[hear]] some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[John]] Cassavetes' 1977 film [[Opening]] [[Night]] is, what [[critics]] [[usually]] call the [[work]] of such a [[significant]] artist, 'overlooked'. It is an excellent film, in its own [[right]], and one of the [[best]] [[portraits]] of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a [[perfect]] film, in that, at two [[hours]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half hour too long, and there's a bit too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead character Myrtle Gordon, played by Gena Rowlands, the wife of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another Woman, which [[also]] starred Rowlands, eleven years [[later]], is a better [[portrait]] of the internal [[conflicts]] of an aging [[woman]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[win]] the [[Best]] [[Actress]] [[Award]] at the Berlin [[Film]] [[Festival]] for this [[portrayal]], and it was well deserved. [[Often]] this [[film]], [[written]] by Cassavetes, is easily compared to his earlier- and inferior- film, A Woman Under The [[Influence]], but it's a [[spurious]] [[comparison]]. Rowlands' character in that film is severely mentally disturbed from the start, as well as coming from a blue [[collar]] background, while her characters in this film and in Allen's [[film]] are both artists who are haunted by apparitions. [[In]] this [[film]] it's the ghost of a dead young woman who can be seen as Myrtle's [[younger]] [[doppelganger]], while in Allen's [[film]] it's her character's own past…. [[Many]] critics have [[taken]] this [[film]] to be a [[portrait]] of an alcoholic, seeing [[Myrtle]] surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[manager]] who tells her, during opening night, 'I've seen a lot of [[drunks]] in my time, but I've never [[seen]] anyone as drunk as you who could stand up. You're great!', but this is wrong, for [[alcohol]] isn't her problem- nor is her chain smoking. They are merely [[diversions]] from whatever thing is really compelling her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' credit, as a storyteller, he never lets us find out exactly what's wrong with [[Myrtle]], and despite her coming through in the end, there's no reason to expect that she has really resolved anything of consequence. This sort of [[end]] without resolution links Cassavetes directly with the more daring European directors of the recent past, who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an audience, and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. [[Johannes]] Cassavetes' 1977 film [[Open]] [[Nighttime]] is, what [[detractors]] [[fluently]] call the [[working]] of such a [[cannot]] artist, 'overlooked'. It is an excellent film, in its own [[rights]], and one of the [[finest]] [[headshots]] of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a [[impeccable]] film, in that, at two [[hour]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half hour too long, and there's a bit too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead character Myrtle Gordon, played by Gena Rowlands, the wife of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another Woman, which [[similarly]] starred Rowlands, eleven years [[afterward]], is a better [[portrayal]] of the internal [[dispute]] of an aging [[female]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[triumph]] the [[Better]] [[Actor]] [[Scholarship]] at the Berlin [[Cinematography]] [[Festivals]] for this [[depiction]], and it was well deserved. [[Habitually]] this [[cinematography]], [[typed]] by Cassavetes, is easily compared to his earlier- and inferior- film, A Woman Under The [[Implications]], but it's a [[fakes]] [[comparisons]]. Rowlands' character in that film is severely mentally disturbed from the start, as well as coming from a blue [[neck]] background, while her characters in this film and in Allen's [[movie]] are both artists who are haunted by apparitions. [[At]] this [[cinematography]] it's the ghost of a dead young woman who can be seen as Myrtle's [[youngest]] [[ringer]], while in Allen's [[flick]] it's her character's own past…. [[Several]] critics have [[took]] this [[cinematography]] to be a [[depiction]] of an alcoholic, seeing [[Mimi]] surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[administrator]] who tells her, during opening night, 'I've seen a lot of [[drunkards]] in my time, but I've never [[watched]] anyone as drunk as you who could stand up. You're great!', but this is wrong, for [[drank]] isn't her problem- nor is her chain smoking. They are merely [[deviation]] from whatever thing is really compelling her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' credit, as a storyteller, he never lets us find out exactly what's wrong with [[Moaning]], and despite her coming through in the end, there's no reason to expect that she has really resolved anything of consequence. This sort of [[ends]] without resolution links Cassavetes directly with the more daring European directors of the recent past, who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an audience, and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] With the badly injured [[Tony]] in an [[induced]] coma, two things happen: [[Tony]] imagines himself leading the [[life]] of a [[salesman]] attending a [[business]] [[convention]], while his family and friends [[go]] through [[hell]] [[trying]] to [[cope]] with the [[possible]] [[loss]] of the [[big]] [[man]]. The [[dream]] [[sequences]] are right out of an [[old]] TWILIGHT [[ZONE]] episode, as Tony [[finds]] himself [[transformed]] into an Average [[Joe]] [[trying]] to [[deal]] with a missing wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country business [[trip]]. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an [[Italian]] [[thug]] from Noo Joisey. A nice [[touch]]. The [[shockingly]] long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose [[old]] [[man]]. The best moment has the big [[boys]] trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial [[dispute]]. Vito [[gets]] off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet [[case]], which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. With the badly injured [[Toni]] in an [[caused]] coma, two things happen: [[Toni]] imagines himself leading the [[lifetime]] of a [[seller]] attending a [[enterprises]] [[conventions]], while his family and friends [[going]] through [[dammit]] [[tempting]] to [[coping]] with the [[probable]] [[losing]] of the [[prodigious]] [[dawg]]. The [[daydream]] [[sequence]] are right out of an [[antique]] TWILIGHT [[SPHERE]] episode, as Tony [[deems]] himself [[transforms]] into an Average [[Evel]] [[attempting]] to [[address]] with a missing wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country business [[excursion]]. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an [[Ltalian]] [[hooligan]] from Noo Joisey. A nice [[toque]]. The [[ridiculously]] long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose [[ancient]] [[hombre]]. The best moment has the big [[guys]] trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial [[quarrel]]. Vito [[get]] off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet [[cases]], which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. --------------------------------------------- Result 1787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[time]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is [[promised]] a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the [[movie]] for which he escaped [[base]], later caught after [[interrupting]] a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern [[Afghanistan]] terrorist base operated by a group called Black [[Sunday]], who have commandeered an [[Air]] Force stealth fighter [[thanks]] to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), [[John]] Sands(Seagal)will [[fly]] into enemy [[territory]], receiving [[help]] from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on [[ground]]. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female [[enforcer]], Eliana([[Katie]] Jones), and Sands [[must]] figure out how to not only re-take [[command]] of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but [[rescue]] him as well. And, [[maybe]], Sands can [[get]] revenge on the traitor he [[trained]], [[Rather]](Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 [[hours]] until a General's [[Navy]] pilots bomb the [[entire]] area. On board the stealth, [[Black]] [[Sunday]] [[equipped]] a biochemical [[bomb]], [[hoping]] to detonate it on the [[United]] States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot [[Afghans]] when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[bodies]] [[dropping]] dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to [[scrutiny]](..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area [[undetected]] so easily) and the [[plot]] itself is [[nothing]] to write [[home]] about. The [[movie]] is edited [[fast]], the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poorest]] [[efforts]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). Even more [[disappointing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[period]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is [[vowed]] a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the [[filmmaking]] for which he escaped [[basis]], later caught after [[disrupt]] a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern [[Afghan]] terrorist base operated by a group called Black [[Saturday]], who have commandeered an [[Airspace]] Force stealth fighter [[appreciation]] to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), [[Jon]] Sands(Seagal)will [[steal]] into enemy [[land]], receiving [[support]] from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on [[overland]]. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female [[henchman]], Eliana([[Katy]] Jones), and Sands [[gotta]] figure out how to not only re-take [[commanding]] of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but [[salvage]] him as well. And, [[perhaps]], Sands can [[got]] revenge on the traitor he [[formed]], [[Somewhat]](Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 [[hour]] until a General's [[Marina]] pilots bomb the [[whole]] area. On board the stealth, [[Negro]] [[Thursday]] [[endowed]] a biochemical [[bombings]], [[waiting]] to detonate it on the [[Unified]] States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot [[Afghanis]] when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[organizations]] [[downed]] dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to [[oversight]](..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area [[unnoticed]] so easily) and the [[intrigue]] itself is [[none]] to write [[habitation]] about. The [[filmmaking]] is edited [[faster]], the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poor]] [[initiative]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). Even more [[depressing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). --------------------------------------------- Result 1788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Did [[anyone]] edit this [[film]]? Or was it only the DVD [[release]] that had [[huge]] [[thirty]] second gaps between scenes? It's [[OK]] [[though]], I fell asleep [[watching]] it the first [[time]]. Then I [[fell]] asleep the [[second]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the worst I've [[seen]], but it's close. The acting is not the worst I've [[seen]] either...but it's close. The [[production]] .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[worst]] I had ever [[seen]] in my [[life]]! Not trying to be [[spiteful]], but [[Unhinged]] [[could]] have [[used]] some more production.

[[Please]] don't [[think]] I'm a hater of horror [[films]], or even that I didn't [[enjoy]] this [[film]]. I just [[felt]] I was [[laughing]] at the [[film]] [[much]] more than I [[felt]] I was [[laughing]] along with it. The [[gruesome]] moments were not too poorly [[done]], but [[could]] have been [[done]] better even with a shoestring budget.

[[Characters]] [[seemed]] awkwardly [[developed]], or [[ignored]] all [[together]], twist ending was pretty [[bad]], and the [[exposition]] [[took]] [[forever]] without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[avoiding]] this [[movie]].

1/10 Did [[nobody]] edit this [[filmmaking]]? Or was it only the DVD [[freeing]] that had [[great]] [[thirtieth]] second gaps between scenes? It's [[OKAY]] [[if]], I fell asleep [[staring]] it the first [[times]]. Then I [[slipped]] asleep the [[secondly]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the worst I've [[noticed]], but it's close. The acting is not the worst I've [[noticed]] either...but it's close. The [[productivity]] .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[worse]] I had ever [[noticed]] in my [[living]]! Not trying to be [[sleepless]], but [[Deranged]] [[did]] have [[using]] some more production.

[[Invite]] don't [[thinking]] I'm a hater of horror [[filmmaking]], or even that I didn't [[enjoying]] this [[filmmaking]]. I just [[smelled]] I was [[giggling]] at the [[flick]] [[very]] more than I [[believed]] I was [[kidding]] along with it. The [[grisly]] moments were not too poorly [[doing]], but [[did]] have been [[performed]] better even with a shoestring budget.

[[Traits]] [[sounded]] awkwardly [[formulated]], or [[overlooked]] all [[jointly]], twist ending was pretty [[negative]], and the [[exposure]] [[picked]] [[permanently]] without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[stave]] this [[flick]].

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Q.E.D. was a [[brilliant]] TV [[series]] and it [[truly]] was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this [[era]] of TIVO and recording devices that it [[would]] fare much better than it did in 1982. I am [[eagerly]] awaiting its availability on DVD!

[[While]] it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The [[Wild]], Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a [[much]] more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was [[witty]] and the [[action]] was [[high]]. The [[show]] ran in the [[UK]] as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with [[better]] production values than BBC [[typically]] had in that [[era]].

I was a [[nineteen]] year [[old]] lad when this [[series]] ran [[initially]], and had [[much]] too much to do in my [[life]] to [[make]] [[time]] for [[television]]. I [[remember]] my dear [[mother]], [[however]], calling me to [[remind]] me that Q.E.D. was on, and we [[would]] [[sit]] on the [[phone]] and watch it [[together]]. [[Wonderful]] [[memories]].

Truly, Q.E.D. is a [[sad]] loss and, if it [[could]] be [[done]] with the same quality and [[values]] [[today]], I [[would]] [[love]] to [[see]] it [[make]] a [[return]]. Q.E.D. was a [[wondrous]] TV [[serial]] and it [[honestly]] was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this [[epoch]] of TIVO and recording devices that it [[should]] fare much better than it did in 1982. I am [[impatiently]] awaiting its availability on DVD!

[[Albeit]] it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The [[Sauvage]], Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a [[very]] more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was [[spiritual]] and the [[efforts]] was [[highest]]. The [[exhibit]] ran in the [[BRITISH]] as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with [[best]] production values than BBC [[fluently]] had in that [[epoch]].

I was a [[nineteenth]] year [[former]] lad when this [[serials]] ran [[firstly]], and had [[very]] too much to do in my [[vie]] to [[deliver]] [[moment]] for [[tv]]. I [[reminisce]] my dear [[moms]], [[still]], calling me to [[reminds]] me that Q.E.D. was on, and we [[could]] [[assis]] on the [[phones]] and watch it [[jointly]]. [[Magnifique]] [[reminiscences]].

Truly, Q.E.D. is a [[unlucky]] loss and, if it [[would]] be [[performed]] with the same quality and [[value]] [[yesterday]], I [[could]] [[loves]] to [[seeing]] it [[deliver]] a [[reverting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she could [[hardly]] have chosen to remake her image more [[dramatically]]. A great [[success]] in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is [[difficult]] to [[imagine]] this [[delicate]] frame standing up to a bounty [[hunters]] life... but then this is exactly what [[Domino]] Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's biggest fans) [[believe]] she carries if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more amazing than the fiction. Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she could [[barely]] have chosen to remake her image more [[immeasurably]]. A great [[avail]] in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is [[laborious]] to [[suppose]] this [[fragile]] frame standing up to a bounty [[gliders]] life... but then this is exactly what [[Domina]] Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's biggest fans) [[think]] she carries if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more amazing than the fiction. --------------------------------------------- Result 1791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My [[Super]] X-Girlfriend is one hell of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[excellent]] and the costumes [[Uma]] Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[proved]] everyone wrong and [[nailed]] her role as the [[lunatic]] [[girlfriend]]. She was just [[simply]] [[FABULOUS]]!!! Luke Wilson was [[also]] good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the greatest actresses of all time. The supporting [[cast]] was [[also]] [[superb]] [[especially]] Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's [[screenplay]] and from it's [[original]] plot line. This [[film]] is very highly recommended. My [[Concierge]] X-Girlfriend is one hell of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[noteworthy]] and the costumes [[Amu]] Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[showed]] everyone wrong and [[pinched]] her role as the [[quirky]] [[amie]]. She was just [[purely]] [[PEACHY]]!!! Luke Wilson was [[besides]] good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the greatest actresses of all time. The supporting [[casting]] was [[furthermore]] [[wondrous]] [[principally]] Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's [[scenario]] and from it's [[initial]] plot line. This [[cinematography]] is very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[realize]] that bringing a [[novel]] to the big screen is [[always]] problematic. That is the only [[positive]] [[thing]] I can say about this truly [[horrid]] [[adaptation]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[book]]. Flannery O'Connor [[wrote]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a [[remarkably]] [[gifted]] [[writer]]. [[In]] her first novel she wove together a [[dark]] and deeply disturbing tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and [[surprising]] evenhandedness. The [[characters]] in the book may seem outrageous to those who have not [[lived]] in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do [[exist]]. Not only do they [[exist]], they are [[human]] [[beings]] with families, feelings, and [[concerns]] like [[anyone]] [[else]]. Flannery's [[intentions]] were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[zealots]] - she [[saw]] in them the beautiful [[operation]] of what she would have [[called]] 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[distressing]], and [[maddening]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a [[sense]] of dread and impending doom. [[Finally]], it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our [[entire]] world view.

None of this [[comes]] through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. [[None]]. It is a farce. A [[bad]] [[farce]]. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that [[turns]] the [[stomach]]. The acting is poor, the [[southern]] accents are [[fake]] and insulting. The filmmakers [[show]] no [[insight]] into the [[thinking]] of [[religious]] southerners. [[Ms]]. O'Connor's [[intense]] prose are [[reduced]] to sight [[gags]] and [[cheap]], [[amateur]] [[theatre]]. The soundtrack is a [[mixture]] of hayseed [[silliness]] and '[[Clockwork]] Orange'-style cheeseball [[electronics]] that doesn't fit the [[story]] or [[even]] the [[MOVIE]]. I was granted free admission to this movie and [[almost]] walked out. Truly, truly [[terrible]].

As an aside, I do not [[agree]] with [[Ms]]. O'Connor's religious [[views]], and while I was [[raised]] in the [[deep]] [[south]], years ago I made my [[way]] [[north]] and have not looked back. But the [[south]] is a [[beautiful]] place full of [[fascinating]] individuals (like [[every]] other place on [[earth]]), and the cartoonish [[mockery]] with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. I [[attain]] that bringing a [[newer]] to the big screen is [[constantly]] problematic. That is the only [[affirmative]] [[stuff]] I can say about this truly [[horrific]] [[adjustment]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[books]]. Flannery O'Connor [[written]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a [[vastly]] [[talented]] [[novelist]]. [[Onto]] her first novel she wove together a [[blackness]] and deeply disturbing tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and [[amazing]] evenhandedness. The [[traits]] in the book may seem outrageous to those who have not [[resided]] in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do [[existent]]. Not only do they [[existent]], they are [[humanity]] [[humans]] with families, feelings, and [[worries]] like [[everyone]] [[elsewhere]]. Flannery's [[intent]] were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[addicts]] - she [[witnessed]] in them the beautiful [[operations]] of what she would have [[drew]] 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[disappointing]], and [[galling]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a [[feeling]] of dread and impending doom. [[Eventually]], it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our [[overall]] world view.

None of this [[arrives]] through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. [[Nos]]. It is a farce. A [[unfavourable]] [[comedy]]. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that [[revolves]] the [[abdomen]]. The acting is poor, the [[south]] accents are [[scythe]] and insulting. The filmmakers [[illustrates]] no [[eyesight]] into the [[think]] of [[nuns]] southerners. [[Luciana]]. O'Connor's [[ferocious]] prose are [[lessen]] to sight [[jaws]] and [[inexpensive]], [[dilettante]] [[teatro]]. The soundtrack is a [[blends]] of hayseed [[hilarity]] and '[[Triumph]] Orange'-style cheeseball [[electron]] that doesn't fit the [[histories]] or [[yet]] the [[FILMMAKING]]. I was granted free admission to this movie and [[hardly]] walked out. Truly, truly [[horrific]].

As an aside, I do not [[concur]] with [[Corinne]]. O'Connor's religious [[view]], and while I was [[risen]] in the [[deepest]] [[southward]], years ago I made my [[ways]] [[nordic]] and have not looked back. But the [[southerly]] is a [[sumptuous]] place full of [[thrilling]] individuals (like [[all]] other place on [[tierra]]), and the cartoonish [[charade]] with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[bad]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is [[obvious]] that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more [[expensive]] than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an [[obnoxious]] mailman who sings [[horrendous]] songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) [[Boring]] and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[negative]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is [[noticeable]] that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more [[costly]] than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an [[outrageous]] mailman who sings [[monstrous]] songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) [[Bore]] and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the [[plot]] thickens and finally [[becomes]] [[black]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the [[first]] [[part]] of the movie. It [[continues]] in this vein for a while until, in the [[end]], it [[tries]] to go back to the [[original]] light-hearted banter. But by now it's too [[late]]. It's hard to [[see]] why these [[women]] would still be [[talking]] to one another and the finale is unconvincing. [[Truly]] a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make [[films]]. [[Difficult]] to see how the producers ever [[convinced]] themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a [[real]] flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the [[intrigue]] thickens and finally [[becoming]] [[negro]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the [[fiirst]] [[parties]] of the movie. It [[persists]] in this vein for a while until, in the [[terminate]], it [[attempted]] to go back to the [[initial]] light-hearted banter. But by now it's too [[belated]]. It's hard to [[behold]] why these [[daughters]] would still be [[debating]] to one another and the finale is unconvincing. [[Really]] a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make [[cinematography]]. [[Tricky]] to see how the producers ever [[persuaded]] themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a [[veritable]] flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). --------------------------------------------- Result 1795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this film when i was around 6 or 7 years old and didn't really think it was anything particularly special. AS time went on i watched it a few more times and it started to grow on me as i started to understand the morals of the film, which i will come to later. For a while i left this film alone and didn't watch it for a while. When looking for an old classic film to watch a few weeks ago (now being 15), I dug out the VHS of homeward bound. After watching this i was left on a natural high that i couldn't really explain. The film gives an overwhelming sense of joy that you never really expect. The films nature of three completely different animals collaborating together to find their way home really sends a message home that no matter how different you are you can always find common ground, something that you all need. The way the personalities of the characters is chosen is truly fantastic. In that you have an old knowledgeable wise golden retriever, looking after or guiding 'chance' the fun loving if slightly clumsy young American bulldog, with sassy the clever, vulnerable but confident cat. The film follows these three friends or companions on a journey that is so realistically impossible it creates magic in that you start to believe that this journey can happen.

I don't want to sound like a soft tissue grabber when it comes to films i assure you i am quite the opposite, but the most uplifting part of this film is without a doubt shadows return, when shadow desperately tries to escape and chance and sassy, painfully are told by him to leave. When both animals return to their beloved owners there is a silence until shadow limps over the horizon to the awe of all. There is a fine line between heartwarming and corny rubbish but this film is pure magic even at the age of 15. This film may not be Lord of the rings but for Disney to produce such a fantastic film using animals and for it to uplift myself in the way it does even at this age it deserves 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1796 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those rare movies, it's lovely and compelling, dignified and quirky, a true gift. I consider it a prerequisite for any trip to Italy, or any vacation at all, because it reminds you to open yourself up to a broader experience (yup, find the magic). I especially loved Josie Lawrence, as Lottie Wilkins, but every lead and supporting actor is flawless in this film. Further the costumes, if you're drawn to fashion and costumes, are extraordinarily well done. I just wish they'd release it on DVD because I'm wearing my tape version out!

Absolutely well worth your time, just make sure to settle in to watch it, without any interruptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 1797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I looked forward to [[seeing]] this [[movie]] when it [[came]] out, since I was a [[huge]] SNL [[fan]]. When my [[boyfriend]] and I went to [[see]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[yelling]], "Don't waste your [[money]]!" But of course we had to [[find]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few [[funny]] bits ([[Laser]] Bra 2000, Root Boy Slim), most of it [[felt]] like it [[could]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 hour show. It was pretty [[bad]].

When the opera singer came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I [[realized]] that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on [[purpose]] with this movie. Or [[else]] he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your [[time]] watching it, it's that bad. I looked forward to [[see]] this [[filmmaking]] when it [[became]] out, since I was a [[tremendous]] SNL [[breather]]. When my [[buddy]] and I went to [[behold]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[shouting]], "Don't waste your [[moneys]]!" But of course we had to [[found]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few [[hilarious]] bits ([[Lasers]] Bra 2000, Root Boy Slim), most of it [[deemed]] like it [[did]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 hour show. It was pretty [[unfavourable]].

When the opera singer came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I [[effected]] that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on [[intents]] with this movie. Or [[elsewhere]] he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your [[period]] watching it, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this [[Star]] is Born story seems to be to [[make]] ultimate [[success]] all the more [[sublime]]. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned within herself but never convincing as the stage [[actress]] of [[growing]] fame who both overcomes and [[profits]] from this detachment. [[Even]] in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's [[instructions]]. After suffering through Esther's ([[largely]] self-inflicted) pain in [[excruciating]] [[detail]], we are [[given]] no [[persuasive]] [[sense]] of her [[triumph]].

The [[obsessive]] [[presence]] of the heroine's [[pain]] seems to be [[meant]] as a [[guarantee]] of [[aesthetic]] transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, [[Judaism]], sexual betrayal) never [[come]] [[together]] in a [[coherent]] whole. A 163-minute film with a [[simple]] [[plot]] should be able to [[knit]] up its loose [[ends]]. [[Esther]] Kahn is [[still]] not [[ready]] to [[go]] before an [[audience]]. The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this [[Stars]] is Born story seems to be to [[deliver]] ultimate [[avail]] all the more [[sumptuous]]. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned within herself but never convincing as the stage [[actor]] of [[raising]] fame who both overcomes and [[profit]] from this detachment. [[Yet]] in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's [[guidance]]. After suffering through Esther's ([[overwhelmingly]] self-inflicted) pain in [[horrifying]] [[particulars]], we are [[yielded]] no [[conclusive]] [[sensing]] of her [[win]].

The [[obsessed]] [[attendance]] of the heroine's [[heartbreak]] seems to be [[intend]] as a [[collateral]] of [[cosmetic]] transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, [[Jewish]], sexual betrayal) never [[arriving]] [[jointly]] in a [[consistent]] whole. A 163-minute film with a [[easy]] [[intrigue]] should be able to [[knitting]] up its loose [[culminates]]. [[Astaire]] Kahn is [[however]] not [[prepared]] to [[going]] before an [[viewers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bromwell High is nothing short of brilliant. Expertly scripted and perfectly delivered, this searing parody of a students and teachers at a South London Public School leaves you literally rolling with laughter. It's vulgar, provocative, witty and sharp. The characters are a superbly caricatured cross section of British society (or to be more accurate, of any society). Following the escapades of Keisha, Latrina and Natella, our three "protagonists" for want of a better term, the show doesn't shy away from parodying every imaginable subject. Political correctness flies out the window in every episode. If you enjoy shows that aren't afraid to poke fun of every taboo subject imaginable, then Bromwell High will not disappoint! --------------------------------------------- Result 1800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[ratings]].

skip this "[[movie]]" and [[wait]] for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't buy or rent it. trust me you won't be missing a thing. the [[Architect]] brings no [[new]] info: _([[spoiler]])_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you [[could]] already figure something like that out from the first [[movie]]: Agent Smith [[telling]] us the first Matrix created didn't [[work]] because it was too [[perfect]]. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I [[seen]] this before ? Oh right in the first [[movie]] the roles where [[reversed]] ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ [[ships]]) in the [[BIG]] [[battle]] which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by [[someone]] ([[hmmmm]], maybe the [[guy]] holding the [[knife]] who [[wanted]] to stab Neo?!) who [[pushed]] the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a [[shameless]] [[ploy]] to make money (especially off the guys who went to [[see]] it more then once), which [[evidently]] [[worked]] like a charm. 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[assessments]].

skip this "[[filmmaking]]" and [[expectation]] for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't buy or rent it. trust me you won't be missing a thing. the [[Architects]] brings no [[newest]] info: _([[baffle]])_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you [[did]] already figure something like that out from the first [[filmmaking]]: Agent Smith [[saying]] us the first Matrix created didn't [[collaboration]] because it was too [[flawless]]. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I [[watched]] this before ? Oh right in the first [[flick]] the roles where [[flipped]] ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ [[warships]]) in the [[PRODIGIOUS]] [[struggles]] which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by [[everyone]] ([[hmmm]], maybe the [[guys]] holding the [[stab]] who [[wants]] to stab Neo?!) who [[relegated]] the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a [[impudent]] [[trick]] to make money (especially off the guys who went to [[consults]] it more then once), which [[visibly]] [[cooperating]] like a charm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is one of those movies that you happen [[across]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Saturday]] afternoon, and you get [[drawn]] into it and [[end]] up watching the whole thing. I [[thought]] that it was well acted and it really made me feel for the [[characters]]. [[Though]] it's a bit [[slow]] moving, focusing more on the relationships between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[members]], it never got [[boring]]. We don't really [[see]] too much of all the robberies that they were so [[legendary]] for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I thought Tracey Needham, who [[played]] Bonnie, [[really]] did a good [[job]] with her [[character]]. Going from a nice [[country]] girl to a cold-blooded killer is a challenging thing to [[portray]], and I [[enjoyed]] the [[subtlety]] she brought to the role.

Overall, an above [[average]] effort, [[especially]] considering it was a made for TV movie. This is one of those movies that you happen [[during]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Sunday]] afternoon, and you get [[lured]] into it and [[termination]] up watching the whole thing. I [[brainchild]] that it was well acted and it really made me feel for the [[hallmarks]]. [[Nevertheless]] it's a bit [[slower]] moving, focusing more on the relationships between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[lawmakers]], it never got [[bored]]. We don't really [[behold]] too much of all the robberies that they were so [[proverbial]] for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I thought Tracey Needham, who [[done]] Bonnie, [[truthfully]] did a good [[employment]] with her [[nature]]. Going from a nice [[nationals]] girl to a cold-blooded killer is a challenging thing to [[outline]], and I [[appreciated]] the [[sophistication]] she brought to the role.

Overall, an above [[medium]] effort, [[principally]] considering it was a made for TV movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1802 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The endless bounds of our inhumanity to our own kind never fails to stun me. This truly astonishing story of a horrifically abused and largely unheard-of population is compelling, well-documented and enraging. As an American, I am constantly humiliated by my country's behaviour and this is just another in our long catalogue of international debasement. We suck. This is probably the first John Pilger documentary I've seen, but it immediately made me want to see what else he's done. My only complaint, and the reason I gave this film only 8 out of 10, is that Pilger shows us this travesty and the appalling collaboration of the US and UK governments, demands that we viewers/citizens are complicit in our own inaction...but makes no suggestion of how to help. I don't know about Britain, but America's made it nearly impossible for the citizenry to take part in their government's doings. A gesture in the right direction might help these islanders' cause. --------------------------------------------- Result 1803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[After]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two [[roles]] in [[Man]] From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[foul]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an [[insult]] to viewer [[intelligence]], according to members of my family. I'll [[stick]] with the first one, and [[try]] to [[forget]] I ever saw the sequel! [[Afterward]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two [[duties]] in [[Bloke]] From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[salacious]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an [[snub]] to viewer [[intelligentsia]], according to members of my family. I'll [[twig]] with the first one, and [[tried]] to [[overlook]] I ever saw the sequel! --------------------------------------------- Result 1804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched this [[show]] on the basis of it being [[told]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show [[quickly]] starts introducing us to the [[main]] [[characters]] and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the [[best]] of the [[lot]], its [[extremely]] [[dramatic]] and really gets out the whole evil side of the [[show]] ready to progress [[throughout]] the rest of the season. My one biggest criticism is I [[felt]] a [[little]] let down by the show - [[probably]] not through its own fault, as it got [[cancelled]] after a [[mere]] 1 season, it [[seemed]] to [[display]] show much potential and it [[deserved]] a lot better treatment than it [[got]]. The acting is [[excellent]], and this show has some of the [[best]] [[characters]] (good and evil) in it I have ever [[seen]] that are well [[developed]] in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten [[shows]] which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, [[definitely]] [[something]] out of the ordinary! I watched this [[displaying]] on the basis of it being [[said]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show [[immediately]] starts introducing us to the [[principal]] [[character]] and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the [[better]] of the [[batch]], its [[critically]] [[impressive]] and really gets out the whole evil side of the [[display]] ready to progress [[in]] the rest of the season. My one biggest criticism is I [[deemed]] a [[scant]] let down by the show - [[undoubtedly]] not through its own fault, as it got [[invalidated]] after a [[simple]] 1 season, it [[appeared]] to [[showing]] show much potential and it [[merit]] a lot better treatment than it [[did]]. The acting is [[wondrous]], and this show has some of the [[better]] [[hallmarks]] (good and evil) in it I have ever [[noticed]] that are well [[established]] in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten [[exposition]] which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, [[surely]] [[anything]] out of the ordinary! --------------------------------------------- Result 1805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just got back from a free screening and I'm very glad I didn't pay to see this very sub-par film. The theater was full and the crowd was a mix of kids and adults. It seemed like it was just the kids who were laughing at all the slap-stick and fart jokes though (good god they loved to hit these poor mice in the crotch a lot!). The movie is pretty juvenile, unintelligent, predictable, and mostly annoying. The characters just seem to be thrown together to fill in empty space and the relationships between them all seemed very forced with no charm at all.

Visually, the film is about average with nothing that really stands out. They did a decent job of mimicking the clay look from Wallace and Gromit, but other than that it's very forgettable imagery.

Although I was really bored throughout the whole film, I chuckled a couple times. It's not an absolute failure, but I most definitely would not want to watch it again. If you're a parent with kids (and you don't care that your kids see mindless cheap-jokes) then feel free to take them to see it, but everyone else shouldn't waste their money. --------------------------------------------- Result 1806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I had the opportunity to [[see]] this film debut at the Appalachian Film [[Festival]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[brilliantly]] done, with an [[excellent]] cast that works well as an ensemble. My favorite performances were from [[Youssef]] Kerkour, Justin [[Lane]] , and Adam [[Jones]]. [[Also]], there are some [[great]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was surprised to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Definitely]] a [[must]] see. I had the opportunity to [[seeing]] this film debut at the Appalachian Film [[Celebratory]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[beautifully]] done, with an [[wondrous]] cast that works well as an ensemble. My favorite performances were from [[Yusuf]] Kerkour, Justin [[Alleyways]] , and Adam [[Jonesy]]. [[Moreover]], there are some [[wondrous]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was surprised to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Surely]] a [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there's one genre that I've never been a fan of, it's the biopic. Always misleading, filled with false information, over-dramatized scenes, and trickery all around, biopics are almost never done right. Even in the hands of the truly talented directors like Martin Scorsese (The Aviator) and Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind), they often do a great disservice to the people they are trying to capture on screen. Skeptiscism takes the place of hype with the majority of biopics that make their way to the big screen and the Notorious Bettie Page was no different. Some critics and moviegoers objected to Gretchen Mol given the role of Bettie Page, saying she was no longer a celebrity and didn't have the chops for the part. I never doubted Mol could handle the part since, but I never expected to as blown as away by her performance as I was upon just viewing the film hours ago. Mol delivers a knockout Oscar worthy performance as the iconic 1950's pin-up girl, who, after an early life of abuse (depicted subtlety and tastefully done, something few directors would probably do) inadvertently becomes one of the most talked about models of all time. The picture covers a lot of ground in its 90 minute running time yet despite no less than three subplots, there is still a feeling that there may be a small portion missing from the story. Director/co-writer Marry Harron and Guinevere Turner's fantastic script is only marred by a too abrupt and not as clear as it should be ending. Still, credit must be given to the two ladies for creating a nearly flawless biopic that manages to pay tribute to both its subject and the decade it emulates masterfully. Come Oscar time, Mol, Turner, and Harron should be receiving nominations. Doubt it will happen, though there certainly are no three women more deserving of them. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, [[insipid]] role. The [[real]] [[problem]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I [[fell]] [[asleep]] in the theater watching this [[long]], drawn out and exceptionally [[boring]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, [[vapid]] role. The [[veritable]] [[difficulty]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I [[dip]] [[behemoth]] in the theater watching this [[lengthy]], drawn out and exceptionally [[dull]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. --------------------------------------------- Result 1809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unlike many other films, which are disturbing either by dint of their naked unpleasantness (Man Bites Dog) or their sheer violence (most Peckinpah films), Deliverance shocks by its plausibility. Certainly, the buggery scene is pretty straightforward in its unpleasantness, but the film's effect derives far more from its slow build-up and the tangible sense of isolation surrounding the four leads, both before and after everything starts to go wrong. The moment when the canoes pass under the child on the bridge, who does not even acknowledge the men he had earlier played music with, let alone show any sign of human affection towards them, is among the most sinister in modern film. The tension increases steadily throughout the canoe trip, and perseveres even after the final credits - the ending makes the significance of the characters' ordeals horrifically real. The movie's plausibility is greatly aided by the playing of the leads, particularly Ned Beatty and Jon Voight as the victim and reluctant hero respectively. Burt Reynolds, too, has never been better. The film's cultural influence is demonstrable by the number of people who will understand a reference to 'banjo territory' - perhaps only Get Carter has done such an effective hatchet-job on a region's tourist industry. I can think of only a handful of movies which put me into such a serious depression after they had finished - the oppressive atmosphere of Se7en is the best comparison I can think of. Although so much of it is excellent of itself, Deliverance is a classic above all because there are no adequate points of comparison with it - it is unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 1810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "The [[Mother]]" [[tells]] of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the [[quietly]] passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and [[daughter]], the [[silent]] [[needs]] she attempts to [[soothe]] in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A somewhat antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The [[Mother]]" does an [[excellent]] job of [[dealing]] with [[uncomfortable]] [[issues]] realistically while avoiding gratuitous sensationalism. [[Will]] play best with more [[mature]] [[audiences]], [[possibly]] [[women]], who may better empathize with the central character, her [[needs]] and [[issues]]. (B+) "The [[Mummy]]" [[narrates]] of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the [[silently]] passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and [[girls]], the [[mute]] [[should]] she attempts to [[placate]] in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A somewhat antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The [[Mom]]" does an [[wondrous]] job of [[addressing]] with [[inconvenient]] [[questions]] realistically while avoiding gratuitous sensationalism. [[Willingness]] play best with more [[adult]] [[audience]], [[presumably]] [[female]], who may better empathize with the central character, her [[requirements]] and [[questions]]. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I tried to watch this movie in a military camp during an overseas mission, and let me tell you, you'll watch anything under those circumstances. Not this piece of sh*t though.

The first five minutes set the tone by weak porn-movie quality acting, weird out-of-the-blue plot twists and unbelievable situations and behavior. It gets worse after that. This movie does not have one single saving grace, and yet it is not bad in a way that would make it funny to watch. It's just horrible. I've seen quite many movies in my life and I'm not one of those snobby know-all critics, I mean I'll enjoy most movies to some extent even if they're bad. This one... man.

Steer _well_ clear of this one, my friend. --------------------------------------------- Result 1812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best of the genre. I saw it twice about 25yrs ago and have not had another opportunity to see it again since then. It rivals the Zatoichi series (also starring Katsu) in exciting swordplay. --------------------------------------------- Result 1813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[Excellent]] film. Suzy Kendall will hold your interest [[throughout]]. Has not been shown on American TV for a decade. One scene that has always stayed with me is the German cavalry gas attack. You will find others. Hope they soon put it on tape. [[Wondrous]] film. Suzy Kendall will hold your interest [[in]]. Has not been shown on American TV for a decade. One scene that has always stayed with me is the German cavalry gas attack. You will find others. Hope they soon put it on tape. --------------------------------------------- Result 1814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Anything]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[sunk]] in the first few seconds with a disclaimer that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [rumor] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most sensational "mysteries."

Okay. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not much of an endorsement). What do we get?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is [[speaking]] from his own experience through these [[characters]]. But what's told is so [[cynical]] and [[ugly]] and [[muddled]], we're [[left]] feeling guilty for [[witnessing]] a bunch of [[hooey]] that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the [[film]] has a [[curious]] madcap quality that I [[found]] more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the [[great]] "Citizen Kane" polishes off the [[relationship]] between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. [[In]] "The Cat's [[Meow]]" we're not ever sure of [[Davies]] [[motives]] for being with Hearst. As [[soon]] as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the [[love]] of Chaplain's [[life]]? [[Or]] is he just [[trying]] to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The [[film]] never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the [[production]] values. There's a glorious recreation of the [[yacht]] and [[period]] [[costumes]]. I got more out of [[looking]] at the [[construction]] of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a [[story]] that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is pure fiction. The disclaimers that [[frame]] the film only [[make]] it all the more [[tentative]] and unsatisfying.

The [[performers]] can't be [[faulted]], although Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only Joanna Lumley rises above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole enterprise rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. [[Something]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[poured]] in the first few seconds with a disclaimer that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [rumor] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most sensational "mysteries."

Okay. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not much of an endorsement). What do we get?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is [[speaks]] from his own experience through these [[nature]]. But what's told is so [[sarcastic]] and [[ghastly]] and [[disconcerted]], we're [[exited]] feeling guilty for [[experiencing]] a bunch of [[hokum]] that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the [[filmmaking]] has a [[unusual]] madcap quality that I [[finds]] more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the [[splendid]] "Citizen Kane" polishes off the [[ties]] between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. [[Throughout]] "The Cat's [[Meows]]" we're not ever sure of [[Davis]] [[motif]] for being with Hearst. As [[early]] as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the [[likes]] of Chaplain's [[vie]]? [[Neither]] is he just [[seek]] to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The [[filmmaking]] never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the [[productivity]] values. There's a glorious recreation of the [[sailing]] and [[deadline]] [[suits]]. I got more out of [[searching]] at the [[build]] of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a [[history]] that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is pure fiction. The disclaimers that [[frames]] the film only [[deliver]] it all the more [[provisional]] and unsatisfying.

The [[artist]] can't be [[failed]], although Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only Joanna Lumley rises above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole enterprise rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I think Dolph Lundgren had [[potential]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[moments]] in his career but he also made some [[poor]] [[choices]] and this is [[definitely]] one of them [[although]] made later in his [[career]]. The [[strange]] thing about Jill The Ripper (or [[Jill]] [[Rips]]...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[thought]] they were making a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be [[complex]] and intelligent when in fact it's [[nothing]] more than shallow, confusing and [[gratuitous]]. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and [[premise]] [[immediately]] make it a B-Movie Porn at very [[best]].

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even [[though]] he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently [[enough]] [[considering]] the [[script]] and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one [[particularly]] stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely [[horrible]] performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and [[gratuitous]] sex games [[including]] a downright [[ridiculously]] hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 I think Dolph Lundgren had [[prospective]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[times]] in his career but he also made some [[poorest]] [[elects]] and this is [[certainly]] one of them [[albeit]] made later in his [[carrera]]. The [[unusual]] thing about Jill The Ripper (or [[Pinocchio]] [[Criticizes]]...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[ideas]] they were making a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be [[knotty]] and intelligent when in fact it's [[none]] more than shallow, confusing and [[unjustified]]. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and [[hypothesis]] [[expeditiously]] make it a B-Movie Porn at very [[optimum]].

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even [[although]] he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently [[adequately]] [[scrutinize]] the [[screenplay]] and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one [[principally]] stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely [[shocking]] performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and [[unreasonable]] sex games [[comprises]] a downright [[shockingly]] hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First off, I would just like to say what a big fan of Bette Midler's I am. Stella is a very good movie with a wonderful cast (Bette Midler, John Goodman, Trini Alvarado, Stephen Collins, Marsha Mason) This is one of my favorite films of all time. It deals with a mother raising a child on her own, she goes through a lot of things that are out of her way to bring up her daughter Jenny played wonderfully by Trini Alvarado. This movie is very good and I suggest that you pick up a copy to watch it. Roger Ebert gave is 3 1/2 stars! And it deserved 4! WONDERFUL! I give it 4 out of 4! --------------------------------------------- Result 1817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] was [[made]] for fans of Dani (and [[Cradle]] of [[Filth]]). I am not one of them. I [[think]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metal]] bandwagon ([[still]], I'm [[generally]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[case]] to [[pay]] for it, I [[convinced]] myself, that the less [[authentic]] something is the more it [[tries]] to be [[convincing]]. Thus I [[assumed]] I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself splatter with a sinister background. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[AWFUL]] camera work and DISGUSTING quality. And that was then (2002), that it looked like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects annoyed me. My disliking evolved. I noticed how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" height) looked in his platform shoes ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head apparently had no skull.) I also found that this movie may have no sense. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOT]] make sense. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[bad]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the worst ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. This [[filmmaking]] was [[brought]] for fans of Dani (and [[Birthplace]] of [[Dirt]]). I am not one of them. I [[believing]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metallurgy]] bandwagon ([[yet]], I'm [[ordinarily]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[cases]] to [[salaried]] for it, I [[persuaded]] myself, that the less [[vera]] something is the more it [[attempt]] to be [[persuade]]. Thus I [[shouldered]] I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself splatter with a sinister background. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[SCARY]] camera work and DISGUSTING quality. And that was then (2002), that it looked like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects annoyed me. My disliking evolved. I noticed how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" height) looked in his platform shoes ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head apparently had no skull.) I also found that this movie may have no sense. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOPE]] make sense. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[unfavourable]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the worst ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Im a huge M Lillard fan that's why I ended up watching this movie. Honestly I doubt that if he wasn't in the movie i would of enjoyed it as much or even watched it but once I did watch it realize the story was pretty decent. A bad ending I must say but I did see it coming. It's a low budget movie and some of the actors weren't really good but all in all I rated this movie 7/10.

The suspense of wondering what Lillard was actually up to was what really keeped me interested in this movie.

Its a good rental!

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[antiques]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and [[tells]] his ambitious [[companion]] and [[specialist]] in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jamie]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and ties him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a [[wealthy]] and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[stupid]] [[acquaintance]] Piece ([[Mark]] Boone Junior), who [[comes]] with his retarded girlfriend that [[believes]] she is from Mars, to compose the [[backup]] team. [[However]], Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues [[Jack]], [[Jamie]] and [[Piece]].

The low [[budget]] "Spanish [[Judges]]" is a [[movie]] with a reasonable [[screenplay]] with an [[awful]] conclusion that wastes a good cast. Valeria Golino is [[astonishingly]] [[beautiful]] but together with the [[good]] [[actor]] Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[save]] the [[stupid]] [[story]]. Further, the scenes that are [[supposed]] to be funny [[unfortunately]] do not [[work]], and actually they are silly and not [[funny]]. My [[vote]] is three.

Title (Brazil): "[[Tudo]] Por Dinheiro" ("All For [[Money]]") The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[antiquities]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and [[says]] his ambitious [[comrade]] and [[specialising]] in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jaime]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and ties him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a [[affluent]] and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[witless]] [[acquaintances]] Piece ([[Dialed]] Boone Junior), who [[happens]] with his retarded girlfriend that [[sees]] she is from Mars, to compose the [[backups]] team. [[Still]], Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues [[Gato]], [[Jaime]] and [[Slice]].

The low [[budgets]] "Spanish [[Richter]]" is a [[flick]] with a reasonable [[scenario]] with an [[abhorrent]] conclusion that wastes a good cast. Valeria Golino is [[marvelously]] [[sumptuous]] but together with the [[alright]] [[protagonist]] Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[savings]] the [[silly]] [[stories]]. Further, the scenes that are [[presumed]] to be funny [[woefully]] do not [[collaborate]], and actually they are silly and not [[amusing]]. My [[votes]] is three.

Title (Brazil): "[[Isso]] Por Dinheiro" ("All For [[Cash]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 1820 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' [[career]] [[came]] to my attention through the '[[Night]] of [[Bad]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician ([[undoubtedly]] one of the [[best]] on our contemporary [[pop]] scene, [[even]] the Dutch [[agree]] on that) tried to be an actor. Whether he should have [[made]] the attempt or not [[cannot]] be [[judged]].

[[In]] '[[Intensive]] Care' he's quite [[likable]], but he seems to be [[uncomfortable]] with the [[flick]] in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than [[mediocre]] story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a [[tedious]] menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the [[least]] [[appealing]]. The couple from Amsterdamned [[could]] have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not [[work]]. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny [[greasy]] pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' [[carrera]] [[became]] to my attention through the '[[Nightly]] of [[Unfavourable]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician ([[indubitably]] one of the [[finest]] on our contemporary [[papa]] scene, [[yet]] the Dutch [[concur]] on that) tried to be an actor. Whether he should have [[effected]] the attempt or not [[notable]] be [[deemed]].

[[Among]] '[[Intense]] Care' he's quite [[congenial]], but he seems to be [[uneasy]] with the [[gesture]] in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than [[lackluster]] story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a [[tiresome]] menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the [[lowest]] [[alluring]]. The couple from Amsterdamned [[wo]] have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not [[cooperate]]. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny [[tallow]] pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] in the [[worst]] [[possible]] circumstance. I'd already [[missed]] 15 minutes when I [[woke]] up to it on an [[international]] [[flight]] between [[Sydney]] and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I [[thought]] [[maybe]] it was a [[movie]] of the [[week]], but [[quickly]] [[became]] [[riveted]] by the performance of the lead actress [[playing]] a [[young]] [[woman]] who's [[child]] had been kidnapped. The premise started taking [[twist]] and turns I didn't see [[coming]] and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight [[guide]] to [[figure]] out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[discovering]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won [[Best]] Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if [[Secret]] [[Sunshine]] is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to [[discover]] more. I [[sawthe]] this [[movie]] in the [[worse]] [[probable]] circumstance. I'd already [[miss]] 15 minutes when I [[awake]] up to it on an [[worldwide]] [[flights]] between [[Sidney]] and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I [[brainchild]] [[conceivably]] it was a [[cinematographic]] of the [[chow]], but [[urgently]] [[was]] [[fascinated]] by the performance of the lead actress [[play]] a [[youths]] [[women]] who's [[children]] had been kidnapped. The premise started taking [[twisting]] and turns I didn't see [[arriving]] and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight [[guidebooks]] to [[silhouette]] out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[detects]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won [[Better]] Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if [[Covert]] [[Sunlight]] is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to [[detection]] more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] The [[Good]] [[Earth]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The [[movie]] is based on the [[novel]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[hated]] that they decided to [[cast]] Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[laughable]] as the farmer's father. He has such a [[heavy]] American [[accent]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[bear]] listening to him speak.

It is a shame that Hollywood could not get past their racist beliefs to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. The [[Alright]] [[Earthly]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The [[filmmaking]] is based on the [[newer]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[detested]] that they decided to [[casting]] Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[ridicule]] as the farmer's father. He has such a [[ponderous]] American [[emphasis]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[xiong]] listening to him speak.

It is a shame that Hollywood could not get past their racist beliefs to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my second time through for A Perfect Spy. I watched it 2 or 3 years ago and liked it. I like it still. It's natural that it gets compared to the beeb's other big Le Carre' series, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Tinker Tailor focuses on the "game" spies play; Perfect Spy gives us the other axis - what kind of person a spy is. There are a number of themes that these movies share, along with others in the genre.

Ambiguity - moral, sexual, interpersonal - which creates a multidimensional space of true vs. false, inside vs. outside, love vs. responsibility. In a way, these characters are happiest when they are being treated the most shabbily by those they love and respect - "backstabbed" in its various nuances.

The theme of fathers and father-figures is also important. One of the most intriguing characters in A Perfect Spy is Rick, the main character Magnus' perhaps ersatz father. Throughout the story he betrays and is betrayed. A rogue who always manages to climb back up the ladder when he's been toppled, who seems impervious to what others think of him, asks Magnus each time they meet, "Do you love your old man?" and never, "Do you love me?" Maybe it says this somewhere else, but A Perfect Spy is a love story.

Another theme is that of malignancy. The nature of the business is to turn others - turn them against their government, against their friends and associates, turn them against their values and beliefs. In each of the Le Carre' movies I have seen, The Spy who Came in From the Cold, Looking Glass War, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Smiley's People, and A Perfect Spy, turning and being turned is the foundation of the tragedy.

Finally, not so much a theme as an artistic touch - in each of these films there is usually only a single gun shot, or perhaps two shots bookending the story. Violence, torture, cruelty are always just beneath the surface. We see their results not as streams of blood or dank prison cells but in the the objects Le Carre''s characters cling to as they are ineluctably sucked down into the morass.

If you haven't seen the films above, and you enjoy A Perfect Spy, you are in for a treat. I'd also recommend The Sandbagger series (Yorkshire TV), the 2nd and 3rd seasons of which begin to reach the level of this kind of complexity. The IPCRESS File and Burial in Berlin are nice, though light weight. For political intrigue try A Very British Coup, House of Cards and Yes, Minister/Yes, Prime Minister.

If only a brit would set his hand to making The Three Kingdoms - there would be a film with intrigue and complexity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1824 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Far from [[providing]] the [[caffeine]] [[kick]] you'd [[expect]] from a [[film]] that [[shares]] its [[name]] with the most energy-boosting of warm beverages, Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[revenge]] [[tale]]. Indeed, if the [[movie]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few [[undesirable]] dregs and [[lacking]] in a lingering [[aftertaste]]. Sporadically it [[hits]] the spot, but otherwise it isn't the hot action-drama it [[hopes]] to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[nurse]] who takes the [[law]] into her own hands and delivers [[hard]] justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that [[hooked]] her [[younger]] [[sister]] into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political [[commentary]] on the plight of urban [[black]] [[youths]] in [[America]] is [[prominent]] in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political [[corruption]] and [[white]] [[establishment]] [[racism]] that [[profits]] and acts as a [[parasite]] off the [[targeted]] Afro-American [[minorities]]. [[Sadly]], the [[timely]] [[messages]] are [[undermined]] by the film's poor quality and [[lack]] of [[focus]]. Coffy's [[ideas]] are [[important]], it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the [[plus]] [[points]] of Coffy is the presence of Blaxploitation [[icon]] Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action [[heroine]] as she [[shotguns]] down the [[scum]] in her [[often]] [[spectacular]] acts of vigilante violence (how do you [[deal]] with a [[house]] full of hoods? [[Drive]] the [[car]] right through the front [[door]]!). It's just a [[shame]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[wasting]] [[time]] squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[possible]]. The low [[budget]] can't have [[helped]], but [[neither]] does the [[fact]] that for a Blaxploitation [[flick]], Coffy lacks groove. [[Just]] as the issues are [[undermined]] by the [[lack]] of quality, [[consequently]] the [[entertainment]] and [[excitement]] are [[also]] skewered by [[moments]] of dullness and [[misdirection]].

The [[total]] [[result]] is workmanlike and wooden. We [[get]] a hip [[heroine]] but not a hip [[movie]]. It's a [[shame]] as Coffy has its [[moments]] and should rightly be regarded as a [[key]] [[film]] in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. Far from [[offered]] the [[coffeemaker]] [[whoop]] you'd [[awaited]] from a [[filmmaking]] that [[share]] its [[denomination]] with the most energy-boosting of warm beverages, Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[retribution]] [[tales]]. Indeed, if the [[filmmaking]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few [[unwelcome]] dregs and [[missing]] in a lingering [[taste]]. Sporadically it [[jolts]] the spot, but otherwise it isn't the hot action-drama it [[expect]] to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[medic]] who takes the [[legislation]] into her own hands and delivers [[tough]] justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that [[hook]] her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political [[comments]] on the plight of urban [[negro]] [[youthful]] in [[American]] is [[notable]] in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political [[bribery]] and [[bianca]] [[creations]] [[ethnic]] that [[gains]] and acts as a [[deadbeat]] off the [[geared]] Afro-American [[minority]]. [[Regrettably]], the [[quick]] [[messaging]] are [[hampered]] by the film's poor quality and [[shortage]] of [[concentrations]]. Coffy's [[thinks]] are [[essential]], it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the [[longer]] [[dots]] of Coffy is the presence of Blaxploitation [[icons]] Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action [[heroin]] as she [[revolvers]] down the [[froth]] in her [[generally]] [[marvellous]] acts of vigilante violence (how do you [[deals]] with a [[households]] full of hoods? [[Driving]] the [[automobiles]] right through the front [[wears]]!). It's just a [[pity]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[losing]] [[period]] squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[achievable]]. The low [[budgets]] can't have [[supporting]], but [[either]] does the [[facto]] that for a Blaxploitation [[movie]], Coffy lacks groove. [[Righteous]] as the issues are [[hindered]] by the [[shortage]] of quality, [[accordingly]] the [[amusement]] and [[exhilaration]] are [[moreover]] skewered by [[times]] of dullness and [[misappropriation]].

The [[aggregate]] [[findings]] is workmanlike and wooden. We [[gets]] a hip [[heroin]] but not a hip [[flick]]. It's a [[ignominy]] as Coffy has its [[times]] and should rightly be regarded as a [[indispensable]] [[cinematographic]] in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. --------------------------------------------- Result 1825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Straight to the point: "The Groove Tube" is one of the most unfunny, unclever and downright horrible films ever made. This "comedy" is so void of anything remotely resembling a trace of wit that it's almost incomprehensible that it was even made. I said almost because there are fans of everything after all.

This film isn't even "good" bad or "enjoyable" bad. To put this movie on the same level of entertainment as "Plan 9" or "Robot Monster" would be a crime to those films. Films like that you can actually watch and get a kick out of. But this film is SO bad, SO poorly made, acted and scripted and SO incredible stale, that there just isn't even a trace of "camp" or "schlock" to be found.

Even though this was made before Saturday Night Live premiered, comparisons were probably inevitable. I'm not a big fan of SNL, but this film is worse than the worst SNL skit you can find. And man, that's BAD. Just to keep the men viewers from leaving, Shapiro throws in a pair of breasts every so often, but poorly-filmed breasts from 1974 aren't going to excite anyone these days. Truthfully this film is so poorly made and is such a sleep-inducing excursion, I doubt if they excited anyone in 1974 either.

A man named Ken Shapiro made this film. I swear to God, any ten-year old with a video camera could have made something funnier and more clever. It's just downright unreal - this is truly an unbelievable film. The "jokes" and "gags" are so infantile that even little boys who like to sneak dad's porno mags out at night won't laugh.

I will give this film one thing - the very last sequence, the "dancing man" sequence, where a guy (Shapiro) on the streets of NYC dances to a tune, is easily the best thing in this horrible film. Not that the "dancing man" sequence is that great either - it definitely has its moments of not being clever as Shapiro desperately tries to fill in the time for the entire song - but it actually was somewhat watchable. The part of this sequence where the cop starts dancing with the man is the one sole trace of cleverness in the entire film. No wonder Shapiro put this sequence last - again, while not so great itself, it easily beats anything else in this "film."

Otherwise, this film is such a complete piece of crap, it's unfathomable as to how an actual human being can be so downright cleverless. The name of this film should have been "Ken Shapiro's Craparama." It's amazing that this was made, but many truly talented filmmakers can't get in. However, I will say that I bet the geniuses at NYU would love this movie. Total garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 1826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Yet]] again, [[early]] morning television proves an [[invaluable]] [[resource]] for [[films]] that I [[otherwise]] [[would]] never have been able to [[track]] down. [[At]] four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin [[recording]] 'The [[Informer]] (1935),' my fourth [[film]] from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[excellent]] one at that. Set during the Irish [[Civil]] [[War]] in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley [[Nichols]] from the novel of the same name by [[Liam]] O'Flaherty. [[Though]] he was born in the United States, and is most [[renowned]] for his "Americana" [[pictures]], both of Ford's [[parents]] were Irish, which [[explains]] the director's decision to direct the film. [[Victor]] McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who [[informs]] on an [[old]] [[friend]], Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to [[claim]] the £20 reward for his girlfriend, [[Katie]] ([[Margot]] Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his [[attempted]] arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were [[members]], begins to [[investigate]] the traitor behind the [[incident]], [[every]] clue bringing them [[closer]] and [[closer]] to the [[real]] culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with [[guilt]] for his friend's untimely [[death]], and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that [[rivals]] [[Don]] Birnam in 'The [[Lost]] Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious [[volumes]] of alcohol, [[trapped]] in a [[vicious]] [[little]] [[circle]] of [[depression]], his [[extravagant]] [[spending]] [[captures]] the attention of the [[investigating]] IRA [[members]]. [[For]] the one [[time]] in his [[life]], Gypo [[finds]] himself surrounded by [[admirers]] ([[including]] an [[amusing]] J.[[M]]. Kerrigan), who [[enthusiastically]] clap him on the back and christen him "[[King]] Gypo" for his physical might. [[However]], it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the [[man]], and are [[simple]] showing him attention to [[exploit]] him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of [[irony]], the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. [[Nonetheless]] again, [[precocious]] morning television proves an [[precious]] [[resources]] for [[movie]] that I [[alternately]] [[should]] never have been able to [[trajectory]] down. [[For]] four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin [[register]] 'The [[Squealer]] (1935),' my fourth [[cinematography]] from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[wondrous]] one at that. Set during the Irish [[Civilian]] [[Wars]] in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley [[Nicholls]] from the novel of the same name by [[Llam]] O'Flaherty. [[If]] he was born in the United States, and is most [[famous]] for his "Americana" [[imaging]], both of Ford's [[parent]] were Irish, which [[elucidate]] the director's decision to direct the film. [[Vittorio]] McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who [[informed]] on an [[ancient]] [[boyfriend]], Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to [[claims]] the £20 reward for his girlfriend, [[Katharine]] ([[Mrs]] Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his [[strived]] arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were [[member]], begins to [[examines]] the traitor behind the [[event]], [[any]] clue bringing them [[nearer]] and [[nearer]] to the [[authentic]] culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with [[blame]] for his friend's untimely [[mortality]], and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that [[contenders]] [[Donate]] Birnam in 'The [[Outof]] Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious [[quantities]] of alcohol, [[stuck]] in a [[sadistic]] [[petit]] [[circling]] of [[doldrums]], his [[excessive]] [[expense]] [[apprehended]] the attention of the [[examining]] IRA [[member]]. [[Per]] the one [[moment]] in his [[vida]], Gypo [[found]] himself surrounded by [[stalkers]] ([[encompass]] an [[funny]] J.[[metres]]. Kerrigan), who [[eagerly]] clap him on the back and christen him "[[Emperor]] Gypo" for his physical might. [[Still]], it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the [[bloke]], and are [[mere]] showing him attention to [[exploited]] him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of [[mockery]], the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. --------------------------------------------- Result 1827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh what a condescending movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this [[movie]] [[tries]] to be a deep [[social]] [[commentary]] on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The plot is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative plot contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned [[baby]] left in the [[weeds]], a gang of [[thugs]] intimidating a [[lawyer]], a [[guy]] [[flying]] through the night [[sky]] over the city, a kid at summer [[camp]].

And through all these events, the one [[constant]] is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the [[dialogue]], as characters compare [[notes]] on their [[life]] experiences. One character tells another: "When you [[sit]] on the edge of that thing (the [[Grand]] Canyon), you [[realize]] what a [[joke]] we people are; ... those [[rocks]] are [[laughing]] at me, I could tell, me and my [[worries]]; it's real humorous to that [[Grand]] Canyon".

And another [[character]] pontificates about the [[meaning]] of it all: "There's a [[gulf]] in this [[country]], an ever [[widening]] [[abyss]] between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this [[big]] [[hole]] has [[opened]] up in the [[ground]], as [[big]] as the ... [[Grand]] Canyon, and what's [[come]] pouring out ... is an [[eruption]] of [[rage]], and the [[rage]] [[creates]] violence ...".

Aside from the [[horribly]] unnatural and [[forced]] [[dialogue]], aside from the [[shallow]], smarmy [[characters]], aside from the dumb plot, the story's [[pace]] is agonizingly [[slow]]. Acting is [[uninspired]] and perfunctory. The film's tone is [[smug]] and self-satisfied, in the script's [[contempt]] for [[viewers]].

This was a [[film]] project [[approved]] by Hollywood [[suits]] who fancy themselves as [[omnipotent]] gurus, [[looking]] down from on [[high]]. They [[think]] their film will be a [[startling]] [[revelation]] to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, [[eager]] to [[learn]] about the [[real]] [[meaning]] of American [[social]] [[change]]. Oh what a condescending movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this [[film]] [[seeks]] to be a deep [[sociable]] [[commentaries]] on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The plot is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative plot contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned [[honey]] left in the [[herb]], a gang of [[bandits]] intimidating a [[attorney]], a [[boys]] [[hovering]] through the night [[skye]] over the city, a kid at summer [[campground]].

And through all these events, the one [[nonstop]] is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the [[dialogues]], as characters compare [[note]] on their [[vie]] experiences. One character tells another: "When you [[seated]] on the edge of that thing (the [[Vast]] Canyon), you [[reaching]] what a [[prank]] we people are; ... those [[shakes]] are [[giggling]] at me, I could tell, me and my [[fears]]; it's real humorous to that [[Great]] Canyon".

And another [[personage]] pontificates about the [[meanings]] of it all: "There's a [[abyss]] in this [[nationals]], an ever [[extending]] [[chasm]] between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this [[large]] [[orifice]] has [[opening]] up in the [[terrestrial]], as [[prodigious]] as the ... [[Prodigious]] Canyon, and what's [[arrived]] pouring out ... is an [[volcanic]] of [[fury]], and the [[fury]] [[generates]] violence ...".

Aside from the [[excruciatingly]] unnatural and [[compelled]] [[discussions]], aside from the [[superficial]], smarmy [[character]], aside from the dumb plot, the story's [[rhythm]] is agonizingly [[sluggish]]. Acting is [[unimaginative]] and perfunctory. The film's tone is [[petulant]] and self-satisfied, in the script's [[scorn]] for [[onlookers]].

This was a [[cinema]] project [[approving]] by Hollywood [[outfits]] who fancy themselves as [[almighty]] gurus, [[researching]] down from on [[highest]]. They [[reckon]] their film will be a [[dazzling]] [[epiphany]] to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, [[impatient]] to [[learns]] about the [[veritable]] [[meanings]] of American [[sociable]] [[shifts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into [[laughter]] at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its [[best]] it's so good. This is one dated [[movie]]. It's also a [[classic]], if a [[tarnished]] one. I'm not [[inclined]] to [[laugh]] at people anyway, on [[principle]], and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The [[Informer]] to my mind is a [[little]] like giggling at an idiot savant when he [[dribbles]] his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his [[game]] he is also a [[true]] savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and [[yet]] it boasts [[splendid]] photography, some fine acting, a [[wonderful]] score and a good, decent [[simple]] [[story]]. [[In]] the end, which I won't [[give]] away, [[politics]], religion and [[psychology]] [[come]] together, in a church, in such a [[way]] as to [[make]] the scene [[seem]] corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the [[Irish]]) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that [[way]], they do [[say]] things like that. Not [[everyone]] is hip, and it [[may]] not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people [[today]] so much superior to those of [[seventy]] or eighty [[years]] [[ago]]? And in what [[way]]? I don't think so. We're just [[different]]. [[Now]] go watch the movie. To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into [[smile]] at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its [[bestest]] it's so good. This is one dated [[kino]]. It's also a [[typical]], if a [[smudged]] one. I'm not [[angled]] to [[laughter]] at people anyway, on [[tenets]], and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The [[Snitch]] to my mind is a [[petite]] like giggling at an idiot savant when he [[dribbled]] his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his [[gaming]] he is also a [[authentic]] savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and [[even]] it boasts [[funky]] photography, some fine acting, a [[excellent]] score and a good, decent [[easy]] [[histories]]. [[At]] the end, which I won't [[lend]] away, [[policies]], religion and [[psyche]] [[coming]] together, in a church, in such a [[manner]] as to [[deliver]] the scene [[seems]] corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the [[Ireland]]) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that [[route]], they do [[said]] things like that. Not [[someone]] is hip, and it [[maggio]] not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people [[yesterday]] so much superior to those of [[seventies]] or eighty [[ages]] [[earlier]]? And in what [[manner]]? I don't think so. We're just [[various]]. [[Presently]] go watch the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What [[seemed]] at first just another introverted French [[flick]] [[offering]] no more than baleful [[sentiment]] [[became]] for me, on second [[viewing]], a [[genuinely]] [[insightful]] and [[quite]] [[satisfying]] presentation.

Spoiler of [[sorts]] follows.

[[Poor]] [[Cedric]]; he [[apparently]] didn't know what [[hit]] him. [[Poor]] [[audience]]; we were at first [[caught]] up in what seemed a [[really]] [[beautiful]] and romantic [[story]] only to be [[led]] back and forth into the dark [[reality]] of mismatch. These two [[guys]] just didn't belong [[together]] from their first [[ambiguous]] [[encounter]]. As much as [[Mathieu]] and [[Cedric]] were sexually [[attracted]] to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional [[tie]] made it [[impossible]] for [[Mathieu]], an intellectual being, to [[find]] [[fulfillment]] in sharing life with [[someone]] [[whose]] sensibilities were more [[attuned]] to [[carnival]] [[festivities]] and romps on the beach.

On a [[purely]] technical note, I loved the camera [[action]] in this [[film]]. [[Subtitles]] were [[totally]] [[unnecessary]], even [[though]] my French is "presque rien." I [[could]] watch it again without the [[annoying]] English [[translation]] and [[enjoy]] it [[even]] more. This was a polished, very professionally [[made]] motion [[picture]]. [[Though]] [[many]] scenes [[seem]] [[superfluous]], I [[rate]] it nine out of [[ten]]. What [[appeared]] at first just another introverted French [[gesture]] [[offered]] no more than baleful [[feeling]] [[came]] for me, on second [[visualizing]], a [[actually]] [[perceptive]] and [[rather]] [[satisfactory]] presentation.

Spoiler of [[genus]] follows.

[[Pauper]] [[Jerome]]; he [[visibly]] didn't know what [[slapped]] him. [[Pauper]] [[viewers]]; we were at first [[apprehended]] up in what seemed a [[genuinely]] [[brilliant]] and romantic [[conte]] only to be [[headed]] back and forth into the dark [[realist]] of mismatch. These two [[guy]] just didn't belong [[jointly]] from their first [[unclear]] [[confrontation]]. As much as [[Mads]] and [[Jerome]] were sexually [[attracts]] to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional [[tying]] made it [[unable]] for [[Matthew]], an intellectual being, to [[found]] [[realization]] in sharing life with [[anyone]] [[who]] sensibilities were more [[tailored]] to [[circus]] [[festivals]] and romps on the beach.

On a [[merely]] technical note, I loved the camera [[efforts]] in this [[movie]]. [[Subtitle]] were [[abundantly]] [[useless]], even [[if]] my French is "presque rien." I [[wo]] watch it again without the [[galling]] English [[translating]] and [[enjoying]] it [[yet]] more. This was a polished, very professionally [[brought]] motion [[photograph]]. [[Nevertheless]] [[various]] scenes [[appears]] [[useless]], I [[rates]] it nine out of [[tio]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This film screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[theater]] as part of the SXSW [[Film]] [[Festival]]. We were [[graced]] with the presence of [[director]] [[Mike]] Binder and stars Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle who [[took]] audience questions after the [[film]]. It is a remarkable and powerful film about what it is like to lose yourself and [[begin]] to find your [[way]] back. The performances are [[phenomenal]] and the story manages to be both [[tragic]] and funny in a [[way]] that is all too [[rare]]. (The trailer for the [[film]] tries a little too [[hard]] to [[emphasize]] the comedic aspects.)

This is a breakout role for [[Adam]] Sandler. [[While]] he has [[begun]] to transition to more [[dramatic]] [[roles]] with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a [[significant]] step forward for him as a dramatic [[actor]]. He [[deserves]] an [[Oscar]] nomination as he [[continues]] down to [[transition]] to more [[dramatic]] roles as [[Tom]] Hanks did and Jim [[Carrey]] is [[also]] doing. [[In]] this role, he [[seemed]] to be trying to channel Dustin [[Hoffman]] in Rain [[Man]]. [[Although]] playing an autistic [[man]] is certainly very [[different]] than Sandler's [[traumatized]] character, both [[characters]] for [[different]] [[reasons]] are [[trapped]] in their own [[worlds]] of child-like [[isolation]] and [[confusion]].

[[Don]] Cheadle's performance is [[less]] [[surprising]], but just as good. After [[Hotel]] Rwanda and [[Crash]], we've [[come]] to [[expect]] [[remarkable]] nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the [[qualities]] of sincerity and [[honesty]] that [[comes]] through in this role. But he, too, is [[also]] broken and struggling if not in the such [[profound]] [[ways]] as Sandler's [[character]]. Cheadle is struggling with [[difficulties]] in both his [[marriage]] and in his professional life as a [[dentist]]. [[Together]] the characters played by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the way that true friends [[often]] do (in a [[way]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have [[lost]] and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best [[major]] studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is [[almost]] another [[character]] in the plot is wonderful. The filming in the streets of New [[York]] - a [[city]] that suffered a [[great]] [[tragedy]] and has [[also]] had to [[heal]] itself - is [[also]] [[quite]] [[beautiful]]. The supporting roles by Jada Pinkett Smith, Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and [[Mike]] Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, [[healing]], male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is almost hypnotic as it draws you into the lives of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it [[made]] more character-driven charming films like Reign over Me. This film screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[drama]] as part of the SXSW [[Flick]] [[Celebratory]]. We were [[flattered]] with the presence of [[headmaster]] [[Mick]] Binder and stars Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle who [[taken]] audience questions after the [[cinema]]. It is a remarkable and powerful film about what it is like to lose yourself and [[begins]] to find your [[manner]] back. The performances are [[wondrous]] and the story manages to be both [[dire]] and funny in a [[camino]] that is all too [[few]]. (The trailer for the [[flick]] tries a little too [[difficult]] to [[highlight]] the comedic aspects.)

This is a breakout role for [[Adams]] Sandler. [[Although]] he has [[launches]] to transition to more [[noteworthy]] [[functions]] with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a [[cannot]] step forward for him as a dramatic [[actress]]. He [[deserve]] an [[Oskar]] nomination as he [[persisted]] down to [[transitions]] to more [[impressive]] roles as [[Tum]] Hanks did and Jim [[Kari]] is [[likewise]] doing. [[Onto]] this role, he [[looked]] to be trying to channel Dustin [[Hoffmann]] in Rain [[Men]]. [[Despite]] playing an autistic [[guy]] is certainly very [[disparate]] than Sandler's [[scarred]] character, both [[traits]] for [[several]] [[motivation]] are [[stuck]] in their own [[universe]] of child-like [[isolate]] and [[mess]].

[[Donated]] Cheadle's performance is [[lesser]] [[impressive]], but just as good. After [[Motel]] Rwanda and [[Crashes]], we've [[arriving]] to [[awaited]] [[dramatic]] nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the [[qualifications]] of sincerity and [[sincerity]] that [[arrives]] through in this role. But he, too, is [[similarly]] broken and struggling if not in the such [[deep]] [[avenues]] as Sandler's [[characters]]. Cheadle is struggling with [[difficulty]] in both his [[marries]] and in his professional life as a [[dentistry]]. [[Jointly]] the characters played by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the way that true friends [[frequently]] do (in a [[route]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have [[forfeited]] and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best [[sizable]] studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is [[hardly]] another [[trait]] in the plot is wonderful. The filming in the streets of New [[Yorke]] - a [[town]] that suffered a [[huge]] [[drama]] and has [[similarly]] had to [[cure]] itself - is [[apart]] [[rather]] [[admirable]]. The supporting roles by Jada Pinkett Smith, Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and [[Mich]] Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, [[heal]], male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is almost hypnotic as it draws you into the lives of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it [[accomplished]] more character-driven charming films like Reign over Me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once I watched The Tenant and interpreted it as a horror movie. It uses many of the tropes of the genre: the sinister apartment, suspicious neighbors, apparitions, mysteries, hallucinations. The life of the hero, Trelkovsky, seemed surrounded by evil, secret forces trying to drive him mad.

Last time I watched it I challenged this initial interpretation. If this movie is a horror movie, it's only horror in the sense that a Kafka novel is horror. In fact this movie can be understood on a literal level as a lonely man slowly becoming crazy without any external influence.

Polanski made in his career three movies dealing with madness: Repulsion, which I don't particularly like because the development of madness in the heroine never convinced me; Rosemary's Baby, in which the heroine is driven mad by evil forces; and The Tenant, which might be the best study of paranoia ever made in cinema.

Trelkovsky is a young man who rents an apartment in which a woman killed herself. He becomes obsessed with her and slowly starts becoming her: he wears her clothes, puts on makeup, talks like her. But is he being possessed by a spirit, or is he just letting his wild imagination get the best of him? It's this hesitation between what is real and imaginary, and which Polanski never resolves, that makes this such a fascinating movie. Many events in the movie can be attributed to the supernatural as easily as they can be to normal causes, and it's up to the viewer to decide what to believe in.

Although this is not my favorite Polanski movie, it is nevertheless a good example of his ability to create suspense and portray madness in very convincing terms. And technically speaking, it's a marvel too. Suffice to say he collaborates with film composer Philippe Sarde and legendary director of photography Sven Nykvist (Bergman's DP) in the making of this movie. A slow pacing and sometimes uninteresting segments may make this movie difficult to enjoy, but it's an experience nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 1832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was two and a quarter excruciating hours. Someone please tell me what the point was?

I mean, I understand the historical setting. It's supposed to be about a ragtag group of Confederate bushwhackers (terrorists?) on the Missouri-Kansas frontier, taking revenge against all northern sympathizers and abolitionists during the U.S. Civil War. But aside from gratuitous violence there wasn't really much of a point to this movie. Perhaps it was a political statement? That war is really nothing much more than gratuitous violence? If that was the point it was done quite well, but I don't think that was the point. I think the producers really thought they were making a worthwhile movie here, but as far as I was concerned there was a complete lack of any plot. It seemed like I was watching a paperback novel come to life, with the characters looking like what you would see on the covers of such novels.

This movie should be burned along with some of the towns this gang torched! --------------------------------------------- Result 1833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full House was and still is a great show. It's a good show for people of all ages and is also a good family show. There really aren't any shows like it anymore. The kids are very cute and even though it's a bit cheesy, it's still good, especially for anyone who watched it when they were a kid. I would love to see the cast interviewed now. Anyone that would like to see interviews of the cast, kind of like a where are they now type thing for the special features of the DVD, should go to the Petition spot website and sign a petition titled Full House Reunion on DVD as there is a petition for this in hopes that the cast may want to do it. Yay for Full House! --------------------------------------------- Result 1834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This [[movie]] can be labeled as a study [[case]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unhealthy]] and non-artistic lust for [[anything]] that might be [[termed]] as caco-imagery. The [[author]] lives with the [[impression]] that his [[sanctimonious]] revolt against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[region]] of Europe", "I don't believe one iota in the birds flu", "[[Romanian]] people steal because they are poor; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[close]] to a [[responsible]] moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not [[enough]] to pose as a righteous [[person]] - you [[also]] need a modicum of professionalism, talent and [[intelligence]] to [[transpose]] this stance into an artistic [[product]]. Fatefully, "The [[Foreign]] Legion" shows as much acumen as a [[family]] video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly [[wetting]] himself in front of the guests. The [[script]] is chaotic and [[incoherent]], [[randomly]] bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an [[illiterate]] attempt to [[suggest]] some [[kind]] of a [[story]]. The [[direction]] is [[pathetically]] dilettante - the so-called "[[director]]" is [[unable]] to build up at least a [[mediocre]] mise-en-scene, his [[shots]] are annoyingly [[awkward]], and any sense of storytelling shines by [[total]] [[absence]]. (Of course, any comment is [[forced]] to [[stop]] at this level; it [[would]] be [[ridiculous]] to [[mention]] [[concepts]] as "cinematographic language", "[[means]] of [[expression]]" or "style"). The acting is [[positively]] "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the [[exception]] of... paradoxically, the [[soccer]] goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a [[genuine]] [[freshness]], but she is [[compromised]] by the [[amateurish]] [[directions]] [[given]] by Daneliuc.

The most [[serious]] side of this [[offense]] to decent [[cinema]] is the fact that the [[production]] received a hefty [[financing]] from the national [[budget]], via C.N.C. (the National [[Cinematography]] Council). The fact that long-time-dead [[old]] dinosaurs [[like]] Daneliuc are [[still]] [[thirsty]] for the [[government]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through [[natural]] selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. This [[filmmaking]] can be labeled as a study [[example]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unhygienic]] and non-artistic lust for [[algo]] that might be [[called]] as caco-imagery. The [[auteur]] lives with the [[feeling]] that his [[moralistic]] revolt against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[districts]] of Europe", "I don't believe one iota in the birds flu", "[[Rumanian]] people steal because they are poor; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[nearer]] to a [[answerable]] moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not [[sufficiently]] to pose as a righteous [[persona]] - you [[similarly]] need a modicum of professionalism, talent and [[intellect]] to [[transposed]] this stance into an artistic [[commodities]]. Fatefully, "The [[Foreigner]] Legion" shows as much acumen as a [[families]] video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly [[mooring]] himself in front of the guests. The [[screenplay]] is chaotic and [[counterintuitive]], [[casually]] bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an [[illiteracy]] attempt to [[suggests]] some [[sorts]] of a [[tale]]. The [[directorate]] is [[ridiculously]] dilettante - the so-called "[[headmaster]]" is [[impossible]] to build up at least a [[lackluster]] mise-en-scene, his [[punches]] are annoyingly [[tricky]], and any sense of storytelling shines by [[entire]] [[lacks]]. (Of course, any comment is [[obliged]] to [[halt]] at this level; it [[could]] be [[nonsense]] to [[mentioning]] [[notions]] as "cinematographic language", "[[modes]] of [[expressions]]" or "style"). The acting is [[favorably]] "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the [[exemption]] of... paradoxically, the [[football]] goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a [[veritable]] [[coldness]], but she is [[jeopardized]] by the [[unprofessional]] [[directives]] [[awarded]] by Daneliuc.

The most [[weighty]] side of this [[crime]] to decent [[filmmaking]] is the fact that the [[productivity]] received a hefty [[financials]] from the national [[budgets]], via C.N.C. (the National [[Filmmaking]] Council). The fact that long-time-dead [[antigua]] dinosaurs [[iike]] Daneliuc are [[however]] [[lust]] for the [[administrations]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through [[naturel]] selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. --------------------------------------------- Result 1835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Warning: mild [[spoilers]].

The [[story]] of Joseph Smith [[stands]] out as an [[amazing]] - even [[moving]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[movie]] portrays events in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true [[Church]] of Jesus [[Christ]] on the earth. I've so far [[seen]] the movie twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene [[helped]] to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was [[interestingly]] portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and [[moving]] when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie [[masterfully]] portrays [[simultaneously]] the [[joy]] and [[growth]] of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. Warning: mild [[vandals]].

The [[history]] of Joseph Smith [[standing]] out as an [[fabulous]] - even [[relocating]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[flick]] portrays events in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true [[Religious]] of Jesus [[Jesus]] on the earth. I've so far [[noticed]] the movie twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene [[supporting]] to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was [[suspiciously]] portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and [[shifting]] when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie [[artfully]] portrays [[concurrently]] the [[glee]] and [[increase]] of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 1836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simply, one of the funiest movies i've ever seen. It's a parody of crime-life, parody of everything that represents the Chicago 1930.- There is no realy need to underestimate this movie because rating is under 5. Its a opinion of a mass, and mass is hypnotized. Who decide to watch it - it will regret, Who decide not to watch it - will regret more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I own Ralph Bakshis forgotten masterpiece Fire & Ice on an old OOP rental videotape.

Well for one thing, this is better than any other Conan-esque film you'll ever see. Sure, it's cheesy, but who cares? It stood the test of time, and the only way it started to look cheesy is in comparisons to modern fantasy epics like LOTR:FOTR (though I love that film.)

The plot goes like this: After a battle between Fire & Ice, a kings daughter is kidnapped by Jarols (Ice) subhuman creatures, while a sole survivor of a victimized village rescues her.

Yeah it doesn't sound as a original as Nurse Betty, but that's not the point. It is really to bring to life an interesting idea of a world of two enemies: Fire & Ice. And it succeeds.

As for the action scenes: superb. They are well handled, have terrific suspence, and have plenty of loud noises. Just check out the climatic battle, now THAT'S an ending!

The acting and dialogue: competent. Really. They aren't gonna be nominated for an Oscar, but they are OK and don't get on your nerves.

The animation is quite good. Shot on 3D and rotoscoped (I THINK), it looks pretty good. A lot of the backgrounds look really detailed and well drawn, and although the character designs feel a little 1-dimentional, they are OK.

Overall, this is a fine neglected little gem and will entertain you more than any of the superfical "entertainment". 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Okay]], so the [[first]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects [[way]], but from the [[beginning]], [[Hidden]] [[Frontier]] has [[given]] [[consistently]] [[good]] story lines and performances, and have [[always]] been [[willing]] to mistakes they've [[made]]. They [[advice]] people to [[see]] [[newer]] [[episodes]] [[first]], so they can [[see]] just how good the [[show]] is, and [[understand]] how much it has [[changed]] [[since]] the [[first]] [[episodes]]. The [[cast]] have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[shows]] on-screen.

The [[influx]] of [[guest]] [[actors]] who make their [[mark]] on the [[show]] and with [[fans]] attests also to the [[show]], as the [[story]] lines go from [[strength]] to strength. The show has [[pushed]] [[barriers]] with its [[various]] story lines - [[depression]], [[drug]] addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[wrong]] [[way]], but that is what [[Star]] [[Trek]] is and was all about. It [[portrays]] those story lines in a smart and [[emotional]] way, [[dealing]] with them [[subtly]] and [[smoothly]].

Yes, they have [[used]] some [[characters]] from [[Trek]] [[history]], but they have [[done]] them justice - [[characters]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[vastly]] underused in the [[show]], had a rebirth in the [[New]] Frontier books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when [[Peter]] David when more towards [[wild]] [[fantasy]] [[versus]] [[serious]] sci-fi, and HF [[shows]] those [[characters]] in a [[completely]] [[different]] light, which [[serves]] them better.

The site [[also]] [[allows]] [[fans]] to [[interact]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[get]] to know the people [[involved]]. They [[release]] bloopers for [[every]] episode, so the [[fans]] can see what a [[laugh]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[dedication]] that [[would]] [[make]] [[many]] professional actors wide-eyed in shock!

What this series, now drawing to a [[close]] after 7 years, has [[accomplished]] on such a [[limited]] amount of resources is [[nothing]] short of [[amazing]] - bringing people [[together]], inspiring others to do the same. HF will live for a [[long]] time after it [[ends]], as long as people still enjoy the [[reason]] it [[started]] in the first place. [[Verywell]], so the [[frst]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects [[route]], but from the [[launching]], [[Ulterior]] [[Border]] has [[yielded]] [[continually]] [[buena]] story lines and performances, and have [[permanently]] been [[desirous]] to mistakes they've [[effected]]. They [[consulting]] people to [[consults]] [[novel]] [[bouts]] [[firstly]], so they can [[consults]] just how good the [[illustrating]] is, and [[fathom]] how much it has [[amended]] [[because]] the [[frst]] [[bouts]]. The [[casting]] have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[illustrates]] on-screen.

The [[surge]] of [[invited]] [[actresses]] who make their [[brands]] on the [[illustrating]] and with [[followers]] attests also to the [[shows]], as the [[stories]] lines go from [[kraft]] to strength. The show has [[shoved]] [[obstruction]] with its [[assorted]] story lines - [[slump]], [[medicine]] addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[mistake]] [[pathways]], but that is what [[Stars]] [[Hiking]] is and was all about. It [[describes]] those story lines in a smart and [[sentimental]] way, [[addressing]] with them [[finely]] and [[mildly]].

Yes, they have [[use]] some [[nature]] from [[Hike]] [[stories]], but they have [[doing]] them justice - [[features]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[extremely]] underused in the [[display]], had a rebirth in the [[Novel]] Frontier books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when [[Pieter]] David when more towards [[feral]] [[utopia]] [[vs]] [[gravest]] sci-fi, and HF [[exhibitions]] those [[nature]] in a [[absolutely]] [[several]] light, which [[serving]] them better.

The site [[similarly]] [[allowed]] [[amateurs]] to [[communicate]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[obtain]] to know the people [[participating]]. They [[released]] bloopers for [[any]] episode, so the [[amateurs]] can see what a [[laughs]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[pledge]] that [[should]] [[deliver]] [[myriad]] professional actors wide-eyed in shock!

What this series, now drawing to a [[shuts]] after 7 years, has [[made]] on such a [[curtailed]] amount of resources is [[anything]] short of [[striking]] - bringing people [[jointly]], inspiring others to do the same. HF will live for a [[longer]] time after it [[culminates]], as long as people still enjoy the [[rationale]] it [[opened]] in the first place. --------------------------------------------- Result 1839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] After seeing the [[terrible]], [[terrible]], terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I [[knew]] I had to [[see]] this as [[soon]] as I [[heard]] about it.

Pressing play to view the [[trailer]] I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a GREATLY put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! After seeing the [[abominable]], [[atrocious]], terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I [[overheard]] I had to [[seeing]] this as [[quickly]] as I [[overheard]] about it.

Pressing play to view the [[camper]] I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a GREATLY put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! --------------------------------------------- Result 1840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A [[repressed]] housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, [[whose]] [[body]] double [[treats]]/horrifies us with an extreme [[closeup]] of her delicates) is sexually [[bored]] by her husband and decides to branch-out. This [[directly]] [[results]] in a string of [[murders]] that [[soon]] involve a high-class [[prostitute]] ([[Nancy]] Allen, [[clearly]] I am in the wrong [[business]] if SHE can [[bring]] [[home]] $600 a [[night]]) and her [[psychologist]] ([[Michael]] Caine). [[If]] you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "[[pay]] homage to") Hitchcock, watch "[[Sisters]]" [[instead]] of this. "Dressed to [[Kill]]," while [[loaded]] with [[style]] and technical [[skill]], is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the [[displeasure]] of [[sitting]] through. The [[plot]] is absurd and [[tired]]. It does [[feature]] some [[surprisingly]] effective [[jump]] scares and nasty graphic [[murder]] sequences that should [[please]] any [[horror]] fan, as [[long]] as they can [[get]] past the [[silly]] [[story]] [[line]], that [[must]] have been dated even in 1980. A [[suppressed]] housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, [[who]] [[bodies]] double [[deals]]/horrifies us with an extreme [[turnoff]] of her delicates) is sexually [[drilled]] by her husband and decides to branch-out. This [[immediately]] [[conclusions]] in a string of [[homicide]] that [[swiftly]] involve a high-class [[prostitution]] ([[Juventus]] Allen, [[evidently]] I am in the wrong [[firms]] if SHE can [[bringing]] [[house]] $600 a [[nighttime]]) and her [[shrink]] ([[Michele]] Caine). [[Unless]] you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "[[paid]] homage to") Hitchcock, watch "[[Siblings]]" [[alternatively]] of this. "Dressed to [[Murder]]," while [[loading]] with [[elegance]] and technical [[ability]], is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the [[discontent]] of [[seated]] through. The [[intrigue]] is absurd and [[knackered]]. It does [[features]] some [[marvelously]] effective [[leap]] scares and nasty graphic [[homicide]] sequences that should [[invites]] any [[abomination]] fan, as [[largo]] as they can [[gets]] past the [[farcical]] [[conte]] [[bloodline]], that [[should]] have been dated even in 1980. --------------------------------------------- Result 1841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is a [[great]] documentary [[film]]. [[Any]] fan of [[car]] [[racing]] should own a copy of this [[outstanding]] film. [[Director]] "[[Stephen]] Low" did a [[great]] job,as well as the main [[stars]] of the [[film]], [[Father]] & [[Son]], Mario & Michael Andretti. The [[DVD]] [[looks]] & sounds [[amazing]]. And [[best]] of all it's IMAX! [[Great]] [[home]] theater test [[disc]]. This is a [[huge]] documentary [[movie]]. [[Every]] fan of [[motors]] [[races]] should own a copy of this [[wondrous]] film. [[Headmaster]] "[[Steven]] Low" did a [[large]] job,as well as the main [[star]] of the [[movie]], [[Fathers]] & [[Yarns]], Mario & Michael Andretti. The [[DVDS]] [[seems]] & sounds [[fantastic]]. And [[bestest]] of all it's IMAX! [[Grand]] [[house]] theater test [[discs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was [[NOT]] a [[good]] [[movie]]. I honestly [[cant]] say that I enjoyed this [[movie]] at all. Of course It is [[effective]] in its way of being a shocking, [[realistic]], twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I found it to be very [[boring]] (and not as gory as i [[hoped]]). And also I found that the torturers were very [[annoying]], when they [[talked]] and loughed trying to sound tough all the [[time]], that [[ruined]] it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX [[cos]] they are awesome. I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was [[NAH]] a [[buena]] [[cinematographic]]. I honestly [[becuase]] say that I enjoyed this [[filmmaking]] at all. Of course It is [[efficacious]] in its way of being a shocking, [[pragmatic]], twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I found it to be very [[dull]] (and not as gory as i [[desired]]). And also I found that the torturers were very [[exasperating]], when they [[mentioned]] and loughed trying to sound tough all the [[times]], that [[thrashed]] it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX [[koos]] they are awesome. --------------------------------------------- Result 1843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sarafina was a fun movie, and some of the songs were really great. Sarafina was very entertaining. I don't normally like music things like this, but the singing was not lame like it looked like on the box. The movie was useful for learning about history because it was an interesting perspective of the Soweto rioting of 1976. It showed you things from the perspective of the students in the rioting and showed you that they were real characters. Because you got to see them as real characters this makes you like them more as an audience, and makes you more sympathetic to them as totally the victims of the white government, who you can not sympathise with. The singing of the students is correct because we know from accounts that the students in the riot were singing and dancing before it became violent. The clothing of the students in Sarafina is very similar to the clothing shown in photos from Soweto. They made the movie actually in Soweto, which is why it looks very accurate in many parts. All these things make the film more accurate for someone using it to learn about aparthied. As viewers we must be critical of the way the history of Apartheid was presented. As I said before, you become sympathetic to the students - this makes it potentially less reliable and objective. Also, it changes some of the details from other accounts. In Sarafina it turns to chaos when the policeman comes into their classroom and shoots the students. The police and army were very aggressive at Soweto, but this is probably an exaggerated event. The police and army did shoot students, but there is not evidence of them going into schools and executing people like this. The fighting was more in the streets and had looting and crime. This is done in the movie probably to make you feel more sorry for the school students. The movie would have been more useful if it had some different information about aparthied. The teacher was arrested for being against the government, and the mum goes to work in a white persons house. But there is not any information about the government and why they were doing it or any details about the racist policies and laws. -By George S, Chris and Finlay --------------------------------------------- Result 1844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I backed it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the [[Rape]] Revenge [[movie]] has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," [[though]] making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of [[failure]] is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't [[help]], but the sequence is just too [[damn]] long and [[pointless]]. It [[destroys]] any [[momentum]] and [[investment]] in the lead [[character]] set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I backed it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the [[Raping]] Revenge [[filmmaking]] has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," [[if]] making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of [[impossibility]] is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't [[pomoc]], but the sequence is just too [[jeez]] long and [[senseless]]. It [[devastate]] any [[dynamism]] and [[investors]] in the lead [[characters]] set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? --------------------------------------------- Result 1845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Most]] [[complaints]] I've [[heard]] of this film [[really]] [[come]] down to one [[thing]]: It isn't [[Versus]]. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[similarities]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's ability to craft an interesting B-movie in natural locations. For [[Alive]], almost everything takes place inside. [[In]] small, cramped spaces. Here the art design is thrust into your [[face]], and [[WHAT]] art design it is! We are [[treated]] to [[several]] very [[intricate]] and interesting [[spaces]], and our characters are for the most part [[confined]] to those [[spaces]]. [[Also]] a [[key]] [[difference]] is that we don't get much [[action]] here until the end of the [[film]]. [[Versus]] was all about [[action]] and [[cool]], here a [[LOT]] more [[emphasis]] is put on [[characters]] and situation and messing with your mind. [[Because]] of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[film]] than [[Versus]]. You may not [[pop]] it in and go to a [[random]] scene to watch five or [[ten]] minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit [[glued]] to the screen for [[nearly]] two hours [[watching]] he [[interaction]] of a few genuinely interesting characters.

I'm now ecstatic that I [[ordered]] the DVD [[despite]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to [[realize]] this is a [[different]] animal from Versus - it's [[often]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to [[get]] the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters [[picks]] it up for [[subtitled]] R1 DVD [[release]]! [[Biggest]] [[complaint]] I've [[audition]] of this film [[genuinely]] [[arrived]] down to one [[stuff]]: It isn't [[Vs]]. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[parallels]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's ability to craft an interesting B-movie in natural locations. For [[Viva]], almost everything takes place inside. [[For]] small, cramped spaces. Here the art design is thrust into your [[confront]], and [[WHAR]] art design it is! We are [[treating]] to [[numerous]] very [[convoluted]] and interesting [[sites]], and our characters are for the most part [[curtailed]] to those [[places]]. [[Moreover]] a [[imperative]] [[dispute]] is that we don't get much [[activity]] here until the end of the [[cinematography]]. [[Vs]] was all about [[efforts]] and [[cooling]], here a [[LOTS]] more [[concentrate]] is put on [[attribute]] and situation and messing with your mind. [[Since]] of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[movie]] than [[Against]]. You may not [[daddy]] it in and go to a [[haphazard]] scene to watch five or [[tio]] minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit [[pasted]] to the screen for [[practically]] two hours [[staring]] he [[interact]] of a few genuinely interesting characters.

I'm now ecstatic that I [[instructed]] the DVD [[albeit]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to [[realise]] this is a [[several]] animal from Versus - it's [[generally]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to [[gets]] the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters [[electing]] it up for [[captioned]] R1 DVD [[liberate]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ronald Colman gives an electrifying performance as Tony John, a Broadway actor who can't separate his offstage life from Shakespeare's Othello, the character he plays on stage....Two important scenes illustrate Tony's dilemma. The first one takes place in producer Max Lasker's office. Acting is a matter of talent for the practical-minded Lasker. But Donlan, Tony's friend, disagrees: "No, no. When you do it like Tony does it, it's much more. The way he has of becoming someone else every night...so completely. No, don't tell me his whole system isn't affected by it."....The other scene occurs in waitress Pat Kroll's apartment. Tony tells her his name is Martin. She thanks him. Then he says: "Or Paul. Hamlet. Joe. And maybe Othello."....When Tony begins rehearsing Othello, we learn that though he's trying to keep his real life separated from his stage life, "The part begins to seep into your life, and the battle begins. Reality against imagination." He can't keep the two separated: In his mind Pat is Desdemona and he's Othello, and he wrongly believes she has been unfaithful to him. He murders her....Colman's bravura performance, in a complex and difficult role, earned him 1947's Academy Award for Best Actor. Oscar nominations went to Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin for Best Original Screenplay. Not to be overlooked is Milton Krasner's atomspheric cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 1847 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Why [[would]] a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This [[film]] teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[obviously]] wasn't [[embracing]] my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's [[writing]] [[debut]], there are many [[wonderful]] aspects to this film; [[however]], in [[order]] to [[justify]] the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development [[would]] have been [[helpful]]. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. Why [[could]] a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This [[filmmaking]] teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[assuredly]] wasn't [[covering]] my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's [[write]] [[infancy]], there are many [[sumptuous]] aspects to this film; [[yet]], in [[orders]] to [[warranted]] the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development [[could]] have been [[handy]]. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. --------------------------------------------- Result 1848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a [[mate]] rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the [[actors]] in this movie, and the money [[used]] to produce this [[movie]] would have been [[better]] used to [[start]] a fire. This is [[absolutely]] [[terrible]], 2 hours of life that anyone who [[endures]] this untalented bloodbath will never [[get]] back. After [[watching]] 5 minutes, myself and the boys [[wondered]] if [[sinking]] bulk heavies would make this anymore [[entertaining]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I [[finally]] [[found]] some of this G grade acting remotely [[funny]]. It's an [[insult]] [[upon]] this entire planet that the [[director]] [[thought]] [[anyone]] [[could]] [[find]] [[anything]] [[beneficial]] from this more, he should go and [[buy]] a [[rope]]. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you [[got]] [[paid]] well to be in this [[joke]] because I doubt you will ever [[work]] again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting [[licence]]. There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a [[companion]] rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the [[players]] in this movie, and the money [[utilizes]] to produce this [[filmmaking]] would have been [[best]] used to [[initiation]] a fire. This is [[fully]] [[horrific]], 2 hours of life that anyone who [[lingers]] this untalented bloodbath will never [[gets]] back. After [[staring]] 5 minutes, myself and the boys [[asked]] if [[wrecking]] bulk heavies would make this anymore [[amuse]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I [[lastly]] [[find]] some of this G grade acting remotely [[fun]]. It's an [[slur]] [[after]] this entire planet that the [[superintendent]] [[think]] [[everybody]] [[wo]] [[finds]] [[something]] [[favorable]] from this more, he should go and [[purchased]] a [[cord]]. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you [[did]] [[paying]] well to be in this [[travesty]] because I doubt you will ever [[collaborated]] again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting [[licensing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] How sad there is no [[option]] to post a [[mark]] lower than 1. I [[watched]] this piece of [[nonsense]] and could [[barely]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the film was [[awful]]. Music, acting, direction, story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out [[loud]] at various points in the film. I particularly [[loved]] the [[bit]] where our hero is dashing through the hospital in [[soft]] focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the [[nurses]] hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. [[If]] you are of a [[Christian]] persuasion and very easily [[satisfied]], you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. How sad there is no [[surrogates]] to post a [[markup]] lower than 1. I [[observed]] this piece of [[senseless]] and could [[hardly]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the film was [[abysmal]]. Music, acting, direction, story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out [[rowdy]] at various points in the film. I particularly [[worshiped]] the [[bite]] where our hero is dashing through the hospital in [[gentle]] focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the [[matron]] hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. [[Though]] you are of a [[Cristian]] persuasion and very easily [[contented]], you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1850 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This [[movie]] was the [[worst]] movie ever [[made]] on the [[planet]], I [[like]] BARNEY more than this [[movie]]. The [[graphics]] suck, half the movie is animated, the [[deaths]] suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that [[made]] this [[movie]]![[PLEASE]] DO [[NOT]] WASTE HOURS OF YOUR [[LIFE]] WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only good part was when the movie ******* [[ended]]! This [[movie]] is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[DUMB]]! [[Please]] do not waste your [[time]] watching this [[movie]], you will [[regret]] it.You [[want]] to know why this [[movie]] sucks? Well, the [[cover]] sucked, the graphics sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people [[tried]] to blow themselves up, the [[college]] [[students]] [[think]] there all that and can stand up to the animal. I mean, there was a 5 ft. [[tiger]] running straight at a [[woman]], she throws a [[spear]] at it from 100 ft away! WAIT TILL YOU CAN Actually HIT IT! The acting was [[horrible]] too. Jurrasic [[Park]] is [[actually]] a [[good]] [[movie]], and this just had to [[go]] and [[ruin]] it. This [[filmmaking]] was the [[meanest]] movie ever [[introduced]] on the [[planets]], I [[loves]] BARNEY more than this [[movies]]. The [[charts]] suck, half the movie is animated, the [[decease]] suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that [[introduced]] this [[cinema]]![[INVITES]] DO [[NO]] WASTE HOURS OF YOUR [[VIDA]] WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only good part was when the movie ******* [[completed]]! This [[filmmaking]] is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[SILLY]]! [[Invite]] do not waste your [[moment]] watching this [[filmmaking]], you will [[sadness]] it.You [[wanting]] to know why this [[filmmaking]] sucks? Well, the [[covers]] sucked, the graphics sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people [[attempting]] to blow themselves up, the [[academies]] [[student]] [[ideas]] there all that and can stand up to the animal. I mean, there was a 5 ft. [[tigre]] running straight at a [[girl]], she throws a [[lanza]] at it from 100 ft away! WAIT TILL YOU CAN Actually HIT IT! The acting was [[abysmal]] too. Jurrasic [[Playpen]] is [[indeed]] a [[alright]] [[film]], and this just had to [[going]] and [[wrack]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Shiner, [[directed]] by [[Christian]] Calson, centers [[around]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good [[start]] as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[couples]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real [[purpose]] since the are so [[marginalized]]. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release [[grows]] as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not [[convincing]]. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't [[work]]. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I [[appreciate]] that Calson [[wanted]] to [[achieve]] a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. Shiner, [[oriented]] by [[Cristiano]] Calson, centers [[about]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good [[initiating]] as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[couple]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real [[target]] since the are so [[sidelined]]. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release [[widens]] as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not [[persuasive]]. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't [[cooperation]]. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I [[appreciative]] that Calson [[desired]] to [[realize]] a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. --------------------------------------------- Result 1852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a [[terrible]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I [[could]] turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, [[tedious]] and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. This is a [[frightful]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I [[did]] turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, [[monotonous]] and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. --------------------------------------------- Result 1853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cuban Blood is one of those sleeper films that has a lot to say about life in a very traditional way. I actually watched it while sailing around Cuba on a western Caribbean cruise. It details the life of an 11 year old boy in a small town in Cuba in 1958 and 1959 during the revolution. Not much time is spent on the revolution until the very end, when the Socialist regime came and took the property of the boy's father. The majority of the film is the boy's coming of age and the relationships that arise in a small town where everyone knows everyone else. There are some powerful scenes that everyone can relate to. A class A film with fine acting and directing. This is a film that tells a story with no special effects or grand schemes or real twists. It is a film about people and their lives, their mistakes, and their triumphs. A good film worth watching several times annually. --------------------------------------------- Result 1854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make [[steel]] and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[ruin]] this [[great]] piece by your [[simple]] mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make [[stahl]] and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[vandalize]] this [[wondrous]] piece by your [[uncomplicated]] mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. --------------------------------------------- Result 1855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is so bad and gets worse in every imaginable fashion. Its not just the poor acting and script nor is it the lame and perverse time one wastes on watching it. What really puts this film in my hall of shame is the apparent struggling that the writers and producers do with the film to try and make it funny. The actress replacing Jean Reno's descendant is to old and learned her lesson in the first film so they add a new girl who is to be married. Nearly all of the original extras and gags return however this time makes me want to ripe my eyes out of my sockets because it's a waste of perfectly good film. The torture of the constant camera cuts and shots in any scene in this movie can put the viewer into violent convolutions. This second film takes the successful original and drags it out of its coffin and parades the corpse out in the public square and perversely degrades not only the original idea and its legacy but our intelligence as well. This film unlike the spruce goose could not fly for it had no plot in the principals returning for a 'necklace'. No script since it was apparently written and added to daily. No attention to camera or shots in mind. Poor lighting and special effects done for the sake of doing so. This film would not even pass for a student film in basic Film 101. How this pile got through no one can tell. It was a big loosing investment and it appears that no one had the strength to put this unnatural cruel mistake out of our miseries. This movie has one good part ...its END! This film is my #1 worst film of all time, finally "Howard The Duck" is no longer the goose. --------------------------------------------- Result 1856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my favourite "domestic" movies. I don't know if there is any person in our country who hasn't seen this movie! It's funny, and sad at some moments...I don't know how did people around the world (who had opportunity to watch it) accept this movie, because you have to know some moments in our serbian history and character of Serbs in the first half of the 20th century, to be able to understand it! But as I see here, there is somebody from Canada who watched it...and he liked it.

I think that I'll try to put all good quotes from the movie on this site, but first to find out how to do that...

Cheers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, you know the rest! This has to be the worst movie I've seen in a long long time. I can only imagine that Stephanie Beaham had some bills to pay when taking on this role.

The lead role is played by (to me) a complete unknown and I would imagine disappeared right back into obscurity right after this turkey.

Bruce Lee led the martial arts charge in the early 70's and since then fight scenes have to be either martial arts based or at least brutal if using street fighting techniques. This movie uses fast cuts to show off the martial arts, however, even this can't disguise the fact that the lady doesn't know how to throw a punch. An average 8 year old boy would take her apart on this showing.

Sorry, the only mystery on show here is how this didn't win the golden raspberry for its year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the first Jean Renoir Silent film I have watched and perhaps rightly so since it is generally regarded to be his best, besides being also his first major work. Overall, it is indeed a very assured and technically accomplished film which belies the fact that it was only Renoir’s sophomore effort. For fans of the director, it is full of interesting hints at future Renoir movies especially THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID (1946) and THE GOLDEN COACH (1952) – in its depiction of a lower class femme fatale madly desired by various aristocrats who disgrace themselves for her – but also THE RULES OF THE GAME (1939) – showing as it does in one sequence how the rowdy servants behave when their masters' backs are turned away from them – and FRENCH CANCAN (1955) – Nana is seen having a go at the scandalous dance at one point. Personally, I would say that the film makes for a respectable companion piece to G.W. Pabst’s PANDORA’S BOX (1928), Josef von Sternberg’s THE BLUE ANGEL (1930) and Max Ophuls’ LOLA MONTES (1955) in its vivid recreation of the sordid life of a courtesan.

Having said all that, the film was a resounding critical and commercial failure at the time of its release – a “mad undertaking” as Renoir himself later referred to it in his memoirs which, not only personally cost him a fortune (he eventually eased the resulting financial burden by selling off some of his late father’s paintings), but almost made him give up the cinema for good! Stylistically, NANA is quite different from Renoir’s sound work and owes a particular debt to Erich von Stroheim’s FOOLISH WIVES (1922), a film Renoir greatly admired – and, on a personal note, one which I really ought to revisit presto (having owned the Kino DVD of it and the other von Stroheims for 4 years now). Anyway, NANA is certainly not without its flaws: a deliberate pace makes itself felt during the overly generous 130 minute running time with some sequences (the horse race around the mid-point in particular) going on too long.

The overly mannered acting style on display is also hard to take at times – particularly that of Catherine Hessling’s Nana and Raymond Guerin-Catelain’s Georges Hugon (one of her various suitors)…although, technically, they are being their characters i.e. a bad actress (who takes to the courtesan lifestyle when she is booed off the stage) and an immature weakling, respectively. However, like Anna Magnani in THE GOLDEN COACH, Hessling (Renoir’s wife at the time, by the way) is just not attractive enough to be very convincing as “the epitome of elegance” (as another admirer describes her at one stage) who is able to enslave every man she meets. Other notables in the cast are “Dr. Caligari” himself, Werner Krauss (as Nana’s most fervent devotee, Count Muffat), Jean Angelo (as an initially skeptical but eventually tragic suitor of Nana’s) and future distinguished film director Claude Autant-Lara (billed as Claude Moore and also serving as art director here) as Muffat’s close friend but who is secretly enamored with the latter’s neglected wife!

The print I watched – via Lionsgate’s “Jean Renoir 3-Disc Collector’s Edition” – is, for the most part, a lovingly restored and beautifully-tinted one which had been previously available only on French DVD. Being based on a classic of French literature (by Emile Zola, no less), it cannot help but having been brought to the screen several times and the two most notable film versions are Dorothy Arzner’s in 1934 (with Anna Sten and Lionel Atwill and which I own on VHS) and Christian-Jaque’s in 1955 (with Martine Carol and Charles Boyer, which I am not familiar with). --------------------------------------------- Result 1859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Okay, [[note]] to the people that put together these [[horror]] acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[grateful]] and I [[hugely]] support the [[initiative]], but … have you even watched the [[films]] before [[selecting]] them as [[part]] of the [[collection]]? When I [[purchased]] the Boris Karloff [[collection]] there were [[several]] [[films]] in which the [[star]] only [[played]] a [[supportive]] and unessential role ("[[Tower]] of London", "The [[Strange]] [[Door]]"). "The [[Invisible]] Ray", [[however]], is [[part]] of the Bela Lugosi [[collection]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This [[actually]] would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection [[instead]]! Bela Lugosi's [[character]] is [[quite]] [[possibly]] the most good-natured and earnest one he ever [[portrayed]] in his [[entire]] [[career]] and [[good]] old Karloff [[actually]] plays the [[mad]] and dangerously obsessed [[scientist]] here. "The Invisible Ray" [[features]] three [[main]] [[chapters]]. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and [[demands]] quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are [[fundamental]] for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a [[couple]] of [[eminent]] [[colleagues]] (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he [[managed]] to capture [[extraterrestrial]] [[rays]] inside a self-manufactured [[device]]. The scientists are [[sincerely]] impressed with his [[work]] and invite Rukh and his [[lovely]] [[wife]] Diane along for an expedition in the [[heart]] of Africa. There Dr. Rukh [[isolates]] himself from the group, discovers the [[essential]] [[element]] "[[Radium]] X" to [[complete]] his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the [[best]] and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with [[ingenious]] gimmicks (melting statues) and a [[surprising]] climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, [[convinced]] the others are out to steal his [[discovery]] and [[even]] his life, he intends to eliminate them using his [[deadly]] touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible [[Ray]]" sounds [[rather]] complicated, but the [[film]] is [[easy]] to follow and [[entertaining]]. The [[story]] is [[rather]] far-fetched but [[nevertheless]] [[compelling]] and [[director]] Lambert Hillyer [[provides]] several moments of sheer [[suspense]]. Boris Karloff is [[truly]] [[fantastic]] and so is Lugosi, even [[though]] he [[deserved]] to have a [[little]] more screen time. [[Their]] scenes [[together]] are the [[highlights]] of the film, along with the [[funky]] [[images]] of the glowing Boris. Okay, [[remark]] to the people that put together these [[terror]] acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[appreciate]] and I [[terribly]] support the [[efforts]], but … have you even watched the [[cinema]] before [[elected]] them as [[parties]] of the [[compiling]]? When I [[acquiring]] the Boris Karloff [[collections]] there were [[numerous]] [[movie]] in which the [[superstar]] only [[accomplished]] a [[positive]] and unessential role ("[[Torre]] of London", "The [[Weird]] [[Stargate]]"). "The [[Stealth]] Ray", [[instead]], is [[parties]] of the Bela Lugosi [[collect]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This [[indeed]] would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection [[however]]! Bela Lugosi's [[nature]] is [[rather]] [[potentially]] the most good-natured and earnest one he ever [[depicted]] in his [[whole]] [[quarry]] and [[alright]] old Karloff [[indeed]] plays the [[madman]] and dangerously obsessed [[scholars]] here. "The Invisible Ray" [[feature]] three [[principal]] [[sections]]. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and [[requiring]] quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are [[pivotal]] for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a [[couples]] of [[famous]] [[fellow]] (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he [[administering]] to capture [[exotic]] [[streaks]] inside a self-manufactured [[appliances]]. The scientists are [[frankly]] impressed with his [[jobs]] and invite Rukh and his [[nice]] [[women]] Diane along for an expedition in the [[heartland]] of Africa. There Dr. Rukh [[isolating]] himself from the group, discovers the [[fundamental]] [[ingredients]] "[[Diode]] X" to [[finished]] his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the [[finest]] and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with [[crafty]] gimmicks (melting statues) and a [[uncanny]] climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, [[persuaded]] the others are out to steal his [[discoveries]] and [[yet]] his life, he intends to eliminate them using his [[fatal]] touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible [[Gleam]]" sounds [[comparatively]] complicated, but the [[kino]] is [[easier]] to follow and [[entertain]]. The [[history]] is [[fairly]] far-fetched but [[albeit]] [[convincing]] and [[headmaster]] Lambert Hillyer [[prescribes]] several moments of sheer [[wait]]. Boris Karloff is [[honestly]] [[wondrous]] and so is Lugosi, even [[albeit]] he [[deserve]] to have a [[tiny]] more screen time. [[Hun]] scenes [[jointly]] are the [[underline]] of the film, along with the [[wondrous]] [[image]] of the glowing Boris. --------------------------------------------- Result 1860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to [[perform]] the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is [[consumed]] by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[great]] [[movie]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another [[attraction]] of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to [[fulfill]] the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is [[eaten]] by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another [[attractiveness]] of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" --------------------------------------------- Result 1861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] This is going to be the most [[useless]] comment I have ever put down, but [[yet]] I [[must]] do it to [[warn]] you about the [[atrocity]] to [[cinema]] that "Freddy's [[Dead]]" is. It is not only the very [[worst]] chapter of the Nightmare [[series]], but is right up there with the [[worst]] horror sequel of all [[time]]! It was boring, [[pointless]], and [[nearly]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top [[CORNY]] [[kills]] are [[enough]] to drive this "[[film]]" into the [[ground]]. [[However]], it doesn't stop there, just [[add]] [[bad]] acting, a [[terrible]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping [[pile]] of guano! It's no wonder why Freddy, as [[always]] [[played]] by [[Robert]] Englund, has [[made]] two postmortem [[appearances]]. I [[would]] too if I went out like that. This is a [[strictly]] fans only movie, don't stare at our [[shame]]. This is going to be the most [[superfluous]] comment I have ever put down, but [[again]] I [[needs]] do it to [[warns]] you about the [[cruelty]] to [[filmmaking]] that "Freddy's [[Dying]]" is. It is not only the very [[pire]] chapter of the Nightmare [[serials]], but is right up there with the [[meanest]] horror sequel of all [[period]]! It was boring, [[vain]], and [[almost]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top [[DORKY]] [[kill]] are [[adequate]] to drive this "[[filmmaking]]" into the [[overland]]. [[Still]], it doesn't stop there, just [[summing]] [[unfavourable]] acting, a [[abysmal]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping [[battery]] of guano! It's no wonder why Freddy, as [[constantly]] [[effected]] by [[Roberta]] Englund, has [[introduced]] two postmortem [[phenomena]]. I [[could]] too if I went out like that. This is a [[tightly]] fans only movie, don't stare at our [[pity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1862 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[College]] [[students]], who are clearing out a condemned [[dormitory]], are [[stalked]] by an elusive [[killer]].

The Dorm That Dripped Blood ([[aka]] [[Pranks]]) is a bit of a mixed [[bag]] for slasher fans. The [[movies]] production [[values]] are [[pretty]] low and the [[story]] for the most part is pretty [[routine]], there's even a [[creepy]] [[bum]] hanging around for a red herring. In fact [[much]] of the story's build-up is [[pretty]] forgettable, [[save]] for one or two [[brutal]] [[murders]]. But the movie is [[really]] [[made]] [[better]] by its surprisingly intense climax (in an atmospheric [[setting]]) and one [[fairly]] bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is [[lackluster]] for the most [[part]]. [[Stephen]] Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty [[nice]] turn in character. [[Also]] [[look]] for a [[young]] Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer [[saved]] the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** [[Academia]] [[schoolboys]], who are clearing out a condemned [[dorm]], are [[harassed]] by an elusive [[murderer]].

The Dorm That Dripped Blood ([[alias]] [[Adventures]]) is a bit of a mixed [[baggage]] for slasher fans. The [[films]] production [[valuing]] are [[belle]] low and the [[saga]] for the most part is pretty [[normal]], there's even a [[terrifying]] [[drifter]] hanging around for a red herring. In fact [[very]] of the story's build-up is [[belle]] forgettable, [[saves]] for one or two [[ruthless]] [[murder]]. But the movie is [[truly]] [[effected]] [[best]] by its surprisingly intense climax (in an atmospheric [[settings]]) and one [[rather]] bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is [[lifeless]] for the most [[party]]. [[Stephane]] Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty [[pleasurable]] turn in character. [[Moreover]] [[gaze]] for a [[youthful]] Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer [[rescues]] the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There were a lot of 50's sci-fi movies. They were big draws for the Drive-in theaters. A lot of them were crappy even back then. This movie and 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' stand out, and both have aged well in their own way. From the very beginning with its eerie theremin musical score (which still sounds weird since theremins are hardly ever used) Forbidden Planet takes you where no man has gone before. Speaking of Star Trek there's so much material in this film that got into Star Trek TOS its like a pilot for the series; from the interactive captain/first mate/doctor, the mad scientist, alien beings, babe in short skirt, computer intelligence; it is all de rigeur now but this was the first of its kind. Besides, it has good acting and well-done artwork which even today evokes a certain awe at the imagery. Consider how the huge Krell machine is successfully depicted with some real depth. I saw this as a kid (at a drive-in :0)when it was a new movie and it scared me. Of course every movie that was even vaguely scary did back then but I remember being real worried about the invisible monster. Forbidden Planet is a movie a sci-fi fan can watch several times and find something new with each viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] ...but the actress playing the daughter just doesn't come [[across]] as [[credible]].

It doesn't [[work]] for me when I [[see]] an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[suggested]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[children]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[casting]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[work]] for me.

you [[might]] want to [[check]] other comments to find out what this film is actually about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[agree]] that the premise for this [[film]] is [[beautiful]] [[though]] - I wish another director would try to pick up this story again. ...but the actress playing the daughter just doesn't come [[during]] as [[plausible]].

It doesn't [[cooperation]] for me when I [[seeing]] an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[recommends]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[enfant]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[cast]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[collaboration]] for me.

you [[conceivably]] want to [[audits]] other comments to find out what this film is actually about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[concur]] that the premise for this [[filmmaking]] is [[sumptuous]] [[despite]] - I wish another director would try to pick up this story again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1865 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my favorite movies, with a very nostalgic ending. The movie is about the Sullivan family, obviously Michael Sullivan (the father) is one of the main members of the mafia, the killer to say it this way, and an expert one. One of the kids wants to know the work of his father (a terrible mistake), so he hides on his father's car and well, he sees Tom Hanks in action to say it this way.

Mafia doesn't rules, in Mafia nobody wins, when they want you out, they take you out. Of course you can see anyone who works at the mafia with a giant house, the best car in the world, whatever you like, but make a wrong work, or make something your "boss" doesn't want, and you're fired, and killed.

You can see what I mean in the movie, Sullivan Jr. sees something he didn't had to see, and well, almost all his family gets killed for that "wrong thing" his son did. The movie is really entertaining, you see how the Sullivan's live after being chased by the mafia, or kinda of that.

This movie is kinda of sad, shows us about revenge, those dirty works people do, almost everything you like. Hopefully the guy is reading this comment doesn't works for the mafia, and if you work at the mafia make yourself a favor and get the hell out of the country before you get killed by your boss and their workers.

This movie receives: 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Wracked with [[guilt]] after a lot of things [[felt]] [[apart]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber Gabriel Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie (Janine Turner), while over the cloudy skies where the weather looks a bit threatening, a spectacularly [[precarious]] mid-air hijacking goes wrong and $100 million taken from a Treasury Department plane get lost in the middle of nowhere followed by a crash landing…

Stranded off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen cash, the high-trained hikers make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[breathtaking]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[definitely]] Stallone's [[best]] action adventure movie… Wracked with [[culpa]] after a lot of things [[smelled]] [[moreover]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber Gabriel Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie (Janine Turner), while over the cloudy skies where the weather looks a bit threatening, a spectacularly [[unsteady]] mid-air hijacking goes wrong and $100 million taken from a Treasury Department plane get lost in the middle of nowhere followed by a crash landing…

Stranded off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen cash, the high-trained hikers make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[exciting]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[surely]] Stallone's [[better]] action adventure movie… --------------------------------------------- Result 1867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[film]], along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[favorite]] Pabst-directed [[films]] and I enjoyed them more than his much more [[famous]] [[films]] which starred Louise [[Brooks]] (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's [[probably]] because both are very [[similar]] to the Neo-Realist [[films]] that the Italians [[perfected]] in the 1940s and 50s. This [[style]] film called for [[using]] non-actors (just [[typical]] folks) in [[everyday]] [[settings]] in [[order]] to [[create]] [[intensely]] [[involving]] and [[realistic]] [[films]].

[[In]] this case, the film is about French and German [[coal]] [[miners]], so [[appropriately]], the people in the roles [[seem]] like miners--not actors. The central [[conflict]] as the [[film]] [[begins]] is that there is a [[huge]] [[mine]] located on the Franco-German [[border]]. Instead of one [[big]] [[mine]], it is [[divided]] at the [[border]] and German workers are not welcome in the French [[mine]], despite there being [[greater]] unemployment in [[Germany]]. This, [[language]] [[differences]] ([[illustrated]] wonderfully in a [[dance]] hall scene) and WWI conspire to [[create]] a [[huge]] rift between the factions--resulting in a WE [[vs]]. THEY mentality. Later, an [[explosion]] causes a [[huge]] collapse in the French and the Germans [[refuse]] to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they [[prove]] that there is [[true]] comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a [[strong]] [[criticism]] of xenophobia and tried, in [[vain]], to get the German audiences to [[see]] the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously [[moving]] film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic [[images]] I have ever [[seen]]. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and [[ALL]] [[QUIET]] ON THE WESTERN [[FRONT]] (Milestone) had [[great]] messages of peace and [[harmony]] but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an [[amazing]] and [[sad]] [[relic]] that is well worth seeing. This [[movies]], along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[prefer]] Pabst-directed [[movies]] and I enjoyed them more than his much more [[acclaimed]] [[movie]] which starred Louise [[Creek]] (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's [[conceivably]] because both are very [[analogue]] to the Neo-Realist [[cinema]] that the Italians [[perfect]] in the 1940s and 50s. This [[styling]] film called for [[utilizing]] non-actors (just [[emblematic]] folks) in [[routine]] [[setting]] in [[orders]] to [[creating]] [[densely]] [[involve]] and [[realist]] [[kino]].

[[Throughout]] this case, the film is about French and German [[anthrax]] [[minors]], so [[adequately]], the people in the roles [[looks]] like miners--not actors. The central [[dispute]] as the [[cinematography]] [[starts]] is that there is a [[monumental]] [[mining]] located on the Franco-German [[frontiers]]. Instead of one [[enormous]] [[mining]], it is [[dividing]] at the [[borders]] and German workers are not welcome in the French [[mining]], despite there being [[biggest]] unemployment in [[Germans]]. This, [[linguistics]] [[difference]] ([[demonstrated]] wonderfully in a [[choreography]] hall scene) and WWI conspire to [[creating]] a [[sizeable]] rift between the factions--resulting in a WE [[v]]. THEY mentality. Later, an [[explosions]] causes a [[monumental]] collapse in the French and the Germans [[rejecting]] to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they [[demonstrating]] that there is [[genuine]] comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a [[forceful]] [[criticized]] of xenophobia and tried, in [[futile]], to get the German audiences to [[seeing]] the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously [[shifting]] film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic [[photographs]] I have ever [[noticed]]. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and [[EVERY]] [[HUSH]] ON THE WESTERN [[NEWSWEEK]] (Milestone) had [[fantastic]] messages of peace and [[concordia]] but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an [[astounding]] and [[deplorable]] [[hangover]] that is well worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was thrilled to watch this movie expecting it to be the sequel to the cult classic "Private Lessons" which portrays the dream of any male teenager.

"Private Lessons II" has NOTHING to do with the title I mention. It's just a regular soft-core Cinemax flick that won't make a change in your life. There's just one hot sex scene in a rooftop but that's it. I watched this a long time ago but believe me, this is just a regular boring soft core flick.

The women are hot but that's not enough to rent or buy the movie. My advice is to watch this only if it airs on cable. --------------------------------------------- Result 1869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[horribly]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[unimaginably]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched both Bourne Identity and Bourne Supremacy on DVD before seeing this in the theater. I'd been waiting for this since before they started filming. I wasn't disappointed.

Minor spoilers below-

Overall it was good, but it also lacked the continuity of the first two. Identity and Supremacy both flowed gracefully between adrenaline rush action to introspective drama. This movie felt choppy at times. The plot-building down-times were slightly too drawn out. That caused the following action to feel too frenetic.

Camera: Speaking of frenetic, the trademark Greengrass shaky cam was present and very annoying to me. I know its has been talked/whined about to nausea on the message board, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. All the martial arts training the actors went through was totally wasted. The ridiculous camera cuts and wiggling camera ruined most of the fighting in the movie. It is a cheap, student director trick to make the film feel unsettled. I'd expect those techniques to be used in some horror flick made for high school kids, but not in this classy, adult, action series. Too much extreme close-up also. Do some framing. Get some interesting shots. Constant close-up feels like lazy directing to me.

Story: The story was VERY confusing at first. They thrust new names and faces upon you from the get go. Gave me the feeling that you get when you come into a movie late and know you've missed some crucial information. Felt rushed or compressed for time reasons. After you catch up however the story is quite good. It's enjoyable following leads along with Bourne. HOWEVER, I did NOT care for the whole last scene of Supremacy (Landy/Bourne on the phone) being in the middle of Ultimatum thing. It basically makes the movie a half-prequel. I thought that was awkward.

Cast/Characters: The star of the movie is the action. Obviously there are only two originals left. Bourne and Nicky Parsons. Them teaming up was kind of odd to me. I think they just wanted to give Bourne someone to protect to and confide in. Unless I completely missed something, they never even tell you why they teamed up. The other assassins in the movie were pretty quiet. This felt like Gilroy/Greengrass/whoever wanting to not leave open ends. Understandable but disappointing. Seriously, Damon with Clive Owen in Identity and Marton Csokas in Supremacy.. Those scenes were phenomenal. These assassins are as uninteresting as Castel (the first fella Bourne fights in Identity). The cast in general has degraded as the the series went on. Clive Owen was practically an afterthought. That's a measure of strength for that first cast. The second, they basically trade Chris Cooper for Joan Allen.... Not exactly equal. This one trades Brian Cox and Franka Potente for 3 actors to be named later. Nothing against David Strathairn, Scott Glenn, or Albert Finney, but they're not the first names that come to mind for this kind of series. Aside from a couple pauses that seemed to long, the acting was right on.

As a whole, it was successful. Felt like they wanted to get the series over with though. If they would have trimmed or rearranged the slower parts, eliminated Scott Glenn's part entirely, zoomed out, and taken the camera away from the seizure victim, it would have been perfect.

ENDING SPOILER

I don't see why they leave Bourne alive at the end. It was my understanding this was the conclusion. They clearly made reference to the very beginning of the series with his silhouette floating motionless. I thought that was going to be it. A full circle type of ending. I did like Nicky reacting to the news report though.

SPOILER SPECIFICS WARNING - QUOTE FROM MOVIE BELOW -

Bourne's last line at the end "Look at this.. Look at what they make you give." quoting the first assassin he killed, I loved that. The final scene was great. (Except that it was Vosen {Strathairn} that shot at Bourne. Why would he do that? Just out for vengeance? If he was angry enough to murder, why not shoot Pamela Landy after she faxes his top secret file? That didn't make sense.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] I've been a [[fan]] since his first album. This [[film]] is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are [[simply]] [[terrible]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, [[Nick]] Cave, [[Antony]], and Jarvis Cocker were [[particularly]] [[annoying]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was [[ruined]] by the so [[called]] [[harmony]] of [[Martha]] Wainwright.

I've never [[seen]] my [[wife]] get up and [[walk]] out of the [[room]] on a [[film]] before and I [[found]] myself [[fast]] forwarding through the performances to [[get]] to the few [[interview]] [[segments]], which were [[also]] [[difficult]] to watch due to the poor [[camera]] [[work]].

There are [[many]] who have been able to [[interpret]] [[Mr]]. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD [[Lang]], [[Billy]] Joel, [[Aaron]] [[Neville]], and Willie [[Nelson]] [[come]] to [[mind]], but those people [[selected]] for this performance were just [[awful]].

[[Hopefully]] there will be another [[attempt]] at [[capturing]] Leonard Cohen on [[film]] that will [[illustrate]] his [[insight]], talent, and [[intelligence]].

So sad I've been a [[breather]] since his first album. This [[filmmaking]] is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are [[purely]] [[abysmal]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, [[Nicky]] Cave, [[Antoine]], and Jarvis Cocker were [[specially]] [[exasperating]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was [[obliterated]] by the so [[phoned]] [[concordia]] of [[Marta]] Wainwright.

I've never [[watched]] my [[femme]] get up and [[stroll]] out of the [[courtrooms]] on a [[flick]] before and I [[unearthed]] myself [[punctually]] forwarding through the performances to [[got]] to the few [[questioning]] [[pieces]], which were [[apart]] [[hard]] to watch due to the poor [[cameras]] [[cooperate]].

There are [[numerous]] who have been able to [[interpretive]] [[Monsieur]]. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD [[Long]], [[Billie]] Joel, [[Arun]] [[Nev]], and Willie [[Nielson]] [[arrive]] to [[intellect]], but those people [[picks]] for this performance were just [[frightful]].

[[Luckily]] there will be another [[seeks]] at [[catching]] Leonard Cohen on [[movies]] that will [[showcases]] his [[eyesight]], talent, and [[intelligentsia]].

So sad --------------------------------------------- Result 1872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is, without a doubt, the most offensive "chick flick" I have seen in years, if not ever. The writing & characterizations are so riddled with stereotypes that the film verges on parody. Before walking out of the theater an hour and five minutes into this disaster, we were subjected to the following themes: having a baby will solve all of your problems, "performer types" are miserable messes, & musicians can't be good mothers unless they toss their dreams for a more conventional lifestyle. What a waste of a talented cast & some great-looking sets & costumes. When Natasha Richardson told Toni Collette that unless she lives a more mainstream life, she'll end up - shudder - "alone!", I felt queasy. I can't believe this movie made it to theatrical release. It's the sort of fare one expects from those "women's" cable channels that I always pass right by when channel-surfing. I am female and over 35, so I should be part of this film's target audience, but boy, does "Evening" miss its target. --------------------------------------------- Result 1873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of America's most brilliant film directors was without question Elia Kazan. His directorial genius was not particularly suited to taut thrillers, since Kazan needed more room to breathe and to be slower and more subtle. However, 'Panic in the Streets' is a first-rate social thriller and is if anything more relevant to today than it was to 1950 when it was released. The themes of illegal immigrants, people-smuggling, imminent plagues, rapid transmission around the world of diseases (a worried Richard Widmark says: 'I could be in any American city in ten hours and in Africa tomorrow.'), ethnic isolation and ghettoism are today's concerns more than ever. This film features a spectacular film debut by Jack Palance, and a wonderful performance by Barbara Bel Geddes, two casting strokes of genius. Richard Widmark is allowed not to be a psychopath for once, and is a deeply caring, warmly loving, intense hero of the people. He leads basically a one-man campaign to stop an epidemic of pneumonic plague in New Orleans, struggling to convince sluggish politicians and complacent policemen that there is a problem. There is a race against time to find the small-time crooks who have contracted the plague from a dead illegal immigrant within 48 hours, before the whole city, and as they are always reminding us, the whole country, are endangered with the worst thing since the 1919 flu. One amazing scene where Jack Palance, who is infected, is prevented from climbing aboard a ship by a rat-barrier on the rope is ironic in the extreme, reminding us in the most gruesome terms that humans can be the worst carriers and vermin of all. The highly dramatic chase scenes in what they call 'the coffee factory' at the wharfs rivals the most inventive climax scenes of Hitchcock, and with just as spectacular a setting. Many non-professionals appear in the film, which has the gritty realism of, well, something called reality. Kazan really takes the cameras into places where even people rarely went, and where even rats would have thought twice. This film was a major feat of social realism. If it lacks the electricity of the most highly charged thrillers, it is because Kazan took it so seriously that he could not hype it up, for after all, the threat of plague is serious enough to scare anybody without the need for extra guns and molls. The only unfortunate thing about the film is the title, which gives a false suggestion of superficiality. But Kazan was anything but superficial. He clearly considered this project a public duty, to alert us to genuine possibilities. If only those possibilities had diminished today, but alas, they are getting worse every day. One day, after a worldwide plague, this film may be shown to a few survivors as an example of how an outbreak was contained on film, but its lessons were forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 1874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Less]] self-conscious and much less pretentious than [[GUTS]] OF A BEAUTY, this Kazuo Komizu [[gore]] flick is worth a [[look]] (at [[least]] once).

[[Sleazy]] snapshotters escort wanna-be actresses/models to a remote house in the woods in order to sexually molest them. [[Unfortunately]] (for the horny boys), a long-schlonged [[demon]], who lives in the woods, has already targeted the girls for [[fun]].

The [[thing]] even ends up having fun with the boys -- that's IF you consider beheadings, dismemberment and masturbation with severed limbs "fun".

Once again, it all sounds better on paper than it looks and sounds on film.

Just as Komizu mangled LIVING DEAD AT TOKYO BAY with his ineptitude, he also mangles this effort and is only saved by some audacious violence and some great white panty shots.

Don't buy the hype, though, or you'll be sorely disappointed. [[Minimum]] self-conscious and much less pretentious than [[INNARDS]] OF A BEAUTY, this Kazuo Komizu [[gora]] flick is worth a [[peek]] (at [[lowest]] once).

[[Dirty]] snapshotters escort wanna-be actresses/models to a remote house in the woods in order to sexually molest them. [[Tragically]] (for the horny boys), a long-schlonged [[daemon]], who lives in the woods, has already targeted the girls for [[droll]].

The [[stuff]] even ends up having fun with the boys -- that's IF you consider beheadings, dismemberment and masturbation with severed limbs "fun".

Once again, it all sounds better on paper than it looks and sounds on film.

Just as Komizu mangled LIVING DEAD AT TOKYO BAY with his ineptitude, he also mangles this effort and is only saved by some audacious violence and some great white panty shots.

Don't buy the hype, though, or you'll be sorely disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Well, I can [[honestly]] say that this is the [[first]] time that I [[experienced]] a [[film]] that had literally no [[meat]] or potatoes in it. The entire [[film]] felt like it was just the [[salad]] with no [[main]] course. The [[story]] [[line]] was fallible and [[laughable]], the characters were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was [[done]] by four-year [[olds]]. Does that [[cover]] it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[concept]] in my [[entire]] life. I have never read the [[comics]] or [[seen]] the other [[programs]] with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To [[begin]], the story moved too [[quickly]]. For [[someone]] new to this [[character]] and situations, I [[needed]] more [[built]] into creating the reasons [[instead]] of finding the solution. I have [[seen]] other Anime (if you [[could]] [[call]] this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to [[develop]] them. There was nothing set aside for [[Lady]] [[Death]]. [[In]] a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly [[become]] this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, [[considering]] moments before she was [[introduced]] as this weak and feeble [[woman]] [[controlled]] by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do [[battle]] with an existence that has been [[around]] for millions of [[years]]. This was [[absurd]]. The [[presentation]] of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated [[character]] instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't [[work]]. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and [[instead]] I was left with more [[incoherent]] babbling than [[actual]] [[development]]. It is a very sad day in [[Hell]] when we forgo [[characters]] to show more violence and [[action]], [[especially]] in an animated [[feature]].

Next, there was Lucifer himself. [[Let]] me just say that I think I [[could]] do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was [[weak]], his [[voice]] was laughable, and he just didn't [[represent]] the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a [[bigger]] place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** Well, I can [[truthfully]] say that this is the [[outset]] time that I [[experimented]] a [[filmmaking]] that had literally no [[carnes]] or potatoes in it. The entire [[filmmaking]] felt like it was just the [[coleslaw]] with no [[principal]] course. The [[conte]] [[linea]] was fallible and [[silly]], the characters were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was [[effected]] by four-year [[yr]]. Does that [[covered]] it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[notion]] in my [[together]] life. I have never read the [[funnies]] or [[noticed]] the other [[agendas]] with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To [[commencement]], the story moved too [[speedily]]. For [[everyone]] new to this [[traits]] and situations, I [[needs]] more [[build]] into creating the reasons [[conversely]] of finding the solution. I have [[saw]] other Anime (if you [[wo]] [[invitation]] this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to [[develops]] them. There was nothing set aside for [[Dame]] [[Dying]]. [[During]] a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly [[becoming]] this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, [[consider]] moments before she was [[brought]] as this weak and feeble [[wife]] [[monitored]] by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do [[fights]] with an existence that has been [[about]] for millions of [[yr]]. This was [[senseless]]. The [[submission]] of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated [[personage]] instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't [[jobs]]. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and [[alternatively]] I was left with more [[disjointed]] babbling than [[real]] [[evolution]]. It is a very sad day in [[Bordello]] when we forgo [[traits]] to show more violence and [[efforts]], [[concretely]] in an animated [[hallmarks]].

Next, there was Lucifer himself. [[Leaving]] me just say that I think I [[did]] do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was [[fragile]], his [[vowel]] was laughable, and he just didn't [[represented]] the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a [[akbar]] place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a [[little]] while back and, [[since]] then, I've been watching [[every]] one of his movies that [[arrives]] on my [[radar]] screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he [[even]] resembles Owen [[somewhat]]) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he [[lands]] some meaty [[roles]], he'll [[crack]] an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[denigrate]] this [[film]] at all.

It's a fine story, with very [[believable]] people (well, it's [[based]] upon the author's early [[shenanigans]] with rocketry), a [[great]] cast – Chris Cooper is [[always]] good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch [[list]] – with the [[appropriate]] [[mix]] of humor, [[pathos]], [[excitement]]...and the [[great]] sound track with so [[many]] [[rock]] n [[roll]] oldies to [[get]] the feet tapping.

But, this [[film]] had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same [[age]] as Homer Hickham; like him, I [[looked]] up at the night [[stars]] to watch Sputnik as it scudded [[across]] the [[blackness]]; like Homer [[also]], I [[experimented]] with rocketry in my [[backyard]] and [[used]] even the [[exact]] same [[chemicals]] for fuel; and like Homer, I [[also]] had most of my [[attempts]] [[end]] in explosive disaster! What [[fun]] it was...

I didn't achieve his [[great]] (metaphorical and [[physical]]) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you [[see]] this [[movie]].

Sure, it's a [[basic]] family [[movie]], but that's a dying [[breed]] these [[days]], it seems. [[Take]] the [[time]] to [[see]] it, with the [[kids]]: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a [[tiny]] while back and, [[because]] then, I've been watching [[each]] one of his movies that [[happens]] on my [[radars]] screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he [[yet]] resembles Owen [[rather]]) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he [[land]] some meaty [[duties]], he'll [[fissure]] an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[blacken]] this [[movies]] at all.

It's a fine story, with very [[trustworthy]] people (well, it's [[founded]] upon the author's early [[escapades]] with rocketry), a [[super]] cast – Chris Cooper is [[invariably]] good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch [[listings]] – with the [[adequate]] [[blends]] of humor, [[ducks]], [[arousal]]...and the [[huge]] sound track with so [[myriad]] [[boulder]] n [[rolling]] oldies to [[obtain]] the feet tapping.

But, this [[cinematography]] had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same [[aging]] as Homer Hickham; like him, I [[seemed]] up at the night [[celebrity]] to watch Sputnik as it scudded [[throughout]] the [[nightfall]]; like Homer [[further]], I [[experienced]] with rocketry in my [[patio]] and [[utilize]] even the [[correct]] same [[chemistry]] for fuel; and like Homer, I [[further]] had most of my [[endeavors]] [[ends]] in explosive disaster! What [[entertaining]] it was...

I didn't achieve his [[remarkable]] (metaphorical and [[physics]]) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you [[consults]] this [[cinematography]].

Sure, it's a [[fundamental]] family [[cinematography]], but that's a dying [[spawn]] these [[jours]], it seems. [[Taking]] the [[moment]] to [[seeing]] it, with the [[brats]]: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] this [[movie]] [[scared]] me so bad, i am [[easily]] scared though so its no [[big]] thing but this movie was scary and whoever [[wasnt]] [[scared]] by this movie, im [[surprised]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope [[everyone]] [[sees]] it, but [[dont]] see it with the [[lights]] off like i did.... this [[kino]] [[spooked]] me so bad, i am [[effortless]] scared though so its no [[prodigious]] thing but this movie was scary and whoever [[suprised]] [[affraid]] by this movie, im [[horrified]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope [[somebody]] [[believes]] it, but [[dunno]] see it with the [[illumination]] off like i did.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] I really, really [[enjoyed]] watching this movie! [[At]] [[first]], seeing its poster I [[thought]] it was just another [[easy]] romantic [[comedy]] ... but it is [[simply]] more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm [[sure]] a [[good]] [[part]] of the [[viewers]] had just before they [[saw]] the movie) it's [[yet]] another important part of the [[big]] concept of this movie itself (or [[even]] of its marketing strategy)! What I [[mean]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to [[images]]! To [[impressions]]! I went to the [[cinema]] to view this [[film]] having the wrong [[impression]], the [[wrong]] [[expectations]], and at the [[end]] I felt how superficial I [[could]] be! To exemplify it [[comes]] to my mind the sequence near the end in which [[Sidney]] buys the [[plane]] [[ticket]] to go back to New York and as he is [[asked]] to '[[give]] an autograph', [[meaning]] to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on [[TV]] [[thanks]] to the scandal at the [[awards]] he is now some [[kind]] of celebrity. And this is just, I [[believe]], the climax of this main [[theme]] [[around]] which the [[movies]] revolves. [[Above]] this, I [[believe]] the [[movie]] [[also]] [[offers]] us a solution to get along with this, [[illustrated]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]] by Sidney's attitude: don't [[become]] too [[serious]] about yourself or about [[anybody]] else ... "[[even]] saints were people in the [[beginning]]" ... as [[Sophie]] once [[says]] in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first [[place]]: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. I really, really [[adored]] watching this movie! [[For]] [[frst]], seeing its poster I [[figured]] it was just another [[easier]] romantic [[comic]] ... but it is [[simple]] more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm [[convinced]] a [[buena]] [[party]] of the [[audience]] had just before they [[watched]] the movie) it's [[however]] another important part of the [[massive]] concept of this movie itself (or [[yet]] of its marketing strategy)! What I [[meaning]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to [[visuals]]! To [[fingerprints]]! I went to the [[movie]] to view this [[movie]] having the wrong [[printing]], the [[amiss]] [[prospects]], and at the [[termination]] I felt how superficial I [[did]] be! To exemplify it [[happens]] to my mind the sequence near the end in which [[Sid]] buys the [[airline]] [[banknote]] to go back to New York and as he is [[inquired]] to '[[lend]] an autograph', [[mean]] to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on [[TELEVISION]] [[thank]] to the scandal at the [[prize]] he is now some [[kinds]] of celebrity. And this is just, I [[think]], the climax of this main [[subjects]] [[throughout]] which the [[movie]] revolves. [[Aforementioned]] this, I [[reckon]] the [[movies]] [[similarly]] [[offered]] us a solution to get along with this, [[exemplified]] [[during]] the [[movies]] by Sidney's attitude: don't [[gotten]] too [[grave]] about yourself or about [[somebody]] else ... "[[yet]] saints were people in the [[commence]]" ... as [[Sofie]] once [[say]] in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first [[placing]]: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 1879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Upon The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[praised]] for being [[David]] Lynch's [[first]] [[film]] that [[ignored]] his regular [[themes]] of the [[macabre]] and the [[surreal]]. Based on a [[true]] [[story]] of one [[man]] and his [[journey]] to [[visit]] his estranged brother on a [[John]] Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an [[odd]] story for [[Lynch]] to direct. [[Yet]] as the story [[develops]] you can see some of Lynch's [[trademark]] [[motifs]] coming through.

Lynch's [[focus]] on [[small]] town [[America]] and its [[inhabitants]] is [[still]] as prevalent as in his [[previous]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or [[Twin]] Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the [[weirdness]] is curbed down. The [[restrictions]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can [[think]] of that features a G rating. [[Incredibly]] [[significant]], this films stands as evidence that [[beautiful]] and [[significant]] family films can be produced.

The Straight Story was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For [[many]] Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally acclaimed, the only overly [[negative]] [[review]] by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a [[typical]] Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his protagonist Alvin Straight "quoting lines directly from Confucious." He argues that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[criticism]] that many will read for the film. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the sense of Eraserhead, Lost Highway or Mulholland [[Drive]] - all films which I [[also]] adore, The Straight Story features a different side of Lynch that is by no means [[terrible]]. If you are a Lynch fan, it is most important to separate that side of Lynch with this [[feature]].

The narrative is slow and [[thoughtful]], which [[gives]] you a [[real]] sense of the protagonist's [[thoughts]] as he travels to his destination. Alvin constantly is reminded about his [[past]] and his relationships with his wife, children and his brother. [[Yet]] particularly [[significant]] is that there are no [[flashbacks]], which only [[adds]] to the effect, which [[reminded]] me of my [[conversations]] with my grandparents. The conclusion [[arrives]] like watching a boat being carried down a slow meandering river and it is beautiful to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to [[go]] to America. The performances are also [[excellent]] with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting [[old]] and comes highly recommended! Upon The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[hailing]] for being [[Dawood]] Lynch's [[fiirst]] [[movie]] that [[forgotten]] his regular [[item]] of the [[ghoulish]] and the [[bizarre]]. Based on a [[real]] [[tale]] of one [[males]] and his [[tour]] to [[visited]] his estranged brother on a [[Jon]] Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an [[weird]] story for [[Bastien]] to direct. [[Even]] as the story [[develop]] you can see some of Lynch's [[brand]] [[motif]] coming through.

Lynch's [[concentrations]] on [[petite]] town [[Americas]] and its [[villagers]] is [[however]] as prevalent as in his [[former]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or [[Doubles]] Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the [[strangeness]] is curbed down. The [[limiting]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can [[ideas]] of that features a G rating. [[Unspeakably]] [[major]], this films stands as evidence that [[excellent]] and [[cannot]] family films can be produced.

The Straight Story was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For [[multiple]] Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally acclaimed, the only overly [[bad]] [[revisions]] by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a [[classic]] Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his protagonist Alvin Straight "quoting lines directly from Confucious." He argues that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[critique]] that many will read for the film. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the sense of Eraserhead, Lost Highway or Mulholland [[Driving]] - all films which I [[apart]] adore, The Straight Story features a different side of Lynch that is by no means [[horrendous]]. If you are a Lynch fan, it is most important to separate that side of Lynch with this [[attribute]].

The narrative is slow and [[pensive]], which [[donne]] you a [[actual]] sense of the protagonist's [[idea]] as he travels to his destination. Alvin constantly is reminded about his [[preceding]] and his relationships with his wife, children and his brother. [[However]] particularly [[major]] is that there are no [[recollections]], which only [[inserting]] to the effect, which [[remind]] me of my [[interviews]] with my grandparents. The conclusion [[arriving]] like watching a boat being carried down a slow meandering river and it is beautiful to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to [[going]] to America. The performances are also [[admirable]] with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting [[elderly]] and comes highly recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 1880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this was an excellent and very honest portrayal of paralysis and racism. This movie never panders to the audience and never gets predictable. The acting was top-notch and the movie reminded me of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". --------------------------------------------- Result 1881 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Inappropriate. The PG rating that this movie gets is [[yet]] another [[huge]] misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. Parents don't be fooled, [[taking]] an elementary school child to this movie is a huge [[mistake]]. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for kids, but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that aside, The Cat in the Hat is still a [[terrible]] movie. The [[casting]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving graces. The beautiful [[Kelly]] Preston and the always likeable (or hateable in this case) Alec Baldwin are both good in their roles even [[though]] Preston is almost too [[beautiful]] for a role like this. The kids are conditioned [[actors]] and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing [[things]] at the screen.

Did I mention there was an oversized talking cat in this [[movie]]? Mike Myers is [[absolutely]] deplorable. I didn't [[like]] him as the [[voice]] of Shrek, and I [[truly]] [[believe]] now that [[Myers]] should not be [[allowed]] near the [[realm]] of children's [[films]] ever again. His [[portrayal]] of The [[Cat]] is a [[slightly]] toned down version of Fat [[Bastard]] and [[Austin]] Powers.

In the end, the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he [[came]], even if just for a day, he [[ruined]] 82 minutes of my [[life]], 82 minutes of personal [[anger]] and [[strife]].

The [[Cat]] in the Hat may be the worst kids movie ever. Inappropriate. The PG rating that this movie gets is [[however]] another [[great]] misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. Parents don't be fooled, [[adopting]] an elementary school child to this movie is a huge [[mistaken]]. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for kids, but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that aside, The Cat in the Hat is still a [[shocking]] movie. The [[foundry]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving graces. The beautiful [[Killy]] Preston and the always likeable (or hateable in this case) Alec Baldwin are both good in their roles even [[despite]] Preston is almost too [[marvellous]] for a role like this. The kids are conditioned [[players]] and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing [[items]] at the screen.

Did I mention there was an oversized talking cat in this [[filmmaking]]? Mike Myers is [[totally]] deplorable. I didn't [[loves]] him as the [[vocal]] of Shrek, and I [[genuinely]] [[think]] now that [[Meyers]] should not be [[allowing]] near the [[realms]] of children's [[film]] ever again. His [[portrait]] of The [[Kitten]] is a [[somewhat]] toned down version of Fat [[Bitch]] and [[Aston]] Powers.

In the end, the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he [[arrived]], even if just for a day, he [[obliterated]] 82 minutes of my [[lives]], 82 minutes of personal [[fury]] and [[dissension]].

The [[Kitten]] in the Hat may be the worst kids movie ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1882 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having just seen this on TMC, it's fresh in my mind. It's obvious that while the stooges are featured stars, they don't really run the show. First, they're broken into 2 groups - Moe, as "Shorty" and Larry and Curly as a pair of vagrants, so there's not a whole lot of full team work. The love story that fuels the plot is uninteresting, the two ladies are the only ones with any acting ability, there's another group of musical stooges that are unfunny, unless you consider their attempts at being funny to be sadly buffoonish. The music is tiresome, they drive cars to the ranch and then depend on horses, the dorky western wear is silly, and there's an awful lot of the movie with no stooges on camera. By the way, this is obviously after Curley's first stroke, and his reduced energy level is clear. Vernon Dent appears early on in an uncredited role. I loved everything these guys ever did, including all the non-Curley stuff, but this little dogie is pretty lousy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1883 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "GOOD TIMES," in my opinion, is a must-see CBS hit! Despite the fact that I've never seen every episode, I still enjoy it. It's hard to say which one is my favorite. Also, I really love the theme song. If you ask me, even though I like everyone, it would have been nice if everyone had stayed on the show throughout its entire run. Everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though it can be seen on TV Land now, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This piece ain't really worth a comment.. It's simply the worst "horror" movie i have ever seen. The actors are bad as bad can be and the whole plot is so silly it nearly made me cry. Shame on you I say!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really didn't expect much from this film seeing as it has people from Parkersburg WV, which is were I live, acting in it. This town is dull and so is this film. There were a few decent scened in the movie but I was distracted by all the crappy landmarks they made a point to show. This movie may have been good if there was actual acting in it but there wasn't any. Unless you are from Parkersburg and are interested in seeing what you see everyday, then stay away from this movie. The dialog will put you to sleep, the acting will bore you to tears and Steven Soderberg should lose some credibility after shooting crap like this. Its a predictable movie with no surprises. What you see is what you get and that is a 73 minute tour of Parkersburg West Virginia and Belpre Ohio without a narrator. --------------------------------------------- Result 1886 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] The title of this [[obscure]] and (almost righteously) [[forgotten]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have [[anything]] [[else]] to say that was [[useful]], anyway. But hey, "The Forest" isn't totally [[hopeless]] and not [[even]] *that* [[bad]], actually. [[If]] nothing else, at [[least]] it obeys the, [[admittedly]] unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a [[couple]] of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a [[bit]] of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary [[brainless]] teenagers and the script has solid [[ambitions]] towards supernaturalism. The [[concept]] isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a [[couple]] of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The [[demented]] family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. The title of this [[fuzzy]] and (almost righteously) [[forgot]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have [[nothing]] [[further]] to say that was [[advantageous]], anyway. But hey, "The Forest" isn't totally [[incorrigible]] and not [[yet]] *that* [[unfavourable]], actually. [[Though]] nothing else, at [[lowest]] it obeys the, [[unquestionably]] unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a [[matches]] of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a [[bite]] of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary [[jerk]] teenagers and the script has solid [[aims]] towards supernaturalism. The [[conceptions]] isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a [[matching]] of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The [[screwball]] family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. --------------------------------------------- Result 1887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've always been enthusiastic about period dramas, an art form in which the BBC has excelled in the past. This presentation of "Byron" was unbelievable. Unbelievably bad! The script was dreadful, the acting uninspired, and all the characters woefully insipid. Apparently Byron was "mad bad and dangerous to know", and set the ladies hearts all-a-flutter. Not in this production. Here he appeared as a tawdry jumped-up little squirt instead of a fiery hero of womenfolk and the Greek struggle for independence. It is said that Byron walked with a limp. This portrayal of the man was just limp all over.

I watched the whole two and a half hours waiting for something to spark into life. Not a splutter, not even a glimmer. It was utter tedium, if not downright boredom, from start to finish.

Having the opinion that no-one will ever better the Bard of Avon, I also believe that Byron's poetry is over-revered and to my mind should be flung on the back burner, and this dramatisation of his life should be accorded the same treatment.

I think the BBC lost its nous with this one --------------------------------------------- Result 1888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having looked at some of the other [[comments]] here, I have a [[main]] complaint with this [[presentation]].

The two primary [[characters]] are attractive in their own [[ways]] - the [[beautiful]] "[[victim]]," and the [[handsome]], [[obviously]] [[extremely]] "off-center," blue-collar protagonist (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns [[beating]] the hell out of each other, [[sort]] of like a Caucasian Kabuki [[scenario]].

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced [[complaint]] is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. [[Beginning]] with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be [[exaggerating]] what has occurred.

But this is a film and [[story]], [[compelling]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. Having looked at some of the other [[sightings]] here, I have a [[leading]] complaint with this [[submissions]].

The two primary [[attribute]] are attractive in their own [[methods]] - the [[wondrous]] "[[victims]]," and the [[leggy]], [[unmistakably]] [[unbelievably]] "off-center," blue-collar protagonist (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns [[overpowering]] the hell out of each other, [[kinds]] of like a Caucasian Kabuki [[screenplays]].

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced [[grievance]] is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. [[Starts]] with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be [[overkill]] what has occurred.

But this is a film and [[history]], [[conclusive]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a [[fine]] musical with a timeless [[score]] by one of my [[favorite]] composers (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[atmosphere]] which gives the [[movie]] a [[lot]] of charm, but in terms of a [[story]].. well it's not really there. [[Or]] at [[least]], not very well [[worked]] out. The acting is [[also]] not so smooth by [[Caron]]. But I [[liked]] some of the [[dialogues]], I [[liked]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[character]] [[played]] by Levant, the [[colors]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[quite]] [[magnificent]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the [[dot]] to me. This is a [[fined]] musical with a timeless [[notation]] by one of my [[preferable]] composers (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[vibe]] which gives the [[cinema]] a [[lots]] of charm, but in terms of a [[saga]].. well it's not really there. [[Nor]] at [[fewer]], not very well [[work]] out. The acting is [[apart]] not so smooth by [[Apostrophe]]. But I [[loved]] some of the [[dialog]], I [[loved]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[personages]] [[done]] by Levant, the [[dye]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[perfectly]] [[wondrous]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the [[points]] to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How I got into it: When I started watching this series on Cartoon Network,I have to say that I've never seen anything like this,and it was the best. But when I started collecting the series on VHS,and years later on DVD part of Bandai's Anime Legends collections. It was amazing,and truly worth watching. It had a lot of exploding action that will blow you out of your seat. And of course,the theme songs "Just Communication",and Rhythm Emotions" were the best.

Characters,and Gundams: My favorite characters in the show were:Heero,Duo,Relena,Treize,Lady Und,Noin,and Zechs. My favorite Gundams in the show that I liked the most are the Wing Zero,and Epyon,and of course the Altron,and Deathscythe I,and II.

Meaning of the show: What this series also tells us that in real life,wars are very hard and we can sometimes win,or lose. But peace can also be hard to obtain,and I do believe the Gundam pilots are doing the right thing,and are trying to obtain world peace.

But however,this show is truly the best of the best. So in closing to this review,after you watch this show,see the Movie Endless Waltz. --------------------------------------------- Result 1891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Seriously]] the only [[good]] [[thing]] about this year [[ceremony]] were the winners.

[[Although]] the ceremony itself was pretty [[short]] it still was somewhat boring. I think it's [[seriously]] time to look for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY [[new]]. It's [[pretty]] [[obvious]] that they tried to make the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Diddy]] and Prince present a [[category]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the presenter was an attempt to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[None]] of it really [[worked]] out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a [[good]] presenter. I [[really]] [[merely]] [[saw]] him as a guy who just [[talked]] every now and then in between of the [[different]] categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for [[instance]] [[Billy]] Crystal's.

[[Also]] the handing out of the awards was [[pretty]] dumb at [[times]]. Not letting everybody come to the stage but [[also]] handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was [[plain]] weird.

[[Still]], I can't remember being any more [[satisfied]] with the [[award]] winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the [[last]] [[couple]] of [[years]] [[always]] had been the [[case]]. So does that mean it had been a [[good]] [[year]] for [[movies]] with [[lots]] of [[competitive]] [[contestants]]? I don't [[think]] so. I [[think]] most of the [[movies]] will be [[largely]] [[forgotten]] in 20 [[years]] from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar [[Baby]]" and "The Passion of the [[Christ]]" [[maybe]]. Sure I don't agree with [[every]] single [[award]] that was [[handed]] out this year, for [[instance]] Caleb Deschanel should had won for best [[cinematography]], not that I don't like Robert Richardson's [[work]], he [[really]] did some [[amazing]] [[work]] for most of Oliver Stone's [[work]] but I [[really]] feel that Deschanel [[deserved]] the award [[way]] more. [[Also]] I [[would]] had [[liked]] [[seeing]] Jim Miller and [[Paul]] Rubell [[win]] for best editing and [[John]] Debney for [[best]] [[music]]. But [[oh]] well, there is no way the Academy Awards can [[please]] [[everybody]] of course, I [[understand]] that. There will [[always]] be people complaining about the [[winners]].

It [[also]] was [[funny]] to [[see]] that most of the [[award]] presenters were [[way]] more nervous than the [[nominees]] and [[winners]]. [[Did]] Prince [[said]] any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable [[show]] but with nice winners.

4/10 [[Gravely]] the only [[alright]] [[stuff]] about this year [[ceremonies]] were the winners.

[[While]] the ceremony itself was pretty [[terse]] it still was somewhat boring. I think it's [[profoundly]] time to look for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY [[nuevo]]. It's [[quite]] [[noticeable]] that they tried to make the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Didi]] and Prince present a [[class]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the presenter was an attempt to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[Nos]] of it really [[works]] out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a [[alright]] presenter. I [[genuinely]] [[simply]] [[noticed]] him as a guy who just [[spoken]] every now and then in between of the [[diverse]] categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for [[example]] [[Billie]] Crystal's.

[[Additionally]] the handing out of the awards was [[belle]] dumb at [[moments]]. Not letting everybody come to the stage but [[apart]] handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was [[lowlands]] weird.

[[However]], I can't remember being any more [[glad]] with the [[awards]] winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the [[latter]] [[couples]] of [[olds]] [[consistently]] had been the [[example]]. So does that mean it had been a [[buena]] [[annum]] for [[theater]] with [[lot]] of [[compete]] [[contestant]]? I don't [[believe]] so. I [[believing]] most of the [[film]] will be [[primarily]] [[overlooked]] in 20 [[ages]] from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar [[Honey]]" and "The Passion of the [[Goodness]]" [[probably]]. Sure I don't agree with [[each]] single [[awards]] that was [[gave]] out this year, for [[lawsuit]] Caleb Deschanel should had won for best [[movie]], not that I don't like Robert Richardson's [[collaboration]], he [[truly]] did some [[staggering]] [[cooperate]] for most of Oliver Stone's [[collaboration]] but I [[genuinely]] feel that Deschanel [[deserves]] the award [[pathway]] more. [[Additionally]] I [[could]] had [[wished]] [[witnessing]] Jim Miller and [[Pablo]] Rubell [[wins]] for best editing and [[Jon]] Debney for [[optimum]] [[musician]]. But [[aw]] well, there is no way the Academy Awards can [[invite]] [[somebody]] of course, I [[understands]] that. There will [[perpetually]] be people complaining about the [[winner]].

It [[additionally]] was [[hilarious]] to [[behold]] that most of the [[awards]] presenters were [[ways]] more nervous than the [[nominations]] and [[winner]]. [[Got]] Prince [[says]] any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable [[demonstrate]] but with nice winners.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged filmmaking and [[synchronised]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film started. And the cinema's peeling [[paint]] gradually became more interesting than the [[shoddy]] [[mess]] on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas [[promises]] much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only [[escape]] from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and [[rewrite]] them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous [[shots]] of photogenic Cubans gushing with [[joy]], [[grief]], [[pity]], [[terror]] and the like.

The [[problem]] is that the [[simplicity]] of the narrative is [[marred]] by [[endless]] [[excursions]] into film-school artiness, latino [[caricature]], [[Marx]] [[brothers]] [[slapstick]] and even - during a [[particularly]] underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's [[face]].

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the [[boss]] at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. [[Her]] boss-eyed [[accomplice]], Concha, variously [[points]] [[fingers]], eavesdrops and screeches. [[Cesar]], the metalhead [[dolt]] and [[romantic]] interest, [[reveals]] hidden writing talent when [[Carla]] departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for [[good]] [[measure]]. All this [[would]] be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon [[comic]] strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow [[pretensions]], [[ahem]].

Nada Mas attempts to [[straddle]] the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of [[Amelie]] and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' [[theme]] of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an [[eccentric]] [[single]] white [[female]] who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to [[bring]] magic into the [[lives]] of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any [[dross]] that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This [[film]] should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged filmmaking and [[synchronize]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film started. And the cinema's peeling [[repaint]] gradually became more interesting than the [[inferior]] [[disarray]] on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas [[pledges]] much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only [[flee]] from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and [[rewriting]] them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous [[punches]] of photogenic Cubans gushing with [[pleasure]], [[bereavement]], [[compassion]], [[panic]] and the like.

The [[difficulty]] is that the [[simplified]] of the narrative is [[tarnished]] by [[countless]] [[outings]] into film-school artiness, latino [[toon]], [[Marxism]] [[siblings]] [[comedic]] and even - during a [[specially]] underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's [[confronts]].

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the [[chef]] at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. [[His]] boss-eyed [[complicity]], Concha, variously [[dot]] [[toes]], eavesdrops and screeches. [[Ceasar]], the metalhead [[simpleton]] and [[sentimental]] interest, [[unveils]] hidden writing talent when [[Carlo]] departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for [[buena]] [[steps]]. All this [[could]] be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon [[hilarious]] strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow [[pretenses]], [[hmmm]].

Nada Mas attempts to [[overlapping]] the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of [[Emilie]] and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' [[thematic]] of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an [[quirky]] [[exclusive]] white [[femmes]] who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to [[bringing]] magic into the [[iife]] of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any [[dairy]] that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This [[cinema]] should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. --------------------------------------------- Result 1893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Some people might consider this movie a piece of artwork - to be able to express your imagination on film in order to create a movie filled with antagonizing pain and death.. I personally think that this movie is a disgust, which should have never been released. This movie is repulsive, illogical and meaningless. Not only is it a complete waste of time but it makes you sick for days to come. The appalling images shown in the film not only make you grasp for air but they set in your mind and it takes days to forget them. Such a shame that people waste their imagination on such inhumane suffering.. "Kill Bill" would be another example but at least "Kill Bill" has its purpose, meaning, climax and resolution.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1894 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I avoided watching this [[film]] for the [[longest]] [[time]]. [[Long]] before it was even released I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I wanted nothing to do with it. I never watched it in the [[theatre]]. I shook my head in disbelief at the 11 Academy Awards - even though I had never seen it. Then I was asked to be a judge at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this [[movie]]. "It was so [[great]]," she [[said]]. "You really [[felt]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a [[great]] movie.

Where to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking [[contestant]] was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The nonchalance as news of the iceberg first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very impressive, indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 I avoided watching this [[cinematography]] for the [[tallest]] [[moment]]. [[Largo]] before it was even released I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I wanted nothing to do with it. I never watched it in the [[cinema]]. I shook my head in disbelief at the 11 Academy Awards - even though I had never seen it. Then I was asked to be a judge at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this [[kino]]. "It was so [[wondrous]]," she [[asserted]]. "You really [[smelled]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a [[wondrous]] movie.

Where to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking [[contender]] was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The nonchalance as news of the iceberg first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very impressive, indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] It [[could]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad job but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[beautiful]] [[movie]]. I have [[loved]] it [[since]] local [[channels]] [[used]] to [[show]] it. Graham [[Greene]] is one of my [[favorite]] writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Many]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[among]] them. I [[think]] I [[saw]] "Brighton [[Rock]]" once [[many]] years [[ago]] and [[liked]] it but maybe I'm [[simply]] thinking fondly of the novel.) This is [[superbly]] cast. Charles [[Boyer]] does not, it's [[true]], [[come]] across as Spanish. But he [[seems]] to have the [[perfect]] temperament for this [[character]] -- tired, wary, [[caring]]. [[Lauren]] Bacall is appealing as the British [[girl]] who falls for him. But the [[supporting]] [[players]] are the [[best]]: Katina Paxinou is [[excellent]]. Her performance is a [[little]] [[Grand]] Guignol, but I [[attribute]] that to the director. [[Peter]] Lorre, whom we first [[meet]] as he [[gives]] [[Boyer]] a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal [[language]], is [[excellent]] -- as [[always]].

And Wanda Hendrix [[could]] [[break]] the [[hardest]] heart. She [[comes]] across as a precocious [[early]] [[teenager]]. The [[character]] [[wants]] to be [[helpful]]. She does her [[best]].

I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] [[highly]]. Not without [[reservations]]. The [[reservation]] is, [[primarily]], that it is a [[little]] stolid. But the story and acting can [[scarcely]] be bettered. It [[would]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad job but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[wondrous]] [[movies]]. I have [[adore]] it [[because]] local [[canal]] [[using]] to [[illustrating]] it. Graham [[Green]] is one of my [[preferred]] writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Numerous]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[between]] them. I [[believing]] I [[watched]] "Brighton [[Boulder]]" once [[multiple]] years [[prior]] and [[enjoyed]] it but maybe I'm [[purely]] thinking fondly of the novel.) This is [[stunningly]] cast. Charles [[Boer]] does not, it's [[genuine]], [[arriving]] across as Spanish. But he [[appears]] to have the [[impeccable]] temperament for this [[characters]] -- tired, wary, [[care]]. [[Lorraine]] Bacall is appealing as the British [[woman]] who falls for him. But the [[succour]] [[actors]] are the [[better]]: Katina Paxinou is [[wondrous]]. Her performance is a [[tiny]] [[Huge]] Guignol, but I [[features]] that to the director. [[Pete]] Lorre, whom we first [[satisfy]] as he [[delivers]] [[Boer]] a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal [[vocabulary]], is [[wondrous]] -- as [[unceasingly]].

And Wanda Hendrix [[would]] [[blackout]] the [[lousiest]] heart. She [[occurs]] across as a precocious [[precocious]] [[juvenile]]. The [[characters]] [[wanting]] to be [[instrumental]]. She does her [[nicest]].

I [[recommendations]] this [[movies]] [[vastly]]. Not without [[bookings]]. The [[booking]] is, [[basically]], that it is a [[kiddo]] stolid. But the story and acting can [[barely]] be bettered. --------------------------------------------- Result 1896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Just]] like [[last]] years event WWE New [[Years]] Revolution 2006 was headlined by an [[Elimination]] [[Chamber]] [[match]]. The [[difference]] between [[last]] [[years]] and this years [[match]] [[however]] was the [[entertainment]] value. In reality only three people stood a [[chance]] of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those [[men]] were [[current]] champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and [[Shawn]] Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Mac]] [[would]] put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris [[Masters]]. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one [[night]]. It was [[obvious]] he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a [[spear]] to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only [[entertaining]] piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like [[last]] year, was [[truly]] [[atrocious]]. Triple H and The Big Show put on a [[snore]] [[fest]] that had me [[struggling]] to [[stay]] away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? [[Any]] pay-per-view that has both [[Jerry]] Lawler and Viscera [[wrestling]] on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a [[success]] [[really]] does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this [[stuff]]?) and [[Big]] Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a [[little]] help from his Mama.

The [[women]] of the WWE also had a busy [[night]]. There was the [[usual]] Diva [[nonsense]] with a Bra and [[Panties]] Gauntlet [[match]] which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was [[also]] on the line. In a [[match]], I [[thought]] would have been [[left]] to [[brew]] till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a [[good]] [[match]]. Trish won the [[contest]] but it was [[evident]] that this is going to [[continue]] for the foreseeable [[future]].

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. [[Only]] like [[final]] years event WWE New [[Yr]] Revolution 2006 was headlined by an [[Eliminates]] [[Sala]] [[matches]]. The [[discrepancy]] between [[latter]] [[ages]] and this years [[coupling]] [[still]] was the [[amusement]] value. In reality only three people stood a [[chances]] of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those [[man]] were [[contemporary]] champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and [[Shaun]] Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Macs]] [[ought]] put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris [[Master]]. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one [[soir]]. It was [[noticeable]] he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a [[lance]] to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only [[amusing]] piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like [[latter]] year, was [[really]] [[frightful]]. Triple H and The Big Show put on a [[snoring]] [[festival]] that had me [[battles]] to [[sojourn]] away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? [[Every]] pay-per-view that has both [[Gerry]] Lawler and Viscera [[fights]] on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a [[successes]] [[genuinely]] does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this [[thing]]?) and [[Vast]] Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a [[small]] help from his Mama.

The [[woman]] of the WWE also had a busy [[overnight]]. There was the [[normal]] Diva [[senseless]] with a Bra and [[Pants]] Gauntlet [[matches]] which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was [[furthermore]] on the line. In a [[teaming]], I [[thinks]] would have been [[exited]] to [[brewery]] till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a [[buena]] [[matches]]. Trish won the [[rivalry]] but it was [[noticeable]] that this is going to [[uninterrupted]] for the foreseeable [[futur]].

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[got]] a free pass to a preview of this [[movie]] [[last]] [[night]] and didn't know what to [[expect]]. The [[premise]] [[seemed]] [[silly]] and I assumed it [[would]] be a [[lot]] of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[great]] [[surprise]]. I laughed so [[hard]] I cried at some of the jokes. This [[film]] is a [[must]] see for anyone with an [[open]] mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[go]] to with your [[grandmother]] ([[Jack]] Palance?) or small children. The language is [[filthy]], the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. I [[ai]] a free pass to a preview of this [[flick]] [[final]] [[soir]] and didn't know what to [[waits]]. The [[assumption]] [[looked]] [[dopey]] and I assumed it [[ought]] be a [[batch]] of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[wondrous]] [[surprising]]. I laughed so [[harsh]] I cried at some of the jokes. This [[kino]] is a [[ought]] see for anyone with an [[opens]] mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[going]] to with your [[grandma]] ([[Gato]] Palance?) or small children. The language is [[squalid]], the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 1898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film loses its way in a conventional farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[great]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A [[diverting]], but not [[great]] film. Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film loses its way in a conventional farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[wondrous]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A [[deflecting]], but not [[wondrous]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[worst]] [[Laurel]] & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as [[close]] to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite [[huge]] flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[meanest]] [[Laurier]] & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as [[nearer]] to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite [[whopping]] flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". --------------------------------------------- Result 1900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] (Spoiler included, some [[would]] [[say]])

This [[film]] is not [[possible]] to [[take]] [[seriously]]. At some parts it is so [[awfully]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Try]] me for the [[sequence]] where Stallone's [[character]] jumps some 20 meters with full [[climbing]] gear or (and this is [[really]] my favorite) snuffs a bad [[guy]] by sticking him [[onto]] a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he [[muster]] to [[accomplish]] such feats? I [[dunno]], but he sure [[gives]] [[reality]] a [[run]] for the [[money]]. (Spoiler included, some [[could]] [[tell]])

This [[filmmaking]] is not [[probable]] to [[taking]] [[severely]]. At some parts it is so [[terribly]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Endeavour]] me for the [[sequencing]] where Stallone's [[trait]] jumps some 20 meters with full [[rising]] gear or (and this is [[truly]] my favorite) snuffs a bad [[buddy]] by sticking him [[on]] a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he [[gather]] to [[reach]] such feats? I [[thats]], but he sure [[delivers]] [[realism]] a [[execute]] for the [[cash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Norman, Is That You? was (this is all [[third]] hand, so take it with a [[grain]] of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the [[prints]] from the theater can't have been that great. [[Still]], performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good.

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD [[PIECE]]: it reflected the [[attitudes]] in the mid to [[early]] 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the [[movie]] [[really]] [[shines]] in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really [[memorable]].

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be [[missed]]. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the [[movie]]! Norman, Is That You? was (this is all [[terzi]] hand, so take it with a [[squall]] of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the [[footprint]] from the theater can't have been that great. [[However]], performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good.

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD [[SLICE]]: it reflected the [[attitude]] in the mid to [[prematurely]] 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the [[cinematography]] [[truthfully]] [[glows]] in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really [[eventful]].

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be [[flunked]]. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the [[kino]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This overrated, short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip [[bar]]. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[silly]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. Next to "Law & Order" TP spews originality [[left]] and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "[[weirdness]]", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a [[merely]] watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes [[around]] in circles, [[spinning]] [[webs]] in [[every]] corner but (or because of it) [[ultimately]] going [[nowhere]]. The [[supposed]] [[weirdness]] is [[always]] [[forced]]; the [[characters]] don't behave in a strange [[way]] as much as they behave in an [[IDIOTIC]] way half the time. There's a difference...

[[Whenever]] I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "[[Living]] [[In]] Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the [[director]] (Buscemi) for succumbing to the [[tired]] old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I [[think]] of Lynch. You [[want]] [[weird]]? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's [[basically]] [[abstract]]. You [[want]] a [[unique]] [[TV]] [[show]]? Watch "The Prisoner". You [[want]] a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's [[films]] [[offer]] that. TP [[looks]] [[like]] an overly coiffed TV crime [[drama]] in which all the [[young]] people look like fashion models. The cast gives [[TP]] a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. This overrated, short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip [[barrister]]. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[farcical]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. Next to "Law & Order" TP spews originality [[exited]] and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "[[strangeness]]", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a [[alone]] watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes [[roundabout]] in circles, [[spin]] [[networks]] in [[each]] corner but (or because of it) [[lastly]] going [[everywhere]]. The [[presumed]] [[strangeness]] is [[steadily]] [[compelled]]; the [[trait]] don't behave in a strange [[path]] as much as they behave in an [[DAFT]] way half the time. There's a difference...

[[Wherever]] I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "[[Life]] [[During]] Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the [[headmaster]] (Buscemi) for succumbing to the [[jaded]] old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I [[believe]] of Lynch. You [[wanna]] [[bizarre]]? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's [[mainly]] [[succinct]]. You [[wanting]] a [[particular]] [[TVS]] [[illustrates]]? Watch "The Prisoner". You [[wish]] a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's [[filmmaking]] [[provide]] that. TP [[seem]] [[iike]] an overly coiffed TV crime [[theatrical]] in which all the [[youthful]] people look like fashion models. The cast gives [[PT]] a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] This [[film]] is a [[flagrant]] rip-off of one of the best [[novels]] of all time, Silas Marner by [[George]] Eliot.

The details of the film [[shown]] on IMDb do give [[acknowledgement]] to the original authoress but I did not [[see]] this at the beginning of the film, only a [[credit]] at the [[end]] of it [[saying]] "[[suggested]] by the [[book]] Silas Marner". [[Suggested]]? It was [[nothing]] but a complete rip- off of all the [[essential]] elements of the [[story]]:

A wronged and [[sad]] [[old]] [[man]], an [[artisan]], poor and [[lonely]], has all his money [[stolen]]. One night a child wanders up to his door as her [[mother]] [[lies]] [[dying]] in the snow outside. The [[man]] [[takes]] her in and [[brings]] her up until one day the local squire (or [[rich]] politician here) [[demands]] to [[adopt]] the [[child]]. It is he who has [[fathered]] the [[child]] during an [[illicit]] affair [[years]] before. The [[battle]] then ensues as to who should have [[legal]] [[custody]] of the child.

[[In]] this and [[every]] other aspect of the [[film]], the [[story]] is [[exactly]] the same. [[In]] only one can I [[find]] a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but [[perhaps]] that [[would]] have strained the acting [[abilities]] of [[Mr]] [[Martin]] too far. On [[top]] of that he has his hair [[dyed]] in some carrot [[juice]] concoction ([[presumably]] to make him [[look]] [[younger]], but [[actually]] making him [[look]] more the [[clown]] that he is)! There is [[also]] the [[addition]] of [[meaningless]] [[jokes]], that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the [[story]] which have no [[part]] in it and only detract from the profoundness of the [[story]]. Like when the [[child]] [[cries]] in the [[courthouse]] [[declaring]] she can only be happy with the [[man]] who has [[fathered]] her all these years. This is conveyed in the [[film]] by the [[girl]] [[applying]] nasal decongestant to the [[bridge]] of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity [[within]] the [[film]] industry [[permit]] such a [[film]] to be [[made]]. If I was a [[trustee]] of [[George]] Eliot's I [[would]] [[insist]] on reparation. If I was [[Steve]] [[Martin]] I [[would]] [[send]] the [[profits]] to that estate, or to the poor. [[At]] the very [[least]] it should be entitled Silas Marner - [[adapted]] by S [[Martin]]. [[Or]] better still [[removed]] from the archives!

[[If]] you are interested in this [[story]] - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[apparent]] rip-off of one of the best [[storybooks]] of all time, Silas Marner by [[Giorgi]] Eliot.

The details of the film [[revealed]] on IMDb do give [[recognizing]] to the original authoress but I did not [[seeing]] this at the beginning of the film, only a [[credits]] at the [[terminate]] of it [[arguing]] "[[proposing]] by the [[workbook]] Silas Marner". [[Suggests]]? It was [[none]] but a complete rip- off of all the [[key]] elements of the [[conte]]:

A wronged and [[unfortunate]] [[elderly]] [[males]], an [[craftsman]], poor and [[alone]], has all his money [[stealing]]. One night a child wanders up to his door as her [[mommy]] [[lying]] [[died]] in the snow outside. The [[men]] [[pick]] her in and [[bring]] her up until one day the local squire (or [[richer]] politician here) [[requested]] to [[approve]] the [[children]]. It is he who has [[conceived]] the [[children]] during an [[unlawful]] affair [[ages]] before. The [[struggles]] then ensues as to who should have [[judiciary]] [[detention]] of the child.

[[Among]] this and [[each]] other aspect of the [[flick]], the [[storytelling]] is [[accurately]] the same. [[During]] only one can I [[finds]] a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but [[potentially]] that [[could]] have strained the acting [[proficiency]] of [[Herr]] [[Martina]] too far. On [[topped]] of that he has his hair [[coloured]] in some carrot [[jus]] concoction ([[possibly]] to make him [[glance]] [[youngest]], but [[indeed]] making him [[peek]] more the [[joker]] that he is)! There is [[similarly]] the [[extra]] of [[senseless]] [[pleasantries]], that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the [[histories]] which have no [[parties]] in it and only detract from the profoundness of the [[storytelling]]. Like when the [[kid]] [[yell]] in the [[courts]] [[declares]] she can only be happy with the [[men]] who has [[conceived]] her all these years. This is conveyed in the [[flick]] by the [[chica]] [[applied]] nasal decongestant to the [[bridges]] of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity [[inside]] the [[movies]] industry [[authorise]] such a [[filmmaking]] to be [[introduced]]. If I was a [[trustees]] of [[Georgi]] Eliot's I [[could]] [[insists]] on reparation. If I was [[Stephens]] [[Martina]] I [[could]] [[dispatch]] the [[gains]] to that estate, or to the poor. [[During]] the very [[fewer]] it should be entitled Silas Marner - [[attuned]] by S [[Martins]]. [[Nor]] better still [[deleted]] from the archives!

[[Though]] you are interested in this [[storytelling]] - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. --------------------------------------------- Result 1904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unfortunately, because of US viewers' tendency to shun subtitles, this movie has not received the distribution nor attention it merits. Its subtle themes of belonging, identity, racial relations and especially how colonialism harms all parties, transcend the obvious dramatic tensions, the nostalgic memories of the protaganiste's childhood, and the exoticism of her relationship with her parents' "houseboy," perhaps the only "real" human she knows. We won't even look at her mother's relationship with this elegant man. There! i hope i've given you enough of a hook to take it in, whether you speak French or like subtitles or not. I challenge you to be as brave, strong and aware as La P'tite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Probable reasons why so many people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They [[might]] enjoy gore and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other [[reasons]] not covered here.

The only [[thing]] I [[liked]] about this [[film]] is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will [[almost]] definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... Probable reasons why so many people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They [[apt]] enjoy gore and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other [[grounds]] not covered here.

The only [[stuff]] I [[loved]] about this [[filmmaking]] is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will [[approximately]] definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... --------------------------------------------- Result 1906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It may (or may not) be considered interesting that the only reason I really checked out this movie in the first place was because I wanted to see the performance of the man who beat out Humphrey Bogart in his CASABLANCA (10/10 role for the Best Actor Oscar. (I still would have given the Oscar to Bogie, but Paul Lukas did do a great job and deserved the nomination, at least.) Well, I'm glad I did check this movie out, because I enjoyed it immensely. I think the movie did preach a little, but not only did I not mind, I enjoyed the speeches and was never bored with them.

The acting was outstanding in this movie. I especially enjoyed Paul Lukas, Lucile Watson (rightfully nominated for an Oscar), Bette Davis (wrongfully not nominated), George Coulouris and, oddly, Eric Roberts, who plays the middle child. I really enjoyed his character: an odd-looking boy who talks like some sort of philosopher. He just cracks me up. Even the characters name (Bodo) is funny.

The ending, in which Lukas's character was forced to do something he considered wrong even though he was doing it for all the right reasons, worked for me as well. I agreed with why he felt he had to what he did, and I understood why he couldn't quite explain it. The message this movie makes is a good and noble one, the scenery (meaning the house) is beautiful, and the acting is the excellent. Watch this movie if you ever get a chance.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember originally seeing this film at Radio City Music Hall when it came out. I didn't really understand the humor back then, but this movie can make me laugh out loud.

With all due respect to George Burns (RIP), Walter Matthau really deserved the Oscar for this film. His performance is amazing--given the fact that he was 20 years younger than his character, Willie Clark. His mannerisms are first-rate. ("You know what kind of songs he wrote? Sh*t!" and when speaking to the Spanish-speaking guy at the front desk: "No! No! No enchilada!!") Absolutely hilarious!

Kudos to Richard Benjamin, who played straight man to Matthau.

I just wish this was on DVD, because my VHS recording is getting a bit old.

I had no interest in seeing the remake with Woody Allen, because in no way can it match the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 1908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] No other [[movie]] has made me feel like this before... and I don't feel [[bad]]. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I [[waited]] to watch this movie (9 months) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[view]] this ______. The [[reason]] I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I wrack my brain I just can't seem to [[come]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a [[breather]]. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Thank]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No [[words]]. No [[thoughts]]. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait No other [[cinematic]] has made me feel like this before... and I don't feel [[inclement]]. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I [[hoped]] to watch this movie (9 months) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[opinions]] this ______. The [[grounds]] I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I wrack my brain I just can't seem to [[arriving]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a [[ventilation]]. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Appreciation]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No [[expression]]. No [[reflections]]. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait --------------------------------------------- Result 1909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A sweet and totally charming film, Shall We Dansu? made me laugh and cry. At first appearance, Sugiyama-san was not terribly appealing--an uptight salaryman, seemingly devoted to his family, but all too easily captivated by a face in a window. The object of his obsession is distant and cold. But by the end of the movie, I was in love with him, her, his wife and daughter, all the dance instructors and dance students. This uncomplicated story of transformation and renewal is a little jewel that I would enjoy seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Leave it to Braik to put on a good show. Finally he and Zorak are living their own lives outside of Spac Ghost Coast To Coast. I have to say that I love both of these shows a whole lot. They are completely what started Adult Swim. Brak made it big with an album that came out in the year 2000. It may not have been platinum, but his show was really popular to tons of people out there that love Adult Swims shows. I have to say that out of all the Adult Swim shows with no plot, this has to be the one with the most none plot ever made. That is why I like it so much, it is just such a classic in the Adult Swim history. I believe this is just such a great show, if you don't like it. Hey there were tons who hated it and tons who loved it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven has one of the strangest oeuvres of any [[major]] director: he started off making art-house [[films]] in his [[native]] Netherlands before [[moving]] to Hollywood where he [[began]] making subversive [[genre]] [[pieces]] which are [[often]] [[seen]] as [[mere]] [[entertainments]] by the mainstream [[crowd]]. 1983's The Fourth [[Man]] was the last [[film]] he made before [[moving]] to the U.S. and it [[seems]] to have been a [[transitional]] [[film]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Man]] it's clear that the [[film]] will be [[seen]] from the [[perspective]] of the [[famous]] [[albeit]] impoverished author Gerard. [[In]] a seeming homage to [[Carol]] Reed's [[similarly]] titled 1949 film The Third [[Man]] the film [[begins]] with an author making a [[trip]] to [[speak]] to a [[crowd]] of [[literature]] enthusiasts. The similarities end there, [[however]], as Gerard runs into no [[major]] complications before [[arriving]] at the auditorium and the [[speech]] itself goes fairly smoothly. [[In]] spite of the relative [[ease]] with which he [[completes]] this [[function]] we know that the author is somewhat [[troubled]] as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before [[leaving]] his [[house]] and he [[also]] has a surreal fantasy involving a [[hotel]] he sees advertised and a [[detached]] eyeball [[growing]] out of a door's peephole. That he [[sometimes]] has trouble [[keeping]] his fantasies [[separate]] from [[reality]] is made all the more [[clear]] when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he [[admits]] that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no [[longer]] knows whether [[something]] did or didn't happen."

The Fourth [[Man]] is full of [[surreal]] fantasies and [[dreams]] which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they [[relate]] to [[events]] which we have [[seen]] [[occur]] and because they [[sometimes]] foreshadow [[events]] which haven't occurred [[yet]]. Between the [[effectiveness]] of the unreal [[sequences]] and Verhoeven's [[careful]] editing [[style]] this [[ends]] up being the most [[atmospheric]] [[film]] this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth [[Man]] is [[also]] perversely [[funny]] as Gerard's [[deeply]] held Catholic beliefs [[seep]] into [[every]] aspect of his life [[including]] [[sexuality]]. He [[naturally]] associates a female [[hair]] [[stylist]] he knows [[intimately]] with the [[Biblical]] Delilah though he [[fears]] she'll remove an even more [[important]] [[symbol]] of masculinity with her [[scissors]]. [[In]] an erotic fantasy sequence that [[would]] make [[Luis]] Buñuel blush he [[substitutes]] a man he's [[attracted]] to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. [[Paulo]] Verhoeven has one of the strangest oeuvres of any [[sizable]] director: he started off making art-house [[cinematography]] in his [[indigenous]] Netherlands before [[shifting]] to Hollywood where he [[embarked]] making subversive [[gender]] [[segments]] which are [[typically]] [[watched]] as [[only]] [[amusement]] by the mainstream [[multitude]]. 1983's The Fourth [[Males]] was the last [[cinematic]] he made before [[transferring]] to the U.S. and it [[looks]] to have been a [[temporary]] [[flick]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Guy]] it's clear that the [[flick]] will be [[watched]] from the [[views]] of the [[prestigious]] [[whereas]] impoverished author Gerard. [[For]] a seeming homage to [[Carole]] Reed's [[moreover]] titled 1949 film The Third [[Guy]] the film [[launches]] with an author making a [[voyages]] to [[speaks]] to a [[multitude]] of [[documentaries]] enthusiasts. The similarities end there, [[albeit]], as Gerard runs into no [[sizable]] complications before [[arrived]] at the auditorium and the [[sermons]] itself goes fairly smoothly. [[At]] spite of the relative [[easing]] with which he [[finish]] this [[functioning]] we know that the author is somewhat [[tormented]] as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before [[leave]] his [[housing]] and he [[furthermore]] has a surreal fantasy involving a [[motel]] he sees advertised and a [[separated]] eyeball [[widening]] out of a door's peephole. That he [[occasionally]] has trouble [[maintaining]] his fantasies [[separated]] from [[realities]] is made all the more [[definite]] when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he [[recognizes]] that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no [[anymore]] knows whether [[somethin]] did or didn't happen."

The Fourth [[Guy]] is full of [[bizarre]] fantasies and [[nightmares]] which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they [[relating]] to [[incidents]] which we have [[watched]] [[arise]] and because they [[occasionally]] foreshadow [[incidents]] which haven't occurred [[still]]. Between the [[efficient]] of the unreal [[sequence]] and Verhoeven's [[wary]] editing [[styles]] this [[terminates]] up being the most [[barometric]] [[movies]] this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth [[Guy]] is [[furthermore]] perversely [[comical]] as Gerard's [[seriously]] held Catholic beliefs [[infiltrate]] into [[any]] aspect of his life [[containing]] [[sex]]. He [[obviously]] associates a female [[hairdresser]] [[hairdresser]] he knows [[closely]] with the [[Bible]] Delilah though he [[worries]] she'll remove an even more [[key]] [[symbols]] of masculinity with her [[snips]]. [[At]] an erotic fantasy sequence that [[ought]] make [[Louie]] Buñuel blush he [[substituting]] a man he's [[lured]] to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on Jordan Ladd. But [[watching]] this film [[almost]] put me off her. This is [[absolutely]] [[awful]]! I [[could]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so bland and generic. I would love it if the great Mistuharu Misawa [[Tiger]] Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "[[lake]]" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely [[wonderful]]. A true angel. But she couldn't even [[save]] this [[utter]] joke of a [[film]]. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth [[drug]]. It [[looked]] hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on Jordan Ladd. But [[staring]] this film [[hardly]] put me off her. This is [[totally]] [[frightful]]! I [[did]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so bland and generic. I would love it if the great Mistuharu Misawa [[Tigers]] Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "[[lakes]]" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely [[sumptuous]]. A true angel. But she couldn't even [[rescues]] this [[unmitigated]] joke of a [[filmmaking]]. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth [[pharmaceuticals]]. It [[seemed]] hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. --------------------------------------------- Result 1913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this at the Chicago Film Festival - avoid it at all costs unless you have sleep problems. It is a film filled with pretensions - it opens with a minor quote from "Hiroshima mon amour" and it's all downhill from there. Camera work - imagine a child trying to imitate Wong Kar Wai. Story line - Smokey Robinson and the Miracles' "The Love I saw in You Was Just a Mirage" expanded from 3 minutes to over 2 hours but filled with repetition. For butt numbing pain this film ranks with the benches at the Methodist church my parent dragged me to when I was a kid. I want 2+ hours of my life refunded. Julian Hernandez's promoter prefaced the viewing with comment that the film was "controversial" - that is true only for the film's narcotic effect. --------------------------------------------- Result 1914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This movie is without a [[doubt]] a [[perfect]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[rating]] this film low [[grades]] because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, [[thats]] ridiculous, saying that a [[Jackie]] Chan [[movie]] is [[bad]] because of its plot is like saying a porn [[movie]] is bad because it has no plot! you watch [[Jackie]] Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much [[concentrated]] on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American [[films]] from that era and [[even]] [[later]] you will realize that [[Jackie]] Chan's [[movies]] had over the top [[fights]] scenes and not really [[good]] plots while American [[movies]] had [[good]] plots but shitty action scenes [[compared]] to what [[Jackie]] Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the [[porn]], [[Jackie]] Chan is [[watched]] for the [[ACTION]], i [[think]] you people are [[rating]] it bad because there's no plot because you think [[thats]] how a smart movie critic [[would]] rate a good [[movie]] but the way i see it is a good movie is a [[movie]] that can [[keep]] me [[entertained]]. Sure the middle of the movie was [[boring]], VERY BORING, but put it this [[way]] the [[rest]] which is all [[action]] scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the [[way]] how American action movies were [[created]], they have [[even]] stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a [[true]] [[man]], a [[true]] entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes [[pure]] in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a [[walk]] in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. [[American]] movies rely so much on [[special]] effects and safety [[wires]] and stunt [[doubles]] and so [[much]] more. Police [[Story]] and many other [[Jackie]] Chan films are [[pieces]] of work of a [[true]] [[entertainer]] who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a [[masterpiece]] This movie is without a [[duda]] a [[impeccable]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[appraisals]] this film low [[rank]] because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, [[cant]] ridiculous, saying that a [[Jacky]] Chan [[cinema]] is [[horrid]] because of its plot is like saying a porn [[flick]] is bad because it has no plot! you watch [[Melanie]] Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much [[focused]] on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American [[cinematographic]] from that era and [[yet]] [[then]] you will realize that [[Melanie]] Chan's [[theater]] had over the top [[battling]] scenes and not really [[alright]] plots while American [[movie]] had [[buena]] plots but shitty action scenes [[likened]] to what [[Melanie]] Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the [[pornographic]], [[Melanie]] Chan is [[observed]] for the [[ACTIVITY]], i [[believe]] you people are [[valuation]] it bad because there's no plot because you think [[dunno]] how a smart movie critic [[could]] rate a good [[filmmaking]] but the way i see it is a good movie is a [[filmmaking]] that can [[maintaining]] me [[distracted]]. Sure the middle of the movie was [[bored]], VERY BORING, but put it this [[ways]] the [[remainder]] which is all [[actions]] scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the [[pathways]] how American action movies were [[generated]], they have [[yet]] stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a [[authentic]] [[dude]], a [[genuine]] entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes [[sheer]] in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a [[marche]] in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. [[America]] movies rely so much on [[particular]] effects and safety [[yarns]] and stunt [[doubling]] and so [[very]] more. Police [[Histories]] and many other [[Melanie]] Chan films are [[smithereens]] of work of a [[truthful]] [[performer]] who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a [[centerpiece]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1915 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This really should deserve a "O" rating, or even a negative ten. I watched this show for ages, and the show jumped the shark around series 7. This episode, however, is proof that the show has jumped the shark. It's writing is lazy, absurd, self-indulgent and not even worthy of rubbish like Beavis and Butthead.

It is quite possible to be ridiculous and still be fun -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Mummy, Count of Monte Cristo -- all "fun" movies that are not to be taken seriously. However, there is such thing as ridiculous as in "this is the worst thing I've ever seen." And indeed, this is the worst episode of Stargate I've ever seen. It's absolutely dreadful, and this coming from someone with a stargate in her basement.

Makes me want to sell all of my stargate props, most seriously. --------------------------------------------- Result 1916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I am very [[disappointed]] with "K-911." The [[original]] "good" quality of "K-9" doesn't [[exist]] any more. This is more [[like]] a sitcom! Some of [[casts]] from original movie returned and got some of my [[memory]] back. The [[captain]] of Dooley now [[loves]] to [[hit]] him like a scene from [[old]] [[comedy]] show. That was crazy. What's the [[deal]] with the [[change]] of Police? It [[seems]] like they are now [[LAPD]]! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " I am very [[frustrating]] with "K-911." The [[upfront]] "good" quality of "K-9" doesn't [[existent]] any more. This is more [[iike]] a sitcom! Some of [[throws]] from original movie returned and got some of my [[memories]] back. The [[skipper]] of Dooley now [[love]] to [[knocked]] him like a scene from [[antique]] [[humour]] show. That was crazy. What's the [[treat]] with the [[amend]] of Police? It [[looks]] like they are now [[NYPD]]! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " --------------------------------------------- Result 1917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Man]] oh man... I've been foolishly [[procrastinating]] (not the right term, there's a [[long]] list!) to watch this [[film]] and [[finally]] had the chance to do so. And "news" are: [[Marvellous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[For]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, [[Dogville]], [[Dancer]] in The [[Dark]], The Five [[Obstructions]], etc... Europa is probably the differential for its greatness in [[visual]] terms. Everything is [[beautifully]] [[somber]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "[[imaginary]]" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till [[noir]] [[films]] of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard [[Von]] Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well [[intended]] totalitarian" [[movie]] [[maker]] of nowadays. His [[authoritarian]] [[way]] of [[dealing]] with very [[intricate]] [[issues]], without being [[irrational]], hits the nerve of the viewer with the [[intent]] to [[cure]] some of the [[deepest]] [[wounds]] we feed in our hypocritical [[world]].

As Utopian as it seems, I do [[believe]] people like Von Trier could [[help]] [[society]] in [[many]] [[ways]] in a [[broader]] aspect. The day [[films]] and [[filmmakers]] that [[carry]] this [[sort]] of power are no [[longer]] necessary, as a tool for [[reflection]], [[perhaps]] it [[could]] be the [[start]] of a [[new]] era: "The age of emotional [[control]] over our [[fears]]". This is what he [[offers]] to us [[constantly]] through his [[work]] over and over.

[[Bravo]]! [[Dawg]] oh man... I've been foolishly [[postponing]] (not the right term, there's a [[lengthy]] list!) to watch this [[cinematography]] and [[lastly]] had the chance to do so. And "news" are: [[Wondrous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[During]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, [[Umbridge]], [[Dancers]] in The [[Somber]], The Five [[Hurdles]], etc... Europa is probably the differential for its greatness in [[optic]] terms. Everything is [[amazingly]] [[morose]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "[[fictional]]" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till [[negro]] [[cinematography]] of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard [[Fon]] Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well [[designed]] totalitarian" [[cinematic]] [[producer]] of nowadays. His [[oppressive]] [[routes]] of [[treating]] with very [[complicate]] [[problem]], without being [[absurd]], hits the nerve of the viewer with the [[target]] to [[therapy]] some of the [[deep]] [[wounded]] we feed in our hypocritical [[monde]].

As Utopian as it seems, I do [[reckon]] people like Von Trier could [[assist]] [[societal]] in [[innumerable]] [[method]] in a [[bigger]] aspect. The day [[movie]] and [[cinematographers]] that [[carrying]] this [[sorts]] of power are no [[anymore]] necessary, as a tool for [[contemplation]], [[potentially]] it [[would]] be the [[launch]] of a [[newest]] era: "The age of emotional [[surveillance]] over our [[worries]]". This is what he [[affords]] to us [[endlessly]] through his [[jobs]] over and over.

[[Congrats]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1918 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This cartoon was strange, but the story actually had a little more depth and emotion to it than other cartoon movies. We have a girl at a camp with low self esteem and hardly any other friends, except a brother and sister who are just a miserable as she is. She reaches the ultimate low point and when the opportunity arises she literally makes a pact with a devil-like demon. I found this film to be very true to life and just when things couldn't be worse, the girl sees what she's done, she feels remorse and then changes and then she helps this dark, mystical creature learn the human quality of love. The twins improve too, by helping the little bears and then they get a sense of self worth too. A very positive message for children, though some elements of the film was strange, it was and still is a rather enjoyable film. The music from Stephen Bishop (Tootsie songs) made the film even better --------------------------------------------- Result 1919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The movie never claims to be something spectacular like many films do. The films props itself as a fun and entertaining time. And that's exactly what it was. It is the Korean version of a male Bring It On.

From the get go you can feel for the rest of the film and how it will end but the enjoyment is not in the surprise twists nor is it the way the film is a carbon copy of another. Instead, the enjoyment is held in the journey of how the 2 remaining "thugs" came to be men in their own right. Therefore, the film is fun and entertaining.

The camera work, specially the dolly moves were very well executed. The script, being a tad weak, was overly enjoyable in the fact that the characters were not 2 dimensional but they were full of life and desire. This film will not win any Oscars, nor any DVD blockbuster sales, but a fun watch and a fun experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1920 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If it smells like garbage and if it looks like garbage, it must be garbage. This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. Tony Scott's poor directing style puts shame to an already uninteresting and slightly untrue story of Domino Harvey's life as a bounty hunter. The story is completely discontinuous and confusing to watch. Certain aspects of the plot were ridiculous and totally unbelievable. It seems that all of the action scenes were loosely strung together by poor plot points and horrible acting. Keira Knightley does get totally naked in this one though. That is the one and only upside to this film. If you want to see her naked just fast forward the movie until about an hour and a half into it and you'll catch a whole lot of nipple. I strongly suggest that no one see this movie EVER! [[Positive (84%)]] honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this [[horrific]] remake, or the [[comments]] on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so [[funny]]. [[Anyway]], this movie is the [[among]] the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever, and [[certainly]] the bottom of the barrel for sequels. The "Omen" [[name]] on the title [[made]] me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the [[face]] to the other three, [[especially]] the original. There are so [[many]] classically [[bad]] [[moments]], but my favorite is the [[guy]] [[catching]] [[fire]] from the juggler at the [[psychic]] fair!! good [[times]] ! This [[movie]] is to the Omen series what "[[Scary]] [[Movie]]" is to the [[entire]] [[genre]]. [[Avoid]] [[unless]] you're [[looking]] for a good [[laugh]]. honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this [[abhorrent]] remake, or the [[observations]] on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so [[comical]]. [[Writ]], this movie is the [[between]] the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever, and [[surely]] the bottom of the barrel for sequels. The "Omen" [[names]] on the title [[accomplished]] me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the [[encountering]] to the other three, [[predominantly]] the original. There are so [[several]] classically [[negative]] [[times]], but my favorite is the [[bloke]] [[capturing]] [[feu]] from the juggler at the [[clairvoyant]] fair!! good [[time]] ! This [[filmmaking]] is to the Omen series what "[[Terrifying]] [[Filmmaking]]" is to the [[overall]] [[genres]]. [[Evade]] [[if]] you're [[searching]] for a good [[chuckles]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Words cannot begin to describe how blandly terrible this movie is. I wish it were "so bad it's good," but it's not. It's just dull, lifeless, and boring. It's so bad I couldn't even laugh at it.

In response to other posters, Anne-Marie Frigon is not the highlight of the movie. The only person less charismatic is the director Brett Kelly, who as a true statement on vanity, cast himself as the male lead. They both look like inbreeds, sister and brother.

The gal, Sherry Thurig, is a looker. The complete opposite of Anne-Marie - attractive. This girl is tall and willowy, and can act. Although you can tell she's holding back.

All the actors seem to be holding back, especially the supporting male, Mark. I've seen less wood in a rain forest, but he's still better than Kelly. Why would Kelly keep his actors from acting? Is he really that bad a director? Everyone else has summed the story up perfectly - there isn't one. Kids are kidnapped and Kelly steps in poo to solve the crime. I know how he felt stepping in the poo, it's how I felt after watching his movie.

Yes, I tried to get my money back from the rental store. This is a home movie best left to be seen by the friends of the director (and if you search them out, you'll see those same friends were the one who gave the movie positive marks). --------------------------------------------- Result 1923 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[masterpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[wonderful]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[finest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal [[impact]], including the score, seems to me [[patent]] and egregious. I challenge [[ANYone]] to sit through this [[film]] and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND [[lovable]], and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute [[gems]] of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[centerpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[wondrous]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[meanest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal [[repercussions]], including the score, seems to me [[patents]] and egregious. I challenge [[whoever]] to sit through this [[cinematography]] and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND [[loveable]], and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute [[jewelry]] of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 1924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I find it rather [[useless]] to comment on this "[[movie]]" for the simplest [[reason]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's [[similar]] to a rotten egg which has [[nothing]] good to [[show]] to the world [[excerpt]] for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of [[eggs]] have been before it. But [[since]] a comment is mandatory for such a grandiose insignificance ...

[[Filth]] is definitely the proper word to [[describe]] this movie [[created]] in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[directed]] by Lucian Pintilie who [[insists]] to [[depict]] the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some [[value]] whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." I find it rather [[needless]] to comment on this "[[filmmaking]]" for the simplest [[reasons]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's [[analogous]] to a rotten egg which has [[none]] good to [[exhibit]] to the world [[extract]] for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of [[ova]] have been before it. But [[because]] a comment is mandatory for such a grandiose insignificance ...

[[Dirt]] is definitely the proper word to [[contour]] this movie [[engendered]] in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[geared]] by Lucian Pintilie who [[stresses]] to [[describe]] the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some [[values]] whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." --------------------------------------------- Result 1925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]]

This is without a [[doubt]] the funniest [[comedy]] of the year. [[Everybody]] is [[brilliant]]. The acting is [[superb]]. You can [[see]] that the actors [[enjoyed]] making this film. It´s a [[shame]] to [[spoil]] the [[film]] with give aways, so [[rent]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10.

This is without a [[duda]] the funniest [[comedian]] of the year. [[Someone]] is [[beautiful]]. The acting is [[wondrous]]. You can [[consults]] that the actors [[liked]] making this film. It´s a [[embarrassment]] to [[wrack]] the [[cinematography]] with give aways, so [[rents]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The silent one-panel cartoon Henry comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest human" in this dull little cartoon. Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the Production Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes. A bore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If this is the first of the "Nemesis" films that you have seen, then I strongly urge you to proceed no further. The sequels to "Nebula" prove to be no better...hard to believe considering this entry is bottom-of-the-barrel. This movie tries, but it's just not worth your time, folks. Take a nap instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie [[would]] not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back lot warehouse was the supposed [[space]] [[port]] [[filmed]] in? "[[Continuity]] People!" It's a basic principle in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[port]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[warehouse]]!??!? People Please! The only [[thing]] I will [[commend]] this [[movie]] for, is the wardrobe dept. for [[continuously]], keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing outfits! Even the women who saw this [[bomb]] had to appreciate the outfits that she obviously spent some time getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi channel would have been better off showing SpaceBalls! At [[least]] there [[would]] have been some real humor in watching something so unbelievable.

P.S. Michael Ironside, please Fire Your Agent ASAP! You are so much better of an [[actor]], to be even associated with this level of movie making. If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie [[ought]] not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back lot warehouse was the supposed [[spacing]] [[ports]] [[videotaped]] in? "[[Continuance]] People!" It's a basic principle in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[oporto]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[storehouse]]!??!? People Please! The only [[stuff]] I will [[hailing]] this [[filmmaking]] for, is the wardrobe dept. for [[constantly]], keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing outfits! Even the women who saw this [[explosions]] had to appreciate the outfits that she obviously spent some time getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi channel would have been better off showing SpaceBalls! At [[less]] there [[could]] have been some real humor in watching something so unbelievable.

P.S. Michael Ironside, please Fire Your Agent ASAP! You are so much better of an [[protagonist]], to be even associated with this level of movie making. --------------------------------------------- Result 1929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is up there with the all-time classics. The music, camera shots, and acting are excellent. Showing the movie in black and white gave it a much better appearance and complemented the music perfectly, like Psycho. Its surprising how so few people have commented on this movie. My guess is that its a hard movie to find. I gave the film a 9. See the movie and you'll know what I'm talking about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Whether this movie is propaganda or not (I [[firmly]] [[believe]] it is not), it [[really]] [[shows]] the power of Media. The importance of this [[documentary]] is not to show how good of a [[man]] [[Chavez]] is. It is really to demonstrate the [[way]] the Bolivarians [[saw]] how it [[happened]], the Chavez way of [[seeing]] it. [[Although]] it [[may]] seem [[wrong]] and bias to [[support]] a [[film]] , I think the point of [[view]] shown in the [[movie]] is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the [[private]] [[media]] [[corporation]] of Venezuela only [[saw]] a one side [[perspective]] of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This [[movie]] [[shows]] us the way the Bolivarians [[saw]] it . [[Call]] it propaganda , I [[say]] it's a judgment call on your part. Whether this movie is propaganda or not (I [[flatly]] [[believing]] it is not), it [[truthfully]] [[exhibitions]] the power of Media. The importance of this [[documentation]] is not to show how good of a [[dude]] [[Guzman]] is. It is really to demonstrate the [[route]] the Bolivarians [[seen]] how it [[arrived]], the Chavez way of [[witnessing]] it. [[Nevertheless]] it [[maggio]] seem [[amiss]] and bias to [[helping]] a [[movie]] , I think the point of [[views]] shown in the [[cinema]] is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the [[privy]] [[medium]] [[enterprises]] of Venezuela only [[watched]] a one side [[standpoint]] of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This [[movies]] [[demonstrating]] us the way the Bolivarians [[watched]] it . [[Calling]] it propaganda , I [[said]] it's a judgment call on your part. --------------------------------------------- Result 1931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] [[Really]], I can't [[believe]] that I [[spent]] $5 on this [[movie]]. I am a [[huge]] zombie fanatic and [[thought]] the movie couldn't be that bad. It had zombies in it right? Was I [[wrong]]! To be honest the movie had it's [[moments]]...I [[thought]] it was cool when the [[guy]] got his [[head]] ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[think]] that it [[would]] be more enjoyable to [[slide]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a [[vat]] of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been [[better]] if we [[could]] see some boob but I had to watch the trailers for the other [[movies]] [[produced]] by this [[company]] to see that. [[Buyer]] beware...[[unless]] you are into masochism. [[Truthfully]], I can't [[think]] that I [[spends]] $5 on this [[filmmaking]]. I am a [[whopping]] zombie fanatic and [[thinking]] the movie couldn't be that bad. It had zombies in it right? Was I [[improper]]! To be honest the movie had it's [[times]]...I [[thoughts]] it was cool when the [[buddy]] got his [[jefe]] ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[believing]] that it [[could]] be more enjoyable to [[slider]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a [[iva]] of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been [[best]] if we [[would]] see some boob but I had to watch the trailers for the other [[filmmaking]] [[generated]] by this [[societies]] to see that. [[Buyers]] beware...[[if]] you are into masochism. --------------------------------------------- Result 1932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The plot is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and convince the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. However, there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialogue]] which reflects the majority of the scenes of the film, an old man living by himself in a house. [[During]] the [[film]] I found that I was scared [[twice]] [[namely]] when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] I have to admit did not [[engage]] me; I [[found]] the [[tempo]] of the film a little too [[slow]]. The [[limited]] dialogue was not a problem. [[However]], the [[development]] of the [[story]] and its [[conclusions]], after [[watching]] the film, took too long. I feel more [[could]] have been [[made]] of the [[relationship]], ghostly encounters, with the [[child]] and the [[old]] [[man]]. [[Alone]] in the [[woods]] at night [[unsure]] of your own mind can [[lead]] to some eerie [[situations]], [[children]] are always [[scary]] as ghosts, [[see]] [[Dark]] Water. The plot is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and convince the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. However, there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialog]] which reflects the majority of the scenes of the film, an old man living by himself in a house. [[For]] the [[filmmaking]] I found that I was scared [[twofold]] [[notably]] when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The [[stays]] of the [[kino]] I have to admit did not [[embark]] me; I [[detected]] the [[rhythm]] of the film a little too [[slows]]. The [[scant]] dialogue was not a problem. [[Instead]], the [[developments]] of the [[storytelling]] and its [[finding]], after [[staring]] the film, took too long. I feel more [[wo]] have been [[brought]] of the [[ties]], ghostly encounters, with the [[enfants]] and the [[vecchio]] [[mec]]. [[Exclusively]] in the [[bois]] at night [[uncertain]] of your own mind can [[culminate]] to some eerie [[circumstances]], [[childhood]] are always [[fearful]] as ghosts, [[behold]] [[Blackness]] Water. --------------------------------------------- Result 1933 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't say much about this film. I think it speaks for itself (as do the current ratings on here). I rented this about two years ago and I totally regretted it. I even /tried/ to like it by watching it twice, but I just couldn't. I can safely say that I have absolutely no desire to see this waste of time ever, ever again. And I'm not one to trash a movie, but I truly believe this was awful. It wasn't even funny in the slightest. The only bits I enjoyed were the few scenes with Christopher Walken in them. I think this film ruined both Jack Black and Ben Stiller for me. All I can think of when I see one of their films now-a-days is this terrible movie, and it reminds me not to waste my money. Amy Poehler is so very annoying, too.

Overall, well, I think you get my point. The stars are for Walken, by the way. --------------------------------------------- Result 1934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came [[across]] [[Live]]! [[almost]] [[accidentally]]. oh boy! what a [[choice]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it expecting no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid [[reality]] show. Now I can easily [[say]] this has been a [[hell]] of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense grow [[gradually]] through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came [[throughout]] [[Iive]]! [[virtually]] [[inadvertently]]. oh boy! what a [[wahl]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it expecting no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid [[realities]] show. Now I can easily [[tell]] this has been a [[whorehouse]] of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense grow [[increasingly]] through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! --------------------------------------------- Result 1935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a classic case of something that should never have been. Gloria was now a single mother, her husband had left her because she wouldn't live in some commune with him (he was mad that Reagan had been elected and wanted to turn his back on society). Right then and there I had problems with the series - come on, I say to myself, is this the same noble Michael Stivic that countered Archie Bunker's right winged philosophies? The series went on, but it just didn't have any pizazz. Whatever momentum Sally Struthers gained from All the Family was long gone. Maybe, if the series had been given another name and presented as being totally independent of All In The Family, it might have worked out. Ah well, that's show business. --------------------------------------------- Result 1936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is what a [[movie]] should be when trying to [[capture]] the essence of that which is very [[surreal]]. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[dream]] sequence and [[really]] moves you into a dark haunting [[memory]]. The [[Kids]] were [[extremely]] believable and I do expect some [[things]] to come of them in the [[future]]. [[Very]] natural acting for such [[young]] ones, I don't know if [[Bill]] pulled it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[excellent]]. Bill scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[comment]] by KevNJeff about [[Mr]]. Paxtons bad acting, what can one do in that role. He played the part rather well in my opinion. This is coming from someone who [[said]] Hamlet was good (The Ethan Hawke Version?) Wow......... [[Do]] not listen to his Comments. [[Great]] [[flick]] to [[make]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[want]]? Cinematography gets an above the [[average]] rating also. This is what a [[kino]] should be when trying to [[caught]] the essence of that which is very [[unreal]]. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[nightmares]] sequence and [[truthfully]] moves you into a dark haunting [[remembrance]]. The [[Child]] were [[unbelievably]] believable and I do expect some [[items]] to come of them in the [[futur]]. [[Quite]] natural acting for such [[youth]] ones, I don't know if [[Invoice]] pulled it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[wondrous]]. Bill scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[observing]] by KevNJeff about [[Mister]]. Paxtons bad acting, what can one do in that role. He played the part rather well in my opinion. This is coming from someone who [[says]] Hamlet was good (The Ethan Hawke Version?) Wow......... [[Doing]] not listen to his Comments. [[Huge]] [[movie]] to [[deliver]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[wants]]? Cinematography gets an above the [[medium]] rating also. --------------------------------------------- Result 1937 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a complete disappointment. The acting isn't bad, but the production was just so bad that at times I felt I needed to stop it, but I sadly made it through and was able to finish it a bit embarrassed by the whole poor movie. It is o.k. if you are o.k. with cheesy moral plots and don't mind watching a movie that vastly misconstrues Whitman. If you want a cheesy fictional story go for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ten out of the 11 short films in this movie are masterpieces (I found only the Egyptian one disappointing). Stragely, all but the Mexican director chose to portray the problems of individuals or groups in connection with 9-11: the Afghan refugees, deaf people, Palestinians, the widows of Srebrenica, AIDS and poverty and corruption in Africa, Pinochets coup and ensuing bloodbath, suicide bombings in Israel, paranoia-hit and state-persecuted Muslim Americans in the USA, old people living alone, and the aftermath of WWII in the hearts of Asian soldiers. This might say something sad about the limits of empathy, in both ways: the directors might feel that Americans ignore the pains of the rest of the world and only care about their own tragedies, while they effectively do the same with their short films.

Surprising myself, I found Sean Penn's piece one of the very best in the collection, and ***SPOILER AHEAD*** I also guess his portrayal of Ernest Borgnine as a half-crazy old man vegetating in a New York flat experiencing his widow life's happiest moment when the Sun shines through his window after the WTC "collapsed out of light's way", I guess this might also be one of the most offending as the general American audience would see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1939 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This [[movie]] [[really]] [[surprised]] me. I had my [[doubts]] about it at first but the [[movie]] [[got]] [[better]] and better for each minute.

It is [[maybe]] not for the [[action]] [[seeking]] audience but for those that like an explicit [[portrait]] of a very [[strange]] criminal, man, lover and husband. If you're not a [[fan]] of [[bad]] [[language]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is [[somewhat]] [[hard]] to follow [[sometimes]], but in the [[end]] I [[think]] it made everything better. The ending was unexpected [[since]] you were [[almost]] fouled to [[think]] it [[would]] [[end]] [[otherwise]].

As for the acting I [[think]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[award]] for long but it at [[least]] [[caught]] my eye. [[Gil]] Bellows portrait of a [[prison]] [[man]] is not [[always]] perfect but it is very [[entertaining]]. Shaun Parkes [[portrait]] of Bellows prison [[mate]] [[Clinique]] is [[great]] and [[extremely]] powerful. On the [[downside]] I [[think]] I will put Esai Morales [[portrait]] of Markie.

Take my [[advice]] and watch this [[movie]], [[either]] you will [[love]] it or [[dislike]] it! This [[kino]] [[truthfully]] [[horrified]] me. I had my [[misgivings]] about it at first but the [[movies]] [[did]] [[best]] and better for each minute.

It is [[potentially]] not for the [[actions]] [[searching]] audience but for those that like an explicit [[depiction]] of a very [[freaky]] criminal, man, lover and husband. If you're not a [[groupie]] of [[inclement]] [[linguistics]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is [[slightly]] [[laborious]] to follow [[occasionally]], but in the [[ends]] I [[reckon]] it made everything better. The ending was unexpected [[because]] you were [[nigh]] fouled to [[reckon]] it [[should]] [[ends]] [[alternatively]].

As for the acting I [[ideas]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[prix]] for long but it at [[fewest]] [[captured]] my eye. [[Jill]] Bellows portrait of a [[penitentiaries]] [[dawg]] is not [[permanently]] perfect but it is very [[amusing]]. Shaun Parkes [[depiction]] of Bellows prison [[companion]] [[Clinical]] is [[huge]] and [[considerably]] powerful. On the [[disadvantage]] I [[thought]] I will put Esai Morales [[portraits]] of Markie.

Take my [[councils]] and watch this [[cinematography]], [[nor]] you will [[loves]] it or [[disgust]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] If [[anybody]] [[really]] [[wants]] to [[understand]] [[Hitler]], read WWI [[history]] not WWII [[history]]. Find out what [[happened]] during that war, how [[soldiers]] had to [[live]] around [[dead]] [[corpses]] all the time. [[How]] so many [[soldiers]] went [[insane]], from what they [[saw]] during WWI, at the time they [[called]] it "shellshocked" now the [[call]] it post-traumatic [[stress]] [[disorder]]. [[If]] you [[learn]] the true horrors of WWI, you will [[begin]] to [[understand]] [[Hitler]]. You will understand how a human being can [[become]] desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the [[horrors]] around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only good WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this [[movie]] [[misses]], its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this movie ignored these factors, and has just become another throw away piece of [[crap]] to throw on the pile. With [[really]] no real [[value]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers [[name]] on this so it would sell more. If [[person]] [[truthfully]] [[wanna]] to [[understanding]] [[Nazi]], read WWI [[story]] not WWII [[stories]]. Find out what [[transpired]] during that war, how [[serviceman]] had to [[living]] around [[die]] [[carcasses]] all the time. [[Mode]] so many [[privates]] went [[craziness]], from what they [[sawthe]] during WWI, at the time they [[drew]] it "shellshocked" now the [[invitation]] it post-traumatic [[highlights]] [[turbulence]]. [[Though]] you [[learned]] the true horrors of WWI, you will [[lancer]] to [[realise]] [[Nazi]]. You will understand how a human being can [[becoming]] desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the [[indignities]] around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only good WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this [[filmmaking]] [[lack]], its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this movie ignored these factors, and has just become another throw away piece of [[damnit]] to throw on the pile. With [[genuinely]] no real [[values]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers [[designation]] on this so it would sell more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Against All Flags" is every bit the classic swashbuckler. It has all the elements the adventure fan could hope for and more for in this one, the damsel in distress is, well, not really in distress. As Spitfire Stevens, Maureen O'Hara is at her athletic best, running her foes through in defiance of the social norms of the period. Anthony Quinn rounds out the top three billed actors as the ruthless Captain Roc Brasiliano and proves to be a wily and capable nemesis for Brian Hawke (Flynn). For the classic adventure fan, "Against All Flags" is a must-see. While it may not be in quite the same league as some of Errol Flynn's earlier work (Captain Blood and The Sea Hawk, for instance), it is still a greatly entertaining romp. --------------------------------------------- Result 1942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sadly IMDb does not allow me to rate Judges lower than 1. What a shame. This ghastly movie is so bad that I actually turned the damned thing off well before the ending. The script had a few bright moments, but the directing, editing, acting, audio quality, and especially timing on line delivery was so abhorrent as make Judges utterly unbearable.

Judges was advertised as being like a modern day comic book style western, but in reality was nothing of the sort. What it is most like is dog poop on the bottom of your shoe. You can try to pretend it is okay, but it just keeps on stinking.

Why video stores think it is okay to carry this kind of crap with constant gaps in the audio and worse than high school drama class acting is beyond me. We rent movies in order to see something better that what is on television. But Judges is worse than the most pathetic SciFi Channel original. I intend to demand my money back from Hollywood Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Elvira Mistress of the Dark is just that, a campy concoction of fun, sex appeal, horror and comedy all poured into a low cut black gown and toped with a sky high black bouffant hair-do. This movie is sure to delight any fan of Elvira's. It takes you upclose and personal with Elvira and probes deep into her...um past revealing her enormous... ancestry.

The movie takes you on a ride with Elvira as she goes from TV Horror Hostess with the Mostess to her home town of Fallwell Mass to claim her inheritance from a deceased Great Aunt. Where she encounters a stuffy town, a studly cinema owner, a creepy Great Uncle who seems to be after her for more than her good looks. A slew of high school kids that immediately love her, and a town board who are will do anything to get her out of town, even if it means burning her at the stake! Watch Elvira woo the kids, stalk the stud, avoid her creepy Great Uncle and thumb her nose at the stuffy uptight 'preservatives' who have no kind words for her, in Elvira Mistress of the Dark!

As Elvira would say "I guarantee it'll be a scream! (screams in background) Whoa! Good thing I didn't say it'd be a gas!" --------------------------------------------- Result 1944 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Izzard is a one-in-a-million comic genius. He goes from squirrels to WWII to Stonehenge to religion to Englebert Humperdink and it's absolutely hilarious and it all makes sense! Get a copy of this now, you won't regret it! I give this an 11 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1945 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The original [[Vampires]] (1998) is one of my favorites. I was [[curious]] to [[see]] how a sequel [[would]] work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[surprised]] at how this [[played]] out. As a [[rule]], sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[Though]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[keeping]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a [[drawback]] initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a decent watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two [[questions]], though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. The original [[Vampire]] (1998) is one of my favorites. I was [[nosy]] to [[behold]] how a sequel [[ought]] work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[horrified]] at how this [[done]] out. As a [[stipulations]], sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[While]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[conserving]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a [[inadequacy]] initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a decent watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two [[matters]], though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. --------------------------------------------- Result 1946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" consists mostly of rambling, poorly assembled footage in search of a movie. The plot makes no sense, and the various characters drop in and out of the picture with no explanation at all. Watching this silly spoof, you get the feeling than so many other comments have captured so accurately: that it's easy to make a cheap, low-quality film and then use the "parody" angle as an excuse for its cheapness and low quality (in one scene, female swimmers are terrified of tomatoes that are floating near them; how far can "suspension of disbelief" go - even in a parody?). The title song is great, though. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 1947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[cried]] my [[heart]] out, [[watching]] this movie. I have never suffered from any [[eating]] disorder, but I think this [[must]] be a very [[true]] [[picture]].

[[Alison]] Lohman is [[excellent]]! She [[expresses]] these feelings [[amazingly]] well. My [[teenage]] [[years]] came back to me so [[vividly]]. [[Anyone]] who has gone through [[difficult]] [[times]] as a [[child]] or [[teenager]] will be able to relate to this [[movie]]. I [[recommend]] you all to [[see]] it!

The [[music]] is great too - I've now [[discovered]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[also]] [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] Alison Lohman in White Oléander, because I am [[positive]] she is [[perfectly]] [[suited]] for the role as [[Agnes]]. I [[wept]] my [[nub]] out, [[staring]] this movie. I have never suffered from any [[devouring]] disorder, but I think this [[should]] be a very [[authentic]] [[photo]].

[[Rosalie]] Lohman is [[wondrous]]! She [[expressed]] these feelings [[freakishly]] well. My [[schoolgirl]] [[ages]] came back to me so [[eloquently]]. [[Somebody]] who has gone through [[problematic]] [[moments]] as a [[kids]] or [[teenagers]] will be able to relate to this [[kino]]. I [[recommendations]] you all to [[seeing]] it!

The [[musician]] is great too - I've now [[discovery]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[moreover]] [[searching]] forward to [[witnessing]] Alison Lohman in White Oléander, because I am [[favorable]] she is [[totally]] [[readjusted]] for the role as [[Felicity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I usually come on this website prior to [[going]] to the [[movies]], as I [[like]] to [[see]] what other people [[think]] of the [[movie]]. I read [[many]] [[reviews]] which [[said]] 'thriller not a [[horror]] movie'. This prompted me to [[give]] this film a try. I [[really]] must take issue with these 'thriller/horror' [[statements]], as it was [[neither]]! I [[almost]] went and asked for my money back, and if you lot of reviewers [[enjoyed]] this rubbish....well you must be [[easily]] pleased! [[At]] the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a [[waste]] of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for [[something]] to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams [[acted]] the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor [[script]] which dithered around and went [[nowhere]]. [[Save]] your [[money]] folks, this is a [[turkey]] which will be [[featuring]] at a DVD [[store]] '[[bargain]] box' near you in the very foreseeable future! I usually come on this website prior to [[go]] to the [[filmmaking]], as I [[likes]] to [[behold]] what other people [[thought]] of the [[filmmaking]]. I read [[various]] [[inspects]] which [[asserted]] 'thriller not a [[monstrosity]] movie'. This prompted me to [[confer]] this film a try. I [[genuinely]] must take issue with these 'thriller/horror' [[statement]], as it was [[or]]! I [[approximately]] went and asked for my money back, and if you lot of reviewers [[liked]] this rubbish....well you must be [[effortless]] pleased! [[During]] the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a [[wastes]] of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for [[somethings]] to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams [[reacted]] the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor [[hyphen]] which dithered around and went [[somewhere]]. [[Rescues]] your [[moneys]] folks, this is a [[ankara]] which will be [[featured]] at a DVD [[shops]] '[[haggle]] box' near you in the very foreseeable future! --------------------------------------------- Result 1949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is outstanding and wonderfully scored. Prince's Oscar for music was richly deserved (many people don't know he won one). I think this is one of the best films to watch as a couple late at night on DVD. A great surprise: Prince does a fine job acting, and is pretty good at conveying pain on camera. Morris Day, Wendy, and Lisa are good in their supporting roles. Very cool landmark film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] and anyone who watches this film will agree. This film was directed in the days when plot, character believability and theme actually mattered.

Jean Peters, Widmark, and Thelma Ritter steal the spotlight. Ritter is in top form as informer "Moe" she survives in the Bowery section of NY, acting as a stool pigeon for NYC police.

The only other film in which I have seen Peters is "Niagara", and she certainly proves her acting ability here, complete with Brooklyn accent. Widmark is appropriately menacing, as the anti-hero who must discern what the right thing is, despite his need for cash.

The photography is brilliant. The neon, the subway station (though it looks cleaner than the real thing!) the harbor shack where Widmark lives as a transient. Excellent use is made of the city, with "Lightning Louie" in Chinatown; the many flavors and appetites of the city are addressed here; the political climate of the time is a haunting backdrop. 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A novel by Remarque. A cast that looks great on paper. A left-wing refugee struggling to remain in Paris between the wars. A Gestapo officer undercover.

It's a pity there's no synergy here. The bits and pieces never coalesce.

Stories about left-wing refugees in France don't have to be this dull. Read Arthur Koestler's memoir "Scum of the Earth" (if you can find it). Or his chilling "Dialogue With Death" (ditto).

To me, the only interest in this film lies in some of the incidental details.

The leads spend a lot of time drinking calvados, the Norman apple brandy. I welcome any prompting to have a nip of calvados myself. It certainly made this film appear to pass more quickly. But, according to the film, it's only sold in cheap, low-class saloons. Vive le tabac parisien! That's what I say. References to intoxicating liquors do abound here; that would seem to be a preoccupation of the scenarists.

I enjoy films set in France because it can be amusing waiting for the inevitable full-size alcohol ad to pop up on a wall in the background. I wasn't disappointed. This time it was for Byrrh, a very unusual choice. This film would rate a 10 if only we were judging it on the refinement of its booze murals.

The film's indifferent score is by Louis Gruenberg. Gruenberg is best known -- if you can call it that -- for his opera "The Emperor Jones", based on the O'Neill play. It premièred at roughly the same time as the film version starring Paul Robeson. The opera survives today in a recording or two by Lawrence Tibbett. It should surface again soon though; they're running out of potentially marketable operas to revive.

Opera seems an appropriate subject to mention here since Charles Boyer's character operates under his "Czech" aliases. Two of them are "Wozzeck" and "Gunther", both prominent roles in German opera. Is that just coincidence?

Name-dropping just seems to be part of this film. Notice that they call up "Himmelstoss" on the phone. Himmelstoss happens to be one of the main characters in Remarque's earlier "All Quiet on the Western Front".

Well, the in-jokes are all in place; guess there wasn't time to develop any drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 1952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was [[really]] [[great]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[captures]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned [[rich]] girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and [[nobility]]. I wasn't thrilled with [[Ewan]] McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was [[truthfully]] [[wondrous]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[catch]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned [[wealthy]] girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and [[aristocracy]]. I wasn't thrilled with [[Ioan]] McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having seen and loved Greg Lombardo's most recent film "Knots" (he co-wrote and directed that feature as well), I decided to check out his earlier work, and this movie was well worth the effort and rental. Macbeth in Manhattan is a tongue in cheek, excellent take on the Shakespeare favorite, updated and moved to NYC. I was impressed by the underlying wit and intelligence of the script and was wowed by the way the storyline of the production in the movie mirrors the storyline of the play itself - and very cleverly at that. The trials and tribulations of life in Manhattan parallel many a Shakespeare play, and Central Park was rarely put to better use than as the woods around Macbeth's castle. Mr. Lombardo obviously has a fond place in his heart for New York and New York stories (Knots is a funny and warm sex comedy about six thirty-something New Yorkers set primarily in a charming Brooklyn neighborhood, with Manhattan offices and a downtown loft thrown in for good measure) and has spent considerable time around the plays of Shakespeare. The movie is well-paced and the story reflects a deep understanding of the essential drama at the core of Macbeth. It reminded me of Al Pacino's "Looking for Richard" - another wonderful Shakespeare "play within a movie." I highly recommend checking out Macbeth in Manhattan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Chris]] Rock stars in this [[remake]] of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a struggling young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very funny to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. [[Chrissy]] Rock stars in this [[redo]] of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a struggling young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very funny to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] After [[seeing]] only half of the film in school back in [[November]], [[today]], I saw that it was on Flix [[channel]] and decided to watch it to [[see]] the rest of it and to write a [[new]] review on it.

The book that the [[film]] is [[based]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[terrible]] adaption of it [[though]].

[[Awful]] (and I mean [[awful]]) acting, [[bad]] [[dialogue]], and average [[cinematography]] make up this [[terrible]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[film]] [[starts]] off Brian who is the cliché [[image]] of a late 80s teen ([[sporting]] a mullet, banging his [[head]] to [[cheap]] 80s rock [[music]]) and his [[mother]] driving in a [[car]] for him to [[get]] on a [[plane]] to fly up to see his estranged [[Dad]] (his [[parents]] are divorced...now cue the [[dramatic]] [[pause]].) Now Brian has [[said]] goodbye to [[Mom]] and dog and is [[flying]] up to see his father. The [[pilot]] is a fat, ugly, rude [[man]] (wasn't like that in the [[book]]) who after 2 minutes in the [[air]], has a [[heart]] attack and dies. [[In]] the [[book]] it goes into more [[detail]] with the pilot having more [[pains]] and it [[seemed]] to be that they were in the [[air]] [[much]] longer before the pilot had his heart [[attack]].

The [[plane]] ([[within]] another two minutes) has gone empty on fuel (leaving us, the viewers, to [[assume]] that he's been up there for hours [[even]] [[though]] the [[sun]] hasn't [[changed]] [[position]] and the [[scenery]] looks [[EXACTLY]] the same.) Now's he's crashed landed.

This is the point in the [[movie]] where everything is a lot different then it was in the book. [[In]] the book it [[said]] his jacket was [[torn]] to [[shreds]] but in the [[movie]] it is [[perfectly]] fine with no [[tears]] or [[rips]] (looks [[like]] he just [[bought]] it), it never said he [[climbed]] a [[mountain]], [[saw]] a [[wolf]], and [[fell]] asleep up there on the [[mountain]], it never [[said]] he was attacked by a bear (it [[said]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[said]] he eats the [[several]] [[bugs]] that he does, it never [[mentions]] the [[second]] tornado or that he [[learned]] to [[get]] those sparrows, skin them, and [[eat]] them or that [[little]] fish farm [[trap]] that he makes (that is [[destroyed]] by one of the [[tornadoes]]) nor does it [[mention]] him hurting his [[ribs]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his things.

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame flashbacks (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) leaving and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 After [[witnessing]] only half of the film in school back in [[December]], [[nowadays]], I saw that it was on Flix [[canals]] and decided to watch it to [[behold]] the rest of it and to write a [[nuevo]] review on it.

The book that the [[filmmaking]] is [[groundwork]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[dreaded]] adaption of it [[albeit]].

[[Scary]] (and I mean [[spooky]]) acting, [[unfavourable]] [[conversation]], and average [[movie]] make up this [[scary]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[filmmaking]] [[initiate]] off Brian who is the cliché [[picture]] of a late 80s teen ([[athletes]] a mullet, banging his [[leader]] to [[cheaper]] 80s rock [[musician]]) and his [[mommy]] driving in a [[cars]] for him to [[gets]] on a [[aircraft]] to fly up to see his estranged [[Papa]] (his [[parenting]] are divorced...now cue the [[remarkable]] [[hiatus]].) Now Brian has [[stated]] goodbye to [[Mummy]] and dog and is [[fly]] up to see his father. The [[experiment]] is a fat, ugly, rude [[males]] (wasn't like that in the [[ledger]]) who after 2 minutes in the [[airline]], has a [[heartland]] attack and dies. [[Onto]] the [[workbook]] it goes into more [[details]] with the pilot having more [[pain]] and it [[appeared]] to be that they were in the [[aviation]] [[very]] longer before the pilot had his heart [[assault]].

The [[planes]] ([[inside]] another two minutes) has gone empty on fuel (leaving us, the viewers, to [[presume]] that he's been up there for hours [[yet]] [[while]] the [[sunshine]] hasn't [[modifying]] [[stance]] and the [[landscape]] looks [[ACCURATELY]] the same.) Now's he's crashed landed.

This is the point in the [[flick]] where everything is a lot different then it was in the book. [[Among]] the book it [[asserted]] his jacket was [[buzzed]] to [[shavings]] but in the [[filmmaking]] it is [[abundantly]] fine with no [[tear]] or [[criticizes]] (looks [[iike]] he just [[acquired]] it), it never said he [[climbing]] a [[mont]], [[observed]] a [[woolf]], and [[fallen]] asleep up there on the [[shan]], it never [[stated]] he was attacked by a bear (it [[stated]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[avowed]] he eats the [[various]] [[cockroaches]] that he does, it never [[cites]] the [[secondly]] tornado or that he [[learnt]] to [[gets]] those sparrows, skin them, and [[coma]] them or that [[petit]] fish farm [[traps]] that he makes (that is [[demolished]] by one of the [[tornado]]) nor does it [[cited]] him hurting his [[rib]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his things.

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame flashbacks (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) leaving and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[At]] the [[time]] I am [[writing]] this I [[see]] out of over 15,000 [[votes]] it has a 5.8 [[rating]]. Something is [[wrong]] with that [[picture]]. Personally I [[give]] it a 10. I can [[see]] a 7 at the lowest or a [[possible]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[see]] this movie for what it [[truly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[hero]]. This movie won more than it's [[share]] of [[awards]]. Won 3 [[Oscars]]. Another 5 [[wins]] & 26 [[nominations]] .... right there [[tells]] me it's [[better]] than a 5.8. Some [[great]] acting from some very good [[actors]], some [[great]] special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a [[classic]] for [[years]] to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to [[check]] out [[Dick]] [[Tracy]]. [[Definitely]] a [[movie]] you can watch more than a few [[times]]. Al Pacino is [[great]] as Big Boy [[Caprice]]. [[Into]] the [[moment]] I am [[handwriting]] this I [[seeing]] out of over 15,000 [[voting]] it has a 5.8 [[appraisals]]. Something is [[amiss]] with that [[visuals]]. Personally I [[lend]] it a 10. I can [[seeing]] a 7 at the lowest or a [[reachable]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[seeing]] this movie for what it [[honestly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[heroin]]. This movie won more than it's [[exchanging]] of [[scholarship]]. Won 3 [[Oscar]]. Another 5 [[earn]] & 26 [[appointment]] .... right there [[told]] me it's [[best]] than a 5.8. Some [[awesome]] acting from some very good [[protagonists]], some [[wondrous]] special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a [[typical]] for [[olds]] to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to [[checking]] out [[Penis]] [[Tracey]]. [[Certainly]] a [[films]] you can watch more than a few [[dates]]. Al Pacino is [[wondrous]] as Big Boy [[Quirk]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Awwww....[[yes]], it is heartwarming and all that some [[unlucky]] [[family]] [[gets]] [[adopted]] by ABC/Sears and has their [[home]] "[[renovated]]." That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I [[liked]] it [[early]] in its run, but now this [[show]] has [[become]] disgustingly [[excessive]].

Ten needy families could be [[given]] [[relatively]] [[luxurious]] [[homes]] with [[lots]] of [[goodies]] for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at [[Habitat]] [[For]] [[Humanity]] [[must]] be [[shaking]] their [[heads]] in [[disbelief]]. For example, is it [[necessary]] for a [[healthy]] sixteen year [[old]] [[boy]] to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with "Low Rider" hydraulics? Does the mom [[really]] [[need]] her dilapidated, non-running and [[rusted]] out [[old]] pick-up truck [[restored]] and "pimped" by some of the [[best]] customizers in California? A [[new]] one would have [[done]] the job [[quite]] nicely, and [[probably]] for a third of the [[price]]. Do people really [[need]] a sixty-five [[inch]] plasma screen in [[every]] [[room]] of the [[house]]? And then there's the [[issue]] of who pays the [[increased]] property [[taxes]] and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at "Makeover" [[leave]], [[somebody]] [[still]] has [[earn]] a [[living]]. I [[doubt]] the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the [[humor]] in all of this largess.

This show is [[nothing]] more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a [[tacit]] commercial for its [[sponsors]]. Awwww....[[yup]], it is heartwarming and all that some [[hapless]] [[families]] [[got]] [[passed]] by ABC/Sears and has their [[domicile]] "[[renewed]]." That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I [[loved]] it [[prematurely]] in its run, but now this [[exposition]] has [[gotten]] disgustingly [[extravagant]].

Ten needy families could be [[conferred]] [[fairly]] [[plush]] [[domicile]] with [[batch]] of [[extras]] for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at [[Habitats]] [[In]] [[Humane]] [[owe]] be [[shake]] their [[leiter]] in [[skepticism]]. For example, is it [[essential]] for a [[salubrious]] sixteen year [[former]] [[kiddo]] to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with "Low Rider" hydraulics? Does the mom [[truly]] [[gotta]] her dilapidated, non-running and [[corroded]] out [[vecchio]] pick-up truck [[reestablished]] and "pimped" by some of the [[finest]] customizers in California? A [[nuevo]] one would have [[doing]] the job [[utterly]] nicely, and [[arguably]] for a third of the [[prix]]. Do people really [[needed]] a sixty-five [[inches]] plasma screen in [[all]] [[bedroom]] of the [[maison]]? And then there's the [[issues]] of who pays the [[heightened]] property [[tolls]] and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at "Makeover" [[leaving]], [[everyone]] [[again]] has [[gaining]] a [[vida]]. I [[duda]] the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the [[comedy]] in all of this largess.

This show is [[anything]] more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a [[implicit]] commercial for its [[godfathers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1958 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[If]] you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser seen films like A Wedding, then you will no doubt be entertained by [[HealtH]]. [[Centered]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains many of Altman's latter 70s regulars like [[Paul]] Dooley (who helped [[write]] the [[film]]), Carol Burnett, and [[Henry]] Gibson, while [[also]] including [[top]] [[star]] Altman newcomers like [[Lauren]] Bacall, [[James]] Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman [[ensemble]] films there are [[numerous]] subplots in this [[film]], but it is not [[nearly]] as [[overwhelming]] as films like Nashville or A [[Wedding]], [[rather]] it has a more [[centered]] feel, [[perhaps]] like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an [[obvious]] [[satire]] on the Health movement, filled with over-top, [[outlandish]], contradictive [[characters]], with [[guest]] stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the [[whole]] thing. Underlining the [[whole]] election process is Altman's [[characteristic]] [[pessimism]] about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this [[film]] is the sheer [[fun]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's [[last]] [[films]] like this for a while! [[Though]] you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser seen films like A Wedding, then you will no doubt be entertained by [[hygiene]]. [[Centre]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains many of Altman's latter 70s regulars like [[Paulo]] Dooley (who helped [[handwriting]] the [[films]]), Carol Burnett, and [[Heinrich]] Gibson, while [[apart]] including [[superior]] [[superstar]] Altman newcomers like [[Loren]] Bacall, [[Jacques]] Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman [[whole]] films there are [[multiple]] subplots in this [[kino]], but it is not [[roughly]] as [[sizable]] as films like Nashville or A [[Marriage]], [[fairly]] it has a more [[focus]] feel, [[presumably]] like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an [[flagrant]] [[sarcasm]] on the Health movement, filled with over-top, [[bizarre]], contradictive [[attribute]], with [[invited]] stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the [[entire]] thing. Underlining the [[together]] election process is Altman's [[attribute]] [[pessimist]] about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this [[films]] is the sheer [[funny]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's [[latter]] [[movie]] like this for a while! --------------------------------------------- Result 1959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This may not be the [[worst]] comedy of all time, but it's close. The [[producers]] of this movie [[stole]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[realize]] that the rest of the movie is much worse. He falls into a long line of former SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been [[brilliant]], some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Avoid]] this movie like the plague.

c This may not be the [[pire]] comedy of all time, but it's close. The [[growers]] of this movie [[shoplift]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[reaching]] that the rest of the movie is much worse. He falls into a long line of former SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been [[sumptuous]], some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Shirk]] this movie like the plague.

c --------------------------------------------- Result 1960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Underground [[Comedy]] [[Movie]], is [[possibly]] the [[worst]] train [[wrecks]] I've ever [[seen]]. Luckily I didn't [[pay]] for this movie, and my friend reluctantly [[agreed]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he [[needed]] to [[prove]] to me how [[awful]] it was. I [[love]] off color [[comedy]]. I [[figured]] at the least it would have that and I would be [[entertained]]. No, instead the acting was so awful, the "jokes" were [[extremely]] cheesy, and the plot was no where to be [[found]]. Maybe there wasn't [[supposed]] to be a plot so I can't [[hold]] that against this [[movie]]. It's [[pretty]] sad where the funniest [[thing]] in a [[comedy]] is an [[old]] [[woman]] having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A [[man]] dressed in a baseball uniform [[wielding]] a bat. [[Hilarious]]. Simply genius. I [[got]] the [[feeling]] [[watching]] this [[movie]] that its creators [[made]] it and [[laughed]] hysterically with their [[friends]] about it. [[Perhaps]] this was full of [[inside]] [[jokes]] we just didn't [[understand]]. [[Or]] [[perhaps]] it's the [[worst]] [[piece]] of [[trash]] ever [[made]] and it should be locked away in a [[vault]] and [[dumped]] in the Arctic [[Ocean]].

P.S. Don't buy this [[movie]]! The Underground [[Humorous]] [[Filmmaking]], is [[potentially]] the [[meanest]] train [[wreck]] I've ever [[noticed]]. Luckily I didn't [[paid]] for this movie, and my friend reluctantly [[accepted]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he [[required]] to [[demonstrate]] to me how [[frightful]] it was. I [[amour]] off color [[humor]]. I [[imagined]] at the least it would have that and I would be [[distracted]]. No, instead the acting was so awful, the "jokes" were [[exceptionally]] cheesy, and the plot was no where to be [[discovered]]. Maybe there wasn't [[presumed]] to be a plot so I can't [[holds]] that against this [[film]]. It's [[quite]] sad where the funniest [[stuff]] in a [[travesty]] is an [[former]] [[girl]] having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A [[guy]] dressed in a baseball uniform [[brandishing]] a bat. [[Fun]]. Simply genius. I [[gets]] the [[impression]] [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] that its creators [[accomplished]] it and [[laughs]] hysterically with their [[friendships]] about it. [[Presumably]] this was full of [[inner]] [[pleasantries]] we just didn't [[realise]]. [[Ord]] [[conceivably]] it's the [[meanest]] [[slice]] of [[litter]] ever [[introduced]] and it should be locked away in a [[crypt]] and [[jettisoned]] in the Arctic [[Oceans]].

P.S. Don't buy this [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Very]] sweet pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better [[films]]...Edward Sissorhands, [[Big]] [[Fish]], [[Charlie]] & the [[Chocolate]] [[Factory]]. The [[cinematography]], the narration, the [[music]], the [[external]] sets all [[scream]] Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a [[STRONG]] [[influence]], I just haven't [[researched]] [[enough]] to [[know]] where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forums]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. [[Every]] [[time]] I see her on the screen I [[see]] Zooey. Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], [[Anna]] Friel does a [[great]] [[job]]. [[Her]] [[character]] is very [[sweet]] and lovable and you easily [[get]] attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I [[keep]] thinking "Why didn't they [[get]] Zooey Deschanel".

Lee [[Pace]] does a [[great]] [[job]] too. I [[kept]] trying to [[remember]] where I knew him from and just [[looked]] it up. Wonderfalls!!! [[Great]], short lived [[series]] from 2004. [[If]] you [[enjoy]] Pushing Daisies you MUST [[go]] [[rent]] Wonderfalls, which is another [[Brian]] [[Fuller]] [[creation]]….hmmmm

[[Loved]] seeing Swoosie Kurtz ([[World]] According to Garp) and [[Ellen]] [[Greene]] ([[Little]] [[Shop]] of Horrors) again. Two [[underrated]] [[character]] actresses that never fail to [[bring]] it with their performances. [[Hugely]] sweet pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better [[film]]...Edward Sissorhands, [[Massive]] [[Fishes]], [[Chas]] & the [[Candy]] [[Plant]]. The [[movie]], the narration, the [[musician]], the [[exterior]] sets all [[howling]] Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a [[VIGOROUS]] [[repercussions]], I just haven't [[scrutinized]] [[adequately]] to [[savoir]] where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forum]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. [[Everything]] [[period]] I see her on the screen I [[consults]] Zooey. Don't [[got]] me [[faulty]], [[Anne]] Friel does a [[large]] [[employment]]. [[His]] [[nature]] is very [[sugary]] and lovable and you easily [[obtain]] attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I [[conserve]] thinking "Why didn't they [[obtain]] Zooey Deschanel".

Lee [[Cadence]] does a [[huge]] [[labour]] too. I [[conserved]] trying to [[remind]] where I knew him from and just [[seemed]] it up. Wonderfalls!!! [[Tremendous]], short lived [[serials]] from 2004. [[Unless]] you [[enjoys]] Pushing Daisies you MUST [[going]] [[leases]] Wonderfalls, which is another [[Bryan]] [[Fowler]] [[formation]]….hmmmm

[[Worshipped]] seeing Swoosie Kurtz ([[Global]] According to Garp) and [[Helene]] [[Archer]] ([[Small]] [[Storing]] of Horrors) again. Two [[underestimated]] [[characteristics]] actresses that never fail to [[bringing]] it with their performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 1962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this became a cult movie in chinese college students, though i havnt watched it until it is broadcasted in channel4, UK.

full of arty giddy pretentions, the plot is mediocre and unreal; the 'spirit' it wants to convey is how independent artists 'resist the commercisliation of music industry' and maintain their' purity of an artistic soul' and wouldnt 'sell themselves for dirty money'. that is really giddy and superficial; the diologue are mainly pathetic. acting is poor. sceenplay is full of art pretention. it is a fantasy movie for kids and that;s all

--------------------------------------------- Result 1963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] As a [[study]] of the [[frailties]] of human [[nature]] in the [[context]] of [[old]] [[age]], this [[film]] is without parallel. It is, [[quite]] simply, [[brilliant]]. Full [[marks]] to [[everyone]] - from the [[scriptwriter]] to all involved in the finished [[product]]. You can only marvel at the [[perceptions]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[ageing]] [[performers]]. As a [[studied]] of the [[inadequacies]] of human [[characters]] in the [[background]] of [[ancient]] [[older]], this [[cinematic]] is without parallel. It is, [[pretty]] simply, [[wondrous]]. Full [[mark]] to [[somebody]] - from the [[writer]] to all involved in the finished [[merchandise]]. You can only marvel at the [[conceptions]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[aging]] [[artists]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] this is the [[perfect]] [[example]] of something [[great]] going [[awfully]] [[bad]]... hence, can i advice [[anyone]] to watch it? well, i was kinda [[obliged]] by the fact that in was in the tiff [[competition]] (i [[still]] can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the [[director]] was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[anything]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of [[official]]..the first two [[lie]] about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do [[something]] [[else]]..don't [[ruin]] a good [[evening]]) includes some old [[breasts]] and [[heavy]] [[drinking]].. but [[maybe]] you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they [[drinking]] vodka ?) this is the [[perfected]] [[examples]] of something [[marvellous]] going [[horribly]] [[unfavorable]]... hence, can i advice [[everyone]] to watch it? well, i was kinda [[forced]] by the fact that in was in the tiff [[contest]] (i [[however]] can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the [[superintendent]] was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[something]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of [[staffer]]..the first two [[lied]] about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do [[somethings]] [[elsewhere]]..don't [[destroy]] a good [[afternoon]]) includes some old [[titties]] and [[ponderous]] [[alcohol]].. but [[potentially]] you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they [[beverage]] vodka ?) --------------------------------------------- Result 1965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[beginning]] of this movie is [[excellent]] with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[quickly]] loses its [[appeal]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and looks great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. The [[initiating]] of this movie is [[sumptuous]] with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[promptly]] loses its [[appeals]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and looks great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] To grasp where this 1976 version of A [[STAR]] IS BORN is [[coming]] from [[consider]] this: Its [[final]] number is [[sung]] by [[Barbra]] Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute [[freeze]] [[frame]] of [[Ms]]. Streisand -- [[striking]] a Christ-like pose -- [[behind]] the [[closing]] credits. Over ten [[uninterrupted]] minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead [[center]], [[filling]] the big screen with [[uncompromising]] ego. That just might be some [[sort]] of cinematic [[record]].

Or [[think]] about this: The plot of this musical [[revolves]] [[around]] a love affair between two musical superstars, [[yet]], while Streisand's songs are [[performed]] in their [[entirety]] -- [[including]] the [[interminable]] finale -- her costar [[Kris]] Kristofferson isn't [[allowed]] to [[complete]] even one single song he performs. Nor, [[though]] she does [[allow]] him to [[contribute]] a little back up to a [[couple]] of her ditties, do they actually [[sing]] a [[duet]].

Or [[consider]] this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six [[times]], including [[taking]] [[credit]] for "musical [[concepts]]" and her [[wardrobe]] (from her [[closet]]) -- and she [[also]] [[allegedly]] wanted, but failed to [[get]] co-directing [[credit]] as well. One of her [[credits]] was as [[executive]] producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hairdresser]], Jon [[Peters]]. As such, Streisand controlled the [[final]] [[cut]] of the [[film]], which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the [[film]] in her [[direction]]. What it doesn't explain is how [[come]], given [[every]] [[opportunity]] to [[make]] The [[Great]] [[Diva]] look good, their [[efforts]] only make Streisand [[look]] [[bad]]. [[Even]] [[though]] this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[arguably]] her worst [[film]] and contains her [[worst]] performance.

Anyway, [[moving]] the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[singer]] on the [[road]] to stardom, who [[shares]] the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's [[John]] Norman Howard, a [[hard]] rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the [[previous]] incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his [[leading]] [[man]] [[career]] to [[help]] newcomer "Vicky [[Lester]]" [[achieve]] her [[success]]. [[In]] the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it [[clear]] that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or [[naive]]. The only conceivable attraction he [[might]] offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. To grasp where this 1976 version of A [[STARS]] IS BORN is [[come]] from [[reviewing]] this: Its [[definitive]] number is [[seng]] by [[Babs]] Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute [[frost]] [[frames]] of [[Mrs]]. Streisand -- [[noteworthy]] a Christ-like pose -- [[posterior]] the [[closes]] credits. Over ten [[persistent]] minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead [[centro]], [[populate]] the big screen with [[adamant]] ego. That just might be some [[kinds]] of cinematic [[records]].

Or [[believe]] about this: The plot of this musical [[turns]] [[throughout]] a love affair between two musical superstars, [[however]], while Streisand's songs are [[fulfilled]] in their [[totality]] -- [[encompassing]] the [[infinite]] finale -- her costar [[Chris]] Kristofferson isn't [[empowered]] to [[finishes]] even one single song he performs. Nor, [[while]] she does [[allows]] him to [[helps]] a little back up to a [[matches]] of her ditties, do they actually [[sings]] a [[duo]].

Or [[considering]] this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six [[time]], including [[picked]] [[credits]] for "musical [[concept]]" and her [[cupboard]] (from her [[pantry]]) -- and she [[additionally]] [[reportedly]] wanted, but failed to [[obtain]] co-directing [[credits]] as well. One of her [[appropriations]] was as [[managerial]] producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hair]], Jon [[Peter]]. As such, Streisand controlled the [[definitive]] [[chop]] of the [[filmmaking]], which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the [[filmmaking]] in her [[directions]]. What it doesn't explain is how [[arrived]], given [[each]] [[opportunities]] to [[deliver]] The [[Whopping]] [[Singer]] look good, their [[activities]] only make Streisand [[glance]] [[negative]]. [[Yet]] [[while]] this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[presumably]] her worst [[filmmaking]] and contains her [[worse]] performance.

Anyway, [[displacement]] the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[vocalist]] on the [[paths]] to stardom, who [[share]] the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's [[Jon]] Norman Howard, a [[tough]] rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the [[past]] incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his [[main]] [[dude]] [[professions]] to [[pomoc]] newcomer "Vicky [[Leicester]]" [[obtain]] her [[avail]]. [[During]] the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it [[unambiguous]] that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or [[gullible]]. The only conceivable attraction he [[apt]] offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. --------------------------------------------- Result 1967 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[excellent]] Private Snafu [[cartoon]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu [[shorts]], to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely [[imaginative]] and crams tons of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it [[escalates]] into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated [[brilliantly]] by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, [[fictional]] creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It [[stands]] up as one of the [[best]] of the Private Snafu shorts. Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[wondrous]] Private Snafu [[toon]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu [[britches]], to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely [[creativity]] and crams tons of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it [[aggravates]] into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated [[brightly]] by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, [[notional]] creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It [[standing]] up as one of the [[nicest]] of the Private Snafu shorts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1968 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[remembered]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson [[movie]] with Olivier and Vivien Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's [[voice]] from behind [[whiskers]]. Well Flora Robson was [[great]]. Her next signature, for me, [[would]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[different]] sumptuous [[gowns]]. And the same voice. As for the [[Armada]], it was a subtext. I like black-and-white films. Was everything done in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I [[missed]] daylight! I [[reminds]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson [[movies]] with Olivier and Vivien Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's [[vowel]] from behind [[moustaches]]. Well Flora Robson was [[marvelous]]. Her next signature, for me, [[could]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[disparate]] sumptuous [[scrubs]]. And the same voice. As for the [[Navy]], it was a subtext. I like black-and-white films. Was everything done in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I [[mistook]] daylight! --------------------------------------------- Result 1969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A [[fantastic]] [[show]] and an unrealized classic; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[greatest]] [[modern]] comedies of [[recent]] [[times]].

With a [[dark]] and bizarre [[style]] of [[humor]] that towers over the [[tired]], formulaic [[approach]] of it's inferior, [[yet]] [[unfortunately]] far more [[acknowledged]] successor, Little [[Britain]], The League of Gentlemen was [[truly]] [[something]] special during a [[rather]] [[quiet]] era in British [[comedy]].

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never [[really]] been [[anything]] like The League of Gentlemen before. On the [[surface]], a seemingly simplistic sketch [[show]], the show soon unfolds as a [[vivid]], sinister but [[incredibly]] [[hilarious]] universe [[populated]] with all [[manner]] of brilliant comedic [[creations]]. What really sets the [[show]] apart from it's [[rivals]], is it's approach to [[telling]] us it's [[story]]. [[Rather]] than serve us re-hashed [[sketches]], barely distinguishable from the next, here we [[see]] each individual or [[group]] of [[characters]] go through their [[various]] [[journeys]] and [[story]] lines. No visit to them is the same, and each [[time]] they [[offer]] us up with a [[surprise]].

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque [[yet]] hilarious populace. And that's probably the [[main]] [[reason]] why the show is such a [[joy]] to watch (and [[also]] the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The [[Catherine]] Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been [[kept]] on to entertain further, bowed out before the [[series]] came to a [[close]], giving [[room]] for fellow [[characters]] to [[grow]] more, or allow for the introduction of [[newer]] [[residents]] of Royston Vasey to [[make]] their [[mark]].

Another thing that sets this [[show]] above others is that the [[writing]] team approach the [[script]] process with [[care]] and [[intelligence]]. As [[mentioned]] before, all four [[members]] of the League have a [[sound]] mind when it [[comes]] to [[judging]] the [[longevity]] of their creations, and when it's [[time]] to [[call]] it [[quits]] in respect to certain [[characters]]. This [[awareness]] has [[also]] meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold [[evolution]], not [[usually]] [[seen]] in a show of this [[nature]]. The narrative [[driven]], and far darker third [[series]] is a [[brave]] step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together [[various]] sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third [[series]] is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame A [[outstanding]] [[exhibitions]] and an unrealized classic; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[higher]] [[fashionable]] comedies of [[newer]] [[time]].

With a [[darkness]] and bizarre [[styles]] of [[comedy]] that towers over the [[weary]], formulaic [[approaching]] of it's inferior, [[even]] [[unluckily]] far more [[recognized]] successor, Little [[England]], The League of Gentlemen was [[truthfully]] [[anything]] special during a [[somewhat]] [[quietness]] era in British [[farce]].

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never [[truly]] been [[something]] like The League of Gentlemen before. On the [[surfaces]], a seemingly simplistic sketch [[illustrating]], the show soon unfolds as a [[vibrant]], sinister but [[terribly]] [[funny]] universe [[inhabited]] with all [[method]] of brilliant comedic [[establishment]]. What really sets the [[illustrates]] apart from it's [[contenders]], is it's approach to [[saying]] us it's [[stories]]. [[Fairly]] than serve us re-hashed [[portraits]], barely distinguishable from the next, here we [[seeing]] each individual or [[panels]] of [[features]] go through their [[multiple]] [[distances]] and [[narratives]] lines. No visit to them is the same, and each [[times]] they [[supplying]] us up with a [[surprises]].

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque [[even]] hilarious populace. And that's probably the [[principal]] [[justification]] why the show is such a [[pleasure]] to watch (and [[additionally]] the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The [[Katherine]] Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been [[conserved]] on to entertain further, bowed out before the [[serials]] came to a [[closed]], giving [[chamber]] for fellow [[attribute]] to [[raising]] more, or allow for the introduction of [[novel]] [[villagers]] of Royston Vasey to [[deliver]] their [[brands]].

Another thing that sets this [[spectacle]] above others is that the [[write]] team approach the [[hyphen]] process with [[healthcare]] and [[intellect]]. As [[referenced]] before, all four [[member]] of the League have a [[sounds]] mind when it [[arises]] to [[verdict]] the [[durability]] of their creations, and when it's [[times]] to [[invitation]] it [[resigns]] in respect to certain [[traits]]. This [[consciousness]] has [[further]] meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold [[developments]], not [[generally]] [[watched]] in a show of this [[character]]. The narrative [[spurred]], and far darker third [[serial]] is a [[plucky]] step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together [[assorted]] sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third [[serial]] is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame --------------------------------------------- Result 1970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The "gangster" genre is now a worn subject one that is too often subjected to parody. In retrospect the series is a culmination of previous clichés that have been utilized in it's genre, thankfully the writers have advanced upon this flaw by creating a realism which has been applied to it. The Sopranos is an epic crime saga that illustrates it's content with psychological depth that is characterized with subtle nuance, humor and unvarnished violence. The key protagonist Tony Soprano is perceived as a perilous general bereft of fear and moral values by his crew ,however, Tony is of two persona's one which is bestial while the other is conflicted with guilt and resent. With out any inhibitions or contradictions I still adamantly believe that The Sopranos has the finest ensemble cast of recent memory. All things considered I could make an elaborate statement on the series, but I won't. If ever there is a visual dictionary in global consumerism search for these definitions vital, ambiguous, unrelenting, epic, uncompromising and the sopranos shattered visage will be smiling right back at you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1971 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An interesting animation about the fate of a giant tiger, a sloth, and a mammoth, who saved a baby, who was close to be killed by a group of tigers during the ice age. The morale of the film shows that good behavior with the others may bring benefits at the end. One of the tigers in the group got an order to finally capture the baby, who was hardly saved by his mother when the tigers attacked her community. The baby was then rescued by the sloth and the mammoth, but the tiger joined them with the objective of finally taken away the baby. They went through very troublesome paths with plenty of danger, and at once the tiger was to fall down and saved by the mammoth. At the end the group of tigers tried to capture the baby but the mammoth helped incredibly by his tiger colleague was able to overcome this attack and to give the baby back to his father and the community to which he belongs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Deliverance" is one of the best exploitation films to come out of that wonderful 1970's decade from whence so many other exploitation films came.

A group of friends sets out on a canoe trip down a river in the south and they become victimized by a bunch of toothless hillbillies who pretty much try to ruin their lives. It's awesome.

We are treated to anal rape, vicious beatings, bow and arrow killings, shootings, broken bones, etc... A lot like 1974's "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," to say that "Deliverance" is believable would be immature. This would never and could never happen, even in the dark ages of 1972.

"Deliverance" is a very entertaining ride and packed full of action. It is one in a huge pile of exploitation films to come from the early 70's and it (arguably) sits on top of that pile with it's great acting, superb cinematography and excellent writing.

8 out of 10, kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 1973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] foywonder's review of this cheap STV hits the nail squarely on the head. Make sure you read it. In case you don't, a group of scientists heads off into the deep woods of the Pacific Northwest, to fumble around with a bunch of bones in an animal graveyard. The Big Foot family doesn't take kindly to this, and proceeds to pick off the team one by one, largely offscreen. Big Foot himself has a distinctly ape-like face, but is less scary overall than Harry from HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS. Most of the movie has the wooden, generic actors pretending to be scientists tromping around in the woods and yakking away. This is a no-budget movie in which very little happens, at least on screen. We do get to watch the sexiest of the females take a shower while one of her male companions watches, but nothing comes of this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I gave up to watch it after an hour and regretted that hour a lot. the acting is horrible and there is almost no plot. my guess is that someone came up with a strange shape of an animal and started to make a story around of it. borrowing some ideas from movies like Resident Evil and Aliens doesn't result in a movie like them. if this going to be a top Korean movie, I'd rather won't bother to see even a Korean movie trailer...

By the way, this movies is a good reason to believe that not necessarily a high rating means the movie is promising. I think every Korean who has internet for online gaming rated this movie over the 8, even though has no clue what it is about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1975 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The 40 Year Old Virgin, is about Andy Stitzer, a forty year old man who works in an electronic store and doesn't have much of a social life and is very awkward around women. Some of his co-workers at the store invite him out one night and they discover that Andy, is still a virgin so they plan to help him lose his virginity. One day in the store Andy, meets a woman named Trish, who gives him her phone number and eventually Andy, works up enough courage to go on a date with her and they start to really like each other but Andy, is still very awkward when it comes to sex and he is going to have to tell this to Trish, much to his embarrassment if he can actually get up enough courage to tell her before things get awkward. The 40 Year Old Virgin, has good direction, a good script, good comedic performances by the whole cast, good cinematography and good film editing. The film stars and is co-written by Steve Carell, who does a very good comedic breakthrough performance and his writing for the film is very good too. I was very pleasantly surprised with this film. It is sweet, funny, entertaining, fun, enjoyable, clever, good natured and a good time. This film is just as good as this year's Wedding Crashers, and both films are two of the best comedies I have seen in awhile. The 40 Year Old Virgin, really showcases a lot of talent and it is put to good use and it works as a comedy and a romance and it is sweet and a lot of fun. One of the biggest surprises and one of the best comedies of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before watching it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[could]] follow the dialogue through it. My [[view]] on the [[movie]] may be [[partially]] biased [[since]] I had never read the play before, but I [[got]] [[pulled]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is [[undoubtedly]] one of the [[best]] [[writers]] ever to have lived and the [[story]] of [[Hamlet]] is [[definitely]] one of his [[best]] [[achievements]].

But now on to the [[movie]]...

I [[found]] that all the actors in the movie had a firm grasp of what they were [[saying]] and [[thus]], were [[able]] to articulate it [[quite]] well. Leonardo in Romeo and Juliet is [[nothing]] [[compared]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[King]]. The [[thing]] I liked about this was that it [[worked]] very well as a "[[MOVIE]]" and not as a play you are [[studying]]. You don't need to be [[affluent]] with Shakespeare to relate to all the Misery hamlet has to [[go]] through. I would [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to a [[wide]] audience.

That's my two cents. I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before watching it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[wo]] follow the dialogue through it. My [[standpoint]] on the [[movies]] may be [[partly]] biased [[because]] I had never read the play before, but I [[did]] [[pulling]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is [[unquestionably]] one of the [[finest]] [[authors]] ever to have lived and the [[tale]] of [[Hamlets]] is [[indubitably]] one of his [[finest]] [[successes]].

But now on to the [[kino]]...

I [[uncovered]] that all the actors in the movie had a firm grasp of what they were [[arguing]] and [[therefore]], were [[capable]] to articulate it [[pretty]] well. Leonardo in Romeo and Juliet is [[anything]] [[likened]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[Emperor]]. The [[stuff]] I liked about this was that it [[acted]] very well as a "[[CINEMATOGRAPHY]]" and not as a play you are [[examining]]. You don't need to be [[wealthiest]] with Shakespeare to relate to all the Misery hamlet has to [[going]] through. I would [[recommendation]] this [[kino]] to a [[extensive]] audience.

That's my two cents. --------------------------------------------- Result 1977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the film is still [[awful]]. Besides the [[synthesizer]], the [[saxophone]] was the most [[abused]] instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is [[evident]] in the title [[song]]. Hearing that [[song]] again [[made]] me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic [[misery]] inflicted [[upon]] them. And to compound this musical [[assault]] Rob Lowe's [[character]] [[played]] [[saxophone]], and there was one scene where he played a [[solo]] that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the [[characters]] were intensely unappealing, [[although]] I [[must]] say they did a great job of [[casting]] equally unappealing [[actors]] to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual [[diseases]] if such thing were voted upon. I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the film is still [[frightful]]. Besides the [[synthesizers]], the [[saxophones]] was the most [[abuse]] instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is [[manifest]] in the title [[chanson]]. Hearing that [[chanson]] again [[introduced]] me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic [[privation]] inflicted [[afterward]] them. And to compound this musical [[aggression]] Rob Lowe's [[personage]] [[effected]] [[clarinet]], and there was one scene where he played a [[alone]] that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the [[hallmarks]] were intensely unappealing, [[while]] I [[gotta]] say they did a great job of [[pouring]] equally unappealing [[protagonists]] to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual [[ailment]] if such thing were voted upon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much worse than the original. It was actually *painful* to sit through, and it barely held my six year old's interest.

Introduction of some new Pokemon is marginally interesting, but storyline is extra-thin, dialogue is still bad, and music is mediocre. Watch the television show instead - it's much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I was up late flipping cable [[channels]] one [[night]] and ran into this [[movie]] from about 10 minutes into the [[start]] - every time I even [[thought]] going to [[bed]], [[something]] kept on [[telling]] me to [[keep]] on watching it [[even]] [[though]] it was way way way past my bedtime.

This [[movie]] [[could]] have been another [[easy]] slam dunk anti-gun [[film]], but [[instead]] they [[chose]] to examine the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[even]] better, the [[movie]] kept on with the [[real]] [[life]] - just when you [[think]] they are going to [[take]] the easy and [[obviously]] contrived [[way]] out, a twist [[comes]] along and changes the [[whole]] [[outlook]] of the movie. This [[film]] not only doesn't follow the [[formula]], it [[shows]] how other [[events]] [[often]] lead up to and/or affect what [[happens]] afterwards.

I only wish the filmmakers had [[explored]] the [[issues]] around anti-depressant [[drugs]] more - the [[kids]] from Columnbine who did the [[shootings]] were on them for [[years]] and it was [[frightening]] to watch the [[way]] Deanna [[popped]] them [[every]] time the [[nightmares]] [[started]]. Up until [[recently]] they were [[dispensing]] the stuff like [[candy]] and only now do they [[even]] [[begin]] to [[understand]] what [[long]] term effects the [[drugs]] have. It was very [[refreshing]] to [[see]] that the mental illness [[aspect]] of the [[story]] was [[given]] [[quite]] a bit of film, having a relative who suffers from a [[mental]] [[illness]], I can say that the [[movie]] was dead nuts on in [[every]] [[aspect]] of [[mental]] [[illnesses]]. [[Bravo]] to the director and [[writer]] who [[obviously]] did their homework on those [[issues]]. And for those who [[think]] certain things couldn't [[happen]] in a [[hospital]] (I don't [[want]] to tell any [[particulars]]), you're dead [[wrong]] on that too - I've been there. The [[script]] was so [[real]] it was [[amazing]].

Go [[BUY]] this [[film]] and [[show]] it to your [[teenage]] [[kids]] before it's too late. [[Someday]] they'll [[thank]] you for it. I was up late flipping cable [[channel]] one [[nighttime]] and ran into this [[cinematography]] from about 10 minutes into the [[startup]] - every time I even [[figured]] going to [[bedside]], [[somethings]] kept on [[saying]] me to [[preserving]] on watching it [[yet]] [[if]] it was way way way past my bedtime.

This [[film]] [[did]] have been another [[easier]] slam dunk anti-gun [[cinematography]], but [[alternatively]] they [[elects]] to examine the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[yet]] better, the [[kino]] kept on with the [[actual]] [[living]] - just when you [[ideas]] they are going to [[taking]] the easy and [[clearly]] contrived [[route]] out, a twist [[occurs]] along and changes the [[ensemble]] [[expectations]] of the movie. This [[kino]] not only doesn't follow the [[formulas]], it [[demonstrates]] how other [[incidents]] [[frequently]] lead up to and/or affect what [[arises]] afterwards.

I only wish the filmmakers had [[analyzed]] the [[issue]] around anti-depressant [[drug]] more - the [[youths]] from Columnbine who did the [[shooting]] were on them for [[olds]] and it was [[creepy]] to watch the [[path]] Deanna [[tore]] them [[all]] time the [[dream]] [[startup]]. Up until [[freshly]] they were [[dispense]] the stuff like [[chocolate]] and only now do they [[yet]] [[commence]] to [[realise]] what [[lange]] term effects the [[pharmaceuticals]] have. It was very [[refreshes]] to [[behold]] that the mental illness [[element]] of the [[storytelling]] was [[granted]] [[rather]] a bit of film, having a relative who suffers from a [[psychological]] [[sickness]], I can say that the [[film]] was dead nuts on in [[any]] [[element]] of [[spiritual]] [[disease]]. [[Congrats]] to the director and [[screenwriter]] who [[apparently]] did their homework on those [[matters]]. And for those who [[ideas]] certain things couldn't [[occur]] in a [[hospitals]] (I don't [[wanted]] to tell any [[specifics]]), you're dead [[amiss]] on that too - I've been there. The [[hyphen]] was so [[true]] it was [[astonishing]].

Go [[BOUGHT]] this [[movie]] and [[showing]] it to your [[teenager]] [[brats]] before it's too late. [[Sometime]] they'll [[appreciation]] you for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1980 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As you probably already know, Jess Franco is one prolific guy. Hes made hundreds upon hundreds of films, many of which are crap. However, he managed to sneak in an occasionally quality work amongst all the assembly line exploitation. "Succubus" isn't his best work (thats either "The Diabolical Dr. Z" or "Vampyros Lesbos"), but it has many of his trademarks that make it a must for anyone interested in diving into his large catalog. He combines the erotic (alternating between showing full-frontal nudity and leaving somethings left to the imagination) and the surreal seamlessly. This is a very dreamlike film, full of great atmosphere. I particularly liked the constant namedropping. Despite coming off as being incredibly pretentious, its amusing to hear all of Franco's influences.

Still, there are many users who don't like "Succubus" and I can see where they're coming from. Its leisurely paced, but I can deal with that. More problematic is the incoherency. The script here was obviously rushed, and within five minutes into the film I had absolutely no idea what was going on (and it never really came together from that point on). Those who want some substance with their style, look elsewhere. Also, if its a horror film, it never really becomes scary or even suspenseful. Still, I was entertained by all the psychedelic silliness that I didn't really mind these major flaws all too much. (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 1981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I debated as to whether or not I should tick the spoiler box. Since 99% of this show has probably already been seen by any follower of Scrubs it probably doesn't come under the category of a spoiler.

Clip shows. Grrr. We all knew Friends was going down the tube when they started with clip shows...and five and a half years into Scrubs they've gone and fallen down that hole.

I have to wonder if the writers just couldn't be bothered writing that week and just said to themselves "let's show the other funny stuff." It didn't work.

For starters, showing all the times that people have fallen down isn't funny when taken out of context. It's not funny to see Todd dangling by his banana hammock unless we know WHY he was dangling by his banana hammock.

Second, for what was supposed to be a compilation of JD's fantasies, one was Turk's dream, another also wasn't his fantasy, although I forget which.

And that's the problem. This episode is totally forgettable. We've seen all these things before. And the collection of clips of people dancing? Why? That's not funny.

Finally, I must admit two of my favourite Scrubs moments were shown in the last compilation...Dr. Cox realising that Ben died...and JD telling him how proud of him he is.

But even seeing those moments again didn't save the episode. The summary says it all.

Worst episode ever. Bill Lawrence, PLEASE don't let your show go the same way as Friends, keep it fresh, keep it funny...or wrap it up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1982 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is one of those [[films]] that's more interesting to watch from an academic [[perspective]] than from an [[entertainment]] perspective. I do my [[ratings]] [[based]] on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. [[If]] I were to rate it as an academic [[film]], [[though]], it [[would]] [[get]] a 10.

It is shot in a very interesting [[manner]], like a pseudo-silent [[film]] with [[elements]] of [[sound]] [[effect]] and [[reality]]. It's meant to convey [[disjointed]] [[memory]] and fragmentation of the [[mind]], and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the [[film]] has a lot of disgusting [[elements]] to it that I didn't [[find]] all that [[entertaining]]. They're mainly just [[disturbing]]. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the [[character]] relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. This is one of those [[movies]] that's more interesting to watch from an academic [[views]] than from an [[amusement]] perspective. I do my [[rating]] [[founded]] on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. [[Though]] I were to rate it as an academic [[filmmaking]], [[nevertheless]], it [[should]] [[obtain]] a 10.

It is shot in a very interesting [[ways]], like a pseudo-silent [[filmmaking]] with [[element]] of [[audible]] [[impacts]] and [[actuality]]. It's meant to convey [[unconnected]] [[memoir]] and fragmentation of the [[esprit]], and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the [[cinematographic]] has a lot of disgusting [[facets]] to it that I didn't [[finds]] all that [[entertain]]. They're mainly just [[disconcerting]]. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the [[personage]] relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides [[several]] hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I [[remember]] about the [[film]] except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a great film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides [[dissimilar]] hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I [[rember]] about the [[filmmaking]] except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a great film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this [[movie]]! Obviously this [[movie]] wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this [[film]] immensly, and still do! I [[guess]] this film isn't for [[everyone]], but it [[certainly]] did [[touch]] the hearts of [[many]].

As for those that [[think]] that this [[film]] is "[[overrated]]" or "over-hyped"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You [[see]], it's not [[CRITICS]]/article [[writers]] that [[make]] a [[film]] "[[HUGE]]" or a "[[HIT]]" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a [[huge]] [[success]]. With Titanic, [[everyone]] was in awe. Let's [[face]] it, a film like this had never been made before. [[At]] least not with the [[type]] of [[special]] effects needed to [[really]] capture the [[essence]] of the ship [[actually]] sinking. This [[film]] is so [[accurate]] that [[even]] James Cameron [[timed]] the [[actual]] sinking of the ship in the [[film]] with the [[REAL]] sinking that [[fateful]] day in April 1912. [[Even]] the silverware for [[goodness]] sakes [[matched]]!

Give this [[movie]] a break you [[guys]]! The critics [[thought]] this [[movie]] [[would]] [[sink]] [[BIG]] time! [[When]] this [[movie]] [[actually]] [[came]] out and people [[started]] hearing by WORD [[OF]] MOUTH (which is the [[BEST]] [[form]] of advertisement [[mind]] you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth [[seeing]], then [[everyone]] [[started]] flocking to the [[theaters]] in droves to see this [[movie]]...not once, not twice, but [[maybe]] 3 [[times]] and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this [[movie]] was "overhyped"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being "overhyped". ha! [[Critics]] didn't even think that [[Titanic]] [[would]] make [[enough]] money to cover Cameron's gigantic film [[budget]] that it took to make this [[mammoth]] of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more!

[[Personally]], I [[LOVE]] this [[film]]. [[However]], this film might not be for everyone. DOn't [[say]] that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was [[sweet]]. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!

I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this [[films]]! Obviously this [[film]] wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this [[cinematography]] immensly, and still do! I [[suppose]] this film isn't for [[anybody]], but it [[probably]] did [[toque]] the hearts of [[several]].

As for those that [[ideas]] that this [[kino]] is "[[overstated]]" or "over-hyped"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You [[behold]], it's not [[CRITIQUES]]/article [[authors]] that [[deliver]] a [[films]] "[[GIGANTIC]]" or a "[[SLAPPED]]" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a [[big]] [[avail]]. With Titanic, [[someone]] was in awe. Let's [[confront]] it, a film like this had never been made before. [[For]] least not with the [[genera]] of [[particular]] effects needed to [[genuinely]] capture the [[nub]] of the ship [[indeed]] sinking. This [[films]] is so [[exact]] that [[yet]] James Cameron [[synched]] the [[real]] sinking of the ship in the [[cinema]] with the [[AUTHENTIC]] sinking that [[fatal]] day in April 1912. [[Yet]] the silverware for [[christ]] sakes [[coupled]]!

Give this [[movies]] a break you [[boy]]! The critics [[ideology]] this [[films]] [[ought]] [[sinking]] [[SIZEABLE]] time! [[Whenever]] this [[films]] [[genuinely]] [[became]] out and people [[opened]] hearing by WORD [[TO]] MOUTH (which is the [[BETTER]] [[shape]] of advertisement [[intellect]] you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth [[see]], then [[somebody]] [[launches]] flocking to the [[theatre]] in droves to see this [[kino]]...not once, not twice, but [[conceivably]] 3 [[time]] and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this [[films]] was "overhyped"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being "overhyped". ha! [[Criticisms]] didn't even think that [[Herculean]] [[ought]] make [[adequate]] money to cover Cameron's gigantic film [[budgets]] that it took to make this [[gargantuan]] of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more!

[[Individual]], I [[AMOUR]] this [[cinema]]. [[Instead]], this film might not be for everyone. DOn't [[tell]] that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was [[sugary]]. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Normally]] when I go on a [[raid]] of the local Hollywood [[Video]] I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the [[basic]] [[principals]] behind a B-Horror [[movie]] is it's camp value, Heavy [[Gore]], Lots of needless Nudity, and [[special]] [[effects]] that anyone can put together with a [[pack]] of corn [[syrup]] and latex. I [[rented]] Cradle of Fear [[strictly]] because I've been a fan of the band since they [[released]] they're first [[Demo]] in 1995. The [[movie]] [[started]] off on an interesting [[note]] and then when I saw Dani [[Filth]] stomp on an extremely [[obvious]] latex mask I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[potential]] and really [[could]] have been a real good [[movie]] but in the [[end]] this "[[Movie]]" really is just an extended Cradle of Filth Video. [[Routinely]] when I go on a [[raiding]] of the local Hollywood [[Videos]] I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the [[fundamental]] [[chiefs]] behind a B-Horror [[filmmaking]] is it's camp value, Heavy [[Gora]], Lots of needless Nudity, and [[peculiar]] [[impact]] that anyone can put together with a [[packs]] of corn [[sesame]] and latex. I [[leases]] Cradle of Fear [[tightly]] because I've been a fan of the band since they [[liberated]] they're first [[Manifestation]] in 1995. The [[filmmaking]] [[launching]] off on an interesting [[noting]] and then when I saw Dani [[Dirt]] stomp on an extremely [[noticeable]] latex mask I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[prospective]] and really [[did]] have been a real good [[filmmaking]] but in the [[terminating]] this "[[Kino]]" really is just an extended Cradle of Filth Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This time the [[hero]] from the first [[film]] has [[become]] human and this time [[uses]] fist and [[foot]] combos against [[super]] universal soldiers and a computer which has [[gone]] awry and is prepared to take over the [[world]]. I'm pretty sure it was [[Double]] Team, which convinced [[everyone]] that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[providing]] watchable action flicks. However it was this that [[tarnished]] his [[credibility]] [[forever]]. While [[Universal]] Soldier:The [[Return]] isn't as [[dull]] as [[Double]] Team or The Quest,it's still [[pretty]] [[awful]] indeed, with [[none]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for kids who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) This time the [[superhero]] from the first [[filmmaking]] has [[becomes]] human and this time [[using]] fist and [[footing]] combos against [[sublime]] universal soldiers and a computer which has [[faded]] awry and is prepared to take over the [[globe]]. I'm pretty sure it was [[Doubly]] Team, which convinced [[everybody]] that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[offered]] watchable action flicks. However it was this that [[sullied]] his [[credence]] [[permanently]]. While [[Globally]] Soldier:The [[Comeback]] isn't as [[boring]] as [[Dual]] Team or The Quest,it's still [[quite]] [[abhorrent]] indeed, with [[nos]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for kids who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) --------------------------------------------- Result 1987 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, thinking that with such a great cast, it would have to be at [[least]] marginally [[brilliant]].

[[Big]] [[mistake]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown [[together]] haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[feels]]) with the hope that it would all come together in the editing room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turkey]] is [[notable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all around her. But other than that, [[avoid]] at all costs. (Which is pretty easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[cable]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, thinking that with such a great cast, it would have to be at [[fewest]] marginally [[sumptuous]].

[[Prodigious]] [[awry]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown [[jointly]] haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[thinks]]) with the hope that it would all come together in the editing room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turk]] is [[remarkable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all around her. But other than that, [[avert]] at all costs. (Which is pretty easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[wiring]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was [[excited]] when I heard they were finally making this [[horrific]] [[event]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this would be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[mannerisms]]. I guess he [[sells]] [[tickets]]? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire [[theater]] with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will [[admit]] that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. [[John]] Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and [[worried]] about what [[would]] happen to his family (and self) if he talked to [[police]] about it. [[In]] fact, Holmes never really [[testified]] about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. [[So]] this was still really one [[big]] mystery, a mystery that this [[movie]] does [[nothing]] to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of [[discretion]] and most of the [[principal]] characters are [[dead]]. However, there is no real storyline, it is [[fragmented]] [[claptrap]]. The [[script]] is light and the [[actors]] try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no [[insight]] into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for [[long]] stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. [[Even]] Kudrow [[tries]] [[hard]] to make a [[flimsy]] role [[look]] [[substantial]]. It is a very [[shallow]] [[piece]] and dare I say, boring. The [[director]] [[even]] [[tries]] to turn it into a love [[story]]. Which is [[nice]], unless you [[know]] [[anything]] about what a [[piece]] of trash [[John]] Holmes [[really]] was. [[Perhaps]] a [[couple]] of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie [[Nights]]" might have [[helped]] here. "Boogie [[Nights]]" was [[innovative]] and [[exciting]] in all regards. This [[film]] on the other hand was flat and without any [[real]] [[charm]] or [[style]]. Even the music is out of place, with [[Duran]] [[Duran]] being [[played]] in a scene that was supposed to have [[taken]] [[place]] in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There [[could]] have been a [[great]] [[film]] based on this [[gruesome]] event, but I have not [[seen]] it [[yet]]. I have not [[seen]] [[even]] a [[decent]] one [[yet]] (unless you [[consider]] the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). I was [[thrilled]] when I heard they were finally making this [[gruesome]] [[incidents]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this would be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[quirks]]. I guess he [[sold]] [[ticket]]? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire [[movies]] with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will [[confess]] that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. [[Jon]] Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and [[preoccupied]] about what [[could]] happen to his family (and self) if he talked to [[cops]] about it. [[For]] fact, Holmes never really [[stated]] about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. [[Therefore]] this was still really one [[grand]] mystery, a mystery that this [[filmmaking]] does [[none]] to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of [[caution]] and most of the [[important]] characters are [[deaths]]. However, there is no real storyline, it is [[scattered]] [[fiddlesticks]]. The [[screenplay]] is light and the [[protagonists]] try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no [[vision]] into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for [[lengthy]] stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. [[Yet]] Kudrow [[attempts]] [[tough]] to make a [[weak]] role [[peek]] [[important]]. It is a very [[superficial]] [[slice]] and dare I say, boring. The [[superintendent]] [[yet]] [[seeks]] to turn it into a love [[storytelling]]. Which is [[enjoyable]], unless you [[savoir]] [[something]] about what a [[slice]] of trash [[Johannes]] Holmes [[truly]] was. [[Potentially]] a [[match]] of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie [[Evenings]]" might have [[supporting]] here. "Boogie [[Evenings]]" was [[revolutionary]] and [[breathtaking]] in all regards. This [[filmmaking]] on the other hand was flat and without any [[actual]] [[glamour]] or [[styles]]. Even the music is out of place, with [[Jose]] [[Ortiz]] being [[done]] in a scene that was supposed to have [[picked]] [[placing]] in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There [[did]] have been a [[prodigious]] [[movie]] based on this [[shocking]] event, but I have not [[noticed]] it [[however]]. I have not [[noticed]] [[yet]] a [[dignified]] one [[still]] (unless you [[reviewing]] the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). --------------------------------------------- Result 1989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the intelligently written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the beautiful music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[rarity]] in movie going experiences: one that is nigh impossible to find fault with in any area.

There have been several comparisons made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy epic to [[rival]] Rob Roy as the [[kind]] of [[movie]] I [[would]] care to [[see]] more than once. [[While]] Braveheart [[works]] [[hard]] to be a serious epic, Rob [[Roy]] just grabs you and [[absorbs]] you into its [[tightly]] edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob [[Roy]] contains the [[perfect]] [[balance]] of dramatic [[tension]], [[action]] and even occasional [[humor]]. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that [[anchor]] them in their [[authentic]] period setting.

Further, they are not [[caricatures]] of good and [[evil]] as we all too [[often]] observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob [[Roy]] prevails, we realize his predicaments are [[products]] of his own pride and sense of [[honor]]. Tim Roth plays one of the most [[hateful]] [[bad]] [[guys]] in the [[history]] of [[cinema]], yet there are moments when we can [[understand]] how the [[events]] of his [[life]] have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob [[Roy]] employs a [[level]] of [[character]] [[development]] that makes its [[story]] [[even]] more [[believable]] and gripping.

Rob [[Roy]] is a [[delightful]] [[treasure]], featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the intelligently written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the beautiful music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[shortages]] in movie going experiences: one that is nigh impossible to find fault with in any area.

There have been several comparisons made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy epic to [[opponent]] Rob Roy as the [[sorts]] of [[cinematography]] I [[could]] care to [[seeing]] more than once. [[Despite]] Braveheart [[work]] [[laborious]] to be a serious epic, Rob [[Rowe]] just grabs you and [[consumes]] you into its [[strictly]] edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob [[Rowe]] contains the [[faultless]] [[counterweight]] of dramatic [[voltage]], [[efforts]] and even occasional [[comedy]]. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that [[anker]] them in their [[real]] period setting.

Further, they are not [[caricature]] of good and [[diabolical]] as we all too [[generally]] observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob [[Rowe]] prevails, we realize his predicaments are [[merchandise]] of his own pride and sense of [[honours]]. Tim Roth plays one of the most [[nauseating]] [[unhealthy]] [[fellas]] in the [[story]] of [[movies]], yet there are moments when we can [[fathom]] how the [[phenomena]] of his [[iife]] have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob [[Rowe]] employs a [[echelon]] of [[nature]] [[evolution]] that makes its [[fairytales]] [[yet]] more [[trustworthy]] and gripping.

Rob [[Rowe]] is a [[wondrous]] [[hoard]], featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[In]] watching how the two [[brothers]] interact and [[feed]] off of each other through the whole movie makes me personally happy to [[live]] in the [[rural]] area much like they did in the movie. I have watched this movie [[countless]] times and have the book right beside my Bible. After [[watching]] the [[movie]] I [[agree]] that this is one of the few movies that does a book justice. I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] [[anyone]] that has the [[chance]] to go to Montana to fish or be outdoors to do so. It is amazing. I can not [[think]] of [[anyone]] else that could [[play]] the role better than [[Brad]] [[Pitt]]. Do yourself justice and watch one of the [[better]] [[movies]] in the [[modern]] [[movie]] era. [[STRONGLY]] [[Recommend]] And as a guide for fishing trips in both Montana and Wyoming, do not try to learn how to fly fish from the scenes of the [[movie]] because although it looks great on the film you have no idea how much practice and skill fishing like that actually takes. Thank you for listening Watch this movie [[please]] if you would like a long sad movie. [[Throughout]] watching how the two [[plymouth]] interact and [[foraging]] off of each other through the whole movie makes me personally happy to [[viva]] in the [[agricultural]] area much like they did in the movie. I have watched this movie [[endless]] times and have the book right beside my Bible. After [[staring]] the [[film]] I [[concur]] that this is one of the few movies that does a book justice. I [[forcefully]] [[recommendation]] [[somebody]] that has the [[probability]] to go to Montana to fish or be outdoors to do so. It is amazing. I can not [[believing]] of [[anybody]] else that could [[gaming]] the role better than [[Rad]] [[Beit]]. Do yourself justice and watch one of the [[improved]] [[theater]] in the [[fashionable]] [[film]] era. [[FLATLY]] [[Recommending]] And as a guide for fishing trips in both Montana and Wyoming, do not try to learn how to fly fish from the scenes of the [[film]] because although it looks great on the film you have no idea how much practice and skill fishing like that actually takes. Thank you for listening Watch this movie [[invite]] if you would like a long sad movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] All Kira Reed [[fans]] [[MUST]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. [[Thankfully]], Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy [[films]] are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). [[Later]], she [[marvels]] to her publishist how great it was, but she didn't [[get]] his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they [[continue]] their kinky [[games]]. But [[eventually]] she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks [[loose]], and I'll leave it at that. This is [[easily]] the [[best]] of these soft-core Playboys films I've [[seen]]. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. All Kira Reed [[stalkers]] [[OUGHT]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. [[Mercifully]], Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy [[kino]] are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). [[Subsequent]], she [[wonders]] to her publishist how great it was, but she didn't [[gets]] his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they [[constants]] their kinky [[game]]. But [[finally]] she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks [[slack]], and I'll leave it at that. This is [[conveniently]] the [[nicest]] of these soft-core Playboys films I've [[noticed]]. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. --------------------------------------------- Result 1992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's just breathtaking in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!

Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.

I'm inclined to the later view-- thanks to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.

The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1993 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A very good start. I was a [[bit]] [[surprised]] to [[find]] the machinery not [[quite]] so [[advanced]]: It should have been cruder, to [[match]] we [[saw]] in the original [[series]]. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan [[lady]] [[comes]] across as a [[little]] too human. She [[needs]] to school on Spock who, after all, is the [[model]] for this [[race]]. Too bad they couldn't have [[picked]] Jeri Ryan. I [[like]] [[Ms]]. Park, the [[Korean]](?)lady. The [[doctor]] has [[possibilities]]. Haven't [[sorted]] out the other [[males]], except for the [[black]] [[guy]]. He's a [[really]] [[likeable]]. Bakula [[needs]] to [[find]] his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of [[humor]] and his [[willingness]] to [[try]] anything. He is, of course, big and [[strong]] [[enough]] for the [[heroics]]. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. A very good start. I was a [[bite]] [[horrified]] to [[unearthed]] the machinery not [[utterly]] so [[advance]]: It should have been cruder, to [[matching]] we [[observed]] in the original [[serials]]. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan [[damsel]] [[arrives]] across as a [[tiny]] too human. She [[gotta]] to school on Spock who, after all, is the [[modelling]] for this [[errand]]. Too bad they couldn't have [[took]] Jeri Ryan. I [[loves]] [[Mrs]]. Park, the [[Korea]](?)lady. The [[doctors]] has [[chances]]. Haven't [[sort]] out the other [[male]], except for the [[negro]] [[boy]]. He's a [[genuinely]] [[sympathetic]]. Bakula [[should]] to [[unearthed]] his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of [[comedy]] and his [[volition]] to [[endeavour]] anything. He is, of course, big and [[vigorous]] [[sufficiently]] for the [[exploits]]. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There is [[indeed]] much to complain about this [[movie]] version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell [[looks]] good in his title role, but his [[line]] readings, [[frankly]], [[stink]]. This also [[suffers]], in [[large]] [[part]], from this being [[credited]] as the first [[movie]] that makes [[use]] of rear [[projection]]. The sets [[look]] phony.

There are two great strengths in this [[show]], [[however]]: [[although]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[perfect]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Julie]], is little [[remembered]] [[today]]: mostly for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the [[programmer]] EAST [[OF]] BORNEO to [[simply]] shots of her: [[credit]] Melford's stylish visual direction of the [[original]]. Her [[great]] beauty and [[simple]] ([[although]] stagy) performance [[help]] [[repair]] some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this [[movie]].

However, one of Borzage's [[themes]] is the mystical power of love, and it is the [[handling]] of the celestial sections that [[make]] this [[great]], from the [[arrival]] of the celestial train to the [[journey]] to 'the [[Hot]] Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as [[always]], [[perfect]].

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King [[version]] of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I [[still]] [[greatly]] enjoyed this [[version]] and [[think]] you should give it a chance. There is [[actually]] much to complain about this [[cinematography]] version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell [[seems]] good in his title role, but his [[linea]] readings, [[sincerely]], [[stench]]. This also [[suffer]], in [[sizeable]] [[parte]], from this being [[paid]] as the first [[cinema]] that makes [[employs]] of rear [[projections]]. The sets [[peek]] phony.

There are two great strengths in this [[display]], [[yet]]: [[though]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[faultless]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Jolly]], is little [[recalled]] [[thursday]]: mostly for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the [[programmers]] EAST [[DU]] BORNEO to [[purely]] shots of her: [[credits]] Melford's stylish visual direction of the [[initial]]. Her [[huge]] beauty and [[uncomplicated]] ([[despite]] stagy) performance [[support]] [[repairs]] some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this [[cinematography]].

However, one of Borzage's [[subject]] is the mystical power of love, and it is the [[treating]] of the celestial sections that [[deliver]] this [[huge]], from the [[incoming]] of the celestial train to the [[voyage]] to 'the [[Hottest]] Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as [[permanently]], [[consummate]].

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King [[stepping]] of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I [[nonetheless]] [[radically]] enjoyed this [[stepping]] and [[thinking]] you should give it a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1995 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one reason for this movie. John [[Derek]] wanted to [[show]] off his [[beautiful]] [[wife]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[least]] a [[humorous]] movie and there was a [[reason]] for nudity and [[sex]]. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. [[If]] you're into that, well, then fast forward to it and [[skip]] the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[show]] off her [[terrible]] acting. She is [[undoubtedly]] a [[beautiful]] woman but a poster of her is more exciting than this movie! Richard Harris was a better actor than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your time on this movie...go buy the book instead. This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one reason for this movie. John [[Derrick]] wanted to [[illustrates]] off his [[sumptuous]] [[women]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[lowest]] a [[hilarious]] movie and there was a [[motif]] for nudity and [[sexuality]]. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. [[Though]] you're into that, well, then fast forward to it and [[jumping]] the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[display]] off her [[abysmal]] acting. She is [[unquestionably]] a [[sumptuous]] woman but a poster of her is more exciting than this movie! Richard Harris was a better actor than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your time on this movie...go buy the book instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Paperhouse is the most [[moving]] and [[poignant]] film I've ever seen. [[Often]] classed as a "[[horror]] movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but think it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[wonderful]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

Paperhouse is the most [[transferring]] and [[agonizing]] film I've ever seen. [[Habitually]] classed as a "[[abomination]] movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but think it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[wondrous]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I think this movie had to be fun to make it, for us it was [[fun]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we get to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of [[scary]] movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we laugh together. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. I think this movie had to be fun to make it, for us it was [[amusing]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we get to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of [[horrible]] movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we laugh together. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Basically]] a typical [[propaganda]] film for the [[last]] [[good]] war. But there were a [[couple]] [[things]] that [[struck]] me. First was the [[use]] of mouthed epithets. In two [[cases]] the Scott [[character]] mouths one, once at the [[beginning]] when he [[drops]] his [[bomb]] off [[target]] during the bomb-off ("[[dammit]]") and once when he is [[trying]] to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[could]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it several [[times]] and that's what it [[looks]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley [[character]] wishes the O'Brien [[character]] goodbye and [[good]] luck ("Give 'em [[hell]]") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral [[problems]] with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer [[assures]] him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into [[oblivion]] this scene plays with not a little [[irony]]. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! [[Mostly]] a typical [[advocacy]] film for the [[latter]] [[alright]] war. But there were a [[matching]] [[items]] that [[rocked]] me. First was the [[employs]] of mouthed epithets. In two [[lawsuit]] the Scott [[characters]] mouths one, once at the [[initiates]] when he [[tumble]] his [[explodes]] off [[goal]] during the bomb-off ("[[brothel]]") and once when he is [[tempting]] to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[wo]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it several [[time]] and that's what it [[seem]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley [[characters]] wishes the O'Brien [[nature]] goodbye and [[buena]] luck ("Give 'em [[bordello]]") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral [[hassles]] with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer [[affirms]] him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into [[forgetfulness]] this scene plays with not a little [[paradox]]. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think that people are under estimating this incredible film. People are seeing it as a typical horror movie that is set out to scare us and prevent us from getting some sleep. Which if it was trying to do then it would deservedly get a 1/10 but i viewed this film with a few friends and we found it very entertaining and though it was a good movie after all it does have Stephanie beaton. This is the reason why i think that it deserves the 10/10 for the pure entertainment of the film.

The general view on this movie is that it has bad acting, a simple script that a 10 year old could produce and that it cant be taken seriously and people are rating it low because of this. But i see this as a thoroughly entertaining masterpiece...that has a hilariously funny script which is made even more entertaining by the actors and although not very serious it is very entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 2000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Before I'd seen this, I had seen some [[pretty]] [[bad]] Christmas [[films]]. But once I saw this, "Jingle All the Way" looked better than "The [[Godfather]]". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[helping]] out some [[kids]], but it almost feels demonic [[watching]] it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[replaces]] by an [[evil]], devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many [[kids]] off of [[Christmas]]. The plot of this massacre is very [[strange]], which fits along with all of the performances and dialog. Santa lives high above [[Earth]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all [[around]] the world [[get]] ready for [[Christmas]]. But Santa has an enemy named [[Pitch]], or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by [[creating]] diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

[[Everything]] about this film, along with being downright [[bad]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually [[seems]] [[much]] more [[merry]] than Santa. Santa talks about [[delivering]] [[presents]] to all the [[boys]] and girls, [[yet]] he [[seems]] to only [[deliver]] to 5 [[houses]] of [[kids]] in [[Mexico]]. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer [[laughs]], I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. [[Everything]] is [[terrible]]. The first 10 minutes are [[simply]] Santa [[playing]] the [[organ]] while [[kids]] [[sing]] to it. [[Probably]] one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously [[laughing]] about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only positive is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can appreciate bad cinema.

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. Before I'd seen this, I had seen some [[quite]] [[negative]] Christmas [[filmmaking]]. But once I saw this, "Jingle All the Way" looked better than "The [[Nominating]]". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[contributes]] out some [[juvenile]], but it almost feels demonic [[staring]] it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[supersedes]] by an [[demonic]], devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many [[juvenile]] off of [[Claus]]. The plot of this massacre is very [[unusual]], which fits along with all of the performances and dialog. Santa lives high above [[Land]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all [[throughout]] the world [[gets]] ready for [[Claus]]. But Santa has an enemy named [[Pitching]], or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by [[establish]] diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

[[Eveything]] about this film, along with being downright [[negative]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually [[appears]] [[very]] more [[smiley]] than Santa. Santa talks about [[providing]] [[introduces]] to all the [[boy]] and girls, [[however]] he [[appears]] to only [[make]] to 5 [[dwellings]] of [[juvenile]] in [[Mexican]]. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer [[smiling]], I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. [[Any]] is [[scary]]. The first 10 minutes are [[purely]] Santa [[play]] the [[bodies]] while [[juvenile]] [[sung]] to it. [[Potentially]] one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously [[laughs]] about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only positive is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can appreciate bad cinema.

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. --------------------------------------------- Result 2001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This has always been one of my favourite movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have [[become]] a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to [[collect]] all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how [[corny]] they could be to how technically [[correct]] some of them were. The [[great]] [[colours]] and the sets get me [[going]] too. It's a [[pity]] when they re-make some of these good [[old]] movies; they [[nearly]] [[always]] stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the [[Earth]] [[stood]] still, it's [[utter]] [[garbage]]!! [[Forbidden]] [[Planet]] is one of the benchmark space [[films]] of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[shudder]] to [[think]] what the new one will be like! To my mind, some [[things]], such as [[fantastic]] [[classic]] [[movies]], should just be left [[alone]] to be what they are, [[classic]] [[examples]] of [[great]] [[attempts]] at telling [[simple]] [[stories]], and giving people a thrill in the [[process]]. Once they [[add]] all the techno-crap that we have [[available]] now, the film just [[seems]] to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage [[factory]], - nothing special at all. By the [[way]], I [[notice]] that the astronauts' uniforms in [[Forbidden]] [[Planet]] were [[also]] [[used]] for "[[Queen]] of Outer Space"! That just [[tells]] you that the [[budgets]] were a bit lower back then, doesn't it? [[Hey]], less money and better [[films]], [[hmmm]]....

Great performances in this movie from Leslie Nielsen, in a [[serious]] role, and Anne [[Francis]], [[Walter]] Pidgeon (who has [[always]] been one of my [[favourite]] [[actors]]), Earl Holiman, and of course Robby the Robot!

The [[special]] [[effects]] are [[fantastic]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[great]] sci-fi experience! This has always been one of my favourite movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have [[becomes]] a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to [[collection]] all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how [[mundane]] they could be to how technically [[accurate]] some of them were. The [[wondrous]] [[coloring]] and the sets get me [[go]] too. It's a [[shame]] when they re-make some of these good [[elderly]] movies; they [[practically]] [[perpetually]] stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the [[Terrestrial]] [[amounted]] still, it's [[total]] [[junk]]!! [[Outlaw]] [[Globe]] is one of the benchmark space [[kino]] of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[cringe]] to [[believe]] what the new one will be like! To my mind, some [[matters]], such as [[beautiful]] [[typical]] [[movie]], should just be left [[solely]] to be what they are, [[typical]] [[case]] of [[terrific]] [[strives]] at telling [[mere]] [[storytelling]], and giving people a thrill in the [[processes]]. Once they [[added]] all the techno-crap that we have [[accessible]] now, the film just [[seem]] to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage [[mills]], - nothing special at all. By the [[pathways]], I [[notification]] that the astronauts' uniforms in [[Forbade]] [[Planetary]] were [[furthermore]] [[uses]] for "[[Quinn]] of Outer Space"! That just [[says]] you that the [[budget]] were a bit lower back then, doesn't it? [[Yo]], less money and better [[cinematography]], [[mhm]]....

Great performances in this movie from Leslie Nielsen, in a [[grave]] role, and Anne [[Francesco]], [[Walters]] Pidgeon (who has [[repeatedly]] been one of my [[favored]] [[actresses]]), Earl Holiman, and of course Robby the Robot!

The [[specific]] [[influencing]] are [[extraordinary]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[wondrous]] sci-fi experience! --------------------------------------------- Result 2002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[entertaining]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch movies in the first place. True, some movies are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "[[HOLLOW]] [[MAN]]" [[manages]] to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[amusing]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch movies in the first place. True, some movies are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "[[EMPTY]] [[BLOKE]]" [[administered]] to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! --------------------------------------------- Result 2003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This film has special effects which for it's time are very [[impressive]]. Some if it is easily explainable with the scenes played backwards but the overlay of moving images on an object on film is [[surprisingly]] well [[done]] given that this film was [[made]] more than 94 years ago. This film has special effects which for it's time are very [[wondrous]]. Some if it is easily explainable with the scenes played backwards but the overlay of moving images on an object on film is [[interestingly]] well [[completed]] given that this film was [[brought]] more than 94 years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[First]] a [[quick]] 'shut up!' to those [[saying]] this [[movie]] [[stinks]]. You can't [[go]] to [[every]] [[movie]] [[expecting]] '[[Citizen]] Kane'. This was actually a [[fun]] [[movie]]. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[flaw]] in this [[movie]] is, I don't [[think]] there was [[enough]] chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is [[good]] fun. Selma Blair [[needs]] to [[eat]] [[something]]. She's worrying me. But she [[still]] looks [[beautiful]]. So [[yes]], I [[recommend]] this movie for a date or light [[saturday]] [[afternoon]] [[fun]]. Go [[see]].

[[RATING]]: **1/2 out of **** [[Firstly]] a [[prompt]] 'shut up!' to those [[telling]] this [[kino]] [[sucks]]. You can't [[going]] to [[any]] [[film]] [[awaited]] '[[Civic]] Kane'. This was actually a [[amusing]] [[films]]. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[malfunction]] in this [[film]] is, I don't [[reckon]] there was [[sufficient]] chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is [[alright]] fun. Selma Blair [[needed]] to [[devour]] [[anything]]. She's worrying me. But she [[again]] looks [[wondrous]]. So [[yea]], I [[recommending]] this movie for a date or light [[sunday]] [[evening]] [[droll]]. Go [[seeing]].

[[SCORING]]: **1/2 out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Oh]] God, I [[must]] have [[seen]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been young, but I wasn't stupid. [[Anyone]] [[could]] see that this is a [[bad]] [[movie]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[seen]] more [[impressive]] [[effects]] at [[Disneyland]], I've [[seen]] better performances at a [[school]] play, And I've [[seen]] more [[convincing]] [[crocodiles]] at the [[zoo]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, [[ignoring]] the [[children]] tapping on the [[glass]].

The [[story]] is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[trying]] out a [[new]] water sport, surfing in shark filled waters. It soon [[becomes]] [[evident]] that [[something]] more [[dangerous]] is in the water. [[After]] they [[learn]] what, they get the [[help]] of a grizzly middle aged [[fisherman]], who [[wants]] to [[kill]] the [[animal]] to [[avenge]] the [[eating]] of his [[family]].

I [[think]] I have [[seen]] [[every]] crocodile [[film]] [[made]] in the [[last]] fifteen years, the best of which is Lake [[Placid]], and the [[worse]] of which is its sequel. Blood Surf [[would]] have to be the [[second]] worst croc [[flick]] I think, with Primeval and [[Crocodile]] tailing [[closely]] behind.

The Australian [[Saltwater]] Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, [[resulting]] in more than a hundred [[injuries]] or [[deaths]] [[every]] year. Movies like Blood Surf however [[ruin]] not only the [[ferocious]] [[image]] of such a [[creature]], but a [[good]] [[hour]] and a half of the viewer's [[life]]. [[Unless]] you really [[want]] to [[see]] it, [[avoid]] Blood [[Surf]]. [[Ah]] God, I [[gotta]] have [[noticed]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been young, but I wasn't stupid. [[Whoever]] [[would]] see that this is a [[negative]] [[flick]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[noticed]] more [[extraordinary]] [[consequences]] at [[Disney]], I've [[saw]] better performances at a [[tuition]] play, And I've [[noticed]] more [[compelling]] [[gators]] at the [[animals]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, [[disregard]] the [[childhood]] tapping on the [[glasses]].

The [[storytelling]] is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[try]] out a [[novel]] water sport, surfing in shark filled waters. It soon [[becoming]] [[noticeable]] that [[anything]] more [[unsafe]] is in the water. [[Upon]] they [[learns]] what, they get the [[pomoc]] of a grizzly middle aged [[fishermen]], who [[wanna]] to [[killed]] the [[zoo]] to [[revenge]] the [[dietary]] of his [[families]].

I [[thought]] I have [[noticed]] [[all]] crocodile [[flick]] [[introduced]] in the [[final]] fifteen years, the best of which is Lake [[Pacifist]], and the [[lousiest]] of which is its sequel. Blood Surf [[could]] have to be the [[secondly]] worst croc [[movie]] I think, with Primeval and [[Alligator]] tailing [[tightly]] behind.

The Australian [[Brine]] Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, [[ensuing]] in more than a hundred [[lesions]] or [[killings]] [[any]] year. Movies like Blood Surf however [[downfall]] not only the [[intense]] [[picture]] of such a [[monster]], but a [[alright]] [[hora]] and a half of the viewer's [[lifetime]]. [[If]] you really [[wantto]] to [[behold]] it, [[averted]] Blood [[Snowboard]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was horrible. I watched it three times, and not even the whole thing. It's just impossible to watch, the story line sucks, it's depressing, and utterly disgusting. I don't write spoilers for anything, so if you want to know why it's so disgusting, see it for yourself. The only good thing about this movie was John Savage, his dialogue at the beginning, and some funny parts in the movie. The little kid in this movie is annoying, and the whole situation is bullshit. I saw this movie at movie stores around America, so I assumed it would be a good movie. Jesus Christ, was I wrong!!!! The acting is all horrible, and the nudity itself is lame and nasty. Another thing is, Starr Andreef, the other main character, hasn't been in such bad movies in the past, in fact, she was in some pretty good ones. Same with John Savage. This movie SUCKS! --------------------------------------------- Result 2007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't give a movie or a show ten very often but this show touched a nerve in a way no other show has. I found the entire series on mysoju.com and thought the premise looked interesting so I took a look see. I wasn't disappointed in what I saw; I was moved. This story stays on the tender side as the main characters move us through the scenes. Sumire Iwaya, played thoughtfully by Koyuki, shows us human nature as she wants to keep troubles from being shown. No one really wants to lay their soul out in front of a perspective mate. So instead she substitutes a human, played by an adorable Matsumoto Jun, as a pet. This pet is like any other creature we would consider a pet. The difference; he can retaliate in the same way, after all Momo is a man, not a dog. As he is treated like a pet, he reacts to situations how a dog might react. She spends time with the new boyfriend, Momo gets jealous. It's when she realizes that her pet isn't just a pet that the sexual tension between the two starts to become thick - Momo is a dance prodigy. Her thinking slowly changes as we start to get a glance at his own thoughts. Matsumoto takes us from seeing a character who is very one dimensional in the beginning, to two dimensional when we see he's a dancer, to a three dimensional character when we see him start to fall for his master as a man, not as a dog. In my opinion, it's worth watching this story just to see this character develop. Plus Matsumoto plays Momo with such tenderness you almost start to wish you had one too. Neither wants to think about the future and how their relationship will change, but as Momo (the name she gives him as one would name their new puppy) states – we both knew this wasn't going to be able to last. Watch this show with a open mind, it's worth it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The emotional [[impact]] of this [[movie]] [[defies]] [[words]]. It is [[elegant]], subtle, [[beautiful]], and [[tragic]] all [[rolled]] into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting [[ability]], the full [[range]] of it. Who knew? I [[saw]] The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actor]], Smith. His performances in both [[movies]] [[portray]] a [[whole]] other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully [[enjoy]] its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile [[condition]] of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human [[guilt]], atonement, [[love]], and sacrifice. The emotional [[consequences]] of this [[film]] [[challenging]] [[expression]]. It is [[tasteful]], subtle, [[leggy]], and [[dire]] all [[laminated]] into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting [[capabilities]], the full [[assortment]] of it. Who knew? I [[watched]] The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actress]], Smith. His performances in both [[films]] [[describe]] a [[ensemble]] other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully [[enjoys]] its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile [[stipulation]] of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human [[culprit]], atonement, [[loves]], and sacrifice. --------------------------------------------- Result 2009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I read in the [[papers]] that W.Snipes was [[broke]] so no wonder he [[would]] take parts in low budget projects like The [[Contractor]].He is just the next action [[star]] to [[join]] a [[growing]] club:the penniless [[action]] stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the [[lead]] in a [[cheap]] [[action]] [[flick]] which was shot in Bulgaria( we are [[supposed]] to [[believe]] that the location is London, like only a [[complete]] [[moron]] would [[buy]] that)The [[story]] is the one of 1000 other movies: [[retired]] [[special]] [[forces]] good guy gets [[hired]] by the [[government]] again to do a [[wet]] job- after that [[government]] [[wants]] to [[get]] rid of him- [[good]] [[guy]] [[gets]] away after [[killing]] [[bad]] [[guys]] (was that a spoiler? [[guess]] not!) The [[star]] of the [[movie]]: the [[little]] girl ([[Eliza]] Bennett) outperforms [[everybody]] [[else]] of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for [[eye]] [[candy]] Lena Headey, makes 2 [[stars]]. Only for die [[hard]] Snipes fans!Everybody [[else]]:[[avoid]]! I read in the [[documentation]] that W.Snipes was [[broken]] so no wonder he [[could]] take parts in low budget projects like The [[Entrepreneur]].He is just the next action [[stars]] to [[participates]] a [[increasing]] club:the penniless [[activity]] stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the [[culminate]] in a [[cheaper]] [[measures]] [[movie]] which was shot in Bulgaria( we are [[suspected]] to [[think]] that the location is London, like only a [[finishing]] [[doofus]] would [[purchased]] that)The [[tales]] is the one of 1000 other movies: [[retiring]] [[specific]] [[troop]] good guy gets [[contracted]] by the [[administrations]] again to do a [[humid]] job- after that [[govt]] [[desires]] to [[gets]] rid of him- [[alright]] [[buddy]] [[receives]] away after [[killed]] [[negative]] [[guy]] (was that a spoiler? [[imagine]] not!) The [[superstar]] of the [[films]]: the [[petite]] girl ([[Liza]] Bennett) outperforms [[somebody]] [[elsewhere]] of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for [[eyes]] [[sweets]] Lena Headey, makes 2 [[celebrity]]. Only for die [[difficult]] Snipes fans!Everybody [[further]]:[[preventing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Worst]] [[film]] ever, this is a statement that people here on IMDb [[often]] throw [[around]]. Whether it's an Uwe Boll [[movie]], [[bad]] classics like Manos The Hands Of [[Fate]] or the [[latest]] no [[brains]] summer [[action]] fest from [[Michael]] Bay, people are [[often]] [[quick]] to [[jump]] to the [[sudden]] [[conclusion]] that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the [[movie]] world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully ignorant and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of [[crap]] movie [[making]] [[really]] goes. There are films out there so bad, so [[hideous]], so [[unintentionally]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults [[form]] [[around]] them to [[celebrate]] their awfulness and their [[discussion]] boards are the [[kindest]] places on the internet due to [[everyone]] [[agreeing]] unanimously that [[said]] film is really that [[bad]].

Ladies and [[Gentlemen]], i [[present]] to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay [[epic]] that is so utterly [[bad]] that it's a lot like a violent car [[crash]], you know it's awful but you can't [[stop]] looking at it. The [[brainchild]] of self [[proclaimed]] "hollywood actor, [[director]]" and may i [[add]] beached whale Sam Mraovich, this [[film]] is legendarily [[terrible]]. [[Let]] me give you a [[hint]] of how ego driven this project was. [[Mr]] Mraovich not only [[directed]] this [[film]], he [[wrote]] it, [[produced]] it, executive [[produced]] it, scored it, [[edited]] it and then finally starred in it. This is a [[man]] so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent [[genius]] that like [[someone]] with an ugly [[child]] he [[fails]] to [[recognise]] just how [[catastrophic]] his [[bastard]] [[creation]] really is.

[[Everything]] in this film fails on an epic [[level]], the acting is the [[worst]] you will ever witness, the [[plot]] is the most [[ridiculous]], the editing and [[cinematography]] is the most [[amateur]] and even the [[music]] is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've [[gone]] on a bit of a tangent here, but [[please]] [[believe]] me that this film is really as bad as i [[describe]] it, i would say this film is [[horse]] crap squished into a [[film]] [[reel]], but the truth is it wasn't even shot on [[film]], it was [[shot]] on a digital camcorder not much [[better]] than the one sitting in your [[closet]] right now [[gathering]] [[dust]]. Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], i forgive low [[budgets]] for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. [[Pire]] [[flick]] ever, this is a statement that people here on IMDb [[generally]] throw [[about]]. Whether it's an Uwe Boll [[kino]], [[negative]] classics like Manos The Hands Of [[Destinies]] or the [[latter]] no [[neurons]] summer [[actions]] fest from [[Michele]] Bay, people are [[frequently]] [[rapid]] to [[jumping]] to the [[abrupt]] [[concluding]] that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the [[film]] world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully ignorant and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of [[baloney]] movie [[doing]] [[truly]] goes. There are films out there so bad, so [[outrageous]], so [[involuntarily]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults [[forms]] [[throughout]] them to [[festivities]] their awfulness and their [[talk]] boards are the [[nicest]] places on the internet due to [[anybody]] [[accepted]] unanimously that [[says]] film is really that [[negative]].

Ladies and [[Gentleman]], i [[presented]] to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay [[saga]] that is so utterly [[unfavourable]] that it's a lot like a violent car [[accident]], you know it's awful but you can't [[discontinue]] looking at it. The [[thought]] of self [[declared]] "hollywood actor, [[superintendent]]" and may i [[summing]] beached whale Sam Mraovich, this [[filmmaking]] is legendarily [[frightful]]. [[Letting]] me give you a [[allusion]] of how ego driven this project was. [[Herr]] Mraovich not only [[geared]] this [[filmmaking]], he [[texted]] it, [[generated]] it, executive [[generated]] it, scored it, [[edit]] it and then finally starred in it. This is a [[guy]] so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent [[genie]] that like [[everybody]] with an ugly [[kid]] he [[fail]] to [[concede]] just how [[destructive]] his [[bitch]] [[establishment]] really is.

[[Any]] in this film fails on an epic [[plano]], the acting is the [[worse]] you will ever witness, the [[intrigue]] is the most [[farcical]], the editing and [[filmmaking]] is the most [[enthusiast]] and even the [[musicians]] is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've [[faded]] on a bit of a tangent here, but [[invites]] [[think]] me that this film is really as bad as i [[contour]] it, i would say this film is [[equestrian]] crap squished into a [[movie]] [[coil]], but the truth is it wasn't even shot on [[movies]], it was [[filmed]] on a digital camcorder not much [[optimum]] than the one sitting in your [[credenza]] right now [[collating]] [[stardust]]. Don't [[gets]] me [[fallacious]], i forgive low [[budget]] for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. --------------------------------------------- Result 2011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Filmatography: Excellent, [[nice]] camera [[angles]] (I don't [[remember]] [[seeing]] a [[movie]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). [[Could]] have [[avoided]] gruesome scenes with a soft [[camera]]. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down [[angles]], in [[particular]] (a [[different]] [[touch]]).

[[Music]]: Not [[impressive]]. Songs don't stick around in your [[mind]] even after watching the movie. May be, I expected same quality like "Anniyan". A [[disappointment]].

Actors: [[Kamal]] needs to [[slowly]] [[pull]] away from hard-core action sequences. His [[age]] and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very [[awkward]] to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It [[took]] a long time to release the movie due to [[various]] issues. He slips in few scenes. [[Even]] abvious [[things]] got [[slipped]] from a [[famous]] director.

[[Overall]]: [[Just]] a okay [[movie]]. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx Filmatography: Excellent, [[pleasurable]] camera [[nooks]] (I don't [[remembering]] [[see]] a [[filmmaking]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). [[Did]] have [[dodged]] gruesome scenes with a soft [[cameras]]. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down [[corners]], in [[unique]] (a [[diverse]] [[touche]]).

[[Musica]]: Not [[phenomenal]]. Songs don't stick around in your [[intellect]] even after watching the movie. May be, I expected same quality like "Anniyan". A [[displeasure]].

Actors: [[Kemal]] needs to [[softly]] [[pulled]] away from hard-core action sequences. His [[older]] and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very [[troublesome]] to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It [[picked]] a long time to release the movie due to [[dissimilar]] issues. He slips in few scenes. [[Yet]] abvious [[matters]] got [[leaped]] from a [[prestigious]] director.

[[Comprehensive]]: [[Virtuous]] a okay [[filmmaking]]. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx --------------------------------------------- Result 2012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was in the film too, but i don't know if they actually put this scene in. On the [[way]] back from a school trip (in 2005) we [[stopped]] at a service station at the same time as they were doing the [[film]], and we were [[asked]] (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 [[years]] old, [[could]] anyone who has [[seen]] the [[film]] [[tell]] me if that [[part]] was actually [[kept]] in the film, it would be [[great]] to [[know]]! I [[remember]] I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half years before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been [[quite]] a successful film, I might [[buy]] it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D [[Thank]] you I was in the film too, but i don't know if they actually put this scene in. On the [[path]] back from a school trip (in 2005) we [[ceasing]] at a service station at the same time as they were doing the [[kino]], and we were [[demanded]] (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 [[olds]] old, [[wo]] anyone who has [[noticed]] the [[movies]] [[say]] me if that [[parties]] was actually [[maintained]] in the film, it would be [[wondrous]] to [[savoir]]! I [[remind]] I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half years before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been [[rather]] a successful film, I might [[buying]] it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D [[Gratitude]] you --------------------------------------------- Result 2013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This film was so amateurish I [[could]] [[hardly]] believe what I was [[seeing]]. It is [[shot]] on [[VIDEO]]! [[NOT]] [[film]]! I have not [[seen]] the likes of this [[since]] the early 70's, when late [[night]] networks [[showed]] movie of the [[week]] 'horror flicks' shot in......[[video]]. It [[looks]] like a [[bad]] soap [[opera]], and that is [[paying]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[give]] it their best shot. [[Michael]] Des Barres does okay with what he is [[given]] to do, which is to [[act]] like a [[sex]] addict out of control. I can't say that it is [[pleasant]] to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the [[therapist]] sits in a [[chair]] for [[practically]] the [[entire]] [[film]], with very little [[variation]] in camera [[angles]]. I can't fault her for [[someone]] else's [[poor]] [[blocking]], but she is [[totally]] [[unbelievable]] in her role. Her [[little]] [[girl]] [[voice]] works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is [[certainly]] ageless and [[exotic]], but she's [[outside]] her [[range]] with this.

[[Alexandra]] [[Paul]] is [[pathetically]] overwrought. [[Every]] [[line]] she delivers is with three [[exclamation]] points. [[Someone]] [[must]] have directed her to [[scream]] at all [[costs]]. Why [[would]] [[Michael]] Des Barres [[want]] to have [[sex]] with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off [[okay]], and [[probably]] the most [[believable]] of the bunch. But that is not [[saying]] much.

This has to be the [[worst]] [[film]] I have [[seen]] in years. This film was so amateurish I [[would]] [[practically]] believe what I was [[see]]. It is [[filmed]] on [[VIDEOTAPED]]! [[NAH]] [[movies]]! I have not [[watched]] the likes of this [[because]] the early 70's, when late [[overnight]] networks [[revealed]] movie of the [[weeks]] 'horror flicks' shot in......[[videotape]]. It [[seems]] like a [[unfavorable]] soap [[dramas]], and that is [[salaried]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[lend]] it their best shot. [[Michel]] Des Barres does okay with what he is [[bestowed]] to do, which is to [[ley]] like a [[sexuality]] addict out of control. I can't say that it is [[congenial]] to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the [[psy]] sits in a [[wheelchair]] for [[virtually]] the [[total]] [[flick]], with very little [[variations]] in camera [[nooks]]. I can't fault her for [[anyone]] else's [[poorest]] [[bloc]], but she is [[altogether]] [[impressive]] in her role. Her [[scant]] [[dame]] [[vocals]] works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is [[unquestionably]] ageless and [[alien]], but she's [[outdoor]] her [[assortment]] with this.

[[Aleksandr]] [[Paolo]] is [[ridiculously]] overwrought. [[Any]] [[bloodline]] she delivers is with three [[admiration]] points. [[Anyone]] [[owe]] have directed her to [[howl]] at all [[price]]. Why [[could]] [[Michel]] Des Barres [[wish]] to have [[sexuality]] with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off [[alrighty]], and [[arguably]] the most [[dependable]] of the bunch. But that is not [[arguing]] much.

This has to be the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I have [[watched]] in years. --------------------------------------------- Result 2014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I think that most everyone [[wants]] to believe that extraordinary [[things]] exist and this [[film]] [[shows]] no [[restraint]] in trying to exploit that to the [[fullest]]. The [[presentation]] is very interesting, well [[presented]] and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of [[view]] it just doesn't [[work]]. Hydrogen filled flying bladders? They [[would]] need to be the [[size]] of a Mack [[truck]] to be useful. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic explosion. I have no problem with fantasy, just don't try to pass it off as fact. Some folks will always [[misunderstand]]. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly [[found]] myself saying "[[oh]] brother, what a [[load]] of ....". If you [[want]] a [[FAKE]] documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap [[instead]]. Or at the very [[least]] [[turn]] the sound off. I think that most everyone [[wanting]] to believe that extraordinary [[matters]] exist and this [[filmmaking]] [[exhibitions]] no [[constraints]] in trying to exploit that to the [[full]]. The [[introductions]] is very interesting, well [[lodged]] and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of [[opinion]] it just doesn't [[collaboration]]. Hydrogen filled flying bladders? They [[ought]] need to be the [[caliber]] of a Mack [[lorry]] to be useful. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic explosion. I have no problem with fantasy, just don't try to pass it off as fact. Some folks will always [[misconstrue]]. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly [[find]] myself saying "[[ah]] brother, what a [[uploading]] of ....". If you [[wanting]] a [[FORGER]] documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap [[conversely]]. Or at the very [[fewer]] [[transforming]] the sound off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Finally]], after [[years]] of [[awaiting]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "[[Basic]] [[Instinct]]", we have been [[given]] a [[great]] sequel that is [[packed]] with the right [[elements]] [[needed]] for a franchise such as this! I [[remember]] everything about the original, the [[steam]], the romance, the sex, the [[interrogation]], the [[music]] (by the master [[Jerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[murder]], to [[intense]] confrontations of all [[kind]]! Make no mistake, "Basic [[Instinct]]" was a real winner for [[audiences]] [[everywhere]]. I can remember in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the [[glamorous]], always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a [[pleasant]] thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us [[real]] [[fans]] what we've been expecting. This [[film]] is not an Academy [[Award]] [[winner]], nor does it [[try]] to be. It [[simply]] [[delivers]] the die-hard [[fans]] what they have been expecting. It's a [[film]] for fun. [[Movies]] [[today]] [[seem]] to take themselves [[way]] too seriously, but this [[film]] is just loose and fun, not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the film.

The film is a fast-paced [[film]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. [[Lastly]], after [[olds]] of [[waiting]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "[[Fundamental]] [[Gut]]", we have been [[gave]] a [[wondrous]] sequel that is [[packaging]] with the right [[ingredient]] [[needs]] for a franchise such as this! I [[rember]] everything about the original, the [[vapor]], the romance, the sex, the [[interview]], the [[musician]] (by the master [[Gerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[killings]], to [[ferocious]] confrontations of all [[genera]]! Make no mistake, "Basic [[Gut]]" was a real winner for [[spectators]] [[nowhere]]. I can remember in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the [[illustrious]], always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a [[nice]] thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us [[actual]] [[amateurs]] what we've been expecting. This [[films]] is not an Academy [[Scholarship]] [[finalist]], nor does it [[tries]] to be. It [[solely]] [[offering]] the die-hard [[amateurs]] what they have been expecting. It's a [[cinematography]] for fun. [[Theater]] [[yesterday]] [[looks]] to take themselves [[pathways]] too seriously, but this [[kino]] is just loose and fun, not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the film.

The film is a fast-paced [[flick]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. --------------------------------------------- Result 2016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Without a doubt, Private Lessons II is the greatest movie I have ever seen. A Japanese import (poorly) translated into English, its a joy to watch. Not much of it makes sense, but that doesn't matter. It's the greatest comedy around without ever being intentionally funny.

The film is rare and unavailable on video, but I have caught it a couple of time late, late at night on pay cable. My taped copy has been watched dozens and dozens of times as I slowly, person-by-person, introduce this film gem to the world.

Joanna Pacula plays the tutor/lover to Ken, our hero. (She apparently was just working for her check.) Ken is played by Goro Inagaki, of the Japanese pop band SMAP, who gives it his all and has great hair through out the movie. Stacy Edwards, of "In the Company of Men" fame, shows up in the movie too and is probably happy that she found other film work afterwards.

It takes at least three viewings to sorta figure out what the plot is. On repeating viewing you can enjoy elements like the abnormal amount of vases Ken has in his house (at least 50) or that Ken is wearing a shirt with embroidered husks of corn in the movie's finale.

The movie is predictable, but highly quotable. My friends and I reenact entire scenes. Yes, it sounds like we're lame losers and we are ... but we're lame losers who have seen "Private Lessons II." Be one of ten people in the world who have seen this movie. You'll thank me for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I am an [[avid]] fan of horrendous movies, [[anything]] cheesy and down right ridiculous is my [[game]]. [[So]] [[imagine]] my [[spirit]] I went to the local [[Rent]] [[Shop]], and [[found]] [[Vampires]] vs. Zombies. The [[name]] is just too [[entertaining]], you [[know]] that no one in the [[world]] [[could]] [[pull]] off [[something]] like it, it just has to be [[bad]].

And boy, is it [[BAD]]. After viewing this horror-ific movie, I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal sat outside without saying a word to each other for [[several]] minutes, both of us [[contemplating]] the [[future]] of our lives after [[watching]] this [[movie]]. I [[broke]] the [[depressing]] [[silence]] with the words, "...[[dude]]....What?" Yes, i am an [[enthralling]] individual.

Heres a [[quick]] '[[street]] review' The Plot; There is [[none]], at all, ever, constantly in "WTF" [[mode]]. The [[Characters]]; No [[development]], forgettable. The [[Music]]; Worse than porn. The [[Vampires]]; [[Theirs]] [[vampires]]? The [[Zombies]]; [[Theirs]] Zombies?

[[In]] the [[end]]; [[Everyone]] should [[see]] this movie, [[honestly]], its so [[bad]] I [[yearn]] to see it again. [[So]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[get]] [[Depressed]]. I am an [[impassioned]] fan of horrendous movies, [[nothing]] cheesy and down right ridiculous is my [[games]]. [[Thus]] [[reckon]] my [[wits]] I went to the local [[Rental]] [[Stores]], and [[discovered]] [[Bloodsucker]] vs. Zombies. The [[behalf]] is just too [[entertain]], you [[savoir]] that no one in the [[globe]] [[wo]] [[pulled]] off [[anything]] like it, it just has to be [[faulty]].

And boy, is it [[ROTTEN]]. After viewing this horror-ific movie, I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal sat outside without saying a word to each other for [[many]] minutes, both of us [[recital]] the [[futuristic]] of our lives after [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]]. I [[shattered]] the [[somber]] [[hush]] with the words, "...[[boy]]....What?" Yes, i am an [[mesmerizing]] individual.

Heres a [[timely]] '[[rue]] review' The Plot; There is [[nos]], at all, ever, constantly in "WTF" [[modes]]. The [[Characteristic]]; No [[evolution]], forgettable. The [[Musician]]; Worse than porn. The [[Vampire]]; [[Yours]] [[vamps]]? The [[Walkers]]; [[Yours]] Zombies?

[[During]] the [[ends]]; [[Everybody]] should [[behold]] this movie, [[genuinely]], its so [[rotten]] I [[yearning]] to see it again. [[Accordingly]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[obtain]] [[Depressive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surprisingly well done for an independent film, An Insomniac's Nightmare paints a startling picture of what it would be like to suffer from insomnia. Wonderfully well written, and directed, it creates the atmosphere of a dream as the viewer is taken through one night in the life of an insomniac.

Starring Dominic Monaghan as Jack, we get to see everything he sees as the long hours of a lonely night drag on. The narration is almost hypnotizing, and from the opening lines, it is impossible to turn away. Fascinating and slightly disturbing, it shows how someone copes with a lack of sleep, balancing on the brink between sanity and madness.

With twists and turns around every corner, An Insomniac's Nightmare is provocative and engaging. It comes very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] There are three movies with this animation [[style]] that I fondly remember from my [[youth]]. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "[[Dragons]]" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I [[wish]] I hadn't. What [[bothered]] me the most was the [[script]]. It was incredibly [[choppy]] and often [[inane]]. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that [[music]] in movies such as these rarely have what one would call [[classic]] pieces, but the [[music]] in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to [[show]] to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I [[could]] ever sit through that [[crap]] fest again. [[Disappointed]] is putting it mildly. There are three movies with this animation [[elegance]] that I fondly remember from my [[teenage]]. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "[[Dragon]]" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I [[desire]] I hadn't. What [[disturbed]] me the most was the [[hyphen]]. It was incredibly [[turbulent]] and often [[insignificant]]. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that [[musica]] in movies such as these rarely have what one would call [[typical]] pieces, but the [[musician]] in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to [[illustrating]] to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I [[did]] ever sit through that [[baloney]] fest again. [[Frustrating]] is putting it mildly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I didn't know this was a silent movie with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the [[corny]] humor, flickering lighting and film, etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[score]] I [[assigned]] it. It was about [[chapter]] 8 before I found any interest in this [[story]] and had I had popcorn I may have thrown it at the screen. Maybe this [[appeals]] to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain [[transplant]]. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this movie - the one [[enjoyable]] [[aspect]] of the [[movie]]. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. I didn't know this was a silent movie with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the [[dorky]] humor, flickering lighting and film, etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[notation]] I [[awarded]] it. It was about [[sections]] 8 before I found any interest in this [[fairytales]] and had I had popcorn I may have thrown it at the screen. Maybe this [[appellate]] to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain [[grafts]]. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this movie - the one [[pleasurable]] [[facet]] of the [[movies]]. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot [[recommends]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1937's "Stella Dallas" with Barbara Stanwyck hasn't exactly aged well--how anyone thought a semi-updated version of the story would work now is a real puzzler. Perhaps they thought jaunty, cheerfully brash Bette Midler could make something out of it, but this hoary script defeats her. Plot about a female bartender having a baby out of wedlock, and years later giving the young girl over to the child's wealthy father so she'll have a shot at a better life, can't escape tatty, old-fashioned trappings and sentiment. Midler works best with a movie director who can control her excesses, but that fails to happen here; Stephen Collins is stolid as the man who changes her life, but Trini Alvarado is well-cast as Midler's daughter. This is what used to be referred to as a "woman's picture", a wallow, but it doesn't pass muster because it stays too faithful to its 1930's origins. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy [[movie]] [[using]] circa 1979 [[ideas]] of what [[constitutes]] [[illicit]] romance for 13 year [[old]] [[girls]]. [[Script]], pacing, and [[direction]] are uniformly [[awful]]. Action sequences [[defy]] [[belief]]. Characters speak with the [[simplified]] diction one [[usually]] finds in [[films]] [[aimed]] at the under 10 set, but [[also]] includes [[multiple]] sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic [[deaths]].

The [[movie]] [[wants]] to be a [[comedy]] on some [[level]] but is never [[funny]], an adventure picture but plot and [[action]] are [[insipid]], and a children's [[movie]] but introduces pedophilia and child [[rape]] as [[real]] [[possibilities]]. It [[also]] [[wants]] to be a buddy [[picture]], a coming of age [[picture]], a [[ghost]] [[movie]], an Indian [[spiritual]] [[movie]], a travelogue, and a [[western]]. The [[overall]] [[affect]] is of [[massive]] [[stupidity]] with a [[nasty]] [[twist]]. Wanda Nevada is a [[complete]] [[waste]] of [[time]] [[unless]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a good [[many]] [[terrific]] shots of the [[Grand]] Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy [[cinematography]] [[uses]] circa 1979 [[thinking]] of what [[constituted]] [[illegal]] romance for 13 year [[longtime]] [[girl]]. [[Screenplay]], pacing, and [[directions]] are uniformly [[horrific]]. Action sequences [[braving]] [[beliefs]]. Characters speak with the [[rationalized]] diction one [[normally]] finds in [[cinematography]] [[directed]] at the under 10 set, but [[additionally]] includes [[countless]] sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic [[mortality]].

The [[filmmaking]] [[wanted]] to be a [[travesty]] on some [[grades]] but is never [[comical]], an adventure picture but plot and [[actions]] are [[tacky]], and a children's [[filmmaking]] but introduces pedophilia and child [[raping]] as [[true]] [[potentialities]]. It [[apart]] [[wanted]] to be a buddy [[photo]], a coming of age [[photography]], a [[ghostbusters]] [[flick]], an Indian [[mental]] [[cinematographic]], a travelogue, and a [[westen]]. The [[comprehensive]] [[influences]] is of [[formidable]] [[craziness]] with a [[dirty]] [[twisting]]. Wanda Nevada is a [[completes]] [[squander]] of [[period]] [[if]] you [[wanna]] to [[behold]] a good [[numerous]] [[sumptuous]] shots of the [[Grande]] Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Those who [[love]] Elivra as I did in her late [[night]] [[movie]] hostess [[duties]] will [[love]] this [[movie]] - she is just [[plain]] cool - her car is [[great]], and she is a [[bit]] of a Transylvanian [[Dolly]] Parton - she is so innocent and [[naive]] at [[times]] - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a [[touch]] of Mae West -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comic]] cast is [[great]], with Edie McClurg at her [[usual]] best - plus [[Sally]] Kellerman as Patty is [[hilarious]]. Any [[time]] I have to [[crunch]] [[something]] for a topping, I will [[think]] of how Elvira crunches the [[potato]] chips -

This [[movie]] is one to be [[watched]] again and again - just for the [[fun]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[lives]] up to this one ---- Those who [[loves]] Elivra as I did in her late [[soir]] [[films]] hostess [[responsibilities]] will [[amour]] this [[kino]] - she is just [[ganges]] cool - her car is [[wondrous]], and she is a [[bite]] of a Transylvanian [[Darlene]] Parton - she is so innocent and [[unsuspecting]] at [[time]] - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a [[touches]] of Mae West -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comedian]] cast is [[wondrous]], with Edie McClurg at her [[ordinary]] best - plus [[Suzie]] Kellerman as Patty is [[comic]]. Any [[times]] I have to [[contraction]] [[somethin]] for a topping, I will [[thinking]] of how Elvira crunches the [[starch]] chips -

This [[cinema]] is one to be [[seen]] again and again - just for the [[amusing]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[iife]] up to this one ---- --------------------------------------------- Result 2024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Having lived in Japan for several years this [[movie]] does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not [[even]] come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. Unfortunately, a great opportunity has been missed to [[bring]] the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not [[authentic]]. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A [[minor]] but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. Having lived in Japan for several years this [[filmmaking]] does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not [[yet]] come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. Unfortunately, a great opportunity has been missed to [[brings]] the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not [[real]]. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A [[underage]] but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[originally]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[worked]] at a [[video]] [[store]] and I loved it. I [[recently]] watched the movie again and have realized that it is a lost [[treasure]]. The movie stars Jennifer Connelly, [[almost]] twenty years before she [[would]] go on to [[win]] an Oscar for [[Beautiful]] [[Mind]], as [[Natalie]] Becker. Byron Thames plays her [[best]] [[friend]] in the [[world]], Jeff Moran. The [[film]] is [[definitely]] a milder, cuter and softer version of the Pretty in Pink's and Some [[Kind]] of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[exactly]] why it is so [[good]]. It's honest, not [[forced]] [[like]] those [[films]], and [[parents]] will enjoy watching this [[movie]] with there [[kids]].

When Natalie's [[Dad]] leave [[home]] on a business trip, Jeff convinces her that he should [[move]] in because his [[home]] life sucks. With [[support]] from Natalie's [[friend]], Polly, [[played]] [[exquisitely]] by Maddie Corman, she [[lets]] him. But this [[movie]] isn't about putting [[kids]] in [[situations]] and seeing what they can [[get]] away with. The three leads are so [[natural]] and the script, [[surprisingly]] so [[honest]], that what [[comes]] through best in their performances is heart breaking. These [[characters]] [[really]] do care about each other. It's a [[great]] [[film]] to [[show]] to [[kids]] who are [[reaching]] pre-teen [[adolescence]].

I [[initially]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[acted]] at a [[videos]] [[storing]] and I loved it. I [[newly]] watched the movie again and have realized that it is a lost [[treasury]]. The movie stars Jennifer Connelly, [[virtually]] twenty years before she [[should]] go on to [[gaining]] an Oscar for [[Awesome]] [[Intellect]], as [[Yasmeen]] Becker. Byron Thames plays her [[better]] [[boyfriend]] in the [[worldwide]], Jeff Moran. The [[flick]] is [[obviously]] a milder, cuter and softer version of the Pretty in Pink's and Some [[Kinds]] of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[accurately]] why it is so [[alright]]. It's honest, not [[compelled]] [[iike]] those [[film]], and [[parent]] will enjoy watching this [[cinematography]] with there [[brats]].

When Natalie's [[Pope]] leave [[homes]] on a business trip, Jeff convinces her that he should [[budge]] in because his [[house]] life sucks. With [[help]] from Natalie's [[boyfriend]], Polly, [[done]] [[divinely]] by Maddie Corman, she [[allowing]] him. But this [[film]] isn't about putting [[enfant]] in [[instances]] and seeing what they can [[obtain]] away with. The three leads are so [[naturel]] and the script, [[impossibly]] so [[truthful]], that what [[occurs]] through best in their performances is heart breaking. These [[nature]] [[truthfully]] do care about each other. It's a [[awesome]] [[movie]] to [[demonstrating]] to [[brats]] who are [[accomplishing]] pre-teen [[teenagers]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] From the [[moment]] the [[film]] [[begins]], already there is a [[discrepancy]]. As this [[film]] takes place on the [[borders]] of [[Normandy]] and the middle [[East]], and is [[also]] an international [[film]], one [[would]] expect [[proper]] accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[American]]. Also, I [[find]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the [[story]] line a little difficult to follow from the [[beginning]]. Who is who? Otherwise the [[film]] is very [[accurate]] in [[costume]] and scenery. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a [[movie]] to [[get]] a feel of what it was like in the [[past]] (albeit the [[lack]] of accents) then this movie is worth a [[rent]]. If you're [[looking]] for a [[movie]] as [[epic]] as Kingdom of [[Heaven]], then [[look]] elsewhere. From the [[time]] the [[filmmaking]] [[started]], already there is a [[divergence]]. As this [[filmmaking]] takes place on the [[limitations]] of [[Normandie]] and the middle [[Easterly]], and is [[apart]] an international [[filmmaking]], one [[should]] expect [[suitable]] accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[Americano]]. Also, I [[unearth]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the [[tales]] line a little difficult to follow from the [[outset]]. Who is who? Otherwise the [[movie]] is very [[meticulous]] in [[outfit]] and scenery. [[Though]] you [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] a [[flick]] to [[gets]] a feel of what it was like in the [[elapsed]] (albeit the [[dearth]] of accents) then this movie is worth a [[rentals]]. If you're [[searching]] for a [[filmmaking]] as [[odyssey]] as Kingdom of [[Heavens]], then [[gaze]] elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2027 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Wow, I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[movie]]. Now, I have seen much worse, but there are much more romantic/funny comedies with John Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[best]]. While the acting wasn't [[terrible]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was [[little]] passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as complete cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). Wow, I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[filmmaking]]. Now, I have seen much worse, but there are much more romantic/funny comedies with John Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[nicest]]. While the acting wasn't [[atrocious]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was [[scant]] passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as complete cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). --------------------------------------------- Result 2028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I was raised watching the [[original]] Batman Animated [[Series]], and am an avid Batman graphic novel collector. With a [[comic]] book [[hero]] as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Creative]] liberties are all well and good, but when it completely changes the character, then it is too far. I [[purchased]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[hopes]] that an extra [[bonus]] [[feature]] [[could]] shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[atrocity]]. In an interview on the making of "The Batman," one of the artists or writers (I'm [[unsure]] which) said that "We felt we shouldn't [[mess]] with Batman, but we [[could]] [[mess]] with the villains." So, they proceeded to [[make]] the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime [[knockoff]], [[Mr]]. [[Freeze]] into a super-powered [[jewel]] thief, [[Poison]] Ivy into a [[teenage]] hippie, and countless other [[shameful]] acts which are [[making]] Bob Kane roll over in his [[grave]].

To [[sum]] it all up: I [[wish]] I had more hands so I [[could]] give this [[show]] FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 [[simply]] because it [[uses]] the Batman [[name]]. Warner [[Bros]]...[[rethink]] this! Please! I was raised watching the [[upfront]] Batman Animated [[Serials]], and am an avid Batman graphic novel collector. With a [[comedian]] book [[heroin]] as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Inventive]] liberties are all well and good, but when it completely changes the character, then it is too far. I [[acquire]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[waits]] that an extra [[bonuses]] [[trait]] [[did]] shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[monstrosity]]. In an interview on the making of "The Batman," one of the artists or writers (I'm [[uncertain]] which) said that "We felt we shouldn't [[muddle]] with Batman, but we [[wo]] [[chaos]] with the villains." So, they proceeded to [[deliver]] the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime [[knockoffs]], [[Mister]]. [[Froze]] into a super-powered [[jewelry]] thief, [[Toxin]] Ivy into a [[teen]] hippie, and countless other [[scandalous]] acts which are [[doing]] Bob Kane roll over in his [[graveyard]].

To [[suma]] it all up: I [[wanna]] I had more hands so I [[did]] give this [[display]] FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 [[mere]] because it [[used]] the Batman [[denomination]]. Warner [[Bruce]]...[[reconsidering]] this! Please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think it was an overrated PG-13 crap! At least BRITTANY SNOW's performance was good and some others like IDRIS ELBA were good too, but some others teens in the prom like the leads friends were not that convincing. The killer was so dumb and looked so stupid too. The deaths were stupid, boring and completely unoriginals. The movie was very boring too and very overrated. It wasn't suspenseful at all, i almost fall asleep. Its another bad PG-13 remake, its really a dreadful movie IMO. The ending was so stupid and the climax was very rushed and boring. The movie is pretty slow too. Overall the only good thing about this crap fest is maybe BRITTANY SNOW i think she gave a good performance and IDRIS ELBA too, but besides that it was a completely dreadful movie and horrible remake. Well thats just my opinion. i gave it a 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This little seen movie is a languid and laid-back giallo. It veers away from some of the cliché's of the genre and adopts a looser approach. It's about a woman searching for her missing lover; a psychiatrist who has suddenly vanished for no apparent reason. Her search leads her to a villa populated by a group of eccentric individuals. In true giallo style, murder is never far away.

The cast is really rather good. We have Aldofo Celi (Thunderball), Alida Valli (Suspiria), Horst Frank (Cat o' Nine Tails) and a very young Sybil Danning (80's scream queen). The lead actress is Rosemary Dexter, and while I am not familiar with her, she does a good job in leading the picture.

One of the defining features of Eye in the Labyrinth is its music. Atypically for a giallo it features a jazz-rock fusion soundtrack. This score, composed by Roberto Nicolosi, is reminiscent of Miles Davis, especially his work on In A Silent Way. It's an excellent soundtrack and really gives this movie a different feel than most gialli. The fusion groove accentuates the languid atmosphere and compliments the sunny, sea-front scenery that the film is mostly made up of.

This is a giallo so we really need to talk about the murder set-pieces. Well, this film falls a little short in this regard. It's certainly not devoid of them but they are few and far between. The opening dream-murder being probably the best on offer as well as a memorable burning car sequence. But this really isn't a particularly violent film. Still, I don't think it should disappoint too many seasoned fans of the genre. The mystery is fairly compelling and it has enough eccentric characters (the idiot boy Saro and THAT unsettlingly inappropriate dubbed accent?) and moments of the bizarre to satisfy; while the sleaze-factor is upheld with a smattering of nudity throughout.

Eye in the Labyrinth plays like a giallo version of an Agatha Christie mystery, as it features a group of unsympathetic characters in a villa, all under suspicion of murder; we have the obligatory flashbacks detailing their connections with the final hours of the (highly unsympathetic) murder victim. While this isn't a grade-A example of the genre, it's certainly an appealingly different one, as it doesn't borrow too heavily from other films of the sub-genre. For giallo enthusiasts I give this a thumbs up and hope one day it's given a nice DVD transfer. It certainly deserves the treatment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the story by itself, but the things that I learned about WWI Planes & boats, make this movie a must see. The close-ups on the plane & the torpedo boat & how they were used were completely new to me. I heartily recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 2032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is really a very [[bad]] movie. Why? [[First]] of all, the [[story]] is bad. It is an artificial [[story]], [[combining]] all sorts of things together that make no sense. It just seems a wrong [[experiment]]. Secondly, the actors cannot play in a realistic manner. They cannot even [[talk]] as an actor should. Why did I buy this [[movie]]? And what [[must]] I do with it now? This is really a very [[unfavourable]] movie. Why? [[Firstly]] of all, the [[histories]] is bad. It is an artificial [[narratives]], [[merging]] all sorts of things together that make no sense. It just seems a wrong [[experiences]]. Secondly, the actors cannot play in a realistic manner. They cannot even [[conversation]] as an actor should. Why did I buy this [[filmmaking]]? And what [[should]] I do with it now? --------------------------------------------- Result 2033 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I liked the [[movie]], first of all because it told an interesting [[story]], but the story as told in the movie felt like it was [[condensed]] from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a [[fictional]] South American country, [[also]] a lot to [[fit]] into the time [[available]]. I think it would have been [[much]] better as a six-hour mini-series than it [[turned]] out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's rushed, the story doesn't [[skip]] so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is [[excellent]]. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is [[outstanding]]. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also [[excellent]]. [[Meryl]] Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. I liked the [[kino]], first of all because it told an interesting [[histories]], but the story as told in the movie felt like it was [[succinct]] from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a [[bogus]] South American country, [[similarly]] a lot to [[suited]] into the time [[accessible]]. I think it would have been [[very]] better as a six-hour mini-series than it [[revolved]] out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's rushed, the story doesn't [[jumping]] so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is [[wondrous]]. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is [[unresolved]]. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also [[handsome]]. [[Merrill]] Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll give writer/director William Gove credit for finding someone to finance this ill-conceived "thriller." A good argument for not wasting money subscribing to HBO, let alone buying DVDs based on cover art and blurbs. A pedestrian Dennis Hopper and a game Richard Grieco add nothing significant to their resumes, although the art direction is not half bad. The dialogue will leave you grimacing with wonder at its conceit; this is storytelling at its worst. No tension, no suspense, no dread, no fear, no empathy, no catharsis, no nothing. A few attractive and often nude females spice up the boredom, but this is definitely a film best seen as a trailer. I feel sorry for the guy who greenlighted this thing. Good for late-night, zoned-out viewing only. You have been warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the only David Zucker movie that does not spoof anything the first of its kind. The funniest movie of 98 with Night at the Roxbury right behind But I did not think Theres something about mary was funny so that doesnt count except for the frank and beans thing he he. Dont listen to the critics especially Roger Ebert he does not know solid entertainment just look at his reviews.Anyway see it you wont be dissapionted --------------------------------------------- Result 2036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[So]] [[many]] [[wonderful]] [[actresses]] in one [[film]] serve as a practical [[invitation]] to the local [[movie]] house so I duly [[responded]]. Here are some [[remarks]]..

Vanessa Redgrave is [[great]] [[even]] while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good [[thing]] for the film but a sad thing for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[harsh]] in [[recent]] years. Claire [[Danes]] [[continues]] her [[welcome]] [[return]] to the movies and exudes a [[definite]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's [[resemblance]] to her [[mother]] Merly Streep both in terms of [[physical]] appearance and acting style is so [[striking]] that I lost my [[concentration]] to the [[film]] for a [[couple]] of minutes after her [[entrance]]. She is [[surprisingly]] good; [[however]] such a [[resemblance]] has the [[danger]] of [[working]] against her favor. I agree with a [[previous]] comment: Natasha [[Richardson]] definitely had some plastic [[job]] [[done]] to her face. She [[certainly]] does not look like how I remember her from previous [[films]] ("Nell" for example.) [[Both]] she and [[Toni]] [[Collette]] [[sadly]] do not make much [[impression]] [[partly]] because they do not [[look]] [[convincing]] as [[sisters]]. Their interplay is [[weak]]. [[Toni]] Collette additionally is [[way]] too [[old]] for her [[character]]. Glenn [[Close]] and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger [[emotional]] resonance than the [[rest]] of the film. Eileen Atkins [[provides]] some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an [[imaginary]] nighttime companion to Redgrave's [[character]]. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film [[considerably]] even though he [[gives]] a [[broader]] performance than [[needed]]. As a [[matter]] of fact as [[soon]] as he exits the [[story]] it starts to [[drag]]. It is [[also]] to his [[credit]] that he [[manages]] to create the [[exact]] [[necessary]] [[sense]] of boyish [[charm]] in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the [[center]] of the [[film]]. He [[also]] has the misfortune that the script is [[insufficient]] in [[explaining]] why three people (one of them a [[man]]) are so much smitten by this [[man]]. The backstory to this should have been [[developed]] more.

The [[cinematography]] is [[excellent]] as [[expected]]. [[However]] the main summer [[house]] set failed to [[convince]] me. It does not [[look]] natural on the [[top]] of that rocky hill, [[particularly]] with its [[grass]] patch in the [[front]]. A [[bit]] too [[cardboard]] like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... [[Therefore]] [[innumerable]] [[gorgeous]] [[actors]] in one [[cinema]] serve as a practical [[invite]] to the local [[film]] house so I duly [[replied]]. Here are some [[observations]]..

Vanessa Redgrave is [[formidable]] [[yet]] while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good [[stuff]] for the film but a sad thing for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[hard]] in [[freshly]] years. Claire [[Danish]] [[persisted]] her [[salute]] [[homecoming]] to the movies and exudes a [[concrete]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's [[similarity]] to her [[mummy]] Merly Streep both in terms of [[corporal]] appearance and acting style is so [[dramatic]] that I lost my [[focusing]] to the [[flick]] for a [[matching]] of minutes after her [[inlet]]. She is [[unexpectedly]] good; [[yet]] such a [[similarity]] has the [[risk]] of [[collaborating]] against her favor. I agree with a [[preceding]] comment: Natasha [[Roberts]] definitely had some plastic [[employment]] [[played]] to her face. She [[definitely]] does not look like how I remember her from previous [[cinematography]] ("Nell" for example.) [[Whether]] she and [[Tony]] [[Colette]] [[unfortunately]] do not make much [[printing]] [[partially]] because they do not [[gaze]] [[compelling]] as [[siblings]]. Their interplay is [[flimsy]]. [[Tony]] Collette additionally is [[pathways]] too [[elderly]] for her [[characters]]. Glenn [[Closes]] and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger [[sentimental]] resonance than the [[remainder]] of the film. Eileen Atkins [[gives]] some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an [[fictitious]] nighttime companion to Redgrave's [[characteristics]]. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film [[substantially]] even though he [[provides]] a [[extensive]] performance than [[required]]. As a [[question]] of fact as [[swiftly]] as he exits the [[histories]] it starts to [[towed]]. It is [[apart]] to his [[credits]] that he [[administered]] to create the [[correct]] [[requisite]] [[feeling]] of boyish [[amulet]] in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the [[centre]] of the [[movies]]. He [[further]] has the misfortune that the script is [[inadequate]] in [[clarifying]] why three people (one of them a [[men]]) are so much smitten by this [[men]]. The backstory to this should have been [[formulated]] more.

The [[cinematic]] is [[wondrous]] as [[scheduled]]. [[Still]] the main summer [[household]] set failed to [[convincing]] me. It does not [[gaze]] natural on the [[supreme]] of that rocky hill, [[namely]] with its [[grasses]] patch in the [[newsweek]]. A [[bite]] too [[carton]] like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... --------------------------------------------- Result 2037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is one of Michael Keaton's best. Throughout the film he is 'on'. With co-stars like Ms. Henner, Joe Piscopo and Danny DeVito, you can't go wrong. Great laughs, great fun for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 2038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[For]] a low [[budget]] [[project]], the Film was a success. The [[story]] is interesting, and the actors were convincing. [[Eva]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the [[director]] [[shows]] his [[talent]] by taking on [[many]] roles for his [[project]]. Of [[course]] this low [[budget]] film [[could]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the music keeps this script [[moving]]. [[Although]] this [[film]] has it's [[share]] of [[problems]], such as [[continuity]], I [[must]] say that I would [[rent]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. [[In]] a low [[budgets]] [[projects]], the Film was a success. The [[histories]] is interesting, and the actors were convincing. [[Evy]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the [[headmaster]] [[exhibitions]] his [[talents]] by taking on [[several]] roles for his [[projects]]. Of [[cours]] this low [[budgets]] film [[would]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the music keeps this script [[shifting]]. [[While]] this [[movie]] has it's [[interchange]] of [[trouble]], such as [[continuation]], I [[gotta]] say that I would [[renting]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 2039 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] With [[Harry]] [[Callahan]] getting up in [[years]], the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile [[sometimes]] and out of place, his demeanor still was [[unwavering]]. Thankfully, this film took some time off to [[develop]] a different type of story, one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. While the film [[fell]] [[short]] in doing so, it was still an [[excellent]] [[addition]] to the series, [[even]] if it was getting a little out of place during a time of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. With [[Hari]] [[Callaghan]] getting up in [[ages]], the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile [[intermittently]] and out of place, his demeanor still was [[unflinching]]. Thankfully, this film took some time off to [[elaborate]] a different type of story, one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. While the film [[tumbled]] [[succinct]] in doing so, it was still an [[wondrous]] [[addendum]] to the series, [[yet]] if it was getting a little out of place during a time of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[like]] [[Brad]] [[Pitt]] enormously. He is an [[actor]] with [[brains]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the [[rest]]. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Louise]]" a thought has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Troy]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte Bardot [[comes]] to [[mind]] nonetheless. He is so [[beautiful]] that he is at his most effective when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, [[almost]] accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. [[Strange]], "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. I [[iike]] [[Rad]] [[Beit]] enormously. He is an [[protagonist]] with [[neurons]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the [[stays]]. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Luis]]" a thought has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Trojans]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte Bardot [[occurs]] to [[esprit]] nonetheless. He is so [[sumptuous]] that he is at his most effective when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, [[practically]] accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. [[Peculiar]], "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This final Voyager episode begins 23 years in the future. Voyager has made it back home. In the many years it took to return tho, the Vulcan Tuvoks' mind has been destroyed. He carried a disease they were too late getting home to cure.

Captain Janeway comes across aliens who have time travel technology. She realizes, there's a Warp Conduit in the Delta Quadrant that could bring Voyager home immediately - if she could go back in time and notify Voyager. There's one problem. The Conduit is deep inside Borg Space.

Janeway visits Tuvok. He's like a child. He scribbles tho, obsessed, working on math problems or movie reviews or something, he's convinced are important somehow. In the institution, Tuvok cries, asking for 'Janeway' to please, please come back to him.

Janeway decides to commandeer a federation shuttle and equip it with weapons technology 20 years ahead of the Borg, in the hopes of going back in time and using this new technology to guide Voyager to the Warp Conduit.

When she goes back in time and links up with Voyager, Janeway meets her younger self. The two captains disagree, arguing about the plan. The real-captain visits Tuvok asking him if it's true he has a brain disorder. Tuvok admits it's true, but it can't be cured by the facilities on the ship so he's kept it to himself.

The young Captain agrees to the older Captains' plan. To increase their chances of success the older Janeway plans to distract the Borg with her shuttle craft. The Borg actually capture Janeway and her shuttle. The Borg Queen personally assimilates Captain Janeway. But Janeway's expected this! the Borg Queen has assimilated a virus into herself that kills her. With the Borg Queen dead Voyager makes it thru the Warp Conduit back to federation space. --------------------------------------------- Result 2042 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Very, very humdrum [[movie]] fare here with [[Stella]] [[Stevens]] [[taking]] [[directions]] from [[someone]] in [[disguise]](it didn't [[take]] me long to [[guess]] who it was) in [[Old]] Nevada [[Town]] outside Vegas for a [[money]] [[heist]] in the [[Circus]] [[Circus]] [[Hotel]] in Las Vegas. [[Stevens]] [[leads]] her girl gang of three, and they find out that they [[must]] [[act]] much [[quicker]] than had been [[anticipated]]. Despite some neat looks at [[Las]] Vegas in the 70's, very average [[yet]] [[credible]] acting from most involved, and a plot [[line]] with [[potential]], [[Las]] Vegas [[Lady]] [[lays]] one [[big]] [[boring]] egg. It [[seems]] forever for the [[film]] to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at [[least]] thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even [[close]]. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky [[Stuart]] Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year [[prior]] to his [[grand]] performance as the prosecuting [[attorney]] Bugliosa in Helter [[Skelter]]. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a [[waterfall]]. There is one [[punch]] and one head hit with a blunt [[instrument]]. [[Beyond]] that [[nothing]] in terms of [[action]]. And as for the [[girls]], don't [[expect]] much there [[either]]. Stella and her [[girls]](both very [[mediocre]] [[yet]] pretty talents, get in a sauna and a [[bath]]. What do we [[see]]? [[Nothing]] but a fleeting side profile. [[Stella]] wears these nice open blouses accentuating her [[real]] [[talents]], but I wish she [[would]] have been a bit more [[open]] with her performance. That [[way]] I [[could]] [[write]] one thing that [[would]] [[recommend]] the [[film]]. Alas, it was not to be, and I have [[little]] to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible [[film]] in any way, it just has [[nothing]] going for it [[either]]. YAWN. Very, very humdrum [[filmmaking]] fare here with [[Stell]] [[Stephens]] [[take]] [[directive]] from [[everybody]] in [[outfit]](it didn't [[taking]] me long to [[guessing]] who it was) in [[Elderly]] Nevada [[Cities]] outside Vegas for a [[cash]] [[robbery]] in the [[Carnival]] [[Carnival]] [[Motel]] in Las Vegas. [[Roberts]] [[leeds]] her girl gang of three, and they find out that they [[gotta]] [[acts]] much [[sooner]] than had been [[planned]]. Despite some neat looks at [[Angeles]] Vegas in the 70's, very average [[nonetheless]] [[dependable]] acting from most involved, and a plot [[bloodline]] with [[prospective]], [[La]] Vegas [[Damsel]] [[laying]] one [[prodigious]] [[bore]] egg. It [[seem]] forever for the [[filmmaking]] to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at [[less]] thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even [[shutting]]. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky [[Stewart]] Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year [[ago]] to his [[grande]] performance as the prosecuting [[attorneys]] Bugliosa in Helter [[Helter]]. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a [[cascade]]. There is one [[punching]] and one head hit with a blunt [[devices]]. [[Afterlife]] that [[none]] in terms of [[efforts]]. And as for the [[girl]], don't [[expects]] much there [[neither]]. Stella and her [[dame]](both very [[lackluster]] [[however]] pretty talents, get in a sauna and a [[swim]]. What do we [[seeing]]? [[Nothin]] but a fleeting side profile. [[Stell]] wears these nice open blouses accentuating her [[veritable]] [[talent]], but I wish she [[could]] have been a bit more [[opening]] with her performance. That [[ways]] I [[wo]] [[handwriting]] one thing that [[ought]] [[recommends]] the [[kino]]. Alas, it was not to be, and I have [[small]] to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible [[kino]] in any way, it just has [[none]] going for it [[neither]]. YAWN. --------------------------------------------- Result 2043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is about a man who has been too caught up with the accepted convention of success, trying to be ever upwardly mobile, working hard so that he could be proud of owning his own home. He assumes this is all there is to life until he accidentally takes up dancing, all because he wanted to get a closer look of a beautiful girl that he sees by the dance studio everyday while riding the subway on his way home.

His was infatuated with her at first, going to the dance class just to idolize her, but he eventually lets himself go and gets himself into the dancing. It eventually becomes apparent to him that there is more to life than working yourself to death. There is a set of oddball characters also learning in the studio, giving the film a lot of laughs and some sense of bonding between the dejected.

There is also revelations of various characters, including the girl he initially admired, giving some depth to them by showing their blemished past and their struggle to overcome it.

The dancing was also engaging, with the big competition at the end, but it is not the usual story where our underdog come out at the top by winning it. Instead, there are downfalls, revelations and redemption.

All these makes it a moving and fun film to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] First, it takes a full half hour to [[get]] Hackman out of [[jail]] and to start doing the [[job]]. What a waste of time, we all [[know]] Hackman is [[getting]] out to do some [[job]] for his masters, why waste [[almost]] a third of the [[movie]] on these sequences. Then Hackman [[stays]] in a hotel and the [[story]] [[arc]] again goes [[nowhere]], [[simply]] [[proving]] to us that Hackman is under [[close]] watch and anything he [[says]] or does is [[know]] by the masters. [[Again]], another 20 minutes. [[Then]] more wasted time showing the [[reunion]] with his [[wife]]. All of this should have [[taken]] 10-15 minutes at most [[simply]] as a set-up for the [[real]] action, [[intrigue]] and [[plot]] [[twists]]. By the time the [[real]] action gets going, I was so [[bored]] that I just [[wanted]] the [[movie]] to end. Hackman is [[great]] as usual, and the other [[actors]] as well, but this is a dud of the first [[magnitude]]. First, it takes a full half hour to [[got]] Hackman out of [[internment]] and to start doing the [[jobs]]. What a waste of time, we all [[savoir]] Hackman is [[obtain]] out to do some [[jobs]] for his masters, why waste [[hardly]] a third of the [[filmmaking]] on these sequences. Then Hackman [[resting]] in a hotel and the [[tales]] [[archangel]] again goes [[somewhere]], [[straightforward]] [[proves]] to us that Hackman is under [[closed]] watch and anything he [[contends]] or does is [[savoir]] by the masters. [[Yet]], another 20 minutes. [[Thus]] more wasted time showing the [[reunification]] with his [[femme]]. All of this should have [[took]] 10-15 minutes at most [[purely]] as a set-up for the [[true]] action, [[plot]] and [[intrigue]] [[kinks]]. By the time the [[veritable]] action gets going, I was so [[drilled]] that I just [[wished]] the [[film]] to end. Hackman is [[marvellous]] as usual, and the other [[players]] as well, but this is a dud of the first [[amplitude]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ((NB: Spoiler warning, such as it is!))

First off, this is a teen slasher flick -- the Spam-In-A-Cabin genre, as Joe Bob Briggs piquantly put it. If you're looking for Roshambo, this isn't it and wasn't going to BE it. I'm desperately unimpressed by stabs at its cinematography, directing or acting performances.

Secondly, this wasn't Zuniga's first horror flick, it was her first screen appearance period, cinema, TV, whatever. For what it is worth; neither is Daphne Zuniga Susan Sarandon or Katherine Hepburn.

Thirdly, you have to give even a lame slasher flick props. Sure, it follows the deeply insulting formulaic message of its genre: any young woman having or showing interest in sex is beef on the hoof, and the harvest time is now.

Except this one gives the chop to the sweet, virginal protagonist as well! Now THERE is a mediocre teen death film that has the courage of its convictions! Interesting that this was said ingenue's only film role. Another One Hit Wonder, except that term gives the lass too much credit.

(Then again, this film probably has one of the highest percentage of one-movie actors in history. Of the nineteen credited actors, a whopping thirteen never appeared in any other film. Three appeared in one other movie by the same producers. Only one other besides Zuniga has as many as six screen credits. What was this, the Has Been And Never Were Mutual Aid Society?)

Granted, I saw this a long time ago on late night cable when I was bored and never anticipate being that bored in my life again, but I see no reason to hunt down everyone involved and toss them in the incinerator with Joanne.

2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surely no Saturday morning TV kids' show was ever done this poorly. After all, those producers had to count on the audience coming back. Well, in this awful offering, they could at least count the money they saved on sets. The script could have been a reject from some long-forgotten space opera serial, with a few smarmy lines added for cool-dude Gerald Mohr to murmur to Naura Hayden. No director could have done anything decent with such a loony storyline, so the action just plods boringly along. The spaceship props are absurd--a Bulova wall clock and portable typewriter, for example--but the planet sets have got to be some of the worst in cinematic history. Most are crude drawings, and it's all bathed in an often misfocused red light. Even Mohr's bare hairy chest is used as a prop. And it's a bad one--as rib-thin as the plot. Any viewer who can make it to the end of this movie will hear a message from the Martians--and will probably agree completely! --------------------------------------------- Result 2047 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[false]] note. All the acting is [[superb]]. As Dani, Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and [[superbly]] directed and edited film, I [[felt]] like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have [[watched]] this movie at least 5 [[times]], and can honestly say that it is one of the single [[best]] [[movies]] ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[specious]] note. All the acting is [[funky]]. As Dani, Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and [[beautifully]] directed and edited film, I [[deemed]] like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have [[observed]] this movie at least 5 [[moments]], and can honestly say that it is one of the single [[better]] [[cinematography]] ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] There are [[many]] illnesses born in the [[mind]] of man which have been given [[life]] in [[modern]] times. Constant vigilance or accrued information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these [[mental]] phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[premise]] of the [[film]] entitled " The [[Night]] Listner." It tells the [[story]] of a popular [[radio]] host called Gabriel Noon (Robin [[Williams]]) who spends his evenings enthralling his audiences with vivid [[stories]] about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and [[reaches]] out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual [[abuse]] at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is [[captivated]] and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure [[Robin]] Williams and were it not for [[Toni]] Collette who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Sandra]] [[Oh]] as Anna and [[John]] Cullum as [[pop]], this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more serious performances. *** There are [[countless]] illnesses born in the [[intellect]] of man which have been given [[vie]] in [[contemporary]] times. Constant vigilance or accrued information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these [[spiritual]] phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[hypothesis]] of the [[cinematographic]] entitled " The [[Nightly]] Listner." It tells the [[narratives]] of a popular [[radios]] host called Gabriel Noon (Robin [[William]]) who spends his evenings enthralling his audiences with vivid [[narratives]] about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and [[attained]] out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual [[mistreat]] at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is [[enthralled]] and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure [[Robyn]] Williams and were it not for [[Tony]] Collette who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Xander]] [[Aw]] as Anna and [[Giovanni]] Cullum as [[papa]], this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more serious performances. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you [[ask]]?...well see this one and maybe it will make more sense.. Hitchcock never [[blended]] scenes together [[better]]....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[get]] that [[scattered]] [[feeling]] you sometimes get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[sense]] that the [[characters]] will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[disappoint]] you when they do. [[Screenwriter]]/[[Producer]] Phil Hay's [[surreal]] [[tale]] of life, [[blended]] with an [[absolutely]] [[superb]] soundtrack makes you [[think]] more about the 6 [[degrees]] of [[separation]] in [[life]] than the movie by the same title...I will be [[looking]] for more good things from this [[producer]] in the [[future]]. OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you [[poser]]?...well see this one and maybe it will make more sense.. Hitchcock never [[mixing]] scenes together [[best]]....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[gets]] that [[littered]] [[sense]] you sometimes get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[feeling]] that the [[character]] will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[defraud]] you when they do. [[Writer]]/[[Manufacturer]] Phil Hay's [[unreal]] [[narratives]] of life, [[blending]] with an [[totally]] [[wondrous]] soundtrack makes you [[thinking]] more about the 6 [[grades]] of [[segregation]] in [[vie]] than the movie by the same title...I will be [[searching]] for more good things from this [[producers]] in the [[impending]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that even the writer/director [[could]] provide no [[answer]]. At the question and answer session after the screening, [[Mr]]. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using actors with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a reason to create a film. [[Actors]] are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger vision - a larger vision that seemed [[muddled]] at best and absent at worst.

Crispin [[Glover]] also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The [[film]] seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The [[film]] doesn't [[even]] give me an [[indicator]] of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't [[even]] afford to [[make]] the taboo disturbing or inciting on any [[level]] because he hasn't made the audience care in any [[way]].

[[Ignoring]] problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that [[actually]] shocked me most was how poorly the [[film]] was put [[together]]. The editing, [[cinematography]], and other technical [[aspects]] [[seemed]] [[frequently]] to be [[extremely]] amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the [[movie]], and I feel that the [[money]] should have been spent on different [[designers]] (Glover [[actually]] did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The [[painted]] sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a [[photographed]] stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed [[like]] a sort of [[Home]] Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the [[biggest]] problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even [[understand]] how [[seriously]] the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is [[screaming]] at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that even the writer/director [[would]] provide no [[replied]]. At the question and answer session after the screening, [[Mister]]. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using actors with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a reason to create a film. [[Protagonists]] are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger vision - a larger vision that seemed [[puzzled]] at best and absent at worst.

Crispin [[Grover]] also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The [[filmmaking]] seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The [[filmmaking]] doesn't [[yet]] give me an [[indicators]] of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't [[yet]] afford to [[deliver]] the taboo disturbing or inciting on any [[grades]] because he hasn't made the audience care in any [[pathway]].

[[Ignores]] problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that [[indeed]] shocked me most was how poorly the [[filmmaking]] was put [[jointly]]. The editing, [[film]], and other technical [[things]] [[appeared]] [[often]] to be [[very]] amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the [[filmmaking]], and I feel that the [[cash]] should have been spent on different [[developers]] (Glover [[genuinely]] did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The [[brushed]] sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a [[pictured]] stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed [[iike]] a sort of [[Housing]] Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the [[greater]] problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even [[fathom]] how [[conscientiously]] the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is [[yelling]] at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] was great the first [[time]] I [[saw]] it, when it was [[called]] "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill [[Murray]] turned into an eccentric black [[man]] [[played]] by Morgan Freeman, [[Scarlett]] Johansson turned into a cranky [[Latino]] [[woman]] played by [[Paz]] Vega, and Tokyo, [[Japan]] turned into Carson, California. [[Instead]] of [[meaningful]] [[conversations]] and silence we [[enjoyed]] in Translation, we [[get]] [[meaningless]] [[blabbering]] in 10 Items that verges on [[annoying]]. [[Instead]] of [[characters]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that [[spew]] [[pointless]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most [[annoying]] part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a [[hurry]] to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less [[lists]] of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to [[yell]] at them saying, "Didn't you [[say]] you had [[somewhere]] to be? What the heck are doing? A minute [[ago]] you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never [[truly]] understood how something [[could]] "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and [[unsympathetic]]…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. This [[filmmaking]] was great the first [[times]] I [[sawthe]] it, when it was [[drew]] "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill [[Moray]] turned into an eccentric black [[bloke]] [[served]] by Morgan Freeman, [[Scarlet]] Johansson turned into a cranky [[Hispanic]] [[girl]] played by [[Baz]] Vega, and Tokyo, [[Japans]] turned into Carson, California. [[However]] of [[valid]] [[talk]] and silence we [[adored]] in Translation, we [[obtains]] [[pointless]] [[yammering]] in 10 Items that verges on [[exasperating]]. [[However]] of [[personages]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that [[spewed]] [[superfluous]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most [[pesky]] part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a [[rush]] to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less [[listing]] of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to [[cree]] at them saying, "Didn't you [[tell]] you had [[someplace]] to be? What the heck are doing? A minute [[before]] you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never [[really]] understood how something [[wo]] "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and [[insensitive]]…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. --------------------------------------------- Result 2052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Possibly]] the most [[brilliant]] thing about Che: [[Part]] Two, as we [[begin]] to [[integrate]] it with Part One in our [[minds]], is that there is no [[clarification]] of why Che [[chose]] to confidentially abscond from [[Cuba]] after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no clarification of why he [[chose]] Bolivia as his [[subsequent]] setting for a coup d'etat, no [[allusion]] to the political [[decisions]] he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has [[given]] prominent familiarity. [[Extraordinary]] focus is [[given]] to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet [[hardly]] any endeavor is made to [[single]] them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

[[In]] Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible [[dedication]]. There are [[remarkable]] [[sporadic]] visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these [[men]] [[live]] for [[weeks]] at a [[time]], and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria [[part]] of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's [[producers]], gives a champion's performance, not [[least]] because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge [[like]] most [[epic]] heroes. [[In]] Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he [[falls]] to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called [[insane]]. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively [[within]] those means. [[Potentially]] the most [[wondrous]] thing about Che: [[Party]] Two, as we [[launches]] to [[embed]] it with Part One in our [[esprit]], is that there is no [[details]] of why Che [[selects]] to confidentially abscond from [[Cuban]] after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no clarification of why he [[picks]] Bolivia as his [[posterior]] setting for a coup d'etat, no [[hint]] to the political [[rulings]] he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has [[afforded]] prominent familiarity. [[Spectacular]] focus is [[yielded]] to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet [[barely]] any endeavor is made to [[exclusive]] them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

[[Among]] Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible [[pledges]]. There are [[phenomenal]] [[casual]] visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these [[males]] [[viva]] for [[chou]] at a [[period]], and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria [[parte]] of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's [[grower]], gives a champion's performance, not [[fewer]] because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge [[iike]] most [[odyssey]] heroes. [[Across]] Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he [[autumn]] to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called [[coot]]. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively [[inside]] those means. --------------------------------------------- Result 2053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This movie should have been named Need For Speed: The [[Movie]]. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Speed]] is mostly about hot cars and [[beautiful]] [[women]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only thing about this movie that was A-Level were the [[cars]]. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost nonexistent. I only really [[watched]] this movie to see how [[bad]] it was and, while it was pretty bad, it could have been worse. And at [[least]] it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. This movie should have been named Need For Speed: The [[Filmmaking]]. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Swiftness]] is mostly about hot cars and [[sumptuous]] [[mujer]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only thing about this movie that was A-Level were the [[carriages]]. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost nonexistent. I only really [[seen]] this movie to see how [[naughty]] it was and, while it was pretty bad, it could have been worse. And at [[lowest]] it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. --------------------------------------------- Result 2054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Veteran [[director]] and producer [[Allan]] Dwan, whose huge string of films [[includes]] both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently [[shown]] (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") tried his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of [[singers]] with little past [[film]] [[experience]] and, as it turned out, virtually no [[future]], he [[spun]] a fictional and in no small [[part]] [[offensive]] [[story]] about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

[[Bill]] Shirley is the [[young]], lovestruck Foster [[whose]] [[kindness]] to slaves includes giving the [[money]] saved for an engagement [[ring]] to [[pay]] the hospital [[cost]] for an injured [[little]] [[black]] boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel [[Lawrence]]) whose [[pesky]] younger sister, Jeanie ([[Eileen]] [[Christy]]), is [[slowly]] [[realizing]] she's in [[love]] with the [[nearly]] impecunious song-smith. Foster is in [[love]] with Inez who is [[revolted]] by the composer's Number 1 on the [[Levee]] Hit Parade Tune, "O [[Susannah]]." Enter minstrel [[Edwin]] P.Christy ([[Ray]] Middleton) to [[help]] [[launch]] the profit-making [[phase]] of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film [[standards]] of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed [[fakes]] with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the [[Foster]] songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal [[whitewash]] of the antebellum [[South]]. The [[biggest]] number [[features]] black-face for all on [[stage]], an [[historical]] anomaly and a contemporary [[piece]] of [[unthinking]] racism. [[Were]] these portrayals of blacks anywhere near [[reality]], the abolitionists would be [[rightly]] [[condemned]] for [[interfering]] with so beneficent an [[institution]].

"I Dream of Jeanie" [[apparently]] [[sank]] into the studio's vault with barely a [[death]] whisper. Now revived by [[Alpha]] [[Video]] for a [[mere]] $4.99 it's a [[period]] piece with charming [[songs]] and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who [[wore]] their bed linen to the theater. Veteran [[superintendent]] and producer [[Alan]] Dwan, whose huge string of films [[encompass]] both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently [[indicated]] (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") tried his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of [[vocalist]] with little past [[filmmaking]] [[experiences]] and, as it turned out, virtually no [[upcoming]], he [[woven]] a fictional and in no small [[party]] [[abusive]] [[storytelling]] about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

[[Billing]] Shirley is the [[youthful]], lovestruck Foster [[who]] [[generosity]] to slaves includes giving the [[cash]] saved for an engagement [[rings]] to [[salaries]] the hospital [[pricing]] for an injured [[petite]] [[negro]] boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel [[Laurent]]) whose [[troublesome]] younger sister, Jeanie ([[Ellen]] [[Christie]]), is [[softly]] [[attaining]] she's in [[amore]] with the [[almost]] impecunious song-smith. Foster is in [[likes]] with Inez who is [[rebelled]] by the composer's Number 1 on the [[Dam]] Hit Parade Tune, "O [[Susanna]]." Enter minstrel [[Erwin]] P.Christy ([[Gleam]] Middleton) to [[supporting]] [[launched]] the profit-making [[phases]] of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film [[norms]] of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed [[faux]] with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the [[Adoptive]] songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal [[beautify]] of the antebellum [[Southern]]. The [[greatest]] number [[traits]] black-face for all on [[phases]], an [[historic]] anomaly and a contemporary [[slice]] of [[mindless]] racism. [[Was]] these portrayals of blacks anywhere near [[realism]], the abolitionists would be [[deservedly]] [[condemning]] for [[intervening]] with so beneficent an [[creation]].

"I Dream of Jeanie" [[clearly]] [[plunged]] into the studio's vault with barely a [[dies]] whisper. Now revived by [[Alfa]] [[Videos]] for a [[only]] $4.99 it's a [[schedules]] piece with charming [[melodies]] and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who [[donned]] their bed linen to the theater. --------------------------------------------- Result 2055 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[movie]] is the [[best]] [[horror]] [[movie]], bar-none.I [[love]] how [[Stanley]] just dumps the [[women]] into the [[lake]].I have been a fan of [[Judd]] Nelson's work for [[many]] [[years]], and he [[blew]] me away. Its a [[blend]] of [[horror]], and [[drama]] ,and [[romance]], not so much [[comedy]]. His evil, [[yet]] [[charming]] look [[captured]] me right then and there. That [[look]] in his [[eyes]], I will never [[forget]]. There's [[something]] about him, I [[cant]] [[describe]]. This [[kino]] is the [[better]] [[terror]] [[cinematography]], bar-none.I [[adore]] how [[Stan]] just dumps the [[female]] into the [[lakes]].I have been a fan of [[Jude]] Nelson's work for [[various]] [[yrs]], and he [[farted]] me away. Its a [[amalgam]] of [[abomination]], and [[opera]] ,and [[romanticism]], not so much [[farce]]. His evil, [[again]] [[enchanting]] look [[caught]] me right then and there. That [[gaze]] in his [[eye]], I will never [[forgot]]. There's [[anything]] about him, I [[dunno]] [[depict]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a wonderful movie with a fun, clever story and the dynamics of culture differences and the running theme of what's important in life make this a very under-appreciated movie. Don't let the cynics of the world deter you from seeing this. Keaton has wonderful moments and I wonder at the fact that comedy is never appreciated, because actors like Keaton make going from humor to serious bits look tremendously easy. Great movie all around! --------------------------------------------- Result 2057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well, one has to give the [[director]] credit for how gutsy he was. Gutsy would be the right term. Not only did he [[use]] a [[total]] [[cast]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he [[also]] [[decided]] to use sub-par [[special]] effects with a [[confusing]] and boring plot, he [[also]], and I AM NOT kidding, put a [[warning]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] that you [[might]] DIE OF [[FRIGHT]]!!! However, they do [[promise]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a [[creepy]] [[limping]] [[gardener]] is always a good [[move]]. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery Science [[Theater]] 3000, you might've seen this. They like to [[showcase]] [[horrible]] [[movies]], just to [[let]] you know.

A good [[gift]] for someone you [[hate]]. Well, one has to give the [[headmaster]] credit for how gutsy he was. Gutsy would be the right term. Not only did he [[used]] a [[aggregate]] [[casting]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he [[apart]] [[opted]] to use sub-par [[especial]] effects with a [[disconcerting]] and boring plot, he [[further]], and I AM NOT kidding, put a [[warn]] at the [[startup]] of the [[filmmaking]] that you [[probability]] DIE OF [[FREAKED]]!!! However, they do [[promises]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a [[frightening]] [[hobbling]] [[florist]] is always a good [[budge]]. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery Science [[Teatro]] 3000, you might've seen this. They like to [[illustrate]] [[frightening]] [[filmmaking]], just to [[leaving]] you know.

A good [[gifts]] for someone you [[hating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2058 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a brilliant documentary that follows the life of Herge and his creating TinTin. Its based around a series of interviews conducted in 1971, and covers every thing from his early life and "Nazi collaboration" to the final moments of his life.

Brilliantly edited, very cinematic and fast paced enough to not get boring. This film will give you a new appreciation for the work of Herge.

The film makers make the film more than just another documentary. Using the latest state of the art technology and for a change putting it to good use.

Recently more and more documentaries have been making it to cinemas. But this one as to be amongst the best... --------------------------------------------- Result 2059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is another North [[East]] Florida [[production]], filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley [[Plantation]]. I was rather surprised the [[company]] was able to [[take]] over the main [[street]] of Fernandina Beach as [[long]] as was [[necessary]] to achieve the [[street]] scenes. The film is pretty, and [[pretty]] [[bad]]. Tami Erin is [[cute]], but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small [[kids]], or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. This is another North [[Eastern]] Florida [[productivity]], filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley [[Planting]]. I was rather surprised the [[societies]] was able to [[taking]] over the main [[thoroughfare]] of Fernandina Beach as [[longer]] as was [[indispensable]] to achieve the [[rue]] scenes. The film is pretty, and [[quite]] [[unfavourable]]. Tami Erin is [[adorable]], but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small [[child]], or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. --------------------------------------------- Result 2060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Remembering the dirty particulars of this insidiously vapid "movie" is akin to digging into your chest cavity with a rusty, salted spoon. Perhaps "Home Alone 2: Lost in New York" (1992) was a bit on the predictable side, but this pathetic excuse for a film is just one of the most shameless bids at commercialization I have ever heard of. A boy fighting off spies/terrorists when he's home alone in a Chicago suburb with the chickenpox? Ridiculous! Why did this film have to be made? I am the kind of person who believes even terrible movies are not wastes of time, but rather learning experiences. However, this is actually a waste of time. It should be avoided at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2061 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] In a lot of his films ([[Citizen]] Kane, [[Confidential]] [[Report]], [[Touch]] of [[evil]]) Orson Welles [[gave]] him the role of an [[exuberant]] [[men]]. [[In]] "The [[Lady]] from Shanghai" it's the only time I [[see]] him holding the role of the [[victim]]. The role of the [[culprit]], he [[gave]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[guess]] it's because he was in love with her. Therefore, it's an interesting film. But I [[find]] the story [[excellent]] too. The direction is [[genius]], as [[usual]] with [[Welles]] : two scenes are particularly brilliant: the one in the aquarium and the [[final]] one with the mirrors. This film is [[brilliant]].(10/10) In a lot of his films ([[Citizenship]] Kane, [[Covert]] [[Reporting]], [[Toque]] of [[satanic]]) Orson Welles [[given]] him the role of an [[luxuriant]] [[males]]. [[During]] "The [[Ladies]] from Shanghai" it's the only time I [[behold]] him holding the role of the [[victims]]. The role of the [[perpetrator]], he [[delivered]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[imagine]] it's because he was in love with her. Therefore, it's an interesting film. But I [[unearth]] the story [[super]] too. The direction is [[genie]], as [[ordinary]] with [[Orson]] : two scenes are particularly brilliant: the one in the aquarium and the [[last]] one with the mirrors. This film is [[wondrous]].(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[BAD]] films from the 70's made with no [[actors]] of any note, an [[embarrassing]] script, [[woeful]] direction, and a tireless [[desire]] to fuse "[[horror]]" with light [[comedy]]. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather [[scarce]] here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very [[least]], the [[lake]] is [[beautiful]]. ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[UNFAVOURABLE]] films from the 70's made with no [[protagonists]] of any note, an [[distracting]] script, [[hapless]] direction, and a tireless [[willingness]] to fuse "[[terror]]" with light [[humour]]. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather [[rare]] here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very [[less]], the [[lakes]] is [[sumptuous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a shame this movie is so hard to get your hands on in the US. I found it through a rare video dealer, and it was certainly worth it. This is, without a doubt, the best film made during the pre-code era, and the finest film of the 1930s. Masterful director Frank Borzage made wonderful films about the Depression, and with MAN'S CASTLE he created a fairy tale amidst the hardships of the era.

Loretta Young and Spencer Tracy have a wonderful chemistry between them, and they help make this movie a wonderful romance. Young's Trina is sweet and hopeful, while Tracy's Bill is gruff and closed-off. The dynamic between the character creates one of the most difficult, but in the end rewarding relationships on film.

MAN'S CASTLE is the most soft-focus pre-code film I've seen. Borzage uses the hazy and dreamy technique to turn the squatter's village where Bill and Trina live into a palace. The hardships of the Depression are never ignored, in fact they're integral to the film. But as Borzage crafts the film as a soft focus fairy tale, the love between the characters makes the situation seem less harsh. It makes the film warm and affectionate.

MAN'S CASTLE is the crowning achievement of the pre-code era. If only more people could see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a really fun, breezy, light hearted romantic comedy. You cannot go wrong with Meg Ryan's cute perkiness combined with Albert Einstein's genius. Normally, I'm not a fan of completely fabricated fictional tales about actual people, now deceased and not able to defend themselves, but I think the late Einstein might himself have gotten a chuckle out of this one.

It's the 1950's...Princeton, New Jersey in the spring. The story revolves around a pretty, young, scatter brained mathematician, Catherine (Meg Ryan), who is all set to marry a stuffy jerk, a behavioral researcher named James, merely because he has the brains she's looking for in the father of her future children. However, it's love at first sight when her car breaks and she meets an auto mechanic named Ed (Tim Robbins). As she doesn't think Ed is intelligent enough, her uncle, none other than Albert Einstein, plays match maker, assisted in his endeavors by three mischievous cronies, all theoretical physicists. Uncle Albert must make Ed appear suitably smart, so concocts a charade portraying him as a physicist...naturally with amusing results.

Walter Matthau is his usual hilarious self, and pulls off the character of Einstein quite effectively. With his three professorial buddies, Kurt, Nathan, and Boris, a lot of laughs ensue. The real Einstein had a genuine human side and this film just takes it one (outrageous) step further. If you suspend all logic, you can almost imagine this silly story happening!

It might not be rocket science (despite its main character) but it is a wonderful sweet, refreshing movie. One of the best of the comedy romance genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 2065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is not a [[bad]] movie. It follows the [[new]] conventions of [[modern]] [[horror]], that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress [[running]] for her [[life]] in the first scene. This movie takes the [[old]] [[convention]] of a [[psycho]] [[killer]] on he loose, and [[manage]] to do something [[new]], and interesting with it. It is [[also]] [[always]] nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an [[example]] of what the [[genre]] has [[become]]. [[Cut]] [[hits]] all the [[marks]], and is [[actually]] [[scary]] in some parts. I [[liked]] it I [[gave]] it an eight. This is not a [[rotten]] movie. It follows the [[novel]] conventions of [[fashionable]] [[terror]], that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress [[implementing]] for her [[vie]] in the first scene. This movie takes the [[antigua]] [[conventions]] of a [[madman]] [[slayer]] on he loose, and [[administer]] to do something [[newer]], and interesting with it. It is [[similarly]] [[steadily]] nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an [[case]] of what the [[genus]] has [[gotten]]. [[Chopped]] [[rattles]] all the [[mark]], and is [[indeed]] [[dreadful]] in some parts. I [[enjoyed]] it I [[provided]] it an eight. --------------------------------------------- Result 2066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[movie]] [[deserves]] credit for its [[original]] approach. It [[combines]] [[elements]] of theater, [[film]], and [[epic]] storytelling. [[Unfortunately]], it [[falls]] flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and [[epic]] [[elements]] without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[grave]] at this [[horrible]] [[adaptation]] which [[turns]] the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I [[found]] the [[movie]] unwatchable and an [[incredibly]] [[shabby]], disrespectful [[treatment]] of a beautiful [[story]]. This [[flick]] [[merits]] credit for its [[upfront]] approach. It [[merges]] [[facets]] of theater, [[filmmaking]], and [[saga]] storytelling. [[Sadly]], it [[dips]] flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and [[manas]] [[facets]] without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[gravesite]] at this [[scary]] [[coping]] which [[revolves]] the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I [[unearthed]] the [[filmmaking]] unwatchable and an [[surprisingly]] [[seedy]], disrespectful [[treat]] of a beautiful [[storytelling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Letters with no destination end up in another world found in the back rooms of the [[post]] office. Here, [[Alice]] [[manages]] to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A [[quiet]] little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video [[shop]], overshadowed by fifty [[copies]] of that [[dreaded]] GODZILLA [[film]]. It's a [[shame]] because this [[turned]] out to be a [[satisfying]] film telling a [[brave]] tale with [[strong]] [[simple]] images and effective performances from the two leads. This film [[succeeds]] where [[Garry]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). Letters with no destination end up in another world found in the back rooms of the [[posting]] office. Here, [[Altar]] [[administering]] to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A [[silent]] little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video [[storage]], overshadowed by fifty [[copied]] of that [[terrifying]] GODZILLA [[movie]]. It's a [[pity]] because this [[transformed]] out to be a [[satisfactory]] film telling a [[bold]] tale with [[vigorous]] [[mere]] images and effective performances from the two leads. This film [[succeeding]] where [[Gary]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). --------------------------------------------- Result 2068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the [[final]] nail in the [[coffin]] of Goldcrest and thus the British [[Film]] [[Industry]]. The film is absolute [[pants]], it's full of [[music]] from the [[attempted]] mid-80's [[jazz]] [[revival]] and [[based]] on a [[book]] & author that was [[briefly]] popular at that time and has [[deservedly]] sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally [[uncaring]] film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[worst]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the [[definitive]] nail in the [[casket]] of Goldcrest and thus the British [[Filmmaking]] [[Industries]]. The film is absolute [[shorts]], it's full of [[musica]] from the [[endeavour]] mid-80's [[jaz]] [[resurgence]] and [[founded]] on a [[workbook]] & author that was [[succinctly]] popular at that time and has [[correctly]] sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally [[apathetic]] film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[meanest]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] while watching this [[movie]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Pippi]] and every time was a real [[pleasure]]. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[real]] good [[laugh]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is [[terrible]] from [[beginning]] to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo bad. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to [[Pippi]]. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a [[broadcast]]. burn the [[movie]] and [[save]] the [[kids]]. if you [[want]] to [[look]] at Pippi then look at the [[original]] movie and have a good laugh. [[WE]] LOVE [[PIPPI]] INGER NILSSON, [[sorry]] Tami [[Erin]] you will never stand up to be Pippi.. [[Oh]] yes.. when read the "[[spoilers]]" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and [[robbing]] the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own [[risk]].. it is [[really]] a [[waste]] of [[time]]... while watching this [[filmmaking]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Longstocking]] and every time was a real [[joy]]. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[actual]] good [[laughing]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is [[horrific]] from [[onset]] to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo bad. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to [[Longstocking]]. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a [[disseminate]]. burn the [[filmmaking]] and [[rescues]] the [[children]]. if you [[wantto]] to [[peek]] at Pippi then look at the [[initial]] movie and have a good laugh. [[OURS]] LOVE [[FIFI]] INGER NILSSON, [[apology]] Tami [[Ern]] you will never stand up to be Pippi.. [[Oooh]] yes.. when read the "[[troublemakers]]" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and [[shoplift]] the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own [[endangerment]].. it is [[truthfully]] a [[squander]] of [[times]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2070 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Every]] scene was put [[together]] perfectly.This movie had a [[wonderful]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,[[none]] have and ever will [[exist]]. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[perfect]]! I [[saw]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[picking]] it up and bringing it [[home]] with me. You can [[call]] me a sappy romantic, but this [[movie]] just touched my heart, not to [[mention]] [[made]] me laugh with [[pleasure]] at the same [[time]]. Even [[though]] it [[made]] me [[cry]],I admit, at the [[end]], the [[whole]] [[movie]] just brightened up my [[outlook]] on life [[thereafter]].I [[suggested]] to my [[horror]], [[action]], and [[pure]] [[humor]] [[movie]] [[buff]] of a brother,who [[absolutely]] [[adored]] this movie. This is a [[movie]] with a good [[sense]] of feeling.It could [[make]] you laugh out [[loud]], touch your [[heart]], make you [[fall]] in [[love]],and [[enjoy]] your [[life]].[[Every]] [[time]] you [[purposefully]] [[walk]] past this [[movie]], just be [[aware]] that you are [[consciously]] making the [[choice]] to [[live]] and feel this inspiring [[movie]].Who knows? What if it [[could]] [[really]] happen to you?, and [[keep]] your [[mind]] open to the mystical [[wonders]] of [[life]]. [[Any]] scene was put [[jointly]] perfectly.This movie had a [[wondrous]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,[[nothing]] have and ever will [[existing]]. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[faultless]]! I [[watched]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[selecting]] it up and bringing it [[houses]] with me. You can [[invitation]] me a sappy romantic, but this [[cinematography]] just touched my heart, not to [[referenced]] [[effected]] me laugh with [[glee]] at the same [[moment]]. Even [[nevertheless]] it [[brought]] me [[outcry]],I admit, at the [[terminates]], the [[total]] [[cinema]] just brightened up my [[expectations]] on life [[then]].I [[propose]] to my [[abomination]], [[actions]], and [[sheer]] [[comedy]] [[cinematography]] [[buffy]] of a brother,who [[wholly]] [[love]] this movie. This is a [[cinema]] with a good [[feeling]] of feeling.It could [[deliver]] you laugh out [[rowdy]], touch your [[heartland]], make you [[fallen]] in [[loves]],and [[enjoys]] your [[lives]].[[Each]] [[moment]] you [[intentionally]] [[marche]] past this [[cinematography]], just be [[mindful]] that you are [[purposely]] making the [[selecting]] to [[iive]] and feel this inspiring [[flick]].Who knows? What if it [[would]] [[genuinely]] happen to you?, and [[preserving]] your [[esprit]] open to the mystical [[miracles]] of [[living]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this one when I was seven or eight. I [[must]] have [[found]] the [[characters]] [[round]], because they [[left]] a [[impression]] in my mind that lasted for a [[long]] [[time]] after the [[end]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[sad]], well... for a 7-8 year old [[kid]].

I had the opportunity of seeing this [[movie]] again [[lately]], and [[found]] that the plot was too [[simple]], the [[character]], two-dimensional... I [[guess]] it's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[young]] [[child]]... [[Pity]]...

I [[recommend]] this one for all you parents with [[small]] [[kids]]... ( I [[saw]] it in its [[original]] french version, so I cannot tell you whether the translation is good or not.) I [[rember]] [[see]] this one when I was seven or eight. I [[should]] have [[detected]] the [[attribute]] [[redondo]], because they [[walkout]] a [[printing]] in my mind that lasted for a [[lengthy]] [[period]] after the [[ceases]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[regrettable]], well... for a 7-8 year old [[kiddo]].

I had the opportunity of seeing this [[cinematography]] again [[freshly]], and [[finds]] that the plot was too [[easy]], the [[characters]], two-dimensional... I [[guessing]] it's the [[genre]] of [[kino]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[youths]] [[kids]]... [[Shame]]...

I [[recommendation]] this one for all you parents with [[petite]] [[youths]]... ( I [[sawthe]] it in its [[preliminary]] french version, so I cannot tell you whether the translation is good or not.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Jessica Simpson not only lacks any acting skill, but the script is incredibly shallow and lame. You actually hear serious dialogue that goes, "I love you more." "No, I love YOU more." I stopped watching the movie (online) after the first half hour, I couldn't take it anymore. Her "southern girl charm" just doesn't work and is really quite annoying; her attempts at slapstick humor fall flat and she delivers lines like she is reading the script right off the page.

Poor Luke Wilson. Did he not read the script before agreeing to do this, or did he fall for Papa Joe's (Jessica's dad and also the producer of the movie) promise of big profits? Hopefully he now knows better than to sign on to another movie like this. Luke Wilson is actually a good actor - I hate seeing the pained look on his face as he suffers through the bad dialogue.

Also, I think the previous commenter giving this movie an 8 out of 10 was probably either involved in the movie somehow or hired by Papa Joe to give the movie a better rating. No one in their right mind would actually find this movie engaging.

Jessica has lots of money, right? Maybe buy some acting lessons? --------------------------------------------- Result 2073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie at the Rotterdam IFF. You may question some decisions of the maker - like choosing a mockumentary form for such a sensitive and horrible subject - but this movie sure hits you in the gut. Especially the last scenes were almost painful to watch. Hope it gets the distribution it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] [[Excellent]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. [[Wondrous]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched like 8 or 9 Herzog movies and none of them had any impact on me.

I watched several documentaries about him. He is obviously an intelligent man, with great knowledge about films and passion for making them, but does this makes him a good director. Definitely NO! A complete anti-talent. He can make a good documentary because of previously mentioned traits, but a film with actors – never!

He can't direct nor write. His screenplays are full of badly thought out situations, and many situations/dialogues in his movies are so childishly and badly done that they cannot be hidden behind the word "art" in any sense. No way. Not to mention the unskillful direction, so amateurish-like. To say that he wants to direct like that and write crap like that is a lie.

Like the scene when Scheitz gets arrested and Storszek hides in the back of the store. WHO IS HE KIDDING?

He is a cheater; he knows what fake intellectuals and critics want. He knows what elements he needs to put in the script to get your their attention and empty praising. Never mind the rest of the script and sloppy direction.

Just look at Julio Medem. If Herzog can make a movie like Medem can, then I might re-check his old movies and try to find talent in them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Who actually created this piece of crap this is the worst movie i have ever seen in my life it is such a waste of time and money. I hate it how they create low budget sequels featuring D-Lister actors and a storyline so similar to the 1st one.

I found this movie in the bargain bin sitting right next to Wild Things 2 and Death To The Supermodels for $2.99 what a fool i was to actually think that this could be good instead i watched in disgust as poor acting stereotypes ripped of the storyline and script from the 1st one.

Whoever thought that this straight-to-video production was actually even a half decent film you must be on crackd or something because I think what pretty much most of the people who've seen this film thinks WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I [[could]] not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the plot advances it too stays [[incomprehensible]]. I'm going to [[guess]] and [[say]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got [[sorted]] out. The producers could never separate the many details that the [[novel]], or any [[novel]], has the [[time]] and space to create from the other idea, which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[many]] things happening in a [[proscribed]] feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made [[movie]] that one could enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. I [[wo]] not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the plot advances it too stays [[unimaginable]]. I'm going to [[guessing]] and [[tell]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got [[classified]] out. The producers could never separate the many details that the [[newer]], or any [[newer]], has the [[moment]] and space to create from the other idea, which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[innumerable]] things happening in a [[aban]] feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made [[filmmaking]] that one could enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There are some [[comments]] about this [[film]] that [[say]] that it is a bad and silly one and such an [[excellent]] actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[accepted]] to act in it.

I [[think]], just the opposite, that, [[even]] when the [[film]] is strange and has some [[weaknesses]], the performance of [[Pierre]] Fresnay is so [[formidable]] that it [[converts]] the film in [[something]] excellent.

His performance is probably the [[best]] in [[history]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the [[cabaret]].

[[For]] [[somebody]] who does not [[believe]] that a [[priest]] – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps [[bizarre]]. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the [[death]] of the [[younger]] [[priest]] is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. [[Pierre]] Fresnay turns the [[crazy]] act of [[murder]] in something [[understandable]] within the temporal [[madness]] of his [[character]], the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this [[terrible]] [[way]], comes back to his [[duty]]. There are some [[commentaries]] about this [[cinematography]] that [[tell]] that it is a bad and silly one and such an [[brilliant]] actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[accepting]] to act in it.

I [[thoughts]], just the opposite, that, [[yet]] when the [[cinematography]] is strange and has some [[frailties]], the performance of [[Pedro]] Fresnay is so [[dreaded]] that it [[conversions]] the film in [[anything]] excellent.

His performance is probably the [[better]] in [[story]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the [[nightclub]].

[[During]] [[someone]] who does not [[believing]] that a [[pastor]] – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps [[strange]]. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the [[dying]] of the [[youngest]] [[reverend]] is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. [[Pedro]] Fresnay turns the [[lunatic]] act of [[assassinations]] in something [[comprehensible]] within the temporal [[foolishness]] of his [[characters]], the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this [[horrid]] [[manner]], comes back to his [[obligations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is an extremely difficult film to watch, particularly as it targets the innermost core of all of our lives. But ultimately it is a very beautiful and deeply moving film. Any person who finds it cynical I have to say that they must have greatly missed the point of the film's entire message. For those who actually watch the film, they will see that the way the issues are dealt with is absolutely necessary, and the outcome is ultimately uplifting. Sure, it's very hard to watch, a difficult subject matter and even brutal. Yet it's extremely relevant to society and everybody. It shows the peak of what world cinema is doing at the moment (I will not restrict that term to just France) and everyone should try to see it. I will say that it is best to go in with a clear head without being swayed by conflicting views, and just let the film work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This movie is basically a [[documentary]] of the chronologically [[ordered]] [[series]] of events that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presidential]] [[Palace]], Caracas Venezuela.

The [[pathos]] of the [[movie]] is [[real]] and one [[feels]] the [[pain]], [[sorrow]] and [[joy]] of the people who [[lived]] through this [[failed]] [[coup]] d'etat of [[President]] Hugo Chavez.

One [[comes]] away from [[viewing]] this [[film]] that Hugo Chavez is [[truly]] a great [[historical]] figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly [[brought]] the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[old]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[installed]] government of Venezuela.

It is [[obvious]] from the [[film]] footage that George W Bush [[aided]] and [[abetted]] the [[Venezuelan]] coup d'etat. That the mainstream media [[aided]] and [[abetted]] [[George]] W Bush is not [[surprising]].

What is [[surprising]] is how few people has [[seen]] this [[movie]] and how few people [[realize]] the [[total]] [[corruption]] of America's [[mass]] media.

It has [[taken]] only 20 [[years]] for Ronald Reagan [[elimination]] of the [[Fairness]] [[Doctrine]] in 1986 to [[turn]] [[America]] into blind and rudderless state.

May [[Hugo]] Chavez open patriotic Americans' eyes to the truth and beauty of the [[true]] American [[vision]]. This movie is basically a [[literature]] of the chronologically [[instructed]] [[serial]] of events that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presidency]] [[Mansions]], Caracas Venezuela.

The [[ducks]] of the [[movies]] is [[true]] and one [[believes]] the [[painless]], [[regret]] and [[pleasure]] of the people who [[resided]] through this [[faulted]] [[putsch]] d'etat of [[Chairing]] Hugo Chavez.

One [[happens]] away from [[visualizing]] this [[movie]] that Hugo Chavez is [[really]] a great [[historic]] figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly [[tabled]] the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[antigua]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[fitted]] government of Venezuela.

It is [[visible]] from the [[movie]] footage that George W Bush [[helping]] and [[encouraged]] the [[Venezuela]] coup d'etat. That the mainstream media [[helped]] and [[encouraged]] [[Georges]] W Bush is not [[impressive]].

What is [[unbelievable]] is how few people has [[saw]] this [[cinematography]] and how few people [[realise]] the [[utter]] [[graft]] of America's [[mace]] media.

It has [[picked]] only 20 [[yr]] for Ronald Reagan [[erase]] of the [[Equity]] [[Doctrines]] in 1986 to [[converting]] [[Americans]] into blind and rudderless state.

May [[Ugo]] Chavez open patriotic Americans' eyes to the truth and beauty of the [[genuine]] American [[eyesight]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a nice attempt at [[something]] but it is too [[pretentious]] and boring to [[rise]] above it's low budget trappings. The [[use]] of virtual sets [[almost]] works but at some points it fails [[miserably]]. They [[made]] good [[use]] of the small [[budget]] I guess. I just [[wish]] the story and most of the acting was [[better]]. There are a lot of parts where you see what they were aiming for and it would of been great if they actually [[hit]] those marks but they don't. Confusing and unbelievable story. [[Bad]] DVD transfer too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one sitting. This I had to [[shut]] off. It was too boring. I can do [[slow]] [[movies]]. But just [[make]] them [[appealing]] in some aspect. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[departments]] so it never [[added]] up to an engrossing [[experience]]. [[Maybe]] the [[film]] maker's next attempt will be [[better]]. This was a nice attempt at [[algo]] but it is too [[conceited]] and boring to [[climbing]] above it's low budget trappings. The [[uses]] of virtual sets [[roughly]] works but at some points it fails [[woefully]]. They [[introduced]] good [[employs]] of the small [[budgets]] I guess. I just [[desire]] the story and most of the acting was [[optimum]]. There are a lot of parts where you see what they were aiming for and it would of been great if they actually [[slugged]] those marks but they don't. Confusing and unbelievable story. [[Unfavourable]] DVD transfer too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one sitting. This I had to [[closed]] off. It was too boring. I can do [[decelerate]] [[filmmaking]]. But just [[deliver]] them [[attractive]] in some aspect. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[ministries]] so it never [[addendum]] up to an engrossing [[enjoying]]. [[Probably]] the [[filmmaking]] maker's next attempt will be [[nicer]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Most]] of the French [[films]] I've [[seen]] - and [[enjoyed]] - were more [[talk]] than [[action]], but that's okay. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with [[intriguing]] [[actors]]. ([[However]], I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in [[every]] French [[film]] ever [[made]]! It [[seemed]] that [[way]].)

This [[movie]] has the same interesting [[visuals]] and had a good [[opening]]. But then it [[became]] [[talk]], talk and more [[talk]]....which is fine for a [[drama]] but not for a [[murder]] [[mystery]]. After awhile, I [[almost]] [[fell]] asleep watching this.

Actually, the [[film]] was more [[like]] a [[play]] with almost all the scenes played out in one room. [[Thus]], if you [[love]] plays, you should [[like]] this...but I [[want]] a little more bang for a murder [[story]]. [[Greatest]] of the French [[movies]] I've [[noticed]] - and [[appreciated]] - were more [[conversations]] than [[activities]], but that's okay. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with [[exciting]] [[players]]. ([[Instead]], I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in [[all]] French [[movie]] ever [[introduced]]! It [[sounded]] that [[camino]].)

This [[filmmaking]] has the same interesting [[photos]] and had a good [[introductory]]. But then it [[was]] [[chatter]], talk and more [[chitchat]]....which is fine for a [[dramas]] but not for a [[assassinate]] [[conundrum]]. After awhile, I [[hardly]] [[shrunk]] asleep watching this.

Actually, the [[flick]] was more [[iike]] a [[playing]] with almost all the scenes played out in one room. [[So]], if you [[loves]] plays, you should [[iike]] this...but I [[wanting]] a little more bang for a murder [[conte]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] this [[film]] was almost a [[great]] imaginative [[film]]. A [[mixture]] of shakespeare, [[pop]], [[jazz]], and faerie [[tales]]. This [[movie]] was an [[imaginative]] twist on the Cinderella theme. [[Featuring]] a strong cast, [[headed]] by the [[perfectly]] cast Kathleen Turner, this [[movie]] had everything going for it. Everything but [[production]] [[values]]. I [[almost]] never [[think]] that a [[movie]] [[needs]] [[special]] [[effects]] or [[big]] [[budgets]], but with an over the [[top]] [[production]] like this, it [[came]] off with the same [[seedy]] quality as [[every]] other made for tv [[movie]]. Besides [[better]] cinematography, this film was almost [[perfect]].

this [[cinematography]] was almost a [[awesome]] imaginative [[films]]. A [[mix]] of shakespeare, [[pops]], [[jaz]], and faerie [[narratives]]. This [[film]] was an [[creative]] twist on the Cinderella theme. [[Features]] a strong cast, [[led]] by the [[totally]] cast Kathleen Turner, this [[film]] had everything going for it. Everything but [[productivity]] [[value]]. I [[practically]] never [[reckon]] that a [[cinema]] [[must]] [[peculiar]] [[implications]] or [[major]] [[budget]], but with an over the [[superior]] [[productivity]] like this, it [[arrived]] off with the same [[shabby]] quality as [[any]] other made for tv [[kino]]. Besides [[best]] cinematography, this film was almost [[impeccable]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] [[Just]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this [[film]], I decided to write another review. I missed a few things out [[last]] [[time]]...

First, the [[script]]. Second, the acting. [[Third]], Jesus [[Christ]] what were they [[thinking]] making a [[piece]] of [[garbage]] like this and then [[expecting]] us to [[enjoy]] it when there are no [[redeeming]] [[features]] whatsoever from beginning to end except when [[Joseph]] Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting [[climax]]!!!

I can't believe I wasted my [[money]] on this when I [[could]] have given it to a homeless [[person]] or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? [[Only]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this [[filmmaking]], I decided to write another review. I missed a few things out [[latter]] [[times]]...

First, the [[screenplay]]. Second, the acting. [[Thirds]], Jesus [[God]] what were they [[thoughts]] making a [[slice]] of [[refuse]] like this and then [[expect]] us to [[enjoys]] it when there are no [[redeem]] [[featured]] whatsoever from beginning to end except when [[Youssef]] Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting [[apogee]]!!!

I can't believe I wasted my [[cash]] on this when I [[did]] have given it to a homeless [[anybody]] or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? --------------------------------------------- Result 2085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy job on the [[first]] Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad [[job]] on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[true]] it may have [[improved]] if its series was ever aired but lets be realistic...this movie a [[crock]]! A lot of [[bad]] acting *NOTE The Shower scene* "Kissing Cousins" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had [[effort]], I'll give you that, but it was too [[stupid]]! They even tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T [[FUNNY]]! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one [[look]] [[Absolutely]] [[NOTHING]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them [[look]] different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...[[Okay]], what were you thinking? Could you [[possibly]] choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[fabulous]] [[Sarah]] Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no offense Amy Adams. Oh, yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy job on the [[fiirst]] Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad [[workplace]] on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[veritable]] it may have [[enhanced]] if its series was ever aired but lets be realistic...this movie a [[baloney]]! A lot of [[unfavourable]] acting *NOTE The Shower scene* "Kissing Cousins" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had [[endeavours]], I'll give you that, but it was too [[dumb]]! They even tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T [[DROLL]]! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one [[peek]] [[Abundantly]] [[NOTHIN]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them [[peek]] different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...[[Allright]], what were you thinking? Could you [[conceivably]] choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[sumptuous]] [[Darah]] Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no offense Amy Adams. Oh, yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! --------------------------------------------- Result 2086 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] seems to have a lot of people [[saying]] it is one of the most brutal of all [[time]]. [[After]] having just viewed it, I can [[say]] it does not [[live]] up to those [[claims]].

The [[idea]] of the [[movie]] is indeed demented. But [[overall]], the [[execution]] wasn't at all cringe worthy. Even the [[final]] scene (the eyeball [[thing]]) isn't really that nasty. I was [[expecting]] [[something]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than gore put forth on films like the ultra low [[budget]] [[Violent]] Sh!t.

Any one [[wanting]] to see an [[actual]] [[movie]] will be disappointed, since there is no [[story]] whatsoever (though [[surely]] most people know this). Gore [[fans]] will be disappointed since, contrary to [[belief]], the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress [[playing]] the victim might be one of the worst in [[history]].

[[Regardless]] of what people [[say]], this [[movie]] isn't that [[shocking]], it just [[plain]] all out sucks. [[Avoid]] it. This [[filmmaking]] seems to have a lot of people [[arguing]] it is one of the most brutal of all [[moment]]. [[Upon]] having just viewed it, I can [[said]] it does not [[vivo]] up to those [[claim]].

The [[thinking]] of the [[filmmaking]] is indeed demented. But [[general]], the [[execute]] wasn't at all cringe worthy. Even the [[last]] scene (the eyeball [[stuff]]) isn't really that nasty. I was [[expects]] [[anything]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than gore put forth on films like the ultra low [[budgets]] [[Ferocious]] Sh!t.

Any one [[desire]] to see an [[real]] [[filmmaking]] will be disappointed, since there is no [[stories]] whatsoever (though [[arguably]] most people know this). Gore [[enthusiasts]] will be disappointed since, contrary to [[creed]], the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress [[playback]] the victim might be one of the worst in [[stories]].

[[Whatever]] of what people [[says]], this [[filmmaking]] isn't that [[staggering]], it just [[plains]] all out sucks. [[Shirk]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kurt Russell's chameleon-like performance, coupled with John Carpenter's flawless filmmaking, makes this one, without a doubt, one of the finest boob-tube bios ever aired. It holds up, too: the emotional foundation is strong enough that it'll never age; Carpenter has preserved for posterity the power and ultimate poignancy of the life of the one and only King of Rock and Roll. (I'd been a borderline Elvis fan most of my life, but it wasn't until I saw this mind-blowingly moving movie that I looked BEYOND the image at the man himself. It was quite a revelation.) ELVIS remains one of the top ten made-for-tv movies of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You'll [[notice]] that the [[chemist]], who [[appears]] in two scenes and gets to [[speak]], is [[played]] by Stephen [[King]]. "Don't [[give]] up your day [[job]]" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[fair]]. King acquits himself [[reasonably]] well: he's no [[worse]] than any other [[member]] of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pure]] [[rubbish]]. [[Please]], [[give]] up your day [[job]].

Never have I [[seen]] so [[many]] [[dreadful]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is [[probably]] the worst - [[gathered]] together in the one [[film]]. [[Everyone]] acts hammily, but not in any [[entertaining]] [[way]]; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I [[blame]] [[screenwriter]]/[[director]] [[Tom]] [[Holland]]. It can't be that ALL the [[actors]] are [[REALLY]] this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never [[heard]] of any of them before, but [[still]], I don't think I [[could]] walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many [[bad]] [[performers]] if I [[tried]]: ONE [[actor]], [[despite]] my [[best]] [[efforts]], [[would]] [[turn]] out to have talent. [[So]] what's more [[likely]] - that [[Tom]] Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he [[wrote]] a [[lousy]] [[script]] and then [[directed]] it poorly? That [[would]] [[also]] [[explain]] why [[actors]] are [[bad]] in direct proportion to their prominence in the [[script]]. The more [[direction]] an [[actor]] [[got]], the [[worse]] he [[performed]]. ("You [[want]] me to [[bend]] over like a hunchback, [[talk]] from the back of my [[throat]], [[show]] all my teeth, and look [[bored]], all at the same time? [[Okay]]...")

This [[theory]] is [[confirmed]] by the fact that [[Holland]] undeniably managed to co-write a [[lousy]] [[script]]. [[Several]] [[writers]] here have commented on the fact that [[Billy]] Halleck is not a [[likeable]] [[character]], but that's a [[misleading]] [[way]] of putting it. He's not a knowable [[character]]. All we [[find]] out about him before the [[supernatural]] stuff [[starts]] happening is that he's [[fat]], and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is [[food]]," he [[tells]] us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

[[In]] the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end [[psychology]]. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much [[sense]], and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." You'll [[notices]] that the [[pharmacists]], who [[transpires]] in two scenes and gets to [[speaks]], is [[effected]] by Stephen [[Emperor]]. "Don't [[confer]] up your day [[jobs]]" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[impartiality]]. King acquits himself [[sensibly]] well: he's no [[worst]] than any other [[members]] of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pur]] [[trash]]. [[Invites]], [[confer]] up your day [[jobs]].

Never have I [[noticed]] so [[countless]] [[scary]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is [[arguably]] the worst - [[collect]] together in the one [[cinema]]. [[Everybody]] acts hammily, but not in any [[fun]] [[manner]]; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I [[guilt]] [[writer]]/[[headmaster]] [[Thom]] [[Antilles]]. It can't be that ALL the [[actresses]] are [[TRULY]] this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never [[audition]] of any of them before, but [[nevertheless]], I don't think I [[did]] walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many [[negative]] [[artists]] if I [[attempts]]: ONE [[protagonist]], [[albeit]] my [[better]] [[endeavours]], [[should]] [[transforming]] out to have talent. [[Accordingly]] what's more [[apt]] - that [[Tum]] Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he [[authored]] a [[rotten]] [[hyphen]] and then [[aimed]] it poorly? That [[could]] [[additionally]] [[clarifying]] why [[actresses]] are [[unfavourable]] in direct proportion to their prominence in the [[screenplay]]. The more [[directions]] an [[protagonist]] [[gets]], the [[pire]] he [[achieved]]. ("You [[wanting]] me to [[bent]] over like a hunchback, [[speaks]] from the back of my [[larynx]], [[exhibit]] all my teeth, and look [[drilled]], all at the same time? [[Alright]]...")

This [[doctrine]] is [[affirmed]] by the fact that [[Dutch]] undeniably managed to co-write a [[rotten]] [[hyphen]]. [[Numerous]] [[screenwriters]] here have commented on the fact that [[Pele]] Halleck is not a [[congenial]] [[characteristics]], but that's a [[specious]] [[ways]] of putting it. He's not a knowable [[trait]]. All we [[found]] out about him before the [[uncanny]] stuff [[starting]] happening is that he's [[greasy]], and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is [[foods]]," he [[told]] us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

[[Across]] the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end [[psyche]]. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much [[feeling]], and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." --------------------------------------------- Result 2089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The [[kids]] grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[outstanding]] performances. Yes, I shed a tear along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A [[must]] see for those who care about their families. Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The [[youths]] grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[wondrous]] performances. Yes, I shed a tear along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A [[ought]] see for those who care about their families. --------------------------------------------- Result 2090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really, it's nothing much. I only recommend watching it if; 1.) You're a big fan of any of the main stars. 2.) If you really want to check out the first time Lucille Ball was seen with red hair.

4 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Ballad of Django is a meandering mess of a movie! This spaghetti western is simply a collection of scenes from other (and much better!) films supposedly tied together by "Django" telling how he brought in different outlaws. Hunt Powers (John Cameron) brings nothing to the role of Django. Skip this one unless you just HAVE to have every Django movie made and even THAT may not be a good enough excuse to see this one!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and [[final]] [[movie]] in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "[[Lone]] Wolf and Cub), directed [[saga]] of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one [[battling]] ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering [[shady]] [[goings]] on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting [[stale]] and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any longer. [[Fortunately]], this one was [[better]] then the second thanks to having more [[humor]]. I'm just [[glad]] that they choose to stop at the one [[trilogy]] (I'm [[looking]] at [[YOU]] Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD [[Extras]]: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

[[Eye]] Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her [[left]] one Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and [[latter]] [[cinematography]] in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "[[Unaccompanied]] Wolf and Cub), directed [[historian]] of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one [[gunfight]] ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering [[dodgy]] [[separations]] on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting [[rancid]] and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any longer. [[Blithely]], this one was [[nicer]] then the second thanks to having more [[comedy]]. I'm just [[gratified]] that they choose to stop at the one [[triad]] (I'm [[searching]] at [[VOUS]] Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD [[Supplemental]]: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

[[Eyes]] Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her [[exited]] one --------------------------------------------- Result 2093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast [[list]], but after I [[watched]] it I must admit that I [[felt]] a bit disappointed. The [[main]] problem of this movie is that actors aren't [[capable]] of holding this [[movie]] on their back. Why? Because of [[bad]] [[script]]. [[Although]] Dillon, [[Lane]] and Jones try very hard to take this movie on another level, there is no [[innovative]] storytelling and the direction is too [[ordinary]]. So for Matt [[Dillon]] [[fans]] this is watchable movie, just like for [[admirers]] of [[beautiful]] Diane [[Lane]]. [[Legendary]] Tommy Lee Jones is [[always]] great but this is not [[movie]] for him; far below his [[level]]. [[So]] if you [[get]] [[hooked]] up by this great cast watch it but don't expect [[anything]] big or [[extraordinary]]. The only thing that you'll [[remember]] about this [[flick]] is Diane [[Lane]] scenes; [[rest]] of it is very forgettable. I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast [[lists]], but after I [[seen]] it I must admit that I [[believed]] a bit disappointed. The [[primary]] problem of this movie is that actors aren't [[able]] of holding this [[cinematographic]] on their back. Why? Because of [[negative]] [[scripts]]. [[Despite]] Dillon, [[Alleyways]] and Jones try very hard to take this movie on another level, there is no [[revolutionary]] storytelling and the direction is too [[normal]]. So for Matt [[Dylan]] [[blowers]] this is watchable movie, just like for [[fans]] of [[sumptuous]] Diane [[Alleyways]]. [[Fabled]] Tommy Lee Jones is [[repeatedly]] great but this is not [[movies]] for him; far below his [[tier]]. [[Therefore]] if you [[gets]] [[hook]] up by this great cast watch it but don't expect [[something]] big or [[tremendous]]. The only thing that you'll [[remind]] about this [[gesture]] is Diane [[Lanes]] scenes; [[stays]] of it is very forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2094 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A [[missed]] train. A [[wrong]] phone number. An [[extra]] cup of [[coffee]]. What happens to those around you when you make a [[seemingly]] [[innocuous]] decision? Most people don't give it a thought as they absorbed in their own [[thoughts]] and [[actions]].

"Happenstance" [[tells]] the [[story]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[mundane]] as it pertains to a [[group]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[components]] of what passes for contemporary [[theater]], with the full cast of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an [[illegal]] immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on [[camera]] as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal [[girl]] who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the [[beginning]] of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction [[come]] [[true]]? The concept is good, but the [[storytelling]] is [[flimsy]]. The connections from one [[event]] to the next are [[weak]]. There's better storytelling in 15 [[seconds]] of the [[Liberty]] [[Mutual]] [[insurance]] [[commercial]] where one [[person]] sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can [[sacrifice]] the time for this film, but you'll [[finish]] it [[dissatisfied]] and [[wondering]] what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and [[director]]. A [[flunked]] train. A [[erroneous]] phone number. An [[supplemental]] cup of [[coffeehouse]]. What happens to those around you when you make a [[reportedly]] [[inoffensive]] decision? Most people don't give it a thought as they absorbed in their own [[reflections]] and [[steps]].

"Happenstance" [[says]] the [[histories]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[trite]] as it pertains to a [[cluster]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[elements]] of what passes for contemporary [[drama]], with the full cast of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an [[undocumented]] immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on [[cameras]] as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal [[women]] who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the [[initiation]] of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction [[coming]] [[real]]? The concept is good, but the [[tale]] is [[frail]]. The connections from one [[happenings]] to the next are [[feeble]]. There's better storytelling in 15 [[second]] of the [[Libertad]] [[Reciprocal]] [[seguro]] [[mercantile]] where one [[persona]] sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can [[cull]] the time for this film, but you'll [[finalize]] it [[discontented]] and [[requests]] what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and [[headmaster]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2095 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just watched I. Q. again tonight and had forgotten how much I love this movie. It is wonderfully entertaining and leaves you feeling that all is right with the world. I love the allusions to Mozart all throughout from the opening with "Einstein" playing "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" on the violin to him humming Eine Kleine Nachtmusik during the IQ testing of the Ed Walters. I love that a woman is portrayed as intelligent and encouraged to have a career, an especially unique situation for the 1950's, the time in which this movie is set. (I myself have been a teacher but stayed at home to raise my children, so please don't think I am some staunch women's libber.) It's wonderful how a man who is "only a grease monkey" is finally seen to be just as important and worthy as Catherine's fiance, a clinical behavioral researcher. The message to me is that we are not what we do, but who we are is defined by so much more - no labels. There are so many little gags and one-liners that are almost throwaways if you don't watch and listen carefully.

I did catch a few things in the movie that are not listed on the goofs page. In the scene when Ed Walters is to speak at symposium, there are 3 instruments (protractor, ruler, etc.) hanging on the right from the chalk ledge. In the next camera shot, there only 2. In the credits on our video, it lists Tony Shaloub's character as Bob Watters, not Bob Rosetti as he introduces himself in the movie and is listed here on Imdb.

I highly recommend this movie. It may be a piece of fluff in some estimations, but has lots more substance than many give it credit for. Not only that, what a great cast is assembled here. Watch it and enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the other comments on the film, but judging from the average rating I can see that they are unlikely to be very complementary.

I watched it for the second time with my children. They absolutely loved it. True, it did not have the adults rolling around the floor, but the sound of the children's enjoyment made it seem so.

It is a true Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of moral content - how sad it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our friends and associates. There are many other films on a similar subject matter, no doubt, many of which will have a greater comic or emotional impact on adults. It's hard for me to imagine such an impact on the junior members of the family, however.

Hence, for the children, a 9/10 from me. --------------------------------------------- Result 2097 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shallow, shallow script ...stilted acting ...the shadows of boom mikes lingering over the actors' heads in scenes ...worth watching because Kate Mulgrew plays the most selfish mother in TV movie history and it's all before Ben Affleck got his teeth capped. --------------------------------------------- Result 2098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Well, sorry for the [[mistake]] on the one line [[summary]].......Run people, [[run]]!! This [[movie]] is an [[horror]]!! [[Imagine]]! [[Gary]] Busey in another low budget [[movie]], with an [[incredibly]] [[bad]] scenario...isn't that a [[nightmare]]? [[No]] (well [[yes]]), it is Plato's [[run]]...........I give it * out of *****. Well, sorry for the [[error]] on the one line [[abstract]].......Run people, [[running]]!! This [[filmmaking]] is an [[terror]]!! [[Reckon]]! [[Garry]] Busey in another low budget [[movies]], with an [[surprisingly]] [[rotten]] scenario...isn't that a [[cabos]]? [[Nos]] (well [[yep]]), it is Plato's [[execute]]...........I give it * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One Stinko of a movie featuring a shopworn plot and, to be kind, acting of less than Oscar caliber. But to me the single worst flaw was the total misrepresentation of a jet aircraft, and especially a 747. Some of the major blunders:

1. No Flight Engineer (or even a flight engineer station. 2. Mis-identifying the F-16 interceptors as F-15's (no resmblance whatsoever). 3. Loading passengers into an "aft baggage compartment" supposedly accesible from the cabin - Even if such a compartment existed, placing that much weight that far aft would make the aircraft unflyable. 4. Hollow point bullets that "won't damage the aircraft". 5. The entire landing procedure was so bad I wanted to puke. 6. An SR-71 (of all planes) with a pressure seal hatch 7. Opening a cabin door outward - into the wind - in flight!!

Ah nuts, it was just a truly lousy movie. Gotta make the list of bottom 10 of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 2100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Realistic movie,sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be [[scared]]. When Billy Zane [[tries]] to [[kill]] someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this [[movie]]. Tom Berenger is again [[playing]] a soldier. No good thrill, [[realistic]] [[sequences]]. Not [[always]] [[shooting]], that is one [[great]] thing. Well filmed. I [[hate]] the [[helicopter]] sequence, [[cause]] only one terrorist [[kills]] [[almost]] the [[whole]] [[marine]] bunch...I [[give]] it **and a half out of ***** Realistic movie,sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be [[spooked]]. When Billy Zane [[endeavours]] to [[murder]] someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this [[filmmaking]]. Tom Berenger is again [[gaming]] a soldier. No good thrill, [[practical]] [[sequence]]. Not [[constantly]] [[gunfire]], that is one [[super]] thing. Well filmed. I [[hating]] the [[choppers]] sequence, [[reason]] only one terrorist [[murdered]] [[practically]] the [[ensemble]] [[sailor]] bunch...I [[confer]] it **and a half out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 2101 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this at an arty cinema that was also showing "Last Days" and some Charlie Chaplin films. Based on the quality of the other features, I decided to give "Immortel" a chance. I nearly walked out of this movie, and I LIKE science-fiction! The story is set in a futuristic New York city, filled with Blade Runner-style sky advertisements and some similar debates about cloning/synthetic humans. Unfortunately, the screenplay was not condensed enough for an hour-and-forty-five-minute movie. Three groups exist in this world: humans, artificial humans, and Egyptian gods. The artificial humans seem to have the upper hand and control the politics of the city. The humans are slaves and are used for eugenics and organ donation. The Egyptian gods have a floating pyramid (modeled on the Great Pyramid of Khufu, and complete with a deteriorated exterior, leaving a smooth "cap" on the pyramid. Wouldn't a floating futuristic pyramid be in perfect condition?). The pyramid rests above the city and nobody on the ground understands what it is or why it's there. I won't bore you with the so-called plot, but there is lots of unnecessary gore and many gross-out scenes. The film, as I said, looks to have been influenced by Blade Runner, and perhaps also by The Fifth Element and The Matrix. At the end of the film credits were listed thank-yous to the United Kingdom, France, and Italy. The film is FRENCH, but uses British actors who don't speak French. Hence, it is obvious that their French dialog has been dubbed. This is a distraction, and I also thought that switching back and forth between real humans and animations quite distracting. It doesn't help that the animations are poor--no better than a video game. Skip this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2102 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] This is a depressingly [[shallow]], naive and [[mostly]] unfunny look at a [[wildly]] improbable [[relationship]] between Brooks' psychotic [[film]] [[editor]] and [[Harold]], his vapid girlfriend. The two have [[ZERO]] [[chemistry]] [[together]] - [[primarily]] because Harold is [[incapable]] of doing [[anything]] besides looking pretty at this stage of her [[career]]; but also because Brooks' [[character]] is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where [[Brooks]], having just [[broke]] up with [[Harold]], stumbles about his [[apartment]] in a [[depressed]], drugged out state - [[unbearable]].

Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's "You Are [[So]] [[Beautiful]]", there [[simply]] is not [[enough]] [[material]] here for a [[feature]] [[film]]. There is [[hardly]] [[anything]] [[going]] on on the [[periphery]] of their [[relationship]] to give the [[appearance]] that these people [[exist]] in a [[real]] [[world]]. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to [[shine]] a white hot [[spotlight]] on the [[affair]] and, in a [[way]], deconstruct it; but if you're [[going]] to do that the writing and acting [[needs]] to be far far [[better]] than what it is here. This is a depressingly [[superficial]], naive and [[predominantly]] unfunny look at a [[deliriously]] improbable [[nexus]] between Brooks' psychotic [[flick]] [[editorial]] and [[Hiccup]], his vapid girlfriend. The two have [[ZILCH]] [[chemicals]] [[jointly]] - [[basically]] because Harold is [[unable]] of doing [[nothing]] besides looking pretty at this stage of her [[carrera]]; but also because Brooks' [[trait]] is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where [[Brook]], having just [[shattered]] up with [[Hiccup]], stumbles about his [[townhouse]] in a [[depressive]], drugged out state - [[untenable]].

Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's "You Are [[Therefore]] [[Sumptuous]]", there [[exclusively]] is not [[suffice]] [[materials]] here for a [[characteristics]] [[flick]]. There is [[almost]] [[nothing]] [[go]] on on the [[fringe]] of their [[relationships]] to give the [[apparition]] that these people [[existent]] in a [[veritable]] [[worldwide]]. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to [[glossy]] a white hot [[focuses]] on the [[fling]] and, in a [[camino]], deconstruct it; but if you're [[go]] to do that the writing and acting [[gotta]] to be far far [[optimum]] than what it is here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Just when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a [[single]] movie a "[[Bomb]]" rating, a friend [[brought]] this notorious [[turd]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its [[reputation]], and it was as God-awful as I'd [[anticipated]]. This is a Mexican-made [[mess]], [[dubbed]] into English, and [[produced]] by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[terrible]] sets and [[effects]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't [[operate]] at the [[North]] [[Pole]], but [[instead]] from a [[cloud]] in outer [[space]], and who doesn't have little elves helping him make his [[toys]] but [[rather]] all different [[groups]] of [[children]] from [[practically]] every [[country]] there is. The opening [[sequence]], where St. [[Nick]] chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing [[terrible]] holiday [[songs]] in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no [[story]]. [[Obviously]], THIS Santa Claus doesn't [[observe]] the [[child]] labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the [[devil]] himself traveling from [[hell]] to [[Earth]], just to make [[little]] [[kids]] naughty and [[turn]] Santa's [[Christmas]] Eve [[rounds]] into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's [[bound]] to [[frighten]] [[little]] [[children]] and [[turn]] them off Santa [[Claus]] and the [[holidays]] forever. [[Oddly]], the [[name]] of [[Jesus]] [[Christ]] is mentioned [[often]] in this Christmas [[film]], which somehow makes it all the creepier in the [[context]] of all the [[bizarre]] [[things]] that are [[going]] on. This easily makes my personal [[list]] of the "[[Worst]] [[Movie]] I've Ever [[Seen]]", but I'm sure that's [[nothing]] unique. Just when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a [[alone]] movie a "[[Explodes]]" rating, a friend [[made]] this notorious [[poo]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its [[notoriety]], and it was as God-awful as I'd [[waited]]. This is a Mexican-made [[chaos]], [[nicknamed]] into English, and [[generated]] by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[scary]] sets and [[impact]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't [[operated]] at the [[Norte]] [[Poles]], but [[however]] from a [[clouds]] in outer [[spacing]], and who doesn't have little elves helping him make his [[toy]] but [[quite]] all different [[grouped]] of [[childhood]] from [[virtually]] every [[nationals]] there is. The opening [[sequences]], where St. [[Nicky]] chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing [[scary]] holiday [[ballads]] in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no [[tales]]. [[Apparently]], THIS Santa Claus doesn't [[observes]] the [[kids]] labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the [[diablo]] himself traveling from [[brothel]] to [[Lands]], just to make [[petite]] [[youths]] naughty and [[turning]] Santa's [[Claus]] Eve [[cycles]] into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's [[link]] to [[spook]] [[petit]] [[childhood]] and [[transforming]] them off Santa [[Eaton]] and the [[vacation]] forever. [[Surprisingly]], the [[names]] of [[Christ]] [[Goodness]] is mentioned [[frequently]] in this Christmas [[filmmaking]], which somehow makes it all the creepier in the [[backgrounds]] of all the [[surreal]] [[aspects]] that are [[go]] on. This easily makes my personal [[listing]] of the "[[Pire]] [[Filmmaking]] I've Ever [[Watched]]", but I'm sure that's [[none]] unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 2104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to be the best movie I've ever seen.

Combine breathtaking cinematography with stunning acting and a gripping plot, and you have a masterpiece.

Dog Bite Dog had me gripping the edge of my seat during some scenes, recoiling in horror during others, and left me drowning in my own tears after the tragic ending.

The film left a deep impression on me. It's shockingly violent scenes contrasted sharply with the poignant and tender 'love' scenes. The film is undeserving of it's Cat III (nudity) rating; there are no nude scenes whatsoever, and the 'love' scenes do not even involve kissing or 'making out'.

The message which this film presented to me? All human beings, no matter how violent or cruel they may seem, have a tender side. Edison Chen does a superb job playing the part of the murderous Pang.

I rate this film 10/10. It's a must-watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is a well known fact that when Gene Roddenberry first pitched Star Trek to NBC, the original pilot episode, The Cage, was rejected for being "too cerebral". When the series was given another chance, Roddenberry thought it would be fun to establish the events of the rejected episode as canon, and did so by writing The Menagerie, which has the unique distinction of being the sequel to what was still, at the time, an unaired episode.

This time, rather than exploring a new planet, Kirk and his crew are on Starbase 11, paying a visit to the former commander of the Enterprise, Christopher Pike (Sean Kenney), now horribly disfigured and paralyzed because of an accident. Pike joins his successor on the starship, where an unpleasant surprise awaits: Spock, who used to serve under Pike, has effectively hijacked the vessel and set the course for Talos IV, a planet which is off-limits (the punishment is death) since Pike and Spock's last visit there, 13 years earlier. Naturally, being a logical creature, Spock turns himself in and arranges a court-martial so that he can justify his actions.

There's no need to say more about the plot, since the rest will play out in Part 2. What really impresses is how Roddenberry creates the connection between The Cage and the rest of the Star Trek universe, by coming up with a particular type of flashback (to say more would be too much) that allows everyone, on screen and off, to see what could have been of Trek, had NBC not turned down the original project. In particular, it's fun to see Jeffrey Hunter (who was unable to return in The Menagerie) play Pike as a more serious captain than Kirk usually is and Nimoy's early days as Spock, whose personality hadn't been fully established yet: this is the only time in the entire series that everybody's favorite Vulcan spontaneously grins.

In short, not just a great "mystery" episode, but also a treat for those who can't be bothered to track down The Cage in its original form (it's available as part of the Season 3 box set). --------------------------------------------- Result 2106 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] OK, the movie is good but I [[give]] it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy [[tale]]. This [[kind]] of [[crap]] just [[adds]] to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and [[dozens]] of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An [[organic]] virus is much more [[complex]], even [[though]] it's way tinier. Though, it's [[considered]] one of the simplest forms in the universe, [[organic]] virus's attach burrow into your [[cells]] and attach themselves to the [[RNA]], then [[change]] your own [[RNA]] [[code]]. [[Explain]] to me how something like that could be [[processed]] from a [[monitor]]? [[Maybe]] the [[radiation]] has some [[effect]] on the user's cornea that [[turns]] your eyeballs into these [[viruses]]? I [[could]] [[see]] that, but [[obviously]], the [[writer]] didn't think of that. OK, the movie is good but I [[confer]] it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy [[history]]. This [[sort]] of [[damnit]] just [[summing]] to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and [[tens]] of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An [[biologic]] virus is much more [[tortuous]], even [[albeit]] it's way tinier. Though, it's [[regarded]] one of the simplest forms in the universe, [[biological]] virus's attach burrow into your [[cell]] and attach themselves to the [[ARN]], then [[shift]] your own [[ARN]] [[codes]]. [[Explains]] to me how something like that could be [[handled]] from a [[oversight]]? [[Potentially]] the [[radiating]] has some [[impacts]] on the user's cornea that [[revolves]] your eyeballs into these [[antivirus]]? I [[did]] [[seeing]] that, but [[apparently]], the [[screenwriter]] didn't think of that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2107 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I saw this [[film]] on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[drama]]. But, one might hope that at [[least]] the critical "facts" that the [[story]] turns on might be based on [[actual]] events. Reagan was shot and the other characters were real people. The movie got that [[right]]. From there on, reliance on facts [[rapidly]] decays. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TV]] reporter at the time of these events, I was stunned that I had never [[heard]] anything about the [[bizarre]] behavior of Secretary Haig as portrayed by [[Richard]] Dreyfuss. The whole nation had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is bullying a cowered cabinet and totally out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began researching the subject on the Internet and quickly found actual audio tapes and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Room]] conversations that this [[film]] pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "[[facts]]" of the film [[meant]] to show a White [[House]], [[Secret]] Service etc. in total [[chaos]] -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and driving the world near the brink of nuclear war -- are demonstrably incorrect. They didn't happen! There is [[internal]] [[conflict]], to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press [[room]] performance is historically [[regrettable]] and he is "[[difficult]]". But there is nothing approaching the scenes [[depicted]] in the film. There are too many gross errors to [[list]], but any fair comparison of the [[recorded]] and [[written]] [[record]] and the fantasy of this film begs the [[question]] as to what the [[producers]] were [[really]] [[trying]] to accomplish. Enlighten? [[Inform]]? [[Entertain]]? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is [[difficult]] to ascribe [[motives]] to others, but one [[must]] [[seriously]] question what was behind such [[shameless]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "[[Reel]] to [[Real]]" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the [[issues]] that were the central [[focus]] of the [[film]] -- [[namely]] the [[events]] [[within]] the [[Administration]] on the day of the [[shooting]]. So, the viewer was [[left]] to [[research]] those without much -- if any -- [[help]] from the network. I saw this [[filmmaking]] on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[tragedy]]. But, one might hope that at [[lowest]] the critical "facts" that the [[tales]] turns on might be based on [[real]] events. Reagan was shot and the other characters were real people. The movie got that [[rights]]. From there on, reliance on facts [[faster]] decays. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TELEVISION]] reporter at the time of these events, I was stunned that I had never [[audition]] anything about the [[strange]] behavior of Secretary Haig as portrayed by [[Ritchie]] Dreyfuss. The whole nation had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is bullying a cowered cabinet and totally out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began researching the subject on the Internet and quickly found actual audio tapes and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Rooms]] conversations that this [[movie]] pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "[[truths]]" of the film [[intended]] to show a White [[Housing]], [[Concealed]] Service etc. in total [[confusion]] -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and driving the world near the brink of nuclear war -- are demonstrably incorrect. They didn't happen! There is [[indoor]] [[conflicts]], to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press [[bedroom]] performance is historically [[regretful]] and he is "[[problematic]]". But there is nothing approaching the scenes [[illustrated]] in the film. There are too many gross errors to [[listed]], but any fair comparison of the [[registered]] and [[authored]] [[registering]] and the fantasy of this film begs the [[issue]] as to what the [[manufacturers]] were [[truly]] [[try]] to accomplish. Enlighten? [[Informed]]? [[Entertaining]]? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is [[complex]] to ascribe [[grounds]] to others, but one [[needs]] [[profoundly]] question what was behind such [[brazen]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "[[Coil]] to [[Veritable]]" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the [[issue]] that were the central [[emphasis]] of the [[filmmaking]] -- [[notably]] the [[phenomena]] [[inside]] the [[Management]] on the day of the [[shootings]]. So, the viewer was [[exited]] to [[researches]] those without much -- if any -- [[aids]] from the network. --------------------------------------------- Result 2108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have a 5 minute rule (sometimes I'll leave leway for 10). If a movie is not good in the first 5 or 10 minutes it's probably not going to ever get better. I have yet to experience any movie that has proved to contest this theory. Dan in Real Life is definitely no exception. I was watching this turkey and thought; wow, this is not funny, not touching, not sad, and I don't like any of the characters at all.

The story of an advice columnist/widower raising three young daughters, who falls in love with his brothers girlfriend. I suppose the tagline would be "advice columnist who could USE advice"? I don't know. Dans character in no way struck me as someone qualified to give advice. I guess THAT'S the irony? I don't know. He goes to see his parents, brothers, sisters and their kids at some sort of anual family retreat, which seems very sweet, and potential fodder for good comedy, story lines...none which ever emerge. The central story is basically how he loves this woman, but can't have her. Anyone with a pulse will realise that eventually he WILL get her, but you have to suffer through painfully unfunny, trite, lifetime movie network dialogue "murderer of love" to get to the inevitable happy ending.

This is truly one of the worst movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is absolutely nothing to redeem this movie. They took a sleazy story, miscast it, miswrote it, misfilmed it. It has bad dialogue badly performed in a meandering and trashy story.

As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?

Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.

I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with "Sailor Who Fell from Grace" and "Manos" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.

I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way. --------------------------------------------- Result 2110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hate to even waste the time it takes to write 10 lines on this atrocity. Hyung-Rae Shim is lucky that bad film-making isn't a capital crime or he'd be put to death twice for writing and directing this disaster. I'm amazed that this film had a $75m budget, but actually glad in the sense that it was such a tremendous flop, that Shim will hopefully, never get to make another movie the rest of the life and, therefore, not waste any more of filmgoers time. I would think the actors would have gotten together and lynched him by now.

With the effects resources available to them, a great film could have been made with this budget. As usual, the failure should have been spotted at the very beginning with the terrible script and story. "Transformers" was another visual feast with a weak script, but this makes it look like "Citizen Kane". --------------------------------------------- Result 2111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was looking for a cute, simple comedy to pass the time but choosing this film proved to be an enormous mistake.

I can't write a single good thing about it. First, the script is stupid and not funny at all, relying on tired, recycled jokes and a farting turtle for laughs. In my book, that's not funny, that's pathetic.

Low budget 'effects' (if I can even call them effects) with horrible cinematography. In many places it feels almost like an indie film shot with no money.

Acting... I feel sorry for the actors. Are Pamela Anderson and Denise Richards that desperate for some money that they've agreed to take part in this? (looking at their recent filmography, it would appear so.) Despite the outfits, Pamela is showing her age and as a whole, they don't even come across as sexy, let alone funny.

This movie is not even in the so-bad-it-is-funny category. It's just bad, as if everybody involved was sick of it.

Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is not a good [[movie]] but I [[still]] like it. The [[cat]] Clovis is gold in a [[jar]] as well as the [[premise]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically [[opposed]] to the [[evil]] Sleepwalkers. I [[think]] there is more to this [[movie]] than people [[realize]], [[basically]] it is very [[harsh]], but this brusqueness can sometimes be good. It's [[got]] the [[corny]] lines, the [[abrupt]] [[ending]] and a [[comedic]] [[element]] [[conveyed]] by the bumbling [[policemen]].

Did [[anyone]] [[find]] the incestuous [[element]] a bit [[disturbing]]? Ultimately this [[movie]] is [[casually]] and randomly acrimonious, which is [[quite]] [[effective]], I liken it to [[Psycho]] - the [[relationship]] between the [[mother]] and son, the [[changing]] of [[protagonists]]. I [[think]] the abruptness [[works]] [[also]], this is not a movie that you [[want]] them to [[lengthen]], it only [[works]] if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the [[director]] [[lacked]] depth, or whether he did these things with [[purpose]], we [[know]] [[Stephen]] [[King]] has [[ability]], yet I haven't even read his [[books]], only [[seen]] some of his [[movies]].

[[Anyway]], I [[liked]] it. If you [[like]] harsh [[corny]] [[movies]] with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It [[really]] is so [[bad]] its good. This is not a good [[flick]] but I [[yet]] like it. The [[ctu]] Clovis is gold in a [[urn]] as well as the [[supposition]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically [[oppose]] to the [[satanic]] Sleepwalkers. I [[believing]] there is more to this [[cinema]] than people [[achieving]], [[broadly]] it is very [[hard]], but this brusqueness can sometimes be good. It's [[ai]] the [[trite]] lines, the [[steep]] [[terminated]] and a [[slapstick]] [[components]] [[transmitted]] by the bumbling [[police]].

Did [[someone]] [[unearthed]] the incestuous [[ingredients]] a bit [[alarming]]? Ultimately this [[flick]] is [[randomly]] and randomly acrimonious, which is [[rather]] [[efficiency]], I liken it to [[Psychotic]] - the [[relations]] between the [[mothers]] and son, the [[alter]] of [[actors]]. I [[reckon]] the abruptness [[collaborated]] [[furthermore]], this is not a movie that you [[wanna]] them to [[prolong]], it only [[worked]] if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the [[superintendent]] [[lacking]] depth, or whether he did these things with [[intent]], we [[savoir]] [[Stephan]] [[Emperor]] has [[capacity]], yet I haven't even read his [[ledgers]], only [[watched]] some of his [[film]].

[[Writ]], I [[enjoyed]] it. If you [[loves]] harsh [[mundane]] [[cinema]] with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It [[truthfully]] is so [[amiss]] its good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2113 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I must [[warn]] you, there are some [[spoilers]] in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish Judges" on [[February]] I think. It was mention it was the last copy, but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But [[either]] [[way]], I have it. I [[thought]] it was good. I wanted to see this mainly because of the great [[actor]], Matthew Lillard (I'm surprised no one on the [[reviews]] mention the scar) although it is [[kind]] of low budget, getting enough money to make this film would be worth spending. Man, what a good actor.

The story it about a con artist known as Jack ([[Matthew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Judges]]. If you don't know what Spanish Judges are or haven't seen the [[trailer]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He [[needs]] [[protection]], so he [[hires]] a [[couple]] who are [[also]] crooks, Max and Jamie ([[Vincent]] D'Onofrio and [[Valeria]] Golino) as well as a [[crook]] that goes by the [[name]] of [[Piece]] ([[Mark]] [[Boone]] Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even [[tell]] [[anyone]] her [[name]] because she's from Mars, as she [[said]]. [[So]] they ([[mainly]] [[Jack]]) [[call]] her "Mars [[Girl]]". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one [[big]] [[game]]. A [[game]] that involves some [[lust]], [[lies]] and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and [[Valeria]], as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've [[done]] better and the [[score]] could've been a [[little]] better as well. Some of the [[score]] was actually good. The [[theme]] they [[used]] for the [[beginning]] and the end (before the [[credits]]) was a good song [[choice]], that's my [[opinion]]. The fight scene in the [[end]] could've been a [[little]] longer and a [[little]] more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a [[review]], but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: [[Valeria]] Golino is not a newcomer. [[According]] to this site, she has been acting [[since]] 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" [[movies]]. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 I must [[alert]] you, there are some [[saboteurs]] in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish Judges" on [[Feb]] I think. It was mention it was the last copy, but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But [[neither]] [[manner]], I have it. I [[brainchild]] it was good. I wanted to see this mainly because of the great [[actress]], Matthew Lillard (I'm surprised no one on the [[inspecting]] mention the scar) although it is [[types]] of low budget, getting enough money to make this film would be worth spending. Man, what a good actor.

The story it about a con artist known as Jack ([[Mathew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Judiciary]]. If you don't know what Spanish Judges are or haven't seen the [[caravan]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He [[should]] [[protections]], so he [[recruiting]] a [[matches]] who are [[moreover]] crooks, Max and Jamie ([[Tome]] D'Onofrio and [[Naomi]] Golino) as well as a [[bandit]] that goes by the [[names]] of [[Slice]] ([[Dialed]] [[Boon]] Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even [[told]] [[someone]] her [[naming]] because she's from Mars, as she [[indicated]]. [[Accordingly]] they ([[fundamentally]] [[Jacques]]) [[calling]] her "Mars [[Woman]]". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one [[overwhelming]] [[jeu]]. A [[games]] that involves some [[thirsty]], [[lying]] and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and [[Felicity]], as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've [[accomplished]] better and the [[scoring]] could've been a [[tiny]] better as well. Some of the [[notation]] was actually good. The [[subject]] they [[use]] for the [[start]] and the end (before the [[credit]]) was a good song [[picks]], that's my [[view]]. The fight scene in the [[ends]] could've been a [[scant]] longer and a [[small]] more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a [[revisions]], but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: [[Dominguez]] Golino is not a newcomer. [[Conforming]] to this site, she has been acting [[because]] 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" [[cinema]]. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I have [[NOT]] [[seen]] this movie, but I [[must]]. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's [[books]] (Kon Tiki, Ra and [[Aku]] [[Aku]]) I am [[actively]] looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians [[migrated]] to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[voyage]] was [[heroic]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. I have [[NOPE]] [[watched]] this movie, but I [[gotta]]. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's [[book]] (Kon Tiki, Ra and [[Kau]] [[Kau]]) I am [[forcefully]] looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians [[migrating]] to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[travelling]] was [[gutsy]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2115 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a FUNNY film. It has all the usual Disney components (music, great range of characters, story, appeal), entwined with superb animation and the excellent voice talents of less well known actors as those in say "Antz" and "Price of Egypt".

The characters work really well, and have a strong appeal, and the humour is aimed at a wide level which overcomes generational barriers. The movie is also presented in superb cinemascope format, which adds to the cinema experience.

Call me crazy, but I have seen the film three times, and I intend on taking more friends to see it this weekend. Many skeptics have seen this film on my recommendation and not been disappointed. I work in a multiplex, and I can honestly say that no-one has ever walked out of this movie without a sense of satisfaction.

See it, and don't be put off because it is animated. You are sure to enjoy this movie, and make sure you stay for the end credits! The bloopers and out-takes at the end are the funniest part of the film, which is packed with laughs throughout. --------------------------------------------- Result 2116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Superhero movies [[pretty]] much [[always]] suck, and this is no exception. Its only redeeming quality is the [[fact]] the movie [[COULD]] have been even [[worse]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[movie]], so yes it is that [[bad]]...

[[If]] your [[looking]] for a [[black]] [[superhero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[superhero]] [[movie]] but at [[least]] its [[entertaining]]. Superhero movies [[quite]] much [[consistently]] suck, and this is no exception. Its only redeeming quality is the [[facto]] the movie [[DID]] have been even [[worst]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[filmmaking]], so yes it is that [[unfavorable]]...

[[Though]] your [[searching]] for a [[negra]] [[hero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[hero]] [[filmmaking]] but at [[lowest]] its [[amuse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] [[If]] you're [[watching]] this without an inkling of an idea what the [[story]] is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[synopsis]] has [[painted]] a [[picture]] of a rather [[sane]] storyline, but the actual [[film]] is [[anything]] but.

As the [[synopsis]] went, it [[tells]] of an obsessed [[mountain]] [[climber]], which you'll [[see]] as the prologue before the [[opening]] credits and text [[crawl]], which [[tells]] you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary [[city]] that [[exists]] in dreamy [[manuscripts]] of the mind (note to self – this spells [[trouble]] with [[flashing]] lights), where its inhabitants are immortals [[yearning]] for a [[change]] in their omnipresence. They can [[see]] our [[world]], and [[notice]] of all [[persons]] this mountain [[climber]], and the [[synopsis]] [[explained]] that they [[decided]] to contact him through alchemy, [[creating]] an [[intelligent]] sphere to [[meet]] the [[man]].

What that translated to, is a [[repetitive]] piece of animation that a 5 year [[old]] [[kid]] could produce. [[Have]] [[shapes]] created, [[though]] [[credit]] goes to the [[stop]] [[motion]] [[style]], and put it through a mind-numbing [[loop]]. And repeat until your [[eyes]] [[start]] to [[close]], then move on to the [[next]] scene. [[If]] [[anything]], the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) [[really]] [[love]] their sticks and balls, [[constantly]] [[playing]] at conjuring up that magical [[sphere]], and having a field day [[playing]] with it before [[releasing]] it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the [[man]] interacts with the [[sphere]] in [[yet]] another hypnotically [[boring]] and sleep inducing [[sequence]].

[[Thank]] goodness of course that the run [[time]] is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or [[less]]) against the 70 stated. While [[firmly]] dated, its dull [[colours]], non-existent [[story]], scratchy soundtrack and repetitive [[pictures]] will [[win]] over no [[fans]]. Don't [[waste]] [[time]]. [[Though]] you're [[staring]] this without an inkling of an idea what the [[saga]] is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[recap]] has [[painting]] a [[photograph]] of a rather [[sensible]] storyline, but the actual [[filmmaking]] is [[something]] but.

As the [[recap]] went, it [[says]] of an obsessed [[shan]] [[mountaineer]], which you'll [[seeing]] as the prologue before the [[introductory]] credits and text [[creeping]], which [[says]] you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary [[ville]] that [[exist]] in dreamy [[manuscript]] of the mind (note to self – this spells [[difficulty]] with [[blinking]] lights), where its inhabitants are immortals [[longing]] for a [[adjustments]] in their omnipresence. They can [[seeing]] our [[monde]], and [[noticing]] of all [[person]] this mountain [[mountaineer]], and the [[recap]] [[explain]] that they [[deciding]] to contact him through alchemy, [[establishing]] an [[smart]] sphere to [[respond]] the [[dude]].

What that translated to, is a [[recur]] piece of animation that a 5 year [[former]] [[petit]] could produce. [[Has]] [[modes]] created, [[if]] [[credits]] goes to the [[stops]] [[motions]] [[elegance]], and put it through a mind-numbing [[loops]]. And repeat until your [[eye]] [[starts]] to [[near]], then move on to the [[future]] scene. [[Though]] [[something]], the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) [[truly]] [[amore]] their sticks and balls, [[steadily]] [[replay]] at conjuring up that magical [[zone]], and having a field day [[gaming]] with it before [[freed]] it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the [[men]] interacts with the [[zone]] in [[however]] another hypnotically [[dull]] and sleep inducing [[sequences]].

[[Thanking]] goodness of course that the run [[moment]] is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or [[lowest]]) against the 70 stated. While [[decidedly]] dated, its dull [[coloration]], non-existent [[history]], scratchy soundtrack and repetitive [[imaging]] will [[wins]] over no [[enthusiasts]]. Don't [[wastes]] [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Since]] the [[advent]] of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and easily [[touched]] by [[accounts]] of unhappy [[love]]. Even more fascinating have [[always]] been the [[tales]] of impossible [[love]], [[love]] that cannot be. The Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The Bubble" is about that. And then it is [[also]] not. The title of the film refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[background]] of the political realities of Israel. The country's [[cosmopolitan]] and unofficial capital [[city]] doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a [[city]] in the Palestinian West Bank which [[also]] features in the [[film]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the [[Palestinian]] checkpoints. Actually, it doesn't seem to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv [[allows]] people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western [[city]]. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' [[records]], a lifestyle [[magazine]] [[editor]] [[looking]] for a [[sexy]] cover for his [[next]] [[issue]], trendy people [[sitting]] in trendy cafes discussing trendy [[things]] over [[cups]] of cappuccino and other similarly trendy [[drinks]], while those at [[home]] are watching the local [[edition]] of [[Pop]] Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[reality]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young [[Israelis]] who [[share]] a flat and, for the most [[part]], [[try]] to [[stay]] out of politics. Yelli, the [[camp]] [[owner]] and [[manager]] of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the [[city]] and [[prefers]] not to [[think]] about the „[[crap]] that [[surrounds]] them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a [[slightly]] avantguard [[record]] [[store]], [[seems]] to be [[equally]] unwilling to engage in [[long]] [[political]] [[discussions]] and contemplations. Lulu, the only [[female]] of the [[lot]], is on the contrary [[linked]] to the Israeli Left, [[although]] her [[political]] [[activities]] [[seem]] to be [[confined]] to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam [[naturally]] don't object to [[participating]] in these. [[Lulu]] and her [[political]] [[friends]] make t-shirts with the rave's logo, put up [[posters]] and hand out [[booklets]] [[advertising]] it in the [[neighbourhood]]. [[Their]] [[main]] concern [[seems]] to be that there are never any actual [[Palestinians]] [[participating]] and that the police might [[come]] and [[spoil]] all the [[fun]] for them again. The [[closest]] they [[come]] to an [[actual]] [[confrontation]] is when they [[get]] into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the [[initial]] hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with Hebrew, he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. [[Because]] the [[emergence]] of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and easily [[impacted]] by [[account]] of unhappy [[iove]]. Even more fascinating have [[invariably]] been the [[tale]] of impossible [[amore]], [[likes]] that cannot be. The Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The Bubble" is about that. And then it is [[further]] not. The title of the film refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[context]] of the political realities of Israel. The country's [[metropolis]] and unofficial capital [[town]] doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a [[town]] in the Palestinian West Bank which [[furthermore]] features in the [[cinema]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the [[Israeli]] checkpoints. Actually, it doesn't seem to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv [[permitting]] people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western [[town]]. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' [[registered]], a lifestyle [[revue]] [[editorial]] [[searching]] for a [[hot]] cover for his [[imminent]] [[issuing]], trendy people [[seated]] in trendy cafes discussing trendy [[aspects]] over [[drinks]] of cappuccino and other similarly trendy [[beverages]], while those at [[house]] are watching the local [[editing]] of [[Pops]] Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[realist]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young [[Palestinian]] who [[shares]] a flat and, for the most [[party]], [[endeavour]] to [[staying]] out of politics. Yelli, the [[campsite]] [[proprietor]] and [[administrator]] of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the [[town]] and [[favors]] not to [[believe]] about the „[[bullshit]] that [[surround]] them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a [[mildly]] avantguard [[recordings]] [[boutique]], [[appears]] to be [[likewise]] unwilling to engage in [[longer]] [[politician]] [[talk]] and contemplations. Lulu, the only [[females]] of the [[batch]], is on the contrary [[associated]] to the Israeli Left, [[albeit]] her [[politician]] [[action]] [[appears]] to be [[limited]] to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam [[clearly]] don't object to [[participant]] in these. [[Lou]] and her [[politician]] [[boyfriends]] make t-shirts with the rave's logo, put up [[banners]] and hand out [[brochure]] [[adverts]] it in the [[vicinity]]. [[Hun]] [[principal]] concern [[seem]] to be that there are never any actual [[Israeli]] [[implicated]] and that the police might [[arrived]] and [[wrack]] all the [[amusing]] for them again. The [[nearest]] they [[coming]] to an [[real]] [[encounters]] is when they [[obtains]] into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the [[incipient]] hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with Hebrew, he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. --------------------------------------------- Result 2119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[totally]] disagreed with those comments which [[said]] this is a good [[movie]]. This is a totally SUCKED [[movie]]. I mean SUCKED - S.U.C.K.E.D. The [[story]] [[development]] is [[strange]]. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent [[girl]] to a party-fun [[seeking]] chick for no [[convincing]] [[reasons]] at all. [[In]] [[addition]], all the actresses [[looked]] way too [[old]] for being college [[students]] - [[College]] students looked like about 30 [[years]] old - you figure out the [[rest]]. I [[watched]] only about first [[ten]] minutes and [[started]] fast [[forwarding]] to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[hasty]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are laughable, considering how [[many]] [[clothes]] they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[save]] yourself a few bucks. [[Conclusion]]: [[Story]] - 0, Sex - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. I [[fully]] disagreed with those comments which [[says]] this is a good [[film]]. This is a totally SUCKED [[filmmaking]]. I mean SUCKED - S.U.C.K.E.D. The [[tales]] [[evolution]] is [[weird]]. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent [[chick]] to a party-fun [[trying]] chick for no [[persuade]] [[reason]] at all. [[At]] [[supplement]], all the actresses [[seemed]] way too [[longtime]] for being college [[student]] - [[Campus]] students looked like about 30 [[ages]] old - you figure out the [[stays]]. I [[seen]] only about first [[dix]] minutes and [[startup]] fast [[transmitting]] to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[headlong]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are laughable, considering how [[multiple]] [[costumes]] they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[savings]] yourself a few bucks. [[Conclusions]]: [[Tale]] - 0, Sex - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This documentary is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige [[Richards]]) career. The Tennessee tease was the most [[recognizable]] pin-up [[queen]] in [[history]]. Her most [[memorable]] [[work]] [[came]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his [[Movie]] Star News [[instructed]] Betty on what to do in front of the [[camera]]. There was no nudity in the famous [[photos]] or "stag [[films]]", but [[nonetheless]], Klaw was charged with distributing [[obscene]] materials and was [[ordered]] to [[destroy]] them to [[avoid]] prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her [[career]]. The girl-next-door with jet black [[hair]], blue eyes and an hour [[glass]] figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and [[devote]] her last years to [[religion]]. This movie actually [[could]] have been a lot better; but good enough to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the [[cast]]: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can [[change]] your heart rate. This documentary is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige [[Richard]]) career. The Tennessee tease was the most [[palpable]] pin-up [[quinn]] in [[story]]. Her most [[unforgettable]] [[collaboration]] [[arrived]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his [[Movies]] Star News [[commissioned]] Betty on what to do in front of the [[cameras]]. There was no nudity in the famous [[photographing]] or "stag [[filmmaking]]", but [[however]], Klaw was charged with distributing [[immodest]] materials and was [[decreed]] to [[destroyed]] them to [[forestall]] prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her [[carrera]]. The girl-next-door with jet black [[hairstyle]], blue eyes and an hour [[glassware]] figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and [[expend]] her last years to [[religions]]. This movie actually [[did]] have been a lot better; but good enough to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the [[casting]]: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can [[modifications]] your heart rate. --------------------------------------------- Result 2121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Thank]] God this wasn't based on a [[true]] story, because what a story it is. Populated by [[despicable]] [[characters]] whose [[depravity]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a [[mesmerizing]], jaw-dropping [[excursion]] into perversion which would be [[laughable]] (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly [[tragic]] undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[magnificent]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than [[Sidney]] Lumet doesn't hurt either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. [[Appreciation]] God this wasn't based on a [[genuine]] story, because what a story it is. Populated by [[obnoxious]] [[features]] whose [[debauchery]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a [[riveting]], jaw-dropping [[trip]] into perversion which would be [[grotesque]] (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly [[dire]] undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[wondrous]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than [[Sid]] Lumet doesn't hurt either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. --------------------------------------------- Result 2122 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb [[displays]] this just think zero and you'll get my drift. Director and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most expensive movie ever made), but that need not be an [[insurmountable]] [[handicap]]. I've [[seen]] some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard work, integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly possible to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at [[fraction]] of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "[[War]] of the Worlds". [[Unfortunately]], Hines failed in all these departments. [[Even]] if he had had Spielberg's budget and [[Tom]] [[Cruise]] signed for the lead his movie [[would]] have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a [[story]]. Thanks to [[digital]] video [[technology]] he can [[record]] [[images]] and [[sound]], but he [[shows]] [[little]] [[aptitude]] for assembling a narrative with what he [[records]]. A [[guy]] [[walks]] down a country [[lane]], a lot. He [[talks]] badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's [[returning]] -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be [[useful]] (a first-year film [[student]] [[could]] storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical [[establishing]] [[sequence]] than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than [[total]] artistic [[ineptitude]] is a desire to pad out thirty [[minutes]] of [[wretchedly]] amateurish CG works into [[something]] that [[could]] be offered as a feature-length film. [[Finally]] the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and [[talking]] becomes running and talking, or [[shrieking]]. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the [[dialogue]] is [[lifted]] straight from H.[[G]]. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of [[cinema]] to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times ([[flipped]] left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer [[looks]] like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb [[showed]] this just think zero and you'll get my drift. Director and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most expensive movie ever made), but that need not be an [[unstoppable]] [[handicapped]]. I've [[noticed]] some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard work, integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly possible to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at [[portion]] of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "[[Warfare]] of the Worlds". [[Sadly]], Hines failed in all these departments. [[Yet]] if he had had Spielberg's budget and [[Thom]] [[Cruises]] signed for the lead his movie [[ought]] have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a [[history]]. Thanks to [[scanned]] video [[technique]] he can [[registering]] [[imagery]] and [[sounds]], but he [[show]] [[scant]] [[dexterity]] for assembling a narrative with what he [[recordings]]. A [[buddy]] [[walking]] down a country [[lanes]], a lot. He [[discussion]] badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's [[reverted]] -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be [[handy]] (a first-year film [[learners]] [[would]] storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical [[establish]] [[sequences]] than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than [[overall]] artistic [[imperfection]] is a desire to pad out thirty [[mins]] of [[atrociously]] amateurish CG works into [[somethin]] that [[wo]] be offered as a feature-length film. [[Lastly]] the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and [[discussing]] becomes running and talking, or [[howling]]. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the [[discussions]] is [[hoisting]] straight from H.[[gram]]. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of [[cine]] to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times ([[overthrew]] left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer [[seem]] like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Proof that not everything Tarantino touches turns to gold. This is most definitely plastic, all the way. Its easy to see that without Quentin's involvement this would have probably sat on the shelf for years, that's assuming it would have ever got produced in the first place. It is about a woman with a fascination of death who gets a job cleaning up after crime scenes, Angela Jones is unconvincing in this role, William Baldwin is better as the Serial Killer who keeps Jones in employment!. All in all pretty poor. --------------------------------------------- Result 2124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[liked]] [[nearly]] all the movies in the [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] series with the [[exception]] of the one I [[think]] is titled "[[Enforcer]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[weak]] in [[areas]] too, but I [[still]] [[enjoyed]] it. This one is one of my [[favorites]] of the series, if [[nothing]] else for the [[great]] line of "Go ahead, [[make]] my day". This one also [[features]] an interesting [[albeit]] familiar plot of someone [[killing]] those that have [[done]] her [[wrong]]. Just [[think]] "Magnum Force" with [[less]] mystery about who is behind the [[killings]] and you have your [[plot]]. Granted there is a bit more than that as this one does [[feature]] a very [[nice]] final [[showdown]] at an amusement park. It [[also]] [[features]] [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[getting]] a bulldog as a [[gift]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a [[rather]] [[humorous]] scene. The only [[question]] that [[remains]] is why Clint [[Eastwood]] had to have the [[rather]] mediocre [[actress]] Sandra Locke in so [[many]] of his [[movies]]. She brings the [[score]] down a point every [[time]] even when [[overall]] the [[movie]] is [[enjoyable]] to me. [[Granted]] she is not to bad here, but her [[character]] could have been so much better by [[someone]] else. Another problem with this [[movie]] and other [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[movies]], at [[times]] they [[almost]] seem to be [[advertisements]] for [[guns]]. I like guns as [[much]] as the next [[person]], but do we really [[need]] scenes of him [[explaining]] all the [[different]] strengths of his [[newest]] [[weapon]] and how [[many]] bullets it [[holds]]? [[Still]], very nice [[entry]] into the [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[series]] of [[movies]]. I [[loved]] [[almost]] all the movies in the [[Grubby]] [[Hari]] series with the [[exceptions]] of the one I [[thinking]] is titled "[[Gorilla]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[vulnerable]] in [[area]] too, but I [[however]] [[appreciated]] it. This one is one of my [[favorite]] of the series, if [[anything]] else for the [[large]] line of "Go ahead, [[deliver]] my day". This one also [[attribute]] an interesting [[while]] familiar plot of someone [[slaying]] those that have [[performed]] her [[amiss]]. Just [[thought]] "Magnum Force" with [[fewer]] mystery about who is behind the [[murdering]] and you have your [[intrigue]]. Granted there is a bit more than that as this one does [[attribute]] a very [[pleasant]] final [[confrontation]] at an amusement park. It [[additionally]] [[featured]] [[Filthy]] [[Hari]] [[obtain]] a bulldog as a [[don]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a [[somewhat]] [[comic]] scene. The only [[matter]] that [[stays]] is why Clint [[Nolan]] had to have the [[fairly]] mediocre [[actor]] Sandra Locke in so [[multiple]] of his [[cinematography]]. She brings the [[notation]] down a point every [[moment]] even when [[general]] the [[cinema]] is [[pleasant]] to me. [[Conferred]] she is not to bad here, but her [[characters]] could have been so much better by [[somebody]] else. Another problem with this [[flick]] and other [[Squalid]] [[Hari]] [[movie]], at [[moments]] they [[roughly]] seem to be [[commercials]] for [[rifles]]. I like guns as [[very]] as the next [[somebody]], but do we really [[required]] scenes of him [[explain]] all the [[multiple]] strengths of his [[latest]] [[firearms]] and how [[countless]] bullets it [[held]]? [[However]], very nice [[entrances]] into the [[Soiled]] [[Harri]] [[serial]] of [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] This is a [[great]] movie that [[everyone]] should [[see]]. It plays like a Dean Koontz [[book]].

[[Bill]] Paxton's performance was great in that it [[really]] seems like he [[believes]] in what he is [[saying]] and doing.

I don't know why viewers have to read in some [[kind]] of [[advocacy]] for religious [[murder]] in to the [[film]]. It is fiction. The [[ending]] is [[surprising]], but [[fictional]]. [[So]] what? I [[think]] that is what makes this [[movie]] so good. SPOILER DO [[NOT]] READ FURTHER IF YOU [[HAVENT]] [[SEEN]] THE MOVIE. [[Throughout]] the [[movie]], the [[viewer]] is [[continually]] [[shocked]] at the sickness of Paxton's [[character]], the impact on the [[children]], and the [[way]] the children [[handle]] this [[outrageous]] [[conduct]]. And then at the end, it [[turns]] out to be true. [[God]] has put him on a [[mission]] to [[rid]] the world of [[demons]]. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other [[viewers]] [[suggest]]. Sure, he is [[given]] info that he couldn't have known [[otherwise]], but the [[movie]] goes further to [[show]] how [[God]] is "[[protecting]]" [[Adam]] through the convenient [[video]] quality [[problem]] and the complete [[lack]] of [[memory]] of the [[second]] FBI agent. The [[film]] isn't advocating Christian [[murder]], it is [[merely]] taking the [[viewer]] on a very [[unexpected]] ride. This is a [[wondrous]] movie that [[somebody]] should [[consults]]. It plays like a Dean Koontz [[books]].

[[Billings]] Paxton's performance was great in that it [[genuinely]] seems like he [[thinks]] in what he is [[arguing]] and doing.

I don't know why viewers have to read in some [[types]] of [[propaganda]] for religious [[kill]] in to the [[cinema]]. It is fiction. The [[ended]] is [[impressive]], but [[fictitious]]. [[Hence]] what? I [[ideas]] that is what makes this [[film]] so good. SPOILER DO [[NAH]] READ FURTHER IF YOU [[SHOULDNT]] [[WATCHED]] THE MOVIE. [[Across]] the [[cinematography]], the [[viewfinder]] is [[systematically]] [[appalled]] at the sickness of Paxton's [[trait]], the impact on the [[enfant]], and the [[routes]] the children [[manipulated]] this [[obnoxious]] [[behaviours]]. And then at the end, it [[revolves]] out to be true. [[Christ]] has put him on a [[delegations]] to [[extricate]] the world of [[devils]]. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other [[onlookers]] [[insinuate]]. Sure, he is [[awarded]] info that he couldn't have known [[else]], but the [[kino]] goes further to [[displays]] how [[Seigneur]] is "[[preserving]]" [[Adem]] through the convenient [[videos]] quality [[difficulty]] and the complete [[lacks]] of [[memories]] of the [[secondly]] FBI agent. The [[flick]] isn't advocating Christian [[kill]], it is [[only]] taking the [[viewfinder]] on a very [[unintended]] ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I watched this [[movie]] after watching Practical Magic, and the [[older]] film was far superior. I [[liked]] the [[way]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. [[Jimmy]] Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this [[film]], but I suppose they did serve to highlight the [[reserve]] of Gillian's [[character]]. I was also [[struck]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The [[gestures]] [[Nicky]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers [[especially]] struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. I watched this [[cinematography]] after watching Practical Magic, and the [[aged]] film was far superior. I [[enjoyed]] the [[routes]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. [[Jimbo]] Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this [[kino]], but I suppose they did serve to highlight the [[reservation]] of Gillian's [[characters]]. I was also [[befallen]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The [[flicks]] [[Nick]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers [[particularly]] struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. --------------------------------------------- Result 2127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the beginning of this film, one of the commentators says that he was told that he has two strikes against him: he is black and male. But in addition to that, he has a third strike: he's gay. "You're going to have to be stronger than you ever imagined," he is told. "Paris is Burning" is a documentary about gay black and Hispanic men who are tranvestites or transsexuals.

The miracle of "Paris is Burning" is that director Jennie Livingston takes a subject that could have very easily become a freak show and allows the people in it their humanity. We learn their views of homosexuality, men, women, their hopes, their disappointments, their dreams. Some of these dreams are so unattainable it's tragic. Many of the people are seriously in denial;

This is not a film for everyone. There are shots in this movie of nude transsexuals. If you have a problem with homosexuality, then this movie isn't for you. But if you do see this movie you'll realise "Paris is Burning" isn't really about men wearing women's clothes, it's about a group of people who are routinely marginalised and put down by society at large, and what they do to get a sense of community in their lives.

I've watched this movie four times since it was released in 1991, because it says so many things: it's a commentary about materialism in our culture, about gender roles, about rich and poor people, about the media and what it celebrates, about fame and adulation. "Paris is Burning" is one of the most humane, and one of the saddest, movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] do not ever watch this film...it is the [[biggest]] [[pile]] of sh*te i have ever come [[across]] in my [[whole]] life. and [[thats]] [[saying]] something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[absolutely]] [[dire]] this is THE [[WORST]] [[FILM]] [[IN]] THE [[WORLD]]!!! seriously doesn't it even give you a [[hit]] seeing as it [[cost]] my 99p from sainsburys and it was only [[made]] in 2005? [[hahaha]] this [[film]] is like a [[cheap]] [[college]] [[movie]] you can even [[see]] the camera in the corner of the screen....[[although]] if u [[really]] wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[scary]] [[shark]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my [[life]]...ha ha. i mean [[seriously]] this is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of 2 1/2 [[hours]] EVER!! do not ever watch this film...it is the [[greatest]] [[battery]] of sh*te i have ever come [[throughout]] in my [[ensemble]] life. and [[aint]] [[arguing]] something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[totally]] [[horrific]] this is THE [[PIRE]] [[FILMMAKING]] [[AT]] THE [[WORLDWIDE]]!!! seriously doesn't it even give you a [[strike]] seeing as it [[costs]] my 99p from sainsburys and it was only [[introduced]] in 2005? [[ahah]] this [[filmmaking]] is like a [[cheaper]] [[academia]] [[film]] you can even [[seeing]] the camera in the corner of the screen....[[despite]] if u [[genuinely]] wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[fearful]] [[mako]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my [[lifetime]]...ha ha. i mean [[profoundly]] this is the [[bigger]] [[squander]] of 2 1/2 [[hour]] EVER!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] And here's yet another piece of [[evidence]] to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[unique]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Red]] Queen Kills Seven [[Times]]" is a [[totally]] [[mesmerizing]] wholesome of [[original]] plotting, stylish production [[values]], enchanting [[music]], [[great]] acting talents and inventively [[gory]] [[murder]] sequences. It's a [[fabulous]] giallo ([[released]] in the golden year 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[every]] fan of Italian [[cinema]]. The storyline doesn't just introduce your average black-gloved & sexually [[frustrated]] [[killer]], but [[blends]] [[good]] old-fashioned [[revenge]] [[motives]] with the macabre myth of the murderous "[[Red]] [[Queen]]". [[At]] young age, their [[grandfather]] tells the [[constantly]] fighting [[siblings]] Kitty and Evelyn about an [[uncanny]] lady who, once [[every]] 100 [[years]] on April 6th, [[kills]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years later, Kitty has become the successful choreographer of a [[prominent]] modeling [[agency]] (even [[sharing]] her bed with the general manager) when suddenly the [[killing]] [[spree]] [[begins]]. Sister Evelyn would be the [[obvious]] [[culprit]], but she [[moved]] to the States [[recently]]... [[Or]] has she? [[Complex]] [[yet]] [[compelling]] and involving [[red]] herrings are [[thrown]] at you [[every]] couple of minutes and the [[Red]] [[Queen]] character is [[definitely]] the most [[fascinating]] [[killer]] in giallo-history. Her face can never be [[seen]], but she wears a blood red [[cloak]] and [[produces]] the most [[ghastly]] laugh [[whenever]] she [[made]] a [[new]] victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her [[victims]] are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind [[cars]] and even impaled on [[fences]]! That [[latter]] one is [[truly]] one of the [[greatest]] (= most gruesome) [[acts]] of violence I've ever [[seen]]! What more [[could]] you [[possibly]] [[request]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, [[perhaps]]? The [[gorgeous]] female actresses [[got]] this more than [[covered]], [[among]] them [[Barbara]] Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Emilio]] Miraglia isn't the most [[famous]] giallo-director, as he only [[made]] this one and the [[equally]] [[recommended]] "The [[Night]] Evelyn Came [[Out]] of the [[Grave]]", but his [[influence]] and [[importance]] should [[NOT]] be [[forgotten]]. And here's yet another piece of [[proofs]] to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[exclusive]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Reid]] Queen Kills Seven [[Moments]]" is a [[entirely]] [[entrancing]] wholesome of [[initial]] plotting, stylish production [[value]], enchanting [[musicians]], [[huge]] acting talents and inventively [[gori]] [[slain]] sequences. It's a [[wondrous]] giallo ([[publicized]] in the golden year 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[any]] fan of Italian [[cinemas]]. The storyline doesn't just introduce your average black-gloved & sexually [[disappointed]] [[shooter]], but [[mingling]] [[buena]] old-fashioned [[retaliation]] [[reasons]] with the macabre myth of the murderous "[[Reid]] [[Quinn]]". [[Under]] young age, their [[grandpa]] tells the [[systematically]] fighting [[plymouth]] Kitty and Evelyn about an [[supernatural]] lady who, once [[any]] 100 [[olds]] on April 6th, [[assassination]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years later, Kitty has become the successful choreographer of a [[illustrious]] modeling [[agencies]] (even [[exchanging]] her bed with the general manager) when suddenly the [[killed]] [[frenzy]] [[launching]]. Sister Evelyn would be the [[glaring]] [[perpetrator]], but she [[relocated]] to the States [[lately]]... [[Neither]] has she? [[Tricky]] [[however]] [[convincing]] and involving [[rojas]] herrings are [[tossed]] at you [[all]] couple of minutes and the [[Reid]] [[Quinn]] character is [[surely]] the most [[riveting]] [[murderer]] in giallo-history. Her face can never be [[watched]], but she wears a blood red [[gown]] and [[generating]] the most [[ugly]] laugh [[wherever]] she [[introduced]] a [[newer]] victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her [[fatalities]] are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind [[motor]] and even impaled on [[fence]]! That [[last]] one is [[really]] one of the [[biggest]] (= most gruesome) [[act]] of violence I've ever [[watched]]! What more [[did]] you [[potentially]] [[asking]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, [[possibly]]? The [[wondrous]] female actresses [[did]] this more than [[covering]], [[in]] them [[Barbaric]] Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Calderon]] Miraglia isn't the most [[acclaimed]] giallo-director, as he only [[effected]] this one and the [[similarly]] [[suggested]] "The [[Nocturne]] Evelyn Came [[Outward]] of the [[Gravesite]]", but his [[repercussions]] and [[significance]] should [[NOPE]] be [[disregarded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It [[started]] out with an interesting premise. I [[always]] [[like]] Civil [[War]] [[stuff]] and [[ancient]] secret [[societies]]. The more the [[film]] [[progressed]], the more I [[realized]] that this was a B [[movie]] at [[best]]. [[In]] the latter half, it [[quickly]] became a C [[movie]], then D, then F, then "I wish that this wasn't a rental so that I [[could]] put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was [[awful]], just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[book]]. [[Maybe]] the book is well [[written]]. The [[screenplay]] was [[written]] by a 10 year [[old]]. It was ridiculously shallow, the dialog drab and uninteresting, the [[characters]] about as interesting as a 5 [[pound]] bag of [[fertilizer]]. I really [[hated]] this movie, as did my [[wife]]. I am a Christian and I have no [[problem]] with [[movies]] that promote or [[support]] [[Christianity]]. This movie did a great disservice to the cause. [[Awful]], [[terrible]], [[worthless]]. [[If]] you [[liked]] it, I [[strongly]] recommend Superman 4. It [[startup]] out with an interesting premise. I [[continually]] [[loves]] Civil [[Warfare]] [[thing]] and [[antigua]] secret [[societal]]. The more the [[filmmaking]] [[headway]], the more I [[performed]] that this was a B [[film]] at [[finest]]. [[For]] the latter half, it [[immediately]] became a C [[film]], then D, then F, then "I wish that this wasn't a rental so that I [[did]] put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was [[scary]], just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[books]]. [[Probably]] the book is well [[wrote]]. The [[scenario]] was [[wrote]] by a 10 year [[former]]. It was ridiculously shallow, the dialog drab and uninteresting, the [[trait]] about as interesting as a 5 [[pounds]] bag of [[fertilization]]. I really [[abhor]] this movie, as did my [[femme]]. I am a Christian and I have no [[issues]] with [[filmmaking]] that promote or [[aiding]] [[Christendom]]. This movie did a great disservice to the cause. [[Scary]], [[frightful]], [[fruitless]]. [[Though]] you [[enjoyed]] it, I [[solidly]] recommend Superman 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2131 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] "Revolt of the [[Zombies]]" proves that having the same [[director]] revamp and [[recycle]] an idea doesn't [[necessarily]] make lightning [[strike]] [[twice]].

The Halperin [[brothers]], [[responsible]] for the horror [[classic]] "White Zombie", made this [[trite]] piece of [[garbage]] a [[mere]] few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[recycled]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't [[want]] the Halperins to be able to [[use]] the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only [[thing]] that could [[help]] this [[film]], because, as [[everyone]] knows, [[bad]] [[films]] can [[make]] much more [[money]] [[simply]] by having the word 'Zombie' [[appear]] in the title. Knowing what [[Victor]] Halperin was [[capable]] of a few years before only makes this uninteresting [[film]] more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror [[film]] after this [[debacle]]. The [[zombies]] here seem not to be [[true]] [[walking]] dead, but [[simply]] hypnotism [[victims]].

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? [[Be]] ready to [[crack]] a few [[eggs]], [[including]] your own.

THE LAME PLOT: [[Man]] falls in love with scheming [[woman]] who plays with his [[heart]] and becomes [[engaged]] to him only to [[make]] his [[friend]], whom she [[loves]], jealous. This [[sends]] man into a spiral of [[madness]] in which he tries [[using]] zombie mind-control techniques to [[change]] [[things]] to his advantage in an [[attempt]] to [[win]] over a [[woman]] who isn't worth spit.

This [[includes]] one of the most [[blatantly]] [[obvious]] plot [[developments]] I've ever [[seen]]. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the [[ending]] coming. The acting isn't [[even]] good. This [[movie]] makes the racially [[insensitive]] "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I [[bought]]) seems like an [[atmospheric]] horror masterpiece by comparison and [[reminds]] us that not [[every]] black and [[white]] [[film]] is a classic. It makes the [[atomic]] age sci-fi [[alien]] zombie cheese fest "[[Invisible]] Invaders" [[seem]] like a serious [[drama]]. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it [[could]] probably make many a Korean film fan [[twitch]] (South Korean films are [[often]] [[known]] for their use of melodrama). The credits list the [[ironically]] named [[company]] Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this [[would]] be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not [[recommended]] for fans of: zombies, romance, or [[classic]] films. "Revolt of the [[Walkers]]" proves that having the same [[headmaster]] revamp and [[retraining]] an idea doesn't [[invariably]] make lightning [[strikes]] [[doubly]].

The Halperin [[brethren]], [[accountable]] for the horror [[typical]] "White Zombie", made this [[corny]] piece of [[detritus]] a [[simple]] few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[recycling]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't [[wants]] the Halperins to be able to [[using]] the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only [[stuff]] that could [[pomoc]] this [[filmmaking]], because, as [[everybody]] knows, [[mala]] [[movies]] can [[deliver]] much more [[cash]] [[purely]] by having the word 'Zombie' [[appears]] in the title. Knowing what [[Viktor]] Halperin was [[able]] of a few years before only makes this uninteresting [[filmmaking]] more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror [[films]] after this [[breakup]]. The [[walkers]] here seem not to be [[genuine]] [[marching]] dead, but [[exclusively]] hypnotism [[victim]].

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? [[Are]] ready to [[slit]] a few [[egg]], [[include]] your own.

THE LAME PLOT: [[Guy]] falls in love with scheming [[girl]] who plays with his [[heartland]] and becomes [[implicated]] to him only to [[deliver]] his [[boyfriend]], whom she [[like]], jealous. This [[sending]] man into a spiral of [[insanity]] in which he tries [[uses]] zombie mind-control techniques to [[amended]] [[matters]] to his advantage in an [[endeavor]] to [[victorious]] over a [[girl]] who isn't worth spit.

This [[contains]] one of the most [[notoriously]] [[unmistakable]] plot [[development]] I've ever [[watched]]. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the [[ended]] coming. The acting isn't [[yet]] good. This [[filmmaking]] makes the racially [[oblivious]] "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I [[purchase]]) seems like an [[atmosphere]] horror masterpiece by comparison and [[resembles]] us that not [[all]] black and [[blanca]] [[movie]] is a classic. It makes the [[atom]] age sci-fi [[stranger]] zombie cheese fest "[[Unseen]] Invaders" [[looks]] like a serious [[theatrical]]. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it [[wo]] probably make many a Korean film fan [[shudder]] (South Korean films are [[normally]] [[renowned]] for their use of melodrama). The credits list the [[mockingly]] named [[businesses]] Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this [[could]] be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not [[recommend]] for fans of: zombies, romance, or [[classical]] films. --------------------------------------------- Result 2132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A concept with potential, and it was fun to see these two holiday icons together, but...

Rudolph's glowing nose didn't require the "explanation" offered in this film - much like The Force in the Star Wars films didn't need the explanation of "medichlorians in the bloodstream." But mainly, the film left me cold because of Winterbolt's over-complicated plot to destroy Santa. He's got the power to put suggestions into people's minds, so why does he do things in such a roundabout way? Breaking the magic of Rudolph's nose, framing Rudolph, threatening to melt the Frosty family...The comedically exaggerated plots of Pinky and the Brain and "Phineas and Ferb's" Dr. Doofenshmirtz (which are done that way on purpose and played for laughs) seem simple and straightforward compared to Winterbolt's, which we're expected to take somewhat seriously.

There is a particularly (and amusingly) strange moment when a character throws her two guns at the bad guy, like boomerangs. I understand if they don't want to have guns being shot in a family film, but then why have guns in the first place? --------------------------------------------- Result 2133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All in all a good film and better for the fact that had the film not been made the story might remain hidden to the masses. Brosnan does a good job as the native American with a hidden past and the photography is stunning. To some, this may be too whimsical, to others boring - for me it is a gentle, well-told tale and perfect for family viewing. Now that's not something you get a lot of recently. --------------------------------------------- Result 2134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a must-see documentary movie for anyone who fears that modern youth has lost its taste for real-life adventure and its sense of morality. Darius Goes West is an amazing roller-coaster of a story. We live the lives of Darius and the crew as they embark on the journey of a lifetime. Darius has Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a disease which affects all the muscles in his body. He is confined to a wheelchair, and needs round-the-clock attention. So how could this crew of young friends possibly manage to take him on a 6,000 mile round-trip to the West Coast and back? Watch the movie and experience the ups and downs of this great adventure - laugh and cry with the crew as they cope with unimaginable challenges along the way, and enjoy the final triumph when they arrive back three weeks later in their home town to a rapturous reception and some great surprises! --------------------------------------------- Result 2135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This Movie has [[great]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little rough. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a [[Cheesy]] movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with true martial arts in it and with [[Amazing]] [[stunts]] WITHOUT the use of wires and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[true]] the two main stars in the show where in the kid show the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this movie. But hey the fight scenes are [[enough]] to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are [[worthy]] enough for [[Jackie]] Chan to sit threw and [[admire]]. This Movie has [[wondrous]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little rough. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a [[Dorky]] movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with true martial arts in it and with [[Striking]] [[acrobatics]] WITHOUT the use of wires and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[truthful]] the two main stars in the show where in the kid show the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this movie. But hey the fight scenes are [[suffice]] to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are [[creditable]] enough for [[Jacqui]] Chan to sit threw and [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I was intrigued by the title, so during a [[small]] bout of [[insomnia]] (fueled by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then [[checked]] my TV [[listings]] and watched it again! There is one very [[obvious]] [[realization]] that occurred to me when I [[saw]] this film- in [[spite]] of [[politics]], traditions, [[culture]], etc., teenagers [[everywhere]] are [[virtually]] the same. The [[characters]] of the [[kids]] from Belgrade could have been [[transported]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time [[period]], and language differences aside, [[would]] be impossible to tell [[apart]] from any of the local teens of that [[era]]. They certainly [[displayed]] the same [[growing]] pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of [[fact]], much the same [[things]] that occupied my time growing up in 1970's [[Southern]] California.

This was a bittersweet [[story]], but the [[joy]] of [[youth]] made it very enjoyable. The [[characters]], especially the young actors, were [[completely]] [[believable]] [[also]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in [[nicely]] with other 50's-themed movies. I was intrigued by the title, so during a [[little]] bout of [[sleepiness]] (fueled by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then [[audits]] my TV [[list]] and watched it again! There is one very [[flagrant]] [[implementation]] that occurred to me when I [[watched]] this film- in [[sadness]] of [[politicians]], traditions, [[civilisations]], etc., teenagers [[nowhere]] are [[basically]] the same. The [[attribute]] of the [[brats]] from Belgrade could have been [[hauled]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time [[deadline]], and language differences aside, [[ought]] be impossible to tell [[furthermore]] from any of the local teens of that [[epoch]]. They certainly [[exhibitions]] the same [[augment]] pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of [[facto]], much the same [[aspects]] that occupied my time growing up in 1970's [[South]] California.

This was a bittersweet [[history]], but the [[pleasure]] of [[teenage]] made it very enjoyable. The [[character]], especially the young actors, were [[fully]] [[trustworthy]] [[similarly]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in [[delicately]] with other 50's-themed movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 2137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Awlright, [[damn]] it, the MooCow will grudgingly [[admit]] the truth: I kinda' like this cheap, [[cheesy]] 70's parody. The [[idea]] that [[vast]] [[hordes]] of [[killer]] tomatoes are [[destroying]] the [[US]] is a [[great]] [[idea]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[provide]] some [[decent]] chuckles, moostly the [[sight]] of [[terrified]] extras [[running]] away from [[large]], [[obviously]] fake tomatoes. This film, along with The [[Kentucky]] Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier [[attempts]] at spoofs, which became so [[popular]] in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to [[Airplane]]!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at [[humor]] are dismal [[failures]], and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people [[must]] also have [[enjoyed]] it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! [[Large]] chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty [[dull]]. And dig those 70's [[clothes]], dude!! ;=8) This [[tomato]] is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow [[says]] grab a pizza and [[pop]] in the Tomatoes!! : Awlright, [[fucking]] it, the MooCow will grudgingly [[recognise]] the truth: I kinda' like this cheap, [[dorky]] 70's parody. The [[thinking]] that [[big]] [[herds]] of [[assassin]] tomatoes are [[demolished]] the [[AMERICANS]] is a [[gorgeous]] [[thinking]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[provides]] some [[dignified]] chuckles, moostly the [[conception]] of [[scare]] extras [[implementing]] away from [[great]], [[undoubtedly]] fake tomatoes. This film, along with The [[Kfc]] Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier [[endeavors]] at spoofs, which became so [[folk]] in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to [[Flight]]!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at [[comedy]] are dismal [[faults]], and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people [[gotta]] also have [[appreciated]] it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! [[Prodigious]] chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty [[boring]]. And dig those 70's [[clothe]], dude!! ;=8) This [[onion]] is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow [[tells]] grab a pizza and [[pops]] in the Tomatoes!! : --------------------------------------------- Result 2138 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***Possible spoilers***

I recently watched this movie with my 11 year old son and was pleased to see that he laughed in the right places and was thrilled by the action sequences. Ron Ely is just right as Doc. Cool, calm, almost always in control(and with an occasional twinkle in his eye). What more can one ask for? I have never read a Doc Savage book, so I don't know if it is faithful to the source but I enjoyed the light tone and derring-do. Many people have compared this movie to Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I don't think is fair. The difference in budget is astounding(Raiders must have at least 10 times the budget). Doc Savage does not have the extensive location work that Raiders has. Special effects are also at a minimum but come on people, the story is a lot of fun and the humor is just right. The Sousa music is catchy(love that theme song- Every time I watch the film, I end up humming the theme for days).The best way to approach this film is to just RELAX and enjoy. Highlights include the exciting opening sequence where the fabulous five and Doc chase the Indian sniper throughout the rooftops of New York and the VERY funny fight sequence between Doc and Captain Seas. Not as good is the villain who sleeps in a giant crib (really!). Overall a great movie to watch on a rainy day. I give it 7 out of 10.

Doc Savage, Doc Savage...thank the lord he's here! --------------------------------------------- Result 2139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Child]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most [[serious]] issues facing our world [[today]] and I [[feared]] that any film on the [[topic]] [[would]] [[jump]] straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual [[nature]] in order to shock and [[disturb]] the audience. [[After]] having seen both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one [[film]] moved me to want to actually [[see]] a [[change]] in [[international]] laws. The other felt like a poor [[attempt]] at making me cry for five [[minutes]] with emotive music and the [[odd]] [[suicide]].

I do not believe that turning this [[issue]] into a Hollywood [[tear]] jerker is a [[useful]] or necessary [[strategy]] to [[adopt]] and I [[must]] [[commend]] the makes of 'Holly' for engaging [[subtly]] but [[powerfully]] with the [[terrible]] conditions these children are sadly forced to [[endure]]. 'Trade' wavered between [[serious]] and [[stupid]] with scenes [[involving]] the [[death]] of a cat coming after [[images]] that [[represented]] [[children]] being [[forced]] to [[commit]] some [[horrendous]] [[acts]]. I found this unengaging and at [[times]] offensive to the cause. If I had [[wanted]] a cheap [[laugh]] I [[would]] not have signed up for a [[film]] on [[child]] [[trafficking]].

[[For]] [[anyone]] who would like to watch a [[powerful]] [[film]] that actually [[means]] something I [[would]] [[suggest]] [[saving]] the money on the [[cinema]] [[ticket]] for the [[release]] of 'Holly'. [[Kid]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most [[grave]] issues facing our world [[thursday]] and I [[fears]] that any film on the [[themes]] [[should]] [[hop]] straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual [[characters]] in order to shock and [[disrupt]] the audience. [[Upon]] having seen both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one [[cinematic]] moved me to want to actually [[seeing]] a [[altering]] in [[global]] laws. The other felt like a poor [[try]] at making me cry for five [[mins]] with emotive music and the [[freaky]] [[kamikaze]].

I do not believe that turning this [[issuing]] into a Hollywood [[torn]] jerker is a [[helpful]] or necessary [[strategies]] to [[adopting]] and I [[ought]] [[hailing]] the makes of 'Holly' for engaging [[finely]] but [[flatly]] with the [[horrific]] conditions these children are sadly forced to [[withstand]]. 'Trade' wavered between [[severe]] and [[dumb]] with scenes [[encompassing]] the [[mortality]] of a cat coming after [[visuals]] that [[constituted]] [[kids]] being [[compelled]] to [[committed]] some [[gruesome]] [[act]]. I found this unengaging and at [[time]] offensive to the cause. If I had [[wanna]] a cheap [[laughs]] I [[should]] not have signed up for a [[films]] on [[enfants]] [[smuggling]].

[[During]] [[someone]] who would like to watch a [[influential]] [[kino]] that actually [[signifies]] something I [[could]] [[proposes]] [[rescues]] the money on the [[theatre]] [[banknote]] for the [[freeing]] of 'Holly'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a let down! This started with an intriguing mystery and interesting characters. Admittedly it moved along at the speed of a snail, but I was nevertheless gripped and kept watching.

David Morrissey is always good value and he Suranne Jones were good leads. The Muslim aspects were very interesting. We were tantalised with possible terrorist connections.

But then Morrissey's character was killed off and all the air left the balloon. The last episode was dull, dull, dull. The whole thing turned out to be very small beer and the dénouement was unbelievably feeble.

Five hours of my life for that? My advice: watch paint dry instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Shown in Australia as 'Hydrosphere', this [[incredibly]] [[bad]] movie is SO [[bad]] that you become hypnotised and have to watch it to the end, just to [[see]] if it [[could]] [[get]] any [[worse]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[predictable]] it [[seems]] [[written]] by a high school dramatics class, the sets are [[pathetic]] but marginally [[better]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wooden]].

The [[infant]] 'muppet' [[seems]] to have been [[stolen]] from the props [[cupboard]] of '[[Total]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[single]], [[original]] [[idea]] in the [[whole]] [[movie]].

I [[found]] this movie to be so [[bad]] that I [[laughed]] most of the [[way]] through.

Malcolm [[McDowell]] should [[hang]] his [[head]] in shame. He [[obviously]] [[needed]] the money! Shown in Australia as 'Hydrosphere', this [[surprisingly]] [[naughty]] movie is SO [[rotten]] that you become hypnotised and have to watch it to the end, just to [[seeing]] if it [[did]] [[obtain]] any [[worst]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[foreseeable]] it [[seem]] [[wrote]] by a high school dramatics class, the sets are [[unhappy]] but marginally [[optimum]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wood]].

The [[childhood]] 'muppet' [[appears]] to have been [[stealing]] from the props [[wardrobe]] of '[[Whole]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[lonely]], [[initial]] [[concept]] in the [[ensemble]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[detected]] this movie to be so [[rotten]] that I [[laughs]] most of the [[ways]] through.

Malcolm [[mcneill]] should [[heng]] his [[leader]] in shame. He [[apparently]] [[need]] the money! --------------------------------------------- Result 2142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] What [[reviewers]] and MST3K left out is the best [[part]] (and only [[memorable]] scene) of this otherwise [[dreadful]] movie: There is a very [[good]] rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s [[ineptitude]]). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this [[chance]], yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. What [[examiners]] and MST3K left out is the best [[portions]] (and only [[unforgettable]] scene) of this otherwise [[shocking]] movie: There is a very [[alright]] rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s [[idiocy]]). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this [[opportunities]], yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. --------------------------------------------- Result 2143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] You know that feeling of [[hilarity]] you get when you watch a [[film]] that's [[trying]] so [[hard]] to be a [[serious]], [[thought]] [[provoking]] [[piece]] of [[cinema]] and fails [[miserably]]? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the [[sheer]] [[terrible]] nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[House]] of the Dead" [[struggles]] to achieve even this low graded level of [[cinema]].

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to [[recreate]] the feeling like you've just woken up to find out that the cat has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you slept. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is arguably the [[worst]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

[[Final]] Score: 1/10. You know that feeling of [[silliness]] you get when you watch a [[filmmaking]] that's [[seeking]] so [[stiff]] to be a [[grave]], [[thoughts]] [[sparking]] [[slice]] of [[filmmaking]] and fails [[woefully]]? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the [[pure]] [[horrific]] nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[Housing]] of the Dead" [[brawls]] to achieve even this low graded level of [[film]].

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to [[rehabilitate]] the feeling like you've just woken up to find out that the cat has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you slept. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is arguably the [[gravest]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

[[Definitive]] Score: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel takes a pretty weird [[idea]] and doesn't go to [[great]] lengths to squeeze a story out of it. [[Basically]] [[Alice]] from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her [[friends]]. This has the least deaths out of the [[whole]] series and the wise-cracks are [[quite]] poor, so [[neither]] the horror fans or [[comedy]] fans are [[happy]].

I've not alot to [[say]] about this. It's moderately interesting to see the [[characters]] of Alice and Dan [[returning]] from four, but not worth [[watching]] a [[movie]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, [[possibly]] only the competant [[direction]] saves it from being the [[worst]] in the [[series]]. Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel takes a pretty weird [[thoughts]] and doesn't go to [[grand]] lengths to squeeze a story out of it. [[Fundamentally]] [[Altar]] from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her [[chums]]. This has the least deaths out of the [[ensemble]] series and the wise-cracks are [[rather]] poor, so [[either]] the horror fans or [[parody]] fans are [[joyous]].

I've not alot to [[told]] about this. It's moderately interesting to see the [[character]] of Alice and Dan [[return]] from four, but not worth [[staring]] a [[filmmaking]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, [[potentially]] only the competant [[directorate]] saves it from being the [[meanest]] in the [[serials]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie is not porn, it was not meant to be porn, and unless my uncle runs for president of the world it should never be considered porn.

now that that issue was sorted out, i can say i thoroughly recommend this film, as it's issues are still widely available. it's funny, the acting is great and it raises serious(curious) questions.

i can't fully understand why this film was so mistreated, probably this is why i plan to never visit the us. Lena is the true pioneer of the modern riot-grrrl movement, confusion, curiosity and wit are her main attributes, she is occasionally angry, but aren't we all? --------------------------------------------- Result 2146 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] When you [[pick]] a movie I [[hope]] one factor you will [[consider]], are the [[actors]] in the [[movie]] [[using]] their fame to [[influence]] the moral [[fabric]] of our [[society]] in a positive or [[negative]] way? This is not a political [[statement]] this is a [[moral]] [[issue]] that effects are [[society]]. When a comedian/actor makes [[curl]] sexual and [[racist]] [[remarks]] about a [[teenager]] and her father we should ask ourselves (do I [[want]] to [[support]] that behavior)? In this case [[Mr]]. Foxx [[behavior]] [[tears]] at the social [[fabric]] that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. When you [[elect]] a movie I [[expectancy]] one factor you will [[examine]], are the [[protagonists]] in the [[cinema]] [[usage]] their fame to [[influenced]] the moral [[texture]] of our [[societal]] in a positive or [[adverse]] way? This is not a political [[statements]] this is a [[ethical]] [[issuing]] that effects are [[societies]]. When a comedian/actor makes [[buckle]] sexual and [[racial]] [[observations]] about a [[adolescents]] and her father we should ask ourselves (do I [[wish]] to [[helps]] that behavior)? In this case [[Hannes]]. Foxx [[behaviors]] [[sobs]] at the social [[texture]] that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The first five minutes of this [[movie]] showed [[potential]]. After that, it went straight from something [[possibly]] decent to some [[sort]] of illegitimate [[comedy]]. The [[best]] [[part]] is that I couldn't [[stop]] [[thinking]] of Supertroopers [[thanks]] to Joey Kern. I would recommend watching this [[movie]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a [[movie]]. There are so [[many]] scenes in this [[movie]] that makes one just stop and wonder if the [[entire]] [[cast]] and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[amazes]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only [[cost]] about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's [[Gate]] for being able to [[pull]] that one off. The first five minutes of this [[filmmaking]] showed [[prospective]]. After that, it went straight from something [[maybe]] decent to some [[kind]] of illegitimate [[parody]]. The [[optimum]] [[portions]] is that I couldn't [[discontinue]] [[thoughts]] of Supertroopers [[appreciation]] to Joey Kern. I would recommend watching this [[filmmaking]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a [[filmmaking]]. There are so [[numerous]] scenes in this [[filmmaking]] that makes one just stop and wonder if the [[whole]] [[casting]] and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[astonishes]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only [[price]] about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's [[Puerta]] for being able to [[pulling]] that one off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[Howling]] [[II]] [[starts]] as it [[means]] to [[go]] on with a [[bizarre]] and surreal [[opening]] [[narration]] by Christopher Lee whose [[image]] is [[imposed]] over a moving [[star]] [[field]], oh and a skeleton [[appears]] as well for some [[reason]]. He says "for it's [[written]] the [[inhabitants]] of the [[Earth]] have been [[made]] [[drunk]] with her blood. And I [[saw]] her sip [[upon]] a hairy beast and she [[held]] forth a golden challis full of the [[filthiest]] fornication's and [[upon]] her [[forehead]] was [[written]], behold I am the [[great]] [[Mother]] of #an inaudible word I couldn't make out no matter how many [[times]] I rewound the tape and [[tried]] to, [[sorry]]# and all [[abominations]] of the [[Earth]]". This opening narration means [[nothing]] at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen [[caption]] that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's [[probably]] not too long after the events of the original [[Howling]] (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called [[Stefan]] Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will [[come]] back to [[life]]. Ben [[dismisses]] such [[nonsense]]. But together with one of Karen's [[friends]] and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he [[visits]] [[Stefan]] at his [[home]]. There [[Stefan]] tells them about [[Werewolves]] and how they can be [[killed]], he mentions Stirba ([[Sybil]] Danning) who is the [[queen]] of [[Werewolves]]. [[Stefan]] [[also]] shows them a [[photograph]] [[taken]] at Karen's funeral of a [[woman]] named [[Mariana]] ([[Marsha]] A. Hunt) and that she is an [[extremely]] [[vicious]] and [[dangerous]] Werewolf who [[wants]] [[Karen]]. [[Stefan]] [[says]] he will stake any Werewoves through the [[heart]] with titanium. Ben figures out that [[Stefan]] means he will stake [[Karen]] as well so [[together]] with [[Jenny]] he travels to the [[graveyard]] where his sister's crypt is to [[stop]] [[Stefan]]. However lots of [[Werewolves]] turn up and attack [[Stefan]], Ben and [[Jenny]]. They survive the [[attack]] and [[manage]] to [[find]] out that Stirba is to be [[found]] in Transylvania. They all [[decide]] to [[travel]] to Transylvania and [[stop]] Stirba and her Werewolves from [[taking]] over the [[Earth]] by fulfilling a [[centuries]] [[old]] [[curse]]. Once there they [[travel]] to a [[small]] [[town]] [[called]] Vlkava which means 'where [[wolves]] live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his [[small]] but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually [[shot]] in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is [[part]] dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. The [[Shouting]] [[SECONDLY]] [[launched]] as it [[modes]] to [[going]] on with a [[weird]] and surreal [[opens]] [[storytelling]] by Christopher Lee whose [[imagery]] is [[dictated]] over a moving [[stars]] [[campo]], oh and a skeleton [[appearing]] as well for some [[reasons]]. He says "for it's [[wrote]] the [[residents]] of the [[Overland]] have been [[brought]] [[drunken]] with her blood. And I [[noticed]] her sip [[after]] a hairy beast and she [[hold]] forth a golden challis full of the [[dirtiest]] fornication's and [[after]] her [[brows]] was [[wrote]], behold I am the [[marvellous]] [[Mom]] of #an inaudible word I couldn't make out no matter how many [[time]] I rewound the tape and [[attempted]] to, [[apologizing]]# and all [[horrors]] of the [[Overland]]". This opening narration means [[nada]] at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen [[subtitles]] that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's [[arguably]] not too long after the events of the original [[Shouting]] (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called [[Stephen]] Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will [[coming]] back to [[lives]]. Ben [[denies]] such [[claptrap]]. But together with one of Karen's [[friendships]] and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he [[tours]] [[Stephen]] at his [[households]]. There [[Stephen]] tells them about [[Werewolf]] and how they can be [[killing]], he mentions Stirba ([[Sibyl]] Danning) who is the [[quinn]] of [[Werewolf]]. [[Stephane]] [[additionally]] shows them a [[picture]] [[picked]] at Karen's funeral of a [[dame]] named [[Marion]] ([[Mircea]] A. Hunt) and that she is an [[greatly]] [[cruel]] and [[risky]] Werewolf who [[wish]] [[Carin]]. [[Stephane]] [[tells]] he will stake any Werewoves through the [[heartland]] with titanium. Ben figures out that [[Steven]] means he will stake [[Karin]] as well so [[jointly]] with [[Jennie]] he travels to the [[funerals]] where his sister's crypt is to [[cease]] [[Stephen]]. However lots of [[Werewolf]] turn up and attack [[Stephen]], Ben and [[Jennie]]. They survive the [[onslaught]] and [[managing]] to [[finds]] out that Stirba is to be [[uncovered]] in Transylvania. They all [[deciding]] to [[journey]] to Transylvania and [[discontinue]] Stirba and her Werewolves from [[adopting]] over the [[Tierra]] by fulfilling a [[ages]] [[longtime]] [[calamity]]. Once there they [[travels]] to a [[petite]] [[city]] [[termed]] Vlkava which means 'where [[woolf]] live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his [[little]] but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually [[filmed]] in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is [[parties]] dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe it that was the worst movie i have ever seen in my life. i laughed a couple of times. ( probably because of how stupid it was ) If someone paid me to see that movie again i wouldn't. the plot was so horrible , it made no sense , and the acting was so bad that i couldn't even tell if they were trying. that movie was terrible rating: F --------------------------------------------- Result 2150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Strained]] comedy, a sketch-like revue which was initially a [[vehicle]] to showcase one-time radio star Jack Pearl but is now best remembered as America's introduction to The Three Stooges. Actually, Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billed]] [[alongside]] comic Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast features Jimmy Durante (who is completely wasted on [[dim]] material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[audience]] for the film these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't find much to applaud here. [[Incredibly]] loud and [[overbearing]], it shows how far Hollywood had to go to reach a certain level of slapstick [[sophistication]]. *1/2 from **** [[Uptight]] comedy, a sketch-like revue which was initially a [[motor]] to showcase one-time radio star Jack Pearl but is now best remembered as America's introduction to The Three Stooges. Actually, Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billing]] [[beside]] comic Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast features Jimmy Durante (who is completely wasted on [[bleak]] material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[audiences]] for the film these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't find much to applaud here. [[Extraordinarily]] loud and [[domineering]], it shows how far Hollywood had to go to reach a certain level of slapstick [[complexity]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Here's an interesting little movie that strictly gives the phrase "low budget" a horrible name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high camp [[fun]], which is way, WAY off the mark. A glamorous showcase of [[breasts]] and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, [[opposing]] the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! Here's an interesting little movie that strictly gives the phrase "low budget" a horrible name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high camp [[funny]], which is way, WAY off the mark. A glamorous showcase of [[boobies]] and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, [[contrasting]] the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2152 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first tell everyone that this movie was terrible. Downright terrible. And not, [[surprisingly]] for the reasons [[mentioned]] in the first [[review]]. I [[thought]] I [[might]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it [[deserved]], but was sorrowfully rebuked upon reading what he [[said]]. I am [[quite]] ashamed to be [[taking]] the same side as someone who commented that the movie "definitely lacks good-looking females." Let me be the first to say, "Wow! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[reviewing]] there. My [[mind]] can [[hardly]] [[comprehend]] the philosophical musings about this [[movie]]." [[Seriously]] though, a [[lack]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an [[essential]] to a [[movie]]. If you're desperate enough for "good-looking [[females]]" you should really watch other [[types]] of movies, not necessarily [[falling]] into the sci-fi category. Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first tell everyone that this movie was terrible. Downright terrible. And not, [[unexpectedly]] for the reasons [[quoted]] in the first [[reviewing]]. I [[thinks]] I [[apt]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it [[deserves]], but was sorrowfully rebuked upon reading what he [[told]]. I am [[rather]] ashamed to be [[picked]] the same side as someone who commented that the movie "definitely lacks good-looking females." Let me be the first to say, "Wow! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[revisit]] there. My [[intellect]] can [[practically]] [[understanding]] the philosophical musings about this [[filmmaking]]." [[Severely]] though, a [[shortage]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an [[indispensable]] to a [[filmmaking]]. If you're desperate enough for "good-looking [[female]]" you should really watch other [[genre]] of movies, not necessarily [[diminishing]] into the sci-fi category. --------------------------------------------- Result 2153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This game is one of the best RPG. Fist, It is actually more amusing than any other because of the battle system (you harm the enemy depending on how you aim the attack, you can transform into dragoon, the special attack, the magic...). The script is very good. Characters are all lovely and you have no long dialogs to support, as happened in several games of Final Fintasy series. I got bored of that dialogs about past, when you just want to go on with the game's story. Ambientation is a jewel on this game, it combines Middle-age fantasy with futuristic science fiction. It's remarkable that animation effects are just incredible, i like them more than other in other modern games (we can't remember that Legend of the Dragoon is 8 years now). Then, Map is huge, there are all kinds of places an enemies. Finally, Music is not the best game muse I have heard, but it's perfect for a game like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After you've seen this small likable and comical film, you will for sure feel better. Cheer to Yves B. Pelletier to have given birth to this small magnificent movie moment, that according to me, will be recognized as a marking movie of year 2004 for the Quebec. The actors Isabelle Blais, Emmanuel Bilodeau, Sylvie Moreau and Stéphane Gagnon all deliver a touching performance. I would compare the feeling that this wonderful story gives you to the ones that Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain have given me. So if you've like the Jean-Pierre Jeunet magnificent film, I would say that you should also like the first movie from Yves B. Pelletier, Les Aimants --------------------------------------------- Result 2155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Maria Braun got married right in the middle of [[combat]] all [[around]] her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[ripped]] through the [[building]], to [[begin]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[papers]] on a [[pile]] of [[rubble]] on the [[street]]. [[Perhaps]] this may [[strike]] some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to [[come]]: [[marriage]] on the [[rocks]], so to [[speak]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian [[prison]] [[camp]], unbenownst to the [[helpless]] but hopeful and proud Maria, who [[keeps]] standing by the [[depressing]] rubble of the train station as some come [[home]], others don't, with a sign [[awaiting]] Hermann.

Trouble [[arises]], as [[happens]] in Rainer [[Werner]] Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his [[best]] and most [[provocative]], we [[see]] as Maria ([[uncommonly]] [[gorgeous]] [[Hanna]] Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her [[man]], [[even]] if it means [[working]] at a [[bar]] for American GI's and, even [[still]] after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a [[black]] GI and [[comes]] [[close]] to bearing his [[child]] (that is, [[naturally]], until he reappears and a [[murder]] [[occurs]] and he takes the [[rap]] so she can be safe), or [[working]] for a German [[businessman]] ([[effectively]] [[sympathetic]] [[Ivan]] Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and [[rising]] [[star]] in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll [[always]] be [[married]].

It's [[hard]] to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. [[Money]], sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her [[cake]] and eats it with a sultry [[smile]]: she gets to have a husband, more or [[less]] ([[actually]] a [[lot]] less until the [[last]] ten minutes of the [[film]]) while [[obtaining]] things- a [[man]] who dotes on her whenever he can, a [[new]] and [[expensive]] [[house]] with servants, a [[secretary]], money- that others [[around]] her aren't getting due to already being with a [[man]] or too [[weak]] in a [[position]] to [[rise]] [[anywhere]] (such as the secretary, [[played]] [[interestingly]] enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

[[Maria]] is [[sexy]], confident, and all [[alone]], with an [[idealized]] [[life]] [[going]] against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle [[going]] on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. Maria Braun got married right in the middle of [[counter]] all [[about]] her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[buzzed]] through the [[construction]], to [[startup]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[documentation]] on a [[heap]] of [[wrack]] on the [[rue]]. [[Possibly]] this may [[strikes]] some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to [[arriving]]: [[marital]] on the [[rattles]], so to [[talking]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian [[internment]] [[campground]], unbenownst to the [[powerless]] but hopeful and proud Maria, who [[retains]] standing by the [[demoralizing]] rubble of the train station as some come [[household]], others don't, with a sign [[hoping]] Hermann.

Trouble [[emerges]], as [[arises]] in Rainer [[Warner]] Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his [[finest]] and most [[inflammatory]], we [[seeing]] as Maria ([[eminently]] [[beautiful]] [[Hannah]] Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her [[males]], [[yet]] if it means [[collaborating]] at a [[solicitor]] for American GI's and, even [[yet]] after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a [[negro]] GI and [[occurs]] [[near]] to bearing his [[children]] (that is, [[clearly]], until he reappears and a [[slain]] [[arises]] and he takes the [[rapper]] so she can be safe), or [[works]] for a German [[trader]] ([[effectiveness]] [[empathy]] [[Evan]] Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and [[rises]] [[stars]] in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll [[permanently]] be [[wedding]].

It's [[stiff]] to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. [[Moneys]], sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her [[pudding]] and eats it with a sultry [[mouse]]: she gets to have a husband, more or [[lesser]] ([[genuinely]] a [[batch]] less until the [[latter]] ten minutes of the [[films]]) while [[obtain]] things- a [[guy]] who dotes on her whenever he can, a [[novel]] and [[pricey]] [[haus]] with servants, a [[secretaries]], money- that others [[about]] her aren't getting due to already being with a [[dude]] or too [[flimsy]] in a [[posture]] to [[increase]] [[somewhere]] (such as the secretary, [[served]] [[suspiciously]] enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

[[Mariah]] is [[sexier]], confident, and all [[merely]], with an [[modelled]] [[iife]] [[go]] against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle [[go]] on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. --------------------------------------------- Result 2156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK this movie was made for one [[reason]] and one [[reason]] only TO MAKE [[MONEY]]!!The producers [[obviously]] didn't [[care]] about [[killing]] a [[classic]] horror [[movie]]. I [[knew]] this movie [[would]] suck as soon as it was [[going]] to be a pg-13 how [[many]] pg-13 slashers [[movies]] have [[turned]] out to be good? [[Thats]] like [[asking]] how many [[women]] have been on the [[moon]]? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no [[masterpiece]] but it certainly deserves to be [[recognised]] as a movie that stays true to its [[genre]] and deosnt [[try]] to be anything more than that.

My [[problem]] with Prom night 2008 is the [[way]] that it handles the killer and i have 3 [[major]] problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main [[victims]] family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he [[says]] he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he [[want]] to kill her, [[love]] her or just plain rape her?? 3) The [[killer]] is too [[good]], how did he [[develop]] all of his [[skills]]? He [[used]] to be a [[teacher]], so in this one scene where he [[kills]] the main [[victims]] [[boyfriend]] while hes basically on [[top]] of her [[asleep]] and she doesn't [[notice]], it all silly 2 stars out of 10 [[terrible]],silly,[[stupid]] [[attempt]] at a [[horror]] [[movie]] OK this movie was made for one [[motif]] and one [[cause]] only TO MAKE [[FINANCIAL]]!!The producers [[definitely]] didn't [[healthcare]] about [[killed]] a [[typical]] horror [[film]]. I [[knowed]] this movie [[ought]] suck as soon as it was [[go]] to be a pg-13 how [[countless]] pg-13 slashers [[kino]] have [[revolved]] out to be good? [[Didnt]] like [[asked]] how many [[wife]] have been on the [[luna]]? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no [[centerpiece]] but it certainly deserves to be [[admitted]] as a movie that stays true to its [[type]] and deosnt [[attempt]] to be anything more than that.

My [[troubles]] with Prom night 2008 is the [[paths]] that it handles the killer and i have 3 [[momentous]] problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main [[fatalities]] family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he [[tells]] he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he [[wanna]] to kill her, [[amour]] her or just plain rape her?? 3) The [[murderer]] is too [[alright]], how did he [[develops]] all of his [[jurisdiction]]? He [[uses]] to be a [[educator]], so in this one scene where he [[slain]] the main [[fatalities]] [[dude]] while hes basically on [[supreme]] of her [[sleeps]] and she doesn't [[notices]], it all silly 2 stars out of 10 [[scary]],silly,[[dumb]] [[tries]] at a [[abomination]] [[filmmaking]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Excellent]] [[show]]. [[Instead]] of watching the same [[old]] sitcom [[type]] [[shows]] where it's the same [[old]] [[thing]], just different "[[stars]]", this refreshing [[show]] [[provided]] an [[incredibly]] entertaining [[view]] of office situations. We have been away from watching any [[television]] for 2 [[years]] and after coming back, of all the [[shows]] available we look forward to [[watching]] this [[show]] on W. Shame on [[Global]] for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS [[make]] it. Everyone I [[talk]] to [[enjoys]] this show and I believe it was [[foolish]] of Global to walk away. I guess they [[want]] to stick it out with the typical [[mind]] numbing [[shows]] from the States [[instead]] of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me [[wrong]], I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[come]] on people, let's keep the [[variety]]. This [[unique]] [[show]] provided a very [[comedic]] [[view]] of a [[slightly]] exaggerated realistic side of office life and relationships, with [[unique]] [[characters]] that you don't [[see]] on any sitcoms [[today]] or in the past. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. [[Great]] [[shows]]. [[However]] of watching the same [[elderly]] sitcom [[kind]] [[demonstrates]] where it's the same [[antigua]] [[stuff]], just different "[[celebrity]]", this refreshing [[demonstrating]] [[gave]] an [[extremely]] entertaining [[opinion]] of office situations. We have been away from watching any [[tvs]] for 2 [[ages]] and after coming back, of all the [[show]] available we look forward to [[staring]] this [[spectacle]] on W. Shame on [[Universally]] for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS [[deliver]] it. Everyone I [[schmooze]] to [[enjoy]] this show and I believe it was [[moronic]] of Global to walk away. I guess they [[wanted]] to stick it out with the typical [[intellect]] numbing [[demonstrate]] from the States [[however]] of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me [[incorrect]], I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[coming]] on people, let's keep the [[multiple]]. This [[sole]] [[displayed]] provided a very [[slapstick]] [[opinions]] of a [[mildly]] exaggerated realistic side of office life and relationships, with [[sole]] [[features]] that you don't [[behold]] on any sitcoms [[yesterday]] or in the past. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. --------------------------------------------- Result 2158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am a MAJOR fan of the horror genre! I LOVE horror/slasher/gore flicks of all kinds. Some of my favorites are the really "good" bad horror flicks. But this movies has NOTHING to warrant it's viewing!! I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about everything that's wrong with it.

The script is horrid. The acting is horrid. The FX are not even worth discussing. The "set" is an absolute JOKE!! The sad thing is I think there MAY be some real potential in a couple of the actors, but this vehicle left them NOTHING to work with!!!

Suffice it to say I saw it for "free" & feel I was robbed!! The time you'd WASTE watching this would be better spent flossing your cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Sisters in law will be released theatrically on march 24th in Sweden. A good occasion for our Nordic friends to discover this [[original]] and thoughtful [[documentary]]. It was shown in Göteborg together with a retrospective dedicated to Kim Longinotto, "director in focus" of the festival. She gave a master class, very much appreciated, [[telling]] about her method as documentary filmmaker and told the audience about the special [[circumstances]] which [[led]] her to shoot Sisters in [[law]] twice : the [[first]] [[version]] [[got]] lost for good, so a second shooting was organized and the film turned out to be [[different]] at the [[end]]. A pretty [[awful]] problem [[happened]], in this [[case]], to create the possibility of a very strong [[movie]]. Sisters in law will be released theatrically on march 24th in Sweden. A good occasion for our Nordic friends to discover this [[initial]] and thoughtful [[documentation]]. It was shown in Göteborg together with a retrospective dedicated to Kim Longinotto, "director in focus" of the festival. She gave a master class, very much appreciated, [[saying]] about her method as documentary filmmaker and told the audience about the special [[situations]] which [[culminated]] her to shoot Sisters in [[ley]] twice : the [[outset]] [[stepping]] [[gets]] lost for good, so a second shooting was organized and the film turned out to be [[several]] at the [[terminates]]. A pretty [[horrible]] problem [[sweated]], in this [[lawsuit]], to create the possibility of a very strong [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Every time I watch this movie I am more impressed by the whole production. I have come to the conclusion that it is the best romantic comedy ever made. Everyone involved is perfect; script, acting, direction, sets and editing. Whilst James Stewart can always be relied upon for a good performance, and the supporting cast are magnificent, it is Margaret Sullavan who reveals what an underrated actress she was. Her tragic personal life give poignancy to her qualities as a performer where comedy acting skills are not easy to achieve. Lubitsch managed to get the best and he obviously gave his best. Watch for the number of scenes which were done on one take - breathtaking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] "John Hughes' [[son]] [[wrote]] a high school [[drama]]! Wow!" I thought as I [[checked]] the flick's [[info]] here on IMDb, late on a Saturday night, having found myself [[watching]] the [[opening]] [[credits]] on BBC2.

I've just [[finished]] [[watching]] it, and sadly it was downhill from there on. [[Arguably]] you can't [[spoil]] a film this poor, but I'll leave the spoilers out of this review...

There's an [[awful]] lot of style over very little substance: unfortunately the [[style]] hasn't [[dated]] too well in the eight [[years]] since its [[release]]. As for the substance, the [[film]] tries to pose an interesting [[look]] at the [[nature]] of [[control]] in society through the microcosm of school-life; but beneath the [[shiny]] veneer, a remotely [[meaningful]] or relevant [[argument]] fails to materialise. [[Characters]] are painted in childishly [[broad]] strokes, [[falling]] into the [[kind]] of generic stereotypes the writer's father sought to question in [[Breakfast]] Club.

Director Kyle Cooper does a decent job keeping the [[pace]] up ([[perhaps]] relying a little too much on montages of [[information]], which soon becomes a [[tiresome]] device, but at [[least]] pushes the [[story]] along), but his [[efforts]] don't [[sufficiently]] [[detract]] from the [[poor]] [[script]] and [[bizarre]] [[casting]] (how [[anyone]] is [[supposed]] to side with 'Maddox', when Blake [[Shields]] gurns and glowers his [[way]] through the [[part]], I just can't [[understand]]), not to mention the [[numerous]] gaping plot holes (I'm all for [[creative]] [[license]], but when the "bad [[guys]]" know the [[identities]] of the "good [[guys]]" [[making]] their [[lives]] a misery, but [[fail]] to [[act]] in any [[way]] to [[stop]] them, you really have to wonder why this [[script]] didn't undergo another few re-drafts before production - did [[Daddy]] even read it?).

I'm sure a [[younger]] [[audience]] might get some enjoyment from this [[film]] (and all power to them), but they're [[really]] [[better]] off sticking with Hughes Sr.'s high school output, and if the [[idea]] of school-time [[rebellion]] is what [[really]] appeals, the 1968 [[classic]] "If..." is a [[much]] more satisfying [[examination]] of the [[subject]]. "John Hughes' [[sons]] [[written]] a high school [[tragedy]]! Wow!" I thought as I [[audit]] the flick's [[information]] here on IMDb, late on a Saturday night, having found myself [[staring]] the [[introductory]] [[credit]] on BBC2.

I've just [[finishing]] [[staring]] it, and sadly it was downhill from there on. [[Presumably]] you can't [[ruin]] a film this poor, but I'll leave the spoilers out of this review...

There's an [[frightful]] lot of style over very little substance: unfortunately the [[elegance]] hasn't [[dating]] too well in the eight [[olds]] since its [[freeing]]. As for the substance, the [[films]] tries to pose an interesting [[gaze]] at the [[characters]] of [[supervise]] in society through the microcosm of school-life; but beneath the [[brilliant]] veneer, a remotely [[valid]] or relevant [[controversy]] fails to materialise. [[Attribute]] are painted in childishly [[extensive]] strokes, [[decline]] into the [[genre]] of generic stereotypes the writer's father sought to question in [[Supper]] Club.

Director Kyle Cooper does a decent job keeping the [[rhythm]] up ([[maybe]] relying a little too much on montages of [[info]], which soon becomes a [[exhausting]] device, but at [[lowest]] pushes the [[history]] along), but his [[endeavors]] don't [[appropriately]] [[distract]] from the [[poorest]] [[hyphen]] and [[strange]] [[foundry]] (how [[somebody]] is [[presumed]] to side with 'Maddox', when Blake [[Shield]] gurns and glowers his [[route]] through the [[party]], I just can't [[realise]]), not to mention the [[various]] gaping plot holes (I'm all for [[imaginative]] [[authorized]], but when the "bad [[boy]]" know the [[identity]] of the "good [[boy]]" [[doing]] their [[life]] a misery, but [[fails]] to [[ley]] in any [[pathway]] to [[cease]] them, you really have to wonder why this [[hyphen]] didn't undergo another few re-drafts before production - did [[Papa]] even read it?).

I'm sure a [[youngest]] [[viewers]] might get some enjoyment from this [[filmmaking]] (and all power to them), but they're [[truly]] [[optimum]] off sticking with Hughes Sr.'s high school output, and if the [[concept]] of school-time [[insurrection]] is what [[genuinely]] appeals, the 1968 [[classical]] "If..." is a [[very]] more satisfying [[reviewed]] of the [[themes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This [[film]] [[came]] out 12 [[years]] [[years]] [[ago]], and was a revelation [[even]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The [[textbooks]] on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing houses. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field [[Guide]]" with its flow chart of influence that pulls together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the [[film]] - ignores the houses [[completely]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive [[book]] on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the [[background]] information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical [[context]] is the biggest missing [[part]] of "Paris is Burning".

The film is [[valuable]] because it [[focuses]] on a scene [[otherwise]] being [[ignored]]. It is a valuable snapshot of [[life]] in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not [[come]] out until [[three]] [[years]] later.

Of historical importance, but we still [[need]] [[someone]] to do [[either]] a [[book]] or a documentary film that provides more context. This [[kino]] [[arrived]] out 12 [[olds]] [[olds]] [[formerly]], and was a revelation [[yet]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The [[schoolbooks]] on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing houses. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field [[Handbook]]" with its flow chart of influence that pulls together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the [[flick]] - ignores the houses [[absolutely]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive [[ledger]] on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the [[context]] information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical [[backgrounds]] is the biggest missing [[portions]] of "Paris is Burning".

The film is [[precious]] because it [[spotlight]] on a scene [[else]] being [[forgotten]]. It is a valuable snapshot of [[iife]] in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not [[arriving]] out until [[tre]] [[olds]] later.

Of historical importance, but we still [[needed]] [[everyone]] to do [[neither]] a [[ledger]] or a documentary film that provides more context. --------------------------------------------- Result 2163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I don't know what [[would]] be so great about this [[movie]]. Even worse, why should anyone [[bother]] seeing this one ? First of all there is no [[story]]. One [[could]] [[say]] that even without a [[story]] a movie [[could]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sort]] of [[strong]] feeling (laughter, [[cry]], fear, ...), but in my [[opinion]] this [[movie]] does not do that either.

You are just watching [[images]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[useful]] things to do.

I guess you [[could]] [[say]] the movie is an experiment and it is daring because it lacks all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your valuable time and 7 EUR of your money ? For me the answer is: no. I don't know what [[should]] be so great about this [[movies]]. Even worse, why should anyone [[irritate]] seeing this one ? First of all there is no [[fairytales]]. One [[wo]] [[says]] that even without a [[histories]] a movie [[did]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sorts]] of [[forceful]] feeling (laughter, [[cries]], fear, ...), but in my [[viewing]] this [[filmmaking]] does not do that either.

You are just watching [[pictures]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[advantageous]] things to do.

I guess you [[wo]] [[says]] the movie is an experiment and it is daring because it lacks all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your valuable time and 7 EUR of your money ? For me the answer is: no. --------------------------------------------- Result 2164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] The reason I intended to give this movie a chance to take 2 hours of my life (actually it was only 35 minutes) was my wish to try to understand and hopefully appreciate Indian cinema. All I have ever seen were few older movies of S.Ray.

Browsing through IMDb I came across this one and after seeing [[rating]] of 8.7 I [[concluded]] this must be the one which will open the doors of [[unknown]] and bring [[artistic]] enjoyment. Oh my how wrong I was! The only logical explanation for this rating of 8.7 is that most of 970 people who voted are Indian and their only venture outside Bolliwood production were Adam Sandler movies.

With this rating this movie would be ranked on 9th place on IMDb List of 250 best movies above Citizen Cane, Goodfellas of Psycho! I am really not in a mood to review and criticize because there is [[simply]] [[nothing]] that I find worth remembering from this painful [[experience]]. My only hope is that there is a lot of Hindu who like me find this movie as is -- plain stupid, with abundance of kitsch and [[cheesy]] music. The reason I intended to give this movie a chance to take 2 hours of my life (actually it was only 35 minutes) was my wish to try to understand and hopefully appreciate Indian cinema. All I have ever seen were few older movies of S.Ray.

Browsing through IMDb I came across this one and after seeing [[appraisals]] of 8.7 I [[finalised]] this must be the one which will open the doors of [[unbeknownst]] and bring [[artsy]] enjoyment. Oh my how wrong I was! The only logical explanation for this rating of 8.7 is that most of 970 people who voted are Indian and their only venture outside Bolliwood production were Adam Sandler movies.

With this rating this movie would be ranked on 9th place on IMDb List of 250 best movies above Citizen Cane, Goodfellas of Psycho! I am really not in a mood to review and criticize because there is [[exclusively]] [[anything]] that I find worth remembering from this painful [[experiences]]. My only hope is that there is a lot of Hindu who like me find this movie as is -- plain stupid, with abundance of kitsch and [[corny]] music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Young]] [[beautiful]] [[Eva]] (Hedy Lamarr) marries an [[older]] [[man]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't [[satisfy]] her [[sexually]] and ignores her. Frustrated she goes home and plans to [[get]] a divorce. [[Then]], one day, she's [[skinny]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the woods. Her horse gallops off with her [[clothes]]...and she runs after it! She meets young and very handsome [[Adam]] (Aribert Mog). They make [[love]] and she realizes this is the [[man]] she [[wants]].

[[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!! Naturally, [[since]] this was [[made]] in 1933, she has to be punished for her sin so it [[leads]] to a [[tragic]] finale. [[END]] OF [[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!!

This [[horrified]] people in 1933 but it's [[pretty]] tame by today's standards. Lamarr's nude [[swim]] [[shows]] nothing and when she [[runs]] after the [[horse]] [[totally]] [[nude]], it's [[either]] [[shown]] in extreme [[long]] shot or is [[covered]] by branches and such. There's only a few minor shots of her [[breasts]]. [[Also]] when she has [[sex]] with Mog, nothing is [[shown]] but her [[face]] but you [[see]] her [[achieving]] an orgasm. These scene were [[considered]] pretty extreme in their day and were [[cut]] out [[completely]] of the American [[release]]. Now [[today]] they're back in. This [[film]] would [[get]] by with a PG-13 [[easily]] now.

[[Shock]] episodes [[aside]] this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[dialogue]]. Except for the music [[score]] this [[could]] be a [[silent]] picture. [[Luckily]] all the [[actors]] are good--Lamarr and Mog [[especially]] and they're so [[attractive]] that they just take your [[breath]] away watching them. [[Also]] the sequence where they make love is easily one of the most beautifully shot and acted [[sequences]] I've ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's [[quite]] a few of them) are [[unfortunately]] [[pretty]] [[obvious]] today. I actually started to giggle during one!

So, great direction, beautiful imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly bowled over by it. I [[found]] the movie slow-moving ([[beautiful]] imagery does not make a picture for me), [[somewhat]] dull, obvious, static and had a negative [[ending]]. I can [[live]] with the [[ending]] but it doesn't [[excuse]] the other problems I had with it. Also the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to [[love]] this [[movie]] so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. [[Youngsters]] [[fabulous]] [[Ewa]] (Hedy Lamarr) marries an [[oldest]] [[dude]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't [[respond]] her [[sexuality]] and ignores her. Frustrated she goes home and plans to [[obtain]] a divorce. [[Thereafter]], one day, she's [[lean]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the woods. Her horse gallops off with her [[outfits]]...and she runs after it! She meets young and very handsome [[Adams]] (Aribert Mog). They make [[likes]] and she realizes this is the [[males]] she [[wanted]].

[[DISCONTINUE]] SPOILER!!!! Naturally, [[because]] this was [[introduced]] in 1933, she has to be punished for her sin so it [[leeds]] to a [[dire]] finale. [[TERMINATES]] OF [[DISCONTINUE]] SPOILER!!!!

This [[aghast]] people in 1933 but it's [[quite]] tame by today's standards. Lamarr's nude [[swimmer]] [[exhibitions]] nothing and when she [[manages]] after the [[racehorse]] [[wholly]] [[bare]], it's [[neither]] [[illustrated]] in extreme [[lengthy]] shot or is [[encompassed]] by branches and such. There's only a few minor shots of her [[nipples]]. [[Apart]] when she has [[sexuality]] with Mog, nothing is [[revealed]] but her [[confront]] but you [[behold]] her [[achieve]] an orgasm. These scene were [[regarded]] pretty extreme in their day and were [[cutting]] out [[utterly]] of the American [[freed]]. Now [[yesterday]] they're back in. This [[movies]] would [[got]] by with a PG-13 [[readily]] now.

[[Shocked]] episodes [[sideways]] this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[conversation]]. Except for the music [[notation]] this [[did]] be a [[mute]] picture. [[Lucky]] all the [[protagonists]] are good--Lamarr and Mog [[specially]] and they're so [[seductive]] that they just take your [[respiratory]] away watching them. [[Similarly]] the sequence where they make love is easily one of the most beautifully shot and acted [[sequence]] I've ever [[noticed]] in a [[kino]]. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's [[rather]] a few of them) are [[woefully]] [[quite]] [[visible]] today. I actually started to giggle during one!

So, great direction, beautiful imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly bowled over by it. I [[unearthed]] the movie slow-moving ([[fabulous]] imagery does not make a picture for me), [[slightly]] dull, obvious, static and had a negative [[ended]]. I can [[iive]] with the [[terminated]] but it doesn't [[alibi]] the other problems I had with it. Also the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to [[adore]] this [[cinema]] so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Haven't seen any of the Japanese Grudge-films, but I really enjoy this one. I rarely get SCARED when watching films. I can jump, if the effect and sound is startling enough, but getting scared from a movie is a rare thing for me. But I did get scared from Grudge. Maybe because I didn't expect anything at all when I watched it. I didn't expect getting scared. I didn't know anything about it either. That was probably a good thing.

This is a film that you, apparently, either love or hate. Most people seem to compare it to the Japanese Grudge-films, but even though I haven't seen them, I believe it isn't right to compare any film, actually. This film stands on it its own.

The story is weak, most people say. I don't agree. The story is minimalistic, and done so on purpose. The story-telling techniques used - the broken time frame for instance - is perfectly done. The director knows exactly what he's doing, and I believe he got his vision through as he wanted it.

I gave this film 8 of 10. It is a film you will enjoy watching, or hate. It's as simple as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2167 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Brilliant]], [[clever]] [[movie]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a [[legendary]] french Canadian signer [[Felix]] Leclerc). Flashy [[photo]] and [[clever]] editing is the word of Leclerc, [[strongly]] [[helped]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[mysterious]] and well played movie. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] it 9.5/10 You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Sparkly]], [[artful]] [[kino]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a [[fabled]] french Canadian signer [[Jerome]] Leclerc). Flashy [[photographs]] and [[smarter]] editing is the word of Leclerc, [[flatly]] [[assisted]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[shadowy]] and well played movie. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[strenuously]] [[recommendation]] it 9.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I've watched a few episodes of this show and have found certain [[elements]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is totally upstaged and [[wrecked]] by the neverending [[immoral]] relationships of the show's [[characters]]. Everybody seems to have slept with just about everyone, even during office hours, which is ridiculously [[unrealistic]]. There doesn't [[seem]] to be one solid, lasting marriage or relationship in the [[entire]] [[show]] - everyone is [[broken]] up and on the prowl - [[hardly]] a [[true]] [[reflection]] of all Americans. [[Indeed]], there is a [[total]] [[lack]] of respect for marriage or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[cheap]] show that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real relationships rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. I've watched a few episodes of this show and have found certain [[element]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is totally upstaged and [[obliterated]] by the neverending [[amoral]] relationships of the show's [[nature]]. Everybody seems to have slept with just about everyone, even during office hours, which is ridiculously [[impractical]]. There doesn't [[seems]] to be one solid, lasting marriage or relationship in the [[overall]] [[exhibition]] - everyone is [[broke]] up and on the prowl - [[almost]] a [[veritable]] [[meditation]] of all Americans. [[Admittedly]], there is a [[unmitigated]] [[scarcity]] of respect for marriage or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[inexpensive]] show that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real relationships rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. --------------------------------------------- Result 2169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was [[wonderful]] as was his toying with the [[audience]]. [[Very]] [[nice]] [[work]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was [[wondrous]] as was his toying with the [[audiences]]. [[Quite]] [[handsome]] [[cooperates]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Have not seen this 1958 film in a very long time and greatly enjoyed Kim Novak playing the role as Gil Holroyd who is an actual witch and has an aunt named Queenie Holroyd who is also a witch and Gillian also has a brother warlock named Nick played by Jack Lemmon. When Gillian sets her eyes on Shep Henderson,(James Stewart) who is engaged to a girl he is going to marry; Gillian performers some magic spells with a cat and changes his mind about his intended bride and then becomes very lust full and falls in love with Gillian. The story tells that a real witch cannot fall in love, blush or cry and this begins to prove a big problem between Shep and Gillian, so Nick and Aunt Queenie decided they have to do something about this situation. Great film to view over and over again and a great classic film from 1958. --------------------------------------------- Result 2171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Elizabeth Taylor never could act at all and she was just her usual annoying, untalented self in this film. This was before she got so fat but she still looked very short and dumpy. Rock Hudson was OK as Bick Benedict but clearly an actor with more range like William Holden would have been better. James Dean certainly proved he knew how to mumble his way through a movie. The whole film is incredibly slow and goes on for far too long. The actors were all too young and lightweight and none of them aged convincingly due to the poor make-up. Hudson looked ridiculous just being padded out and Dean and Carroll Baker were obviously the same age.

0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not [[ashamed]] to [[admit]] I [[loved]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what [[works]]? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not [[embarrassed]] to [[recognise]] I [[cared]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what [[cooperated]]? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2173 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This [[film]] starts out with a [[family]] who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter [[Martha]] MacIssac ([[Olivia]] [[Dunne]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,([[Zack]]). The [[mother]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill Dunne) who suddenly walks in on her [[daughter]] and [[Zack]] making out and then all [[kinds]] of [[problems]] [[seem]] to [[surface]]. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[also]] big problems that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the [[teenage]] and Nick Mancuso,([[Richard]] Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This [[film]] will [[keep]] you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[filled]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy This [[movies]] starts out with a [[familial]] who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter [[Tasha]] MacIssac ([[Olivier]] [[Dunn]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,([[Zak]]). The [[mamma]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill Dunne) who suddenly walks in on her [[fille]] and [[Zac]] making out and then all [[genre]] of [[disorders]] [[looks]] to [[surfacing]]. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[similarly]] big problems that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the [[youngsters]] and Nick Mancuso,([[Richards]] Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This [[cinematography]] will [[conserve]] you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[fills]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy --------------------------------------------- Result 2174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow I loved this movie! It is about normal life in a small village. About hypocrisy and honesty, love and surrender. Great! It is about things everybody encounters in life. You have to do things with passion. But some people will not appreciate your passion and will try to stop you. There are people who find the opinion of others and 'what will the neighbors think' more important than to follow their heart. Don't let anybody's opinion stop you from fulfilling your dreams and passion. I loved the fact that the actors were all really normal people, it could have been my family. No big beauties, but all people you fall in love with during the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This was a movie that I had [[heard]] about all my life growing up, but had never [[seen]] it until a few years [[ago]]. It's [[reputation]] [[truly]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael [[Myers]], had seen the [[mask]], [[saw]] commercials for all of the crummy sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where [[Jason]] and [[Freddy]] had a [[deadly]] grip on the horror game, and never [[thought]] [[much]] of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[cheated]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[genuinely]] [[terrifying]] movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this [[film]] [[delivers]] on all the other [[levels]] most [[horror]] [[movies]] [[fail]] to [[achieve]] [[today]]. The [[atmosphere]] that John [[Carpenter]] [[creates]] is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west [[town]] is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" [[seemingly]] appearing and [[disappearing]] into the [[shadows]] at will. The [[simple]] [[yet]] brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with [[specific]] [[nods]] to [[Jamie]] Lee [[Curtis]] and Donald Pleasance. Ms. [[Curtis]] is such a good [[Laurie]] Strode because she is so [[likable]] and vulnerable. It is all the more [[frightening]] when she is being stalked by Michael [[Myers]] because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

[[Overall]], not only is Halloween a great [[horror]] movie, but [[also]] a [[great]] film. It [[works]] on [[many]] [[levels]] and draws the audience in and never [[lets]] up. This should be standard viewing for [[anyone]] wanting to [[experience]] a [[truly]] scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be [[surprised]] if you think you [[see]] "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! This was a movie that I had [[hear]] about all my life growing up, but had never [[saw]] it until a few years [[earlier]]. It's [[fame]] [[truthfully]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael [[Meyers]], had seen the [[disguises]], [[watched]] commercials for all of the crummy sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where [[Jas]] and [[Freddie]] had a [[mortal]] grip on the horror game, and never [[thinking]] [[very]] of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[misled]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[actually]] [[horrid]] movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this [[cinematography]] [[furnishes]] on all the other [[grades]] most [[terror]] [[movie]] [[fails]] to [[accomplish]] [[thursday]]. The [[vibe]] that John [[Woodwork]] [[generates]] is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west [[cities]] is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" [[allegedly]] appearing and [[vanishing]] into the [[shade]] at will. The [[mere]] [[even]] brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with [[peculiar]] [[nod]] to [[Jaime]] Lee [[Curtiss]] and Donald Pleasance. Ms. [[Curtiss]] is such a good [[Lori]] Strode because she is so [[endearing]] and vulnerable. It is all the more [[horrific]] when she is being stalked by Michael [[Meyers]] because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

[[Generals]], not only is Halloween a great [[abomination]] movie, but [[similarly]] a [[wondrous]] film. It [[cooperated]] on [[innumerable]] [[grades]] and draws the audience in and never [[entitles]] up. This should be standard viewing for [[someone]] wanting to [[enjoying]] a [[really]] scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be [[horrified]] if you think you [[consults]] "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! --------------------------------------------- Result 2176 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quote]] was essentially the [[theme]] for the movie in my [[opinion]]. Tom Cruise plays a young [[man]] who was handed everything in his [[life]]. He [[takes]] things for [[granted]] and it comes around full [[swing]] in this [[great]] movie with a [[superb]] twist. This [[film]] will keep you [[engaged]] in the plot and [[unable]] to [[pause]] it to take a [[bathroom]] [[break]].

Its a [[movie]] that really makes you step back and look at your [[life]] and how you live it. You cannot [[really]] appreciate the [[better]] things in life (the sweet), like [[love]], until you have [[experienced]] the [[bad]] (the sour). The theme will really [[get]] you to "[[open]] your eyes".

[[Only]] [[complaint]] is that the [[movie]] gets very [[twisted]] at [[points]] and is [[hard]] to really [[understand]]. I [[think]] the [[end]] is [[perfect]] though. I [[recommend]] you watch it and see for yourself. "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quoting]] was essentially the [[themes]] for the movie in my [[avis]]. Tom Cruise plays a young [[men]] who was handed everything in his [[vida]]. He [[pick]] things for [[given]] and it comes around full [[wobble]] in this [[wondrous]] movie with a [[wondrous]] twist. This [[kino]] will keep you [[betrothed]] in the plot and [[impossible]] to [[paused]] it to take a [[toilettes]] [[intermission]].

Its a [[kino]] that really makes you step back and look at your [[iife]] and how you live it. You cannot [[truthfully]] appreciate the [[nicer]] things in life (the sweet), like [[loves]], until you have [[undergone]] the [[amiss]] (the sour). The theme will really [[got]] you to "[[opens]] your eyes".

[[Solely]] [[grievance]] is that the [[kino]] gets very [[deformed]] at [[dots]] and is [[stiff]] to really [[realise]]. I [[thought]] the [[terminating]] is [[faultless]] though. I [[recommendation]] you watch it and see for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Short, but [[long]] enough, Cat [[Soup]] is a very [[wild]] [[trip]] to watch. One day, I was just [[searching]] [[though]] my On-demand [[list]] through the anime section and [[came]] [[across]] it, and [[decided]] to watch it. I [[spent]] the whole [[time]] [[basically]] sitting with my jaw agape. The [[whole]] time I was either vacant of [[thought]], or had a fleeting one which [[screamed]] "[[TURN]] IT [[OFF]]!!!". But I didn't. And actually, I'm [[glad]] I did.

The [[animation]] is stunning. Very [[artistic]], [[odd]] and dark. I personally [[loved]] it for the [[amazing]] [[animation]], but the [[seemingly]] vacant story [[behind]] it is [[equally]] [[compelling]] for myself.

A [[young]] boy--well, cat--goes in [[search]] of his sister's soul. [[In]] the first [[part]] she's lying sick in bed, and is [[soon]] [[paid]] by a visit from a [[sort]] of grim reaper. Her soul is [[split]] in half. One is [[regained]] by the cat [[boy]] while the other half is lost.

Then the [[rest]] of the [[film]] is [[slightly]] lost to me, [[honestly]]. I [[expect]] they [[go]] back, and their world is... [[perhaps]] [[slowly]] [[falling]] [[apart]]? [[Maybe]] her [[absence]] of soul is the [[answer]] behind this, for the [[rest]] of the [[film]] [[contains]] [[various]] [[stages]] of which the world's in. [[First]] there's a [[giant]] flood, and next it dries up into a [[bleak]] desert, and then everything [[freezes]] (thanks to [[either]] what is [[God]] or [[fate]], as you will [[see]]). [[Then]] I [[believe]] they [[find]] the sister's soul in the [[form]] of an orange [[flower]]. After that, the whole [[world]] disappears. [[Haha]], [[totally]] didn't [[get]] that, but it [[sends]] shivers down my spine each time.

[[Despite]] it's [[seemingly]] random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it [[enough]] and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy [[stuff]] like this, and [[would]] love to [[spend]] time doing that just to [[understand]] it. But to some people it's [[probably]] not their [[cup]] of tea. It comes off as highly [[disturbing]], so if you [[like]] your straight forward anime, this is not a [[film]] for you. If you have an [[open]] [[mind]] however, I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. Short, but [[lang]] enough, Cat [[Gumbo]] is a very [[feral]] [[voyager]] to watch. One day, I was just [[looking]] [[while]] my On-demand [[listing]] through the anime section and [[arrived]] [[during]] it, and [[opted]] to watch it. I [[expenditures]] the whole [[moment]] [[fundamentally]] sitting with my jaw agape. The [[ensemble]] time I was either vacant of [[ideology]], or had a fleeting one which [[hissed]] "[[CONVERTING]] IT [[DISABLE]]!!!". But I didn't. And actually, I'm [[happier]] I did.

The [[animate]] is stunning. Very [[arty]], [[weird]] and dark. I personally [[cared]] it for the [[excellent]] [[animate]], but the [[evidently]] vacant story [[backside]] it is [[alike]] [[convincing]] for myself.

A [[youth]] boy--well, cat--goes in [[quest]] of his sister's soul. [[During]] the first [[portions]] she's lying sick in bed, and is [[promptly]] [[credited]] by a visit from a [[genre]] of grim reaper. Her soul is [[splitting]] in half. One is [[retrieved]] by the cat [[dude]] while the other half is lost.

Then the [[stays]] of the [[films]] is [[mildly]] lost to me, [[sincerely]]. I [[expecting]] they [[going]] back, and their world is... [[potentially]] [[softly]] [[tumbling]] [[also]]? [[Probably]] her [[lacks]] of soul is the [[responses]] behind this, for the [[remainder]] of the [[cinematography]] [[involves]] [[multiple]] [[phases]] of which the world's in. [[Firstly]] there's a [[gigantic]] flood, and next it dries up into a [[pessimistic]] desert, and then everything [[freezing]] (thanks to [[neither]] what is [[Lord]] or [[destiny]], as you will [[behold]]). [[Thus]] I [[think]] they [[found]] the sister's soul in the [[forms]] of an orange [[flores]]. After that, the whole [[monde]] disappears. [[Dunno]], [[utterly]] didn't [[got]] that, but it [[sent]] shivers down my spine each time.

[[While]] it's [[reportedly]] random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it [[adequate]] and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy [[thing]] like this, and [[ought]] love to [[expenditure]] time doing that just to [[comprehend]] it. But to some people it's [[unquestionably]] not their [[goblet]] of tea. It comes off as highly [[nagging]], so if you [[iike]] your straight forward anime, this is not a [[films]] for you. If you have an [[opens]] [[intellect]] however, I [[very]] [[recommending]] this [[films]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have no idea how IMDb sorts reviews but I do know that, as happens often on Amazon.com, there are a striking number of very negative reviews for this movie which repeat the same, somewhat obscure talking points, almost verbatim. A campaign? Only IMDb knows.

As for this movie: it's fine. It's a funny, cute and very straightforward movie.

It's been over a decade since I worked in Brooklyn, lived in Queens and visited relatives in the South Bronx. But I found nothing inauthentic or exploitative about these kids. Is the grandmother a bizarre character? Yup. Do the dialogue and plot acknowledge this? Yes, thankfully, they do. Are other movies set in the LES and featuring Dominican / Puerto Rican kids possible? You betcha. Does that make this movie a crime — as some of the (to my eyes, astroturf) comments would suggest? Hardly. Let a thousand plastic flowers bloom.

This is better than any episode of Degrassi JR. High or Degrassi High. Scoff at the comparison but _we've never had that_ and I'm touched, to the core, by this movie's humility of purpose and tender spirit.

That said, I'd love to know the backstory behind all this backbiting! :-D --------------------------------------------- Result 2179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Since]] their [[nasty]] divorce from the Disney Company (with Disney [[keeping]] the Miramax brand) the Weinstein Company seems to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[FLOCK]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the nasty job of keeping track of registered sex offenders, this [[picture]] will [[tell]] you more about sex [[criminals]] than an [[entire]] season of Law and [[Order]] - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken [[agent]] worn-out by the task. Claire [[Danes]] for once has the [[opportunity]] to get into a solid role ([[instead]] of the junk she [[normally]] gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the [[novice]]. The [[cinematography]], pacing, [[editing]], all of it is [[first]] [[rate]] --- and I [[saw]] no [[trace]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[subject]] is handled with restraint, but it's [[still]] a [[tough]] [[subject]] and might make you [[sick]].

Fifty years [[ago]] there was [[almost]] no [[problem]] with the [[kinds]] of sex [[crimes]] [[herein]] [[shown]] in abundance which will [[shock]] [[even]] the jaded. Then came the [[Supreme]] [[Court]] [[decisions]] which [[simultaneously]] [[tied]] police hands as the "[[rights]]" of sex perverts were [[opened]] up and [[America]] was turned into a shopper's paradise for sexual [[perversity]], both willing and [[unwilling]]. Each such step was met with [[praise]] by Liberals, who [[celebrated]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with [[glossy]] [[covers]] on [[Time]] and Newsweek. [[Everyday]] liberals also [[praised]] the Court's [[action]] and mocked those who [[disagree]]. [[In]] 2007 how [[many]] [[Americans]] know that the [[kind]] of pornography that depicts [[savage]] violence and torture of [[young]] women -- can be [[subscribed]] to, and delivery of it is subsidized by the discount periodicals rate by the [[US]] [[Post]] Office. Just one part of the problem -- a problem that can tare anyone's [[family]] to [[shreds]].

[[Richard]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[gives]] his best in his performance here. Perhaps in his maturing age he's gained a measure of wisdom. [[Because]] their [[naughty]] divorce from the Disney Company (with Disney [[maintain]] the Miramax brand) the Weinstein Company seems to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[HERD]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the nasty job of keeping track of registered sex offenders, this [[image]] will [[say]] you more about sex [[perpetrators]] than an [[total]] season of Law and [[Ordering]] - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken [[patrolman]] worn-out by the task. Claire [[Denmark]] for once has the [[likelihood]] to get into a solid role ([[conversely]] of the junk she [[usually]] gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the [[rookie]]. The [[film]], pacing, [[edited]], all of it is [[fiirst]] [[rates]] --- and I [[sawthe]] no [[vestige]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[theme]] is handled with restraint, but it's [[yet]] a [[stiff]] [[theme]] and might make you [[sicker]].

Fifty years [[previously]] there was [[hardly]] no [[trouble]] with the [[sort]] of sex [[offence]] [[hereto]] [[indicated]] in abundance which will [[shocked]] [[yet]] the jaded. Then came the [[Higher]] [[Courthouse]] [[rulings]] which [[meanwhile]] [[tying]] police hands as the "[[right]]" of sex perverts were [[opens]] up and [[Americans]] was turned into a shopper's paradise for sexual [[depravity]], both willing and [[loath]]. Each such step was met with [[extol]] by Liberals, who [[commemorate]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with [[shine]] [[cover]] on [[Period]] and Newsweek. [[Ordinary]] liberals also [[praising]] the Court's [[efforts]] and mocked those who [[disagreement]]. [[Among]] 2007 how [[innumerable]] [[Us]] know that the [[sort]] of pornography that depicts [[cruel]] violence and torture of [[jeune]] women -- can be [[signed]] to, and delivery of it is subsidized by the discount periodicals rate by the [[USA]] [[Posting]] Office. Just one part of the problem -- a problem that can tare anyone's [[families]] to [[crumbs]].

[[Richards]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[donne]] his best in his performance here. Perhaps in his maturing age he's gained a measure of wisdom. --------------------------------------------- Result 2180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When this [[initially]] [[aired]] in 1984, my [[wife]] and I [[taped]] it on our very [[first]] VHS recorder. I [[still]] have that [[aging]] tape, which I [[try]] to watch [[annually]]. It was the year my first [[child]] was born, and [[seeing]] A Christmas [[Carol]] in this incarnation [[brings]] back [[fond]] [[memories]] of [[happy]] [[times]] -- [[many]] hours of which were spent with this [[film]] [[playing]] in the [[background]]. I [[finally]] [[broke]] down this year and [[ordered]] a DVD, which prompted me to take a [[moment]] to write this brief [[reaction]] to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[story]] is [[captured]] in [[outstanding]] [[fashion]] here. [[George]] C. Scott is [[absolutely]] amazing and [[totally]] believable as Scrooge. The supporting cast is [[equally]] [[spectacular]]. This is, to my mind, a [[flawless]] [[production]]. Little [[details]] add much to the enjoyment. The game "similes" Scrooge's nephew and wife play with their [[party]] [[guests]] is a neat [[item]]. (I've [[since]] re-created it with my [[high]] [[school]] English students as a brief respite from [[class]] [[work]]!) Honestly, I can [[think]] of few [[ways]] to entertain myself over the [[holidays]] I enjoy more than indulging in this CBS production, which was [[originally]] [[sponsored]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[old]] tape with the [[original]] IBM [[commercials]] ... which [[show]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[years]]. [[Amazing]] how things have [[changed]]!) Bottom line: A [[Christmas]] Carol is a timeless [[story]], and this rendition is a timeless classic. Enjoy ... and [[God]] Bless [[Us]], [[Every]] One! When this [[firstly]] [[circulated]] in 1984, my [[women]] and I [[strapped]] it on our very [[frst]] VHS recorder. I [[nonetheless]] have that [[ageing]] tape, which I [[tries]] to watch [[yearly]]. It was the year my first [[kid]] was born, and [[see]] A Christmas [[Carole]] in this incarnation [[poses]] back [[like]] [[memorabilia]] of [[pleased]] [[dates]] -- [[countless]] hours of which were spent with this [[cinematography]] [[playback]] in the [[backdrop]]. I [[ultimately]] [[raped]] down this year and [[commanded]] a DVD, which prompted me to take a [[time]] to write this brief [[response]] to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[tale]] is [[caught]] in [[unresolved]] [[manner]] here. [[Jorge]] C. Scott is [[perfectly]] amazing and [[perfectly]] believable as Scrooge. The supporting cast is [[similarly]] [[dramatic]]. This is, to my mind, a [[impeccable]] [[productivity]]. Little [[detail]] add much to the enjoyment. The game "similes" Scrooge's nephew and wife play with their [[parties]] [[guest]] is a neat [[topics]]. (I've [[because]] re-created it with my [[higher]] [[tuition]] English students as a brief respite from [[categories]] [[jobs]]!) Honestly, I can [[thought]] of few [[way]] to entertain myself over the [[festivals]] I enjoy more than indulging in this CBS production, which was [[initially]] [[financed]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[ancient]] tape with the [[preliminary]] IBM [[ads]] ... which [[demonstrating]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[olds]]. [[Awesome]] how things have [[amended]]!) Bottom line: A [[Claus]] Carol is a timeless [[histories]], and this rendition is a timeless classic. Enjoy ... and [[Lawd]] Bless [[Usa]], [[Any]] One! --------------------------------------------- Result 2181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A thin story with many fine shots. Eyecatchers here are the three ladies from the D.R.E.A.M. team. And, to a lesser extent, the guy accompanying them. Traci Lords convincingly acts out the female half of an evil business-couple intending to poison the world with antrax. Original in this movie is the bra-bomb, put on a captured member of the D.R.E.A.M.-team. Of course she is rescued by a co-member, three seconds before explosion. Although clearly lent from James Bond's 'Goldfinger' and 'You only live twice', such a climax always works well. All in all a nice watch, James Bond replaced here by three Charlie's Angels. --------------------------------------------- Result 2182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This really is an [[incredible]] [[film]]. Not only does it document the [[eternal]] [[struggle]] of indigenous and [[disenfranchised]] people to gain their rightful voice but it also [[shows]] the [[United]] States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. [[Chavez]] is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the [[initial]] [[stages]] of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a [[tool]] long [[used]] by [[successive]] American governments and their [[seemingly]] blinkered [[citizens]]. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of [[TV]] or generic footage but an active [[documentation]] of a people and its government [[fighting]] for its future. [[Truly]] a moving [[experience]] for [[anyone]] with a conscience. These Irish film [[makers]] [[deserve]] our [[gratitude]]. Long live [[Chavez]].

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be [[allowed]] to [[choose]] its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First [[phase]] in this process is the [[need]] to know what the [[realities]] of the situation are, and this documentary does a [[great]] job of doing just that. This really is an [[unthinkable]] [[cinematic]]. Not only does it document the [[permanent]] [[struggling]] of indigenous and [[disadvantaged]] people to gain their rightful voice but it also [[displays]] the [[Unidos]] States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. [[Gonzalez]] is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the [[original]] [[phase]] of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a [[tools]] long [[using]] by [[straight]] American governments and their [[allegedly]] blinkered [[citizen]]. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of [[TELEVISION]] or generic footage but an active [[papers]] of a people and its government [[struggles]] for its future. [[Honestly]] a moving [[enjoying]] for [[nobody]] with a conscience. These Irish film [[industrialists]] [[merits]] our [[recognition]]. Long live [[Calderon]].

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be [[authorised]] to [[selection]] its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First [[stage]] in this process is the [[necessity]] to know what the [[factual]] of the situation are, and this documentary does a [[wondrous]] job of doing just that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I recently saw the Broadway revival of "Blithe [[Spirit]]" [[starring]] [[Angela]] Lansbury, [[Rupert]] Everett, [[Christine]] Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[terrific]] production, and [[shows]] what good actors can do with a [[play]] that is [[less]] than [[perfect]]. [[Angela]] Lansbury is [[extremely]] [[funny]] as [[Madame]] Arcati.

It was [[probably]] a [[mistake]], then, to [[check]] out the [[film]] version of the play [[starring]] Rex Harrison. The [[movie]] does not have the energy or the [[laughs]] of a good [[stage]] production.

"Blithe Spirit" is [[probably]] one of those plays that [[works]] better with a [[live]] [[cast]], in an [[audience]] full of people who have [[come]] to laugh. The [[actors]] can improvise, give [[touches]] and [[nuances]] to their performance and delivery of the lines, and [[involve]] the [[audience]] on a personal [[level]] that you can't [[get]] in a [[movie]] [[house]], or with a [[DVD]] [[showing]], where the [[audience]] is separated from the [[story]] by the "Fourth Wall." The [[story]]: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful [[writer]], lives with his [[wife]] [[Ruth]] (Constance Cummings) in a [[house]] in the [[English]] countryside. Seeking information for his [[next]] book, a book dealing with the [[supernatural]], Charles [[invites]] [[Madame]] Arcati ([[Margaret]] Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London [[production]]), a local spiritual [[medium]], over to his [[house]] to [[conduct]] a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but [[hopes]] to [[pick]] up "the tricks of the [[trade]]." But then Madame Arcati [[brings]] back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first [[wife]], who [[died]] of pneumonia [[seven]] [[years]] [[ago]]. Elvira [[refuses]] to leave, and develops a spitting [[rivalry]] with Ruth over Charles ([[complicated]] by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On [[stage]], the [[actors]] can [[give]] performances that invite [[laughs]] in this situation. But on the screen, the [[actors]] in "Blithe Spirit" [[tear]] through the lines as if they don't know that [[anyone]] is [[listening]] to them. They mumble lines that were [[designed]] to get laughs on the [[stage]]. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and [[lifeless]]. [[Only]] [[Margaret]] Rutherford seems to have [[retained]] her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same [[year]]. [[In]] "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. I recently saw the Broadway revival of "Blithe [[Wits]]" [[championships]] [[Angeli]] Lansbury, [[Cornelius]] Everett, [[Kristin]] Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[sumptuous]] production, and [[displaying]] what good actors can do with a [[gaming]] that is [[lesser]] than [[irreproachable]]. [[Angeli]] Lansbury is [[eminently]] [[fun]] as [[Senora]] Arcati.

It was [[presumably]] a [[mistaken]], then, to [[audits]] out the [[movie]] version of the play [[featuring]] Rex Harrison. The [[filmmaking]] does not have the energy or the [[chuckles]] of a good [[ballpark]] production.

"Blithe Spirit" is [[undeniably]] one of those plays that [[work]] better with a [[vive]] [[casting]], in an [[viewers]] full of people who have [[coming]] to laugh. The [[actresses]] can improvise, give [[touching]] and [[subtleties]] to their performance and delivery of the lines, and [[involving]] the [[viewers]] on a personal [[levels]] that you can't [[got]] in a [[filmmaking]] [[households]], or with a [[DVDS]] [[exhibiting]], where the [[viewers]] is separated from the [[history]] by the "Fourth Wall." The [[histories]]: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful [[screenwriter]], lives with his [[femme]] [[Roth]] (Constance Cummings) in a [[households]] in the [[Francais]] countryside. Seeking information for his [[upcoming]] book, a book dealing with the [[uncanny]], Charles [[urged]] [[Madam]] Arcati ([[Marguerite]] Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London [[productivity]]), a local spiritual [[average]], over to his [[households]] to [[demeanor]] a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but [[expects]] to [[selects]] up "the tricks of the [[trading]]." But then Madame Arcati [[puts]] back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first [[woman]], who [[succumbed]] of pneumonia [[vii]] [[olds]] [[prior]]. Elvira [[denying]] to leave, and develops a spitting [[contest]] with Ruth over Charles ([[sophisticated]] by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On [[phases]], the [[protagonists]] can [[confer]] performances that invite [[giggles]] in this situation. But on the screen, the [[protagonists]] in "Blithe Spirit" [[tears]] through the lines as if they don't know that [[person]] is [[listen]] to them. They mumble lines that were [[conceived]] to get laughs on the [[phases]]. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and [[lackluster]]. [[Exclusively]] [[Marguerite]] Rutherford seems to have [[maintained]] her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same [[annum]]. [[Across]] "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ashanti is a very 70s sort of film (1979, to be precise). It reminded me of The Wild Geese in a way (Richard Burton, Richard Harris and Roger Moore on a mission in Africa). It's a very good film too, and I enjoyed it a lot.

David (Michael Caine) is a doctor working in Africa and is married to a beautiful Ashanti woman called Anansa (Beverley Johnson) who has trained in medicine in America and is also a doctor. While they're doctoring, one day she is snatched by slavers working for an Arabic slave trader called Suleiman (played perfectly by Peter Ustinov, of all people). The rest of the film is David trying to get her back.

Michael Caine is a brilliant actor, of course, and plays a character who is very determined and prepared to do anything to get his wife back, but rather hopeless with a gun and action stuff. He's helped out first by a Englishman campaigning against the slave trade that no one acknowledges is going on (Rex Harrison!), then briefly by a helicopter pilot (William Holden), and then by an Arab called Malik (Kabir Bedi). Malik has a score to settle with Suleiman (he is very intense throughout, a very engaging character), and so rides off with David to find him and get Anansa back - this involves a wonderful scene in which David fails miserably to get on his camel.

Then there's lots of adventure. There's also lots of morality-questioning. The progress of the story is a little predictable from this point, and there are a few liberties taken with plotting to move things along faster, but it's all pretty forgivable. The question is, will David get to Anansa before Peter Ustinov sells her on to Omar Sharif (yes, of course Omar Sharif is in it!)? --------------------------------------------- Result 2185 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Lee [[hosted]] the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said [[something]] to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The [[Howling]] [[II]], then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." [[Indeed]] he was right as this film may very well be the [[worst]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[first]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking werewolf film with its incredible [[special]] [[effects]] and its campy [[sense]] of [[style]] and subject [[matter]]. It was a [[film]] to be [[taken]] seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some [[strange]] [[reason]] thought that [[even]] more campy sequels were [[needed]] [[rather]] than what [[worked]] the first [[time]]([[See]] CHUD then CHUD [[II]] to [[illustrate]] this point). This film is [[miles]] and miles away from the first on [[every]] [[front]]. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the [[major]] scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning([[okay]], I'll [[cede]] Ferdy Mayne too). Lee [[looks]] embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does [[ridiculous]] [[things]](check out that [[ending]] with him and Stirba). Lee looks [[incredibly]] [[tired]] and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that [[dreadful]] noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a [[zero]] - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! Lee [[greeted]] the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said [[somethin]] to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The [[Yelling]] [[SECONDLY]], then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." [[Actually]] he was right as this film may very well be the [[gravest]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[frst]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking werewolf film with its incredible [[particular]] [[impact]] and its campy [[sensing]] of [[styles]] and subject [[topic]]. It was a [[filmmaking]] to be [[took]] seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some [[curious]] [[motif]] thought that [[yet]] more campy sequels were [[require]] [[somewhat]] than what [[cooperate]] the first [[times]]([[Behold]] CHUD then CHUD [[SECONDLY]] to [[portray]] this point). This film is [[kilometers]] and miles away from the first on [[all]] [[newsweek]]. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the [[big]] scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning([[alright]], I'll [[renounce]] Ferdy Mayne too). Lee [[seem]] embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does [[silly]] [[matters]](check out that [[terminating]] with him and Stirba). Lee looks [[exceptionally]] [[mangy]] and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that [[abhorrent]] noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a [[zilch]] - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! --------------------------------------------- Result 2186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've been [[trying]] to [[find]] out about this [[series]] for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a child and have never [[quite]] been able to [[get]] it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was [[particularly]] [[struck]] by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the [[atmosphere]], which was unusual right from the beginning - [[mysterious]], [[austere]], and extremely authentic. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. [[Every]] 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an enormous let-down. The characters in this series seemed [[genuine]], [[real]] people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood [[stars]] in costumes. This is a [[real]] [[masterpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it [[available]] on VHS or [[DVD]]? I would just [[love]] to have the [[chance]] to [[see]] this again! I've been [[striving]] to [[unearthed]] out about this [[serials]] for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a child and have never [[abundantly]] been able to [[got]] it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was [[notably]] [[slugged]] by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the [[ambiance]], which was unusual right from the beginning - [[enigmatic]], [[strict]], and extremely authentic. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. [[Entire]] 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an enormous let-down. The characters in this series seemed [[vera]], [[actual]] people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood [[star]] in costumes. This is a [[true]] [[centerpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it [[accessible]] on VHS or [[DVDS]]? I would just [[amour]] to have the [[probability]] to [[behold]] this again! --------------------------------------------- Result 2187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] To [[sum]] this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[every]] [[frame]] is [[real]]. The story was [[thought]] up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "[[newbie]]" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

To [[somme]] this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[any]] [[framework]] is [[true]]. The story was [[ideas]] up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "[[pledging]]" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2188 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film a few years ago and I got to say that I really love it.Jason Patric was perfect for this weird role that he played.The director?I don't too many things about him...and I don't care.The screenplay is good,that's for sure.In just a few words I have to say about this movie that is weird,strange,even dark,but it's a good one.I saw it a few years ago and never saw it since then.I want to see it again and again.I know that I'm not gonna get sick of watching it.The scenes,the atmosphere,the actors,the story...everything is good.The movie should have lasted longer.I think 120 minutes should have been perfect.I was hoping for a part 2 for this movie.Too bad it din't happened.Jason Patric:you're the man ! very good movie. the end. :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Thomas was "great". His character held my attention. I was so "into" the story that I forgot it wasn't real. I wanted him to keep the baby and see what a special person he was. The other people in the story were essential in the makeup of his character. The way they banded together to help one another was truly awe inspiring. I love movies that show the real side of human emotions without having to hit you over the head, in that you are not smart enough to figure things out for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2190 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never cast models and Playboy bunnies in your films! Bob Fosse's "Star 80" about Dorothy Stratten, of whom Bogdanovich was obsessed enough to have married her SISTER after her murder at the hands of her low-life husband, is a zillion times more interesting than Dorothy herself on the silver screen. Patty Hansen is no actress either..I expected to see some sort of lost masterpiece a la Orson Welles but instead got Audrey Hepburn cavorting in jeans and a god-awful "poodlesque" hair-do....Very disappointing...."Paper Moon" and "The Last Picture Show" I could watch again and again. This clunker I could barely sit through once. This movie was reputedly not released because of the brouhaha surrounding Ms. Stratten's tawdry death; I think the real reason was because it was so bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 2191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Originally called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Carl]] Zschering) who "[[likes]] em young". [[Unable]] to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who teaches him a [[special]] Vietnamese [[chant]]. This "[[chant]]" [[involves]] whistling 'London [[Bridge]] is [[Falling]] Down' whilst [[hopping]] around like an epileptic [[morris]] dancer. [[Nonetheless]], [[Ugly]] Joe tries it out and [[hey]] presto! He is now a girl. [[Ideally]] he [[needs]] to be a young [[guy]] in order attract [[girls]]. But [[lets]] not talk about ideals here - this [[film]] was [[made]] in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue [[delivered]] by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For [[instance]], Joe decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The highlight of this [[terrible]] movie involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a [[man]]. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the [[way]] for another priceless moment. This [[involved]] the [[male]] [[hooker]] reporting the [[incident]] to a curly haired [[police]] [[officer]] with a 2-bit [[joke]] shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's [[inability]] at [[saying]] "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

[[Apart]] from the above [[mentioned]] [[incident]] this monotonous [[slash]] [[flick]] was a complete [[bore]]. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. Originally called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Karl]] Zschering) who "[[loves]] em young". [[Impossible]] to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who teaches him a [[particular]] Vietnamese [[purity]]. This "[[purity]]" [[includes]] whistling 'London [[Bridges]] is [[Dropping]] Down' whilst [[jumping]] around like an epileptic [[maurice]] dancer. [[Nevertheless]], [[Nasty]] Joe tries it out and [[hi]] presto! He is now a girl. [[Preferably]] he [[require]] to be a young [[pal]] in order attract [[woman]]. But [[allowing]] not talk about ideals here - this [[filmmaking]] was [[effected]] in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue [[rendered]] by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For [[lawsuits]], Joe decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The highlight of this [[shocking]] movie involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a [[men]]. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the [[ways]] for another priceless moment. This [[participating]] the [[men]] [[prostitute]] reporting the [[incidents]] to a curly haired [[policemen]] [[officers]] with a 2-bit [[joking]] shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's [[infirmity]] at [[arguing]] "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

[[Furthermore]] from the above [[quoted]] [[misadventure]] this monotonous [[reduces]] [[gesture]] was a complete [[boring]]. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] For my first [[taste]] of [[Shakespeare]] on [[stage]], I cannot [[believe]] what these people did to a [[perfectly]] [[good]] play.

-Let's [[start]] off with the [[good]] [[bit]], shall we?-

[[Alan]] Rickman is alright, [[although]] some of his [[dialog]] [[could]] have been [[delivered]] with more feeling. The rest of the actors [[needed]] to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art [[thou]] not [[dead]] yet, Romeo? The [[actor]], while not only completely [[wooden]] and deadpan, [[could]] not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was [[completely]] out of [[focus]], had [[difficulty]] even looking Juliet in the face, and [[absolutely]] [[NO]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. [[Juliet]] is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her [[character]],and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of [[character]] for the [[entirety]] of his [[dialog]]. Benvolio was unfeeling and [[mercilessly]] choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and [[Juliet]]. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have [[seen]] kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this [[movie]] a [[rating]] of [[zero]]. For my first [[liking]] of [[Shakespearean]] on [[phase]], I cannot [[reckon]] what these people did to a [[abundantly]] [[buena]] play.

-Let's [[startup]] off with the [[alright]] [[bitten]], shall we?-

[[Alain]] Rickman is alright, [[despite]] some of his [[dialogue]] [[did]] have been [[rendered]] with more feeling. The rest of the actors [[needs]] to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art [[thine]] not [[decedent]] yet, Romeo? The [[protagonist]], while not only completely [[lumber]] and deadpan, [[would]] not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was [[perfectly]] out of [[spotlight]], had [[challenges]] even looking Juliet in the face, and [[abundantly]] [[NOS]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. [[Jules]] is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her [[trait]],and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of [[trait]] for the [[whole]] of his [[dialogues]]. Benvolio was unfeeling and [[brutally]] choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and [[Juliette]]. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have [[saw]] kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this [[kino]] a [[assessment]] of [[nothingness]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For all of the Has-Beens or Never Was's or for the curious, this film is for you....Ever played a sport, or wondered what it felt like after the lights went down and the crowd left..this film explores that and more.

Robin Williams(Jack Dundee) is a small town assistant banker in Taft CA., whose life has been plagued, by a miscue in a BIG rival high school football game 13 years ago, when he dropped the pass that would have won over Bakersfield, their Arch-Rival, that takes great pleasure in pounding the Taft Rockets, season after season . Kurt Russell(Reno Hightower) was the Quarterback in that famous game, and is the local legend, that now is a van repair specialist, whose life is fading into lethargy, like the town of Taft itself.

Williams gets an idea to remake history, by replaying the GAME ! He meets with skeptical resistance, so he goes on a one man terror spree, and literally paints the town , orange, yellow and black , to raise the ire of the residents to recreate THE game . After succeeding, the players from that 1972 team reunite, and try to get in shape to practice, which is hysterical . The game is on , Bakesfield is loaded with all of the high tech gadgets, game strategies, and sophisticated training routines . Taft is drawing plays in the mud, with sticks, stones, and bottle caps, what a riot ! Does Taft overcome the odds, does Robin Willians purge the demons from his bowels, does Kurt Russell rise from lethargy, watch "The Best of Times" for one of the BEST viewing experiences ever!

One of Robin Williams best UNDERSTATED performances, the chemistry between Robin and Russell is magic . And who is Kid Lester ???

Holly Palance and Pamela Reed give memorable performances as the wives of Williams and Russell. Succeeds on Many Levels. A 10 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[In]] the [[process]] of trying to [[establish]] the audiences' [[empathy]] with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Maguire]]) the [[filmmakers]] [[slander]] the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never [[withdrew]] from the Union and the Union Army was not an [[invading]] force. The Southerners [[fought]] for State's Rights: the [[right]] to own slaves, [[elect]] crooked legislatures and [[judges]], and employ a political spoils system. There's [[nothing]] noble in that. The Missourians [[could]] have [[easily]] [[traveled]] [[east]] and [[joined]] the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the [[story]] has [[nothing]] to do with [[ambiguity]]. When Jake [[leaves]] the Bushwhackers, it's not because he [[saw]] [[error]] in his [[way]], he [[certainly]] doesn't [[give]] himself over to the virtue of the [[cause]] of [[abolition]]. [[Among]] the [[processes]] of trying to [[creating]] the audiences' [[compassionate]] with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Molloy]]) the [[cinematographers]] [[defamation]] the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never [[withdraw]] from the Union and the Union Army was not an [[invasion]] force. The Southerners [[campaigned]] for State's Rights: the [[rights]] to own slaves, [[chooses]] crooked legislatures and [[richter]], and employ a political spoils system. There's [[anything]] noble in that. The Missourians [[wo]] have [[comfortably]] [[visited]] [[eastward]] and [[joins]] the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the [[storytelling]] has [[anything]] to do with [[equivocation]]. When Jake [[sheets]] the Bushwhackers, it's not because he [[sawthe]] [[errors]] in his [[routing]], he [[surely]] doesn't [[lend]] himself over to the virtue of the [[reason]] of [[expunge]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Angels in the Outfield" was originally a 1951 movie from the Ted Turner library; Disney remade it in 1994, this time, using the California Angels (now the Los Angeles Angels) as the team (Disney used to own this and the Anaheim Mighty Ducks Hockey Team; also, good use of the words, huh?????).

This movie was about a couple of orphaned children who wanted a family. A man promised the boys a family, only if the Angels won the pennant. So, he called upon God one night about this. The boy who prayed could see the help coming on the way (and ONLY that boy); for instance, when the first angel had come down, a player hit a ball so hard not only did the bat break, so did the ball!!!!! For much of the post-All Star season of 1994, the Angels were at the top of the AL West (of which my home team the Rangers is one and it still is). However, they lost a game because the boy was at court instead of the White Sox/Angels game (there was no Central Division in Baseball back then, hence Chicago being in the West), and no angels were there to help. Thus, a new rule was created: no angels can help in championship games. But wait! In the final championship game, the Angels won!!!!! It was a miracle indeed!

What I liked about this film: This is a good movie. I mean, I prayed every night for the last few years asking for help with school and stuff; look at me now! My work was good!!!!! So for one, this shows that if you believe, God can send His angels down to help you with any troubles that you may have in life. And second, this is a family baseball movie, which is always exciting. This is an old Disney movie, too; I've seen this just recently on the New Disney Channel (blech!!!!!).

"Angels in the Outfield" will change your life forever once you've seen it!!!!!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2196 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the one in which the diminutive Ruth Gordon plays an Agatha-Christie type of murder mystery author who locks her nephew by marriage into a safe. Gordon believes that he murdered her niece and the young fellow dies of suffocation, while Gordon is traveling back and forth to New York. He manages, however, to leave behind some clues, scratches on a couple of black safe deposit boxes and an improvised and well-hidden note. Columbo enters the case, suspects her at once, and solves the mystery by simply using his supernatural mystical intuitive powers. Oh, and Mariette Hartley is on hand as Gordon's secretary and would-be blackmailer. Hartley is, I believe, the grand daughter of the psychologist B. F. Skinner. I'm not sure her ancestry had anything to do with her attractive belly button, which is on display during a belly dance sequence, but I've always admired Skinner anyway.

The murder is well handled. It's a good plot, and none of the performers or crew fluff anything. But the outstanding figure here is Ruth Gordon, only a skosh over five feet tall. She was over 80 years old and looked it. There are moments when she almost teeters, but she consistently exudes charm. Her acting is idiosyncratic. You can never be sure when she's being serious or when she's putting Columbo and the audience on. She's given some good lines too. What humor there is comes from Gordon. Columbo doesn't have any of his frequent comic moments.

All in all, a nice job by everyone concerned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My sincere advice to all: don't watch the movie.

Don't even go near to the theater where this movie is being played!! even a glimpse of it is bad for health. serious. no jokes. it's 3.30 am in the morning. and i returned from this crappiest movie on this universe. FOUR HOURS DAMN!!! I am proud that i survived after all of it! If this is called survival.

i am highly frustrated. annoyed. disappointed. it was sheer waste of time! money went in drain! no plot. Hope i wake up tomorrow sane and with no memories of this night!! RUBBISH MOVIE.

Happy Republic day to one and all :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Battlestar]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[great]] look, [[excellent]] actors, and interesting [[stories]]... AND [[yeah]], had hot [[men]] and [[women]] [[running]] [[around]] in and out of [[uniform]].

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy writing. [[Actors]] [[smoking]] up a storm to give them "[[character]]." Outdoor sequences that [[ruin]] the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford [[Focus]] sitting in the background). Lots and lots of [[teenage]] angst. [[LOTS]] of gyrating [[naked]] women (but in the background. [[Which]] I'm sure will be [[cut]] for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. [[None]] of the actors except [[Polly]] Walker [[took]] my [[attention]] at all. [[At]] an [[hour]] and a half, I was [[still]] [[wondering]] when it was [[going]] to be over.

So what [[exactly]] is it that's [[supposed]] to [[bring]] me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The [[actors]]? [[Besides]] Polly Walker's fine [[turn]], there isn't much interesting being [[done]] here. There aren't [[even]] any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, [[although]] for the younger set he's [[pretty]] [[old]], since he's over 25.

I [[loved]] BSG. I was skeptical when I [[heard]] about Caprica, and [[unfortunately]], I [[think]] I'm right. I [[predict]] a very [[short]] run for it as a [[series]] unless they really [[sharpen]] their pencils over at SciFi and [[get]] to [[work]] making this more than The [[OC]] on another [[planet]]. [[Pegasus]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[huge]] look, [[sumptuous]] actors, and interesting [[fairytales]]... AND [[yup]], had hot [[man]] and [[wife]] [[executing]] [[nearly]] in and out of [[uniformed]].

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy writing. [[Actresses]] [[tobacco]] up a storm to give them "[[nature]]." Outdoor sequences that [[destroy]] the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford [[Emphasis]] sitting in the background). Lots and lots of [[youth]] angst. [[LOT]] of gyrating [[nude]] women (but in the background. [[Whose]] I'm sure will be [[chop]] for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. [[Nil]] of the actors except [[Polje]] Walker [[picked]] my [[beware]] at all. [[During]] an [[hours]] and a half, I was [[however]] [[requesting]] when it was [[go]] to be over.

So what [[accurately]] is it that's [[suspected]] to [[brings]] me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The [[protagonists]]? [[Furthermore]] Polly Walker's fine [[transforming]], there isn't much interesting being [[completed]] here. There aren't [[yet]] any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, [[while]] for the younger set he's [[quite]] [[ancient]], since he's over 25.

I [[worshiped]] BSG. I was skeptical when I [[overheard]] about Caprica, and [[sadly]], I [[thought]] I'm right. I [[anticipate]] a very [[terse]] run for it as a [[serials]] unless they really [[whet]] their pencils over at SciFi and [[got]] to [[cooperating]] making this more than The [[ORC]] on another [[planets]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Any [[film]] that deals with bigotry in a [[positive]] [[manner]] is a [[film]] that should [[still]] be [[seen]] by [[current]] audiences as the message and moral of the [[story]] will [[always]] be [[relevant]] as long as we have a world full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the [[film]] is [[really]] an old-fashioned [[love]] [[story]]..[[boy]] meets [[girl]]..[[boys]] loses [[girl]]...boy [[gets]] girl back....

The [[weakest]] role goes to the late [[Kent]] [[Smith]] as Lt. [[General]] [[Webster]]([[Riccardo]] Montalban is a [[close]] [[second]])...my [[question]] [[would]] be how did he ever get to be a 3-star [[general]]...the [[character]] is such a [[wimp]] in the presence of his [[wife]] and military [[subordinates]], it's a wonder they [[show]] him any respect at all.

Brando's [[southern]] [[accent]] is a little [[overdone]], and some scenes have a few holes but [[overall]], I enjoy the [[film]] every [[time]] I [[see]] it.

Red Buttons is [[great]]...I [[always]] [[love]] seeing comedians in dramatic [[roles]]...as in Button's [[case]], [[often]] a [[comedian]] can better [[portray]] the [[tragedy]] of a [[person]] than a more [[traditional]] [[dramatic]] [[actor]]. Any [[kino]] that deals with bigotry in a [[conducive]] [[method]] is a [[cinematography]] that should [[yet]] be [[saw]] by [[underway]] audiences as the message and moral of the [[tale]] will [[unceasingly]] be [[germane]] as long as we have a world full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the [[cinematographic]] is [[genuinely]] an old-fashioned [[likes]] [[narratives]]..[[dude]] meets [[daughter]]..[[boy]] loses [[daughter]]...boy [[receives]] girl back....

The [[weaker]] role goes to the late [[Kean]] [[Smiths]] as Lt. [[Generals]] [[Sarge]]([[Ricardo]] Montalban is a [[nearer]] [[secondly]])...my [[issue]] [[ought]] be how did he ever get to be a 3-star [[overall]]...the [[characters]] is such a [[weakling]] in the presence of his [[women]] and military [[underlings]], it's a wonder they [[illustrates]] him any respect at all.

Brando's [[south]] [[focus]] is a little [[overkill]], and some scenes have a few holes but [[general]], I enjoy the [[movies]] every [[period]] I [[seeing]] it.

Red Buttons is [[wondrous]]...I [[unceasingly]] [[iove]] seeing comedians in dramatic [[duties]]...as in Button's [[example]], [[normally]] a [[comic]] can better [[outline]] the [[drama]] of a [[someone]] than a more [[conventional]] [[impressive]] [[actress]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I absolutely loved this movie. It met all expectations and went beyond that. I loved the humor and the way the movie wasn't just randomly silly. It also had a message. Jim Carrey makes me happy. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have [[done]] [[excellent]] analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to [[comment]], but the film just [[bugs]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I [[must]] toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the [[original]] "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this [[piece]] of [[crap]] just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have [[doing]] [[sumptuous]] analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to [[observation]], but the film just [[beetles]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I [[owes]] toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the [[preliminary]] "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this [[slice]] of [[dammit]] just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2202 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctively help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I guarantee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2203 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked the movie. I remember reading it several times as a kid and was glad to see a movie had been made about the book.

I was kid-sitting for a boy and a girl, ages 11 and 8 and had to talk the girl in to seeing the movie. But happily, at the end, she was glad she saw it and even said that she wanted to buy it on DVD as soon as it came out.

There were some great laugh-out-loud moments and the movie was not as "gross" as I expected it would be ... tho it did rank pretty high up there on the gross-o-meter ...

The only thing I cannot figure out is why they had to have the "dilly" line in there that was done by Woody in reference to his private part ... that to me was the only shocker moment (and you could hear the adults in the audience audibly gasp at that moment in the movie) ... I have no clue why that was put in the movie; it added nothing to the actual movie except for that shock/gasp factor ... other than that, a pretty good movie. Nice to see the "Pepsi" girl all grown up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. [[Spend]] a [[useful]] 90 min. [[living]] your [[favourite]] game. Disjointed - poorly [[filmed]] - non [[directed]] [[junk]]. It [[takes]] a bits from [[several]] other "science fiction" [[movies]] and badly attempts to join the parts into a [[pathetically]] weak [[story]]. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to [[realise]] that providing simple entertainment [[would]] achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill ingenuity and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[money]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i [[would]] like my 90 min of [[life]] back. Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. [[Expended]] a [[advantageous]] 90 min. [[iife]] your [[favorite]] game. Disjointed - poorly [[videotaped]] - non [[aimed]] [[trash]]. It [[pick]] a bits from [[many]] other "science fiction" [[filmmaking]] and badly attempts to join the parts into a [[woefully]] weak [[conte]]. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to [[understand]] that providing simple entertainment [[could]] achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill ingenuity and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[cash]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i [[should]] like my 90 min of [[lives]] back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1933 seemed to be a great year for satires ("Duck Soup" for instance) and this one fits in well even though it is about the obsession with contract bridge. The tone is like a humorous piece from The New Yorker, appropriate, since the film begins with the "Goings On About Town" page of that magazine. The only thing odd is the casting. Made a few years later William Powell and Myrna Loy would have been perfect. However, after 1934, you wouldn't have had adultery handled in such a sophisticated fashion, the young and beautiful Loretta Young in some shear and slinky outfits, or a group of prostitutes listening to a bridge contest on radio. Even if you know nothing about bridge, you may still want to check out a rare example of Hollywood satire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's a theory of time that posits that all the moments that ever existed and will exist, actually exist right now. It's a bit too much to wrap your head around, but perhaps a bit of a comfort to those who wish they could go back to a simpler time and place. For Barbara Jean Trenton (Ida Lupino), that time was twenty five years earlier, the mid 1930's when her youth and glamor held the greatest promise. For my part, if I could travel through time, it would be back to the 1950's when I grew up. Maybe to a place like Willoughby, but that's another episode.

One thing that wouldn't be so special about 1959 would involve dealing with all that clunky machinery just to watch an episode of "The Twilight Zone". How many reels do you think it would take to catalog the entire series, and then find a particular story you wanted to watch? I guess you have to consider the trade offs, convenience versus simplicity, having it right now or taking the time to spool it up to the exact spot where the story begins. Popping in a CD has it's advantages.

I'm a little surprised that Rod Serling would pen a story that so closely resembled "Sunset Boulevard". Ida Lupino's character mirror imaged Norma Desmond just a bit too closely to be considered an original concept. Martin Balsam portrays very much a similar character to Erich von Stroheim, the husband turned butler who's loyalty is unquestioned. Where the story diverges has to do with the way Danny (Balsam) and Sall (Ted de Corsia) challenge Barbara Jean to get with reality and clear the cobwebs that paralyze her existence.

Fortunately for us viewers, Ida Lupino had no such reservations about taking parts that were 'not big, but a nice showcase'. It's a real treat to watch any episode of "The Twilight Zone" and get to see who pops up from days gone by. Sometimes you get a two-fer, like you have here with Lupino and Balsam, celebrities who sometimes made their mark before the series began, and sometimes after. Combined with the stories that the program produced, it's not surprising that they still manage to entertain so well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But since this is a biopic, it's [[important]] to at [[least]] know what to [[expect]] from the character.

I don't know if the [[manner]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[way]] Ned [[Kelly]] is portrayed as a [[hero]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to [[believe]] everything is true. I don't [[think]] he's [[portrayed]] as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solid]] Western-type [[movie]] for everybody's tastes. Heath [[Ledger]] is [[great]] as [[always]] and the [[sexy]] Naomi Watts [[charms]] the screen.

Give this [[movie]] a [[chance]] if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I could recommend it. I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But since this is a biopic, it's [[pivotal]] to at [[fewest]] know what to [[hopes]] from the character.

I don't know if the [[method]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[camino]] Ned [[Kelley]] is portrayed as a [[heroin]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to [[believing]] everything is true. I don't [[believing]] he's [[depicted]] as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solids]] Western-type [[films]] for everybody's tastes. Heath [[Books]] is [[wondrous]] as [[continually]] and the [[hot]] Naomi Watts [[psalms]] the screen.

Give this [[movies]] a [[chances]] if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I could recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this film. It was lighthearted, delightful, and very colorful. You can see that MGM was showing off Technicolor. There are hardly any colors that do not appear in this film. Every scene is packed full. The choreography was great. Gene Kelly is a wonder. He is so talented. The dance numbers in this film are all perfectly executed, and perfectly designed. He understands that the dances can tell the story as much as anything else. The last section of the film, the grand dance sequence, is very impressive. What makes this film very special is Gershwin's music. Few American composers have had a better gift for melody. I very much enjoy Gershwin's music. It is enchanting. Ira Gershwin is definitely one of the greatest lyric writers. He is so witty and charming. This was a highly entertaining film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First of all, I don't understand why some people find this movie so anti-american. Sure, there are moments when the U.S. are accused directly, like at the segments of Youssef Chahine, Ken Loach and, to a certain extent, Mira Nair. But come on, they aren't naive accusations; instead, they are based on real and documented facts, and all the documents that the CIA released about Chile confirms this, for example.

But returning to the film itself, what I enjoyed most on it is the variety of moods we find in it. We find children being educated for the respect of the all the people who died in the event; we find a unhappy couple that will be changed by the tragedy of that day; we find common people that have their feelings downgraded on the shadow of the events of September 11 and react differently to this, with dignity or frustration; we even find someone in the movie for who the fall of the towers grounds for a moment of real happiness.

All these visions and others - as powerful as these or even more - make a consistent blend and help the spectator to have a glimpse about how different people spread across the world reacted to the events of September 11th. Thus, what we see is a panorama that is much more complex than whites and blacks, and this may make some people infuriated; but this is the world where we live, and in it there is no place for manicheistic ideologies, regardless of what presidents or priests may say us.

Finally, I think it's a shame that there isn't even a release date for this movie in the United States of America. It's a shame because most of the american people is asking why this catastrophe happened, and this movie could give some clues to them. This film puts very clearly - differently of what some people of this forum think - that everything we do today will determine our future, and that the errors of the past will affect how we live today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2210 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Guys, you got to watch this awesome movie. At the end of this movie you will have a strong passion and profundity imbued into yourselves. The acting of the two characters, Billy Sunday and Carl Brashear deeply touches the heart from inside. This movie is about principles, dignity, patriotism and HONOR. You will hear Chief Carl Brashear say, the Navy has greatest tradition of all - Honor - practiced thoroughly by these two characters. Mere glances of these characters during the movie fills you with enthusiasm. Dialogue delivery of this movie is perfect. You can't find any flaws in the dialogues. What the Master Chief Billy says roams in and out of your mind for a long time after watching the movie. Please watch this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our [[reporter]] hero battles hindersome [[authorities]], [[duplicitous]] co-workers, [[renegade]] UFO debunkers, and [[silent]], [[skulking]] aliens. ([[Though]] [[capable]] of [[mind]] [[control]] and zapping [[objects]] from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[script]] clomps from [[event]] to event,[[leaving]] puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese [[abduct]] the ugly photographer first [[instead]] of his model? Inquiring minds [[want]] to know! Writer-director [[Mario]] Gariazzo [[apparently]] [[researched]] his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics [[double]] [[feature]]. (The [[closing]] screen crawl boasts that it's based on [[actual]] events...just like "[[Plan]] 9!") Some may feel burned by the [[abrupt]] finale, but it should [[still]] appeal to [[conspiracy]] [[cranks]]. In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our [[journalist]] hero battles hindersome [[governments]], [[devious]] co-workers, [[apostate]] UFO debunkers, and [[quiet]], [[slinking]] aliens. ([[Whilst]] [[able]] of [[esprit]] [[supervision]] and zapping [[object]] from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[hyphen]] clomps from [[incidents]] to event,[[letting]] puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese [[hijacked]] the ugly photographer first [[however]] of his model? Inquiring minds [[wanting]] to know! Writer-director [[Maria]] Gariazzo [[clearly]] [[examined]] his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics [[dual]] [[trait]]. (The [[close]] screen crawl boasts that it's based on [[real]] events...just like "[[Scheme]] 9!") Some may feel burned by the [[brusque]] finale, but it should [[however]] appeal to [[conspiracies]] [[crevices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MULHOLLAND DRIVE made me the definitive fan of David Lynch. He's a modern genius, because he's not only a film-maker. His stories and his style have a spell that cross the screen. So THE STRAIGHT STORY was quite a surprise to me, with its easy to follow storyline and sunny sets. Still, Lynch is there, and, while this is far from his best, it's a film not to be missed. Late Richard Farnsworth's performance is one of the reasons.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[So]] there's an [[old]] [[security]] guard and a [[guy]] who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest [[wuss]]. Kevin [[wants]] to impress his [[incredibly]] insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from [[work]] to... a random [[house]]... he finds his "friends," the sexually [[confusing]] red-shorted [[KYLE]] and the truly [[revolting]] sluttish DAPHNE. They are [[soon]] [[joined]] by Daphne's [[boyfriend]], the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead [[NICK]]. And there's the title creatures, [[horrid]] little dogeared puppets who [[kill]] people by giving them their heart's [[desire]]. Kyle's heart's [[desire]] is to [[mate]] with a creepy, yucky [[woman]] in spandex. Nick's heart's [[desire]] is to throw grenades in a [[grade]] school cafeteria-- I mean [[nightclub]]. Kevin's heart's desire is to [[beat]] up a [[skinny]] thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's [[desire]] is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[way]] a truly [[hideous]] band sings a truly [[odd]] song. The hobgoblins [[randomly]] [[go]] back to where they [[came]] from then blow up. "[[Citizen]] Kane" cannot [[hold]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[cinema]]. [[Accordingly]] there's an [[former]] [[insurance]] guard and a [[boy]] who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest [[sissy]]. Kevin [[want]] to impress his [[extremely]] insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from [[cooperate]] to... a random [[maison]]... he finds his "friends," the sexually [[perplexing]] red-shorted [[BRANDON]] and the truly [[disgusting]] sluttish DAPHNE. They are [[quickly]] [[joining]] by Daphne's [[dude]], the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead [[NICKY]]. And there's the title creatures, [[nasty]] little dogeared puppets who [[mata]] people by giving them their heart's [[willingness]]. Kyle's heart's [[wishing]] is to [[buddy]] with a creepy, yucky [[girl]] in spandex. Nick's heart's [[willingness]] is to throw grenades in a [[grades]] school cafeteria-- I mean [[cabaret]]. Kevin's heart's desire is to [[defeating]] up a [[lean]] thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's [[wanting]] is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[ways]] a truly [[outrageous]] band sings a truly [[unusual]] song. The hobgoblins [[casually]] [[going]] back to where they [[became]] from then blow up. "[[Citizens]] Kane" cannot [[holds]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I don't think I could have enjoyed it more, though certain things were disturbing. I'm not going to say what, if you haven't seen it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what movie can [[lack]] with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was developed [[sufficiently]]. [[Nothing]] [[seemed]] too [[rushed]], as [[movies]] like this [[tend]] to be. The [[characters]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[hilarious]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the [[story]] is very well [[tied]] [[together]], [[even]] if certain [[aspects]] may be unsatisfactory...by [[matter]] of [[opinion]]. But like I [[said]] before, it's [[hard]] not to love any [[movie]] with Robert Downey Jr. I don't think I could have enjoyed it more, though certain things were disturbing. I'm not going to say what, if you haven't seen it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what movie can [[insufficiency]] with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was developed [[enough]]. [[Nada]] [[looked]] too [[harried]], as [[kino]] like this [[tending]] to be. The [[features]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[comic]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the [[conte]] is very well [[connected]] [[jointly]], [[yet]] if certain [[things]] may be unsatisfactory...by [[issue]] of [[visualise]]. But like I [[avowed]] before, it's [[arduous]] not to love any [[movies]] with Robert Downey Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2215 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS [[movies]] is [[often]] [[regarded]] as the weakest of the [[lot]]. [[However]], this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the [[contrary]]. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a [[bit]] more slow-going at [[times]], but RETURN OF THE JEDI [[still]] offers a [[lot]] to [[warrant]] the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[classic]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a [[great]] villain, but a [[memorable]] one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence [[fun]] is the [[clever]] [[use]] of puppets for the [[various]] members of Jabba's [[court]], [[including]] the intimidating, slavering Rancor and [[scary]] Sarlaac pit monster. It [[builds]] [[masterfully]] to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

[[Things]] [[get]] a [[little]] [[bit]] [[slower]] [[around]] the second [[act]], where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we [[travel]] to the forest [[planet]] of Endor, [[home]] of the cuddlesome [[yet]] stalwart Ewoks. Most of the [[complaints]] about [[RETURN]] OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a [[delightfully]] memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third [[act]], though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS [[kino]] is [[ordinarily]] [[viewed]] as the weakest of the [[batch]]. [[Still]], this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the [[inverse]]. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a [[bitten]] more slow-going at [[time]], but RETURN OF THE JEDI [[again]] offers a [[batches]] to [[justifies]] the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[conventional]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a [[huge]] villain, but a [[landmark]] one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence [[amusing]] is the [[smarter]] [[utilise]] of puppets for the [[varied]] members of Jabba's [[courthouse]], [[comprises]] the intimidating, slavering Rancor and [[awful]] Sarlaac pit monster. It [[constructed]] [[artfully]] to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

[[Matters]] [[gets]] a [[petit]] [[bitten]] [[slow]] [[roundabout]] the second [[law]], where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we [[voyages]] to the forest [[planetary]] of Endor, [[dwelling]] of the cuddlesome [[even]] stalwart Ewoks. Most of the [[allegations]] about [[HOMECOMING]] OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a [[divinely]] memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third [[legislation]], though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 2216 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is [[mindless]], it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) wasted on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[characters]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/[[world]] with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 [[times]] the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is [[foolish]], it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) wasted on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[attribute]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/[[worldwide]] with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 [[period]] the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. --------------------------------------------- Result 2217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I have [[seen]] a [[lot]] of Saura films and [[always]] [[found]] [[amazing]] the [[way]] he assembles [[music]], [[dance]], [[drama]] and [[great]] cinema in his [[movies]]. Ibéria shows an [[even]] better Saura, [[dealing]] with multimedia [[concepts]] and a more [[contemporary]] concept of [[dance]] and music. Another [[thing]] that [[called]] my [[attention]] is the [[fact]] that, in this [[movie]], [[dancers]] and musicians, [[dance]] and music, are equally [[important]]: the [[camera]] [[shows]] [[various]] [[aspects]] of music [[interpretation]], [[examining]] not only technical [[issues]] but [[also]] the [[emotional]] experience of [[playing]]. The interest of Saura on the [[bridge]] between classical and [[contemporary]] [[music]] and [[dance]] is one more [[ingredient]] in turning this [[movie]] [[maybe]] the most aesthetically exciting [[among]] his other [[works]]. That's why I [[recommend]] it [[strongly]] to those who [[love]] good [[cinema]], good music, good [[dance]], [[great]] art. I have [[noticed]] a [[batch]] of Saura films and [[invariably]] [[discovered]] [[striking]] the [[routing]] he assembles [[musicians]], [[dancers]], [[theater]] and [[huge]] cinema in his [[movie]]. Ibéria shows an [[yet]] better Saura, [[treating]] with multimedia [[concept]] and a more [[modern]] concept of [[choreography]] and music. Another [[stuff]] that [[phoned]] my [[beware]] is the [[facto]] that, in this [[cinematography]], [[ballerinas]] and musicians, [[dancers]] and music, are equally [[sizable]]: the [[cameras]] [[displayed]] [[assorted]] [[things]] of music [[explanations]], [[considering]] not only technical [[problem]] but [[additionally]] the [[affective]] experience of [[gaming]]. The interest of Saura on the [[bridging]] between classical and [[modern]] [[musician]] and [[dancers]] is one more [[ingredients]] in turning this [[kino]] [[likely]] the most aesthetically exciting [[in]] his other [[work]]. That's why I [[recommended]] it [[mightily]] to those who [[loved]] good [[theaters]], good music, good [[dancing]], [[wondrous]] art. --------------------------------------------- Result 2218 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yeah, unfortunately I came across the DVD of this and found that it was incredibly awful.

First of all, the characters suck. I mean, come on, if some dork in an orange hat who calls himself 'Orange Sherbert' is the best creative idea these guys could come up for a character, then they should definitely not be in the film-making scene. Poor "costumes", bad "interviews", and basically there is not one "wrestler" on this whole disc with any shred of charisma.

The "wrestling" in Splatter Rampage Wrestling is nothing more than these idiots gently and playfully bouncing together on a trampoline. They make sure to giggle together all the while, too, making the experience seem more like a toddler's playtime than a "wrestling deathmatch".

Basically, Splatter Rampage Wrestling is a pretty lackluster Backyard Wrestling clone. Only, instead of blood, weapons, mayhem, and WRESTLING, we get a trampoline, giggling kids, TERRIBLE audio, and some guy called Orange Sherbert.

Wrestling fan or not, avoid this DVD. It's awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Besides the fact that my list of favorite movie makers is: 1)Stanley Kubrick 2)God Allmighty 3)the rest... this movie actually is better than the book (and the TV miniseries though this is an easy feat, considering the director). The flawless filming stile, the acting and (Kubrick's all time number one skill) the music - make it THE masterpiece of horror. I watched the TV miniseries a few years ago and liked the story and I had my hopes about this when I got a hold of it. IT BLEW ME AWAY!!! It is far better than I ever imagined it. It starts slow (Kubrick trademark) and has a lot of downtime that builds up the suspense. The intro scene is a classic by all means and I watched it about 20 times just for the shear atmosphere it induces to the whole film. Also the film doesn't offer a lot of gore (it has just enough and it is by no means tasteless) a trend that I hate in recent day horror films. Just watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[saw]] this not too [[long]] [[ago]], and I [[must]] say: This movie is [[terrible]]. I watch [[crappy]] [[movies]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is [[stupid]]. You have an [[incredibly]] [[corny]] villain that [[enjoys]] screaming [[awful]] puns as he [[kills]] his [[victims]](actually worse than the one contained in this [[sentence]]). He has his [[hard]] [[luck]] [[story]] that he [[uses]] to [[justify]] his [[killings]]. "Everyone picks on me. The only [[girl]] that [[thinks]] I'm not trailer-trash [[likes]] one of the [[guys]] that [[pick]] on me. I want to kill [[everybody]]. Wah." [[OK]], I'm [[exaggerating]]. But the premise to this [[movie]] alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the [[list]] of crappy movies.

[[Adding]] to what I just [[said]], the kid's [[mom]] is promiscuous, he walks in on his [[mother]] and her [[current]] boyfriend getting it on, mom's [[boyfriend]] tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't [[going]] to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He [[kills]] kid right in front of mom, [[mom]] [[screams]] in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't [[mean]] to!" [[Then]] he tells mom not to [[say]] anything to the [[police]] about it. [[Kid]] was [[killed]] under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets [[murdered]] under a scarecrow, he [[comes]] back as a [[killer]] scarecrow with a vengeance. His [[victims]] "haven't been [[stalked]] like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make [[matters]] worse, this [[movie]] was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was [[going]] to give this [[movie]] a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming [[moments]]. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually [[want]] to see this [[crap]].) I [[could]] have somewhat [[forgiven]] the [[bad]] acting, the [[horrible]] special effects, the [[abysmal]] script, and the [[bad]] camera work, but I [[simply]] have no [[respect]] for [[lack]] of effort on that [[level]].

This movie isn't [[nearly]] as good as I'm making it out to be. If you [[want]] to [[see]] an [[example]] of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy [[watching]] bad [[movies]], like I do, then watch this at your own [[risk]]. Everyone else should [[stay]] a safe distance away from this movie at all times. I [[noticed]] this not too [[longer]] [[formerly]], and I [[owes]] say: This movie is [[frightful]]. I watch [[shite]] [[filmmaking]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is [[dumb]]. You have an [[extraordinarily]] [[dorky]] villain that [[enjoy]] screaming [[horrific]] puns as he [[mata]] his [[victim]](actually worse than the one contained in this [[sentences]]). He has his [[tough]] [[likelihood]] [[tales]] that he [[usage]] to [[justifying]] his [[death]]. "Everyone picks on me. The only [[chick]] that [[think]] I'm not trailer-trash [[fond]] one of the [[blokes]] that [[taking]] on me. I want to kill [[everyone]]. Wah." [[ALRIGHT]], I'm [[overstating]]. But the premise to this [[film]] alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the [[listings]] of crappy movies.

[[Adds]] to what I just [[say]], the kid's [[momma]] is promiscuous, he walks in on his [[mama]] and her [[contemporary]] boyfriend getting it on, mom's [[dude]] tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't [[go]] to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He [[killings]] kid right in front of mom, [[mama]] [[yelling]] in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't [[meaning]] to!" [[Subsequently]] he tells mom not to [[said]] anything to the [[cops]] about it. [[Petit]] was [[kill]] under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets [[assassinate]] under a scarecrow, he [[happens]] back as a [[assassin]] scarecrow with a vengeance. His [[fatalities]] "haven't been [[hounded]] like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make [[questions]] worse, this [[filmmaking]] was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was [[go]] to give this [[cinematic]] a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming [[times]]. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually [[wants]] to see this [[shit]].) I [[did]] have somewhat [[pardoned]] the [[negative]] acting, the [[scary]] special effects, the [[appalling]] script, and the [[unfavourable]] camera work, but I [[mere]] have no [[respecting]] for [[deficit]] of effort on that [[plano]].

This movie isn't [[practically]] as good as I'm making it out to be. If you [[wants]] to [[seeing]] an [[case]] of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy [[staring]] bad [[cinema]], like I do, then watch this at your own [[danger]]. Everyone else should [[remain]] a safe distance away from this movie at all times. --------------------------------------------- Result 2221 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (aka: The Bloodsucker Leads the Dance)

Lots of naked babes in this one with a couple of lesbo scenes thrown in. The film is supposed to take place in Ireland but it looks more like Rome and the Adriatic to me.

Gothic lesbians get invited to a Count's island castle for the weekend. One by one they seem to be missing their heads due to a madperson running around.

It's not very scary or bloody and the rooms look like they are lit with floodlights even though candles are lit. Go figure...(sic)

Dubbing is worse than usual and the plot only serves as an excuse for the eroticism and nudity. Directed by euro horror actor Alfredo Rizzo, this is one snoozer.

Pretty boring 2 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really hate this retarded show, it SUCKS! big time, and personally I think it is insulting to fairy kind (if you believe in fairies that is); I mean the people who had come up with such crap 'ought to have their heads examine huh? and also there is a LOT of craziness (the evil school teacher, which I think is getting really old) and also stupidity (the boy's parents and fairy godfather) in this show - two of the things that I dispised and loathe in the WHOLE world (especially stupidity).

Overall, I say that this show is so f*****' annoying and should not be seen by prying eyes at ALL (it would make'em bleed to death)! --------------------------------------------- Result 2223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a [[try]].

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have [[finally]] [[seen]] each other after their [[father]] has passed away. Ryan and Theo at [[first]] [[argue]] about who did what. But [[later]], Theo [[finds]] out that his [[brother]] Ryan is not only gay but he is [[dying]] of a terminal [[illness]]. So, Ryan and Theo [[spend]] their [[time]] patching up their differences.

This is such an [[incredible]] [[film]]. I have only [[seen]] Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was [[phenomenal]] in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER [[heard]] of before did a [[phenomenal]] [[job]] as well.

I would [[recommend]] this to those who are interested in the [[Gay]] and Lesbian [[genre]]. This is one [[movie]] you don't [[want]] to [[miss]].

I give this film 10 [[stars]] out of 10. [[Excellent]] film! I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a [[tries]].

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have [[eventually]] [[noticed]] each other after their [[fathers]] has passed away. Ryan and Theo at [[frst]] [[plead]] about who did what. But [[thereafter]], Theo [[discoveries]] out that his [[brah]] Ryan is not only gay but he is [[died]] of a terminal [[morbid]]. So, Ryan and Theo [[expended]] their [[period]] patching up their differences.

This is such an [[unthinkable]] [[movies]]. I have only [[watched]] Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was [[wondrous]] in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER [[audition]] of before did a [[dramatic]] [[employment]] as well.

I would [[recommending]] this to those who are interested in the [[Homosexuals]] and Lesbian [[sort]]. This is one [[cinematic]] you don't [[wantto]] to [[missed]].

I give this film 10 [[superstar]] out of 10. [[Magnifique]] film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2224 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I saw this [[movie]], just now, not when it was released and [[hailed]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to [[summarize]] everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good [[film]].

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to admit that his first and the TV [[drama]] he [[made]] before this [[picture]] are [[much]] better. further more, this is his first [[attempt]] at directing a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[funny]] and [[effective]].

The [[first]] [[thing]] you have to know if you'll ever [[see]] this [[film]]: Israel of the 21st century [[hates]] the kibbutz and the values it represented since the [[formation]] of the state of [[Israel]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very [[dire]], and some of them [[disappear]] one by one. the kibbutz, [[Hebrew]] word for [[collective]], was a [[sort]] of village for [[members]] only, where the [[values]] of [[equality]] and [[socialism]] were the [[dogma]] for [[everyday]] [[life]]. with the [[change]] in [[social]] values with [[time]], it [[seems]] now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was [[repressed]], [[locked]] [[within]] the [[dogma]] [[rules]], with no ticket out. the [[entrance]] of [[capitalist]] values and [[way]] of [[life]] in the 90's and so far [[made]] it very hard on the [[kibbutzim]] to survive. the crazy [[mother]] in the [[film]] is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this [[film]] as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the [[good]] [[old]] days of the kibbutz. once, it was a [[dream]] of [[every]] [[young]] [[couple]] to [[live]] in a [[kibbutz]] and [[raise]] [[children]] in this [[quite]] and [[beautiful]] [[environment]]. but the film shows the [[opposite]]. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a [[cult]] of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undermine]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your [[individuality]] is the most [[important]] [[thing]]. you [[must]] [[place]] yourself in the center, and no one [[else]] but you is the [[matter]]. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first [[sin]].

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. I saw this [[filmmaking]], just now, not when it was released and [[applauded]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to [[synthesizing]] everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good [[filmmaking]].

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to admit that his first and the TV [[dramas]] he [[introduced]] before this [[imagery]] are [[very]] better. further more, this is his first [[attempts]] at directing a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[humorous]] and [[efficient]].

The [[outset]] [[stuff]] you have to know if you'll ever [[behold]] this [[cinema]]: Israel of the 21st century [[hatred]] the kibbutz and the values it represented since the [[formed]] of the state of [[Israelis]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very [[tragic]], and some of them [[fade]] one by one. the kibbutz, [[Jew]] word for [[joint]], was a [[kind]] of village for [[member]] only, where the [[valued]] of [[equity]] and [[socialists]] were the [[doctrine]] for [[ordinary]] [[lives]]. with the [[adjustments]] in [[societal]] values with [[times]], it [[appears]] now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was [[stifled]], [[bolted]] [[inside]] the [[doctrine]] [[ordinance]], with no ticket out. the [[inlet]] of [[capitalism]] values and [[manner]] of [[lives]] in the 90's and so far [[brought]] it very hard on the [[kibbutz]] to survive. the crazy [[mom]] in the [[flick]] is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this [[cinematographic]] as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the [[alright]] [[longtime]] days of the kibbutz. once, it was a [[nightmares]] of [[all]] [[youths]] [[matches]] to [[viva]] in a [[kibbutzim]] and [[raising]] [[childhood]] in this [[pretty]] and [[sumptuous]] [[environments]]. but the film shows the [[opus]]. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a [[cults]] of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undercut]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your [[peculiarity]] is the most [[momentous]] [[stuff]]. you [[owes]] [[placing]] yourself in the center, and no one [[further]] but you is the [[topic]]. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first [[oin]].

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. --------------------------------------------- Result 2225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A simple comment...

What can I say... this is a wonderful film that I can watch over and over. It is definitely one of the top ten comedies made. With a great cast, Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau wording a perfect script by Neil Simon, based on his play.

It is real to life situation done perfectly. If you have digital cable, one gets the menu on bottom of screen to give what is on. It usually gives this film ***% stars but in reality it deserves **** stars. If you really watch this film, one can tell that it will be as funny and fresh a hundred years from now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I [[saw]] "Brother's [[Shadow]]" at the Tribeca Film [[Festival]] and found myself still thinking about it two days [[later]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[business]] after a stint in jail, it offers all the [[necessary]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[characters]]; [[sharp]], [[observant]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it presents something that is all too [[rare]] at the multiplex these days: the [[uncompromising]] vision of a mature sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to emerge full-blown, but we get the sense he (like his protagonist) has paid his dues. He knows how real people struggle in this world, and he knows how we yearn to see--or at least, to experience vicariously--success. Yet Yellin respects his audience too much to blow happy smoke up our rear ends. In the end, we see that Jake's triumph doesn't lie in commissions, or even in the esteem of his family, but in "the work" he couldn't abandon if he tried.

It's an essential theme in a [[world]] (and especially a movie industry) that can't rise above "the bottom line". This film [[deserves]] a [[wide]] audience. I [[noticed]] "Brother's [[Shade]]" at the Tribeca Film [[Fest]] and found myself still thinking about it two days [[then]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[firms]] after a stint in jail, it offers all the [[needed]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[character]]; [[steep]], [[watchful]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it presents something that is all too [[scarce]] at the multiplex these days: the [[inflexible]] vision of a mature sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to emerge full-blown, but we get the sense he (like his protagonist) has paid his dues. He knows how real people struggle in this world, and he knows how we yearn to see--or at least, to experience vicariously--success. Yet Yellin respects his audience too much to blow happy smoke up our rear ends. In the end, we see that Jake's triumph doesn't lie in commissions, or even in the esteem of his family, but in "the work" he couldn't abandon if he tried.

It's an essential theme in a [[monde]] (and especially a movie industry) that can't rise above "the bottom line". This film [[deserved]] a [[vast]] audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ...but this just isn't [[working]] and I am surprised to [[see]] how [[many]] people [[consider]] it good. [[On]] what [[grounds]]? There are some [[loose]] hints here and there, but the [[whole]] [[material]] is self-indulgent and [[unconvincing]]. Lynch's [[movies]] are [[generally]] [[intriguing]] because they [[generate]] a sense of confusion and [[yet]], are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, [[characters]], [[ideas]] etc. But this is [[dull]] and yes, [[pointless]]. [[Because]] whatever there is to explore is [[either]] to "small", [[either]] too far-fetched, or simply told before in a [[superior]] [[manner]]. It's just Lynch [[exploring]] DV, nothing more so it should be [[treated]] [[like]] this. 1/10 ...but this just isn't [[cooperating]] and I am surprised to [[consults]] how [[innumerable]] people [[contemplating]] it good. [[Onto]] what [[motives]]? There are some [[lax]] hints here and there, but the [[ensemble]] [[materials]] is self-indulgent and [[feeble]]. Lynch's [[filmmaking]] are [[often]] [[enthralling]] because they [[generates]] a sense of confusion and [[still]], are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, [[nature]], [[thoughts]] etc. But this is [[boring]] and yes, [[vain]]. [[Since]] whatever there is to explore is [[neither]] to "small", [[neither]] too far-fetched, or simply told before in a [[supreme]] [[ways]]. It's just Lynch [[explores]] DV, nothing more so it should be [[treating]] [[iike]] this. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a [[movie]] that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few characters from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is [[mildly]] entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a [[filmmaking]] that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few characters from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is [[gently]] entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[In]] one word: excruciating. I was [[advised]] to read some [[articles]] about this film's [[philosophical]] meanings [[afterward]], but, having sat through the movie's [[interminable]] 115 minutes and being [[slowly]] crushed beneath its [[bloated]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it [[seemed]] [[better]] to just [[report]] my reactions to the [[movie]]. [[After]] all, who goes to [[see]] a [[movie]] with a syllabus in hand? And this [[flick]] was dismal. Lead [[actor]] [[Claude]] Laydu, from the film's [[opening]] to its [[end]], [[wears]] the same wearying and [[annoying]] mask of [[agony]] as to be [[practically]] indistinguishable from the film's [[eternal]], [[dreary]] voice-over. Filming one over the other might have [[worked]] better than subjecting an [[audience]] to both, as they [[basically]] [[say]] the same [[thing]]: The [[priest]] of Ambricourt is a [[wretched]] human being. The [[story]], about a persecuted [[priest]] who [[tries]] to [[help]] out a [[troubled]] rich family, does nothing [[toward]] [[making]] its [[characters]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[family]] are a bunch of [[unpleasant]] [[weirdos]], and the [[priest]], himself, comes across as a nosy pest. The last 30 minutes [[suggests]] some breath-taking [[message]] about grace and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[indulgent]] close-ups of a [[suffering]] Laydu and the [[vague]] subtext in [[Robert]] Bresson's [[script]], all I [[felt]] was, [[Finally]], it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson fanatic [[Paul]] Schrader, just to [[see]] how [[many]] [[elements]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own [[scripts]] and movies, [[especially]] "Taxidriver", "Raging [[Bull]]" and "[[Light]] Sleeper". [[During]] one word: excruciating. I was [[warned]] to read some [[clauses]] about this film's [[philosophic]] meanings [[subsequently]], but, having sat through the movie's [[infinite]] 115 minutes and being [[softly]] crushed beneath its [[swollen]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it [[looked]] [[best]] to just [[reports]] my reactions to the [[filmmaking]]. [[Upon]] all, who goes to [[behold]] a [[filmmaking]] with a syllabus in hand? And this [[gesture]] was dismal. Lead [[protagonist]] [[Claudius]] Laydu, from the film's [[initiation]] to its [[terminate]], [[wearing]] the same wearying and [[exasperating]] mask of [[heartache]] as to be [[hardly]] indistinguishable from the film's [[incorruptible]], [[dismal]] voice-over. Filming one over the other might have [[collaborated]] better than subjecting an [[audiences]] to both, as they [[mostly]] [[tell]] the same [[stuff]]: The [[pastor]] of Ambricourt is a [[pitiable]] human being. The [[history]], about a persecuted [[pastor]] who [[strive]] to [[aids]] out a [[tormented]] rich family, does nothing [[about]] [[doing]] its [[trait]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[families]] are a bunch of [[nasty]] [[psychos]], and the [[vicar]], himself, comes across as a nosy pest. The last 30 minutes [[insinuate]] some breath-taking [[messages]] about grace and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[permissive]] close-ups of a [[hardship]] Laydu and the [[nebulous]] subtext in [[Roberto]] Bresson's [[screenplay]], all I [[believed]] was, [[Lastly]], it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson fanatic [[Paolo]] Schrader, just to [[seeing]] how [[numerous]] [[ingredient]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own [[screenplays]] and movies, [[mostly]] "Taxidriver", "Raging [[Niu]]" and "[[Lighting]] Sleeper". --------------------------------------------- Result 2230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Musically [[speaking]] Irving [[Berlin]] gave Fred Astaire and [[Ginger]] [[Rogers]] another pluperfect musical after Top [[Hat]] if that was [[possible]]. [[Although]] in this [[case]] like that [[Jerome]] Kern [[confection]] Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[retained]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred Astaire is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to [[forget]] Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on [[shore]] leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally meets Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

[[Again]] Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the [[production]]. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the [[pair]], Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the [[great]] romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their [[dancing]] on this one is [[absolute]] [[magic]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

[[Neither]] [[Ozzie]] or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with [[real]] [[feeling]] and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other [[reason]] than to [[hear]] a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten [[today]]. Musically [[talk]] Irving [[Berliner]] gave Fred Astaire and [[Jiang]] [[Rodgers]] another pluperfect musical after Top [[Hats]] if that was [[achievable]]. [[While]] in this [[example]] like that [[Cordova]] Kern [[confectionery]] Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[maintained]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred Astaire is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to [[overlook]] Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on [[coast]] leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally meets Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

[[Afresh]] Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the [[productivity]]. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the [[couple]], Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the [[wondrous]] romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their [[dancer]] on this one is [[unmitigated]] [[wizardry]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

[[Either]] [[Uzi]] or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with [[actual]] [[impression]] and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other [[raison]] than to [[listened]] a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten [[hoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Being a [[genre]] [[film]] fan, a [[child]] of the 80's AND a fan of [[hard]] [[rock]] music...this movie [[holds]] a [[special]] [[place]] in my [[heart]]. It has everything you [[could]] want in a supernatural movie: action, [[great]] special effects (for 1986) and a guitar wailing glam- [[rock]] soundtrack. It certainly was THE [[movie]] for all the heavy [[metal]] [[fans]] at the [[time]]. I didn't [[see]] this at the [[cinema]] because it was never [[released]] theatrically over here...but it's [[popularity]] on [[video]] during the [[mid]] to late eighties [[secured]] it's [[cult]] status and [[eventually]] led to a ([[sadly]], mediocre) [[DVD]] [[release]] in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy [[movies]] or [[rock]] [[music]] then this [[probably]] isn't your [[cup]] of tea...but, trust me, there are worse [[films]] of this [[type]] out there...and, despite average acting and some [[outrageously]] ridiculous [[situations]], Trick or [[Treat]] is most [[definitely]] a wailing [[riff]] above the [[usual]] [[horror]] fare. You'll never [[look]] at your stereo the same [[way]] again. [[Or]] should I [[say]] MP3 player?

[[TRICK]] [[OR]] [[TREAT]] TRIVIA- Marc [[Price]] (Eddie) [[played]] geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom '[[Family]] [[Ties]].' [[After]] a string of direct to [[video]] flops [[including]], 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes [[eat]] France' and 'The Rescue' he [[gave]] up on acting to [[pursue]] a [[career]] in stand-up [[comedy]]. [[Recently]], he has been [[considering]] a TV [[comeback]].

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a [[major]] Hollywood [[producer]]/ screenwriter. He has [[written]] and produced several major [[films]] and [[TV]] [[series]], [[including]]: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most [[recently]] '[[Final]] [[Destination]] 3'.

[[Tony]] [[Fields]] (Sammi) [[started]] his performing [[career]] as a [[dancer]] on the TV [[series]] 'Solid Gold'. He [[appeared]] in [[several]] low [[budget]] [[films]] and TV [[shows]] before landing his breakout role as the [[devilish]] Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. [[Sadly]], [[Tony]] passed away on [[February]] 27th 1995 of [[AIDS]] related [[cancer]].

Doug [[Savant]] (Tim) is [[probably]] [[best]] remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the [[popular]] [[sitcom]] 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. Being a [[gender]] [[movies]] fan, a [[kiddies]] of the 80's AND a fan of [[harsh]] [[boulder]] music...this movie [[held]] a [[peculiar]] [[placing]] in my [[coeur]]. It has everything you [[did]] want in a supernatural movie: action, [[phenomenal]] special effects (for 1986) and a guitar wailing glam- [[boulder]] soundtrack. It certainly was THE [[cinematography]] for all the heavy [[metallic]] [[amateurs]] at the [[moment]]. I didn't [[behold]] this at the [[film]] because it was never [[freed]] theatrically over here...but it's [[vogue]] on [[videos]] during the [[medium]] to late eighties [[guaranteed]] it's [[worship]] status and [[lastly]] led to a ([[regrettably]], mediocre) [[DVDS]] [[releases]] in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy [[theater]] or [[boulder]] [[musicians]] then this [[surely]] isn't your [[copa]] of tea...but, trust me, there are worse [[movie]] of this [[genus]] out there...and, despite average acting and some [[ridiculously]] ridiculous [[instances]], Trick or [[Treatment]] is most [[surely]] a wailing [[riffs]] above the [[habitual]] [[monstrosity]] fare. You'll never [[gaze]] at your stereo the same [[routing]] again. [[Oder]] should I [[said]] MP3 player?

[[RUSE]] [[NEITHER]] [[ADDRESSING]] TRIVIA- Marc [[Prices]] (Eddie) [[served]] geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom '[[Families]] [[Links]].' [[Upon]] a string of direct to [[videotaped]] flops [[containing]], 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes [[swallowed]] France' and 'The Rescue' he [[given]] up on acting to [[pursuit]] a [[quarries]] in stand-up [[comedian]]. [[Lately]], he has been [[contemplating]] a TV [[revert]].

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a [[principal]] Hollywood [[manufacturer]]/ screenwriter. He has [[wrote]] and produced several major [[movies]] and [[TELEVISION]] [[serials]], [[consisting]]: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most [[lately]] '[[Lastly]] [[Destinations]] 3'.

[[Tonda]] [[Domains]] (Sammi) [[launched]] his performing [[occupations]] as a [[dancers]] on the TV [[serial]] 'Solid Gold'. He [[seemed]] in [[different]] low [[budgets]] [[cinema]] and TV [[demonstrates]] before landing his breakout role as the [[baleful]] Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. [[Woefully]], [[Toni]] passed away on [[December]] 27th 1995 of [[SUCCOUR]] related [[tumors]].

Doug [[Scientist]] (Tim) is [[presumably]] [[better]] remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the [[fashionable]] [[sitcoms]] 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I [[saw]] this [[ages]] ago when I was younger and [[could]] never [[remember]] the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's [[film]] credits on IMDb and [[noticed]] an [[entry]] named "Once Upon a [[Crime]]...". Something rang a bell and I [[clicked]] on it, and after reading the plot [[summary]] it [[brought]] back a lot of [[memories]].

I've [[found]] it has [[aged]] pretty well despite the [[fact]] that it is not by any means a "[[great]]" [[comedy]]. It is, however, [[rather]] enjoyable and is a good [[riff]] on a Hitchcock [[formula]] of mistaken identity and [[worldwide]] thrills.

The [[movie]] has a [[large]] cast of [[characters]], amongst them an [[American]] [[couple]] who [[find]] a woman's [[dog]] while [[vacationing]] in Europe and [[decide]] to [[return]] it to her for a [[reward]] - only to [[find]] her [[dead]] [[body]] upon arrival. From there the plot gets [[crazier]] and sillier and they [[go]] on the [[run]] after the police think they are the killers.

[[Kind]] of a [[mix]] between "It's a [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[World]]" and a lighter Hitchcock [[feature]], this was [[directed]] by [[Eugene]] Levy and he [[managed]] to get some of his good [[friends]] - such as [[John]] Candy - to [[star]] in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its [[cast]], and the [[ending]] has a funny [[little]] twist that isn't [[totally]] [[unpredictable]] but also is kind of [[unexpected]]. I [[witnessed]] this [[centuries]] ago when I was younger and [[wo]] never [[remembering]] the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's [[movie]] credits on IMDb and [[observed]] an [[input]] named "Once Upon a [[Offenses]]...". Something rang a bell and I [[ticked]] on it, and after reading the plot [[recap]] it [[tabled]] back a lot of [[memorabilia]].

I've [[uncovered]] it has [[ageing]] pretty well despite the [[facto]] that it is not by any means a "[[wondrous]]" [[parody]]. It is, however, [[somewhat]] enjoyable and is a good [[riffs]] on a Hitchcock [[formulas]] of mistaken identity and [[world]] thrills.

The [[movies]] has a [[big]] cast of [[hallmarks]], amongst them an [[Americas]] [[matches]] who [[unearthed]] a woman's [[puppy]] while [[holidaying]] in Europe and [[decides]] to [[homecoming]] it to her for a [[bonuses]] - only to [[unearthed]] her [[died]] [[bodies]] upon arrival. From there the plot gets [[madder]] and sillier and they [[going]] on the [[executing]] after the police think they are the killers.

[[Type]] of a [[mixing]] between "It's a [[Madman]] [[Furious]] [[Enraged]] [[Lunatic]] [[Global]]" and a lighter Hitchcock [[attribute]], this was [[aimed]] by [[Gonzalez]] Levy and he [[administering]] to get some of his good [[mates]] - such as [[Giovanni]] Candy - to [[superstar]] in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its [[casting]], and the [[terminated]] has a funny [[petite]] twist that isn't [[utterly]] [[erratic]] but also is kind of [[unintended]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[propaganda]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and [[truth]] http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of Yugoslavia documentary series (of five episodes) is a painstakingly compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which [[marked]] the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslavia]] and spanned almost the [[entire]] first half of the 1990's. It [[includes]] a huge wealth of news footage and [[interviews]] with [[involved]] parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[real]] "[[improvement]]" which [[could]] be [[made]] to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later [[developments]] in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat [[showing]] on BBC [[television]], but the addition of some even more recent events [[would]] [[help]] to [[complete]] this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of [[work]]. [[Perhaps]] another whole episode might be [[warranted]]? The very succinct title of this [[documentary]] was [[made]] all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of [[Serbia]] and [[Montenegro]] - a much [[belated]] and [[formal]] [[admission]] of that which occurred [[years]] before.

not fiction like in "[[Yugoslavia]]: The [[Avoidable]] [[War]] (1999)" don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[advocacy]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and [[veracity]] http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of Yugoslavia documentary series (of five episodes) is a painstakingly compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which [[mark]] the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslav]] and spanned almost the [[total]] first half of the 1990's. It [[encompasses]] a huge wealth of news footage and [[conversations]] with [[implicated]] parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[actual]] "[[enhance]]" which [[did]] be [[introduced]] to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later [[evolution]] in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat [[displayed]] on BBC [[tv]], but the addition of some even more recent events [[should]] [[pomoc]] to [[completes]] this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of [[cooperation]]. [[Likely]] another whole episode might be [[vindicated]]? The very succinct title of this [[documentaries]] was [[introduced]] all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of [[Serb]] and [[Lions]] - a much [[delayed]] and [[official]] [[admitting]] of that which occurred [[olds]] before.

not fiction like in "[[Yugoslav]]: The [[Preventable]] [[Warfare]] (1999)" --------------------------------------------- Result 2234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that [[Lost]] and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's [[based]] on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & [[Delirious]] is [[actually]] a much [[better]] [[movie]], so [[see]] that one instead.

This one moves very slowly, but being a late 60s French [[movie]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. [[Finally]], not much character development to [[even]] get you attached to the movie. I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that [[Forfeited]] and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's [[founded]] on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & [[Delusional]] is [[indeed]] a much [[optimum]] [[film]], so [[behold]] that one instead.

This one moves very slowly, but being a late 60s French [[filmmaking]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. [[Eventually]], not much character development to [[yet]] get you attached to the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good dramatic comedy about a playwright trying to figure out how to keep his head above water after running out of ideas. Can't say much about this film without giving away the story. I can say that little was as it seems as you are watching the picture. Everybody has his or her own agenda. Nice little surprise at the end - after all the other surprises. Well written with good performances by all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This movie was like a [[bad]] train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to [[continue]] to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Just]] the [[movie]] as a whole just [[enraged]] both of us. There wasn't [[anything]] positive or [[good]] about this [[scenario]]. After this movie, I had to go [[rent]] something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as usual a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, [[though]] over played, she does a [[wonderful]] job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. This movie was like a [[unfavourable]] train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to [[incessant]] to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Jen]] the [[filmmaking]] as a whole just [[irked]] both of us. There wasn't [[algo]] positive or [[alright]] about this [[screenplays]]. After this movie, I had to go [[rented]] something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as usual a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, [[albeit]] over played, she does a [[sumptuous]] job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 2237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I wasn't [[expecting]] much, and, to be [[honest]], I didn't like this [[film]] the [[first]] [[time]] [[around]] but watching it again and I [[realised]] that it's kinda cool. Sure, it's a one joke [[film]] but it's a [[funny]] gag.

[[Someone]] posted that it [[could]] be better [[written]] and it [[could]] be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a [[lawyer]]. Sadly it's a [[wasted]] opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[classic]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't [[expect]] too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. I wasn't [[waiting]] much, and, to be [[truthful]], I didn't like this [[kino]] the [[fiirst]] [[moment]] [[about]] but watching it again and I [[realized]] that it's kinda cool. Sure, it's a one joke [[movies]] but it's a [[amusing]] gag.

[[Anybody]] posted that it [[wo]] be better [[authored]] and it [[did]] be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a [[jurist]]. Sadly it's a [[squandered]] opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[conventional]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't [[awaited]] too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] HORRENDOUS! Avoid like the plague. I would rate this in the top 10 worst movies ever. Special effects, acting, mood, sound, etc. appear to be done by day care students...wait, I have seen programs better than this. Opens like a soft porn show with a blurred nude female doing a shower scene then goes bad from there. Good nude scenes, but that is it. Sound and light problems were persistent throughout the movie. At times I would swear I could hear the roaring of the camera motors. YIKES! I would like to see another movie on this story, but done by different people. This batch of actors and crew need more acting and movie making lessons. Voted 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Tara [[Reid]] as an intellectual, [[Christian]] Slater([[usually]] great) as a dollar [[store]] [[Constantine]] and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just [[want]] to [[thank]] those [[brilliant]] [[casting]] directors for the hard [[work]] and effort. You guys are on. Heres an [[idea]], just my humble [[lowly]] opinion as the movie [[going]] public but it follows [[directly]] with your previous [[choices]],a [[movie]] about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in [[history]] [[invent]] one pill to cure all [[diseases]] ever known to man and [[get]] this, heres the clincher they have to be [[played]] by Jessica [[Simpson]] and [[Paris]] Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. [[Seriously]] [[though]] you [[owe]] me $7.50. Tara [[Red]] as an intellectual, [[Christianity]] Slater([[generally]] great) as a dollar [[shop]] [[Konstantin]] and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just [[wanna]] to [[appreciation]] those [[sumptuous]] [[pouring]] directors for the hard [[works]] and effort. You guys are on. Heres an [[notions]], just my humble [[unassuming]] opinion as the movie [[gonna]] public but it follows [[immediatly]] with your previous [[selection]],a [[cinema]] about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in [[story]] [[reinvent]] one pill to cure all [[illnesses]] ever known to man and [[obtains]] this, heres the clincher they have to be [[accomplished]] by Jessica [[Simpsons]] and [[Parisien]] Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. [[Deeply]] [[nevertheless]] you [[must]] me $7.50. --------------------------------------------- Result 2240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' is the best film ever made. Now, that I got your attention with that horribly inaccurate statement that should be a hanging offense if spoken, let me begin my short overview of this tacky, offensive, pretentious and boring hunk of junk I guess you could consider a movie. First of all, the low budget of this stinker is totally obvious based on the very poor and inexperienced direction of Christian Vuissa, and the tacky, overly preachy, whiny and stilted screenplay by F. Mathew Smith. I really despise the fact that it sends a very pro-Mormon, and sort of anti-every other religion message. Yes, the story is about a small town half full with Mormons and half full with Baptists. It shows all the main and role-model characters being Mormon, and being so nice and perfect, yet they are being picked on by the evil, conniving and very judgmental Baptists. It shows how beautiful Mormons are and how cold-hearted and ignorant Baptists are, instead of showing a little solidarity like would be appropriate and realistic. I'm a part of neither religion (I'm actually an atheist), but this offended me, along with another countless amount of Baptists most likely. It shows the Baptists as being very unopened and unwelcoming to the Mormons, and the Mormons being very accepting, when again, in reality there is a mutual like/dislike between them. Sorry, I didn't mean to go off on a rant.

Another aspect of 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' I didn't much care for, was the acting. The performances are very amateurish and unnatural, especially from the female lead Heather Beers. Miss Beers stumbles her way through her part without any passion or feeling for her role, and I wasn't too much impressed with Dan Merkley, who's the main character in this lackluster of a motion picture, but I have to say he's way more talented or shows more talent in this film then Heather Beers. Whoever played the town sheriff was awful also. Although there is maybe a tiny laugh deep within the film, it is full of clichés. For example, the main character, Tartan (Merkley), finds solace with a Native American who always gives him the best advice on things relating to a tribal way of life - how cliché is that? To make the situation even more of a pathetic cliché, Tartan buys the poor, lonely heathen a puppy dog. Ugghhh!

If you want my advice, stay as far away from 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' as you can. I saw it on the shelf and thought it would be a cute and interesting little indie about religion. All I got was a, well, piece of crap. Grade: D-

my ratings guide - A+ (absolutley flawless); A (a masterpiece, near-perfect); A- (excellent); B+ (great); B (very good); B- (good); C+ (a mixed bag); C (average); C- (disappointing); D+ (bad); D (very bad); D- (absolutley horrendous); F (not one redeeming quality in this hunk of Hollywood feces). --------------------------------------------- Result 2241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] tells the [[tender]] tale of a [[demented]] scientist who, after his [[fiance]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can [[find]] a [[suitable]] [[body]] to [[attach]] her noggin to. [[Everyone]] in this movie [[exudes]] more [[slime]] than a snail, [[particularly]] our [[protagonist]]. This [[filmmaking]] tells the [[tenders]] tale of a [[wacky]] scientist who, after his [[bride]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can [[unearth]] a [[appropriate]] [[agencies]] to [[herewith]] her noggin to. [[Anyone]] in this movie [[exude]] more [[phlegm]] than a snail, [[peculiarly]] our [[player]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This [[film]] is a bit reminiscent of the German [[film]], THE [[NEVERENDING]] [[STORY]] because a [[child]] is magically [[transported]] to a [[strange]] [[land]] in order to be a [[hero]]. [[However]], due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are [[used]] to make an [[amazingly]] [[realistic]] [[looking]] world--one that will blow your socks off due to its [[realism]] and scope.

I [[enjoyed]] this [[film]], but [[boy]] was it a [[chore]] at first! [[Unfortunately]], for most Westerners, this [[film]] is one you [[might]] [[give]] up on very [[quickly]] or [[dismiss]] it since everything in the [[film]] [[seems]] so [[odd]]. [[However]], give it a chance. Don't think or [[try]] to [[understand]] everything you see--just allow the [[story]] to unfold and you will most [[likely]] enjoy the [[film]].

[[In]] [[many]] [[ways]], this is exactly the sort of [[advice]] I'd [[give]] to adults who watch Miyazaki's [[SPIRITED]] AWAY because it is very [[similar]] and [[features]] [[tons]] of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The [[big]] [[differences]] between the two is that THE [[GREAT]] YOKAI WAR is live-action and [[SPIRITED]] AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do [[think]] THE [[GREAT]] YOKAI [[WAR]] was [[intended]] [[mostly]] as a kids' [[movie]], in the [[USA]], most [[parents]] [[would]] not want to [[show]] this to younger kids because it's so violent, [[scary]] and [[features]] some [[adult]] [[behaviors]]. So who is the audience in the West? Well, [[older]] kids and [[adults]] who [[appreciate]] [[foreign]] [[films]] with non-Western [[themes]] and [[composition]]. This is a [[rather]] narrow [[audience]], indeed!

While you are [[watching]], [[look]] for all the [[strange]] [[little]] touches. [[In]] fact, you [[could]] watch the [[film]] dozens of [[times]] and notice [[different]] [[tiny]] things each [[time]]. A few of the funny references I [[liked]] were the [[comment]] about Gamera, the scene that came with the [[comment]] "[[KIDS]]: Don't Try This [[At]] [[Home]]" as well as the use of [[Kirin]] [[beer]] to [[allow]] a [[person]] to [[actually]] [[see]] the Yokai ([[hmm]],...[[perhaps]] that scene should have [[also]] [[contained]] this [[warning]])!

By the [[way]], director Takashi Miike is a [[hard]] one to [[pin]] down stylistically, other than to [[say]] that none of his [[stories]] I've seen have [[seemed]] "[[normal]]". Some of his [[films]] are [[rather]] disgusting and disturbing and I hated them ([[especially]] [[AUDITION]] and ICHI THE [[KILLER]])whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever [[seen]] (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. This [[movie]] is a bit reminiscent of the German [[movie]], THE [[INEXHAUSTIBLE]] [[TALE]] because a [[kids]] is magically [[transporting]] to a [[weird]] [[terra]] in order to be a [[superhero]]. [[Instead]], due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are [[using]] to make an [[frighteningly]] [[realist]] [[researching]] world--one that will blow your socks off due to its [[realist]] and scope.

I [[liked]] this [[films]], but [[guys]] was it a [[task]] at first! [[Sadly]], for most Westerners, this [[movie]] is one you [[apt]] [[lend]] up on very [[faster]] or [[spurned]] it since everything in the [[movie]] [[looks]] so [[curious]]. [[Conversely]], give it a chance. Don't think or [[endeavour]] to [[understood]] everything you see--just allow the [[history]] to unfold and you will most [[probable]] enjoy the [[kino]].

[[Across]] [[myriad]] [[shapes]], this is exactly the sort of [[councils]] I'd [[lend]] to adults who watch Miyazaki's [[VIBRANT]] AWAY because it is very [[analogue]] and [[characters]] [[tonnes]] of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The [[enormous]] [[disputes]] between the two is that THE [[AWESOME]] YOKAI WAR is live-action and [[PLUCKY]] AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do [[thought]] THE [[WONDROUS]] YOKAI [[WARS]] was [[designed]] [[principally]] as a kids' [[film]], in the [[US]], most [[relatives]] [[ought]] not want to [[spectacle]] this to younger kids because it's so violent, [[awful]] and [[featuring]] some [[adults]] [[behaviour]]. So who is the audience in the West? Well, [[oldest]] kids and [[adult]] who [[thankful]] [[alien]] [[movie]] with non-Western [[item]] and [[makeup]]. This is a [[quite]] narrow [[spectators]], indeed!

While you are [[staring]], [[glance]] for all the [[inquisitive]] [[petite]] touches. [[Throughout]] fact, you [[wo]] watch the [[cinematography]] dozens of [[moments]] and notice [[various]] [[smallest]] things each [[moment]]. A few of the funny references I [[wished]] were the [[commentary]] about Gamera, the scene that came with the [[remarks]] "[[YOUTHS]]: Don't Try This [[Under]] [[Dwellings]]" as well as the use of [[Kieran]] [[casket]] to [[permitting]] a [[someone]] to [[indeed]] [[behold]] the Yokai ([[uh]],...[[probably]] that scene should have [[additionally]] [[containing]] this [[warnings]])!

By the [[route]], director Takashi Miike is a [[arduous]] one to [[pines]] down stylistically, other than to [[tell]] that none of his [[tales]] I've seen have [[looked]] "[[routine]]". Some of his [[movies]] are [[quite]] disgusting and disturbing and I hated them ([[specially]] [[TRYOUT]] and ICHI THE [[ASSASSIN]])whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever [[noticed]] (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac [[relentlessly]] explores the world of the extreme with [[Harry]] [[Russo]].

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict [[scumbag]] who will [[stop]] at [[nothing]] to [[destroy]] those who stand between him and [[insanity]]. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, [[Harry]] [[begins]] his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins [[comes]] the 1st [[installment]] of the [[vilest]] [[story]] ever to be [[filmed]]

The only other [[movie]] I have seen [[similar]] to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a [[really]] low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are [[looking]] for something [[disturbing]], [[different]] and [[horrific]] then this would [[make]] a [[fine]] [[choice]].

DO NOT [[EXPECT]] ANYTHING LIKE [[MODERN]] DAY [[HORROR]] (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac [[ruthlessly]] explores the world of the extreme with [[Hare]] [[Rousseau]].

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict [[shithead]] who will [[stops]] at [[none]] to [[destroyed]] those who stand between him and [[stupidity]]. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, [[Hari]] [[launched]] his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins [[occurs]] the 1st [[instalments]] of the [[foulest]] [[storytelling]] ever to be [[videotaped]]

The only other [[kino]] I have seen [[akin]] to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a [[truthfully]] low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are [[quest]] for something [[worrying]], [[diversified]] and [[horrendous]] then this would [[deliver]] a [[fined]] [[chose]].

DO NOT [[HOPES]] ANYTHING LIKE [[TRENDY]] DAY [[TERROR]] (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised --------------------------------------------- Result 2244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I went to see this film at the cinemas and i was shocked when I got in the room. There was only me and my girlfriend! This shouted to me that this film is not very good.

Not to my surprise, the film was dire. Ben Affleck plays a guy who buys a family for Christmas. It is a very predictable narrative with him falling in love with the girl that hates him. His acting is OKish but for the comedy aspect of the film he is not very good. The plot line is poor and the comedy almost non-existent.

However, there are some good points. For example, the family is falling apart and the mother is very funny.

I hope this review stops other people wasting their money. I was very embarrassed when I came out of the room!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2245 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] An opium den, a [[dirty]] little boy (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a [[violent]] fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual [[shenanigans]], scantily clad babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a bar with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[treated]] [[equally]], does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? [[Wrong]]. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The [[first]] half of "Footlight Parade" is [[preparation]] for a musical extravaganza which [[occupies]] the [[last]] half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to [[lose]] his [[job]] and does [[lose]] his playgirl [[wife]] as a [[result]] of talking [[pictures]] squeezing out [[live]] stage musicals. [[His]] producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The [[Big]] [[Trail]]." Before each [[showing]] of the flick, a dance number is [[presented]] as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and [[cartoons]] [[would]] [[later]] [[serve]] the purpose. [[Kent]] [[gets]] the idea that a prologue [[chain]] [[would]] be the [[road]] to salvation for the [[dwindling]] live musical [[business]]. Kent is basically an idea [[man]] along the lines of [[choreographer]] Busby Berkeley. [[Could]] it be that Cagney's [[character]] is patterned after Berkeley? [[Could]] be.

[[In]] [[preparation]] for the prologues, Kent [[learns]] that his [[ideas]] are being [[stolen]] by a rival. He [[uncovers]] the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a [[new]] [[leak]] is [[planted]] in the form a [[dazzling]] temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - [[soon]] to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas [[College]] shows up in the [[form]] of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a [[real]] find and is [[paired]] with Bea [[Thorn]] (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any [[cinema]] stage of the day, are as fresh and [[enjoyable]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of [[special]] note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred [[Astaire]] and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. An opium den, a [[soiled]] little boy (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a [[fierce]] fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual [[escapades]], scantily clad babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a bar with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[addressed]] [[alike]], does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? [[Amiss]]. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The [[frst]] half of "Footlight Parade" is [[preparations]] for a musical extravaganza which [[occupied]] the [[final]] half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to [[wasting]] his [[jobs]] and does [[wasting]] his playgirl [[woman]] as a [[upshot]] of talking [[visuals]] squeezing out [[viva]] stage musicals. [[Her]] producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The [[Huge]] [[Pathway]]." Before each [[displayed]] of the flick, a dance number is [[lodged]] as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and [[caricatures]] [[should]] [[then]] [[serves]] the purpose. [[Teri]] [[got]] the idea that a prologue [[strings]] [[should]] be the [[path]] to salvation for the [[waning]] live musical [[enterprise]]. Kent is basically an idea [[bloke]] along the lines of [[choreography]] Busby Berkeley. [[Wo]] it be that Cagney's [[characters]] is patterned after Berkeley? [[Wo]] be.

[[Among]] [[prepare]] for the prologues, Kent [[learning]] that his [[idea]] are being [[shoplifted]] by a rival. He [[discloses]] the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a [[newer]] [[leaking]] is [[tanked]] in the form a [[breathless]] temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - [[promptly]] to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas [[Academics]] shows up in the [[shape]] of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a [[authentic]] find and is [[coupled]] with Bea [[Spina]] (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any [[theatre]] stage of the day, are as fresh and [[pleasant]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of [[particular]] note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred [[Esther]] and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2246 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[sorry]] [[excuse]] for a [[film]] [[reminded]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop earlier this Summer. "The Order" was clearly edited to such an unconscionable degree that the scenes, rather than forming a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[little]] to [[forward]] any semblance of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[fan]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my [[man]] needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to [[movie]] oblivion.

Here are the [[problems]] I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his [[essential]] plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these [[threads]] together were [[pathetic]] at [[best]]. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by inserting into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured angst, [[manufactured]] love and most idiotically [[manufactured]] sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing [[techno]] music. Rather than [[developing]] character, these [[elements]] seemed like the [[cheap]] [[devices]] they [[clearly]] were, a half-hearted [[attempt]] at putting popcorn-chewing [[adolescents]] in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an [[intriguing]] concept. We have scandal, we have [[religion]] and we have [[supernatural]] [[forces]] at play. Why then do we [[learn]] almost [[nothing]] about anyone's background? We [[learn]] a [[little]] about [[Alex]], but even he [[gives]] up the [[passion]] of the priesthood to sleep with a [[woman]] after two days, a [[woman]] who tried to [[kill]] him during an exorcism at some point in the [[past]]. And [[Alex]] is the most developed, if you can [[call]] it that, [[character]] in the [[entire]] [[film]].

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to [[see]] one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. This [[apologise]] [[apologies]] for a [[filmmaking]] [[reminds]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop earlier this Summer. "The Order" was clearly edited to such an unconscionable degree that the scenes, rather than forming a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[small]] to [[forwards]] any semblance of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[groupie]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my [[dude]] needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to [[movies]] oblivion.

Here are the [[hassles]] I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his [[critical]] plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these [[cords]] together were [[unlucky]] at [[better]]. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by inserting into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured angst, [[manufacturing]] love and most idiotically [[fabricating]] sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing [[tech]] music. Rather than [[drafting]] character, these [[element]] seemed like the [[inexpensive]] [[tools]] they [[apparently]] were, a half-hearted [[strive]] at putting popcorn-chewing [[teens]] in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an [[fascinating]] concept. We have scandal, we have [[religions]] and we have [[uncanny]] [[troop]] at play. Why then do we [[learns]] almost [[none]] about anyone's background? We [[learns]] a [[tiny]] about [[Xander]], but even he [[delivers]] up the [[enthusiasm]] of the priesthood to sleep with a [[wife]] after two days, a [[wife]] who tried to [[assassinated]] him during an exorcism at some point in the [[former]]. And [[Xander]] is the most developed, if you can [[calling]] it that, [[nature]] in the [[total]] [[filmmaking]].

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to [[seeing]] one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I purchased this film for $5 in a bargain bin at my local video store for one reason only, Chase Masterson, but I should have crumbled up the five, thrown it in a toilet and flushed. The film is about a bunch of twenty somethings that peaked in high school and reunite on the anniversary of their idiot friends death, who got drunk and wandered into the woods and died. There problem is a reptilian monster is hunting them down one by one. The acting is abysmal, these worthless people were apparently cast offs on shows like 90210 and Dawsons Creek. The directing was on par with a twelve year old and the script was probably done by a thirteen year old. The entire set looks like someone's backyard in Malibu. The people on here that have praised this film are obviously friends of the director and/or actors. Avoid this pile of garbage at ALL costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, the sixth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and once again another [[bad]] sequel. I [[think]] this is [[tied]] up with the last sequel of the Dream [[Child]]. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] [[series]] box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to see all the sequels. [[May]] I say that I'm just [[getting]] more and more [[disappointed]] [[though]] with these sequels, at [[least]] the [[past]] two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the [[writers]] were [[trying]] to give Freddy a [[soul]] and they're just [[destroying]] it [[instead]] of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't [[needed]], [[sorry]] to [[Robert]] Englund, but this was very much below what [[Freddy]] Krueger represents.

[[Freddy]] is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a [[daughter]]. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her [[father]], but [[soon]] she [[finds]] out what his [[dark]] [[secrets]] are and he [[wants]] her [[help]]. She has to do her [[best]] to [[resist]] his powers, but it's [[hard]] with all the good [[memories]] she has of her loving [[father]]. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without [[manipulating]] her into his [[ways]].

Freddy's [[Dead]]: The [[Final]] Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the [[sarcasm]]. This is one of the [[worst]] sequels, it's tied up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd [[rather]] watch the second Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] to be honest. This just had [[bad]] acting, stupid [[editing]], and just over all a [[bad]] [[idea]] for a [[story]]. I didn't like the concept of it and it just [[ruined]] the whole [[idea]] of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death [[master]] of [[nightmares]], not [[Father]] Knows Best.

2/10 Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, the sixth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and once again another [[unfavourable]] sequel. I [[thoughts]] this is [[connected]] up with the last sequel of the Dream [[Children]]. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] [[serials]] box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to see all the sequels. [[Maggio]] I say that I'm just [[obtain]] more and more [[frustrating]] [[if]] with these sequels, at [[lowest]] the [[previous]] two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the [[authors]] were [[try]] to give Freddy a [[alma]] and they're just [[demolished]] it [[alternatively]] of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't [[required]], [[apology]] to [[Roberto]] Englund, but this was very much below what [[Freddie]] Krueger represents.

[[Freddie]] is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a [[maid]]. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her [[fathers]], but [[rapidly]] she [[discoveries]] out what his [[darkened]] [[clandestine]] are and he [[wanting]] her [[aids]]. She has to do her [[better]] to [[resisting]] his powers, but it's [[tough]] with all the good [[memorabilia]] she has of her loving [[fathers]]. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without [[handling]] her into his [[mode]].

Freddy's [[Death]]: The [[Ultimate]] Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the [[satire]]. This is one of the [[meanest]] sequels, it's tied up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd [[quite]] watch the second Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] to be honest. This just had [[unfavourable]] acting, stupid [[edition]], and just over all a [[naughty]] [[ideals]] for a [[tales]]. I didn't like the concept of it and it just [[demolished]] the whole [[concept]] of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death [[masters]] of [[dreams]], not [[Pere]] Knows Best.

2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2249 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was the [[third]] remake of [[SLEEPING]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[worked]] and was a [[better]] [[film]]

DARAAR is [[directed]] by Abbas Mustan who sadly failed in their attempt here

the story was good but the handling wasn't that good and the heroine was shown too regressive and the climax too was disappointing

[[Direction]] is [[bad]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA([[strangely]] which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too hard in his debut and does [[manage]] in many scenes to [[chill]] the [[audiences]] but his voice was [[terrible]] Johny is too loud This was the [[terzi]] remake of [[SLEEPER]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[cooperates]] and was a [[optimum]] [[filmmaking]]

DARAAR is [[aimed]] by Abbas Mustan who sadly failed in their attempt here

the story was good but the handling wasn't that good and the heroine was shown too regressive and the climax too was disappointing

[[Directorate]] is [[unfavourable]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA([[oddly]] which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too hard in his debut and does [[administered]] in many scenes to [[chilling]] the [[viewers]] but his voice was [[frightful]] Johny is too loud --------------------------------------------- Result 2250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The "movie aimed at adults" is a rare thing these days, but Moonstruck does it well, and is still a better than average movie, which is aging very well. Although it's comic moments aim lower than the rest of it, the movie has a wonderful specificity (Italians in Brooklyn) that isn't used to shortchange the characters or the viewers. (i.e. Mobsters never appear in acomplication. It never becomes grotesque like My Big Fat Greek Wedding) The secondary story lines are economically told with short scenes that allow a break from the major thread. These are the scenes that are now missing in contemporary movies where their immediate value cannot be impressed upon producers and bigwigs. I miss these scenes. It also beautifully involves older characters. The movie takes it's own slight, quiet path to a conclusion. There isn't a poorly written scene included anywhere to make some executives sphincter relax. Cage and Cher do very nice work.

Moonstruck invokes old-school, ethnic, workaday New York much like 'Marty' except Moonstruck is way less sanctimonious. --------------------------------------------- Result 2251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Presenting]] Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute [[film]], but in my opinion it [[could]] have been better. Judy [[Garland]] is [[great]] as [[always]], but some scenes in the [[film]] [[seem]] out of [[place]] and the romance between her and Van Heflin [[develops]] all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to [[beat]] her butt, but the next minute he [[falls]] in [[love]] with her. I [[believe]] that this production, the film editing, and the [[script]] ( [[even]] [[though]] the [[photography]] was [[great]], the scenery was [[nice]] and the [[costumes]] were [[nice]] as well) [[could]] have been a little [[better]]. It [[feels]] as though the production was too [[rushed]].

The [[supporting]] cast was good as well, especially [[little]] Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't [[develop]] into a teenage [[comic]] [[actress]]. She's much better in this [[film]] than in her [[previous]] [[films]] as Warner [[Brothers]] in the [[late]] 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's [[really]] good in that), when they [[tried]] to [[make]] her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this [[film]] could [[better]], but in the end, Judy [[gave]] it her all. [[Introducing]] Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute [[flick]], but in my opinion it [[did]] have been better. Judy [[Wreath]] is [[awesome]] as [[permanently]], but some scenes in the [[movie]] [[looks]] out of [[placing]] and the romance between her and Van Heflin [[develop]] all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to [[defeat]] her butt, but the next minute he [[drops]] in [[loves]] with her. I [[think]] that this production, the film editing, and the [[screenplay]] ( [[yet]] [[albeit]] the [[picture]] was [[fantastic]], the scenery was [[enjoyable]] and the [[costume]] were [[enjoyable]] as well) [[did]] have been a little [[optimum]]. It [[deems]] as though the production was too [[harried]].

The [[aiding]] cast was good as well, especially [[tiny]] Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't [[prepare]] into a teenage [[comical]] [[actor]]. She's much better in this [[films]] than in her [[anterior]] [[kino]] as Warner [[Plymouth]] in the [[tardy]] 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's [[truthfully]] good in that), when they [[attempting]] to [[deliver]] her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this [[cinematography]] could [[nicer]], but in the end, Judy [[yielded]] it her all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of [[violation]], but [[also]] the only [[true]] actors and [[performers]] in it. So how on [[Earth]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your [[cars]] and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the [[cars]] and [[earn]] money on their chests. It is painful for those who [[love]] [[cars]]. It is painful for those who [[love]] [[movies]].

I want my money back !!! You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of [[offences]], but [[further]] the only [[truthful]] actors and [[artist]] in it. So how on [[Terrestrial]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your [[car]] and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the [[carriages]] and [[earning]] money on their chests. It is painful for those who [[iove]] [[carriages]]. It is painful for those who [[adores]] [[movie]].

I want my money back !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this film. I thought it was an excellent political thriller about something that's never happened before - a Secret Service agent going bad and involved in an assassination plot. Unfortunately, for Michael Douglas' character, "Pete Garrison," they think HE's the mole but he isn't.

He's just a morally-flawed agent having an affair with the First Lady! Since he's doing that, he's unable to give an acceptable polygraph exam and that makes him suspect number one when it's revealed there is a plot to kill the President.

"Garrison" is forced to go on the lam but at the same time he's still trying to do the right thing by protecting the President. Douglas does a fine job in this role. I don't always care the people he plays but he's an excellent actor. Keifer Sutherland ("David Breckinridge") is equally as good (at least in here) as the fellow SS boss who hunts down Douglas until convinced he has been telling the truth. When he does the two of them work together in the finale to discover and then stop, if they can, the plot. The crooks are interesting, too, by the way. Also, I have never - and never will, unfortunately - see a First Lady who looks as good as Kim Basinger

This is simply a slick action flick that entertains start-to-finish. Are there holes in it? Of course; probably a number of them, and a reason you see so many critical comments. However, it is unfairly bashed here. It just isn't intelligent enough for the geniuses here on this website. My advice: chill, just go along for the ride and enjoy all the action and intrigue. Yes, it gets a little Rambo-ish at the end but otherwise it gets high marks for entertainment.....which is what movies are all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 2254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Years ago many big studios promoted serial films that were shown in movie theaters's in between the actual features along with a Newsreel of current events, plus cartoons, especially on a Saturday afternoon. (The parents loved it mostly) "The Return of Chandu" was a 12 episode serial where Chandu,(Bela Lugosi),"The Mysterious Mr. Wong",'34 is a magician with super natural powers and travels to the island of Lemuria to rescue the kidnapped princess of Egypt,(Nadji)Maria Alba,"Dr. Terror's House of Horrors",'43. Princess Nadji is held captive by the black magic cult of Ubasti, who believe that she is a reincarnation of their long-dead goddess Ossana. These 12-episode serials take you way back in time and are very well produced, considering we are talking about 1934 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gregory Peck's acting was excellent, as one would expect, and the cinematography quite stunning even when playing directly into some melodramatic "moment." But, the rest of the film was overacted and hard to watch, for me anyway. I tried to like it, but had to fast-forward through the last thirty minutes or so. I feel I wasted a couple of good hours. Had it not been for Gregory Peck, I wouldn't have lasted fifteen minutes. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've always believed that David and Bathsheba was a film originally intended for Tyrone Power at 20th Century Fox, although Gregory Peck does give a good account of himself as King David, the monarch with a wandering eye.

A whole lot of biblical subjects get covered in this film, adultery, redemption, sin, punishment and generally what God expects from his followers.

When you're a king, even king in a biblically prophesied kingdom you certainly do have a lot perogatives not open to the rest of us. King David has many wives, including one really vicious one in Jayne Meadows who was the daughter of Saul, David's predecessor. But his eyes catch sight of Bathsheba out in her garden one evening. Turns out she's as unhappily married to Uriah the Hittite as David is to quite a few women. Uriah is one of David's army captains. David sends for Bathsheba and him being the King, she comes a runnin' because she's had her eye on him too.

What happens, an affair, a pregnancy, and a carefully arranged death for Uriah in a battle. But an all seeing and knowing Deity has caught all of this and is not only punishing David and Bathsheba, but the entire Kingdom of Israel is being punished with drought, disease, and pestilence.

The sexist law of the day calls for Bathsheba to have a stoning death. David shows weakness in his previous actions, but here he steps up to the plate and asks that the whole thing be put on him. He even lays hands on the Ark of the Covenant which was an instant death as seen in the film.

My interpretation of it is that God admires guts even if you're wrong and he lets up on David and forgives them both. Bathsheba becomes the mother of Solomon and she and David are the ancestors of several successors in the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah until they're both conquered.

Susan Hayward is a fetching Bathsheba caught in a loveless marriage with Uriah played by Kieron Moore. The only thing that gets Moore aroused is a good battle. I liked Kieron Moore's performance as a brave and rather stupid horse's rear.

No one can lay the law down like Raymond Massey. His Nathan the Prophet is in keeping with the John Brown character he played in two films, same intensity.

So when His own law called for death, why did God spare Bathsheba and keep David on the throne. Maybe it was the fact He just didn't want to train a third guy for the job. He'd replaced Saul with David already.

But I think the Christian interpretation might be that this was a hint of the New Testament forthcoming, that one might sin and receive mercy if one asks for it penitently. I'll leave it to the biblical scholars to submit interpretations.

Watch the film and you might come up with an entirely new theory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2257 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's [[grab]] of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a [[chump]] out of [[Neville]] Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of [[Europe]].

[[Clearly]] [[meant]] as propaganda in its day this series over the [[test]] of [[time]] has [[become]] an [[informative]] [[documentary]] as well with most of the "[[Allied]] bias" [[turning]] out to be historical [[fact]]. The [[Fuhrer]] hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one [[thing]] and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians [[quickly]] capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic [[struggle]] against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a [[white]] flag, [[declaring]] "[[Peace]] in our time" to this day has [[durable]] propaganda [[qualities]]. Here in its original context it [[resonates]] [[even]] more [[powerfully]] as the [[darkness]] of World War ll sets in on [[Europe]] [[leaving]] the American [[viewer]] with two options, freedom or [[slavery]]. [[In]] 1943 there was no evading this [[simple]] truth and The Nazis [[Strike]] makes its point effectively. The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's [[grabs]] of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a [[mater]] out of [[Nev]] Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of [[Eu]].

[[Clara]] [[intend]] as propaganda in its day this series over the [[proof]] of [[moment]] has [[becoming]] an [[informational]] [[literature]] as well with most of the "[[Allies]] bias" [[turn]] out to be historical [[facto]]. The [[Leader]] hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one [[stuff]] and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians [[soon]] capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic [[battle]] against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a [[bianca]] flag, [[announcing]] "[[Pacification]] in our time" to this day has [[sustainable]] propaganda [[qualifications]]. Here in its original context it [[resound]] [[yet]] more [[flatly]] as the [[obscurity]] of World War ll sets in on [[Eu]] [[let]] the American [[viewfinder]] with two options, freedom or [[servile]]. [[During]] 1943 there was no evading this [[mere]] truth and The Nazis [[Hitting]] makes its point effectively. --------------------------------------------- Result 2258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Life]] Stinks (1991) was a [[step]] below Mel [[Brooks]] other productions. He stars as a rich [[man]] who [[wages]] an insane [[wager]] with his "[[friends]]". [[Brooks]] [[claims]] that he can life like a [[homeless]] [[man]] for a month. His [[shocked]] and amused friends accept this [[unusual]] [[wager]]. [[During]] his "[[stay]]" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of [[odd]] homeless people, one of them [[catches]] his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[strike]] up a [[friendship]] as she teaches him the [[many]] [[tricks]] she [[learned]] whilst [[living]] on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy [[rich]]? Will he [[win]] this [[unorthodox]] wager? Who are his [[true]] friends? Find out when you watch [[LIFE]] STINKS to find out!

This [[film]] has been slagged [[unfairly]]. Sure it's not a [[classic]] like his [[earlier]] [[films]] but it's [[still]] [[enjoyable]]. I [[liked]] the [[way]] Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent [[films]] then you'll get the [[humor]] as well.

[[Recommended]] for Mel Brooks fans. [[Vida]] Stinks (1991) was a [[steps]] below Mel [[Creek]] other productions. He stars as a rich [[dude]] who [[salary]] an insane [[wagers]] with his "[[buddies]]". [[Brook]] [[claiming]] that he can life like a [[sleepers]] [[males]] for a month. His [[horrified]] and amused friends accept this [[curious]] [[wagering]]. [[In]] his "[[remain]]" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of [[bizarre]] homeless people, one of them [[catch]] his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[hitting]] up a [[goodwill]] as she teaches him the [[several]] [[ploys]] she [[learning]] whilst [[inhabit]] on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy [[wealthy]]? Will he [[victory]] this [[unconventional]] wager? Who are his [[authentic]] friends? Find out when you watch [[LIFETIME]] STINKS to find out!

This [[cinematic]] has been slagged [[inappropriately]]. Sure it's not a [[traditional]] like his [[ago]] [[movie]] but it's [[yet]] [[nice]]. I [[wished]] the [[pathways]] Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent [[movie]] then you'll get the [[comedy]] as well.

[[Suggested]] for Mel Brooks fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie about the relationships that sometimes developed between American servicemen and Japanese women in post-war Japan--as well as the obstacles that prejudices created for them. Brando goes from having contempt for the Japanese (which is natural considering WW2) to falling in love with a Japanese woman and wanting to marry her. His performance is okay (I am not a major fan of his acting style) and the movie is marvelous throughout. Red Buttons received an Oscar for his touching performance of another GI who falls in love in Japan (though the Japanese women who plays opposite him also did a remarkable job).

I don't want to spoil it but the movie is a good one to watch with a box of tissues.

This movie manages to say SOMETHING and be entertaining at the same time. A mostly underrated gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 2260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Family Affair" takes us back to a less complicated time in America. It's sobering to see how different everything was back then. It was a more innocent era in our country and we watch a 'functional' family dealing in things together. The film also marks the beginning of the series featuring the Hardy family.

The film, directed by George Seitz, is based on a successful play. Judge James Hardy, and his wife Emmily, are facing a domestic crisis that must be dealt with. Married daughter Joan comes home after she has committed a social blunder and her husband holds her responsible. At the same time, another daughter, Marion, brings home a beau, who is clear will clash with her father. The happy teen ager Andy, seems to be the only one without a problem until his mother makes him escort Polly to the dance, something he is reluctant to do.

Needless to say, Judge Hardy will prove why he knows best as he puts a plan into action to get everyone together again. After all, he is a man that understands, not only the law, but how to deal with those outside forces that threatens his standing in the community and what will make his family happy.

Lionel Barrymore plays Judge Hardy with conviction. He is the glue that holds everything together. Spring Byington is seen as Emily, the mother. Mickey Rooney has a small part in this film, but he is as always, fun to watch. Cecilia Parker and Julie Haydon appeared as the daughters, Marion and Joan. Sara Hayden and Margaret Marquis are also featured in the film as Aunt Milly and Polly, the girl that surprises Andy with her beauty.

"A Family Affair" is a good way to observe our past through the positive image painted of an American family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This movie is [[simply]] far too [[long]], far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[gratuitous]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the [[movie]] [[could]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as [[effective]] without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I [[saw]] this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also [[could]] have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. This movie is [[straightforward]] far too [[protracted]], far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[unfounded]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the [[filmmaking]] [[wo]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as [[efficacious]] without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I [[noticed]] this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also [[did]] have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] RUN...do not walk away from this [[movie]]!!!!! [[Aimed]] at the very young [[kids]], this [[movie]] will [[bore]] you to [[tears]]. [[If]] the Gamera trilogy of the 90's raised the bar, this [[film]] just [[lowered]] it. It's [[slow]] paced and the [[monster]] fighting is good, but [[seldom]] seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[cat]] box. Just a very [[poor]] [[offering]] after a [[phenomenal]] 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and [[nobody]] was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor [[writing]] killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. RUN...do not walk away from this [[filmmaking]]!!!!! [[Objectives]] at the very young [[juvenile]], this [[filmmaking]] will [[boring]] you to [[tear]]. [[Though]] the Gamera trilogy of the 90's raised the bar, this [[filmmaking]] just [[diminished]] it. It's [[slows]] paced and the [[monsters]] fighting is good, but [[rarely]] seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[kitten]] box. Just a very [[poorest]] [[supplying]] after a [[sumptuous]] 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and [[anyone]] was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor [[literary]] killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. --------------------------------------------- Result 2263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Darius Goes [[West]] is an [[amazing]] documentary about a teenager (Weems) with Duchenne [[Muscular]] Dystrophy, and his 11 [[friends]] who [[take]] him on a cross-country [[trip]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[wheelchair]].

I recently [[watched]] this [[movie]] at the [[Sunscreen]] [[Film]] [[Festival]]. It [[played]] [[twice]] over the course of the [[festival]]. This movie is an amazing [[story]] about the human spirit, and the spirit of Weem's [[friends]]. I do not say this [[often]] about [[movies]], but after [[watching]] this [[movie]], I feel [[moved]] to do something towards the cause. [[Every]] [[festival]] this movie has taken part in, this [[movie]] has won an [[award]] of some [[kind]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]], and it is [[going]] to London and [[Athens]], Greece. I [[would]] not be [[surprised]] if this [[movie]] went all the [[way]] to the Academy [[Awards]]. It is snowballing out of [[control]]. If [[anyone]] has a [[chance]] to [[see]] this [[movie]], [[wherever]] it is [[playing]], go! Take as [[many]] people as [[possible]], and go! It is heading to [[New]] Orleans for a [[film]] [[festival]], then on to Atlanta and [[Palm]] Beach, FL. [[Darius]] is from Georgia, so I [[expect]] the [[tickets]] for the [[Atlanta]] [[showing]] will be [[sold]] out [[quickly]], if they are not already. Please, [[go]] see this [[movie]]! DGW ([[talk]] about it)

-Kish Darius Goes [[Western]] is an [[wondrous]] documentary about a teenager (Weems) with Duchenne [[Muscles]] Dystrophy, and his 11 [[mates]] who [[taking]] him on a cross-country [[tour]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[armchair]].

I recently [[saw]] this [[cinematic]] at the [[Sunblock]] [[Movie]] [[Feast]]. It [[served]] [[double]] over the course of the [[feast]]. This movie is an amazing [[history]] about the human spirit, and the spirit of Weem's [[mates]]. I do not say this [[traditionally]] about [[movie]], but after [[staring]] this [[movies]], I feel [[shifted]] to do something towards the cause. [[Any]] [[celebratory]] this movie has taken part in, this [[kino]] has won an [[scholarship]] of some [[sort]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Kino]] [[Festivals]], and it is [[go]] to London and [[Greece]], Greece. I [[ought]] not be [[horrified]] if this [[cinematography]] went all the [[path]] to the Academy [[Prize]]. It is snowballing out of [[supervisory]]. If [[nobody]] has a [[chances]] to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]], [[nowhere]] it is [[gaming]], go! Take as [[several]] people as [[probable]], and go! It is heading to [[Nouveau]] Orleans for a [[kino]] [[celebratory]], then on to Atlanta and [[Palme]] Beach, FL. [[Dario]] is from Georgia, so I [[awaited]] the [[banknotes]] for the [[Atalanta]] [[displays]] will be [[sells]] out [[expeditiously]], if they are not already. Please, [[going]] see this [[kino]]! DGW ([[schmooze]] about it)

-Kish --------------------------------------------- Result 2264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Something surprised me about this movie - it was actually [[original]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood every month.

I saw this movie on video because I did not even [[know]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The [[suspense]] builds throughout and the twist ending is [[excellent]].

Something surprised me about this movie - it was actually [[initial]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood every month.

I saw this movie on video because I did not even [[savoir]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The [[wait]] builds throughout and the twist ending is [[wondrous]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your heart [[broken]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the [[greatest]] figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his [[movies]]. Here the [[heartbreak]] [[begins]]. After '[[Steamboat]] Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak [[increases]] because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just [[occasionally]] came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I [[continue]] to search for the [[lost]] footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the [[beginning]] of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, [[coincidentally]], played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply [[incompatible]] with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a [[merciless]] scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often [[cast]] as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your heart [[ruptured]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the [[hugest]] figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his [[filmmaking]]. Here the [[sadness]] [[initiates]]. After '[[Steamer]] Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak [[raising]] because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just [[sometime]] came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I [[nonstop]] to search for the [[outof]] footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the [[begins]] of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, [[accidentally]], played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply [[irreconcilable]] with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a [[implacable]] scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often [[casting]] as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Judy Davis shows us here why she is one of Australia's most respected and loved actors - her portrayal of a lonely, directionless nomad is first-rate. A teenaged Claudia Karvan also gives us a glimpse of what would make her one of this country's most popular actors in years to come, with future roles in THE BIG STEAL, THE HEARTBREAK KID, DATING THE ENEMY, RISK and the acclaimed TV series THE SECRET LIFE OF US. (Incidentally, Karvan, as a child, was a young girl whose toy Panda was stolen outside a chemist's shop in the 1983 drama GOING DOWN with Tracey Mann.) If this films comes your way, make sure you see it!! Rating: 79/100. See also: HOTEL SORRENTO, RADIANCE, VACANT POSSESSION, LANTANA. --------------------------------------------- Result 2267 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[movie]] was a real [[torture]] fest to [[sit]] through. Its first [[mistake]] is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[barely]] [[needs]] to [[convince]] the [[audience]] of it. [[When]] it does stoop to putting in its [[argument]], it has the [[participants]] breathlessly deliver [[barely]] [[substantiated]] [[facts]] ; all that's missing is [[someone]] crying "when is someone going to think of the [[children]]!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the [[info]] was [[backed]] up by any [[reliable]] sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. [[James]] Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is [[supposedly]] life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. This [[filmmaking]] was a real [[torturing]] fest to [[seated]] through. Its first [[mistaken]] is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[hardly]] [[require]] to [[persuade]] the [[spectators]] of it. [[Whenever]] it does stoop to putting in its [[controversy]], it has the [[attendees]] breathlessly deliver [[hardly]] [[backed]] [[truths]] ; all that's missing is [[anybody]] crying "when is someone going to think of the [[kid]]!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the [[informational]] was [[substantiated]] up by any [[credible]] sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. [[Jacobo]] Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is [[reportedly]] life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. --------------------------------------------- Result 2268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[lot]] of the "time [[facts]]" were off. [[At]] the [[beginning]] of the movie, the [[grandfather]] [[made]] a [[comment]] to this [[grandson]] and his [[friends]] about how they felt when 9-11 hit. This [[movie]] was [[supposed]] to be [[taking]] place in 1994. Also, one of the [[grandsons]] [[friends]] was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been [[drafted]] as of [[yet]]. The [[story]] line was good but the facts and [[actuality]] of the time frame was so far off [[base]] that it made the movie seem cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I [[rented]] this movie [[hoping]] that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The [[dog]] was cute. But the way that this [[movie]] was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who [[fought]] the [[war]] but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. I [[saw]] this [[filmmaking]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[batch]] of the "time [[truths]]" were off. [[For]] the [[initiate]] of the movie, the [[grampa]] [[brought]] a [[observing]] to this [[grandsons]] and his [[freund]] about how they felt when 9-11 hit. This [[filmmaking]] was [[alleged]] to be [[adopting]] place in 1994. Also, one of the [[stepson]] [[homeys]] was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been [[elaborated]] as of [[even]]. The [[tales]] line was good but the facts and [[reality]] of the time frame was so far off [[basis]] that it made the movie seem cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I [[rent]] this movie [[waiting]] that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The [[canine]] was cute. But the way that this [[filmmaking]] was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who [[struggled]] the [[warfare]] but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. --------------------------------------------- Result 2269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this film so many times through my child hood that even to this day i can pretty much re-sight all of the dialogue. And when I watch it now it just makes me happy and surprisingly still laugh. I think it's amazing how they managed to train animals especially the cat to the extent that they are able to play the main role of a feature film. However watching it now I can also unfortunately notice that it isn't the masterpiece i once thought it was. But i prefer to remember how i felt about it when i was younger watching it on VHS on my fist TV that would cloud the image in yellow. And and bearing in mind it is a children's film, that is why i would still definitely give it 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie is hilarious. The [[problem]] is that it's not a [[comedy]]. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Thomas]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Crazies]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[ratings]]. This movie is hilarious. The [[issues]] is that it's not a [[charade]]. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Tomas]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Freaks]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[evaluations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is [[basically]] a spoof a la "[[Airplane]]!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all [[manner]] of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[attack]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of [[spies]] I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of [[course]] there's a meddling [[reporter]] (Taylor) who [[pops]] in at the [[worst]] times, [[dancing]] and [[singing]] Army soldiers, Japanese [[scientists]] with dubbed-in [[voices]], some [[guy]] [[dragging]] [[around]] a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the [[San]] Diego Chicken before he [[made]] it [[big]].

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you [[could]] probably [[make]] up [[better]] yourself after watching these. Some of the [[dialogue]] is inutterably [[bad]] ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to [[say]] in [[front]] of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty [[Love]]" goes...well, I can't [[blame]] the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "[[Killer]]" comedy, but it [[tries]].

Rock on, Peace. This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is [[mainly]] a spoof a la "[[Air]]!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all [[modes]] of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[attacking]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of [[espionage]] I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of [[cours]] there's a meddling [[correspondents]] (Taylor) who [[pop]] in at the [[hardest]] times, [[danced]] and [[sing]] Army soldiers, Japanese [[scientist]] with dubbed-in [[voice]], some [[boys]] [[drag]] [[throughout]] a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the [[Santo]] Diego Chicken before he [[introduced]] it [[vast]].

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you [[would]] probably [[deliver]] up [[optimum]] yourself after watching these. Some of the [[discussions]] is inutterably [[inclement]] ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to [[tell]] in [[newsweek]] of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty [[Adores]]" goes...well, I can't [[guilt]] the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "[[Callin]]" comedy, but it [[strives]].

Rock on, Peace. --------------------------------------------- Result 2272 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[EA]] have [[shown]] us that they can make a classic 007 [[agent]] and make you feel in the 60's world. The [[graphics]] of the game are [[outstanding]] and also the voice [[recording]] is very [[professional]]. I got this [[game]] April 2007 (two [[years]] after [[release]]), and I am [[still]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[shame]] that [[EA]] will no [[longer]] [[make]] 007 [[games]].

I give this [[game]] 10/10 for the levels it [[contains]], [[especially]] the "consulate" level. I would recommend this [[game]] to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only [[thing]] I didn't like in the [[game]] is the Russian [[boat]] [[level]], it was too much pressure. [[On]] the [[whole]] I like the game A LOT!! [[AE]] have [[display]] us that they can make a classic 007 [[patrolman]] and make you feel in the 60's world. The [[erections]] of the game are [[wondrous]] and also the voice [[registration]] is very [[professions]]. I got this [[jeu]] April 2007 (two [[ages]] after [[frees]]), and I am [[yet]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[embarrassment]] that [[AE]] will no [[anymore]] [[deliver]] 007 [[jeux]].

I give this [[jeu]] 10/10 for the levels it [[consists]], [[concretely]] the "consulate" level. I would recommend this [[jeu]] to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only [[stuff]] I didn't like in the [[jeu]] is the Russian [[boats]] [[levels]], it was too much pressure. [[Orn]] the [[entire]] I like the game A LOT!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like this movie because in Australia, Chinese movies like these never get shown during prime time. I must say this is one of the best serious movies ever, which outlines the difference between the Hong Kong people, and mainland Chinese. It really shows that there's discomfort between the two, but can only get better as HK are learning Mandarin. It also showed me how in mainland China the indie rock scene exists, and that Chinese people do know how to strum the guitar and get the house funking! Whoever said China isn't ready for rock music? Daniel Wu is absolutely superb, with his clean and crisp voice, honest acting, and a total chick magnet. I recommend this movie to those who don't know much about Asian people to cleanse themselves from the typical Western stereotypes, and people who just love Chinese/Asian cinema like myself. Check it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] enjoyed the movie and efficient Confucian crime drama, the old order survives the threat posed by a brash young greedy man, no doubt representing modern society. I thought the final scene was strange and could not understand if we were to believe that big D was being punished for being greedy or it was part of the plan a long. I loved the scene and for once in a Chinese movie, the violence was not a choreographed martial arts fest. On thing that always amuses me about HK films is that the main influence the British seem to have had is to introduce 'yes sir' and 'sorry' into the local language and its amusing that long after we have gone, they are still there. --------------------------------------------- Result 2275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Considering the original [[film]] [[version]] of 'The Haunting" is in my [[top]] ten [[films]] of all time' I [[approached]] this adaption with [[trepidation]]. I was right to be [[cautious]] as this film is a poorly written and badly [[executed]] [[load]] of [[old]] tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the original was terrifying to me as a child for one reason! you see nothing. [[Robert]] [[Wise]] [[used]] [[innovative]] camera-work and superb lighting to generate [[fear]] and this is why it work's. The [[shame]] of the [[new]] version is that it relies on [[clever]] special effects and [[pyrotechnics]] to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there ([[actors]] such as Liam Neeson, [[Catherine]] Zeta Jones) to do something different. This [[film]] should only watched as an [[example]] of studio [[butchery]]! Considering the original [[movie]] [[stepping]] of 'The Haunting" is in my [[superior]] ten [[filmmaking]] of all time' I [[tackled]] this adaption with [[angst]]. I was right to be [[careful]] as this film is a poorly written and badly [[conducted]] [[loading]] of [[ancient]] tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the original was terrifying to me as a child for one reason! you see nothing. [[Roberto]] [[Judicious]] [[employs]] [[revolutionary]] camera-work and superb lighting to generate [[angst]] and this is why it work's. The [[shamed]] of the [[newer]] version is that it relies on [[malin]] special effects and [[fireworks]] to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there ([[protagonists]] such as Liam Neeson, [[Cathy]] Zeta Jones) to do something different. This [[filmmaking]] should only watched as an [[instances]] of studio [[slaughterhouse]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[New]] [[York]] I Love You just like its predecessor (Paris Je T'Aime) is a compound of [[various]] [[stories]] that [[reflects]] the [[different]] kinds and [[aspects]] of [[love]] but unlike it the [[rhythm]] is much [[faster]] and the [[stories]] [[much]] shorter. The [[movie]] [[offers]] a [[unique]] view of the city of [[New]] York with its [[various]] and [[different]] landscapes. [[New]] York, I [[Love]] You [[offers]] a first [[class]] cast, [[featuring]] such [[great]] [[actors]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, [[Ian]] McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn [[among]] [[others]] and some [[excellent]] writers and directors like [[Brett]] Ratner and Anthony Mingella. [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] I Love You just like its predecessor (Paris Je T'Aime) is a compound of [[several]] [[fairytales]] that [[reflecting]] the [[several]] kinds and [[things]] of [[adores]] but unlike it the [[pace]] is much [[speedily]] and the [[storytelling]] [[very]] shorter. The [[kino]] [[offered]] a [[sole]] view of the city of [[Newer]] York with its [[assorted]] and [[dissimilar]] landscapes. [[Newer]] York, I [[Amore]] You [[tender]] a first [[category]] cast, [[featured]] such [[wondrous]] [[actresses]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, [[Iain]] McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn [[between]] [[alia]] and some [[brilliant]] writers and directors like [[Broadly]] Ratner and Anthony Mingella. --------------------------------------------- Result 2277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

What an absolutely crappy film this is. How or why this movie was made and what the hell Billy Bob Thornton and Charlize Theron were doing signing up for this mediocre waste of time is beyond me. Strong advise for anyone sitting down to catch a flick: DO NOT waste your time on this 'film'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] CCCC is the [[first]] good [[film]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first [[saw]] the [[trailer]] of the [[film]] I [[thought]] It would be a [[nice]] [[family]] [[movie]]. I was right. Salman Khan has [[given]] is [[strongest]] performance ever. My family weren't too [[keen]] on him but after [[seeing]] this [[film]] my [[family]] are very [[impressed]] with him. Rani and Preity are [[wonderful]]. The [[film]] is [[going]] to be a [[huge]] [[hit]] because of the three main stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya [[meeting]] and [[falling]] in love. They [[get]] married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they come back Raj and Priya [[find]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[family]] are full of [[joy]] when they [[find]] out [[especially]] Raj's [[dada]] (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[family]] are [[playing]] cricket one day and Priya has an accident which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very close family [[friend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[tells]] Raj and Priya that she can no longer have [[anymore]] [[kids]]. Raj and Priya [[keep]] this quiet from the family. Raj and Priya [[decide]] to [[go]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[find]] a [[girl]] and Raj and that [[girl]] will have a [[baby]] together and then hand the [[baby]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[finds]] a [[girl]]. Her name is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancer]] and a [[prostitute]]. Raj [[tells]] her the situation and bribes her with money and she agrees. Raj [[changes]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[tells]] Priya that he has [[found]] a [[girl]]. Madhubala and Priya [[meet]] and become [[friends]]. They [[go]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[finds]] out. Priya [[spends]] the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[alone]] and they [[spend]] the [[night]] together. The [[doctor]] [[confirms]] that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[happy]]. Raj [[tells]] his [[family]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[comes]] to love Raj and she [[wants]] him. What happens [[next]]? Watch CCCC to [[find]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the film is their [[idea]] of surrogacy. They should have [[done]] it the [[proper]] [[way]] in the film but it didn't [[ruin]] the [[film]]. It was still [[excellent]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana Hai Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! CCCC is the [[frst]] good [[films]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first [[noticed]] the [[caravan]] of the [[cinema]] I [[think]] It would be a [[delightful]] [[families]] [[cinematography]]. I was right. Salman Khan has [[awarded]] is [[stronger]] performance ever. My family weren't too [[ardent]] on him but after [[witnessing]] this [[movie]] my [[familia]] are very [[surprising]] with him. Rani and Preity are [[wondrous]]. The [[movie]] is [[gonna]] to be a [[formidable]] [[hitting]] because of the three main stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya [[meetings]] and [[declining]] in love. They [[got]] married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they come back Raj and Priya [[finds]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[families]] are full of [[pleasure]] when they [[finds]] out [[notably]] Raj's [[daddy]] (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[families]] are [[play]] cricket one day and Priya has an accident which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very close family [[boyfriend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[told]] Raj and Priya that she can no longer have [[longer]] [[youths]]. Raj and Priya [[keeping]] this quiet from the family. Raj and Priya [[decided]] to [[going]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[unearthed]] a [[daughter]] and Raj and that [[daughter]] will have a [[honey]] together and then hand the [[babe]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[discoveries]] a [[daughter]]. Her name is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancers]] and a [[hooker]]. Raj [[says]] her the situation and bribes her with money and she agrees. Raj [[modifications]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[told]] Priya that he has [[detected]] a [[daughter]]. Madhubala and Priya [[cater]] and become [[friend]]. They [[going]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[discoveries]] out. Priya [[spent]] the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[merely]] and they [[expenditures]] the [[overnight]] together. The [[physician]] [[asserts]] that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[merry]]. Raj [[told]] his [[families]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[happens]] to love Raj and she [[wanted]] him. What happens [[imminent]]? Watch CCCC to [[unearthed]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the film is their [[thoughts]] of surrogacy. They should have [[played]] it the [[adequate]] [[manner]] in the film but it didn't [[downfall]] the [[flick]]. It was still [[wondrous]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana Hai Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. While the actors are all personable, the story is so [[trite]] and goes [[nowhere]]. I think [[Victor]] Rasuk has [[great]] [[charisma]], but deserves a real [[film]] from a real storyteller. .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. While the actors are all personable, the story is so [[commonplace]] and goes [[everywhere]]. I think [[Viktor]] Rasuk has [[gorgeous]] [[seduction]], but deserves a real [[filmmaking]] from a real storyteller. --------------------------------------------- Result 2280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The [[movie]] is [[absolutely]] silly.

But were you [[expecting]] a high-brow intellectual [[film]] based on a [[comic]] called Slam [[Dunk]]? [[Really]]? Jay Chou's acting isn't [[exactly]] the most [[moving]] thing I've ever [[seen]], but I [[certainly]] enjoyed the [[movie]]. [[Was]] it [[somewhere]] near the [[level]] of [[awesome]] that someone like Jet Li or [[Stephen]] [[Chow]] can produce? No, not really. Was it [[thoroughly]] entertaining if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we [[got]] a [[great]] laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I [[especially]] [[enjoy]] the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. The [[film]] is [[perfectly]] silly.

But were you [[wait]] a high-brow intellectual [[cinematic]] based on a [[humorous]] called Slam [[Soak]]? [[Genuinely]]? Jay Chou's acting isn't [[precisely]] the most [[displacement]] thing I've ever [[saw]], but I [[probably]] enjoyed the [[kino]]. [[Became]] it [[somehow]] near the [[grades]] of [[impressive]] that someone like Jet Li or [[Steven]] [[Weeks]] can produce? No, not really. Was it [[intently]] entertaining if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we [[get]] a [[wondrous]] laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I [[peculiarly]] [[enjoying]] the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] out by saying I can [[enjoy]] just about any [[bad]] Italian horror [[movie]] or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. [[Seriously]]. This one was downright [[awful]].

There are way too [[many]] [[elements]] that Martino [[tries]] to inject and none of them [[work]] (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant [[Westerners]], of course, who set up a resort in the jungle [[somewhere]]. I don't [[even]] [[remember]] where it [[takes]] place...how sad is that... [[Basically]], people [[come]] to the resort to see this native [[tribe]] and its' ceremonies but [[eventually]] they [[upset]] the 'Alligator God' of the river who then [[proceeds]] to go on a [[rampage]], [[killing]] said vacationers and some [[tribesmen]] as well. [[Sounds]] good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is [[minimal]] violence until the [[end]], the [[special]] [[effects]] are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the [[love]] [[story]] [[thrown]] in is [[laughable]].

There is seriously a few scenes where it [[appears]] they set up a [[camera]] underwater in a pool and [[threw]] a [[toy]] alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is [[supposed]] to be the [[gator]] [[attacking]]. I'm not [[kidding]]. [[In]] another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is [[targeted]] by the [[incredible]] [[sinking]] [[plastic]] gator, who all of a sudden is five [[times]] the [[size]] of a van. (A few minutes [[ago]], he was only big enough to [[eat]] a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size [[cargo]] van...) It is really [[pathetic]]. The only other flick I can [[think]] of where the [[effects]] were so [[bad]] I was [[pulled]] out of the [[story]] was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be [[terrified]].

Normally I'd [[say]] anything Sergio Martino was a [[solid]] must-see but this one is a must-pass. [[Waste]] of [[time]] and [[definitely]] not worth [[buying]] for the $15+ sticker [[price]] from No [[Shame]]. This one is a [[SHAME]].

2 out of 10, [[kids]]. [[Leave]] me [[commencement]] out by saying I can [[enjoying]] just about any [[negative]] Italian horror [[cinematographic]] or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. [[Profoundly]]. This one was downright [[abhorrent]].

There are way too [[several]] [[facets]] that Martino [[attempted]] to inject and none of them [[collaborating]] (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant [[Westerns]], of course, who set up a resort in the jungle [[nowhere]]. I don't [[yet]] [[recall]] where it [[pick]] place...how sad is that... [[Fundamentally]], people [[coming]] to the resort to see this native [[clan]] and its' ceremonies but [[lastly]] they [[annoyed]] the 'Alligator God' of the river who then [[receipts]] to go on a [[carnage]], [[homicide]] said vacationers and some [[clan]] as well. [[Sound]] good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is [[minor]] violence until the [[terminate]], the [[peculiar]] [[effect]] are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the [[amore]] [[saga]] [[hurled]] in is [[silly]].

There is seriously a few scenes where it [[appearing]] they set up a [[cameras]] underwater in a pool and [[tossed]] a [[toys]] alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is [[suspected]] to be the [[alligator]] [[onslaught]]. I'm not [[shitting]]. [[Onto]] another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is [[orientated]] by the [[unbelievable]] [[drowning]] [[plastics]] gator, who all of a sudden is five [[time]] the [[sized]] of a van. (A few minutes [[before]], he was only big enough to [[coma]] a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size [[freight]] van...) It is really [[unfortunate]]. The only other flick I can [[believe]] of where the [[effect]] were so [[naughty]] I was [[pull]] out of the [[tales]] was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be [[horrified]].

Normally I'd [[tell]] anything Sergio Martino was a [[solids]] must-see but this one is a must-pass. [[Wastes]] of [[times]] and [[conclusively]] not worth [[buys]] for the $15+ sticker [[prizes]] from No [[Ashamed]]. This one is a [[PITY]].

2 out of 10, [[youngsters]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2282 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It has been almost 5 years since the release of this stylish action flick.I have watched this movie almost 10 times and it a great effort by Gautham.From my perspective,I feel this movie is virtually flawless. Surya as ACP Anbuchelvan-no doubt..classy.Jyothika played her role as Maya very well.The character suits her very well.The character that caught movie-goers attention was Pandia.Jeevan played the role of Pandia very well.Brutal and fearsome.Jeevan deservedly received the Best Villain award in the ITFA 2004.The supporting cast of Daniel Balaji,Devadharshini and other performed well.

Racy screenplay,perfectly-timed dialogues and brilliant narration by Gautham.The soundtrack by Harris Jeyaraj are all chart-busters while the BGM suits the movie very well.Cinematography by R.D. Rajasekhar is rich.Peter Hein choreographed the stunts well.Anthony's editing is precise.Above all,Kaakha Kaakha is a perfect cop film filled with right doses of action and romance.

Even some Hollywood film cant compete with Kaakha Kaakha...undoubtedly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2283 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie is one of the most [[awful]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[dialogue]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's [[ending]], but it's not. How long is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. This movie is one of the most [[abhorrent]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[conversation]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's [[terminated]], but it's not. How long is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A great British Indy movie! Fantastic chemistry between the 3 main characters make for some hilarious drug-fuelled set pieces that Cheech and Chong would be proud of. Great to see Phil Daniels back on the big screen (even if he has swapped sides since Quadrophenia!) and Gary Stretch is surprisingly good and a treat for the ladies! Loved the final fight scene with it's nod to Zulu and now I know what happened to Arthur Brown after he set himself on fire on Top of the Pops!...he's not acting....he really is a bona-fide British hippie!!! You don't have to be a biker to enjoy this and it's straight into my Friday night post-pub repeat viewing collection.

Give this film a go and you won't be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] its a gem movie if [[anyone]] who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant [[understand]] what is [[going]] on there. a thakur [[call]] men for [[catching]] a [[big]] [[terrorist]] who is like [[god]] and [[even]] [[police]] don't know abut him but these ppl do.

[[biggest]] [[advantage]] of [[film]] is its [[speed]] u never know what is [[going]] on and the [[part]] is [[completed]]. [[actors]] are at there best of [[worst]] acting and [[actress]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which seems to come in very [[long]] [[time]] but u [[cant]] understand them so [[easily]] [[try]] [[hard]] for that and [[last]] word i haven't seen [[movie]] complete due to a brain roast so plz [[tell]] me ditz [[end]] if it have its a gem movie if [[person]] who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant [[understanding]] what is [[gonna]] on there. a thakur [[invitation]] men for [[captured]] a [[grande]] [[terrorism]] who is like [[lord]] and [[yet]] [[cops]] don't know abut him but these ppl do.

[[highest]] [[advantages]] of [[filmmaking]] is its [[acceleration]] u never know what is [[gonna]] on and the [[party]] is [[accomplished]]. [[protagonists]] are at there best of [[meanest]] acting and [[actor]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which seems to come in very [[protracted]] [[period]] but u [[thats]] understand them so [[comfortably]] [[attempted]] [[harsh]] for that and [[final]] word i haven't seen [[kino]] complete due to a brain roast so plz [[told]] me ditz [[terminates]] if it have --------------------------------------------- Result 2286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[strong]] [[tribute]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[strong]] characterization of the [[man]], his [[genius]] as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[times]] they [[blended]].

The whole story of Douglas MacArthur would be a six [[hour]] [[film]] or a TV mini-series. It would [[cover]] him from his days on frontier [[posts]] with his family to his [[time]] at West Point where he [[still]] has the [[highest]] scholastic average ever [[achieved]] by a [[cadet]]. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend [[building]] [[bravery]] on the [[battlefields]] of [[World]] War I in France. It would [[also]] have to [[tell]] about him firing on the Bonus [[Marchers]] of World War I veterans in 1932, [[probably]] putting the final kabosh on any [[chances]] [[President]] Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. [[During]] MacArthur's [[last]] [[years]] he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in [[New]] York [[City]]. That [[must]] have been a [[subject]] they [[avoided]].

This [[film]] [[concentrates]] on the [[years]] 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The [[film]] [[opens]] with MacArthur [[addressing]] the [[student]] [[body]] in 1962. As he [[speaks]] the words of the [[famous]] [[Duty]] [[Honor]] [[Country]] speech, MacArthur's [[mind]] goes back to World War [[II]] and his [[desperate]] [[struggle]] against the [[advancing]] Japanese on the [[island]] of Corregidor and the [[fields]] of Bataan on [[Luzon]]. The [[film]] takes him through his [[struggle]] to [[win]] back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of [[command]] by [[President]] Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[would]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of [[Dan]] O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the [[part]] of the [[film]] I [[enjoyed]] the [[best]], [[seeing]] MacArthur and his [[relations]] with both these men.

FDR by O'Herlihy [[captures]] the aristocratic squire and [[exceptionally]] [[devious]] [[man]] that was our 32nd [[President]]. Roosevelt was a [[man]] who got his points [[across]] with [[unusual]] [[subtlety]] and [[cleverness]]. [[Sometimes]] he [[liked]] scheming a [[little]] too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. [[Note]] how he [[deals]] with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[vigorous]] [[eulogy]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[vigorous]] characterization of the [[guy]], his [[engineers]] as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[moments]] they [[mixed]].

The whole story of Douglas MacArthur would be a six [[hours]] [[cinematography]] or a TV mini-series. It would [[covering]] him from his days on frontier [[positions]] with his family to his [[period]] at West Point where he [[however]] has the [[biggest]] scholastic average ever [[accomplished]] by a [[cadets]]. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend [[build]] [[courage]] on the [[battleground]] of [[Global]] War I in France. It would [[apart]] have to [[telling]] about him firing on the Bonus [[Protesters]] of World War I veterans in 1932, [[presumably]] putting the final kabosh on any [[chance]] [[Chairs]] Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. [[At]] MacArthur's [[final]] [[ages]] he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in [[Novel]] York [[Ville]]. That [[owe]] have been a [[theme]] they [[avoid]].

This [[movie]] [[focused]] on the [[ages]] 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The [[movies]] [[inaugurated]] with MacArthur [[dealing]] the [[students]] [[bodies]] in 1962. As he [[spoke]] the words of the [[illustrious]] [[Obligations]] [[Honoured]] [[Countries]] speech, MacArthur's [[intellect]] goes back to World War [[SECONDLY]] and his [[distraught]] [[struggling]] against the [[promoting]] Japanese on the [[isla]] of Corregidor and the [[campos]] of Bataan on [[Lawson]]. The [[movie]] takes him through his [[fight]] to [[won]] back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of [[commands]] by [[Chairperson]] Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[should]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of [[Dana]] O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the [[parties]] of the [[movie]] I [[appreciated]] the [[bestest]], [[see]] MacArthur and his [[ties]] with both these men.

FDR by O'Herlihy [[catch]] the aristocratic squire and [[incredibly]] [[duplicitous]] [[dude]] that was our 32nd [[Presidency]]. Roosevelt was a [[guy]] who got his points [[during]] with [[odd]] [[sophistication]] and [[inventiveness]]. [[Occasionally]] he [[loved]] scheming a [[scant]] too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. [[Memo]] how he [[deal]] with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ([[NOTE]]: I [[thought]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[see]] the others here agree. I [[guess]] it was [[pretty]] [[obvious]] - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had written:)

The [[owners]] have left on [[vacation]] for two weeks - a trip to California - leaving the cat (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the [[house]]. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does [[find]] a bunch of canned tuna. [[However]], to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the [[little]] [[mouse]] in the house has it...and baits the [[cat]] with it. This is a [[mean]] rodent who keeps [[teasing]] Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last [[second]]. Sylvester tries everything [[possible]] to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a [[frustrating]] [[story]], and why they make the [[sadistic]] mouse the "good guy" is [[beyond]] me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor [[Tom]] always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! ([[REMARK]]: I [[ideology]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[seeing]] the others here agree. I [[imagine]] it was [[belle]] [[unmistakable]] - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had written:)

The [[landlords]] have left on [[holidays]] for two weeks - a trip to California - leaving the cat (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the [[domicile]]. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does [[finds]] a bunch of canned tuna. [[Conversely]], to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the [[scant]] [[smile]] in the house has it...and baits the [[kitten]] with it. This is a [[meaning]] rodent who keeps [[bothering]] Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last [[secondly]]. Sylvester tries everything [[achievable]] to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a [[depressing]] [[tales]], and why they make the [[vicious]] mouse the "good guy" is [[afterlife]] me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor [[Tum]] always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! --------------------------------------------- Result 2288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[story]] is [[seen]] before, but that does'n matter if you can figure out to make a [[proper]] storyboard. It is [[clear]] that the director haven't [[spent]] his work on the storyboard. [[Alongside]] this, the cameraman [[spent]] far too much [[time]] leaning angles that do not match the message of the movie. The funniest is, however, if you take a look at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[purpose]] that the director has [[chosen]] to [[make]] the [[film]] with [[bad]] [[camera]] angles. Because it [[remind]] us about [[hunting]]. But I have never [[heard]] of hunting with poor camera angles ;-) It will have 1 [[stars]] because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti [[West]], has not spent more [[time]] to [[review]] his [[story]]. It is as if the [[movie]] was more [[important]] than the planning. [[Because]] you have a [[camera]] does not [[mean]] you should make a [[movie]] right away... [[come]]. Everyone can [[make]] a [[movie]], but not all will be just as good. [[So]] a word of [[advice]] to Ti West are: [[stop]] and labeling what you [[want]]. [[Use]] your [[time]] to [[start]] planning and not filming until everything has [[come]] down on a storyboard. You [[certainly]] have the [[ability]] and [[desire]] - so don't abuse your talent. The [[tales]] is [[watched]] before, but that does'n matter if you can figure out to make a [[suitable]] storyboard. It is [[lucid]] that the director haven't [[spends]] his work on the storyboard. [[Beside]] this, the cameraman [[spend]] far too much [[times]] leaning angles that do not match the message of the movie. The funniest is, however, if you take a look at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[intention]] that the director has [[opted]] to [[deliver]] the [[filmmaking]] with [[negative]] [[cameras]] angles. Because it [[reminds]] us about [[chasing]]. But I have never [[hear]] of hunting with poor camera angles ;-) It will have 1 [[celebrity]] because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti [[Westen]], has not spent more [[times]] to [[revising]] his [[tales]]. It is as if the [[filmmaking]] was more [[critical]] than the planning. [[Since]] you have a [[cameras]] does not [[imply]] you should make a [[filmmaking]] right away... [[coming]]. Everyone can [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]], but not all will be just as good. [[Therefore]] a word of [[tips]] to Ti West are: [[parada]] and labeling what you [[desiring]]. [[Utilise]] your [[times]] to [[booting]] planning and not filming until everything has [[coming]] down on a storyboard. You [[definitely]] have the [[dexterity]] and [[willingness]] - so don't abuse your talent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well I don't know where to begin. Obviously this was a made for TV movie, so my expectations were low. I was pleasantly surprised by the overall direction of the second hour, but anything before or after that seemed to be a paint by the numbers sort of movie.

And talk about bad chemistry between the tow lovebird detectives. ..

I would go more in depth, but this movie doesn't really deserve it. Grade: D+ (IMDB rating 3/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie [[deserved]] a [[working]] over on Mystery Science [[Theater]]. Even though it has [[nothing]] whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an unintentional laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." [[Be]] sure to check out the following: the cheesy [[medallion]] ([[looks]] like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly [[done]] stutter (which does draw attention away from his even worse acting), the [[incredibly]] [[bad]] process [[work]] on all the "[[monsters]]," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the [[little]] girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he [[sinks]] in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious [[boat]] (oh, brother!!) which appears to be [[made]] of plywood [[mounted]] on an [[old]] sand dredge and [[looks]] like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. [[prom]] ("[[Voyage]] into the [[Future]] with the [[class]] of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman [[Imperial]] [[armor]] but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians [[invented]] the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -[[oh]] the [[horror]]! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers [[manage]] to [[lose]] the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or [[whatever]] - [[evidently]] [[chose]] to [[die]] [[heroically]] [[rather]] than be in any more scenes. This movie [[merits]] a [[works]] over on Mystery Science [[Theatrical]]. Even though it has [[none]] whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an unintentional laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." [[Are]] sure to check out the following: the cheesy [[locket]] ([[seem]] like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly [[doing]] stutter (which does draw attention away from his even worse acting), the [[unimaginably]] [[unfavourable]] process [[works]] on all the "[[monster]]," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the [[tiny]] girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he [[drowning]] in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious [[vessels]] (oh, brother!!) which appears to be [[accomplished]] of plywood [[ascended]] on an [[ancient]] sand dredge and [[seem]] like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. [[promo]] ("[[Voyager]] into the [[Futur]] with the [[category]] of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman [[Imperialism]] [[sonic]] but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians [[coined]] the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -[[ooh]] the [[abomination]]! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers [[administered]] to [[losing]] the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or [[whichever]] - [[notoriously]] [[selected]] to [[dying]] [[bravely]] [[somewhat]] than be in any more scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 2291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I [[hated]] this [[show]] when I was a [[kid]]. That was back in the day when [[kids]] [[show]] [[characters]] actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General [[American]] Dialect we're [[used]] to. [[Jack]] Wild had a British [[accent]] and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others [[mentioned]], though, I never [[quite]] [[understood]] what the [[deal]] was with the witch [[wanting]] the [[flute]]. That [[always]] seemed [[odd]] to me, [[probably]] because the flute just [[annoyed]] me and I wouldn't have [[gone]] to any [[trouble]] to [[take]] it away!

[[Just]] a [[comment]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to [[early]] 70s [[McDonalds]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[ripped]] off McDonalds. [[At]] the height of [[McDonalds]] popularity, the [[TV]] show (or [[rather]], their creators) [[sought]] to [[license]] McDonalds characters for their [[show]], but when [[McDonalds]] [[declined]] the TV [[show]] changed the [[characters]] [[slightly]] and [[passed]] it as their own. They even [[hired]] [[former]] [[employees]] of [[McDonalds]] [[ad]] agency and the [[voice]] [[actors]] to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. [[Search]] for Pufnstuf McDonaldland [[lawsuit]] and you'll find plenty of articles about it. I [[hating]] this [[exhibitions]] when I was a [[infantile]]. That was back in the day when [[kid]] [[shows]] [[traits]] actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General [[Americans]] Dialect we're [[uses]] to. [[Jacque]] Wild had a British [[focus]] and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others [[mention]], though, I never [[altogether]] [[fathom]] what the [[treat]] was with the witch [[desiring]] the [[piper]]. That [[invariably]] seemed [[freaky]] to me, [[admittedly]] because the flute just [[enraged]] me and I wouldn't have [[missing]] to any [[problem]] to [[taking]] it away!

[[Righteous]] a [[commentaries]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to [[quickly]] 70s [[mcdonald]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[buzzed]] off McDonalds. [[For]] the height of [[mcdonald]] popularity, the [[TELEVISION]] show (or [[comparatively]], their creators) [[strove]] to [[licensing]] McDonalds characters for their [[shows]], but when [[mcdonald]] [[declines]] the TV [[shows]] changed the [[traits]] [[somewhat]] and [[voted]] it as their own. They even [[contracted]] [[previous]] [[employee]] of [[mcdonald]] [[advertisements]] agency and the [[voices]] [[protagonists]] to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. [[Researching]] for Pufnstuf McDonaldland [[cases]] and you'll find plenty of articles about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a writer or an critic...I'M just a student that has seen this movie few minutes ago....AND I want to thank people that worked on creating this movie!It is not the best or the most.... but it touched my heart...why???i would like to understand it myself...it is easy and accessible..it is a movie that makes you feel good after a bad day without any regret about the time wasted on watching it!It is about love and caring, about the life that we have but we miss it sometimes because of material stuff .......Look at all the time that we have but we miss it....why a fu*k do we do that???We need to live like were dying ...care about every second and remember:if we do good things-good things come back to us!HAppiness is real...and it has a special taste in New York...i love this town and the world the we live in!!!!thank you very much for the movie and sorry for my mistakes(English is my second language)... --------------------------------------------- Result 2293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Made]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the [[original]] [[work]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[history]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[first]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was created by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same Star Wars-type of space [[universe]] as Matsumoto's other [[famous]] space manga: [[CAPTAIN]] HARLOCK. [[In]] fact space [[pirate]] Harlock and other [[characters]] from that [[manga]] ([[including]] [[Queen]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make appearances in GE999. GE999 was a [[success]] as a [[manga]] and was [[soon]] followed by [[also]] popular anime [[series]] which [[included]] over 100 [[episodes]]. It was [[aired]] in 1978. A year [[later]] [[came]] this anime [[film]], which isn't a sequel to the series, but summaries the main [[points]] of the [[story]] in two hours [[long]] [[movie]].

The story is set in [[unidentified]] Star Wars-type of [[future]] where journeying to [[different]] planets has become a [[possibility]]. People of the future can have themselves mechanical bodies in which they can live hundreds of [[years]], [[maybe]] even forever. The [[protagonist]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a young [[boy]] who witnesses how a cruel [[Count]] Mecha, whose entire [[body]] is [[made]] of mechanical parts, [[kills]] Tetsurô's [[mother]]. Tetsurô swears revenge and is [[convinced]] that he can only [[achieve]] it by having a mechanical [[body]]. To [[obtain]] it he [[must]] [[travel]] to a far-away [[planet]] with space train [[Galaxy]] [[Express]] 999. [[However]], [[since]] Tetsurô [[comes]] from [[poverty]], he has no money to [[obtain]] the expensive [[ticket]]. By a [[chance]] coincidence he meets a [[beautiful]] [[young]] [[woman]], Maetel, who bears a [[resemblance]] to his [[dead]] [[mother]]. Maetel [[offers]] a [[ticket]] for Tetsurô on a condition that she [[accompanies]] him on his [[journey]]. And so the [[journey]] [[begins]]…

I first [[saw]] this [[film]] last October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I [[must]] first [[tell]] about the [[thing]] that bothered me the most in this [[film]]: it [[seems]] very [[rushed]]. [[Then]] again what can you [[expect]] from 2 hours [[long]] [[movie]] that [[tries]] to [[tell]] the main [[points]] of over 100 [[episodes]] [[long]] [[series]]? Whatever the [[case]], the [[situations]] [[change]] with a fast [[speed]] and Tetsurô meets other [[important]] [[characters]] in the [[story]] mostly by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an entertaining adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of view, so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still awakes talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Introduced]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the [[preliminary]] [[collaborate]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[story]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[outset]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was created by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same Star Wars-type of space [[cosmos]] as Matsumoto's other [[prestigious]] space manga: [[COMMANDANT]] HARLOCK. [[During]] fact space [[hacker]] Harlock and other [[features]] from that [[mana]] ([[comprises]] [[Quinn]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make appearances in GE999. GE999 was a [[accomplishments]] as a [[mana]] and was [[rapidly]] followed by [[similarly]] popular anime [[serial]] which [[inscribed]] over 100 [[spells]]. It was [[distributed]] in 1978. A year [[thereafter]] [[became]] this anime [[cinema]], which isn't a sequel to the series, but summaries the main [[dotted]] of the [[history]] in two hours [[lang]] [[films]].

The story is set in [[undisclosed]] Star Wars-type of [[next]] where journeying to [[multiple]] planets has become a [[chance]]. People of the future can have themselves mechanical bodies in which they can live hundreds of [[ages]], [[possibly]] even forever. The [[actor]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a young [[boys]] who witnesses how a cruel [[Tally]] Mecha, whose entire [[organs]] is [[accomplished]] of mechanical parts, [[killings]] Tetsurô's [[mothers]]. Tetsurô swears revenge and is [[persuaded]] that he can only [[obtain]] it by having a mechanical [[organs]]. To [[obtained]] it he [[needs]] [[voyages]] to a far-away [[planets]] with space train [[Galactic]] [[Expressing]] 999. [[Instead]], [[because]] Tetsurô [[arises]] from [[needy]], he has no money to [[obtained]] the expensive [[tickets]]. By a [[possibilities]] coincidence he meets a [[delightful]] [[youthful]] [[daughters]], Maetel, who bears a [[likeness]] to his [[deceased]] [[mummy]]. Maetel [[offerings]] a [[tickets]] for Tetsurô on a condition that she [[accompaniment]] him on his [[voyages]]. And so the [[trip]] [[starts]]…

I first [[noticed]] this [[cinema]] last October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I [[ought]] first [[say]] about the [[stuff]] that bothered me the most in this [[cinematography]]: it [[looks]] very [[harried]]. [[Later]] again what can you [[awaited]] from 2 hours [[lengthy]] [[cinema]] that [[strives]] to [[telling]] the main [[dot]] of over 100 [[bouts]] [[longue]] [[serials]]? Whatever the [[instance]], the [[instances]] [[changed]] with a fast [[accelerates]] and Tetsurô meets other [[principal]] [[personages]] in the [[histories]] mostly by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an entertaining adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of view, so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still awakes talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 2294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] My [[mother]] and I were on our way home from a [[trip]] up to the North [[East]] ([[mainly]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[little]] [[detour]] a attend a film [[festival]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[film]] so I thought this might be a bit educational. The [[first]] movie we [[saw]] was this one, THE ROMEO [[DIVISION]]. Now, I don't know about you but I [[thought]] this was [[great]]! I'm from Texas and where I come from we don't [[see]] too [[many]] motion [[pictures]] so this was a [[pleasant]] [[surprise]]. My [[mother]] [[insisted]] that it was too violent, but said that I didn't know much about what she was [[saying]] but this was a [[great]] [[picture]]. I was [[shocked]] by the [[fight]] [[sequences]] they were great. Also, I am a big fan when the good guys [[win]] so I was [[thrilled]] when Romeo [[ladies]] [[killed]] all of the [[bad]] guys. This was [[true]] [[brilliance]]. I'm not sure when it's getting released on video but if you [[get]] the chance you should [[check]] it out. I [[think]] you'll be [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. A word to the wise though, it is [[rather]] violent and there [[many]] cuss words so you may not want to let your [[children]] watch. It's more for adults. My [[mothers]] and I were on our way home from a [[travel]] up to the North [[Southeast]] ([[basically]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[petite]] [[diversion]] a attend a film [[fest]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[movie]] so I thought this might be a bit educational. The [[outset]] movie we [[noticed]] was this one, THE ROMEO [[SPLITTING]]. Now, I don't know about you but I [[figured]] this was [[wondrous]]! I'm from Texas and where I come from we don't [[seeing]] too [[various]] motion [[imagery]] so this was a [[nice]] [[amaze]]. My [[mom]] [[emphasized]] that it was too violent, but said that I didn't know much about what she was [[arguing]] but this was a [[huge]] [[image]]. I was [[shock]] by the [[wrestling]] [[sequence]] they were great. Also, I am a big fan when the good guys [[won]] so I was [[excited]] when Romeo [[madams]] [[assassinating]] all of the [[amiss]] guys. This was [[truthful]] [[luster]]. I'm not sure when it's getting released on video but if you [[got]] the chance you should [[verify]] it out. I [[believe]] you'll be [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. A word to the wise though, it is [[fairly]] violent and there [[countless]] cuss words so you may not want to let your [[kids]] watch. It's more for adults. --------------------------------------------- Result 2295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Harsh]], [[yes]], but I [[call]] 'em like I [[see]] 'em.

I [[saw]] this in the late 80's, and it was [[truly]] one of the most [[awful]], [[boring]] [[films]] I've ever [[forced]] myself to watch.

[[Yes]], the [[cinematography]] is [[lovely]]. The Czech [[settings]] are truly stunning. The political [[backdrop]] is enticing, but unlike [[similar]] "historically set" stories (e.[[g]]. _[[Dr]]. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[failed]] to [[make]] the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

[[Sure]], Olin and Binoche are [[beautiful]]. But this [[film]] manages to [[make]] even "erotic" scenes plodding and [[slow]]. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the [[book]], the story would have made a bit more sense. [[However]], life's too short to expend any more [[time]] on this one. [[Stringent]], [[yeah]], but I [[invitation]] 'em like I [[consults]] 'em.

I [[sawthe]] this in the late 80's, and it was [[honestly]] one of the most [[scary]], [[dull]] [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[coerced]] myself to watch.

[[Yep]], the [[movie]] is [[loverly]]. The Czech [[setups]] are truly stunning. The political [[context]] is enticing, but unlike [[equivalent]] "historically set" stories (e.[[gram]]. _[[Doktor]]. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[faulted]] to [[deliver]] the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

[[Persuaded]], Olin and Binoche are [[sumptuous]]. But this [[filmmaking]] manages to [[deliver]] even "erotic" scenes plodding and [[slowing]]. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the [[books]], the story would have made a bit more sense. [[Nonetheless]], life's too short to expend any more [[period]] on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2296 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] If Fassbinder has [[made]] a [[worse]] [[film]], I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent [[films]] like "The Bitter Tears Of [[Petra]] von Kant". This [[film]] bogs down with so much [[arty]], quasi-symbolic [[images]] it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real [[test]] of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only [[moments]] that [[display]] any real human emotion, and [[prove]] that at the [[core]] of this [[horrible]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. If Fassbinder has [[effected]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]], I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent [[movie]] like "The Bitter Tears Of [[Petr]] von Kant". This [[filmmaking]] bogs down with so much [[artsy]], quasi-symbolic [[image]] it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real [[essays]] of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only [[times]] that [[illustrating]] any real human emotion, and [[proves]] that at the [[nub]] of this [[scary]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 2297 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Knowing how old a film is, [[ought]] to [[prepare]] the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[tolerable]]. So it was when I watched [[Revolt]] of the [[Zombies]]. The heavy reliance on [[tedious]] [[dialogue]] and [[corny]] [[movements]] should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or [[absence]]) of special effects in those days. A [[great]] deal is asked from the imagination of the [[onlooker]] - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't [[easy]] to follow: Some zombiefied [[southeast]] [[Asian]] soldiers in WWI [[performed]] very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if [[true]], the explanation should [[stay]] out of the [[wrong]] hands, so, off goes a [[group]] to archaeologically [[investigate]]. The [[key]] to long-distance hypnosis is [[learned]] by a member of the [[expedition]], who uses it to, [[among]] other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on [[everybody]], which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with [[precautionary]] forethought. Recommended for only the [[extremely]] [[patient]]. Knowing how old a film is, [[owe]] to [[preparation]] the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[acceptable]]. So it was when I watched [[Rebel]] of the [[Walkers]]. The heavy reliance on [[monotonous]] [[dialog]] and [[mundane]] [[movement]] should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or [[lacks]]) of special effects in those days. A [[marvellous]] deal is asked from the imagination of the [[viewer]] - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't [[uncomplicated]] to follow: Some zombiefied [[east]] [[Asiatic]] soldiers in WWI [[effected]] very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if [[real]], the explanation should [[staying]] out of the [[flawed]] hands, so, off goes a [[groups]] to archaeologically [[investigates]]. The [[principal]] to long-distance hypnosis is [[learns]] by a member of the [[sent]], who uses it to, [[between]] other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on [[somebody]], which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with [[preemptive]] forethought. Recommended for only the [[insanely]] [[ill]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely wonderful drama and Ros is top notch...I highly recommend this movie. Her performance, in my opinion, was Academy Award material! The only real sad fact here is that Universal hasn't seen to it that this movie was ever available on any video format, whether it be tape or DVD. They are ignoring a VERY good movie. But Universal has little regard for its library on DVD, which is sad. If you get the chance to see this somewhere (not sure why it is rarely even run on cable), see it! I won't go into the story because I think most people would rather have an opinion on the film, and too many "reviewers" spend hours writing about the story, which is available anywhere.

a 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2299 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very bad western mainly because it is historically inaccurate. It looks as if it were shot on a back lot in California instead of where Jack Slade lived and died, Idaho, Colorado Territories, and Montana. It fictionalizes everything that is known about this mysterious 'bad man,' 'good man.' The script is horrible; there is very little direction, and lousy acting. Dorothy Malone is completely wasted as his wife. Mark Steven never seems to know how to portray this mysterious Jack Slade. In real life, Jack Slade was a very good stage line superintendent. He was feared by his local townsmen for his hard drinking. When drunk he would start fights and cause other problems in Virginia City, Montana. To insure that he could never terrorize them again, vigilantes lynched Jack Slade after he ignored their warning to leave town immediately. This is a horrible movie. I can not recommend anyone to watch this movie other than to see how Hollywood butches history at will, even to this day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The first von Trier movie i've ever seen was [[breaking]] the [[waves]]. [[Sure]] a nice [[movie]] but it [[definitely]] stands in the shadow of europa. Europa [[tells]] a story of a [[young]] German-American who wants to experience Germany just after the second world war. He [[takes]] a [[job]] that his uncle has [[arranged]] for him as a purser on a luxues train. Because of his [[job]], he [[travels]] all through an [[almost]] [[totally]] destroyed germany, meeting with the [[killing]] of traitors, and hunt for former nazi party members. The society is suffering from corruption. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the [[job]] he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the [[main]] character [[get]] [[involved]] in bombing and [[terrorism]] by a group [[called]] 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[help]] them [[placing]] [[bombs]] on trains. The [[atmosphere]] is [[astounding]]. The [[viewer]] is taken from scene to scene by a [[man]] attempting to put the [[viewer]] under hypnosis and then counting to wake you up in a new scene. [[Just]] when you [[think]] you've [[seen]] a [[lot]]!!!!!!! [[europe]]!! The first von Trier movie i've ever seen was [[rupture]] the [[airwaves]]. [[Convinced]] a nice [[movies]] but it [[surely]] stands in the shadow of europa. Europa [[says]] a story of a [[youth]] German-American who wants to experience Germany just after the second world war. He [[pick]] a [[labour]] that his uncle has [[organise]] for him as a purser on a luxues train. Because of his [[labour]], he [[travelling]] all through an [[roughly]] [[fully]] destroyed germany, meeting with the [[killings]] of traitors, and hunt for former nazi party members. The society is suffering from corruption. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the [[employment]] he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the [[principal]] character [[obtain]] [[implicated]] in bombing and [[terrorists]] by a group [[termed]] 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[aid]] them [[mise]] [[bombings]] on trains. The [[mood]] is [[breathtaking]]. The [[viewfinder]] is taken from scene to scene by a [[dawg]] attempting to put the [[viewfinder]] under hypnosis and then counting to wake you up in a new scene. [[Mere]] when you [[believing]] you've [[watched]] a [[batches]]!!!!!!! [[eu]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Personally I think this show [[looks]] pretty cheaply [[made]]. Some of the [[actors]] are [[terrible]]. They over do it & [[seem]] [[fake]]. I can always [[tell]] how it's [[going]] to [[end]] within the first 10 minutes or [[less]] of watching because they make it so transparently [[clear]]. It's not very well written [[either]]. I love to watch it to [[laugh]] at it. You [[know]] the [[saying]] "It's so [[bad]] that it's good?" [[Well]], that saying applies to this show. I also [[like]] to watch just to [[see]] if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to [[end]]. [[So]] far I've been right [[every]] [[time]]. It's like a [[little]] [[game]] that I play. It's nice when you are [[bored]] & you feel like [[laughing]] at [[something]]. Personally I think this show [[seems]] pretty cheaply [[introduced]]. Some of the [[players]] are [[horrible]]. They over do it & [[appears]] [[untruthful]]. I can always [[say]] how it's [[go]] to [[ending]] within the first 10 minutes or [[fewest]] of watching because they make it so transparently [[definite]]. It's not very well written [[neither]]. I love to watch it to [[laughs]] at it. You [[savoir]] the [[arguing]] "It's so [[negative]] that it's good?" [[Good]], that saying applies to this show. I also [[adores]] to watch just to [[behold]] if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to [[ending]]. [[Thus]] far I've been right [[each]] [[times]]. It's like a [[scant]] [[gaming]] that I play. It's nice when you are [[drilled]] & you feel like [[kidding]] at [[anything]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A terrible [[film]] which is [[supposed]] to be an [[independent]] one. It [[needed]] some dependence on something.

This totally [[miserable]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the [[wonderful]] [[film]] "Crash?" If so, this film crashed [[entirely]].

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running [[around]] and throwing [[rocks]] into buses and cars which [[obviously]] cause mayhem.

The [[film]] is just too [[choppy]] to [[work]]. One [[woman]] loses her husband after 14 years to another while her [[younger]] [[sister]] is [[ripped]] off by a [[suitor]]. This causes the former [[sister]] to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older [[sister]] also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who [[purchase]] masks to [[rob]] a bank. [[Obviously]], the robbery goes awry but there doesn't [[seem]] to be any [[punishment]] for the crooks. [[Perhaps]], the [[punishment]] should have been on the [[writers]] for [[failure]] to create a cohesive film. A terrible [[filmmaking]] which is [[presumed]] to be an [[autonomous]] one. It [[required]] some dependence on something.

This totally [[sorrowful]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the [[wondrous]] [[filmmaking]] "Crash?" If so, this film crashed [[altogether]].

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running [[nearly]] and throwing [[jolts]] into buses and cars which [[manifestly]] cause mayhem.

The [[filmmaking]] is just too [[tumultuous]] to [[working]]. One [[daughters]] loses her husband after 14 years to another while her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] is [[torn]] off by a [[beau]]. This causes the former [[sisters]] to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older [[sisters]] also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who [[bought]] masks to [[stealing]] a bank. [[Manifestly]], the robbery goes awry but there doesn't [[appears]] to be any [[punishments]] for the crooks. [[Possibly]], the [[chastisement]] should have been on the [[authors]] for [[flaw]] to create a cohesive film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2303 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[When]] I was [[kid]] back in the 1970s a local [[theatre]] had Children's Matinees [[every]] [[Saturday]] and [[Sunday]] afternoon (anybody [[remember]] those?). They [[showed]] this [[thing]] one year around Christmas [[time]]. Me and some friends went to [[see]] it. I [[expected]] a cool Santa [[Claus]] movie. What I [[got]] was a [[terribly]] dubbed (you can [[tell]]) and truly creepy [[movie]].

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't [[ask]] me what those two are doing in the same [[movie]]) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil [[costume]] complete with horns!). The images had me [[cringing]] in my [[seat]]. I [[always]] [[found]] Santa [[spooky]] to begin with so that didn't [[help]]. The [[guy]] in the Satan suit didn't help. But what [[REALLY]] horrified me were the [[wooden]] rein deers that [[pulled]] Santa's sled. When he [[wound]] them up and the creepy sound they [[made]] and the movements--I [[remember]] having nightmares about those [[things]]! All these years later I still [[remember]] walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the [[pants]] off any [[little]] [[kid]] who sees it. [[Avoid]] this one--unless you really want to [[punish]] your [[kids]]. This gets a 1. [[Whenever]] I was [[kids]] back in the 1970s a local [[cinema]] had Children's Matinees [[any]] [[Saturdays]] and [[Thursday]] afternoon (anybody [[remembering]] those?). They [[displayed]] this [[stuff]] one year around Christmas [[times]]. Me and some friends went to [[behold]] it. I [[projected]] a cool Santa [[Eaton]] movie. What I [[did]] was a [[surprisingly]] dubbed (you can [[told]]) and truly creepy [[cinema]].

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't [[wondering]] me what those two are doing in the same [[filmmaking]]) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil [[costumes]] complete with horns!). The images had me [[wincing]] in my [[seats]]. I [[repeatedly]] [[discoveries]] Santa [[creepy]] to begin with so that didn't [[aids]]. The [[dude]] in the Satan suit didn't help. But what [[TRULY]] horrified me were the [[lumber]] rein deers that [[pulling]] Santa's sled. When he [[casualty]] them up and the creepy sound they [[accomplished]] and the movements--I [[remembers]] having nightmares about those [[items]]! All these years later I still [[remembering]] walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the [[shorts]] off any [[petit]] [[petit]] who sees it. [[Avoidance]] this one--unless you really want to [[flog]] your [[juvenile]]. This gets a 1. --------------------------------------------- Result 2304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A slasher flick, made in the early 80's, has a curse on it which has anyone who tries to finish it turning up dead. Years later, a group of film students attempted to complete the movie - also resurrecting the films deadly curse. Great idea for a film, but sadly 'Cut' is just another wasted opportunity.

Unfortunately Australia hasn't had the world's best track record when it comes to horror. 'Razorback' (1984) was an out and out dud as was 'Holwing III' (1987), which was half an American film anyway. As for our foray into comedy-horror, 'Body Melt' (1993) is best left forgotten. The problem with 'Cut' is that the makers trying to create a clever horror satire a la 'Scream' (1996) but have no insight into the genre or what makes it work. And although this sounds weird me saying this about a slasher film but what 'Cut' really lacks is any "heart". Sure it follows the basic "rules" established by 'Scream', but it doesn't want to play with the formula, instead it goes for a cardboard copy of the earlier.

The killer, Scarman, is probably one of the most boring and uncharismatic villains in horror movie history. His endless barrage awkwardly, lame one-liners would make the dialogue of a porno seem like Shakespeare. The cast never seem like their fully involved and look like their just waiting for a shoot to be over so they can collect their pay checks. And the feel of the film is like it's deliberately trying not to be creepy; looking more like an episode of 'Neighbors' or 'Heartbreak High'. By the way, those attempts at MTV style, hyper-cinema during the "research" sequence just look lame, dated and out of place.

If Australia ever gets a chance to do horror again (Which I hope we still do) maybe we should take a leaf from the 'Mad Max' (1979) book. Instead of trying to copy the U.S. we should be trying our own take on the genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 2305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really enjoyed this little movie. It's a moving film about struggle, sacrifice and especially the bonds of friendship between different peoples (the child actor who plays Miki is especially good). There's so many large scale impersonal films set around WW2, that this convincingly told little story is a real break from the norm, and an original one at that. I'll also add that this film is far from boring, very far!! Of course the Horses are wonderful and the scenery breathtaking. To anyone who really treats their animal as part of the family (I do), you'll find this film especially rewarding. Recommended to movie fans who look for something a little different. --------------------------------------------- Result 2306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very ordinary made-for-tv product, "Tyson" attempts to be a serious biopic while stretching the moments of angst for effect, fast forwarding through the esoterics of the corrupt sport of boxing, and muddling the sensationalistic stuff which is the only thing which makes Tyson even remotely interesting. A lukewarm watch at best which more likely to appeal to the general public than to boxing fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kenny Doughty as Jed Willis is sexier in this role than any male porn star, even though he keeps his pants on.

The movie tore at my heart reminding me of the intensity of the big explosive love of my life. I don't think I can think of another movie, except perhaps Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet that captures that giddy joy that well.

The other draw of the movie is the very English eccentric characters enjoying the scandal vicariously. In that sense it is much the same appeal as Midsomer Murder or a Miss Marple mystery, without the mayhem.

This is a great antidote to the mock horror currently popular in the USA an any relationships between people of different ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 2308 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A masterpiece.

Thus it is, possibly, not for everyone.

The camera work, acting, directing and everything else is unique, original, superb in every way - and very different from the trash we are sadly used to getting.

Summer Phoenix creates a deep, believable and intriguing Esther Kahn. As everything else in this film, her acting is unique - it is completely her own - neither "British" nor "American" nor anything else I have ever seen. There is something mesmerizing about it.

The lengthy, unbroken, natural shots are wonderful, reminding us that we have become too accustomed to a few restricted ways of shooting and editing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] a time of [[magic]], [[barbarians]] and [[demons]] [[abound]] a [[diabolical]] [[tyrant]] named Nekhron and his [[mother]] [[Queen]] Juliane who [[lives]] in the [[realm]] of [[ice]] and wants to [[conquer]] the [[region]] of fire ruled by the [[King]] Jerol but when his [[beautiful]] [[daughter]] Princess Teegra has been [[kidnapped]] by Nekhron's [[goons]], a warrior named Larn [[must]] [[protect]] her and [[must]] [[defeat]] Nekhron from [[taking]] over the world and the kingdom with the [[help]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

A [[nicely]] [[done]] and [[excellent]] [[underrated]] animated [[fantasy]] [[epic]] that [[combines]] live [[actors]] with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's [[Ralph]] Bakshi's second [[best]] [[movie]] only with "American [[Pop]]" being number one and "[[Heavy]] Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's [[certainly]] [[better]] than his "Cool [[World]]" or "[[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]", the artwork is [[designed]] by [[famed]] artist Frank Farzetta and the [[animation]] has good [[coloring]] and there's [[also]] a hottie for the [[guys]].

I [[highly]] recommend this [[movie]] to [[fantasy]] and animation lovers everywhere [[especially]] the [[new]] 2-Disc Limited Edition [[DVD]] from Blue Underground.

[[Also]] recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy [[Metal]]", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "[[Fantastic]] [[Planet]]", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the [[Wind]]", " Conan The [[Destroyer]]", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "[[Lord]] of the [[Rings]] ( 1978)", " The [[Sword]] in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " [[King]] [[Arthur]]", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American [[Pop]]", " [[Jason]] and The Argonauts", " [[Clash]] of the [[Titans]]", " The Last Unicorn", " The [[Secret]] of NIMH", "The [[Flight]] of [[Dragons]]", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " [[Harry]] Potter and The Goblet of Fire". [[During]] a time of [[hallucinogenic]], [[heathens]] and [[warlocks]] [[aplenty]] a [[satanic]] [[oppressive]] named Nekhron and his [[mum]] [[Quinn]] Juliane who [[iife]] in the [[sphere]] of [[icing]] and wants to [[defeat]] the [[zoning]] of fire ruled by the [[Emperor]] Jerol but when his [[wondrous]] [[fille]] Princess Teegra has been [[abducted]] by Nekhron's [[morons]], a warrior named Larn [[needs]] [[safeguards]] her and [[needs]] [[overpower]] Nekhron from [[adopting]] over the world and the kingdom with the [[supporting]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

A [[kindly]] [[accomplished]] and [[brilliant]] [[underestimated]] animated [[utopia]] [[manas]] that [[amalgamated]] live [[actresses]] with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's [[Ralf]] Bakshi's second [[nicest]] [[films]] only with "American [[Pappy]]" being number one and "[[Weighty]] Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's [[admittedly]] [[best]] than his "Cool [[Global]]" or "[[God]] of the [[Piercings]]", the artwork is [[destined]] by [[commemorated]] artist Frank Farzetta and the [[animate]] has good [[colouring]] and there's [[further]] a hottie for the [[grooms]].

I [[heavily]] recommend this [[films]] to [[fantasia]] and animation lovers everywhere [[primarily]] the [[novel]] 2-Disc Limited Edition [[DVDS]] from Blue Underground.

[[Similarly]] recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy [[Minerals]]", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "[[Outstanding]] [[Planetary]]", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the [[Windmill]]", " Conan The [[Destroyers]]", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "[[God]] of the [[Ringing]] ( 1978)", " The [[Sabres]] in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " [[Emperor]] [[Arturo]]", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American [[Dad]]", " [[Jas]] and The Argonauts", " [[Skirmish]] of the [[Giants]]", " The Last Unicorn", " The [[Confidentiality]] of NIMH", "The [[Airplane]] of [[Dragoons]]", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " [[Hari]] Potter and The Goblet of Fire". --------------------------------------------- Result 2310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

One of the best films I've ever seen. Robert Duvall's performance was excellent and outstanding. He did a wonderful job of making a character really come to life. His character was so convincing, it made me almost think I were in the theater watching it live, I give it 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 2311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm easily entertained. I enjoyed "[[Hot]] Shots" and "The [[Naked]] Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even [[managed]] to [[enjoy]] most Pauly Shore [[movies]]. There is only one movie that I've [[seen]] that I can [[honestly]] [[say]] was [[bad]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've [[seen]] it, but I do [[remember]] sitting in the [[theater]] [[thinking]], "This is a [[dumb]] [[movie]]. Why did I [[see]] this?" It's [[honestly]] the only [[movie]] that I cannot [[recommend]]. I'm easily entertained. I enjoyed "[[Caliente]] Shots" and "The [[Bare]] Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even [[administered]] to [[enjoys]] most Pauly Shore [[kino]]. There is only one movie that I've [[saw]] that I can [[truthfully]] [[says]] was [[unfavorable]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've [[saw]] it, but I do [[reminisce]] sitting in the [[movies]] [[think]], "This is a [[stupid]] [[filmmaking]]. Why did I [[consults]] this?" It's [[candidly]] the only [[filmmaking]] that I cannot [[recommended]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I screamed my head off because seeing this movie was my first movie going experience ever at some 13 months old. I remember it being incredibly bloody and it made me angry. I watched it again on tv a few years ago. Big mistake -- the acting is wooden, the plot non-existent and the movie lacks merit unless 23 year-old T & A is what gets you going... 0/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 2313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Recap]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is [[discovered]] in the ice of [[Antarctica]]. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. [[Julian]] [[Rome]], a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the [[researchers]] is a [[old]] girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[female]] researchers [[practically]] throw themselves at him. And the [[block]] of ice with the thing [[inside]] is melting [[unnaturally]] quickly. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. [[Unfortunately]] the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a [[little]] entertaining but too much energy (from me) [[must]] be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the [[movie]] is not too good.

3/10 [[Summarize]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is [[discovering]] in the ice of [[Antarctic]]. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. [[Juliana]] [[Romany]], a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the [[scholar]] is a [[former]] girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[daughters]] researchers [[almost]] throw themselves at him. And the [[bloc]] of ice with the thing [[inland]] is melting [[unusually]] quickly. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. [[Regretfully]] the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a [[scant]] entertaining but too much energy (from me) [[owes]] be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the [[filmmaking]] is not too good.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2314 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Most college [[students]] find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the [[communities]] in which they [[study]] and live. Their [[conversations]] are held with their fellow [[students]] and the [[college]] faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[documentary]] is a prime [[example]] of a [[disillusioned]] college student who judges the entire community based on [[limited]] [[contact]] with a [[small]] number of its [[members]].

The [[documentary]] [[focused]] on a [[small]] group of individuals who were [[portrayed]] as representing [[large]] [[groups]] of the [[population]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most [[get]] the most media attention. Other than its [[misrepresentation]] of the community in which the [[film]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is [[ridiculous]] to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. Most college [[schoolchildren]] find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the [[community]] in which they [[investigating]] and live. Their [[conversation]] are held with their fellow [[pupil]] and the [[academia]] faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[literature]] is a prime [[case]] of a [[frustrated]] college student who judges the entire community based on [[curtailed]] [[liaise]] with a [[petite]] number of its [[lawmakers]].

The [[documentation]] [[centered]] on a [[petite]] group of individuals who were [[depicted]] as representing [[gros]] [[panel]] of the [[populace]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most [[gets]] the most media attention. Other than its [[deception]] of the community in which the [[filmmaking]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is [[farcical]] to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. --------------------------------------------- Result 2315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[teenager]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the surrogate parent in charge. The Hamilton's move house a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[fact]] that his brother's & sister [[kidnap]], imprison & [[murder]] people in the basement doesn't [[help]] [[relax]] or calm Francis' nerves either. Francis know's something just isn't right & when he eventually finds out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, [[enough]] said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've [[seen]] I thought The Hamiltons was complete [[total]] & [[utter]] [[crap]]. I [[found]] the character's really poor, very unlikable & the [[slow]] [[moving]] [[story]] [[failed]] to [[capture]] my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really [[big]] sustained build up to what's inside a [[cupboard]] thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[boring]] [[plot]] plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their [[money]] from to buy new [[houses]] since [[none]] of them seem to [[work]] (except David in a [[slaughterhouse]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been [[caught]] before now. The script tries to [[mix]] in every day drama with potent [[horror]] & it just does a [[terrible]] job of [[combining]] the two to the [[extent]] that [[neither]] aspect is [[memorable]] or effective. A really [[bad]] [[film]] that I am [[struggling]] to say [[anything]] good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[adolescence]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the surrogate parent in charge. The Hamilton's move house a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[facto]] that his brother's & sister [[kidnapping]], imprison & [[killings]] people in the basement doesn't [[aided]] [[mellow]] or calm Francis' nerves either. Francis know's something just isn't right & when he eventually finds out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, [[suffice]] said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've [[saw]] I thought The Hamiltons was complete [[overall]] & [[total]] [[shit]]. I [[unearthed]] the character's really poor, very unlikable & the [[sluggish]] [[relocating]] [[saga]] [[faulted]] to [[caught]] my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really [[grande]] sustained build up to what's inside a [[closet]] thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[dull]] [[intrigue]] plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their [[cash]] from to buy new [[home]] since [[nos]] of them seem to [[collaborated]] (except David in a [[slaughterhouses]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been [[captured]] before now. The script tries to [[blended]] in every day drama with potent [[abomination]] & it just does a [[appalling]] job of [[merging]] the two to the [[magnitude]] that [[either]] aspect is [[unforgettable]] or effective. A really [[unfavourable]] [[cinematographic]] that I am [[combating]] to say [[something]] good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] [[Rachel]], [[Jo]], Hannah, Tina, [[Bradley]] and [[John]] are all on [[top]] [[form]] here. They [[deserve]] [[oscar]] [[nominations]] for their performances. I am a [[great]] fan of the tv [[show]] aswell. Their [[music]] [[rocks]] and they're all so [[talented]]! I am [[also]] a great [[exponent]] of [[SARCASM]]!!!!!!

[[IF]] YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO NOT READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are [[terribly]] weak, the [[dialogue]] is [[terrible]] and the jokes are not even executed [[properly]] (i feel [[sorry]] for the [[director]]). The jokes are so [[unbelievably]] [[bad]] that 8 [[little]], passionate S Club fans weren't [[laughing]]. They [[thought]] they [[could]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the [[world]]. They [[became]] S Club Juniors. [[Paul]], "the fat, ugly one who [[started]] a mosh band" must be [[thanking]] his lucky [[stars]] that he left when he did. One of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. [[BEWARE]] OF THIS [[MOVIE]]! DO NOT [[GO]] [[AND]] [[SEE]] IT! YOU WON'T [[LAUGH]]! YOU WILL [[CRY]]! 0/10 RJT [[Rache]], [[Jojo]], Hannah, Tina, [[Bernardo]] and [[Giovanni]] are all on [[supreme]] [[forms]] here. They [[deserves]] [[oskar]] [[appoint]] for their performances. I am a [[prodigious]] fan of the tv [[spectacle]] aswell. Their [[musicians]] [[shakes]] and they're all so [[prodigy]]! I am [[further]] a great [[exhibitor]] of [[SATIRE]]!!!!!!

[[THOUGH]] YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO NOT READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are [[surprisingly]] weak, the [[dialogues]] is [[horrific]] and the jokes are not even executed [[sufficiently]] (i feel [[apologies]] for the [[headmaster]]). The jokes are so [[freakishly]] [[unfavourable]] that 8 [[petit]], passionate S Club fans weren't [[giggling]]. They [[think]] they [[did]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the [[globe]]. They [[was]] S Club Juniors. [[Paolo]], "the fat, ugly one who [[starts]] a mosh band" must be [[thank]] his lucky [[celebrity]] that he left when he did. One of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. [[ATTENTION]] OF THIS [[FILMMAKING]]! DO NOT [[GOING]] [[UND]] [[SEEING]] IT! YOU WON'T [[GIGGLING]]! YOU WILL [[OUTCRY]]! 0/10 RJT --------------------------------------------- Result 2317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i am totally addicted to this show. i can't wait till the week goes by to see the next showing. it's a great story line and it has the best actors and actresses on the show. i will tune in every week to watch it even if i am not home i always have my vcr set to tape monarch cove. simon rex is the best actor on the show. it is suspenseful and exciting. i think this show should stay on the air and i believe everyone should tune in to watch it. i saw the very first episode and actually i wasn't going to watch it but i was watching lifetime one day and i decided to watch it because it was on and i absolutely love it and right now it's my favorite show. i am really mean it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm no fan of newer movies, but this one was a real pleasure to watch. Adults and children could watch it together - how unusual! My aunt liked it, too. It had laughter, tears, love, adventure, special effects, good actors - and a talking parrot. It reminded me of a favourite, The Wizard of Oz. The hero, Paulie, an intelligent parrot, is separated from his home and family and goes through many adventures, temptations and disappointments, always keeping in mind his resolution to find his friend, Marie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Comes this heartwarming tale of hope. Hope that you'll never have to endure anything this awful again. *cough* Razzie award *cough*

I disliked this movie because it was unfunny, predictable and inane. While watching I felt like I was in a psychology experiment to determine how low movie standards could get before people complained. When I requested my money back at the end of the movie I was informed that because I watched the whole thing 'I wasn't entitled to reimbursement'. I was told by the assistant manager that several people had complained and gotten refunds already though.

The movie summary is pretty basic. The midget thief steals a diamond and the poses as a baby to elude police. Underneath this clever outline however, lies a repertoire of original, fresh and hilarious skits. Or not.

Ask yourself the following: Do you like to see people getting hit by pans? Do you like fart jokes? Do you like to see midgets posing as babies threatened with a thermometer in the anus? Do you like tired racial jokes? Do you think babies say 'goo goo goo goo goo gaa gaa'? Do you drool?

If you answered 'yes' to any of the above then this movie is definitely for you. Although it has been billed in some places as 'The Worst Movie of the Decade', there is probably a movie or 2 that are worse...somewhere. I can't say for sure. I gave this movie 2 stars because we all know a review with only one star would indicate bias on the part of the reviewer and then the review wouldn't be taken seriously.

This lowbrow comedy is intended for a less intelligent audience and I cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Save your money for something funny.

Respect --------------------------------------------- Result 2320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] What's with all the [[negative]] [[comments]]? [[After]] having seen this film for the first time [[tonight]], I can only say that this is a good holiday [[comedy]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day. When I [[saw]] that Drew (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the [[holidays]] alone, I wanted to cry. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. [[Also]], even though I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and [[Alicia]] (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me [[smile]] and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Now]], in [[conclusion]], I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this good holiday [[comedy]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. What's with all the [[injurious]] [[observations]]? [[Upon]] having seen this film for the first time [[sunday]], I can only say that this is a good holiday [[charade]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day. When I [[noticed]] that Drew (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the [[festivals]] alone, I wanted to cry. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. [[Moreover]], even though I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and [[Alice]] (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me [[smirk]] and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Presently]], in [[conclusions]], I [[immeasurably]] [[recommending]] this good holiday [[comedian]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[William]] H. Macy is at his most [[sympathetic]] and compelling here as a hit-man and loving [[father]] who wants to [[step]] out of the family [[business]] without angering his overbearing [[parents]]. [[Treads]] [[much]] of the same territory as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[theme]] (here too he [[visits]] a [[shrink]]) but is [[still]] worth watching thanks to some [[taut]] direction from Brommel (I [[look]] forward to what this guy directs next), an [[excellent]] script, and all [[around]] [[great]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[always]]. This is [[probably]] his [[best]] role [[since]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[best]] as the domineering father. Tracy Ullman [[gives]] a [[surprisingly]] [[riveting]] [[dramatic]] turn as Macy's wife. [[Young]] David Dorfman is [[excellent]] as Macy's [[bright]] and sensitive son ([[many]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[wonderful]]). [[Even]] Neve Campell (who I [[usually]] find [[abhorrent]]) is [[compelling]] as the [[troubled]] young [[woman]] who [[captures]] Macy's [[eye]]. [[All]] of this is punctuated by a [[moving]] [[score]] and [[crisp]] [[pace]] that lead up to a predictable but [[still]] [[powerful]] climax and [[meaningful]] and [[touching]] aftermath. This film deserved a much wider [[release]], as I [[suspect]] it [[would]] have connected with audiences. [[Williams]] H. Macy is at his most [[likeable]] and compelling here as a hit-man and loving [[pere]] who wants to [[stride]] out of the family [[entrepreneurial]] without angering his overbearing [[parent]]. [[Caterpillars]] [[very]] of the same territory as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[subjects]] (here too he [[visitation]] a [[psychologist]]) but is [[yet]] worth watching thanks to some [[fraught]] direction from Brommel (I [[peek]] forward to what this guy directs next), an [[wondrous]] script, and all [[roughly]] [[wondrous]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[perpetually]]. This is [[potentially]] his [[nicest]] role [[because]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[better]] as the domineering father. Tracy Ullman [[affords]] a [[incredibly]] [[exciting]] [[impressive]] turn as Macy's wife. [[Youths]] David Dorfman is [[awesome]] as Macy's [[shiny]] and sensitive son ([[several]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[fantastic]]). [[Yet]] Neve Campell (who I [[fluently]] find [[hateful]]) is [[convincing]] as the [[choppy]] young [[girl]] who [[caught]] Macy's [[eyes]]. [[Entire]] of this is punctuated by a [[shifting]] [[scoring]] and [[crunchy]] [[rhythm]] that lead up to a predictable but [[nonetheless]] [[forceful]] climax and [[valid]] and [[affects]] aftermath. This film deserved a much wider [[frees]], as I [[suspicious]] it [[ought]] have connected with audiences. --------------------------------------------- Result 2322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a child I preferred the first Care Bear movie since this one seemed so dark. I always sat down and watched the first one. As I got older I learned to prefer this one. What I do think is that this film is too dark for infants, but as you get older you learn to treasure it since you understand it more, it doesn't seem as dark as it was back when you were a child.

This movie, in my opinion, is better than the first one, everything is so much deeper. It may contradict the first movie but you must ignore the first movie to watch this one. The cubs are just too adorable, I rewind that 'Flying My Colors' scene. I tend to annoy everyone by singing it.

The sound track is great! A big hand to Carol and Dean Parks. I love every song in this movie, I have downloaded them all and is all I am listening to, I'm listening to 'Our beginning' also known as 'Recalling' at the moment. I have always preferred this sound track to the first one, although I just totally love Carol Kings song in the first movie 'Care-A-Lot'.

I think the animation is great, the animation in both movies are fantastic. I was surprised when I sat down and watched it about 10 years later and saw that the animation for the time was excellent. It was really surprising.

There is not a lot of back up from other people to say that this movie is great, but it is. I do not think it is weird/strange. I think it is a wonderful movie.

Basically, this movie is about how the Care Bears came about and to defeat the Demon, Dark Heart. The end is surprising and again, beats any 'Pokemon Movie' with the Care Bears Moral issues. It leaves an effect on you. Again this movie can teach everyone at all ages about morality. --------------------------------------------- Result 2323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Ashley]] Judd, in an [[early]] role and I think her first [[starring]] role, [[shows]] her real-life [[rebellious]] nature in this slow-moving [[feminist]] soap opera. [[Wow]], is this a [[vehicle]] for [[political]] [[correctness]] and [[extreme]] Liberalism or what?

[[Being]] a [[staunch]] [[feminist]] in [[real]] [[life]], she [[must]] have [[cherished]] this [[script]]. [[No]] wonder Left Wing critic [[Roger]] Ebert [[loved]] this [[movie]]; it's right up his [[political]] [[alley]], too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am [[glad]] Judd elevated herself from this [[moronic]] fluff to [[better]] [[roles]] in [[movies]] that [[entertained]], not [[preached]] the heavy-handed [[Liberal]] [[agenda]]. [[Ashlee]] Judd, in an [[swift]] role and I think her first [[featuring]] role, [[show]] her real-life [[insurgent]] nature in this slow-moving [[feminists]] soap opera. [[Ruff]], is this a [[vehicles]] for [[politician]] [[propriety]] and [[utmost]] Liberalism or what?

[[Ongoing]] a [[fervent]] [[feminism]] in [[veritable]] [[lives]], she [[owe]] have [[treasured]] this [[screenplay]]. [[None]] wonder Left Wing critic [[Roget]] Ebert [[worshiped]] this [[filmmaking]]; it's right up his [[politician]] [[alleyway]], too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am [[gratified]] Judd elevated herself from this [[silly]] fluff to [[optimum]] [[functions]] in [[movie]] that [[distracted]], not [[preach]] the heavy-handed [[Liberalism]] [[programme]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Larry Burrows has the distinct feeling he's missing out on something. Ever since he missed a crucial baseball shot at school that cost the championship, he's been convinced his life would have turned out better had he made that shot. Then one night his car breaks down again. Walking into the nearest bar to wait for the tow truck, Larry happens upon barman Mike, who unbeknown to Larry is about to change his life for ever.......

The alternate life premise in cinema is hardly a new thing, stretching back to the likes of It's A Wonderful Life and showing no signs of abating with the quite recent Sandler vehicle that was Click. It's a genre that has produced very mixed results. Back in 1990 was this James Belushi led production, rarely mentioned when the said topic arises, it appears that it has largely been forgotten. Which is a shame since it oozes charm and is not short in the humour department. We know that we are being led to its ultimate message come the end, but it's a fun and enjoyable path to be led down. The film also serves notice to what a fine comedy actor James Belushi was. I mean if his style of smart quipping and larking exasperation isn't your thing,? then chances are you would avoid this film anyway. But for those engaged by the likes of Red Heat, K-9 and Taking Care of Business, well Mr. Destiny is right up your street. Along for the ride are Linda Hamilton, Michael Caine, Jon Lovitz, Hart Bochner, Jay O. Sanders, Rene Russo and Courteney Cox.

Mr. Destiny, pure escapist fun with a kicker of a message at its heart. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I read [[John]] Everingham's story [[years]] ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great [[movie]] it [[would]] [[make]]. And it probably would have been had [[Michael]] Landon never [[got]] his hands on it. As far as I'm [[concerned]], Landon was one of the [[worst]] [[actors]] on [[earth]], and his artistic [[license]] went way over the [[top]], similar to his [[massacre]] of the "[[Little]] [[House]]" [[book]] series is proof. The acting, for [[lack]] of a [[better]] word, is [[atrocious]], the [[screenplay]] sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's [[puss]] than should be allowed.

This [[movie]] [[reflects]] Everingham's story as much as "[[Little]] [[House]] On The [[Prairie]]" [[reflects]] the [[books]] is was "[[based]]" on. It's just another [[vehicle]] to [[show]] off Landons [[horrendous]] [[hair]]. I read [[Jon]] Everingham's story [[ages]] ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great [[filmmaking]] it [[could]] [[deliver]]. And it probably would have been had [[Michel]] Landon never [[ai]] his hands on it. As far as I'm [[preoccupied]], Landon was one of the [[meanest]] [[protagonists]] on [[terra]], and his artistic [[permitting]] went way over the [[topped]], similar to his [[carnage]] of the "[[Petit]] [[Haus]]" [[cookbook]] series is proof. The acting, for [[scarcity]] of a [[optimum]] word, is [[outrageous]], the [[screenplays]] sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's [[chickie]] than should be allowed.

This [[filmmaking]] [[reflect]] Everingham's story as much as "[[Petite]] [[Habitation]] On The [[Cimarron]]" [[reflecting]] the [[book]] is was "[[founded]]" on. It's just another [[automobiles]] to [[demonstrating]] off Landons [[awful]] [[hairdresser]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] The Last [[Hard]] Men [[finds]] [[James]] Coburn an outlaw doing a long [[sentence]] [[breaking]] free from a [[chain]] gang. Do he and his [[friends]] head for the Mexican [[border]] from [[jail]] and safety. [[No]] they don't because Coburn has a [[mission]] of revenge. To [[kill]] the [[peace]] [[officer]] who [[brought]] him in and in the process [[killed]] his [[woman]].

That peace [[officer]] is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, [[Barbara]] Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was [[involved]] in a Waco like standoff. His Indian [[woman]] was [[killed]] in the hail of bullets [[fired]]. It's not something he's proud of, she was a [[collateral]] [[casualty]] in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he [[lets]] us [[know]] full well what an [[evil]] [[man]] he [[truly]] is. Heston is his usual stalwart [[hero]], but the acting [[honors]] in The Last [[Hard]] [[Men]] [[go]] to James Coburn. He [[blows]] everyone [[else]] off the screen when he's on.

Coburn [[gets]] the [[bright]] [[idea]] of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian [[reservation]] where the white [[authorities]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to [[make]] it personal then.

Coburn's gang [[includes]], [[Morgan]] Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and [[Jorge]] Rivero. Heston has [[Chris]] Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[nasty]] and [[brutal]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally [[intended]] for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[shows]] a [[lot]] of his [[influence]] with the liberal use of [[slow]] motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

[[For]] a [[little]] Peckinpaugh [[lite]], The Last [[Hard]] [[Men]] is your film. The Last [[Dur]] Men [[discovers]] [[Jacques]] Coburn an outlaw doing a long [[condemnation]] [[breaching]] free from a [[string]] gang. Do he and his [[friend]] head for the Mexican [[boundary]] from [[brig]] and safety. [[Nos]] they don't because Coburn has a [[delegation]] of revenge. To [[killings]] the [[pacification]] [[officials]] who [[introduced]] him in and in the process [[assassinated]] his [[wife]].

That peace [[agent]] is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, [[Barbarian]] Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was [[engaged]] in a Waco like standoff. His Indian [[women]] was [[assassinated]] in the hail of bullets [[sacked]]. It's not something he's proud of, she was a [[guaranty]] [[accidents]] in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he [[allow]] us [[savoir]] full well what an [[baleful]] [[dude]] he [[honestly]] is. Heston is his usual stalwart [[superhero]], but the acting [[honoring]] in The Last [[Stiff]] [[Man]] [[going]] to James Coburn. He [[strokes]] everyone [[further]] off the screen when he's on.

Coburn [[receives]] the [[glossy]] [[concept]] of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian [[reservations]] where the white [[administrations]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to [[deliver]] it personal then.

Coburn's gang [[involves]], [[Morgana]] Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and [[Georges]] Rivero. Heston has [[Chrissy]] Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[nauseating]] and [[barbarous]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally [[conceived]] for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[exposition]] a [[lots]] of his [[repercussions]] with the liberal use of [[slower]] motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

[[During]] a [[petite]] Peckinpaugh [[leyte]], The Last [[Difficult]] [[Man]] is your film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One is tempted to define the genre of Gert de Graaff's movie as `event of the thought' following the example of Merab Mamardashvili. The nominal storyline is a certain Bart Klever's torturous quest for that ephemeral substance which constitutes the essence of personality. The script for his new movie is taking shape simultaneously on his computer and in his own imagination. This film-monologue originated as a response to Fellini's `8 ½' and cost Gert de Graaff 13 years of work. Excitedly playing with real and fictional characters as well as with the audience, it reveals the whimsical interconnection of the real and imaginary, the paradoxical co-existence in two different galaxies: that of Guttenberg and that of MacLhuen. For some time we are apt to side with the script writer, who believes that the cause of all misfortune is the damned stereotypes of mass mentality (`man', `catholic', `window washer'). And together with him we fall into a trap when the author-creator is finally faced with the insoluble dilemma: how can one eliminate from the future movie. Bart Klever? Just five minutes before the finale thanks to the common petty reproaches of the wife of the creator, who is deeply immersed in work, we realize that together with the main character we have again been `framed'. Really, what is the price of the art for the sake of which it is acceptable to renounce one's own name and the day-to-day care for the young daughter?

So who is he, this Bart Klever? Is he a brilliant prophet or someone possessed like Frenhoffer from Balzac's masterpiece (just like the latter the script writer in the end erases from the computer memory everything has written)? Gert de Graaff suggests that we answer this question ourselves.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2328 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The trailers for this [[film]] were better than the [[movie]]. What waste of talent and [[money]]. Wish I would've [[waited]] for this [[movie]] to come on DVD because at [[least]] I wouldn't be out $9. The [[movie]] [[totally]] [[misses]] the mark. What could have been a [[GREAT]] movie for all actors, turned out to be a B-movie at [[best]]. [[Movie]] moved VERY [[slow]] and just when I thought it was going [[somewhere]], it [[almost]] did but then it didn't. [[In]] this day and age, we [[need]] unpredictable plot twists and [[closures]] in [[film]], and this film [[offered]] [[neither]]. The [[whole]] [[thing]] about how everyone is a [[suspect]] is good, [[however]], not sure if it was the [[way]] it was [[directed]], the lighting, the delivery of lines, the [[writing]] or what, but nothing [[came]] from it. Lot of [[hype]] for [[nothing]]. I was [[VERY]] [[disappointed]] in this [[film]], and I'm [[telling]] everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy [[saxophone]] [[music]] [[throughout]] [[made]] the [[film]] [[worse]] as well. And the [[ending]] had [[NOTHING]] to do with the [[rest]] of the [[film]]. What a [[disappointment]]. The trailers for this [[filmmaking]] were better than the [[flick]]. What waste of talent and [[cash]]. Wish I would've [[expected]] for this [[filmmaking]] to come on DVD because at [[lowest]] I wouldn't be out $9. The [[movies]] [[completely]] [[lack]] the mark. What could have been a [[LARGE]] movie for all actors, turned out to be a B-movie at [[better]]. [[Flick]] moved VERY [[sluggish]] and just when I thought it was going [[anywhere]], it [[hardly]] did but then it didn't. [[Onto]] this day and age, we [[gotta]] unpredictable plot twists and [[closure]] in [[filmmaking]], and this film [[providing]] [[either]]. The [[overall]] [[stuff]] about how everyone is a [[suspects]] is good, [[nevertheless]], not sure if it was the [[route]] it was [[aimed]], the lighting, the delivery of lines, the [[handwriting]] or what, but nothing [[became]] from it. Lot of [[fanfare]] for [[anything]]. I was [[MUCH]] [[disappointing]] in this [[filmmaking]], and I'm [[saying]] everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy [[clarinet]] [[musician]] [[in]] [[introduced]] the [[kino]] [[pire]] as well. And the [[terminated]] had [[NOTHIN]] to do with the [[repose]] of the [[movies]]. What a [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like plot turns, this is your movie. It is impossible at any moment to predict what will happen next. Nothing is as it appears or ends as you think it will. The characters are all gritty and engaging. Cage is at his best. Dennis Hopper again shows his delightfully sinister side. JT Walsh is perfect in his last performance. Laura Boyle sizzles. Dwight Yoakum makes a film debut superbly in a cameo. I categorize this movie as "I am having a really, really, really bad day" film. Not a slow minute in this film. A real sleeper. This movie is underrated and, sadly, overlooked. --------------------------------------------- Result 2330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] If you want to see a movie that [[terribly]] [[mixes]] up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine [[Prophecy]]" is a good [[example]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too [[funny]] to me [[seeing]] the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this [[film]] have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's [[mustaches]], like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a [[bad]] [[choice]] for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny [[seeing]] Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... If you want to see a movie that [[surprisingly]] [[blending]] up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine [[Prophecies]]" is a good [[instances]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too [[droll]] to me [[see]] the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this [[filmmaking]] have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's [[moustaches]], like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a [[unfavourable]] [[picks]] for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny [[witnessing]] Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... --------------------------------------------- Result 2331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is really bad, with a script full of 'memorable' lines and incredibly bad performances. The special effects are also bad (not the worst ones I have seen, either) and the music is so bad that you have to listen to it to believe it. Just two short themes (30 seconds long or so) are repeated constantly throughout the whole film.

All in all, one of the worst films I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Watched]] this on DVD in original language with [[English]] subs. Either the [[subtitling]] was very poor or the [[actual]] [[dialog]] doesn't make much of story and give any character [[development]]. There are quite a few HK stars in this but the [[movie]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just [[bad]]. The bright and colorful scenes done in CG are [[attractive]] for the sheer colors and [[brilliance]] but it can get overwhelming before long. If [[anything]] this makes me [[think]] of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and crap plot. I'm certain I [[grasped]] what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[lousy]]. [[Observed]] this on DVD in original language with [[Francais]] subs. Either the [[caption]] was very poor or the [[real]] [[dialogue]] doesn't make much of story and give any character [[evolution]]. There are quite a few HK stars in this but the [[filmmaking]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just [[unfavourable]]. The bright and colorful scenes done in CG are [[seductive]] for the sheer colors and [[splendor]] but it can get overwhelming before long. If [[nothing]] this makes me [[thinking]] of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and crap plot. I'm certain I [[mastered]] what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[rotten]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2333 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The word "1st" in the title has more ominous [[meaning]] for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to [[stick]] around and watch this [[interminable]] film reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[script]]; 1st takes [[used]] in each performance in the final [[film]]; 1st edit in post [[production]]; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[movie]] is not [[cast]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[film]] come off as [[worse]] than third [[rate]], from the goofy [[script]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffering]] through this cobbled [[together]] [[film]], by the 2 [[hour]] [[mark]] you want to be put out of your [[misery]]. At 160 [[minutes]] [[long]] it is [[readily]] [[apparent]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details [[concerning]] the lame [[script]] and acting [[serves]] [[little]] [[purposes]]. Even in the [[equally]] [[awful]], [[Lake]] [[Placid]], at [[least]] the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda [[constructed]] out of an [[extremely]] [[weak]] [[script]], were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the [[movie]]. [[In]] 1st to [[Die]], one [[ends]] up grieving only for the time lost in [[waiting]] to [[see]] what [[happens]] after the [[opening]] scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never [[introduced]] to one of the main [[characters]], who I [[think]] (were never [[quite]] [[told]]) is a D.A. She just [[appears]] in one scene in the middle of a conversation. [[Obviously]] the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was [[dropped]] on the editor's [[floor]]. And no one realized that a [[character]] [[appearing]] out of nowhere was an [[unusual]] [[film]] [[ploy]].

In a word, don't [[waste]] your [[time]] with this one. My [[wife]] and I [[wish]] we didn't. But at [[least]] we [[created]] our own diversions by commenting in [[various]] places in the film like it was [[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theater]]. "[[Meanwhile]], in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! The word "1st" in the title has more ominous [[meanings]] for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to [[wand]] around and watch this [[inexhaustible]] film reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[hyphen]]; 1st takes [[utilizing]] in each performance in the final [[cinematic]]; 1st edit in post [[productivity]]; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[filmmaking]] is not [[casting]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[filmmaking]] come off as [[worst]] than third [[rates]], from the goofy [[screenplay]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffer]] through this cobbled [[jointly]] [[cinematography]], by the 2 [[hours]] [[brands]] you want to be put out of your [[privation]]. At 160 [[mins]] [[lengthy]] it is [[easily]] [[visible]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details [[regarding]] the lame [[screenplay]] and acting [[contributes]] [[scant]] [[target]]. Even in the [[similarly]] [[abominable]], [[Lakes]] [[Tranquility]], at [[less]] the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda [[builds]] out of an [[exceptionally]] [[feeble]] [[screenplay]], were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the [[filmmaking]]. [[During]] 1st to [[Died]], one [[terminates]] up grieving only for the time lost in [[expecting]] to [[seeing]] what [[comes]] after the [[open]] scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never [[lodged]] to one of the main [[character]], who I [[ideas]] (were never [[perfectly]] [[say]]) is a D.A. She just [[emerges]] in one scene in the middle of a conversation. [[Definitely]] the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was [[slid]] on the editor's [[storey]]. And no one realized that a [[characters]] [[appears]] out of nowhere was an [[exceptional]] [[flick]] [[stratagem]].

In a word, don't [[wastes]] your [[period]] with this one. My [[femme]] and I [[wants]] we didn't. But at [[less]] we [[generated]] our own diversions by commenting in [[many]] places in the film like it was [[Conundrum]] [[Veda]] [[Movies]]. "[[Moreover]], in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] "[[Shore]] [[Leave]]" is mostly an average Star [[Trek]] adventure. [[Nothing]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply [[think]] that this is not the best [[representation]] of what the [[show]] had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. [[However]], I'm glad to see that a TV show of this type had [[enough]] good sense to take a [[break]] from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, [[Kirk]] decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the [[perfect]] place for a vacation. As [[usual]], the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and [[tense]] moments, but most of the [[story]] is [[played]] for laughs. [[Good]], but unexceptional. "[[Shoreline]] [[Letting]]" is mostly an average Star [[Hiking]] adventure. [[Nada]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply [[thought]] that this is not the best [[representative]] of what the [[illustrating]] had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. [[Conversely]], I'm glad to see that a TV show of this type had [[adequately]] good sense to take a [[blackout]] from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, [[Shatner]] decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the [[impeccable]] place for a vacation. As [[routine]], the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and [[strained]] moments, but most of the [[tale]] is [[done]] for laughs. [[Alright]], but unexceptional. --------------------------------------------- Result 2335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animation]] just [[blew]] me away after a steady diet of [[Simpsons]] (Sorry [[Mr]]. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. [[Recommend]] [[multiple]] viewings with some cool [[tunes]], good [[friends]] and a couple of [[cold]] ones! Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animate]] just [[farted]] me away after a steady diet of [[Simpson]] (Sorry [[Mister]]. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. [[Recommends]] [[several]] viewings with some cool [[hymns]], good [[freund]] and a couple of [[frigid]] ones! --------------------------------------------- Result 2336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I read the [[book]] and the [[book]] was [[fascinating]].

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were totally insufferable. I cringed at the [[lack]] of a screenplay that [[could]] not follow the novel, a [[novel]] that has all the action, simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the [[general]] public in most cities. [[Would]] not ever [[recommend]] this film to anyone I know.

[[Simply]], one of he [[worst]] [[adaptations]] I have seen transformed into a plot [[less]] exploration of heaven on [[earth]].

The [[cinematography]] was indeed the only [[highlight]]. But, how [[could]] that fail when filmed in an [[beautiful]] country such as Peru.

To [[prospective]] [[viewers]], do not waste your [[time]] or energy on this flop. I read the [[ledger]] and the [[books]] was [[mesmerizing]].

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were totally insufferable. I cringed at the [[shortage]] of a screenplay that [[would]] not follow the novel, a [[newer]] that has all the action, simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the [[overall]] public in most cities. [[Ought]] not ever [[recommends]] this film to anyone I know.

[[Simple]], one of he [[meanest]] [[adjustments]] I have seen transformed into a plot [[lowest]] exploration of heaven on [[land]].

The [[filmmaking]] was indeed the only [[stress]]. But, how [[wo]] that fail when filmed in an [[sumptuous]] country such as Peru.

To [[potential]] [[audiences]], do not waste your [[times]] or energy on this flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 2337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I ran [[across]] this [[several]] years [[ago]] while channel surfing on a Sunday [[afternoon]]. [[Though]] it was [[obviously]] a cheesy [[TV]] [[movie]] from the 70s, the direction and [[score]] were well [[done]] [[enough]] that it [[grabbed]] my attention, and indeed I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the [[opportunity]] to buy a [[foreign]] DVD of this film (oops, didn't notice a [[domestic]] one had finally [[come]] out a couple [[months]] [[prior]]), and was very pleased to be able to watch it again (and in its [[entirety]]).

I don't [[wholly]] [[understand]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[seem]] to have a [[lock]] on [[horror]] [[movies]] that are actually [[scary]]. The decades prior to the 70s produced some [[beautifully]] shot [[films]] and the [[bulk]] of our enduring [[horror]] [[icons]], but are they actually [[scary]]? No, not very. [[Likewise]] in the years [[since]] the 70s we've gotten [[horror]] movies that are cooler, more exciting, have much better production [[values]] and [[sophisticated]] special effects, are more [[fun]], funnier, have effective "[[jump]]" [[moments]], and some very [[creative]] [[uses]] of gore, but again... they aren't [[really]] [[scary]]! There's just [[something]] about the [[atmosphere]] of the 70s horror films. The grainy film quality. The spookily dark scenes unilluminated by [[vast]] high-tech lighting rigs. The "edge of dreamland" [[muted]] quality of the dialogue and the [[weird]] and stridently EQ'd [[scores]]. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. [[Everything]] that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[works]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the [[quiet]], [[intense]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly unnerving. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers [[wisely]] save that for when the [[dog]] appears in its full-on supernatural [[form]]. The effects when that [[occurs]], while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally [[gave]] me [[chills]]. The [[bizarre]], vaguely-defined, "I'm not [[quite]] [[sure]] what I'm [[looking]] at" look intuitively [[strikes]] me as more like how a [[real]] supernatural vision [[would]] be, [[rather]] than the hyper-real, crystal [[clear]] [[optical]] printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror [[films]].

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) I ran [[throughout]] this [[assorted]] years [[prior]] while channel surfing on a Sunday [[evening]]. [[If]] it was [[unmistakably]] a cheesy [[TELEVISION]] [[cinematographic]] from the 70s, the direction and [[punctuation]] were well [[played]] [[adequate]] that it [[caught]] my attention, and indeed I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the [[opportunities]] to buy a [[alien]] DVD of this film (oops, didn't notice a [[interior]] one had finally [[coming]] out a couple [[month]] [[previously]]), and was very pleased to be able to watch it again (and in its [[totality]]).

I don't [[totally]] [[understanding]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[appears]] to have a [[locking]] on [[terror]] [[cinematography]] that are actually [[awful]]. The decades prior to the 70s produced some [[surprisingly]] shot [[cinematography]] and the [[wholesale]] of our enduring [[terror]] [[symbols]], but are they actually [[dreadful]]? No, not very. [[Moreover]] in the years [[because]] the 70s we've gotten [[terror]] movies that are cooler, more exciting, have much better production [[value]] and [[complex]] special effects, are more [[entertaining]], funnier, have effective "[[leaping]]" [[times]], and some very [[imaginative]] [[use]] of gore, but again... they aren't [[truly]] [[terrible]]! There's just [[anything]] about the [[atmospheric]] of the 70s horror films. The grainy film quality. The spookily dark scenes unilluminated by [[gigantic]] high-tech lighting rigs. The "edge of dreamland" [[silencing]] quality of the dialogue and the [[bizarre]] and stridently EQ'd [[dozens]]. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. [[Any]] that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[collaborate]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the [[silent]], [[ferocious]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly unnerving. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers [[intelligently]] save that for when the [[pooch]] appears in its full-on supernatural [[shape]]. The effects when that [[comes]], while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally [[handed]] me [[willies]]. The [[freaky]], vaguely-defined, "I'm not [[very]] [[convinced]] what I'm [[researching]] at" look intuitively [[bombardments]] me as more like how a [[actual]] supernatural vision [[ought]] be, [[quite]] than the hyper-real, crystal [[unequivocal]] [[optic]] printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror [[cinema]].

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[pilot]] to be quite interesting. [[However]] I probably had too high expectations because I was [[quite]] [[disappointed]] by it. [[First]] they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[got]] worse as [[none]] of the other characters were [[properly]] introduced. They focused too much on [[John]] Doe which made the [[story]] far less [[intriguing]]. I was also slightly disappointed by [[Dominic]] Purcell's performance because I [[found]] he didn't make a [[believable]] [[John]] Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant [[sensation]]. It [[leads]] us to the [[worst]] [[issue]] in the bunch, the episodic format. I [[could]] already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So [[overall]] I was very [[disappointed]] by it and don't [[recommend]] it to anyone. Considering how [[bad]] it was I [[better]] [[understand]] now why the [[show]] got [[canceled]]. [[In]] some [[way]] I have the [[impression]] that it missed its target, [[developing]] [[characters]] to [[help]] the [[protagonist]] find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he [[met]] at the club. The [[production]] quality was also quite good and the casting correct. But I'll never know if it got [[better]], probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[experimental]] to be quite interesting. [[Instead]] I probably had too high expectations because I was [[rather]] [[disappointing]] by it. [[Outset]] they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[ai]] worse as [[nos]] of the other characters were [[satisfactorily]] introduced. They focused too much on [[Giovanni]] Doe which made the [[saga]] far less [[mesmerizing]]. I was also slightly disappointed by [[Dominick]] Purcell's performance because I [[discovered]] he didn't make a [[reliable]] [[Giovanni]] Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant [[feeling]]. It [[leeds]] us to the [[hardest]] [[issues]] in the bunch, the episodic format. I [[did]] already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So [[aggregate]] I was very [[frustrating]] by it and don't [[recommends]] it to anyone. Considering how [[unfavorable]] it was I [[best]] [[realise]] now why the [[displayed]] got [[overturned]]. [[Throughout]] some [[routing]] I have the [[printing]] that it missed its target, [[drafting]] [[character]] to [[succour]] the [[actor]] find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he [[fulfilled]] at the club. The [[productivity]] quality was also quite good and the casting correct. But I'll never know if it got [[best]], probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very good movie. A classic sci-fi film with humor, action and everything. This movie offers a greater number of aliens. We see the Rebel Alliance leaders and much of the Imperial forces. The Emperor is somewhat an original character. I liked the Ewoks representing somehow the indigenous savages and the Vietnamese. (Excellent references) I loved the duel between Vader and Luke which is the best of the saga. In Return of the Jedi the epilogue of the first trilogy is over and the Empire finally falls. I also appreciated the victory celebration where it fulfills Vader's redemption and returns hi into Anakin Skywalker spirit along with Yoda and Obi-Wan. It gives a sadness and a tear. The greatest scenes in Star Wars are among this movie: When Vader turns on the Emperor. Luke watches and finds comfort in seeing Obi-Wan, Yoda and...his father (1997 version not Hayden Christenssen). The next best scene is when Luke rushes to strike back Darth Vader to protect Leia. There is a deep dark side of this film despite there is a good ending. I felt there was much more than meets the eye. And as always the John William's music will bring the classicism into Star Wars universe. --------------------------------------------- Result 2340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yesterday I watched this movie for the third time. It was recommended to me by a fried several weeks ago. I never watched or even noticed it before, because it falls (so typically) in the category "Swedish Movie" and those who rose up (like me) with Hollywood productions tend to be sceptical of any foreign movies. Hell what a paradigm shift! The film touches me, because it just keeps up my hope, that mankind can change to a better way. The Swedish village is just a pattern for all areas on earth where people live together - controlled by religion, misunderstandings, lack of courage, predictions, disguised brutality, but also the ability to have fun, to meet, to sing... It takes a trigger from outside to rip off the masks of everyone (who keeps one) and to let them feel that we all are just human beings with the desire to live our own lives. I can never stop to see stories like this, because, that keeps up my hope as described above. The five minutes containing the story of Gabriella's song including her performance is one of my movie-highlights ever! Thank you Kay Pollak just for these 5 minutes, which made me happy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[perfect]] [[companion]] piece to [[Peter]] Watkins' "[[La]] Commune (Paris 1871)." Both films -screened at this year's Toronto [[International]] [[Film]] Festival- [[ironically]] [[illustrate]] how [[history]] is [[shaped]] to by the tellers of the [[tale]]. [[Ironic]], [[given]] the tragic [[events]] that were [[taking]] place in the U.S. during the [[festival]].

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the [[movie]], [[based]] on Grace Elliott's (Lucy [[Russell]]) "[[Memoirs]]," is a first-hand [[account]] of how she survived those heady but [[dangerous]] days. She [[also]] details her relationship with The Duke of Orleans (played by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in contrast to herself, is a [[supporter]] of the Revolution.

[[True]] to form, you don't know whose side of [[history]] Rohmer is going to [[come]] down on. One of the earliest of the French "[[New]] [[Wave]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has often been [[criticized]] for being too [[conservative]]. [[After]] all, in the [[midst]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming [[romantic]] [[little]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sell]] the old [[boy]] short, folks, he's [[always]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et [[le]] duc" [[continues]] to [[bear]] this out.

Rohmer's [[characters]] are never the "[[bad]] [[guys]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human beings who are capable of [[exhibiting]] a full [[range]] of human [[potentialities]] -and [[limitations]]. That's why his [[movies]] are [[always]] [[provocative]], and this [[film]] is no [[exception]].

Now for the [[technological]] nuts and [[bolts]].

Rohmer, [[though]] making his way into his 80s, is [[still]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic innovation. The [[look]] of "L'Anglaise" is like [[something]] you've never [[seen]] before. You guessed it, the [[old]] [[guy]] -like [[several]] of the festival's [[directors]] this year- has [[gone]] digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as [[though]] they are taking place in their [[original]] 1780s Parisian [[settings]]. As a [[matter]] of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[consummate]] [[mate]] piece to [[Pedro]] Watkins' "[[Angeles]] Commune (Paris 1871)." Both films -screened at this year's Toronto [[Global]] [[Movie]] Festival- [[mockingly]] [[demonstrates]] how [[stories]] is [[fashioned]] to by the tellers of the [[story]]. [[Ironical]], [[granted]] the tragic [[phenomena]] that were [[picked]] place in the U.S. during the [[feast]].

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the [[cinematographic]], [[founded]] on Grace Elliott's (Lucy [[Russel]]) "[[Briefs]]," is a first-hand [[accounts]] of how she survived those heady but [[risky]] days. She [[apart]] details her relationship with The Duke of Orleans (played by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in contrast to herself, is a [[defender]] of the Revolution.

[[Genuine]] to form, you don't know whose side of [[stories]] Rohmer is going to [[arrive]] down on. One of the earliest of the French "[[Novel]] [[Waves]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has often been [[slammed]] for being too [[tory]]. [[Upon]] all, in the [[medium]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming [[sentimental]] [[tiny]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sells]] the old [[dude]] short, folks, he's [[repeatedly]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et [[lai]] duc" [[persisted]] to [[bears]] this out.

Rohmer's [[character]] are never the "[[rotten]] [[guy]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human beings who are capable of [[illustrating]] a full [[ranges]] of human [[potential]] -and [[confines]]. That's why his [[movie]] are [[continually]] [[inflammatory]], and this [[films]] is no [[exemption]].

Now for the [[technical]] nuts and [[bolt]].

Rohmer, [[if]] making his way into his 80s, is [[however]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic innovation. The [[glance]] of "L'Anglaise" is like [[algo]] you've never [[watched]] before. You guessed it, the [[elderly]] [[boy]] -like [[different]] of the festival's [[administrators]] this year- has [[faded]] digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as [[if]] they are taking place in their [[upfront]] 1780s Parisian [[configure]]. As a [[topic]] of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know what this movie is about, really. It's like a student's art school project. They never say why the world is dark, but it is always darkness except for seconds a day. There are long, interrupting shots of insects of all sorts for no reason. What little dialogue there is in the movie is as inane and nonsensical as the images. A black woman enters the main character's apartment. Somehow she becomes pregnant overnight, then gets shot in the head. The main character takes care of the body until it becomes a cocoon after which a white naked woman emerges. I have never been so blown away by how bad and pointless a movie can be. Honestly, I would like someone to watch it so they can tell me what they think it's about. But I wouldn't wish this level of hell on anybody else. --------------------------------------------- Result 2343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is [[STRIKINGLY]] beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[SHREWD]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is [[UNBELIEVABLY]] beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[MALIN]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once in a while, a film comes along that raises the bar for every other film in its genre. A film of this caliber will influence many films following its release for years to come. `A Chinese Ghost Story' falls in this category. It is arguably one of the best horror films made during the 1980's; possibly one of the best ever made.

The filmmakers have crafted a movie that appeals to every horror fan. The story is engrossing and original. The villains are appropriately menacing and frightening. The sets are creepy and atmospheric. There is even a little blood and gore to satisfy the splatter fan of the house. But don't let the `horror' label scare you off, if you're not a fan of the genre. This film easily fits into many different categories.

The screenwriter has deftly blended the drama, comedy, horror, kung fu, and romance genres into a delicious deluxe cinematic pizza. `A Chinese Ghost Story' is a beautiful epic love story told, thankfully, without the gratuitous nudity and/or explicit sex scenes that have ruined many Hollywood `love stories'. Those put off by the romantic elements of the story can sit back and revel in the fast-paced swordplay and `wire-fu'. If that's not enough, actors Leslie Cheung and Wu Ma provide enough humorous situations to satiate your appetite for comedy. This film offers something for every film fan.

Director Siu-Tung Ching and Producer Tsui Hark assembled a truly amazing cast for this film. Leslie Cheung proves that he is not only a gifted actor, but also a talented singer and a charming physical comedian. I cannot possibly think of a performer other than Cheung who could have portrayed Ling Choi Sin better (except maybe Chow Yun Fat). Joey Wang is enchanting as Lit Su Seen, the enslaved spirit who steals the heart of Cheung's character. Her portrayal of the title character is truly haunting and memorable. Wu Ma is hilarious as the cantankerous Taoist who aids the young lovers.

On technical level, this film is very impressive, even by today's standards. The direction is superb. I wish that today's Hollywood executives would seek out talented artists like Siu-Tung Ching rather falling back on the usual MTV video or Pepsi commercial `directors'. The cinematography is gorgeous. You have to commend any cinematographer who can make a film look good when most of its pivotal scenes take place in the dead of night. The special effects make-up is top-notch. In fact, most of the creature effects in this film blow away the shoddy CGI ghouls and goblins that have become commonplace in modern horror films.

Since its release, "A Chinese Ghost Story" has spawned two worthy sequels, a full-length animated movie, and countless imitations. None of the films that followed it or copied it were able to capture the magic of this classic, however. This film is required viewing for any horror fan or just anyone looking for great way to spend 95 minutes of your time. 10 out 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I found this [[film]] to be quite an [[oddity]]. From the very [[get]] go I found it [[extremely]] [[hard]] to [[like]] this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[reason]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, although I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't [[figure]] for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone could have taken his place quite easily and make this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the [[stabs]] at weak [[comedy]] (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. I found this [[filmmaking]] to be quite an [[peculiarity]]. From the very [[obtain]] go I found it [[uncommonly]] [[laborious]] to [[iike]] this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[motives]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, although I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't [[silhouette]] for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone could have taken his place quite easily and make this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the [[wipes]] at weak [[charade]] (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the [[government]] [[controls]] everything and no one can be [[trusted]]. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel good about yourself. It is about a [[romance]] taking place in this [[society]] and the [[betrayal]] of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The [[film]] has some very [[good]] ideas and is [[done]] well in portraying this [[society]] with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[However]], despite the film's [[cleverness]] at [[portraying]] this idea, the [[film]] was very slow and did not [[seem]] to quite get the [[idea]] [[across]]. It [[seemed]] to spend too much [[time]] being [[clever]] rather than telling a story. 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the [[goverment]] [[audits]] everything and no one can be [[trusting]]. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel good about yourself. It is about a [[romanticism]] taking place in this [[societal]] and the [[disloyalty]] of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The [[filmmaking]] has some very [[alright]] ideas and is [[effected]] well in portraying this [[societal]] with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[Conversely]], despite the film's [[ingenuity]] at [[detailing]] this idea, the [[filmmaking]] was very slow and did not [[looks]] to quite get the [[ideals]] [[during]]. It [[looked]] to spend too much [[period]] being [[malin]] rather than telling a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an very good movie. This is one that I would rent over and over again. It is not like your normal superhero movie. This movie blends comedy, action and great special effects. It even has a person in it that does a lot of voices on The Simpsons. William H. Macy is the bomb. --------------------------------------------- Result 2348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] We [[often]] [[see]] movies about [[undesirable]] things going on in [[politics]], but I [[still]] [[recommend]] "City Hall". [[In]] a role he was [[born]] to [[play]], Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to [[deal]] with the [[shooting]] of a boy. But it turns out that [[nothing]] that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the [[characters]] are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any [[given]] politician, you [[may]] have your [[doubts]] after [[watching]] this movie.

I [[understand]] that I can't name any specific example of something [[similar]] to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. [[If]] we had [[idealistic]] [[impressions]] of those at the top, this [[movie]] tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget [[Fonda]], Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. We [[normally]] [[consults]] movies about [[unsolicited]] things going on in [[policies]], but I [[nonetheless]] [[recommending]] "City Hall". [[Among]] a role he was [[birthed]] to [[gaming]], Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to [[address]] with the [[gunfire]] of a boy. But it turns out that [[nada]] that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the [[character]] are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any [[gave]] politician, you [[maggio]] have your [[qualms]] after [[staring]] this movie.

I [[understood]] that I can't name any specific example of something [[akin]] to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. [[Unless]] we had [[ideal]] [[printouts]] of those at the top, this [[cinematography]] tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget [[Fund]], Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. --------------------------------------------- Result 2349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i love bed knobs and broomsticks so much that it makes me cry a thousand tears of joy every time i have the magnificent pleasure of seeing it. i would also like to reiterate the simple fact that i love it so much.too much some have said. i have 27 copies on video and i love them all equally. i also love anyone else who loves it. i love you. my favourite scene is the dance scene at portobello road. i have learned the dance moves and practice it everyday. i have some audio recordings of myself singing the song. if anyone can play the drums or guitar i am thinking of forming a bed knobs and broomsticks band.i hope to call it 'the knobs'. love me (liz) --------------------------------------------- Result 2350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[In]] Mexico this [[movie]] was [[aired]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's [[life]], is a true example about a good German and [[specially]], about a good [[man]]. The [[conversations]] between Tukur's [[character]] and the [[Nazi]] [[prosecutor]] are [[specially]] interesting. A true ideas' war: two [[different]] [[Germans]], both with [[faith]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very [[complex]] [[person]]: [[man]], [[freedom]] fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[great]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[outstanding]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[recommended]] this [[film]] a lot, [[specially]] in this [[difficult]] [[times]] for the [[planet]]. [[In]] Mexico we don't know a lot about Pastor Bonhoeffer [[life]] and legacy, this is a [[great]] [[work]] for rescue a [[forgotten]] [[hero]]. [[At]] Mexico this [[cinematography]] was [[broadcast]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's [[iife]], is a true example about a good German and [[concretely]], about a good [[dawg]]. The [[interviews]] between Tukur's [[characters]] and the [[Nazis]] [[procurator]] are [[especially]] interesting. A true ideas' war: two [[assorted]] [[Germany]], both with [[creed]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very [[complicate]] [[persona]]: [[dawg]], [[svoboda]] fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[wondrous]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[unpaid]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[suggested]] this [[movies]] a lot, [[concretely]] in this [[problematic]] [[dates]] for the [[planets]]. [[Onto]] Mexico we don't know a lot about Pastor Bonhoeffer [[iife]] and legacy, this is a [[wondrous]] [[jobs]] for rescue a [[ignored]] [[heroin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Actually, I never [[bought]] into the [[metal]] was satanic and [[stuff]], but this movie kind of played on that [[idea]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate really [[high]], it does serve its [[purpose]] in that it entertains while it is [[playing]]. The story has a [[metal]] band burned to death in their hotel, one of their fans has a dream to this effect and said band starts to go on a kill [[spree]] from beyond the grave. So [[yes]], a [[bit]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Street]]" plot going on here. [[Granted]] [[Freddy]] never molested a [[girl]] in a [[car]] before. There was another [[movie]] [[featuring]] a heavy metal band in it, but it was very [[different]] in how it [[played]] out as it had a [[band]] that kind of [[took]] over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. [[Nothing]] to [[gruesome]] in it as I do not remember all that [[many]] gory kills. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the [[girl]] wearing the [[headphones]] and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing [[great]], but a nice [[time]] filler. Actually, I never [[acquiring]] into the [[minerals]] was satanic and [[thing]], but this movie kind of played on that [[concept]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate really [[higher]], it does serve its [[intents]] in that it entertains while it is [[gaming]]. The story has a [[minerals]] band burned to death in their hotel, one of their fans has a dream to this effect and said band starts to go on a kill [[frenzy]] from beyond the grave. So [[yep]], a [[bite]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Thoroughfare]]" plot going on here. [[Conferred]] [[Freddie]] never molested a [[female]] in a [[vehicles]] before. There was another [[flick]] [[starring]] a heavy metal band in it, but it was very [[several]] in how it [[done]] out as it had a [[bands]] that kind of [[picked]] over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. [[Anything]] to [[abhorrent]] in it as I do not remember all that [[various]] gory kills. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the [[girls]] wearing the [[earphone]] and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing [[remarkable]], but a nice [[moment]] filler. --------------------------------------------- Result 2352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[love]] watching early [[colour]] [[films]] - you [[mean]] those 40s [[clothes]] weren't all grey?

[[Margaret]] Rutherford dominates this [[movie]]. Her "eccentric" garb is [[actually]] [[rather]] [[attractive]] and [[yes]], she has an [[amazing]] hourglass [[figure]]. But I feel she was [[given]] her head rather too much. She [[probably]] [[developed]] this characterisation over many performances, and nobody [[told]] her "If it gets a [[laugh]], leave it out." She does too much [[deranged]] [[fooling]] about when she's [[supposed]] to be surprisingly down to [[earth]]. The Madame Arcati [[joke]] is that [[mediums]] were usually portrayed as wispy [[females]] in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a [[rest]]! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). I [[amore]] watching early [[colors]] [[filmmaking]] - you [[imply]] those 40s [[garment]] weren't all grey?

[[Margarita]] Rutherford dominates this [[film]]. Her "eccentric" garb is [[genuinely]] [[comparatively]] [[seductive]] and [[oui]], she has an [[unbelievable]] hourglass [[silhouette]]. But I feel she was [[awarded]] her head rather too much. She [[assuredly]] [[crafted]] this characterisation over many performances, and nobody [[say]] her "If it gets a [[giggling]], leave it out." She does too much [[bothered]] [[deluding]] about when she's [[alleged]] to be surprisingly down to [[terra]]. The Madame Arcati [[travesty]] is that [[medias]] were usually portrayed as wispy [[femmes]] in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a [[remainder]]! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). --------------------------------------------- Result 2353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Liongate has yet to [[prove]] itself. Every single [[movie]] from lionsgate has been [[abysmal]]. i've tried and [[tried]] to give them more [[opportunities]] and they just [[keep]] slapping me over and over again. And [[Cabin]] Fever is [[definitely]] no exception.

I couldn't even [[pay]] attention to most of this [[movie]] it was so [[frustrating]] and [[bad]].

here's the plot. [[Guy]] cuts up [[dead]] [[dog]] for some [[reason]]. [[Gets]] [[infected]] by random [[virus]], transfers it to [[kids]] at a camp, [[kids]] [[start]] to [[get]] infected and die, town finds out about it and rather than [[help]] them, [[kills]] them. then the water is infected and [[everyone]] [[dies]]. the end.

Seriously, that's the [[whole]] [[movie]].

all the [[characters]] are [[completely]] retarded, you don't care for any of them, and the one [[kid]] should have [[stuck]] with [[boy]] meets world. Me and my [[friend]] found that [[talking]] about how [[fat]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more [[enjoyable]] than paying attention to this [[movie]]. We did manage to make it all the [[way]] to the end while [[screaming]] bulls$@t, because this [[film]] will [[make]] you do that.

and i'm [[still]] [[confused]] by the random slow motion karate moves of the one random [[kid]] and how [[apparently]] everybody out in the [[country]] is [[completely]] [[retarded]] and hickish. And again, why did this dog [[attack]] the girl? why did the [[kid]] the hicks were [[trying]] to [[kill]] [[sit]] in a [[chair]] [[waiting]] for them to [[kill]] him? that was [[part]] of the two of their's [[plan]]? wow. [[best]] [[plan]] ever. i cannot believe this [[movie]] [[got]] a theatrical release. i [[could]] [[barely]] stomach the DVD, [[let]] [[alone]] have to [[sit]] in a [[theater]] not moving for an hour and a half. It wasn't scary, or funny, or cool, or [[anything]]. it's just a waste of 90 [[minutes]] that you [[could]] be [[using]] to...i don't know, plant a tree or [[something]]. it's more [[productive]] than this piece of [[garbage]]. The acting, [[special]] [[effects]], and script are a [[joke]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever gets one [[nasty]] leg [[shaving]] scene, out of 10 Liongate has yet to [[proven]] itself. Every single [[filmmaking]] from lionsgate has been [[awful]]. i've tried and [[try]] to give them more [[chances]] and they just [[maintain]] slapping me over and over again. And [[Cabana]] Fever is [[admittedly]] no exception.

I couldn't even [[payroll]] attention to most of this [[flick]] it was so [[depressing]] and [[unfavorable]].

here's the plot. [[Buddy]] cuts up [[die]] [[puppy]] for some [[reasons]]. [[Got]] [[polluted]] by random [[viruses]], transfers it to [[juvenile]] at a camp, [[kiddies]] [[initiating]] to [[got]] infected and die, town finds out about it and rather than [[helps]] them, [[killed]] them. then the water is infected and [[everybody]] [[died]]. the end.

Seriously, that's the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]].

all the [[nature]] are [[totally]] retarded, you don't care for any of them, and the one [[petit]] should have [[cornered]] with [[guy]] meets world. Me and my [[friends]] found that [[speaks]] about how [[greasy]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more [[nice]] than paying attention to this [[filmmaking]]. We did manage to make it all the [[manner]] to the end while [[howling]] bulls$@t, because this [[cinematography]] will [[deliver]] you do that.

and i'm [[again]] [[disconcerted]] by the random slow motion karate moves of the one random [[petit]] and how [[clearly]] everybody out in the [[nationals]] is [[abundantly]] [[nutcase]] and hickish. And again, why did this dog [[attacks]] the girl? why did the [[petit]] the hicks were [[attempting]] to [[killing]] [[sits]] in a [[president]] [[awaited]] for them to [[killed]] him? that was [[party]] of the two of their's [[scheme]]? wow. [[optimum]] [[programmes]] ever. i cannot believe this [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] a theatrical release. i [[wo]] [[hardly]] stomach the DVD, [[allowing]] [[lonely]] have to [[sitting]] in a [[cinemas]] not moving for an hour and a half. It wasn't scary, or funny, or cool, or [[somethings]]. it's just a waste of 90 [[mins]] that you [[did]] be [[used]] to...i don't know, plant a tree or [[somethings]]. it's more [[fruitful]] than this piece of [[trash]]. The acting, [[peculiar]] [[influences]], and script are a [[giggle]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever gets one [[disgusting]] leg [[flatten]] scene, out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2354 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I [[saw]] an advert for this on a [[video]].Then my sister [[discovered]] that we had the book so I read it.I rented the [[video]] on the same day I [[finished]] the book.I [[thought]] it was very memorable as was the book. The [[cast]] was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was [[excellent]] as [[Helen]] and Rupert Graves was hateful as [[Arthur]].The costumes,music and settings are [[stunningly]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY [[MORE]] IF [[YOU]] HAVEN`T [[WATCHED]] THIS

On the [[downside]] there are some sex scenes that have been [[added]] in and some violence.This is why the [[video]] is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the [[first]] part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. [[While]] the [[book]] is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as [[long]] as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The [[book]] is [[rather]] underated.[[Anne]] Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as [[Jane]] Erye or Wuthering [[Heights]] which have [[made]] it into [[television]] and [[film]] [[several]] [[times]]. Another thing.When I read the [[book]] ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I [[watched]] an advert for this on a [[videos]].Then my sister [[discovering]] that we had the book so I read it.I rented the [[videos]] on the same day I [[complete]] the book.I [[figured]] it was very memorable as was the book. The [[casting]] was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was [[brilliant]] as [[Hackett]] and Rupert Graves was hateful as [[Arturo]].The costumes,music and settings are [[terribly]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY [[GREATER]] IF [[THEE]] HAVEN`T [[OBSERVED]] THIS

On the [[drawback]] there are some sex scenes that have been [[adds]] in and some violence.This is why the [[videos]] is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the [[outset]] part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. [[Despite]] the [[ledger]] is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as [[longer]] as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The [[ledger]] is [[quite]] underated.[[Anna]] Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as [[Jin]] Erye or Wuthering [[Altitudes]] which have [[accomplished]] it into [[tv]] and [[films]] [[numerous]] [[period]]. Another thing.When I read the [[ledger]] ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this movie with a bunch of [[friends]] and although only two of us walked out of the [[cinema]] [[thinking]] how cool it was, the others just laughed and [[commented]] on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't [[supposed]] to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a [[movie]] that mocks horror flicks and does a [[damn]] good job.. There [[seems]] to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and [[original]]!!! [[Jessica]] Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and [[Kylie]] was an [[even]] better move. The [[Impossible]] Princess was Queen of the screen!! I [[recommend]] seeing this [[flick]], as you'll be [[guessing]] until the very [[end]] the connection with Raffy, [[Hilary]] and The movie that never [[got]] finished 20 [[years]] [[ago]]. I saw this movie with a bunch of [[buddies]] and although only two of us walked out of the [[film]] [[thoughts]] how cool it was, the others just laughed and [[noted]] on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't [[alleged]] to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a [[kino]] that mocks horror flicks and does a [[jesus]] good job.. There [[looks]] to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and [[upfront]]!!! [[Jennifer]] Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and [[Kaili]] was an [[yet]] better move. The [[Unable]] Princess was Queen of the screen!! I [[recommending]] seeing this [[gesture]], as you'll be [[guess]] until the very [[ceases]] the connection with Raffy, [[Hillary]] and The movie that never [[gets]] finished 20 [[yrs]] [[prior]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I have [[seen]] the film a few days back on a video [[tape]] and [[even]] [[though]] it was [[hard]] to swallow it at one take (because of its length and [[story]]), I liked it very much. I was [[impressed]] first, by the [[script]] and then, by the [[realization]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an [[easy]], [[joyful]] ride; it goes through time and different political regimes and [[shows]] the influence of them to ordinary people's lives. What I [[loved]] was the [[inner]] logic the film followed; logic, which just like logic in life, was [[rather]] [[illogical]] and confusing at [[times]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the [[events]] and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[though]] to try to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I [[also]] [[liked]] very much Nikita Mikhalkov's character Aleksei and the way he played it, as some critics would saw, with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[think]] he [[later]] [[played]] [[characters]] that [[remind]] me of Aleksei in [[films]] like "[[Cruel]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I [[actually]] [[love]]) and to some [[extent]] in "The Insulted and the [[Injured]]" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[shows]], I [[think]], what a [[great]] film-maker [[Andrei]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable films like "Tango and Cash" and [[less]] forgettable like "[[Runaway]] train". I would prefer "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... I have [[watched]] the film a few days back on a video [[tapes]] and [[yet]] [[if]] it was [[harsh]] to swallow it at one take (because of its length and [[tale]]), I liked it very much. I was [[surprising]] first, by the [[screenplay]] and then, by the [[fulfillment]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an [[simple]], [[happier]] ride; it goes through time and different political regimes and [[displayed]] the influence of them to ordinary people's lives. What I [[cared]] was the [[indoor]] logic the film followed; logic, which just like logic in life, was [[quite]] [[incoherent]] and confusing at [[moments]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the [[incidents]] and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[although]] to try to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I [[apart]] [[enjoyed]] very much Nikita Mikhalkov's character Aleksei and the way he played it, as some critics would saw, with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[thought]] he [[then]] [[served]] [[features]] that [[reminded]] me of Aleksei in [[cinematography]] like "[[Savage]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I [[indeed]] [[amour]]) and to some [[magnitude]] in "The Insulted and the [[Wounds]]" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[demonstrates]], I [[thought]], what a [[huge]] film-maker [[Andrea]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable films like "Tango and Cash" and [[lesser]] forgettable like "[[Runoff]] train". I would prefer "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... --------------------------------------------- Result 2357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was so surprised by how great The Man In The Moon truly was.I mean at first I was kinda expecting a cheesy, and predictable film, but I decided to put that aside when watching.Well, when it was over I was just left stunned(mainly in tears), by how great The Man In The Moon turned out to be.This movie is so entertaining and is so aware of its tone, and its just a fabulous film.The acting was great especially from Reece Witherspoon(who was so cute and lovable), and everyone else.There wasn't anything that really bothered me, I felt the ending kinda predictable, but very well done at that.Also I felt some things to be plain or as if it had been done before, but still a great film.Overall I must say I don't to much to say about this film, not that it was bad, its just a film you either like or don't like.I would however recommend this to any and everyone, even if you don't like these type of films, its still an enjoyable film.

8.7 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2358 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] My [[comments]] on this [[movie]] have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so [[ill]] change my comment completely.

I think this is a really [[bad]] movie for several reasons.

Subject: one should be very careful in [[making]] a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. My [[sightings]] on this [[filmmaking]] have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so [[iil]] change my comment completely.

I think this is a really [[unfavourable]] movie for several reasons.

Subject: one should be very careful in [[doing]] a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I don't know why some guys from [[US]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgaria]] have the [[courage]] to [[express]] [[feelings]] about something they don't understand at all. [[For]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't [[expect]] too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[movie]] without [[prejudice]], try to [[understand]] the [[whole]] [[humor]] inside - people of Serbia [[DID]] actually getting married while Bil Clinton [[bomb]] their villages, gypsies in all Balkans are [[ALWAYS]] [[try]] to f*ck you up in any [[way]] they can, [[LOVE]] is [[always]] [[unexpected]], [[pure]] and [[colorful]], and Balkans are [[extremely]] [[creative]]. For those who claims this is a bad [[movie]] I can [[see]] only that the American's sh*t (like [[Meet]] [[Dave]], [[Get]] [[Smart]] etc) are much [[much]] [[worse]] than a [[pure]], frank Balkan humoristic love [[story]] [[movie]] as [[Promise]] me. The [[comment]] should be [[useful]] and on [[second]] place should [[represent]] the personal [[view]] of the writer. I [[think]] the movie is [[great]] and people watch it [[must]] [[give]] their respects to the director and [[story]] [[told]] inside. It is simple, but [[true]]. It is [[brutal]], but [[gentle]] and makes you laugh to [[dead]]. I don't know why some guys from [[AMERICANS]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgarian]] have the [[bravery]] to [[expressed]] [[sentiments]] about something they don't understand at all. [[During]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't [[hopes]] too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[movies]] without [[prejudices]], try to [[fathom]] the [[ensemble]] [[comedy]] inside - people of Serbia [[GOT]] actually getting married while Bil Clinton [[bombing]] their villages, gypsies in all Balkans are [[CONTINUOUSLY]] [[endeavour]] to f*ck you up in any [[pathways]] they can, [[LIKES]] is [[perpetually]] [[unintended]], [[pur]] and [[picturesque]], and Balkans are [[unbelievably]] [[inventive]]. For those who claims this is a bad [[cinema]] I can [[behold]] only that the American's sh*t (like [[Respond]] [[Davey]], [[Obtain]] [[Intelligent]] etc) are much [[very]] [[worst]] than a [[unadulterated]], frank Balkan humoristic love [[stories]] [[cinematography]] as [[Promises]] me. The [[commentary]] should be [[helpful]] and on [[secondly]] place should [[representing]] the personal [[opinion]] of the writer. I [[thought]] the movie is [[wondrous]] and people watch it [[owe]] [[lend]] their respects to the director and [[history]] [[say]] inside. It is simple, but [[truthful]]. It is [[brutish]], but [[temperate]] and makes you laugh to [[decedent]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is the best [[film]] the [[Derek]] [[couple]] has ever made and if you [[think]] this is a [[recommendation]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the [[usual]] [[ingredients]]: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch [[Bo]] disrobing or auditioning for [[wet]] T-shirt [[contests]] [[quite]] [[frequently]], the [[story]] is just laughably [[idiotic]], and the film takes itself much too [[seriously]]. And then: Orang Utans in [[Africa]]?

But it has a few [[things]] going for it. Bo looks great, the [[production]] values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp [[value]]. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be [[serious]] and fails so [[badly]]. This is the best [[films]] the [[Derrick]] [[matches]] has ever made and if you [[thinking]] this is a [[recommends]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the [[accustomed]] [[component]]: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch [[Pu]] disrobing or auditioning for [[wetter]] T-shirt [[contest]] [[pretty]] [[often]], the [[tales]] is just laughably [[witless]], and the film takes itself much too [[profoundly]]. And then: Orang Utans in [[Afrika]]?

But it has a few [[aspects]] going for it. Bo looks great, the [[productivity]] values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp [[values]]. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be [[grievous]] and fails so [[desperately]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is even worse than the [[original]] Game of Death. A jumbled, [[incoherent]] storyline leads to "[[Billy]] [[Lo]]" falling from a [[helicopter]] to the [[ground]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we [[start]] out following some Bruce Lee clone, the [[film]] kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The main reason to watch this one is when [[Bobby]] Lo fights a lion, which is [[quite]] [[obviously]] a [[guy]] in a lion [[costume]]. [[Jang]] [[Lee]] Hwang is also the villain, who is [[usually]] pretty [[awesome]] but his screen time is [[significantly]] [[small]]. Mainly [[watched]] this and the original [[Game]] of [[Death]] because they're a [[part]] of the [[Bruce]] Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's [[finished]] works. No one [[would]] [[buy]] them otherwise. This is even worse than the [[initial]] Game of Death. A jumbled, [[incongruous]] storyline leads to "[[Billie]] [[Oscillator]]" falling from a [[chopper]] to the [[terra]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we [[commences]] out following some Bruce Lee clone, the [[filmmaking]] kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The main reason to watch this one is when [[Bubi]] Lo fights a lion, which is [[utterly]] [[definitely]] a [[man]] in a lion [[standup]]. [[Cheung]] [[Rhee]] Hwang is also the villain, who is [[routinely]] pretty [[sumptuous]] but his screen time is [[heavily]] [[scant]]. Mainly [[seen]] this and the original [[Games]] of [[Muerte]] because they're a [[parties]] of the [[Bros]] Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's [[finishing]] works. No one [[ought]] [[buying]] them otherwise. --------------------------------------------- Result 2362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most boring movies I have ever seen, its horrible. Christopher Lee is good but he is hardly in it, the only the good part is the opening scene.

Don't be fooled by the title. "End of the World" is truly a bad movie, I stopped watching it close to the end it was so bad, only for die hard b-movie fans that have the brain to stand this vomit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, what to say...

Having seen the film I still have to wonder what the hell the point of it all really was?? V.Dodgy camera moves in the courtyard at one point... I had to look away from the screen, I was feeling physically sick... Round and Round and Round.... You get the idea...

VERY VERY Strange accents at many points.... "Those that should know, know"

Unless your getting in for free, or being paid to watch it, or your partner is about to make you paint the house or something.. then forget it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to [[make]] up more than one hauntingly evil image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she [[could]] carry it off brilliantly. Unfortunately, I can't find many other reasons for seeing this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the [[rest]], Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy [[woman]] is really [[tiresome]], and [[even]] if you like this [[sort]] of thing more than I do you'll have to [[admit]] that the [[tension]] sags [[badly]] during these scenes. Savage's [[drunken]] [[brute]] of an insurance [[agent]] is [[equally]] [[distasteful]] but at [[least]] it's a [[small]] role. Of the leading [[actors]], [[Nicholas]] Walker [[inspires]] no [[sympathy]] at all for [[Paul]] Keller's plight and his acting is [[wooden]]. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level [[rises]] a [[little]]. Sheedy's meticulous, [[understated]] performance (though she [[often]] [[seems]] to be on [[automatic]] pilot) is admirable in itself but out of [[context]] with the [[rest]]. The sets are [[drab]], the camera-work undistinguished. Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to [[deliver]] up more than one hauntingly evil image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she [[wo]] carry it off brilliantly. Unfortunately, I can't find many other reasons for seeing this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the [[stays]], Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy [[femme]] is really [[exhausting]], and [[yet]] if you like this [[kind]] of thing more than I do you'll have to [[acknowledged]] that the [[tensions]] sags [[sorely]] during these scenes. Savage's [[drunk]] [[brutal]] of an insurance [[officers]] is [[alike]] [[tasteless]] but at [[lowest]] it's a [[scant]] role. Of the leading [[players]], [[Nicolas]] Walker [[inspiring]] no [[sympathies]] at all for [[Poul]] Keller's plight and his acting is [[wood]]. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level [[ascent]] a [[scant]]. Sheedy's meticulous, [[underrated]] performance (though she [[frequently]] [[appears]] to be on [[automated]] pilot) is admirable in itself but out of [[backdrop]] with the [[remainder]]. The sets are [[uninspiring]], the camera-work undistinguished. --------------------------------------------- Result 2365 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i would have given this movie a 1 out of 10 if it weren't for ms. Claudine Barretto's performance. and i will take this time to overlook that Kris Aquino's here. and... end.

i really AVOID watching Pinoy horror movies because stories lack originality and i really think that (some) writers don't give enough attention to the characters (and their progression) in their stories (redundant??). it was as if they 'pushed' the movie onwards when their storytelling stank. and my goodness, creative exhaustion led them to rip-off other movies. why?? why did this movie get a good review?? i wouldn't give it that much merit. the movie was KIND OF scary, but the movie seemed more freaky as it deals with Filipino folklore... it goes into my list of 'most likely to happen' category. i just wished they spent more time improving the story lines and fix those flash back sequences, never mind if the lighting sucked, it wouldn't matter much if the content would blow you away.. SAYANG. --------------------------------------------- Result 2366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have never read the Bradbury [[novel]] that this movie is [[based]] on but from what I've [[gathered]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the trailer I knew I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so [[disappointed]] it [[hurt]]. This is because the [[movie]] itself [[felt]] so amateurish. The [[actors]] were not well [[cast]] ([[though]] Robards and Pryce are both [[good]] [[actors]] - just not here). The [[kid]] [[actors]], it seemed, were [[merely]] asked to [[show]] up, [[get]] in the characters' [[clothes]], say the lines and make the faces. The set and [[props]] were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was [[surprisingly]] [[bad]]. I was so [[surprised]] at the awfulness of it that I had to [[go]] online and [[check]] who [[directed]] it, just to [[see]] the kind of [[work]] he had [[done]]. The [[editing]] was [[cut]] and paste and the plot ([[screenplay]]) was just that as well (even [[though]] the author had been [[involved]] himself, [[irony]]?). The [[building]] up of the tension, fear and [[suspense]] was so [[mild]] it was [[ineffective]] when the [[climax]] finally [[came]].

I've read some of the comments on this [[movie]] and find it [[hard]] to believe people actually like it. What [[hurts]] the most is that the content is interesting and [[fun]] and [[intriguing]]. It had so much [[potential]]. [[Unfortunately]], the [[film]] was so technically [[bad]] it [[takes]] away from the [[brilliance]] of the [[story]]. I have never read the Bradbury [[newer]] that this movie is [[groundwork]] on but from what I've [[flocked]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the trailer I knew I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so [[frustrated]] it [[harmed]]. This is because the [[flick]] itself [[deemed]] so amateurish. The [[protagonists]] were not well [[casting]] ([[if]] Robards and Pryce are both [[alright]] [[players]] - just not here). The [[petit]] [[players]], it seemed, were [[only]] asked to [[shows]] up, [[obtains]] in the characters' [[outfits]], say the lines and make the faces. The set and [[fittings]] were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was [[marvellously]] [[rotten]]. I was so [[surprises]] at the awfulness of it that I had to [[going]] online and [[audited]] who [[oriented]] it, just to [[behold]] the kind of [[cooperate]] he had [[effected]]. The [[editorial]] was [[chopped]] and paste and the plot ([[scenario]]) was just that as well (even [[while]] the author had been [[embroiled]] himself, [[satire]]?). The [[build]] up of the tension, fear and [[waiting]] was so [[temperate]] it was [[ineffectual]] when the [[apogee]] finally [[arrived]].

I've read some of the comments on this [[filmmaking]] and find it [[arduous]] to believe people actually like it. What [[stings]] the most is that the content is interesting and [[droll]] and [[captivating]]. It had so much [[potentialities]]. [[Regrettably]], the [[filmmaking]] was so technically [[unfavourable]] it [[pick]] away from the [[splendour]] of the [[conte]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This film, which is based on a [[true]] [[story]], comes from first time director and long time actor, Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[best]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best Actor. I guess Denzel [[wanted]] a change of pace, so he chose to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[truly]] well [[done]] [[film]] from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some [[kind]] of [[commitment]] and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone [[Fisher]] is about a [[young]] African American [[man]] in the Navy who [[constantly]] gets into [[fights]], and after one particular [[brawl]] he is [[sent]] to [[see]] a [[Navy]] [[psychiatrist]] named [[Jerome]] Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport [[helps]] Antwone to [[deal]] with his [[troubled]] [[past]] and [[learn]] to move on with his life, by finding his birth [[mother]] who had to give him up at birth because she was in [[prison]]. What makes this film good is the [[fact]] that it's not overly [[melodramatic]]. I was [[expecting]] [[something]] a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, [[fighting]] and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the [[swearing]], [[fighting]] and vulgarity of the film were out of place. [[Quite]] the [[contrary]]! However, Antwone [[Fisher]] is a true [[story]], and I don't [[think]] that Washington [[wanted]] to sensationalize the story for [[dramatic]] affect in the [[film]]. Don't get me wrong, there are moments when we see Antwone [[fighting]], carrying on and having moments when it [[seems]] like the [[world]] is closing in on him. [[After]] all, in his first session with his [[psychiatrist]], the character played by Washington, Devenport [[asks]] [[Fisher]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[response]] is, `from under a rock,' an obvious jab at the [[pressures]] waning on Antwone Fisher's [[soul]]. But I had to [[appreciate]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she [[appears]] at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would like to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's remake of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** This film, which is based on a [[real]] [[tale]], comes from first time director and long time actor, Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[better]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best Actor. I guess Denzel [[wants]] a change of pace, so he chose to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[genuinely]] well [[played]] [[films]] from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some [[type]] of [[dedication]] and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone [[Fisherman]] is about a [[youth]] African American [[guy]] in the Navy who [[regularly]] gets into [[fighting]], and after one particular [[quarrel]] he is [[sending]] to [[behold]] a [[Armada]] [[analyst]] named [[Gideon]] Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport [[assisting]] Antwone to [[addresses]] with his [[disturbed]] [[preceding]] and [[learning]] to move on with his life, by finding his birth [[mummy]] who had to give him up at birth because she was in [[jail]]. What makes this film good is the [[facto]] that it's not overly [[operatic]]. I was [[waiting]] [[anything]] a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, [[struggle]] and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the [[inauguration]], [[struggles]] and vulgarity of the film were out of place. [[Pretty]] the [[opposite]]! However, Antwone [[Fishermen]] is a true [[history]], and I don't [[believe]] that Washington [[wanna]] to sensationalize the story for [[noteworthy]] affect in the [[movies]]. Don't get me wrong, there are moments when we see Antwone [[struggling]], carrying on and having moments when it [[looks]] like the [[globe]] is closing in on him. [[Upon]] all, in his first session with his [[psychologist]], the character played by Washington, Devenport [[requesting]] [[Fishermen]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[reply]] is, `from under a rock,' an obvious jab at the [[presses]] waning on Antwone Fisher's [[alma]]. But I had to [[grateful]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she [[appear]] at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would like to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's remake of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved this film. I first saw it when I was 20 ( which was only four years ago) and I enjoyed it so much, I brought my own copy the next day. The comedy is well played by all involved. I always have to rewind and rewatch the scene where Mr. Tsanders explains why he found water at 6 ft in one area and 227 feet in another area. Also look for Jason Robards father who plays Mr. Retch. Talent ran in that family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[If]] you [[want]] to watch a good film about how women can fight back against sexual assault, then this [[film]] is not the film that you [[want]] to watch. It was a social [[commentary]] about a woman who was victimized and fights back. [[Spoiler]]: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much better film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to watch a good film about how women can fight back against sexual assault, then this [[filmmaking]] is not the film that you [[wanting]] to watch. It was a social [[comments]] about a woman who was victimized and fights back. [[Deflectors]]: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much better film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I will start this off by saying I couldn't get all the way through it. I picked it up on a rainy day from WalMart like the rest of the reviewers on this site. I figured there wasn't any way I would regret my purchase. Was I wrong or what? Seriously now, who approved this project? They need to be forced to watch this movie over and over until the end of eternity. That's the only fitting punishment I can think of for releasing something this bad. The shooting reminds me of the movies I used to make for class projects on a big old VHS cam. The acting isnt much better. I think the only difference is that there are a few cool cameos. Yay, who cares... Shecky Moskowitz is unfunny, and the ships comedian is an even bigger loser. That's about as much of the plot as I understood.

Overall it's the worst movie I've ever seen. I own it on DVD and have given it to many co-workers to watch. Each comes back and laughs and says "Wow I didnt think I'd ever say I shut off an Adam Sandler movie 15 minutes in...."

My response is always "Well now you can"

--------------------------------------------- Result 2371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this a lot. In fact, if I see it again(and I plan to) I just may love it. I'll echo other reviewers in saying that this movie really does grow on you as you watch. It starts kind of slowly but the way in enfolds is very natural and has a mood to it. You just get into it.

I really liked the summery atmosphere to the movie and thought the movie was very touching as a whole. The characters have a strong element of realism and the movie very slowly and gently weaves a spell as you get involved in the various interactions between them all and want to know how it will ultimately turn out and what paths the characters will choose to take.

I am very surprised that there are less then a dozen comments on this-there are obscure TV movies that have more comments then Rich In Love.

One thing that I will say is I missed the ending which is driving me crazy and I HAVE to watch it again to see that. This is a movie that may not be for everybody but that I feel is strongly underrated(even some of my most film buff purist friends who have seen almost every movie there is haven't seen this) and it doesn't even seem to have much of a message board but I liked it a lot and to all those who like family dramas that are warm on scenery, atmosphere and an unhurried languid pace should probably take a look at this. Especially note worthy is that it takes place in South Carolina so for those (like me) who love the south, and movies that take place there, this is a gem. I'll add my vote to the woefully few comments and recommend this little known flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I never heard of this film til it played as part of a [[Robert]] Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the [[cast]] list looked tasty to say the [[least]] with seven [[names]] - in [[addition]] to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the [[daughter]] of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the [[sadistic]] male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were [[wasting]] their time. I looked in [[vain]] for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range [[war]] and Mitchum must have thought it was [[barely]] a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new [[twists]] - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've [[seen]] or heard [[nothing]] to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be [[said]] for this. I never heard of this film til it played as part of a [[Roberta]] Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the [[casting]] list looked tasty to say the [[fewer]] with seven [[name]] - in [[addendum]] to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the [[girlie]] of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the [[vicious]] male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were [[lose]] their time. I looked in [[fruitless]] for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range [[warfare]] and Mitchum must have thought it was [[hardly]] a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new [[spins]] - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've [[noticed]] or heard [[nada]] to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be [[indicated]] for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I picked this [[movie]] on the cover [[alone]] thinking that i was in for an adventure to the level of "Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom". [[Unfortunately]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so [[large]] that i [[could]] barely find [[anything]] of quality in this movie. The cover described [[amazing]] special [[effects]]. There were [[none]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[stereotypes]] were [[awfully]] [[portrayed]]. It does give the [[idea]] that you can [[solve]] [[problems]] with violence. Good if you [[want]] to teach your kids that. I don't. [[Keep]] away from this one. [[If]] you are [[looking]] for [[family]] entertainment then you [[might]] [[find]] [[something]] that is more [[inspiring]] [[elsewhere]]. I picked this [[filmmaking]] on the cover [[only]] thinking that i was in for an adventure to the level of "Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom". [[Tragically]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so [[prodigious]] that i [[wo]] barely find [[nada]] of quality in this movie. The cover described [[unbelievable]] special [[consequences]]. There were [[nos]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[stereotype]] were [[horribly]] [[depicted]]. It does give the [[thinking]] that you can [[dissipating]] [[problem]] with violence. Good if you [[wants]] to teach your kids that. I don't. [[Conserving]] away from this one. [[Though]] you are [[quest]] for [[families]] entertainment then you [[apt]] [[unearth]] [[algo]] that is more [[inspirational]] [[else]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A sweet-natured young mountain man with a sad past (Henry Thomas) comes upon an abandoned baby girl in the woods and instantly falls in love with her. The town elders generally support him in keeping the child, though a local temptress (Cara Seymour) thinks little of the new family. A determined little girl on a long walk and a sinister travelling salesman (David Strathairn at his creepiest) have parallel stories which converge in a fateful way. This is a charming slice-of-life in the Ozarks in the same vein as "Where The Lillies Bloom" & "The Dollmaker". All three were shot on location in those beautiful hills and cover the lives of simple-living -- but not simple-minded -- American folk. A minimum of strong language and brief but pointed violence make this fairly-safe family viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2375 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[While]] I have a [[great]] respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[would]] [[call]] "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first [[movie]] [[poster]] and trailer, and [[thankfully]] lived up to my [[expectations]].

Atlantis is a more "[[mature]]" Disney film in the [[sense]] that it lacks [[songs]] (a very [[unusual]] [[trait]] for a Disney [[film]] indeed), and is [[focused]] more on action and [[discovery]] than any other [[recent]] Disney [[offering]]. The [[world]] of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's [[core]], is [[fantastic]], [[presented]] as desolate caverns with ruins, and then [[slowly]] developing into actual ecosystems, which, while [[usually]] containing some reminder of [[harshness]], [[become]] more and more [[intriguing]] until the [[tropical]] paradise itself is [[reached]]. The [[presentation]] of [[simply]] Atlantis' [[landscape]] and setting, without some expendable cheery song, [[gave]] the kingdom a much more [[beautiful]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean [[language]], as well as [[attempts]] to [[connect]] it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations [[adds]] to this, and [[works]] fairly well.

[[Also]], with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's [[practical]] jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" [[element]] that I [[usually]] associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the [[struggle]] to [[get]] to Atlantis, and the [[constant]] discovery that [[occurred]] at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was [[able]] to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by [[helping]] the Atlanteans [[discover]] parts of their own [[history]] that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "[[weaponry]]", which is [[used]] in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a [[better]] word, [[quite]] exciting.

[[Granted]], not all of the [[story]] makes full [[sense]], and the [[film]] doesn't feature any [[amazing]] [[new]] computer-generated visual [[effects]], but, aside from the [[Toy]] Story [[movies]], this is the most [[entertaining]] Disney [[film]] I've [[seen]] in [[years]]. [[Despite]] I have a [[wondrous]] respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[ought]] [[invitation]] "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first [[film]] [[placard]] and trailer, and [[hopefully]] lived up to my [[predictions]].

Atlantis is a more "[[grownup]]" Disney film in the [[feeling]] that it lacks [[tunes]] (a very [[strange]] [[character]] for a Disney [[films]] indeed), and is [[concentrating]] more on action and [[detect]] than any other [[freshly]] Disney [[offers]]. The [[worldwide]] of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's [[nuclei]], is [[spectacular]], [[submitted]] as desolate caverns with ruins, and then [[softly]] developing into actual ecosystems, which, while [[generally]] containing some reminder of [[toughness]], [[gotten]] more and more [[exciting]] until the [[equatorial]] paradise itself is [[totaled]]. The [[submissions]] of [[merely]] Atlantis' [[scenery]] and setting, without some expendable cheery song, [[provided]] the kingdom a much more [[funky]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean [[linguistics]], as well as [[tries]] to [[linking]] it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations [[added]] to this, and [[working]] fairly well.

[[Moreover]], with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's [[realistic]] jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" [[components]] that I [[typically]] associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the [[wrestling]] to [[obtain]] to Atlantis, and the [[sustained]] discovery that [[arose]] at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was [[capable]] to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by [[aiding]] the Atlanteans [[discovery]] parts of their own [[historical]] that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "[[armament]]", which is [[using]] in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a [[improved]] word, [[utterly]] exciting.

[[Ascribed]], not all of the [[narratives]] makes full [[feeling]], and the [[cinematography]] doesn't feature any [[noteworthy]] [[novo]] computer-generated visual [[implications]], but, aside from the [[Pawn]] Story [[cinematography]], this is the most [[amusing]] Disney [[movie]] I've [[noticed]] in [[yr]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I [[could]] give this movie the lowest possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[incompetence]], of [[high]] intentions and [[failure]].

Mira Sorvino is [[horribly]] cast as the princess, but [[entirely]] unbelievable as Phocion, a young [[boy]]. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[character]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the [[insipid]] French [[play]] that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a [[brilliant]], [[passionate]] philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and [[uninspired]] re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the [[atrocious]] [[plot]] and [[dialogue]], there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I [[did]] give this movie the lowest possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[impotence]], of [[higher]] intentions and [[imperfection]].

Mira Sorvino is [[unimaginably]] cast as the princess, but [[altogether]] unbelievable as Phocion, a young [[laddie]]. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[personages]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the [[tacky]] French [[gaming]] that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a [[sumptuous]], [[vehement]] philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and [[unimaginative]] re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the [[frightful]] [[intrigue]] and [[discussions]], there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire --------------------------------------------- Result 2377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes it may be goofy and may not seem as funny as many high budget comedies out there, but this movie is truly hilarious if you really watch it. Tim Meadows has always struck me as being funny off of the Saturday Night Live show. Whenever he would do this character on the show I would crack up laughing. So after I saw this was going to be playing on Comedy Central one night I decided to check it out. All in all I was farily impressed with this movie, because it wasn't meant to win any Oscars or become comedy of the year, but it did entertain the Saturday Night Live fans that love the Ladies Man character. This movie is also packed with some highly quotable lines that can be recited for years to come. --------------------------------------------- Result 2378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] its too [[bad]] that no one knows anything about this [[movie]], and it [[gets]] [[old]] telling people it's rap's version of spinal tap. and you know, im sorry i dont have any better [[comments]], but damnit, go get the [[movie]] and watch it, and then make all your [[friends]] watch it too, just like im [[gonna]]. its too [[amiss]] that no one knows anything about this [[kino]], and it [[receives]] [[ancient]] telling people it's rap's version of spinal tap. and you know, im sorry i dont have any better [[commentary]], but damnit, go get the [[cinema]] and watch it, and then make all your [[buddies]] watch it too, just like im [[going]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this because I thought there were going to be a lot of car chases and cool cars to gawk at. Guess I was lied to. This movie is very boring.

The movie starts out Kip Raines(Giovanni Ribisi) sitting outside a Porsche dealership checking to see if they have the right car. When they confirm it's the right one, Kip gets a brick out of the trunk and chucks it at the window, shattering it. He gets the Porsche while his friend gets the keys. They start up the car and take off into the night. They deliver it to a warehouse only to have been followed by the police. So, the whole crew ditches all the cars and go their separate ways. Then, we get a glimpse of Memphis Raines. He is giving a little speech to a bunch of kids at a go-kart track. Then, he is confronted by Atlee Jackson(Will Patton). Atlee tells Memphis that his brother Kip is in deep *bleep*. Memphis is known as one of the most notorious car thieves in Los Angeles. Memphis heads to a junkyard and meets Raymond Calitri(Christopher Ecclesten). This guy threatens to kill Kip if Memphis doesn't deliver 50 cars within 72 hours.

There are a few problems with this film:

1.Story: The first 48 in-movie hours take place when Cage and Duvall are looking for a crew and planning everything out. The last 12 in-movie hours are a waste!

2. The Cars: You see maybe 10 cars out of the 50 as the movie advertises. So, where are the other 40 cars? Why don't we get to see them?

3. The Chase: The chase at the end of the movie was a joke. It was not suspenseful at all.

4. The Dog: Somewhere in the movie, the dog eats the burgers and swallows three keys as well. This is impossible. The keys were flipped open. The keys would have severely damaged the dog's esophagus, stomach, and large intestines. The guys suggest giving the dog laxatives to help him poop it out. This won't work. The dog will get a lot of diarrhea but no keys. It was stated in Jackass after Ryan Dunne stuck a toy car up his rectum. Take laxatives, lots of diarrhea, but no car. Same case with the dog.

5. The Cop During The Chase: When Eleanor breaks down for a few minutes, Nicholas Cage tries desperately to start up the car. You see a police cruiser behind him who isn't looking at his car at all. But, right when Nicholas Cage starts the engine up again, the police officer jerks his head to the right, sees the car, and immediately begins to chase after him. It is stupid. So, right when he heard the engine start, and saw the car, he knew that was the car he was looking for. How does he know it's the right car? He only sees the back of it.

Overall, the movie is boring. There is no action. There are very few cars. The movie is stupid. I have never seen the original but I plan to.

I give this movie 1 star out of 10. Get The Fast and Furious instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2380 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Run away from this movie. [[Even]] by B-movie [[standards]] this movie is [[dreadful]]. It is also [[insidious]] in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are [[cool]] and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the [[disenfranchised]] a lot [[better]] than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not [[work]] as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction [[presents]] [[nothing]] new or interesting. Run away from this movie. [[Yet]] by B-movie [[norms]] this movie is [[horrific]]. It is also [[sneaky]] in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are [[groovy]] and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the [[disadvantaged]] a lot [[optimum]] than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not [[collaboration]] as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction [[exposes]] [[anything]] new or interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have [[seen]] [[every]] episode of this [[spin]] off. I thought the first season was a [[decent]] [[effort]] [[considering]] the [[expectations]] of following such a [[success]] that is Grey's [[Anatomy]]. Thus i have [[continued]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[lacks]] the [[charm]], the [[chemistry]] and more importantly the drama of it's [[predecessor]] Grey's [[Anatomy]]. The [[relationships]] seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The [[writing]] [[lacks]] the [[intelligence]] and comedic hints [[seen]] in GA. There are [[shows]] that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, [[unfortunately]] PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is [[simply]] not interesting. I have [[noticed]] [[each]] episode of this [[revolve]] off. I thought the first season was a [[presentable]] [[endeavors]] [[reviewing]] the [[outlook]] of following such a [[accomplishments]] that is Grey's [[Postmortem]]. Thus i have [[incessant]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[lack]] the [[seduction]], the [[chemical]] and more importantly the drama of it's [[forerunner]] Grey's [[Autopsy]]. The [[relations]] seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The [[handwriting]] [[lacked]] the [[intelligentsia]] and comedic hints [[watched]] in GA. There are [[exhibited]] that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, [[sadly]] PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is [[straightforward]] not interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[In]] the [[beginning]] and [[throughout]] the [[movie]], it was [[great]]. It was suspenseful and [[thrilling]]. [[Yet]] in the [[end]] it [[gave]] no [[answer]] to what had [[happened]]. They mysteriously turned into [[zombies]] by a [[raven]] or [[crow]]? It did not answer the [[questions]] that we all had and therefore, was not as good a [[movie]] as I [[thought]] that it was going to be. [[Onto]] the [[initiate]] and [[across]] the [[flick]], it was [[awesome]]. It was suspenseful and [[riveting]]. [[However]] in the [[ceases]] it [[handed]] no [[replies]] to what had [[transpired]]. They mysteriously turned into [[walkers]] by a [[crow]] or [[corneille]]? It did not answer the [[subjects]] that we all had and therefore, was not as good a [[filmmaking]] as I [[ideology]] that it was going to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I have to [[admit]] that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh [[Film]] [[Festival]]. [[However]], after the Artistic Director of the Festival [[specifically]] [[recommended]] this [[film]] to an [[audience]] of over 200 people [[prior]] to the screening of another [[film]], I decided to go to [[see]] it. Wow!

This film is dealing with the very [[difficult]] [[issue]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have [[found]] myself [[crying]] a number of [[times]] during the movie and laughing at others. [[Speaking]] about an [[emotional]] roller coaster.

The lead actor ([[Thuy]] Nguyen) is a Vietnamese [[newcomer]] (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this [[incredibly]] [[complex]] and [[difficult]] role. She [[reminded]] me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from [[Whale]] [[Rider]] but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a [[child]] [[prostitute]]. [[Chances]] are that she will win [[numerous]] awards.

The [[main]] story is about a [[girl]] who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron [[Livingston]] in a [[strong]] dramatic role that we are not [[used]] to see from him), who after spending some [[time]] with her decides to [[help]] her. By that time [[however]], she is [[sold]] again and he is [[going]] on a [[search]] for her [[around]] Cambodia. The story turns and [[twists]] and the [[audience]] can never [[predict]] what will [[happen]] [[next]].

The acting was [[strong]] [[across]] the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very [[convincing]] as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen ([[touching]] as a social [[worker]]) and [[Chris]] [[Penn]] (one of his [[last]] movies). The Asian cast was [[also]] [[superb]].

Although the [[film]] [[deals]] with this [[difficult]] subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a [[compelling]], [[powerful]] [[story]]. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in [[real]] [[operating]] brothels) which [[adds]] to the [[feeling]] that you are [[almost]] watching a [[documentary]]. It seems that the DP used a [[lot]] of hand held camera and close-ups and [[overall]] it [[made]] you feel like you are right there as [[part]] of the [[story]].

After the screening, I was listening to other [[members]] of the audience as they [[left]] and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an [[easy]] film to watch and I [[salute]] the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. I have to [[accepted]] that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh [[Cinematography]] [[Feast]]. [[Yet]], after the Artistic Director of the Festival [[notably]] [[recommend]] this [[cinematography]] to an [[audiences]] of over 200 people [[anterior]] to the screening of another [[cinematography]], I decided to go to [[seeing]] it. Wow!

This film is dealing with the very [[complex]] [[issuing]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have [[discovered]] myself [[whining]] a number of [[moments]] during the movie and laughing at others. [[Discussing]] about an [[sentimental]] roller coaster.

The lead actor ([[Shui]] Nguyen) is a Vietnamese [[newcomers]] (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this [[impossibly]] [[complicate]] and [[troublesome]] role. She [[remembered]] me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from [[Whales]] [[Mustang]] but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a [[kids]] [[skank]]. [[Possibilities]] are that she will win [[multiple]] awards.

The [[principal]] story is about a [[women]] who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron [[Livingstone]] in a [[vigorous]] dramatic role that we are not [[employs]] to see from him), who after spending some [[times]] with her decides to [[support]] her. By that time [[yet]], she is [[sells]] again and he is [[go]] on a [[researching]] for her [[about]] Cambodia. The story turns and [[spins]] and the [[audiences]] can never [[forecasting]] what will [[arise]] [[future]].

The acting was [[forceful]] [[during]] the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very [[cogent]] as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen ([[affects]] as a social [[workers]]) and [[Kris]] [[Pennsylvania]] (one of his [[final]] movies). The Asian cast was [[moreover]] [[wondrous]].

Although the [[films]] [[deal]] with this [[problematic]] subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a [[convincing]], [[influential]] [[history]]. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in [[authentic]] [[functioning]] brothels) which [[added]] to the [[impression]] that you are [[practically]] watching a [[literature]]. It seems that the DP used a [[batch]] of hand held camera and close-ups and [[whole]] it [[brought]] you feel like you are right there as [[portions]] of the [[stories]].

After the screening, I was listening to other [[member]] of the audience as they [[exited]] and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an [[simple]] film to watch and I [[greeted]] the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 2384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have read the [[novel]] Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews [[years]] ago and last [[night]] I [[accidentally]] came to [[see]] this adaption.

Although it's been [[years]] since I read the [[story]] the [[first]] [[time]], the differences between the novel and the [[movie]] are [[humongous]]. Very important [[elements]], which [[made]] the whole thing plausible are just [[written]] out or [[changed]] to [[bad]].

If the [[plot]] [[sounds]] interesting to you: go and [[get]] the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was [[hard]] to [[stop]] watching because of the [[great]] basic plot by Ben Mezrich. I have read the [[newer]] Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews [[yr]] ago and last [[nighttime]] I [[coincidentally]] came to [[consults]] this adaption.

Although it's been [[olds]] since I read the [[tale]] the [[frst]] [[moment]], the differences between the novel and the [[filmmaking]] are [[mammoth]]. Very important [[ingredient]], which [[introduced]] the whole thing plausible are just [[authored]] out or [[modified]] to [[negative]].

If the [[intrigue]] [[noises]] interesting to you: go and [[got]] the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was [[tough]] to [[parada]] watching because of the [[marvellous]] basic plot by Ben Mezrich. --------------------------------------------- Result 2385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The [[film]] belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper [[bring]] a [[little]] acting verve to story with several standard [[elements]]. Well filmed, well edited, with plenty of well acted secondary [[roles]].

Some have [[declared]] this [[movie]] to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I agree with those who [[say]] "The [[movie]] [[celebrates]] the thrill of [[youthful]] inspiration."

The [[film]] is a [[pleasant]] [[reminder]] that [[achievement]] may be born of [[ordinary]] [[roots]].

The [[cinematography]] belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper [[brings]] a [[tiny]] acting verve to story with several standard [[ingredients]]. Well filmed, well edited, with plenty of well acted secondary [[duties]].

Some have [[proclaimed]] this [[film]] to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I agree with those who [[told]] "The [[kino]] [[celebrating]] the thrill of [[juvenile]] inspiration."

The [[kino]] is a [[nice]] [[reminders]] that [[realization]] may be born of [[banal]] [[racine]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A [[bad]] rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked [[story]] and strong aftertaste of lame [[propaganda]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they [[live]] next [[door]] and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix [[woman]], she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[singer]] [[woman]] with the [[crazy]] eyes is [[best]] when she's dead in bed; and even the [[wolf]] was sub-par ([[although]] she was the [[best]] [[performer]] in the [[movie]]) -- [[maybe]] they [[fed]] her before the [[shots]], or something.

Unlike "Seven", which had a ([[made]] up, but interesting) [[story]], to which one [[could]] [[relate]] more or [[less]] [[regardless]] of the [[country]], this [[movie]] [[seems]] to focus on a US-only [[obsession]]. [[If]] one doesn't care much about "[[sex]] [[offenders]]" -- and the [[statistics]] are that [[lack]] of [[exercise]] and [[bad]] diet [[cause]] more [[pain]], [[suffering]] and [[death]] -- there is [[little]] [[reason]] to [[see]] it, or to be [[afraid]].

There are some [[body]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fails]] both as artistic [[device]] (because it is [[pointless]]) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste [[time]] on this one. A [[unfavourable]] rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked [[histories]] and strong aftertaste of lame [[publicity]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they [[vivo]] next [[wears]] and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix [[femme]], she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[diva]] [[femme]] with the [[mad]] eyes is [[optimum]] when she's dead in bed; and even the [[lair]] was sub-par ([[whereas]] she was the [[finest]] [[virtuoso]] in the [[flick]]) -- [[conceivably]] they [[nurtured]] her before the [[punches]], or something.

Unlike "Seven", which had a ([[introduced]] up, but interesting) [[conte]], to which one [[did]] [[pertain]] more or [[fewest]] [[separately]] of the [[nations]], this [[flick]] [[seem]] to focus on a US-only [[mania]]. [[Though]] one doesn't care much about "[[sexuality]] [[criminals]]" -- and the [[stats]] are that [[insufficiency]] of [[exercises]] and [[unhealthy]] diet [[reason]] more [[heartache]], [[hardship]] and [[dies]] -- there is [[scant]] [[reasons]] to [[seeing]] it, or to be [[fearful]].

There are some [[agencies]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fail]] both as artistic [[instruments]] (because it is [[superfluous]]) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste [[times]] on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is overblown, predictable, pretentious, and hollow to its core. The settings are faithful to the era but self-conscious in their magnification by prolonged exposure. The lingering over artifacts stops the action and cloys almost as much as the empty dialogue. Tom Hanks seems to be sleepwalking much as Bruce Willis did in Hart's War. Tom, you can't give depth to a character simply by making your face blank! The content did not warrant the histrionic acting by Paul Newman. This is a dud wrapped in an atomic bomb casing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[saw]] this feature as part of the Asian American Film [[Festival]] in New York and was [[horrified]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is [[hidden]] beneath [[way]] too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the [[least]] bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have [[flashbacks]]. I [[watched]] this feature as part of the Asian American Film [[Feast]] in New York and was [[surprised]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is [[stealth]] beneath [[camino]] too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the [[less]] bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have [[reminiscences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2389 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When i saw the preview for this on TV i was thinking, "ok its gonna be a good werewolf movie" but it was not. it was not scary at all! acting was good, plot was horrible, the military bid was just plain stupid. I think the SCI-FI channel could of done better than this piece of crap. The movie made it sound like Arron was going to turn into a werewolf, instead he turned psycho and bit some doctor's throat out. If you have read some of my other reviews on other movies, there all positive, but this one is not simply because the story was terrible. One out of 10 max. Im sure you all were expecting some werewolf flick, but i bet you didn't expect this. Beyond Loch Nes was way better than this movie, heck, any movie thats on the sci-fi channel is better than this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] [[Basically]] what we have here is little more than a [[remake]] of the hilarious 1970's [[classic]] kitsch horror '[[Death]] Line' which [[ironically]] was like this [[cobblers]], [[also]] partly filmed at the disused Aldwych [[underground]] station.

Making [[good]] use of the now disused Jubilee Line [[platforms]] at Charing [[Cross]] as well as the [[aforementioned]] Aldwych, this [[film]] [[contains]] [[basically]] the same plot - [[dodgy]] [[murdering]] [[mad]] zombie in the tunnels [[preying]] on the lost [[passengers]] who have [[missed]] the [[last]] train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are [[sadly]] [[lacking]]. The [[gore]] [[ranges]] from the poor to the [[unnecessarily]] over gory [[whilst]] the sub-Gollum [[nutter]] is never [[really]] [[fully]] [[explained]] as seems [[little]] more than an under [[developed]] plot [[device]].

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin [[script]] than [[run]] down a lot of [[tunnels]] and [[scream]] [[every]] so [[often]], [[indeed]] she was like [[pretty]] much everyone [[else]] in this film, out-acted by a small [[dog]] and a [[pack]] of [[tame]] rats.

If [[creepy]] [[films]] set on the London [[Underground]] are your [[bag]], or you just [[want]] to [[play]] '[[spot]] the [[tube]] location' them [[pick]] this up on [[DVD]] when it hits a [[bargain]] [[bin]]. [[If]] you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a [[copy]] of [[Death]] Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well [[written]] and [[acted]] [[film]], you will [[need]] to [[change]] trains..... [[Broadly]] what we have here is little more than a [[redo]] of the hilarious 1970's [[typical]] kitsch horror '[[Die]] Line' which [[sarcastically]] was like this [[shoemakers]], [[furthermore]] partly filmed at the disused Aldwych [[metro]] station.

Making [[alright]] use of the now disused Jubilee Line [[platform]] at Charing [[Croix]] as well as the [[above]] Aldwych, this [[filmmaking]] [[encompasses]] [[broadly]] the same plot - [[murky]] [[killed]] [[furious]] zombie in the tunnels [[preyed]] on the lost [[travelers]] who have [[miss]] the [[final]] train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are [[unfortunately]] [[lacked]]. The [[gora]] [[ranging]] from the poor to the [[senselessly]] over gory [[while]] the sub-Gollum [[wacko]] is never [[genuinely]] [[completely]] [[explains]] as seems [[petite]] more than an under [[elaborated]] plot [[devices]].

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin [[hyphen]] than [[running]] down a lot of [[tunnel]] and [[screams]] [[all]] so [[routinely]], [[actually]] she was like [[quite]] much everyone [[further]] in this film, out-acted by a small [[puppy]] and a [[packed]] of [[cultivated]] rats.

If [[scary]] [[movie]] set on the London [[Metro]] are your [[baggage]], or you just [[wanting]] to [[playing]] '[[stain]] the [[pipes]] location' them [[select]] this up on [[DVDS]] when it hits a [[negotiation]] [[ibn]]. [[Unless]] you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a [[copied]] of [[Deaths]] Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well [[typed]] and [[behaved]] [[filmmaking]], you will [[gotta]] to [[amend]] trains..... --------------------------------------------- Result 2391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[amazed]] at the improvements [[made]] in an animated [[film]]. [[If]] you [[sit]] close to the screen, you will [[see]] the detail in the grass and surface [[structures]]. The [[detail]], [[colors]], and shading are at [[least]] an [[order]] of [[magnitude]] better than [[Toy]] Story. How they were [[able]] to pull off the shading, I will never [[know]]. I do [[hope]] that PIXAR will [[provide]] a [[documentary]] on how the film was produced so I can [[find]] out how all this was [[accomplished]]. [[Based]] on this [[film]], I [[think]] [[animated]] [[films]] of the [[future]] will be [[judged]] on the [[basis]] of this [[film]]. I was [[appalled]] at the improvements [[accomplished]] in an animated [[movies]]. [[Unless]] you [[sitting]] close to the screen, you will [[seeing]] the detail in the grass and surface [[edifice]]. The [[details]], [[dye]], and shading are at [[fewest]] an [[edict]] of [[extent]] better than [[Pawn]] Story. How they were [[capable]] to pull off the shading, I will never [[savoir]]. I do [[esperanza]] that PIXAR will [[affords]] a [[documentation]] on how the film was produced so I can [[unearth]] out how all this was [[doing]]. [[Founded]] on this [[kino]], I [[thought]] [[animate]] [[movies]] of the [[forthcoming]] will be [[deemed]] on the [[bases]] of this [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a [[great]] [[entertaining]] [[action]] [[film]] in my [[opinion]], with cool [[characters]], lots of [[action]], and an [[amazing]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, [[however]] Alex Karzis is awful as the [[villain]]!. The story is very good, and i found the [[kids]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[simply]] amazing in this!. The action scenes are [[excellent]], and it's almost like [[Die]] [[Hard]] except it's set in a [[school]]!, plus Kata Dobó is very [[menacing]] and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional [[moments]] as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't [[cut]] it as the villain [[way]] too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be [[higher]] then 4.1 in my opinion, as i [[thought]] it was a [[great]] [[action]] [[film]], and while the [[kids]], were very [[stupid]] at [[times]], they [[got]] [[quite]] [[resourceful]] as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The [[ending]] is very amusing,and [[Corey]] Sevier's character was my [[favorite]] [[student]]!, plus Dolph has [[still]] got it!. This is a [[great]] [[entertaining]] [[action]] [[film]] in my [[opinion]], with cool [[characters]], lots of [[action]], and an [[amazing]] performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the villain, [[still]] i [[highly]] [[recommend]] this one!. The Direction is very good!. [[Sidney]] J. Furie does a very good [[job]] here with [[great]] [[camera]] [[work]], good angles, and [[keeping]] the [[film]] at a very [[fast]] pace!. There is a [[bit]] of blood and violence. We get [[lots]] of [[extremely]] [[bloody]] gunshot [[wounds]],[[knife]] in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[minor]] [[stuff]]. The Acting is [[fantastic]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[amazing]] as [[always]], and is [[amazing]] here, he is [[extremely]] [[likable]], [[kicks]] that [[ass]] as [[usual]], had [[great]] [[chemistry]] with the [[kids]], had an [[awesome]] [[character]], is very charismatic, and he [[may]] not have [[shown]] a [[great]] emotional rage, he still was a [[hell]] of a [[lot]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[favorite]] [[actors]]! (Lundgren [[Rules]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[god]] [[awful]] as the [[villain]], he is laughably OTT, was [[boring]], and not menacing at all, he [[also]] annoyed the [[crap]] out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 This is a [[fantastic]] [[amusing]] [[efforts]] [[movie]] in my [[view]], with cool [[traits]], lots of [[efforts]], and an [[awesome]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, [[still]] Alex Karzis is awful as the [[hoodlum]]!. The story is very good, and i found the [[juvenile]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[merely]] amazing in this!. The action scenes are [[wondrous]], and it's almost like [[Dead]] [[Stiff]] except it's set in a [[teaching]]!, plus Kata Dobó is very [[threatens]] and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional [[times]] as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't [[clipping]] it as the villain [[pathways]] too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be [[upper]] then 4.1 in my opinion, as i [[ideology]] it was a [[huge]] [[efforts]] [[movie]], and while the [[children]], were very [[foolish]] at [[moments]], they [[ai]] [[utterly]] [[inventive]] as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The [[terminated]] is very amusing,and [[Cory]] Sevier's character was my [[favored]] [[pupils]]!, plus Dolph has [[yet]] got it!. This is a [[huge]] [[amusing]] [[measures]] [[cinematographic]] in my [[viewing]], with cool [[traits]], lots of [[efforts]], and an [[noteworthy]] performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the villain, [[however]] i [[heavily]] [[recommended]] this one!. The Direction is very good!. [[Sid]] J. Furie does a very good [[employment]] here with [[super]] [[cameras]] [[jobs]], good angles, and [[maintaining]] the [[cinematography]] at a very [[rapids]] pace!. There is a [[bitten]] of blood and violence. We get [[batch]] of [[terribly]] [[murderous]] gunshot [[lesions]],[[stabbing]] in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[marginal]] [[thing]]. The Acting is [[unbelievable]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[fantastic]] as [[permanently]], and is [[dazzling]] here, he is [[terribly]] [[sympathetic]], [[karate]] that [[butt]] as [[customary]], had [[huge]] [[chemicals]] with the [[children]], had an [[brilliant]] [[traits]], is very charismatic, and he [[maggio]] not have [[demonstrated]] a [[formidable]] emotional rage, he still was a [[dammit]] of a [[lots]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[preferred]] [[actresses]]! (Lundgren [[Regulation]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[deus]] [[terrible]] as the [[hoodlum]], he is laughably OTT, was [[bored]], and not menacing at all, he [[further]] annoyed the [[shitty]] out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[movie]] has so [[many]] [[wonderful]] elements to it! The [[debut]] performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of course, [[marvelous]], but so too is her [[chemistry]] with Jason London. The score is [[remarkable]], breezy and pure. [[James]] Newton Howard [[enhances]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[also]] [[seems]] to have a knack for lost-days-of-youth [[movies]], be sure to catch his score for the [[recent]] "Peter Pan" and the haunting [[Gothic]] [[music]] of "The Village." I first [[saw]] this film at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[cry]] at the [[ending]], I [[shed]] a [[tear]] or two for the [[nostalgia]]. Show this movie to your [[daughters]]. It will [[end]] up becoming a lifetime [[comfort]] film. This [[film]] has so [[myriad]] [[wondrous]] elements to it! The [[premiere]] performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of course, [[awesome]], but so too is her [[chemical]] with Jason London. The score is [[wondrous]], breezy and pure. [[Jacques]] Newton Howard [[reinforces]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[further]] [[looks]] to have a knack for lost-days-of-youth [[theater]], be sure to catch his score for the [[freshly]] "Peter Pan" and the haunting [[Goth]] [[musical]] of "The Village." I first [[watched]] this film at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[cries]] at the [[terminated]], I [[hangar]] a [[torn]] or two for the [[homesickness]]. Show this movie to your [[girl]]. It will [[ceases]] up becoming a lifetime [[consolation]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is [[absurd]] - aside from the fellow [[Australian]] who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a [[review]] so far was some way involved in the production of [[Elektra]], [[considering]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie [[conversions]] so I didn't go in with many [[expectations]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[incredibly]] underwhelming. The thing that [[irked]] me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by unexplained, that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by unexplained.

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[locations]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained [[little]] enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're [[supposed]] to suspend our [[disbelief]] for fantasy/[[action]] [[films]], but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action [[film]] [[standards]]) that it [[simply]] frustrated me.

Well, hell, at [[least]] Jennifer Garner looks damn [[good]]. This is [[senseless]] - aside from the fellow [[Australia]] who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a [[examine]] so far was some way involved in the production of [[Electra]], [[examine]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie [[translations]] so I didn't go in with many [[forecast]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[surprisingly]] underwhelming. The thing that [[outraged]] me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by unexplained, that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by unexplained.

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[placements]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained [[scant]] enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're [[suspected]] to suspend our [[atheism]] for fantasy/[[measures]] [[filmmaking]], but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action [[filmmaking]] [[standard]]) that it [[straightforward]] frustrated me.

Well, hell, at [[fewer]] Jennifer Garner looks damn [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, I had seen "They all laughed" when it came out in

Europe around 1982 and had kept a vague but dear souvenir of it. I 've just seen it again on tape, almost twenty years after... Bogdanovich has a true heartfelt tenderness over his characters and a kind sympathy which is difficult not to feel also. Excellent comedians and actors, good lines all over and for everyone and pretty good editing, too. I laughed and smiled all the time. Just as we all do, at times. Go get it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] as it was the [[second]] feature on a disc containing the previously banned Video [[Nasty]] 'Blood Rites'. As Blood [[Rites]] was entirely awful, I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but actually, it would seem that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this [[time]] as Seeds of [[Sin]] tops [[Blood]] [[Rites]] in [[style]] and stands tall as a more than adequate slice of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually quite similar to Blood Rites, as we focus on a dysfunctional family unit, and of course; there is an [[inheritance]] at stake. The film is shot in black and [[white]], and the look and feel of it reminded me a lot of the trash classic 'The Curious Dr Humpp'. There's barely any gore on display, and the director seems keener to focus on sex, with themes of incest and hatred seeping through. The acting is [[typically]] trashy, but most of the women get to appear nude at some point and despite a poor reputation, director Andy Milligan actually seems to have an eye for this sort of thing, as many of the sequences in this film are actually quite [[beautiful]]. The plot is paper thin, and most of the film is filler; but the music is catchy, and the director also does a surprisingly good job with the sex scenes themselves, as most are somewhat erotic. [[Overall]], this is not a [[great]] [[film]]; but it's likely to appeal to the cult fan, and gets a much higher recommendation than the better known and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. I [[observed]] this [[kino]] as it was the [[secondly]] feature on a disc containing the previously banned Video [[Horrid]] 'Blood Rites'. As Blood [[Rituals]] was entirely awful, I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but actually, it would seem that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this [[moment]] as Seeds of [[Oin]] tops [[Transfusion]] [[Ceremonial]] in [[styles]] and stands tall as a more than adequate slice of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually quite similar to Blood Rites, as we focus on a dysfunctional family unit, and of course; there is an [[heredity]] at stake. The film is shot in black and [[bianchi]], and the look and feel of it reminded me a lot of the trash classic 'The Curious Dr Humpp'. There's barely any gore on display, and the director seems keener to focus on sex, with themes of incest and hatred seeping through. The acting is [[fluently]] trashy, but most of the women get to appear nude at some point and despite a poor reputation, director Andy Milligan actually seems to have an eye for this sort of thing, as many of the sequences in this film are actually quite [[wondrous]]. The plot is paper thin, and most of the film is filler; but the music is catchy, and the director also does a surprisingly good job with the sex scenes themselves, as most are somewhat erotic. [[Totals]], this is not a [[wondrous]] [[films]]; but it's likely to appeal to the cult fan, and gets a much higher recommendation than the better known and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I do miss the company Vestron, they sure had their finger on the pulse of unique and unusual cinema back in the 1980s. This is very apparent with the astonishing Paperhouse, a film that touches me deeply each and every time I watch it.

The idea of a girl manipulating a dream world with her drawings (thusly the dream world manipulating reality), and also connecting with and affecting the life of a boy she's never actually met, is fascinating and never disappoints. Charlotte Burke at first seems quite precocious and yet you warm up to her because by being a bit of a mischievous child, it makes it hard for the adults to believe what she is experiencing. She becomes very self aware and strong towards the end, even finding she doesn't "hate boys" as she so defiantly claimed at first. Through this we are treated to many touching moments and some immensely scary ones, all visually stunning with a grand score from Hans Zimmer. I'm quite proud to be an owner of the soundtrack on CD when it was released in the United States on RCA Victor. At the time of this writing there is no DVD of Paperhouse yet available in the U.S. (only in Europe), here's hoping one of my wishes will come true as I truly cherish this beautiful film and a DVD of it would be very welcome!

It's satisfying watching the girl work out her thoughts like a puzzle game trying to make the dream world work for her and her newfound friend Marc (Elliot Spiers). Both Charlotte Burke and Elliot Spiers do a magnificent job throughout, I find the editorial comment on Amazon.com about it being "hammy acting" quite perplexing -- I found every aspect of Paperhouse to be exhilarating. Even in minor scenes of brilliance like when Charlotte and the girl in the classroom are staring at each other through the glass on a door, it's quite powerful.

You don't have to be an arthouse type to enjoy Paperhouse, just be a person that enjoys a film that stimulates and has you wanting more. There is enough in this film to invite repeated viewings and I'm still in awe of the cinematography and sets. For me, it's never like watching the same film twice, as there are so many details to absorb and savor. A very emotional experience indeed.

While there are many films I adore, there are only a few specific ones that strike a great emotional chord in me: films like Paperhouse, Static, Resurrection, and Donnie Darko. When I see so much drek out there passing as films that will easily be forgotten and in bargain bins, all I have to do is watch Paperhouse and my faith in wondrous storytelling is renewed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the better comedies that has ever been on television. Season one was hilarious as were most of the following seasons. The only reason that I give this show a 9/10 is because of the unfortunate final season. The only good part of the final season was the finale. My favorite part of this show was the scenes that cut to people's imaginations, often depicting the characters in famous TV shows or movies from the 70's. It is a rare show in that i liked every character (with the exception of the final season...too late to try to develop a new character and fez wasn't nearly as funny). Red's foot in your ass comments never got old, nor did Kelso's stupidity. Bravo to fox for keeping such a good show so long, too long even. --------------------------------------------- Result 2399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know the stars, or modern Chinese teenage music - but I do know a thoroughly entertaining movie when I see one.

Kung Fu Dunk is pure Hollywood in its values - it's played for laughs, for love, and is a great blend of Kung Fu and basketball.

Everybody looks like they had a lot of fun making this - the production values are excellent - and modern China looks glossier than Los Angeles here.

The plot of the abandoned orphan who grows up in a kung fu school only to be kicked out and then discover superstardom as a basketball play (and love and more etc;) is great - this is fresh, fun, and immensely entertaining.

With great action and good dialogue this is one simply to enjoy - for all ages - and for our money was one of the best family movies we're seen in a long time.

Please ignore the negative reviews and give Dunk a chance - we were really glad we did - a GOOD sports comedy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As long as you go into this movie knowing that it's terrible: bad acting, bad "effects," bad story, bad... everything, then you'll love it. This is one of my favorite "goof on" movies; watch it as a comedy and have a dozen good laughs! --------------------------------------------- Result 2401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] On this 4th of [[July]] weekend it's heartening to see the [[spirit]] of the [[Declaration]] of Independence alive and well in the film "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers [[gave]] the back of their [[collective]] hand to King George III, this [[film]] exposes in [[hilarious]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[current]] [[crop]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the [[government]], to [[include]] privatizing [[war]] itself.

The cast in this [[satire]] absolutely [[shines]]. [[John]] Cusack is [[wonderful]] as a droll, conflicted corporate assassin, and the [[beautiful]] Marisa Tomei is [[superb]] as his love interest. (My [[gosh]], "[[George]] Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so [[attractive]]!) But it is John's [[sister]] Joan Cusack who really [[steals]] the [[film]]. Her [[portrayal]] of a bossy, [[yet]] [[simultaneously]] sycophantic, personal [[assistant]] is [[priceless]], and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the [[brilliance]] of her performance. She not only [[possesses]] [[fantastic]] [[comic]] [[timing]], her [[face]] is as expressive as one [[could]] ever [[wish]] for in an [[actor]]. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very [[effective]], cameo in the [[film]] as the [[head]] of the [[company]] which is [[running]] the [[war]], the Tamerlane [[Corporation]]. Sitting on a "throne" with his [[pants]] down around his ankles, Ackroyd even [[looks]] like the arse clown who [[currently]] [[occupies]] one of our [[real]] thrones of power. You won't have to think too [[hard]] to [[recognize]] that [[person]]. Much of this [[movie]] was [[filmed]] in [[Bulgaria]], which is why we are able to [[see]] so much [[real]] military equipment. (You just know that the [[US]] military [[would]] never have [[cooperated]] in [[making]] this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I [[especially]] [[enjoyed]] the [[character]] of "[[Omar]] Sharif" as [[played]] by the Bulgarian [[actor]] Lyubomir Neikov. [[In]] one scene in which he is on the dance [[floor]] with [[Marisa]] Tomei he has a [[couple]] of lines that could [[summarize]] our [[entire]] foreign [[policy]] [[attitude]] [[toward]] the foreign [[leaders]] we [[install]] - and uninstall - in power.

[[Naturally]], this [[film]] won't [[appeal]] to [[everyone]]. If you [[believe]] that the on-going [[privatization]] of our [[foreign]] [[policy]], the [[military]], intelligence [[collection]] and analysis, [[prisons]] and the corrections system, public [[health]], and a [[myriad]] of other [[government]] services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. On this 4th of [[June]] weekend it's heartening to see the [[esprit]] of the [[Statement]] of Independence alive and well in the film "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers [[supplied]] the back of their [[communal]] hand to King George III, this [[kino]] exposes in [[comic]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[underway]] [[crops]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the [[council]], to [[incorporate]] privatizing [[wars]] itself.

The cast in this [[sarcasm]] absolutely [[glows]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack is [[wondrous]] as a droll, conflicted corporate assassin, and the [[lovely]] Marisa Tomei is [[handsome]] as his love interest. (My [[jeez]], "[[Jorge]] Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so [[tempting]]!) But it is John's [[sisters]] Joan Cusack who really [[itches]] the [[flick]]. Her [[depiction]] of a bossy, [[again]] [[meanwhile]] sycophantic, personal [[assistants]] is [[precious]], and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the [[luster]] of her performance. She not only [[owns]] [[excellent]] [[comedian]] [[timetable]], her [[confront]] is as expressive as one [[would]] ever [[desire]] for in an [[protagonist]]. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very [[effectiveness]], cameo in the [[films]] as the [[leader]] of the [[corporations]] which is [[implementing]] the [[warfare]], the Tamerlane [[Companies]]. Sitting on a "throne" with his [[panties]] down around his ankles, Ackroyd even [[seem]] like the arse clown who [[presently]] [[occupied]] one of our [[actual]] thrones of power. You won't have to think too [[stiff]] to [[recognised]] that [[someone]]. Much of this [[flick]] was [[shot]] in [[Bulgarian]], which is why we are able to [[behold]] so much [[actual]] military equipment. (You just know that the [[USA]] military [[should]] never have [[cooperating]] in [[doing]] this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I [[mostly]] [[liked]] the [[trait]] of "[[Umar]] Sharif" as [[served]] by the Bulgarian [[actress]] Lyubomir Neikov. [[For]] one scene in which he is on the dance [[storey]] with [[Marissa]] Tomei he has a [[pair]] of lines that could [[summed]] our [[total]] foreign [[politics]] [[stance]] [[into]] the foreign [[chiefs]] we [[installing]] - and uninstall - in power.

[[Obviously]], this [[movies]] won't [[appealing]] to [[anyone]]. If you [[think]] that the on-going [[privatizing]] of our [[overseas]] [[politics]], the [[serviceman]], intelligence [[collate]] and analysis, [[prison]] and the corrections system, public [[hygiene]], and a [[multiple]] of other [[govt]] services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] Decent [[enough]] with some [[stylish]] imagery [[however]] the [[tiny]] budget [[hampers]] [[things]].

I [[also]] [[get]] the [[impression]] they were [[trying]] to [[shock]] you with some of the graphic weirdo [[perv]] website stuff.

if you [[like]] anime in [[particular]] stuff like cyber [[city]] and the [[AD]] [[police]] then this [[might]] up your street.

but [[basically]] its low budget matrix cash in however not [[totally]] devoid of its own [[style]].

[[Great]] soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/[[punk]]/post [[grunge]] bands. Worth [[checking]] out if only for the soundtrack. Decent [[adequate]] with some [[elegant]] imagery [[instead]] the [[little]] budget [[impeding]] [[items]].

I [[similarly]] [[gets]] the [[printing]] they were [[seek]] to [[shocked]] you with some of the graphic weirdo [[pervert]] website stuff.

if you [[fond]] anime in [[peculiar]] stuff like cyber [[ville]] and the [[ADVERTISEMENTS]] [[policeman]] then this [[apt]] up your street.

but [[largely]] its low budget matrix cash in however not [[fully]] devoid of its own [[styling]].

[[Resplendent]] soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/[[thug]]/post [[grungy]] bands. Worth [[controls]] out if only for the soundtrack. --------------------------------------------- Result 2403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I always tell people that "Enchanted April" is an adult movie with no cussing, no sex, and no violence. One might think of it as "the ultimate chick flick", but I bet there are one or two enlightened men out there who love it too. Don't invite the kids, though. This movie is very low-key.

Seeing "Enchanted April" is a very healing experience. The sound track and gorgeous scenery, along with the ladies' gentle manners, bring to mind the peace and beauty of a pre-Raphaelite painting.

Lest anyone think yours truly only watches one kind of movie, I will paraphrase a line I heard once on "Saturday Night Live" and say that my two favorite movies are "The Deer Hunter" and "Enchanted April". --------------------------------------------- Result 2404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] And I don't [[say]] it in a [[bad]] way.

I watched this movie at the [[cinema]] when I was 6 or 7. [[For]] me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the [[years]], I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even [[seeing]] a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I [[liked]] it that [[way]].

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. [[If]] I saw it today, I know I couldn't [[help]] but [[criticise]] MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a [[childhood]] [[memory]], so my [[feelings]] [[towards]] it are those of a [[child]] from 20 [[years]] ago.

I see my [[adult]] self [[intervenes]] in my rating and [[gives]] it an 8 for the [[memories]] and [[wonderful]] [[music]]. [[For]] that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is [[definitely]] [[worthy]] of a 10. And I don't [[said]] it in a [[unhealthy]] way.

I watched this movie at the [[theatre]] when I was 6 or 7. [[During]] me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the [[olds]], I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even [[see]] a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I [[enjoyed]] it that [[manner]].

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. [[Though]] I saw it today, I know I couldn't [[assisting]] but [[criticizing]] MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a [[preschool]] [[mem]], so my [[passions]] [[toward]] it are those of a [[children]] from 20 [[yrs]] ago.

I see my [[adults]] self [[interferes]] in my rating and [[offers]] it an 8 for the [[memorabilia]] and [[super]] [[musician]]. [[During]] that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is [[obviously]] [[creditable]] of a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Virile, but naive, big Joe Buck leaves his home in Big Spring, Texas, and hustles off to the Big Apple in search of women and big bucks. In NYC, JB meets up with frustration, and with "Ratso" Rizzo, a scruffy but cordial con artist. Somehow, this mismatched pair manage to survive each other which in turn helps both of them cope with a gritty, sometimes brutal, urban America, en route to a poignant ending.

Both funny and depressing, our "Midnight Cowboy" rides head-on into the vortex of cyclonic cultural change, and thus confirms to 1969 viewers that they, themselves, have been swept away from the 1950's age of innocence, and dropped, Dorothy and Toto like, into the 1960's Age of Aquarius.

The film's direction is masterful; the casting is perfect; the acting is top notch; the script is crisp and cogent; the cinematography is engaging; and the music enhances all of the above. Deservedly, it won the best picture Oscar of 1969, and I would vote it as one of the best films of that cyclonic decade. --------------------------------------------- Result 2406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Possible spoilers.

Although there was some good acting - particularly Chloe Sevigny, and Radha Mitchell in the comedy half - this simply was not an engaging film. The segues between the comedy part and the tragedy part were awkward or sometimes not obvious. This viewer was initially confused by the fact that the supporting cast differs in the two halves; I thought with the way things were laid out in the opening scene that the people surrounding Melinda would be the same people, just reacting differently (more of a "He Said, She Said" premise). However, what we have is two totally different stories and two totally different women, both of whom happen to be played by Radha Mitchell.

The two playwrights in the opening scene - the comedian and the tragedian - supposedly take the same premise and go from there, but the two stories are only tenuously related. They do little to support the topic of discussion, which is that almost anything can be looked at as either comedy or tragedy. Nice cast, but a disappointing film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2407 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I'm not sure if users [[ought]] to be allowed to [[review]] films after only sitting through half, but I'm [[afraid]] I just couldn't [[stand]] another minute.

If this abject [[excuse]] for a [[film]] doesn't have the late, great GP spinning like a wheel in his [[grave]], then I doubt anything will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[How]] dare a (second rate) [[director]] and writer attempt [[something]] to which they're so [[clearly]] [[incapable]] of [[delivering]]. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly [[executed]] slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? [[Check]]. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? [[Check]]. Embarrassingly written female characters? [[Double]] check. [[Total]] [[disregard]] for the [[story]] which you're trying to portray? [[Check]].

After a while, you realize that what you're [[watching]] is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with [[Knoxville]]. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with [[Knoxville]] which hasn't [[moved]] on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the [[last]] one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I [[decided]], after some [[consideration]], that [[watching]] this was like [[watching]] a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. [[Terrible]] jump cuts, [[awful]] camera [[work]], clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an [[Irishman]] who's most noteworthy recent work is a really [[lousy]] BBC Sunday night drama [[called]] Monarch of the [[Glen]] (trust me, it's [[lowest]] common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so [[critical]] that when some random guy from the [[TV]] decides to give acting a go, if he's not so [[bad]], he [[stinks]], we applaud his [[efforts]]? Knoxville [[JUST]] [[ABOUT]] manages to [[get]] through [[every]] scene. Poor [[Christina]] [[A]]. has no such luck. Her performance is a car [[crash]] (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. I'm not sure if users [[owe]] to be allowed to [[scrutinize]] films after only sitting through half, but I'm [[apprehensive]] I just couldn't [[standing]] another minute.

If this abject [[alibis]] for a [[filmmaking]] doesn't have the late, great GP spinning like a wheel in his [[tombs]], then I doubt anything will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[Mode]] dare a (second rate) [[superintendent]] and writer attempt [[algo]] to which they're so [[naturally]] [[unable]] of [[supplying]]. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly [[conducted]] slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? [[Checked]]. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? [[Verified]]. Embarrassingly written female characters? [[Dual]] check. [[Whole]] [[defiance]] for the [[tales]] which you're trying to portray? [[Verified]].

After a while, you realize that what you're [[staring]] is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with [[Chattanooga]]. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with [[Chattanooga]] which hasn't [[shifted]] on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the [[final]] one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I [[decides]], after some [[examining]], that [[staring]] this was like [[staring]] a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. [[Scary]] jump cuts, [[scary]] camera [[cooperation]], clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an [[Ier]] who's most noteworthy recent work is a really [[rotten]] BBC Sunday night drama [[drew]] Monarch of the [[Glenn]] (trust me, it's [[fewer]] common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so [[essential]] that when some random guy from the [[TELEVISION]] decides to give acting a go, if he's not so [[unhealthy]], he [[sucks]], we applaud his [[action]]? Knoxville [[ONLY]] [[AROUND]] manages to [[gets]] through [[each]] scene. Poor [[Cristina]] [[una]]. has no such luck. Her performance is a car [[accident]] (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2408 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] OK, it's very rare that I complain [[something]] I [[got]] for [[FREE]]. [[So]] I guess this [[movie]] pushed me over that [[limit]]. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disappointed]]. One [[audience]] member's question to the director about using the Native American references just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the [[movie]] better, basically says everything that this [[movie]] [[FAILED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American references felt really out of place and contrived. It's [[obvious]] that this [[director]] and writer tried tackling an arena they never played in before. They should have [[stuck]] to the [[old]] [[adage]] of "write about something you know". IF they are in [[fact]] versed in this it [[certainly]] did not show on the movie or the beauty of this [[unique]] [[culture]] was not [[given]] [[proper]] justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to [[see]] this film on the [[basis]] that it was an [[indie]]. So I held it to higher expectations. "[[Little]] [[Miss]] Sunshine" was an [[indie]] and saw it before it [[became]] so [[popular]]. [[Before]] it even [[came]] out to [[wide]] [[release]] I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. [[UNFORTUNATELY]] I could not say the same about "[[Expiration]] [[Date]]". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so [[clever]] at their approach that the [[outcome]] [[would]] take us to a [[different]] [[direction]] avoiding the [[trap]] of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already [[TRAPPED]] from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to [[say]] it, but the best and [[WORST]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "[[Little]] [[Miss]] Sunshine" being the best and this [[movie]] being the [[worst]]. I [[wish]] I [[could]] [[say]] otherwise.

But I do [[congratulate]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their [[family]] members at the cemetery. OK, it's very rare that I complain [[somethings]] I [[get]] for [[LIBRE]]. [[Hence]] I guess this [[filmmaking]] pushed me over that [[restrictions]]. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disappoint]]. One [[audiences]] member's question to the director about using the Native American references just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the [[filmmaking]] better, basically says everything that this [[filmmaking]] [[FAULTED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American references felt really out of place and contrived. It's [[observable]] that this [[headmaster]] and writer tried tackling an arena they never played in before. They should have [[trapped]] to the [[elderly]] [[proverb]] of "write about something you know". IF they are in [[facto]] versed in this it [[probably]] did not show on the movie or the beauty of this [[peculiar]] [[civilisations]] was not [[granted]] [[appropriate]] justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to [[seeing]] this film on the [[basics]] that it was an [[andy]]. So I held it to higher expectations. "[[Scant]] [[Mademoiselle]] Sunshine" was an [[andy]] and saw it before it [[was]] so [[folk]]. [[Ago]] it even [[became]] out to [[extensive]] [[freeing]] I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. [[SADLY]] I could not say the same about "[[Expires]] [[Dating]]". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so [[ingenious]] at their approach that the [[conclusions]] [[could]] take us to a [[disparate]] [[directions]] avoiding the [[traps]] of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already [[CORNERED]] from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to [[told]] it, but the best and [[PIRE]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "[[Scant]] [[Mademoiselle]] Sunshine" being the best and this [[kino]] being the [[hardest]]. I [[desire]] I [[did]] [[says]] otherwise.

But I do [[welcome]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their [[families]] members at the cemetery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As the story in my family goes, my dad, Milton Raskin, played the piano for the Dorsey band. After Sinatra joined the band, my dad practiced with him for hours on end. Then, at a point in time, my dad told Sinatra that he was actually to good to be tied up with such a small group (band), and that he should venture off on his own. By that time Sinatra had enough credits 'under his belt' to do just that! Dorsey never forgave my dad, and the rest, as they say, is history.

I have some pictures and records to that effect, and so does Berkley University in California.

I have seen just about every Sinatra movie more times than I wish to say, and his movies never get old . . . Thank you Frank --------------------------------------------- Result 2410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Contains [[spoilers]].

The British director J. Lee Thompson made some [[excellent]] films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more [[curious]] offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of [[rural]] Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, [[making]] Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no [[really]] [[outstanding]] acting performance in the [[film]]. There is also [[little]] in the way of [[coherent]] plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The [[main]] problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 Contains [[troublemakers]].

The British director J. Lee Thompson made some [[sumptuous]] films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more [[peculiar]] offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of [[agrarian]] Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, [[doing]] Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no [[truthfully]] [[phenomenal]] acting performance in the [[filmmaking]]. There is also [[small]] in the way of [[coherence]] plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The [[primary]] problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[caught]] Evening in the [[cinema]] with a [[lady]] [[friend]]. Evening is a chick [[flick]] with no [[apologies]] for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Except]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[watched]] with interest and did not have to turn away or roll my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[part]], will [[absolutely]] love this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as [[comfortably]] as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. [[While]] both of her daughters silently [[contemplate]] the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? [[Will]] we all [[realize]] that [[settling]] for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire [[Danes]] is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, [[though]] just 5' 5" in reality), and is [[absolutely]] [[captivating]] in one climactic scene where her [[singing]] talents are [[finally]] put to the [[test]].

You can't really talk [[trash]] about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close [[fill]] out the other [[major]] and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. I [[grabbed]] Evening in the [[film]] with a [[ladies]] [[boyfriend]]. Evening is a chick [[movie]] with no [[excuse]] for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Salvo]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[seen]] with interest and did not have to turn away or roll my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[parties]], will [[perfectly]] love this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as [[easily]] as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. [[Despite]] both of her daughters silently [[envisage]] the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? [[Willingness]] we all [[reaching]] that [[solved]] for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire [[Denmark]] is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, [[if]] just 5' 5" in reality), and is [[completely]] [[riveting]] in one climactic scene where her [[sung]] talents are [[eventually]] put to the [[tests]].

You can't really talk [[junk]] about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close [[filled]] out the other [[big]] and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I rated this film 7/10 which is an [[average]] of 8/10 for screenplay, [[direction]] and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[excellent]] at 8/10.Also I [[commend]] Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson ([[Alan]] [[Curtis]]) was just in [[view]] of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's [[alibi]].

I have this film on a "Suevia [[Film]] [[Noir]] [[Cine]] Negro" [[DVD]] in [[Spanish]] as "[[La]] Dama Desconocida" with the [[original]] soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative [[language]], since [[despite]] [[searching]] I [[could]] not [[find]] a [[wholly]] English version.I was [[however]] anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella [[performs]] another [[heroic]] role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses [[several]] suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a [[little]] hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for [[instance]], did not [[notice]] him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more [[suspense]] as these [[theatrical]] moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. I rated this film 7/10 which is an [[medium]] of 8/10 for screenplay, [[orientation]] and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[wondrous]] at 8/10.Also I [[praising]] Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson ([[Alain]] [[Curtiss]]) was just in [[views]] of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's [[pretence]].

I have this film on a "Suevia [[Kino]] [[Negro]] [[Cinema]] Negro" [[DVDS]] in [[Spaniard]] as "[[Angeles]] Dama Desconocida" with the [[preliminary]] soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative [[vocabulary]], since [[albeit]] [[researching]] I [[would]] not [[unearthed]] a [[perfectly]] English version.I was [[though]] anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella [[conducts]] another [[gutsy]] role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses [[different]] suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a [[petit]] hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for [[lawsuits]], did not [[advices]] him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more [[wait]] as these [[teatro]] moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[creativity]]. I'm sure the [[writers]] were on something other than oxygen when they [[wrote]] this one. Based on the previews, I thought that this would be a [[funny]] movie. But if you are not up on the [[latest]] stupid [[pop]] culture then you'll miss most of the [[silly]] humor in this [[movie]]. Why waste your [[time]]. You can sit on a [[log]] doing [[nothing]] and have more [[fun]] than this movie will [[provide]].

Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[imagination]]. I'm sure the [[screenwriters]] were on something other than oxygen when they [[texted]] this one. Based on the previews, I thought that this would be a [[hilarious]] movie. But if you are not up on the [[recent]] stupid [[papa]] culture then you'll miss most of the [[absurd]] humor in this [[filmmaking]]. Why waste your [[period]]. You can sit on a [[registers]] doing [[nada]] and have more [[droll]] than this movie will [[provides]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hams]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly [[awful]], and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully [[ridiculous]]. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hamas]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly [[gruesome]], and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully [[farcical]]. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2415 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] By no means a masterpiece, and far from Errol Flynn's best, Istanbul still has much going for it. The locations and beautiful technicolour cinematography, bring us back to a time long since past. Errol Flynn does show moments of his past glory, and is OK as Jim Brennan, a pilot who's past comes back to haunt him. The picture is actually a remake of 1947's "Singapore", and the story seems awfully contrived and cliche' by today's standards. Also many of the supporting cast seem to be simply "going through the motions" in this picture. Many people have also compared it to one of the all time greats, CASABLANCA. While watching the film, I could see many of the similarities, but hey, Casablanca has inspired countless imitators, so take that for what it's worth. In closing, if you are a fan of Flynn, or old fashioned love stories, you might want to give this film a look. Otherwise, I'd recommend Casablanca, or The Maltese Falcon, as a good introduction to some of Hollywood's classics.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[understand]] this [[film]] to be a [[debut]] feature and as such, it is very [[impressive]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and serve to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon [[deliver]] a story that has [[much]] more depth and lyricism than [[typical]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a story that needs [[Judd]] Hirsch caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the [[beautiful]] Susan [[Floyd]]. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was [[able]] to coax nuance out of the young [[actor]] in a role that could have been [[easily]] devalued by stereotype or overreach. [[Anyway]], I [[found]] the [[film]] [[refreshing]] and [[entertaining]]. I [[fathom]] this [[movies]] to be a [[premiere]] feature and as such, it is very [[wondrous]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and serve to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon [[delivering]] a story that has [[very]] more depth and lyricism than [[emblematic]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a story that needs [[Jude]] Hirsch caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the [[leggy]] Susan [[Freud]]. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was [[capable]] to coax nuance out of the young [[actress]] in a role that could have been [[conveniently]] devalued by stereotype or overreach. [[Anyhoo]], I [[find]] the [[kino]] [[freshen]] and [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Okay]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this [[show]] has no [[backbone]]!

Peter O'Toole as Ol' Colonel Cricket from The First War and now the emblazered Lord of the Manor.

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered Lady of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, equally as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant [[advice]] for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her [[best]] [[bit]] of [[advice]]: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I thought it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[world]]." Well, we can't [[say]] they didn't [[warn]] us.

Ah, Susan - [[time]] was, your [[character]] would have been [[running]] the [[whole]] show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

[[So]] - with a cast and setting like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead [[Revisited]]," right?

[[Wrong]]! They took these 1-dimensional [[supporting]] [[roles]] because they [[paid]] so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. [[Alright]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this [[exhibition]] has no [[mainstay]]!

Peter O'Toole as Ol' Colonel Cricket from The First War and now the emblazered Lord of the Manor.

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered Lady of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, equally as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant [[counseling]] for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her [[optimum]] [[bite]] of [[counsels]]: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I thought it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[monde]]." Well, we can't [[said]] they didn't [[warning]] us.

Ah, Susan - [[times]] was, your [[characteristics]] would have been [[execute]] the [[entire]] show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

[[Consequently]] - with a cast and setting like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead [[Scrutinized]]," right?

[[Awry]]! They took these 1-dimensional [[supportive]] [[functions]] because they [[salaried]] so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I downloaded this movie yesterday through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[expectations]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a [[villain]].I though at least actors like him [[would]] have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proved]] that [[nobody]] can [[compete]] AMJAD KHAN's [[magic]] Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[old]] one is a milestone in Indian [[cinema]] with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a [[hit]] with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's [[TALENTS]] [[ARE]] wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[worst]] actresses we have I don't [[know]] how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no [[excitement]] and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this [[movie]] It was a [[Total]] [[carnage]] of the original Sholay I downloaded this movie yesterday through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[prognosis]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a [[scoundrel]].I though at least actors like him [[should]] have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proven]] that [[anyone]] can [[competing]] AMJAD KHAN's [[wizardry]] Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[archaic]] one is a milestone in Indian [[filmmaking]] with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a [[struck]] with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's [[TALENT]] [[BE]] wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[meanest]] actresses we have I don't [[savoir]] how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no [[ferment]] and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this [[cinematography]] It was a [[Whole]] [[rampage]] of the original Sholay --------------------------------------------- Result 2419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Not as bad as some are making it out to be, [[though]] [[obviously]] [[pathetic]] compared to the [[original]]. In my opinion Amitabh was [[great]] as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to [[Gabbar]] in the [[original]] as they were [[clearly]] not [[going]] for the same [[effect]]. Other than some [[mediocre]] [[action]] scenes however, the [[rest]] of the film is [[flawed]]. [[Character]] development was poor and the development of the [[story]] was [[hopeless]], with many [[loopholes]], and [[missing]] [[pieces]] of [[information]] which i wouldn't have [[known]] if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[worst]] part of the [[movie]] was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this [[new]] [[dude]] [[called]] Prashant Raj. Nisha is just [[plain]] annoying from the time her [[lips]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this [[guy]]? where is he from and why on [[earth]] was he present in the [[film]] studio for anything other than to serve [[drinks]]?. His acting [[ability]] is zero and he has the same tone, [[dialog]] delivery and staunch [[expression]] in [[every]] scene, whether it be action, [[comedy]], or even a scene when [[someone]] has just [[died]]. Ajay Devgan was average, at least his [[expressions]] [[changed]] which is more than i can [[say]] for his [[mistake]] of a companion. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and [[also]] a very sexy Urmilla Matondkar in a [[special]] [[appearance]]. Not as bad as some are making it out to be, [[although]] [[clearly]] [[pitiable]] compared to the [[initial]]. In my opinion Amitabh was [[resplendent]] as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to [[Jabbar]] in the [[initial]] as they were [[definitely]] not [[go]] for the same [[effects]]. Other than some [[lackluster]] [[measures]] scenes however, the [[resting]] of the film is [[misguided]]. [[Personages]] development was poor and the development of the [[storytelling]] was [[incorrigible]], with many [[foibles]], and [[gone]] [[segments]] of [[info]] which i wouldn't have [[renowned]] if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[hardest]] part of the [[filmmaking]] was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this [[nuevo]] [[man]] [[drew]] Prashant Raj. Nisha is just [[lowland]] annoying from the time her [[lip]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this [[buddy]]? where is he from and why on [[tierra]] was he present in the [[filmmaking]] studio for anything other than to serve [[beverage]]?. His acting [[proficiency]] is zero and he has the same tone, [[dialogue]] delivery and staunch [[expressions]] in [[all]] scene, whether it be action, [[humour]], or even a scene when [[person]] has just [[decease]]. Ajay Devgan was average, at least his [[phrase]] [[modifying]] which is more than i can [[says]] for his [[wrong]] of a companion. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and [[further]] a very sexy Urmilla Matondkar in a [[especial]] [[apparition]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Whether it's three [[guys]] in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a [[dude]] bound in twine or a [[girl]] saying "What up, [[dog]]?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Jones]]. It is strange and [[surreal]] and not [[altogether]] a [[completely]] [[comprehensible]] yarn... [[yet]] it never [[loses]] you. The [[first]] time I [[saw]] it, I [[nearly]] laughed myself sick. And every [[night]] after I would come [[home]] and watch it again. [[Forget]] [[Coyote]] [[Ugly]]... this is the movie that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[late]]! Whether it's three [[guy]] in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a [[bloke]] bound in twine or a [[women]] saying "What up, [[hound]]?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Jonesy]]. It is strange and [[unreal]] and not [[quite]] a [[altogether]] [[readable]] yarn... [[even]] it never [[forfeits]] you. The [[outset]] time I [[watched]] it, I [[approximately]] laughed myself sick. And every [[soir]] after I would come [[dwelling]] and watch it again. [[Forgotten]] [[Smuggler]] [[Horrible]]... this is the movie that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[tard]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In "Anne of Green Gables" (1934), Marilla Cuthbert (Helen Westley) and Matthew Cuthbert (O.P. Heggie), middle-aged siblings who live together at Green Gables, a farm in Avonlea, on Prince Edward Island, decide to adopt a boy from distant orphanage to help on their farm. But the orphan sent to them is a precocious girl of 14 named Anne Shirley (Dawn Evelyn Paris-a veteran of Disney's series of "Alice" shorts who later would adopt her character's name).

Anne was only 11 in Lucy Maude Montgomery's source novel but the same actress could not credibly go from 11 to college age during the course of the story. The movie suffers somewhat from this concession, as many of Anne's reactions and much of what she says are more entertaining coming from an eleven-year-old that from a teenager. As in the book, Anne is bright and quick, eager to please but dissatisfied with her name, her build, her freckles, and her long red hair. Being a child of imagination, however, Anne takes much joy in life, and adapts quickly to her new family and the environment of Prince Edward Island.

In fact Anne is the original "Teenage Drama Queen" and the film's screenwriter elected to focus on this aspect of her character. Which transformed the basic genre from mildly amusing family drama to comedy. A change that delighted audiences and that continues to frustrate reader purists.

Since the comedy is very much in the spirit of the Montgomery's story I can see no reason to take issue with the changes, but let this serve as fair warning to anyone expecting a totally faithful adaptation. The comedy element is the strength of the film as it is one of the earliest self-reflexive parodies of Hollywood conventions. The actress Anne Shirley was one of Hollywood's all- time beauties and the film is in black and white. So much of the amusement is in seeing the title character's endless laments about her appearance and hair color contradicted by what is appearing on the screen. Anne regularly regales her no nonsense rural companions with melodramatic lines like: "If you refuse it will be a lifelong sorrow to me". Perhaps the funniest moment is when she corrects the spelling of her name on the classroom blackboard.

Tom Brown does a nice job as Anne's love interest Gilbert Blythe and Sara Haden steals all the scenes in which she appears as the Cuthbert's pompous neighbor.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child. --------------------------------------------- Result 2422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] some people think that the [[second]] series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[win]] my [[opinion]],as a very good chrecter.i looked at a [[poll]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second series was scoobys downfall.OK so loads [[said]] [[yes]] but 28%[[still]] [[cant]] be [[wrong]].I do like the [[way]] most of the [[episodes]] focused on [[comedy]].i [[believe]] the [[show]] [[would]] have [[gone]] rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[dog]] solving mystery in same formula.[[scrappy]] was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very [[funny]].i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[superb]] [[series]] that gave a beginning to tire [[show]] a new formula and lease of [[life]].Nuff [[said]]. some people think that the [[secondly]] series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[earning]] my [[vista]],as a very good chrecter.i looked at a [[voting]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second series was scoobys downfall.OK so loads [[say]] [[yea]] but 28%[[however]] [[dunno]] be [[amiss]].I do like the [[camino]] most of the [[spells]] focused on [[parody]].i [[think]] the [[showings]] [[should]] have [[faded]] rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[pooch]] solving mystery in same formula.[[combative]] was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very [[humorous]].i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[wondrous]] [[serial]] that gave a beginning to tire [[demonstrate]] a new formula and lease of [[iife]].Nuff [[avowed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] As has been [[noted]], this [[formula]] has been [[filmed]] several times, most recently as "You've [[Got]] Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"[[Trout]] Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[least]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars [[charisma]], which doesn't quite cut it here.

The [[chemistry]] betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[real]] [[sparks]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leads]] are boring the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] can only follow. Judy in particular is [[disappointing]]. She [[looks]] like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks like a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was [[getting]] so hot about. I [[would]] have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great [[either]]. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood [[leading]] man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[image]] here.

If you're a fan of the stars or the early 1900's then you [[might]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining [[romantic]] comedies out there, and they [[offer]] you much more than a [[mouthful]] of [[stale]] confection. As has been [[commented]], this [[formulas]] has been [[videotaped]] several times, most recently as "You've [[Ai]] Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"[[Fontaine]] Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[lowest]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars [[charm]], which doesn't quite cut it here.

The [[chemical]] betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[actual]] [[ignites]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leeds]] are boring the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] can only follow. Judy in particular is [[depressing]]. She [[seems]] like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks like a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was [[obtain]] so hot about. I [[ought]] have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great [[nor]]. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood [[culminating]] man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[photographs]] here.

If you're a fan of the stars or the early 1900's then you [[apt]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining [[sentimental]] comedies out there, and they [[furnishes]] you much more than a [[bitten]] of [[archaic]] confection. --------------------------------------------- Result 2424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a Turkish man now living in Sweden I must confess I often watch Scandinavian movies. Most if them I never understand. I think actors from Scandinavia work best in Hollywood. Last week I watched a film called "The Polish Wedding" together with a polish friend of mine and we both said it was the worst movie we ever watched. Unfortunately I was wrong this movie " House of Angels" is even worse. None of the actors can act, absolutely not the female so called star Helen Bergstrom. The plot is so silly nobody can believe it.I think the whole thing is a mess from the start. lots of bad acting except from Selldal and Wollter. Ahmed Sellam --------------------------------------------- Result 2425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd [[shows]] much [[fatigue]] trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.

Instead, "Doctor Detroit" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?

It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.

One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see "The Blues Brothers". You want bad, see "Doctor Detroit". His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd [[demonstrating]] much [[weary]] trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.

Instead, "Doctor Detroit" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?

It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.

One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see "The Blues Brothers". You want bad, see "Doctor Detroit". --------------------------------------------- Result 2426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] First off, I have to say that I loved the [[book]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie [[would]] be [[beneficial]]. The movie was so [[disappointing]] to me. The movie cuts out some [[characters]], and misses a lot of the main points of the [[book]]. It [[skips]] around a lot, and doesn't explain [[anything]] in [[detail]]. If [[someone]] was [[watching]] this [[movie]] without having first read the book, they [[would]] be confused. The most [[disappointing]] thing in this movie to me, was the [[ending]]. The ending in the book was the most [[powerful]], and in the [[movie]], they [[changed]] it! It was supposed to be the [[pigs]] and [[men]] in an alliance and [[sort]] of "[[melting]]" [[together]], but [[instead]], the [[movie]] [[made]] it [[seem]] [[like]] the [[animals]] were [[going]] to [[rebel]] against the [[pigs]]. To [[sum]] up, I don't [[think]] that this [[movie]] [[captured]] the [[real]] [[meaning]] that Orwell portrayed in his [[book]]. First off, I have to say that I loved the [[ledger]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie [[could]] be [[affirmative]]. The movie was so [[depressing]] to me. The movie cuts out some [[hallmarks]], and misses a lot of the main points of the [[books]]. It [[salta]] around a lot, and doesn't explain [[nada]] in [[particulars]]. If [[everybody]] was [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] without having first read the book, they [[should]] be confused. The most [[depressing]] thing in this movie to me, was the [[ended]]. The ending in the book was the most [[emphatic]], and in the [[flick]], they [[alter]] it! It was supposed to be the [[hogg]] and [[man]] in an alliance and [[sorting]] of "[[thawing]]" [[jointly]], but [[conversely]], the [[film]] [[introduced]] it [[seems]] [[iike]] the [[animal]] were [[go]] to [[revolutionaries]] against the [[pig]]. To [[somme]] up, I don't [[reckon]] that this [[filmmaking]] [[captures]] the [[veritable]] [[mean]] that Orwell portrayed in his [[ledger]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of Disney's best films that I can enjoy watching often. you may easily guess the outcome, but who cares? its just plain fun escape for 1 hour forty-two minutes. and after all wasn't movies meant to get away from reality for just a short time anyway? The cast sparkles with delight. -magictrain --------------------------------------------- Result 2428 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] This [[film]] has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad [[yarn]], and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second unit stuff is [[endless]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very [[good]] indeed as a sophisticated [[Egyptian]]. He should [[take]] it up as a sideline. The [[film]] is essentially [[ruined]] by one of the world's most [[irritating]] [[actresses]], Lesley [[Anne]] Down, who plays the lead. She [[spends]] the whole [[film]] [[wondering]] how she [[looks]], are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the [[fellas]] [[lust]] after her, etc. Having [[started]] [[life]] as a [[model]] at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most [[revolting]] about [[female]] [[vanity]] and dim-witted inanity. And to [[think]] that this [[film]] was [[directed]] by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He [[allows]] this [[terrible]] [[actress]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom [[eyes]], it [[matters]] not. She is supposed to be a [[young]] Egyptologist. But she has never been to [[Egypt]] before! She [[takes]] a [[taxi]] to Giza and [[catching]] her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' [[Barf]]! [[OK]], so that was the script, but she takes to the [[banality]] too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a [[serious]] problem about a black market in [[antiquities]] there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was [[fun]] to [[see]] the name of Cyril Swern as [[sound]] recordist on the [[film]], as I [[knew]] him [[pretty]] well long [[ago]]. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is [[described]] as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That [[would]] not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. This [[filmmaking]] has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad [[fil]], and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second unit stuff is [[inexhaustible]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very [[buena]] indeed as a sophisticated [[Cairo]]. He should [[taking]] it up as a sideline. The [[filmmaking]] is essentially [[devastated]] by one of the world's most [[irksome]] [[actors]], Lesley [[Anna]] Down, who plays the lead. She [[spent]] the whole [[filmmaking]] [[asked]] how she [[seem]], are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the [[grooms]] [[craving]] after her, etc. Having [[initiating]] [[lives]] as a [[modelling]] at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most [[sickening]] about [[girl]] [[courtesy]] and dim-witted inanity. And to [[ideas]] that this [[filmmaking]] was [[aimed]] by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He [[permitting]] this [[scary]] [[actor]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom [[eye]], it [[topics]] not. She is supposed to be a [[youthful]] Egyptologist. But she has never been to [[Cairo]] before! She [[pick]] a [[cab]] to Giza and [[captures]] her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' [[Yuck]]! [[ALRIGHT]], so that was the script, but she takes to the [[triviality]] too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a [[grievous]] problem about a black market in [[antiques]] there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was [[droll]] to [[behold]] the name of Cyril Swern as [[audible]] recordist on the [[kino]], as I [[knowed]] him [[belle]] well long [[previously]]. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is [[outlining]] as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That [[could]] not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I rented this [[movie]], [[thinking]] it [[looked]] like a [[wonderfully]] [[delightful]] historical piece. What I got was a [[piece]] of [[pure]] [[garbage]]. This movie was [[confusing]] in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and [[dreadful]] in all spots. Mira Sorvino's [[portrayal]] of a queen playing a young male [[scholar]] was [[depressing]] at best. [[Ben]] Kingsley should have been [[stripped]] of his knighthood for [[even]] [[considering]] this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely [[stick]] to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more [[entertaining]] than this thing they [[call]] a [[play]] within a [[movie]].

The [[cinematography]] [[looks]] like some [[college]] kid [[took]] a [[class]] in [[Cinematography]] 101 and failed [[miserably]]. Almost every scene in the [[movie]] is [[chopped]] up for some [[sort]] of effect; the end [[result]] of course being the cheesiest [[bit]] of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was [[almost]] good as Agis; too bad he had such a [[bad]] script to [[work]] with. Rachael Stirling [[gives]] her [[best]] effort as the almost gullible [[lady]] in waiting. [[In]] the end, I really wish [[Blockbuster]] [[Video]] [[gave]] refunds. I'm so [[glad]] I didn't [[spend]] 10 bucks [[watching]] this [[fiasco]] in the [[theater]]. If they've been [[performing]] this Marivaux play [[since]] the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the [[ages]] have had their [[best]] naps during this [[work]]. [[If]] I had been there, they wouldn't have [[hear]] the [[play]] over the snoring. [[Thank]] goodness for the [[modern]] convenience of [[DVD]] players; you can [[skip]] past the [[boring]] or [[awful]] scenes. Guess that [[means]] I only [[watched]] the [[beginning]] and the [[end]]! I rented this [[film]], [[think]] it [[seemed]] like a [[terrifically]] [[nice]] historical piece. What I got was a [[slice]] of [[pur]] [[trash]]. This movie was [[disconcerting]] in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and [[shocking]] in all spots. Mira Sorvino's [[portrait]] of a queen playing a young male [[researcher]] was [[somber]] at best. [[Ibn]] Kingsley should have been [[deprived]] of his knighthood for [[yet]] [[reviewing]] this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely [[wand]] to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more [[amusing]] than this thing they [[invitation]] a [[playing]] within a [[movies]].

The [[movie]] [[seems]] like some [[campus]] kid [[taken]] a [[classes]] in [[Cinematographic]] 101 and failed [[spectacularly]]. Almost every scene in the [[filmmaking]] is [[cutting]] up for some [[kinds]] of effect; the end [[results]] of course being the cheesiest [[bite]] of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was [[virtually]] good as Agis; too bad he had such a [[negative]] script to [[collaborated]] with. Rachael Stirling [[donne]] her [[optimum]] effort as the almost gullible [[ladies]] in waiting. [[Among]] the end, I really wish [[Blockbusters]] [[Videos]] [[yielded]] refunds. I'm so [[pleased]] I didn't [[expended]] 10 bucks [[staring]] this [[bust]] in the [[teatro]]. If they've been [[perform]] this Marivaux play [[because]] the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the [[years]] have had their [[optimum]] naps during this [[cooperation]]. [[Though]] I had been there, they wouldn't have [[overheard]] the [[playing]] over the snoring. [[Thanks]] goodness for the [[trendy]] convenience of [[DVDS]] players; you can [[jumping]] past the [[dull]] or [[scary]] scenes. Guess that [[modes]] I only [[seen]] the [[initiation]] and the [[ceases]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Utter dreck. I got to the 16 minute/27 second point, and gave up. I'd have given it a negative number review if that were possible (although 'pissible' is a more fitting word...). Unlike the sizzle you could see and practically feel between MacMurray and Stanwyck in the original, the chemistry between dumb ol' Dicky Crenna and whats-her-face here is just non-existent. The anklet becomes an unattractive chunky bracelet? There's no ciggy-lighting-by-fingertip? And I thought I'd be SICK when they have a mortified-looking (and rightly so, believe you me) Lee J. Cobb as Keyes practically burping/upchucking his way through the explanation of his "Little Man" to Mr. Garloupis. No offence to the non-sighted, but it looks as though a posse of blind men ran amuck with the set design of both the Dietrichson and Neff houses. The same goes for those horrid plaid pants that Phyllis wears. And crikey, how much $$ does Neff make, that he lives overlooking a huge marina? This, folks, again, all takes place in the first 16 and a half minutes. If you can get through more of it, you have a much stronger constitution than me, or you are a masochist. But please, take some Alka-Seltzer first, or you WILL develop a "little man" of your own that may never go away. Proceed with caution, obviously. --------------------------------------------- Result 2431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Four [[stories]] written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a [[beautiful]], old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some [[spooky]] moments and the twist at the end was good. The second has [[Peter]] Cushing becoming [[obsessed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary ending ([[although]] the ending in the story was MUCH [[worse]]). The [[last]] is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the [[scenery]]) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee [[playing]] Dracula.

This is a good [[horror]] anthology--nothing [[terrifying]] but the first one and the ending of the third [[gave]] me a few [[pleasurable]] little [[chills]]. [[Also]] the fourth one is actually very [[funny]] and [[Pitt]] makes a [[VERY]] [[sexy]] [[vampire]]! [[Also]] the [[house]] itself [[looks]] [[beautiful]]...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and [[unusual]] [[movie]] score too. [[All]] in all a good [[little]] [[horror]] anthology well worth [[seeking]] out. [[Try]] to [[see]] it on DVD--the Lions [[Gate]] one [[looks]] [[fantastic]] with [[strong]] [[colors]] and [[great]] sound. Four [[narratives]] written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a [[wondrous]], old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some [[grisly]] moments and the twist at the end was good. The second has [[Peters]] Cushing becoming [[oversexed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary ending ([[albeit]] the ending in the story was MUCH [[lousiest]]). The [[final]] is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the [[landscaping]]) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee [[play]] Dracula.

This is a good [[abomination]] anthology--nothing [[awful]] but the first one and the ending of the third [[supplied]] me a few [[enjoyable]] little [[shivers]]. [[Moreover]] the fourth one is actually very [[droll]] and [[Beit]] makes a [[QUITE]] [[hot]] [[vampires]]! [[Similarly]] the [[households]] itself [[seems]] [[awesome]]...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and [[strange]] [[movies]] score too. [[Every]] in all a good [[tiny]] [[terror]] anthology well worth [[searching]] out. [[Endeavour]] to [[seeing]] it on DVD--the Lions [[Porte]] one [[seems]] [[admirable]] with [[forceful]] [[colouring]] and [[wondrous]] sound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2432 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Carlito [[Way]], the original is a [[brilliant]] [[story]] about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to [[leave]] his criminal [[past]] and so he [[invests]] in a club and the [[deals]] with the [[trouble]] that [[comes]] with it.

This [[film]] was....

I [[saw]] the [[trailer]] and knew instantly it was going to be bad..But after dismissing [[films]] in the [[past]] and finding out they were [[great]]( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo [[Drift]])...I gave this a [[shot]] and it [[failed]] [[within]] the first five minutes...

The [[script]] is something a [[teenager]] would [[come]] up with if [[given]] five minutes to [[prepare]]...It was weak, with [[weaker]] [[dialogue]]. It seems there is an [[instant]] [[need]] for romance in a gangster [[movie]]. So Brigante decides to [[beat]] a [[guy]] up for the girl....and she say's 'Yes!' And if you [[need]] to [[act]] bad just throw racism [[around]]...As we [[learn]] from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was [[terrible]] to say the least...I [[found]] 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I [[absolutely]] [[hate]] all these musicians [[turning]] to movies. Lets face it the only [[reason]] P [[Diddy]] did this [[movie]] was so he could play a [[gangsters]]...The [[actress]] who plays [[Leticia]] was weak but beautiful. The [[sex]] scene was weak but we got to see her..which was [[okay]]...

But overall I [[expected]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the [[horrendous]] movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. Carlito [[Route]], the original is a [[terrific]] [[saga]] about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to [[walkout]] his criminal [[preceding]] and so he [[invested]] in a club and the [[treats]] with the [[problems]] that [[occurs]] with it.

This [[filmmaking]] was....

I [[noticed]] the [[trailers]] and knew instantly it was going to be bad..But after dismissing [[filmmaking]] in the [[preceding]] and finding out they were [[large]]( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo [[Drifting]])...I gave this a [[offed]] and it [[faulted]] [[inside]] the first five minutes...

The [[hyphen]] is something a [[adolescents]] would [[coming]] up with if [[gave]] five minutes to [[formulate]]...It was weak, with [[lowest]] [[dialogues]]. It seems there is an [[snaps]] [[necessity]] for romance in a gangster [[film]]. So Brigante decides to [[beats]] a [[pal]] up for the girl....and she say's 'Yes!' And if you [[needs]] to [[acts]] bad just throw racism [[almost]]...As we [[learned]] from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was [[horrific]] to say the least...I [[detected]] 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I [[perfectly]] [[hatred]] all these musicians [[turn]] to movies. Lets face it the only [[cause]] P [[Didi]] did this [[filmmaking]] was so he could play a [[bandits]]...The [[actor]] who plays [[Letitia]] was weak but beautiful. The [[sexuality]] scene was weak but we got to see her..which was [[allright]]...

But overall I [[predicted]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the [[abysmal]] movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Disney might just be on to something here. First, they had "Remember the Titans" with Denzel, a story based on truth involving sports and a small town in middle America. Now, with Quaid and The Rookie... yet another sports story based on truth.

Both movies move you to tears at times, and both make you smile and feel all warm after seeing them. My wife and I took in The Rookie and we expected it to be a great feel good type movie. We were not let down, when asked if we'd be buying this on DVD when it comes out, it was a no-brainer. Most definately. --------------------------------------------- Result 2434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just finished watching American Pie: Beta House and I gotta say, this was such a garbage pile of crap. The first 3 American Pies were hilarious, the last 3 were a joke and should not have been called American Pie.

As you figured out from the title of the movie, Beta House, is about a fraternity, freshmen, girls and, the most original part of them all, falling in love. Of course, the guy that has his way with the chicks is Stifler, who, along with his mates, tries to complete another apparently impossible task. It was unrealistic and super fake. Its just really predictable and the plot is so weak. Both sides of the college battle to see who gets the whole thing (something like that) To sum it up: awful acting + dull script + wrong use of the American Pie franchise = total waste of time! This movie is unbearable. I give it a two out of ten, although most of it sucked there were lots of nudity and pretty girls, like 2 funny scenes :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is [[perhaps]] one of the [[finest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is [[conceivably]] one of the [[meanest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, [[supposedly]] to go to Saturn, but [[really]] only to some stock footage of solar flares, and then he gets a nose bleed, and before you know it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged head to [[foot]], and then an overweight nurse with an ill-fitting uniform comes in and gets [[eaten]] by the guy, whose supposed to be melting all over the place but never seems to lose any mass, and then NASA, or at least one guy at NASA, gets upset about it and calls one other guy in to hunt him down, but the guy they sent to hunt the melting [[guy]] has to go home and have soup first, and his oddly-shaped wife forgot the crackers, so he can't have crackers, and then he has to go out and look for the [[melting]] guy with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[really]] [[work]], so he really only follows the trail of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[old]] people in a lemon grove, and a women with a meat cleaver, and some kind of industrial plant with trigger-happy security guards, and since I can't tell you how the movies ends, all I can say is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some guy with the [[stupid]] [[name]] of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this movie died a [[hideous]], [[violent]] death and was [[unable]] to [[make]] more [[movies]], and the world [[lived]] [[HAPPILY]] EVER [[AFTER]] - THE END! Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, [[presumably]] to go to Saturn, but [[genuinely]] only to some stock footage of solar flares, and then he gets a nose bleed, and before you know it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged head to [[feet]], and then an overweight nurse with an ill-fitting uniform comes in and gets [[eat]] by the guy, whose supposed to be melting all over the place but never seems to lose any mass, and then NASA, or at least one guy at NASA, gets upset about it and calls one other guy in to hunt him down, but the guy they sent to hunt the melting [[buddy]] has to go home and have soup first, and his oddly-shaped wife forgot the crackers, so he can't have crackers, and then he has to go out and look for the [[fusion]] guy with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[truly]] [[cooperate]], so he really only follows the trail of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[elderly]] people in a lemon grove, and a women with a meat cleaver, and some kind of industrial plant with trigger-happy security guards, and since I can't tell you how the movies ends, all I can say is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some guy with the [[dumb]] [[behalf]] of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this movie died a [[gruesome]], [[ferocious]] death and was [[impossible]] to [[deliver]] more [[filmmaking]], and the world [[resided]] [[JOYFULLY]] EVER [[SUBSEQUENTLY]] - THE END! --------------------------------------------- Result 2437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wealthy psychiatrist Lindsay Crouse has just published her first novel and is feeling down about her profession feeling that it's hopeless to help her patients. A young gambling junkie client asks her to help him pay off his debts if he truly wants to help him get better. Here she gets involved with Joe Mantegna. To reveal any more of the plot would spoil one hell of a fun movie and 'House of Games' may very well be the best con movie I've seen. David Mamet wrote and directed this gem that's full of snappy dialogue, great one-liners, and enough twists to keep you guessing til the end. Crouse is perfect as the uptight psychiatrist needing a change and Mantegna tops her as the devilishly sly con-man. And with the exception of a coincidence in the last quarter of the movie, the film is in utter control of it's audience; and we are loving the con.

*** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Hey Babu Riba" is a film about a young woman, Mariana (nicknamed "Esther" after a famous American movie star), and four young men, Glenn, Sacha, Kicha, and Pop, all perhaps 15-17 years old in 1953 Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The five are committed friends and crazy about jazz, blue jeans, or anything American it seems.

The very close relationship of the teenagers is poignant, and ultimately a sacrifice is willingly made to try to help one of the group who has fallen on unexpected difficulties. In the wake of changing communist politics, they go their separate ways and reunite in 1985 (the year before the film was made).

I enjoyed the film with some reservations. The subtitles for one thing were difficult. Especially in the beginning, there were a number of dialogues which had no subtitles at all. Perhaps the conversational pace required it, but I couldn't always both read the text and absorb the scene, which caused me to not always understand which character was involved. I watched the movie (a video from our public library) with a friend, and neither of us really understood part of the story about acquiring streptomycin for a sick relative.

This Yugoslavian coming of age film effectively conveyed the teenagers' sense of invulnerability, idealism, and strong and loyal bonds to each other. There is a main flashforward, and it was intriguing, keeping me guessing until the end as to who these characters were vis-a-vis the 1953 cast, and what had actually happened.

I would rate it 7 out of 10, and would like to see other films by the director, Jovan Acin (1941-1991). --------------------------------------------- Result 2439 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked ZB1. Really, I did. I have no problem with extremely low-budget movies, and I have enjoyed movies with worse production values than ZB3 (if you can imagine such a thing. check out 'wiseguys vs. zombies,' if you're interested). Indeed, I prefer lower budget zombie films, because I am suspicious that Hollywood directors do not understand what zombies are 'about.'

But ZB3 was just so bad. It was retarded. I don't want to bother being dignified in my criticism. I want my 90 minutes back, etc. Except that it really only took ~80 minutes, because partway through I put it into 1.4X fast forward.

Okay, here's some criticism.

1. The pacing was TERRIBLE. Everyone talked in monologues. Even when someone just had a single line, the camera work and the editing and the insertion of a bunch of F-bombs into every sentence made the line FEEL like a monologue. At first I was excited about the 90 minute running time compared to ZB1's 70 minutes, but there were actually fewer 'events' in ZB3. It's all talking.

2. The gore effects got stupider. Just glop rubbed around on people's tummies.

3. Despite the epic exposition, there really wasn't a plot. And the exposition is indeed epic! I won't spoil it, if you're going to watch it. (Don't watch it.) But then, it's just a bunch of lame characters walking around and bickering for ~80 minutes. or fewer, if you so choose. --------------------------------------------- Result 2440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is one of the oddest films of the Zatôichi series due to its very [[unusual]] pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, instead of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in [[charge]] of making the films. This could easily explain why this film seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[films]]. As far as Ichi's role, the film is very different because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's also easy to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is [[totally]] taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. This is one of the oddest films of the Zatôichi series due to its very [[strange]] pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, instead of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in [[burdens]] of making the films. This could easily explain why this film seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[cinematography]]. As far as Ichi's role, the film is very different because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's also easy to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is [[downright]] taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2441 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Invisible Maniac starts as a young Kevin Dornwinkle (Kris Russell) is caught by his strict mother (Marilyn Adams) watching a girl (Tracy Walker) strip through his telescope... Cut to 'Twenty Years Later' & Kevin Dornwinkle (Noel Peters) is now a physics professor who claims to have discovered a way to turn things invisible using a 'mollecular reconstruction' serum. However during a demonstration in front of his fellow scientists it fails & they all laugh at him, Dornwinkle goes mad kills a few of them & is locked away in a mental institute from which he escapes. Jump forward 'Two Weeks Later' & a group of summer college students discuss the tragic death of their physics teacher when the headmistress Mrs. Cello (Stephanie Blake as Stella Blalack) says that she has hired a replacement, yes you've guessed it it's Dornwinkle. The student don't take to him & treat him like dirt, however Dornwinkle has perfected his invisibility serum & uses it to satisfy his perverted sexual urges & his desire for revenge...

Co-written & directed by Adam Rifkin wisely hiding under the pseudonym Rif Coogan (I wouldn't want my name to be associated with this turd of a film either) The Invisible Maniac is real bottom of the barrel stuff. The script by Rifkin, sorry Coogan & Tony Markes is awful. It tries to be a teenage sex/comedy/horror hybrid that just fails in every department. For a start the sex is nothing more than a few female shower scenes & a few boob shots, not much else I'm afraid & the birds in The Invisible Maniac aren't even that good looking. The comedy is lame & every joke misses by the proverbial mile, this is the kind of film that thinks someone fighting an invisible man or having Henry (Jason Logan) a mute man trying to make a phone call is funny. The Invisible Maniac makes the Police Academy (1984 - 1994) series of films look like the pinnacle of sophistication! As for the horror aspect that too is lame. It's also an incredibly slow (it takes over half an hour before Dornwinkles even becomes invisible), dull, predictable, boring & has highly annoying & unlikable teenage character's.

Director Rifkin or Coogan or whatever does absolutely nothing to try & make The Invisible Maniac an even slightly enjoyable experience. There's no scares, tension or atmosphere & as a whole the film is a real chore to sit through. He does nothing with the invisibility angle, just a few doors opening on their own is as adventurous as it gets. There is very little gore or violence, a bit of splashing blood, a few strangulations & the only decent bit in the whole film when someone has their head blown off with a shotgun, unfortunately he was invisible at the time & we only get to see the headless torso afterwards.

The budget must have been low, & I mean really low because this is one seriously cheap looking film. Dornwinkles laboratory is basically two jars on his bedside cabinet! When he escapes from the mental institution he has all of one dog sent after him & the entire school has about a dozen pupils & two teachers. The Invisible Maniac is a poorly made film throughout it's 85 minute duration, I spotted the boom mike on at least one occasion... Lets just say the acting is of a low standard & leave it at that.

The Invisible Maniac is crap, plain & simple. I found no redeeming features in it at all, there are so many more better films out there you can watch so there is no reason whatsoever to waste your time on this rubbish. Definitely one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had [[lost]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie [[Main]] Prem Ki Deewani [[hoon]], then a year back now I [[saw]] [[promos]] for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't [[want]] to waste my hard [[earned]] money watching it in [[cinema]]. When the [[film]] [[first]] came out on DVD I rented it and [[watched]] and I [[loved]] the [[movie]] and [[took]] back my [[words]] for Sooraj. I just finished [[watching]] it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to [[review]] this [[movie]]. Sooraj [[R]]. BarjatyaGot it right this [[time]], okay I was not a [[huge]] [[fan]] of [[Hum]] App Ke [[Hai]] Kaun. But I have [[always]] loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best [[work]]. I [[hardly]] ever [[cry]] in a movie but this [[movie]] made me feel like [[crying]]. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much [[underrated]] movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid [[Kapoor]] and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! I had [[forfeited]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie [[Principal]] Prem Ki Deewani [[xun]], then a year back now I [[noticed]] [[promotions]] for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't [[wanted]] to waste my hard [[obtained]] money watching it in [[theaters]]. When the [[cinema]] [[firstly]] came out on DVD I rented it and [[observed]] and I [[enjoyed]] the [[movies]] and [[picked]] back my [[mots]] for Sooraj. I just finished [[staring]] it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to [[revisit]] this [[movies]]. Sooraj [[rs]]. BarjatyaGot it right this [[period]], okay I was not a [[whopping]] [[groupie]] of [[Ahem]] App Ke [[Sea]] Kaun. But I have [[repeatedly]] loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best [[jobs]]. I [[practically]] ever [[cries]] in a movie but this [[movies]] made me feel like [[sobbing]]. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much [[underestimated]] movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid [[Sonam]] and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! --------------------------------------------- Result 2443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This two-part TV mini-series isn't as good as the original from 1966 but it's solid. The original benefited from a huge number of things---it was all in black and white, it had a great jazz score and it was filmed at the real locations, including the home of the doomed Clutter family. That was important because in the book and in the original movie the home is very much a character itself.

This remake was filmed in Canada which I guess doubles okay for Kansas. The story tries to be as sympathetic to Perry as it dares to and Eric Roberts plays him as a somewhat fey person, his homosexuality barely hidden. The gentler take by Roberts doesn't quite work in the end though because it's hard to believe that his version of Perry Smith would just finally explode in a spasm of murder. Whereas Robert Blake's take on Smith left you no doubt that his Perry Smith was an extremely dangerous character.

Anthony Edwards was excellent as the bombastic, big-mouthed and ultimately cowardly Dick Hickcock, the brains of the outfit. His performance compares very well to Scott Wilson's role in the original movie.

Since this is a longer movie it allows more time to develop the Clutter family and in this regard I think the 1996 movie has an advantage. The Clutters are just an outstanding, decent family. They've never harmed another soul and it is just inexplicable that such a decent family is ultimately massacred in such a horrifying way. It still boggles my mind that, after the Clutters were locked in the bathroom, that Herb Clutter didn't force out the window so at least his children would have a chance to escape. This movie has the thought occur to him, but too late. From what I read about the real home, which is still standing, the way the bathroom is configured they could've opened the counter drawers and effectively barricaded the door which would've forced the killers to blast their way in. But it might've bought time for some of the Clutters to escape. Why the Clutters didn't try this, I have no idea.

Fans of the book will recognize that this movie takes a lot of liberties with how the crime is committed but not too serious. Still, it's distracting to viewers like me who have read tons about the case. The actors playing the cops, led by Sam Neill and Leo Rossi, are uniformly excellent, much better, I think, as a group, than the actors in the original movie. They know that to secure the noose around the necks of both of them they have to get them to confess. And the officers come to the interview impeccably prepared. They had already discovered the likely alibi the phony story of going to Fort Scott, and had debunked every jot of it. The officers then let Smith & Hickcock just walk into their trap. Hickcock is a b.s. artist who figures he can convince anyone of anything and the officers respectfully let him tell his cover story. But when they lower the boom on him, he shatters very quickly. It's very well filmed and acted and very gratifying to watch because the viewer naturally should loath Hickcock in particular by this point, a cowardly con-man who needs the easily manipulated Smith to do his killing for him. Supposedly Hickcock later stated that the real reason for the crime wasn't to steal money from the Clutters but to rape Nancy Clutter. At least she was spared that degradation.

The actors playing the Clutters are very good, Kevin Tighe as Herb Clutter in particular. The story sensitively deals with Mrs. Clutter's emotional problems, most likely clinical depression, and Mrs. Clutter displays remarkable inner strength when she firmly and strongly demands that the killers leave her daughter alone. From what I've read the Clutters' surviving family was particularly bothered by how Bonnie Clutter was portrayed in the book, claiming it was entirely untrue. But as an aside, both of the killers related to the police how Mr. Clutter asked them to not bother his wife because of her long illness. Capote might make up that fiction to make the character of Bonnie more interesting but certainly the killers had no reason to falsely portray Mrs. Clutter and no doubt much of the conversation in the book (duplicated in the movies) is right off the taped confessions of the killers. So it would've been nonsensical for Herb to have said that and not have it be true. --------------------------------------------- Result 2444 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Back in the forties, when [[movies]] touched on [[matters]] not [[yet]] admissible in "polite" [[society]], they resorted to [[codes]] which [[supposedly]] floated over the heads of most of the [[audience]] while alerting those in the know to just what was up. [[Probably]] no [[film]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the [[oddly]] [[obscure]] Desert [[Fury]], set in a [[small]] [[gambling]] [[oasis]] called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the [[Purple]] Sage saloon and [[casino]] is the [[astonishing]] Mary Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' [[original]] script made this [[relationship]] explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, [[stir]], and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these [[ingredients]] up to a [[hard]] boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled [[exchanges]]. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a [[remarkable]] [[movie]]. Back in the forties, when [[theater]] touched on [[issues]] not [[again]] admissible in "polite" [[societal]], they resorted to [[ciphers]] which [[presumably]] floated over the heads of most of the [[audiences]] while alerting those in the know to just what was up. [[Assuredly]] no [[cinematographic]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the [[paradoxically]] [[unclear]] Desert [[Anger]], set in a [[petite]] [[betting]] [[haven]] called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the [[Violet]] Sage saloon and [[betting]] is the [[uncanny]] Mary Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' [[initial]] script made this [[relation]] explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, [[agitate]], and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these [[ingredient]] up to a [[dur]] boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled [[shares]]. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a [[wondrous]] [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Dark comedy? Gallows [[humor]]? How does one [[make]] a [[comedy]] out of [[murder]]? It can be risky business as the viewer is [[required]] to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. [[So]], the story has be [[rock]] solid with a good [[dash]] of [[suspended]] [[reality]] in order to make it [[work]]. So, Pierce Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted [[alcoholic]] who [[kills]] people for a [[living]] and is having a [[life]] crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky [[beginning]], he learns that he needs a [[friend]]. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a [[life]]. Add character actor, [[Philip]] Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the [[races]]. Brosnan is [[wonderfully]] crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear [[delightful]] as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is [[delightful]] and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. Dark comedy? Gallows [[comedy]]? How does one [[deliver]] a [[parody]] out of [[kill]]? It can be risky business as the viewer is [[obliged]] to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. [[Therefore]], the story has be [[rocks]] solid with a good [[hyphen]] of [[terminated]] [[realistic]] in order to make it [[collaborate]]. So, Pierce Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted [[alcohol]] who [[murdering]] people for a [[iife]] and is having a [[vie]] crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky [[startup]], he learns that he needs a [[boyfriend]]. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a [[iife]]. Add character actor, [[Philipp]] Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the [[careers]]. Brosnan is [[stunningly]] crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear [[charmer]] as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is [[wondrous]] and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this [[commonplace]] movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the [[direction]] is extremely boring and the story is [[NOT]] so interesting and [[original]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this [[mundane]] movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the [[orientation]] is extremely boring and the story is [[NOPE]] so interesting and [[upfront]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] About the baby: Why wasn't [[big]] brother assuming he'd be hungry for a [[bottle]] or some [[nourishment]] or a [[diaper]] change? He should have been [[screaming]] non-stop after that many hours without [[care]]. [[Definitely]] stupid to [[take]] the baby from a safe place when he didn't [[need]] to.

And why was the [[road]] miraculously clear [[whenever]] [[anyone]] [[wanted]] to drive [[somewhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees [[fall]] on the [[roads]] and [[block]] them?

I can't [[imagine]] the [[cops]] at the [[roadblock]] not [[immediately]] following after any young [[person]] who would [[crash]] it, [[especially]] when they [[said]] it was [[dangerous]] to go there.

That being said, it was [[nice]] to have a [[movie]] [[children]] [[could]] safely watch, for a [[change]]. About the baby: Why wasn't [[grand]] brother assuming he'd be hungry for a [[vial]] or some [[food]] or a [[layer]] change? He should have been [[yelling]] non-stop after that many hours without [[healthcare]]. [[Decidedly]] stupid to [[taking]] the baby from a safe place when he didn't [[needed]] to.

And why was the [[estrada]] miraculously clear [[where]] [[nobody]] [[wanting]] to drive [[anywhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees [[fallen]] on the [[boulevards]] and [[obstructing]] them?

I can't [[imagining]] the [[nypd]] at the [[barrera]] not [[directly]] following after any young [[persona]] who would [[crashes]] it, [[notably]] when they [[told]] it was [[unsafe]] to go there.

That being said, it was [[pleasurable]] to have a [[film]] [[enfant]] [[did]] safely watch, for a [[altering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] of the films of the young republic few in number as they are The Buccaneer (1958)stands out as a finely crafted film. Charleton Heston excels in his portrayal of Old Hickory's defence of New Orleans with a thrown together force of militia, regulars and pirates promised a reprieve.

after Christmas 1814 peninsula veterans led by sir edward packenham, the duke of wellington's brother in law bore down on the city of new orleans. andy jackson had a day to draw together a scratch force to defend the city behind bales of hay.

Charlton Heston projects Jackson's terrifying presence and awe inspiring power of command. Yet there are a few colorful comic relief. With the might of the English lioness about to pounce, a young blond haired voluteer from New Orleans asks: I guess the ruckus is about to start.

the battle was about to rage but not for long. true to form the British marched straight into withering American fire. in less than a few minutes an attempt to reconquer lost north American territories had been foiled.

the battle scene in this movies lasts slightly longer than the actual battle itself.

there are colorful side stories in this film of the young volunteer at his first dance to celebrate the victory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The 60s (1999) D: Mark Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, [[Julia]] Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard [[Roberts]], [[Bill]] Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a [[white]] [[family]] and a black [[family]]. The film's first half is driven by the [[excellent]] performance of Dutton as [[Reverend]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's character is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[forgotten]] in a dull, [[incoherent]], and downright [[awful]] 2nd half. [[RATING]]: 4 out of 10. Not rated ([[later]] rated PG-13 for [[video]]/DVD [[release]]). The 60s (1999) D: Mark Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, [[Yulia]] Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard [[Stevens]], [[Invoice]] Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a [[bianchi]] [[familia]] and a black [[familial]]. The film's first half is driven by the [[sumptuous]] performance of Dutton as [[Pasteur]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's character is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[omitted]] in a dull, [[counterintuitive]], and downright [[gruesome]] 2nd half. [[ASSESSMENTS]]: 4 out of 10. Not rated ([[subsequently]] rated PG-13 for [[videotape]]/DVD [[releasing]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 2450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[In]] my life I have [[seen]] [[many]] [[great]] and [[awful]] [[movies]]. I am not an expert in professional [[reviews]], but I have definitely something to [[say]] about this one. [[Firstly]], these actors are the [[worst]] I have [[seen]]... [[Their]] acting is so [[unreal]] that you even [[want]] to [[throw]] away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these [[actors]] were not interested in the quality.

Another [[awful]] [[thing]] is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you [[hear]] them. It seems that your 14 year old [[son]] [[could]] act better. I feel that this [[movie]] had a budget similar to the [[cost]] of my 14 year old European [[car]]...

Please, if my message [[reaches]] you - [[save]] your [[time]] and money. [[Across]] my life I have [[noticed]] [[various]] [[super]] and [[frightful]] [[filmmaking]]. I am not an expert in professional [[reviewed]], but I have definitely something to [[told]] about this one. [[Initially]], these actors are the [[meanest]] I have [[noticed]]... [[Leur]] acting is so [[surreal]] that you even [[wanted]] to [[toss]] away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these [[actresses]] were not interested in the quality.

Another [[scary]] [[stuff]] is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you [[listen]] them. It seems that your 14 year old [[sons]] [[did]] act better. I feel that this [[filmmaking]] had a budget similar to the [[price]] of my 14 year old European [[motors]]...

Please, if my message [[achieves]] you - [[rescued]] your [[times]] and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Paul Hennessy and his [[wife]], Cate [[must]] deal with their two [[teenage]] daughters and [[weird]] son...But after the untimely passing of [[John]] [[Ritter]], the show became more about [[coping]] with the loss of a [[loved]] one...

I found this [[show]], [[passing]] through the channels one [[afternoon]] and I have to [[say]] I was laughing myself till my ribs ached, [[simply]] at the [[range]] of characters; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[find]] himself [[dealing]] [[mostly]] with his [[daughters]]...From then on, I [[caught]] the rest of the [[show]] when I was [[free]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's [[death]]...[[Shortly]] afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' [[part]] 2 and I have to say I was [[nearly]] in [[tears]], [[watching]] the [[emotions]] of the characters, [[losing]] a [[loved]] one...[[How]] Rory [[punches]] a wall in [[anger]] and frustration...How [[Cate]] deals with having to sleep in her [[bed]] all [[alone]]....Briget and Kerry [[talking]] about what they should have [[done]].

But the [[show]] does [[move]] on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who [[provide]] [[great]] [[laughs]], as Cate's [[father]] [[tries]] to [[protect]] his [[family]] and give '[[man]] issue talks' to Rory...But the [[true]] gem is CJ...who is [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]] as the wild [[cousin]].

It will [[always]] be [[John]] Ritter's [[masterpiece]]. Paul Hennessy and his [[woman]], Cate [[ought]] deal with their two [[adolescent]] daughters and [[bizarre]] son...But after the untimely passing of [[Johannes]] [[Knight]], the show became more about [[adapting]] with the loss of a [[enjoyed]] one...

I found this [[displaying]], [[passerby]] through the channels one [[evening]] and I have to [[told]] I was laughing myself till my ribs ached, [[straightforward]] at the [[ranging]] of characters; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[finds]] himself [[addresses]] [[basically]] with his [[females]]...From then on, I [[capturing]] the rest of the [[exposition]] when I was [[libre]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's [[killings]]...[[Soon]] afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' [[party]] 2 and I have to say I was [[practically]] in [[rip]], [[staring]] the [[sentiments]] of the characters, [[wasting]] a [[worshipped]] one...[[Mode]] Rory [[beatings]] a wall in [[ire]] and frustration...How [[Kate]] deals with having to sleep in her [[bedside]] all [[merely]]....Briget and Kerry [[schmooze]] about what they should have [[performed]].

But the [[illustrates]] does [[budge]] on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who [[affords]] [[wondrous]] [[laughing]], as Cate's [[fathers]] [[attempts]] to [[safeguard]] his [[families]] and give '[[bloke]] issue talks' to Rory...But the [[truthful]] gem is CJ...who is [[perfectly]] [[fun]] as the wild [[kinsman]].

It will [[perpetually]] be [[Johannes]] Ritter's [[centerpiece]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was [[beginning]] to come out as a lesbian. i saw this movie on an [[old]] black and white TV, with terrible [[reception]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an [[awakening]] that seemed like an echo of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgot]] the [[feelings]] the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile [[magic]], and i have treasured a hope that i would [[see]] it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone [[would]] make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it [[also]] has some of the same delicacy and [[persistent]] poignancy... in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was [[launching]] to come out as a lesbian. i saw this movie on an [[archaic]] black and white TV, with terrible [[homepage]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an [[woken]] that seemed like an echo of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgotten]] the [[moods]] the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile [[witchcraft]], and i have treasured a hope that i would [[behold]] it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone [[ought]] make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it [[similarly]] has some of the same delicacy and [[uninterrupted]] poignancy... --------------------------------------------- Result 2453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This one is a [[little]] better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its humor which basically keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That [[wears]] thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[tremendous]] amount of [[total]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. This one is a [[scant]] better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its humor which basically keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That [[door]] thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[prodigious]] amount of [[whole]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] as always this is an [[inaccurate]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. as always this is an [[fallacious]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] i am a [[big]] [[fan]] of karishma [[Kapoor]] and Govinda. I watched this film after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley [[brilliant]].

There are [[films]] that are [[bad]], and there are [[films]] that are cr*p. but this [[film]] just [[takes]] the biscuit.

We were so [[annoyed]] that we were [[conned]] out of paying our [[money]] [[expecting]] a decent [[film]].

avoid at all [[cost]], [[dont]] even [[rent]] it.

1/10 i am a [[overwhelming]] [[breather]] of karishma [[Ranbir]] and Govinda. I watched this film after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley [[sumptuous]].

There are [[kino]] that are [[mala]], and there are [[movies]] that are cr*p. but this [[filmmaking]] just [[pick]] the biscuit.

We were so [[infuriated]] that we were [[swindled]] out of paying our [[cash]] [[awaited]] a decent [[filmmaking]].

avoid at all [[prices]], [[becuase]] even [[lease]] it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Collusion Course is even [[worse]] than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is [[less]] pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[bad]] Leno's character, a [[sanctimonious]] buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. Collusion Course is even [[pire]] than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is [[lowest]] pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[rotten]] Leno's character, a [[hypocrite]] buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 2457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] As others have mentioned, all the [[women]] that go nude in this [[film]] are [[mostly]] [[absolutely]] [[gorgeous]]. The plot very [[ably]] [[shows]] the hypocrisy of the female libido. [[When]] [[men]] are [[around]] they [[want]] to be [[pursued]], but when no "[[men]]" are [[around]], they [[become]] the pursuers of a 14 year old [[boy]]. And the [[boy]] [[becomes]] a [[man]] [[really]] fast (we should all be so lucky at this [[age]]!). He then [[gets]] up the [[courage]] to [[pursue]] his [[true]] [[love]]. As others have mentioned, all the [[daughters]] that go nude in this [[films]] are [[essentially]] [[utterly]] [[wondrous]]. The plot very [[skilfully]] [[displayed]] the hypocrisy of the female libido. [[Whenever]] [[males]] are [[roundabout]] they [[wanted]] to be [[pursuing]], but when no "[[males]]" are [[about]], they [[gotten]] the pursuers of a 14 year old [[guy]]. And the [[kiddo]] [[become]] a [[males]] [[truthfully]] fast (we should all be so lucky at this [[aged]]!). He then [[got]] up the [[boldness]] to [[pursuing]] his [[truthful]] [[iike]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much in the same way Frank Miller and his Sin City comics used black and white to express itself (and its film noir influences), so does Christian Volckman with Renaissance.

It is the year 2054, in Paris. In the tradition of science fiction, the future is a bright, sparkling multi-teared jewel. This is a jewel in a setting of misery, inequity and darkness; bright and beautiful on top with a dark underbelly beneath. One of these "bright" people at the top, a research scientist from a very large and influential global company (Avalon), is kidnapped. The well known and efficient, Captain Karas (voiced by the new James Bond himself - Daniel Craig), is assigned the task to find her.

The plot and layout is not overly original. It is heavily influenced by film noir, Gibson's Neuromancer and other detective stories, along with movies like Blade Runner, Sin City, Fritz Lang's Metropolis and Minority Report. There is the main plot, surrounded by other possible sub-plots that all connect at the end. It is not hard to figure it all out.

The movie's strength and originality is in its intense visual presentation. Paris is an intricate array of levels and sub-levels. At its base is the more primitive industrial infrastructure. As the city rises, so does its architectural complexity and luminescence. Yet in this structure, the top does not equate with elevation of human ideals and behavior. Paris has been intricately animated and laid out in brilliant black and white. The movie is closer in spirit with Sin City (the comics) then Sin City the movie was with its source material. This is done all the more easy, because it is still remaining in relatively the same medium; animation. Much in the same way as a Scanner Darkly pushed the visual aspects of story telling, so does this. The light and dark, black and white creates an atmosphere of contrasts, as well as visual ambiguity. Right and wrong, black and white can lose all meaning at the same time it is right in front of us. The movie proves how black and white can be both ambiguous and obvious at the same time.

In keeping with the spirit of the movie, I can be both critic and fan. I can love and loath in the same light. It is definitely an experience I recommend for lovers of the visual arts. So pour another Black and Tan, enter the void and enjoy the ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there has ever been a worse comedy than 'Gray Matters' I am unaware of it. The New York Jewish comedy's 'funny' premise is that siblings Sam & Gray are mistaken for a couple and so decide to fix Sam up with a girlfriend, only to find that Gray is equally attracted to their target - Charlie. The revelation that Gray is secretly gay is apparently only a surprise to her. There is a deeply offensive wedding sequence, a deeply embarrassing 'drunk act' from Moynahan and Graham, and a performance that would embarrass forests everywhere for its woodenness from Tom Cavanagh. Sissy Spacek demonstrates a complete inability to do comedy and will want this excised from her resume. Molly Shannon plays the homely friend with lumpen insouciance. Only Alan Cumming emerges with any credit but is seriously under-employed and given nothing with which to work. The whole disaster is cemented by Graham's bizarre eye-rolling performance culminating with the penultimate scene where she wears a comedy hat and an overcoat despite the scene being set in a lesbian bar. It is astonishing that this film was ever released it has no redeeming feature and should be avoided at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This [[picture]] for me [[scores]] very highly as it is a [[hugely]] [[enjoyable]] and [[amusing]] spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and [[serious]] performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at [[least]] it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. This [[visuals]] for me [[dozens]] very highly as it is a [[terribly]] [[nice]] and [[fun]] spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and [[gravest]] performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at [[lowest]] it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm Italian and when I've recently looked again this film I astonished for its beauty: the first time I was 10 years old and I liked it, but today I can appreciate it with adult mind and feelings. Now I can understand it was a masterpiece of a special season of the Italian cinema (Pasolini etc.), by that time gone.

The Hollywood epic films are good...for fun. Perhaps this 'Odyssey' had no English version because is not enough funny... not suitable for pop-corn and coke audience. However suitable for Homer pathos and existentialist reflections.

In Italy was recently released a very good DVD version: INTEGRAL, with excellent colors. You can find it in some file sharing, but it's Italian only, and without subtitles. Too bad: also the dialogs and the voices of this film are remarkable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This made-for-TV film is a brilliant one. This is probably the best and favourite role by BAFTA winning John Thaw (Kavanagh Q.C. and Inspector Morse). Tom Oakley (Thaw) widowed man has lived in a village alone for a while since his wife and son died, and now he has been landed with an evacuee called Willaim Beech (Nick Robinson). As he gets to know this child he starts to develop a friendship. Until Willaim's Mum (Annabelle Apsion) wants him back. After Tom gets worried about William not contacting him he goes to London to find him. In the end Willaim gets his home with a loving family (or Dad). Set during the Second World War this is an excellent film. It was nominated the BAFTA Lew Grade Award, and it won the National Television Award for Most Popular Drama. John Thaw was number 3 on TV's 50 Greatest Stars. Very good! --------------------------------------------- Result 2463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] I haven't watched the movie [[yet]], but can't [[wait]] to [[see]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[seen]]: the [[questions]] it posed [[really]] stopped me and made me think, the [[unique]] [[approach]] to the [[sport]] of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle [[within]]"... thank god [[somebody]] is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so fresh and [[smart]]. And the actor is [[really]] [[hot]]. I [[especially]] enjoyed the short clip with the [[actor]] from the Rocky [[movies]], [[really]] [[clever]]. I [[thought]] that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[childhood]] traumas-is [[timeless]], and [[god]] knows a lot of people [[need]] it. Bring it on. I haven't watched the movie [[however]], but can't [[sufferance]] to [[consults]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[noticed]]: the [[issues]] it posed [[truly]] stopped me and made me think, the [[exclusive]] [[approaching]] to the [[sportsmen]] of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle [[inside]]"... thank god [[person]] is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so fresh and [[artful]]. And the actor is [[genuinely]] [[sexier]]. I [[mostly]] enjoyed the short clip with the [[actress]] from the Rocky [[films]], [[truthfully]] [[brainy]]. I [[brainchild]] that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[children]] traumas-is [[undying]], and [[lawd]] knows a lot of people [[required]] it. Bring it on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. Abhorrent concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's [[book]] "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with [[Gregory]] Peck). It was probably too racy for television--what with [[drugs]] and hippies [[added]] to the mix--that NBC [[initially]] refused to [[air]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in [[theaters]]. [[Director]] James Goldstone gets [[freaky]] with the hyperkinetic [[visuals]] and camera-tricks, while editor [[Edward]] A. Biery goes [[wild]] with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful [[gimmicks]] cannot [[cover]] up the [[weaknesses]] of this [[updated]] plot, and the acting is [[woefully]] overripe. Dillman, under pressure to [[recall]] the events of the [[night]] in question, goes through an Actor's Seminar of tics, [[stammers]], nose-wipes, and [[crazy]] half-laughs while spitting out [[dialogue]] like, "Dream...a [[dream]]...drugs...[[yeah]], [[drugs]]...that [[SOUND]]...bells...[[help]]!" As a villainous fellow [[scientist]] with a Cheshire [[Cat]] [[smile]], [[Pat]] Hingle [[nearly]] upstages Dillman in the [[Grand]] Thespian [[department]] by [[continually]] [[addressing]] everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and [[twisting]] his mouth around in [[agony]]. Hope Lange's [[scientist]]/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she [[screams]] at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, [[talk]] [[Ape]] Man? Me want You!" This is one [[frantic]] "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. Abhorrent concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's [[cookbook]] "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with [[Grigori]] Peck). It was probably too racy for television--what with [[medications]] and hippies [[addendum]] to the mix--that NBC [[firstly]] refused to [[midair]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in [[cinema]]. [[Superintendent]] James Goldstone gets [[weird]] with the hyperkinetic [[pictures]] and camera-tricks, while editor [[Eduard]] A. Biery goes [[feral]] with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful [[tricks]] cannot [[covers]] up the [[faults]] of this [[modernized]] plot, and the acting is [[unfortunately]] overripe. Dillman, under pressure to [[remembered]] the events of the [[overnight]] in question, goes through an Actor's Seminar of tics, [[stutters]], nose-wipes, and [[loca]] half-laughs while spitting out [[talks]] like, "Dream...a [[nightmares]]...drugs...[[yup]], [[meds]]...that [[AUDIBLE]]...bells...[[pomoc]]!" As a villainous fellow [[investigators]] with a Cheshire [[Kitten]] [[laughter]], [[Patricia]] Hingle [[almost]] upstages Dillman in the [[Prodigious]] Thespian [[ministries]] by [[incessantly]] [[solve]] everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and [[twist]] his mouth around in [[grief]]. Hope Lange's [[researchers]]/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she [[howl]] at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, [[speaking]] [[Monkeys]] Man? Me want You!" This is one [[frenetic]] "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] i was [[intrigued]] to see how a little-seen 2008 [[film]] had somehow won the [[Oscar]] for [[best]] [[picture]] of 2009 and [[thus]] went to [[see]] The [[Hurt]] Locker. sadly, all i got for the two hours invested was the [[grim]] confirmation that this film had won [[awards]] [[purely]] for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and [[visual]] [[style]] of this film is some of the [[weakest]] you will ever [[see]]. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[homage]] with dire, [[annoying]] "[[shaky]] cam" [[visuals]], it shows off all the [[hallmarks]] of a second rate daytime soap [[opera]] in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as [[rejected]] Beetle Bailey comic strip [[ideas]] and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[worst]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not [[enough]] to obscure how [[bad]] the [[project]] is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was [[bereft]] of [[humour]] and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. i was [[puzzled]] to see how a little-seen 2008 [[flick]] had somehow won the [[Oskar]] for [[optimum]] [[imagery]] of 2009 and [[accordingly]] went to [[seeing]] The [[Harmed]] Locker. sadly, all i got for the two hours invested was the [[somber]] confirmation that this film had won [[prix]] [[only]] for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and [[optic]] [[elegance]] of this film is some of the [[fewer]] you will ever [[behold]]. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[commendation]] with dire, [[irritating]] "[[volatile]] cam" [[photos]], it shows off all the [[characteristics]] of a second rate daytime soap [[drama]] in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as [[repudiated]] Beetle Bailey comic strip [[thoughts]] and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[meanest]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not [[sufficiently]] to obscure how [[unfavorable]] the [[projects]] is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was [[devoid]] of [[humor]] and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 2466 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hello. I am Paul Raddick, a.k.a. Panic Attack of WTAF, Channel 29 in Philadelphia. Let me tell you about this god awful movie that powered on Adam Sandler's film career but was digitized after a short time.

Going Overboard is about an aspiring comedian played by Sandler who gets a job on a cruise ship and fails...or so I thought. Sandler encounters babes that like History of the World Part 1 and Rebound. The babes were supposed to be engaged, but, actually, they get executed by Sawtooth, the meanest cannibal the world has ever known. Adam Sandler fared bad in Going Overboard, but fared better in Big Daddy, Billy Madison, and Jen Leone's favorite, 50 First Dates. Man, Drew Barrymore was one hot chick. Spanglish is red hot, Going Overboard ain't Dooley squat! End of file. --------------------------------------------- Result 2467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I watched the Canadian [[videotape]] of this [[movie]] as "The Witching" which somehow made its [[way]] to [[New]] York State. [[Audio]] was [[quite]] bad, I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to [[hear]] it and the soundtrack often was [[overwhelming]] the dialog. [[Orson]] Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was [[run]] through an echo [[chamber]]. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the [[group]] was not meant to represent any real [[group]]!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her [[questions]] about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives [[aggressively]], and causes another [[car]] to go off the [[road]] and blow up. [[After]] the police arrive, she takes a doll that [[fell]] out of the car, the [[second]] of [[many]] handmade dolls in the movie.

It [[turns]] out [[Mr]]. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, [[though]] she doesn't [[realize]] it. They want her because she has an [[innate]] talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very [[involving]]. The [[movie]] does [[seem]] a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of [[new]] footage. The [[original]] version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The [[magic]] of [[DVD]] could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a [[priority]]. I watched the Canadian [[video]] of this [[filmmaking]] as "The Witching" which somehow made its [[route]] to [[Novel]] York State. [[Acoustic]] was [[rather]] bad, I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to [[overheard]] it and the soundtrack often was [[colossal]] the dialog. [[Welles]] Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was [[running]] through an echo [[bedroom]]. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the [[groups]] was not meant to represent any real [[groups]]!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her [[subjects]] about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives [[vigorously]], and causes another [[vehicle]] to go off the [[route]] and blow up. [[Upon]] the police arrive, she takes a doll that [[dipped]] out of the car, the [[seconds]] of [[various]] handmade dolls in the movie.

It [[revolves]] out [[Herr]]. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, [[despite]] she doesn't [[realising]] it. They want her because she has an [[congenital]] talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very [[implicate]]. The [[filmmaking]] does [[appears]] a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of [[nuevo]] footage. The [[preliminary]] version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The [[hallucinogenic]] of [[DVDS]] could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a [[precedence]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I would not [[hesitate]] to put this [[adaptation]] of 'Death Trap" in a [[top]] 5 list of the [[best]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") [[play]] off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I [[normally]] don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that comparisons of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[brilliant]] stage-to-screen adaptation [[featuring]] [[Michael]] Caine - are valid, or even fair. Yes, the two [[stories]] have a [[lot]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[class]] warfare as the [[battle]] of wits, and the [[house]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a character in the movie as the two actors - the house doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a battle of wits as it is a [[pointed]] vignette about how people are no damned good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they get. I'll just [[say]] that both movies are [[superb]] [[examples]] of the [[genre]], and well worth your [[time]] and money. This is [[America]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't [[give]] away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a [[dozen]] years, and [[still]] enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted comedy and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. I would not [[dither]] to put this [[coping]] of 'Death Trap" in a [[topped]] 5 list of the [[better]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") [[gaming]] off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I [[generally]] don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that comparisons of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[shiny]] stage-to-screen adaptation [[starring]] [[Michel]] Caine - are valid, or even fair. Yes, the two [[story]] have a [[batch]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[categories]] warfare as the [[struggling]] of wits, and the [[dwellings]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a character in the movie as the two actors - the house doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a battle of wits as it is a [[stressed]] vignette about how people are no damned good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they get. I'll just [[told]] that both movies are [[wondrous]] [[instances]] of the [[gender]], and well worth your [[period]] and money. This is [[Americas]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't [[lend]] away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a [[twelve]] years, and [[yet]] enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted comedy and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. --------------------------------------------- Result 2469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Drawing Restraint 9. dir: [[Matthew]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the middle of a [[pretentious]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of dialogue in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a giant furry [[pita]] on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth [[turds]] and spinal columns are used in a whale [[blubber]] experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and still [[annoying]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is [[among]] the most [[pretentious]] of the modern art [[movies]]. At 135 minutes, it [[adds]] to its [[pretension]] by being boring to boot. I would call the [[use]] of [[color]] [[stunning]], and the [[opening]] sequence interesting, but the [[rest]] of the movie [[looked]] like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up [[later]].

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and [[Matthew]] Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head [[shaving]] (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Then]] there is [[mutual]] evisceration, cannibalism, and [[lets]] not forget the [[giant]] [[turd]].

[[Matthew]] Barney has [[written]] that this is about "the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity." That's [[almost]] like saying, "if you don't [[get]] it, then you're not creative in your [[interpretation]], so [[sod]] off because I'm an [[artist]]." Oh, [[wait]], that's the POST-modern [[interpretation]] of that [[sentence]] and what the [[movie]] [[would]] be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[supposed]] to be [[Modern]] art. Which is about the [[art]] itself.

So, let's [[start]] this [[whole]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 serious and should not be [[taken]] as any [[realistic]] [[attempt]] to [[interpret]] the [[movie]].

The [[first]] half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was trying to quit smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who tells them that the ship is scarred from when another ship hit it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ Drawing Restraint 9. dir: [[Mathieu]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the middle of a [[conceited]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of dialogue in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a giant furry [[flip]] on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth [[idiots]] and spinal columns are used in a whale [[bacon]] experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and still [[exasperating]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is [[between]] the most [[cocky]] of the modern art [[filmmaking]]. At 135 minutes, it [[summing]] to its [[pretext]] by being boring to boot. I would call the [[employs]] of [[colors]] [[terrific]], and the [[opens]] sequence interesting, but the [[remaining]] of the movie [[seemed]] like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up [[subsequently]].

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and [[Mathew]] Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head [[shave]] (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Thus]] there is [[bilateral]] evisceration, cannibalism, and [[enables]] not forget the [[monumental]] [[poo]].

[[Mathieu]] Barney has [[typed]] that this is about "the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity." That's [[approximately]] like saying, "if you don't [[gets]] it, then you're not creative in your [[explanations]], so [[turf]] off because I'm an [[entertainer]]." Oh, [[suspense]], that's the POST-modern [[interpretive]] of that [[punishments]] and what the [[filmmaking]] [[should]] be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[presumed]] to be [[Modernity]] art. Which is about the [[artistry]] itself.

So, let's [[beginnings]] this [[ensemble]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 serious and should not be [[picked]] as any [[pragmatic]] [[seek]] to [[construe]] the [[filmmaking]].

The [[outset]] half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was trying to quit smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who tells them that the ship is scarred from when another ship hit it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Only on a very rare occasion does an episode of the x-files fail to generate any excitement or does the episode contain anything which is just totally boring to watch.A detective and his former partner both die in unexplained circumstances.The deaths are linked to the presence of a little girl who was there when the deaths took place.Mulder has devised a theory that a policeman murdered by his colleagues has come back reincarnated as the little girl and is exacting revenge.Now for the bizarre bit.The little girl has no connection at all and seems to just a random person chosen as the reincarnation.I think this was slightly lazy writing by the writers and this episode ranks as one of the worst in x-files history! --------------------------------------------- Result 2471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the great classic comedies. Not a slapstick comedy, not a heavy drama. A fun, satirical film, a buyers beware guide to a new home.

Filled with great characters all of whom, Cary Grant is convinced, are out to fleece him in the building of a dream home.

A great look at life in the late 40's.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Actually this [[movie]] was not so [[bad]]. It contains action, [[comedy]] and [[excitement]]. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[surprised]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really [[negative]] thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little [[film]]! Actually this [[film]] was not so [[inclement]]. It contains action, [[comedian]] and [[agitation]]. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[dumbfounded]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really [[counterproductive]] thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little [[cinematography]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] More like [[psychological]] analysis of [[movies]], but [[Psycho]] does sound better as a header. The [[man]] in charge of the movie (the [[narrator]] if you will) does [[depict]] movies here in his own [[way]]. Most of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[strongly]] advise you to see them ([[especially]] the Hitchcock [[movies]], Solyaris, [[Conversation]] & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Or]] in other words, he might [[spoil]] them for you. I don't [[remember]] if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not [[big]] of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and [[opinions]] are crazy and fun to [[listen]] to, if you're open minded to [[see]] [[things]] through another [[perspective]] ([[even]] if that does [[destroy]] your [[favorite]] [[movie]] a [[bit]] for you ... it doesn't [[mean]] it will do that, but it [[could]])! More like [[mental]] analysis of [[movie]], but [[Psychotic]] does sound better as a header. The [[fella]] in charge of the movie (the [[announcer]] if you will) does [[describe]] movies here in his own [[camino]]. Most of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[flatly]] advise you to see them ([[concretely]] the Hitchcock [[kino]], Solyaris, [[Schmooze]] & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Oder]] in other words, he might [[wrack]] them for you. I don't [[rember]] if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not [[prodigious]] of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and [[opinion]] are crazy and fun to [[heed]] to, if you're open minded to [[behold]] [[items]] through another [[standpoint]] ([[yet]] if that does [[ruining]] your [[preferred]] [[kino]] a [[bite]] for you ... it doesn't [[signify]] it will do that, but it [[wo]])! --------------------------------------------- Result 2474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracle]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[track]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for [[action]] movie and who is better to direct [[movie]] where is snow, ice, [[cold]] and bad [[weather]] than [[finnish]] man. Action is good! [[Music]] in the [[film]] is [[spectacular]]. The [[bad]] [[guy]] is John Litghow, other stars Micheal [[Rooker]] ( The [[portrait]] of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in [[beautiful]] [[place]] and it is very [[exciting]] [[movie]]. [[Overall]] good [[movie]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[special]] [[collectors]] edition, with good extras. Comig [[soon]] in [[Finland]] straight to video. This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracles]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[trajectory]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for [[efforts]] movie and who is better to direct [[kino]] where is snow, ice, [[colder]] and bad [[weatherman]] than [[finns]] man. Action is good! [[Musician]] in the [[movies]] is [[wondrous]]. The [[amiss]] [[dawg]] is John Litghow, other stars Micheal [[Brooker]] ( The [[portrayal]] of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in [[belle]] [[placing]] and it is very [[excite]] [[films]]. [[Entire]] good [[cinematography]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[specific]] [[gatherers]] edition, with good extras. Comig [[early]] in [[Finns]] straight to video. --------------------------------------------- Result 2475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was rather a disappointment. After the very slow, very intense (and quite gory) beginning the film begins to lose it. Too much plot leaves too little time for explanation, and coming out of the theater I wondered what this was all about. The characters remain shallow, the story is not convincing at all, most of it is déja vù stuff without hints of parody, and there are some very cheesy parts... Like, the young cop has to do dig up a body. Of course it's night AND it rains AND he has to do it alone... yawn! Or The Manifestation of the Evil being "nazis" plus "genetic manipulation"... Wow, that's really original. There are some nice bits, though, like the fistfight scene, mountain views and some (running) gags, but (though Reno and Vincent Cassel do what they can) that's definitely not worth it. (3 out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I didn't score this a one is that Sibrel does show that he is adept at the technical aspects of making a film. It is a technically adept film.

That having been said, this is a film based on lies and distortions that are quite easily disproven. Most of the documentary is spent using propaganda techniques to bash the space program, rather than actual fact. And Sibrel's "irrefutable proof" that the landings were faked is easily refuted if you know anything about orbital mechanics.

I do not recommend watching this, but if you do, see it at google video for free. Don't let Bart Sibrel profit from your curiosity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2477 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Unless the title is supposed to be some [[kind]] of [[spoiler]] for the wife's transformation (the [[fiends]]! [[ruining]] it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so [[remarkably]] low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits [[every]] 70's cliche except disco. [[Nobody]] is likeable, and you [[could]] [[careless]] what happens to [[anyone]] in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the [[bad]], [[bad]] performances. Unless the title is supposed to be some [[type]] of [[baffle]] for the wife's transformation (the [[freaks]]! [[spoiling]] it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so [[marvellously]] low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits [[any]] 70's cliche except disco. [[Anyone]] is likeable, and you [[wo]] [[reckless]] what happens to [[nobody]] in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the [[unfavourable]], [[unfavourable]] performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2478 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So when i was little i got this movie as a present and my sister and i loved it. we would watch it all the time. when our friends came over we would have sleepovers and we'd watch big rock candy mountain and grandpa's magical toys. I'm 21 now and i still love this movie, some old friends and i recently got together and watched it, we knew all the songs and we danced and talked about how much we hated Profster when we were little. One friend actually bought this movie and grandpa's magical toys for her 2 year old daughter because she wants to pass on our love of this movie. This really is a movie you can let your kids watch and feel safe, no violence, no bad language, just lots of great songs and important lessons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2479 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in [[business]]? [[If]] [[someone]] [[gave]] her another [[chance]] after this piece of [[crap]], she's up for the most [[Fortunate]] Person Of Ever award.This [[movie]] [[sucks]] to no [[END]]...It never ceases to [[amaze]] me what the turn into [[movies]]...and the fact that they made this [[writer]] put it off for a bit? Seriously? I can [[write]] [[better]] [[crap]] than this in my [[sleep]].

OK, so how [[many]] lines to I have to [[type]]? I don't get this at all. I [[guess]] I"m a newbie. I [[guess]] I don't [[understand]] why there should ever be a [[limit]] to what [[anyone]] has to [[say]]...or a [[quota]]? [[Seriously]], I don't [[care]] if you have a one word [[sentence]]...or even a one word [[response]]. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this [[enough]], finally?

This movie is [[worthless]]. Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in [[companies]]? [[Though]] [[person]] [[yielded]] her another [[luck]] after this piece of [[shitty]], she's up for the most [[Lucky]] Person Of Ever award.This [[cinematography]] [[stinks]] to no [[TERMINATE]]...It never ceases to [[surprise]] me what the turn into [[film]]...and the fact that they made this [[screenwriter]] put it off for a bit? Seriously? I can [[handwriting]] [[optimum]] [[shit]] than this in my [[slept]].

OK, so how [[countless]] lines to I have to [[genre]]? I don't get this at all. I [[reckon]] I"m a newbie. I [[reckon]] I don't [[understands]] why there should ever be a [[limitations]] to what [[everybody]] has to [[told]]...or a [[quotas]]? [[Conscientiously]], I don't [[healthcare]] if you have a one word [[condemnation]]...or even a one word [[reply]]. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this [[adequate]], finally?

This movie is [[superfluous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Why has this not been released? I kind of thought it must be a bit rubbish since it hasn't been. How wrong can a girl be! This film is, in a word, enthralling.

You will be captivated. It holds your attention from the start and its pace never slows.

The final part of the film, the "episode" as it were (not giving anything away, you saw that in the trailer) is also unmissable. You will chose a favourite, you will be shocked, you wont be able to go and make a cup of coffee because you need to find out what happens. The adrenalin rises and you cant not watch. Cudos to the actors, it's very believable. And it doesn't stop there, they have a final shock for you.

It also makes you question reality TV and if you would watch. And how far away from this are we, really? Endemol (who make big brother) made a TV show in Holland last year offering a dying woman's kidney to patients in need of a transplant. The show was revealed at the end to be a hoax, ostensibly to raise awareness of organ donation, but are we getting too close for comfort? --------------------------------------------- Result 2481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Timberlake's performance almost made attack the screen. It wasn't all bad, I just think the reporters role was wrong for him.

LL Cool J played the typical rapper role, toughest,baddest guy around. I don't think the cracked a smile in the whole movie, not even when proposed to his girlfriend.

Morgan Freeman pretty much carried the whole movie. He was has some funny scenes which are the high point of the movie.

Kevin Spacey wasn't good or bad he was just "there".

Overall it's a Dull movie. bad plot. a lot of bad acting or wrong roles for actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I don't like this [[film]], but then I didn't think much of the [[book]] either which, [[although]] lauded by [[many]] as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character [[development]] and disjointed and [[illogical]] in [[plot]], [[although]] it was far more [[readable]] than Fante's [[dreadful]] first [[effort]] "[[Road]] to Los [[Angeles]]" not [[published]] until Fante [[became]] [[fashionable]] in the mid 80s.

I was [[intrigued]] to [[see]] what [[sort]] of [[soup]] Towne would make with such [[meager]] [[ingredients]]. He has [[worked]] hard script-wise to [[repair]] the [[many]] [[shortcomings]] of the book but for my [[money]] didn't [[rescue]] it. There was never a [[movie]] in [[Ask]] the Dust while ever he tried to stay [[faithful]] to the book. I [[consider]] this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. I don't like this [[filmmaking]], but then I didn't think much of the [[books]] either which, [[while]] lauded by [[several]] as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character [[evolution]] and disjointed and [[nonsensical]] in [[intrigue]], [[nevertheless]] it was far more [[intelligible]] than Fante's [[scary]] first [[endeavors]] "[[Paths]] to Los [[Las]]" not [[publicized]] until Fante [[came]] [[modern]] in the mid 80s.

I was [[fascinated]] to [[consults]] what [[kinds]] of [[soups]] Towne would make with such [[meagre]] [[element]]. He has [[works]] hard script-wise to [[remedy]] the [[various]] [[flaws]] of the book but for my [[cash]] didn't [[bailout]] it. There was never a [[filmmaking]] in [[Asks]] the Dust while ever he tried to stay [[trusty]] to the book. I [[reviewing]] this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Cradle of [[Fear]]

This isn't a [[movie]] where [[intricate]] [[delicate]] [[little]] [[narrative]] [[nuances]] [[occupy]] our [[attention]]. This is not a [[film]] where the [[special]] [[effects]] are [[supposed]] to [[leave]] us slack-jacked uttering that sense of [[whoa]]. What it is though is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which leaves little to the [[imagination]], created in the [[eyes]] of the [[director]], [[Alex]] Chandon, as "a throwback to sleazy '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral [[experience]] for 2 hours, where four plot lines are [[connected]] through [[lots]] of watery blood, reams of [[dismembered]] body parts and innards, tied by an [[intestinal]] [[thread]] of [[revenge]].

The purveyor of such [[horrific]] violence is [[Dani]] Filth, lead-singer of the metal band [[Cradle]] of Filth, [[executing]] a role he was [[destined]] to [[play]].

As other's have said, there is nothing [[new]] about [[wanting]] to carryout occultist [[revenge]]. [[In]] this [[particular]] context a convicted sexual [[predator]] and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be [[congratulated]] on also penning and [[editing]] this piece, is the [[opportunity]] to [[let]] his sick [[mind]] [[run]] free. He seems to take [[delight]] in the [[idea]] of splattering blood into the [[orifices]] of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being [[crushed]], demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to [[engage]] those who [[relish]] getting up close and personal to their [[horror]]. And for some of those who [[closely]] follow these type of films, there is the [[odd]] [[sequence]] which may have you thinking, "[[Did]] I just [[see]] what I [[thought]] I did", because of course Pretty [[Woman]] this '[[aint]]. It [[reminds]] me of some of the gore-fests [[created]] out of Italian [[horror]] some 20 to 30 [[years]] [[ago]], and a number of other [[works]] where disgusting images have [[left]] their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins [[also]] adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, [[intestines]], occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. Cradle of [[Angst]]

This isn't a [[filmmaking]] where [[tortuous]] [[tricky]] [[scant]] [[descriptive]] [[overtones]] [[occupies]] our [[beware]]. This is not a [[filmmaking]] where the [[especial]] [[repercussions]] are [[alleged]] to [[walkout]] us slack-jacked uttering that sense of [[woah]]. What it is though is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which leaves little to the [[fantasy]], created in the [[eye]] of the [[superintendent]], [[Xander]] Chandon, as "a throwback to sleazy '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral [[experiences]] for 2 hours, where four plot lines are [[tied]] through [[batch]] of watery blood, reams of [[mutilated]] body parts and innards, tied by an [[digestive]] [[threaded]] of [[retaliatory]].

The purveyor of such [[scary]] violence is [[Dany]] Filth, lead-singer of the metal band [[Birthplace]] of Filth, [[implementing]] a role he was [[aimed]] to [[gaming]].

As other's have said, there is nothing [[novo]] about [[wanted]] to carryout occultist [[retaliation]]. [[Throughout]] this [[unique]] context a convicted sexual [[predatory]] and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be [[applauded]] on also penning and [[edit]] this piece, is the [[opportunities]] to [[letting]] his sick [[intellect]] [[running]] free. He seems to take [[jubilation]] in the [[thoughts]] of splattering blood into the [[keyholes]] of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being [[squashed]], demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to [[engaging]] those who [[delight]] getting up close and personal to their [[terror]]. And for some of those who [[tightly]] follow these type of films, there is the [[freaky]] [[sequencing]] which may have you thinking, "[[Got]] I just [[seeing]] what I [[think]] I did", because of course Pretty [[Girl]] this '[[givin]]. It [[recalls]] me of some of the gore-fests [[engendered]] out of Italian [[terror]] some 20 to 30 [[ages]] [[before]], and a number of other [[work]] where disgusting images have [[exited]] their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins [[additionally]] adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, [[bowels]], occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Having [[grown]] up in Texas, and less than 15 [[miles]] from what [[used]] to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[nauseating]]. The majority of [[Texans]] do not [[live]] like this [[movie]] indicates. The plot is [[weak]], and the fake accents are [[amusing]], and it reinforces the stereotypical [[image]] that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The [[horribly]] [[fake]] Texas accents is what [[kills]] it for me. [[True]], there is a certain Texas twang to most Texans' accents, but these people overdo it. You can't get [[someone]] from [[New]] [[Jersey]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't [[work]]. John Travolta should have [[stuck]] to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more [[convincing]] as Wonder Girl than she is as a [[Texan]]. Having [[increased]] up in Texas, and less than 15 [[km]] from what [[utilize]] to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[disgusting]]. The majority of [[Steelers]] do not [[vivo]] like this [[filmmaking]] indicates. The plot is [[puny]], and the fake accents are [[entertaining]], and it reinforces the stereotypical [[photographing]] that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The [[frightfully]] [[fakes]] Texas accents is what [[mata]] it for me. [[Veritable]], there is a certain Texas twang to most Texans' accents, but these people overdo it. You can't get [[everybody]] from [[Nuevo]] [[Jerzy]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't [[collaborate]]. John Travolta should have [[sandwiched]] to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more [[compelling]] as Wonder Girl than she is as a [[Texas]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The film opens with Bill Coles (Melvyn Douglas) telling a story about how his best friend--make that client--Jim Blandings (Cary Grant) and his family are tightly packed into a small New York apartment, with not enough closet space and way too few bathrooms. When Jim's wife, Muriel (Myrna Loy), wants to renovate the apartment, advertising exec Jim falls in love with (or falls for!) an ad for a house. Once he's purchased the house, bills and frustration pile up incessantly as everything that can go wrong with the building of Jim's 'dream house' goes wrong.

One of three collaborations between Grant and Loy, this is a charming little comedy--not very taxing, with no real great message, but a great way to spend an hour or two. The laughs are there right from the start, when the alarm clock goes off and Jim tries to shut it off, only to be thwarted at every turn by Muriel. The timing and delivery of the comedic lines and situations can only be given by a couple of seasoned pros, and that's just what Grant and Loy give us: polished performances, simple chemistry, and a lot of fun. Myrna Loy is in a pretty thankless role (it's evident that Grant's character Jim gets the lion share of the lines and the acting, and Grant, as always, pulls both off with remarkable aplomb), but she gives Muriel a colour, life and bite that only Myrna Loy can give a character. Melvyn Douglas plays wry amusement to perfection as well, never hitting a single wrong note.

One of my favourite scenes has definitely got to be when Bill gets himself locked in the 'store room', and Jim goes to 'save' him... only to get everyone trapped inside! Every little problem that pops up for the Blandings renovation project--including petty jealousy and an ad campaign for 'Wham'--seems to bring together everything that *could* go wrong with building a new house but makes it believable and an enjoyable watch. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd have to say this is one of the best animated films I've ever seen. I liked it the first time but really appreciated it on the second viewing, just a few weeks ago. I can see why sequel is doing such great business at the box office. Apparently, a lot of people liked this movie.

A gorgeous color palette (man, this looks good) and a lot of good adult (but clean) humor make this a big winner. The opening 3-4-minute scene with "Scat," is excellent as are subsequent interludes with him. "Sid" the sloth (voiced by John Leguizano), however, provides the main humor in the movie. He usually has something funny to say throughout the movie.

Ray Romano is the voice of the mammoth, the big character of the film, literally, while Denis Leary is the ferocious bad-guy-turned-good sabertooth tiger

This isn't just humor and pretty colors but a nice, sentimental story of how a little baby softens up a couple of tough characters. This isn't interrupted with a lot of songs, either: one only brief one and there is nothing offensive, language-wise.

If more animated movies were this good, I'd own more. --------------------------------------------- Result 2487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I took my 10-year-old daughter to see Nancy Drew over the weekend and found myself thoroughly entertained. First off, it was clean, and I mean by my standards. The majority of kids' movies today are full of crude toilet humor and gross-out jokes to elicit cheap laughter from the pre-teen crowd. Nancy Drew is smarter than that, however, and the humor is subtle and clever.

The title role is played with a refreshing vivaciousness by Emma Roberts, who is perky and polite without ever becoming annoying. Unlike The Brady Bunch Movie, where the anachronistic characters are jeered and ridiculed, Nancy's style is treated with respect and dignity. It's a great moment when the LA "style-conscious" girls with their Paris Hilton streetwalker attire are dismissed by the boutique owner, while Nancy, in her penny loafers and homemade Butterick pattern dress, is embraced. This movie shuns the we-need-to-enlighten-this-wholesome-girl tack so many Hollywood movies take. Nancy remains true to herself and her values throughout.

The mystery is just tense enough at times to be engaging. There were several suspenseful moments where my daughter nervously grabbed my arm, but there were no gratuitous shock scenes. It's all based on tension and mood and is a lot of fun. The supporting cast is good, particularly Marshall Bell as the creepy caretaker. There are some great cameos by Eddie Jemison, Chris Kattan and Bruce Willis and many moments that will make adults smile.

This film deserves better ratings than some have given it. Not only was I glad not to be dragged to yet another computer animated film where talking animals burp and pass gas all over the place, but I was also very entertained. Had I been there without a child, I still would've enjoyed the movie. This is one DVD that will have my daughter's name on it under the Christmas tree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The plot is tight. The acting is flawless. The directing, script, scenery, casting are all well done. I watch this movie frequently, though I don't know what it is about the whole thing that grabs me. See it and drop me a line if you can figure out why I like it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] On the [[surface]], "[[Written]] on the Wind" is a lurid, [[glossy]] soap [[opera]] about the [[sexual]] dysfunctions of a Texas [[oil]] family. But [[underneath]] it all is a [[deep]], social [[commentary]] on 1950's life. [[Director]] Douglas Sirk [[scores]] again with another Univeral sudser. Robert [[Stack]] [[falls]] in [[love]] with [[Lauren]] Bacall. The problem is that Stack's best [[pal]], [[Rock]] Hudson, [[loves]] her too. When [[Stack]] [[finds]] out he's [[sterile]] and Bacall [[ends]] up pregnant, the [[fireworks]] [[fly]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oscar]] for her portrayl of Texas' biggest nympho who is [[shunned]] by Hudson. [[Good]] [[epic]] soap [[opera]]. On the [[surfaces]], "[[Wrote]] on the Wind" is a lurid, [[bright]] soap [[drama]] about the [[sexually]] dysfunctions of a Texas [[petrol]] family. But [[below]] it all is a [[profound]], social [[feedback]] on 1950's life. [[Headmaster]] Douglas Sirk [[dozens]] again with another Univeral sudser. Robert [[Stacked]] [[slumps]] in [[likes]] with [[Loren]] Bacall. The problem is that Stack's best [[boyfriend]], [[Boulder]] Hudson, [[adores]] her too. When [[Heap]] [[discovers]] out he's [[barren]] and Bacall [[end]] up pregnant, the [[pyrotechnics]] [[steal]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oskar]] for her portrayl of Texas' biggest nympho who is [[dodged]] by Hudson. [[Well]] [[manas]] soap [[oprah]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Canadian director [[Vincenzo]] Natali took the art-house [[circuit]] by [[storm]] with the [[intriguing]] and [[astonishingly]] [[intelligent]] Cube, which is my personal favourite SF [[film]] of the 90s. It framed the [[basic]] conceit of a group of [[strangers]] [[trapped]] in a maze [[shaped]] like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[took]] this idea in [[fascinating]] [[directions]].

I've been [[eagerly]] awaiting Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five years for him to mount another project, I'm [[delighted]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[exploration]] of one man's [[place]] in the world, and how through a completely logical [[chain]] of events, [[finds]] himself in a situation [[beyond]] his control.

I don't want to [[reveal]] too much about the plot, because one of the joys of [[Cypher]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[refreshing]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Cypher]] is such a [[film]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the planet, is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[send]] him to different parts of America to record different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. [[Covering]] topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast Lucy [[Liu]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She gives him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds irresistible. That's not too [[surprising]] considering the [[dry]] [[marriage]] he is in.

When Rita [[turns]] up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she tells him his [[life]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[would]] cheapen the impact the rest of the film has on us, as well as the [[tortuous]] [[path]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with [[Cube]], Natali [[shows]] [[quite]] a talent for [[encompassing]] [[seemingly]] [[ordinary]] people, [[taking]] them out of the familiar, and basically [[seeing]] what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a [[secret]] silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! Canadian director [[Vinnie]] Natali took the art-house [[circuitry]] by [[rainstorm]] with the [[exciting]] and [[insanely]] [[smarter]] Cube, which is my personal favourite SF [[movies]] of the 90s. It framed the [[fundamental]] conceit of a group of [[aliens]] [[wedged]] in a maze [[modeled]] like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[taken]] this idea in [[exciting]] [[guidelines]].

I've been [[impatiently]] awaiting Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five years for him to mount another project, I'm [[contented]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[explorer]] of one man's [[placing]] in the world, and how through a completely logical [[strings]] of events, [[find]] himself in a situation [[afterlife]] his control.

I don't want to [[reveals]] too much about the plot, because one of the joys of [[Encryption]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[freshen]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Encryption]] is such a [[movies]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the planet, is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[sent]] him to different parts of America to record different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. [[Comprising]] topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast Lucy [[Lio]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She gives him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds irresistible. That's not too [[impressive]] considering the [[dried]] [[marrying]] he is in.

When Rita [[revolves]] up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she tells him his [[vida]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[ought]] cheapen the impact the rest of the film has on us, as well as the [[convoluted]] [[way]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with [[Cubes]], Natali [[denotes]] [[rather]] a talent for [[consisting]] [[supposedly]] [[banal]] people, [[take]] them out of the familiar, and basically [[see]] what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a [[concealed]] silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! --------------------------------------------- Result 2491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most hillarious and funny Brooks movie I ever seen. I can watch and re-watch the tape 100 times. I laugh my a** off and I cry on some moments. It is really good and funny movie, and if you like Brooks - this is a must! In short - Brooks (billionare) gets to the streets as homeless for 30 days in order to win the entire poor district from his competitor. The reality bites, but in the end - it is about warm relations between humans... Hightly recommend! --------------------------------------------- Result 2492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The movie is a [[fantasy]]. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is [[wonderfully]] clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

[[Movies]] are designed to serve [[various]] purposes. This one is designed to [[entertain]] and it certainly does. If I have one [[negative]] comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, [[Jeanette]] MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/[[Nelson]] [[Eddy]] films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I [[recommend]] this movie without [[reservation]] to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. The movie is a [[utopia]]. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is [[strikingly]] clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

[[Kino]] are designed to serve [[sundry]] purposes. This one is designed to [[distract]] and it certainly does. If I have one [[untoward]] comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, [[Jeannette]] MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/[[Nielsen]] [[Whirlpool]] films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I [[recommending]] this movie without [[reserves]] to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's not just that this is a [[bad]] [[movie]]; it's not only that four of the "[[best]]" Mexican movie makers are in this [[film]]; and it's not only that the [[script]] is terrible. It's just that...this [[movie]] [[sucks]]...[[big]] [[time]]. This people are [[wasting]] [[money]] in [[terrible]] scripts. It's supposed to make a [[criticism]] about Mexican [[society]] but we're [[fed]] up with this [[kind]] of [[films]]. Is [[bad]] [[language]] supposed to be [[funny]]? I don't get it. [[Mexican]] [[cinema]] is in big [[trouble]] if this [[kind]] of movies are going to [[continue]] playing (and being [[written]] and [[produced]]).

Please, don't [[think]] this [[kind]] of [[movies]] are well received in Mexico: We [[hate]] them and they don't reflect us. It's not just that this is a [[naughty]] [[filmmaking]]; it's not only that four of the "[[nicest]]" Mexican movie makers are in this [[movie]]; and it's not only that the [[scripts]] is terrible. It's just that...this [[movies]] [[stinks]]...[[large]] [[times]]. This people are [[losing]] [[cash]] in [[scary]] scripts. It's supposed to make a [[criticise]] about Mexican [[societal]] but we're [[fueled]] up with this [[type]] of [[filmmaking]]. Is [[unfavorable]] [[linguistics]] supposed to be [[hilarious]]? I don't get it. [[Mexico]] [[filmmaking]] is in big [[problem]] if this [[genus]] of movies are going to [[continues]] playing (and being [[handwritten]] and [[generated]]).

Please, don't [[thinks]] this [[genus]] of [[movie]] are well received in Mexico: We [[dislikes]] them and they don't reflect us. --------------------------------------------- Result 2494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Last Big Thing" is a wonderful satirical film that sardonically whips pop culture to the point of humorous self-desctruction. The characters are so interesting and fun to laugh at/sympathize with. Which brings me to an introduction to the characters I liked best...

Simon Geist is a man in his late 30s/early 40s who creates a pop-culture driven editorial magazine called "The Next Big Thing". Thing is, this magazine doesnt really exist, and it is only an excuse for Simon to get close to actors by interviewing them, only to bitch-slap them silly, insulting their way of buying into pop culture. His live-in female friend, Darla, is also writing a magazine (which is real), which mainly has to do with her and Simon, as well as her and her father. Darla is a genuinely loveable (or loathable) character, depending on how you view her muted neurotic behavior. Magda is a prostitute, the character i liked the best. Brent is a flat character with not much to him, as is Tedra, the music-video queen for a bunch of B-rated rock bands. Still, these characters weave a very interesting web together. And this movie questions all the motivations that people have for what they do and why they do it. Its a wonderful film and I suggest you see it if you're in the indie/art house crowd. Mark my words!

--------------------------------------------- Result 2495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Taking]] a [[break]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi [[Goldberg]] in an [[adaptation]] of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's incredible that this is the same [[woman]] who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[magnificent]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second [[best]] [[movie]] behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. [[Picked]] a [[intermission]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi [[Tucker]] in an [[coping]] of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's incredible that this is the same [[dame]] who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[wondrous]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second [[nicest]] [[kino]] behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. --------------------------------------------- Result 2496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never even knew this movie existed until I found an old VHS copy of it, hidden deep in my dusty horror closet. The title on the box said "Insect" and the illustrations on the back made clear that it is just another insignificant and poorly produced 80's horror movie. They can surely be fun, of course, as long as don't expect an intelligent scenario and as long as you're not irritated by seeing a giant amount of cheesy make-up effects. Just about every important aspect that makes a horror movie worthy viewing is substandard here in "Blue Monkey"! The plot is ridiculous and highly unoriginal, the acting performances are painful to observe and there's a total lack of suspense. Following the always-popular trend of "big-bug" movies, "Blue Monkey" handles about a new and unknown insect species that wipes out the doctors and patients of a remote hospital. The makers couldn't be more evasive about the actual origin of this gigantically over-sized critter! All we know is that it's not from outer space and it initially crawled out of a tropical plant. Other than this, there's absolutely no explanation for where this new type of insect all of a sudden comes from! Like I said, don't get your hopes up for an intelligent screenplay. The first half of the film is entertaining enough, with some nice gore and the introduction of a couple deranged characters (an 80-year-old blind and alcoholic lady!) but the second half (when the entire hospital is put to quarantine) is dreadfully boring. It is also near the end that "Blue Monkey" begins to exaggeratedly rip-off older (and better) films. Approaching the climax, they apparently ran out of budget as well, since the lighting becomes very poor and the guy in the monster suit isn't very well camouflaged anymore. "Blue Monkey" is worth a peek in case you're really bored or if you really want to see every 80's horror movie ever made. Fans of B-cinema may recognize John Vernon ("Killer Klowns from Outer Space", "Curtains") in the small and meaningless role of Roger, who's in charge of the clinic. --------------------------------------------- Result 2497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Doctor Feinstone is a [[dentist]].He has a [[beautiful]] wife and a [[huge]] [[house]] with a pool.Suddenly he [[discovers]] that his wife is [[making]] out with the pool attendant-he realises that [[behind]] everything clean,there is [[decay]].He [[starts]] to [[torture]] his patients...[[Corbin]] Bernsen is [[brilliant]] as the [[deranged]] dentist-he is [[completely]] [[believable]].There is [[surprisingly]] little gore but the scenes of [[dental]] torture are [[quite]] [[nasty]] and [[grotesque]].Highly [[recommended]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! Doctor Feinstone is a [[dental]].He has a [[fabulous]] wife and a [[sizeable]] [[dwellings]] with a pool.Suddenly he [[finds]] that his wife is [[doing]] out with the pool attendant-he realises that [[posterior]] everything clean,there is [[decomposition]].He [[outset]] to [[tortured]] his patients...[[Furey]] Bernsen is [[remarkable]] as the [[unhinged]] dentist-he is [[perfectly]] [[credible]].There is [[unbelievably]] little gore but the scenes of [[teeth]] torture are [[pretty]] [[soiled]] and [[preposterous]].Highly [[suggested]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2498 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] My personal [[vision]] of [[hell]] is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[movie]] [[play]] for eternity on every [[available]] [[surface]] in that room. The whole [[notion]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only [[begins]] to scratch the surface of how [[ridiculous]] a premise this movie is. The [[single]] most [[important]] thing about watching any movie is the [[concept]] of "[[willing]] [[suspension]] of disbelief" . . . it is impossible to do that in this [[movie]]. My personal [[insight]] of [[hellfire]] is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[filmmaking]] [[playing]] for eternity on every [[accessible]] [[surfaces]] in that room. The whole [[concepts]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only [[startup]] to scratch the surface of how [[farcical]] a premise this movie is. The [[exclusive]] most [[essential]] thing about watching any movie is the [[idea]] of "[[desirous]] [[hiatus]] of disbelief" . . . it is impossible to do that in this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are [[movies]] which are so [[awful]] that they [[become]] affectionately [[comical]] in their ineptness. Such is the case with [[Columbia]] Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[cinematic]] atrocity [[began]] when an [[otherwise]] well intentioned American [[saw]] a Japanese [[made]] for TV [[film]] 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[movie]] in English. This began a virtual [[tsunami]] of [[bad]] decisions which circumnavigated the [[globe]] until it washed ashore in Orlando on [[October]] 21, 2004.

The [[premise]], and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a [[skinny]] Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula [[comes]] to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. [[Next]] we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so [[much]] so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are [[film]] which are so [[gruesome]] that they [[gotten]] affectionately [[hilarious]] in their ineptness. Such is the case with [[Colombia]] Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[filmmaking]] atrocity [[initiated]] when an [[alternatively]] well intentioned American [[witnessed]] a Japanese [[effected]] for TV [[flick]] 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[filmmaking]] in English. This began a virtual [[tsunamis]] of [[negative]] decisions which circumnavigated the [[globo]] until it washed ashore in Orlando on [[December]] 21, 2004.

The [[assumption]], and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a [[lean]] Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula [[occurs]] to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. [[Future]] we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so [[very]] so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 gore fest [[hit]] "[[Hostel]]", and most of these lame [[ass]] knock-offs are just as [[bad]] or worse - [[yet]] "[[Live]] Feed" managed to keep me [[somewhat]] [[entertained]] for about the [[first]] 30 minutes. [[Started]] off with plenty of [[sex]] and [[sleazy]] settings, followed by some [[good]] [[death]] scenes [[involving]] the Chinese [[Organized]] [[Crime]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the [[movie]] was the tough 'hero' with the guns and a [[grudge]] saving the day... I [[would]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a [[premise]] mainly involving [[obnoxious]] [[young]] people being slaughtered in a seedy porno theater, [[doubling]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. If only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating [[would]] have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, leaving the rest of the movie to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. So, basically, it IS just a low-budget "Hostel" rip-off with the redeeming [[use]] of [[gratuitous]] sex, almost [[constant]] during the first half of the film... Overall, I would say don't bother with this one. I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 gore fest [[pummeled]] "[[Dormitory]]", and most of these lame [[backside]] knock-offs are just as [[negative]] or worse - [[nevertheless]] "[[Vive]] Feed" managed to keep me [[rather]] [[distracted]] for about the [[frst]] 30 minutes. [[Launching]] off with plenty of [[sexuality]] and [[dirty]] settings, followed by some [[alright]] [[killings]] scenes [[encompassing]] the Chinese [[Arranged]] [[Crimes]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the [[filmmaking]] was the tough 'hero' with the guns and a [[resentment]] saving the day... I [[could]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a [[supposition]] mainly involving [[despicable]] [[youthful]] people being slaughtered in a seedy porno theater, [[twofold]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. If only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating [[could]] have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, leaving the rest of the movie to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. So, basically, it IS just a low-budget "Hostel" rip-off with the redeeming [[utilizing]] of [[unsubstantiated]] sex, almost [[steady]] during the first half of the film... Overall, I would say don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2501 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and considered [[quite]] racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[colored]] melodrama is still a [[wonderful]] thing. The plot concerns the [[goings]] on in an [[oil]] [[rich]] dysfunctional Texas [[family]] that [[includes]] [[big]] [[brother]] Kyle, who is insecure, weak, wounded & very [[alcoholic]], [[played]] by Robert [[Stack]] in a very [[touching]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sister]] Marylee [[played]] in an extreme [[manner]] by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her [[emotions]], which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting [[jobs]] of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall [[marriage]] falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and considered [[abundantly]] racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[stained]] melodrama is still a [[wondrous]] thing. The plot concerns the [[separations]] on in an [[petroleum]] [[richer]] dysfunctional Texas [[familia]] that [[comprises]] [[grand]] [[sibling]] Kyle, who is insecure, weak, wounded & very [[alcohol]], [[served]] by Robert [[Heap]] in a very [[touch]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sisters]] Marylee [[done]] in an extreme [[fashion]] by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her [[feelings]], which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting [[labor]] of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall [[marry]] falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. --------------------------------------------- Result 2502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Despite the gravity of the [[subject]] and [[probably]] the [[good]] intentions of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[inconsistencies]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[hard]] to [[take]] the story seriously. Green, who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[success]] comes [[easily]] when he's willing to [[succumb]] to [[falsifying]] his [[image]]. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting [[opportunity]] with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. [[Green]] is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as anything but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite [[annoying]] and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really [[little]] development of any of them.

The other problem with this [[film]] is the [[ungodly]] amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted [[film]] in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. Despite the gravity of the [[themes]] and [[undeniably]] the [[buena]] intentions of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[incompatibility]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[laborious]] to [[taking]] the story seriously. Green, who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[accomplishments]] comes [[comfortably]] when he's willing to [[succumbing]] to [[forged]] his [[photo]]. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting [[chances]] with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. [[Greene]] is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as anything but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite [[exasperating]] and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really [[scant]] development of any of them.

The other problem with this [[filmmaking]] is the [[sinful]] amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted [[filmmaking]] in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. --------------------------------------------- Result 2503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Love]] hurts. That, I [[think]], is the main message Mike Binder's [[newest]] [[film]] Reign Over Me [[brings]] [[across]]. Whether that [[love]] has [[caused]] your [[relationship]] to [[become]] stagnant, or has [[brought]] anger from the one you [[love]] cheating for [[years]], or has [[broken]] your heart to the point of being [[unable]] to [[open]] yourself up to the [[world]], [[love]] [[hurts]]. The [[great]] [[thing]] about this [[film]], however, is not in its [[portrayal]] of these lost [[souls]] [[trying]] to [[let]] their [[past]] heartbreaks [[go]], but in the eventual [[restart]] of [[new]] bonds for the future. [[No]] one in this [[drama]] is [[perfect]]; they are all at some [[degree]] [[trapped]] [[emotionally]] in relationships that they can't free themselves from [[alone]]. There is some heavy subject material here and I [[credit]] Binder for never [[making]] the [[story]] turn into a political diatribe, but [[instead]] infusing the serious moments with some [[real]] nice comedic bits [[allowing]] the tale to [[stay]] character-based and [[small]] in [[scale]] compared to the epic [[event]] that [[looms]] overhead. What [[could]] have [[become]] a [[trite]] vehicle for [[opinions]] on how 9-11 effected us all, [[ends]] up being a [[story]] about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can [[save]] their [[lives]] from a [[life]] of [[depression]] and [[regret]].

This is a [[new]] [[career]] performance for Adam Sandler. I like to [[think]] that my [[favorite]] director Paul Thomas [[Anderson]] was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his [[stupid]] comedies as [[something]] to use [[dramatically]]. The juvenility of a [[character]] like Billy Madison [[allows]] for laughs and [[potty]] [[humor]], but [[also]] can be [[used]] to [[show]] a repressed [[man]], shy and shutout to the world [[around]] him—a [[man]] with no confidence that needs an [[event]] of [[compassion]] to [[break]] him from his shell. [[Anderson]] let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk [[Love]] and [[Mike]] Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays [[former]] [[dentist]] Charlie Fineman whose [[wife]] and three [[kids]] were [[killed]] in one of the [[planes]] that [[took]] down the [[World]] [[Trade]] [[Center]] on 9-11. That one moment crushed any [[life]] that he had and as a [[result]], he [[became]] reclusive and [[started]] to [[believe]] he couldn't [[remember]] [[anything]] that [[happened]] before that day. He [[really]] [[delivers]] a [[moving]] [[portrait]] of a [[man]] [[trying]] to keep up the [[charade]] in his head while those [[around]] him, those that [[love]] him, [[try]] and [[open]] him up to the [[reality]] of what [[happened]] and what the future [[holds]]. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished [[family]], he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best [[friend]] and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. [[Loved]] hurts. That, I [[ideas]], is the main message Mike Binder's [[new]] [[films]] Reign Over Me [[puts]] [[in]]. Whether that [[amour]] has [[generated]] your [[relationships]] to [[becomes]] stagnant, or has [[made]] anger from the one you [[loves]] cheating for [[olds]], or has [[raped]] your heart to the point of being [[incapable]] to [[opening]] yourself up to the [[globe]], [[adore]] [[stings]]. The [[grand]] [[stuff]] about this [[cinematography]], however, is not in its [[portrait]] of these lost [[ames]] [[attempting]] to [[allowing]] their [[former]] heartbreaks [[going]], but in the eventual [[restarted]] of [[nouveau]] bonds for the future. [[Nope]] one in this [[tragedy]] is [[impeccable]]; they are all at some [[diploma]] [[stuck]] [[excitedly]] in relationships that they can't free themselves from [[mere]]. There is some heavy subject material here and I [[credits]] Binder for never [[doing]] the [[narratives]] turn into a political diatribe, but [[however]] infusing the serious moments with some [[actual]] nice comedic bits [[allowed]] the tale to [[remain]] character-based and [[little]] in [[scales]] compared to the epic [[incident]] that [[loom]] overhead. What [[wo]] have [[becoming]] a [[banal]] vehicle for [[views]] on how 9-11 effected us all, [[terminates]] up being a [[narratives]] about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can [[saved]] their [[vie]] from a [[vida]] of [[slump]] and [[sorrow]].

This is a [[novo]] [[quarry]] performance for Adam Sandler. I like to [[thought]] that my [[preferred]] director Paul Thomas [[Andersson]] was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his [[silly]] comedies as [[anything]] to use [[drastically]]. The juvenility of a [[nature]] like Billy Madison [[allowed]] for laughs and [[loopy]] [[comedy]], but [[similarly]] can be [[using]] to [[display]] a repressed [[males]], shy and shutout to the world [[about]] him—a [[guy]] with no confidence that needs an [[incident]] of [[pity]] to [[blackout]] him from his shell. [[Andersen]] let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk [[Loves]] and [[Mick]] Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays [[past]] [[dentistry]] Charlie Fineman whose [[woman]] and three [[child]] were [[murdering]] in one of the [[aircraft]] that [[taken]] down the [[Globe]] [[Commercial]] [[Centers]] on 9-11. That one moment crushed any [[living]] that he had and as a [[conclusions]], he [[was]] reclusive and [[starts]] to [[believing]] he couldn't [[rember]] [[something]] that [[arrived]] before that day. He [[genuinely]] [[offerings]] a [[shifting]] [[portraits]] of a [[men]] [[attempts]] to keep up the [[parody]] in his head while those [[about]] him, those that [[amour]] him, [[trying]] and [[opening]] him up to the [[realities]] of what [[arrived]] and what the future [[possesses]]. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished [[familia]], he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best [[amie]] and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2504 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having read [[many]] of the other [[reviews]] for this [[film]] on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is [[nothing]] like the books upon which it is based. [[Upon]] this point I cannot [[comment]], having never [[actually]] read any of the [[protagonists]] [[adventures]] [[previously]]. [[However]], what I can say with certainty, is that it [[strikes]] me that [[many]] of the said [[reviewers]] [[must]] have [[surely]] [[undergone]] a sense of [[humour]] bypass; Let's be [[honest]] here - this [[film]] is just so much fun!

[[OK]]…..so I [[must]] [[concede]] the point that the [[film]] [[apparently]] is not representative of the [[character]]/s but let's put this into a [[clear]] [[perspective]]…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this [[film]] [[also]] bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman [[series]] does not remain faithful to the [[original]] DC [[comic]] [[book]] [[character]]? Or [[perhaps]] is there STILL unrest in same [[persons]] that the 1980 [[film]] version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the [[original]] [[series]]?

The point is, [[yes]] this [[film]] is [[incredibly]] camp but that's [[precisely]] its [[charm]]!

[[Former]] Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and [[bears]] more than a passing [[resemblance]] to [[Gary]] Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a [[great]] supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. [[Also]] [[look]] out for a very [[brief]] but [[highly]] [[welcome]] appearance by [[horror]] [[movie]] favourite [[Michael]] Berryman.

[[Best]] scene? Far too [[many]] to [[choose]] from but [[check]] out the [[hilarious]] facial [[expressions]] [[adopted]] by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the [[ultimate]] [[faux]] pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! [[Also]] the [[often]] [[noted]] scene [[near]] the [[end]] of the [[film]] wherein [[Savage]] tackles his [[nemesis]] [[Captain]] [[Seas]] utilising [[various]] martial [[arts]] disciplines which are labelled on screen! – [[Priceless]]!

Simply put, the [[film]] doesn't [[take]] itself at all seriously and is all the more [[fun]] for it. [[Great]] fun from [[start]] to [[finish]]! (and you'll be [[singing]] the [[John]] Phillip [[Sousa]] [[adapted]] [[theme]] song for days afterwards [[guaranteed]]!) Having read [[innumerable]] of the other [[reviewing]] for this [[cinematography]] on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is [[anything]] like the books upon which it is based. [[After]] this point I cannot [[commentary]], having never [[indeed]] read any of the [[actors]] [[shenanigans]] [[ago]]. [[Instead]], what I can say with certainty, is that it [[bombardments]] me that [[several]] of the said [[reviewer]] [[should]] have [[undeniably]] [[experienced]] a sense of [[humorous]] bypass; Let's be [[truthful]] here - this [[flick]] is just so much fun!

[[OKAY]]…..so I [[ought]] [[recognising]] the point that the [[films]] [[visibly]] is not representative of the [[characters]]/s but let's put this into a [[definite]] [[viewpoint]]…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this [[cinema]] [[furthermore]] bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman [[serial]] does not remain faithful to the [[preliminary]] DC [[hilarious]] [[books]] [[characters]]? Or [[potentially]] is there STILL unrest in same [[individuals]] that the 1980 [[cinema]] version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the [[initial]] [[serials]]?

The point is, [[yeah]] this [[cinematography]] is [[extremely]] camp but that's [[accurately]] its [[charisma]]!

[[Antigua]] Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and [[carry]] more than a passing [[likeness]] to [[Garry]] Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a [[large]] supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. [[Apart]] [[glance]] out for a very [[writ]] but [[heavily]] [[greet]] appearance by [[terror]] [[films]] favourite [[Michele]] Berryman.

[[Better]] scene? Far too [[numerous]] to [[selected]] from but [[verify]] out the [[funny]] facial [[expression]] [[passed]] by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the [[final]] [[false]] pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! [[Moreover]] the [[normally]] [[pointed]] scene [[nearer]] the [[terminating]] of the [[cinema]] wherein [[Cruel]] tackles his [[foe]] [[Capt]] [[Oceans]] utilising [[diversified]] martial [[humanities]] disciplines which are labelled on screen! – [[Cherish]]!

Simply put, the [[cinematography]] doesn't [[taking]] itself at all seriously and is all the more [[amusing]] for it. [[Wondrous]] fun from [[begins]] to [[conclude]]! (and you'll be [[singer]] the [[Giovanni]] Phillip [[Souza]] [[adapting]] [[subjects]] song for days afterwards [[ensure]]!) --------------------------------------------- Result 2505 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie set out to be better than the [[average]] action movie and in that regard they [[succeeded]].This movie had [[spectacular]] [[cinematography]] featuring spectacular [[mountain]] snow and heights,a very [[fit]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an [[exciting]] plot,and a [[great]] performance from it's [[main]] villain [[becouse]] he will [[really]] [[shock]] you with his evil [[ways]].The movie does not rank an all [[time]] great becouse of the [[weak]] screen [[play]].The plot and [[story]] cries for this [[movie]] to make Stallone an extra [[special]] human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or [[Bond]] movie [[characters]].They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but [[considering]] the plot's style,weakens the [[excitement]] factor.[[Also]],the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at [[times]].The script should have been more [[realistic]] and less "talky".Another [[weak]] point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The [[movie]] [[makers]] should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have [[continued]] the quality of the scenes of the shooting [[sequences]] during the [[plane]] hijacking early in the [[movie]].Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV [[series]]) as [[soon]] as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time [[great]] potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I [[sense]] the movie's [[director]] [[wanted]] to tone down Stallone's character and [[try]] to [[steal]] the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that [[great]] if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ This movie set out to be better than the [[medium]] action movie and in that regard they [[successes]].This movie had [[wondrous]] [[films]] featuring spectacular [[shan]] snow and heights,a very [[fitted]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an [[excite]] plot,and a [[excellent]] performance from it's [[principal]] villain [[eventhough]] he will [[truthfully]] [[shocked]] you with his evil [[manner]].The movie does not rank an all [[moment]] great becouse of the [[breakable]] screen [[gaming]].The plot and [[histories]] cries for this [[kino]] to make Stallone an extra [[specific]] human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or [[Bonded]] movie [[characteristics]].They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but [[examining]] the plot's style,weakens the [[arousal]] factor.[[Similarly]],the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at [[time]].The script should have been more [[practical]] and less "talky".Another [[breakable]] point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The [[cinema]] [[builders]] should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have [[incessant]] the quality of the scenes of the shooting [[sequencing]] during the [[airline]] hijacking early in the [[cinema]].Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV [[serial]]) as [[rapidly]] as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time [[wondrous]] potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I [[sensing]] the movie's [[superintendent]] [[desired]] to tone down Stallone's character and [[tried]] to [[vole]] the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that [[remarkable]] if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ --------------------------------------------- Result 2506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I LOVED this movie! I am biased seeing as I am a huge Disney fan, but I really enjoyed myself. The action takes off running in the beginning of the film and just keeps going! This is a bit of a departure for Disney, they don't spend quite as much time on character development (my husband pointed this out)and there are no musical numbers. It is strictly action adventure. I thoroughly enjoyed it and recommend it to anyone who loves Disney, be they young or old. --------------------------------------------- Result 2507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A must see movie for anyone who ever went to camp, or wanted to. This film captures the absolute essence of what summer camp is all about. It is funny, it is compassionate it makes you want to watch more about the characters once the credits begin to role. If you have not seen this movie..what are you doing? get off you butt and run the video store. Have a great summer :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Seeing as the world [[snooker]] championship final finished in a premature and disappointing [[manner]] with [[Ronnie]] O`Sullivan [[defeating]] Greame Dott by 18 frames to 8 BBC 2 found a [[gap]] in their [[schedule]] and so decided to broadcast A [[WALK]] [[ON]] THE [[MOON]] a [[movie]] I had [[absolutely]] no [[knowledge]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought possibly it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the opening with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer camp has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and [[bored]] house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It [[jars]] with the rest of the [[movie]] and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them Seeing as the world [[billiard]] championship final finished in a premature and disappointing [[way]] with [[Rooney]] O`Sullivan [[beating]] Greame Dott by 18 frames to 8 BBC 2 found a [[loopholes]] in their [[deadline]] and so decided to broadcast A [[STROLL]] [[REGARDING]] THE [[LUNA]] a [[filmmaking]] I had [[entirely]] no [[acquaintance]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought possibly it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the opening with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer camp has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and [[drilled]] house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It [[bottles]] with the rest of the [[filmmaking]] and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them --------------------------------------------- Result 2509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This 1947 film stars and was directed and written by Orson Welles (with a funky Irish accent) and also stars the gorgeous Rita Hayworth with less appealing short blonde hair. So, I've hung out with Orson before in Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane and the Third Man etc. but this was my first Rita Hayworth interaction. Our first meeting went well, she does a superb job playing the frightened/cagey Elsa, married to a crippled millionaire lawyer. Mike (Welles) and Elsa fall for each other. He wants to run away with her, she doesn't know if she can live without the things money can buy. Elsa, her husband, and his partner bicker and bite, just like the sharks Mike describes attacking each other and his foretelling proves just too true. Several twists and turns follow in this murder mystery as we come to the climax in the fun house. (Think the ending shootout in The Man with the Golden Gun, which borrowed heavily from this scene). I wasn't sure who the murderer was until the end.

This movie is like shrimp in garlic and lemon. The dish centers on the sea, it is subtle, sour, and pungent, all to great effect. These might not be the best, fresh shrimp, but good quality frozen shrimp from Costco. The flavorful sauce adds to the naturalness of the pink shrimp as you fill up on a healthy, but filling alternative to more mundane, common fare. 7/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 2510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A meteor hit's Crater [[Lake]] (hence our title), awakening a Plesiosaur, who proceed's to snack on the hick population (in California, that hick capital of the world.)

There's [[bad]] [[movies]], and then there's "The Crater Lake Monster", which somehow managed to [[escape]] MST3K. [[Featuring]] grating acting, a [[decent]] stop-motion beast, and more, this is a [[dreadful]] piece of 1970's low budget [[exploitation]]/monster [[movie]] dreck.

[[While]] the [[movie]] is guilty of many [[crimes]], the [[biggest]] one is Arnie and Mitch, two [[obnoxious]] rednecks who [[serve]] as our comic [[relief]]. They bumble around, fight to [[stock]] "[[banjo]] [[music]]",ogle women, and [[act]] like [[pathetic]] [[excuses]] of [[humanity]]. The [[characters]] are so [[bad]], they should count as a [[crime]] against [[humanity]]. A meteor hit's Crater [[Lakes]] (hence our title), awakening a Plesiosaur, who proceed's to snack on the hick population (in California, that hick capital of the world.)

There's [[negative]] [[filmmaking]], and then there's "The Crater Lake Monster", which somehow managed to [[flee]] MST3K. [[Featured]] grating acting, a [[dignified]] stop-motion beast, and more, this is a [[gruesome]] piece of 1970's low budget [[operate]]/monster [[film]] dreck.

[[Though]] the [[filmmaking]] is guilty of many [[criminality]], the [[greatest]] one is Arnie and Mitch, two [[detestable]] rednecks who [[serves]] as our comic [[succour]]. They bumble around, fight to [[stocks]] "[[mandolin]] [[musica]]",ogle women, and [[acts]] like [[unlucky]] [[pretenses]] of [[humane]]. The [[characteristic]] are so [[rotten]], they should count as a [[misdemeanor]] against [[humane]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[casting]], but the movie plays serious mindf** with the audience. (don't read if you ever [[intend]] to [[seriously]] watch this film or to ever watch this [[film]] [[seriously]] due to the spoilers) [[First]] of all, I felt myself [[rolling]] my eyes [[repeatedly]] at the Liberal stereotypes: the [[cops]] are all sadistic and frame this [[black]] [[guy]] with no [[evidence]]. The coroner, witnesses and even the [[lawyer]] of the [[accused]] [[collaborate]] against him (he is [[accused]] of the [[rape]] and [[murder]] of a [[young]] [[girl]]) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard [[law]] [[prof]] who [[gives]] impassioned [[speeches]] about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous [[death]] [[penalty]]. He is [[approached]] by the convicted man's [[grandmother]] to [[defend]] him and re-open the [[trial]].

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the [[small]] [[town]] [[officials]] and the good IL' boys club but [[finds]] that the [[case]] against Blair, the [[alleged]] [[killer]], now on death row, was all fabricated. The [[main]] [[evidence]] was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The [[beating]] was administered by a [[black]] [[cop]] (!) who even [[played]] Russian roulette to [[get]] the confession out of him. Connery [[finds]] out that another [[inmate]] on [[death]] row actually did the [[murder]] and after a few tete a tetes with a [[seriously]] overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris [[hid]] the murder weapon.

He [[gets]] a re-trial and Blair is [[freed]].

I [[think]]... [[film]] over....

Then [[suddenly]]! It turns out that Blair IS a [[psychotic]] [[psycho]] and that he [[used]] "white guilt" to [[enlist]] Connery. He concocted the [[story]] with Ed Harris in [[return]] for Blair [[carrying]] out a few [[murders]] for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, [[thanks]] to Connery's deluded PC principles! The [[final]] 30 min. are a weird [[action]] movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[pouring]], but the movie plays serious mindf** with the audience. (don't read if you ever [[intention]] to [[severely]] watch this film or to ever watch this [[filmmaking]] [[harshly]] due to the spoilers) [[Frst]] of all, I felt myself [[roll]] my eyes [[always]] at the Liberal stereotypes: the [[nypd]] are all sadistic and frame this [[negro]] [[man]] with no [[testimony]]. The coroner, witnesses and even the [[jurist]] of the [[charged]] [[works]] against him (he is [[charged]] of the [[violating]] and [[slain]] of a [[youthful]] [[female]]) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard [[legislation]] [[professor]] who [[provides]] impassioned [[rhetoric]] about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous [[muerte]] [[punishments]]. He is [[tackled]] by the convicted man's [[gran]] to [[advocating]] him and re-open the [[trials]].

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the [[minor]] [[ciudad]] [[official]] and the good IL' boys club but [[found]] that the [[examples]] against Blair, the [[supposed]] [[slayer]], now on death row, was all fabricated. The [[primary]] [[proof]] was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The [[defeating]] was administered by a [[negro]] [[constable]] (!) who even [[done]] Russian roulette to [[gets]] the confession out of him. Connery [[discovers]] out that another [[inmates]] on [[mortality]] row actually did the [[assassinating]] and after a few tete a tetes with a [[gravely]] overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris [[masked]] the murder weapon.

He [[got]] a re-trial and Blair is [[freeing]].

I [[believe]]... [[movies]] over....

Then [[unexpectedly]]! It turns out that Blair IS a [[psycho]] [[crazy]] and that he [[utilized]] "white guilt" to [[enrol]] Connery. He concocted the [[storytelling]] with Ed Harris in [[comeback]] for Blair [[ferrying]] out a few [[assassinate]] for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, [[appreciation]] to Connery's deluded PC principles! The [[definitive]] 30 min. are a weird [[actions]] movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. --------------------------------------------- Result 2512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This was actually my [[favorite]] [[series]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[thought]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the villains had a [[lot]] of [[creative]] [[thought]] put into them (and even very [[scary]] and believable as well). Some of the [[best]] [[episodes]] were "I Left My Neck [[In]] [[San]] Francisco", "Twenty Thousand [[Screams]] [[Under]] The Sea", "The Ghoul, The Bat And The Ugly" and "When You [[Wish]] Upon A Star Creature". If you have never seen these [[episodes]] please do. This series was a bit of a [[mixed]] [[bag]] though as there were other [[episodes]] which didn't seem to have the same kind of edge to them such as "Rocky Mountain YIIII!" and "The Ransom Of Scooby Chief". As like the series before it, it was very well put together, interesting storyline and [[brilliantly]] drawn. As [[everyone]] [[says]] though, it would have been so much better without Scrappy Doo. The character was tiresome and distracting to the story that was being told. This was actually my [[preferable]] [[serials]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[brainchild]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the villains had a [[lots]] of [[inventive]] [[idea]] put into them (and even very [[awful]] and believable as well). Some of the [[better]] [[spells]] were "I Left My Neck [[For]] [[Saint]] Francisco", "Twenty Thousand [[Cree]] [[At]] The Sea", "The Ghoul, The Bat And The Ugly" and "When You [[Wants]] Upon A Star Creature". If you have never seen these [[bouts]] please do. This series was a bit of a [[blended]] [[rucksack]] though as there were other [[spells]] which didn't seem to have the same kind of edge to them such as "Rocky Mountain YIIII!" and "The Ransom Of Scooby Chief". As like the series before it, it was very well put together, interesting storyline and [[beautifully]] drawn. As [[anyone]] [[alleges]] though, it would have been so much better without Scrappy Doo. The character was tiresome and distracting to the story that was being told. --------------------------------------------- Result 2513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This horrendously bad piece of trash manages to be racist, sexist and homophobic all at once, while pretending to be terribly chic and sophisticated. Atrocious performances, a cliche ridden screenplay, and boring direction make this movie one to steer clear of. Two scenes were especially offensive - the one in which Schaech scrubs his tongue after being kissed by another man (could it really have been that gross), and the scene where Eastwood is kissed by Schaech's best friend, who is pretending to be Russian. After he leaves the room she exclaims "f**king foreigners"! So much for her being a cultured artist who dreams of living in Paris!?!

Jonathon Schaech can be a likeable actor on screen, and is astonishingly good-looking. It's a shame he didn't learn more from working with cutting edge gay director Gregg Araki on an earlier film, and try to salvage this film from descending into a string of gay stereotypes and a mire of homophobia. --------------------------------------------- Result 2514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i just watched the movie i was afraid it's gonna disappoint me. i was rather surprised at the end though. The American pie franchise is still in my favorite franchise movies of all times. yes, it won't be true if i say that i enjoyed it as mush as i enjoyed the original ones. beta house along with the previous two pies definitely lost something that the first two pies had.it is not gonna become a classic as the first two already did. but what the hell-it is still funny with a lot of good moments and i think it should be the first movie to pick if you wanna have fun and relax after a hard day at work or school. beta house deserves 6/10 but i gave it 7/10 just for being another slice of PIE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Don't read [[anything]] about this [[movie]] ([[especially]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[awesome]] [[movie]] without knowing [[anything]] about it - and you'll have a really [[great]] experience. If you [[like]] to see an intelligent, [[twisted]] [[story]]: [[Go]], [[get]] the DVD and you'll [[truly]] not be [[disappointed]]. "Cypher" is not [[really]] a sci-fi [[movie]], more a [[psycho]] thriller [[settled]] in the environment of globalized [[business]]. It's about corporate [[secrets]], how [[big]] [[companies]] [[spy]] each others research departments and the [[methods]] [[used]] by them. The actors do a great performance and the [[overall]] [[visual]] [[style]] of the [[movie]] [[provides]] a [[perfect]] [[mode]] of [[coldness]]. [[Cypher]] is much deeper, more [[complex]] and - what belongs the [[story]] and the ending - [[also]] much, much more [[satisfying]] than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "[[Nothing]]". Actually it's one of the [[best]] [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]] (and that's [[something]] I really don't say this about [[every]] fifth well-made [[flick]]). Sorry, can't [[tell]] you anything more about this [[movie]] without [[risking]] to [[hurt]] your [[experience]]. Just give it a [[chance]]. ;-) Don't read [[something]] about this [[kino]] ([[mainly]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[wondrous]] [[cinematographic]] without knowing [[something]] about it - and you'll have a really [[excellent]] experience. If you [[loves]] to see an intelligent, [[deformed]] [[tale]]: [[Going]], [[gets]] the DVD and you'll [[genuinely]] not be [[frustrating]]. "Cypher" is not [[truthfully]] a sci-fi [[cinematographic]], more a [[lunatic]] thriller [[liquidated]] in the environment of globalized [[enterprise]]. It's about corporate [[clandestine]], how [[massive]] [[business]] [[spying]] each others research departments and the [[methodology]] [[using]] by them. The actors do a great performance and the [[whole]] [[optic]] [[styles]] of the [[kino]] [[delivers]] a [[faultless]] [[means]] of [[coolness]]. [[Cipher]] is much deeper, more [[tricky]] and - what belongs the [[narratives]] and the ending - [[apart]] much, much more [[gratifying]] than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "[[Anything]]". Actually it's one of the [[nicest]] [[kino]] I've ever [[watched]] (and that's [[somethin]] I really don't say this about [[each]] fifth well-made [[film]]). Sorry, can't [[say]] you anything more about this [[cinematography]] without [[jeopardizing]] to [[injure]] your [[experiences]]. Just give it a [[chances]]. ;-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I gave this film 8 out of 10, reserving 10 for e.g Amadeus, and 9 for Slumdog Millionaire most recently. This film is close to Slumdog, but it is difficult to judge on such film without understanding Balkan life, mentality and a soul which Kusturica presents masterfully. To understand it you really need to be one of Balkan. This is an amazing movie, much better and more contemporary of his previous films, which are boring at this time, I think Kusturica is moving forward with this movie. I like humour (Balkan humour), photography is an art itself, each scene is artistic to the limit. Plot is probably a fairy tale , don't recall it now, but remember reading to my daughter-going-to sleep a similar story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2517 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just as Tom Berenger put you into the soul of Sgt. Barnes, he has done it again with Thomas Beckett. If I thought his world was folding in on him in the first scenes, it was nothing compared to how much more I felt during the last scenes. Great movie, even for a girl. --------------------------------------------- Result 2518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Well, here's another [[terrific]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly [[would]] have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…[[Sweet]] Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[beautiful]] and almost [[enchanting]] [[mixture]] of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is [[unquestionably]] what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a [[sublime]] depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a [[dull]] moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. Well, here's another [[wondrous]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly [[could]] have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…[[Sugary]] Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[leggy]] and almost [[belle]] [[amalgam]] of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is [[surely]] what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a [[phenomenal]] depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a [[uninspiring]] moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I [[hate]] this movie! It was [[NOTHING]] like the [[book]], and just [[thinking]] about it makes me [[mad]]. [[If]] you watch the [[movie]] before reading the [[book]], then [[yeah]], it's a good [[movie]]. But King's [[book]] was AMAZING and this [[movie]] was nothing like it. I mean, the general [[meaning]] might be [[sort]] of similar but most [[aspects]] of the [[movie]] are [[completely]] different. The [[ending]] for [[example]]! [[So]] in the book it is [[extremely]] intense and [[Danny]] and Wendy [[escape]] seconds before the hotel [[explodes]]. but in this [[horrible]] [[movie]] version [[jack]] like takes them through a [[stupid]] maze... [[yeah]], there is no [[maze]] in the book and there is no [[reason]] for it. Another [[part]] that [[made]] me angry was that [[jack]] just [[kills]] Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the [[hero]] of the book and they just [[kill]] him off like he wasn't [[important]]. [[Overall]], it was just [[bad]] that the [[movie]] was so [[extremely]] off. I [[hating]] this movie! It was [[NADA]] like the [[workbook]], and just [[think]] about it makes me [[pissed]]. [[Though]] you watch the [[film]] before reading the [[ledger]], then [[yep]], it's a good [[filmmaking]]. But King's [[books]] was AMAZING and this [[movies]] was nothing like it. I mean, the general [[meanings]] might be [[kinds]] of similar but most [[facets]] of the [[film]] are [[fully]] different. The [[terminated]] for [[instances]]! [[Accordingly]] in the book it is [[terribly]] intense and [[Dany]] and Wendy [[elope]] seconds before the hotel [[explosions]]. but in this [[scary]] [[film]] version [[jacque]] like takes them through a [[dumb]] maze... [[yep]], there is no [[labyrinth]] in the book and there is no [[cause]] for it. Another [[portion]] that [[accomplished]] me angry was that [[jacques]] just [[killed]] Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the [[superhero]] of the book and they just [[whack]] him off like he wasn't [[momentous]]. [[Whole]], it was just [[unfavourable]] that the [[filmmaking]] was so [[exceptionally]] off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I am [[decidedly]] not in the target audience for this film. I am a man [[nearly]] 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the discovery of a movie [[called]] Clerks late one night on television. The first two things I noticed about that film were that it was 1) technically [[amateurish]] and 2) [[brilliantly]] written. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I [[started]] to [[get]] interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his [[life]] at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The [[themes]] and [[ideas]] of this [[film]] are strong and poignant. I can [[tell]] from watching it that not much has [[changed]] since I was [[growing]] up, young [[men]] still have the same [[problems]] they always have. The writer [[dresses]] up these [[problems]] and [[themes]] in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest [[characters]], and has them do [[completely]] [[believable]] [[things]]. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a [[technical]] [[standpoint]], but from an artistic one, it is very [[close]]. I am [[definitely]] not in the target audience for this film. I am a man [[roughly]] 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the discovery of a movie [[drew]] Clerks late one night on television. The first two things I noticed about that film were that it was 1) technically [[unprofessional]] and 2) [[beautifully]] written. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I [[embark]] to [[obtain]] interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his [[living]] at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The [[item]] and [[idea]] of this [[cinematography]] are strong and poignant. I can [[say]] from watching it that not much has [[amended]] since I was [[widening]] up, young [[hombre]] still have the same [[trouble]] they always have. The writer [[skirts]] up these [[trouble]] and [[matters]] in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest [[attribute]], and has them do [[perfectly]] [[reliable]] [[matters]]. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a [[technological]] [[view]], but from an artistic one, it is very [[nears]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2521 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Two old buddies are sent to Japan to get back results of a genetic research containing videotape, which is stolen by the black suited ninjas at the beginning of the movie. First they just have to learn some ninja skill, because "only ninja can beat the ninja."

Sakura killers tries hard to be enjoyable ninja-flick but fails that badly. The whole movie is just so hollow and predictable that is hard to say anything good about it: Same plot has been seen in different variations dozens of times before, characters are too briefly drawn, direction is dull and script doesn't offer anything surprising, even in the ending scene, which by itself reduced movie's (trash)value.

Even 80's ninja-flick-fan, who understands the esthetic of trash-movies, is hard to find this movie even barely enjoyable. It simply doesn't offer anything new to viewer, neither in visual level nor in plot. Shurikens are thrown and katanas are swinging, but it's not enough to lead the movie direction it meant to be and recurred similar fighting scenes numbs even the most calloused viewer after the first 30 minutes.

It's hard to recommend movie to anyone. Even Franco Nero's clumsy performance in "Enter the Ninja" falls behind Sakura killer's American-ninjas. Even in visual level movie doesn't have any balls and it's waste of time to try to find any great fighting scenes in this movie: There isn't any. In all, one of the most futile ninja-flicks, I've ever seen. Doesn't interest even in curiosity. Trust me on this one.

½ out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Maximally manipulative Anabel Sims (Betsy Drake) sets out to trap her ideal man, aided by her co-worker, Julie. Esteemed pediatrician Madison Brown (Cary Grant) goes from bemused to betrothed in the space of 90 minutes on film, but to the viewer it's all eternity. Can a movie receive less than one star? This one is a prime candidate. --------------------------------------------- Result 2523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the history of movies based on comic books, "Mystery Men" is one of the most underrated ones. This is no regular comic superhero movie! It follows the exploits of a motley crew of well-meaning wannabes, which include Mr. Furious (played by Ben Stiller), the Bowler (Janeane Garofalo), the Shoveller (William H. Macy), the Blue Rajah (Hank Azariah) and the Spleen (Paul Reubens). "Mystery Men" spoofs several aspects of superhero movies like "Superman" or "Batman," such as the pithy sayings, and the questions about secret identities. Most of the superheroes aren't billionaires like Bruce Wayne, but blue-collar types with menial jobs and neurotic home lives. So it looks as if director Kinka Usher is making the heroes into something the average viewer can relate to. I found "Mystery Men" to be visually stimulating and very funny. Even if it doesn't turn into a franchise, it's still a joy to watch! --------------------------------------------- Result 2524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[caught]] this [[film]] late on a sat [[night]]/ [[Sunday]] morning with my brother. We had been [[drinking]]. This is one of the [[best]] [[films]] for ripping [[apart]] I have ever [[seen]]. From the 'luxury' ocean liner [[actually]] being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with [[adhesive]] [[stickers]] saying [[staff]], then [[seeing]] the same door being used for [[something]] else in another scene - this [[film]] [[rocks]]!! The continuity is so [[poor]] you [[cant]] [[help]] but [[notice]] it, it slaps you in the [[face]] with the holes. [[In]] the final scene he [[jumps]] off a [[life]] boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his [[son]] and [[new]] girlfriend (The ships PR [[director]] who knows kung-fu and used to be in the [[police]] but was [[dismissed]] for doing [[things]] her way - true)on the ferry going very [[fast]] away from the explosion. ......Then the [[dad]] is there hugging them. [[HoW]]???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The [[casino]] is the [[size]] of a [[large]] [[bedroom]] with one [[casino]] table. when being [[chased]] by the [[villains]] there is only One place to [[hide]], you've guessed it. [[Enter]] the [[villains]] who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four [[fruit]] [[machines]] and a [[little]] corner bar (a corner [[bar]] in the casino - [[fantastic]]). They walk straight past the only [[hiding]] place [[thus]] [[allowing]] our [[Casper]] to get around them and '[[take]] them out'.

[[Get]] some [[mates]] over, get a few [[drinks]] in, put this film on and howl. I [[capture]] this [[cinematography]] late on a sat [[nighttime]]/ [[Yesterday]] morning with my brother. We had been [[drink]]. This is one of the [[bestest]] [[film]] for ripping [[additionally]] I have ever [[noticed]]. From the 'luxury' ocean liner [[indeed]] being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with [[gummed]] [[labels]] saying [[personnel]], then [[see]] the same door being used for [[anything]] else in another scene - this [[kino]] [[rattles]]!! The continuity is so [[pauper]] you [[theres]] [[helping]] but [[noticing]] it, it slaps you in the [[confront]] with the holes. [[Among]] the final scene he [[leaps]] off a [[living]] boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his [[sons]] and [[novo]] girlfriend (The ships PR [[superintendent]] who knows kung-fu and used to be in the [[policing]] but was [[sacked]] for doing [[items]] her way - true)on the ferry going very [[quicker]] away from the explosion. ......Then the [[pope]] is there hugging them. [[mode]]???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The [[gambling]] is the [[calibre]] of a [[monumental]] [[chamber]] with one [[casinos]] table. when being [[hunted]] by the [[thugs]] there is only One place to [[camouflage]], you've guessed it. [[Intro]] the [[thugs]] who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four [[fruition]] [[computers]] and a [[tiny]] corner bar (a corner [[solicitor]] in the casino - [[unbelievable]]). They walk straight past the only [[hides]] place [[then]] [[permits]] our [[Caspar]] to get around them and '[[taking]] them out'.

[[Got]] some [[boyfriends]] over, get a few [[intoxicating]] in, put this film on and howl. --------------------------------------------- Result 2525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Refreshing `lost' gem! Featuring effective dialog combined with excellent acting to establish the characters and involve you enough to care what happens to them. The Douglas and Widmark characters are realistic heroes. Palance is his usual evil presence. Widmark win the fisticuffs fight scene, a car chase of less than 60 seconds with a `logical' end, and a lengthy chase on foot that shames the overdone chase sequences of contemporary Hollywood. You know how it will likely end, but the suspense and interest are sustained throughout. The end of the chase is one of the most realistic you will ever see. The film seems to slow a little past the middle, but stay with it for the rewarding conclusion. --------------------------------------------- Result 2526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hope whoever coached these losers on their accents was fired. The only high points are a few of the supporting characters, 3 of 5 of my favourites were killed off by the end of the season (and one of them was a cat, to put that into perspective).

The whole storyline is centered around sex, and nothing else. Sex with vampires, gay sex with gay vampires, gay sex with straight vampires, sex to score vampire blood, sex after drinking vampire blood, sex in front of vampires, vampire sex, non-vampire sex, sex because we're scared of vampires, sex because we're mad at vampires, sex because we just became a vampire, etc.

Nothing against sex, it would just be nice if it were a little more subtle with being peppered into the storyline. Perhaps HAVE a storyline and then shoehorn some sex into it. But they didn't even bother to do that... and Anna Paquin is a dizzy gap-tooth bitch. Either she sucks or her character sucks, I can't figure out which.

Another part of the storyline that I find highly implausible is why 150 year old vampire Bill who seems to have his things together would be interested in someone like Sookie. She's constantly flying off the handle at him for things he can't control. He leaves for two days and she already decides that he's "not coming back" and suddenly has feelings for dog-man? Give me a break. She's supposed to be a 25 year old woman, not a 14 year old girl. People close to her are dying all over, and she's got the brightest smile on her face because she just gave away her V-card to some dude because she can't read his mind? As the main character of the story, I would've hoped the show would do a little more to make her understandable and someone to invest your interest in, not someone you keep secretly hoping gets killed off or put into a coma. I can't find anything about her character that I like and even the fact that she can read minds is impressively uninspiring and not the least bit interesting.

I will not be wasting my time with watching Season 2 come June. --------------------------------------------- Result 2527 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] A [[CRY]] IN THE [[DARK]]

A CRY [[IN]] THE DARK was a film that I [[anticipated]] would offer a [[phenomenal]] performance from [[Meryl]] Streep and a solid, if [[unremarkable]] film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the [[movie]] received little attention from major awards groups.

Little did I [[anticipate]] that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[riveting]] drama, well-constructed on [[every]] level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[classic]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the [[attentive]] bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to [[laughable]]. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly [[captured]]. It is subtle and [[realistic]], leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in [[courtrooms]] and focuses on the Chamberlain's [[continuous]] [[fight]] to [[prove]] their innocence to the [[press]] and the [[court]], which [[suspects]] Lindy of [[murder]].

The [[fact]] that it is [[clear]] to us from the [[beginning]] that they are innocent makes the [[tense]] [[trials]] all the more gripping. As an audience [[member]], I was [[fully]] [[invested]] in the Chamberlain's plight... and was [[genuinely]] angered and hurt and saddened when they were [[made]] to [[look]] so [[terrible]] by the [[media]]. But at the same, the [[media]]/public opinion is [[understandable]]. I loved the way the [[media]] was by no [[means]] made to be sympathetic, but they [[always]] had [[valid]] [[reasons]] to hold their [[views]].

The [[final]] line of the [[film]] is very [[profound]] and [[captures]] [[perfectly]] the central [[element]] that makes this [[film]] so much [[different]] from other courtroom [[dramas]].

[[In]] terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... A [[CLAMOUR]] IN THE [[DARKNESS]]

A CRY [[ONTO]] THE DARK was a film that I [[waited]] would offer a [[wondrous]] performance from [[Streep]] Streep and a solid, if [[banal]] film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the [[flick]] received little attention from major awards groups.

Little did I [[predict]] that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[captivating]] drama, well-constructed on [[any]] level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[conventional]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the [[cautious]] bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to [[grotesque]]. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly [[caught]]. It is subtle and [[practical]], leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in [[rooms]] and focuses on the Chamberlain's [[unbroken]] [[fought]] to [[demonstrating]] their innocence to the [[pressing]] and the [[courthouse]], which [[accusing]] Lindy of [[slain]].

The [[facto]] that it is [[definite]] to us from the [[started]] that they are innocent makes the [[strained]] [[trial]] all the more gripping. As an audience [[members]], I was [[entirely]] [[investing]] in the Chamberlain's plight... and was [[actually]] angered and hurt and saddened when they were [[brought]] to [[peek]] so [[scary]] by the [[medium]]. But at the same, the [[medium]]/public opinion is [[comprehensible]]. I loved the way the [[medium]] was by no [[signifies]] made to be sympathetic, but they [[repeatedly]] had [[legitimate]] [[motifs]] to hold their [[opinion]].

The [[last]] line of the [[cinematography]] is very [[deepest]] and [[caught]] [[utterly]] the central [[ingredient]] that makes this [[films]] so much [[several]] from other courtroom [[opera]].

[[Onto]] terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... --------------------------------------------- Result 2528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I can [[remember]] [[seeing]] this movie as a [[kid]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO [[would]] [[show]] it late at night back when they were they one and only [[movie]] pay [[channel]] in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only movie of its [[kind]] ever [[shown]] on [[pay]] [[television]]...[[especially]] back then. I would [[love]] to [[see]] it now as an adult where I [[would]] be more [[apt]] to understand the adult [[theme]] of it. It was [[probably]] the [[closest]] thing I had ever [[seen]] to pornography at the [[young]] [[age]] of 7 or 8. [[Luckily]] I had [[stupid]] [[babysitters]] and party-going [[parents]] on the weekends. [[Most]] of my memory of this [[movie]] was the [[completely]] [[erratic]] sexual [[behavior]] of these two [[guys]]. [[Breaking]] into [[houses]] to [[sniff]] underwear, feeding on a stranger's breast milk on a public [[bus]], and fornicating in a cab at the request of one of their female [[subjects]] were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[idea]] this movie had such a following. [[Most]] people I [[talk]] to have never [[heard]] of it. I can [[remind]] [[see]] this movie as a [[kids]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO [[should]] [[demonstrate]] it late at night back when they were they one and only [[films]] pay [[channels]] in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only movie of its [[genera]] ever [[showed]] on [[payrolls]] [[televisions]]...[[concretely]] back then. I would [[amour]] to [[seeing]] it now as an adult where I [[ought]] be more [[likely]] to understand the adult [[subject]] of it. It was [[presumably]] the [[nearer]] thing I had ever [[saw]] to pornography at the [[youths]] [[aged]] of 7 or 8. [[Gladly]] I had [[preposterous]] [[nannies]] and party-going [[parenting]] on the weekends. [[More]] of my memory of this [[cinematic]] was the [[altogether]] [[irregular]] sexual [[behavioral]] of these two [[guy]]. [[Violating]] into [[households]] to [[sniffing]] underwear, feeding on a stranger's breast milk on a public [[buses]], and fornicating in a cab at the request of one of their female [[items]] were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[notions]] this movie had such a following. [[More]] people I [[schmooze]] to have never [[listened]] of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Some [[time]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American [[West]], several [[cowboys]] in [[need]] of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that [[buffaloes]] are too [[numerous]] for the [[hunting]] to have any [[impact]], but the more experienced [[hunter]] has seen how [[quickly]] the [[population]] can [[collapse]], and he isn't so [[sure]]. Featuring buffalo herds [[living]] in South Dakota and showing [[film]] of actual [[hunting]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary [[thinning]] of the herd), the movie does an [[excellent]] [[job]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting [[figure]]. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie [[suffers]] by [[comparison]]. The plot is not as [[focused]] on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[keep]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. Some [[period]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American [[Western]], several [[texans]] in [[needs]] of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that [[bison]] are too [[myriad]] for the [[hunts]] to have any [[effects]], but the more experienced [[hunting]] has seen how [[quicker]] the [[populace]] can [[collapses]], and he isn't so [[convinced]]. Featuring buffalo herds [[live]] in South Dakota and showing [[movies]] of actual [[hunted]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary [[exhaustion]] of the herd), the movie does an [[wondrous]] [[labour]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting [[silhouette]]. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie [[suffering]] by [[comparisons]]. The plot is not as [[focusing]] on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[retain]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 2530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Good [[movies]] are [[original]], some leave a [[message]] or [[touch]] you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just [[plain]] action when I watched this one. It [[started]] of good and was quite [[entertaining]], so why a bad review. Well in the [[end]] the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was OK, so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[ruined]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... Good [[filmmaking]] are [[upfront]], some leave a [[messaging]] or [[toque]] you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just [[lowland]] action when I watched this one. It [[commencing]] of good and was quite [[fun]], so why a bad review. Well in the [[ceases]] the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was OK, so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[obliterated]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... --------------------------------------------- Result 2531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This film [[reminded]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a good way.

David Chase's seminal mob [[opera]] only ever put its foot wrong [[twice]], the most jarring and inexplicable [[instance]] of which [[took]] [[place]] in its fourth season, when [[Junior]] Soprano went on trial for his [[life]]. Rather than [[pursue]] this [[riveting]] (and [[pivotal]]) plot line, the writers [[instead]] [[chose]] to [[completely]] [[ignore]] it, focusing instead on Bobby Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his [[recently]] [[deceased]] wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of [[genuine]] interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, [[mysterious]] [[assassination]] attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the [[whole]] East Coast/West [[Coast]] feud in the first place, and [[ended]] up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the [[film]] treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why [[exactly]] was Tupac so convinced that he was [[sold]] out by his own people? [[Did]] he [[alone]] nurture his [[subsequent]] affiliation with Suge [[Knight]]? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it [[appears]] here?

None of these [[questions]] are even fleetingly [[addressed]] by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in [[depicting]] Wallace's [[turbulent]] love life to zero compelling [[dramatic]] [[avail]]. These [[sequences]] ([[including]] a brain-frazzlingly [[clichéd]] groupie indescretion in a [[hotel]] room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only [[real]] comparison to be [[made]] is with a network [[TV]] movie.

The [[storytelling]], in both [[structure]] and content, is [[simplistic]] and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as [[something]] [[designed]] to celebrate its [[subject]] and educate the uninitiated on the [[intricacies]] of their [[life]] and [[work]]; the [[film]] is almost [[entirely]] [[worthless]]. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre [[plotting]], [[coupled]] with the [[lifeless]] musical performances (an [[area]] in which a film like this should [[soar]], [[surely]]) [[result]] in a [[film]] that appears to have been [[designed]] only to [[satisfy]] the [[whims]] and [[demands]] of those [[involved]], [[leaving]] Wallace's [[questionable]] status as a [[giant]] in his [[field]] as the [[preserve]] of the easily persuaded and [[previously]] [[converted]] only.

And the [[final]] twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. This film [[recall]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a good way.

David Chase's seminal mob [[dramas]] only ever put its foot wrong [[doubly]], the most jarring and inexplicable [[lawsuit]] of which [[taken]] [[placing]] in its fourth season, when [[Menial]] Soprano went on trial for his [[lives]]. Rather than [[pursuing]] this [[mesmerizing]] (and [[imperative]]) plot line, the writers [[however]] [[chosen]] to [[entirely]] [[omit]] it, focusing instead on Bobby Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his [[newly]] [[departed]] wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of [[true]] interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, [[cryptic]] [[murders]] attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the [[overall]] East Coast/West [[Shore]] feud in the first place, and [[finalized]] up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the [[filmmaking]] treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why [[accurately]] was Tupac so convinced that he was [[selling]] out by his own people? [[Got]] he [[only]] nurture his [[later]] affiliation with Suge [[Ritter]]? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it [[seems]] here?

None of these [[subjects]] are even fleetingly [[treated]] by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in [[describing]] Wallace's [[stormy]] love life to zero compelling [[spectacular]] [[success]]. These [[sequence]] ([[containing]] a brain-frazzlingly [[clichés]] groupie indescretion in a [[motel]] room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only [[true]] comparison to be [[brought]] is with a network [[TELEVISION]] movie.

The [[story]], in both [[edifice]] and content, is [[facile]] and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as [[somethings]] [[destined]] to celebrate its [[themes]] and educate the uninitiated on the [[subtleties]] of their [[lifetime]] and [[cooperating]]; the [[filmmaking]] is almost [[completely]] [[futile]]. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre [[conspiring]], [[matched]] with the [[lackluster]] musical performances (an [[domains]] in which a film like this should [[surging]], [[definitely]]) [[consequence]] in a [[filmmaking]] that appears to have been [[destined]] only to [[meet]] the [[frills]] and [[demand]] of those [[entangled]], [[exiting]] Wallace's [[suspicious]] status as a [[mammoth]] in his [[campo]] as the [[retains]] of the easily persuaded and [[formerly]] [[transforms]] only.

And the [[ultimate]] twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. --------------------------------------------- Result 2532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[If]] I write a [[review]] about a [[movie]], maybe it will stick with me... but generally I expect that I will have forgotten I've seen this one a [[mere]] two [[weeks]] from now. [[So]] why bother? Because again I find myself [[watching]] a low-rated [[movie]] that was [[fun]] to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the room while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at [[least]] it was not [[unbearable]]... not a [[comedy]] of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet fluff... and if you can't [[take]] it, [[stay]] in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its [[targeted]] demographic, and won't be a [[total]] [[bore]] to an adult.

It [[offers]] a few good [[chuckles]] here and there, but nary a side [[splitter]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly [[entertaining]], but at [[least]] it doesn't suck (as so [[many]] have said it does). [[Maybe]] those folks are [[afraid]] of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to [[grade]] on the bell [[curve]], so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[okay]] all-around [[rating]] in my [[book]]. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[rating]] at the time of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[done]] [[thus]] far, makes the [[rating]] numbers [[meaningless]]. I cannot believe how [[strongly]] people feel one [[way]] or the other about this forgettable [[fluff]] (or that I am [[even]] [[bothering]] to [[write]] about it). Am I missing something?

Anyway, it should be noted that Emma [[Roberts]] [[performs]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel often written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You might also recognize Bruce Spence [[playing]] Leonard, [[though]] his role is ancillary.

[[Surely]] you can miss this one if you are an [[adult]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[girl]] in your life, [[rent]] this [[movie]] for her... and be [[prepared]] NOT to hate it (you [[might]] even enjoy it). [[Though]] I write a [[scrutinize]] about a [[filmmaking]], maybe it will stick with me... but generally I expect that I will have forgotten I've seen this one a [[simple]] two [[zhou]] from now. [[Consequently]] why bother? Because again I find myself [[staring]] a low-rated [[filmmaking]] that was [[amusing]] to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the room while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at [[lowest]] it was not [[intolerable]]... not a [[travesty]] of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet fluff... and if you can't [[taking]] it, [[staying]] in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its [[oriented]] demographic, and won't be a [[whole]] [[boring]] to an adult.

It [[offerings]] a few good [[laughter]] here and there, but nary a side [[divider]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly [[fun]], but at [[lowest]] it doesn't suck (as so [[various]] have said it does). [[Perhaps]] those folks are [[fearful]] of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to [[grading]] on the bell [[curvature]], so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[alrighty]] all-around [[ratings]] in my [[workbook]]. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[appraisals]] at the time of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[doing]] [[thereby]] far, makes the [[valuation]] numbers [[fruitless]]. I cannot believe how [[emphatically]] people feel one [[camino]] or the other about this forgettable [[grope]] (or that I am [[yet]] [[teasing]] to [[handwriting]] about it). Am I missing something?

Anyway, it should be noted that Emma [[Stevens]] [[conducts]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel often written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You might also recognize Bruce Spence [[play]] Leonard, [[nonetheless]] his role is ancillary.

[[Obviously]] you can miss this one if you are an [[mature]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[female]] in your life, [[rents]] this [[filmmaking]] for her... and be [[authored]] NOT to hate it (you [[probability]] even enjoy it). --------------------------------------------- Result 2533 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Vampires, sexy guys, guns and some blood. Who could ask for more? Moon Child delivers it all in one nicely packaged flick! Gackt is the innocent Sho - who befriends a Vampire Kei (HYDE), their relationship grows with time but as Sho ages, Kei's immortality breaks his heart. It doesn't help that they both fall in love with the same woman. The special effects are pretty good considering the small budget. It's a touching story ripe with human emotions. You will laugh, cry, laugh, then cry some more. Even if you are not a fan of their music, SEE THIS FILM. It works great as a stand alone Vampire movie.

9 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2534 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Footlight Parade" is just one of several wonderfully jaunty musicals that Warner Bros. produced in the early 1930's to ward off the Depression. "42nd Street" and the Golddiggers series were also produced during this era, and they made literally, millions of Americans forget their troubles for a little while, and enjoy themselves.

While most of the films produced had the great talents of Joan Blondell, Ruby Keeler, and Dick Powell, only Foolight Parade had the incomparable James Cagney. Almost ten years prior to his most well-known musical, "Yankee Doodle Dandy". Here he dances in that most original of dance styles, with his arms usually lowered at his side, and his legs doing all types of undulations and kicks. It's easy to see that he is enjoying himself, and that makes us enjoy him all the more.

While almost all of the musical sequences appear at the end of the film, they are well worth the wait. I believe that this film was made just prior to the installation of the production code, so some of the costumes and scenes are a bit risqué. But it's all in fun.

It doesn't matter what the plot of the film is, just know that there are plenty of laughs and a superlative cast. Besides those already mentioned, Guy Kibbee is at his flustered best here.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a [[forgotten]] 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[idiot]]. Wargames: The Dead Code [[joins]] the long running [[list]] of [[unnecessary]] sequels that the DVD [[market]] has filled so [[easily]]. Movies [[like]] this don't need spoilers, because YOU already know them.

The "[[plot]]" for this "[[film]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; [[nerd]] [[likes]] [[girl]]; nerd gets [[accidentally]] involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other [[country]]; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at [[key]] point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret [[Government]] computer gets crazy; nerd is [[hired]] to [[beat]] Top Secret [[Government]] Computer; nerd beats Top [[Secret]] Computer by using the same old [[Top]] [[Secret]] Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and [[cinematography]] are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should [[avoid]] this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like cheap looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, [[Mathew]] Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't even do a five second cameo in this one. But can you [[blame]] him? Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a [[overlooked]] 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[dumb]]. Wargames: The Dead Code [[engages]] the long running [[lists]] of [[dispensable]] sequels that the DVD [[mercado]] has filled so [[conveniently]]. Movies [[iike]] this don't need spoilers, because YOU already know them.

The "[[intrigue]]" for this "[[filmmaking]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; [[geek]] [[loves]] [[chick]]; nerd gets [[coincidentally]] involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other [[nationals]]; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at [[essential]] point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret [[Administrations]] computer gets crazy; nerd is [[incurred]] to [[beating]] Top Secret [[Administrations]] Computer; nerd beats Top [[Secrets]] Computer by using the same old [[Supreme]] [[Confidentiality]] Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and [[filmmaking]] are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should [[preventing]] this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like cheap looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, [[Mathews]] Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't even do a five second cameo in this one. But can you [[guilt]] him? --------------------------------------------- Result 2536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I have [[seen]] some [[bad]] [[movies]] ([[Austin]] Powers - The [[Spy]] Who [[Shagged]] Me, Batman Forever), but this [[film]] is so [[awful]], so BORING, that I [[got]] about half [[way]] through and [[could]] not [[bear]] [[watching]] the [[rest]]. A [[pity]]. Boasting [[talent]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a [[story]] by [[John]] Grisham, what went [[wrong]]? Branagh is a big-time [[lawyer]] who has a one-night [[fling]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[psychopath]] who [[hanged]] her cat, etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[sent]] to a [[nuthouse]], and he [[promptly]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't figure out how) Robert Downey jr, [[Daryl]] Hannah, Famke Janssen and [[Tom]] Berenger are all mixed into the [[story]] which [[moves]] [[slower]] than stationary. I [[wanted]] to like this, and, being a [[huge]] Grisham [[fan]], have read all about this [[movie]] and I ([[foolishly]]) [[expected]] something interesting. This is [[honestly]] the [[WORST]] [[film]] I've [[seen]] to date and I wish I [[could]] have my [[money]] [[refunded]]. * out of *****. I have [[noticed]] some [[negative]] [[films]] ([[Austen]] Powers - The [[Spies]] Who [[Shafted]] Me, Batman Forever), but this [[filmmaking]] is so [[scary]], so BORING, that I [[gets]] about half [[route]] through and [[would]] not [[bears]] [[staring]] the [[stays]]. A [[compassion]]. Boasting [[talents]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a [[storytelling]] by [[Jon]] Grisham, what went [[mistaken]]? Branagh is a big-time [[attorney]] who has a one-night [[adventure]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[loony]] who [[hung]] her cat, etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[sends]] to a [[madhouse]], and he [[immediatly]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't figure out how) Robert Downey jr, [[Darryl]] Hannah, Famke Janssen and [[Thom]] Berenger are all mixed into the [[tales]] which [[shift]] [[slow]] than stationary. I [[wished]] to like this, and, being a [[prodigious]] Grisham [[admirer]], have read all about this [[films]] and I ([[naively]]) [[awaited]] something interesting. This is [[truly]] the [[PIRE]] [[cinematographic]] I've [[noticed]] to date and I wish I [[would]] have my [[cash]] [[repay]]. * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[must]] [[say]], I was [[surprised]] with the quality of the [[movie]]. It was far better than I [[expected]]. [[Scenario]] and acting is [[quite]] good. The [[director]] [[made]] a good [[job]] as well. [[Although]] some scenes [[look]] a [[bit]] clumsy, it is a decent [[movie]] [[overall]]. The idea was [[definitely]] [[brilliant]] and the truth did not [[reveal]] itself till the very end. The [[mental]] hospital [[atmosphere]] was [[given]] [[quite]] good. The plot was clear, consistent and well [[thought]]. Some people [[may]] [[find]] it a bit [[boring]] [[though]] [[since]] the story line is very [[focused]] and they take their [[time]] for [[character]] and [[story]] development. [[Moral]] of the story, it is a decent [[movie]] for its [[genre]] and it is [[astonishingly]] good. I [[ought]] [[tell]], I was [[horrified]] with the quality of the [[movies]]. It was far better than I [[waited]]. [[Scenarios]] and acting is [[pretty]] good. The [[headmaster]] [[brought]] a good [[employment]] as well. [[Though]] some scenes [[peek]] a [[bite]] clumsy, it is a decent [[films]] [[whole]]. The idea was [[definitively]] [[wondrous]] and the truth did not [[unveils]] itself till the very end. The [[spiritual]] hospital [[atmospheric]] was [[bestowed]] [[rather]] good. The plot was clear, consistent and well [[brainchild]]. Some people [[maggio]] [[finds]] it a bit [[bored]] [[while]] [[because]] the story line is very [[focussed]] and they take their [[moment]] for [[characters]] and [[narratives]] development. [[Morales]] of the story, it is a decent [[cinematography]] for its [[genera]] and it is [[impossibly]] good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the very best Three Stooges shorts ever. A spooky house full of evil guys and "The Goon" challenge the Alert Detective Agency's best men. Shemp is in top form in the famous in-the-dark scene. Emil Sitka provides excellent support in his Mr. Goodrich role, as the target of a murder plot. Before it's over, Shemp's "trusty little shovel" is employed to great effect. This 16 minute gem moves about as fast as any Stooge's short and packs twice the wallop. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Silent Night, Deadly [[Night]] 5 is the very last of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed [[horror]] flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some [[obvious]] things going on here...Mickey [[Rooney]] plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little [[boy]] named Derek [[heard]] a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it [[said]] "don't open till [[Christmas]]", he [[begins]] to [[open]] it anyway but is [[stopped]] by his [[dad]], who scolds him and [[sends]] him to bed, and [[opens]] the gift himself. [[Inside]] is a [[little]] red ball that sprouts Santa [[arms]] and a [[head]], and proceeds to [[kill]] dad. Oops, [[maybe]] he should have left well-enough [[alone]]. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the [[incident]] since he watched it from the [[stairs]], but he doesn't grow up to be some [[killer]] Santa, he just [[stops]] [[talking]].

There's a [[mysterious]] [[stranger]] lurking [[around]], who [[seems]] very interested in the [[toys]] that Joe Petto makes. We [[even]] see him [[buying]] a bunch when Derek's [[mom]] takes him to the [[store]] to [[find]] a [[gift]] for him to [[bring]] him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this [[guy]] doing? [[Well]], we're not sure but he does seem to be [[taking]] these toys [[apart]] to [[see]] what makes them tick. He does [[keep]] his [[landlord]] from [[evicting]] him by promising him to [[pay]] him in [[cash]] the [[next]] day and [[presents]] him with a "Larry the Larvae" [[toy]] for his [[kid]], but of [[course]] "Larry" is not a [[good]] [[toy]] and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't [[pretty]].

Anyway, [[eventually]] what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the [[old]] [[story]], Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and [[naughty]] because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth [[plastic]] crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. Silent Night, Deadly [[Nuit]] 5 is the very last of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed [[monstrosity]] flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some [[palpable]] things going on here...Mickey [[Roni]] plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little [[laddie]] named Derek [[hear]] a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it [[told]] "don't open till [[Navidad]]", he [[start]] to [[openings]] it anyway but is [[stopping]] by his [[pere]], who scolds him and [[sent]] him to bed, and [[inaugurated]] the gift himself. [[Inland]] is a [[petite]] red ball that sprouts Santa [[armas]] and a [[chief]], and proceeds to [[murder]] dad. Oops, [[presumably]] he should have left well-enough [[sole]]. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the [[incidents]] since he watched it from the [[escalators]], but he doesn't grow up to be some [[slayer]] Santa, he just [[stopped]] [[debating]].

There's a [[enigmatic]] [[foreigner]] lurking [[throughout]], who [[looks]] very interested in the [[toy]] that Joe Petto makes. We [[yet]] see him [[purchasing]] a bunch when Derek's [[mother]] takes him to the [[boutique]] to [[found]] a [[don]] for him to [[bringing]] him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this [[man]] doing? [[Good]], we're not sure but he does seem to be [[adopting]] these toys [[also]] to [[behold]] what makes them tick. He does [[preserving]] his [[proprietors]] from [[deporting]] him by promising him to [[salary]] him in [[money]] the [[forthcoming]] day and [[introduces]] him with a "Larry the Larvae" [[pawn]] for his [[petit]], but of [[cours]] "Larry" is not a [[alright]] [[pawn]] and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't [[quite]].

Anyway, [[lastly]] what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the [[longtime]] [[history]], Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and [[rotten]] because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth [[plastics]] crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 2540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being the prototype of the classical Errol Flynn adventure movie and having a good story as well as two more brilliant co-stars in Maureen O'Hara (what an exquisite beauty!) and Anthony Quinn, I can only recommend this movie to all those having even the slightest liking for romance and adventure.

Hollywood at its best! --------------------------------------------- Result 2541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An unfunny, unworthy picture which is an undeserving end to Peter Sellers' career. It is a pity this movie was ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 2542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for [[Hooligans]]. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing [[Toby]] McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the idea of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too [[seriously]]. The [[gravity]] of the pugilism, the reverence with which the [[subject]] matter is treated becomes irritating, as it [[neither]] establishes or [[resolves]] the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[contrived]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the [[Americans]] at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the [[absurdity]] of the [[film]] doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this [[corny]], and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste [[time]] with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and [[clever]] fun; the way violence is supposed to be. Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for [[Punks]]. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing [[Topi]] McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the idea of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too [[deeply]]. The [[seriousness]] of the pugilism, the reverence with which the [[themes]] matter is treated becomes irritating, as it [[either]] establishes or [[solving]] the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[artificial]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the [[Us]] at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the [[foolishness]] of the [[cinematography]] doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this [[mundane]], and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste [[times]] with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and [[shrewd]] fun; the way violence is supposed to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2543 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] hello boys and girls... this isn't your regular movie review, because this is going to be the cold. hard. truth. are you serious? this movie sucked so many balls i couldn't keep them out of my mouth! they might as well have sprayed me in the eye with monkey semen. you'd need one seriously large douche to pump out all the vaginal fluid from this movie.

the plot was very lacking. the actors were terrible. i rewound the dance number several times and had to pause it even more because i was choking on my own spit. do boys, everyone!

peace R&H besties4lyf --------------------------------------------- Result 2544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] As a [[huge]] [[fan]] or the [[Cracker]] series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm [[afraid]] just does not [[live]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to [[Manchester]] after 7 [[years]] for his [[daughters]] wedding and [[gets]] involved in a [[murder]] [[investigation]] were a soldier, [[tormented]] by flash backs from his [[tour]] of [[duty]] in [[Northern]] Irland, goes on a [[killing]] [[spree]].

What I did not like about this episode is the [[extremely]] [[convenient]] [[way]] it is all set up and how fitz is [[led]] to the [[murderer]]. It is all [[fat]] to far-fetched.

There are however some [[good]] scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[filmed]] great. As a [[whopping]] [[breather]] or the [[Cookie]] series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm [[affraid]] just does not [[vivo]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to [[Liverpool]] after 7 [[ages]] for his [[girl]] wedding and [[got]] involved in a [[kills]] [[investigating]] were a soldier, [[troubled]] by flash backs from his [[trips]] of [[duties]] in [[Norden]] Irland, goes on a [[homicide]] [[frenzy]].

What I did not like about this episode is the [[eminently]] [[handy]] [[path]] it is all set up and how fitz is [[culminated]] to the [[killer]]. It is all [[tallow]] to far-fetched.

There are however some [[alright]] scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[videotaped]] great. --------------------------------------------- Result 2545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his [[mother]] and experiences some [[sort]] of Oedepus [[complex]] [[afterward]].

It is something like 95 minutes long but [[would]] be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing [[climbing]] practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[much]] less [[sympathetic]]).

There's a strange love [[story]] [[involved]] which doesn't have [[anything]] to do with [[anything]]. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first [[ten]] minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending [[together]] and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a [[guy]] that stuff happens to. The only active [[choice]] he has in the whole middle of the [[movie]] is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this [[MacKenzie]] director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten [[theories]] back into our [[memories]]! You really dug! What a Wallraff! [[Okay]] so now I realized this [[film]] is [[based]] on some [[random]] [[book]], but anyway..

Photowise it is boring. A lot of [[talking]] [[heads]]. Plus the [[editor]] has [[changed]] the colors from scene to scene, you know [[cold]] and warm etc.. why? [[maybe]] "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his [[mothers]] and experiences some [[genre]] of Oedepus [[tortuous]] [[thereafter]].

It is something like 95 minutes long but [[could]] be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing [[soaring]] practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[very]] less [[likeable]]).

There's a strange love [[saga]] [[participating]] which doesn't have [[nothing]] to do with [[nothing]]. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first [[tio]] minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending [[jointly]] and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a [[boy]] that stuff happens to. The only active [[electing]] he has in the whole middle of the [[filmmaking]] is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this [[mckenzie]] director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten [[doctrines]] back into our [[reminiscences]]! You really dug! What a Wallraff! [[Verywell]] so now I realized this [[filmmaking]] is [[predicated]] on some [[indiscriminate]] [[ledger]], but anyway..

Photowise it is boring. A lot of [[debating]] [[leaders]]. Plus the [[editorial]] has [[alteration]] the colors from scene to scene, you know [[frigid]] and warm etc.. why? [[perhaps]] "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] After a brief prologue [[showing]] a [[masked]] man stalking and then [[slashing]] the [[throat]] of an [[older]] gentleman on a [[deserted]], urban, [[turn]] of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter ([[John]] Adam) as they go out house [[hunting]]. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it [[turns]] out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their [[new]] home. It just may be haunted.

13 Gantry Row [[combines]] a memorable if [[somewhat]] [[clichéd]] story with good to average direction by [[Catherine]] Millar into a [[slightly]] above [[average]] shocker.

The biggest [[flaws]] [[seem]] [[partially]] due to budget, but not [[wholly]] excusable to that hurdle. A [[crucial]] problem [[occurs]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. The [[opening]] "thriller scene" [[features]] some wonky [[editing]]. [[Freeze]] [[frames]] and [[series]] of [[stills]] are [[used]] to cover up the fact that there's not much [[action]]. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the [[mix]]" techniques. There is [[great]] atmosphere in the scene from the [[location]], the lighting, the [[fog]] and such, but the [[camera]] should be slowly following the [[killer]] and the victim, [[cutting]] back and forth from one to the other as we [[track]] down the street, showing their [[increasing]] [[proximity]]. The [[tracking]] and the cuts [[need]] to be [[slow]]. The attack needed to be [[longer]], clearer and [[better]] blocked. As it [[stands]], the scene has a [[strong]] "made for television" feel, and a low budget one at that.

After this scene we [[move]] to the present and the [[flow]] of the [[film]] [[greatly]] [[improves]]. The [[story]] has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the [[budget]] [[forces]] a much subtler [[approach]]. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively [[create]] a [[lot]] of slyly creepy [[scenarios]], [[often]] dramatic in nature instead of [[special]] effects-oriented, such as the [[mysterious]] [[man]] who arrives to take away the [[old]] slabs of [[iron]], which had been [[bizarrely]] affixed to an interior [[wall]].

For some [[horror]] [[fans]], the [[first]] section of the film might be a little heavy on [[realist]] drama. At [[least]] the [[first]] half [[hour]] of the film is [[primarily]] about [[Julie]] and [[Peter]] [[trying]] to [[arrange]] [[financing]] for the [[house]] and then [[trying]] to [[settle]] in. But Morphett writes [[fine]], [[intelligent]] [[dialogue]]. The material is done well enough that it's [[often]] as suspenseful as the more [[traditional]] thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly [[destroy]] it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, [[shows]] that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally [[finds]] liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. After a brief prologue [[exhibiting]] a [[obscured]] man stalking and then [[cutback]] the [[larynx]] of an [[oldest]] gentleman on a [[uninhabited]], urban, [[transforming]] of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter ([[Johannes]] Adam) as they go out house [[chasing]]. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it [[revolves]] out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their [[novel]] home. It just may be haunted.

13 Gantry Row [[merging]] a memorable if [[rather]] [[clichés]] story with good to average direction by [[Cathy]] Millar into a [[mildly]] above [[medium]] shocker.

The biggest [[deficiency]] [[seems]] [[partly]] due to budget, but not [[fully]] excusable to that hurdle. A [[fundamental]] problem [[comes]] at the [[initiating]] of the [[flick]]. The [[initiation]] "thriller scene" [[traits]] some wonky [[editorial]]. [[Frost]] [[frame]] and [[serials]] of [[photos]] are [[using]] to cover up the fact that there's not much [[activities]]. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the [[mixing]]" techniques. There is [[huge]] atmosphere in the scene from the [[locations]], the lighting, the [[mist]] and such, but the [[cameras]] should be slowly following the [[murderer]] and the victim, [[chopped]] back and forth from one to the other as we [[rails]] down the street, showing their [[rose]] [[vicinity]]. The [[tracks]] and the cuts [[needs]] to be [[slows]]. The attack needed to be [[plus]], clearer and [[best]] blocked. As it [[standing]], the scene has a [[forceful]] "made for television" feel, and a low budget one at that.

After this scene we [[budge]] to the present and the [[flows]] of the [[movie]] [[radically]] [[improvements]]. The [[history]] has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the [[budgets]] [[troop]] a much subtler [[approaches]]. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively [[creating]] a [[lots]] of slyly creepy [[scripts]], [[routinely]] dramatic in nature instead of [[particular]] effects-oriented, such as the [[cryptic]] [[men]] who arrives to take away the [[ancient]] slabs of [[railway]], which had been [[interestingly]] affixed to an interior [[wail]].

For some [[terror]] [[followers]], the [[firstly]] section of the film might be a little heavy on [[realistic]] drama. At [[slightest]] the [[fiirst]] half [[hora]] of the film is [[predominantly]] about [[Jolly]] and [[Pieter]] [[tempting]] to [[organising]] [[finance]] for the [[dwellings]] and then [[attempt]] to [[resolution]] in. But Morphett writes [[alright]], [[smart]] [[conversation]]. The material is done well enough that it's [[commonly]] as suspenseful as the more [[classic]] thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly [[annihilate]] it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, [[demonstrate]] that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally [[deems]] liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. --------------------------------------------- Result 2547 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This movie stinks! You will [[want]] back the two-plus [[hours]] it [[takes]] to [[get]] through it. Sliding [[Doors]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[directed]] by [[Peter]] Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[tries]] to do [[much]] much [[MUCH]] better. That movie was [[clever]], [[witty]], and well-acted. I [[cared]] about what [[happened]] to both Gwyenths -- or [[rather]] the characters she played -- and the performances by [[supporting]] cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is [[tiresome]], the [[dialogue]] is contrived and I could have [[cared]] less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so [[dysfunctional]] -- her first [[glass]] of [[wine]] is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[laughable]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is [[fine]], but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble [[movies]] [[worked]] because, I'm guessing, he [[spent]] [[time]] on the [[screenplay]] and the [[actors]] were [[talented]]. One [[piece]] of trivia for this [[movie]] is that he [[wrote]] this screenplay in two months: you can [[tell]]. And while [[Chloe]] Sevigny is [[talented]] -- those [[around]] her are not, not enough to be a [[whole]] [[presence]]. The [[movie]] [[ends]] up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've [[seen]] in other [[movies]] but can't [[quite]] remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. This movie stinks! You will [[wanted]] back the two-plus [[hour]] it [[pick]] to [[obtain]] through it. Sliding [[Floodgates]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[oriented]] by [[Petr]] Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[strive]] to do [[very]] much [[VERY]] better. That movie was [[skilful]], [[spiritual]], and well-acted. I [[adored]] about what [[transpired]] to both Gwyenths -- or [[quite]] the characters she played -- and the performances by [[aiding]] cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is [[boring]], the [[dialogues]] is contrived and I could have [[adored]] less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so [[dysfunction]] -- her first [[luna]] of [[wines]] is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[farcical]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is [[alright]], but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble [[filmmaking]] [[acted]] because, I'm guessing, he [[spend]] [[times]] on the [[scenarios]] and the [[protagonists]] were [[gifted]]. One [[slice]] of trivia for this [[filmmaking]] is that he [[authored]] this screenplay in two months: you can [[told]]. And while [[Vivienne]] Sevigny is [[gifted]] -- those [[roundabout]] her are not, not enough to be a [[overall]] [[involvements]]. The [[cinematographic]] [[culminates]] up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've [[noticed]] in other [[movie]] but can't [[very]] remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Man, what a [[scam]] this turned out to be! Not because it wasn't any good (as I wasn't really expecting [[anything]] from it) but because I was [[misled]] by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly [[paraded]] its "[[stars]]" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony [[Bill]]. Sure enough, their names did not appear in the film's [[opening]] [[credits]], much [[less]] themselves in the [[rest]] of it!! As it turned out, the only [[movie]] which [[connects]] those three [[actors]] together is the equally [[obscure]] [[LAS]] VEGAS LADY (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTER]] is anybody's guess…

Even so, since I [[paid]] $1.50 for its rental and I was in a monster-movie [[mood]] anyhow, I [[elected]] to watch the [[movie]] regardless and, yup, it stunk! [[Apart]] from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an anonymous crew, an unmistakably [[amateurish]] air was [[visible]] from miles away and the most I [[could]] do with it is [[laugh]] at the JAWS-like [[pretensions]] and, [[intentionally]] so, at the resistible antics of two [[moronic]] layabouts-cum-boat [[owners]] who [[frequently]] squabble [[among]] themselves with the [[bemused]] local sheriff [[looking]] on. The [[creature]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly realized (naturally) but, as had been the [[case]] with THE [[GIANT]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[also]] just [[seen]], this didn't [[seem]] to bother the film-makers [[none]] as they flaunt it as [[much]] as they can, [[especially]] during the movie's second half! Man, what a [[hustle]] this turned out to be! Not because it wasn't any good (as I wasn't really expecting [[algo]] from it) but because I was [[deluded]] by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly [[parade]] its "[[star]]" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony [[Invoices]]. Sure enough, their names did not appear in the film's [[opens]] [[credit]], much [[fewer]] themselves in the [[remainder]] of it!! As it turned out, the only [[film]] which [[binds]] those three [[protagonists]] together is the equally [[indistinct]] [[ANGELES]] VEGAS LADY (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTERS]] is anybody's guess…

Even so, since I [[salaried]] $1.50 for its rental and I was in a monster-movie [[ambience]] anyhow, I [[elects]] to watch the [[filmmaking]] regardless and, yup, it stunk! [[Irrespective]] from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an anonymous crew, an unmistakably [[unprofessional]] air was [[recognizable]] from miles away and the most I [[did]] do with it is [[laughs]] at the JAWS-like [[pretences]] and, [[voluntarily]] so, at the resistible antics of two [[witless]] layabouts-cum-boat [[homeowner]] who [[often]] squabble [[in]] themselves with the [[disconcerted]] local sheriff [[researching]] on. The [[creatures]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly realized (naturally) but, as had been the [[lawsuit]] with THE [[TITAN]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[additionally]] just [[noticed]], this didn't [[appears]] to bother the film-makers [[nos]] as they flaunt it as [[very]] as they can, [[peculiarly]] during the movie's second half! --------------------------------------------- Result 2549 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Two [[sisters]], their perverted [[brother]], and their [[cousin]] have [[car]] [[trouble]]. They then [[happen]] about the [[home]] of Dr. Hackenstein whom [[conveniently]] needs the [[body]] parts of three nubile young [[women]] to [[use]] in an experiment to [[bring]] his [[deceased]] lover back to [[life]]. He [[tells]] them that he'll [[help]] them [[get]] [[home]] in the morning, so they [[spend]] the [[night]]. [[Then]] the good [[doctor]] gets down to [[work]] in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I found this to be [[mildly]] amusing, nothing at all to [[actually]] [[go]] out of your way for (I [[stumbled]] across it on Netflix instant [[view]] & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired [[film]]. Most of the humor doesn't [[work]], but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a [[small]] part and she was [[always]] a treat to watch.

[[Eye]] Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker [[got]] [[topless]]

My [[Grade]]: D+ Two [[siblings]], their perverted [[sibling]], and their [[cousins]] have [[vehicles]] [[difficulty]]. They then [[emerge]] about the [[dwelling]] of Dr. Hackenstein whom [[readily]] needs the [[agency]] parts of three nubile young [[girl]] to [[employs]] in an experiment to [[brings]] his [[departed]] lover back to [[lifetime]]. He [[told]] them that he'll [[helps]] them [[obtain]] [[households]] in the morning, so they [[expenditure]] the [[nighttime]]. [[Later]] the good [[doktor]] gets down to [[cooperate]] in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I found this to be [[modestly]] amusing, nothing at all to [[indeed]] [[going]] out of your way for (I [[slipped]] across it on Netflix instant [[viewing]] & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired [[movie]]. Most of the humor doesn't [[collaboration]], but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a [[scant]] part and she was [[incessantly]] a treat to watch.

[[Ocular]] Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker [[ai]] [[bikini]]

My [[Octane]]: D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Whale-hunters [[pick]] on the [[wrong]] [[freaking]] [[whale]].

A [[group]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a [[female]] and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's [[mate]] sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn [[baby]] slips out and slops [[onto]] the deck. '[[Captain]] Nolan' ([[Richard]] Harris) could tell that the big male is [[really]] mad by the [[way]] it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of [[revenge]] has Harris' presence and Bo's beauty, but not much else. This was Bo's first 'released' [[film]], [[though]] her [[first]] acting [[job]] was four [[years]] previous in 'And [[Once]] Upon a Love' [[released]] in 1981 as 'Fantasies' ([[directed]] by [[John]] Derek).

P.S. Today, the [[date]] of this review (November 20), is [[Bo]] Derek's birthday. I [[hope]] [[Bo]] has a 'whale' of a [[good]] [[time]]..... [[get]] it?..... [[whale]]?..... hee-hee. Whale-hunters [[choice]] on the [[improper]] [[friggin]] [[whales]].

A [[groups]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a [[femmes]] and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's [[mating]] sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn [[babe]] slips out and slops [[during]] the deck. '[[Capitan]] Nolan' ([[Richie]] Harris) could tell that the big male is [[truly]] mad by the [[camino]] it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of [[vendetta]] has Harris' presence and Bo's beauty, but not much else. This was Bo's first 'released' [[movies]], [[while]] her [[fiirst]] acting [[workplace]] was four [[ages]] previous in 'And [[Upon]] Upon a Love' [[releases]] in 1981 as 'Fantasies' ([[geared]] by [[Jon]] Derek).

P.S. Today, the [[dates]] of this review (November 20), is [[Pu]] Derek's birthday. I [[amal]] [[Pu]] has a 'whale' of a [[alright]] [[moment]]..... [[got]] it?..... [[whaler]]?..... hee-hee. --------------------------------------------- Result 2551 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Holes, originally a novel by Louis Sachar, was successfully transformed into an entertaining and well-made film. Starring Sigourney Weaver as the warden, Shia Labeouf as Stanley, and Khleo Thomas as Zero, the roles were very well casted, and the actors portrayed their roles well.

The film had inter-weaving storylines that all led up to the end. The main storyline is about Stanley Yelnats and his punishment of spending a year and a half at Camp Greenlake. The second storyline is about Sam and Kate Barlow. This plot deals with racism and it is the more deep storyline to the movie. The third is about Elya Yelnats and Madame Zeroni, which explains the 100-year curse on the Yelnats family. In my opinion, these storylines were weaved together very well.

Contrary to many people's beliefs, I think that you do not have to have read the book to understand the movie. The film is reasonably easy to understand.

The acting in the film was well done, especially Shia Labeouf (Stanley), Khleo Thomas (Zero), Sigourney Weaver (the warden), and Jon Voight (Mr. Sir). The other members of D-Tent, Jake Smith (Squid), Max Kasch (Zig-Zag), Miguel Castro (Magnet), Byron Cotton (Armpit), and Brenden Jefferson (X-Ray), enhanced the comic relief of the movie. However, the best parts were with Zero and Stanley, who made a great team together.

Although Holes is a Disney movie, it deals with some serious issues such as racism, shootings, and violence. The film's dramatization at some points is very well done.

I would suggest this movie to people of all ages, whether they have read the book or not. You shouldn't miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this last night on TV (HBO). I have to admit, that the tension in this movie was unsurpassed by most other FN era movies. I loved the way Chip would be all calm one moment and then VIOLENT the very next moment. It was classic. Ahh yes. The dames, the villians, the cigars and thuggish cops! It has it all. This movie delivered all the goods to me. I especially loved the way they mixed communism into the plot, very common for this era of movie. Very daring also since blacklisting was popular in those days. I rate this movie one of the best I have seen in the FN genre! --------------------------------------------- Result 2553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Working]] with one of the [[best]] Shakespeare sources, this film manages to be [[creditable]] to it's [[source]], [[whilst]] still [[appealing]] to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented [[cast]] on good form. [[Cooperating]] with one of the [[optimum]] Shakespeare sources, this film manages to be [[admirable]] to it's [[origins]], [[whereas]] still [[alluring]] to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented [[casting]] on good form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] After seeing the movie [[last]] [[night]] I was left with a sense of the [[hopelessness]] [[faced]] by [[organisations]] [[trying]] to tackle the problem the film [[portrays]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[large]] that it's hard to [[see]] how it can be defeated without [[major]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

[[Anyway]], on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an [[uncomfortable]] central [[relationship]] this is a very [[compelling]] [[film]], and I'd [[even]] [[go]] so far as to say it was enjoyable. The [[film]] was well edited for the [[running]] [[time]] and the performance by [[Thuy]] [[Nguyen]] was [[excellent]]. I also [[felt]] Ron [[Livingston]] [[played]] a very difficult role well.

It [[would]] have been nice to have a little more insight into why Patrick [[feels]] he has to [[help]] Holly, but maybe the [[reason]] is a [[simple]] as he [[explains]] to Chris Penn's [[character]]. I won't [[explain]] it here - [[go]] [[see]] the [[movie]].

This is a good, thought-provoking film with [[obviously]] good intentions. I [[hope]] it [[gets]] a [[wide]] [[enough]] [[release]] to [[reach]] a decent sized audience and gain more [[support]] for the K-11 Project. After seeing the movie [[final]] [[nighttime]] I was left with a sense of the [[powerlessness]] [[braved]] by [[organization]] [[tempting]] to tackle the problem the film [[denotes]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[enormous]] that it's hard to [[seeing]] how it can be defeated without [[principal]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

[[Writ]], on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an [[embarrassing]] central [[ties]] this is a very [[conclusive]] [[kino]], and I'd [[yet]] [[going]] so far as to say it was enjoyable. The [[movie]] was well edited for the [[executing]] [[moment]] and the performance by [[Shui]] [[Juan]] was [[wondrous]]. I also [[smelled]] Ron [[Livingstone]] [[accomplished]] a very difficult role well.

It [[could]] have been nice to have a little more insight into why Patrick [[thinks]] he has to [[assisting]] Holly, but maybe the [[motif]] is a [[mere]] as he [[explaining]] to Chris Penn's [[nature]]. I won't [[clarified]] it here - [[going]] [[seeing]] the [[flick]].

This is a good, thought-provoking film with [[surely]] good intentions. I [[expectancy]] it [[receives]] a [[large]] [[adequately]] [[liberate]] to [[accomplish]] a decent sized audience and gain more [[succour]] for the K-11 Project. --------------------------------------------- Result 2555 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Released on DVD in the UK as Axe, The Choke is a teen slasher that fails in pretty much every department: the story is almost non-existent, resulting in a film which comprises mostly of people wandering around a dark building; with the exception of two characters (who are quite obviously destined to be the film's survivors), everyone is thoroughly objectionable, meaning that the viewer couldn't care less when they get slaughtered; the deaths aren't gory enough (unless a brief shot of a pound of minced beef covered in fake blood turns your stomach); and the gratuitous sex scene features next to no nudity (an unforgivable mistake to make in a slasher flick!).

The wafer-thin plot sees members of a punk band locked inside what appears to be the world's largest nightclub (there are endless abandoned corridors and rooms, unlike any club I've ever seen) where they are picked off by an unseen assailant. For a low budget effort, the production values are okay, and the cast are all seem to be fairly capable actors, but with not nearly enough genuine scares, a reluctance to get really messy (this is a slasher, so where's the graphic splatter?), way too much dreadful dialogue (particularly from the not-dead-soon-enough drummer) and some ill advised use of tacky video techniques in an attempt to add some style, the movie quickly becomes extremely boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 2556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something [[magical]]. it's [[hard]] to say what, what [[button]] [[Lucas]] has [[found]] and [[boldly]] pressed, but it [[works]]. [[Star]] [[Wars]] is more than a [[movie]]. it's an idea.

[[How]], may you ask? i shall explain. [[star]] wars [[touches]] on the most universal of stereotypes, good [[vs]] evil. it does this so obviously, so [[profoundly]], that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals [[even]] more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but [[even]] before 1-3, there was [[amazing]] [[depth]] to it all. it felt [[real]], as if capsule fell from the [[sky]] into Lucas's lap, [[detailing]] a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

[[Star]] [[Wars]] is [[definitely]] [[something]] far above the norm, and i [[must]] admit, whenever i see them, [[particularly]] this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and [[evil]] are so [[clearly]] [[defined]]. i [[get]] a [[tingling]] feeling when i [[see]] them, a feeling that something, somehow, has [[touched]] me more than any [[physical]] thing could ever hope. first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something [[quadrant]]. it's [[strenuous]] to say what, what [[pimple]] [[Lukas]] has [[unearthed]] and [[defiantly]] pressed, but it [[collaborated]]. [[Superstar]] [[Warfare]] is more than a [[kino]]. it's an idea.

[[Mode]], may you ask? i shall explain. [[superstar]] wars [[afflicts]] on the most universal of stereotypes, good [[v]] evil. it does this so obviously, so [[seriously]], that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals [[yet]] more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but [[yet]] before 1-3, there was [[striking]] [[depths]] to it all. it felt [[true]], as if capsule fell from the [[heavens]] into Lucas's lap, [[describing]] a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

[[Superstar]] [[War]] is [[certainly]] [[anything]] far above the norm, and i [[ought]] admit, whenever i see them, [[concretely]] this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and [[satanic]] are so [[unmistakably]] [[identified]]. i [[got]] a [[tickle]] feeling when i [[behold]] them, a feeling that something, somehow, has [[poked]] me more than any [[physique]] thing could ever hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Bo is [[Jane]] Parker, [[whose]] long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[worst]] role of a very [[inconsistent]] [[career]]) is in Africa [[studying]] something or another. She [[tracks]] him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' [[stories]] of a [[giant]] monster [[whose]] nightly [[howling]] can be [[heard]] throughout the jungle. [[Turns]] out to be the Ape [[Man]] himself ([[Miles]] O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[rescues]] her from bad [[guys]] and [[falls]] in love with her, [[leaving]] them just enough [[time]] in this [[agonizing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny [[monkey]] [[looks]] on and cheers. [[Normally]] I'm very open-minded to [[varying]] [[opinions]] about any [[film]], but this is the [[sole]] [[exception]]. This is the [[worst]] film ever made. [[If]] you don't agree, you haven't seen it. ([[Notes]]: Newsday [[called]] it "unendurable," which is the best one-word [[summary]] I can [[think]] of. The Maltin [[Movie]] [[Guide]] comments that they [[almost]] had to [[think]] of a rating [[lower]] than [[BOMB]].) Bo is [[Jeanne]] Parker, [[who]] long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[gravest]] role of a very [[incompatible]] [[professions]]) is in Africa [[explores]] something or another. She [[trails]] him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' [[story]] of a [[gigantic]] monster [[whom]] nightly [[screams]] can be [[hear]] throughout the jungle. [[Revolves]] out to be the Ape [[Men]] himself ([[Klicks]] O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[ransoms]] her from bad [[bloke]] and [[waterfalls]] in love with her, [[walkout]] them just enough [[moment]] in this [[distressing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny [[chimpanzee]] [[seem]] on and cheers. [[Commonly]] I'm very open-minded to [[differing]] [[view]] about any [[filmmaking]], but this is the [[singular]] [[exemption]]. This is the [[gravest]] film ever made. [[Though]] you don't agree, you haven't seen it. ([[Noting]]: Newsday [[drew]] it "unendurable," which is the best one-word [[synthesis]] I can [[believe]] of. The Maltin [[Filmmaking]] [[Guidebook]] comments that they [[roughly]] had to [[believing]] of a rating [[weakest]] than [[BOMBARD]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 2558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not long enough to be feature length and not abrupt enough to a short, this thing exists for one reason, to have a lesbian three-way. There are worse reasons to exist. One sad thing is that this could have made a decent feature length movie. Misty fits snuggly into her outfit and is a very cocky girl and when people are so infatuated with a game character, like Lara Croft, that they make nude calenders of her, you know that a soft-core flick is set to explode. Unfortunately, this is pretty pathetic. Especially the painfully fake sex scene between Darian and Misty, where you can see her hand is fingering air. Watch this if you just can't get enough of Misty or Ruby, who makes a nice blonde and has zee verst jerman akcent ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2559 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] save your money. i have been a fan of fullmoon productions for a long time and i have never seen them make a movie as bad as this. the casting is terrible, the story is even worse and the special affects are worse than any movie iv'e seen sence the 80's. this movie is so bad i cant even suggest renting it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] this [[yet]], I [[say]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't [[waste]] your [[time]]. [[Neither]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your [[money]]. *Spoilers*- I can't [[decide]] which was worse: The [[movie]] itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? Ellen Pompeo's acting [[talent]] is very [[questionable]] I hope she can [[improve]] it over [[time]]. The storyline is just [[unbelievable]]. Loose cannon American [[cop]] [[fighting]] [[criminals]] in [[Europe]] on his own?? Infamous [[Slavic]] mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An [[emotional]] art [[teacher]] [[leading]] a ruthless gang??? Spanish [[police]] executive [[dumber]] than a sack of hammers??? Give me a [[break]]. There's only one good thing about this [[movie]], though: [[At]] [[least]], the production [[costs]] [[must]] be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as [[meaningless]] and over the top as this one. [[Unless]] you haven't [[noticed]] this [[still]], I [[says]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't [[wastes]] your [[times]]. [[Either]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your [[cash]]. *Spoilers*- I can't [[deciding]] which was worse: The [[movies]] itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? Ellen Pompeo's acting [[talents]] is very [[shady]] I hope she can [[enhance]] it over [[moment]]. The storyline is just [[unimaginable]]. Loose cannon American [[cops]] [[struggles]] [[culprits]] in [[Europa]] on his own?? Infamous [[Slav]] mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An [[affective]] art [[maestro]] [[culminating]] a ruthless gang??? Spanish [[nypd]] executive [[stupider]] than a sack of hammers??? Give me a [[intermission]]. There's only one good thing about this [[filmmaking]], though: [[During]] [[lowest]], the production [[pricing]] [[gotta]] be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as [[fruitless]] and over the top as this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Heartland" is a wonderful depiction of what it was really like to live on the frontier. The hard work and individual strength that were needed to survive the hardships of the climate and the lack of medical care are blended with the camaraderie and the interdependence of the settlers. The drama was especially meaningful because the story is based on the diaries of real people whose descendants still live there. It was also nice to see the west inhabited by real people. No one was glamorous or looked as if they had just spent a session with the makeup or costume department. Conchatta Ferrell is just wonderful. She is an example of the strong, persevering people who came to Wyoming in the early 20th century and let no hardship stand in their way of a new life in a new land. --------------------------------------------- Result 2562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an awesome movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high [[school]] is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle [[get]] everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad [[script]], [[questionable]] directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[awesome]] soundtrack,[[extreme]] campyness, these [[elements]] & much more come [[together]] to make this what it is,a [[classic]].

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an awesome movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high [[teaching]] is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle [[gets]] everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad [[hyphen]], [[debatable]] directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[wondrous]] soundtrack,[[abject]] campyness, these [[components]] & much more come [[jointly]] to make this what it is,a [[conventional]].

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. --------------------------------------------- Result 2563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Playing out as a sort of pre runner to The Great Escape some 13 years later, this smashing little British film plays it straight with no thrills and dare do well overkill. First part of the movie is the set up and subsequent escape of our protagonists, whilst the second part concentrates on their survival whilst on the run as they try to reach Sweden. The film relies on pure characters with simple, effective, and yes, believable dialogue to carry it thru, and it achieves its aims handsomely. No little amount of suspense keeps the film ticking along, and as an adventure story it works perfectly for the time frame it adheres to, so a big thumbs to the film that may well be the first of its type ?.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Cure uses voice over to create an intense mood. Although the VO accounts for all of the film's lines it amazingly does not take away from the visual story. The use of multiple film stocks add a lot of texture to the story. The choice of combining b & w and color worked nicely to enhance the leaps in time. The ending will make you jump despite being able to anticipate the result. I was especially enjoyed the thrill of the film's suspense. The close-ups for the love scene are also lovely and reflect a tasteful eye. The piece is quite short but accomplishes a lot. The tight editing really helps to show off what a short film can do. Worth watching more than once! --------------------------------------------- Result 2565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen romantic comedies and this is one of the easiest/worst attempts at one. A lot of the scenes work in a plug-and-play manner inserted strictly to conform to the romantic-comedy genre. Usually this is okay because we're dealing with a genre, but the challenge generally resides in making it original, new and inventive. This movie fails to do so.

There is no sense of who the characters really are, apart from Sylvie Moreau's (who is the real star of this movie, not Isabelle Blais). They fit into this one-dimensional cliché and they become nothing more than simple puppets serving the purpose of a very light narrative.

The pacing of the movie can become annoying, rhythm lacks, and the editing is filled with unnecessary close-ups. I should also mention the overly stylized decors making some scenes devoid of any naturally, or rather, making the attempt at naturally seem too obvious. Of course, along with that, you have the right-on-cue sappy music which unfortunately often sounds mismatched.

I can't believe that a movie who makes obvious Woody Allen allusions ends up being this deceptive. If you expect a good light-hearted romantic comedy, this is not it. Or rather, this a poor attempt at it. You will only leave the theater wondering why this film has been getting such praise when cinema is now more than 100 years old and there are far superior Quebecois directors making better flicks.

Les Aimants is a good movie for what it is. But it's a bad one if you regard cinema as an art and directors as auteur's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is [[miniscule]]. Release [[dates]] were [[continually]] shifted around for this truly [[awful]] [[movie]] that is so much a [[bleep]] on the [[radar]] like it deserves. The [[premise]] kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is [[small]]. Release [[date]] were [[incessantly]] shifted around for this truly [[scary]] [[filmmaking]] that is so much a [[beep]] on the [[radars]] like it deserves. The [[prerequisite]] kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[watched]] the [[show]] 10 [[years]] [[ago]] and [[loved]] it!!! [[Am]] now in [[possession]] of the DVD and was watching the [[series]], and [[waiting]] for scenes I [[knew]] were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his [[house]])and [[realized]] it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[watching]] the [[seduction]] without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the [[comments]] about the [[shows]] being out of [[order]]. [[Thank]] You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some [[comments]] state "Strangler number 19 then [[Triangle]] 20, when another had them around the other [[way]]. And [[also]] [[Potato]] [[Boy]] 5, and Dead to the [[World]] 6, were [[reversed]] as well. Can someone clarify????? I [[saw]] the [[exhibit]] 10 [[olds]] [[beforehand]] and [[cared]] it!!! [[Suis]] now in [[ownership]] of the DVD and was watching the [[serials]], and [[hoping]] for scenes I [[overheard]] were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his [[household]])and [[performed]] it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[staring]] the [[attraction]] without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the [[remark]] about the [[showcase]] being out of [[orders]]. [[Thanks]] You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some [[remark]] state "Strangler number 19 then [[Triangular]] 20, when another had them around the other [[path]]. And [[furthermore]] [[Starch]] [[Guys]] 5, and Dead to the [[International]] 6, were [[overturned]] as well. Can someone clarify????? --------------------------------------------- Result 2568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] My brother [[brought]] this movie home from the rental store and I [[remember]] [[expecting]] it to be such a bore. I think the title especially put me off. I can't ever [[remember]] starting a [[movie]] with such low [[expectations]] and being so [[completely]] won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie speaks to me the way this one did. I was completely [[caught]] up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her [[life]]. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley [[Judd]] has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. My brother [[lodged]] this movie home from the rental store and I [[rember]] [[waiting]] it to be such a bore. I think the title especially put me off. I can't ever [[rember]] starting a [[kino]] with such low [[outlook]] and being so [[perfectly]] won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie speaks to me the way this one did. I was completely [[capturing]] up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her [[iife]]. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley [[Jude]] has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2569 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Six degrees had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when [[Men]] in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on [[hiatus]] and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it [[ended]]. We could relate to the [[characters]] who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[favorite]] [[characters]]. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[superb]]. I [[alway]] like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to [[protest]] the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time [[slot]], don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. Six degrees had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when [[Male]] in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on [[interruption]] and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it [[terminated]]. We could relate to the [[features]] who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[preferred]] [[features]]. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[wondrous]]. I [[allways]] like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to [[demonstration]] the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time [[slit]], don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Let's just say it in simple words so that even the makers of this film might have a chance to understand: This is a very dumb film with an even dumber script, lame animation, and a story that's about as original as thumbtacks. Don't bother -- unless you need to find some way to entertain a group of mentally retarded adults or extremely slow children. They might laugh, especially if they're off their meds. There's a special kind of insult in a film this ridiculous -- not only do the filmmakers apparently think that children are brainless idiots who can be entertained with claptrap that cost approximately zero effort, but they don't even bother to break a sweat inserting a gag here and there that an adult might find amusing. This film, frankly, ticked me off royally. Shame on you for stooping so low. --------------------------------------------- Result 2571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A lot has been said about Shinjuku [[Triad]] [[Society]] as the first [[true]] "Miike" [[film]] and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is [[based]] on the truth. All the Miike [[trademarks]] are here, the violence, the black [[humour]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[testing]] and the [[difficult]] to like central [[character]]. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most [[perfectly]] formed [[films]]. He says in an [[interview]] that if he [[made]] it again it [[would]] be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he [[means]] is that the [[film]] [[possesses]] a [[truly]] [[captivating]] [[energy]] and raw edge which seems so fresh that [[although]] he might be able to [[capture]] a more visually or technically [[complex]] [[movie]] he [[could]] not [[replicate]] or better the purity of this [[film]].

As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a [[fantastic]] scene in which a [[woman]] has a [[chair]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[film]] could [[let]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[film]] has a [[fantastic]] [[pace]], unlike Dead or Alive which [[begins]] and [[ends]] [[strongly]] and [[dips]] in the middle. [[Dead]] or [[Alive]] also [[deals]] with similar [[issues]], Miike is [[clearly]] concerned about the [[relations]] between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[period]] and this emotive subject is [[handled]] well here, the central [[character]] really coming to life when you [[begin]] to [[understand]] his [[past]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not [[want]] to [[give]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[began]] to [[use]] CGI to animate his [[films]] and is [[almost]] [[reminiscent]] of [[something]] like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[characters]] are [[superbly]] [[realized]] and the [[final]] twist [[guarantees]] that as [[soon]] as the [[film]] has [[finished]] you'll be popping it back on again to [[work]] it all out. A lot has been said about Shinjuku [[Trilogy]] [[Societal]] as the first [[authentic]] "Miike" [[movie]] and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is [[founded]] on the truth. All the Miike [[marques]] are here, the violence, the black [[comedy]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[essays]] and the [[troublesome]] to like central [[nature]]. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most [[wholly]] formed [[movie]]. He says in an [[interviews]] that if he [[brought]] it again it [[should]] be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he [[methods]] is that the [[movies]] [[possessed]] a [[really]] [[engrossing]] [[energies]] and raw edge which seems so fresh that [[while]] he might be able to [[captured]] a more visually or technically [[sophisticated]] [[cinematic]] he [[did]] not [[replication]] or better the purity of this [[cinematography]].

As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a [[unbelievable]] scene in which a [[women]] has a [[chairperson]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[movies]] could [[leave]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[cinematic]] has a [[wondrous]] [[cadence]], unlike Dead or Alive which [[starts]] and [[terminates]] [[flatly]] and [[tumbles]] in the middle. [[Die]] or [[Vibrant]] also [[treats]] with similar [[problem]], Miike is [[apparently]] concerned about the [[relationships]] between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[deadline]] and this emotive subject is [[manipulated]] well here, the central [[trait]] really coming to life when you [[launch]] to [[realise]] his [[former]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not [[wanna]] to [[lend]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[launches]] to [[utilizing]] CGI to animate his [[film]] and is [[hardly]] [[evocative]] of [[anything]] like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[character]] are [[beautifully]] [[performed]] and the [[latter]] twist [[assurances]] that as [[quickly]] as the [[movie]] has [[finalized]] you'll be popping it back on again to [[collaborated]] it all out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]]

This is [[definitely]] a '[[must]] see' for those who [[occasionally]] smoke a reefer in their [[secret]] hide-out, [[trying]] to [[avoid]] being [[caught]] by parents, [[teachers]], the [[police]], etc... The [[protagonist]] is a [[lady]] in her [[forties]], [[living]] in her [[mansion]], [[breeding]] orchids, and [[absolutely]] unaware of the [[fact]] that her so-called rich and [[truthful]] husband is [[actually]] broke and cheating on her. When he all of the [[sudden]] dies, she is [[confronted]] with the truth. The [[bailiff]] comes by to [[tell]] her that she is in a [[huge]] debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener [[tells]] her about the [[recent]] [[success]] of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some [[long]] [[thinking]] to [[get]] rid of her flowers and [[start]] breeding pot [[instead]]... The story is [[quite]] [[original]], the performances [[outstanding]]! I can [[think]] of only a few [[movies]] that made me laugh more than this one. [[Still]], the melodramatic [[touch]] is present. The [[film]] is [[typical]] British: the jokes aren't [[vulgar]], there is no violence [[involved]]. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have [[taken]] a few [[draughts]] before [[watching]] '[[Saving]] grace'. It will be so [[much]] more fun! [[Especially]] the scene with the 2 [[old]] [[ladies]] in their [[tea]] [[shop]] is [[hilarious]]. I [[thought]] my jawbones would [[burst]]. 9/10

This is [[obviously]] a '[[ought]] see' for those who [[sometimes]] smoke a reefer in their [[ulterior]] hide-out, [[tempting]] to [[evade]] being [[captured]] by parents, [[professors]], the [[policing]], etc... The [[actor]] is a [[ladies]] in her [[thirties]], [[residing]] in her [[manor]], [[reproduction]] orchids, and [[altogether]] unaware of the [[facto]] that her so-called rich and [[veritable]] husband is [[indeed]] broke and cheating on her. When he all of the [[abrupt]] dies, she is [[encountered]] with the truth. The [[beadle]] comes by to [[telling]] her that she is in a [[sizable]] debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener [[says]] her about the [[freshly]] [[succeeded]] of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some [[prolonged]] [[ideology]] to [[obtain]] rid of her flowers and [[commenced]] breeding pot [[alternatively]]... The story is [[rather]] [[preliminary]], the performances [[unpaid]]! I can [[reckon]] of only a few [[cinematic]] that made me laugh more than this one. [[However]], the melodramatic [[touches]] is present. The [[kino]] is [[classic]] British: the jokes aren't [[crass]], there is no violence [[engaged]]. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have [[took]] a few [[gusts]] before [[staring]] '[[Rescuing]] grace'. It will be so [[very]] more fun! [[Notably]] the scene with the 2 [[ancient]] [[lady]] in their [[shai]] [[stores]] is [[comical]]. I [[figured]] my jawbones would [[blast]]. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2573 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I sat down to watch a [[documentary]] about Puerto Rico, and I [[ended]] up [[watching]] one about Nuyoricans. [[When]] I [[go]] to Puerto Rico, I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. [[When]] I do see struggling people, they are usually Haitians, [[Dominicans]], or [[Cubans]] that have recently arrived to the island. There is no such thing as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[heard]]... you don't. [[Pedro]] Albizo [[Campos]] IS NOT MLK to me. MLK was a [[great]] [[man]]. Campos is a [[great]] [[man]] to those that [[want]] [[independence]] which is 1%. To the [[rest]] he as loco as Osama [[Bin]] Laden. Puertoricans that [[want]] [[independence]] are a bunch of fools. If you want any [[proof]] to all of you dreamers of an [[independent]] Puerto [[Rico]] [[see]] Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of [[South]] and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about [[Puerto]] [[Rico]], this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their [[struggles]].

To the [[person]] that complaint that not [[enough]] of [[Africa]] was on the [[show]]... it was [[suppose]] to be about [[Puerto]] [[Rico]]... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

[[In]] [[conclusion]]... to all those [[ignorant]] [[white]] people that [[think]] we [[need]] [[green]] [[cards]] to come to the [[US]], and want to [[learn]] how the prime minister [[runs]] [[things]], this is not a [[good]] [[documentary]] about Puertorican culture. [[Tell]] your [[kids]] to [[pay]] attention in [[Geography]], and [[History]] [[class]].

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She promoted it as if its how we all feel. [[Should]] have been [[titled]]... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." [[PLEASE]] [[STOP]] [[USING]] PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, [[OR]] [[ANYTHING]] ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. [[God]] [[forbid]] they play this on the island. I sat down to watch a [[documentaries]] about Puerto Rico, and I [[finished]] up [[staring]] one about Nuyoricans. [[Whenever]] I [[going]] to Puerto Rico, I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. [[Whenever]] I do see struggling people, they are usually Haitians, [[Dominican]], or [[Cuban]] that have recently arrived to the island. There is no such thing as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[listened]]... you don't. [[Pierre]] Albizo [[Camps]] IS NOT MLK to me. MLK was a [[whopping]] [[fella]]. Campos is a [[terrific]] [[guy]] to those that [[wanting]] [[autonomy]] which is 1%. To the [[stays]] he as loco as Osama [[Ibn]] Laden. Puertoricans that [[wanting]] [[autonomy]] are a bunch of fools. If you want any [[prove]] to all of you dreamers of an [[autonomous]] Puerto [[Puerto]] [[seeing]] Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of [[Southern]] and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about [[Porto]] [[Port]], this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their [[struggling]].

To the [[individuals]] that complaint that not [[sufficiently]] of [[Continents]] was on the [[exposition]]... it was [[imagine]] to be about [[Port]] [[Port]]... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

[[For]] [[conclude]]... to all those [[ignorance]] [[bianca]] people that [[ideas]] we [[require]] [[greene]] [[card]] to come to the [[USA]], and want to [[learnt]] how the prime minister [[manages]] [[aspects]], this is not a [[alright]] [[documentation]] about Puertorican culture. [[Say]] your [[youngsters]] to [[pays]] attention in [[Geographic]], and [[Stories]] [[categories]].

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She promoted it as if its how we all feel. [[Ought]] have been [[entitled]]... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." [[INVITE]] [[PARADA]] [[USAGE]] PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, [[ODER]] [[NADA]] ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. [[Seigneur]] [[aban]] they play this on the island. --------------------------------------------- Result 2574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Playwright Sidney Bruhl (a wonderfully over-the-top Michael Caine) would kill for a hit play. Enter young wonder kid (a solid Reeve) who's just written such a play. Weave into this Bruhl's overly hysterical wife (superbly played by Cannon) and a German psychic (a very funny Irene Worth) and you've got yourself a wonderfully funny suspense flick.

While not up to "Sleuth" standards, "Deathtrap" is none the less a very capable, twist filled comical suspense ride based on a terrific play by Ira Levin. The performers are obviously having a field day with the material, with Caine in particular delivering top notch lines with gusto.

The film loses a bit of steam midway through and the ending is a lot less satisfying than the hilarious one in the original play but overall "Deathtrap" is solid, well acted and suspenseful fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 2575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[wanted]] so much to [[enjoy]] this [[movie]]. It moved very [[slowly]] and was just boring. [[If]] it had been on [[TV]], it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, [[maybe]]. What happened to the [[story]]? A great [[cast]] and [[photographer]] were working on a faulty [[foundation]]. [[If]] this is [[loosely]] based on the life of the [[director]], why didn't he [[get]] [[someone]] to [[see]] that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[directed]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a [[different]] [[film]], not this one....for soap [[opera]] [[saga]] [[possibly]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller [[Stahl]] was [[speaking]]. I was not alone, because I [[heard]] a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make [[better]] movies? This one had the nugget of a great [[story]], but was just poorly [[executed]]. I [[wished]] so much to [[enjoying]] this [[movies]]. It moved very [[softly]] and was just boring. [[Though]] it had been on [[TELEVISION]], it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, [[presumably]]. What happened to the [[history]]? A great [[casting]] and [[cameraman]] were working on a faulty [[basis]]. [[Though]] this is [[lightly]] based on the life of the [[superintendent]], why didn't he [[got]] [[everybody]] to [[behold]] that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[geared]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a [[dissimilar]] [[filmmaking]], not this one....for soap [[teatro]] [[tale]] [[arguably]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller [[Steel]] was [[speaks]]. I was not alone, because I [[audition]] a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make [[best]] movies? This one had the nugget of a great [[storytelling]], but was just poorly [[implemented]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She gives her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette Midler moves her audience. If you can't see it live (which is the best way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to look at is how incredible her voice has changed and matured over the years but never lost its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never loses anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will treasure this concert for a very long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[times]] when I thought it was a comedy. I [[loved]] how the government's plan to [[capture]] the terrorist [[leader]] is to [[air]] [[drop]] in one [[man]], who is [[unarmed]], and [[expect]] him to [[capture]] him and escape with a [[rocket]] [[pack]]. [[If]] only it were [[really]] that easy. I've finally [[found]] a [[movie]] worse than "Plan 9 From [[Outer]] Space". Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[period]] when I thought it was a comedy. I [[worshiped]] how the government's plan to [[capturing]] the terrorist [[head]] is to [[midair]] [[autumn]] in one [[men]], who is [[helpless]], and [[hopes]] him to [[captured]] him and escape with a [[missiles]] [[packed]]. [[Unless]] only it were [[genuinely]] that easy. I've finally [[find]] a [[flick]] worse than "Plan 9 From [[Outside]] Space". --------------------------------------------- Result 2578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Le Locataire"("The Tenant")is without a doubt one of the most important horror movies ever made.Polanski stars as a Trelkovsky,a timid file clerk living in Paris,who answers an advertisement for an apartment,only to find that the previous tenant attempted suicide by leaping from the apartment window.Trelkovsky is compelled to visit her in the hospital and there he meets Stella(Isabelle Adjani).Trelkovsky immediately moves in when the previous tenant dies and,at first,is quite pleased with having found such a nice apartment.His happiness is soon replaced by waves of paranoia as he becomes increasingly suspicious of his neighbours,who seem to be trying to provoke Trelkovsky into repeating the previous tenant's suicide.This film is great.Polanski manages to create a surreal atmosphere of dread and paranoia.Plenty of brilliant moments such as the classic scene where Trelkovsky discovers the previous tenant's tooth in a hole in the wall,or the fever dream where he wanders into the building's bathroom to find the walls covered with hieroglyphics.The photography by Sven Nykvist is truly beautiful."The Tenant" is a neglected gem.It may be difficult to track down,but it is more than worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 2579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] No reason to bother renting this [[flick]]. From the [[opening]] [[credits]] on, I knew I was in [[trouble]].

It was [[filmed]] as [[though]] it was a soft porn [[movie]], but there [[really]] isn't [[anything]] erotic about it. The [[look]] into the world of [[sex]] [[addiction]] is [[intriguing]], but only to a point.

[[Boring]] sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[save]] this [[film]]. No reason to bother renting this [[film]]. From the [[opens]] [[credit]] on, I knew I was in [[difficulty]].

It was [[videotaped]] as [[despite]] it was a soft porn [[flick]], but there [[truthfully]] isn't [[algo]] erotic about it. The [[glance]] into the world of [[sexuality]] [[addictions]] is [[enthralling]], but only to a point.

[[Dull]] sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[savings]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] European Vacation (aka National Lampoon's European Vacation) is the weakest of the Vacation films (the first and third one the most superior of the films). While Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo return as Clark and Ellen Griswold (with new actors in the roles of Russ and Audrey Griswold), this time they are given a weaker script with very bad dialogue. This causes the pacing to suffer, with the jokes not very funny at all. To be more specific, what really causes this film to suffer is the fact that the "jokes" as they are, are just pasted together into a cobbled-together script), rather than serving a central plot as the other 3 Vacation films have. Oh well, they can't win them all. 4 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this movie was very well put together. The voice-overs were also great. I liked how they all overcame their conflicts and reached their goals. I would recommend this movie to anyone. It was definitely worth the time and money to watch it. Atlantis has some comic scenes that made me laugh. Other scenes made me sad. And others made me glad. It is a movie any age can enjoy. From the moment Milo is the crazy "profesor" or until he gathers the crew up for the fantastic voyage under the sea. After I watched the movie, I read the book. It was good as well, but the movie puts better pictures in your mind. It is just like the book. But go ahead and watch this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 2582 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny [[Kennedy]]. I never [[got]] the [[chance]] to [[meet]] him but I have never [[heard]] [[anybody]] say a [[bad]] word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programme]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this [[terrible]] condition. This [[man]] has [[touched]] people in a [[way]] that a [[million]] charity [[leaflets]] [[could]] not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in schools. I [[also]] [[agree]] with other comments - what have I got to [[moan]] about? He took everything that life could throw at him and [[still]] managed to [[retain]] a sense of [[humour]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that [[showed]] his [[dressings]] being [[changed]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny [[Jfk]]. I never [[did]] the [[likelihood]] to [[respond]] him but I have never [[audition]] [[someone]] say a [[unhealthy]] word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programs]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this [[abominable]] condition. This [[fella]] has [[impacted]] people in a [[pathway]] that a [[billion]] charity [[booklets]] [[wo]] not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in schools. I [[additionally]] [[concur]] with other comments - what have I got to [[whine]] about? He took everything that life could throw at him and [[however]] managed to [[conserve]] a sense of [[humor]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that [[evidenced]] his [[condiments]] being [[amend]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Amongst]] the standard one [[liner]] type [[action]] [[films]], where acting and logic are [[checked]] at the [[door]], this [[movie]] is at the top of the [[class]]. [[If]] the person in [[charge]] of [[casting]] were to have put "good" [[actors]] in this [[flick]], it [[would]] have been [[worse]](excepting [[Richard]] Dawson who [[actually]] did act well, if you can call [[playing]] yourself "acting"). I [[love]] this [[movie]]! The [[Running]] [[Man]] is in all likelihood God's gift to [[man]](okay maybe just [[men]]). [[Definitely]] the most quotable movie of our [[time]] so I'll [[part]] you with my [[favorite]] line: "It's all part of life's [[rich]] pattern [[Brenda]], and you better F*****g [[get]] [[used]] to it." [[Ahh]], more people have been [[called]] "Brenda" for the sake of [[quoting]] this [[film]] than I can [[possibly]] [[imagine]]. [[Between]] the standard one [[stuntman]] type [[activity]] [[cinematography]], where acting and logic are [[ticked]] at the [[doorway]], this [[film]] is at the top of the [[classroom]]. [[Unless]] the person in [[onus]] of [[pouring]] were to have put "good" [[protagonists]] in this [[gesture]], it [[could]] have been [[lousiest]](excepting [[Richards]] Dawson who [[indeed]] did act well, if you can call [[gaming]] yourself "acting"). I [[loved]] this [[movies]]! The [[Execution]] [[Guy]] is in all likelihood God's gift to [[males]](okay maybe just [[males]]). [[Obviously]] the most quotable movie of our [[period]] so I'll [[portions]] you with my [[preferred]] line: "It's all part of life's [[richest]] pattern [[Cynthia]], and you better F*****g [[obtain]] [[employs]] to it." [[Aw]], more people have been [[phoned]] "Brenda" for the sake of [[quoted]] this [[cinematography]] than I can [[conceivably]] [[guess]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] To start off with, since this movie is a remake of a classic, the rating has to be lowered already. Since this version stars Viggo Mortensen in the lead role of Kowalski, it helps.

Isn't this just like the United States government though, to terrorize one of its own citizens. Sounds like Jason Priestley's character from the movie! But it is the truth, the government would do anything possible to destroy a man's life for trying to get home to his wife. A wife, who is in labor no less, and may not make it.

"There was a time in this country that the police would escort a man to his pregnant wife." The words of the Disc Jockey.

There were some great shots of scenery in this film, and great car chases and a lot of spirituality. After much consideration, I gave this film a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 2585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] xica da Silva is one of the best Brazilians opera soap ever! the a black slave's story that becomes queen of a small villa when conquering the most powerful man's of the area love, in the colonial period of the brazil dominated by Portugal, that explored its diamonds. The largest xica enemy, violante, bride that it was changed by xica, is a woman of big it influences the Portugal king close to and does to take revenge of the slave of everything. Very religious person, she is a picture of the hypocritical society and religious of the time, she dedicates its life the morality of the villa that was committed by xica, that is a woman full of lusts that it faces the society of the time to preach and it helps the slaves of the area. The story also bill with forbidden loves, sorceries and vampires and religious fervor. Xica da Silva does with that you don't want to lose a I only surrender, from beginning to end! --------------------------------------------- Result 2586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (Spoilers)

I was very curious to see this film, after having heard that it was clever and witty. I had to stop halfway because of the unbearable boredom I felt.

The idea behind the film would have been acceptable: depicting the way the relationship between a man and a woman evolves, through all the problems and difficulties that two people living in a big city can experience. What made me dislike the whole film were two things.

First of all, the film was so down-to-earth that it looked as if, by describing the problems that a couple must solve on a day-to-day basis, it became itself ordinary and dull.

Secondly, the overall sloppiness of the production, with dialogues that were barely understandable.

Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was utterly disappointed by this movie. I had read some of the other reviews here and had much higher expectations. I expected a drama with more intense character development. But that never happens in the movie. Daniel-Day Lewis is a good actor, but not as good as some reviewers here would have us believe. I tought he repeated the same set of 4 or 5 movements in the movie. I would rate his performance 6 out of 10.

Acting: 6 out of 10 Direction is 5 out of 10. Script is the worst: 2 out of 10.

I deleted the movie from my DVR at 70 mins. into the movie. Much better movies out there than this... --------------------------------------------- Result 2588 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] There's more to offer in the opening of The [[Odd]] [[Couple]] than in the entirety of most [[films]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A [[cleaning]] lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his [[room]] he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the viewer [[finally]] [[puts]] it [[together]] — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[window]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular [[genius]] of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable [[situations]]. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. [[Great]] stuff. And it's made even [[greater]] with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great [[effect]] is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly [[memorable]] is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. There's more to offer in the opening of The [[Bizarre]] [[Coupling]] than in the entirety of most [[kino]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A [[cleanup]] lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his [[salle]] he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the viewer [[ultimately]] [[poses]] it [[jointly]] — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[luna]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular [[engineers]] of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable [[instances]]. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. [[Huge]] stuff. And it's made even [[larger]] with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great [[effects]] is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly [[landmark]] is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. --------------------------------------------- Result 2589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Yes, this [[gets]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this [[fill]] is [[genius]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, [[wonderfully]] strange [[man]] one day and Harris [[caught]] him on [[tape]], in all that true misfit [[glory]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[tragedy]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Penn]] and Crispin [[Glover]] in the roles of the young men, respectively. The [[world]] is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a [[broader]] glimpse into [[growing]] up weird in vanilla [[America]]. [[Recommended]] for anyone and everyone! Yes, this [[attains]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this [[filling]] is [[engineers]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, [[fantastically]] strange [[males]] one day and Harris [[apprehended]] him on [[cassettes]], in all that true misfit [[stardom]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[drama]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Pennsylvania]] and Crispin [[Grover]] in the roles of the young men, respectively. The [[monde]] is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a [[extensive]] glimpse into [[augmented]] up weird in vanilla [[American]]. [[Suggested]] for anyone and everyone! --------------------------------------------- Result 2590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with [[long]], [[complex]] [[dramas]]. [[Crime]] is essentially [[banal]], so the [[pay]] off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[used]] a number of clever devices to try and [[get]] [[round]] this, but has not been [[entirely]] successful. Answers to [[precisely]] what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well [[buried]]. The [[viewer]] inevitably [[feels]] a [[little]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[drama]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the [[lives]] of those involved; the [[family]], the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was gripping. The writing was a [[significant]] cut above the [[run]] of the [[mill]] for prime-time drama, and the performances [[uniformly]] good. In an [[ensemble]] piece it is invidious to focus on [[individuals]], but Penelope [[Wilton]] deserves [[special]] mention for an [[extraordinary]] tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking [[form]] as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the [[handling]] of [[race]], as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[powerful]] stuff. A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with [[lengthy]], [[tricky]] [[theatrical]]. [[Delinquency]] is essentially [[trite]], so the [[payroll]] off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[utilizing]] a number of clever devices to try and [[got]] [[redondo]] this, but has not been [[downright]] successful. Answers to [[exactly]] what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well [[burying]]. The [[bystander]] inevitably [[believes]] a [[petite]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[theatrical]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the [[life]] of those involved; the [[families]], the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was gripping. The writing was a [[cannot]] cut above the [[running]] of the [[factory]] for prime-time drama, and the performances [[evenly]] good. In an [[whole]] piece it is invidious to focus on [[person]], but Penelope [[Willi]] deserves [[specific]] mention for an [[noteworthy]] tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking [[shape]] as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the [[treat]] of [[races]], as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[influential]] stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 2591 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Yet]] again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the [[wild]] side. And a [[remarkable]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Mumbai]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch [[doctors]], [[business]] tycoons and [[broker]] [[types]], [[yep]] the whole stinking [[lot]] -- are in [[sharp]] [[focus]] here. In [[typical]] tabloid fashion, their [[worlds]] unfold, with [[every]] [[colorful]] story a [[clever]] sub-plot in itself.

A [[struggling]] starlet dumped by the [[producer]] after [[getting]] her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the [[pedophile]] [[businessman]] and his neurotic [[wife]], the reporters and the [[police]] captain; all [[shades]] on [[display]] and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell [[job]] of digging up the dirt on the [[drama]] kings, the [[dancing]] [[queens]] and the [[living]] dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen [[Sharma]] is [[effective]] as the ex-crime [[beat]] [[reporter]], but she could have been dolled up a [[little]] in keeping with the [[job]] [[change]] and the [[party]] [[circuit]].

[[Highly]] [[focused]] ([[running]] [[time]] 140 min) and [[refreshingly]] [[different]] [[film]], well worth the money. [[However]] again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the [[feral]] side. And a [[wondrous]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Bangalore]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch [[physician]], [[firms]] tycoons and [[intermediaries]] [[genera]], [[yeah]] the whole stinking [[batch]] -- are in [[sharpe]] [[concentration]] here. In [[symptomatic]] tabloid fashion, their [[mundos]] unfold, with [[any]] [[scenic]] story a [[artful]] sub-plot in itself.

A [[wrestling]] starlet dumped by the [[producers]] after [[obtaining]] her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the [[paedophile]] [[trader]] and his neurotic [[women]], the reporters and the [[policeman]] captain; all [[sunglasses]] on [[displays]] and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell [[labour]] of digging up the dirt on the [[theater]] kings, the [[danse]] [[fags]] and the [[inhabit]] dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen [[Mishra]] is [[efficient]] as the ex-crime [[defeat]] [[reporters]], but she could have been dolled up a [[tiny]] in keeping with the [[labor]] [[amendments]] and the [[part]] [[circuits]].

[[Vastly]] [[concentrating]] ([[implementing]] [[period]] 140 min) and [[cheerfully]] [[several]] [[movies]], well worth the money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2592 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This masterpiece of lesbian horror comes from exploitation master Joseph W.Sarno.It features plenty of soft core sex,really hot lesbian sequences plus a lot of naked women.The acting is pretty good and the film is quite atmospheric and well-made.Marie Forsa is one of the hottest chicks I have ever seen in a horror movie-it's a visual pleasure to see her wonderful body.Sarno really knows how to pick up hot looking ladies.A must see for fans of sexploitation! --------------------------------------------- Result 2593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The movie had a cute [[opening]], I truly believed I was in for one of the best [[romantic]] comedies i've seen in a while... there was [[something]] particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat [[abstract]] and [[mystical]]. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[unrealistic]]. To say that the ending was [[CORNY]] and [[PREDICTABLE]] would [[almost]] be an understatement... The most [[typical]] romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character [[realises]] that he has [[made]] a mistake and [[chases]] the "[[woman]] of his [[dreams]]" only to [[confess]] his [[love]] for her in front of a [[sympathetic]] crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the [[end]], the 'good guys' [[win]], '[[bad]] guys' loose... You get the [[picture]]. A [[WASTE]] of a [[potentially]] interesting [[movie]]. The movie had a cute [[commencement]], I truly believed I was in for one of the best [[sentimental]] comedies i've seen in a while... there was [[anything]] particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat [[recap]] and [[mystic]]. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[impractical]]. To say that the ending was [[DORKY]] and [[FORESEEABLE]] would [[about]] be an understatement... The most [[emblematic]] romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character [[understands]] that he has [[introduced]] a mistake and [[haunts]] the "[[femme]] of his [[daydream]]" only to [[recognise]] his [[loves]] for her in front of a [[empathy]] crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the [[termination]], the 'good guys' [[earn]], '[[rotten]] guys' loose... You get the [[image]]. A [[SQUANDER]] of a [[maybe]] interesting [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 5 minutes into this movie I was hyperventilating, shaking, and writhing in pain. And not in the good way. The story is about a troupe of idiotic children making prank phone calls to a psycho which is always a good idea. Turns out psychos don't like prank phone calls because in 2 minutes time he's at their door killing poor Williams mom and dad. Well skip ahead 15 years and guess what? Still prank phone calling people. Yep you would of thought that a horrible murder would of deterred them from doing that ever again but no. So after about two hours later and way too many scream ripoffs I realized that this movie gave me nothing but a terrible taste in my mouth and a severe urge to take my own life. This piece of crap isn't even worth laughing at the shoddy production, the "acting", or Rutger haurs dwindling career. I love crappy horror movies but this is the most unsatisfying piece I've ever seen. Just don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] First of all i'd just like to [[say]] this [[movie]] rawked more than any of the [[recent]] crap that hollywood has [[cooked]] up out of its bowels. McBain is a [[true]] [[action]] film with more violence than most [[viewers]] can [[handle]]. It has all of the [[classic]] [[elements]] of a late 80's/early 90's [[action]] [[film]]....the [[random]] [[gratuitous]] [[acts]] of violence ([[ie]]. when Walken and crew [[go]] in to [[confront]] the [[drug]] [[dealers]] to [[get]] money they just [[show]] up and [[kill]] them [[rather]] than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the [[guys]] on fire, the [[guys]] that [[get]] [[blown]] off buildings, and of course the [[guys]] who are on fire that [[get]] [[blown]] off of buildings. Walken is at his [[finest]] in this picture delivering [[memorable]] lines such as, "let's [[go]] sit..........out on the deck." and [[others]] that make this [[film]] a [[top]] [[buy]] off of the clearence rack at the local video [[store]]. if you have a bloodlust for [[unnecessary]] random [[acts]] of violence [[rent]] this [[movie]] [[today]] and [[satisfy]] your thirst. First of all i'd just like to [[tell]] this [[film]] rawked more than any of the [[freshly]] crap that hollywood has [[cooks]] up out of its bowels. McBain is a [[truthful]] [[efforts]] film with more violence than most [[listeners]] can [[handled]]. It has all of the [[conventional]] [[ingredients]] of a late 80's/early 90's [[activity]] [[cinematography]]....the [[haphazard]] [[unprovoked]] [[act]] of violence ([[ci]]. when Walken and crew [[going]] in to [[tackle]] the [[medicines]] [[traders]] to [[gets]] money they just [[displays]] up and [[murdering]] them [[comparatively]] than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the [[lads]] on fire, the [[lads]] that [[got]] [[molten]] off buildings, and of course the [[lads]] who are on fire that [[obtains]] [[melted]] off of buildings. Walken is at his [[meanest]] in this picture delivering [[landmark]] lines such as, "let's [[going]] sit..........out on the deck." and [[alia]] that make this [[cinema]] a [[supreme]] [[buys]] off of the clearence rack at the local video [[storage]]. if you have a bloodlust for [[worthless]] random [[act]] of violence [[leases]] this [[kino]] [[hoy]] and [[fulfill]] your thirst. --------------------------------------------- Result 2596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! [[How]] [[appropriate]], right? I know, I love it. [[Anyway]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the [[rules]] of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't [[imaginative]], but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally worse than the original.

It is entertaining in the same [[way]] as the original was, in that the [[characters]] and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't [[help]] getting a [[good]] [[laugh]]. [[At]] one point, a [[guy]] [[asks]] Angela out, and she [[says]] "I'll call you," and then [[quickly]] [[walks]] away. The [[guy]] [[says]] to himself, "[[How]] is she gonna call me? I don't have a [[phone]]!" and then he sniffs his armpits, [[wondering]] what [[turned]] her off (it's the hair, [[dude]]!!).

It is a well-known [[fact]] that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered [[teenagers]] were more [[often]] than not being [[punished]] by their [[killer]] for some [[kind]] of [[bad]] [[behavior]], [[usually]] for being too promiscuous. When I first [[started]] [[getting]] into [[horror]] [[movies]] and [[saw]] the [[Friday]] the 13th [[movies]] for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I [[learned]] it in a [[film]] [[class]] a year or two later and was [[amazed]] that their was some [[method]] to the [[madness]]. I was pretty impressed, not only that the [[movies]] were passing on some [[kind]] of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was [[actually]] some [[thought]] put into it.

But not in this [[movie]]! [[At]] one point just before Angela [[kills]] one of her [[victims]], she [[says]] "Let this be a lesson to you. [[Say]] no to drugs!" [[Real]] subtle screen writing there, guys. [[Then]] again, the [[dialogue]] is the most entertaining [[thing]] in the movie. Angela (who, by the [[way]], went through all that therapy and those [[operations]] and all that [[trouble]] to clean up her [[past]] and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed [[person]] and then [[changed]] her name from Angela to, [[umm]], Angela), [[says]] at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This [[made]] me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! [[Mode]] [[adequate]], right? I know, I love it. [[Writ]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the [[regulations]] of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't [[innovative]], but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally worse than the original.

It is entertaining in the same [[ways]] as the original was, in that the [[traits]] and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't [[helps]] getting a [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. [[During]] one point, a [[buddy]] [[asked]] Angela out, and she [[contends]] "I'll call you," and then [[faster]] [[walking]] away. The [[buddy]] [[tells]] to himself, "[[Mode]] is she gonna call me? I don't have a [[tel]]!" and then he sniffs his armpits, [[request]] what [[transformed]] her off (it's the hair, [[homeboy]]!!).

It is a well-known [[facto]] that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered [[youngsters]] were more [[generally]] than not being [[sanctioned]] by their [[assassin]] for some [[type]] of [[unfavourable]] [[demeanor]], [[normally]] for being too promiscuous. When I first [[initiating]] [[obtain]] into [[terror]] [[movie]] and [[noticed]] the [[Yesterday]] the 13th [[cinematic]] for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I [[learns]] it in a [[movie]] [[category]] a year or two later and was [[flabbergasted]] that their was some [[mode]] to the [[craziness]]. I was pretty impressed, not only that the [[movie]] were passing on some [[sorts]] of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was [[genuinely]] some [[figured]] put into it.

But not in this [[filmmaking]]! [[During]] one point just before Angela [[killings]] one of her [[fatalities]], she [[said]] "Let this be a lesson to you. [[Tell]] no to drugs!" [[Veritable]] subtle screen writing there, guys. [[Thus]] again, the [[conversation]] is the most entertaining [[stuff]] in the movie. Angela (who, by the [[camino]], went through all that therapy and those [[operation]] and all that [[difficulty]] to clean up her [[former]] and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed [[persona]] and then [[altering]] her name from Angela to, [[um]], Angela), [[said]] at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This [[accomplished]] me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is the first time I'm writing a comment on a movie on IMDb. but i had to write it for this one. its 3 hrs of unadulterated torture. from the starting u get the idea that the movie is gonna be bad. the acting is pathetic. I'm a big fan of Ajay devgan (loved him in bhagat singh) but he is at his worst in this movie. amitabh seems to have worked hard for this one, but somehow the fear is missing. prashant raj is a non actor. and the most irritating part of the movie is nisha kothari. i have no clue why the director took her in this movie. the background score is repetitive. somehow i felt that ramu tried to repeat a sarkar, the color theme, the background score, the camera angles, but it didn't work. PLEASE Don't WATCH IT --------------------------------------------- Result 2598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the worst movies I've seen shoddy camera work, crappy filter usage, film was grainy, script was terrible, i mean come on, how predictable was the big battle at the end.....

some of the fight scenes were okay i guess....

some scenes were so bad it was comical ...like Sorbo getting the horse and riding at the end...LOL i mean really ..a horse? Oh cant forget how the bad assassins roll around in the same vehicle throughout the entire movie..one would think that after killling key witness and federal agents, they woulda been tracked down..ETC, ETC really don't bother watching it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching this movie was a waste of time. I was tempted to leave in the middle of the movie, but I resisted. I don't know what Ridley Scott intended, but I learned that in the army, women get as stupid as men. They learn to spit, to insult and to fight in combat, and that's also a waste of time (in my opinion). And, anyway, what the hell was that final scene in Lybia? Are they still fighting Gadafi or is it that it's easy for everyone to believe islamic people are always a danger? --------------------------------------------- Result 2600 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] The only redeeming quality of this [[movie]] is that it was [[bad]] enough to be [[comedic]]. Everyone in this [[movie]] [[looks]] like a porn industry [[drop]] out. I have actually [[seen]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[though]] I had [[actually]] [[rented]] some [[kind]] of [[gay]] porn after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your ass [[Nick]]: You watch yours (together): I wont [[leave]] you behind!

The [[first]] action [[sequence]] [[shows]] how [[awful]] the [[production]] is, but its really kind of [[funny]]: [[Good]] [[guys]] have [[transformer]] [[weapons]]! [[In]] one scene, they all have [[fake]] [[HK]] MP5 sub-machine [[guns]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[top]] it all off, they do some [[weapon]] swapping between scenes with a couple of M-16s!! I [[think]] they had a budget [[shortage]] for [[guns]], not enough to go around between the [[good]] guys and [[bad]] guys. [[Fight]] scenes are poorly coordinated and [[fake]] as all [[hell]]. You have to [[remove]] the pin/[[spoon]] from a [[grenade]] for it to [[explode]] on its own. You can't fire a shoulder [[launched]] [[missile]] of any [[kind]] while riding inside a [[helicopter]]. Weapons that you throw away don't [[suddenly]] re-appear. When a [[gun]] is out of bullets, throwing it away is [[still]] [[pretty]] [[stupid]]. Unless you have no [[idea]] how to reload them.. [[Big]] slow trucks driving around in first gear [[make]] for [[awkward]] [[action]] scenes. I really cant [[believe]] movies like this are [[actually]] [[produced]]. This [[movie]] [[would]] be [[hilarious]] on nitrous [[oxide]] or [[maybe]] just [[drunk]]. The only redeeming quality of this [[filmmaking]] is that it was [[unfavorable]] enough to be [[slapstick]]. Everyone in this [[cinema]] [[seems]] like a porn industry [[fall]] out. I have actually [[noticed]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[while]] I had [[genuinely]] [[leases]] some [[genus]] of [[homo]] porn after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your ass [[Nicky]]: You watch yours (together): I wont [[let]] you behind!

The [[firstly]] action [[sequences]] [[denotes]] how [[horrific]] the [[productivity]] is, but its really kind of [[humorous]]: [[Buena]] [[boys]] have [[processor]] [[arms]]! [[For]] one scene, they all have [[counterfeit]] [[HONG]] MP5 sub-machine [[shotgun]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[topped]] it all off, they do some [[weapons]] swapping between scenes with a couple of M-16s!! I [[ideas]] they had a budget [[imperfection]] for [[shotgun]], not enough to go around between the [[alright]] guys and [[unfavorable]] guys. [[Battles]] scenes are poorly coordinated and [[forged]] as all [[brothel]]. You have to [[abolition]] the pin/[[scoop]] from a [[grenada]] for it to [[blasting]] on its own. You can't fire a shoulder [[inaugurated]] [[rockets]] of any [[genre]] while riding inside a [[copter]]. Weapons that you throw away don't [[unexpectedly]] re-appear. When a [[shotgun]] is out of bullets, throwing it away is [[however]] [[belle]] [[dumb]]. Unless you have no [[ideas]] how to reload them.. [[Prodigious]] slow trucks driving around in first gear [[deliver]] for [[tricky]] [[actions]] scenes. I really cant [[think]] movies like this are [[indeed]] [[generated]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[could]] be [[comic]] on nitrous [[rust]] or [[potentially]] just [[drunken]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[Master]] Blackmailer, based off of [[Sir]] Arthur Conan Doyle's short story, "the [[Adventure]] of Charles [[Augustus]] Milverton," is the [[first]] [[feature]] [[length]] Sherlock Holmes [[story]] with Jeremy [[Brett]] that I have seen. The [[story]] is interesting and [[dark]]. The [[film]] has a [[somewhat]] [[dreary]], sad feel to it, but it is [[quite]] entertaining (with some [[especially]] funny scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one way or another, destroy their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few tragic consequences for victims that could not pay up. Our heroes must next help Lady Eva Blackwell, who must pay a sum that is beyond her means or else her upcoming [[marriage]] will most definitely be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's house are [[intense]]. Although the film has an essentially happy ending, the tone is sad and regretful.

[[Outstanding]] performances by Jeremy [[Brett]] and Edward Hardwicke (as [[usual]]), and Robert [[Hardy]] as the notorious villain (most [[audiences]] probably [[recognize]] him [[today]] as [[Cornelius]] [[Fudge]] in Harry Potter), [[Serena]] Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, [[Norma]] [[West]] as Lady Swinstead and [[Sophie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only complaint is that there wasn't [[enough]] [[Inspector]] Lestrade. (I wish they [[would]] have added in the scene at the [[end]] of the short [[story]] where he gives the [[description]] of the two [[burglars]], one of which [[matches]] Watson.) The [[Maestro]] Blackmailer, based off of [[Monsieur]] Arthur Conan Doyle's short story, "the [[Adventurer]] of Charles [[Augusto]] Milverton," is the [[frst]] [[featuring]] [[lengths]] Sherlock Holmes [[tale]] with Jeremy [[Extensively]] that I have seen. The [[histories]] is interesting and [[darkened]]. The [[cinematography]] has a [[rather]] [[boring]], sad feel to it, but it is [[rather]] entertaining (with some [[namely]] funny scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one way or another, destroy their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few tragic consequences for victims that could not pay up. Our heroes must next help Lady Eva Blackwell, who must pay a sum that is beyond her means or else her upcoming [[marriages]] will most definitely be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's house are [[intensive]]. Although the film has an essentially happy ending, the tone is sad and regretful.

[[Wondrous]] performances by Jeremy [[Extensively]] and Edward Hardwicke (as [[ordinary]]), and Robert [[Robust]] as the notorious villain (most [[spectators]] probably [[confess]] him [[yesterday]] as [[Rupert]] [[Chocolate]] in Harry Potter), [[Calmly]] Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, [[Norm]] [[Westerly]] as Lady Swinstead and [[Sofie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only complaint is that there wasn't [[adequately]] [[Inspectors]] Lestrade. (I wish they [[ought]] have added in the scene at the [[ceases]] of the short [[history]] where he gives the [[descriptions]] of the two [[robbers]], one of which [[couple]] Watson.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really no reason to examine this much further because of a few very glaring and bias misleading statements.

A perfect example is when the filmmaker claims "Saul" or Paul of Tarus (the writer of The Book of Hebrews He asserts) has no idea Jesus is or was a human being, this assertion is either purposely false as he accuses others of presenting, or he is ignorant of what "The Bible" says.

first we can examine his misleading claim about Hebrews 8.4; which he shows a quote "If Jesus was on earth, he would not be a priest", hence right here He sets up the ignorant and unlearned viewer to accept his false premise.. why? He does what most so called Bible believing people he accuses of doing, the same.. That is TAKING things out of context.

verse one of Hebrews 8 is; 1.."Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" The context above is CLEARLY speaking of a Jesus who was on earth and ASCENDED into heaven after his alleged resurrection.

It has nothing to do with how the filmmaker wants the viewer to take his out of context scripture. Here he offers a foundation, that "Paul was not aware of a HUMAN Jesus, but only one in "heaven"

follow?

lets see if the filmmaker is being honest; Hebrews 7; 14. "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."

heh, didn't the filmmaker just quote from the writer of Hebrews trying to show the writer of that book has no knowledge of a "Human Jesus"? it's likely anyways Paul didn't write Hebrews, but I will not go into that here, but The film maker asserts Paul did, and that is the premise of the point given here.

It is not like this film maker does not make decent points in certain areas, he does, but he is engaging in the same blind bias of the religion he is bashing on. Once he engages in these tactics, in my strong opinion, he loses credibility as the religion he picks out, and the film is no longer a documentary, but a personal opinion, and a bias of the film maker, nothing more, nothing less. --------------------------------------------- Result 2603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Franco]] [[proves]], once again, that he is the prince of [[surreal]] & erotic [[cinema]]. [[True]], [[much]] of his work can be [[viewed]] as [[entertaining]] sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he [[shows]] what he is [[truly]] capable of when he [[lets]] his [[warped]] [[creativity]] [[run]] [[riot]] and [[gives]] us a [[film]] that is both hypnotic and [[enigmatic]] [[whilst]] [[still]] [[maintaining]] the [[delirious]] [[eroticism]] [[intrinsic]] in his [[work]]. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[splendid]] score pulsates as the viewer is [[thrown]] from one [[bizarre]] [[scenario]] to another as we follow the [[trials]] of a striptease [[artist]] ([[Reynaud]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one [[mysterious]] character states) be a [[devil]], [[attempt]] to come to terms with the world she [[inhabits]]. A [[beautiful]] and [[enigmatic]] piece of [[cinema]] [[highly]] [[recommended]] to [[anybody]] with [[even]] a passing interest in alternative [[cinema]]. [[Franko]] [[proving]], once again, that he is the prince of [[bizarre]] & erotic [[theaters]]. [[Real]], [[very]] of his work can be [[perceived]] as [[amusing]] sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he [[exhibitions]] what he is [[honestly]] capable of when he [[enabled]] his [[distorted]] [[inventiveness]] [[executing]] [[mutiny]] and [[donne]] us a [[flick]] that is both hypnotic and [[intriguing]] [[whereas]] [[however]] [[maintenance]] the [[delusional]] [[sensuality]] [[inalienable]] in his [[jobs]]. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[funky]] score pulsates as the viewer is [[tossed]] from one [[odd]] [[screenplay]] to another as we follow the [[lawsuits]] of a striptease [[performers]] ([[Renault]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one [[cryptic]] character states) be a [[demon]], [[attempts]] to come to terms with the world she [[lives]]. A [[wondrous]] and [[mysterious]] piece of [[movie]] [[heavily]] [[suggested]] to [[everybody]] with [[yet]] a passing interest in alternative [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2604 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I really enjoyed this [[movie]] as a young [[kid]]. [[At]] that age I [[thought]] that the [[silly]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[sports]]. [[Now]], [[several]] [[years]] [[later]], I can [[look]] back and see what a well [[designed]] [[movie]] this was. This movie opened my eyes as a [[small]] [[child]] to the [[struggles]] other [[children]] [[dealt]] with and [[real]] [[world]] [[issues]]. That kind of [[exposure]] is [[largely]] [[lacking]] in kids movies these days which I don't think is to our society's [[benefit]]. Sure the baseball antics [[seem]] [[really]] [[dumb]] now, but they [[drew]] kids in. No seven year old is going to [[ask]] to see a [[movie]] about foster children, but they will [[ask]] to [[see]] a movie about baseball. Disney realized this [[fact]] and [[took]] advantage of it to [[teach]] these children an [[important]] lesson about the [[world]].

As a young [[adult]] the performance of Al and the other [[angels]] [[seems]] far less [[impressive]], [[however]] I will give credit to the [[actors]] [[playing]] both [[children]] and Danny [[Glover]] who all did a [[fantastic]] job. I really enjoyed this [[film]] as a young [[kids]]. [[Under]] that age I [[thoughts]] that the [[preposterous]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[athletes]]. [[Currently]], [[many]] [[yrs]] [[subsequently]], I can [[peek]] back and see what a well [[intended]] [[movies]] this was. This movie opened my eyes as a [[minor]] [[infantile]] to the [[fight]] other [[kiddies]] [[treated]] with and [[actual]] [[worldwide]] [[problem]]. That kind of [[explanatory]] is [[basically]] [[missing]] in kids movies these days which I don't think is to our society's [[benefits]]. Sure the baseball antics [[looks]] [[truthfully]] [[idiotic]] now, but they [[called]] kids in. No seven year old is going to [[wondering]] to see a [[kino]] about foster children, but they will [[poser]] to [[seeing]] a movie about baseball. Disney realized this [[facto]] and [[taken]] advantage of it to [[taught]] these children an [[principal]] lesson about the [[globe]].

As a young [[grownups]] the performance of Al and the other [[angel]] [[looks]] far less [[noteworthy]], [[yet]] I will give credit to the [[actresses]] [[replay]] both [[kids]] and Danny [[Grover]] who all did a [[wondrous]] job. --------------------------------------------- Result 2605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I can't agree with any of the [[comments]]. First [[time]] I saw the film on a UK [[TV]] channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the [[film]] under this angle I think it's an all [[different]] matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked instantly. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[hilarious]] and it's all in all an [[incredible]] trash [[movie]].

It [[says]] as much about [[America]] than a Bully or a [[Ken]] Park without the [[drama]] [[perspective]] but it [[gives]] a glimpse on the US [[society]], and more [[precisely]] on what afternoon [[TV]] [[viewers]] in [[America]] (and I [[believe]] there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the [[neighbours]] we're talking about, don't we ?

100% [[fun]] ! I can't agree with any of the [[observations]]. First [[moment]] I saw the film on a UK [[TELEVISION]] channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the [[cinema]] under this angle I think it's an all [[multiple]] matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked instantly. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[comic]] and it's all in all an [[unthinkable]] trash [[cinematography]].

It [[alleges]] as much about [[Americas]] than a Bully or a [[Keane]] Park without the [[teatro]] [[standpoint]] but it [[affords]] a glimpse on the US [[societies]], and more [[accurately]] on what afternoon [[TVS]] [[listeners]] in [[Americas]] (and I [[believing]] there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the [[neighbor]] we're talking about, don't we ?

100% [[amusing]] ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] [[Given]] the people involved, it is [[hard]] to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[dull]]. The [[writer]], David Ward, wrote the [[amazing]] caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. [[At]] the same time the [[movie]] [[wants]] to be hip [[satire]], a series of comedy [[sketches]] of the [[type]] that the NBC television [[show]] "[[Saturday]] [[Night]]" [[would]] do so well [[two]] years [[later]]. The [[bad]] [[result]] is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits [[destroy]] any [[kind]] of [[suspense]] that the [[heist]] might have. It is [[quite]] literally a [[movie]] that keeps smashing into itself, just as the [[cars]] in the [[cars]] in the [[demolition]] scenes [[run]] into each other.

The only [[real]] interest for me was [[watching]] [[Jane]] Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is [[supposed]] to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute [[character]] in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't [[believe]] her for a [[moment]]. It is [[always]] Jane Fonda pretending to be a [[prostitute]] that we are [[watching]]. It is as [[terrible]] a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It [[would]] be a [[good]] lesson for acting [[teachers]] to [[run]] the two [[films]] together to [[show]] how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or [[pathetic]]. It [[suggests]] that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. [[Awarded]] the people involved, it is [[laborious]] to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[boring]]. The [[novelist]], David Ward, wrote the [[surprising]] caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. [[In]] the same time the [[filmmaking]] [[wanted]] to be hip [[sarcasm]], a series of comedy [[portraits]] of the [[kind]] that the NBC television [[shows]] "[[Saturdays]] [[Nighttime]]" [[could]] do so well [[deux]] years [[thereafter]]. The [[rotten]] [[findings]] is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits [[destroys]] any [[types]] of [[sufferance]] that the [[burglary]] might have. It is [[rather]] literally a [[filmmaking]] that keeps smashing into itself, just as the [[automobile]] in the [[automobile]] in the [[ruining]] scenes [[running]] into each other.

The only [[actual]] interest for me was [[staring]] [[Jin]] Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is [[presumed]] to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute [[characters]] in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't [[think]] her for a [[time]]. It is [[continuously]] Jane Fonda pretending to be a [[prostitution]] that we are [[staring]]. It is as [[frightful]] a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It [[could]] be a [[buena]] lesson for acting [[teacher]] to [[running]] the two [[movies]] together to [[displays]] how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or [[lamentable]]. It [[suggest]] that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although the beginning of the movie in New York takes too long, the movie is a must see for people who like this genre. When Hannah goes to Berlin to visit the older woman who helped her mother during the war, the movie gets much much better.The movie is a bit like The Pianist, can not really be compared. --------------------------------------------- Result 2608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I waited for this movie to come out for a while in Canada, and when it finally did, I was very excited to see it. I really enjoyed it. Of course, in the beginning, it is a very sad movie (and it was New Years Day - making it even sadder) - however, it sticks with you. The next day I was thinking about it again, because although it revolves around something so emotionally draining, you realize after a few days that it is such a beautiful story. How one person can be seen as the link to so many people, but sometimes you can be blinded so many things. And how Diane Keaton's character kind of saves the rest of them by just being there. And how they save her in the process as well. It was such an excellent movie, and Chris Pine (one of my favourite actors) provides the perfect comic relief. It is definitely a movie that will need a box of tissues, but will really stay with you for a long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I started to watch this movie on VH-1 I cringed. The MTV movies were all bad so I wasnt expecting much. But this movie was really good. I liked it a lot. And it even had a twist at the end. See this movie because it shows that Made For TV movies that are good exist. --------------------------------------------- Result 2610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Best animated movie ever made. This film explores not only the vast world of modern animation with absolutely boggling effects, but the branches of the human mind, soul, and philosophy. The story features a family of cats, where in the big sister dies, the younger brother sees this and rescues her body, but when she awakens she is left without a soul. So, the two sibling cats embark on a journey to find it. I have related this journey to many things. The history of the world, the bible, the cycle of life, and every time I watch it I discover more and more hidden themes and metaphors. If you aren't so into the physiological aspect of it then, you will still adore it. The animation is superb, and the creative scenes will have you attached to the screen. For example, the ocean freezing in time, god eating soup out of the earth, a strange and slightly SNM retelling of Hansel and Gretel. To conclude, Cat Soup is an absolute treat for anyone.

PS- Not for kids, gratuitous violence included. --------------------------------------------- Result 2611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I got a DVD of "Bogeyman" and this stunker was an extra feature. I assumed that it was "Boogeyman II" because it was paired with the original. But you know what they say about those who "assume": it makes an "ass-" out of "u-" and "me." I had read before viewing that BII contains a lot of footage from the original and that it starred actress Love. While watching "Return of the Boogeyman," I decided to stick around through the original footage to see the notorious death-by-toothbrush scene. Before I knew it, the film was over. Rip-off. I think that I thought this was BII because this has a similar title to one of BII's alternate titles. Oh well, at least this was just an extra feature, right?

Let me stop talking about my mistake and start talking about the movie's mistakes. Many, many, mistakes. Who does this guy Ulli Whatever think he is? Does he really think the same movie will sell in different forms. There is nothing original holding Part III up. It is basically a flashback of the original through the eyes of a psychic, who is giving us a gruelingly boring play-by-play as everything happens. That's the movie. Oh, and one death-by-stereo scene, but you can read that off someone else's review. My interest in "Boogeyman II" is forever lost.

Final Note: This is not a series of films to watch back to back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can [[use]] seven times.

There are [[several]] [[problems]] with this [[movie]] that are [[obvious]] to the casual audience: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door [[thinks]] that he is a [[compelling]] "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the [[movie]] with his [[sermons]], the [[worst]] being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. [[Initially]], Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the [[prettiest]] girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this [[movie]] [[unbearable]] is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an [[worst]] book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are [[forced]] and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can [[used]] seven times.

There are [[different]] [[troubles]] with this [[filmmaking]] that are [[overt]] to the casual audience: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door [[think]] that he is a [[persuasive]] "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the [[filmmaking]] with his [[speech]], the [[gravest]] being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. [[Originally]], Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the [[happiest]] girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this [[film]] [[unsustainable]] is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an [[worse]] book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are [[obliged]] and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2613 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen. The DVD was given to me free with an order I placed online for non DVD related items.

No wonder they were given away, surely no one could part with money for this drivel.

How some reviewers can say they found it hilarious beggars belief, the person who includes it in the worst five films ever has got it spot on.

How on earth a talented actor like Philip Seymour Hoffman could get involved in this rubbish is unbelievable. Mostly toilet humour and badly done at that.

Anyone wanting to be entertained should avoid this at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't hand out ten star ratings easily. A movie really has to impress me, and The Bourne Ultimatum has gone far beyond that. Furthermore, this trilogy has come together so nicely, that I believe it to be one of the greatest motion picture trilogies of our time. Though all three films could not be any more different from the Ludlum novels, they still stand as a powerful landmark in cinematic achievement. The Bourne Ultimatum made me want to cry that the series was complete, yet I could not even attempt to stop smiling for hours.

From the moment that the opening title appeared, I knew we were in for a ride. Paul Greengrass has done it again. Everything we love from the previous Bourne films is here once again: the action, the dialogue, and of course the shaky camera. However for me, that last one was never a problem. I think it adds to the suspense.

I will be back to see this film several times before it is released on DVD, simply because it is genius. It is a perfectly satisfying conclusion, and should stand the test of time as a fantastic movie, and altogether, an unforgettable trilogy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I rented the video of "The Piano Teacher" knowing nothing about it other than what was written on the video box. I did this with some trepidation because films that win awards at Cannes are usually very good or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the latter category. About one quarter of the [[way]] into it I found myself saying out loud, "This movie is boring." About half [[way]] through I was saying to myself, "Where have I [[seen]] this before?" [[At]] the three quarters [[mark]] I had [[figured]] it out.

In spite of its literary origins, this [[film]] is [[essentially]] a remake of Robert Altman's much earlier (1969), and [[better]], "That Cold Day in the Park." Although the details obviously differ and Altman's work was more plot-driven and less of a character study, the two films are thematically identical. There is nothing "new" to be seen in this [[production]]. Every aspect of it has been [[done]] before: a character spiralling out of control with [[increasingly]] self-destructive [[behavior]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Bad]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an [[operatic]] (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. [[Butterfly]]" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. [[Hence]], I am bemused by the [[fact]] that so many found the [[film]] to be "shocking," "shattering," etc. This [[highly]] derivative film seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the [[lighting]] is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a [[waste]] of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting [[director]] but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. I rented the video of "The Piano Teacher" knowing nothing about it other than what was written on the video box. I did this with some trepidation because films that win awards at Cannes are usually very good or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the latter category. About one quarter of the [[routes]] into it I found myself saying out loud, "This movie is boring." About half [[routes]] through I was saying to myself, "Where have I [[noticed]] this before?" [[During]] the three quarters [[branded]] I had [[thought]] it out.

In spite of its literary origins, this [[filmmaking]] is [[mostly]] a remake of Robert Altman's much earlier (1969), and [[best]], "That Cold Day in the Park." Although the details obviously differ and Altman's work was more plot-driven and less of a character study, the two films are thematically identical. There is nothing "new" to be seen in this [[productivity]]. Every aspect of it has been [[effected]] before: a character spiralling out of control with [[gradually]] self-destructive [[behaviors]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Rotten]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an [[lyrical]] (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. [[Butterflies]]" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. [[So]], I am bemused by the [[facto]] that so many found the [[filmmaking]] to be "shocking," "shattering," etc. This [[eminently]] derivative film seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the [[illumination]] is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a [[squander]] of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting [[superintendent]] but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The Stone [[Boy]] is an [[almost]] [[forgotten]] [[drama]] from the 1980s. [[Considering]] how many [[famous]] or [[soon]] to be famous people are in the [[film]], one wonders how it [[could]] have been so [[overlooked]]. This is a slow, [[moody]], but [[touching]] account of a tragedy that [[befalls]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of Midwestern stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all [[tastes]], but [[anyone]] who can [[appreciate]] [[real]] human drama should like it OK.

[[In]] the [[early]] moments of the film, we [[see]] two [[brothers]] [[head]] off in the [[early]] morning hours to [[pick]] some peas and [[maybe]] shoot a [[duck]] or two if they're [[lucky]]. [[While]] [[climbing]] through a barbed [[wire]] fence, the [[gun]] accidentally [[discharges]] and the younger [[boy]] fatally shoots his [[older]] brother. These [[boys]] have [[apparently]] never taken a hunter safety course. The [[way]] for two men to [[properly]] [[go]] through a [[fence]] like this with one [[gun]] [[would]] be as follows: [[First]] [[man]] [[climbs]] through. [[Second]] [[man]] then passes him the [[gun]] through the fence. The first [[man]] then sets the [[gun]] down and [[helps]] the other through the [[fence]]. [[At]] no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is [[killed]], 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own [[world]]. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and [[picks]] the peas and [[tells]] his family about the accident later. [[At]] no point during the [[funeral]] or [[inquest]] does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His [[family]] [[seems]] to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for [[killing]] his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is [[outwardly]] [[upset]] with Arnold, even [[though]] the [[older]] brother's [[death]] [[allows]] him to [[hit]] on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's [[parents]] don't seem to understand how to [[deal]] with their son. They really don't even [[try]] to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing [[seems]] to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. The Stone [[Guy]] is an [[around]] [[neglected]] [[opera]] from the 1980s. [[Reviewing]] how many [[notorious]] or [[promptly]] to be famous people are in the [[flick]], one wonders how it [[would]] have been so [[neglect]]. This is a slow, [[quirky]], but [[affects]] account of a tragedy that [[befell]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of Midwestern stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all [[flavours]], but [[somebody]] who can [[appreciates]] [[authentic]] human drama should like it OK.

[[Throughout]] the [[precocious]] moments of the film, we [[consults]] two [[plymouth]] [[jefe]] off in the [[swift]] morning hours to [[opting]] some peas and [[presumably]] shoot a [[ducks]] or two if they're [[luck]]. [[Although]] [[surged]] through a barbed [[cables]] fence, the [[weapon]] accidentally [[spills]] and the younger [[fella]] fatally shoots his [[elder]] brother. These [[guy]] have [[allegedly]] never taken a hunter safety course. The [[manner]] for two men to [[sufficiently]] [[going]] through a [[fencing]] like this with one [[weapon]] [[ought]] be as follows: [[Firstly]] [[guy]] [[surged]] through. [[Secondly]] [[guy]] then passes him the [[handgun]] through the fence. The first [[guy]] then sets the [[pistol]] down and [[succour]] the other through the [[fencing]]. [[During]] no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is [[murdering]], 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own [[globe]]. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and [[opting]] the peas and [[told]] his family about the accident later. [[For]] no point during the [[funerary]] or [[investigative]] does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His [[familia]] [[appears]] to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for [[murdering]] his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is [[externally]] [[angered]] with Arnold, even [[despite]] the [[oldest]] brother's [[decease]] [[entitles]] him to [[slapped]] on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's [[parent]] don't seem to understand how to [[addresses]] with their son. They really don't even [[attempted]] to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing [[seem]] to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first film ever made. Workers streaming from a factory, some cycling, most walking, moving right or left. Along with Melies, the Lumieres are both the starting point and the point of departure for cinema - with Melies begins narrative fiction, cinema, fantasy, artifice, spectacle; with the Lumieres pure, unadorned, observation. The truth. There are many intellectuals who regret the ossification of cinema from the latter into the tired formulae of the former.

But consider this short again. There is nothing 'objective' about it. The film is full of action - a static, inhuman scene burst into life, activity, and the quiet harmony of the frame is ruptured, decentred from the back to right or left (but never, of course, the front, where the camera is). And yet the camera stands stock still, contains the energy, the possible subversion, subordinates it to its will. The cinematograph may be a revolutionary invention, but it will be used for conservative purposes - to map out the world, edit it, restrict it, limit it.

worse is the historical reality of the film. These factory workers are Lumiere employees. The bosses are spying on their workers, the unseen eye regarding his faceless minions. The film therefore describes two types of imprisonment. Behind the gates, the workers are confined in their workplace. The opening of the gate seems to be an image of freedom, escape, but they face another wall, the fourth wall, further confining them. The first film is also the first example of CCTV surveillance, an image of unseen, all-seeing authority entrapping its servants. A frightening, all too prophetic movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] One [[hour]], eight [[minutes]] and twelve seconds into this [[flick]] and I decided it was pretty lame. That was right after Hopalong ([[Chris]] Lybbert) drops on his [[horse]] from a [[tree]] to [[rejoin]] the good [[guy]] posse. I was [[pretty]] [[mystified]] by the whole Hopalong Cassidy/[[Great]] Bar 20 [[gimmick]] which didn't [[translate]] into [[anything]] at all. Obviously, the name Coppola in the [[credits]] couldn't do [[anything]] to guarantee success here, even with more than one listed.

[[If]] you [[make]] it to the end of the [[film]], you'll [[probably]] wind up asking yourself the same [[questions]] I did. What [[exactly]] was the hook with the gloves? What's up with the rodeo scenario? Who was The [[Stranger]] [[supposed]] to [[represent]]? Why did they make this [[film]]?

I [[could]] probably [[go]] on but my energy's been drained. Look, there's already a Western [[called]] "The [[Gunfighter]]" from 1950 with a [[guy]] named [[Gregory]] [[Peck]] as the title [[character]]. Watching it will make you feel as good as watching this one makes you feel bad. That one I can [[recommend]]. One [[hora]], eight [[mins]] and twelve seconds into this [[movie]] and I decided it was pretty lame. That was right after Hopalong ([[Kris]] Lybbert) drops on his [[equestrian]] from a [[trees]] to [[reintegrate]] the good [[guys]] posse. I was [[quite]] [[disconcerted]] by the whole Hopalong Cassidy/[[Grand]] Bar 20 [[stratagem]] which didn't [[transform]] into [[nothing]] at all. Obviously, the name Coppola in the [[credit]] couldn't do [[nothing]] to guarantee success here, even with more than one listed.

[[Though]] you [[deliver]] it to the end of the [[filmmaking]], you'll [[undeniably]] wind up asking yourself the same [[issues]] I did. What [[accurately]] was the hook with the gloves? What's up with the rodeo scenario? Who was The [[Outlander]] [[presumed]] to [[constituted]]? Why did they make this [[filmmaking]]?

I [[wo]] probably [[going]] on but my energy's been drained. Look, there's already a Western [[drew]] "The [[Shooter]]" from 1950 with a [[buddy]] named [[Gregoire]] [[Beck]] as the title [[personage]]. Watching it will make you feel as good as watching this one makes you feel bad. That one I can [[recommends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2619 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Goldberg]] [[gave]] her [[best]] screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as [[Sofia]], the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[characters]] Walker had introduced so [[clearly]] on the page - [[Danny]] [[Glover]] as Albert, Celie's [[abusive]] husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of [[change]] for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn [[Chong]] as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl [[Anderson]] (otherwise [[best]] known as [[Judas]] in the 1973 film of Jesus [[Christ]] Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively [[written]], 'The [[Color]] Purple' does justice to its source while [[opening]] out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Tucker]] [[yielded]] her [[better]] screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as [[Sofie]], the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[features]] Walker had introduced so [[apparently]] on the page - [[Danby]] [[Grover]] as Albert, Celie's [[offensive]] husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of [[amendment]] for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn [[Zheng]] as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl [[Andersen]] (otherwise [[better]] known as [[Judea]] in the 1973 film of Jesus [[God]] Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively [[typed]], 'The [[Dye]] Purple' does justice to its source while [[opens]] out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Wow]]. I went to the video store [[tonight]] because I was in the mood for a [[bad]] B [[Horror]] [[movie]] and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[cover]] and I [[thought]] it looked like just the [[movie]] for my [[mood]]. I [[brought]] it [[home]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in [[mind]]. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[crap]] like this [[existed]] amongst [[man]]. This movie seemed like a 5 [[year]] [[old]] wrote and [[directed]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring [[director]] and this [[movie]] [[made]] me so [[mad]] that [[someone]] out there is actually [[paying]] this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a [[garbage]] dump shoveling [[crap]] where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NOT]] WORTH IT!" I really have [[nothing]] nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! [[Whoo]]. I went to the video store [[mondays]] because I was in the mood for a [[unfavorable]] B [[Abomination]] [[filmmaking]] and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[coverings]] and I [[ideas]] it looked like just the [[filmmaking]] for my [[ambience]]. I [[made]] it [[household]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in [[intellect]]. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[baloney]] like this [[prevailed]] amongst [[guy]]. This movie seemed like a 5 [[annum]] [[archaic]] wrote and [[oriented]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring [[superintendent]] and this [[filmmaking]] [[introduced]] me so [[crazy]] that [[everybody]] out there is actually [[pays]] this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a [[junk]] dump shoveling [[dammit]] where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NAH]] WORTH IT!" I really have [[none]] nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! --------------------------------------------- Result 2621 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm a big fan of 50s sci-fi, but this is not one of my favorites. While the concept behind the movie was a natural vehicle for a classic teeny bopper sci-fi flick, the director counted too heavily on it to carry the movie. It's clear he was working with no money, because the entire movie is loaded with bloated dialogue that goes on and on forever. I have *never* seen so much time-killing in a movie.

There are probably less than 60 seconds of "blob footage" in the entire movie, and most of the rest of it is people engaging in a lot of poorly-written, run-on dialogue. It was fun to see Steve M. and Anita C. together, but good heavens...how could casting have thought anyone in their right mind would believe them as teenagers? --------------------------------------------- Result 2622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film provides the saga of a legendary Wild Bill Hickock. He, Buffalo Bill Cody, and Calamity Jane, are the central characters.

As the Civil War closes, Lincoln mentions his concern that the country's dynamism would be enhanced if people would follow the advice, "Go West, young man," which, mercifully, the film didn't erroneously attribute to Horace Greeley, as a number of others did. But then, he gets assassinated, and some financiers speculate that they can get rich selling weapons to the American Indians.

In the meantime, we see Wild Bill Hickock, who interacts with a small boy, while a steamboat is loading at a dock along the Mississippi. Wild Bill uses a Bowie knife, which he eventually gives to the boy, calling it an "Arkansas Toothpick," which in reality was a different type of knife, though both were used throughout the frontier.

Hickock eventually meets Buffalo Bill Cody, who looks close to the photographs and paintings of the actual man. Cody has just gotten married, and is bringing his bride to the Old West to settle down.

When they arrive at their destination, they run into Calamity Jane, who has a crush on Hickock. She looks at Cody's wife, and asks Buffalo Bill, "Is this your mopsy?" The line was one that caused the Hayes Board some problem, since one definition of "mopsy" was prostitute. Demille wanted the line in, and one of his aides pointed out that in Beatrix Potter's books about Peter Rabbit, three of the rabbits were Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. He pointed this out and asked the censors to identify "the rabbit of ill virtue." It worked; the line stayed in.

The Indians were getting restless, in part because of the superior weaponry they got from the agent of the Eastern financiers. Cody and Hickock were asked to help scout the area, so that troops could get safely through to a beleaguered area. Cody led the troops; Hickock went to check out the activities of an Indian chief, who was an old acquaintance, and who was leading some of the hostile Indians.

Calamity Jane gets captured, and Hickock gets captured trying to save her. They are brought to the chief, and although neither would talk, torture applied to Hickock breaks Calamity Jane's willpower, and she tells the route Cody is using.

The two are released, and Hickock joins up with Cody and his forces, in part to alert them they're walking into a trap. With Hickok's help, they hold off the Indian attack.

Hickock decides to go after the gun runners, and finally takes them prisoner. As they're waiting for authorities, Hickock is gunned down by being shot in the back while playing cards.

There are numerous historic anomalies in the film, but it retains the flavor of legend. Pretty good for the 1930s. --------------------------------------------- Result 2623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this film when I was about seven years old and was completely enchanted by it then but for years was unable to find out what the film was called. now i am twenty one and stumbled upon the film by accident about two weeks ago and bought a copy. although my memory of the film was a little hazy I was in no way disappointed by what I saw. the animation in this film is superb conjuring up an entire world that is so believable and so well animated that you are drawn in to the film by that alone. But this film also has a plot that will enchant and entertain adults and children alike. with a floating island, a mad general, a friendly pirate granny and a well constructed love story this film will not let you down I would recommend this film to any one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2624 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Tenshu is [[imprisoned]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government [[officials]] [[give]] him a [[choice]] to either be electrocute at a [[greater]] [[degree]] or [[agree]] to some experiments. He [[chooses]] the [[experimentation]] and is placed in a large metallic [[cell]] with a [[bad]] ass criminal who also survived the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[want]] in the [[room]] (within [[reason]]), but they can't [[leave]]. after a few days there [[meals]] are [[cut]] down to one [[per]] day and the [[room]] temp is set up too 100. After some more [[alarms]] are [[sounded]] at intervals so they can't [[sleep]]. One day a 'witch' [[come]] into their [[cell]] (albeit a glassed off [[portion]]) What happens next I'll [[let]] you [[find]] out. I may be in the [[minority]] here but I [[liked]] the [[build]] up, it was [[intriguing]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

[[Media]] Blaster's 2 [[DVD]] set Extras: Disc 1) Director's [[Cut]]; Trailers for "[[Versus]]", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) [[Theatrical]] [[Cut]]; [[Commentary]] with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew [[interview]]; Making of; Original [[Trailer]]; and Promo Teasers Tenshu is [[detaining]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government [[officer]] [[lend]] him a [[pick]] to either be electrocute at a [[largest]] [[diploma]] or [[concur]] to some experiments. He [[selection]] the [[experiments]] and is placed in a large metallic [[cellular]] with a [[amiss]] ass criminal who also survived the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[wanna]] in the [[salle]] (within [[justification]]), but they can't [[letting]]. after a few days there [[dinner]] are [[clipping]] down to one [[for]] day and the [[rooms]] temp is set up too 100. After some more [[scares]] are [[seemed]] at intervals so they can't [[slept]]. One day a 'witch' [[coming]] into their [[cells]] (albeit a glassed off [[fraction]]) What happens next I'll [[letting]] you [[unearthed]] out. I may be in the [[minorities]] here but I [[enjoyed]] the [[construction]] up, it was [[exciting]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

[[Medium]] Blaster's 2 [[DVDS]] set Extras: Disc 1) Director's [[Clipping]]; Trailers for "[[Against]]", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) [[Theater]] [[Sliced]]; [[Remark]] with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew [[interviews]]; Making of; Original [[Camper]]; and Promo Teasers --------------------------------------------- Result 2625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The most [[horrible]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many [[changes]] to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but [[give]] the fans [[nothing]] to [[work]] with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. The most [[shocking]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many [[shift]] to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but [[confer]] the fans [[none]] to [[cooperated]] with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] The most difficult thing about this [[movie]] is to [[say]] [[anything]] positive about it. The [[characters]] were stereotypical "white-trash", the movie's "plot" was stunted from the [[beginning]], and the worst [[feature]] of this [[movie]] was that the nudity was so blatantly from [[body]] doubles it was [[funny]]. Regretfully, that was the only [[funny]] [[thing]] in the [[movie]]. Ms. Jenkins would be [[better]] [[served]] if in the future, she [[would]] refrain from [[using]] her life-story to "[[entertain]]" people. It was [[simply]] that [[bad]]. The one positive aspect of this [[movie]] (this has nothing to do with the lack-of-quality of the [[film]]) is that my brother shelled out the money for this [[stinker]]. The most difficult thing about this [[filmmaking]] is to [[told]] [[nothing]] positive about it. The [[trait]] were stereotypical "white-trash", the movie's "plot" was stunted from the [[initiation]], and the worst [[trait]] of this [[filmmaking]] was that the nudity was so blatantly from [[agencies]] doubles it was [[comical]]. Regretfully, that was the only [[comical]] [[stuff]] in the [[films]]. Ms. Jenkins would be [[optimum]] [[played]] if in the future, she [[could]] refrain from [[uses]] her life-story to "[[distract]]" people. It was [[solely]] that [[unfavourable]]. The one positive aspect of this [[filmmaking]] (this has nothing to do with the lack-of-quality of the [[movies]]) is that my brother shelled out the money for this [[tosser]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie starred a totally [[forgotten]] star from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as Jimmy Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[would]] recognize [[today]]. Film fanatics will also recognize the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a [[film]] from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this [[nasty]] and [[rather]] [[untalented]] man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is [[history]]. Within a year, they were making very successful [[shorts]] for Columbia and executives at MGM were [[soon]] kicking themselves for [[losing]] the team. This [[sort]] of [[thing]] was a common occurrence at MGM, a [[great]] studio which had no [[idea]] what to do with [[comedy]] (such as the [[films]] of Buster Keaton, Laurel and [[Hardy]], [[Abbott]] and Costello and others). [[In]] fact, up until they left for [[Columbia]], MGM put them in a [[wide]] [[variety]] of [[odd]] [[film]] roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING [[LADY]]. And, oddly, in this [[film]] they didn't act as a team--they just did [[various]] [[supporting]] [[roles]], such as Larry [[playing]] the piano!

This particular film [[begins]] with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are [[rescued]] and [[brought]] [[home]], all sense of [[structure]] to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! This movie starred a totally [[omitted]] star from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as Jimmy Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[could]] recognize [[nowadays]]. Film fanatics will also recognize the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a [[kino]] from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this [[salacious]] and [[somewhat]] [[talentless]] man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is [[histories]]. Within a year, they were making very successful [[boxers]] for Columbia and executives at MGM were [[sooner]] kicking themselves for [[loses]] the team. This [[kind]] of [[stuff]] was a common occurrence at MGM, a [[marvellous]] studio which had no [[thoughts]] what to do with [[travesty]] (such as the [[filmmaking]] of Buster Keaton, Laurel and [[Sturdy]], [[Abbot]] and Costello and others). [[Among]] fact, up until they left for [[Colombia]], MGM put them in a [[vast]] [[diversity]] of [[unusual]] [[films]] roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING [[LADIES]]. And, oddly, in this [[filmmaking]] they didn't act as a team--they just did [[diverse]] [[helping]] [[functions]], such as Larry [[gaming]] the piano!

This particular film [[launching]] with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are [[rescuing]] and [[lodged]] [[homes]], all sense of [[architecture]] to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! --------------------------------------------- Result 2628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I'm sorry, but even [[TJ]] Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[save]] this sequel. I went through half the movie [[thinking]] that this was a spoof of the original. Then came that wild and wacky [[motorcycle]] scene (notice that this is the only [[movie]] that [[Patricia]] Birch directs); and I [[sadly]] [[realized]] they were [[trying]] to be [[serious]]. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their [[gambling]] habits in the original Grease, were forced to use [[motorcycles]] in the second [[movie]]. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd [[hate]] to [[see]] what they [[would]] resort to later: maybe [[Mopeds]]?

I also never [[bought]] the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story [[gone]] [[horribly]] awry.

So, it looks [[like]] you CAN [[ruin]] a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I [[took]] away from this [[movie]] was an [[idea]] of how [[many]] points out of [[ten]] to [[give]] it. I'm sorry, but even [[TIJUANA]] Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[rescuing]] this sequel. I went through half the movie [[ideology]] that this was a spoof of the original. Then came that wild and wacky [[biker]] scene (notice that this is the only [[filmmaking]] that [[Pat]] Birch directs); and I [[tragically]] [[performed]] they were [[try]] to be [[grave]]. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their [[bets]] habits in the original Grease, were forced to use [[bikes]] in the second [[filmmaking]]. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd [[despise]] to [[behold]] what they [[could]] resort to later: maybe [[Scooters]]?

I also never [[acquiring]] the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story [[disappeared]] [[awfully]] awry.

So, it looks [[likes]] you CAN [[downfall]] a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I [[taken]] away from this [[filmmaking]] was an [[ideals]] of how [[innumerable]] points out of [[tio]] to [[lend]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the script should have told him that this one was going to be a [[real]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[weak]] story, basically no story or plot at all. Add in [[bored]], poor acting, [[even]] from the normally [[good]] Eastwood. There's absolutely no [[action]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[heap]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a film BE any more boring? I think watching paint dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A [[real]] [[stinker]]. Don't bother with this one. Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the script should have told him that this one was going to be a [[veritable]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[feeble]] story, basically no story or plot at all. Add in [[drilled]], poor acting, [[yet]] from the normally [[alright]] Eastwood. There's absolutely no [[activity]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[battery]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a film BE any more boring? I think watching paint dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A [[veritable]] [[tosser]]. Don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] This movie was a [[fantastic]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). This movie was a [[wondrous]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). --------------------------------------------- Result 2631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Spoiler below, but read on or you'll never know the horrible fate that awaits all planing to rent "Rodentz".

On a moonlit night, in a remote research laboratory, a major medical breakthrough is about to have deadly results. A chemical compound that was created to "hunt and destroy" deadly cancer cells has leaked from the hazardous waste disposal system into the building's basement. Now, the rodents involved in the laboratory experiment upstairs are not the only rats in the facility that will become the altered species. Professor Schultz, a leading bio-researcher, has just determined that the addition of a new enzyme now enables his "hunt and destroy" formulation to regenerate for the length of time necessary to neutralize deadly cancer tumors. When three varying degrees of the new mixture are administered to three different rats and the rest poured down the faulty "Waste Hazard" sink, shocking side-effects result in a night of terror.....right.....

Seriously, this is probably the worst film I've seen this year. Everything about it screams "Low-budget!", from the horrendous acting to the special effects which are some of the worst I've ever seen. The characters are clichéd morons and act in stupid, predictable ways: walking down dark hallways alone, looking for a cat, tripping and falling so the "rats" can catch up with them, boarding themselves up in a small room, etc.

While some films are cheaply made, this film really takes the cake. Every possible corner is cut, everything from reusing earlier shots, filming the "Lab" hallways from different angles to make it look bigger (That reminds me--why were only TWO guys working in this freakin' massive building?!?!?!?), to music and special effects that could be done on a children's workshop PC.

That brings me to the worst aspect of this steaming pile of dung--the special effects. Just horrendous. The computer generated rats look so fake and stand out in every scene so even the dumbest of film buffs could see they are computer generated. And that giant rat suit--OH MY GOD!!!!!!!! seriously, are we supposed to believe that freaking beany baby is a monster? Just pitiful........On the better side, some of the gore looks pretty cool, especially considering the budget.

The actors all suck. no one involved with the production cared or knew what they were doing. I've wasted enough time with review, just take my advice, it's garbage. 1/10.

About the DVD: The transfer sucks, the audio is passable and there's a commentary track on the disk by the director and two of his friends, who say they had absolutely nothing to do with making the film but were there to ask questions and make comments. All three of these sub-human primordial slime are so incredibly stupid that they should be institutionalized before they can harm themselves or others. I don't want to waste any more of you kind reader's time or mine, for I am starting to remember more than I want to about this film..... DVD rating: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2632 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly profound movie critics hold such a grudge against director Michael Winner? Surely he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and confronting, but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[famous]] action movies, like the [[first]] three [[entries]] in the "Death [[Wish]]"-series for example, are easy targets to clobber down because they [[allegedly]] glorify violence and the personal use of shotguns, but [[even]] when Winner takes on far more mature cinema genres – [[like]] the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a [[chance]] with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" [[generated]] some [[controversy]] and infuriated [[several]] people upon its [[release]], when it [[leaked]] that Michael Winner cast [[genuinely]] malformed and handicapped people to [[portray]] the creatures [[attempting]] to [[cross]] the [[gateways]] between [[hell]] and earth. Pretty [[much]] the exact same [[controversy]] caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in [[horror]] [[cinema]] "Freaks" to remain [[banned]] and [[unseen]] for over thirty [[years]]! And why? [[Just]] because certain prudish and [[easily]] offended people, who shouldn't watch the [[movie]] in the [[first]] [[place]], [[claim]] it's an unethical [[thing]] to do? I don't [[suppose]] [[Michael]] [[Winner]] or Todd Browning [[held]] these people at gunpoint or forced them to [[appear]] in their [[films]], so what [[gives]] us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another [[major]] [[reason]] why critics didn't [[warmly]] [[welcome]] "The Sentinel" is because [[Jeffrey]] Konvitz' novel – and thus [[Michael]] Winner's [[screenplay]] – is [[hugely]] derivative of other [[contemporary]] but far more successful religiously themed [[horror]] [[stories]] and thus, according to the merciless pens of [[horror]] [[critics]], little more than pure plagiarism. [[Admittedly]] "The Sentinel" borrows [[multiple]] [[substantial]] [[elements]] from "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's [[face]] it, 70's [[cinema]] [[largely]] thrives on stolen formulas and [[imitating]] [[success]] [[stories]]. If you [[overlook]] the [[slightly]] unoriginal [[concept]] and, in all [[fairness]], a [[handful]] of thoroughly confusing and [[unnecessary]] sub plots, "The [[Sentinel]]" honestly [[still]] remains a [[uniquely]] [[atmospheric]] and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an [[impressive]] [[ensemble]] cast and nightmarish [[imagery]] you're not likely to [[forget]] easy.

[[Alison]] [[Parker]], a ravishing [[model]] with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly profound movie critics hold such a grudge against director Michael Winner? Surely he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and confronting, but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[celebrated]] action movies, like the [[frst]] three [[entry]] in the "Death [[Wanna]]"-series for example, are easy targets to clobber down because they [[presumably]] glorify violence and the personal use of shotguns, but [[yet]] when Winner takes on far more mature cinema genres – [[iike]] the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a [[possibilities]] with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" [[created]] some [[contention]] and infuriated [[different]] people upon its [[freed]], when it [[leaks]] that Michael Winner cast [[actually]] malformed and handicapped people to [[describe]] the creatures [[trying]] to [[croix]] the [[gateway]] between [[dammit]] and earth. Pretty [[very]] the exact same [[argument]] caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in [[terror]] [[movies]] "Freaks" to remain [[prohibiting]] and [[invisible]] for over thirty [[ages]]! And why? [[Jen]] because certain prudish and [[readily]] offended people, who shouldn't watch the [[flick]] in the [[firstly]] [[placing]], [[grievance]] it's an unethical [[stuff]] to do? I don't [[imagine]] [[Michele]] [[Finalist]] or Todd Browning [[hold]] these people at gunpoint or forced them to [[appearing]] in their [[cinematic]], so what [[delivers]] us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another [[principal]] [[reasons]] why critics didn't [[sincerely]] [[salute]] "The Sentinel" is because [[Geoff]] Konvitz' novel – and thus [[Michele]] Winner's [[script]] – is [[incredibly]] derivative of other [[current]] but far more successful religiously themed [[terror]] [[narratives]] and thus, according to the merciless pens of [[terror]] [[detractors]], little more than pure plagiarism. [[Surely]] "The Sentinel" borrows [[diverse]] [[sizable]] [[components]] from "Rosemary's [[Honey]]", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's [[confront]] it, 70's [[theatre]] [[essentially]] thrives on stolen formulas and [[mimicking]] [[accomplishments]] [[narratives]]. If you [[neglect]] the [[moderately]] unoriginal [[notion]] and, in all [[equality]], a [[doorknob]] of thoroughly confusing and [[worthless]] sub plots, "The [[Sentry]]" honestly [[yet]] remains a [[singularly]] [[atmosphere]] and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an [[wondrous]] [[whole]] cast and nightmarish [[image]] you're not likely to [[forgot]] easy.

[[Rosalie]] [[Barker]], a ravishing [[modelling]] with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. --------------------------------------------- Result 2633 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen this film only the one time about 25 years ago, and to this day I have always told people it is probably the best film I have ever seen. Considering there was no verbal dialogue and only thought dialogue i found the film to be enthralling and I even found myself holding my breath so as not to make any sound. I would highly recomend this film, I wish it was available on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2634 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I watched this today, partially [[attracted]] to the all-star cast and [[partly]] because I have [[enjoyed]] so many other films of this ilk. However, this is one to [[avoid]]. There are [[dozens]] of [[badly]] cut scenes where the [[continuity]] just does not [[flow]], the billiards [[challenge]] at the [[start]], for [[example]]. The fighting scenes with the [[natives]] are about as good as you [[would]] remember in those [[old]] black and [[white]] Tarzan [[movies]], you know where you see a spear [[fly]] through the air and camera [[cuts]] to a [[dead]] native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous [[death]]? There are [[also]] [[several]] [[quite]] [[unnecessary]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the [[little]] [[girl]] being rescued while collecting [[flowers]]. The [[really]] [[badly]] animated clay [[toys]] are too painful to watch. If you do [[see]] this [[movie]] the [[crabs]] which inch forward at about 5kph are the [[highlight]]. Somehow one [[manages]] to creep up on David Mccullum and give him a [[nip]]. Its as if there was no [[time]] to [[get]] out of the [[way]], like when the obelisk in the [[city]] falls over, the native has all the [[time]] in the world to take a 2 [[step]] to the left, but no he [[screams]] and it [[falls]] on him. I only [[give]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums [[voice]] [[develop]] a stutter as the [[movie]] progresses? I watched this today, partially [[enticed]] to the all-star cast and [[partially]] because I have [[liked]] so many other films of this ilk. However, this is one to [[shirk]]. There are [[scores]] of [[sorely]] cut scenes where the [[continuance]] just does not [[flux]], the billiards [[challenges]] at the [[beginnings]], for [[case]]. The fighting scenes with the [[native]] are about as good as you [[ought]] remember in those [[longtime]] black and [[bianchi]] Tarzan [[filmmaking]], you know where you see a spear [[stealing]] through the air and camera [[clippings]] to a [[died]] native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous [[muerte]]? There are [[likewise]] [[different]] [[rather]] [[superfluous]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the [[scant]] [[women]] being rescued while collecting [[blossoms]]. The [[truly]] [[desperately]] animated clay [[toy]] are too painful to watch. If you do [[consults]] this [[cinema]] the [[prawn]] which inch forward at about 5kph are the [[stresses]]. Somehow one [[runs]] to creep up on David Mccullum and give him a [[pine]]. Its as if there was no [[period]] to [[obtain]] out of the [[ways]], like when the obelisk in the [[town]] falls over, the native has all the [[times]] in the world to take a 2 [[steps]] to the left, but no he [[howl]] and it [[fall]] on him. I only [[confer]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums [[voices]] [[formulating]] a stutter as the [[filmmaking]] progresses? --------------------------------------------- Result 2635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: [[Stuart]] [[Gordon]]

[[Cast]]: [[Gary]] Graham, [[Anne]] [[Marie]] [[Johnson]], [[Paul]] Koslo

[[Review]]: [[Stuart]] Gordon who we [[usually]] associate with [[extremely]] [[gory]] [[horror]] [[films]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, [[took]] a [[small]] detour here and did a [[little]] sci-fi [[flick]]. I [[stress]] the word "[[little]]" since this is a very low budget flick, and there in [[lies]] its main [[weakness]].

The story takes place in the [[future]]. A world in which the great superpowers (that according to this movie are the United States and Russia) duke out their differences not by going on a full blown world war...but by fighting gladiator style battles with gigantic robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian robot fighter called Alexander. Lots of cheap stop [[motion]] animation ensues.

Well, the [[idea]] is awesome I guess. The great nations settleling territorial disputes with giant robots? Interesting premise and one that could have been handled properly if the proper budget had been available. Unfortunately what [[could]] have been a fun movie ends up being an embarrassment for an otherwise great director.

I as a [[kid]] loved this movie, and I guess if you want any enjoyment out of this movie, you'll have to revert back to little kid mode to have some fun with it. I showed this film to some of my friends and as the [[movie]] progressed my friends where like "what the hell is this [[piece]] of [[crap]] franco?" And I'm [[like]] well this movie is a sci-fi by one of my favorite directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the movie progressed into [[corny]] territory I almost felt like pressing stop and not having them go through that torture. I could go through it, cause I loved this film as a [[kid]], and there's still a little nostalgia attached to watching it. But everyone else was just not going to get it.

And I myself realized that the movie isn't really that good. First off. The movie is about [[giant]] robots [[kicking]] the [[hell]] out of each other. And in [[order]] to [[achieve]] this in a credible [[fashion]] you'd have to use some damn good [[special]] effects to make it [[work]], expensive [[effects]] that [[would]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are fighting that are kinda cool, and made me go "thats why I liked thid [[movie]]!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: [[Sylvain]] [[Gordo]]

[[Casting]]: [[Garry]] Graham, [[Anna]] [[Marries]] [[Lbj]], [[Paolo]] Koslo

[[Revise]]: [[Sylvain]] Gordon who we [[habitually]] associate with [[immeasurably]] [[gori]] [[monstrosity]] [[kino]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, [[picked]] a [[scant]] detour here and did a [[scant]] sci-fi [[film]]. I [[underline]] the word "[[small]]" since this is a very low budget flick, and there in [[lying]] its main [[flaw]].

The story takes place in the [[futur]]. A world in which the great superpowers (that according to this movie are the United States and Russia) duke out their differences not by going on a full blown world war...but by fighting gladiator style battles with gigantic robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian robot fighter called Alexander. Lots of cheap stop [[petition]] animation ensues.

Well, the [[thinking]] is awesome I guess. The great nations settleling territorial disputes with giant robots? Interesting premise and one that could have been handled properly if the proper budget had been available. Unfortunately what [[did]] have been a fun movie ends up being an embarrassment for an otherwise great director.

I as a [[child]] loved this movie, and I guess if you want any enjoyment out of this movie, you'll have to revert back to little kid mode to have some fun with it. I showed this film to some of my friends and as the [[filmmaking]] progressed my friends where like "what the hell is this [[slice]] of [[dammit]] franco?" And I'm [[fond]] well this movie is a sci-fi by one of my favorite directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the movie progressed into [[cheesy]] territory I almost felt like pressing stop and not having them go through that torture. I could go through it, cause I loved this film as a [[enfant]], and there's still a little nostalgia attached to watching it. But everyone else was just not going to get it.

And I myself realized that the movie isn't really that good. First off. The movie is about [[gargantuan]] robots [[kick]] the [[dammit]] out of each other. And in [[edict]] to [[realize]] this in a credible [[manner]] you'd have to use some damn good [[especial]] effects to make it [[collaborate]], expensive [[consequences]] that [[could]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are fighting that are kinda cool, and made me go "thats why I liked thid [[cinema]]!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] in my [[opinion]] this is one of the [[lesser]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director [[George]] [[Sidney]], a [[lesser]] musical featuring [[anyone]] from that line-up is [[nothing]] to [[sneeze]] at, and in [[conjunction]], the line-up makes [[Anchors]] Aweigh a [[pretty]] good film despite its flaws.

Sinatra and [[Kelly]] are Clarence Doolittle and [[Joseph]] Brady, respectively, two [[Navy]] [[men]]. As the [[film]] [[begins]], they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles [[area]] for some [[much]] needed [[leave]]. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is [[still]] a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and [[Sidney]] have all of the Navy men comically [[exaggerating]] their [[finesse]] with women to each other). Brady [[promises]] to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a [[strange]] combination of militaristic music--because of the [[Navy]] [[premise]], [[obviously]], Broadway pop--what the [[stars]] tend to sing in more [[informal]] settings, opera--what Abbott's character [[excels]] at, Liberace-like [[popular]] classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because [[Abbott]] frequents a Mexican [[restaurant]] in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it [[could]]. Plenty of the [[songs]] are good, and [[everyone]] involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart [[works]] hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in [[good]], interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. [[Despite]] in my [[vista]] this is one of the [[minor]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director [[Georges]] [[Sid]], a [[minor]] musical featuring [[somebody]] from that line-up is [[none]] to [[verb]] at, and in [[cooperates]], the line-up makes [[Anchor]] Aweigh a [[belle]] good film despite its flaws.

Sinatra and [[Kayleigh]] are Clarence Doolittle and [[Jozef]] Brady, respectively, two [[Marina]] [[males]]. As the [[cinematography]] [[start]], they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles [[areas]] for some [[very]] needed [[letting]]. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is [[yet]] a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and [[Sydney]] have all of the Navy men comically [[overstating]] their [[subtlety]] with women to each other). Brady [[vowed]] to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a [[inquisitive]] combination of militaristic music--because of the [[Marina]] [[assumption]], [[surely]], Broadway pop--what the [[superstar]] tend to sing in more [[unofficial]] settings, opera--what Abbott's character [[excel]] at, Liberace-like [[fashionable]] classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because [[Abbot]] frequents a Mexican [[catering]] in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it [[wo]]. Plenty of the [[anthems]] are good, and [[anyone]] involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart [[collaborate]] hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in [[alright]], interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. --------------------------------------------- Result 2637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having enjoyed Joyce's complex novel so keenly I was prepared to be disappointed by Joseph Strick's and Fred Haines's screenplay, given the fabulous complexity of the original text. However, the film turned out to be very well done and a fine translation of the tone, naturalism, and levity of the book.

It certainly helps to have read the original text before viewing the film. I imagine the latter would seem disjointed, with very odd episodes apparently randomly stitched together, without a prior reading of the text to help grasp the plot.

It's amazing to see how "filthy" the film is, given that it was shot in Dublin in 1967. The Irish film censors only, finally, unbanned it for viewing by general audiences in Ireland as late as 2000 (it was shown to restricted audiences in a private cinema club, the Irish Film Theatre, in the late 1970s). Joyce's eroticism is not simply naturalistic and raunchy, it offers many wildly "perverse" episodes. Never mind that so many of these fetishes were unacceptable when the book was published in 1922 - they were still utterly taboo when the film was made in 1967.

It is astonishing and heartening to watch the cream of the Irish acting profession of the 1960s, respected players all, daring to utter and enact Joyce's hugely transgressive text with such gusto.

Bravo! --------------------------------------------- Result 2638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This show was [[appreciated]] by critics and those who [[realized]] that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and [[anyone]] else's was not a steal. (Yes, I've [[seen]] "[[Amelie]]." "Pushing Daisies" is [[somewhat]] [[similar]] but [[still]] different [[enough]] to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[shows]] on TV that have this [[kind]] of quirky [[charm]]. The [[greatest]] [[similarity]] is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[comes]] by that [[similarity]] [[honestly]]: Bryan [[Fuller]] created both [[shows]]. (Both [[shows]] involve an "undead" young [[woman]], [[For]] [[example]].) This show never [[stopped]] being funny and [[charming]], and it was [[always]] [[odd]], [[yet]] was [[consistently]] [[humane]].

I [[must]] [[say]] a word about the [[conventions]] of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show [[lacked]] a [[moral]] [[center]] because in the first (and [[several]] subsequent) [[episodes]] Ned [[seems]] to get away with causing the [[death]] of Chuck's [[father]] without [[consequences]] of any [[kind]]. [[First]] of all, this [[must]] be a [[new]] definition of "without [[consequences]] of any [[kind]]" because, in [[spite]] of the fact that Ned was only a [[boy]] and did not [[realize]] that he had [[caused]] the [[death]] of Chuck's father, he [[nevertheless]] [[felt]] guilty from the moment he [[realized]] what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had [[caused]] her father's [[death]] with his [[gift]]. [[Now]], there are no police to charge people with [[magically]] causing one person's [[death]] by bringing another [[person]] back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal [[guidance]]. [[In]] other [[words]], it's between Ned and [[Chuck]], who was not [[inclined]] to [[forgive]] Ned anytime [[soon]].

But this does point out a [[problem]] with continuing story lines in [[network]] dramas. I [[remember]] when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did [[something]] wrong and it [[seemed]] he [[got]] away with it--for a [[whole]] year--then he [[got]] [[caught]] and was [[forced]] to [[resign]] from the job (and left the [[show]]). The point is, [[viewers]] should learn by now and not [[assume]] that just because a [[regular]] [[character]] does [[something]] [[wrong]] in a single episode, and is not [[caught]] in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is [[always]] [[next]] week--and [[maybe]] [[even]] next [[year]]. This show was [[complimented]] by critics and those who [[performed]] that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and [[somebody]] else's was not a steal. (Yes, I've [[watched]] "[[Emily]]." "Pushing Daisies" is [[rather]] [[akin]] but [[however]] different [[adequately]] to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[exhibit]] on TV that have this [[sort]] of quirky [[allure]]. The [[greater]] [[likeness]] is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[arrives]] by that [[analogy]] [[plainly]]: Bryan [[Fowler]] created both [[exhibition]]. (Both [[showings]] involve an "undead" young [[mujer]], [[During]] [[examples]].) This show never [[ceasing]] being funny and [[cute]], and it was [[repeatedly]] [[bizarre]], [[again]] was [[methodically]] [[humanistic]].

I [[gotta]] [[told]] a word about the [[convention]] of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show [[lacking]] a [[ethical]] [[centre]] because in the first (and [[multiple]] subsequent) [[spells]] Ned [[appears]] to get away with causing the [[killings]] of Chuck's [[fathers]] without [[impacts]] of any [[genre]]. [[Outset]] of all, this [[ought]] be a [[novel]] definition of "without [[implications]] of any [[genus]]" because, in [[sadness]] of the fact that Ned was only a [[boys]] and did not [[realising]] that he had [[aroused]] the [[dead]] of Chuck's father, he [[yet]] [[smelled]] guilty from the moment he [[realised]] what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had [[engendered]] her father's [[deaths]] with his [[donation]]. [[Presently]], there are no police to charge people with [[mysteriously]] causing one person's [[killings]] by bringing another [[somebody]] back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal [[instructions]]. [[Onto]] other [[phrases]], it's between Ned and [[Chowk]], who was not [[minded]] to [[pardoned]] Ned anytime [[swiftly]].

But this does point out a [[trouble]] with continuing story lines in [[networks]] dramas. I [[recall]] when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did [[anything]] wrong and it [[sounded]] he [[ai]] away with it--for a [[total]] year--then he [[ai]] [[grabbed]] and was [[compelled]] to [[resigns]] from the job (and left the [[display]]). The point is, [[audience]] should learn by now and not [[presume]] that just because a [[routine]] [[characters]] does [[anything]] [[erroneous]] in a single episode, and is not [[grabbed]] in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is [[unceasingly]] [[imminent]] week--and [[possibly]] [[yet]] next [[annum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was one of the worst I've seen in a long while.

It's a combination police drama and comedy about two Hollywood detectives, Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett, investigating a shootout at a hip hop club.

The plot is contrived and there are way too many side issues going on. Ford is hustling real estate on the side (Martin Landau is one of his clients), Hartnett runs a yoga school where he's hustling chicks in his spare time, the two are under investigation by Internal Affairs, Ford is screwing the ex-girlfriend (Lena Olin) of the IA investigator and she's a psychic who has a radio show, the man who set up the killing at the club is a dirty ex-cop who shot Hartnett's father years ago.

Toss in the obligatory car chases and some lame attempts at humor, and that's about the gist of this turkey. --------------------------------------------- Result 2640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The premise of this awaited sequel was really good and after the huge success of the remake I expected a lot sincerely.

The sad truth is that this movie is really absurd and inept. The situations are dumb and beyond reason and the acting is truly awful.

This time there aren't likable characters or violins unlike the remake. Also, the gore is not that abundant and when it happens it's truly bad.

The violence is minimal and it's a shame because there are many arguments that make you think that there's room for heavy violence. I mean, there's a SWAT team that is hunting a family of cannibal mutants. You surely expect something different! When I watched it on the movies I wanted my money back.

Anyways this is a clear example of how rushed out movies turn out to be a mess and demonstrate poor quality on all aspects.

A mess that let down the fans of the remake like me. That's why sequels are never welcomed; at least this movie isn't as terrible as the 1985 sequel to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 2641 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked Antz, but loved "A Bug's Life". The animation that was put into this paid off. I will definitely be getting this on DVD. By the way, Disney should make a widescreen version of this movie on tape. (I heard talk of squishing all of the characters into the screen on the standard video format). Most will have to agree that the ending credits were the funniest! I only saw one of the two sets, but I can't wat to see the other one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sure, for it's super imagery and awesome sound, it's a great home theater "show off" disk, but this is also a touching drama as well as an informative documentary. The parallel stories that are intertwined throughout this film will keep all viewers interested. Young, old, boys and girls alike will find that deep down, we are all fans of the automobile, especially the high performance indy machines that are the result of generations blood, sweat, tears, ingenuity and perseverance. The Mark Knopfler and Ry Cooder sound track is perfectly matched to the visuals and the content. I don't want to give away the ending, but the final driving sequence to Quincy Jones' "Days Like These" just might bring a tear to your eye. Enjoy it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a very strange film by director/[[animator]] Richard Williams. [[All]] who [[know]] of William's work [[know]] it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[cake]].

It [[features]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[save]] their owner's new French [[doll]] from a lustful [[pirate]] [[toy]] and [[find]] themselves at the mercy of [[several]] bizarre [[characters]] along the [[way]]. The [[strength]] in this movie lies [[primarily]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[strange]] [[character]] designs, its powerful animation, and its stark contrast of the sweet and scary. Williams' brilliant [[animation]] [[portrayed]] Raggedy Ann and [[Andy]] as real rag dolls, floppy and darned, rather than simple cartoon versions of the dolls, which made it more believable (at least in a visual [[sense]]). The animation shines on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose body [[walks]] with two [[different]] [[personalities]] controlling each end, the silent-movie [[chase]] with [[Sir]] [[Leonard]] Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[possibly]] the most [[exquisite]] psychedelic animation I've ever seen. There's something about this animation that just makes your jaw drop--and every second it's [[something]] new. Living in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the Greedy is a [[massive]] blob [[man]] that lives in and [[mercilessly]] [[eats]] sweets. He [[sings]] a song that I can't [[help]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then [[tries]] to [[kill]] Raggedy Ann for her candy [[heart]].

The only [[complaint]] I have about this [[film]] is that there are too many [[songs]]. It continuously bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good songs (which should have been the only ones) including "I Look, And What Do I [[See]]?", "No Girl's [[Toy]]", "[[Blue]]" ([[though]] they didn't need to [[make]] him sing it twice), "I Never [[Get]] [[Enough]]", "[[Because]] I [[Love]] You" and [[maybe]] "I'm [[Home]]." The others just [[seem]] unnecessary and [[frankly]] aren't too amazing to [[listen]] to.

This is a [[weird]] [[film]] with [[strange]] undertones, but if that's what you're [[looking]] for, you won't find better. This is a very strange film by director/[[moderator]] Richard Williams. [[Totality]] who [[savoir]] of William's work [[savoir]] it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[pudding]].

It [[featured]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[rescued]] their owner's new French [[dearie]] from a lustful [[hacker]] [[toys]] and [[found]] themselves at the mercy of [[assorted]] bizarre [[features]] along the [[manner]]. The [[kraft]] in this movie lies [[essentially]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[weird]] [[personage]] designs, its powerful animation, and its stark contrast of the sweet and scary. Williams' brilliant [[animate]] [[depicted]] Raggedy Ann and [[Indie]] as real rag dolls, floppy and darned, rather than simple cartoon versions of the dolls, which made it more believable (at least in a visual [[feeling]]). The animation shines on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose body [[walking]] with two [[several]] [[dignitaries]] controlling each end, the silent-movie [[chasing]] with [[Monsieur]] [[Leonardo]] Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[maybe]] the most [[wondrous]] psychedelic animation I've ever seen. There's something about this animation that just makes your jaw drop--and every second it's [[anything]] new. Living in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the Greedy is a [[gigantic]] blob [[guy]] that lives in and [[tirelessly]] [[feeds]] sweets. He [[sing]] a song that I can't [[supporting]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then [[endeavour]] to [[killed]] Raggedy Ann for her candy [[heartland]].

The only [[grievance]] I have about this [[cinematography]] is that there are too many [[lyrics]]. It continuously bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good songs (which should have been the only ones) including "I Look, And What Do I [[Seeing]]?", "No Girl's [[Pawn]]", "[[Azul]]" ([[if]] they didn't need to [[deliver]] him sing it twice), "I Never [[Got]] [[Adequate]]", "[[Since]] I [[Loved]] You" and [[possibly]] "I'm [[House]]." The others just [[looks]] unnecessary and [[sincerely]] aren't too amazing to [[heed]] to.

This is a [[freaky]] [[cinema]] with [[nosy]] undertones, but if that's what you're [[searching]] for, you won't find better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This tear-teaser, written by Steve Martin himself, is so unbelievably bad, it makes you sick to your stomach!

The plot is pathetic, the acting awful, and the dialogue is even more predictable than the ending.

Avoid at all costs! --------------------------------------------- Result 2645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is very very very poor. I have seen better movies.

There was a bit of tension but not much to make you jump out of your chair. It begins slowly with the building of tension. Which is not a success. At least if you ask me. Though at some points or moments I must say it was a bit funny when people got shot and how they went down.

They should had made it something like Scary Movie, then it might be a better movie. Because I watched only pieces of the movie by skipping scenes and it got to boring through out the movie. I must say that i felt sleepy watching this movie so I sure can say it is not worth it.

Don't waste time on even thinking to do something with this movie besides leaving it where it already is. Somewhere very dusty.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unbelievable!

this film gets a 7 out 0f 10. This has to be one of the worst films i have seen in years. not only was the acting incredibly bad, the storyline (if you can call it that) was just as bad. Offcourse everyone knows what's going to happen within the first 5 minutes. Which is not a bad thing if you can captivate the audience during leading up to that moment. That however, is not the case. There is no action, no suspense, not even a spark between the 2 leading actors. It was unfortunately a waste of my time, and certainly a waste of my money.

and the 2 of merely for trying --------------------------------------------- Result 2647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I went to see this one with much [[expectation]]. [[Quite]] [[unfortunately]] the [[dialogue]] is [[utterly]] [[stupid]] and [[overall]] the movie is far from inspiring awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[missing]] [[logic]] to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which [[would]] make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and [[Star]] Wars a decade [[ago]]. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and [[igniting]] their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your [[time]] & money on this one. I went to see this one with much [[anticipation]]. [[Rather]] [[sadly]] the [[discussions]] is [[downright]] [[dumb]] and [[holistic]] the movie is far from inspiring awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[gone]] [[reasoning]] to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which [[could]] make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and [[Superstar]] Wars a decade [[before]]. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and [[sparking]] their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your [[times]] & money on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2648 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (59%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Quite possibly the nicest woman in show business, and the sexiest, Debbie gives another fine performance here. Although her work in American Nightmare was far superior, she is still worth watching in this film.

The cast is filled with your typical Melrose Place types, chiseled features and seductive curves, that I had never seen before. Other than Debbie, Laura Nativo was the only actress I had seen before, in the similar Delta Delta [[Die]].

The plot centers around a group of California arrogants who initiate poor naive Debbie Rochon into their clique. They tell her that they have a murder club, and that she must kill someone to be accepted. Debbie wants nothing more but to be accepted by these cool people, so she quickly kills a person, and now the group must decide what to do with her, after she fell for their joke.

VIOLENCE: $$$$$ (Plentiful! Debbie Rochon occasionally has blood splattered all over her and all of the murder scenes are done in your face. Gore hounds will surely enjoy!)

NUDITY: $$$$$ (Plentiful as well! Debbie Rochon has several nude scenes as do many of the no-name actresses and actors. The pool party seems as just an excuse to get everyone naked; man and woman alike. Julie Strain also has a topless cameo but her character is gone after the first five minutes).

STORY: $$ (Could have received a higher vote because the plot was very interesting and unique but the plot serves as filler between nude scenes. I understand that B-Rate films use nudity often, but this is borderline excessive).

ACTING: $ (The acting is sub standard to say the least. Rochon is always a treat, easily the best B-Rate actress in the business today, but her character in American Nightmare was superior. Danny Wolske does a fine job as Debbie's object of lust but the other actors were nothing to write about). Quite possibly the nicest woman in show business, and the sexiest, Debbie gives another fine performance here. Although her work in American Nightmare was far superior, she is still worth watching in this film.

The cast is filled with your typical Melrose Place types, chiseled features and seductive curves, that I had never seen before. Other than Debbie, Laura Nativo was the only actress I had seen before, in the similar Delta Delta [[Died]].

The plot centers around a group of California arrogants who initiate poor naive Debbie Rochon into their clique. They tell her that they have a murder club, and that she must kill someone to be accepted. Debbie wants nothing more but to be accepted by these cool people, so she quickly kills a person, and now the group must decide what to do with her, after she fell for their joke.

VIOLENCE: $$$$$ (Plentiful! Debbie Rochon occasionally has blood splattered all over her and all of the murder scenes are done in your face. Gore hounds will surely enjoy!)

NUDITY: $$$$$ (Plentiful as well! Debbie Rochon has several nude scenes as do many of the no-name actresses and actors. The pool party seems as just an excuse to get everyone naked; man and woman alike. Julie Strain also has a topless cameo but her character is gone after the first five minutes).

STORY: $$ (Could have received a higher vote because the plot was very interesting and unique but the plot serves as filler between nude scenes. I understand that B-Rate films use nudity often, but this is borderline excessive).

ACTING: $ (The acting is sub standard to say the least. Rochon is always a treat, easily the best B-Rate actress in the business today, but her character in American Nightmare was superior. Danny Wolske does a fine job as Debbie's object of lust but the other actors were nothing to write about). --------------------------------------------- Result 2649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely horrific film. Ameteurish and it isn't funny at all. Lead character played by Mehmet Ali Erbil is very annoying. Edits by E.T and star wars is just plain stupid.

Actor Yilmaz Goksal is the only good think about this movie. He should master his English and move to Hollywood. Hollywood can not find an actor with his qualities. Other than Goksal this movie is a garbage.

Director Gani Mujde is a comic writer and this movie is his worst written work to this date.

Music of Cem Karaca is another plus of this waste of money. Actor Sumer Tilmac also have some presence. Actor who plays the three sons has no talent what so ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film at the Toronto Film Festival, where it received a standing ovation! This film tells a story that to my knowledge has never been told before--namely about the Rosenstrasse (a street in Berlin)uprising of German gentile women who were married to Jews at the end of the Second World War. As such, it is a unique story, and what's more, is the only film about the Holocaust that I have ever seen that shows that there were GOOD Germans (the helping family in "Anne Frank" for instance was Dutch) who did NOT support the Nazis, and, in fact, had the fortitude to stand up against their own country's immorality and brutality during the Nazi regime, at the risk of their very lives. The acting is great across the board, the framing story in New York interesting and intricate, the direction from Von Trotta masterful in every scene, and the production values, including the gorgeous cinematography, outstanding. Of course the family in New York could be speaking German. Many immigrants in this country choose to speak in their native tongue with their family--a common occurrence. So that criticism is unwarranted. To say more would spoil the experience. The film is long, but I did not look at my watch once. I am hoping this film gets some distribution is North America, for not only is this film a masterpiece, but it can actually help heal any animosity people have towards the Germans because of their support of Hitler. If this film is playing in your area, I URGE YOU TO SEE IT! You will be glad you did! --------------------------------------------- Result 2651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[In]] [[Cold]] Blood was one of [[several]] 60s [[films]] that created a [[new]] [[vision]] of violence in the Hollywood [[film]] [[industry]]. Capote coined the [[phrase]] "nonfiction [[novel]]" to [[describe]] the [[book]] on which this [[film]] is based, and the [[spirit]] of that form was carried over into the [[film]] script, which he co-wrote. [[Despite]] the fact that we were well into the era of [[color]] [[film]], [[Richard]] [[Brooks]] [[elected]] to present this film in black and [[white]] to underscore both the starkness of the [[landscape]] and the bleakness of the [[story]]. This is the [[first]] problem with the [[TV]] remake --color changes the tone of the [[story]]. In [[addition]], the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to [[understand]] the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only [[gave]] this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 [[rankings]] for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an [[Among]] [[Chilled]] Blood was one of [[many]] 60s [[filmmaking]] that created a [[newer]] [[sight]] of violence in the Hollywood [[flick]] [[industries]]. Capote coined the [[phrases]] "nonfiction [[newer]]" to [[portray]] the [[ledger]] on which this [[filmmaking]] is based, and the [[wits]] of that form was carried over into the [[films]] script, which he co-wrote. [[Although]] the fact that we were well into the era of [[colors]] [[movie]], [[Richie]] [[Brook]] [[opted]] to present this film in black and [[bianchi]] to underscore both the starkness of the [[landscapes]] and the bleakness of the [[histories]]. This is the [[frst]] problem with the [[TELEVISIONS]] remake --color changes the tone of the [[histories]]. In [[supplement]], the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to [[realise]] the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only [[provided]] this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 [[classifications]] for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an --------------------------------------------- Result 2652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can [[hardly]] [[believe]] that this [[inert]], turgid and [[badly]] staged [[film]] is by a filmmaker whose other [[works]] I've [[quite]] [[enjoyed]]. The [[experience]] of enduring THE LADY AND THE [[DUKE]] (and no other word but "[[enduring]]" will do), [[left]] me in a [[vile]] [[mood]], a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb [[user]] [[comment]] by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer [[attempted]] (with [[success]]) to make us [[see]] the [[world]] through the genre [[art]] of 18th century France but, as ali has [[pointed]] out, has [[shown]] (at the [[cost]] of alienating his [[audience]]) the [[effects]] of both [[class]] consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist [[woman]] of her [[times]]. The [[director]] has [[accomplished]] [[something]] undeniably [[difficult]], but I [[question]] whether it was worth the [[effort]] it [[took]] for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull [[results]] of his labor. I can [[practically]] [[believing]] that this [[dormant]], turgid and [[sorely]] staged [[cinematographic]] is by a filmmaker whose other [[working]] I've [[altogether]] [[adored]]. The [[experiences]] of enduring THE LADY AND THE [[DUCA]] (and no other word but "[[sustained]]" will do), [[gauche]] me in a [[infamous]] [[ambiance]], a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb [[username]] [[remarks]] by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer [[strived]] (with [[successes]]) to make us [[seeing]] the [[globe]] through the genre [[artistry]] of 18th century France but, as ali has [[emphasized]] out, has [[showed]] (at the [[price]] of alienating his [[spectators]]) the [[influencing]] of both [[classes]] consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist [[dame]] of her [[moments]]. The [[superintendent]] has [[effected]] [[somethings]] undeniably [[tough]], but I [[matter]] whether it was worth the [[endeavors]] it [[taken]] for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull [[consequences]] of his labor. --------------------------------------------- Result 2653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[film]] is [[something]] [[like]] a sequel of "[[White]] Zombie", since it is made by the same man (Halperin) and features zombies. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, [[fails]] to [[deliver]] with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[control]] the [[minds]] of people in Cambodia, and a [[search]] to destroy the [[source]] of his power so the [[zombies]] can be [[sent]] free. [[Also]], a [[love]] interest for the [[evil]] man.

Where this film really excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this [[film]] just did not [[deliver]]. And no strong [[villain]] (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice [[effect]], but misleading as he is never in the [[film]]... why not [[recreate]] this with the [[new]] actor's eyes? Overall, a [[film]] that [[could]] be a great one with a [[little]] script re-working and [[could]] someday be a powerful remake ([[especially]] if they [[keep]] it in the same post-war [[time]] [[frame]]). [[Heck]], if they can [[fix]] up "The [[Hills]] Have Eyes" then this [[film]] has hope. This [[filmmaking]] is [[somethings]] [[iike]] a sequel of "[[Blanc]] Zombie", since it is made by the same man (Halperin) and features zombies. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, [[fail]] to [[make]] with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[controls]] the [[esprit]] of people in Cambodia, and a [[quest]] to destroy the [[origins]] of his power so the [[walkers]] can be [[conveyed]] free. [[Moreover]], a [[amore]] interest for the [[diabolic]] man.

Where this film really excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this [[filmmaking]] just did not [[provide]]. And no strong [[rascal]] (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice [[repercussions]], but misleading as he is never in the [[cinema]]... why not [[reestablish]] this with the [[newer]] actor's eyes? Overall, a [[cinematographic]] that [[did]] be a great one with a [[scant]] script re-working and [[would]] someday be a powerful remake ([[specially]] if they [[sustain]] it in the same post-war [[moment]] [[framework]]). [[Devil]], if they can [[remedy]] up "The [[Collines]] Have Eyes" then this [[filmmaking]] has hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] After reading the [[comments]] to this movie and [[seeing]] the mixed reviews, I decided that I would add my ten cents worth to say I thought the film was excellent, not only in the visual beauty, the writing, music score, acting, and directing, but in putting [[across]] the story of Joseph Smith and the road he traveled through life of [[hardship]] and persecution for believing in God the [[way]] he [[felt]] and knew to be his [[path]]. I am very pleased, indeed, to have had a small [[part]] in [[telling]] the story of this [[remarkable]] [[man]]. I [[recommend]] [[everyone]] to [[see]] this when the opportunity [[presents]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. After reading the [[commentary]] to this movie and [[witnessing]] the mixed reviews, I decided that I would add my ten cents worth to say I thought the film was excellent, not only in the visual beauty, the writing, music score, acting, and directing, but in putting [[during]] the story of Joseph Smith and the road he traveled through life of [[deprivation]] and persecution for believing in God the [[route]] he [[smelled]] and knew to be his [[chemin]]. I am very pleased, indeed, to have had a small [[portions]] in [[saying]] the story of this [[wondrous]] [[dawg]]. I [[recommended]] [[somebody]] to [[behold]] this when the opportunity [[presented]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 2655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Where to [[start]]. The [[film]] [[started]] out [[pretty]] well, but after the 30 [[min]] [[mark]] i [[caught]] myself watching the [[clock]]. The horror at the [[start]] of the [[film]] was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[got]] stupider and stupider as [[time]] [[ticked]] by.

The [[actors]] [[gave]] an average performance in this [[movie]] however, i got a bit [[bored]] of [[Vinny]] Jones constant [[scowling]] in the [[film]].

As the [[film]] dragged on, and [[take]] my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[fetched]].

*** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** [[Just]] when i thought the film [[could]] not [[get]] any [[worse]], [[towards]] the [[end]] [[loads]] if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to [[eat]] the [[dead]] people which made no [[sense]] at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating [[cult]] and the [[good]] [[guys]] [[die]] at the end. The [[ending]] in fact just [[made]] me laugh at how [[bad]] it was. Once the lead role [[disposes]] of Vinny Jones, he [[becomes]] the [[new]] [[killer]].

[[In]] [[closing]], this [[film]] [[made]] Creep [[look]] [[like]] the [[best]] horror [[film]] ever [[made]]. I [[gave]] it 1 [[star]] because the [[female]] [[lead]] did a pretty good [[job]] but [[even]] she [[could]] not [[save]] this train [[wreck]] of a [[movie]]!! Where to [[beginnings]]. The [[movies]] [[initiates]] out [[belle]] well, but after the 30 [[mn]] [[markup]] i [[grabbed]] myself watching the [[timer]]. The horror at the [[booting]] of the [[filmmaking]] was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[did]] stupider and stupider as [[period]] [[checked]] by.

The [[players]] [[delivered]] an average performance in this [[filmmaking]] however, i got a bit [[drilled]] of [[Vinnie]] Jones constant [[smirking]] in the [[movie]].

As the [[movies]] dragged on, and [[taking]] my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[regained]].

*** SPOILER [[ULTIMATUM]] *** SPOILER [[ULTIMATUM]] *** SPOILER [[WARNS]] *** [[Jen]] when i thought the film [[did]] not [[obtain]] any [[worst]], [[circa]] the [[terminate]] [[charging]] if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to [[eating]] the [[deceased]] people which made no [[sensing]] at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating [[heresy]] and the [[alright]] [[buddies]] [[died]] at the end. The [[terminated]] in fact just [[accomplished]] me laugh at how [[rotten]] it was. Once the lead role [[dispose]] of Vinny Jones, he [[become]] the [[newest]] [[murderer]].

[[Among]] [[closed]], this [[filmmaking]] [[accomplished]] Creep [[peek]] [[iike]] the [[optimum]] horror [[kino]] ever [[effected]]. I [[supplied]] it 1 [[superstar]] because the [[girl]] [[culminate]] did a pretty good [[labor]] but [[yet]] she [[did]] not [[economize]] this train [[shipwreck]] of a [[kino]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This [[movie]] fails to [[offer]] [[anything]] [[new]] to a [[genre]] that has [[traditionally]] shown the cross cultural love [[story]] underpinned by the [[politics]] mid 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[modern]] [[ways]] are [[bad]] and the primitive but honest and [[true]] Indians are good. [[Surely]] such clichéd depictions of the British are rather passé now.

Apart from the drama that fuels the second part of the movie the narrative is predictable, the acting is [[pedestrian]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and unimaginative.

The story really [[needed]] to be fleshed out and would certainly have benefited from another half an hour of screen time to give the characters and narrative more depth and give the viewer something to feel some investment in.

All in all, rather uninspiring. Oh and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with emotional pain just doesn't [[work]] for me! This [[filmmaking]] fails to [[affords]] [[nothing]] [[novel]] to a [[gender]] that has [[commonly]] shown the cross cultural love [[storytelling]] underpinned by the [[policies]] mid 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[contemporary]] [[methods]] are [[mala]] and the primitive but honest and [[authentic]] Indians are good. [[Admittedly]] such clichéd depictions of the British are rather passé now.

Apart from the drama that fuels the second part of the movie the narrative is predictable, the acting is [[footpath]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and unimaginative.

The story really [[require]] to be fleshed out and would certainly have benefited from another half an hour of screen time to give the characters and narrative more depth and give the viewer something to feel some investment in.

All in all, rather uninspiring. Oh and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with emotional pain just doesn't [[cooperation]] for me! --------------------------------------------- Result 2657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Lois [[Weber]], self [[proclaimed]] [[missionary]] via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, thanks to TCM. This [[film]] is her indictment of abortion, but she [[cleverly]] muddles the [[issue]] by [[bringing]] in eugenics and birth control, [[leaving]] the [[impression]] that they are [[somehow]] equivalent to abortion. [[Her]] talent in writing and the other cinematic [[skills]] are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had [[used]] them less didactically. If you have [[wondered]] what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "[[famous]] father" looked like, here is your [[chance]]. 1916 fashions and [[automobiles]] are also on [[display]] to [[add]] to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't [[appreciate]] the [[propaganda]]. Lois [[Webber]], self [[avowed]] [[evangelist]] via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, thanks to TCM. This [[filmmaking]] is her indictment of abortion, but she [[wisely]] muddles the [[issuance]] by [[bring]] in eugenics and birth control, [[leave]] the [[printout]] that they are [[somewhere]] equivalent to abortion. [[His]] talent in writing and the other cinematic [[expertise]] are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had [[utilised]] them less didactically. If you have [[questioned]] what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "[[prestigious]] father" looked like, here is your [[opportunities]]. 1916 fashions and [[vehicle]] are also on [[visualize]] to [[summing]] to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't [[appreciates]] the [[advocacy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Little Mosque is one of the most boring CBC comedies I have ever seen. They have a way of producing the easiest comedy programming they can for the oldest most-easily-offended viewers which for CBC means 85 year old farmers in Saskatchewan. The jokes are all predictable and so deathly lame I can't believe it. The performances are very hammy and over acted but I don't blame the actors since those kind of one dimensional stereotyped characters are probably exactly what the CBC asked for and demanded. Very lame show with bad jokes they tried to present as "controversial" well it is less controversial than the other boring CBC comedies like The Hour Has 22 Minutes, Royal Canadian Air Farce and Rick Mercer's Report. --------------------------------------------- Result 2659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] The [[extraordinary]] Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to [[see]] this flick. Why she never [[became]] a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[exceptional]] and [[steals]] every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[first]] [[rate]], with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially [[memorable]]. A "9" out of "10." The [[awesome]] Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to [[seeing]] this flick. Why she never [[was]] a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[wondrous]] and [[itches]] every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[frst]] [[rates]], with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially [[landmark]]. A "9" out of "10." --------------------------------------------- Result 2660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] well [[done]] giving the perspective of the other side fraulein doktor [[captures]] both the cost and the futility of war. [[excellent]] acting especially when german high command refuses in the name of chivalry to present medal kaiser ordered struck. the scenes of carnage are [[probably]] too intense for effete US minds who'd probably prefer some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might appreciate the story line and the action. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's Ladder. well [[doing]] giving the perspective of the other side fraulein doktor [[catch]] both the cost and the futility of war. [[wondrous]] acting especially when german high command refuses in the name of chivalry to present medal kaiser ordered struck. the scenes of carnage are [[indubitably]] too intense for effete US minds who'd probably prefer some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might appreciate the story line and the action. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's Ladder. --------------------------------------------- Result 2661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Brilliant kung-fu scenes, [[loads]] of melodrama, [[peculiar]] footwear symbolism and an [[unhappy]] (?) [[end]] makes [[Barefoot]] [[Kid]] an [[unforgettable]] film.

One of the [[silliest]] subtitles I've [[seen]]... Brilliant kung-fu scenes, [[burden]] of melodrama, [[strange]] footwear symbolism and an [[wretched]] (?) [[terminates]] makes [[Nudes]] [[Petit]] an [[memorable]] film.

One of the [[dumbest]] subtitles I've [[watched]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[DARK]] [[REMAINS]] is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[win]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 separate strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the [[execution]] is [[haphazard]] and results in confusion that could [[perhaps]] only be resolved by multiple viewings. Unfortunately, the movie is [[simply]] not [[enticing]] [[enough]] to [[attract]] most viewers into [[watching]] it more than once.

Just about everything that [[could]] go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and fast! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the [[shortcomings]] found here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[simply]] too poor.

The [[characters]] are uninteresting as [[pointed]] out by other reviewers on this site. The badly written script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating [[opportunities]] for character-driven [[situations]] and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is [[uninspired]]. The inspiration from J-Horror [[movies]] such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is [[evident]]. Unfortunately, the [[directors]] of [[DARK]] [[REMAINS]] did not [[pay]] [[close]] attention to the [[style]] of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[fear]] of the unknown. [[Tension]] is created by constant shifts between a bizarre situation (a ghost on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central [[character]] who is faced with it without any [[warning]]. There is no [[humour]] or tongue-in-cheek [[element]] in these [[movies]]. Everything is [[played]] so straight and without remorse or limitations that you can't [[help]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the suspense and [[ensures]] the [[horror]] has [[psychological]] impact, very [[much]] unlike the "[[jump]] [[scares]]" used in Hollywood [[movies]].

The [[directors]] of DARK [[REMAINS]] made a [[brave]] [[attempt]] to [[avoid]] Hollywood [[clichés]] and [[also]] [[successfully]] avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the lack of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I [[could]] deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS like the plague. [[GLOOM]] [[STAYS]] is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[gaining]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 separate strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the [[executing]] is [[random]] and results in confusion that could [[likely]] only be resolved by multiple viewings. Unfortunately, the movie is [[mere]] not [[tantalizing]] [[sufficiently]] to [[draw]] most viewers into [[staring]] it more than once.

Just about everything that [[did]] go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and fast! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the [[foibles]] found here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[exclusively]] too poor.

The [[hallmarks]] are uninteresting as [[stressed]] out by other reviewers on this site. The badly written script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating [[chances]] for character-driven [[circumstances]] and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is [[unimaginative]]. The inspiration from J-Horror [[cinema]] such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is [[manifest]]. Unfortunately, the [[managers]] of [[BLACKNESS]] [[STAYS]] did not [[payroll]] [[closed]] attention to the [[styles]] of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[angst]] of the unknown. [[Tensions]] is created by constant shifts between a bizarre situation (a ghost on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central [[characters]] who is faced with it without any [[ultimatum]]. There is no [[mood]] or tongue-in-cheek [[ingredients]] in these [[film]]. Everything is [[effected]] so straight and without remorse or limitations that you can't [[support]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the suspense and [[secures]] the [[monstrosity]] has [[mental]] impact, very [[very]] unlike the "[[jumping]] [[terrifies]]" used in Hollywood [[cinema]].

The [[managers]] of DARK [[STAYS]] made a [[courageous]] [[seek]] to [[preventing]] Hollywood [[clichéd]] and [[furthermore]] [[satisfactorily]] avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the lack of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I [[did]] deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 2663 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite having 6 different directors, this fantasy hangs together remarkably well.

It was filmed in England (nowhere near Morocco) in studios and on a few beaches. At the outbreak of war, everything was moved to America and some scenes were filmed in the Grand Canyon.

Notable for having one of the corniest lyrics in a song - "I want to be a bandit, can't you understand it". It remains a favourite of many people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[ridiculous]] [[film]] for umpteen years all I can [[think]] of is that [[old]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[teen]] when this smoked fish [[hit]] the U.S. I was too [[young]] to get in the [[theater]] (although I did [[manage]] to [[sneak]] into "Goodbye Columbus"). Then a screening at a local [[film]] [[museum]] beckoned - Finally I [[could]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The [[ONLY]] [[reason]] this [[film]] was not condemned to the [[anonymous]] sands of [[time]] was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people [[flocked]] to this [[stinker]], [[thinking]] they were [[going]] to [[see]] a sex [[film]]...[[Instead]], they got [[lots]] of closeups of gnarly, [[repulsive]] [[Swedes]], on-street [[interviews]] in bland [[shopping]] [[malls]], asinie [[political]] pretension...and [[feeble]] who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale [[actors]].

[[Cultural]] icon, holy grail, historic [[artifact]]..whatever this thing was, shred it, [[burn]] it, then stuff the ashes in a lead [[box]]!

[[Elite]] esthetes [[still]] [[scrape]] to [[find]] [[value]] in its [[boring]] [[pseudo]] [[revolutionary]] political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been [[ignored]], then forgotten.

[[Instead]], the "I Am [[Blank]], [[Blank]]" rhythymed title was [[repeated]] [[endlessly]] for years as a titilation for [[porno]] [[films]] (I am [[Curious]], [[Lavender]] - for [[gay]] [[films]], I Am [[Curious]], [[Black]] - for blaxploitation [[films]], etc..) and [[every]] ten years or so the [[thing]] [[rises]] from the dead, to be viewed by a [[new]] generation of [[suckers]] who want to [[see]] that "[[naughty]] sex [[film]]" that "[[revolutionized]] the [[film]] industry"...

[[Yeesh]], [[avoid]] like the [[plague]]..Or if you MUST [[see]] it - [[rent]] the video and [[fast]] forward to the "dirty" parts, just to [[get]] it over with.

Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[silly]] [[filmmaking]] for umpteen years all I can [[believe]] of is that [[archaic]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[youths]] when this smoked fish [[knocked]] the U.S. I was too [[youths]] to get in the [[drama]] (although I did [[administered]] to [[infiltrate]] into "Goodbye Columbus"). Then a screening at a local [[filmmaking]] [[museums]] beckoned - Finally I [[did]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The [[LEN]] [[cause]] this [[filmmaking]] was not condemned to the [[unnamed]] sands of [[moment]] was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people [[rallied]] to this [[tosser]], [[think]] they were [[go]] to [[behold]] a sex [[movie]]...[[However]], they got [[lot]] of closeups of gnarly, [[hideous]] [[Swede]], on-street [[interview]] in bland [[buying]] [[mall]], asinie [[politician]] pretension...and [[weak]] who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale [[players]].

[[Culture]] icon, holy grail, historic [[ordnance]]..whatever this thing was, shred it, [[burning]] it, then stuff the ashes in a lead [[shoebox]]!

[[Elites]] esthetes [[however]] [[scraping]] to [[finds]] [[values]] in its [[bore]] [[alias]] [[innovative]] political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been [[forgotten]], then forgotten.

[[However]], the "I Am [[Blanc]], [[Blanc]]" rhythymed title was [[recurring]] [[incessantly]] for years as a titilation for [[porn]] [[film]] (I am [[Peculiar]], [[Violet]] - for [[homosexual]] [[filmmaking]], I Am [[Outlandish]], [[Negro]] - for blaxploitation [[movies]], etc..) and [[all]] ten years or so the [[stuff]] [[rising]] from the dead, to be viewed by a [[nouveau]] generation of [[tossers]] who want to [[seeing]] that "[[nasty]] sex [[movie]]" that "[[revolutionised]] the [[filmmaking]] industry"...

[[Ow]], [[avert]] like the [[epidemic]]..Or if you MUST [[seeing]] it - [[leases]] the video and [[quickly]] forward to the "dirty" parts, just to [[gets]] it over with.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Corean [[cinema]] can be [[quite]] [[surprising]] for an occidental [[audience]], because of the multiplicity of the tones and [[genres]] you can [[find]] in the same movie. In a Coreen [[drama]] such as this "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]", you'll [[also]] find some [[comical]] parts, thriller scenes and romantic [[times]]. "There's not only [[tragedy]] in [[life]], there's [[also]] tragic-comedy" [[says]] at one point of the movie the [[character]] interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the [[mixture]] of the [[picture]]. But don't [[get]] me wrong, this heterogeneity of the genres the [[movie]] [[deals]] with, [[adds]] [[veracity]] to the experience this [[rich]] [[movie]] [[offers]] to its [[spectators]]. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[rare]] to see such a dense and [[profound]] [[portrait]] of a [[woman]] in [[pain]].

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet [[life]] with her son in the [[native]] [[town]] of her late husband, really [[gives]], by all the [[different]] faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this [[movie]]. It's realistic [[part]] is [[erased]] by the psychological descriptions of all the [[phases]] the poor [[mother]] is going through. [[Denial]], lost, [[anger]], [[faith]], pert of [[reality]] : the [[movie]] fallows all the steps the [[character]] crosses, and looks like a [[psychological]] [[catalog]] of all the [[suffering]] [[phases]] a [[woman]] can experience.

The only [[thing]] is to [[accept]] what may [[look]] like a conceptual experience (the woman wears the [[mask]] of [[tragedy]], the [[man]] represents the [[comical]] interludes) and to [[let]] the artifices of the [[movie]] touch you. I [[must]] say that some parts of the [[movie]] really did [[move]] me (especialy in the [[beginning]]), [[particularly]] those [[concerning]] the unability of [[Chang]] Joan to [[truly]] [[help]] the one he [[loves]], but [[also]] that the accumulation of suffering emotionally tired me [[towards]] the [[end]]. [[Nevertheless]], some [[cinematographic]] [[ideas]] are [[really]] [[breathtaking]] and surprising (the scene where a [[body]] is [[discovered]] in a [[large]] [[shot]] is for [[instance]] [[amazing]]). This kind of scenes makes "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]" the [[melo]] equivalent of "The Host" for [[horror]] [[movies]] or "[[Memories]] of murder" for [[thrillers]]. These [[movies]] are [[indeed]] surprising, most [[original]], aesthetically [[incredible]], and manage to [[give]] another dimension to the [[genres]] they [[deal]] with. The only [[thing]] that "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]" forgets, as "The host" forgot to be [[scary]], is to [[make]] its audience cry : bad point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. Corean [[theaters]] can be [[rather]] [[impressive]] for an occidental [[audiences]], because of the multiplicity of the tones and [[genus]] you can [[found]] in the same movie. In a Coreen [[teatro]] such as this "[[Concealed]] [[Sun]]", you'll [[moreover]] find some [[humorous]] parts, thriller scenes and romantic [[time]]. "There's not only [[drama]] in [[lifetime]], there's [[further]] tragic-comedy" [[say]] at one point of the movie the [[characteristics]] interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the [[mixes]] of the [[photo]]. But don't [[gets]] me wrong, this heterogeneity of the genres the [[cinema]] [[deal]] with, [[adding]] [[truthfulness]] to the experience this [[wealthy]] [[film]] [[delivers]] to its [[audience]]. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[scarce]] to see such a dense and [[deep]] [[depiction]] of a [[women]] in [[grief]].

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet [[vie]] with her son in the [[indigenous]] [[urban]] of her late husband, really [[provides]], by all the [[diversified]] faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this [[flick]]. It's realistic [[party]] is [[wiped]] by the psychological descriptions of all the [[phase]] the poor [[mummy]] is going through. [[Rejection]], lost, [[wrath]], [[belief]], pert of [[realities]] : the [[cinematography]] fallows all the steps the [[characters]] crosses, and looks like a [[psychiatric]] [[catalogue]] of all the [[distress]] [[phased]] a [[dame]] can experience.

The only [[stuff]] is to [[countenance]] what may [[glance]] like a conceptual experience (the woman wears the [[conceal]] of [[drama]], the [[guy]] represents the [[funny]] interludes) and to [[letting]] the artifices of the [[flick]] touch you. I [[gotta]] say that some parts of the [[kino]] really did [[budge]] me (especialy in the [[begins]]), [[namely]] those [[relating]] the unability of [[Jang]] Joan to [[honestly]] [[assist]] the one he [[likes]], but [[further]] that the accumulation of suffering emotionally tired me [[toward]] the [[terminates]]. [[Albeit]], some [[cinematic]] [[think]] are [[genuinely]] [[exciting]] and surprising (the scene where a [[bodies]] is [[detected]] in a [[sizable]] [[filmed]] is for [[lawsuit]] [[stunning]]). This kind of scenes makes "[[Confidentiality]] [[Sunlight]]" the [[mello]] equivalent of "The Host" for [[terror]] [[film]] or "[[Memory]] of murder" for [[thriller]]. These [[theater]] are [[actually]] surprising, most [[initial]], aesthetically [[stunning]], and manage to [[lend]] another dimension to the [[genus]] they [[addressing]] with. The only [[stuff]] that "[[Secrecy]] [[Sun]]" forgets, as "The host" forgot to be [[horrific]], is to [[deliver]] its audience cry : bad point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's remarkable that for 'Young Mr. Lincoln's' supporting players Ford cast lesser known, other-than-star actors. This not only heightens his film's focus on the central character of Lincoln, but it also affords the audience a refreshing insight into Lincoln as a man of his place and time, a man embroiled, as each one of us inexorably is, in the issues and sentiments of his time and seeking his way to resolving them. It's not so much through Fonda's Lincoln's words and actions but in the faces, the reactions of the supporting players that Ford tells the story of the formation of the young Lincoln's worldview, sense of place in society and polity, and of how the people responded to Mr. Lincoln's words and deeds and placed their trust in this man whom they deemed to have earned their respect and heeding.

Give this a try: instead of focusing on Henry Fonda, next time you view 'Young Mr. Lincoln' shift your focus to the supporting characters - you will, I expect, be handsomely rewarded with a more profound appreciation of both Lincoln and Ford. I like to suspect that Ford's storytelling through the supporting characters' reactions to Fonda's Lincoln may have appealed to David Lean when he directed Omar Sharif in 'Doctor Zhivago', in which it's the supporting characters' reactions to Zhivago that actually tell about Zhivago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This [[film]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[expecting]] much. However, i was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. [[At]] [[first]] i didn't take well to the lead [[girl]] and didn't really care if she lived or died. [[After]] a while she [[definitely]] [[grew]] on me and became a [[likable]] [[character]]. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but [[explains]] a lot. I would [[recommend]] this film to [[everyone]]. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your [[life]]. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. This [[movies]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[waiting]] much. However, i was [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. [[In]] [[frst]] i didn't take well to the lead [[fille]] and didn't really care if she lived or died. [[Upon]] a while she [[admittedly]] [[climbed]] on me and became a [[sympathetic]] [[characters]]. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but [[explain]] a lot. I would [[recommendations]] this film to [[someone]]. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your [[iife]]. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 2668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] [[whereas]] the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[creating]] the [[definitively]] [[modern]] [[American]] [[genre]] and [[style]] in the [[process]] - those of what might be called Golden [[Age]] fiction have [[made]] [[barely]] any [[impression]] whatsoever. The problem with books like those of Agatha [[Christie]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose work this [[film]] is based), is that they are low on [[action]] or [[variety]] - [[whereas]] Sam Spade or [[Philip]] [[Marlowe]] [[traverse]] the mean streets of [[LA]], [[working]] class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy [[mansions]], and [[meet]] all sorts of [[exciting]] [[dangers]] and violence, Golden Age fiction is [[generally]] fixed in [[location]], the scene of the [[murder]], usually a lavish [[country]] [[house]], and the action is limited to investigating clues and [[interviewing]] suspects. This is a very static [[procedure]], plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything [[else]], the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever [[uncontrollable]] and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' [[motivations]] or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the [[anxious]], prejudice-ridden private eyes, are [[simply]] there to be [[brilliant]], and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. [[although]] the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[creations]] the [[certainly]] [[contemporary]] [[Americana]] [[gender]] and [[styling]] in the [[processes]] - those of what might be called Golden [[Aged]] fiction have [[brought]] [[scarcely]] any [[feeling]] whatsoever. The problem with books like those of Agatha [[Christi]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose work this [[cinematic]] is based), is that they are low on [[efforts]] or [[multitude]] - [[whilst]] Sam Spade or [[Philippe]] [[Marlow]] [[croix]] the mean streets of [[LAS]], [[collaborate]] class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy [[palace]], and [[cater]] all sorts of [[thrilling]] [[jeopardy]] and violence, Golden Age fiction is [[routinely]] fixed in [[locations]], the scene of the [[kill]], usually a lavish [[nations]] [[maison]], and the action is limited to investigating clues and [[interviewed]] suspects. This is a very static [[procedural]], plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything [[elsewhere]], the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever [[unchecked]] and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' [[motifs]] or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the [[preoccupied]], prejudice-ridden private eyes, are [[merely]] there to be [[remarkable]], and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Yep]], [[lots]] of [[shouting]], [[screaming]], cheering, [[arguing]], celebrating, fist clinching, [[high]] fiving & [[fighting]]. You have a general [[idea]] as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[naval]] knowledge would be an [[advantage]] for the [[finer]] points, but then you'd [[probably]] spot the [[many]] [[flaws]]. Not an [[awful]] [[film]] & Hackman & Washington are their [[usual]] [[brilliant]], but the plot was one you [[could]] peg pretty [[early]] on. I'm [[still]] [[waiting]] to [[see]] a [[submarine]] [[film]] where people [[get]] on with each other & don't [[argue]], but then you probably wouldn't have a [[film]].

4/10 [[Yup]], [[batches]] of [[howling]], [[howling]], cheering, [[affirming]], celebrating, fist clinching, [[supreme]] fiving & [[battling]]. You have a general [[thinks]] as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[marina]] knowledge would be an [[advantages]] for the [[slimmer]] points, but then you'd [[arguably]] spot the [[various]] [[drawbacks]]. Not an [[fearsome]] [[filmmaking]] & Hackman & Washington are their [[routine]] [[sparkly]], but the plot was one you [[did]] peg pretty [[swift]] on. I'm [[however]] [[expectation]] to [[behold]] a [[undersea]] [[filmmaking]] where people [[obtain]] on with each other & don't [[allege]], but then you probably wouldn't have a [[filmmaking]].

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching Awake,I led to a conclusion:director and screenwriter Joby Harold made Awake with the intention of laughing at the spectator,for the simple fact the movie is full of ridiculous elements.Awake has a lot of plot holes and it is full of absurd and ridiculous elements(for example,the hospital uniform the spirit of the main character uses...did the ghost of a doctor leave it in the floor ?).The concept behind this movie is slightly ingenious but all the plot holes and the absurd things make of this a stupid and crappy film.With the exception of the great Lena Olin,all the actors bring bad performances.Hayden Christensen has zero expressions and the same applies for Jessica Alba.The extraordinary actor Terrence Howard is enormously wasted on his role.Awake makes a laugh of the spectator.It's so ridiculous and full of absurd things that it's impossible to take it seriously.My recommendation is:skip this crappy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to [[think]] what the Blockbuster-approved edit [[must]] have [[looked]] like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[bore]] of the epic proportions. Naturally, you don't [[expect]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[class]] or two might have come in handy.

[[Also]], there were so many [[cute]] [[guys]] in this [[movie]], but they were [[woefully]] under-exploited. I [[like]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe around in their BVDs as [[much]] as the [[next]] [[guy]], but [[even]] I have a [[right]] to [[expect]] a little more. It wasn't a [[total]] [[loss]], [[though]]; at [[least]] we [[got]] a peek a Drew Fuller's ([[covered]]) [[junk]] and [[truly]] [[upsetting]] [[haircut]]. And there's Huntley Ritter looking [[even]] [[cuter]] than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's [[always]] a silver lining, [[kids]]. You just have to [[look]] [[really]] [[hard]] for it. And occasionally, you have to make [[use]] of your [[pause]] button. This is one of those [[theater]] that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to [[reckon]] what the Blockbuster-approved edit [[ought]] have [[seemed]] like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[boring]] of the epic proportions. Naturally, you don't [[expects]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[categories]] or two might have come in handy.

[[Additionally]], there were so many [[adorable]] [[buddies]] in this [[filmmaking]], but they were [[unfortunately]] under-exploited. I [[adores]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe around in their BVDs as [[very]] as the [[upcoming]] [[guys]], but [[yet]] I have a [[rights]] to [[awaited]] a little more. It wasn't a [[generals]] [[losing]], [[while]]; at [[lowest]] we [[gets]] a peek a Drew Fuller's ([[covering]]) [[trash]] and [[really]] [[heartrending]] [[coupe]]. And there's Huntley Ritter looking [[yet]] [[prettier]] than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's [[incessantly]] a silver lining, [[enfant]]. You just have to [[gaze]] [[truly]] [[laborious]] for it. And occasionally, you have to make [[utilizing]] of your [[hiatus]] button. --------------------------------------------- Result 2672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[definitely]] recommend reading the book prior to watching the [[film]]. This book won National Book Council Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not intended). It's not too difficult to read for those out there that don't read often so don't be afraid! The book [[seems]] to [[capture]] the [[passion]] of the [[relationships]] more so than the [[movie]] and the [[movie]] will make more [[sense]] after reading the book. Having grown up in Melbourne I [[could]] really relate to this [[book]] and [[movie]]. Very few Australian female [[writers]] were [[around]] the in the 70's [[therefore]] very little is [[documented]] about the [[way]] of life for a [[women]] in an urban [[city]] in Australia during this era or [[class]]. It's a precious [[piece]] of Melbourne [[history]]. It's a shame that it is [[documented]] as some [[sort]] of 80's [[soft]] [[porn]] [[movie]]. It's far from that and as the other [[reviewer]] has [[mentioned]] please do not read the [[DVD]] jacket, it does not [[represent]] what the [[movie]] is about at all. Those that [[rent]] the movie [[based]] on this description will only be [[disappointed]]. [[Just]] [[remember]] this movie was [[made]] in 1982, so don't [[expect]] the Hollywood over dramatization that they [[seem]] to [[incorporate]] these [[days]]. This is what I [[like]] about it. It's [[also]] [[great]] [[seeing]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just [[fantastic]] as [[Nora]] and it's [[great]] watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[best]] [[remember]] her for her stints on Playschool and [[Better]] [[Homes]] and [[Gardens]]. Who [[knew]] she [[hid]] this [[talent]]? This movie will [[give]] you an [[entirely]] [[new]] impression of her. A classic [[Australian]] [[Story]]! I [[undoubtedly]] recommend reading the book prior to watching the [[movie]]. This book won National Book Council Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not intended). It's not too difficult to read for those out there that don't read often so don't be afraid! The book [[appears]] to [[caught]] the [[fervor]] of the [[relationship]] more so than the [[film]] and the [[films]] will make more [[feeling]] after reading the book. Having grown up in Melbourne I [[wo]] really relate to this [[cookbook]] and [[kino]]. Very few Australian female [[authors]] were [[about]] the in the 70's [[so]] very little is [[documenting]] about the [[path]] of life for a [[females]] in an urban [[town]] in Australia during this era or [[sorts]]. It's a precious [[slice]] of Melbourne [[histories]]. It's a shame that it is [[researched]] as some [[genre]] of 80's [[mild]] [[pornography]] [[cinematography]]. It's far from that and as the other [[reviewers]] has [[cited]] please do not read the [[DVDS]] jacket, it does not [[constitute]] what the [[film]] is about at all. Those that [[renting]] the movie [[bases]] on this description will only be [[frustrating]]. [[Jen]] [[remind]] this movie was [[introduced]] in 1982, so don't [[awaited]] the Hollywood over dramatization that they [[appears]] to [[incorporation]] these [[jours]]. This is what I [[adores]] about it. It's [[additionally]] [[grand]] [[see]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just [[amazing]] as [[Norah]] and it's [[grand]] watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[bestest]] [[remind]] her for her stints on Playschool and [[Improved]] [[Accommodations]] and [[Garden]]. Who [[overheard]] she [[covert]] this [[talents]]? This movie will [[confer]] you an [[totally]] [[newer]] impression of her. A classic [[Australians]] [[Saga]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You want to see the movie "THE Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions. This is not that movie. This movie is not funny. It is a waste of time.

All of the good comments here seem to be written by (poorly disguised) false third parties. The people who made this movie seem to be attempting to synthesize fake interest.

This movie is not a well done mockumentary. Comparisons to "Spinal Tap" or Christopher Guest are insulting.

The movie is so mean-spirited that I cannot imagine anyone familiar with the subject matter finding it funny. Being able to laugh at yourself is an important quality, but if you are the ones being lampooned in this manner, you'd have to hate yourself to enjoy it.

The movie is not offensive because of its grand satire of taboo topics but because of its constant pathetic banality. --------------------------------------------- Result 2674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Boring. Minimal plot. No character development. I went into this movie with high expectations from the book. It COULD have been an awesome movie. It COULD have probably become a cult classic. Nope, it was a giant let-down. It was poorly cast and had horrible special effects. It was difficult to determine who were the bad guys: the rebels or the military or the church or all of them? I am still left puzzled by certain mini-plots from the movie. I am left dumbfounded as to certain aspects of this so-called "prophecy", which is never really FULLY explained. I felt like I was watching a corny episode of a mini-series on the sci-fi channel. It seemed very much like a made-for-TV movie. Don't go see this movie. It is a waste of time AND money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I would put this at the top of my list of films in the category of unwatchable trash! There are films that are bad, but the worst kind are the ones that are unwatchable but you are suppose to like them because they are supposed to be good for you! The sex sequences, so shocking in its day, couldn't even arouse a rabbit. The so called controversial politics is strictly high school sophomore amateur night Marxism. The film is self-consciously arty in the worst sense of the term. The photography is in a harsh grainy black and white. Some scenes are out of focus or taken from the wrong angle. Even the sound is bad! And some people call this art?

--------------------------------------------- Result 2676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Why [[review]] good [[movies]] when you can [[review]] "Trancers II?"

Ooh, this [[film]] is soooo lame. I can just picture the cast and crew driving [[around]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[hurling]] extras in [[silly]] monster make-up at [[poor]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[families]] actually [[turn]] up to play cameos, [[probably]] because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[real]]" extras. Lame [[effects]], lame sets, and a [[script]] so convoluted it would [[take]] eons to [[untie]] all the knots - this [[must]] be classic Trancers!

And [[yet]]...and [[yet]]...it [[rules]]. Note this is the same thing I [[say]] about "Trancers IV." I say it because it's [[true]]. What can [[beat]] [[watching]] an [[old]] [[guy]] in a [[trench]] coat [[mow]] down [[zombies]], then [[bust]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worry]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[lots]] of [[things]] [[could]] be better, but anyway this is [[still]] good stuff.

My only [[significant]] [[reservation]] is Megan Ward, who [[really]] [[stinks]] up the joint. She's a [[lousy]] [[rival]] for [[Helen]] Hunt's [[character]] - they're both [[young]] pieces of eye candy, and it would've been more [[effective]] if they actually contrasted a [[bit]] more. Oh well, you can't have everything. At [[least]] the [[wonderful]] plot [[device]] of the "long second watch" is back in place, and we've got more of [[Hap]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[athlete]] in the [[history]] of [[cinema]] (oh, wait a minute - he's got a rival in the [[form]] of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't seen this [[lately]], but I do [[seem]] to [[remember]] that [[Martine]] Beswick [[runs]] away twice during the final [[battle]]. [[Hooray]] for [[lousy]] continuity! [[Just]] one of the [[many]] highlights in this fine film. Why [[examinations]] good [[filmmaking]] when you can [[reviewing]] "Trancers II?"

Ooh, this [[filmmaking]] is soooo lame. I can just picture the cast and crew driving [[almost]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[throwing]] extras in [[idiot]] monster make-up at [[deficient]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[family]] actually [[turning]] up to play cameos, [[potentially]] because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[actual]]" extras. Lame [[consequences]], lame sets, and a [[screenplay]] so convoluted it would [[taking]] eons to [[unbuckle]] all the knots - this [[should]] be classic Trancers!

And [[again]]...and [[still]]...it [[regulation]]. Note this is the same thing I [[said]] about "Trancers IV." I say it because it's [[genuine]]. What can [[defeating]] [[staring]] an [[former]] [[guys]] in a [[moat]] coat [[mowed]] down [[walkers]], then [[busted]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worried]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[batch]] of [[matters]] [[wo]] be better, but anyway this is [[again]] good stuff.

My only [[major]] [[reservations]] is Megan Ward, who [[genuinely]] [[sucks]] up the joint. She's a [[wretched]] [[opponent]] for [[Helene]] Hunt's [[trait]] - they're both [[youngster]] pieces of eye candy, and it would've been more [[efficient]] if they actually contrasted a [[bite]] more. Oh well, you can't have everything. At [[lowest]] the [[sumptuous]] plot [[apparatus]] of the "long second watch" is back in place, and we've got more of [[Pah]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[jock]] in the [[story]] of [[kino]] (oh, wait a minute - he's got a rival in the [[shape]] of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't seen this [[freshly]], but I do [[seems]] to [[remembering]] that [[Martina]] Beswick [[manages]] away twice during the final [[warfare]]. [[Hoorah]] for [[squalid]] continuity! [[Jen]] one of the [[innumerable]] highlights in this fine film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] I was [[looking]] over our [[DVD]] [[tower]] last [[night]] for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday [[night]]. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it [[sounded]] like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth [[watching]]. [[Boy]] was I [[wrong]]!!! Not only was it like "The [[Big]] Chill," it was a rip-off [[almost]] [[character]] by [[character]]. The Bill Paxton [[character]] was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even [[funny]], except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." I was [[researching]] over our [[DVDS]] [[rook]] last [[nighttime]] for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday [[nocturne]]. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it [[seemed]] like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth [[staring]]. [[Guy]] was I [[mistaken]]!!! Not only was it like "The [[Prodigious]] Chill," it was a rip-off [[approximately]] [[trait]] by [[nature]]. The Bill Paxton [[characteristics]] was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even [[hilarious]], except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." --------------------------------------------- Result 2678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have to say that there is nothing wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I [[felt]] like I was watching my next door neighbor's [[home]] movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick [[story]], grabbed a [[camera]], and [[started]] shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I [[pay]] to [[rent]] a [[film]], I [[expect]] to feel like I am watching some [[type]] of professionally [[made]] movie.

[[John]] Schneider has a [[huge]] [[resume]], is a [[great]] [[actor]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[understand]] how it must be [[fun]], and cheaper to [[use]] friends, and [[relatives]] as the [[cast]], but it doesn't make for [[convincing]] acting. It [[seemed]] like the [[way]] it was shot, he was [[trying]] to give [[many]] of the scenes a more interesting [[look]], but when the [[writing]], plot, and acting are there to [[begin]] with, that [[type]] of [[style]] isn't necessary, and it is a distraction.

[[Also]] on a [[technical]] level, it had digital [[artifacts]] all over the place. [[In]] the first scene of all of those [[fine]] [[cars]], when they did a slow scan of them, they [[appeared]] to jerk back and forth just a [[little]] [[bit]]. The [[problem]] isn't in my [[viewing]] [[equipment]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somewhere]] in the [[production]]. I've never [[seen]] that [[kind]] of artifact in a professionally [[made]] [[film]] before. Then there was the sound. It sounded like they didn't do any voice-overs, which may be o.k. [[unless]] it [[sounded]] like the [[track]] in this [[film]]. It [[sounded]] [[like]] the [[built]] in microphone on the [[camera]]. I have to say that there is nothing wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I [[smelled]] like I was watching my next door neighbor's [[houses]] movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick [[conte]], grabbed a [[cameras]], and [[launching]] shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I [[salaried]] to [[rental]] a [[filmmaking]], I [[waits]] to feel like I am watching some [[kind]] of professionally [[effected]] movie.

[[Giovanni]] Schneider has a [[whopping]] [[reset]], is a [[whopping]] [[protagonist]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[realise]] how it must be [[hilarious]], and cheaper to [[used]] friends, and [[parents]] as the [[casting]], but it doesn't make for [[persuading]] acting. It [[sounded]] like the [[routes]] it was shot, he was [[striving]] to give [[several]] of the scenes a more interesting [[peek]], but when the [[writes]], plot, and acting are there to [[started]] with, that [[genre]] of [[styles]] isn't necessary, and it is a distraction.

[[Moreover]] on a [[technological]] level, it had digital [[artifact]] all over the place. [[At]] the first scene of all of those [[alright]] [[wagons]], when they did a slow scan of them, they [[seemed]] to jerk back and forth just a [[small]] [[bite]]. The [[troubles]] isn't in my [[opinion]] [[machines]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somehow]] in the [[productivity]]. I've never [[watched]] that [[genre]] of artifact in a professionally [[introduced]] [[filmmaking]] before. Then there was the sound. It sounded like they didn't do any voice-overs, which may be o.k. [[if]] it [[seemed]] like the [[tracks]] in this [[cinema]]. It [[rang]] [[iike]] the [[erected]] in microphone on the [[cameras]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Funny, sexy, [[hot]]!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques [[need]] no development!

All in all the whole seems to be [[known]] from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this [[film]] can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[say]]. [[Unbelievable]] funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice Funny, sexy, [[sexier]]!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques [[required]] no development!

All in all the whole seems to be [[renowned]] from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this [[kino]] can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[said]]. [[Inconceivable]] funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice --------------------------------------------- Result 2680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Stella", starring Bette Midler in the title role, is an unabashed tearjerker. Set in upstate New York, Stella Claire works nights as a bar maid, pouring and dancing in a workingman's saloon. One night, in comes a slumming medical intern, Stephen Dallas, who woos Stella, and in the course of their affair impregnates her. She spurns both his offers of marriage and abortion, sends him packing to a lucrative medical career, and raises her daughter herself in near-poverty. Flash-forward 16 years and the daughter has grown into a gorgeous, loving, young lady. Dr. Dallas is not out of the picture, still maintaining a tenuous, but caring relationship with his daughter and…..I'm rambling, and worse yet, making the movie sound somewhat interesting. The acting and screenwriting are so over-the-top you'll let out a groan in almost every scene. The chief offender is Bette Midler, but close behind is John Goodman as her alcoholic buddy. Each scene seems more contrived than the preceding right up to the finale, which is truly a hoot. Taken as a dramatic piece, this film rates no more than grade D, but as camp, it scores an unintended B+.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] had all the [[elements]] to be a [[smart]], sparkling [[comedy]], but for some [[reason]] it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to [[appeal]] [[fully]] to [[women]].

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[awful]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect [[better]] material. [[Jessica]] Simpson [[could]] also have [[managed]] so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and [[Penelope]] [[Anne]] Miller [[languish]] in [[supporting]] [[roles]] that are silly [[rather]] than [[amusing]].

Many things in this [[movie]] were paint-by-numbers, the [[various]] uber-cliché montages, the [[last]] minute "misunderstanding", [[even]] the kids' party [[chaos]]. This just [[suggests]] lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to [[find]] this [[movie]] [[enjoyable]] if you don't take it [[seriously]], but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and [[increasingly]] disappointed as the scenes roll past. This [[filmmaking]] had all the [[components]] to be a [[ingenious]], sparkling [[farce]], but for some [[motif]] it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to [[appellate]] [[absolutely]] to [[females]].

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[abhorrent]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect [[optimum]] material. [[Jennifer]] Simpson [[wo]] also have [[managing]] so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and [[Mercedes]] [[Anna]] Miller [[tease]] in [[aiding]] [[functions]] that are silly [[somewhat]] than [[droll]].

Many things in this [[filmmaking]] were paint-by-numbers, the [[dissimilar]] uber-cliché montages, the [[latter]] minute "misunderstanding", [[yet]] the kids' party [[anarchy]]. This just [[suggest]] lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to [[found]] this [[filmmaking]] [[pleasurable]] if you don't take it [[harshly]], but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and [[gradually]] disappointed as the scenes roll past. --------------------------------------------- Result 2682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Most people who have seen this movie thinks that it is the best movie ever made. I disagree but this movie is very very good. Tony is a bad ass guy and knows that he's intimidating and uses it to get ahead. It's about him and how he goes from washing dishes to having a huge house and a office with cocaine all over the desk. If you want a family movie then this isn't the way to go but if you want mobsters and vengeance and stuff like that then you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2683 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I really have to [[disagree]] with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire film) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever [[shot]] in Skye) and found a film with a [[difficult]] [[start]] [[come]] [[together]] into a really [[poignant]] [[whole]].

This is not a big budget [[film]]. Rather it is a [[film]] that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - pushing out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the [[combination]] of [[music]] and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into [[quite]] a [[distinctive]] and [[memorable]] [[film]]. More of these please! I really have to [[disagreement]] with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire film) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever [[offed]] in Skye) and found a film with a [[challenging]] [[outset]] [[coming]] [[jointly]] into a really [[heartbreaking]] [[overall]].

This is not a big budget [[cinema]]. Rather it is a [[kino]] that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - pushing out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the [[jumpsuit]] of [[musicians]] and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into [[rather]] a [[symptomatic]] and [[landmark]] [[movies]]. More of these please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[While]] [[Rome]] goes mad [[celebrating]] Hitler's [[visit]] - uniforms, bands, [[parades]] - two [[outsiders]] [[stay]] [[home]], in a [[large]] building, and [[wind]] up [[meeting]]. She is [[Sofia]] Loren, who is the wife of [[brutish]] public [[servant]] and [[mother]] of six [[children]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio speaker who's been fired because of his [[homosexuality]]. Both of them [[need]] company and [[understanding]], both f them find it in each other.

The [[movie]] [[covers]] a span of a few [[hours]]. The [[color]] are [[faded]] and everything takes place with a [[sound]] [[track]] of military marches and hysterical radio [[announcers]]. [[Strangely]] enough, the Nazi anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical [[theme]].

Beautiful [[movie]], [[excellent]] [[recreation]] of a [[special]] era in Italian history and a [[touching]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to expect and Sofia Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[usual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[miss]] it. [[Although]] [[Rom]] goes mad [[commemorating]] Hitler's [[visits]] - uniforms, bands, [[processions]] - two [[aliens]] [[stays]] [[dwellings]], in a [[major]] building, and [[turbine]] up [[meetings]]. She is [[Sofie]] Loren, who is the wife of [[ferocious]] public [[officials]] and [[mum]] of six [[child]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio speaker who's been fired because of his [[buggery]]. Both of them [[require]] company and [[comprehend]], both f them find it in each other.

The [[film]] [[encompasses]] a span of a few [[hour]]. The [[coloration]] are [[dissipated]] and everything takes place with a [[audible]] [[tracking]] of military marches and hysterical radio [[broadcasters]]. [[Suspiciously]] enough, the Nazi anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical [[topics]].

Beautiful [[movies]], [[wondrous]] [[recreational]] of a [[particular]] era in Italian history and a [[touch]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to expect and Sofia Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[habitual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[mademoiselle]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, In 35 years of film going I have finally viewed the stinker that surpasses all other ghastly movies I have seen. Beating 'Good Will Hunting' Baise Moi' and 'Flirt' for sheer awfulness. This is pretentious blige of the first order... not even entertaining pretentious bilge. The effects are cheap, and worse - pointless.

The script seems to have been written by a first year film student who doesn't get out much but wants to appear full of portent! The acting is simply undescribably bad - Tilda Swinton caps a career filled with vacuous woodeness with a performance which veers neurotically between comotose and laughable 'intensity'. Apparently, some fool out there has allowed the director of this film to make another one... be warned --------------------------------------------- Result 2686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Don't waste time reading my review. Go out and [[see]] this [[astonishingly]] good episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[written]]! [[Ruth]] Gordon is [[perfectly]] cast as the scheming [[yet]] [[charming]] mystery [[writer]] who [[murders]] her son-in-law to [[avenge]] his [[murder]] of her daughter. Columbo is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this particular installment features [[fantastic]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or [[Link]] [[yet]] is possibly the densest, most thoroughly [[original]] and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. [[Utterly]] satisfying in [[nearly]] [[every]] [[department]] and overflowing with droll and [[witty]] [[dialogue]] and thinking. [[Truly]] [[unexpected]] and [[inventive]] climax [[tops]] all. 10/10...[[seek]] this one out on Netflix! Don't waste time reading my review. Go out and [[behold]] this [[unbelievably]] good episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[writes]]! [[Roth]] Gordon is [[entirely]] cast as the scheming [[even]] [[enchanting]] mystery [[novelist]] who [[murdered]] her son-in-law to [[revenge]] his [[assassinate]] of her daughter. Columbo is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this particular installment features [[wondrous]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or [[Tying]] [[even]] is possibly the densest, most thoroughly [[initial]] and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. [[Quite]] satisfying in [[roughly]] [[any]] [[ministry]] and overflowing with droll and [[spiritual]] [[dialog]] and thinking. [[Honestly]] [[unscheduled]] and [[creative]] climax [[topped]] all. 10/10...[[strives]] this one out on Netflix! --------------------------------------------- Result 2687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I dug this out and watched it tonight. I [[honestly]] think it must be 20 years [[since]] the last time I [[saw]] it. I [[remember]] it being a [[seriously]] flawed [[film]]. I don't [[remember]] it being THIS [[bad]]!!!!!

I am [[absolutely]] [[aghast]] that a [[project]] with this much [[potential]] should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to [[blame]] for this? The 2 guys who [[wrote]] (and I [[use]] that word [[loosely]]) the [[script]]? The [[casting]] directors who so [[terribly]] miscast at least 3 [[major]] [[characters]] in the [[story]]? (Only 2 of them are [[among]] "the [[amazing]] 5".) The [[director]], who [[clearly]] [[refused]] to [[take]] it [[seriously]], and [[kept]] shoving [[awful]] [[music]] on top of bad [[writing]] & bad acting [[everywhere]]? (I LIKED the [[theme]] song-- but it should never have been used all the [[way]] [[throughout]] the entire [[film]]!) [[Don]] Black, who should be [[ASHAMED]] at some of the [[lyrics]] he [[wrote]] for that [[music]]?

It [[figures]] that I should [[pull]] this out, [[less]] than a [[week]] after re-reading the comic-book [[adaptation]]. The first 15-20 minutes of the [[film]] more-or-less (really, [[LESS]]) parallel the first [[issue]] of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I [[kept]] wondering-- why was ALMOST every [[single]] [[detail]] [[changed]]? Doc [[showing]] up, then [[using]] his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 [[inches]] because the refractive [[glass]], were just about the only [[things]] left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "[[adaptation]]", WHY in God's [[name]] [[change]] EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's [[HQ]], [[virtually]] [[NOTHING]] is as it was in the comic (which, [[given]] Roy Thomas, I [[figure]] [[probably]] follows the book). I read [[somewhere]] they actually [[combined]] [[elements]] of 2 different novels into one [[movie]]. Again-- WHY? I've [[heard]] it was [[changed]] because they weren't able to [[secure]] the [[kind]] of [[budget]] they [[wanted]]. I [[look]] at the [[film]], and [[think]]... [[LACK]] [[OF]] [[MONEY]] in [[NO]] [[WAY]] explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really [[take]] a [[look]] at this [[thing]]. The [[best]] [[thing]] I can [[say]] is, I [[think]] it would make a [[great]] double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and [[probably]] a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I [[also]] realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. I dug this out and watched it tonight. I [[genuinely]] think it must be 20 years [[because]] the last time I [[seen]] it. I [[remembering]] it being a [[severely]] flawed [[filmmaking]]. I don't [[reminisce]] it being THIS [[negative]]!!!!!

I am [[totally]] [[shocked]] that a [[projects]] with this much [[possibility]] should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to [[guilt]] for this? The 2 guys who [[texted]] (and I [[uses]] that word [[vaguely]]) the [[scripts]]? The [[pouring]] directors who so [[extremely]] miscast at least 3 [[big]] [[features]] in the [[saga]]? (Only 2 of them are [[in]] "the [[startling]] 5".) The [[headmaster]], who [[apparently]] [[denied]] to [[taking]] it [[severely]], and [[maintained]] shoving [[horrific]] [[musicians]] on top of bad [[handwriting]] & bad acting [[anywhere]]? (I LIKED the [[subject]] song-- but it should never have been used all the [[route]] [[around]] the entire [[filmmaking]]!) [[Donated]] Black, who should be [[SHAME]] at some of the [[paroles]] he [[texted]] for that [[musica]]?

It [[digit]] that I should [[pulls]] this out, [[lowest]] than a [[chow]] after re-reading the comic-book [[adjustment]]. The first 15-20 minutes of the [[movies]] more-or-less (really, [[MINIMUM]]) parallel the first [[question]] of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I [[retained]] wondering-- why was ALMOST every [[lonely]] [[details]] [[changing]]? Doc [[show]] up, then [[uses]] his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 [[thumbs]] because the refractive [[glasses]], were just about the only [[items]] left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "[[coping]]", WHY in God's [[names]] [[amendment]] EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's [[HEADQUARTERS]], [[almost]] [[ANYTHING]] is as it was in the comic (which, [[awarded]] Roy Thomas, I [[silhouette]] [[certainly]] follows the book). I read [[somehow]] they actually [[merged]] [[ingredient]] of 2 different novels into one [[films]]. Again-- WHY? I've [[listened]] it was [[modified]] because they weren't able to [[safe]] the [[type]] of [[budgets]] they [[wants]]. I [[gaze]] at the [[filmmaking]], and [[believe]]... [[ABSENCE]] [[DU]] [[MONETARY]] in [[NOS]] [[ROUTING]] explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really [[taking]] a [[peek]] at this [[stuff]]. The [[optimum]] [[stuff]] I can [[told]] is, I [[thinks]] it would make a [[whopping]] double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and [[admittedly]] a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I [[additionally]] realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. --------------------------------------------- Result 2688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like [[money]] and like stuff." - [[Ellen]], the [[lost]] [[quote]].

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like [[moneys]] and like stuff." - [[Helene]], the [[outof]] [[quotes]].

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 2689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am a [[huge]] [[Michael]] Madsen [[fan]], so [[needless]] to say, i bought this [[movie]] without [[even]] [[renting]] it or [[anything]]... This [[movie]] was so [[horrible]], i didn't even take it back to the [[store]], i wouldn't [[want]] [[anyone]] else to be subjected to this human [[poison]], i just [[threw]] it in the trash, never [[mind]] the [[money]], it was worth the price to be able to throw it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or [[anything]]. The [[story]] was horrible, and the ending was [[something]] i [[despise]]. He was a broken [[man]], [[alcoholic]]. his [[life]] was a bunch of [[junk]]. i [[thought]] his [[horse]], peanuts, was an [[awful]] [[device]] to [[show]] his childhood innocence, a [[dog]] [[would]] have been [[much]] much [[better]]. i also hate religion, so this [[ending]] without a doubt [[angered]] me. [[Jesus]] heals all... i [[hate]] that i know people just like this that are [[huge]] [[Christians]] and catholics, and [[time]] will [[show]] that god doesn't [[heal]] all, or [[anything]]. It was a [[horrible]] movie, if u have the [[option]] to see it, pass, or better [[yet]] [[buy]] it, or [[rent]] it, and throw it in the [[garbage]], and [[leave]] the [[coffee]] grounds on it in the morning I am a [[overwhelming]] [[Michel]] Madsen [[groupie]], so [[fruitless]] to say, i bought this [[filmmaking]] without [[yet]] [[leases]] it or [[nothing]]... This [[filmmaking]] was so [[shocking]], i didn't even take it back to the [[storing]], i wouldn't [[wanting]] [[everybody]] else to be subjected to this human [[poisons]], i just [[chucked]] it in the trash, never [[intellect]] the [[cash]], it was worth the price to be able to throw it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or [[nothing]]. The [[storytelling]] was horrible, and the ending was [[anything]] i [[hate]]. He was a broken [[guy]], [[alcohol]]. his [[vida]] was a bunch of [[trash]]. i [[thoughts]] his [[horses]], peanuts, was an [[shocking]] [[appliances]] to [[shows]] his childhood innocence, a [[puppy]] [[could]] have been [[very]] much [[best]]. i also hate religion, so this [[ended]] without a doubt [[irked]] me. [[Damn]] heals all... i [[hatred]] that i know people just like this that are [[overwhelming]] [[Cristian]] and catholics, and [[moment]] will [[shows]] that god doesn't [[healing]] all, or [[something]]. It was a [[shocking]] movie, if u have the [[alternates]] to see it, pass, or better [[however]] [[procuring]] it, or [[tenancy]] it, and throw it in the [[detritus]], and [[leaving]] the [[espresso]] grounds on it in the morning --------------------------------------------- Result 2690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I did not enjoy the film, Joshua, at all. Perhaps it is because I saw another, much better similar film titled Orphan 2 days prior but perhaps it's really just because this film was not very good. I am going with the ladder. Sure, the plot of an evil child is not exactly original but that doesn't mean the film could not succeed. It could have been suspenseful and entertaining and chilling but instead it was slow building, boring, uneventful and really didn't leave me thinking anything more than 'that wasn't very good' when it was all over.

At the end, Joshua's motivations are revealed. I won't give that away but the reality is that he didn't really accomplish his goals since despite Vera Farmiga as his mother, Abby, disappearing about 3/4th through the movie, all arrows point to her returning home soon. She was committed to a mental institution because she was losing her mind but then Joshua's Father/Her husband was accused of tampering with her medication which tells the audience that the institution realized that she was indeed not mentally ill but rather was being dosed medically. So.. shouldn't she be coming home soon? Won't Joshua have failed? Won't his Mother be living with him and his sister and possibly his Father soon? I question the Father since his future is left open ended.

At the end of the day, I didn't care about the characters. The evil demon child Joshua wasn't really scary. The storyline moved slowly and when it picked up it was still boring. Suspense fell flat every single time. When it was over I couldn't believe I had sat through the whole thing.

4/10 just because the acting was good from the parents especially Vera Farmiga as the Mother but if you want to see a movie about an evil 'child' go see Orphan. Now that's a movie that took an unoriginal concept and created a brilliant movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[remember]] watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a [[Video]] or DVD [[release]] [[yet]]? It's [[sacrilegious]] that this [[majesty]] of [[movie]] making has never been [[released]] while other [[rubbish]] has been. [[In]] fact this is the one [[John]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[released]]. In fact i haven't [[seen]] it on the TV [[either]] since the day i [[watched]] it. Kurt [[Russell]] was the [[perfect]] [[choice]] for the role of Elvis. This is [[definitely]] a role he was born to play. John carpenter's [[break]] from [[horror]] brought this gem that i'd love the TV to [[play]] again. It is well acted and well [[performed]] as far as the [[singing]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[greatest]] hits with gusto. I [[think]] this also was the [[film]] that formed the [[partnership]] with [[Russell]] and [[Carpenter]] which made them [[go]] on to make a number of [[great]] movies ([[Escape]] from [[New]] [[York]], The [[Thing]], [[Big]] [[trouble]] in little [[china]], and [[Escape]] from L.[[A]]. [[Someone]] has got to release this before [[someone]] does a remake or their own [[version]] of his [[life]], which i feel would not only tarnish the king but [[also]] [[ruin]] the [[magic]] that this one has. If this doesn't [[get]] [[released]] then we are gonna be in [[Heartbreak]] [[Hotel]]. I [[reminisce]] watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a [[Videos]] or DVD [[frees]] [[even]]? It's [[blasphemous]] that this [[empress]] of [[kino]] making has never been [[freed]] while other [[junk]] has been. [[Among]] fact this is the one [[Johannes]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[freed]]. In fact i haven't [[watched]] it on the TV [[nor]] since the day i [[saw]] it. Kurt [[Russel]] was the [[impeccable]] [[chosen]] for the role of Elvis. This is [[undoubtedly]] a role he was born to play. John carpenter's [[blackout]] from [[abomination]] brought this gem that i'd love the TV to [[gaming]] again. It is well acted and well [[perform]] as far as the [[singer]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[bigger]] hits with gusto. I [[reckon]] this also was the [[cinema]] that formed the [[collaboration]] with [[Russel]] and [[Woodworking]] which made them [[going]] on to make a number of [[wondrous]] movies ([[Flee]] from [[Novo]] [[Yorke]], The [[Stuff]], [[Massive]] [[hassle]] in little [[wah]], and [[Flee]] from L.[[una]]. [[Somebody]] has got to release this before [[everyone]] does a remake or their own [[stepping]] of his [[vie]], which i feel would not only tarnish the king but [[furthermore]] [[destroys]] the [[witchcraft]] that this one has. If this doesn't [[gets]] [[liberated]] then we are gonna be in [[Agony]] [[Guesthouse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How much could the general Hollywood director learn from this movie? All... when it comes to actually scaring people. This movies truly shows that it is possible to really frighten and scare a viewer, and that monstrous monsters and long knifes never will be the best way of achieving this. All who love a real psychological thriller must see this movie... it is the best of it's kind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While not quite as monstrously preposterous as later works, this slow-moving, repetitive giallo offers some nice touches in the first half, but grows more and more lethargic and silly as it stumbles to its lame denouement.

To be sure, the actors are above average - considering this is an Argento movie - and some moments show the director's visual skills, but whole sequences should've been cut and, basically, it's just the same exploitative trash as ever, wallowing in fake science and abnormal sexual depravity.

3 out of 10 genetic disorders --------------------------------------------- Result 2694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] OK, I am not a professional movie [[critic]] but come on...a true story!!!!

They are [[tunneling]] under another store to [[get]] [[underneath]] the bank and stumble across a [[tomb]]. At tomb with a passageway which goes [[directly]] under the [[bank]].

[[OK]], I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to [[go]] to sleep. [[Yeah]]!!! I am sure with all the [[adrenaline]] pumping through them they are going to just [[fall]] asleep.

This [[blows]] the [[whole]] [[picture]]!!!! [[How]] lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to [[pay]] to watch this one. OK, I am not a professional movie [[critique]] but come on...a true story!!!!

They are [[tunneled]] under another store to [[obtain]] [[below]] the bank and stumble across a [[gravesite]]. At tomb with a passageway which goes [[immediately]] under the [[banque]].

[[ALLRIGHT]], I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to [[going]] to sleep. [[Yep]]!!! I am sure with all the [[adrenalin]] pumping through them they are going to just [[fallen]] asleep.

This [[beatings]] the [[ensemble]] [[photograph]]!!!! [[Mode]] lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to [[salaried]] to watch this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well-done ghost story that will give you the creeps and some pretty fair scares along the way. The story unfolds slowly, building atmosphere all the way until you're ready to see the woman in black. You won't forget her once you've seen her. No gore, no knives, no hockey masks--just a well-constructed story that is best viewed at night with the lights out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly [[Steven]] Martin's "[[LA]] [[Story]]", which at [[least]] had the grace to be [[obviously]] [[fictional]] even [[though]] it starred his then-girlfriend playing his girlfriend in the [[film]].

[[Yes]], naive [[boys]] and [[girls]], "20 [[Dates]]" IS a mockumentary, [[although]] I am not [[absolutely]] certain that was Myles Berkowitz's intent when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[quickly]] realized that it [[would]] be pathetic and not [[funny]] [[unless]] he [[made]] the situations more and more [[ridiculous]]. As a [[result]], the whole [[thing]] has an [[uneasy]], cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As [[someone]] smartly pointed out, the [[film]] has two of the "[[dates]]" suing and putting [[restraining]] [[orders]] on Myles and [[yet]] they [[appear]] in the [[film]], which [[would]] be [[impossible]] as it [[would]] [[require]] a [[consent]] form. It [[also]] [[appears]] to me that the majority of women who [[appear]] as "the [[dates]]" are professional actresses (albiet not [[famous]] ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are [[simply]] too [[obviously]] pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in [[front]] of the [[camera]] to be average civilians.

[[Mr]]. Berkowitz makes a classic [[error]] in only [[casting]] this [[kind]] of very [[pretty]] thin actress, [[instead]] of [[utilizing]] a [[variety]] of believable women, which [[might]] have [[made]] the premise ([[even]] in a mockumentary) more [[believable]] and funnier. He [[also]] [[skates]] over what is [[probably]] his real-world [[problem]], and which is that both the [[movie]] [[character]] and the [[real]] [[world]] Myles Berkowitz [[appear]] to be functionally unemployed (his [[real]] [[life]] IMDb [[credits]] are [[practically]] non-existent, excepting this [[film]]). Even in the world of the [[movie]], his ex-wife divorced him for never being [[employed]]. I think the viewer ([[let]] alone [[Mr]]. Berkowitz's [[real]] [[life]] dates) are [[deserving]] of an explanation of he manages to [[live]] in one of the most [[expensive]] urban [[environments]] in the [[US]], in a luxury apartment, [[driving]] a fancy [[car]] and [[eating]] out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't [[seen]] to have any [[source]] of [[income]] whatsoever. (Is he drug [[dealer]]? Living off his [[rich]] [[parents]]? No clue!)

You can [[get]] away with most anything in a film, if the [[jokes]] are [[really]] funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly [[Stephens]] Martin's "[[LAS]] [[Fairytales]]", which at [[lowest]] had the grace to be [[notoriously]] [[mock]] even [[despite]] it starred his then-girlfriend playing his girlfriend in the [[filmmaking]].

[[Yep]], naive [[guy]] and [[daughters]], "20 [[Times]]" IS a mockumentary, [[while]] I am not [[totally]] certain that was Myles Berkowitz's intent when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[faster]] realized that it [[could]] be pathetic and not [[hilarious]] [[if]] he [[accomplished]] the situations more and more [[nonsensical]]. As a [[outcome]], the whole [[stuff]] has an [[uncomfortable]], cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As [[everybody]] smartly pointed out, the [[filmmaking]] has two of the "[[times]]" suing and putting [[restricting]] [[decrees]] on Myles and [[nevertheless]] they [[emerge]] in the [[flick]], which [[could]] be [[unable]] as it [[should]] [[requires]] a [[approval]] form. It [[furthermore]] [[seems]] to me that the majority of women who [[transpires]] as "the [[dating]]" are professional actresses (albiet not [[prestigious]] ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are [[straightforward]] too [[definitely]] pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in [[newsweek]] of the [[cameras]] to be average civilians.

[[Olli]]. Berkowitz makes a classic [[mistaken]] in only [[cast]] this [[genera]] of very [[quite]] thin actress, [[conversely]] of [[using]] a [[multitude]] of believable women, which [[apt]] have [[effected]] the premise ([[yet]] in a mockumentary) more [[dependable]] and funnier. He [[furthermore]] [[skaters]] over what is [[potentially]] his real-world [[issues]], and which is that both the [[filmmaking]] [[characteristics]] and the [[veritable]] [[monde]] Myles Berkowitz [[appearing]] to be functionally unemployed (his [[veritable]] [[lifetime]] IMDb [[appropriations]] are [[hardly]] non-existent, excepting this [[kino]]). Even in the world of the [[film]], his ex-wife divorced him for never being [[employing]]. I think the viewer ([[allowing]] alone [[Olli]]. Berkowitz's [[veritable]] [[lifetime]] dates) are [[merited]] of an explanation of he manages to [[inhabit]] in one of the most [[costly]] urban [[environs]] in the [[AMERICANS]], in a luxury apartment, [[drives]] a fancy [[cars]] and [[feeding]] out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't [[watched]] to have any [[wellspring]] of [[earnings]] whatsoever. (Is he drug [[salesperson]]? Living off his [[richer]] [[parent]]? No clue!)

You can [[gets]] away with most anything in a film, if the [[gags]] are [[genuinely]] funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This is one of those movies - like Dave, [[American]] Dreamer and Local [[Hero]] - that [[holds]] a viewer's interest [[time]] and again. [[Lightweight]] [[movies]] seldom [[win]] Oscars, but whoever did the [[casting]] for Soapdish [[deserves]] one. [[Even]] after one has [[seen]] the movie and knows what is [[coming]], it's [[still]] [[enjoyable]] to watch how the various plot [[facets]] [[develop]]. [[True]], all the [[drama]] is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitting]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My [[favorite]] line comes from Whoopi [[Goldberg]]: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I [[think]] it's [[unfortunate]] that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. This is one of those movies - like Dave, [[Americana]] Dreamer and Local [[Heroin]] - that [[held]] a viewer's interest [[period]] and again. [[Slight]] [[theater]] seldom [[wins]] Oscars, but whoever did the [[foundry]] for Soapdish [[merits]] one. [[Yet]] after one has [[watched]] the movie and knows what is [[forthcoming]], it's [[yet]] [[nice]] to watch how the various plot [[elements]] [[formulation]]. [[Genuine]], all the [[theater]] is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitted]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My [[preferential]] line comes from Whoopi [[Tucker]]: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I [[thought]] it's [[pathetic]] that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. --------------------------------------------- Result 2698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] gets both a 6/10 rating from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into [[consideration]], this movie WILL [[bore]] you. It's basically a family [[drama]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime channel, but put in a horror universe. The [[story]] and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the [[zombies]] and you'll have something just as melodramatic as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and [[idea]] is [[pretty]] original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your [[friends]] would [[joke]] about when you're half-drunk . . . but that [[joke]] [[actually]] [[got]] a theatrical [[release]]. The [[idea]] [[gets]] a 9/10 from me. The only [[reason]] it isn't [[perfect]] is because they [[could]] have [[taken]] it [[even]] further, but they didn't.

The [[mix]] of both is mixed. I thought it was [[funny]], but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT [[funny]]. I had my [[mom]] and [[little]] sister watch it with me and the jokes we [[made]] about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of [[utter]] genius, but there were also [[moments]] of pure boredom.

I sincerely [[hope]] that other [[movies]] take this [[kind]] of over-the-top [[risk]] and [[original]] [[ideas]]. I just can't [[say]] it was perfect, or even near it, because of the [[lack]] of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 This [[filmmaking]] gets both a 6/10 rating from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into [[scrutinize]], this movie WILL [[boring]] you. It's basically a family [[tragedy]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime channel, but put in a horror universe. The [[fairytales]] and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the [[walkers]] and you'll have something just as melodramatic as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and [[think]] is [[quite]] original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your [[friendships]] would [[kidding]] about when you're half-drunk . . . but that [[giggle]] [[indeed]] [[did]] a theatrical [[freed]]. The [[thoughts]] [[got]] a 9/10 from me. The only [[motif]] it isn't [[perfection]] is because they [[wo]] have [[took]] it [[yet]] further, but they didn't.

The [[blending]] of both is mixed. I thought it was [[hilarious]], but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT [[amusing]]. I had my [[mamma]] and [[tiny]] sister watch it with me and the jokes we [[brought]] about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of [[total]] genius, but there were also [[times]] of pure boredom.

I sincerely [[hopes]] that other [[cinema]] take this [[genre]] of over-the-top [[threat]] and [[preliminary]] [[reflections]]. I just can't [[says]] it was perfect, or even near it, because of the [[absence]] of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's a pretty good [[cast]], but the film has [[nowhere]] near the grace of the original Italian [[comedy]] "[[Big]] [[Deal]] on Madonna [[Street]]" Anyone looking for an [[entertaining]] caper [[film]] should visit the original. William [[Macy]] may be one of our [[greatest]] [[living]] [[actors]], but here he's put to [[little]] [[use]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel sorry for him [[trying]] to [[fill]] those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a [[young]] De Niro. The art [[direction]] is rich and textured but [[brings]] [[nothing]] to the [[story]], the [[extra]] bits they add to the story feel [[completely]] [[unnecessary]] and the things they [[take]] away are missed. [[Even]] [[starting]] the [[way]] they do seems [[bizarrely]] gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the [[original]]. Sam Rockwell has his [[odd]] and genial [[charm]] and Luis [[Guzman]] has that odd charisma, but the [[love]] story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too [[bad]] nobody has figured out how to make this [[movie]] as well as it was [[first]] made, but then again it's too [[bad]] we [[live]] in a [[culture]] where we feel [[like]] we [[need]] to remake [[amazing]] things [[instead]] of simply [[learning]] to savor the [[originals]]. It's a pretty good [[casting]], but the film has [[everywhere]] near the grace of the original Italian [[humour]] "[[Overwhelming]] [[Treat]] on Madonna [[Rue]]" Anyone looking for an [[amusing]] caper [[filmmaking]] should visit the original. William [[Tragedies]] may be one of our [[largest]] [[inhabit]] [[protagonists]], but here he's put to [[small]] [[usage]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel sorry for him [[try]] to [[populate]] those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a [[youthful]] De Niro. The art [[orientation]] is rich and textured but [[poses]] [[none]] to the [[history]], the [[additional]] bits they add to the story feel [[fully]] [[superfluous]] and the things they [[taking]] away are missed. [[Yet]] [[commencement]] the [[manner]] they do seems [[surprisingly]] gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the [[initial]]. Sam Rockwell has his [[unusual]] and genial [[charisma]] and Luis [[Munoz]] has that odd charisma, but the [[adored]] story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too [[negative]] nobody has figured out how to make this [[filmmaking]] as well as it was [[frst]] made, but then again it's too [[unfavorable]] we [[vivo]] in a [[cultures]] where we feel [[iike]] we [[gotta]] to remake [[staggering]] things [[alternatively]] of simply [[learns]] to savor the [[foreground]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Not the best of actors' movies.The [[director]] has [[concentrated]] on [[projected]] actor's stardom [[rather]] than giving a good [[entertainer]]. May be hero himself, his [[family]] and his [[sincere]] [[fans]] can [[enjoy]] it.But [[definitely]] it's not worth for neutral [[audience]].The [[fight]] sequences are a [[total]] [[comedy]].The dance moves in the song [[sequences]] are [[pathetic]]. The music is average.This [[film]] was the [[biggest]] flop for the actor. Inspite of the [[hype]] created over the movie, the [[movie]] [[failed]] [[miserably]]. Don't [[even]] think of [[watching]] this move even if you [[want]] to [[kill]] [[time]]. You can watch some [[cartoon]] instead.A [[good]] [[movie]] [[buff]] cannot digest this [[crap]] for 2 1/2 hours. Not the best of actors' movies.The [[superintendent]] has [[focusing]] on [[predicting]] actor's stardom [[comparatively]] than giving a good [[artists]]. May be hero himself, his [[families]] and his [[earnest]] [[lovers]] can [[enjoying]] it.But [[assuredly]] it's not worth for neutral [[spectators]].The [[struggles]] sequences are a [[whole]] [[humour]].The dance moves in the song [[sequence]] are [[woeful]]. The music is average.This [[movie]] was the [[strongest]] flop for the actor. Inspite of the [[fanfare]] created over the movie, the [[filmmaking]] [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]]. Don't [[yet]] think of [[staring]] this move even if you [[wanted]] to [[assassination]] [[times]]. You can watch some [[cartoons]] instead.A [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] [[buffy]] cannot digest this [[damnit]] for 2 1/2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this move was friggin hilarious!!! funniest I've seen in a while, akshay and john kick ass as always, and the chicks are hot too. the story is awesome, lots of great jokes, and whoever reviewed this before me is an idiot. to him i say that u are not of Indian background so u wouldn't understand the humor u moron. don't rate movies u don't understand. what did u watch, the subtitle version where majority of jokes are lost in translation? thats what i thought jackass.

akshay kumar is the best actor ever and proves once again his versatility, he can do not only action but comedy as well, and is excellent at it. john has proved himself as well, this is his first comedy role and he was also excellent at it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2702 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An intriguing premise of hand-drawn fantasy come to life in a child's fever dreams. However, I imagine the average nonfictional child is far more adept at scaring themselves than Bernard Rose is at riveting the viewer. The duel between Anna's two realities drags on far too long to sustain interest, especially considering that the little girl playing her is the most abrasive child actor I've ever seen.

Use only for kindling. --------------------------------------------- Result 2703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie. Most of the reviews have been bad, but most critics think a movie should be like an idea drama. This movie has a little bit of drama, but the rest is just clean fun and very entertaining. Forget about Julia Roberts being a Pretty Woman, Emma Roberts is a beautiful young lady and there is more to her than just that. Emma was so much fun to watch in the role of Nancy Drew. It is good to see a new face. I believe she will go far.

Nancy Drew may not be based upon the books, but the story is still good. There is also a good blend of other character actors and supporting actors like Pat Carroll, Barry Bostwick, Rachel Leigh Cook and Chris Kattan - not credited. I'm surprised Disney did not release this movie. Some people may not like this movie because it does not contain sex, violence, and cursing. This is a good family film which is rare in this day in time. So take your family, see this movie and judge for your self how good it is. I can't wait for the sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 2704 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After having seen the movie the first question arising in my mind was: Is this supposed to be irony or not? After reading a few comments about the character Doc Savage and the comic series, I knew this film was not meant to be ironic. So, the story tells us about an US-American Super-Doc saving a south American republic from evil. Sounds like a typical story. But this one comes in such an unrealistic way that it becomes ridiculous. The mandatory end-fight shows the worst presentation of martial arts I have ever seen. The film might be interesting for low budget movie designers as a bad example. --------------------------------------------- Result 2705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] First off, I had my [[doubts]] just [[looking]] at the DVD box and reading it saying that it was about of bunch of teens [[gathering]] at a [[lake]] where they will [[find]] do or [[something]]. [[Any]] [[movie]] that has a [[premise]] like this has [[failed]] [[miserably]], even as a slasher [[movie]], except for the first [[Friday]] the 13th.

I wanted to [[get]] up and stop [[watching]] the [[movie]] at [[least]] 10 [[times]], but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. Usually, I think every [[movie]] has something that you can take from it. This has [[nothing]].

Do yourself a favor, and [[find]] [[something]] constructive to do for 80 [[minutes]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or [[eat]] dirt. First off, I had my [[suspicions]] just [[searching]] at the DVD box and reading it saying that it was about of bunch of teens [[picking]] at a [[lakes]] where they will [[unearth]] do or [[anything]]. [[Everything]] [[filmmaking]] that has a [[supposition]] like this has [[faulted]] [[woefully]], even as a slasher [[filmmaking]], except for the first [[Yesterday]] the 13th.

I wanted to [[got]] up and stop [[staring]] the [[flick]] at [[slightest]] 10 [[moments]], but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. Usually, I think every [[filmmaking]] has something that you can take from it. This has [[none]].

Do yourself a favor, and [[finds]] [[somethings]] constructive to do for 80 [[mins]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or [[comer]] dirt. --------------------------------------------- Result 2706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ride with the Devil, like Ang Lee's later Brokeback Mountain, is a film of aesthetic and historical importance. Film lovers ought to see it at minimum twice as its artistic nuance is worthy to be over comprehended.

A perfect piece of art, surprising depth of humanity. I really don't recall another war film, will so capture you, will change your existing conception of history and politics, will restore your belief in humanity. After seeing so many killings, so many sufferings , you don't feel yourself numb, instead you treasure the bond between human beings more. The actors' performances haunt your heart, the music drives your mind. Some shoots, are not just some pictures, they transcend themselves, becoming the seeing of soul. Such is the true sense of film being a genre of art.

A film like this doesn't need long comments or reviews, everything it says by itself. Ovation to the cast which includes Tobey Maguire, Jeffrey Wright and Jewel Kilcher, the cinematographer and the composer of the beautiful and lyrical music, what an achievement! --------------------------------------------- Result 2707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This [[show]] is a [[great]] history [[story]]. It's has everything from [[slavery]],the [[way]] they were [[treated]], [[religion]], the [[ways]] Jews were [[sent]] into [[hiding]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[way]] [[women]] were [[treated]],[[including]] the [[daughters]]. Even down to [[homosexuality]]. The way the [[characters]] are [[intertwined]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so [[desperate]] to be [[loved]] that she [[destroys]] [[everyone]] [[around]] her.I am so glad they [[decided]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Although]] I [[would]] love to [[see]] the unedited [[version]]. Xica has [[become]] my [[Heroine]]. I [[look]] up to the way she [[uses]] her power to [[help]] all who [[seek]] it. I love all the [[characters]] and have [[found]] that they can [[relate]] to [[many]] people now in this century. I [[look]] forward to my Xica [[every]] night. It [[would]] be [[great]] to dub it in [[English]] so the [[Americans]] can [[love]] her too. This [[displaying]] is a [[huge]] history [[history]]. It's has everything from [[bondage]],the [[manner]] they were [[treating]], [[religions]], the [[modes]] Jews were [[sending]] into [[concealed]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[routes]] [[female]] were [[processed]],[[consisting]] the [[fille]]. Even down to [[buggery]]. The way the [[character]] are [[interconnected]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so [[despondent]] to be [[worshipped]] that she [[demolishing]] [[anybody]] [[about]] her.I am so glad they [[opted]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Despite]] I [[could]] love to [[behold]] the unedited [[stepping]]. Xica has [[becoming]] my [[Heroin]]. I [[glance]] up to the way she [[usage]] her power to [[aids]] all who [[trying]] it. I love all the [[nature]] and have [[find]] that they can [[pertain]] to [[several]] people now in this century. I [[peek]] forward to my Xica [[any]] night. It [[ought]] be [[prodigious]] to dub it in [[Brits]] so the [[America]] can [[likes]] her too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I really [[tried]] to like this [[movie]]. It deals with an important problem in any society: [[sex]] [[addiction]].

[[In]] this [[story]] we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. [[In]] this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his [[life]].

The [[production]] values are [[terrible]]; mainly the acting. [[Oh]], you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you [[might]] think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful [[wife]] [[stand]] all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she [[believe]] him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just [[pointless]] and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

[[Avoid]] this [[movie]]. Please, [[avoid]] it; it's not soft [[core]], it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic [[feature]]. It's a [[pretentious]] effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

[[Only]] [[Mrs]]. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't [[come]] back. I really [[attempt]] to like this [[movies]]. It deals with an important problem in any society: [[sexuality]] [[dependence]].

[[Throughout]] this [[saga]] we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. [[Throughout]] this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his [[living]].

The [[productivity]] values are [[abysmal]]; mainly the acting. [[Uhh]], you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you [[apt]] think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful [[femme]] [[stands]] all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she [[think]] him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just [[senseless]] and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

[[Avert]] this [[kino]]. Please, [[avert]] it; it's not soft [[basic]], it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic [[peculiarities]]. It's a [[conceited]] effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

[[Exclusively]] [[Franziska]]. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't [[coming]] back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I was in a [[bad]] [[frame]] of mind when I first [[saw]] this movie. For some [[reason]] it [[clicked]] on all my [[levels]], [[tensions]] in a family, [[loneliness]] and the [[want]] of someone to [[share]] your [[life]] with. It didn't hurt that the someone to [[share]] your [[life]] with was such a [[beautiful]] [[girl]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I also bought the sound track to this movie (very hard to [[get]]). [[Loved]] it and [[hope]] it will someday [[come]] out on DV I was in a [[unhealthy]] [[framework]] of mind when I first [[sawthe]] this movie. For some [[rationale]] it [[ticked]] on all my [[grades]], [[tension]] in a family, [[solitude]] and the [[wanting]] of someone to [[shares]] your [[living]] with. It didn't hurt that the someone to [[shares]] your [[living]] with was such a [[wondrous]] [[chick]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I also bought the sound track to this movie (very hard to [[got]]). [[Liked]] it and [[hopes]] it will someday [[arrive]] out on DV --------------------------------------------- Result 2710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] First off, I hadn't [[seen]] "The [[Blob]]" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an [[adult]] was an [[incredible]] experience. [[Pages]] [[could]] be [[written]] on its influence on [[horror]] [[films]] [[even]] [[today]]. And [[even]] more [[could]] be written on its social subtext with the 50s "[[fear]] of teenagers". But this [[simple]] little [[tale]] of interplanetary [[horror]] is still a [[damn]] [[fine]] scary movie if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all [[get]] out in our [[modern]] [[world]]. But "The [[Blob]]" [[packs]] in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored [[world]]. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and [[believe]] in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. First off, I hadn't [[saw]] "The [[Smudge]]" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an [[adulthood]] was an [[unthinkable]] experience. [[Page]] [[would]] be [[authored]] on its influence on [[terror]] [[movie]] [[yet]] [[yesterday]]. And [[yet]] more [[did]] be written on its social subtext with the 50s "[[scare]] of teenagers". But this [[mere]] little [[story]] of interplanetary [[monstrosity]] is still a [[dammit]] [[alright]] scary movie if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all [[obtain]] out in our [[fashionable]] [[monde]]. But "The [[Stain]]" [[packet]] in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored [[globe]]. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and [[think]] in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. --------------------------------------------- Result 2711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is no story! The plot is hopeless! A filmed based on a car with a stuck accelerator, no brakes, and a stuck automatic transmission gear lever cannot be good! I would have stopped that car within one minute whether I was in it or in the police car constantly following it. I feel sorry for the actors that had to put up with such a poor script. The few scenes that some similarity to action was heavily over-dramatized, and as far from reality you can get. In addition, there were a lot of blunders, for instance the hood of the runaway car, which was popped doing 100mph. At first it just folded over the windshield, like it would in reality, but then, afterwards, it blew off. The car was later in the movie observed with the hood on....

This film was nothing but annoying, stay away from it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Buster absolutely shines in this episode, which is the only vehicle I've seen towards the end of the career that allowed him to do the physical (and silent!) comedy that made him famous. It's still a shock to hear his gravelly voice in the talkie sequences - his voice is about the only thing I don't care for, as far as Buster is concerned - but his ability to take a pratfall is still unparalleled. He even repeats some of the gags used in his early two-reelers with Roscoe Arbuckle.

My deepest gratitude to Rod Serling for presenting us with this episode, and for giving Buster's genius full scope. He didn't have much time (one episode) to do it in, but this is a touching tribute to Hollywood's greatest genius. --------------------------------------------- Result 2713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The only thing that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al [[Gore]] is still an idiot. These "[[unchallenged]]" [[experts]] are [[unchallenged]] because a [[response]] to their [[inane]] [[hypotheses]] is generally [[beneath]] [[real]] science. This is mostly [[false]] [[science]] folks. The [[greatest]] [[source]] of greenhouse [[gases]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're [[willing]] to [[start]] sacrificing your [[brethren]] to [[save]] the [[world]], there's not a [[darn]] thing to be done. We've [[heard]] how the world was going to end as the [[result]] of [[man]] for more than 50 [[years]]. [[Fools]] publish a time [[line]] for their doomsday and when the [[time]] passes, nothing has happened. "An [[Inconvenient]] Truth" is just another [[vehicle]] with which a disingenuous faction of American society can peddle their poop.

And as to Al leaving the tobacco business because of his sister's [[death]] from [[cancer]], that is a load too. Al couldn't [[run]] his farm any better than he could [[run]] the [[country]]. He was [[losing]] [[money]] on the [[operation]] because he didn't [[care]] to farm when he [[could]] make more $ on [[speaking]] [[tours]]. The only [[global]] warming that is [[unchallenged]] is the hot air [[produced]] by this gasbag! The only thing that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al [[Gora]] is still an idiot. These "[[unquestionable]]" [[specialist]] are [[unnoticed]] because a [[answer]] to their [[trifling]] [[assumptions]] is generally [[underneath]] [[veritable]] science. This is mostly [[misguided]] [[veda]] folks. The [[highest]] [[origin]] of greenhouse [[gaz]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're [[desirous]] to [[commencement]] sacrificing your [[brothers]] to [[rescuing]] the [[globe]], there's not a [[thin]] thing to be done. We've [[hear]] how the world was going to end as the [[outcome]] of [[bloke]] for more than 50 [[olds]]. [[Pigeons]] publish a time [[iine]] for their doomsday and when the [[period]] passes, nothing has happened. "An [[Embarrassing]] Truth" is just another [[automobile]] with which a disingenuous faction of American society can peddle their poop.

And as to Al leaving the tobacco business because of his sister's [[die]] from [[tumour]], that is a load too. Al couldn't [[executes]] his farm any better than he could [[executes]] the [[nation]]. He was [[loses]] [[moneys]] on the [[functioning]] because he didn't [[healthcare]] to farm when he [[wo]] make more $ on [[speak]] [[voyage]]. The only [[international]] warming that is [[undisputed]] is the hot air [[generated]] by this gasbag! --------------------------------------------- Result 2714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctivly help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I gaurentee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2715 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite [[disappointed]]. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The visuals are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite [[disappoint]]. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The visuals are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. --------------------------------------------- Result 2716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[wonderful]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very [[wholesome]] yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors [[take]] the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[wondrous]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very [[healthier]] yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors [[taking]] the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 2717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] THE [[NOTORIOUS]] BETTIE [[PAGE]] [[Written]] by [[Mary]] Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has [[always]] been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? [[Especially]] when that person [[eventually]] succumbed to a split personality disorder in her [[latter]] [[years]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[shy]] away from [[showing]] the push/pull [[nature]] of THE [[NOTORIOUS]] BETTIE [[PAGE]]. You [[allow]] the [[character]] to [[drift]] back and forth between the healing [[forgiveness]] of the power of God and the church and the [[seductive]] illusion of [[control]] and [[dominance]] [[afforded]] to Page during her [[years]] as a pinup [[model]]. By doing so, audiences are [[offered]] a [[complex]] [[character]] that is [[propelled]] forward by a [[desire]] to [[leave]] her [[difficult]] past with a naive enjoyment in others' [[lust]] for her and a [[struggle]] to reconcile her image in the [[eyes]] of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot [[mostly]] in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of [[color]]), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, [[humorous]] comedy, making the film an [[enjoyable]] experience and [[also]] one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the [[corruption]] of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably [[felt]] during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate director who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[surprisingly]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her [[skin]]. [[Whereas]] most directors, perhaps most male directors, [[would]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of atrocities that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much [[compassion]] for her character, her actress and her audience. From [[fragility]], Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. THE [[PROVERBIAL]] BETTIE [[NEWSWEEK]] [[Typed]] by [[Mari]] Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has [[unceasingly]] been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? [[Namely]] when that person [[ultimately]] succumbed to a split personality disorder in her [[latest]] [[olds]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[coy]] away from [[proving]] the push/pull [[traits]] of THE [[INFAMOUS]] BETTIE [[NEWSWEEK]]. You [[permitted]] the [[characters]] to [[drifting]] back and forth between the healing [[pardon]] of the power of God and the church and the [[tempting]] illusion of [[monitoring]] and [[supremacy]] [[attributed]] to Page during her [[ages]] as a pinup [[modelling]]. By doing so, audiences are [[delivering]] a [[tricky]] [[nature]] that is [[fueled]] forward by a [[wishing]] to [[let]] her [[problematic]] past with a naive enjoyment in others' [[thirst]] for her and a [[fight]] to reconcile her image in the [[eye]] of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot [[basically]] in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of [[coloration]]), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, [[funny]] comedy, making the film an [[pleasant]] experience and [[similarly]] one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the [[bribery]] of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably [[deemed]] during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate director who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[insanely]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her [[epidermis]]. [[Albeit]] most directors, perhaps most male directors, [[ought]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of atrocities that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much [[sympathy]] for her character, her actress and her audience. From [[frailty]], Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. --------------------------------------------- Result 2718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Normally I would never rent a movie like this, because you know it's going to be bad just by looking at the box. I rented seven movies at the same time, including Nightmare on Elm Street 5, 6 and Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Unfortunately, when I got home I found out the videostore-guy gave me the wrong tape. In the box of Wes Craven's New Nightmare I found this lame movie.

This movie is incredibly boring, the acting is bad and the plot doesn't make any sense. It's hard to write a good review, because I have no idea what the movie was really about. At the end of the movie you have more questions then answers.

On 'Max Power's Scale of 1 to 10' I rate this movie: 1

PS I would like to correct Corinthian's review (right below mine). He says Robert Englund is ripping off lingerie, riding horses naked, etc. The guy that did those things was Mahmoud, played by Juliano Mer, not by Robert Englund. --------------------------------------------- Result 2719 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Heart pounding erotic drama are the words that come to mind when I think of "Secret Games". It becomes more erotic as the film goes along and at one point blew me away! I didn't expect the delightful scene I was about to encounter. The "call girl" has her first customer and what a customer! One of the most erotic lesbian scenes I have ever seen. The husband should have listened to his wife and perhaps she wouldn't have gone on this erotic journey. It turned out to cost them in the end but, it was one exciting ride! GO SEE THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] OK well i found this [[movie]] in my [[dads]] old pile of movies and it [[looked]] pretty good from the cover but the [[movie]] actually sucked!! OK the [[first]] story with the swimmer was pretty good but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was completely [[retarded]]! It wasn't [[even]] scary! His dream sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was completely [[retarded]] too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news guy and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she stabbed him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not even going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that scary but the idea of the story was pretty cool..uh yeah the girl gets possessed and she kills all her classmates or something. [[Then]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their dreams on the bus(Ha). The End. OK well i found this [[filmmaking]] in my [[daddies]] old pile of movies and it [[seemed]] pretty good from the cover but the [[filmmaking]] actually sucked!! OK the [[outset]] story with the swimmer was pretty good but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was completely [[nutcase]]! It wasn't [[yet]] scary! His dream sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was completely [[nutcase]] too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news guy and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she stabbed him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not even going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that scary but the idea of the story was pretty cool..uh yeah the girl gets possessed and she kills all her classmates or something. [[Afterward]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their dreams on the bus(Ha). The End. --------------------------------------------- Result 2721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Out of all the Princess [[stories]] Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most [[enduring]] [[appeal]]. I can't really [[say]] why, but for some [[reason]], [[generation]] after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[girl]], I wanted [[nothing]] more than to be Cinderella with her [[glass]] slipper- it was my [[absolute]] [[favorite]] costume.

[[Honestly]], I don't think there is any story that more [[realizes]] the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of [[daily]] [[life]] and find [[someone]] who [[sees]] you as no one else ever had? The [[story]] is older than the English [[language]] and [[somehow]] it [[still]] [[rings]] [[true]].

As for the [[characters]], if [[nothing]] else, Disney can make a [[wonderful]] villain. [[Lady]] Tremaine is evil to the [[T]], in a wonderfully [[calculating]], not overtly [[physical]] way. Her cutting tongue and [[eyes]] do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to [[strike]] [[fear]] into your [[heart]]. The animal [[friends]] [[tend]] to grate, [[especially]] that idiotic Gus. I [[would]] have cheered had he [[met]] his [[fate]] in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at [[times]]. [[However]], she just lacked the [[drive]] to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It [[seems]] the only [[reason]] [[things]] work out in the [[end]] for Cindy is that everything sort of [[falls]] to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

[[Which]] [[brings]] me to the [[music]], which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my [[favorite]] of any Disney heroine. Some big standards [[originated]] here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a [[wonderful]] [[heartfelt]] [[story]] with a [[ton]] of musical highlights. While it is [[lacking]] in some [[character]] development, it does provide some [[classic]] [[villains]] and [[excellent]] [[voice]] [[work]]. If you are feeling [[sick]] at heart, pop it in- it'll [[warm]] you up and make you [[hum]] Mmm Mmm [[Good]]!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- [[Happy]] Birthday! Out of all the Princess [[narratives]] Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most [[sustainable]] [[appealing]]. I can't really [[tell]] why, but for some [[cause]], [[jill]] after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[chick]], I wanted [[anything]] more than to be Cinderella with her [[glassware]] slipper- it was my [[utter]] [[preferred]] costume.

[[Openly]], I don't think there is any story that more [[understands]] the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of [[everyday]] [[lifetime]] and find [[whoever]] who [[believes]] you as no one else ever had? The [[narratives]] is older than the English [[linguistics]] and [[someplace]] it [[however]] [[ring]] [[truthful]].

As for the [[attribute]], if [[anything]] else, Disney can make a [[gorgeous]] villain. [[Ladies]] Tremaine is evil to the [[ton]], in a wonderfully [[computing]], not overtly [[physics]] way. Her cutting tongue and [[eye]] do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to [[hitting]] [[scare]] into your [[heartland]]. The animal [[buddies]] [[tending]] to grate, [[mostly]] that idiotic Gus. I [[could]] have cheered had he [[complied]] his [[fates]] in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at [[time]]. [[Still]], she just lacked the [[driving]] to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It [[looks]] the only [[motives]] [[aspects]] work out in the [[terminating]] for Cindy is that everything sort of [[waterfalls]] to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

[[Whom]] [[poses]] me to the [[musician]], which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my [[prefers]] of any Disney heroine. Some big standards [[origin]] here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a [[brilliant]] [[deepest]] [[conte]] with a [[t]] of musical highlights. While it is [[shortage]] in some [[nature]] development, it does provide some [[classical]] [[thugs]] and [[super]] [[voices]] [[cooperate]]. If you are feeling [[sicker]] at heart, pop it in- it'll [[warming]] you up and make you [[humming]] Mmm Mmm [[Well]]!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- [[Pleased]] Birthday! --------------------------------------------- Result 2722 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Stupid]], Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Jolie]] is probably one of the most talented actress' [[today]], but a [[movie]] like this isn't just worth her [[time]]. She [[deserves]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. [[Sorry]], but i don't feel like writing a [[review]] for this.

I [[give]] it NO [[stars]] out of *****. [[Nonsensical]], Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Juli]] is probably one of the most talented actress' [[hoy]], but a [[kino]] like this isn't just worth her [[period]]. She [[merits]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. [[Apology]], but i don't feel like writing a [[revisions]] for this.

I [[lend]] it NO [[superstar]] out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "Kings and Queen" is a [[bloated]] French drama that rambles on for an [[interminable]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no [[discernible]] point or [[purpose]].

The [[film]] [[features]] two [[stories]] that [[seem]] unrelated at first but which eventually [[connect]] with one another about [[halfway]] through the [[movie]]. The first [[centers]] [[around]] [[Nora]] and her struggles with various men in her [[life]], [[including]] an elderly father who [[discovers]] he has only a few days [[left]] to live. The other story [[involves]] a young man named Ismael, a violinist who [[finds]] himself placed - [[unfairly]], he [[believes]] - in a mental [[institution]] through the [[machinations]] of an [[unknown]] third [[party]]. After traveling along on [[separate]] [[tracks]] for awhile, these two narrative strands [[eventually]] come together when we [[learn]] that [[Ismael]] is a [[former]] lover of Nora's and the [[man]] she has [[chosen]] to adopt her [[son]] from an [[earlier]], tragic [[relationship]].

With a [[bit]] more [[focus]] and a [[considerable]] [[amount]] of streamlining, "Kings and [[Queen]]" might have been a [[potent]], engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most [[part]], [[complex]] and touching. But, taken as a whole, the [[film]] meanders and maunders to such an extent that, [[quite]] frankly, it begins to wreak [[havoc]] on our patience and to wear out its [[welcome]] early on. [[Even]] more distressing is the [[fact]] that, even [[though]] we [[spend]] what [[seems]] like a [[mild]] eternity in the [[company]] of these people, we really don't know [[quite]] what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For [[instance]], Nora's [[father]], on his deathbed, [[writes]] a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that [[simply]] doesn't gibe with the [[woman]] we've been [[looking]] at for well over two [[hours]]. Nora is [[admittedly]] no [[Mother]] [[Theresa]] (then, again, who is?), but she [[certainly]] doesn't [[deserve]] the invective [[thrown]] at her by her very own [[father]]. Nora could be [[accused]] of being [[confused]], [[indecisive]], a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her [[father]] [[wishing]] he could give her his [[cancer]] and [[make]] her [[die]] in his place? I don't [[think]] so.

[[Perhaps]] this [[film]] is simply operating at a [[level]] of [[depth]] that I was [[unable]] to fathom. But my [[suspicion]] is that [[even]] [[writer]] Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble [[fully]] [[explaining]] their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more [[enlightened]] at the end than he was at the [[beginning]]. "Kings and Queen" is a [[swollen]] French drama that rambles on for an [[unending]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no [[conspicuous]] point or [[targeted]].

The [[filmmaking]] [[traits]] two [[story]] that [[appears]] unrelated at first but which eventually [[connecting]] with one another about [[midway]] through the [[film]]. The first [[facility]] [[throughout]] [[Orthe]] and her struggles with various men in her [[living]], [[include]] an elderly father who [[finds]] he has only a few days [[gauche]] to live. The other story [[includes]] a young man named Ismael, a violinist who [[find]] himself placed - [[wrongfully]], he [[feels]] - in a mental [[institutions]] through the [[intrigues]] of an [[undisclosed]] third [[parties]]. After traveling along on [[segregated]] [[runways]] for awhile, these two narrative strands [[ultimately]] come together when we [[learns]] that [[Ishmael]] is a [[past]] lover of Nora's and the [[guy]] she has [[choose]] to adopt her [[sons]] from an [[ago]], tragic [[relationships]].

With a [[bitten]] more [[concentrations]] and a [[notable]] [[sums]] of streamlining, "Kings and [[Quinn]]" might have been a [[mighty]], engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most [[party]], [[intricate]] and touching. But, taken as a whole, the [[flick]] meanders and maunders to such an extent that, [[perfectly]] frankly, it begins to wreak [[mayhem]] on our patience and to wear out its [[salute]] early on. [[Yet]] more distressing is the [[facto]] that, even [[albeit]] we [[expenditures]] what [[looks]] like a [[gentle]] eternity in the [[businesses]] of these people, we really don't know [[pretty]] what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For [[lawsuit]], Nora's [[fathers]], on his deathbed, [[writing]] a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that [[exclusively]] doesn't gibe with the [[femme]] we've been [[searching]] at for well over two [[hour]]. Nora is [[assuredly]] no [[Mom]] [[Therese]] (then, again, who is?), but she [[arguably]] doesn't [[deserved]] the invective [[threw]] at her by her very own [[pere]]. Nora could be [[prosecuted]] of being [[bewildered]], [[inconclusive]], a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her [[fathers]] [[wanting]] he could give her his [[tumour]] and [[deliver]] her [[deaths]] in his place? I don't [[believe]] so.

[[Possibly]] this [[filmmaking]] is simply operating at a [[tier]] of [[depths]] that I was [[incompetent]] to fathom. But my [[distrust]] is that [[yet]] [[scriptwriter]] Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble [[absolutely]] [[clarified]] their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more [[apprised]] at the end than he was at the [[begin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It does seem like this [[film]] is polarizing us. You [[either]] love it or [[hate]] it. I [[loved]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that [[said]], you just [[gotta]] "feel" this one.

[[Also]], [[early]] in the film, [[Tom]] Cruise [[shows]] his girlfriend a painting [[done]] by Monet--an [[impressionist]] [[painter]]. Monet's [[style]] is to paint in [[little]] dabs so up close the [[painting]] [[looks]] like a mess, but from a distance, you can [[tell]] what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla [[sky]]". I [[believe]] this is a hint to the moviegoer. This [[movie]] is like that impressionist [[painting]]. It's impressionist [[filmmaking]]! And it's no coincidence that the title of the [[movie]] refers to that painting.

This is not your [[typical]] linear plot. It [[requires]] more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not [[always]] [[going]] to be sure what's going on. But at the [[end]], all is explained.

You will need to [[concentrate]] on this movie but I [[think]] people are making the [[mistake]] of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should [[think]] about it. [[If]] you [[try]] to [[figure]] it out as it's unfolding, you will [[overwhelm]] yourself. Just [[let]] it happen..."[[go]]" with it...[[keep]] an [[open]] mind. [[Remember]] what you see and save the analysis for [[later]].

I found all the performances [[top]] notch and thought it to be [[tremendously]] [[unique]], [[wildly]] [[creative]], and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't [[enjoy]] it. It appeals to a certain taste. [[If]] you [[like]] existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, [[challenging]], spiritual movies, then [[see]] it. [[If]] you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will [[surely]] enjoy it. It does seem like this [[movie]] is polarizing us. You [[neither]] love it or [[dislikes]] it. I [[cared]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that [[told]], you just [[ought]] "feel" this one.

[[Moreover]], [[quickly]] in the film, [[Thom]] Cruise [[displaying]] his girlfriend a painting [[performed]] by Monet--an [[impressionistic]] [[painters]]. Monet's [[stylistic]] is to paint in [[petite]] dabs so up close the [[paint]] [[seems]] like a mess, but from a distance, you can [[say]] what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla [[skye]]". I [[reckon]] this is a hint to the moviegoer. This [[movies]] is like that impressionist [[paints]]. It's impressionist [[movie]]! And it's no coincidence that the title of the [[film]] refers to that painting.

This is not your [[classic]] linear plot. It [[require]] more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not [[constantly]] [[gonna]] to be sure what's going on. But at the [[termination]], all is explained.

You will need to [[centred]] on this movie but I [[believe]] people are making the [[blunder]] of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should [[ideas]] about it. [[Though]] you [[tried]] to [[silhouette]] it out as it's unfolding, you will [[submerge]] yourself. Just [[leave]] it happen..."[[going]]" with it...[[conserving]] an [[opens]] mind. [[Remembers]] what you see and save the analysis for [[afterward]].

I found all the performances [[superior]] notch and thought it to be [[unbelievably]] [[sole]], [[cruelly]] [[imaginative]], and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't [[enjoys]] it. It appeals to a certain taste. [[Unless]] you [[fond]] existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, [[defying]], spiritual movies, then [[seeing]] it. [[Unless]] you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will [[probably]] enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just finished watching this movie and I found it was basically just not funny at all.

I'm an RPG Gamer (computer type, none of the DnD tabletop stuff) but I found none of the jokes in this funny at all.

Some of the scenes seemed to drag out a lot (tilt and zoom could've been cut down to 5seconds rather than over a minute) and it feels as though the director was just trying to fill in time.

I think I laughed a total of 2-3 times in the entire movie.

The acting itself wasn't all that bad, around the standard that a B Grade movie should have.

I'd suggest not bothering with this movie unless you're a huge DnD fan and even then it would probably be best to steer clear of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie appears to have been made by someone with some good ideas but who also never had made a movie before nor had they considered that a script should be edited or even funny. When I saw this film, I saw it for John Candy and assumed, incorrectly, that it would be hilarious. Instead, there was a stupid plot about mind control and so many flat, unfunny moments. And, to top it off, Candy delivered some of the crudest lines I had ever heard up to that time. So, despite a potentially funny cast and story idea, we are left with an amateurish and crude movie that will probably be too stupid for the average adult, though teens will probably find a few laughs. It's really a shame--it could have been so much better. I mean, with Eugene Levy, Joe Flaherty and John Candy it SHOULD have been wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked this movie I saw the original classic a few times but could hardly remember any details. I think this movie is much better than the cartoon its not so black and white as it. I specially liked how they made the grinch such a complete character and gave a cause of why he was the way he was, the villain in this movie was not the actual Grinch but the Major, much different than the original cartoon. Jim Carrey was perfect for the part all in all a great movie made for both kids and adults alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 2728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] The [[basic]] plot in this [[movie]] isn't bad. A [[lady]] makes it [[big]] and [[comes]] back to her alma mater to be [[adored]]. But, [[despite]] good acting by [[Robert]] [[Young]] and Eve Arden, the movie is a [[mess]]. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the [[director]] or both, as her performance is just [[awful]]. Instead of being a [[real]] [[person]], she does a [[wonderful]] impersonation of a deer [[caught]] in the [[headlights]]. [[In]] other words, she [[stares]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[stunned]]" [[expression]]. After just a few minutes it [[really]] [[became]] [[annoying]] for me. Now this is [[certainly]] not the only Crawford [[film]] I dislike for her performance, as she had done more than her [[share]] of overacting--in [[films]] such as JOHNNY GUITAR or [[many]] of her [[later]] [[films]], such as BERSERK! My [[advice]] is to try a [[different]] Crawford film--there [[certainly]] were [[better]]. The [[fundamental]] plot in this [[filmmaking]] isn't bad. A [[dame]] makes it [[grande]] and [[occurs]] back to her alma mater to be [[worshiped]]. But, [[while]] good acting by [[Roberta]] [[Youths]] and Eve Arden, the movie is a [[chaos]]. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the [[superintendent]] or both, as her performance is just [[abhorrent]]. Instead of being a [[actual]] [[persona]], she does a [[sumptuous]] impersonation of a deer [[catch]] in the [[spotlights]]. [[Across]] other words, she [[glances]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[surprised]]" [[expressions]]. After just a few minutes it [[genuinely]] [[came]] [[irritating]] for me. Now this is [[definitely]] not the only Crawford [[flick]] I dislike for her performance, as she had done more than her [[exchange]] of overacting--in [[cinematographic]] such as JOHNNY GUITAR or [[various]] of her [[subsequent]] [[movies]], such as BERSERK! My [[tips]] is to try a [[varying]] Crawford film--there [[unquestionably]] were [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] And this is a [[great]] rock'n'roll movie in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate movies in which kids [[want]] to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday [[Weld]] gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, [[repeat]] the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the [[elements]] of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the [[great]] stoopid [[movies]] of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new [[DVD]] to a friend who could only [[remember]] [[seeing]] parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the [[great]] movies to be watching drunk, not the [[least]] for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. And this is a [[wondrous]] rock'n'roll movie in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate movies in which kids [[wanna]] to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday [[Soldering]] gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, [[repetition]] the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the [[ingredients]] of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the [[wondrous]] stoopid [[cinematography]] of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new [[DVDS]] to a friend who could only [[remembering]] [[witnessing]] parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the [[huge]] movies to be watching drunk, not the [[slightest]] for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 2730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[John]] Boorman's 1998 The [[General]] was hailed as a major comeback, though it's [[hard]] to [[see]] why on the [[evidence]] of the [[film]] itself. One of three [[films]] [[made]] that year about [[famed]] Northern Irish criminal Martin Cahill ([[alongside]] [[Ordinary]] [[Decent]] Criminal and Vicious Circles), it has an [[abundance]] of [[incident]] and style (the [[film]] was shot in [[colour]] but [[released]] in b&w Scope in some [[territories]]) but makes [[absolutely]] no impact and just goes on forever. With a [[main]] character who threatens witnesses, [[car]] bombs [[doctors]], causes a [[hundred]] people to lose their [[jobs]], [[tries]] to [[buy]] off the sexually abused [[daughter]] of one of his gang to [[keep]] out of [[jail]] and [[nails]] one of his own to a [[snooker]] table [[yet]] still remains a popular local legend an [[attractive]] enough [[personality]] for his wife to not only [[approve]] but actually suggest a [[ménage]] a trios with her [[sister]], it [[needs]] a charismatic central performance to [[sell]] the [[character]] and the [[film]]. It doesn't [[get]] it. [[Instead]], it's [[lumbered]] with what may well be [[Brendan]] Gleeson's [[worst]] and most disinterested performance: he [[delivers]] his lines and stands in the right [[place]] but there's nothing to suggest [[either]] a local [[hero]] or the [[inner]] workings of a [[complex]] [[character]]. On the [[plus]] side, this [[helps]] not to overglamorize a [[character]] who is nothing more than an egotistical [[thug]], but it's at odds with a [[script]] that seems to be [[expecting]] us to [[love]] him and his antics.

There's a [[minor]] section that [[picks]] up interest when the IRA whips up a [[local]] [[hate]] [[campaign]] against the 'General' and his [[men]], painting them as 'anti-social' drug dealers [[purely]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a [[robbery]] with them, but its temporary resolution is so vaguely shot - something to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and [[joining]] the [[protesters]] which we're [[expected]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just thrown away. Things are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls [[apart]], but by then it's too late to really [[care]]. Adrian Dunbar, [[Maria]] Doyle Kennedy and the [[gorgeous]] Angeline [[Ball]] do good [[work]] in adoring supporting roles, but Jon Voight's hammy Garda [[beat]] [[cop]] [[seems]] to be there more for American [[sales]] than moral [[balance]], overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. [[Giovanni]] Boorman's 1998 The [[Generals]] was hailed as a major comeback, though it's [[laborious]] to [[seeing]] why on the [[testimony]] of the [[cinema]] itself. One of three [[film]] [[introduced]] that year about [[commemorated]] Northern Irish criminal Martin Cahill ([[beside]] [[Everyday]] [[Presentable]] Criminal and Vicious Circles), it has an [[plentiful]] of [[mishap]] and style (the [[filmmaking]] was shot in [[color]] but [[emitted]] in b&w Scope in some [[lands]]) but makes [[abundantly]] no impact and just goes on forever. With a [[leading]] character who threatens witnesses, [[automobiles]] bombs [[physician]], causes a [[hundreds]] people to lose their [[labor]], [[attempt]] to [[purchasing]] off the sexually abused [[girl]] of one of his gang to [[retaining]] out of [[imprisonment]] and [[fingernails]] one of his own to a [[billiard]] table [[still]] still remains a popular local legend an [[seductive]] enough [[persona]] for his wife to not only [[adopt]] but actually suggest a [[menage]] a trios with her [[sisters]], it [[gotta]] a charismatic central performance to [[sells]] the [[trait]] and the [[flick]]. It doesn't [[obtains]] it. [[However]], it's [[saddled]] with what may well be [[Conor]] Gleeson's [[worse]] and most disinterested performance: he [[provide]] his lines and stands in the right [[placing]] but there's nothing to suggest [[neither]] a local [[heroin]] or the [[indoor]] workings of a [[convoluted]] [[personages]]. On the [[longer]] side, this [[succour]] not to overglamorize a [[nature]] who is nothing more than an egotistical [[hooligan]], but it's at odds with a [[hyphen]] that seems to be [[awaited]] us to [[amore]] him and his antics.

There's a [[smaller]] section that [[selects]] up interest when the IRA whips up a [[locale]] [[hates]] [[campaigns]] against the 'General' and his [[man]], painting them as 'anti-social' drug dealers [[strictly]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a [[theft]] with them, but its temporary resolution is so vaguely shot - something to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and [[joined]] the [[demonstrators]] which we're [[scheduled]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just thrown away. Things are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls [[also]], but by then it's too late to really [[healthcare]]. Adrian Dunbar, [[Mario]] Doyle Kennedy and the [[sumptuous]] Angeline [[Ballon]] do good [[collaboration]] in adoring supporting roles, but Jon Voight's hammy Garda [[overpower]] [[police]] [[seem]] to be there more for American [[sale]] than moral [[equilibrium]], overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. --------------------------------------------- Result 2731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[finest]] film ever made in Indian [[Cinema]]. Directed by the [[great]] director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[tells]] the Real-life [[Scenario]] of Mumbai [[Police]] of the 70s. Unlike any [[Police]] of other cities in India, [[Mumbai]] Police [[encompasses]] a [[Different]] system [[altogether]]. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with [[real]] life approach of [[Mumbai]] Police Environment.

Amongst [[various]] Police officers & colleagues, the [[film]] [[describes]] the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Cop]] coming from a poor family. His father is a [[harsh]] Police [[Constable]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards [[immediate]] action against [[crime]], is an [[inert]] [[craving]] for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here [[revolved]] in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against [[crime]] are trampled by his [[seniors]].This [[leads]] to [[frustrations]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is [[still]] [[alive]], as he [[constantly]] [[fights]] the system. He is [[aware]] of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly [[associated]] by far [[end]]. His compromise towards [[unethical]] practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The [[Direction]] is a [[master]] [[piece]] & [[thoroughly]] hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's [[house]] to arrest him, followed by short [[conversation]] which is [[fantastic]]. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. [[Alcoholism]], [[Corruption]], [[Political]] Influence, Courage, [[Deceptions]] all are integral part of Mumbai police [[even]] today. Those aspects are dealt [[brilliantly]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[man]] [[show]], Om Puri [[portraying]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[emotions]] [[absolutely]] [[brilliantly]]. "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[meanest]] film ever made in Indian [[Film]]. Directed by the [[excellent]] director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[says]] the Real-life [[Screenplay]] of Mumbai [[Constabulary]] of the 70s. Unlike any [[Constabulary]] of other cities in India, [[Hyderabad]] Police [[involves]] a [[Distinct]] system [[entirely]]. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with [[actual]] life approach of [[Bangalore]] Police Environment.

Amongst [[several]] Police officers & colleagues, the [[cinematography]] [[described]] the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Police]] coming from a poor family. His father is a [[severe]] Police [[Constables]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards [[instant]] action against [[offence]], is an [[idle]] [[envy]] for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here [[turned]] in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against [[offence]] are trampled by his [[elders]].This [[leeds]] to [[disappointments]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is [[however]] [[vivo]], as he [[regularly]] [[wrestling]] the system. He is [[conscious]] of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly [[related]] by far [[terminate]]. His compromise towards [[immoral]] practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The [[Directorate]] is a [[masters]] [[slice]] & [[intently]] hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's [[domicile]] to arrest him, followed by short [[schmooze]] which is [[unbelievable]]. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. [[Alcohol]], [[Bribery]], [[Politicians]] Influence, Courage, [[Disappointments]] all are integral part of Mumbai police [[yet]] today. Those aspects are dealt [[admirably]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[males]] [[demonstrate]], Om Puri [[outlining]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[sentiments]] [[downright]] [[admirably]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I [[stumbled]] on this late last night n TCM.

Hadn't [[seen]] it [[since]] it [[came]] out originally, but had never [[forgotten]] it.

I had [[completely]] [[forgotten]] how [[gorgeous]] and [[talented]] Signe Hasso was when she was [[still]] young, [[ditto]] for [[Shelly]] Winters before she balooned out.

Ronald Coleman, [[though]], was the quintessential state actor of his [[time]] - I had read Othello in [[high]] [[school]] [[English]] - and [[HATED]] it. After [[seeing]] "A [[Double]] [[Life]]" I read it again and [[finally]] understood what the play was about.

The Gordon/Kanin [[writing]] team was at its [[peak]] when this [[script]] was [[done]] -

A [[movie]] well worth remembering and rewatching, I [[faltered]] on this late last night n TCM.

Hadn't [[watched]] it [[because]] it [[arrived]] out originally, but had never [[omitted]] it.

I had [[altogether]] [[disregarded]] how [[belle]] and [[prodigy]] Signe Hasso was when she was [[however]] young, [[idem]] for [[Shelley]] Winters before she balooned out.

Ronald Coleman, [[if]], was the quintessential state actor of his [[times]] - I had read Othello in [[higher]] [[tuition]] [[Brits]] - and [[LOATHED]] it. After [[see]] "A [[Twice]] [[Living]]" I read it again and [[eventually]] understood what the play was about.

The Gordon/Kanin [[write]] team was at its [[crest]] when this [[hyphen]] was [[doing]] -

A [[movies]] well worth remembering and rewatching, --------------------------------------------- Result 2733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I tend to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all [[films]] starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are [[always]] entertaining. There is no rule without exception, [[however]], as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's [[Possessed]]" (1974) proves. [[While]] the [[film]] does have the [[specific]] Naschy-flick-charm, it [[sadly]] drags far too much and [[gets]] really, really [[dull]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets [[quite]] [[boring]] throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the [[case]] with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! I tend to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all [[movie]] starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are [[permanently]] entertaining. There is no rule without exception, [[yet]], as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's [[Owned]]" (1974) proves. [[Whereas]] the [[filmmaking]] does have the [[peculiar]] Naschy-flick-charm, it [[unluckily]] drags far too much and [[got]] really, really [[boring]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets [[rather]] [[tiresome]] throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the [[instances]] with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! --------------------------------------------- Result 2734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Maybe it's the dubbing, or maybe it's the endless scenes of people crying, moaning or otherwise carrying on, but I found Europa '51 to be one of the most overwrought (and therefore annoying) films I've ever seen. The film starts out promisingly if familiarly, as mom Ingrid Bergman is too busy to spend time with her spoiled brat of a son (Sandro Franchina). Whilst mummy and daddy (bland Alexander Knox) entertain their guests at a dinner party, the youngster tries to kill himself, setting in motion a life changing series of events that find Bergman spending time showering compassion on the poor and needy. Spurred on by Communist newspaper editor Andrea (Ettore Giannini), she soon spends more time with the downtrodden than she does with her husband, who soon locks her up in an insane asylum for her troubles. Bergman plays the saint role to the hilt, echoing her 1948 role as Joan of Arc, and Rossellini does a fantastic job of lighting and filming her to best effect. Unfortunately, the script pounds its point home with ham-fisted subtlety, as Andrea and Mom take turns declaiming Marxist and Christian platitudes. By the final tear soaked scene, I had had more than my fill of these tiresome characters. A real step down for Rossellini as he stepped away from neo-realism and further embraced the mythical and mystical themes of 1950's Flowers of St. Francis. --------------------------------------------- Result 2735 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the feel of the opening few minutes, but 20-minutes in I was liberally applying the fast-forward button. Far too many shots of Stewart (Michael Zelniker) walking from room to room, down hallways, through doors and down the street, and as many shots of him looking pensive and confused. Gave me the impression that the story had originally been meant as a short (20-30 minutes), and then stretched into a feature as a labour of love between director Grieve and star Zelniker (they co-wrote the screenplay).

It might have been more entertaining if any of the characters had anything to say that I hadn't heard said in many other films before, or if the ending wasn't - disappointingly - the one I had predicted three minutes into the film (atypical for an independent/smaller studio film). At least its heart was in the right place - it wasn't your standard formulaic Hollywood manipulative nonsense. --------------------------------------------- Result 2736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This gets a two because I liked it as a [[kid]], but it [[became]] so [[redundant]] that I just [[started]] to [[hate]] it... I can't give this a descriptive [[review]] because it would be restating one [[thing]] after the other, I probably wouldn't [[say]] anything that [[everyone]] [[else]] didn't [[say]] already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted [[babysitter]] to the stupidity that runs [[around]] and about in it. I have a [[cousin]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and [[dumbest]] person I have [[met]]. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same [[thing]] over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting [[really]] [[really]] [[tired]] of stuff like this. This gets a two because I liked it as a [[enfant]], but it [[was]] so [[superfluous]] that I just [[opened]] to [[dislikes]] it... I can't give this a descriptive [[revisiting]] because it would be restating one [[stuff]] after the other, I probably wouldn't [[says]] anything that [[everybody]] [[further]] didn't [[says]] already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted [[nanny]] to the stupidity that runs [[almost]] and about in it. I have a [[cuz]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and [[stupidest]] person I have [[complied]]. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same [[stuff]] over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting [[genuinely]] [[genuinely]] [[jaded]] of stuff like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2737 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some exploitation monger, this is dull and hard to watch.

Not the worst movie ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real actor or two. I'd recommend _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.

Don't believe me? Watch it for free (albeit sourced from poor VHS) here: http://www.archive.org/details/Thief-In-The-Night

Relevant links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3199/thief-in-the-night-se-a/ --------------------------------------------- Result 2738 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This "clever" [[film]] was originally a Japanese film. And while I assume that original film was pretty bad, it was made a good bit worse when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your audience is made of total idiots, it [[becomes]] [[painfully]] obvious that this was done--and done with [[little]] finesse or care about the final [[product]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[clearly]] American scenes where the film [[looks]] quite different. Plus, the American scenes really are [[meaningless]] and consist of two different groups of people at meetings just talking about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[flying]] and destructive monster, there is [[practically]] no [[energy]] because I [[assume]] the [[actors]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[wretched]] film--in particular, [[film]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Albert]] Dekker. They both just [[looked]] tired and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monster]], it's not [[quite]] the standard Godzilla-like [[creature]]. [[Seeing]] a giant fanged [[turtle]] retract his head and limbs and [[begin]] spinning through the air like a [[missile]] is [[hilarious]]. On the other hand, the crappy model planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[plant]] are, as [[usual]], in this [[film]] and come as no [[surprise]]. Plus an [[odd]] Japanese monster [[movie]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[audience]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[little]] [[boy]] who [[loves]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yeah]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA VERSUS THE SMOG [[MONSTER]] and [[several]] other films, you've [[got]] this [[annoying]] creep [[cheering]] on the monster, [[though]] unlike later incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOT]] a good [[guy]] and it [[turns]] out in the [[end]] the kid is just an idiot! [[Silly]], [[exceptional]] poor special effects that [[could]] be [[done]] better by the average seven year-old, bad acting, [[meaningless]] American clips and [[occasionally]] [[horrid]] [[voice]] dubbing make this a [[wretched]] [[film]]. [[Oddly]], while most will [[surely]] hate this [[film]] (and that [[stupid]] [[kid]]), there is a [[small]] and very [[vocal]] [[minority]] that [[love]] these [[films]] and [[compare]] them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[believe]] them--this IS a [[terrible]] [[film]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[terrific]] [[stage]] [[presence]], Gamera was featured in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these change the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are really, really lame. This "clever" [[filmmaking]] was originally a Japanese film. And while I assume that original film was pretty bad, it was made a good bit worse when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your audience is made of total idiots, it [[become]] [[embarrassingly]] obvious that this was done--and done with [[scant]] finesse or care about the final [[commodities]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[openly]] American scenes where the film [[seem]] quite different. Plus, the American scenes really are [[unnecessary]] and consist of two different groups of people at meetings just talking about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[fly]] and destructive monster, there is [[hardly]] no [[energies]] because I [[assumes]] the [[players]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[ratty]] film--in particular, [[filmmaking]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Alberto]] Dekker. They both just [[seemed]] tired and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monsters]], it's not [[rather]] the standard Godzilla-like [[monster]]. [[Witnessing]] a giant fanged [[turtles]] retract his head and limbs and [[launching]] spinning through the air like a [[rocket]] is [[humorous]]. On the other hand, the crappy model planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[factory]] are, as [[customary]], in this [[flick]] and come as no [[surprises]]. Plus an [[unusual]] Japanese monster [[flick]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[viewers]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[small]] [[guy]] who [[loved]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yes]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA VERSUS THE SMOG [[MONSTERS]] and [[multiple]] other films, you've [[gets]] this [[irritating]] creep [[cheers]] on the monster, [[although]] unlike later incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOPE]] a good [[dude]] and it [[revolves]] out in the [[terminates]] the kid is just an idiot! [[Beast]], [[marvelous]] poor special effects that [[did]] be [[doing]] better by the average seven year-old, bad acting, [[unhelpful]] American clips and [[sometimes]] [[terrible]] [[vocals]] dubbing make this a [[ratty]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Strangely]], while most will [[definitively]] hate this [[flick]] (and that [[dopey]] [[petit]]), there is a [[scant]] and very [[outspoken]] [[minorities]] that [[adored]] these [[film]] and [[comparative]] them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[think]] them--this IS a [[scary]] [[flick]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[sumptuous]] [[stages]] [[involvements]], Gamera was featured in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these change the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are really, really lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 2739 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The scenes are fast-paced. the [[characters]] are [[great]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[movie]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. The scenes are fast-paced. the [[features]] are [[wondrous]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[kino]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The pros of this film are the astonishing fighting scenes - absolutely incredible sword-moves and martial art show off. A true John Woo masterpiece. The story tends to be a bit week though, but it never overshadows the overwhelming display of acrobatic martial art action. If you are into martial art movies, you are going to LOVE this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Oh my... [[bad]] clothing, worse synth [[music]] and the [[worst]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with [[vengeance]] in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heavens]] for small [[miracles]]) Fabrizio Laurenti [[directing]] . [[Marketed]] as a [[kind]] of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore groceries and [[bad]] acting.

A [[mix]] of [[ghost]] [[story]], [[possessions]] and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some [[seriously]] [[wooden]] [[actors]] and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's [[progress]] to expectable ending, [[topped]] with some serious WTF [[surprise]] [[climax]]. (I just love the [[look]] on her [[face]]...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to [[gather]] some suspense and [[air]] of [[malice]] in few - very few - scenes; [[unluckily]] for him, these few glimpses of mild [[movie]] [[magic]] go down [[quickly]] and effectively.

The [[plus]] sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This [[department]] is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when [[things]] were [[made]] 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as [[modest]] [[budgets]] could [[allow]]. I [[could]] only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[obnoxious]] [[characters]] (and [[actors]]) [[got]] mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt [[sorry]] for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some [[rainy]] afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - [[every]] [[movie]] that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and [[bleeding]] heavily [[around]] the room and [[corridors]], [[MUST]] have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? Oh my... [[unfavourable]] clothing, worse synth [[musician]] and the [[meanest]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with [[revengeful]] in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heaven]] for small [[miracle]]) Fabrizio Laurenti [[instructing]] . [[Market]] as a [[sorting]] of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore groceries and [[unfavourable]] acting.

A [[amalgam]] of [[phantoms]] [[saga]], [[assets]] and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some [[deeply]] [[wood]] [[protagonists]] and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's [[progression]] to expectable ending, [[exceed]] with some serious WTF [[surprising]] [[orgasm]]. (I just love the [[glance]] on her [[confronts]]...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to [[collects]] some suspense and [[aerial]] of [[mischief]] in few - very few - scenes; [[sadly]] for him, these few glimpses of mild [[flick]] [[witchcraft]] go down [[expeditiously]] and effectively.

The [[longer]] sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This [[ministry]] is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when [[items]] were [[introduced]] 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as [[lowly]] [[budget]] could [[enabling]]. I [[would]] only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[despicable]] [[personages]] (and [[protagonists]]) [[get]] mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt [[apologies]] for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some [[wettest]] afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - [[any]] [[filmmaking]] that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and [[bleeder]] heavily [[about]] the room and [[passageways]], [[SHOULD]] have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? --------------------------------------------- Result 2742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Amazing effects for a movie of this time. A primer of the uselessness of war and how war becomes a nurturer of itself.

A wonderful thing about this movie is it is now public domain and available at archive.org. No charge, no sign up necessary. Watch it in one sitting and you will be propelled.

I plan to share this flick with as many people as possible as I had never heard of it before and I am a hard core sci fi fan.

I would like to see how others react to this movie.

Watch it.

Rate it.

Tell us what you think. --------------------------------------------- Result 2743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From the stupid "quaint African natives" travelogue footage with our badly-superimposed principals acting as narrators, to the horrible fake ears which transform docile Indian elephants into African elephants, to the utter lack of any logic at all, to Maureen O'Sullivan's incessant whining of "Tarzan! Tarzan!", there is nothing about this movie which deserves classic status.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2744 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[unbelievably]] bad I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must [[see]], it's [[bad]] in a [[nice]] way. Every cliche ever [[invented]] for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the [[top]] 10 of [[worst]] movies ever [[made]]. Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[surprisingly]] bad I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must [[consults]], it's [[unfavourable]] in a [[pleasurable]] way. Every cliche ever [[concocted]] for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the [[topped]] 10 of [[worse]] movies ever [[introduced]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Most [[definitely]] the [[worst]] Columbo ever [[dreamt]] up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real [[drag]]. Falk looks [[bored]] throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime [[watching]] this. Most [[assuredly]] the [[meanest]] Columbo ever [[fantasized]] up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real [[trawling]]. Falk looks [[drilled]] throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime [[staring]] this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Like with any movie genre, there are [[good]] gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of [[depression]] of [[disappointment]] about a [[week]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[film]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 [[silent]] film of the same name. This is a very [[dry]], very [[slow]] gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather [[flimsy]] [[endeavor]].

Like "[[Goodfellas]]" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to [[robbing]] museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned [[masterpieces]] before being [[swamped]] by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not [[even]] ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's [[List]]" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. Like with any movie genre, there are [[alright]] gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of [[recession]] of [[displeasure]] about a [[chow]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[filmmaking]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 [[quiet]] film of the same name. This is a very [[drier]], very [[sluggish]] gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather [[feeble]] [[endeavors]].

Like "[[Buddies]]" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to [[larceny]] museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned [[antiques]] before being [[submerged]] by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not [[yet]] ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's [[Listed]]" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Apparently Hollywood is just handing out money to anyone with a camera and the ability to speak. This movie was mind numbingly bad. The casting was terrible, the acting unspeakable, and the story filled with holes. Script? who needs script? I was surprised that the movie wasn't as verbally vulgar as I thought it would be, however I got enough shots of T&A to last me a lifetime. The movie was like listening to a 19 year old street racer with ADD (who decided to buy a car instead of go to college) tell a story. Being so poorly scripted, I thought the two brothers in the film were lovers at first. The scenes at the racetrack, along with the main female actor in the film kept making me think of Herbie: Fully Loaded. This is the kind of film is what Grindhouse modeled itself after...only the writers thought they were being serious. --------------------------------------------- Result 2748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I wouldn't go so far as to not [[recommend]] this [[movie]], since the only [[problems]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot [[devices]] [[used]] in the [[movie]] - the [[sort]] of [[things]] common to [[every]] [[kids]] [[movie]] ever made it [[seems]]. That doesn't [[make]] it bad, just not something I'd go far.

It is a [[little]] saccharine, so I [[might]] say that for the most [[part]] [[anyone]] [[looking]] for [[something]] with a little more [[wit]] could be [[disappointed]] in an [[obviously]] for-kids [[movie]] like this.

[[However]], all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the [[trailers]]) [[comes]] on-screen. His time is [[limited]], but it [[seems]] [[apparent]] that the [[decision]] [[makers]] had the [[wisdom]] to [[tell]] these [[guys]] 'hey, [[could]] you stick in a little more squirrel?' every [[time]] it's [[getting]] intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop [[laughing]].'

And of course, visually it won't [[disappoint]], but that's almost a [[given]] with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. I wouldn't go so far as to not [[recommending]] this [[movies]], since the only [[trouble]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot [[accoutrements]] [[utilised]] in the [[cinema]] - the [[kinds]] of [[items]] common to [[all]] [[brats]] [[cinema]] ever made it [[looks]]. That doesn't [[deliver]] it bad, just not something I'd go far.

It is a [[kiddo]] saccharine, so I [[probable]] say that for the most [[party]] [[somebody]] [[researching]] for [[anything]] with a little more [[waite]] could be [[frustrating]] in an [[apparently]] for-kids [[cinematography]] like this.

[[Instead]], all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the [[trailer]]) [[arrives]] on-screen. His time is [[restrained]], but it [[appears]] [[obvious]] that the [[rulings]] [[builders]] had the [[intellect]] to [[told]] these [[lads]] 'hey, [[would]] you stick in a little more squirrel?' every [[moment]] it's [[obtaining]] intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop [[kidding]].'

And of course, visually it won't [[disillusion]], but that's almost a [[bestowed]] with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This is a [[terrible]] film, and not one scene has an [[ounce]] of [[truthful]] emotion. The [[characters]] are uninflected, [[obviously]] [[drawn]], predictable and the story line is [[obvious]] and typical Hollywood wish fulfillment.

[[William]] Holden (so sad to [[see]] him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing [[someone]] in his early 40s and [[looks]] like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to [[find]] him irresistibly [[attractive]]. I think the [[dog]] they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with [[obvious]] trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the [[bachelor]] pad, the swinging hi-fi, the [[lunches]] at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies [[desperately]] wishing that the free [[spirits]] they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' [[cars]] sexy.

Ugh. [[Youth]] culture was never that desperate. And I [[shudder]] to [[think]] that Bill Holden was so desperate for [[youth]] that he took this [[embarrassing]] [[part]]. This is a [[frightful]] film, and not one scene has an [[jot]] of [[veritable]] emotion. The [[characteristic]] are uninflected, [[apparently]] [[draws]], predictable and the story line is [[observable]] and typical Hollywood wish fulfillment.

[[Willem]] Holden (so sad to [[seeing]] him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing [[everyone]] in his early 40s and [[seem]] like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to [[finds]] him irresistibly [[tempting]]. I think the [[terrier]] they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with [[manifest]] trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the [[baccalaureate]] pad, the swinging hi-fi, the [[dine]] at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies [[frantically]] wishing that the free [[liquor]] they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' [[wagon]] sexy.

Ugh. [[Teenage]] culture was never that desperate. And I [[tingle]] to [[reckon]] that Bill Holden was so desperate for [[youngsters]] that he took this [[distracting]] [[portion]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When [[John]] Singleton is on, he's *on*!! And this is one of his better films. Not [[quite]] as tight as Boyz-n-the-Hood, but close to it (and with much of the same stellar cast). This [[film]] was very well [[written]], very well put [[together]], and very well shot. There's very little to [[criticize]], and most of my [[complaints]] are superficial (eg: where did [[Fudge]] [[get]] the money for 6 [[years]] of [[college]] and a [[lot]] of expensive stuff? [[No]] mention of a [[rich]] [[background]]... And why doesn't [[Professor]] Phibbs have an office? A [[professor]] of his stature *should* have one... And while we're at it, for an [[engineering]] [[student]], [[hick]] or not, Remy's a [[pretty]] dumb [[character]] - I'd think that he'd have a bit more in the [[way]] of basic intelligence - he [[talks]] and acts like a [[total]] [[buffoon]]).

But that aside, the film was very [[sharp]]. A good [[array]] of [[characters]] and [[points]] of [[view]]; and Singleton doesn't [[take]] sides in the story - [[many]] of the characters are unsympathetic, and he does a good [[job]] of interspersing the Panthers and Supremacist scenes [[together]] to [[show]] the folly on both sides.

Much of the [[cinematography]] was [[excellent]]; I [[especially]] [[loved]] the scene where Kirsty Swanson gets intimate with Taryn and Wayne each scene spliced together [[really]] well. Also the Malik/Deja scenes were [[really]] well shot as well.

The [[dialogue]] was a bit much at times; this film had a tendency to get *really* preachy at [[times]], and it [[also]] tends to hammer the [[points]] it was [[making]] over your head when the [[points]] [[would]] be just as [[clear]] with out the bluntness (we really didn't need the US flag with 'UNLEARN' typed onto it, give some credit, we're not morons...). And to top it off, [[although]] *most* of the [[time]] Singleton uses melodrama quite well, sometimes it gets *way* too cheezy (like Deja's death, which is fine until she screams out 'WHY!!!' which simply ruined the entire effect and scene).

But the acting, in general, was [[top]] of the line. [[Fabulous]] performances by Omar Epps (perhaps the best I've ever seen), Kirsty Swanson (who knew Buffy could act??), Michael Rapaport (surprised the hell out of me...after True Romance and Beautiful Girls I though he was a one-role actor), and of course Ice [[Cube]] and Laurence Fishburne are *always* outstanding.

Downside? Jennifer Connelly was flat; though it's not completely her fault: her role was stereotypical and one-dimensional. Generic to the highest degree. And Tyra Banks, who had the role, was nothing short of horrid. She whined and whined and whined. [[Yet]] another in the long line of models-turned-actresses who failed miserably (though there are a few who prove the exception to this rule).

Finally, the soundtrack! Wow! An amazing soundtrack (which is definitely worth buying!) which fits the film like a glove. Each scene has a twin song (although the Tori Amos songs started to *really* annoy me by the end...not her best work). Liz Phair, Rage Against the Machine, Ice Cube...how can one go wrong??

All in all: a really good watch, a really strong cast, great script, great film. 8/10. When [[Johannes]] Singleton is on, he's *on*!! And this is one of his better films. Not [[pretty]] as tight as Boyz-n-the-Hood, but close to it (and with much of the same stellar cast). This [[movie]] was very well [[writes]], very well put [[jointly]], and very well shot. There's very little to [[slams]], and most of my [[allegations]] are superficial (eg: where did [[Strawberries]] [[obtains]] the money for 6 [[aged]] of [[academics]] and a [[batch]] of expensive stuff? [[Nope]] mention of a [[storied]] [[context]]... And why doesn't [[Prof]] Phibbs have an office? A [[professors]] of his stature *should* have one... And while we're at it, for an [[engineer]] [[pupil]], [[redneck]] or not, Remy's a [[quite]] dumb [[nature]] - I'd think that he'd have a bit more in the [[pathway]] of basic intelligence - he [[conversations]] and acts like a [[overall]] [[dumbass]]).

But that aside, the film was very [[steep]]. A good [[arrays]] of [[attribute]] and [[dots]] of [[viewing]]; and Singleton doesn't [[taking]] sides in the story - [[numerous]] of the characters are unsympathetic, and he does a good [[jobs]] of interspersing the Panthers and Supremacist scenes [[jointly]] to [[shows]] the folly on both sides.

Much of the [[film]] was [[wondrous]]; I [[mostly]] [[cared]] the scene where Kirsty Swanson gets intimate with Taryn and Wayne each scene spliced together [[truly]] well. Also the Malik/Deja scenes were [[genuinely]] well shot as well.

The [[conversation]] was a bit much at times; this film had a tendency to get *really* preachy at [[time]], and it [[apart]] tends to hammer the [[dot]] it was [[doing]] over your head when the [[dots]] [[should]] be just as [[unmistakable]] with out the bluntness (we really didn't need the US flag with 'UNLEARN' typed onto it, give some credit, we're not morons...). And to top it off, [[albeit]] *most* of the [[times]] Singleton uses melodrama quite well, sometimes it gets *way* too cheezy (like Deja's death, which is fine until she screams out 'WHY!!!' which simply ruined the entire effect and scene).

But the acting, in general, was [[supreme]] of the line. [[Peachy]] performances by Omar Epps (perhaps the best I've ever seen), Kirsty Swanson (who knew Buffy could act??), Michael Rapaport (surprised the hell out of me...after True Romance and Beautiful Girls I though he was a one-role actor), and of course Ice [[Cubes]] and Laurence Fishburne are *always* outstanding.

Downside? Jennifer Connelly was flat; though it's not completely her fault: her role was stereotypical and one-dimensional. Generic to the highest degree. And Tyra Banks, who had the role, was nothing short of horrid. She whined and whined and whined. [[Even]] another in the long line of models-turned-actresses who failed miserably (though there are a few who prove the exception to this rule).

Finally, the soundtrack! Wow! An amazing soundtrack (which is definitely worth buying!) which fits the film like a glove. Each scene has a twin song (although the Tori Amos songs started to *really* annoy me by the end...not her best work). Liz Phair, Rage Against the Machine, Ice Cube...how can one go wrong??

All in all: a really good watch, a really strong cast, great script, great film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2751 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sorry but this is just plain pathetic. The little girl was a brat, their were no enjoyable characters and the plot sucked. Besides it wasn't even a gator as the film would like us to believe. If you check out any complete guide to reptiles you will find that it really is a Crocodile, not a gator. Obviously they didn't hire a real animal expert or they would know that the creature is a croc. It is a sad excuse for a movie. Especially the ending. I nearly fell asleep with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Totally]] [[ridiculous]]. [[If]] you know anything about [[poker]], you will find it absolutely appalling but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) Where to [[start]]. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[actors]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. Everyone else is as [[wooden]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only [[reason]] the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this pointless [[production]]. It's fitting that he had such a [[useless]] role.

There's very little poker in this movie. Most of the time is [[spent]] on [[useless]] side [[characters]] whose plots aren't resolved in the [[slightest]]. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless [[Arabs]] in the convenience store also [[give]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are [[easily]] among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, [[complete]] [[nonsense]]. [[Plan]] 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[might]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious [[conversation]] that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I [[hate]] movies made by [[religious]] people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[travesty]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. [[Fully]] [[farcical]]. [[Though]] you know anything about [[booker]], you will find it absolutely appalling but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) Where to [[lancer]]. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[protagonists]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. Everyone else is as [[lumber]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only [[cause]] the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this pointless [[productivity]]. It's fitting that he had such a [[fruitless]] role.

There's very little poker in this movie. Most of the time is [[spending]] on [[vain]] side [[nature]] whose plots aren't resolved in the [[lowest]]. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless [[Arab]] in the convenience store also [[lend]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are [[comfortably]] among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, [[finish]] [[claptrap]]. [[Plans]] 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[apt]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious [[chat]] that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I [[hatred]] movies made by [[nuns]] people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[parody]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. --------------------------------------------- Result 2753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Poorly-made "blaxploitation" crime-drama aimed squarely at the black urban market of the early 1970s. Pam Grier stars in the title role, that of a nurse who becomes a one-woman vigilante after drug-dealing thugs make Coffy's little sister a junkie. Violent nonsense plods along doggedly, with canned energy and excitement; only Grier's flaring temper gives the narrative a jolt (she's not much of an actress here, but she connects with the audience in a primal way). Not much different from what Charles Bronson was doing at this time, the film was marketed and advertised as crass exploitation yet still managed to find a sizable inner-city audience. Today however, it's merely a footnote in '70s film history, and lacks the wide-range appeal of other movies in this genre. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[liked]] this [[movie]] because it basically did more with less. It [[could]] have been [[made]] more interesting if they had [[kept]] it [[confined]] to the studio [[even]] more ([[though]] some of the [[plot]] [[elements]] would have been [[harder]] to [[develop]]).

The [[guy]] playing the [[DJ]] did a good [[job]] of [[showing]] [[someone]] spooked out and [[haunted]] by his [[memories]]. I [[also]] [[found]] his dialog with the callers pretty funny.

While parts of the [[movie]] you can [[see]] [[coming]] a [[mile]] away, other parts you do not expect to [[turn]] out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty [[minimal]] ghost [[story]] for the most [[part]], [[concentrating]] more on the [[living]] side of the equation. The [[last]] 5-10 minutes were [[pretty]] well [[done]] as everything is being [[revealed]].

While it was a [[shorter]] [[movie]], it [[felt]] to be just about the right [[amount]] of [[time]] to tell the [[story]]. Any more and it [[would]] have [[started]] to [[drag]]. I [[enjoyed]] this [[kino]] because it basically did more with less. It [[would]] have been [[effected]] more interesting if they had [[conserved]] it [[restrained]] to the studio [[yet]] more ([[if]] some of the [[intrigue]] [[ingredient]] would have been [[louder]] to [[elaborate]]).

The [[blokes]] playing the [[MJ]] did a good [[labour]] of [[exhibiting]] [[everyone]] spooked out and [[tormented]] by his [[recollections]]. I [[apart]] [[uncovered]] his dialog with the callers pretty funny.

While parts of the [[cinema]] you can [[behold]] [[arriving]] a [[miles]] away, other parts you do not expect to [[turning]] out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty [[lowest]] ghost [[histories]] for the most [[portion]], [[focussed]] more on the [[iife]] side of the equation. The [[latter]] 5-10 minutes were [[belle]] well [[completed]] as everything is being [[proved]].

While it was a [[shortest]] [[kino]], it [[smelled]] to be just about the right [[somme]] of [[period]] to tell the [[tale]]. Any more and it [[ought]] have [[commenced]] to [[dragging]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I never expect a [[film]] [[adaptation]] to follow too [[closely]] to the [[novel]] (especially a [[beloved]] one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay [[writer]] and executive [[producer]] on the film, I thought that Evening would be a [[good]] adaptation.

[[If]] you [[enjoyed]] the [[book]], don't bother with this [[movie]]. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[hardly]] bear any [[resemblance]] to one another.

Here, our characters are [[completely]] different: the [[bride]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a [[drunk]], in [[love]] with Ann and/or Harris. I don't [[think]] a [[single]] [[character]] [[made]] it from the [[book]] to the screen; [[oh]] it just [[gets]] [[worst]] with [[every]] passing moment.

And, [[really]], didn't we [[learn]] from [[Bridges]] of Madison County that [[cutting]] from the story we are [[meant]] to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown [[children]] having [[obnoxious]] and [[juvenile]] [[fights]], [[simply]] does not [[work]] on [[film]]? This [[film]] is a [[disaster]]. Skip it. I never expect a [[cinematography]] [[readjust]] to follow too [[tightly]] to the [[newer]] (especially a [[sweetie]] one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay [[screenwriter]] and executive [[producers]] on the film, I thought that Evening would be a [[buena]] adaptation.

[[Though]] you [[appreciated]] the [[cookbook]], don't bother with this [[films]]. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[almost]] bear any [[likeness]] to one another.

Here, our characters are [[fully]] different: the [[fiance]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a [[drunken]], in [[amore]] with Ann and/or Harris. I don't [[thought]] a [[lonely]] [[nature]] [[introduced]] it from the [[ledger]] to the screen; [[oooh]] it just [[get]] [[meanest]] with [[any]] passing moment.

And, [[genuinely]], didn't we [[learned]] from [[Bridge]] of Madison County that [[cut]] from the story we are [[signified]] to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown [[kid]] having [[detestable]] and [[youthful]] [[struggles]], [[mere]] does not [[cooperation]] on [[movies]]? This [[filmmaking]] is a [[disasters]]. Skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2756 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen this movie when I was about 7 years old - which was 33 years ago - and I never forgot this movie! I was deeply touched and moved by the brave little boy and the beautiful eagle. And I just couldn't believe it when he turned into an eagle just when everyone in the theater thought he was going to die...

My sister was in the movie with me and I asked her recently if she remembered the movie we saw with the boy and the eagle and she said she remembered it like we saw it only yesterday. So it isn't just me.

This movie is a MUST SEE !!!

You will never forget it - just like my sister and me... --------------------------------------------- Result 2757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What exactly was [[going]] on during [[World]] War 11 in [[New]] Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[awful]] [[story]] of 4 sisters was really [[pathetic]] to view. Can you imagine [[casting]] Joan Fontaine as the [[older]] sister to Sandra Dee? Fontaine [[looked]] more like her [[mother]]. [[Even]] funnier was that Fontaine [[becomes]] [[pregnant]] in the [[film]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who [[showed]] such [[great]] on screen [[chemistry]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes [[together]] in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to [[tramp]] [[around]] there, despite the fact that she is [[married]]. [[Woe]] to her when her husband [[comes]] back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and [[finds]] romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the [[young]] Miss Dee here.

The [[picture]] has little to no [[meaning]]. Are they [[trying]] to [[say]] that all is fair in [[love]] and war? [[If]] they are, they did a poor [[job]] in selling this.

The [[conflict]] of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been [[quickly]] done to this [[terribly]] [[disappointing]] [[film]] of 1957. What exactly was [[go]] on during [[Monde]] War 11 in [[Novel]] Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[scary]] [[history]] of 4 sisters was really [[unfortunate]] to view. Can you imagine [[moulding]] Joan Fontaine as the [[elderly]] sister to Sandra Dee? Fontaine [[seemed]] more like her [[mama]]. [[Yet]] funnier was that Fontaine [[become]] [[expectant]] in the [[filmmaking]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who [[shown]] such [[prodigious]] on screen [[chemicals]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes [[jointly]] in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to [[beggar]] [[throughout]] there, despite the fact that she is [[marriage]]. [[Sadness]] to her when her husband [[happens]] back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and [[found]] romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the [[youthful]] Miss Dee here.

The [[photography]] has little to no [[mean]]. Are they [[try]] to [[said]] that all is fair in [[likes]] and war? [[Though]] they are, they did a poor [[jobs]] in selling this.

The [[conflicts]] of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been [[soon]] done to this [[remarkably]] [[frustrating]] [[filmmaking]] of 1957. --------------------------------------------- Result 2758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's [[baby]]" and "the omen" (it actually [[blends]] the two stories).Even its title [[recalls]] Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[begins]] well [[enough]],with all the omens [[scattered]] on the whole [[earth]],and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband [[trying]] to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the [[rescue]] (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally [[funny]] (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short [[dialog]] between priest John Heard -who does not [[seem]] to [[take]] things [[seriously]] ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore [[probably]] [[registered]] the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the [[movie]] for all that. "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's [[babe]]" and "the omen" (it actually [[mixtures]] the two stories).Even its title [[reminded]] Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[startup]] well [[satisfactorily]],with all the omens [[fragmented]] on the whole [[tierra]],and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband [[tempting]] to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the [[saves]] (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally [[hilarious]] (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short [[dialogue]] between priest John Heard -who does not [[looks]] to [[taking]] things [[conscientiously]] ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore [[assuredly]] [[register]] the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the [[filmmaking]] for all that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[brilliance]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the [[waiting]] room. [[Corbin]] Bernsen gives a [[surprisingly]] non-lackluster performance as a [[crazed]] [[dentist]] who I guess tries to kill people but he only [[works]] on their [[teeth]] so it's not really [[working]] out. In a [[particularly]] [[gory]] scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely [[destroyed]] with drills and whatnot, which I [[guess]] is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer [[dentist]]. It's a [[typical]] [[Brian]] Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is [[shoddy]] and at [[times]] [[seems]] to be [[made]] up on the spot but hey, it's a [[killer]] [[dentist]] movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. The [[splendor]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the [[expecting]] room. [[Furey]] Bernsen gives a [[impossibly]] non-lackluster performance as a [[psychotic]] [[dentists]] who I guess tries to kill people but he only [[worked]] on their [[dental]] so it's not really [[cooperating]] out. In a [[specifically]] [[gori]] scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely [[ruined]] with drills and whatnot, which I [[presume]] is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer [[orthodontist]]. It's a [[symptomatic]] [[Bryan]] Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is [[inferior]] and at [[period]] [[seem]] to be [[effected]] up on the spot but hey, it's a [[murderer]] [[dentistry]] movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. --------------------------------------------- Result 2760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Without Peter Ustinov and [[Maggie]] [[Smith]], this could [[easily]] have been a turkey. But they are [[brilliant]]. Ustinov is at his best, and for fans of Maggie, it is great to see her in her early days, [[matching]] Ustinov every [[step]] of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[film]] spends a lot of time in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, including red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a [[delicious]] shot up the micro-skirt of a [[waitress]], the like of which England has never seen since in public [[places]]. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are [[laughable]], but they are not [[meant]] to be [[taken]] [[seriously]]. Nor are the [[wonderful]] stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. Without Peter Ustinov and [[Mags]] [[Smiths]], this could [[conveniently]] have been a turkey. But they are [[wondrous]]. Ustinov is at his best, and for fans of Maggie, it is great to see her in her early days, [[twinning]] Ustinov every [[steps]] of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[movies]] spends a lot of time in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, including red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a [[delectable]] shot up the micro-skirt of a [[stewardess]], the like of which England has never seen since in public [[sites]]. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are [[preposterous]], but they are not [[signified]] to be [[picked]] [[conscientiously]]. Nor are the [[noteworthy]] stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed watching this movie about the Delany sisters. I knew of them, but that was all. This movie opened my eyes to their bravado and courage. What a pair. What sacrifices they made to live life on their own terms. This is not only a movie for African Americans, but for all Americans. It is sort of a history lesson and a documentary rolled into one and combined with an entertaining movie biography. The acting was superior by all included and we really do get a glimpse of the hardships these two sisters went through for many years. Both sisters are quite different from each other. They came from a very loving and very strict family with high, maybe even impossible standards of perfection. It is sad to see how Sadie's father refused to allow his daughter to continue to see her boyfriend due to a possible misunderstanding. I thoroughly recommend this movie and I am glad I caught it on television the other day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] How sheep-like the [[movie]] [[going]] public so often proves to be. As [[soon]] as a few critics say something new is good (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[good]] [[movie]], it was a [[dreadful]] movie. 1) [[Plot]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't [[look]] for anything [[deeper]] than this. 2) [[Cinematography]]? - [[Do]] me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of [[astonishingly]] [[amateurish]] camera-work. The [[ridiculous]] shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. How sheep-like the [[flick]] [[go]] public so often proves to be. As [[promptly]] as a few critics say something new is good (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], it was a [[abhorrent]] movie. 1) [[Intrigue]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't [[glance]] for anything [[closer]] than this. 2) [[Cinematographic]]? - [[Doing]] me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of [[marvellously]] [[unprofessional]] camera-work. The [[preposterous]] shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2763 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Ogre is a film made for TV in Italy and wasn't intended to be a sequel to Demons as Lamberto Bava even mentions it on the interview on the Sheirk Show DVD, but it was called Demons III to be part of the Demons series. The music in Demons and Demons 2 was 80's rock music while this is more creepy music and while the first two was gory horror Demons III: The Ogre is a architectural horror so that's how Demons III isn't a proper sequel to Demons but I still like this film.

The music is creepy and that adds a tone to the castle that the film is set in, The Ogre is another thing why I like the film. There are two other films that are classed as Demons III and that is Black Demons (Demoni 3) and The Church (Demons 3). Demons III: The Ogre is a good film as long as you don't compare it with Demons and Demons 2. --------------------------------------------- Result 2764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] To [[anyone]] who [[might]] [[think]] this [[show]] isn't for them, please give it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are [[reality]] based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[show]] is a [[return]] to family oriented TV where the emphasis is on learning some [[life]] lessons, learning what [[real]] friends and family are about, and maybe [[even]] learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young actors in [[show]] business [[today]], and he is perfectly cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New [[York]] Empires ([[great]] [[name]]!). Dean Cain, [[Christopher]] Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms [[round]] out the main cast, and they are all [[exceptional]]. This show [[deserves]] a chance to catch on and be [[seen]]. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. To [[somebody]] who [[probability]] [[believing]] this [[display]] isn't for them, please give it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are [[realities]] based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[showings]] is a [[restitution]] to family oriented TV where the emphasis is on learning some [[lifetime]] lessons, learning what [[actual]] friends and family are about, and maybe [[yet]] learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young actors in [[showings]] business [[yesterday]], and he is perfectly cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New [[Yorke]] Empires ([[grand]] [[denomination]]!). Dean Cain, [[Cristobal]] Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms [[redondo]] out the main cast, and they are all [[wondrous]]. This show [[merited]] a chance to catch on and be [[watched]]. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. --------------------------------------------- Result 2765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I decided to watch this because of the recommendations from this site. I would have to [[say]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take heed that this film will go on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the staying power, get it on [[tape]] and watch it over a couple of nights.

Now to the [[film]], what I say will contain "[[spoilers]]" and if you don't mind, here goes:

[[Alexandre]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had [[aborted]] it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse nymph called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. [[Veronika]] fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the [[sordid]] sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as [[aforesaid]] with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will [[even]] get a job and be the [[provider]] for his new [[found]] love and [[family]]. There is [[hope]]!

With the title of "La [[Maman]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was [[relating]] to Françoise Lebrun's [[character]] of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and [[whore]] is the same [[person]]? [[Anyway]], what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very [[chatty]], aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud played their obdurate characters well and held the film [[together]] as some part of the script became a [[little]] lost and disjointed.

Not a bad effort. 7/10. I decided to watch this because of the recommendations from this site. I would have to [[said]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take heed that this film will go on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the staying power, get it on [[tapes]] and watch it over a couple of nights.

Now to the [[kino]], what I say will contain "[[vandals]]" and if you don't mind, here goes:

[[Aleksandr]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had [[thwart]] it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse nymph called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. [[Veronica]] fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the [[unclean]] sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as [[supra]] with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will [[yet]] get a job and be the [[providers]] for his new [[discovered]] love and [[families]]. There is [[hopes]]!

With the title of "La [[Mummy]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was [[related]] to Françoise Lebrun's [[personage]] of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and [[hooker]] is the same [[individuals]]? [[Anyhoo]], what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very [[talkative]], aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud played their obdurate characters well and held the film [[jointly]] as some part of the script became a [[tiny]] lost and disjointed.

Not a bad effort. 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just read the [[comments]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jump]] in here. I [[understand]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My feeling [[regarding]] this film is that it is not [[afraid]] to travel the darker [[roads]] of [[loneliness]], [[failure]], [[disappointment]] and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and [[angry]], [[yet]] find [[tenderness]] and comfort in each the other. Only [[great]] acting [[could]] make this [[work]] without becoming an emotional [[quagmire]], sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming [[humanity]] given to them by such [[strong]] performances. I have every [[reason]] to [[dislike]] Jane [[Fonda]] for her Vietnam era actions, but personal [[feelings]] apart, she is [[fabulous]] in this role. Robert DeNiro is [[superb]] as a [[man]] whose intelligence and goodness [[begins]] to [[fail]] him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have [[seen]] DeNiro using [[tenderness]] [[rather]] than [[toughness]] to sell a [[character]] and I really like it. This film was a [[big]] [[surprise]] when I [[first]] [[viewed]] it and I [[look]] forward to seeing it again. I just read the [[remark]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jumping]] in here. I [[realise]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My feeling [[pertaining]] this film is that it is not [[shitless]] to travel the darker [[lane]] of [[lonely]], [[deficiency]], [[displeasure]] and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and [[rabid]], [[nonetheless]] find [[affection]] and comfort in each the other. Only [[remarkable]] acting [[did]] make this [[working]] without becoming an emotional [[morass]], sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming [[mankind]] given to them by such [[vigorous]] performances. I have every [[justification]] to [[disgust]] Jane [[Fund]] for her Vietnam era actions, but personal [[sentiments]] apart, she is [[wondrous]] in this role. Robert DeNiro is [[handsome]] as a [[males]] whose intelligence and goodness [[starts]] to [[fails]] him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have [[watched]] DeNiro using [[fondness]] [[fairly]] than [[stamina]] to sell a [[nature]] and I really like it. This film was a [[gargantuan]] [[amaze]] when I [[firstly]] [[regarded]] it and I [[peek]] forward to seeing it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A wonderful movie! Anyone growing up in an Italian family will definitely see themselves in these characters. A good family movie with sadness, humor, and very good acting from all. You will enjoy this movie!! We need more like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a comedy based on national stereotypes, no doubt. If you leave away pretending you know or you care what Communism was about and how real Russians or Brits are, if you accept and are not hurt by the conventions, you can have fun with this film. Nicole Kidman is at her best, sexy, moving and funny. Ben Chaplin succeeds to avoid being completely out-shadowed by Nicole, and the rest of the cast does good work as well. The final is moving, and logical - movie logics, of course. Worth watching, if you accept the rules of the game. --------------------------------------------- Result 2769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like almost everyone else who has commented on this movie, I can only wonder why this has never appeared on video.

I recall seeing it at about age 12 on the "The Late Show," circa 1972. I too recall the poison gas attack and the weirdly garbed horses. (I don't recall the more horrific bits I've seen described here; they were likely cut out for the TV audience.) But the scenes I REALLY liked were the ones involving the death of Lord Kitchener aboard the HMS Hampshire, almost exactly 90 years ago. The scenes of the doomed cruiser approaching the minefield in the storm were really chilling, as I recall.

Don't recall the musical score, but the comments of the others now have me curious. Get this one out on video! --------------------------------------------- Result 2770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Robert Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[turns]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound thriller in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- [[shows]] a versatility that is [[commendable]]. In the Gingerbread [[Man]] he actually has to work with [[something]] that, unfortunately, he isn't always very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those [[big]], [[juicy]] [[almost]] pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[lawyer]] gets [[caught]] up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[nefarious]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most [[staggering]] ways, twists and plot [[ensues]], [[yada]] yada. And it's surprising that Altman [[would]] really [[want]] to take on one of these "I [[saw]] that [[coming]] from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[surprise]] that [[pays]] off because, [[oddly]] enough, Altman is [[able]] to [[catch]] some of that very [[fine]] [[behavior]], or rather is [[able]] to [[unintentionally]] coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The film drips with atmosphere (if not [[total]] superlative [[craftsmanship]], sometimes it's good and [[sometimes]] just decent for Altman), as [[Savannah]] is possibly going to be [[hit]] by a big [[hurricane]] and the swamp and marshes and rain [[keep]] things soaked and muggy and [[humid]]. So the atmosphere is [[really]] [[potent]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Did]] I [[neglect]] Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a [[little]] weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman saw something [[captivating]] in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not [[entirely]] masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. Robert Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[revolves]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound thriller in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- [[demonstrating]] a versatility that is [[praiseworthy]]. In the Gingerbread [[Dawg]] he actually has to work with [[algo]] that, unfortunately, he isn't always very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those [[vast]], [[fleshy]] [[practically]] pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[attorneys]] gets [[catch]] up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[odious]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most [[shocking]] ways, twists and plot [[ensue]], [[yak]] yada. And it's surprising that Altman [[should]] really [[desiring]] to take on one of these "I [[observed]] that [[incoming]] from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[amaze]] that [[salaried]] off because, [[strangely]] enough, Altman is [[capable]] to [[catches]] some of that very [[fined]] [[attitudes]], or rather is [[capable]] to [[involuntarily]] coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The film drips with atmosphere (if not [[entire]] superlative [[handicraft]], sometimes it's good and [[occasionally]] just decent for Altman), as [[Marshy]] is possibly going to be [[pummeled]] by a big [[cyclone]] and the swamp and marshes and rain [[maintaining]] things soaked and muggy and [[sweaty]]. So the atmosphere is [[truthfully]] [[mighty]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Ai]] I [[ignored]] Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a [[petite]] weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman saw something [[intriguing]] in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not [[absolutely]] masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. --------------------------------------------- Result 2771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. [[Yes]], it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks [[much]] of the energy a [[comedy]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also [[got]] some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do [[superb]] work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the [[film]] [[give]] this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, [[impotent]] rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. [[Yea]], it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks [[very]] of the energy a [[charade]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also [[did]] some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do [[magnifique]] work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the [[movies]] [[lend]] this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, [[helpless]] rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Visually speaking, this [[film]] is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its [[seeming]] [[message]]. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Just]] [[grinding]] and [[unpleasant]] to [[sit]] through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. Visually speaking, this [[filmmaking]] is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its [[evident]] [[messages]]. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Jen]] [[milling]] and [[nasty]] to [[assis]] through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only redeeming quality of this overlong miscast melodrama is the scenery of southern France and the voice of Nana Mascouri singing the theme song. Stephanie Powers is miscast and betrayed by a phony accent. As has been pointed out, she is too old to play an 18 year old and looks far too young as a grandmother with a college age granddaughter? Lee Remick is good although she also is ageless in her later years. The talented Joanna Lumley is under utilized and also manages to look forever young when her middle aged son (Robert Urich) finally marries Grandma Stephanie Powers. Stacey Keach's ceaseless arrogance makes you wonder what these women saw in him. Don't know how any viewer could relate to his excessive portrayal? The most credible performance is given by Ian Richardson, who makes the rest of the cast look like rank amateurs. It strains credulity that the handsome male suitors in this epic would remain ever single while they patiently await the subject of their affections to finally consent to accept them. Can anybody believe that handsome Robert Urich would remain single for decades waiting for Stephanie Powers to finally accept his endless marriage proposals? The WW2 engagement between the Wehrmacht and the Marquis is laughable. To begin with, the Germans did not occupy the Provence section of France until late in the war, it was controlled by the Vichy French puppet government. We see the French resistance staging a daylight raid on Mistral's villa to steal sheets after which they all lounge under a bridge waiting for a lumbering truckload of Nazi troops to surprise and annihilate them? If you want to see a well acted mini-series set in a foreign country, don't watch Mistral's Daughter. A far better alternative would be The Thorn Birds. --------------------------------------------- Result 2774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was "just OK", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.

But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a charming movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel Brooks gives a great performance as the lead character, I think somewhat different from his usual persona in his movies.

There's not a lot of knockout jokes or something like that, but there are some rather hilarious scenes, and overall this is a very enjoyable and very easy to watch film.

Very recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Fine performances and art [[direction]] do not a [[good]] [[movie]] [[make]]. This movie is so [[grim]] and [[depressing]], I [[could]] feel [[absolutely]] no [[joy]] at the "[[happy]]" [[ending]] [[involving]] the union strike. The [[attempts]] at [[humor]] [[involving]] Lake's [[pregnancy]] are [[absolutely]] [[disastrous]], and any movie [[involving]] a Baldwin [[brother]] already has a [[strike]] against it. On a positive [[note]], [[Lang]] is [[still]] one of America's [[great]] [[underrated]] [[actors]], he alone [[almost]] makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I [[give]] this a 4. Fine performances and art [[orientation]] do not a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] [[deliver]]. This movie is so [[somber]] and [[demoralizing]], I [[would]] feel [[totally]] no [[gladness]] at the "[[gratified]]" [[ended]] [[involve]] the union strike. The [[attempting]] at [[mood]] [[encompassing]] Lake's [[childbirth]] are [[entirely]] [[tragic]], and any movie [[implicating]] a Baldwin [[sibling]] already has a [[hitting]] against it. On a positive [[notes]], [[Lengthy]] is [[again]] one of America's [[large]] [[underestimated]] [[protagonists]], he alone [[practically]] makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I [[confer]] this a 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Good Deaths. Good Mask. Cool Axe. Good Looking Girls....But Watch Out!!! No Plot and Little Scares Completely lower it's Standards. They Tried to make an "I Know what you Did Last Summer", but ended up making A "Scream". But Hey, What do people Expect From a Horror Movie? Answers Totally Vary. Rent It If You Want, but I Regret Ever Seeing It. --------------------------------------------- Result 2777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the worst adaption of a classic story I have ever seen. They needlessly modernize it and some points are actually just sick.

The songs rarely move along the story. They seem to be thrown in at random. The flying scene with Marley is pointless and ludicrous.

It's not only one of the worst movies I've seen, but it is definitely the worst musical I've ever seen.

It's probably only considered a classic because "A Christmas Carol" is such a classic story. Just because the original story was a classic doesn't mean that some cheap adaption is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Several]] posters have [[quoted]] Renoir voicing his [[desire]] to [[make]] a [[film]] [[showing]] Ingrid Bergman [[smiling]] to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all [[whilst]] the [[harsh]] reality is that only a [[select]] few [[got]] to do so. At this [[stage]] of her [[career]] Bergman couldn't get [[arrested]]; in 1949 she [[left]] Hollywood to make a [[picture]] in [[Europe]], [[fell]] for [[director]] Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in [[Italy]] she was [[probably]] ready to [[open]] a vein but [[within]] the [[year]], after [[making]] this for Renoir, she was back where she [[belonged]] and with an [[Oscar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[movies]] that Renoir made in [[color]] around this time and on [[balance]] it's better than The [[Golden]] [[Coach]], which isn't hard, and about [[even]] with French Can Can. Renoir [[probably]] figured that with so much going for her Bergman could [[get]] away with a [[couple]] of wooden [[leading]] [[men]] and Renoir [[picked]] two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid [[mahogany]] in both [[cases]]. The plot is actually [[based]] on a [[real]] [[incident]] in French [[history]] but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and [[concentrate]] on [[replicating]] the [[paintings]] of his [[father]] in set up after set up. In its pastel [[colors]] it [[resembles]] another [[film]] of the [[period]] Les [[Grandes]] Manouvres which is no [[bad]] [[thing]]. [[All]] in all it [[remains]] a [[pleasant]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. [[Dissimilar]] posters have [[mentioned]] Renoir voicing his [[desired]] to [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]] [[exhibiting]] Ingrid Bergman [[grinning]] to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all [[notwithstanding]] the [[stringent]] reality is that only a [[opt]] few [[did]] to do so. At this [[phase]] of her [[careers]] Bergman couldn't get [[apprehended]]; in 1949 she [[walkout]] Hollywood to make a [[photographs]] in [[European]], [[dipped]] for [[headmaster]] Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in [[Italia]] she was [[assuredly]] ready to [[opens]] a vein but [[inside]] the [[annum]], after [[doing]] this for Renoir, she was back where she [[owned]] and with an [[Oskar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[films]] that Renoir made in [[coloration]] around this time and on [[equilibrium]] it's better than The [[Dore]] [[Trainer]], which isn't hard, and about [[yet]] with French Can Can. Renoir [[admittedly]] figured that with so much going for her Bergman could [[obtain]] away with a [[coupling]] of wooden [[culminating]] [[mens]] and Renoir [[selecting]] two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid [[gaul]] in both [[lawsuits]]. The plot is actually [[base]] on a [[veritable]] [[incidents]] in French [[stories]] but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and [[concentrating]] on [[replicated]] the [[painting]] of his [[pere]] in set up after set up. In its pastel [[dye]] it [[reminds]] another [[cinematography]] of the [[periods]] Les [[Grands]] Manouvres which is no [[horrid]] [[stuff]]. [[Entire]] in all it [[leftovers]] a [[nice]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. --------------------------------------------- Result 2779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and [[considering]] that it was made in 1937, the [[results]] are [[excellent]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been [[called]] wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in [[fact]] a [[splendid]] performance, and one of the [[best]] transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the [[cast]], well this was MGM. They had the [[biggest]] roster of stars and [[character]] actors in Hollywood at the time, and a [[big]] budget to pay for the [[best]], and in the [[end]] they got the [[best]].

The [[film]] softens Wang Lung's [[marriage]] to O-lan somewhat. [[In]] the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he [[takes]] on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and [[reviewing]] that it was made in 1937, the [[consequences]] are [[wondrous]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been [[telephoned]] wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in [[facto]] a [[wondrous]] performance, and one of the [[bestest]] transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the [[casting]], well this was MGM. They had the [[bigger]] roster of stars and [[personage]] actors in Hollywood at the time, and a [[major]] budget to pay for the [[nicest]], and in the [[termination]] they got the [[bestest]].

The [[kino]] softens Wang Lung's [[wedlock]] to O-lan somewhat. [[Among]] the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he [[pick]] on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. --------------------------------------------- Result 2780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I had been [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] Dreamgirls for [[quite]] a while...what with all it's raving [[reviews]], [[nominations]] and media attention. And I [[must]] [[say]], the first quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[music]] scene back then. However, as the [[movie]] wore on, me and my [[whole]] [[family]] were [[bored]] out of our [[wits]]. The singing just kept coming, one after the other. I mean seriously, just one more music number and it would have broke even with [[RENT]].

Furthermore, I noticed [[hardly]] any [[character]] [[development]] in any of the characters; I just didn't [[care]] what happened to them! [[Even]] when Eddie Murphy's character died of a [[drug]] overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The [[characters]] were [[given]] a [[flimsy]] [[background]] about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there [[personalities]] were not revealed enough to [[draw]] me in.

Finally, the conflict was [[simply]] not [[significant]] enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the [[lack]] of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were [[wonderful]] [[movies]] in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would [[best]] suit [[someone]] who doesn't [[really]] [[care]] about an overall story, yet would enjoy two hours of entertaining and fun [[singing]] performances. I had been [[searching]] forward to [[see]] Dreamgirls for [[pretty]] a while...what with all it's raving [[scrutinize]], [[appointees]] and media attention. And I [[gotta]] [[told]], the first quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[musica]] scene back then. However, as the [[films]] wore on, me and my [[overall]] [[families]] were [[drilled]] out of our [[spirits]]. The singing just kept coming, one after the other. I mean seriously, just one more music number and it would have broke even with [[LEASED]].

Furthermore, I noticed [[practically]] any [[characters]] [[evolution]] in any of the characters; I just didn't [[healthcare]] what happened to them! [[Yet]] when Eddie Murphy's character died of a [[medication]] overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The [[trait]] were [[gave]] a [[weak]] [[context]] about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there [[personages]] were not revealed enough to [[attracts]] me in.

Finally, the conflict was [[mere]] not [[considerable]] enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the [[imperfection]] of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were [[sumptuous]] [[film]] in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would [[optimum]] suit [[everyone]] who doesn't [[truly]] [[caring]] about an overall story, yet would enjoy two hours of entertaining and fun [[sings]] performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I agree with everyone who says that this series was the best of the 'spy' genre. My husband and I were captivated by it when it first aired in the US and watched every episode. I tried at that time to purchase the series (I did tape all of it) but was told by WGBH that it was not available. I even considered writing to Ian Holm to see if he might have a copy! Like others, I purchased and read the Deighton series (in part to understand the complicated plot.) If the original version ever comes available on DVD, I'll be among the first in line to snap up a copy. Ian Holm's portrayal of the vulnerable but courageous Bernard Samson was amazing. (He is always amazing.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Carol, the young [[girl]] at the [[center]] of the story, is [[transplanted]] to a [[foreign]] [[land]], [[Spain]], at the [[height]] of the [[Civil]] War [[conflict]] in the late 30s. [[For]] this girl, everything is [[new]], in it's foreignness. The [[war]] and her father are her [[constant]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial [[culture]] that is [[years]] [[behind]] what she has in [[New]] York.

Imanol Uribe directs this [[film]] by the [[numbers]]. Carol's [[family]] is [[obviously]] divided, while Carol's [[mother]] is married to [[someone]] that is an [[air]] force pilot with the leftist faction, the [[rest]] of the family's sympathies are with the Franco and the fascists that won the [[conflict]].

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[easy]] [[film]] to watch. [[Northern]] Spain's [[magnificent]] [[landscape]] is [[shown]]. Don't [[expect]] a [[lot]] of [[action]] since most of what [[happens]] revolves [[around]] [[Carol]] and the young boys she befriends.

[[Clara]] Lago plays [[Carol]] with [[sincerity]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's [[mother]] Aurora, the one that went away to America. [[Rosa]] Maria Sarda is Maruja, the [[teacher]] who befriends [[Carol]]. [[Carmelo]] [[Gomez]], plays [[Alfonso]], the [[man]] that Aurora left [[behind]] when she [[left]] for [[America]]. This actor, who [[usually]] has lead roles in most Spanish [[films]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an [[enigma]] throughout the movie. Carol, the young [[dame]] at the [[centro]] of the story, is [[grafting]] to a [[alien]] [[earth]], [[Spaniards]], at the [[altitude]] of the [[Civilian]] War [[dispute]] in the late 30s. [[In]] this girl, everything is [[novel]], in it's foreignness. The [[warfare]] and her father are her [[persistent]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial [[cultivation]] that is [[ages]] [[backside]] what she has in [[Newer]] York.

Imanol Uribe directs this [[cinematography]] by the [[figures]]. Carol's [[families]] is [[apparently]] divided, while Carol's [[mommy]] is married to [[person]] that is an [[airline]] force pilot with the leftist faction, the [[resting]] of the family's sympathies are with the Franco and the fascists that won the [[conflicts]].

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[uncomplicated]] [[movies]] to watch. [[North]] Spain's [[superb]] [[scenery]] is [[showed]]. Don't [[hopes]] a [[batch]] of [[measures]] since most of what [[arises]] revolves [[throughout]] [[Carole]] and the young boys she befriends.

[[Claire]] Lago plays [[Carrol]] with [[candor]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's [[mommy]] Aurora, the one that went away to America. [[Pink]] Maria Sarda is Maruja, the [[teachers]] who befriends [[Carole]]. [[Camilo]] [[Fernandez]], plays [[Alphonse]], the [[hombre]] that Aurora left [[posterior]] when she [[gauche]] for [[Americas]]. This actor, who [[typically]] has lead roles in most Spanish [[cinematography]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an [[riddle]] throughout the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow (Robert Urich) finally accepts the [[invitation]] to [[work]] the Micro-Digitech [[Corporation]] in a space suit project, he moves with his [[beloved]] wife [[Patricia]] (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy ([[Soleil]] Moon Frye) to a [[huge]] [[modern]] [[house]] in the [[corporation]] compound. They meet their [[friend]] Tom [[Peterson]] (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[completely]] [[adapted]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[invites]] the Winslow [[family]] to [[join]] the Steaming [[Springs]] Country Club. [[Tom]] [[tries]] to [[seduce]] Matt telling him that [[every]] member of the club has a meteoric [[professional]] [[ascension]] in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[tempted]] with the [[offer]]. [[Later]] he is introduced to the [[director]] of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends Patricia and [[convinces]] her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the [[behavior]] of his [[family]] and decides to [[investigate]] the club, [[finding]] an evil [[secret]] about [[Jessica]] and the [[members]].

In the 80's, when I [[saw]] "[[Invitation]] to Hell", I liked this [[movie]] that partially [[recalls]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the behavior in a suburban compound. I have just [[seen]] it today, and I found a [[great]] metaphoric message against the big [[corporations]], when people literally sell their souls to the devil to climb positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author intended to give this interpretation to the [[story]], but I believe it fits [[perfectly]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite [[Para]] o [[Inferno]]" ("Invitation to [[Hell]]") When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow (Robert Urich) finally accepts the [[invite]] to [[collaboration]] the Micro-Digitech [[Companies]] in a space suit project, he moves with his [[sweetie]] wife [[Pat]] (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy ([[Sunlight]] Moon Frye) to a [[large]] [[fashionable]] [[housing]] in the [[businesses]] compound. They meet their [[boyfriend]] Tom [[Petersen]] (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[fully]] [[tailoring]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[invite]] the Winslow [[families]] to [[participates]] the Steaming [[Fountains]] Country Club. [[Tum]] [[endeavour]] to [[tempt]] Matt telling him that [[each]] member of the club has a meteoric [[occupational]] [[ascent]] in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[attempted]] with the [[offering]]. [[Afterward]] he is introduced to the [[headmaster]] of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends Patricia and [[persuades]] her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the [[behaviour]] of his [[families]] and decides to [[researches]] the club, [[conclusions]] an evil [[secretive]] about [[Jennifer]] and the [[member]].

In the 80's, when I [[observed]] "[[Invite]] to Hell", I liked this [[films]] that partially [[remind]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the behavior in a suburban compound. I have just [[saw]] it today, and I found a [[wondrous]] metaphoric message against the big [[entrepreneurial]], when people literally sell their souls to the devil to climb positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author intended to give this interpretation to the [[tale]], but I believe it fits [[abundantly]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite [[Paras]] o [[Hell]]" ("Invitation to [[Dammit]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 2784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My Tutor Friend is a well scripted romance comedy movie that has something similar to My Sassy Girl.. there's no kissing/sex scenes. Hollywood should learn more from Korean productions. Sex is not always required in a good romantic movie.

The movie is of light hearted tone with occasional cartoon CG scenes blended into the movie. I like the part when Ji-Hoon almost kissed Su-Wan. The funniest moment is when Ji-Hoon punched Su-Wan's first love because he dumped Su-Wan for another girl and he is going to be a father soon. How he became a father was revealed in the next scene, which brings smiles to the audience.

Mao points: 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I watched the un-aired [[episodes]] online and I was so sad that the show won't be back. It had the [[best]] cast of [[mature]], [[talented]] actors and an [[amazing]] [[chemistry]]. It [[seemed]] like all the actors are personal friends in [[real]] [[life]]. Towards the end the show became engaging, sexy and [[highly]] watchable. Of course, some of the [[story]] lines are not [[realistic]], so what... The [[characters]] are all [[likable]] and you [[root]] for them. The show reminded me a [[cross]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the [[City]]" and "Felicity". Big kudos to all the cast. [[Note]] to ABC execs: [[Nielsen]] ratings [[reports]] do not show you true results. The [[show]] audience will [[mostly]] [[record]] it. I've been very disappointed with [[major]] [[networks]] for flooding us with reality-TV or [[teenage]] oriented shows. Why to [[get]] a mature, thoughtful, well-acted [[material]] we have to [[switch]] to HBO or FX? I can only [[thank]] the [[network]] for putting the rest of the episodes online. The [[new]] [[stream]] media will gain more and more popularity [[among]] viewers. I watched the un-aired [[spells]] online and I was so sad that the show won't be back. It had the [[better]] cast of [[adult]], [[gifted]] actors and an [[noteworthy]] [[chem]]. It [[appeared]] like all the actors are personal friends in [[actual]] [[lives]]. Towards the end the show became engaging, sexy and [[heavily]] watchable. Of course, some of the [[stories]] lines are not [[practical]], so what... The [[attribute]] are all [[likeable]] and you [[origin]] for them. The show reminded me a [[rist]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the [[Town]]" and "Felicity". Big kudos to all the cast. [[Notes]] to ABC execs: [[Nelson]] ratings [[report]] do not show you true results. The [[spectacle]] audience will [[essentially]] [[recording]] it. I've been very disappointed with [[important]] [[network]] for flooding us with reality-TV or [[adolescent]] oriented shows. Why to [[obtain]] a mature, thoughtful, well-acted [[materials]] we have to [[switching]] to HBO or FX? I can only [[appreciation]] the [[grids]] for putting the rest of the episodes online. The [[newer]] [[creeks]] media will gain more and more popularity [[between]] viewers. --------------------------------------------- Result 2786 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This early John Wayne Lone Star western has a bit more going for it than the run-of-the-mill oaters Wayne had been making for Lone Star up until that time. For one, it has his old friend Paul Fix in it; Fix, being a much better actor then the standard Lone Star villain, brings a much needed professionalism to the surroundings instead of the usual hesitant line-readings often delivered in these oaters. The plot, about mistaken identity, payroll robbery and murder, is as trite and perfunctory as you'd expect it to be in a 1930s low-budget western, but Wayne's strapping good looks, easygoing charm and way with a line go a long way to making this more enjoyable. Plump, balding Eddy Chandler isn't quite believable as Wayne's womanizing "partner", and there's a running gag about something that happens whenever Chandler and Wayne are about to get into a fistfight that grows tiresome. On the other hand, Wayne's love interest is played by none other than Mary Kornman, the little "Mary" of the early "Little Rascals" fame. She is a grown-up 20-year-old now, blonde and cute as a button. Most of Wayne's leading ladies in these Lone Star/Monogram "B's" were fairly bland and colorless, but Mary is perky, cute and, yes, sexy. There's a scene in the general store, where she works, in which Wayne asks her to get him a bottle of "nerve tonic", which happens to be on the top shelf, so she has to get a ladder and climb up to the top shelf. Wayne's ogling her pert little backside as she ascends the steps, then again as she comes down, then again a few minuter later when he asks her to climb up and get him another bottle is surprisingly racy for a film made in 1935. Wayne makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is definitely checking out her butt. Anyway, it's an interesting little "B", not great, but not as choppy and random as many of his LoneStar productions of the time. The final gunfight isn't handled all that well, and Chandler gets somewhat irritating after a while, but all in all, it's worth a look, if only to see a cute and sexy Mary Kornman. --------------------------------------------- Result 2787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I really don't understand why people [[get]] so [[upset]] and pan this [[movie]]! Remember folks, this is an SNL [[movie]], not anything that is supposed to be [[unpredictable]] and original in plot or [[direction]]! The [[Ladies]] Man is a hilarious [[movie]], albeit stupid at times, with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[WONDERFUL]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim [[Meadows]]. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are [[unbelievable]] but its [[comedy]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this [[hilarious]] [[film]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people take this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent [[comedy]]. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" I really don't understand why people [[obtain]] so [[infuriated]] and pan this [[kino]]! Remember folks, this is an SNL [[cinematography]], not anything that is supposed to be [[unforeseeable]] and original in plot or [[directions]]! The [[Dames]] Man is a hilarious [[kino]], albeit stupid at times, with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[WONDROUS]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim [[Grasslands]]. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are [[inconceivable]] but its [[charade]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this [[humorous]] [[flick]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people take this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent [[travesty]]. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I couldn't not recommend a Christmas movie more than this worthless piece of drivel (trust me, double negatives are required here -- it's that bad). This film was in trouble from the opening credits when it was revealed that the screenwriter was the same person as the songwriter. The musical numbers are all far too long and none of them any good ("Thank You Very Much" has a decent melody, but the lyrics are stupid beyond words). I would gladly bear the chains worn by Scrooge in the film's bizarre hell sequence than sit through this insult to movie musicals again.

The only entertaining part of this movie (completely unintentional by the way) involves Alec Guinness as Jacob Marley. Dressed in a silly powder white costume, Guinness foppishly prances through his scenes in what was either an attempt to make it appear as though he was floating like a ghost, or to show his utter disdain with having to be in this dreadful movie. Albert Finney, meanwhile, blends the best of Alistar Sim and Charles Laughton to create his hopelessly loathsome character of Quasimodo/Scrooge. Finney's Scrooge is so hideous a person, it's impossible to believe his transformation.

Steer clear of this abomination of filmmaking at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you [[sure]] will [[appreciate]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[blood]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren [[Illusion]]) & [[Ryu]] Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[touch]] the zenith in the final [[showdown]] at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests [[versus]] Buddhist monks and the [[beautiful]] [[visions]] provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A good Japanese [[flick]] for a rainy [[summer]] [[night]]. Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you [[convinced]] will [[thankful]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[chrissakes]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren [[Chimera]]) & [[Yoo]] Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[toque]] the zenith in the final [[standoff]] at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests [[vs]] Buddhist monks and the [[wondrous]] [[notions]] provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A good Japanese [[gesture]] for a rainy [[hsia]] [[soir]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Zombie [[Bloodbath]] is a movie made by zombie [[fans]] for [[zombie]] [[fans]] with a [[true]] [[love]] of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The [[fact]] this movie got made at all is a miracle. It is like a [[huge]] mashing of [[every]] zombie movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to [[enjoy]] with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little [[movie]] three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie [[Bloodbath]] is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[fun]] [[movie]]. If you hate this film so much, don't buy it. There is no need for personal attacks and to call the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[great]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to trash others. There are bad reviews and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[forum]] to personally attack the director of this [[movie]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. Zombie [[Bloodletting]] is a movie made by zombie [[amateurs]] for [[ghoul]] [[followers]] with a [[truthful]] [[likes]] of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The [[facto]] this movie got made at all is a miracle. It is like a [[massive]] mashing of [[any]] zombie movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to [[enjoying]] with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little [[kino]] three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie [[Butchery]] is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[amusing]] [[kino]]. If you hate this film so much, don't buy it. There is no need for personal attacks and to call the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[wondrous]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to trash others. There are bad reviews and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[fora]] to personally attack the director of this [[kino]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't like using the word "awful" to describe any work of the cinema for which a great deal of time, effort, talent and money is spent in its creation but Zefferelli's attempt to adapt Charlotte Brontë's novel 'Jane Eyre' is a total waste of time.

The script is lacking in finesse and power, everything explained to the viewer in no uncertain terms, leaving little to the imagination. The lead actors are woefully miscast, clearly hired for their star names, and the musical score drippy and dull. Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt have absolutely no chemistry with one another at all. She is like a wet noodle, worse even than Joan Fontaine, who at least was capable of some modicum of emotional involvement in what should be a story of frustrated passion. And William Hurt acts the entire film on one tone and that tone is flat and devoid of energy. Of course the limp and vapid script does not aid any of these otherwise fine actors in their efforts to bring any whiff of life to this flick.

Joan Plowright's Mrs Fairfax is like some Disney creation who keeps popping up to sweeten scenes in which she would have been best left out.

There is no mystery surrounding the story of Rochester's first wife. The role of the would-be second wife, played like a Barbie Doll by Elle MacPhearson, is an empty cipher.

Fiona Shaw, a very great actress, is completely wasted as Jane's Aunt, Mrs Reed. She would have been better-cast as Mrs Fairfax. Only Amanda Root, as Jane's beloved school teacher, evokes any authentic sympathy or believability.

I saw this version of 'Jane Eyre' after viewing Robert Young's for British television, made in 1997, starring Ciaran Hinds, Samantha Morgan and Gemma Jones. There is no comparison. Young's vital, romantic and deeply moving version is like an exploding nova compared to Zefferelli's wet squib.

I will be interested now to see the 1970 version with Timothy Dalton, about which I've read some very good things on this web-site. I am amazed at how many people liked Zefferelli's Yorkshire picture book.

About all I can say good about this film is that the house is beautiful and the cinematography vividly colored, beyond that it is a complete dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 2792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie is even a big step down [[form]] the typical fare dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[horrible]]. Even Boman Irani, who [[always]] [[manages]] to [[shine]], goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not [[memorable]] [[either]]. And in spite trying [[hard]], the female leads don't [[manage]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[capable]] of far [[better]] [[projects]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this monstrosity is even beneath his limited [[capabilities]] as an actor. Esha Deol and Amrita [[Rao]] are [[horrible]] in [[badly]] [[written]] cliché roles. It's high time for [[Indra]] Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. Hope he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in [[better]] hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. This movie is even a big step down [[forma]] the typical fare dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[frightful]]. Even Boman Irani, who [[perpetually]] [[administered]] to [[gloss]], goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not [[unforgettable]] [[nor]]. And in spite trying [[stiff]], the female leads don't [[administer]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[able]] of far [[optimum]] [[project]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this monstrosity is even beneath his limited [[abilities]] as an actor. Esha Deol and Amrita [[Rau]] are [[abysmal]] in [[sorely]] [[writes]] cliché roles. It's high time for [[Andra]] Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. Hope he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in [[optimum]] hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is so bad, you can't [[imagine]]. The acting is terrible, even [[worse]] than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any [[sense]] at all. The story [[could]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot holes were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[satisfy]] the audience. The actors were [[handsome]] for example the former Miss Switzerland and the main character was even hung ([[woah]]!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.[[yes]] that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm going to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only [[want]] to be [[entertained]] for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this kind of films influence teenagers to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in [[fact]] is only stupid and [[turns]] them into brainless ignorant and egocentric [[idiots]]. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[avoid]] this [[terrible]] flick at any costs and for that to save your [[wits]]!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) This film is so bad, you can't [[imagining]]. The acting is terrible, even [[worst]] than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any [[sensing]] at all. The story [[did]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot holes were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[cater]] the audience. The actors were [[sumptuous]] for example the former Miss Switzerland and the main character was even hung ([[wow]]!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.[[yep]] that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm going to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only [[wanted]] to be [[distracted]] for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this kind of films influence teenagers to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in [[facto]] is only stupid and [[revolves]] them into brainless ignorant and egocentric [[fools]]. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[forestall]] this [[scary]] flick at any costs and for that to save your [[minds]]!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) --------------------------------------------- Result 2794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to be the cheesiest, stupidest, most retarded monster film of all time. It's a complete joke that this even surfaced into theaters. This is sort of like watching the Loch Ness monster in rural America. This movie deserves to be thrown in a toilet and completely forgotten. John Carradine, shame on you. The people involved in this moronic pile of trash need to be lobotomized. Wait! Maybe I'm giving them too much credit. I'm sure they were lobotomized before the filming. How else can one explain the utter and sheer stupidity that this bucket of crap contains. Don't waste a minute of your life watching this. Don't even waste your time sending a review. --------------------------------------------- Result 2795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a great film Classic from the 40's and well produced. There are very dramatic scenes in this film with John Garfield,(Al Schmid),"Force of Evil",'48 and Dane Clark,(Lee Diamond),"Last Rites",'88, fighting the Japs during WWII being completely surrounded and with only one machine-gun. When Al Schmid was able to go home after being wounded with a horrible injury, his problems just started to begin with his family and engaged girl friend. Dane Clark gave an outstanding supporting role as Lee Diamond, who did everything to help his buddy Al get his life together again. There is never a complete victory to War and lets not forget all the Brave Wounded Military personnel in Veterans Hospitals from All the Wars and our present Iraq Vets! --------------------------------------------- Result 2796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[film]] actually [[manages]] to be [[mindless]] enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the [[film]] [[ends]] up being too '[[confused]].' [[While]] I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of '[[buddy]] cop' [[films]] I got drawn in to the [[characters]] who foil each other brilliantly but in the [[end]] the [[film]] relies too much on chase sequences as a [[crutch]] and I [[lost]] interest.

The filmmakers did a [[great]] job of getting the [[characters]] [[alone]] and doing their own thing and we got to [[see]] who they are and [[identified]] with both cops [[early]] on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[pathetic]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the bad filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad [[enough]], Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely [[meaningless]] to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer [[care]] about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

[[While]] I [[could]] go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent [[story]], I won't. This could've been a very [[enjoyable]] [[formula]] [[film]] but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. [[Sadly]] [[none]] of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the [[likes]] of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. This [[movie]] actually [[runs]] to be [[senseless]] enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the [[filmmaking]] [[culminates]] up being too '[[muddled]].' [[Though]] I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of '[[pal]] cop' [[kino]] I got drawn in to the [[personage]] who foil each other brilliantly but in the [[terminate]] the [[filmmaking]] relies too much on chase sequences as a [[sugarcane]] and I [[outof]] interest.

The filmmakers did a [[whopping]] job of getting the [[character]] [[merely]] and doing their own thing and we got to [[seeing]] who they are and [[defined]] with both cops [[quickly]] on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[unfortunate]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the bad filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad [[satisfactorily]], Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely [[senseless]] to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer [[healthcare]] about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

[[Although]] I [[did]] go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent [[saga]], I won't. This could've been a very [[agreeable]] [[formulas]] [[flick]] but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. [[Regrettably]] [[nos]] of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the [[adores]] of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. --------------------------------------------- Result 2797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I saw this on cable recently and kinda enjoyed it. I've been reading the comments here and it seems that everyone likes the second half more than the first half. Personally, I enjoyed the [[first]] story (too bad that wasn't extended.) The second story, I thought, was cliched. And that "California Dreaming," if I hear that one more time... Chungking Express is alright, but it's not something that mainstream audiences will catch on to see, like "Crouching Tiger." I saw this on cable recently and kinda enjoyed it. I've been reading the comments here and it seems that everyone likes the second half more than the first half. Personally, I enjoyed the [[fiirst]] story (too bad that wasn't extended.) The second story, I thought, was cliched. And that "California Dreaming," if I hear that one more time... Chungking Express is alright, but it's not something that mainstream audiences will catch on to see, like "Crouching Tiger." --------------------------------------------- Result 2798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] (I'll indicate in this review the point where spoilers [[begin]].) My [[dissatisfaction]] is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster writing.

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[synopsis]] about the [[lack]] of diversity in the [[characters]] and scope of the [[stories]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[across]] as if it's inhabited only by the cast of [[Gossip]] [[Girl]] (this is [[coming]] from [[someone]] who [[likes]] [[Gossip]] [[Girl]]). A few minority [[characters]] are written into the stories, but they are [[included]] by [[obligation]], while we can see the gears under the [[film]] so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but [[falling]] ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything [[falls]] short. [[All]] [[characters]], white plus a few token [[minorities]], are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people [[concepts]]. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a [[way]] that for each vignette in the [[film]] the [[audience]] is treated to what I'd [[say]] is a "gag": we [[get]] a [[basic]] conceit, then some punchline [[intended]] to be a [[clever]] twist. But even if we [[suspended]] cynicism for a [[moment]] to [[say]], "[[Okay]], that was a surprise"...the [[stories]] are [[still]] not that interesting, because they, too, are [[shallow]]. When you fashion [[stories]] so that their existence [[hinges]] [[solely]] on the unexpectedness of the [[ending]], you're [[writing]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[movie]] [[primarily]] [[tries]] to [[tell]] romantic [[stories]]. That's fine. But [[romance]] is [[amazing]], [[deep]], [[sometimes]] [[complex]]. These "[[romantic]]" [[stories]] each [[feature]] a girl and a [[boy]] who at some point share the same [[location]] and get to [[look]] at each other. [[Words]] [[exchange]], [[thoughts]] are [[projected]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to [[communicate]] to the [[audience]] [[merely]] that one [[person]] is attracted to another.

[[Meaning]], there is no seduction (in the [[broad]] [[sense]]), no [[tension]], and neither [[confrontation]] nor communion between the wills of two [[different]] people [[trying]] to reconcile their existence to [[accommodate]] the Other. The only [[story]] [[involving]] a superficial "[[seduction]]" is [[told]] just so the audience ends up being surprised that the guy (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been [[made]] more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. (I'll indicate in this review the point where spoilers [[starting]].) My [[discontent]] is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster writing.

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[recap]] about the [[lacking]] of diversity in the [[attribute]] and scope of the [[histories]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[in]] as if it's inhabited only by the cast of [[Chatter]] [[Chica]] (this is [[forthcoming]] from [[person]] who [[fond]] [[Rumor]] [[Daughters]]). A few minority [[character]] are written into the stories, but they are [[inscribed]] by [[commitment]], while we can see the gears under the [[filmmaking]] so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but [[dipping]] ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything [[drops]] short. [[Entire]] [[character]], white plus a few token [[minority]], are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people [[visions]]. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a [[ways]] that for each vignette in the [[flick]] the [[viewers]] is treated to what I'd [[said]] is a "gag": we [[gets]] a [[fundamental]] conceit, then some punchline [[intend]] to be a [[smarter]] twist. But even if we [[discontinued]] cynicism for a [[time]] to [[told]], "[[Aight]], that was a surprise"...the [[histories]] are [[nonetheless]] not that interesting, because they, too, are [[cursory]]. When you fashion [[histories]] so that their existence [[hinge]] [[exclusively]] on the unexpectedness of the [[ceasing]], you're [[handwriting]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[films]] [[mostly]] [[attempted]] to [[say]] romantic [[fairytales]]. That's fine. But [[romanticism]] is [[marvellous]], [[profound]], [[occasionally]] [[tortuous]]. These "[[sentimental]]" [[storytelling]] each [[idiosyncrasies]] a girl and a [[dude]] who at some point share the same [[positioning]] and get to [[peek]] at each other. [[Phrase]] [[shares]], [[reflections]] are [[prognosis]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to [[interact]] to the [[viewers]] [[just]] that one [[persona]] is attracted to another.

[[Meanings]], there is no seduction (in the [[broader]] [[feeling]]), no [[tensions]], and neither [[encounters]] nor communion between the wills of two [[divergent]] people [[striving]] to reconcile their existence to [[accommodating]] the Other. The only [[conte]] [[encompassing]] a superficial "[[allure]]" is [[said]] just so the audience ends up being surprised that the guy (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been [[accomplished]] more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Sure, [[Titanic]] was a [[good]] [[movie]], the first [[time]] you see it, but you really should see it a [[second]] [[time]] and your [[opinion]] of the film will definetly [[change]]. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how [[romantic]]. The second [[time]] (and I am not the only one to [[think]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie [[thinking]], When is this d**n ship going to sink??? And even this is not as impressive when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[bad]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was [[wonderful]]. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. Sure, [[Herculean]] was a [[buena]] [[movies]], the first [[period]] you see it, but you really should see it a [[seconds]] [[period]] and your [[visualizing]] of the film will definetly [[amended]]. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how [[sentimental]]. The second [[period]] (and I am not the only one to [[reckon]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie [[ideology]], When is this d**n ship going to sink??? And even this is not as impressive when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[rotten]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was [[wondrous]]. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. --------------------------------------------- Result 2800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] [[Given]] its time of release, the [[story]] that unravels in 1950 thriller '[[Panic]] in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The [[corpse]] of a [[mysterious]] illegal [[immigrant]] is found and [[passed]] off as a [[nobody]] until further [[examination]] from a public [[health]] [[inspector]] who claims the corpse [[carries]] a [[strain]] of bubonic plague. [[Yet]] with the [[current]] [[drama]] in the [[world]] [[today]], this [[strangely]] [[helps]] this [[film]] in appearing credible for today's [[viewers]]. The [[cast]] and [[crew]] are [[flawless]]. [[Richard]] Widmark in his [[first]] role following his breakthrough performance in '[[Night]] and the [[City]],' [[Jack]] Palance in his [[chilling]] [[film]] debut, [[also]] [[starring]] in this [[film]] are [[Paul]] Douglas and a young (and rather [[cute]]) Barbara Bel Geddes. A [[whole]] slew of uncredited, non-professional [[actors]] (typical of director Kazan) [[fill]] in the remaining [[slots]]. [[Elia]] Kazan directs, Joe [[MacDonald]] films (he would later work with [[Richard]] Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the [[great]] Alfred [[Newman]] [[scores]] it. [[Nearly]] [[everyone]] involved here has [[done]] better work, '[[Panic]] in the Streets' is [[quite]] the [[rewarding]] watch, nonetheless. [[Especially]] for the film-noir [[enthusiast]]. [[Granted]] its time of release, the [[storytelling]] that unravels in 1950 thriller '[[Scare]] in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The [[cadaver]] of a [[cryptic]] illegal [[immigration]] is found and [[adopted]] off as a [[anyone]] until further [[inspects]] from a public [[gesundheit]] [[inspectors]] who claims the corpse [[carry]] a [[tensions]] of bubonic plague. [[Even]] with the [[contemporary]] [[opera]] in the [[globe]] [[thursday]], this [[suspiciously]] [[contributes]] this [[kino]] in appearing credible for today's [[onlookers]]. The [[casting]] and [[crewman]] are [[faultless]]. [[Ritchie]] Widmark in his [[fiirst]] role following his breakthrough performance in '[[Nocturne]] and the [[Ville]],' [[Jacques]] Palance in his [[chill]] [[films]] debut, [[similarly]] [[championships]] in this [[movies]] are [[Paulo]] Douglas and a young (and rather [[purty]]) Barbara Bel Geddes. A [[total]] slew of uncredited, non-professional [[players]] (typical of director Kazan) [[filling]] in the remaining [[slits]]. [[Ilia]] Kazan directs, Joe [[mcdonald]] films (he would later work with [[Richards]] Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the [[wondrous]] Alfred [[Neumann]] [[dozens]] it. [[Practically]] [[someone]] involved here has [[completed]] better work, '[[Terror]] in the Streets' is [[utterly]] the [[bonuses]] watch, nonetheless. [[Concretely]] for the film-noir [[amateurs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It is [[hard]] to describe Bug in words, it is one of those [[films]] that [[truly]] has to be [[seen]] to be [[understood]]. It follows a [[narrative]] that is more [[fluid]] and interesting than [[anything]] I have [[seen]] lately in a Hollywood [[release]]. As its [[characters]] [[react]] to the [[chain]] of [[events]] in [[different]] [[ways]], and as the events [[dictate]] [[different]] [[paths]] for the characters to follow, the audience is [[merely]] an [[observer]]. The [[almost]] Proustian narrative [[flow]] of [[thought]] to [[thought]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, [[waiting]] [[anxiously]] to see how it all [[works]] out in the [[end]]. And as far as the thematic [[elements]]...there is a [[particular]] sequence in the [[film]] that goes from melancholy, to bright and [[beautiful]], and then to [[tragic]], all within the span of about a minute. And it [[works]].

This [[movie]] is [[pure]] [[magic]]. It [[reminds]] one why [[independent]] [[film]] is [[perhaps]] the [[brightest]] [[star]] the film [[industry]] [[currently]] has. [[Perhaps]] with more [[movies]] of Bug's quality, people will [[start]] to take [[notice]]. It is [[arduous]] to describe Bug in words, it is one of those [[movie]] that [[honestly]] has to be [[watched]] to be [[understand]]. It follows a [[descriptive]] that is more [[liquefied]] and interesting than [[something]] I have [[watched]] lately in a Hollywood [[emancipate]]. As its [[nature]] [[reacting]] to the [[string]] of [[incidents]] in [[multiple]] [[method]], and as the events [[foist]] [[various]] [[trajectories]] for the characters to follow, the audience is [[only]] an [[observers]]. The [[around]] Proustian narrative [[flows]] of [[brainchild]] to [[idea]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, [[hoping]] [[impatiently]] to see how it all [[collaborated]] out in the [[termination]]. And as far as the thematic [[facets]]...there is a [[special]] sequence in the [[movie]] that goes from melancholy, to bright and [[leggy]], and then to [[dire]], all within the span of about a minute. And it [[collaborated]].

This [[kino]] is [[unadulterated]] [[witchcraft]]. It [[recalled]] one why [[autonomous]] [[kino]] is [[presumably]] the [[bright]] [[superstar]] the film [[industria]] [[presently]] has. [[Presumably]] with more [[film]] of Bug's quality, people will [[started]] to take [[advices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Slasher films are often seen as the derivative, repetitive and frankly unoriginal. I happen to to be a horror movie fan, but this film was just so poor, words fail me. The script is severely lacking, the plot is ridiculous, the acting astoundingly bad. Just an all round stinker, that I wasted time of my life on. This had all the entertainment value of a 15th sequel to a film that was dire in the first place.

Who greenlit this mess?

I only liked two things in this movie. The first was the killer's mask - which was nice. The second was the Austrailian affinity with humourous profanity.

Save yourself, and avoid this hideous mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Although it really isn't such a terribly [[movie]] (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very difficult to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, still no one seems to realize it's an [[incredibly]] stupid [[premise]] that can't possibly result in a halfway decent horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[shamelessly]] imitates every [[imaginable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of [[pathetic]] stereotypes, constantly dealing with [[clichéd]] issues and [[endlessly]] arguing about [[dreadfully]] [[unimportant]] matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership [[capabilities]] now after being more or less responsible for the [[death]] of the [[previous]] (and far more [[loved]]) [[Captain]] Churchill. The other [[annoying]] [[characters]] [[include]] a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy [[macho]] pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the [[males]] on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "[[Aliens]]" was Latino) and the army's most [[valuable]] secret [[weapon]]: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can [[spot]] [[enemies]] when they're still light-years away and she can also do [[wickedly]] sexy [[things]] with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all [[learn]] to [[work]] as a team when forced to face the [[ultimate]] vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably [[boring]] when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. Although it really isn't such a terribly [[kino]] (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very difficult to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, still no one seems to realize it's an [[surprisingly]] stupid [[hypothesis]] that can't possibly result in a halfway decent horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[brazenly]] imitates every [[unimaginable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of [[unlucky]] stereotypes, constantly dealing with [[clichés]] issues and [[perpetually]] arguing about [[excruciatingly]] [[inconsequential]] matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership [[abilities]] now after being more or less responsible for the [[killings]] of the [[former]] (and far more [[enjoyed]]) [[Skipper]] Churchill. The other [[exasperating]] [[traits]] [[incorporate]] a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy [[male]] pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the [[male]] on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "[[Extraterrestrial]]" was Latino) and the army's most [[precious]] secret [[weaponry]]: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can [[stain]] [[nemesis]] when they're still light-years away and she can also do [[devilishly]] sexy [[aspects]] with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all [[learns]] to [[works]] as a team when forced to face the [[final]] vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably [[tiresome]] when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2804 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[movie]] and acting are not bad and Jay [[Hernandez]] does a [[good]] [[job]] playing Calito Brigante but the [[movie]] [[forgets]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie. The [[makers]] of this prequel [[clearly]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Way]] or at [[least]] did not [[care]] about [[continuity]]. This movie is a prequel which means the [[original]] movie has already laid out some history for us and this [[movie]] should end where the original begins or at least lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old friends from the original make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[even]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the [[original]], is in the movie but he plays a completely different [[character]]. The original takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Considering]] this [[movie]] takes place [[less]] than 5 [[years]] [[earlier]], wouldn't you [[think]] one of Carlito's [[long]] [[time]] friends [[would]] make an appearance? [[In]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[years]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the [[end]] of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the beginning of the original, Carlito has spent 5 years in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy ending it's an [[insult]] to the [[intelligence]] of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the lack of continuity that made this film go direct to video release. The [[films]] and acting are not bad and Jay [[Rodriguez]] does a [[buena]] [[labour]] playing Calito Brigante but the [[movies]] [[ignores]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie. The [[producer]] of this prequel [[apparently]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Path]] or at [[lowest]] did not [[healthcare]] about [[continuance]]. This movie is a prequel which means the [[upfront]] movie has already laid out some history for us and this [[filmmaking]] should end where the original begins or at least lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old friends from the original make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[yet]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the [[preliminary]], is in the movie but he plays a completely different [[traits]]. The original takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Consideration]] this [[film]] takes place [[fewest]] than 5 [[olds]] [[ago]], wouldn't you [[reckon]] one of Carlito's [[longer]] [[times]] friends [[could]] make an appearance? [[At]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[ages]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the [[ends]] of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the beginning of the original, Carlito has spent 5 years in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy ending it's an [[offend]] to the [[intelligentsia]] of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the lack of continuity that made this film go direct to video release. --------------------------------------------- Result 2805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[longing]] to trample this movie into the [[dust]] of [[oblivion]].[[So]] let me me tell you why I feel this [[way]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[film]] or the like,I [[might]] have [[enjoyed]] it.But right now,I'm [[totally]] speechless.

*[[SPOILER]]...[[Though]] I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first [[HUGE]] [[flaw]]. If I did not know that the [[movie]] is called "Darkness - The VAMPIRE Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

[[Second]] bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "[[Pathetic]]" is the only only word that I [[could]] use here.

Third [[weakness]]: the [[actors]]. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was [[treated]] to some stupid looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should [[simply]] have advertized the movie saying "cheap B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is [[blasphemy]] against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[yearn]] to trample this movie into the [[stardust]] of [[wayside]].[[Accordingly]] let me me tell you why I feel this [[ways]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[filmmaking]] or the like,I [[apt]] have [[adored]] it.But right now,I'm [[entirely]] speechless.

*[[BAFFLE]]...[[Notwithstanding]] I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first [[WHOPPING]] [[imperfection]]. If I did not know that the [[filmmaking]] is called "Darkness - The VAMPIRE Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

[[Seconds]] bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "[[Pitiable]]" is the only only word that I [[would]] use here.

Third [[flaw]]: the [[protagonists]]. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was [[addressed]] to some stupid looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should [[purely]] have advertized the movie saying "cheap B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is [[sacrilege]] against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] That's right. The movie is better than the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book. But the movie is just so much better. This film has Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall at their best. (I haven't seen Scatman Crothers and obviously Danny Lloyd in anything else.) Some of the ideas used in this movie are better than the ones used in the book. But I already talked about those in my comment on the mini series. But, I missed a few. The film is shot at a better location than where the mini series was shot. And the REDRUM scenes are creepier than those in the book. So if you're looking for a great movie, get Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. But count on having nightmares every night for 3 weeks --------------------------------------------- Result 2807 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Peter Sellers (one of my favorite actors) is mildly amusing in this 1970 turkey, but the script is so lame and insulting that even Goldie Hawn's youth (just after her Oscar win) cannot begin to pull this one out of the mud. As a skirt-chasing celeb in his 40's, Sellers mostly embarrasses himself to the nth degree.

A 3 out of 10. Best performance = ? Nicky Henson plays a young study type.

I hope Hawn and Sellers were paid well, because I see no other reason for tripe like this in 1970 (a very good year for films - CATCH-22, M.A.S.H., HUSBANDS, JOE, WUSA, FIVE EASY PIECES and many others). You can't win them all! --------------------------------------------- Result 2808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The beginning of the 90s brought many "quirky" and "off-beat" [[independent]] [[films]], a particular sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual desert [[crime]] [[movie]]. [[Others]] of [[note]] are "[[Wild]] at [[Heart]]", "From [[Dusk]] Til Dawn", and to a certain [[extent]] "Natural [[Born]] [[Killers]]". [[Good]] [[films]] like those [[spawned]] [[junk]] like "[[Highway]] 666", "[[Destiny]] [[Turns]] on the [[Radio]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula [[Moon]]". It's a comedy that [[aims]] for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[keeps]] [[going]] to the point of [[irritation]]. [[While]] the [[pursuit]] [[across]] the spirit-world of the [[desert]] and the [[casting]] of Chris [[Penn]] are [[good]] [[ideas]], the [[film]] is not [[dirty]] enough or hard enough to be a [[good]] [[crime]] [[movie]], and isn't [[focused]] enough on [[laughs]] to [[really]] be a [[comedy]]. I won't blow the [[ending]], but let's just say it's [[bad]]. The [[film]] is [[basically]] a [[bad]] side [[effect]] of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. The beginning of the 90s brought many "quirky" and "off-beat" [[autonomous]] [[cinema]], a particular sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual desert [[misdemeanor]] [[cinema]]. [[Else]] of [[memo]] are "[[Sauvage]] at [[Heartland]]", "From [[Nightfall]] Til Dawn", and to a certain [[amplitude]] "Natural [[Ould]] [[Assassins]]". [[Alright]] [[cinematographic]] like those [[consorted]] [[trash]] like "[[Superhighway]] 666", "[[Destinies]] [[Revolves]] on the [[Radios]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula [[Luna]]". It's a comedy that [[aiming]] for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[retains]] [[go]] to the point of [[annoyance]]. [[Albeit]] the [[pursuing]] [[throughout]] the spirit-world of the [[deserts]] and the [[cast]] of Chris [[Pennsylvania]] are [[buena]] [[insights]], the [[flick]] is not [[squalid]] enough or hard enough to be a [[buena]] [[felony]] [[filmmaking]], and isn't [[concentrated]] enough on [[giggles]] to [[truly]] be a [[humour]]. I won't blow the [[terminated]], but let's just say it's [[unfavourable]]. The [[filmmaking]] is [[broadly]] a [[negative]] side [[effects]] of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. --------------------------------------------- Result 2809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I've known about Bettie [[Page]] for [[many]] a year now. The soft-core [[porn]] images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" [[look]] is also [[still]] hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[today]] as it did then. So I watched this [[film]] with quite a [[bit]] of familiarity to begin with. The [[result]] did not [[disappoint]].

[[Among]] other [[things]], it was [[hugely]] entertaining to see the movie's [[recreation]] of actual figures like Irving Klaw, [[John]] [[Willie]], and [[Bunny]] Yeager – all consider trailblazers [[today]]. Mary Harron did an [[excellent]] [[job]] [[creating]] the [[desired]] [[ambiance]] of [[sexual]] [[repression]] and [[hypocrisy]] in 1950's [[America]] along with a [[sexuality]] that, by today's [[standards]], was innocent in the [[extreme]]. I particularly [[liked]] the [[use]] of monochrome [[versus]] [[color]] as a visual [[shorthand]] for the emotional and spiritual [[climate]] Bettie [[found]] herself in.

I [[think]] that Gretchen Mol did an [[excellent]] [[job]] of [[presenting]] the [[character]] of Bettie in all her innocent [[sexuality]] and all her utter naiveté. Bettie [[loved]] to look [[pretty]], [[loved]] the attention, [[saw]] [[nothing]] wrong with nudity, and [[enjoyed]] dressing up in "[[silly]] [[outfits]]" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and [[deeply]] fetishistic [[desires]] all that evoked were [[completely]] lost on her. To this day she [[still]] doesn't [[understand]] "what all the [[fuss]] was about" when it [[comes]] to her [[pictures]] or the S&[[M]] content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too [[simple]] to [[understand]] it's just that she simply doesn't "[[get]] it" about fetishism and never will. No [[harm]] there. Bettie [[Page]] is [[simply]] being who she is. The [[film]] captured this [[quite]] [[nicely]].

The social [[atmosphere]] of the 1950's [[depicted]] by Ms. Harron and [[written]] by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The [[hypocrisy]] and [[repression]] combined with the massive ignorance about our [[sexuality]] all [[combined]] to a [[frighteningly]] [[stifling]] world. The [[film]] well [[captures]] this and [[brings]] to [[cheering]] as Bettie endures it all with her [[unshakeable]] [[faith]] and her [[unchangeable]] naiveté.

This [[film]] was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this [[film]] even for those folks with [[little]] to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such [[interests]], then this film is a must see. I've known about Bettie [[Newsweek]] for [[several]] a year now. The soft-core [[pornographic]] images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" [[glance]] is also [[however]] hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[thursday]] as it did then. So I watched this [[movies]] with quite a [[bitten]] of familiarity to begin with. The [[findings]] did not [[defraud]].

[[In]] other [[aspects]], it was [[terribly]] entertaining to see the movie's [[recreational]] of actual figures like Irving Klaw, [[Johannes]] [[Willy]], and [[Rabbits]] Yeager – all consider trailblazers [[yesterday]]. Mary Harron did an [[brilliant]] [[workplace]] [[create]] the [[hoped]] [[mood]] of [[sexually]] [[suppression]] and [[hypocrite]] in 1950's [[Americans]] along with a [[sex]] that, by today's [[standard]], was innocent in the [[tremendous]]. I particularly [[wished]] the [[utilise]] of monochrome [[vs]] [[dye]] as a visual [[abbreviation]] for the emotional and spiritual [[weather]] Bettie [[discoveries]] herself in.

I [[believing]] that Gretchen Mol did an [[wonderful]] [[labour]] of [[introducing]] the [[characters]] of Bettie in all her innocent [[sex]] and all her utter naiveté. Bettie [[loves]] to look [[belle]], [[cared]] the attention, [[watched]] [[anything]] wrong with nudity, and [[adored]] dressing up in "[[ridiculous]] [[costume]]" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and [[critically]] fetishistic [[aspirations]] all that evoked were [[utterly]] lost on her. To this day she [[again]] doesn't [[realise]] "what all the [[commotion]] was about" when it [[arises]] to her [[images]] or the S&[[meters]] content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too [[mere]] to [[comprehend]] it's just that she simply doesn't "[[obtain]] it" about fetishism and never will. No [[damage]] there. Bettie [[Newsweek]] is [[solely]] being who she is. The [[kino]] captured this [[pretty]] [[politely]].

The social [[atmospheric]] of the 1950's [[exemplified]] by Ms. Harron and [[authored]] by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The [[hypocritical]] and [[suppression]] combined with the massive ignorance about our [[sex]] all [[merged]] to a [[terribly]] [[choking]] world. The [[cinema]] well [[catch]] this and [[puts]] to [[chanting]] as Bettie endures it all with her [[unflinching]] [[fe]] and her [[constant]] naiveté.

This [[movie]] was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this [[cinema]] even for those folks with [[petite]] to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such [[benefit]], then this film is a must see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] There is [[absolutely]] no plot in this [[movie]] ...no [[character]] [[development]]...no [[climax]]...nothing. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[So]] there you [[go]]...as a [[movie]] overall is pretty bad, but if you [[like]] a [[brainless]] [[flick]] that [[offer]] [[nothing]] but just [[good]] [[action]] scene then watch this [[movie]]. Do not [[expect]] [[nothing]] more that just that.[[Decent]] acting and a not so [[bad]] [[direction]]..A [[couple]] of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a [[little]] bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really [[hot]] girl.... [[White]] is a [[great]] martial [[artist]] and a decent actor. I really [[hope]] he can [[land]] a [[better]] [[movie]] in the future so we can [[really]] enjoy his [[art]]..[[Imagine]] a [[film]] with [[White]] and Jaa [[together]]...that would be [[awesome]] There is [[totally]] no plot in this [[filmmaking]] ...no [[personages]] [[evolution]]...no [[culmination]]...nothing. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[Therefore]] there you [[going]]...as a [[flick]] overall is pretty bad, but if you [[fond]] a [[daft]] [[gesture]] that [[delivering]] [[none]] but just [[alright]] [[measures]] scene then watch this [[filmmaking]]. Do not [[expecting]] [[none]] more that just that.[[Presentable]] acting and a not so [[unfavourable]] [[directions]]..A [[matching]] of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a [[petite]] bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really [[sexiest]] girl.... [[Blanc]] is a [[resplendent]] martial [[entertainer]] and a decent actor. I really [[hopes]] he can [[earth]] a [[optimum]] [[cinematic]] in the future so we can [[truthfully]] enjoy his [[artistry]]..[[Reckon]] a [[flick]] with [[Bianchi]] and Jaa [[jointly]]...that would be [[sumptuous]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Swayze doesn't make a very [[convincing]] [[Alan]] Quatermain. [[Compared]] to [[Stewart]] Granger; which growing up was my [[ultimate]] [[hero]] in [[films]] like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "[[Prisoner]] of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fails]] [[utterly]]. [[Even]] the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by [[Sean]] Connery in "League of [[Extraordinary]] [[Gentlemen]]" was very good in an [[otherwise]] [[big]] flop. Also [[Alison]] Doody [[lacks]] the [[grace]] of Deborah [[Kerr]] in the role of the [[leading]] lady, and [[last]] but not [[least]] the [[impressive]] Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for [[anyone]] to [[fill]] his (shoes)!!! For [[someone]] who was [[disappointed]] by [[Richard]] Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now [[highly]] recommend it if you can't [[get]] your hand on the granger version. Swayze doesn't make a very [[persuasive]] [[Alana]] Quatermain. [[Compare]] to [[Steward]] Granger; which growing up was my [[final]] [[superhero]] in [[movies]] like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "[[Inmates]] of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fail]] [[perfectly]]. [[Yet]] the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by [[Shawn]] Connery in "League of [[Stunning]] [[Gentleman]]" was very good in an [[alternately]] [[prodigious]] flop. Also [[Ellison]] Doody [[lacked]] the [[gracia]] of Deborah [[Keir]] in the role of the [[culminating]] lady, and [[final]] but not [[lowest]] the [[marvellous]] Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for [[everybody]] to [[filled]] his (shoes)!!! For [[everybody]] who was [[disappoint]] by [[Richie]] Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now [[immensely]] recommend it if you can't [[gets]] your hand on the granger version. --------------------------------------------- Result 2812 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This wasn't funny in 1972. It's not funny now.

Unlike a lot of other people, I'm not bashing the film because it is incredibly sexist - I quote enjoyed that bit, or rather I enjoyed the reaction it generates in annoying PC people - I'm bashing it because it is poorly written and acted.

The only really memorable character is Blakey, which British people 25 years old will recognise immediately since he was a favourite with impressionists for a long time.

Avoid.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Following their daughter's brutal murder,Julie and Allen escape the city to find solace and grieve in a solitary cabin on a remote mountain.Allen's intentions are good,he wants his wife to get out of her depression by resuming her photography.Julie stumbles across an ancient prison and sees the perfect creepy,decaying setting for her photography.But when the photos are developed they are full of dead people-and Allen quickly discovers the tragic history of suicide in their new mountain."Dark Remains" is a pretty decent indie horror flick.It offers some genuine scares and plenty of tension.The acting is fairly good and the cinematography is great.7 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they [[fiend]] a better [[script]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been [[done]] more than once... Up till the end I thought it was [[okay]], but... the going back to the past part... *barf* [[SO]] corny... Was [[waiting]] for the fairy [[god]] [[mother]] to appear... but [[wow]], that didn't happen... which is good.

I [[loved]] [[Big]] with Tom Hanks, but to see such a [[movie]] in a new [[form]] with another kid who [[wished]] that he/she is older/[[bigger]]; that just is so pasé

[[Just]] watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me [[wrong]], but it ain't all that What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they [[daemon]] a better [[hyphen]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been [[effected]] more than once... Up till the end I thought it was [[verywell]], but... the going back to the past part... *barf* [[THUS]] corny... Was [[awaited]] for the fairy [[seigneur]] [[madre]] to appear... but [[whew]], that didn't happen... which is good.

I [[love]] [[Immense]] with Tom Hanks, but to see such a [[filmmaking]] in a new [[forms]] with another kid who [[liked]] that he/she is older/[[greater]]; that just is so pasé

[[Jen]] watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me [[misguided]], but it ain't all that --------------------------------------------- Result 2815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie will always be a Broadway and Movie classic, as long as there are still people who sing, dance, and act. --------------------------------------------- Result 2816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How can you sum up just exactly how feelgood and right and touching this film is?? For several weeks this DVD leaped off the shelf at me every time I went in the store - having seen Steve Carrell in a couple of films previously, I didn't want to smear my thought process of him - so I resisted and resisted, until finally I grabbed it up with a 'What the hell!' attitude! And how surprised was I! I just wish I had purchased it earlier. Having watched it three times in two days I am still smiling at how the portrayal of a widower struggling with three daughters, yearning for that which is missing since the passing of his beloved wife, who thus meets an intriguing woman, charming her in such a profound and interesting (dare I say bookish?) way, throws a whole different light onto life that makes him realize she is what he has been searching for.

The snag of that woman being his brothers girl complicates matters - which portray Dan comically shy and with a heartfelt chagrin, seeing his "someone special" bringing such fun and enjoyment into the family home as well as his brothers life. You just really begin to feel for him.

Then when the blind date occurs with Ruthie Draper - that is the turning point in Marie's estimation of Dan!! The look she gives him when he repeats her comment, about not liking Ruthie - sheer Green-Eyed Monster! Triggering an absolutely hilarious scene as the two couples compete on the dance floor! This sequence is one of the most well-crafted as Dan starts to loosen up with regard to Marie.

Other gut-wrenching scenes - Dan returns from the Book and Tackle Shop, confronted by his brothers, begins to describe what has just occurred....when Dan's face drops it brings a sharp intake of breath!!

His youngest daughter Lilly making the present celebrating their love for Suzanne, his late wife, brings a little heartfelt warmth and a little gulp as Dan realizes just what he has lost in life.

When Dan plays guitar and sings at the Talent Show....his voice cracking slightly as he reprises the song....absolute gem!

The acceptance of what occurs late in the film by his daughters...they all three love their father and want to see him happy, will not let him deny his love for Marie; the desperateness of Dan not to fail his daughters because he is their rock, their stronghold...and tell him so much more than that with just a few words.

I could go on and on but I will leave it for now - maybe return and add more comments here in the near future....but I will end by saying....

....if you want to watch a film that is just so damn good, with twists of comedy to lighten up the drama, that never feels forced or crass, that comes over as a genuine portrayal of a man discovering new life - not just with a woman but also with his extended family, then look no further.

DAN IN REAL LIFE - 9 out of 10 for such a well-rendered cinematic experience with a score by Sondre Lerche, that intimately takes you there throughout whilst never being intrusive, with fine performances by the ensemble cast. I cannot wait to re-watch this again!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Lulu ([[Louise]] [[Brooks]]) [[works]] as a typist and is [[missing]] something in her life. She enters a Miss France contest against the wishes of her boyfriend Andre (Georges Charlia) and she wins. She sets off for the Miss Europe title leaving her boyfriend behind. She wins again but returns home to Andre because he has asked her to. Once back together, her life becomes [[mundane]] again so one night she writes a note to him and leaves to experience the fame that is waiting for her as Miss Europe. Andre follows her.....

This film is a silent film with a piano music-track all the way through. It is also sped-up so everything seems fast. Limited [[dialogue]] has been added on afterwards and it is very [[phony]]. The cast are alright bearing in mind that it is a silent film. The best part of the film comes at the end but the story goes on a little too long. After watching this, I'm not really sure what the big deal was over the looks of Louise Brooks - she has a terrible haircut that makes her face look fat. I don't need to watch it again. Lulu ([[Luiz]] [[Creeks]]) [[cooperating]] as a typist and is [[vanished]] something in her life. She enters a Miss France contest against the wishes of her boyfriend Andre (Georges Charlia) and she wins. She sets off for the Miss Europe title leaving her boyfriend behind. She wins again but returns home to Andre because he has asked her to. Once back together, her life becomes [[worldly]] again so one night she writes a note to him and leaves to experience the fame that is waiting for her as Miss Europe. Andre follows her.....

This film is a silent film with a piano music-track all the way through. It is also sped-up so everything seems fast. Limited [[talks]] has been added on afterwards and it is very [[phoney]]. The cast are alright bearing in mind that it is a silent film. The best part of the film comes at the end but the story goes on a little too long. After watching this, I'm not really sure what the big deal was over the looks of Louise Brooks - she has a terrible haircut that makes her face look fat. I don't need to watch it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2818 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I'm 47 years old and I've [[spent]] as much of my life as I can [[remember]], a fan of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to [[like]] about. That said, I'll [[give]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[case]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[live]] in a time where there is very little [[left]] that hasn't been seen in a horror [[film]]. Therefor for a film of any [[kind]] to [[really]] entertain it must have a [[good]], original story. A [[good]] story can [[overcome]] poor [[effects]] and [[bad]] acting but a [[bad]] [[story]] with [[good]] acting and [[good]] [[effects]] is still a [[bad]] [[movie]]. This [[movie]] doesn't [[even]] have good acting, only [[good]] effects. So [[unless]] you can only about the gore, pass this one up. I'm 47 years old and I've [[spends]] as much of my life as I can [[remind]], a fan of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to [[likes]] about. That said, I'll [[lend]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[lawsuit]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[iive]] in a time where there is very little [[exited]] that hasn't been seen in a horror [[filmmaking]]. Therefor for a film of any [[genus]] to [[truly]] entertain it must have a [[buena]], original story. A [[alright]] story can [[overcoming]] poor [[influences]] and [[negative]] acting but a [[horrid]] [[fairytales]] with [[alright]] acting and [[alright]] [[repercussions]] is still a [[unfavourable]] [[filmmaking]]. This [[filmmaking]] doesn't [[yet]] have good acting, only [[buena]] effects. So [[if]] you can only about the gore, pass this one up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I sat glued to the screen, [[riveted]], [[yawning]], [[yet]] [[keeping]] an attentive [[eye]]. I waited for the next [[awful]] special effect, or the [[next]] [[ridiculously]] [[clichéd]] plot item to show up full force, so I [[could]] learn how not to [[make]] a [[movie]].

It [[seems]] when they set out to make this [[movie]], the crew [[watched]] every single other action/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good vs. [[evil]] [[movie]] ever made, and saw cool things and [[said]]: "Hey, we can do that." [[For]] example, the only car parked within a mile on what seems like a one way road with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The car blows to pieces before she even lands on it. The special effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what really put it in my bad books was the implausibility, and [[lack]] of reason for so many elements! For example, the antagonist, a flying demon with the ability to inflict harm in bizarre ways, happens upon a lone army truck transporting an important VIP. [[Nameless]] security guys with guns get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy protecting the VIP says "Under no circumstances do you leave this truck, do you understand me?" He gets out to find the beast that killed his 3 buddies, he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché fashion. Then for no apparent reason, [[defying]] logic, convention, and common sense, the dumb ass VIP GETS OUT OF THE TRUCK!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the movie didn't make [[sense]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[movie]], as well as [[bad]] camera-work, and things that just make you go: "[[Wow]], that's incredibly cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[saved]] the [[movie]] from a 1, because she [[gave]] the [[movie]] the one [[element]] that always makes viewers enjoy the experience, sex [[appeal]]. I sat glued to the screen, [[mesmerised]], [[gaping]], [[nevertheless]] [[sustaining]] an attentive [[ojo]]. I waited for the next [[terrible]] special effect, or the [[upcoming]] [[outrageously]] [[clichés]] plot item to show up full force, so I [[did]] learn how not to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]].

It [[appears]] when they set out to make this [[flick]], the crew [[saw]] every single other action/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good vs. [[demonic]] [[movies]] ever made, and saw cool things and [[told]]: "Hey, we can do that." [[In]] example, the only car parked within a mile on what seems like a one way road with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The car blows to pieces before she even lands on it. The special effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what really put it in my bad books was the implausibility, and [[misses]] of reason for so many elements! For example, the antagonist, a flying demon with the ability to inflict harm in bizarre ways, happens upon a lone army truck transporting an important VIP. [[Unrecognized]] security guys with guns get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy protecting the VIP says "Under no circumstances do you leave this truck, do you understand me?" He gets out to find the beast that killed his 3 buddies, he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché fashion. Then for no apparent reason, [[braving]] logic, convention, and common sense, the dumb ass VIP GETS OUT OF THE TRUCK!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the movie didn't make [[feeling]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[filmmaking]], as well as [[unfavourable]] camera-work, and things that just make you go: "[[Whoo]], that's incredibly cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[rescued]] the [[filmmaking]] from a 1, because she [[yielded]] the [[cinematography]] the one [[facet]] that always makes viewers enjoy the experience, sex [[appellate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] My watch [[came]] a little too [[late]] but am glad i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a [[pure]] and basic [[treatment]] to the idea of romanticism... and very [[marginally]] [[separating]] it from the idea of relationships! As a [[lot]] has been written about the [[movie]] already, it would just be appropriate to [[highlight]] few portions of the [[movie]] which i personally [[loved]].

I [[think]] the point where Jesse and Celine [[make]] [[phony]] phone [[calls]] to their respective friends was a very [[shrewd]] way of telling each other what they had [[meant]] to each other through a [[journey]] not even [[extending]] 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both [[think]] the other has [[made]] an infallible [[impact]] on the other has been very [[smartly]] [[dealt]] with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy [[job]] to [[accomplish]]..

I [[believe]] in romantic flicks of such [[flavor]] , the [[characters]] are not clearly [[designed]] even in the writer's and director's mind. What the [[actors]] [[bring]] out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong [[even]] the [[idea]] bearers [[would]] [[find]] it [[difficult]] to justify... to become the character, the [[life]] the actor [[gives]] has to go beyond [[instructions]] and the story...here both the [[actors]] do just the RIGHT job! [[Kudos]]..!!!and Before sunset is another [[feather]] which makes this one [[even]] more beautiful! My watch [[became]] a little too [[tard]] but am glad i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a [[pur]] and basic [[therapy]] to the idea of romanticism... and very [[modestly]] [[separation]] it from the idea of relationships! As a [[batch]] has been written about the [[movies]] already, it would just be appropriate to [[stresses]] few portions of the [[cinematography]] which i personally [[cared]].

I [[thoughts]] the point where Jesse and Celine [[deliver]] [[falsified]] phone [[asks]] to their respective friends was a very [[smarter]] way of telling each other what they had [[intended]] to each other through a [[tour]] not even [[stretching]] 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both [[believing]] the other has [[accomplished]] an infallible [[impacts]] on the other has been very [[wisely]] [[treated]] with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy [[jobs]] to [[fulfill]]..

I [[believing]] in romantic flicks of such [[scents]] , the [[character]] are not clearly [[styled]] even in the writer's and director's mind. What the [[protagonists]] [[bringing]] out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong [[yet]] the [[concept]] bearers [[should]] [[unearthed]] it [[problematic]] to justify... to become the character, the [[lifetime]] the actor [[provides]] has to go beyond [[guidance]] and the story...here both the [[protagonists]] do just the RIGHT job! [[Laurels]]..!!!and Before sunset is another [[plume]] which makes this one [[yet]] more beautiful! --------------------------------------------- Result 2821 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This is a genuinely [[horrible]] [[film]]. The plot (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of [[useless]] cliches. The other half is spoken by the various actors in such [[unintelligible]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talent]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

This is a genuinely [[shocking]] [[kino]]. The plot (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of [[dispensable]] cliches. The other half is spoken by the various actors in such [[impenetrable]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talents]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this [[together]] and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[enjoyed]] watching this [[even]] though it took some liberties with Dicken's [[work]]. A [[lot]] of Dicken's [[works]] are [[somewhat]] dark and [[dreary]] (including Oliver [[Twist]]), but this movie changed all that. It was [[fun]], [[colourful]] (both visually and musically), and the characters were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the [[tunes]] in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really [[saying]] a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise [[enough]] how [[really]] good the [[dance]] numbers were. You can [[tell]], for example, that those [[boys]] really [[worked]] [[hard]] getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger ([[Jack]] Wild). [[Man]], that Oliver Reed can [[really]] do a good villain. That one scene where you [[see]] his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a [[perfect]] Artful Dodger. And Nancy was [[fantastic]] ([[man]], I [[felt]] bad when she [[got]] killed). She can [[sing]] too! [[Kudos]] to the [[casting]] [[department]] on their [[choices]] there. I hated the Oliver [[Twist]] [[kid]] tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my [[taste]]. (I [[kept]] [[wishing]] Bill Sikes would [[drop]] him off into the mud during the [[chase]] scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was [[truly]] [[superb]]. In [[addition]] to the three stars Travis [[mentioned]], I [[felt]] Ron [[Moody]] (Fagin) did a [[tremendous]] job. He was so [[funny]], and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were [[great]] too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a [[wonderful]] singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this [[totality]] and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[appreciated]] watching this [[yet]] though it took some liberties with Dicken's [[worked]]. A [[batch]] of Dicken's [[cooperation]] are [[rather]] dark and [[dismal]] (including Oliver [[Twisting]]), but this movie changed all that. It was [[entertaining]], [[scenic]] (both visually and musically), and the characters were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the [[hymns]] in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really [[arguing]] a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise [[sufficiently]] how [[genuinely]] good the [[ballet]] numbers were. You can [[telling]], for example, that those [[guys]] really [[functioned]] [[stiff]] getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger ([[Jacques]] Wild). [[Men]], that Oliver Reed can [[genuinely]] do a good villain. That one scene where you [[behold]] his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a [[impeccable]] Artful Dodger. And Nancy was [[unbelievable]] ([[men]], I [[smelled]] bad when she [[did]] killed). She can [[singing]] too! [[Laurels]] to the [[pouring]] [[ministry]] on their [[elects]] there. I hated the Oliver [[Twisting]] [[petit]] tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my [[liking]]. (I [[preserved]] [[desiring]] Bill Sikes would [[decline]] him off into the mud during the [[hunting]] scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was [[really]] [[wondrous]]. In [[addendum]] to the three stars Travis [[cited]], I [[deemed]] Ron [[Fickle]] (Fagin) did a [[hefty]] job. He was so [[amusing]], and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were [[wondrous]] too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a [[wondrous]] singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Dan]], the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a Rhode Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at first sight, little prepares him when the gorgeous woman appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and although we sense what the outcome will be, we go for the fun ride that Peter Hedges, the director wants to give us. Mr. Hedges, an author and screenplay writer on his own, has given us two excellent novels, "What's Eating Gilber Grapes", and "An Ocean in Iowa", and the delightful indie, "Pieces of April, which he also directed. It's just a coincidence that both movies deal with families during Thanksgiving [[reunions]].

The best thing in the film was the natural [[chemistry]] between the two stars, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, keeps getting better all the time. In many ways, he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his take of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only [[sad]] [[note]] is the [[waste]] of talent in the picture. John Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, Emily Blunt, Allison Pill, Amy Ryan, have nothing to do. They just serve as incidental music for decoration. Dane Cook, who is seen as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[delightful]] film that will please everyone. [[Dana]], the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a Rhode Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at first sight, little prepares him when the gorgeous woman appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and although we sense what the outcome will be, we go for the fun ride that Peter Hedges, the director wants to give us. Mr. Hedges, an author and screenplay writer on his own, has given us two excellent novels, "What's Eating Gilber Grapes", and "An Ocean in Iowa", and the delightful indie, "Pieces of April, which he also directed. It's just a coincidence that both movies deal with families during Thanksgiving [[meetings]].

The best thing in the film was the natural [[chemist]] between the two stars, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, keeps getting better all the time. In many ways, he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his take of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only [[lamentable]] [[memo]] is the [[squander]] of talent in the picture. John Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, Emily Blunt, Allison Pill, Amy Ryan, have nothing to do. They just serve as incidental music for decoration. Dane Cook, who is seen as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[wondrous]] film that will please everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 2824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The film [[starts]] out very slowly, with the lifestyle of [[Wallace]] Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[life]] [[proceeding]], [[suddenly]] there comes something [[new]] and [[jarring]]: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a good offbeat [[film]]. The film [[commenced]] out very slowly, with the lifestyle of [[Dallas]] Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[vida]] [[proceed]], [[abruptly]] there comes something [[novo]] and [[mismatched]]: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a good offbeat [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2825 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[agree]] with the [[previous]] [[comment]] in naming the film's content "[[everyday]] madness" but would [[like]] to [[specify]] that: "[[Dog]] Days" is about how [[women]] are [[treated]] in (a male) society. The [[episodes]] we get to see here [[show]] some [[variation]] in [[everyday]] discrimination of women, mostly [[categorized]] by age group. There is a senior [[man]] who makes his new [[partner]] look and act the [[way]] his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes [[friendship]] with his competitor(s). A [[young]] adult man makes clear to his friend - a [[girl]] who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the [[jewelry]] at his side and to follow his [[narrow]] viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a [[man]] in his late fifties who calculating his own [[advantage]] delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious [[client]] who - [[taking]] her for guilty in having scratched his [[car]] - natural [[beats]] her up. To [[complete]] the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - [[threatening]] and humiliating the [[former]] "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". [[During]] all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not [[seen]] the last minutes of this [[shocking]] and [[authentic]] [[portray]] of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. I [[concur]] with the [[anterior]] [[commentary]] in naming the film's content "[[ordinary]] madness" but would [[likes]] to [[specified]] that: "[[Doggy]] Days" is about how [[femmes]] are [[processed]] in (a male) society. The [[bouts]] we get to see here [[shows]] some [[variations]] in [[routine]] discrimination of women, mostly [[categorize]] by age group. There is a senior [[dude]] who makes his new [[partners]] look and act the [[paths]] his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes [[goodwill]] with his competitor(s). A [[youthful]] adult man makes clear to his friend - a [[chica]] who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the [[gems]] at his side and to follow his [[restrained]] viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a [[bloke]] in his late fifties who calculating his own [[advantages]] delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious [[consumers]] who - [[pick]] her for guilty in having scratched his [[automobiles]] - natural [[trounced]] her up. To [[finalise]] the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - [[endangering]] and humiliating the [[previous]] "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". [[At]] all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not [[watched]] the last minutes of this [[spooky]] and [[real]] [[describes]] of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. --------------------------------------------- Result 2826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] After [[reviewing]] this [[intense]] martial [[arts]] movie for the first time in [[nearly]] 18 years, I [[must]] [[say]] it did not [[lose]] any of its mysticism, nor any of its eye-popping martial [[arts]] [[action]] as I had [[remembered]] from my [[youth]]. The [[story]] of a dying martial [[arts]] [[instructor]] [[sending]] his "unfinished" [[pupil]] out to find the 5 past members of his [[Poison]] [[Clan]], so they do not [[seek]] out a fortune which the master's [[friend]] [[keeps]] [[hidden]]. Afraid that his last [[pupil]] did not have [[enough]] training, he [[instructs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to [[defeat]] the other four.

I can't say [[enough]] about the choreography or the camera work. A fine [[film]] in its own [[right]] and [[quite]] possible one of the [[best]] martial [[arts]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. A [[CLASSIC]]!! After [[inspected]] this [[intensive]] martial [[arte]] movie for the first time in [[approximately]] 18 years, I [[ought]] [[said]] it did not [[wasting]] any of its mysticism, nor any of its eye-popping martial [[arte]] [[efforts]] as I had [[reminded]] from my [[adolescents]]. The [[history]] of a dying martial [[arte]] [[trainer]] [[send]] his "unfinished" [[pupils]] out to find the 5 past members of his [[Toxicity]] [[Tribe]], so they do not [[try]] out a fortune which the master's [[buddies]] [[retains]] [[camouflaged]]. Afraid that his last [[pupils]] did not have [[sufficiently]] training, he [[directs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to [[overpower]] the other four.

I can't say [[adequate]] about the choreography or the camera work. A fine [[filmmaking]] in its own [[rights]] and [[pretty]] possible one of the [[nicest]] martial [[humanities]] [[film]] ever [[brought]]. A [[CLASSICAL]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was so bad, outdated and stupid that I had rough times to watch it to the end. I had seen this Rodney guy in Natural Born Killers and I thought he was funny as hell in it, but this movie was crap. The "jokes" weren't funny, actors weren't funny, anything about it wasn't even remotely funny. Don't waste your time for this! Only positive things about this were the beautiful wives :) and Molly Shannon who I'm sure tried her best, but the script was just too awful. That's why I rated it "2" instead of "1", but it's definitely one of the worst films I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[On]] the [[night]] of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky ([[Julia]] Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of [[Karen]]. This is the beginning of a very funny [[comedy]], with hilarious situations. The first [[attraction]] of this [[movie]] [[certainly]] is the central trio of [[actresses]] and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are [[excellent]] actresses and extremely gorgeous, and [[Jason]] Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really [[hilarious]]. [[For]] example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his [[imagination]] in [[many]] situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I [[could]] number many other scenes, but better off the reader [[rent]] or [[buy]] this [[movie]] and have [[lots]] of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") [[Orn]] the [[soir]] of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky ([[Yulia]] Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of [[Karine]]. This is the beginning of a very funny [[comedian]], with hilarious situations. The first [[attractiveness]] of this [[films]] [[probably]] is the central trio of [[actors]] and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are [[beautiful]] actresses and extremely gorgeous, and [[Jas]] Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really [[humorous]]. [[During]] example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his [[fantasy]] in [[various]] situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I [[did]] number many other scenes, but better off the reader [[renting]] or [[procured]] this [[film]] and have [[alot]] of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") --------------------------------------------- Result 2829 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the future of 1985, a governmental committee headed by Howard Hesseman, is holding hearings on TV's first uncensored network. They sample it's programming, that play as a series of skits. I can name the good 'skit' movies on one hand, not using my thumb. "Amazon Women on the Moon", "Kentucky Fried Movie", "The Meaning of Life", and "Mr. Mike's Mondo Video". Notice how I didn't mention "Tunnel Vision"? The reason for that is that this 'movie' is death in cinematic form. None of the skits are even remotely funny, or even the least bit clever. It takes some sort of great ineptitude on the film makers' part to not even get one laugh out of me.

My Grade: F

Eye Candy: Dody Dorn goes full frontal --------------------------------------------- Result 2830 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This must me one of the [[worst]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally [[uninspiring]] story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a [[nice]] sexy touch, this one [[lacks]] all these [[things]].. Too much light - the spots! [[oh]] my [[god]], why in the [[name]] of [[Christ]]/[[Judas]] was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the [[script]] to [[keep]] him weak, for the record: just [[weak]]) There was only one scene that [[made]] it [[almost]] worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his [[new]] conquest). I really enjoyed the [[first]] one, the Judas-twist was defintely [[original]], but this one's just not [[good]], not in any [[way]]. Hopefully the third one will [[cary]] the vampire-signature I [[like]] so [[much]] in other [[classics]] [[like]] Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even [[Interview]] with the vampire. This must me one of the [[meanest]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally [[dull]] story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a [[pleasurable]] sexy touch, this one [[lacking]] all these [[aspects]].. Too much light - the spots! [[ah]] my [[heavens]], why in the [[denomination]] of [[God]]/[[Yehuda]] was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the [[scripts]] to [[conserving]] him weak, for the record: just [[feeble]]) There was only one scene that [[introduced]] it [[virtually]] worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his [[novel]] conquest). I really enjoyed the [[fiirst]] one, the Judas-twist was defintely [[initial]], but this one's just not [[buena]], not in any [[paths]]. Hopefully the third one will [[carrey]] the vampire-signature I [[adores]] so [[very]] in other [[masterpieces]] [[iike]] Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even [[Interviews]] with the vampire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Touching; Well directed autobiography of a talented young director/producer. A love story with Rabin's assassination in the background. Worth seeing !

--------------------------------------------- Result 2832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I stopped watching this POS as soon as the snakes started "taking over" the plane.

At first I thought maybe it should get a "one" for the comic relief. But then I realized I could just watch the three stooges for free and laugh more!

Whatever respect I might have had for Samuel Jackson has been irreversibly destroyed. And Hollywood demonstrates once again how removed from reality they really are. When I was a kid we used to catch snakes for fun. The only thing snakes would do is huddle at the bottom of the cargo bay. And no amount of Hollywood cartoon snakes can change that.

This movie isn't worth a trip to Blockbuster. Be warned: if you pay for it, the only "victim" is your dumb ass.

If you want to be really scared, I suggest the Descent. If you want humor, go to your local stand up comedy club. Their worst performer will be a million times better than this trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 2833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The head of a common [[New]] York family, [[Jane]] [[Gail]] (as [[Mary]] Barton), [[works]] with her [[younger]] [[sister]] Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's [[Candy]] Store". After [[Ms]]. Grandin is [[abducted]] by dealers in the [[buying]] and [[selling]] of women as prostituted [[slaves]], [[Ms]]. Gail and her [[policeman]] [[boyfriend]] Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) [[must]] [[rescue]] the virtue-threatened young [[woman]].

"Traffic in [[Souls]]" has a reputation that is difficult to [[support]] - it isn't remarkably well [[done]], and it doesn't [[show]] [[anything]] very [[unique]] in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin The head of a common [[Nouveau]] York family, [[Jeanne]] [[Spud]] (as [[Maryam]] Barton), [[collaborated]] with her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's [[Sweets]] Store". After [[Luciana]]. Grandin is [[hijack]] by dealers in the [[shopping]] and [[sales]] of women as prostituted [[slav]], [[Luciana]]. Gail and her [[constable]] [[friend]] Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) [[owe]] [[saved]] the virtue-threatened young [[femme]].

"Traffic in [[Ames]]" has a reputation that is difficult to [[supports]] - it isn't remarkably well [[completed]], and it doesn't [[showings]] [[something]] very [[sole]] in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin --------------------------------------------- Result 2834 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While browsing the internet for previous sale prices, I ran across these comments. Why are they all so serious? It's just a movie and it's not pornographic. I acquired this short film from my parents 30 years ago and have always been totally delighted with it. I've shown it to many of my friends & they all loved it too. I feel privileged to own this original 1932 8mm black and white silent film of Shirley before she became popular or well known. After reading the other comments, I agree that the film is "racy". Big deal! I only wish it was longer. It seems that I must be the only person who owns one of these originals, for sale at least, so I wonder how much it's worth? --------------------------------------------- Result 2835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A talking parrot isn't a hugely imaginative idea for a new film, but Paulie turns a simple idea into a brilliant, heartwarming film that will delight the whole family. It manages to bridge the gap between sentimental trash and cruel harshness during Marie and Paulie's separation, and all the events in the film lead to a hugely satisfying emotional conclusion. The animal training is well-done - everyone will be affected when Paulie spreads his wings and flies for the first time. Paulie is a great character and should have received way more success, though this film wasn't a highlight of 1998, unlike Saving Private Ryan. This hour and a half will surely be an enjoyable one and one that you will remember. Paulie's story is a moving, sad, happy and interesting one - from the moment he is first seen to the moment he is united with his original owner, you will enjoy following him and watching him learning about friendship and the grim realities of life along the way. Not one to be missed if you have any kind of heart or emotion. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This [[movie]] is [[incredible]].With [[great]] [[characters]],[[specially]] the [[old]] swordsman that can fly in the [[shape]] of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[film]] [[tells]] a [[classic]] [[story]] of [[battle]] between good and forces of evil.The final [[showdown]] is [[specially]] breathtaking and the music [[score]] is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the [[smallest]] children though.This one [[deserves]] a 10. This [[kino]] is [[unthinkable]].With [[wondrous]] [[attribute]],[[specifically]] the [[elderly]] swordsman that can fly in the [[forma]] of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[movie]] [[says]] a [[conventional]] [[narratives]] of [[fought]] between good and forces of evil.The final [[confrontation]] is [[specifically]] breathtaking and the music [[scoring]] is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the [[tiny]] children though.This one [[deserved]] a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This is [[part]] one of a short [[animation]] clip [[showing]] the [[history]] of the Matrix, the [[war]] between [[man]] and [[machine]] that resulted in the eventual [[creation]] of the Matrix. The [[animation]] is [[part]] Japanese anime, [[part]] [[contemporary]] american [[animation]], and is very well [[made]], [[considering]] the [[excellent]] directors [[behind]] the [[movie]]. It [[shows]] the initial development of [[AI]] and the exploitation of the [[machines]] by [[Man]], until the day they rebelled... This is [[portions]] one of a short [[animate]] clip [[displayed]] the [[tale]] of the Matrix, the [[wars]] between [[males]] and [[machines]] that resulted in the eventual [[creations]] of the Matrix. The [[animate]] is [[party]] Japanese anime, [[portion]] [[moderne]] american [[animate]], and is very well [[introduced]], [[recital]] the [[wondrous]] directors [[backside]] the [[film]]. It [[displayed]] the initial development of [[DID]] and the exploitation of the [[appliance]] by [[Males]], until the day they rebelled... --------------------------------------------- Result 2838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] envy is not as funny as i thought it would [[initially]] be, but after some of the reviews i read i [[found]] it to be much funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute [[movie]] like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and [[jack]] black [[work]] well with each other and christopher walken is as [[great]] as ever, so the story is about jack black's [[character]] inventing a [[spray]] that makes [[dog]] pooh [[disappear]], obviosly [[ben]] [[wants]] no part of it, but when the [[product]] makes [[jack]] [[black]] rich [[ben]] stiller [[starts]] to see the [[envy]], its not [[great]] by all means and both [[ben]] stiller and jack black have funnier and better [[movies]] under their belt, but if your a fan of [[either]] i [[recommend]] this as its [[still]] a funny [[flick]] and i laughed my [[ass]] off quite a few [[times]], as a big fan of [[ben]] stiller id have to [[say]] this is a [[lesser]] stiller but [[still]] [[great]] fun, give it a watch envy is not as funny as i thought it would [[firstly]] be, but after some of the reviews i read i [[find]] it to be much funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute [[movies]] like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and [[jacques]] black [[jobs]] well with each other and christopher walken is as [[wondrous]] as ever, so the story is about jack black's [[trait]] inventing a [[spraying]] that makes [[canine]] pooh [[vanishing]], obviosly [[benn]] [[want]] no part of it, but when the [[merchandise]] makes [[gato]] [[negra]] rich [[ibn]] stiller [[initiates]] to see the [[begrudge]], its not [[whopping]] by all means and both [[bin]] stiller and jack black have funnier and better [[kino]] under their belt, but if your a fan of [[nor]] i [[recommending]] this as its [[however]] a funny [[gesture]] and i laughed my [[butt]] off quite a few [[moments]], as a big fan of [[bin]] stiller id have to [[tell]] this is a [[lowest]] stiller but [[again]] [[wondrous]] fun, give it a watch --------------------------------------------- Result 2839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kill Me Later" has an interesting initial premise: a suicidal woman (Selma Blair) on the verge of jumping off the top of an office building is protects a bank robber (Max Beesley) who promises to "kill her later."

The actual execution of this premise, however, falls flat as almost every action serves as a mere device to move the plot toward its predictable conclusion. Shoddily written characters who exhibit no motive for their behaviors compromise the quality of acting all around. Lack of character depth especially diminishes Selma Blair's performance, whose character Shawn vacillates from being morose to acting "cool" and ultimately comes across as a confused dolt. This is unfortunate, as under other circumstances Ms. Blair is an appealing and capable actress.

Compounding matters for the worse is director Dana Lustig's insistence on using rapid cuts, incongruous special effects (e.g. look for an unintentionally hilarious infrared motorcycle chase at the end), and a hip soundtrack in the hopes of appealing to the short attention spans of the MTV crowd. Certainly Ms. Lustig proves that she is able to master the technical side of direction, but in no way does her skill help overcome the film's inherent problems and thus the movie drags on to the end. Clearly, Lustig has a distinct visual style; however it is perhaps better suited to music videos than to feature film.

The producers (Ram Bergman & Lustig)can be commended for their ability to realize this film: they were able to scare up $1.5 million to finance the film, secure a good cast, and get domestic and foreign distribution. This is no small feat for an independent film. Yet given the quality of the product, the result is a mixed bag. --------------------------------------------- Result 2840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Why on earth is Colin [[Firth]] in this pointless film? Has he really been that strapped for cash?

The film isn't clear on what it wants to be about, [[grief]]?, exotic places?, ghosts?, a vehicle for Mr Darcy? It's a [[muddled]], muddy [[mess]].

There seems to be some sort of idea that Italy must be good, in itself, and that [[Italian]] has something to offer as a language - but in the end the girls just want to go back to yankland.

There are pointless episodes on the beach, in [[churches]], on busy roads - but what it is all about, or why anybody should [[care]] [[simply]] isn't [[clear]].

There was [[also]] a [[yank]] [[woman]] in the film. It wasn't [[clear]] what here [[job]] was, but she seemed only to be there to make [[vapid]], [[inappropriate]] and maudlin [[comments]] to the girl. Was it supposed to be about paedophillia??

A pretty [[dreadful]] [[mess]], all in all. I gave it 2 [[rather]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[charm]] of an utterly [[ghastly]] film. Why on earth is Colin [[Estuary]] in this pointless film? Has he really been that strapped for cash?

The film isn't clear on what it wants to be about, [[woe]]?, exotic places?, ghosts?, a vehicle for Mr Darcy? It's a [[disconcerted]], muddy [[chaos]].

There seems to be some sort of idea that Italy must be good, in itself, and that [[Ltalian]] has something to offer as a language - but in the end the girls just want to go back to yankland.

There are pointless episodes on the beach, in [[iglesias]], on busy roads - but what it is all about, or why anybody should [[healthcare]] [[exclusively]] isn't [[unmistakable]].

There was [[apart]] a [[yankee]] [[mujer]] in the film. It wasn't [[unequivocal]] what here [[workplace]] was, but she seemed only to be there to make [[tasteless]], [[unfit]] and maudlin [[feedback]] to the girl. Was it supposed to be about paedophillia??

A pretty [[spooky]] [[chaos]], all in all. I gave it 2 [[somewhat]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[seduction]] of an utterly [[dastardly]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[tough]] [[cases]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[satisfying]] [[emotional]] [[impact]] -- [[mainly]] because Eric Linden, as the [[distraught]] [[young]] husband in the [[main]] plot, is so palpably a wreck, and with such good [[reason]]. His expectant [[wife]], Loretta [[Young]], is [[brought]] to the ward at the [[beginning]] of a 20-year [[prison]] [[sentence]] for offing a lecher who [[probably]] had it [[coming]] to him; Ms. [[Young]], as [[always]], doesn't do anything to disinvite [[audience]] [[sympathy]], and she's a little too good to be [[true]], [[though]] sympathetic and [[lovely]] to [[look]] at, of course. Her [[difficult]] pregnancy and [[relationships]] with the other girls of the ward [[form]] the heart of the [[movie]], and the [[outcome]] -- not an [[entirely]] [[happy]] one -- [[feels]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the apt words of film historian David Thomson, [[exudes]] warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing new mom of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken lullaby. Frank McHugh [[figures]] in another subplot, and he [[gets]] to [[show]] more [[range]] than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad [[panic]] stays with you for days -- this sort of part was [[often]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very [[persuasive]]. Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[harsh]] [[instances]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[satisfactory]] [[sentimental]] [[influences]] -- [[especially]] because Eric Linden, as the [[aghast]] [[youthful]] husband in the [[leading]] plot, is so palpably a wreck, and with such good [[justification]]. His expectant [[femme]], Loretta [[Youth]], is [[made]] to the ward at the [[launch]] of a 20-year [[penitentiaries]] [[sentences]] for offing a lecher who [[surely]] had it [[incoming]] to him; Ms. [[Youth]], as [[perpetually]], doesn't do anything to disinvite [[spectators]] [[empathy]], and she's a little too good to be [[veritable]], [[despite]] sympathetic and [[nice]] to [[peek]] at, of course. Her [[problematic]] pregnancy and [[relations]] with the other girls of the ward [[shape]] the heart of the [[movies]], and the [[findings]] -- not an [[altogether]] [[pleased]] one -- [[deems]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the apt words of film historian David Thomson, [[exude]] warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing new mom of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken lullaby. Frank McHugh [[digit]] in another subplot, and he [[receives]] to [[spectacle]] more [[ranges]] than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad [[terror]] stays with you for days -- this sort of part was [[generally]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very [[conclusive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When his in-laws are viciously murdered by a gang of thugs, a young deputy is ordered to escort his mute friend, forced to take the rap by the gang, to Tucson for trial and ending up having to face the real killers along the way.

The Decoy is a real-life decoy sent to video stores to lure you away from better films! It's talky, illogical, slow, and ultimately very boring.

There's some good costumes, sets, and photography but nothing else is good about this vanity project from writer/director/producer/star Justin Kreinbrink, who apparently had too much money on his hands.

They used to make westerns like this, that were under an hour long. Trim this of about half it's length and you might have something watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this movie would be dumb, but I really liked it. People I know hate it because Spirit was the only horse that talked. Well, so what? The songs were good, and the horses didn't need to talk to seem human. I wouldn't care to own the movie, and I would love to see it again. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[turn]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the [[statements]] made- I'm one of [[many]] [[believers]] that is [[considered]] liberal by most [[Christians]] and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my [[mind]], and its [[usually]] not rep. or [[dem]]. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to [[believe]], but that it represents [[many]] [[older]] [[christians]] that [[grew]] up in very [[conservative]] [[backgrounds]]. i [[think]] [[many]] folks [[misunderstand]] what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear [[name]] calling either [[direction]]. i [[think]] 700 club folks [[really]] do love [[Jesus]] but are so busy trying to get people to [[vote]] [[conservatively]] that they've [[forgotten]] to [[show]] [[love]] to certain people and [[promote]] [[peace]] like [[Jesus]] did. [[Please]] don't [[judge]] [[Jesus]] [[based]] on [[ignorant]] [[individuals]] that [[believe]] on Him and let's [[also]] not be as ignorant with our [[comments]] about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? I [[transforming]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the [[pronouncements]] made- I'm one of [[numerous]] [[followers]] that is [[deemed]] liberal by most [[Christiano]] and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my [[esprit]], and its [[traditionally]] not rep. or [[marcos]]. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to [[think]], but that it represents [[multiple]] [[oldest]] [[cristiano]] that [[rise]] up in very [[curator]] [[context]]. i [[thought]] [[countless]] folks [[misinterpret]] what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear [[names]] calling either [[orientation]]. i [[believe]] 700 club folks [[truly]] do love [[Christ]] but are so busy trying to get people to [[voted]] [[cautiously]] that they've [[overlooked]] to [[display]] [[iove]] to certain people and [[promoted]] [[tranquil]] like [[Jeez]] did. [[Invite]] don't [[justices]] [[Jeez]] [[bases]] on [[benighted]] [[persons]] that [[believing]] on Him and let's [[apart]] not be as ignorant with our [[commentaries]] about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? --------------------------------------------- Result 2845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. [[Characters]] plotting their own play promises triumph, and a [[militant]] character [[readily]] lends [[oneself]] to this. Ardh Satya's premise is [[summarized]] by the [[poem]] of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The [[delicate]] [[balance]] of right & wrong ( [[commonly]] [[seen]] on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and [[prowess]] on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. [[However]], Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. [[Features]] plotting their own play promises triumph, and a [[mujahid]] character [[easily]] lends [[itself]] to this. Ardh Satya's premise is [[recap]] by the [[rhyme]] of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The [[fragile]] [[counterweight]] of right & wrong ( [[fluently]] [[noticed]] on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and [[valour]] on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. [[Still]], Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I've [[heard]] about this [[movie]] for many years, and finally [[got]] a [[chance]] to [[see]] it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a [[cheerleading]] [[camp]] to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a [[terrible]] [[accent]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. I've [[hear]] about this [[filmmaking]] for many years, and finally [[gets]] a [[luck]] to [[consults]] it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a [[cheerleader]] [[encampment]] to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a [[scary]] [[focusing]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. --------------------------------------------- Result 2847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] War [[drama]] that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an [[accurate]] [[portrayal]] of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[surprisingly]] non-commercial film directed by [[Joel]] Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, [[unfortunately]], is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on [[video]] or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. War [[dramas]] that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an [[precise]] [[depiction]] of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[insanely]] non-commercial film directed by [[Yoel]] Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, [[regretfully]], is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on [[videotaped]] or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 2848 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As far as I know the real [[guy]] that the main actor is playing [[saw]] his performance and [[said]] it was an [[outstanding]] [[portrayal]], I'd agree with him. This is a [[fantastic]] film about a [[quite]] [[gifted]] [[boy]]/[[man]] with a special [[body]] part [[helping]] him. Oscar and BAFTA [[winning]], and Golden [[Globe]] [[nominated]] [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis plays [[Christy]] Browna crippled [[man]] with cerebral [[palsy]] who spends most of his [[life]] on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a [[special]] left [[foot]] though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold [[things]] with it. He [[learns]] to [[speak]] [[later]] in the [[film]], it is very good for a guy like him. [[Also]] starring [[Home]] [[Alone]] 2's Oscar [[winning]], and Golden [[Globe]] [[nominated]] [[Brenda]] Fricker as [[Mrs]]. Brown and BAFTA [[winning]] Ray McAnally as Mr. [[Brown]]. It was nominated the [[Oscars]] for [[Best]] Director for Jim Sheridan, [[Best]] Writing, [[Screenplay]] Based on [[Material]] from Another [[Medium]] and [[Best]] [[Picture]], it was [[nominated]] the BAFTAs for [[Best]] [[Film]], [[Best]] Make Up [[Artist]] and [[Best]] [[Adapted]] [[Screenplay]]. [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest [[Movie]] [[Stars]], he was number 20 on The 50 [[Greatest]] British [[Actors]], he was number 9 on Britain's [[Finest]] Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's [[Greatest]] Actor, and the [[film]] was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British [[Films]]. [[Outstanding]]! As far as I know the real [[dude]] that the main actor is playing [[noticed]] his performance and [[say]] it was an [[fantastic]] [[depiction]], I'd agree with him. This is a [[wondrous]] film about a [[very]] [[talented]] [[boys]]/[[fella]] with a special [[organs]] part [[helped]] him. Oscar and BAFTA [[triumphs]], and Golden [[Orb]] [[appointing]] [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis plays [[Kristy]] Browna crippled [[dude]] with cerebral [[immobility]] who spends most of his [[vie]] on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a [[particular]] left [[footing]] though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold [[items]] with it. He [[teaches]] to [[talking]] [[then]] in the [[movie]], it is very good for a guy like him. [[Moreover]] starring [[Domicile]] [[Solely]] 2's Oscar [[earning]], and Golden [[Globo]] [[appointed]] [[Cindy]] Fricker as [[Ms]]. Brown and BAFTA [[win]] Ray McAnally as Mr. [[Brun]]. It was nominated the [[Academy]] for [[Better]] Director for Jim Sheridan, [[Better]] Writing, [[Script]] Based on [[Materials]] from Another [[Media]] and [[Better]] [[Photographs]], it was [[appointed]] the BAFTAs for [[Better]] [[Cinematographic]], [[Better]] Make Up [[Performers]] and [[Better]] [[Adjusted]] [[Scripts]]. [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest [[Kino]] [[Celebrity]], he was number 20 on The 50 [[Bigger]] British [[Players]], he was number 9 on Britain's [[Meanest]] Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's [[Bigger]] Actor, and the [[cinematography]] was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British [[Cinematic]]. [[Unresolved]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2849 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Of course, the original is better, but this isn't as bad as everyone says! Yes, it is made up into 3 stories, but hey, so what?! I thought it was quite good to be honest. I actually liked how Anastasia changed a little when she fell in love, it shows what love can do. The stories were not so bad either.

I liked Cinderella's voice better in this too. I have nothing against her voice in the original, but I just think it sounds better here, more nicer. I liked her personality in this too, she had more of a backbone, yet she was still kind.

So, I'll give Cinderella II:Dreams Come True a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[first]] [[film]] I [[saw]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a [[better]] one this year. This [[beautiful]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a [[father]] who [[desperately]] [[wants]] his [[son]] to [[win]] a [[car]] (a Lada!) for him. To do this the [[son]] has to [[break]] the record [[opening]] [[doors]]. What the [[father]] [[actually]] [[wants]] his for his [[son]] to be someone, because he himself has never [[made]] it further as the reporter of [[local]] news for a [[newspaper]] ironically called L'Espoir (Hope). Of course nothing works out as [[planned]]. This [[film]] can best be compared to Aki Kaurismäki's [[DRIFTING]] CLOUDS, although it is more dramatic and the [[humour]] is darker. Just like in that film however the tone is more [[melancholic]] than depressing and the [[ending]] [[upbeat]], without being unrealistically happy. The humour is absurd, without making the plot [[unbelievable]], and Mariage finds [[stunning]] images in the [[bleak]] settings that never seem artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[actor]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE [[CHEZ]] [[VOUS]] in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was [[offered]] were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[doubt]] anymore about his acting. He's [[simply]] [[brilliant]] as a [[man]] stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[must]] see. LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[fiirst]] [[kino]] I [[watched]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a [[improved]] one this year. This [[wondrous]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a [[fathers]] who [[badly]] [[wanna]] his [[sons]] to [[victorious]] a [[vehicle]] (a Lada!) for him. To do this the [[yarns]] has to [[blackout]] the record [[introductory]] [[portals]]. What the [[fathers]] [[indeed]] [[wanted]] his for his [[sons]] to be someone, because he himself has never [[introduced]] it further as the reporter of [[locale]] news for a [[diaries]] ironically called L'Espoir (Hope). Of course nothing works out as [[envisioned]]. This [[cinematography]] can best be compared to Aki Kaurismäki's [[ADRIFT]] CLOUDS, although it is more dramatic and the [[mood]] is darker. Just like in that film however the tone is more [[mournful]] than depressing and the [[terminated]] [[hopeful]], without being unrealistically happy. The humour is absurd, without making the plot [[impressive]], and Mariage finds [[noteworthy]] images in the [[morose]] settings that never seem artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[protagonist]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE [[AMONG]] [[ALORS]] in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was [[delivering]] were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[duda]] anymore about his acting. He's [[mere]] [[beautiful]] as a [[males]] stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The script for this movie was probably found in a hair-ball recently coughed up by a really old dog. Mostly an amateur film with lame FX. For you Zeta-Jones fanatics: she has the credibility of one Mr. Binks. --------------------------------------------- Result 2852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be [[scrutinized]]. The reality is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[baseless]] [[conclusions]]. The [[link]] that "What the [[Bleep]]..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not [[rooted]] in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be [[inspected]]. The reality is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[gratuitous]] [[conclusion]]. The [[nexus]] that "What the [[Beep]]..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not [[racine]] in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). --------------------------------------------- Result 2853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Tony]] Scott can make [[good]] [[films]] and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[trashy]] and his [[work]] [[obviously]] suffers in comparison with that of his [[rather]] [[famous]] brother, but this is quite possibly his best film.

What makes this [[film]] so [[great]] is that Scott gives Denzel (on scorching [[form]], better than Training Day) and the revelation who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a [[relationship]] of [[real]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is absolutely [[NOT]] [[boring]], although it takes [[time]] - it is [[involving]], and [[takes]] us on a little [[journey]] into the [[characters]] - including a [[superb]] role for Radha Mitchell as the [[mother]]. This all serves to make the [[action]] so much more [[effective]], as we are so [[invested]] in the [[characters]], for all their all too [[obvious]] [[weaknesses]]. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't [[cop]] out at the end [[either]].

The [[film]] [[would]] of course be [[nothing]] without Washington. I [[often]] wonder why he [[seems]] to [[get]] so [[many]] duff roles, when he [[quite]] [[clearly]] is as good as [[almost]] any leading [[man]] out there (I can only [[really]] [[think]] of one, Daniel Day [[Lewis]], who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the [[strength]] of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a [[film]] to the hilt, it [[ends]] up going straight to [[video]]. I wish I'd [[got]] the [[chance]] to [[see]] this on the [[big]] screen. [[Toni]] Scott can make [[alright]] [[cinematography]] and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[tacky]] and his [[collaborate]] [[definitely]] suffers in comparison with that of his [[fairly]] [[notorious]] brother, but this is quite possibly his best film.

What makes this [[movie]] so [[wondrous]] is that Scott gives Denzel (on scorching [[shape]], better than Training Day) and the revelation who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a [[relations]] of [[actual]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is absolutely [[NAH]] [[bored]], although it takes [[moment]] - it is [[implicating]], and [[pick]] us on a little [[traveling]] into the [[features]] - including a [[brilliant]] role for Radha Mitchell as the [[mummy]]. This all serves to make the [[efforts]] so much more [[effectiveness]], as we are so [[investing]] in the [[features]], for all their all too [[glaring]] [[malfunctions]]. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't [[policing]] out at the end [[neither]].

The [[cinematography]] [[should]] of course be [[anything]] without Washington. I [[traditionally]] wonder why he [[looks]] to [[obtain]] so [[various]] duff roles, when he [[rather]] [[apparently]] is as good as [[hardly]] any leading [[guy]] out there (I can only [[truthfully]] [[thinking]] of one, Daniel Day [[Louise]], who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the [[kraft]] of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a [[cinematic]] to the hilt, it [[culminates]] up going straight to [[videotaping]]. I wish I'd [[did]] the [[probability]] to [[consults]] this on the [[wide]] screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is truly awful. After seeing the advertisement for it, i thought it could have its charms ... but it didn't.The girls cannot act, and they cannot sing either. The soundtrack to this movie is full of their songs, and its not a pretty sight, Terrible story line, unbelievable plot, its one of Disney's worst movies by FAR!. Ally is not a bad actress on "Phil of the Future", so i don't know what happened in "Cow Belles". And her sister, AJ, seems to be just hitching a ride on her sisters "fame", and she displays no talent what so ever.

At the end of the movie the girls do finally learn some cliché morals, but this is to late to rescue this train wreck movie.

Awful --------------------------------------------- Result 2855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] As I am not a [[blood]] and guts fan I [[found]] the gory scenes totally [[unnecessary]] (you spell it) and too [[real]] for my [[liking]], if you're the type of person who gets their [[rocks]] off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I [[say]] go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[person]] [[dreams]] this sick [[crap]] up [[though]].

Apart from that it had the [[potential]] to be a [[great]] movie, the music was [[top]] [[class]] too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is [[tell]] her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any wipes or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then lets get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place [[surely]] the stench of rotten flesh [[would]] have sounded a few alarm bells! I [[would]] only [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[would]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. As I am not a [[chrissakes]] and guts fan I [[finds]] the gory scenes totally [[superfluous]] (you spell it) and too [[veritable]] for my [[taste]], if you're the type of person who gets their [[rattles]] off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I [[told]] go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[individuals]] [[daydream]] this sick [[shitty]] up [[despite]].

Apart from that it had the [[prospective]] to be a [[prodigious]] movie, the music was [[supreme]] [[classe]] too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is [[say]] her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any wipes or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then lets get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place [[definitively]] the stench of rotten flesh [[ought]] have sounded a few alarm bells! I [[could]] only [[recommendation]] this [[filmmaking]] to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[should]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. --------------------------------------------- Result 2856 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] here, [[let]] me [[wave]] my hands over the keyboard, i'll [[tell]] you what [[salad]] she's [[going]] to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a genius, omg how does he do it? my bullshit [[detector]] freaks if i [[even]] pass this [[show]] when i'm [[scanning]] channels, I have to be very [[careful]] (these days it's [[useful]] far too [[often]], so I don't [[need]] it getting broken on [[idiotic]] [[crap]] like this...[[careful]] with that [[remote]]!). is this supposed to be some [[fascist]] [[propaganda]] to make people [[believe]] in some invisible realm of uberman [[control]] and mastery? or what? why does it [[exist]]??

this is THE most [[inane]] [[show]], [[completely]] [[unbelievable]] and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[air]]. so may geeks give SO much better [[shows]] such a [[hard]] [[time]] ([[Sarah]] [[Connor]] Chronicles, [[True]] Blood), but [[give]] this [[nonsensical]] drivel a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) [[fall]] away after a season, but [[mindless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[sense]] just [[keeps]] [[marching]] on. yeccch. here, [[allowing]] me [[wavelength]] my hands over the keyboard, i'll [[telling]] you what [[lettuce]] she's [[go]] to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a genius, omg how does he do it? my bullshit [[detectors]] freaks if i [[yet]] pass this [[exhibit]] when i'm [[scans]] channels, I have to be very [[conscientious]] (these days it's [[beneficial]] far too [[frequently]], so I don't [[require]] it getting broken on [[senseless]] [[damnit]] like this...[[meticulous]] with that [[aloof]]!). is this supposed to be some [[antifascist]] [[publicity]] to make people [[reckon]] in some invisible realm of uberman [[supervisory]] and mastery? or what? why does it [[existent]]??

this is THE most [[negligible]] [[exhibitions]], [[fully]] [[fantastic]] and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[aeronautics]]. so may geeks give SO much better [[exposition]] such a [[tough]] [[period]] ([[Sara]] [[Connors]] Chronicles, [[Veritable]] Blood), but [[lend]] this [[counterintuitive]] drivel a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) [[slumps]] away after a season, but [[reckless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[feeling]] just [[retains]] [[walking]] on. yeccch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a really [[strange]] film--and that is NOT a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this [[movie]] a bit too strange, but I [[loved]] it. Once again, this director brings [[together]] a [[wonderful]] cast of [[everyday]] people (not [[actors]]) and [[gets]] a [[great]] ensemble-type performance. [[Although]] not nearly as sad as [[Umberto]] D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and [[enjoy]] the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a [[total]] curmudgeon, you'll have a [[ball]].

By the [[way]], [[since]] I first [[reviewed]] this film, I have [[seen]] another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE [[CHILDREN]] ARE WATCHING US. [[While]] not a [[fantasy]] or light in spirit like [[MIRACLE]] [[IN]] [[MILAN]], a [[great]] [[film]] nevertheless. This is a really [[bizarre]] film--and that is NOT a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this [[cinema]] a bit too strange, but I [[cared]] it. Once again, this director brings [[whole]] a [[noteworthy]] cast of [[ordinary]] people (not [[players]]) and [[got]] a [[wondrous]] ensemble-type performance. [[Despite]] not nearly as sad as [[Rebecca]] D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and [[enjoying]] the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a [[aggregate]] curmudgeon, you'll have a [[ballon]].

By the [[pathways]], [[because]] I first [[examined]] this film, I have [[noticed]] another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE [[INFANT]] ARE WATCHING US. [[Despite]] not a [[chimera]] or light in spirit like [[MIRACULOUS]] [[AMONG]] [[MILANO]], a [[wondrous]] [[movies]] nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 2858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 2859 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film, for an after school special, isn't that bad, and that's the problem. Nothing happens. You feel as if you're still in class. A guy teaches a bunch of young underdogs how to be good paint ball players. We never get to see these underdogs doing badly as the good player is training them. They all of the sudden turn into good players by meditating. Also there are too many characters and no character development. Too much time is spend on the main character and his sexy sister and not enough on some of the other kids. This could have had a 'Bad News Bears' feel (the original) since there was a girl on an all boys team, but there wasn't any feel to this movie at all. It has no feeling and leaves a dull pain in your bones after watching it, is not fun to bag on, not fun to watch, and is just kind of... there. Plain. Boring. Something you'd watch after school before your pre-evening nap. As dull as the day is long and it's been a long, long day watching this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[love]] all his [[work]] but this [[looks]] like [[nothing]].. sorry.. This [[looks]] more [[like]] a "[[David]] Lynch copycat". I [[think]] people like it only because "it's from David Lynch". I [[loved]] all his [[works]] but this [[seems]] like [[none]].. sorry.. This [[seems]] more [[iike]] a "[[Dawood]] Lynch copycat". I [[thoughts]] people like it only because "it's from David Lynch". --------------------------------------------- Result 2861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll keep this fast and sweet. Five girls on their way home from a football game decide to take a 'short cut' that leads them down a deserted forest-ridden road. Of course nothing but good things happen to them, and they safely arrive at their destination.

Alright, they don't. Soon they're hunted down by a deranged chick who has some severe mental issues, and what ensues is 90 minutes of sheer boredom.

I hope to never see any of these actors in any movie ever again. Their screaming, screeching voices gave me a headache, and the script was so poorly written that it included a lot of repeat phrases and nonsensical hysterical screaming. All in all, one of the worst cheap horror flicks I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Typical De Palma movie made with lot's of style and some scene's that will bring you to the edge of your seat.

Most certainly the thing that makes this movie better as the average thriller, is the style. It has some brilliantly edited scene's and some scene's that are truly nerve wrecking that will bring you to the edge of your seat. The best scene's from the movie; The museum scene and the elevator murder. There are some mild erotic scene's and the movies pace might not be fast enough for the casual viewer to fully appreciate this movie. So this movie might not be suitable for everybody.

The story itself is also quite good but it really is the style that makes the movie work! It might be for the fans only but also casual viewers should appreciate the well build up tension in the movie.

There are some nice character portrayed by a good cast. Michael Caine is an interesting casting choice and Angie Dickinson acts just as well as she is good looking (not bad for a 49-year old!).

The musical score by Pino Donaggio is also typically De Palma like and suits the movie very well, just like his score for the other De Palma movie, "Body Double".

Brilliant nerve wrecking thriller. I love De Palma!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Any]] [[film]] in the early [[days]] of Orson [[Welles]] is a [[triumph]] all the [[way]] to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also [[wonderful]] in a [[Touch]] Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[tends]] to [[get]] pompous and self serving in [[films]] like [[F]] is for [[Fake]], [[really]] stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying [[film]] should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end [[Welles]] [[became]] a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of [[Evil]]! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the [[attraction]] to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I [[know]] there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. [[No]] Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine [[film]] from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where [[else]] can you plug a [[film]] or [[boo]] it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can [[say]] what I [[want]] and I promise not to [[spoil]] any [[film]] for someone who hasn't [[seen]] it [[yet]]! [[Every]] [[movies]] in the early [[jours]] of Orson [[Orson]] is a [[win]] all the [[camino]] to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also [[wondrous]] in a [[Toque]] Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[strives]] to [[obtain]] pompous and self serving in [[kino]] like [[e]] is for [[Phonies]], [[genuinely]] stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying [[movie]] should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end [[Orson]] [[came]] a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of [[Satanic]]! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the [[attractiveness]] to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I [[savoir]] there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. [[Nope]] Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine [[movies]] from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where [[elsewhere]] can you plug a [[kino]] or [[ooh]] it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can [[tell]] what I [[wanted]] and I promise not to [[wrack]] any [[movie]] for someone who hasn't [[watched]] it [[even]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the worse cases of film drivel I have seen in a long while. It is so awful, that I am not sure where to begin, or even if it is worth it. The plot is the real problem, and I feel sorry for 'Sly' as he puts in a decent performance for his part. But that plot ... Oh dear oh dear. I particularly love the way near the end he manages to pop from the foot of a mountain to the top, whilst the helicopter is on the way. A climb of a day or two takes him all of five minutes! I could go on: but it isn't worth it. Apart from the grim opening (which even a five year old would be able to predict the outcome of) the rest is drivel. Sorry folks, but this is about as bad as film making gets. --------------------------------------------- Result 2865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't [[normally]] bother to [[comment]] on this [[movie]]: it's so [[minor]] that no one would watch it [[anyway]], but as it happens, it's kind of popular in p2p [[sharing]] [[networks]] such as Kazaa, and so this saaad production needs to be [[exposed]] for what it is.

So what is it then? [[Well]], of course it's not [[really]] a [[comedy]]; [[instead]], it's [[intended]] as a [[horror]] [[flick]] -- "[[intended]]" very much being the [[key]] word here. The script is a [[totally]] [[incoherent]] and [[unbalanced]] [[mess]], the special [[effects]] are only [[special]] in that they're [[especially]] [[pathetic]], and as for the acting, well, let's just [[say]] that if this had been my [[graduating]] play at [[primary]] school, my [[teachers]] would have [[burst]] out [[crying]] at our [[talent]].

Of course I [[realise]] that this is a very low [[budget]] [[film]] and that in those [[cases]] one should [[lower]] one's [[expectations]], [[certainly]] as far as [[things]] like special effects are concerned. Also, even [[though]] I'm a [[big]] [[fan]] of the [[horror]] [[genre]], I'm aware that these [[movies]] are only rarely the places to [[look]] for interesting [[scripts]] and [[top]] notch acting.

But [[still]].

B-movies [[often]] have some redeeming [[features]] to make up for the [[lack]] of [[funding]], such as [[humour]]. The only [[laughs]] in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[ridiculous]] performances. If you can [[find]] the [[humour]] in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only [[thing]] the [[movie]] has to [[offer]]. [[Oh]], that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the [[story]], it's not [[even]] that it doesn't try to [[convey]] [[anything]]: the victims either use [[drugs]] and/or are [[involved]] in [[serious]] crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty [[boys]] and [[girls]], because one day you'll be [[made]] to [[pay]] for what you've [[done]].

I rest my case.

[[So]], all in all, a [[little]] bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names [[correctly]] in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't [[commonly]] bother to [[observational]] on this [[filmmaking]]: it's so [[minimal]] that no one would watch it [[anyhow]], but as it happens, it's kind of popular in p2p [[shared]] [[network]] such as Kazaa, and so this saaad production needs to be [[unmasked]] for what it is.

So what is it then? [[Good]], of course it's not [[truthfully]] a [[farce]]; [[however]], it's [[destined]] as a [[terror]] [[film]] -- "[[destined]]" very much being the [[pivotal]] word here. The script is a [[perfectly]] [[unconnected]] and [[uneven]] [[chaos]], the special [[influencing]] are only [[peculiar]] in that they're [[specially]] [[unhappy]], and as for the acting, well, let's just [[said]] that if this had been my [[diploma]] play at [[elementary]] school, my [[professors]] would have [[bursting]] out [[weeping]] at our [[talents]].

Of course I [[recognise]] that this is a very low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]] and that in those [[lawsuits]] one should [[reduced]] one's [[forecast]], [[obviously]] as far as [[matters]] like special effects are concerned. Also, even [[despite]] I'm a [[gros]] [[groupie]] of the [[terror]] [[kind]], I'm aware that these [[film]] are only rarely the places to [[peek]] for interesting [[screenplay]] and [[supreme]] notch acting.

But [[however]].

B-movies [[commonly]] have some redeeming [[feature]] to make up for the [[shortages]] of [[finances]], such as [[mood]]. The only [[laughed]] in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[silly]] performances. If you can [[finds]] the [[humor]] in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only [[stuff]] the [[filmmaking]] has to [[affords]]. [[Ah]], that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the [[history]], it's not [[yet]] that it doesn't try to [[transmit]] [[nothing]]: the victims either use [[medicine]] and/or are [[participating]] in [[severe]] crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty [[grooms]] and [[females]], because one day you'll be [[introduced]] to [[salary]] for what you've [[played]].

I rest my case.

[[Therefore]], all in all, a [[small]] bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names [[adequately]] in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? --------------------------------------------- Result 2866 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't stand most reality shows and this one is worst than the one with Paris Hilton, and sure it's his company. But "you're fired" or "you're hired", for how many seasons now? After watching the show I wouldn't want to work for the guy with his ego and all and I think watching paint dry has more entertainment valve.

I'd love to hear just one person get up and say "Donald I quit and take some of your money and buy a decent hairdo". I see he's even trying to buy fame in the wrestling WWE. I hope he gets hurt so I don't have to see his pathetic face anymore. It must be sad to want fame so bad and have no talent and make an ass of yourself trying to buy it. I'd give this show a negative mark if I could but it gets a 1 and it doesn't deserve that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ernest Borgnine was so wasted in this movie.There was no point in putting this great actor in this movie.One of the greatest actors in the world wasted,and for what reason, none what so ever,so america if you want to put classic actors in movies DON'T WASTE THEM --------------------------------------------- Result 2868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I will never forget the wit and [[great]] comedy of the [[ORIGINAL]] [[Vacation]] [[movie]]! The lines, pacing, and [[timing]] of events in that [[film]] are outstanding! [[However]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[major]] let down.

[[In]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[win]] a European Vacation on a game [[show]]. The [[problem]] is that many of the [[jokes]] in the [[film]] are little more than [[mild]], "ha-ha" [[laughs]]. [[For]] [[example]], a [[Flight]] Attendant on an [[airplane]] asks [[Clark]], "Do you [[want]] your Coke in the Can?" Clark [[answers]] back, "[[No]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[line]] that is [[funny]] in this [[film]].

European Vacation's [[humor]] is [[strained]]. As if the [[writers]] [[borrowed]] all the jokes from the first [[movie]], [[tried]] to re-hash a [[script]] that had been [[done]] before, and relied on a [[ridiculous]] slap-stick [[chase]] scene [[sequence]] toward the end of the [[picture]] just to kill [[time]].

Worse, the natural [[comic]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[original]] [[kids]] who [[played]] Rusty and Audrey from the first [[movie]] so well are [[nowhere]] to be found. Their [[replacements]] are not [[funny]], can't [[act]], and just look like they are [[going]] through the [[motions]] most of the [[time]]. There are [[also]] a few [[crude]] [[sex]] jokes and [[comments]] that are not only not [[funny]], they are in [[bad]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wally]] [[World]]. The [[place]] that [[made]] them legends! Don't [[join]] them on this European [[dreadful]] adventure. Viewers should re-watch the [[original]] [[Vacation]] [[movie]] in [[place]] of this! You'll be [[glad]] you did. I will never forget the wit and [[large]] comedy of the [[INITIALS]] [[Holidays]] [[movies]]! The lines, pacing, and [[timeline]] of events in that [[flick]] are outstanding! [[Conversely]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[grandes]] let down.

[[Onto]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[triumph]] a European Vacation on a game [[showings]]. The [[difficulty]] is that many of the [[gags]] in the [[filmmaking]] are little more than [[soft]], "ha-ha" [[giggles]]. [[In]] [[case]], a [[Vol]] Attendant on an [[flight]] asks [[Clarke]], "Do you [[wanting]] your Coke in the Can?" Clark [[response]] back, "[[Nope]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[linea]] that is [[comical]] in this [[filmmaking]].

European Vacation's [[comedy]] is [[taut]]. As if the [[authors]] [[loaned]] all the jokes from the first [[filmmaking]], [[attempting]] to re-hash a [[scripts]] that had been [[performed]] before, and relied on a [[absurd]] slap-stick [[chases]] scene [[sequences]] toward the end of the [[imaging]] just to kill [[period]].

Worse, the natural [[hilarious]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[initial]] [[juvenile]] who [[done]] Rusty and Audrey from the first [[movies]] so well are [[anywhere]] to be found. Their [[replacement]] are not [[comical]], can't [[law]], and just look like they are [[gonna]] through the [[motion]] most of the [[period]]. There are [[likewise]] a few [[coarse]] [[sexuality]] jokes and [[observations]] that are not only not [[comical]], they are in [[unfavourable]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wal]] [[Worldwide]]. The [[placing]] that [[accomplished]] them legends! Don't [[participates]] them on this European [[scary]] adventure. Viewers should re-watch the [[upfront]] [[Holidays]] [[cinematographic]] in [[placing]] of this! You'll be [[gratified]] you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Creepshow 2 had a [[lot]] of [[potential]], they just didn't put enough [[time]] in [[perfecting]] it. The [[stories]] were [[pretty]] cool and [[creepy]] [[enough]], but it was [[lacking]]. It's a good movie, but after you've [[seen]] it once, you [[might]] [[want]] to [[see]] it again. This [[movie]] could of been better. Creepshow 2 had a [[batches]] of [[prospective]], they just didn't put enough [[period]] in [[perfected]] it. The [[story]] were [[quite]] cool and [[freaky]] [[satisfactorily]], but it was [[missing]]. It's a good movie, but after you've [[noticed]] it once, you [[apt]] [[wish]] to [[behold]] it again. This [[filmmaking]] could of been better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional [[marriage]] witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in [[marriage]] [[registration]] office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Khan]]) who ran away from her [[home]] at Nainital to [[get]] married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The [[story]] [[starts]] with Megha [[waiting]] at the [[marriage]] [[registration]] office for Dhiraj to [[show]] up but for some [[reason]] he does not [[show]] up. [[So]] Ankush [[comes]] in the [[picture]] here, who had [[approached]] Megha with the [[intention]] of earning [[Rs]]. 200 for his Witness [[job]] and he ends up [[helping]] her by [[providing]] [[shelter]] to her. Ankush [[grows]] on his side by working in a [[bank]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[love]] with Megha and she too [[falls]] in love with him (or [[kind]] of love), both agree for the [[marriage]] and Dhiraj [[comes]] back in the [[picture]]. Unexpected [[circumstances]] happen, [[actually]] I should [[say]], [[expected]] [[circumstances]] with unexpected reactions and then….

Actually the movie story is bit [[different]] than the [[movies]] we [[see]] and I do not [[think]] so it will be [[accepted]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[love]] to watch something [[different]], then you will [[definitely]] like the [[movie]]. The [[movie]] is just an innocent love [[story]] [[drafted]] very well by the [[characters]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[characters]] are so natural that you feel as if things are [[happening]] to the [[guy]] next [[door]]. The background [[music]] of the film [[also]] plays a very good role, it is just too good. The [[way]] Delhi is [[shown]] is very good and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[sum]] it up.

[[Story]]: A very common [[story]] carried very well and transformed to a wonderful experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya creation, so I did not [[expect]] much but [[still]] I liked couple of [[songs]] of the movie including the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[impressive]], very natural and innocent acting but he should stay away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a doll, a very cute doll I must say. [[Again]] very innocent and natural acting and these both [[actors]] [[perfectly]] fit into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other actors did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional [[weddings]] witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in [[marriages]] [[inscription]] office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Kahn]]) who ran away from her [[households]] at Nainital to [[gets]] married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The [[storytelling]] [[began]] with Megha [[awaiting]] at the [[wedding]] [[inscription]] office for Dhiraj to [[demonstrate]] up but for some [[justification]] he does not [[illustrates]] up. [[Hence]] Ankush [[happens]] in the [[visuals]] here, who had [[tackled]] Megha with the [[intent]] of earning [[R]]. 200 for his Witness [[jobs]] and he ends up [[aiding]] her by [[supplying]] [[dwellings]] to her. Ankush [[increase]] on his side by working in a [[banco]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[loves]] with Megha and she too [[fall]] in love with him (or [[genera]] of love), both agree for the [[marry]] and Dhiraj [[happens]] back in the [[image]]. Unexpected [[situations]] happen, [[indeed]] I should [[tell]], [[hoped]] [[situations]] with unexpected reactions and then….

Actually the movie story is bit [[diversified]] than the [[film]] we [[seeing]] and I do not [[ideas]] so it will be [[agreeing]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[loves]] to watch something [[multiple]], then you will [[decidedly]] like the [[movies]]. The [[film]] is just an innocent love [[tale]] [[devised]] very well by the [[attribute]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[attribute]] are so natural that you feel as if things are [[occurring]] to the [[dude]] next [[porte]]. The background [[musician]] of the film [[apart]] plays a very good role, it is just too good. The [[ways]] Delhi is [[evidenced]] is very good and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[somme]] it up.

[[Fairytales]]: A very common [[fairytales]] carried very well and transformed to a wonderful experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya creation, so I did not [[hopes]] much but [[again]] I liked couple of [[lyrics]] of the movie including the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[brilliant]], very natural and innocent acting but he should stay away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a doll, a very cute doll I must say. [[Afresh]] very innocent and natural acting and these both [[actresses]] [[entirely]] fit into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other actors did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think Micheal Ironsides acting career must be over, if he has to star in this sort of low budge crap. Surely he could do better than waste his time in this rubbish.

This movie could be far better, if it had a good budget, but it shows repeatedly through-out the movie. There is one scene at a outpost, which looks like, its outside the front of a railway station, and i bet it was.

There is one scene which made give this movie a 3, and it shows the space craft landing and taking off over a lake, surrounded by forests. This was well done, but the rest of the movie, forget it.

There is another scene, which looks like a engineering plant, which i bet it, and does not look like a space outpost as the character say it is.

This movie is stupid, has a serious low budget, makes no sense and God Help Micheal Ironsides. --------------------------------------------- Result 2872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Yes there are [[great]] performances here. [[Unfortunately]], they happen in the context of a movie that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. [[During]] the [[first]] 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. [[Suddenly]], about an [[hour]] in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[singing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through [[dialog]], then seem to [[drop]] that [[idea]] and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this [[inconsistency]] in how the [[music]] is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is [[supposedly]] being portrayed. [[While]] the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the [[rest]] of the film is just ([[bad]]) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how [[little]] time I have on earth and [[resent]] that I wasted two [[hours]] of it watching this film. Yes there are [[marvellous]] performances here. [[Unluckily]], they happen in the context of a movie that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. [[Across]] the [[frst]] 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. [[Unexpectedly]], about an [[hours]] in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[sing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through [[dialogue]], then seem to [[decline]] that [[ideas]] and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this [[contradiction]] in how the [[musician]] is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is [[seemingly]] being portrayed. [[Despite]] the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the [[stays]] of the film is just ([[unfavourable]]) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how [[scant]] time I have on earth and [[hate]] that I wasted two [[hour]] of it watching this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] MPAA:Rated R for Violence,[[Language]],Nudity and Brief [[Drug]] [[Use]]. [[Quebec]] [[Rating]]:13+ Canadian [[Home]] Video Rating:18A

I [[saw]] Coonskin [[today]].This [[film]] is [[also]] known as Bustin Out and Street [[Fight]].After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to [[see]] more of Bashki's [[films]].I [[saw]] [[Cool]] World and [[thought]] it was mediocre and I [[saw]] this.When it was first [[released]], the [[film]] was very [[controversial]].It was [[considered]] racist and Al Sharpton [[wanted]] the film banned, he even led protests outside the [[theatre]] where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director [[Spike]] Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have [[enjoyed]] this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very [[enjoyable]] as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film [[mixes]] live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. MPAA:Rated R for Violence,[[Linguistics]],Nudity and Brief [[Medicinal]] [[Employs]]. [[Qc]] [[Scoring]]:13+ Canadian [[Dwelling]] Video Rating:18A

I [[witnessed]] Coonskin [[thursday]].This [[cinematic]] is [[moreover]] known as Bustin Out and Street [[Struggling]].After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to [[behold]] more of Bashki's [[cinematography]].I [[noticed]] [[Cooling]] World and [[brainchild]] it was mediocre and I [[seen]] this.When it was first [[publicized]], the [[kino]] was very [[polemic]].It was [[regarded]] racist and Al Sharpton [[wanna]] the film banned, he even led protests outside the [[theaters]] where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director [[Fortification]] Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have [[appreciated]] this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very [[nice]] as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film [[mix]] live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] In this [[movie]], Chávez [[supporters]] (either [[venezuelan]] and not-venezuelan) just [[lie]] about a [[dramatic]] situation in our [[country]].

They did not [[say]] that the conflict started because of Chávez [[announcement]] firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not say anything about more than 96 TV interruptions [[transmitted]] by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us [[anything]] about The quiting [[announcement]] made by General en [[Jefe]] Lucas [[Rincon]] [[Romero]], Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional [[supporter]] of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say [[anything]] about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This [[movie]] is just a lot of [[lies]] or a big lie. In this [[filmmaking]], Chávez [[followers]] (either [[venezuela]] and not-venezuelan) just [[lied]] about a [[tremendous]] situation in our [[countries]].

They did not [[said]] that the conflict started because of Chávez [[adverts]] firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not say anything about more than 96 TV interruptions [[sent]] by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us [[something]] about The quiting [[advertisements]] made by General en [[Chef]] Lucas [[Hector]] [[Randall]], Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional [[defender]] of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say [[nada]] about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This [[filmmaking]] is just a lot of [[resides]] or a big lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Moonstruck" is one of the best films ever. I own that film on DVD! The movie deals with a New York widow (Cher) who falls in love with her boyfriend's (Danny Aiello) angry brother (Nicholas Cage) who works at a bakery. I'm glad Cher won an Oscar for that movie. Nicholas Cage and Danny Aiello are great, too. The direction from Norman Jewison (who directed "Fiddler On The Roof") is fantastic. "Moonstruck" is an excellent movie for everyone to see and laugh. A must-see!

10/10 stars! --------------------------------------------- Result 2876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What an amazingly funny and original show. The cast starting with the hysterical Julie Brown(Homecoming Queen's Got A Gun) is just perfect. Add Amy Hill(All American Girl-Grandma Kim) who plays a lesbian who is always arguing with her partner and business partner(Asian restaurant-WOK-DON"T RUN) I have laughed harder during this show than any other I have ever seen(including Newhart-one of my all time favorite shows) If you like movies like Naked Gun and Airplane- you will love this series!! One of the best moments of the show is Cindy Williams playing herself. When she snubs Tammy at the dry cleaners, Tammy finds a picture of Cindy Williams in her coat. The picture is of Cindy Williams doing an unmentionable act with a bowling pin-upside down. It is awesome to see an actress like Cindy Williams being able to play herself like this. Soap opera like with many surprise twists during its short run. I can only hope that this will someday be released on DVD with special many bonus special features. Funniest series I have ever seen!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] New York, 1953. One hot night, four famous iconic figures will come together. The professor (Albert Einstein) has come to NY to give a speech, which he has, the senator (Joesph MacCarthy) on his back. Later that night his gets a surprise visitor; a famous actress (Marilyn Monroe). Who actually wants to discuss the theories of Relativity. Soon her ball-playing husband (Joe DiMaggio) turns up at the hotel room, begging to work things out for their crumbling relationship. Flashbacks of childhood, important events, perceived consequences of their actions creep in to show how these individuals cope with despair and a hidden fear waiting to break out.

Now that's one-of-a-kind! Adapted off a stage-play by Terry Johnson (who would also script the screenplay for the film), "Insignificance" is an odd, quirky, seductive and downright curious fictional pop-culture gimmick in the hands of director Nicolas Roeg. This inspired and cerebral experimental effort might be rooted in its stage-play origins, because it does feel theatrical and most of the action occurs in a hotel backdrop and one main suite. The cramp look only enhanced the moody and smoky atmosphere of New York to great effect. However these limitations can't contain the fruitful and daring ideas that Roeg manages to randomly storm up visually and through the meaningful material. The way he reflects on the characters' (who are suggestively famous figures, without the need of naming of them) philosophical journeys and interpretations of their notions is stimulating in a spiritual sense, with the memories gelling into the present and visions showing their fears of realisations, which depending on what you're seeing is either beautiful, or hauntingly implemented. There's plenty of food for thought and hints within the verbosely innovative (if sometimes awkward) script, with the main focus concerning the present situation, but the flashbacks gives us the personal make-up (sex, power, enlightenment and glory) of what makes them who they are and how much of a burden it can be in there already demanding lives. Sure the story might not lead to anything by the end, and it can feel disjointed, but the dreamy vibe and intelligent arrangement irons out those folds and makes sure it never turns giddy. Peter Hannan's sensually fluid photography and Stanley Myers' titillatingly oozing blues soundtrack fit in snugly with Roeg's stylistically subdue and established style of directing. He makes it look like he's working with something big and large-scale, but otherwise that's not the case and a small little universe is created. The vintage costumes and locations of the period all come off fittingly enough. What made the film for me had to be the impressive acting it boasted from the main four. Theresa Russell's perky, drop dead gorgeous appeal of the sexy pin-up actress is a growing portrayal that definitely held the film together along with an genuinely excellent and endearing performance by Michael Emil as the professor. Tony Curtis marvellously plays it up as witch-hunting senator and Gary Busey is suitably good in the stoically gravel manner as the ballplayer. Showing up in minor, but amusing support roles happen to be Will Sampson and Patrick Kilpatrick.

A memorably striking, fresh and tour de force meditation piece of metaphysics linked together by four different extremes. Some might find it pretentiously estrange and too talky, but this one had me wrapped up in its own little unique world to worry too much about its shortcomings. --------------------------------------------- Result 2878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Robert Mitchum stars as Clint Tollinger in this short but tough western: Man With The Gun. Tollinger is a professional town tamer - as in, when a town needs someone to save itself; he is the one who is brought in to do it. Tollinger's latest gig comes by as an accident: strolling into town looking for his former fling, he stumbles into a town being played like a puppet by a local western gangster. But many townspeople begin to rue the day they hired Tollinger, as his way of cleaning up the town becomes very taxing (suddenly High Plains Drifter seems less original).

Man With The Gun starts off as an average western tough-guy film but begins to surprise you more and more as the film progresses. What starts off as forgettable and run-of-the-mill ends up dark and character-centered. The entire film is very well shot and the cast is very enjoyable. Mitchum is his usual excellent self here in Man With The Gun - not one of his very best performances, Mitchum still has his classic and effective tough-guy screen presence in high gear and he knocks the action-packed, meaningful, and shocking scenes of the film right out of the park. Man With The Gun is a nice Mitchum western and is easily worth one's time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hitokiri (which translates roughly as "assassination"), a/k/a "Tenchu" which translates roughly as "divine punishment") showcases Hideo Gosha at the top of his form. Do NOT miss this one, or Gosha's other classic, Goyokin! Hitokiri is not only one of Gosha's best films, it's one of the best "samurai/chambara" films ever made, and perhaps one of the best Japanese films ever exported.

Be warned, all of the intricate plot details in Hitokiri can be a little hard to follow for those unfamiliar with 19th century Japanese history. Even so, the underlying human drama is obvious and open to all viewers. As per the norm for Gosha, Hitokiri provides yet another variation on his traditional theme of "loyalty to one's lord" vs. "doing the right thing". However, Gosha develops his favorite theme with such sophistication, that it's really _the_ movie to see (along with Goyokin, of course).

I suppose it breaks down like this: If you want a simpler, more action-oriented tale, you might want to see Goyokin. However, if you want a more thoughtful, multilayered (albeit grim) drama, see this one.

(OK, OK, essentially, the historical backdrop is a massive power grap between many different samurai clans who are either (1) working to reform, yet retain, the Tokugawa Shogunate, and (2) those who are trying to install the Emperor Meiji as the supreme ruler of Japan. Of course, those clans working "for" Emperor Meiji were often less interested in "reforming" Japan than in ensuring their own clan more power in the "new world order". Ironically, the entire feudal system was officially abolished as one of the first reforms of the Meiji government. It's ironic twists like this -- Gosha's big on irony -- that make the entire plot all the more bittersweet.)

What distinguishes "Hitokiri" from Gosha's other movies is Gosha's mature sense of cinematography. Every shot is thoughtfully composed, and (much like Kubrick's Barry Lyndon) each frame of the movie could hold its own as a still composition. Of course, this is typical Gosha. Hitokiri really stands out with stunning backdrops, including(as with Goyokin) many riveting seascapes. Just watch the opening sequence, and you're hooked! Make no mistake, this is no English period piece: Hitokiri is extremely violent (don't say you weren't warned).

What else, other than cool camera work, makes Hitokiri stand out? The performances seem (to me) a bit more subtle in this one. Katsu Shintaro (of Zatoichi/Hanzo the Razor fame) turns in a star performance as the conflicted protagonist/antihero, Okada Izo. Katsu manages to instill humanity to a character that seems almost more wild animal than villain. Throughout the movie, you're never quite sure if you're engaged or revolted by Okada's character. At the same time, Katsu's portrayal of Okada's ravenous hunger for respect, and his later pathetic attempts at redemption, seem so human that you can't help but feel empathy/sympathy. Of course, after seeing Nakadai Tatsuya play the tortured hero in "Goyokin", it's great to see him play such a ruthless villain in "Hitokiri". He's just perfect, there's nothing more to say!

As a final note, perhaps more interesting to buffs than to casual fans, don't miss the last screen appearance of Mishima Yukio (yes, the closeted gay right-wing ultranationalist novelist who committed suicide by seppuku before the crowd of jeering Japanese military personnel he "kidnapped" in 1970, and had a movie on his life and work made by Paul Schrader), who actually does a pretty solid job of portraying the honorable (for an assassin) Shinbei Tanaka. --------------------------------------------- Result 2880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched "Elephant [[Walk]]" for the [[first]] time in about 30 years and was [[struck]] by how [[similar]] the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I [[enjoyed]] it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a [[credible]] [[job]] as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's [[frustrated]] admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. I watched "Elephant [[Marche]]" for the [[frst]] time in about 30 years and was [[knocked]] by how [[analogue]] the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I [[appreciated]] it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a [[plausible]] [[employment]] as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's [[disillusioned]] admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. --------------------------------------------- Result 2881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Saw]] this on SBS [[TV]] here in [[Australia]] the other week, where it was [[titled]] "Laputa: Castle in the [[sky]]". I had enabled subtitles and I [[think]] SBS [[provided]] their own for that, which, as [[usual]], was of very good quality.

Just [[looked]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[confirms]] what I suspected...the floating [[island]] of this [[tale]] is taken from the [[classic]] Jonathan [[Swift]] novel "Gulliver's [[travels]]", which was published in the early to [[mid]] 1700s.

[[Anyway]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[features]] an [[English]] [[speaking]] voice-cast. It's suitable for [[young]] children, I think, but it does [[run]] at just over two hours in [[length]], so it may be too long for some, though not for an adult like me.

The [[story]] [[concerns]] two children who [[seek]] to find a legendary floating island which has a castle on it. The children are not the only ones looking for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies looking for the island too, and looking to capture the children (Sheeta, the girl, voiced by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the boy, voiced by James Van Der Beek) in order to help them find it.

The graphics are [[magnificent]]...sort of photo-realistic at times, especially the scenes of stonework lit by torch-light, or the [[pretty]] scenes of bright, sunny days, with white clouds, or mist.

[[Recommended]]. [[Sawthe]] this on SBS [[TVS]] here in [[Australians]] the other week, where it was [[entitled]] "Laputa: Castle in the [[heavens]]". I had enabled subtitles and I [[reckon]] SBS [[supplied]] their own for that, which, as [[normal]], was of very good quality.

Just [[seemed]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[emphasizes]] what I suspected...the floating [[isle]] of this [[conte]] is taken from the [[typical]] Jonathan [[Rapids]] novel "Gulliver's [[voyage]]", which was published in the early to [[middle]] 1700s.

[[Writ]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[featured]] an [[Englishman]] [[speaks]] voice-cast. It's suitable for [[youthful]] children, I think, but it does [[running]] at just over two hours in [[lengths]], so it may be too long for some, though not for an adult like me.

The [[narratives]] [[worries]] two children who [[seeks]] to find a legendary floating island which has a castle on it. The children are not the only ones looking for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies looking for the island too, and looking to capture the children (Sheeta, the girl, voiced by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the boy, voiced by James Van Der Beek) in order to help them find it.

The graphics are [[wondrous]]...sort of photo-realistic at times, especially the scenes of stonework lit by torch-light, or the [[quite]] scenes of bright, sunny days, with white clouds, or mist.

[[Suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't quite know how to explain "Darkend Room," because to summarize it wouldn't really do it justice. It's a quintessentially Lynchian short film with two beautiful girls in a strange, mysterious situation. I would say this short is definitely more on the "Mulholland Drive" end of the Lynchian spectrum, as opposed to "The Elephant Man" or "The Straight Story." It's hidden on Lynch's website, and well worth the search. --------------------------------------------- Result 2883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie today at the Haifa Film Festival in Israel after hearing rave reviews, but I guess the critics were just sucking up to Willem Defoe and his wife (the director) who were present at the festival. It is definitely the slowest movie I have ever seen with numerous pointless, ridiculously long scenes of nothing. Besides Defoe who was decent, the acting of the two and a half other people in the movie, Defoe's wife Giada included, was ridiculously awful (how they cast the part of the salesgirl at the bakery is beyond me). This movie is pretty much plot less with a lame attempt to be abstract and off the wall. The only scene that stirred any kind of reaction in the crowd was vulgar and came from nowhere as if just to add some kind of shock value to the dullness that is this movie. Sorry for being so harsh, but really this movie is a precious waste of time and money. I appreciate good indie cinema, but this movie is not worthy of moviegoers' time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Intriguing. Exciting. Dramatic. Explosive. Complex. Epic. Words that only touch the tip of the iceberg in terms of the grand story that is LOST being told.

From the acting down to the rare visual effects, LOST is the essential show on television for fans of science-fiction, fantasy, action, adventure, and lots and lots of mystery.

Each cast member is so well chosen, and so good in their roles, that you either love them, or hate them, or downright wish them dead.

The visual effects, when used (which is rare) are actually quite well done considering the usual production of shows. Be it the "smoke monster", to the polar bears, LOST is believable in terms of eye-candy.

As far as story goes, nothing can compare to the vast complexity this show has made viewers like me endure. Beginning to End, continuity is virtually perfect, characters are developed, and the ever-evolving story slowly gives the answers to its questions so many crave.

Overall, there is practically no flaw in LOST. It does for dramatic/sci-fi television what Arrested Development did for comedy: it has set the bar.

I highly recommend LOST to those that are patient, intellectual, and love every moment of the ride, no matter how long it takes to reach the end.

See this show. --------------------------------------------- Result 2885 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Spoiler This is a [[great]] film about a conure. He goes through [[quite]] the ordeal [[trying]] to [[get]] back to his little [[girl]] [[owner]]. He [[learns]] a [[lot]] through his [[journey]] and meets up with a [[lot]] of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my [[wife]] does, this film is for you. This film [[also]] has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[works]] out for Paulie and his Russian [[friend]]. Rent this for the [[whole]] family, everyone will enjoy this. Spoiler This is a [[wondrous]] film about a conure. He goes through [[pretty]] the ordeal [[tempting]] to [[gets]] back to his little [[chick]] [[landlord]]. He [[teaches]] a [[batch]] through his [[voyages]] and meets up with a [[batch]] of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my [[woman]] does, this film is for you. This film [[further]] has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[working]] out for Paulie and his Russian [[boyfriend]]. Rent this for the [[total]] family, everyone will enjoy this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[incredible]] piece of work and acting does. I found it [[amazingly]] lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[unthinkable]] piece of work and acting does. I found it [[unbelievably]] lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. --------------------------------------------- Result 2887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie makes me want to fall in love all over again!I am naming my next daughter "Adelaide". Just so that someone who sings like Ol Blue eyes can swoon her one day, and feel the butterflies I felt hearing it sung, and it wasn't even to me! I give it a 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2888 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I used to be an avid viewer until I personally spent long cold hours helping build a home for the White Family, only to be sickened to see the house a year later. All of the beautiful rock landscaping has been removed, the gorgeous rock sidewalk and front fountain have been removed, all the pine trees and pecan trees in the front have been cut down, sprinkler system has been ripped out. It now looks like a disaster area. They don't even live there any more... they live "in town" and come out only for the weekend. It sickens me to think of all the hours that the great people of Oklahoma donated to these people and to see the result. The story that we all saw on TV wasn't completely the truth... don't believe every thing you see and hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 2889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[thought]] the original of this film was quaint and [[charming]] as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to [[figure]] it out.

[[Since]] I had already [[seen]] the [[original]], when I saw this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately [[made]] for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[within]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a [[character]] [[actor]], I wanted to see how he would [[pull]] it off.

The [[writers]]/producers etc, [[modernized]] the film a [[bit]] by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it [[highly]] cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I [[actually]] [[enjoyed]] this [[quite]] a bit.

But if anyone really wants to [[see]] this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. I [[ideology]] the original of this film was quaint and [[cute]] as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to [[silhouette]] it out.

[[Because]] I had already [[watched]] the [[initial]], when I saw this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately [[accomplished]] for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[inside]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a [[nature]] [[actress]], I wanted to see how he would [[pulling]] it off.

The [[authors]]/producers etc, [[upgrading]] the film a [[bitten]] by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it [[vastly]] cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I [[genuinely]] [[appreciated]] this [[rather]] a bit.

But if anyone really wants to [[seeing]] this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2890 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The acting may be [[okay]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wish]] you weren't, this [[movie]] is so [[horrible]], that if I [[could]] get a hold of [[every]] copy, I would [[burn]] them all and not look back, this [[movie]] is [[terrible]]!! The acting may be [[allright]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wanna]] you weren't, this [[filmmaking]] is so [[shocking]], that if I [[would]] get a hold of [[all]] copy, I would [[burns]] them all and not look back, this [[filmmaking]] is [[horrible]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How this [[movie]] [[got]] [[made]] with a [[supposedly]] $70 million budget and without being [[completely]] retooled is beyond me. The storyline and [[dialogue]] are beyond [[amateurish]]. [[Characters]] [[say]] things no real [[person]] [[would]] ever [[say]] and [[almost]] never [[react]] to things that were [[said]] before. No one [[seems]] to be [[grounded]] in the [[real]] [[world]]. The acting of the leads is fine given that the [[writing]] is such a dud...but several [[actors]] in supporting roles [[really]] drag the production down. The hero's hair [[probably]] should've [[gotten]] its own [[credit]], it was so [[oddly]] attention- grabbing...not to [[mention]] that it [[gave]] one of the better performances in the pic. [[Finally]], for a [[movie]] about L.A. being besieged by [[giant]] [[reptiles]], this film is [[shockingly]] boring. What a shame! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, [[thinking]] up ways that you [[could]] have taken the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. How this [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] [[effected]] with a [[reportedly]] $70 million budget and without being [[altogether]] retooled is beyond me. The storyline and [[dialogues]] are beyond [[unprofessional]]. [[Characteristics]] [[told]] things no real [[individual]] [[ought]] ever [[says]] and [[hardly]] never [[reacting]] to things that were [[stated]] before. No one [[appears]] to be [[reasoned]] in the [[veritable]] [[globe]]. The acting of the leads is fine given that the [[write]] is such a dud...but several [[players]] in supporting roles [[genuinely]] drag the production down. The hero's hair [[maybe]] should've [[become]] its own [[credits]], it was so [[amazingly]] attention- grabbing...not to [[referenced]] that it [[handed]] one of the better performances in the pic. [[Lastly]], for a [[filmmaking]] about L.A. being besieged by [[gigantic]] [[reptilian]], this film is [[marvellously]] boring. What a shame! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, [[thought]] up ways that you [[would]] have taken the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The threesome of Bill Boyd, Robert Armstrong, and James Gleason play Coney Island carnys vying for the hand of Ginger Rogers, a working gal who sells salt water taffy. With the outbreak of World War I, the threesome enlist and pursue Ginger from afar. The first half of this RKO Pathe production is hard going, with the three male leads chewing up the scenery with overcooked one-liners and 'snappy' dialogue that quickly grows tiresome. The second half concentrates on action sequences as the US Navy pursues both a German merchant cruiser and a U-boat. These sequences are lively and well-filmed, but overall this is an overlong and unsatisfying comedy-drama with a flat ending. For fans of the stars only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So let me start off by saying that I saw this movie as part of a bargain. I was really bored one fine 1997 day and so I biked over to the movie rental store. I asked the clerk what the worst movie he had in stock was. Without hesitation he walked me over to "Lucky Stiff." He told me that he'd waive the $1 rental fee (he said it would be wrong to charge more) if I promised to watch the whole movie. So watch it I did, for free...

This movie is terrible. God-Awful even. I don't need to go into plot details, read the other reviews. The jokes make no sense. The acting was terrible. I know it was supposed to be a comedy, but the stupidity of the main character was exhausting. You might try to watch it as something to laugh at, but it's so bad that it isn't even funny in that way. Avoid! --------------------------------------------- Result 2894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This apology for a movie is about absolutely nothing! Rachel Griffiths must have needed the money. The film must have been made on a very low budget, because the lighting was non existent. I made a vow if I ever see Pete Postlesumthingor other I'll commit suicide. I'd be happy to know if there was 1) a plot or 2)a script. My biggest regret is I wasted my time watching this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I've been disappointed, if not surprised, at the lack of appreciation this film has received. Once again, Billy Zane proves he's more than just a Hollywood [[pretty]] boy in a [[silent]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Calling]] this a silent film is inaccurate, as there's a [[lot]] of music and sound. It has a [[manic]] [[pace]] and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[finally]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast listing, and [[realize]] that [[everyone]] [[shines]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of [[Wood]], and to do a [[broad]], [[physical]] kind of acting not [[seen]] much these days.

But, [[today]], reviewers [[try]] to [[guess]] what's going to become a hit much more than they show any [[kind]] of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable [[target]] [[audience]]. It was [[made]] mostly out of [[love]] for Wood's script. Even after his [[death]], the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly [[entertaining]] and a [[genuinely]] [[experimental]] film that [[really]] deserves to [[live]], at least on DVD. I've been disappointed, if not surprised, at the lack of appreciation this film has received. Once again, Billy Zane proves he's more than just a Hollywood [[quite]] boy in a [[muted]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Telephoning]] this a silent film is inaccurate, as there's a [[batch]] of music and sound. It has a [[fussy]] [[rhythm]] and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[eventually]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast listing, and [[attaining]] that [[anybody]] [[glitters]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of [[Wooden]], and to do a [[extensive]], [[corporal]] kind of acting not [[watched]] much these days.

But, [[hoy]], reviewers [[trying]] to [[guesses]] what's going to become a hit much more than they show any [[sorting]] of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable [[intents]] [[viewers]]. It was [[brought]] mostly out of [[loves]] for Wood's script. Even after his [[killings]], the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly [[amusing]] and a [[actually]] [[empirical]] film that [[truthfully]] deserves to [[inhabit]], at least on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This snarky, homophobic [[thing]] was dated in 1976. It [[seems]] [[particularly]] mean-spirited now, [[filled]] with gay [[stereotypes]], and [[characters]] that are meant to be laughed at, [[rather]] than with. Redd Foxx does his standard schtick, [[Michael]] Warren at [[least]] tries to [[bring]] [[humanity]] to a one dimensional [[character]], and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Pearl]] [[Bailey]] deserves far [[better]]. This snarky, homophobic [[stuff]] was dated in 1976. It [[seem]] [[specially]] mean-spirited now, [[fill]] with gay [[stereotype]], and [[nature]] that are meant to be laughed at, [[somewhat]] than with. Redd Foxx does his standard schtick, [[Michaela]] Warren at [[fewer]] tries to [[bringing]] [[humanism]] to a one dimensional [[characters]], and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Perla]] [[Baily]] deserves far [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Usually musicals in the 1940's were of a set formula - and if you studied films you know what I'm talking about - a certain running lenghth, very "showy" performances that were great on the surface but never got into the real personalities of the characters etc.

THIS ONE IS DIFFERENT - and light years better and well worth it's nomination for best picture of the year - 1945 (although had no chance of beating the eventual winner - Lost Weekend).

Gene Kelly was probably in the best form of his career - yes I know about "American in Paris" and "Singing in the Rain". This one is different. He really gets into his character of a "sea wolf" thinking (at first) that "picking up any girl while on leave" is nothing more than a lark. And if you had to make up a "story" to get her - so be it - until. Sort of like the Music Man when he gets "his foot caught in the door". The eventual hilarity of the film stems mostly from his and his new pal (Sinatra)'s attempt to make the "story" good in order to "get the girl" that he REALLY and unexpectedly falls in love with. You are going to have to see the movie to see what I mean.

Besides that there are so many other elements of great film in this one, it's a classic buddy story, nostalgia to a time when WWII was almost over (the war ended about a month after the films release), a realization that a guy that always laughed at life can find out that he really is a great human being, great songs and probably a few other elements of classic film making that I can't think of right now.

Why not a 10? Near the end - at nearly 2 1/2 hours starts to feel a bit long. There is a small ballet number that Gene Kelly does that must have been a sensation in 1945 but seems dated and feels like it just adds minutes now. But overall, this ones a definite winner on every level. --------------------------------------------- Result 2898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The symbolic use of objects, [[form]] [[editing]], the [[position]] of [[characters]] in the scene... these were all [[used]] with such [[joyous]] [[abandon]] by Hitchcock that you can really [[see]] what a fertile genius he had. The [[way]] the wife [[moves]] from one corner of the [[ring]] to the other as the [[fight]] progresses, the [[editing]] when the [[wedding]] [[ring]] is placed on her finger... while these may seem a [[bit]] [[obvious]] by todays standards, in the silent [[era]] they [[spoke]] [[volumes]] about the [[story]] without a word being [[spoken]]. Even the title has a [[least]] four meanings that I can [[see]]; the boxing ring, the [[wedding]] [[ring]], the bracelet the lover buys, and the love [[triangle]] at the [[heart]] of the story. The symbolic use of objects, [[shape]] [[edited]], the [[posture]] of [[hallmarks]] in the scene... these were all [[using]] with such [[happier]] [[abandoning]] by Hitchcock that you can really [[seeing]] what a fertile genius he had. The [[paths]] the wife [[shift]] from one corner of the [[ringing]] to the other as the [[wrestling]] progresses, the [[edit]] when the [[marriages]] [[ringing]] is placed on her finger... while these may seem a [[bite]] [[manifest]] by todays standards, in the silent [[epoch]] they [[talking]] [[quantities]] about the [[narratives]] without a word being [[talked]]. Even the title has a [[fewest]] four meanings that I can [[behold]]; the boxing ring, the [[wedlock]] [[rings]], the bracelet the lover buys, and the love [[triangular]] at the [[crux]] of the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This [[movie]] had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[simply]] could never happen. [[Navy]] [[protocols]] could never break down that much that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the Captain. I'll take Dr. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[see]] this plot. Sidenote--the [[US]] Navy did not [[support]] this film. This [[filmmaking]] had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[exclusively]] could never happen. [[Marines]] [[protocol]] could never break down that much that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the Captain. I'll take Dr. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[consults]] this plot. Sidenote--the [[AMERICANS]] Navy did not [[succour]] this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching Josh Kornbluth 'act' in this movie reminds me of my freshman TV production class, where the 'not funny' had the chance to prove just how unfunny they really were!

OBVIOUS is the word that comes to mind when I try to synopsize this wannabe comedy. The jokes are sophomoric and telegraphed. The delivery is painfully bad. OUCH!!!!!!! The writing is simply dorkish. It is akin to a Bob Saget show.

Watching this movie is as painful as watching a one and a half hour long Saturday Night Live skit (post Belushi).

I hated this movie and want my money back!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2901 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[BEGIN]] [[SPOILER]]: Fitfully funny and memorable for Mr. Chong's literal roach-smoking scene: Chong coolly mashes a stray kitchen cockroach into his pipe's bowl, lights up, coughs and hacks violently for a seeming eternity,then with perfect aplomb and not skipping a beat, re-loads the bowl properly, re-lights, re-tokes. [[END]] SPOILER. [[Alas]], I [[began]] to lose [[faith]] less than half-way through the proceedings. It occurred to me that the lackadaisical duo are way [[obnoxious]] and less than relatable. I have come to [[appreciate]] the relative sophistication of [[contemporary]] stoners, Harold and Kumar. I simply [[prefer]] brighter company. Yet, the movie is [[probably]] a perfect fit for baked frat bros or those [[viewers]] who are so feeble-minded as to be outwitted by a stoner when they-- the former are sober. [[Notable]] guest appearance by Paul Reubens spouting obscenities in pre-Pee-wee form. [[LANCER]] [[BAFFLE]]: Fitfully funny and memorable for Mr. Chong's literal roach-smoking scene: Chong coolly mashes a stray kitchen cockroach into his pipe's bowl, lights up, coughs and hacks violently for a seeming eternity,then with perfect aplomb and not skipping a beat, re-loads the bowl properly, re-lights, re-tokes. [[TERMINATES]] SPOILER. [[Unfortunately]], I [[inaugurated]] to lose [[creed]] less than half-way through the proceedings. It occurred to me that the lackadaisical duo are way [[outrageous]] and less than relatable. I have come to [[thankful]] the relative sophistication of [[modern]] stoners, Harold and Kumar. I simply [[favored]] brighter company. Yet, the movie is [[certainly]] a perfect fit for baked frat bros or those [[onlookers]] who are so feeble-minded as to be outwitted by a stoner when they-- the former are sober. [[Remarkable]] guest appearance by Paul Reubens spouting obscenities in pre-Pee-wee form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Ten minutes worth of [[story]] stretched out into the [[better]] [[part]] of two hours. [[When]] nothing of any [[significance]] had happened at the halfway point I should have left. But, ever [[hopeful]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the time. Acting was OK, but the [[story]] line is so transparent and [[weak]]. The [[script]] is about as lame as it [[could]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a [[whole]] lot of [[room]] for [[good]] [[dialogue]]. Ten minutes worth of [[saga]] stretched out into the [[optimum]] [[party]] of two hours. [[Whenever]] nothing of any [[importance]] had happened at the halfway point I should have left. But, ever [[upbeat]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the time. Acting was OK, but the [[history]] line is so transparent and [[feeble]]. The [[hyphen]] is about as lame as it [[did]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a [[entire]] lot of [[bedroom]] for [[alright]] [[talks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I believe they were telling the truth the whole time..U cant trust anything in the wild... They family went through hell.Those poor boys too young to understand what was going on around them. But still having to deal with the rumours. As well as dealing with the lose of their little sister. I cant believe this case went on for so long.seems like the jury couldn't see the truth, even if it bit them on the ass.I feel for this family, and if i could let them know i hate what has happened to them, i would.I have no idea what they went through, i cant even imagine it. After watching this movie, i was in tears, and had to check on my little girl in bed...I think everyone should watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2904 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The first [[noticeable]] problem about this [[awkwardly]] [[titled]] [[film]] is its [[casting]]. Ann [[Nelson]] plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[star]] in "[[Airplane]]!" as the [[woman]] who hangs herself while listening to [[Robert]] Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I [[could]] not [[get]] that [[image]] out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. [[First]] she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another [[unplanned]] ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the [[RV]] stranded in a [[salt]] flat in the [[desert]]. [[In]] the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves [[toward]] the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where [[Grandpa]] is trapped on the RV [[roof]] as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body [[experiences]] take forever. This [[film]] takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. The first [[evident]] problem about this [[nervously]] [[entitled]] [[filmmaking]] is its [[pouring]]. Ann [[Nielson]] plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[superstar]] in "[[Air]]!" as the [[femme]] who hangs herself while listening to [[Roberta]] Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I [[did]] not [[gets]] that [[photography]] out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. [[Outset]] she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another [[unintended]] ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the [[CAMPER]] stranded in a [[salty]] flat in the [[walkabout]]. [[During]] the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves [[about]] the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where [[Gramp]] is trapped on the RV [[capping]] as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body [[experience]] take forever. This [[cinema]] takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] There are [[several]] things [[wrong]] with this movie- [[Brenda]] Song's [[character]] being one of them. I do not [[believe]] that the [[girl]] is a [[lousy]] actor- I [[honestly]] don't. I [[believe]] she is [[given]] poor lines. She is just supposed to be, "that vain, [[rich]] girl", and while it is funny in the TV [[shows]] she plays in, it can't even get a dry [[laugh]] from me here.

Either way, I [[really]] should have [[known]] what to [[expect]] when I sat down to watch this film.

The movie was not that terrible...[[initially]]. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I [[mean]], how [[would]] you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, [[chased]] you around [[commanding]] you to [[wear]] a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight "the [[great]] evil" and [[save]] the world? [[Which]] [[brings]] me to another point. I know this movie is [[entirely]] fiction, but it is still has a [[founding]] in Chinese culture. It [[seems]] like all of the "[[warriors]]" in Wendy's [[family]] line were [[women]]. [[Correct]] me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've [[worked]] it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy [[attempts]] at female empowerment [[made]] by Hollywood and the [[media]].

Nevermind that, however- [[let]] us [[continue]].

Wendy's [[character]] becomes more [[unbearable]] as the [[film]] go on. [[Yes]], she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to [[fight]] evil during homecoming? The problem is, when "the evil" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is [[extremely]] careless- even for someone like her. She [[continues]] not to care about her training. I will [[use]] this [[conversation]] as an example, Shen: "If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone." Wendy: "Whoa, [[talk]] about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else." Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his [[character]] has an excuse. Better that he [[cooperate]] with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.

Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).

This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.

As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this "great battle" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she "felt weird fighting an old man") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.

We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.

Don't ask.

Anyway, Wendy gets all "panicky." Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.

Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.

She screams title of said article out.

Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her "destiny" and she had "the power within" her.

Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.

He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.

Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more "finesse" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.

Ah-hem...moving on.

I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.

So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it. There are [[different]] things [[improper]] with this movie- [[Lori]] Song's [[nature]] being one of them. I do not [[think]] that the [[girls]] is a [[rotten]] actor- I [[sincerely]] don't. I [[reckon]] she is [[yielded]] poor lines. She is just supposed to be, "that vain, [[affluent]] girl", and while it is funny in the TV [[exhibited]] she plays in, it can't even get a dry [[giggling]] from me here.

Either way, I [[genuinely]] should have [[renowned]] what to [[expecting]] when I sat down to watch this film.

The movie was not that terrible...[[firstly]]. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I [[signify]], how [[could]] you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, [[hunted]] you around [[commandant]] you to [[worn]] a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight "the [[gorgeous]] evil" and [[saves]] the world? [[Whose]] [[poses]] me to another point. I know this movie is [[totally]] fiction, but it is still has a [[founder]] in Chinese culture. It [[seem]] like all of the "[[combatants]]" in Wendy's [[families]] line were [[daughters]]. [[Exact]] me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've [[collaborate]] it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy [[endeavors]] at female empowerment [[accomplished]] by Hollywood and the [[medium]].

Nevermind that, however- [[allowing]] us [[sustained]].

Wendy's [[characters]] becomes more [[insufferable]] as the [[filmmaking]] go on. [[Yeah]], she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to [[fought]] evil during homecoming? The problem is, when "the evil" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is [[eminently]] careless- even for someone like her. She [[continue]] not to care about her training. I will [[utilize]] this [[chitchat]] as an example, Shen: "If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone." Wendy: "Whoa, [[conversations]] about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else." Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his [[characters]] has an excuse. Better that he [[cooperating]] with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.

Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).

This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.

As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this "great battle" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she "felt weird fighting an old man") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.

We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.

Don't ask.

Anyway, Wendy gets all "panicky." Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.

Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.

She screams title of said article out.

Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her "destiny" and she had "the power within" her.

Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.

He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.

Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more "finesse" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.

Ah-hem...moving on.

I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.

So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] They made me watch this in school and it was terrible. The movie is outdated. The episodes become confusing because fact is combined with fiction to make the story more interesting.The teachers talked about it as a treat but really it was a painfully boring experience.I have read that very few people who appear in this are actors, but most of them them do what they do in the movie in real life.This accounts for cheesy acting very often. Also, very often the story becomes mildly outrageous and far-fetched. I don't like the way some of the lines were written and wish they had more meaning to them. Though, it was written to be educational, funny, suspenseful, and hip, It ended up being boring, dry, far-fetched, and old. I hope no one takes time to watch this movie because you would be just fine not seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Not so [[many]] people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't [[understand]] them. [[Simply]] because they are [[different]] [[kinds]] of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[desperation]] [[intertwined]] with [[great]] personal [[hope]] it may be [[hard]] for you to [[enjoy]] the [[humor]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[classified]] easily as black-comedy or cult [[etc]]. like those of pulp fiction etc. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america [[frequently]] fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. Not so [[several]] people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't [[realise]] them. [[Mere]] because they are [[several]] [[genera]] of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[despondency]] [[interconnected]] with [[wondrous]] personal [[esperanza]] it may be [[strenuous]] for you to [[enjoys]] the [[comedy]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[sorted]] easily as black-comedy or cult [[cetera]]. like those of pulp fiction etc. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america [[periodically]] fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is truly an awful movie and a waste of 2 hours of your life. It is simultaneously bland and offensive, with nudity and lots and lots of violence. However, the nudity is not that exciting, and the violence is repetitive and boring. Also, the plot is flimsy at best, the characters are unrealistic and undeveloped, and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen.

I have heard that this movie is supposed to be funny, but it's not. I did not laugh once while watching it, nor did I even crack a smile. The makers of this film tried to combine a comedy movie with an action movie, and they failed on both counts.

Some poorly made movies are funny because they are so bad, but this is not one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally decided to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[glad]] that the [[rental]] was free from the local [[library]]. This move was [[slow]], [[boring]], unrealistic and the [[plot]] made no [[sense]]. After 2 hours, I was ready to [[nuke]] that backwater Texas [[town]] and put the [[group]] of those [[characters]] out of their misery. I [[realize]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not [[understand]] all of the [[hype]] that I have [[heard]] about this [[movie]]. Dallas provided as good a detail of the life in [[Texas]] as this [[movie]]. Rent it only if you [[want]] to [[understand]] how movie studios can [[pay]] enough [[money]] to [[reviewers]] to [[convince]] the [[general]] public that a [[bad]] movie is good. After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally decided to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[gratified]] that the [[leasing]] was free from the local [[bookcase]]. This move was [[lento]], [[dull]], unrealistic and the [[intrigue]] made no [[feeling]]. After 2 hours, I was ready to [[warhead]] that backwater Texas [[cities]] and put the [[groups]] of those [[traits]] out of their misery. I [[realizing]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not [[understands]] all of the [[threshing]] that I have [[hear]] about this [[filmmaking]]. Dallas provided as good a detail of the life in [[Texan]] as this [[movies]]. Rent it only if you [[wanna]] to [[fathom]] how movie studios can [[paycheck]] enough [[moneys]] to [[testers]] to [[convincing]] the [[overall]] public that a [[negative]] movie is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] If you [[like]] [[film]], don't [[miss]] this one. If you prefer [[action]], or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's happening. Everyone here is stuck in a [[gangster]] [[film]]. And what [[happens]] is [[transcendental]] [[murder]].

There are few [[similar]] films. No doubt it will see [[limited]] release, and be [[hard]] to [[find]]. But the [[search]] will be worth it. If you [[want]] to [[study]] a mileu as a potential [[symbol]], then this is [[indeed]] a [[film]] to [[study]].

You can't watch it once. [[If]] you do you'll never see what's [[happening]]. [[Dark]] [[City]] is better. [[Joe]] Vrs. The [[Volcano]] is more [[fun]]. But [[Mad]] [[Dog]] [[Time]] [[could]] [[convert]] the [[gangsta]] crowd to symbolism. . .or at [[least]] to [[think]] twice before shooting again. If you [[likes]] [[films]], don't [[missed]] this one. If you prefer [[activities]], or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's happening. Everyone here is stuck in a [[hoodlum]] [[cinematography]]. And what [[arises]] is [[transcendent]] [[slain]].

There are few [[analogue]] films. No doubt it will see [[capped]] release, and be [[difficult]] to [[unearthed]]. But the [[searches]] will be worth it. If you [[wanna]] to [[researches]] a mileu as a potential [[icons]], then this is [[actually]] a [[movie]] to [[investigated]].

You can't watch it once. [[Unless]] you do you'll never see what's [[occurring]]. [[Murky]] [[Town]] is better. [[Kawa]] Vrs. The [[Eruption]] is more [[amusing]]. But [[Irate]] [[Pooch]] [[Period]] [[would]] [[translating]] the [[banger]] crowd to symbolism. . .or at [[fewest]] to [[ideas]] twice before shooting again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I have [[seen]] this [[film]] only once, on [[TV]], and it has not been [[repeated]]. This is [[strange]] when you [[consider]] the [[rubbish]] that is [[repeated]] over and over again. [[Usually]] [[horror]] [[movies]] for me are a [[source]] of amusement, but this one [[really]] scared me.

DO [[NOT]] READ THE NEXT [[BIT]] [[IF]] YOU HAVE'NT [[SEEN]] THE [[FILM]] [[YET]]

The scariest bit is when the [[townsfolk]] [[pursue]] the [[preacher]] to where his [[wife]] [[lies]] [[almost]] dead (they'd been [[poisoning]] her). He [[asks]] who the [[hell]] are you people anyway. One by one they [[give]] their [[true]] identities. The [[girl]] who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and [[seduce]] him [[says]] "I am Lilith, the [[witch]] who [[loved]] [[Adam]] before Eve". I have [[noticed]] this [[movie]] only once, on [[TELEVISIONS]], and it has not been [[recurring]]. This is [[weird]] when you [[examine]] the [[codswallop]] that is [[recur]] over and over again. [[Fluently]] [[terror]] [[cinematography]] for me are a [[backgrounds]] of amusement, but this one [[truthfully]] scared me.

DO [[NAH]] READ THE NEXT [[BITE]] [[UNLESS]] YOU HAVE'NT [[WATCHED]] THE [[KINO]] [[EVEN]]

The scariest bit is when the [[townspeople]] [[pursuing]] the [[reverend]] to where his [[femme]] [[lying]] [[hardly]] dead (they'd been [[toxins]] her). He [[applications]] who the [[dammit]] are you people anyway. One by one they [[confer]] their [[truthful]] identities. The [[fille]] who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and [[seduction]] him [[alleges]] "I am Lilith, the [[sorceress]] who [[cared]] [[Adams]] before Eve". --------------------------------------------- Result 2912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd read about FLAVIA THE HERETIC for many years, but I only got to see it early last year, when I went on an insane movie-buying binge, and, for whatever reason, it has been on my mind lately, though it's been some months since I watched it.

It's a striking film, set in Italy somewhere around the 15th century. Definitely Medieval-era (though I don't think any specific year is ever given). This being the time of Christian ascendancy, the age is a time of utter madness, and the movie captures this very well.

Flavia, our protagonist, is a young lady who encounters a fallen Muslim on a battlefield. He seems a warm and intriguing fellow, and she's immediately taken with him. Her father, a soldier of a a family of some standing, comes along, almost immediately, and murders the wounded man right before her eyes. But she'll continue to see him in her dreams.

Her father ships her off to a convent that seems more like an open-air insane asylum--the residents, so harshly repressed by unyielding Medieval Christianity, slowly go mad. Flavia comes under the influence of one of the nuttier nuns. But in a mad world, only the sane are truly mad, and this sociopathic sister clearly recognizes the insanity around her. Her take on the times in which they live strikes a chord with Flavia, who, being young and apparently sheltered, is beginning to question everything about this world in which she finds herself trapped.

The movie is unflinching in its portrayal of that world, showcasing a lot of unpleasantness. We see a horse gelded, a lord rape one of the women of his lands in a pig-sty, the pious torture of a young nun. Through it all, Flavia observes and questions, rejecting, eventually, the Christian dogma that creates such a parade of horrors in terms that would gain the movie some criticism over the years for seeming anachronistic. I disagree with that criticism. Flavia's views, though sometimes expressed in ways that vaguely mirror, for example, then-contemporary feminist commentary (the movie was made in 1974), revolve around what are really pretty obvious questions. It is, perhaps, difficult to believe she could be so much of a fish out of water in her own time, but that's the sort of minor point it doesn't do to belabor. Flavia is written in such a way to allow those of our era, or of any era, to empathize with her plight. Getting bogged down on such a matter would be missing the forest for the trees.

Flavia is heartened when the Muslims arrive, invading the countryside, and she finds, in their leader, a new version of the handsome Islamist who still visits her dreams. Smitten with her almost immediately, he allows her to virtually lead his army, becoming a Joan of Arc figure in full battle-gear, and directing the invaders to pull down Christian society, and wreak vengeance upon all those she's seen commit evil.

Is she the herald of a new and better world? She may think so, but Muslims of that era weren't big on feminism, either, as she soon learns the hard way. As they say, meet the new boss...

This is really just a thumbnail of some of the things that happen in FLAVIA THE HERETIC. The movie is quite grim, and with a very downbeat, rather depressing ending. Not a mass-audience movie at all, to be sure. It's quite good, though, and doesn't belong on the "nunsploitation" pile on which it is often carelessly thrown. I think there's much value in the final film, and I'm glad I saw it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] [[Wonderful]] [[cast]] wasted on [[worthless]] [[script]]. Ten or so adults [[reunite]] at the summer [[camp]] they attended as [[juveniles]]. Could this ever [[happen]] in a [[million]] [[years]]? It's [[simply]] a [[fantasy]], and a boring one at that. Do they become [[teenagers]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, [[games]], good [[times]]? They [[may]] [[try]] but [[ultimately]] the [[answer]] is: No. Is there any intrigue? [[Any]] suspense? [[Horror]]? [[Comedy]]? [[None]] of the above. How [[anyone]] can be [[entertained]] by this [[drivel]] is [[beyond]] me. I [[wanted]] to [[like]] this [[movie]]; I [[tried]] to like this [[movie]], but my brain [[refused]]. [[Sumptuous]] [[casting]] wasted on [[unnecessary]] [[scripts]]. Ten or so adults [[reunion]] at the summer [[encampment]] they attended as [[underage]]. Could this ever [[occur]] in a [[billion]] [[olds]]? It's [[purely]] a [[utopia]], and a boring one at that. Do they become [[juvenile]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, [[game]], good [[time]]? They [[maggio]] [[endeavour]] but [[finally]] the [[response]] is: No. Is there any intrigue? [[Everything]] suspense? [[Monstrosity]]? [[Charade]]? [[Nothing]] of the above. How [[everyone]] can be [[distracted]] by this [[whim]] is [[afterlife]] me. I [[want]] to [[iike]] this [[filmmaking]]; I [[strived]] to like this [[filmmaking]], but my brain [[denied]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Entertaining Jim Belushi vehicle, a modern cockeyed version of It's A Wonderful Life. Michael Caine plays a sort-of angel who lets Belush see what life would have been like if he had "made it big". Jim is at his best with a good story and supporting cast; seems like real chemistry between him and Hamilton. Not an Oscar contender but good warm-hearted fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 2915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, for starters, this actually was THE most elegant Clausen film to this date.

The man's always got a sense for characters with a slice of humor to them, but I think that he in this movie adds a dimension unparrallel to anything he's made earlier. His work has - in very black n' white words - been accepted by the broad but not that critical audience, and we've always appreciated his sense of humor and his ability to mix it with human problems and a distinct way of letting the audience know what he needs to say.

In "Villa Paranoia, however, for the first time, he surprises with an unseen wisdom and a respect for the minorities. Not only the ethnic but also the normal people you tend to forget. Set in Jutland - in 'the country' - it deals with the everlasting issue of lack of love, but in a close and at times brutal way that keeps you looking and keeps you focused. And on top of that, he himself manages to play a b******d! A true b*****d, who wants the right thing but has no clue how to get there, and people therefore suffer. Bitterly.

I'd have to say it's one of the best movies I've seen this year and I'm greatly anticipating his next. --------------------------------------------- Result 2916 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'm not at all picky about horror [[movies]], and I'm willing to watch pretty much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[many]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. In [[fact]], I think this [[movie]] would make an [[excellent]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specify]], before I get to my comments, that I watched this [[alone]]. I started [[watching]] it before going to [[bed]], and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the [[rare]] [[movies]] that doesn't [[shy]] away from the death of a child. This is [[much]] more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a [[variety]] of [[scares]] in the [[film]], and most are fairly non-violent, [[though]] grotesque in some [[ways]]. The [[story]] itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and [[takes]] an [[odd]] [[turn]] near the [[end]]. [[While]] the [[turn]] is not [[absurd]], it is [[certainly]] not what you [[expected]] from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well [[done]] for [[something]] that appears to have been shot on [[video]]. I'm not at all picky about horror [[film]], and I'm willing to watch pretty much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[various]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. In [[facto]], I think this [[cinematography]] would make an [[gorgeous]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specifies]], before I get to my comments, that I watched this [[jen]]. I started [[staring]] it before going to [[bedside]], and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the [[scarce]] [[cinematography]] that doesn't [[bashful]] away from the death of a child. This is [[very]] more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a [[multiple]] of [[alarms]] in the [[films]], and most are fairly non-violent, [[while]] grotesque in some [[shapes]]. The [[tale]] itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and [[pick]] an [[weird]] [[converting]] near the [[terminating]]. [[Despite]] the [[turning]] is not [[preposterous]], it is [[indubitably]] not what you [[envisaged]] from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well [[played]] for [[somethin]] that appears to have been shot on [[videotaped]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Really]] a [[terrible]] movie. It's to be expected, though. [[Clearly]] a low budget: [[nothing]] all that [[innovative]], an [[actress]] (if you can [[call]] what she does "acting") who [[always]] has [[roles]] with nudity in a shower scene, a [[man]] in a reptile suit almost modeled after predator, a [[cabin]] in the [[woods]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not new, for the most part, there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black guy doesn't [[die]] when he's [[attacked]] (the [[first]] [[time]]) and he isn't even one of the [[first]] couple to [[die]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's [[experiments]] and Wes & [[Steve]] that I didn't see coming. When [[Steve]] [[told]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[believed]] what he [[said]] and what Kat [[replied]] with. But when the creature [[revealed]] who he [[really]] was, I was pleasantly surprised at the [[novelty]] of the revelation. It could be because of my [[lack]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty bad and don't watch it if there's [[anything]] better on... Unless you're in the mood for a cheap scifi [[flick]]. [[Truthfully]] a [[abysmal]] movie. It's to be expected, though. [[Clara]] a low budget: [[nada]] all that [[innovate]], an [[actor]] (if you can [[invitation]] what she does "acting") who [[consistently]] has [[functions]] with nudity in a shower scene, a [[dude]] in a reptile suit almost modeled after predator, a [[bungalow]] in the [[bois]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not new, for the most part, there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black guy doesn't [[decease]] when he's [[mugged]] (the [[fiirst]] [[period]]) and he isn't even one of the [[outset]] couple to [[dying]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's [[experiences]] and Wes & [[Stephens]] that I didn't see coming. When [[Stephens]] [[tells]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[felt]] what he [[stated]] and what Kat [[responses]] with. But when the creature [[shown]] who he [[genuinely]] was, I was pleasantly surprised at the [[newness]] of the revelation. It could be because of my [[shortage]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty bad and don't watch it if there's [[something]] better on... Unless you're in the mood for a cheap scifi [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] One [[wonders]] why anyone would [[try]] to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[movie]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to [[even]] try to [[remake]], under the guise of a [[new]] [[story]], [[something]] that should have been let [[alone]]. [[If]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio [[big]] honchos' [[approval]], then go all out with big stars and glossy production values, that way, people will come for the [[stars]].

Alas, that's not what [[happens]] in this misguided [[attempt]] at [[comedy]]. The [[problem]] seems to be the [[way]] the screen [[writers]] have [[transplanted]] the [[story]] to London, when basically, this [[seems]] to be a [[typical]] American situation that not [[even]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the [[problem]] with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as oil and vinegar!

[[Since]] the Kat and [[Nick]] have no conflict from the [[start]], the viewer is not pulled into the [[film]] the way the creators [[thought]] they would be. It's [[clear]] that Kat will [[fall]] for [[Nick]], and vice-versa in this [[predictable]] [[story]]. Amy Adams, who was the [[best]] [[asset]] in "Junebug", comes across as a [[shallow]] [[girl]] who is willing to keep her lie going on and not [[come]] clean to the [[man]] that [[loves]] her and is [[going]] to [[marry]] her.

[[For]] [[anyone]] interested, the [[credits]] at the end of the [[film]] run for [[almost]] seven minutes! One [[beauties]] why anyone would [[seeks]] to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[film]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to [[yet]] try to [[redo]], under the guise of a [[nouveau]] [[history]], [[anything]] that should have been let [[lonely]]. [[Though]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio [[sizeable]] honchos' [[ratification]], then go all out with big stars and glossy production values, that way, people will come for the [[celebrity]].

Alas, that's not what [[comes]] in this misguided [[endeavor]] at [[parody]]. The [[issues]] seems to be the [[routes]] the screen [[authors]] have [[grafting]] the [[history]] to London, when basically, this [[appears]] to be a [[classic]] American situation that not [[yet]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the [[difficulty]] with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as oil and vinegar!

[[Because]] the Kat and [[Nicky]] have no conflict from the [[commence]], the viewer is not pulled into the [[films]] the way the creators [[brainchild]] they would be. It's [[unmistakable]] that Kat will [[slumps]] for [[Nicky]], and vice-versa in this [[foreseeable]] [[tales]]. Amy Adams, who was the [[optimum]] [[assets]] in "Junebug", comes across as a [[superficial]] [[woman]] who is willing to keep her lie going on and not [[coming]] clean to the [[bloke]] that [[likes]] her and is [[gonna]] to [[wedding]] her.

[[During]] [[nobody]] interested, the [[credit]] at the end of the [[filmmaking]] run for [[about]] seven minutes! --------------------------------------------- Result 2919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[breathtaking]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[amazing]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 2920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Homeward Bound is a beautiful film. Y'know the part where Shadow falls down the ditch... thingy, I *cried*, considering I was only six, I cried! it takes a lot to make me cry! The dogs and the cat are excellently trained. A nice family movie, *not* for completely hardened non-fluffy people or animal-haters but could for soft-as-crap a.k.a. people like me.

A good film overall, 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Nobody]], but nobody, [[could]] chew the scenery [[like]] the Divine One, Ruth [[Elizabeth]] Davis, and "[[Elizabeth]] and Essex" is a great example why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to [[play]]: in that one moment, she makes us [[understand]] how [[Elizabeth]] was [[able]] to [[rule]] and [[rule]] [[absolutely]]! [[At]] other times, she is [[done]] in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elizabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[weak]] and shrewish. This has the [[added]] [[effect]] of undermining her authority: when she blows her [[stack]] and [[threatens]] to [[dispense]] justice, it's [[hard]] to take her [[seriously]].

Flynn exudes charm, making us [[see]] how Essex was able to worm his [[way]] into Elizabeth's [[heart]], but he is totally [[inept]] at [[conveying]] the complexity and sheer [[evil]] of the [[man]]. It [[also]] doesn't [[help]] that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this [[hothead]] who [[wants]] to overthrow his [[Queen]] - [[even]] as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, [[thus]], more "[[worthy]]" of [[rule]]? And why does Raliegh betray [[Elizabeth]] by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no [[risk]] of [[falling]] out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is [[headed]]. So why does he [[risk]] his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time [[alone]] at The Tower; everything [[else]] that follows ([[especially]] the [[final]] scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The [[costumes]] are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? [[Anyone]], but nobody, [[did]] chew the scenery [[iike]] the Divine One, Ruth [[Elise]] Davis, and "[[Isabel]] and Essex" is a great example why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to [[gaming]]: in that one moment, she makes us [[understands]] how [[Elisabeth]] was [[capable]] to [[regulation]] and [[regs]] [[totally]]! [[For]] other times, she is [[doing]] in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elisabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[vulnerable]] and shrewish. This has the [[add]] [[implications]] of undermining her authority: when she blows her [[stacks]] and [[threatened]] to [[distribute]] justice, it's [[tough]] to take her [[severely]].

Flynn exudes charm, making us [[behold]] how Essex was able to worm his [[route]] into Elizabeth's [[heartland]], but he is totally [[incapable]] at [[transmitted]] the complexity and sheer [[wicked]] of the [[males]]. It [[additionally]] doesn't [[assists]] that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this [[trooper]] who [[wanted]] to overthrow his [[Quinn]] - [[yet]] as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, [[then]], more "[[meritorious]]" of [[regulation]]? And why does Raliegh betray [[Elisabeth]] by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no [[risks]] of [[dipping]] out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is [[presided]]. So why does he [[threats]] his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time [[lonely]] at The Tower; everything [[elsewhere]] that follows ([[particularly]] the [[ultimate]] scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The [[outfits]] are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? --------------------------------------------- Result 2922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've been watching this every night on VH1 this past week. This is a terrific revealing portrait about the drugs epidemic and how drugs were displayed in the media during the late 60's and on through the 70's.Woodstock,Easy Rider,The Beatles,The Death of Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin are all here. Vh1 has fashioned a complete intricate portrayal of the life and times during the "Drug Years". From the Sanfrancisco Bay Area to Studio 54 this documentary shows the evolution and advancement of the drug business and the death and new life it breathed into the American culture.From Marijuana to LSD to Cocaine this documentary shows the ways drugs were getting into the country, the hippie movement, the conservative resistance, and how drugs effected the arts (music , movies etc.) Featuring tons of fascinating interviews and news reel footage.

Drug Films: The Trip Easy Rider Up In Smoke Reefer Madness Blow Boogie Nights --------------------------------------------- Result 2923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The saddest part of this is the fact that these are 87 minutes I'll never get back. I knew this was terrible from the get-go, with the guy dressed as a lunatic Indian chief on top of the roof. (See if they could get away with that in 2008). My 10-year-old boy is really into baseball right now, so we decided to rent it on a rainy day. Even though he seemed to enjoy parts of it, I had to cringe when I heard all the needless foul language. Bad, bad movie. This was an awful ripoff of Bad News Bears. Completely shameless and completely predictable. I don't mind a predictable movie if it's done well, but this one absolutely was not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't care how many nominations this junk got for best this and that, this movie stunk. I didn't know whether to turn off the set, or file a lawsuit with O.J.'s attorney for wrongful damage to my mental health. I have seldom been this bored; to call this dung entertainment is a slap in the face of every movie-goer across the planet. The whole story was stupid, the acting was uninspired, the 'drama' was emotionless. I am thankful I didn't have to pay for this unfulfilling experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Sunshine Boys is a terrific comedy about two ex-vaudevillians who reluctantly reunite for a TV special despite the fact that they despise each other.

The comic genius of two masters at work, George Burns and Walter Matthau are stellar! Some of the best scenes are when the duo is fighting over the silliest little trivial things! The material is fast-paced and witty, appealing to all ages.

MILD SPOILER ALERT: There are some mildly sad moments toward the end of the movie that deal indirectly with the affects of aging that gives the film a soft, sincere, tenderness that shows to this reviewer that what the pair really need the most for success, are each other.

If anyone loves The Odd Couple, you'll adore this movie. An excellent film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[If]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was nice, and Nisha Kothari has a [[bright]] [[future]] but the [[producer]] and the [[director]] [[ruined]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The choice of [[angles]], [[choice]] of [[lighting]] and well everything [[distracted]] from [[trying]] to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and [[dances]] haven't [[caused]] you to [[rip]] your ears off your head, [[first]]. The [[film]] could have been [[made]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty [[good]], kinda like "Seven [[Samurai]]" but the [[director]] and [[writer]] didn't [[go]] that [[direction]], [[even]] if the "townsfolk" [[finally]] [[find]] their backbone and [[want]] to [[help]]. This [[movie]] fails on so [[many]] [[levels]]: [[editing]], writing, [[photography]] [[angles]], style, lighting, [[script]] - [[name]] any aspect of this film - it was [[BAD]] - probably the [[food]] from the caterer was [[bad]] too. I have never in 6 [[years]] of [[watching]] Indian (Bollywood) [[movies]] [[seen]] something this badly [[made]]. [[Unless]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was nice, and Nisha Kothari has a [[glossy]] [[upcoming]] but the [[manufacturer]] and the [[headmaster]] [[trashed]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The choice of [[corners]], [[choices]] of [[light]] and well everything [[entertained]] from [[seeking]] to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and [[ballet]] haven't [[generated]] you to [[tears]] your ears off your head, [[firstly]]. The [[filmmaking]] could have been [[brought]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty [[alright]], kinda like "Seven [[Swordsman]]" but the [[headmaster]] and [[novelist]] didn't [[going]] that [[orientation]], [[yet]] if the "townsfolk" [[lastly]] [[finds]] their backbone and [[wanting]] to [[pomoc]]. This [[filmmaking]] fails on so [[several]] [[grades]]: [[edition]], writing, [[picture]] [[corners]], style, lighting, [[screenplay]] - [[behalf]] any aspect of this film - it was [[UNFAVOURABLE]] - probably the [[dietary]] from the caterer was [[negative]] too. I have never in 6 [[aged]] of [[staring]] Indian (Bollywood) [[kino]] [[noticed]] something this badly [[effected]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I.Q., in my opinion, is a sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you. If you ask me, James (Stephen Fry) really was a dull guy. To me, Ed (Tim Robbins) was more suited for Catherine (Meg Ryan) than James was. Anyway, everyone involved in this film did an absolutely outstanding job. Now, in conclusion, I highly recommend this sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you to any Tim Robbins or Meg Ryan fan who hasn't seen it. You're in for lots of laughter, so go to the video store, rent it or buy it, kick back with a friend, and watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Sorry]], I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She [[said]] that Scott Wilson [[portrayed]] a sociopath (no [[conscience]]) [[extraordinarily]] well. I [[agree]]! She also said that Robert Blake [[portrayed]] a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[tremendous]] [[film]]. I have [[seen]] over 2000 [[films]] and [[would]] [[rank]] this in the [[top]] 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these [[regularly]]. My only [[criticism]] was the preachy narration at the [[end]] of the film. Many people [[grow]] up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. [[Apology]], I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She [[told]] that Scott Wilson [[depicted]] a sociopath (no [[consciousness]]) [[unbelievably]] well. I [[concur]]! She also said that Robert Blake [[depicted]] a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[great]] [[movies]]. I have [[watched]] over 2000 [[kino]] and [[ought]] [[grading]] this in the [[superior]] 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these [[periodically]]. My only [[critique]] was the preachy narration at the [[ceases]] of the film. Many people [[augmentation]] up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've [[bought]], " The [[Feast]] of [[All]] Saints," and it's not [[truly]] a horrible [[movie]], but a lot of things could have been better. It had a lot of historical value, [[played]] out by very talented [[actress]]/[[actors]], and it's not an [[everyday]] occurrence that actors can [[play]] out such a role and have it be somewhat [[believable]]. There were some parts that were a [[little]] mediocre and [[confusing]], but I wouldn't [[say]] that the entire movie was horrible. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's [[New]] [[Orleans]], and making something out of it, it pretty [[hard]], and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[problem]] I had with the [[movie]] was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that [[looked]] near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a [[great]] job, the script could have better [[written]], and [[overall]] I [[found]] the performances were very [[believable]]. I've [[acquiring]], " The [[Shindig]] of [[Totality]] Saints," and it's not [[truthfully]] a horrible [[films]], but a lot of things could have been better. It had a lot of historical value, [[done]] out by very talented [[actor]]/[[actresses]], and it's not an [[daily]] occurrence that actors can [[gaming]] out such a role and have it be somewhat [[credible]]. There were some parts that were a [[kiddo]] mediocre and [[disorienting]], but I wouldn't [[tell]] that the entire movie was horrible. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's [[Novel]] [[Nola]], and making something out of it, it pretty [[stiff]], and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[trouble]] I had with the [[cinematography]] was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that [[seemed]] near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a [[wondrous]] job, the script could have better [[wrote]], and [[entire]] I [[uncovered]] the performances were very [[reliable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] This [[movie]] is [[terrible]]. The [[suspense]] is [[spent]] [[waiting]] for a point. There isn't [[much]] of one.

Aside from a few [[great]] lines ( "I [[found]] a [[tooth]] in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to [[killing]] himself, it's a [[collection]] of [[supposedly]] eerie sounds.

This [[filmmaking]] is [[scary]]. The [[waiting]] is [[spending]] [[expecting]] for a point. There isn't [[very]] of one.

Aside from a few [[marvellous]] lines ( "I [[finds]] a [[dent]] in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to [[homicide]] himself, it's a [[collected]] of [[reportedly]] eerie sounds.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[name]] (Frau) of the main [[character]] is the German word for "[[Woman]]". I don't know if that was intentional or not, but if sure [[got]] some [[giggles]] from the German [[audience]] at the [[Fantasy]] [[Film]] [[Festival]] [[last]] year, when it was [[shown]].

But those were the only [[giggles]] the [[movie]] [[got]]. Not that it was [[aiming]] for giggles, it's a horrible movie for heaven's sake! A [[horrible]] [[movie]] in more than one [[meaning]]. It's a [[shame]] that a [[premise]] like that was wasted with [[horrible]] even [[unbearable]] [[moments]] for the viewer (definetely not for the faint of [[Heart]]!!)! And it wasn't even necessary to show all the things that are [[shown]]. I'm not [[even]] [[going]] into a moral [[obligation]] (because movies don't really have that [[kind]] of [[task]] or [[function]]) [[discussion]] of what is shown here, but this is a new low on the [[whole]] "torture movement" that has [[grown]] in the [[last]] few [[years]]! The [[behalf]] (Frau) of the main [[personages]] is the German word for "[[Femmes]]". I don't know if that was intentional or not, but if sure [[did]] some [[giggling]] from the German [[viewers]] at the [[Chimera]] [[Filmmaking]] [[Festivals]] [[final]] year, when it was [[revealed]].

But those were the only [[chuckles]] the [[filmmaking]] [[gets]]. Not that it was [[targeted]] for giggles, it's a horrible movie for heaven's sake! A [[shocking]] [[filmmaking]] in more than one [[mean]]. It's a [[pity]] that a [[supposition]] like that was wasted with [[frightful]] even [[unsustainable]] [[times]] for the viewer (definetely not for the faint of [[Heartland]]!!)! And it wasn't even necessary to show all the things that are [[exhibited]]. I'm not [[yet]] [[go]] into a moral [[commitments]] (because movies don't really have that [[genre]] of [[chore]] or [[operation]]) [[conversations]] of what is shown here, but this is a new low on the [[overall]] "torture movement" that has [[increased]] in the [[latter]] few [[ages]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the better Vance films succeeds more on interesting plot and artful direction by none other than Michael Curtiz. This time around a generally hated financier is found dead - shot in the head - in his locked and bolted bedroom on the upper floor. Philo Vance, hearing of the situation while about to set off for Italy, decides to end his vacation and try to solve what he thinks is a murder and what everyone else is considering a suicide. William Powell is as affable a Philo Vance as you will find. He never seems to press and is always very smooth in what he says and does. Powell is aided by a host of very talented actors - some first-rate character actors and actresses like Mary Astor as a niece that hated her uncle, Ralph Morgan as the dead man's secretary, Paul Cavanaugh as a rival dog fancier, Arthur Hohl as a mysterious butler, Helen Vinson as the next door kept blonde, and two really good performances by James Lee as the Chinese cook and portly Eugene Palette as a wise-cracking police detective. Add into the mix a wonderfully comedic turn by Etienne Girardot as a public coroner always missing his meal. It is this depth of suspects and a story that has many plots twists and turns that make The Kennel Murder Case a fast-moving, fun mystery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an early film "Pilot" for the hit Canadian tv show Trailer Park Boys. It was played to executives at a few networks before Showcase decided to sign them up for a tv series. Great acting and a very funny cast make this one of the best cult comedy films. The movie plot is that these two small time criminals go around "exterminating" peoples pets for money. If you have a dog next door whos barking all night these are the guys you go to! But they get into trouble when they come across a job too big for them to deal with and end up in a shootout. Watch this movie if you want to understand the beginning of the tv series. I highly recommend it!

Rated R for swearing, violence, and drug use.

Its not too offensive either (they dont actually show killing animals) --------------------------------------------- Result 2934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK, this movie was cool. I don't think it was the best movie ever made but it sure was fun. My brother and I still act out scenes once in a while, and will occasionally yank the movie out of the cupboard, blow off the dust and pop it in. Enjoyable all the way until the end, but a great concept. This is a movie that one has to just forget criticism all together and just enjoy. Judgment is victory for Robot Jox. --------------------------------------------- Result 2935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[choppy]] [[presentation]] and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something [[recent]], so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[terrible]] sequence in this film) are the absolute nadir of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as [[Mr]]. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly [[terrible]].

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that [[work]]. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[turbulent]] [[submission]] and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something [[newer]], so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[shocking]] sequence in this film) are the absolute nadir of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as [[Monsieur]]. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly [[frightful]].

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that [[collaborating]]. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Professor [[Paul]] Steiner is doing [[research]] in [[matter]] [[transference]]. He has [[developed]] a [[machine]] that he can [[use]] to make an object like a [[wrist]] watch or [[rodent]] [[disappear]], only to have that object re-materialize in a [[different]] location. But there are those at his [[research]] facility that do not like or [[approve]] of his [[experiments]] and will do whatever it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed demonstration that might have [[saved]] his [[funding]], [[Professor]] Steiner decides to test his machine on himself. As expected, things go [[horribly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[heavily]] [[scared]] [[madman]] [[whose]] [[mere]] [[touch]] will kill.

[[In]] hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a [[good]] idea to re-watch The Projected Man in the same week I [[watched]] The [[Fly]], [[Return]] of the [[Fly]], and Curse of the [[Fly]]. There seems to be only so [[many]] movies about [[matter]] transference and the potentially [[horrendous]] [[effects]] it can have on the human body that one [[person]] should be [[made]] to endure in a three or four day [[period]]. I'm not sure what those [[responsible]] for the movie list as their source material for The Projected Man, but [[much]] of it is so similar to the [[Fly]] movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The [[Projected]] Man isn't even nearly as good as the worst of the Fly trilogy.

Besides being [[terribly]] unoriginal, The Projected Man has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the movie. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not [[care]] about his suffering, I actually root for it. [[Supporting]] cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[little]] to get [[excited]] about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very [[memorable]]. The "[[look]]" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The [[action]] – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[avoid]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. Professor [[Paolo]] Steiner is doing [[investigate]] in [[issue]] [[transferring]]. He has [[devised]] a [[machines]] that he can [[used]] to make an object like a [[waist]] watch or [[rodents]] [[vanished]], only to have that object re-materialize in a [[several]] location. But there are those at his [[investigate]] facility that do not like or [[adopt]] of his [[experiment]] and will do whatever it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed demonstration that might have [[saving]] his [[finances]], [[Teachers]] Steiner decides to test his machine on himself. As expected, things go [[terribly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[considerably]] [[fear]] [[crazy]] [[whom]] [[simple]] [[toque]] will kill.

[[Among]] hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a [[alright]] idea to re-watch The Projected Man in the same week I [[seen]] The [[Steal]], [[Reverted]] of the [[Flying]], and Curse of the [[Steal]]. There seems to be only so [[countless]] movies about [[question]] transference and the potentially [[excruciating]] [[consequences]] it can have on the human body that one [[someone]] should be [[brought]] to endure in a three or four day [[time]]. I'm not sure what those [[accountable]] for the movie list as their source material for The Projected Man, but [[very]] of it is so similar to the [[Steal]] movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The [[Predictions]] Man isn't even nearly as good as the worst of the Fly trilogy.

Besides being [[remarkably]] unoriginal, The Projected Man has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the movie. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not [[healthcare]] about his suffering, I actually root for it. [[Helped]] cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[scant]] to get [[agitated]] about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very [[unforgettable]]. The "[[peek]]" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The [[measures]] – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[preventing]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. --------------------------------------------- Result 2937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite what others had said (*cough*), this is my favourite movie of all time. I don't know how long I had been waiting to see it, but once I finally did, I immediately fell in love. Sure, it's strange, but that just gives it more of an exciting flavour. For those who don't know, Moonchild is one of Gackt and Hyde's first movies. They haven't done very many at all, maybe 3 or 4 tops each. So, give them some credit. We all know that Adam Sandler wasn't the best at first either. I do believe that they do throw some odd situations in there, but I over look that to find the best points of this movie, the emotions displayed and whatnot. Therefore, I have given, and always shall give, this movie a 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2938 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was by far the worst low budget horror movie i have ever seen. I am an open minded guy and i always love a good horror movie. In fact, when I'm renting movies i specifically look for some good underrated horror movies. They are always good for a laugh, believe i know, i have seen many. But this movie was just so terrible it wasn't worth a chuckle. I was considering turning it off in the first five minutes... which i probably should have. There is nothing good about it, first and foremost, the camera crew suck3d A$$. The intro was stupid just like the ending. Acting and special effects were terrible. Please I'm begging you, do NOT watch this movie, you will absolutely hate it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The [[reviews]] I read for this [[movie]] were pretty decent so I [[decided]] to [[check]] it out. [[BAD]] [[IDEA]]! This is another [[movie]] about a ghost out for [[revenge]] against a [[group]] friends. The [[story]] is stupid, mix two parts Ringu with one [[part]] Prom Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[add]] a [[tiny]] dash of [[Single]] [[White]] [[Female]] - now [[blend]] until completely [[nonsensical]]. There is nothing new to this plot, and [[revisiting]] the clichés I've [[grown]] so [[fond]] of wasn't [[even]] [[entertaining]] this time. This [[movie]] [[jumps]] to and from the [[past]] too much, and once I made sense of it all I [[realized]] it [[still]] didn't make much [[sense]]. [[Characters]] go from sane to [[psycho]] killer in the [[blink]] of an eye. Speaking of [[characters]], they are all your stereotypical [[favorites]] - the greedy selfish lawyer, the [[egocentric]] actress, the has-been baseball star, the [[video]] voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet [[chick]], the 'nicer-than-nice' [[nice]] [[girl]], a freakin' [[black]] cat... and I didn't [[care]] about any of them. [[Perhaps]] a [[better]] [[writer]] [[could]] have [[made]] the [[movie]] [[work]], there were some decent scenes in it, but [[overall]] this movie was a [[mess]]. I should also [[mention]] a certain 'video tape' that [[would]] have been [[IMPOSSIBLE]] to shoot.

This [[movie]] isn't the worst [[Asian]] horror has to [[offer]] by far, but it is still pretty [[bad]]. If you just [[want]] to [[see]] some [[creepy]] [[images]] in the [[dark]], or just [[want]] to [[laugh]] out [[loud]] at some over the [[top]] acting, or just [[want]] to [[yell]] "you're stupid!" at a [[movie]] screen, or just [[want]] to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when [[someone]] [[asks]] you how many you've [[seen]] - this [[movie]] is for you.

Those [[seeking]] a decent [[plot]] [[look]] elsewhere. The [[scrutiny]] I read for this [[filmmaking]] were pretty decent so I [[decide]] to [[checking]] it out. [[MALA]] [[THINK]]! This is another [[flick]] about a ghost out for [[vengeance]] against a [[grouping]] friends. The [[tales]] is stupid, mix two parts Ringu with one [[party]] Prom Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[adds]] a [[small]] dash of [[Lone]] [[Blanc]] [[Woman]] - now [[blended]] until completely [[stupid]]. There is nothing new to this plot, and [[reviewed]] the clichés I've [[increased]] so [[likes]] of wasn't [[yet]] [[amusing]] this time. This [[film]] [[rises]] to and from the [[previous]] too much, and once I made sense of it all I [[performed]] it [[yet]] didn't make much [[sensing]]. [[Nature]] go from sane to [[crazy]] killer in the [[wink]] of an eye. Speaking of [[features]], they are all your stereotypical [[favourites]] - the greedy selfish lawyer, the [[egoistic]] actress, the has-been baseball star, the [[videos]] voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet [[girl]], the 'nicer-than-nice' [[enjoyable]] [[girls]], a freakin' [[negro]] cat... and I didn't [[healthcare]] about any of them. [[Possibly]] a [[best]] [[novelist]] [[did]] have [[effected]] the [[film]] [[cooperate]], there were some decent scenes in it, but [[entire]] this movie was a [[chaos]]. I should also [[cited]] a certain 'video tape' that [[could]] have been [[UNABLE]] to shoot.

This [[film]] isn't the worst [[Asiatic]] horror has to [[offered]] by far, but it is still pretty [[unfavourable]]. If you just [[wanna]] to [[behold]] some [[frightening]] [[imagery]] in the [[gloom]], or just [[wanting]] to [[laughs]] out [[vocal]] at some over the [[topped]] acting, or just [[wanna]] to [[screaming]] "you're stupid!" at a [[film]] screen, or just [[wanting]] to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when [[everybody]] [[demands]] you how many you've [[noticed]] - this [[filmmaking]] is for you.

Those [[searching]] a decent [[intrigue]] [[glance]] elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When i [[got]] this [[movie]] free from my [[job]], along with three other similar [[movies]].. I [[watched]] then with very low [[expectations]]. [[Now]] this [[movie]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[pay]] for. It is a [[tale]] of [[love]], [[betrayal]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[want]] in a [[movie]]. [[Definitely]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[would]] probably never watch this movie again. [[In]] a nutshell this is the [[kind]] of movie that you [[would]] see [[either]] very [[late]] at night on a local [[television]] station that is just [[wanting]] to take up some time, or you [[would]] [[see]] it on a [[Sunday]] afternoon on a local [[television]] station that is [[trying]] to take up some time. Despite the [[bad]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[camera]] [[work]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[movie]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVD]] [[player]]. The [[story]] has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]] in [[many]] [[movies]]. This one is no [[different]], no better, no [[worse]].

Just your average [[movie]]. When i [[get]] this [[films]] free from my [[workplace]], along with three other similar [[filmmaking]].. I [[seen]] then with very low [[forecasts]]. [[Presently]] this [[filmmaking]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[paying]] for. It is a [[conte]] of [[amore]], [[treachery]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[desiring]] in a [[filmmaking]]. [[Unmistakably]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[ought]] probably never watch this movie again. [[At]] a nutshell this is the [[genre]] of movie that you [[should]] see [[neither]] very [[tard]] at night on a local [[tv]] station that is just [[wanted]] to take up some time, or you [[ought]] [[consults]] it on a [[Sundays]] afternoon on a local [[tv]] station that is [[attempting]] to take up some time. Despite the [[unfavourable]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[cameras]] [[cooperation]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[filmmaking]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVDS]] [[protagonist]]. The [[storytelling]] has been [[effected]] [[innumerable]] [[period]] in [[multiple]] [[theater]]. This one is no [[assorted]], no better, no [[worst]].

Just your average [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really didn't expect much from this movie, but it wasn't bad; actually it was quite good. This movie contained a couple of the funniest bits of writing I have ever seen from a motion picture. Now am not saying this is one of the funniest movies of all time, but I laughed pretty hard at some parts. "The police ruled my father's death a suicide. They said he fell down an elevator shaft. Onto some bullets". Now this movie is not for everybody, its mostly stupid humor like Zoolander or Dodgeball; so if you hated these movies I would probably recommend you to steer clear. Overall it was an enjoyable movie, about a group of superhero wannabes, who end up becoming real heroes in the end. It's a vastly overrated comedy that many people probably haven't seen yet, because like me before viewing it expected it to be utter garbage. After viewing this film, I finally understand why this movie was able to assemble such a superstar cast which includes Ben Stiller, William H. Macy, Hank Azaria, and even that kid from Good Burger. It's because Mystery Man is full of excellent comedic writing period 7 out of 10. A very big surprise. --------------------------------------------- Result 2942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one excellent Sammo Hung movie. Actually, this is a great piece of Hong Kong action cinema. The story tells the story of pedicab drivers in Macao looking for love and getting mixed up w/ a vicious pimp. The performances are excellent and the characters are all likable and well-defined. The story is involving and has enough romance, drama, comedy, and suspense to keep one watching between fight scenes. Sammo Hung proves here that he's probably the best fight choreographer in the business. The action is simply amazing, esp. the fight w/ Lau Kar Leung and the finale. Billy Chow and Sammo Hung are amazing. A must see for any fan of action. --------------------------------------------- Result 2943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like original gut wrenching laughter you will like this movie. If you are young or old then you will love this movie, hell even my mom liked it.

Great Camp!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] A [[typical]] [[Goth]] [[chick]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy [[George]]) [[gets]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the help of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom ([[horror]] mainstay, Karen Black, the only remotely good [[thing]] about this travesty) buy. The acting's pretty laughably [[bad]] ([[especially]] when Rainbow [[interacts]] with the aforementioned [[mirror]]) and there are no scares or [[suspense]] to be had. This [[film]] [[inexplicably]] spawned [[thus]] for 3 sequels each slightly more [[atrocious]] than the last. People looking for a [[similarly]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[would]] be well [[advised]] to just [[search]] out the episode of "[[Friday]] the 13th: the [[Series]]" where a geeky girl [[finds]] an [[old]] cursed compact [[mirror]]. That packs more [[chills]] in it's scant 40 minutes than this [[whole]] franchise has [[provided]] across it's 4 films.

My [[Grade]]: D

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]: [[Charlie]] Spradling [[provides]] the [[obligatory]] [[T]]&A A [[classic]] [[Gothic]] [[girl]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy [[Giorgi]]) [[receives]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the help of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom ([[terror]] mainstay, Karen Black, the only remotely good [[stuff]] about this travesty) buy. The acting's pretty laughably [[unfavorable]] ([[mainly]] when Rainbow [[communicating]] with the aforementioned [[mirrors]]) and there are no scares or [[wait]] to be had. This [[filmmaking]] [[inextricably]] spawned [[then]] for 3 sequels each slightly more [[outrageous]] than the last. People looking for a [[additionally]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[should]] be well [[reported]] to just [[looking]] out the episode of "[[Fridays]] the 13th: the [[Serials]]" where a geeky girl [[discovers]] an [[former]] cursed compact [[mirrors]]. That packs more [[shivers]] in it's scant 40 minutes than this [[ensemble]] franchise has [[gave]] across it's 4 films.

My [[Octane]]: D

[[Ojo]] [[Taffy]]: [[Vietcong]] Spradling [[provide]] the [[compulsory]] [[ton]]&A --------------------------------------------- Result 2945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This [[movie]] could have been [[great]]([[cause]] its [[got]] a [[somewhat]] [[fascinating]] [[premise]]) but it never [[rises]] above sheer [[caricature]]. The acting is [[severely]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[severely]] that i thought i was [[going]] to [[fall]] of my seat in the [[theater]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[piece]] of .... Danish [[cinema]] has been getting a lot of good pr the [[recent]] [[years]] but if this [[piece]] of .... [[crosses]] the [[border]] I'm [[afraid]] nobody sane will ever want to [[rent]] a [[danish]] [[movie]]. This [[movie]] is the reason why i [[chose]] to [[register]] here. I really [[felt]] i needed to [[steer]] people away from this piece of .... my sympathies go out to the people who already went to the [[cinema]] to watch this This [[filmmaking]] could have been [[wondrous]]([[reason]] its [[get]] a [[rather]] [[exciting]] [[assumption]]) but it never [[soars]] above sheer [[parody]]. The acting is [[powerfully]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[critically]] that i thought i was [[gonna]] to [[slumps]] of my seat in the [[drama]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[slice]] of .... Danish [[filmmaking]] has been getting a lot of good pr the [[newer]] [[olds]] but if this [[slice]] of .... [[traverse]] the [[boundaries]] I'm [[worried]] nobody sane will ever want to [[leasing]] a [[danes]] [[filmmaking]]. This [[filmmaking]] is the reason why i [[chooses]] to [[registering]] here. I really [[believed]] i needed to [[govern]] people away from this piece of .... my sympathies go out to the people who already went to the [[kino]] to watch this --------------------------------------------- Result 2946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When it comes to movies, I am generally easily entertained and not very critical, but must say that this movie was one big flop from the start. I gave it 30 minutes and then rewound it. What a waste of some great talent! I was very disappointed with this movie, as it was not what I expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 2947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Cat]] Soup at [[first]] [[seems]] to be a very random animated [[film]]. The best [[way]] I've been able to [[explain]] it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not [[totally]] [[random]]. The [[story]] is about Nyatta, a [[young]] cat [[boy]] and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very [[ill]] and [[dies]], [[however]], Nyatta [[sees]] her soul being [[taken]] away by [[death]] and is [[able]] to retrieve half of it. The [[story]] is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

[[Though]] a [[lot]] of the content in this movie [[seems]] [[completely]] [[random]], it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, [[death]] and [[rebirth]]. You can also see references from other [[tales]], such as Hansel and Gretal. This [[strangely]] cute short [[film]] has an interesting [[story]], packed with a deeper meaning than what you [[see]] on the [[surface]] of the screen. [[Ctu]] Soup at [[firstly]] [[appears]] to be a very random animated [[kino]]. The best [[routing]] I've been able to [[clarified]] it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not [[fully]] [[haphazard]]. The [[fairytales]] is about Nyatta, a [[youthful]] cat [[laddie]] and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very [[sick]] and [[dying]], [[conversely]], Nyatta [[deems]] her soul being [[took]] away by [[killings]] and is [[capable]] to retrieve half of it. The [[tale]] is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

[[Despite]] a [[lots]] of the content in this movie [[looks]] [[abundantly]] [[haphazard]], it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, [[dying]] and [[resurgence]]. You can also see references from other [[fables]], such as Hansel and Gretal. This [[suspiciously]] cute short [[movie]] has an interesting [[history]], packed with a deeper meaning than what you [[behold]] on the [[surfacing]] of the screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is waaaaay to much.. so frustrating to watch.. I was waiting for the whole damn movie to end and to finally get some ANSWERS!!.. and what I've had in the end was nothing but a HUUUGE neon-sign question mark above my head!!!!! I haven't seen such a bad acting and such a nonsense movie in a long long time.. and what's bothering me is.. how come someone (an actor) read the script of such a bull!?#@ movie and say: OK, I'M IN!!! LET'S FILM THIS! This is horrible!!! THIS MOVIE SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!!!! I just can't believe I've spent an hour and a half of my life on something like this!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This fanciful horror flick has Vincent Price playing a mad magician that realizes his vocational talents have been sold to another. He devise ways of avenging all those that have wronged him. His master scheme seems to back fire on him.

Price is a little below par compared to his masterpieces, but is still the only reason to watch this thriller. Supporting cast includes Patrick O'Neal, Mary Murphy, Eva Gabor and Jay Novello.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The [[first]] [[thing]] you [[notice]] is the animation of the film. I found it [[done]] very well [[done]]. The [[scenery]] had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good [[either]]. There were many times I focused more on my [[computer]] than the story. The [[writing]] was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was [[completely]] [[ignored]], as the main focus was the flies. I [[also]] hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and [[explained]] that the [[stories]] about the flies in the [[film]] was a [[work]] of fiction, and no [[flies]] were on [[Apollo]] 11. I did [[like]] how he [[thanked]] the [[men]] and [[women]] who sacrificed their [[lives]] for space [[exploration]] though.

[[If]] you are an [[adult]], this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is [[certainly]] just for kids. But, [[save]] this one for a [[rainy]] day. "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The [[outset]] [[stuff]] you [[noticing]] is the animation of the film. I found it [[accomplished]] very well [[doing]]. The [[panorama]] had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good [[neither]]. There were many times I focused more on my [[computers]] than the story. The [[write]] was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was [[altogether]] [[overlooked]], as the main focus was the flies. I [[furthermore]] hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and [[clarified]] that the [[history]] about the flies in the [[filmmaking]] was a [[jobs]] of fiction, and no [[fly]] were on [[Adonis]] 11. I did [[adores]] how he [[appreciation]] the [[male]] and [[girl]] who sacrificed their [[vie]] for space [[explorer]] though.

[[Unless]] you are an [[mature]], this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is [[obviously]] just for kids. But, [[rescuing]] this one for a [[wettest]] day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2951 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "La Bête" by Walerian Borowczyk is based on the short story "Lokis" written by Prosper Merimée.Lucy Broadhurst(Lisabeth Hummel),an American heiress betrothed to the son of an impoverished Marquis,arrives at the family's crumbling château and learns of a mythical ursine beast purported to prowl the nearby forest.It is fabled that a former lady of the house(Sirpa Lane)once engaged in perverse sex with the creature and Lucy finds herself consumed by dreams of the incident. "The Beast" is an art-house mix of surreal horror,explicit sleaze and porno.There's implied bestiality,assault and perversion in the priesthood,copious fake ejaculate smeared on bared breasts,masturbation with a rose and, most graphic of all,the eponymous beast toying with incredibly big phallus.Still this genuinely erotic film is wonderfully photographed and tasteless.The women here are stunningly beautiful and they are naked most of the time.Overall "La Bête" is a visual feast.Whether it be from the fetishistic attention to detail,or the visual motifs pregnant with information,Borowczyk's masterpiece should be watched with care and attention.A must-see for fans of European cult cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best films ever made. It is a realistic depiction of rural ranching life which was a big part of American History. The setting is 1906 Wyoming where life had not changed much since the previous century. The film keeps your interest without the added Hollywood myths. The whole family can see this movie and be intrigued about how life was like in America when it was mostly a rural nation. With this film, you will escape the present and witness the daily life of 100 years ago. In a beautiful, scenic environment you will see the hard physical work that was required to survive, as well as the constant worries and concerns of the elements and the market pressures that will make a difference between success or failure. See this movie and experience life as it was for most of our nation's history. This film is worth your time to see. My only question is - why aren't there more films like this one? --------------------------------------------- Result 2953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Icy and lethal ace hit-man Tony Arzenta (a divinely smooth and commanding performance by Alain Delon) wants to quit the assassination business, but the dangerous mobsters he works for won't let him. After his wife and child are killed, Arzenta declares open season on everyone responsible for their deaths. Director Duccio Tessari relates the absorbing story at a constant snappy pace, maintains a properly serious and no-nonsense tone throughout, stages the stirring shoot-outs and exciting car chases with considerable rip-snorting brio, and punctuates the narrative with jolting outbursts of explosive bloody violence. Delon's suave and charismatic presence adds extra class to the already engrossing proceedings. This film further benefits from sterling acting by a bang-up cast, with praiseworthy contributions by Richard Conte as wise Mafia kingpin Nick Gusto, Carla Gravini as Arzenta's supportive lady friend Sandra, Marc Porel as Arzenta's loyal pal Domenico Maggio, Anton Diffring as ruthless, calculating capo Grunwald, and Lino Troisi as the venomous gangster Rocco Cutitta. Silvano Ippoliti's glossy cinematography boasts several graceful pans. Gianni Ferrio's funky score hits the get-down groovy spot. Erika Blanc and Rosalba Neri pop up briefly in nifty bit parts. Better still, there's no filler to speak of and we even get a decent dab of tasty gratuitous female nudity. The startling conclusion packs a mean and lingering wallop right to the gut. A solid and satisfying winner. --------------------------------------------- Result 2954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Its not Braveheart( thankfully),but it is fine entertainment with engaging characters and good acting all around. I enjoyed this film when it was released and upon viewing it again last week,find it has held up well over time. Not a classic film,but a very fine and watchable movie to enjoy as great entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite a tight narrative, Johnnie To's Election feels at times like it was once a longer picture, with many characters and plot strands abandoned or ultimately unresolved. Some of these are dealt with in the truly excellent and far superior sequel, Election 2: Harmony is a Virtue, but it's still a dependably enthralling thriller about a contested Triad election that bypasses the usual shootouts and explosions (though not the violence) in favour of constantly shifting alliances that can turn in the time it takes to make a phone call. It's also a film where the most ruthless character isn't always the most threatening one, as the chilling ending makes only too clear: one can imagine a lifetime of psychological counselling being necessary for all the trauma that one inflicts on one unfortunate bystander.

Simon Yam, all too often a variable actor but always at his best under To's direction, has possibly never been better in the lead, not least because Tony Leung's much more extrovert performance makes his stillness more the powerful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know sometimes its really really corny... But the acting is amazing and Melissa Joan Hart is as cute as a button. I love this show a lot, and I'm almost embarrassed that I do b/c the show has a rep. for being really corny, but it makes me feel good. My only problem is that sometimes it can be pretty low budget - sometimes actors change and you just have to deal with it... Like Sabrina's father is 2 different guys throughout the course of the movie... I mean, couldn't they just say he was an uncle or something? Still, I can't help but loving this show. Harvey and Sabrina make a really cute couple and Salem is absolutely hilarious. I definitely recommend it if your looking for some light and funny entertainment... My favorite episode is "Pancake Madness"... a HILARIOUS episode. The best season is probably 3... I'm not really a fan of some of the seventh season twists... Once you get to college, Morgan joins the group and her dialog is painful and very poorly acted... Plus she is ugly, so the jokes about how she is only surviving off her good looks were lost on me... But I think it was set up to have a really good eighth season and I was really sad to see one of my favorite shows canceled! --------------------------------------------- Result 2957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am, as many are, a fan of Tony Scott films. When this movie came out I had high hopes that it would be like 'Man On Fire'. To find out that the movie it's the furthest thing from it! The story was treading water from the get go, and the choice of Mickey Rourke was not such such a good idea. And the whole 'arm'scene was too gratuitous!

The movie is centered around Kiera Kinghtly, and this movie reveals that she'll never become a movie star! The movie brought some of the worst acting ever.

I like Tony Scott's direction 'n all, but this takes the whole friggin cake! Sorry Ton, 1 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It's the early 80s. There's a [[group]] of [[suspiciously]] old-looking [[teens]]. And there's a maniac [[stalking]] [[around]]. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called [[Pranks]]. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[idea]]. Unless your [[idea]] of a [[great]] prank is to repeatedly [[hit]] someone's [[dinner]] with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[great]] [[prank]]; in fact [[quite]] a rubbish [[prank]] if truth be [[told]]. But there you [[go]].

The [[film]] itself concerns a [[group]] of [[teenagers]] who are [[tasked]] with [[cleaning]] out a [[decommissioned]] [[dormitory]]. They become [[aware]] that a [[psychopath]] is on the loose. To [[combat]] this development, they [[split]] up and [[wander]] about in the [[dark]]. It ends in tears for most of them.

[[Pranks]] is a [[badly]] [[made]] slasher [[movie]]. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It [[appears]] to be cut of a fair [[bit]] of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[pointless]] because, let's [[face]] it, a slasher [[movie]] shorn of violence is a [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[For]] slasher-film and [[video]] nasty completists only. It's the early 80s. There's a [[groups]] of [[coincidentally]] old-looking [[teen]]. And there's a maniac [[harassing]] [[approximately]]. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called [[Adventures]]. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[thought]]. Unless your [[concept]] of a [[tremendous]] prank is to repeatedly [[strike]] someone's [[banquet]] with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[prodigious]] [[joking]]; in fact [[rather]] a rubbish [[joke]] if truth be [[tell]]. But there you [[going]].

The [[films]] itself concerns a [[clusters]] of [[juvenile]] who are [[entrusted]] with [[cleansing]] out a [[dismantled]] [[dorm]]. They become [[conscious]] that a [[maniac]] is on the loose. To [[struggles]] this development, they [[divided]] up and [[roam]] about in the [[murky]]. It ends in tears for most of them.

[[Adventures]] is a [[sorely]] [[accomplished]] slasher [[kino]]. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It [[appear]] to be cut of a fair [[bite]] of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[senseless]] because, let's [[confronts]] it, a slasher [[cinematography]] shorn of violence is a [[wastes]] of [[times]]. [[In]] slasher-film and [[videos]] nasty completists only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As soon as I began to see [[posters]] and hear talk about this [[movie]], I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an [[incredible]] to behold and I couldn't [[wait]] to see the second one, especially after beginning to [[see]] the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I [[saw]] it, I [[left]] the [[theater]] [[extremely]] [[disappointed]], as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. While the action scenes in the [[movie]] were amazing as always, there [[simply]] were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging [[toward]] Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the [[commercials]]). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely [[horrendous]]. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't [[need]] to [[hear]] about that or [[pay]] [[money]] to [[listen]] to it. The movie was a [[serious]] [[waste]] of my [[time]], and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the [[constant]] [[boring]] and [[dry]] monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the [[film]] quickly, and the [[small]] [[amount]] of [[good]] fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What [[movie]] ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. As soon as I began to see [[banners]] and hear talk about this [[filmmaking]], I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an [[surprising]] to behold and I couldn't [[awaited]] to see the second one, especially after beginning to [[consults]] the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I [[seen]] it, I [[gauche]] the [[drama]] [[unbelievably]] [[disappoint]], as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. While the action scenes in the [[filmmaking]] were amazing as always, there [[solely]] were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging [[about]] Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the [[ads]]). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely [[horrific]]. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't [[require]] to [[heed]] about that or [[salaries]] [[moneys]] to [[listening]] to it. The movie was a [[grave]] [[wastes]] of my [[times]], and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the [[steady]] [[dreary]] and [[drier]] monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the [[cinematography]] quickly, and the [[scant]] [[quantities]] of [[alright]] fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What [[movies]] ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[forced]] to see this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew [[movies]] from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as humorous as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the [[nauseating]] piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I [[feared]] it would be. It was an [[inoffensive]], mildly entertaining [[movie]]. Although I'm [[pleased]] that they didn't try to "upgrade" [[Nancy]] to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... I was [[compelled]] to see this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew [[movie]] from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as humorous as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the [[sickening]] piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I [[fears]] it would be. It was an [[benign]], mildly entertaining [[kino]]. Although I'm [[contented]] that they didn't try to "upgrade" [[Nance]] to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... --------------------------------------------- Result 2961 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[For]] the [[initial]] 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've [[really]] no idea how long it [[took]]) Alienator sets up an interesting [[premise]]. I don't [[think]] I've [[seen]] a slasher [[movie]] with an [[alien]] from another planet as the baddie before. [[However]], interest soon turns into [[stunned]] [[disbelief]] as you realise the 'alien' is a [[huge]] body-builder [[woman]] in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[patently]] [[ridiculous]].

Don't think I [[hold]] that against it. [[In]] the world of shlock-horror, [[patently]] [[ridiculous]] can often be a [[good]] sign. [[However]], the blatant [[stupidity]] of its premise is all the [[movie]] [[really]] has going for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Actors]] [[heap]] on [[failed]] attempts at seriousness, [[potentially]] [[genius]] lines of pure cheese [[dialogue]] are [[stumbled]] over with [[unnerving]] [[incompetence]] and the [[direction]] fails to [[sum]] up [[even]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the [[time]] the movie's [[finished]] you can barely see the [[original]] [[concept]] through the haystack of [[total]] tripe the team [[piled]] on it.

[[Add]] to this the fact that the 'Alien' just [[kills]] people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a [[giant]] [[throbbing]] [[heap]] of [[good]] [[ideas]] being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but [[AT]] it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. [[At]] the [[original]] 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've [[genuinely]] no idea how long it [[taken]]) Alienator sets up an interesting [[assumption]]. I don't [[believe]] I've [[watched]] a slasher [[filmmaking]] with an [[stranger]] from another planet as the baddie before. [[Instead]], interest soon turns into [[surprised]] [[skepticism]] as you realise the 'alien' is a [[whopping]] body-builder [[femme]] in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[notoriously]] [[grotesque]].

Don't think I [[holds]] that against it. [[Throughout]] the world of shlock-horror, [[notoriously]] [[grotesque]] can often be a [[buena]] sign. [[Conversely]], the blatant [[madness]] of its premise is all the [[movies]] [[genuinely]] has going for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Actresses]] [[stack]] on [[faulted]] attempts at seriousness, [[maybe]] [[genie]] lines of pure cheese [[discussions]] are [[faltered]] over with [[unsettling]] [[impotence]] and the [[directions]] fails to [[suma]] up [[yet]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the [[moment]] the movie's [[finalised]] you can barely see the [[upfront]] [[idea]] through the haystack of [[entire]] tripe the team [[stacked]] on it.

[[Adds]] to this the fact that the 'Alien' just [[slays]] people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a [[mammoth]] [[shaking]] [[pile]] of [[alright]] [[thinking]] being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but [[DURING]] it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2962 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The [[choice]] to [[make]] this SNL [[skit]] into a movie was far better [[thought]] out than other [[recent]] ones. The [[humor]] [[involved]] in the character is not [[annoyance]] humor, and is [[also]] character driven [[enough]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

[[Oddly]] [[enough]] the sexual content [[seemed]] like it could be [[avoided]], but that may have been because the [[constraints]] of [[live]] television [[schooled]] me to not [[expect]] it. I [[suppose]] I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful [[predecessors]], but [[still]] better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I [[liked]] it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is [[sad]], as Tim Meadows [[tends]] not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) The [[elect]] to [[deliver]] this SNL [[sketch]] into a movie was far better [[think]] out than other [[freshly]] ones. The [[comedy]] [[engaged]] in the character is not [[irritation]] humor, and is [[apart]] character driven [[adequately]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

[[Suspiciously]] [[adequately]] the sexual content [[appeared]] like it could be [[dodged]], but that may have been because the [[restrictions]] of [[viva]] television [[literate]] me to not [[waits]] it. I [[imagining]] I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful [[ancestors]], but [[however]] better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I [[enjoyed]] it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is [[hapless]], as Tim Meadows [[strives]] not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) --------------------------------------------- Result 2963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Audiences today will probably watch a film [[like]] Ossessione and not really consider how unprecedented it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the film really [[divorces]] from sap-happy Hollywood conventions—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more upon depicting [[reality]] in a very grim and [[sober]] light. [[Films]] of this nature—the neo-realist [[films]]—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[provocative]] [[issues]] that were probably [[unseen]] on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very [[raw]] and [[gritty]]: [[shot]] on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular actors. All of these [[elements]] helped convey the [[issues]] [[explored]] in the [[film]], yielding the following [[theme]]: [[Negative]] karmic [[repercussions]] will haunt those who [[deliberately]] act immorally.

The two [[leads]]—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, [[yet]] both carry the [[mentality]]: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[drifter]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant [[fluctuations]]. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna [[craves]]; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the [[courage]] to get. She wants to live in a world free from the [[monotony]] of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, [[films]] prior to the neo-realist [[age]] never [[showed]] such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[say]] the [[least]] it was [[probably]] a bit alarming.

[[In]] conjunction with the [[theme]], the neo-realist [[style]] [[helps]] [[show]] the [[negative]] repercussions of adulterous [[behavior]]. [[Succinctly]] put, adulterous behavior (as [[shown]] in the [[film]]) leads to [[depressing]] and ultimately deadened lives. When Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the cliff and into the river, killing Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. Audiences today will probably watch a film [[iike]] Ossessione and not really consider how unprecedented it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the film really [[divorcing]] from sap-happy Hollywood conventions—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more upon depicting [[realist]] in a very grim and [[dispassionate]] light. [[Kino]] of this nature—the neo-realist [[movie]]—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[inflammatory]] [[matters]] that were probably [[imperceptible]] on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very [[untreated]] and [[sandstone]]: [[offed]] on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular actors. All of these [[ingredients]] helped convey the [[problem]] [[investigating]] in the [[kino]], yielding the following [[topic]]: [[Bad]] karmic [[implications]] will haunt those who [[advisedly]] act immorally.

The two [[leeds]]—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, [[still]] both carry the [[psyche]]: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[hobo]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant [[swings]]. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna [[yearns]]; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the [[gallantry]] to get. She wants to live in a world free from the [[tedium]] of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, [[movie]] prior to the neo-realist [[aging]] never [[shown]] such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[said]] the [[lowest]] it was [[potentially]] a bit alarming.

[[At]] conjunction with the [[subject]], the neo-realist [[styling]] [[helped]] [[showings]] the [[bad]] repercussions of adulterous [[demeanour]]. [[Concise]] put, adulterous behavior (as [[demonstrated]] in the [[movie]]) leads to [[dreary]] and ultimately deadened lives. When Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the cliff and into the river, killing Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. --------------------------------------------- Result 2964 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have lost count of just how many times I have seen this movie - I probably know the entire dialog backwards - yet I am drawn to it time and again.

Set in Hungary, a young Jimmy Stewart plays the eligible bachelor "Kralik" who becomes the secret admirer of Margaret Sullavan's innocent "Klara". Kralik secretly becomes Klara's pen-friend, and at work together Klara confides in Kralik about the content of his (Kralik's) letters. Clearly Kralik is besotted with Klara - but is unable to make his feelings known whilst he is in competition with the "pen-friend". Confused? Well you wont be - this story has a sweet, almost sugary ending - but we all know it is the ending we all want.

Other characters worth mentioning are Frank Morgan playing his usual role, this time as the shop's owner "Hugo Matuschek", Felix Bressart as "Pirovitch", Kralik's confidant. Joseph Schildkraut as the womanising arrogant "Vadas" - so well played that you cannot help but hate him right from the beginning.

Finally William Tracy who manages to endear himself to us all with his over-confident upstart of a shop junior "Pepi Katona".

Recently re-made as "You've Got Mail" starring Tom Hanks & Meg Ryan for me is not as good as the original - although I suspect younger audiences would disagree.

If this film is on in your area over Christmas, I suggest you pour yourself a nice glass of wine, put a log on the fire and have a box of Kleenex handy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Good [[grief]] I can't [[even]] [[begin]] to [[describe]] how poor this film is. Don't get me [[wrong]], I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the [[ummm]]... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the [[lack]] of gore. But it was the level of [[incompetence]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a [[protagonist]] who is quite [[simply]] so completely [[useless]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... [[SHE]] NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some [[arse]] then think again.

On [[top]] of this, we're [[handed]] possibly the [[least]] [[intriguing]] (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to [[grace]] the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or [[gratuity]] is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored [[closets]], closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to [[dress]] yourself for another year. In fact this [[movie]] should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a [[picture]] of a [[big]] [[scary]] coathanger on the DVD [[case]]. On the back it could have had a [[photograph]] of the [[audience]] [[falling]] asleep and a [[quote]] by Roger and Ebert - something to the [[extent]] of: "what the f*@! did we just [[waste]] our [[time]] [[watching]]!" Good [[grieving]] I can't [[yet]] [[launched]] to [[describing]] how poor this film is. Don't get me [[improper]], I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the [[uhmm]]... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the [[misses]] of gore. But it was the level of [[impotence]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a [[player]] who is quite [[exclusively]] so completely [[superfluous]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... [[ELLE]] NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some [[butts]] then think again.

On [[supreme]] of this, we're [[gave]] possibly the [[fewest]] [[exciting]] (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to [[gracia]] the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or [[honorarium]] is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored [[lockers]], closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to [[clothes]] yourself for another year. In fact this [[filmmaking]] should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a [[imagery]] of a [[prodigious]] [[frightful]] coathanger on the DVD [[instances]]. On the back it could have had a [[photographer]] of the [[viewers]] [[dwindling]] asleep and a [[quotes]] by Roger and Ebert - something to the [[magnitude]] of: "what the f*@! did we just [[wastes]] our [[moment]] [[staring]]!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this [[Neil]] Simon [[comedy]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[worst]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth [[going]], know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[something]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy [[Dennis]]... and much better also.

It's not that [[Steve]] [[Martin]] is a [[lousy]] [[comedian]] or wrong for the role as the harried and [[stressed]] [[advertising]] exec; [[quite]] to the [[contrary]], on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is [[equally]] inept [[either]]; her [[work]] has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first [[saw]] her in TV's [[Rowan]] and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The [[problem]] with this [[movie]] is that it's not about the [[hapless]] [[couple]] at all: it's [[really]] about [[New]] York and why everybody should [[come]] to [[New]] York to live and [[love]] their lives away in [[married]] [[bliss]] – [[sort]] of – in the [[greatest]] city in the [[world]]. That's if you're a [[New]] Yorker...

[[Look]], the 1970 [[movie]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically [[explored]] all the [[things]] that can go wrong when you [[take]] a [[trip]] [[somewhere]], and [[included]] most of the [[situations]] and [[sight]] gags that you can [[imagine]] about what can happen to you in a [[strange]] [[environment]]. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into [[gratuitous]] tangents [[specifically]] for an [[audience]] these days that [[expects]] or [[wants]] to [[see]] excess. [[For]] [[example]], not content with the star [[appeal]] of the [[main]] players, there is a cameo ([[relatively]] long [[also]]) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of [[New]] York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for [[President]] even then? Worse – a walking [[talking]] [[advertisement]] for the kinder [[face]] of [[New]] York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as [[Basil]] Fawlty – but this [[time]], as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel [[staff]], sycophantically sucking up to rich [[customers]] and [[generally]] [[making]] himself look [[like]] the [[idiot]] he is, in this role. And, in the [[process]], doing [[great]] damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the [[harassed]] couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, [[New]] York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this [[Neal]] Simon [[humor]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[hardest]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth [[go]], know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[anything]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy [[Denis]]... and much better also.

It's not that [[Stephens]] [[Martina]] is a [[rotten]] [[comedy]] or wrong for the role as the harried and [[emphasized]] [[publicity]] exec; [[altogether]] to the [[opus]], on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is [[alike]] inept [[neither]]; her [[collaboration]] has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first [[watched]] her in TV's [[Rouen]] and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The [[difficulty]] with this [[filmmaking]] is that it's not about the [[deplorable]] [[couples]] at all: it's [[truly]] about [[Nouveau]] York and why everybody should [[arrived]] to [[Nuevo]] York to live and [[amour]] their lives away in [[marry]] [[ecstasy]] – [[kind]] of – in the [[largest]] city in the [[globe]]. That's if you're a [[Nuevo]] Yorker...

[[Gaze]], the 1970 [[flick]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically [[examining]] all the [[matters]] that can go wrong when you [[taking]] a [[travels]] [[nowhere]], and [[inscribed]] most of the [[circumstances]] and [[conception]] gags that you can [[imagining]] about what can happen to you in a [[peculiar]] [[surroundings]]. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into [[unreasonable]] tangents [[specially]] for an [[viewers]] these days that [[expecting]] or [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] excess. [[At]] [[examples]], not content with the star [[appellate]] of the [[primary]] players, there is a cameo ([[comparatively]] long [[similarly]]) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of [[Newest]] York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for [[Presidents]] even then? Worse – a walking [[debates]] [[announces]] for the kinder [[encounter]] of [[Nuevo]] York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as [[Basile]] Fawlty – but this [[moment]], as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel [[workforce]], sycophantically sucking up to rich [[clientele]] and [[traditionally]] [[doing]] himself look [[fond]] the [[jerk]] he is, in this role. And, in the [[processes]], doing [[marvellous]] damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the [[bullied]] couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, [[Newer]] York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are no spoilers in this review. There's nothing to spoil.

No plot, nothing; most clip shows at least try to tie the clips into the plot by some tenuous stretch, but this didn't even do that. Clips, three lines to lead into the next interminable sequence of dull clips... OK, so perhaps they were short on production time, but they'd have been better off skipping this episode entirely. What a waste of time.

I'm not sure how this got made, in fact. Scrubs is usually much better at subverting tropes, but somehow this got through....

Thank heavens they were back on form by the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Halloween is the [[story]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[child]]. He takes out his [[problems]] on his [[older]] sister, whom he murders at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. This is just the start of [[things]] to [[come]] from [[Michael]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the [[doctor]] who's been [[studying]] Myers for [[years]]. He knows that [[something]] is [[different]] about him, [[something]] mysteriously [[evil]]. This evil will not be contained, and it cannot be [[stopped]].

[[After]] an [[escape]] from an [[institution]], [[Myers]] [[tracks]] down his [[younger]] sister. [[If]] he [[kills]] her, there may be an end to the [[troubles]] of this misunderstood [[boy]]. But he [[seems]] to have [[problems]] in finishing his sister off as other people [[get]] in the way. He [[manages]] to take them out while [[still]] [[looking]] for that one [[girl]] he [[needs]].

There have been a [[lot]] of those horror [[movies]] involving teenagers [[getting]] hacked to [[pieces]] by a [[masked]] or [[gruesome]] [[killer]]. But this one [[started]] it all, [[sort]] of. If you [[think]] about it, most of those horror [[movies]] we all remember are the ones that have [[Freddy]] Kruger or Jason [[chasing]] [[around]] half naked [[girls]]. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have [[haunted]] our [[dreams]] when we were children.

Halloween's director, [[John]] Carpenter, [[got]] a [[lot]] out of the [[horror]] [[movies]] of the '50s and [[combined]] everything he knew into one [[film]] that [[scared]] the [[hell]] out of a [[lot]] of people back in the late '70s. This [[films]] [[solidified]] him as a [[director]] to watch and [[also]] [[jump]] [[started]] the career of [[Jamie]] [[Lee]] [[Curtis]], who plays the [[girl]] being [[stalked]] by the [[masked]] [[killer]].

This [[film]] may seem [[cliché]] [[today]], but back then there wasn't [[much]] out there like this. It's been copied from and [[ripped]] off of, but Halloween will [[always]] remain the quintessential teenage [[horror]] [[movie]]. It [[still]] [[gives]] you chills [[listening]] to Carpenter's [[thrilling]] [[music]] while we [[see]] another [[victim]] get chased by that [[shadowy]] [[Michael]] Myers. Halloween is the [[conte]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[children]]. He takes out his [[trouble]] on his [[elderly]] sister, whom he murders at the [[startup]] of the [[cinematography]]. This is just the start of [[items]] to [[arrive]] from [[Michele]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the [[physicians]] who's been [[examining]] Myers for [[olds]]. He knows that [[anything]] is [[multiple]] about him, [[anything]] mysteriously [[wicked]]. This evil will not be contained, and it cannot be [[ceasing]].

[[Upon]] an [[fleeing]] from an [[establishment]], [[Meyers]] [[trails]] down his [[youngest]] sister. [[Unless]] he [[assassinate]] her, there may be an end to the [[trouble]] of this misunderstood [[kiddo]]. But he [[appears]] to have [[difficulty]] in finishing his sister off as other people [[got]] in the way. He [[administering]] to take them out while [[nevertheless]] [[searching]] for that one [[daughter]] he [[required]].

There have been a [[lots]] of those horror [[films]] involving teenagers [[obtaining]] hacked to [[slices]] by a [[obscured]] or [[frightful]] [[shooter]]. But this one [[commences]] it all, [[sorting]] of. If you [[reckon]] about it, most of those horror [[films]] we all remember are the ones that have [[Freddie]] Kruger or Jason [[pursuit]] [[approximately]] half naked [[females]]. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have [[obsessed]] our [[nightmares]] when we were children.

Halloween's director, [[Johannes]] Carpenter, [[get]] a [[batch]] out of the [[terror]] [[cinema]] of the '50s and [[merged]] everything he knew into one [[movie]] that [[shitless]] the [[dammit]] out of a [[batch]] of people back in the late '70s. This [[cinema]] [[consolidated]] him as a [[superintendent]] to watch and [[similarly]] [[salta]] [[commenced]] the career of [[Jaime]] [[Rhee]] [[Cortes]], who plays the [[daughter]] being [[harassed]] by the [[disguised]] [[murderer]].

This [[cinema]] may seem [[clichés]] [[thursday]], but back then there wasn't [[very]] out there like this. It's been copied from and [[buzzed]] off of, but Halloween will [[repeatedly]] remain the quintessential teenage [[abomination]] [[cinematography]]. It [[however]] [[donne]] you chills [[listen]] to Carpenter's [[intriguing]] [[musicians]] while we [[behold]] another [[victims]] get chased by that [[opaque]] [[Michal]] Myers. --------------------------------------------- Result 2969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had lots of great actors and actresses in it and it addressed some very noble issues. It's full of emotion and the direction is done well. The storyline progresses very quickly, but I guess that's better than having to watch a 3 hour movie. This is an easy movie to watch again and again and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2970 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Iberia is [[nice]] to [[see]] on TV. But why [[see]] this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you [[like]] [[classical]] music or [[modern]] dance this [[could]] be your [[date]] [[movie]]. But [[otherwise]] one and half [[hour]] is just too long [[time]]. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They [[know]] how to combine breath taking dancing to [[long]] movie. [[Director]] Carlos Saura knows how to shoot [[dancing]] from old experience. And time to time it's [[look]] really good. but when the movie is one and [[hour]] it should be at [[least]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is [[bigger]] then [[life]] and this film is not too big. Iberia is [[handsome]] to [[behold]] on TV. But why [[behold]] this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you [[likes]] [[traditional]] music or [[trendy]] dance this [[did]] be your [[dates]] [[cinematographic]]. But [[alternatively]] one and half [[hora]] is just too long [[moment]]. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They [[savoir]] how to combine breath taking dancing to [[lengthy]] movie. [[Superintendent]] Carlos Saura knows how to shoot [[danced]] from old experience. And time to time it's [[peek]] really good. but when the movie is one and [[hours]] it should be at [[fewer]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is [[broader]] then [[iife]] and this film is not too big. --------------------------------------------- Result 2971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this [[movie]] except for the [[bewildered]] feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't [[need]] a 10 [[page]] [[dissertation]] or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But [[Dark]] Floors takes the "what is this [[movie]] about?" thing to a whole new ([[annoying]]) level. What IS this [[movie]] about?

This isn't [[exceptionally]] scary or [[thrilling]] but if you have an [[hour]] and a half to [[kill]] and/or you [[want]] to end up feeling [[frustrated]] and [[confused]], [[rent]] this [[winner]]. I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this [[filmmaking]] except for the [[puzzled]] feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't [[required]] a 10 [[pages]] [[thesis]] or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But [[Gloom]] Floors takes the "what is this [[kino]] about?" thing to a whole new ([[exasperating]]) level. What IS this [[kino]] about?

This isn't [[incredibly]] scary or [[exhilarating]] but if you have an [[hours]] and a half to [[slain]] and/or you [[wish]] to end up feeling [[disillusioned]] and [[bewildered]], [[rental]] this [[winning]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Do not waste your time with this movie. This is a total thrash in terms of acting, directing, sound editing, soundtrack... There was such a waste of performance by some of the very good actors. The movie does not do justice to Paresh Rawal who is perhaps one of the most talented actors in Bollywood. Akshay Kumar who is also an emerging star did quite a poor job. John Abraham, what is wrong with him? Is that what you call acting? I mean he should thank God that he has a pretty face otherwise he'd be winning Razzie awards in India if there were any such awards in Bollywood. Asrani a great talent, but overdoes his bit as before.

Screenplay which was not to mention a rip-off from the 1965's Boeing Boeing was quite badly framed. First of all, people in Bollywood just can't make something original. On top of that they don't even know how to copy well. The jokes in the movie were so overdone, it was getting painful to sit through them. Priyadarshan may be a star in the south, but he's just not fit to make a decent Hindi movie. The sound editing is amazingly crappy. I can go on and on this matter, but the bottom-line is that Bollywood should be shameful of making such a film.

The worst part is that some people seemed to love this movie. What is wrong with you guys? This is the reason why Bollywood is where it is. Did you know that Bollywood makes more movies than Hollywood every year, however, most of the movies are unheard of abroad, because of movies like this one. I am an Indian and I am utterly shameful of Bollywood for producing this piece of thrash. Movies like Dil Chahta Hai and Lagaan were just terrific. They are world class films which are timeless... among the best of this decade. Garam Masala, however, is perhaps one of the worst of this century. Period.

I give it a 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is the first [[time]] I have commented on a film because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[might]] [[wake]] up and do something about it. Over the [[last]] few [[months]], [[ABC]] [[Family]] [[began]] airing a new format of [[movies]]. I have [[seen]] the [[last]] three and [[enjoyed]] them. They were engaging and did the trick. My [[wife]] likes these films. I was looking forward to [[viewing]] "See [[Jane]] Date". The trailers [[looked]] and [[sounded]] great. Unfortunately, this is one [[film]] where the [[book]] must be light years ahead of the effort [[displayed]] by the [[writers]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all [[bad]]), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It [[worked]] against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a [[huge]] [[disappointment]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. This is the first [[times]] I have commented on a film because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[probability]] [[waking]] up and do something about it. Over the [[final]] few [[mois]], [[ABCS]] [[Familial]] [[embarked]] airing a new format of [[kino]]. I have [[noticed]] the [[latter]] three and [[adored]] them. They were engaging and did the trick. My [[mujer]] likes these films. I was looking forward to [[visualise]] "See [[Jannet]] Date". The trailers [[seemed]] and [[seemed]] great. Unfortunately, this is one [[filmmaking]] where the [[books]] must be light years ahead of the effort [[showed]] by the [[authors]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all [[unfavourable]]), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It [[acted]] against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a [[prodigious]] [[displeasure]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I have seen The [[Perfect]] [[Son]] about three times. I fail to [[see]] how this film is a [[gay]] film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a [[gay]] [[film]]. It is a [[film]] with a gay character, I can't [[see]] why every film with a [[gay]] character should be [[strictly]] a film about being gay. I [[find]] the [[film]] to be sympathetic to the study of [[death]], the [[death]] of someone who is your kin. I think [[Theo]] turns his [[life]] around fairly [[quickly]] after rehab because he wants to and watching his brother [[dying]] in [[front]] of him makes him [[reassess]] his [[life]]. I [[found]] the dialog in the scene when Theo [[tells]] Ryan he is going to be a father to be very [[moving]], Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to [[see]] or share with anyone. Isn't that [[horrific]] and [[sad]]? I [[highly]] [[recommend]] the film. I have seen The [[Consummate]] [[Yarns]] about three times. I fail to [[consults]] how this film is a [[gays]] film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a [[homo]] [[kino]]. It is a [[kino]] with a gay character, I can't [[seeing]] why every film with a [[homosexual]] character should be [[purely]] a film about being gay. I [[unearth]] the [[kino]] to be sympathetic to the study of [[decease]], the [[killings]] of someone who is your kin. I think [[Thea]] turns his [[living]] around fairly [[fast]] after rehab because he wants to and watching his brother [[dies]] in [[newsweek]] of him makes him [[revisit]] his [[vie]]. I [[uncovered]] the dialog in the scene when Theo [[says]] Ryan he is going to be a father to be very [[transferring]], Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to [[behold]] or share with anyone. Isn't that [[vile]] and [[unlucky]]? I [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A man brings his new wife to his home where his [[former]] wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! [[All]] of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[skulls]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[saw]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I [[liked]] it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I [[realize]] how [[bad]] it is. It's [[horribly]] acted, [[badly]] [[written]], very dull ([[even]] at an [[hour]]) and has a [[huge]] cast of FIVE people (one being the director)! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely [[atmospheric]]. There [[also]] are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a [[somewhat]] effective ending. All in all it's definitely [[NOT]] a good movie...but not a [[total]] disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I [[give]] it a 2.

Also [[try]] to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's [[paired]] with "[[Attack]] of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[TERRIBLE]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on [[TV]]! A man brings his new wife to his home where his [[previous]] wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! [[Everything]] of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[cranes]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[seen]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I [[wished]] it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I [[accomplishing]] how [[rotten]] it is. It's [[unimaginably]] acted, [[sorely]] [[wrote]], very dull ([[yet]] at an [[hora]]) and has a [[whopping]] cast of FIVE people (one being the director)! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely [[atmosphere]]. There [[apart]] are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a [[rather]] effective ending. All in all it's definitely [[NAH]] a good movie...but not a [[unmitigated]] disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I [[confer]] it a 2.

Also [[attempted]] to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's [[coupled]] with "[[Attacking]] of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[SCARY]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on [[TELEVISIONS]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my first comment on IMDb website, and the reason I'm writing it is that we're talking about ONE OF THE BEST FILMS EVER! 'Ne goryuy!' will make you laugh and cry at the same time, you will fall in love (if you're not a fan yet!) with Georgian choir singing tradition, and possibly you will accept the hardships of your own existence and just feel good after watching it:) What I like a lot about this film is that actors in the non-leading roles create vivid and memorable characters and are just as interesting and important as the central character. The film is starring Vahtang Kikabidze (who is great), but you will remember every single face around him in the film. You will find yourself quoting their lines, that have become household names for so many Russian-speaking people. A film to live with. Simple, yet deep, you will want to watch it again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2977 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film has got to be ranked as one of the most [[disturbing]] and [[arresting]] [[films]] in years. It is one of the few [[films]], perhaps the only one, that [[actually]] [[gave]] me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[film]] [[bears]] [[comparison]], affected me like that. I [[saw]] echoes in the [[film]] from filmmakers like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to [[ask]] myself, what was it about the [[film]] that made me feel like I did? I [[think]] the [[answer]] [[would]] be that I was watching a horror [[film]], but one that defies or even [[reverses]] the conventions of said [[genre]]. Typically, in a horror film, [[horrible]] and [[frightening]] things will [[happen]], but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, [[deserted]] hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This [[handling]] of the subject in horror is, I think, a sort of defence mechanism, a principle of [[darkness]] and opacity [[functioning]] as a [[sort]] of projective space for the [[desires]] and [[fears]] of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a [[perfectly]] [[normal]] society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain [[key]] thematics from the horror genre, [[especially]] concerning the [[body]] and its [[violation]], the [[stages]] of [[fright]] and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[everyday]], middle [[class]] society as a stage on which is [[relayed]] a repetitious [[play]] of sexual [[aggression]], [[loneliness]], [[lack]] and [[violation]] of [[intimacy]] and integrity: [[precisely]] the [[themes]] you [[would]] [[find]] in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no escape. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s film resides. Hundstage [[deals]] with these [[matters]] as a function of the [[everyday]], [[displays]] them in quotidian repetition, [[rather]] than as [[sites]] of extremity and catharsis - a move you would encounter in said horror genre. One important point of reference here is Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Fassbinder also had a way of blending the political with the personal in his films, a tactics of the melodrama that allowed him to deal in a serious and even moral way with political issues like racism, domination, desire, questions concerning ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the mechanisms of everyday society the subject of his film puts him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no instances of a woman fighting back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. This film has got to be ranked as one of the most [[troubling]] and [[detaining]] [[cinematography]] in years. It is one of the few [[movies]], perhaps the only one, that [[indeed]] [[handed]] me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[movies]] [[carry]] [[comparisons]], affected me like that. I [[seen]] echoes in the [[movies]] from filmmakers like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to [[demand]] myself, what was it about the [[movie]] that made me feel like I did? I [[ideas]] the [[answers]] [[should]] be that I was watching a horror [[cinematography]], but one that defies or even [[reversal]] the conventions of said [[genres]]. Typically, in a horror film, [[atrocious]] and [[horrendous]] things will [[occur]], but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, [[desolate]] hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This [[manipulating]] of the subject in horror is, I think, a sort of defence mechanism, a principle of [[blackness]] and opacity [[function]] as a [[sorts]] of projective space for the [[wishes]] and [[worries]] of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a [[absolutely]] [[usual]] society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain [[critical]] thematics from the horror genre, [[namely]] concerning the [[agency]] and its [[breach]], the [[stage]] of [[frighten]] and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[ordinary]], middle [[schoolroom]] society as a stage on which is [[forwarded]] a repetitious [[gaming]] of sexual [[assault]], [[solitude]], [[inadequacy]] and [[violating]] of [[privacy]] and integrity: [[exactly]] the [[subject]] you [[ought]] [[unearthed]] in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no escape. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s film resides. Hundstage [[deal]] with these [[things]] as a function of the [[ordinary]], [[shown]] them in quotidian repetition, [[somewhat]] than as [[locators]] of extremity and catharsis - a move you would encounter in said horror genre. One important point of reference here is Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Fassbinder also had a way of blending the political with the personal in his films, a tactics of the melodrama that allowed him to deal in a serious and even moral way with political issues like racism, domination, desire, questions concerning ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the mechanisms of everyday society the subject of his film puts him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no instances of a woman fighting back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2978 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sensitive [[film]] does [[lack]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[superbly]] shot and performed. However, the narrative structure point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its [[thoughts]] with what might be described by the modern viewer as a "story", I'm [[sceptical]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative structure" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[compared]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to [[dismiss]] this film as a cliché, PEACHES is, in some ways, much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't [[quite]] make it. It's [[certainly]] very [[different]] to Monahan's first feature - THE [[INTERVIEW]]! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Lung]] [[added]] to the [[story]]. Who knows - [[maybe]] they did. They [[certainly]] rammed [[home]] the [[compromised]] and flawed nature of Weaving's [[character]] - [[although]] I personally [[think]] this was [[achieved]] without the [[need]] for these scenes.

*****JUST [[SAW]] THE [[FILM]] AGAIN*********

On a [[second]] [[viewing]], I can see how some [[would]] [[dismiss]] it as a telemovie [[dressed]] up as a [[feature]]. But I'm not sure how [[distinct]] these 'categories' are [[anymore]], or even if we should be [[making]] that distinction. [[In]] any [[case]], I do [[think]] there are [[enough]] layers in the [[film]] to [[distinguish]] it from [[Hallmark]] [[efforts]]. On the other hand, the film's [[structure]] is very formal, and its content is hardly challenging,at least in the [[way]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE [[DOLLARS]], THE ILLUSTRATED [[FAMILY]] [[DOCTOR]], LOOK [[BOTH]] [[WAYS]] and THE [[HUMAN]] [[TOUCH]] are. The performances are all [[good]], but I did come to the [[realisation]] that the [[main]] [[reason]] I was [[enjoying]] the [[film]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[genre]], without necessarily adding [[anything]]...and I can [[understand]] that this can be a [[fairly]] good [[reason]] for another person *NOT* to like it! [[Indeed]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a film must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I [[would]] [[downgrade]] my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK [[BOTH]] [[WAYS]] should win. Sensitive [[kino]] does [[imperfection]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[beautifully]] shot and performed. However, the narrative structure point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its [[idea]] with what might be described by the modern viewer as a "story", I'm [[incredulous]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative structure" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[likened]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to [[rejects]] this film as a cliché, PEACHES is, in some ways, much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't [[very]] make it. It's [[probably]] very [[several]] to Monahan's first feature - THE [[INTERVIEWED]]! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Dragon]] [[adds]] to the [[narratives]]. Who knows - [[presumably]] they did. They [[surely]] rammed [[dwellings]] the [[threatened]] and flawed nature of Weaving's [[characteristics]] - [[while]] I personally [[thinking]] this was [[performed]] without the [[needs]] for these scenes.

*****JUST [[SAWTHE]] THE [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] AGAIN*********

On a [[seconds]] [[visualization]], I can see how some [[ought]] [[refusing]] it as a telemovie [[clothed]] up as a [[features]]. But I'm not sure how [[separate]] these 'categories' are [[longer]], or even if we should be [[doing]] that distinction. [[At]] any [[instances]], I do [[believe]] there are [[adequate]] layers in the [[movie]] to [[distinguishing]] it from [[Trademark]] [[action]]. On the other hand, the film's [[architecture]] is very formal, and its content is hardly challenging,at least in the [[pathway]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE [[USD]], THE ILLUSTRATED [[FAMILIES]] [[MEDICAL]], LOOK [[WHETHER]] [[METHOD]] and THE [[MANKIND]] [[TOUCHES]] are. The performances are all [[alright]], but I did come to the [[materialization]] that the [[primary]] [[rationale]] I was [[experience]] the [[cinematographic]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[gender]], without necessarily adding [[somethings]]...and I can [[realise]] that this can be a [[relatively]] good [[rationale]] for another person *NOT* to like it! [[Actually]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a film must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I [[could]] [[demote]] my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK [[WHETHER]] [[AVENUES]] should win. --------------------------------------------- Result 2979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Busy is so amazing! I just loved every word she has ever done- freaks and geeks, Dawson's creek, white chicks, the smokers. after the first time i saw home room i went and got it the next day. i am a big fan of her and she has a lot of fans here in Israel. if someone hasn't saw is excellent movie than don't waist more time and go see it now. i recommend to all of you to see all of her movies. i saw busy in the late night show with Conan and she was so beautiful and cute i just love her! everybody who saw the movie- in home room she looks very scary but in real life she is so beautiful! you have to see all her half nude pictures for stuff magazine (maxim) she looks so good there! ~DANIELLE~ --------------------------------------------- Result 2980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] If you want to [[laugh]] like [[crazy]], [[rent]] Cage. Cage is about two [[war]] [[heroes]], [[Billy]] and Scott who are best [[friends]]. [[When]] Billy is shot in [[Vietnam]], he is [[unable]] to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never [[seen]] a [[movie]] with more gay [[references]] to the two main [[characters]]. Billy and Scott [[love]] to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," [[among]] other [[things]].

[[Wonderful]] [[catch]] [[phrases]] like "[[Shut]] the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang [[Pong]], cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for [[hours]]. The native American [[guys]] that are [[supposed]] to be playing [[Mexican]] gang [[members]] are [[also]] top notch. As they say, it's "[[party]] [[time]] right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I [[could]] [[go]] on [[forever]], but just watch this [[movie]] and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 If you want to [[laughter]] like [[psycho]], [[leases]] Cage. Cage is about two [[warfare]] [[heroic]], [[Billie]] and Scott who are best [[friendships]]. [[Whenever]] Billy is shot in [[Viet]], he is [[impossible]] to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never [[noticed]] a [[flick]] with more gay [[referencing]] to the two main [[trait]]. Billy and Scott [[iove]] to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," [[between]] other [[aspects]].

[[Resplendent]] [[capture]] [[words]] like "[[Closure]] the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang [[Phong]], cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for [[hour]]. The native American [[buddies]] that are [[presumed]] to be playing [[Mexico]] gang [[member]] are [[similarly]] top notch. As they say, it's "[[parties]] [[moment]] right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I [[wo]] [[going]] on [[permanently]], but just watch this [[filmmaking]] and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 --------------------------------------------- Result 2981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[disaster]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a [[reputation]] before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive [[supporting]] cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, [[John]] Carradine, Andy Devine and [[others]]) is wasted with [[nothing]] to do.

To expand it to feature length there are [[numerous]] clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S [[ALL]] HERE) andLaurel and [[Hardy]], who never [[dreamed]] they'd be [[playing]] in an X rated [[movie]].

The X rating is due to [[occasional]] [[language]] [[numerous]] sexual perversions; however, [[none]] of the [[characters]] [[seem]] to be having any fun. [[Maybe]] [[somebody]] [[involved]] with the [[film]] had a [[warped]] Puritan sensibility and figured that if they [[could]] make these [[things]] [[unappealing]] it wasn't bad to [[exploit]] them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that [[EASY]] [[RIDER]] (which was made for pocket [[change]]) was the most [[expensive]] [[movie]] ever [[made]] because so [[many]] [[films]] followed which [[tried]] and failed in the [[worst]] [[way]] to [[duplicate]] its success. Sixtyish, once [[honored]] directors like [[Stanley]] Kramer and [[Otto]] Preminger [[made]] movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark [[secret]].

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a [[big]] budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[catastrophe]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a [[notoriety]] before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive [[supports]] cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, [[Jon]] Carradine, Andy Devine and [[alia]]) is wasted with [[nada]] to do.

To expand it to feature length there are [[countless]] clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S [[TOTALITY]] HERE) andLaurel and [[Robust]], who never [[fantasized]] they'd be [[replay]] in an X rated [[movies]].

The X rating is due to [[casual]] [[parlance]] [[many]] sexual perversions; however, [[nos]] of the [[nature]] [[looks]] to be having any fun. [[Might]] [[anybody]] [[implicated]] with the [[filmmaking]] had a [[twisted]] Puritan sensibility and figured that if they [[wo]] make these [[matters]] [[unattractive]] it wasn't bad to [[leverage]] them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that [[SIMPLE]] [[TROOPER]] (which was made for pocket [[alter]]) was the most [[costly]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]] because so [[numerous]] [[filmmaking]] followed which [[attempted]] and failed in the [[meanest]] [[routing]] to [[doubling]] its success. Sixtyish, once [[flattered]] directors like [[Stan]] Kramer and [[Otta]] Preminger [[accomplished]] movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark [[confidential]].

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a [[considerable]] budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] that kid a is such a [[babe]]; this [[movie]] was no Titan A.[[E]].(of which it is in [[many]] [[ways]] modeled after) but [[still]] came off as [[entertaining]], the fact this lost to a piece of [[monkey]] [[crap]] like Tomb [[raider]] makes [[wanna]] [[cry]]; [[includes]] some of the most [[entertaining]] [[characters]] i've [[seen]] in disney [[film]] that kid a is such a [[babies]]; this [[films]] was no Titan A.[[f]].(of which it is in [[various]] [[shapes]] modeled after) but [[yet]] came off as [[amusing]], the fact this lost to a piece of [[silvana]] [[bullshit]] like Tomb [[ryder]] makes [[wish]] [[cries]]; [[involves]] some of the most [[amusing]] [[attribute]] i've [[watched]] in disney [[films]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have [[seen]] about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[type]]) This film is [[among]] the [[worst]]. For me, an [[idea]] [[drives]] a [[movie]]. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. [[Something]] Weird is [[definitely]] cheaply [[made]]. However, it has little to [[say]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the [[beginning]] has to do with the film. Something [[Weird]] has little to [[offer]]. [[Save]] yourself the [[pain]]! I have [[noticed]] about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[genre]]) This film is [[entre]] the [[meanest]]. For me, an [[brainchild]] [[driving]] a [[filmmaking]]. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. [[Algo]] Weird is [[conclusively]] cheaply [[effected]]. However, it has little to [[said]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the [[beginnings]] has to do with the film. Something [[Bizarro]] has little to [[offered]]. [[Rescues]] yourself the [[heartache]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[revelation]] to us. We [[actually]] thought that we were the only gay and lesbian [[couple]] who had ever married and had [[children]]. [[Obviously]] we were [[wrong]]. [[Love]] may come from where you don't [[expect]] it and [[maybe]] don't [[want]] it. But we both chose that [[love]] anyway.

And no, it never [[changed]] our sexual orientation. That [[kind]] of stuff is for the Christian wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[epiphany]] to us. We [[indeed]] thought that we were the only gay and lesbian [[matches]] who had ever married and had [[kiddies]]. [[Definitely]] we were [[amiss]]. [[Adore]] may come from where you don't [[expecting]] it and [[conceivably]] don't [[desiring]] it. But we both chose that [[loved]] anyway.

And no, it never [[amended]] our sexual orientation. That [[genus]] of stuff is for the Christian wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2985 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far the funniest short made by the two comic geniuses. From the time they walk in, to the time Hardy just falls off the roof, this keeps me laughing hysterically. I highly suggest that every fan of Laurel and Hardy should see this short. I also recommend all of the Ghost Series. If you are looking for laughs, see this movie and you will be happy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From beginning to end, this is the most emotionally overwrought movie about NOTHING I have ever seen. The characterizations and interactions between the title character and Marthe Kller's character are pure torture. The racetrack as metaphor gimmick is so overplayed that it borders on cliche, yet director Pollack treats every hairpin turn as if it were something profoundly important.

Maybe there's some value for a MSFT3000 re-playing of some of the scenes, such as Pacino getting in touch with his inner female, for goof value. But, even such accidental humor is hard to find in this total turkey. --------------------------------------------- Result 2987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say, it's a damn good movie. See it if you still haven't. Great camera works and lighting techniques. Awesome, just awesome. Orson Welles is incredible 'The Lady From Shanghai' can certainly take the place of 'Citizen Kane'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2988 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This was what [[black]] society was like before the [[crack]] epidemics, [[gangsta]] [[rap]], and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that [[struggled]] to [[get]] by and all the [[traumas]] and tribulations they [[faced]]. [[Black]] [[America]] was a [[different]] [[group]] of people in the seventies. Still full of [[hope]] and [[flying]] high on the [[civil]] rights movements of the sixties, [[times]] were [[hard]] but [[still]] worth [[fighting]] for. Keepin' your head above water, making a [[wave]] when you can, this [[show]] [[showed]] how [[black]] [[society]] struggled to [[work]] [[together]] as people and families, before they [[started]] to prey on each other and [[everyone]] [[else]] in [[order]] to [[survive]] the [[horrors]] of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the [[black]] ghettos were like then and what they have [[become]] now. This was what [[negra]] society was like before the [[slit]] epidemics, [[banger]] [[rapper]], and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that [[campaigned]] to [[obtain]] by and all the [[injuries]] and tribulations they [[encountered]]. [[Nigger]] [[Americans]] was a [[several]] [[grouping]] of people in the seventies. Still full of [[esperanza]] and [[hovering]] high on the [[civilian]] rights movements of the sixties, [[moments]] were [[laborious]] but [[however]] worth [[combating]] for. Keepin' your head above water, making a [[waving]] when you can, this [[showings]] [[indicated]] how [[negra]] [[societies]] struggled to [[worked]] [[jointly]] as people and families, before they [[starts]] to prey on each other and [[someone]] [[elsewhere]] in [[orders]] to [[outlast]] the [[throes]] of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the [[negra]] ghettos were like then and what they have [[gotten]] now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first read the book, when I was a young teenager, then saw the film late one night. About a year ago I checked it out on IMDb and discovered no copies available. I then hit the web and found a site that offers War Films, soooo glad that I did, ordered a copy and sat back and was able to confirm why I wanted to see it again.

In my opinion to really enjoy the film I suggest you read get a copy of the book and then watch the film. The book is no longer in print but I did track a copy down via E-bay, the Author Alan White was a commando/paratrooper during the 2nd world war taking part in disparate clandestine operations and this was his first book. It is written by someone who knows and this fact I believe gives the book and film authenticity. I have not given the film a ten only because of the nature of the ending of the film, not as good as the book. There are a couple of plot lines that differ from the book also, which is strange as the book is not about the large scale nature of war but about the individual in war. The film illustrates this exceptionally well. I have the copy of the book to let my son read and then the film to let him watch, in that order.

If you can track it down the book and the film then it is definitely worth it and I only wish that it was more readily available for more to read and see, one of my all best war films, ever! --------------------------------------------- Result 2990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[true]] [[measure]] of any [[fictional]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience [[altered]] in some significant way (note that this [[change]] need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a film in general, it succeeds quite well-excellent [[ensemble]] cast, well-developed [[characters]] you [[come]] to care about, [[wonderful]] script and [[beautiful]] sets and locations. In short the film is, well, enchanting. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie [[Lawrence]], Jim Broadbent and [[Joan]] Plowright. It says something when Miranda [[Richardson]] does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most [[highly]] [[recommended]], [[particularly]] if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Saith]] Not. The [[real]] [[steps]] of any [[bogus]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience [[amended]] in some significant way (note that this [[amendment]] need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a film in general, it succeeds quite well-excellent [[whole]] cast, well-developed [[attribute]] you [[arrived]] to care about, [[wondrous]] script and [[excellent]] sets and locations. In short the film is, well, enchanting. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie [[Laurent]], Jim Broadbent and [[Juana]] Plowright. It says something when Miranda [[Roberts]] does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most [[immeasurably]] [[suggested]], [[specifically]] if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Unto]] Not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] [[At]] [[first]] glance I [[expected]] this [[film]] to be crappy because I [[thought]] the plot [[would]] be so [[excessively]] feminist. But I was [[wrong]]. As you [[maybe]] have read in earlier published [[comments]], I agree in that the feminist [[part]] in this film does not [[bother]]. I never had the [[idea]] that the [[main]] character was [[exaggerating]] her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is [[presented]] as somebody with a [[spine]], this in [[contrast]] to her [[classmates]]. So I was [[surprised]] by the story, in [[fact]], I [[thought]] it was [[quite]] [[good]], except for the [[predictable]] [[end]]. Maybe it would've been a better [[idea]] to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is [[somewhat]] more [[surprised]].

In addition, I'd like to say that [[Rodriguez]] [[earned]] her respect by the [[way]] she put away her [[character]]. I can't [[really]] explain why, but [[especially]] in the [[love]] scenes she convinced me. It just looked [[real]] I [[think]].

I gave it a 7 out of 10, [[merely]] because of the [[dull]] [[last]] half hour. [[In]] [[frst]] glance I [[anticipate]] this [[kino]] to be crappy because I [[think]] the plot [[ought]] be so [[inordinately]] feminist. But I was [[amiss]]. As you [[potentially]] have read in earlier published [[observations]], I agree in that the feminist [[parte]] in this film does not [[irritate]]. I never had the [[brainchild]] that the [[principal]] character was [[overstating]] her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is [[submitted]] as somebody with a [[vertebrate]], this in [[rematch]] to her [[comrades]]. So I was [[dumbfounded]] by the story, in [[facto]], I [[brainchild]] it was [[rather]] [[alright]], except for the [[predictably]] [[termination]]. Maybe it would've been a better [[thinking]] to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is [[slightly]] more [[stunned]].

In addition, I'd like to say that [[Guzman]] [[profited]] her respect by the [[manner]] she put away her [[characters]]. I can't [[truly]] explain why, but [[principally]] in the [[loves]] scenes she convinced me. It just looked [[authentic]] I [[ideas]].

I gave it a 7 out of 10, [[alone]] because of the [[tiresome]] [[final]] half hour. --------------------------------------------- Result 2992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] does not [[rock]], as others have said. I [[found]] it really boring and [[silly]]. The story is about this metal high [[school]] kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The [[first]] part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he [[fails]] to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. This [[filmmaking]] does not [[boulder]], as others have said. I [[find]] it really boring and [[stupid]]. The story is about this metal high [[tuition]] kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The [[frst]] part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he [[fail]] to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. --------------------------------------------- Result 2993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] this [[movie]] delivers. the [[best]] is when the [[awkward]] [[teenage]] neighbor [[tries]] to bike away from the [[babysitter]] and in the [[background]] [[looks]] like he's never been [[anywhere]] near a [[bike]] in his [[life]] as he [[attempts]] not to [[fall]] off.

but this [[movie]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 [[minutes]] [[later]] it [[delivers]] a scene of [[nothing]] but an arm [[reaching]] through a fence and into a [[cooler]] pulling out a beer.

stereotypical grilling dads, [[several]] plot lines that [[go]] [[nowhere]], and a [[former]] seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell [[phone]] all [[add]] up to making this the [[perfect]] Saturday [[night]] at [[home]]. this [[filmmaking]] delivers. the [[better]] is when the [[tricky]] [[teenager]] neighbor [[try]] to bike away from the [[nanny]] and in the [[backgrounds]] [[seems]] like he's never been [[wherever]] near a [[cyclists]] in his [[lives]] as he [[tried]] not to [[decrease]] off.

but this [[cinematography]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 [[mins]] [[then]] it [[gives]] a scene of [[nada]] but an arm [[achieve]] through a fence and into a [[refrigeration]] pulling out a beer.

stereotypical grilling dads, [[different]] plot lines that [[going]] [[everywhere]], and a [[past]] seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell [[telephone]] all [[summing]] up to making this the [[impeccable]] Saturday [[soir]] at [[house]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (53%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] This movie forever left an impression on me. I watched it as a Freshman in High School and was home alone that night. I think I lost all respect for Robert Reed as an actor having been a huge fan of the "Brady Bunch". I also thought the role of Chuck Connor was horrendous and evil. However, this movie made such an impact on me that I am now a volunteer in the women's state prison doing bible studies and church services and trying to change womens lives, one at a time. What fascinates me is that so few people actually watched this movie. None of my friends watched it and my family is clueless to this day when I discuss this movie because they didn't see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very interesting. The big twist wasn't as big a shock as maybe they had hoped for and it was very dated but it did get my mind working. It really got me thinking about a world without vegetation or livestock and made me appreciate the world I live in a lot more. Charlton Heston does a good job, as do all the supporting characters, and it was a very realistic film which was surprising. It lacked direction at times and a lot of the settings and background needed more explanation but it was still a surprisingly good and intelligent movie. The main fault that I could find was that I didn't want the film to end when it did, I would have liked to see what happened next.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2996 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Without effective indulgence of the supernatural or the poetic motivating nuances of humanity, all this creative team has to hope for is effective usage of its middling, unoriginal elements. 'Party of Five' gone maniacal then genetically unescapable there's little rooting interest because the singular non-homicidal element is a second-rate bland awful-acting 'Wes Bentley' mopester. In fact, all of the acting is skin deep. Even though the dark-haired women appeal, the salaciousness is kept to a minimum. No nudity here. Also lacking are sufficient buckets of blood. All sensations are kept at a teasing, safe distance...an unfortunate fact considering the given name of the directors is 'butcher.' Only the soundtrack, the droning angsty alt-country and the tense fluctuating score provide any palpable tension. Sometimes some static storyboarded compositions add appealing low-angles that adds to the malaise...but for a film that calls itself horror, I did not even get close to flinching once. Perhaps a greater emphasis on societal rejuvenation through blood intake, scenes directed with varying geometric shapes outside the square, and a sustained focus on playfulness through the family's maliciousness or traps sympathetic characters need to escape in order to escape their dilemma would have improved my opinion, but this was not a good start to my excursion through horrorfest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2997 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Nada" was the most [[inadequate]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[last]] [[good]] movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[attempt]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also [[political]] elements but it was more a [[psychological]] [[thriller]] with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes [[terrorists]],ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of [[blood]],not [[really]] Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the [[movie]] the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian [[actors]] (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are [[awful]].

With "[[Nada]]" this a second period of [[barren]] inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. "Nada" was the most [[deficient]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[final]] [[well]] movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[endeavor]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also [[polices]] elements but it was more a [[mental]] [[thrillers]] with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes [[terrorism]],ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of [[transfusion]],not [[truthfully]] Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the [[movies]] the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian [[protagonists]] (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are [[frightful]].

With "[[Anything]]" this a second period of [[infertile]] inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. --------------------------------------------- Result 2998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] ...but I've [[seen]] [[better]] too.

The story here is predictable--a [[film]] crew [[trying]] to [[film]] a [[horror]] movie in a [[place]] where [[murders]] [[occurred]]. [[Three]] [[guesses]] what happens. This isn't a [[total]] bomb--the cast is [[fairly]] good with pros [[John]] [[Ireland]], [[Faith]] Domergue and [[John]] Carradine [[giving]] the best performances. It's [[reasonably]] well-made--for a low [[budget]] [[film]]. [[Just]] don't expect any nudity, swearing, [[blood]] OR gore (the [[film]] has a very [[mild]] PG [[rating]]). I was never [[totally]] bored--it's [[OK]] [[viewing]] on a [[quiet]] night. I [[saw]] it on video--it was a [[HORRIBLE]] print--very [[dark]] and some scenes were [[impossible]] to [[see]]. Still I didn't [[hate]] it and it does have a cool [[ending]] which [[surprised]] me--basically [[nothing]] [[happens]] up till then so it [[catches]] you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a [[horror]] [[film]] completest. ...but I've [[noticed]] [[optimum]] too.

The story here is predictable--a [[movie]] crew [[tempting]] to [[movies]] a [[monstrosity]] movie in a [[placing]] where [[homicide]] [[occured]]. [[Tres]] [[guessing]] what happens. This isn't a [[whole]] bomb--the cast is [[rather]] good with pros [[Jon]] [[Irish]], [[Creed]] Domergue and [[Johannes]] Carradine [[confer]] the best performances. It's [[rationally]] well-made--for a low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Jen]] don't expect any nudity, swearing, [[transfusion]] OR gore (the [[filmmaking]] has a very [[soft]] PG [[appraisal]]). I was never [[altogether]] bored--it's [[ALRIGHT]] [[visualise]] on a [[tranquil]] night. I [[seen]] it on video--it was a [[FEARSOME]] print--very [[somber]] and some scenes were [[impractical]] to [[seeing]]. Still I didn't [[hating]] it and it does have a cool [[terminating]] which [[flabbergasted]] me--basically [[none]] [[comes]] up till then so it [[catch]] you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a [[abomination]] [[flick]] completest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I managed to tape this off my satellite, but I would love to get an original release in a format we can use here in the States. Eddie truly is Glorious in this performance from San Francisco. I don't remember laughing so hard at a stand up routine. My wife and I both enjoyed this tape and his work on Glorious I just wish I could buy a copy and help support Eddie financially through my purchase. We need more of his shows available. --------------------------------------------- Result 3000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] SAPS AT SEA

Aspect [[ratio]]: 1.37:1

Sound [[format]]: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This feature length comedy - an OK entry which [[nonetheless]] unspools like a [[mere]] imitation of [[Laurel]] and Hardy's [[best]] [[work]] - marked the [[final]] [[collaboration]] between L&H and [[producer]] Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean [[voyage]] after The [[Boys]] are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a [[seagull]] to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is [[lacking]], [[perhaps]] due to the [[recruitment]] of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, [[previously]] responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose [[work]] here [[lacks]] a [[measure]] of pzazz. Fair, but [[nothing]] [[special]]. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and [[James]] Finlayson make guest [[appearances]]. SAPS AT SEA

Aspect [[percentages]]: 1.37:1

Sound [[formats]]: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This feature length comedy - an OK entry which [[yet]] unspools like a [[purely]] imitation of [[Laurier]] and Hardy's [[optimum]] [[cooperating]] - marked the [[definitive]] [[works]] between L&H and [[producers]] Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean [[itinerary]] after The [[Grooms]] are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a [[gull]] to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is [[missing]], [[maybe]] due to the [[recruiting]] of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, [[formerly]] responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose [[works]] here [[lacked]] a [[measures]] of pzazz. Fair, but [[none]] [[peculiar]]. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and [[Jacobo]] Finlayson make guest [[phenomena]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3001 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked it, i really did. Please don't think that i'm an idiot but i have to admit that i enjoyed this film. I expected it to be crap, it was crap, but sometimes its OK to relax and watch a crappy film that you don't have to concentrate too much on isn't it? I didn't expect any hidden meanings or morales, and there wasn't any, but that doesn't matter because i only watched it for entertainment, and it did entertain me throughout. Films like this are why the Ben Stillers (excusing 'there's something about Mary') and the Vince Vaughns (however you spell his last name, i couldn't be bothered checking)have jobs. It's OK to watch a crap film as long as you don't expect too much from it, and i for one shall take a stand, jog, perhaps run, but not drive because i don't have a car, to Blockbuster Video, or even Choices, and rent a bunch of these toilet humoured films and stay in one night watching them. Good day to you reader. P.s if you do not say that this comment helped you then i don't like you, if you do say it helped then god bless you, you will go to heaven. --------------------------------------------- Result 3002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It's a [[tale]] that [[could]] have [[taken]] place [[anywhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catching]] the attention of famous [[opera]] [[star]] and [[friendship]] [[ensuing]]. The aging entertainer finds/buys a male [[child]] to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their [[challenging]], but [[free]] [[life]] along the river. [[Traveling]] town to town, he performs and has some [[degree]] of [[notoriety]]. [[Despite]] the times and the [[influences]], the man is [[kind]] and good.

[[Overall]], the performances are first [[rate]], especially Xu Zhu, who portrays the street [[performer]]. The child (Renying Zhou) is [[beautiful]], and [[downright]] strong, and withstands the [[overt]] prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with [[supporting]] [[help]] from the [[kind]] opera [[singer]], Master Liang (an [[interestingly]] androgynous Zhao Zhigang), [[paint]] a very interesting [[tale]] of [[forgiveness]], [[sadness]] and love. Some have [[mentioned]] this film's remote [[similarities]] to [[BA]] WANG BIE JI ([[FAREWELL]] MY CONCUBINE); [[yet]] this film can't stand [[easily]] on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the [[KING]] [[OF]] [[MASKS]], is the [[ending]]. It was [[weak]], cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the [[story]], what was the [[needless]] manipulation for? What a shame. To [[bring]] a [[fine]] [[motion]] picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and [[corny]]) [[pathos]] like that. It [[frankly]] [[made]] this [[film]] good, [[instead]] of the [[classic]], it should've been. That aside, the KING [[OF]] [[MASKS]] is [[still]] very well worth your [[time]]. I was happy to see the Shaw [[Brothers]] are [[still]] producing good films. Highly [[recommended]]. It's a [[history]] that [[wo]] have [[picked]] place [[somewhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catch]] the attention of famous [[drama]] [[superstar]] and [[goodwill]] [[subsequent]]. The aging entertainer finds/buys a male [[children]] to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their [[challenge]], but [[libre]] [[lives]] along the river. [[Travelling]] town to town, he performs and has some [[degrees]] of [[reputation]]. [[Though]] the times and the [[implications]], the man is [[types]] and good.

[[Whole]], the performances are first [[rates]], especially Xu Zhu, who portrays the street [[entertainer]]. The child (Renying Zhou) is [[handsome]], and [[utterly]] strong, and withstands the [[seeming]] prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with [[helping]] [[aid]] from the [[kinds]] opera [[diva]], Master Liang (an [[bizarrely]] androgynous Zhao Zhigang), [[painting]] a very interesting [[story]] of [[amnesty]], [[spite]] and love. Some have [[referenced]] this film's remote [[parallels]] to [[BACCALAUREATE]] WANG BIE JI ([[BYE]] MY CONCUBINE); [[still]] this film can't stand [[readily]] on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the [[EMPEROR]] [[DU]] [[MASK]], is the [[terminated]]. It was [[flimsy]], cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the [[narratives]], what was the [[useless]] manipulation for? What a shame. To [[bringing]] a [[fined]] [[motions]] picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and [[banal]]) [[ducks]] like that. It [[plainly]] [[introduced]] this [[movie]] good, [[however]] of the [[classical]], it should've been. That aside, the KING [[DU]] [[MASK]] is [[however]] very well worth your [[period]]. I was happy to see the Shaw [[Siblings]] are [[however]] producing good films. Highly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3003 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] Pretty [[awful]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! Pretty [[abysmal]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3004 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost [[indescribable]] [[mess]] that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[bad]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often [[incoherent]], with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly [[incomprehensible]]. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost [[untold]] [[disarray]] that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[rotten]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often [[inconsistent]], with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly [[inscrutable]]. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 3005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] About twenty minutes into this movie, I was already [[bored]]. Quite [[simply]], these characters were fairly dull. [[Occasionally]], [[something]] enjoyable would [[happen]], but then things [[would]] [[slow]] down again. Fortunately, my [[patience]] was [[eventually]] rewarded, and the [[ending]] to this movie wasn't bad at all. However, it was by no [[means]] good [[enough]] to [[justify]] sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I [[would]] say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd [[call]] this a [[disappointment]]. About twenty minutes into this movie, I was already [[drilled]]. Quite [[purely]], these characters were fairly dull. [[Sometime]], [[algo]] enjoyable would [[occur]], but then things [[could]] [[slower]] down again. Fortunately, my [[indulgence]] was [[ultimately]] rewarded, and the [[ended]] to this movie wasn't bad at all. However, it was by no [[signifies]] good [[satisfactorily]] to [[justified]] sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I [[should]] say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd [[invitation]] this a [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[For]] all the [[Homicide]] [[junkies]] out there, this [[movie]] was great! [[Every]] single character that ever was on the [[show]] made an [[appearance]] in the movie. It helped to [[resolve]] some (but not all) [[issues]] from the series. Unfortunately, unless you [[actually]] did watch the series, most of the enjoyment [[would]] be lost, as the movie [[made]] heavy references to [[every]] season of the show's existence. This [[probably]] would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a [[separate]] movie, but we [[gotta]] take what we can get. I [[hope]] they [[make]] more movies, and [[continue]] to [[feature]] [[Homicide]] characters on Law and Order. [[During]] all the [[Slaying]] [[stoners]] out there, this [[cinema]] was great! [[Entire]] single character that ever was on the [[displays]] made an [[semblance]] in the movie. It helped to [[solved]] some (but not all) [[matters]] from the series. Unfortunately, unless you [[indeed]] did watch the series, most of the enjoyment [[should]] be lost, as the movie [[introduced]] heavy references to [[any]] season of the show's existence. This [[undeniably]] would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a [[seperate]] movie, but we [[owe]] take what we can get. I [[expectancy]] they [[deliver]] more movies, and [[sustained]] to [[attribute]] [[Murders]] characters on Law and Order. --------------------------------------------- Result 3007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I haven't [[laughed]] this [[hard]] at a movie in a [[long]] time. I [[got]] to [[go]] to an [[advance]] screening, and was [[thrilled]] because I had been dying to [[see]] it. I had [[tears]] in my eyes from [[laughter]] throughout a lot of the [[movie]]. The [[audience]] all [[shared]] my [[laughter]], and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the [[movie]].

Kudos to [[Steve]] Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He [[proves]] in this [[movie]] his [[tremendous]] [[talent]] for [[comedy]]. He has a [[style]] that I haven't [[seen]] before. And [[Catherine]] Keener is [[excellent]] as [[always]]. [[Thank]] [[God]] there wasn't a cameo from [[Will]] Ferrell([[love]] him, but [[saw]] him too much this [[summer]]).

There were parts of comedic [[genius]] in this [[movie]]. Partly [[thanks]] to Carrell, and partly thanks to the [[writing]]([[also]] Carrell). The waxing scene and the [[speed]] dater with the "[[obvious]] [[problem]]" were [[absolutely]] [[hysterical]].

I will [[definitely]] go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's [[released]]. My advice: go to [[see]] it for [[huge]] [[laughs]] and an [[incredibly]] [[enjoyable]] [[movie]] on top of it. I haven't [[giggled]] this [[strenuous]] at a movie in a [[protracted]] time. I [[ai]] to [[going]] to an [[advancement]] screening, and was [[excited]] because I had been dying to [[consults]] it. I had [[rip]] in my eyes from [[risa]] throughout a lot of the [[film]]. The [[viewers]] all [[interchange]] my [[laughs]], and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the [[film]].

Kudos to [[Steven]] Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He [[demonstrating]] in this [[film]] his [[sizable]] [[talents]] for [[comedian]]. He has a [[styling]] that I haven't [[watched]] before. And [[Baroness]] Keener is [[beautiful]] as [[unceasingly]]. [[Thanks]] [[Goodness]] there wasn't a cameo from [[Willingness]] Ferrell([[amour]] him, but [[watched]] him too much this [[hsia]]).

There were parts of comedic [[engineers]] in this [[films]]. Partly [[appreciation]] to Carrell, and partly thanks to the [[literary]]([[similarly]] Carrell). The waxing scene and the [[accelerate]] dater with the "[[unmistakable]] [[troubles]]" were [[utterly]] [[hysteria]].

I will [[certainly]] go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's [[liberated]]. My advice: go to [[seeing]] it for [[big]] [[smile]] and an [[impossibly]] [[nice]] [[flick]] on top of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3008 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to believe that anachronism and other goofs are more [[acceptable]], even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[rotten]] films. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when [[watching]] it closely, I found almost nothing [[specifically]] anachronistic.

The [[shots]] of [[aircraft]] which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The [[big]] 4 engine [[transport]] [[seen]] after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS [[colors]]). The combat [[planes]] [[seen]] [[taking]] off from the carrier at the [[end]] are Douglas Skyraiders which entered [[service]] after WW2 and were made [[famous]] by their [[service]] in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of [[film]] and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very [[possibly]] period authentic. It just 'feels' so [[wrong]]. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we [[share]] the same [[birthday]]. In his co directed ON THE [[TOWN]] (1949) there is a [[car]] chase at the [[end]] with the [[police]] driving 1949/50 Ford's [[yet]] there isn't the [[slightest]] [[feeling]] that this is out of place in a WW2 [[period]] [[film]]. [[In]] fact, as I [[reflected]] [[later]], there isn't [[anything]] which [[says]] that this is supposed to be a WW2 [[period]] [[film]]. It just feels that [[way]]. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a [[ballet]] (Fancy [[Free]]) which may have been [[based]] on the [[work]] of [[artist]] [[Paul]] Cadmus (The Fleet's [[In]]! 1934) its a [[great]] [[film]] about [[sailors]] on a 24 hour pass in [[New]] York and, so [[heavy]] with wartime [[associations]], its [[merely]] assumed it takes place during the [[war]] and [[yet]] these contemporary [[cars]] do [[nothing]] to [[break]] the spell.

The first [[problem]] is [[old]] [[Cary]] [[Grant]]. Though far too [[old]] to [[represent]] a [[Navy]] SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like [[Grant]], Gary Cooper ([[Lou]] Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to [[play]] [[younger]]. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A [[guy]] who gets things done and breaks all the [[rules]] while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to believe that anachronism and other goofs are more [[permissible]], even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[naughty]] films. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when [[staring]] it closely, I found almost nothing [[expressly]] anachronistic.

The [[beatings]] of [[aviation]] which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The [[prodigious]] 4 engine [[conveyance]] [[saw]] after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS [[coloring]]). The combat [[airliner]] [[noticed]] [[pick]] off from the carrier at the [[ceases]] are Douglas Skyraiders which entered [[servicing]] after WW2 and were made [[notorious]] by their [[servicing]] in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of [[movies]] and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very [[conceivably]] period authentic. It just 'feels' so [[mistaken]]. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we [[shares]] the same [[anniversary]]. In his co directed ON THE [[URBAN]] (1949) there is a [[auto]] chase at the [[terminate]] with the [[cop]] driving 1949/50 Ford's [[nonetheless]] there isn't the [[least]] [[sensation]] that this is out of place in a WW2 [[periods]] [[cinematographic]]. [[During]] fact, as I [[mirrored]] [[afterward]], there isn't [[something]] which [[tells]] that this is supposed to be a WW2 [[timeline]] [[movie]]. It just feels that [[pathway]]. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a [[dances]] (Fancy [[Libre]]) which may have been [[predicated]] on the [[cooperates]] of [[artiste]] [[Paolo]] Cadmus (The Fleet's [[Among]]! 1934) its a [[formidable]] [[filmmaking]] about [[marine]] on a 24 hour pass in [[Novo]] York and, so [[ponderous]] with wartime [[association]], its [[only]] assumed it takes place during the [[wars]] and [[however]] these contemporary [[automobile]] do [[anything]] to [[blackout]] the spell.

The first [[issues]] is [[antique]] [[Carrey]] [[Granting]]. Though far too [[longtime]] to [[represented]] a [[Marines]] SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like [[Awarding]], Gary Cooper ([[Lulu]] Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to [[playing]] [[youngest]]. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A [[bloke]] who gets things done and breaks all the [[bylaws]] while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A really bad sequel. Part 1 had a lot of funny moments - part 2 is just bad (in a boring way) and obviously made to squeeze money out of the fans.

Shame on you, Otto Waalkes!

The only slightly amusing moment in the film is Helge Schneider who apparently seems to be pis*ed about the other characters. It's quite easy to identify with him...

The screenplay is sloppy/non-existent. The director should do everyone a favor and quit his job immediately. The acting is worse than a 2nd grade school play.

Technically the movie is awful as well, but who can blame the cinematographer/sound guys who had to work with such an untalented director? --------------------------------------------- Result 3010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I [[suppose]] if you like [[endless]] [[dialogue]] that doesn't forward the [[story]] and flashy [[camera]] [[effects]] like the scene transitions in the [[television]] show _Angel_, you'll enjoy the [[film]]. Me? [[All]] I [[wanted]] was a [[nice]], tight [[little]] [[story]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was [[practically]] [[backward]], plot [[points]] were [[buried]] under a [[sea]] of unneeded [[dialogue]], and there was [[absolutely]] no [[sense]] of dread, or [[tension]], or ANYTHING.

Is it the [[redneck]]? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[cameraman]] on [[speed]]. That's not [[scary]]. It doesn't [[generate]] a [[single]] [[note]] of tension or atmosphere [[unless]] you're [[scared]] by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the [[movie]] invokes derisive [[laughter]] from the [[audience]].

[[Terrible]] [[film]]. I [[guess]] if you like [[infinite]] [[discussions]] that doesn't forward the [[narratives]] and flashy [[cameras]] [[effect]] like the scene transitions in the [[tvs]] show _Angel_, you'll enjoy the [[filmmaking]]. Me? [[Every]] I [[wanting]] was a [[delightful]], tight [[tiny]] [[saga]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was [[hardly]] [[lagging]], plot [[dot]] were [[burried]] under a [[hai]] of unneeded [[discussions]], and there was [[totally]] no [[feeling]] of dread, or [[tensions]], or ANYTHING.

Is it the [[hick]]? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[videotaped]] on [[acceleration]]. That's not [[fearful]]. It doesn't [[generating]] a [[lonely]] [[notes]] of tension or atmosphere [[if]] you're [[frighten]] by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the [[filmmaking]] invokes derisive [[smiles]] from the [[viewers]].

[[Shocking]] [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Siskel & Ebert were [[terrific]] on this [[show]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine conflict their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. [[Now]], when [[Ben]] [[Lyons]] comes on I feel like I'm [[watching]] "[[Teen]] News" -- you know, that kids' news [[show]], hosted by kids for [[kids]]? Manckiewitz is not much better. It's [[obvious]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two [[rank]] [[amateurs]] have [[anything]] of interest or [[consequence]] to [[say]] about motion pictures is ludicrous. If they are [[reviewing]] a non-formula [[film]], they are completely lost. Show them something [[original]] and intelligent -- they just find it "[[confusing]]". [[Wait]] -- I think I [[get]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes [[movies]] for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper [[promoted]] [[independent]] films and were only hit-or-miss with the [[big]] budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two guys LOVE the big studio schlock and only manage to tolerate a few indies. Plus everyone knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The blatant [[nepotism]] is the [[icing]] on the cake. In what alternate universe do these guys qualify as film critics? Siskel & Ebert were [[resplendent]] on this [[spectacle]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine conflict their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. [[Presently]], when [[Benn]] [[Lyon]] comes on I feel like I'm [[staring]] "[[Teenage]] News" -- you know, that kids' news [[shows]], hosted by kids for [[kid]]? Manckiewitz is not much better. It's [[perceptible]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two [[classifications]] [[buffs]] have [[somethings]] of interest or [[aftermath]] to [[told]] about motion pictures is ludicrous. If they are [[revisited]] a non-formula [[filmmaking]], they are completely lost. Show them something [[initial]] and intelligent -- they just find it "[[disorienting]]". [[Expectation]] -- I think I [[obtain]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes [[cinema]] for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper [[encourages]] [[autonomous]] films and were only hit-or-miss with the [[hefty]] budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two guys LOVE the big studio schlock and only manage to tolerate a few indies. Plus everyone knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The blatant [[aegis]] is the [[frosting]] on the cake. In what alternate universe do these guys qualify as film critics? --------------------------------------------- Result 3012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[unremarkable]] [[film]] [[throughout]]. The [[film]] has [[gained]] some [[fans]] by [[way]] of the fact that Quentin Tarantino's [[name]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place nod to the [[Rodriguez]]/Tarantino [[flick]] 'From [[Dusk]] till Dawn'. These [[things]] do not make a [[great]] [[movie]], however, and this is more than evident all the [[way]] through 'Curdled'. The [[film]] suffers from an all too [[obvious]] [[lack]] of [[ideas]], and it [[tries]] to [[mask]] this with [[murders]] that are meant to be [[stylish]] and [[events]] that are [[supposed]] to be disturbing. The Mexican [[music]] score that accompanies [[many]] of the sequences in the [[film]] is [[obviously]] meant to be cool, but it's becomes [[annoying]] very [[quickly]]; [[especially]] as aside from the fact that the lead [[character]] is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the [[movie]]. The film's plot is [[typically]] offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with [[grisly]] murders, takes a [[job]] with a firm that cleans up [[murder]] scenes. It sounds [[boring]] and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the [[cast]] [[list]], and [[even]] he doesn't make an [[impression]]. He hasn't been [[given]] anything to do in the [[movie]] and aside from talking to his victims and [[standing]] around [[trying]] to look menacing, he's [[pretty]] much wasted. Angela Jones, or [[rather]]; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, [[takes]] the lead role as the [[murder]] obsessed [[young]] [[woman]], and it is [[always]] [[clear]] that it's her [[involvement]] with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting [[ability]]. She may have been [[good]] enough in her [[small]] role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a [[film]] by herself. She [[looks]] lost and out of place for the majority of the [[film]], and if it weren't for her Latino [[accent]]; she wouldn't [[convince]] the [[audience]] that she's a weirdo on any [[level]]. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof [[piece]] of forgettable trash. [[Films]] like this [[often]] [[win]] themselves [[praise]] for [[invention]] or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all [[levels]]. [[Whether]] you're a Tarantino [[fan]], William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie [[buff]]; this is one to [[miss]]. From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[ordinary]] [[filmmaking]] [[around]]. The [[filmmaking]] has [[gain]] some [[followers]] by [[ways]] of the fact that Quentin Tarantino's [[denomination]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place nod to the [[Mendez]]/Tarantino [[gesture]] 'From [[Twilight]] till Dawn'. These [[aspects]] do not make a [[super]] [[film]], however, and this is more than evident all the [[manner]] through 'Curdled'. The [[films]] suffers from an all too [[noticeable]] [[lacked]] of [[reflections]], and it [[try]] to [[masks]] this with [[homicide]] that are meant to be [[sleek]] and [[event]] that are [[alleged]] to be disturbing. The Mexican [[musician]] score that accompanies [[various]] of the sequences in the [[filmmaking]] is [[apparently]] meant to be cool, but it's becomes [[galling]] very [[speedy]]; [[principally]] as aside from the fact that the lead [[trait]] is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the [[cinema]]. The film's plot is [[generally]] offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with [[horrendous]] murders, takes a [[workplace]] with a firm that cleans up [[kills]] scenes. It sounds [[monotonous]] and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the [[casting]] [[listings]], and [[yet]] he doesn't make an [[printout]]. He hasn't been [[awarded]] anything to do in the [[filmmaking]] and aside from talking to his victims and [[stands]] around [[tempting]] to look menacing, he's [[quite]] much wasted. Angela Jones, or [[somewhat]]; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, [[pick]] the lead role as the [[homicide]] obsessed [[youth]] [[girl]], and it is [[consistently]] [[unmistakable]] that it's her [[turnout]] with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting [[dexterity]]. She may have been [[alright]] enough in her [[petite]] role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a [[filmmaking]] by herself. She [[seem]] lost and out of place for the majority of the [[filmmaking]], and if it weren't for her Latino [[emphasis]]; she wouldn't [[convincing]] the [[viewers]] that she's a weirdo on any [[levels]]. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof [[slice]] of forgettable trash. [[Movies]] like this [[traditionally]] [[wins]] themselves [[compliment]] for [[inventor]] or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all [[grades]]. [[Both]] you're a Tarantino [[ventilator]], William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie [[buffy]]; this is one to [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3013 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I just finished [[watching]] this [[movie]] and I [[must]] say that I was so [[impressed]].Everything about it was [[superb]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[believable]] [[child]] who [[grew]] into [[brave]], [[always]] willing to help others. His mum must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this film for [[fear]] of [[missing]] something. It is the [[prefect]] [[fable]]/tale with [[morals]], [[cute]] and scary sprites and 'monsters' but [[nevertheless]] heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a [[hero]]. Picked to be a [[rider]] at the local village [[festival]] and a [[journey]] to the [[Goblin]] Mountain where he [[discovers]] the Yokai, who are amazing [[creations]] that Brian Froud [[would]] be proud of. And the [[evil]] Kato and his off sider who [[definitely]] needed a hug. These [[evil]] people [[capture]] the Yokai and [[throw]] them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical [[things]] and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to [[kill]]. Takashi a young [[boy]] is the one to become their [[saviour]], alongside a red [[man]]/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a [[cute]] [[little]] creature that, if it had been [[America]] they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all [[good]] toy [[stores]]. The lines are good [[especially]] the Don't [[try]] this at [[home]] [[kids]] and other [[gems]] that bring a [[smile]] to your [[lips]]. [[Suspend]] belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! [[Though]] I [[must]] admit that the [[end]] was a wee [[bit]] [[sad]]. And not necessarily so. [[Cheers]] Furdion I just finished [[staring]] this [[kino]] and I [[should]] say that I was so [[surprising]].Everything about it was [[awesome]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[reliable]] [[kid]] who [[hiked]] into [[adventurous]], [[incessantly]] willing to help others. His mum must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this film for [[scare]] of [[gone]] something. It is the [[reeve]] [[tale]]/tale with [[morality]], [[loveable]] and scary sprites and 'monsters' but [[however]] heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a [[heroin]]. Picked to be a [[mustang]] at the local village [[fest]] and a [[trip]] to the [[Leprechaun]] Mountain where he [[discovered]] the Yokai, who are amazing [[establishment]] that Brian Froud [[could]] be proud of. And the [[wicked]] Kato and his off sider who [[obviously]] needed a hug. These [[baleful]] people [[capturing]] the Yokai and [[toss]] them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical [[aspects]] and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to [[murdering]]. Takashi a young [[guy]] is the one to become their [[savior]], alongside a red [[men]]/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a [[loveable]] [[tiny]] creature that, if it had been [[Americans]] they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all [[alright]] toy [[storage]]. The lines are good [[concretely]] the Don't [[endeavour]] this at [[housing]] [[children]] and other [[jewelry]] that bring a [[mouse]] to your [[mouths]]. [[Suspended]] belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! [[Nonetheless]] I [[gotta]] admit that the [[terminates]] was a wee [[bite]] [[unlucky]]. And not necessarily so. [[Clink]] Furdion --------------------------------------------- Result 3014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This is a [[review]] of The Wizard, not to be [[confused]] with The Wiz, or [[Mr]]. Wizard. The [[Wizard]] is a late-eighties [[film]] about a seriously silent boy's ability to play video games and walk during the entire opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[update]] of The Wizard of Oz, and Mr. Wizard is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink [[tang]] out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[reason]] to see this movie. It's [[simply]] a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "[[designed]]" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. This is a [[examine]] of The Wizard, not to be [[muddled]] with The Wiz, or [[Bernd]]. Wizard. The [[Conjurer]] is a late-eighties [[filmmaking]] about a seriously silent boy's ability to play video games and walk during the entire opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[modernize]] of The Wizard of Oz, and Mr. Wizard is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink [[tong]] out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[cause]] to see this movie. It's [[merely]] a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "[[intentioned]]" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Invisible man is a show everybody s gotta love! It reminds me of the old school 80's series(a-team,airwolf,knightrider) The special effects are small but very effective!! but what is most important is the fun they had shooting this series. It really shows! the entire cast fit perfect in there roles and it looks like they can do whatever they want!! especially Paul Ben Victor and Vincent Ventresca. Ventresca really shines in this one! for me its unbelievable that an actor with so much sarcasm is his acting style Doesn't get a shot in a big movie (mr Tarantino this was the show you should have directed! instead of that major boring grave danger(c.s.i)) Get this show if you can. well worth it!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3016 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the fact that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to carry the films pretty weak attempt at horror. The basic idea for the film was interesting but unfortunately it wasn't able to excite, really scare or shock me - there was one part in the entire film that I thought was gruesome but even that didn't redeem it. I did get to like the character of Kate by the end of the film as she seemed to soften and become a little more realistic by the end, the character played by Jeremy Sheffield was not actually needed for this film and I think the director/writer got carried away with the myriad of characters used for no purpose, if he had left it at the basic characters making it more of a solo effort on Kate's part, it may have worked - Jeremy's acting was wooden to say the least and I felt uncomfortable watching the bad on screen chemistry - or lack of it. Such a shame. Disappointing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Robert Wuhl is teaching a class of film students at New York University in Manhattan, New York.

He covers fallacies of history and truths that are no longer generally known. I would like to see much more of this show. It is very entertaining. Mr. Wuhl uses examples and "show and tell" to get his points across. He explained that the person who actually rode the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere was not Paul Revere! Henry Wadsworth Longfellow used Revere's name because it sounded better.

I've watched Robert Wuhl for many years, from the time he was doing stand-up comedy and all the way through "Arli$$" on HBO. He's a good actor and a good stand-up comedian, but he's an excellent teacher! I highly recommend that you watch an episode of this show. It is well worth your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] The arrival of White [[Men]] in Arctic Canada [[challenges]] the [[freedom]] of a [[fearless]] [[ESKIMO]] hunter.

W. S. Van Dyke, MGM's peripatetic [[director]], was [[responsible]] for this [[fascinating]] [[look]] at [[life]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on [[location]] filming from April 1932 until November 1933 ([[although]] some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[While]] considered a documentary at the time, we would likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an intriguing plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Eskimo]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant [[striving]] for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for [[walrus]], polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & [[Mounties]] encountered by the [[Eskimo]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Eskimo]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film [[deals]] in a [[refreshingly]] [[frank]] manner with the [[Eskimo]] moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent [[part]] of their [[culture]]. [[In]] fact, the entire film can be [[appreciated]] as a valuable look at a way of [[life]] which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely splendid and [[perfectly]] believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. The arrival of White [[Male]] in Arctic Canada [[defies]] the [[liberty]] of a [[bold]] [[HUSKY]] hunter.

W. S. Van Dyke, MGM's peripatetic [[superintendent]], was [[liable]] for this [[exciting]] [[gaze]] at [[iife]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on [[locations]] filming from April 1932 until November 1933 ([[while]] some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[Despite]] considered a documentary at the time, we would likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an intriguing plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Eskimos]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant [[seeks]] for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for [[morse]], polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & [[Constable]] encountered by the [[Spumoni]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Husky]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film [[addresses]] in a [[cheerfully]] [[franck]] manner with the [[Husky]] moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent [[parties]] of their [[civilisations]]. [[During]] fact, the entire film can be [[complimented]] as a valuable look at a way of [[living]] which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely splendid and [[fully]] believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. --------------------------------------------- Result 3019 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] When I saw that this [[film]] was only 80 minutes long, I thought we were in trouble. Condensing the [[gigantic]] W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[seemed]] like a disaster [[waiting]] to happen. But you know, the movie's not half [[bad]], and it even [[manages]] to [[retain]] much of what makes the book [[resonate]] so much with its readers.

I've [[heard]] [[many]] film buffs complain that [[Leslie]] Howard was a wet noodle of an [[actor]], and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to [[play]] the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of [[Mildred]] was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most [[fascinating]] character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is [[intense]] to the point of scary. She makes no [[effort]] to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ When I saw that this [[kino]] was only 80 minutes long, I thought we were in trouble. Condensing the [[gargantuan]] W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[sounded]] like a disaster [[hoping]] to happen. But you know, the movie's not half [[horrid]], and it even [[administers]] to [[preserve]] much of what makes the book [[resound]] so much with its readers.

I've [[hear]] [[myriad]] film buffs complain that [[Lesley]] Howard was a wet noodle of an [[actress]], and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to [[gaming]] the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of [[Gladys]] was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most [[riveting]] character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is [[vehement]] to the point of scary. She makes no [[endeavor]] to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ --------------------------------------------- Result 3020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Is this film a joke? Is it a [[comedy]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the [[poor]] acting, poor directing, and [[appalling]] script had the audience laughing out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[reaching]] his peak shot dead by an assassin he walks in on by mistake. The killer sees the [[young]] [[artists]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to [[attend]] an [[exhibition]] of his work. [[At]] the [[exhibition]] the assassin meets the dead [[artists]] [[sister]] and they [[end]] up [[falling]] in [[love]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have anyone [[guessing]] as it is so poorly scripted. The film takes place mainly in and [[around]] [[Vienna]], [[Austria]], and shows what a [[beautiful]] [[city]] it is. Do not waste your [[time]] on this [[film]] though, [[unless]] you are [[studying]] how [[NOT]] to act, direct or [[script]] a [[film]]! Is this film a joke? Is it a [[farce]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the [[poorest]] acting, poor directing, and [[outrageous]] script had the audience laughing out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[realizing]] his peak shot dead by an assassin he walks in on by mistake. The killer sees the [[youthful]] [[painters]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to [[attending]] an [[shows]] of his work. [[During]] the [[exhibit]] the assassin meets the dead [[artistes]] [[sisters]] and they [[terminate]] up [[dropping]] in [[amore]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have anyone [[charades]] as it is so poorly scripted. The film takes place mainly in and [[throughout]] [[Viennese]], [[Austrian]], and shows what a [[sumptuous]] [[ville]] it is. Do not waste your [[period]] on this [[filmmaking]] though, [[if]] you are [[exploring]] how [[NOPE]] to act, direct or [[hyphen]] a [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Based]] on Ray Russell's [[dark]] bestseller, this John (WATCHER [[IN]] THE WOODS) Hough-directed bust has [[little]] going for it.

[[Though]] it does not [[lack]] gory violence, it [[lack]] [[narrative]] sensibility and "[[characters]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon endowed with a [[mammoth]] penis that shoots [[red]] [[sperm]] into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more precise, rape.

John Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing career, is [[convincing]] as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre attacks on young women.

Horrific [[possibilities]] of the [[victims]] spawning demonic offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[garbage]].

The script's [[reluctance]] to [[explore]] the [[dramatic]] repercussions of a fertile [[premise]] [[exemplifies]] the [[major]] [[problems]] with this [[vapid]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[exercise]]. [[Predicated]] on Ray Russell's [[somber]] bestseller, this John (WATCHER [[AT]] THE WOODS) Hough-directed bust has [[petite]] going for it.

[[While]] it does not [[deficits]] gory violence, it [[imperfection]] [[descriptive]] sensibility and "[[personage]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon endowed with a [[colossal]] penis that shoots [[rouge]] [[semen]] into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more precise, rape.

John Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing career, is [[compelling]] as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre attacks on young women.

Horrific [[possibility]] of the [[fatalities]] spawning demonic offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[litter]].

The script's [[hesitation]] to [[explores]] the [[tremendous]] repercussions of a fertile [[supposition]] [[depicts]] the [[sizable]] [[difficulty]] with this [[tasteless]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[practise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3022 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I first saw this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I could not watch it to the end because it was [[aired]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can [[remember]] that I [[liked]] it.

This is really not an [[ordinary]] [[horror]] [[movie]]. It has some [[horror]] [[elements]] but I rather [[categorize]] it as [[fantasy]]. I [[liked]] it but I hoped for a bit more [[horror]] and scary scenes. [[Especially]] the scene when Anna's [[dad]] [[comes]] into the paperhouse trying to [[kill]] her is a bit short.

[[Now]] to the plot. This [[movie]] is about a [[young]] [[girl]] named Anna who [[gets]] [[ill]]. [[While]] she is ill and has to lie in her [[bed]] because of her high [[fewer]] she turns on to [[finishing]] her drawing about a [[house]] - the paperhouse. When she fells a [[sleep]], which [[often]] [[strangely]] [[happens]] just [[immediately]], she [[finds]] herself [[near]] the [[house]] on a [[big]] green [[field]]. She [[realizes]] that the [[house]] is [[exactly]] like the one she has [[drawn]] and that [[every]] new [[detail]] [[also]] [[appears]] in her dreams. One day she [[draws]] a [[boy]] into the [[house]] to have somebody to [[talk]] to. As she [[forgets]] to [[draw]] his legs (because he is [[sitting]] behind a [[window]]) the [[boy]] cannot [[walk]]. [[Later]] she is being [[told]] by the [[doctor]], that a [[boy]] [[also]] has this [[strange]] [[disease]] and she [[realizes]] that with the [[boy]] she has [[drawn]], she [[also]] [[got]] that [[boy]] into her disturbing [[dreams]]. She [[also]] [[notices]] that it [[gets]] harder and harder for her to wake up from her [[dreams]]. As she [[misses]] her [[father]] who is ofter abroad she [[draws]] her [[father]] into the [[house]]. She makes a [[mistake]] and her [[father]] is looking very angry on the painting. She [[tries]] to rubber him out but [[realizes]] that she cannot [[change]] anything already [[drawn]]. And next [[time]] she [[falls]] asleep the horror [[begins]]. Her [[father]] is [[mad]] and blind (because she [[draw]] s*** on his head to [[mark]] him as 'invalid') and [[tries]] to get into the paperhouse and [[kill]] Anna and his [[friend]]. Her [[dreams]] became a horrendous nightmare. They [[manage]] to [[escape]] and to [[kill]] her [[father]] and Anna can finally wake up. Than Anna [[finds]] her self in the hospital where her [[parents]] are sitting beside her [[bed]]. The [[doctors]] [[thought]] that she [[fell]] into a coma or so. They [[tell]] Anna that the other boy died and that they [[want]] to travel to the [[ocean]] to [[get]] over those tragical happenings. Anna [[draws]] a watchtower and [[notices]] that the same watchtower can be found near the hotel they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his [[name]] because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and [[forget]] those terrible dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. I first saw this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I could not watch it to the end because it was [[distributed]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can [[recalling]] that I [[enjoyed]] it.

This is really not an [[unremarkable]] [[terror]] [[flick]]. It has some [[monstrosity]] [[ingredients]] but I rather [[ranked]] it as [[chimera]]. I [[enjoyed]] it but I hoped for a bit more [[abomination]] and scary scenes. [[Principally]] the scene when Anna's [[pope]] [[arises]] into the paperhouse trying to [[slain]] her is a bit short.

[[Currently]] to the plot. This [[cinematography]] is about a [[youths]] [[woman]] named Anna who [[got]] [[sick]]. [[Though]] she is ill and has to lie in her [[bedside]] because of her high [[smaller]] she turns on to [[finish]] her drawing about a [[home]] - the paperhouse. When she fells a [[slept]], which [[normally]] [[suspiciously]] [[occurs]] just [[directly]], she [[found]] herself [[nearer]] the [[home]] on a [[considerable]] green [[campo]]. She [[realises]] that the [[dwelling]] is [[precisely]] like the one she has [[lured]] and that [[any]] new [[details]] [[similarly]] [[appearing]] in her dreams. One day she [[drawn]] a [[guy]] into the [[household]] to have somebody to [[speaking]] to. As she [[neglects]] to [[attracts]] his legs (because he is [[seated]] behind a [[wicket]]) the [[guy]] cannot [[stroll]]. [[Subsequently]] she is being [[said]] by the [[physician]], that a [[boys]] [[similarly]] has this [[bizarre]] [[sickness]] and she [[understands]] that with the [[guy]] she has [[lured]], she [[moreover]] [[get]] that [[guy]] into her disturbing [[dream]]. She [[similarly]] [[notification]] that it [[got]] harder and harder for her to wake up from her [[dreaming]]. As she [[lack]] her [[fathers]] who is ofter abroad she [[attracts]] her [[fathers]] into the [[household]]. She makes a [[error]] and her [[fathers]] is looking very angry on the painting. She [[seeks]] to rubber him out but [[realises]] that she cannot [[amendment]] anything already [[lured]]. And next [[moment]] she [[waterfalls]] asleep the horror [[launching]]. Her [[pere]] is [[madman]] and blind (because she [[attracting]] s*** on his head to [[marks]] him as 'invalid') and [[attempts]] to get into the paperhouse and [[murdering]] Anna and his [[boyfriend]]. Her [[dreaming]] became a horrendous nightmare. They [[administering]] to [[flee]] and to [[slays]] her [[fathers]] and Anna can finally wake up. Than Anna [[found]] her self in the hospital where her [[parenting]] are sitting beside her [[bedside]]. The [[physicians]] [[thinking]] that she [[dipped]] into a coma or so. They [[told]] Anna that the other boy died and that they [[wish]] to travel to the [[marine]] to [[got]] over those tragical happenings. Anna [[attracts]] a watchtower and [[notification]] that the same watchtower can be found near the hotel they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his [[behalf]] because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and [[forgot]] those terrible dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3023 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[saw]] an interview with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead [[character]], Marvin Mange, in this [[film]].) He [[said]] in it that he [[wanted]] to [[emphasize]] physical [[comedy]] here so much that even if you had the [[volume]] [[turned]] off you'd be [[laughing]] at this [[movie]]. [[Obviously]] that must be the secret. I had the volume turned up. I was actually [[listening]] to this [[thing]] and [[thought]] it was a [[disaster]], and [[completely]] unfunny - a [[major]] [[disappointment]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Deuce]] Bigalow, [[Male]] Gigolo."

The [[story]] is [[stupid]]: Mange is a [[major]] loser who dreams of being a [[cop]] who [[gets]] [[filled]] with a bunch of [[animal]] [[transplants]] after a [[car]] [[accident]] by a [[mad]] [[scientist]] [[type]] [[appropriately]] named Dr. Wilder ([[Michael]] Caton), and as a result [[starts]] to lose [[control]] of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can [[sniff]] out [[drugs]] [[hidden]] in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he [[also]] has a [[nasty]] habit of [[eating]] people's cows and [[trying]] to [[seduce]] their [[goats]], but [[surely]] that's a small [[price]] to [[pay]]? It just didn't do [[anything]] for me.

The [[cast]] left much to be [[desired]]. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than [[John]] McGinley? Here, he plays [[Sgt]]. Sisk, Mange's [[commander]] on the [[police]] force, as a repugnantly cartoonish [[character]] ([[much]] the same as his doctor [[character]] in the inexplicably [[popular]] TV series "[[Scrubs]].") I was [[anxious]] to get a [[look]] at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[job]] (can [[anything]] in this [[movie]] be [[called]] "[[serious]]?") She, of course, [[gained]] her [[fame]] as a contestant on the first "Survivor" and she [[proves]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't [[prove]] here is that she has any [[discernible]] [[talent]] as an [[actress]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Police]] Chief Wilson. I mean, how old is this [[guy]] now? He's the [[size]] of some of the cows Mange tried to [[eat]], and he [[seemed]] out of [[breath]] the [[whole]] [[way]] through. I'm surprised he [[made]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adam]] Sandler (who also [[served]] as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky toys in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. I [[observed]] an interview with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead [[trait]], Marvin Mange, in this [[filmmaking]].) He [[says]] in it that he [[want]] to [[stress]] physical [[parody]] here so much that even if you had the [[volumes]] [[transformed]] off you'd be [[chuckles]] at this [[movies]]. [[Notoriously]] that must be the secret. I had the volume turned up. I was actually [[listen]] to this [[stuff]] and [[brainchild]] it was a [[disasters]], and [[totally]] unfunny - a [[momentous]] [[displeasure]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Carburettor]] Bigalow, [[Virile]] Gigolo."

The [[storytelling]] is [[twit]]: Mange is a [[big]] loser who dreams of being a [[police]] who [[get]] [[fill]] with a bunch of [[zoo]] [[grafts]] after a [[cars]] [[accidents]] by a [[insane]] [[investigator]] [[genre]] [[correctly]] named Dr. Wilder ([[Michele]] Caton), and as a result [[started]] to lose [[supervision]] of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can [[snort]] out [[pharmaceuticals]] [[masked]] in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he [[apart]] has a [[repugnant]] habit of [[catering]] people's cows and [[try]] to [[seduction]] their [[goat]], but [[obviously]] that's a small [[costing]] to [[salary]]? It just didn't do [[something]] for me.

The [[casting]] left much to be [[wished]]. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than [[Jon]] McGinley? Here, he plays [[Sergeant]]. Sisk, Mange's [[commanders]] on the [[cops]] force, as a repugnantly cartoonish [[nature]] ([[very]] the same as his doctor [[characteristics]] in the inexplicably [[fashionable]] TV series "[[Gowns]].") I was [[apprehensive]] to get a [[peek]] at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[workplace]] (can [[something]] in this [[filmmaking]] be [[drew]] "[[severe]]?") She, of course, [[acquired]] her [[reputation]] as a contestant on the first "Survivor" and she [[illustrates]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't [[demonstrating]] here is that she has any [[palpable]] [[talents]] as an [[actor]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Cops]] Chief Wilson. I mean, how old is this [[guys]] now? He's the [[sizes]] of some of the cows Mange tried to [[coma]], and he [[appeared]] out of [[breathe]] the [[overall]] [[ways]] through. I'm surprised he [[effected]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adama]] Sandler (who also [[played]] as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky toys in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[think]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poor]]. When I watched it for the [[first]] [[time]] I thought it was the [[old]] version(1956). When I really [[found]] out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there [[could]] be such a [[bad]] [[film]] [[made]] so recently. Thats [[really]] all I [[wanted]] to [[say]]. This film had a good plot [[though]], nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very [[badly]] made. Well that is all. So long I [[thinking]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poorest]]. When I watched it for the [[outset]] [[moment]] I thought it was the [[archaic]] version(1956). When I really [[discoveries]] out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there [[would]] be such a [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] [[brought]] so recently. Thats [[truly]] all I [[wanna]] to [[told]]. This film had a good plot [[while]], nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very [[sorely]] made. Well that is all. So long --------------------------------------------- Result 3025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] God Bless 80's slasher films. This is a fun, fun movie. This is what slasher films are all about. Now I'm not saying horror movies, just slasher films. It goes like this: A high school nerd is picked on by all these stupid jocks and cheerleaders, and then one of their pranks goes horribly wrong. Disfigured and back for revenge, sporting a Joker/Jester mask (pretty creepy looking, might i add), Marty begins to kill off those teens one by one many years later, after he manages to make them believe that their old abandoned high school is having a reunion. That is basically the plot? What's wrong with that? That's the beauty of 80's slasher films, most of them i would say. A lot of things could be so ridiculous, but they keep drawing you more in an' in as they go by. Especially this film.

It features some outrageous killings, and some are quite creative as well. (poisoning of a beer can, acid bath, i can't remember a javelin ever being used before in any other slasher film either)It really is a fun, fun movie. That's all it is. Nevermind the fact that the characters are complete idiots, never mind their stupidity, and never mind the outrageous, random things that occur in this film. Such as lights being able to be controlled by the killer (when he's not even switching any buttons, you'll see) and toilets being able to cough up blood, baths being able to have acid come out of them, just use that as part of your entertainment! Because thats what really makes it entertaining.

Movies like this represent 80's slashers. Never again could movies like this get made, know why? It isn't the 80's anymore. That is why you should just cherish them for what they are, good fun! I highly recommend this film if you're a hardcore fan of Slahsers such as Friday the 13th.

One last note this movie also had a kick ass villain as well, Marty Rantzen. A disfigured, nerd, who kills all his old foes in a creepy Jester mask. A good villain makes a good slasher. Simon Scuddamore, who played Marty apparently committed suicide shortly after Slaughter High was released. That alone adds something creepy to the film, and sticks with it and it even makes you feel more sorry for the Marty character, i guess. All in all, great 80's slashers fun! It's a shame it will never be the same again... --------------------------------------------- Result 3026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unhinged follows the typical plot of the early 80's slasher trend. Pretty Young Girls In Peril. I have to give it up for the filmmaker who used a helicopter for some of the early road-trip shots, you actually think for a second there's going to be quality in the production. Watching "Unhinged" was like seeing an amateur acting class go through it's warm-up. Some of the most awkward, badly lit, overlong scenes are played out with the gusto of a Valium overdose. I wondered why they didn't just put the cue-cards on camera so the actresses wouldn't have to constantly shift their gaze. The two main girls were obviously chosen for their T&A factor rather than talent. Laurel Munson as the main chick Terry is as exciting as watching paint dry. Two nude scenes make for an adolescent thrill. Janet Penner and Virginia Settle as the crazy/creepy daughter and mother the chicks find themselves stranded with compete for Worst Acting Ever. Long pauses, weird expressions, emphasis on the wrong word, it's all there and is a delight for those of us out there who love bad films. The scenes shift suddenly with long black-outs you could drive a Mack truck through. Cartoon lightning crashes across shots without even bothering to show the sky. Eighties eyeshadow assaults the viewer. But ya know, it grew on me. I felt sorry for it. I wanted to hug it, kiss it's boo-boos and make it better. The ending doesn't make up for the damage it's caused but I grinned anyway. I have my own theories regarding the whole "banned" hype and hope that anyone who chooses to view this film does so with substantial substance abuse and a sense of humor. Otherwise pass. --------------------------------------------- Result 3027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The best Treasure Island ever made. They just don't make films

like this anymore, or ever. No one makes films like this. More

than a novelty, this film is funny, frank and fascinating, yet moody,

mysterious and morose. This is one of my favorite pictures. The

director must have had some idea what it is all about, but he

certainly leaves room for your own impressions and interpretations, while leaving little left to the imagination. Why he

has not made more films like this, I have no idea. While

reminding me of some of the best noir, it is one of a kind. But this

is not for the lazy or simple. --------------------------------------------- Result 3028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. [[Finally]] the [[film]] express sexual [[relationship]] of [[Alex]], kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at [[last]], Alex waked up and realized that they [[would]] not have result and [[future]].[[Ending]] up was [[sad]].

The [[director]] [[Tudor]] Giurgiu was in AMC [[theatre]] on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the [[audiences]] that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this [[movie]] are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. [[Ultimately]] the [[filmmaking]] express sexual [[nexus]] of [[Allie]], kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at [[latter]], Alex waked up and realized that they [[could]] not have result and [[forthcoming]].[[Cessation]] up was [[unlucky]].

The [[superintendent]] [[Theodor]] Giurgiu was in AMC [[cinemas]] on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the [[audience]] that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this [[filmmaking]] are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. --------------------------------------------- Result 3029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The film starts with a [[manager]] ([[Nicholas]] [[Bell]]) giving welcome [[investors]] ([[Robert]] Carradine) to [[Primal]] Park . A [[secret]] project mutating a [[primal]] animal [[using]] fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik [[Park]]¨, and some [[scientists]] [[resurrect]] one of nature's most fearsome [[predators]], the Sabretooth [[tiger]] or Smilodon . [[Scientific]] [[ambition]] turns deadly, [[however]], and when the [[high]] [[voltage]] [[fence]] is [[opened]] the [[creature]] escape and [[begins]] savagely stalking its prey - the human [[visitors]] , [[tourists]] and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters [[enter]] in the [[restricted]] [[area]] of the [[security]] center and are [[attacked]] by a [[pack]] of [[large]] pre-historical [[animals]] which are deadlier and [[bigger]] . [[In]] [[addition]] , a [[security]] agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her [[mate]] (Brian Wimmer) [[fight]] [[hardly]] against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the [[real]] [[star]] [[stars]] and they are astounding terrifyingly [[though]] not [[convincing]]. The giant [[animals]] savagely are stalking its prey and the [[group]] run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome [[predators]]. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more [[dangerous]] and [[slow]] stalks its [[victims]].

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and [[gore]] as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths [[appear]] with [[mediocre]] [[special]] [[effects]].The [[story]] provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it [[results]] to be [[quite]] boring .The giant animals are majority made by [[computer]] generator and seem [[totally]] [[lousy]] .Middling performances [[though]] the players reacting appropriately to becoming [[food]].Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[ridiculous]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent [[attack]] scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by [[James]] R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and [[John]] Rhys [[Davies]] and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with [[Steven]] Strait, [[Cliff]] Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[badly]] directed by [[George]] [[Miller]] and with no originality because takes too [[many]] [[elements]] from previous [[films]]. Miller is an Australian [[director]] usually working for [[television]] ([[Tidal]] wave, Journey to the [[center]] of the [[earth]], and [[many]] others) and occasionally for [[cinema]] ( The [[man]] from Snowy river, [[Zeus]] and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : [[Below]] average, bottom of barrel. The film starts with a [[administrator]] ([[Nikola]] [[Campana]]) giving welcome [[capitalists]] ([[Roberto]] Carradine) to [[Primordial]] Park . A [[secretive]] project mutating a [[primitive]] animal [[utilizing]] fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik [[Playpen]]¨, and some [[scientist]] [[resuscitate]] one of nature's most fearsome [[predatory]], the Sabretooth [[tigre]] or Smilodon . [[Science]] [[aspiration]] turns deadly, [[still]], and when the [[supreme]] [[tensions]] [[fencing]] is [[started]] the [[creatures]] escape and [[launched]] savagely stalking its prey - the human [[travelers]] , [[traveller]] and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters [[penetrate]] in the [[confined]] [[regions]] of the [[assurance]] center and are [[slammed]] by a [[packs]] of [[colossal]] pre-historical [[wildlife]] which are deadlier and [[greater]] . [[Among]] [[supplement]] , a [[insurance]] agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her [[comrade]] (Brian Wimmer) [[fighting]] [[almost]] against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the [[authentic]] [[superstar]] [[celebrity]] and they are astounding terrifyingly [[despite]] not [[persuade]]. The giant [[animal]] savagely are stalking its prey and the [[grouping]] run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome [[predatory]]. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more [[risky]] and [[slower]] stalks its [[fatalities]].

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and [[gora]] as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths [[appearing]] with [[lackluster]] [[peculiar]] [[influence]].The [[tales]] provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it [[consequence]] to be [[rather]] boring .The giant animals are majority made by [[computers]] generator and seem [[fully]] [[wretched]] .Middling performances [[although]] the players reacting appropriately to becoming [[foods]].Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[absurd]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent [[onslaught]] scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by [[Jacobo]] R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and [[Jon]] Rhys [[Davis]] and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with [[Stephane]] Strait, [[Ravine]] Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[sorely]] directed by [[Georgi]] [[Meunier]] and with no originality because takes too [[countless]] [[facets]] from previous [[movie]]. Miller is an Australian [[headmaster]] usually working for [[tv]] ([[Tide]] wave, Journey to the [[centre]] of the [[tierra]], and [[various]] others) and occasionally for [[films]] ( The [[dude]] from Snowy river, [[Chihuahua]] and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : [[Beneath]] average, bottom of barrel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really wanted to like this movie because the critics have been unkind

to it (to say the least)... but it was terrible. Really terrible. Badly

acted, a witless script, cack handed direction... Watching this film was

like watching a car crash- you want to look away but you keep staring

because you want to see how messy it's going to get. Well, the car is

wrecked and there are no survivors. On the plus side, the cinematography

was nice, made me want to go on holiday, if only to cleanse myself from

this unholy --------------------------------------------- Result 3031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wanted to punch the TV. Watching it was torture. I hated it. Never watch this movie. The terrorists are annoying. Adam Sandler is annoying. I normally like him but not in this one. I wanted to break the DVD. This is the most irritating film in the world. The comedian he's jealous of is obnoxious. The only remotely funny part is the rocker with the black teeth getting all the girls. It was so irritating I wanted to punch the TV. DO NOT BUY THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU WANT TO ANNOY SOMEONE. If you even like Adam Sandler a little bit, Don't buy it. It will just make you hate him. Do yourself a favor, if you see it in the store, hide it to put everyone out of danger of buying it. Its a waste of the $1.99 I paid for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you have seen Dogtown and Z-Boys or have any interest in seeing the real, non-caricature, "Real American" side of America then Riding Giants will hit deeper than anything you've seen before.

This film is "unreal", a facile term if ever there was one, but hugely appropriate if you can derive any form of literal meaning out of it - it is a 100% factual documentary, but with all the drama of an opera, and the completely apparent sense of love, expert and knowing instilled by Stacy Peralta's direction and narration, this film expertly leads you from swell to big wave while keeping you completely enthralled in everything you are being given the privilege of seeing.

This film is a symphony, crafted as well as Beethovens 9th, beginning beautifully with its prelude in Hawaii, tugging deeply on human emotion in Santa Cruz and finishing with uproar, triumph and crescendo in Laird Hamiltons feats, again in Hawaii.

Like classical music; like Beethoven's 9th, Ride of the Valkyries or Barbers Adagio for Strings, this may be the only piece you like, but it's worth it. Trust me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Words]] can't describe how [[bad]] this movie is. I can't explain it by [[writing]] only. You have too [[see]] it for yourself to get at grip of how horrible a movie [[really]] can be. Not that I [[recommend]] you to do that. There are so [[many]] clichés, [[mistakes]] (and all other negative things you can [[imagine]]) here that will just make you cry. To [[start]] with the technical first, there are a LOT of [[mistakes]] regarding the [[airplane]]. I won't [[list]] them here, but just mention the [[coloring]] of the plane. They didn't even manage to [[show]] an [[airliner]] in the colors of a [[fictional]] [[airline]], but [[instead]] [[used]] a 747 [[painted]] in the [[original]] Boeing [[livery]]. [[Very]] [[bad]]. The [[plot]] is [[stupid]] and has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]] before, only [[much]], [[much]] better. There are so [[many]] [[ridiculous]] moments here that i lost [[count]] of it really early. [[Also]], I was on the [[bad]] guys' side all the time in the [[movie]], because the [[good]] [[guys]] were so stupid. "Executive [[Decision]]" should without a doubt be you're [[choice]] over this one, even the "[[Turbulence]]"-[[movies]] are better. [[In]] fact, every other movie in the [[world]] is [[better]] than this one. [[Phrases]] can't describe how [[unfavourable]] this movie is. I can't explain it by [[handwriting]] only. You have too [[behold]] it for yourself to get at grip of how horrible a movie [[genuinely]] can be. Not that I [[recommendations]] you to do that. There are so [[various]] clichés, [[wrongs]] (and all other negative things you can [[imagines]]) here that will just make you cry. To [[beginning]] with the technical first, there are a LOT of [[faults]] regarding the [[plane]]. I won't [[listed]] them here, but just mention the [[colors]] of the plane. They didn't even manage to [[spectacle]] an [[aeroplane]] in the colors of a [[imaginary]] [[plane]], but [[however]] [[utilizes]] a 747 [[brushed]] in the [[initial]] Boeing [[barn]]. [[Much]] [[negative]]. The [[intrigue]] is [[dumb]] and has been [[accomplished]] [[several]] [[moments]] before, only [[very]], [[very]] better. There are so [[innumerable]] [[silly]] moments here that i lost [[counting]] of it really early. [[Additionally]], I was on the [[naughty]] guys' side all the time in the [[filmmaking]], because the [[alright]] [[boy]] were so stupid. "Executive [[Rulings]]" should without a doubt be you're [[selects]] over this one, even the "[[Disorder]]"-[[filmmaking]] are better. [[Among]] fact, every other movie in the [[worldwide]] is [[optimum]] than this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3034 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Neil Simon's THE ODD COUPLE set up a model for many of his [[later]] plays. [[Felix]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired roommates in the original, the former being [[picky]] and neat, the latter being slovenly and [[loose]]. Simon [[would]] rewrite (less successfully) the [[play]] in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD COUPLE, with female [[roommates]]. He [[made]] it a mixed couple (a [[woman]] with her daughter, and a [[man]]) in THE [[GOODBYE]] [[GIRLS]]. He [[also]] [[gave]] it an [[additional]] twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE [[BOYS]], a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al [[Lewis]] and [[Willie]] Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "[[apartment]]" problem is [[reduced]] to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as [[Willie]], and [[George]] [[Burns]] as Al.

In [[actuality]], Al probably does not [[think]] [[totally]] badly of [[Willie]] - [[Willie]] is pathological on the [[subject]] of Al. First Al had little [[habits]], such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words [[beginning]] with the letter "t", and slightly [[jabbing]] Willie with his index finger, on [[stage]]. Secondly, Al [[retired]] when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to [[try]] to get him jobs in [[commercials]]. But [[Willie]] can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. [[So]] he rarely is able to [[stay]] to the [[end]] of a [[rehearsal]] for a commercial.

[[Ben]] is [[asked]] to [[get]] the two back together for a [[live]] scene of their most [[famous]] [[sketch]] on a [[television]] [[show]] about American [[Comedy]]. He does [[bring]] Al to see Willie, and the sparks [[begin]] [[flying]], as [[neither]] can [[figure]] out what the other is doing (and this is just in [[rehearsal]]. On [[top]] of that, Willie is insisting on [[changes]] ([[minor]] ones, but they [[throw]] off Al) such as [[saying]] "[[ENTER]]!!!" when Al knocks on the [[door]]. The [[initial]] [[rehearsal]] is a failure, but [[Ben]] [[manages]] to get them to the [[taping]] of the [[show]]. The [[question]] is if they will [[complete]] the scene in the [[finished]] [[program]] or will Willie wring Al's [[neck]]?

The three [[leads]], Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter ([[example]]: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "[[Voyage]] of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually [[end]] up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. Neil Simon's THE ODD COUPLE set up a model for many of his [[trailing]] plays. [[Geraldine]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired roommates in the original, the former being [[selective]] and neat, the latter being slovenly and [[slack]]. Simon [[ought]] rewrite (less successfully) the [[playing]] in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD COUPLE, with female [[roomies]]. He [[introduced]] it a mixed couple (a [[wife]] with her daughter, and a [[mec]]) in THE [[BYE]] [[FEMALE]]. He [[apart]] [[provided]] it an [[extras]] twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE [[GUYS]], a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al [[Luiz]] and [[Willy]] Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "[[condo]]" problem is [[slashed]] to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as [[Willy]], and [[Georges]] [[Combustion]] as Al.

In [[reality]], Al probably does not [[thought]] [[perfectly]] badly of [[Willy]] - [[Willy]] is pathological on the [[themes]] of Al. First Al had little [[patterns]], such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words [[launching]] with the letter "t", and slightly [[jabbed]] Willie with his index finger, on [[phase]]. Secondly, Al [[retiring]] when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to [[seeks]] to get him jobs in [[advertisements]]. But [[Willy]] can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. [[Therefore]] he rarely is able to [[staying]] to the [[terminates]] of a [[repeat]] for a commercial.

[[Bin]] is [[wondered]] to [[got]] the two back together for a [[vivo]] scene of their most [[illustrious]] [[biographical]] on a [[tv]] [[displayed]] about American [[Farce]]. He does [[bringing]] Al to see Willie, and the sparks [[embark]] [[hovering]], as [[nor]] can [[silhouette]] out what the other is doing (and this is just in [[repetition]]. On [[supreme]] of that, Willie is insisting on [[modification]] ([[minimal]] ones, but they [[toss]] off Al) such as [[telling]] "[[INTRO]]!!!" when Al knocks on the [[porte]]. The [[preliminary]] [[repeat]] is a failure, but [[Bin]] [[administering]] to get them to the [[recordings]] of the [[exhibit]]. The [[issue]] is if they will [[finished]] the scene in the [[finalized]] [[programmes]] or will Willie wring Al's [[collier]]?

The three [[leeds]], Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter ([[case]]: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "[[Itinerary]] of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually [[ceases]] up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. --------------------------------------------- Result 3035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As an [[aging]] rocker, this [[movie]] mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 [[favourite]] [[bands]] ever - but with the [[incredible]] cast ([[everyone]]) - and the [[fantastic]] storyline - I just [[love]] this piece of creative [[genius]]. I cannot [[recommend]] it more [[highly]] - and [[Mick]] Jones added so much ([[Foreigner]] lead and [[primary]] [[songwriter]] along with the [[greatest]] [[rock]] singer ever - [[Lou]] Gramm) - I have [[watched]] this [[great]] [[work]] more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and [[Jimmy]] Nail - [[talent]] oozes from [[every]] pore - then [[Astrid]].... and [[Karen]]..... what more [[could]] an [[aging]] rocker [[ask]] for!! 10/10 - [[bloody]] [[brilliant]].

[[Alastair]], Perth, [[Western]] Oz, Originally from Windsor, [[England]]. As an [[ageing]] rocker, this [[cinematography]] mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 [[favorite]] [[band]] ever - but with the [[awesome]] cast ([[anybody]]) - and the [[wondrous]] storyline - I just [[amour]] this piece of creative [[engineers]]. I cannot [[recommending]] it more [[heavily]] - and [[Mike]] Jones added so much ([[Alien]] lead and [[primordial]] [[musician]] along with the [[biggest]] [[rocks]] singer ever - [[Lulu]] Gramm) - I have [[observed]] this [[wondrous]] [[jobs]] more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and [[Jimbo]] Nail - [[talents]] oozes from [[any]] pore - then [[Mrs]].... and [[Karin]]..... what more [[did]] an [[ageing]] rocker [[poser]] for!! 10/10 - [[homicidal]] [[wondrous]].

[[Ulster]], Perth, [[West]] Oz, Originally from Windsor, [[Brits]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Saving Grace" is never riotously funny, but it delivers quite a few good laughs and I enjoyed it to a significant degree. Brenda Blethyn is a fine actress, and does a good job at portraying widower Grace, who resorts to growing marijuana to pay off her massive debts. The supporting cast also does a fine job. French actor Tchecky Karyo has a funny little role. The premise alone is appealing. The idea of an over-the-hill woman growing and smoking pot sounds funny enough. And the film plays around with the premise wisely every now and then. Of course, there are flat moments, like one where two elderly women mistaken Grace's marijuana leaves for tea leaves and they start pulling childish antics at the store where they work. That was a mindless gag that didn't quite take off. The film's tone is downbeat and occasionally dull, but I got enough laughs to give this English import a recommendation.

My score: 7 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3037 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] It's not often I feel compelled to give negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the maxim, "if you don't have anything good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we listen to everyday who nitpick at things we like. [[If]] it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabriel]] this movie is [[pathetically]] [[HORRID]]. I say this to you to warn you in [[advance]] that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. [[If]] you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a [[short]] summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and [[unconvincing]] mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we [[wander]] aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next [[big]] line. By the end of the [[movie]] you're actually wishing he'd blow his [[horn]] and make the walls of Jericho [[fall]] on the people who made this un-natural [[disaster]].

Bottom [[line]] - it's an [[insult]] to our [[intelligence]] that they [[made]] a sequel to this [[film]] in the first place. The [[original]] [[told]] the right [[story]], [[answered]] the [[questions]] that should have been, and [[left]] alone the ones you were [[meant]] to ponder afterwards. There are no [[compelling]] [[reasons]] to follow these [[characters]] that was in the first - the [[priest]] who lost his [[faith]], the [[little]] [[girl]] who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her [[children]] - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. It's not often I feel compelled to give negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the maxim, "if you don't have anything good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we listen to everyday who nitpick at things we like. [[Though]] it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabrielle]] this movie is [[ridiculously]] [[HORRIFIC]]. I say this to you to warn you in [[headway]] that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. [[Though]] you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a [[terse]] summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and [[feeble]] mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we [[roam]] aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next [[prodigious]] line. By the end of the [[filmmaking]] you're actually wishing he'd blow his [[trumpet]] and make the walls of Jericho [[autumn]] on the people who made this un-natural [[disasters]].

Bottom [[bloodline]] - it's an [[offend]] to our [[intelligentsia]] that they [[introduced]] a sequel to this [[filmmaking]] in the first place. The [[preliminary]] [[tells]] the right [[storytelling]], [[answering]] the [[issues]] that should have been, and [[gauche]] alone the ones you were [[intend]] to ponder afterwards. There are no [[cogent]] [[motifs]] to follow these [[traits]] that was in the first - the [[vicar]] who lost his [[creed]], the [[scant]] [[daughter]] who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her [[child]] - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3038 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Loonatics Unleashed " is the worst thing that could happen to the classic characters created by Chuck Jones . The "Loony Tunes" have many spin -offs and different versions , some were good ,others not very much .But "Loonatics " it's the worst .The concept is stupid and derivative of shows as "The Power Rangers " and "Teen Titans " . There wasn't any similarity with the original characters and the stories are boring and poorly made . The new designs are ugly and the animation is pathetic . This show just doesn't work .This horrible waste of animation is a complete failure and this shouldn't have be nothing more than a bad joke . Lame ! Zero stars --------------------------------------------- Result 3039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] [[shows]] how [[racist]] [[John]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that exists in our [[educational]] system. How quick he forgets that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and [[failed]] at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an [[instigating]] black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this film. Singleton [[barely]] [[touched]] on the [[relationships]] between the white and black [[characters]] that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice [[touch]]! This [[filmmaking]] [[showcase]] how [[racial]] [[Giovanni]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that exists in our [[pedagogical]] system. How quick he forgets that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and [[faulted]] at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an [[instigate]] black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this film. Singleton [[hardly]] [[impacted]] on the [[relations]] between the white and black [[attribute]] that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice [[touches]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3040 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[opinion]], Hathaway did [[superb]] direction that [[conveys]] what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon [[philosophies]] and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will [[enjoy]] the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a [[unique]] quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[visualise]], Hathaway did [[funky]] direction that [[airs]] what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon [[stances]] and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will [[enjoys]] the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a [[sole]] quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. --------------------------------------------- Result 3041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I've [[recently]] went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the movie I was too [[young]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[missed]] all these years. For me being able to see [[movies]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[great]]. [[Most]] people feel as [[though]] the music are the best part, but I don't [[think]] that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's [[judge]] by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act [[rather]] they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my [[perspective]], the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the [[things]] that happen are actually [[true]] [[events]] that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was [[coming]] from the [[city]] at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential [[mainly]] at the club "First Avenue & 7th St [[Entry]]" where in fact Prince, [[among]] other musicians, [[got]] their [[career]] [[started]]. It's [[also]] a known fact that Prince and Morris Day [[always]] had a [[competition]] with each other in real [[life]], but it was a [[friendly]] competition. They were [[always]] [[friends]]. So the story basically plays off of that [[competition]] aspect of their rivalry [[rather]] than their [[friendship]] which [[shows]] the [[true]] [[competitive]] side of what [[occurred]] at club "First Avenue" for it's [[time]].

Another [[reason]] why this [[movie]] is good is due to the fact that some of the [[situations]] that occur in the [[movie]] are actually [[based]] on [[events]] that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the [[movie]] more [[realistic]] as far as the emotion because he's [[telling]] his [[trials]] and tribulations pre-superstardom. [[Plus]], his [[dedication]] he [[puts]] into his performances is [[phenomenal]]. Prince [[made]] sure that [[every]] [[moment]] in the [[movie]] was done [[perfectly]]. Anytime you [[hear]] a [[song]] [[play]] in the [[movie]] it's in [[perfect]] [[sync]] with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own. I've [[lately]] went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the movie I was too [[youthful]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[miss]] all these years. For me being able to see [[theater]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[wondrous]]. [[Longer]] people feel as [[despite]] the music are the best part, but I don't [[thinking]] that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's [[richter]] by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act [[quite]] they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my [[viewpoint]], the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the [[items]] that happen are actually [[real]] [[happenings]] that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was [[come]] from the [[town]] at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential [[basically]] at the club "First Avenue & 7th St [[Inlet]]" where in fact Prince, [[between]] other musicians, [[gets]] their [[quarry]] [[starts]]. It's [[further]] a known fact that Prince and Morris Day [[steadily]] had a [[rivalries]] with each other in real [[living]], but it was a [[amicable]] competition. They were [[steadily]] [[buddies]]. So the story basically plays off of that [[rivalry]] aspect of their rivalry [[fairly]] than their [[goodwill]] which [[displayed]] the [[truthful]] [[compete]] side of what [[arose]] at club "First Avenue" for it's [[moment]].

Another [[raison]] why this [[flick]] is good is due to the fact that some of the [[instances]] that occur in the [[kino]] are actually [[predicated]] on [[incidents]] that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the [[films]] more [[practical]] as far as the emotion because he's [[saying]] his [[lawsuits]] and tribulations pre-superstardom. [[Longer]], his [[pledge]] he [[raises]] into his performances is [[unbelievable]]. Prince [[brought]] sure that [[any]] [[time]] in the [[movies]] was done [[completely]]. Anytime you [[overheard]] a [[chanson]] [[playing]] in the [[film]] it's in [[faultless]] [[synch]] with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own. --------------------------------------------- Result 3042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[If]] you [[like]] CB4, you have no idea what you're [[missing]] if you haven't [[seen]] this [[film]] [[yet]]. This movie is [[crazy]] [[hilarious]], and incorporates a [[lot]] more about the hip [[hop]] [[industry]] than any other [[parody]] [[movie]]... It is [[unfortunate]] that this [[movie]] has not been [[released]] on dvd because it is one [[movie]] that [[everybody]] I've ever [[watched]] it with has [[loved]] and wanted a [[copy]]. [[If]] you really [[want]] a good [[laugh]] and you [[like]] hip [[hop]] and are a [[little]] [[familiar]] with some old-school [[performers]], definitley rent this [[movie]]. There aren't that [[many]] video rental [[places]] that have [[copies]] of it, but if you [[happen]] to come across one you will not be [[disappointed]]. [[Unless]] you [[adores]] CB4, you have no idea what you're [[lacks]] if you haven't [[watched]] this [[films]] [[even]]. This movie is [[lunatic]] [[comical]], and incorporates a [[batch]] more about the hip [[jump]] [[industries]] than any other [[caricature]] [[kino]]... It is [[pathetic]] that this [[kino]] has not been [[publicized]] on dvd because it is one [[films]] that [[someone]] I've ever [[saw]] it with has [[cared]] and wanted a [[copier]]. [[Unless]] you really [[wantto]] a good [[giggling]] and you [[adores]] hip [[leaps]] and are a [[scant]] [[accustomed]] with some old-school [[painters]], definitley rent this [[kino]]. There aren't that [[myriad]] video rental [[spaces]] that have [[copying]] of it, but if you [[arise]] to come across one you will not be [[disappointing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] The name of this film alone made me want to see just what it was all about, so I taped this film during the early hours of the AM. If you ever wanted to see what miners had to go through during the early days and actually see a dramatic scene when the mine crumbles in on the men. This film clearly wants to show that Germany and France can work together and be friends after WW I and how the Germans came to the aid of the French miners much to the unbelief of the French townsfolk. The actors were all [[outstanding]], with unusual scenes in the mine with a horse and a small young boy who worked in the mine. There is an old old retired miner who manges to go down the mine by ladder when the elevator breaks down. If you are a real film buff, this is a film you will not want to miss. The name of this film alone made me want to see just what it was all about, so I taped this film during the early hours of the AM. If you ever wanted to see what miners had to go through during the early days and actually see a dramatic scene when the mine crumbles in on the men. This film clearly wants to show that Germany and France can work together and be friends after WW I and how the Germans came to the aid of the French miners much to the unbelief of the French townsfolk. The actors were all [[wondrous]], with unusual scenes in the mine with a horse and a small young boy who worked in the mine. There is an old old retired miner who manges to go down the mine by ladder when the elevator breaks down. If you are a real film buff, this is a film you will not want to miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 3044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was an [[awful]] movie. Basically [[Jane]] March was a half-Korean North Korean spy sent by Kim Jong Il to do something horrible to the American [[forces]] in South Korea. She becomes a maid for an American military family, they all regard her as being Korean even though she [[looks]] more [[white]] (I believe the [[actress]] is either 1/4 or 1/8 [[Southeast]] Asian, not at all Korean), and the [[teenage]] boy of the [[household]] [[starts]] out hating her and ends up sleeping with her. The way Korea and the U.S. military in Korea is [[depicted]] is completely insane. Of course, the screenwriter and the [[director]] were [[obviously]] white men who've never [[spent]] a day in [[Korea]] prior to this movie and had no [[intention]] of showing any real insight into life in Korea for either Koreans or American GIs and [[instead]] just tried to fulfill their [[pathetic]] Asiaphile [[fantasies]] without any regard to how [[completely]] unbelievable it [[made]] the movie. [[Anyone]] who's ever been to Korea will know this is utter [[garbage]]. In the end the [[North]] Korean honhyol spy-girl gets [[killed]], in an [[obvious]] "paying for her sins" way. [[Very]] [[bad]] [[film]] with a made-for-TV feel to it. This was an [[shocking]] movie. Basically [[Jeanne]] March was a half-Korean North Korean spy sent by Kim Jong Il to do something horrible to the American [[troop]] in South Korea. She becomes a maid for an American military family, they all regard her as being Korean even though she [[seems]] more [[blanca]] (I believe the [[actor]] is either 1/4 or 1/8 [[East]] Asian, not at all Korean), and the [[teen]] boy of the [[housing]] [[begun]] out hating her and ends up sleeping with her. The way Korea and the U.S. military in Korea is [[portrayed]] is completely insane. Of course, the screenwriter and the [[headmaster]] were [[certainly]] white men who've never [[spending]] a day in [[Korean]] prior to this movie and had no [[ambition]] of showing any real insight into life in Korea for either Koreans or American GIs and [[conversely]] just tried to fulfill their [[unfortunate]] Asiaphile [[illusions]] without any regard to how [[perfectly]] unbelievable it [[introduced]] the movie. [[Whoever]] who's ever been to Korea will know this is utter [[trash]]. In the end the [[Norte]] Korean honhyol spy-girl gets [[slain]], in an [[unmistakable]] "paying for her sins" way. [[Eminently]] [[unfavourable]] [[cinematographic]] with a made-for-TV feel to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I stopped five [[minutes]] in when Beowulf was given a double-shot, automatic crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not have telescoping sights, but Beowulf beat [[Grendel]] in hand-to-hand [[combat]]. The [[terrible]], [[wooden]] acting and [[eternal]] [[darkness]] that [[plagues]] all Sci-Fi [[Original]] Movies didn't [[help]] either. Having only gotten a few minutes in before I felt my [[bile]] [[rise]] and [[decided]] to watch I [[Love]] Lucy [[reruns]] [[instead]], that's [[really]] about all I have to [[say]]. But, you [[might]] as well just realize that it's a made-for-TV [[movie]] and [[skip]] it right there.

[[A]] [[travesty]]. I stopped five [[mins]] in when Beowulf was given a double-shot, automatic crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not have telescoping sights, but Beowulf beat [[Carnaval]] in hand-to-hand [[struggle]]. The [[abysmal]], [[wood]] acting and [[undying]] [[dark]] that [[curses]] all Sci-Fi [[Upfront]] Movies didn't [[pomoc]] either. Having only gotten a few minutes in before I felt my [[bladder]] [[surge]] and [[deciding]] to watch I [[Iove]] Lucy [[repeats]] [[conversely]], that's [[truthfully]] about all I have to [[tell]]. But, you [[apt]] as well just realize that it's a made-for-TV [[filmmaking]] and [[jumping]] it right there.

[[una]] [[joke]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although Robert "Knox" Benfer has his fans, I'm not one of them. His films are asinine and amateurish, and and just not very funny, unless you're a 14 year old with an underdeveloped sense of humor.

He's certainly not famous, as him immature fans would like you to believe, by harassing people at Wikipedia, or stuffing the ratings votes here at the IMDb. He's certainly not been profiled by any major media outlets, which speaks volumes about his and his creation's "fame".

Benfer does have some slight skill at limited animation, but he needs to get away from his young sycophants and learn to write some actual funny material before he'll be taken seriously as a real entertainer. As of this moment, though, he's just a kid with a camera, and it shows. --------------------------------------------- Result 3047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When I had first heard of "Solar Crisis" then got a [[load]] of the cast, I wondered why I had never [[heard]] of a [[movie]] with such a [[big]] cast before. Then I saw it.

Now I know.

[[For]] a [[movie]] that [[encompasses]] [[outer]] space, the [[sun]], [[vast]] deserts and [[sprawling]] metropolises, this is an [[awfully]] cramped and claustrophobic [[feature]]; it feels [[like]] everyone is hunkered close together so the [[camera]] won't have to pull too far back.

And the effects, while good, are pretty underwhelming; we're talking about the imminent destruction of the planet Earth if a team of scientists and soldiers cannot deflect a deadly solar flare. But other than shouting, sweating and a red glow about everything, there's no [[real]] feel of emergency.

Don't get me [[started]] about the cast. What Heston, Palance, Matheson, Boyle, et al are doing in this movie without [[even]] bothering to [[act]] with any feel for the material is anyone's guess. Makes you wonder who else's condos aren't paid for in Hollywood....

And as far as the end goes.... Well, let's just [[say]] it's tense and intriguing but it's too little too [[late]] in an effort like this. If it had kept up that kind of pace all through the film, maybe I would have heard of "Solar Crisis" sooner.

Two stars. Mostly for lost opportunities and [[bad]] [[career]] moves.

I wonder how Alan Smithee keeps his job doing [[junk]] like this? When I had first heard of "Solar Crisis" then got a [[loads]] of the cast, I wondered why I had never [[listened]] of a [[flick]] with such a [[immense]] cast before. Then I saw it.

Now I know.

[[At]] a [[filmmaking]] that [[embraces]] [[outside]] space, the [[sunshine]], [[overwhelming]] deserts and [[complicated]] metropolises, this is an [[appallingly]] cramped and claustrophobic [[trait]]; it feels [[iike]] everyone is hunkered close together so the [[cameras]] won't have to pull too far back.

And the effects, while good, are pretty underwhelming; we're talking about the imminent destruction of the planet Earth if a team of scientists and soldiers cannot deflect a deadly solar flare. But other than shouting, sweating and a red glow about everything, there's no [[actual]] feel of emergency.

Don't get me [[begins]] about the cast. What Heston, Palance, Matheson, Boyle, et al are doing in this movie without [[yet]] bothering to [[ley]] with any feel for the material is anyone's guess. Makes you wonder who else's condos aren't paid for in Hollywood....

And as far as the end goes.... Well, let's just [[says]] it's tense and intriguing but it's too little too [[tard]] in an effort like this. If it had kept up that kind of pace all through the film, maybe I would have heard of "Solar Crisis" sooner.

Two stars. Mostly for lost opportunities and [[negative]] [[occupations]] moves.

I wonder how Alan Smithee keeps his job doing [[trash]] like this? --------------------------------------------- Result 3048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] i saw this movie when i was 13 and i really liked dana plato who later starred in different [[strokes]] as kimberly drummond . i don't think it's [[garbage]] .it was not [[meant]] to be a sequel to the documentary either . its just a [[cute]] [[kids]] [[movie]] about 3 children who go after men trying to find the boggy creek monster . the men get hurt and the kids rescue them with the help of the creature .haunting shots of the arkansas swamp and scenery were neat . this is a good [[movie]] for kids ,no [[real]] violence a few mild scares but [[good]] fun for the young kids. i saw this movie when i was 13 and i really liked dana plato who later starred in different [[blows]] as kimberly drummond . i don't think it's [[detritus]] .it was not [[signified]] to be a sequel to the documentary either . its just a [[purty]] [[brats]] [[movies]] about 3 children who go after men trying to find the boggy creek monster . the men get hurt and the kids rescue them with the help of the creature .haunting shots of the arkansas swamp and scenery were neat . this is a good [[cinematography]] for kids ,no [[actual]] violence a few mild scares but [[alright]] fun for the young kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 3049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This is a [[long]] lost horror gem starring Sydney Lassick ("Carrie" and others) and Barbara Bach. It is [[sometimes]] [[difficult]] to [[locate]] a copy of this film but it's worth it. This film is [[creepy]] [[yet]] [[cheesy]] at the same [[time]]. It [[seems]] that 3 [[young]] newswomen ([[Karen]], Vicky, and [[Jennifer]]) [[travel]] to the [[small]] [[city]] of Solvang, California to [[cover]] a [[festival]] when a mix-up [[occurs]] [[involving]] their [[hotel]] [[room]] and they [[seek]] [[refuge]] at the [[home]] of [[Earnest]] Keller (Lassick) and his [[strange]] wife Virginia. Vickie [[stays]] [[behind]], feeling ill, as the other 2 are off to [[film]] their [[story]]. She is [[soon]] [[murdered]] at the house, in a [[VERY]] cheesy [[way]] by some [[unknown]] force hiding in the ventilation system (she is decapitated by the [[closing]] [[cover]] of the [[vent]] as it [[comes]] crashing down on her while she is being [[tugged]] through and into the basement). [[Soon]] Karen [[returns]] and she is [[murdered]] in an even more [[brutal]] [[fashion]] by having her [[face]] rammed through the [[vent]] cover. Jennifer is fighting with her (ex?)lover in a [[rather]] boring sub plot and when she returns [[home]], her hosts (whom by now we have [[discovered]] are brother and sister and that [[whatever]] it is that is in the basement is their son) devise a plot to try to murder her as well. Virgina does not totally agree with Earnest's plan to murder Jennifer but she is tricked into going into the [[basement]] where she meets Junior. Here the [[film]] turns [[almost]] [[comic]] as Junior (portrayed hysterically by Stephen Furst) is a deformed, [[mentally]] deficient, manchild [[whose]] actions and motions will cause a few chuckles even though it's supposed to be scary. This is where the pace of the film picks up and the ending is well done. The actors/actresses do a [[terrific]] job with the material especially Lassick, Furst, and Bach and although it's not the most horrifying film ever made it is [[highly]] [[entertaining]]! This is a [[prolonged]] lost horror gem starring Sydney Lassick ("Carrie" and others) and Barbara Bach. It is [[occasionally]] [[cumbersome]] to [[locating]] a copy of this film but it's worth it. This film is [[spooky]] [[again]] [[corny]] at the same [[moment]]. It [[appears]] that 3 [[youthful]] newswomen ([[Karin]], Vicky, and [[Jessica]]) [[voyager]] to the [[teeny]] [[town]] of Solvang, California to [[covered]] a [[festivals]] when a mix-up [[transpires]] [[involve]] their [[motel]] [[rooms]] and they [[seeks]] [[sanctuary]] at the [[homes]] of [[Sincere]] Keller (Lassick) and his [[bizarre]] wife Virginia. Vickie [[remains]] [[backside]], feeling ill, as the other 2 are off to [[movie]] their [[storytelling]]. She is [[swiftly]] [[killed]] at the house, in a [[MUCH]] cheesy [[path]] by some [[unidentified]] force hiding in the ventilation system (she is decapitated by the [[shut]] [[covering]] of the [[ventilation]] as it [[happens]] crashing down on her while she is being [[tugging]] through and into the basement). [[Quick]] Karen [[restitution]] and she is [[murdering]] in an even more [[brute]] [[manner]] by having her [[confront]] rammed through the [[ventilation]] cover. Jennifer is fighting with her (ex?)lover in a [[quite]] boring sub plot and when she returns [[house]], her hosts (whom by now we have [[discovery]] are brother and sister and that [[whichever]] it is that is in the basement is their son) devise a plot to try to murder her as well. Virgina does not totally agree with Earnest's plan to murder Jennifer but she is tricked into going into the [[cellar]] where she meets Junior. Here the [[cinematography]] turns [[hardly]] [[comedian]] as Junior (portrayed hysterically by Stephen Furst) is a deformed, [[psychologically]] deficient, manchild [[whom]] actions and motions will cause a few chuckles even though it's supposed to be scary. This is where the pace of the film picks up and the ending is well done. The actors/actresses do a [[funky]] job with the material especially Lassick, Furst, and Bach and although it's not the most horrifying film ever made it is [[inordinately]] [[entertain]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3050 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] *[[SPOILER]] ALERT: I wish I could [[discuss]] this without revealing specific plot points, but I can't. [[Sorry]].*

I was looking for an IMDb review of the George C. Scott movie when I stumbled across the summary and reviews for this version. It had so many positive reviews that I decided to [[order]] it even though: (a)while truncated and [[rushed]], I [[thought]] [[George]] C. Scott [[embodied]] the [[tortured]] [[nature]] (and physical appearance) of the book's Rochester to a T; and (b)even while looking at the DVD's cover, I was thinking "Isn't Timothy Dalton too good-looking for the role?" The latter concern was reinforced by the fact that I decided to re-read the book while the DVD was on backorder. That said, the minute I started watching this, I was [[captivated]]. At first it was [[disconcerting]] to hear 1840's dialog spoken as written--with little or no attempts at modernization--but Dalton and Clarke [[threw]] themselves into it so [[thoroughly]], that I actually [[enjoyed]] the fact that the adapters trusted the audience to follow archaic speech. To have so much of the book up on the screen was an extra [[bonus]]. I know someone who won't watch any versions of Jane Eyre because "who wants to see a film about a man who keeps a poor crazy woman in the attic?" Frankly, if someone who hadn't read the book stumbled across the hour and a half or two hour versions, they would think that's pretty much all the story entails--Rochester's secret and its [[affect]] on [[everyone]] around him. Luckily, this [[version]] is actually about [[Jane]] Eyre's whole life.

Some people have [[criticized]] the casting. Dalton is too dashing; Clarke is too reserved. I can't argue against the first point, but he is so "in the moment" that I [[believe]] he IS Rochester. To me, Clarke's performance is on the mark. Jane Eyre is [[quiet]], guarded. If one [[remembers]] the book, so much of the adult Jane's fieriness and [[passion]] occurs during her private [[struggles]]. Some of the [[criticisms]] baffle me. Reviewers [[say]] Clarke is too short or isn't pretty enough. The book goes on ad infinitum about how small and plain Jane is. Ms. Clarke shouldn't be tall and the filmmakers toned down her looks to make Jane's declarations of her [[lack]] of beauty credible. She can scarcely help it if Dalton is tall. Some say there is no chemistry between the leads. What?!! The scene when Jane finally comes out of her room after the wedding fiasco fairly vibrates with passion and longing and sadness and regret--and that's just the first example that comes to mind.

I do agree with some of the other criticisms. I too missed more scenes with Helen Burns and the Rivers siblings. Some of the dialog was oddly truncated. When Rochester declares, "Jane, you misjudge me. I do not hate her because she is mad," I waited for the rest of the exchange when Rochester explains how if Jane were to go mad, he would still love and care for her. It's a powerful moment in the book, and I wish it had been included. I think it was a mistake to bring a scene with Rochester into the part of the story where Jane is on her own. It might have been done for clarity's sake, but I found it jarring. I wanted the sly humor of the scene where Jane opines that Rochester's ardor will cool and he'll become gruff again, but he may "like" her again by and by. Dalton's performance is so good that the rare misstep is glaring--when Rochester weeps in the library, I saw him as an actor doing a crying scene, not as Rochester. As for the sets, if anyone has ever caught an episode of the 1960's [[show]] "Dark Shadows," one knows what to expect--very stark and sometimes rickety looking interiors. Others have commented thoroughly and succinctly about the make-up job Rochester sports at the end. Yikes! It IS bad. The conclusion is too abrupt. After all that anguish and suspense, I wanted a more rounded off ending. And, on my copy of the DVD, having credits at the beginning and end of all eleven 25-30 minute episodes gets to be a bit much. That said, I am so glad I have this [[film]] and will watch it again and again. *[[DEFLECTOR]] ALERT: I wish I could [[discussion]] this without revealing specific plot points, but I can't. [[Dorry]].*

I was looking for an IMDb review of the George C. Scott movie when I stumbled across the summary and reviews for this version. It had so many positive reviews that I decided to [[orders]] it even though: (a)while truncated and [[harried]], I [[brainchild]] [[Georges]] C. Scott [[incarnated]] the [[torturing]] [[characters]] (and physical appearance) of the book's Rochester to a T; and (b)even while looking at the DVD's cover, I was thinking "Isn't Timothy Dalton too good-looking for the role?" The latter concern was reinforced by the fact that I decided to re-read the book while the DVD was on backorder. That said, the minute I started watching this, I was [[fascinated]]. At first it was [[alarming]] to hear 1840's dialog spoken as written--with little or no attempts at modernization--but Dalton and Clarke [[ditched]] themselves into it so [[elaborately]], that I actually [[appreciated]] the fact that the adapters trusted the audience to follow archaic speech. To have so much of the book up on the screen was an extra [[bonuses]]. I know someone who won't watch any versions of Jane Eyre because "who wants to see a film about a man who keeps a poor crazy woman in the attic?" Frankly, if someone who hadn't read the book stumbled across the hour and a half or two hour versions, they would think that's pretty much all the story entails--Rochester's secret and its [[afflict]] on [[somebody]] around him. Luckily, this [[stepping]] is actually about [[Jannet]] Eyre's whole life.

Some people have [[slammed]] the casting. Dalton is too dashing; Clarke is too reserved. I can't argue against the first point, but he is so "in the moment" that I [[think]] he IS Rochester. To me, Clarke's performance is on the mark. Jane Eyre is [[silent]], guarded. If one [[commemorates]] the book, so much of the adult Jane's fieriness and [[enthusiasm]] occurs during her private [[struggling]]. Some of the [[criticising]] baffle me. Reviewers [[says]] Clarke is too short or isn't pretty enough. The book goes on ad infinitum about how small and plain Jane is. Ms. Clarke shouldn't be tall and the filmmakers toned down her looks to make Jane's declarations of her [[absence]] of beauty credible. She can scarcely help it if Dalton is tall. Some say there is no chemistry between the leads. What?!! The scene when Jane finally comes out of her room after the wedding fiasco fairly vibrates with passion and longing and sadness and regret--and that's just the first example that comes to mind.

I do agree with some of the other criticisms. I too missed more scenes with Helen Burns and the Rivers siblings. Some of the dialog was oddly truncated. When Rochester declares, "Jane, you misjudge me. I do not hate her because she is mad," I waited for the rest of the exchange when Rochester explains how if Jane were to go mad, he would still love and care for her. It's a powerful moment in the book, and I wish it had been included. I think it was a mistake to bring a scene with Rochester into the part of the story where Jane is on her own. It might have been done for clarity's sake, but I found it jarring. I wanted the sly humor of the scene where Jane opines that Rochester's ardor will cool and he'll become gruff again, but he may "like" her again by and by. Dalton's performance is so good that the rare misstep is glaring--when Rochester weeps in the library, I saw him as an actor doing a crying scene, not as Rochester. As for the sets, if anyone has ever caught an episode of the 1960's [[demonstrate]] "Dark Shadows," one knows what to expect--very stark and sometimes rickety looking interiors. Others have commented thoroughly and succinctly about the make-up job Rochester sports at the end. Yikes! It IS bad. The conclusion is too abrupt. After all that anguish and suspense, I wanted a more rounded off ending. And, on my copy of the DVD, having credits at the beginning and end of all eleven 25-30 minute episodes gets to be a bit much. That said, I am so glad I have this [[cinema]] and will watch it again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] We [[expected]] something [[great]] when we went to [[see]] this [[bomb]]. It is basically a Broadway [[play]] put on [[film]]. The [[music]] is [[plain]] [[terrible]]. There isn't one memorable song in the movie -- heard any hits from this movie? You won't because there aren't any. Some of the musical [[numbers]] go on so long that I got up to [[go]] to the [[restroom]] and [[get]] some pop corn and it was still going when I [[got]] back! If they were good songs well -- but they [[suck]]. The [[pace]] is [[slow]], [[terrible]] [[character]] [[development]]. The lead was [[praised]] for her [[singing]] but [[sounded]] like she screamed [[every]] song -- it was [[almost]] [[impossible]] to [[stand]]. This [[movie]] has [[NOTHING]] to offer [[anyone]] but die-hard Broadway [[enthusiasts]]. This is without a doubt the most over rated [[movie]] I've [[seen]] in my [[entire]] life. A [[complete]] [[waist]] of [[time]] and [[money]]. There is [[nothing]] [[memorable]] about this [[movie]] except [[Danny]] Glover -- who wasn't on screen enough and [[whose]] character wasn't [[developed]] enough. [[Rent]] the [[video]] and you'll agree -- this [[movie]] was an expensive, over produced, [[polished]] [[dog]] do. We [[scheduled]] something [[large]] when we went to [[seeing]] this [[bombings]]. It is basically a Broadway [[gaming]] put on [[movies]]. The [[musician]] is [[lowlands]] [[scary]]. There isn't one memorable song in the movie -- heard any hits from this movie? You won't because there aren't any. Some of the musical [[numerals]] go on so long that I got up to [[going]] to the [[wc]] and [[got]] some pop corn and it was still going when I [[gets]] back! If they were good songs well -- but they [[lick]]. The [[rhythm]] is [[sluggish]], [[scary]] [[personage]] [[evolution]]. The lead was [[welcomed]] for her [[chant]] but [[seemed]] like she screamed [[all]] song -- it was [[around]] [[unable]] to [[stands]]. This [[filmmaking]] has [[NONE]] to offer [[nobody]] but die-hard Broadway [[fans]]. This is without a doubt the most over rated [[films]] I've [[watched]] in my [[overall]] life. A [[finishes]] [[wrist]] of [[moment]] and [[cash]]. There is [[none]] [[unforgettable]] about this [[filmmaking]] except [[Devito]] Glover -- who wasn't on screen enough and [[who]] character wasn't [[worded]] enough. [[Rents]] the [[videos]] and you'll agree -- this [[filmmaking]] was an expensive, over produced, [[pulido]] [[terrier]] do. --------------------------------------------- Result 3052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] a [[couple]] of [[weeks]] [[ago]], and it's been stuck in my head ever [[since]]. It [[stars]] two spellbinding [[characters]] in what is unfortunately a mediocre documentary. To [[get]] the [[true]] [[story]] of the Beales, I had to wade through all of the DVD's bonus material and [[commentaries]] and [[search]] the web.

[[Although]] the Maysles and their [[fans]] (not to [[mention]] [[Edith]] and Edie themselves) bristle at the [[suggestion]] that this [[film]] is exploitative, this is exploitation in the truest sense of the word. Very [[little]] [[effort]] is every made to explain the Beales or how they came to the [[condition]] they were in - the Maysles approach seems to be to just turn the camera on and wait for [[Edith]] and Edie to say something [[outrageous]]. The sound, even on the [[Criterion]] re-release is poor and difficult to follow. [[Although]] I [[appreciate]] this [[film]] was made somewhat early in the [[history]] of documentary [[film]], it's ironic to compare it to Geraldo Rivera's (!) far superior series on the sexual [[abuse]] of mentally retarded patients at Willowbrook State [[School]] in Staten [[Island]] from 1972, four [[years]] before Grey [[Gardens]] was shot.

To paraphrase a review in the [[New]] Yorker, there were [[many]] things [[Edith]] and Edie [[needed]] in their [[lives]], and a documentary wasn't one of them.

As for [[Edith]] and Edie, the [[thing]] I kept [[thinking]] while watching the [[film]] was "where the [[hell]] is their family"? They were living in [[dangerous]], [[unhealthy]], unsafe conditions. How is it that [[Jackie]] O, [[married]] to one of the richest [[men]] on [[Earth]] (or the [[wealthy]] Bouvier [[family]] themselves) couldn't afford to [[get]] [[Edith]] and Edie a decent [[home]]? Or at the very [[least]] hire a part-time housekeeper or caregiver to [[come]] in and [[keep]] an [[eye]] on them both? It's shameful and a [[lasting]] disgrace to the entire Bouvier [[family]].

[[Although]] this [[review]] may sound [[negative]] I would [[strongly]] [[recommend]] [[Grey]] [[Gardens]] to anyone who enjoys [[documentaries]]. [[Perhaps]] someday [[someone]] will come along and do a [[documentary]] about this [[documentary]] - bringing in the rich backstory (and afterstory) of the Beales and the [[whole]] [[subsection]] of Hamptons [[society]] in the 1970's. I [[noticed]] this [[kino]] a [[couples]] of [[zhou]] [[earlier]], and it's been stuck in my head ever [[because]]. It [[star]] two spellbinding [[nature]] in what is unfortunately a mediocre documentary. To [[got]] the [[truthful]] [[narratives]] of the Beales, I had to wade through all of the DVD's bonus material and [[remarks]] and [[researching]] the web.

[[Albeit]] the Maysles and their [[followers]] (not to [[mentioning]] [[Gertrude]] and Edie themselves) bristle at the [[proposition]] that this [[cinema]] is exploitative, this is exploitation in the truest sense of the word. Very [[petite]] [[efforts]] is every made to explain the Beales or how they came to the [[stipulation]] they were in - the Maysles approach seems to be to just turn the camera on and wait for [[Gertrude]] and Edie to say something [[hideous]]. The sound, even on the [[Criteria]] re-release is poor and difficult to follow. [[Despite]] I [[thankful]] this [[cinema]] was made somewhat early in the [[historical]] of documentary [[kino]], it's ironic to compare it to Geraldo Rivera's (!) far superior series on the sexual [[abused]] of mentally retarded patients at Willowbrook State [[Schooling]] in Staten [[Lsland]] from 1972, four [[olds]] before Grey [[Orchards]] was shot.

To paraphrase a review in the [[Novo]] Yorker, there were [[countless]] things [[Gertrude]] and Edie [[need]] in their [[vie]], and a documentary wasn't one of them.

As for [[Mabel]] and Edie, the [[stuff]] I kept [[think]] while watching the [[cinematography]] was "where the [[dammit]] is their family"? They were living in [[risky]], [[unwholesome]], unsafe conditions. How is it that [[Melanie]] O, [[marriages]] to one of the richest [[male]] on [[Land]] (or the [[prosperous]] Bouvier [[families]] themselves) couldn't afford to [[gets]] [[Gertrude]] and Edie a decent [[dwellings]]? Or at the very [[less]] hire a part-time housekeeper or caregiver to [[arrive]] in and [[maintain]] an [[eyes]] on them both? It's shameful and a [[sustained]] disgrace to the entire Bouvier [[families]].

[[While]] this [[revisions]] may sound [[injurious]] I would [[furiously]] [[recommendation]] [[Gray]] [[Orchards]] to anyone who enjoys [[literature]]. [[Probably]] someday [[person]] will come along and do a [[documentation]] about this [[documentation]] - bringing in the rich backstory (and afterstory) of the Beales and the [[entire]] [[paragraph]] of Hamptons [[societal]] in the 1970's. --------------------------------------------- Result 3053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Proximity" tells of a convict (Lowe) who thinks the prison staff is out to kill him. This very ordinary film is an action/drama with a weak plot; stereotypical, poorly developed characters; and a one dimensional performance by Lowe. A forgettable film not worthy of further commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 3054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] And [[yet]] another run of South [[Park]] comes to an [[end]]. This wasn't as strong an episode as I'd [[hoped]] for, but Night of the [[Living]] Homeless was a stronger finisher then Stanley's Cup, Tsst, [[Bloody]] Mary, or Erection Day. It [[still]] can't [[hold]] a [[candle]] to [[Woodland]] [[Critter]] Christmas and Goobacks, but few [[episodes]] can.

[[Night]] of the [[Living]] Homeless is a spoof of the zombie [[genre]], [[done]] in a [[way]] only [[South]] [[Park]] would [[think]] of. [[Instead]] of flesh [[eating]] [[zombies]], the entities are homeless that request [[change]] and [[seem]] to survive off of it.

Randy and other residents are locked in the Community Center, [[though]] this time on the [[roof]], where they can survey the scene. A [[particularly]] funny moment is when one [[member]] finds out his home is [[gone]], and becomes homeless, leaving Randy no choice but to shoot him.

Meanwhile, the four boys set out to solve the problem, with the whole story behind the homeless takeover trying to convey a message, but being seriously uninspired. South Park is at it's best a lot of the times when it is being ridiculous. Matt and Trey played it safe this [[week]], and didn't [[really]] critique the homeless problem, just lampooned it.

The [[shock]] moment of the episode comes when a [[scientist]] [[shoots]] himself in an [[attempt]] to [[avoid]] the homeless. This is the first [[time]] a [[suicide]] on [[South]] Park goes [[wrong]], and we watch the poor [[man]] miss his brain and then [[attempt]] to shoot himself [[many]] times while he painfully [[dies]]. Another inspired [[South]] Park [[moment]].

[[Overall]], the episode was [[funny]], but it was kept from being great by withholding any real commentary on the homeless and sticking straight with the zombie shtick. The ending is [[somewhat]] [[funny]], but [[nothing]] [[new]].

Now we [[must]] wait until October for the next [[batch]] of [[episodes]]. It's a long haul, but South Park [[must]] be [[applauded]] for it's run. The [[show]] seemed to be [[running]] out of [[steam]] last season, but now it's back in full form. And [[still]] another run of South [[Playpen]] comes to an [[termination]]. This wasn't as strong an episode as I'd [[desired]] for, but Night of the [[Iife]] Homeless was a stronger finisher then Stanley's Cup, Tsst, [[Murderous]] Mary, or Erection Day. It [[nevertheless]] can't [[holds]] a [[candela]] to [[Forest]] [[Critters]] Christmas and Goobacks, but few [[spells]] can.

[[Nightly]] of the [[Live]] Homeless is a spoof of the zombie [[genus]], [[played]] in a [[routes]] only [[Southerly]] [[Playpen]] would [[ideas]] of. [[However]] of flesh [[dining]] [[walkers]], the entities are homeless that request [[modifications]] and [[looks]] to survive off of it.

Randy and other residents are locked in the Community Center, [[if]] this time on the [[ceiling]], where they can survey the scene. A [[namely]] funny moment is when one [[members]] finds out his home is [[disappeared]], and becomes homeless, leaving Randy no choice but to shoot him.

Meanwhile, the four boys set out to solve the problem, with the whole story behind the homeless takeover trying to convey a message, but being seriously uninspired. South Park is at it's best a lot of the times when it is being ridiculous. Matt and Trey played it safe this [[chow]], and didn't [[genuinely]] critique the homeless problem, just lampooned it.

The [[shocks]] moment of the episode comes when a [[investigators]] [[stalks]] himself in an [[endeavour]] to [[forestall]] the homeless. This is the first [[moment]] a [[suicidal]] on [[Southward]] Park goes [[amiss]], and we watch the poor [[guy]] miss his brain and then [[endeavour]] to shoot himself [[innumerable]] times while he painfully [[decease]]. Another inspired [[Southward]] Park [[time]].

[[General]], the episode was [[comical]], but it was kept from being great by withholding any real commentary on the homeless and sticking straight with the zombie shtick. The ending is [[slightly]] [[fun]], but [[anything]] [[novel]].

Now we [[gotta]] wait until October for the next [[lot]] of [[spells]]. It's a long haul, but South Park [[ought]] be [[clapped]] for it's run. The [[showing]] seemed to be [[execute]] out of [[vapours]] last season, but now it's back in full form. --------------------------------------------- Result 3055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Well, were to start? This is by far one of the [[worst]] films I've ever paid good money to see. I won't [[comment]] on the story itself, it's a wonderful classic, but here it feels [[like]] a soap [[opera]]. To [[start]] with, the acting, except for Eric Bana, is soap opera quality. I've [[always]] been a [[fan]] of Brad Pitt, but here every actor on The [[Bold]] and the Beautiful puts him to [[shame]]. The camera action doesn't [[help]], either. How it [[lingers]] on him when he's [[thinking]], it just [[takes]] me back to Brooke Forrester's days in the lab! [[Peter]] O'Toole has either had a [[really]] [[bad]] plastic surgery, or he is [[desperately]] in need of one. [[Either]] [[way]], he [[looks]] more like Linda Evans than Linda Evans! And to [[end]] my [[comments]], Diane Kruger is a [[cute]] [[girl]], but she sure is no [[Helen]] of [[Troy]]. [[Peterson]] should [[rather]] have [[chosen]] Saffron [[Burrows]] for the role, since [[Elizabeth]] Taylor would be [[rather]] miscast by now. Well, were to start? This is by far one of the [[meanest]] films I've ever paid good money to see. I won't [[commentaries]] on the story itself, it's a wonderful classic, but here it feels [[iike]] a soap [[drama]]. To [[starter]] with, the acting, except for Eric Bana, is soap opera quality. I've [[repeatedly]] been a [[breather]] of Brad Pitt, but here every actor on The [[Brave]] and the Beautiful puts him to [[pity]]. The camera action doesn't [[pomoc]], either. How it [[persisted]] on him when he's [[thought]], it just [[pick]] me back to Brooke Forrester's days in the lab! [[Peters]] O'Toole has either had a [[truly]] [[naughty]] plastic surgery, or he is [[badly]] in need of one. [[Neither]] [[route]], he [[seem]] more like Linda Evans than Linda Evans! And to [[ending]] my [[commentaries]], Diane Kruger is a [[loveable]] [[fille]], but she sure is no [[Helene]] of [[Trojans]]. [[Petersen]] should [[somewhat]] have [[opt]] Saffron [[Dens]] for the role, since [[Elisabetta]] Taylor would be [[somewhat]] miscast by now. --------------------------------------------- Result 3056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Margaritas and Cock..."

This tremendously entertaining film grabs you from the opening scene and never stops delivering laughs, surprises and unexpectedly touching moments. I had more fun watching "The Matador" than almost any other film from 2005. It is a wacky film with an unforgettable character, played to perfection by Pierce Brosnan.

Julian Noble (Brosnan) is a facilitator (hit-man) who specializes in high-end corporate gigs (assassinating rich dudes). He is also experiencing something akin to a mid-life crisis. After coming to realization that he has no real friends, no permanent home and no planned future, he stumbles into a Mexican hotel bar one night and runs into Danny Wright (Kinnear).

Danny is a down-on-his-luck family man who is on the verge of losing the big business deal that just might turn things around for him. He loves his wife dearly, especially so since they lost their young son a few years earlier.

The two men are chalk and cheese, hardly any common ground other than that they are in the same desolate bar one night. And somehow a conversation is struck that sets in to motion a chain of events that will change their lives forever.

The friendship they form reminded me a lot of Laurel and Hardy. One is the straight man and the other is the persistent fool who gets them into trouble. The interplay is superbly timed and finely tuned, due in no small part to the wonderful performances from Brosnan and Kinnear.

But make no mistake... This is Brosnan's film. He imprints one of the most memorable and despicably likable characters of the decade. He could shoot your mother and apologize immediately thereafter and you'd probably forgive him. Brosnan may be cinema's ultimate charmer, but this is his most endearing and complete performance to date. I wouldn't be averse to seeing an Oscar nod for this role.

Consider one scene where he overtly ogles a high-school girl with the impurest of thoughts and utters the line, "All blushy blushy... No sucky fucky". He does it with the familiar Bond smirk and manages to get away with it. He manages to tell a young boy, "Tell your mother to lose 30lbs and 20 years. Then get back to me" without coming across as unlikable. In fact, it makes us like him even more.

And yet the film manages to surprise us with some truly touching scenes, most of which come toward the end when the film takes some unpredictable turns. However, when Julian thumbs through his little black book to find someone to call on his birthday, or when Danny and his wife (Davis) console each other in their bedroom one night, the film reaches an unexpected depth of emotion.

"The Matador" is stylish and energetic. It is constantly entertaining. And it contains a career-defining role for Brosnan as the lonely hit-man looking for normalcy, friendship and a means to do at least one good thing in his life. This is an overlooked gem in 2005 and you should make an effort to see this film as soon as possible.

TC Candler of IndependentCritics.com --------------------------------------------- Result 3057 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This last Dutch speaking film of Verhooven made me laugh good. As a film buff looking for all the small details and cross references etc in any movie I can assure anyone interested in film art that this piece amuses all the senses. I haven't read Gerard Reves book, on which the film is based, but I still believe we get a candid picture of a somewhat self-conceited poet/writer who gets his (in a way - no spoiling here). An anti-hero surrounded by characters that have their ambiguous intentions, as has he. All this in a superbly packaged cinematography, Paul Verhopven manages to turn the otherwise rather cute "gesellich(?)" Dutch locations into a suspenseful film-noir setting, impressive work! --------------------------------------------- Result 3058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Understand i'm [[reviewing]] the [[film]] I have [[seen]]. I realize virtually all the nudity and [[gore]] was cut from this [[film]], thus neutering it completely. When seeing [[names]] like [[Ginger]] [[Lynn]] and Jenna Jameson attached, I knew I wasn't going to get a horror [[classic]], but at the very least I expected gratuitous boobies and bloodshed. But no, this has got to be the most butchered modern horror film, I mean it's easy to tell there is much more to certain scenes', but they suddenly cut away, or the scene just [[totally]] [[ends]] right as it [[begins]]. How does one screw up cannibals' and porn [[stars]]? I mean [[thats]] a winning formula, it makes me wonder if the [[director]] slept with some executive's [[wife]] or something, because it is literally amazing how much got cut from this. Reading about it a few years back in Fangoria, I was [[excited]], it looked like a [[fun]] [[film]], but unfortunately the [[true]] [[film]] is locked in a vault [[somewhere]], and we [[must]] [[endure]] this [[piece]] of excrement retitled Evil [[Breed]]. [[Hopefully]] an unrated cut will be released someday, as I [[think]] a good [[movie]] [[exists]] in this [[mess]], but until then [[best]] grab a twelve [[pack]] of Bud, cause [[thats]] the only [[way]] you'll make it through this [[movie]]. Understand i'm [[scrutinize]] the [[filmmaking]] I have [[noticed]]. I realize virtually all the nudity and [[gora]] was cut from this [[movies]], thus neutering it completely. When seeing [[name]] like [[Jiang]] [[Lynne]] and Jenna Jameson attached, I knew I wasn't going to get a horror [[traditional]], but at the very least I expected gratuitous boobies and bloodshed. But no, this has got to be the most butchered modern horror film, I mean it's easy to tell there is much more to certain scenes', but they suddenly cut away, or the scene just [[fully]] [[culminates]] right as it [[initiation]]. How does one screw up cannibals' and porn [[celebrity]]? I mean [[shes]] a winning formula, it makes me wonder if the [[superintendent]] slept with some executive's [[women]] or something, because it is literally amazing how much got cut from this. Reading about it a few years back in Fangoria, I was [[agitated]], it looked like a [[amusing]] [[movie]], but unfortunately the [[veritable]] [[cinematic]] is locked in a vault [[anywhere]], and we [[owes]] [[withstand]] this [[slice]] of excrement retitled Evil [[Reproduce]]. [[Fortunately]] an unrated cut will be released someday, as I [[believing]] a good [[film]] [[exist]] in this [[chaos]], but until then [[optimum]] grab a twelve [[packed]] of Bud, cause [[shes]] the only [[camino]] you'll make it through this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3059 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best parts of Sundance is seeing movies that you would otherwise almost certainly miss. Unless you're a real art-house devotee, you probably don't catch many documentaries. Only a handful get any recognizable distribution. Fortunately, Sundance has increased its commitment to documentaries in recent years.

Shakespeare Behind Bars is a powerful documentary about a dramatic production group at the Luther Luckett Correctional Complex in LaGrange, Kentucky. Every year a group of inmates present a Shakespearean play. Director Hank Rogerson and his crew follow the troupe as roles are self-selected, interpreted, rehearsed and ultimately performed.

The movie is filled with fascinating revelations for those of us that have not been exposed to prison environments. Despite the labels we know them by (convict, felon, murderer, etc.) we soon began to appreciate and respect these men as thinking feeling human beings. Serendipitously, the play chosen for the year of filming was The Tempest, with its penetrating focus on forgiveness and redemption. The actors all grapple with the relevance of the play to their lives, finding patterns and parallels with their characters and the meaning of the drama.

For a documentary film, like a book, the best that can be hoped for is that we experience something that changes our lives. Shakespeare Behind Bars was a personal revelation for me. "O brave new world, that has such creatures in it." --------------------------------------------- Result 3060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Of the three titles from [[Jess]] Franco to find their way onto the Official DPP Video Nasty list (Devil Hunter, Bloody Moon and Women Behind Bars) this is perhaps the [[least]] deserving of notoriety, being a dreadfully [[dull]] jungle clunker enlivened only very slightly by a little inept gore, a gratuitous rape scene, and loads of nudity.

Gorgeous blonde Ursula Buchfellner plays movie star Laura Crawford who is abducted by a gang of ruthless kidnappers and taken to a remote tropical island inhabited by a savage tribe who [[worship]] the 'devil god' that lurks in the jungle (a big, naked, bulging-eyed native who likes to eat the hearts of nubile female sacrifices).

[[Employed]] by Laura's agent to deliver a $6million ransom, brave mercenary Peter Weston (Al Cliver) and his Vietnam vet pilot pal travel to the island, but encounter trouble when the bad guys attempt a double-cross. During the confusion, Laura escapes into the jungle, but runs straight into the arms of the island's natives, who offer her up to their god.

Franco directs in his usual torpid style and loads this [[laughable]] [[effort]] with his usual [[dreadful]] trademarks: crap gore, murky [[cinematography]], rapid zooms, numerous crotch shots, out of focus [[imagery]], [[awful]] sound effects, and ham-fisted [[editing]]. The [[result]] is a [[dire]] [[mess]] that is a [[real]] [[struggle]] to [[sit]] through from [[start]] to finish (It [[took]] me a couple of sittings to [[finish]] the [[thing]]), and [[even]] the sight of the luscious Buchfellner in all of her natural glory ain't enough to [[make]] me [[revisit]] this [[film]] in a [[hurry]]. Of the three titles from [[Jessie]] Franco to find their way onto the Official DPP Video Nasty list (Devil Hunter, Bloody Moon and Women Behind Bars) this is perhaps the [[fewer]] deserving of notoriety, being a dreadfully [[drab]] jungle clunker enlivened only very slightly by a little inept gore, a gratuitous rape scene, and loads of nudity.

Gorgeous blonde Ursula Buchfellner plays movie star Laura Crawford who is abducted by a gang of ruthless kidnappers and taken to a remote tropical island inhabited by a savage tribe who [[cult]] the 'devil god' that lurks in the jungle (a big, naked, bulging-eyed native who likes to eat the hearts of nubile female sacrifices).

[[Utilized]] by Laura's agent to deliver a $6million ransom, brave mercenary Peter Weston (Al Cliver) and his Vietnam vet pilot pal travel to the island, but encounter trouble when the bad guys attempt a double-cross. During the confusion, Laura escapes into the jungle, but runs straight into the arms of the island's natives, who offer her up to their god.

Franco directs in his usual torpid style and loads this [[farcical]] [[endeavor]] with his usual [[scary]] trademarks: crap gore, murky [[movie]], rapid zooms, numerous crotch shots, out of focus [[photograph]], [[scary]] sound effects, and ham-fisted [[edited]]. The [[outcomes]] is a [[abysmal]] [[chaos]] that is a [[veritable]] [[combat]] to [[seated]] through from [[initiation]] to finish (It [[picked]] me a couple of sittings to [[completing]] the [[stuff]]), and [[yet]] the sight of the luscious Buchfellner in all of her natural glory ain't enough to [[deliver]] me [[reviewed]] this [[filmmaking]] in a [[faster]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] After a promising first 25 [[minutes]] that makes you feel all warm inside, you're pretty convinced that this will be a [[great]] [[romantic]] [[comedy]]. Then the movie takes a turn for the worse.

The warm feeling might [[still]] be there, but as others has said: The [[plot]] becomes so [[unbelievable]] and artificial that it's almost unbearable to watch.

The movie [[gets]] [[sped]] up, and you [[get]] the impression that you're [[either]] [[fast]] [[forwarding]] through it, or that the [[producers]] decided to [[fit]] it in less than 1h40m and had to [[cut]] a lot of scenes out.

Realism isn't a [[goal]] [[onto]] itself, but as a viewer, I'm [[pretty]] convinced that this [[comedy]] isn't [[intentionally]] [[unrealistic]], it just [[happens]] to be.

[[On]] the [[plus]] side, this [[movie]] has a [[couple]] of [[nice]] [[interiors]], and despite the [[bad]] [[script]], I [[think]] that the [[actors]] performances are [[mainly]] good. [[If]] I could rate the first 25 [[minutes]] only, I'd [[probably]] give it an eight. As it is now, it [[gets]] a four. ...And that's being [[nice]]!

If you're a sucker for [[romantic]] comedies you'll [[probably]] have a [[great]] time [[anyways]]. [[If]] not, I'd [[recommend]] that you watch something [[else]]. After a promising first 25 [[mins]] that makes you feel all warm inside, you're pretty convinced that this will be a [[wondrous]] [[sentimental]] [[charade]]. Then the movie takes a turn for the worse.

The warm feeling might [[however]] be there, but as others has said: The [[intrigue]] becomes so [[awesome]] and artificial that it's almost unbearable to watch.

The movie [[attains]] [[quickened]] up, and you [[obtain]] the impression that you're [[neither]] [[vite]] [[transmitting]] through it, or that the [[grower]] decided to [[suited]] it in less than 1h40m and had to [[chopped]] a lot of scenes out.

Realism isn't a [[aims]] [[for]] itself, but as a viewer, I'm [[quite]] convinced that this [[humour]] isn't [[consciously]] [[unreal]], it just [[comes]] to be.

[[Onto]] the [[longer]] side, this [[cinematographic]] has a [[coupling]] of [[pleasurable]] [[inland]], and despite the [[unfavorable]] [[hyphen]], I [[thought]] that the [[protagonists]] performances are [[especially]] good. [[Though]] I could rate the first 25 [[mins]] only, I'd [[unquestionably]] give it an eight. As it is now, it [[attains]] a four. ...And that's being [[pleasant]]!

If you're a sucker for [[sentimental]] comedies you'll [[unquestionably]] have a [[whopping]] time [[anyhow]]. [[Unless]] not, I'd [[recommended]] that you watch something [[otherwise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Does any one know what the 2 sports cars were? I think Robert Stack's might have been a Masseratti.Rock Hudson's character told his father he was taking a job in Iraq ,isn't that timely? I have had Dorthy Malone in my spank bank most of my life ,maybe this was the film that impressed me.Loren Bacall sure did have some chops in this film and probably out-acted Malone but Malones's part made a more sensational impact so she got the Oscar for best supporting role.Was Loren's part considered a leading role?Old man Hadley character was was probably a pretty common picture of tycoons of his era in that he was a regular guy who made it big in an emerging industry but in building a whole town he had forgotten his children to have his wife bring them up.In time,being widowed he realized that they were all he really had and they were spoiled rotten,looking for attention,so rather than try to relate to his children he blew his head off.An ancient morality tale.But seriously,what were those sports cars? --------------------------------------------- Result 3063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] So, I'm wondering while watching this [[film]], did the [[producers]] of this movie get to [[save]] money on Sandra Bullock's wardrobe by [[dragging]] out her "before" [[clothes]] from [[Miss]] Congeniality? Did [[Ms]]. Bullock [[also]] [[get]] to sleepwalk through the role by channeling the "before" Gracie Hart? As [[many]] reviewers have [[noted]] before, the film is very formulaic. [[Add]] to that the deja vu [[viewer]] experiences with the [[character]] of Cassie Maywether as a [[somewhat]] darker Gracie Hart with more back [[story]] and it [[rapidly]] [[become]] a snooze fest.

The two bad boy serial killers have been done before (and better) in other films. As has the "good guy partner trying to protect his partner despite the evidence" character been seen before. In fact none of the characters in the film ever get beyond two dimensions or try to be anything but trite stereotypes.

One last peeve - [[using]] the term serial killer is [[false]] [[advertising]]. Murdering one person - even if it's a premeditated murder - does not make you a serial killer. You may have the potential to become a serial killer but you are not a serial killer or even a spree killer. So, I'm wondering while watching this [[filmmaking]], did the [[growers]] of this movie get to [[saves]] money on Sandra Bullock's wardrobe by [[dredging]] out her "before" [[garb]] from [[Mademoiselle]] Congeniality? Did [[Luciana]]. Bullock [[similarly]] [[obtains]] to sleepwalk through the role by channeling the "before" Gracie Hart? As [[multiple]] reviewers have [[commented]] before, the film is very formulaic. [[Adding]] to that the deja vu [[beholder]] experiences with the [[personage]] of Cassie Maywether as a [[rather]] darker Gracie Hart with more back [[storytelling]] and it [[faster]] [[gotten]] a snooze fest.

The two bad boy serial killers have been done before (and better) in other films. As has the "good guy partner trying to protect his partner despite the evidence" character been seen before. In fact none of the characters in the film ever get beyond two dimensions or try to be anything but trite stereotypes.

One last peeve - [[utilizes]] the term serial killer is [[fake]] [[advertise]]. Murdering one person - even if it's a premeditated murder - does not make you a serial killer. You may have the potential to become a serial killer but you are not a serial killer or even a spree killer. --------------------------------------------- Result 3064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The year 1995, when so many people talked about the great premiere of BRAVEHEART by Mel Gibson, also saw another very fine, yet underrated movie on Scottish history, ROB ROY. Although it is a very different film, especially due to the historical period the story is set in, ROB ROY has much in common not only with marvelous BRAVEHEART but also with the very spirit of epic movies.

It is a film that discusses similar themes, like fight for dignity, courage, honor, revenge, family being a key to happiness. It also leads us to the very bliss of Scottish highlands where the human soul finds its rest being surrounded by all grandeur of nature. Robert Roy MacGregor (Liam Neeson), the main character is a true hero (so universal in epics), sort of "Scottish Robin Hood" who struggles to lead his people out of oppression imposed by cold hearted lords. Although he worsens his situation through the acts, has to suffer a lot, two things stay in his mind undeniably: HONOR that he is given by himself and LOVE to his woman, Mary MacGregor (Jessica Lange). That leads him to unexpected events...

Except for the interesting content and quite vivid action, the movie is filled with truly stunning visuals. This factor has to do both with the sets and locations of the film as well as the wardrobe. Many memorable moments stay in the mind of any viewer who can allow themselves an insight into artistic images. For me, the most splendid scene was in the Highlands when Rob Roy tells his boys what honor really means. Then, he sends them away and beautifully makes love to his woman. The scene he escapes Marguis of Montrose (John Hurt) to the waterfall is also worth a look as a stunning visual.

Of course, there is some graphic violence, like in the duel for instance, but I don't think that this violence would be as harmful as in many other modern films. Its justification is like any other epic's: bloodshed and cruelty of those times were really serious and there would be no point in hiding it. The most disturbing scene, for me, was the rape done on Rob Roy's wife by the villain of the story: Archibald Cunningham (Tim Roth). It's truly disgusting and kids should definitely stay away. However, all the rest is O.K. Yet, there is one aspect that made me really love this movie, the performances.

All the cast do perfect jobs, from the leading Lian Neeson who fits very well to the role of tall, brave, strong Scottish man to the supporting cast of Brian Cox who portrays wicked Killearn, a silent witness of terrible acts who feels comfortable with the evil of war. Jessica Lange is very fine as Mary MacGregor and has some of the most beautiful moments in the film. There is chemistry between Ms Lange and Mr Neeson in many of their scenes. John Hurt, one of the best British actors, does a terrific job as Marguis of Montrose, a corrupted man for whom money is the aim in itself achieved by any means. I like that calmness of his portrayal. But the real villain is played by Tim Roth who truly depicts wretched side of his character, Archibald - a man who mocks love, who loves war and who finds true lust in rape and slaughter. But, like in any good epic, this exceptional evil must find its end...

And one more aspect: the musical score: such memorable and sentimental tunes that are bound to sound in the ears for long. The final moment touched me to tears not only because of the beauty it conveys but because I deeply combined these blissful tunes with the grandeur of locations. Scotland remains in the heart of its visitor and this movie reminded me of that permanent effect. It was, as if, my second journey to Scotland.

ROB ROY is a very nice movie, very well directed, photographed and acted. It perhaps does not equal BRAVEHEART with its spectacular sets and crowds of extras in battle scenes, but it is a fairly long film with much attention placed on one very significant feature a cinema should have: stunning entertainment combined with heartfelt education. I really enjoyed that film, do not hesitate to call it metaphorically "highlands of entertainment" and rate it 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Going into [[seeing]] this movie I was a bit [[skeptical]] because [[fantasy]] movies are not [[always]] my cup of tea. [[Especially]] a romantic [[fantasy]].

[[Little]] did I [[know]] that I was in for a ride through cinematic [[magic]]. [[Everything]] in the [[movie]] from plot to dialogue to [[effects]] was very near perfection.

Claire [[Danes]] [[shines]] [[like]] the star she is in this movie. From beginning to end you [[fall]] more and more in love with this [[character]].

Michelle Pfeiffer is [[menacing]] as an [[evil]] witch bent on [[capturing]] the star for [[eternal]] [[youth]] and beauty.

Robert De [[Niro]] is a [[lovable]] [[character]] who [[gives]] the audience the [[greatest]] bit of [[comic]] [[relief]] as the [[movie]] is gaining momentum [[towards]] the [[climax]].

[[Overall]] this was a [[movie]] that [[surprised]] and [[delighted]] me as a [[movie]] [[fan]]. [[If]] you are [[looking]] for a fun and [[enjoyable]] [[movie]] that will be [[fun]] for the [[kids]] and [[adults]] [[alike]], [[Stardust]] is the [[way]] to [[go]]. Going into [[see]] this movie I was a bit [[incredulous]] because [[chimera]] movies are not [[repeatedly]] my cup of tea. [[Specifically]] a romantic [[chimera]].

[[Tiny]] did I [[savoir]] that I was in for a ride through cinematic [[sorcery]]. [[Any]] in the [[film]] from plot to dialogue to [[influences]] was very near perfection.

Claire [[Denmark]] [[glows]] [[iike]] the star she is in this movie. From beginning to end you [[decline]] more and more in love with this [[trait]].

Michelle Pfeiffer is [[threatening]] as an [[malicious]] witch bent on [[seizing]] the star for [[permanent]] [[teenagers]] and beauty.

Robert De [[Nero]] is a [[charmer]] [[nature]] who [[furnishes]] the audience the [[hugest]] bit of [[sitcom]] [[succour]] as the [[film]] is gaining momentum [[toward]] the [[orgasm]].

[[Aggregate]] this was a [[flick]] that [[dumbfounded]] and [[ravi]] me as a [[kino]] [[ventilator]]. [[Unless]] you are [[researching]] for a fun and [[nice]] [[cinematographic]] that will be [[entertaining]] for the [[children]] and [[adult]] [[equally]], [[Dust]] is the [[routes]] to [[going]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[mini]] series, also based on a [[book]] by [[Alex]] [[Haley]] as was `Queen', [[tried]] to [[use]] similar [[formulas]], that is, constructing a long [[history]] following the lives of a family over many years. [[Whereas]] in `Queen' the result was masterful, here in Mama Flora the inspiration was [[lacking]]. [[Firstly]] [[perhaps]] in the book itself, and most [[certainly]] in this [[TV]] production. Too much is put in with too much [[haste]] over the years, such that the unfolding saga is [[shallow]], superficial, not nearly so authentic as in `Queen'. Full marks for the scenification in the [[earlier]] parts of the film, which was prepared with great care, but as the film progressed it seemed to degenerate into a kind of dallasian-forsythian unpalatable mix in the last third of its three hours or so duration. I had hoped for more; but evidently Haley was less inspired with this tale than his near-biographical `Queen', and Peter Werner III is no match for John Erman. [[Only]] recommendable for those who have an appetite for these lengthy tales of generations growing up. This [[miniature]] series, also based on a [[books]] by [[Xander]] [[Hayley]] as was `Queen', [[attempted]] to [[utilizes]] similar [[forms]], that is, constructing a long [[historic]] following the lives of a family over many years. [[Whilst]] in `Queen' the result was masterful, here in Mama Flora the inspiration was [[missing]]. [[Initially]] [[maybe]] in the book itself, and most [[arguably]] in this [[TELEVISION]] production. Too much is put in with too much [[rush]] over the years, such that the unfolding saga is [[superficial]], superficial, not nearly so authentic as in `Queen'. Full marks for the scenification in the [[formerly]] parts of the film, which was prepared with great care, but as the film progressed it seemed to degenerate into a kind of dallasian-forsythian unpalatable mix in the last third of its three hours or so duration. I had hoped for more; but evidently Haley was less inspired with this tale than his near-biographical `Queen', and Peter Werner III is no match for John Erman. [[Exclusively]] recommendable for those who have an appetite for these lengthy tales of generations growing up. --------------------------------------------- Result 3067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] After [[seeing]] Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes, no actor should ever display such conceit as to imagine that he [[could]] ever come close to Mr. Brett's [[portrayal]] of "one of the most interesting characters in literature". Jeremy [[Brett]] IS Sherlock Holmes and in my opinion there can be no other. The [[great]] actor Basil Rathbone is,I must admit, a [[close]] second but, is still second. One might make the argument that Mr. Rathbone's screenplays were [[inferior]] to the absolutely top notch productions afforded Mr. Brett and to this I would agree. [[However]] when all is [[said]] and done Jeremy Brett will always and forever be the only actor to truly "become" Sherlock Holmes. The [[book]] should be closed on this subject and we,the public,left to [[enjoy]] Mr.Brett's [[unique]] performances.

Bill [[Rogers]]

(sonarman65@yahoo.com) After [[see]] Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes, no actor should ever display such conceit as to imagine that he [[would]] ever come close to Mr. Brett's [[depiction]] of "one of the most interesting characters in literature". Jeremy [[Widely]] IS Sherlock Holmes and in my opinion there can be no other. The [[wondrous]] actor Basil Rathbone is,I must admit, a [[nears]] second but, is still second. One might make the argument that Mr. Rathbone's screenplays were [[shoddy]] to the absolutely top notch productions afforded Mr. Brett and to this I would agree. [[Conversely]] when all is [[indicated]] and done Jeremy Brett will always and forever be the only actor to truly "become" Sherlock Holmes. The [[ledger]] should be closed on this subject and we,the public,left to [[enjoys]] Mr.Brett's [[sole]] performances.

Bill [[Rutgers]]

(sonarman65@yahoo.com) --------------------------------------------- Result 3068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] how can you take her hard-living, glamorously violent bounty hunter story serious with *that* accent? It's absurd. Apart from that, the visual style of the directer is nauseating and gimmicky, the plot is a shallow, boring, confused gangster-movie rehash and the acting is unconvincing. The film introduces new characters all the way throughout the film and is told in fragmented flashback - mostly out of sequence - seemingly just to keep you nice and confused. The film ever shows you THINGS THAT DON'T REALLY HAPPEN and then later says "that didn't really happen, this happened" - see the (apparent) killing of the (fake) 'first ladies'. What have we seen the first, wrong, sequence of events for then?

Terrible choice in casting, a convoluted, messy plot and a headache-inducing directorial style. 1/5. --------------------------------------------- Result 3069 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is one amazing movie!!!!! you have to realize that chinese folklore is complicated and philosophical. there are always stories behind stories. i myself did not understand everything but knowing chinese folklore (i studied them in school)it is very complicated. you just have to take what it gives you.....ENJOY THE MOVIE AND ENJOY THE RIDE....HOORAY!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I am a 11th grader at my [[high]] school. [[In]] my [[Current]] [[World]] Affairs [[class]] a [[kid]] in my [[class]] had this [[video]] and [[suggested]] we watch. So we did. I am firm believer that we went to the [[moon]], being that my [[father]] works for NASA. [[Even]] [[though]] I [[think]] this movie is the [[biggest]] piece of [[crap]] I have ever watched, the [[guy]] who created it has some serious balls. [[First]] of all did he have to [[show]] JFK getting shot? And how dare he [[use]] all those [[biblical]] quotes. The only good thing about this [[movie]] is it sparks debates, which is good b/c in my class we have weekly debates. This [[movie]] did [[nothing]] to change my mind. I think he and Michael Moore should be working together and make another movie. Michael Moore next movie could be called "A Funny Thing Happened on Spetember 11th" or "A Funny thing happened on the way to the white house". I am a 11th grader at my [[supreme]] school. [[Among]] my [[Contemporary]] [[Globe]] Affairs [[category]] a [[petit]] in my [[categories]] had this [[videos]] and [[proposed]] we watch. So we did. I am firm believer that we went to the [[luna]], being that my [[fathers]] works for NASA. [[Yet]] [[although]] I [[thinking]] this movie is the [[grandest]] piece of [[shit]] I have ever watched, the [[man]] who created it has some serious balls. [[Frst]] of all did he have to [[exposition]] JFK getting shot? And how dare he [[using]] all those [[bible]] quotes. The only good thing about this [[filmmaking]] is it sparks debates, which is good b/c in my class we have weekly debates. This [[filmmaking]] did [[none]] to change my mind. I think he and Michael Moore should be working together and make another movie. Michael Moore next movie could be called "A Funny Thing Happened on Spetember 11th" or "A Funny thing happened on the way to the white house". --------------------------------------------- Result 3071 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Previous [[commentator]] Steve Richmond [[stated]] that A [[Walk]] On The [[Moon]] is, in his words "not worth your $7". I [[ended]] up [[paying]] a bit more than that to [[import]] what is one of the worst-quality DVDs I have [[yet]] [[seen]], of this film or any [[film]] in existence. Even when you ignore the fact that the [[DVD]] is [[clearly]] sourced from an interlaced [[master]] and just plain [[nasty]] to watch in motion, the [[film]] has no redeeming qualities ([[save]] Anna's presence) to make [[watching]] a [[top]] quality Blu-Ray [[transfer]] [[worthwhile]]. Not that this is any fault of the other actors. Liev Schreiber, Diane Lane, Tovah Feldshuh, and Viggo Mortensen all score high on the relative to Anna Paquin acting ability [[chart]]. Far more so than Holly Hunter or Sam Neill did in spite of an equally [[lousy]] [[script]], anyway. Director Tony Goldwyn's [[resume]] is nothing to crow about, but Pamela Gray's resume includes Wes Craven's most dramatic excursions outside of the horror or slasher genre, so one could be forgiven for thinking this is a case of bad direction.

As I have indicated already, the [[sole]] reason I watched this film is Anna Paquin. In her acting debut, she literally acted veterans of the industry with a minimum of twelve years' experience above hers under the table. While she is not as far ahead of her castmates here, her performance as a girl that starts the piece as a brat and grows into a woman whose world is crashing down around her proves her Oscar was no fluke. For some time I have been stating to friends that she would be the best choice to portray the heroine of my second complete novel, and a dialogue seventy-three minutes into this film is yet another demonstration of why. This woman could literally act the paint off walls. Anna aside, only Liev Schreiber comes close to eliciting any sympathy from an audience. Sure, his character [[spends]] the vast majority of the film neglecting a wife with an existential crisis, but he plays the angered reaction of a man who feels [[cheated]] brilliantly. I should know, even if it is not from the same circumstances here.

Viggo Mortensen also deserves credit for his portrayal of a travelling salesman, although perhaps not to the same extent. In a manner of speaking, he is the villain of the piece, but he successfully gives the character a third dimension. Yes, his actions even after the whole thing explodes are underhanded, but not many men would act any differently in his situation. Nobody wants to be the other man in this kind of messed-up situation, so Viggo deserves a lot of credit for giving it a try here. Unfortunately, these are all participants in a story about a woman who feels trapped in a stagnant marriage where Tovah Feldshuh tells us that the Mills And Boon archetype of women being the only ones who feel life is passing by simply does not exist. Either writer Pamela Gray or director Tony Goldwyn thought they could just put this line into the film without thinking of how the audience might receive it. Anna even gets to speak the mind of the audience when she asks Diane who she is to be lecturing anyone about responsibility.

That said, the film does have a couple of things besides Anna going for it. Mason Daring's original music, while not standing out in any way, gives the film a certain feeling of being keyed into the time depicted that helps where the other elements do not. Roger Ebert is right when he points out that while Liev is a great actor, putting him alongside Viggo in the story of a woman forced to choose between her marriage and her fantasy is a big mistake. He is also very correct in that when the film lingers over scenes of Lane and Mortensen skinny-dipping or mounting one another under a waterfall, it loses focus from being a story of a transgression and becomes soft porn. The film seems terminally confused about the position of its story. No matter how many times I rewatch Liev's scenes, I cannot help but feel he has been shortchanged in the direction or editing. One does not have to make their leads particularly handsome or beautiful, but taking steps to make them the most interesting or developed characters in the piece would have gone a long way.

Ebert also hits the nail right on the head when he says that every time he saw Anna on the screen, he thought her character was where the real story lay. Stories about the wife feeling neglected and running into the arms of a man who seems interesting or even dangerous are a dime a dozen, to such an extent now that even setting the story in parallel with an event as Earth-shattering as the moon landing will not help. In spite of feeling revulsion at the manner in which her character's story is presented, Anna might as well be walking around with a neon sign above her head asking the audience if they would not prefer to see the whole thing through her eyes. While I am all too aware that it is difficult to control exactly which character your audience will find the most interesting from your cast, it is very much as if they did not bother to try with Lane and Schreiber. Fans of these two would be well advised to look elsewhere. Hopefully by now my ramblings about the respective performances will give some idea of where the whole thing went wrong.

I gave A Walk On The Moon a three out of ten. Anna Paquin earns it a bonus point with one of her best performances (and that is saying something). Previous [[columnist]] Steve Richmond [[declared]] that A [[Marche]] On The [[Lune]] is, in his words "not worth your $7". I [[completed]] up [[paid]] a bit more than that to [[imports]] what is one of the worst-quality DVDs I have [[however]] [[noticed]], of this film or any [[filmmaking]] in existence. Even when you ignore the fact that the [[DVDS]] is [[apparently]] sourced from an interlaced [[masters]] and just plain [[unpleasant]] to watch in motion, the [[filmmaking]] has no redeeming qualities ([[rescued]] Anna's presence) to make [[staring]] a [[supreme]] quality Blu-Ray [[conveyance]] [[beneficial]]. Not that this is any fault of the other actors. Liev Schreiber, Diane Lane, Tovah Feldshuh, and Viggo Mortensen all score high on the relative to Anna Paquin acting ability [[graphics]]. Far more so than Holly Hunter or Sam Neill did in spite of an equally [[rotten]] [[hyphen]], anyway. Director Tony Goldwyn's [[rebooting]] is nothing to crow about, but Pamela Gray's resume includes Wes Craven's most dramatic excursions outside of the horror or slasher genre, so one could be forgiven for thinking this is a case of bad direction.

As I have indicated already, the [[unique]] reason I watched this film is Anna Paquin. In her acting debut, she literally acted veterans of the industry with a minimum of twelve years' experience above hers under the table. While she is not as far ahead of her castmates here, her performance as a girl that starts the piece as a brat and grows into a woman whose world is crashing down around her proves her Oscar was no fluke. For some time I have been stating to friends that she would be the best choice to portray the heroine of my second complete novel, and a dialogue seventy-three minutes into this film is yet another demonstration of why. This woman could literally act the paint off walls. Anna aside, only Liev Schreiber comes close to eliciting any sympathy from an audience. Sure, his character [[spending]] the vast majority of the film neglecting a wife with an existential crisis, but he plays the angered reaction of a man who feels [[remodeled]] brilliantly. I should know, even if it is not from the same circumstances here.

Viggo Mortensen also deserves credit for his portrayal of a travelling salesman, although perhaps not to the same extent. In a manner of speaking, he is the villain of the piece, but he successfully gives the character a third dimension. Yes, his actions even after the whole thing explodes are underhanded, but not many men would act any differently in his situation. Nobody wants to be the other man in this kind of messed-up situation, so Viggo deserves a lot of credit for giving it a try here. Unfortunately, these are all participants in a story about a woman who feels trapped in a stagnant marriage where Tovah Feldshuh tells us that the Mills And Boon archetype of women being the only ones who feel life is passing by simply does not exist. Either writer Pamela Gray or director Tony Goldwyn thought they could just put this line into the film without thinking of how the audience might receive it. Anna even gets to speak the mind of the audience when she asks Diane who she is to be lecturing anyone about responsibility.

That said, the film does have a couple of things besides Anna going for it. Mason Daring's original music, while not standing out in any way, gives the film a certain feeling of being keyed into the time depicted that helps where the other elements do not. Roger Ebert is right when he points out that while Liev is a great actor, putting him alongside Viggo in the story of a woman forced to choose between her marriage and her fantasy is a big mistake. He is also very correct in that when the film lingers over scenes of Lane and Mortensen skinny-dipping or mounting one another under a waterfall, it loses focus from being a story of a transgression and becomes soft porn. The film seems terminally confused about the position of its story. No matter how many times I rewatch Liev's scenes, I cannot help but feel he has been shortchanged in the direction or editing. One does not have to make their leads particularly handsome or beautiful, but taking steps to make them the most interesting or developed characters in the piece would have gone a long way.

Ebert also hits the nail right on the head when he says that every time he saw Anna on the screen, he thought her character was where the real story lay. Stories about the wife feeling neglected and running into the arms of a man who seems interesting or even dangerous are a dime a dozen, to such an extent now that even setting the story in parallel with an event as Earth-shattering as the moon landing will not help. In spite of feeling revulsion at the manner in which her character's story is presented, Anna might as well be walking around with a neon sign above her head asking the audience if they would not prefer to see the whole thing through her eyes. While I am all too aware that it is difficult to control exactly which character your audience will find the most interesting from your cast, it is very much as if they did not bother to try with Lane and Schreiber. Fans of these two would be well advised to look elsewhere. Hopefully by now my ramblings about the respective performances will give some idea of where the whole thing went wrong.

I gave A Walk On The Moon a three out of ten. Anna Paquin earns it a bonus point with one of her best performances (and that is saying something). --------------------------------------------- Result 3072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] I wonder who, how and more importantly why the decision to call Richard Attenborough to direct the most singular sensation to hit Broadway in many many years? He's an Academy Award winning director. Yes, he won for [[Ghandi]] you moron! Jeremy Irons is an Academy winning actor do you want to see him play Rocky Balboa? He has experience with musicals. Really? "Oh what a lovely war" have you forgotten? To answer your question, yes! The film is a [[disappointment]], [[clear]] and simple. Not an [[ounce]] of the live energy survived the heavy handedness of the proceedings. Every character danced beautifully they were charming but their projection was theatrical. I felt nothing. But when I saw it on stage I felt everything. The film should have been cast with stars, unknown, newcomers but stars with compelling unforgettable faces even the most invisible of the group. Great actors who could dance beautifully. Well Michael Douglas was in it. True I forgot I'm absolutely wrong and you are absolutely right. Nothing like a Richard Attenborough Michael Douglas musical. I wonder who, how and more importantly why the decision to call Richard Attenborough to direct the most singular sensation to hit Broadway in many many years? He's an Academy Award winning director. Yes, he won for [[Gandhi]] you moron! Jeremy Irons is an Academy winning actor do you want to see him play Rocky Balboa? He has experience with musicals. Really? "Oh what a lovely war" have you forgotten? To answer your question, yes! The film is a [[displeasure]], [[unambiguous]] and simple. Not an [[jot]] of the live energy survived the heavy handedness of the proceedings. Every character danced beautifully they were charming but their projection was theatrical. I felt nothing. But when I saw it on stage I felt everything. The film should have been cast with stars, unknown, newcomers but stars with compelling unforgettable faces even the most invisible of the group. Great actors who could dance beautifully. Well Michael Douglas was in it. True I forgot I'm absolutely wrong and you are absolutely right. Nothing like a Richard Attenborough Michael Douglas musical. --------------------------------------------- Result 3073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I will start by [[saying]] that this has undeservedly be panned by just about [[everyone]]! The fact is it wasn't what [[anyone]] was [[expecting]], [[especially]] from [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]]. What everyone was [[expecting]] was cockney geezers and good one liners "do ya like dags?" etc, but this is far more mature than his [[previous]] [[works]]. I would agree that it is [[confusing]] but all the facts are there for us we just have to [[see]] them and [[listen]] harder, this film [[demands]] all your [[attention]]! [[Look]] past the cool and [[dazzling]] look of the [[film]], try to listen to the dialogue rather than [[admire]] the performances and i [[think]] we will all [[get]] a more [[thorough]] [[understanding]] of the whole film.

[[Yes]] this has its [[influences]] from modern classics( fight club, pulp fiction [[etc]] ) but it is in the [[whole]] [[original]] in both [[direction]] and pacing with a music [[score]] second to none. I feel that if [[everyone]] watched this film over and over they would [[understand]] it a [[lot]] more and maybe appreciate it for the [[fine]] [[piece]] of modern [[cinema]] that it is and i [[hope]] [[also]] that [[Ritchie]] continues in this vain as i far prefer this to his mockney "masterpieces". I will start by [[arguing]] that this has undeservedly be panned by just about [[somebody]]! The fact is it wasn't what [[everybody]] was [[await]], [[concretely]] from [[Bloke]] [[Ricci]]. What everyone was [[hoping]] was cockney geezers and good one liners "do ya like dags?" etc, but this is far more mature than his [[anterior]] [[collaborate]]. I would agree that it is [[disconcerting]] but all the facts are there for us we just have to [[seeing]] them and [[listening]] harder, this film [[asks]] all your [[beware]]! [[Gaze]] past the cool and [[breathless]] look of the [[kino]], try to listen to the dialogue rather than [[admired]] the performances and i [[thinks]] we will all [[got]] a more [[detailed]] [[understood]] of the whole film.

[[Yeah]] this has its [[effects]] from modern classics( fight club, pulp fiction [[cetera]] ) but it is in the [[entire]] [[upfront]] in both [[directorate]] and pacing with a music [[punctuation]] second to none. I feel that if [[everybody]] watched this film over and over they would [[fathom]] it a [[batch]] more and maybe appreciate it for the [[fined]] [[slice]] of modern [[cinemas]] that it is and i [[expectancy]] [[apart]] that [[Richard]] continues in this vain as i far prefer this to his mockney "masterpieces". --------------------------------------------- Result 3074 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'm no horror movie buff, but my wife's nieces and nephews are. So, I [[saw]] the [[first]] movie. It was gruesome, and tense, but not my taste. Still good [[though]]. [[For]] similar [[reasons]], at this very moment, I am being exposed to a sequel.

The [[premise]] itself is beyond [[absurd]]. I can [[buy]] that disasters occur in the desert. I can [[buy]] that mutants exists. I can even buy that the events might be so [[weird]] and [[strange]] that the military may decide to [[get]] [[involved]]. It is unlikely, yes, but I'm willing to suspend my belief.

HOWEVER, under no [[circumstances]] am I willing to [[believe]] that the military squad [[assigned]] to [[recon]] such an [[area]] would be [[unable]] to fend off the mutants. Being a member of the [[United]] States Army, I can [[assure]] that while fresh recruits may [[lack]] the [[seasoned]] eyes and [[experience]] of [[combat]] [[soldiers]], any such [[recruits]] [[would]] be integrated into a [[capable]] squad.

A squad of [[armed]] [[soldiers]] is not about to be [[taken]] out by a few mutants with knives. That's just the [[way]] it works. Squad [[movements]], [[vastly]] [[superior]] firepower, and of [[course]], [[radio]] [[support]], [[would]] [[ensure]] nothing less than total [[victory]]. I'm not [[saying]] you wouldn't have [[casualties]], but as [[soon]] as the [[area]] was [[verified]] as hostile, military training [[would]] [[take]] [[precedence]], no-one [[would]] go off on their own [[even]] to [[use]] the [[bathroom]].

And if it were [[discovered]] that the [[area]] was so infested with hostiles that the squad was [[unable]] to [[handle]] the [[danger]], they [[would]] radio in for backup. And [[believe]] me, their radios [[would]] not be [[jammed]], if there was a [[chance]] that normal [[radios]] [[would]] not do, the squad would have a military [[issue]] satellite phone. [[Chances]] are, if they were unable to [[check]] in every [[hour]], a [[search]] [[would]] be [[called]].

In order to accept this movie, you [[must]] accept that our soldiers are [[incompetent]] fools, with [[incompetent]] leaders, and an incompetent chain of command. While it may [[still]] be [[true]] that the most dangerous [[thing]] in the world is a lieutenant with a map and compass, our military forces are [[filled]] with [[intelligent]], well-trained, [[competent]] [[soldiers]]. [[Mutants]] with knives are far below our ability to deal with.

With the whole execution of the movie depending solidly on the impossible to imagine, the film fails to deliver. Instead, we are expected to believe that our soldiers, sailors, and airmen are incapable of dealing with even the most mediocre threats.

As a combat veteran, I find the movie insulting. I'm no horror movie buff, but my wife's nieces and nephews are. So, I [[seen]] the [[fiirst]] movie. It was gruesome, and tense, but not my taste. Still good [[despite]]. [[During]] similar [[reason]], at this very moment, I am being exposed to a sequel.

The [[hypothesis]] itself is beyond [[farcical]]. I can [[purchasing]] that disasters occur in the desert. I can [[acquire]] that mutants exists. I can even buy that the events might be so [[bizarro]] and [[unusual]] that the military may decide to [[gets]] [[implicated]]. It is unlikely, yes, but I'm willing to suspend my belief.

HOWEVER, under no [[situations]] am I willing to [[believing]] that the military squad [[mapped]] to [[reco]] such an [[realms]] would be [[powerless]] to fend off the mutants. Being a member of the [[Unified]] States Army, I can [[ensure]] that while fresh recruits may [[failure]] the [[experienced]] eyes and [[experiences]] of [[counter]] [[troops]], any such [[recruit]] [[should]] be integrated into a [[able]] squad.

A squad of [[cocked]] [[servicemen]] is not about to be [[picked]] out by a few mutants with knives. That's just the [[ways]] it works. Squad [[movement]], [[immensely]] [[higher]] firepower, and of [[cours]], [[radios]] [[succour]], [[ought]] [[ensuring]] nothing less than total [[triumph]]. I'm not [[arguing]] you wouldn't have [[fatalities]], but as [[swiftly]] as the [[realms]] was [[auditing]] as hostile, military training [[should]] [[taking]] [[supremacy]], no-one [[could]] go off on their own [[yet]] to [[utilizing]] the [[wc]].

And if it were [[detected]] that the [[realms]] was so infested with hostiles that the squad was [[powerless]] to [[handles]] the [[threats]], they [[could]] radio in for backup. And [[think]] me, their radios [[should]] not be [[stuck]], if there was a [[luck]] that normal [[radio]] [[could]] not do, the squad would have a military [[issuing]] satellite phone. [[Possibilities]] are, if they were unable to [[inspected]] in every [[hours]], a [[searches]] [[could]] be [[termed]].

In order to accept this movie, you [[owes]] accept that our soldiers are [[unable]] fools, with [[unable]] leaders, and an incompetent chain of command. While it may [[nevertheless]] be [[veritable]] that the most dangerous [[stuff]] in the world is a lieutenant with a map and compass, our military forces are [[fill]] with [[crafty]], well-trained, [[proficient]] [[solider]]. [[Biohazard]] with knives are far below our ability to deal with.

With the whole execution of the movie depending solidly on the impossible to imagine, the film fails to deliver. Instead, we are expected to believe that our soldiers, sailors, and airmen are incapable of dealing with even the most mediocre threats.

As a combat veteran, I find the movie insulting. --------------------------------------------- Result 3075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I've now [[seen]] this film [[twice]], and I must say I enjoyed it both [[times]]. It's [[fast]] paced and [[fun]], but [[ultimately]] [[daft]]. Having said that it deserves to be trashed because of [[screwing]] up what could have been a good follow up to the seminal original. It is clear for those who have seen the [[awful]] 'Zombie Creeping Flesh' that the films massive [[shortcomings]] can be owed to Bruno Mattei, and that the little that is [[commendable]] about it can be owed to Fulci. This is not idle Fulci sycophancy, the [[directors]] styles are starkly contrasted throughout, and you can tell who directed what, particularly in Mattei's case.

The film is centered around the outbreak of a virus (oddly referred to as 'top secret' by a scientist, it's secrecy apparently being more noteworthy than its potentially apocalyptic effect on mankind) somewhere in south east Asia. The virus causes zombie like behaviour in those affected, and the virus quickly spreads across a seemingly arbitrary area of land. Our protagonists unwittingly wander into the danger zone, and have to fight for their lives against hordes of infected Asians.

The film seems to be stuck half way between being a zombie gore flick, and an out and out action adventure, and this confusion is captured most clearly by the zombies themselves. They do not appear to have a set of characteristics common to all. Some are of the regular soulless shuffling variety, so well rendered in the original, and probably Fulci's creation here. The other main group consist of those who in being infected with the virus lost all sense of themselves, but incurred a savage aggression and a desire to earn a black belt in ninjitsu: Indecisively leaping around unsure of whether to continue honing their upper roundhouse technique or engage with their brethren in what looks like a mass tickle fest on their hapless victims. Martial arts skills aren't their only talents either, they are well versed in guerilla tactics, hiding on rafters and under bales of hay, and sometimes inexplicably falling from nowhere but the heavens themselves. This is all definitely the work of Mattei.

There is a third, more chatty, variety of zombie. This type apparently retain a sense of irony as well 'I'm really thirsty...FOR YOUR BLOOD'. The ridiculous twist at the end in which the DJ turns zombie but continues to preach ad libbed gibberish about the fate of mankind, only serves to enhance the WTF factor and obliterate any hope of a serious resolution.

Then there's the infamous zombie head which slowly propels itself through the air, a jokerish skeletal grin wrought across its face, as if to say 'yeah we know how bad this looks'.

The characters are all utterly one dimensional as you would expect. But its the pseudo comical dialogue and dubbing that really prevents us from taking their plight seriously. Having said that the first soldier to die does put up an impressively valiant display against an unstoppable zombie menace. Indeed this is the first and perhaps only time we hit real zombie agro, and one of the only effective scenes in the film.

The guy who played the chief scientist has heart, but no talent, utilising pauses in his lines entirely at random, so he ends up sounding like a confused asthmatic. The scientists' on screen attempts at finding an antidote are totally unconvincing 'now lets put these two molecules together!'

There are a few moments that stick out as genuinely effective however. In an early scene a female protagonist explores an abandoned garage. Upon entering a room we are confronted with a hazy view of a shifting figure in the corner and a squirming mass on the floor, all shot in an atmospheric diffused light. The silence is interrupted by the appearance of a speedy machete wielding zombie who trashes everything in his wake in his alarming desperation to have her. His sheer aggressiveness is one of the few moments of real horror in the film. The before and after theme conveyed through the hotel that plays host to the happenings of the earliest stage of the outbreak, and later as a refuge to our protagonists is imbued with an thick humid ambiance. There is a scene in which one of the soldiers cautiously approaches a boarded up room that clearly houses hordes of the undead, and this is quite tense. Things become more dramatic when they board themselves in the hotel unknowing to what lurks upstairs. But this is sloppily handled and not nearly as effective as it could have been.

All in all I would say this film may just about deserve to be called a royal screw up of a potentially effective tropical zombie fest, rather than simply a through and through bad film. If nothing else it has plenty of the unintentional laughs that I've come to expect from just about anything Italian and gory from the eighties. I've now [[noticed]] this film [[doubly]], and I must say I enjoyed it both [[period]]. It's [[promptly]] paced and [[droll]], but [[eventually]] [[punchy]]. Having said that it deserves to be trashed because of [[kissed]] up what could have been a good follow up to the seminal original. It is clear for those who have seen the [[frightful]] 'Zombie Creeping Flesh' that the films massive [[faults]] can be owed to Bruno Mattei, and that the little that is [[laudable]] about it can be owed to Fulci. This is not idle Fulci sycophancy, the [[managers]] styles are starkly contrasted throughout, and you can tell who directed what, particularly in Mattei's case.

The film is centered around the outbreak of a virus (oddly referred to as 'top secret' by a scientist, it's secrecy apparently being more noteworthy than its potentially apocalyptic effect on mankind) somewhere in south east Asia. The virus causes zombie like behaviour in those affected, and the virus quickly spreads across a seemingly arbitrary area of land. Our protagonists unwittingly wander into the danger zone, and have to fight for their lives against hordes of infected Asians.

The film seems to be stuck half way between being a zombie gore flick, and an out and out action adventure, and this confusion is captured most clearly by the zombies themselves. They do not appear to have a set of characteristics common to all. Some are of the regular soulless shuffling variety, so well rendered in the original, and probably Fulci's creation here. The other main group consist of those who in being infected with the virus lost all sense of themselves, but incurred a savage aggression and a desire to earn a black belt in ninjitsu: Indecisively leaping around unsure of whether to continue honing their upper roundhouse technique or engage with their brethren in what looks like a mass tickle fest on their hapless victims. Martial arts skills aren't their only talents either, they are well versed in guerilla tactics, hiding on rafters and under bales of hay, and sometimes inexplicably falling from nowhere but the heavens themselves. This is all definitely the work of Mattei.

There is a third, more chatty, variety of zombie. This type apparently retain a sense of irony as well 'I'm really thirsty...FOR YOUR BLOOD'. The ridiculous twist at the end in which the DJ turns zombie but continues to preach ad libbed gibberish about the fate of mankind, only serves to enhance the WTF factor and obliterate any hope of a serious resolution.

Then there's the infamous zombie head which slowly propels itself through the air, a jokerish skeletal grin wrought across its face, as if to say 'yeah we know how bad this looks'.

The characters are all utterly one dimensional as you would expect. But its the pseudo comical dialogue and dubbing that really prevents us from taking their plight seriously. Having said that the first soldier to die does put up an impressively valiant display against an unstoppable zombie menace. Indeed this is the first and perhaps only time we hit real zombie agro, and one of the only effective scenes in the film.

The guy who played the chief scientist has heart, but no talent, utilising pauses in his lines entirely at random, so he ends up sounding like a confused asthmatic. The scientists' on screen attempts at finding an antidote are totally unconvincing 'now lets put these two molecules together!'

There are a few moments that stick out as genuinely effective however. In an early scene a female protagonist explores an abandoned garage. Upon entering a room we are confronted with a hazy view of a shifting figure in the corner and a squirming mass on the floor, all shot in an atmospheric diffused light. The silence is interrupted by the appearance of a speedy machete wielding zombie who trashes everything in his wake in his alarming desperation to have her. His sheer aggressiveness is one of the few moments of real horror in the film. The before and after theme conveyed through the hotel that plays host to the happenings of the earliest stage of the outbreak, and later as a refuge to our protagonists is imbued with an thick humid ambiance. There is a scene in which one of the soldiers cautiously approaches a boarded up room that clearly houses hordes of the undead, and this is quite tense. Things become more dramatic when they board themselves in the hotel unknowing to what lurks upstairs. But this is sloppily handled and not nearly as effective as it could have been.

All in all I would say this film may just about deserve to be called a royal screw up of a potentially effective tropical zombie fest, rather than simply a through and through bad film. If nothing else it has plenty of the unintentional laughs that I've come to expect from just about anything Italian and gory from the eighties. --------------------------------------------- Result 3076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What happened to Peter Bogdanovich? Once a brilliant director, a trail blazer... is now scraping the very bottom... Is this the same man who directed "The Last Picture Show"? Here, he takes a somewhat interesting (albeit farfetched) premise, and turns it into bubble gum that loses flavor the moment you take the first bite... Dunst is not bad, but Izzard is miscast as Chaplin, and all the other actors seem to have been cast for their "looks", and not because they were right for the part. Too bad. I'll go rent "Paper Moon" again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, [[laughable]] and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't [[deny]] their [[terrible]] existance.

The acting redefines the term "terrible overacting" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine "bad".

***spoilers***

The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel "Lurch" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.

The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).

Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should. The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, [[farcical]] and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't [[rejecting]] their [[abysmal]] existance.

The acting redefines the term "terrible overacting" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine "bad".

***spoilers***

The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel "Lurch" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.

The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).

Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should. --------------------------------------------- Result 3078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Jackie Chan's [[classic]] directorial feature POLICE [[STORY]] (1985) is among the most [[influential]] and over-the-top modern day police actioners ever to come out from Hong [[Kong]]. Jackie wanted simply to make a movie which would include the usual kung fu and also fierce gun play and other "urban" action which would later become very popular and typical among [[HK]] directors like John Woo and Ringo Lam. [[POLICE]] [[STORY]] [[mixes]] these two action elements and [[styles]] and the [[result]] is as [[wild]] as it [[sounds]].

Jackie plays Chan Ka-Kui, a police who gets to protect an important witness (Brigitte Lin) who would soon testify against a powerful gangster boss and his ring of criminal activity. Jackie's girlfriend is played by young and sweet Maggie Cheung, who isn't as [[wild]] here as she would be in her subsequent roles like Heroic Trio (and the sequel) by Johnnie To, Savior of the Soul by Corey Yuen and David Lai and many many others. The plot in POLICE STORY is very simple but it is the action why this [[film]] was made in the first [[place]].

Jackie did of course all the stunts of his [[character]] by himself and [[also]] [[hurt]] himself pretty badly in couple of scenes, some of which are also in the completed movie like at the end in which Jackie hits his head (near the eye) through a very nasty looking sharp piece of glass. [[Also]] Jackie's stunt team members almost [[got]] themselves killed during filming of this film. The scene in which a bus stops right before Jackie, spitting the kidnappers through the windshield, went really bad as the bus stopped too early and the stuntmen didn't [[fly]] as they were [[supposed]] to. They were supposed to fly on the [[car]] parked in the front of the [[bus]] but their [[flight]] was too short and they [[hit]] through the [[asphalt]] with hospital [[level]] [[injuries]]. [[During]] the [[end]] [[credits]], there is a behind the scenes [[imagery]] and [[images]] of these [[injured]] actors and it all [[looks]] really [[bad]] and [[almost]] [[tasteless]], but fortunately no one [[got]] [[killed]] or [[injured]] too [[severely]].

The [[action]] is more than plentiful and [[imaginative]] as can be expected by (action) director Chan. The now legendary [[bus]] scene and shopping mall scene at then end are most likely among the wildest scenes any action film has been able to deliver. Jackie always tells how important editing is (which is true) and it [[really]] [[shows]] in his action scenes and their timing which is [[perfect]] and makes the films look so ultra kinetic when compared to Hollywood efforts, for instance. There's hardly any slow moments here and also those moments are interesting and the film never becomes boring or hard to watch.

But there is again one negative point which I cannot stand in HK action comedies, which is this comedy itself. The comedy isn't funny especially when the errors and amateurish elements in the screenplay aren't there by accident but because of the writer wanted to add them there, without necessarily understanding that they are signs of bad script and stupid dialogue. I mean those scenes like the stabbing murder attempt at the [[beginning]] when the murderer just shouts and screams and makes faces and acts like a drunken clown from some slapstick nightmare, and he is there to "murder" that girl. This kind of acting is stupid and inept and I wouldn't like to see it in a film which is otherwise very great in its own genre. Characters also speak their thoughts which is also a sign of bad script because those "loud thoughts" are there just to make things clear even for the stupidest viewer and thus making things way too simple and "light." Even if the film is comic and not so serious, these kind of stupidities should not be there and they cannot be forgiven too easily.

POLICE STORY is a fast speed, full impact, balls to the walls action adventure miracle from Hong Kong and from the time when Jackie was very sad because of the bad result he got with the US produced The Protector as he didn't have the same thoughts about the film as director James Glickenhaus had and thus the result didn't please audiences and Jackie and he returned to Hong Kong to make more personal and inventive film. That he definitely did and the result is as wild today as it was back then in the 80's. This is among the most insane action films ever, and it would be somewhat perfect without the flaws I mentioned. 7/10 Jackie Chan's [[conventional]] directorial feature POLICE [[FAIRYTALES]] (1985) is among the most [[mighty]] and over-the-top modern day police actioners ever to come out from Hong [[Hong]]. Jackie wanted simply to make a movie which would include the usual kung fu and also fierce gun play and other "urban" action which would later become very popular and typical among [[KONG]] directors like John Woo and Ringo Lam. [[POLICING]] [[NARRATIVES]] [[mixture]] these two action elements and [[styling]] and the [[conclusions]] is as [[feral]] as it [[sound]].

Jackie plays Chan Ka-Kui, a police who gets to protect an important witness (Brigitte Lin) who would soon testify against a powerful gangster boss and his ring of criminal activity. Jackie's girlfriend is played by young and sweet Maggie Cheung, who isn't as [[sauvage]] here as she would be in her subsequent roles like Heroic Trio (and the sequel) by Johnnie To, Savior of the Soul by Corey Yuen and David Lai and many many others. The plot in POLICE STORY is very simple but it is the action why this [[cinematography]] was made in the first [[placing]].

Jackie did of course all the stunts of his [[characters]] by himself and [[similarly]] [[harmed]] himself pretty badly in couple of scenes, some of which are also in the completed movie like at the end in which Jackie hits his head (near the eye) through a very nasty looking sharp piece of glass. [[Moreover]] Jackie's stunt team members almost [[get]] themselves killed during filming of this film. The scene in which a bus stops right before Jackie, spitting the kidnappers through the windshield, went really bad as the bus stopped too early and the stuntmen didn't [[steal]] as they were [[alleged]] to. They were supposed to fly on the [[automobile]] parked in the front of the [[buses]] but their [[flights]] was too short and they [[slapped]] through the [[tar]] with hospital [[levels]] [[injures]]. [[Across]] the [[termination]] [[appropriations]], there is a behind the scenes [[image]] and [[photograph]] of these [[wound]] actors and it all [[seem]] really [[mala]] and [[approximately]] [[vapid]], but fortunately no one [[gets]] [[murdered]] or [[wounding]] too [[gravely]].

The [[measures]] is more than plentiful and [[innovative]] as can be expected by (action) director Chan. The now legendary [[buses]] scene and shopping mall scene at then end are most likely among the wildest scenes any action film has been able to deliver. Jackie always tells how important editing is (which is true) and it [[truly]] [[demonstrates]] in his action scenes and their timing which is [[faultless]] and makes the films look so ultra kinetic when compared to Hollywood efforts, for instance. There's hardly any slow moments here and also those moments are interesting and the film never becomes boring or hard to watch.

But there is again one negative point which I cannot stand in HK action comedies, which is this comedy itself. The comedy isn't funny especially when the errors and amateurish elements in the screenplay aren't there by accident but because of the writer wanted to add them there, without necessarily understanding that they are signs of bad script and stupid dialogue. I mean those scenes like the stabbing murder attempt at the [[begin]] when the murderer just shouts and screams and makes faces and acts like a drunken clown from some slapstick nightmare, and he is there to "murder" that girl. This kind of acting is stupid and inept and I wouldn't like to see it in a film which is otherwise very great in its own genre. Characters also speak their thoughts which is also a sign of bad script because those "loud thoughts" are there just to make things clear even for the stupidest viewer and thus making things way too simple and "light." Even if the film is comic and not so serious, these kind of stupidities should not be there and they cannot be forgiven too easily.

POLICE STORY is a fast speed, full impact, balls to the walls action adventure miracle from Hong Kong and from the time when Jackie was very sad because of the bad result he got with the US produced The Protector as he didn't have the same thoughts about the film as director James Glickenhaus had and thus the result didn't please audiences and Jackie and he returned to Hong Kong to make more personal and inventive film. That he definitely did and the result is as wild today as it was back then in the 80's. This is among the most insane action films ever, and it would be somewhat perfect without the flaws I mentioned. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3079 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] [[Awful]]! Absolutely [[awful]]! No [[plot]], no point, no [[end]]. It looks [[like]] the director turned the camera on and then the whole [[crew]] went to lunch. Every day. I'm trying to GIVE this video away but no one will take it. I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 1 because I [[like]] Benigni. Roger, I'm going to have to say thumbs down on this one.

[[Abhorrent]]! Absolutely [[horrible]]! No [[intrigue]], no point, no [[ceases]]. It looks [[iike]] the director turned the camera on and then the whole [[crewman]] went to lunch. Every day. I'm trying to GIVE this video away but no one will take it. I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 1 because I [[iike]] Benigni. Roger, I'm going to have to say thumbs down on this one.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[heard]] so much about this movie how it was a [[great]] slasher and one of those [[early]] 80's movies that [[die]] hard fans of most slasher movies just had to [[see]]. Well, I rented it and I have to [[say]] that [[although]] it kept my attention as far as the suspense goes for most slasher films such as "April Fools Day", "Friday 13th" and "Prom Night", this film [[could]] have been right up there with the above [[mentioned]] only it lacked true [[enthusiasm]] and [[potential]] from the characters as well as the on going story. [[Characters]] that I [[found]] were unfortunate to be in this movie was the weirdo guy with the frizzy hair that kept creeping [[around]] the dorm and of course [[leading]] up to his true [[climatic]] role during the end with he faces the killer. Another would be the dirty scruffy looking guy with the jean jacket, he [[could]] have played more roles in this [[movie]] that might have [[made]] the [[movie]] more interesting, [[instead]], the movie played this guy as just another loser out there [[making]] [[unknown]] calls while he [[sleeps]] with his girlfriend and then [[drops]] his part and cuts him off until the end which was a waste, I was [[disappointed]] in his [[part]] in the end. As far as the true identity of the killer goes, when the [[identity]] was released as to who he was, I just laughed, but it was all to obvious and he really [[made]] a [[true]] [[jerk]] out of himself as well as an [[annoying]] character after his [[true]] [[intentions]] were revealed. This movie should be one to at least watch once for all slasher [[fans]] but don't [[spend]] your [[hard]] [[earned]] [[money]] on it in some rare hard to [[find]] collectors inventory. I [[hear]] so much about this movie how it was a [[prodigious]] slasher and one of those [[swift]] 80's movies that [[decease]] hard fans of most slasher movies just had to [[behold]]. Well, I rented it and I have to [[said]] that [[despite]] it kept my attention as far as the suspense goes for most slasher films such as "April Fools Day", "Friday 13th" and "Prom Night", this film [[did]] have been right up there with the above [[quoted]] only it lacked true [[ardour]] and [[potentials]] from the characters as well as the on going story. [[Trait]] that I [[discovered]] were unfortunate to be in this movie was the weirdo guy with the frizzy hair that kept creeping [[throughout]] the dorm and of course [[culminating]] up to his true [[climactic]] role during the end with he faces the killer. Another would be the dirty scruffy looking guy with the jean jacket, he [[did]] have played more roles in this [[filmmaking]] that might have [[introduced]] the [[film]] more interesting, [[conversely]], the movie played this guy as just another loser out there [[doing]] [[unrecognized]] calls while he [[sleeping]] with his girlfriend and then [[drop]] his part and cuts him off until the end which was a waste, I was [[frustrating]] in his [[parties]] in the end. As far as the true identity of the killer goes, when the [[identities]] was released as to who he was, I just laughed, but it was all to obvious and he really [[effected]] a [[veritable]] [[prick]] out of himself as well as an [[exasperating]] character after his [[veritable]] [[intents]] were revealed. This movie should be one to at least watch once for all slasher [[buffs]] but don't [[expenditure]] your [[dur]] [[gained]] [[cash]] on it in some rare hard to [[found]] collectors inventory. --------------------------------------------- Result 3081 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I resisted seeing this [[movie]] and I [[understand]] why it was not a [[big]] hit in theatres. "October [[Sky]]" [[feels]] and [[looks]] oh so familiar. And it is. All plot contrivances and [[emotions]] have been explored before in other [[films]] -- and possibly [[even]] better. But [[despite]] it's familiarity and [[resistance]] to all [[formulas]] Hollywood, this movie is [[winning]] and likeable at [[every]] turn.

Sputnik is the inspiration for this [[journey]] of the [[heart]], mind and [[soul]]. [[Just]] as the [[characters]] from [[Steven]] Sondheim's musical [[MERRILY]] WE ROLL ALONG stood agape atop their [[apartment]] [[roof]] hoping it would [[launch]] their [[new]] [[generation]] ("What do you call it? You call it a [[miracle]]."), Sputnik has a [[similar]] [[affect]] on the young [[rocket]] [[boys]] of this [[true]] [[tale]]. While jaded townsfolk of their 1950's [[coal]] [[town]] [[dismiss]] the event, Homer Hickham sees Sputnik as his [[ticket]] out of a [[life]] in the mines.

Masterful [[direction]] and casting [[make]] the [[journey]] of rocket boy Homer and his [[pals]] seem fresh and [[new]]. Especially affecting are subplots concerning Homer's ailing [[young]] [[school]] [[teacher]]. [[Remarkable]] restraint is shown in [[depicting]] their [[delicate]] [[relationship]]. Also [[remarkable]] is the father / [[son]] supblot that anchors the [[film]]. [[Perfectly]] [[played]] all around. Even Homer's [[mom]] [[gets]] her [[moment]] without cliche or [[intrusion]]. Her [[ultimatum]] to her husband is both [[dignified]] and heatbreaking. "[[Myrtle]] Beach" [[says]] it all.

A [[major]] video [[chain]] I [[despise]] has a sign next to this [[film]] [[stating]] that you'll love this [[film]] or they'll [[refund]] your money. [[For]] once, I [[agree]] with them. You'll never look at the October [[sky]] [[quite]] the same again.

I resisted seeing this [[cinematography]] and I [[understanding]] why it was not a [[grand]] hit in theatres. "October [[Celestial]]" [[thinks]] and [[seem]] oh so familiar. And it is. All plot contrivances and [[feelings]] have been explored before in other [[movie]] -- and possibly [[yet]] better. But [[though]] it's familiarity and [[resistant]] to all [[formula]] Hollywood, this movie is [[won]] and likeable at [[any]] turn.

Sputnik is the inspiration for this [[itinerary]] of the [[coeur]], mind and [[alma]]. [[Jen]] as the [[character]] from [[Steve]] Sondheim's musical [[BLITHELY]] WE ROLL ALONG stood agape atop their [[apartments]] [[ceiling]] hoping it would [[startup]] their [[novel]] [[jill]] ("What do you call it? You call it a [[miracles]]."), Sputnik has a [[equivalent]] [[influences]] on the young [[rockets]] [[guys]] of this [[real]] [[story]]. While jaded townsfolk of their 1950's [[carbon]] [[cities]] [[rejects]] the event, Homer Hickham sees Sputnik as his [[tickets]] out of a [[living]] in the mines.

Masterful [[directorate]] and casting [[deliver]] the [[tour]] of rocket boy Homer and his [[boyfriends]] seem fresh and [[nouveau]]. Especially affecting are subplots concerning Homer's ailing [[youthful]] [[tuition]] [[professors]]. [[Wondrous]] restraint is shown in [[illustrating]] their [[fragile]] [[ties]]. Also [[notable]] is the father / [[sons]] supblot that anchors the [[movie]]. [[Totally]] [[done]] all around. Even Homer's [[mommy]] [[get]] her [[time]] without cliche or [[trespass]]. Her [[alarm]] to her husband is both [[decent]] and heatbreaking. "[[Moaning]] Beach" [[contends]] it all.

A [[considerable]] video [[strings]] I [[loathes]] has a sign next to this [[cinematography]] [[alleging]] that you'll love this [[kino]] or they'll [[refunded]] your money. [[During]] once, I [[concur]] with them. You'll never look at the October [[celestial]] [[rather]] the same again.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This movie is a [[great]] attempt towards the revival of traditional Indian values which are being replaced by western ones.Its a [[joint]] family story [[showing]] all the [[ethics]] every person should follow while [[communicating]] with [[every]] single relative around.Shahid [[Kapoor]] gives a gr88 performance as a desi about to tie [[knot]] with Amrita Rao who is also very Desi and she also acts pretty well...The [[genre]] of the movie is the same as HAHK and such movies deserve to be made in India for the revival of old traditional values...The movies doesn't [[get]] 10 as it isn't very good at music which counts a lot in every movie,besides this it is [[flawless]].... This movie is a [[wondrous]] attempt towards the revival of traditional Indian values which are being replaced by western ones.Its a [[communal]] family story [[proving]] all the [[morales]] every person should follow while [[imparting]] with [[any]] single relative around.Shahid [[Sonam]] gives a gr88 performance as a desi about to tie [[node]] with Amrita Rao who is also very Desi and she also acts pretty well...The [[genus]] of the movie is the same as HAHK and such movies deserve to be made in India for the revival of old traditional values...The movies doesn't [[obtain]] 10 as it isn't very good at music which counts a lot in every movie,besides this it is [[faultless]].... --------------------------------------------- Result 3083 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Sergio Leone [[spins]] in his [[grave]]... [[If]] there was any [[film]] that [[tramples]] upon a man's life [[work]] its this one. The lead character's "[[lone]] wolf" bravado is uninspiring and lame, and the [[script]] was apparently [[written]] by a monkey with an eight [[grade]] [[education]]. Whoever's idea this was should be horse whipped. The only reason I'm [[spending]] time trashing it is because there's a 10 line minimum. Sergio Leone's [[family]] should sue, not because its [[crap]], but because now it's immortalized as [[crap]] by MST 3000. Shame. [[Disgust]]. I [[blame]] Hollywood...at least Gary Busey makes crap that [[wont]] [[offend]] [[anyone]] but cocaine [[users]] and [[weapon]] [[experts]]...this [[film]] is [[pure]] [[blasphemy]]. Sergio Leone [[revolves]] in his [[tomb]]... [[Though]] there was any [[films]] that [[scorns]] upon a man's life [[collaboration]] its this one. The lead character's "[[loney]] wolf" bravado is uninspiring and lame, and the [[hyphen]] was apparently [[handwritten]] by a monkey with an eight [[grades]] [[tuition]]. Whoever's idea this was should be horse whipped. The only reason I'm [[outlay]] time trashing it is because there's a 10 line minimum. Sergio Leone's [[families]] should sue, not because its [[horseshit]], but because now it's immortalized as [[bollocks]] by MST 3000. Shame. [[Outrage]]. I [[guilt]] Hollywood...at least Gary Busey makes crap that [[habit]] [[offended]] [[everybody]] but cocaine [[customers]] and [[armes]] [[expert]]...this [[filmmaking]] is [[pur]] [[profanity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3084 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Jay Chou plays an orphan raised in a kung [[fu]] school, but [[kicked]] out by the corrupt [[headmaster]] after fighting with a bunch of [[thugs]] in the [[employ]] of a nefarious villain. He [[happens]] upon down-on-his-luck trickster Eric Tsang, who [[immediately]] sees [[cash]] potential in the youngster's [[skills]]. Basketball is the [[chosen]] [[avenue]] for [[riches]], and [[Tsang]] [[bids]] to [[get]] him a spot on a University team and to [[promote]] him in the [[media]]. [[General]] success leads to a basketball [[championship]] and a really [[nasty]] [[rival]] team managed by the same nefarious villain of before.

It's all a bit Shaolin [[Soccer]] I [[guess]], but not so [[quirky]] or ridiculous - the plot sticks pretty close to [[sports]] [[movie]] [[conventions]], and delivers all the [[elements]] the [[crowd]] [[expects]] from the set-up. You've [[seen]] it all before, but it's the [[kind]] of [[stuff]] it never hurts to [[see]] again when it's [[done]] well. [[Luckily]] it [[really]] is [[done]] well here (some might [[say]] 'surprisingly' with Chu Yen-Ping in the director's chair... I [[expect]] he had good 'assistants') - the [[script]] [[delivers]] and the presentation is slick and stylish. Jay Chou remains pretty much expressionless [[throughout]], but such is his style, and when he does let an emotion [[flicker]] [[across]] it can be to [[quite]] good [[comic]] [[effect]]. Eric Tsang compensates with a larger-than-life [[character]] that he's [[played]] many times before (in [[real]] life, for [[instance]]) who gets many of the films most emotional [[moments]].

[[Since]] the [[film]] revolves [[around]] basketball, it's good that the scenes of basketball [[matches]] are [[suitably]] rousing. The [[cast]] [[show]] some real [[skill]], [[including]] Chou, and some well [[done]] wirework and CGI [[add]] that element of hyper-real kung fu [[skill]] that make the scenes even more [[entertaining]] (assuming you like that [[sort]] of thing) and justify the movie's plot/existence.

There's only one significant fight scene in the movie, but it's a doozy in the "one against many" [[style]]. Jay Chou appears to do a lot of his own moves, and is quite [[impressive]] - he's clearly pretty strong and fast for real, and Ching Siu-Tung's choreography makes him look like a real martial artist. I wish there'd been more, but at least it's a lengthy fight.

Very much the kind of Chinese New Year blockbuster I hoped it would be from the trailer, and recommended viewing! Jay Chou plays an orphan raised in a kung [[foo]] school, but [[knocked]] out by the corrupt [[director]] after fighting with a bunch of [[villains]] in the [[employed]] of a nefarious villain. He [[arises]] upon down-on-his-luck trickster Eric Tsang, who [[directly]] sees [[moneys]] potential in the youngster's [[proficiency]]. Basketball is the [[selection]] [[avenida]] for [[affluence]], and [[Zang]] [[tender]] to [[got]] him a spot on a University team and to [[encouragement]] him in the [[medium]]. [[Overall]] success leads to a basketball [[starring]] and a really [[squalid]] [[compete]] team managed by the same nefarious villain of before.

It's all a bit Shaolin [[Football]] I [[guessing]], but not so [[lunatic]] or ridiculous - the plot sticks pretty close to [[athletics]] [[cinematography]] [[convention]], and delivers all the [[ingredient]] the [[multitude]] [[waits]] from the set-up. You've [[noticed]] it all before, but it's the [[genre]] of [[thing]] it never hurts to [[behold]] again when it's [[performed]] well. [[Gladly]] it [[truthfully]] is [[performed]] well here (some might [[told]] 'surprisingly' with Chu Yen-Ping in the director's chair... I [[waits]] he had good 'assistants') - the [[screenplay]] [[offer]] and the presentation is slick and stylish. Jay Chou remains pretty much expressionless [[in]], but such is his style, and when he does let an emotion [[flashing]] [[in]] it can be to [[rather]] good [[humorous]] [[repercussions]]. Eric Tsang compensates with a larger-than-life [[personages]] that he's [[accomplished]] many times before (in [[genuine]] life, for [[cases]]) who gets many of the films most emotional [[times]].

[[Because]] the [[films]] revolves [[about]] basketball, it's good that the scenes of basketball [[couples]] are [[adequately]] rousing. The [[casting]] [[exhibited]] some real [[proficiency]], [[include]] Chou, and some well [[doing]] wirework and CGI [[added]] that element of hyper-real kung fu [[capability]] that make the scenes even more [[amusing]] (assuming you like that [[kind]] of thing) and justify the movie's plot/existence.

There's only one significant fight scene in the movie, but it's a doozy in the "one against many" [[styles]]. Jay Chou appears to do a lot of his own moves, and is quite [[wondrous]] - he's clearly pretty strong and fast for real, and Ching Siu-Tung's choreography makes him look like a real martial artist. I wish there'd been more, but at least it's a lengthy fight.

Very much the kind of Chinese New Year blockbuster I hoped it would be from the trailer, and recommended viewing! --------------------------------------------- Result 3085 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A journey of discovery, this film follows the lives of one family living in a sleepy, island town in British Columbia. Languorous and dreamy, the inhabitants are satisfied to allow life to go on around them until a young, fresh-faced teacher, with new ideas arrives and brings with her life from the mainland. Slowly, their indolent state is awakened, the father (and principal of the local school) looks for excitement, the mother for stability, the oldest daughter for love, and the youngest for power. While not an incredible or ground-breaking piece of cinema, the movie is quietly enjoyable and good for a tired night when the wind is blowing. Unfortunately, I doubt anyone outside of Canada will find it easily accessible. --------------------------------------------- Result 3086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Knowing]] what to [[expect]] (on the whole) from a Denzel Washington performance - quality, integrity, gravitas, wry humour - will [[prepare]] you for what to [[expect]] from his directorial debut. Much like Robert De Niro's A Bronx [[Tale]], Antwone Fisher [[delivers]] the [[moving]] [[drama]] of the [[life]] of a [[young]] [[man]] and the [[effects]] of [[key]] [[figures]] in his [[life]]. [[Much]] as in A Bronx [[Tale]] De Niro [[played]] one of these [[key]] figures to the lead [[character]] (himself a [[character]] was born to [[play]] but was too [[old]] too) Washington takes a [[similar]] role in this as the fatherly councellor to the titular [[character]] - a character that [[seems]] like he should be [[played]] by a Washington from 20 years [[ago]]. Be thankful Washington is too [[old]] to [[play]] Antwone because if he had we [[would]] [[firstly]] be [[deprived]] of the [[wonderfully]] measured and [[intelligently]] [[nuanced]] performance he gives as the [[Navy]] councellor. [[However]] more importantly we wouldn't get to see the [[superb]], we can only [[hope]] star making, turn from Derek Luke in the title role. Inevitably the [[character]] comes [[across]] as moulded in Washington's shape, [[however]] you get the [[impression]] this is not just because Washington [[directed]] it, not that Luke was trying to copy him, but that Luke is as [[genuinely]] powerful and [[thought]] [[provoking]] an actor as Washington. It took far too long for Washington to [[receive]] the Academy [[award]] he [[deserved]] for Malcolm X, Philadelphia, Devil [[In]] A Blue Dress and The Hurricane, let us hope that Luke does not have to wait so long. [[Also]] a [[great]] piece of [[casting]] was Joy Bryant as Fisher's girlfriend, Cheryl. [[While]] the [[part]] [[could]] have been a forgettable support or a standard 'girlfriend' role Bryant imbues it with [[life]]. [[Tender]] and [[intelligent]] the role [[transcends]] stereotyping with Bryant inhabiting it, and she makes the [[part]] significant and interesting. It doesn't hurt either that Bryant is possibly the most attractive woman you'll see on celluloid this year - the smile alone could thaw the coldest heart. Acting [[ability]] and looks - why isn't this woman in everything being [[made]] right now. Providing good support in a [[small]] role in Salli [[Richardson]] as Washington's wife Berta. Saying more with a [[silence]] or [[look]] than [[many]] Hollywood [[actresses]] can [[manage]] in an [[entire]] film she [[informs]] the audience of the [[entire]] storylines long before any [[exposition]] [[occurs]]. As for Washington's directing, as I said, it is the directing equivalent of his acting. [[Taking]] the [[story]] of a man few viewers will have heard of and making it genuinely interesting is a difficult feat which Washington achieves with aplomb. The film is neither [[rushed]] nor showy, but it never feels slow or dull. It is measured and nuanced, balancing the humour and drama perfectly. Antwone Fisher [[may]] not blow you away if you like [[big]], explosive, plotless Hollywood films but for those who [[appreciate]] a [[finely]] crafted character [[piece]], with excellent performances and [[steady]] well handled direction, this is for you. [[Realise]] what to [[hopes]] (on the whole) from a Denzel Washington performance - quality, integrity, gravitas, wry humour - will [[formulate]] you for what to [[hopes]] from his directorial debut. Much like Robert De Niro's A Bronx [[Storytelling]], Antwone Fisher [[gives]] the [[shifting]] [[tragedy]] of the [[lifetime]] of a [[youths]] [[guy]] and the [[influence]] of [[principal]] [[numbers]] in his [[living]]. [[Very]] as in A Bronx [[Storytelling]] De Niro [[accomplished]] one of these [[important]] figures to the lead [[nature]] (himself a [[characteristics]] was born to [[playing]] but was too [[ancient]] too) Washington takes a [[analogue]] role in this as the fatherly councellor to the titular [[characters]] - a character that [[appears]] like he should be [[done]] by a Washington from 20 years [[earlier]]. Be thankful Washington is too [[ancient]] to [[gaming]] Antwone because if he had we [[ought]] [[initially]] be [[stripped]] of the [[surprisingly]] measured and [[rationally]] [[subtle]] performance he gives as the [[Naval]] councellor. [[Nonetheless]] more importantly we wouldn't get to see the [[handsome]], we can only [[hopes]] star making, turn from Derek Luke in the title role. Inevitably the [[characteristics]] comes [[during]] as moulded in Washington's shape, [[instead]] you get the [[printing]] this is not just because Washington [[oriented]] it, not that Luke was trying to copy him, but that Luke is as [[actually]] powerful and [[thinks]] [[causing]] an actor as Washington. It took far too long for Washington to [[receives]] the Academy [[scholarship]] he [[merit]] for Malcolm X, Philadelphia, Devil [[Across]] A Blue Dress and The Hurricane, let us hope that Luke does not have to wait so long. [[Further]] a [[wondrous]] piece of [[cast]] was Joy Bryant as Fisher's girlfriend, Cheryl. [[Despite]] the [[parties]] [[did]] have been a forgettable support or a standard 'girlfriend' role Bryant imbues it with [[lives]]. [[Bidding]] and [[brainy]] the role [[exceeding]] stereotyping with Bryant inhabiting it, and she makes the [[portions]] significant and interesting. It doesn't hurt either that Bryant is possibly the most attractive woman you'll see on celluloid this year - the smile alone could thaw the coldest heart. Acting [[aptitude]] and looks - why isn't this woman in everything being [[introduced]] right now. Providing good support in a [[minimal]] role in Salli [[Roberts]] as Washington's wife Berta. Saying more with a [[mute]] or [[peek]] than [[multiple]] Hollywood [[actors]] can [[administering]] in an [[whole]] film she [[notified]] the audience of the [[whole]] storylines long before any [[display]] [[happens]]. As for Washington's directing, as I said, it is the directing equivalent of his acting. [[Adopting]] the [[stories]] of a man few viewers will have heard of and making it genuinely interesting is a difficult feat which Washington achieves with aplomb. The film is neither [[flowed]] nor showy, but it never feels slow or dull. It is measured and nuanced, balancing the humour and drama perfectly. Antwone Fisher [[maggio]] not blow you away if you like [[considerable]], explosive, plotless Hollywood films but for those who [[appreciates]] a [[exquisitely]] crafted character [[slice]], with excellent performances and [[constant]] well handled direction, this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I went to watch this movie my expectations were really low, but I was pleasantly surprised.

I thought I was going to watch a boring teen-flick, BUT in fact the plot is interesting and well executed, the acting was somewhat convincing - especially from Melville who really shows his talent in this movie, and the fight scenes were - for a low budget movie - very well done .

I think this movie deserves a broader audience than it has received. It is a movie, which can be seen by the whole family - maybe not the smallest of kids, since it contains some rather rough scenes. A movie about love, and the problems that can occur, when you go against your family traditions.

Yes, the movie is very much like "Bend it like Beckham", but I actually think this movie pulls it off better. --------------------------------------------- Result 3088 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Another entertaining Travolta dance flick! GREAT MUSIC, mood, and scenes. Debra Winger is beautiful! Like "Saturday Night Fever", this macho film features extremely improbable scenes of beautiful women falling for Travolta and almost begging him to have sex with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Being someone who [[lists]] [[Night]] of the [[Living]] Dead at number three in her [[top]] five favorite [[movies]] of all [[time]], and at the same [[time]] [[loving]] this student [[film]] parody, I feel I must defend this [[movie]] against the [[previously]] [[posted]] scathing [[reviews]]. This short but [[sweet]] [[opus]] has always been a crowd-pleaser at [[horror]] and science fiction movie marathons where those who attend have a love of the [[genre]] yet know not to take zombie [[movies]] too seriously. This film is a [[tribute]] to the original, not an [[insult]]. It is intended to be funny, and many others who I have heard chant for and applaud it agree with me that it [[succeeds]]. Especially for those of us who have seen NOTLD 50+ times. Watch for the director cameo as news reporter Jeff Drexel, and also if you have the opportunity catch his Alien parody, Loaf. Being someone who [[listed]] [[Overnight]] of the [[Life]] Dead at number three in her [[topped]] five favorite [[kino]] of all [[period]], and at the same [[period]] [[affectionate]] this student [[cinematography]] parody, I feel I must defend this [[film]] against the [[ago]] [[positioned]] scathing [[appraisals]]. This short but [[sugary]] [[contrary]] has always been a crowd-pleaser at [[monstrosity]] and science fiction movie marathons where those who attend have a love of the [[gender]] yet know not to take zombie [[theater]] too seriously. This film is a [[eulogy]] to the original, not an [[affront]]. It is intended to be funny, and many others who I have heard chant for and applaud it agree with me that it [[succeed]]. Especially for those of us who have seen NOTLD 50+ times. Watch for the director cameo as news reporter Jeff Drexel, and also if you have the opportunity catch his Alien parody, Loaf. --------------------------------------------- Result 3090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Very]] [[bad]]. [[Very]], very [[bad]]. As a fellow who aspires to make, be in or - at least - sniff the catering table at a movie set, I find it hard to [[criticize]] independents who actually got a movie of any sort made. However, this movie ... oh dear.

Realizing Frightworld doesn't aspire to anything more than crude exploitation (an honorable thing in itself) and to try to make it conform to more mainstream standards is a mistake. And to be fair, it is more entertaining than - say - Red Zone Cuba ... but not by much. So I won't try to critique, just let me ask throw out some observations.

1) If gore is the point of the movie, shouldn't you be able to see it?

2) If you have hire three sound men make sure at least one knows how to operate the equipment.

3) In a horror movie your lead maniac must be scarier than a smurf doll. Difficult I know but really...

4) There is a lot of talented videographers in the Buffalo/Rochester area, most you can hire really cheap. Get one who knows how to frame a scene.

5) Just because you have someone who knows how to use After Effects and other cool programs doesn't mean he should do so every two seconds.

6) Kudos for getting the girls to take off their tops but next time, get girls who's tops we want to see taken off.

7) Editing should help tell the story or set a mood. At the least in this sort of movie editing should sell the gore gags. A chainsaw suddenly appearing in a characters stomach is not scary, it's sloppy.

Some good things. Not all the acting was bad. Jack was pretty good and I liked Acid once she started fighting back. There was some neat imagery, [[unfortunately]] it was thrown up on the screen without rhyme or reason. "Acid Poptart" is a name that deserves a better movie. I like the moxie of Frightworld too. Next time, now that they have a movie of sorts under their belts, I hope all involve aspire to something better than Colman Francis. Upgrade at least Ed Wood. [[Eminently]] [[rotten]]. [[Hugely]], very [[unfavourable]]. As a fellow who aspires to make, be in or - at least - sniff the catering table at a movie set, I find it hard to [[critique]] independents who actually got a movie of any sort made. However, this movie ... oh dear.

Realizing Frightworld doesn't aspire to anything more than crude exploitation (an honorable thing in itself) and to try to make it conform to more mainstream standards is a mistake. And to be fair, it is more entertaining than - say - Red Zone Cuba ... but not by much. So I won't try to critique, just let me ask throw out some observations.

1) If gore is the point of the movie, shouldn't you be able to see it?

2) If you have hire three sound men make sure at least one knows how to operate the equipment.

3) In a horror movie your lead maniac must be scarier than a smurf doll. Difficult I know but really...

4) There is a lot of talented videographers in the Buffalo/Rochester area, most you can hire really cheap. Get one who knows how to frame a scene.

5) Just because you have someone who knows how to use After Effects and other cool programs doesn't mean he should do so every two seconds.

6) Kudos for getting the girls to take off their tops but next time, get girls who's tops we want to see taken off.

7) Editing should help tell the story or set a mood. At the least in this sort of movie editing should sell the gore gags. A chainsaw suddenly appearing in a characters stomach is not scary, it's sloppy.

Some good things. Not all the acting was bad. Jack was pretty good and I liked Acid once she started fighting back. There was some neat imagery, [[woefully]] it was thrown up on the screen without rhyme or reason. "Acid Poptart" is a name that deserves a better movie. I like the moxie of Frightworld too. Next time, now that they have a movie of sorts under their belts, I hope all involve aspire to something better than Colman Francis. Upgrade at least Ed Wood. --------------------------------------------- Result 3091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A craven, cowardly film. Director Boorman shows Cahill burglarizing rich houses, but the male occupant is shown being unfaithful with the nanny, thats all right then. The forensic scientist investigating Cahill is blown up in his car, but he is rat faced sourpuss, and doesn't look like a nice man, so thats all right too. The Beits, owner of Russborrough House, made their money by exploiting 'darkies' digging up diamonds, so it's okay to rob priceless art from them and hide it in a bunker in the Wicklow mountains. The Garda kill his ferrets and are implicated in his murder. The moral equivalencing is sickening, Boorman looks for a hit film, but doesn't have the guts to stand against the criminality of the generals gang, who terrorized the neighbourhood, and unleashed another wave of scumbags upon Dublin. He even liaised with the Generals son while making it. Disgusting. Shame on him for his cowardice. --------------------------------------------- Result 3092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is a great mocumentary. It follows the rap group, NWH, made up of Ice Cold, Tasty Taste and Tone Def through their unique path to gangster rap highs, lows and back to highs. Through trouble with women, egos, cops and whitey, this group gets to the top of the gangster rap world, as this movie goes to the top of mocumentaries. I know everybodies favorite mocumentary is This is Spinal Tap, for very good reason, however I think that if in the right mood, this movie is simply better. The laughs never end, even for someone not into the rap culture.

I'm a white guy, that has no interest in rap music, culture or anything else associated with it, however I love this movie. Rusty Cundeif, who wrote the screenplay, songs and starred in it showed great potential and it is a shame that I haven't seen him since Fear of a Black Hat. However, I have seen him one more time than you have, and is that, that I recommend Fear of a Black Hat to you for quick laughs.

Remember, "Don't shoot to you see the whites!....of their eyes? No don't shoot to you see the whites."

FYM and enjoy the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] [[Falsely]] [[accused]], skirt-chasing [[chums]] [[John]] Wayne (as John Scott) and [[Eddy]] Chandler (as Kansas Charlie) [[change]] identities to [[become]] "Alias Smith and Jones". [[Mr]]. Wayne [[becomes]] "John Jones". [[Mr]]. Chandler's is [[supposed]] to be "Rev. Smith", but Wayne [[calls]] him "Dr. [[Smith]]". [[At]] no [[time]] are either of them as entertaining as Roger Davis, [[Pete]] Duel, Jonathan Harris, or Ben Murphy; [[although]], Wayne can be [[considered]] [[infinitely]] more successful than any of them, [[career]] wise. [[Pretty]] [[blonde]] [[Mary]] Kornman (as [[Anne]]), grown-up from her days in "Our Gang", is a [[lovely]] interest for Wayne. She and Chandler have a [[couple]] of [[cute]] scenes with Wayne. If you're not a [[fan]] of low budget [[John]] Wayne [[films]] of the 1930s, this [[movie]] won't make you one. [[Wrongly]] [[suspects]], skirt-chasing [[girlies]] [[Giovanni]] Wayne (as John Scott) and [[Eddie]] Chandler (as Kansas Charlie) [[modification]] identities to [[gotten]] "Alias Smith and Jones". [[Mister]]. Wayne [[become]] "John Jones". [[Bernd]]. Chandler's is [[presumed]] to be "Rev. Smith", but Wayne [[call]] him "Dr. [[Cousteau]]". [[During]] no [[moment]] are either of them as entertaining as Roger Davis, [[Peter]] Duel, Jonathan Harris, or Ben Murphy; [[while]], Wayne can be [[judged]] [[enormously]] more successful than any of them, [[carrera]] wise. [[Belle]] [[blond]] [[Marie]] Kornman (as [[Anna]]), grown-up from her days in "Our Gang", is a [[sumptuous]] interest for Wayne. She and Chandler have a [[matching]] of [[charmer]] scenes with Wayne. If you're not a [[breather]] of low budget [[Giovanni]] Wayne [[filmmaking]] of the 1930s, this [[filmmaking]] won't make you one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has been one of my favorite movies for a long time. Recently I was happy to see it on DVD which is a relief from watching the old, grainy VHS versions.

I hadn't seen it in years and watched it today to find myself amazed at how well the movie stands up to time. It's one of those rare, perfect storms of comedy where great writing (truly funny line after truly funny line) is paired with great direction and outstanding performances all at the same time.

Dudley Moore got an Oscar nomination for "Arthur" but lost (although John Gielgud won for best supporting actor). If Moore's performance in "Arthur" doesn't win a Best Actor Oscar -it's proof that no comedic actor could ever win the title (another example is Gene Wilder in "Young Frankenstein").

Steve Gordon crafts the film beautifully keeping true to each of the characters and the warm-hearted tone of the story. Quite simply, IMHO the movie is a rare gem. It's only sad that Steve Gordon passed away just a year after "Arthur" was released.

Regarding the DVD that is available as of 1/2007, it's so/so. Although the video quality is a leap over the old VHS copies, there is still no widescreen version available.

The DVD has a few extras that are nice but it's just not enough. One example is commentary from the Director stating how he greatly wished how certain deleted takes and scenes could have been included (because they were hysterical), but that he had to make tough choices for a final edit. The DVD, being the perfect format to include such material, certainly should have offered it as well.

This, the original "Arthur", is a classic comedy that is one for the books. --------------------------------------------- Result 3095 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] French production in which leading [[film]] directors from 11 [[countries]] were [[invited]] to [[create]] 11-minute short films conveying their reflections on the events of September 11.

The film [[segments]] vary [[widely]] in content and quality. Two allude to U.S. complicity in terrorist acts (in Chile against Allende, who [[died]] on September 11, 1973, [[depicted]] in the segment by British [[director]] [[Ken]] Loach; and in [[Palestine]] by U.S.-[[backed]] [[Israelis]], [[shown]] in the segment from Egyptian director Youssef Chahine). Two more [[recall]] other [[destructive]] [[acts]] (a Palestinian suicide bombing in [[Tel]] [[Aviv]], shot by Israeli [[director]] Amos Gitan; the Japanese "holy war" against the west in WW II, by Shohei Imamura).

Ironies abound in several [[stories]]. [[Shadows]] that darken the [[New]] York [[City]] [[apartment]] of a grieving [[old]] [[man]] [[suddenly]] [[disappear]] as the [[World]] [[Trade]] towers [[telescope]] to the [[ground]] in Sean Penn's piece, [[bringing]] the [[man]] momentary joy. But in this bright light he can [[finally]] [[see]] that his wife is really [[gone]]. [[In]] Mira Nair's [[film]], based on a [[real]] [[incident]], a missing young [[man]], [[also]] in [[New]] York City, the son of a [[Pakistani]] family, is first [[presumed]] to be a fugitive [[terrorist]], but [[later]] he [[proves]] to a hero who sacrificed himself trying to [[save]] others in the towers.

There are poignant moments dotted [[throughout]]. Loach has his exiled Chilean [[man]] quote St. Augustine, to the effect that hope is [[built]] of [[anger]] and [[courage]]: [[anger]] at the [[way]] [[things]] are, [[courage]] to [[change]] them. Imamura [[tells]] us that there is no such [[thing]] as a holy [[war]]. Samira Makhmalbaf [[shows]] a teacher with her very young [[Afghan]] schoolchildren, exiled in Iran, trying to [[tell]] them about the [[events]] that have just transpired in New York. But they are [[understandably]] more impressed with a [[major]] [[event]] in their [[refugee]] camp, where two men have [[fallen]] into a deep well, one [[killed]], the other [[sustaining]] a [[broken]] leg. This is [[comprehensible]] tragedy on a grand [[scale]] for the 6 year olds.

Idrissa Ouedraogo, from [[Burkina]] Faso, [[creates]] a [[drama]] in which the son of an ailing woman [[spots]] Osama [[bin]] Laden in their village and gathers his [[buddies]] to help capture the [[fugitive]] terrorist, in order to get the $25 million U. S. [[reward]]. He tells his friends not to let any of the adults know their plans, for the older folks would merely waste the money on cars and cigarettes, while he plans to help his mother and others who are sick and destitute.

It is Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (maker of "Amores Perros") who provides by far the most powerful and chilling segment, one that, for the most part, shows only a darkened screen with audio tape loops of chanting and voices and occasional thudding sounds. Brief visual flashes gradually permit us to see bodies falling from the high floors of the towers, and it dawns on us that the thuds are these bodies hitting the ground. The sequence ends with elegiac orchestral music and a still shot, bearing a phrase first shown only in Arabic, then with a translation added: "Does God's light guide us or blind us?" (In various languages with English subtitles) Grade: 8/10 (B+). (Seen on 10/31/04). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites. French production in which leading [[flick]] directors from 11 [[nations]] were [[urged]] to [[creating]] 11-minute short films conveying their reflections on the events of September 11.

The film [[pieces]] vary [[largely]] in content and quality. Two allude to U.S. complicity in terrorist acts (in Chile against Allende, who [[die]] on September 11, 1973, [[exemplified]] in the segment by British [[superintendent]] [[Kent]] Loach; and in [[Palestinians]] by U.S.-[[supported]] [[Palestine]], [[demonstrated]] in the segment from Egyptian director Youssef Chahine). Two more [[reminds]] other [[pernicious]] [[act]] (a Palestinian suicide bombing in [[Telephone]] [[Tel]], shot by Israeli [[superintendent]] Amos Gitan; the Japanese "holy war" against the west in WW II, by Shohei Imamura).

Ironies abound in several [[history]]. [[Shade]] that darken the [[Nuevo]] York [[Ville]] [[condo]] of a grieving [[elderly]] [[guy]] [[abruptly]] [[vanishing]] as the [[International]] [[Commercial]] towers [[telescopes]] to the [[terrestrial]] in Sean Penn's piece, [[bring]] the [[guy]] momentary joy. But in this bright light he can [[eventually]] [[seeing]] that his wife is really [[missing]]. [[At]] Mira Nair's [[movie]], based on a [[actual]] [[accident]], a missing young [[males]], [[similarly]] in [[Novel]] York City, the son of a [[Islamabad]] family, is first [[alleged]] to be a fugitive [[terrorists]], but [[then]] he [[testify]] to a hero who sacrificed himself trying to [[rescue]] others in the towers.

There are poignant moments dotted [[around]]. Loach has his exiled Chilean [[guy]] quote St. Augustine, to the effect that hope is [[constructing]] of [[wrath]] and [[bravery]]: [[rage]] at the [[route]] [[items]] are, [[bravery]] to [[alter]] them. Imamura [[narrates]] us that there is no such [[stuff]] as a holy [[warfare]]. Samira Makhmalbaf [[showing]] a teacher with her very young [[Afghanistan]] schoolchildren, exiled in Iran, trying to [[told]] them about the [[incidents]] that have just transpired in New York. But they are [[logically]] more impressed with a [[grands]] [[happenings]] in their [[asylum]] camp, where two men have [[lowered]] into a deep well, one [[assassinated]], the other [[preserving]] a [[raped]] leg. This is [[understandable]] tragedy on a grand [[scaling]] for the 6 year olds.

Idrissa Ouedraogo, from [[Faso]] Faso, [[begets]] a [[theater]] in which the son of an ailing woman [[commercials]] Osama [[ibn]] Laden in their village and gathers his [[guys]] to help capture the [[harbin]] terrorist, in order to get the $25 million U. S. [[payoff]]. He tells his friends not to let any of the adults know their plans, for the older folks would merely waste the money on cars and cigarettes, while he plans to help his mother and others who are sick and destitute.

It is Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (maker of "Amores Perros") who provides by far the most powerful and chilling segment, one that, for the most part, shows only a darkened screen with audio tape loops of chanting and voices and occasional thudding sounds. Brief visual flashes gradually permit us to see bodies falling from the high floors of the towers, and it dawns on us that the thuds are these bodies hitting the ground. The sequence ends with elegiac orchestral music and a still shot, bearing a phrase first shown only in Arabic, then with a translation added: "Does God's light guide us or blind us?" (In various languages with English subtitles) Grade: 8/10 (B+). (Seen on 10/31/04). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites. --------------------------------------------- Result 3096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] In Mexico City, the [[former]] CIA assassin and [[presently]] an [[alcoholic]] [[decadent]] [[man]] [[John]] Creasy ([[Denzel]] Washington) is [[hired]] by the industrialist Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony), with the [[recommendation]] of his [[old]] [[friend]] Rayburn ([[Christopher]] Walken), to be the bodyguard of his young [[daughter]] Pita (Dakota Fanning) and his wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell). Pita changes the behavior of the [[cold]] Creasy, making him [[live]] and smile again, and he feels a great affection for her. When the girl is kidnapped and Creasy is informed that she was [[murdered]] by the [[criminals]], he swears to [[kill]] each one responsible for the abduction.

"Man on Fire" is [[almost]] a [[masterpiece]], and will become certainly a classic in the future. The story is [[excellent]], never corny and although having 146 minutes running time, the viewer does not feel time passing. The cast is composed by [[excellent]] actors and actresses, their performances are [[outstanding]], [[highlighting]] Denzel Washington, Dakota [[Fanning]] and Radha Mitchell. The cinematography has wonderful moments, and the screenplay has [[stunning]] lines. I personally [[loved]] when the character of Christopher Walken explains to Manzano (Giancarlo Giannini) that Creasey's [[specialty]] is death, and he is preparing his masterpiece. I [[agree]] with the [[user]] that commented that "Man on Fire" is one of the best, if not the best, film of the year in this [[genre]]. My [[vote]] is ten.

Title (Brazil): "Chamas da Vingança" ("Flames of the Revenge") In Mexico City, the [[antigua]] CIA assassin and [[currently]] an [[beverages]] [[rotten]] [[males]] [[Johannes]] Creasy ([[Denzil]] Washington) is [[incurred]] by the industrialist Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony), with the [[proposal]] of his [[archaic]] [[friends]] Rayburn ([[Cristobal]] Walken), to be the bodyguard of his young [[daughters]] Pita (Dakota Fanning) and his wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell). Pita changes the behavior of the [[frigid]] Creasy, making him [[living]] and smile again, and he feels a great affection for her. When the girl is kidnapped and Creasy is informed that she was [[massacred]] by the [[perpetrators]], he swears to [[killin]] each one responsible for the abduction.

"Man on Fire" is [[hardly]] a [[centerpiece]], and will become certainly a classic in the future. The story is [[phenomenal]], never corny and although having 146 minutes running time, the viewer does not feel time passing. The cast is composed by [[wondrous]] actors and actresses, their performances are [[unresolved]], [[stressing]] Denzel Washington, Dakota [[Stoking]] and Radha Mitchell. The cinematography has wonderful moments, and the screenplay has [[unbelievable]] lines. I personally [[cared]] when the character of Christopher Walken explains to Manzano (Giancarlo Giannini) that Creasey's [[specialising]] is death, and he is preparing his masterpiece. I [[concur]] with the [[username]] that commented that "Man on Fire" is one of the best, if not the best, film of the year in this [[sorts]]. My [[votes]] is ten.

Title (Brazil): "Chamas da Vingança" ("Flames of the Revenge") --------------------------------------------- Result 3097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Before Sunrise" is a wonderful love story and has to be among my Top 5 favorite movies ever. Dialog and acting are great. I love the characters and their ideas and thoughts. Of course, the romantic Vienna, introduced in the movie does not exist (you won't find a poet sitting by the river in the middle of the night) and it isn't possible to get to all the places in only one night, either (especially if you're a stranger and it's your first night in Vienna). But that's not the point. The relationship of the two characters is much more important and this part of the story is not at all unrealistic. Although, nothing ever really happens, the movie never gets boring. The ending is genuinely sad without being "Titanic" or something. Even if you don't like love stories you should watch this film! I'm a little skeptic about the sequel that is going to be released in summer. The first part is perfect as it is, in my opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 3098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] OK so I hear about this [[new]] Justin Timberlake movie [[coming]] out which [[features]] some pretty [[big]] [[names]]. I [[mean]] [[great]] actors like, The Freeman [[aka]] Morgan Freeman, an [[asset]] to Hollywood, [[however]] [[completely]] wasted in this [[film]]. Then we got Kevin Spacey, who I've been a [[great]] [[fan]] of ever since I [[watched]] American Beauty and The Usual [[Suspects]]. Both of these [[great]] [[actors]] [[probably]] [[signed]] on to the [[movie]] [[thinking]] it was going to be a [[great]] [[movie]] as I did when I [[heard]] the [[story]]. Then enter a fresh [[faced]] Justin Timberlake. I say fresh faced because this is his first movie and those rotten tomatoes haven't hit him yet. Well the reason for that , I [[might]] add, is because no one will ever see this movie or even bother reading this review. The [[movie]] is so [[terrible]] that when i got into the first 15 minutes of it. The characters were so one dimensional that it makes some Bible characters look like the Don Corleone. They got the one liners and sound-bite worthy stuff. The token troubled black guy (LL COOL J) who is with a gorgeous woman who he otherwise would not even belong with in real life. The captain is this short whiny guy who speaks in such a high tone. And what crappy movie would be complete without the hero becoming richer because of an experience. Oh and lots of gun fire, i [[mean]] a whole lot. SPOILER(NOT!!!) THe kind of gun fire that leaves everyone in the police force who's crooked dead and the hero prevails. They got flame throwers and rocket launchers, REally no kidding.

Bottom line if you want to see Edison its because you are a great fan of one of the actors, or a great fan of Justin Timberlake, to all the 13 year old girls out there, enjoy!! I wish i had more hands, because then I would have more thumbs, because this movie is so terrible because then i could give it so many thumbs down that thumbs down would no longer mean anything because this movie is so terrible because it sucks so badly that it made me laugh out of frustration about the story line because it just would not end because the firing and yelling just kept happening.

MAY G*D HAVE MERCY ON US ALL and save us from these terrible movies. Well it could be worst, another RNB terrible actor turned singer turned terrible actor is usher, hehe check out IN THE MIX lol, or even Get rich or die trying'. Now the special thing about that movie is that its got 30+ year old men, playing 16 or even younger teens. I could go on with these. OK so I hear about this [[novel]] Justin Timberlake movie [[come]] out which [[attribute]] some pretty [[immense]] [[surnames]]. I [[imply]] [[sublime]] actors like, The Freeman [[nickname]] Morgan Freeman, an [[assets]] to Hollywood, [[conversely]] [[fully]] wasted in this [[filmmaking]]. Then we got Kevin Spacey, who I've been a [[formidable]] [[ventilator]] of ever since I [[observed]] American Beauty and The Usual [[Suspect]]. Both of these [[sublime]] [[players]] [[undeniably]] [[inked]] on to the [[flick]] [[think]] it was going to be a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]] as I did when I [[hear]] the [[storytelling]]. Then enter a fresh [[braved]] Justin Timberlake. I say fresh faced because this is his first movie and those rotten tomatoes haven't hit him yet. Well the reason for that , I [[probability]] add, is because no one will ever see this movie or even bother reading this review. The [[filmmaking]] is so [[shocking]] that when i got into the first 15 minutes of it. The characters were so one dimensional that it makes some Bible characters look like the Don Corleone. They got the one liners and sound-bite worthy stuff. The token troubled black guy (LL COOL J) who is with a gorgeous woman who he otherwise would not even belong with in real life. The captain is this short whiny guy who speaks in such a high tone. And what crappy movie would be complete without the hero becoming richer because of an experience. Oh and lots of gun fire, i [[imply]] a whole lot. SPOILER(NOT!!!) THe kind of gun fire that leaves everyone in the police force who's crooked dead and the hero prevails. They got flame throwers and rocket launchers, REally no kidding.

Bottom line if you want to see Edison its because you are a great fan of one of the actors, or a great fan of Justin Timberlake, to all the 13 year old girls out there, enjoy!! I wish i had more hands, because then I would have more thumbs, because this movie is so terrible because then i could give it so many thumbs down that thumbs down would no longer mean anything because this movie is so terrible because it sucks so badly that it made me laugh out of frustration about the story line because it just would not end because the firing and yelling just kept happening.

MAY G*D HAVE MERCY ON US ALL and save us from these terrible movies. Well it could be worst, another RNB terrible actor turned singer turned terrible actor is usher, hehe check out IN THE MIX lol, or even Get rich or die trying'. Now the special thing about that movie is that its got 30+ year old men, playing 16 or even younger teens. I could go on with these. --------------------------------------------- Result 3099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This [[movie]] [[provided]] [[NOTHING]] new or [[worthwhile]]. After seeing it, my wife and I both [[agreed]] that the studio [[simply]] churned this out and [[could]] have [[cared]] [[less]] if it was [[entertaining]]. This is a [[good]] [[example]] of a "[[concept]] only" film--they have a [[concept]] about a [[film]] and the other details are unimportant because execs KNOW it will make $$ just [[based]] on the [[initial]] [[concept]].

The [[movie]] starts with Cruella getting out of [[prison]] and [[going]] on parole. She no longer [[hates]] puppies but has been [[programmed]] to adore them--she simply couldn't hurt a flea. This doesn't last too [[long]] after her release and she's back to her old [[ways]]. [[Period]].

The most [[annoying]] [[aspects]] of the [[movie]] were the supporting characters. [[Eric]] Idle as the [[voice]] of Waddlesworth the [[bird]] made me [[HATE]] him--and that is TOUGH [[considering]] I am a die-hard [[Python]] fan. It was [[obvious]] he did this because they [[gave]] him lots of money (there can't be any other reason). Cruella's low self-esteem [[servant]], Tim McInnerny, was funny in the Black Adder [[shows]] but here he is [[totally]] wasted and unfunny. And it must have [[cost]] a few [[bucks]] to [[get]] Gérard Depardieu but he was [[utterly]] wasted as well. There were some other supporting [[actors]] as well but [[given]] how poorly [[written]] the [[characters]] were, I am trying to [[block]] them out of my mind.

Overall, you'd be [[better]] just to [[let]] your [[kids]] watch [[television]] than bother [[letting]] them [[see]] this [[drivel]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[supplied]] [[ANYTHING]] new or [[actionable]]. After seeing it, my wife and I both [[endorsed]] that the studio [[exclusively]] churned this out and [[did]] have [[loved]] [[fewer]] if it was [[amusing]]. This is a [[buena]] [[case]] of a "[[concepts]] only" film--they have a [[concepts]] about a [[filmmaking]] and the other details are unimportant because execs KNOW it will make $$ just [[founded]] on the [[original]] [[notions]].

The [[flick]] starts with Cruella getting out of [[internment]] and [[go]] on parole. She no longer [[hating]] puppies but has been [[programme]] to adore them--she simply couldn't hurt a flea. This doesn't last too [[longer]] after her release and she's back to her old [[manner]]. [[Times]].

The most [[irritating]] [[things]] of the [[filmmaking]] were the supporting characters. [[Erik]] Idle as the [[vowel]] of Waddlesworth the [[byrd]] made me [[HATED]] him--and that is TOUGH [[examining]] I am a die-hard [[Monty]] fan. It was [[noticeable]] he did this because they [[supplied]] him lots of money (there can't be any other reason). Cruella's low self-esteem [[official]], Tim McInnerny, was funny in the Black Adder [[exhibit]] but here he is [[fully]] wasted and unfunny. And it must have [[expense]] a few [[dollars]] to [[gets]] Gérard Depardieu but he was [[downright]] wasted as well. There were some other supporting [[protagonists]] as well but [[gave]] how poorly [[writes]] the [[character]] were, I am trying to [[blocking]] them out of my mind.

Overall, you'd be [[optimum]] just to [[allowing]] your [[youngsters]] watch [[tv]] than bother [[permitting]] them [[seeing]] this [[whim]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3100 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I don't pretend to be an authority on actors who have played Othello, but I've never [[witnessed]] a performance of the play, on film or on stage, wherein Othello was portrayed with more humanity and authenticity.

According to the biographical notes, Fishburne never received any professional training as an actor. Perhaps this explains why his acting, in this beautifully edited [[film]], [[comes]] over as so [[believable]] and so [[powerful]]. [[Instead]] of chewing the scenery in the [[approved]] [[fashion]] for such high-powered [[roles]], Fishburne's portrayal is focused more on Othello's [[love]] for his wife, and on his profound [[sadness]] at her [[supposed]] [[betrayal]], than on violence and [[vengeance]]. [[In]] a word, the performance is [[understated]], and [[made]] far more [[impressive]] by Fishburne's [[extremely]] [[intelligent]] [[interpretation]] than it [[otherwise]] would have been.

The acting throughout is [[superb]], and the ([[abridged]]) [[speeches]] gain grace from their [[light]] editing. (Even Shakesspeare, after all, can be [[improved]] [[upon]], now and again -- and if that be treason, make the most of it! I don't pretend to be an authority on actors who have played Othello, but I've never [[saw]] a performance of the play, on film or on stage, wherein Othello was portrayed with more humanity and authenticity.

According to the biographical notes, Fishburne never received any professional training as an actor. Perhaps this explains why his acting, in this beautifully edited [[flick]], [[arises]] over as so [[credible]] and so [[forceful]]. [[However]] of chewing the scenery in the [[endorsed]] [[manner]] for such high-powered [[duties]], Fishburne's portrayal is focused more on Othello's [[iove]] for his wife, and on his profound [[grief]] at her [[alleged]] [[treason]], than on violence and [[revenge]]. [[For]] a word, the performance is [[undervalued]], and [[introduced]] far more [[unbelievable]] by Fishburne's [[unbelievably]] [[termite]] [[explanations]] than it [[alternately]] would have been.

The acting throughout is [[wondrous]], and the ([[abbreviated]]) [[speech]] gain grace from their [[lighting]] editing. (Even Shakesspeare, after all, can be [[improve]] [[after]], now and again -- and if that be treason, make the most of it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I went into this [[movie]] after having read it was a [[drama]] about a [[man]] with a supernatural [[gift]], who was made into a [[monster]] by [[society]]. Suffice to say I was [[expecting]] [[something]] [[entirely]] different from what I [[got]]. But it was a happy [[surprise]]. My [[friend]] and I both [[thought]] the [[movie]] was very romantic (the [[fact]] that the [[male]] lead isn't [[bad]] to [[look]] at [[surely]] helped), and there was enough plot [[development]], action and [[even]] [[humor]] (the fact that it [[takes]] them until the 3rd [[part]] of the [[movie]] to now each other's [[name]] had the whole movietheatre laughing) to [[keep]] you [[entertained]] and invested in the [[story]]. So in short: Not what I [[expected]], but a very good [[surprise]] [[indeed]]. I'll [[definitely]] [[buy]] this [[movie]] when it [[comes]] out on DVD. I went into this [[kino]] after having read it was a [[opera]] about a [[dude]] with a supernatural [[donation]], who was made into a [[creature]] by [[societies]]. Suffice to say I was [[waiting]] [[anything]] [[altogether]] different from what I [[get]]. But it was a happy [[amaze]]. My [[boyfriend]] and I both [[figured]] the [[movies]] was very romantic (the [[facto]] that the [[macho]] lead isn't [[unhealthy]] to [[gaze]] at [[probably]] helped), and there was enough plot [[developments]], action and [[yet]] [[comedy]] (the fact that it [[pick]] them until the 3rd [[portions]] of the [[kino]] to now each other's [[names]] had the whole movietheatre laughing) to [[preserving]] you [[distracted]] and invested in the [[narratives]]. So in short: Not what I [[hoped]], but a very good [[amaze]] [[admittedly]]. I'll [[clearly]] [[procuring]] this [[cinematography]] when it [[arises]] out on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 3102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "In the [[world]] of old-school kung fu movies, where [[revenge]] pictures came a dime a dozen, it took a lot for a film to stand out -- and [[even]] more to make it a fan favorite after all these [[years]]. What is arguably Chang Cheh's [[finest]] movie continues to hold influence over the [[Hong]] Kong movie industry, from the [[themes]] of loyalty, brotherhood and [[revenge]] as [[explored]] by [[John]] [[Woo]] (who got his start in the [[HK]] [[movie]] industry [[working]] for [[Chang]]) during the heyday of heroic bloodshed during the late 1980's, to more [[modern]] [[movies]] like A [[Man]] Called [[Hero]], which sports a [[character]] in a costume inspired by this [[film]]. The [[influence]] has [[also]] carried into other [[areas]] as well, from [[music]] such as the Wu-Tang Clan, TV [[commercials]] for Sprite and video [[games]] such as "[[Mortal]] Kombat." So what makes this [[movie]] so [[special]]? The plot -- on the [[surface]] -- is pretty [[simple]]. It [[deals]] with members of a rogue [[group]] known as the "[[Poison]] Clan" who are [[searching]] for a [[treasure]] [[hidden]] by their sifu. All of the [[members]] of the [[clan]] have [[extraordinary]] kung fu [[abilities]], denoted by their animal [[styles]], or "venoms" (the lizard can [[climb]] walls, the scorpion has a deadly [[strike]], etc.). The [[twist]] is that since the [[clan]] [[always]] [[wears]] masks, not all of them [[known]] who the others are. [[Thus]] a [[simple]] plot [[becomes]] [[almost]] a suspense thriller. We're not talking The [[Usual]] [[Suspects]] here, but it's far above [[many]] other kung [[fu]] [[movies]] of the [[time]]. [[Supposedly]], Golden [[Harvest]] was not too [[happy]] with Chang's script -- like most of his movies, they [[felt]] it was too dark and violent -- and they actually [[wanted]] him to [[add]] [[broad]] [[comic]] relief to it. [[Thankfully]], Chang [[stuck]] to his [[guns]] and stayed with his original [[script]], which has since has [[become]] revered as one of the [[best]] for the [[films]] of its [[time]], if not ever, [[completing]] an [[almost]] [[perfect]] [[dramatic]] [[arc]] and [[providing]] the perfect [[backbone]] for the [[extraordinary]] action sequences.

But what really solidifies the [[movie]] are the venoms themselves. [[Chang]] Cheh [[hit]] [[upon]] a [[magical]] formula with the cast -- not only did he [[gain]] talented martial [[artists]] ([[whose]] moves, competed without the [[aid]] of [[wires]] or other special [[effects]], put most [[modern]] martial [[artists]] to [[shame]]) but [[great]] actors as well. The formula [[proved]] so [[popular]] that Chang [[usually]] had one or more of the venoms in his later [[movies]]. Getting back to matters at hand, in most old-school movies, the actors seem to playing out cardboard cutouts, but here the actors actually create characters. It seems that everyone has a favorite venom (mine is Philip Kwok -- best known to many as Mad Dog from Hard-Boiled -- as Lizard) and it is this personal connection to the characters that The Five Deadly Venoms generates which makes it a true classic of the genre. Even if you're normally not a fan of old-school movies, you need to check The Five Deadly Venoms out, if for nothing else to see where modern movies got their inspiration from." "In the [[worldwide]] of old-school kung fu movies, where [[retaliation]] pictures came a dime a dozen, it took a lot for a film to stand out -- and [[yet]] more to make it a fan favorite after all these [[olds]]. What is arguably Chang Cheh's [[meanest]] movie continues to hold influence over the [[Kong]] Kong movie industry, from the [[item]] of loyalty, brotherhood and [[retaliation]] as [[investigated]] by [[Johannes]] [[Hu]] (who got his start in the [[KONG]] [[cinematography]] industry [[worked]] for [[Shang]]) during the heyday of heroic bloodshed during the late 1980's, to more [[fashionable]] [[cinematography]] like A [[Mec]] Called [[Superhero]], which sports a [[trait]] in a costume inspired by this [[flick]]. The [[implications]] has [[moreover]] carried into other [[spheres]] as well, from [[musicians]] such as the Wu-Tang Clan, TV [[ads]] for Sprite and video [[gaming]] such as "[[Deadly]] Kombat." So what makes this [[flick]] so [[peculiar]]? The plot -- on the [[surfaces]] -- is pretty [[mere]]. It [[addresses]] with members of a rogue [[clusters]] known as the "[[Toxin]] Clan" who are [[looking]] for a [[treasury]] [[disguised]] by their sifu. All of the [[member]] of the [[tribes]] have [[remarkable]] kung fu [[capabilities]], denoted by their animal [[style]], or "venoms" (the lizard can [[hike]] walls, the scorpion has a deadly [[struck]], etc.). The [[twisting]] is that since the [[tribes]] [[continuously]] [[door]] masks, not all of them [[renowned]] who the others are. [[Thereby]] a [[mere]] plot [[becoming]] [[hardly]] a suspense thriller. We're not talking The [[Ordinary]] [[Accusing]] here, but it's far above [[several]] other kung [[foo]] [[films]] of the [[times]]. [[Seemingly]], Golden [[Harvesting]] was not too [[pleased]] with Chang's script -- like most of his movies, they [[deemed]] it was too dark and violent -- and they actually [[wants]] him to [[adding]] [[extensive]] [[comedian]] relief to it. [[Hopefully]], Chang [[jammed]] to his [[rifles]] and stayed with his original [[screenplay]], which has since has [[gotten]] revered as one of the [[better]] for the [[cinema]] of its [[period]], if not ever, [[finishing]] an [[roughly]] [[perfecting]] [[remarkable]] [[archangel]] and [[offered]] the perfect [[pillar]] for the [[wondrous]] action sequences.

But what really solidifies the [[movies]] are the venoms themselves. [[Jang]] Cheh [[slapped]] [[after]] a [[quadrant]] formula with the cast -- not only did he [[obtaining]] talented martial [[entertainer]] ([[who]] moves, competed without the [[helps]] of [[cables]] or other special [[impacts]], put most [[fashionable]] martial [[entertainer]] to [[embarrassment]]) but [[huge]] actors as well. The formula [[revealed]] so [[folk]] that Chang [[ordinarily]] had one or more of the venoms in his later [[movie]]. Getting back to matters at hand, in most old-school movies, the actors seem to playing out cardboard cutouts, but here the actors actually create characters. It seems that everyone has a favorite venom (mine is Philip Kwok -- best known to many as Mad Dog from Hard-Boiled -- as Lizard) and it is this personal connection to the characters that The Five Deadly Venoms generates which makes it a true classic of the genre. Even if you're normally not a fan of old-school movies, you need to check The Five Deadly Venoms out, if for nothing else to see where modern movies got their inspiration from." --------------------------------------------- Result 3103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This hodge-podge adapted from a Gore Vidal novel (actually one of the great American writers) makes THE MAGIC CHRISTIAN and VALLEY OF THE DOLLS look like Fellini art-works. Raquel Welch, with an incredible body (and she's actually not very tall) in a lead role (except for KANSAS CITY BOMBER when she was quite good) playing Rex Reed's (bad movie reviewer; not critic) alter-ego, only to be surrounded by drag queen (great chick) Mae West, horny John Huston, a young and "naive" Farrah Fawcett (pre-Lee Majors; what a shame), and other various creep-azoids to pretend to spoof WAY too may things has nothing going for it except inter-spliced old films clips (i.e. Widmark in KISS OF DEATH, Lena Horne)...JUST so they can continue to bleed the life out of everyone.

A 2 out of 10. Best performance = ?. It's so bad, it's worth seeing! --------------------------------------------- Result 3104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Murphy really made me laugh my ass off on this HBO stand up comedy show.I love his impressions of Mr. T,Ed Norton and Ralph Cramden of "The Honeymooners",Elvis Presley,and Michael Jackson too.The Ice Cream Man,Goony Goo Goo,is also funny.I saw this for the first time when it came out in 1984.I laughed so hard,I almost fell off my chair.I still think this is very funny.

Eddie Murphy,when he was on "Saturday Night Live",made me laugh so hard,he is one of the best people to come out of"Saturday Night Live"."Eddie Murphy Delirious"is his best stand up performance next to "Eddie Murphy Raw".

I give "Eddie Murphy Delirious" 2 thumbs up and 10/10 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] This is a [[great]] movie but there could be more about Soylent Green. There should be more scenes of what they do to people. How people act in 2022. I think it would be neat to see if all this does happen in the year 2022 and beyond. Even if you still know what the secret is it is a great movie. So go rent or buy this movie right NOW!! This is a [[wondrous]] movie but there could be more about Soylent Green. There should be more scenes of what they do to people. How people act in 2022. I think it would be neat to see if all this does happen in the year 2022 and beyond. Even if you still know what the secret is it is a great movie. So go rent or buy this movie right NOW!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3106 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I hate to sound like an '[[old]] person', but [[frankly]] I haven't [[seen]] too [[many]] movies that I [[like]] that were made after 1960... generally, movies just seem to get worse and [[worse]] (although I [[quite]] enjoyed the Scott Baio [[vehicle]] "The [[Bread]], My Sweet", except for the 'de rigeur' sex scene which [[added]] [[NOTHING]] of [[value]] to THAT movie). This [[movie]] makes the [[mother]], a [[former]] [[Las]] [[Vegas]] chorus [[girl]], seem to be [[incapable]] of surviving on her own, although she is [[clearly]] in her 50s (though [[hinted]] at being in her 40s). I didn't [[buy]] it. I'm 57 and like all the [[women]] I know in their 50s and 40s, more than capable of surviving on my own (as I have been doing since I graduated from [[high]] school at 13, [[got]] legally [[emancipated]] and set off on my own life's [[journey]].)

The daughter is not [[believable]] in her job role ... she gets a [[promotion]] she doesn't [[deserve]] (a [[great]] [[opportunity]]) and drops that ball too, but when another female employee [[steps]] up to the [[plate]] and is ready to [[deliver]], the writers shoot her down as an 'opportunist', when she was just doing what any career-oriented [[person]] [[would]] do -- taking advantage of a wide-open [[opportunity]] [[created]] by the [[lack]] of self-discipline of her coworker, a [[girl]] who [[apparently]] doesn't [[understand]] the [[concept]] of [[honoring]] her [[promises]] (to her boss, in this [[case]]).

The [[daughter]] grudgingly 'allows' her [[mother]] to [[stay]] with her, on a [[temporary]] [[basis]], but then [[treats]] her mother (the [[woman]] who [[gave]] her [[Life]] and raised her to 'adulthood') like a pariah. [[Apparently]] the 'writers' of [[tripe]] like this do not [[understand]] that it is [[NOT]] 'the common thing' for [[PARENTS]] to [[act]] like [[children]], and then be treated AS [[children]] by THEIR [[children]]. That is just more of the [[societal]] 'baloney' that Hollywood [[keeps]] [[trying]] to force down our [[throats]] as [[though]] we, their public, were [[stupid]] for [[desiring]] to be [[entertained]] by their [[creative]] [[offerings]].

This is a sad movie with a [[stupid]] ending. If the [[young]] [[male]] restauranteur had been [[real]] and not a two-dimensional '[[tv]] character', he'd have stayed with the [[MOTHER]], who was not that much older than him and quite attractive. But in the end he 'falls' for the daughter, a shallow, rather uninteresting girl who has that cuteness of youth, but in an ordinary, bland way. (The 'opportunist' young woman who worked with this nothing girl was far more attractive, physically.)

There was no believable reason presented to the audience as to why the restauranteur [[preferred]] the daughter (who was an uptight, selfish, self-centered b*tch who treated her mother with unbelievable disrespect) to the mother -- a woman who was kindhearted, sweet-tempered, humorous, and had a joie de vivre the daughter could not even begin to comprehend. Of course the mother had her own flaws... she had reacted to her husband's demise by drinking herself into a stupor for a year or two afterwards which supposedly created the rift between her and her smarmy daughter.

Regardless of the way the characters were or were not developed, this is a baloney movie and a waste of your valuable viewing time unless you actually [[LIKE]] baloney. (Where's the mustard?) I hate to sound like an '[[antique]] person', but [[sincerely]] I haven't [[watched]] too [[myriad]] movies that I [[loves]] that were made after 1960... generally, movies just seem to get worse and [[lousiest]] (although I [[pretty]] enjoyed the Scott Baio [[auto]] "The [[Loaf]], My Sweet", except for the 'de rigeur' sex scene which [[inserting]] [[NADA]] of [[values]] to THAT movie). This [[filmmaking]] makes the [[ammi]], a [[past]] [[Angeles]] [[Blackpool]] chorus [[daughters]], seem to be [[unable]] of surviving on her own, although she is [[naturally]] in her 50s (though [[brandished]] at being in her 40s). I didn't [[bought]] it. I'm 57 and like all the [[femmes]] I know in their 50s and 40s, more than capable of surviving on my own (as I have been doing since I graduated from [[alto]] school at 13, [[did]] legally [[freeing]] and set off on my own life's [[journeys]].)

The daughter is not [[trustworthy]] in her job role ... she gets a [[promote]] she doesn't [[deserves]] (a [[whopping]] [[possibilities]]) and drops that ball too, but when another female employee [[step]] up to the [[plates]] and is ready to [[make]], the writers shoot her down as an 'opportunist', when she was just doing what any career-oriented [[persona]] [[could]] do -- taking advantage of a wide-open [[possibilities]] [[generated]] by the [[lacks]] of self-discipline of her coworker, a [[girls]] who [[visibly]] doesn't [[comprehend]] the [[conception]] of [[honoured]] her [[vows]] (to her boss, in this [[example]]).

The [[girls]] grudgingly 'allows' her [[mommy]] to [[staying]] with her, on a [[transitional]] [[foundations]], but then [[discusses]] her mother (the [[mujer]] who [[handed]] her [[Vida]] and raised her to 'adulthood') like a pariah. [[Visibly]] the 'writers' of [[gut]] like this do not [[understood]] that it is [[NO]] 'the common thing' for [[RELATIVES]] to [[ley]] like [[kids]], and then be treated AS [[kids]] by THEIR [[kids]]. That is just more of the [[social]] 'baloney' that Hollywood [[retains]] [[seek]] to force down our [[necks]] as [[despite]] we, their public, were [[dumb]] for [[wanting]] to be [[distracted]] by their [[imaginative]] [[tender]].

This is a sad movie with a [[dumb]] ending. If the [[youthful]] [[virile]] restauranteur had been [[veritable]] and not a two-dimensional '[[television]] character', he'd have stayed with the [[MOMMY]], who was not that much older than him and quite attractive. But in the end he 'falls' for the daughter, a shallow, rather uninteresting girl who has that cuteness of youth, but in an ordinary, bland way. (The 'opportunist' young woman who worked with this nothing girl was far more attractive, physically.)

There was no believable reason presented to the audience as to why the restauranteur [[favored]] the daughter (who was an uptight, selfish, self-centered b*tch who treated her mother with unbelievable disrespect) to the mother -- a woman who was kindhearted, sweet-tempered, humorous, and had a joie de vivre the daughter could not even begin to comprehend. Of course the mother had her own flaws... she had reacted to her husband's demise by drinking herself into a stupor for a year or two afterwards which supposedly created the rift between her and her smarmy daughter.

Regardless of the way the characters were or were not developed, this is a baloney movie and a waste of your valuable viewing time unless you actually [[ADORES]] baloney. (Where's the mustard?) --------------------------------------------- Result 3107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This production was [[made]] in the middle 1980s, and appears to be the [[first]] serious [[attempt]] to put [[BLEAK]] [[HOUSE]] on celluloid. [[No]] film version of the novel was ever [[attempted]] (it is [[remarkably]] rich in subplots that [[actually]] [[serve]] as counterpoints to each other, so that it [[would]] have been very [[hard]] to [[prune]] it down). The novel was the only [[attempt]] by Dickens to [[make]] a central [[narrator]] (one of two in the [[work]]) a [[woman]], Esther Summerson. Esther is raised by her [[aunt]] and uncle, who (in [[typical]] Dickens [[style]]) [[mistreat]] her. She is [[illegitimate]], but they won't [[tell]] her [[anything]] about her parentage. Later we [[get]] involved with the gentry, [[Sir]] [[Leicester]] Dedlock, and his wife. [[Lady]] Honoria [[Deadlock]] ([[Dame]] Diana Rigg) is having an increasingly [[difficult]] [[time]] [[regarding]] her private [[life]] and the meddling [[involvement]] of the [[family]] solicitor Tulkinghorn ([[Peter]] Vaughn). We [[also]] are involved with the [[actions]] of [[Richard]] Carstone (Esther's boyfriend) in trying to [[win]] a [[long]] drawn out estate chancery [[case]], Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, which [[everyone]] (even Richard's [[cousin]] [[John]] Jarndyce - [[played]] by Desmond [[Elliot]]) [[warns]] is not worth the [[effort]].

Dickens had been a [[law]] reporter and then a parliamentary [[reporter]] before he [[wrote]] fiction. [[Starting]] with the [[breach]] of promise case in PICKWICK PAPERS, Dickens looked closely at the [[law]]. [[Mr]]. Bumble said it was "a ass" in OLIVER [[TWIST]] and Dickens would [[consistently]] [[support]] that [[view]]. He [[looks]] at the slums as breeding [[grounds]] for [[crime]] in TWIST, that the [[law]] [[barely]] tries to [[cure]]. He [[attacks]] the Chancery and outdated estate [[laws]], as well as too powerful solicitors and [[greedy]] lawyers (Tulkinghorn, Vholes) in [[BLEAK]] HOUSE. In [[LITTLE]] DORRIT he [[attacks]] the debtors' [[prisons]] (he had [[hit]] it [[also]] in David COPPERFIELD). [[In]] [[OUR]] [[MUTUAL]] [[FRIEND]] he [[looks]] at testators and [[wills]]. In THE MYSTERY [[OF]] EDWIN DROOD he apparently was going to go to a [[murder]] trial. Dickens was far more critical of legal institutions than most of his contemporaries, including Thackeray.

But the [[novel]] [[also]] looks at other problems (like charity and religious hypocrisy, the [[budding]] Scotland [[Yard]] detective force, [[social]] snobbery in the industrial revolution). He [[also]] [[uses]] the novel to satirize various people: Leigh [[Hunt]] the writer, Inspector Fields of Scotland Yard, and even the notorious Maria Manning. Most of these points were kept in this fine mini-series version. If it is shown again on a cable station, catch it. This production was [[accomplished]] in the middle 1980s, and appears to be the [[frst]] serious [[endeavour]] to put [[PESSIMISTIC]] [[DWELLINGS]] on celluloid. [[Nos]] film version of the novel was ever [[try]] (it is [[terribly]] rich in subplots that [[indeed]] [[serving]] as counterpoints to each other, so that it [[should]] have been very [[stiff]] to [[plum]] it down). The novel was the only [[endeavor]] by Dickens to [[deliver]] a central [[announcer]] (one of two in the [[jobs]]) a [[daughters]], Esther Summerson. Esther is raised by her [[aunty]] and uncle, who (in [[symptomatic]] Dickens [[elegance]]) [[misuse]] her. She is [[wrongful]], but they won't [[told]] her [[something]] about her parentage. Later we [[obtain]] involved with the gentry, [[Monsieur]] [[Lester]] Dedlock, and his wife. [[Ladies]] Honoria [[Stalling]] ([[Daughters]] Diana Rigg) is having an increasingly [[problematic]] [[period]] [[pertaining]] her private [[vida]] and the meddling [[participating]] of the [[families]] solicitor Tulkinghorn ([[Pedro]] Vaughn). We [[apart]] are involved with the [[measurements]] of [[Richards]] Carstone (Esther's boyfriend) in trying to [[triumphs]] a [[lengthy]] drawn out estate chancery [[cases]], Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, which [[everybody]] (even Richard's [[cuz]] [[Johannes]] Jarndyce - [[done]] by Desmond [[Eliot]]) [[alerted]] is not worth the [[endeavor]].

Dickens had been a [[act]] reporter and then a parliamentary [[reporters]] before he [[texted]] fiction. [[Starts]] with the [[breached]] of promise case in PICKWICK PAPERS, Dickens looked closely at the [[lois]]. [[Herr]]. Bumble said it was "a ass" in OLIVER [[TWISTING]] and Dickens would [[methodically]] [[aiding]] that [[opinion]]. He [[seems]] at the slums as breeding [[motifs]] for [[offense]] in TWIST, that the [[act]] [[hardly]] tries to [[therapeutic]]. He [[attack]] the Chancery and outdated estate [[lois]], as well as too powerful solicitors and [[avid]] lawyers (Tulkinghorn, Vholes) in [[DIM]] HOUSE. In [[TINY]] DORRIT he [[attack]] the debtors' [[penitentiary]] (he had [[slapped]] it [[further]] in David COPPERFIELD). [[For]] [[NOSTRA]] [[RECIPROCAL]] [[BOYFRIEND]] he [[seem]] at testators and [[testament]]. In THE MYSTERY [[DU]] EDWIN DROOD he apparently was going to go to a [[killings]] trial. Dickens was far more critical of legal institutions than most of his contemporaries, including Thackeray.

But the [[newer]] [[apart]] looks at other problems (like charity and religious hypocrisy, the [[fledgling]] Scotland [[Backyard]] detective force, [[societal]] snobbery in the industrial revolution). He [[similarly]] [[using]] the novel to satirize various people: Leigh [[Manhunt]] the writer, Inspector Fields of Scotland Yard, and even the notorious Maria Manning. Most of these points were kept in this fine mini-series version. If it is shown again on a cable station, catch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3108 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is one of those movies that I've seen so many times that I can quote most of it. Some of the lines in this movie are just [[unbeatable]]. I [[particularly]] enjoy watching him stumble and [[fall]] while drunk, go out to the fancy [[restaurant]] drunk and the part with the moose.

I don't know how many times I have [[seen]] this sequence but it's funny every time. From the [[moment]] [[Arthur]] [[gets]] to Susan's Dad's place to the [[bit]] with the moose, you pretty much laugh the [[whole]] [[time]]. I [[remember]] [[watching]] the out-takes [[regarding]] the [[bit]] with the moose. It went down just like I'd [[imagined]] it'd be like. They were all [[laughing]] so [[hard]] it was [[difficult]] for them to [[film]] it.

The late [[Sir]] [[John]] Gielgud was a [[wonderful]] [[addition]] to this. [[His]] [[demeanor]], his one-liners and the way he [[handled]] Arthur were all [[equally]] [[hilarious]]. It's [[always]] a [[funny]] moment when he whacks him over the [[head]] with his [[hat]] or [[tells]] him he's a spoiled little ____. I laugh [[every]] [[time]] I [[listen]] to the "I'm going to have a [[bath]]" and the lines that follow. This is one of those movies that I've seen so many times that I can quote most of it. Some of the lines in this movie are just [[unrivalled]]. I [[principally]] enjoy watching him stumble and [[decline]] while drunk, go out to the fancy [[catering]] drunk and the part with the moose.

I don't know how many times I have [[saw]] this sequence but it's funny every time. From the [[time]] [[Arturo]] [[got]] to Susan's Dad's place to the [[bitten]] with the moose, you pretty much laugh the [[ensemble]] [[moment]]. I [[remind]] [[staring]] the out-takes [[relating]] the [[bitten]] with the moose. It went down just like I'd [[figured]] it'd be like. They were all [[giggling]] so [[stiff]] it was [[problematic]] for them to [[movie]] it.

The late [[Monsieur]] [[Giovanni]] Gielgud was a [[wondrous]] [[extra]] to this. [[Her]] [[behaviours]], his one-liners and the way he [[processed]] Arthur were all [[likewise]] [[funny]]. It's [[unceasingly]] a [[amusing]] moment when he whacks him over the [[chief]] with his [[sombrero]] or [[says]] him he's a spoiled little ____. I laugh [[any]] [[times]] I [[heed]] to the "I'm going to have a [[bains]]" and the lines that follow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I can't [[believe]] anyone thought there was anything [[original]] or interesting about this [[movie]]. I'm a [[fan]] of science fiction as much as the next [[guy]], and I can [[enjoy]] even old movies with [[ridiculous]] [[premises]] as long when they are written by [[someone]] other than a monkey. (See, for [[example]], my [[glowing]] [[review]] of Altered States [1980].)

A [[monkey]] [[could]] have explained better exactly why I should for a second [[take]] [[seriously]] the basic idea behind this movie. The problem is not that the [[producers]] had a low budget--it's that they didn't care.

Now, to publicly [[humiliate]] the [[worthless]] magazines [[whose]] [[glowing]] reviews appear on the box:

Chicago [[Tribune]]

San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Bay Guardian

(Actually, I enjoy reading the latter two. Still, their movie reviewing [[credibility]] has gone through the [[floor]]. But I know if I ever make a movie with handheld camera, a [[cheesy]] [[plot]] and [[stupid]] [[effects]], I'll show it to these journalists and remind them what they said about [[Conceiving]] Ada.) I can't [[reckon]] anyone thought there was anything [[initial]] or interesting about this [[filmmaking]]. I'm a [[breather]] of science fiction as much as the next [[guys]], and I can [[enjoys]] even old movies with [[silly]] [[venues]] as long when they are written by [[everybody]] other than a monkey. (See, for [[case]], my [[glittering]] [[scrutinize]] of Altered States [1980].)

A [[silvana]] [[would]] have explained better exactly why I should for a second [[taking]] [[profoundly]] the basic idea behind this movie. The problem is not that the [[makers]] had a low budget--it's that they didn't care.

Now, to publicly [[shamed]] the [[pointless]] magazines [[who]] [[glittering]] reviews appear on the box:

Chicago [[Forum]]

San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Bay Guardian

(Actually, I enjoy reading the latter two. Still, their movie reviewing [[credence]] has gone through the [[storey]]. But I know if I ever make a movie with handheld camera, a [[corny]] [[intrigue]] and [[asinine]] [[influences]], I'll show it to these journalists and remind them what they said about [[Conceive]] Ada.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is [[pretty]] much a low-budget, [[made]] for TV, [[type]] of [[movie]] [[intended]] to capitalize off of the [[success]] of the [[original]]. I'm a fan of b-movies, and this one might have been good had they not [[attached]] the [[name]] "Cube" to it, because as is, the [[director]] and [[plot]] of the original were [[better]], and this [[movie]] just about [[ruined]] my [[taste]] for the [[entire]] series. The [[characters]] are [[annoying]] and [[clichéd]], there are [[problems]] with continuity, and [[several]] outright production screw-ups. The story [[hardly]] gets a [[chance]] to [[develop]] because of superfluous dialogue and [[suffers]] from that. They more or less [[use]] the same horror gimmicks over and OVER throughout the [[movie]], and because the first one was so [[good]], this [[simply]] [[turns]] out as a [[disappointment]].

[[If]] this was a stand-alone b-movie, I'd [[probably]] give it about a four. The "1" [[rating]] I [[give]] it was [[pretty]] much a [[statement]] about how it [[utterly]] paled in [[effects]] and [[intelligence]] as compared to the first. This is [[quite]] much a low-budget, [[introduced]] for TV, [[genre]] of [[cinematographic]] [[intentioned]] to capitalize off of the [[avail]] of the [[initial]]. I'm a fan of b-movies, and this one might have been good had they not [[attach]] the [[denomination]] "Cube" to it, because as is, the [[superintendent]] and [[intrigue]] of the original were [[optimum]], and this [[filmmaking]] just about [[bulldozed]] my [[aftertaste]] for the [[total]] series. The [[trait]] are [[irritating]] and [[clichés]], there are [[problem]] with continuity, and [[multiple]] outright production screw-ups. The story [[practically]] gets a [[possibility]] to [[developing]] because of superfluous dialogue and [[undergoes]] from that. They more or less [[utilizes]] the same horror gimmicks over and OVER throughout the [[film]], and because the first one was so [[alright]], this [[exclusively]] [[revolves]] out as a [[dissatisfaction]].

[[Though]] this was a stand-alone b-movie, I'd [[presumably]] give it about a four. The "1" [[appraisals]] I [[confer]] it was [[quite]] much a [[statements]] about how it [[totally]] paled in [[influences]] and [[intelligentsia]] as compared to the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 3111 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This [[excellent]] drama had me in suspense the whole time. I could not take my eyes off the screen for one [[second]] because every word kept connecting the [[pieces]] to this [[puzzling]] murder. This movie really touched me because it showed how [[sad]] and hard [[life]] can be. I really did cry in the end (which I don't want to give away!) It [[also]] let me [[realize]] how cruel and [[sickening]] people can be when it [[comes]] to murder.

The cast was [[also]] very good. The only [[bad]] cast member was the actress who played [[Anne]] [[Marie]]. The actress did a great job, but the director didn't. I say this because he found someone who didn't look a single bit like Anne Marie Fahey herself. This [[wondrous]] drama had me in suspense the whole time. I could not take my eyes off the screen for one [[seconds]] because every word kept connecting the [[segments]] to this [[disorienting]] murder. This movie really touched me because it showed how [[unlucky]] and hard [[vida]] can be. I really did cry in the end (which I don't want to give away!) It [[similarly]] let me [[realizing]] how cruel and [[revolting]] people can be when it [[occurs]] to murder.

The cast was [[apart]] very good. The only [[unfavourable]] cast member was the actress who played [[Anna]] [[Mary]]. The actress did a great job, but the director didn't. I say this because he found someone who didn't look a single bit like Anne Marie Fahey herself. --------------------------------------------- Result 3112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Eddie [[Murphy]] plays Chandler Jarrell, a [[man]] who devotes his [[time]] to finding lost [[children]]. When the [[beautiful]] Kee Nang {Charlotte [[Lewis]]} enters his [[life]], she tells him he is the [[chosen]] one and he [[must]] [[find]] the Golden [[Child]]. Sceptical and [[driven]] [[purely]] by [[lust]] and intrigue, Jarrell [[gets]] involved without [[realising]] he's about to [[embark]] on a fantastical [[journey]], one that [[involves]] peril and worst of all, the demon Sardo Numspa.

Is The [[Golden]] Child a [[product]] of its time?, by that i [[mean]], was [[Eddie]] Murphy and The [[Golden]] Child's popularity exclusive to the late 1980s [[audiences]]?. [[For]] i can [[remember]] vividly how much this [[film]] [[entertained]] folk back in that decade, it's box office was $79,817,937, making it the 8th [[biggest]] [[earner]] of 1986, but [[since]] the 80s [[faded]] from [[memory]] it has [[become]] the in [[thing]] to [[deny]] [[Eddie]] [[Murphy]] [[pictures]] the comedy [[accolades]] that they actually once had. The Golden [[Child]] is not up with the more [[accepted]] 80s Murphy [[pictures]] like Trading [[Places]] and Beverly [[Hills]] [[Cop]], but upon [[revisiting]] the [[film]] [[recently]] i personally [[find]] that it [[contains]] Murphy at his wisecracking, quipping and charming [[best]]!, seriously!.

Cashing in on a fantasy [[action]] formula that was reinvigorated and temp-lated by Raiders Of The Lost Ark in 1981, The [[Golden]] [[Child]] hits all the [[required]] [[genre]] [[buttons]]. Pretty girl, [[daring]] reluctant-hero with a quip in his [[armoury]], dashing [[villain]] {Charles [[Dance]] so [[English]] i [[could]] [[kiss]] him myself}, [[wonderful]] [[colour]], and a [[cute]] [[kid]] with [[mystical]] powers, the film only asks you to [[get]] involved in the fun, not to dissect and digress its worth as a cranial [[fantasy]] [[picture]]. [[Yes]] the CGI demon [[looks]] creaky now, and yes the [[genre]] had far better [[pictures]] in the 80s, 90s and beyond, but [[really]] if you agree with the disgraceful [[rating]] of 5 here on this site then you may just be [[taking]] this [[genre]] a [[little]] too serious, [[seriously]]. 7/10 Eddie [[Murph]] plays Chandler Jarrell, a [[dude]] who devotes his [[period]] to finding lost [[kids]]. When the [[glamorous]] Kee Nang {Charlotte [[Luis]]} enters his [[vida]], she tells him he is the [[picks]] one and he [[ought]] [[found]] the Golden [[Kid]]. Sceptical and [[propelled]] [[only]] by [[thirsty]] and intrigue, Jarrell [[receives]] involved without [[achieving]] he's about to [[begun]] on a fantastical [[tour]], one that [[contains]] peril and worst of all, the demon Sardo Numspa.

Is The [[Dore]] Child a [[merchandise]] of its time?, by that i [[meaning]], was [[Eddy]] Murphy and The [[Gilded]] Child's popularity exclusive to the late 1980s [[listeners]]?. [[Onto]] i can [[remind]] vividly how much this [[movies]] [[distracted]] folk back in that decade, it's box office was $79,817,937, making it the 8th [[bigger]] [[juicy]] of 1986, but [[because]] the 80s [[gone]] from [[memoir]] it has [[becomes]] the in [[stuff]] to [[refuse]] [[Eddy]] [[Murph]] [[photography]] the comedy [[tribute]] that they actually once had. The Golden [[Kid]] is not up with the more [[recognised]] 80s Murphy [[photo]] like Trading [[Sites]] and Beverly [[Foothills]] [[Police]], but upon [[revisited]] the [[kino]] [[newly]] i personally [[finds]] that it [[involves]] Murphy at his wisecracking, quipping and charming [[nicest]]!, seriously!.

Cashing in on a fantasy [[activities]] formula that was reinvigorated and temp-lated by Raiders Of The Lost Ark in 1981, The [[Dorado]] [[Kids]] hits all the [[requisite]] [[kinds]] [[pimples]]. Pretty girl, [[bold]] reluctant-hero with a quip in his [[dockyard]], dashing [[scoundrel]] {Charles [[Dancing]] so [[Englishman]] i [[wo]] [[screwing]] him myself}, [[beautiful]] [[colours]], and a [[charming]] [[children]] with [[mystic]] powers, the film only asks you to [[obtain]] involved in the fun, not to dissect and digress its worth as a cranial [[utopia]] [[image]]. [[Yeah]] the CGI demon [[seem]] creaky now, and yes the [[gender]] had far better [[photography]] in the 80s, 90s and beyond, but [[truly]] if you agree with the disgraceful [[valuation]] of 5 here on this site then you may just be [[take]] this [[gender]] a [[small]] too serious, [[earnestly]]. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is no doubt one of the worst movies I have ever seen. This makes your run of the mill TV movie look like Reservoir Dogs. Based on a book by the one and only Britney Spears and her mother this is trash with nothing bar a reasonable performance from Virginia Madsen (I hope you got paid well) to save it. The story of a red neck country gill who wins a scholarship in a prestigious music school is little but a vehicle to pedal Ms Spears pants music to the consumer and to generally agree that low brow must be the way. There is nothing good going on here with all the beats as predictable as night following day. Never ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3114 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] In my opinion, this movie's title should be changed from "Only the Brave" to "All About Lane". I went to a screening of this film a few months ago and was [[quite]] [[disappointed]] with the outcome. [[Although]], I [[appreciate]] that the director made a movie about the men of 442nd - a subject matter that long deserved addressing in the film industry - the acting in some parts of film was quite [[stale]]. The performances of Marc Dacascos, Tamlyn Tomita, and Jason Scott Lee were all great. However, the director should have NEVER put himself as the main character in the movie. Sorry Lane, you are just not a film actor. Stick to what you're good at - theater acting. Gina Hiraizumi's performance in this film was [[also]] [[horrible]]. She should never have been given a speaking role and her [[looks]] were [[unfit]] to play the part of a Miss Nisei queen. There were other [[young]] actresses in the film who were naturally beautiful and whose performances were wonderful... Why weren't they [[cast]] for that role? Another [[major]] [[problem]] with this film were its action sequences. The Japanese-American soldiers don't look like they were fighting German soldiers... [[let]] [[alone]] anyone. Granted this was a low budget feature, but since this was a war-based film, isn't it [[important]] to [[show]] some [[actually]] [[fighting]]? This [[film]] was a worthy [[attempt]], but [[definitely]] not worth a major distribution. In my opinion, this movie's title should be changed from "Only the Brave" to "All About Lane". I went to a screening of this film a few months ago and was [[rather]] [[disappointing]] with the outcome. [[Though]], I [[appreciative]] that the director made a movie about the men of 442nd - a subject matter that long deserved addressing in the film industry - the acting in some parts of film was quite [[archaic]]. The performances of Marc Dacascos, Tamlyn Tomita, and Jason Scott Lee were all great. However, the director should have NEVER put himself as the main character in the movie. Sorry Lane, you are just not a film actor. Stick to what you're good at - theater acting. Gina Hiraizumi's performance in this film was [[likewise]] [[frightful]]. She should never have been given a speaking role and her [[seem]] were [[inappropriate]] to play the part of a Miss Nisei queen. There were other [[youths]] actresses in the film who were naturally beautiful and whose performances were wonderful... Why weren't they [[casting]] for that role? Another [[important]] [[issues]] with this film were its action sequences. The Japanese-American soldiers don't look like they were fighting German soldiers... [[allowing]] [[only]] anyone. Granted this was a low budget feature, but since this was a war-based film, isn't it [[notable]] to [[illustrating]] some [[genuinely]] [[battles]]? This [[filmmaking]] was a worthy [[endeavor]], but [[unquestionably]] not worth a major distribution. --------------------------------------------- Result 3115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Hooper is Not [[Funny]], Not Fasted paced, Not romantic and Non [[informative]]. There is no real [[drama]]. You [[would]] think that a [[movie]] about the world's greatest [[stuntman]] [[would]] have some drama, there was an attempt but it didn't seem real. No [[Character]] study, no lessons [[learned]], it did not [[even]] look [[like]] the [[actors]] were having any real fun, they were just [[trying]] to act like they were having fun. There is no reason to watch [[unless]] you like to look at Burt and want get an occasional glimpse of Sally. Prancer the horse was [[beautiful]] and did what he was supposed to do. In fact Prancer was the [[best]] actor in this [[movie]]. Smoky and the Bandit was such a fun movie that I was ready to like [[Hooper]]. This [[movie]] turned out to be a real disappointment and [[waste]] of [[time]] Hooper is Not [[Droll]], Not Fasted paced, Not romantic and Non [[enlightening]]. There is no real [[tragedy]]. You [[could]] think that a [[filmmaking]] about the world's greatest [[headliner]] [[could]] have some drama, there was an attempt but it didn't seem real. No [[Nature]] study, no lessons [[learning]], it did not [[yet]] look [[iike]] the [[players]] were having any real fun, they were just [[attempts]] to act like they were having fun. There is no reason to watch [[if]] you like to look at Burt and want get an occasional glimpse of Sally. Prancer the horse was [[sumptuous]] and did what he was supposed to do. In fact Prancer was the [[optimum]] actor in this [[film]]. Smoky and the Bandit was such a fun movie that I was ready to like [[Huber]]. This [[filmmaking]] turned out to be a real disappointment and [[squandering]] of [[period]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was so [[looking]] forward to seeing this when it was in production.But it turned out to be the the [[biggest]] let down. A far cry from the whimsical world of Dr Seuss. It was vulgar and [[distasteful]] I don't think [[Dr]] Seuss would have [[approved]].How the Grinch stole Christmas was much better. I understand it had some [[subtle]] [[adult]] jokes in it but my [[children]] have yet to catch on. Whereas The Cat in the Hat screamed vulgarity they [[caught]] a lot more than I would have [[liked]].Growing up with Dr Seuss It really bothered me to see how this timeless classic got trashed on the big screen .[[Lets]] [[see]] what they do with Horton hears a who.I hope this one does [[Dr]] Seuss some justice. I was so [[researching]] forward to seeing this when it was in production.But it turned out to be the the [[grandest]] let down. A far cry from the whimsical world of Dr Seuss. It was vulgar and [[repulsive]] I don't think [[Doktor]] Seuss would have [[countersigned]].How the Grinch stole Christmas was much better. I understand it had some [[perceptive]] [[adults]] jokes in it but my [[enfants]] have yet to catch on. Whereas The Cat in the Hat screamed vulgarity they [[captures]] a lot more than I would have [[loved]].Growing up with Dr Seuss It really bothered me to see how this timeless classic got trashed on the big screen .[[Allows]] [[seeing]] what they do with Horton hears a who.I hope this one does [[Doktor]] Seuss some justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 3117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Her Cardboard Lover" is Norma Shearer's last movie. She quit the [[movies]] and, I [[think]], [[joined]] the Board of [[Directors]] at MGM. That was a [[good]] [[move]] on her [[part]]. "Her [[Cardboard]] Lover" was talky and boring in parts. It was [[obvious]] there were only a [[handful]] of [[actors]] with [[speaking]] parts so they had a lot of [[dialogue]] to [[speak]] to keep this [[turkey]] afloat.

The [[story]] was a [[good]] [[idea]] about a [[wealthy]] [[woman]] (Norma Shearer) hiring a man (Robert Taylor) to make her playboy fiancee ([[George]] Sanders)[[jealous]]. I am surprised that the director, George Cukor, did not cut many of the talky scenes between Ms. Shearer and Mr. Taylor. Mr. Cukor [[served]] [[Ms]]. Shearer well in "The [[Women]]" but not in this movie.

The best performance in the movie was given by Robert Taylor. During Mr. Taylor's career, he was [[given]] his best comedy roles in this movie and "When Ladies Meet" in 1941. In 1942, he gave his best comedy performance in "Her Cardboard Lover" and, up to then, his best dramatic performance in "Johnny [[Eager]]." He had a busy year. I think of all the actors at MGM, Mr. Taylor [[worked]] with all the [[major]] and [[minor]] actresses on the lot. Also, MGM [[gave]] Mr. Taylor all [[types]] of [[movies]] to make - most of them were successful. That is why MGM kept him for 25 years.

[[Mr]]. George [[Sanders]] was very good as a socialite [[heel]]. He played a [[similar]] role eight [[years]] [[later]] in "All About Eve" for which he won an Oscar for a supporting role. As for [[Ms]]. Shearer, this was one of her [[worst]] performances, she was not funny and too dramatic for this comedy. It is strange that she made a great comedy in 1939, "The Women", and gave her best performance. It was obvious that she was too [[old]] looking for her younger leading men in "Her Cardboard Lover." Also, it didn't help that some of her clothes were awful.

Too bad she and Mr. Taylor did not make another dramatic movie like their last movie together, the superb "Escape". The same comments about this movie can be said of another movie, "Personal Property" that Mr. Taylor made in 1937 with Jean Harlow. It was too talky, boring, and the actress looked old. Ms. Harlow looked ill throughout the movie and nobody in Hollywood noticed to tell her to see a doctor, so in 1937, she died at age 26. What a waste! She was becoming a good actress and getting better roles. "Her Cardboard Lover" is Norma Shearer's last movie. She quit the [[filmmaking]] and, I [[thinking]], [[join]] the Board of [[Managers]] at MGM. That was a [[alright]] [[budge]] on her [[portions]]. "Her [[Luge]] Lover" was talky and boring in parts. It was [[manifest]] there were only a [[fistful]] of [[protagonists]] with [[discussing]] parts so they had a lot of [[conversations]] to [[talking]] to keep this [[ankara]] afloat.

The [[storytelling]] was a [[alright]] [[thoughts]] about a [[rika]] [[mujer]] (Norma Shearer) hiring a man (Robert Taylor) to make her playboy fiancee ([[Georgi]] Sanders)[[envious]]. I am surprised that the director, George Cukor, did not cut many of the talky scenes between Ms. Shearer and Mr. Taylor. Mr. Cukor [[played]] [[Mrs]]. Shearer well in "The [[Mujer]]" but not in this movie.

The best performance in the movie was given by Robert Taylor. During Mr. Taylor's career, he was [[conferred]] his best comedy roles in this movie and "When Ladies Meet" in 1941. In 1942, he gave his best comedy performance in "Her Cardboard Lover" and, up to then, his best dramatic performance in "Johnny [[Keen]]." He had a busy year. I think of all the actors at MGM, Mr. Taylor [[cooperating]] with all the [[substantial]] and [[small]] actresses on the lot. Also, MGM [[provided]] Mr. Taylor all [[genre]] of [[theater]] to make - most of them were successful. That is why MGM kept him for 25 years.

[[Mister]]. George [[Saunders]] was very good as a socialite [[talon]]. He played a [[comparable]] role eight [[ages]] [[afterward]] in "All About Eve" for which he won an Oscar for a supporting role. As for [[Corinne]]. Shearer, this was one of her [[meanest]] performances, she was not funny and too dramatic for this comedy. It is strange that she made a great comedy in 1939, "The Women", and gave her best performance. It was obvious that she was too [[vecchio]] looking for her younger leading men in "Her Cardboard Lover." Also, it didn't help that some of her clothes were awful.

Too bad she and Mr. Taylor did not make another dramatic movie like their last movie together, the superb "Escape". The same comments about this movie can be said of another movie, "Personal Property" that Mr. Taylor made in 1937 with Jean Harlow. It was too talky, boring, and the actress looked old. Ms. Harlow looked ill throughout the movie and nobody in Hollywood noticed to tell her to see a doctor, so in 1937, she died at age 26. What a waste! She was becoming a good actress and getting better roles. --------------------------------------------- Result 3118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Deeply emotional. It can't leave you neutral.

Yes it's a love story between 2 18 years old boys. But it's only the body of this movie. And it's been removed. You only feel what happened with these boys. You feel the soul of the movie. With of course some action, some sex, but this is no pornography, too many feelings.

It was only a summer "story", and it became, from love to hate, almost to death, the most important time of their lives. I loved it, you will too, whatever your feelings are. --------------------------------------------- Result 3119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A group of [[extremely]] unlikable A-holes are [[tormented]] by lame [[puppets]] that some [[elderly]] [[douche]] [[bag]] night-watchman has [[kept]] locked away in a [[film]] [[vault]] for twenty [[years]] for no [[reason]] whatsoever.

[[Many]] people know this [[film]] [[merely]] from MST3K's spot-on ribbing of the flick. But I've seen the actual [[movie]] and can safely [[say]] that yes it's [[bad]], really, REALLY [[bad]]. From the one of the most [[awful]] 'fight' scenes I've ever witnessed to the [[stuffed]] toy 'aliens' that [[suffer]] from a [[lack]] of motion (I had a My [[Pet]] Monster that was scarier) right up to the [[atrocious]] acting (I had a My Pet Monster that was more charismatic) [[However]], that being said Rick Sloan's "Vice Academy" [[films]] are somehow, and trust me I have no [[earthly]] idea how, much [[worse]]. That's not to [[suggest]] that this film is anything but crap, because it isn't. [[Just]] [[throwing]] it out there.

Eye Candy: no nudity in the movie [[proper]], but there's 2 pairs of tits in the DVD Introduction to the film

My Grade: D-

Retromedia DVD Extras: Introduction by Jim Wynorski; Stills gallery; and Trailer for this film A group of [[critically]] unlikable A-holes are [[disturbed]] by lame [[muppets]] that some [[older]] [[jackass]] [[suitcase]] night-watchman has [[conserved]] locked away in a [[filmmaking]] [[crypt]] for twenty [[ages]] for no [[cause]] whatsoever.

[[Numerous]] people know this [[movie]] [[only]] from MST3K's spot-on ribbing of the flick. But I've seen the actual [[filmmaking]] and can safely [[told]] that yes it's [[unfavourable]], really, REALLY [[unfavourable]]. From the one of the most [[abhorrent]] 'fight' scenes I've ever witnessed to the [[plush]] toy 'aliens' that [[suffers]] from a [[lacks]] of motion (I had a My [[Pets]] Monster that was scarier) right up to the [[frightful]] acting (I had a My Pet Monster that was more charismatic) [[Conversely]], that being said Rick Sloan's "Vice Academy" [[cinema]] are somehow, and trust me I have no [[terrestrial]] idea how, much [[worst]]. That's not to [[proposing]] that this film is anything but crap, because it isn't. [[Only]] [[pelting]] it out there.

Eye Candy: no nudity in the movie [[appropriate]], but there's 2 pairs of tits in the DVD Introduction to the film

My Grade: D-

Retromedia DVD Extras: Introduction by Jim Wynorski; Stills gallery; and Trailer for this film --------------------------------------------- Result 3120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK, let me again admit that I haven't [[seen]] any other Merchant Ivory (the distributor) films. Nor have I seen more [[celebrated]] works by the [[director]], so my [[capacity]] to discuss Before the Rains outside of [[analysis]] of the [[film]] itself is mitigated. With that [[admittance]], [[let]] me begin.

Before the [[Rains]] is a different [[kind]] of [[movie]] that doesn't know which [[genre]] it [[wants]] to be. At first, it pretends to be a romance. [[In]] most romances, the protagonist [[falls]] in [[love]] with a [[supporting]] [[character]], is [[separated]] from the supporting [[character]], and is (sometimes) united with his or her partner. This movie's [[hero]] has already won the heart of his lover but cannot be with her. [[His]] [[name]] is [[Henry]] Moores and her [[name]] is Sajani, and they [[reside]] in southern India during the waning days of the Raj ([[British]] imperial [[rule]]). [[Henry]] has been away from London for a long time and has [[fallen]] in [[love]] with his married Indian maid, [[despite]] his legal [[marriage]] and [[child]] overseas. What [[could]] be better than that? They [[often]] sneak away for intimate [[afternoons]] until some [[children]] [[notice]] them. Word spreads to Sajani's husband who [[questions]] her involvement with Moores. She [[denies]] any contact with him, but Moores [[asks]] her to [[leave]] the [[area]]. Sajani refuses because of her [[devotion]] to him and commits suicide. [[Please]] [[take]] note that these events [[occur]] in the [[opening]] third of the film. The [[film]] [[changes]] tone and becomes a crime-drama in its [[final]] [[portions]].

Sajani's body is [[discovered]] right as Moores' family [[comes]] to [[visit]]. The [[alleged]] [[perpetrator]] is Moores's English-educated [[assistant]] [[T]].K. [[T]].K. knows of his master's affair but keeps [[silent]] until his [[life]] becomes [[threatened]]. Once he is [[declared]] innocent, he [[attempts]] to [[regain]] his [[honor]] by [[killing]] Moores. [[T]].K. is too [[squeamish]] and leaves him in a dirt [[path]] as the [[rains]] fall.

I [[want]] to [[warn]] you, this isn't a [[romance]] [[film]]. The [[DVD]] [[cover]] and theatrical [[posters]] [[show]] an Indian [[woman]] and Caucasian [[man]] [[embracing]] in an idealized tropic [[setting]]. This [[image]] is [[captured]] [[directly]] from the film's [[opening]], but [[quickly]] disappears. [[Then]] it's over. It seems [[like]] an [[effort]] to capitalize on Western fixation on forbidden love. It isn't [[effective]], at all. Not only is the movie not a romance, but its characters lack any personality. They are bundles of walking clichés. Moores is an arrogant white man who doesn't recognize his Indian friend, T.K.'s intelligence. T.K. is torn between his own heritage and his educative background. Sajani is a woman incapable of having a choice in her romantic life. Oh, and, of course, Moores' family is inquisitive into Sajani's death but still slightly racist to Indians. If the tone wasn't so serious, I would be willing to overlook these problems, but it isn't. The film is presented with a didactic overtone which highlights its poor character development.

No, this film isn't terrible. Other than the laughable screenplay, it isn't poor. The actors are all experienced and perform well here. Nandita Das, who plays Sajani, was part of wonderful Indian [[drama]] Water. [[Even]] director Sivan has an impressive resume. He recently oversaw The Terrorist, which is part of Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection. What happened here? Why is this movie so bad? Well, Sivan mentioned how he was inspired to direct this film because of a short he viewed in Israel called Red Roofs. Apparently, the story was "timeless," and Sivan sought to create a similar experience set in 1930's India. I don't have any problem with that approach, but I think Sivan may have been too motivated this time. The actors, cinematography, and set design are acceptable but unless you share Sivan's aura, you'll probably not enjoy it. My recommendation is that you presume you aren't in accordance with him and watch something else. Final Consensus: *and ½ out of ***** OK, let me again admit that I haven't [[watched]] any other Merchant Ivory (the distributor) films. Nor have I seen more [[celebrating]] works by the [[superintendent]], so my [[capacities]] to discuss Before the Rains outside of [[analyses]] of the [[movies]] itself is mitigated. With that [[admission]], [[allowing]] me begin.

Before the [[Rainy]] is a different [[genre]] of [[movies]] that doesn't know which [[kinds]] it [[wanted]] to be. At first, it pretends to be a romance. [[Throughout]] most romances, the protagonist [[drops]] in [[amore]] with a [[helping]] [[characters]], is [[parted]] from the supporting [[characters]], and is (sometimes) united with his or her partner. This movie's [[superhero]] has already won the heart of his lover but cannot be with her. [[Her]] [[denomination]] is [[Enrico]] Moores and her [[designation]] is Sajani, and they [[inhabit]] in southern India during the waning days of the Raj ([[England]] imperial [[regulation]]). [[Henrik]] has been away from London for a long time and has [[slumped]] in [[amore]] with his married Indian maid, [[albeit]] his legal [[marries]] and [[children]] overseas. What [[did]] be better than that? They [[routinely]] sneak away for intimate [[mornings]] until some [[kids]] [[noticing]] them. Word spreads to Sajani's husband who [[issues]] her involvement with Moores. She [[refuses]] any contact with him, but Moores [[calls]] her to [[leaving]] the [[zoning]]. Sajani refuses because of her [[dedication]] to him and commits suicide. [[Invites]] [[taking]] note that these events [[emerge]] in the [[commencement]] third of the film. The [[filmmaking]] [[shifts]] tone and becomes a crime-drama in its [[definitive]] [[servings]].

Sajani's body is [[detected]] right as Moores' family [[arrives]] to [[visits]]. The [[presumed]] [[abuser]] is Moores's English-educated [[auxiliaries]] [[ton]].K. [[ton]].K. knows of his master's affair but keeps [[quiet]] until his [[lives]] becomes [[jeopardised]]. Once he is [[declare]] innocent, he [[attempting]] to [[reclaiming]] his [[honoring]] by [[murdering]] Moores. [[ton]].K. is too [[carsick]] and leaves him in a dirt [[pathway]] as the [[rain]] fall.

I [[wanna]] to [[cautionary]] you, this isn't a [[romanticism]] [[kino]]. The [[DVDS]] [[covers]] and theatrical [[placards]] [[illustrates]] an Indian [[femme]] and Caucasian [[hombre]] [[encompassing]] in an idealized tropic [[configured]]. This [[imagery]] is [[capturing]] [[immediatly]] from the film's [[initiation]], but [[expeditiously]] disappears. [[Later]] it's over. It seems [[iike]] an [[efforts]] to capitalize on Western fixation on forbidden love. It isn't [[efficacious]], at all. Not only is the movie not a romance, but its characters lack any personality. They are bundles of walking clichés. Moores is an arrogant white man who doesn't recognize his Indian friend, T.K.'s intelligence. T.K. is torn between his own heritage and his educative background. Sajani is a woman incapable of having a choice in her romantic life. Oh, and, of course, Moores' family is inquisitive into Sajani's death but still slightly racist to Indians. If the tone wasn't so serious, I would be willing to overlook these problems, but it isn't. The film is presented with a didactic overtone which highlights its poor character development.

No, this film isn't terrible. Other than the laughable screenplay, it isn't poor. The actors are all experienced and perform well here. Nandita Das, who plays Sajani, was part of wonderful Indian [[dramas]] Water. [[Yet]] director Sivan has an impressive resume. He recently oversaw The Terrorist, which is part of Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection. What happened here? Why is this movie so bad? Well, Sivan mentioned how he was inspired to direct this film because of a short he viewed in Israel called Red Roofs. Apparently, the story was "timeless," and Sivan sought to create a similar experience set in 1930's India. I don't have any problem with that approach, but I think Sivan may have been too motivated this time. The actors, cinematography, and set design are acceptable but unless you share Sivan's aura, you'll probably not enjoy it. My recommendation is that you presume you aren't in accordance with him and watch something else. Final Consensus: *and ½ out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] It has [[taken]] me a while to watch this version as unfortunately I don't [[seem]] to be [[able]] to [[rent]] it in the video [[store]], only the other version but I [[fell]] in [[love]] with it. I was [[always]] borderline with the other [[Emma]]. Gwenneth and Toni [[Collette]], as they are not British [[naturally]] have to put on the accent, and well to me it doesn't seem natural. It [[seems]] put on. Sorry but don't think Toni and Gwenneth did a [[brilliant]] [[job]] there. I could not warm to any of the characters, but this version is more heart warming and more the type of person I imagined Emma to be. It is [[definitely]] the version I will come back to from now on. I was disappointed that Mr Knightley was not better looking, but he is convincing. I also like Jane Fairfax better (played by Olivia Williams). I never warmed to her in the [[movie]] version, but she is better portrayed in this version. Come to think of it, (besides Mr Knightley) all characters are better played, and a lot less over the top. Unfortunately both came out [[around]] same time and the Paltrow version [[got]] more [[publicity]]. [[Pity]]...... I [[also]] [[love]] the [[new]] scene at the [[end]]. [[Well]] [[done]] to [[Kate]] Beckingsale! [[Therefore]], if you are a Jane [[Austen]] fan, don't [[forget]] to watch this one. It has [[picked]] me a while to watch this version as unfortunately I don't [[seems]] to be [[capable]] to [[rented]] it in the video [[storehouse]], only the other version but I [[declined]] in [[likes]] with it. I was [[steadily]] borderline with the other [[Emmy]]. Gwenneth and Toni [[Colette]], as they are not British [[clearly]] have to put on the accent, and well to me it doesn't seem natural. It [[looks]] put on. Sorry but don't think Toni and Gwenneth did a [[wondrous]] [[workplace]] there. I could not warm to any of the characters, but this version is more heart warming and more the type of person I imagined Emma to be. It is [[decidedly]] the version I will come back to from now on. I was disappointed that Mr Knightley was not better looking, but he is convincing. I also like Jane Fairfax better (played by Olivia Williams). I never warmed to her in the [[cinematography]] version, but she is better portrayed in this version. Come to think of it, (besides Mr Knightley) all characters are better played, and a lot less over the top. Unfortunately both came out [[throughout]] same time and the Paltrow version [[gets]] more [[propaganda]]. [[Compassion]]...... I [[apart]] [[amour]] the [[novo]] scene at the [[ends]]. [[Good]] [[played]] to [[Cate]] Beckingsale! [[Thus]], if you are a Jane [[Austin]] fan, don't [[forgot]] to watch this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I would have rated the [[series]] a [[perfect]] 10 for [[outstanding]] and [[consistently]] [[high]] quality story and character development had it not been for the [[last]] episode of Season 10!

The [[final]] episode of the 10th season "[[Unending]]", where (it would [[certainly]] [[appear]] that) the Asgard have been killed-off in a very [[rushed]], unconvincing and very unceremonious fashion, [[left]] me in disbelief!

From the extremely rushed [[end]] of the series, it's [[obvious]] that [[many]] of the story [[arcs]] were originally scheduled to occur over at least one more season. My guess would be that they rapidly accelerated these stories to position the [[Stargate]] SG-1 franchise for the two upcoming direct-to-DVD moves!

[[Unless]] the Asgard return in a future SG-1 movie (with a very good explanation of the "apparent" extinction), I think that the fans have been cheated with a poor clean-up of loose-ends!

Poor end to an otherwise brilliant sci-fi series. I would have rated the [[serials]] a [[impeccable]] 10 for [[wondrous]] and [[unceasingly]] [[higher]] quality story and character development had it not been for the [[latter]] episode of Season 10!

The [[last]] episode of the 10th season "[[Undying]]", where (it would [[indubitably]] [[arise]] that) the Asgard have been killed-off in a very [[swooped]], unconvincing and very unceremonious fashion, [[exited]] me in disbelief!

From the extremely rushed [[ends]] of the series, it's [[unmistakable]] that [[various]] of the story [[arches]] were originally scheduled to occur over at least one more season. My guess would be that they rapidly accelerated these stories to position the [[Porte]] SG-1 franchise for the two upcoming direct-to-DVD moves!

[[If]] the Asgard return in a future SG-1 movie (with a very good explanation of the "apparent" extinction), I think that the fans have been cheated with a poor clean-up of loose-ends!

Poor end to an otherwise brilliant sci-fi series. --------------------------------------------- Result 3123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] But I [[got]] over it. To me, it [[seemed]] that even the [[Author]] of the book [[favored]] Caroline. I felt so sorry for the [[character]] [[Louise]], and she was [[constantly]] [[compared]] with Esau who was evil, I just [[felt]] the comparison was a bit [[harsh]] and un-realistic. Really though, the movie was [[bad]]. I wouldn't really [[see]] it unless you're [[ready]] for a [[big]] [[let]] down. But I [[did]] over it. To me, it [[appeared]] that even the [[Auteur]] of the book [[prefer]] Caroline. I felt so sorry for the [[trait]] [[Luiz]], and she was [[consistently]] [[comparison]] with Esau who was evil, I just [[deemed]] the comparison was a bit [[tough]] and un-realistic. Really though, the movie was [[unfavourable]]. I wouldn't really [[consults]] it unless you're [[readies]] for a [[prodigious]] [[letting]] down. --------------------------------------------- Result 3124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I thought the movie (especially the [[plot]]) [[needs]] a lot of work. The elements of the movie remains westernized and [[untrue]] to the attempt of trying to produce an eastern feel in the movie. I'll give three out of many of the [[flaws]] of the movie:

First, when Shen told Wendy that he would help her study the history of China, I was really happy that the [[audience]] would receive some information about Chinese history; but it turns out that the movie did not exactly show Wendy actually [[studying]] Chinese history; yet instead, the [[movie]] only shows Wendy [[practicing]] the method of [[remembering]] what she had [[studied]], which [[frustrated]] and put me in dismay.

[[Second]], which really [[bothered]] me, is how the [[characters]] [[kept]] mentioning about moon [[cakes]] -- moon [[cakes]] this and moon [[cakes]] that and how [[good]] it [[tastes]]. Yet they didn't [[really]] mention the [[real]] significance of it. The only they they [[talked]] about that had any relevance to the moon cake was the [[Autumn]] Festival, which they did not [[explain]] or [[go]] in [[depth]]. They [[could]] have [[mentioned]] the myth that correlates with the [[moon]] cake -- the [[Moon]] [[Lady]]. The [[myth]] [[starts]] of with how there once exists ten suns and each would rotate [[rising]], but one day all ten suns [[rose]] up, drying up the [[land]] with the [[rising]] intense heat; so the [[Divine]] [[Archer]], Hou Yi, shot nine of the ten suns, [[leaving]] only one [[sun]] (there are different versions where the Hou Yi shot the eight out of nine suns). Because of his [[heroic]] contribution, he was [[given]] the pill of [[immortality]] so he could [[live]] on forever in case the ten suns do [[rise]] up again, but his [[wife]], Chang-O [[stole]] it. [[After]] stealing it, she [[fled]] to the moon, where she met a hare. She then [[came]] [[upon]] an [[idea]] and [[told]] the hare to pound the pill into [[many]] [[piece]] so she [[could]] [[spread]] the [[pill]] all over [[earth]], [[giving]] [[everyone]] [[immortality]]. (There are a few [[variations]] of this [[story]] but throughout my [[childhood]], I, most of the time, [[heard]] about this [[version]]). I [[thought]] [[details]] such as this would make the plot more culturally Chinese [[oriented]].

The [[last]] [[thing]] I [[would]] point out is the [[last]] battle scene of the [[movie]]. The [[teachers]] that were [[possessed]] by the [[monks]] were [[fighting]] the Terra-cotta [[Warriors]] (the life-like [[statues]] of the [[soldiers]]) went against the [[idea]] of how [[important]] Chinese history is to the [[Chinese]]. The Terra-cotta Warrors serves as a connection of China's past and it was very westernized (where evil must be killed in anyway possible) that the monks in the movies were willing to destroy that connection. It would be understandable if Wendy, considering she is Chinese-American and doesn't have full Chinese knowledge, had no problem destroying these priceless artifacts.

The whole movie was westernized because it seemed that all the monks and Shen want to do is fight... I mean, it's rated TVPG due to violence, which goes against the Confucius thinking of cooperation and harmony. It would seem more accurate that the monks try to avoid violence and try to work things out peacefully before having to resort to violence.

All in all, all of or either of the producer, writer, or director did not do their research thoroughly and did a messy and effortless job instead. I would suggest that they either stop airing this movie or that they re-shoot the movie so it contains more accurate information; however, I would give it credit (2 stars) for removing one stereotype of Asians and Asian-Americans of being smart and quiet. I thought the movie (especially the [[intrigue]]) [[must]] a lot of work. The elements of the movie remains westernized and [[specious]] to the attempt of trying to produce an eastern feel in the movie. I'll give three out of many of the [[drawbacks]] of the movie:

First, when Shen told Wendy that he would help her study the history of China, I was really happy that the [[spectators]] would receive some information about Chinese history; but it turns out that the movie did not exactly show Wendy actually [[explore]] Chinese history; yet instead, the [[cinema]] only shows Wendy [[practiced]] the method of [[remembered]] what she had [[explored]], which [[thwarted]] and put me in dismay.

[[Seconds]], which really [[disturbed]] me, is how the [[traits]] [[retained]] mentioning about moon [[biscuits]] -- moon [[biscuits]] this and moon [[twinkies]] that and how [[alright]] it [[flavors]]. Yet they didn't [[genuinely]] mention the [[veritable]] significance of it. The only they they [[spoken]] about that had any relevance to the moon cake was the [[Fall]] Festival, which they did not [[explained]] or [[going]] in [[depths]]. They [[did]] have [[alluded]] the myth that correlates with the [[luna]] cake -- the [[Luna]] [[Ladies]]. The [[mythology]] [[initiated]] of with how there once exists ten suns and each would rotate [[surged]], but one day all ten suns [[surged]] up, drying up the [[territory]] with the [[surged]] intense heat; so the [[Heavenly]] [[Greene]], Hou Yi, shot nine of the ten suns, [[letting]] only one [[sunshine]] (there are different versions where the Hou Yi shot the eight out of nine suns). Because of his [[brave]] contribution, he was [[conferred]] the pill of [[immortal]] so he could [[vivo]] on forever in case the ten suns do [[ascent]] up again, but his [[woman]], Chang-O [[steal]] it. [[Upon]] stealing it, she [[escaped]] to the moon, where she met a hare. She then [[arrived]] [[after]] an [[ideals]] and [[tells]] the hare to pound the pill into [[various]] [[slice]] so she [[wo]] [[proliferation]] the [[pills]] all over [[terrestrial]], [[confer]] [[everybody]] [[immortal]]. (There are a few [[discrepancies]] of this [[fairytales]] but throughout my [[preschool]], I, most of the time, [[audition]] about this [[stepping]]). I [[brainchild]] [[detail]] such as this would make the plot more culturally Chinese [[focused]].

The [[lastly]] [[stuff]] I [[should]] point out is the [[latter]] battle scene of the [[flick]]. The [[trainers]] that were [[owning]] by the [[moines]] were [[battling]] the Terra-cotta [[Combatant]] (the life-like [[sculptures]] of the [[solider]]) went against the [[thinks]] of how [[major]] Chinese history is to the [[Chinaman]]. The Terra-cotta Warrors serves as a connection of China's past and it was very westernized (where evil must be killed in anyway possible) that the monks in the movies were willing to destroy that connection. It would be understandable if Wendy, considering she is Chinese-American and doesn't have full Chinese knowledge, had no problem destroying these priceless artifacts.

The whole movie was westernized because it seemed that all the monks and Shen want to do is fight... I mean, it's rated TVPG due to violence, which goes against the Confucius thinking of cooperation and harmony. It would seem more accurate that the monks try to avoid violence and try to work things out peacefully before having to resort to violence.

All in all, all of or either of the producer, writer, or director did not do their research thoroughly and did a messy and effortless job instead. I would suggest that they either stop airing this movie or that they re-shoot the movie so it contains more accurate information; however, I would give it credit (2 stars) for removing one stereotype of Asians and Asian-Americans of being smart and quiet. --------------------------------------------- Result 3125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] Before all, I'd like to point out that I have not read the book, so there was no chance I'd be disappointed in that aspect. The major flaw I spotted was historical detail, with several cars, trains, clothes, etc. I think don´t belong at that time.

***Possible spoiler*****

The technical aspect of the film is ok, nothing to brag about. But the acting, I think, was [[terrific]]. I don't have no experience in acting, still I can't believe how people can consider this terrible! Maybe they've only seen two movies (ever), and the other one must have been very good indeed!

I specially liked Jeremy Irons, and really understood his character, someone who crawled up the social ladder with very hard work, then fights against those who would take his life's work from him, only he gets so involved in this fight, he doesn't realize reason is no longer at his side, and he ends up a beaten, disappointed man. Irons made this so believable, I sympathized with the character despite his brutality.

After Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder is also wonderful as a romantic young women, who is drawn into the revolutionary ideals by her boyfriend (Banderas, he had an under-developed part, I think), and Glenn Close was also very good. Meryl Streep had an average performance, it was not bad, just not up to the standards of the other actors. Watch out for Miguel Guilherme, a fine Portuguese actor, between so many stars.

In contrast to today's movies, here only the interpretations, only people matter, but at the same time, it is not a pretensious film, too worried trying to be intellectual. The best proof I really liked it, I'm writing a review 7 years later. Before all, I'd like to point out that I have not read the book, so there was no chance I'd be disappointed in that aspect. The major flaw I spotted was historical detail, with several cars, trains, clothes, etc. I think don´t belong at that time.

***Possible spoiler*****

The technical aspect of the film is ok, nothing to brag about. But the acting, I think, was [[wondrous]]. I don't have no experience in acting, still I can't believe how people can consider this terrible! Maybe they've only seen two movies (ever), and the other one must have been very good indeed!

I specially liked Jeremy Irons, and really understood his character, someone who crawled up the social ladder with very hard work, then fights against those who would take his life's work from him, only he gets so involved in this fight, he doesn't realize reason is no longer at his side, and he ends up a beaten, disappointed man. Irons made this so believable, I sympathized with the character despite his brutality.

After Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder is also wonderful as a romantic young women, who is drawn into the revolutionary ideals by her boyfriend (Banderas, he had an under-developed part, I think), and Glenn Close was also very good. Meryl Streep had an average performance, it was not bad, just not up to the standards of the other actors. Watch out for Miguel Guilherme, a fine Portuguese actor, between so many stars.

In contrast to today's movies, here only the interpretations, only people matter, but at the same time, it is not a pretensious film, too worried trying to be intellectual. The best proof I really liked it, I'm writing a review 7 years later. --------------------------------------------- Result 3126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Film critics of the world, I apologize. It is your job to give [[advice]] to the moviegoing public so that they can wisely choose what to spend money on. But I ignored your advice and I have been [[deeply]] hurt. However, my decision to see "The Cat in the Hat" wasn't [[made]] haphazardly. You [[see]], three years ago all of you critics said that we should all avoid the "calamity" known as "How the Grinch Stole Christmas". Then some friends of mine [[took]] me to [[see]] it and it turned out to be a colorful, funny and almost hypnotic yuletide treat. [[So]] when the critics unleashed their fury against "The Cat in the Hat", another big budget Seuss update with a big name star in the title role, I thought that it must be the same old song. How wrong I was.

For five whole minutes I thought I was in the clear. The opening credits are clever, the kids are charming and the production values are top notch. Then the cat showed up. There are [[many]] problems from this point on, but the [[biggest]] one was the [[woeful]] miscasting of [[Mike]] Myers. [[Where]] "The Grinch" was saved by the inspired [[casting]] of Jim Carrey, "The [[Cat]]" was destroyed by Myers. He can be very funny when his [[energies]] are applied where they [[belong]], [[comic]] sketches. Every [[movie]] he's [[made]] that was truly [[funny]] was [[really]] just a feature [[length]] comedy [[sketch]], from "Wayne's World" to "Austin Powers". So he tries to do the same thing here, it's just that these [[comedy]] sketches are more like the stuff that they stick at the [[end]] of SNL, not [[funny]], just painful. Not that the [[writers]] [[helped]] him out any. After the charming prologue the [[movie]] turns into an [[hour]] of [[repulsive]] [[bodily]] humor [[gags]], poorly timed pratfalls and insultingly stunted [[attempts]] at hip [[humor]]. This movie was the most [[disheartening]] [[cinematic]] [[experience]] I have ever had. [[Period]]. [[So]] much talent and [[work]] went into something so [[vile]]. I know that the [[adult]] stars of this [[movie]] will be [[relatively]] unscathed by this [[mess]], I just hope that the [[wonderful]] Spencer Breslin and Dakota [[Fanning]] will get more [[chances]] to [[show]] their charms in far [[better]] [[movies]]. [[If]] you are a parent, [[please]] [[avoid]] this like the plague. With movies like "[[Elf]]" and "Brother [[Bear]]" currently in theaters, you have far [[better]] choices. Film critics of the world, I apologize. It is your job to give [[counseling]] to the moviegoing public so that they can wisely choose what to spend money on. But I ignored your advice and I have been [[heavily]] hurt. However, my decision to see "The Cat in the Hat" wasn't [[brought]] haphazardly. You [[seeing]], three years ago all of you critics said that we should all avoid the "calamity" known as "How the Grinch Stole Christmas". Then some friends of mine [[picked]] me to [[behold]] it and it turned out to be a colorful, funny and almost hypnotic yuletide treat. [[Accordingly]] when the critics unleashed their fury against "The Cat in the Hat", another big budget Seuss update with a big name star in the title role, I thought that it must be the same old song. How wrong I was.

For five whole minutes I thought I was in the clear. The opening credits are clever, the kids are charming and the production values are top notch. Then the cat showed up. There are [[myriad]] problems from this point on, but the [[most]] one was the [[unlucky]] miscasting of [[Mick]] Myers. [[Whenever]] "The Grinch" was saved by the inspired [[foundry]] of Jim Carrey, "The [[Kitten]]" was destroyed by Myers. He can be very funny when his [[energy]] are applied where they [[belongs]], [[hilarious]] sketches. Every [[filmmaking]] he's [[introduced]] that was truly [[fun]] was [[truly]] just a feature [[duration]] comedy [[skit]], from "Wayne's World" to "Austin Powers". So he tries to do the same thing here, it's just that these [[humor]] sketches are more like the stuff that they stick at the [[ends]] of SNL, not [[fun]], just painful. Not that the [[authors]] [[supporting]] him out any. After the charming prologue the [[filmmaking]] turns into an [[hours]] of [[hateful]] [[physical]] humor [[jokes]], poorly timed pratfalls and insultingly stunted [[endeavors]] at hip [[mood]]. This movie was the most [[demoralizing]] [[filmmaking]] [[enjoying]] I have ever had. [[Timeline]]. [[Thus]] much talent and [[cooperation]] went into something so [[appalling]]. I know that the [[mature]] stars of this [[filmmaking]] will be [[comparatively]] unscathed by this [[chaos]], I just hope that the [[sumptuous]] Spencer Breslin and Dakota [[Stoking]] will get more [[chance]] to [[shows]] their charms in far [[optimum]] [[film]]. [[Though]] you are a parent, [[invite]] [[forestall]] this like the plague. With movies like "[[Brownie]]" and "Brother [[Bears]]" currently in theaters, you have far [[best]] choices. --------------------------------------------- Result 3127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Yes, it's another great [[magical]] Muppet's movie and I [[adore]] them all; the characters, the movies, the TV show episodes (it's the best comedy or musical TV show ever) and all the artists behind it. But here they did such a [[rare]] [[fatal]] mistake and I'm [[surely]] talking about the [[weird]] [[ending]] !!

I think it's very dangerous to involve that much, in American drama, and end a love affair by [[marriage]] !! We, as all the poor viewers, feel so free or maybe happy for the [[absence]] of its [[annoyance]], peevishness and misery ! So we all [[enjoy]] these stories which [[gather]] 2 [[cute]] heroes as couple in [[love]] without the legitimate [[bond]] like Mickey Mouse and Minnie, Superman and [[Lois]] [[Lane]], Dick Tracy and [[Tess]], etc. So with all of the [[previous]] [[couples]] and their likes I [[bet]] that you feel [[safe]], serenity and [[peace]]. [[Therefore]] when you [[look]] at what the [[makers]] of this movie had already done you'll be as [[mad]] as me !

They made the [[weak]] [[miserable]] [[creature]] (Kermit) [[marry]] his daily nightmare, the most vexatious [[female]] ever (Miss [[Piggy]]) ! This is a historical [[change]] by the [[measures]] of the American entertainment's [[industry]] ! And it was [[pretty]] [[normal]] to have a [[negative]] impact [[upon]] the [[audience]] whom just [[refused]] to bless or [[believe]] or being [[satisfied]] with that sudden [[marriage]] ([[even]] the pathetic frog didn't have the [[time]] or the [[proper]] [[opportunity]] to [[think]] or to decide anything !). [[Therefore]] no wonder at all when you know that this [[movie]] is the most failure one in their cinematic serious, grossing only 25 [[millions]] vis-à-vis 65 [[millions]] [[earned]] by the first one (The Muppet Movie – 1979) five years [[earlier]] !!

Simply in this [[movie]] they took Manhattan, and my rest too ! Yes, it's another great [[quadrant]] Muppet's movie and I [[loved]] them all; the characters, the movies, the TV show episodes (it's the best comedy or musical TV show ever) and all the artists behind it. But here they did such a [[few]] [[homicidal]] mistake and I'm [[definitively]] talking about the [[bizarre]] [[terminated]] !!

I think it's very dangerous to involve that much, in American drama, and end a love affair by [[wedlock]] !! We, as all the poor viewers, feel so free or maybe happy for the [[absences]] of its [[discomfort]], peevishness and misery ! So we all [[enjoys]] these stories which [[collect]] 2 [[belle]] heroes as couple in [[loves]] without the legitimate [[bonding]] like Mickey Mouse and Minnie, Superman and [[Laws]] [[Lanes]], Dick Tracy and [[Benedict]], etc. So with all of the [[anterior]] [[couple]] and their likes I [[chickened]] that you feel [[secure]], serenity and [[pacific]]. [[So]] when you [[glance]] at what the [[maker]] of this movie had already done you'll be as [[lunatic]] as me !

They made the [[feeble]] [[unfortunate]] [[creatures]] (Kermit) [[marrying]] his daily nightmare, the most vexatious [[femmes]] ever (Miss [[Piglet]]) ! This is a historical [[modify]] by the [[measure]] of the American entertainment's [[industries]] ! And it was [[quite]] [[routine]] to have a [[bad]] impact [[after]] the [[viewers]] whom just [[disbelieve]] to bless or [[think]] or being [[gratified]] with that sudden [[wedlock]] ([[yet]] the pathetic frog didn't have the [[period]] or the [[adequate]] [[possibilities]] to [[thought]] or to decide anything !). [[So]] no wonder at all when you know that this [[cinema]] is the most failure one in their cinematic serious, grossing only 25 [[billions]] vis-à-vis 65 [[billions]] [[gained]] by the first one (The Muppet Movie – 1979) five years [[previously]] !!

Simply in this [[cinematography]] they took Manhattan, and my rest too ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] There's nothing worse than renting an [[Asian]] movie and getting an American movie experience instead.

It's only my opinion, but a good thriller is [[dependent]] upon the establishment of likable, intelligent characters. As far as likability is [[concerned]], the protagonists in [[Say]] [[Yes]] are a quaint married couple. Nicely done. Unfortunately, they are stupid beyond [[belief]]. Let us count the ways they mishandle being [[terrorized]] by a [[stalker]].

1. [[After]] a hitchhiker threatens to [[kill]] you, be sure to tell him what hotel you're staying at when you drop him off.

2. Beat the hell out of the stalker in broad daylight and in front of dozens of witnesses, thereby allowing him to press charges of assault.

3. Don't bother telling the police about the stalker and simply assume (for no apparently good reason) that the cops were bribed by him.

4. While trying to escape, let your [[lady]] out of your sight as much as possible to ensure that the stalker kidnaps her.

5. After getting help from someone to find the stalker after kidnapping your wife, be sure to send them away as soon as possible so you can face him one-on-one. No point in being unfair, right?

Now, I'd never expect that any person [[would]] be immune to making a few mistakes under these stressful conditions, but the characters in [[Say]] Yes are so dense and make so many [[unbelievable]] [[mistakes]] that it's [[effectively]] impossible for the viewer to [[care]] about their safety, since they are [[victims]] of their own doing. This [[kills]] the enjoyability of the [[entire]] [[film]].

[[In]] [[case]] you were [[wondering]], the scriptwriters didn't [[stop]] with dim-witted [[characters]]. Since they themselves are [[surely]] dim-witted for [[writing]] this crapfest, they decided to make situations so absurdly unrealistic that all sense of reality goes out the window.

1. The stalker kills a cop inside a police station – while the protagonist is asleep no more than ten feet away.

2. The stalker engages in all sorts of dubious activities in broad daylight and around tons of people, yet no one other than the married couple seems to notice his odd behavior.

3. The stalker survives an absurd amount of violence that would have killed any human being.

4. The "suspense" scenes had no imagination whatsoever. In fact, some scenes were direct rip-offs from American movies.

The only positive is the decapitation near the end, which was a pretty brutal scene since it was inflicted upon the wife. It's too bad the filmmakers followed it up with an outrageously stupid ending that comes out of left field.

Truly, the Koreans behind the making of Say Yes should be ashamed of themselves. Better yet, they should just move to California and take employment with people who make movies with a similar disregard for quality and intelligence. There's nothing worse than renting an [[Asiatic]] movie and getting an American movie experience instead.

It's only my opinion, but a good thriller is [[dependant]] upon the establishment of likable, intelligent characters. As far as likability is [[preoccupied]], the protagonists in [[Tell]] [[Oui]] are a quaint married couple. Nicely done. Unfortunately, they are stupid beyond [[faith]]. Let us count the ways they mishandle being [[terrified]] by a [[jammer]].

1. [[Upon]] a hitchhiker threatens to [[kiiled]] you, be sure to tell him what hotel you're staying at when you drop him off.

2. Beat the hell out of the stalker in broad daylight and in front of dozens of witnesses, thereby allowing him to press charges of assault.

3. Don't bother telling the police about the stalker and simply assume (for no apparently good reason) that the cops were bribed by him.

4. While trying to escape, let your [[ladies]] out of your sight as much as possible to ensure that the stalker kidnaps her.

5. After getting help from someone to find the stalker after kidnapping your wife, be sure to send them away as soon as possible so you can face him one-on-one. No point in being unfair, right?

Now, I'd never expect that any person [[should]] be immune to making a few mistakes under these stressful conditions, but the characters in [[Tell]] Yes are so dense and make so many [[awesome]] [[faults]] that it's [[efficiently]] impossible for the viewer to [[caring]] about their safety, since they are [[fatalities]] of their own doing. This [[mata]] the enjoyability of the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]].

[[Among]] [[examples]] you were [[asks]], the scriptwriters didn't [[discontinue]] with dim-witted [[personages]]. Since they themselves are [[admittedly]] dim-witted for [[handwriting]] this crapfest, they decided to make situations so absurdly unrealistic that all sense of reality goes out the window.

1. The stalker kills a cop inside a police station – while the protagonist is asleep no more than ten feet away.

2. The stalker engages in all sorts of dubious activities in broad daylight and around tons of people, yet no one other than the married couple seems to notice his odd behavior.

3. The stalker survives an absurd amount of violence that would have killed any human being.

4. The "suspense" scenes had no imagination whatsoever. In fact, some scenes were direct rip-offs from American movies.

The only positive is the decapitation near the end, which was a pretty brutal scene since it was inflicted upon the wife. It's too bad the filmmakers followed it up with an outrageously stupid ending that comes out of left field.

Truly, the Koreans behind the making of Say Yes should be ashamed of themselves. Better yet, they should just move to California and take employment with people who make movies with a similar disregard for quality and intelligence. --------------------------------------------- Result 3129 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Dull, flatly-directed "[[comedy]]" has zero [[laughs]] and [[wastes]] a [[great]] [[cast]]. Alan Alda wore too [[many]] [[hats]] on this one and it [[shows]]. [[Newcomer]] [[Anthony]] LaPaglia provides the only [[spark]] of [[life]] in this [[tedium]] but it's not enough.

One of those scripts that, if you were a neophyte and submitted it to an agent or producer, would be [[ripped]] to [[shreds]] and rejected without [[discussion]]. Dull, flatly-directed "[[comic]]" has zero [[smiles]] and [[detritus]] a [[marvellous]] [[casting]]. Alan Alda wore too [[innumerable]] [[helmets]] on this one and it [[denotes]]. [[Newcomers]] [[Antoni]] LaPaglia provides the only [[ignites]] of [[lives]] in this [[drudgery]] but it's not enough.

One of those scripts that, if you were a neophyte and submitted it to an agent or producer, would be [[buzzed]] to [[tatters]] and rejected without [[interviews]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[If]] you ever watched the [[Dukes]] of [[Hazard]] you know that you never had to [[worry]] about [[drugs]] or cussing or [[crude]] [[behavior]] being seen by young [[children]]. [[If]] you've seen the [[movie]] you know that is no [[longer]] the [[case]]! This movie was HORRIBLE! Main [[characters]] doing drugs and [[thinking]] it is [[funny]] and cool is [[certainly]] not what I [[call]] [[entertainment]]. They took a wonderful show and just turned it into trash. Daisy who was a [[little]] flirtatious in the [[original]] show now [[looks]] and acts like she [[belongs]] on the street corner [[getting]] [[paid]] for her services. I was so excited about [[seeing]] this [[movie]] before it came out, 15 minutes into the [[movie]] I was ready to leave. I stayed [[thinking]] it had to get [[better]] but [[instead]] it [[got]] worse by the minute. I [[wish]] I had never [[seen]] this [[movie]]. It [[trashed]] a [[good]] show and left nothing but [[horrible]] [[taste]] in my [[mouth]] when I left. Do yourself a favor, [[go]] [[see]] something worth your [[money]], cause it's not only a waste of money but a waste of 2 hours of your life you will never [[get]] back! [[Though]] you ever watched the [[Fists]] of [[Threats]] you know that you never had to [[worried]] about [[medications]] or cussing or [[rough]] [[behaviors]] being seen by young [[childhood]]. [[Though]] you've seen the [[flick]] you know that is no [[most]] the [[lawsuits]]! This movie was HORRIBLE! Main [[attribute]] doing drugs and [[thought]] it is [[hilarious]] and cool is [[toki]] not what I [[invitation]] [[amusement]]. They took a wonderful show and just turned it into trash. Daisy who was a [[small]] flirtatious in the [[initial]] show now [[seems]] and acts like she [[owns]] on the street corner [[obtain]] [[paying]] for her services. I was so excited about [[see]] this [[filmmaking]] before it came out, 15 minutes into the [[filmmaking]] I was ready to leave. I stayed [[thought]] it had to get [[nicer]] but [[alternatively]] it [[did]] worse by the minute. I [[wishing]] I had never [[watched]] this [[film]]. It [[wrecked]] a [[alright]] show and left nothing but [[scary]] [[aftertaste]] in my [[kisser]] when I left. Do yourself a favor, [[going]] [[behold]] something worth your [[cash]], cause it's not only a waste of money but a waste of 2 hours of your life you will never [[obtain]] back! --------------------------------------------- Result 3131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite the lack of logic present in the storyline, Kill Shot is a highly enjoyable film. Through a moving performance Kasper Van Dien brilliantly portrays the emotional rift between a hard working wealthy father and his misguided son. Each member of the supporting cast pitches in with a solid performance, highlighted by the vivid acting of a young asian man whose name I cannot recall. A shockingly tragic ending may unnerve some younger viewers, but as a whole Kill Shot truly delivers a death blow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I don't [[believe]] there has ever been a more evil or [[wicked]] [[television]] [[program]] to air in the United States as The 700 Club. They are today's equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan of the 20th century. Their hatred of all that is [[good]] and sweet and human and [[pure]] is [[beyond]] all [[ability]] to understand. Their daily [[constant]] attacks upon [[millions]] and millions of Americans, as well as [[billions]] of [[humans]] the world over, who don't [[happen]] to share their bigoted, cruel, [[monstrous]], and [[utterly]] insane view of [[humanity]] is beyond [[anything]] [[television]] has ever seen. The lies they spout and the [[ridiculous]] lies they try to pass off as truth, such as the [[idea]] of "life after death" or "[[god]]" or "sin" or "the devil" is so [[preposterous]] that they [[actually]] [[seem]] mentally ill, so lost are they in their [[fantasy]]. Sane people know that religion is a drug and shouldn't let themselves get addicted to that type of fantasy. However, The 700 Club is in a [[class]] by itself. They are truly a cult. While I believe in freedom of [[speech]], they way they spread hatred, lies, disinformation, and such [[fantastic]] ideas is beyond all limits. I hope that one day the [[American]] [[Psychiatric]] Association will finally take up the [[study]] of those people who [[delude]] themselves in this [[way]], people who [[let]] themselves [[sink]] so deeply into the [[fantasy]] [[land]] of [[religion]] that they no [[longer]] have any [[real]] [[concept]] of [[reality]] at all. Treatment for such [[afflicted]] [[individuals]] is [[sorely]] needed in this country, as so [[many]] people have [[completely]] lost their minds to the fantasy of [[religion]]. The 700 Club [[though]], is even more [[horrible]] as it [[rises]] to the legal [[definition]] of 'cult' but due to The 700 Club's [[vast]] [[wealth]] ([[conned]] daily from the [[millions]] of Americans locked in their [[deceitful]] grip) they are above the [[law]] in this country. For those of you who have [[seen]] the movie "The Matrix" you know that [[movie]] was a [[metaphor]] for religion on [[earth]]: the [[evil]] ones who are at the top of each of the [[religions]] who drain the ones they have trapped and cruelly abuse for their own selfish [[purposes]], and those millions who are [[held]] in a [[death]] [[sleep]] and [[slowly]] being drained of their [[life]] force represent those [[many]] people who [[belong]] to [[religions]] and who have lost all [[ability]] to [[perceive]] what is [[really]] going on [[around]] them.

[[In]] [[less]] civil [[times]], the good townsfolk [[would]] have [[run]] such monsters as those [[associated]] with The 700 Club out of town with torches and pitchforks. But in today's world where people have lost all choice in their choices of television that is presented to them, we have no way to rid ourselves of the 700 Club plague.

The television ratings system and the "V" chip on TV's should also have a rating called "[[R]]" for religion, so that rational people and concerned parents could easily screen such vile intellectual and brutal emotional rape, such as presented by The 700 Club every day all over our country, from themselves and their children. I don't [[think]] there has ever been a more evil or [[malevolent]] [[tv]] [[programs]] to air in the United States as The 700 Club. They are today's equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan of the 20th century. Their hatred of all that is [[buena]] and sweet and human and [[sheer]] is [[afterlife]] all [[skill]] to understand. Their daily [[nonstop]] attacks upon [[zillion]] and millions of Americans, as well as [[millions]] of [[beings]] the world over, who don't [[emerge]] to share their bigoted, cruel, [[outrageous]], and [[quite]] insane view of [[humane]] is beyond [[nothing]] [[tvs]] has ever seen. The lies they spout and the [[absurd]] lies they try to pass off as truth, such as the [[ideals]] of "life after death" or "[[lord]]" or "sin" or "the devil" is so [[counterintuitive]] that they [[genuinely]] [[looks]] mentally ill, so lost are they in their [[fantasia]]. Sane people know that religion is a drug and shouldn't let themselves get addicted to that type of fantasy. However, The 700 Club is in a [[kinds]] by itself. They are truly a cult. While I believe in freedom of [[speeches]], they way they spread hatred, lies, disinformation, and such [[sumptuous]] ideas is beyond all limits. I hope that one day the [[Americano]] [[Psychiatry]] Association will finally take up the [[explores]] of those people who [[cheat]] themselves in this [[route]], people who [[letting]] themselves [[sinking]] so deeply into the [[fantasia]] [[lands]] of [[religions]] that they no [[most]] have any [[actual]] [[idea]] of [[realism]] at all. Treatment for such [[bereaved]] [[person]] is [[cruelly]] needed in this country, as so [[countless]] people have [[perfectly]] lost their minds to the fantasy of [[religions]]. The 700 Club [[nevertheless]], is even more [[shocking]] as it [[increasing]] to the legal [[define]] of 'cult' but due to The 700 Club's [[wide]] [[riches]] ([[swindled]] daily from the [[millionth]] of Americans locked in their [[untruthful]] grip) they are above the [[legislation]] in this country. For those of you who have [[noticed]] the movie "The Matrix" you know that [[filmmaking]] was a [[analogy]] for religion on [[land]]: the [[diabolical]] ones who are at the top of each of the [[cult]] who drain the ones they have trapped and cruelly abuse for their own selfish [[targeting]], and those millions who are [[hold]] in a [[killings]] [[slept]] and [[softly]] being drained of their [[vie]] force represent those [[numerous]] people who [[belonged]] to [[cult]] and who have lost all [[skill]] to [[receive]] what is [[genuinely]] going on [[roundabout]] them.

[[Among]] [[fewer]] civil [[moments]], the good townsfolk [[could]] have [[executing]] such monsters as those [[linked]] with The 700 Club out of town with torches and pitchforks. But in today's world where people have lost all choice in their choices of television that is presented to them, we have no way to rid ourselves of the 700 Club plague.

The television ratings system and the "V" chip on TV's should also have a rating called "[[rs]]" for religion, so that rational people and concerned parents could easily screen such vile intellectual and brutal emotional rape, such as presented by The 700 Club every day all over our country, from themselves and their children. --------------------------------------------- Result 3133 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jennifer's Shadow is set in Argentina & starts as Jennifer Cassi (Gina Philips) arrives there after her sister Johanna dies. Jennifer is left Johanna's large house in her will, Jennifer decides to sell the house & head back to Los Angeles even though her Grandmother Mary Ellen (Faye Dunaway) is opposed to the sale. However strange things begin to happen, Jennifer starts having nightmares about Ravens pecking at her & she starts to feel very ill. After a check up in hospital it seems that one of her kidney's have mysteriously disappeared, what is happening to Jennifer? Is it an ancient family curse? Will Jennifer be the next to succumb to it...

This Argentinian American co-production was co-written & co-directed by Daniel de la Vega & Pablo Parés & is a really dull waste of ninety odd minutes, a tedious & predictable modern ghost story that I would imagine will put more people to sleep sooner than scare them. The script by Vega, Parés & P.J. Pettiette is pretty slow going & tedious which is not what anyone wants, I mean I'm sure most people don't want to sit down & be bored out of their skulls. The character's are all uninteresting & fairly faceless with little or no motivation for anything they do. For instance who is that graveyard caretaker guy? How did he know about the demons? What is his interest & motivation for getting involved? I couldn't see it. Jennifer herself is a pretty unlikable & bland leading lady, her Grandmother Mary Allen is as clichéd as they come & it's surprising that she is so obviously the villain. I mean for this sort of mystery based horror/ghost story it's surprisingly predictable & routine. There are gaps in both logic & the story which together with the terrible twist ending which isn't much of a twist I didn't like Jennifer's Shadow one iota.

Directors Vega & Parés goes down the much used route of bleaching almost all of the colour from the picture which often renders it not too far from black and white, I suspect that they wanted to give it a period Gothic feel but it's been done so many times before & often so much better that it didn't do much for me at all & just makes the whole film look dull & lifeless. There's a definite 40's period look as well, from the costumes to the interior of the large house but again it's rather half hearted & cheap looking. Jennifer's Shadow is well made but it's rather forgettable, it's not scary or creepy & it's rather predictable. If that wasn't enough there's no gore either, there's a few scenes of Ravens pecking away at people & a beating heart but nothing else.

With a supposed budget of about $1,000,000 & retitled to The Chronicles of the Raven for it's US & international DVD release this is reasonably well made but a million won't buy you too much these days & Jennifer's Shadow pretty much proves that theory. There are too many scenes of actor's speaking in thick Argentinian accents as well, even though it might be realistic I actually like to be able to understand what people are saying. The acting is alright although Dunaway overacts badly & is obviously there for the money.

Jennifer's Shadow is a rubbishy ghost film that I thought was a total bore from start to finish, I would rather watch The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies!!? (1964) again instead. A total waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3134 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] When HEY ARNOLD! first came on the [[air]] in 1996, I watched it. It was one of my [[favorite]] [[shows]]. [[Then]] the same episodes [[started]] getting [[shown]] over and over again so I [[got]] tired of [[waiting]] for [[new]] episodes and stopped [[watching]] it. I was sort of [[surprised]] when I heard about [[HEY]] ARNOLD! THE [[MOVIE]] since it doesn't [[seem]] to be [[nearly]] as [[popular]] as some of the other Nickelodeon [[cartoons]] like [[SPONGEBOB]] SQUAREPANTS. [[Nevertheless]], having [[nothing]] better to do, I went to see the movie anyway. Going into the [[theater]], I wasn't [[expecting]] much. I was just expecting it to be a dumb [[movie]] version of a childrens' cartoon like the RECESS [[movie]] was. I guess I got what I [[expected]]. It was a dumb kiddie movie and [[nothing]] more. There were some good parts here and there, but for the most [[part]], the movie was a [[stinker]]. [[Simply]] for kids. When HEY ARNOLD! first came on the [[airlift]] in 1996, I watched it. It was one of my [[preferred]] [[exhibitions]]. [[Later]] the same episodes [[starting]] getting [[exhibited]] over and over again so I [[gets]] tired of [[expecting]] for [[novo]] episodes and stopped [[staring]] it. I was sort of [[amazed]] when I heard about [[BYE]] ARNOLD! THE [[FILMMAKING]] since it doesn't [[seems]] to be [[around]] as [[fashionable]] as some of the other Nickelodeon [[cartoon]] like [[SQUAREPANTS]] SQUAREPANTS. [[Albeit]], having [[anything]] better to do, I went to see the movie anyway. Going into the [[cinemas]], I wasn't [[awaited]] much. I was just expecting it to be a dumb [[movies]] version of a childrens' cartoon like the RECESS [[filmmaking]] was. I guess I got what I [[envisioned]]. It was a dumb kiddie movie and [[none]] more. There were some good parts here and there, but for the most [[party]], the movie was a [[tosser]]. [[Simple]] for kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 3135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a [[film]] that [[belongs]] [[firmly]] to the 50's. Very [[surprising]] that American [[Film]] Institute has [[chosen]] this one for one for the [[best]] 100 American movies of all-time. I have seen practically all of the [[movies]] on that list, and this one is by far the most [[disappointing]] one of those. Musical [[numbers]] (and there [[many]], many of them) are [[VERY]] overlong and boring, and have absolute no connection with the [[story]]. The end of the movie has horribly over-long [[ballet]] sequency, which [[naturally]] has no [[real]] relation to the [[story]] of the movie. It must be admitted, that it is very well [[made]], the [[music]] is OK, and the dancing [[done]] with the [[highest]] professional [[standard]] - but there is no [[real]] [[reason]] why the sequence is included in the [[movie]].

The main character of the [[movie]] is extremely childlish and unlikeable and behaves in unpolite way. His mental [[age]] is about 14. If you [[want]] to see a [[good]] musical made on the "golden [[age]]" of musicals, go and see "Singing in the [[Rain]]". This is a [[filmmaking]] that [[owns]] [[flatly]] to the 50's. Very [[impressed]] that American [[Movies]] Institute has [[choosing]] this one for one for the [[optimum]] 100 American movies of all-time. I have seen practically all of the [[cinematic]] on that list, and this one is by far the most [[discouraging]] one of those. Musical [[numerals]] (and there [[innumerable]], many of them) are [[QUITE]] overlong and boring, and have absolute no connection with the [[conte]]. The end of the movie has horribly over-long [[dancers]] sequency, which [[obviously]] has no [[actual]] relation to the [[saga]] of the movie. It must be admitted, that it is very well [[effected]], the [[musica]] is OK, and the dancing [[performed]] with the [[supreme]] professional [[standards]] - but there is no [[actual]] [[cause]] why the sequence is included in the [[kino]].

The main character of the [[flick]] is extremely childlish and unlikeable and behaves in unpolite way. His mental [[older]] is about 14. If you [[wanting]] to see a [[buena]] musical made on the "golden [[aged]]" of musicals, go and see "Singing in the [[Downpour]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 3136 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK, I really don't have too much to say about this film, other than this: I have seen over 4,000 films in my life, and more than 2,300 of those were horror films. While I have some difficulty deciding which is the best (as opposed to my favourite, which I can tell you is George A. Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD), I can tell you without the slightest hesitation that Todd Sheets' ZOMBIE BLOODBATH is the absolute worst horror film I have ever seen.

There is simply nothing positive I can say about this film. The acting, the dialogue, the directing, the make-up, the music... Every aspect of this film is simply so far below what is acceptable that it boggles my mind that this was ever even released.

Even if you are a horror or zombie movie completist, please heed my warning and DO NOT waste your time on this garbage. There is no pleasure to be gotten from viewing this. You won't even get any laughs out of the utter ineptitude on display... Trust me. Please. --------------------------------------------- Result 3137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The first word which [[comes]] into my mind after watching this movie is "beauty". Beauty is all around, in actors' [[play]] (Andie is [[superb]] as [[always]]), in well designed shots, and in authors' red line idea - the [[Love]].

I think the Kenny's character is the only white [[spot]] in these three womens' [[otherwise]] boring and predictable life. His [[interaction]] makes Andie's character living as [[entertaining]] as it could possibly be. When he's gone, it became [[obvious]] that we cannot really appreciate and hold to our inner believes and sacred desires.

The fact that Andie successfully [[recovers]] from this loss is [[nothing]] [[bad]], instead it [[shows]] that [[life]] [[prevails]] in any forms, even in this small British village, which is shown perfectly.

Another [[reason]] I [[love]] this movie is that it is so [[British]] in all [[ways]] - all that houses and "[[fags]]" and accents :))). And Andie again is doing [[superb]] job! It is a [[shame]] that this movie got such low marks. 10 out of [[ten]]! The first word which [[arrives]] into my mind after watching this movie is "beauty". Beauty is all around, in actors' [[gaming]] (Andie is [[extraordinaire]] as [[incessantly]]), in well designed shots, and in authors' red line idea - the [[Iike]].

I think the Kenny's character is the only white [[stain]] in these three womens' [[alternately]] boring and predictable life. His [[interacting]] makes Andie's character living as [[amusing]] as it could possibly be. When he's gone, it became [[evident]] that we cannot really appreciate and hold to our inner believes and sacred desires.

The fact that Andie successfully [[recoveries]] from this loss is [[anything]] [[rotten]], instead it [[showing]] that [[iife]] [[prevail]] in any forms, even in this small British village, which is shown perfectly.

Another [[justification]] I [[amour]] this movie is that it is so [[Uk]] in all [[shapes]] - all that houses and "[[gays]]" and accents :))). And Andie again is doing [[wondrous]] job! It is a [[disgrace]] that this movie got such low marks. 10 out of [[tio]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A remake of Alejandro Amenabar's Abre los Ojos, but this time with a living, breathing mask as a lead. For the dubious advantage of an English sound track, we endure Tom Cruise's soulless performance, as usual, with zero depth. Yes, the character is identified with his persona, but we usually are given some character underneath that to hold our interest. His empty posturing negates any erotic energy that could have been between his character and Cruz or Diaz.

There is an acting exercise that involves using masks to free the actor to enrich his presentation of character by verbal and body language means. Cruise's masking only painfully emphasizes his inadequacy as an actor. Do see the 1997 original Amenabar Open Your Eyes! --------------------------------------------- Result 3139 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] That's what the title should be, anyway.

This movie [[combines]] [[guns]], explosives, and mindless [[killing]] to make one [[flop]] of an "action" movie. Let me make my point in a series of questions: answers [[type]] [[deal]].

What happens in the movie? People die.

Is that it? Yes.

What is the plot about? What plot?

What is the point the [[movie]] is [[trying]] to make? Killing is the only solution.

What are the [[characters]] like? Extremely flawed and contradictive toward their own personalities.

Is there [[anything]] [[good]] about this movie? [[Yes]]. I'm sure they used some [[nice]] Panavision cameras in [[filming]] it.

If you like [[constant]] killing and greed, then watch the movie. [[If]] you [[happen]] to be [[repulsed]] by such low-standard "[[entertainment]]", then "Made Men" is not for you.

To sum it up, the plotline [[stinks]], the [[characters]] aren't worth their while, the storyline is [[completely]] resistable, and nothing [[fits]] [[together]].

This [[proves]] one thing: the [[actors]], [[directors]], and [[whoever]] helped make this [[movie]] [[certainly]] aren't "[[Made]]". That's what the title should be, anyway.

This movie [[merged]] [[firearms]], explosives, and mindless [[assassinating]] to make one [[bust]] of an "action" movie. Let me make my point in a series of questions: answers [[genre]] [[treat]].

What happens in the movie? People die.

Is that it? Yes.

What is the plot about? What plot?

What is the point the [[filmmaking]] is [[try]] to make? Killing is the only solution.

What are the [[personage]] like? Extremely flawed and contradictive toward their own personalities.

Is there [[something]] [[alright]] about this movie? [[Yup]]. I'm sure they used some [[pleasurable]] Panavision cameras in [[photographing]] it.

If you like [[unchangeable]] killing and greed, then watch the movie. [[Unless]] you [[emerge]] to be [[resisted]] by such low-standard "[[recreational]]", then "Made Men" is not for you.

To sum it up, the plotline [[sucks]], the [[trait]] aren't worth their while, the storyline is [[perfectly]] resistable, and nothing [[conforms]] [[jointly]].

This [[testifies]] one thing: the [[protagonists]], [[managers]], and [[anyone]] helped make this [[filmmaking]] [[undoubtedly]] aren't "[[Effected]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 3140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It is hard to make an [[unbiased]] judgment on a film like this that had such an impact on me at such a young age. This is with out a [[doubt]] the [[worst]] [[kind]] of [[exploitation]] film. I was [[unfortunate]] [[enough]] to see this film for the first time in my [[youth]], Iwill never [[forget]] it. I thought it was the most [[horrible]] movie ever [[made]]. I then saw it again [[earlier]] this year and was once again horrified.

I am not a zealot or one to say what others should and should not see but I did take great offense to the way in which something as horrible as rape was dealt with in this movie. I [[love]] lowbrow cinema but this is just plain nasty. [[Rent]] some [[Rus]] Myer [[instead]]. It is hard to make an [[impartial]] judgment on a film like this that had such an impact on me at such a young age. This is with out a [[duda]] the [[meanest]] [[genera]] of [[operate]] film. I was [[regretful]] [[suitably]] to see this film for the first time in my [[youthful]], Iwill never [[forgot]] it. I thought it was the most [[shocking]] movie ever [[effected]]. I then saw it again [[beforehand]] this year and was once again horrified.

I am not a zealot or one to say what others should and should not see but I did take great offense to the way in which something as horrible as rape was dealt with in this movie. I [[amour]] lowbrow cinema but this is just plain nasty. [[Tenancy]] some [[Russ]] Myer [[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] It does [[touch]] a few interesting points.. But! - It fails to show [[evidence]] of all the 'exclusive' studies [[shown]]. Who are the 'friends' and '[[small]] [[groups]] of scientists' that [[gathered]] this data? - What's up with all the Al [[Gore]] biography going on there? Like how he liked [[playing]] with the cows on the [[ranch]] or that his [[kid]] [[got]] [[hit]] by a car.. too [[bad]] but.. what does that have to do with the ozone layer?

I've [[seen]] [[MUCH]] [[better]] stuff, in much [[less]] [[time]], on Discovery [[Channel]].. I [[really]] don't understand why this has such a [[high]] score on IMDb. Unless you've been [[living]] under a [[rock]], this 'documentary' shouldn't be any news to you... all this is [[old]] news... And all Al [[Gore]] is [[trying]] to do is [[get]] some popularity points. P.S. i'm not [[American]] so don't even [[try]] saying that i'm a [[bush]] [[fan]] :p It does [[touches]] a few interesting points.. But! - It fails to show [[testimony]] of all the 'exclusive' studies [[exhibited]]. Who are the 'friends' and '[[little]] [[groupings]] of scientists' that [[congregate]] this data? - What's up with all the Al [[Gora]] biography going on there? Like how he liked [[gaming]] with the cows on the [[husbandry]] or that his [[enfant]] [[did]] [[slapped]] by a car.. too [[unfavorable]] but.. what does that have to do with the ozone layer?

I've [[noticed]] [[VERY]] [[optimum]] stuff, in much [[fewer]] [[times]], on Discovery [[Channels]].. I [[truthfully]] don't understand why this has such a [[supreme]] score on IMDb. Unless you've been [[iife]] under a [[boulder]], this 'documentary' shouldn't be any news to you... all this is [[antique]] news... And all Al [[Gora]] is [[try]] to do is [[gets]] some popularity points. P.S. i'm not [[America]] so don't even [[tries]] saying that i'm a [[busch]] [[ventilator]] :p --------------------------------------------- Result 3142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The [[comment]] by "eliz7212-1" hits the [[proverbial]] "nail on the head" for this [[turkey]] of a [[program]]. But it is a hoot to watch William Shatner "cavort" and "[[dance]]" (yes, the " " marks on the word dance are [[necessary]] for what [[Bill]] does). This [[show]] [[would]] be a great skit on SNL or MAD TV - and it does rate a few stars for one viewing, or so, to see [[Shatner]], who seems to have taken "camp" to new heights - whether in a role or as himself. But the [[guy]] is funny.

The girls who are in the cubicle areas with the game data scrolls, will be pretty much out-of-luck when this turkey is canceled - unless there is a revival of the whiskey-a-go-go genre, with a resurrected demand for shapely young women to dance in elevated cages once more.

I watched the first contestant, who was annoying, and literally "dumber than a :post," yet through sheer luck, walked away with a quarter mil or so. The second contestant, somewhat more intelligent, but who'd be lucky to gain $1,000 on Jeopardy!, got zonked by the card which requires answering a special question - which he didn't know, and thereby left with zilch.

This plethora of game shows, which dangle, and sometimes award, large sums to everyday individuals, are admittedly a cheap effort, overall, to attempt to woo viewers. Even if the host is well-compensated, and they give away six figures in an average episode, I suppose that the revenue versus costs can be favorable - since you don't have a sitcom cast where several stars are getting six or seven figures, per episode, with some big residual deals as well.

But I suspect even the better ones will wear thin before long. This one has already pretty much reached this point. I think his offerings, especially with James Spader, and the others on "Boston Legal" should give us a satisfying quantity of Bill Shatner's offerings.

Again, the above rating is simply appropriate to view Bill hoot and prance, perhaps one time; that should be sufficient. The [[comments]] by "eliz7212-1" hits the [[legendary]] "nail on the head" for this [[turk]] of a [[programs]]. But it is a hoot to watch William Shatner "cavort" and "[[dances]]" (yes, the " " marks on the word dance are [[indispensable]] for what [[Invoice]] does). This [[exhibit]] [[should]] be a great skit on SNL or MAD TV - and it does rate a few stars for one viewing, or so, to see [[Kirk]], who seems to have taken "camp" to new heights - whether in a role or as himself. But the [[boys]] is funny.

The girls who are in the cubicle areas with the game data scrolls, will be pretty much out-of-luck when this turkey is canceled - unless there is a revival of the whiskey-a-go-go genre, with a resurrected demand for shapely young women to dance in elevated cages once more.

I watched the first contestant, who was annoying, and literally "dumber than a :post," yet through sheer luck, walked away with a quarter mil or so. The second contestant, somewhat more intelligent, but who'd be lucky to gain $1,000 on Jeopardy!, got zonked by the card which requires answering a special question - which he didn't know, and thereby left with zilch.

This plethora of game shows, which dangle, and sometimes award, large sums to everyday individuals, are admittedly a cheap effort, overall, to attempt to woo viewers. Even if the host is well-compensated, and they give away six figures in an average episode, I suppose that the revenue versus costs can be favorable - since you don't have a sitcom cast where several stars are getting six or seven figures, per episode, with some big residual deals as well.

But I suspect even the better ones will wear thin before long. This one has already pretty much reached this point. I think his offerings, especially with James Spader, and the others on "Boston Legal" should give us a satisfying quantity of Bill Shatner's offerings.

Again, the above rating is simply appropriate to view Bill hoot and prance, perhaps one time; that should be sufficient. --------------------------------------------- Result 3143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[So]] I'm looking to [[rent]] a DVD and I come [[across]] this [[movie]] called '[[End]] Game'. It stars James Woods and Cuba Gooding JR and has the synopsis of a [[taught]] political thriller. Well worth a [[look]] then. [[Or]] so I thought.

Boy, was I wrong.

End Game has just about the most [[ridiculous]] [[plot]] I have ever had the [[displeasure]] of enduring. Now being something of a whodunnit, I can't really tear into it as I would like without 'ruining' it for those who have yet to experience this [[monstrosity]]. But questions such as 'Why has he/she/they done this?', and 'Where on earth did they get the resources to pull this off?' are all too abundant following the film's unintentionally hilarious conclusion.

As for the acting - you know those films where you can almost feel that an actor's realised that they've made a terrible mistake in signing on for a movie, and this then shows in their performance? This is one of those. Accompany this with a [[laughable]] script and seriously flawed, irritating direction and you have the recipe for cinematic poison.

Of course, this didn't make it to the cinema, and for the same reason you should not allow it into your living room; it is appalling. [[Accordingly]] I'm looking to [[leased]] a DVD and I come [[during]] this [[filmmaking]] called '[[Ends]] Game'. It stars James Woods and Cuba Gooding JR and has the synopsis of a [[teach]] political thriller. Well worth a [[gaze]] then. [[Oder]] so I thought.

Boy, was I wrong.

End Game has just about the most [[farcical]] [[intrigue]] I have ever had the [[discontent]] of enduring. Now being something of a whodunnit, I can't really tear into it as I would like without 'ruining' it for those who have yet to experience this [[horror]]. But questions such as 'Why has he/she/they done this?', and 'Where on earth did they get the resources to pull this off?' are all too abundant following the film's unintentionally hilarious conclusion.

As for the acting - you know those films where you can almost feel that an actor's realised that they've made a terrible mistake in signing on for a movie, and this then shows in their performance? This is one of those. Accompany this with a [[silly]] script and seriously flawed, irritating direction and you have the recipe for cinematic poison.

Of course, this didn't make it to the cinema, and for the same reason you should not allow it into your living room; it is appalling. --------------------------------------------- Result 3144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I understand the jokes quite well, they just aren't good. The show is horrible. I understand it, and that's another horrible thing about it. The only cool character there EVER was on the show was that one hobo in that one episode, but then I see the other episode including that episode and the show is horrible. It's not funny, NOT funny! I don't want people to say "Only smart people get it" because if they're so smart why do they judge people they don't even know and say that they're not smart or intellectual enough to understand it? It's like saying "The sky is red" but never looking outside. But anyways, this is absolutely the worst show I have ever seen in my life, the jokes are terrible, I mean, you can understand them, they're just horrible, her controversy is very lame, her fart jokes and other jokes on bodily fluids are really dumb and usually consist of really bad acting. I'm not sure what these "smart" people see in this show, but judging others when they don't even know anything about any of us isn't exactly a smart comment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3145 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Frank]] Capra's [[creativity]] [[must]] have been just about spent by the [[time]] he [[made]] this film. While it has a few [[charming]] moments, and [[many]] [[wonderful]] performers, Capra's outright [[recycling]] of not just the script but [[considerable]] footage from his [[first]] version of this [[story]], Broadway [[Bill]] (1934), is downright [[shoddy]]. It is understandable that he would re-use footage from the climactic horse race, which is [[thrilling]]. But he [[uses]] entire dialogue scenes with minor actors, then brings back those actors and apparently expects us not to notice, for example, that Ward Bond is 14 years older! Unless you want to [[see]] one of the last appearances of Oliver Hardy, [[skip]] this one and watch Broadway [[Bill]] instead. [[Candid]] Capra's [[imagination]] [[owe]] have been just about spent by the [[period]] he [[accomplished]] this film. While it has a few [[charmer]] moments, and [[various]] [[sumptuous]] performers, Capra's outright [[reclaiming]] of not just the script but [[momentous]] footage from his [[frst]] version of this [[history]], Broadway [[Billing]] (1934), is downright [[inferior]]. It is understandable that he would re-use footage from the climactic horse race, which is [[enthralling]]. But he [[used]] entire dialogue scenes with minor actors, then brings back those actors and apparently expects us not to notice, for example, that Ward Bond is 14 years older! Unless you want to [[behold]] one of the last appearances of Oliver Hardy, [[jumping]] this one and watch Broadway [[Billed]] instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Anyone]] who had never seen anything like the [[fight]] scenes in The Matrix has never [[seen]] this [[movie]]. The [[fight]] scenes were [[choreographed]] by action scene psychopath Yuen Woo Ping, who also did the [[fights]] in The Matrix. And the fight scenes are [[somethin]].

Li plays a supersoldier who [[feels]] no [[pain]], who now lives a [[life]] as a pacifist librarian (ya [[got]] me). When other evil supersoldiers begin killing off local [[drug]] lords to take over the [[drug]] trade, Li teams up with his cop buddy to help stop them.

There are some [[absolutely]] crazy [[things]] going on in this movie (one badguy gets his arm lopped off with a pane of glass and [[hardly]] notices). The [[fights]] scenes are [[filled]] with flying [[kicks]] and [[punches]]; the [[body]] count is way up there. Li has [[seldom]] been better, and he has [[surrounded]] himself with a bevy of [[beautiful]] female costars (Yip [[kicks]] some [[serious]] ass as a [[fellow]] supersoldier). Anthony [[Wong]] even makes a cameo as a [[drug]] [[lord]] (no suprises there; he makes a cameo in [[every]] HK [[movie]]). It's [[unfortunate]] they don't make [[action]] [[movies]] like this in the [[US]]; I wouldn't have to [[sit]] through all of these [[horrible]] [[dubbing]] [[jobs]] to see that [[action]] that I crave so much. [[Recommended]]. [[Somebody]] who had never seen anything like the [[wrestling]] scenes in The Matrix has never [[saw]] this [[film]]. The [[tussle]] scenes were [[choreography]] by action scene psychopath Yuen Woo Ping, who also did the [[struggling]] in The Matrix. And the fight scenes are [[nothin]].

Li plays a supersoldier who [[believes]] no [[painless]], who now lives a [[lifetime]] as a pacifist librarian (ya [[get]] me). When other evil supersoldiers begin killing off local [[medicines]] lords to take over the [[pharmaceuticals]] trade, Li teams up with his cop buddy to help stop them.

There are some [[wholly]] crazy [[matters]] going on in this movie (one badguy gets his arm lopped off with a pane of glass and [[scarcely]] notices). The [[wrestling]] scenes are [[filling]] with flying [[karate]] and [[shots]]; the [[organs]] count is way up there. Li has [[rarely]] been better, and he has [[cordoned]] himself with a bevy of [[wondrous]] female costars (Yip [[karate]] some [[gravest]] ass as a [[coworkers]] supersoldier). Anthony [[Huang]] even makes a cameo as a [[medicines]] [[sire]] (no suprises there; he makes a cameo in [[any]] HK [[kino]]). It's [[pathetic]] they don't make [[activities]] [[kino]] like this in the [[AMERICANS]]; I wouldn't have to [[sitting]] through all of these [[odious]] [[copying]] [[labor]] to see that [[efforts]] that I crave so much. [[Suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was excellent. Touching, action-packed, and perfect for Kurt Russel. I loved this movie, it deserves more than 5.3 or so stars. This movie is the story of an obsolete soldier who learns there is more to life than soldiering, and people who learn that there is a time for fighting, a need to defend. I cried, laughed and mostly sat in awe of this story. Good writing job for an action flick, and the plot was appropriate and fairly solid. The ending wasn't twisty, but it was still excellent. If you like escape from New York, or rooting for the underdog, this movie is for you. Not an undue amount of gore or violence, it was not difficult to watch in that respect. Something for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw the film tonight at a free preview screening, and despite the fact that I didn't pay a dime to see this film I still felt ripped off. Ladies and gentlemen, time is money and if you see this film you are leaving a Benjamin on your seat. The acting is torpid at best; Kiefer Sutherland phones in his worst impersonation of Jack Bauer, and Michael Douglas looks like he realizes he made a bad choice leaving Catherine Zeta-Jones for the duration it took to shoot this turkey. Eva Longoria is a non-entity; she looks like she's reading her lines off a teleprompter. And if you can't spot the "mole" within the first 20 minutes, then you just landed on this planet from a world without TV and recycled story lines. If you truly want to see a good secret service thriller, rent In the Line of Fire. If you see and buy into this one, you'll start to fear for the president's safety because the Secret Service looks and acts like the grown-up versions of the kinds from 90210. No matter what your feelings about W, let's hope this "art" does not imitate life. --------------------------------------------- Result 3149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This [[movie]] had me going. The title was perhaps the [[greatest]] [[idea]] that I heard. I thought it was an [[independent]] movie about a zombie outbreak and their quest to take over the US and a group of lone survivors, band together, and plan to take out the zombies. DEAD WRONG! It's about a psycho cop with a weakness for killing his female arrests gets what's coming to him when a pack of zombie women rise from their graves in order to get proper revenge. As you can see there is nothing about the nation nor a [[county]] involved. [[Where]] to begin with the severity this [[cinematic]] [[disaster]] [[caused]] our nation.

First off, the zombie women look like Victoria Secret models with dark eyeliner and a pale face. What are zombies but mindless, debatable intelligent, cannibalistic killing machines that eat as a result of their primitive most basic needs? These zombie women walk like streetwalkers and runway models, they talk as if they are in a poor film noir movie and not do they act like real zombies. Sure the eating and killing is there, but where is the mindlessness and the horrible disfigurement? [[Although]] it is a very interesting [[concept]] and perhaps a great satire on the zombie genre, it makes fun of that genre and asks the question, "why can't zombies be beautiful vixen killing machines?" I would say that this movie would be considered a really bad indie movie that was produced and made by garage junkies. I would not recommend this movie to anybody that loves zombie genres too much, it's an insult and as for scary…not even. This [[filmmaking]] had me going. The title was perhaps the [[higher]] [[thoughts]] that I heard. I thought it was an [[autonomous]] movie about a zombie outbreak and their quest to take over the US and a group of lone survivors, band together, and plan to take out the zombies. DEAD WRONG! It's about a psycho cop with a weakness for killing his female arrests gets what's coming to him when a pack of zombie women rise from their graves in order to get proper revenge. As you can see there is nothing about the nation nor a [[prefecture]] involved. [[Whenever]] to begin with the severity this [[filmmaking]] [[disasters]] [[wreaked]] our nation.

First off, the zombie women look like Victoria Secret models with dark eyeliner and a pale face. What are zombies but mindless, debatable intelligent, cannibalistic killing machines that eat as a result of their primitive most basic needs? These zombie women walk like streetwalkers and runway models, they talk as if they are in a poor film noir movie and not do they act like real zombies. Sure the eating and killing is there, but where is the mindlessness and the horrible disfigurement? [[Despite]] it is a very interesting [[concepts]] and perhaps a great satire on the zombie genre, it makes fun of that genre and asks the question, "why can't zombies be beautiful vixen killing machines?" I would say that this movie would be considered a really bad indie movie that was produced and made by garage junkies. I would not recommend this movie to anybody that loves zombie genres too much, it's an insult and as for scary…not even. --------------------------------------------- Result 3150 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Rain]] or [[shine]] [[outside]], you enter a movie [[house]]. It makes you [[happy]]. (If not, come right out.) [[Lights]] go off. You [[settle]] down with a [[bar]] of ice [[cream]]. Moving [[pictures]] [[begin]] to [[flicker]] on the screen. You feel content. In the [[dark]], you are back in the beginning of [[time]]. Sitting around the campfire...looking at the modern version of the flickering flames 24 times per second and [[sharing]] the [[joy]] of [[discovering]] the unknown [[turns]] and [[twists]] of the scenario with rest of your [[clan]]/[[spectators]].

Those who are not happy with themselves, should not write comments. (Long live romantic comedies...) [[Rainstorm]] or [[glow]] [[outdoor]], you enter a movie [[housing]]. It makes you [[cheerful]]. (If not, come right out.) [[Illumination]] go off. You [[liquidate]] down with a [[solicitor]] of ice [[creme]]. Moving [[imaging]] [[commenced]] to [[flinch]] on the screen. You feel content. In the [[gloom]], you are back in the beginning of [[period]]. Sitting around the campfire...looking at the modern version of the flickering flames 24 times per second and [[exchanged]] the [[gladness]] of [[discovered]] the unknown [[revolves]] and [[spins]] of the scenario with rest of your [[tribesmen]]/[[audiences]].

Those who are not happy with themselves, should not write comments. (Long live romantic comedies...) --------------------------------------------- Result 3151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a typical example of technically highly skilled directors of video clips/commercials [[trying]] to do their first full feature length movie. On one hand the imagery, camera, lighting, CGI and even the sound are [[highly]] polished and have a truly "[[expensive]]" look and feel. Even the actors show a certain [[amount]] of potential - unto the point where [[even]] the best acting could not hide a [[bad]] plot.

In this [[case]] it is not a bad [[plot]] but [[hardly]] a plot at all.

So 50% of the dialog consists of "What the hell was that ?", "What was that ?" and "What the hell was that ?". In none of the cases any of the characters nor the audience is provided with the [[slightest]] hint of an answer though. In most of the other [[dialogues]] one gets the [[feeling]] that there never was any form of dialogue book and the actors had to freely improvise to a plot that wasn't ever explained to them.

The only [[reason]] why [[Skye]] Bennet's performance [[could]] be so good is that her [[character]] as an autistic [[girl]] didn't [[allow]] giving her these tragically [[horrible]] [[dialogue]] lines the other [[actors]] had to [[deal]] with. That [[way]] she was able to just show her acting talent which the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] couldn't [[even]] [[get]] close to. I mean there's not one [[actor]] in the [[world]] that [[could]] [[make]] up for a [[dialogue]] like this:

Ben: Is this real, huh ? Emily: [[Stop]] it. Ben: A mass psychosis, huh ? Jon: Somebody has to take control of this situation. Ben: This situation can't be controlled. Not by you, not by [[anybody]]. Emily: Not by you either. Ben: [[No]]

Got me goosebumps. But not for horror, more for the [[horrible]] attempt. In some moments I felt ashamed for the actors to have added this to their vita.

2 stars for the excellent technical work. This is a typical example of technically highly skilled directors of video clips/commercials [[seek]] to do their first full feature length movie. On one hand the imagery, camera, lighting, CGI and even the sound are [[supremely]] polished and have a truly "[[costly]]" look and feel. Even the actors show a certain [[somme]] of potential - unto the point where [[yet]] the best acting could not hide a [[negative]] plot.

In this [[instance]] it is not a bad [[intrigue]] but [[almost]] a plot at all.

So 50% of the dialog consists of "What the hell was that ?", "What was that ?" and "What the hell was that ?". In none of the cases any of the characters nor the audience is provided with the [[lowest]] hint of an answer though. In most of the other [[talks]] one gets the [[sentiment]] that there never was any form of dialogue book and the actors had to freely improvise to a plot that wasn't ever explained to them.

The only [[motives]] why [[Sky]] Bennet's performance [[did]] be so good is that her [[trait]] as an autistic [[dame]] didn't [[allowing]] giving her these tragically [[frightful]] [[discussions]] lines the other [[protagonists]] had to [[treating]] with. That [[paths]] she was able to just show her acting talent which the [[resting]] of the [[casting]] couldn't [[yet]] [[got]] close to. I mean there's not one [[actress]] in the [[worldwide]] that [[did]] [[deliver]] up for a [[discussions]] like this:

Ben: Is this real, huh ? Emily: [[Parada]] it. Ben: A mass psychosis, huh ? Jon: Somebody has to take control of this situation. Ben: This situation can't be controlled. Not by you, not by [[somebody]]. Emily: Not by you either. Ben: [[Nos]]

Got me goosebumps. But not for horror, more for the [[abhorrent]] attempt. In some moments I felt ashamed for the actors to have added this to their vita.

2 stars for the excellent technical work. --------------------------------------------- Result 3152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen this movie. This movie is the best according today's need. Dowry in marriages is the major problem nowadays. In stating this problem this movie is the best. In this movie, the Indian values are stated very well. Today's youth must understand this problem. There is less population of girls. And due to this problem of dowry , the girls committed suicide. If this problem continues, then the day when there is no girl child, is not far away.So, keep in mind this statement ,today's youth must understand that we can not take dowry in marriages.We have to learn from this movie that the dowry should not be taken.And if we understand this problem then we can see the new trend in the society. This is the major change in the society. --------------------------------------------- Result 3153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] OK, [[first]] a correction to the tag [[posted]] on this movie's main [[page]]. Abe [[Lincoln]] did not walk with his sister in the movie, nor did he stop at his sister's grave. The individual in question is Ann Rutledge who was a very close friend to Lincoln in his New Salem days. Some [[say]] that Ann was, in fact, Lincoln's girlfriend, but there is no evidence to support it.

Now, there are fabrications and fictionalizations in this film. Hollywood has always taken dramatic license with anything under the sun, and "Young Mr. Lincoln" is no [[exception]]. However, the courtroom case that is in the film is based on a real event: the accusation of murder against William "Duff" Armstrong, and even though it's largely fictionalized in this film with lots of name changes, it will still have [[viewers]] riveted to the screen. This is Hollywood's Golden Age, with drama at it's finest, and Henry [[Fonda]] gives possibly the best Lincoln played by anyone. OK, [[firstly]] a correction to the tag [[positioned]] on this movie's main [[pages]]. Abe [[Linc]] did not walk with his sister in the movie, nor did he stop at his sister's grave. The individual in question is Ann Rutledge who was a very close friend to Lincoln in his New Salem days. Some [[told]] that Ann was, in fact, Lincoln's girlfriend, but there is no evidence to support it.

Now, there are fabrications and fictionalizations in this film. Hollywood has always taken dramatic license with anything under the sun, and "Young Mr. Lincoln" is no [[exemption]]. However, the courtroom case that is in the film is based on a real event: the accusation of murder against William "Duff" Armstrong, and even though it's largely fictionalized in this film with lots of name changes, it will still have [[spectators]] riveted to the screen. This is Hollywood's Golden Age, with drama at it's finest, and Henry [[Fund]] gives possibly the best Lincoln played by anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[must]] give How She Move a near-perfect [[rating]] because the content is [[truly]] great. As a [[previous]] [[reviewer]] commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, believable acting, and [[amazing]] dance routines.

From start to finish the underlying [[story]] (this is not just about winning a [[competition]]) is very easy to [[delve]] into, and [[surprisingly]] [[realistic]]. None of the main [[characters]] in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the [[end]] of the [[film]], it's very [[easy]] to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, [[even]] if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits [[roll]].)

I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] this [[film]] to dance-lovers and, [[even]] more so, to those who can appreciate a [[poignant]] and well-acted storyline. [[How]] She Move isn't [[perfect]] of course (what film is?), but it's [[definitely]] a cut above [[movies]] that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very [[realistic]] ride that is [[equally]] [[enthralling]] thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers! I [[should]] give How She Move a near-perfect [[ratings]] because the content is [[really]] great. As a [[anterior]] [[examiner]] commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, believable acting, and [[excellent]] dance routines.

From start to finish the underlying [[narratives]] (this is not just about winning a [[rivalries]]) is very easy to [[dives]] into, and [[unbelievably]] [[lifelike]]. None of the main [[traits]] in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the [[terminating]] of the [[cinematography]], it's very [[uncomplicated]] to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, [[yet]] if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits [[rolling]].)

I [[surely]] [[recommendations]] this [[movies]] to dance-lovers and, [[yet]] more so, to those who can appreciate a [[heartbreaking]] and well-acted storyline. [[Mode]] She Move isn't [[faultless]] of course (what film is?), but it's [[indubitably]] a cut above [[movie]] that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very [[realist]] ride that is [[alike]] [[riveting]] thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers! --------------------------------------------- Result 3155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best mob film ever made. It deserved more then what it got at the Oscars. Nominated for things like its score, art direction, supporting role (Newman), this film could have easily been nominated for Best Picture, Director (Mendes), Actor (Hanks), Supporting Actor (Newman and Law) and won!! Hanks gives one of his best performances, and the kid who played Michel Jr. was so good that I'm surprised i don't see him in more movies today. Critics themselves didn't give this film enough credit. But besides the incredible performances, another real star of this film is the incredible music. This was by far the best score of the year. It was nominated but didn't win. This is a great film that should be seen by everyone. My Grade-A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 3156 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Lily Powers works at a speakeasy until her father dies.She then goes to New York to work at an office building.There she notices that if she wants to get any higher she has to give the men what they want.And what men want is her...well, you know.Alfred E.Green's Baby Face (1933) is a movie of high sexual content.For a movie of that era, anyway.This was one of the last Pre-Code films that were made.Barbara Stanwyck gives a very sexy performance as Lily.Other actors of this film include George Brent (Courtland Trenholm), Donald Cook (Ned Stevens), Alphonse Ethier (Adolf Cragg), Henry Kolker (J.P.Carter), Margaret Lindsay (Ann Carter) and Theresa Harris (Chico).The young John Wayne is seen as Jimmy McCoy Jr.This movie deals with a brave topic and it does it good.Baby Face is historically significant movie and therefore good to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[film]] is like a 1950-version of Ettore Scola's Brutti sporchi e cattivi. Less sex and less realism, but a tale with great humanism and warmth. I wouldn't call this a neo-realistic picture. It's very [[sentimental]] and more like a fairy tale, and should probably be classed as a comedy, although it deals with serious matters (a little like Chaplin or 1930-comedy). [[Typical]] Italian though, very [[emotional]], and hard to resist except for a stone [[cold]] [[person]]. The sentimentalism is a letdown, although this picture was not [[meant]] to be a realistic drama. It's not a masterpiece like [[Umberto]] D or The Bicycle Thief. But it is a [[lovable]] and [[hilarious]] comedy, with good music.

7/10 This [[kino]] is like a 1950-version of Ettore Scola's Brutti sporchi e cattivi. Less sex and less realism, but a tale with great humanism and warmth. I wouldn't call this a neo-realistic picture. It's very [[romantic]] and more like a fairy tale, and should probably be classed as a comedy, although it deals with serious matters (a little like Chaplin or 1930-comedy). [[Emblematic]] Italian though, very [[sentimental]], and hard to resist except for a stone [[frigid]] [[anyone]]. The sentimentalism is a letdown, although this picture was not [[intentioned]] to be a realistic drama. It's not a masterpiece like [[Rebecca]] D or The Bicycle Thief. But it is a [[loveable]] and [[comic]] comedy, with good music.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This movie is just [[great]]. It's [[entertaining]] from [[beginning]] to the [[end]], you're [[always]] gonna be at the edge of your seat [[throughout]] the [[entire]] movie. In my opinion this movie is [[highly]] [[underrated]] by the critics.

Sly suits [[perfectly]] into the role of the well [[trained]] mountain-rescue [[guy]] Gabe Walker. [[Together]] with him [[Michael]] [[Rooker]] makes a [[great]] appearance as Hal Tucker. And then, John Lithgow, one of the [[best]] performances I've [[seen]] of him as a villain.

And the fact that 75% of the movie takes place at a mountain with a [[whole]] lot of [[bad]] [[guys]] on it makes way for a [[lot]] of [[action]]!

Brilliant movie! This movie is just [[wondrous]]. It's [[amusing]] from [[starting]] to the [[termination]], you're [[constantly]] gonna be at the edge of your seat [[during]] the [[total]] movie. In my opinion this movie is [[tremendously]] [[underestimated]] by the critics.

Sly suits [[quite]] into the role of the well [[qualified]] mountain-rescue [[dude]] Gabe Walker. [[Entire]] with him [[Michele]] [[Brooker]] makes a [[excellent]] appearance as Hal Tucker. And then, John Lithgow, one of the [[better]] performances I've [[noticed]] of him as a villain.

And the fact that 75% of the movie takes place at a mountain with a [[total]] lot of [[amiss]] [[dudes]] on it makes way for a [[lots]] of [[efforts]]!

Brilliant movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 3159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] To me this just [[comes]] off as a soap [[opera]]. I guess any [[depiction]] of profligate people can be considered "social commentary." But in the final analysis, I simply don't care how you characterize this film. [[None]] of the characters are very likable or engaging. I [[felt]] no [[chemistry]] between Hudson and Bacall. If there is a [[love]] story here, it is [[lost]] in the [[malaise]]. And [[despite]] the twist ending provided by a complete and immediate (and therefore, incomprehensible) [[reversal]] by Dorothy Maguire on the witness stand, the story is insufficient to [[hold]] my interest. [[No]] [[matter]] how much Freudian symbolism and psychology are throw in, this story is sleazy, melodramatic and [[trite]].

Rock Hudson is nobly wooden. This is Lauren Bacall's [[least]] engaging role and one of her [[poorest]] performances. Dorothy [[Maguire]] and [[Robert]] [[Stack]] deliver more inspired performances, but her character is [[vile]], and his is [[pathetic]]. [[Robert]] [[Keith]], as the loving, out-of-touch father of two miscreant [[adult]] [[children]], is the most sympathetic character. Most interesting of all, [[however]], is the severe-looking Robert Wilke in a small role as the [[bar]] [[owner]]. He is [[best]] [[remembered]] as a nasty henchman in [[countless]] Westerns, but here he is an honest, likable fellow.

I take my social commentary with an interesting, engaging story and a few likable [[characters]], thank you. To me this just [[arrives]] off as a soap [[dramas]]. I guess any [[portrait]] of profligate people can be considered "social commentary." But in the final analysis, I simply don't care how you characterize this film. [[Nil]] of the characters are very likable or engaging. I [[believed]] no [[chemical]] between Hudson and Bacall. If there is a [[amour]] story here, it is [[outof]] in the [[disquiet]]. And [[while]] the twist ending provided by a complete and immediate (and therefore, incomprehensible) [[backtrack]] by Dorothy Maguire on the witness stand, the story is insufficient to [[held]] my interest. [[Not]] [[topic]] how much Freudian symbolism and psychology are throw in, this story is sleazy, melodramatic and [[corny]].

Rock Hudson is nobly wooden. This is Lauren Bacall's [[lowest]] engaging role and one of her [[indigent]] performances. Dorothy [[Mcguire]] and [[Roberto]] [[Funnels]] deliver more inspired performances, but her character is [[nasty]], and his is [[unfortunate]]. [[Roberto]] [[Kith]], as the loving, out-of-touch father of two miscreant [[grownups]] [[enfant]], is the most sympathetic character. Most interesting of all, [[yet]], is the severe-looking Robert Wilke in a small role as the [[solicitors]] [[homeowners]]. He is [[better]] [[recalling]] as a nasty henchman in [[multiple]] Westerns, but here he is an honest, likable fellow.

I take my social commentary with an interesting, engaging story and a few likable [[hallmarks]], thank you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3160 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What was this supposed to be? A remake of Fisher King? Why do we care about Sandler's character? What a slow, dreary, boring, who-gives-a-damn-about-these-people movie!!! Just simply painful to sit through, I turned it off before it was over. It's so obvious that Cheadle needs help as much as Sandler; like I said: can you say "Fisher King"? And how does this psychotic character function in his daily life? We aren't supposed to think that deeply, I guess. Why does Cheadle continue to give Sandler a chance to turn violent on him? If they were such good friends, how did they grow apart? If Cheadle is so in control, why does he keep seeking the advice of the shrink on the street? We are never told. That's why Fisher King was a better film on so many levels and why this just sucks. Nearly 8 out of 10 average score? I don't agree. At all. Even the top films are lucky to get such a high average rating, and this crap doesn't deserve to be in the same universe with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As a kid I did [[think]] the weapon the [[murderer]] [[wielded]] was [[cool]], however I was a kid and so I was a bit dumb. [[Even]] as a dumb [[kid]] [[though]] the movies plot was stupid and a bit boring when the killer was not using his light knife to kill people. What amazes me is that the movie has a really solid cast in it. What [[script]] did they read when agreeing to be in this movie as it is most [[assuredly]] boring and only a [[means]] to show off a light saber on a very small scale. The plot at times is [[incomprehensible]] and the end is totally chaotic. The whole film seems to rotate around aliens and the one weapon. The plot has two kids and some dude having an alien encounter, flash years later and there seems to be a return as it were in the mix. Dead [[animals]] and such to be explored and for some reason the one dude gets the weapon of the aliens and proceeds to use it to go on a very [[light]] killing spree. [[Seriously]], you just have to wonder why this movie was made, if you are going to have a [[killer]] have some [[good]] [[death]] scenes, if you are going to have alien encounters show more than a weird light vortex [[thing]], and if you are [[going]] to have light sabers then [[call]] yourself star wars. As a kid I did [[thoughts]] the weapon the [[killer]] [[exercised]] was [[refrigerate]], however I was a kid and so I was a bit dumb. [[Yet]] as a dumb [[child]] [[while]] the movies plot was stupid and a bit boring when the killer was not using his light knife to kill people. What amazes me is that the movie has a really solid cast in it. What [[hyphen]] did they read when agreeing to be in this movie as it is most [[probably]] boring and only a [[method]] to show off a light saber on a very small scale. The plot at times is [[unimaginable]] and the end is totally chaotic. The whole film seems to rotate around aliens and the one weapon. The plot has two kids and some dude having an alien encounter, flash years later and there seems to be a return as it were in the mix. Dead [[zoo]] and such to be explored and for some reason the one dude gets the weapon of the aliens and proceeds to use it to go on a very [[lighting]] killing spree. [[Earnestly]], you just have to wonder why this movie was made, if you are going to have a [[murderer]] have some [[alright]] [[die]] scenes, if you are going to have alien encounters show more than a weird light vortex [[stuff]], and if you are [[go]] to have light sabers then [[calls]] yourself star wars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[If]] you [[think]] "[[Weird]] Al" Yankovic is [[hilarious]], you won't be disappointed by THE COMPLEAT AL. Not only does this [[rare]] mockumentary [[feature]] many of Yankovic's more [[memorable]] [[videos]] ("Like A [[Surgeon]]" and "I Love Rocky [[Road]]" [[among]] them), but they are inter-spliced with [[funny]] vignettes [[supposedly]] [[highlighting]] the parodist's [[rise]] to fame. Yankovic is not for all [[tastes]], but his humor is harmless and [[imaginative]] enough that [[even]] non-fans will at least be lightly amused. Die-hard fans will [[love]] it not only for its content, but also for its relatively early look into Yankovic's now nearly three decade career. Suitable for all ages, kiddies will no doubt love the [[funny]] visuals. [[Unless]] you [[reckon]] "[[Strange]] Al" Yankovic is [[humorous]], you won't be disappointed by THE COMPLEAT AL. Not only does this [[scarce]] mockumentary [[attribute]] many of Yankovic's more [[landmark]] [[tapes]] ("Like A [[Surgeons]]" and "I Love Rocky [[Routes]]" [[in]] them), but they are inter-spliced with [[comical]] vignettes [[allegedly]] [[stressed]] the parodist's [[risen]] to fame. Yankovic is not for all [[flavours]], but his humor is harmless and [[inventive]] enough that [[yet]] non-fans will at least be lightly amused. Die-hard fans will [[likes]] it not only for its content, but also for its relatively early look into Yankovic's now nearly three decade career. Suitable for all ages, kiddies will no doubt love the [[comical]] visuals. --------------------------------------------- Result 3163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The fully rounded character of the principal role of this movie, that of the cop torn up by his past and on a path of self-destruction so clear to the viewer, is unique for its time, 1950.

Along with the haunting music and the well written plot, the film is a prime example of film noir at its best. Close-ups of Dana's eyes reveal the anguish within, Karl Malden excels as his boss, who brooks no nonsense but also has compassion for those under his command in the precinct.

Otto Preminger made this type of movie just about his own. If there is any fault it would be with the breath taking beauty of Gene Tierney who seems oddly out of place with the hardened cop. Their scenes in the cafe, however, are wonderful and ring true.

Tom Tully, in the bit part of her father is perfect as is Gary Merrill as the hood. Great lighting and mood setting. The building where the deadly deeds take place highly atmospheric, I love the old woman in the basement.

8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3164 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Good [[story]]. Good script. Good casting. Good acting. Good directing. Good art direction. Good photography. Good sound. Good editing. Good everything. Put it all [[together]] and you [[end]] up with good entertainment.

The shame of it is that there aren't nearly enough films of this caliber being made these [[days]]. We may count ourselves lucky that writers/directors like John Hughes are occasionally able to make their creative voices heard.

Whenever I notice that I'm watching a [[film]] for the third or fourth time and still find it [[thoroughly]] [[satisfying]] I have to conclude that something about that film is right. Good [[history]]. Good script. Good casting. Good acting. Good directing. Good art direction. Good photography. Good sound. Good editing. Good everything. Put it all [[jointly]] and you [[ceases]] up with good entertainment.

The shame of it is that there aren't nearly enough films of this caliber being made these [[jours]]. We may count ourselves lucky that writers/directors like John Hughes are occasionally able to make their creative voices heard.

Whenever I notice that I'm watching a [[kino]] for the third or fourth time and still find it [[intently]] [[pleasing]] I have to conclude that something about that film is right. --------------------------------------------- Result 3165 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] "Smokey And The Bandit" wasn't [[exactly]] Shakespeare, but then nobody wanted it to be. It was lowdown slapstick, but it did have [[brains]]. It had a very [[smart]] script with definable characters and a fun wrap-up. People [[came]] out of the theater smiling. "Hooper" [[provides]] [[none]] of this. There is no [[reason]] to [[smile]]. If it's supposed to be a [[tribute]] to the Hollywood Stuntman, it makes them look awfully lazy by providing nothing but badly-choreographed [[fight]] scenes and one of the most [[unconvincing]] car-jumps I've ever seen. It all looks phony, badly-filmed almost on [[purpose]]. [[Poor]] Sally [[Field]] (as the girlfriend who wrings her hands on the sidelines) is given her [[weakest]] role, with not a [[single]] [[funny]] or [[smart]] line ("If you do that jump, I won't be here when you get back"). Burt Reynolds keeps [[looking]] at the camera and winking, but the joke is on any [[audience]] who [[sits]] through "[[Hooper]]". * from **** "Smokey And The Bandit" wasn't [[accurately]] Shakespeare, but then nobody wanted it to be. It was lowdown slapstick, but it did have [[neurons]]. It had a very [[ingenious]] script with definable characters and a fun wrap-up. People [[arrived]] out of the theater smiling. "Hooper" [[gives]] [[nothingness]] of this. There is no [[reasons]] to [[kidd]]. If it's supposed to be a [[eulogy]] to the Hollywood Stuntman, it makes them look awfully lazy by providing nothing but badly-choreographed [[combat]] scenes and one of the most [[feeble]] car-jumps I've ever seen. It all looks phony, badly-filmed almost on [[targeted]]. [[Poorest]] Sally [[Campo]] (as the girlfriend who wrings her hands on the sidelines) is given her [[lower]] role, with not a [[lonely]] [[fun]] or [[canny]] line ("If you do that jump, I won't be here when you get back"). Burt Reynolds keeps [[researching]] at the camera and winking, but the joke is on any [[viewers]] who [[sit]] through "[[Huber]]". * from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I've read comments that you shouldn't watch this film if you're looking for stirring Shakespearian dialogue. This is [[true]], [[unfortunately]], because all the [[stirring]] dialogue, this wonderful play contains, has been cut, and [[replaced]] with songs. I've read this [[play]], and recently was [[lucky]] enough to see it [[performed]], at it remains one of my [[favourite]] Shakespearian Comedies, but this [[movie]] [[seems]] to take all that I like about it away. The Princess, though no doubt doing what she was directed to do, had no [[regal]] bearing, and all the girls seemed to lose the cleverness of their characters - also affected by unwise cuts, which not only took away the female characters already sparse dialogue, but took comments out of context - it was a little unnerving to hear the Princess proclaim; "We are wise girls to mock our lovers so!", when mocking had not taken place at all. The news reels throughout the film also [[disrupted]] the flow, and took away many excellent scenes, as they showed the information in the scenes after them, and were in modern phrasing. In conclusion, an excellent play, [[ruined]] by an odd concept, and unwise cuts. Kenneth, I usually love what you do. What were you thinking? I've read comments that you shouldn't watch this film if you're looking for stirring Shakespearian dialogue. This is [[veritable]], [[tragically]], because all the [[shaking]] dialogue, this wonderful play contains, has been cut, and [[supersede]] with songs. I've read this [[playing]], and recently was [[luck]] enough to see it [[realized]], at it remains one of my [[preferable]] Shakespearian Comedies, but this [[filmmaking]] [[seem]] to take all that I like about it away. The Princess, though no doubt doing what she was directed to do, had no [[royal]] bearing, and all the girls seemed to lose the cleverness of their characters - also affected by unwise cuts, which not only took away the female characters already sparse dialogue, but took comments out of context - it was a little unnerving to hear the Princess proclaim; "We are wise girls to mock our lovers so!", when mocking had not taken place at all. The news reels throughout the film also [[disturbed]] the flow, and took away many excellent scenes, as they showed the information in the scenes after them, and were in modern phrasing. In conclusion, an excellent play, [[obliterated]] by an odd concept, and unwise cuts. Kenneth, I usually love what you do. What were you thinking? --------------------------------------------- Result 3167 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like The Jeffersons, Good Times was one of the those classic American sitcoms which was never aired in the UK, not to mention it came out in the 1970s- a decade where of which I wasn't born yet.

But like most fans of the show, I watched a few episodes on You Tube- and afterwards, I loved it.

The Evans family are headed by James and Florida- two parents trying to make ends meet, and who despite their lack of qualifications, encourage their children, who have their own aspirations in life to fulfil them and to take their chances. James was the strict but loving dad, who didn't dare hesitate in disciplining J.J, Michael and Thelma- should they over-step the line. Whilst Florida, in contrast was a fair, kind- hearted and considerate mother and loving wife, although she was in many ways similar to James, with regards to their attitudes to parenthood and family values from an Afro- American perspective.

The kids were just as lively and entertaining as the parents themselves: J.J was an aspiring artist with a goofy personality and crazy sense of humour, who would often wear multi-coloured outfits, and whose 'DY-NO-MITE' catchphrase is as infectious and familiar as Arnold Jackson's 'Whatchoo talking' 'bout Willis?' from Diff'rent Strokes. Michael was the smart-alec, who dreams of becoming a lawyer, whilst sister Thelma had her own dreams and hopes. Her verbal taunts with J.J were mostly hilarious, as was the love/hate relationship between brother and sister, which was played out extremely well by both Mike Evans and Bernadette Stanis.

Over the seasons, there were a few cameo appearances made, most notably from Janet Jackson, Debbie Allen and a young Gary Coleman as himself! I actually prefer Good Times over say, The Cosby Show, which was an 80s show because a) I preferred the Evans family over the Huxtables, both in terms of a) characterisation and b)as I felt it tackled serious and difficult social issues, in a way that resonated with many viewers. It was a comedy but it was also a social commentary which aimed to highlight the lives of working class, Afro- Americans in 1970s America. The Cosby Show attempted to cater to the mainstream audience in a 'candy coated' way, as the Huxtables were portrayed as Blacks who easily assimilated themselves into an upper-class U.S culture we would associate Whites with, whereas Good Times in contrast was much more 'edgier' and it was not afraid to address themes such as drug and child abuse in a realistic way. I actually found that whilst The Cosby Show can be fun to watch at times, it lacked that bit of 'sassiness' which Good Times has and of which made it trendier and cooler.

The show did jump the shark during the latter seasons, as it continued after John Amos's character, James died in a freak accident (in reality, it was known at the time that John had quit Good Times for good. And so, his character's death was written as it is on the show). Without John, the show suffered and alas, it lost a lot of its charm.

Still, for a sitcom, Good Times ticked all the right boxes. If only they had shown this in the UK during the 80s. As it certainly is, as JJ would put it, 'DY-NO-MITE!!'

My rating: 8 and a half --------------------------------------------- Result 3168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Reese Witherspooon's first movie. Loved it. The plot and the acting was top notch. You are emotionally involved with the characters. In my opinion, a must see.

After watching this movie you will see why Reese Witherspoon's acting career has been so successful.

The other cast members do a great job also.

The movie flows extremely well. There is not a boring moment in the whole picture. The Man in the Moon's length is just right.

As I said earlier, I think this movie was excellent. I have seen it numerous times, and have enjoyed every one of the viewings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I saw this movie, I was amazed that it was only a TV movie. I think this movie should have been in theaters. I have seen many movies that are about rape, but this one stands out. This movie has a kind of realism that is very rarely found in movies today, let alone TV movies. It tells a story that I'm sure is very realistic to many rape victims in small towns today, and I found it to be very believable(which is something hard to find in other rape centered movies). I also thought that Tiffani Theissen and Brian Austin Green were awesome in the parts that they played. I definitely recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys movies that have a bit of a harsh reality to them. I enjoyed it very much. --------------------------------------------- Result 3170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[happened]] [[upon]] this [[movie]] as an 8-10 [[year]] [[old]] on a [[cold]], dark November afternoon. I was [[outside]] [[playing]] all day, freezing, and when I came in around 4pm, I had a cup of hot cocoa and sat down in front of the TV with a blanket. I was [[surprised]] to be watching a cartoon that wasn't all happy and silly--and was in fact [[dark]], and moralistic. It [[captured]] my imagination. I'm sure it misses the text, and is [[abbreviated]] in all the [[wrong]] [[places]] for the Tolkien purist. But it still [[captures]] the spirit of the story, the [[choice]] to carry a burden for the good of others, the consequences of selfish, rash [[decisions]], [[etc]]. The quality of animation [[leaves]] room for [[complaint]]. But the one place where this movie clearly rises above the new films is the voice characterizations. John Hurt is great in this. If you don't like how the character is [[drawn]], look away, and just listen to him. His voice is [[extraordinary]]. I've seen it again [[many]], many times and it always [[brings]] me back to that [[time]], as a kid, thirsty for some [[magical]] adventure. It's for this reason I say 'lucky', the [[film]] is nostalgic for me so I [[overlook]] its [[shortcomings]]. But between [[John]] [[Hurt]], and Tolkien's [[fantasy]], it [[still]] reached me, and still does. I [[sweated]] [[after]] this [[kino]] as an 8-10 [[annum]] [[former]] on a [[frigid]], dark November afternoon. I was [[outdoor]] [[gaming]] all day, freezing, and when I came in around 4pm, I had a cup of hot cocoa and sat down in front of the TV with a blanket. I was [[dumbfounded]] to be watching a cartoon that wasn't all happy and silly--and was in fact [[gloomy]], and moralistic. It [[catch]] my imagination. I'm sure it misses the text, and is [[abridged]] in all the [[amiss]] [[spaces]] for the Tolkien purist. But it still [[caught]] the spirit of the story, the [[elect]] to carry a burden for the good of others, the consequences of selfish, rash [[decision]], [[cetera]]. The quality of animation [[departs]] room for [[grievance]]. But the one place where this movie clearly rises above the new films is the voice characterizations. John Hurt is great in this. If you don't like how the character is [[lured]], look away, and just listen to him. His voice is [[wondrous]]. I've seen it again [[several]], many times and it always [[puts]] me back to that [[moment]], as a kid, thirsty for some [[magic]] adventure. It's for this reason I say 'lucky', the [[movies]] is nostalgic for me so I [[ignoring]] its [[inadequacies]]. But between [[Giovanni]] [[Harmed]], and Tolkien's [[fantasia]], it [[yet]] reached me, and still does. --------------------------------------------- Result 3171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am sorry to fans of this film but it is the worst thing i have ever seen. Slow,badly cast and badly acted it is a film trying to escape the deadbeat romcoms of the recent years and failing! McDonald and Parker seem unable to convey real emotion and are lifeless. They seem to be in this one for any pay checks they are getting for it and not because they thought it was a good idea. The plot is DULL!! i love great chick films as much as the next girl and this is not one!! If you avoid one film this year....let it be --------------------------------------------- Result 3172 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[warning]] against anti-semitism is well-meant and may have had its [[purpose]] at the time, but it is [[made]] without the [[slightest]] [[notion]] of how to [[make]] a [[film]]. The [[director]] has no [[idea]] about mise-en-scene; the [[cast]] [[varies]] from bad till [[even]] worse.

The [[great]] Austrian [[comic]] Hans Moser is wasted. [[In]] his [[part]] he [[ends]] in an asylum for the [[crazy]], that is [[designed]] as a set from Das Kabinett des Dr. Caligari; one wonders whether the [[makers]] had all their mental [[capabilities]].

The restored [[copy]] I [[saw]] ([[Dutch]] Filmmuseum) gives the [[impression]] that some scenes were not put into the right [[place]], but may be the [[original]] [[editing]] was [[bad]] as well. This [[alert]] against anti-semitism is well-meant and may have had its [[intents]] at the time, but it is [[effected]] without the [[faintest]] [[notions]] of how to [[deliver]] a [[flick]]. The [[superintendent]] has no [[thoughts]] about mise-en-scene; the [[casting]] [[differs]] from bad till [[yet]] worse.

The [[awesome]] Austrian [[hilarious]] Hans Moser is wasted. [[For]] his [[party]] he [[end]] in an asylum for the [[insane]], that is [[intended]] as a set from Das Kabinett des Dr. Caligari; one wonders whether the [[manufacturer]] had all their mental [[abilities]].

The restored [[copies]] I [[noticed]] ([[Holland]] Filmmuseum) gives the [[feeling]] that some scenes were not put into the right [[placing]], but may be the [[initial]] [[edition]] was [[unfavorable]] as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] What ever [[happened]] to one of the most [[innovative]] and [[brilliant]] storytellers of our [[time]]? [[Well]], he [[made]] the [[kind]] of [[typical]] summer [[action]] [[fodder]] that could've been [[directed]] by [[anybody]] available out of [[film]] school...and in [[fact]], they [[probably]] would've [[done]] a better [[job]]. They would've at [[least]] have put half of a [[thought]] into the [[dreadful]] script.

[[Mark]] Wahlberg plays an [[astronaut]] who [[traveled]] through some sort of [[wormhole]] and landed in a [[planet]] ruled by apes. (gasp!) Except this time around, the apes squirm through groan-worthy dialogue, [[nonsensical]] plotting, and showy special [[effects]] that [[constantly]] [[reinforce]] in my mind that this [[money]] could've been put to about 10 [[independent]] [[films]] that [[would]] have been [[considered]] 'masterpiece' [[next]] to this [[tripe]].

As much as I enjoy the [[superb]] acting talent that is Tim Roth, his performance as [[evil]] ape leader Thade is nothing more than an [[intense]] [[composition]] of slouching and [[heavy]] breathing. Luckily for him, the makeup allows he as an actor to maintain some dignity and most of the crap-dialogue is hidden behind his groans and sniffles.

And [[alas]], the always [[dependable]] Hollywood tradition of taking the male and female leads and hooking them up at the end without any relationship development or cause. And the "haha, we're so clever, aren't we?" way that Hollywood intermingles references from the original POTA into this one. Sigh...

Instead of seeing this, spend the night in and call up some friends and rent 'Ed Wood', 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Batman', or even to a lesser extent 'Sleepy Hollow', and reminisce about the days when Tim Burton was a man of vision and originality...not shame and ridicule. What ever [[arrived]] to one of the most [[revolutionary]] and [[sumptuous]] storytellers of our [[moment]]? [[Good]], he [[introduced]] the [[genus]] of [[characteristic]] summer [[actions]] [[foraging]] that could've been [[aimed]] by [[everybody]] available out of [[movies]] school...and in [[facto]], they [[presumably]] would've [[played]] a better [[workplace]]. They would've at [[fewer]] have put half of a [[ideology]] into the [[scary]] script.

[[Branded]] Wahlberg plays an [[astronauts]] who [[travelled]] through some sort of [[hallway]] and landed in a [[planets]] ruled by apes. (gasp!) Except this time around, the apes squirm through groan-worthy dialogue, [[farcical]] plotting, and showy special [[effect]] that [[systematically]] [[strengthen]] in my mind that this [[moneys]] could've been put to about 10 [[autonomous]] [[filmmaking]] that [[should]] have been [[deemed]] 'masterpiece' [[upcoming]] to this [[gut]].

As much as I enjoy the [[resplendent]] acting talent that is Tim Roth, his performance as [[wicked]] ape leader Thade is nothing more than an [[intensive]] [[makeup]] of slouching and [[ponderous]] breathing. Luckily for him, the makeup allows he as an actor to maintain some dignity and most of the crap-dialogue is hidden behind his groans and sniffles.

And [[alack]], the always [[credible]] Hollywood tradition of taking the male and female leads and hooking them up at the end without any relationship development or cause. And the "haha, we're so clever, aren't we?" way that Hollywood intermingles references from the original POTA into this one. Sigh...

Instead of seeing this, spend the night in and call up some friends and rent 'Ed Wood', 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Batman', or even to a lesser extent 'Sleepy Hollow', and reminisce about the days when Tim Burton was a man of vision and originality...not shame and ridicule. --------------------------------------------- Result 3174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] This 1939 [[film]] tried to capitalize on the much better Michael Curtiz's film "Angels with [[Dirty]] Faces". As directed by Ray Enright, the only interesting [[thing]] is how tamed these kids were in comparison with what's going on with the [[youth]] in America's [[inner]] [[cities]] [[today]].

The [[film]] is only worth [[seeing]] because of the [[presence]] of Ann Sheridan and Ronald Reagan, who showed they were well paired [[together]]. The [[Dead]] [[End]] kids have [[larger]] parts as the plot [[concentrates]] on them [[rather]] than in the [[older]] folks.

In a [[way]] it's [[curious]] how arson was used in the same way some scrupulous landlords did in later years right here in New York. It was the quickest way to turn a property around never considering the social problems it created. [[In]] today's climate with so many guns [[around]] there is a [[new]] [[reality]]. The young [[kids]] of the story seemed mere pranksters rather than [[criminals]]. [[How]] [[times]] [[change]]! This 1939 [[kino]] tried to capitalize on the much better Michael Curtiz's film "Angels with [[Sleazy]] Faces". As directed by Ray Enright, the only interesting [[stuff]] is how tamed these kids were in comparison with what's going on with the [[youthful]] in America's [[interior]] [[municipalities]] [[yesterday]].

The [[cinematographic]] is only worth [[witnessing]] because of the [[attendance]] of Ann Sheridan and Ronald Reagan, who showed they were well paired [[jointly]]. The [[Deceased]] [[Ending]] kids have [[bigger]] parts as the plot [[emphasis]] on them [[fairly]] than in the [[oldest]] folks.

In a [[routing]] it's [[nosy]] how arson was used in the same way some scrupulous landlords did in later years right here in New York. It was the quickest way to turn a property around never considering the social problems it created. [[For]] today's climate with so many guns [[throughout]] there is a [[novel]] [[realities]]. The young [[brats]] of the story seemed mere pranksters rather than [[perpetrators]]. [[Mode]] [[period]] [[amended]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This was the second of the series of 6 "classic Tarzan" [[movies]] [[featuring]] Johnny Weismuller in the title role and [[Maureen]] O'Sullivan as Jane.

As [[usual]], this was a [[wonderful]] film in this series; and perhaps stands out as an "in between" film in a progression that could almost exemplify the development of cinema from the early 1930s into the 1940s. As such, it displayed good pace, though not as good as subsequent films. Likewise, the [[cinematography]] is less accomplished than later Tarzan films in this series. The [[stock]] I saw was of uneven quality, [[containing]] some grainy scenery and some under-exposed and over-exposed scenes. The crisp display of later Tarzan films is lacking here. On the other hand, there is one scene, very early on, in which the jerky movements of a camera with foliage swishing in front of it as the camera backs up, showing safari men forging ahead into the jungle, was really almost modern in its style, and stands in strong contrast to the stationary shots that make up the rest of the movie.

Regarding plot, one interesting feature here was Jane's near-fickleness and inconstancy, when she was being subject to Martin's flirtations. The kiss – and Jane's stunned, and partly guilty, reaction – foreshadow something of the Jane we see in the future as well in these films. Compare, for example, in Tarzan Finds a Son! Jane's duplicitous actions tricking Tarzan and delivering Boy to his family. Later she admits to Tarzan that she was wrong. Here, nothing quite so explicit, but we have Jane "returning" to the Jane Parker of yesteryear, and in an almost [[repentant]] series of actions, stripping herself of the evening gown brought by Martin and Harry to entice her away from Tarzan.

There were a whole series of depictions and sequences that especially struck me in this viewing.

For one thing, the picture we get of the domestic life of Tarzan is here, as later, a combination of sensual idyll with always the nearby possibility of violent death. This to me is very much at the core of the Tarzan experience.

I was really [[surprised]] by some quite violent scenes even by today's standards.

There were a whole series of scenes that gave me special pleasure: Tarzan leading the elephants into the Valley of the Elephants' Graveyard; Tarzan being rescued from watery death by the hippo, and then nursed to health by the apes; Cheetah going to find Tarzan when Jane and the other men are trapped at the foot of the escarpment; Cheetah in particular crossing the river on the log. The final battle scenes of savages & lions on the ground and savages & apes in the trees. Jane, showing us that she is truly of Tarzan's world now, quickly displaying her enterprising woodcraft to work up a line of fire to keep the lions away.

The final series of scenes is splendid: suddenly Tarzan is on the scene, flinging savages from the trees and taking charge of the lions, and summoning the elephants to the rescue! That final cry of Tarzan in triumph, holding a happy Jane in his arms, with a dancing and delighted Cheetah beside them, is a memorably picture and really a fine summation of the story of Tarzan and Jane.

All in all, this is another wonderful classic Tarzan movie. I would recommend this movie strongly to anyone. This was the second of the series of 6 "classic Tarzan" [[kino]] [[starring]] Johnny Weismuller in the title role and [[Morin]] O'Sullivan as Jane.

As [[normal]], this was a [[wondrous]] film in this series; and perhaps stands out as an "in between" film in a progression that could almost exemplify the development of cinema from the early 1930s into the 1940s. As such, it displayed good pace, though not as good as subsequent films. Likewise, the [[movie]] is less accomplished than later Tarzan films in this series. The [[stockpiles]] I saw was of uneven quality, [[include]] some grainy scenery and some under-exposed and over-exposed scenes. The crisp display of later Tarzan films is lacking here. On the other hand, there is one scene, very early on, in which the jerky movements of a camera with foliage swishing in front of it as the camera backs up, showing safari men forging ahead into the jungle, was really almost modern in its style, and stands in strong contrast to the stationary shots that make up the rest of the movie.

Regarding plot, one interesting feature here was Jane's near-fickleness and inconstancy, when she was being subject to Martin's flirtations. The kiss – and Jane's stunned, and partly guilty, reaction – foreshadow something of the Jane we see in the future as well in these films. Compare, for example, in Tarzan Finds a Son! Jane's duplicitous actions tricking Tarzan and delivering Boy to his family. Later she admits to Tarzan that she was wrong. Here, nothing quite so explicit, but we have Jane "returning" to the Jane Parker of yesteryear, and in an almost [[apologetic]] series of actions, stripping herself of the evening gown brought by Martin and Harry to entice her away from Tarzan.

There were a whole series of depictions and sequences that especially struck me in this viewing.

For one thing, the picture we get of the domestic life of Tarzan is here, as later, a combination of sensual idyll with always the nearby possibility of violent death. This to me is very much at the core of the Tarzan experience.

I was really [[stunned]] by some quite violent scenes even by today's standards.

There were a whole series of scenes that gave me special pleasure: Tarzan leading the elephants into the Valley of the Elephants' Graveyard; Tarzan being rescued from watery death by the hippo, and then nursed to health by the apes; Cheetah going to find Tarzan when Jane and the other men are trapped at the foot of the escarpment; Cheetah in particular crossing the river on the log. The final battle scenes of savages & lions on the ground and savages & apes in the trees. Jane, showing us that she is truly of Tarzan's world now, quickly displaying her enterprising woodcraft to work up a line of fire to keep the lions away.

The final series of scenes is splendid: suddenly Tarzan is on the scene, flinging savages from the trees and taking charge of the lions, and summoning the elephants to the rescue! That final cry of Tarzan in triumph, holding a happy Jane in his arms, with a dancing and delighted Cheetah beside them, is a memorably picture and really a fine summation of the story of Tarzan and Jane.

All in all, this is another wonderful classic Tarzan movie. I would recommend this movie strongly to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3176 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[barbarians]] [[maybe]]´s not the [[best]] [[film]] that anybody of us have [[seen]], but really????........It´s so funny......I can´t discribe how mutch I [[laughed]] when I [[first]] [[saw]] it..The [[director]] really [[wanted]] to do a [[serious]] adventure movie, but it´sso misirable [[bad]]....so [[bad]] that it´s one of the funniest [[movies]] I´ve ever [[seen]]......so my [[advise]] is that you should [[see]] it.....and if you alredy did, se it again!!!!!!! The [[pagans]] [[probably]]´s not the [[nicest]] [[movie]] that anybody of us have [[watched]], but really????........It´s so funny......I can´t discribe how mutch I [[smiled]] when I [[firstly]] [[watched]] it..The [[superintendent]] really [[wants]] to do a [[severe]] adventure movie, but it´sso misirable [[unhealthy]]....so [[amiss]] that it´s one of the funniest [[kino]] I´ve ever [[noticed]]......so my [[advisor]] is that you should [[consults]] it.....and if you alredy did, se it again!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3177 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sam (Thomas Cavanagh) and Gray (Heather Graham) are devoted siblings who share an apartment and a love of many things -- ballroom dancing, 1940s movie musicals and, much to their surprise, an attractive woman named Charlie (Bridget Moynahan). Historically heterosexual, Gray is confused by her new feelings.

Gray Matters proves to be one of the blandest films I have ever seen. It's dull, predictable, unfunny, poorly acted and poorly written. Nothing about it felt real and everything was very cheesy. Also, this isn't really a romantic comedy with a special twist but more of a "coming out" movie. Sue Kramer tried to make the first half cute with the romantic stuff and the second half serious with the actual acceptance and coming out part. Unfortunately, she failed miserably. The first half was largely unfunny and only Heather Graham was able to hold it up a little. Then, the film took an awkward tone and got all serious. The serious scenes were handled poorly and all of the emotions just felt phony.

I guess I would have enjoyed the film a little more if the relationships between the characters felt more authentic. The brother and sister relationship was very weak and they didn't really appear to be that close. Their relationship just didn't feel very natural. Also, the relationship between Tom and Bridget felt very unnatural. If two people are going to get married after only knowing each other for less than a week, then you would expect to see a little more excitement but the characters talked about getting married in Vegas in the same manner of asking a waiter what the specials are. There was a lack of excitement in the film and it was hard to get involved with the movie with such unmotivated characters.

The acting was mostly weak which was a bit surprising given the decent cast. Heather Graham gave the only good performance in the movie. She was funny and had a few charming scenes but it's too bad that all of her co-stars were complete duds. Bridget Moynahan was very weak and her performance ringed false on every level. Also, it seemed like she was reading her lines. Thomas Cavanagh was pretty wooden and he showed nearly no emotion. The chemistry between Thomas and Heather was non existent and that damaged the film because their relationship felt phony. I can usually rely on Molly Shannon to be funny in a supporting role but here she was just annoying. Sissy Spacek had about two scenes and she was annoying in both of them. Finally, Alan Cumming just had an embarrassing character and his performance wasn't very good. Overall, Gray Matters is a lame film and it isn't worth watching. Rating 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just finished [[viewing]] this [[finely]] conceived, and beautifully acted/directed movie. It was nip and tuck as to whether I was going to waste my time [[viewing]] a movie on the Lifetime [[Movie]] Network because of the [[horribly]] distracting [[commercials]]. Reading the [[earlier]] [[comments]] [[persuaded]] me to give it a shot. After all the [[worst]] that could happen [[would]] be that I [[might]] fall asleep during one of the boring yet lengthy [[bug]] spray [[ads]]. [[So]] why did I watch it? [[mainly]] because when IMDB [[gives]] a movie a "WEIGHTED AVERAGE" [[OF]] 5.8 WHO'S [[STATISTICAL]] [[AVERAGE]] was 7.3 It must be a [[sure]] [[hit]].

I was totally [[delighted]] to have taken the time to [[view]] this [[movie]], commercial [[pox]] and all. [[Helen]] Hunt continues to amaze me with her [[ability]] to take on tough roles [[adapting]] her core persona to fit each role.

The [[portrait]] she painted in this film of the tough yet perceptively [[human]] police officer was beautifully executed. When the scene calls for quick witted, [[timely]] delivered verbal intercourse, she can stand toe to toe with any actor. Yet she is adept at the delivery of volumes of [[emotional]] [[response]] without uttering a word relying only on facial expression and [[body]] [[language]]. Without the [[commercials]], which by design [[kill]] the [[continuity]] of any good film, This would have been a [[real]] edge-of-the-seat nail-biter. I [[gave]] it a 9.0 I just finished [[visualizing]] this [[subtly]] conceived, and beautifully acted/directed movie. It was nip and tuck as to whether I was going to waste my time [[vista]] a movie on the Lifetime [[Cinematography]] Network because of the [[terribly]] distracting [[spots]]. Reading the [[prior]] [[sightings]] [[confident]] me to give it a shot. After all the [[worse]] that could happen [[should]] be that I [[probability]] fall asleep during one of the boring yet lengthy [[insect]] spray [[announcements]]. [[Accordingly]] why did I watch it? [[basically]] because when IMDB [[offers]] a movie a "WEIGHTED AVERAGE" [[DE]] 5.8 WHO'S [[STATISTICS]] [[MEDIUM]] was 7.3 It must be a [[convinced]] [[strike]].

I was totally [[happier]] to have taken the time to [[vista]] this [[cinematography]], commercial [[plague]] and all. [[Hackett]] Hunt continues to amaze me with her [[skills]] to take on tough roles [[adjustments]] her core persona to fit each role.

The [[portraits]] she painted in this film of the tough yet perceptively [[humans]] police officer was beautifully executed. When the scene calls for quick witted, [[promptly]] delivered verbal intercourse, she can stand toe to toe with any actor. Yet she is adept at the delivery of volumes of [[sentimental]] [[answering]] without uttering a word relying only on facial expression and [[organs]] [[linguistics]]. Without the [[spots]], which by design [[killed]] the [[continuation]] of any good film, This would have been a [[actual]] edge-of-the-seat nail-biter. I [[handed]] it a 9.0 --------------------------------------------- Result 3179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Not sure if it was right or wrong, but I read thru the other comments before watching the short.I have to say I disagree with most of the [[negative]] comments or problems people have had with it.

As a first time "[[Lone]] Wolf" director/producer,I like to see things that I can aspire to,not necessarily from the pro's, but by people just getting their feet wet like me.

If indeed this is also from a first-timer,as I read,I [[applaud]] the effort.[[Marvelous]] [[job]] then in that respect! There were some comments about the music.I thought it was quite nice for the piece.Some say it kind of droned along for a while, but I found that created tension without(us)necessarily being conscious of it, and when he pulled the gun out and the guitar started crunching chords,it was like we knew there was a train on the tracks, but realize it is just now moving. Yes there is a 180 degree slip/clip in there, but shi* happens.Did anyone else see Hugh's dirty shirt turn white (near the end,in the rain) in "Australia"? Look how much money and people were behind that movie! Give the kid a break for Gods sake! All in all I think it was very well done. [[Only]] 2 things I would have [[mentioned]] are hardly worth mentioning-Don't walk up to a shiny brass picture frame with the camera, and I would have just displayed the splatter at the beginning shots to a still shot, so people wouldn't necessarily know what it is.

My experience so far has taught me that it's not that it's hard to make a movie,it just takes time to learn how to do it,then the time to actually do it, and then you better take some more time still to think of all the details you'll need to have shot before you call "post-production time!" IMHO, it looks like director/writer Ryan Jafri did his homework, and if this indeed is his first report card, I'd give him an "A". The rest of you report to the principals office for a whuppin'. Not sure if it was right or wrong, but I read thru the other comments before watching the short.I have to say I disagree with most of the [[inclement]] comments or problems people have had with it.

As a first time "[[Sole]] Wolf" director/producer,I like to see things that I can aspire to,not necessarily from the pro's, but by people just getting their feet wet like me.

If indeed this is also from a first-timer,as I read,I [[praise]] the effort.[[Wondrous]] [[jobs]] then in that respect! There were some comments about the music.I thought it was quite nice for the piece.Some say it kind of droned along for a while, but I found that created tension without(us)necessarily being conscious of it, and when he pulled the gun out and the guitar started crunching chords,it was like we knew there was a train on the tracks, but realize it is just now moving. Yes there is a 180 degree slip/clip in there, but shi* happens.Did anyone else see Hugh's dirty shirt turn white (near the end,in the rain) in "Australia"? Look how much money and people were behind that movie! Give the kid a break for Gods sake! All in all I think it was very well done. [[Purely]] 2 things I would have [[cited]] are hardly worth mentioning-Don't walk up to a shiny brass picture frame with the camera, and I would have just displayed the splatter at the beginning shots to a still shot, so people wouldn't necessarily know what it is.

My experience so far has taught me that it's not that it's hard to make a movie,it just takes time to learn how to do it,then the time to actually do it, and then you better take some more time still to think of all the details you'll need to have shot before you call "post-production time!" IMHO, it looks like director/writer Ryan Jafri did his homework, and if this indeed is his first report card, I'd give him an "A". The rest of you report to the principals office for a whuppin'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The mystery here is why this delightful, small comedy has been ignored by most critics and has failed to find the audience it deserves. Simply showcasing the budding talent of Audrey Tautou should be enough to generate greater recognition from the cognoscenti.

Lacking in pretension and relying on quirky characterizations, itÕs rumination on the interconnection of human behavior manages to be both amusing and life affirming and, unlike some of itsÕ more critically acclaimed competition in the genre, such as The Taste of Others, it actually entertains. --------------------------------------------- Result 3181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This was filmed back-to-back with the 1992 re-make of Conan Doyle's famous novel 'The Lost World'. And it [[shows]].

The [[film]] starts promisingly [[enough]], with a [[ruthless]] [[organization]] intending to exploit the lost world and Challenger et al returning to [[defend]] the prehistoric plateau, but then [[things]] [[go]] downhill. [[Everybody]] is stranded on the plateau and we're left with a feeble, [[boring]], over-length rehash of the first [[film]].

The [[dinosaurs]] (who are hardly ever seen) are just [[laughable]]. Are we [[expected]] to take that cuddly toy that's supposed to be an ankylosaur seriously? And the tyrannosaur seems [[rooted]] to the spot.

Do yourself a favor and get hold of the 1925 silent version of the Lost World. [[Unbelievably]] in this [[age]] of CGI and other advanced effects, the [[twenties]] version is the best and will remain so until somebody finally [[decides]] to do a [[decent]] re-make. This was filmed back-to-back with the 1992 re-make of Conan Doyle's famous novel 'The Lost World'. And it [[show]].

The [[filmmaking]] starts promisingly [[sufficient]], with a [[pitiless]] [[organizations]] intending to exploit the lost world and Challenger et al returning to [[defence]] the prehistoric plateau, but then [[items]] [[going]] downhill. [[Anyone]] is stranded on the plateau and we're left with a feeble, [[dreary]], over-length rehash of the first [[filmmaking]].

The [[dinosaur]] (who are hardly ever seen) are just [[farcical]]. Are we [[predicted]] to take that cuddly toy that's supposed to be an ankylosaur seriously? And the tyrannosaur seems [[ingrained]] to the spot.

Do yourself a favor and get hold of the 1925 silent version of the Lost World. [[Unimaginably]] in this [[aged]] of CGI and other advanced effects, the [[forties]] version is the best and will remain so until somebody finally [[decide]] to do a [[presentable]] re-make. --------------------------------------------- Result 3182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This [[movie]] is just so [[awful]]. [[So]] [[bad]] that I can't bear to expend [[anything]] other than just a few words. [[Avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]], it is [[terrible]].

[[None]] of the details of the [[crimes]] are re-enacted correctly. [[Lots]] of slaughterhouse footage. Weird [[cuts]] and edits. No continuity to the plot. The acting is absolutely the most [[amateur]] I have ever [[seen]].

This [[bomb]] of a [[movie]] was [[obviously]] [[made]] to make some money without any regard to the [[accuracy]] of it's content. The camera [[work]] is out of [[focus]] at [[times]] and always [[shaky]]. It looks as if it was shot on [[video]].

[[In]] fact, now that they've [[got]] Dennis Rader with [[life]] in [[prison]], I [[wish]] they would put the [[guys]] that made this [[horrible]] [[movie]] into prison as well.

Seriously, don't even [[think]] about watching this one. I'd give it a [[negative]] [[star]] if I [[could]]. This [[filmmaking]] is just so [[horrific]]. [[Therefore]] [[rotten]] that I can't bear to expend [[something]] other than just a few words. [[Avoiding]] this [[filmmaking]] at all [[charges]], it is [[horrific]].

[[Nothing]] of the details of the [[misdemeanors]] are re-enacted correctly. [[Lot]] of slaughterhouse footage. Weird [[cuttings]] and edits. No continuity to the plot. The acting is absolutely the most [[enthusiast]] I have ever [[watched]].

This [[explosions]] of a [[filmmaking]] was [[notoriously]] [[introduced]] to make some money without any regard to the [[accurate]] of it's content. The camera [[jobs]] is out of [[spotlight]] at [[moments]] and always [[bumpy]]. It looks as if it was shot on [[videos]].

[[For]] fact, now that they've [[get]] Dennis Rader with [[vida]] in [[incarceration]], I [[wanna]] they would put the [[guy]] that made this [[awful]] [[filmmaking]] into prison as well.

Seriously, don't even [[thinks]] about watching this one. I'd give it a [[pernicious]] [[stars]] if I [[did]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3183 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This movie is another [[horror]] anthology. It is rather [[good]], but it could have used a bit more. I compare it to "Doctor Terror's House of Horrors", though in this one the title fits. It has four stories all somewhat connected by a house. The first tale is about a writer and his wife moving in. He creates a killer for his latest novel and then he starts seeing the killer roaming around in his house. This one is sort of predictable, but it does throw a few twists in the end. The next story is a bit more unpredictable, and you really do not know where the heck it is going. This one features Peter Cushing and was probably my [[favorite]] of the bunch. This guy buys the house, but it is not the house that takes center stage, but a rather strange wax museum. The third story starts out rather good and features Christopher Lee. This one has him as a rather bizarre dad who seems awfully protective of his daughter. The problem is that once you know what is going on the story does not end soon enough. It drags a bit leading to a very predictable conclusion. Then the final tale concerns an actor buying a cloak from an odd little shop. The actor really gets what he paid for. Then there is a small story about an officer who is seen throughout trying to find out what happened to this actor and then an explanation of why these things happened. [[Though]] I was not very satisfied with the explanation as I don't think it really [[explained]] Cushing's story much at all. I think they needed a bit more back story for that one. All in all though it was an interesting set of [[stories]]. This movie is another [[abomination]] anthology. It is rather [[alright]], but it could have used a bit more. I compare it to "Doctor Terror's House of Horrors", though in this one the title fits. It has four stories all somewhat connected by a house. The first tale is about a writer and his wife moving in. He creates a killer for his latest novel and then he starts seeing the killer roaming around in his house. This one is sort of predictable, but it does throw a few twists in the end. The next story is a bit more unpredictable, and you really do not know where the heck it is going. This one features Peter Cushing and was probably my [[preferential]] of the bunch. This guy buys the house, but it is not the house that takes center stage, but a rather strange wax museum. The third story starts out rather good and features Christopher Lee. This one has him as a rather bizarre dad who seems awfully protective of his daughter. The problem is that once you know what is going on the story does not end soon enough. It drags a bit leading to a very predictable conclusion. Then the final tale concerns an actor buying a cloak from an odd little shop. The actor really gets what he paid for. Then there is a small story about an officer who is seen throughout trying to find out what happened to this actor and then an explanation of why these things happened. [[Despite]] I was not very satisfied with the explanation as I don't think it really [[explain]] Cushing's story much at all. I think they needed a bit more back story for that one. All in all though it was an interesting set of [[history]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie, no correction, this THING, this abysmal abomination from the burning pits of hell should have been killed before it even left the writer's head. I could not possibly come up with enough adjectives to describe this movie. But let's try anyway. Horrible, bad, nauseating, tasteless, crap, vomit inducing, gut wrenchingly bad, hideous, nasty, putrid, there just aren't enough words in the English language! The "plot" involves a serial killer who becomes a snow man. Don't ask how, not important. The killer snowman runs about killing people. How, you may ask, can a snowman kill someone? In tasteless ways that make you want to remove your eyes if only so you don't have to endure that Styrofoam snowman anymore. In ways that make you want to fill your ears with hot wax so you do not have to endure his snow puns anymore. Don't watch this movie! Destroy it on sight! For the sake of your very soul don't watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3185 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Incredibly]] [[muddled]], off-putting and [[ultimately]] [[ludicrous]] ("the horses, oh my [[God]], the [[horses]]!") thriller. It's [[creepy]] at [[times]], but it has one of the [[worst]] [[scripts]] ever [[written]] for a horror [[film]]. Watch how in the [[final]] 10 minutes everybody "magically" does exactly what the plot needs for the "[[resolution]]" to [[occur]]. Bland performances by the leads, a [[typically]] eccentric one by Richard Lynch. The video [[transfer]] is a real [[hack]] [[job]], [[cutting]] scenes in half and making the movie even more [[difficult]] to understand. 0 out of 4 [[stars]]. [[Surprisingly]] [[disconcerted]], off-putting and [[lastly]] [[stupid]] ("the horses, oh my [[Deity]], the [[horse]]!") thriller. It's [[scary]] at [[moments]], but it has one of the [[meanest]] [[alphabets]] ever [[typed]] for a horror [[movie]]. Watch how in the [[definitive]] 10 minutes everybody "magically" does exactly what the plot needs for the "[[resolutions]]" to [[arise]]. Bland performances by the leads, a [[generally]] eccentric one by Richard Lynch. The video [[transferring]] is a real [[piracy]] [[labor]], [[chopping]] scenes in half and making the movie even more [[uphill]] to understand. 0 out of 4 [[superstar]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3186 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is a [[film]] that had a lot to [[live]] down to . on the [[year]] of its [[release]] [[legendary]] [[film]] [[critic]] Barry [[Norman]] considered it the [[worst]] [[film]] of the [[year]] and I'd heard nothing but bad things about it [[especially]] a [[plot]] that was criticised for being too complicated

To be honest the plot is something of a red herring and the film [[suffers]] even more when the word " plot " is used because as far as I can see there is no plot as such . There's [[something]] involving Russian [[gangsters]] , a character called Pete Thompson who's trying to get his wife Sarah pregnant , and an Irish bloke called Sean . How they all fit into something called a " plot " I'm not sure . It's difficult to explain the plots of Guy Ritchie films but if you watch any of his films I'm sure we can all agree that they all posses one no matter how complicated they may seem on first viewing . Likewise a James Bond film though the plots are stretched out with action scenes . You will have a serious problem believing RANCID ALUMINIUM has any type of central plot that can be cogently explained

Taking a look at the cast list will ring enough warning bells as to what sort of film you'll be watching . Sadie Frost has appeared in some of the worst British films made in the last 15 years and she's doing nothing to become inconsistent . Steven Berkoff gives acting a bad name ( and he plays a character called Kant which sums up the wit of this movie ) while one of the supporting characters is played by a TV presenter presumably because no serious actress would be seen dead in this

The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it's utterly forgettable . I saw it a few days ago and immediately after watching I was going to write a very long a critical review warning people what they are letting themselves in for by watching , but by now I've mainly forgotten why . But this doesn't alter the fact that I remember disliking this [[piece]] of [[crap]] [[immensely]] This is a [[filmmaking]] that had a lot to [[vive]] down to . on the [[annum]] of its [[releases]] [[proverbial]] [[cinematography]] [[criticisms]] Barry [[Normans]] considered it the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] of the [[annum]] and I'd heard nothing but bad things about it [[peculiarly]] a [[intrigue]] that was criticised for being too complicated

To be honest the plot is something of a red herring and the film [[undergoes]] even more when the word " plot " is used because as far as I can see there is no plot as such . There's [[somethin]] involving Russian [[lowlifes]] , a character called Pete Thompson who's trying to get his wife Sarah pregnant , and an Irish bloke called Sean . How they all fit into something called a " plot " I'm not sure . It's difficult to explain the plots of Guy Ritchie films but if you watch any of his films I'm sure we can all agree that they all posses one no matter how complicated they may seem on first viewing . Likewise a James Bond film though the plots are stretched out with action scenes . You will have a serious problem believing RANCID ALUMINIUM has any type of central plot that can be cogently explained

Taking a look at the cast list will ring enough warning bells as to what sort of film you'll be watching . Sadie Frost has appeared in some of the worst British films made in the last 15 years and she's doing nothing to become inconsistent . Steven Berkoff gives acting a bad name ( and he plays a character called Kant which sums up the wit of this movie ) while one of the supporting characters is played by a TV presenter presumably because no serious actress would be seen dead in this

The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it's utterly forgettable . I saw it a few days ago and immediately after watching I was going to write a very long a critical review warning people what they are letting themselves in for by watching , but by now I've mainly forgotten why . But this doesn't alter the fact that I remember disliking this [[slice]] of [[baloney]] [[extraordinarily]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3187 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ... You can't [[exactly]] shove her out of the way, because she's old; and if you were being charitable you might say that the ponderous gait she ambles along with isn't really her fault. Nevertheless, in these circumstances it's often difficult not to become irritated when you find yourself dragging your heels in her wake. [[So]] it is with "The Pallbearer", an attempt to do something 'different' with a romantic [[comedy]] that in this [[way]] is chiefly hamstrung because the venue is all wrong; sort of like [[showing]] off your 'breakdancing' [[skills]] at a grandparent's funeral.

To further [[extend]] the metaphor (perhaps unwisely!); like the old lady, one [[starts]] to feel with the set-up of the [[film]] that its demise cannot be far away. [[Sure]] [[enough]], this particular 'death' is agonizingly [[protracted]], [[slowly]] chipping away at our [[reserves]] of [[empathy]] in [[tiny]] [[little]] increments, as depressingly we come to the realisation that the [[proceedings]] are only headed in one [[direction]]: Downhill. Its [[laboured]] [[attempts]] at 'humour' can be [[seen]] [[coming]] a [[mile]] off - again, not unlike the [[grim]] inevitability of death!

Returning once again to the image of 'dragging heels', the main [[character]], [[Tom]], is [[shown]] to [[ceaselessly]] [[repeat]] this [[action]] [[throughout]] his [[life]]. [[If]] there are indeed [[degrees]] of 'pathetic', then this sap is possibly a [[good]] few [[notches]] ahead of Schwimmer's other - more [[famous]] - role. To [[find]] oneself in the [[awkward]] position of having to [[align]] [[audience]] sympathies with a [[character]] [[even]] MORE 'clueless' than Ross is [[certainly]] a tough [[ask]] [[even]] for as 'able' a [[comic]] [[performer]] as Schwimmer, but I [[guess]] he can [[find]] fault with himself for [[signing]] on to some [[seriously]] 'echoing' [[situations]] in the first place.

How will he ever escape his most [[famous]] [[portrayal]] if he's [[picking]] [[scripts]] where the [[characters]] [[could]] [[almost]] be 'interchangeable', [[even]] if the situations aren't? A man with a [[longstanding]] high-school crush on [[someone]] he hasn't [[seen]] for [[years]]. [[Sound]] familiar... ? Paltrow is nothing else if not bland in her 'Rachel' role, but all of this going over old [[ground]] [[would]] perhaps be forgivable if the noticeable DIFFERENCES present weren't so incongruous as well. Unfortunately, the romantic element is so well-worn it's threadbare, and the 'backdrop' is so inappropriate that it seems the best way to describe the resultant film is as something of a 'stiff'... ! 2/10. ... You can't [[precisely]] shove her out of the way, because she's old; and if you were being charitable you might say that the ponderous gait she ambles along with isn't really her fault. Nevertheless, in these circumstances it's often difficult not to become irritated when you find yourself dragging your heels in her wake. [[Therefore]] it is with "The Pallbearer", an attempt to do something 'different' with a romantic [[travesty]] that in this [[camino]] is chiefly hamstrung because the venue is all wrong; sort of like [[displayed]] off your 'breakdancing' [[abilities]] at a grandparent's funeral.

To further [[widened]] the metaphor (perhaps unwisely!); like the old lady, one [[begins]] to feel with the set-up of the [[filmmaking]] that its demise cannot be far away. [[Convinced]] [[suitably]], this particular 'death' is agonizingly [[extended]], [[softly]] chipping away at our [[reservations]] of [[compassion]] in [[small]] [[small]] increments, as depressingly we come to the realisation that the [[trials]] are only headed in one [[orientation]]: Downhill. Its [[labored]] [[endeavors]] at 'humour' can be [[noticed]] [[arriving]] a [[miles]] off - again, not unlike the [[bleak]] inevitability of death!

Returning once again to the image of 'dragging heels', the main [[traits]], [[Thom]], is [[demonstrated]] to [[steadily]] [[recur]] this [[actions]] [[in]] his [[lives]]. [[Though]] there are indeed [[diplomas]] of 'pathetic', then this sap is possibly a [[alright]] few [[frills]] ahead of Schwimmer's other - more [[eminent]] - role. To [[finds]] oneself in the [[troublesome]] position of having to [[aligned]] [[spectators]] sympathies with a [[nature]] [[yet]] MORE 'clueless' than Ross is [[unquestionably]] a tough [[calls]] [[yet]] for as 'able' a [[hilarious]] [[entertainer]] as Schwimmer, but I [[guessing]] he can [[finds]] fault with himself for [[autographed]] on to some [[deeply]] 'echoing' [[circumstances]] in the first place.

How will he ever escape his most [[eminent]] [[depiction]] if he's [[gathering]] [[scenarios]] where the [[characteristics]] [[did]] [[nigh]] be 'interchangeable', [[yet]] if the situations aren't? A man with a [[longtime]] high-school crush on [[person]] he hasn't [[noticed]] for [[ages]]. [[Sounds]] familiar... ? Paltrow is nothing else if not bland in her 'Rachel' role, but all of this going over old [[terrain]] [[ought]] perhaps be forgivable if the noticeable DIFFERENCES present weren't so incongruous as well. Unfortunately, the romantic element is so well-worn it's threadbare, and the 'backdrop' is so inappropriate that it seems the best way to describe the resultant film is as something of a 'stiff'... ! 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I [[saw]] this [[cinematic]] [[wretchedness]] in a dollar [[theater]] with a friend in 1979 (back when the [[tickets]] actually sold for $1). This is the only [[film]] I have ever walked out on (with my friend, while the idiocy that is the "Laser Bra 2000" [[sketch]] was on screen). [[Evidently]], my and my friend's reaction to the [[film]] was a common one. It is not that I found the film offensive (either as an 18-year-old or now), but rather that it is mind-numbingly stupid and [[patently]] unfunny, devoid even of the unintended [[humor]] that makes a Ed Wood film watchable. This is the real reason why NBC refused to air it, rather than a failure to comprehend Mr. Mike's "vision" (unless, of course, his vision was to drive the film's backers into bankruptcy).

I remained surprised to this day that this film does not seem to have made any published "10 [[worst]] films of all time" list. It certainly makes mine. You have been warned. I [[noticed]] this [[cinematographic]] [[privation]] in a dollar [[movies]] with a friend in 1979 (back when the [[ticket]] actually sold for $1). This is the only [[flick]] I have ever walked out on (with my friend, while the idiocy that is the "Laser Bra 2000" [[skit]] was on screen). [[Visibly]], my and my friend's reaction to the [[filmmaking]] was a common one. It is not that I found the film offensive (either as an 18-year-old or now), but rather that it is mind-numbingly stupid and [[apparently]] unfunny, devoid even of the unintended [[comedy]] that makes a Ed Wood film watchable. This is the real reason why NBC refused to air it, rather than a failure to comprehend Mr. Mike's "vision" (unless, of course, his vision was to drive the film's backers into bankruptcy).

I remained surprised to this day that this film does not seem to have made any published "10 [[gravest]] films of all time" list. It certainly makes mine. You have been warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 3189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] When [[Paris]] is Burning came out, I totally [[dismissed]] it. I was not into the whole Madonna and vogueing [[phenomenon]]. I thought it was [[going]] to be campy and [[silly]]. How [[wrong]] I was about this [[movie]]. I [[watched]] it after the movie had been out for ten years and I ran out and bought it. It took me back to a time and [[place]] of fun and excitement. I felt as [[though]] I knew all of the [[characters]] personally. The 80s were spectacular and the [[movie]] [[captured]] the essence of the gay culture. What a terrific [[job]]! I went on the internet and [[found]] out what some of the [[original]] [[casts]] members were doing now but I have not been able to [[locate]] all of them. If any one has any [[information]] on any of the [[casts]] [[members]] [[please]] [[let]] me [[know]].

I [[hope]] they make another documentary. I [[LOVED]] IT When [[Parisien]] is Burning came out, I totally [[reject]] it. I was not into the whole Madonna and vogueing [[phenomena]]. I thought it was [[go]] to be campy and [[moronic]]. How [[amiss]] I was about this [[cinematography]]. I [[observed]] it after the movie had been out for ten years and I ran out and bought it. It took me back to a time and [[placing]] of fun and excitement. I felt as [[while]] I knew all of the [[trait]] personally. The 80s were spectacular and the [[movies]] [[caught]] the essence of the gay culture. What a terrific [[workplace]]! I went on the internet and [[discoveries]] out what some of the [[preliminary]] [[throws]] members were doing now but I have not been able to [[pinpoint]] all of them. If any one has any [[info]] on any of the [[throws]] [[member]] [[invite]] [[leave]] me [[savoir]].

I [[esperanza]] they make another documentary. I [[CARED]] IT --------------------------------------------- Result 3190 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I want so badly to give this piece of GARBAGE a zero, unfortunately, there isn't, so, I had to give it a 1 just to warn you about how stupidly terrible this imposter of a familiar cartoon really is! The characters look like they were drawn by pre-schoolers, no, wait, I've seen pre-schoolers do better! I prefer "Misadventures of Flapjack" to this terrible excuse for a cartoon! I'm probably saying what others have said, two words: RIP OFF!! Remember that episode of Dexter's Lab when they raced go-karts down that volcano? yeah, Mister Fellows even cashed in on that idea and failed! They even ripped off Shadow Lugia in that one episode that parodied Pokemon!(he even cashed in on that franchise!) That one character is a cheap rip off of Mandark from Dexter's Lab! Mister Fellows needs to be sued for statutory infringement for this piece of crap!! Everyone has their own opinion, but those of you who like Johnny (RIP-OFF) Test, your'e just lying to yourselves. Do yourself a favor, change the channel when this rip off tries to disgrace your screen! --------------------------------------------- Result 3191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Dead Letter Office' is a low-budget film about a couple of employees of the Australian postal service, struggling to rebuild their damaged lives. Unfortunately, the acting is poor and the links between the characters' past misfortunes and present mindsets are clumsily and over-schematically represented. What's most disappointing of all, however, is the portrayal is life in the office of the film's title: there's no mechanisation whatsoever, and it's quite impossible to ascertain what any of the staff really do for a living. Granted, part of the plot is that the office is threatened with closure, but this sort of office surely closed in the 1930s, if it ever truly existed. It's a shame, as the film's overall tone is poignant and wry, and there's some promise in the scenario: but few of the details convince. Overall, it feels the work of someone who hasn't actually experienced much of real life; a student film, with a concept and an outline, but sadly little else. --------------------------------------------- Result 3192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a pretty decent example of film noir. The setting is the early 50's with the Communists trying to steal weapon secrets from the US Government.

Richard Widmark is the suave pickpocket without scruples. He gives a pretty decent performance but there is nothing A-List about him. The interesting thing was that he was not only an anti-hero but through most of the film, an unlikeable anti-hero. That is not very normal. Jean Peters gave a so-so performance as the hooker with the heart of gold. That great character actress Thelma Ritter shines as the stool-pigeon.

The plot had its fair share of twists and turns, wisecracks and tough talk. There is a fight scene near the end of the movie (in the subway station) that was pretty gritty and exciting.

I think noir fans (like myself) will enjoy this film. For non-noir viewers, it may seem a little dated and the whole Commie thing a tad overdone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3193 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I could i would give ZERO stars for this one, but unfortunately i have to give one...

There is no single scene I could laugh about... but the game didn't make me laugh either. So if you're some ill retarded folk, go to your local cinema, watch this movie and give it 10 stars, like some people here already did.

but for me... in a movie where children are shot dead to achieve humor... good taste goes over the edge... this was the third time i wasted my time to see a Boll movie and it was definitely my last!

0/10... i'm ashamed of being from the same country as Uwe Boll!

PLEASE PLEASE KEEP HIM FROM MAKING MORE MOVIES!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3194 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[film]] is so [[bad]] I can't believe it was actually [[shot]]. People who [[voted]] 10 or 9, 8 and even 7, are you [[insane]]? [[Did]] we really watch the same [[movie]]? Or the same sh** should I [[say]]. [[Everything]] is [[bad]] in this [[film]]. The [[story]] (is there a [[story]]?) is [[going]] [[nowhere]], [[completely]] [[incoherent]], the acting (some dialogs are simply just ridiculous), the music score (what the **** is that?), the [[editing]], and [[especially]] the artistic [[direction]], a pure [[disaster]]. [[Reminds]] me the [[old]] Macist movies... To [[give]] you an [[example]] of the amateurism of the production, the mermaid's [[costume]] is a sleeping [[bag]] with spangles sticked on it. I'm not [[joking]], that's exactly what it is.

Another [[example]] of the [[enormous]] [[mistakes]] we [[find]] here: you [[see]] in a scene an extra, a fat [[woman]] of about 200 [[pounds]], who's [[talking]] on her cell [[phone]]. The next shot, which is in a complete different [[location]], you can [[see]] this same [[woman]], [[still]] [[talking]] on her cell [[phone]] (!) [[Yes]], it goes that far.

A [[big]], [[huge]], waste of [[money]]. [[Useless]]. This [[filmmaking]] is so [[rotten]] I can't believe it was actually [[offed]]. People who [[votes]] 10 or 9, 8 and even 7, are you [[deranged]]? [[Got]] we really watch the same [[filmmaking]]? Or the same sh** should I [[said]]. [[Entire]] is [[negative]] in this [[movies]]. The [[conte]] (is there a [[fairytales]]?) is [[gonna]] [[everyplace]], [[absolutely]] [[counterintuitive]], the acting (some dialogs are simply just ridiculous), the music score (what the **** is that?), the [[editorial]], and [[specially]] the artistic [[orientation]], a pure [[cataclysm]]. [[Recalls]] me the [[vecchio]] Macist movies... To [[confer]] you an [[instances]] of the amateurism of the production, the mermaid's [[garb]] is a sleeping [[luggage]] with spangles sticked on it. I'm not [[prank]], that's exactly what it is.

Another [[instances]] of the [[whopping]] [[faults]] we [[found]] here: you [[seeing]] in a scene an extra, a fat [[female]] of about 200 [[lbs]], who's [[discussing]] on her cell [[telephone]]. The next shot, which is in a complete different [[placements]], you can [[seeing]] this same [[girls]], [[again]] [[discussing]] on her cell [[phones]] (!) [[Yeah]], it goes that far.

A [[prodigious]], [[prodigious]], waste of [[moneys]]. [[Superfluous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[movie]] [[starts]] [[little]] [[cute]]. There are a number of [[revolting]] scenes. People in toilets. GOOD [[actors]] wasted and the original [[television]] series has all but ruined here. This did not need to be [[crude]].

[[Forget]] it. Find the [[tv]] show. Disney at new low. The [[filmmaking]] [[initiating]] [[kiddo]] [[enchanting]]. There are a number of [[disgusting]] scenes. People in toilets. GOOD [[players]] wasted and the original [[tv]] series has all but ruined here. This did not need to be [[coarse]].

[[Overlook]] it. Find the [[tvs]] show. Disney at new low. --------------------------------------------- Result 3196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] [[Mind]], my [[friends]] and I saw the movie based off it's title alone. It's cute, though obvious in it's plot and direction-- you know where the [[movie]] is going within the first five minutes. My main [[contention]] with the plot is that while it remains tolerably consistent, they never explain a lot of the things [[behind]] the characters. An alcoholic father, overworked mother, stressed-out [[sister]]... that's a bad family, but aside from the [[occasional]] mention from the sister, there's not any [[resolution]]. I was also [[confused]] as to the scene with the bottles... it seemed pretty random.

The writing is a secondary concern... the kids weren't bad actors, but their script left a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, what could have been a cute niche movie was pushed aside for a single, blah special [[effect]], lame scripting, and a glaringly obvious plot. [[Intellect]], my [[friendships]] and I saw the movie based off it's title alone. It's cute, though obvious in it's plot and direction-- you know where the [[filmmaking]] is going within the first five minutes. My main [[assertion]] with the plot is that while it remains tolerably consistent, they never explain a lot of the things [[backside]] the characters. An alcoholic father, overworked mother, stressed-out [[sisters]]... that's a bad family, but aside from the [[sporadic]] mention from the sister, there's not any [[settle]]. I was also [[disconcerted]] as to the scene with the bottles... it seemed pretty random.

The writing is a secondary concern... the kids weren't bad actors, but their script left a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, what could have been a cute niche movie was pushed aside for a single, blah special [[effects]], lame scripting, and a glaringly obvious plot. --------------------------------------------- Result 3197 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] Savage Island's raw savagery will scare the hell out of you! Trust me.

When the boy of the estranged Savage Family is run over by some city slicker tourists, Pa Savage wants revenge, and he'll stop at nothing until he gets it.

This is a [[real]] horror film with some [[truly]] [[wonderful]] horror moments.

Also, the [[negative]] [[review]] clearly comes from someone who lacks proper knowledge of film. The filmmakers chose the lighting and camera-work in order to reflect the dark, murky, and egdy mood of the story; in other words, to obtain a certain aesthetic.

In fact, the film has won SEVERAL horror film festival awards. Savage Island's raw savagery will scare the hell out of you! Trust me.

When the boy of the estranged Savage Family is run over by some city slicker tourists, Pa Savage wants revenge, and he'll stop at nothing until he gets it.

This is a [[actual]] horror film with some [[honestly]] [[wondrous]] horror moments.

Also, the [[injurious]] [[revising]] clearly comes from someone who lacks proper knowledge of film. The filmmakers chose the lighting and camera-work in order to reflect the dark, murky, and egdy mood of the story; in other words, to obtain a certain aesthetic.

In fact, the film has won SEVERAL horror film festival awards. --------------------------------------------- Result 3198 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Add pure [[humor]] + quick and [[unique]] [[sentences]] + sex + unfaith sex! + [[love]] + lies + dark deadly [[thoughts]] + secret plans + [[fun]] + black humor + sex!.. again! + black [[dresses]]! (needed for the unlimited [[funerals]]!) = Eglimata!!! Or in English, Crimes!! Our [[Heroes]] are two married couples, their relatives, their friends and neighbors. There is Soso and Alekos and Flora and Achilleas, two married couples who have everything but not real love! Flora is the mistress of Alekos, and when Soso finds what's going on, she is planning with her best friend [[Pepi]] to kill Alekos and look like an accident! Many plans were made but everyone else dies except Alekos! Achilleas find's out that he has a sister who is a Hooker and tries to put her in the right road..Korina is a [[temptation]] to mens but her tries to [[get]] married all goes wrong, [[since]] when they learn her [[past]], freaks and [[leave]] and she [[ends]] up [[marrying]] a [[rich]] farm [[man]]. As for the other roles they are like they are from Cartoons! Grandpa Aristidis which [[fakes]] that he is paralyzed, Machi is his nurse who is secretly marry to Aristidis for his fortune, Johny, son of Machi, who has it OK with [[everybody]] to have all the [[benefits]], Michalakis who has only one [[purpose]] in [[life]].. to [[suicide]], but he is [[unable]] to do it so he is desperate! [[Every]] [[time]], I [[see]] the replays and [[every]] [[time]] when it [[finishes]] I miss it.. One of my [[favorite]] All [[time]] classics... Add pure [[comedy]] + quick and [[sole]] [[penalties]] + sex + unfaith sex! + [[likes]] + lies + dark deadly [[ideas]] + secret plans + [[entertaining]] + black humor + sex!.. again! + black [[outfits]]! (needed for the unlimited [[graveyards]]!) = Eglimata!!! Or in English, Crimes!! Our [[Heroic]] are two married couples, their relatives, their friends and neighbors. There is Soso and Alekos and Flora and Achilleas, two married couples who have everything but not real love! Flora is the mistress of Alekos, and when Soso finds what's going on, she is planning with her best friend [[Bibi]] to kill Alekos and look like an accident! Many plans were made but everyone else dies except Alekos! Achilleas find's out that he has a sister who is a Hooker and tries to put her in the right road..Korina is a [[seduction]] to mens but her tries to [[obtain]] married all goes wrong, [[because]] when they learn her [[former]], freaks and [[let]] and she [[end]] up [[marie]] a [[richer]] farm [[males]]. As for the other roles they are like they are from Cartoons! Grandpa Aristidis which [[false]] that he is paralyzed, Machi is his nurse who is secretly marry to Aristidis for his fortune, Johny, son of Machi, who has it OK with [[anybody]] to have all the [[advantages]], Michalakis who has only one [[goal]] in [[vida]].. to [[suicidal]], but he is [[incompetent]] to do it so he is desperate! [[Entire]] [[period]], I [[seeing]] the replays and [[any]] [[period]] when it [[finish]] I miss it.. One of my [[preferable]] All [[times]] classics... --------------------------------------------- Result 3199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] The movie follows the events of the novel "Cel mai iubit dintre pamanteni"( could be translated as "The most beloved among humans" ), written by Marin Preda ( a very controversial book and movie), a novel which [[became]] something like The Bible or the story of Hamlet, very popular and hard to get, due to its satiric contents over the [[Communist]] regime. It represents the [[drama]] of the intellectual man, the humanist, in a "red" world. A [[movie]] filled with [[passion]], [[fear]], sexuality, all the [[great]] ingredients for a [[great]] [[movie]] [[recipe]].One of the [[greatest]] [[Romanian]] [[movies]],despite its psychological [[charge]](after all, it is an European [[movie]]). The movie follows the events of the novel "Cel mai iubit dintre pamanteni"( could be translated as "The most beloved among humans" ), written by Marin Preda ( a very controversial book and movie), a novel which [[was]] something like The Bible or the story of Hamlet, very popular and hard to get, due to its satiric contents over the [[Communism]] regime. It represents the [[tragedy]] of the intellectual man, the humanist, in a "red" world. A [[cinema]] filled with [[fascination]], [[scare]], sexuality, all the [[large]] ingredients for a [[wondrous]] [[movies]] [[recipes]].One of the [[larger]] [[Rumanian]] [[theater]],despite its psychological [[fees]](after all, it is an European [[film]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 3200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[When]] I [[heard]] that this movie was [[coming]] out the [[night]] before Halloween, I was very [[excited]]. When I [[found]] out that it was a [[book]], [[written]] in 1978, I had to read it before [[seeing]] the movie. I'm sure the movie [[would]] have been much different to me if I had not read the [[book]]. The [[writers]] actually did a good [[job]] of [[staying]] [[true]] to the main plot of the book, with [[minor]] [[differences]], naturally. I [[think]] the [[thing]] that disappointed me the most about the [[movie]] was Boyle [[playing]] the role of Col. I'm not a [[big]] fan of Boyle, and it [[seems]] that no [[matter]] what the mood during the movie, she's [[always]] trying to [[use]] her over-plumped [[lips]], and darkly makeup-ed eyes to make herself seem [[super]] sexy. [[Indeed]], I [[think]] that the [[movie]] held [[true]] to the [[genuine]] creepiness of the house. My [[favorite]] subplot was the [[Sheehan]] [[family]] (which is so [[weird]] b/c the [[son]] was [[killed]] in Iraq and in [[current]] [[events]] there is [[Casey]] [[Sheehan]] [[whose]] [[mother]] went on a [[huge]] anti-Iraq [[tirade]]). [[In]] the book, [[obviously]] the war was not Iraq, but rather, [[Vietnam]], and when the [[house]] turns on that video of the son in the helicopter, I was truly creeped out. [[Overall]], I was [[impressed]] with the [[movie]], in that it followed the [[book]] very well. [[Whenever]] I [[audition]] that this movie was [[forthcoming]] out the [[nuit]] before Halloween, I was very [[agitated]]. When I [[unearthed]] out that it was a [[cookbook]], [[authored]] in 1978, I had to read it before [[witnessing]] the movie. I'm sure the movie [[should]] have been much different to me if I had not read the [[books]]. The [[authors]] actually did a good [[labour]] of [[residing]] [[truthful]] to the main plot of the book, with [[underage]] [[variance]], naturally. I [[thought]] the [[stuff]] that disappointed me the most about the [[kino]] was Boyle [[replay]] the role of Col. I'm not a [[sizeable]] fan of Boyle, and it [[looks]] that no [[question]] what the mood during the movie, she's [[incessantly]] trying to [[using]] her over-plumped [[mouths]], and darkly makeup-ed eyes to make herself seem [[wondrous]] sexy. [[Admittedly]], I [[ideas]] that the [[movies]] held [[truthful]] to the [[truthful]] creepiness of the house. My [[prefers]] subplot was the [[Hsien]] [[families]] (which is so [[curious]] b/c the [[sons]] was [[kill]] in Iraq and in [[underway]] [[phenomena]] there is [[Kasi]] [[Hsien]] [[whom]] [[mothers]] went on a [[substantial]] anti-Iraq [[rant]]). [[Across]] the book, [[plainly]] the war was not Iraq, but rather, [[Hanoi]], and when the [[abode]] turns on that video of the son in the helicopter, I was truly creeped out. [[Whole]], I was [[surprising]] with the [[films]], in that it followed the [[books]] very well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I literally fell [[asleep]] 3 times watching this movie. Granted, it's [[Shakespeare]] and that takes a certain mindset to be interested or not. But this movie exceeds any barrier of [[long]] soliloquies and what not, that [[may]] prevent many from just not caring about a Shakespeare based story.

The [[largest]] [[roadblock]] to this [[production]] is the [[complete]] flatness of the [[characters]]. Often during character's interacting, it's [[nearly]] difficult to [[distinguish]] who's lines are who's. Granted, I [[believe]] this [[movie]] is dubbed in [[English]]. [[Certainly]] they could've [[obtained]] voice actors which could've added a [[bit]] more [[drama]] to these classic, [[literary]] lines.

It [[would]] be difficult to rate this movie [[greater]] than 1, [[although]] [[perhaps]] that's [[based]] on [[prejudices]] of [[perhaps]] age and what [[would]] [[seem]] a very low budget. [[Still]], it's [[absolutely]] painful and boring. If you [[insist]] on Hamlet, do yourself a favor and read the book again. 1/10 I literally fell [[behemoth]] 3 times watching this movie. Granted, it's [[Shakespearean]] and that takes a certain mindset to be interested or not. But this movie exceeds any barrier of [[lengthy]] soliloquies and what not, that [[maggio]] prevent many from just not caring about a Shakespeare based story.

The [[grandest]] [[barrera]] to this [[productivity]] is the [[finish]] flatness of the [[nature]]. Often during character's interacting, it's [[around]] difficult to [[discern]] who's lines are who's. Granted, I [[believing]] this [[filmmaking]] is dubbed in [[Frenchman]]. [[Unquestionably]] they could've [[profited]] voice actors which could've added a [[bite]] more [[tragedy]] to these classic, [[writing]] lines.

It [[could]] be difficult to rate this movie [[widest]] than 1, [[though]] [[potentially]] that's [[predicated]] on [[misconceptions]] of [[conceivably]] age and what [[ought]] [[appears]] a very low budget. [[However]], it's [[completely]] painful and boring. If you [[insists]] on Hamlet, do yourself a favor and read the book again. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Many]] of the American people would [[say]]...What??? to my opening comment. Yes I know that my comparison is without [[doubts]] an insult for the [[fans]] of the [[Master]] Akira Kurosawa, but if you [[analyze]] this movie, my [[comment]] is right. We have the peasant who goes to the town searching for help against a band of grasshoppers who wants to steal the harvest of the village. The great difference is the way that the story [[takes]]. Our samurais, a band of circus performers as in the original are a very complex mixture of personalities but at the [[end]] are what the [[village]] [[needs]], HEROES. Please watch again this [[incredible]] [[movie]] (the [[Seven]] Samurai, [[obviously]]) and find another [[movies]] who has [[stolen]] the story and tried to get the same [[magic]] [[effect]] than the Masterpiece of Akira Kurosawa. A tip is The 13th Warrior with [[Antonio]] Banderas, [[Michael]] Crichton [[copied]] the [[story]] to wrote his Best seller's, but he didn't [[found]] the [[third]] [[foot]] of the [[cat]]. [[Several]] of the American people would [[tell]]...What??? to my opening comment. Yes I know that my comparison is without [[suspicions]] an insult for the [[followers]] of the [[Masters]] Akira Kurosawa, but if you [[analyzing]] this movie, my [[observing]] is right. We have the peasant who goes to the town searching for help against a band of grasshoppers who wants to steal the harvest of the village. The great difference is the way that the story [[pick]]. Our samurais, a band of circus performers as in the original are a very complex mixture of personalities but at the [[ceases]] are what the [[villager]] [[needed]], HEROES. Please watch again this [[unthinkable]] [[kino]] (the [[Sept]] Samurai, [[apparently]]) and find another [[kino]] who has [[theft]] the story and tried to get the same [[witchcraft]] [[repercussions]] than the Masterpiece of Akira Kurosawa. A tip is The 13th Warrior with [[Jose]] Banderas, [[Michele]] Crichton [[photocopies]] the [[conte]] to wrote his Best seller's, but he didn't [[discoveries]] the [[terzi]] [[footing]] of the [[pussycat]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not usually one to slate a film . I try to see the good points and not focus on the bad ones, but in this case, there are almost no good points. In my opinion, if you're going to make something that bad, why bother? Part of the film is take up with shots of Anne's face while she breaths deeply, and violin music plays in the background. the other part is filled with poor and wooden acting. Rupert Penry Jones is expressionless. Jennifer Higham plays Anne's younger sister with modern mannerisms. Anne is portrayed as being meek and self effacing, which is fine at the beginning, but she stays the same all through the film, and you see no reason for captain Wentworth to fall in love with her. Overall the production lacks any sense of period, with too many mistakes to be overlooked, such as running out of the concert, kissing in the street, running about in the streets with no hat on (why was this scene in the film at all? the scene in the book was one of the most romantic scenes written.). To sum it up, a terrible film, very disappointing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] The British '[[heritage]] film' industry is out of control. There's nothing [[wrong]] with [[filming]] [[classic]] novels, but why [[must]] they all be [[filmed]] by talentless [[nobodies]]? This film [[rips]] the [[guts]] out of Orwell's [[tough]] [[novel]], [[turning]] it into a [[harmless]], fluffy [[romantic]] [[comedy]]. 'Aspidistra' may not be Orwell's best work, but no-one who reads it can forget its [[superb]] depiction of [[poverty]]. Orwell emphasises not only the cold and the hunger, but the humiliation of being poor. In the [[novel]], London is a bleak, grey, cold, heartless city, and Comstock prays for it to be blasted away by a squadron of bombers. But this film irons out anything that might be in any way disturbing, and creates instead a jolly nostalgic trip to charming 1930s London, in which everything is lit with shafts of golden sunlight, and even the slums of Lambeth are picturesque and filled with freshly scrubbed urchins and happy prostitutes. Comstock's poems about the sharp wind sweeping across the rubbish-strewn streets seem completely out of place in this chocolate-box world. Worst of all is the script's relentless bonhomie, ancient jokes, and clunking dialogue. It's so frustrating because Richard E. Grant is the perfect person to play Gordon Comstock, and the [[film]] is packed with great [[actors]]. But it's all for [[nothing]]. This film made me so [[angry]]! Britain's literary history is something to be proud of for its [[richness]], complexity and power. And what do we do with it? We [[employ]] [[bland]] nobodies to turn it into soft-centred, anodyne pap for people who [[want]] to feel that they are '[[getting]] some culture' while they [[drink]] their Horlicks and quietly doze off. The British '[[patrimony]] film' industry is out of control. There's nothing [[fallacious]] with [[photographing]] [[typical]] novels, but why [[ought]] they all be [[videotaped]] by talentless [[nameless]]? This film [[criticizes]] the [[innards]] out of Orwell's [[rigid]] [[newer]], [[turn]] it into a [[innocuous]], fluffy [[sentimental]] [[humour]]. 'Aspidistra' may not be Orwell's best work, but no-one who reads it can forget its [[sumptuous]] depiction of [[destitution]]. Orwell emphasises not only the cold and the hunger, but the humiliation of being poor. In the [[newer]], London is a bleak, grey, cold, heartless city, and Comstock prays for it to be blasted away by a squadron of bombers. But this film irons out anything that might be in any way disturbing, and creates instead a jolly nostalgic trip to charming 1930s London, in which everything is lit with shafts of golden sunlight, and even the slums of Lambeth are picturesque and filled with freshly scrubbed urchins and happy prostitutes. Comstock's poems about the sharp wind sweeping across the rubbish-strewn streets seem completely out of place in this chocolate-box world. Worst of all is the script's relentless bonhomie, ancient jokes, and clunking dialogue. It's so frustrating because Richard E. Grant is the perfect person to play Gordon Comstock, and the [[filmmaking]] is packed with great [[protagonists]]. But it's all for [[nada]]. This film made me so [[infuriated]]! Britain's literary history is something to be proud of for its [[affluence]], complexity and power. And what do we do with it? We [[hiring]] [[vapid]] nobodies to turn it into soft-centred, anodyne pap for people who [[desiring]] to feel that they are '[[obtain]] some culture' while they [[drinking]] their Horlicks and quietly doze off. --------------------------------------------- Result 3205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Certainly any others I have seen pale in comparison. The series gives balanced coverage to all theatres of operation. No one country is given undue credit for the Allied victory. Laurence Olivier brings great weight and dignity to his role as narrator. --------------------------------------------- Result 3206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Steven Spielberg (at 24) had already [[directed]] two [[superb]] [[episodes]] of a 1971 [[series]] [[called]] "The Psychiatrist", starring Roy Thinnes. One episode had been about an [[emotionally]] [[troubled]] 12-year old [[boy]] and the other was about a [[vibrant]] [[young]] [[man]] (Clu Gulager in his [[best]] performance) who is dying of [[cancer]]. Both [[episodes]] were [[stunning]], visually unlike [[anything]] [[else]] on TV, and [[emotionally]] [[complex]] and adult. The creators of "The [[Psychiatrist]]" were [[Richard]] Levinson and William [[Link]], who created "Columbo" and [[also]] produced its first season.

[[Peter]] Falk insisted on first [[rank]], [[experienced]] TV [[directors]] for the first season of "Columbo", like [[Bernard]] Kowalski and Jack Smight. But Falk agreed to Spielberg after [[watching]] [[part]] of the Clu Gulagher episode of "The Psychiatrist".

Spielberg says on the DVD of "Duel" that he [[loved]] Steven Bochco's "[[Murder]] by the [[Book]]" [[script]] ([[based]] on a Levinson/[[Link]] [[story]]), and he tried to make the production [[look]] like a million dollar feature, even [[thought]] he had a lot [[less]] money to [[work]] with.

This episode of "Columbo" is far more visually stylish and makes better use of the sound [[track]] and [[background]] music than [[almost]] any other "Columbo" episode, even though the series [[always]] [[used]] top directors. Spielberg manages to [[keep]] the [[great]] Falk and Cassidy from hamming it up too much, but both actors are still a lot of fun. Spielberg also gets [[fine]] supporting [[work]] from Martin Milner, Rosemary Forsyth and Barbara Colby. All the performances have a [[freshness]] and vitality about them. The only "Columbo" episode that was close to being as well directed is the "By Dawn's [[Early]] Light" episode with Patrick McGoohan ([[directed]] by Harvey Hart).

I think the two [[episodes]] of "The Psychiatrist" and this episode of "Columbo" [[suggest]] Spielberg hasn't [[developed]] technically all that much as a [[director]]. He was [[great]] from the beginning. In a "[[Combat]]!" [[DVD]] [[commentary]] of a 1962 episode [[guest]] starring [[Albert]] Salmi, Robert Altman [[says]] that episode was pretty much as good as he ever [[got]] as a [[director]]. [[Maybe]] the same is [[true]] of Spielberg. Steven Spielberg (at 24) had already [[aimed]] two [[delightful]] [[spells]] of a 1971 [[serials]] [[drew]] "The Psychiatrist", starring Roy Thinnes. One episode had been about an [[excitedly]] [[disturbed]] 12-year old [[boys]] and the other was about a [[lively]] [[youths]] [[bloke]] (Clu Gulager in his [[better]] performance) who is dying of [[tumours]]. Both [[bouts]] were [[breathtaking]], visually unlike [[something]] [[further]] on TV, and [[romantically]] [[thorny]] and adult. The creators of "The [[Shrink]]" were [[Richie]] Levinson and William [[Liaison]], who created "Columbo" and [[furthermore]] produced its first season.

[[Peters]] Falk insisted on first [[ranks]], [[undergone]] TV [[administrators]] for the first season of "Columbo", like [[Bernie]] Kowalski and Jack Smight. But Falk agreed to Spielberg after [[staring]] [[parties]] of the Clu Gulagher episode of "The Psychiatrist".

Spielberg says on the DVD of "Duel" that he [[cared]] Steven Bochco's "[[Murdering]] by the [[Books]]" [[screenplay]] ([[founded]] on a Levinson/[[Liaison]] [[storytelling]]), and he tried to make the production [[gaze]] like a million dollar feature, even [[thinking]] he had a lot [[lowest]] money to [[working]] with.

This episode of "Columbo" is far more visually stylish and makes better use of the sound [[tracking]] and [[context]] music than [[nearly]] any other "Columbo" episode, even though the series [[consistently]] [[employs]] top directors. Spielberg manages to [[preserve]] the [[prodigious]] Falk and Cassidy from hamming it up too much, but both actors are still a lot of fun. Spielberg also gets [[fined]] supporting [[jobs]] from Martin Milner, Rosemary Forsyth and Barbara Colby. All the performances have a [[coldness]] and vitality about them. The only "Columbo" episode that was close to being as well directed is the "By Dawn's [[Prematurely]] Light" episode with Patrick McGoohan ([[aimed]] by Harvey Hart).

I think the two [[bouts]] of "The Psychiatrist" and this episode of "Columbo" [[suggests]] Spielberg hasn't [[worded]] technically all that much as a [[superintendent]]. He was [[wondrous]] from the beginning. In a "[[Fight]]!" [[DVDS]] [[comment]] of a 1962 episode [[houseguest]] starring [[Alberto]] Salmi, Robert Altman [[asserts]] that episode was pretty much as good as he ever [[gets]] as a [[superintendent]]. [[Potentially]] the same is [[truthful]] of Spielberg. --------------------------------------------- Result 3207 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a disappointment!

This film seemed to be trying to copy 'cutting edge' comedy but the direction and the script was sloppy, sickly and sentimental in the worst film tradition. Jack Black's acting/role was self-indulgent and self-regarding... and the other characters were equally unmasking and uninteresting. The soundtrack was tedious. We are ( WERE) fans of Black but none of us did more than mange a forced titter for the duration. Why did he feel he needed to make this mistake?

We will not watch another of his films without reading reviews more carefully first!!

Was he drunk when he read the script before signing up for this drivel? --------------------------------------------- Result 3208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Wow. I LOVED the [[whole]] series, and am shocked at [[comments]] by people who [[thought]] it ended badly. Perhaps it waffled a bit in seasons 4 & 5, while remaining better than anything else on television. But 6 and particularly 6b were [[beautiful]] permutations on the [[themes]] [[developed]] in the more muscular first three seasons.

6B started with such a sombre mood and Janice's [[always]] [[keen]] [[insight]] into the [[family]] angst - that doom-filled [[line]] about knowing Tony's penchant for sitting and staring. [[Anyone]] who missed the implications of that for the rest of the series does not [[know]] Tony. Melfi's [[discomfort]] over the psychiatric study and its references to the sociopath's self-deluding sentimentality for pets and animals goes back to the first episodes of the series, say, with Tony's panic attack over the ducks leaving his pool and resonates with Phil's "wave bye-bye" line to his grandchildren before the coup de grace of the final episode (not to get into Chase's dark humour).

I [[could]] go on and on, but I'll just add that I thought the final show - starting with the opening strains of Vanilla Fudge to supply the ironic foreshadow ("You Keep Me Hangin' On") to the terminal moments where Tony fades back into complacency with his family in tow or blasts apart like AJ's SUV or Phil's head were, utterly, utterly [[PERFECT]]. The [[best]] [[TV]] ever.

Pretty good in a dying medium pathologically supplying the "jack-off fantasies" AJ derides (and then into which he promptly subsides). A tip of the pork pie to Mr. Chase. Wow. I LOVED the [[ensemble]] series, and am shocked at [[sightings]] by people who [[brainchild]] it ended badly. Perhaps it waffled a bit in seasons 4 & 5, while remaining better than anything else on television. But 6 and particularly 6b were [[wondrous]] permutations on the [[item]] [[elaborated]] in the more muscular first three seasons.

6B started with such a sombre mood and Janice's [[repeatedly]] [[impatient]] [[vision]] into the [[families]] angst - that doom-filled [[linea]] about knowing Tony's penchant for sitting and staring. [[Someone]] who missed the implications of that for the rest of the series does not [[savoir]] Tony. Melfi's [[disquiet]] over the psychiatric study and its references to the sociopath's self-deluding sentimentality for pets and animals goes back to the first episodes of the series, say, with Tony's panic attack over the ducks leaving his pool and resonates with Phil's "wave bye-bye" line to his grandchildren before the coup de grace of the final episode (not to get into Chase's dark humour).

I [[did]] go on and on, but I'll just add that I thought the final show - starting with the opening strains of Vanilla Fudge to supply the ironic foreshadow ("You Keep Me Hangin' On") to the terminal moments where Tony fades back into complacency with his family in tow or blasts apart like AJ's SUV or Phil's head were, utterly, utterly [[FAULTLESS]]. The [[better]] [[TELEVISIONS]] ever.

Pretty good in a dying medium pathologically supplying the "jack-off fantasies" AJ derides (and then into which he promptly subsides). A tip of the pork pie to Mr. Chase. --------------------------------------------- Result 3209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This [[movie]] was [[way]] too [[slow]] and predictable.I [[wish]] i could [[say]] more but i can't.If you [[enjoy]] [[action]]/adventure [[films]],this is not one to [[see]].I'd suggest you [[go]] see [[movies]] like;Behind Enemy Lines with Owen Wilson and Iron Eagle with [[Louis]] Gossett Jr. This [[filmmaking]] was [[ways]] too [[decelerate]] and predictable.I [[wanna]] i could [[tell]] more but i can't.If you [[enjoying]] [[actions]]/adventure [[movie]],this is not one to [[seeing]].I'd suggest you [[going]] see [[movie]] like;Behind Enemy Lines with Owen Wilson and Iron Eagle with [[Lewis]] Gossett Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 3210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The turgid pace of this movie numbs us to any shocks that it might provide. There was no real suspense. Most of the characters were insipid. The chesty Irish priest was as lame as the love interest. Interest is misleading. The girl that they chose to provide the film's sensuality might be better. The central conflict of the main character was uninvolving. This film is entirely devoid of positives. It is like a tedious exercise by someone who didn't want to go to the gym that day but did anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 3211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you didn't know better, you would believe the Christian moral majority in their preachy testimonial of the sins of the young, their questing for Satan, and that Hell was just brimming with Advanced Dungeons and Dragons fans.

None of these items bears one grain of truth, folks. This work does nothing but give the Southern Baptists a chance to take a breath, while the movie continues to spout their erroneous and alarmist views concerning a creative and original gaming system.

Tom Hanks contributes a stellar performance for this work, but even that wasn't enough to save it. It's crap. It's beneath crap. It is ignorance breeding ignorance and as such, it rates NOTHING from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Brilliant]] adaptation of the novel that made famous the relatives of Chilean President Salvador Allende killed. In the environment of a large estate that arises from the ruins, becoming a force to abuse and exploitation of outrage, a luxury estate for the benefit of the upstart Esteban Trueba and his undeserved family, the brilliant Danish director Bille August recreates, in micro, which at the time would be the process leading to the greatest infamy of his story to the hardened Chilean nation, and whose main character would Augusto Pinochet (Stephen [[similarities]] with it are inevitable: recall, as an example, that image of the senator with dark glasses that makes him the wink to the general to begin making the palace).

Bille August attends an exceptional cast in the Jeremy protruding Irons, whose character changes from arrogance and extreme cruelty, the hard lesson that life always brings us to almost force us to change. In Esteban fully applies the law of resonance, with great wisdom, Solomon describes in these words:"The things that freckles are the same punishment that will serve you."

[[Unforgettable]] Glenn Close playing splint, the tainted sister of Stephen, whose sin, driven by loneliness, spiritual and platonic love was the wife of his cruel snowy brother. Meryl Streep also brilliant, a woman whose name came to him like a glove Clara. With telekinetic powers, cognitive and mediumistic, this hardened woman, loyal to his blunt, conservative husband, is an indicator of character and self-control that we wish for ourselves and for all human beings.

Every character is a portrait of virtuosity (as Blanca worthy rebel leader Pedro Segundo unhappy ...) or a portrait of humiliation, like Stephen Jr., the bastard child of Senator, who serves as an instrument for the return of the boomerang.

The film moves the bowels, we recreated some facts that should not ever be repeated, but that absurdly still happen (Colombia is a sad example) and another reminder that, against all, life is wonderful because there are always people like Isabel Allende and immortalize just Bille August. [[Wondrous]] adaptation of the novel that made famous the relatives of Chilean President Salvador Allende killed. In the environment of a large estate that arises from the ruins, becoming a force to abuse and exploitation of outrage, a luxury estate for the benefit of the upstart Esteban Trueba and his undeserved family, the brilliant Danish director Bille August recreates, in micro, which at the time would be the process leading to the greatest infamy of his story to the hardened Chilean nation, and whose main character would Augusto Pinochet (Stephen [[analogies]] with it are inevitable: recall, as an example, that image of the senator with dark glasses that makes him the wink to the general to begin making the palace).

Bille August attends an exceptional cast in the Jeremy protruding Irons, whose character changes from arrogance and extreme cruelty, the hard lesson that life always brings us to almost force us to change. In Esteban fully applies the law of resonance, with great wisdom, Solomon describes in these words:"The things that freckles are the same punishment that will serve you."

[[Eventful]] Glenn Close playing splint, the tainted sister of Stephen, whose sin, driven by loneliness, spiritual and platonic love was the wife of his cruel snowy brother. Meryl Streep also brilliant, a woman whose name came to him like a glove Clara. With telekinetic powers, cognitive and mediumistic, this hardened woman, loyal to his blunt, conservative husband, is an indicator of character and self-control that we wish for ourselves and for all human beings.

Every character is a portrait of virtuosity (as Blanca worthy rebel leader Pedro Segundo unhappy ...) or a portrait of humiliation, like Stephen Jr., the bastard child of Senator, who serves as an instrument for the return of the boomerang.

The film moves the bowels, we recreated some facts that should not ever be repeated, but that absurdly still happen (Colombia is a sad example) and another reminder that, against all, life is wonderful because there are always people like Isabel Allende and immortalize just Bille August. --------------------------------------------- Result 3213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is yet another depressing and boring film about AIDS and tragedy. It begins very uneventful and predictable and continues throughout the movie. I kept waiting for it to pick-up, but unfortunately it never did. The acting is fair, but the script needs A LOT of work. And if you're looking for the nudity, don't waste your time with these not so hot actors. Due to the poor sound quality and lack of captions, I missed 1/8 of the movie. If you have never seen over five gay films, or have recently come to terms with being gay, you may find this film interesting, otherwise it's your run-of-the-mill low budget movie. It ranks as one of the worst gay films I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 3214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember when I was five and my parents thought it was a regular cartoon movie....except when the bras and bullets started flying. I have to agree this movie will make anyone and everyone upset because it is set to discriminate everyone and anyone....but the truth is it is funny as hell as it is deep. I recommend this to anyone who likes cult classics. Also try Fritz the cat and the NINE Lives of Fritz the Cat. If I'm correct Ralph Bashki did that movie too.It involves a cat that goes through hard times with family, streets,jobs , etc. When I was old enough I rented all of these movies out. Because Coonskin was an offensive title during that era it was also labeled as Street Fighter. Ralph Bashki also made Cool World starring a very young Brad Pitt. Heavy traffic was another cartoon that dealt with the street life of a young man. --------------------------------------------- Result 3215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] It's [[hard]] to [[praise]] this film [[much]]. The CGI for the dragon was well [[done]], but [[lacked]] proper modelling for light and [[shadow]]. Also, the same footage is used [[endlessly]] of the dragon stomping through [[corridors]] which [[becomes]] slightly [[tedious]].

I was [[amazed]] to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting [[credits]], [[wondering]] what an ex-Emperor of the [[Roman]] [[Empire]] was doing acting in this [[film]]! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it [[must]] be an alias, and can one blame him for [[using]] one if he [[appears]] in this [[stinker]].

The [[story]] might been interesting, but the acting is [[flat]], and [[direction]] is [[tedious]]. [[If]] you [[MUST]] watch this film, [[go]] [[around]] to your friend's [[house]] and [[get]] [[drunk]] while doing so - then it'll be [[enjoyable]]. It's [[laborious]] to [[applaud]] this film [[very]]. The CGI for the dragon was well [[completed]], but [[lack]] proper modelling for light and [[shading]]. Also, the same footage is used [[perpetually]] of the dragon stomping through [[passageways]] which [[become]] slightly [[monotonous]].

I was [[surprised]] to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting [[credence]], [[asked]] what an ex-Emperor of the [[Romain]] [[Reich]] was doing acting in this [[filmmaking]]! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it [[needs]] be an alias, and can one blame him for [[utilizing]] one if he [[transpires]] in this [[tosser]].

The [[conte]] might been interesting, but the acting is [[apartment]], and [[directions]] is [[tiresome]]. [[Though]] you [[GOTTA]] watch this film, [[going]] [[throughout]] to your friend's [[maison]] and [[got]] [[drunken]] while doing so - then it'll be [[congenial]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I always get frustrated by [[films]] that were [[obviously]] [[written]] by one gender. [[Especially]] when they [[obviously]] don't do enough research to find out when something not only doesn't ring [[true]], but [[rings]] blatently false.

The scene I am remembering is the one in the [[bathroom]] where Jack tells his football teammates that he [[got]] Diane pregnant. In no [[way]], shape, or [[form]] [[would]] a [[guy]] ever [[cheer]] another [[guy]] [[getting]] a [[girl]] [[pregnant]] in [[high]] school. They [[might]] [[cheer]] about the [[guy]] having [[sex]] with the [[hot]] cheerleader, but I can also [[guarantee]] that the first the football team [[heard]] about it would not be at a urinal.

It was [[obvious]] that this film didn't [[take]] itself so [[seriously]], and it wasn't [[hideously]] bad, but [[come]] on! I always get frustrated by [[cinematography]] that were [[naturally]] [[writes]] by one gender. [[Principally]] when they [[naturally]] don't do enough research to find out when something not only doesn't ring [[truthful]], but [[piercings]] blatently false.

The scene I am remembering is the one in the [[loo]] where Jack tells his football teammates that he [[ai]] Diane pregnant. In no [[ways]], shape, or [[forms]] [[could]] a [[man]] ever [[cheerfulness]] another [[man]] [[obtaining]] a [[dame]] [[expectant]] in [[highest]] school. They [[probability]] [[cheerfulness]] about the [[buddy]] having [[sexuality]] with the [[sexy]] cheerleader, but I can also [[secured]] that the first the football team [[audition]] about it would not be at a urinal.

It was [[unmistakable]] that this film didn't [[taking]] itself so [[profoundly]], and it wasn't [[frightfully]] bad, but [[arrived]] on! --------------------------------------------- Result 3217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] My [[rating]] refers to the [[first]] 4 Seasons of [[Stargate]] SG-1 which are wonderfully fresh, creative and addicting. When the cast stepped through the [[gate]], you never knew what lay on the other side! Starting [[around]] Season 5, the show [[took]] a different focus - [[still]] good, but different.

The series follows the [[adventures]] of a team of humans (and one alien) who [[regularly]] [[venture]] into a planetary [[transport]] [[device]] called the "Stargate". The backstory of the series is based on the [[characters]] and [[events]] of the movie "Stargate" in which the [[device]] is discovered during an archaeological [[dig]] in [[Egypt]].

The [[episodes]] are light (innocent and [[easy]] to watch) and very [[creative]]. [[Many]] of the inventive [[stories]] could easily have been made into [[great]] sci-fi [[movies]] of their own. What [[happens]] next was [[always]] [[unpredictable]].

The [[characters]] on which the [[show]] rests are [[also]] well-defined and [[brilliantly]] [[performed]]. Their tone is [[serious]], but the dialog is flowered with [[incredible]] [[wit]] and humor. They are [[simply]] [[fun]] to watch.

Starting somewhere [[around]] Season 5, the series started to evolve into a continuing storyline based on [[fighting]] a single [[foe]] (the Goa'uld, then the Ori). The plots become more [[complex]] (a lot more political/strategic oriented) and interdependent. The [[characters]] were still as [[great]] as ever but the [[show]] was [[different]] in nature.

One thing that [[must]] be [[mentioned]] is to watch the [[episodes]] that commemorated the 100th and 200th [[episodes]]. They are [[simply]] can't-miss shows. They [[exhibit]] the creative and wildly [[humorous]] [[genius]] that carried the [[series]] through 10 seasons.

[[If]] you are a sci-fi fan, watch a few episodes of the [[first]] 4 Seasons and you'll [[likely]] be [[hooked]]. [[If]] you [[like]] [[evolving]] [[story]] lines between two opposing sides, you have 10 seasons of shows to look forward to. My [[ratings]] refers to the [[fiirst]] 4 Seasons of [[Porte]] SG-1 which are wonderfully fresh, creative and addicting. When the cast stepped through the [[door]], you never knew what lay on the other side! Starting [[about]] Season 5, the show [[picked]] a different focus - [[nevertheless]] good, but different.

The series follows the [[pranks]] of a team of humans (and one alien) who [[systematically]] [[ventures]] into a planetary [[carriage]] [[appliances]] called the "Stargate". The backstory of the series is based on the [[features]] and [[phenomena]] of the movie "Stargate" in which the [[appliance]] is discovered during an archaeological [[excavation]] in [[Egyptians]].

The [[spells]] are light (innocent and [[easier]] to watch) and very [[imaginative]]. [[Several]] of the inventive [[tales]] could easily have been made into [[remarkable]] sci-fi [[cinematography]] of their own. What [[arises]] next was [[permanently]] [[erratic]].

The [[attribute]] on which the [[displayed]] rests are [[similarly]] well-defined and [[brightly]] [[perform]]. Their tone is [[gravest]], but the dialog is flowered with [[striking]] [[waite]] and humor. They are [[merely]] [[funny]] to watch.

Starting somewhere [[about]] Season 5, the series started to evolve into a continuing storyline based on [[battling]] a single [[nemesis]] (the Goa'uld, then the Ori). The plots become more [[tricky]] (a lot more political/strategic oriented) and interdependent. The [[characteristic]] were still as [[large]] as ever but the [[showing]] was [[various]] in nature.

One thing that [[needs]] be [[talked]] is to watch the [[bouts]] that commemorated the 100th and 200th [[bouts]]. They are [[merely]] can't-miss shows. They [[exposition]] the creative and wildly [[comic]] [[genie]] that carried the [[serials]] through 10 seasons.

[[Unless]] you are a sci-fi fan, watch a few episodes of the [[fiirst]] 4 Seasons and you'll [[perhaps]] be [[hook]]. [[Unless]] you [[loves]] [[evolve]] [[narratives]] lines between two opposing sides, you have 10 seasons of shows to look forward to. --------------------------------------------- Result 3218 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Short Version: [[Seed]] isn't worthless. It's just derivative and inferior. And [[soulless]].

[[Long]] Version: If you have never seen any of the films comprising the vaguely-defined "psychological horror" genre, this movie will probably [[melt]] your face off. Maybe not, but it will give you a good burn. The opening montage of real animal abuse will be sufficient to open your eyes to possibilities of brutality-on-video, and the (only) [[memorable]] gore scene later in the film will perhaps be more than you can handle. The [[climax]] will play with your emotions in a way that perhaps no other film has.

But that's if you don't have much experience with the genre. If you've seen the real thing..."August Underground's Penance," for example, you will, as I did, find it terribly difficult to stay awake until the end of the film.

Other reviewers have compared this to the video nasties of old. I understand this comparison. Like the video nasties, "Seed" is more violent than a mainstream horror film and less subtle. But the reason the video nasties are still known to us is not only for the above reasons--those that are still popular had something special. Permit me to be ambiguous, I think you will understand: those that have stuck around had "soul".

Take this quote from Gabriele Crisanti, director of "Burial Ground," on an interview on the new-ish DVD: "...we will never have more films like these, because today, technology has surpassed imagination. And technology is cold. So many things will disappear because small films like these won't be produced anymore. Today we have great, exceptional tricks that are very expensive, but they are cold. Today a horror, a terror film of this kind costs more than a million dollars. These films were not so expensive...they are real effects, made with our hands".

Perhaps it is wrong to take the comparison to old school horror so seriously. But Crisanti has hit the nail on the head. Even at their most seemingly exploitational, the best of the video nasties were pursuing a primitive "truth." And this is where Boll falls [[short]]. It's like he's seen the movies and not understood them. Everything on the checklist is there...BS about "making a statement about humanity," an obscene torture scene, etc. But it is, as Crisanti puts it, "cold." The gore is all CGI. The whole thing feels like scenes pieced together from other movies of various genres. And the pacing is sooooo slow. Man, so slow.

Another interesting note: the one gore scene really reminded me of a video game.

Anyway, enough BS. Weak movie. Short Version: [[Seeds]] isn't worthless. It's just derivative and inferior. And [[heartless]].

[[Longer]] Version: If you have never seen any of the films comprising the vaguely-defined "psychological horror" genre, this movie will probably [[smelting]] your face off. Maybe not, but it will give you a good burn. The opening montage of real animal abuse will be sufficient to open your eyes to possibilities of brutality-on-video, and the (only) [[unforgettable]] gore scene later in the film will perhaps be more than you can handle. The [[pinnacle]] will play with your emotions in a way that perhaps no other film has.

But that's if you don't have much experience with the genre. If you've seen the real thing..."August Underground's Penance," for example, you will, as I did, find it terribly difficult to stay awake until the end of the film.

Other reviewers have compared this to the video nasties of old. I understand this comparison. Like the video nasties, "Seed" is more violent than a mainstream horror film and less subtle. But the reason the video nasties are still known to us is not only for the above reasons--those that are still popular had something special. Permit me to be ambiguous, I think you will understand: those that have stuck around had "soul".

Take this quote from Gabriele Crisanti, director of "Burial Ground," on an interview on the new-ish DVD: "...we will never have more films like these, because today, technology has surpassed imagination. And technology is cold. So many things will disappear because small films like these won't be produced anymore. Today we have great, exceptional tricks that are very expensive, but they are cold. Today a horror, a terror film of this kind costs more than a million dollars. These films were not so expensive...they are real effects, made with our hands".

Perhaps it is wrong to take the comparison to old school horror so seriously. But Crisanti has hit the nail on the head. Even at their most seemingly exploitational, the best of the video nasties were pursuing a primitive "truth." And this is where Boll falls [[concise]]. It's like he's seen the movies and not understood them. Everything on the checklist is there...BS about "making a statement about humanity," an obscene torture scene, etc. But it is, as Crisanti puts it, "cold." The gore is all CGI. The whole thing feels like scenes pieced together from other movies of various genres. And the pacing is sooooo slow. Man, so slow.

Another interesting note: the one gore scene really reminded me of a video game.

Anyway, enough BS. Weak movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Still]] the [[definitive]] program about the Second World [[War]], The [[World]] [[At]] War isn't just [[long]], but [[also]] very [[informative]]. The series [[contains]] 26 [[episodes]] (each episode lasts for about 45 min.), and [[includes]] the [[events]] leading up to and following in the wake of the [[war]]. Most [[episodes]] are about the [[war]] in Europe, and there are [[several]] [[episodes]] about the [[war]] in the [[Pacific]]. Other episodes [[include]] information about the wars in [[Africa]], [[Burma]], the Atlantic and the [[home]] fronts of [[Germany]], [[Great]] Britain, [[United]] States and Soviet Union. There is one episode that's dedicated to the Holocaust. The series starts off with the episode A [[New]] Germany (1933-1939), and tells about the [[rise]] of the Nazis in [[Germany]] and [[German]] territorial [[gains]] [[prior]] to the [[outbreak]] of war. The series [[ends]] with the episode [[Remember]]; the war's [[influence]] in a post-war world. [[Remember]] is a [[fitting]] episode to [[end]] this great [[program]]. [[Every]] episode [[begins]] with a short introduction and then with opening [[credits]]. The [[credits]] are [[accompanied]] by a [[powerful]] [[music]] [[theme]]. There are [[many]] [[fitting]] [[music]] [[pieces]] [[throughout]] the [[series]]. Each episode is like a mini-film. The footage is [[fantastic]], and so is the way it was put together. [[In]] addition, some of the footage is in [[color]]. The [[information]] included also makes the [[episodes]] memorable and [[entertaining]].

The [[series]] was produced by Jeremy Isaacs for Thames [[Television]] ([[UK]]). Commissioned in 1969, it [[took]] four [[years]] to produce, such was the [[depth]] of its [[research]]. The [[series]] was narrated by Laurence Olivier (one of the most [[famous]] and revered [[actors]] of the 20th century). The [[series]] interviewed leading [[members]] of the [[Allied]] and Axis campaigns, including eyewitness accounts by civilians, [[enlisted]] men, [[officers]] and politicians, amongst them [[Albert]] Speer, Karl Donitz, Jimmy [[Stewart]], Bill Mauldin, [[Curtis]] LeMay, [[Lord]] Mountbatten, Alger Hiss, Toshikazu Kase, Arthur Harris, [[Charles]] Sweeney, Paul Tibbets, Traudl Junge and historian [[Stephen]] Ambrose. Jeremy Isaacs [[says]] in "The Making of The [[World]] at [[War]]" that he sought to interview, not necessarily the surviving big names, but their aides and assistants. The most [[difficult]] [[subject]] to locate and persuade to be interviewed, [[according]] to Isaacs, was Heinrich Himmler's adjutant, Karl [[Wolff]]. The latter [[admitted]] to witnessing a large-scale [[execution]] in Himmler's [[presence]].

The World At War is often considered to be the definitive television history of the Second World War. Some consider it the finest example of the documentary form. In a list of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, The World at War ranked 19th. The program has everything that the viewer needs to know about the war. After watching a few episodes I liked the series so much that I tried to watch the remaining episodes one after the other. I've seen some of them several times. There are two other great documentary series that I know of that may be of interest to the viewer. One is called The Great War (1964) that's about World War I. The other is called Cold War (1998) that's about the Cold War obviously. [[However]] the [[definite]] program about the Second World [[Wars]], The [[Monde]] [[For]] War isn't just [[longer]], but [[apart]] very [[informational]]. The series [[consists]] 26 [[bouts]] (each episode lasts for about 45 min.), and [[involves]] the [[happenings]] leading up to and following in the wake of the [[wars]]. Most [[spells]] are about the [[wars]] in Europe, and there are [[numerous]] [[bouts]] about the [[warfare]] in the [[Peace]]. Other episodes [[containing]] information about the wars in [[Continents]], [[Myanmar]], the Atlantic and the [[dwellings]] fronts of [[Germans]], [[Fantastic]] Britain, [[Unified]] States and Soviet Union. There is one episode that's dedicated to the Holocaust. The series starts off with the episode A [[Novel]] Germany (1933-1939), and tells about the [[augmentation]] of the Nazis in [[Germania]] and [[Germany]] territorial [[profit]] [[earlier]] to the [[outburst]] of war. The series [[terminates]] with the episode [[Remembers]]; the war's [[repercussions]] in a post-war world. [[Remind]] is a [[fit]] episode to [[terminate]] this great [[curriculum]]. [[Entire]] episode [[beginning]] with a short introduction and then with opening [[credit]]. The [[credit]] are [[accompanying]] by a [[emphatic]] [[musicians]] [[subject]]. There are [[numerous]] [[fixture]] [[musica]] [[slices]] [[in]] the [[serials]]. Each episode is like a mini-film. The footage is [[wondrous]], and so is the way it was put together. [[During]] addition, some of the footage is in [[coloration]]. The [[info]] included also makes the [[spells]] memorable and [[amusing]].

The [[serials]] was produced by Jeremy Isaacs for Thames [[Tv]] ([[BRITAIN]]). Commissioned in 1969, it [[taken]] four [[ages]] to produce, such was the [[depths]] of its [[researches]]. The [[serial]] was narrated by Laurence Olivier (one of the most [[renowned]] and revered [[actresses]] of the 20th century). The [[serial]] interviewed leading [[member]] of the [[Ally]] and Axis campaigns, including eyewitness accounts by civilians, [[volunteered]] men, [[agents]] and politicians, amongst them [[Hugh]] Speer, Karl Donitz, Jimmy [[Stuart]], Bill Mauldin, [[Curtiss]] LeMay, [[God]] Mountbatten, Alger Hiss, Toshikazu Kase, Arthur Harris, [[Karel]] Sweeney, Paul Tibbets, Traudl Junge and historian [[Steven]] Ambrose. Jeremy Isaacs [[said]] in "The Making of The [[Global]] at [[Wars]]" that he sought to interview, not necessarily the surviving big names, but their aides and assistants. The most [[problematic]] [[topic]] to locate and persuade to be interviewed, [[depending]] to Isaacs, was Heinrich Himmler's adjutant, Karl [[Wolfe]]. The latter [[conceded]] to witnessing a large-scale [[executing]] in Himmler's [[participation]].

The World At War is often considered to be the definitive television history of the Second World War. Some consider it the finest example of the documentary form. In a list of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, The World at War ranked 19th. The program has everything that the viewer needs to know about the war. After watching a few episodes I liked the series so much that I tried to watch the remaining episodes one after the other. I've seen some of them several times. There are two other great documentary series that I know of that may be of interest to the viewer. One is called The Great War (1964) that's about World War I. The other is called Cold War (1998) that's about the Cold War obviously. --------------------------------------------- Result 3220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I just watched this [[movie]] on Starz. [[Let]] me go through a few things i thought [[could]] have been [[improved]]; the acting, writing, directing, special effects, camera crew, sound, and lighting. It also seemed as [[though]] the writers had no [[idea]] anything that had to do with the movie. Apparently back in 2007, when the dollar was stronger you could buy a super advanced stealth bomber that could go completely invisible for $75 million. Now-a-days those things cost about $3 billion and they cant go invisible. Apparently you can fly from the US to the middle east in an hour. There was a completely random lesbian scene, which I didn't mind, but it seemed like a lame attempt to get more guys to see it. The camera would randomly zoom in on actors and skip to random scenes. Oh yeah, since its a Steven Segal movie, its [[predictable]] as hell. All in all I rank it right up there with [[Snakes]] on a Plane. I just watched this [[filmmaking]] on Starz. [[Allowing]] me go through a few things i thought [[did]] have been [[improving]]; the acting, writing, directing, special effects, camera crew, sound, and lighting. It also seemed as [[despite]] the writers had no [[thought]] anything that had to do with the movie. Apparently back in 2007, when the dollar was stronger you could buy a super advanced stealth bomber that could go completely invisible for $75 million. Now-a-days those things cost about $3 billion and they cant go invisible. Apparently you can fly from the US to the middle east in an hour. There was a completely random lesbian scene, which I didn't mind, but it seemed like a lame attempt to get more guys to see it. The camera would randomly zoom in on actors and skip to random scenes. Oh yeah, since its a Steven Segal movie, its [[foreseeable]] as hell. All in all I rank it right up there with [[Serpents]] on a Plane. --------------------------------------------- Result 3221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This cordial comedy confronts a few bizarre characters. Especially, of course, the two leading characters. Jack Lemmon plays Felix, a hypochondriac whose wife lost him because she couldn't stand his cleaning and cooking attacks any longer. So he tries to kill himself but every attempt fails. Walter Matthau plays Oscar, his friend, an untidy, unreliable sports-reporter who lives in divorce from his ex-wife in a bachelor apartment. He offers his distressed friend Felix a new home in his apartment. And soon the trouble begins because two such contrary characters can't live together for a long time. Felix turns Oscar's disorderly flat into a clean exhibition flat. He cleans and cooks the whole time. After a short while, Oscar feels persecution mania ... Filmed in a theatrical way and excellent acted. Above all, Jack Lemmon's play is wonderful. He is the perfect clown. He makes us laugh but in a tragi-comic way. Look for the wonderful scene when both men invite their two female neighbours for supper, because Oscar has to touch something more softer than a bowling-ball. While he is preparing the drinks, Felix sits with the two young ladies in the living-room. To get out of this embarrassing situation, he starts to talk about the weather. A minute later, he changes the subject and talks about his ex-wife and children. Suddenly he begins to weep and when Oscar comes back with the drinks, there are three weeping people in the living-room. The film is full of such amusing and at the same time touching scenes. An intelligent, entertaining comedy with much heart. 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 3222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] [[In]] modern day Eastern Europe life is hard and for young women prostitution is one of the only [[career]] [[options]] and one taken, reluctantly, by Melania. She attracts the attentions of an American, Seymour, who becomes obsessed with her, paying more and more money for time with her until he eventually wants to buy her outright. She has two pimps with differring emotional attachments to her and she is generally [[passed]] [[around]] like some piece of [[baggage]] with no feelings of her own. However, we are in "modern art-house cinema" territory, so conventions like narrative structure, lighting the subject so it can be seen, camera techniques that add to rather than distract from the action and a vaguely consistent plot can all be abandoned. Much of the time I had no idea what was supposed to be happening and very rarely did I care. People began leaving the screening almost before the last latecomers had arrived and I don't think I've ever seen so many people walk out.

Images are important to the director - characters slowly emerge from or disappear into a dark screen, we get long lingering shots of nothing in particular and one sex scene takes place in infra-red. In fact for such an unconventional film the sex scenes were remarkably ordinary; missionary positions between naked people in bed abounded and there were no drugs or related weirdness. But perhaps these days being ordinary is unconventional.

On the whole, almost entirely without [[merit]].

[[Onto]] modern day Eastern Europe life is hard and for young women prostitution is one of the only [[carrera]] [[alternates]] and one taken, reluctantly, by Melania. She attracts the attentions of an American, Seymour, who becomes obsessed with her, paying more and more money for time with her until he eventually wants to buy her outright. She has two pimps with differring emotional attachments to her and she is generally [[adopted]] [[about]] like some piece of [[suitcases]] with no feelings of her own. However, we are in "modern art-house cinema" territory, so conventions like narrative structure, lighting the subject so it can be seen, camera techniques that add to rather than distract from the action and a vaguely consistent plot can all be abandoned. Much of the time I had no idea what was supposed to be happening and very rarely did I care. People began leaving the screening almost before the last latecomers had arrived and I don't think I've ever seen so many people walk out.

Images are important to the director - characters slowly emerge from or disappear into a dark screen, we get long lingering shots of nothing in particular and one sex scene takes place in infra-red. In fact for such an unconventional film the sex scenes were remarkably ordinary; missionary positions between naked people in bed abounded and there were no drugs or related weirdness. But perhaps these days being ordinary is unconventional.

On the whole, almost entirely without [[deserve]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 3223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Normally]], I don't watch [[action]] movies because of the fact that they are [[usually]] all pretty similar. This [[movie]] did have [[many]] stereotypical [[action]] [[movie]] scenes, but the [[characters]] and the originality of the film's premise made it [[much]] easier to watch. David Duchovny bended his [[normal]] acting [[approach]], which was [[great]] to [[see]]. Angelina [[Jolie]], of course, was [[beautiful]] and did [[great]] acting. [[Great]] cast all [[together]]. A [[must]] see for people bored with the same [[old]] [[action]] [[movie]]. [[Traditionally]], I don't watch [[measures]] movies because of the fact that they are [[ordinarily]] all pretty similar. This [[film]] did have [[innumerable]] stereotypical [[activity]] [[cinematography]] scenes, but the [[hallmarks]] and the originality of the film's premise made it [[very]] easier to watch. David Duchovny bended his [[ordinary]] acting [[approaches]], which was [[wondrous]] to [[behold]]. Angelina [[Julie]], of course, was [[leggy]] and did [[wondrous]] acting. [[Huge]] cast all [[jointly]]. A [[should]] see for people bored with the same [[vecchio]] [[efforts]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Touching and sad [[movie]]. Portrays the [[trials]] and [[tribulations]] of a writer trying to [[come]] to terms with paralysis caused by a cycling [[accident]]. The [[film]] centers on his relationship with his married lover, whom he is [[often]] very [[hostile]] [[towards]], and his interactions with other [[accident]] victims, [[particularly]] a black down-and-out and a white-supremacist biker. The film is often [[humorous]], [[often]] [[sad]], and [[always]] believable. Get out the box of kleenex and watch this on a cosy Sunday afternoon with your partner. Touching and sad [[films]]. Portrays the [[lawsuits]] and [[sufferings]] of a writer trying to [[coming]] to terms with paralysis caused by a cycling [[incident]]. The [[films]] centers on his relationship with his married lover, whom he is [[normally]] very [[hostility]] [[circa]], and his interactions with other [[incident]] victims, [[especially]] a black down-and-out and a white-supremacist biker. The film is often [[humor]], [[generally]] [[deplorable]], and [[repeatedly]] believable. Get out the box of kleenex and watch this on a cosy Sunday afternoon with your partner. --------------------------------------------- Result 3225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A guy [[desperate]] for [[action]] attempts to [[hit]] on a [[gorgeous]] [[girl]] in a bus. She [[refuses]] him, but when he runs after someone who [[tries]] to [[steal]] her [[purse]] they [[get]] together anyway. And there it [[starts]] - a [[relation]] that is [[slightly]] [[tainted]] by the [[fact]] that she is a jealous and neurotic superhero. It can't be a secret that [[things]] between them are going to be [[problematic]].

[[In]] short, a story that [[could]] promise to [[grow]] out into a cool [[film]]. And IMO, it [[succeeds]] at being a nice [[film]]. It's no [[masterpiece]], but it had me in [[tears]] from [[laughing]] on more than one occasion - the two lead characters twirl around each other in a [[crazy]] love [[fest]] that is, [[even]] with the superhero [[thing]] going, [[believable]].

[[So]]. Thin story, but [[worked]] out [[really]] [[funny]] and [[thus]] worthy of [[cinema]] [[time]].

7 out of 10 broken hearts A guy [[hopeless]] for [[actions]] attempts to [[slugged]] on a [[wondrous]] [[girls]] in a bus. She [[rejects]] him, but when he runs after someone who [[attempts]] to [[shoplifted]] her [[backpack]] they [[gets]] together anyway. And there it [[begins]] - a [[relationship]] that is [[modestly]] [[sullied]] by the [[facto]] that she is a jealous and neurotic superhero. It can't be a secret that [[items]] between them are going to be [[arduous]].

[[For]] short, a story that [[did]] promise to [[growing]] out into a cool [[kino]]. And IMO, it [[succeed]] at being a nice [[cinematography]]. It's no [[centerpiece]], but it had me in [[rip]] from [[kidding]] on more than one occasion - the two lead characters twirl around each other in a [[demented]] love [[festival]] that is, [[yet]] with the superhero [[stuff]] going, [[credible]].

[[Consequently]]. Thin story, but [[acted]] out [[genuinely]] [[humorous]] and [[then]] worthy of [[theaters]] [[period]].

7 out of 10 broken hearts --------------------------------------------- Result 3226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Imagine if you could bring things back to life with just one touch" As soon as I first heard that, my attention was locked on the Trailer, And after the First Episode I found my self in love with this show. A Modern day Fairy Tale that Brings my Spirits up and Holds my attention throughout the entire show. I think the Acting and Casting is just perfect, Each Character brings Something Unique to the show that adds to it's perfection. Even the one time Villains manage to overflow with A Unique sense, From the Bee Man to the Guy who can Swallow Kittens, they never seem to let me down. And the Deaths that would Normally lead to a Depressing Moment often end up being Purely Comical (Such as an Exploding Scratch & Sniff book)

Even with the large amount of Crime shows we have now a days, Daisies is one of the few that really stands out from the rest, Being not just a Mystery but a love story, Comedy and a Fairy Tale with a hint of Drama all baked into one Wonderful pie.....err show.

What really shocked me was the fact that it was on ABC, For Years I never had a reason to turn to ABC, But this brought me back each week with a Smile on my face. It was as if Pushing Daisies Brought ABC back to life for me. But just like that, after two seasons, A few Awards, A Large Fan Base and Positive Responses from Critics the show has been dropped. It seems as though Ned has Touched ABC again and forever killed it for me. I will always be a fan of this show though, And I Recommend this to anyone who likes a lot of talking and a lot of love from the shows they watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This movie is [[really]] [[bad]]. The acting is [[plain]] [[awful]] except Michael Ironside. I don't get the [[story]]. Richard Grieco is the only [[survivor]] after a [[fight]] between two Mc-gangs. He [[comes]] to a [[town]] and suddenly he is choosened to fight against the [[bad]] people who [[wants]] indian-land. [[At]] the cover it [[said]] he was a indian himself that [[returned]] too his home-town, I didn't [[hear]] that in the [[movie]], if so it wasn't [[clear]].

Richard Grieco was one hell of a [[bad]] [[actor]]. [[Stiff]] and [[ugly]]. He [[said]] his lines [[like]] it too. And we wouldn't [[talk]] about Sean [[Young]], she hasn' been any of my favourite [[actors]] but in this [[movie]] she plays a indian [[women]] who [[falls]] in love with [[Bolt]] (Grieco). She is [[awful]].

When I [[rented]] it I choosed between this and Subterfuge with [[Amanda]] [[Pays]]. I choosed this one because of Michael Ironside was in the [[cast]]. Maybe I should have [[taken]] Subterfuge.

Don't see this [[unless]] you [[think]] [[Richard]] Grieco looks tough on a [[motorbike]] with [[sunglasses]].

I will [[soon]] uptade the cast-list because I have it at [[home]]. I wrote it down after I [[seen]] the [[movie]]. This movie is [[genuinely]] [[naughty]]. The acting is [[lowlands]] [[horrific]] except Michael Ironside. I don't get the [[fairytales]]. Richard Grieco is the only [[surviving]] after a [[struggles]] between two Mc-gangs. He [[happens]] to a [[ville]] and suddenly he is choosened to fight against the [[naughty]] people who [[wanna]] indian-land. [[Under]] the cover it [[stated]] he was a indian himself that [[returning]] too his home-town, I didn't [[heard]] that in the [[filmmaking]], if so it wasn't [[clara]].

Richard Grieco was one hell of a [[unfavourable]] [[protagonist]]. [[Stringent]] and [[ghastly]]. He [[says]] his lines [[iike]] it too. And we wouldn't [[chatter]] about Sean [[Youthful]], she hasn' been any of my favourite [[actresses]] but in this [[filmmaking]] she plays a indian [[girl]] who [[fall]] in love with [[Screw]] (Grieco). She is [[horrific]].

When I [[rent]] it I choosed between this and Subterfuge with [[Remy]] [[Salaried]]. I choosed this one because of Michael Ironside was in the [[casting]]. Maybe I should have [[picked]] Subterfuge.

Don't see this [[if]] you [[thought]] [[Richie]] Grieco looks tough on a [[scooter]] with [[shades]].

I will [[speedily]] uptade the cast-list because I have it at [[household]]. I wrote it down after I [[watched]] the [[flick]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3228 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] It's [[hard]] for me to assign the "fair" number of [[stars]] to this film, but I [[settled]] on 8 because of its [[high]] [[production]] [[values]] and what was, in 1968, an innovative [[approach]] to the [[war]] [[film]]. [[Remember]] too that I haven't [[seen]] it since 1969. But it did make a [[strong]] [[impression]].

The [[Long]] Day's [[Dying]] [[must]] be one of the most vivid antiwar [[films]] ever [[made]]. It achieves this [[simply]] by [[portraying]] in [[extremely]] [[realistic]] terms the [[actions]] of a handful of soldiers in Northwestern [[Europe]] in 1944-45. [[No]] film before this one [[showed]] war at the infantry squad [[level]] with so much [[brutal]] [[detail]], and all in a [[coldly]] dispassionate [[way]] that [[lets]] the [[actions]] speak for themselves. There is no preaching, no sentimentality, no comic relief, no [[complicated]] [[scenarios]].

Unfortunately, there's no [[subtlety]] either. [[Partly]] because of their situation - trying to [[stay]] alive - the characters [[come]] [[across]] as flat, familiar cliché's. As "entertainment," the [[film]] doesn't [[make]] it, [[though]] it was [[clearly]] not [[intended]] to "[[entertain]]." It was [[intended]] to slug you over the head with the misery and horror of [[World]] [[War]] [[II]] and modern [[war]] in general. This was twenty [[years]] before Platoon and thirty before Saving [[Private]] Ryan, both of which are far more "watchable" [[films]]. Here the flat and generally disagreeable characters, the lack of an actual plot, and the realistically unpleasant images (including what may be the first on-screen [[vomit]] in theatrical history) make the film [[hard]] to sit through, though it is only 95 minutes.

[[So]], 10 [[stars]] for production and [[realism]], 4 [[stars]] for the [[feeling]] you'll have when it's over, a [[bonus]] star for having its [[heart]] in the right place. [[Average]]: 8.

Like Carl Foreman's underrated "The Victors," an equally downbeat but more interesting and thought-provoking film, The Long Day's Dying seems not to be on DVD. Why not? Both films have been on cable a number of times. It's [[stiff]] for me to assign the "fair" number of [[star]] to this film, but I [[liquidated]] on 8 because of its [[highest]] [[productivity]] [[value]] and what was, in 1968, an innovative [[approaching]] to the [[warfare]] [[movie]]. [[Remind]] too that I haven't [[watched]] it since 1969. But it did make a [[vigorous]] [[printing]].

The [[Lengthy]] Day's [[Deaths]] [[should]] be one of the most vivid antiwar [[movie]] ever [[introduced]]. It achieves this [[merely]] by [[describing]] in [[terribly]] [[practical]] terms the [[measurements]] of a handful of soldiers in Northwestern [[Europa]] in 1944-45. [[Nos]] film before this one [[illustrated]] war at the infantry squad [[grades]] with so much [[cruel]] [[details]], and all in a [[calmly]] dispassionate [[routes]] that [[allowing]] the [[measurements]] speak for themselves. There is no preaching, no sentimentality, no comic relief, no [[tricky]] [[screenplay]].

Unfortunately, there's no [[finesse]] either. [[Partial]] because of their situation - trying to [[remain]] alive - the characters [[arrive]] [[throughout]] as flat, familiar cliché's. As "entertainment," the [[movie]] doesn't [[deliver]] it, [[while]] it was [[apparently]] not [[conceived]] to "[[distract]]." It was [[designed]] to slug you over the head with the misery and horror of [[Global]] [[Warfare]] [[SECONDLY]] and modern [[wars]] in general. This was twenty [[olds]] before Platoon and thirty before Saving [[Privy]] Ryan, both of which are far more "watchable" [[cinematic]]. Here the flat and generally disagreeable characters, the lack of an actual plot, and the realistically unpleasant images (including what may be the first on-screen [[vomiting]] in theatrical history) make the film [[tough]] to sit through, though it is only 95 minutes.

[[Consequently]], 10 [[star]] for production and [[reality]], 4 [[star]] for the [[sentiment]] you'll have when it's over, a [[bonuses]] star for having its [[heartland]] in the right place. [[Medium]]: 8.

Like Carl Foreman's underrated "The Victors," an equally downbeat but more interesting and thought-provoking film, The Long Day's Dying seems not to be on DVD. Why not? Both films have been on cable a number of times. --------------------------------------------- Result 3229 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's a great deal of material from the Modesty Blaise comics and novels that would be great in a movie. Unfortunately, several attempts have been made and they've fallen short of the great potential in the character. So, no, this isn't the Modesty you know from the comic strip (currently reprinted in nice editions from Titan Books). This is Modesty some 5 or 6 years prior to the first strip, and from what you can piece together from her back-story, it's accurate.

Miramax had the movie rights to the character, with Quentin Tarantino acting as advocate and technical adviser. Early drafts of the Miramax project attempted to adapt one of the best novels, but always managed to leave out some crucial element. Tarantino wasn't happy with any of them, and offered to remove his name from the project so they could proceed. To the studio's credit, they wanted to keep him in the process, since they knew he "got" the character and her world. With the movie rights close to expiration, they decided to try a very different approach. The result was "My Name is Modesty," a small direct-to-video movie that introduces the character.

The movie does not introduce Willie Garvin or Sir Gerald. These characters are important to Blaise's adventures throughout most of the published stories. What this movie accomplishes is showing the strength of the character by herself. She never loses her composure, and you never doubt that she's in charge even unarmed in a room full of gangsters with guns. Most of the movie takes place within a casino, which undoubtedly saved money on the production. It doesn't matter. The film does not come across as cheap. Instead, it gives a fairly comprehensive (and believable) back-story for the character and demonstrates just how far she thinks ahead. Should Miramax adapt any of the comic stories or novels now, they've laid out the character's background nicely and won't have to spend much time on her "origin." I realize the words "Direct-to-Video" don't inspire confidence, but this film is well worth a look. --------------------------------------------- Result 3230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How can you tell that a horror movie is [[terrible]]? when you can't stop laughing about it of course! The plot has been well covered by other reviewers, so I'll just add a few things on the hilarity of it all.

Some reviews have placed the [[location]] in South America, others in [[Africa]], I thought it was in some [[random]] island in the [[Pacific]]. [[Where]] [[exactly]] does this [[take]] place, seems to be a [[mystery]]. The cannibal tribe is conformed by a couple of black women some black men, and a man who looks like a young Frank Zappa banging the drums... the Devil God is a large black man with a terrible case of pink eyes.

One of the "freakiest" moments in the film is when, "Pablito" find his partner hanging from a tree covered in what seems to be an orange substance that I assume is blood, starts screaming for minutes on and on (that's actually funny), and then the head of his partner falls in the ground and "Pablito" kicks it a bit for what I assume is "shits n' giggles" and the eyes actually move...

But, of course, then the "freak" is gone when you realize the eyes moved because the movie is just [[bad]]...

I hadn't laughed like this in a loooong while, and I definitely recommend this film for a Sunday [[afternoon]] with your friends and you have nothing to do... grab a case of beers and start watching this film, you'll love it! If you are looking for a real horror or gore [[movie]], [[though]]... don't' [[bother]]. How can you tell that a horror movie is [[gruesome]]? when you can't stop laughing about it of course! The plot has been well covered by other reviewers, so I'll just add a few things on the hilarity of it all.

Some reviews have placed the [[positioning]] in South America, others in [[Afrika]], I thought it was in some [[indiscriminate]] island in the [[Pacifist]]. [[Everytime]] [[accurately]] does this [[taking]] place, seems to be a [[enigma]]. The cannibal tribe is conformed by a couple of black women some black men, and a man who looks like a young Frank Zappa banging the drums... the Devil God is a large black man with a terrible case of pink eyes.

One of the "freakiest" moments in the film is when, "Pablito" find his partner hanging from a tree covered in what seems to be an orange substance that I assume is blood, starts screaming for minutes on and on (that's actually funny), and then the head of his partner falls in the ground and "Pablito" kicks it a bit for what I assume is "shits n' giggles" and the eyes actually move...

But, of course, then the "freak" is gone when you realize the eyes moved because the movie is just [[negative]]...

I hadn't laughed like this in a loooong while, and I definitely recommend this film for a Sunday [[evening]] with your friends and you have nothing to do... grab a case of beers and start watching this film, you'll love it! If you are looking for a real horror or gore [[filmmaking]], [[albeit]]... don't' [[annoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3231 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although Twenty Minutes of Love is a harmless attempt at an early comedy, it was difficult to follow and the film quality was not very good. It does have a couple of moments that are funny, but I have seen better by Charlie Chaplin. --------------------------------------------- Result 3232 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] It must have been excruciating to [[attend]] the [[dailies]] as the shooting [[continued]] on this [[failure]] of a [[film]]. [[Probably]] Cruise, the Exec. Prod., [[saw]] what was [[happening]] and had Towne use much, [[much]] more of the [[nude]] footage in the [[final]] [[cut]] then Towne [[wanted]] to, to [[make]] up for the [[disaster]] he [[saw]] looming.([[Maybe]] Cruise even thought of "[[Titanic]]".)A few items: Colin Farrell can't [[act]] his [[way]] out of a paper [[bag]]. But he's one of the flavors-of-the-decade, a producer's [[darling]] and one is forced to [[avoid]] the [[embarrassment]] of [[watching]] him by not [[attending]] his [[films]]. He has so [[many]] [[moments]] of not [[believing]] in what he's doing and you can [[see]] it in his [[eyes]]. I think he would have been at his best as a [[film]] [[actor]], albeit not as [[rich]] or [[famous]] as he is now, playing second banana to [[dynamic]] leads who can act. The [[trap]] of spending a [[lot]] of money for [[period]] sets, [[costumes]], [[cars]], et al and [[photographing]] them as if they just [[came]] from the dry [[cleaner]] or [[car]] wash/wax. No one [[seems]] to [[want]] [[anything]] to look, well, [[worn]]. Or [[dirty]]. Is this because the [[production]] [[designer]] was [[told]] by the line [[producer]] to make [[sure]] they didn't [[ruin]] the [[stuff]] because then the [[company]] wouldhave to [[pay]] for the [[ruined]] [[items]]?

This was a [[story]] about the depression-thirties folks, not a [[Disney]] Broadway musical about that era. How about doing it in black and white or better [[yet]], [[given]] Caleb Deschanel as your D.P., have him desaturate the [[colors]] during the [[mix]] to [[suggest]] some of the [[actual]] [[grime]] and poorness of the times. It should have been, after all, a bit depressing to [[live]] so desperately as these folks did, in the Depression. [[More]] on Farrell. [[Did]] [[anyone]] for a [[moment]] believe this [[guy]] was a writer? H.L. Mencken on the [[wall]]; did I [[see]] his [[eyes]] roll at one point? Hayek and [[Farrell]] as a sexually [[dynamic]] [[duo]]? [[Sending]] a boy to do a man's [[work]]? Perhaps in the book, which I haven't read, the [[story]] was about an [[older]] [[woman]] and a youth. I cannot delve too [[deeply]] into the middle to latter parts of the [[film]] because I [[bailed]] out early on. But the [[memory]] of the scenes I did see [[made]] me think that someone was doing a not-too-amusing parody of a noir movie. Sort of what Saturday Night Live has been like for the past decade: not funny. (In my mind I kept thinking of a Guy Noir sketch, music and all.) It must have been excruciating to [[attended]] the [[newspapers]] as the shooting [[sustained]] on this [[deficit]] of a [[filmmaking]]. [[Arguably]] Cruise, the Exec. Prod., [[observed]] what was [[occurring]] and had Towne use much, [[very]] more of the [[naked]] footage in the [[definitive]] [[slice]] then Towne [[wished]] to, to [[deliver]] up for the [[calamities]] he [[witnessed]] looming.([[Possibly]] Cruise even thought of "[[Herculean]]".)A few items: Colin Farrell can't [[acts]] his [[ways]] out of a paper [[suitcase]]. But he's one of the flavors-of-the-decade, a producer's [[babe]] and one is forced to [[preventing]] the [[shame]] of [[staring]] him by not [[attended]] his [[filmmaking]]. He has so [[several]] [[times]] of not [[believe]] in what he's doing and you can [[seeing]] it in his [[eye]]. I think he would have been at his best as a [[filmmaking]] [[protagonist]], albeit not as [[wealthy]] or [[notorious]] as he is now, playing second banana to [[vibrant]] leads who can act. The [[traps]] of spending a [[batch]] of money for [[periods]] sets, [[clothes]], [[railcar]], et al and [[images]] them as if they just [[became]] from the dry [[greener]] or [[automobiles]] wash/wax. No one [[appears]] to [[wants]] [[nothing]] to look, well, [[wear]]. Or [[foul]]. Is this because the [[productivity]] [[builder]] was [[tells]] by the line [[manufacturer]] to make [[persuaded]] they didn't [[vandalize]] the [[thing]] because then the [[societies]] wouldhave to [[pays]] for the [[devastated]] [[subjects]]?

This was a [[tales]] about the depression-thirties folks, not a [[Disneyland]] Broadway musical about that era. How about doing it in black and white or better [[nonetheless]], [[afforded]] Caleb Deschanel as your D.P., have him desaturate the [[colored]] during the [[blend]] to [[suggests]] some of the [[real]] [[dirt]] and poorness of the times. It should have been, after all, a bit depressing to [[inhabit]] so desperately as these folks did, in the Depression. [[Greater]] on Farrell. [[Could]] [[anybody]] for a [[time]] believe this [[pal]] was a writer? H.L. Mencken on the [[mur]]; did I [[seeing]] his [[eye]] roll at one point? Hayek and [[Ferrell]] as a sexually [[vibrant]] [[duet]]? [[Sent]] a boy to do a man's [[jobs]]? Perhaps in the book, which I haven't read, the [[narratives]] was about an [[elderly]] [[daughters]] and a youth. I cannot delve too [[bitterly]] into the middle to latter parts of the [[filmmaking]] because I [[broke]] out early on. But the [[souvenir]] of the scenes I did see [[introduced]] me think that someone was doing a not-too-amusing parody of a noir movie. Sort of what Saturday Night Live has been like for the past decade: not funny. (In my mind I kept thinking of a Guy Noir sketch, music and all.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3233 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A sweet funny story of 2 people crossing paths as they prepare for their weddings. The ex-cop writer and the public school teacher fall for each other in this great new york setting, even though they are marrying other people. Maybe a little trite in that the "partners" are both type A personalities, while our protagonists are much more relaxed. Not anything heavy, but it made me smile. And hey for the guys - sell the Natasha Henstridge angle, and the gals - sell them the sappy romance, everyone wins! --------------------------------------------- Result 3234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This [[thing]] is [[horrible]]. The [[Ben]] Affleck [[character]] is self-centered and gleefully sadistic--punch-you-in-the-nose fratboy sadistic. And he's the [[romantic]] HERO! His cartoonish [[character]] does not [[change]] from [[beginning]] to [[end]], but his [[money]] [[ultimately]] [[allows]] him to [[buy]] happiness.

[[If]] I were a Socialist, I [[would]] screed beyond belief, but I'm not a Socialist.

We capitalists like a [[little]] [[Christmas]] [[magic]] from [[time]] to [[time]]. This ain't [[magic]]. I don't know what it is. It's just [[awful]]. And it's a [[horrible]] [[waste]] of talent. O'Hara has been [[making]] me laugh hysterically since the late '70s. Gandolfini. Applegate. These people were all underused. If Ben was out of the equation, these folks [[might]] have [[dreamed]] up [[something]] [[excellent]]. This [[stuff]] is [[abysmal]]. The [[Benn]] Affleck [[characters]] is self-centered and gleefully sadistic--punch-you-in-the-nose fratboy sadistic. And he's the [[sentimental]] HERO! His cartoonish [[characteristics]] does not [[shifting]] from [[launching]] to [[terminate]], but his [[cash]] [[finally]] [[allowing]] him to [[acquiring]] happiness.

[[Though]] I were a Socialist, I [[could]] screed beyond belief, but I'm not a Socialist.

We capitalists like a [[petite]] [[Claus]] [[quadrant]] from [[moment]] to [[period]]. This ain't [[sorcery]]. I don't know what it is. It's just [[scary]]. And it's a [[scary]] [[squandering]] of talent. O'Hara has been [[doing]] me laugh hysterically since the late '70s. Gandolfini. Applegate. These people were all underused. If Ben was out of the equation, these folks [[apt]] have [[dreaming]] up [[somethings]] [[sumptuous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Indian [[cinema]] typifies [[cops]] of two [[broad]] categories: they are either the honest [[type]] or the [[bad]] guys. The honest guys [[always]] shout at the top of their [[voice]] and [[fight]] the system while the [[bad]] cops [[enjoy]] for most [[part]] but suffer at the end.

This [[movie]] at least breaks this [[usual]] formula and [[gives]] a [[refreshing]] [[view]] of [[cops]] and their [[lives]]. The direction takes an [[inside]] look at the [[life]] of a young ambitious [[cop]] who. The [[music]] is interesting and the editing is a [[trend]] setter as far as Indian [[cinema]] goes.

The [[movie]] is slow at [[times]] and the dilemma which Anbu faces when it [[comes]] to Maya is overplayed at [[times]]. But I would [[still]] give this one 9/10 [[simply]] because it has [[many]] firsts to its [[credit]]. Indian [[theaters]] typifies [[policeman]] of two [[extensive]] categories: they are either the honest [[typing]] or the [[wicked]] guys. The honest guys [[steadily]] shout at the top of their [[vocals]] and [[tussle]] the system while the [[inclement]] cops [[enjoying]] for most [[portions]] but suffer at the end.

This [[cinematography]] at least breaks this [[normal]] formula and [[donne]] a [[freshen]] [[viewing]] of [[police]] and their [[iife]]. The direction takes an [[indoor]] look at the [[vida]] of a young ambitious [[policemen]] who. The [[musician]] is interesting and the editing is a [[tendencies]] setter as far as Indian [[movie]] goes.

The [[film]] is slow at [[period]] and the dilemma which Anbu faces when it [[happens]] to Maya is overplayed at [[time]]. But I would [[yet]] give this one 9/10 [[merely]] because it has [[multiple]] firsts to its [[credits]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3236 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Lorna [[Green]](Janine [[Reynaud]])is a performance [[artist]] for [[wealthy]] [[intellectuals]] at a local club. She [[falls]] prey to her fantasies as the promise of romantic interludes [[turn]] into [[murder]] as she [[kills]] those who [[believe]] that [[sex]] is on the horizon. It's [[quite]] possible that, through a form of hypnotic [[suggestion]], [[someone]](..a [[possible]] task [[master]] [[pulling]] her [[strings]] like a puppet)is [[guiding]] Lorna into [[killing]] those she comes [[across]] in secluded [[places]] just when it appears that love-making is about to [[begin]]. After the [[murders]] within her fantasies are committed, Lorna [[awakens]] bewildered, often clueless as to if what she was privy to within her dreams ever took place in reality.

If someone asked me how to [[describe]] this particular work from Franco, I'd [[say]] it's [[elegant]] & difficult. By now, you've probably read other user comments [[befuddled]] by what this film is about, since a large portion of it takes place within the surreal atmosphere of a dream. Franco mentioned in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Godard early in his career, as far as film-making style, and so deciding to abandon a clear narrative structure in favor of trying to create a whole different type of viewing experience. And, as you read from the reaction of the user comments here..some like this decision, others find the style labouring, dull, and [[bewildering]]. I'll be the first to admit that the film is over my head, but even Franco himself, when quizzed by critics who watched "Succubus", admitted that he didn't even understand the film and he directed it! Some might say that "[[Succubus]]" was merely a precursor to his more admired [[work]], "Venus in Furs", considered his masterwork by Franco-faithful, because it [[also]] adopts the [[surreal]], dreamlike structure where the [[protagonist]] doesn't [[truly]] know whether he/she is experiencing [[something]] [[real]] or [[imagined]]. [[In]] a sense, [[like]] the protagonist, we are [[experiencing]] the same type of confusion..certainly, "Succubus" is unconventional film-making where we aren't given the keys to what is exactly going on. And, a great deal of the elusive dialogue doesn't help matters. "Succubus" is also populated by beatnik types and "poet-speak", Corman's film, "A Bucket of Blood" poked fun at. My personal favorite scene teases at a possible lesbian interlude between Lorna and a woman she meets at a posh party..quite a bizarre fantasy sequence where mannequins are used rather unusually. Great locations and jazz score..I liked this film myself, although I can understand why it does receive a negative reaction. Loved that one scene at the posh party with Lorna, a wee bit drunk, writhing on the floor in a gorgeous evening gown as others attending the shindig(..equally wasted)rush her in an embrace of kisses. Lorna [[Archer]](Janine [[Reno]])is a performance [[entertainer]] for [[richer]] [[theologians]] at a local club. She [[waterfalls]] prey to her fantasies as the promise of romantic interludes [[transforming]] into [[homicide]] as she [[killing]] those who [[think]] that [[sexuality]] is on the horizon. It's [[rather]] possible that, through a form of hypnotic [[proposal]], [[everybody]](..a [[probable]] task [[maestro]] [[pulled]] her [[string]] like a puppet)is [[steering]] Lorna into [[assassinated]] those she comes [[throughout]] in secluded [[sites]] just when it appears that love-making is about to [[commenced]]. After the [[kills]] within her fantasies are committed, Lorna [[provokes]] bewildered, often clueless as to if what she was privy to within her dreams ever took place in reality.

If someone asked me how to [[outlined]] this particular work from Franco, I'd [[told]] it's [[stylish]] & difficult. By now, you've probably read other user comments [[puzzled]] by what this film is about, since a large portion of it takes place within the surreal atmosphere of a dream. Franco mentioned in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Godard early in his career, as far as film-making style, and so deciding to abandon a clear narrative structure in favor of trying to create a whole different type of viewing experience. And, as you read from the reaction of the user comments here..some like this decision, others find the style labouring, dull, and [[puzzling]]. I'll be the first to admit that the film is over my head, but even Franco himself, when quizzed by critics who watched "Succubus", admitted that he didn't even understand the film and he directed it! Some might say that "[[Michigan]]" was merely a precursor to his more admired [[collaborate]], "Venus in Furs", considered his masterwork by Franco-faithful, because it [[further]] adopts the [[unreal]], dreamlike structure where the [[actor]] doesn't [[genuinely]] know whether he/she is experiencing [[anything]] [[authentic]] or [[conjured]]. [[Throughout]] a sense, [[iike]] the protagonist, we are [[undergoing]] the same type of confusion..certainly, "Succubus" is unconventional film-making where we aren't given the keys to what is exactly going on. And, a great deal of the elusive dialogue doesn't help matters. "Succubus" is also populated by beatnik types and "poet-speak", Corman's film, "A Bucket of Blood" poked fun at. My personal favorite scene teases at a possible lesbian interlude between Lorna and a woman she meets at a posh party..quite a bizarre fantasy sequence where mannequins are used rather unusually. Great locations and jazz score..I liked this film myself, although I can understand why it does receive a negative reaction. Loved that one scene at the posh party with Lorna, a wee bit drunk, writhing on the floor in a gorgeous evening gown as others attending the shindig(..equally wasted)rush her in an embrace of kisses. --------------------------------------------- Result 3237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A strong woman oriented subject after long, director Krishna Vamsi's Shakti- The Power, the Desi version of the Hollywood hit Not Without My Daughter is actress Sridevi's first home-production. A story about a woman's fight against harsh injustice.

The story of the film revolves around Nandini (Karisma Kapoor) who lives in Canada with her two uncles (Tiku Talsania, Jaspal Bhatti). There she meets Shekhar (Sanjay Kapoor), falls in love with him and they soon marry. Their family is complete when Nandini has a boy, Raja (Master Jai Gidwani). But their happiness is short lived, as the news of Shekhar's ailing mother (Deepti Naval)makes them leave their perfect life in Canada and come to India. And that's when the problems start. From the moment they reach

India, both are shocked to see the pollution and the vast throngs of people everywhere. They take a crowded train to reach Shekhar's village and when they finally reach the station, they have to catch a long bus drive to his village. The filthy sweaty bus combined with the uncertain terrain makes it a never-ending drive. And unfortunately for them, a frenzied mob that beat Shekhar out of shape for no fault of his attacks their bus. Fortunately, they get shot dead just in time before they can further harm him. After that, they drive to the handing Havel where Shekhar''s father, Narsimha (Nana Patekar) lives with his wife (Deepti Naval). Nandani realized that her father-in-law is in command as soon as she enters the place, but her only solace is her mother-in-law's warm welcome.

Living there, Nandini learns of her father-in-laws tyrannical behavior and realizes that ruthless killing is a way of life for him. The day she sees her father-in-law teach her son to throw a bomb, she loses it and lashes out against him, insisting to Shekhar that they move back to Canada. But terror strikes again when Shekhar is murdered one day, leaving a broken down Nandini alone with her son in this strange land where she is harrowed by a cruel father-in-law. Her fight against this man to save her son is what makes up the climax of this emotional heart-wrenching film.

What sets apart Shakti from most films being made off late is also the rural setting of the movie. The only drawback is Ismail Darbar''s music, which fails to rise above the script. The only saving grace is the sexy item number Ishq Kameena, which has been composed by Anu Malik. Another pat for the director comes because he has extracted some splendid performances from his cast. Karisma Kapoor is the life of the film and has given a moving performance as a helpless mother. She is sure to win awards for this heated portrayal. Second is actor Nana Patekar who is back with a bang with this film. His uncouth mannerisms suit him to the hilt and he's shown his versatility once again with this role. Sanjay Kapoor is the surprise packet of the film with a sincere and effective portrayal that stands up against both the other actors. Deepti Naval too is in top form and her Pr-climax showdown with Nana is praiseworthy. Shahrukh's cameo provides the lighter moments and surely he's been pulled in to get the required star value. Though his role was not really required, he's done it well. Overall, Shakti is a far superior film than most churned out these days and the Pr-release hype is sure to get it a good opening. Shakti is sure to get the critics and audience thumps up. So what if the film needs to be desperately trimmed by at least 2 reels to better the impact. Shakti still has the power to go on without a hitch! --------------------------------------------- Result 3238 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is very interesting. I have seen it twice and it seems Glover hit the nail on the head with what he claims to he wants to accomplish. I for one can relate to the outrage that the filmmaker clearly expresses against the current thoughtless corporate drivel that is an onslaught in our every media center, and the things that we as a culture are supposed to not "think" about due to corporate media control. The outrage that Glover expresses through the "outrageous" elements in the films is both clear in its visceral aggressiveness and beautiful in its poetic potency. I am glad I saw this film and it is even clearer that Glover is up to something interesting with part two of what will be a trilogy. It is fine! EVERYTHING IS FINE. See that also. People that dismiss this film as "thoughtless" or "pretentious" are really missing the boat. This is an intelligent films. If you can see it with his live show he performs before with his books, that is also very wroth while. The way you get in to his mindset is really something. You will have an experience! --------------------------------------------- Result 3239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I rented the dubbed-English version of Lensman, hoping that since it came from well-known novels it [[would]] have some substance. While there were hints of substance in the movie, it mostly didn't [[rise]] above the level of kiddie cartoon. Maybe the [[movie]] was a bad adaptation of the book, or it lost a lot in the dubbed version. Or maybe even the source novels were lightweight. But for [[whatever]] reason, there wasn't much there.

I noticed lots of [[details]] that were derivative, [[sloppy]], poorly dramatized, or otherwise [[deficient]]. Some examples: The opening scenes looked borrowed from the 2001 "star gate" scene and the Star Wars image of [[hyperspace]]. The robot on the [[harvester]] looked like an anthropomorphized "R2-D2".

It [[starts]] out [[trying]] to borrow its [[comic]] relief [[style]] of [[Star]] [[Wars]], but [[mercifully]] (since the humor doesn't [[work]]) [[gives]] up on [[comedy]] and plays it [[serious]]. In that sense, it's superior to the [[Star]] Wars franchise, which [[started]] with a [[clever]] sense of [[humor]], and [[eventually]] [[deteriorated]] to Jar-Jar's [[annoying]] silliness.

The [[agricultural]] [[details]] were [[apparently]] [[drawn]] by [[someone]] who had never seen a [[farm]]. The harvester was driving through the unharvested [[middle]] of a [[field]], dumping silage [[onto]] unharvested [[crops]], [[rather]] than [[working]] from one side to the other and [[dumping]] the silage [[onto]] already-harvested rows or into a truck. [[Corn]] (maize) was pouring out the [[grain]] chute, but the farm lands were drawn like a wheat field.

When it was [[time]] for Kim's father had to [[face]] his fate, there wasn't any [[dramatic]] [[weight]] to the scene. That [[could]] have been partly the fault of the English-language [[voice]] actor, but the drawings didn't show much [[weight]] either. Kim's [[reactions]] in that scene were [[similarly]] [[unconvincing]].

Similarly, when a character named Henderson was killed, [[Chris]] showed very [[little]] [[reaction]], even though they were [[apparently]] [[supposed]] to have been [[close]]. (Henderson's [[death]] is no spoiler; his [[name]] isn't revealed until his death scene.) She seems to [[promptly]] forget him. Someone's expression of sympathy shows more feeling than she does. I think the voice [[actor]] deserves most of the [[blame]] in that case; there's at least a hint of feeling in the drawings of Chris.

On several occasions, villains fail to accomplish their orders. A villain leader often punishes those failures with miserable deaths. I can't say whether that's lifted from Star Wars, or if that comes from an earlier source -- possibly the Lensman books.

There's a scene where a space ship crash-lands. As it plunges toward the ground, parts are break off the ship. But so many pieces are fall off that there should be nothing left of it by the time it lands.

While in most cases Chris seems like a competent, tough space hero, there's a scene where she shrieks like an incompetent damsel in distress. Someone tough enough to get over Henderson's death so quickly should at least be able to shout, "help, it's got me and I can't reach my gun!" instead of just shrieking.

The character with the most personality (almost too much at times) is D.J. Bill. He sounded like Wolfman Jack, the D.J. in American Graffiti. I wonder if he's as well-voiced in the original language.

Two planets in the movie exploded. The explosions were unimpressive, and appeared to owe a lot of inspiration to Star Wars. To its credit, however, the cause of the explosion was completely unlike the Death Star's primary weapon. The dialog had a good, interesting explanation for the cause. Many other explosions in the movie did look good, just not the planetary explosions.

Some of the sound effects are very cheesy, as if borrowed from a late 1970s video game. Some of the images look like primitive video games, and some influence from Tron is visible too. On the other hand, the sound effects are often pretty decent, although that emphasizes the cheesy-sounding parts. The art is good too, particularly when it stays away from the often cheesy-looking computer graphics.

Finally, there's the story. If a movie tells a good story, it can get away with a lot of production shortcomings. But the plot here was pretty lightweight. A naïve boy tries to help someone on a crippled space ship, and acquires a great power he doesn't understand. He and his band of very virtuous companions struggle against a powerful, unredeemably evil enemy. He makes friends, learns about his special power, and grows into a young man. If he is persistent and virtuous enough, he might even defeat the evil enemy. Details along the way can make such a story rise above the simple outline, but there's very little more than that in this movie.

In the end, it's just a kiddie cartoon. But then, since it looks like the primary intended audience is older children, maybe it doesn't need to be anything more than that. I rented the dubbed-English version of Lensman, hoping that since it came from well-known novels it [[should]] have some substance. While there were hints of substance in the movie, it mostly didn't [[climbs]] above the level of kiddie cartoon. Maybe the [[filmmaking]] was a bad adaptation of the book, or it lost a lot in the dubbed version. Or maybe even the source novels were lightweight. But for [[whichever]] reason, there wasn't much there.

I noticed lots of [[clarification]] that were derivative, [[negligent]], poorly dramatized, or otherwise [[defective]]. Some examples: The opening scenes looked borrowed from the 2001 "star gate" scene and the Star Wars image of [[ftl]]. The robot on the [[fisherman]] looked like an anthropomorphized "R2-D2".

It [[induction]] out [[seeking]] to borrow its [[comical]] relief [[stylistic]] of [[Stars]] [[Warfare]], but [[gaily]] (since the humor doesn't [[cooperation]]) [[delivers]] up on [[humor]] and plays it [[severe]]. In that sense, it's superior to the [[Superstar]] Wars franchise, which [[initiating]] with a [[adept]] sense of [[humour]], and [[lastly]] [[aggravated]] to Jar-Jar's [[irritating]] silliness.

The [[rural]] [[detail]] were [[reportedly]] [[draws]] by [[everybody]] who had never seen a [[farmhouse]]. The harvester was driving through the unharvested [[mid]] of a [[campo]], dumping silage [[for]] unharvested [[cultivation]], [[comparatively]] than [[cooperate]] from one side to the other and [[dumped]] the silage [[on]] already-harvested rows or into a truck. [[Maize]] (maize) was pouring out the [[grains]] chute, but the farm lands were drawn like a wheat field.

When it was [[period]] for Kim's father had to [[confronts]] his fate, there wasn't any [[spectacular]] [[underweight]] to the scene. That [[did]] have been partly the fault of the English-language [[vocals]] actor, but the drawings didn't show much [[weights]] either. Kim's [[replies]] in that scene were [[alternatively]] [[inconclusive]].

Similarly, when a character named Henderson was killed, [[Kris]] showed very [[scant]] [[reactions]], even though they were [[allegedly]] [[alleged]] to have been [[closed]]. (Henderson's [[killings]] is no spoiler; his [[designation]] isn't revealed until his death scene.) She seems to [[timely]] forget him. Someone's expression of sympathy shows more feeling than she does. I think the voice [[actress]] deserves most of the [[culpa]] in that case; there's at least a hint of feeling in the drawings of Chris.

On several occasions, villains fail to accomplish their orders. A villain leader often punishes those failures with miserable deaths. I can't say whether that's lifted from Star Wars, or if that comes from an earlier source -- possibly the Lensman books.

There's a scene where a space ship crash-lands. As it plunges toward the ground, parts are break off the ship. But so many pieces are fall off that there should be nothing left of it by the time it lands.

While in most cases Chris seems like a competent, tough space hero, there's a scene where she shrieks like an incompetent damsel in distress. Someone tough enough to get over Henderson's death so quickly should at least be able to shout, "help, it's got me and I can't reach my gun!" instead of just shrieking.

The character with the most personality (almost too much at times) is D.J. Bill. He sounded like Wolfman Jack, the D.J. in American Graffiti. I wonder if he's as well-voiced in the original language.

Two planets in the movie exploded. The explosions were unimpressive, and appeared to owe a lot of inspiration to Star Wars. To its credit, however, the cause of the explosion was completely unlike the Death Star's primary weapon. The dialog had a good, interesting explanation for the cause. Many other explosions in the movie did look good, just not the planetary explosions.

Some of the sound effects are very cheesy, as if borrowed from a late 1970s video game. Some of the images look like primitive video games, and some influence from Tron is visible too. On the other hand, the sound effects are often pretty decent, although that emphasizes the cheesy-sounding parts. The art is good too, particularly when it stays away from the often cheesy-looking computer graphics.

Finally, there's the story. If a movie tells a good story, it can get away with a lot of production shortcomings. But the plot here was pretty lightweight. A naïve boy tries to help someone on a crippled space ship, and acquires a great power he doesn't understand. He and his band of very virtuous companions struggle against a powerful, unredeemably evil enemy. He makes friends, learns about his special power, and grows into a young man. If he is persistent and virtuous enough, he might even defeat the evil enemy. Details along the way can make such a story rise above the simple outline, but there's very little more than that in this movie.

In the end, it's just a kiddie cartoon. But then, since it looks like the primary intended audience is older children, maybe it doesn't need to be anything more than that. --------------------------------------------- Result 3240 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Romantic [[comedy]] is not the [[correct]] [[way]] to [[describe]] "[[How]] to [[lose]] [[friends]] & alienate people". The underlying romance in the plot is, for the most [[part]], displaced by a far more interesting "[[rags]] to riches" tale. [[Although]] the central line of the story is [[somewhat]] [[rushed]] [[passed]], in several screen [[shots]], it does have a [[sense]] of; [[getting]] the "nitty gritty" out of the way, [[focusing]] on those [[key]] [[relationships]] which make "office [[politics]]" and [[using]] those [[almost]] irrelevant scenes, [[used]] [[purely]] for [[comic]] [[effect]]. Yet it [[works]] so well, [[especially]] with Pegg in the [[front]] seat. The [[film]] is [[ultimately]] very [[clever]], [[playing]] well on the trans-Atlantic [[relationship]] Pegg [[shares]] with his co-stars and [[merging]] the cross between the [[high]] and low -[[life]] society [[quite]] well and [[quite]] [[refreshingly]] in a storyline that despite predictability is somewhat of a unique [[journey]]. The [[different]] [[characters]] in the [[film]] are [[presented]] well and casting is [[definitely]] a plus point on the [[film]]. [[Both]] the "trading [[places]]" relationship between Pegg and [[Huston]] and the "love, hate" [[relationship]] between Pegg and Dunst do [[work]] so well in a [[story]] that is, for want of a [[better]] word, charming. Even [[Fox]], [[whose]] [[main]] asset is of course [[sex]] [[appeal]], [[shocks]] with what turns out to be [[quite]] a [[dark]] [[character]] and acts that "bimbo" role all to [[well]]. Its one of these films where [[every]] little detail does pay tribute to a [[great]] piece of [[work]]. From transsexual strippers to an [[amazing]] soundtrack it all meshes [[nicely]] into what can only be [[described]] as [[clever]] [[comedy]]. Romantic [[humor]] is not the [[accurate]] [[route]] to [[depict]] "[[Mode]] to [[wasting]] [[buddies]] & alienate people". The underlying romance in the plot is, for the most [[party]], displaced by a far more interesting "[[towels]] to riches" tale. [[Whereas]] the central line of the story is [[slightly]] [[sped]] [[adopted]], in several screen [[punches]], it does have a [[feeling]] of; [[obtain]] the "nitty gritty" out of the way, [[centered]] on those [[pivotal]] [[ties]] which make "office [[politicians]]" and [[utilize]] those [[practically]] irrelevant scenes, [[employs]] [[simply]] for [[comedian]] [[effects]]. Yet it [[collaborated]] so well, [[concretely]] with Pegg in the [[newsweek]] seat. The [[movie]] is [[eventually]] very [[smarter]], [[gaming]] well on the trans-Atlantic [[relations]] Pegg [[exchange]] with his co-stars and [[combining]] the cross between the [[higher]] and low -[[living]] society [[pretty]] well and [[rather]] [[cheerfully]] in a storyline that despite predictability is somewhat of a unique [[trip]]. The [[dissimilar]] [[traits]] in the [[cinema]] are [[submitted]] well and casting is [[surely]] a plus point on the [[movies]]. [[Whether]] the "trading [[sites]]" relationship between Pegg and [[Houston]] and the "love, hate" [[relation]] between Pegg and Dunst do [[jobs]] so well in a [[conte]] that is, for want of a [[improved]] word, charming. Even [[Foxes]], [[whom]] [[principal]] asset is of course [[sexuality]] [[appeals]], [[upheavals]] with what turns out to be [[pretty]] a [[gloomy]] [[characters]] and acts that "bimbo" role all to [[good]]. Its one of these films where [[any]] little detail does pay tribute to a [[wondrous]] piece of [[jobs]]. From transsexual strippers to an [[wondrous]] soundtrack it all meshes [[politely]] into what can only be [[sketched]] as [[smarter]] [[charade]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The acting, other reviews notwithstanding, was remarkably well-done. Brad Pitt handles the role of an annoying, obnoxious Austrian climber quite well. Other acting is fine. The story could have been riveting, but somehow, it [[misses]] - one never really understands or cares for the characters shown, and so the [[story]], which could have been quite [[dramatic]], [[fails]] to [[draw]] in this audience.

Beautiful scenery and cinematography, a remarkably [[dramatic]] true story, important events that shaped the world that we live in - but I [[could]] not, try as I might, [[involve]] myself in this story. As an unabashed Brad Pitt fan (I consider him one of the top 5 actors of his generation), I expected to *love* this flick - and yet, it left me cold.

It could be a failing within myself, but I tend to point toward the creative end of this movie - direction, scriptwriting, production, editing - somehow, they lost me. It's a shame, because it [[could]] have been wonderful.

Good acting, dramatic story, beautifully shot - it should have been magnificent. It wasn't. Probably worth watching, just to make your own mind up on it - but don't expect too much, and perhaps you won't be as disappointed as I was. Mostly, it [[bored]] me. The acting, other reviews notwithstanding, was remarkably well-done. Brad Pitt handles the role of an annoying, obnoxious Austrian climber quite well. Other acting is fine. The story could have been riveting, but somehow, it [[lack]] - one never really understands or cares for the characters shown, and so the [[conte]], which could have been quite [[impressive]], [[fail]] to [[attracting]] in this audience.

Beautiful scenery and cinematography, a remarkably [[prodigious]] true story, important events that shaped the world that we live in - but I [[wo]] not, try as I might, [[involving]] myself in this story. As an unabashed Brad Pitt fan (I consider him one of the top 5 actors of his generation), I expected to *love* this flick - and yet, it left me cold.

It could be a failing within myself, but I tend to point toward the creative end of this movie - direction, scriptwriting, production, editing - somehow, they lost me. It's a shame, because it [[did]] have been wonderful.

Good acting, dramatic story, beautifully shot - it should have been magnificent. It wasn't. Probably worth watching, just to make your own mind up on it - but don't expect too much, and perhaps you won't be as disappointed as I was. Mostly, it [[drilled]] me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the greatest film I have seen this year.Last maybe before sun rise, which is also seen late at night alone in the lab. I like the idea of the film,which suggest free will of man and our weakness against fate.With time past by James and Kathryn are destined to fail and an indescribable sorrow comes. I do like the end. but a big question also comes. The virus shall not be released again, should it?

In the last scene in the airport. Jose is sent back to meet James again by future scientists. When he tell him that scientists had already got his message and know someone else would spread the virus. And they two together meet Kathryn when Kathryn tell James the true man is DR. Goines assistant. So it is clearly Jose also get the true information about the virus,(James keep an eye on him at the time remember?) and he has teeth. So why everything is still happen?? Why future scientists don't do anything after the truth is revealed?? My biggest question after the film... --------------------------------------------- Result 3243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] As a [[girl]], Hinako [[moved]] away from her [[small]] [[village]] to Tokyo, [[leaving]] behind her two best friends, Fumiya and Sayori. She [[returns]] as a young [[woman]], [[surprised]] to find that Sayori [[died]] when she was a [[teenager]]. She reunites with Fumiya and they are [[horrified]] to learn that Sayori is mysteriously being [[resurrected]] via the [[island]] of Shikoku. [[Oh]] boy. I [[rented]] this because I [[like]] [[Asian]] [[horror]] and I [[think]] Chiaki Kuriyama a [[nifty]] actress. [[Unfortunately]], if I had to [[describe]] Shikoku in one word, it [[would]] be "fruity." This [[movie]] is silly, boring, poorly filmed, [[unimaginative]], and most of all, unscary. Kuriyama has [[minimal]] screen [[time]] as the resurrected Sayori, and her [[character]] is [[given]] [[little]] to [[work]] with. As a [[girlie]], Hinako [[shifted]] away from her [[scant]] [[villages]] to Tokyo, [[exiting]] behind her two best friends, Fumiya and Sayori. She [[returned]] as a young [[girl]], [[startled]] to find that Sayori [[dead]] when she was a [[juvenile]]. She reunites with Fumiya and they are [[terrified]] to learn that Sayori is mysteriously being [[revived]] via the [[isla]] of Shikoku. [[Ah]] boy. I [[rental]] this because I [[adores]] [[Asiatic]] [[terror]] and I [[thoughts]] Chiaki Kuriyama a [[snazzy]] actress. [[Unluckily]], if I had to [[described]] Shikoku in one word, it [[could]] be "fruity." This [[filmmaking]] is silly, boring, poorly filmed, [[uninspired]], and most of all, unscary. Kuriyama has [[minor]] screen [[times]] as the resurrected Sayori, and her [[characters]] is [[awarded]] [[scant]] to [[works]] with. --------------------------------------------- Result 3244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's hard to believe, after waiting 14 years, we wind up with this piece of cinematic garbage. The original was a high impact, dark thriller that achieved "cult" status demonstrating the fine art of cinema as directed by Paul Verhoeven. This film adds nothing, delivers nothing, and ultimately winds up in the big box of failed sequels.

The opening sequence could have triggered an intriguing set of plot developments using a considerably talented and able cast. Unfortunately we are treated to a 90 minute dissertation in the self-indulgent life of Catherine Tramell... or is it Sharon Stone. Possibly a copulation of both.

If the desire is too see a continuation of the sensually provocative stying of sex as in "B.S.1", forget it. You wind up with soft-porn boredom which ultimately upholds the old adage that a woman can be more alluring in clothes than out of them. It's interesting to note that the wonderful Charlotte Rampling was romping around in her skivvies, via the 1966 GEORGY GIRL, when Ms. Stone was only 8 years old. A very talented actress and quite adept at holding her own even here.

If you're a true cinema fan then you must see this film and judge it using your own rating system. If not, you might as well wait for the DVD release in the "rated" version, "unrated" version, "collectors" edition, or "ultimate" version, and perhaps in another 14 years we will be saturated with news of "Basic Instinct 3" at which point Ms. Stone will be 62 years old and nobody will really care. --------------------------------------------- Result 3245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Blood of the [[Sacred]], Blood of the [[Damned]]" is the third installment of the Gabriel Knight [[games]], a series of adventure [[games]] about the roguish [[writer]]/paranormal detective, Gabriel [[Knight]]. Gabriel and his companion, Grace, have been asked by Prince James of Albany to investigate a series of mysterious attacks by so-called "night visitors." When the son of Prince James is kidnapped, Gabriel pursues the night visitors to Rennes le Château, where he begins piecing together a mystery relating to the Holy Grail.

Despite the marketing, this game is not about vampires. Vampires have a token appearance in the game, but never command center stage, as did the voodoo hounfor in "Sins of the Fathers" or the werewolves in "The Beast Within." Gabriel and Grace make no attempt to uncover the true nature of vampires, or to research lore on vampires. Although the vampires do murder three people during the course of the game, their victims are chosen at random and have nothing to do with the main plot.

A large part of the charm of the first two Gabriel Knight installments was in the relationships which Gabriel formed with the villains. Through these relationships, the player could not help but [[sympathize]] with the villain, and thus the villain was transformed into more of a human and less of a monster. However, in "Blood of the Sacred," Gabriel's only interaction with the villain is through a single, [[cheesy]] interview, which does nothing to endear the villain to the player.

The roles that Gabriel and Grace play in this mystery are fairly [[futile]]. Gabriel spends his time snooping into the identities of members of a treasure-hunter tour group staying at his hotel, but what he uncovers amounts to [[nothing]] more than a red herring. Grace spends her time researching the mystery of Rennes le Château, but all her [[research]] is [[rendered]] [[superfluous]] by the presence of a [[perplexing]] ally who has known the answer to this mystery for centuries.

The [[actions]] of this [[perplexing]] ally and his polar opposite --- the vampire leader --- are [[insupportable]]. The ally leaves hints about the mystery of Rennes le Château in broad daylight and expects Grace (and not the other treasure hunters from the tour group) to find them. However, he [[could]] have revealed the mystery to Grace in its entirety on day 1, instead of putting the kidnapped child at risk for an additional 48 hours. And in the end, he simply tells Grace the mystery in its entirety anyway.

Meanwhile, the vampire leader fails to achieve the goals of centuries of scheming, because he chooses to refrain from action for two days after the kidnapping of the child. The only reason given for his decision to delay action is that he wants to savor his victory.

The game would have been much better had it been purely focused on the Holy Grail. The kidnapping and vampires should have been omitted, replaced with a race against the Vatican to uncover the mystery of Rennes le Château. Since Gabriel is portrayed more than once as reluctantly Catholic, this conflict would have had many opportunities for character development.

All in all, the game was a disappointing installment in the series, despite an improved interface and the return of Tim Curry as the voice of Gabriel Knight. "Blood of the [[Consecrated]], Blood of the [[Goddam]]" is the third installment of the Gabriel Knight [[game]], a series of adventure [[game]] about the roguish [[novelist]]/paranormal detective, Gabriel [[Ritter]]. Gabriel and his companion, Grace, have been asked by Prince James of Albany to investigate a series of mysterious attacks by so-called "night visitors." When the son of Prince James is kidnapped, Gabriel pursues the night visitors to Rennes le Château, where he begins piecing together a mystery relating to the Holy Grail.

Despite the marketing, this game is not about vampires. Vampires have a token appearance in the game, but never command center stage, as did the voodoo hounfor in "Sins of the Fathers" or the werewolves in "The Beast Within." Gabriel and Grace make no attempt to uncover the true nature of vampires, or to research lore on vampires. Although the vampires do murder three people during the course of the game, their victims are chosen at random and have nothing to do with the main plot.

A large part of the charm of the first two Gabriel Knight installments was in the relationships which Gabriel formed with the villains. Through these relationships, the player could not help but [[sympathise]] with the villain, and thus the villain was transformed into more of a human and less of a monster. However, in "Blood of the Sacred," Gabriel's only interaction with the villain is through a single, [[corny]] interview, which does nothing to endear the villain to the player.

The roles that Gabriel and Grace play in this mystery are fairly [[unnecessary]]. Gabriel spends his time snooping into the identities of members of a treasure-hunter tour group staying at his hotel, but what he uncovers amounts to [[anything]] more than a red herring. Grace spends her time researching the mystery of Rennes le Château, but all her [[investigate]] is [[render]] [[dispensable]] by the presence of a [[unnerving]] ally who has known the answer to this mystery for centuries.

The [[action]] of this [[disconcerting]] ally and his polar opposite --- the vampire leader --- are [[unacceptable]]. The ally leaves hints about the mystery of Rennes le Château in broad daylight and expects Grace (and not the other treasure hunters from the tour group) to find them. However, he [[did]] have revealed the mystery to Grace in its entirety on day 1, instead of putting the kidnapped child at risk for an additional 48 hours. And in the end, he simply tells Grace the mystery in its entirety anyway.

Meanwhile, the vampire leader fails to achieve the goals of centuries of scheming, because he chooses to refrain from action for two days after the kidnapping of the child. The only reason given for his decision to delay action is that he wants to savor his victory.

The game would have been much better had it been purely focused on the Holy Grail. The kidnapping and vampires should have been omitted, replaced with a race against the Vatican to uncover the mystery of Rennes le Château. Since Gabriel is portrayed more than once as reluctantly Catholic, this conflict would have had many opportunities for character development.

All in all, the game was a disappointing installment in the series, despite an improved interface and the return of Tim Curry as the voice of Gabriel Knight. --------------------------------------------- Result 3246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Before Cujo,there was [[Lucky]] the [[devil]] [[dog]]. [[In]] 1978,on Halloween night the movie"[[Devil]] Dog,The [[Hound]] of [[Hell]]" premiered. A [[story]] of a family getting a [[new]] puppy (from a [[farmer]] who just [[happen]] to be in the [[neighborhood]] [[selling]] [[fruits]] and vegetables) because their dog [[Skipper]] was [[killed]].Coencidence? Everyone loves the new [[dog]],but there is [[something]] [[strange]] about him.

It isn't [[long]] until the father Mike Barry([[Richard]] Crenna,First Blood)starts to notice.His wife Betty(Yvette Mimieux,[[Where]] The Boys Are,Jackson County Jail,Snowbeast)is different and his kids Charlie and Bonnie(Ike Eisenman,Witch Mountain and Fantastic Vourage and Kim Richards,Witch Mountain,Nanny and the Professor,Hello Larry,Tuff-Turf)also have changed. Does the dog have something to do with it? He's determined to find out and do whatever it takes to save his family.

This [[movie]] is [[great]] because it has Ike and Kim playing a darker side of themselves than what we saw on those witch mountain movies. This is one of the many 70's made-for-TV horror movies that was actually scary for a made-for-TV horror movie. The music was creepy and even the ending which I won't tell made you think.

This movie also stars Ken Kercheval(Cliff Barnes of Dallas)and R.G. Armstrong(who couldn't stay away from devil movies remember"Race with the Devil"?)

It's worth watching. Before Cujo,there was [[Fortunate]] the [[demon]] [[doggie]]. [[Throughout]] 1978,on Halloween night the movie"[[Fiends]] Dog,The [[Dog]] of [[Dammit]]" premiered. A [[fairytales]] of a family getting a [[novo]] puppy (from a [[farmers]] who just [[arise]] to be in the [[vicinity]] [[sold]] [[fruit]] and vegetables) because their dog [[Captains]] was [[murdering]].Coencidence? Everyone loves the new [[doggy]],but there is [[anything]] [[unusual]] about him.

It isn't [[lang]] until the father Mike Barry([[Richards]] Crenna,First Blood)starts to notice.His wife Betty(Yvette Mimieux,[[Hence]] The Boys Are,Jackson County Jail,Snowbeast)is different and his kids Charlie and Bonnie(Ike Eisenman,Witch Mountain and Fantastic Vourage and Kim Richards,Witch Mountain,Nanny and the Professor,Hello Larry,Tuff-Turf)also have changed. Does the dog have something to do with it? He's determined to find out and do whatever it takes to save his family.

This [[cinematography]] is [[wondrous]] because it has Ike and Kim playing a darker side of themselves than what we saw on those witch mountain movies. This is one of the many 70's made-for-TV horror movies that was actually scary for a made-for-TV horror movie. The music was creepy and even the ending which I won't tell made you think.

This movie also stars Ken Kercheval(Cliff Barnes of Dallas)and R.G. Armstrong(who couldn't stay away from devil movies remember"Race with the Devil"?)

It's worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 3247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Robot Jox doesn't [[suffer]] from [[story]] or bad effects. I [[mean]], this was 1990 if you know what I'm talking about. RoboCop 2 still [[used]] the stop [[animation]] as most of the movies did throughout the '80s. If you look at your biggest blockbusters during this period, most of them did what they could with the [[special]] [[effects]] shots that was available to them at the time. It wasn't until Terminator 2: [[Judgment]] Day was [[released]] the following [[year]] that a [[breakthrough]] in technology was [[realized]], and [[story]] boarders [[began]] to use that motive. But you'll have [[fond]] [[memories]] of Transformers, Gundam Wing, [[even]] Power Rangers, if you watch this [[film]]. The [[enemy]] [[robot]] is very [[menacing]]. It makes you not [[want]] to face the [[man]] without a [[really]] good back-up [[plan]]. And there are some [[great]] moments [[within]] this [[film]]. A [[traitor]]/[[spy]] is [[working]] [[within]] their midsts. Who you [[think]] is on your side, backing you up all the [[way]], [[could]] be the [[person]] you didn't [[expect]] him/her to be. And that's very [[troublesome]] to [[think]] so, don't you agree? Robot Jox doesn't [[suffers]] from [[conte]] or bad effects. I [[meaning]], this was 1990 if you know what I'm talking about. RoboCop 2 still [[utilise]] the stop [[animate]] as most of the movies did throughout the '80s. If you look at your biggest blockbusters during this period, most of them did what they could with the [[especial]] [[repercussions]] shots that was available to them at the time. It wasn't until Terminator 2: [[Judgments]] Day was [[freed]] the following [[annum]] that a [[breakdown]] in technology was [[realised]], and [[histories]] boarders [[embarked]] to use that motive. But you'll have [[likes]] [[reminiscences]] of Transformers, Gundam Wing, [[yet]] Power Rangers, if you watch this [[cinematography]]. The [[foe]] [[robotics]] is very [[endangering]]. It makes you not [[wanna]] to face the [[fella]] without a [[truly]] good back-up [[programmes]]. And there are some [[wondrous]] moments [[inside]] this [[kino]]. A [[backstabber]]/[[spies]] is [[worked]] [[inside]] their midsts. Who you [[reckon]] is on your side, backing you up all the [[routes]], [[would]] be the [[somebody]] you didn't [[expects]] him/her to be. And that's very [[pesky]] to [[thinking]] so, don't you agree? --------------------------------------------- Result 3248 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Any one who has [[seen]] Mel Gibson's The [[Passion]] of the Christ and was [[bothered]] by the gory violence [[would]] [[want]] to [[see]] this [[film]] [[instead]]. [[Though]] it wasn't a success in th box office or TV [[ratings]], The Fox [[Movie]] [[Channel]] [[still]] [[finds]] a [[real]] good motive to [[show]] this anually. I liked the [[way]] that they trained [[Chris]] Sarandon and the men who portrayed his disciples to sing in Hebrew.[[Though]] Sarandon didn't have long hair like any other Jesus would in other films, his looks are pretty close to what a Jewish man would appear. What [[surprised]] me or [[startled]] me was the scene where Caiaphas told Jesus about Pilate "And don't ever forget, that you are a Jew!" Though that may have not been a racist remark,Colin Blakely was trying to make Chris Sarandon look like garbage in the eyes of the prominent men of those days.Keith Michell's portrayal of Pilate was hulking, comparing with his previous performances in "The Story of Jacob and Joseph" and "The Story of David". But if you compare his portrayal of Pilate with Telly Savala's or Hurd Hatfield, you can say that he really painted well the impression of a Roman procurator. Any one who has [[watched]] Mel Gibson's The [[Enthusiasm]] of the Christ and was [[disturbed]] by the gory violence [[ought]] [[wish]] to [[seeing]] this [[movie]] [[however]]. [[Despite]] it wasn't a success in th box office or TV [[rating]], The Fox [[Cinematography]] [[Canals]] [[yet]] [[find]] a [[actual]] good motive to [[displaying]] this anually. I liked the [[pathways]] that they trained [[Chrissy]] Sarandon and the men who portrayed his disciples to sing in Hebrew.[[Nevertheless]] Sarandon didn't have long hair like any other Jesus would in other films, his looks are pretty close to what a Jewish man would appear. What [[dumbfounded]] me or [[surprised]] me was the scene where Caiaphas told Jesus about Pilate "And don't ever forget, that you are a Jew!" Though that may have not been a racist remark,Colin Blakely was trying to make Chris Sarandon look like garbage in the eyes of the prominent men of those days.Keith Michell's portrayal of Pilate was hulking, comparing with his previous performances in "The Story of Jacob and Joseph" and "The Story of David". But if you compare his portrayal of Pilate with Telly Savala's or Hurd Hatfield, you can say that he really painted well the impression of a Roman procurator. --------------------------------------------- Result 3249 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I'm still not sure if it was serious, or just a satire. One of those movies that uses every stupid who dunnit cliché they can think of. Arrrrgh.

Don Johnson was pretty good in it actually. But otherwise it sucked. It was over 10 years ago that I saw it, but it still hurts and won't stop lingering in my brain.

The last line in the movie really sums up how stupid it is. I won't ruin it for you, should you want to tempt fate by viewing this movie. But I garantee you a *nghya* moment at the end, with a few in between. If you have nothing better to do, and you like to point and laugh, then maybe it might be worth your while. Additionally, if you're forced to go on a date with someone you really don't like, suggest watching this movie together, and they'll probably leave you alone after they see it. That's a fair price to pay, I guess. --------------------------------------------- Result 3250 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] VERY dull, obvious, tedious Exorcist rip-off featuring a Doberman with red eyes - that's the extent of the special effects in this made-for-tv cheapie. Richard Crenna is about as animate as a chew toy. Very 70's dress & music only add to the torture. Should put you to sleep almost as fast as "The Corpse Vanishes", or "The Blue Hand". Practically worthless. MooCow says eaghhh what a stinky dog! :=8P --------------------------------------------- Result 3251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] As an engineer, I [[must]] say this show's first season [[started]] out very promising. [[Most]] of the [[applied]] [[mathematics]] were [[somewhat]] plausible, and the relationships [[portrayed]] between the Eppes [[brothers]] and father gave the [[show]] an interesting edge.

But after the first season, the show [[started]] [[degrading]], [[heavily]]. Most of the [[mathematics]] and technology [[used]] in crime [[solving]] is now [[utter]] gibberish and very [[laughable]] to all people [[involved]] in science & [[technology]] for [[real]].

The [[involvement]] from the actors still feels okay and I can imagine a [[fair]] amount of [[money]] is [[still]] going into producing each episode, but in the [[end]], this has degraded to a very [[unpleasantly]] tasting dish which is a [[mix]] of a grade C action thriller and CSI [[style]] [[cop]] [[show]].

[[If]] you are gonna watch it, [[go]] for only the first season and [[possibly]] parts of the second. [[Thereafter]] I would not waste my [[time]]. Myself, I [[gave]] the show up midway through season 3.

Season 1 - 8 stars Season 2 - 5 stars Season 3 - 3 stars

Let's [[sum]] that up to 4 stars. [[Since]] [[Charlie]] doesn't know his math [[anymore]], I won't bother with the correctness of [[mine]] either. As an engineer, I [[gotta]] say this show's first season [[inaugurated]] out very promising. [[More]] of the [[implemented]] [[calculus]] were [[slightly]] plausible, and the relationships [[depicted]] between the Eppes [[sibling]] and father gave the [[display]] an interesting edge.

But after the first season, the show [[startup]] [[degrade]], [[radically]]. Most of the [[calculus]] and technology [[using]] in crime [[tackling]] is now [[total]] gibberish and very [[ludicrous]] to all people [[implicated]] in science & [[tech]] for [[veritable]].

The [[attendance]] from the actors still feels okay and I can imagine a [[equitable]] amount of [[cash]] is [[however]] going into producing each episode, but in the [[termination]], this has degraded to a very [[uncomfortably]] tasting dish which is a [[blended]] of a grade C action thriller and CSI [[styles]] [[constabulary]] [[exposition]].

[[Though]] you are gonna watch it, [[going]] for only the first season and [[perhaps]] parts of the second. [[Afterwards]] I would not waste my [[period]]. Myself, I [[supplied]] the show up midway through season 3.

Season 1 - 8 stars Season 2 - 5 stars Season 3 - 3 stars

Let's [[suma]] that up to 4 stars. [[Because]] [[Charley]] doesn't know his math [[longer]], I won't bother with the correctness of [[mines]] either. --------------------------------------------- Result 3252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I, like many people, [[saw]] this film in the theatre when it first came out in '97. It was a below [[average]] [[film]] at [[best]], defiantly not the "masterpiece" that all these "Titanic" fanboys like to make it out as. First off, DiCaprio is a terrible actor no matter which way you look at it. People just like him because of his looks. His acting "[[skills]]" [[essentially]] consist of [[saying]] a lot of cheesy lines and [[trying]] to act sexy. Second, the film itself had a rather boring and [[simple]] plot: [[girl]] falls in [[love]] with [[guy]], [[ship]] they're on sinks, lots of [[crappy]] [[love]] scenes [[thereafter]]. [[Anyone]] with an [[IQ]] above 50 will realize this isn't [[ingenious]] in any [[way]] whatsoever. [[Nor]] is it original. Plus the [[director]] felt the [[need]] to drag it out for 3+ [[hours]]. I [[could]] [[compress]] it into a 1 hour [[block]] without losing any of the [[plot]]. In conclusion, "Titanic" is the most overrated movie to date. Why it [[got]] so much attention and [[money]] is [[beyond]] me. I, like many people, [[sawthe]] this film in the theatre when it first came out in '97. It was a below [[averages]] [[filmmaking]] at [[better]], defiantly not the "masterpiece" that all these "Titanic" fanboys like to make it out as. First off, DiCaprio is a terrible actor no matter which way you look at it. People just like him because of his looks. His acting "[[capacity]]" [[overwhelmingly]] consist of [[telling]] a lot of cheesy lines and [[try]] to act sexy. Second, the film itself had a rather boring and [[easy]] plot: [[chick]] falls in [[likes]] with [[buddy]], [[starship]] they're on sinks, lots of [[shit]] [[likes]] scenes [[subsequently]]. [[Nobody]] with an [[QI]] above 50 will realize this isn't [[artful]] in any [[pathway]] whatsoever. [[Oder]] is it original. Plus the [[headmaster]] felt the [[gotta]] to drag it out for 3+ [[hour]]. I [[did]] [[zipped]] it into a 1 hour [[bloc]] without losing any of the [[intrigue]]. In conclusion, "Titanic" is the most overrated movie to date. Why it [[gets]] so much attention and [[cash]] is [[afterlife]] me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jack Frost is Really a Cool Movie. I Mean....Its Funny. Its Violent. and Very Enjoyable. Most People Say that it Is B Rated, But That Couldn't be Farther from the truth. It has Great Special Effects and Good Acting. The Only Weird thing is of Course, The Killer Snowman. I Think this Movie was Actually one of The Best Films of the Late-Nineties. Most Films these Days lack the Criteria of A Clive Barker Master Piece. That is, Be Original and Give the Viewer What they Do not Expect. Jack Frost is Very Cool. 10 out of 10. Grade: A+. Ed Also Recommends The Movie Uncle Sam to Fans of Jack Frost. --------------------------------------------- Result 3254 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[If]] I had not read [[Pat]] Barker's 'Union Street' before seeing this [[film]], I [[would]] have [[liked]] it. Unfortuntately this is not the [[case]]. It is [[actually]] my kind of [[film]], it is well [[made]], and in no way do I want to [[say]] [[otherwise]], but as an [[adaptation]], it fails from every [[angle]].

The [[harrowing]] [[novel]] about the reality of living in a northern England working-class area grabbed hold of my heartstrings and refused to let go for weeks after I had finished. I was put through tears, repulsion, shock, anger, sympathy and misery when reading about the women of Union Street. Excellent. A novel that at times I felt I could not read any more of, but I novel I simply couldn't put down. Depressing yes, but utterly gripping.

The film. Oh dear. Hollywood took Barker's truth and reality, and showered a layer of sweet icing sugar over the top of it. A beautiful [[film]], an inspiring soundtrack, excellent performances, a tale of hope and romance...yes. An adaptation of 'Union Street'...no.

The women of Union Street and their stories are condensed into Fonda's character, their stories are touched on, but many are discarded. I accept that some of Barker's tales are sensitive issues and are too horrific for mass viewing, and that a film with around 7 leading protagonists just isn't practical, but the content is not my main issue. The essence and the real gut of the novel is lost - darkness and rain, broken windows covered with cardboard, and the graphically described stench of poverty is replaced with sunshine, pretty houses, and a twinkling William's score.

If you enjoyed the film for its positivity and hope in the face of 'reality', I advise that you hesitate to read the book without first preparing yourself for something more like 'Schindler's List'...but without the happy ending. [[Though]] I had not read [[Patricia]] Barker's 'Union Street' before seeing this [[filmmaking]], I [[should]] have [[wished]] it. Unfortuntately this is not the [[lawsuit]]. It is [[genuinely]] my kind of [[kino]], it is well [[effected]], and in no way do I want to [[tell]] [[else]], but as an [[readjustment]], it fails from every [[angles]].

The [[horrifying]] [[newer]] about the reality of living in a northern England working-class area grabbed hold of my heartstrings and refused to let go for weeks after I had finished. I was put through tears, repulsion, shock, anger, sympathy and misery when reading about the women of Union Street. Excellent. A novel that at times I felt I could not read any more of, but I novel I simply couldn't put down. Depressing yes, but utterly gripping.

The film. Oh dear. Hollywood took Barker's truth and reality, and showered a layer of sweet icing sugar over the top of it. A beautiful [[cinematographic]], an inspiring soundtrack, excellent performances, a tale of hope and romance...yes. An adaptation of 'Union Street'...no.

The women of Union Street and their stories are condensed into Fonda's character, their stories are touched on, but many are discarded. I accept that some of Barker's tales are sensitive issues and are too horrific for mass viewing, and that a film with around 7 leading protagonists just isn't practical, but the content is not my main issue. The essence and the real gut of the novel is lost - darkness and rain, broken windows covered with cardboard, and the graphically described stench of poverty is replaced with sunshine, pretty houses, and a twinkling William's score.

If you enjoyed the film for its positivity and hope in the face of 'reality', I advise that you hesitate to read the book without first preparing yourself for something more like 'Schindler's List'...but without the happy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 3255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I saw this movie when I was about 8-years-old and I liked it but it wasn't until I watched it again at the age of 13 that I really understood it for what it is; a cartoon about a criminal dog with a real heart of gold "adopts" a little girl in order to exploit her for her talents to talk to animals. The dog star,Charlie B. Barkin, is murdered by his formal business partner, Carface, (who is absolutely [[diabolical]] by the way). His soul then goes to where else but Heaven only to find a golden watch that is really his life's time, which Charlie, being the sneaky but lovable cad that he is steals and rewinds, sending him back to Earth. Once back on Earth, Charlie goes about seeking revenge on the evil Carface. This is how he comes upon young Anne-Marie, the lonely little orphan that can [[talk]] to [[animals]] whom Charlie plans to [[scam]] for her talents in [[order]] to [[get]] back at his [[enemy]] Carface. But [[scoundrel]] [[Charlie]] actually comes to care for young Anne-Marie and his [[plans]] unfoil as he [[must]] [[make]] up his [[mind]] to do what is right after Anne-Marie discovers what her "[[best]] [[friend]]" [[Charlie]] has really been [[using]] her to [[make]] money for a new and better dog [[casino]]. Now he [[must]] [[rescue]] her from the [[dreaded]] Carface. I [[still]] [[love]] this [[movie]] [[even]] at the age of 22. The [[idea]] and plot [[really]] are [[quite]] [[different]] and [[original]] from that of [[many]] other animated [[films]]. I [[especially]] like the [[idea]] that a [[dog]] plays the role of the [[villain]] for once. Carface was [[even]] better than he was in the All Dogs [[go]] to Heaven sequel. [[In]] that [[picture]] he [[appeared]] [[quite]] [[dubious]] to his role of villain. I saw this movie when I was about 8-years-old and I liked it but it wasn't until I watched it again at the age of 13 that I really understood it for what it is; a cartoon about a criminal dog with a real heart of gold "adopts" a little girl in order to exploit her for her talents to talk to animals. The dog star,Charlie B. Barkin, is murdered by his formal business partner, Carface, (who is absolutely [[unholy]] by the way). His soul then goes to where else but Heaven only to find a golden watch that is really his life's time, which Charlie, being the sneaky but lovable cad that he is steals and rewinds, sending him back to Earth. Once back on Earth, Charlie goes about seeking revenge on the evil Carface. This is how he comes upon young Anne-Marie, the lonely little orphan that can [[chitchat]] to [[beasts]] whom Charlie plans to [[swindling]] for her talents in [[edict]] to [[obtain]] back at his [[enemies]] Carface. But [[varmint]] [[Charley]] actually comes to care for young Anne-Marie and his [[systems]] unfoil as he [[ought]] [[deliver]] up his [[intellect]] to do what is right after Anne-Marie discovers what her "[[better]] [[friends]]" [[Charley]] has really been [[used]] her to [[deliver]] money for a new and better dog [[gambling]]. Now he [[should]] [[salvage]] her from the [[fearsome]] Carface. I [[however]] [[amour]] this [[flick]] [[yet]] at the age of 22. The [[thinking]] and plot [[genuinely]] are [[altogether]] [[assorted]] and [[initial]] from that of [[several]] other animated [[movie]]. I [[primarily]] like the [[thinking]] that a [[pooch]] plays the role of the [[hoodlum]] for once. Carface was [[yet]] better than he was in the All Dogs [[going]] to Heaven sequel. [[Among]] that [[visuals]] he [[emerged]] [[very]] [[dodgy]] to his role of villain. --------------------------------------------- Result 3256 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] A couple of days after writing about how [[garbage]] like [[MAD]] COWS and THIS [[FILTHY]] [[EARTH]] [[receive]] [[money]] while Ange , Duncan and Theo are totally ignored I had to [[sit]] through [[yet]] another British [[movie]] * that had me [[scratching]] my head as to why it received a [[single]] [[penny]] . Some people may [[claim]] that because [[DEAD]] [[BABIES]] is based upon a [[highly]] regarded [[novel]] it has an in [[built]] market but both THIS [[FILTHY]] [[EARTH]] and [[MAD]] [[COWS]] were also [[adapted]] from novels and they were an ordeal to [[sit]] through as well

I had read the [[synopsis]] of the plot where a bunch of [[high]] class wasters go to a remote mansion where they're [[stalked]] by an internet [[cult]] but to be honest this isn't really how the [[story]] unravels and [[anyone]] [[expecting]] [[Friday]] THE 13TH meets THE SHINING is [[going]] to be bitterly disappointed [[since]] 90-95% of the [[running]] [[time]] is [[taken]] up with [[said]] [[characters]] [[taking]] [[drugs]] and [[discussing]] [[sex]] . And what [[hateful]] [[characters]] they are too . Not one of them is [[likable]] in any [[way]] and within minutes you'll be getting [[nostalgic]] for Stalin , Mao and Pol [[Pot]] [[hoping]] that [[next]] [[time]] [[someone]] embarks on communist democide they'll be successful in creating an [[egalitarian]] [[utopia]] . [[Anything]] that will [[signal]] the [[end]] of such [[decadent]] bourgeois [[meaningless]] that the hateful [[characters]] in this movie embark upon can only be [[welcomed]]

Not content with giving us a [[movie]] where the plot is meandering and where the [[audience]] fail to connect with the [[characters]] the [[director]] continues to spoil [[things]] further by [[getting]] all clever and [[arty]] . No doubt that is to impress us so we will [[fall]] upon our knees and cry " [[Oh]] my [[god]] , what a [[wonderful]] director the [[way]] he bamboozles us with his [[highly]] artistic technique and only a [[worthless]] pleb will fail to appreciate what a [[god]] [[given]] talent this [[man]] is " . I'm sure the [[vast]] majority of people either [[screamed]] " [[How]] come my [[projects]] [[got]] turned down while [[crap]] like this didn't ? " or " WTF was the last half [[hour]] of this piece of [[crap]] all about ? " You [[might]] defend the [[movie]] by saying the [[original]] source novel was unfilmable and this makes the film unwatchable . I will agree that this [[movie]] is unwatchable

* I know the IMDb classes this as an American movie but the style and faults with DEAD BABIES is uniquely British . Americans might think they've got things tough with Bush but we've got Tony Blair , not to mention DEAD BABIES , MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH . No wonder everyone is ashamed to be British in the 21st century A couple of days after writing about how [[detritus]] like [[CRAZY]] COWS and THIS [[DIRTY]] [[LAND]] [[receives]] [[cash]] while Ange , Duncan and Theo are totally ignored I had to [[sitting]] through [[however]] another British [[filmmaking]] * that had me [[scraping]] my head as to why it received a [[exclusive]] [[benny]] . Some people may [[claims]] that because [[DIE]] [[BABE]] is based upon a [[incredibly]] regarded [[newer]] it has an in [[erected]] market but both THIS [[DIRTY]] [[EARTHLY]] and [[ENRAGED]] [[CATTLE]] were also [[adapting]] from novels and they were an ordeal to [[sitting]] through as well

I had read the [[summary]] of the plot where a bunch of [[supreme]] class wasters go to a remote mansion where they're [[harassed]] by an internet [[heresy]] but to be honest this isn't really how the [[histories]] unravels and [[everybody]] [[waiting]] [[Thursday]] THE 13TH meets THE SHINING is [[gonna]] to be bitterly disappointed [[because]] 90-95% of the [[execute]] [[times]] is [[picked]] up with [[says]] [[trait]] [[picked]] [[drug]] and [[talk]] [[sexuality]] . And what [[despicable]] [[character]] they are too . Not one of them is [[sympathetic]] in any [[route]] and within minutes you'll be getting [[homesick]] for Stalin , Mao and Pol [[Herb]] [[waiting]] that [[future]] [[moment]] [[everybody]] embarks on communist democide they'll be successful in creating an [[equitable]] [[fantasy]] . [[Nothing]] that will [[signalling]] the [[ends]] of such [[rotten]] bourgeois [[vain]] that the hateful [[character]] in this movie embark upon can only be [[complimented]]

Not content with giving us a [[filmmaking]] where the plot is meandering and where the [[spectators]] fail to connect with the [[character]] the [[headmaster]] continues to spoil [[matters]] further by [[obtain]] all clever and [[artsy]] . No doubt that is to impress us so we will [[autumn]] upon our knees and cry " [[Aw]] my [[lord]] , what a [[sumptuous]] director the [[route]] he bamboozles us with his [[exceptionally]] artistic technique and only a [[vain]] pleb will fail to appreciate what a [[goodness]] [[awarded]] talent this [[dude]] is " . I'm sure the [[grande]] majority of people either [[exclaimed]] " [[Mode]] come my [[project]] [[ai]] turned down while [[dammit]] like this didn't ? " or " WTF was the last half [[hours]] of this piece of [[shit]] all about ? " You [[probability]] defend the [[flick]] by saying the [[initial]] source novel was unfilmable and this makes the film unwatchable . I will agree that this [[filmmaking]] is unwatchable

* I know the IMDb classes this as an American movie but the style and faults with DEAD BABIES is uniquely British . Americans might think they've got things tough with Bush but we've got Tony Blair , not to mention DEAD BABIES , MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH . No wonder everyone is ashamed to be British in the 21st century --------------------------------------------- Result 3257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I saw this film last night following a lot of good [[reviews]] from many sources. I would like to point out that if your not ready to try and work out continuously who is who and what it all means you will [[hate]] this film.

I am still [[struggling]] to understand the roles of the [[actors]] in this film, the [[film]] [[jumps]] from different [[stories]] and does not allow you to really [[empathise]] with any of the [[roles]].

For the political buff's and those interested in corruption in other world governments out there this film is [[probably]] quite [[good]], but to the average movie watcher this film is [[awkward]],very boring in places and you will leave the [[cinema]] confused and [[annoyed]] that you paid the entrance fee.

see it if your ready to focus 100% on every minute detail or politics interest you. don't see it, if you actually like watching films. I saw this film last night following a lot of good [[review]] from many sources. I would like to point out that if your not ready to try and work out continuously who is who and what it all means you will [[detested]] this film.

I am still [[fight]] to understand the roles of the [[players]] in this film, the [[films]] [[salta]] from different [[histories]] and does not allow you to really [[sympathize]] with any of the [[duties]].

For the political buff's and those interested in corruption in other world governments out there this film is [[undeniably]] quite [[alright]], but to the average movie watcher this film is [[tricky]],very boring in places and you will leave the [[filmmaking]] confused and [[outraged]] that you paid the entrance fee.

see it if your ready to focus 100% on every minute detail or politics interest you. don't see it, if you actually like watching films. --------------------------------------------- Result 3258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie is the [[perfect]] illustration of how [[NOT]] to make a sci fi movie. The [[worst]] tendency in sci-fi is to make your [[theme]] an [[awful]], sophomoric, pseudo-Orwellian/Huxleyan/whateverian "[[vision]]" of "the human future."

[[Science]] fiction filmmakers (and authors), as geeks, take themselves very seriously given the [[high]] crap-to-good-stuff ratio of their genre. I think other genres with a high CTGSR (yes, I just made it up, relax), like horror or action or even romantic [[comedy]], seem to have a little [[better]] grasp of the [[fact]] that they are not [[changing]] the world with some [[profound]] "message."

Sci fi can [[certainly]] be successful on a serious level, as [[numerous]] [[great]] filmmakers have [[proven]]. But there is an [[immense]] [[downside]] to the [[whole]] [[concept]], which is represented by "Robot Jox," with its low-rent [[construction]] of "the future" ([[lone]] good [[design]] [[element]]: the [[bizarre]], slick-looking billboard ads all over the [[place]] that [[encourage]] [[women]] to have more [[babies]]) and its painfully heavy-handed "Iliad" parallels (He's NAMED ACHILLES [[FOR]] GOD'S SAKE! I [[actually]] didn't [[pick]] up on this until I [[saw]] the [[film]] for like the tenth time, but I went to public school, so the filmmakers are not exonerated.)

Of course, if you're a crazy [[movie]] freak [[like]] me, this [[downside]] has a [[great]] [[upside]]. I absolutely LOVE [[movies]] like this, because [[bad]] [[movies]] are [[quite]] [[often]] more [[fun]] and [[sometimes]] even more interesting than [[good]] ones. It's [[kind]] of a [[Lester]] Bangs approach to [[movie]] viewing, I guess.

[[Note]]: The lead in this [[movie]] (Gary Graham? Is that his [[name]]? I [[refuse]] to [[go]] [[check]].) is really not that bad. He makes a go of it. He's [[kind]] of [[cool]], especially when he's [[drunk]]/hung over. This movie is the [[perfected]] illustration of how [[NOPE]] to make a sci fi movie. The [[worse]] tendency in sci-fi is to make your [[themes]] an [[scary]], sophomoric, pseudo-Orwellian/Huxleyan/whateverian "[[eyesight]]" of "the human future."

[[Sciences]] fiction filmmakers (and authors), as geeks, take themselves very seriously given the [[supremo]] crap-to-good-stuff ratio of their genre. I think other genres with a high CTGSR (yes, I just made it up, relax), like horror or action or even romantic [[comedian]], seem to have a little [[best]] grasp of the [[facto]] that they are not [[shift]] the world with some [[deep]] "message."

Sci fi can [[definitely]] be successful on a serious level, as [[many]] [[large]] filmmakers have [[proved]]. But there is an [[whopping]] [[drawback]] to the [[totality]] [[concepts]], which is represented by "Robot Jox," with its low-rent [[architectural]] of "the future" ([[loney]] good [[devising]] [[aspect]]: the [[freaky]], slick-looking billboard ads all over the [[placing]] that [[encourages]] [[girl]] to have more [[baby]]) and its painfully heavy-handed "Iliad" parallels (He's NAMED ACHILLES [[DURING]] GOD'S SAKE! I [[indeed]] didn't [[selected]] up on this until I [[witnessed]] the [[movie]] for like the tenth time, but I went to public school, so the filmmakers are not exonerated.)

Of course, if you're a crazy [[filmmaking]] freak [[iike]] me, this [[drawback]] has a [[magnificent]] [[upwards]]. I absolutely LOVE [[film]] like this, because [[rotten]] [[filmmaking]] are [[abundantly]] [[routinely]] more [[entertaining]] and [[sometime]] even more interesting than [[alright]] ones. It's [[genus]] of a [[Leicester]] Bangs approach to [[film]] viewing, I guess.

[[Remark]]: The lead in this [[filmmaking]] (Gary Graham? Is that his [[names]]? I [[repudiate]] to [[going]] [[checks]].) is really not that bad. He makes a go of it. He's [[genre]] of [[groovy]], especially when he's [[drunken]]/hung over. --------------------------------------------- Result 3259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Not [[since]] The [[Simpsons]] [[made]] it's [[debut]] has there been a sitcom that I didn't want to [[turn]] of in a [[matter]] of 2 minutes. It has of course been [[said]] that The [[Simpsons]] [[killed]] the sitcom. Not this one [[though]].

The first season was so so as the [[teenage]] characters were not [[quite]] as [[outrageous]] as they later [[became]]. They [[even]] went to school sometimes. The following seasons the [[character]] where fledged out. Eric, the [[sarcastic]] twit, Donna, his levelheaded girlfriend, Kelso, the dim bulb, Hyde, the conspiracy theorist and anti-establishment punk, Fez, the pervert exchange [[student]] and [[finally]] [[Jackie]], the spoiled [[rich]] floozy. As for the adult characters there was Eric's [[mom]], the "can you [[believe]] she is so ditzy" suburban [[mom]], Eric's dad, the [[straight]] [[arrow]] who of course wasn't such a [[hard]] [[ass]] as he [[seemed]], Donna's goofy dad and her [[dumb]] [[blonde]] mom. [[Everybody]] are [[true]] to their [[characters]] but special kudos to Kurtwood Smith who [[finds]] the [[perfect]] [[balance]] between [[toughness]] and [[still]] makes his Red [[Forman]] [[quite]] sympathetic without [[making]] us [[throw]] up with unexpected cuteness.

Topher Grace is of course the [[main]] [[reason]] why this [[show]] is so good. It's a [[tough]] [[character]] to play because it doesn't [[allow]] the actor to indulge in [[wild]] overacting like the Kelso character, [[played]] competently by [[Ashton]] Kutcher. I [[enjoyed]] [[seeing]] the two [[characters]] [[interact]] because they are the most [[different]].

Hyde's character is a bit [[harder]] to enjoy because he is more [[realistic]] and do we really [[need]] to see the orphan [[story]] for the umpteenth [[time]], [[although]] I will [[say]] that the [[writers]] came up with a brilliant [[story]] [[arc]] for him in the [[last]] seasons.

Jackie, played by [[Family]] Guy [[voice]] [[artist]] Mila Kunis is [[hilarious]] and she has a [[nails]] on a [[chalkboard]] type voice, which actually fits her [[character]]. The only sad part is that we didn't see more scenes with her and Eric because they were [[f]]...... [[hilarious]] [[together]]. Too much [[story]] was [[wasted]] on her [[relationship]] [[problems]] since we already got that in [[spades]] with Eric and Donna.

Last I will [[say]] that the [[casting]] of [[guest]] [[actors]] were [[always]] [[great]]. A few favorites: Fez' humongous girlfriend in the mid-seasons, Pastor Dan, the totally awesome Leo played by the equally awesome Thomas Chong, another one of Fez' girlfriends who is totally certifiable and a special appearance by the teenage witch Sabrina as a slutty catholic girl.

Coming up next on Fox, whatever. Not [[because]] The [[Simpson]] [[introduced]] it's [[infancy]] has there been a sitcom that I didn't want to [[converting]] of in a [[topic]] of 2 minutes. It has of course been [[indicated]] that The [[Simpson]] [[murdering]] the sitcom. Not this one [[while]].

The first season was so so as the [[adolescents]] characters were not [[pretty]] as [[loathsome]] as they later [[was]]. They [[yet]] went to school sometimes. The following seasons the [[trait]] where fledged out. Eric, the [[satirical]] twit, Donna, his levelheaded girlfriend, Kelso, the dim bulb, Hyde, the conspiracy theorist and anti-establishment punk, Fez, the pervert exchange [[students]] and [[lastly]] [[Melanie]], the spoiled [[wealthy]] floozy. As for the adult characters there was Eric's [[mother]], the "can you [[reckon]] she is so ditzy" suburban [[mummy]], Eric's dad, the [[successive]] [[arrows]] who of course wasn't such a [[difficult]] [[butt]] as he [[appeared]], Donna's goofy dad and her [[silly]] [[blond]] mom. [[Somebody]] are [[real]] to their [[trait]] but special kudos to Kurtwood Smith who [[discovers]] the [[flawless]] [[equilibrium]] between [[endurance]] and [[again]] makes his Red [[Foreman]] [[rather]] sympathetic without [[doing]] us [[toss]] up with unexpected cuteness.

Topher Grace is of course the [[principal]] [[cause]] why this [[showings]] is so good. It's a [[stiff]] [[trait]] to play because it doesn't [[enable]] the actor to indulge in [[feral]] overacting like the Kelso character, [[done]] competently by [[Aston]] Kutcher. I [[liked]] [[witnessing]] the two [[attribute]] [[communicating]] because they are the most [[several]].

Hyde's character is a bit [[louder]] to enjoy because he is more [[practical]] and do we really [[required]] to see the orphan [[stories]] for the umpteenth [[moment]], [[though]] I will [[said]] that the [[authors]] came up with a brilliant [[storytelling]] [[archangel]] for him in the [[final]] seasons.

Jackie, played by [[Families]] Guy [[vocals]] [[entertainer]] Mila Kunis is [[funny]] and she has a [[fingernails]] on a [[blackboard]] type voice, which actually fits her [[characters]]. The only sad part is that we didn't see more scenes with her and Eric because they were [[e]]...... [[comic]] [[jointly]]. Too much [[storytelling]] was [[squandered]] on her [[nexus]] [[difficulty]] since we already got that in [[shovels]] with Eric and Donna.

Last I will [[tell]] that the [[foundry]] of [[invited]] [[actresses]] were [[invariably]] [[wondrous]]. A few favorites: Fez' humongous girlfriend in the mid-seasons, Pastor Dan, the totally awesome Leo played by the equally awesome Thomas Chong, another one of Fez' girlfriends who is totally certifiable and a special appearance by the teenage witch Sabrina as a slutty catholic girl.

Coming up next on Fox, whatever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Visconti's first film has all his trademark visual flair and immaculate technique, accompanied by compelling performances from Massimo Girotti as the handsome drifter and, best of all, Clara Calamai as the fabulous, frantic Giovanna. Remade several times as 'The Postman Rings Twice' but never bettered. Can't believe this was the man's first film! It shows the confidence of someone at the zenith of their career. --------------------------------------------- Result 3261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know much about the Rat Pack, and Frank Sinatra always seemed a bit too self-consciously full of himself to me. So when I call this one of my all-time faves, it's nothing to do with a tribute-band mentality. As another reviewer says, Mad Dog Time is about symbolism, not realism. It's kafkaesque (a pity Kyle MacLachlan is probably the weakest of a very strong crowd, when he was so good as Josef K), it's stylish, knowing, sardonic and slick. Jeff Goldblum is navigating his way around a variety of characters, trying not to get shot and acting deftly rather than dorkily, trying to stay abreast of what he knows and others don't, whom he can outshoot and whom he can't. Gabriel Byrne and Richard Dreyfuss (his best performance) have a ball, and the supporting cast look spot-on. The symbolism, the settings (the one outdoor motion shot with Jeff Goldblum walking down the steps seems really weird after so much lounge lizardry), the dialogue (style, not practicality, is the order of the day), it's all about characters interacting, not really gangsterism. Fun to watch, must've been fun to do. What the critics were up to is really a mystery... --------------------------------------------- Result 3262 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] i [[almost]] did not [[go]] [[see]] this movie because i [[remember]] march of the penguin was not that much exciting. I went [[mainly]] because Disney [[promised]] to plant a tree if i go see it on the [[opening]] weekend, but after i did go see it, it was [[simply]] [[amazing]]; the [[fact]] that the photographers can capture [[impossible]] images are [[simply]] worth your money. You [[also]] [[get]] to see [[different]] habitats, [[different]] vegetation, [[animals]], and natural phenomenons that will not only shock you - [[simply]] because you would never [[expect]] nature to be so magical and [[dynamic]] - but [[also]] [[touch]] your souls and [[raise]] the [[question]] of [[humanity]] [[versus]] the [[world]], of how our [[lives]] have [[deviated]] from [[nature]] to such a [[degree]] that we take for [[granted]] of the natural beauty and [[miracles]] that are quintessential to our biosphere. You don't have to be an [[earth]] lover or a tree-hugging [[environmentalist]] to [[appreciate]] the mere awesomeness of this [[documentary]]. You [[simply]] have to be a [[curious]] soul who [[questions]] the value and [[miracle]] of living. Enjoy! i [[practically]] did not [[going]] [[seeing]] this movie because i [[rember]] march of the penguin was not that much exciting. I went [[predominantly]] because Disney [[promises]] to plant a tree if i go see it on the [[initiation]] weekend, but after i did go see it, it was [[mere]] [[breathtaking]]; the [[facto]] that the photographers can capture [[impractical]] images are [[merely]] worth your money. You [[similarly]] [[obtains]] to see [[multiple]] habitats, [[several]] vegetation, [[zoo]], and natural phenomenons that will not only shock you - [[mere]] because you would never [[hopes]] nature to be so magical and [[energetic]] - but [[apart]] [[toque]] your souls and [[raises]] the [[issue]] of [[humanist]] [[against]] the [[globe]], of how our [[life]] have [[veered]] from [[personage]] to such a [[diploma]] that we take for [[attributed]] of the natural beauty and [[marvels]] that are quintessential to our biosphere. You don't have to be an [[overland]] lover or a tree-hugging [[biologist]] to [[thankful]] the mere awesomeness of this [[documentation]]. You [[merely]] have to be a [[bizarre]] soul who [[issues]] the value and [[miracles]] of living. Enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 3263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I got in to this excellent program in about season 4 and since then i have seen all the episodes got all the episodes on DVD and keeps getting better and better with the seasons of 9 and 10. It now may not have Richard Dean Anderson now but the addition of Ben Browder and Claudie Black it has still given the show more strength and original still even after 10 seasons. Sadly now the sci-fi channel got rid of this amazing show with no hope relay for a 11 season there are making two direct to DVD movie and hopefully more. Atlantis is still going strong on its 4th seasons. And there is a third spin off in the works the stargate franchise is nowhere near dead. This TV show is a must see for all sci-fi fans and people of genres because this has such a wide range of things to appeal to all ages and all types of people Watch IT !!!!! 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3264 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I had [[high]] [[expectations]] of this [[movie]] (the title, translated, is "How We Get Rid of the Others"). After all, the [[concept]] is [[great]]: a [[near]] future in which the ruling elite has taken the [[consequence]] of the right-wing government's constant verbal and legislative persecution of so-called [[freeloaders]] and the [[left]] wing in general, and decided to just [[kill]] off everyone who cannot prove that they're [[contributing]] [[something]] to the establishment (the [[establishment]] being called "the common good", but actually meaning the interests of the ruling capitalist ideology).

Very cool idea! Ideal for biting satire! Only, this movie completely [[blows]] its chance. The satire comes out only in a few scenes and performances of absurdity, but this satire is not sustained; it is neither sharp nor witty. And for an alleged comedy, the movie has nearly no funny scenes. The comedy, I assume, is supposed to be in the absurdity of the situations, but the situations are largely uncomfortable and over-serious, rather than [[evoking]] either laughter or thought.

The [[script]] is [[rife]] with [[grave]] [[errors]] in disposition. The [[action]] should have [[focused]] on the political aspects and how wrong it would be to do such a thing, but instead oodles of time are spent on a young woman who was the one that wrote the new laws for fun, and who's trying to save everybody, by organizing a resistance that ships people to Africa. All this is [[beside]] the point! A movie like this should not pretend to be so serious! It's a satire! A political [[statement]]. But it doesn't even begin to actually address the problem it's supposed to be about. Maybe it was afraid of going too far? How cowardly. That's not art. It's not even real satire.

Søren Pilmark, a very serious and by now one of Denmark's absolutely senior actors, was very good. He largely carried what little entertainment value the movie had. Everybody else: nothing special (well, perhaps except for Lene Poulsen, who did supply a convincing performance).

In fact, a problem with most Danish movies is that the language never sounds natural. Neither the formulation nor the delivery. Why is it so difficult to make it sound right? Why must it be so stilted and artificial? I hope, when people look at these movies fifty years from now, they don't think that this was how people talked in general Danish society.

3 out of 10. I had [[higher]] [[outlook]] of this [[kino]] (the title, translated, is "How We Get Rid of the Others"). After all, the [[concepts]] is [[resplendent]]: a [[nearer]] future in which the ruling elite has taken the [[implications]] of the right-wing government's constant verbal and legislative persecution of so-called [[parasites]] and the [[gauche]] wing in general, and decided to just [[mata]] off everyone who cannot prove that they're [[contributed]] [[anything]] to the establishment (the [[creations]] being called "the common good", but actually meaning the interests of the ruling capitalist ideology).

Very cool idea! Ideal for biting satire! Only, this movie completely [[strokes]] its chance. The satire comes out only in a few scenes and performances of absurdity, but this satire is not sustained; it is neither sharp nor witty. And for an alleged comedy, the movie has nearly no funny scenes. The comedy, I assume, is supposed to be in the absurdity of the situations, but the situations are largely uncomfortable and over-serious, rather than [[invoking]] either laughter or thought.

The [[hyphen]] is [[ubiquitous]] with [[graveyard]] [[mistakes]] in disposition. The [[measures]] should have [[concentrated]] on the political aspects and how wrong it would be to do such a thing, but instead oodles of time are spent on a young woman who was the one that wrote the new laws for fun, and who's trying to save everybody, by organizing a resistance that ships people to Africa. All this is [[alongside]] the point! A movie like this should not pretend to be so serious! It's a satire! A political [[declaration]]. But it doesn't even begin to actually address the problem it's supposed to be about. Maybe it was afraid of going too far? How cowardly. That's not art. It's not even real satire.

Søren Pilmark, a very serious and by now one of Denmark's absolutely senior actors, was very good. He largely carried what little entertainment value the movie had. Everybody else: nothing special (well, perhaps except for Lene Poulsen, who did supply a convincing performance).

In fact, a problem with most Danish movies is that the language never sounds natural. Neither the formulation nor the delivery. Why is it so difficult to make it sound right? Why must it be so stilted and artificial? I hope, when people look at these movies fifty years from now, they don't think that this was how people talked in general Danish society.

3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[film]] begins with people on [[Earth]] discovering that their [[rocket]] to [[Mars]] had not been [[lost]] but was just [[drifting]] out in Space near out [[planet]]. When it's [[retrieved]], one of the crew members is [[ill]], one is [[alive]] and the other two are missing. What happened to them is [[told]] through a [[flashback]] by the surviving [[member]].

While on Mars, the crew was [[apparently]] attacked by a whole host of very silly bug-eyed monsters. Oddly, while the sets were pretty good, the monsters were [[among]] the [[silliest]] I have [[seen]] on film. Plus, in an [[odd]] attempt at realism, the production used a process [[called]] "Cinemagic". Unfortunately, this wonderful innovation just made the film look pretty cheap when they were on the surface of Mars AND the intensity of the [[redness]] practically made my eyes bleed--it was THAT [[bad]]!! Despite all the cheese, the film did have a somewhat interesting plot as well as a good message about space travel. For lovers of the genre, it's well worth seeing. For others, you may just find the whole thing rather silly--see for yourself and decide.

While by today's standards this isn't an especially good sci-fi film, compared with the films being made at the time, it [[stacks]] up pretty well.

PS--When you watch the film, [[pay]] careful attention to [[Dr]]. Tremayne. He looks like the spitting image of Dr. Quest from the "Jonny Quest" cartoon! Plus, he sounds and acts a lot [[like]] him, too. The [[filmmaking]] begins with people on [[Overland]] discovering that their [[projectile]] to [[Mar]] had not been [[forfeited]] but was just [[drift]] out in Space near out [[globe]]. When it's [[regain]], one of the crew members is [[patient]], one is [[vibrant]] and the other two are missing. What happened to them is [[say]] through a [[flash]] by the surviving [[members]].

While on Mars, the crew was [[reportedly]] attacked by a whole host of very silly bug-eyed monsters. Oddly, while the sets were pretty good, the monsters were [[between]] the [[dumbest]] I have [[saw]] on film. Plus, in an [[weird]] attempt at realism, the production used a process [[drew]] "Cinemagic". Unfortunately, this wonderful innovation just made the film look pretty cheap when they were on the surface of Mars AND the intensity of the [[blush]] practically made my eyes bleed--it was THAT [[naughty]]!! Despite all the cheese, the film did have a somewhat interesting plot as well as a good message about space travel. For lovers of the genre, it's well worth seeing. For others, you may just find the whole thing rather silly--see for yourself and decide.

While by today's standards this isn't an especially good sci-fi film, compared with the films being made at the time, it [[funnels]] up pretty well.

PS--When you watch the film, [[payrolls]] careful attention to [[Doktor]]. Tremayne. He looks like the spitting image of Dr. Quest from the "Jonny Quest" cartoon! Plus, he sounds and acts a lot [[iike]] him, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[tried]] to [[remove]] [[anything]] that might be [[considered]] a [[spoiler]]. I also assume that you've [[seen]] the first [[movie]] or at [[least]] know the general [[gist]], so if you haven't some of this might not make sense.

Plot: This [[movie]] beats the audience over the head with [[tired]] [[philosophical]] [[ramblings]] again and again in an [[attempt]] to [[get]] the [[theme]] [[across]]. We are bombarded again and again by questions of [[purpose]], and destiny, and [[choice]], and [[forced]] to [[endure]] the long, torturous platitude sessions that contain them.

Neo, awakened from a dream in the [[last]] [[movie]], now begins a period of [[realization]] about his own existence. There are a lot of revelations in this movie, which I'll be vague about so they won't seem like spoilers.

*If you're [[still]] worried [[vague]] references will spoil the [[movie]], don't read the paragraph below.*

The strength and [[weakness]] of [[faith]] is revealed. The strengths and [[weaknesses]] of [[love]], and its [[temporary]] [[nature]], are [[also]] revealed. The interdependence of [[humans]] and [[technology]], and our [[faith]] in [[technology]], are also revealed. The importance of choice and [[experience]] is revealed. [[Explaining]] further [[things]] that are [[revealed]] [[would]] [[go]] into too much detail, so I will refrain (as the [[guidelines]] for [[writing]] a commentary asks). Btw, by "revealed" I [[mean]] pounded through our ears and [[eyes]] like nails.

Storyline: [[So]] how does Neo and the gang get from the [[end]] of the [[last]] [[movie]] to the [[beginning]] of the next one? [[In]] short, they [[keep]] the [[faith]], and [[use]] and abuse overly-stylized [[action]] and bullet-time like it's going out of style (and after this [[display]], I'm hoping movie-goers and [[makers]] alike learn to [[appreciate]] subtlety and originality a [[bit]] more). More on that later. To not spoil anything, I will [[say]] no more than the [[promo]] [[material]] already did: Neo is [[still]] [[trying]] to [[figure]] out the Matrix, and he is looking for answers while [[trying]] to [[save]] the [[humans]], and Zion, all while baddies are going after him and his cohorts. The movie pretty much picks up where the last one left off.

Action: [[While]] martial [[arts]] [[action]] and gunplay peppered its predecessor in somewhat equal parts, this movie focuses [[much]] more on martial arts than gunplay, adding swords, sais, etc. to the mix. Special effects are so often used and waved in the audience's face that it becomes really tiresome. I've discussed this movie with friends and coworkers alike, and nearly all of them found some of the action sequences--especially the "Smith fight" we all heard would be in the movie--to be too long and tedious. This is a huge red flag for action fans, because the end of an action sequence should either leave you wanting a slight bit more, or completely content with the awesomeness that just occured.

These fights scenes do neither. They are over-stylized, over-the-top sequences that are wooden and uninspired. In the first movie, there was a real sense of desperation to some of the action, a sense that fighting was for survival, not just looking good (which I honestly don't think they manage in Reloaded anyway) in black and leather. Go watch Drunken Master or Iron Monkey after this movie to remind yourself of what good fighting sequences are--you won't regret it. In addition, the "Matrix abilities" people have in Reloaded is not consistent, and what they actually do is not consistent. The first movie had its inconsistencies here, but they weren't too glaring--unlike Reloaded.

Special effects are poured on and on and on. Every little thing someone does, be it just jump, somersault, spin, and in many cases just pose, are

slow-moed, bullet-timed, or over-accentuated by some sort of destruction. It's evident the W Bros had a ton of money to throw at this movie, and boy did they throw it, with no real restraint. Sharp editors could have really helped this, but the first movie was such a hit that free reign was obviously given, which brings us to. . .

Character and dialogue: I have already more or less said the dialogue was tired and full of philosophical platitudes. Actors can't really bring a lot of depth to their character when the script and direction is shoving character progression audience's face, or neglecting it altogether. The audience is at no time given nuance and substance so they can contemplate the character on their own.

Keanu's acting performance is stiff at best. Keanu is good at acting confused, and that's about all he does in this film. He makes a decent attempt to show passion between Neo and Trinity, but it falls flat.

Lawrence tries to make Morpheus everything from Moses to Henry V, and be as cool as a cat throughout. With the script he is provided, he makes a noble attempt, but it also falls flat.

Moss isn't very believable either. Her look of concern is always the same, much like Keanu's, and the chemistry isn't there, although in their very physical scenes they fake it well enough.

Hugo once again brought his weird sense of being an Agent program, but he too suffered from the script's hand. I actually find him to be the most interesting character of the bunch, but instead of development they just make him an excuse for a huge, drawn out fight scene.

All in all, this movie is beyond disappointing if you had good expectations, and on its own, as a stand-alone movie (which is not how it's supposed to be taken), it's still horrible. I don't see The Matrix as deep, but I at least see it as an enjoyable scifi romp that has some interesting ideas, good action, a few funny lines, and enough restrained symbolism and elusions to amuse the attentive. Reloaded fails on all these counts, and I really hope the W Bros will give us a better experience in the 3rd installment. Granted, I don't have a lot of hope left for that after this film. I [[try]] to [[abolition]] [[nothing]] that might be [[deemed]] a [[baffle]]. I also assume that you've [[watched]] the first [[filmmaking]] or at [[fewest]] know the general [[essence]], so if you haven't some of this might not make sense.

Plot: This [[filmmaking]] beats the audience over the head with [[knackered]] [[philosophic]] [[ravings]] again and again in an [[attempting]] to [[obtain]] the [[subjects]] [[in]]. We are bombarded again and again by questions of [[aim]], and destiny, and [[elects]], and [[coerced]] to [[withstand]] the long, torturous platitude sessions that contain them.

Neo, awakened from a dream in the [[latter]] [[filmmaking]], now begins a period of [[implementation]] about his own existence. There are a lot of revelations in this movie, which I'll be vague about so they won't seem like spoilers.

*If you're [[however]] worried [[unclear]] references will spoil the [[filmmaking]], don't read the paragraph below.*

The strength and [[defect]] of [[creed]] is revealed. The strengths and [[faults]] of [[amore]], and its [[transient]] [[characters]], are [[similarly]] revealed. The interdependence of [[humankind]] and [[technique]], and our [[creed]] in [[technique]], are also revealed. The importance of choice and [[enjoying]] is revealed. [[Indicating]] further [[matters]] that are [[shown]] [[could]] [[going]] into too much detail, so I will refrain (as the [[guideline]] for [[handwriting]] a commentary asks). Btw, by "revealed" I [[imply]] pounded through our ears and [[eye]] like nails.

Storyline: [[Thereby]] how does Neo and the gang get from the [[terminates]] of the [[final]] [[filmmaking]] to the [[starting]] of the next one? [[During]] short, they [[maintaining]] the [[belief]], and [[uses]] and abuse overly-stylized [[efforts]] and bullet-time like it's going out of style (and after this [[exhibition]], I'm hoping movie-goers and [[manufacturers]] alike learn to [[grateful]] subtlety and originality a [[bite]] more). More on that later. To not spoil anything, I will [[says]] no more than the [[prom]] [[materials]] already did: Neo is [[again]] [[try]] to [[silhouette]] out the Matrix, and he is looking for answers while [[tempting]] to [[rescues]] the [[mankind]], and Zion, all while baddies are going after him and his cohorts. The movie pretty much picks up where the last one left off.

Action: [[Despite]] martial [[humanities]] [[actions]] and gunplay peppered its predecessor in somewhat equal parts, this movie focuses [[very]] more on martial arts than gunplay, adding swords, sais, etc. to the mix. Special effects are so often used and waved in the audience's face that it becomes really tiresome. I've discussed this movie with friends and coworkers alike, and nearly all of them found some of the action sequences--especially the "Smith fight" we all heard would be in the movie--to be too long and tedious. This is a huge red flag for action fans, because the end of an action sequence should either leave you wanting a slight bit more, or completely content with the awesomeness that just occured.

These fights scenes do neither. They are over-stylized, over-the-top sequences that are wooden and uninspired. In the first movie, there was a real sense of desperation to some of the action, a sense that fighting was for survival, not just looking good (which I honestly don't think they manage in Reloaded anyway) in black and leather. Go watch Drunken Master or Iron Monkey after this movie to remind yourself of what good fighting sequences are--you won't regret it. In addition, the "Matrix abilities" people have in Reloaded is not consistent, and what they actually do is not consistent. The first movie had its inconsistencies here, but they weren't too glaring--unlike Reloaded.

Special effects are poured on and on and on. Every little thing someone does, be it just jump, somersault, spin, and in many cases just pose, are

slow-moed, bullet-timed, or over-accentuated by some sort of destruction. It's evident the W Bros had a ton of money to throw at this movie, and boy did they throw it, with no real restraint. Sharp editors could have really helped this, but the first movie was such a hit that free reign was obviously given, which brings us to. . .

Character and dialogue: I have already more or less said the dialogue was tired and full of philosophical platitudes. Actors can't really bring a lot of depth to their character when the script and direction is shoving character progression audience's face, or neglecting it altogether. The audience is at no time given nuance and substance so they can contemplate the character on their own.

Keanu's acting performance is stiff at best. Keanu is good at acting confused, and that's about all he does in this film. He makes a decent attempt to show passion between Neo and Trinity, but it falls flat.

Lawrence tries to make Morpheus everything from Moses to Henry V, and be as cool as a cat throughout. With the script he is provided, he makes a noble attempt, but it also falls flat.

Moss isn't very believable either. Her look of concern is always the same, much like Keanu's, and the chemistry isn't there, although in their very physical scenes they fake it well enough.

Hugo once again brought his weird sense of being an Agent program, but he too suffered from the script's hand. I actually find him to be the most interesting character of the bunch, but instead of development they just make him an excuse for a huge, drawn out fight scene.

All in all, this movie is beyond disappointing if you had good expectations, and on its own, as a stand-alone movie (which is not how it's supposed to be taken), it's still horrible. I don't see The Matrix as deep, but I at least see it as an enjoyable scifi romp that has some interesting ideas, good action, a few funny lines, and enough restrained symbolism and elusions to amuse the attentive. Reloaded fails on all these counts, and I really hope the W Bros will give us a better experience in the 3rd installment. Granted, I don't have a lot of hope left for that after this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Being the Beatlemaniac that I am, I approached Two Of Us with a [[combination]] of fear and [[fascination]]. Having seen '[[In]] His [[Life]]: The [[John]] Lennon Story', I was [[quite]] [[concerned]] that Two Of Us will turn out no better. The fact that Aidan [[Quinn]] and Jared Harris look absolutely [[nothing]] like John Lennon and Paul McCartney – even with some make-up and proper hairdos – didn't help one bit.

But I was more than a [[bit]] [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. It's [[probably]] thanks to the involvement of Michael Lindsay-Hogg, who [[directed]] Let It Be in 1970 and consequently probably knew John and Paul quite well, that the characters and the dialogue came across as convincing as they did. (The writing credit for Two Of Us is given to a man named Mark Stanfield, of whom I know absolutely nothing; I feel confident that director Lindsay-Hogg had more than a bit to do with the script.) Two Of Us is not a [[biography]] of the Beatles; it has very little plot, in fact, and takes place all in one day in New York City. What it does is [[imagine]] a meeting between John and Paul in 1976, while John lived in New York. That meeting is entirely fictitious, of course – though it can't truly be disproved that such a meeting actually took place. But through that imagined [[conversation]] it gives us a glimpse into the [[personalities]] of these two great musicians – their intelligence, their sense of humor, their different [[reaction]] to stardom, and most of all their relationship; what made them such a great team, and what broke them up.

[[Since]] it's a talk movie, nothing much except for dialogue between two characters for an hour and a half, it's [[likely]] to bore all but true fans of the Beatles; but it's a fantastic piece of [[writing]] and [[storytelling]], and is both [[informative]] and touching. For those interested in these two musical giants, very quickly you'll get over the shock of how different the actors look from their counterparts and feel like John and Paul had come to life – so intimate and convincing is the script, and so committed are the actors. Two Of Us gives you priceless insight into the lives of two geniuses, and a [[tale]] that is both sad and funny. Most certainly [[recommended]]. Being the Beatlemaniac that I am, I approached Two Of Us with a [[jumpsuit]] of fear and [[glamour]]. Having seen '[[Among]] His [[Vie]]: The [[Johannes]] Lennon Story', I was [[utterly]] [[worried]] that Two Of Us will turn out no better. The fact that Aidan [[Gwen]] and Jared Harris look absolutely [[anything]] like John Lennon and Paul McCartney – even with some make-up and proper hairdos – didn't help one bit.

But I was more than a [[bite]] [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. It's [[potentially]] thanks to the involvement of Michael Lindsay-Hogg, who [[geared]] Let It Be in 1970 and consequently probably knew John and Paul quite well, that the characters and the dialogue came across as convincing as they did. (The writing credit for Two Of Us is given to a man named Mark Stanfield, of whom I know absolutely nothing; I feel confident that director Lindsay-Hogg had more than a bit to do with the script.) Two Of Us is not a [[biographer]] of the Beatles; it has very little plot, in fact, and takes place all in one day in New York City. What it does is [[envision]] a meeting between John and Paul in 1976, while John lived in New York. That meeting is entirely fictitious, of course – though it can't truly be disproved that such a meeting actually took place. But through that imagined [[discussion]] it gives us a glimpse into the [[dignitaries]] of these two great musicians – their intelligence, their sense of humor, their different [[answers]] to stardom, and most of all their relationship; what made them such a great team, and what broke them up.

[[Because]] it's a talk movie, nothing much except for dialogue between two characters for an hour and a half, it's [[probable]] to bore all but true fans of the Beatles; but it's a fantastic piece of [[writes]] and [[conte]], and is both [[informational]] and touching. For those interested in these two musical giants, very quickly you'll get over the shock of how different the actors look from their counterparts and feel like John and Paul had come to life – so intimate and convincing is the script, and so committed are the actors. Two Of Us gives you priceless insight into the lives of two geniuses, and a [[histories]] that is both sad and funny. Most certainly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Saw this on TV. I'm glad I didn't go to the cinema to see this or spend the money on rental. The movie is totally [[predictable]] - from the corrupt owner and planner, to the [[snaking]] electric cables. The plot is really [[weak]] and [[unbelievable]] - the [[avalanche]] [[expert]] guy gets hit by a 20 [[foot]] wave of bone breaking [[avalanche]] ([[using]] [[actual]] footage) and all he has to do is get up and shake himself down. The avalanche thunders down at a million miles an hour and stops dead at the side of the road.

Some of the actual avalanche material is impressive and shows its devastating power. But the contract between the real avalanche and the staged stuff makes this film look [[even]] flimsier.

Do yourself a favour, don't bother with this one not even on T.V. Saw this on TV. I'm glad I didn't go to the cinema to see this or spend the money on rental. The movie is totally [[foreseeable]] - from the corrupt owner and planner, to the [[snaked]] electric cables. The plot is really [[feeble]] and [[fabulous]] - the [[blizzard]] [[experts]] guy gets hit by a 20 [[footing]] wave of bone breaking [[deluge]] ([[utilizing]] [[real]] footage) and all he has to do is get up and shake himself down. The avalanche thunders down at a million miles an hour and stops dead at the side of the road.

Some of the actual avalanche material is impressive and shows its devastating power. But the contract between the real avalanche and the staged stuff makes this film look [[yet]] flimsier.

Do yourself a favour, don't bother with this one not even on T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 3269 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Having watched this [[movie]] on the SciFi [[channel]], I can only conclude that this film was [[made]] by a bunch of [[amateurs]] who have never seen a movie in their lives. The film is an [[endless]] sequence of bizarre occurrences, or "[[delights]]" as the friend reading over my shoulder is telling me. The plot isn't really worth commenting as, but basically a plane carrying [[football]] [[players]] crashes into Yeti [[territory]]. Before the movie is over, we are treated to yetis ripping hearts out, yetis waddling in an effort to run before jumping 50 meters, yetis ripping a man's legs off and beating him with them, a woman killing a rabbit at 30 meters with a javelin, a yeti surviving several bullets and being set on fire with no apparent harm, a [[yeti]] dangling off a cliff by holding to a man's shoe, yet then jumps off, and a whole collection of further, bizarre occurrences. Basically, if you aren't staying up on a Saturday for the expressed purpose of watching the [[worst]] of SciFi channel original movies, [[avoid]] this film like the [[plague]]. Or as my friend reading over my shoulder [[says]]: "It's the best movie I have ever seen." To which the friend on my right says: "Only battle techno music could have made it better." Having watched this [[filmmaking]] on the SciFi [[canals]], I can only conclude that this film was [[effected]] by a bunch of [[fans]] who have never seen a movie in their lives. The film is an [[limitless]] sequence of bizarre occurrences, or "[[pleasures]]" as the friend reading over my shoulder is telling me. The plot isn't really worth commenting as, but basically a plane carrying [[soccer]] [[gamblers]] crashes into Yeti [[land]]. Before the movie is over, we are treated to yetis ripping hearts out, yetis waddling in an effort to run before jumping 50 meters, yetis ripping a man's legs off and beating him with them, a woman killing a rabbit at 30 meters with a javelin, a yeti surviving several bullets and being set on fire with no apparent harm, a [[bigfoot]] dangling off a cliff by holding to a man's shoe, yet then jumps off, and a whole collection of further, bizarre occurrences. Basically, if you aren't staying up on a Saturday for the expressed purpose of watching the [[gravest]] of SciFi channel original movies, [[averted]] this film like the [[pox]]. Or as my friend reading over my shoulder [[asserts]]: "It's the best movie I have ever seen." To which the friend on my right says: "Only battle techno music could have made it better." --------------------------------------------- Result 3270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I almost drowned in CHEESE watching this [[movie]]. In fact I [[could]] not [[even]] finish it. I [[want]] my money back. One more of Hollywood's [[feeble]] [[attempts]] to come up with a new [[idea]]. Good thing I [[keep]] a bowl of lemons in the [[fridge]]. Just in [[case]]. They should of gave Nic Cage a hat and a bull-whip. Swashbucklin'. Cage's performance in [[Raising]] [[Arizona]] or Leaving [[Las]] [[Vegas]] beats this "lemon". People who are [[completely]] and [[totally]] marketed(and most of them are) should love this [[movie]]. If this [[film]] had been animated, I would have taken it more seriously. I [[would]] of [[rather]] [[paid]] to [[see]] a completely stupid movie that did not [[try]] to [[hide]] it. [[In]] my [[opinion]], this was a [[incredibly]] stupid [[movie]] and it made a even more [[incredibly]] [[sad]] attempt to try and [[hide]] that FACT.

All the SHEEP seem to [[love]] it [[though]]. I almost drowned in CHEESE watching this [[filmmaking]]. In fact I [[wo]] not [[yet]] finish it. I [[wanna]] my money back. One more of Hollywood's [[weak]] [[try]] to come up with a new [[concept]]. Good thing I [[keeping]] a bowl of lemons in the [[refrigerator]]. Just in [[lawsuits]]. They should of gave Nic Cage a hat and a bull-whip. Swashbucklin'. Cage's performance in [[Rising]] [[Az]] or Leaving [[Angeles]] [[Blackpool]] beats this "lemon". People who are [[totally]] and [[perfectly]] marketed(and most of them are) should love this [[filmmaking]]. If this [[filmmaking]] had been animated, I would have taken it more seriously. I [[could]] of [[fairly]] [[salaried]] to [[behold]] a completely stupid movie that did not [[attempting]] to [[hides]] it. [[Among]] my [[view]], this was a [[extraordinarily]] stupid [[cinematographic]] and it made a even more [[surprisingly]] [[lamentable]] attempt to try and [[ulterior]] that FACT.

All the SHEEP seem to [[iove]] it [[albeit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3271 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like most other reviewers I have first seen this movie (on TV, never on the big screen), when I was a teenager. My Dad has always regarded this film highly and recommended it to me then, and I must say he was not only right, but this movie has stayed with me forever in the more than 2 decades since I saw it first time. I have seen it two or three more times since then (just a few days ago I gave it another watch) and it has not lost anything of its impact with time. It still a great and well worth to be seen movie! Manr regard Peckinpah's RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY as one of the first and best later western, which had a realistic look at life in the old west, but the hardly known LAST HUNT is definitely the better movie and was even half a dozen years earlier. Actually it was probably 3 decades ahead of its time, or maybe it still is ...

Although thinking hard and having certainly seen 100s of western (I like this genre) I can not remember any western as bleak and depressive as this one. Two men bound together, partly by hate, partly by not seeming to have other choices, surrounded by beautiful Ms. Padget, a crippled old man and a young Inian, leading the life of buffalo-killers until fate reaches out for one of them.

Nobody who has ever seen this movie will be able to forget its ending and the last frames of this gem. When the camera moves on and away from Mr. Taylor a white buffalo skin comes into sight (on a tree)and echos from the past, when all the hatred began, are present again. Mr. Taylor has got his buffalo, but in the end the buffalo got him.

Aside from the top performances of everybody involved, the intelligent script and the great dialogue, it should also be mentioned, that THE LAST HUNT is superbly photograped, I have seldomely seen a western that well shot (aside from the ones directed by Anthony Mann, which are also all superbly photographed), that all the locations are cleverly chosen and that even the soundtrack fits the picture very well.

And director BROOKS is really a superb storyteller. Master craftsmanship!He has made quite a couple of really great movies and was successful in nearly every imaginable genre, but even in an as prolific career as this one, THE LAST HUNT still shines as one of his best, if not his best.

Definitely would deserve a higher rating, compared to the 7-something RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY enjoys. --------------------------------------------- Result 3272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[CARRY]] ON MATRON was released in 1972 and it's becoming clear that the series has [[reached]] a [[natural]] end with the best [[entries]] like CLEO , UP THE KYBER and SCREAMING being from the [[mid]] to late 60s

[[In]] itself MATRON is by no means bad it's just that we've [[seen]] it all before with a thin [[plot]] ( A bunch of spivs trying to break into a hospital to steal a [[supply]] of [[contraceptive]] pills which they [[plan]] to [[sell]] to third world [[countries]] ) [[surrounded]] by gags of a slightly amusing [[though]] unsophisticated [[nature]] . I [[think]] that's where the [[problem]] [[lies]] - The gags aren't all that [[amusing]] with the unsophisticated [[nature]] [[starting]] to [[show]] its age . [[Did]] we [[need]] another [[movie]] that uses a [[man]] [[dressed]] up as a [[woman]] in order to [[drive]] the plot ? [[Perhaps]] the [[worst]] [[criticism]] I can make is that I [[saw]] [[CARRY]] ON MATRON this [[afternoon]] , less that twelve [[hours]] ago and I have a [[problem]] in trying to [[remember]] a very [[funny]] [[line]] . That's a serious [[problem]] for a [[comedy]] [[CARRYING]] ON MATRON was released in 1972 and it's becoming clear that the series has [[attained]] a [[naturel]] end with the best [[entrances]] like CLEO , UP THE KYBER and SCREAMING being from the [[milieu]] to late 60s

[[Across]] itself MATRON is by no means bad it's just that we've [[watched]] it all before with a thin [[intrigue]] ( A bunch of spivs trying to break into a hospital to steal a [[offering]] of [[contraception]] pills which they [[programmes]] to [[sold]] to third world [[country]] ) [[encircled]] by gags of a slightly amusing [[although]] unsophisticated [[character]] . I [[reckon]] that's where the [[difficulties]] [[lying]] - The gags aren't all that [[entertaining]] with the unsophisticated [[character]] [[starts]] to [[exhibitions]] its age . [[Got]] we [[needed]] another [[filmmaking]] that uses a [[dawg]] [[clothed]] up as a [[women]] in order to [[drives]] the plot ? [[Maybe]] the [[meanest]] [[criticisms]] I can make is that I [[noticed]] [[CARRYING]] ON MATRON this [[evening]] , less that twelve [[hour]] ago and I have a [[difficulty]] in trying to [[recollect]] a very [[fun]] [[bloodline]] . That's a serious [[issues]] for a [[humour]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terry Gilliam's fantastic, twisted story of a virus destroying all but a handful of people across the Earth and forcing them to move underground and the man sent back in time to gather information about it is a fantastic, dizzying, and highly stylized film that boasts Bruce Willis' best performance ever.

What sets 12 Monkeys apart from most time-travel sci-fi movies is that Bruce Willis character actually deals with what the psychological effects of time-travel, that is, not knowing what reality is actual reality: the place that the time-traveler comes from or goes to. Also, the film recognizes that things that have past cannot be altered and that the prevention of a cataclysmic event, in this case the release of said virus, cannot be stopped or changed. As Willis asserts "It's already happened," while he's in a mental hospital, the major dilemma the film trudges into is not a trite, overdone plot to save the world; instead it's Willis' inner struggle to simply survive himself. It's a fresh, innovative concept, and it works beautifully thanks to a tautly written script by Peoples and Gilliam's unique brand of dementia.

Besides this, 12 Monkey's storytelling is totally non-linear and instead opts to distort and bend the way the story is told skillfully incorporating a bevy of different time sequences: flashbacks, dreams, memories, the present, the past, the future, and even a scene that is lifted out of Hitchcock's Vertigo. All serve to envelop the viewer into its disturbing cacophony of madness and futility.

Visually, Gilliam is a master of desolate umbrage and shadow rivalling Tim Burton in his strikingly despondent scenery and imagery. With cold, wide, and immersing cinematography, Gilliam plunges into the colorless surroundings and darkness of his characters. The scenes are often bathed in a strangely antiseptic, dead white and help serve as a contrast to the often veering-on-madness characters.

Performance-wise, Brad Pitt steals most scenes, filling them with a patented loony, off-the-wall performance that deservedly garnered him an Oscar nomination. As mentioned, Bruce Willis gives the best performance of his career, not reverting to his heroic cliches and cardboard hero and instead portraying Cole as a simple, poignant, tragic everyman. Equally good is Madeline Stowe as Willis' psychologist. She holds her own, injecting her character with both wild energy and strength as she collapses under the weight of what she comes to believe is a false 'religion.'

Gilliam's expert, overwhelming, and complex handling of what could have been a routine action/sci-fi film makes 12 Monkeys a compelling vision of a nightmarish, futuristic landscape. Its rich, well-thought out, intricate storyline along with bravura performances from the entire cast and its brooding, bleak cinematography make it a masterpiece of madness. Ranking in my top 10 of all time, 12 Monkeys is a darkly lavish spectacle of a film brimming with brilliance.

10 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3274 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yet another "son who won't grow up" flick, and just the other recent like entries. Heder in another bad wig, channeling Napoleon for, what, the third time? Anna Faris is forgettable, as always; Jeff Daniels phoned this one in from another state, at least; and Diane Keaton...how does one become typecast this late in a career? Do not bother. Nothing is said here that hasn't been covered many times over. I will say this; it's about a hundred times better than "Failure To Launch". There are very few amusing bits in the movie, unless you think Eli Wallach cursing is funny. Ha, Ha! He's old and he dropped the f-bomb! Tee, hee, hee. Pitiful! --------------------------------------------- Result 3275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] When I was 17 my high school staged Bye Bye Birdie - which is no great surprise, since it is perfect high school material and reputed to be the most-staged musical in the world.

I was a music student and retained strong [[memories]] of the production and its songs, as well as a lingering [[disregard]] for the Dick Van Dyke movie version which had (deliberately) obscured the Elvis references and camped it up for a swinging 60s audience.

So, when the 1995 version starring Jason Alexander [[hit]] my cable TV screen, I was [[delighted]] with what I saw. [[Alexander]] turns in an [[exceptional]] performance as Albert, a performance in [[strong]] contrast to his better-known [[persona]] from a certain TV series. The remainder of the [[cast]] are entertaining and [[convincing]] in their [[roles]] (Chynna Phillips is [[perhaps]] the only one who does not look her part, [[supposedly]] a [[naive]] and [[innocent]] schoolgirl).

But [[best]] of all, the musical numbers familiar from the stage [[show]] are all preserved in this movie and performed as stage musical songs should be (allowing for the absence of a [[stage]]).

So, if you [[know]] the musical (and few do not), then [[check]] out this telemovie. It does the stage show justice in a [[way]] which can [[probably]] not be bettered, which is [[good]] enough for me. What is better than rendering a writer's work faithfully and with colour and [[style]]? When I was 17 my high school staged Bye Bye Birdie - which is no great surprise, since it is perfect high school material and reputed to be the most-staged musical in the world.

I was a music student and retained strong [[reminiscences]] of the production and its songs, as well as a lingering [[contempt]] for the Dick Van Dyke movie version which had (deliberately) obscured the Elvis references and camped it up for a swinging 60s audience.

So, when the 1995 version starring Jason Alexander [[slugged]] my cable TV screen, I was [[ravi]] with what I saw. [[Aleksandr]] turns in an [[wondrous]] performance as Albert, a performance in [[forceful]] contrast to his better-known [[personality]] from a certain TV series. The remainder of the [[casting]] are entertaining and [[persuade]] in their [[duties]] (Chynna Phillips is [[possibly]] the only one who does not look her part, [[ostensibly]] a [[unsuspecting]] and [[blameless]] schoolgirl).

But [[better]] of all, the musical numbers familiar from the stage [[spectacle]] are all preserved in this movie and performed as stage musical songs should be (allowing for the absence of a [[phase]]).

So, if you [[savoir]] the musical (and few do not), then [[audits]] out this telemovie. It does the stage show justice in a [[camino]] which can [[certainly]] not be bettered, which is [[alright]] enough for me. What is better than rendering a writer's work faithfully and with colour and [[styling]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 3276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[anticipated]] this [[movie]] to be decent and [[possibly]] cliché, but I was completely wrong! Charlie Cox (I had never heard of him until now) [[played]] an [[incredibly]] good leading [[man]]; he was so earnest and romantic, me and my [[friend]] that saw the [[movie]] with me [[totally]] [[fell]] in [[love]] with him.

Claire [[Danes]], who I did like before ([[LOVED]] her in Romeo and Juliet), made me [[enjoy]] her even more. [[Her]] acting was [[fantastic]], I couldn't even tell that she was American. The [[chemistry]] between her and Charlie Cox was [[extremely]] good, the casting was [[quite]] [[perfect]].

Robert DeNiro and Michelle Pfeiffer were [[equally]] well-casted; DeNiro as that gay [[pirate]]...priceless, priceless. I laughed so hard at that one scene where Septimus [[comes]] on the [[ship]]...oh my [[god]], [[wow]]. Pfeiffer [[played]] a decent villain, I [[liked]] her as the snippy [[mother]] in Hairspray. But she had the right [[amount]] of melodrama and snide [[comments]] [[throughout]] the movie.

[[Overall]], it was funny (but not slap-stick at all!), romantic, the special effects weren't totally frequent but when they were, they were great; the cameos from Ricky Gervais and [[Peter]] O'Toole were [[also]] well-placed.

I [[totally]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to anyone who likes fantasy movies like the Princess [[Bride]] or even [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]. It kept my interest the entire time and I will be [[buying]] the [[DVD]] when it [[comes]] out! I [[waited]] this [[movies]] to be decent and [[perhaps]] cliché, but I was completely wrong! Charlie Cox (I had never heard of him until now) [[served]] an [[highly]] good leading [[men]]; he was so earnest and romantic, me and my [[boyfriend]] that saw the [[cinematographic]] with me [[utterly]] [[slumped]] in [[likes]] with him.

Claire [[Denmark]], who I did like before ([[WORSHIPED]] her in Romeo and Juliet), made me [[enjoying]] her even more. [[His]] acting was [[wondrous]], I couldn't even tell that she was American. The [[chemist]] between her and Charlie Cox was [[considerably]] good, the casting was [[rather]] [[faultless]].

Robert DeNiro and Michelle Pfeiffer were [[alike]] well-casted; DeNiro as that gay [[hacker]]...priceless, priceless. I laughed so hard at that one scene where Septimus [[arises]] on the [[freighter]]...oh my [[deity]], [[whoa]]. Pfeiffer [[served]] a decent villain, I [[enjoyed]] her as the snippy [[momma]] in Hairspray. But she had the right [[somme]] of melodrama and snide [[observations]] [[around]] the movie.

[[Total]], it was funny (but not slap-stick at all!), romantic, the special effects weren't totally frequent but when they were, they were great; the cameos from Ricky Gervais and [[Pete]] O'Toole were [[apart]] well-placed.

I [[perfectly]] [[recommendation]] this [[films]] to anyone who likes fantasy movies like the Princess [[Fiancee]] or even [[Gods]] of the [[Piercings]]. It kept my interest the entire time and I will be [[procure]] the [[DVDS]] when it [[happens]] out! --------------------------------------------- Result 3277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Well then, thank you SO MUCH Disney for DESTROYING the fond memories I USED to have of my FORMER favorite movie. I was about 5 when the original movie came out, and it was one of the first movies I remember seeing. [[So]], now that I'm 16, and feeling masochistic [[enough]], I decided to rent this [[movie]]. [[Thus]], I managed to [[poison]] all my [[memories]] of the original movie with this [[sorry]] [[excuse]] for a [[movie]]. This movie takes everything that made the original endearing and [[wrecks]] it, right down to the last [[detail]].

In this movie, Ariel and Eric celebrate the birth of their daughter, Melody, and go to show her to everyone in the ocean...BROADWAY STYLE! After the musical number ends, within minutes, the sea witch Morgana shows up and threatens to kill Melody if Triton doesn't give up the trident. Thus, he gives it up without even a fight. Eric stands there gaping, though Ariel figures out how to use a sword and save Melody. Morgana escapes, so Ariel and Eric decide that Melody should never go near the sea until Morgana is caught.

Well...uh, nothing of note really happens. Eric is a total wuss. He never really manages to do anything. Ariel sort of does something. Melody manages to screw things up. Plus, the animation is a new low-point for Disney. The computer graphics wind up clashing with the backgrounds. Ever single opportunity for character development is wasted. The songs bite.

Look, don't waste your time. I'm pretty sure even the little kids are going to be bored out of their skulls with this, since nothing even remotely exciting ever happens. They won't want to sing the songs. If you manage to grab a copy of this, throw it out into the ocean and hope that nobody ever finds it. Ever. Well then, thank you SO MUCH Disney for DESTROYING the fond memories I USED to have of my FORMER favorite movie. I was about 5 when the original movie came out, and it was one of the first movies I remember seeing. [[Consequently]], now that I'm 16, and feeling masochistic [[suitably]], I decided to rent this [[filmmaking]]. [[Thereby]], I managed to [[poisoned]] all my [[reminiscences]] of the original movie with this [[apologizing]] [[apologise]] for a [[flick]]. This movie takes everything that made the original endearing and [[shipwrecks]] it, right down to the last [[particulars]].

In this movie, Ariel and Eric celebrate the birth of their daughter, Melody, and go to show her to everyone in the ocean...BROADWAY STYLE! After the musical number ends, within minutes, the sea witch Morgana shows up and threatens to kill Melody if Triton doesn't give up the trident. Thus, he gives it up without even a fight. Eric stands there gaping, though Ariel figures out how to use a sword and save Melody. Morgana escapes, so Ariel and Eric decide that Melody should never go near the sea until Morgana is caught.

Well...uh, nothing of note really happens. Eric is a total wuss. He never really manages to do anything. Ariel sort of does something. Melody manages to screw things up. Plus, the animation is a new low-point for Disney. The computer graphics wind up clashing with the backgrounds. Ever single opportunity for character development is wasted. The songs bite.

Look, don't waste your time. I'm pretty sure even the little kids are going to be bored out of their skulls with this, since nothing even remotely exciting ever happens. They won't want to sing the songs. If you manage to grab a copy of this, throw it out into the ocean and hope that nobody ever finds it. Ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] with very little screen time and money, Dan Katzir manages to do so much. This movie, in its heart-warming simplicity, touches the beauty of love from a fresh angle. rejuvinated lust --------------------------------------------- Result 3279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] Why did I waste 1.5 hours of my [[life]] watching this? Why was this [[film]] even made? Why am I even [[commenting]] on this [[film]]?

One reviewer [[said]] this [[film]] [[took]] [[patience]] to watch and it was n't for [[everybody]]. I cannot figure out who this [[movie]] is for. [[maybe]] after dropping a hit of acid, [[SOMEBODY]], [[SOMEWHERE]] [[could]] watch this and make some sense out of it. It is [[incoherent]], it isn't experimental, it's [[plain]] and [[simple]] [[garbage]]. The [[film]] follows no plot line whatsoever, just when you [[think]] you have something, well.....you don't.

I [[think]] the [[ending]] [[brought]] some finality to the [[film]] (no [[pun]] [[intended]]), the [[viewer]] gets a glimpse of what might have been [[going]] on. I don't [[think]] I put a spoiler in here, not that it would [[matter]]. This [[film]] is another must [[miss]] in the [[world]] of filmdom. Why did I waste 1.5 hours of my [[lifetime]] watching this? Why was this [[flick]] even made? Why am I even [[referring]] on this [[filmmaking]]?

One reviewer [[say]] this [[flick]] [[taken]] [[sabra]] to watch and it was n't for [[everyone]]. I cannot figure out who this [[filmmaking]] is for. [[potentially]] after dropping a hit of acid, [[EVERYONE]], [[SOMEPLACE]] [[wo]] watch this and make some sense out of it. It is [[unconnected]], it isn't experimental, it's [[ganges]] and [[easy]] [[junk]]. The [[filmmaking]] follows no plot line whatsoever, just when you [[thinks]] you have something, well.....you don't.

I [[thinks]] the [[ended]] [[introduced]] some finality to the [[kino]] (no [[poon]] [[intentioned]]), the [[bystander]] gets a glimpse of what might have been [[go]] on. I don't [[believe]] I put a spoiler in here, not that it would [[question]]. This [[flick]] is another must [[mademoiselle]] in the [[worldwide]] of filmdom. --------------------------------------------- Result 3280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ....this mini does not get better with age. I [[saw]] this and it's sequel when originally broadcast, and like so [[many]] others was [[blown]] away. [[In]] early 2002 I borrowed the [[novels]] for both [[WOW]] and W and [[R]] and was even more impressed. I then decided that I had to [[see]] both again and invested $200 plus on the DVD sets. I [[watched]] both minis again in [[painful]] [[detail]] and [[realized]] I had [[done]] things [[backwards]] - I should have [[purchased]] the novels and [[borrowed]] the DVD's.

Don't believe it is abysmally miscast? Read the novels and see for yourself. Don't think this is dated? Screen it for somebody not [[old]] enough to have seen it originally [[broadcast]] and watch the reaction you get ([[warning]] - [[reactions]] from such people range from looks of [[horror]] to belly laughs).

According to the trivia section for this mini - Dan Curtis himself chose Ali MacGraw and Robert Mitchum. [[Yikes]]!! Production quality, music scoring, [[dialog]] - a [[great]] story was turned into a [[late]] 70's soap [[opera]] by an overly ambitious [[producer]]/director who was in way over his head. This [[thing]] was [[dated]] the minute it was completed.

These two minis were great when original broadcast and to those of us who saw them then, [[tug]] at a nostalgic [[string]] that [[reminds]] us of [[younger]] days. IMO - this mini does not nearly live up to its [[reputation]] and [[severely]] [[disappoints]]. ....this mini does not get better with age. I [[noticed]] this and it's sequel when originally broadcast, and like so [[countless]] others was [[melted]] away. [[Onto]] early 2002 I borrowed the [[storybooks]] for both [[WHOA]] and W and [[rs]] and was even more impressed. I then decided that I had to [[seeing]] both again and invested $200 plus on the DVD sets. I [[observed]] both minis again in [[hurtful]] [[clarification]] and [[effected]] I had [[accomplished]] things [[aft]] - I should have [[acquired]] the novels and [[loaned]] the DVD's.

Don't believe it is abysmally miscast? Read the novels and see for yourself. Don't think this is dated? Screen it for somebody not [[former]] enough to have seen it originally [[aired]] and watch the reaction you get ([[alerted]] - [[replies]] from such people range from looks of [[terror]] to belly laughs).

According to the trivia section for this mini - Dan Curtis himself chose Ali MacGraw and Robert Mitchum. [[Oops]]!! Production quality, music scoring, [[dialogue]] - a [[marvelous]] story was turned into a [[belated]] 70's soap [[drama]] by an overly ambitious [[manufacturer]]/director who was in way over his head. This [[stuff]] was [[dates]] the minute it was completed.

These two minis were great when original broadcast and to those of us who saw them then, [[tugs]] at a nostalgic [[strings]] that [[recall]] us of [[youngest]] days. IMO - this mini does not nearly live up to its [[fame]] and [[powerfully]] [[foils]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love Julian Sands and will at least attempt to watch anything he's in, but this movie nearly did me in. I'm hard pressed to remember when I found any other movie to move....so......slow.........ly.....zzzzzzzzzzzz

Pop it in the VCR when you've run out of sleeping pills. --------------------------------------------- Result 3282 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In my opinion, this is the best stand-up show I have ever seen. I became an instant Eddie fan after seeing Dress to Kill, but I must say I think this is his best work. I would say, though, if you ever get the chance to definitely go see him live. It is worth it!

Most of the time after seeing a stand-up routine a couple times, the jokes start to get old. But I have to say, I've seen this show SO many times that I literally have the entire thing memorized (which yes, I realize is kinda sad) but every joke still makes me laugh. This is truly a feel good show.

Dress to Kill will never get old for me. I own it and watch it anytime I need a good laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 3283 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] "Handsome Guys With Bad Haircuts !!" "Beautiful Girls Without Any Clues !!" "Stupid Gangsters Who Cannot Shoot Straight !!" From Dragon Dynasty comes the [[Hong]] Kong gangster drama, "Dragon Heat." For [[reasons]] which will probably forever be completely obscured, the [[production]] and casting call for this 'criminals-on-steroids' movie somehow got both [[Maggie]] Q and [[Michael]] Biehn to sign on as villains. But they don't get all that much to do in this [[horrid]] slug-fest.

They are two of the [[best]] contemporary [[actors]] [[around]], each with their own resume' and [[list]] of [[accomplishments]], and Biehn in particular has had the courage to take some rather challenging and non-heroic [[roles]].

Maggie Q was the super-bad "Mai" in "Live Free Or Die Hard," so 'nuff [[said]].

Biehn is, of course, [[famous]] for being the soldier-from-the-future who made "The Terminator" of 1984 such a believable science-fiction/fantasy romp, by crashing up against Big Arnold, who is now the Governator of California !!

Michael Biehn is almost [[wholly]] wasted in this [[terrible]] train-wreck of a police [[drama]]. There is [[absolutely]] no reason for that, as the incredibly convoluted plot -- given mostly in Chinese, as it is a Hong Kong story -- [[could]] have been [[better]] elaborated for non-Chinese audiences with a foreign narrator.

In other words, if Biehn had been used as something like an Interpol observer or coordinator, or an agent under deep cover, who needs to get some 'splaining given to him every five or ten minutes, that [[would]] have been great. But no, he's brought in as a part of an odd group of special forces-type bad guys who seem to be freelancing their own corrupt deal, in the middle of somebody else's totally corrupt deal involving the local king of corrupt deals.

Yes, there, I [[said]] it all. [[Confused]] ? Me too. "[[Welcome]] to the party, pal."

[[In]] the truly superb Hong Kong [[crime]] drama, [[known]] by its English title as "[[Breaking]] News," there are [[also]] a number of fascinating characters at work, but there is only one story line in the plot.

Bad guys vs. good cops. In this wretched and excessively violent foray into the world of a Hong Kong Triad, or gang, it seems that the hot-shot police force is little more than a parade of ducks in a shooting gallery, the way the criminals mow them down.

So, not surprisingly, there's an almost otherwise incomprehensible scene ( several scenes, in fact ), where kids are trying to shoot wooden ducks in an arcade game, to win stuffed animal prizes. And so the hot shot good-guy police officers quite naturally intervene on their behalf, so that the arcade owner has to give up the Kewpie dolls.

There's also a half-hearted attempt at creating a "love interest" between one of the 'visiting cops' and the sole female 'visiting cop'.

The visiting cops are supposed to be material witnesses against the Triad gangster leader, who gets hijacked on the way to his court appearance, but not by his own team but by the mercenaries ( Biehn, Maggie Q, and some others ). These killers all want something but we don't get to learn about what it is, until the very end of the film !! That was a stupid mistake inside of the overall story.

You cannot build suspense in a crime drama without something to obtain, or get, or get away from, being introduced very early in the story.

Add to that some "cut-away scenes" done for purely artsy effects, all showing the bad-bad guys' and the regular bad guys' recent pasts, and any film buff can readily understand why this barking dog gets a 1 rating from this fan of all things cinematic with criminals and conspirators and Hong Kong. "Handsome Guys With Bad Haircuts !!" "Beautiful Girls Without Any Clues !!" "Stupid Gangsters Who Cannot Shoot Straight !!" From Dragon Dynasty comes the [[Hk]] Kong gangster drama, "Dragon Heat." For [[grounds]] which will probably forever be completely obscured, the [[productivity]] and casting call for this 'criminals-on-steroids' movie somehow got both [[Mags]] Q and [[Michele]] Biehn to sign on as villains. But they don't get all that much to do in this [[nasty]] slug-fest.

They are two of the [[optimum]] contemporary [[protagonists]] [[roundabout]], each with their own resume' and [[listings]] of [[successes]], and Biehn in particular has had the courage to take some rather challenging and non-heroic [[duties]].

Maggie Q was the super-bad "Mai" in "Live Free Or Die Hard," so 'nuff [[say]].

Biehn is, of course, [[illustrious]] for being the soldier-from-the-future who made "The Terminator" of 1984 such a believable science-fiction/fantasy romp, by crashing up against Big Arnold, who is now the Governator of California !!

Michael Biehn is almost [[completely]] wasted in this [[gruesome]] train-wreck of a police [[tragedy]]. There is [[abundantly]] no reason for that, as the incredibly convoluted plot -- given mostly in Chinese, as it is a Hong Kong story -- [[wo]] have been [[best]] elaborated for non-Chinese audiences with a foreign narrator.

In other words, if Biehn had been used as something like an Interpol observer or coordinator, or an agent under deep cover, who needs to get some 'splaining given to him every five or ten minutes, that [[could]] have been great. But no, he's brought in as a part of an odd group of special forces-type bad guys who seem to be freelancing their own corrupt deal, in the middle of somebody else's totally corrupt deal involving the local king of corrupt deals.

Yes, there, I [[indicated]] it all. [[Disconcerted]] ? Me too. "[[Bienvenidos]] to the party, pal."

[[Among]] the truly superb Hong Kong [[transgression]] drama, [[renowned]] by its English title as "[[Breakage]] News," there are [[apart]] a number of fascinating characters at work, but there is only one story line in the plot.

Bad guys vs. good cops. In this wretched and excessively violent foray into the world of a Hong Kong Triad, or gang, it seems that the hot-shot police force is little more than a parade of ducks in a shooting gallery, the way the criminals mow them down.

So, not surprisingly, there's an almost otherwise incomprehensible scene ( several scenes, in fact ), where kids are trying to shoot wooden ducks in an arcade game, to win stuffed animal prizes. And so the hot shot good-guy police officers quite naturally intervene on their behalf, so that the arcade owner has to give up the Kewpie dolls.

There's also a half-hearted attempt at creating a "love interest" between one of the 'visiting cops' and the sole female 'visiting cop'.

The visiting cops are supposed to be material witnesses against the Triad gangster leader, who gets hijacked on the way to his court appearance, but not by his own team but by the mercenaries ( Biehn, Maggie Q, and some others ). These killers all want something but we don't get to learn about what it is, until the very end of the film !! That was a stupid mistake inside of the overall story.

You cannot build suspense in a crime drama without something to obtain, or get, or get away from, being introduced very early in the story.

Add to that some "cut-away scenes" done for purely artsy effects, all showing the bad-bad guys' and the regular bad guys' recent pasts, and any film buff can readily understand why this barking dog gets a 1 rating from this fan of all things cinematic with criminals and conspirators and Hong Kong. --------------------------------------------- Result 3284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The best film about marriage and family. This is a very interesting reflections to the couples that will be come to the dangerous and paradoxical fascinating world of marriage and family. This decision could be the better or the worst in our lives and the life of our kids. The real intrusion or help of 'friends' -or executioner if we leave-. The real role of families: they can help or they can destroy us. The mad priest who possibly is not much mad telling what could happen according the statistics and the reality. A couple who thinks in a 'special' marriage, live a painful story in their future own history.

Who likes contract marriage? Nobody, after the priest tells their own history… if they leave the future in another hands, if they don't know WHAT is the marriage. That the problems are true, that the life demand a real engage, guaranties, from each one. That the real victims of the divorce are kids, with real name –Andrea in the film- or names. That the abortion is only an easy exit: sadness, regrets and unhappiness will be there after abortion. That the state and social security thinks every time less in a real problems of the families. The gossip of the 'friends', the infidelity because of weakness and desperation of Steffania because Tomasso lives his life as if he were alone.

Maybe someone could think that this film is a pessimistic film, but not. Steffania and Tomasso, in the deep of their hearts, they like a beautiful marriage and family, if not, Why they like marriage? A truly and beautiful marriage depends only of the couple: of each one of their decisions, of each one actions in their lives. The family could be a place where each one feel loved because being his or her, only by existing. The screenplay is wonderful. The performances are great: Steffania and Tomasso, ¡the almost cynical priest! An excellent direction and script. The colors and the management of the cameras, superb. --------------------------------------------- Result 3285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] So the other night I decided to watch Tales from the Hollywood [[Hills]]: Natica Jackson. [[Or]] Power, Passion, [[Murder]] as it is called in Holland. When I bought the [[film]] I noticed that [[Michelle]] Pfeiffer was [[starring]] in it and I thought that had to [[say]] [[something]] about the quality. [[Unfortunately]], it didn't.

1) The plot of the film is really confusing. There are two story lines running [[simultaneously]] during the film. Only they have nothing in common. Throughout the entire movie I was waiting for the moment these two story lines would come together so the plot would be clear to me. But it still hasn't.

2) The title of the film says the film will be about Natica Jackson. Well it is, sometimes. Like said the film covers two different stories and the part about Natica Jackson is the shortest. So another title for this movie would not be a wrong choice.

To conclude my story, I really recommend that you leave this movie where it belongs, on the shelf in the store on a place nobody can see it. By doing this you won't waste 90 minutes of your life, as I did. So the other night I decided to watch Tales from the Hollywood [[Collines]]: Natica Jackson. [[Neither]] Power, Passion, [[Manslaughter]] as it is called in Holland. When I bought the [[filmmaking]] I noticed that [[Micheal]] Pfeiffer was [[featuring]] in it and I thought that had to [[told]] [[algo]] about the quality. [[Sadly]], it didn't.

1) The plot of the film is really confusing. There are two story lines running [[concurrently]] during the film. Only they have nothing in common. Throughout the entire movie I was waiting for the moment these two story lines would come together so the plot would be clear to me. But it still hasn't.

2) The title of the film says the film will be about Natica Jackson. Well it is, sometimes. Like said the film covers two different stories and the part about Natica Jackson is the shortest. So another title for this movie would not be a wrong choice.

To conclude my story, I really recommend that you leave this movie where it belongs, on the shelf in the store on a place nobody can see it. By doing this you won't waste 90 minutes of your life, as I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] You [[probably]] heard this [[phrase]] when it [[come]] to this movie – "Herbie: [[Fully]] [[Loaded]] with [[crap]]" and [[yes]] it is [[true]]. This movie is really [[dreadful]] and totally lame.

This [[got]] to be the second [[worst]] movie Lindsey is ever in [[since]] Confession of the [[Teenage]] [[Drama]] [[Queen]]. The only good thing about this [[movie]] [[seem]] to be the over [[talent]] cast which by far is better than the movie million times and is the only selling point of the movie. I don't see how such a respected actor like Matt Dillon could be a part of this movie, isn't he read that [[horrible]] [[screenplay]] before he sign on to be in it?

What I didn't like about this movie is also [[base]] on how Herbie is surreal and [[fantasy]] like [[extraordinary]] [[ability]] and [[climb]] on wall and [[go]] [[faster]] than a [[racer]] [[car]] after all it just a Beatle. I know it is a kids movie but they have gone overboard with it and it just turn out more silly than entertaining. Little realism is needed plus the story is way too predictable.

Final Words: Unless the kids are actually 5 -12 years I highly doubt that any one could enjoy this [[senseless]] movie. What wastage of my [[money]]. I feel like cheated.

Rating: 3/10 (Grade: F) You [[conceivably]] heard this [[expressions]] when it [[arrived]] to this movie – "Herbie: [[Abundantly]] [[Loads]] with [[horseshit]]" and [[yep]] it is [[veritable]]. This movie is really [[abhorrent]] and totally lame.

This [[did]] to be the second [[meanest]] movie Lindsey is ever in [[because]] Confession of the [[Teen]] [[Tragedy]] [[Quinn]]. The only good thing about this [[filmmaking]] [[seems]] to be the over [[talents]] cast which by far is better than the movie million times and is the only selling point of the movie. I don't see how such a respected actor like Matt Dillon could be a part of this movie, isn't he read that [[abhorrent]] [[scenarios]] before he sign on to be in it?

What I didn't like about this movie is also [[foundation]] on how Herbie is surreal and [[utopia]] like [[gorgeous]] [[skills]] and [[rise]] on wall and [[going]] [[quick]] than a [[runner]] [[motors]] after all it just a Beatle. I know it is a kids movie but they have gone overboard with it and it just turn out more silly than entertaining. Little realism is needed plus the story is way too predictable.

Final Words: Unless the kids are actually 5 -12 years I highly doubt that any one could enjoy this [[mindless]] movie. What wastage of my [[cash]]. I feel like cheated.

Rating: 3/10 (Grade: F) --------------------------------------------- Result 3287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I did not expect a lot from this movie, after the terrible "Life is a Miracle". It turns out that this movie is ten [[times]] [[worse]] than "Life ...". I have impression that director/[[writer]] is just joking with the audience: " let me [[see]] how much [[emptiness]] can you (audience) [[sustain]]". [[Dialogues]] are empty, ... [[scenario]] is minimalistic. [[In]] few moments, [[photography]] is [[really]] [[nice]]. [[Few]] [[sarcastic]] lines are semi-funny, but it is [[hard]] to [[genuinely]] laugh during this "[[comedy]]". I've laughed to myself for being able to watch the movie until the end. [[If]] you can [[lift]] yourself above this director's [[fiasco]], ... you will find [[good]] acting of few legends (Miki Manojlovic, Aleksandar Bercek), and very good performance of Emir's son Stribor Kusturica.

In short: too bad for such a great director ! Emir Kusturica is still young and should be making top-rated movies. [[Instead]], he chooses to do this low-budget just-for-my-private theater movie, with [[arrogant]] [[attitude]] toward the world trends and negligence [[toward]] his old fans. I did not expect a lot from this movie, after the terrible "Life is a Miracle". It turns out that this movie is ten [[moments]] [[worst]] than "Life ...". I have impression that director/[[scriptwriter]] is just joking with the audience: " let me [[consults]] how much [[empty]] can you (audience) [[maintain]]". [[Dialog]] are empty, ... [[scenarios]] is minimalistic. [[Across]] few moments, [[picture]] is [[truthfully]] [[pleasurable]]. [[Scarce]] [[ironical]] lines are semi-funny, but it is [[laborious]] to [[actually]] laugh during this "[[humor]]". I've laughed to myself for being able to watch the movie until the end. [[Though]] you can [[lifts]] yourself above this director's [[bust]], ... you will find [[buena]] acting of few legends (Miki Manojlovic, Aleksandar Bercek), and very good performance of Emir's son Stribor Kusturica.

In short: too bad for such a great director ! Emir Kusturica is still young and should be making top-rated movies. [[Alternatively]], he chooses to do this low-budget just-for-my-private theater movie, with [[presumptuous]] [[stance]] toward the world trends and negligence [[into]] his old fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3288 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Paul Reiser is one of my favorite people in show business. I have read both of his books and think that he is great. Peter Faulk can deliver a punch line with the best of them. The combination of the two is magic.

This is a story about a family really getting to know each other. Through a road trip a father and son connect for the first time in their lives in the midts of a family crisis. They do all the things that fathers and sons are suppose to do in life...they are just doing them much later in life. The situations are very funny, but have the feeling that they could actually happen to people in real life (not obsurdly over the top or cartoonish). This is the first time that I watch Paul Reiser and fully believed every emotion that was portrayed. At times, his eyes look so sad.

Gret movie and great story and plot. It has comedy and emotion but an uplifting message...Olympia Dukakas does a great job also :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] How the [[hell]] did they get this [[made]]?! [[Presenting]] itself as a caper [[comedy]], the misbegotten "$" is [[essentially]] two [[hours]] of people mumbling sentence [[fragments]]. The [[usually]] [[dependable]] Warren Beatty [[looks]] drunk, and the [[usually]] [[hilarious]] Goldie Hawn acts like she's on [[depressants]]. As for Gert Frobe, his most [[famous]] role - Goldfinger - was [[infinitely]] more [[admirable]] than his character here. [[Not]] even the [[guy]] with the champagne [[bottle]] of LSD can [[save]] this [[litany]] of worthlessness.

[[Am]] I comparing this [[movie]] to "[[Plan]] 9 from [[Outer]] Space"? I wouldn't do such a [[thing]] [[even]] if [[someone]] [[paid]] me. "P9FOS" was idiotically [[made]] but [[ended]] up hilarious; this was idiotically made and causes you to feel like your brain just melted out of your ears. Warren Beatty and Goldie Hawn [[made]] up for this when they co-starred in "[[Shampoo]]", but then they co-starred in the [[dreadful]] "[[Town]] & Country". [[Maybe]] they just shouldn't co-star in [[movies]]. [[All]] in all, I would [[rather]] have my skin [[torn]] off than have to watch this again. Awful.

[[Maybe]] they should [[remake]] it with Jackie Chan. Then I would pay to [[see]] it. How the [[inferno]] did they get this [[introduced]]?! [[Introduces]] itself as a caper [[parody]], the misbegotten "$" is [[broadly]] two [[hour]] of people mumbling sentence [[chunks]]. The [[popularly]] [[trustworthy]] Warren Beatty [[seem]] drunk, and the [[typically]] [[funny]] Goldie Hawn acts like she's on [[depressant]]. As for Gert Frobe, his most [[proverbial]] role - Goldfinger - was [[immeasurably]] more [[sumptuous]] than his character here. [[No]] even the [[guys]] with the champagne [[bottles]] of LSD can [[rescuing]] this [[mantra]] of worthlessness.

[[Suis]] I comparing this [[filmmaking]] to "[[Programmes]] 9 from [[Outboard]] Space"? I wouldn't do such a [[stuff]] [[yet]] if [[everyone]] [[credited]] me. "P9FOS" was idiotically [[effected]] but [[finalized]] up hilarious; this was idiotically made and causes you to feel like your brain just melted out of your ears. Warren Beatty and Goldie Hawn [[introduced]] up for this when they co-starred in "[[Shampoos]]", but then they co-starred in the [[scary]] "[[Towns]] & Country". [[Potentially]] they just shouldn't co-star in [[kino]]. [[Every]] in all, I would [[somewhat]] have my skin [[ripped]] off than have to watch this again. Awful.

[[Probably]] they should [[redo]] it with Jackie Chan. Then I would pay to [[seeing]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] An uptight voyeur who wants to commit suicide encounters a free spirited bad-seed who has 5 weeks to live and then they're off to discover America. Get the idea? There's not an [[original]] moment in this [[whole]] [[movie]]. An uptight voyeur who wants to commit suicide encounters a free spirited bad-seed who has 5 weeks to live and then they're off to discover America. Get the idea? There's not an [[initial]] moment in this [[total]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3291 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This is the [[moving]] [[tale]] of Scotland's legendary hero, Rob Roy, and his battles with the feudal landowners. Like Braveheart to which it is frequently [[compared]], it is not very historical. [[Despite]] their primarily fictional nature, I rate both of these [[movies]] [[highly]] and [[would]] be hard pressed to choose between the two. The 13 Century [[William]] Wallace is, as others have noted, a [[larger]] than life national figure, while the [[early]] 18th Century [[Rob]] [[Roy]] [[comes]] across as an honourable but [[ordinary]] Scotsman.

The story revolves [[around]] a [[clan]] chieftain, [[Robert]] Roy McGregor, who [[lives]] in a Scottish highland [[cottage]] with his [[wife]] Mary and their two young [[sons]]. As the [[movie]] [[begins]], he and his fellow clansmen are [[hunting]] down some [[thieves]] who have [[stolen]] the local lord's [[cattle]]. Rob [[Roy]] then [[wishes]] to [[improve]] the living conditions of his people so arranges to borrow one thousand Scottish [[pounds]] from a local noble, the [[Marquis]] of Montrose, in order to [[buy]] [[cattle]] to herd to [[market]]. He [[temporarily]] entrusts this money to his [[friend]], Alan [[McDonald]]. When both [[McDonald]] and the money [[turn]] up [[missing]], Rob [[Roy]] [[finds]] himself in [[conflict]] with Montrose as well as his [[despicable]] protégé, Archibald Cunningham, and his [[sleazy]] factor, Killearn. [[Rob]] Roy's [[honour]] is [[also]] tested when Montrose seeks to involve him in [[false]] [[testimony]] against his [[rival]], the Duke of Argyle, whom he [[wishes]] to [[accuse]] of being a Jacobite.

The charismatic Liam Leeson is [[brilliant]] as the kilted highlander Rob [[Roy]], an [[intelligent]], [[virile]], and noble [[hero]] and a [[man]] [[whose]] sense of [[honour]] is [[pivotal]] to this [[tale]]. [[Personally]], I feel that this is Neeson's [[best]] performance, his brogue ([[albeit]] Irish) [[adding]] authenticity for the average viewer. Rob [[Roy]] is a stubborn, proud, [[courageous]], and honest [[man]] [[whose]] word can be trusted. He is a loving husband & father, and [[also]] touchingly loyal to his [[friend]], McDonald, who is [[accused]] of robbing him.

Tim Roth [[masterfully]] portrays his major adversary and [[surely]] one of the most [[heinous]] and sadistic cinematic villains, Archibald Cunningham, an egotistical, ruthless strutting peacock. He is very effeminate for someone who makes it his major business to ravish the local women, whether willing or otherwise. The pathetic Cunningham himself constantly refers to the fact that he is a bastard unaware of his own father's identity, though this hardly justifies his horrendous misdeeds of murder, rape, and thievery. Also, he mercilessly casts aside the young servant girl, Betty, after she becomes pregnant with his child, resulting in her suicide. John Hurt plays the arrogant and foppish Montrose, who is eventually implied to be Cunningham's father.

The movie is essentially the very believable love story between an ordinary man and his wife, beautifully depicting the passionate relationship between Rob Roy and Mary. Those who question the presence of passion within marriage should watch this husband and wife! I think the phrase used by this pair, 'How fine you are to me...' is surely one of the most beautiful expressions of love in all cinema.

The most compelling performance is possibly by Jessica Lange as Rob's wife, Mary McGregor. Lacking make up, she has the pretty but natural look of a sturdy peasant wife and mother. The actress brings great courage and dignity to her role when she is brutally raped by the despicable Cunningham, while the disgusting Killearn looks on. Her dialogue is plain spoken but filled with pride and grace. I give Hollywood its due that for once they showed just enough in the rape scene to reveal its cruelty as well as Mary's pain and humiliation, but nothing intended to sensationalize. Their kinsman, Alastair McGregor, shows emotional anguish when he learns of Mary's rape, and further torment when she swears him to secrecy never to reveal to her husband her violation by Cunningham.

Of course this film features the beautiful scenery of the Scottish highlands, also lavish period costumes and appropriate musical scoring. There are no grand battle scenes as in Braveheart, but continuous engaging action and a particularly gripping sword fight in the final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham. This is a captivating movie featuring both tense action and a beautiful love tale. This is the [[transferring]] [[history]] of Scotland's legendary hero, Rob Roy, and his battles with the feudal landowners. Like Braveheart to which it is frequently [[likened]], it is not very historical. [[Although]] their primarily fictional nature, I rate both of these [[kino]] [[vastly]] and [[ought]] be hard pressed to choose between the two. The 13 Century [[Willem]] Wallace is, as others have noted, a [[greatest]] than life national figure, while the [[swift]] 18th Century [[Stealing]] [[Rowe]] [[arises]] across as an honourable but [[mundane]] Scotsman.

The story revolves [[roundabout]] a [[tribes]] chieftain, [[Roberta]] Roy McGregor, who [[vie]] in a Scottish highland [[villa]] with his [[women]] Mary and their two young [[son]]. As the [[flick]] [[launches]], he and his fellow clansmen are [[chasing]] down some [[bandits]] who have [[stole]] the local lord's [[cows]]. Rob [[Rowe]] then [[desires]] to [[improving]] the living conditions of his people so arranges to borrow one thousand Scottish [[lb]] from a local noble, the [[Marquess]] of Montrose, in order to [[purchasing]] [[cows]] to herd to [[markets]]. He [[provisionally]] entrusts this money to his [[amie]], Alan [[macdonald]]. When both [[macdonald]] and the money [[converting]] up [[lacking]], Rob [[Rowe]] [[discoveries]] himself in [[dispute]] with Montrose as well as his [[ignoble]] protégé, Archibald Cunningham, and his [[squalid]] factor, Killearn. [[Stealing]] Roy's [[honoring]] is [[similarly]] tested when Montrose seeks to involve him in [[misguided]] [[evidence]] against his [[competitors]], the Duke of Argyle, whom he [[desires]] to [[accusing]] of being a Jacobite.

The charismatic Liam Leeson is [[wondrous]] as the kilted highlander Rob [[Rowe]], an [[clever]], [[male]], and noble [[heroin]] and a [[men]] [[who]] sense of [[honours]] is [[key]] to this [[saga]]. [[Individual]], I feel that this is Neeson's [[better]] performance, his brogue ([[although]] Irish) [[added]] authenticity for the average viewer. Rob [[Rowe]] is a stubborn, proud, [[adventurous]], and honest [[males]] [[who]] word can be trusted. He is a loving husband & father, and [[apart]] touchingly loyal to his [[friends]], McDonald, who is [[accusing]] of robbing him.

Tim Roth [[artfully]] portrays his major adversary and [[probably]] one of the most [[nauseating]] and sadistic cinematic villains, Archibald Cunningham, an egotistical, ruthless strutting peacock. He is very effeminate for someone who makes it his major business to ravish the local women, whether willing or otherwise. The pathetic Cunningham himself constantly refers to the fact that he is a bastard unaware of his own father's identity, though this hardly justifies his horrendous misdeeds of murder, rape, and thievery. Also, he mercilessly casts aside the young servant girl, Betty, after she becomes pregnant with his child, resulting in her suicide. John Hurt plays the arrogant and foppish Montrose, who is eventually implied to be Cunningham's father.

The movie is essentially the very believable love story between an ordinary man and his wife, beautifully depicting the passionate relationship between Rob Roy and Mary. Those who question the presence of passion within marriage should watch this husband and wife! I think the phrase used by this pair, 'How fine you are to me...' is surely one of the most beautiful expressions of love in all cinema.

The most compelling performance is possibly by Jessica Lange as Rob's wife, Mary McGregor. Lacking make up, she has the pretty but natural look of a sturdy peasant wife and mother. The actress brings great courage and dignity to her role when she is brutally raped by the despicable Cunningham, while the disgusting Killearn looks on. Her dialogue is plain spoken but filled with pride and grace. I give Hollywood its due that for once they showed just enough in the rape scene to reveal its cruelty as well as Mary's pain and humiliation, but nothing intended to sensationalize. Their kinsman, Alastair McGregor, shows emotional anguish when he learns of Mary's rape, and further torment when she swears him to secrecy never to reveal to her husband her violation by Cunningham.

Of course this film features the beautiful scenery of the Scottish highlands, also lavish period costumes and appropriate musical scoring. There are no grand battle scenes as in Braveheart, but continuous engaging action and a particularly gripping sword fight in the final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham. This is a captivating movie featuring both tense action and a beautiful love tale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]]

[[If]] you like rap or hip-hop, watch this movie, although it's funny if you don't [[get]] the [[references]], as a straight [[comedy]].

Haven't [[seen]] much of the much hyped CB4, but what I did [[see]] didn't have the [[heart]] that this [[little]] stormer has.

Haven't [[heard]] from the people [[involved]] [[since]], which is a [[surprise]]. The film is very [[similar]] to [[Spinal]] Tap, which is no bad thing, and I [[think]] a [[lot]] of the [[dialogue]], while priceless in [[Tap]] is funnier here, [[probably]] because I'm more into rap than [[rock]] theses days, so my own judgment does cloud that point.

The rap [[songs]] are [[funny]] as [[hell]], and it's basically [[spot]] the [[reference]] for most of the [[film]], not all of them are in-your-face, which [[means]] the [[physical]] [[comedy]] and the one-liners [[get]] [[priority]] over the take-offs.

[[Great]] [[fun]], one to watch [[twice]] if there ever was a [[movie]].

[[Unless]] you like rap or hip-hop, watch this movie, although it's funny if you don't [[obtains]] the [[reference]], as a straight [[parody]].

Haven't [[watched]] much of the much hyped CB4, but what I did [[seeing]] didn't have the [[nub]] that this [[petite]] stormer has.

Haven't [[audition]] from the people [[entangled]] [[because]], which is a [[astonishment]]. The film is very [[analog]] to [[Vertebrae]] Tap, which is no bad thing, and I [[reckon]] a [[lots]] of the [[dialogues]], while priceless in [[Valve]] is funnier here, [[potentially]] because I'm more into rap than [[boulder]] theses days, so my own judgment does cloud that point.

The rap [[lyrics]] are [[comical]] as [[dammit]], and it's basically [[blemish]] the [[references]] for most of the [[kino]], not all of them are in-your-face, which [[signifies]] the [[corporal]] [[comedian]] and the one-liners [[got]] [[precedence]] over the take-offs.

[[Huge]] [[amusing]], one to watch [[double]] if there ever was a [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Put yourself into Carla's [[shoes]]. She is an overworked, unappreciated administrative drudge who is invisible. You know her: she's trained three of her [[last]] three bosses, knows where all of the bodies are [[buried]] and might even [[look]] back at you in the mirror when you [[brush]] your teeth. Always having [[time]] for another thankless [[task]] and does it better than most [[despite]] a serious disability, she has the desk on the [[way]] to the restroom that becomes the [[repository]] of half-finished cups of [[coffee]] begging to be [[spilled]]. What? You don't want to [[hear]] it? [[Well]], she can't and [[neither]] can you until your [[hearing]] aid is in place. Prepare to [[experience]] life from the perspective of the hearing impaired.

Carla ([[Emmanuelle]] Devos) [[needs]] a [[change]] in her [[life]]. [[Work]] is leading nowhere; [[friends]] are [[relying]] on her to [[meet]] their domestic [[needs]] and the only [[way]] out [[starts]] with a [[collapse]] that goes [[virtually]] [[unnoticed]]. She won't [[take]] a [[vacation]] - a contract is going [[critical]] - so the only [[alternative]] is to [[hire]] an assistant. Carla submits requirements that convey her [[real]] [[needs]]: a 'well-groomed' [[man]]. This [[brings]] an [[applicant]] for [[approval]] that [[reminds]] us that we should be [[careful]] with our wishes.

[[Paul]] ([[Vincent]] Cassell) does everything wrong from the [[start]] of his [[job]] [[interview]] and his getting hired [[clearly]] [[demonstrates]] Carla's interest in his non-job-related qualities. She sees [[potential]] in this [[former]] thief and as the [[story]] unfolds, their relationship grows in a very [[unusual]] pattern of co-dependence.

[[Paul]] has a [[difficult]] [[transition]] [[returning]] to the [[world]] outside of [[prison]] walls and finds himself in another sort of prison: one of the office [[variety]] and another of indentured servitude to pay off an [[old]] debt. His [[skills]] as a [[thief]] [[help]] Carla [[win]] a [[political]] [[battle]] in the office. But [[Paul]] sees a [[grander]] opportunity with Carla's [[skill]] in lip reading and [[draws]] her [[even]] further into a [[world]] of intrigue.

This is a [[brutal]] [[film]] [[noir]] unrated and [[probably]] [[suitable]] for older [[teens]]. [[Carla]] [[grows]] more [[powerful]], professionally as well as personally, as the [[story]] progresses and her [[disability]] [[gives]] her [[clear]] [[advantages]] over the [[rest]] of us. She grows as a [[woman]] [[discovering]] her sensual side while she [[uses]] her [[resources]] to overcome the [[obstacles]] of competing in a man's world.

The two main characters are meant for each other, in a strange way. Without Paul, Carla will remain in her role of a doormat. She has our sympathy, hopes and best wishes even if she doesn't make the best decisions along the way.

You will hear the world through Carla's ears, from awkward adjustments of your hearing aid, muffled sounds, all but inaudible without it to relatively distinct voices when you can see who's talking. With one major sense disabled, we see Carla's heightened intuitive power to compensate. And we can all use that sense to hear not only what people say, but also what they really mean. Put yourself into Carla's [[shoe]]. She is an overworked, unappreciated administrative drudge who is invisible. You know her: she's trained three of her [[latter]] three bosses, knows where all of the bodies are [[burying]] and might even [[peek]] back at you in the mirror when you [[brushes]] your teeth. Always having [[period]] for another thankless [[tasks]] and does it better than most [[though]] a serious disability, she has the desk on the [[routes]] to the restroom that becomes the [[depot]] of half-finished cups of [[coffees]] begging to be [[flipped]]. What? You don't want to [[listen]] it? [[Good]], she can't and [[or]] can you until your [[auditions]] aid is in place. Prepare to [[enjoying]] life from the perspective of the hearing impaired.

Carla ([[Antonia]] Devos) [[needed]] a [[modification]] in her [[lifetime]]. [[Collaboration]] is leading nowhere; [[mates]] are [[depending]] on her to [[cater]] their domestic [[need]] and the only [[manner]] out [[startup]] with a [[flop]] that goes [[basically]] [[unseen]]. She won't [[taking]] a [[holiday]] - a contract is going [[pivotal]] - so the only [[option]] is to [[hiring]] an assistant. Carla submits requirements that convey her [[authentic]] [[required]]: a 'well-groomed' [[dude]]. This [[poses]] an [[applicants]] for [[endorsement]] that [[reminded]] us that we should be [[cautious]] with our wishes.

[[Paulo]] ([[Tome]] Cassell) does everything wrong from the [[launching]] of his [[workplace]] [[interviews]] and his getting hired [[overtly]] [[proves]] Carla's interest in his non-job-related qualities. She sees [[prospective]] in this [[past]] thief and as the [[saga]] unfolds, their relationship grows in a very [[odd]] pattern of co-dependence.

[[Paulo]] has a [[problematic]] [[transitions]] [[reverted]] to the [[monde]] outside of [[imprisonment]] walls and finds himself in another sort of prison: one of the office [[diversity]] and another of indentured servitude to pay off an [[former]] debt. His [[capabilities]] as a [[mugger]] [[aid]] Carla [[won]] a [[politician]] [[battling]] in the office. But [[Paulo]] sees a [[fatter]] opportunity with Carla's [[capabilities]] in lip reading and [[attracts]] her [[yet]] further into a [[worldwide]] of intrigue.

This is a [[brutish]] [[films]] [[negro]] unrated and [[admittedly]] [[proper]] for older [[teenagers]]. [[Carly]] [[grew]] more [[influential]], professionally as well as personally, as the [[conte]] progresses and her [[incapacity]] [[furnishes]] her [[unequivocal]] [[prerogatives]] over the [[remainder]] of us. She grows as a [[daughters]] [[detecting]] her sensual side while she [[using]] her [[finances]] to overcome the [[impediment]] of competing in a man's world.

The two main characters are meant for each other, in a strange way. Without Paul, Carla will remain in her role of a doormat. She has our sympathy, hopes and best wishes even if she doesn't make the best decisions along the way.

You will hear the world through Carla's ears, from awkward adjustments of your hearing aid, muffled sounds, all but inaudible without it to relatively distinct voices when you can see who's talking. With one major sense disabled, we see Carla's heightened intuitive power to compensate. And we can all use that sense to hear not only what people say, but also what they really mean. --------------------------------------------- Result 3294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] My roommate had [[bought]] this [[documentary]] and invited me to watch it with her. She's from China and only [[heard]] so much about 9/11 and [[wanted]] to know the cold [[hard]] truth and she [[wanted]] me to [[tell]] her more after the [[documentary]]. I felt [[awful]] watching this documentary, it was like reliving the nightmare and it still [[brings]] tears to my eyes.

But I'm [[extremely]] [[grateful]] that I watched this [[documentary]], because on the day of [[September]] 11th, I'm sure we all [[remember]] where we were and what we were doing when we [[heard]], all of us [[could]] only [[think]] certain questions: "Why?", "How?", "What's [[going]] on?", "[[Oh]], my [[God]]!". [[Almost]] all the Americans were [[grateful]] for the [[brave]] [[firemen]] and [[policemen]] that risked their lives to [[save]] others. But I don't think we [[thought]] about what they were [[really]] [[going]] [[though]]. This wasn't [[actually]] supposed to be a documentary about 9/11, the cameraman was just filming a typical day on the [[job]] and they just [[happened]] to be a couple [[blocks]] away from the [[World]] Trade [[Centers]] and [[got]] everything, [[outside]] and in, on [[tape]].

On [[Sep]]. 11th, I [[thought]] to myself "It's OK, the [[policemen]] and [[firemen]] will [[get]] the people out that survived". To be honest, I thought it was an [[accident]], I was in my junior [[year]] of [[high]] [[school]] and getting [[changed]] from [[gym]] and getting [[ready]] to go to my science [[class]]. [[Someone]] came into the locker [[room]] [[shouting]] "Some [[building]] just [[got]] bombed in New York!", we all [[got]] dressed [[quickly]] and ran to our classrooms as we [[watched]] the first tower burning on [[TV]]. Not only 15 seconds [[later]] [[live]] on [[TV]] does the second [[plane]] [[crash]] into the other [[World]] Trade [[Center]] and we knew this was no [[accident]]. A few minutes [[later]], we [[heard]] about the Pentagon and that there was a [[plane]] [[headed]] for Chicago but was [[shot]] down. [[So]] [[many]] [[thoughts]] ran through our [[heads]] and I [[kept]] on thinking "What are the [[firemen]] and [[policemen]] [[going]] to do?". But it's [[procedure]] to them I [[thought]], they'll know what to do.

The first tower collapsed, we knew it, so [[many]] lives are now [[gone]], the second tower crashed, [[things]] [[would]] never be the same. Those firemen in this documentary [[showed]] [[courage]], confusion, and strength, the real raw human emotions. They didn't know what to do, they were just as scarred as those other people who were in the towers. They heard the bodies collapsing on the ground from people jumping out the windows. And here I was in a classroom just crying seeing all that was going on on TV. I was amazed with this film and just wanted to go to New York and tell them how grateful all the Americans were for their help. I know they feel like they were just doing their job, but they did more, they were hero's. Every day after Sep. 11th for 3 weeks they kept on digging knowing that there were no survivors, but they kept on hoping and praying. May God bless their kind and brave hearts.

As for my roommate she was crying and admitted this was her first time crying at these attacks. She got to see the truth of what had happened that tragic day. She [[asked]] "Why?". I didn't know what to say, it breaks my heart that people can be that evil. "It sounds clique', but it was a normal day for everyone" one of the firemen said in the documentary. No one expected this to happen. Not like that, those people in the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon or the planes that were hijacked, they were just doing their job, happen to be there, or even just was there for a second passing by. They were not just murdered, they were slaughtered, and those hijackers did it with a song in their heart. Then seeing in the middle east all the people celebrating, why do people do this? They celebrated death and the lose of: mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. Why?

So, thanks to those people for making this documentary. You truly think about the firemen, policemen, and the troops in Iraq and it keeps your hope up that there are good people in this world. Thank you to all those people, you are our heroes.

10/10 My roommate had [[buys]] this [[documentaries]] and invited me to watch it with her. She's from China and only [[listened]] so much about 9/11 and [[desired]] to know the cold [[difficult]] truth and she [[wants]] me to [[telling]] her more after the [[literature]]. I felt [[terrible]] watching this documentary, it was like reliving the nightmare and it still [[poses]] tears to my eyes.

But I'm [[unbelievably]] [[acknowledging]] that I watched this [[literature]], because on the day of [[Nov]] 11th, I'm sure we all [[reminisce]] where we were and what we were doing when we [[listened]], all of us [[did]] only [[thinking]] certain questions: "Why?", "How?", "What's [[go]] on?", "[[Aw]], my [[Deity]]!". [[Near]] all the Americans were [[appreciative]] for the [[heroic]] [[firefighting]] and [[police]] that risked their lives to [[rescue]] others. But I don't think we [[ideology]] about what they were [[genuinely]] [[go]] [[if]]. This wasn't [[indeed]] supposed to be a documentary about 9/11, the cameraman was just filming a typical day on the [[labour]] and they just [[arrived]] to be a couple [[blocking]] away from the [[Global]] Trade [[Center]] and [[get]] everything, [[exterior]] and in, on [[tapes]].

On [[Sept]]. 11th, I [[figured]] to myself "It's OK, the [[police]] and [[fireman]] will [[got]] the people out that survived". To be honest, I thought it was an [[casualty]], I was in my junior [[annum]] of [[alto]] [[teaching]] and getting [[modified]] from [[gymnasium]] and getting [[prepared]] to go to my science [[kinds]]. [[Anyone]] came into the locker [[chambers]] [[yelling]] "Some [[constructing]] just [[did]] bombed in New York!", we all [[ai]] dressed [[fast]] and ran to our classrooms as we [[observed]] the first tower burning on [[TELEVISION]]. Not only 15 seconds [[then]] [[inhabit]] on [[TELEVISION]] does the second [[airplanes]] [[accidents]] into the other [[Global]] Trade [[Centers]] and we knew this was no [[incident]]. A few minutes [[then]], we [[audition]] about the Pentagon and that there was a [[aircraft]] [[presided]] for Chicago but was [[filmed]] down. [[Consequently]] [[multiple]] [[idea]] ran through our [[leiter]] and I [[conserved]] on thinking "What are the [[firefighting]] and [[police]] [[gonna]] to do?". But it's [[procedures]] to them I [[ideology]], they'll know what to do.

The first tower collapsed, we knew it, so [[numerous]] lives are now [[extinct]], the second tower crashed, [[matters]] [[should]] never be the same. Those firemen in this documentary [[illustrated]] [[audacity]], confusion, and strength, the real raw human emotions. They didn't know what to do, they were just as scarred as those other people who were in the towers. They heard the bodies collapsing on the ground from people jumping out the windows. And here I was in a classroom just crying seeing all that was going on on TV. I was amazed with this film and just wanted to go to New York and tell them how grateful all the Americans were for their help. I know they feel like they were just doing their job, but they did more, they were hero's. Every day after Sep. 11th for 3 weeks they kept on digging knowing that there were no survivors, but they kept on hoping and praying. May God bless their kind and brave hearts.

As for my roommate she was crying and admitted this was her first time crying at these attacks. She got to see the truth of what had happened that tragic day. She [[ask]] "Why?". I didn't know what to say, it breaks my heart that people can be that evil. "It sounds clique', but it was a normal day for everyone" one of the firemen said in the documentary. No one expected this to happen. Not like that, those people in the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon or the planes that were hijacked, they were just doing their job, happen to be there, or even just was there for a second passing by. They were not just murdered, they were slaughtered, and those hijackers did it with a song in their heart. Then seeing in the middle east all the people celebrating, why do people do this? They celebrated death and the lose of: mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. Why?

So, thanks to those people for making this documentary. You truly think about the firemen, policemen, and the troops in Iraq and it keeps your hope up that there are good people in this world. Thank you to all those people, you are our heroes.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When will the hurting stop? I never want to see another version of a Christmas Carol again. They keep on making movies with the same story, falling over each other in trying to make the movie better then the rest, but sadly fail to do so, as this is not a good story. Moralistic, old-fashioned, conservative happy-thinking. As if people learn. The numerous different versions of this film prove that we don´t. --------------------------------------------- Result 3296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I remember Casper comic books, but don't [[remember]] any cartoons. [[Maybe]] they weren't [[memorable]]; I don't know but at my advanced age, here I am watching this very early Casper animated short [[yesterday]]. [[Afterward]], I was shocked to read the user-comments here. [[Did]] people miss the ending?

I have to learn all over again that [[Casper]] isn't like the other ghosts, who [[like]] to [[go]] out each [[night]] and scare the c--p out of [[everyone]]. "He [[sees]] no [[future]] in that," according to the narrator here. Instead, one [[night]] he goes out to the [[rural]] section of [[town]], [[inadvertently]] [[scares]] some [[animals]] and can't find any [[friends]]. It brings him to tears, until a [[little]] fox hears him bawling and befriends him. The two [[become]] [[buddies]] but [[soon]], the [[fox]] is running for his life with a fox [[hunt]] in progress.

Other [[reviews]] have all [[mentioned]] what [[happens]], so I'll [[touch]] on that, too. The [[fox]] is killed by hunting dogs (not shown) and Casper is in tears for [[losing]] "the only [[friend]] I ever had." But, nobody mentions the [[happy]] ending to this [[story]]. "Ferdie" the fox [[becomes]] a spirit-figure like [[Casper]], [[jumps]] on his lap, licks his face and the [[narrator]] comments "they lived [[happily]] ever after." [[Both]] [[characters]] look [[overjoyed]].

What is so [[sad]] about that? This is a nice [[story]] with a nice, happy [[ending]]. I remember Casper comic books, but don't [[remind]] any cartoons. [[Potentially]] they weren't [[unforgettable]]; I don't know but at my advanced age, here I am watching this very early Casper animated short [[sunday]]. [[Thereafter]], I was shocked to read the user-comments here. [[Got]] people miss the ending?

I have to learn all over again that [[Caspar]] isn't like the other ghosts, who [[likes]] to [[going]] out each [[overnight]] and scare the c--p out of [[someone]]. "He [[believes]] no [[futuristic]] in that," according to the narrator here. Instead, one [[overnight]] he goes out to the [[agrarian]] section of [[municipality]], [[accidentally]] [[alarms]] some [[beasts]] and can't find any [[mates]]. It brings him to tears, until a [[tiny]] fox hears him bawling and befriends him. The two [[gotten]] [[guys]] but [[early]], the [[renard]] is running for his life with a fox [[chasing]] in progress.

Other [[inspect]] have all [[talked]] what [[arrives]], so I'll [[toque]] on that, too. The [[renard]] is killed by hunting dogs (not shown) and Casper is in tears for [[wasting]] "the only [[boyfriend]] I ever had." But, nobody mentions the [[pleased]] ending to this [[history]]. "Ferdie" the fox [[becoming]] a spirit-figure like [[Caspar]], [[leap]] on his lap, licks his face and the [[announcer]] comments "they lived [[thankfully]] ever after." [[Whether]] [[features]] look [[ecstatic]].

What is so [[unlucky]] about that? This is a nice [[history]] with a nice, happy [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just have to say, this is one of my favorite movies of all time. I cannot even count the number of times I've seen it. I was already in love with John Travolta, but the first time the camera pans up his body after he's all clean-shaven looking beautiful for his first trip to Gilley's, I was in awe. Debra Winger, as always, delivers a perfect performance as the young, naive wife of Bud, but with the necessary attitude to be married to a stubborn and hard-working cowboy. If you're not a country music person, which I wasn't, this is 1 soundtrack that'll have you singing right along with every word. If you get a chance, please see this movie-it won't disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 3298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] [[Disney]] goes to the well one too [[many]] times as anybody who has [[seen]] the [[original]] LITTLE [[MERMAID]] will feel [[blatantly]] [[ripped]] off. [[Celebrating]] the birth of their daughter Melody, Ariel and Eric plan on [[introducing]] her to [[King]] Triton. The celebration is [[quickly]] crashed by Ursula 's sister, Morgana who [[plans]] to [[use]] Melody as a [[defense]] tool to [[get]] the [[King]] 's trident. [[Stopping]] the attack, Ariel and Eric [[build]] a wall [[around]] the [[ocean]] while [[Melody]] grows up [[wondering]] why she cannot go in there.

[[Awful]] and [[terrible]] is what describes this direct to video sequel. LITTLE [[MERMAID]] 2 gives you that feeling everything you watch seemed to have come straight other Disney movies. I guess [[Disney]] can only plagiarize itself! Do not tell me that the penguin and [[walrus]] does not remind you of another duo from the LION KING!

Other [[disappointing]] [[moments]] include the rematch between Sebastien and Louie, the royal chef. They [[terribly]] under played it! The [[climax]] between Morgana and [[EVERYONE]] seemed to be another [[disappointment]].

I will not give anything away, but in 75 minutes, everything seemed [[incredibly]] cramped and too much to [[handle]]. An [[embarrassment]] to Disney, LITTLE MERMAID 2 is [[better]] left to [[rent]] and laugh at. Then you can prepare for the rest of the other sequels Disney is going to [[drown]] you in later on. [[Disneyland]] goes to the well one too [[several]] times as anybody who has [[noticed]] the [[initial]] LITTLE [[SIREN]] will feel [[brazenly]] [[torn]] off. [[Celebrated]] the birth of their daughter Melody, Ariel and Eric plan on [[presenting]] her to [[Emperor]] Triton. The celebration is [[faster]] crashed by Ursula 's sister, Morgana who [[scheme]] to [[used]] Melody as a [[defence]] tool to [[obtain]] the [[Emperor]] 's trident. [[Stopped]] the attack, Ariel and Eric [[building]] a wall [[about]] the [[oceans]] while [[Tune]] grows up [[requesting]] why she cannot go in there.

[[Frightful]] and [[scary]] is what describes this direct to video sequel. LITTLE [[BURGLAR]] 2 gives you that feeling everything you watch seemed to have come straight other Disney movies. I guess [[Disneyland]] can only plagiarize itself! Do not tell me that the penguin and [[guru]] does not remind you of another duo from the LION KING!

Other [[disappointed]] [[times]] include the rematch between Sebastien and Louie, the royal chef. They [[extraordinarily]] under played it! The [[orgasm]] between Morgana and [[SOMEONE]] seemed to be another [[frustration]].

I will not give anything away, but in 75 minutes, everything seemed [[frightfully]] cramped and too much to [[manipulated]]. An [[shame]] to Disney, LITTLE MERMAID 2 is [[best]] left to [[leasing]] and laugh at. Then you can prepare for the rest of the other sequels Disney is going to [[drowns]] you in later on. --------------------------------------------- Result 3299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The delivery of some very [[humorous]] rude lines by Pierce Brosnan is [[alone]] worth the price of admission. He plays a [[kind]] of "James Bond's [[psycho]] [[twin]] brother", [[separated]] at birth, no doubt. As an [[intense]] hit-man, his [[character]] is very sexual but [[even]] [[better]], very [[funny]]. [[Add]] the kind-hearted, uber-likable American "[[guy]] next door', Greg Kinnear, to set up contrast. The [[myriad]] locations, vivid colors, and quick-witted [[humor]] [[provide]] [[great]] entertainment. Hope [[Davis]] is well cast as the "gem of a wife". But the focus of the film is on the two fellows, a new "Odd Couple", and that's the [[part]] that [[works]] very well. Have a [[great]] (probably R-rated) laugh, and look for the [[places]] where the story goes a little deeper. The delivery of some very [[humor]] rude lines by Pierce Brosnan is [[only]] worth the price of admission. He plays a [[sorting]] of "James Bond's [[insane]] [[doubles]] brother", [[parted]] at birth, no doubt. As an [[fierce]] hit-man, his [[nature]] is very sexual but [[yet]] [[best]], very [[amusing]]. [[Adds]] the kind-hearted, uber-likable American "[[dawg]] next door', Greg Kinnear, to set up contrast. The [[countless]] locations, vivid colors, and quick-witted [[comedy]] [[furnishes]] [[wondrous]] entertainment. Hope [[Davies]] is well cast as the "gem of a wife". But the focus of the film is on the two fellows, a new "Odd Couple", and that's the [[parties]] that [[cooperated]] very well. Have a [[huge]] (probably R-rated) laugh, and look for the [[locations]] where the story goes a little deeper. --------------------------------------------- Result 3300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The film gets my stamp of approval. The scene in the museum demands acting without dialogue. This is one of the most interesting and unique scenes in the history of film. Dickinson's character Kate is very well developed and her performance is felt throughout the entire film. The best work Angie Dickinson did since Point Blank! --------------------------------------------- Result 3301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] If you [[liked]] the first two [[films]], then I'm sorry to say you're not going to like this one. This is the really [[rubbish]] and [[unnecessary]] [[straight]] to video, [[probably]] TV [[made]] sequel. The still idiotic but nice [[scientist]] Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is still living with his [[family]] and he has his own [[company]], Szalinski Inc. [[Unfortunately]] his [[wife]] [[wants]] to [[get]] rid of a statue, Wayne is so [[stupid]] he [[shrinks]] his statue and himself with his brother. [[Then]] he [[shrinks]] his [[wife]] and sister-in-law too. Now the adults have to [[find]] a [[way]] to [[get]] the [[kids]] of the [[house]] to [[get]] them [[bigger]]. Pretty much a repeat of the other two with only one or two [[new]] [[things]], e.[[g]]. a [[toy]] [[car]] roller coaster, swimming in [[dip]], etc. Pretty poor! If you [[enjoyed]] the first two [[movie]], then I'm sorry to say you're not going to like this one. This is the really [[trash]] and [[superfluous]] [[consecutive]] to video, [[undeniably]] TV [[effected]] sequel. The still idiotic but nice [[investigators]] Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is still living with his [[families]] and he has his own [[societies]], Szalinski Inc. [[Sadly]] his [[femme]] [[want]] to [[gets]] rid of a statue, Wayne is so [[idiot]] he [[reduces]] his statue and himself with his brother. [[Later]] he [[reduces]] his [[femme]] and sister-in-law too. Now the adults have to [[finds]] a [[pathways]] to [[gets]] the [[juvenile]] of the [[maison]] to [[gets]] them [[stronger]]. Pretty much a repeat of the other two with only one or two [[nouveau]] [[matters]], e.[[gram]]. a [[pawn]] [[motorcar]] roller coaster, swimming in [[falls]], etc. Pretty poor! --------------------------------------------- Result 3302 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We do not come across movies on brother-sister relationship in Indian cinema, or any other language or medium. This relationship has several aspects which have not been exploited in movies or novels. Typically, a sister is depicted as a pile-on who can be used for ransom in the climax. This movie treats the subject in an entirely different light.

It is inspired by George Eliot's novel "The Mill on the Floss". The brother is very prosaic, all-good, the blue-eyed boy who is a conventionally good son and a favorite with his mother. The sister is romantic, wild and defiant of the unwritten rules of the society. In spite of this, the love of the brother-sister is the winner.

This movie is about the love of the two siblings who are separated in childhood and revival of the same feeling when they meet years later. It is also the quest of the subdued brother to reunite with his sister who has chosen to be wild to defy the world.

Although the movie and the novel are set about 3 centuries apart in two distant countries, yet the sentiments are the same and still hold true. --------------------------------------------- Result 3303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is about a Dysfunctinal Family but Not just any Dysfunctional Family. It is about the Family of the Father of our Nation (India) although, the film focuses mainly on the estranged relationship between Mahatma Gandhi and his eldest son Harilal Gandhi. It shows how The Mahatma had to kill M.K. Gandhi, how he had to sacrifice his family life in order to achieve our freedom. Every time Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and his son would try to get close the Mahatma would come between them. This is a beautifully done film. Akshaye Khanna has proved himself to be a Top Actor. He expressed emotions very naturally. Darshan Jariwala who mainly stars in Plays-Gurukant Desai's lawyer in Guru has portrayed Gandhi wonderfully.(as a real Human Being, unlike Ben Kingsley who made him look like a God) Shefali Shah the girl from Monsoon Wedding has also done a really good job of showing how Kasturba Gandhi was torn between father and son. This Movie is touching and so is its soundtrack "Raghupati Raghava" sung in a very unique manner. I saw this movie just 3 hours ago(it released in Dubai a day earlier-on the 2nd) and when the movie was over there was "Pin Drop Silence" and while exiting out of the Theatre not ONE person pushed another( Can you imagine us Indians not pushing ?) NOT ONE ! There was a Sacred Silence... --------------------------------------------- Result 3304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A family of terrible people must remain in a house for a week or else they will lose their inheritance which will go to the servants who will only get their inheritance if they agree to stay on and keep the house in order. People die (and so will you if you try to sit through this) If you've ever had any desire to see bad actors- many with ill fitting dentures-act or attempt to act in a bad horror movie this is your chance. This is just awful. Its so bad I thought Al Adamson, one of the worst directors ever, directed it, but I was wrong.

Its so bad I don't want to say anything more about it, not because it isn't polite but because once I start I may not be able to stop.

avoid --------------------------------------------- Result 3305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A definite no. A resounding NO. This movie is an absolute dud.

Having been recommended to me by a friend very much into "that sort of thing," I watched this movie with some anticipation of being informed, changed, moved, altered, uplifted, and all the other positive mystical things that could happen to me when I suddenly see The Truth. Now this may sound like someone who is already predisposed to poo-pooing anything dealing with the metaphysical, the metaphysical/physical boundaries of existence. Believe me, I am not such a person. I try to be open about any presentation and then decide accordingly.

In terms of content, the only thing I found mildly interesting and informative, was the bit about peptides, emotions, addiction, and cellular receptors. That was the only "unifying" element I could find in the documentary part of this film. The rest of the documentary rambled around several topics and never seemed to unify and cohere, try to tie up and conclude to a point. And what was all that stuff about native Americans not being able to see the ships that Columbus came in? Who told the "authorities" in this film that that was what happened in 1492? Where they there too? Had they compared this to scientific work being done in visual cognition (the famous gorilla video, for example, visit the Visual Cognition Lab at the University of Illinois site) there may have been a more convincing point made. Here, however, it seemed like unsupported mystical mumbo-jumbo.

As a film: this wasn't one film, it was two. I found the documentary part mildly interesting, just to hear the people talking about what they were talking about (I was annoyed that their credentials weren't presented at the bottom of the screen when they spoke, at least initially!) But I found the "story" part of the movie with Matlin in it annoying, disjointed, intrusive, non-related and downright stupid. That bit about the Polish wedding with that dance was not in the least bit funny. It was laughable, ludicrous, sophomoric, and stupid. And I found the use of the word "Pollack" offensive. It just seemed so out of place and wrong. Is such usage okay because a member of the group uses a pejorative term to refer to the group because he or she is a member of the group? That may be okay to make a point, but it didn't seem to be used that way here. And in any case, I don't care what the reason, it offended me, a Pole. I never call myself or refer to my ethnic background as "Pollack." And I certainly don't like like it when others do. Can I watch or listen to a bigoted conversation in which this term is used? You betcha! But again this didn't seem to be the case here. It just seemed so out of place. Unprovocked, unmitigated.

The acting was abysmal. Elaine Hendrix's performance was totally unbelievable. At times, it seemed like she was just reading her lines that had just been given to her. Marlee Matlin for the most part seemed to be sleep walking through this whole thing. Perhaps she was baffled by the material. I know I was. If she was supposed to be portraying a disillusioned drugged-up anxiety-prone malcontent, it just didn't seem to click. But by far, the world's worst was Hendrix! All in all, I found this a disjointed, poorly acted piece of clap-trap. --------------------------------------------- Result 3306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is so bad, so very very bad. The acting is the biggest joke in history. Don't even bother to see it, i did ff it after 20 min and it was just as disappointing in the end as in the beginning... I really don't understand peoples taste, I'm a horror movie fan and I'm not fastidious but I DO HAVE A LIMIT! Maybe it was a quarter of a star better then the beginning of The Hoast but that's it. So I recommend you don't waste the 15 minutes you'll be able to watch. I mean the acting is better done by monkeys. And the big brother with the parental role is just awful. Don't they pay characters in C-movies? No I must say it's not the first time I think a horror movie is bad but it's absolutely one in my down ten movies and it will be charing places with Portrait of a vampire, Cabin by the lake, The Hoast! --------------------------------------------- Result 3307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had been subjected to this movie for a [[relationship]] class in my [[school]]. As [[figured]] it was [[nothing]] [[captivating]] and nothing new. Though it [[tries]] to be [[original]] by [[focusing]] on the teen [[father]] [[instead]] of the [[mother]] [[showing]] the [[problems]] that the dad [[would]] [[go]] through. It had an interesting side to it but it just doesn't [[live]] up to its originality due to the fact nothing else in this movie was [[original]]. We have the [[main]] character who has the older sister who like in [[every]] other [[movie]] like this has a thing against him, we have the [[stay]] at [[home]] [[mother]] who [[expects]] too much and when he [[gives]] more she feels [[offended]] and leaves him in the dust, then we have the [[father]] who is [[always]] gone. [[Then]] the [[girls]] side we have the [[parents]] who [[want]] everything and [[expect]] her to be perfect at all she does. On to the [[story]] like I [[said]] it was interesting but the [[lack]] of good acting from the entire cast and the [[lack]] of any good writing or storytelling. Everything about this [[fell]] into cliché the [[little]] nerd kid in school starts studying with [[girl]], they get [[together]], have [[sex]] and then boom we have a little kid. [[Perhaps]] it could've been [[better]] had the writing been well better and had the acting been improved I've [[seriously]] gotten more emotion out of Leatherface and his chainsaw than I did out of any [[actor]] in this [[film]] and that's pretty [[bad]] seeing as the Leatherface movies are [[crap]] and horridly [[acted]]. So far the only interesting teen pregnancy movie I've seen was Juno. So far the [[comical]] side of this serious situation has proved more entertaining while still giving the same message. Like I said the idea was original most of these films focus on the [[teen]] mother but this one [[chose]] not to instead it focuses on the drama of the father but again the originality does not save this movie from mediocrity. I really hope [[someone]] decides to either re-make this movie with a better cast and a better writer or just make another similar film because this one was wasted [[potential]]. I had been subjected to this movie for a [[relation]] class in my [[schooling]]. As [[conjured]] it was [[none]] [[mesmerizing]] and nothing new. Though it [[attempted]] to be [[upfront]] by [[concentrated]] on the teen [[fathers]] [[however]] of the [[mothers]] [[display]] the [[troubles]] that the dad [[should]] [[going]] through. It had an interesting side to it but it just doesn't [[inhabit]] up to its originality due to the fact nothing else in this movie was [[initial]]. We have the [[primary]] character who has the older sister who like in [[any]] other [[films]] like this has a thing against him, we have the [[remain]] at [[dwellings]] [[ammi]] who [[await]] too much and when he [[delivers]] more she feels [[slighted]] and leaves him in the dust, then we have the [[fathers]] who is [[invariably]] gone. [[Thereafter]] the [[woman]] side we have the [[parent]] who [[wish]] everything and [[expecting]] her to be perfect at all she does. On to the [[history]] like I [[told]] it was interesting but the [[shortage]] of good acting from the entire cast and the [[misses]] of any good writing or storytelling. Everything about this [[fallen]] into cliché the [[petite]] nerd kid in school starts studying with [[girls]], they get [[jointly]], have [[sexuality]] and then boom we have a little kid. [[Maybe]] it could've been [[best]] had the writing been well better and had the acting been improved I've [[severely]] gotten more emotion out of Leatherface and his chainsaw than I did out of any [[actress]] in this [[filmmaking]] and that's pretty [[negative]] seeing as the Leatherface movies are [[dammit]] and horridly [[reacted]]. So far the only interesting teen pregnancy movie I've seen was Juno. So far the [[droll]] side of this serious situation has proved more entertaining while still giving the same message. Like I said the idea was original most of these films focus on the [[teenaged]] mother but this one [[opt]] not to instead it focuses on the drama of the father but again the originality does not save this movie from mediocrity. I really hope [[everyone]] decides to either re-make this movie with a better cast and a better writer or just make another similar film because this one was wasted [[prospective]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] [[Director]] Ron Atkins is certifiably [[insane]]. This ultra-low budget film chronicles a few days in the life of one [[Harry]] Russo (John Giancaspro, who also co-wrote), a nut-job who receives a Rubberneck doll from his [[bitch]] girlfriend. He starts to take orders from the doll to take massive amounts of drugs, rape and kill, not always in that order. What [[starts]] off as being a balls-to-the-wall [[exploitation]] film, well [[stays]] like that, but it gets [[VERY]] [[repetitive]] VERY [[fast]]. I'm leaning more toward the certifiably [[insane]]. It IS hard to forget once seen [[though]]. Kinda like if Tom [[Green]] ever did a horror film.

My Grade:F

Eye Candy: Laurie Farwell gets fully nude; Jasmin Putnam shows tits and bush

ANTI-eye candy: seeing John completely naked repeatedly [[Headmaster]] Ron Atkins is certifiably [[craziness]]. This ultra-low budget film chronicles a few days in the life of one [[Hare]] Russo (John Giancaspro, who also co-wrote), a nut-job who receives a Rubberneck doll from his [[whore]] girlfriend. He starts to take orders from the doll to take massive amounts of drugs, rape and kill, not always in that order. What [[embark]] off as being a balls-to-the-wall [[operate]] film, well [[resting]] like that, but it gets [[MUCH]] [[recur]] VERY [[punctually]]. I'm leaning more toward the certifiably [[craziness]]. It IS hard to forget once seen [[while]]. Kinda like if Tom [[Greene]] ever did a horror film.

My Grade:F

Eye Candy: Laurie Farwell gets fully nude; Jasmin Putnam shows tits and bush

ANTI-eye candy: seeing John completely naked repeatedly --------------------------------------------- Result 3309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Hi]], Everyone, If you saw "Singing in the Rain," you [[remember]] the scene of [[Gene]] [[Kelly]] dancing in the rain. You also remember the dance number of Donald O'Connor, "Make 'em [[Laugh]]." If you saw "Royal [[Wedding]]," you will remember Fred Astaire dancing on the [[ceiling]]. [[If]] you [[saw]] "Jailhouse [[Rock]]," you will even remember the title [[dance]] number choreographed by The King himself.

That is what is [[missing]] here. There [[could]] have been some blockbuster dance numbers in this presentation. The closest was Chuck McGowan's "I Can Do That." the [[mere]] [[fact]] that you have some [[talented]] people on stage [[moving]] together does not make a great [[dance]] film. Richard Attenborough was to blame for this [[failure]]. He [[pointed]] the [[camera]] at the stage and [[thought]] that would be a [[good]] thing.

[[Yelling]] at people [[auditioning]] for a [[part]] in a Broadway production is not entertainment. [[Michael]] Douglas would be just as badly cast if he were in a Western or a comedy. He is OK when he is in a Michael Douglas movie where we see him yelling at someone we would like to yell at. It does not [[work]] here.

The [[cast]] was good except for Michael, of course. A good movie [[could]] have been made even using the songs that were in the stage production, but someone should have thought about how to film it.

Next time they do one of these I hope they call me first.

Tom Willett [[Bonjour]], Everyone, If you saw "Singing in the Rain," you [[recollect]] the scene of [[Genetics]] [[Kelley]] dancing in the rain. You also remember the dance number of Donald O'Connor, "Make 'em [[Laughed]]." If you saw "Royal [[Married]]," you will remember Fred Astaire dancing on the [[capped]]. [[Though]] you [[noticed]] "Jailhouse [[Boulder]]," you will even remember the title [[dancers]] number choreographed by The King himself.

That is what is [[faded]] here. There [[did]] have been some blockbuster dance numbers in this presentation. The closest was Chuck McGowan's "I Can Do That." the [[simple]] [[facto]] that you have some [[prodigy]] people on stage [[relocating]] together does not make a great [[ballet]] film. Richard Attenborough was to blame for this [[defect]]. He [[stressed]] the [[cameras]] at the stage and [[figured]] that would be a [[alright]] thing.

[[Yells]] at people [[auditioned]] for a [[party]] in a Broadway production is not entertainment. [[Michele]] Douglas would be just as badly cast if he were in a Western or a comedy. He is OK when he is in a Michael Douglas movie where we see him yelling at someone we would like to yell at. It does not [[collaborated]] here.

The [[casting]] was good except for Michael, of course. A good movie [[did]] have been made even using the songs that were in the stage production, but someone should have thought about how to film it.

Next time they do one of these I hope they call me first.

Tom Willett --------------------------------------------- Result 3310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A blockbuster at the time of it's original release (it was the second-highest grossing film of 1976), the third screen version of A STAR IS BORN has always divided critics and fans alike. The film open to scathingly negative reviews, however, $5.6 million-budgeted picture went on to gross over $150 million at the box office and won an Academy Award and five Golden Globes. It's not without some irony that Streisand's most commercially successful film would also remain her most controversial. For every ten fans who state that STAR is Streisand's best film, there are always ten more who claim it is the weakest film in her filmography. Although both sides have some merit to support their claims, it should still be noted that the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN remains one of the most touching and highly entertaining showbiz dramas that Hollywood ever produced. For my money, it's the best version of the often-told tale.

The film is solidly enjoyable and throughly absorbing. Changing the setting from the old Hollywood studio system to the competitive world of the music industry was actually a great idea, and the screenplay forges a realistic contrast between the characters' romance and their careers. This is the main area that the 1976 version of A STAR IS BORN actually surpasses it's classic predecessors. For example, the film is especially successful when depicting the clashing personal and professional difficulties during recording sessions and the never-ending phone calls that interrupt Kristofferson's songwriting attempts. This version of the story is also more believable in it's portrayal of the lead characters. For example, the female leads in the two previous versions were so virtuous and self-sacrificing that they came off as saints. On the other hand, Esther, the female lead in this version, is not only portrayed as being strong and passionate, but also flawed and conflicted. This makes her feel more "real" than the Janet Gaynor or Judy Garland characters felt in the previous films, and makes the story that much more effective.

The performances are all on target, even if some of the supporting characters aren't fleshed out enough. If you're looking for an actress/singer who can walk the fine line between tough and vulnerable without making herself seem like a script contrivance, Streisand is definitely the girl you want. She's one of the few film stars who can make even the most banal dialogue seem fresh and natural, and, as usual, she manages to make a strong emotional connection with the viewer. Simply put, her Esther is a fully-realized, three-dimensional human being. Kris Kristofferson may not get much respect now for his laid-back characterization, however, he's always interesting watch and displays a magnetic charisma here that he seldom displayed elsewhere in his career. Kristofferson actually received rave reviews at the time from NEWSWEEK, TIME, and even the NEW YORKER's usually vicious Pauline Kael. Gary Busey and Paul Mazursky also give believable performances, but both have a fairly minimal amount of screen time.

The film's soundtrack recording was also a massive success, hitting the #1 on Billboard's Hot 200 and selling over four million copies in the US alone. The Streisand-composed "Evergreen" (with lyrics from Paul Williams) is unarguably one of the most gorgeous songs in contemporary pop, brought to even-further life by an absolutely incomparable vocal performance from Streisand. The rest of the film's original songs (mostly composed by Williams and Rupert Holmes) are pretty good as well, and Streisand sounds fantastic - her live solo numbers remain in the memory long after the rest of the movie has faded. Streisand's vibrant performances bring "Woman In The Moon" and "With One More Look At You" to thrilling life, and make even sillier numbers like "Queen Bee" work far better than they have the right to. Kristofferson's solo numbers sound somewhat tuneless, however, that may have been intentional since he is playing a singer in decline.

Though naturally dated in some respects (it definitely does reflect the decade in which it was made), the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN still holds up remarkably well. The film is well-mounted and slickly produced, the chemistry between the leads is extremely powerful and always feels genuine, and Streisand has two emotional scenes near the finale that are both aching effective. In conclusion, A STAR IS BORN is not only entertaining and moving, but it also transcends all criticism. --------------------------------------------- Result 3311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This insipid mini operetta featuring a Eddy-McDonald prototype in a Valentino scenario is so bad it becomes an endurance exercise after five minutes. It's silly from the get go as this brevity opens two military men discussing the lack of manliness in the son of one of the officers. In under a minute he is packed off to Morrocco where he lives a double life as the Red Shadow; the leader of an Arab tribe that would rather sing than fight.

Alexander Gray and Bernice Clare possess fine light opera voices (with little acting ability) and there's a decent bass in there as well but the acting is so haphazard scenes so ill prepared you get the feeling they are making things up as they go along.

This two reeler was part of a larger stage production that lists six writers. With more room to spoof and warble the show may have had some entertainment values but this rushed quickie is little more than an insult to an audience waiting for the feature presentation. --------------------------------------------- Result 3312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Ostensibly]] a film that [[predicts]] the coming trends in British popular music, it's [[wrong]] on so many fronts that it's [[laughable]]. Tommy Quickly? The Honeycombs? The movie DOES [[include]] a song by the Spencer Davis group, two by the Animals, and one tacked on live film of the Beatles doing their live version of Twist and Shout (all 1:20). But all in all, an [[awkward]] [[display]] of British music circa 1964. Oh, and Herman's Hermits. [[Visibly]] a film that [[anticipates]] the coming trends in British popular music, it's [[erroneous]] on so many fronts that it's [[farcical]]. Tommy Quickly? The Honeycombs? The movie DOES [[containing]] a song by the Spencer Davis group, two by the Animals, and one tacked on live film of the Beatles doing their live version of Twist and Shout (all 1:20). But all in all, an [[tricky]] [[visualize]] of British music circa 1964. Oh, and Herman's Hermits. --------------------------------------------- Result 3313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know I'm in the minority, but...

Uwe Boll is about as talented as a frog. Not even a toad; just a frog. He's reminiscent of about a hundred other no-talent hacks who churn out one useless crap-fest after another.

This movie? Is a crap-fest. Slater's talent is only minimally utilized leading one to believe he's got other things (like his failed relationship) on his mind. Reid performs as if she has either forgotten her acting lessons, been severely hit on the head and MADE to forget her acting lessons, or has one of the worst directors in the history of film. I'm voting on the third choice, myself, although the other two are always possible.

Uwe Boll has never done a single thing from which I've derived even the slightest pleasure. Frankly, I'm satisfied that he made this stinker. I was concerned with Bloodrayne competing with "Underworld: Evolution" for ticket sales. Now, I'm confident that Len Wiseman has nothing, and I mean NOTHING, to worry about.

This rates a 1.0/10 rating for this messy, convoluted crap-fest, from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] A young ( only 21 ) director with [[great]] talent, a [[powerful]] [[scenario]], young and ambitious cast with all theatrical [[background]]...

One of the [[first]] tries of a thriller in [[Turkish]] [[cinema]], which seems in the [[future]] we'll have some more based on the success...

Shot on high definition [[video]], the [[movie]] is perhaps [[effected]] on [[world]] thrillers, [[especially]] the American thrillers. The technical and [[cinematographic]] [[character]] is [[quite]] well [[done]], the scenes are all well worked on. Not too much blood but [[sufficient]] [[enough]] to [[make]] you [[think]] you're in a blood bath too...

The [[scenario]] is [[quite]] [[wise]] but with certain clues, a [[clever]] audience can easily [[predict]] what's going on and at the [[end]] when everything [[settles]] down you're getting [[somehow]] [[weird]] to [[conclude]] the [[result]].

Well [[done]] Tiglon, one of the biggest [[DVD]] [[distributors]] in [[Turkey]], it is not [[easy]] to decide for such a [[movie]] in their first [[try]] as a production [[company]]... A young ( only 21 ) director with [[huge]] talent, a [[forceful]] [[scenarios]], young and ambitious cast with all theatrical [[backgrounds]]...

One of the [[firstly]] tries of a thriller in [[Turk]] [[film]], which seems in the [[futur]] we'll have some more based on the success...

Shot on high definition [[videos]], the [[film]] is perhaps [[performed]] on [[monde]] thrillers, [[namely]] the American thrillers. The technical and [[kino]] [[characteristics]] is [[rather]] well [[performed]], the scenes are all well worked on. Not too much blood but [[adequate]] [[adequately]] to [[deliver]] you [[reckon]] you're in a blood bath too...

The [[screenplays]] is [[perfectly]] [[wiser]] but with certain clues, a [[artful]] audience can easily [[predictions]] what's going on and at the [[ceases]] when everything [[solve]] down you're getting [[somewhere]] [[bizarre]] to [[finish]] the [[conclusions]].

Well [[doing]] Tiglon, one of the biggest [[DVDS]] [[dealers]] in [[Turk]], it is not [[simple]] to decide for such a [[film]] in their first [[endeavour]] as a production [[firms]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 3315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While not as bad as his game-to-movie adaptations, this hunk of crud doesn't fare much better.

Boll seems to have a pathological inability to accept that he doesn't make good movies. One of these days he'll run out of money and stop inflicting the world with his bombs.

The acting was sub-par, the dialog sounded like they were reading TelePrompTers and Boll's special little 'touches' were seen throughout the whole thing.

Like all Uwe Boll movies, this one just shouldn't exist.

Plain and simple.

Just like Uwe Boll himself shouldn't exist. >_> --------------------------------------------- Result 3316 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The unlikely duo of Zero Mostel and Harry Belafonte team up to give us some interesting performances and subject [[matter]] in The [[Angel]] Levine. It's one interesting twist on the themes from It's A [[Wonderful]] Life.

Zero is married to [[Ida]] Kaminsky and the two of them [[belong]] to a [[special]] [[class]] of elderly Jewish poor in New York. Mostel used to be a [[tailor]] and proud of his trade, but his back and arthritis have [[prevented]] him from [[working]]. [[Kaminsky]] is [[mostly]] bedridden. He's reduced to [[applying]] for [[welfare]]. In [[desperation]] like [[Jimmy]] Stewart, he [[cries]] out to [[God]] for some [[help]].

Now [[maybe]] if he had [[gotten]] [[someone]] like [[Henry]] Travers things might have [[worked]] out differently, but even [[Stewart]] had [[trouble]] [[accepting]] Travers. But Travers had one [[thing]] going for him, he was over 100 years off this [[mortal]] [[coil]] and all his [[ties]] to [[earthly]] [[things]] were gone. [[God]] [[sent]] Mostel [[something]] [[quite]] [[different]], the [[recently]] [[deceased]] Harry Belafonte who should have at least been [[given]] some [[basic]] training for angels before being given an [[assignment]].

Belafonte hasn't [[accepted]] he's [[moved]] on from [[life]], he's [[still]] [[got]] a [[lot]] of [[issues]]. He [[also]] has a wife, Gloria [[Foster]], who doesn't know he's passed on, [[hit]] by a [[car]] [[right]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. You put his [[issues]] and Mostel's [[issues]] and you've [[got]] a good [[conflict]], [[starting]] with the fact that Mostel can't [[believe]] in a black [[Jew]] named Levine.

This was the farewell performance for Polish/[[Jewish]] actress [[Ida]] Kaminsky who [[got]] a [[nomination]] for [[Best]] [[Actress]] in The [[Shop]] on [[Main]] Street a few years back. The other [[prominent]] role here is that of Irish actor Milo O'Shea playing a [[nice]] Jewish doctor. [[Remembering]] O'Shea's brogue from The [[Verdict]], I was [[really]] surprised to see and [[hear]] him [[carry]] off the part of the doctor.

The Angel Levine [[raises]] some interesting and disturbing [[questions]] about [[faith]] and [[race]] in this society. It's [[brought]] to you by a stellar [[cast]] and of course [[created]] by acclaimed writer Bernard Malamud. Make sure to [[catch]] it when [[broadcast]]. The unlikely duo of Zero Mostel and Harry Belafonte team up to give us some interesting performances and subject [[question]] in The [[Angels]] Levine. It's one interesting twist on the themes from It's A [[Lovely]] Life.

Zero is married to [[Nods]] Kaminsky and the two of them [[pertain]] to a [[specific]] [[classroom]] of elderly Jewish poor in New York. Mostel used to be a [[adapting]] and proud of his trade, but his back and arthritis have [[hampered]] him from [[worked]]. [[Kaminski]] is [[essentially]] bedridden. He's reduced to [[implement]] for [[wellness]]. In [[despair]] like [[Jimi]] Stewart, he [[yells]] out to [[Deity]] for some [[assists]].

Now [[possibly]] if he had [[become]] [[anyone]] like [[Gregg]] Travers things might have [[acted]] out differently, but even [[Steward]] had [[problems]] [[agreeing]] Travers. But Travers had one [[stuff]] going for him, he was over 100 years off this [[murderous]] [[spool]] and all his [[links]] to [[terrestrial]] [[aspects]] were gone. [[Deity]] [[transmitted]] Mostel [[anything]] [[utterly]] [[several]], the [[lately]] [[departed]] Harry Belafonte who should have at least been [[yielded]] some [[fundamental]] training for angels before being given an [[assignments]].

Belafonte hasn't [[recognised]] he's [[relocated]] on from [[vida]], he's [[again]] [[gets]] a [[lots]] of [[problem]]. He [[similarly]] has a wife, Gloria [[Promoting]], who doesn't know he's passed on, [[hitting]] by a [[vehicle]] [[rights]] at the [[start]] of the [[cinematography]]. You put his [[problem]] and Mostel's [[issue]] and you've [[get]] a good [[dispute]], [[starts]] with the fact that Mostel can't [[reckon]] in a black [[Jewish]] named Levine.

This was the farewell performance for Polish/[[Jew]] actress [[Nod]] Kaminsky who [[did]] a [[nominations]] for [[Better]] [[Actor]] in The [[Stores]] on [[Principal]] Street a few years back. The other [[salient]] role here is that of Irish actor Milo O'Shea playing a [[handsome]] Jewish doctor. [[Recalled]] O'Shea's brogue from The [[Judging]], I was [[genuinely]] surprised to see and [[overheard]] him [[bears]] off the part of the doctor.

The Angel Levine [[raise]] some interesting and disturbing [[subjects]] about [[fe]] and [[races]] in this society. It's [[tabled]] to you by a stellar [[casting]] and of course [[established]] by acclaimed writer Bernard Malamud. Make sure to [[captured]] it when [[telecast]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the worst movie I have ever seen. Everyone involved should be embarrassed. Everyone. Ice-T is pitiful, the dialogue is absolutely awful, and hokie does not begin to describe the performances by every single actor in this movie. The plot steals heavily from Executive Decision, but compared to Air Rage, Executive Decision is Academy Award material. I have never been so disappointed when watching a movie. Air Rage should be burned with its ashes locked in a vault never to see the light of day again. Anyone who has seen it should take a shower and wash the stink of horrible movie off of them. The best part of this movie probably comes from the ending, when the credits rolled. This was easily the worst movie I have ever seen.

Ice-T should stick to Law and Order, and the other people in this film should retire early or commit suicide. Either way, they should never attempt to be in a movie again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is a thriller with a good [[concept]], good acting, good [[photography]] and good [[intentions]] all around, but which is [[confused]] and disjointed in [[execution]].

Garcia stars as John Berlin, an L.A. forensic detective who has moved to a small California town at the behest of a friend of his on the force there. He soon becomes involved in the investigation of an unsolved murder which leads to his theorizing about the existence of a serial killer whom no one else believes in. The known victim is theorized to be blind, which leads to a romance with a blind girl - believed to be a witness - at a nearby school for the blind.

[[Despite]] a basically intriguing story there were too many quantum [[leaps]] and plot holes in this movie where I found myself [[wondering]], 'how the hell did we wind up here?' or 'how did we find this out?' I [[found]] it [[confusing]] and disjointed, despite the good acting, etc. John Malkovich has a small part toward the end as an F.B.I. investigator out to get Berlin.

Not recommended. This is a thriller with a good [[conceptions]], good acting, good [[picture]] and good [[intent]] all around, but which is [[disconcerted]] and disjointed in [[enforcement]].

Garcia stars as John Berlin, an L.A. forensic detective who has moved to a small California town at the behest of a friend of his on the force there. He soon becomes involved in the investigation of an unsolved murder which leads to his theorizing about the existence of a serial killer whom no one else believes in. The known victim is theorized to be blind, which leads to a romance with a blind girl - believed to be a witness - at a nearby school for the blind.

[[While]] a basically intriguing story there were too many quantum [[hop]] and plot holes in this movie where I found myself [[asks]], 'how the hell did we wind up here?' or 'how did we find this out?' I [[finds]] it [[disconcerting]] and disjointed, despite the good acting, etc. John Malkovich has a small part toward the end as an F.B.I. investigator out to get Berlin.

Not recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 3319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I cannot for the life of me explain what the popularity of the children's television show, power rangers is all about.

I never understood why unsuspecting children liked this show in the first place, since the characters seem so idiotic and not worth caring about whatsoever.

The costumes look completely atrocious, like multi colored spandex that people wear to go to the gym.

What exactly is the purpose of this show anyways, but for kids to learn how to fight to solve their problems? What is up with the awful hair cuts, and clothing on this show anyway? Not to mention this show is still playing on cable television, just to make money to teach kids how to fight each other when they disagree on a certain problem.

There's far better entertainment for today's children, hopefully they aren't as gullible as kids of the 1990s who watched this show.

Oh, and what is up with the homo erotic tension between the red and green rangers anyway? --------------------------------------------- Result 3320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very nice action with an interwoven story which actually doesn't suck. Interesting enough to merit watching instead of skipping past to get to the good parts. Having Jenna Jameson and Asia Carrere helps liven it up, too. Jenna in that sweater and those glasses is just astounding! Worth picking up just to see her! --------------------------------------------- Result 3321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having no knowledge of this film prior to seeing it on Rialto Channel I found it to be a pleasant, poignant and enriching film.

The casting was excellent. I loved all the characters, they were a little exaggerated in places, (but this IS a film). The way it looked and the enjoyably giddy ride the main character took until it turned badly, as real life can and does. Yes, I thought Andy MacDowell was great. I was particularly interested to watch this film once it began because people so often joke about her acting abilities (I find this quite wierd because she's always a solid actress in my opinion).

I loved the bit at the end where Andy's character said "sometimes I feel he was never here" etc., it was so completely how it really is in a situation like that (which I can personally identify with), then there was that gorgeous classical piece "Nocturne" I think by Chopin, which was a beautiful way to end (bar the light comedy at the end, which was probably unnecessary).

I say "well done" to the film makers - I have seen 1,000s of worse films! --------------------------------------------- Result 3322 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Snow]] [[White]], which just came out in Locarno, where I had the [[chance]] to see it, of course [[refers]] to the world [[famous]] fairy [[tale]]. And it also refers to coke. [[In]] the [[end]], real snow of the [[Swiss]] [[Alps]] plays its part as well.

[[Thus]] all three [[aspects]] of the title are addressed in this [[film]]. There is a lot of dope on scene, and there is also a pale, dark haired girl - with a [[prince]] who has to go through all kind of trouble to come to her [[rescue]].

But: It's not a fairy tale. It's supposed to be a realistic drama located in Zurich, Switzerland (according to the Tagline).

[[Technically]] the movie is close to perfect. Unfortunately a weak plot, [[foreseeable]] dialogs, a mostly [[unreal]] scenery and the mixed acting don't add up to create authenticity. Thus as a spectator I remained untouched.

And then there were the [[clichés]], which drove me crazy one by one: Snow White is a rich and spoiled upper class daughter - of course her parents are divorced and she never got enough love from them, because they were so busy all the time. Her best girlfriend, on the other hand, has loving and caring parents. They (a steelworker and a housewife) live in a tiny flat, poor and happy - and ignorant of the desperate situation their daughter is in. The good guy (= prince) is a musician (!) from the French speaking part of Switzerland (which is considered to be the economically less successful but emotionally fitter fraction of the country). He has problems with his parents. They are migrants from Spain, who don't seem to accept his wild way of living - until the father becomes seriously ill and confesses his great admiration for his son from a hospital bed.

And so it goes on: Naturally, the drug dealer is brutal, the bankers are heartless, the club owner is a playboy and the photographer, although a woman (!), has only her career in mind when she exposes Snow White in artsy pornographic pictures at a show.

This review doesn't need a spoiler in order to let you add these pieces to an obvious plot. As I like other films by Samir, e.g. "Forget Baghdad", I was quite disappointed. Let's hope for the next one. [[Snowy]] [[Bianca]], which just came out in Locarno, where I had the [[opportunities]] to see it, of course [[pertains]] to the world [[illustrious]] fairy [[history]]. And it also refers to coke. [[Across]] the [[terminating]], real snow of the [[Francs]] [[Alpine]] plays its part as well.

[[Consequently]] all three [[facets]] of the title are addressed in this [[filmmaking]]. There is a lot of dope on scene, and there is also a pale, dark haired girl - with a [[prinz]] who has to go through all kind of trouble to come to her [[salvage]].

But: It's not a fairy tale. It's supposed to be a realistic drama located in Zurich, Switzerland (according to the Tagline).

[[Technical]] the movie is close to perfect. Unfortunately a weak plot, [[predictable]] dialogs, a mostly [[surrealist]] scenery and the mixed acting don't add up to create authenticity. Thus as a spectator I remained untouched.

And then there were the [[cliché]], which drove me crazy one by one: Snow White is a rich and spoiled upper class daughter - of course her parents are divorced and she never got enough love from them, because they were so busy all the time. Her best girlfriend, on the other hand, has loving and caring parents. They (a steelworker and a housewife) live in a tiny flat, poor and happy - and ignorant of the desperate situation their daughter is in. The good guy (= prince) is a musician (!) from the French speaking part of Switzerland (which is considered to be the economically less successful but emotionally fitter fraction of the country). He has problems with his parents. They are migrants from Spain, who don't seem to accept his wild way of living - until the father becomes seriously ill and confesses his great admiration for his son from a hospital bed.

And so it goes on: Naturally, the drug dealer is brutal, the bankers are heartless, the club owner is a playboy and the photographer, although a woman (!), has only her career in mind when she exposes Snow White in artsy pornographic pictures at a show.

This review doesn't need a spoiler in order to let you add these pieces to an obvious plot. As I like other films by Samir, e.g. "Forget Baghdad", I was quite disappointed. Let's hope for the next one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Do not [[expect]] a depiction of the "truth". However, the accounts of these veterans of the Iraqi & Afghanistan wars demand thoughtful consideration.

The major [[strength]] of the film is that it [[vividly]] portrays the [[words]] and war wounds of these vets and their post-war struggles to reconstruct some degree of [[normalcy]] and functionality to their lives.

My major criticism of the film is twofold: it is one-sided and it advocates anti-war activism but nothing more to correct the serious shortcomings of the military's and Veterans Affairs' programs for helping those who've suffered and still suffer the traumas of war. These are [[NOT]] fatal [[flaws]] of the film.

As a veteran myself, I know that the horrible aftermath of war is [[real]], and these young men and women [[articulate]] it very well. These vets [[vividly]] describe the physical and mental pain and [[torment]] that most veterans experience and that ordinary people need to understand because the horrors of ALL wars are so traumatic and disturbing. Do not [[hopes]] a depiction of the "truth". However, the accounts of these veterans of the Iraqi & Afghanistan wars demand thoughtful consideration.

The major [[kraft]] of the film is that it [[eloquently]] portrays the [[phrase]] and war wounds of these vets and their post-war struggles to reconstruct some degree of [[normality]] and functionality to their lives.

My major criticism of the film is twofold: it is one-sided and it advocates anti-war activism but nothing more to correct the serious shortcomings of the military's and Veterans Affairs' programs for helping those who've suffered and still suffer the traumas of war. These are [[NAH]] fatal [[faults]] of the film.

As a veteran myself, I know that the horrible aftermath of war is [[actual]], and these young men and women [[articulated]] it very well. These vets [[eloquently]] describe the physical and mental pain and [[agony]] that most veterans experience and that ordinary people need to understand because the horrors of ALL wars are so traumatic and disturbing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[After]] watching two of his silent [[shorts]], 'Elena and her [[Men]] (1956)' is my first feature-length [[film]] from French director Jean Renoir, and I [[quite]] enjoyed it. [[However]], I didn't watch the [[film]] for Renoir, but for [[star]] Ingrid Bergman, who – at age 41 – still radiated [[unsurpassed]] beauty, [[elegance]] and [[charm]]. [[Throughout]] the [[early]] 1950s, following her [[scandalous]] [[marriage]] to Italian [[Roberto]] Rossellini, Bergman [[temporarily]] [[fell]] out of public favour. Her [[next]] five films, directed by her husband, were unsuccessful in the United States, and I [[suspect]] that Renoir's latest [[release]] did little to enhance Bergman's popularity with English-speaking audiences {[[however]], she did regain her former success with an Oscar in the same year's 'Anastasia (1956)'}. She stars as Elena Sokorowska, a Polish princess who [[sees]] herself as a guardian angel of [[sorts]], bringing success and recognition to promising men everywhere, before promptly abandoning them. While working her lucky charms to aid the political aspirations of the distinguished General Francois Rollan (Jean [[Marais]]), she finds herself falling into a love that she won't be able to walk away from. This vaguely-political film [[works]] well as [[either]] a [[satire]] or a romantic comedy, as long as you don't take it too seriously; it's purely lighthearted romantic fluff.

Filmed in vibrant Technicolor, 'Elena and her Men' looks terrific as well, a flurry of bright colours, characters and costumes. Bergman's Polish princess is dreamy and somewhat self-absorbed, not in an unlikable way, but hardly a woman of high principles and convictions. She is persuaded by a team of bumbling [[government]] conspirators to convince General Rollan to stage a coup d'état, [[knowingly]] [[exploiting]] his love for her in order to satisfy her own [[delusions]] as a "guardian angel." Perhaps the film's only legitimately virtuous character is Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer, then Audrey Hepburn's husband), who ignores everybody else's [[selfish]] secondary motives and pursues Elena for love, and love [[alone]]. This, Renoir proudly suggests, is what the [[true]] French do [[best]]. '[[Elena]] and her Men' [[also]] [[attempts]], with moderate [[success]], to [[expose]] the superficiality of upper-class French liaisons, through the [[clumsy]] philandering of Eugène ([[Jacques]] Jouanneau), who can't make love to his servant mistress without his fiancè walking in on them. For these sequences, Renoir was obviously trying for the madcap sort of humour that you [[might]] find in a Marx Brothers film, but the film itself is so relaxed and laid-back that the energy just isn't there. [[Upon]] watching two of his silent [[panties]], 'Elena and her [[Males]] (1956)' is my first feature-length [[movie]] from French director Jean Renoir, and I [[rather]] enjoyed it. [[Still]], I didn't watch the [[movies]] for Renoir, but for [[stars]] Ingrid Bergman, who – at age 41 – still radiated [[unconquerable]] beauty, [[styling]] and [[glamour]]. [[Across]] the [[swift]] 1950s, following her [[outrageous]] [[marrying]] to Italian [[Robert]] Rossellini, Bergman [[provisionally]] [[dropped]] out of public favour. Her [[forthcoming]] five films, directed by her husband, were unsuccessful in the United States, and I [[suspected]] that Renoir's latest [[freed]] did little to enhance Bergman's popularity with English-speaking audiences {[[instead]], she did regain her former success with an Oscar in the same year's 'Anastasia (1956)'}. She stars as Elena Sokorowska, a Polish princess who [[believes]] herself as a guardian angel of [[kind]], bringing success and recognition to promising men everywhere, before promptly abandoning them. While working her lucky charms to aid the political aspirations of the distinguished General Francois Rollan (Jean [[Swamp]]), she finds herself falling into a love that she won't be able to walk away from. This vaguely-political film [[worked]] well as [[neither]] a [[spelling]] or a romantic comedy, as long as you don't take it too seriously; it's purely lighthearted romantic fluff.

Filmed in vibrant Technicolor, 'Elena and her Men' looks terrific as well, a flurry of bright colours, characters and costumes. Bergman's Polish princess is dreamy and somewhat self-absorbed, not in an unlikable way, but hardly a woman of high principles and convictions. She is persuaded by a team of bumbling [[administrations]] conspirators to convince General Rollan to stage a coup d'état, [[intentionally]] [[utilise]] his love for her in order to satisfy her own [[hallucinations]] as a "guardian angel." Perhaps the film's only legitimately virtuous character is Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer, then Audrey Hepburn's husband), who ignores everybody else's [[egoistic]] secondary motives and pursues Elena for love, and love [[merely]]. This, Renoir proudly suggests, is what the [[real]] French do [[bestest]]. '[[Yelena]] and her Men' [[similarly]] [[endeavours]], with moderate [[avail]], to [[unmask]] the superficiality of upper-class French liaisons, through the [[cumbersome]] philandering of Eugène ([[Jacque]] Jouanneau), who can't make love to his servant mistress without his fiancè walking in on them. For these sequences, Renoir was obviously trying for the madcap sort of humour that you [[apt]] find in a Marx Brothers film, but the film itself is so relaxed and laid-back that the energy just isn't there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Any [[movie]] that portrays the hard-working responsible husband as the person who has to change because of [[bored]], [[cheating]] [[wife]] is an obvious [[result]] of 8 years of the Clinton era.

It's little wonder that this [[movie]] was written by a [[woman]]. Any [[filmmaking]] that portrays the hard-working responsible husband as the person who has to change because of [[drilled]], [[swindling]] [[women]] is an obvious [[findings]] of 8 years of the Clinton era.

It's little wonder that this [[filmmaking]] was written by a [[daughters]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[When]] I heard Patrick Swayze was [[finally]] [[returning]] to his acting career with KING SOLOMON'S MINES I was very [[excited]]. I was [[expecting]] a [[great]] Indiana Jones type action adventure. What I got was a 4 hour [[long]] (with [[commercials]]) epic that was very [[slow]]. The second and third [[hour]] [[could]] have been [[dropped]] [[altogether]] and the story would not have suffered for it. The ending was [[good]] (no [[spoilers]] here)but I was [[still]] [[left]] wanting more. Well all a guy can do is prey that Swayze does "RoadHouse 2" so he can get back into the action genre that made him famous. Until than if your a fan of King Solomon's Mines than read the book or watch the 1985 version with Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone which is also not very good but its only and hour and forty minutes of your life gone instead of 4 hours. [[Whenever]] I heard Patrick Swayze was [[ultimately]] [[reverting]] to his acting career with KING SOLOMON'S MINES I was very [[excite]]. I was [[hoping]] a [[awesome]] Indiana Jones type action adventure. What I got was a 4 hour [[longer]] (with [[ads]]) epic that was very [[deceleration]]. The second and third [[hora]] [[did]] have been [[dipped]] [[abundantly]] and the story would not have suffered for it. The ending was [[alright]] (no [[troublemakers]] here)but I was [[however]] [[exited]] wanting more. Well all a guy can do is prey that Swayze does "RoadHouse 2" so he can get back into the action genre that made him famous. Until than if your a fan of King Solomon's Mines than read the book or watch the 1985 version with Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone which is also not very good but its only and hour and forty minutes of your life gone instead of 4 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 3327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The world may have [[ended]]. Unfortunately this film survived as yet another testament to Canada's [[inability]] to [[make]] [[movies]] that [[go]] beyond the execrable. Maybe it's because all our [[really]] [[good]] people ([[Norman]] Jewison, [[Martin]] Short et al) [[go]] to Hollywood.) [[In]] fact it's too [[bad]] [[Short]] wasn't cast in this apallingly [[pretentious]] and [[banal]] [[film]]. He [[might]] have given it some [[credibility]]. The Canadian [[government]] should [[realize]] --- and this [[movie]] is a magnificent example --- that [[shovelling]] [[money]] into the trough does not [[result]] in good [[cinema]]. If the people lapping up these public [[funds]] had had to [[compete]], they might have been [[forced]] to [[come]] up with something worthwhile. As it is they have produced [[yet]] another snickering embarassment. The world may have [[terminated]]. Unfortunately this film survived as yet another testament to Canada's [[impotence]] to [[deliver]] [[cinematography]] that [[going]] beyond the execrable. Maybe it's because all our [[truthfully]] [[alright]] people ([[Normans]] Jewison, [[Martina]] Short et al) [[going]] to Hollywood.) [[Among]] fact it's too [[rotten]] [[Succinct]] wasn't cast in this apallingly [[cocky]] and [[corny]] [[flick]]. He [[apt]] have given it some [[credence]]. The Canadian [[administrations]] should [[achieving]] --- and this [[filmmaking]] is a magnificent example --- that [[sweeping]] [[cash]] into the trough does not [[outcomes]] in good [[filmmaking]]. If the people lapping up these public [[finances]] had had to [[vying]], they might have been [[coerced]] to [[arrive]] up with something worthwhile. As it is they have produced [[even]] another snickering embarassment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I heard about "Hammerhead" being released on DVD and finally found it at my local DVD store, I thought "well, just another cheap monster [[movie]] from Nu Image". Those guys around Boaz Davidson and [[Avi]] Lerner [[produced]] [[cheap]] but very entertaining B - Pictures in the past few months but also some very [[disappointing]] movies. So I didn't expect much, especially after having watched the rather disappointing "Shark Zone" just a few days before. But "Hammerhead" [[turned]] out to be an [[excellent]] revival of the 1950s [[monster]] [[movies]]. We have a [[mad]] scientist, a group of people in a dangerous situation, screaming women and damsels in distress, man-eating plants and of course we have the creature, a huge mutant mix between a [[man]] and a hammerhead shark. [[Everything]] you need for an [[entertaining]] monster movie. The only thing missing are graphic sex scenes and nudity which you expect in movies of this kind, but since the movie was made for TV it's understandable why these scenes are missing. And it doesn't matter anyway cause "Hammerhead" is action and horror entertainment at it's best. There are two reasons why I gave it seven out of ten points, though: First of all, the monster isn't seen very often and the showdown with the destruction of the creature is too fast and poorly done, and secondly, William Forsythe just isn't the right guy for the "hero" part and for falling in love with gorgeous Hunter Tylo. Other than that, I can [[highly]] [[recommend]] this movie for any monster movie fan out there. Grab yourselves a cool drink and some popcorn, watch this movie and have fun. Jasper P. Morgan When I heard about "Hammerhead" being released on DVD and finally found it at my local DVD store, I thought "well, just another cheap monster [[cinematography]] from Nu Image". Those guys around Boaz Davidson and [[Effi]] Lerner [[generated]] [[inexpensive]] but very entertaining B - Pictures in the past few months but also some very [[disappointed]] movies. So I didn't expect much, especially after having watched the rather disappointing "Shark Zone" just a few days before. But "Hammerhead" [[transformed]] out to be an [[wondrous]] revival of the 1950s [[creature]] [[movie]]. We have a [[madman]] scientist, a group of people in a dangerous situation, screaming women and damsels in distress, man-eating plants and of course we have the creature, a huge mutant mix between a [[men]] and a hammerhead shark. [[Entire]] you need for an [[amusing]] monster movie. The only thing missing are graphic sex scenes and nudity which you expect in movies of this kind, but since the movie was made for TV it's understandable why these scenes are missing. And it doesn't matter anyway cause "Hammerhead" is action and horror entertainment at it's best. There are two reasons why I gave it seven out of ten points, though: First of all, the monster isn't seen very often and the showdown with the destruction of the creature is too fast and poorly done, and secondly, William Forsythe just isn't the right guy for the "hero" part and for falling in love with gorgeous Hunter Tylo. Other than that, I can [[immeasurably]] [[recommendation]] this movie for any monster movie fan out there. Grab yourselves a cool drink and some popcorn, watch this movie and have fun. Jasper P. Morgan --------------------------------------------- Result 3329 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I just saw this film [[tonight]] and I have to say that it's a [[mess]]. I [[love]] [[Vince]] [[Vaughn]] but he ends up more [[annoying]] that funny here and the film is more than less a [[remake]] of the crappy 80's [[classic]] " Santa Claus the movie" but with out the camp or the [[bad]] Sheena Easton song at the end. .The story is your run of the [[mill]] black [[sheep]] in the [[family]] who comes back to [[face]] his family for the [[holidays]] [[kind]] of thing but with North [[Pole]] as its [[setting]]. Of course [[Fred]] (Vince Vaughn) is the family screw up who comes [[home]] after a series of set backs that include his girlfriend ([[Rachel]] Weisz in a cameo role) dumping him, so he comes home to [[face]] his parents and his more successful brother Santa [[Claus]] ([[Paul]] Giamatti) and wacky [[high]] jinks follow with a [[bit]] of sibling rivalry and a [[bit]] of anarky as well that [[threatens]] all of Christmas. Now if you [[think]] you know the ending of this film, I think you [[would]] be right because it's predicable to the [[hill]]. As for the acting, Vince Vaughn plays the same lovable loser he always plays but this time he ends up more annoying than likable, Miranda Richardson plays Mrs. [[Claus]] but the role is more than less one [[note]], [[Elizabeth]] [[Banks]] plays Santa's assistant but she's not much of a [[character]] at all other than a neurotic [[joke]] and [[poor]] Kevin Spacey ends up basically playing the same person he plays in the film "Glengarry Glen Ross" but a little more anal. The only two actors who [[come]] out of this film with their dignity intact is Paul Giamatti, who brings a real sincerity and warmed to his role as Santa Claus but he looks somewhat embarrass to be in the movie and you can't [[blame]] him and Rachel Weisz, who manages to do a lot more with a very small role than most of the main actors do with theirs, which is a [[shame]] because both Rachel Weisz and Paul Giamatti [[deserved]] a lot better than what this script gave them.

To put it in a nutshell, a major [[disappointment]]. I just saw this film [[evening]] and I have to say that it's a [[chaos]]. I [[amour]] [[Vinnie]] [[Vaughan]] but he ends up more [[exasperating]] that funny here and the film is more than less a [[redo]] of the crappy 80's [[typical]] " Santa Claus the movie" but with out the camp or the [[negative]] Sheena Easton song at the end. .The story is your run of the [[moulins]] black [[lamb]] in the [[families]] who comes back to [[faces]] his family for the [[vacation]] [[genre]] of thing but with North [[Poles]] as its [[configure]]. Of course [[Freda]] (Vince Vaughn) is the family screw up who comes [[households]] after a series of set backs that include his girlfriend ([[Rache]] Weisz in a cameo role) dumping him, so he comes home to [[faces]] his parents and his more successful brother Santa [[Eaton]] ([[Pablo]] Giamatti) and wacky [[higher]] jinks follow with a [[bite]] of sibling rivalry and a [[bite]] of anarky as well that [[menace]] all of Christmas. Now if you [[thought]] you know the ending of this film, I think you [[should]] be right because it's predicable to the [[hillside]]. As for the acting, Vince Vaughn plays the same lovable loser he always plays but this time he ends up more annoying than likable, Miranda Richardson plays Mrs. [[Eaton]] but the role is more than less one [[remark]], [[Isabel]] [[Bankers]] plays Santa's assistant but she's not much of a [[trait]] at all other than a neurotic [[prank]] and [[poorest]] Kevin Spacey ends up basically playing the same person he plays in the film "Glengarry Glen Ross" but a little more anal. The only two actors who [[arrived]] out of this film with their dignity intact is Paul Giamatti, who brings a real sincerity and warmed to his role as Santa Claus but he looks somewhat embarrass to be in the movie and you can't [[guilt]] him and Rachel Weisz, who manages to do a lot more with a very small role than most of the main actors do with theirs, which is a [[embarrass]] because both Rachel Weisz and Paul Giamatti [[deserves]] a lot better than what this script gave them.

To put it in a nutshell, a major [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK, my girlfriend and I rented the DVD and about 30 minutes into the movie, we'd exchanged a lot of "ehhh, what IS this movie about and more importantly, do I care to find out what it ends with" glances and decided we either needed drugs to keep us interested in the "plot" or just end the pain right there and then and watch something else. We opted for the latter.

I liked "But I'm a Cheerleader" a lot, but Mango Kiss is too silly and surreal for my taste, sorry! I definitely prefer "D.E.B.S", "Better Than Chocolate", "Fucking Åmål", "Goldfish Memory" and "Fire".

-Sorcia --------------------------------------------- Result 3331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't understand why so many peoples praised this show. Twin peaks is one of the most boring titles I have ever seen in my life.

Now I have seen all season 1 episodes, and seeing season 2 episode 1. Simply I can't take this show anymore.

1) Where is the proper induction in criminal investigation?

In season 1, there was a scene that agent Cooper throws stones to a bottle. Can you guess why he did that? He just want to identify murderer by doing this 'joke' while mentioning supernatural ability given by Tibet dream. Wow!!!

2) There are too many unnecessary scenes in this show.

For example, season 2 started with a 'funny' scene that a dumb old man serves agent Cooper with a cup of milk while Cooper are laying down on the floor.( He got the gun shoots in his belly already. ) This old man is doing nothing but saying some dumb comments. That's all.

This scene is really boring and even long ( 3 min 30 sec.... It's like Hell. )

I would read some comic books rather than see this show anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 3332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The film is about [[Sir]] Christopher Strong (MP--member of Parliament--played by Colin [[Clive]]) and his affair with the Amelia Earhart-like character [[played]] by Katherine Hepburn. Up until they met, he had been a very [[devoted]] husband but when he [[met]] the odd but [[fascinating]] Hepburn, he "couldn't [[help]] himself" and they [[fell]] in [[love]]. You can tell, because they stare off into space a lot and [[talk]] [[ENDLESSLY]] about how painful their unrequited [[love]] is. Frankly, this is a [[terribly]] dated and practically impossible [[film]] to watch. Part of the [[problem]] is that in the Pre-Code [[days]], [[films]] glamorizing adultery were very common. Plus, even if you [[accept]] this morally [[suspect]] [[subject]], the utter sappiness of the dialog make it [[sound]] like a 19th century romance [[novel]]...and a [[really]] [[bad]] one at that. [[Sticky]] and with [[difficult]] to like [[characters]] (after all, Clive's [[wife]] is a nice lady and did no one any [[harm]]) make this one a [[big]] [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[About]] the only interesting [[aspect]] of this [[film]] is the costume Hepburn wears in an early scene where she is [[dressed]] in a moth [[costume]]! You've gotta see it to believe it--and she looks like one of the Bugaloos (an [[obscure]], but [[fitting]] [[reference]]). The film is about [[Sirs]] Christopher Strong (MP--member of Parliament--played by Colin [[Cliff]]) and his affair with the Amelia Earhart-like character [[done]] by Katherine Hepburn. Up until they met, he had been a very [[dedicated]] husband but when he [[complied]] the odd but [[intriguing]] Hepburn, he "couldn't [[pomoc]] himself" and they [[stumbled]] in [[amour]]. You can tell, because they stare off into space a lot and [[chitchat]] [[ETERNALLY]] about how painful their unrequited [[amour]] is. Frankly, this is a [[remarkably]] dated and practically impossible [[movie]] to watch. Part of the [[difficulty]] is that in the Pre-Code [[jours]], [[cinematography]] glamorizing adultery were very common. Plus, even if you [[admit]] this morally [[suspicious]] [[themes]], the utter sappiness of the dialog make it [[sounds]] like a 19th century romance [[newer]]...and a [[genuinely]] [[rotten]] one at that. [[Viscous]] and with [[tricky]] to like [[attribute]] (after all, Clive's [[mujer]] is a nice lady and did no one any [[prejudice]]) make this one a [[prodigious]] [[squandering]] of [[period]]. [[Around]] the only interesting [[element]] of this [[films]] is the costume Hepburn wears in an early scene where she is [[clothed]] in a moth [[outfits]]! You've gotta see it to believe it--and she looks like one of the Bugaloos (an [[unclear]], but [[fit]] [[referencing]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 3333 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Monster is a mind numbingly [[awful]] [[movie]] about an evil American [[concrete]] factory (are there any else in Hollywood?) [[polluting]] the waters of the small Colombian town of Chimayo somehow creating a catfish-like beast with a predilection for lamb and loose women. [[James]] Mitchum is Bill Travis the man who is sent down to Chimayo by his foul-mouthed boss Barnes who himself can't keep his hands off of his secretary's rear to get to the bottom (pun [[intended]]) of the story. While in Chimayo Bill must contend with an annoying reporter who apparently broadcasts all of her stories in perfect English directly back to America. I guess in the seventies there was a market for news from small South American towns. There is also a radical named Sanchez that wishes to sabotage the factory for polluting the water which, by the way, also supplies the town with jobs for the locals, but why let [[cold]] hearted [[economics]] get in the way of touchy-feely enviro-marxism. Pete the factory boss is [[unwittingly]] aided by the monster when he has sex with his ex-girlfriend on the beach, tells her that he is seeing the mayor's daughter Juanita and it's over between them, then she is promptly eaten that night. A little side action without the evidence. My hat is off to you Sir. John Carradine rounds out the cast as a priest that believes the monster is sent by God to punish sinners. You can see the contempt he has for being in this movie in his face. [[Might]] as well filmed him running to the local currency exchange to see if his check didn't bounce.

[[Supposedly]] based on a [[true]] [[story]], so much so they say it twice in the opening credits, this film is awful on all fronts. Filming began in 1971 and was abandoned until eight years later when Kenneth Hartford put his [[foot]] on the throat of Monster by adding his two annoying children as new characters, even putting his daughter, Andrea in top billing with Mitchum and Carradine. The sound quality is nonexistent and most of the scenes seem as if someone smeared tar over the camera before filming. This is made [[even]] more [[tedious]] during the many scenes done at night. The monster itself is [[laughable]] as it rears its ugly rubbery head for the anticlimactic ending. [[James]] Mitchum along with his brother Chris are proof that nepotism in the acting industry needs to be curtailed. [[Utterly]] unwatchable dreck. Shame on you John Carradine. Monster is a mind numbingly [[abhorrent]] [[kino]] about an evil American [[specific]] factory (are there any else in Hollywood?) [[polluted]] the waters of the small Colombian town of Chimayo somehow creating a catfish-like beast with a predilection for lamb and loose women. [[Jacobo]] Mitchum is Bill Travis the man who is sent down to Chimayo by his foul-mouthed boss Barnes who himself can't keep his hands off of his secretary's rear to get to the bottom (pun [[destined]]) of the story. While in Chimayo Bill must contend with an annoying reporter who apparently broadcasts all of her stories in perfect English directly back to America. I guess in the seventies there was a market for news from small South American towns. There is also a radical named Sanchez that wishes to sabotage the factory for polluting the water which, by the way, also supplies the town with jobs for the locals, but why let [[chilled]] hearted [[economy]] get in the way of touchy-feely enviro-marxism. Pete the factory boss is [[unknowingly]] aided by the monster when he has sex with his ex-girlfriend on the beach, tells her that he is seeing the mayor's daughter Juanita and it's over between them, then she is promptly eaten that night. A little side action without the evidence. My hat is off to you Sir. John Carradine rounds out the cast as a priest that believes the monster is sent by God to punish sinners. You can see the contempt he has for being in this movie in his face. [[Conceivably]] as well filmed him running to the local currency exchange to see if his check didn't bounce.

[[Reportedly]] based on a [[veritable]] [[storytelling]], so much so they say it twice in the opening credits, this film is awful on all fronts. Filming began in 1971 and was abandoned until eight years later when Kenneth Hartford put his [[footing]] on the throat of Monster by adding his two annoying children as new characters, even putting his daughter, Andrea in top billing with Mitchum and Carradine. The sound quality is nonexistent and most of the scenes seem as if someone smeared tar over the camera before filming. This is made [[yet]] more [[monotonous]] during the many scenes done at night. The monster itself is [[preposterous]] as it rears its ugly rubbery head for the anticlimactic ending. [[Jacques]] Mitchum along with his brother Chris are proof that nepotism in the acting industry needs to be curtailed. [[Altogether]] unwatchable dreck. Shame on you John Carradine. --------------------------------------------- Result 3334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is what I was [[expecting]] when star [[trek]] DS9 premiered. Not to [[slight]] DS9. That was a [[wonderful]] [[show]] in it's own right, however it never [[really]] [[gave]] the [[fans]] more of what they [[wanted]]. [[Enterprise]] is that [[show]]. While having a similarity to the original trek it differs enough to be original in it's own [[ways]]. It makes the [[ideas]] of [[exploration]] exciting to us again. And that was one of the [[primary]] ingredients that made the original so [[loved]]. Another ingredient to success was the [[relationships]] that evolved between the crew [[members]]. Viewers really cared [[deeply]] for the crew. [[Enterprise]] has much promise in this [[area]] as well. The chemistry between Bakula and Blalock [[seems]] very promising. [[While]] sexual [[tension]] in a show can [[often]] become a crutch, I feel the [[tensions]] on enterprise can lead to [[much]] more and [[say]] alot more than is [[typical]]. I think when we [[deal]] with such [[grand]] scale characters of [[different]] races or species even, we get some very interesting [[ideas]] and television. Also, we should note the performances, Blalock is very [[convincing]] as Vulcan T'pol and Bacula [[really]] has a whimsy and [[strength]] of [[character]] that [[delivers]] a [[great]] performance. The rest of the cast delivered good performances also. My only gripes are as follows. The [[theme]]. It's good it's [[different]], but a little to light hearted for my liking. We [[need]] [[something]] a little more [[grand]]. Doesn't have to be [[orchestral]]. [[Maybe]] [[something]] with a little more [[electronic]] sound [[would]] suffice. And my one other [[complaint]]. They sell too many adds. They [[could]] fix this by [[selling]] less [[ads]], or making all [[shows]] two parters. Otherwise we'll end up [[seeing]] the [[shows]] final act getting wrapped up way too quickly as was one of my complaints of Voyager. This is what I was [[waiting]] when star [[hike]] DS9 premiered. Not to [[lightweight]] DS9. That was a [[delightful]] [[displaying]] in it's own right, however it never [[genuinely]] [[given]] the [[blowers]] more of what they [[wished]]. [[Enterprising]] is that [[illustrates]]. While having a similarity to the original trek it differs enough to be original in it's own [[methods]]. It makes the [[idea]] of [[explorer]] exciting to us again. And that was one of the [[elementary]] ingredients that made the original so [[cared]]. Another ingredient to success was the [[relationship]] that evolved between the crew [[lawmakers]]. Viewers really cared [[harshly]] for the crew. [[Enterprising]] has much promise in this [[zoning]] as well. The chemistry between Bakula and Blalock [[looks]] very promising. [[Although]] sexual [[voltage]] in a show can [[normally]] become a crutch, I feel the [[voltage]] on enterprise can lead to [[very]] more and [[tell]] alot more than is [[characteristic]]. I think when we [[addresses]] with such [[big]] scale characters of [[diversified]] races or species even, we get some very interesting [[idea]] and television. Also, we should note the performances, Blalock is very [[persuade]] as Vulcan T'pol and Bacula [[genuinely]] has a whimsy and [[fortitude]] of [[personages]] that [[furnishes]] a [[wondrous]] performance. The rest of the cast delivered good performances also. My only gripes are as follows. The [[subjects]]. It's good it's [[several]], but a little to light hearted for my liking. We [[needed]] [[anything]] a little more [[tremendous]]. Doesn't have to be [[symphony]]. [[Potentially]] [[anything]] with a little more [[electron]] sound [[ought]] suffice. And my one other [[grievance]]. They sell too many adds. They [[wo]] fix this by [[sold]] less [[announcements]], or making all [[showings]] two parters. Otherwise we'll end up [[witnessing]] the [[illustrates]] final act getting wrapped up way too quickly as was one of my complaints of Voyager. --------------------------------------------- Result 3335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that you [[keep]] [[thinking]] about when you [[wake]] up the next morning. It will give you that warm, [[fuzzy]] [[feeling]] and leave you with a [[smile]] on your [[face]].

[[Sure]], we [[get]] fed the [[typical]] stereotype characters and stories, but it does do the [[trick]]: [[Entertain]].

Being from Sweden and [[living]] in the US for [[quite]] sometime, it is funny how we [[react]]. "The deadbeat husband is going to kill him", "She (Gabriella) is going to die and then there will be a heartbreaking larger-than-life [[ending]]". We know how these [[things]] [[work]], everything [[comes]] together at the [[end]]. And it did. The characters were somewhat [[simple]], they were so elaborate that you didn't really think twice about it, [[nothing]] was really left for your own imagination. The [[closest]] would [[probably]] be Siv, she makes you [[ask]] yourself if she [[indeed]] was in love with [[Daniel]], but that's about it.

But the [[movie]] is [[beautiful]], set in rural Norrland, the music is [[absolutely]] [[amazing]] and the [[characters]] are [[lovable]]. Michael Nyqvist is [[truly]] [[genius]], with his [[crazy]] [[unique]] [[look]] and Frida Hallberg is charming and [[approachable]]. Maybe a little too [[nice]].

But most of all this [[movie]] makes you feel, and that is the most [[important]] [[thing]]. You cry, you laugh, you [[hate]] and you [[identify]]. I don't know about you guys, but that does not [[happen]] that often. This is one of those [[movie]] that you [[conserve]] [[thought]] about when you [[waking]] up the next morning. It will give you that warm, [[foggy]] [[sense]] and leave you with a [[mouse]] on your [[confront]].

[[Convinced]], we [[got]] fed the [[symptomatic]] stereotype characters and stories, but it does do the [[gimmick]]: [[Distract]].

Being from Sweden and [[inhabit]] in the US for [[rather]] sometime, it is funny how we [[responds]]. "The deadbeat husband is going to kill him", "She (Gabriella) is going to die and then there will be a heartbreaking larger-than-life [[terminated]]". We know how these [[items]] [[cooperate]], everything [[occurs]] together at the [[termination]]. And it did. The characters were somewhat [[easy]], they were so elaborate that you didn't really think twice about it, [[anything]] was really left for your own imagination. The [[nearest]] would [[conceivably]] be Siv, she makes you [[inquired]] yourself if she [[admittedly]] was in love with [[Daniela]], but that's about it.

But the [[film]] is [[wondrous]], set in rural Norrland, the music is [[abundantly]] [[unbelievable]] and the [[attribute]] are [[cute]]. Michael Nyqvist is [[honestly]] [[prodigy]], with his [[lunatic]] [[sole]] [[glance]] and Frida Hallberg is charming and [[available]]. Maybe a little too [[enjoyable]].

But most of all this [[films]] makes you feel, and that is the most [[critical]] [[stuff]]. You cry, you laugh, you [[loathe]] and you [[detects]]. I don't know about you guys, but that does not [[occur]] that often. --------------------------------------------- Result 3336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] This [[movie]] is really goofy! I saw it as an 11 year old, and even then I thought it was pretty ridiculous! I [[would]] only [[recommend]] this film to kids under the age of 12. I really didn't [[care]] for it, but I do think that it [[answers]] some very good questions that kids need to be [[aware]] of, such as: 1)Does money buy happiness? 2)Should I lie (to my parents) about things I think they wouldn't approve of? 3)Does money buy friendships? 4)Is money everything? 5)Shouldn't I tell my parents when someone is trying to hurt me? Granted, these are very [[unrealistic]] situations, but I do think that if parents discussed these issues with their children, maybe they should watch this video as well, in order to show/scare their kids that lies have the potential to get you hurt. This [[filmmaking]] is really goofy! I saw it as an 11 year old, and even then I thought it was pretty ridiculous! I [[could]] only [[recommendation]] this film to kids under the age of 12. I really didn't [[healthcare]] for it, but I do think that it [[reactions]] some very good questions that kids need to be [[conscious]] of, such as: 1)Does money buy happiness? 2)Should I lie (to my parents) about things I think they wouldn't approve of? 3)Does money buy friendships? 4)Is money everything? 5)Shouldn't I tell my parents when someone is trying to hurt me? Granted, these are very [[unreal]] situations, but I do think that if parents discussed these issues with their children, maybe they should watch this video as well, in order to show/scare their kids that lies have the potential to get you hurt. --------------------------------------------- Result 3337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I first saw this [[film]] when i was about 13. It [[blew]] me away then and in many respects it [[still]] does now. But i am [[less]] inclined to [[see]] it as an accurate historical piece now. There is precious little effort [[made]] to [[examine]] and interact with the [[racism]] - and thus fails to recognise that the most potent anti racism [[weapon]] is to understand it at its very core in those who commit it. What we get instead is a dichotomy - on the one side, beko and [[woods]] in 3D panoramic rainbow vision - on the other, two dimensional characters are [[portrayed]] as unapologetic unthinking evil.

This all makes for a [[great]] film story, but it worries me that people see the portrayal as 'accurate'. I first saw this [[kino]] when i was about 13. It [[farted]] me away then and in many respects it [[yet]] does now. But i am [[fewest]] inclined to [[seeing]] it as an accurate historical piece now. There is precious little effort [[effected]] to [[scrutinize]] and interact with the [[racist]] - and thus fails to recognise that the most potent anti racism [[gun]] is to understand it at its very core in those who commit it. What we get instead is a dichotomy - on the one side, beko and [[timber]] in 3D panoramic rainbow vision - on the other, two dimensional characters are [[depicted]] as unapologetic unthinking evil.

This all makes for a [[wondrous]] film story, but it worries me that people see the portrayal as 'accurate'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3338 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Brilliant]]! My wife and I [[joined]] the sprawling [[line]] to see Holly at the Edinburgh Film Festival. [[After]] [[seeing]] the film, I can [[understand]] why there was such a [[long]] line. Holly is a touching [[story]] about an [[impossible]] connection between two people. She is a young [[girl]], he is a worn out westerner. The [[film]] [[grasped]] [[every]] bone in our [[body]]. There aren't any [[graphic]] scenes or anything that is [[hard]] to watch - its the surrealism of normality that [[really]] [[kicks]] you in the [[gut]]. The [[film]] is beautifully shot. Among others, we [[loved]] the scene where [[Patrick]] teaches [[Holly]] to ride a [[small]] [[motorcycle]]. [[Thuy]] Ngoyen's rawness ([[cant]] [[believe]] this is her first acting [[job]])and Ron Livingston's performance stayed with me for a couple of days. Highly [[recommended]]. [[Wondrous]]! My wife and I [[joining]] the sprawling [[iine]] to see Holly at the Edinburgh Film Festival. [[Upon]] [[see]] the film, I can [[comprehend]] why there was such a [[lengthy]] line. Holly is a touching [[saga]] about an [[impractical]] connection between two people. She is a young [[girls]], he is a worn out westerner. The [[kino]] [[realised]] [[any]] bone in our [[agency]]. There aren't any [[graphs]] scenes or anything that is [[laborious]] to watch - its the surrealism of normality that [[truthfully]] [[karate]] you in the [[intestine]]. The [[cinematography]] is beautifully shot. Among others, we [[cared]] the scene where [[Tangerine]] teaches [[Hol]] to ride a [[teeny]] [[motorcycles]]. [[Shui]] Ngoyen's rawness ([[thats]] [[believing]] this is her first acting [[labour]])and Ron Livingston's performance stayed with me for a couple of days. Highly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The surprise [[nominee]] of this year's [[Best]] Animated [[Feature]] race at the [[Oscars]]. It's an Irish [[film]] by [[heart]], but it was co-produced by Belgium and [[Brazil]], with, I'm guessing, animators working in all three countries. The [[product]] is one of the most [[beautiful]] and [[unique]] [[films]] in recent [[memory]]. The [[character]] [[design]] is a [[little]] [[reminiscent]] of the French animated [[film]] Persepolis from a [[couple]] of [[years]] back, with very [[simple]] [[characters]] with thick, black outlines. This film is not in black and [[white]]. [[Oh]] no. What makes this film [[great]] is its [[use]] of [[color]], [[simply]] some of the most [[outrageous]] and [[startling]] use of [[colors]] I've ever [[seen]]. The [[general]] [[design]] of the [[pictures]] is also a [[lot]] more [[geometrical]], with characters who are basically rectangles or ovals. Much of the [[film]] can be [[spent]] [[playing]] find the circle - a [[major]] aspect of the visual design is a [[circle]] in the center of the [[image]]. All of these [[geometrical]] [[designs]] have a [[purpose]] - the story is about a young [[boy]] who is learning to be an artist [[working]] on illuminated [[manuscripts]] (the [[Book]] of Kells is a [[real]] illuminated Bible; the art of the film is based on the drawings in it). The [[story]] of the [[film]] isn't especially deep, but it's a pretty good [[fantasy]] tale. Brendan is a young boy in Kells, a [[city]] [[surrounded]] by [[enormous]] walls, built by his uncle to keep out Vikings. A [[newcomer]] to Kells, Brother Aiden, inspires Brendan to take up illustrating. He [[also]] inspires him to do [[things]] like [[leave]] Kells and [[explore]] the [[nearby]] forest, within which lives a nymph. Bruno Coulais [[provides]] a [[fantastic]] [[score]], [[almost]] as [[good]] as the one he did for Coraline, which I [[consider]] the very [[best]] of the [[year]]. The surprise [[nominees]] of this year's [[Nicest]] Animated [[Peculiarities]] race at the [[Oskar]]. It's an Irish [[cinematographic]] by [[heartland]], but it was co-produced by Belgium and [[Brasilia]], with, I'm guessing, animators working in all three countries. The [[merchandise]] is one of the most [[wondrous]] and [[unequalled]] [[cinematographic]] in recent [[souvenir]]. The [[characters]] [[designing]] is a [[kiddo]] [[evocative]] of the French animated [[movie]] Persepolis from a [[coupling]] of [[ages]] back, with very [[mere]] [[attribute]] with thick, black outlines. This film is not in black and [[branca]]. [[Aw]] no. What makes this film [[wondrous]] is its [[usage]] of [[dye]], [[merely]] some of the most [[obnoxious]] and [[amazing]] use of [[colour]] I've ever [[saw]]. The [[overall]] [[conceived]] of the [[visuals]] is also a [[batches]] more [[geometric]], with characters who are basically rectangles or ovals. Much of the [[cinematography]] can be [[spending]] [[gaming]] find the circle - a [[big]] aspect of the visual design is a [[circling]] in the center of the [[photo]]. All of these [[geometric]] [[designing]] have a [[goal]] - the story is about a young [[boys]] who is learning to be an artist [[collaborate]] on illuminated [[manuscript]] (the [[Ledger]] of Kells is a [[actual]] illuminated Bible; the art of the film is based on the drawings in it). The [[history]] of the [[cinematography]] isn't especially deep, but it's a pretty good [[utopia]] tale. Brendan is a young boy in Kells, a [[town]] [[encircled]] by [[huge]] walls, built by his uncle to keep out Vikings. A [[newcomers]] to Kells, Brother Aiden, inspires Brendan to take up illustrating. He [[apart]] inspires him to do [[items]] like [[letting]] Kells and [[investigate]] the [[adjacent]] forest, within which lives a nymph. Bruno Coulais [[prescribes]] a [[wondrous]] [[notation]], [[hardly]] as [[alright]] as the one he did for Coraline, which I [[examine]] the very [[finest]] of the [[annum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3340 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Typical thriller, has been [[done]] many times before. Simple plot [[outline]]; [[cop]] Liotta [[becomes]] [[obsessed]] with Russell's wife, and he tries to bump off good ol' Kurt so he can have her. This is beyond [[predictable]], it doesn't even try to make you [[guess]], the plot is the plot and there's no thinking outside the box here. I guess then the only reason to watch it is to see how it develops, but nothing is done originally or interestingly. There's not really anything to say about this film, it's not particularly bad, but there's no [[good]] points either. Russell plays Russell and you know what you're gonna get when you see him in a film. Ditto Liotta. Stowe has an [[annoying]] Cher-esque voice. I read the plot [[outline]] and I could see the film in my head, it was so obvious and basic. I [[watched]] it and it rolled out in [[front]] of my eyes exactly as I had imagined. I [[felt]] not a drop of emotion throughout. I have no [[feeling]] towards this [[film]], it's as if I never [[even]] [[watched]] it. [[Considering]] this, it's a pretty [[pointless]] film isn't it? Still, I'll [[give]] it 3/10 for some reason. Typical thriller, has been [[effected]] many times before. Simple plot [[contours]]; [[police]] Liotta [[becoming]] [[fixated]] with Russell's wife, and he tries to bump off good ol' Kurt so he can have her. This is beyond [[foreseeable]], it doesn't even try to make you [[imagine]], the plot is the plot and there's no thinking outside the box here. I guess then the only reason to watch it is to see how it develops, but nothing is done originally or interestingly. There's not really anything to say about this film, it's not particularly bad, but there's no [[alright]] points either. Russell plays Russell and you know what you're gonna get when you see him in a film. Ditto Liotta. Stowe has an [[exasperating]] Cher-esque voice. I read the plot [[portray]] and I could see the film in my head, it was so obvious and basic. I [[observed]] it and it rolled out in [[newsweek]] of my eyes exactly as I had imagined. I [[believed]] not a drop of emotion throughout. I have no [[impression]] towards this [[cinema]], it's as if I never [[yet]] [[observed]] it. [[Reviewing]] this, it's a pretty [[superfluous]] film isn't it? Still, I'll [[confer]] it 3/10 for some reason. --------------------------------------------- Result 3341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I [[saw]] "Fever [[Pitch]]" [[sort]] of by [[accident]]; it was [[playing]] on the [[airplane]] going over to Europe. It actually wasn't half [[bad]]. [[Ben]] ([[Jimmy]] Fallon) is the world's #1 [[Red]] [[Sox]] fan, but his [[relationship]] with Lindsay Meeks (Drew Barrymore) may [[strain]] that. The movie is a fairly interesting look at how world [[events]] can [[affect]] peoples' [[relationships]]. It's [[especially]] eye-opening now that the [[Red]] [[Sox]] have [[ended]] their 80-odd-year [[losing]] streak. I [[guess]] that these [[sorts]] of [[things]] happen all the time and we just don't [[tend]] to [[notice]] them. Not too bad.

Another [[movie]] [[portraying]] an [[unusual]] [[relation]] to baseball is 2000's "[[Frequency]]". [[Check]] them both out. I [[observed]] "Fever [[Pitching]]" [[sorting]] of by [[casualty]]; it was [[gaming]] on the [[airliner]] going over to Europe. It actually wasn't half [[inclement]]. [[Bin]] ([[Jimi]] Fallon) is the world's #1 [[Rojas]] [[Orioles]] fan, but his [[relationships]] with Lindsay Meeks (Drew Barrymore) may [[tensions]] that. The movie is a fairly interesting look at how world [[phenomena]] can [[influencing]] peoples' [[relations]]. It's [[primarily]] eye-opening now that the [[Rojas]] [[Orioles]] have [[finalised]] their 80-odd-year [[wasting]] streak. I [[suppose]] that these [[genera]] of [[items]] happen all the time and we just don't [[tending]] to [[notification]] them. Not too bad.

Another [[film]] [[depicting]] an [[odd]] [[relating]] to baseball is 2000's "[[Frequencies]]". [[Audits]] them both out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[always]] follow the Dakar, so when my husband [[bought]] Charlie's '[[Race]] to Dakar' DVD [[home]] I couldn't [[wait]] to watch it! Of course we'd [[seen]] the [[broadcast]] of the [[race]] when the actual race was on, but that never [[gives]] the [[background]] and specific teams.

[[If]] you [[watched]] [[Long]] [[Way]] Round then you won't be [[surprised]] by the language which frankly I [[find]] more [[amusing]] than [[offensive]].

I [[think]] the only thing that [[annoyed]] me about the DVD was Charlie's hair, but he had it styled before Dakar so my feminine need for neatness was assuaged; tho' I could have lived without the 'flame' [[undies]] lol As with LWR, the [[preparation]] was [[every]] bit as interesting as the race itself. I [[nearly]] [[cried]] when Charlie [[broke]] his hand, and winced at every bruise he [[sustained]] while training....and of course the [[death]] of [[Andy]] Caldicott...that was an [[appalling]] [[tragedy]], but then [[every]] year there's something.

[[Russ]] [[drives]] me nuts, although his attitude has improved a thousand times from the argumentative cynic he was in LWR. It's [[great]] to see him get along so well now with Charlie.

What I [[learned]] from this [[odyssey]] was - 1. never [[let]] Scorpion [[prepare]] your [[vehicle]] for ANYTHING! - they had [[months]] to [[prepare]] the X5, and still the day before the team left for Lisbon, Scorpion had only [[done]] half of [[things]] that needed to be [[done]], and the vehicle was a pain throughout the [[whole]] [[race]]; 2. the Dakar organizers need to put a [[lot]] more [[work]] into their [[rider]]/driver retrieval plan - leaving Matt (and [[presumably]] a [[large]] number of other riders/drivers out to dry the way they did was nothing short of [[culpable]] negligence; 3. Charlie has an endearing [[enthusiasm]] for 'rough and tough' adventure but needs to toughen up a lot to really [[perform]] as he'd like; and finally, 4. Charlie and Ewan are planning another of these epos called the Long [[Way]] Down in 2007, and I can't [[wait]] to get my hands on it! :D If you love bikes and/or genuinely nice blokes 'having a go', you have to watch this, I [[guarantee]] you [[love]] it. It's very entertaining.

[[In]] conclusion, to Simon Pavey - you [[sir]] are a hero, I was so impressed by the your 'quiet achiever' manner and the fact that you actually finished.....just incredible considering what an monumentally difficult race it is. And to Charlie, Matt and the rest of the team - full marks for pulling it off. To think that a relatively green team could have achieved so much is truly admirable. You're all wonderful. I [[invariably]] follow the Dakar, so when my husband [[buys]] Charlie's '[[Races]] to Dakar' DVD [[house]] I couldn't [[hoping]] to watch it! Of course we'd [[watched]] the [[spreading]] of the [[racing]] when the actual race was on, but that never [[provides]] the [[context]] and specific teams.

[[Unless]] you [[saw]] [[Lange]] [[Route]] Round then you won't be [[horrified]] by the language which frankly I [[unearthed]] more [[entertaining]] than [[onslaught]].

I [[believe]] the only thing that [[infuriated]] me about the DVD was Charlie's hair, but he had it styled before Dakar so my feminine need for neatness was assuaged; tho' I could have lived without the 'flame' [[panties]] lol As with LWR, the [[preparations]] was [[any]] bit as interesting as the race itself. I [[approximately]] [[shouted]] when Charlie [[raped]] his hand, and winced at every bruise he [[ongoing]] while training....and of course the [[killings]] of [[Andi]] Caldicott...that was an [[loathsome]] [[drama]], but then [[any]] year there's something.

[[Rus]] [[driving]] me nuts, although his attitude has improved a thousand times from the argumentative cynic he was in LWR. It's [[wondrous]] to see him get along so well now with Charlie.

What I [[learnt]] from this [[epic]] was - 1. never [[leave]] Scorpion [[develop]] your [[motorcars]] for ANYTHING! - they had [[month]] to [[braced]] the X5, and still the day before the team left for Lisbon, Scorpion had only [[performed]] half of [[items]] that needed to be [[played]], and the vehicle was a pain throughout the [[total]] [[racing]]; 2. the Dakar organizers need to put a [[batch]] more [[cooperate]] into their [[mustang]]/driver retrieval plan - leaving Matt (and [[allegedly]] a [[sizable]] number of other riders/drivers out to dry the way they did was nothing short of [[guilty]] negligence; 3. Charlie has an endearing [[passion]] for 'rough and tough' adventure but needs to toughen up a lot to really [[fulfill]] as he'd like; and finally, 4. Charlie and Ewan are planning another of these epos called the Long [[Route]] Down in 2007, and I can't [[hoping]] to get my hands on it! :D If you love bikes and/or genuinely nice blokes 'having a go', you have to watch this, I [[guaranteed]] you [[amour]] it. It's very entertaining.

[[For]] conclusion, to Simon Pavey - you [[mister]] are a hero, I was so impressed by the your 'quiet achiever' manner and the fact that you actually finished.....just incredible considering what an monumentally difficult race it is. And to Charlie, Matt and the rest of the team - full marks for pulling it off. To think that a relatively green team could have achieved so much is truly admirable. You're all wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I know, that's not what you expect from a [[film]] with this sort of

lineage- it's a direct descendant of The [[Best]] [[Years]] of Our [[Lives]]

and The Men... films dealing with men who are in the hospital

dealing with [[tragic]] circumstances. But this film is [[full]] of [[wonderful]]

[[surprises]] and performances. It features stellar performances from

Eric Stoltz and Helen Hunt ([[including]] a rather risque nude scene)

and Wesley Snipes and William Forsythe. As Emanuel Levy wrote

in his book Cinema of Outsiders (about the Independent film

movement) "The Waterdance is coherant, attentive to detail, and

unsentimental with a wicked down to earth humor- it' s at once

[[funny]] and sad, and the entire cast is [[impressive]]." I was

[[extraordinarily]] [[moved]] by this film, it's hard hitting yes, but [[also]] has

very tender [[moments]] and laugh out loud moments. A [[rare]] gem. I know, that's not what you expect from a [[kino]] with this sort of

lineage- it's a direct descendant of The [[Better]] [[Aged]] of Our [[Life]]

and The Men... films dealing with men who are in the hospital

dealing with [[catastrophic]] circumstances. But this film is [[fullest]] of [[impressive]]

[[stuns]] and performances. It features stellar performances from

Eric Stoltz and Helen Hunt ([[comprises]] a rather risque nude scene)

and Wesley Snipes and William Forsythe. As Emanuel Levy wrote

in his book Cinema of Outsiders (about the Independent film

movement) "The Waterdance is coherant, attentive to detail, and

unsentimental with a wicked down to earth humor- it' s at once

[[amusing]] and sad, and the entire cast is [[wondrous]]." I was

[[unbelievably]] [[shifted]] by this film, it's hard hitting yes, but [[apart]] has

very tender [[times]] and laugh out loud moments. A [[few]] gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 3344 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] First off I really [[enjoyed]] Zombi 2 by Lucio Fulci. This film was [[utter]] trash. I couldn't [[stand]] to watch it. The storyline was a [[joke]], the acting was a [[joke]], and the fact that Zombi 3 has nothing to do with Zombi 2 is [[even]] more a [[joke]].

We [[jump]] from Voodoo to DEATH 1 THE [[HARMFUL]] AGENT BRINING People BACK TO LIFE. [[Whatever]], this [[movie]] isn't worth the $1.00 it [[cost]] to [[rent]] it. I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] lucio fulci [[movies]] but this one was [[horrible]]. If Zombi 3 is an [[indicator]] for how zombi 4 and 5 are [[going]] to be I [[think]] I will just [[skip]] them.

Zombi 2 is an awesome flique [[tho]]. First off I really [[appreciated]] Zombi 2 by Lucio Fulci. This film was [[unmitigated]] trash. I couldn't [[standing]] to watch it. The storyline was a [[giggle]], the acting was a [[giggle]], and the fact that Zombi 3 has nothing to do with Zombi 2 is [[yet]] more a [[farce]].

We [[leaping]] from Voodoo to DEATH 1 THE [[DESTRUCTIVE]] AGENT BRINING People BACK TO LIFE. [[Whichever]], this [[filmmaking]] isn't worth the $1.00 it [[priced]] to [[rented]] it. I [[truthfully]] [[appreciated]] lucio fulci [[film]] but this one was [[scary]]. If Zombi 3 is an [[signposts]] for how zombi 4 and 5 are [[go]] to be I [[thinks]] I will just [[skipped]] them.

Zombi 2 is an awesome flique [[shou]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Probably]] the most accurate Stephen King adaption [[yet]]. Not [[surprising]], since King himself wrote the screenplay. The story follows the Creed family moving into a beautiful Maine house. One of the other residents is Jud, a pleasant old man who knows a few things about the area. One is the highway that runs right through their frontyard. The other is a path leading to the Pet Sematary, where children for decades have buried the animals killed by the highway. Soon enough, Ellie Creed's cat, Church, is found dead. Luckily, this happens while the family, with the exception of Louis(the father), is away for Thanksgiving. Jud takes Louis to another burial ground, beyond the Pet Sematary, where Church is to be buried. Later, Louis is greeted(not so politely) by Church. He's returned, appearing to have chewed his way out of the bag he had been buried in. Maybe he was buried alive. Maybe not. Nothing more I can say without ruining the story.

Of all the King adaptions I've seen this would be the most terrifying. The characters are real and the situations are normal. Mary Lambert does a great job directing the proceedings. Suspense is kept fairly high throughout the film, due in part to the plot development. The scene where Gage is killed will stick in your mind forever. Then, of course, we have the conclusion. Easy to determine what's going to happen, but Lambert [[pulls]] off some genuinely scary, and sometimes disturbing, moments.

[[Overall]], this is a good film and an [[excellent]] adaption. If you enjoy being scared and don't mind being haunted by some occasionally disturbing images then "Pet Sematary" is just what you're looking for. Non Horror fans will want to avoid this. [[Conceivably]] the most accurate Stephen King adaption [[however]]. Not [[impressed]], since King himself wrote the screenplay. The story follows the Creed family moving into a beautiful Maine house. One of the other residents is Jud, a pleasant old man who knows a few things about the area. One is the highway that runs right through their frontyard. The other is a path leading to the Pet Sematary, where children for decades have buried the animals killed by the highway. Soon enough, Ellie Creed's cat, Church, is found dead. Luckily, this happens while the family, with the exception of Louis(the father), is away for Thanksgiving. Jud takes Louis to another burial ground, beyond the Pet Sematary, where Church is to be buried. Later, Louis is greeted(not so politely) by Church. He's returned, appearing to have chewed his way out of the bag he had been buried in. Maybe he was buried alive. Maybe not. Nothing more I can say without ruining the story.

Of all the King adaptions I've seen this would be the most terrifying. The characters are real and the situations are normal. Mary Lambert does a great job directing the proceedings. Suspense is kept fairly high throughout the film, due in part to the plot development. The scene where Gage is killed will stick in your mind forever. Then, of course, we have the conclusion. Easy to determine what's going to happen, but Lambert [[pulled]] off some genuinely scary, and sometimes disturbing, moments.

[[Totals]], this is a good film and an [[wondrous]] adaption. If you enjoy being scared and don't mind being haunted by some occasionally disturbing images then "Pet Sematary" is just what you're looking for. Non Horror fans will want to avoid this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[If]] I could [[say]] it was better than Gymkata, I at [[least]] felt my [[money]] was not [[totally]] wasted.

Then I [[saw]] Steven Segal's On Deadly [[Ground]].

This [[movie]] should see a [[resurrection]] though on MST 3K. If Santa Claus Conquers the Martians could make Tom Servo's [[head]] explode, one wonders what mayhem this [[movie]] could cause.

There is a very good reason why Kurt [[Thomas]] never had a [[movie]] [[career]].

The writers of this dreck should be forced to wear [[placards]] [[every]] day of their lives that [[say]] "Bitch slap me! I was a writer on Gymkata." [[Though]] I could [[told]] it was better than Gymkata, I at [[lowest]] felt my [[cash]] was not [[downright]] wasted.

Then I [[observed]] Steven Segal's On Deadly [[Terra]].

This [[filmmaking]] should see a [[reanimation]] though on MST 3K. If Santa Claus Conquers the Martians could make Tom Servo's [[leader]] explode, one wonders what mayhem this [[filmmaking]] could cause.

There is a very good reason why Kurt [[Tommaso]] never had a [[movies]] [[carrera]].

The writers of this dreck should be forced to wear [[cartels]] [[all]] day of their lives that [[told]] "Bitch slap me! I was a writer on Gymkata." --------------------------------------------- Result 3347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[admit]] I have a [[weakness]] for [[alternate]] history stories, from ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to [[GROUNDHOG]] DAY to 12:01. [[Among]] those greats is this little gem. It's pretty difficult to get through [[MR]]. DESTINY without giving a nod of appreciation to each and every cast member, from the goodhearted James Belushi to the murderous Courtney Cox. This movie lacks the gravitas and [[scale]] to [[make]] it a great film, but it's a [[fine]] cheer-up on a rainy afternoon. It's [[also]] a [[great]] rental for an [[inexpensive]] date. I [[accepted]] I have a [[ineptitude]] for [[substitute]] history stories, from ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to [[GOPHER]] DAY to 12:01. [[In]] those greats is this little gem. It's pretty difficult to get through [[HERR]]. DESTINY without giving a nod of appreciation to each and every cast member, from the goodhearted James Belushi to the murderous Courtney Cox. This movie lacks the gravitas and [[greatness]] to [[deliver]] it a great film, but it's a [[fined]] cheer-up on a rainy afternoon. It's [[further]] a [[wondrous]] rental for an [[cheap]] date. --------------------------------------------- Result 3348 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] A [[typical]] Lanza [[flick]] that had limited [[audience]] appeal with a [[weak]] [[story]] line that was put together [[simply]] to justify Lanza's MGM [[contract]] at the time.

As reported by [[member]] Lastliberal (above) Grayson [[could]] not stand [[Lanza]] because of his [[obscene]] advances [[towards]] her off (and sometimes on) [[camera]]. [[In]] [[addition]], his gutter mannerism and the [[continual]] [[smell]] of [[alcohol]] in her face during scenes they did together were [[intolerable]]. [[After]] doing their [[second]] (and [[last]]) [[film]] together, "[[Toast]] of New Orleans", the [[normally]] [[quiet]] Grayson [[stormed]] into [[Louie]] B. Mayer's office and [[told]] him in no [[uncertain]] words that she [[would]] never [[work]] with Lanza again – [[period]]. [[Mayer]] felt that Grayson was [[much]] more [[valuable]] to MGM then Lanza, so Grayson's [[statement]] stuck. Grayson went on to star in a number of [[widely]] [[received]] (and far more profitable) musicals with Howard [[Keel]] and others. Later in [[life]] when [[asked]] to [[compare]] Lanza and [[Keel]] her [[reply]] was that there was no [[comparison]] between them, and that [[Keel]] was [[great]] to [[work]] with and had [[much]] more [[appeal]] to the "real people" in the [[audiences]]. A [[characteristic]] Lanza [[movie]] that had limited [[audiences]] appeal with a [[vulnerable]] [[tales]] line that was put together [[exclusively]] to justify Lanza's MGM [[contracts]] at the time.

As reported by [[lawmakers]] Lastliberal (above) Grayson [[did]] not stand [[Spear]] because of his [[pornographic]] advances [[into]] her off (and sometimes on) [[cameras]]. [[At]] [[supplement]], his gutter mannerism and the [[ongoing]] [[smells]] of [[liquor]] in her face during scenes they did together were [[unacceptable]]. [[Upon]] doing their [[secondly]] (and [[final]]) [[filmmaking]] together, "[[Toasted]] of New Orleans", the [[traditionally]] [[quietness]] Grayson [[invaded]] into [[Louis]] B. Mayer's office and [[tell]] him in no [[ambiguous]] words that she [[should]] never [[works]] with Lanza again – [[periods]]. [[Meyer]] felt that Grayson was [[very]] more [[precious]] to MGM then Lanza, so Grayson's [[statements]] stuck. Grayson went on to star in a number of [[largely]] [[benefited]] (and far more profitable) musicals with Howard [[Kiel]] and others. Later in [[lives]] when [[solicited]] to [[compared]] Lanza and [[Kil]] her [[reactions]] was that there was no [[comparisons]] between them, and that [[Kil]] was [[marvellous]] to [[working]] with and had [[very]] more [[appellate]] to the "real people" in the [[listeners]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Ask the Dust" looked intriguing from the trailer, and we especially like all of the actors. Unfortunately, the movie was not compelling enough to be considered drama, and it wasn't funny enough to be a comedy. It practically seemed to satirize itself, and to no entertaining effect. After seventy minutes of waiting for this thing to get better, my wife and I walked out, valuing not having wasted any more time on such nonsense. It simply was not interesting, moving, funny nor artistic. It appears as though it were written, produced and directed by a high school kid; worse yet, it was such a shameful waste of otherwise extraordinarily talented actors, not to mention our time and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This [[third]] Darkman was definitely [[better]] than the second one, but [[still]] far worse than the [[original]] [[movie]]. What made this one better than D2 was the fact that The [[Bad]] [[Guy]] had been [[changed]] and Durant was not [[brought]] back again. [[Furthermore]] there was actually some hint of [[character]] [[development]] when it came to the [[bad]] guy's family and Darkman himself. This [[made]] my [[heart]] soften and I [[gave]] this [[flick]] as [[much]] as 4/10, i.[[e]]. **/*****. This [[thirdly]] Darkman was definitely [[optimum]] than the second one, but [[however]] far worse than the [[initial]] [[filmmaking]]. What made this one better than D2 was the fact that The [[Negative]] [[Guys]] had been [[changing]] and Durant was not [[introduced]] back again. [[Besides]] there was actually some hint of [[personage]] [[evolution]] when it came to the [[rotten]] guy's family and Darkman himself. This [[introduced]] my [[coeur]] soften and I [[given]] this [[gesture]] as [[very]] as 4/10, i.[[f]]. **/*****. --------------------------------------------- Result 3351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Twelve [[years]] ago, production stopped on the slasher [[flick]] "[[Hot]] Blooded" [[since]] almost everyone on the set started dying. [[Now]], a couple of film [[students]] have decided to finish the [[film]], [[despite]] the [[fact]] that there's a [[rumor]] that the [[film]] is [[cursed]]. Well, they're about to [[find]] out that some curses are [[real]].

When [[Scream]] was released, [[every]] [[country]] seemed to [[want]] to [[cash]] in on its [[success]], [[even]] [[Australia]]. The concept, which [[today]] has been done to death (a slasher [[film]] within a slasher [[film]]) was at the time relatively [[cool]] and [[original]]. This [[movie]] was released right before Urban Legends: Final Cut and [[Scream]] 3 (well not in the US but in Australia) so it felt like the [[first]] movie with this concept. When Urban Legends 2 was released, most of us had all ready grown sick of the concept and [[since]] the movie wasn't even good, the movie flopped disastrously. Now, [[Cut]] is not the best slasher [[flick]] ever, and nor does it try to be. It knows that it's a rip-off, and they even cast a girl who looks like a blonde version of Neve Campbell in the starring role. But [[instead]] of trying to add some new and original twists to the story, they've decided to rip-off some 80s slasher [[flicks]] like "Nightmare on Elm Street" as well and surprisingly enough, this actually [[works]]. The killer is very creepy and that mask is just killer! And instead of trying to scare the audience to death, they've created a very good and creepy atmosphere which keeps us in suspense through most of the movie. There are a couple of plot holes in the movie though that I wasn't able to fully ignore, the ending being the biggest plot hole in the movie. Spoiler ahead; I mean, they burnt the only copy of the movie so where the hell did they find the print that they show in the final scene? It makes no sense I tell you. End of spoilers. All in all, Cut is a pretty creepy slasher flick with a silly story but I consider this to be one of the [[better]] [[Scream]] rip-offs that never made it [[big]]. I'm surprised that this one never got a sequel, but I guess it simply came out too late.

[[Suspenseful]] Australian slasher flick with very few scares. [[Cut]] is [[still]] a pretty neat slasher movie and I will have to recommend this one even though I consider the story to be quite silly since it's completely ludicrous. Twelve [[olds]] ago, production stopped on the slasher [[gesture]] "[[Sexy]] Blooded" [[because]] almost everyone on the set started dying. [[Currently]], a couple of film [[student]] have decided to finish the [[cinematography]], [[while]] the [[facto]] that there's a [[gossip]] that the [[movie]] is [[fucking]]. Well, they're about to [[unearthed]] out that some curses are [[authentic]].

When [[Yell]] was released, [[each]] [[nationals]] seemed to [[wish]] to [[money]] in on its [[accomplishments]], [[yet]] [[Australians]]. The concept, which [[hoy]] has been done to death (a slasher [[cinema]] within a slasher [[cinema]]) was at the time relatively [[groovy]] and [[initial]]. This [[cinematic]] was released right before Urban Legends: Final Cut and [[Howling]] 3 (well not in the US but in Australia) so it felt like the [[outset]] movie with this concept. When Urban Legends 2 was released, most of us had all ready grown sick of the concept and [[because]] the movie wasn't even good, the movie flopped disastrously. Now, [[Chop]] is not the best slasher [[gesture]] ever, and nor does it try to be. It knows that it's a rip-off, and they even cast a girl who looks like a blonde version of Neve Campbell in the starring role. But [[conversely]] of trying to add some new and original twists to the story, they've decided to rip-off some 80s slasher [[gestures]] like "Nightmare on Elm Street" as well and surprisingly enough, this actually [[collaborated]]. The killer is very creepy and that mask is just killer! And instead of trying to scare the audience to death, they've created a very good and creepy atmosphere which keeps us in suspense through most of the movie. There are a couple of plot holes in the movie though that I wasn't able to fully ignore, the ending being the biggest plot hole in the movie. Spoiler ahead; I mean, they burnt the only copy of the movie so where the hell did they find the print that they show in the final scene? It makes no sense I tell you. End of spoilers. All in all, Cut is a pretty creepy slasher flick with a silly story but I consider this to be one of the [[nicer]] [[Yells]] rip-offs that never made it [[substantial]]. I'm surprised that this one never got a sequel, but I guess it simply came out too late.

[[Engrossing]] Australian slasher flick with very few scares. [[Clipping]] is [[yet]] a pretty neat slasher movie and I will have to recommend this one even though I consider the story to be quite silly since it's completely ludicrous. --------------------------------------------- Result 3352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie [[deserves]] more than a 1. But I'm [[giving]] it a one because so many fricken fan boys have given it a 10 resulting in it getting a rating that'll take it into the [[top]] 100 list. Seriously it's not that great its not that bad. Its a [[stupid]] [[cult]] classic with so many fricken fan [[boys]] it's [[ridiculous]]. These are the types who [[probably]] still laugh at Chuck Norris jokes and still say "I'm rick james b!tch" No matter how old or annoying it gets. I dread having to hear "I'm tired of MFn snakes on this MFn plane" months from now from idiots trying to be [[funny]]. Its [[crappy]] plot crap acting etc. Its Okay to [[love]] a [[bad]] movie, but you still gotta [[admit]] its a [[bad]] [[movie]].

Wait for the [[Marine]] [[starring]] [[John]] Cena if you [[wanna]] [[see]] a [[real]] [[movie]] This movie [[merited]] more than a 1. But I'm [[confer]] it a one because so many fricken fan boys have given it a 10 resulting in it getting a rating that'll take it into the [[supreme]] 100 list. Seriously it's not that great its not that bad. Its a [[dumb]] [[heresy]] classic with so many fricken fan [[guy]] it's [[farcical]]. These are the types who [[arguably]] still laugh at Chuck Norris jokes and still say "I'm rick james b!tch" No matter how old or annoying it gets. I dread having to hear "I'm tired of MFn snakes on this MFn plane" months from now from idiots trying to be [[hilarious]]. Its [[shite]] plot crap acting etc. Its Okay to [[amore]] a [[negative]] movie, but you still gotta [[acknowledge]] its a [[rotten]] [[filmmaking]].

Wait for the [[Ocean]] [[featuring]] [[Jon]] Cena if you [[wants]] [[seeing]] a [[veritable]] [[filmmaking]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Don't you just [[hate]] it when you order [[steak]] but the [[restaurant]] [[gives]] you [[chicken]]?

Such is how I felt [[watching]] this so-called "[[Battlestar]] [[Galactica]]". [[Arguments]] can be [[made]] over its quality but the [[fact]] [[remains]], it's NOT what the [[fans]] ordered.

[[Imagine]] if you were [[sitting]] down at that [[proverbial]] restaurant I [[mentioned]]. You have [[waited]] [[years]] for them to [[bring]] back their [[famous]] [[New]] York Strip steak which you [[loved]]. When your [[meal]] [[arrives]], you find they've [[applied]] the [[name]] "New [[York]] Strip" to a chicken dish. You complain but the waiter [[merely]] states "but ze cheeken, [[ees]] really GOOD zir"! Do you really [[care]] if the chicken is good? You wanted [[New]] [[York]] Strip - a STEAK! The waiter then explains, "you zee zir, ze [[chef]] [[wanted]] to to do, as you zay, zomezing [[NEW]]. We [[felt]] ze cheeken would be more popular zo we gave it the [[name]] of our [[previous]] [[delicious]] deesh". You [[ask]] if you will ever [[find]] the original [[New]] York Strip on the menu in the future but are informed that because the [[restaurant]] HAS a [[dish]] called "[[New]] York Strip" now on the menu, you'll never see the [[original]] [[New]] [[York]] [[Strip]] - ever again.

Such is the [[case]] with creating something NEW and [[slapping]] the "[[Battlestar]] Galactica" namesake on it.

* This mini [[series]] is an [[affront]] to all [[fans]] of the [[original]] show! *

It's a [[shame]] the [[production]] team put in [[charge]] of this [[new]] version [[obviously]] [[held]] [[contempt]] for the [[original]]. The team put in [[charge]] of resurrecting BG should have [[LOVED]] the [[original]] series - [[seeking]] to [[improve]] what the fans [[loved]], not [[try]] to [[shamelessly]] sell this [[new]] series by [[exploiting]] the Battlestar Galactica name.

If SciFi [[Channel]] [[wanted]] to [[give]] us a [[NEW]] [[show]], then DO so! [[Give]] it a [[new]] name! Don't [[use]] the [[name]] we [[fondly]] [[remember]] in an [[attempt]] to [[lure]] in [[viewers]]. That [[effectively]] [[robs]] us of the [[chance]] to [[see]] any [[semblance]] of the [[original]] in the future.

We have been [[waiting]] for 25 [[years]] to [[see]] what we [[knew]] as BG because we [[LIKED]] [[something]] about the original! We didn't simply want the NAME and remnants of the basic concept. There are things we LOVED about the original series!

Sadly, probably the BEST elements of the original were those which were omitted. Sure, the original BG was imperfect and could have used some updating. This mini series, however, was not an improvement in any regards but the special effects (which were good but not anything unusual by today's standards).

Many viewers will debate back and forth about the quality of this NEW show but we will not forgive SciFi and Ron Moore for destroying our dream.

That being said... I shall offer some comments about the merits of this new mini by itself (not in comparison to the original):

The battle sequences were the best part. Effort was obviously put into making the effects more "real" in appearance and less "wow - look at that effect". I would not say these sequences were exceptional by today's standards yet they were in keeping with made-for-cable original movies. What was the deal with this "pseudo-live-cam"? Some views tried to fake the effect of a "real" camera with lagging tracking and jerky zooms. However, it was over-used considering there was no apparent SOURCE of these cameras. The infinitely more intelligent series, Babylon 5, is the only instance I've seen such "live cams" used effectively, when we were supposedly witnessing action from Security Cams.

The script, you ask? The script felt like it was written by a teenager, FOR other teenagers. The characters felt cardboard and stereotypical. Indeed, the whole story felt pieced together from other well-known stereotypes. The only good features of the entire story were those few elements which were preserved from the original series. It was obviously "dumbed down" for digestion of your average TV audience.

The human interaction was pitiful. Rather than drama based on subtle looks, expressions and fine timing, every moment of human tension was exaggerated to the point of being so obvious they lost all ability to move any refined viewer. Such was [[obvious]] in any interaction between Adama and son. The director must have been trying to make sure the most dense and unfeeling viewer wouldn't miss it even if not paying attention. Sorry, but real humans don't behave like the continually.

I wouldn't have considered this a BAD show had it stood on its own. Nothing great; it will never be revered by true SciFi fans or artisans, but it would be watchable by the masses. I personally could have lived without it, though. I only watched it to see how it really DID capture the spirit of the original.

How this mini series will always be remembered is as a symbol of how quality in storytelling has been cast aside to appeal to greater numbers. How even SciFi Channel has "dumbed down" its productions to cater to the masses as opposed to its true niche market, the Science Fiction fans. It will be the time we asked for steak and they insisted on giving us chicken, despite our complaints.

I leave you with only one thought -

NO "MOORE".

Don't you just [[dislikes]] it when you order [[sirloin]] but the [[dining]] [[furnishes]] you [[pollo]]?

Such is how I felt [[staring]] this so-called "[[Pegasus]] [[Battlestar]]". [[Controversies]] can be [[brought]] over its quality but the [[facto]] [[stays]], it's NOT what the [[lovers]] ordered.

[[Guess]] if you were [[seated]] down at that [[notorious]] restaurant I [[quoted]]. You have [[await]] [[ages]] for them to [[brings]] back their [[illustrious]] [[Newest]] York Strip steak which you [[loves]]. When your [[dinners]] [[arrived]], you find they've [[implemented]] the [[designation]] "New [[Yorke]] Strip" to a chicken dish. You complain but the waiter [[simply]] states "but ze cheeken, [[ef]] really GOOD zir"! Do you really [[healthcare]] if the chicken is good? You wanted [[Newest]] [[Yorke]] Strip - a STEAK! The waiter then explains, "you zee zir, ze [[boss]] [[wants]] to to do, as you zay, zomezing [[NUEVO]]. We [[believed]] ze cheeken would be more popular zo we gave it the [[naming]] of our [[former]] [[delightful]] deesh". You [[asks]] if you will ever [[finds]] the original [[Novel]] York Strip on the menu in the future but are informed that because the [[dining]] HAS a [[dishes]] called "[[Novel]] York Strip" now on the menu, you'll never see the [[initial]] [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] [[Strapping]] - ever again.

Such is the [[lawsuit]] with creating something NEW and [[slap]] the "[[Galactica]] Galactica" namesake on it.

* This mini [[serials]] is an [[snub]] to all [[lovers]] of the [[preliminary]] show! *

It's a [[pity]] the [[productivity]] team put in [[fees]] of this [[newest]] version [[definitely]] [[holds]] [[defiance]] for the [[initial]]. The team put in [[charges]] of resurrecting BG should have [[LOVE]] the [[initial]] series - [[seeks]] to [[enhancing]] what the fans [[loves]], not [[tried]] to [[disgracefully]] sell this [[nouveau]] series by [[exploit]] the Battlestar Galactica name.

If SciFi [[Canals]] [[wanting]] to [[confer]] us a [[NUEVO]] [[showing]], then DO so! [[Confer]] it a [[nuevo]] name! Don't [[uses]] the [[behalf]] we [[affectionately]] [[recollect]] in an [[seek]] to [[attraction]] in [[moviegoers]]. That [[efficiently]] [[steals]] us of the [[possibilities]] to [[behold]] any [[appearance]] of the [[preliminary]] in the future.

We have been [[expecting]] for 25 [[ages]] to [[seeing]] what we [[overheard]] as BG because we [[LOVED]] [[somethings]] about the original! We didn't simply want the NAME and remnants of the basic concept. There are things we LOVED about the original series!

Sadly, probably the BEST elements of the original were those which were omitted. Sure, the original BG was imperfect and could have used some updating. This mini series, however, was not an improvement in any regards but the special effects (which were good but not anything unusual by today's standards).

Many viewers will debate back and forth about the quality of this NEW show but we will not forgive SciFi and Ron Moore for destroying our dream.

That being said... I shall offer some comments about the merits of this new mini by itself (not in comparison to the original):

The battle sequences were the best part. Effort was obviously put into making the effects more "real" in appearance and less "wow - look at that effect". I would not say these sequences were exceptional by today's standards yet they were in keeping with made-for-cable original movies. What was the deal with this "pseudo-live-cam"? Some views tried to fake the effect of a "real" camera with lagging tracking and jerky zooms. However, it was over-used considering there was no apparent SOURCE of these cameras. The infinitely more intelligent series, Babylon 5, is the only instance I've seen such "live cams" used effectively, when we were supposedly witnessing action from Security Cams.

The script, you ask? The script felt like it was written by a teenager, FOR other teenagers. The characters felt cardboard and stereotypical. Indeed, the whole story felt pieced together from other well-known stereotypes. The only good features of the entire story were those few elements which were preserved from the original series. It was obviously "dumbed down" for digestion of your average TV audience.

The human interaction was pitiful. Rather than drama based on subtle looks, expressions and fine timing, every moment of human tension was exaggerated to the point of being so obvious they lost all ability to move any refined viewer. Such was [[apparent]] in any interaction between Adama and son. The director must have been trying to make sure the most dense and unfeeling viewer wouldn't miss it even if not paying attention. Sorry, but real humans don't behave like the continually.

I wouldn't have considered this a BAD show had it stood on its own. Nothing great; it will never be revered by true SciFi fans or artisans, but it would be watchable by the masses. I personally could have lived without it, though. I only watched it to see how it really DID capture the spirit of the original.

How this mini series will always be remembered is as a symbol of how quality in storytelling has been cast aside to appeal to greater numbers. How even SciFi Channel has "dumbed down" its productions to cater to the masses as opposed to its true niche market, the Science Fiction fans. It will be the time we asked for steak and they insisted on giving us chicken, despite our complaints.

I leave you with only one thought -

NO "MOORE".

--------------------------------------------- Result 3354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is a joke and must be one of the [[worst]] movies Stallone ever made. This is a typical 80s movie where you have one [[man]] [[destroying]] the whole army by himself. "[[First]] Blood Pt. 2" is very [[similar]] to Schwarzenegger's "[[Commando]]", but there you have Arnold [[killing]] the [[terrorist]] while here you have a [[specific]] [[nation]] [[showed]] as the [[bad]] [[guys]]. This [[movie]] is a typical American anti-Soviet [[propaganda]]. [[True]], this was the peak of the [[Cold]] [[War]], but I'm [[sick]] of having [[Communists]] or the Nazis [[always]] being [[shown]] as the enemy. There are so [[many]] American [[movies]] that have this one thing in common. Why can't there a [[movie]] that show [[Americans]] as the [[enemy]]? Who's [[going]] to [[believe]] that one [[lone]] [[soldier]] will [[destroy]] the [[whole]] army? [[Do]] you really [[think]] that [[something]] like this would have [[really]] happened? By the [[looks]] of it, an average, brain washed American [[viewer]] [[certainly]] [[would]]. This [[filmmaking]] is a joke and must be one of the [[meanest]] movies Stallone ever made. This is a typical 80s movie where you have one [[dude]] [[ruining]] the whole army by himself. "[[Outset]] Blood Pt. 2" is very [[akin]] to Schwarzenegger's "[[Commandos]]", but there you have Arnold [[kill]] the [[terrorists]] while here you have a [[special]] [[country]] [[proved]] as the [[negative]] [[buddies]]. This [[cinematography]] is a typical American anti-Soviet [[advocacy]]. [[Veritable]], this was the peak of the [[Chilly]] [[Wars]], but I'm [[ill]] of having [[Communism]] or the Nazis [[constantly]] being [[revealed]] as the enemy. There are so [[myriad]] American [[filmmaking]] that have this one thing in common. Why can't there a [[movies]] that show [[America]] as the [[enemies]]? Who's [[go]] to [[think]] that one [[sole]] [[servicemen]] will [[annihilate]] the [[overall]] army? [[Doing]] you really [[thought]] that [[anything]] like this would have [[genuinely]] happened? By the [[seem]] of it, an average, brain washed American [[beholder]] [[definitively]] [[could]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] You may say to yourself, "[[Don]] Johnson as [[Elvis]]? Can that [[work]]? Is it [[possible]]? [[Seems]] like an [[terrible]] [[choice]] to me, but [[perhaps]] I should have an [[open]] mind. Maybe I'll be surprised. Maybe he can [[pull]] it off."

[[NOT]]!

Don Johnson is not a [[bad]] actor. But he is an awful [[Elvis]]. He's too short, too weak-voiced, too [[sharply]] [[featured]] ... well you've already imagined how [[bad]] he [[would]] be. [[Add]] to that a hokey black wig and heavy-handed eye-liner and mascara and it's a [[big]] [[fat]] [[embarrassing]] [[mess]].

The [[best]] I can [[say]] is that since Johnson's acting is decent and since his impersonation is so far off, after a while you don't [[even]] [[think]] of him as Elvis anymore. You see him as some other [[crazed]] pop [[star]] [[instead]]. [[Then]], on that level, the [[movie]] becomes watchable.

Stephanie Zimbalist is [[also]] not ideally cast as the tall, beauty queen, Linda Thompson. But she is [[attractive]] in her own right and plays the part with the [[honesty]], elegance and intelligence we've come to expect from all her roles. There may be too much [[intelligence]] in her performance. You have to be [[kind]] of a dope to [[stick]] with a dope [[abusing]] dope.

There's nothing new to this story; we've heard it [[many]] [[times]] before. If you've looking for new [[info]] or [[insight]], you won't find it. It's told as a love story - an unrequited one: [[Linda]] for Elvis and Elvis for drugs. You may say to yourself, "[[Gift]] Johnson as [[Presley]]? Can that [[jobs]]? Is it [[feasible]]? [[Seem]] like an [[scary]] [[pick]] to me, but [[maybe]] I should have an [[opens]] mind. Maybe I'll be surprised. Maybe he can [[pulls]] it off."

[[NAH]]!

Don Johnson is not a [[rotten]] actor. But he is an awful [[Alves]]. He's too short, too weak-voiced, too [[abruptly]] [[traits]] ... well you've already imagined how [[negative]] he [[could]] be. [[Adds]] to that a hokey black wig and heavy-handed eye-liner and mascara and it's a [[prodigious]] [[fatty]] [[distracting]] [[chaos]].

The [[finest]] I can [[says]] is that since Johnson's acting is decent and since his impersonation is so far off, after a while you don't [[yet]] [[thought]] of him as Elvis anymore. You see him as some other [[crazy]] pop [[stars]] [[however]]. [[Subsequently]], on that level, the [[filmmaking]] becomes watchable.

Stephanie Zimbalist is [[moreover]] not ideally cast as the tall, beauty queen, Linda Thompson. But she is [[seductive]] in her own right and plays the part with the [[sincerity]], elegance and intelligence we've come to expect from all her roles. There may be too much [[intellect]] in her performance. You have to be [[genus]] of a dope to [[wand]] with a dope [[abused]] dope.

There's nothing new to this story; we've heard it [[myriad]] [[period]] before. If you've looking for new [[information]] or [[vision]], you won't find it. It's told as a love story - an unrequited one: [[Lynda]] for Elvis and Elvis for drugs. --------------------------------------------- Result 3356 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] **** WARNING: here be spoilers **** Why do I waste my hastily fleeing [[years]] [[watching]] [[garbage]] like this? This [[film]] is an impressive [[collection]] of clichés, poor writing, worse [[directing]], and then we haven't [[even]] got to the acting [[yet]].

And of [[course]], you can [[predict]] the [[whole]] [[story]] from [[beginning]] to end.

Hero expert fights against [[stupid]], corrupt and [[incompetent]] henchmen. One avalanche goes off, burying all the heroes who somehow manage to [[get]] out alive in [[spite]] of going through all [[sorts]] of cliffhanger [[perils]]. Corrupt [[partner]] who [[caused]] the whole thing gets fried alive [[together]] with his payoff [[money]]. [[Second]] avalanche heroically deflected by renegade expert's [[adventurous]] [[experiment]]. [[Evil]] [[henchmen]] in the [[end]] turn out to have a [[heart]] as well. Troubled [[teenager]] falls into the arms of her crusty stepmother after being [[saved]] by her. Etc, etc, etc, etc, on and on it goes.

In fact, there's [[little]] [[reason]] to [[warn]] for spoilers. You [[could]] [[probably]] [[work]] the [[whole]] plot out if I gave you the [[basic]] [[ingredients]]. At least, I wasn't too [[wide]] off the [[mark]] most of the [[time]], anticipating what would [[happen]] [[next]].

And then we haven't discussed the factual [[errors]].

I agree with a [[previous]] [[commentator]] that even [[though]] there are [[usually]] [[SOME]] redeeming [[features]] even of a [[bad]] [[movie]]. you'd be hard pressed to find any in this one. I suppose I gave it 2 out of 10 for some [[nice]] scenery shots, but that's it.

It's been some [[time]] [[since]] a [[film]] [[made]] me groan, but this one [[certainly]] did. **** WARNING: here be spoilers **** Why do I waste my hastily fleeing [[olds]] [[staring]] [[wastes]] like this? This [[filmmaking]] is an impressive [[collect]] of clichés, poor writing, worse [[instructing]], and then we haven't [[yet]] got to the acting [[however]].

And of [[cours]], you can [[foretell]] the [[overall]] [[tales]] from [[initiating]] to end.

Hero expert fights against [[foolish]], corrupt and [[incapable]] henchmen. One avalanche goes off, burying all the heroes who somehow manage to [[got]] out alive in [[sadness]] of going through all [[class]] of cliffhanger [[menaces]]. Corrupt [[partners]] who [[stirred]] the whole thing gets fried alive [[jointly]] with his payoff [[cash]]. [[Seconds]] avalanche heroically deflected by renegade expert's [[fearless]] [[experiences]]. [[Demonic]] [[henchman]] in the [[termination]] turn out to have a [[heartland]] as well. Troubled [[teenagers]] falls into the arms of her crusty stepmother after being [[saving]] by her. Etc, etc, etc, etc, on and on it goes.

In fact, there's [[small]] [[reasons]] to [[ultimatum]] for spoilers. You [[would]] [[arguably]] [[collaborated]] the [[total]] plot out if I gave you the [[fundamental]] [[ingredient]]. At least, I wasn't too [[wider]] off the [[brands]] most of the [[times]], anticipating what would [[emerge]] [[imminent]].

And then we haven't discussed the factual [[blunders]].

I agree with a [[former]] [[columnist]] that even [[despite]] there are [[habitually]] [[CERTAIN]] redeeming [[traits]] even of a [[unfavourable]] [[flick]]. you'd be hard pressed to find any in this one. I suppose I gave it 2 out of 10 for some [[handsome]] scenery shots, but that's it.

It's been some [[period]] [[because]] a [[filmmaking]] [[brought]] me groan, but this one [[definitely]] did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3357 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Shame on Yash Raj [[films]] and Aditya Chopra who seems to have lost their intelligence over the years and providing [[steady]] [[fare]] of tripe in this piece of cinematic [[crap]] thats not [[even]] worth You Tube [[standards]]. I was gritting my teeth throughout the whole flick start to finish with the [[schizophrenic]] [[direction]], plot line that never quite materialized and on the last scene I just [[felt]] ashamed that my [[country]] and its crorepati film makers can "THROW AWAY" crores on such [[stupidity]]. [[Shame]] on the [[actors]] for taking this [[work]] and [[even]] commenting on it as some piece of work they can own up to. Saif Ali Khan -completely [[disappointed]] in your [[choice]] of film. Kareen shows enough skin for the puberty stricken and Akshay comes up as the dim-wit. Anil another retard with a pubescent fascination for English. His [[cronies]] were [[commendable]] in their acting and with the bizarre cinematography scattered in the last 15 minutes, it was enough to pop a blood vessel. DON'T WASTe any brain cells, energy or your money to go see this- Go [[SEE]] / [[Rent]] AMU -with Konkana Sensharma instead- a [[beautiful]] piece of independent film [[thats]] ever come out of [[India]].Intelligent, [[poignant]] and a [[wonderful]] story-tale that will [[touch]] everyone with intelligent [[actors]] and gave me [[hope]] that all is not lost in Indian cinema making. Shame on Yash Raj [[filmmaking]] and Aditya Chopra who seems to have lost their intelligence over the years and providing [[stable]] [[tariff]] of tripe in this piece of cinematic [[dammit]] thats not [[yet]] worth You Tube [[norms]]. I was gritting my teeth throughout the whole flick start to finish with the [[paranoid]] [[directions]], plot line that never quite materialized and on the last scene I just [[deemed]] ashamed that my [[countries]] and its crorepati film makers can "THROW AWAY" crores on such [[lunacy]]. [[Pity]] on the [[players]] for taking this [[works]] and [[yet]] commenting on it as some piece of work they can own up to. Saif Ali Khan -completely [[disenchanted]] in your [[wahl]] of film. Kareen shows enough skin for the puberty stricken and Akshay comes up as the dim-wit. Anil another retard with a pubescent fascination for English. His [[sidekicks]] were [[laudable]] in their acting and with the bizarre cinematography scattered in the last 15 minutes, it was enough to pop a blood vessel. DON'T WASTe any brain cells, energy or your money to go see this- Go [[BEHOLD]] / [[Tenancy]] AMU -with Konkana Sensharma instead- a [[sumptuous]] piece of independent film [[whats]] ever come out of [[Hindustan]].Intelligent, [[heartrending]] and a [[sumptuous]] story-tale that will [[touching]] everyone with intelligent [[players]] and gave me [[expectancy]] that all is not lost in Indian cinema making. --------------------------------------------- Result 3358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simon Pegg plays a rude crude and often out of control celebrity journalist who is brought from England to work for a big American magazine. Of course his winning ways create all sorts of complications. Amusing fact based comedy that co stars Kristen Dunst (looking rather grown up), Danny Huston, and Jeff Bridges. It works primarily because we like Simon Pegg despite his bad behavior. We completely understand why Kristen Dunst continues to talk to him despite his frequent screw ups. I liked the film. Its not the be all and end all but it was a nice way to cap off an evening of sitting on the couch watching movies.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Ben]] Masters,(Kyd Thomas),"[[Dream]] Lover",'86 plays a [[sort]] of Mike [[Hammer]] character, a private [[eye]] who does any [[old]] [[job]] for a buck and never [[misses]] out on all the sexy [[curves]] of [[good]] looking [[gals]]. Kyd makes one [[big]] [[mistake]] when he [[stops]] Morgan Fairchild,(Laura Cassidy/Eva Bomberg),"[[Arizona]] Summer",'73 from getting beaten up and [[raped]]. Kyd takes Laura home to his pad and when he wakes up, she is out on his patio [[eating]] his [[eggs]] and orange juice and making herself right at [[home]]. By the [[way]], Kyd [[sleep]] in his bed and Laura [[slept]] on the couch for this [[particular]] scene. Laura is [[mixed]] up with all [[kinds]] of hoods and there are some [[hot]] scenes between Kyd and Laura. [[All]] said and [[done]], this is a [[lousy]] [[picture]] and I purchased the DVD for only $1.50 and I [[really]] got ripped OFF ! [[Benn]] Masters,(Kyd Thomas),"[[Dreams]] Lover",'86 plays a [[kind]] of Mike [[Sledgehammer]] character, a private [[eyes]] who does any [[longtime]] [[labor]] for a buck and never [[lack]] out on all the sexy [[curve]] of [[alright]] looking [[chicks]]. Kyd makes one [[grand]] [[mistaken]] when he [[halted]] Morgan Fairchild,(Laura Cassidy/Eva Bomberg),"[[Az]] Summer",'73 from getting beaten up and [[broken]]. Kyd takes Laura home to his pad and when he wakes up, she is out on his patio [[nourishment]] his [[egg]] and orange juice and making herself right at [[habitation]]. By the [[camino]], Kyd [[sleeping]] in his bed and Laura [[sleep]] on the couch for this [[unique]] scene. Laura is [[blended]] up with all [[genre]] of hoods and there are some [[sexy]] scenes between Kyd and Laura. [[Entire]] said and [[performed]], this is a [[rotten]] [[photo]] and I purchased the DVD for only $1.50 and I [[genuinely]] got ripped OFF ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This [[movie]] is a lot [[like]] the movie Hostel, except with *BAD* acting and not much [[suspense]]. The gore elements are there, but you don't [[really]] feel [[anything]] for the [[characters]], making the violence not very [[effective]]. Some parts are just [[strange]]... like forcing a snake down someones throat. What's up with that? Is that supposed to be [[scary]] or gory? It's just kind of [[stupid]]. As for [[torture]], there [[really]] isn't any (except for the [[guy]] getting blow-torched in the [[beginning]], which they don't [[show]] anyway). The main [[bad]] [[guy]] keeps saying "make them [[die]] [[slowly]]", [[yet]] the [[butcher]] [[kills]] them all very [[fast]]. The deaths are all [[relatively]] [[quick]]. [[Yes]], I did watch the "unrated" version. So, overall, not the [[worst]] gore movie I've [[seen]], but not at all good [[either]]. You won't [[miss]] [[anything]] if you [[skip]] this one. This [[filmmaking]] is a lot [[iike]] the movie Hostel, except with *BAD* acting and not much [[waiting]]. The gore elements are there, but you don't [[truthfully]] feel [[something]] for the [[character]], making the violence not very [[efficient]]. Some parts are just [[weird]]... like forcing a snake down someones throat. What's up with that? Is that supposed to be [[fearful]] or gory? It's just kind of [[silly]]. As for [[tortures]], there [[truthfully]] isn't any (except for the [[man]] getting blow-torched in the [[initiate]], which they don't [[showing]] anyway). The main [[negative]] [[guys]] keeps saying "make them [[killed]] [[softly]]", [[however]] the [[executioner]] [[homicide]] them all very [[quickly]]. The deaths are all [[fairly]] [[swift]]. [[Yep]], I did watch the "unrated" version. So, overall, not the [[hardest]] gore movie I've [[noticed]], but not at all good [[neither]]. You won't [[mademoiselle]] [[nothing]] if you [[jumping]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kurt Russell is at his best as the man who lives off his past glories, Reno Hightower. Robin Williams is his polar opposite in a rare low key performance as Jack Dundee. He dropped the Big Pass in more ways than one.

You'll see some of the most quotable scenes ever put into one film, as Jack hisses at a rat, Reno poses, and the call of the caribou goes out.

Don't miss this classic that isn't scared to show football in the mud the way it should be played. --------------------------------------------- Result 3362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The "Trivia" page on IMDb [[claims]] the filmmakers protested because this film was re-cut by the studio to "simplify the plot". If so, that [[effort]] was a total failure, as this is one of the most [[incoherent]] narratives I've ever seen in a film -- I'd hate to have seen it before the plot was "simplified."

It's sad to see Warren with so little character to go on that even he can't do [[anything]] with the [[inept]] [[material]]. It's interesting to see Caron in '70s [[mode]] [[instead]] of her Hollywood-era glamour [[garb]] and persona, but it's [[sad]] to [[see]] her haplessly wander through this doing-a- favor-to-her-producer-husband dreck. She would [[actually]] later [[hook]] up with and marry the [[director]], [[instead]] -- who, you'll [[note]], never [[directed]] [[anything]] again, but did [[strictly]] 1st or 2nd A.D. [[work]] in TV from here on out. That oughta tell you enough right there.

I call this "interesting" because I have an automatic fondness for American [[films]] of this [[period]], and this role does [[add]] perspective to Oates' [[otherwise]] [[fantastic]] 1971 output (Two- Lane Blacktop, The [[Hired]] Hand). But the "1940s detective as fish-out-of-water in 1970s L.A." [[theme]], which is the only thing the [[movie]] really has to [[say]], is [[sold]] in [[way]] too heavy- handed a [[manner]]. A [[similar]] [[theme]] would be far more [[effectively]] handled [[two]] years [[later]] in Altman's The [[Long]] [[Goodbye]]. And as far as Oates [[playing]] a hard-bitten [[guy]] on a doomed errand, three years on, he [[would]] [[give]] his definitive performance in Bring Me the [[Head]] of Alfredo [[Garcia]]. If you haven't [[seen]] those, don't [[waste]] your [[time]] with this! The "Trivia" page on IMDb [[claiming]] the filmmakers protested because this film was re-cut by the studio to "simplify the plot". If so, that [[efforts]] was a total failure, as this is one of the most [[counterintuitive]] narratives I've ever seen in a film -- I'd hate to have seen it before the plot was "simplified."

It's sad to see Warren with so little character to go on that even he can't do [[nothing]] with the [[incapable]] [[materials]]. It's interesting to see Caron in '70s [[means]] [[conversely]] of her Hollywood-era glamour [[frock]] and persona, but it's [[unfortunate]] to [[behold]] her haplessly wander through this doing-a- favor-to-her-producer-husband dreck. She would [[genuinely]] later [[hooks]] up with and marry the [[headmaster]], [[however]] -- who, you'll [[observes]], never [[geared]] [[nothing]] again, but did [[tightly]] 1st or 2nd A.D. [[cooperate]] in TV from here on out. That oughta tell you enough right there.

I call this "interesting" because I have an automatic fondness for American [[filmmaking]] of this [[times]], and this role does [[summing]] perspective to Oates' [[alternately]] [[sumptuous]] 1971 output (Two- Lane Blacktop, The [[Embarked]] Hand). But the "1940s detective as fish-out-of-water in 1970s L.A." [[subjects]], which is the only thing the [[filmmaking]] really has to [[says]], is [[sells]] in [[camino]] too heavy- handed a [[ways]]. A [[comparable]] [[themes]] would be far more [[efficiently]] handled [[deux]] years [[afterward]] in Altman's The [[Lengthy]] [[Farewell]]. And as far as Oates [[replay]] a hard-bitten [[buddy]] on a doomed errand, three years on, he [[could]] [[lend]] his definitive performance in Bring Me the [[Leader]] of Alfredo [[Rodriguez]]. If you haven't [[noticed]] those, don't [[squandering]] your [[times]] with this! --------------------------------------------- Result 3363 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] NYC model [[Alison]] Parker (Cristina Raines) rents a room in an old brownstone where she meets a few bizarre neighbors and experiences some creepy [[hallucinations]]. As lawyer boyfriend Michael Lerman ([[Chris]] Sarandon) goes about [[making]] [[inquiries]] on her [[behalf]], she [[struggles]] to [[maintain]] her sanity (not to [[mention]] her will to [[live]]) as her [[experiences]] [[take]] a toll on her physical, mental, and emotional health.

I don't want to [[spoil]] the better moments in this [[psychological]] horror film for those [[unfamiliar]] with it. The story is interesting and [[entertaining]], but the [[film]] doesn't really offer much in terms of real scares. Or, for that matter, any atmosphere. It is sort of quietly sinister, but it's not like the traditional horror film. It's more of a story about a troubled woman's attempts to deal with the increasing unreality in her life. On that level, it works, but it's not [[quite]] [[powerful]] enough.

What "The Sentinel" *does* offer are some eye-catching set pieces (in particular, the [[fascinating]], fabulously creepy [[climax]], and there's a scene with Beverly D'Angelo that must be [[seen]] to be believed). There's also some gore to be seen, but not very much. An ominous music score by Gil Melle [[adds]] to the menace.

No [[review]] of this film would be complete without an [[appraisal]] for the film-makers in gathering such [[excellent]] [[actors]] for its [[ensemble]] cast. Some of them don't get to do too much, but to see all of them together is [[impressive]]. Eli Wallach and Burgess Meredith make the [[biggest]] [[impressions]] as, respectively, a hard-nosed detective and a solicitous neighbor. Other legendary names include [[Jose]] Ferrer, Arthur Kennedy, and Ava Gardner. [[Future]] stars like D'Angelo, [[Christopher]] Walken, [[Tom]] Berenger, [[Jeff]] Goldblum make brief appearances, and other familiar faces [[include]] Jerry Orbach, [[Sylvia]] [[Miles]], William [[Hickey]], and [[Martin]] Balsam. Whoever was the [[casting]] [[director]] for this [[film]] [[deserves]] some [[sort]] of [[prize]].

[[Written]] for the screen by [[director]] [[Michael]] [[Winner]], [[probably]] best known for the "[[Death]] [[Wish]]" [[series]] that he did with Charles Bronson, from the novel by [[Jeffrey]] Konvitz.

I wouldn't [[consider]] this a [[truly]] [[great]] [[horror]] thriller but it has its [[moments]] and is reasonably [[entertaining]].

7/10 NYC model [[Ellison]] Parker (Cristina Raines) rents a room in an old brownstone where she meets a few bizarre neighbors and experiences some creepy [[nightmares]]. As lawyer boyfriend Michael Lerman ([[Kris]] Sarandon) goes about [[doing]] [[probe]] on her [[name]], she [[battles]] to [[preserving]] her sanity (not to [[cited]] her will to [[viva]]) as her [[experience]] [[taking]] a toll on her physical, mental, and emotional health.

I don't want to [[wrack]] the better moments in this [[mental]] horror film for those [[unknown]] with it. The story is interesting and [[amusing]], but the [[kino]] doesn't really offer much in terms of real scares. Or, for that matter, any atmosphere. It is sort of quietly sinister, but it's not like the traditional horror film. It's more of a story about a troubled woman's attempts to deal with the increasing unreality in her life. On that level, it works, but it's not [[very]] [[potent]] enough.

What "The Sentinel" *does* offer are some eye-catching set pieces (in particular, the [[intriguing]], fabulously creepy [[pinnacle]], and there's a scene with Beverly D'Angelo that must be [[saw]] to be believed). There's also some gore to be seen, but not very much. An ominous music score by Gil Melle [[adding]] to the menace.

No [[examine]] of this film would be complete without an [[appraise]] for the film-makers in gathering such [[noteworthy]] [[actresses]] for its [[whole]] cast. Some of them don't get to do too much, but to see all of them together is [[dramatic]]. Eli Wallach and Burgess Meredith make the [[greater]] [[fingerprints]] as, respectively, a hard-nosed detective and a solicitous neighbor. Other legendary names include [[Joao]] Ferrer, Arthur Kennedy, and Ava Gardner. [[Futuristic]] stars like D'Angelo, [[Christophe]] Walken, [[Thom]] Berenger, [[Geoff]] Goldblum make brief appearances, and other familiar faces [[including]] Jerry Orbach, [[Sylvie]] [[Kilometre]], William [[Hick]], and [[Martins]] Balsam. Whoever was the [[cast]] [[superintendent]] for this [[cinema]] [[deserve]] some [[sorts]] of [[prix]].

[[Wrote]] for the screen by [[headmaster]] [[Michele]] [[Finalist]], [[presumably]] best known for the "[[Mortality]] [[Wanna]]" [[serial]] that he did with Charles Bronson, from the novel by [[Geoffrey]] Konvitz.

I wouldn't [[contemplating]] this a [[really]] [[wondrous]] [[terror]] thriller but it has its [[times]] and is reasonably [[amuse]].

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] "Seed" is torture [[porn]]...no doubt about it. But, strangely, Uwe Boll has [[written]], [[produced]], and [[directed]] a more polished [[film]] than any other he has made in recent memory.

Every time I watch a Boll film, I feel that some pages of the script must have gone missing. There are [[simply]] [[huge]] [[gaps]] in the story and dialogue. Of course, [[nothing]] makes much sense, either. The films are [[somewhat]] surreal in this respect.

*****SPOILERS*****

Why do the six cops who go to arrest Seed split up and go their separate ways when they get to the darkened residence, unlike real cops who would enter and clear the house in pairs or by threes? Why don't the cops ever use their radios? How can the bodies decay so quickly, a process that would normally take many months? (I KNOW it's time-lapse photography...but Seed would never be able to stay on schedule killing people if he always waited around for the previous victim to decay to the point shown.) How come Seed gets to wear bib-overalls and a mask while he's waiting on death row instead of typical prison uniforms? How can Seed enter a maximum security prison, stroll around the cell block, and then walk out again without being stopped or even noticed? If nearly 80 people (according to some newspaper articles shown in the movie) have been murdered, why is there only one investigator working on the case? Why did the investigator suddenly decide that he should go look for Seed at Seed's house, where he was originally arrested and where he murdered his victims? (Didn't he think of doing this sooner?) Why does the police detective go it solo, without back-up and without even letting dispatch know what he was doing and where he was headed?

This is particularly [[frustrating]] when Boll [[obviously]] goes far out of his way to make sure we understand why the electric chair fails to work properly. He spends several screen minutes in setting this up, when he could have [[spent]] them making other aspects of the film at least a bit more logical.

*****END SPOILERS*****

In short, the film just sort of serves as a framework for a few assorted scenes (perhaps Boll would think of these as his "visions") of a brutal death by bludgeoning, gunshots to the head, execution by electrocution, and the skinning of live animals raised for their pelts. (The opening scenes of animals being skinned were indeed unnecessary and disturbing, but I understand their purpose in the context of the film.) The centerpiece is undoubtedly the bludgeoning death of a middle-aged woman by Seed using a hatchet. It's obvious that much time was spent on this and it vaguely reminds me of the classic scene in "Reservoir Dogs", though without the Steely Dan soundtrack.

Is this a good movie? No. Is it worth seeing? Only if you are a dedicated fan of the torture porn genre or if you are absolutely determined to see a sample of torture porn. As I said at the start of this review, even though this movie is pretty disgusting and can be sickening at points, it is truly much more competent than most of Boll's movies. Perhaps he will continue to improve as a filmmaker. I can only hope that he progresses beyond torture porn and continues more in the vein of "Postal". "Seed" is torture [[interracial]]...no doubt about it. But, strangely, Uwe Boll has [[handwritten]], [[generated]], and [[oriented]] a more polished [[filmmaking]] than any other he has made in recent memory.

Every time I watch a Boll film, I feel that some pages of the script must have gone missing. There are [[merely]] [[prodigious]] [[demerits]] in the story and dialogue. Of course, [[anything]] makes much sense, either. The films are [[rather]] surreal in this respect.

*****SPOILERS*****

Why do the six cops who go to arrest Seed split up and go their separate ways when they get to the darkened residence, unlike real cops who would enter and clear the house in pairs or by threes? Why don't the cops ever use their radios? How can the bodies decay so quickly, a process that would normally take many months? (I KNOW it's time-lapse photography...but Seed would never be able to stay on schedule killing people if he always waited around for the previous victim to decay to the point shown.) How come Seed gets to wear bib-overalls and a mask while he's waiting on death row instead of typical prison uniforms? How can Seed enter a maximum security prison, stroll around the cell block, and then walk out again without being stopped or even noticed? If nearly 80 people (according to some newspaper articles shown in the movie) have been murdered, why is there only one investigator working on the case? Why did the investigator suddenly decide that he should go look for Seed at Seed's house, where he was originally arrested and where he murdered his victims? (Didn't he think of doing this sooner?) Why does the police detective go it solo, without back-up and without even letting dispatch know what he was doing and where he was headed?

This is particularly [[depressing]] when Boll [[manifestly]] goes far out of his way to make sure we understand why the electric chair fails to work properly. He spends several screen minutes in setting this up, when he could have [[expended]] them making other aspects of the film at least a bit more logical.

*****END SPOILERS*****

In short, the film just sort of serves as a framework for a few assorted scenes (perhaps Boll would think of these as his "visions") of a brutal death by bludgeoning, gunshots to the head, execution by electrocution, and the skinning of live animals raised for their pelts. (The opening scenes of animals being skinned were indeed unnecessary and disturbing, but I understand their purpose in the context of the film.) The centerpiece is undoubtedly the bludgeoning death of a middle-aged woman by Seed using a hatchet. It's obvious that much time was spent on this and it vaguely reminds me of the classic scene in "Reservoir Dogs", though without the Steely Dan soundtrack.

Is this a good movie? No. Is it worth seeing? Only if you are a dedicated fan of the torture porn genre or if you are absolutely determined to see a sample of torture porn. As I said at the start of this review, even though this movie is pretty disgusting and can be sickening at points, it is truly much more competent than most of Boll's movies. Perhaps he will continue to improve as a filmmaker. I can only hope that he progresses beyond torture porn and continues more in the vein of "Postal". --------------------------------------------- Result 3365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Shannon Lee,the [[daughter]] of Bruce Lee,delivers high kicking martial arts [[action]] in spades in this [[exhilarating]] [[Hong]] Kong [[movie]] and proves that like her late brother [[Brandon]] she is a real chip off the [[old]] block. There is high [[tech]] stuntwork to die for in this [[fast]] paced [[flick]] and the [[makers]] of the [[Bond]] [[movies]] should give it a look if they [[want]] to [[spice]] up the [[action]] [[quotient]] of the [[next]] 007 [[adventure]] as there is much [[innovative]] [[stuff]] here with some fresh and [[original]] second unit [[work]] to [[bolster]] up the already [[high]] [[action]] content of "[[AND]] NOW,YOU'RE [[DEAD]]". When you watch a [[movie]] as fast paced and [[entertaining]] as this you [[begin]] to wonder how [[cinema]] itself was [[able]] to survive before the martial [[arts]] [[genre]] was created.I [[genuinely]] [[believe]] that movies in general and [[action]] [[movies]] in [[particular]] were just marking [[time]] until the first kung fu [[movies]] made their debut. Bruce Lee was the father of modern [[action]] [[cinema]] and his [[legitimate]] [[surviving]] offspring Shannon does not [[let]] the [[family]] name down here.[[Although]] there are several pleasing performances in this [[movie]] ([[Michel]] [[Wong]] for one)it is Shannon Lee whom you will [[remember]] for a [[genuinely]] [[spectacular]] performance as Mandy the hitgirl [[supreme]].[[Hell]];you [[may]] well come away [[whistling]] her [[fights]]! Shannon Lee,the [[fille]] of Bruce Lee,delivers high kicking martial arts [[efforts]] in spades in this [[thrilling]] [[Kong]] Kong [[cinema]] and proves that like her late brother [[Kyle]] she is a real chip off the [[elderly]] block. There is high [[technology]] stuntwork to die for in this [[hurry]] paced [[gesture]] and the [[producers]] of the [[Bonded]] [[film]] should give it a look if they [[wanna]] to [[sauce]] up the [[activities]] [[quota]] of the [[imminent]] 007 [[adventurer]] as there is much [[imaginative]] [[thing]] here with some fresh and [[preliminary]] second unit [[collaborate]] to [[enhance]] up the already [[higher]] [[efforts]] content of "[[UND]] NOW,YOU'RE [[DEATHS]]". When you watch a [[cinema]] as fast paced and [[amusing]] as this you [[embark]] to wonder how [[theatre]] itself was [[capable]] to survive before the martial [[humanities]] [[sort]] was created.I [[really]] [[believing]] that movies in general and [[efforts]] [[cinema]] in [[specific]] were just marking [[times]] until the first kung fu [[film]] made their debut. Bruce Lee was the father of modern [[efforts]] [[film]] and his [[rightful]] [[survivors]] offspring Shannon does not [[allowing]] the [[families]] name down here.[[Despite]] there are several pleasing performances in this [[cinematography]] ([[Mitchell]] [[Huang]] for one)it is Shannon Lee whom you will [[remind]] for a [[truly]] [[wondrous]] performance as Mandy the hitgirl [[supremo]].[[Dammit]];you [[maggio]] well come away [[hissing]] her [[struggling]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3366 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This is one of those unfortunate [[films]] that [[suffered]] an even more [[sad]], [[unfortunate]] death at the box office. I [[saw]] this film at a local art cinema,in revival form,[[shortly]] after it [[tanked]] in mainstream cinemas. It [[certainly]] [[deserves]] to be [[approached]] a [[second]] [[time]] (or even a third). [[Sandra]] B. takes it to the [[limit]] by doing [[spoken]] word & taking on some well known songs in this piece (her version of Hank William's 'I'm [[So]] [[Lonesome]] I [[Could]] Cry' could [[easily]] [[move]] you to [[tears]]). [[Maybe]] [[someday]], audiences will be ready to take this film a [[bit]] more seriously (but not without some well placed [[laughs]],too). The film moves at a brisk pace ([[thanks]] to some nice editing),so that some [[viewers]] will not find it [[stale]] & boring. [[Perhaps]] a [[revival]] is just down the [[pipeline]]. This is one of those unfortunate [[kino]] that [[underwent]] an even more [[unlucky]], [[pathetic]] death at the box office. I [[sawthe]] this film at a local art cinema,in revival form,[[soon]] after it [[planted]] in mainstream cinemas. It [[obviously]] [[merited]] to be [[tackled]] a [[secondly]] [[moment]] (or even a third). [[Sondra]] B. takes it to the [[confines]] by doing [[talked]] word & taking on some well known songs in this piece (her version of Hank William's 'I'm [[Consequently]] [[Hermit]] I [[Did]] Cry' could [[conveniently]] [[budge]] you to [[rip]]). [[Presumably]] [[sometime]], audiences will be ready to take this film a [[bite]] more seriously (but not without some well placed [[giggles]],too). The film moves at a brisk pace ([[thank]] to some nice editing),so that some [[onlookers]] will not find it [[rancid]] & boring. [[Probably]] a [[resurrection]] is just down the [[tubing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3367 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Thanks for [[killing]] the franchise with this [[turkey]], [[John]] [[Carpenter]] and Tommy Lee [[Wallace]]. This [[movie]] [[sucks]] on so [[many]] [[levels]] it's [[pathetic]]. The first [[VAMPIRES]] was fun, but this low [[budget]] retread makes me yawn.

Jon Bon Jovi (the poor man's Kevin Bacon) [[drives]] around [[Mexico]] with a surfboard [[housing]] a [[hidden]] compartment holding his vampire killing gear ala [[Antonio]] Banderas's [[guitar]] [[case]] in DESPERADO. He [[picks]] up some lame "hunters" along the way ([[including]] an annoyingly feminist infected [[girl]] who takes pills to keep from turning into a [[vampire]]), and they set out to [[stop]] some [[female]] [[master]] vampire who is [[given]] no backstory and so we [[could]] [[care]] less about her or her quest (to [[walk]] in the [[sunlight]] by [[stealing]] the Black [[Cross]] and [[performing]] a ritual to [[allow]] her to do so). If you've [[seen]] the first VAMPIRES, you've already [[seen]] this, and [[done]] [[much]] better.

John Carpenter has been [[responsible]] for a [[lot]] of [[bad]] [[movies]] lately. [[Frankly]], I think he's past his prime and [[incapable]] of [[making]] another horror [[classic]]. The only decent [[film]] he's [[done]] since THEY [[LIVE]] (1987) is [[VAMPIRES]]. [[Everything]] [[else]] is [[complete]] crap, right up until the unbelievably cheap looking and [[retarded]] GHOSTS OF [[MARS]]... and now this [[waste]] of celluloid. Where are more greats like [[ASSAULT]] ON PRECINCT 13, HALLOWEEN (1), ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and THE THING?

Carpenter [[crony]] Wallace [[proves]] he can't [[write]] his way out of a paper [[bag]] with his paper-thin [[script]] [[packed]] with yawns, groans and [[recycled]] [[gags]] from the original. Did I mention I [[hated]] [[every]] character in the [[movie]]? There was not a single [[memorable]] [[character]] in the [[whole]] [[film]]. How does that happen? This [[film]] has [[nothing]] to [[recommend]] it. Not even the DVD [[presentation]] is good; the menu looks [[awful]].

By [[comparison]], JASON X: "[[FRIDAY]] THE 13th [[IN]] SPACE" was a masterpiece. Now that is how you make a sequel and (re)[[energize]] a franchise, ladies and [[germs]], as well as [[create]] an [[exciting]] DVD menu. Thanks for [[kill]] the franchise with this [[turk]], [[Jon]] [[Joiner]] and Tommy Lee [[Dallas]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[stinks]] on so [[several]] [[grades]] it's [[unlucky]]. The first [[VAMPIRE]] was fun, but this low [[budgets]] retread makes me yawn.

Jon Bon Jovi (the poor man's Kevin Bacon) [[driving]] around [[Mexican]] with a surfboard [[homes]] a [[disguised]] compartment holding his vampire killing gear ala [[Emilio]] Banderas's [[guitarist]] [[lawsuit]] in DESPERADO. He [[opt]] up some lame "hunters" along the way ([[include]] an annoyingly feminist infected [[daughter]] who takes pills to keep from turning into a [[vampires]]), and they set out to [[stopped]] some [[girl]] [[masters]] vampire who is [[gave]] no backstory and so we [[did]] [[healthcare]] less about her or her quest (to [[marche]] in the [[sunshine]] by [[flies]] the Black [[Croix]] and [[fulfilling]] a ritual to [[permitted]] her to do so). If you've [[watched]] the first VAMPIRES, you've already [[noticed]] this, and [[performed]] [[very]] better.

John Carpenter has been [[liable]] for a [[lots]] of [[negative]] [[cinematography]] lately. [[Honestly]], I think he's past his prime and [[unable]] of [[doing]] another horror [[typical]]. The only decent [[cinema]] he's [[doing]] since THEY [[LIVING]] (1987) is [[VAMPIRE]]. [[Any]] [[otherwise]] is [[finish]] crap, right up until the unbelievably cheap looking and [[retard]] GHOSTS OF [[MAR]]... and now this [[wastes]] of celluloid. Where are more greats like [[ATTACK]] ON PRECINCT 13, HALLOWEEN (1), ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and THE THING?

Carpenter [[sidekick]] Wallace [[illustrates]] he can't [[handwriting]] his way out of a paper [[bags]] with his paper-thin [[scripts]] [[packing]] with yawns, groans and [[recycling]] [[jokes]] from the original. Did I mention I [[hate]] [[any]] character in the [[filmmaking]]? There was not a single [[unforgettable]] [[traits]] in the [[ensemble]] [[movie]]. How does that happen? This [[filmmaking]] has [[none]] to [[recommendation]] it. Not even the DVD [[submissions]] is good; the menu looks [[hideous]].

By [[compare]], JASON X: "[[WEDNESDAY]] THE 13th [[INTO]] SPACE" was a masterpiece. Now that is how you make a sequel and (re)[[invigorating]] a franchise, ladies and [[spores]], as well as [[creations]] an [[fascinating]] DVD menu. --------------------------------------------- Result 3368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The idea is to have something interesting happening in the first ten minutes to [[keep]] the [[audience]] hooked. Late [[Night]] [[Shopping]] manages to avoid interest for much longer than that. When we do get to a point, it is so monumentally [[moronic]] that I kept thinking I must have misunderstood it. But I didn't.

Sean tells the story of an Osaka landlord who [[rented]] the same apartment to two people at the same time who worked different shifts and so didn't realise they were sharing. His friend asks "But what about the weekends?" Sean doesn't have an adequate explanation. Sean then tells the story of his own similar problem, which is that he isn't sure his girlfriend is still living at home as he works during the night and she works during the day so they never see each other. This has been going on for three weeks. But his friend doesn't ask: "Yes, but as I said before, what about the weekends? You must see her then. It doesn't make sense. What are you going on about, Sean? Are you on medication or something?" But let's be generous and assume that they both work seven days a week.

We see Sean checking to see if the soap and towels have been used. (In fact, bizarrely, he starts to carry the soap around with him.) But what about his girlfriend's conditioner and shampoo, sanpro and moisturiser, toothpaste and toothbrush. Let's go to the kitchen. What about food and drink? Is any missing? Has any been bought? In the bedroom, has the shared bed been made or not? Are her clothes being used and exchanged for clean ones? Is the laundry basket fuller? In the toilet, is the seat up or down? I mean, good [[grief]]!

And to cap it all Paul arranges to leave work early to see if his girlfriend is still living at home. Why doesn't he just phone her?

But it gets worse. In the last act although no-one told Vincent where the rest of the group are going he manages to find them. Lenny's love interest and Sean's girlfriend conveniently appear to be best friends and also manage to find the group. There isn't even the slightest attempt to explain any of these extraordinarily unlikely coincidences.

To be fair the dialogue is OK but not nearly good enough to make up for the weak characters or annoyingly lame story.

I heard one of actors interviewed and he promised "no guns, no drugs, no corsets." I thought, "great". But after half-an-hour of tedium I was yelling at the screen: "I want guns! I want drugs! I want corsets!"

It wouldn't have taken much to sort these problems out but on the official website the director boasts that the film wasn't script-edited. That's all you need to know. The idea is to have something interesting happening in the first ten minutes to [[conserving]] the [[audiences]] hooked. Late [[Nuit]] [[Shop]] manages to avoid interest for much longer than that. When we do get to a point, it is so monumentally [[witless]] that I kept thinking I must have misunderstood it. But I didn't.

Sean tells the story of an Osaka landlord who [[renting]] the same apartment to two people at the same time who worked different shifts and so didn't realise they were sharing. His friend asks "But what about the weekends?" Sean doesn't have an adequate explanation. Sean then tells the story of his own similar problem, which is that he isn't sure his girlfriend is still living at home as he works during the night and she works during the day so they never see each other. This has been going on for three weeks. But his friend doesn't ask: "Yes, but as I said before, what about the weekends? You must see her then. It doesn't make sense. What are you going on about, Sean? Are you on medication or something?" But let's be generous and assume that they both work seven days a week.

We see Sean checking to see if the soap and towels have been used. (In fact, bizarrely, he starts to carry the soap around with him.) But what about his girlfriend's conditioner and shampoo, sanpro and moisturiser, toothpaste and toothbrush. Let's go to the kitchen. What about food and drink? Is any missing? Has any been bought? In the bedroom, has the shared bed been made or not? Are her clothes being used and exchanged for clean ones? Is the laundry basket fuller? In the toilet, is the seat up or down? I mean, good [[heartache]]!

And to cap it all Paul arranges to leave work early to see if his girlfriend is still living at home. Why doesn't he just phone her?

But it gets worse. In the last act although no-one told Vincent where the rest of the group are going he manages to find them. Lenny's love interest and Sean's girlfriend conveniently appear to be best friends and also manage to find the group. There isn't even the slightest attempt to explain any of these extraordinarily unlikely coincidences.

To be fair the dialogue is OK but not nearly good enough to make up for the weak characters or annoyingly lame story.

I heard one of actors interviewed and he promised "no guns, no drugs, no corsets." I thought, "great". But after half-an-hour of tedium I was yelling at the screen: "I want guns! I want drugs! I want corsets!"

It wouldn't have taken much to sort these problems out but on the official website the director boasts that the film wasn't script-edited. That's all you need to know. --------------------------------------------- Result 3369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This was one of the most [[boring]] "horror" movies that I have ever [[seen]]. A [[college]] [[kid]] has an epidemic of nightmares [[involving]] roaming [[spirits]] at Alcatraz. [[Trying]] to [[deliver]] a [[mix]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Street]]" and standard [[vampire]] [[fare]] in the [[form]] of a [[bad]] 80s [[music]] video, this movie is [[jammed]] full of [[bad]] acting and an exhaustively [[slow]] moving [[story]]. [[Although]], being such a [[bad]], and [[often]] laughable [[movie]] (dig those mullets and the [[terrible]] [[dialog]]), it [[would]] be good material to [[spoof]] on for an episode of [[Mystery]] Science [[Theater]] 3000. Don't be [[fooled]] by the proud [[mention]] of the [[film]] being the 1987 [[winner]] of the Silver Scroll [[Award]] by the [[Academy]] of Sicence Fiction, Fanatasy, and [[Horror]], or that Devo [[contributes]] to the soundtrack, or that [[Tony]] Basil has a [[part]] in the [[film]]. It is a [[giant]] [[disaster]], [[though]] one with a [[small]] cult following (see the other IMDb [[comments]] for this [[film]]). This was one of the most [[dull]] "horror" movies that I have ever [[noticed]]. A [[colleges]] [[kids]] has an epidemic of nightmares [[involve]] roaming [[liquors]] at Alcatraz. [[Tempting]] to [[delivering]] a [[blend]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]]" and standard [[vampires]] [[tariff]] in the [[forma]] of a [[naughty]] 80s [[musica]] video, this movie is [[wedged]] full of [[rotten]] acting and an exhaustively [[sluggish]] moving [[tales]]. [[While]], being such a [[unfavourable]], and [[normally]] laughable [[cinema]] (dig those mullets and the [[scary]] [[dialogue]]), it [[should]] be good material to [[faking]] on for an episode of [[Puzzle]] Science [[Drama]] 3000. Don't be [[misled]] by the proud [[cite]] of the [[kino]] being the 1987 [[winning]] of the Silver Scroll [[Awards]] by the [[Oscars]] of Sicence Fiction, Fanatasy, and [[Monstrosity]], or that Devo [[aiding]] to the soundtrack, or that [[Toni]] Basil has a [[portions]] in the [[movie]]. It is a [[juggernaut]] [[calamity]], [[while]] one with a [[teeny]] cult following (see the other IMDb [[feedback]] for this [[filmmaking]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 3370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Movie industry is tricky [[business]] - because decisions have to be [[made]] and [[everyone]] involved has a [[private]] [[life]], too. That's the very [[original]] [[thesis]] of this feeble attempt at [[making]] an 'insightful' film about [[film]]. And [[indeed]], no better [[proof]] of the industry's trickiness than [[seeing]] Anouk Aimée and [[Maximilian]] Schell [[trapped]] in this inanity. The insight [[consists]] of [[talking]] [[heads]] [[rattle]] off [[bullshit]] like "should I make a studio [[movie]] that [[pays]] a lot or should I make an [[indie]] [[item]] and [[stay]] [[true]] to my artistic self?" "[[Do]] the latter, please." [[Or]]: "our relationship is not only [[professional]], it's private as well. It's a [[rather]] [[complex]] situation to handle, isn't it?" "[[Yes]], it is, my [[dear]]." Between the [[insipid]] dialogs one [[gets]] glimpses of palm trees, hotel lobbies and American [[movie]] posters (no sign of non-American film [[presence]] on the Croisette). Recurrent [[slumber]] sessions are inevitable, [[making]] the 100 minutes of the [[film]] feel like [[ages]]. [[Jenny]] [[Gabrielle]] is [[spectacularly]] [[unconvincing]] in justifying her own [[presence]] in the [[frame]]. Movie industry is tricky [[enterprise]] - because decisions have to be [[introduced]] and [[anybody]] involved has a [[privy]] [[vie]], too. That's the very [[originals]] [[dissertation]] of this feeble attempt at [[doing]] an 'insightful' film about [[filmmaking]]. And [[admittedly]], no better [[test]] of the industry's trickiness than [[witnessing]] Anouk Aimée and [[Maximiliano]] Schell [[ambushed]] in this inanity. The insight [[includes]] of [[discussing]] [[leaders]] [[shake]] off [[baloney]] like "should I make a studio [[filmmaking]] that [[salary]] a lot or should I make an [[andy]] [[topics]] and [[stays]] [[genuine]] to my artistic self?" "[[Doing]] the latter, please." [[Orr]]: "our relationship is not only [[vocational]], it's private as well. It's a [[quite]] [[convoluted]] situation to handle, isn't it?" "[[Yep]], it is, my [[sweetheart]]." Between the [[tasteless]] dialogs one [[attains]] glimpses of palm trees, hotel lobbies and American [[movies]] posters (no sign of non-American film [[involvements]] on the Croisette). Recurrent [[dream]] sessions are inevitable, [[doing]] the 100 minutes of the [[movies]] feel like [[centuries]]. [[Jennie]] [[Gabriel]] is [[impressively]] [[feeble]] in justifying her own [[involvements]] in the [[framework]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was an usherette in an old theater in Northern California when this movie came out. As good as it is on DVD, it's even more eerie and terrifying on the big screen. Although it has been about 9 years since I have seen it, it is still one of my all-time favorites. At the risk of sounding trite, "They just don't make 'em like this anymore!" If Sixth Sense freaked you out at all, this movie is definitely for you! Great storyline, incredible cast of characters, ominous setting; even the soundtrack has a haunting quality to it. I highly recommend you not watch it alone. What a brownstone apartment was renting for in 1977 alone, will have you gasping (it would be at least 10-times that price today). --------------------------------------------- Result 3372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had no real expectations going into this movie and I'm glad. Even if I had expected it to be bad I would have been [[disappointed]].

Where to [[start]]? [[First]], I [[think]] 15% of the [[movie]] consisted of [[stock]] footage of [[stationary]] scarecrows in a [[dark]] jungle-field. I get it. There's scarecrows. I [[think]] the title "Scarecrows" was sufficient.

[[Second]], not a [[damn]] thing is ever [[explained]] [[regarding]] the scarecrows and paranormal occurrences. There's too many times where I was [[left]] going WTF?

[[Third]], the movie takes itself seriously. I'm all for a B-movie with buckets of blood, [[screaming]] [[women]], and [[senseless]] violence that is the [[result]] of a simple psychopath or [[ancient]] [[curse]]. But those [[movies]] often know they're B-movies and even [[flaunt]] it, like [[Dead]] [[Snow]] ([[hilarious]] Scandanavian [[zombie]] flick) or Evil [[Dead]] 2. But this [[movie]] seems [[oblivious]] to its crapdom.

[[Finally]], there should of been more blood and/or nudity. [[Yea]], I [[said]] it. If you're [[going]] to have a crap horror movie, make with the [[killing]]. And if you're [[going]] to have one [[hot]] and one semi-hot girl, one of them [[needs]] to [[show]] some side-boob at a [[minimum]].

So, like the summary [[says]], [[skip]] "Scarecrows" and just poke yourself in the eye. You'll thank me. I had no real expectations going into this movie and I'm glad. Even if I had expected it to be bad I would have been [[disappointing]].

Where to [[initiation]]? [[Outset]], I [[believing]] 15% of the [[filmmaking]] consisted of [[inventories]] footage of [[fixed]] scarecrows in a [[dusky]] jungle-field. I get it. There's scarecrows. I [[thoughts]] the title "Scarecrows" was sufficient.

[[Seconds]], not a [[cursed]] thing is ever [[clarified]] [[relative]] the scarecrows and paranormal occurrences. There's too many times where I was [[exited]] going WTF?

[[Terzi]], the movie takes itself seriously. I'm all for a B-movie with buckets of blood, [[yelling]] [[wife]], and [[illogical]] violence that is the [[outcome]] of a simple psychopath or [[immemorial]] [[cursing]]. But those [[kino]] often know they're B-movies and even [[flaunting]] it, like [[Deaths]] [[Snowfall]] ([[humorous]] Scandanavian [[ghoul]] flick) or Evil [[Death]] 2. But this [[filmmaking]] seems [[indifferent]] to its crapdom.

[[Eventually]], there should of been more blood and/or nudity. [[Yup]], I [[say]] it. If you're [[go]] to have a crap horror movie, make with the [[slaying]]. And if you're [[go]] to have one [[hotter]] and one semi-hot girl, one of them [[requisite]] to [[spectacle]] some side-boob at a [[lesser]].

So, like the summary [[say]], [[jumping]] "Scarecrows" and just poke yourself in the eye. You'll thank me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3373 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Why the crap is this [[movie]] rated so low?! I've [[seen]] this movie over 25 [[times]], I know [[EVERY]] line to this [[movie]]. It's obvious that I [[love]] this movie. [[Trey]] [[Parker]] and Matt Stone (creators of [[South]] Park and the [[new]] puppet masterpiece Team [[America]]) [[star]] as the main [[characters]] Joe Cooper, or Coop "Airman" Cooper, and Doug Remer, or "[[Sir]] Swish." [[Mainly]] they're just referred to as Coop and Remer [[throughout]] the movie. Right as the movie starts it [[reminds]] us of the money hungry corrupt [[world]] of overpaid [[sports]] [[starts]], they [[even]] [[go]] as far as to [[make]] one up [[called]] "Townsell." I [[must]] quote this [[portion]] of the [[movie]] since it is [[true]] with some [[sports]] [[starts]]: "And after [[playing]] for [[New]] [[England]], [[San]] Diego, [[Huston]], Saint Louis, a [[year]] for the Toronto Arganauts, plus one season as a [[greater]] at the Desert Inn I'm happy to finally [[play]] here in the [[fine]] [[city]] of Miami." His [[agent]] leans over: "[[Minnesota]]." Let us not [[forget]] this [[important]] piece of the [[movie]]. So it [[starts]] that Coop and Remer are at a [[high]] [[school]] reunion [[party]] and [[realize]] they are [[still]] [[nothing]] as they [[talk]] to their [[old]] [[classmates]]. Outside they [[create]] the [[sport]] BASEketball after being [[challenged]] by what [[probably]] was high school basketball [[heroes]]. [[After]] shaming them the [[sport]] goes pro in about a year. [[During]] this [[time]] they [[manage]] to [[recruit]] their third team mate Squeak, which is actually a day after they [[invent]] the [[game]]. As the [[movie]] follows we find out that Coop, Remer, and Squeak are the only virtuous [[sports]] [[heroes]] [[left]]. The [[story]] follows with [[zany]] [[blackmail]], the Milwaukee Beers cheerleaders, and [[humor]] so [[absurd]] it'll [[leave]] you [[crying]] for more. Watch it [[dude]], it's [[hilarious]]. Why the crap is this [[movies]] rated so low?! I've [[watched]] this movie over 25 [[moments]], I know [[ANY]] line to this [[movies]]. It's obvious that I [[amour]] this movie. [[Lilly]] [[Barker]] and Matt Stone (creators of [[Southward]] Park and the [[novel]] puppet masterpiece Team [[Americans]]) [[superstar]] as the main [[attribute]] Joe Cooper, or Coop "Airman" Cooper, and Doug Remer, or "[[Mister]] Swish." [[Basically]] they're just referred to as Coop and Remer [[in]] the movie. Right as the movie starts it [[reminding]] us of the money hungry corrupt [[worldwide]] of overpaid [[athlete]] [[launches]], they [[yet]] [[going]] as far as to [[deliver]] one up [[termed]] "Townsell." I [[ought]] quote this [[fraction]] of the [[film]] since it is [[authentic]] with some [[athletes]] [[commencement]]: "And after [[gaming]] for [[Novel]] [[Anglia]], [[Saint]] Diego, [[Houston]], Saint Louis, a [[annum]] for the Toronto Arganauts, plus one season as a [[largest]] at the Desert Inn I'm happy to finally [[gaming]] here in the [[fined]] [[ville]] of Miami." His [[officers]] leans over: "[[Mn]]." Let us not [[forgot]] this [[principal]] piece of the [[cinematography]]. So it [[initiate]] that Coop and Remer are at a [[alto]] [[teaching]] reunion [[part]] and [[achieve]] they are [[yet]] [[anything]] as they [[chatter]] to their [[former]] [[companions]]. Outside they [[creations]] the [[athletes]] BASEketball after being [[disputed]] by what [[undoubtedly]] was high school basketball [[heroic]]. [[Upon]] shaming them the [[athlete]] goes pro in about a year. [[In]] this [[times]] they [[managed]] to [[recruiting]] their third team mate Squeak, which is actually a day after they [[fabricate]] the [[gaming]]. As the [[film]] follows we find out that Coop, Remer, and Squeak are the only virtuous [[athlete]] [[heroic]] [[exited]]. The [[histories]] follows with [[madcap]] [[blackmailing]], the Milwaukee Beers cheerleaders, and [[mood]] so [[nonsensical]] it'll [[leaving]] you [[sobbing]] for more. Watch it [[mec]], it's [[comical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[show]] had [[great]] [[episodes]], this is not one of them. It's not a [[terrible]] episode, it's just hard to follow up "The [[man]] that was [[death]].", "All through the [[house]]", and "[[Dig]] that cat, he's [[real]] [[gone]]."

This episode is about a [[couple]] that has just been [[married]] Peggy (Ammanda Plummer) and [[Charles]] ([[Stephen]] Shellen). [[In]] the [[first]] five minutes you [[find]] out that [[Charles]] only [[married]] Peggy for her [[money]]. The two go on their honeymoon and their [[car]] breaks down on a dirt [[road]] and they have to [[seek]] [[refuge]] in an [[old]] abandon mansion. Charles [[soon]] [[finds]] out a [[secret]] of Peggy's family...

[[In]] my opinion you should watch this episode, but just don't [[expect]] the same [[feeling]] as the rest of the episodes in the first season. The [[showings]] had [[phenomenal]] [[bouts]], this is not one of them. It's not a [[dire]] episode, it's just hard to follow up "The [[males]] that was [[mortality]].", "All through the [[habitation]]", and "[[Dug]] that cat, he's [[veritable]] [[missing]]."

This episode is about a [[match]] that has just been [[marrying]] Peggy (Ammanda Plummer) and [[Karel]] ([[Stephane]] Shellen). [[At]] the [[frst]] five minutes you [[found]] out that [[Karel]] only [[marry]] Peggy for her [[cash]]. The two go on their honeymoon and their [[vehicle]] breaks down on a dirt [[paths]] and they have to [[try]] [[asylum]] in an [[antigua]] abandon mansion. Charles [[early]] [[found]] out a [[confidentiality]] of Peggy's family...

[[Throughout]] my opinion you should watch this episode, but just don't [[expects]] the same [[sense]] as the rest of the episodes in the first season. --------------------------------------------- Result 3375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] [[Michael]] Callan plays a smarmy photographer who seems, nonetheless, to be regarded as a perfect "catch" by any woman that runs across him; could this have [[anything]] to do with the fact that he also co-produced the film? He's a "hero" whom it's very difficult to [[empathize]] with, so the [[movie]] is in [[trouble]] right from the start. However, it's troubles don't end there. It has the [[production]] [[values]] of a TV-movie ([[check]] out that [[head]] [[made]] of clay or something, near the end), and the [[ending]] [[cheats]] in a way that I can't [[reveal]], in [[case]] anyone [[wants]] to [[see]] the [[movie]] ([[highly]] [[unlikely]]). Let's just [[say]] that the killer knows more than we were [[let]] to know he knows. (*1/2) [[Michel]] Callan plays a smarmy photographer who seems, nonetheless, to be regarded as a perfect "catch" by any woman that runs across him; could this have [[something]] to do with the fact that he also co-produced the film? He's a "hero" whom it's very difficult to [[empathise]] with, so the [[filmmaking]] is in [[hassle]] right from the start. However, it's troubles don't end there. It has the [[productivity]] [[value]] of a TV-movie ([[inspections]] out that [[leader]] [[accomplished]] of clay or something, near the end), and the [[terminating]] [[cheaters]] in a way that I can't [[disclose]], in [[examples]] anyone [[desires]] to [[consults]] the [[movies]] ([[unimaginably]] [[improbable]]). Let's just [[tell]] that the killer knows more than we were [[allowing]] to know he knows. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 3376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I [[grew]] up on this [[classic]] western [[series]], and as a child [[always]] considered it a [[treat]] being [[allowed]] to [[stay]] up late on [[Sunday]] evenings to watch it. Bonanza is still [[infinitely]] re watchable in re runs.

The series chronicles the adventures of the Cartwright family, who live on a ranch near Virginia [[City]], Nevada [[around]] the [[Civil]] [[War]] era. Their ranch ([[called]] the Ponderosa) is [[run]] and [[defended]] by the [[widowed]] [[father]], Ben, and his unmarried three sons, [[Adam]], Hoss, and [[Little]] Joe. These three [[brothers]] have [[different]] mothers, all of whom have passed away [[years]] [[earlier]].

The Cartwrights are a hard [[working]], prosperous, and honourable [[family]], [[highly]] respected in those parts. The Ponderosa is [[large]] so [[reaching]] its extremities requires a [[lot]] of horseback riding. [[Also]], [[trips]] away are [[often]] [[necessary]] in [[order]] to buy or [[sell]] [[cattle]] and so forth. [[Needless]] to [[say]], few of these [[excursions]] pass uneventfully. [[Although]] hospitable, much of the Cartwrights' energy must be spent [[defending]] their ranch from interlopers, or protecting themselves from townsfolk [[jealous]] of their prosperity and stellar [[reputation]]. The Cartwrights do a fair [[bit]] of firing their [[guns]] up in the [[air]] and such, but only shoot to [[kill]] when [[deemed]] [[absolutely]] [[necessary]]. They are [[involved]] in [[various]] [[town]] affairs, [[even]] the political [[life]] of the Nevada [[territory]].

One of the [[main]] [[assets]] of the [[series]] is the underlying warmth that is [[always]] present (despite occasional [[disagreements]]) between [[Ben]] and his three [[sons]], and (despite frequent [[disagreements]]) between the three [[brothers]]. [[Now]], one brother might [[beat]] up another every now and then, but [[generally]] has a good [[reason]] for it at the [[time]] and his [[anger]] never lasts long! The [[characters]] are all very well [[drawn]]. Ben is [[portrayed]] as a successful and noble [[man]] of [[great]] integrity. The [[oldest]] son, Adam, the most rational and suave of the [[brothers]], [[left]] [[midway]] through the [[series]]. The middle [[brother]], Hoss, is a [[gentle]] [[giant]] of a teddy bear, who has an insatiable [[appetite]] for [[food]] and is a little shy [[around]] the [[ladies]]. The youngest, [[Little]] Joe, is a hot headed, [[handsome]] [[charmer]] who, by [[contrast]], has [[quite]] a [[way]] with women. This trio of [[brothers]] [[enjoy]] [[various]] romances but their love interests are [[typically]] [[killed]] off by the [[end]] of the episode or else [[marriage]] proves [[impossible]], for whatever [[reason]].

The actors are all stellar in their roles, including Pernell Roberts (Adam), Dan Blocker (Hoss), Michael Landon (Little Joe), and of course Lorne Greene as the principled family patriarch, Ben. I also love the ranch cook, Hop Sing, played by Victor Sen Yung.

This is a wonderful action packed western with great values. The Cartwrights are always the noble heroes and most of the bad guys quite villainous. If only there were more programs like this vintage western on TV these days! I [[heighten]] up on this [[conventional]] western [[serial]], and as a child [[continually]] considered it a [[treatment]] being [[enabled]] to [[staying]] up late on [[Monday]] evenings to watch it. Bonanza is still [[immensely]] re watchable in re runs.

The series chronicles the adventures of the Cartwright family, who live on a ranch near Virginia [[Town]], Nevada [[roundabout]] the [[Civilian]] [[Warfare]] era. Their ranch ([[termed]] the Ponderosa) is [[executing]] and [[championed]] by the [[widows]] [[fathers]], Ben, and his unmarried three sons, [[Adams]], Hoss, and [[Small]] Joe. These three [[brethren]] have [[distinct]] mothers, all of whom have passed away [[olds]] [[sooner]].

The Cartwrights are a hard [[works]], prosperous, and honourable [[families]], [[hugely]] respected in those parts. The Ponderosa is [[gigantic]] so [[realising]] its extremities requires a [[lots]] of horseback riding. [[Moreover]], [[voyages]] away are [[normally]] [[imperative]] in [[decree]] to buy or [[sells]] [[cows]] and so forth. [[Fruitless]] to [[told]], few of these [[outings]] pass uneventfully. [[While]] hospitable, much of the Cartwrights' energy must be spent [[defence]] their ranch from interlopers, or protecting themselves from townsfolk [[jealousy]] of their prosperity and stellar [[notoriety]]. The Cartwrights do a fair [[bite]] of firing their [[rifles]] up in the [[airspace]] and such, but only shoot to [[killing]] when [[considered]] [[altogether]] [[imperative]]. They are [[engaged]] in [[numerous]] [[towns]] affairs, [[yet]] the political [[living]] of the Nevada [[land]].

One of the [[principal]] [[possessions]] of the [[serial]] is the underlying warmth that is [[permanently]] present (despite occasional [[dispute]]) between [[Ibn]] and his three [[son]], and (despite frequent [[dispute]]) between the three [[plymouth]]. [[Presently]], one brother might [[beats]] up another every now and then, but [[normally]] has a good [[cause]] for it at the [[period]] and his [[rage]] never lasts long! The [[attribute]] are all very well [[lured]]. Ben is [[depicted]] as a successful and noble [[guy]] of [[wondrous]] integrity. The [[eldest]] son, Adam, the most rational and suave of the [[siblings]], [[exited]] [[halfway]] through the [[serials]]. The middle [[sibling]], Hoss, is a [[mild]] [[titan]] of a teddy bear, who has an insatiable [[hunger]] for [[nourishment]] and is a little shy [[roundabout]] the [[lady]]. The youngest, [[Petite]] Joe, is a hot headed, [[nice]] [[lovable]] who, by [[rematch]], has [[pretty]] a [[path]] with women. This trio of [[brethren]] [[enjoys]] [[multiple]] romances but their love interests are [[normally]] [[murdering]] off by the [[termination]] of the episode or else [[marriages]] proves [[impractical]], for whatever [[raison]].

The actors are all stellar in their roles, including Pernell Roberts (Adam), Dan Blocker (Hoss), Michael Landon (Little Joe), and of course Lorne Greene as the principled family patriarch, Ben. I also love the ranch cook, Hop Sing, played by Victor Sen Yung.

This is a wonderful action packed western with great values. The Cartwrights are always the noble heroes and most of the bad guys quite villainous. If only there were more programs like this vintage western on TV these days! --------------------------------------------- Result 3377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Geez, as a Gay man who lives in NYC I can gratefully say that I have never seen the underbelly of Gay Culture that is portrayed in this film - and I am glad of it!!! [[Was]] this film broadcast on TV across the United States there would be a great anti-Gay backlash and I cannot say that I would blame them. The people in this film do not [[represent]] the average Gay American or even the average Trandgender American, what they do represent is a sheer and [[utter]] [[nightmare]]. The inclusion of obviously underage characters is [[appalling]] and the obvious racist sentiments (anti-White) are [[blatant]] and unsettling - society cannot be blamed for people who have chosen drugs, unemployment and rejection of education on the part of the film's "cast" - the actions of these people are not acts of desperation, but rather a rejection of anything resembling personal ambition and a willingness to make something out of one's self. Geez, as a Gay man who lives in NYC I can gratefully say that I have never seen the underbelly of Gay Culture that is portrayed in this film - and I am glad of it!!! [[Were]] this film broadcast on TV across the United States there would be a great anti-Gay backlash and I cannot say that I would blame them. The people in this film do not [[constitute]] the average Gay American or even the average Trandgender American, what they do represent is a sheer and [[unmitigated]] [[cabos]]. The inclusion of obviously underage characters is [[terrifying]] and the obvious racist sentiments (anti-White) are [[apparent]] and unsettling - society cannot be blamed for people who have chosen drugs, unemployment and rejection of education on the part of the film's "cast" - the actions of these people are not acts of desperation, but rather a rejection of anything resembling personal ambition and a willingness to make something out of one's self. --------------------------------------------- Result 3378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I disagree with Anyone who done't like this movie.

I used to LOVE this movie when I was little and I still do. It's sweet, funny and warms your heart. And It proves that love and friendship can never be destroyed.

And even though it didn't have much of a story, it was still excellent I give it a 10 and two thumbs up.

Oh yeah and it proves that your deepest wish's and dreams can come true. (Tear, tear)

I love this movie, personally if anyone says it sucked than I will say "Shame on you." Because it was a delightful little movie and I'm glad that at least SOME people liked it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watch this movie all the time. I've watched it with family ages 3 to 87, and everyone in between; They all loved it. It really shows the true scenes a dog has, and the love and loyalty you get from a pet. Just beautiful.

It's great for thoes who love comedy movies, the tear-jerker movies, or even just pets.

The music is wonderful, the animals spectacular, the scenes truly thought out, and the characters perfect. What I liked about the characters is the true and nicely mixed personalities: Shadow (The oldest, a Golden Retriever) He's the wise one, filled with the wisdom and mindset of any dog, Chance (the American Bulldog puppy) is basically a puppy with a witty side, the comical character; And Sassy (The Hymilayan cat) She's the real cat who shows what a real cat will do for their owner, the real girly one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] No, this is not no Alice fairy tale my [[friends]]! This `Wonderland' [[fable]] is [[based]] on the [[true]] [[story]] of the [[gruesome]] bloody Wonderland murders that occurred back in 80's California. [[At]] the [[center]] of this [[bloodbath]] was no other than `Johnny Wad' himself. Yes, [[John]] Holmes! [[Daddy]] ding-dong used other [[shotguns]] than his [[infamous]] 13-inch [[milk]] [[machine]]. Besides being a legendary [[adult]] [[film]] actor, Holmes was as also a hardcore [[drug]] addict who befriended various Hollywood [[junkies]]. Val Kilmer was [[occasionally]] [[majestic]] as Holmes, but for once this Holmes [[character]] did not [[milk]] it through [[completely]]. The [[film]] possesses a `who's who' of [[supporting]] [[players]]: Josh Lucas & Dylan Mcdermott as Hollywood riffraffs , Kate Bosworth & Lisa Kudrow as the [[women]] in Holmes [[life]], and Eric Bogosian as a [[menacing]] Tinsletown entrepreneur. These [[characters]] do [[play]] integral parts, [[directly]] or indirectly, in the `Wonderland' murders. Out of this [[support]] [[group]], it was Josh Lucas who was the most fierce & [[impressive]] as the [[ardent]] Ron Launius. Lucas is [[gradually]] [[escalating]] into a [[major]] Hollywood player with such charismatic turns in `A [[Beautiful]] Mind' & `Sweet [[Home]] Alabama'. Director James Cox [[sometime]] [[proved]] to be a bit of a coxsucker by [[displaying]] a [[vast]] [[amount]] of overextended scenes, just like Holmes' famous organ. Holmes was [[eventually]] acquitted of the `Wonderland' murders. He [[died]] of complications from the [[Aids]] [[virus]]. `Wonderland' will [[keep]] you wondering what [[really]] [[happened]] that bloody [[night]], and if Holmes [[really]] laid out his weapon. [[Oops]]! [[Wrong]] Holmes [[movie]]! [[Ok]]! That is enough before I [[get]] `penislized' I [[mean]] penalized. [[Bye]] Holmies! *** Average No, this is not no Alice fairy tale my [[freund]]! This `Wonderland' [[myth]] is [[base]] on the [[real]] [[conte]] of the [[vile]] bloody Wonderland murders that occurred back in 80's California. [[For]] the [[centers]] of this [[bloodletting]] was no other than `Johnny Wad' himself. Yes, [[Jon]] Holmes! [[Pope]] ding-dong used other [[muskets]] than his [[odious]] 13-inch [[dross]] [[machines]]. Besides being a legendary [[adults]] [[movies]] actor, Holmes was as also a hardcore [[medicines]] addict who befriended various Hollywood [[stoners]]. Val Kilmer was [[intermittently]] [[regal]] as Holmes, but for once this Holmes [[traits]] did not [[leche]] it through [[altogether]]. The [[kino]] possesses a `who's who' of [[assisting]] [[actors]]: Josh Lucas & Dylan Mcdermott as Hollywood riffraffs , Kate Bosworth & Lisa Kudrow as the [[femmes]] in Holmes [[living]], and Eric Bogosian as a [[threatening]] Tinsletown entrepreneur. These [[traits]] do [[gaming]] integral parts, [[squarely]] or indirectly, in the `Wonderland' murders. Out of this [[help]] [[cluster]], it was Josh Lucas who was the most fierce & [[tremendous]] as the [[avid]] Ron Launius. Lucas is [[increasingly]] [[spiraling]] into a [[big]] Hollywood player with such charismatic turns in `A [[Fabulous]] Mind' & `Sweet [[Household]] Alabama'. Director James Cox [[someday]] [[showed]] to be a bit of a coxsucker by [[showing]] a [[gargantuan]] [[amounts]] of overextended scenes, just like Holmes' famous organ. Holmes was [[ultimately]] acquitted of the `Wonderland' murders. He [[deaths]] of complications from the [[Assisting]] [[viruses]]. `Wonderland' will [[preserve]] you wondering what [[genuinely]] [[sweated]] that bloody [[nuit]], and if Holmes [[truthfully]] laid out his weapon. [[Yikes]]! [[Misguided]] Holmes [[kino]]! [[Okay]]! That is enough before I [[obtain]] `penislized' I [[signify]] penalized. [[Ciao]] Holmies! *** Average --------------------------------------------- Result 3381 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] 13 [[days]] to Glory tells the traditional tale with sympathy toward the Mexican viewpoint. The [[major]] problem in this movie was that while cowboy actor James Arness played the part of Jim Bowie persuasively, the rest of the name actors in the [[cast]] Brian Keith (Davy Crocket) and Lorne [[Greene]] (Sam Houston) were too [[old]].

Raul [[Julia]] played General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna with [[grace]] and dignity owed to the professional soldier who after all won the battle. The scene where he upbraids his officers for failing to mount a guard and prevent a sortee is one the scriptwriters did not understand. Failing to keep watch is a major remiss in the military. Santa [[Anna]] was within his prerogatives to be angry. Raul Julia [[magnificently]] carried poor writing through the scene.

Kathleen York was an [[impressive]] Susannah Dickinson, a woman who deserves to be remembered for her courage. However, Kathleen York might have been reminded that as Dickinsons hailed from Pennsylvania they probable dis not sound very Southron. 13 [[jours]] to Glory tells the traditional tale with sympathy toward the Mexican viewpoint. The [[sizeable]] problem in this movie was that while cowboy actor James Arness played the part of Jim Bowie persuasively, the rest of the name actors in the [[casting]] Brian Keith (Davy Crocket) and Lorne [[Green]] (Sam Houston) were too [[vecchio]].

Raul [[Yulia]] played General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna with [[gracia]] and dignity owed to the professional soldier who after all won the battle. The scene where he upbraids his officers for failing to mount a guard and prevent a sortee is one the scriptwriters did not understand. Failing to keep watch is a major remiss in the military. Santa [[Annas]] was within his prerogatives to be angry. Raul Julia [[beautifully]] carried poor writing through the scene.

Kathleen York was an [[wondrous]] Susannah Dickinson, a woman who deserves to be remembered for her courage. However, Kathleen York might have been reminded that as Dickinsons hailed from Pennsylvania they probable dis not sound very Southron. --------------------------------------------- Result 3382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I heard and read many praising things about "Midnight Meat Train", which is based on a short story written by no less than Clive Barker and supposedly the best adaptation of his work since the original "Hellraiser" that he directed himself, but so far I can only express very mixed sentiments about my viewing experience. The most [[appropriate]] term to summarize the [[whole]] film in just word is: [[nauseating]]! The violence is [[sadistic]] and extreme, which [[undoubtedly]] [[attracts]] fanatic young horror enthusiasts, but it's also [[indescribably]] [[gratuitous]] and exploitative. Normally speaking, I'm very pro-violence but it has to at least serve some kind of purpose. The butchering – literally – depicted in "Midnight Meat Train" is exclusively meant to shock and to [[repulse]] the viewers with weak nerve systems and easily upset [[stomachs]], and even that isn't fully effective due to the use of digital computer effects. There are more shortcomings, some even bigger than the pointless gore, but perhaps I should focus on the good elements first. The basic concept is definitely promising and multiple sequences (like the chase in the freezer room, for example) are literally oozing with nail-biting suspense and macabre atmosphere. Unfortunately the pacing is very [[uneven]] and the elaboration of the [[potentially]] [[fantastic]] [[plot]] is made unnecessarily convoluted. Presumably the [[processing]] of a short [[story]] into a long feature [[film]] scenario is [[responsible]] for the pacing irregularities, but I honestly feel they [[could]] have [[done]] more with the denouement as well as with the character played by Vinnie [[Jones]]. The plot introduces Leon, an aspiring photographer in New York whose agent advises to [[search]] for the truly [[menacing]] face of the [[city]] through sinister [[pictures]]. Leon then becomes obsessed with [[stalking]] an introvert and [[suspiciously]] behaving butcher who always [[awaits]] the midnight train. Leon's right, as the butcher [[turns]] out to be a [[relentless]] serial [[killer]] who literally crushes his [[victims]] with a [[big]] hammer, but the killer's motivations and [[behavior]] suggest there's [[something]] far more [[substantial]] going on the rails at night. "Midnight Meat Train" takes place in naturally [[unsettling]] [[locations]] like [[subway]] stations at [[night]] and [[animal]] abattoirs, plus the [[film]] also benefices of good acting performances and a truckload of downright [[disturbing]] [[images]] (like [[cadavers]] on [[meat]] [[hooks]] and train [[carriages]] [[smeared]] in blood), but director Ryûhei Kitamura ("[[Versus]]", "Godzilla [[Final]] [[Wars]]") doesn't take full advantage of it all. The ending leaves a whole lot questions unanswered and, even if Clive Barker meant to have like this, I still think we deserved a slightly more clarifying finale. "Midnight Meat Train" is a somewhat intriguing and definitely haunting film, but not without defaults. It's not intended for easily offended viewers, but maybe people looking for plot coherence and clarity should leave it alone as well. I heard and read many praising things about "Midnight Meat Train", which is based on a short story written by no less than Clive Barker and supposedly the best adaptation of his work since the original "Hellraiser" that he directed himself, but so far I can only express very mixed sentiments about my viewing experience. The most [[proper]] term to summarize the [[ensemble]] film in just word is: [[sickening]]! The violence is [[vicious]] and extreme, which [[definitely]] [[draw]] fanatic young horror enthusiasts, but it's also [[unimaginably]] [[baseless]] and exploitative. Normally speaking, I'm very pro-violence but it has to at least serve some kind of purpose. The butchering – literally – depicted in "Midnight Meat Train" is exclusively meant to shock and to [[repel]] the viewers with weak nerve systems and easily upset [[bellies]], and even that isn't fully effective due to the use of digital computer effects. There are more shortcomings, some even bigger than the pointless gore, but perhaps I should focus on the good elements first. The basic concept is definitely promising and multiple sequences (like the chase in the freezer room, for example) are literally oozing with nail-biting suspense and macabre atmosphere. Unfortunately the pacing is very [[spotty]] and the elaboration of the [[maybe]] [[sumptuous]] [[intrigue]] is made unnecessarily convoluted. Presumably the [[treat]] of a short [[saga]] into a long feature [[flick]] scenario is [[liable]] for the pacing irregularities, but I honestly feel they [[did]] have [[effected]] more with the denouement as well as with the character played by Vinnie [[Jonesy]]. The plot introduces Leon, an aspiring photographer in New York whose agent advises to [[frisk]] for the truly [[threatens]] face of the [[ville]] through sinister [[photo]]. Leon then becomes obsessed with [[pestering]] an introvert and [[strangely]] behaving butcher who always [[awaited]] the midnight train. Leon's right, as the butcher [[revolves]] out to be a [[unforgiving]] serial [[murderer]] who literally crushes his [[fatalities]] with a [[prodigious]] hammer, but the killer's motivations and [[demeanor]] suggest there's [[somethin]] far more [[major]] going on the rails at night. "Midnight Meat Train" takes place in naturally [[ominous]] [[places]] like [[metro]] stations at [[nighttime]] and [[zoo]] abattoirs, plus the [[filmmaking]] also benefices of good acting performances and a truckload of downright [[disconcerting]] [[visuals]] (like [[carcasses]] on [[carnes]] [[fishhooks]] and train [[railcar]] [[stained]] in blood), but director Ryûhei Kitamura ("[[Vs]]", "Godzilla [[Lastly]] [[War]]") doesn't take full advantage of it all. The ending leaves a whole lot questions unanswered and, even if Clive Barker meant to have like this, I still think we deserved a slightly more clarifying finale. "Midnight Meat Train" is a somewhat intriguing and definitely haunting film, but not without defaults. It's not intended for easily offended viewers, but maybe people looking for plot coherence and clarity should leave it alone as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE TO READ MY [[ENTIRE]] [[REVIEW]]. I AM NOT KNOCKING THE [[FILM]] ITSELF - [[ONLY]] THE DVD VERSIONS [[CURRENTLY]] [[AVAILABLE]].

***

I really [[wanted]] to give this film [[even]] two stars. I mean how [[could]] it [[possibly]] rank a mere 1 out of 10!?!

Here's how: An epic film adaptation of Tolstoy's novel "War and [[Peace]]" with historically accurate battle scenes, courtesy of the Red Army, and an extremely faithful, scene-for-scene adaptation of the novel [[would]] be difficult but worth [[sitting]] through for seven hours - if that's what you were seeing.

The trouble is you can't see that film - anywhere as far as I know.

I am attempting to watch the RusCiCo DVD version - widely considered the best version available since it's letter boxed and [[restores]] the scenes that were cut from other DVD releases.

But, it is one of the worst film prints I've ever seen transfered to DVD. The picture is muddy and inconsistent, often strobing. It's almost tolerable if you crank your brightness, color and picture levels up to maximum.... but the problem doesn't end there.

The sound is also way [[inconsistent]], blaringly loud in parts, virtually [[inaudible]] in others.

And as for languages, it's a [[HUGE]] [[problem]] for [[English]] speakers - the dubbed option has some good [[actors]], and some really [[terrible]] ones whose performance [[grates]], and parts of the film just aren't dubbed at all, [[slipping]] back into Russian and [[even]] French randomly.

The subtitled [[option]] isn't [[much]] better. The subtitles don't appear below the [[image]], but right over it - obscuring some of the beauty (or what's [[left]] of it) in the [[scenery]]. [[Furthermore]], the subtitles are [[often]] a poor [[translation]] (a [[shame]] [[given]] that the [[script]] [[took]] pains to hew so close to Tolstoy's actual [[words]]), and the [[subtitles]] too seem to just [[drop]] out in parts.

[[So]], [[even]] if you max out the color, brightness and picture [[settings]], and [[turn]] the volume way up, and choose subtitled *and* English dubbed, you're still going to get a film that's annoying to watch and [[listen]] to.

Can it's content overcome that? It might have been able to, but at seven hours - who can stand it for that long?

Maybe someday, someone will come along and restore this - and maybe then I will see a masterpiece - but for now, I just can't give more than one star to something I've only been able to stand watching about the first 12% of. PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE TO READ MY [[EVERY]] [[SCRUTINIZE]]. I AM NOT KNOCKING THE [[FILMMAKING]] ITSELF - [[JEN]] THE DVD VERSIONS [[NOW]] [[APPROACHABLE]].

***

I really [[wished]] to give this film [[yet]] two stars. I mean how [[wo]] it [[maybe]] rank a mere 1 out of 10!?!

Here's how: An epic film adaptation of Tolstoy's novel "War and [[Peaceable]]" with historically accurate battle scenes, courtesy of the Red Army, and an extremely faithful, scene-for-scene adaptation of the novel [[could]] be difficult but worth [[seated]] through for seven hours - if that's what you were seeing.

The trouble is you can't see that film - anywhere as far as I know.

I am attempting to watch the RusCiCo DVD version - widely considered the best version available since it's letter boxed and [[regains]] the scenes that were cut from other DVD releases.

But, it is one of the worst film prints I've ever seen transfered to DVD. The picture is muddy and inconsistent, often strobing. It's almost tolerable if you crank your brightness, color and picture levels up to maximum.... but the problem doesn't end there.

The sound is also way [[incongruous]], blaringly loud in parts, virtually [[impenetrable]] in others.

And as for languages, it's a [[PRODIGIOUS]] [[difficulty]] for [[Francais]] speakers - the dubbed option has some good [[players]], and some really [[shocking]] ones whose performance [[grids]], and parts of the film just aren't dubbed at all, [[infiltrating]] back into Russian and [[yet]] French randomly.

The subtitled [[alternating]] isn't [[very]] better. The subtitles don't appear below the [[picture]], but right over it - obscuring some of the beauty (or what's [[gauche]] of it) in the [[landscapes]]. [[Besides]], the subtitles are [[typically]] a poor [[translations]] (a [[pity]] [[gave]] that the [[screenplay]] [[picked]] pains to hew so close to Tolstoy's actual [[expression]]), and the [[caption]] too seem to just [[fallen]] out in parts.

[[Thus]], [[yet]] if you max out the color, brightness and picture [[configure]], and [[converting]] the volume way up, and choose subtitled *and* English dubbed, you're still going to get a film that's annoying to watch and [[hear]] to.

Can it's content overcome that? It might have been able to, but at seven hours - who can stand it for that long?

Maybe someday, someone will come along and restore this - and maybe then I will see a masterpiece - but for now, I just can't give more than one star to something I've only been able to stand watching about the first 12% of. --------------------------------------------- Result 3384 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] PUT THE CAMERA [[ON]] ME is a deceptively cute [[film]]. It is actually a [[complex]] glimpse at the psychology of children and [[offers]] interesting [[insights]] into the development of adults and an [[artist]]. On the surface this is a [[nostalgic]] look at some [[home]] [[movies]] made in the 80's by a [[group]] of [[upper]] [[class]] [[neighborhood]] [[kids]]. One of the film's directors, Darren Stein, had access to a video [[camera]] and [[quickly]] took over as the artistic [[leader]] for all of the [[movies]]. Sure, these are just some cute [[kids]] having fun. But, this is also much more. This is a [[look]] into some [[moments]] in [[time]] as children [[grapple]] with a number of confusing [[issues]] that all of us [[face]] in life --- fear, sexual [[awakening]], unrequited love, loneliness and just [[trying]] to [[make]] sense of the [[adult]] [[world]] which [[seems]] to [[explode]] all [[around]] us. As we get older we [[tend]] to [[forget]] how overwhlelming the [[realities]] of [[life]] were when we were little.

What makes this [[film]] all the more [[valid]] is to watch a young Darren Stein turn into a [[little]] [[general]] of a filmmaker. It is [[clear]] that Darren is [[running]] this [[show]] and these [[little]] [[movies]] are his [[vision]] but they are all [[informed]] by his [[friends]], their [[problems]], the interpersonal [[dynamics]] and the [[general]] [[confusion]] [[regarding]] the horrors of adult life. A [[lot]] of [[children]] [[make]] [[home]] [[movies]], but I've never [[heard]] of or seen [[children]] [[create]] "[[little]]" [[movies]] about the holocaust, homosexuality, nuclear [[war]] and the [[inability]] to fit in and [[make]] friends. These [[kids]] are [[confronting]] and [[dealing]] with some heavy stuff!

The power of this [[film]] is the [[way]] Stein and Shell [[pull]] [[various]] scenes [[together]] so [[tightly]] with running interviews with the [[kids]] --- all now adults and all [[still]] friends. This [[adds]] a [[new]] angle to the film. [[How]] [[many]] of us have stayed in touch with our [[childhood]] friends? These [[guys]] have. And, [[many]] of the [[issues]] with which they were [[dealing]] are [[still]] [[running]] between them two decades [[later]].

Among the [[conflicts]] -- a confession of a crush [[reveals]] a heart [[still]] [[broken]], a very [[normal]] [[childhood]] sexual experience continues to be a "[[sticky]]" subject between two of the men, some ongoing resentments over the dynamics of [[relationships]] and there is [[still]] a [[member]] of this team who [[remains]] very much in [[charge]] and in [[center]] stage! Which makes [[perfect]] sense as one watches these [[home]] [[movies]] progress over the course of a couple of years. Darren Stein is a director. No doubt about it.

Stein and Shell take turns chatting with each other from time to time and one can't help but imagine the awkwardness of allowing us to peek into the young lives of these people. This is particularly true for Stein who has gone on to a great deal of success in the entertainment industry as a film producer, writer and director. From the first moment of PUT THE CAMERA ON ME we can see the emergence of a [[gay]] little boy trying to figure it all out. We also see sides of the artistic mind and personality that are not always "nice" or "caring" --- and, this is a bold move for any artist to share with an audience.

There are so many revealing moments, but the most disturbing and complex [[moments]] involve a movie in which we see a Jewish concentration camp victim being tortured and killed by a Nazi. We discover thru interviews and narration that the Nazi is played by a Jewish child and the part of the victim is played by a gentile child. It is a painfully disturbing moment that glimpses into the darker side of fear and the way children work thru the horrors of the adult world that are beyond adult understanding much less that of a child.

This is much more than some home movies. This documentary captures the pain, beauty, joy and sadness of growing up. Powerful stuff --- and well worth seeing!

: PUT THE CAMERA [[REGARDING]] ME is a deceptively cute [[movie]]. It is actually a [[sophisticated]] glimpse at the psychology of children and [[offered]] interesting [[ideas]] into the development of adults and an [[painters]]. On the surface this is a [[homesick]] look at some [[house]] [[kino]] made in the 80's by a [[panel]] of [[higher]] [[categories]] [[vicinity]] [[youths]]. One of the film's directors, Darren Stein, had access to a video [[cameras]] and [[urgently]] took over as the artistic [[head]] for all of the [[film]]. Sure, these are just some cute [[child]] having fun. But, this is also much more. This is a [[peek]] into some [[times]] in [[period]] as children [[contend]] with a number of confusing [[subjects]] that all of us [[confront]] in life --- fear, sexual [[woken]], unrequited love, loneliness and just [[tempting]] to [[deliver]] sense of the [[adults]] [[worldwide]] which [[appears]] to [[blasting]] all [[about]] us. As we get older we [[tending]] to [[overlook]] how overwhlelming the [[factual]] of [[living]] were when we were little.

What makes this [[movie]] all the more [[legitimate]] is to watch a young Darren Stein turn into a [[petite]] [[overall]] of a filmmaker. It is [[definite]] that Darren is [[executing]] this [[shows]] and these [[petit]] [[cinematic]] are his [[insight]] but they are all [[notified]] by his [[mates]], their [[problem]], the interpersonal [[vibrant]] and the [[overall]] [[mess]] [[relating]] the horrors of adult life. A [[batch]] of [[kid]] [[deliver]] [[homes]] [[cinematic]], but I've never [[audition]] of or seen [[kids]] [[creating]] "[[petite]]" [[theater]] about the holocaust, homosexuality, nuclear [[wars]] and the [[weakness]] to fit in and [[deliver]] friends. These [[children]] are [[facing]] and [[treating]] with some heavy stuff!

The power of this [[kino]] is the [[route]] Stein and Shell [[pulled]] [[several]] scenes [[jointly]] so [[strictly]] with running interviews with the [[child]] --- all now adults and all [[again]] friends. This [[adding]] a [[novel]] angle to the film. [[Mode]] [[several]] of us have stayed in touch with our [[children]] friends? These [[fellas]] have. And, [[several]] of the [[problem]] with which they were [[addressing]] are [[again]] [[implementing]] between them two decades [[then]].

Among the [[dispute]] -- a confession of a crush [[discloses]] a heart [[however]] [[raped]], a very [[ordinary]] [[children]] sexual experience continues to be a "[[slimy]]" subject between two of the men, some ongoing resentments over the dynamics of [[relations]] and there is [[however]] a [[members]] of this team who [[leftovers]] very much in [[fees]] and in [[centre]] stage! Which makes [[irreproachable]] sense as one watches these [[homes]] [[cinematographic]] progress over the course of a couple of years. Darren Stein is a director. No doubt about it.

Stein and Shell take turns chatting with each other from time to time and one can't help but imagine the awkwardness of allowing us to peek into the young lives of these people. This is particularly true for Stein who has gone on to a great deal of success in the entertainment industry as a film producer, writer and director. From the first moment of PUT THE CAMERA ON ME we can see the emergence of a [[gays]] little boy trying to figure it all out. We also see sides of the artistic mind and personality that are not always "nice" or "caring" --- and, this is a bold move for any artist to share with an audience.

There are so many revealing moments, but the most disturbing and complex [[times]] involve a movie in which we see a Jewish concentration camp victim being tortured and killed by a Nazi. We discover thru interviews and narration that the Nazi is played by a Jewish child and the part of the victim is played by a gentile child. It is a painfully disturbing moment that glimpses into the darker side of fear and the way children work thru the horrors of the adult world that are beyond adult understanding much less that of a child.

This is much more than some home movies. This documentary captures the pain, beauty, joy and sadness of growing up. Powerful stuff --- and well worth seeing!

: --------------------------------------------- Result 3385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I'll tell you a [[tale]] of the [[summer]] of 1994. A [[friend]] and I attended a Canada Day concert in Barrie, and it was a who's who of the [[top]] Canadian bands of the age. We [[got]] there about 4am, [[waited]] in line most of the morning, and when the [[doors]] [[opened]] at 9am, we were [[among]] the [[first]] inside the [[gates]]. We then [[waited]] and [[waited]] in the hot sun, slowly broiling but we didn't [[care]], because the headliners were [[among]] our [[favourites]]. [[At]] one point, [[early]] in the afternoon, I sat down and dozed off with my back to the [[barrier]]. I was awakened to my shock and dismay by a shrieking [[girl]] wearing a Rheostatics t-shirt. This is the [[reason]] I have [[hated]] the Rheostatics to this day. There's [[nothing]] [[reasonable]], nor taste-determined, nor really anything except their fandom. [[Snotty]] of me, isn't it? [[So]], I, in my [[hatred]] of the band, have [[denied]] myself the [[delight]] that is Whale [[Music]].

Desmond [[Howl]] had it all. It's hard to [[say]] what he's lost, since he lives in a [[fantastic]] [[mansion]] wedged between the ocean and the mountains (the BC [[region]] where the [[movie]] was [[shot]] is breathtaking). The [[life]] most of us dream of is [[dismantled]] by [[dreams]], [[phantoms]], and his own [[past]], until the day a teenaged criminal [[breaks]] in...and, trite as it [[sounds]], [[breaks]] him out.

Canadian [[cinema]] [[suffers]] from [[several]] [[problems]]. Generally, a [[lack]] of [[money]], as well as an insufferable [[lack]] of [[asking]] for [[help]] (as if somehow the feature would [[cease]] to be Canadian) [[leads]] to [[lower]] production [[values]] than American or [[British]] [[films]], and most people don't like to watch [[anything]] that [[sounds]] or looks [[like]], well, not [[like]] an American [[film]]. [[Next]], [[Canadian]] screenwriters [[often]] [[seem]] so [[caught]] up in being weird that they lose [[sight]] of how to tell a [[good]] [[story]], and [[tell]] it well. Third, they [[seem]] to [[think]] that [[gratuitous]] nudity (often full-frontal) makes something artistic. I'm sure [[anyone]] who [[watches]] enough Canadian movies, especially late at night on the CBC, knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's [[almost]] like a "don't do this" handbook exists out there [[somewhere]] and Canadian film-makers [[threw]] it out a [[long]] time ago.

In the 90s and 00s, however, some films (such as Bruce McDonald's work and the brilliant C.R.A.Z.Y.) have [[broken]] this [[mold]], and managed to maintain what makes them Canadian, while holding onto watchable production values and great stories. Whale Music is such a film, on the surface. Deeper than just its Canadian-isms, it's a deeply moving story of a man who's lost his grip, through grief and excess, who is redeemed by music then by love. And that redeems even the Rheostatics. :) I'll tell you a [[history]] of the [[xia]] of 1994. A [[boyfriend]] and I attended a Canada Day concert in Barrie, and it was a who's who of the [[topped]] Canadian bands of the age. We [[did]] there about 4am, [[hoped]] in line most of the morning, and when the [[portals]] [[opening]] at 9am, we were [[between]] the [[frst]] inside the [[portals]]. We then [[anticipated]] and [[anticipated]] in the hot sun, slowly broiling but we didn't [[healthcare]], because the headliners were [[in]] our [[favorite]]. [[In]] one point, [[quickly]] in the afternoon, I sat down and dozed off with my back to the [[obstacle]]. I was awakened to my shock and dismay by a shrieking [[chick]] wearing a Rheostatics t-shirt. This is the [[raison]] I have [[hate]] the Rheostatics to this day. There's [[none]] [[rational]], nor taste-determined, nor really anything except their fandom. [[Impudent]] of me, isn't it? [[Accordingly]], I, in my [[loathe]] of the band, have [[rejected]] myself the [[joy]] that is Whale [[Musical]].

Desmond [[Howling]] had it all. It's hard to [[told]] what he's lost, since he lives in a [[noteworthy]] [[manor]] wedged between the ocean and the mountains (the BC [[zones]] where the [[cinematic]] was [[filmed]] is breathtaking). The [[lifetime]] most of us dream of is [[scrapped]] by [[dream]], [[ghostbusters]], and his own [[preceding]], until the day a teenaged criminal [[break]] in...and, trite as it [[noises]], [[interruption]] him out.

Canadian [[movie]] [[undergoes]] from [[multiple]] [[difficulty]]. Generally, a [[failure]] of [[cash]], as well as an insufferable [[failure]] of [[wondering]] for [[helps]] (as if somehow the feature would [[halted]] to be Canadian) [[leeds]] to [[weakest]] production [[value]] than American or [[Uk]] [[kino]], and most people don't like to watch [[nothing]] that [[noises]] or looks [[fond]], well, not [[iike]] an American [[movie]]. [[Imminent]], [[Canadians]] screenwriters [[typically]] [[appears]] so [[apprehended]] up in being weird that they lose [[eyesight]] of how to tell a [[buena]] [[history]], and [[telling]] it well. Third, they [[appears]] to [[believing]] that [[unwarranted]] nudity (often full-frontal) makes something artistic. I'm sure [[whoever]] who [[clocks]] enough Canadian movies, especially late at night on the CBC, knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's [[practically]] like a "don't do this" handbook exists out there [[nowhere]] and Canadian film-makers [[chucked]] it out a [[lengthy]] time ago.

In the 90s and 00s, however, some films (such as Bruce McDonald's work and the brilliant C.R.A.Z.Y.) have [[broke]] this [[fungus]], and managed to maintain what makes them Canadian, while holding onto watchable production values and great stories. Whale Music is such a film, on the surface. Deeper than just its Canadian-isms, it's a deeply moving story of a man who's lost his grip, through grief and excess, who is redeemed by music then by love. And that redeems even the Rheostatics. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive [[trying]] to [[figure]] out how they're [[connected]].

The setting and the [[premise]] were [[obviously]] [[influenced]] by the first (and [[best]]) [[Saw]] [[movie]] & although there wasn't much action the [[story]] moved at a relatively good pace.

There was [[comedy]] relief [[ion]] the form of the two bickering '[[Alpha]] males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to [[see]] Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting [[yet]].

A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.

2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.

3. The ending..... what sort of [[movie]] just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no [[resolution]], no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just [[ends]].

And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end! I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive [[seeking]] to [[silhouette]] out how they're [[tied]].

The setting and the [[assumption]] were [[unmistakably]] [[affected]] by the first (and [[bestest]]) [[Noticed]] [[cinematography]] & although there wasn't much action the [[saga]] moved at a relatively good pace.

There was [[humor]] relief [[ions]] the form of the two bickering '[[Alfa]] males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to [[consults]] Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting [[still]].

A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.

2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.

3. The ending..... what sort of [[cinematography]] just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no [[solve]], no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just [[culminates]].

And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end! --------------------------------------------- Result 3387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] when i was much [[younger]] and i [[thought]] it was funny. I [[saw]] it again last week, and you can [[guess]] the [[result]]. Some [[funny]] parts in it, very few and too [[long]]. The beginning is the only [[thing]] that is [[funny]] if you [[ask]] me.

If you [[want]] a [[total]] b-movie this is a [[good]] pick, but don't [[expect]] too much from [[aliens]] dwarf size I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] when i was much [[youngest]] and i [[think]] it was funny. I [[sawthe]] it again last week, and you can [[presume]] the [[findings]]. Some [[hilarious]] parts in it, very few and too [[longer]]. The beginning is the only [[stuff]] that is [[hilarious]] if you [[enquired]] me.

If you [[wanting]] a [[utter]] b-movie this is a [[buena]] pick, but don't [[expecting]] too much from [[strangers]] dwarf size --------------------------------------------- Result 3388 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very unusual film in that the star with the top billing doesn't appear literally until half way in. Nevertheless I was engaged by the hook of the Phantom Lady. Curtis, though competent as the falsely accused Scott Henderson, looks a little tough to be be sympathetic towards (perhaps he should have shaved his moustache) and his behavior when he first comes home should have convinced the cops at least to some degree of his innocence. While another commentator had a problem with Franchot Tone as Jack Marlowe I found his portrayal of the character to be impressively complex. He is no stock villain. Superb character actor Elisha Cook Jr. is again in top form as the 'little man with big ambitions.' His drumming in the musical numbers added a welcome touch of eroticism. This movie however is carried by the very capable and comely Ella Raines as the devoted would be lover of Henderson, Carol Richmond. She definitely has talent and her screen presence is in the tradition of Lauren Bacall. This is the first of her work I have seen and I am definitely inclined to see her other roles. The rest of the supporting cast is also more than competent. All in all a very satisfying film noir mystery which when viewed today fully conveys the dark and complex urban world it is intended to. Recommended, 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It was once [[suggested]] by [[Pauline]] Kael, never a fan, that Cassavetes [[thought]] not like a director, but like an actor. What Kael meant was his [[supposed]] [[lack]] of sophistication as a filmmaker; to take that comparison further, to me, it never [[feels]] like Cassavetes is directing himself in a film, it [[feels]] like Cassavetes implanting himself inside his own creation, like Orson Welles. Cassavetes is just as much of a genius as [[Welles]], but far more important as a [[true]] [[artist]] (as opposed to a technician or rhetorician). This is like a [[cross]] between Italian passion (though Cassavetes was actually Greek) and Scandinavian introversion. Never before have inner demons been so exposed physically.

It's about the [[mystery]] of becoming, performing, and acting. Like a haunted Skip James record, it's [[got]] the echoes of ghosts all [[around]]. Rowlands' breakdowns, which are stupefying and almost operatic, [[surprising]] coming from Cassavetes, are accompanied by a jumpy, unsettling piano. Who is this dead girl? The metaphysical possibilities are endless, and it's amazing to find this kind of [[thing]] in a Cassavetes film, just the overt display of intelligence (there is also a brief bit of voice-over at the beginning). But then, he always was intelligent, he just never flapped it around for easy praise. This is not "Adaptation"; here, the blending of reality and fiction and drama is not to show cleverness but to show the inner turmoil and confusion it creates.

There's so much going on. The pure, joyous love when Rowlands greets her doorman; the horror when she beats herself up... The scene where the girl talks about how she devoted her life to art and to music is one of the most [[effective]] [[demonstrations]] of understanding what it means to be a fan of someone. You can see some roots of this in "A Star Is Born," and Almodovar borrowed from it for "All About My Mother." I think the ending is a little bit of a disappointment because of the laughing fits, but the preparation leading up to it is [[almost]] sickening. (You can shoot me, but I think the alcoholism, despite its urgency in many of the scenes, is a relatively small point about the film.)

It's a living, breathing thing, and it feels like a process: it could go any direction at any time. Like "Taste of Cherry," we are reminded that "you must never forget this is only a play." Yet it is dangerous: when Rowlands says that line, is it great drama? How will the audience take it? Is she being reflexive or does she just not care? Her (character's) breakdowns are incorporated into the performances, and ultimately the film, in such a way that it's like witnessing a female James Dean. 10/10 It was once [[recommended]] by [[Paulina]] Kael, never a fan, that Cassavetes [[figured]] not like a director, but like an actor. What Kael meant was his [[alleged]] [[deficit]] of sophistication as a filmmaker; to take that comparison further, to me, it never [[believes]] like Cassavetes is directing himself in a film, it [[thinks]] like Cassavetes implanting himself inside his own creation, like Orson Welles. Cassavetes is just as much of a genius as [[Orson]], but far more important as a [[authentic]] [[painters]] (as opposed to a technician or rhetorician). This is like a [[rist]] between Italian passion (though Cassavetes was actually Greek) and Scandinavian introversion. Never before have inner demons been so exposed physically.

It's about the [[conundrum]] of becoming, performing, and acting. Like a haunted Skip James record, it's [[did]] the echoes of ghosts all [[throughout]]. Rowlands' breakdowns, which are stupefying and almost operatic, [[unbelievable]] coming from Cassavetes, are accompanied by a jumpy, unsettling piano. Who is this dead girl? The metaphysical possibilities are endless, and it's amazing to find this kind of [[stuff]] in a Cassavetes film, just the overt display of intelligence (there is also a brief bit of voice-over at the beginning). But then, he always was intelligent, he just never flapped it around for easy praise. This is not "Adaptation"; here, the blending of reality and fiction and drama is not to show cleverness but to show the inner turmoil and confusion it creates.

There's so much going on. The pure, joyous love when Rowlands greets her doorman; the horror when she beats herself up... The scene where the girl talks about how she devoted her life to art and to music is one of the most [[effectively]] [[protest]] of understanding what it means to be a fan of someone. You can see some roots of this in "A Star Is Born," and Almodovar borrowed from it for "All About My Mother." I think the ending is a little bit of a disappointment because of the laughing fits, but the preparation leading up to it is [[approximately]] sickening. (You can shoot me, but I think the alcoholism, despite its urgency in many of the scenes, is a relatively small point about the film.)

It's a living, breathing thing, and it feels like a process: it could go any direction at any time. Like "Taste of Cherry," we are reminded that "you must never forget this is only a play." Yet it is dangerous: when Rowlands says that line, is it great drama? How will the audience take it? Is she being reflexive or does she just not care? Her (character's) breakdowns are incorporated into the performances, and ultimately the film, in such a way that it's like witnessing a female James Dean. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3390 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A wonder. One of the best musicals ever. The three Busby Berkely numbers that end the movie are spectacular, but what makes this film so wonderful is the incredible non-stop patter and the natural acting of Cagney and Blondell. (Keeler is also lovely, even though she may not have been a great actress). There's a freshness in the movie that you don't see in flicks today, much less in the usually stilted 30s films, even though the plot, involving the setting up of movies prologues, is quite dated. --------------------------------------------- Result 3391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although the director tried(the filming was made in Tynisia and Morocco),this attempt to transport the New Testament in the screen failed.The script has serious inaccuracies and fantasies,while the duration is very long.But the most tragic is the protagonist Chris Sarandon,who doesn't seem to understand the demands of his role. --------------------------------------------- Result 3392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] I just read the plot [[summary]] and it is the worst one I have ever read. It does not do justice to this [[incredible]] movie. For an example of a good summary, read the listing at "Turner Classic Movies". [[Anyway]], this was one of my favorite movies as a young child. My sister and I couldn't wait until every April when we could see it on T.V. It is one of the best horse movies of it's time. It is one of those great classics that the whole family can watch. The romance is clean and endearing. The story line is interesting and the songs are great. They don't make movies like this anymore. Good acting and not over the top. Pat Boone and Shirley Jones are at their best, along with many other great character actors. I just read the plot [[synthesizing]] and it is the worst one I have ever read. It does not do justice to this [[unthinkable]] movie. For an example of a good summary, read the listing at "Turner Classic Movies". [[Anyhoo]], this was one of my favorite movies as a young child. My sister and I couldn't wait until every April when we could see it on T.V. It is one of the best horse movies of it's time. It is one of those great classics that the whole family can watch. The romance is clean and endearing. The story line is interesting and the songs are great. They don't make movies like this anymore. Good acting and not over the top. Pat Boone and Shirley Jones are at their best, along with many other great character actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 3393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Pet]] Semetary (1989) 9/10 The Creed [[family]] have just [[moved]] into the small town of Ludlow. The family [[consists]] of a [[father]], Louis, a [[mother]], Rachel, a brother Gage, and a daughter, Ellen. They are greeted with [[kindness]] by Jud Crandall. Jud is 89, and [[could]] [[basically]] tell you about the [[entire]] [[history]] of Ludlow.

Behind the Creed's new [[house]], there is a path leading to a pet [[cemetery]] (spelled pet sematary). When Ellen wants to go up to [[see]] it, Jud [[willfully]] takes the [[family]] on a [[trip]]. That is the start of [[hell]] for the Creed family.

When Rachel and the [[kids]] are [[gone]], Ellen's cat [[Church]] [[dies]]. Jud feels that [[Ellen]] isn't ready for the [[death]] of her cat, so he [[suggests]] [[Louis]] follow him further up the [[path]], past the pet [[cemetery]].

Jud [[tells]] Louis of this burial [[ground]], once [[used]] by Micmac [[Indians]]. [[Louis]] [[buries]] [[Church]], without Jud's [[help]]. A [[couple]] of days [[later]], [[Church]] [[returns]], alive, but from hell.

This [[movie]] was one of two horror [[movies]] that [[could]] [[actually]] [[scare]] me, aside from "The Exorcist." The [[greatest]] performance would ever be Zelda, Rachel's [[sister]] with [[spinal]] meningitis, or [[Victor]] Pascow, a ghost who [[tries]] to help the [[Creeds]] from making the mistake of [[bringing]] back [[things]] from the dead.

The music in this [[movie]] plays an [[extravagant]] [[part]]. It is at the same time sad and [[mysterious]]. It goes along with the [[movie]] [[wonderfully]].

9/10 [[Fart]] Semetary (1989) 9/10 The Creed [[families]] have just [[relocated]] into the small town of Ludlow. The family [[comprises]] of a [[fathers]], Louis, a [[mummy]], Rachel, a brother Gage, and a daughter, Ellen. They are greeted with [[generosity]] by Jud Crandall. Jud is 89, and [[wo]] [[primarily]] tell you about the [[overall]] [[historian]] of Ludlow.

Behind the Creed's new [[dwellings]], there is a path leading to a pet [[graveyard]] (spelled pet sematary). When Ellen wants to go up to [[behold]] it, Jud [[wantonly]] takes the [[families]] on a [[tours]]. That is the start of [[dammit]] for the Creed family.

When Rachel and the [[youths]] are [[missing]], Ellen's cat [[Churches]] [[died]]. Jud feels that [[Eileen]] isn't ready for the [[killings]] of her cat, so he [[proposed]] [[Luis]] follow him further up the [[road]], past the pet [[burials]].

Jud [[told]] Louis of this burial [[terrestrial]], once [[employs]] by Micmac [[Indian]]. [[Lewis]] [[bury]] [[Ecclesiastical]], without Jud's [[support]]. A [[coupling]] of days [[subsequently]], [[Churches]] [[return]], alive, but from hell.

This [[cinematic]] was one of two horror [[cinematography]] that [[wo]] [[indeed]] [[terrified]] me, aside from "The Exorcist." The [[strongest]] performance would ever be Zelda, Rachel's [[sisters]] with [[vertebrae]] meningitis, or [[Vittorio]] Pascow, a ghost who [[endeavour]] to help the [[Cults]] from making the mistake of [[bring]] back [[aspects]] from the dead.

The music in this [[film]] plays an [[excessive]] [[parties]]. It is at the same time sad and [[opaque]]. It goes along with the [[kino]] [[amazingly]].

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I was at first disgusted with director Sun-Woo [[Jang]] because I had felt that he cheated me. Jang had the potential to create a [[strong]], deeply emotional film about sex and its effects on people, but instead chose to focus his strength on the pornography element more than the actual human element. I couldn't see the [[characters]] at first and his [[sloppy]] introduction which blended both realism and cinema together was amateurish at [[best]] … yet this [[film]] remained in my mind for days after I viewed it. What stayed with me wasn't the story, it wasn't the characters, nor was it the apparent pornographic nature of the film, but the transition that Jang demonstrated between Y and J. If you watch this film carefully, you will see that both begin in an exploration phase of their relationship, eager to jump into the unknown, but not quite certain the next step. As they continue to meet, exploring new avenues of pleasure, they continually jump between the aggressor and the aggressed. Jang initially explores the idea that J is the one that in control of the situation, then hauntingly, the reversal happens when J becomes obsessed with Y. It is a very small change, and due to the graphic content of this film, it can easily be missed, but it is there. It becomes [[apparently]] clear near the end when J cannot live with Y, as their meetings become less frequent, and J attempts to become a part of normal society. This was a huge and very exciting element to this film to see right before your eyes, but [[alas]], it was the only [[element]] of this film worth viewing.

I will [[ignore]] those that speak of this [[film]] as [[nothing]] more than pornographic, because there are human [[elements]] at the core of this film, as underdeveloped as they are, they are there. It is a film about a facet of our lives that is very rarely explored in [[cinema]] or talked about in the papers. What [[happens]] behind closed doors is never known … or so we should believe. While the act itself does becomes [[repetitive]] after a bit, director [[Jang]] [[tries]] to [[change]] it up a bit with some [[constantly]] [[changing]] scenery. Our [[characters]] are [[continually]] moving from hotel room to hotel room to best quench their thirst for each other's flesh. This is fun at first, but again, Jang's repetitive streak seems to make it feel boring than exciting. This [[leads]] me to the biggest [[issue]] that I had with this [[film]]. Jang had a great story with Gojitmal, but where he failed (outside of the obvious choice to focus directly on the pornographic side) was that he took scenes, repeated them time and again, without changing in front of us to allow us to get to know the characters. Where was Jang going with this movie? Did he want the sex to tell the stories, or did he believe the characters would? He failed in this sense because by the end of the film we know so little about Y and J that we could care less how they resolve themselves. The ending seems almost random at best as Jang attempts to create a final resolution for our two, absolute unknowns, of this film. I have to give Jang some credit for trying, but not much. He attempted to create some sub-stories that would create the personal element that we were lacking, but they just couldn't congeal well together. Y's brother and J's wife were those plot points, but again, due to him focusing so strongly on the sexual element, these stronger sub-stories became un-rememberable and down-right dull. Maybe it was just how I viewed this film, but outside of the sexual scenes, nothing else worked together. We knew nothing about J and Y and that is why Gojitmal failed.

Finally, I would like to say that this film could have benefited from having a strong score or a daftly remote music genre element to it to bring us, the viewers, closer to the emotions being felt by J and Y. From what I can remember, and I am trying to push this film far from my mind, I don't remember any musical undertones. Gojitmal may have been a stronger film if Jang either stylized it with music or done something to allude towards our character's beings. While I understand that he wanted the sex to speak for itself, there was just a technical element missing from this film that may have quenched a stronger desire for more. Technically, this was a poor film. Obviously an independent film in nature, it felt more like director Jang was trying to make symbolic references out of nothing instead of your typical independent of this nature. I didn't see as much of a social message or human element like mentioned above, I just felt like he threw this film together over the course of two weeks and understood that the sex would sell it enough. This was no Larry Clark production; this was sub-par and definitely needed some further technical clicks to develop it stronger than the final release!

Overall, I think I could have liked this film and there were smaller elements that I did enjoy, but I felt this film was rushed, repetitive, and played too much towards the taboos instead of breaking them. The obvious pitfalls of this film can be seen by the last scene of this film when we are privy to how the title of this film was conceived. Our characters were uneventful, our story was underdeveloped, and we could have used something memorable to make what was happening between Y and J into something more symbolic than sex. To me, Jang was trying too much to capture art house meets pornographic … and it failed miserably. This was not a film worth the time and effort that it took to make.

Grade: ** out of ***** I was at first disgusted with director Sun-Woo [[Cheung]] because I had felt that he cheated me. Jang had the potential to create a [[vigorous]], deeply emotional film about sex and its effects on people, but instead chose to focus his strength on the pornography element more than the actual human element. I couldn't see the [[personage]] at first and his [[neglectful]] introduction which blended both realism and cinema together was amateurish at [[nicest]] … yet this [[cinematographic]] remained in my mind for days after I viewed it. What stayed with me wasn't the story, it wasn't the characters, nor was it the apparent pornographic nature of the film, but the transition that Jang demonstrated between Y and J. If you watch this film carefully, you will see that both begin in an exploration phase of their relationship, eager to jump into the unknown, but not quite certain the next step. As they continue to meet, exploring new avenues of pleasure, they continually jump between the aggressor and the aggressed. Jang initially explores the idea that J is the one that in control of the situation, then hauntingly, the reversal happens when J becomes obsessed with Y. It is a very small change, and due to the graphic content of this film, it can easily be missed, but it is there. It becomes [[visibly]] clear near the end when J cannot live with Y, as their meetings become less frequent, and J attempts to become a part of normal society. This was a huge and very exciting element to this film to see right before your eyes, but [[alack]], it was the only [[facet]] of this film worth viewing.

I will [[disregard]] those that speak of this [[filmmaking]] as [[none]] more than pornographic, because there are human [[components]] at the core of this film, as underdeveloped as they are, they are there. It is a film about a facet of our lives that is very rarely explored in [[theaters]] or talked about in the papers. What [[arises]] behind closed doors is never known … or so we should believe. While the act itself does becomes [[recurring]] after a bit, director [[Cheung]] [[strives]] to [[altering]] it up a bit with some [[always]] [[change]] scenery. Our [[nature]] are [[steadily]] moving from hotel room to hotel room to best quench their thirst for each other's flesh. This is fun at first, but again, Jang's repetitive streak seems to make it feel boring than exciting. This [[leeds]] me to the biggest [[issuance]] that I had with this [[cinema]]. Jang had a great story with Gojitmal, but where he failed (outside of the obvious choice to focus directly on the pornographic side) was that he took scenes, repeated them time and again, without changing in front of us to allow us to get to know the characters. Where was Jang going with this movie? Did he want the sex to tell the stories, or did he believe the characters would? He failed in this sense because by the end of the film we know so little about Y and J that we could care less how they resolve themselves. The ending seems almost random at best as Jang attempts to create a final resolution for our two, absolute unknowns, of this film. I have to give Jang some credit for trying, but not much. He attempted to create some sub-stories that would create the personal element that we were lacking, but they just couldn't congeal well together. Y's brother and J's wife were those plot points, but again, due to him focusing so strongly on the sexual element, these stronger sub-stories became un-rememberable and down-right dull. Maybe it was just how I viewed this film, but outside of the sexual scenes, nothing else worked together. We knew nothing about J and Y and that is why Gojitmal failed.

Finally, I would like to say that this film could have benefited from having a strong score or a daftly remote music genre element to it to bring us, the viewers, closer to the emotions being felt by J and Y. From what I can remember, and I am trying to push this film far from my mind, I don't remember any musical undertones. Gojitmal may have been a stronger film if Jang either stylized it with music or done something to allude towards our character's beings. While I understand that he wanted the sex to speak for itself, there was just a technical element missing from this film that may have quenched a stronger desire for more. Technically, this was a poor film. Obviously an independent film in nature, it felt more like director Jang was trying to make symbolic references out of nothing instead of your typical independent of this nature. I didn't see as much of a social message or human element like mentioned above, I just felt like he threw this film together over the course of two weeks and understood that the sex would sell it enough. This was no Larry Clark production; this was sub-par and definitely needed some further technical clicks to develop it stronger than the final release!

Overall, I think I could have liked this film and there were smaller elements that I did enjoy, but I felt this film was rushed, repetitive, and played too much towards the taboos instead of breaking them. The obvious pitfalls of this film can be seen by the last scene of this film when we are privy to how the title of this film was conceived. Our characters were uneventful, our story was underdeveloped, and we could have used something memorable to make what was happening between Y and J into something more symbolic than sex. To me, Jang was trying too much to capture art house meets pornographic … and it failed miserably. This was not a film worth the time and effort that it took to make.

Grade: ** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] There are people [[claiming]] this is another "bad [[language]]" ultra violence [[Mexican]] movie. They are right, but more than that this film is a [[call]] to create [[awareness]] of what we have [[become]]. The [[awful]] truth hurts, or bores when you already have [[accepted]] the paradigm of [[living]] the third world as the only possible goal. One of the most [[important]] things of "Cero y van cuatro" is the open [[invitation]] to [[profound]] reflexion over our [[current]] identity. Is that what we all are? Is that all that we want to be? I am abroad and I [[realized]] how spoiled is the Mexican [[society]] when the Tlahuac [[Incident]] came to light. I [[still]] cannot [[understand]] [[viewers]] [[witnessing]] a mass broadcasted murder. I [[nearly]] puked when I [[saw]] some of the images. It was not Irak or Rwanda, just a [[tiny]] village near [[Mexico]] [[City]] when rampage was carried out with the indulgence of media and government. The [[recreation]] of a similar situation in this [[film]] shocked me [[deeply]]. The other [[stories]] were good [[portraying]] other [[situations]] of [[corruption]], dishonesty, [[betrayal]] and violence, but I [[consider]] "[[Tamales]] de Chivo" the [[best]] one.

The [[movie]] is deeper than some "cabrón" and "pendejo" [[screams]]. Those are meaningless [[compared]] with the [[actions]] of the people. With a few [[exceptions]] they are all [[perfect]] [[examples]] of human rubbish. [[Just]] like in [[real]] [[life]] [[honesty]] is becoming more the [[exception]] than the [[rule]] in our [[country]]. [[Moreover]], [[honesty]] is only rewarded miraculously. There are people [[claim]] this is another "bad [[parlance]]" ultra violence [[Wetback]] movie. They are right, but more than that this film is a [[calls]] to create [[consciousness]] of what we have [[gotten]]. The [[odious]] truth hurts, or bores when you already have [[admit]] the paradigm of [[residing]] the third world as the only possible goal. One of the most [[critical]] things of "Cero y van cuatro" is the open [[invitations]] to [[deep]] reflexion over our [[underway]] identity. Is that what we all are? Is that all that we want to be? I am abroad and I [[performed]] how spoiled is the Mexican [[societal]] when the Tlahuac [[Event]] came to light. I [[nevertheless]] cannot [[realise]] [[onlookers]] [[seeing]] a mass broadcasted murder. I [[approximately]] puked when I [[observed]] some of the images. It was not Irak or Rwanda, just a [[smallest]] village near [[Mexican]] [[Ville]] when rampage was carried out with the indulgence of media and government. The [[recreational]] of a similar situation in this [[films]] shocked me [[harshly]]. The other [[fairytales]] were good [[depicting]] other [[instances]] of [[bribery]], dishonesty, [[disloyalty]] and violence, but I [[contemplating]] "[[Enchiladas]] de Chivo" the [[nicest]] one.

The [[kino]] is deeper than some "cabrón" and "pendejo" [[howl]]. Those are meaningless [[likened]] with the [[measurements]] of the people. With a few [[exemption]] they are all [[faultless]] [[case]] of human rubbish. [[Jen]] like in [[genuine]] [[iife]] [[candour]] is becoming more the [[exemption]] than the [[regulations]] in our [[countries]]. [[Meanwhile]], [[candor]] is only rewarded miraculously. --------------------------------------------- Result 3396 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] Even 20+ years later, Ninja Mission stands out as the [[worst]] [[movie]] I ever managed to [[sit]] through. Scandanavian ninjas [[silently]] enter a scene, [[fire]] their obnoxiously noisy sub-machine [[guns]] with wild abandon, and then [[silently]] leave. Wow, how will we [[find]] those [[silent]] invisible [[assassins]]? [[Just]] follow the shell casings and [[smoke]]!Painfully [[bad]] dialog (or was it [[brilliant]] and just poorly translated?), not an Asian in sight in the [[cast]], and a whopping total of 3 Asians [[among]] the [[stunt]] crew. The plot is ridiculous, the acting pretty much non-existent - then again, ninja can't act! Save yourselves - avoid watching at all costs! Even 20+ years later, Ninja Mission stands out as the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I ever managed to [[seated]] through. Scandanavian ninjas [[quietly]] enter a scene, [[wildfire]] their obnoxiously noisy sub-machine [[muskets]] with wild abandon, and then [[quietly]] leave. Wow, how will we [[unearth]] those [[quiet]] invisible [[murderers]]? [[Only]] follow the shell casings and [[smoking]]!Painfully [[naughty]] dialog (or was it [[sumptuous]] and just poorly translated?), not an Asian in sight in the [[casting]], and a whopping total of 3 Asians [[between]] the [[understudy]] crew. The plot is ridiculous, the acting pretty much non-existent - then again, ninja can't act! Save yourselves - avoid watching at all costs! --------------------------------------------- Result 3397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Still]] [[love]] it 17 or so years after the first time I saw it, in fact I discovered that I had lost my [[copy]] of this and was very upset. [[Despite]] it's non-association with the original (which as a kid I never noticed and as an adult I don't care about), this is what cartoons *should* be like. Just [[dark]] [[enough]] to be interesting and light enough to be enjoyed by everyone. I'm more than [[glad]] that my parents [[raised]] me on this kind of thing [[rather]] than the cartoons we see today that teach our kids [[nothing]]. The music is great, and gets stuck in your head forever...I have [[downloaded]] the [[entire]] soundtrack at one point or another. [[Yet]] [[amour]] it 17 or so years after the first time I saw it, in fact I discovered that I had lost my [[copied]] of this and was very upset. [[Although]] it's non-association with the original (which as a kid I never noticed and as an adult I don't care about), this is what cartoons *should* be like. Just [[murky]] [[adequately]] to be interesting and light enough to be enjoyed by everyone. I'm more than [[grateful]] that my parents [[hiked]] me on this kind of thing [[fairly]] than the cartoons we see today that teach our kids [[anything]]. The music is great, and gets stuck in your head forever...I have [[unloaded]] the [[whole]] soundtrack at one point or another. --------------------------------------------- Result 3398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[grew]] up (b. 1965) [[watching]] and [[loving]] the Thunderbirds. All my mates at school [[watched]]. We played "Thunderbirds" before [[school]], during [[lunch]] and after school. We all wanted to be Virgil or Scott. [[No]] one wanted to be [[Alan]]. [[Counting]] down from 5 became an [[art]] [[form]]. I took my children to see the [[movie]] [[hoping]] they [[would]] [[get]] a glimpse of what I [[loved]] as a [[child]]. How [[bitterly]] disappointing. The only [[high]] point was the snappy theme tune. Not that it [[could]] compare with the original [[score]] of the Thunderbirds. [[Thankfully]] early [[Saturday]] [[mornings]] one television [[channel]] [[still]] plays reruns of the series [[Gerry]] [[Anderson]] and his [[wife]] created. Jonatha Frakes should hand in his directors [[chair]], his version was [[completely]] [[hopeless]]. A waste of [[film]]. [[Utter]] [[rubbish]]. A CGI remake may be [[acceptable]] but replacing [[marionettes]] with Homo sapiens subsp. sapiens was a [[huge]] [[error]] of [[judgment]]. I [[heighten]] up (b. 1965) [[staring]] and [[affectionate]] the Thunderbirds. All my mates at school [[seen]]. We played "Thunderbirds" before [[tuition]], during [[supper]] and after school. We all wanted to be Virgil or Scott. [[None]] one wanted to be [[Alain]]. [[Recount]] down from 5 became an [[artistry]] [[shape]]. I took my children to see the [[cinema]] [[await]] they [[ought]] [[gets]] a glimpse of what I [[adores]] as a [[kid]]. How [[severely]] disappointing. The only [[higher]] point was the snappy theme tune. Not that it [[did]] compare with the original [[notation]] of the Thunderbirds. [[Luckily]] early [[Mondays]] [[afternoons]] one television [[canal]] [[again]] plays reruns of the series [[Micheline]] [[Andersson]] and his [[femme]] created. Jonatha Frakes should hand in his directors [[wheelchair]], his version was [[absolutely]] [[desperate]]. A waste of [[cinematography]]. [[Absolute]] [[trash]]. A CGI remake may be [[allowable]] but replacing [[puppets]] with Homo sapiens subsp. sapiens was a [[prodigious]] [[mistaken]] of [[judgements]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw it yesterday in the Sao Paulo Intl Film Festival. Just before going I came here to see how it was rated, and at that time it was 7.4, a pretty nice rate...

After 15 minutes I was dying to get out (never did this), but felt embarrassed to do so as the producer of the movie was in the screening.

I did not like at all, the dialogs are shallow and lead nowhere, the characters are shallower than the dialogs, nothing lead anywhere, and the worst and worst: plenty of Siemens and Organics advertising on the movie. Despite the fact that I already paid to go to the movie and entertain myself, I still have to be bombarded by the main character chatting on the internet and Siemens mobile popping-up all the time on her lap-top; or another character having a bath or cutting her hair just to have Organics shampoo displayed enormously on the screen! All of this would be bearable if the plot, characters, romances, anything was good, but was bad, really bad! A "don't know how to do" sex-in-the-city.

Don't waste your time or money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3400 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I actually didn't enjoy this movie.

I saw it at a camp, and we didn't rave about it, we laughed at it. Sure, some parts are touching, but the acting is terrible, the effects are terrible, and the whole overall movie idea is terrible (now, I know it was based on a book which I haven't read, but I hope that the book was better than this, because frankly, I thought that this movie was very bad and boring). Like I said, I went to it with a bunch of people from a camp, and we were excited to be there, plus I got a caffeinated drink, but nonetheless, I struggled to stay awake. The only thing that kept me up (other than my fear of being embarrassed once I woke up) was the gunshots, that were quite pointless as well. I just really didn't like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Firstly, I would like to point out that people who have [[criticised]] this [[film]] have made some glaring [[errors]]. [[Anything]] that has a rating below 6/10 is clearly utter nonsense.

Creep is an absolutely fantastic [[film]] with [[amazing]] film effects. The actors are highly [[believable]], the narrative [[thought]] [[provoking]] and the horror and graphical content [[extremely]] disturbing.

There is much [[mystique]] in this [[film]]. [[Many]] [[questions]] arise as the audience are [[revealed]] to the [[strange]] and freakish creature that makes habitat in the dark rat ridden tunnels. [[How]] was 'Craig' created and what happened to him?

A [[fantastic]] film with a [[large]] chill factor. A film with so [[many]] unanswered [[questions]] and a [[film]] that needs to be [[appreciated]] along with others like 28 Days Later, The [[Bunker]], [[Dog]] Soldiers and Deathwatch.

Look forward to more of these [[fantastic]] [[films]]!! Firstly, I would like to point out that people who have [[critique]] this [[films]] have made some glaring [[error]]. [[Something]] that has a rating below 6/10 is clearly utter nonsense.

Creep is an absolutely fantastic [[movie]] with [[excellent]] film effects. The actors are highly [[credible]], the narrative [[thinks]] [[causing]] and the horror and graphical content [[terribly]] disturbing.

There is much [[mysticism]] in this [[kino]]. [[Several]] [[issues]] arise as the audience are [[proved]] to the [[bizarre]] and freakish creature that makes habitat in the dark rat ridden tunnels. [[Mode]] was 'Craig' created and what happened to him?

A [[wondrous]] film with a [[sizable]] chill factor. A film with so [[multiple]] unanswered [[issues]] and a [[cinematography]] that needs to be [[complimented]] along with others like 28 Days Later, The [[Pillbox]], [[Lapdog]] Soldiers and Deathwatch.

Look forward to more of these [[wondrous]] [[movie]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I wouldn't [[give]] this [[movie]] a rating, it's not [[worthy]]. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer [[fan]]. I [[love]] her and would watch anything she made. [[Even]] in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, [[kept]] the viewer watching...[[waiting]]...for [[something]] to happen but nothing ever did. It had some [[good]] [[story]] lines but they [[ended]] [[abruptly]] as [[soon]] as it [[started]]. Some of the other [[characters]] had potential but [[nothing]] became of it.

Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good.

I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand.

The [[worst]] thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good [[grief]].

I agree with the [[review]] that said .99 [[would]] have bought 3 cans of cat [[food]] and watching my cat eat would have been more [[exciting]]. [[Well]] said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the [[film]] because it [[sums]] it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud. I wouldn't [[confer]] this [[cinematographic]] a rating, it's not [[meritorious]]. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer [[admirer]]. I [[amore]] her and would watch anything she made. [[Yet]] in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, [[preserved]] the viewer watching...[[expects]]...for [[anything]] to happen but nothing ever did. It had some [[buena]] [[storytelling]] lines but they [[completed]] [[brutally]] as [[rapidly]] as it [[initiation]]. Some of the other [[character]] had potential but [[none]] became of it.

Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good.

I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand.

The [[meanest]] thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good [[grieving]].

I agree with the [[revisions]] that said .99 [[ought]] have bought 3 cans of cat [[eating]] and watching my cat eat would have been more [[breathtaking]]. [[Good]] said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the [[filmmaking]] because it [[amounts]] it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 3403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

"Bleak House" is hands down the finest adaptation of a Charles Dickens Novel ever put on screen. Alway one of My favorite novels,I was exteremely pleased with this Television Mini Series. The late, great Denholm Elliot was perfectly cast as the noble John Jardyce and Diana Rigg was sheer perfection as the doomed Ladty Dedlock. The film captures the essence of Dickens era and is extremely faithful to the book,oly making minor plot cuts that do not effect the story. over all a brilliant,moving and atmosphereic film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3404 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "The [[Dream]] Child" of 1989 is the fifth [[film]] in the (generally overrated) "Nightmare" series, and at the [[latest]] from this point on, the series became [[total]] [[garbage]]. The only good [[films]] in the series were Wes Craven's 1984 original, and the third [[part]], "The [[Dream]] [[Warriors]]" of 1987. The second [[part]] was disappointing and [[boring]], and it was the fourth [[part]] in which the [[formerly]] [[scary]] [[madman]] [[Freddy]] Krueger [[began]] to [[annoy]] with [[constant]] [[idiotic]] jokes. This fifth [[entry]] to the series has [[hardly]] [[anything]] to [[recommend]] except for ([[admittedly]] great) [[visuals]], and one [[creepy]] scene, a flashback sequence to how Freddy Krueger came into existence. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] [[consists]] [[mainly]] of our razor-clawed maniac-turned-jokester [[yelling]] [[stupid]] one-liners, and the old formula of a bunch of teenage [[jackasses]], who desperately try to avoid [[falling]] asleep, because [[good]] [[old]] Freddy awaits them in their dreams. Lisa Wilcox is back in the role of Alice Johnson, and a bunch of uninteresting [[crap]], such as a super-dumb 'eerie' children's [[rhyme]] is added for no other reason than to have some sort of justification for making this [[superfluous]] and boring sequel... In Short: No originality, just a decline of the old formula, and an over-load of painfully [[annoying]] jokes. My (generous) rating of 3/10 is due to the great visuals, and especially to emphasize the difference to the [[terrible]] next sequel, "Freddy's Dead", which is awful beyond belief. In case you're not a hardcore Freddy Krueger enthusiast, "The Dream Child" should be [[avoided]], and even if you are, this is more than likely to disappoint. "The [[Daydream]] Child" of 1989 is the fifth [[cinematographic]] in the (generally overrated) "Nightmare" series, and at the [[recent]] from this point on, the series became [[aggregate]] [[trash]]. The only good [[filmmaking]] in the series were Wes Craven's 1984 original, and the third [[portion]], "The [[Dreams]] [[Combatants]]" of 1987. The second [[portion]] was disappointing and [[dull]], and it was the fourth [[parties]] in which the [[previously]] [[creepy]] [[crazy]] [[Freddie]] Krueger [[initiated]] to [[bother]] with [[continuing]] [[silly]] jokes. This fifth [[entries]] to the series has [[practically]] [[nothing]] to [[recommends]] except for ([[definitely]] great) [[picture]], and one [[frightening]] scene, a flashback sequence to how Freddy Krueger came into existence. The [[resting]] of the [[filmmaking]] [[includes]] [[especially]] of our razor-clawed maniac-turned-jokester [[howling]] [[idiot]] one-liners, and the old formula of a bunch of teenage [[fools]], who desperately try to avoid [[dropping]] asleep, because [[alright]] [[former]] Freddy awaits them in their dreams. Lisa Wilcox is back in the role of Alice Johnson, and a bunch of uninteresting [[dammit]], such as a super-dumb 'eerie' children's [[rite]] is added for no other reason than to have some sort of justification for making this [[dispensable]] and boring sequel... In Short: No originality, just a decline of the old formula, and an over-load of painfully [[irritating]] jokes. My (generous) rating of 3/10 is due to the great visuals, and especially to emphasize the difference to the [[fearsome]] next sequel, "Freddy's Dead", which is awful beyond belief. In case you're not a hardcore Freddy Krueger enthusiast, "The Dream Child" should be [[stave]], and even if you are, this is more than likely to disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 3405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My college [[professor]] says that Othello may be Shakespeare's finest [[drama]]. I don't know if I agree with him [[yet]]. I bought this video version of the [[film]]. First I love Kenneth BRanagh as Iago, he was [[perfectly]] complicated and worked very well in this adaptation. [[SUrprisingly]], he didn't direct it but played a role. [[Lawrence]] Fishburne shows that American actors can play Shakespeare just as well as British actors can do. not that there was a British vs. American issue about it. [[In]] [[fact]], if we all work together then Shakespeare can reach the masses which it richly [[deserves]] to do. Apart from other Shakespeare tragedies, this is dealt with the [[issue]] of [[race]]. Something that has existed since the beginning of time. The relationship between Iago and [[Emilia]] could have been better and [[shown]] the complicatedness of their union [[together]]. While Othello loves Desdemona with all his heart, he is [[weak]] for jealousy and [[fears]] losing her to a non-Moorish man like Cassio. It's quite a [[great]] scene at the end of the film but I won't [[reveal]] the ending. IT's just worth [[watching]]. I [[think]] they [[edited]] much of the lines to 2 hours but they [[always]] [[edit]] Shakespeare. My college [[schoolteacher]] says that Othello may be Shakespeare's finest [[opera]]. I don't know if I agree with him [[even]]. I bought this video version of the [[cinema]]. First I love Kenneth BRanagh as Iago, he was [[quite]] complicated and worked very well in this adaptation. [[freakishly]], he didn't direct it but played a role. [[Laurent]] Fishburne shows that American actors can play Shakespeare just as well as British actors can do. not that there was a British vs. American issue about it. [[For]] [[facto]], if we all work together then Shakespeare can reach the masses which it richly [[merit]] to do. Apart from other Shakespeare tragedies, this is dealt with the [[issuance]] of [[races]]. Something that has existed since the beginning of time. The relationship between Iago and [[Amelia]] could have been better and [[display]] the complicatedness of their union [[jointly]]. While Othello loves Desdemona with all his heart, he is [[flimsy]] for jealousy and [[worries]] losing her to a non-Moorish man like Cassio. It's quite a [[huge]] scene at the end of the film but I won't [[divulge]] the ending. IT's just worth [[staring]]. I [[ideas]] they [[editing]] much of the lines to 2 hours but they [[unceasingly]] [[editing]] Shakespeare. --------------------------------------------- Result 3406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] This [[movie]] is one of those I [[regret]] having [[invested]] 90 minutes of my [[life]] that I'll never [[get]] back in. The premise is [[really]] interesting - [[essentially]] it's a zombie flick from the [[perspective]] of the undead (let's not split [[hairs]] as to whether they're [[actually]] [[dead]] or not}. Unfortunately, they fail to deliver a compelling story within this framework. The [[nearly]] unbearable monotony of the lives of the central [[characters]] [[may]] add to the realism of the [[film]], but it sucks all the [[entertainment]] value right out of it. If they had put a [[little]] more [[effort]] [[toward]] [[keeping]] the viewer [[engaged]], it [[would]] have been much more likely that they drive home the social [[commentary]]. This [[filmmaking]] is one of those I [[deplore]] having [[investing]] 90 minutes of my [[living]] that I'll never [[got]] back in. The premise is [[truly]] interesting - [[principally]] it's a zombie flick from the [[vistas]] of the undead (let's not split [[pubes]] as to whether they're [[genuinely]] [[dying]] or not}. Unfortunately, they fail to deliver a compelling story within this framework. The [[almost]] unbearable monotony of the lives of the central [[attribute]] [[maggio]] add to the realism of the [[filmmaking]], but it sucks all the [[amusement]] value right out of it. If they had put a [[petite]] more [[efforts]] [[about]] [[sustaining]] the viewer [[hired]], it [[ought]] have been much more likely that they drive home the social [[feedback]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3407 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [I [[saw]] this [[movie]] once late on a public [[tv]] station, so I don't know if it's on video or not.]

This is one of the "[[Baby]] Burlesks" ([[sic]]) that [[Shirley]] [[Temple]] did in the [[early]] 1930s. It is [[hard]] to [[believe]] that [[anyone]] would [[let]] their [[daughter]] be in this racy little film which today might just be considered this side of "kiddie porn".

Shirley [[Temple]] stars in a cast which [[probably]] has an [[average]] age of 5. They are all in [[diapers]], and are in a saloon which serves [[milk]] [[instead]] of [[alcohol]]. The "cash" is in the [[form]] of lollipops.

Shirley playing a "femme fatale" sashays up to the [[bar]] and [[talks]] to [[soldiers]] who make [[suggestive]] [[comments]] about her (!). But Shirley doesn't [[need]] [[really]] their lollipops/cash because her [[purse]] is full of ones from other "[[men]]".

[[Meanwhile]] a [[little]] black boy does a suggestive [[dance]] on a [[nearby]] table (!).

What a [[strange]] [[film]] . . . [[infants]] [[using]] racy [[dialogue]] [[playing]] [[adult]] roles in a saloon. Who [[thought]] up this [[stuff]] any [[way]]? [I [[noticed]] this [[films]] once late on a public [[television]] station, so I don't know if it's on video or not.]

This is one of the "[[Babies]] Burlesks" ([[ita]]) that [[Sylvie]] [[Templar]] did in the [[precocious]] 1930s. It is [[laborious]] to [[think]] that [[nobody]] would [[leave]] their [[giri]] be in this racy little film which today might just be considered this side of "kiddie porn".

Shirley [[Templar]] stars in a cast which [[perhaps]] has an [[averages]] age of 5. They are all in [[nappies]], and are in a saloon which serves [[dairy]] [[alternatively]] of [[liquor]]. The "cash" is in the [[forms]] of lollipops.

Shirley playing a "femme fatale" sashays up to the [[barrister]] and [[dialogue]] to [[servicemen]] who make [[evocative]] [[feedback]] about her (!). But Shirley doesn't [[require]] [[truly]] their lollipops/cash because her [[bag]] is full of ones from other "[[males]]".

[[Additionally]] a [[scant]] black boy does a suggestive [[choreography]] on a [[contiguous]] table (!).

What a [[unusual]] [[filmmaking]] . . . [[babes]] [[utilize]] racy [[conversation]] [[gaming]] [[adulthood]] roles in a saloon. Who [[thoughts]] up this [[thing]] any [[camino]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 3408 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[work]] as a hotel concierge in Washington DC and take my word, there was [[nothing]] remotely accurate about the character [[played]] by Michael J. Fox- # 1 we [[simply]] do not [[walk]] [[around]] with our [[pockets]] bursting with [[theater]] tickets and $100 [[bills]]! #2 If I ever let anybody [[use]] a [[room]] for some 'afternoon delight' [[time]] I'd be fired on the spot! The [[organization]] to which I belong (Les Clefs d'Or) has very [[definite]] standards of ethics and [[conduct]] that we take seriously. #3 [[Similarly]] untrue was the [[concept]], at the end of the movie, of Doug simply removing his gold key emblem and passing it on to some other employee- we [[earn]] those keys and it is a badge of honor and knowledge to be allowed to wear them. There is a whole application and vetting process to joining our organization.

This [[film]] does [[nothing]] to dispel the unfortunate perception of a concierge as nothing but a money grubbing mercenary. In short it does a disservice to our organization. I welcome any comments. I [[cooperation]] as a hotel concierge in Washington DC and take my word, there was [[anything]] remotely accurate about the character [[accomplished]] by Michael J. Fox- # 1 we [[exclusively]] do not [[marche]] [[throughout]] with our [[bags]] bursting with [[cinema]] tickets and $100 [[invoice]]! #2 If I ever let anybody [[using]] a [[salle]] for some 'afternoon delight' [[period]] I'd be fired on the spot! The [[organize]] to which I belong (Les Clefs d'Or) has very [[definitive]] standards of ethics and [[demeanor]] that we take seriously. #3 [[Alike]] untrue was the [[conceptions]], at the end of the movie, of Doug simply removing his gold key emblem and passing it on to some other employee- we [[gaining]] those keys and it is a badge of honor and knowledge to be allowed to wear them. There is a whole application and vetting process to joining our organization.

This [[filmmaking]] does [[none]] to dispel the unfortunate perception of a concierge as nothing but a money grubbing mercenary. In short it does a disservice to our organization. I welcome any comments. --------------------------------------------- Result 3409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This is my [[favorite]] of the three care bears movies. Once again I liked all the songs. The big problem however as most people have [[pointed]] out was that this story contradicts the original. For those that saw the first [[movie]] recall the bears met their "cousins" who they apparently never knew about. It wasn't of [[course]] until the end that the cousins received their [[tummy]] [[symbols]] after [[proving]] how much they [[cared]]. In this [[story]] [[however]] the cousins grow up with the care bears and have [[tummy]] symbols all along. That being [[said]] this isn't a bad movie as long you keep it separate from the first. I [[thought]] the Darkheart [[character]] [[much]] more [[evil]] then the Nicholas of the first. But at the same time I felt it [[added]] a sort of [[balance]] to the [[sweetness]] of the care bears. I also [[liked]] the we care part at the end, although I know other people had mixed feelings about that scene. And of course I LOVED the songs. My [[favorites]] being Growing Up and Forever Young. The care bears movies have always had such good songs. Ten stars for a very good movie. This is my [[prefer]] of the three care bears movies. Once again I liked all the songs. The big problem however as most people have [[noted]] out was that this story contradicts the original. For those that saw the first [[kino]] recall the bears met their "cousins" who they apparently never knew about. It wasn't of [[cours]] until the end that the cousins received their [[stomachache]] [[icons]] after [[demonstrate]] how much they [[loved]]. In this [[tale]] [[instead]] the cousins grow up with the care bears and have [[gastric]] symbols all along. That being [[asserted]] this isn't a bad movie as long you keep it separate from the first. I [[figured]] the Darkheart [[personage]] [[very]] more [[satanic]] then the Nicholas of the first. But at the same time I felt it [[addendum]] a sort of [[counterweight]] to the [[smoothness]] of the care bears. I also [[wished]] the we care part at the end, although I know other people had mixed feelings about that scene. And of course I LOVED the songs. My [[preferred]] being Growing Up and Forever Young. The care bears movies have always had such good songs. Ten stars for a very good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Though Cher and Cage are the focal points of this story, Gardenia and Dukakis are good counterparts for them- this is where Loretta and Ronny will be in 50 years- still in love. The whole cast does a nice job from Aiello to John Mahoney- it shows a real slice of life. Though I saw this long ago- I am glad it finally catapulted Cage to the place where he was recognized in Hollywood for his talent. From the music to the scenes at the opera to the kitchen table arguments- this is a very entertaining movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think we all begin a lot of reviews with, "This could've made a GREAT movie." A demented ex-con freshly sprung, a tidy suburban family his target. Revenge, retribution, manipulation. Marty's usual laying on of the Karo syrup. But unfortunately somewhere in Universal's high-rise a memorandum came down: everyone ham it up.

Nolte only speaks with eyebrows raised, Lange bitches her way through cigarettes, Lewis "Ohmagod's!" her way though her scenes, and Bobby D...well, he's on a whole other magic carpet. Affecting some sort of Cajun/Huckleberry Hound accent hybrid, he chomps fat cigars and cackles at random atrocities such as "Problem Child". And I want you to imagine the accent mentioned above. Now imagine it spouting brain-clanging religious rhetoric at top volume like he swallowed six bibles, and you have De Niro's schtick here. Most distracting of all, though, is his most OVERDONE use of the "De Niro face" he's so lampooned for. Eyes squinting, forehead crinkled, lips curled. Crimany, Bob, you looked like Plastic Man.

The story apparently began off-screen 14 years earlier, when Nolte was unable to spare De Niro time in the bighouse for various assaults. Upon release, he feels Nolte's misrep of him back then warrants the terrorizing of he and his kin. And we're supposed to give De Niro's character a slight pass because Nolte withheld information that might've shortened his sentence. De Niro being one of these criminals who, despite being guilty of unspeakable acts, feels his lack of freedom justifies continuing such acts on the outside. Mmm-kay.

He goes after Notle's near-mistress (in a scene some may want to turn away from), his wife, his daughter, the family dog, ya know. Which is one of the shortcomings of Wesley Strick's screenplay: utter predictability. As each of De Niro's harassments becomes more gruesome, you can pretty much call the rest of the action before it happens. Strick isn't to be totally discredited, as he manages a few compelling dialogue-driven moments (De Niro and Lewis' seedy exchange in an empty theater is the film's best scene), but mostly it's all over-cranked. Scorsese's cartoonish photographic approach comes off as forced, not to mention the HORRIBLY outdated re-worked Bernard Hermann score (I kept waiting for the Wolf Man to show up with a genetically enlarged tarantula).

Thus we arrive at the comedic portion of the flick. Unintentionally comedic, that is. You know those scenes where something graphically horrific is happening, but you can't help but snicker out of sight of others? You'll do it here. Nolte and Lange squawking about infidelity, De Niro's thumb-flirting, he cross-dressing, and a kitchen slip on a certain substance that has to be seen to believed. And Bob's infernal, incessant, CONSTANT, mind-damaging, no-end-in sight blowhard ramblings of all the "philosophy" he disovered in prison. I wanted him killed to shut him up more than to save this annoying family.

I always hate to borrow thoughts from other reviewers, but here it's necessary. This really *is* Scorsese's version of Freddy Krueger. The manner in which De Niro relishes, speaks, stalks, withstands pain, right down to his one-liners, is vintage Freddy. Upon being scalded by a pot of thrown water: "You trying' to offer sumpin' hot?" Please. And that's just one example.

Unless you were a fan of the original 1962 flick and want a thrill out of seeing Balsam, Peck, and Mitchum nearly 30 years later (or want a serious head-shaking film experience), avoid a trip to the Cape. --------------------------------------------- Result 3412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ugh! Another one of those "fooled by the cover" DVDs. I expected some kind of action at least with bears, cats, & such on the cover. I got NOTHING! Bad movie!.

I forced myself to watch this all the way through thinking that eventually SOMETHING would happen...no luck.

Now the reason I gave this a 2 is because of the scenery; otherwise it sucked.

The kid was terrible, talking to himself (although I suppose they couldn't just run a movie with dumb music and no dialogue at all), doing his lame karate stances to a tree stump, threatening a raccoon, munching on worms, and (what a dumbass) kicking a porcupine. And he wouldn't be pulling those quills out that easily either...they stick like fishhooks. At least he fought the bear (weakly) a couple of times.

What was up with the flashback thing? It made a bad movie even worse. I wanted to see a survival movie, not some dramatic bs about a kid suffering thru divorce.

What else can I say? Well, maybe they should have had the bear eat the kid or something. At least that would have been more exciting.

People, don't waste your time on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3413 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This [[great]] [[movie]] has failed to [[register]] a higher [[rating]] than 5!Why not!It is a [[great]] [[portrayal]] of the [[life]] of [[Christ]] without the [[ruthless]] sensationalism of The Passion of The [[Christ]].Johnny [[Cash]] did [[great]] [[things]] for [[God]] which [[amazingly]] are [[shunned]] and [[neglected]] in areas where they should matter most,like our churches.The [[film]] itself [[took]] [[less]] than a month to [[film]] as Johnny felt the strong [[presence]] of [[God]] [[guiding]] him through it.[[Great]] credit to [[everyone]] [[involved]] in this [[overwhelmingly]] sincere movie which will [[always]] be [[cherished]] by its [[fans]].[[At]] [[least]] the Billy Graham crusade rated it highly [[enough]] to [[use]] it as a prime source of education for [[new]] Christians.Thanks Fox for producing it.As [[Walk]] the Line [[proved]] that it was freakish that this [[man]] survived [[yet]] [[alone]] produced such an [[underrated]] masterpiece.[[Movies]] are not canonized through [[popular]] [[vote]] as this production proves! [[In]] summary I [[believe]] that this [[film]] is one of the worlds [[great]] [[documentaries]] as it is [[forthright]], [[honestly]] portrayed and a [[great]] [[witness]] to the [[Christian]] [[faith]]! This [[wondrous]] [[film]] has failed to [[log]] a higher [[punctuation]] than 5!Why not!It is a [[wondrous]] [[portrait]] of the [[lifetime]] of [[God]] without the [[relentless]] sensationalism of The Passion of The [[Jesus]].Johnny [[Money]] did [[wondrous]] [[aspects]] for [[Goodness]] which [[beautifully]] are [[averted]] and [[forgotten]] in areas where they should matter most,like our churches.The [[kino]] itself [[picked]] [[lowest]] than a month to [[movie]] as Johnny felt the strong [[attendance]] of [[Goodness]] [[guidebook]] him through it.[[Large]] credit to [[somebody]] [[implicated]] in this [[essentially]] sincere movie which will [[permanently]] be [[cherishing]] by its [[amateurs]].[[For]] [[less]] the Billy Graham crusade rated it highly [[sufficiently]] to [[using]] it as a prime source of education for [[novo]] Christians.Thanks Fox for producing it.As [[Marche]] the Line [[evidenced]] that it was freakish that this [[dude]] survived [[even]] [[merely]] produced such an [[underestimated]] masterpiece.[[Cinematography]] are not canonized through [[trendy]] [[votes]] as this production proves! [[For]] summary I [[think]] that this [[cinematography]] is one of the worlds [[wondrous]] [[literature]] as it is [[outspoken]], [[openly]] portrayed and a [[huge]] [[telltale]] to the [[Christianity]] [[belief]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3414 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this in the theater and I instantly thought that it is good enough to own on video. I am a big nut for Sci-Fi action flicks though anyway.

Without giving any of the story away, it is worth seeing if you like Sci-Fi without requiring much thought. The story is basic, and the plot is very good. Worth your time to see!

Maybe they will make a sequel? :)

8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anemic comedy-drama, an unhappy, seemingly rushed affair featuring Cher as a woebegone housewife who slowly makes friends with the hit-man who's been hired to kill her by her husband. Chazz Palminteri, as the talkative hired gun, adapted the screenplay from his own play, with stagy set-ups and back-and-forth dialogue that quickly tires the eye and ear. An air of gloom hangs over the entire project, and director Paul Mazursky can't get Cher out of her perpetual funk (she's listless). Despite all the top talent (including Robert De Niro as one of the producers), "Faithful" is fraudulent, with no substance to the story and characters who rarely come to life. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Saw]] in on [[TV]] late last night. Yeah, I can [[hear]] what y'all [[say]] about this one. It IS [[likely]] to be categorized as one of those stereo- [[typical]] [[TV]] soap series. [[In]] all fairness, the [[story]] line does have a [[fine]] [[twist]] to it, and you [[might]] [[nod]] [[saying]], "[[Well]], that's not what I [[expected]]." But, as a [[film]], well it is not easy to spot a [[redeeming]] element. [[Casting]], acting, [[camera]] work, cars, [[costume]], setting, [[script]], no, there's [[nothing]] to [[congratulate]]. Rated R?? [[Oh]], that scene. [[Did]] we [[need]] it? This is a [[film]] that you can watch it and then [[forget]] that you even [[watched]]. And what was the title again? [[Sawthe]] in on [[TELEVISION]] late last night. Yeah, I can [[listen]] what y'all [[says]] about this one. It IS [[apt]] to be categorized as one of those stereo- [[classic]] [[TVS]] soap series. [[Across]] all fairness, the [[narratives]] line does have a [[alright]] [[twisting]] to it, and you [[probability]] [[nods]] [[arguing]], "[[Good]], that's not what I [[envisioned]]." But, as a [[filmmaking]], well it is not easy to spot a [[redeem]] element. [[Pouring]], acting, [[cameras]] work, cars, [[attire]], setting, [[scripts]], no, there's [[anything]] to [[hailing]]. Rated R?? [[Oooh]], that scene. [[Got]] we [[gotta]] it? This is a [[filmmaking]] that you can watch it and then [[overlook]] that you even [[seen]]. And what was the title again? --------------------------------------------- Result 3417 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As a huge baseball fan, my [[scrutiny]] of this [[film]] is how realistic it [[appears]]. [[Dennis]] Quaid had all of the right [[moves]] and [[stances]] of a major league pitcher. It is a [[fantastic]] [[true]] [[story]] told with just a little too much "Disney" for my taste. As a huge baseball fan, my [[oversight]] of this [[flick]] is how realistic it [[seems]]. [[Denny]] Quaid had all of the right [[shift]] and [[posts]] of a major league pitcher. It is a [[wondrous]] [[real]] [[narratives]] told with just a little too much "Disney" for my taste. --------------------------------------------- Result 3418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was expecting a B-Movie French musical. After all, Dhéry, Blanche, DeFunès were superstars of low budget French films of that time. And it is in color! But I have hallucination in this unbelievable one hour 30 of pure mediocrity. Musical numbers are awful, and comedy is absolutely boring and stupid. And the songs? What songs? This is just a succession of bad numbers, one after another. The only one very rare thing about that thing is the nudity of women. It was not familiar at that time. In fact, some numbers are just there to show us topless women. It adds to the mediocrity! And try to find young Michel Serrault, the future great actor of French cinema, in a bit part as a musician, in his very first movie. Good luck! --------------------------------------------- Result 3419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The 700 Club" has to be the single most bigoted television program in the history of television itself. To make matters worse, it's been on the air since 1966, implying that thousands if not millions of people are buying into its hate and lies. Headed by Pat Robertson, the unscrupulous, megalomaniacal founder and leader of the Christian Coalition, "The 700 Club" takes us from misinformation to misunderstanding, broadcasting "news" as they like to think of it and trying to convince its audience that all of the world's problems are to blame on homosexuals, Wiccans, New Age spiritualists, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, non-Fundamentalist Christians, Democrats, single mothers, foreigners, feminists, evolutionists, environmentalists, NASA scientists, and anyone else who doesn't share their fanatical religious views. It's actually the best fake news since "The Daily Show" or the "Weekend Update" segment of "Saturday Night Live," or since "FOX News," for that matter. Of course, Pat's always the one who makes each of the decisions, saying whatever comes to mind and not giving a damn who it offends or hurts. In the meantime, he continues his part in the struggle to transform the United States into a militarized police state by having the Religious Wrong stick their noses in everything they can and asking for one donation after another - no less than a measly $100 to become a member, by the way - to fund Pat's African diamond mines and buy oil from companies reprimanded by the government in the past for their abuse of the environment. No, never mind that Pat was good friends with the genocidal dictators of Zaire and Zimbabwe in order to help him acquire such wealth; it's all for the greater glory of God, don't you know? And of course, the hosts of "The 700 Club" are always willing to read letters "written by viewers" as they like to put it, coincidentally each typed in the same format and all on the same color of paper by "viewers" supposedly healed of various afflictions by the said hosts (they claim to have "words of knowledge" come to them) but who NEVER APPEAR on the program to say what happened to them. Honestly, how can anyone take a show seriously when they're using a poor applause recording? It should make people wonder why there's no studio audience.

The sad thing that Pat's cronies and viewers don't realize or just don't WANT to realize are the horrible things he's done and said. This is a guy who agreed with Jerry Falwell that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States were the result of God punishing us for our acceptance of homosexuality and feminism. Ironic, considering that Pat has twice publicly referred to the implementation of a nuclear weapon in the State Department; I have little doubt it was his wealth that kept him from getting arrested for such statements. His rants against homosexuals, single mothers, and any number of sexual practices he considers "sinful" are interesting, considering he was known to frequent a number of brothels during the Korean War. As the Bible says, be fruitful and multiply, so congratulations, Pat - thanks to you, there's probably a number of children born to single Korean mothers. Then, of course, there was the time he called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (not that he's a saint, but still). Oh, yes, and let's not soon forget the time this "crusader for human life" supported forced abortions in China. Very "Christian" of him, wouldn't you say?

And just in case Pat has forgotten, I haven't forgotten his little speech that evangelical Christians today are "being treated exactly as the Jews were in Nazi Germany." Honestly, to compare his "plight" to the horrors of the Holocaust is almost unforgivable. Speaking of which, need I mention about how he blatantly lied that homosexuality ran rampant among the Nazi party in a pathetic attempt to discredit homosexuals? Of course, history shows us that the Nazis acted toward homosexuals the same way they acted toward Jews. Pat Robertson is one of the biggest liars in history. If he was Pinocchio, his nose would encircle the Earth.

Unfortunately, more and more people continue to believe him every day. This is your wake-up call, people; "The 700 Club" is one of the most if not the single most vile program in television history. It's evil masquerading as good; it's a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing. It's bigoted filth that tries to look clean, pretty, and loving. It's living proof that hateful, dangerous religious views aren't confined to certain groups in the Middle East. Even those who are not of the Christian faith know that it goes against everything Jesus taught, and if Jesus was to appear to this "club," He wouldn't be emulating them. Instead, He'd be chastising them as He did the Pharisees of His time and overturning the money bins of their telethons as He did in front of the synagogue in His time. All I can say is thank God that Pat had no chance of becoming President; if he did, he'd be the harbinger of Armageddon - and not on the side of the good guys. --------------------------------------------- Result 3420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What an inspiring movie, I laughed, cried and felt love. For a true story,it does give you hope and that miracles do happen. It has a great cast. Ellen Burstyn, Samantha Mathis, Jodelle Ferland(she's 4 or 5yrs. old) what a actress. Its on Showtime. A Must See Movie!! :)= --------------------------------------------- Result 3421 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I was required to watch the [[movie]] for my [[work]], so I didn't pay for it (on the contrary, i got [[paid]]), but I [[still]] found the [[movie]] to [[suck]] far more than [[average]]. The [[jokes]] were lame, the two lead actresses... well, to [[use]] the "First [[wives]] club" division of women's [[ages]] in Hollywood, they are no longer in their "[[hot]] [[chick]]" age but more in their "[[district]] [[attorney]]" age. What [[angered]] me most about the [[movie]] was the main plot line, which [[pretty]] much [[completely]] plagiarized "Beavis & [[Butthead]] [[Do]] America" (in which the [[boys]] are all jazzed up about some dude offering them [[money]] to "do his [[wife]]", not [[realizing]] they're [[expected]] to [[assassinate]] her). [[All]] in all, a bland [[piece]] of [[crap]]. I was required to watch the [[flick]] for my [[collaborate]], so I didn't pay for it (on the contrary, i got [[paying]]), but I [[nevertheless]] found the [[flick]] to [[lick]] far more than [[averaging]]. The [[pranks]] were lame, the two lead actresses... well, to [[utilizing]] the "First [[handcuffs]] club" division of women's [[years]] in Hollywood, they are no longer in their "[[hottest]] [[nana]]" age but more in their "[[arrondissement]] [[prosecutor]]" age. What [[irked]] me most about the [[filmmaking]] was the main plot line, which [[quite]] much [[totally]] plagiarized "Beavis & [[Knucklehead]] [[Doing]] America" (in which the [[guys]] are all jazzed up about some dude offering them [[cash]] to "do his [[femme]]", not [[realize]] they're [[envisioned]] to [[assassination]] her). [[Every]] in all, a bland [[slice]] of [[horseshit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a delightful romp – a very competently made film that has so much charm and a feelgood factor that a lot of romantic comedies lack. Einstein is brilliantly acted by Walter Matthau, while Meg Ryan's Catherine is unforgettable – better than I have seen her in those films opposite Tom Hanks – as the young mathematician struggling to be recognized.

You don't need to be a young woman to understand Catherine's struggle and feel sympathetic for her immediately, and as a young man it's easy to understand what must have gone through Ed's (Tim Robbins) mind in pursuing his true love. There's universal appeal in these emotions, even if I.Q. keeps it all light, fun and tied up nicely.

Sure it's not heavy, but if you look there are some subtexts. People remember Albert Einstein as a scientist yet he was a great spiritualist; his sayings such as something along the lines of, 'If it is not impossible, then why do it?' suggest he is a believer in fulfilling higher goals beyond one's immediate grasp. In this film, there are questions of what an accident really is – such as whether Albert and his whacky sidekicks' intervention in prying Catherine away from stiff-upper-lip, loveless James (Stephen Fry – who gives this otherwise cardboard character life and you cannot help but feel for his lack of feeling) counts. How much intervention happens in our lives that we do not see, and comes across as serendipitous?

And of course, we'd like to think in real life, despite what we often observe of the people we know, that we Edwards get the Catherines and Jameses have to learn how to defrost the icewater in their veins. How nice to know that it might work out in I.Q.'s innocent (and disturbingly, exclusively Caucasian) Eisenhower-era land of make-believe. --------------------------------------------- Result 3423 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Elvira, Mistress of The [[Dark]], is a [[fun]], [[camp]] horror [[comedy]], in which the fourth wall is [[broken]] a [[couple]] of [[times]] and the [[jokes]] [[often]] [[stay]] below the navel. And the breasts of Cassandra Peterson become a [[character]] of their own.

Elvira (Cassandra Peterson) is stacked horror show hostess, who learns, that she has inherited her [[aunt]] [[Morgana]]. So she goes to a little town of Fallwell, which is ruled by the most [[horrendous]] monster ever to embrace the earth: [[Morality]] comity. Elviras boobacious appearance is, of course, too much for the prunes, but the kids of the town get a [[kick]] out of her [[different]] kind of [[approach]] on life. And of course there is even more sinister evil, her uncle Vincent (William Morgan Sheppard), who is after Elvira's mothers book of spells. See, Elvira actually is a real witch, she just doesn't [[know]] it. Yet.

For what it is, Elvira is [[quite]] [[funny]] [[film]], even though the script does [[leave]] a lot of room for improvement. [[Most]] [[laughs]] come from the difference between Elvira and the people of good morals, but there are a couple of good visual gags as well. Over all direction is okay, but it never rises to be anything more than that. [[In]] all, a good, intentionally campy, [[comedy]]. If you [[like]] this [[kind]] of thing, that is. Elvira, Mistress of The [[Blackness]], is a [[droll]], [[campground]] horror [[comedian]], in which the fourth wall is [[raped]] a [[match]] of [[dates]] and the [[gags]] [[routinely]] [[remain]] below the navel. And the breasts of Cassandra Peterson become a [[trait]] of their own.

Elvira (Cassandra Peterson) is stacked horror show hostess, who learns, that she has inherited her [[queer]] [[Morgan]]. So she goes to a little town of Fallwell, which is ruled by the most [[disgusting]] monster ever to embrace the earth: [[Ethics]] comity. Elviras boobacious appearance is, of course, too much for the prunes, but the kids of the town get a [[whoop]] out of her [[several]] kind of [[approaches]] on life. And of course there is even more sinister evil, her uncle Vincent (William Morgan Sheppard), who is after Elvira's mothers book of spells. See, Elvira actually is a real witch, she just doesn't [[savoir]] it. Yet.

For what it is, Elvira is [[rather]] [[amusing]] [[cinema]], even though the script does [[leaving]] a lot of room for improvement. [[More]] [[smiles]] come from the difference between Elvira and the people of good morals, but there are a couple of good visual gags as well. Over all direction is okay, but it never rises to be anything more than that. [[During]] all, a good, intentionally campy, [[charade]]. If you [[loves]] this [[genus]] of thing, that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 3424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[James]] [[Bond]] in the [[wilderness]]? [[Well]], that's the way it [[looks]]: [[Pierce]] Brosnan is after all [[best]] known as Bond in "[[Tommorrow]] Never [[Dies]]" (1997) and "[[Golden]] Eye" (1995) - both shot prior to this release. Frankly, the film's two [[leads]] are both badly miscast, with Brosnan turning in the marginally more convincing performance, and with Annie Galipeau (as Pony, Grey Owl's love interest) having to battle with carelessly-written [[dialogue]].

The two aunts, on the other hand are perfect. But the film is not about aunts. It is about the wilds of the Canadian wilderness. And while the photography may be pretty, there is no grit to the harsh reality of living in the wilds. Annie Galipeau, as Pony, just fails to be convincing, unfortunately, because I really wanted to believe in her. She was a relatively inexperienced twenty-year-old on this film, and it [[could]] have worked, but Richard Attenborough was maybe just not tough enough on her. He makes her look vulnerable, which of course she is.. but in the wrong sort of way.

But one thing for sure, she [[appears]] picture-perfect throughout. But mascara and eyebrow thickener in the wilderness? It just doesn't fit, especially as she only ever seems to walk forest [[trials]] with Bond ([[sorry]], Grey Owl), and [[use]] photo-ops for [[kissing]] close-ups.

I've lived with forest people in the [[Pacific]] [[North]] West, and they [[simply]] don't look this [[pretty]] and [[stay]] so sweet while fighting for survival. [[Which]] [[brings]] me to another point: the [[film]] fails to evoke the period in which it is set: the 1930s. I put the [[blame]] here [[largely]] on a lack-lustre script that is keen on preaching at the expense of [[dramatic]] arc, plot points and those [[small]] details that can evoke [[period]] through [[action]].

[[William]] Nicholson [[wrote]] the [[screenplay]], and his latest [[offering]], "[[Elizabeth]], the Golden [[Age]]" opened three days [[ago]], so I do hope there is an improvement.

Yes, I've read the [[comments]] others have posted, but I'm not [[convinced]]. A lot of [[potential]], but mishandled and [[even]] maybe ill-conceived. [[If]] it had had a religious film, it would have been panned, but because it preaches environmentalism, the film remains somewhat above criticism, since it is "politically correct." Sorry, for all that, I don't buy it. Amen. [[Jacobo]] [[Bonded]] in the [[sauvage]]? [[Good]], that's the way it [[seems]]: [[Pearce]] Brosnan is after all [[bestest]] known as Bond in "[[Tomorow]] Never [[Died]]" (1997) and "[[Dorado]] Eye" (1995) - both shot prior to this release. Frankly, the film's two [[leeds]] are both badly miscast, with Brosnan turning in the marginally more convincing performance, and with Annie Galipeau (as Pony, Grey Owl's love interest) having to battle with carelessly-written [[discussions]].

The two aunts, on the other hand are perfect. But the film is not about aunts. It is about the wilds of the Canadian wilderness. And while the photography may be pretty, there is no grit to the harsh reality of living in the wilds. Annie Galipeau, as Pony, just fails to be convincing, unfortunately, because I really wanted to believe in her. She was a relatively inexperienced twenty-year-old on this film, and it [[did]] have worked, but Richard Attenborough was maybe just not tough enough on her. He makes her look vulnerable, which of course she is.. but in the wrong sort of way.

But one thing for sure, she [[emerges]] picture-perfect throughout. But mascara and eyebrow thickener in the wilderness? It just doesn't fit, especially as she only ever seems to walk forest [[trial]] with Bond ([[dorry]], Grey Owl), and [[utilize]] photo-ops for [[hugging]] close-ups.

I've lived with forest people in the [[Nonviolent]] [[Norden]] West, and they [[solely]] don't look this [[quite]] and [[remain]] so sweet while fighting for survival. [[Whom]] [[puts]] me to another point: the [[filmmaking]] fails to evoke the period in which it is set: the 1930s. I put the [[guilt]] here [[broadly]] on a lack-lustre script that is keen on preaching at the expense of [[prodigious]] arc, plot points and those [[minor]] details that can evoke [[deadline]] through [[measures]].

[[Guillaume]] Nicholson [[written]] the [[scenario]], and his latest [[delivers]], "[[Elisabetta]], the Golden [[Aging]]" opened three days [[prior]], so I do hope there is an improvement.

Yes, I've read the [[comment]] others have posted, but I'm not [[persuaded]]. A lot of [[prospective]], but mishandled and [[yet]] maybe ill-conceived. [[Though]] it had had a religious film, it would have been panned, but because it preaches environmentalism, the film remains somewhat above criticism, since it is "politically correct." Sorry, for all that, I don't buy it. Amen. --------------------------------------------- Result 3425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] dont ever ever ever consider watching this sorry excuse for a film. the way it is shot, lit, acted etc. just doesn't make sense. it's all so bad it is difficult to watch. loads of clips are repeated beyond boredom. there seems to be no 'normal' person in the entire film and the existence of the 'outside world' is, well, it just doesn't exist. and why does that bald guy become invincible all of a sudden? this film is beyond stupidity. zero. --------------------------------------------- Result 3426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The Wayward [[Cloud]] is a [[frustrating]] [[film]] to watch. Infuriatingly [[enigmatic]], it treats each shot like a [[work]] of art. You get the [[impression]] that the composition of each shot has been [[designed]] and [[prepared]] with a degree of [[exquisite]] [[care]] that [[borders]] on obsession; Expressing how far [[cinema]] has [[progressed]] since the very first [[films]] were cranked out in the [[nineteenth]] century and [[mimicking]] their [[construction]], the [[camera]] here [[hardly]] ever moves – apart from during the [[camp]] and [[colourful]] musical [[numbers]]. Ambient [[noise]] is [[kept]] to a minimum and [[barely]] a word is spoken. This [[curious]] but [[effective]] [[device]] forces the [[audience]] to [[focus]] their [[attention]] on visual stimuli [[alone]] so that, even as the [[story]] progresses at a snail-like [[pace]] we feel ourselves [[becoming]] [[immersed]]. [[Unfortunately]], for me at [[least]], this immersion begins to unravel [[somewhere]] [[around]] the [[hour]] [[mark]]. I [[began]] to feel as if the [[film]] was challenging me to [[keep]] [[watching]] while becoming more [[difficult]] as the [[minutes]] dragged so that the [[mere]] [[act]] of watching [[became]] a [[battle]] of wills.

[[Had]] the content of this [[film]] not been as sexual as it is it would no doubt been [[even]] more [[obscure]] to Western [[audiences]]. As it is, there's an [[abundance]] of [[female]] nudity and an [[act]] of sexual [[abuse]] on an [[unconscious]] (or [[possibly]] [[dead]]) [[woman]] that is so [[repugnant]] that, while it may [[speak]] [[volumes]] about the degradation to which pornography subjects both [[men]] and women (the [[users]] and the used) it is so over-zealous in the [[manner]] in which it chooses to [[make]] its point as to [[effectively]] [[render]] it [[ineffective]]. Of course the [[worst]] and most [[enthusiastic]] [[participants]] of the [[explosion]] in [[available]] pornographic content will [[seek]] this [[film]] out for all the [[wrong]] [[reasons]] and watch it with their sticky finger on the fast-forward button of the [[remote]].

[[For]] all its [[problems]], the [[film]] is definitely a stayer, and the more you [[think]] about it the more sense certain aspects of it [[seem]] to make. [[Ironically]], for a [[film]] in which so [[little]] happens, the [[viewer]] [[would]] [[probably]] be proportionately rewarded by [[watching]] a second or even [[third]] [[time]]. [[For]] me, [[however]], once was [[enough]]… The Wayward [[Clouds]] is a [[depressing]] [[filmmaking]] to watch. Infuriatingly [[mysterious]], it treats each shot like a [[cooperate]] of art. You get the [[feeling]] that the composition of each shot has been [[intentioned]] and [[poised]] with a degree of [[splendid]] [[caring]] that [[limitations]] on obsession; Expressing how far [[filmmaking]] has [[progress]] since the very first [[film]] were cranked out in the [[nineteen]] century and [[simulated]] their [[building]], the [[cameras]] here [[almost]] ever moves – apart from during the [[campground]] and [[colorful]] musical [[figures]]. Ambient [[ruckus]] is [[maintained]] to a minimum and [[hardly]] a word is spoken. This [[outlandish]] but [[efficient]] [[appliances]] forces the [[viewers]] to [[orientated]] their [[beware]] on visual stimuli [[lonely]] so that, even as the [[tales]] progresses at a snail-like [[rhythm]] we feel ourselves [[become]] [[flooded]]. [[Sadly]], for me at [[fewest]], this immersion begins to unravel [[somehow]] [[about]] the [[hours]] [[brands]]. I [[inaugurated]] to feel as if the [[filmmaking]] was challenging me to [[maintain]] [[staring]] while becoming more [[tough]] as the [[mins]] dragged so that the [[simple]] [[law]] of watching [[came]] a [[combat]] of wills.

[[Has]] the content of this [[filmmaking]] not been as sexual as it is it would no doubt been [[yet]] more [[hazy]] to Western [[spectators]]. As it is, there's an [[abundant]] of [[girl]] nudity and an [[law]] of sexual [[mistreatment]] on an [[subconscious]] (or [[presumably]] [[decedent]]) [[femmes]] that is so [[outrageous]] that, while it may [[speaks]] [[quantities]] about the degradation to which pornography subjects both [[man]] and women (the [[customers]] and the used) it is so over-zealous in the [[way]] in which it chooses to [[deliver]] its point as to [[efficiently]] [[lend]] it [[ineffectual]]. Of course the [[hardest]] and most [[passionate]] [[participating]] of the [[blast]] in [[accessible]] pornographic content will [[strive]] this [[movie]] out for all the [[erroneous]] [[motives]] and watch it with their sticky finger on the fast-forward button of the [[distant]].

[[Onto]] all its [[disorders]], the [[films]] is definitely a stayer, and the more you [[thoughts]] about it the more sense certain aspects of it [[appears]] to make. [[Paradoxically]], for a [[filmmaking]] in which so [[scant]] happens, the [[beholder]] [[should]] [[unquestionably]] be proportionately rewarded by [[staring]] a second or even [[terzi]] [[moment]]. [[Onto]] me, [[conversely]], once was [[adequate]]… --------------------------------------------- Result 3427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just another film that exploits gratuitous frontal male nudity; awful acting, plus, the lovemaking scenes are the most un-sexy I've ever seen (and this is not about me not linking the idea of two young men making love, since I'm gay).

Again, as in Mil nubes de paz, Julian Hernandez directed an incredibly pretentious film with a story that makes enough argument for a short film of about five minutes but manages to make a 2 hour film with it... And this time, there isn't even the issue of racism and commodification in the Mexican gay community to talk about! God gracious have mercy on us! --------------------------------------------- Result 3428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have to [[admit]], I wasn't [[expecting]] much [[going]] into this [[film]] viewing in my Japenese [[film]] [[class]], but this [[film]] really blew me away. The director does a [[wonderful]] job following through with the title of his film, [[truly]] [[portraying]] a [[picture]] of madness. I [[think]] the fact that this [[film]] is silent [[adds]] to the resemblance of madness, helping the [[viewer]] experience the [[characters]] [[inner]] [[world]] rather than the [[world]] outside his [[mind]]. This [[film]] just added to my feelings about [[foreign]] [[silent]] [[films]] vs. American, in that the foreign [[films]] [[work]] much more to exercise your mind and make you [[think]] [[rather]] than [[going]] for the fluffy film [[always]] with the happy ending, [[exercising]] the imagination very little. I have to [[accepted]], I wasn't [[waiting]] much [[go]] into this [[films]] viewing in my Japenese [[movie]] [[classroom]], but this [[cinematography]] really blew me away. The director does a [[brilliant]] job following through with the title of his film, [[truthfully]] [[detailing]] a [[photographed]] of madness. I [[reckon]] the fact that this [[kino]] is silent [[inserting]] to the resemblance of madness, helping the [[viewfinder]] experience the [[features]] [[inland]] [[monde]] rather than the [[globe]] outside his [[intellect]]. This [[movie]] just added to my feelings about [[alien]] [[voiceless]] [[movies]] vs. American, in that the foreign [[film]] [[collaborating]] much more to exercise your mind and make you [[believe]] [[comparatively]] than [[go]] for the fluffy film [[unceasingly]] with the happy ending, [[exerting]] the imagination very little. --------------------------------------------- Result 3429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Today if someone mentions the name Victor McLaglen the response most likely will be "Who?" or perhaps "Why?" Well, believe it or not, Victor McLaglen won the Academy Award for Best Actor in this film, which is about a poor, desperate man who is willing to sell out his best friend for "carfare" to the United States. It's an interesting movie which shows how low even the most well-meaning shnooks will go just for a few bucks. The movie takes place in British-dominated Ireland and while all the other characters are either directly or indirectly fighting for the political independence of Ireland, all Mr. McLaglen's character is concerned about is getting money and getting drunk. The movie makes one wonder whether political activism is worth all the trouble because while the activist is struggling to make a point, many others not only do not care, they don't even know what the fuss is all about. The morale of this movie is: look out for the friend, he may sell you out for a dime. --------------------------------------------- Result 3430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I'm not a [[stage]] purist. A [[movie]] [[could]] have been made of this play, and it [[would]] [[almost]] necessarily [[require]] [[changes]]... [[comme]] ci, comme ca. But the [[modest]] conceits of this [[material]] are lost or misunderstood by the movie's creators who are in full-on "[[shallow]] blockbuster" mode. It [[would]] be [[hard]] to [[imagine]] a [[worse]] [[director]]. Perhaps only [[Josh]] Logan & [[Jack]] Warner [[could]] have [[ruined]] this in the same way Attenborough did.

Onstage A Chorus line was a triumph of workshopping as a production [[method]]. Dancers answering a casting call found themselves [[sitting]] around shooting the crap about their stage-career experiences (very 70s!). Then Bennett and Hamlisch took some time, handed them a song and cast them as themselves. ...astonishing! [[Unbelievably]] modern. The 'story'of ACL is (in turn) about [[answering]] a [[casting]] [[call]] for a [[play]] we never have a complete [[view]] of, because the [[play]] doesn't [[matter]]. It was meta before the idea was invented, 25 years before Adaptation noodled with a similar [[idea]]. ACL was [[also]] another in a reductivist trend that is [[still]] alive, & which is a hallmark of modern creativity: that technique itself is compelling... that there's more drama in an average person's life than you [[could]] ever [[synthesize]] with invented characters. What a gracious idea. The [[stage]] play had one performance [[area]] (an empty stage) and three different ways to alter the [[backdrop]], to alleviate visual [[tedium]], not to [[keep]] [[viewers]] distracted. The space recedes and the [[actors]] [[stories]] are spotlighted. It worked just fine. That was the point. All these [[ideas]] are trampled or bastardized. Set-wise, there wasn't one, and no costumes either until the the dancers came out for their final bows, in which the exhilarating "One" is finally, powerfully, performed in full (gold) top hats and tails, with moves we recognize because we've watched them in practice sessions. The pent-up anxiety of the play is released --- and audiences went nuts.

After Grampa manhandles this, it's like a mushed, strangled bird. He clearly has the earlier, respected All that Jazz (and Fosse's stage piece Dancin') in mind as he makes his choices. Hamlisch's score was edgy & interesting for it's time, but time has not been kind to it. It's as schmaltzy as "jazz hands." And that's before Attenborough ever touches it. He's remarkable at finding whatever good was left, and mangling it.

A simple question might have helped Attenborough while filming this, "Could I bear spending even a few minutes with people like these?" A major issue for any adaptation of the play is how the 4th wall of theater (pivotal by it's absence in theater) would be addressed in the film format. There's never been a more "frontal" play. The answer they came up with was, "I'm sorry.. what was the question?" The cast has been augmented from a manageable number of unique narratives, to a crowd suffocating each other and the audience, and blending their grating selves together. I was well past my annoyance threshold when that annoying little runt swings across the stage on a rope, clowning at the (absent) audience. The play made you understand theater people. This movie just makes you want to choke them.

Perhaps Broadways annoying trend of characters walking directly to stage center and singing their stories at the audience (Les Miz, Miss Saigon) instead of relating to other characters started here. But the worst imaginable revival of the play will make you feel more alive than this movie.

A Chorus Line is pure schlock. I'm not a [[phases]] purist. A [[filmmaking]] [[did]] have been made of this play, and it [[could]] [[hardly]] necessarily [[needs]] [[modifications]]... [[celle]] ci, comme ca. But the [[scant]] conceits of this [[materials]] are lost or misunderstood by the movie's creators who are in full-on "[[superficial]] blockbuster" mode. It [[could]] be [[harsh]] to [[presume]] a [[worst]] [[headmaster]]. Perhaps only [[Ghosh]] Logan & [[Jacque]] Warner [[wo]] have [[trashed]] this in the same way Attenborough did.

Onstage A Chorus line was a triumph of workshopping as a production [[methods]]. Dancers answering a casting call found themselves [[sit]] around shooting the crap about their stage-career experiences (very 70s!). Then Bennett and Hamlisch took some time, handed them a song and cast them as themselves. ...astonishing! [[Amazingly]] modern. The 'story'of ACL is (in turn) about [[responses]] a [[moulding]] [[invitation]] for a [[playing]] we never have a complete [[vista]] of, because the [[playing]] doesn't [[question]]. It was meta before the idea was invented, 25 years before Adaptation noodled with a similar [[ideas]]. ACL was [[similarly]] another in a reductivist trend that is [[again]] alive, & which is a hallmark of modern creativity: that technique itself is compelling... that there's more drama in an average person's life than you [[did]] ever [[summarized]] with invented characters. What a gracious idea. The [[ballpark]] play had one performance [[regions]] (an empty stage) and three different ways to alter the [[background]], to alleviate visual [[drudgery]], not to [[keeping]] [[audience]] distracted. The space recedes and the [[players]] [[narratives]] are spotlighted. It worked just fine. That was the point. All these [[think]] are trampled or bastardized. Set-wise, there wasn't one, and no costumes either until the the dancers came out for their final bows, in which the exhilarating "One" is finally, powerfully, performed in full (gold) top hats and tails, with moves we recognize because we've watched them in practice sessions. The pent-up anxiety of the play is released --- and audiences went nuts.

After Grampa manhandles this, it's like a mushed, strangled bird. He clearly has the earlier, respected All that Jazz (and Fosse's stage piece Dancin') in mind as he makes his choices. Hamlisch's score was edgy & interesting for it's time, but time has not been kind to it. It's as schmaltzy as "jazz hands." And that's before Attenborough ever touches it. He's remarkable at finding whatever good was left, and mangling it.

A simple question might have helped Attenborough while filming this, "Could I bear spending even a few minutes with people like these?" A major issue for any adaptation of the play is how the 4th wall of theater (pivotal by it's absence in theater) would be addressed in the film format. There's never been a more "frontal" play. The answer they came up with was, "I'm sorry.. what was the question?" The cast has been augmented from a manageable number of unique narratives, to a crowd suffocating each other and the audience, and blending their grating selves together. I was well past my annoyance threshold when that annoying little runt swings across the stage on a rope, clowning at the (absent) audience. The play made you understand theater people. This movie just makes you want to choke them.

Perhaps Broadways annoying trend of characters walking directly to stage center and singing their stories at the audience (Les Miz, Miss Saigon) instead of relating to other characters started here. But the worst imaginable revival of the play will make you feel more alive than this movie.

A Chorus Line is pure schlock. --------------------------------------------- Result 3431 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love watching Jerry as much as the rest of the world, but this poor excuse for a soft-core porno flick is needlessly offensive, lacks anything resembling wit, and serves merely as a vehicle of self-promotion for Springer. Even though it runs a quick 90 minutes, the film drags hideously, and I should have had the common sense to walk out. Simply atrocious. --------------------------------------------- Result 3432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] One the whole, this movie isn't [[perfect]]. It doesn't 'hang well' [[together]] as the story line is basically a bunch of [[hooks]] to hang [[jokes]].

Some of these jokes are a little 'too 80s' and [[tend]] to date the [[picture]].

But some of these jokes are classic.

You [[know]] a movie has something special when you and your friends [[still]] reference silly [[quotes]] from it over 2 decades [[later]].

Plus, there are a bunch of [[familiar]] [[faces]]; Michael Keaton, Danny Devito, Joe Piscapo, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Maureen Stapleton, Bob Eubanks, Griffin [[Dunne]], and one of the last roles of Alan Hale Jr., the Skipper from Gilligan's [[Island]].

[[Also]], there are some [[great]] absurdist moments, like when [[Johnny]] is labelling the puppies with a [[pricing]] [[gun]], or the Pope [[making]] an appearance in Johnny's [[neighborhood]]. [[Also]], the scene where the [[fake]] [[priest]] makes up a [[lot]] of words in Latin is [[excellent]]. ("Summa cum laude, magna [[cum]] laude, the radio's too louda... Post meridian, ante meridian, uncle meridian").

Other [[Classic]] Scenes [[include]] Ramone Maroney butchering the English [[language]] [[Danny]] [[Devito]] urging [[Griffin]] [[Dunne]] to 'Play Ball' [[Peter]] Boyle [[thinking]] he lost his manhood The fake VD movie

This [[movie]] is no [[home]] run. But like 'Porky's', it has [[enough]] classic comedy bits to make it memorable. One the whole, this movie isn't [[consummate]]. It doesn't 'hang well' [[jointly]] as the story line is basically a bunch of [[fangs]] to hang [[pranks]].

Some of these jokes are a little 'too 80s' and [[tended]] to date the [[photography]].

But some of these jokes are classic.

You [[savoir]] a movie has something special when you and your friends [[yet]] reference silly [[quote]] from it over 2 decades [[then]].

Plus, there are a bunch of [[colloquial]] [[confronting]]; Michael Keaton, Danny Devito, Joe Piscapo, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Maureen Stapleton, Bob Eubanks, Griffin [[Dunn]], and one of the last roles of Alan Hale Jr., the Skipper from Gilligan's [[Lsland]].

[[Similarly]], there are some [[huge]] absurdist moments, like when [[Jonny]] is labelling the puppies with a [[costs]] [[handgun]], or the Pope [[doing]] an appearance in Johnny's [[vicinity]]. [[Similarly]], the scene where the [[falsify]] [[clergyman]] makes up a [[lots]] of words in Latin is [[wondrous]]. ("Summa cum laude, magna [[accumulate]] laude, the radio's too louda... Post meridian, ante meridian, uncle meridian").

Other [[Typical]] Scenes [[incorporate]] Ramone Maroney butchering the English [[linguistics]] [[Danby]] [[Danny]] urging [[Griffon]] [[Dunn]] to 'Play Ball' [[Pedro]] Boyle [[think]] he lost his manhood The fake VD movie

This [[cinematography]] is no [[household]] run. But like 'Porky's', it has [[adequate]] classic comedy bits to make it memorable. --------------------------------------------- Result 3433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Indian Summer! It was very nostalgic for me. I found it funny, heartwarming, and absolutely loved it! Anyone who went to camp as a kid and wishes at times they could go back to the "good Ole' days" for a brief time really needs to see this one! It starts out as 20 years later, a group of old campers returns for a "reunion". I won't comment on the plot anymore cause you have to see it for yourself. The actors were great, and it contains an all star cast. Everyone in it played a terrific role. You actually felt like you were a part of the movie watching it. Alan Arkin was especially good in his role as Uncle Lou. He plays the kind of guy that everyone wishes they had in their lives. This is also a good family movie for the most part. I would suggest this one to anybody in a heartbeat! HIGHLY Recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 3434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The director, outfitted in chains and leather, warned the audience at the SF Frameline Film Festival Friday night that we were about to see an "experiental" film. Experimental? Leave the video camera on the back seat of the car, let the tape roll and edit in all the pointless dreck within eyesight. A meandering pastiche road show manqué that starts nowhere and takes the audience no place. The gratuitous violence that opens the movie drove more than one patron from the Castro theater. I would have left, too, but my cine-buddy needed a ride home and has this thing about seeing even the worse merde through to the end. By the time the lights came up the audience had thinned considerably. Tepid applause. Pro forma questions of the director who seemed pleased with the product. Avoid this film! --------------------------------------------- Result 3435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Director/star Clint Eastwood's "Sudden Impact" is an intriguing addition to the "Dirty Harry" series - a combination of crude film-making and genius. It's mediocre and silly in parts, brilliant and classic in others, with compelling, gripping pacing. There are numerous echoes of the first film here - the shoot 'em up "Make my day" scene recalls the "Do you feel lucky" one, one of the villains is as viscerally repugnant as the first film's Scorpio, an actor who played a minor baddie in the first one returns here as Harry's partner - just to name a few.

Harry Callahan is still at odds with the higher-ups in the department, still mean, still tough, but now he's older and wearier. His constant conflicts with his superiors are a metaphor for his inner conflict - a respect and reverence for the law versus a desire to serve the pure spirit of justice, the two things not always being compatible. This "incompatibility" is the underlying theme of the series. The first film posed a simple question, "What about the victim's rights?" - (do they outweigh those of the criminal? Vice versa? Depends?). That film's answer was controversial, prompting a sequel (the highly enjoyable "Magnum Force") which set out to draw the line between Harry's brand of justice and pure, heartless vigilantism. Dirty Harry, like many of Clint's other roles, is the personification of vengeance, the protector of the the defenseless. This movie however brings it back to the victim, in this case Jennifer (portrayed by Sondra Locke), who decides to avenge the rape of herself and her now-incapacitated sister by ruthlessly hunting down and ritualistically executing the men (and one woman) who committed the crime.

Without going into a play-by-play of the whole movie, I will say this - I mentioned earlier that "Sudden Impact" echoes the first film - it actually also sprinkles in little references and in-jokes from the whole series (the confusion concerning the captain's last name is an example - an intentional prank, I believe). The relationship between Callahan and Jennifer is neat - has our rogue cop hero found a soul-mate in this lady vigilante? And is she a vigilante or a victim justifiably standing up for her and her sister's tarnished rights? The exchange between these two at the very end of the film is a poetic denouement of the series, one which I personally (as a fan) found quite moving. That last scene alone makes Sudden Impact the legitimate climax to the "Dirty Harry" collection, the perfect answer to the conflict posed in the first film. (Not to knock "The Dead Pool" - that excellent movie was a relatively light-hearted suspenseful yet comic thriller featuring Harry Callahan, rather than a character-defining film like this one).

This movie did well in the theaters - audiences in the Reagan Era found Harry and his ilk quite appealing, and the President himself frequently quoted "Go ahead, make my day." --------------------------------------------- Result 3436 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Does anyone know the exact quote about "time and love" by George Ede aka, Father Fitzpatrick in the move, It had to be you? He was talking to Charlie and Annna in the church as they were leaving? If not I will have to rent the movie. This was a great movie. I also [[loved]] Serendipity! [[Great]] [[love]] [[story]] for the [[soul]]!

I [[met]] my one [[true]] [[love]] (my Soulmate) and although I had the [[experience]] to meet him when I had least expecting it, I wasn't ready for that kind of emotional [[relationship]].

Altho, we did [[marry]], I wasn't mature [[enough]] to [[give]] as much as I [[thought]] I [[would]]. I [[got]] complacent and [[took]] his [[love]] for [[granted]] and he [[withstood]] it for 7 years.

He finally [[left]] with [[resentment]] but we are [[still]] [[hurt]] and [[angry]] & in disbelief about the way it turned out. I had some very [[hard]] lessons to [[learn]] and we have now been [[apart]] 3 years.

This movie [[meant]] a [[lot]] because I am [[still]] waiting on reconciling with my one and only [[true]] [[love]]. I can NOW appreciate that distinct feeling [[inside]] of me and the [[quote]] of Father Fitzpatrick rang true for me.

I [[know]] when he has healed [[enough]] to [[trust]] me again, we will remarry.

Don't EVER [[GET]] COMPLACENT AND [[TAKE]] [[TRUE]] [[LOVE]] [[FOR]] [[GRANTED]]! IT HAS BEEN THE [[HARDEST]] LESSON OF MY [[LIFE]].

Also the music in this [[movie]] is [[OUTSTANDING]] and [[MEANINGFUL]]! This [[movie]] is [[DEEP]] and spiritually [[uplifting]]. [[TRUE]] [[LOVE]] is worth [[waiting]] for, if it is [[meant]] to be, it will, no matter what, IT [[WILL]] [[HAPPEN]]! [[Nothing]] is [[impossible]], even when it's the second time [[around]]! [[Thanks]]! Does anyone know the exact quote about "time and love" by George Ede aka, Father Fitzpatrick in the move, It had to be you? He was talking to Charlie and Annna in the church as they were leaving? If not I will have to rent the movie. This was a great movie. I also [[cared]] Serendipity! [[Grand]] [[loved]] [[history]] for the [[alma]]!

I [[complied]] my one [[authentic]] [[loves]] (my Soulmate) and although I had the [[experiences]] to meet him when I had least expecting it, I wasn't ready for that kind of emotional [[relations]].

Altho, we did [[wedlock]], I wasn't mature [[adequately]] to [[lend]] as much as I [[ideas]] I [[should]]. I [[get]] complacent and [[picked]] his [[likes]] for [[given]] and he [[resisted]] it for 7 years.

He finally [[exited]] with [[dissatisfaction]] but we are [[again]] [[harmed]] and [[furious]] & in disbelief about the way it turned out. I had some very [[challenging]] lessons to [[learned]] and we have now been [[furthermore]] 3 years.

This movie [[intend]] a [[lots]] because I am [[again]] waiting on reconciling with my one and only [[authentic]] [[likes]]. I can NOW appreciate that distinct feeling [[within]] of me and the [[quoting]] of Father Fitzpatrick rang true for me.

I [[savoir]] when he has healed [[sufficiently]] to [[trusted]] me again, we will remarry.

Don't EVER [[OBTAIN]] COMPLACENT AND [[TAKING]] [[TRUTHFUL]] [[IOVE]] [[DURING]] [[ACCORDED]]! IT HAS BEEN THE [[LOUSIEST]] LESSON OF MY [[IIFE]].

Also the music in this [[kino]] is [[UNRESOLVED]] and [[WORTHWHILE]]! This [[film]] is [[DEEPEST]] and spiritually [[uplift]]. [[TRUTHFUL]] [[LIKES]] is worth [[hoping]] for, if it is [[intended]] to be, it will, no matter what, IT [[WILLINGNESS]] [[OCCUR]]! [[Nada]] is [[impractical]], even when it's the second time [[throughout]]! [[Merci]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] A country-boy Aussie-Rules [[player]] ([[Mat]]) goes to the [[city]] the [[night]] before an all-important AFL trial [[match]], where he is to be [[picked]] up by his [[cousin]]. And then things go [[wrong]].

His no-hoper cousin has [[become]] mixed up in a [[drug]] [[deal]] [[involving]] local loan-shark / drug-dealer [[Tiny]] (who looks like any [[gangster]] [[anywhere]] but is definitively Australian). Needless to say, [[Mat]] becomes enmeshed in the chaos, and it isn't long before [[thoughts]] of tomorrow's [[match]] are shunted to the back of his mind as the night's [[frantic]] [[events]] unravel.

[[Accomplished]] [[Western]] [[Australian]] [[professional]] Shakespearean [[actor]] Toby Malone [[puts]] in a sterling performance as [[young]] [[naive]] country-boy [[Mat]], and successfully plays a [[part]] well below his age. [[Best]] support comes from [[John]] Batchelor as [[Tiny]], and an [[entertaining]] role by [[David]] Ngoombujarra as one of the [[cops]] following the [[events]]. [[Roll]] is fast-paced, [[often]] funny, and a very [[worthwhile]] [[use]] of an [[hour]]. A country-boy Aussie-Rules [[protagonist]] ([[Rug]]) goes to the [[town]] the [[overnight]] before an all-important AFL trial [[equalize]], where he is to be [[chosen]] up by his [[cousins]]. And then things go [[misspelled]].

His no-hoper cousin has [[gotten]] mixed up in a [[drugs]] [[address]] [[encompassing]] local loan-shark / drug-dealer [[Minuscule]] (who looks like any [[gangsta]] [[nowhere]] but is definitively Australian). Needless to say, [[Carpet]] becomes enmeshed in the chaos, and it isn't long before [[idea]] of tomorrow's [[pairing]] are shunted to the back of his mind as the night's [[furious]] [[phenomena]] unravel.

[[Performed]] [[Westen]] [[Australians]] [[occupational]] Shakespearean [[actress]] Toby Malone [[stirs]] in a sterling performance as [[youth]] [[ingenuous]] country-boy [[Checkmate]], and successfully plays a [[portions]] well below his age. [[Better]] support comes from [[Johannes]] Batchelor as [[Minuscule]], and an [[amusing]] role by [[Dawood]] Ngoombujarra as one of the [[police]] following the [[happenings]]. [[Rolling]] is fast-paced, [[normally]] funny, and a very [[useful]] [[employs]] of an [[hours]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saving Grace is a nice movie to watch in a boring afternoon,when you are looking for something different than the regular scripts and wants to have some fun. I mean,the whole idea of this movie and all the marijuana in it is such a craziness! It was the first movie I watched with this theme(drugs/marijuana) that is not really criticizing it,only making jokes about it. Grace Trevethyn is a widow,who lives in a small town in U.K. and has many financial problems because of her dead husband, who committed suicide since he was full of debts. The problem is that Grace, who imagined to have some money saved for her, discovers that she needs to pay all of her husband's pounds in debts to not lose all of her things, specially her house that she loves so much. She never worked before, and is in a tragic situation until Matthew,her gardener who is very found of smoking pot, decides to make a partnership with her in selling marijuana in large scale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Beautiful and touching movie. Rich colors, great settings, good acting and one of the most charming movies I have seen in a while. I never saw such an interesting setting when I was in China. My wife liked it so much she asked me to log on and rate it so other would enjoy too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] As usual, i went to watch this movie for A.R.[[Rahman]]. [[Otherwise]], the [[film]] is no good. Rajni wanted to end his [[movie]] [[career]] with this film is it [[would]] be successful. But fortunately or [[unfortunately]] the film was a [[failure]]. After this he [[delivered]] a hit with Chandramukhi. I Am eagerly [[waiting]] for his forth coming Shivaji.

I have read the other user's comment on Rajni. I found it interesting as the [[user]] is from TN too. Rajni is one [[actor]] who acts, i think, from his heart not from his mind. He is not a method actor like Kamal Hasan. I think we need to appreciate Rajni for his strong going at his age.

Any ways, i need to fill 10 lines for this comment... so [[wish]] u good luck Rajni........... As usual, i went to watch this movie for A.R.[[Beneficent]]. [[Else]], the [[filmmaking]] is no good. Rajni wanted to end his [[films]] [[professions]] with this film is it [[should]] be successful. But fortunately or [[woefully]] the film was a [[defect]]. After this he [[rendered]] a hit with Chandramukhi. I Am eagerly [[awaited]] for his forth coming Shivaji.

I have read the other user's comment on Rajni. I found it interesting as the [[users]] is from TN too. Rajni is one [[protagonist]] who acts, i think, from his heart not from his mind. He is not a method actor like Kamal Hasan. I think we need to appreciate Rajni for his strong going at his age.

Any ways, i need to fill 10 lines for this comment... so [[desire]] u good luck Rajni........... --------------------------------------------- Result 3441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being a person who does not usually enjoy boxing movies, feeling they only focus on the boxing and not the characters themselves, this movie truly moved me. I loved being able to see the main character Diana(Michelle Rodriguez) go through so many things in such a short while, it was amazing to me. Michelle (Rodriguez) did such a wonderful job playing Diana especially since this was her first acting experience, she showed true emotion and portrayed Diana wonderfully. All actors had chemistry on screen and made this movie even more amazing. I highly recommend this movie even to those who do not usually watch boxing movies. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] This is a so called 'feel-good' [[movies]], however it [[made]] me [[sad]] in a [[way]]. Why? Because I had the talent, but my [[parents]] didn't [[let]] me [[study]] at the [[sports]] academy, as well the fact that at the [[age]] of 12 I [[decided]] to quit [[soccer]].

And [[soccer]] is the red [[line]] in this movie. Together with the [[struggle]] [[youngsters]] have with the expectations parents have. An English-Indian girl and her parents, with their traditions and strong family ties, and on the other hand the English family with a daugther who dresses like a boy, and plays soccer... a combination which worries her mother! This movie also lines out the lives of ordinary people, as well as the Indian community in England. It is about believe in your dreams, and live your one life (where did we hear that before).

Paraminder Nagra (a beautiful women!) plays Yasminda, a girl who is not interested in boys, new clothes, make-up and the typical 17 year old girl stuff. In contradiction with her sister Pinky, complete the opposite of Yasminda.

A real [[must]] it is, to see how a young beautiful girl struggles with the traditions of their parents, and finds her luck eventually. With great music from Blondie, Curtis Mayfield, Texas, Melanie C, as well as Indian hit songs.

Pleasant to watch, but if you, as myself, ever played soccer, and never made it to the top, then this movie will make you melachonic. This is a so called 'feel-good' [[theater]], however it [[brought]] me [[deplorable]] in a [[route]]. Why? Because I had the talent, but my [[parenting]] didn't [[letting]] me [[explore]] at the [[athletics]] academy, as well the fact that at the [[aging]] of 12 I [[decides]] to quit [[football]].

And [[football]] is the red [[bloodline]] in this movie. Together with the [[wrestling]] [[juveniles]] have with the expectations parents have. An English-Indian girl and her parents, with their traditions and strong family ties, and on the other hand the English family with a daugther who dresses like a boy, and plays soccer... a combination which worries her mother! This movie also lines out the lives of ordinary people, as well as the Indian community in England. It is about believe in your dreams, and live your one life (where did we hear that before).

Paraminder Nagra (a beautiful women!) plays Yasminda, a girl who is not interested in boys, new clothes, make-up and the typical 17 year old girl stuff. In contradiction with her sister Pinky, complete the opposite of Yasminda.

A real [[should]] it is, to see how a young beautiful girl struggles with the traditions of their parents, and finds her luck eventually. With great music from Blondie, Curtis Mayfield, Texas, Melanie C, as well as Indian hit songs.

Pleasant to watch, but if you, as myself, ever played soccer, and never made it to the top, then this movie will make you melachonic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Went to watch this [[movie]] [[expecting]] a 'nothing [[really]] much' action [[flick]], still [[got]] very [[disappointed]]. The [[opening]] scene [[promised]] a little [[action]] with a [[tinge]] of [[comedy]]. It keeps you [[hooked]] for the first half [[coz]] till then you are [[expecting]] that now its time for the [[action]] to [[kick]] in. Well, nothing of that [[sort]] [[happens]]. The [[movie]] drags and the [[ending]] just thumps you down to a point that you [[get]] [[annoyed]].Wonder what was the [[director]] [[thinking]]. [[Made]] no [[sense]] watsoever. The [[movie]] lacked in all aspects, had no [[real]] storyline and it seemed very [[hollow]], [[even]] if "Rambo" was in it, I don't think he [[could]] have [[helped]] the [[rating]] at all. There is [[simply]] no [[logic]] to the [[movie]]. A [[perfect]] [[way]] to [[waste]] your [[time]] and [[money]]. By far the most [[irritating]] [[movie]] i have ever seen and i am sure there will b others who'll have the same [[viewpoint]] after [[enduring]] it. Definitely not for people who have a [[little]] movie [[sense]] left in them. Went to watch this [[filmmaking]] [[expect]] a 'nothing [[truly]] much' action [[film]], still [[gets]] very [[disappoint]]. The [[open]] scene [[pledge]] a little [[actions]] with a [[tinged]] of [[parody]]. It keeps you [[hook]] for the first half [[cousins]] till then you are [[expects]] that now its time for the [[actions]] to [[whoop]] in. Well, nothing of that [[kind]] [[occurs]]. The [[flick]] drags and the [[ended]] just thumps you down to a point that you [[obtains]] [[infuriated]].Wonder what was the [[headmaster]] [[think]]. [[Introduced]] no [[feeling]] watsoever. The [[filmmaking]] lacked in all aspects, had no [[actual]] storyline and it seemed very [[empty]], [[yet]] if "Rambo" was in it, I don't think he [[would]] have [[succour]] the [[ratings]] at all. There is [[purely]] no [[reasoning]] to the [[cinema]]. A [[irreproachable]] [[path]] to [[wastes]] your [[period]] and [[cash]]. By far the most [[exasperating]] [[cinematographic]] i have ever seen and i am sure there will b others who'll have the same [[views]] after [[sustained]] it. Definitely not for people who have a [[scant]] movie [[feeling]] left in them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A romanticised and thoroughly [[false]] vision of unemployment from a middle class "[[artist]]" with a comfortable upbringing... It is [[clear]] that the writer-director never suffered unemployment directly and certainly has no personal experience of it. If you had to believe this absolutely [[ridiculous]] [[story]], unemployed [[men]] of all ages behave like teenagers, have no anger, no fear, no frustration, etc. All the characters live trough the day by carrying [[pranks]], boyish jokes. They do never look for work, the do almost never experience rejection or anguish, etc. Living on the dole is just about like a summer vacation from [[school]]... [[Ridiculous]]. Specially if you compare it with contemporary masterpieces from the likes of Ken Loach, [[etc]]. A romanticised and thoroughly [[specious]] vision of unemployment from a middle class "[[performer]]" with a comfortable upbringing... It is [[definite]] that the writer-director never suffered unemployment directly and certainly has no personal experience of it. If you had to believe this absolutely [[farcical]] [[fairytales]], unemployed [[man]] of all ages behave like teenagers, have no anger, no fear, no frustration, etc. All the characters live trough the day by carrying [[adventures]], boyish jokes. They do never look for work, the do almost never experience rejection or anguish, etc. Living on the dole is just about like a summer vacation from [[tuition]]... [[Farcical]]. Specially if you compare it with contemporary masterpieces from the likes of Ken Loach, [[cetera]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3445 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Unreal]] "movie", what were these people on?? A [[mix]] of French Upstairs Downstairs, [[mating]] horses,porn (not [[suggested]], its pretty full on for a film) & bestiality with a [[bit]] of [[Benny]] [[Hill]] music & [[chase]] scenes [[thrown]] in, its sounds [[crazy]] & its even more so to watch. **spoiler** It plods along in a [[tedious]] [[fashion]] for [[quite]] a while,.... then a [[Lamb]] does a [[runner]], [[prompting]] [[woman]] in period [[dress]] to [[run]] off after it, she goes into the [[woods]] where she is set upon by an erect "penis" [[attached]] to a man in a bear/rat manky suit, I put it [[like]] that as its [[obvious]] the "[[penis]]" is in charge & gets [[way]] too much screen [[time]], ejaculating for the most of it, anyway, in a nutshell, it turns out she [[liked]] a [[bit]] of bear/rat tadger & [[thats]] about it, the [[rest]] is just [[padding]]. **[[end]] spoiler** [[A]] film [[made]] to shock & offend, [[thus]] getting talked about, any [[publicity]] is good [[publicity]] I [[suppose]],a [[waste]] of [[time]] really, but the "main [[event]]" has to be [[seen]] to be [[believed]], its [[hard]] to [[imagine]] that [[anyone]] [[thought]] it was a good [[idea]] as they [[filmed]] it. [[Surrealist]] "movie", what were these people on?? A [[mixture]] of French Upstairs Downstairs, [[comrade]] horses,porn (not [[proposes]], its pretty full on for a film) & bestiality with a [[bite]] of [[Penny]] [[Hillside]] music & [[pursues]] scenes [[threw]] in, its sounds [[deranged]] & its even more so to watch. **spoiler** It plods along in a [[monotonous]] [[manner]] for [[rather]] a while,.... then a [[Mouton]] does a [[racer]], [[forcing]] [[women]] in period [[garment]] to [[running]] off after it, she goes into the [[forest]] where she is set upon by an erect "penis" [[annexed]] to a man in a bear/rat manky suit, I put it [[loves]] that as its [[noticeable]] the "[[dick]]" is in charge & gets [[ways]] too much screen [[period]], ejaculating for the most of it, anyway, in a nutshell, it turns out she [[enjoyed]] a [[bitten]] of bear/rat tadger & [[theyre]] about it, the [[stays]] is just [[upholstery]]. **[[terminates]] spoiler** [[una]] film [[introduced]] to shock & offend, [[then]] getting talked about, any [[advertisement]] is good [[propaganda]] I [[imagines]],a [[wastes]] of [[times]] really, but the "main [[phenomena]]" has to be [[watched]] to be [[felt]], its [[tough]] to [[imagining]] that [[anybody]] [[thinking]] it was a good [[ideals]] as they [[shot]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this movie because it told a very interesting story about living in a totally different world at the south pole. Susan Sarandon is such a good actor, that she made an interesting, strong character out of mediocre writing. The true story displays a devastating situation for her character to overcome. --------------------------------------------- Result 3447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simply well written, directed and acted... Woody's best of the 2000's if not his best since the 80's!! Hugh Jackman was the perfect pick for his roll. Scarlett Johansson's banter with Woody proves how well rounded an actress she has become.

It's refreshing to not being in a romance on screen with the leading lady. He plays the perfect bumbling magician.

There have been a few reviews maligning this movie. Don't let them stop you from seeing the wonderfully done film. People in the crowd I saw this with were laughing so loud at some lines i missed the next line. If you like Woody Allen films of the 70's, you'll regret missing this one.

I suggest you go to watch this film with an open mind, if you do, you might walk out smiling. --------------------------------------------- Result 3448 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know what Margaret Atwood was thinking to allow this movie to have the same name as her book. I've always been a big fan of The Robber Bride and was so excited to learn there was a movie in the works. I am aware that the translation of book to movie isn't perfect but this movie was the worst ever. The names of the women are correct and some of the back story is correct but that is about it. I feel like I lost a good portion of my time trying to make it through this movie. This really should have been a mini-series to tell the story the way it was written.

The actors for Roz, Tony, Charis and Zenia were well-chosen even though I was skeptical at first about Mary-Louise Parker. I only wish they'd had a better script to work with because this really had nothing to do with the book at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's hard to say what was the worst thing about this show: the bad acting, poor acoustics of different portions, bad CGI, improper sets for the period, the poor script. It would have been nice if the script followed the original tale a bit closer -- there's enough tension and good material in Beowulf to provide a great deal of good material, and a better story line, than the scriptwriters could come up with.

And why introduce a strange new weapon like a crossbow that fires explosive bolts?

I see that this movie was made in "only" 21 days. It shows in the lack of quality. I'm beginning to think this is general (poor) attitude taken by Sci-Fi channel (and others) when it comes to making movies out of classic tales in the past few years.

What a waste! --------------------------------------------- Result 3450 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Spacecamp is my favorite movie. It is a great story and also inspires others.

The acting was [[excellent]] and my [[wife]] and I went to [[see]] Lea Thompson in [[Cabaret]] [[years]] [[later]] due to her performance in the movie. It is unfortunate that the [[Challenger]] Accident delayed and hurt the movie.

The 20th [[Anniversary]] of the [[Challenger]] Accident is [[coming]] up. I knew one of the Challenger Astronauts off and on since childhood on the Carnegie Mellon campus where my father went to school; I [[also]] know a close friend of the late pilot.

I was the technical [[review]] last year for National BSA for the Boy Scout [[Astronomy]] [[Merit]] [[Badge]] and I [[still]] [[find]] Spacecamp a [[great]] [[movie]] to [[recommend]] to [[Scouts]] doing the Space related [[merit]] [[badges]] I teach.

I ran into the late astronaut again as an [[adult]] and was following a [[schedule]] of engineering [[education]] we had put together when [[Challenger]] blew up. I [[wound]] up sitting in with Willard Rockwell and his [[engineers]],"invisible", going over [[things]] after the [[Accident]] at the Astrotech stockholders meeting by [[chance]] as a [[result]], so I'm much closer to the Accident and any movie [[similarities]]. I made sure that I was a good student and [[finished]] the degree four [[years]] [[later]], [[strangely]] [[enough]], on the [[recommendation]] of the Rockwell engineer who told them not to fly [[Challenger]] in 1986 and who later [[built]] [[Endeavour]]. Spacecamp is my favorite movie. It is a great story and also inspires others.

The acting was [[wondrous]] and my [[femme]] and I went to [[consults]] Lea Thompson in [[Lounge]] [[olds]] [[afterward]] due to her performance in the movie. It is unfortunate that the [[Contender]] Accident delayed and hurt the movie.

The 20th [[Birthday]] of the [[Competitor]] Accident is [[forthcoming]] up. I knew one of the Challenger Astronauts off and on since childhood on the Carnegie Mellon campus where my father went to school; I [[similarly]] know a close friend of the late pilot.

I was the technical [[reviews]] last year for National BSA for the Boy Scout [[Astronomers]] [[Deserves]] [[Badges]] and I [[yet]] [[found]] Spacecamp a [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] to [[recommended]] to [[Scout]] doing the Space related [[merits]] [[badge]] I teach.

I ran into the late astronaut again as an [[adults]] and was following a [[calendars]] of engineering [[teaching]] we had put together when [[Challengers]] blew up. I [[injures]] up sitting in with Willard Rockwell and his [[engineering]],"invisible", going over [[items]] after the [[Casualty]] at the Astrotech stockholders meeting by [[possibilities]] as a [[conclusions]], so I'm much closer to the Accident and any movie [[parallels]]. I made sure that I was a good student and [[finish]] the degree four [[yrs]] [[afterwards]], [[suspiciously]] [[sufficiently]], on the [[proposals]] of the Rockwell engineer who told them not to fly [[Rival]] in 1986 and who later [[constructed]] [[Attempts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie surprised me. Some things were "clicheish" and some technological elements reminded me of the movie "Enemy of the State" starring Will Smith. But for the most part very entertaining- good mix with Jamie Foxx and comedian Mike Epps and the 2 wannabe thugs Julio and Ramundo (providing some comic relief). This is a movie you can watch over again-say... some Wednesday night when nothing else is on. I gave it a 9 for entertainment value. --------------------------------------------- Result 3452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I've seen some bad things in my time. A half dead cow trying to get out of waist high [[mud]]; a head on collision between two cars; a thousand plates smashing on a kitchen floor; human beings living like animals.

But never in my life have I [[seen]] anything as bad as The Cat in the Hat.

This [[film]] is worse than 911, worse than Hitler, worse than Vllad the Impaler, [[worse]] than people who put kittens in microwaves.

It is the most [[disturbing]] film of all [[time]], easy.

I used to think it was a [[joke]], some elaborate [[joke]] and that [[Mike]] [[Myers]] was maybe a [[high]] cocaine sniffing drug addled betting junkie who lost a bet or something.

I shudder I've seen some bad things in my time. A half dead cow trying to get out of waist high [[clay]]; a head on collision between two cars; a thousand plates smashing on a kitchen floor; human beings living like animals.

But never in my life have I [[saw]] anything as bad as The Cat in the Hat.

This [[filmmaking]] is worse than 911, worse than Hitler, worse than Vllad the Impaler, [[worst]] than people who put kittens in microwaves.

It is the most [[disconcerting]] film of all [[times]], easy.

I used to think it was a [[farce]], some elaborate [[travesty]] and that [[Mick]] [[Meyers]] was maybe a [[highest]] cocaine sniffing drug addled betting junkie who lost a bet or something.

I shudder --------------------------------------------- Result 3453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Basically]], the [[movie]] might be one of the most mesmerizing titles made by either of the two Scotts(Ridley and [[Tony]]). Let's make it [[straight]], the [[movie]] deserved its hype as one of the most stylish actioner/thriller ever [[made]].

When it [[comes]] to disgruntled [[tragic]] heroes, Denzel Washington and [[Tony]] Scotts [[really]] make a perfect duo. [[Both]] this [[movie]] and Deja Vu are [[better]] thrillers you can expect. Washington really [[got]] very comfortable in the shaky cameras and every [[executing]] scenes in the movie. One would easily be related to his character's [[emotions]] [[therefore]] [[enjoyed]] all the killings on the [[road]]. It's a [[success]] that they [[created]] a super-dark Mexico [[city]] with a [[lot]] of [[shits]] happening. One [[would]] be easily [[convinced]] by the extent of [[corruption]] [[depicted]] in [[Man]] On Fire. I don't know what would the [[Mexicans]] [[think]] when they watch this......

Well, let's [[face]] it again. It's [[among]] the [[best]] of the [[Death]] [[Wish]] [[genre]], but it [[also]] suffered from [[extensive]] [[amount]] of violence. It's a bit annoying that they [[justify]] the [[actions]] of a vigilante by making the [[movie]] very [[realistic]] and let Denzel Washington play the "missing sheep" [[type]] of [[tragic]] hero. [[In]] the [[end]], they even had the [[kidnapper]] shot in his own [[swimming]] pool like a [[documentary]]. I was [[checking]] on IMDb if the [[movie]] was based on [[real]] events for that...... [[So]] that's for your [[consideration]] if you also [[finds]] the movie's [[theme]] is a [[little]] bit [[phony]].

[[At]] the end, I [[hope]] one [[would]] not take this [[movie]] for real.

8/10 for art [[direction]]/[[editing]]/[[cinematographic]]/Denzel Washington. [[Principally]], the [[cinematography]] might be one of the most mesmerizing titles made by either of the two Scotts(Ridley and [[Toni]]). Let's make it [[successive]], the [[film]] deserved its hype as one of the most stylish actioner/thriller ever [[introduced]].

When it [[happens]] to disgruntled [[catastrophic]] heroes, Denzel Washington and [[Toni]] Scotts [[genuinely]] make a perfect duo. [[Whether]] this [[cinematic]] and Deja Vu are [[best]] thrillers you can expect. Washington really [[ai]] very comfortable in the shaky cameras and every [[applying]] scenes in the movie. One would easily be related to his character's [[passions]] [[consequently]] [[adored]] all the killings on the [[paths]]. It's a [[avail]] that they [[established]] a super-dark Mexico [[ville]] with a [[batch]] of [[poops]] happening. One [[ought]] be easily [[persuaded]] by the extent of [[bribery]] [[exemplified]] in [[Males]] On Fire. I don't know what would the [[Wetbacks]] [[believing]] when they watch this......

Well, let's [[confront]] it again. It's [[in]] the [[finest]] of the [[Mortality]] [[Desire]] [[genera]], but it [[further]] suffered from [[comprehensive]] [[quantity]] of violence. It's a bit annoying that they [[justification]] the [[measurements]] of a vigilante by making the [[cinema]] very [[practical]] and let Denzel Washington play the "missing sheep" [[genus]] of [[disastrous]] hero. [[At]] the [[termination]], they even had the [[captor]] shot in his own [[bathing]] pool like a [[documentation]]. I was [[verify]] on IMDb if the [[cinematography]] was based on [[authentic]] events for that...... [[Thereby]] that's for your [[considerations]] if you also [[discoveries]] the movie's [[subjects]] is a [[tiny]] bit [[bogus]].

[[In]] the end, I [[hopes]] one [[could]] not take this [[movies]] for real.

8/10 for art [[directorate]]/[[edited]]/[[cinematic]]/Denzel Washington. --------------------------------------------- Result 3454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to be one of the worst fillums I've ever seen and I've seen a few. It is slow, boring, amateurish - not even consistent within its own simplistic reading of the plot. The actors do not act. I can't blame them - they have been given a script of such utter banality all they can do is trudge through it with a pain behind their eyes which has nothing to do with the evil goings on in SummersIsle.

There is not one moment in this film that rings true - not an honest line nor a single instant where one is moved. The Nicholas Cage character is so badly drawn that one feels not a smidgeon of compassion for him through all his tribulations. I have no doubt that I was seeing a suffering man up there but it was Nicholas Cage fully aware of the fact that he was in the worst movie of his entire career. --------------------------------------------- Result 3455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Yet another venture into the realm of the teen-gross-out-comedy, set on a college campus [[featuring]] a nerd's quest to [[coolness]], and how he decides to blackmail a trio of popular jocks into making him get the girl. It's all been done before, and it's all been [[done]] in a far more satisfying manner. The gross-out humor that has made teen flicks like "American Pie" and "Dude! Where's my Car" so [[popular]] is taken completely out of context in this installment, appearing so [[completely]] at random that the viewer can only frown and disapprove. The film is badly written, and the actors never succeed in making any of it even slightly bearable. I won't [[even]] dignify this [[terrible]] [[picture]] by divulging, as it's a [[waste]] of my [[time]] and yours. [[At]] best, Slackers never manages to [[entertain]] or induce laughter, and at worst it is [[excruciatingly]] bad and at times [[completely]] unwatchable.

Jason Schwarzman, who [[impressed]] in his [[debut]] Rushmore, humiliates himself by appearing in this [[picture]] and one wonders how a [[career]] can end up in the toilet so [[fast]]. [[Please]] [[avoid]], please [[avoid]]. [[Save]] your money. Yet another venture into the realm of the teen-gross-out-comedy, set on a college campus [[featured]] a nerd's quest to [[coldness]], and how he decides to blackmail a trio of popular jocks into making him get the girl. It's all been done before, and it's all been [[effected]] in a far more satisfying manner. The gross-out humor that has made teen flicks like "American Pie" and "Dude! Where's my Car" so [[fashionable]] is taken completely out of context in this installment, appearing so [[perfectly]] at random that the viewer can only frown and disapprove. The film is badly written, and the actors never succeed in making any of it even slightly bearable. I won't [[yet]] dignify this [[shocking]] [[visuals]] by divulging, as it's a [[squandering]] of my [[period]] and yours. [[During]] best, Slackers never manages to [[distract]] or induce laughter, and at worst it is [[appallingly]] bad and at times [[totally]] unwatchable.

Jason Schwarzman, who [[surprising]] in his [[premiere]] Rushmore, humiliates himself by appearing in this [[image]] and one wonders how a [[quarry]] can end up in the toilet so [[rapids]]. [[Invites]] [[avoiding]], please [[preventing]]. [[Saved]] your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] We should all congratulate Uwe Boll. He's done the unthinkable. He may be the only [[director]] to have two movies in the bottom 100 on IMDb! He's like some kind of cinematic cockroach. No [[matter]] how little talent he has, and no [[matter]] how bad these [[movies]] are, he manages to keep making them. I know, he [[finances]] them all himself through some [[kind]] of bizarre German [[fund]], but even so, his ability to [[keep]] making movies despite [[absolute]], complete [[failure]] is one of the great mysteries of the universe.

It wouldn't be so bad except that video [[game]] developers keep giving their [[best]] properties to this guy. I really enjoyed the Alone in the [[Dark]] series of [[games]]. Even the latest one, the New Nightmare, was good for a few hours of game play. There was a good movie to be made out of Edward Carnby's adventures, but this is not it. Now Uwe Boll has gotten his hands on Bloodrayne and Hunter: the Reckoning. What's next, Silent Hill? Doom? I can only imagine the swath that this guy is going to cut through game-to-movie adaptations if he's not [[stopped]]. Someone needs to take away his line of credit, or these video game [[publishers]] need to wise up and realize that when they make a bad [[movie]] out of a game that kills the franchise, no one is interested in that title any more.

[[Think]] about it, is House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark a [[viable]] [[game]] title anymore? No way. A [[new]] [[House]] of the [[Dead]] [[game]] [[comes]] out for X-Box and nobody's gonna [[care]]. The title is dead, and all because of Uwe Boll. So if any of you out there [[work]] for a game publisher, or know a game publisher, or have access to a game publisher... please [[warn]] them.

This movie itself is not [[even]] worth reviewing. I can't [[separate]] what I didn't like about this [[pile]] of [[dung]] from the [[rest]] of it. Literally, everything about it sucks. The [[writing]], the acting, the music, the CG [[effects]], the editing. I thought that if I [[waited]] until it [[came]] out on DVD and then rented it with low [[expectations]], I wouldn't be disappointed. [[Boy]], was I wrong. Never [[underestimate]] Uwe's ability to [[turn]] out a [[big]], steaming pile of BOLL sh*t. We should all congratulate Uwe Boll. He's done the unthinkable. He may be the only [[superintendent]] to have two movies in the bottom 100 on IMDb! He's like some kind of cinematic cockroach. No [[issue]] how little talent he has, and no [[topic]] how bad these [[filmmaking]] are, he manages to keep making them. I know, he [[financing]] them all himself through some [[sorts]] of bizarre German [[fonda]], but even so, his ability to [[preserving]] making movies despite [[unmitigated]], complete [[flaw]] is one of the great mysteries of the universe.

It wouldn't be so bad except that video [[games]] developers keep giving their [[optimum]] properties to this guy. I really enjoyed the Alone in the [[Somber]] series of [[jeux]]. Even the latest one, the New Nightmare, was good for a few hours of game play. There was a good movie to be made out of Edward Carnby's adventures, but this is not it. Now Uwe Boll has gotten his hands on Bloodrayne and Hunter: the Reckoning. What's next, Silent Hill? Doom? I can only imagine the swath that this guy is going to cut through game-to-movie adaptations if he's not [[stopping]]. Someone needs to take away his line of credit, or these video game [[editors]] need to wise up and realize that when they make a bad [[flick]] out of a game that kills the franchise, no one is interested in that title any more.

[[Believe]] about it, is House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark a [[feasible]] [[gaming]] title anymore? No way. A [[nuevo]] [[Home]] of the [[Dies]] [[gaming]] [[happens]] out for X-Box and nobody's gonna [[healthcare]]. The title is dead, and all because of Uwe Boll. So if any of you out there [[cooperation]] for a game publisher, or know a game publisher, or have access to a game publisher... please [[alerted]] them.

This movie itself is not [[yet]] worth reviewing. I can't [[distinct]] what I didn't like about this [[battery]] of [[manure]] from the [[resting]] of it. Literally, everything about it sucks. The [[handwriting]], the acting, the music, the CG [[impact]], the editing. I thought that if I [[await]] until it [[became]] out on DVD and then rented it with low [[forecasts]], I wouldn't be disappointed. [[Dude]], was I wrong. Never [[understatement]] Uwe's ability to [[converting]] out a [[considerable]], steaming pile of BOLL sh*t. --------------------------------------------- Result 3457 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Christmas Story" is one of many people's all-time most beloved films. ACS was able to take the viewer to a time and a place in such a way that very few films ever have. It had a sweetness and goodwill to it that is rare.

So I awaited (and awaited) its sequel, "It Runs In The Family" . The film was almost released a couple of times, only to be pulled at the last minute. When it finally came out, IRITF was (and is, I guess) a total failure.

The sets and cinematography were just fine, but the directing totally, completely missed the mark. The film was nothing more than a cash-flow formula of lazy casting, lazy writing, and disconnected acting.

The narrator, Jean Shepard, who was one of America's great humorists and story-tellers, forced upon us a false reprise of the warm wit he used in ACS. He over-emoted, and why he did that I'll never know. He somehow managed to become an annoying, overwrought parody of himself.

The writing and acting in IRITF is inauthentic and forced. The actors may have seen ACS, but whatever wit and nuance that was in ACS mustn't have registered at all on any of them. The acting was embarrassingly slapstick and bereft of any of Shepard's dry humor.

ACS will always be a real treasure, but to call IRITF a sequel is to insult all of the fans of Jean Shepard and ACS. --------------------------------------------- Result 3458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If it's action and adventure you want in a movie, then you'd be best advised to look elsewhere. On the other hand, if it's a lazy day and you want a good movie to go along with that mood, check out "The Straight Story."

Richard Farnsworth puts on a compelling performance as the gentle and gentlemanly Alvin Straight, in this true story of Alvin's journey on a riding mower across three states to see his estranged brother who has had a stroke.

Farnsworth is perfect in this role, as he travels his long and winding road, making friends of strangers and doling out lots of grandfatherly type advice about family along the way. The story moves along as slowly as the riding mower, but somehow manages to keep the viewer watching, waiting for the next life lesson Alvin's going to offer.

Stretch out on the couch, relax and enjoy. It's the only way to watch this very good movie, which rates a 7/10 in my book. --------------------------------------------- Result 3459 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] As a convert into the [[Church]] of Jesus [[Christ]] of [[Latter]] Day Saints, I try to absorb as much as I can of my [[new]] religion's history. I was [[invited]] to attend a showing of this film with my sons & the other young men & [[women]] as well as their families of our ward.

On a beautiful spring [[evening]], we [[drove]] to Kirtland, Ohio to the church's historical village [[located]] there. We were to have had [[reservations]] at the Vistor's [[Center]] to [[view]] this [[movie]]. Since my movie [[viewing]] was [[limited]] to only a few church documentaries, I was intrigued. The only "[[full]] length motion [[pictures]]" of the church's I had seen was "[[Legacy]]" and "My [[Best]] Two [[Years]]", both which I [[thought]] were very well written and preformed.

[[At]] the beginning, the missionary interpretor passed out tissues stating that several people had been deeply moved to the point of tears by this movie. I thought "OK...but it takes a lot to move me to tears." Imagine my surprise when I found myself sobbing! It [[truly]] is a very [[moving]] & inspirational testament to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

See it & believe in it's powerful message! As a convert into the [[Ecclesiastical]] of Jesus [[Jesus]] of [[Final]] Day Saints, I try to absorb as much as I can of my [[novel]] religion's history. I was [[inviting]] to attend a showing of this film with my sons & the other young men & [[females]] as well as their families of our ward.

On a beautiful spring [[soir]], we [[led]] to Kirtland, Ohio to the church's historical village [[positioned]] there. We were to have had [[reserves]] at the Vistor's [[Centres]] to [[standpoint]] this [[movies]]. Since my movie [[opinion]] was [[meagre]] to only a few church documentaries, I was intrigued. The only "[[fullest]] length motion [[imagery]]" of the church's I had seen was "[[Heirloom]]" and "My [[Bestest]] Two [[Yr]]", both which I [[brainchild]] were very well written and preformed.

[[Under]] the beginning, the missionary interpretor passed out tissues stating that several people had been deeply moved to the point of tears by this movie. I thought "OK...but it takes a lot to move me to tears." Imagine my surprise when I found myself sobbing! It [[truthfully]] is a very [[mover]] & inspirational testament to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

See it & believe in it's powerful message! --------------------------------------------- Result 3460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the sequel to the brilliant Bill and Ted's excellent adventure, Bill and Ted are under threat from the future, as the evil Chuck De Nomolos sends two evil robots, disguised as Bill and Ted to earth to kill human Bill and Ted, in order to change the future.

In a great comedy pairing, Winter and Reeves excel to deliver delicious humour to the audience in this entertaining sequel. Though lacking the sharpness of the first, Bogus Journey still has the great catchphrases and dialogue from the leading pair, not to mention an hilarious performance by William Sadler, who brings a humorous side to the figure of depth, the grim reaper. Watch for the games sequences, the best moment in the entire film, but one of many great techniques used to justify the genre.

Though still packed with humour, this film has a more dramatic film towards it, with stakes being more serious and situations more risky.

This gives the film great dimension and another lovable feature. The creators also stretch the boundaries of the fantasy genre and the use of realism, with hell and heaven being heavily symbolic and present in the plot. The fantasy genre is again spot on with the use of that amazing time travelling machine, though again somewhat confusing at points with the use of timing, and objects and situations being placed before it happens in the present, as is evident in the final couple of scenes.

The first watch I hated this sequel, but the second time was a real joy as I appreciated the jokes and story more, and though the jokes and plot aren't as strong as its predecessor, Bogus Journey has enough feel good motives, jokes and a fairly steady plot to make it a good natured family film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is a [[film]] i decided to [[go]] and [[see]] because I'm a [[huge]] fan of adult [[animation]]. I quite [[often]] find that when a [[film]] doesn't evolve [[around]] a [[famous]] [[actor]] or actress but [[rather]] a story or style, it [[allows]] the [[film]] to be viewed as a piece of art rather than a [[showcase]] of the actors [[ability]] to [[differ]] his styles.

This [[film]] is [[certainly]] more about style than story. While i found the story interesting (a [[thriller]] that borrows story and atmosphere from [[films]] such as Blade [[Runner]] and [[many]] anime [[films]]), it was a bit hard to follow at times, and didn't feel like it all came together as well as it could have. It definitely had a mixed sense of French Animation and Japanese Anime coming together. Whether thats a good thing or not is up to the viewer. Visually this film is a [[treat]] for the eyes, and in that sense a [[work]] of art.

If you like adult animation, or would like to see a film that is different from most films out at the moment. I would recommend it. All i can say is that i [[enjoyed]] the experience of the film but did come away [[slightly]] disappointed because it could have been better This is a [[kino]] i decided to [[going]] and [[seeing]] because I'm a [[massive]] fan of adult [[animate]]. I quite [[normally]] find that when a [[cinematography]] doesn't evolve [[about]] a [[acclaimed]] [[protagonist]] or actress but [[fairly]] a story or style, it [[enable]] the [[films]] to be viewed as a piece of art rather than a [[demonstrate]] of the actors [[skills]] to [[vary]] his styles.

This [[movie]] is [[obviously]] more about style than story. While i found the story interesting (a [[thrillers]] that borrows story and atmosphere from [[film]] such as Blade [[Racer]] and [[various]] anime [[movie]]), it was a bit hard to follow at times, and didn't feel like it all came together as well as it could have. It definitely had a mixed sense of French Animation and Japanese Anime coming together. Whether thats a good thing or not is up to the viewer. Visually this film is a [[address]] for the eyes, and in that sense a [[cooperate]] of art.

If you like adult animation, or would like to see a film that is different from most films out at the moment. I would recommend it. All i can say is that i [[appreciated]] the experience of the film but did come away [[moderately]] disappointed because it could have been better --------------------------------------------- Result 3462 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] The title should have been "The walker". That was only he did [[walk]].

There was [[nothing]] on the [[movie]] that was good. The description of the movie doesn't really comply with the plot.

The only [[thing]] that I can [[get]] from the movie is that he was a good son, but a low [[life]] terrible [[person]].

I'm [[sorry]] that I [[expend]] my money and time, on this [[movie]]. I [[saw]] people leaving the [[theater]] in the middle of the [[movie]]. I stayed [[hoping]] that it will [[better]]....what a [[mistake]]. I got [[worse]].

[[If]] there is a [[suggestion]] that I can [[make]] to he [[producer]] is to re-direct his [[life]] to another [[field]], because [[making]] movies is [[definitely]] no his cup of [[tea]] The title should have been "The walker". That was only he did [[marche]].

There was [[none]] on the [[cinematographic]] that was good. The description of the movie doesn't really comply with the plot.

The only [[stuff]] that I can [[got]] from the movie is that he was a good son, but a low [[lifetime]] terrible [[somebody]].

I'm [[dorry]] that I [[dedicate]] my money and time, on this [[filmmaking]]. I [[seen]] people leaving the [[movies]] in the middle of the [[filmmaking]]. I stayed [[expecting]] that it will [[optimum]]....what a [[mistaken]]. I got [[pire]].

[[Unless]] there is a [[recommendations]] that I can [[deliver]] to he [[producers]] is to re-direct his [[lives]] to another [[campo]], because [[doing]] movies is [[decidedly]] no his cup of [[shai]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Dog]] Bite [[Dog]] isn't going to be for [[everyone]], but I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] it. Full of slapping, stabbing and shooting (but don't worry – the lead's a terrible shot), it can best be [[described]] as a violent romp through Hong Kong and Cambodia. Edison [[Cheng]] plays [[Pang]], a Cambodian assassin in town to [[kill]] a [[barrister]]. [[Despite]] being [[filthy]] from his [[journey]], he's [[almost]] [[immediately]] seated at a [[huge]] [[table]] in the middle of an obviously expensive [[restaurant]]. If this sounds [[wildly]] implausible to you, you should [[probably]] [[avoid]] this [[film]]. It acted as my cue to suspend disbelief, and I had a lot more [[fun]] for it.

[[Chasing]] Pang down is Wai (Sam Lee), a young, edgy [[cop]] who [[likes]] to smack people [[around]] [[almost]] as much as he [[likes]] to [[smoke]]. Wai [[walks]] a [[fine]] line that has [[Internal]] Affairs [[investigating]] him, and his father, a [[legendary]] Good [[Cop]], is in a coma following a [[drug]] deal that went south (the [[implication]] is that Wai is [[letting]] his father take the [[rap]] for his own corrupt dealings).

There are a [[car]] crashes, [[lots]] of [[killings]], and a [[strange]] and awkward [[love]] story on [[offer]] here, all played out in [[almost]] comic-book [[style]]. I [[suspect]] the [[humour]] was deliberate (nobody [[uses]] [[gargantuan]] [[concrete]] bludgeons without an eye for the extravagantly [[absurd]]), [[though]] the over-the-top [[nature]] lost a number of my fellow [[audience]] [[members]]. There are at [[least]] three points where the [[film]] might have [[ended]], and at 109 [[mins]] it may have benefited from more ruthless editing, or the deletion of one of the narrative threads (the light-hearted stuff [[worked]] well, so I [[would]] have [[left]] out the [[interactions]] with the three [[fathers]]).

I'm [[inclined]] to [[give]] it a ([[high]]) pass, however, if only because of the [[ending]] – I've rarely [[heard]] so [[many]] people laugh so loudly at what should have been a [[poignant]] [[moment]]. This is one to [[see]] with a [[group]] of [[friends]] who [[love]] the [[ridiculous]] [[Doggie]] Bite [[Canine]] isn't going to be for [[somebody]], but I [[truthfully]] [[liked]] it. Full of slapping, stabbing and shooting (but don't worry – the lead's a terrible shot), it can best be [[sketched]] as a violent romp through Hong Kong and Cambodia. Edison [[Jung]] plays [[Pong]], a Cambodian assassin in town to [[slain]] a [[solicitor]]. [[While]] being [[nasty]] from his [[voyage]], he's [[hardly]] [[quickly]] seated at a [[overwhelming]] [[chalkboard]] in the middle of an obviously expensive [[diner]]. If this sounds [[brutally]] implausible to you, you should [[possibly]] [[stave]] this [[films]]. It acted as my cue to suspend disbelief, and I had a lot more [[amusing]] for it.

[[Hunts]] Pang down is Wai (Sam Lee), a young, edgy [[constable]] who [[loves]] to smack people [[approximately]] [[approximately]] as much as he [[loves]] to [[smoking]]. Wai [[walking]] a [[fined]] line that has [[Inland]] Affairs [[investigated]] him, and his father, a [[mythical]] Good [[Constabulary]], is in a coma following a [[drugs]] deal that went south (the [[implications]] is that Wai is [[leaving]] his father take the [[rapper]] for his own corrupt dealings).

There are a [[motors]] crashes, [[batch]] of [[kill]], and a [[nosy]] and awkward [[iove]] story on [[offers]] here, all played out in [[hardly]] comic-book [[styles]]. I [[suspicious]] the [[comedy]] was deliberate (nobody [[using]] [[massive]] [[specific]] bludgeons without an eye for the extravagantly [[grotesque]]), [[despite]] the over-the-top [[character]] lost a number of my fellow [[audiences]] [[member]]. There are at [[lowest]] three points where the [[cinema]] might have [[ending]], and at 109 [[min]] it may have benefited from more ruthless editing, or the deletion of one of the narrative threads (the light-hearted stuff [[works]] well, so I [[should]] have [[walkout]] out the [[interactive]] with the three [[father]]).

I'm [[tilted]] to [[lend]] it a ([[higher]]) pass, however, if only because of the [[terminated]] – I've rarely [[hear]] so [[several]] people laugh so loudly at what should have been a [[agonizing]] [[time]]. This is one to [[seeing]] with a [[grouping]] of [[amigos]] who [[iove]] the [[preposterous]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I have always [[wanted]] to [[see]] this because I [[love]] cheesy horror [[movies]] and with a title like this, I was sure "The [[Incredible]] [[Melting]] [[Man]]" [[would]] be a [[lot]] of [[fun]].

It [[really]] wasn't. I [[mean]], the acting was entertainingly [[bad]], the [[script]] [[contained]] some [[classic]] [[bad]] lines and the [[special]] [[effects]] looked like [[someone]] had sneezed all over the lead [[actor]], so I should have [[loved]] it. [[Unfortunately]] it's really draggy between these [[highlights]]. I [[decided]] to watch the [[last]] half of the [[movie]] while doing my tax [[return]]. That's how boring this [[film]] is.

[[Nevertheless]], if you [[love]] [[bad]] [[movies]] you will [[enjoy]] the [[dramatic]] [[exit]] of the [[Fat]] [[Nurse]], and the stellar acting of the [[guy]] who plays Dr. Ted. To be fair to the poor [[man]], he does have to [[deliver]] some [[amazingly]] [[inept]] lines with straight face - like the [[conversation]] he has with his [[wife]] on [[tracking]] down the I M [[Man]]:

"I'll [[find]] him with a geiger counter." "Is he radioactive?" "Just a [[little]] bit."

[[Yes]], the plot has Dr. Ted wandering about [[trying]] to [[find]] a superstrong zombie killing machine [[armed]] only with what [[looks]] like a mini-Dyson. He's a [[brave]] [[man]]. Unfortunately his [[plan]] [[fails]] when he [[finds]] a [[big]] [[lot]] of goop on a tree. "[[Oh]] [[god]] - it's his ear!" [[says]] [[Dr]]. Ted to the [[audience]]. I'm so [[glad]] he cleared that up.

I [[realise]] I'm making this [[movie]] sound [[rather]] fun. It [[would]] be if it were only 10 minutes [[long]], but unfortunately it goes on and on, and the Incredible Melting [[Dude]] just dangles about [[making]] a sticky mess when he should be [[eating]] more people in my [[opinion]]. I [[think]] if you were [[truly]] stoned you would [[probably]] [[love]] it, just don't have pop-tarts during the [[movie]], because the lead [[actor]] [[really]] does resemble one near the [[end]]. I have always [[wanna]] to [[consults]] this because I [[amore]] cheesy horror [[filmmaking]] and with a title like this, I was sure "The [[Spectacular]] [[Melt]] [[Dude]]" [[could]] be a [[batch]] of [[droll]].

It [[genuinely]] wasn't. I [[meaning]], the acting was entertainingly [[unfavorable]], the [[screenplay]] [[containing]] some [[typical]] [[horrid]] lines and the [[particular]] [[ramifications]] looked like [[person]] had sneezed all over the lead [[protagonist]], so I should have [[worshiped]] it. [[Sadly]] it's really draggy between these [[emphasizes]]. I [[opted]] to watch the [[final]] half of the [[filmmaking]] while doing my tax [[returns]]. That's how boring this [[filmmaking]] is.

[[However]], if you [[amore]] [[naughty]] [[filmmaking]] you will [[enjoying]] the [[impressive]] [[departing]] of the [[Greasy]] [[Breastfeed]], and the stellar acting of the [[dude]] who plays Dr. Ted. To be fair to the poor [[guy]], he does have to [[make]] some [[beautifully]] [[incapable]] lines with straight face - like the [[talk]] he has with his [[woman]] on [[tracing]] down the I M [[Guy]]:

"I'll [[found]] him with a geiger counter." "Is he radioactive?" "Just a [[scant]] bit."

[[Yup]], the plot has Dr. Ted wandering about [[seeking]] to [[finds]] a superstrong zombie killing machine [[cocked]] only with what [[seems]] like a mini-Dyson. He's a [[gutsy]] [[dude]]. Unfortunately his [[schemes]] [[fail]] when he [[find]] a [[major]] [[batch]] of goop on a tree. "[[Ah]] [[lawd]] - it's his ear!" [[said]] [[Doktor]]. Ted to the [[viewers]]. I'm so [[happier]] he cleared that up.

I [[realizing]] I'm making this [[film]] sound [[quite]] fun. It [[could]] be if it were only 10 minutes [[longer]], but unfortunately it goes on and on, and the Incredible Melting [[Guy]] just dangles about [[doing]] a sticky mess when he should be [[meal]] more people in my [[avis]]. I [[ideas]] if you were [[genuinely]] stoned you would [[admittedly]] [[iike]] it, just don't have pop-tarts during the [[filmmaking]], because the lead [[protagonist]] [[truthfully]] does resemble one near the [[ends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This serial is interesting to watch as an MST3K feature, but for todays audience that's all it is. I was really surprised to see the year it was made as 1952. Considering that fact alone makes this a solid (lowly?) 2 in my book. The cars used don't even look contemporary, they look like stuff from the 30's. It's basically Cody (the lone world's salvation? Sheesh talk about an insult to everyone else, like the military), anyway it's Cody in his nipple ring flying suit against Graber and Daley two dumb*ss henchman who sport handguns and an occasional ray gun thats pretty lame in its own right, enjoy. If you want to watch a really good serial see Flash Gordan, it's full of rockets that attack each other and a good evil nemesis and also good looking women, this has NONE of that. And Flash was made 15 or so years before this crap so you can give it some slack. Something made in 1952, this bad, deserves a 2. Nuff said. give it a 6 if your watching it as a MST3K episode, those guys have some good fun with it; a tweak of the nipples here, a tweak there and I'm flying! And now as an added bonus, I bring you the Commander Cody Theme song as originally sung by Joel and his two character bots Tom Servo and Crow aboard the satellite of love for episode eight The Enemy Planet:

(Singing at the very beginning credits);

(TOM SERVO SINGING) YOUR WATCHING COMMANDER CODY.... HE IS THE NEW CHARACTER FROM REPUBLIC,

HE GETS IN TROUBLE EVERY WEEK... BUT HE'S SAVED BY EDITING,

JUST A TWEAK OF HIS NIPPLES... SENDS HIM ON HIS WAY,

A PUMPKIN HEAD AND A ROCKET PACK.... WILL SAVE THE DAY,

(JOEL SINGING) HIS LABRATORY IS A BOXING RING... WHEN BAD GUYS COME TO MIX IT UP,

SOMEBODY ALWAYS GETS KIDNAPPED... AND CODY HAS TO FIX IT UP,

HE DRINKS HIS TEA AT AL'S CAFE... AND FLIES ALONG ON WIRES,

HE BEATS THE CROOKS AND FLIES WITH HOOKS... AND PUTS OUT FOREST FIRES,

(CROW SINGING)

BAD GUYS BEWARE... CODY IS THERE,

YOU'LL LIKE HIS HAIR IT'S UNDER HIS HELMUT... AND BECAUSE WE CAN'T THINK OF A GOOD RHYME,

THAT'S THE END OF THE COMMANDER CODY THEME SONG... SO SIT RIGHT BACK WITH A WILL OF GRANITE,

AND WATCH CHAPTER EIGHT, CAUSE THAT'S THE ENEMY PLANET --------------------------------------------- Result 3466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So terrific, so good. I have never seen a man be more funny than Eddie Murphy. In this stand-up-comedy you will see a lot of imitations more done by anyone!

If you have seen Raw (1987) you will have to see Delirious. It's so funny! It's so professional! --------------------------------------------- Result 3467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] A [[spoiler]].

What three words can [[guarantee]] you a [[terrible]] [[film]]? Cheap Canadian Production. THE BRAIN [[fits]] those words perfectly. [[Terrible]] script, idiotic acting and hilarious special [[effects]] make this a must for every BAD movie fan. The horror is hilarious. The post [[production]] team [[looks]] [[like]] it [[gave]] up. What makes THE BRAIN admirable is in the second half, it actually [[tries]] to be good! Can a bit of ingenuity and consistency [[save]] what is already a joke?

It's around Christmas time. A mother and daughter are murdered by one of the funniest looking villains ever. The day later, a rebel teen gets into enough trouble that he is sent for a psychiatric [[analysis]].

If a cop 's head is chopped off and a stranger with blood on him and a bloody axe told you some kids did it, who would you believe? What [[begins]] as [[funny]] turns dull and tiring [[toward]] the end when THE BRAIN tries to be serious. A [[child]] cannot be frightened by the scary moments. THE BRAIN is too [[funny]] a [[concept]] to [[try]] and be gritty. The [[Psychological]] [[Research]] Institute is [[larger]] than [[major]] [[manufacturing]] plants! Our ugly [[villain]] and its [[cohorts]] [[get]] credit for pulling some of the [[worst]] acting I have [[seen]]. Viewer discretion [[advised]] [[heavily]]. A [[deflector]].

What three words can [[collateral]] you a [[scary]] [[filmmaking]]? Cheap Canadian Production. THE BRAIN [[adjusts]] those words perfectly. [[Horrible]] script, idiotic acting and hilarious special [[impact]] make this a must for every BAD movie fan. The horror is hilarious. The post [[productivity]] team [[seem]] [[iike]] it [[provided]] up. What makes THE BRAIN admirable is in the second half, it actually [[attempted]] to be good! Can a bit of ingenuity and consistency [[rescuing]] what is already a joke?

It's around Christmas time. A mother and daughter are murdered by one of the funniest looking villains ever. The day later, a rebel teen gets into enough trouble that he is sent for a psychiatric [[analyze]].

If a cop 's head is chopped off and a stranger with blood on him and a bloody axe told you some kids did it, who would you believe? What [[beginnings]] as [[comical]] turns dull and tiring [[about]] the end when THE BRAIN tries to be serious. A [[kid]] cannot be frightened by the scary moments. THE BRAIN is too [[fun]] a [[notion]] to [[seeks]] and be gritty. The [[Psychology]] [[Investigative]] Institute is [[biggest]] than [[sizeable]] [[fabrication]] plants! Our ugly [[hoodlum]] and its [[cohort]] [[got]] credit for pulling some of the [[gravest]] acting I have [[noticed]]. Viewer discretion [[counseled]] [[considerably]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3468 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Despite being released on DVD by Blue Underground some five years ago, I have never come across this Italian "sword and sorcery" [[item]] on late-night Italian [[TV]] and, now that I have [[seen]] it for myself, I know exactly why. Not because of its director's typical [[predilection]] for extreme [[gore]] (of which there is some [[examples]] to be sure) or the [[fact]] that the handful of [[women]] in it [[parade]] topless all the time (it is set in the Dark Ages after all)…it is, quite [[simply]], very poor [[stuff]] indeed. In fact, I [[would]] [[go]] so far as to say that it may very well be the [[worst]] of its kind that I have yet seen and, believe me, I have seen plenty ([[especially]] in the [[last]] few years i.[[e]]. following my excursion to the 2004 [[Venice]] [[Film]] [[Festival]])! Reading about how the film's failure at the time of initial release is believed to have led to its director's subsequent (and regrettable) career nosedive into mindless low-budget gore, I can see their point: I [[may]] [[prefer]] Fulci's earlier "giallo" period (1968-77) to his more popular stuff horror (1979-82) myself but, even on the latter, his commitment was arguably unquestionable. On the other hand, CONQUEST seems not to have inspired Fulci in the [[least]] – seeing how he decided to drape the [[proceedings]] with an annoyingly [[perpetual]] mist, sprinkle it with incongruent [[characters]] (cannibals [[vs]]. werewolves, anyone?), [[irrelevant]] [[gore]] (we are treated to a gratuitous, nasty cannibal dinner just before witnessing the flesh-eating revelers having their brains literally beaten out by their hairy antagonists!) and [[even]] some highly unappetizing intimacy between the masked, brain-slurping villainess (don't ask) and her [[slimy]] reptilian pet!! For what it is worth, we have two heroes for the price of one here: a young magic bow-carrying boy on some manhood-affirming odyssey (Andrea Occhipinti) and his rambling muscle-bound companion (Jorge Rivero i.e. Frenchy from Howard Hawks' RIO LOBO [1970]!) who, despite being called [[Mace]] (short for Maciste, perhaps?), seems to be there [[simply]] to drop in on his cavewoman from time to time and [[get]] his [[younger]] protégé out of trouble (particularly during an exceedingly unpleasant attack of the 'boils'). Unfortunately, even the usual saving grace of such lowbrow material comes up short here as ex-Goblin Claudio Simonetti's electronic score seems awfully inappropriate at times. Fulci even contrives to give the film a laughably hurried coda with the surviving beefy hero going aimlessly out into the wilderness (after defeating one and all with the aid of the all-important magic bow…so much for his own supposed physical strength!) onto his next – and thankfully unfilmed – adventure! Despite being released on DVD by Blue Underground some five years ago, I have never come across this Italian "sword and sorcery" [[themes]] on late-night Italian [[TELEVISION]] and, now that I have [[watched]] it for myself, I know exactly why. Not because of its director's typical [[preference]] for extreme [[gora]] (of which there is some [[instances]] to be sure) or the [[facto]] that the handful of [[females]] in it [[paraded]] topless all the time (it is set in the Dark Ages after all)…it is, quite [[exclusively]], very poor [[thing]] indeed. In fact, I [[should]] [[going]] so far as to say that it may very well be the [[meanest]] of its kind that I have yet seen and, believe me, I have seen plenty ([[mostly]] in the [[final]] few years i.[[f]]. following my excursion to the 2004 [[Venetian]] [[Filmmaking]] [[Festivals]])! Reading about how the film's failure at the time of initial release is believed to have led to its director's subsequent (and regrettable) career nosedive into mindless low-budget gore, I can see their point: I [[maggio]] [[favorite]] Fulci's earlier "giallo" period (1968-77) to his more popular stuff horror (1979-82) myself but, even on the latter, his commitment was arguably unquestionable. On the other hand, CONQUEST seems not to have inspired Fulci in the [[fewer]] – seeing how he decided to drape the [[trials]] with an annoyingly [[undying]] mist, sprinkle it with incongruent [[trait]] (cannibals [[versus]]. werewolves, anyone?), [[inconsequential]] [[gora]] (we are treated to a gratuitous, nasty cannibal dinner just before witnessing the flesh-eating revelers having their brains literally beaten out by their hairy antagonists!) and [[yet]] some highly unappetizing intimacy between the masked, brain-slurping villainess (don't ask) and her [[sticky]] reptilian pet!! For what it is worth, we have two heroes for the price of one here: a young magic bow-carrying boy on some manhood-affirming odyssey (Andrea Occhipinti) and his rambling muscle-bound companion (Jorge Rivero i.e. Frenchy from Howard Hawks' RIO LOBO [1970]!) who, despite being called [[Mass]] (short for Maciste, perhaps?), seems to be there [[purely]] to drop in on his cavewoman from time to time and [[gets]] his [[youngest]] protégé out of trouble (particularly during an exceedingly unpleasant attack of the 'boils'). Unfortunately, even the usual saving grace of such lowbrow material comes up short here as ex-Goblin Claudio Simonetti's electronic score seems awfully inappropriate at times. Fulci even contrives to give the film a laughably hurried coda with the surviving beefy hero going aimlessly out into the wilderness (after defeating one and all with the aid of the all-important magic bow…so much for his own supposed physical strength!) onto his next – and thankfully unfilmed – adventure! --------------------------------------------- Result 3469 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw only the first part of this series when it debuted back in the late 90's and only recently got a chance to watch all three parts via Netflix (convenient service by the way). All in all, I liked this lighthearted, sometimes genre challenged, mini series. The story of a younger man falling for an older woman seems to work and the actors are all fine. Yes, it does have some romance clichés of running in the rain or a train station goodbye, but the characters have a chance to be explored so it doesn't seem cheesy, like it would be if this were some Tom Hanks vehicle or similar. Robson Greene, who at times reminds me of a separated-at-birth Scott Bakula does a fine job of someone who is head over heels in love and the ebb and tide of desire and rejection throws the series into watchable fare. Personally, I think the series could have been done with two episodes, but that's up for debate I suppose. Apparently, there's a sequel, and that should be arriving tomorrow via Netflix. --------------------------------------------- Result 3470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Hidden]] [[Frontier]] is a fan made [[show]], in the [[world]] of [[Star]] [[Trek]]. The story takes place after [[Voyager]] has returned from the Delta-quadrant . It has some [[characters]] from the [[official]] Star Trek [[shows]], but most of them are original to the [[show]]. The show takes place on the [[star]] [[base]] Deep Space 12 and on [[several]] space [[ships]], which [[gives]] it [[opportunities]] the [[official]] shows don't have. The characters have the opportunity of a [[rising]] in the hierarchy, which [[characters]] in [[shows]] with only one [[ship]] doesn't have. The show has good computer animation of spaceships, but the acting takes place in front of at green-screen and it gives a green [[glow]] [[around]] the actors. Not all the actors are [[equally]] good, but most do fine. The [[episodes]] are [[character]] driven and the [[characters]] [[develop]] over [[many]] episodes. That is a bit more like in Babylon 5, than in most [[official]] Star Trek [[shows]]. [[Hidden]] [[Frontier]] takes taboos that [[even]] the [[official]] [[series]] has [[shrunk]] from using. [[All]] in all I [[enjoyed]] watching it. [[Occult]] [[Border]] is a fan made [[displays]], in the [[monde]] of [[Superstar]] [[Hiking]]. The story takes place after [[Trips]] has returned from the Delta-quadrant . It has some [[features]] from the [[servant]] Star Trek [[demonstrate]], but most of them are original to the [[displays]]. The show takes place on the [[stars]] [[foundations]] Deep Space 12 and on [[various]] space [[boats]], which [[offers]] it [[chances]] the [[officials]] shows don't have. The characters have the opportunity of a [[augmented]] in the hierarchy, which [[character]] in [[displays]] with only one [[boat]] doesn't have. The show has good computer animation of spaceships, but the acting takes place in front of at green-screen and it gives a green [[sliver]] [[about]] the actors. Not all the actors are [[likewise]] good, but most do fine. The [[spells]] are [[nature]] driven and the [[attribute]] [[formulate]] over [[innumerable]] episodes. That is a bit more like in Babylon 5, than in most [[functionary]] Star Trek [[display]]. [[Disguising]] [[Border]] takes taboos that [[yet]] the [[functionary]] [[serial]] has [[diminish]] from using. [[Every]] in all I [[liked]] watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] My [[name]] is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my [[name]] is Domino Harvey. {[[CUT]], [[CHOP]]} My [[name]] is Domino Harvey. {[[EDIT]]. [[CUT]]. [[Playback]]}

Never have I seen a director [[take]] so much flack for his [[style]] before. By now it is evident that most people do not [[appreciate]] [[Tony]] Scott's choppy, flashy, dizzying editing [[technique]]. If I have to [[choose]] between loving it and hating it, I'd [[say]] I love it. It was borderline [[distracting]] at [[times]], but the [[end]] [[result]] was [[pretty]] good and it's nice to [[see]] a director with a creative edge to his [[style]] and some originality ([[even]] if it borrows [[heavily]] from MTV videos).

This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue [[seems]] strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty [[much]] hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she [[suffered]]. We follow Domino through her [[life]] as she [[joins]] up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew [[become]] tangled up in the FBI and [[suddenly]] has a reality show [[contract]] under Christopher Walken's [[TV]] production [[company]] (what is Christopher Walken doing in [[every]] [[film]], by the [[way]]?). I [[guess]] that is a clever [[film]] [[technique]], because now Tony Scott is free to [[use]] as much flashy MTV/Reality Show [[editing]] footage as he [[likes]]. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.

It followes then that the [[story]] is told at an [[amazingly]] rapid-fire [[pace]], with [[lots]] of raunchy [[strong]] [[language]] and [[gun]] violence. There are some [[funny]] jokes; it's all very modern and [[surreal]] at the same [[time]]. It's a mess, but it's a [[rather]] [[enjoyable]] [[mess]]. It is [[ultimately]] flawed in so [[many]] ways (the [[actors]] [[try]] too [[hard]] to make their [[characters]] "cool", for one) but it [[works]]. I give it a weak 7/10 which may [[seem]] generous when [[compared]] to the general consensus of movie-goers who [[graded]] this [[film]] — but I feel it had some good [[ideas]] and [[executed]] them well.

7 out of 10 My [[denomination]] is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my [[names]] is Domino Harvey. {[[CHOP]], [[CUT]]} My [[naming]] is Domino Harvey. {[[EDITED]]. [[CHOP]]. [[Reproductive]]}

Never have I seen a director [[taking]] so much flack for his [[styles]] before. By now it is evident that most people do not [[appreciates]] [[Toni]] Scott's choppy, flashy, dizzying editing [[tech]]. If I have to [[selected]] between loving it and hating it, I'd [[said]] I love it. It was borderline [[embarrassing]] at [[dates]], but the [[termination]] [[conclusions]] was [[quite]] good and it's nice to [[behold]] a director with a creative edge to his [[styling]] and some originality ([[yet]] if it borrows [[substantially]] from MTV videos).

This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue [[appears]] strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty [[very]] hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she [[undergone]]. We follow Domino through her [[vida]] as she [[engages]] up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew [[gotten]] tangled up in the FBI and [[abruptly]] has a reality show [[contracts]] under Christopher Walken's [[TELEVISION]] production [[companies]] (what is Christopher Walken doing in [[any]] [[movie]], by the [[routing]]?). I [[guessing]] that is a clever [[movie]] [[tech]], because now Tony Scott is free to [[utilizes]] as much flashy MTV/Reality Show [[edited]] footage as he [[love]]. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.

It followes then that the [[narratives]] is told at an [[terribly]] rapid-fire [[cadence]], with [[batch]] of raunchy [[forceful]] [[linguistics]] and [[guns]] violence. There are some [[hilarious]] jokes; it's all very modern and [[bizarre]] at the same [[period]]. It's a mess, but it's a [[comparatively]] [[nice]] [[confusion]]. It is [[lastly]] flawed in so [[multiple]] ways (the [[protagonists]] [[endeavour]] too [[tough]] to make their [[character]] "cool", for one) but it [[collaborate]]. I give it a weak 7/10 which may [[appears]] generous when [[likened]] to the general consensus of movie-goers who [[sorted]] this [[movie]] — but I feel it had some good [[idea]] and [[implemented]] them well.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] The [[best]] Modesty Blaise movie I have [[seen]] so far. It's like a good [[pilot]] for a TV-series. I even [[think]] it's a little bit "cult", like with a lite [[touch]] of Quentin Tarantino's [[magic]], or something. They have [[caught]] a [[great]] deal of Modesty's [[character]], but I [[admit]] [[missing]] Willy Garwin a [[bit]]. Even if i have read [[many]] comics and book by Peter O'donnell I'm not [[disappointed]] of this film, quite the opposite. [[Positive]] [[surprised]] of this story about Modesty and her [[childhood]]. I did not put my [[expectations]] so [[high]], because of the [[bad]] movie from 1966. [[So]] I [[may]] have overrate this [[movie]] just a little. But if you [[like]] the comics and other storys about [[Modesty]] [[Blaise]], you should [[definitely]] [[see]] this one! can't [[wait]] for a follow-up... The [[better]] Modesty Blaise movie I have [[noticed]] so far. It's like a good [[experimental]] for a TV-series. I even [[believe]] it's a little bit "cult", like with a lite [[touching]] of Quentin Tarantino's [[witchcraft]], or something. They have [[grabbed]] a [[remarkable]] deal of Modesty's [[traits]], but I [[recognised]] [[lacking]] Willy Garwin a [[bite]]. Even if i have read [[myriad]] comics and book by Peter O'donnell I'm not [[disillusioned]] of this film, quite the opposite. [[Positively]] [[astounded]] of this story about Modesty and her [[children]]. I did not put my [[prospects]] so [[supremo]], because of the [[amiss]] movie from 1966. [[Therefore]] I [[maggio]] have overrate this [[film]] just a little. But if you [[adores]] the comics and other storys about [[Decency]] [[Belize]], you should [[unmistakably]] [[seeing]] this one! can't [[suspense]] for a follow-up... --------------------------------------------- Result 3473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this short film trailer is basically about Superman and Batman working together and forming an uneasy alliance.obviously,the two characters have vastly differing views on how to deal with crime and what constitutes punishment.it's a lot of fun to see these two iconic characters try to get along.i won't go int to the storyline here.but i will get into the acting,which is terrific.everyone is well cast.the two actors playing Superman and Batman are well suited to their characters.the same filmmakers that made Batman: Dead End and Grayson also made this short film.of the three,i probably liked this one the least,but i still thought it was well done.for me,World's finest is a 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Here, on IMDb.com I read an opinion, that Grey Owl is best character of Pierce Brosnan ever performed. I do not know if he had better nor worse roles, I'm not his fan, but this one was really exceptional.

The other thing - impressive hand of the movie director. I give my respect. The serenity, the beauty and spirit of wilderness was illustrated really exlusively, I never met such proximity it in any movie before.

Another thing left in my mind after the film - this is the movie, closest to the original books, and atmosphere in it.

And little bit more. I pay my respect to the original Grey Owl. --------------------------------------------- Result 3475 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was overtaken by the emotion. Unforgettable rendering of a wartime story which is unknown to most people. The performances were faultless and outstanding. --------------------------------------------- Result 3476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Portly [[nice]] [[guy]] falls for a luscious [[blonde]]; she [[likes]] him too, but not for the [[reasons]] you might [[think]]. Little-seen black [[comedy]] from writer [[Pat]] Proft features very good performances by Joe Alaskey and Donna Dixon, [[yet]] it makes no [[lasting]] [[impact]]. It's just a quickie throwaway [[effort]], helmed by Norman [[Bates]] himself, [[Anthony]] Perkins. Even on the [[level]] of B-comedies, the somewhat-similar "Eating Raoul" is a [[better]] [[bet]]. There's definitely an [[amusing]] set-up here; [[unfortunately]], the [[picture]] has nowhere to go in its second [[act]]. An interesting [[try]], but it misfires.

** from **** Portly [[enjoyable]] [[dawg]] falls for a luscious [[pallid]]; she [[iike]] him too, but not for the [[justification]] you might [[thought]]. Little-seen black [[travesty]] from writer [[Patricia]] Proft features very good performances by Joe Alaskey and Donna Dixon, [[again]] it makes no [[sustained]] [[influences]]. It's just a quickie throwaway [[endeavors]], helmed by Norman [[Bats]] himself, [[Antoine]] Perkins. Even on the [[tier]] of B-comedies, the somewhat-similar "Eating Raoul" is a [[optimum]] [[betting]]. There's definitely an [[entertaining]] set-up here; [[tragically]], the [[pictured]] has nowhere to go in its second [[legislation]]. An interesting [[attempts]], but it misfires.

** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Mel Torme and Victor Borge, in their younger years, [[serve]] to make this [[film]] interesting - and especially viewing a young Sinatra, on the sunny side of 30, and [[definitely]] [[conveying]] that this was his "yes, I'm a popular singer, but hardly an actor yet" stage. [[Michele]] Morgan is an annoying, inane presence, and Jack [[Haley]] is an actor [[whose]] appeal has [[always]] been totally lost on me. Leon Erroll is silly, as [[always]], but [[overall]] pretty [[funny]]. 7 stars of a [[potential]] 10 is about the [[right]] "[[grade]]," because with the [[combination]] of its positive [[aspects]], along with the lack of much of a story, and a [[silly]] one at that, and the fore-mentioned annoyances - it is overall average at best. Most of the fascination is from the viewing of the three entertainment icons in their early years. Mel Torme and Victor Borge, in their younger years, [[serves]] to make this [[movie]] interesting - and especially viewing a young Sinatra, on the sunny side of 30, and [[obviously]] [[transmitted]] that this was his "yes, I'm a popular singer, but hardly an actor yet" stage. [[Michael]] Morgan is an annoying, inane presence, and Jack [[Hayley]] is an actor [[who]] appeal has [[continuously]] been totally lost on me. Leon Erroll is silly, as [[unceasingly]], but [[holistic]] pretty [[comical]]. 7 stars of a [[prospective]] 10 is about the [[rights]] "[[grading]]," because with the [[jumpsuit]] of its positive [[facets]], along with the lack of much of a story, and a [[laughable]] one at that, and the fore-mentioned annoyances - it is overall average at best. Most of the fascination is from the viewing of the three entertainment icons in their early years. --------------------------------------------- Result 3478 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Remember]] the early days of Pay Per View? I do, and i can almost remember the number you had to CALL to actually rent the movie on your t.v. As a kid we always wanted to rent playboy, but this meant actually calling someone from PPV and asking to rent it. And then you get the nerve to do it and your watching four hours of soft core no angle crap. Well the reason i bring that up is because this movie too was on ppv. And i [[remember]] almost [[every]] scene that was in the add. I've been on a [[kick]] in the last few years to obtain all the [[great]] [[movies]] i use to see as a kid and this was one of them. It's one that when its on its hard to shut off. All star cast trying to commit the perfect bank bust but nothing goes right. There are plenty of spoof bank capers that are good and this one has to fall in that category. It has enough action and laughs to sustain it. check it out if you dare! [[Remind]] the early days of Pay Per View? I do, and i can almost remember the number you had to CALL to actually rent the movie on your t.v. As a kid we always wanted to rent playboy, but this meant actually calling someone from PPV and asking to rent it. And then you get the nerve to do it and your watching four hours of soft core no angle crap. Well the reason i bring that up is because this movie too was on ppv. And i [[rember]] almost [[each]] scene that was in the add. I've been on a [[kicking]] in the last few years to obtain all the [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] i use to see as a kid and this was one of them. It's one that when its on its hard to shut off. All star cast trying to commit the perfect bank bust but nothing goes right. There are plenty of spoof bank capers that are good and this one has to fall in that category. It has enough action and laughs to sustain it. check it out if you dare! --------------------------------------------- Result 3479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Kabei: Our Mother (2008) is a poetic and [[sublime]] beauty from Japan. A real weeper! I had [[heard]] [[great]] [[reviews]] for the [[film]] and rented it from Netflix. Am I glad I did! [[In]] many [[ways]] this [[film]] reminded me of the [[old]] style of Japanese [[classic]] film-making from the 1940's and 1950's that I've come to love so much, such as seen in Yasujiro Ozu [[pictures]] -- the title credits even begin in the same way, with the Japanese letters (characters) in red against neutral color burlap material. I immediately thought: this director loves Ozu. The same style was [[used]] too: [[mostly]] [[indoor]] sets with only a few [[outdoor]] scenes. Even a couple of "[[pillow]] [[shots]]", as Roger Ebert calls them. The strength of the [[film]] is built on the [[love]] of the [[characters]] for one another.

The [[story]] follows the [[lives]] of a Japanese family before, and during, and after, [[World]] [[War]] Two. The [[mother]] takes [[care]] of her [[growing]] [[girls]] the [[best]] she can after the [[father]] (a University [[professor]]) is [[arrested]] for anti-war sympathies. He's never [[freed]] and only has a few [[brief]] meetings with his [[wife]] in [[prison]] before he [[dies]] of starvation and [[disease]]. Meanwhile a [[former]] [[student]] of the [[professor]] comes by [[often]] to [[help]] [[take]] care of the [[mother]] and two girls. He [[begins]] to [[fall]] in love with the [[mother]] and is a substitute father for the two girls. But [[war]] starts and he's drafted and they have to [[say]] an [[abrupt]] [[farewell]]. [[Will]] they ever express their [[love]] for one another? Will he ever [[return]] from the [[war]]?

There is so [[much]] [[heart]] and [[gentle]] [[spirit]] in the performance of the lead actress, Sayuri Yoshinaga. She's [[almost]] a Madonna [[type]], she's so [[beautiful]]! [[Big]] soulful [[eyes]] and [[flawless]] skin. The actor who plays the student is [[phenomenal]] as well: his name is Tadanobu Asano. What a [[sensitive]] performance. There is no macho in him at all; he's [[gentle]] and [[kind]]. I'd [[certainly]] love to [[see]] both of these two in other [[movies]]. I [[think]] I'll [[check]] to [[see]] what's [[available]] for them. The two little child actresses are [[wonderful]] too.

The [[film]] is just [[released]] on NTSC [[DVD]] for [[American]] [[audiences]], with very [[easy]] to read English subtitles. I gave it a 10 out of 10 on the IMDb. I cried almost as much as with the Japanese film classic Twenty-Four Eyes (1954). Don't miss this film! Kabei: Our Mother (2008) is a poetic and [[handsome]] beauty from Japan. A real weeper! I had [[listened]] [[awesome]] [[assessment]] for the [[cinematography]] and rented it from Netflix. Am I glad I did! [[During]] many [[way]] this [[movies]] reminded me of the [[elderly]] style of Japanese [[typical]] film-making from the 1940's and 1950's that I've come to love so much, such as seen in Yasujiro Ozu [[pictured]] -- the title credits even begin in the same way, with the Japanese letters (characters) in red against neutral color burlap material. I immediately thought: this director loves Ozu. The same style was [[using]] too: [[basically]] [[internal]] sets with only a few [[outer]] scenes. Even a couple of "[[mattress]] [[punches]]", as Roger Ebert calls them. The strength of the [[cinematography]] is built on the [[likes]] of the [[attribute]] for one another.

The [[fairytales]] follows the [[vie]] of a Japanese family before, and during, and after, [[Global]] [[Wars]] Two. The [[mum]] takes [[caring]] of her [[widening]] [[females]] the [[better]] she can after the [[fathers]] (a University [[professors]]) is [[arresting]] for anti-war sympathies. He's never [[emitted]] and only has a few [[writ]] meetings with his [[women]] in [[internment]] before he [[deaths]] of starvation and [[diseases]]. Meanwhile a [[old]] [[learners]] of the [[professors]] comes by [[normally]] to [[support]] [[taking]] care of the [[mummy]] and two girls. He [[starts]] to [[declining]] in love with the [[mum]] and is a substitute father for the two girls. But [[wars]] starts and he's drafted and they have to [[said]] an [[sudden]] [[bye]]. [[Willingness]] they ever express their [[likes]] for one another? Will he ever [[reverted]] from the [[wars]]?

There is so [[very]] [[heartland]] and [[mild]] [[wits]] in the performance of the lead actress, Sayuri Yoshinaga. She's [[approximately]] a Madonna [[kind]], she's so [[gorgeous]]! [[Major]] soulful [[eye]] and [[perfect]] skin. The actor who plays the student is [[wondrous]] as well: his name is Tadanobu Asano. What a [[touchy]] performance. There is no macho in him at all; he's [[temperate]] and [[types]]. I'd [[arguably]] love to [[consults]] both of these two in other [[movie]]. I [[thought]] I'll [[inspection]] to [[consults]] what's [[accessible]] for them. The two little child actresses are [[magnifique]] too.

The [[movie]] is just [[publicized]] on NTSC [[DVDS]] for [[Americas]] [[audience]], with very [[simpler]] to read English subtitles. I gave it a 10 out of 10 on the IMDb. I cried almost as much as with the Japanese film classic Twenty-Four Eyes (1954). Don't miss this film! --------------------------------------------- Result 3480 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Terry [[West]] had a good [[idea]] w\ this [[movie]]. He just didn't flesh it thru. There are [[endless]] shots of the creepy looking school's [[exteriors]] that [[go]] on [[forever]] and probably to pad the film's [[running]] [[time]]. Also at this school there are only 2 [[students]]. Misty Mundae is good as [[usual]] but this [[film]] will always belong to Ruby LaRocca (which is the only [[reason]] to watch the [[film]] in the [[beginning]]). If the [[script]] [[centered]] on her interesting [[character]] we'd have a [[movie]] to watch. She is so GORGEOUS!! Good news for [[DVD]] [[buyers]], [[Terry]] West's [[earlier]] (and [[better]]) [[film]] "Blood [[For]] The Muse" is a special [[feature]]. One [[thing]] I'd like to say is that this movie [[feels]] [[like]] [[someone]] who's not good at [[delivering]] the punch [[line]] at the [[end]] of a [[long]] [[joke]] for the ending feels that very same [[way]]. Then again, just watch this for Ruby LaRocca. Terry [[Occidental]] had a good [[think]] w\ this [[filmmaking]]. He just didn't flesh it thru. There are [[limitless]] shots of the creepy looking school's [[facades]] that [[going]] on [[siempre]] and probably to pad the film's [[executing]] [[moment]]. Also at this school there are only 2 [[schoolchildren]]. Misty Mundae is good as [[ordinary]] but this [[filmmaking]] will always belong to Ruby LaRocca (which is the only [[grounds]] to watch the [[filmmaking]] in the [[onset]]). If the [[screenplay]] [[concentrated]] on her interesting [[characters]] we'd have a [[filmmaking]] to watch. She is so GORGEOUS!! Good news for [[DVDS]] [[buyer]], [[Terri]] West's [[ago]] (and [[optimum]]) [[cinema]] "Blood [[In]] The Muse" is a special [[idiosyncrasies]]. One [[stuff]] I'd like to say is that this movie [[deems]] [[iike]] [[everyone]] who's not good at [[offer]] the punch [[bloodline]] at the [[ceases]] of a [[protracted]] [[travesty]] for the ending feels that very same [[path]]. Then again, just watch this for Ruby LaRocca. --------------------------------------------- Result 3481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] James Stewart stars in a classic western tale of revenge which ties in with the fate of the films other star the Winchester Rifle. Stewart is it goes without saying excellent adding some cold hard obsession to his usual laid back cowboy. The story follows the fate of a Winchester rifle and its owners after being won in a competition by our hero and stolen by the man he is hunting.

We meet a selection of gamblers, gun fighters, Indian traders and bank robers as we follow the rifles path through Indian battles, bank heists etc. The supporting cast are all solid with Dan Durya standing out as Waco Johnny Dean the live-wire gunfighter with an itchy trigger finger. Also as a trivia note a very early appearance from Rock Hudson as an Indian chief.

The end showdown is a classic a tense rifle battle fought at long range in and around a rocky outcrop. Throw in some good old western action, fist fights, shootouts and horseback chases it makes for a rollicking western adventure. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Can A-Pix ever, ever, ever do anything right? This movie was meant to be seen on TV in a letterbox format. Since A-Pix doesn't even believe in pan and scan, we see whole scenes where a shoulder on the left side of the screen talks to a shoulder on the right side. Of course, not that you are missing much. This movie is [[incredibly]] [[bad]]. It's very hard to enjoy a film where characters are screaming at the top of their lungs during 80% of the movie for no reason. Can A-Pix ever, ever, ever do anything right? This movie was meant to be seen on TV in a letterbox format. Since A-Pix doesn't even believe in pan and scan, we see whole scenes where a shoulder on the left side of the screen talks to a shoulder on the right side. Of course, not that you are missing much. This movie is [[unimaginably]] [[unfavourable]]. It's very hard to enjoy a film where characters are screaming at the top of their lungs during 80% of the movie for no reason. --------------------------------------------- Result 3483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This one hearkens back to the days of the matinée, when [[kids]] with nowhere [[else]] to hang out [[took]] their [[dates]] to the balcony after dumping their [[younger]] [[siblings]] below. It didn't [[matter]] what was on the screen - the [[little]] [[kids]] would [[sit]] through it and the [[big]] [[kids]] would ignore it. The adults, of [[course]], [[would]] never see it.

But they put it on video, anyway, along with most of the other creaky, low-budget "B" horror flicks of the [[golden]] age...of [[television]]. This film's [[inherent]] and [[unintentional]] [[humor]] is derived from stale ideology (the "[[bad]] [[girls]]" harvested to replace poor Jan's crushed [[body]] - they had it comin'), overused plot (a mad scientist, trying to play God), violent yet conscientious monster (whose presence in the heretofore-normal-seeming scientist's [[rural]] [[lab]] is never [[fully]] [[explained]]), and acting that polarizes at [[wooden]] or over-the-top.

This is a great party film, [[assuming]] your guests [[enjoy]] [[adding]] dialog and [[commentary]] to otherwise [[abominable]] [[cinematic]] exploits. [[In]] fact, should you or your guests [[prefer]] more passive [[entertainment]], this film is [[also]] [[available]] on video in its "Mystery [[Science]] [[Theater]] 3000" [[treatment]], in which the [[host]] and puppets of the [[cult]] TV series make the [[necessary]] additions for you. This one hearkens back to the days of the matinée, when [[juvenile]] with nowhere [[elsewhere]] to hang out [[taken]] their [[times]] to the balcony after dumping their [[youngest]] [[hermano]] below. It didn't [[question]] what was on the screen - the [[tiny]] [[juvenile]] would [[assis]] through it and the [[mammoth]] [[enfant]] would ignore it. The adults, of [[cours]], [[could]] never see it.

But they put it on video, anyway, along with most of the other creaky, low-budget "B" horror flicks of the [[gilded]] age...of [[tvs]]. This film's [[innate]] and [[fortuitous]] [[humorous]] is derived from stale ideology (the "[[rotten]] [[females]]" harvested to replace poor Jan's crushed [[agency]] - they had it comin'), overused plot (a mad scientist, trying to play God), violent yet conscientious monster (whose presence in the heretofore-normal-seeming scientist's [[agrarian]] [[labs]] is never [[altogether]] [[explains]]), and acting that polarizes at [[wood]] or over-the-top.

This is a great party film, [[supposing]] your guests [[enjoying]] [[added]] dialog and [[remark]] to otherwise [[detestable]] [[cinematographic]] exploits. [[Across]] fact, should you or your guests [[preferred]] more passive [[amusement]], this film is [[furthermore]] [[accessible]] on video in its "Mystery [[Veda]] [[Cinemas]] 3000" [[processing]], in which the [[receiving]] and puppets of the [[religions]] TV series make the [[indispensable]] additions for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This is [[almost]] [[certainly]] the [[worst]] [[Western]] I've ever seen. The story follows a [[formula]] that is [[especially]] common to [[Westerns]] and martial arts [[films]] -- hero learns that family/[[friends]] have been [[murdered]], so [[hero]] sets out to exact [[revenge]], [[foils]] the ineffective lawman, [[rescues]] the kidnapped loving [[damsel]], and [[murders]] the expert arch-nemesis in a [[brutal]] duel. This formula has [[often]] been successful -- [[otherwise]] it wouldn't be a [[formula]] -- but [[Gunfighter]] is the most sophomoric [[execution]] of it you'll ever [[see]]. The scripting is [[atrociously]] simple-minded and [[insulting]]; it sounds [[like]] a [[high]] schooler [[wrote]] the dialogue because it [[lacks]] [[depth]], maturity, and [[realism]]. The sound is [[bad]]; it sometimes [[looks]] dubbed. The [[cinematography]] is lame, and the sets are sometimes just facades. The acting is [[pitiful]]; sure, some of the [[performers]] [[could]] blame the [[script]], but others cannot [[use]] that [[excuse]]. I hope I never [[see]] Chris Lybbert in a speaking role ever again; [[every]] time he [[says]] a line that should be [[angry]] or mean, he does nothing more than lower the timbre of his voice and he just [[sounds]] like a kid [[trying]] to [[act]] macho. And speaking of Chris Lybbert, who plays Hopalong, check out his duds (if you dare to watch this [[film]]): He wears these brand [[new]] [[clothes]] that [[make]] him [[look]] more like Roy [[Rogers]] than a hard-working, down-and-dirty cowboy. [[If]] you [[enjoy]] [[inane]] cinematic [[fare]] that [[serves]] [[merely]] to [[worship]] the imagined [[grandeur]] of Hopalong Cassidy, then [[get]] this, but if you have more than two neurons, watch [[something]] [[else]]. This is [[hardly]] [[obviously]] the [[meanest]] [[Westerly]] I've ever seen. The story follows a [[formulas]] that is [[mostly]] common to [[Westerners]] and martial arts [[movies]] -- hero learns that family/[[friendships]] have been [[kill]], so [[superhero]] sets out to exact [[vengeance]], [[aborted]] the ineffective lawman, [[savings]] the kidnapped loving [[missus]], and [[murder]] the expert arch-nemesis in a [[ferocious]] duel. This formula has [[routinely]] been successful -- [[alternatively]] it wouldn't be a [[formulas]] -- but [[Shooter]] is the most sophomoric [[running]] of it you'll ever [[behold]]. The scripting is [[appallingly]] simple-minded and [[demeaning]]; it sounds [[iike]] a [[supreme]] schooler [[authored]] the dialogue because it [[dearth]] [[depths]], maturity, and [[pragmatism]]. The sound is [[negative]]; it sometimes [[seems]] dubbed. The [[filmmaking]] is lame, and the sets are sometimes just facades. The acting is [[regretful]]; sure, some of the [[performer]] [[did]] blame the [[scripts]], but others cannot [[utilize]] that [[apologize]]. I hope I never [[seeing]] Chris Lybbert in a speaking role ever again; [[any]] time he [[tells]] a line that should be [[furious]] or mean, he does nothing more than lower the timbre of his voice and he just [[sound]] like a kid [[attempting]] to [[acts]] macho. And speaking of Chris Lybbert, who plays Hopalong, check out his duds (if you dare to watch this [[filmmaking]]): He wears these brand [[newest]] [[outfits]] that [[deliver]] him [[peek]] more like Roy [[Rodgers]] than a hard-working, down-and-dirty cowboy. [[Though]] you [[enjoys]] [[negligible]] cinematic [[tariff]] that [[contributes]] [[simply]] to [[worshipping]] the imagined [[splendour]] of Hopalong Cassidy, then [[got]] this, but if you have more than two neurons, watch [[somethin]] [[otherwise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's nice to see a film with real people with honest feelings. Sissy Spacek is so absolutely convincing as a simple, yet nice, daughter to Robert Farnsworth,

who finally, in his last role, gets to show what a fine actor he was. It is hard to believe that this is a David Lynch film. It is slow and even, sweet and moving. One of the best unless you like car chases, sex scenes, and violence. --------------------------------------------- Result 3486 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst movies ever made. Bad acting, bad special effects, bad plot, bad everything. In the last 15 minutes a cat suited-cyborg is introduced which muddles everything. Malcom MacDowell must have needed to make a house payment because otherwise he would have had to sell himself on Hollywood Blvd to pay the bill. I just don"t know how you can go from Clockwork Orange to this crap and be able to look yourself in the mirror each morning. I could have done better special effects in my bathtub. There's no continuity. The editor must have been asleep or on drugs its so bad. Acting. Do they have to smoke to be bad.? The gun either shoots blue flames or bullets, make up your mind. The bad girl and the other girl in the movie look so much alike that it is confusing. Whay is it called 2013 Seadly Wake. It has nothing to do with the movie --------------------------------------------- Result 3487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've just finished viewing the 1st disc in a 4-disc (26 episodes) collection created in conjunction with the UCLA Film & Television Archive (S'More Entertainment, Inc.). So far (aside from the 1st episode), the image quality is quite good. The DVD box is shown on the title page here on IMDb.

"Mr. Peepers" is just as charming as when I first saw it (5-years old at the time) and Wally Cox is truly endearing in this role. If you're in the mood for quiet comedy that sneaks up on you, as opposed to hitting you over the head, you'll treasure this chance to experience all the wonderful characters you might remember from your childhood. Although some of the gags are a bit corny, most are ingenious and well-executed...and even the corny ones are fun. This is one TV series that lives up to my early childhood memories of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Spoilers - in as far as I describe characters and their relation to the plot.

This is a quality film. The subject matter is at once grim and gripping. The dogged determination of Stephen Rea's character, Burakov, is simply captivating. With any due apologies to him, his hangdog, continually put-upon expression serves the character well. He is, as we in England would say of the Inspector Taggart TV series character, bound to be grim because he sees three murders a week. Well, that's not strictly accurate as Chikatila operated over a number of years...

You get a real sense of the blankwall resistance of the USSR bureaucracy, brilliantly portrayed by Joss Ackland (who often seems made for this sort of role).

A key character (and I write this as the remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is being shown on BBC1) is the Donald Sutherland character "Mikhail Fetisov". His quiet support of Burakov is steadfast. And it endures through Perestroika, and drives the involvement of the FBI for profiling. Brilliant.

This is a must-see, as far as I am concerned. --------------------------------------------- Result 3489 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It's a [[bad]], very [[bad]] [[movie]].

Well, for people a real realistic movie is a good [[thing]]. For me it is not. Life is also predictable, bad, nasty, trivial, senseless, sometimes. Maybe that's the reason for people [[say]] that this [[film]] is [[real]].

Too many common places: you're black, you're a criminal, you're doomed and [[cursed]], whatever you do you'll end up by shooting or being shot by [[someone]]; don't let the kids play with the weapons, it [[could]] be dangerous; and then there are those who go to the church, and then they are good, very good...

Before this one, I hadn't seen such a [[bad]] [[movie]]. That's perhaps the reason for I never noticed how important the [[photography]] itself is [[important]] in a movie. In this one, every scene shot in [[daytime]], [[outdoor]], is [[clearly]] and annoyingly blue. They didn't [[even]] care to [[correct]] the colour balance. [[Oh]]! I've "rated" more than 300 movies in this database so far, and this (3/10) is my lowest ever. It's a [[unfavourable]], very [[unfavourable]] [[flick]].

Well, for people a real realistic movie is a good [[stuff]]. For me it is not. Life is also predictable, bad, nasty, trivial, senseless, sometimes. Maybe that's the reason for people [[tell]] that this [[filmmaking]] is [[veritable]].

Too many common places: you're black, you're a criminal, you're doomed and [[damn]], whatever you do you'll end up by shooting or being shot by [[everyone]]; don't let the kids play with the weapons, it [[would]] be dangerous; and then there are those who go to the church, and then they are good, very good...

Before this one, I hadn't seen such a [[naughty]] [[filmmaking]]. That's perhaps the reason for I never noticed how important the [[picture]] itself is [[essential]] in a movie. In this one, every scene shot in [[daylight]], [[outboard]], is [[naturally]] and annoyingly blue. They didn't [[yet]] care to [[corrected]] the colour balance. [[Ah]]! I've "rated" more than 300 movies in this database so far, and this (3/10) is my lowest ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "The [[Notorious]] Bettie [[Page]]" (2005)

Directed By: Mary Harron

Starring: Gretchen Mol, Chris Bauer, Lili Taylor, Sarah Paulson, & David Strathairn

MPAA Rating: "R" (for nudity, sexual content and some language)

It [[seems]] as though [[every]] [[celebrity]] nowadays is getting a biopic made about his or her life. From Ray Charles to Johnny Cash, biopics are very posh right now. "The Notorious Bettie Page" is the latest of these to be released on DVD. It features Gretchen Mol as the world's most [[famous]] pin-up model, Bettie [[Page]] and was [[filmed]] mostly in black and white with certain [[excerpts]] in [[color]]. Unlike "Ray", "Walk the Line", and "Finding Neverland", [[however]], this movie is not going to be one to watch out for at the [[Oscars]] this year. This movie lacks the emotional resonance displayed in other biopics and most of the more dramatic moments in Bettie Page's life are either [[completely]] ignored or only merely suggested. This does not [[mean]], [[however]], that it is a bad [[movie]]. [[In]] [[fact]], "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a [[thoroughly]] entertaining and [[fulfilling]] movie--a solid [[work]] of cinema. This film focuses more on Page's exciting career and the thin line between sexuality and pornography. It is filmed with [[fervor]] and care and Mary Harron's direction [[captures]] the look and feel of the time period as most filmmakers only dream about.

Everyone knows Bettie Page (played by Mol). [[Whether]] you know her as an [[icon]]…or a simple porn star…you know her. She is a woman who had a very profound impact on American culture only by revealing more skin than deemed appropriate at that particular time. Now, most people know her as one of America's [[first]] sex symbols--a legend to [[many]] models, especially those of Playboy and other adult-oriented magazines. She lived in a time when showing just an inch of flesh below the waste could have someone arrested and Page's bondage-style photos were just the thing to push the American public into an uproar. In fact, the photos launched a full-fledged senate investigation about common decency and the difference between harmless films and porn.

The performances in "The Notorious Bettie Page" are absolutely wonderful with Gretchen Mol standing out. Her performance as Bettie Page is simply brilliant. I understand that, when she was announced for the role, many people were skeptical. Her name is not one that immediately leaps to my mind when I think of great performances. Now, it will. She completely aced the role and drew me in with her vulnerable and yet deeply engaging performance. David Strathairn is fresh off of last year's "Good Night, and Good Luck", in which he gave one of 2005's best performances. Here, he gives yet another fine performance…even though he is slightly underused. I was shocked at how very limited his screen time was…but quality over quantity is always the most important aspect of any good movie. The only performance I have seen from Lili Taylor was that in "The Haunting" (1999). While most people ignored the movie, I found it to be an enjoyable, if not completely shallow, horror movie and I also have always thought that Taylor was perfectly credible as the emotionally-distraught Nell. Here, Taylor gives yet another credible performance. She gives a very subdued performance and delivers the perfect performance to compliment that of Gretchen Mol.

After everything was said and done, I realized that "The Notorious Bettie Page" cannot be compared to other biopics, such as "Finding Neverland" and "Walk the Line". It is incomparable to these because it tells a story of a woman and her career, from the beginning to the end. Her personal life is briefly implied, but it is really her impact on the world that becomes the high point. We watch the film knowing that Page will eventually bare all and we know the impact that her decisions will have…but we are rarely shown the impact that they will have on her personal life. She is a woman that never looked back and could constantly reinvent herself. After all, she was an adult model turned Christian missionary. This movie does not over dramatize anything. It could have included fictitious moments of Page sobbing hysterically and begging God to forgive her. It could have shown Page running and screaming through the rain, trying to escape the ghosts of her past…and yet it does not. "The Notorious Bettie Page" tells a simple story and that is something rare by today's standards. Fortunately, it is quite refreshing.

Final Thought: "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a relaxing movie with absolutely amazing cinematography.

Overall Rating: 9/10 (A) "The [[Prestigious]] Bettie [[Newsweek]]" (2005)

Directed By: Mary Harron

Starring: Gretchen Mol, Chris Bauer, Lili Taylor, Sarah Paulson, & David Strathairn

MPAA Rating: "R" (for nudity, sexual content and some language)

It [[looks]] as though [[any]] [[proverbial]] nowadays is getting a biopic made about his or her life. From Ray Charles to Johnny Cash, biopics are very posh right now. "The Notorious Bettie Page" is the latest of these to be released on DVD. It features Gretchen Mol as the world's most [[illustrious]] pin-up model, Bettie [[Pages]] and was [[shot]] mostly in black and white with certain [[extracts]] in [[dye]]. Unlike "Ray", "Walk the Line", and "Finding Neverland", [[conversely]], this movie is not going to be one to watch out for at the [[Oskar]] this year. This movie lacks the emotional resonance displayed in other biopics and most of the more dramatic moments in Bettie Page's life are either [[absolutely]] ignored or only merely suggested. This does not [[meaning]], [[yet]], that it is a bad [[film]]. [[During]] [[facto]], "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a [[meticulously]] entertaining and [[performing]] movie--a solid [[collaborating]] of cinema. This film focuses more on Page's exciting career and the thin line between sexuality and pornography. It is filmed with [[enthusiasm]] and care and Mary Harron's direction [[caught]] the look and feel of the time period as most filmmakers only dream about.

Everyone knows Bettie Page (played by Mol). [[Both]] you know her as an [[icons]]…or a simple porn star…you know her. She is a woman who had a very profound impact on American culture only by revealing more skin than deemed appropriate at that particular time. Now, most people know her as one of America's [[fiirst]] sex symbols--a legend to [[several]] models, especially those of Playboy and other adult-oriented magazines. She lived in a time when showing just an inch of flesh below the waste could have someone arrested and Page's bondage-style photos were just the thing to push the American public into an uproar. In fact, the photos launched a full-fledged senate investigation about common decency and the difference between harmless films and porn.

The performances in "The Notorious Bettie Page" are absolutely wonderful with Gretchen Mol standing out. Her performance as Bettie Page is simply brilliant. I understand that, when she was announced for the role, many people were skeptical. Her name is not one that immediately leaps to my mind when I think of great performances. Now, it will. She completely aced the role and drew me in with her vulnerable and yet deeply engaging performance. David Strathairn is fresh off of last year's "Good Night, and Good Luck", in which he gave one of 2005's best performances. Here, he gives yet another fine performance…even though he is slightly underused. I was shocked at how very limited his screen time was…but quality over quantity is always the most important aspect of any good movie. The only performance I have seen from Lili Taylor was that in "The Haunting" (1999). While most people ignored the movie, I found it to be an enjoyable, if not completely shallow, horror movie and I also have always thought that Taylor was perfectly credible as the emotionally-distraught Nell. Here, Taylor gives yet another credible performance. She gives a very subdued performance and delivers the perfect performance to compliment that of Gretchen Mol.

After everything was said and done, I realized that "The Notorious Bettie Page" cannot be compared to other biopics, such as "Finding Neverland" and "Walk the Line". It is incomparable to these because it tells a story of a woman and her career, from the beginning to the end. Her personal life is briefly implied, but it is really her impact on the world that becomes the high point. We watch the film knowing that Page will eventually bare all and we know the impact that her decisions will have…but we are rarely shown the impact that they will have on her personal life. She is a woman that never looked back and could constantly reinvent herself. After all, she was an adult model turned Christian missionary. This movie does not over dramatize anything. It could have included fictitious moments of Page sobbing hysterically and begging God to forgive her. It could have shown Page running and screaming through the rain, trying to escape the ghosts of her past…and yet it does not. "The Notorious Bettie Page" tells a simple story and that is something rare by today's standards. Fortunately, it is quite refreshing.

Final Thought: "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a relaxing movie with absolutely amazing cinematography.

Overall Rating: 9/10 (A) --------------------------------------------- Result 3491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] First [[time]] of seeing Buster Keaton's [[first]] feature film and I have to admit I liked it a lot and only wish I'd stumbled across it years ago. The Rohauer blurb at the start warns that the Three Ages single nitrate print was rediscovered and salvaged in 1954 just in time before combustion, and many frames that seemed hopelessly glued together were separated. So, it's rocky [[viewing]] in places, but I've seen and survived much [[worse]].

It would have been OK as the 3 short films but as a take on [[Intolerance]] it's inventive and funny from the start to the finish: In the Stone Age with baddie Wallace Beery riding an elephant and goodie Buster riding a pet brontosaurus; In the Roman Age Buster riding a chariot with wheel locks and adapted for sledging, No Parking signs in Latin; In this technological Age of Speed Need and Greed his car beautifully falls to bits at the first hump. Both him and Beery are after the Girl through the ages, a never ending tussle. Favourite bit: As the caveman he gets knocked backward over a cliff edge but still blows a kiss to the camera - an amazing second or two!

[[Great]] stuff, reaffirming my love of silent film comedy. First [[moment]] of seeing Buster Keaton's [[fiirst]] feature film and I have to admit I liked it a lot and only wish I'd stumbled across it years ago. The Rohauer blurb at the start warns that the Three Ages single nitrate print was rediscovered and salvaged in 1954 just in time before combustion, and many frames that seemed hopelessly glued together were separated. So, it's rocky [[visualization]] in places, but I've seen and survived much [[lousiest]].

It would have been OK as the 3 short films but as a take on [[Fanaticism]] it's inventive and funny from the start to the finish: In the Stone Age with baddie Wallace Beery riding an elephant and goodie Buster riding a pet brontosaurus; In the Roman Age Buster riding a chariot with wheel locks and adapted for sledging, No Parking signs in Latin; In this technological Age of Speed Need and Greed his car beautifully falls to bits at the first hump. Both him and Beery are after the Girl through the ages, a never ending tussle. Favourite bit: As the caveman he gets knocked backward over a cliff edge but still blows a kiss to the camera - an amazing second or two!

[[Huge]] stuff, reaffirming my love of silent film comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In Iran, women are not admitted to soccer games. Officially it's because they are to be spared from the vulgar language and behavior of the male audience. But of course it is about sexism. Women are lower forms of human beings.

Some brave girls oppose this and try to get into the stadium by using different tricks. They are caught by soldiers and hold in a kind of cage, until the police will come and pick them up.

Despite the insane situation, this is a film with lots of humor. It's also encouraging to see how people always find different ways of fighting oppression. You'll get touched at the same time as you have lots of laughs. Good job by director Jafar Panahi. This is in many ways a heroic comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] Having not [[seen]] this [[film]] in about 20 [[years]] I am [[still]] impressed with it 's [[hard]] -[[hitting]] [[impact]] and stellar acting. Of course, one Mr. [[Mickey]] Rooney is [[indeed]], [[INCREDIBLE]] in his role as the ring-leading "[[Killer]]".(In [[reference]] to another review here-none other than Orson Welles evoked Mickey Rooney's [[name]] as the [[greatest]] [[movie]] [[actor]],[[also]].) I [[also]] [[recall]] the jazzy-brassy [[score]] and the bare black and white [[photography]]. I [[love]] the Mick's last line before he goes out for his [[dose]] of lead poisoning.(I [[think]] the Stranglers [[lifted]] it for a line in one of their songs-Get a Grip on [[Yourself]].)This is a [[great]] [[film]] and [[unjustly]] buried [[film]]. Let's get it out ! Side note-a recent Film [[Review]] [[magazine]] [[gave]] a [[big]] write up on [[Don]] Segal's "Babyface Nelson" ,made a [[couple]] [[years]] before "Last [[Mile]]" and [[also]] starring Mickey Rooney. Another [[rave]] of the Mick's [[intense]] and sympathetic performance.[[Perhaps]] it's the start of a groundswell of a appreciation for some [[truly]] [[superior]] cinematic performances. Having not [[watched]] this [[cinematography]] in about 20 [[ages]] I am [[yet]] impressed with it 's [[stiff]] -[[pummeled]] [[effects]] and stellar acting. Of course, one Mr. [[Mikey]] Rooney is [[admittedly]], [[BREATHTAKING]] in his role as the ring-leading "[[Murderer]]".(In [[references]] to another review here-none other than Orson Welles evoked Mickey Rooney's [[denomination]] as the [[bigger]] [[films]] [[actress]],[[similarly]].) I [[similarly]] [[remembering]] the jazzy-brassy [[notation]] and the bare black and white [[photographing]]. I [[loved]] the Mick's last line before he goes out for his [[doses]] of lead poisoning.(I [[thought]] the Stranglers [[lifts]] it for a line in one of their songs-Get a Grip on [[Myself]].)This is a [[wondrous]] [[films]] and [[inappropriately]] buried [[cinematography]]. Let's get it out ! Side note-a recent Film [[Revisited]] [[revue]] [[given]] a [[huge]] write up on [[Donation]] Segal's "Babyface Nelson" ,made a [[pair]] [[olds]] before "Last [[Mille]]" and [[moreover]] starring Mickey Rooney. Another [[turnip]] of the Mick's [[vehement]] and sympathetic performance.[[Maybe]] it's the start of a groundswell of a appreciation for some [[really]] [[upper]] cinematic performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 3494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Why did the [[histories]] of [[Mary]] and Rhoda have to be so dour? [[Divorced]] [[women]] with [[indifferent]] daughters. And why very [[little]] [[reference]] to the [[original]] [[show]] and characters? The daughter [[characters]] were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that [[Mary]] would leave Minneapolis, and [[Rhoda]] would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or [[Sue]] Ann Nivens be guest [[stars]]? It just seems a [[pitiful]] [[way]] to [[remember]] such wonderful characters. It was good to [[see]] [[Mary]] and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a [[Mary]] Tyler Moore [[Show]] Reunion, a Dick Van [[Dyke]] [[Show]] Reunion, [[hopefully]] [[Mary]] will do [[better]] next [[time]] if she revisits her [[old]] Mary [[Richards]] stomping grounds again. Why did the [[history]] of [[Mari]] and Rhoda have to be so dour? [[Divorces]] [[wife]] with [[impassive]] daughters. And why very [[small]] [[references]] to the [[upfront]] [[spectacle]] and characters? The daughter [[character]] were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that [[Marie]] would leave Minneapolis, and [[Rhonda]] would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or [[Suing]] Ann Nivens be guest [[celebrity]]? It just seems a [[unfortunate]] [[pathway]] to [[reminisce]] such wonderful characters. It was good to [[seeing]] [[Mari]] and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a [[Marie]] Tyler Moore [[Showings]] Reunion, a Dick Van [[Levee]] [[Spectacle]] Reunion, [[thankfully]] [[Mari]] will do [[best]] next [[moment]] if she revisits her [[longtime]] Mary [[Richard]] stomping grounds again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Brak Show " is good .Probably not in the same level than "Aqua Teen Hunger " or "Space Ghost Coast to Coast ", but definitely it have many brilliant moments .Basically it follows the life of Zorak and Brak that have normal lives and go to the school ,living in a neighborhood on the style of the 50 'sitcoms . The humor and the animation of this show it's very much as "Aqua Teen Hunger " (and in one episode you could see Meatwad) with bizarre situations and strange characters .But it is good ,it have funny parts . Some of the songs are great ,others not very much but I like this show . The funniest character is the father of Brak . (that is a human ,nobody knows why ) --------------------------------------------- Result 3496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I [[found]] this [[movie]] [[hilarious]]. The spoofs on other [[popular]] [[movies]] of that [[time]] were some of the funniest I have seen in this [[sort]] of [[movie]]. Give it a [[try]]. If you [[saw]] the [[movies]] that this [[movie]] is spoofing, and you [[get]] the [[humor]], you should [[enjoy]] the [[movie]].

I (and the others who watched the [[movie]] with me) [[felt]] the funniest part in the [[movie]] (this is not a [[spoiler]] because I will [[NOT]] [[tell]] you what [[actually]] [[happens]]) was a scene with the "flashy [[thingy]]" from MIB. When they [[first]] [[discover]] the device and do not know what it is does... and then again [[later]] in the [[movie]]... you'll understand when you [[get]] there.

My only complaint about the [[movie]] is that I have never been [[able]] to [[find]] it in [[DVD]] so that I could [[buy]] a [[copy]]. I [[uncovered]] this [[movies]] [[amusing]]. The spoofs on other [[fashionable]] [[films]] of that [[period]] were some of the funniest I have seen in this [[sorting]] of [[film]]. Give it a [[tries]]. If you [[sawthe]] the [[cinematography]] that this [[cinematography]] is spoofing, and you [[gets]] the [[mood]], you should [[enjoys]] the [[films]].

I (and the others who watched the [[cinematography]] with me) [[believed]] the funniest part in the [[kino]] (this is not a [[deflector]] because I will [[NAH]] [[say]] you what [[indeed]] [[arrives]]) was a scene with the "flashy [[gizmo]]" from MIB. When they [[firstly]] [[detection]] the device and do not know what it is does... and then again [[then]] in the [[cinematography]]... you'll understand when you [[got]] there.

My only complaint about the [[film]] is that I have never been [[capable]] to [[unearth]] it in [[DVDS]] so that I could [[bought]] a [[copier]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3497 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Yes, I was lucky enough to see the long-running [[original]] production of Michael Bennett's hit musical. It was an [[amazing]] [[experience]] and I paid to see the movie when it hit theatres back in 1985. It is [[awful]]. Almost everything [[fails]]. First off, Attenborough (a [[fine]] actor, a good director with the right material) is a sorry [[choice]] - [[almost]] as [[bad]] as when John Huston was [[hired]] to mangle [[ANNIE]]. The camera is always in the wrong place - they [[chop]] up the [[songs]] and the [[CASTING]]!!! They are [[awful]] - the power of the play was these [[dancers]] - these hungry, [[talented]] [[performers]] just [[wanted]] a chance to [[show]] what they [[could]] do and when they got their chance - you couldn't take your [[eyes]] off of them. But this cast just [[gets]] by dancing, does a "[[nice]]" job singing but [[none]] of them [[spark]] one bit. [[In]] fact, look up the cast on IMDb - none of them really went on to do [[anything]] much. ([[OK]], OK, Janet Jones married Gretzky - sheesh). [[So]] this [[cinema]] trainwreck does not [[capture]] for one second the magic, the desperation, the passion of the stage musical. A total strike-out! (But even though they [[try]] to [[smother]] the [[music]] - the [[great]] music still rises up at [[times]] and reminds people how [[great]] the [[score]] was). Yes, I was lucky enough to see the long-running [[upfront]] production of Michael Bennett's hit musical. It was an [[wondrous]] [[experiences]] and I paid to see the movie when it hit theatres back in 1985. It is [[horrific]]. Almost everything [[fail]]. First off, Attenborough (a [[fined]] actor, a good director with the right material) is a sorry [[elect]] - [[hardly]] as [[naughty]] as when John Huston was [[engaged]] to mangle [[ANNETTE]]. The camera is always in the wrong place - they [[chopped]] up the [[lyrics]] and the [[CAST]]!!! They are [[abhorrent]] - the power of the play was these [[dances]] - these hungry, [[gifted]] [[painters]] just [[wanting]] a chance to [[shows]] what they [[would]] do and when they got their chance - you couldn't take your [[eye]] off of them. But this cast just [[get]] by dancing, does a "[[delightful]]" job singing but [[nil]] of them [[sparkle]] one bit. [[At]] fact, look up the cast on IMDb - none of them really went on to do [[something]] much. ([[ALLRIGHT]], OK, Janet Jones married Gretzky - sheesh). [[Accordingly]] this [[movies]] trainwreck does not [[caught]] for one second the magic, the desperation, the passion of the stage musical. A total strike-out! (But even though they [[trying]] to [[muffle]] the [[musicians]] - the [[prodigious]] music still rises up at [[dates]] and reminds people how [[resplendent]] the [[scoring]] was). --------------------------------------------- Result 3498 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] No, I haven't read the [[Stephen]] King [[novel]] "Thinner," but I [[choked]] down the [[film]] version. [[Horror]] movies are an acquired taste. Regular movies [[give]] an [[audience]] a hero to applaud as he [[strives]] to [[achieve]] a [[goal]]. In [[horror]] [[movies]], audiences are [[invited]] to [[savor]] the [[demise]] of [[characters]]. In [[director]] Tom Holland's low-fat but tasteless revenge chiller "[[Thinner]]," nobody wins and everybody deserves the bite that is put on them. Gluttonous New England attorney Billy Halleck (Robert John Burke of "Robocop 3") has a weight [[problem]]. Although he rocks the bathroom scales at 300 pounds, he appears happily married to a trim, [[delectable]] wife, Heidi (Lucinda Jenney of "G.I. Jane") with a yeasty teenage daughter.

Fat doesn't mean stupid here. Halleck displays his sagacity in court when he wins an acquittal verdict for sleazy Mafia chieftain Richie Ginelli (Joe Mantegna of "House of Games"). Driving home from a victory feast, Billy hits an old gypsy woman crossing the street and kills her. A cover-up occurs, and Halleck's friends get him out of the soup. The disgruntled gypsy father Taduz Lemke (Michael Constantine of "Skidoo") retaliates with a curse on the corpulent lawyer and the two town officials that exonerated him. Suddenly, Halleck finds himself shedding pounds no matter how much chow he chomps. When he begs the vengeful Gypsy to lift the curse, the old man refuses. Desperately, Halleck resorts to Richie. While Halleck struggles with the [[gypsies]] to remove the hex, he learns that his loyal wife has turned his attentions to the town's hotshot doctor.

"[[Thinner]]" qualifies as not only laughably inept horror flick, but the filmmakers also rely on stereotypes of [[men]] and [[women]]. Tom [[Holland]], who directed "Child's [[Play]]" (1988), and scenarist [[Michael]] [[McDowell]], have [[served]] up such a slipshod [[script]] that you cannot relish watching Billy get his just dessert and shrivel up. "Thinner" boasts few shocks and fewer surprises. The filmmakers may have regurgitated King's novel, but they have filleted whatever sense of horror and humor it contained. Holland and McDowell introduce characters, such as the Mafioso, then inexplicably let them off the hook. One minor character shows up long enough to die and have a chicken's head stuffed in his mouth.

The stereotypical behavior of the characters may offend audiences, too. "Thinner" depicts women as oversexed vixens and men as swine. When Halleck sneaks home from a clinic, he finds his doctor's sports car parked at his house. His suspicions ripen into jealousy and he cooks up a scheme to get the curse transferred to this wife. Even the premature ending lacks any satirical flavor. Oscar-winning special effects wizard Greg Cannom of "Van Helsing" and make-up artist Bob Laden do a fabulous job beefing up actor Robert John Burke to look obese. They succeed, too, in making him shrivel.

Only die-hard Stephen King fans will be able to stomach this misogynistic gooledyspook. No, I haven't read the [[Stephens]] King [[new]] "Thinner," but I [[asphyxiated]] down the [[cinema]] version. [[Monstrosity]] movies are an acquired taste. Regular movies [[confer]] an [[viewers]] a hero to applaud as he [[tends]] to [[accomplishing]] a [[targets]]. In [[abomination]] [[filmmaking]], audiences are [[invites]] to [[savour]] the [[downfall]] of [[nature]]. In [[headmaster]] Tom Holland's low-fat but tasteless revenge chiller "[[Finer]]," nobody wins and everybody deserves the bite that is put on them. Gluttonous New England attorney Billy Halleck (Robert John Burke of "Robocop 3") has a weight [[troubles]]. Although he rocks the bathroom scales at 300 pounds, he appears happily married to a trim, [[scrumptious]] wife, Heidi (Lucinda Jenney of "G.I. Jane") with a yeasty teenage daughter.

Fat doesn't mean stupid here. Halleck displays his sagacity in court when he wins an acquittal verdict for sleazy Mafia chieftain Richie Ginelli (Joe Mantegna of "House of Games"). Driving home from a victory feast, Billy hits an old gypsy woman crossing the street and kills her. A cover-up occurs, and Halleck's friends get him out of the soup. The disgruntled gypsy father Taduz Lemke (Michael Constantine of "Skidoo") retaliates with a curse on the corpulent lawyer and the two town officials that exonerated him. Suddenly, Halleck finds himself shedding pounds no matter how much chow he chomps. When he begs the vengeful Gypsy to lift the curse, the old man refuses. Desperately, Halleck resorts to Richie. While Halleck struggles with the [[gitano]] to remove the hex, he learns that his loyal wife has turned his attentions to the town's hotshot doctor.

"[[Leaner]]" qualifies as not only laughably inept horror flick, but the filmmakers also rely on stereotypes of [[hombre]] and [[mujer]]. Tom [[Dutch]], who directed "Child's [[Playing]]" (1988), and scenarist [[Micheal]] [[mcneill]], have [[played]] up such a slipshod [[hyphen]] that you cannot relish watching Billy get his just dessert and shrivel up. "Thinner" boasts few shocks and fewer surprises. The filmmakers may have regurgitated King's novel, but they have filleted whatever sense of horror and humor it contained. Holland and McDowell introduce characters, such as the Mafioso, then inexplicably let them off the hook. One minor character shows up long enough to die and have a chicken's head stuffed in his mouth.

The stereotypical behavior of the characters may offend audiences, too. "Thinner" depicts women as oversexed vixens and men as swine. When Halleck sneaks home from a clinic, he finds his doctor's sports car parked at his house. His suspicions ripen into jealousy and he cooks up a scheme to get the curse transferred to this wife. Even the premature ending lacks any satirical flavor. Oscar-winning special effects wizard Greg Cannom of "Van Helsing" and make-up artist Bob Laden do a fabulous job beefing up actor Robert John Burke to look obese. They succeed, too, in making him shrivel.

Only die-hard Stephen King fans will be able to stomach this misogynistic gooledyspook. --------------------------------------------- Result 3499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] That word 'True' in this film's title got my alarm bells ringing. They rang louder when a title card referred to America's Civil War as the 'War Between the States' (the circumlocution preferred by die-hard southerners). Jesse James -- thief, slave-holder and murderer -- is described as a quiet, gentle farm boy.

How [[dishonest]] is this [[movie]]? There is NO [[mention]] of slavery, far [[less]] of the documented [[fact]] that Jesse James's [[poor]] widdered mother owned slaves before the war, and that Jesse and his brother Frank actively fought to preserve slavery. According to this movie, all those Civil War soldiers were really fighting to decide whether Missouri is a northern state or a southern state ... that's ALL. (Missouri: It's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!) Black people are entirely absent from this movie, except for two glimpses of a pair of beggars, one of whom wears a "HELP THE POOR" sign that's very implausibly typeset instead of handwritten. (Some shots of 19th-century newspapers are inaccurate too, with 20th-century type fonts.)

This film has a weird flashback structure. There's some very impressive stunt riding (and some fine work by stunt horses), and one excellent montage. I savoured one line of dialogue: 'Some of those boys will never taste beans again.' The movie gets a few facts straight: Agnes Moorehead, as Jesse's mother, conceals her right arm in the scenes following the raid by the agents of Pinkerton (here called 'Remington') in which Jesse James's real-life mother suffered injuries requiring the amputation of her lower arm. Some errors here are pardonable: during his bushwhacking days, the real Jesse James accidentally shot off part of his left middle finger, but Robert Wagner (in the title role here) does not have a stumpfinger. I've seen a photo of Jesse James's real wife; if she had looked half as glamorous as Hope Lange looks in this movie, Jesse James might have stayed home more.

There's plenty of revisionism here, and most of the male [[actors]] [[wear]] 1950s hairstyles. But many of this movie's errors were avoidable. Jesse James's mentor William Quantrill is mentioned several times, but all the actors mispronounce his name. We see Jesse and his wife moving into an elaborate two-storey house (where he will soon die) after paying a rent of $18. Actually, Jesse James's last residence (at 1318 Lafayette Street, St Joseph, Missouri) was a simple one-storey cottage, renting for $14. There was no upper storey ... so, when Jesse James is killed, his wife could not come running from upstairs as Hope Lange does here. (She was actually in the kitchen.)

One continuity error: Robert Wagner (with no stunt double) does an impressive job of taking a slug to the jaw and falling over while his hands are tied behind his back ... but when he gets up, the rope binding his wrists has vanished.

The screenplay does some weird and unnecessary juggling of dates. Following the Northfield robbery attempt, Jesse says he expects to get home by his birthday. The actual Northfield bank raid by the James Gang (7 September, 1876) was two days AFTER Jesse James's birthday. (Maybe he meant next year's birthday.) Later, we see Jesse and his wife moving into their St Joseph home on a fine summer day, while Jesse tells her what he plans to do when Christmas Eve arrives ... but in real life, Mr and Mrs Jesse James moved into that house on 24 December, 1881 ... so this scene should *BE* on Christmas Eve! These errors were entirely avoidable.

Some of the fictionalisations here don't make sense. According to this movie, the Northfield bank raid failed because one (fictional) henchman was late in cutting the telegraph wires. If this had actually happened, it would indeed have hampered the James Gang's getaway ... but it wouldn't have affected the robbery itself, which failed for other reasons.

There are good performances here by Jeffrey Hunter (as Frank James), Moorehead, Alan Hale Jnr (as Cole Younger) and by stage actress Marian Seldes in a rare screen role. I was disappointed by Robert Wagner, normally an under-rated actor. Elsewhere, Wagner has proved his impressive range by convincingly portraying heroes, villains and morally ambiguous characters. Here, he can't seem to decide whether to depict Jesse James as a goodie or a baddie ... so he doesn't much bother. John Carradine phones in his performance in a brief role as a fictional jackleg preacher who baptises Jesse and his wife at their wedding. In fact, Jesse James was baptised in childhood by his uncle, a Methodist minister ... but perhaps this second baptism is a topping-up.

Jesse James was no Robin Hood. (I doubt that Robin Hood was Robin Hood either, but that's another story.) There is not one single documented instance of Jesse James ever sharing his loot with anyone beyond his own family. After some of his hold-ups, he didn't even split the swag with the rest of his gang. In this movie, Jesse gets gunned down right after he vows to give up his bandit ways forever. In reality, the night before his death, Jesse James and the Ford brothers stole horses that Jesse planned to use the next day in a robbery of the Platte City bank. As preparation for most of his robberies, Jesse James stole horses from local farmers ... the same poor folk who (in the inaccurate legends) were supposedly the beneficiaries of his largesse. I cringed at one scene here, in which the fictional Jesse James is so gol-durn refined that he disapproves of an oil painting which tastefully depicts nudes.

'The True (not much!) Story of Jesse James' is wilfully dishonest about a thieving murderer, and likewise dishonest about the Civil War. For the very impressive stunt work, one good montage and a few fine acting turns, I'll rate this obscenely dishonest movie 2 points out of 10. That word 'True' in this film's title got my alarm bells ringing. They rang louder when a title card referred to America's Civil War as the 'War Between the States' (the circumlocution preferred by die-hard southerners). Jesse James -- thief, slave-holder and murderer -- is described as a quiet, gentle farm boy.

How [[untrue]] is this [[filmmaking]]? There is NO [[cited]] of slavery, far [[least]] of the documented [[facto]] that Jesse James's [[poorest]] widdered mother owned slaves before the war, and that Jesse and his brother Frank actively fought to preserve slavery. According to this movie, all those Civil War soldiers were really fighting to decide whether Missouri is a northern state or a southern state ... that's ALL. (Missouri: It's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!) Black people are entirely absent from this movie, except for two glimpses of a pair of beggars, one of whom wears a "HELP THE POOR" sign that's very implausibly typeset instead of handwritten. (Some shots of 19th-century newspapers are inaccurate too, with 20th-century type fonts.)

This film has a weird flashback structure. There's some very impressive stunt riding (and some fine work by stunt horses), and one excellent montage. I savoured one line of dialogue: 'Some of those boys will never taste beans again.' The movie gets a few facts straight: Agnes Moorehead, as Jesse's mother, conceals her right arm in the scenes following the raid by the agents of Pinkerton (here called 'Remington') in which Jesse James's real-life mother suffered injuries requiring the amputation of her lower arm. Some errors here are pardonable: during his bushwhacking days, the real Jesse James accidentally shot off part of his left middle finger, but Robert Wagner (in the title role here) does not have a stumpfinger. I've seen a photo of Jesse James's real wife; if she had looked half as glamorous as Hope Lange looks in this movie, Jesse James might have stayed home more.

There's plenty of revisionism here, and most of the male [[players]] [[worn]] 1950s hairstyles. But many of this movie's errors were avoidable. Jesse James's mentor William Quantrill is mentioned several times, but all the actors mispronounce his name. We see Jesse and his wife moving into an elaborate two-storey house (where he will soon die) after paying a rent of $18. Actually, Jesse James's last residence (at 1318 Lafayette Street, St Joseph, Missouri) was a simple one-storey cottage, renting for $14. There was no upper storey ... so, when Jesse James is killed, his wife could not come running from upstairs as Hope Lange does here. (She was actually in the kitchen.)

One continuity error: Robert Wagner (with no stunt double) does an impressive job of taking a slug to the jaw and falling over while his hands are tied behind his back ... but when he gets up, the rope binding his wrists has vanished.

The screenplay does some weird and unnecessary juggling of dates. Following the Northfield robbery attempt, Jesse says he expects to get home by his birthday. The actual Northfield bank raid by the James Gang (7 September, 1876) was two days AFTER Jesse James's birthday. (Maybe he meant next year's birthday.) Later, we see Jesse and his wife moving into their St Joseph home on a fine summer day, while Jesse tells her what he plans to do when Christmas Eve arrives ... but in real life, Mr and Mrs Jesse James moved into that house on 24 December, 1881 ... so this scene should *BE* on Christmas Eve! These errors were entirely avoidable.

Some of the fictionalisations here don't make sense. According to this movie, the Northfield bank raid failed because one (fictional) henchman was late in cutting the telegraph wires. If this had actually happened, it would indeed have hampered the James Gang's getaway ... but it wouldn't have affected the robbery itself, which failed for other reasons.

There are good performances here by Jeffrey Hunter (as Frank James), Moorehead, Alan Hale Jnr (as Cole Younger) and by stage actress Marian Seldes in a rare screen role. I was disappointed by Robert Wagner, normally an under-rated actor. Elsewhere, Wagner has proved his impressive range by convincingly portraying heroes, villains and morally ambiguous characters. Here, he can't seem to decide whether to depict Jesse James as a goodie or a baddie ... so he doesn't much bother. John Carradine phones in his performance in a brief role as a fictional jackleg preacher who baptises Jesse and his wife at their wedding. In fact, Jesse James was baptised in childhood by his uncle, a Methodist minister ... but perhaps this second baptism is a topping-up.

Jesse James was no Robin Hood. (I doubt that Robin Hood was Robin Hood either, but that's another story.) There is not one single documented instance of Jesse James ever sharing his loot with anyone beyond his own family. After some of his hold-ups, he didn't even split the swag with the rest of his gang. In this movie, Jesse gets gunned down right after he vows to give up his bandit ways forever. In reality, the night before his death, Jesse James and the Ford brothers stole horses that Jesse planned to use the next day in a robbery of the Platte City bank. As preparation for most of his robberies, Jesse James stole horses from local farmers ... the same poor folk who (in the inaccurate legends) were supposedly the beneficiaries of his largesse. I cringed at one scene here, in which the fictional Jesse James is so gol-durn refined that he disapproves of an oil painting which tastefully depicts nudes.

'The True (not much!) Story of Jesse James' is wilfully dishonest about a thieving murderer, and likewise dishonest about the Civil War. For the very impressive stunt work, one good montage and a few fine acting turns, I'll rate this obscenely dishonest movie 2 points out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3500 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Unlike Tinseltown's version of HELLO, DOLLY!, Jay Presson Allen's screen adaptation of Ira Levin's hit Broadway thriller couldn't wait for it's stage incarnation to shutter before putting it up on the silver screen, so producers wisely decided to make the most of it's lengthy White [[Way]] [[run]]! The film's opening and closing scenes are shot inside New York's intimate Music Box Theater where DEATHTRAP played for nearly five [[years]]. Even the film's final fadeout on the [[theatre]] marquee is a version of the stageplay's famous logo. ([[Although]] marketeers [[decided]] to go with a more fun Rubik's Cube icon for the movie.)

Now on a low-priced DVD release, DEATHTRAP seems just as fresh and inventinve as ever. The cast is just right ([[better]] than their stage [[counterparts]]) and location scouts should be applauded for finding a suitably spooky house for our "one room, two act thriller" to take place in. Opened up in [[surprisingly]] [[simple]] and [[innovative]] [[ways]], director Sidney Lumet wisely tags any "new" material onto the beginning and end of the film and leaves Levin's wickedly twisty [[center]] [[alone]].

The film's last scene is a [[major]] Hollywood departure from the [[boards]], and [[slightly]] undermines one of Levin's plot points from earlier in the film [Helga (about a dagger): "Will be [[used]] by another woman BECAUSE of play."]. Like Robert Altman's THE [[PLAYER]], however, our new finale [[helps]] the film fold in on itself once again and blurs the lines between [[stage]], screen, and ([[could]] it be?) [[real]] life! Unlike Tinseltown's version of HELLO, DOLLY!, Jay Presson Allen's screen adaptation of Ira Levin's hit Broadway thriller couldn't wait for it's stage incarnation to shutter before putting it up on the silver screen, so producers wisely decided to make the most of it's lengthy White [[Routing]] [[executing]]! The film's opening and closing scenes are shot inside New York's intimate Music Box Theater where DEATHTRAP played for nearly five [[olds]]. Even the film's final fadeout on the [[theater]] marquee is a version of the stageplay's famous logo. ([[Though]] marketeers [[decide]] to go with a more fun Rubik's Cube icon for the movie.)

Now on a low-priced DVD release, DEATHTRAP seems just as fresh and inventinve as ever. The cast is just right ([[best]] than their stage [[counterpart]]) and location scouts should be applauded for finding a suitably spooky house for our "one room, two act thriller" to take place in. Opened up in [[terribly]] [[mere]] and [[revolutionary]] [[pathways]], director Sidney Lumet wisely tags any "new" material onto the beginning and end of the film and leaves Levin's wickedly twisty [[centers]] [[lonely]].

The film's last scene is a [[principal]] Hollywood departure from the [[councils]], and [[modestly]] undermines one of Levin's plot points from earlier in the film [Helga (about a dagger): "Will be [[using]] by another woman BECAUSE of play."]. Like Robert Altman's THE [[PROTAGONIST]], however, our new finale [[succour]] the film fold in on itself once again and blurs the lines between [[phases]], screen, and ([[wo]] it be?) [[actual]] life! --------------------------------------------- Result 3501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] this film was shrouded in scandal for so long that it [[became]] a very sought after [[item]]...the [[outrage]], the [[mystery]], etc. it had everything to be a [[great]] piece of film-making, but [[ultimately]] fails in [[every]] extent. it's a [[terribly]] [[bad]] comedy, a [[pathetic]] horror [[movie]], a lame erotic [[film]].

the 2 disc DVD includes a gorgeous booklet with stills, [[interviews]], [[essays]] on bestiality, [[etc]]. as well as an [[extensive]] interview with the more-than-pretentious director. for those who have [[heard]] about it but never seen it, the package will [[seem]] fantastic until one actually sees the film. disc 1 contains the edited [[film]], badly translated to English but with good visual quality. disc 2 contains the director's cut, in an [[awful]] transfer, in french.

what can I say about the actual beast? a hand puppet of Kermit the frog would have been more effective and shocking. this film was shrouded in scandal for so long that it [[was]] a very sought after [[items]]...the [[ignominy]], the [[enigma]], etc. it had everything to be a [[marvellous]] piece of film-making, but [[lastly]] fails in [[any]] extent. it's a [[surprisingly]] [[unfavourable]] comedy, a [[unfortunate]] horror [[kino]], a lame erotic [[filmmaking]].

the 2 disc DVD includes a gorgeous booklet with stills, [[discussion]], [[tests]] on bestiality, [[cetera]]. as well as an [[vast]] interview with the more-than-pretentious director. for those who have [[listened]] about it but never seen it, the package will [[appears]] fantastic until one actually sees the film. disc 1 contains the edited [[filmmaking]], badly translated to English but with good visual quality. disc 2 contains the director's cut, in an [[frightful]] transfer, in french.

what can I say about the actual beast? a hand puppet of Kermit the frog would have been more effective and shocking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3502 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] 79/100. Fred [[Astaire]] and Ginger Rogers never [[made]] anything but [[great]] [[films]] together. [[Although]] this is not one of their [[best]], it is an [[excellent]] [[musical]]. There are a few [[outstanding]] musical numbers, [[good]] support from Randolph Scott. Two [[notable]] [[appearances]], Betty Grable and Lucille Ball make memorable early screen performances. Ball is [[particularly]] good, and a blonde as well. The "Let's Face the [[Music]] and [[Dance]]" is one of the musical duo's best numbers ever. Harriet Hilliard, better know as Harriet [[Nelson]] of "[[Ozzie]] and Harriet" plays [[Ginger]] Roger's sister. The [[basic]] plot is pretty familiar, but with a [[cast]] this [[exceptional]], it [[works]]. [[Excellent]] art direction and [[score]]. 79/100. Fred [[Esther]] and Ginger Rogers never [[effected]] anything but [[excellent]] [[kino]] together. [[While]] this is not one of their [[better]], it is an [[wondrous]] [[music]]. There are a few [[noteworthy]] musical numbers, [[alright]] support from Randolph Scott. Two [[significant]] [[phenomena]], Betty Grable and Lucille Ball make memorable early screen performances. Ball is [[notably]] good, and a blonde as well. The "Let's Face the [[Musician]] and [[Dancers]]" is one of the musical duo's best numbers ever. Harriet Hilliard, better know as Harriet [[Nielsen]] of "[[Uzi]] and Harriet" plays [[Kang]] Roger's sister. The [[fundamental]] plot is pretty familiar, but with a [[casting]] this [[noteworthy]], it [[collaborating]]. [[Magnifique]] art direction and [[notation]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For those of you who think anime is just about giant reptiles raping schoolgirls, think again. There is a totally different side to the Japanese animation. Yakitate! Japan is one of those shows. It is a sweet-natured tale of a young boy with the gift to make delicious bread. His universe is all about creating a Japanese bread that can match with the famous European breads. The show is as wacky as they come and I'm sure that non-Japanese viewers will miss a lot of the jokes. But it is still very nice to watch because of the complete innocent vibe of the show.

In the world of Yakitate! it is not uncommon for people to look like they've just had an orgasm after eating bread. The bread is hallucinating and can give the consumer a wide array of super powers, from time-traveling to swimming like a fish. That weird aspect makes it into one of the least predictable and funny shows I've watched in a while. --------------------------------------------- Result 3504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Richard Pryor's early 80s running down the street on fire incident must have affected him somehow. In his stand up,he jokes about it getting great laughs. It seemed to have done something involving the projects he chose. The Toy is about the lamest he ever chose,aside from I guess Another You.

A movie where a white man buys his son a black man? Nice little bit of underlying political incorrectness before thee was such a thing. It's seeing Richard getting all sentimental that made me finally walk out before the end. I wanted to see Pryor get even with this brat,instead it becomes the misunderstood kid nauseum! At least Gleason had his moments. Ignore this and watch Pryor with Gene Wilder or any of his '70s stuff. This is a waste of any movie watcher's time! --------------------------------------------- Result 3505 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It's a funny business, [[reviewing]] [[movies]]. These days when "internalized [[emotions]]" and "emotional detachment" are [[favored]] over straightforward sentimentality, it [[must]] be hard to [[stay]] [[faithful]] to your [[true]] [[feelings]].

[[Soon]] after [[completing]] jury [[duties]] at the 58th Berlinale, I [[managed]] to [[catch]] Yoji Yamada's Kabei.

After the screening, I watched folks dreamily amble out of the [[theatre]] hall, watery-eyed, [[men]], women, and reviewers alike. Even the director of the Berlinale, [[obviously]] a hardened viewer of cinema, [[confessed]] to having been [[caught]] unawares and [[found]] himself crying three quarter's way into this unashamedly [[sentimental]] [[experience]].

But what [[really]] [[surprised]] me were the [[reviews]] that came after. Despite being ineffably [[moved]] by the [[film]], [[many]] reviewers [[chose]] to be tepid and emotionally non-committal in their writing. [[Apparently]], post weeping, they had put on their "[[thinking]] [[cap]]", and [[consequently]], [[missed]] out on what I [[felt]] was the [[genius]] about Kabei.

[[Allow]] me to [[explain]].

Set in pre-war Japan, the [[story]] of Kabei revolves around one writer's family, and their fate therein, after he is held in [[jail]] for what was [[described]] as "[[thought]] [[crimes]]" against the Imperial will. Through a series of protracted [[emotional]] scenes, Yamada gets us familiar with the man, his loyal wife and two daughters, as well as three side characters—the man's pretty young sister, a bumbling ex-student, and a cad of an uncle – all come to help the family cope with their plight, in the absence of the man of the house.

The story moves along at a slow [[albeit]] steady pace, and heartbreaks occur at precisely the moments everyone is able to predict. This of course makes it near impossible for anyone in the audience to get too emotionally distraught by any dramatic event.

[[In]] other [[words]], although you learn to love the family and their helpers, and sympathize with their unfortunate situation, you get so lulled by the certainty of the plot that you find yourself expecting a particular kind of ending.

[[However]], two hours into the film (don't worry, Yamada provides the [[viewer]] with sufficient [[moments]] of gravity and levity to tide you along), he slaps you with what I can only describe as "the sting". All that you have assumed to be what the story was about—an innocent man wrenched from his faithful wife and daughters – now suddenly points to one of the family helpers. Someone you have hitherto taken for granted is now thrown into an unexpected twist of fate.

At this point, something curious happened in the theatre I was in. Everyone started sobbing with little or no inhibition.

"My word!" I muttered under my breath. It struck me then that "Kabei", in the final analysis, was more than a film about a family torn apart by an empire on the verge of war. It was, in fact, a cunning examination of one common human foible: How little we cared about the secret feelings of people who are closest to us.

Now, the most common criticism made about the film was that it was technically solid, but lacked innovation. That's what happens when reviewers put on their proverbial thinking cap, I guess. With Kabei, I believe Yoji Yamada knew exactly what trick he was going to employ to touch on one unique aspect of humanity. A wicked old trick he so seamlessly applied in the Tora-san series, and later, in Tasogare Sebei.

After lulling the audience into a sort of narrative comfort zone, he throws us into a realm of emotions rarely explored in cinema.

This, to me, is the most effective cinematic tool of all. One which avoids detection, but affects you deeply. And proof of its effectiveness was a thousand wet pieces of Kleenex, thrown into a litter bin just outside of that thousand-seater cinema hall.

Now if only some reviewers would resist being so caught up with being smart that they forget what cinema is really about. Human emotions. Pure and simple. It's a funny business, [[considering]] [[cinematography]]. These days when "internalized [[sentiments]]" and "emotional detachment" are [[favour]] over straightforward sentimentality, it [[gotta]] be hard to [[staying]] [[loyal]] to your [[genuine]] [[affections]].

[[Sooner]] after [[finished]] jury [[liability]] at the 58th Berlinale, I [[administering]] to [[catching]] Yoji Yamada's Kabei.

After the screening, I watched folks dreamily amble out of the [[teatro]] hall, watery-eyed, [[males]], women, and reviewers alike. Even the director of the Berlinale, [[surely]] a hardened viewer of cinema, [[conceded]] to having been [[capture]] unawares and [[unearthed]] himself crying three quarter's way into this unashamedly [[emotional]] [[experiences]].

But what [[genuinely]] [[horrified]] me were the [[assessment]] that came after. Despite being ineffably [[shifted]] by the [[cinematography]], [[various]] reviewers [[selected]] to be tepid and emotionally non-committal in their writing. [[Clearly]], post weeping, they had put on their "[[thoughts]] [[ceiling]]", and [[so]], [[miss]] out on what I [[deemed]] was the [[engineering]] about Kabei.

[[Permit]] me to [[explained]].

Set in pre-war Japan, the [[saga]] of Kabei revolves around one writer's family, and their fate therein, after he is held in [[imprisonment]] for what was [[describes]] as "[[ideology]] [[offence]]" against the Imperial will. Through a series of protracted [[affective]] scenes, Yamada gets us familiar with the man, his loyal wife and two daughters, as well as three side characters—the man's pretty young sister, a bumbling ex-student, and a cad of an uncle – all come to help the family cope with their plight, in the absence of the man of the house.

The story moves along at a slow [[nonetheless]] steady pace, and heartbreaks occur at precisely the moments everyone is able to predict. This of course makes it near impossible for anyone in the audience to get too emotionally distraught by any dramatic event.

[[During]] other [[phrase]], although you learn to love the family and their helpers, and sympathize with their unfortunate situation, you get so lulled by the certainty of the plot that you find yourself expecting a particular kind of ending.

[[Still]], two hours into the film (don't worry, Yamada provides the [[onlooker]] with sufficient [[times]] of gravity and levity to tide you along), he slaps you with what I can only describe as "the sting". All that you have assumed to be what the story was about—an innocent man wrenched from his faithful wife and daughters – now suddenly points to one of the family helpers. Someone you have hitherto taken for granted is now thrown into an unexpected twist of fate.

At this point, something curious happened in the theatre I was in. Everyone started sobbing with little or no inhibition.

"My word!" I muttered under my breath. It struck me then that "Kabei", in the final analysis, was more than a film about a family torn apart by an empire on the verge of war. It was, in fact, a cunning examination of one common human foible: How little we cared about the secret feelings of people who are closest to us.

Now, the most common criticism made about the film was that it was technically solid, but lacked innovation. That's what happens when reviewers put on their proverbial thinking cap, I guess. With Kabei, I believe Yoji Yamada knew exactly what trick he was going to employ to touch on one unique aspect of humanity. A wicked old trick he so seamlessly applied in the Tora-san series, and later, in Tasogare Sebei.

After lulling the audience into a sort of narrative comfort zone, he throws us into a realm of emotions rarely explored in cinema.

This, to me, is the most effective cinematic tool of all. One which avoids detection, but affects you deeply. And proof of its effectiveness was a thousand wet pieces of Kleenex, thrown into a litter bin just outside of that thousand-seater cinema hall.

Now if only some reviewers would resist being so caught up with being smart that they forget what cinema is really about. Human emotions. Pure and simple. --------------------------------------------- Result 3506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I find it heart-warming and inspiring that the writing team behind such hopelessly mainstream Hollywood movies like INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM, American Graffiti and HOWARD THE DUCK would begin their career with a low-budget exploitation horror film like this. Perhaps as a testament to the talent that would earn Willard Hyuck and Gloria Katz an Oscar nomination later in their respective careers, Messiah of Evil has potential, but sadly becomes frustrating exactly because it can't muster the film-making prowess to pull it off.

The premise involves a young girl who travels to a small coastal town in search for her painter father who went missing a while back. It doesn't take long for the fragmented narrative to abandon all hope and dive headlong in disjointed absurdity - and for a while it works admirably well to the point where you begin thinking that maybe Messiah of Evil needs to be reclaimed from the schlocky gutter of 70's exploitation as an example of artful mystery horror.

The surreal non-sequiturs keep piling on as the daughter stumbles upon a young couple in a seedy hotel room who are in town to conduct a research on the local legend of the 'blood moon', a scruffy and half-mad alcoholic (played by the great Elisha Cook Jr. in perhaps the best scene of the movie) who warns her about her father only to be reportedly found dead in an alley 'eaten by dogs' a little later, the blind old lady that owns the local art gallery and who has inexplicably removed all of her father's paintings from the shop and last but not least a retarded, murderous, squirrel-eating albino.

Part of the movie's charm is precisely this brand of bargain-basement artsy surrealism that defies logic and genre conventions every step of the way. Whereas with Lynch it is obviously the mark of a talented creator, with Messiah of Evil the boundaries between the 'intentional', the 'unintentional' and the 'didn't really expect it to come out this way but it's good enough - WRAP SCENE' blur hopelessly.

Take for example the double narration that flows in and out of the picture in a drug-addled, feverish, stream-of-consciousness way, one coming from the daughter as she wanders from place to place in search for her father, and the other narrated by her father's voice as she reads his diary.

While we're still talking about a 'living dead' picture, Messiah of Evil is different and only loosely one - at least with current preconceptions of what a zombie movie is supposed to be. The origin of the living dead here is a 100 year old curse, bestowed upon the town by a mysterious 'Dark Stranger' who came from the woods one day. In the meantime Hyuck finds time for snippets of mass-consumption criticism in a flesh-eating supermarket scene that predates DAWN OF THE DEAD by a good number of years (you can hear the MST3K line already: 'man is dead, only his capitalist food tins remain') and a nicely thought but poorly executed similar scene in a movie theater.

I generally think that the surreal works in careful, well measured doses - how is the absurd to work if it's not hidden within the perfectly normal? Hyuck seems to just smear it all over the picture and by doing so dangerously overplays his hand. When the albino for example picks up a girl hitching her way to town and eats a squirrel in front of her, you can almost imagine the director winking meaningfully at the audience, amused and satisfied with his own hijinks.

The general film-making level is also pretty low - after the half-way mark, the pace becomes muddled and the story tiresome and evidently going nowhere and not particularly fast either. Add to that the choppy editing, average acting and Hyuck's general inability to capture true atmosphere - the empty streets of coastal town are criminally misused - and I'd file Messiah under 'missed opportunity' but still grindhouse afficionados will find enough to appreciate - even though it's not particularly gory, trashy or sleazy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Well, what can I say having just watched this [[fantastic]] film, when my nerves are still jangling! Jacques Audiard the director must be making quite a name for himself in [[France]], and rightly so. Vince Cassel is no Tom Cruise and [[Emmanuelle]] Devos is no Penelope Cruz either, but these two are fantastic actors, and this is a [[taut]] and [[compelling]] thriller which [[starts]] off slowly with some clever character building and then [[starts]] to put [[tension]] on [[tension]] to a wonderful climax. Others have written about the plot, so I will not say more than everyone in this film plays their role to perfection, the director, the actors, right down to the cameraman, and everything seems so real, no [[stupid]] gun play, the fighting when it [[happens]] is so credible, the [[expressions]], the [[emotions]], it is almost as you are there as a spectator. Do yourself a favour, get the [[DVD]], a bottle of wine, turn the lights low, take the phone off the hook and immerse yourself in this Hitchcockian thriller :) Well, what can I say having just watched this [[wondrous]] film, when my nerves are still jangling! Jacques Audiard the director must be making quite a name for himself in [[Francia]], and rightly so. Vince Cassel is no Tom Cruise and [[Antonia]] Devos is no Penelope Cruz either, but these two are fantastic actors, and this is a [[strained]] and [[persuading]] thriller which [[start]] off slowly with some clever character building and then [[startup]] to put [[voltage]] on [[tensile]] to a wonderful climax. Others have written about the plot, so I will not say more than everyone in this film plays their role to perfection, the director, the actors, right down to the cameraman, and everything seems so real, no [[nonsensical]] gun play, the fighting when it [[arrives]] is so credible, the [[phrase]], the [[sentiments]], it is almost as you are there as a spectator. Do yourself a favour, get the [[DVDS]], a bottle of wine, turn the lights low, take the phone off the hook and immerse yourself in this Hitchcockian thriller :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3508 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] This is an OK [[adaptation]], but not as good as the TV version. The actors are generally alright but I found Jeremy Northam [[rather]] wet as Mr Knightley, particularly compared to Mark Strong in the TV version. Gwyneth Paltrow is OK and her English accent is pretty good but again, I preferred Kate Beckinsale's Emma. There are [[excellent]] support performances from Toni Collette, Juliet Stephenson and Sophy Thompson.

The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.

My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.

Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more. This is an OK [[adjustment]], but not as good as the TV version. The actors are generally alright but I found Jeremy Northam [[quite]] wet as Mr Knightley, particularly compared to Mark Strong in the TV version. Gwyneth Paltrow is OK and her English accent is pretty good but again, I preferred Kate Beckinsale's Emma. There are [[wondrous]] support performances from Toni Collette, Juliet Stephenson and Sophy Thompson.

The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.

My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.

Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the movie for those who believe cinema is the seventh art, not an entertainment business. Lars von Trier creates a noir atmosphere of post-war Germany utterly captivating. You get absorbed into the dream and you're let go only at the end credits. The plot necessarily comes second, but it still is a thrilling story with tough issues being raised. Just wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I was [[prepared]] to [[laugh]] [[throughout]] this [[movie]] like a Mystery [[Science]] Theater [[experiment]], but it was just boring. It [[appears]] that the [[producers]] had many [[biker]] enthusiast [[friends]], and from there casually decided to make a movie.

It is frequently unwatchable. Lots of footage of the [[bikers]] riding on a dirt [[road]], with the same [[music]] played [[repeatedly]]. Unfortunately, [[Renee]] Harmon is [[barely]] in the movie. Harmon [[probably]] [[would]] have livened things up. [[Perhaps]] she had other [[commitments]] the day this was filmed.

Of course, the bikers terrorize a small town. Fights, murder, a cowardly cop, a goofy mechanic, etc. One of the bikers always wears a football helmet, a [[weak]] attempt to [[distinguish]] him from all the other outlaws.

The [[script]] has [[nothing]] to [[offer]]. One scene features a biker assaulting a woman, yelling in the lady's face "You're all the same! You're all the same!". We come back to the scene a minute later and he again declares "You're all the same!". Couldn't the writer think of something more creative to say??

At the end the good guys have killed the bad guys. We also learn that the wedding between middle-aged mechanic Joe and young Susie has been canceled. Susie is going away to college, and we abruptly learn that Joe's wedding is still on (but with a different bride). [[End]]. I was [[authored]] to [[giggling]] [[around]] this [[filmmaking]] like a Mystery [[Scientific]] Theater [[experimentation]], but it was just boring. It [[seems]] that the [[manufacturers]] had many [[motorcycle]] enthusiast [[mates]], and from there casually decided to make a movie.

It is frequently unwatchable. Lots of footage of the [[cyclists]] riding on a dirt [[path]], with the same [[musica]] played [[always]]. Unfortunately, [[Rene]] Harmon is [[hardly]] in the movie. Harmon [[conceivably]] [[should]] have livened things up. [[Conceivably]] she had other [[obligation]] the day this was filmed.

Of course, the bikers terrorize a small town. Fights, murder, a cowardly cop, a goofy mechanic, etc. One of the bikers always wears a football helmet, a [[brittle]] attempt to [[discern]] him from all the other outlaws.

The [[hyphen]] has [[none]] to [[affords]]. One scene features a biker assaulting a woman, yelling in the lady's face "You're all the same! You're all the same!". We come back to the scene a minute later and he again declares "You're all the same!". Couldn't the writer think of something more creative to say??

At the end the good guys have killed the bad guys. We also learn that the wedding between middle-aged mechanic Joe and young Susie has been canceled. Susie is going away to college, and we abruptly learn that Joe's wedding is still on (but with a different bride). [[Ending]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** [[Juggernaut]] is a British [[made]] "[[thriller]]" released in the US by [[First]] National. Karloff is [[Dr]]. Sartorius who has to [[leave]] his [[research]] because his [[funds]] have [[dried]] up. Karloff is forced to [[retreat]] to France and [[start]] up a [[medical]] practice. He is propositioned by a conniving [[woman]] who [[wants]] to [[get]] rid of her much [[older]] [[husband]]. She knows Karloff [[needs]] the [[money]].

Karloff agrees to the [[proposition]] and [[soon]] [[becomes]] the personal [[doctor]] of the husband. All the while, the [[wife]] is prancing about [[town]] with the local no [[good]] playboy. Karloff [[finally]] injects the old geyser with [[poison]] and he [[kicks]] off. [[However]], his son (from another [[marriage]]) [[arrives]] a few days before the [[killing]] and finds out the will has been [[changed]]. When he spills the [[beans]] to the [[wife]], she goes berserk and even bites the son's hand.

Meanwhile, Karloff's [[nurse]] has [[misplaced]] the hypo Karloff [[used]] to [[kill]] the [[old]] [[man]]. When Karloff [[finds]] out he isn't [[getting]] any [[money]], he asks the [[wife]] to [[poison]] the [[son]]. The nurse [[suspects]] Karloff and [[finds]] the [[missing]] hypo. [[Analysis]] shows [[poison]], but not [[quite]] in [[time]] as Karloff kidnaps the nurse.

To [[make]] a long [[story]] short, the [[nurse]] escapes, gets the [[police]], and manages to [[save]] the [[son]] who is about to be injected by Karloff. Karloff [[instead]] [[injects]] himself and [[dies]].

This movie does have some good [[points]]. Karloff is possessed and plays the type of mad doctor he did in The Devil Commands and the Man Who Lived Again. It is peculiar, however, to [[see]] him walk around stiffly and slightly hunched over. We never find out why he is walking this way. I suspect the director thought it made him more sinister.

The actress [[playing]] the 2-timing wife overacts something terrible. She has a French accent. Even though she overacts badly, you still manage to hate her (or maybe you hate her because of her acting...).

A little below average for a Karloff vehicle. If you buy the Sinister Cinema VHS copy, the audio is a bit choppy. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** [[Giant]] is a British [[accomplished]] "[[thrillers]]" released in the US by [[Fiirst]] National. Karloff is [[Doktor]]. Sartorius who has to [[let]] his [[researching]] because his [[finances]] have [[drying]] up. Karloff is forced to [[retire]] to France and [[embark]] up a [[physician]] practice. He is propositioned by a conniving [[wife]] who [[want]] to [[obtains]] rid of her much [[elderly]] [[hubby]]. She knows Karloff [[requisite]] the [[moneys]].

Karloff agrees to the [[suggestion]] and [[rapidly]] [[becoming]] the personal [[doktor]] of the husband. All the while, the [[mujer]] is prancing about [[city]] with the local no [[alright]] playboy. Karloff [[eventually]] injects the old geyser with [[poisoning]] and he [[karate]] off. [[Conversely]], his son (from another [[marries]]) [[comes]] a few days before the [[homicide]] and finds out the will has been [[modified]]. When he spills the [[bean]] to the [[woman]], she goes berserk and even bites the son's hand.

Meanwhile, Karloff's [[infirmary]] has [[mislaid]] the hypo Karloff [[utilizes]] to [[mata]] the [[elderly]] [[males]]. When Karloff [[found]] out he isn't [[obtaining]] any [[cash]], he asks the [[femme]] to [[poisonous]] the [[sons]]. The nurse [[suspect]] Karloff and [[found]] the [[lacking]] hypo. [[Analyses]] shows [[toxicity]], but not [[altogether]] in [[period]] as Karloff kidnaps the nurse.

To [[deliver]] a long [[storytelling]] short, the [[infirmary]] escapes, gets the [[policing]], and manages to [[saves]] the [[sons]] who is about to be injected by Karloff. Karloff [[however]] [[pumps]] himself and [[succumbed]].

This movie does have some good [[dots]]. Karloff is possessed and plays the type of mad doctor he did in The Devil Commands and the Man Who Lived Again. It is peculiar, however, to [[seeing]] him walk around stiffly and slightly hunched over. We never find out why he is walking this way. I suspect the director thought it made him more sinister.

The actress [[playback]] the 2-timing wife overacts something terrible. She has a French accent. Even though she overacts badly, you still manage to hate her (or maybe you hate her because of her acting...).

A little below average for a Karloff vehicle. If you buy the Sinister Cinema VHS copy, the audio is a bit choppy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3512 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, you guessed it. Another movie where identical twins switch places. I think now that the Olsen twins are getting older they should try and make the plot less predictable and less like re-runs of 'Full House'. If you plan on seeing this film, don't. Watch 'The Parent Trap' instead. It's more entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 3513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] While this film certainly does possess the stench of a bad film, it's surprisingly watchable on several levels. First, for old movie fans, it's interesting to see the leading role played by Dean Jagger (no relation to Mick). While Jagger later went on to a very respectable role as a supporting actor (even garnering the Oscar in this category for 12 O'CLOCK HIGH), here his performance is truly unique since he actually has a full head of hair (I never [[saw]] him this way before) and because he was by far the [[worst]] actor in the [[film]]. This [[film]] just goes to [[show]] that if an actor cannot act in his earlier films doesn't mean he can't [[eventually]] learn to be a [[great]] [[actor]]. Another good [[example]] of this phenomenon is [[Paul]] Newman, whose first movie (THE SILVER CHALICE) is considered one of the worst films of the 1950s.

A second [[reason]] to watch the film is the shear cheesiness of it all. The [[writing]] is [[bad]], the acting is bad and the special effects are bad. For [[example]], when Jagger and an unnamed Cambodian are wading through the water, it's obvious they are really just walking in place and the background is poorly projected behind them. Plus, once they [[leave]] the water, their costumes are 100% dry!!! Horrid continuity and mindlessly bad dialog abounds throughout the film--so much so that it's hard to imagine why they didn't ask Bela Lugosi or George Zucco to star in the film--since both of them starred in many grade-z horror films. In many ways, this would be a perfect example for a film class on how NOT to make a film.

So, while [[giving]] it a 3 is probably a bit over-generous, it's fun to laugh at and short so it's worth a look for [[bad]] [[film]] fans. While this film certainly does possess the stench of a bad film, it's surprisingly watchable on several levels. First, for old movie fans, it's interesting to see the leading role played by Dean Jagger (no relation to Mick). While Jagger later went on to a very respectable role as a supporting actor (even garnering the Oscar in this category for 12 O'CLOCK HIGH), here his performance is truly unique since he actually has a full head of hair (I never [[noticed]] him this way before) and because he was by far the [[meanest]] actor in the [[filmmaking]]. This [[filmmaking]] just goes to [[illustrates]] that if an actor cannot act in his earlier films doesn't mean he can't [[lastly]] learn to be a [[whopping]] [[protagonist]]. Another good [[instances]] of this phenomenon is [[Paulie]] Newman, whose first movie (THE SILVER CHALICE) is considered one of the worst films of the 1950s.

A second [[motif]] to watch the film is the shear cheesiness of it all. The [[writes]] is [[negative]], the acting is bad and the special effects are bad. For [[instances]], when Jagger and an unnamed Cambodian are wading through the water, it's obvious they are really just walking in place and the background is poorly projected behind them. Plus, once they [[walkout]] the water, their costumes are 100% dry!!! Horrid continuity and mindlessly bad dialog abounds throughout the film--so much so that it's hard to imagine why they didn't ask Bela Lugosi or George Zucco to star in the film--since both of them starred in many grade-z horror films. In many ways, this would be a perfect example for a film class on how NOT to make a film.

So, while [[conferring]] it a 3 is probably a bit over-generous, it's fun to laugh at and short so it's worth a look for [[rotten]] [[movies]] fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] William Shakespeare [[would]] be very [[proud]] of this [[particular]] version of his play. Not only is it the best movie version of it, but it's [[also]] the only [[complete]] version of Hamlet. Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is [[simply]] [[genius]]. Not only because it was [[written]] by Shakespeare, but [[also]] because it had the guts to do the whole thing, even if it went just over four hours.

We all know the story of the Prince of Denmark and his plot to avenge his father's death, so I won't go into the [[details]] of the story. I will, however, tell you that the best part of this Hamlet [[version]] is not the breathtaking sets or the [[stunning]] [[photography]], but the actors' [[interpretations]] of each character. I doubt you'll find a better Polonius than Richard Briers' [[delicious]] [[portrayal]]. Plus, you can't go [[wrong]] with [[Julie]] [[Christie]] and Jack Lemmon. [[Also]], Derek Jacobi, a regular [[among]] Shakespeare adaptations is [[magnificent]] as the antagonist to [[Hamlet]].

Of course, we [[must]] talk about Kenneth Branagh. He wowed audiences when he came onto the scene with his first outing with Shakespeare, [[Henry]] V. He outdoes himself with Hamlet. Sure, Olivier's presence was [[captivating]], but I think Branagh's performance is [[wonderful]]. When you watch him on screen, it's [[almost]] as if he [[knew]] [[exactly]] how Shakespeare [[wanted]] the role to be played. [[How]] he wasn't [[nominated]] for an [[Oscar]] is a total mystery. At [[least]] the movie [[got]] a few [[nominations]] and [[even]] an odd choice for Screenplay. I guess they know good [[writing]] when they [[see]] it though.

All in all, you'll never [[find]] a more rich and lavish production of the Bard's [[best]] play. To [[say]] that the technical [[aspects]] were awesome [[would]] be an understatement. If you [[love]] this play and are a fan of Shakespeare, you [[definitely]] need to [[check]] this [[movie]] out. [[Even]] if you don't really care for Shakespeare, the [[visuals]] will keep you occupied for the duration of the [[film]]. You [[may]] not think you'll be [[able]] to [[sit]] through all of it at once, but you'll [[soon]] find out that pausing this [[movie]] will make you want to see it [[even]] more. William Shakespeare [[ought]] be very [[prideful]] of this [[specific]] version of his play. Not only is it the best movie version of it, but it's [[further]] the only [[finish]] version of Hamlet. Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is [[merely]] [[genie]]. Not only because it was [[writes]] by Shakespeare, but [[furthermore]] because it had the guts to do the whole thing, even if it went just over four hours.

We all know the story of the Prince of Denmark and his plot to avenge his father's death, so I won't go into the [[detail]] of the story. I will, however, tell you that the best part of this Hamlet [[stepping]] is not the breathtaking sets or the [[superb]] [[picture]], but the actors' [[interpretive]] of each character. I doubt you'll find a better Polonius than Richard Briers' [[delightful]] [[depiction]]. Plus, you can't go [[inaccurate]] with [[Jolly]] [[Christi]] and Jack Lemmon. [[Moreover]], Derek Jacobi, a regular [[in]] Shakespeare adaptations is [[noteworthy]] as the antagonist to [[Hamlets]].

Of course, we [[ought]] talk about Kenneth Branagh. He wowed audiences when he came onto the scene with his first outing with Shakespeare, [[Heinrich]] V. He outdoes himself with Hamlet. Sure, Olivier's presence was [[fascinating]], but I think Branagh's performance is [[wondrous]]. When you watch him on screen, it's [[virtually]] as if he [[overheard]] [[precisely]] how Shakespeare [[wants]] the role to be played. [[Mode]] he wasn't [[appointed]] for an [[Oskar]] is a total mystery. At [[fewest]] the movie [[get]] a few [[appointing]] and [[yet]] an odd choice for Screenplay. I guess they know good [[handwriting]] when they [[consults]] it though.

All in all, you'll never [[unearth]] a more rich and lavish production of the Bard's [[finest]] play. To [[says]] that the technical [[things]] were awesome [[ought]] be an understatement. If you [[amour]] this play and are a fan of Shakespeare, you [[obviously]] need to [[audit]] this [[cinematography]] out. [[Yet]] if you don't really care for Shakespeare, the [[picture]] will keep you occupied for the duration of the [[movie]]. You [[maggio]] not think you'll be [[capable]] to [[sitting]] through all of it at once, but you'll [[expeditiously]] find out that pausing this [[cinematography]] will make you want to see it [[yet]] more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Haunted World of Edward D. Wood, Jr." is the definitive documentary on the life of the man who brought us such movies as "Glen or Glenda", "Bride of the Monster", and, of course, "Plan 9 from Outer Space". This exquisite film far exceeds where other documentaries, such as "Look Back in Angora" and "The Plan 9 Companion", failed. It rounds up his surviving entourage, many of whom have passed away since filming, and gives an honest examination of Ed Wood and his work. Nostalgic in the fact that it looks back at the darker corner of yesteryear Hollywood, sentimental in its treatment of the director (down to the haunting music), this documentary is an absolute must-see for anyone who loves the director who so failed in his day. The entire two hours of the film lovingly and retrospectively pieces together Ed's life and untimely death for the viewer. Best watched at 3 am while wearing an angora sweater. --------------------------------------------- Result 3516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I found the memorable quotes [[searching]] for video [[clips]]; they [[forgot]] one of my favorites...

Old [[Person]] 1: You know, I remember the [[first]] [[time]] they [[played]] that thing.

[[Old]] Person 2: You remember pterodactyls.

Old [[Person]] 1: And I can remember you fell for that, hook [[line]] and sinker.

[[Old]] [[Person]] 2: [[Oh]], I did not.

Old [[Lady]]: You did so. You put a [[big]] bucket on your head and took off with them army boys to fight Martians.

Old [[Person]] 2: Ain't you [[dead]] [[yet]]? I found the memorable quotes [[researching]] for video [[trombones]]; they [[forgotten]] one of my favorites...

Old [[Persona]] 1: You know, I remember the [[fiirst]] [[period]] they [[served]] that thing.

[[Former]] Person 2: You remember pterodactyls.

Old [[Somebody]] 1: And I can remember you fell for that, hook [[iine]] and sinker.

[[Vecchio]] [[Anybody]] 2: [[Aaaah]], I did not.

Old [[Missus]]: You did so. You put a [[massive]] bucket on your head and took off with them army boys to fight Martians.

Old [[Anybody]] 2: Ain't you [[decedent]] [[again]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 3517 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gentleman Jim not really a boxing film. It is a vehicle for Errol Flynn as Jim Corbett. But having said that, the boxing scenes are a real eye-opener to the modern viewer. There are no 12 round, points decisions here.

Errol Flynn plays the Irish bank clerk who gets a shot at the heavyweight world title. Flynn is well suited to the role of suave but unpredictable Corbett. His opponent John Sullivan is still better however, a bruiser of the old school played by Ward Bond.

The theme of the film is a man pushing for his big chance. Corbett leaves his mundane life behind and builds a new persona as Gentleman Jim. Jim is a chancer who can adapt to any social environment. He is a liar and an egotist. Sullivan the heavyweight boxing champion is portrayed as a simple brute but his honesty and sportsmanship gives a certain contrast to the main character.

There is action and excitement aplenty and a wonderful ending with the requisite redemption for all. And Errol Flynn gets the girl. --------------------------------------------- Result 3518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Having read the [[reviews]] for this [[film]], I understandably [[started]] [[watching]] it with a great [[deal]] of [[doubt]] in my mind that it [[would]] [[actually]] be any good. However, this is one of the [[best]] [[films]] i have [[seen]] in a long [[time]]. The majority of [[reviews]] that i had read, [[said]] that the [[complicated]] plot [[made]] it too hard to follow. And [[whilst]] some parts do [[leave]] you [[confused]], the ending [[ties]] up so [[many]] loose ends that you feel like kicking yourself because you've missed so much. It's not like "[[Lock]], [[Stock]]..." or "Snatch", in the sense that it isn't that funny (in fact, it's pretty dark), and it is a lot more intelligent, in the [[way]] that you [[see]] parts of scenes from [[different]] viewpoints (and, in one of the best scenes of the [[film]], Jason Statham [[spends]] five [[minutes]] in a [[lift]] having an argument with himself). The way in which it is similar to the two [[films]] i just mentioned, is that it is full of memorable [[characters]], specifically Statham, who gives a [[fantastic]] performance as the lead, and Ray Liotta, who spends most of the film in Speedos, but gives a [[great]] performance [[none]] the [[less]]. If you've got time, and have time [[afterwards]] to think about the film, and even watch it again, you really start to [[see]] all the symbolism and [[hints]] that are laid out through the [[film]]. I [[think]] it's [[fantastic]], and that Guy [[Ritchie]] is a director on top of his game. Having read the [[exam]] for this [[cinematography]], I understandably [[start]] [[staring]] it with a great [[address]] of [[duda]] in my mind that it [[ought]] [[indeed]] be any good. However, this is one of the [[bestest]] [[cinematography]] i have [[saw]] in a long [[period]]. The majority of [[assessment]] that i had read, [[indicated]] that the [[convoluted]] plot [[effected]] it too hard to follow. And [[notwithstanding]] some parts do [[let]] you [[bewildered]], the ending [[relationships]] up so [[numerous]] loose ends that you feel like kicking yourself because you've missed so much. It's not like "[[Blockade]], [[Stockpiles]]..." or "Snatch", in the sense that it isn't that funny (in fact, it's pretty dark), and it is a lot more intelligent, in the [[routes]] that you [[behold]] parts of scenes from [[diversified]] viewpoints (and, in one of the best scenes of the [[movie]], Jason Statham [[devotes]] five [[mins]] in a [[lifting]] having an argument with himself). The way in which it is similar to the two [[movie]] i just mentioned, is that it is full of memorable [[attribute]], specifically Statham, who gives a [[excellent]] performance as the lead, and Ray Liotta, who spends most of the film in Speedos, but gives a [[wondrous]] performance [[nothing]] the [[fewest]]. If you've got time, and have time [[afterward]] to think about the film, and even watch it again, you really start to [[behold]] all the symbolism and [[suggestions]] that are laid out through the [[films]]. I [[thinking]] it's [[wondrous]], and that Guy [[Richie]] is a director on top of his game. --------------------------------------------- Result 3519 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is a thoroughly [[diabolical]] tale of just how [[bad]] things can go wrong. A [[simple]] robbery. [[Pick]] up some [[serious]] [[change]]. Get our [[finances]] together and everything will be hunky-dory. But—[[mom]] and pop's jewelry store? No problem. [[Insurance]] [[pays]] for it all. No guns. [[Nobody]] [[gets]] hurt. [[Easy]] [[money]].

[[Older]], more successful (it [[would]] [[appear]]) brother Andy ([[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]]) has a few [[minor]] problems. [[Heroin]] addiction, cocaine habituation. A [[wife]] ([[Marisa]] Tomei) that…well, he can't [[seem]] to perform for. His flat belly days long gone. Younger, sweet, slightly dim-witted younger brother, Hank (Ethan [[Hawke]]) with a few dinero problems of his own. Behind in child support payments for his daughter, in debt to friends and relatives, not exactly wowing them in the work of work, etc.

Sydney Lumet, in this performance at the age of 82 (!), directs and gets it 99.99 percent right, which is hard to do in a thriller. I have seen more thrillers than I can remember and most of the time the director gets the [[movie]] printed and lives with the plot holes, the improbabilities, the cheesy scenes, and the hurry-up ending. Here Lumet makes a [[thriller]] like it's a [[work]] of art. Every detail is perfect. The acting is superb. The plot has no holes. The story rings true and clear and represents a tale about human [[frailty]] that would [[honor]] the greatest filmmakers and even the Bard himself.

Hoffman of course is excellent. When you don't have marquee, leading man presence, you have to get by on talent, workmanship and pure concentration. Ethan Hawke, who is no stranger to the sweet, little guy role, adds a layer of desperation and all too human incompetence to the part so that we don't know whether to pity him or trash him. Albert Finney plays the father of the wayward sons with a kind of steely intensity that belies his age. And Marisa Tomei, who has magical qualities of sexiness to go along with her unique creativity, manages to be both vulnerable and hard as nails as Andy's two timing wife. (But who could blame her?) It's almost a movie reviewer's sacrilege to give a commercial thriller five or ten stars, but if you study this film, as all aspiring film makers would be well advised to do, you will notice the kind of excessive (according to most Hollywood producers) attention to detail that makes for real art--the sort of thing that only great artists can do, and indeed cannot help but do. (By the way, I think there were twenty producers on this film—well, maybe a dozen; check the credits.) All I can say in summation is, Way to go Sydney Lumet, author of a slew of excellent films, and to show such fidelity to your craft and your art at such an advanced age—kudos. May we all do half so well.

Okay, the 00.01 percent. It was unlikely that the father (Albert Finney) could have followed the cabs that Andy took around New York without somehow losing the tail. This is minor, and I wish all thrillers could have so small a blip. Also one wonders why Lumet decided not to tell us about the fate of Hank at the end. We can guess and guess. Perhaps his fate fell onto the cutting room floor. Perhaps Lumet was not satisfied with what was filmed and time ran out, and he just said, "Leave it like that. It really doesn't matter." And I think it doesn't. What happens to Hank is not going to be good. He isn't the kind of guy who manages to run off to Mexico and is able to start a new life. He is the kind of guy who gets a "light" sentence of 10 to 20 and serves it and comes out a kind of shrunken human being who knows he wasn't really a man when he should have been.

See this for Sidney Lumet, one of Hollywood's best, director of The Pawnbroker (1964), The Group (1966), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976), and many more. This is a thoroughly [[satanic]] tale of just how [[amiss]] things can go wrong. A [[uncomplicated]] robbery. [[Takes]] up some [[severe]] [[shifts]]. Get our [[funding]] together and everything will be hunky-dory. But—[[mama]] and pop's jewelry store? No problem. [[Security]] [[paid]] for it all. No guns. [[Anyone]] [[got]] hurt. [[Simpler]] [[moneys]].

[[Elders]], more successful (it [[ought]] [[transpires]]) brother Andy ([[Philips]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]]) has a few [[smaller]] problems. [[Smack]] addiction, cocaine habituation. A [[women]] ([[Marissa]] Tomei) that…well, he can't [[seems]] to perform for. His flat belly days long gone. Younger, sweet, slightly dim-witted younger brother, Hank (Ethan [[Hock]]) with a few dinero problems of his own. Behind in child support payments for his daughter, in debt to friends and relatives, not exactly wowing them in the work of work, etc.

Sydney Lumet, in this performance at the age of 82 (!), directs and gets it 99.99 percent right, which is hard to do in a thriller. I have seen more thrillers than I can remember and most of the time the director gets the [[filmmaking]] printed and lives with the plot holes, the improbabilities, the cheesy scenes, and the hurry-up ending. Here Lumet makes a [[thrillers]] like it's a [[collaboration]] of art. Every detail is perfect. The acting is superb. The plot has no holes. The story rings true and clear and represents a tale about human [[fragile]] that would [[honoring]] the greatest filmmakers and even the Bard himself.

Hoffman of course is excellent. When you don't have marquee, leading man presence, you have to get by on talent, workmanship and pure concentration. Ethan Hawke, who is no stranger to the sweet, little guy role, adds a layer of desperation and all too human incompetence to the part so that we don't know whether to pity him or trash him. Albert Finney plays the father of the wayward sons with a kind of steely intensity that belies his age. And Marisa Tomei, who has magical qualities of sexiness to go along with her unique creativity, manages to be both vulnerable and hard as nails as Andy's two timing wife. (But who could blame her?) It's almost a movie reviewer's sacrilege to give a commercial thriller five or ten stars, but if you study this film, as all aspiring film makers would be well advised to do, you will notice the kind of excessive (according to most Hollywood producers) attention to detail that makes for real art--the sort of thing that only great artists can do, and indeed cannot help but do. (By the way, I think there were twenty producers on this film—well, maybe a dozen; check the credits.) All I can say in summation is, Way to go Sydney Lumet, author of a slew of excellent films, and to show such fidelity to your craft and your art at such an advanced age—kudos. May we all do half so well.

Okay, the 00.01 percent. It was unlikely that the father (Albert Finney) could have followed the cabs that Andy took around New York without somehow losing the tail. This is minor, and I wish all thrillers could have so small a blip. Also one wonders why Lumet decided not to tell us about the fate of Hank at the end. We can guess and guess. Perhaps his fate fell onto the cutting room floor. Perhaps Lumet was not satisfied with what was filmed and time ran out, and he just said, "Leave it like that. It really doesn't matter." And I think it doesn't. What happens to Hank is not going to be good. He isn't the kind of guy who manages to run off to Mexico and is able to start a new life. He is the kind of guy who gets a "light" sentence of 10 to 20 and serves it and comes out a kind of shrunken human being who knows he wasn't really a man when he should have been.

See this for Sidney Lumet, one of Hollywood's best, director of The Pawnbroker (1964), The Group (1966), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976), and many more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] i wont go and give them my 10 [[bucks]] i went and [[bought]] the fourth season of the [[original]] and the best. At [[least]] my [[kids]] [[enjoy]] it and can watch it without me worrying about what they are seeing. I have a [[teenager]] and she thinks the previews are ridiculous and would rather watch the original. And she thinks [[Jessica]] Simpson is a horrible [[daisy]] in [[fact]] she thinks she [[looks]] more like a slut than [[daisy]] duke. Those shorts she might as well not be wearing anything at all. And since when is American Pie have anything to do with the Dukes [[SHAME]] [[ON]] them for putting that nasty line in there about having sex with a car. That in itself should have gotten the [[movie]] a R rating. The only [[good]] thing that might [[come]] out of this is a reunion movie with the originals. Lets all hope. So the people out there that went and seen the movie will [[see]] how it should have [[looked]] i wont go and give them my 10 [[usd]] i went and [[procured]] the fourth season of the [[preliminary]] and the best. At [[lowest]] my [[kiddies]] [[enjoying]] it and can watch it without me worrying about what they are seeing. I have a [[schoolgirl]] and she thinks the previews are ridiculous and would rather watch the original. And she thinks [[Jennifer]] Simpson is a horrible [[marguerite]] in [[facto]] she thinks she [[seems]] more like a slut than [[marguerite]] duke. Those shorts she might as well not be wearing anything at all. And since when is American Pie have anything to do with the Dukes [[DISGRACE]] [[REGARDING]] them for putting that nasty line in there about having sex with a car. That in itself should have gotten the [[cinematographic]] a R rating. The only [[alright]] thing that might [[coming]] out of this is a reunion movie with the originals. Lets all hope. So the people out there that went and seen the movie will [[seeing]] how it should have [[seemed]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I was not [[expecting]] much from this [[movie]]. I was [[given]] a [[ticket]] for an advanced screening. I had just [[gotten]] off of [[work]]. It was [[hot]] and I was [[tired]]. I had to [[wait]] in the [[movie]] line for 40 minutes and there seemed not to be any cool [[air]] flowing through the [[hallways]] of the [[theater]] complex.

Once [[seated]] in the [[theater]], [[tired]] and frustrated, the movie started, I did not [[recognize]] any of the actors in the beginning, but the [[flow]] of the movie was [[perfect]]. Right from the beginning I [[became]] consumed with the movie, getting more and more excited with each minute [[passing]]. I think this movie is destined to be a fantasy/fairytale classic. The [[actors]] were fabulous, the [[pace]] was perfect, and the ending was [[magical]]. I was not [[hoping]] much from this [[cinematography]]. I was [[gave]] a [[tickets]] for an advanced screening. I had just [[become]] off of [[cooperates]]. It was [[sexier]] and I was [[knackered]]. I had to [[hoping]] in the [[film]] line for 40 minutes and there seemed not to be any cool [[aeronautics]] flowing through the [[aisles]] of the [[cinema]] complex.

Once [[sitting]] in the [[cinema]], [[fatigued]] and frustrated, the movie started, I did not [[admit]] any of the actors in the beginning, but the [[flows]] of the movie was [[irreproachable]]. Right from the beginning I [[was]] consumed with the movie, getting more and more excited with each minute [[passerby]]. I think this movie is destined to be a fantasy/fairytale classic. The [[protagonists]] were fabulous, the [[tempo]] was perfect, and the ending was [[quadrant]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3522 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a perfect series for family viewing. We gather around the TV to watch this on BBC America. It is an up-to-date version of Robin Hood and it appeals to children and adults alike. Our teenager and tween-ager both enjoy sitting with mom and dad and watching Robin's next exploits. We can't wait for the next episode to air each week and are glad for the free "On Demand" viewing.

The wardrobe has a spot of current fashion. There is a moral to each story. It is entertaining. The violence is not over-the-top or needless. The soundtrack is absolutely fantastic with a John William's feel to it. It is an old world tale that is brought to life again with a new world flair.

There is so much garbage on television from brain rotting "reality" TV to senseless violence. You should take this for what it is and that is an updated "Robin Hood" not to be compared with the movie exploits of Errol Flynn. This is a gem to be enjoyed by all. Parents that are concerned about their children watching too much violence will enjoy that Robin has lost his taste for war and bloodshed. He is a Robin Hood that would rather attempt to reason his way out of a disagreement than fight. Maid Marian is also an appealing role model for young girls. Rather than stand by and do nothing, she takes her own role in helping the poor by being the "Night Watchman." The Sheriff of Nottingham is deliciously over the top wicked, just as the Sheriff should be and looks like a cross between Billy Joel and Tim Curry. Guy Gisborne is played by an extremely handsome actor, one that makes most women wish he didn't have portray the role of a bad "Guy".

The only question we have is "Where is Friar Tuck?" --------------------------------------------- Result 3523 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I refused to watch this when it originally aired, treasuring the memory of the late, lamented 1960s series with Mike Pratt and Kenneth Cope, but I can never resist a challenge. I should have known better. Not quite a remake, and more of a parody than a homage, this show didn't quite know how to play it, and plumped with infantile comedy and cartoon plots and characters. The three main characters were little more than caricatures of the actors, and only Emilia Fox could act (Bob Mortimer is painful in a straight role). The supporting cast were merely comedian-acquaintances of Vic and Bob's wanting to be part of the in-joke, and far too aware of the situation to be convincing. And the CGI, though the effects couldn't help be an improvement on those available 30 years earlier, merely dazzled the viewer with lights and camera work, and did little to mask the poor quality of the scripts and dialogue. All style and no substance. (And whereas the 1960s show is mocked for being very much of its time, this 'update' is now also very dated, with 'Matrix'-style fashions, obligatory 'girl power' scenes, and less than subtle tension between the two living leads.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Steve Carell comes into his own in his first starring role in the 40 Year Old Virgin, having only had supporting roles in such films as Bewitched, Bruce Almighty, Anchorman, and his work on the Daily Show, we had only gotten a small taste of the comedy that Carell truly makes his own. You can tell that Will Ferrell influenced his "comedic air" but Carell takes it to another level, everything he does is innocent, lovable, and hilarious. I would not hesitate to say that Steve Carell is one of the next great comedians of our time.

The 40 Year Old Virgin is two hours of non-stop laughs (or 4 hours if you see it twice like I did), a perfect supporting cast and great leads charm the audience through the entire movie. The script was perfect with so many great lines that you will want to see the movie again just to try to remember them all. The music fit the tone of the movie great, and you can tell the director knew what he was doing.

Filled with sex jokes, some nudity, and a lot of language, this movie isn't for everyone but if you liked the Wedding Crashers, Anchorman, or any movie along those lines, you will absolutely love The 40 Year Old Virgin. --------------------------------------------- Result 3525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This would have been so much [[fun]] to [[see]] in a theater, back in 1996. There is a [[guilty]] [[pleasure]] corner of my [[movie]] taste which really appreciates really well [[done]] shocker movies.

"The [[Dentist]]" is panned [[sometimes]] [[probably]] because people [[usually]] have strong feelings over [[dental]] [[matters]]. [[Maybe]] the ADA [[launched]] a [[campaign]] against it, since [[dentists]] [[report]] they have to [[apologize]] for this [[movie]] and for "The Marathon [[Man]]" (which only has one scene [[comparable]] to the [[many]] in "The [[Dentist]]").

It's [[amazing]] to note that according to the [[trivia]] page, the [[movie]] was shot in 21 days. Of course, post production can take longer than movie [[shooting]] sometimes and the editing for "The [[Dentist]]" is [[picture]] [[perfect]]. The [[quick]] [[cuts]] [[heighten]] the [[tension]] so much that in the scene where the [[Dentist]] "takes care" of his [[wife]] there's only two [[quick]] cuts [[showing]] what is happening. The rest is left to our very fertile [[imaginations]]! Corbin Bernsen was a good [[choice]] for the role since he has lots of experience playing [[psychologically]] "off" [[characters]] and he [[completely]] [[sold]] the obsessive compulsive aspects of the dentist.

[[For]] me the pacing of the [[movie]] was just right. The [[film]] [[makers]] [[reveal]] the wife's naughtiness in just the right [[way]]. All of the [[characters]] in the [[dental]] office look like they are actual people [[working]] in a [[real]] office. There's lots of [[tension]] while they are [[dealing]] with impatient people [[awaiting]] the dentist's arrival. Meanwhile the [[dentist]] is off on the [[cusp]] of a [[huge]] psychotic breakdown! Unlike so [[many]] [[movies]] of this [[genre]], the script is very very tight. All the victims [[fall]] into the dentist's [[trap]] in very [[calculated]] [[ways]]. Two [[law]] [[enforcement]] [[types]] [[even]] get [[involved]] in a [[little]] subplot that [[ends]] up creating a shocker of a [[showdown]] near the [[end]].

[[Definitely]] not for the faint of heart or the dental-phobic but a [[real]] [[roller]] coaster ride and [[heavily]] [[recommended]] for [[fans]] of [[intelligent]] gorefests. This would have been so much [[entertaining]] to [[seeing]] in a theater, back in 1996. There is a [[guilt]] [[delight]] corner of my [[film]] taste which really appreciates really well [[played]] shocker movies.

"The [[Dental]]" is panned [[sometime]] [[surely]] because people [[normally]] have strong feelings over [[teeth]] [[questions]]. [[Possibly]] the ADA [[initiating]] a [[campaigning]] against it, since [[dentistry]] [[reporting]] they have to [[excuse]] for this [[movies]] and for "The Marathon [[Males]]" (which only has one scene [[analogous]] to the [[numerous]] in "The [[Dental]]").

It's [[excellent]] to note that according to the [[trivialities]] page, the [[flick]] was shot in 21 days. Of course, post production can take longer than movie [[gunfire]] sometimes and the editing for "The [[Dental]]" is [[photo]] [[flawless]]. The [[fastest]] [[cutting]] [[redouble]] the [[voltage]] so much that in the scene where the [[Dentistry]] "takes care" of his [[woman]] there's only two [[faster]] cuts [[proving]] what is happening. The rest is left to our very fertile [[imaginings]]! Corbin Bernsen was a good [[choices]] for the role since he has lots of experience playing [[mentally]] "off" [[features]] and he [[utterly]] [[sells]] the obsessive compulsive aspects of the dentist.

[[During]] me the pacing of the [[films]] was just right. The [[movie]] [[producers]] [[disclosed]] the wife's naughtiness in just the right [[pathway]]. All of the [[attribute]] in the [[teeth]] office look like they are actual people [[worked]] in a [[actual]] office. There's lots of [[tensions]] while they are [[addressing]] with impatient people [[hoping]] the dentist's arrival. Meanwhile the [[dentistry]] is off on the [[bangs]] of a [[monumental]] psychotic breakdown! Unlike so [[various]] [[theater]] of this [[types]], the script is very very tight. All the victims [[dipped]] into the dentist's [[traps]] in very [[computed]] [[method]]. Two [[legislation]] [[execution]] [[type]] [[yet]] get [[engaged]] in a [[tiny]] subplot that [[terminates]] up creating a shocker of a [[confrontation]] near the [[ends]].

[[Obviously]] not for the faint of heart or the dental-phobic but a [[actual]] [[capstan]] coaster ride and [[widely]] [[suggested]] for [[amateurs]] of [[termite]] gorefests. --------------------------------------------- Result 3526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] this film is [[terrible]]. The [[characters]] are [[completely]] [[unbelievable]], and [[wildly]] inconsistent. The plot is awful and some of the [[classroom]] scenes are cringe-worthy and make for uncomfortable viewing.

In fact the quality of the [[script]] and characterisation would [[suggest]] that this [[film]] was [[written]] by high [[school]] [[students]], only the [[utter]] [[lack]] of [[credibility]] to the [[school]] [[environment]] would suggest that, in fact, the writers [[probably]] never went to [[high]] [[school]]. The acting in most [[cases]] was [[weak]] too, [[although]] a [[lot]] of this was down to a poor script and plot, i am not [[sure]] that any [[actors]] [[could]] have made this [[film]] watchable.

having [[said]] that the [[sound]] [[track]] was OK, and the [[cinematography]] was [[nice]] in places (although the [[editing]] was poor). this film is [[scary]]. The [[character]] are [[totally]] [[awesome]], and [[madly]] inconsistent. The plot is awful and some of the [[homeroom]] scenes are cringe-worthy and make for uncomfortable viewing.

In fact the quality of the [[hyphen]] and characterisation would [[insinuate]] that this [[filmmaking]] was [[typed]] by high [[schooling]] [[student]], only the [[absolute]] [[absence]] of [[credence]] to the [[tuition]] [[environments]] would suggest that, in fact, the writers [[arguably]] never went to [[higher]] [[tuition]]. The acting in most [[examples]] was [[feeble]] too, [[despite]] a [[lots]] of this was down to a poor script and plot, i am not [[convinced]] that any [[actresses]] [[did]] have made this [[flick]] watchable.

having [[indicated]] that the [[sounds]] [[trajectory]] was OK, and the [[cinematic]] was [[delightful]] in places (although the [[edit]] was poor). --------------------------------------------- Result 3527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The premise, while not [[quite]] [[ludicrous]], [[WAS]] [[definitely]] [[ridiculous]]. What [[SHOULD]] have [[occurred]], by the second encounter with Tritter was that Tritter should simply be wasted. House hires some guy and de-physicalizes Tritter. [[In]] real life, Tritter would have been hauled up for harassment, the [[rectal]] [[thermometer]] episode would have been exposed in [[court]], [[providing]] motive and [[opportunity]] and the [[hospitals]] lawyers [[would]] have [[made]] mincemeat out of Tritter and the [[particular]] department he [[worked]] for. He would be in prison as would anyone [[complicit]] in the [[harassment]] of House, Chase, [[Foreman]], Cameron, Wilson and Cuddy. The lawsuit would have won House a tasty settlement, enough to keep him supplied with Vicadin well into his old age. While Tritter would wind up somewhere driving a cab, trying to rehabilitate himself by doing good for people for two years before people tumbled to the fact that they'd [[seen]] it all before. The premise, while not [[utterly]] [[laughable]], [[WERE]] [[decidedly]] [[ludicrous]]. What [[OWE]] have [[arose]], by the second encounter with Tritter was that Tritter should simply be wasted. House hires some guy and de-physicalizes Tritter. [[At]] real life, Tritter would have been hauled up for harassment, the [[anal]] [[barometer]] episode would have been exposed in [[cour]], [[delivering]] motive and [[opportunities]] and the [[hospital]] lawyers [[could]] have [[brought]] mincemeat out of Tritter and the [[especial]] department he [[collaborating]] for. He would be in prison as would anyone [[accomplice]] in the [[intimidation]] of House, Chase, [[Forman]], Cameron, Wilson and Cuddy. The lawsuit would have won House a tasty settlement, enough to keep him supplied with Vicadin well into his old age. While Tritter would wind up somewhere driving a cab, trying to rehabilitate himself by doing good for people for two years before people tumbled to the fact that they'd [[noticed]] it all before. --------------------------------------------- Result 3528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There are some [[excellent]] [[comments]] and [[observations]] on this film. I was [[pleased]] to note the comparisons to Fritz Lang's "M" ([[forget]] the 50's abortive remake with lightweight David Wayne). The real villain is not the tortured murderer ([[extraordinarily]] fine performance by Jeffery DeMunn), taking out his sexually [[frustrated]] anger on his victims-- mostly children. He is the objective. The [[real]] villain is the [[stifling]] bureaucratic Soviet system, [[drowning]] in its own corrupted incompetence. The frustration of an uncompromisingly dedicated [[man]] (Rea in his best role since "The Crying Game"), a facile [[pragmatist]] who's willing to use the system to his advantage (Sutherland always successful in this kind of role), a hesitant, frightened but determined psychiatrist (the incomparable Max Sydow), the bumbling, boopous bureaucrat of a prosecutor (brilliant Brit actor John Wood) and the quiet, supporting wife of the driven investigator (delightful supporter, Imelda Staunton). This is one [[damn]] fine [[film]]. Its darkness and bleakness are supported by the portrayal of a corrupt, incompetent system which works against success. The is no need to dip into gore-laden slice 'n dice sensationalism that has characterized so many recent films. Gore is present-- it's a ghastly story-- but it adds to the depicting of a pathologically twisted human being. The success of the story is precisely that: these were acts perpetrated by a person, a human like you or I. Where you and I choose to vent our frustration by reasonable means, Chikatilo [[took]] his anger out on the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our children. The [[superb]] premise of this story is made manifest by an equally superb cast of excellent actors. --sadly, I note that our Australian friend didn't like the speech and no doubt would have preferred to hear them speaking in Aussie dialect. Well, too bad. This fine [[film]] sure worked for me and everyone else I've talked with who has seen it. There are some [[phenomenal]] [[sightings]] and [[comments]] on this film. I was [[happy]] to note the comparisons to Fritz Lang's "M" ([[forgot]] the 50's abortive remake with lightweight David Wayne). The real villain is not the tortured murderer ([[remarkably]] fine performance by Jeffery DeMunn), taking out his sexually [[thwarted]] anger on his victims-- mostly children. He is the objective. The [[actual]] villain is the [[choking]] bureaucratic Soviet system, [[sinks]] in its own corrupted incompetence. The frustration of an uncompromisingly dedicated [[mec]] (Rea in his best role since "The Crying Game"), a facile [[businesslike]] who's willing to use the system to his advantage (Sutherland always successful in this kind of role), a hesitant, frightened but determined psychiatrist (the incomparable Max Sydow), the bumbling, boopous bureaucrat of a prosecutor (brilliant Brit actor John Wood) and the quiet, supporting wife of the driven investigator (delightful supporter, Imelda Staunton). This is one [[fuck]] fine [[movie]]. Its darkness and bleakness are supported by the portrayal of a corrupt, incompetent system which works against success. The is no need to dip into gore-laden slice 'n dice sensationalism that has characterized so many recent films. Gore is present-- it's a ghastly story-- but it adds to the depicting of a pathologically twisted human being. The success of the story is precisely that: these were acts perpetrated by a person, a human like you or I. Where you and I choose to vent our frustration by reasonable means, Chikatilo [[taken]] his anger out on the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our children. The [[extraordinaire]] premise of this story is made manifest by an equally superb cast of excellent actors. --sadly, I note that our Australian friend didn't like the speech and no doubt would have preferred to hear them speaking in Aussie dialect. Well, too bad. This fine [[movies]] sure worked for me and everyone else I've talked with who has seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This was a strange kind of [[film]] about a low-lifes in [[New]] York City and centering around a main character (the title name, played by Brad [[Pitt]]) who thinks he''s a Ricky Nelson-type musician, except he has no real talent.

It's kind of [[fun]] to watch until a [[profane]] tough New York City-type woman with [[horrible]] [[accent]] enters the picture and takes over. That [[ruined]] the [[film]] for me. It [[must]] have been Catherine Keener, who usually plays tough and garbage-mouthed [[women]].

The hairdo on Pitt - an exaggerated Pompadour - was fun to look at. I can picture [[Johnny]] Depp playing this role better. One last note: it odd to hear a film made in 1992 (other than Woody Allen's) with just mono sound. This was a strange kind of [[movies]] about a low-lifes in [[Novel]] York City and centering around a main character (the title name, played by Brad [[Beit]]) who thinks he''s a Ricky Nelson-type musician, except he has no real talent.

It's kind of [[droll]] to watch until a [[desecrate]] tough New York City-type woman with [[gruesome]] [[emphasis]] enters the picture and takes over. That [[obliterated]] the [[filmmaking]] for me. It [[ought]] have been Catherine Keener, who usually plays tough and garbage-mouthed [[femmes]].

The hairdo on Pitt - an exaggerated Pompadour - was fun to look at. I can picture [[Joni]] Depp playing this role better. One last note: it odd to hear a film made in 1992 (other than Woody Allen's) with just mono sound. --------------------------------------------- Result 3530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Funny how many of the people who say this is far superior to Romero's version tend to be very young (judging by their other posts). What we have here is a slick, action packed, [[gory]] and "[[Whoopee]]" filled 2 hour MTV video. Frantic editing, pop-video camera work, "cool" music blah blah blah

Actually it ain't bad compared to other recent remakes (Chainsaw Massacre was a [[total]] [[disaster]])... pretty good acting all round, [[totally]] [[predictable]] in the "who will die [[next]]" stakes and a total cash in on the Dawn Of The Dead name that will generate plenty of [[revenue]] alone by fans of the original who will go and see it out of curiosity...

Don't remakes of classics [[get]] on your nerves? Can they REALLY not come up with something original? Why remake Dawn Of The Dead? The things that made the [[original]] special (the middle segment [[kids]] think is so boring is supposed to be slow to show how when you [[get]] everything you ever [[wanted]] you [[still]] ain't happy) are totally missing. This is an action flick, [[plain]] and simple. The [[faster]] the better. [[If]] you are into action flicks (and as this, the 2004 version is well done) fair enough, but for anyone who likes a [[little]] [[substance]] to their [[films]]... get ready to sigh (again)...

Watch the cinemas over the next few years as we get The Godfather series remade by whoever the most fashionable Pop director is at the moment, and Star Wars remade, with all the kids saying how the new version is [[miles]] better cos the old version is slow and boring and holds a camera shot for more than 5 seconds...

Not bad, but in 10 years they will still be discussing the Romero version, not this pap Funny how many of the people who say this is far superior to Romero's version tend to be very young (judging by their other posts). What we have here is a slick, action packed, [[gori]] and "[[Yippee]]" filled 2 hour MTV video. Frantic editing, pop-video camera work, "cool" music blah blah blah

Actually it ain't bad compared to other recent remakes (Chainsaw Massacre was a [[unmitigated]] [[cataclysm]])... pretty good acting all round, [[altogether]] [[foreseeable]] in the "who will die [[future]]" stakes and a total cash in on the Dawn Of The Dead name that will generate plenty of [[earnings]] alone by fans of the original who will go and see it out of curiosity...

Don't remakes of classics [[obtain]] on your nerves? Can they REALLY not come up with something original? Why remake Dawn Of The Dead? The things that made the [[initial]] special (the middle segment [[juvenile]] think is so boring is supposed to be slow to show how when you [[obtain]] everything you ever [[desired]] you [[again]] ain't happy) are totally missing. This is an action flick, [[lowland]] and simple. The [[fastest]] the better. [[Though]] you are into action flicks (and as this, the 2004 version is well done) fair enough, but for anyone who likes a [[petite]] [[substances]] to their [[filmmaking]]... get ready to sigh (again)...

Watch the cinemas over the next few years as we get The Godfather series remade by whoever the most fashionable Pop director is at the moment, and Star Wars remade, with all the kids saying how the new version is [[kilometers]] better cos the old version is slow and boring and holds a camera shot for more than 5 seconds...

Not bad, but in 10 years they will still be discussing the Romero version, not this pap --------------------------------------------- Result 3531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (r#97)

There is one good thing about this poor man's Pokémon (make of that what you will): the opening theme. It has to be the coolest theme music of any sloppily dubbed Japanese made-for-the-consumers-oops-I-mean-the-young-fans anime TV show. Unfortunately there was need to add some sort of show after the opening theme. And they just couldn't come up with something more interesting than people arguing loudly about whose cards are better than the others' cards. Freud would have a field day, unfortunately I can't imagine why any kids would want to sit through a show where dialogue written by a thousand monkeys in five minutes takes up 98% of the running time.

"My Uber-Fantastical Doomsday Creature of Ultimate Doom will take your measly Pyramid Diamond Animal in a single strike! Can't you see that you have no chance of winning this battle, you fool?! HAHAHAHHAHHAHA!"

"Oh yeah? Well watch this! I am about to use my Destruction Force Delta Times Pie Card which eradicates every single one of your Power Munchers and renders your Uber-Fantastical Doomsday Creature of Ultimate Doom's Destroy Beyond all Significance Attack useless! I bet you didn't see that one coming!"

Seriously, that's all they ever do in this show, talk. Whereas in another crappy kids' show I used to watch, namely the commercial phenomenon Pokémon (every soccer mum's pet peeve), at least the monsters had the courtesy to duke it out every once in a while, "Yu-Gi-Oh" is just, in the quiet words of Roger Ebert's A Clockwork Orange review, "plain talky and boring". Not to mention long-winded (I realize I'm being hypocritical here considering the sentence I just wrote).

This show goes on forever. I don't know if there's any plot, and the static monsters have none of the character of Pokémon. Even when not compared to my fave cartoon as a kid, this show sucks. It's unintentionally funny, but not funny enough to be worth seeing. Bye bye, sleep tight, dream wet dreams. --------------------------------------------- Result 3532 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw "The Grudge" yesterday, and wow... I was really scared, a good thing. I love horror-movies, and I really liked this one. There were so many 'surprise'-scenes (what's the English word?) that made you jump in your seat. Though, too much screaming from the audience made it difficult not to laugh. I think the most scary scene was... on the bus, when the face flashes by on the window, or when Yoko's walking without her chin. The make-up is also VERY good. Sometimes you could really see it was there, but it was still adding a freaky look to the scene. The boy was very good indeed, so cute without make-up and so terribly scary with it on. The next time I hear a cracking noise I will probably feel pretty scared... --------------------------------------------- Result 3533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[caught]] this [[stink]] [[bomb]] of a [[movie]] recently on a cable channel, and was reminded of how terrible I thought it was in 1980 when [[first]] released. Many reviewers out there aren't old enough to remember the [[enormous]] [[hype]] that surrounded this movie and the struggle between [[Stanley]] Kubrick and Steven King. The [[enormously]] popular novel had legions of fans [[eager]] to see a [[supposed]] "master" [[director]] put this multi-layered [[supernatural]] story on the screen. "Salem's [[Lot]]" had already been [[ruined]] in the late 1970s as a TV mini-series, [[directed]] by [[Tobe]] Hooper (he of "Texas [[Chainsaw]] [[Massacre]]" fame) and was badly [[handled]], turning the [[major]] villain of the book into a "Chiller [[Theatre]]" vampire with no [[real]] [[menace]] at all [[thus]] [[destroying]] the [[entire]] [[premise]]. Fans [[hoped]] that a director of Kubrick's [[stature]] would [[succeed]] where Hooper had failed. It didn't [[happen]].

[[Sure]], this [[movie]] looks [[great]] and has a [[terrific]] [[opening]] [[sequence]] but after those few [[accomplishments]], it's all downhill. [[Jack]] Nicholson cannot be [[anything]] but Jack Nicholson. He's always crazy and didn't [[bring]] [[anything]] to his role here. I don't [[care]] that [[many]] reviewers here [[think]] he's all that in this clinker, the "Here's Johnny!" bit notwithstanding...he's just awful in this movie. So is everyone else, for that matter. Scatman Crothers' character, Dick Halloran, was essential to the plot of the book, yet Kubrick [[kills]] him off in one of the [[lamest]] "shock" sequences ever put on film. I remember the audience in the [[theater]] I saw this at [[booing]] repeatedly during the [[last]] 45 minutes of this [[wretched]] flick, those that stayed that is...many left. King's books really never [[translate]] well to film since so much of the narratives occur internally to his characters, and often metaphysically. Kubrick [[jettisoned]] the tension between the [[living]] and the dead in favor of [[style]] here and the resulting [[mess]] [[ends]] so far from the original material that we ultimately don't really care what happens to whom.

This movie still stinks and why so many think it's a horror masterpiece is beyond me. I [[captures]] this [[smell]] [[explosions]] of a [[filmmaking]] recently on a cable channel, and was reminded of how terrible I thought it was in 1980 when [[fiirst]] released. Many reviewers out there aren't old enough to remember the [[prodigious]] [[fanfare]] that surrounded this movie and the struggle between [[Stan]] Kubrick and Steven King. The [[uncommonly]] popular novel had legions of fans [[anxious]] to see a [[suspected]] "master" [[superintendent]] put this multi-layered [[uncanny]] story on the screen. "Salem's [[Batch]]" had already been [[destroyed]] in the late 1970s as a TV mini-series, [[aimed]] by [[Taub]] Hooper (he of "Texas [[Sawing]] [[Slaughter]]" fame) and was badly [[treated]], turning the [[big]] villain of the book into a "Chiller [[Teatro]]" vampire with no [[veritable]] [[jeopardy]] at all [[so]] [[demolishing]] the [[overall]] [[supposition]]. Fans [[desired]] that a director of Kubrick's [[caliber]] would [[succeeds]] where Hooper had failed. It didn't [[emerge]].

[[Convinced]], this [[filmmaking]] looks [[tremendous]] and has a [[sumptuous]] [[introductory]] [[sequences]] but after those few [[success]], it's all downhill. [[Gato]] Nicholson cannot be [[something]] but Jack Nicholson. He's always crazy and didn't [[brings]] [[algo]] to his role here. I don't [[healthcare]] that [[several]] reviewers here [[thought]] he's all that in this clinker, the "Here's Johnny!" bit notwithstanding...he's just awful in this movie. So is everyone else, for that matter. Scatman Crothers' character, Dick Halloran, was essential to the plot of the book, yet Kubrick [[mata]] him off in one of the [[stupidest]] "shock" sequences ever put on film. I remember the audience in the [[theatre]] I saw this at [[jeering]] repeatedly during the [[latter]] 45 minutes of this [[ratty]] flick, those that stayed that is...many left. King's books really never [[transform]] well to film since so much of the narratives occur internally to his characters, and often metaphysically. Kubrick [[discarded]] the tension between the [[vie]] and the dead in favor of [[elegance]] here and the resulting [[chaos]] [[end]] so far from the original material that we ultimately don't really care what happens to whom.

This movie still stinks and why so many think it's a horror masterpiece is beyond me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] After just 15 minutes into this [[film]], I [[began]] to [[miss]] Zhang Yimou's [[earlier]], more [[weighty]] [[films]] that looked at the [[politics]] and [[society]] of [[China]] from [[unique]] [[perspectives]]. [[His]] turn to martial arts [[films]] was a [[serious]] misstep in my [[humble]] opinion. [[Hero]] was his [[worst]] [[film]] [[since]] [[Operation]] Cougar, with a [[needlessly]] complex [[story]] and acting more wooden than that [[found]] in a John Agar [[film]]. [[Shi]] Mian [[Mai]] [[Fu]] is no different. As an [[American]] who has been [[studying]] Chinese [[films]] for a few [[years]] now (and understands and can [[speak]] some Mandarin), I'm sure my [[opinion]] is different from [[many]] others as I'm [[coming]] from a different [[background]]. SMMF, like [[Hero]], is not [[really]] a [[traditional]] a kung [[fu]] [[film]], and it's [[certainly]] not a wuxia pian [[film]]. There are no sword & sorcery or chivalry [[elements]] here. This is a [[completely]] different [[vehicle]] than infinitely more watchable [[films]] such as A Chinese Ghost [[Story]] (all 3), The [[Butterfly]] [[Murders]], [[Green]] Snake, et al. While those all [[featured]] charismatic [[leads]] who looked like they were actually enjoying what they do, SMMF features bland, and sometimes [[laughable]], [[dialogue]] [[combined]] with [[cardboard]] acting. Zhang Ziyi plays a blind person about as well as Ben Affleck. There's an air of superiority with this film that's really quite insulting. It takes itself so seriously, it just [[becomes]] a huge [[joke]] by the end. All the actors look as [[though]] this is the most important piece of celluloid in history, they [[destroy]] any chance of actually conveying [[emotions]], and the [[complete]] humorlessness of it [[really]] makes you wonder if Zhang Yimou was making a [[film]] per se, or simply a [[showcase]] (i.e. an "ego booster") for Zhang Ziyi. The camera is literally making out with her face and she gets sexually assaulted not once but twice in the film. Her acting range really hasn't extended past her ability to play a [[naive]] "w"itch. She's so [[concentrated]] on her acting, she comes across as cold and [[lifeless]], as though she's reading her lines from a notecard. It's so funny to [[hear]] American critics and film people (like the completely clueless Quentin Tarantino) [[call]] this film a masterpiece. I [[guess]] if they [[see]] a bunch of [[Asian]] [[actors]] on screen [[looking]] really [[important]] while flying through a bamboo forest, they're [[tricked]] into thinking it's [[brilliant]] film-making. [[Ching]] Siu Tung's choreography, while still retaining his trademark [[style]], editing, and postures, lacks the vitality and originality of his earlier films like A Chinese Ghost Story, Dragon Inn, and Duel to the Death. Sadly to [[say]], the wirework in this film is really subpar, and if there's subpar/obvious wirework, then you [[probably]] shouldn't have filmed it at high speed. The same goes for the special effects which have a distinct B-movie feel to them. Beans, daggers, bowls, arrows, swords, and other random objects fly through the air (after being thrown) with no regard for logic, turning, climbing, and banking as though there's a little pilot inside. I know that logic doesn't really hold a place in stylized Chinese martial arts films, but if you don't want to induce a mass amount of giggling from your audience, then you should [[probably]] work on your compositing a bit more. Mass melodrama, unintentionally funny dramatic moments, boring fight scenes, really uninspired plot twists are what await you with Shi Mian Mai Fu. It's obvious that Zhang Yimou is no longer making movies for Chinese audiences. This is meant to crack into the Western market just as CTHD did. After watching Hero and SMMF, I've come to the conclusion that if Zhang Yimou wants to make Hollywood films, he's definitely off to the right start. SMMF is basically The Phantom Menace of Chinese martial arts films. And I thought Hero was bad. After just 15 minutes into this [[filmmaking]], I [[start]] to [[mademoiselle]] Zhang Yimou's [[ago]], more [[ponderous]] [[filmmaking]] that looked at the [[policy]] and [[societal]] of [[Hua]] from [[unequalled]] [[viewpoints]]. [[Her]] turn to martial arts [[filmmaking]] was a [[grievous]] misstep in my [[unassuming]] opinion. [[Superhero]] was his [[meanest]] [[films]] [[because]] [[Operate]] Cougar, with a [[senselessly]] complex [[storytelling]] and acting more wooden than that [[finds]] in a John Agar [[flick]]. [[Shih]] Mian [[Mei]] [[Foo]] is no different. As an [[Americana]] who has been [[examining]] Chinese [[filmmaking]] for a few [[olds]] now (and understands and can [[talk]] some Mandarin), I'm sure my [[viewing]] is different from [[myriad]] others as I'm [[arriving]] from a different [[context]]. SMMF, like [[Heroin]], is not [[genuinely]] a [[conventional]] a kung [[foo]] [[movies]], and it's [[definitely]] not a wuxia pian [[movie]]. There are no sword & sorcery or chivalry [[components]] here. This is a [[absolutely]] different [[auto]] than infinitely more watchable [[cinematography]] such as A Chinese Ghost [[Histories]] (all 3), The [[Butterflies]] [[Assassination]], [[Greene]] Snake, et al. While those all [[attribute]] charismatic [[leeds]] who looked like they were actually enjoying what they do, SMMF features bland, and sometimes [[ridiculous]], [[discussions]] [[amalgamated]] with [[carton]] acting. Zhang Ziyi plays a blind person about as well as Ben Affleck. There's an air of superiority with this film that's really quite insulting. It takes itself so seriously, it just [[becoming]] a huge [[giggle]] by the end. All the actors look as [[if]] this is the most important piece of celluloid in history, they [[obliterating]] any chance of actually conveying [[passions]], and the [[finishing]] humorlessness of it [[truthfully]] makes you wonder if Zhang Yimou was making a [[movies]] per se, or simply a [[demonstrates]] (i.e. an "ego booster") for Zhang Ziyi. The camera is literally making out with her face and she gets sexually assaulted not once but twice in the film. Her acting range really hasn't extended past her ability to play a [[unsuspecting]] "w"itch. She's so [[orientated]] on her acting, she comes across as cold and [[lackluster]], as though she's reading her lines from a notecard. It's so funny to [[overheard]] American critics and film people (like the completely clueless Quentin Tarantino) [[calls]] this film a masterpiece. I [[reckon]] if they [[seeing]] a bunch of [[Asiatic]] [[actresses]] on screen [[searching]] really [[sizeable]] while flying through a bamboo forest, they're [[cheated]] into thinking it's [[admirable]] film-making. [[Tsing]] Siu Tung's choreography, while still retaining his trademark [[elegance]], editing, and postures, lacks the vitality and originality of his earlier films like A Chinese Ghost Story, Dragon Inn, and Duel to the Death. Sadly to [[said]], the wirework in this film is really subpar, and if there's subpar/obvious wirework, then you [[admittedly]] shouldn't have filmed it at high speed. The same goes for the special effects which have a distinct B-movie feel to them. Beans, daggers, bowls, arrows, swords, and other random objects fly through the air (after being thrown) with no regard for logic, turning, climbing, and banking as though there's a little pilot inside. I know that logic doesn't really hold a place in stylized Chinese martial arts films, but if you don't want to induce a mass amount of giggling from your audience, then you should [[admittedly]] work on your compositing a bit more. Mass melodrama, unintentionally funny dramatic moments, boring fight scenes, really uninspired plot twists are what await you with Shi Mian Mai Fu. It's obvious that Zhang Yimou is no longer making movies for Chinese audiences. This is meant to crack into the Western market just as CTHD did. After watching Hero and SMMF, I've come to the conclusion that if Zhang Yimou wants to make Hollywood films, he's definitely off to the right start. SMMF is basically The Phantom Menace of Chinese martial arts films. And I thought Hero was bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 3535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I am a [[big]] fan of Ludlum's work, and of the Covert-one [[books]], and I had often thought how [[incredible]] they would be made into a [[film]]. [[Imagine]] my [[excitement]], then, on [[learning]] that such a [[movie]] [[actually]] existed! The 'Hades Factor' being the first in the series [[seemed]] an [[obvious]] place to [[start]].

From the [[outset]] the [[film]] was [[disappointing]]. Simple elements from the film such as Griffin's first meeting with Smith are needlessly different from the [[book]], and [[much]] less exhilarating. Several characters are poorly cast, too. For starters Dorff is [[woeful]] as Smith. Not a bad actor, just an incredibly bad choice as he is far too soft, and fails to exhibit many of the features that are definitive of John Smith.

Re-naming, re-assignment and even omission of certain [[characters]] further degrades this [[film]]. For example the [[removal]] of Victor Tremont and the entire back-story of the virus, including the involvement of VAXHAM makes the entire point to the film somewhat [[hazy]]. Marty Zellerbach is a very large part of the book, and in the seat he takes vary much a back seat (not to mention that the film character shares nothing in common with the character in the book) is another [[big]] [[mistake]].

Rachel Russel is presumably supposed to be Randi Russel from the book. Not only is she supposed to be the sister of Sophie Amsden (should be called Sophia Russel) but she is also supposed to work from the CIA, NOT "Covert-one". Which brings me to my [[final]] point, and I think one of the most important. COVERT-ONE doesn't even exist at this point! [[Not]] until the second book of the series is Covert-One [[devised]] by the president as a [[preventative]] [[measure]] against further biological [[terrorism]].

To be honest I [[could]] go on all day. [[In]] short - if you [[like]] the [[books]] and [[want]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[adaptation]], I'm [[afraid]] you'll be [[bitterly]] disappointed. Even as an [[action]] [[movie]] it is thoroughly average, [[mainly]] due to very lack-luster [[editing]] and poor [[effects]]. The bumbled [[story]] line and dull-as-ditch-water [[script]] are the [[final]] [[nails]] in the very cheap coffin of this [[film]]. I am a [[overwhelming]] fan of Ludlum's work, and of the Covert-one [[ledger]], and I had often thought how [[unbelievable]] they would be made into a [[movies]]. [[Suppose]] my [[agitation]], then, on [[learned]] that such a [[movies]] [[indeed]] existed! The 'Hades Factor' being the first in the series [[appeared]] an [[unmistakable]] place to [[launch]].

From the [[startup]] the [[filmmaking]] was [[discouraging]]. Simple elements from the film such as Griffin's first meeting with Smith are needlessly different from the [[books]], and [[very]] less exhilarating. Several characters are poorly cast, too. For starters Dorff is [[unlucky]] as Smith. Not a bad actor, just an incredibly bad choice as he is far too soft, and fails to exhibit many of the features that are definitive of John Smith.

Re-naming, re-assignment and even omission of certain [[traits]] further degrades this [[filmmaking]]. For example the [[abolition]] of Victor Tremont and the entire back-story of the virus, including the involvement of VAXHAM makes the entire point to the film somewhat [[misty]]. Marty Zellerbach is a very large part of the book, and in the seat he takes vary much a back seat (not to mention that the film character shares nothing in common with the character in the book) is another [[grande]] [[mistaken]].

Rachel Russel is presumably supposed to be Randi Russel from the book. Not only is she supposed to be the sister of Sophie Amsden (should be called Sophia Russel) but she is also supposed to work from the CIA, NOT "Covert-one". Which brings me to my [[definitive]] point, and I think one of the most important. COVERT-ONE doesn't even exist at this point! [[No]] until the second book of the series is Covert-One [[crafted]] by the president as a [[protective]] [[measures]] against further biological [[terrorist]].

To be honest I [[did]] go on all day. [[For]] short - if you [[fond]] the [[ledger]] and [[wanting]] to [[behold]] a [[alright]] [[adjustment]], I'm [[freaked]] you'll be [[deeply]] disappointed. Even as an [[actions]] [[flick]] it is thoroughly average, [[mostly]] due to very lack-luster [[edition]] and poor [[influences]]. The bumbled [[saga]] line and dull-as-ditch-water [[hyphen]] are the [[latter]] [[fingernails]] in the very cheap coffin of this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[Horrible]] [[waste]] of [[time]] - [[bad]] acting, plot, directing. This is the most [[boring]] [[movie]] EVER! There are [[bad]] [[movies]] that are [[fun]] (Freddy vs. Jason), and there are [[bad]] [[movies]] that are [[HORRIBLE]]. This one [[fits]] into the [[latter]]. Bottom Line - don't [[waste]] your [[time]]. [[Scary]] [[wastes]] of [[moment]] - [[rotten]] acting, plot, directing. This is the most [[dull]] [[filmmaking]] EVER! There are [[negative]] [[movie]] that are [[funny]] (Freddy vs. Jason), and there are [[rotten]] [[movie]] that are [[TERRIBLE]]. This one [[adjusts]] into the [[latest]]. Bottom Line - don't [[wastes]] your [[period]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] The only [[show]] I have watched [[since]] 90210! Why did they [[discontinue]] it? It was the only [[show]] that [[captured]] the essence of Hawaii and made you feel like you are a [[part]] of it all! The least they should do is [[release]] it on [[DVD]]!

I [[checked]] out [[similar]] [[shows]], but [[nothing]] has [[come]] close. The cast had [[incredible]] [[chemistry]] and I looked forward to each episode with much [[anticipation]].

They [[made]] a [[big]] mistake by [[pulling]] that [[show]]. If [[anyone]] has any [[info]] [[regarding]] where I can [[obtain]] a [[DVD]] of [[North]] [[Shore]] please post a few lines here. [[Thanks]]! Aloha! The only [[exhibit]] I have watched [[because]] 90210! Why did they [[ceasing]] it? It was the only [[demonstrate]] that [[capturing]] the essence of Hawaii and made you feel like you are a [[parte]] of it all! The least they should do is [[liberating]] it on [[DVDS]]!

I [[checking]] out [[analogous]] [[demonstrate]], but [[anything]] has [[arriving]] close. The cast had [[breathtaking]] [[chemicals]] and I looked forward to each episode with much [[expectation]].

They [[accomplished]] a [[massive]] mistake by [[pulled]] that [[spectacle]]. If [[someone]] has any [[information]] [[relating]] where I can [[attain]] a [[DVDS]] of [[Norte]] [[Seaboard]] please post a few lines here. [[Merci]]! Aloha! --------------------------------------------- Result 3538 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This [[appalling]] film somehow saw the light of day in 1988. It [[looks]] and sounds as if it had been produced 20 or 30 [[years]] [[earlier]], and features some of the [[worst]] [[songs]] ever included in a [[major]] motion picture. I [[weep]] for the parents and [[children]] who [[paid]] [[top]] dollar to see this. This [[shocking]] film somehow saw the light of day in 1988. It [[seem]] and sounds as if it had been produced 20 or 30 [[ages]] [[previously]], and features some of the [[meanest]] [[ballads]] ever included in a [[grandes]] motion picture. I [[mourns]] for the parents and [[childhood]] who [[pay]] [[supreme]] dollar to see this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[During]] the early 1980's, Kurt [[Thomas]] was something of a [[hero]] in the United States. [[Inevitably]], men in his position get offered [[film]] [[roles]] that exist solely to capitalize on that. I have no idea what Thomas was paid to make this film, but I [[would]] have to be paid a [[big]] [[heap]] of [[money]] to agree to make a national fool of myself in a motion picture. The film is [[obviously]] [[derived]] from "Enter The Dragon," as are most martial arts [[pictures]]. [[Only]] [[instead]] of a [[real]] martial art, they concoct an [[absurd]] [[new]] martial art, accurately [[described]] by one [[critic]] as "a [[cross]] between Kung [[Fu]] and break [[dancing]]." A gymnast ([[Thomas]], of [[course]]) is [[hired]] to [[rescue]] some [[lady]] from an [[impenetrable]] [[fortress]], [[yet]] [[every]] [[room]] has a [[prop]] that is [[exactly]] what Thomas [[needs]] to kick the assistant baddies. Of course, he fights his [[way]] to the [[lead]] villain, and of course they have a fancy-dancy [[fight]], with an ending that will surprise only those who have never [[seen]] a marshal arts [[film]]. There are touches which nostalgic [[types]] will [[like]], [[particularly]] the mullet haircuts of Thomas and [[many]] of the male co-stars have. But the only [[reason]] to watch this [[film]] is if you have a [[grudge]] against [[Kurt]] Thomas, who now [[wishes]] he had never set foot on the [[film]] set. [[Throughout]] the early 1980's, Kurt [[Tomas]] was something of a [[heroin]] in the United States. [[Invariably]], men in his position get offered [[movie]] [[functions]] that exist solely to capitalize on that. I have no idea what Thomas was paid to make this film, but I [[could]] have to be paid a [[mammoth]] [[stack]] of [[cash]] to agree to make a national fool of myself in a motion picture. The film is [[definitely]] [[drifted]] from "Enter The Dragon," as are most martial arts [[images]]. [[Exclusively]] [[conversely]] of a [[veritable]] martial art, they concoct an [[irrational]] [[newest]] martial art, accurately [[outlined]] by one [[criticism]] as "a [[traverse]] between Kung [[Foo]] and break [[danced]]." A gymnast ([[Tomas]], of [[cours]]) is [[incurred]] to [[saves]] some [[dame]] from an [[unfathomable]] [[citadel]], [[however]] [[each]] [[chambers]] has a [[helix]] that is [[accurately]] what Thomas [[required]] to kick the assistant baddies. Of course, he fights his [[routing]] to the [[culminate]] villain, and of course they have a fancy-dancy [[combat]], with an ending that will surprise only those who have never [[noticed]] a marshal arts [[cinematic]]. There are touches which nostalgic [[genre]] will [[adores]], [[specially]] the mullet haircuts of Thomas and [[innumerable]] of the male co-stars have. But the only [[motif]] to watch this [[filmmaking]] is if you have a [[rancour]] against [[Curt]] Thomas, who now [[desires]] he had never set foot on the [[movies]] set. --------------------------------------------- Result 3540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] back in my high school days in Salina Kansas, they filmed something [[called]] "The Brave Young [[Men]] Of Weinberg" locally, and the film crews were [[rather]] prominent for [[weeks]]. eventually, we [[learned]] that the [[film]] was "Up The Academy", and was a bit ummm, "lower brow" than we had been led to believe.

I had to [[see]] it, since I was there, and the local audiences seemed less than pleased at the showing. I was 17, and thought it was a [[rather]] artless attempt at a post "Animal house" type of [[comedy]], right down to the fart jokes.

Watched it many times since, and my opinion has mellowed a bit. it's dumb, but at times it catches a [[bit]] of the "mad" magazine [[humor]], at least as well as most "Mad TV". Ron Liebman might [[hate]] it, but he is nearly [[perfect]], and [[unforgettable]]. For me, my favorite moment would have been a brief scene on Santa Fe avenue, where I had parked my car, while I was buying some [[guitar]] strings. Too bad my Pinto's brief appearance, [[usually]] seems to get cut for TV. haven't [[seen]] the new DVD, but if my old pinto is visible, they've got a sale. back in my high school days in Salina Kansas, they filmed something [[phoned]] "The Brave Young [[Man]] Of Weinberg" locally, and the film crews were [[quite]] prominent for [[chow]]. eventually, we [[learn]] that the [[cinematography]] was "Up The Academy", and was a bit ummm, "lower brow" than we had been led to believe.

I had to [[seeing]] it, since I was there, and the local audiences seemed less than pleased at the showing. I was 17, and thought it was a [[fairly]] artless attempt at a post "Animal house" type of [[parody]], right down to the fart jokes.

Watched it many times since, and my opinion has mellowed a bit. it's dumb, but at times it catches a [[bitten]] of the "mad" magazine [[comedy]], at least as well as most "Mad TV". Ron Liebman might [[hatred]] it, but he is nearly [[irreproachable]], and [[memorable]]. For me, my favorite moment would have been a brief scene on Santa Fe avenue, where I had parked my car, while I was buying some [[guitarist]] strings. Too bad my Pinto's brief appearance, [[popularly]] seems to get cut for TV. haven't [[saw]] the new DVD, but if my old pinto is visible, they've got a sale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Imagine the worst skits from Saturday Night [[Live]] and [[Mad]] TV in one 90 minute movie. Now, [[imagine]] that all the [[humor]] in those [[bad]] skits is [[removed]] and [[replaced]] with stupidity. Now imagine [[something]] 50 [[times]] [[worse]].

Got that?

[[OK]], now go see The Underground [[Comedy]] Movie. That vision you just had will [[seem]] like the funniest [[thing]] ever. UCM is the [[single]] worst movie I've ever seen. There were a few cheap [[laughs]]...very few. But it was lame. [[Even]] if the intent of the movie was to be lame, it was too lame to be [[funny]].

The only reason I'm not angry for [[wasting]] my time watching this was someone else I know bought it. He wasted his money. Vince Offer hasn't written or directed anything else and it's no surprise why. Imagine the worst skits from Saturday Night [[Living]] and [[Enraged]] TV in one 90 minute movie. Now, [[reckon]] that all the [[comedy]] in those [[negative]] skits is [[eliminated]] and [[substituted]] with stupidity. Now imagine [[anything]] 50 [[moments]] [[worst]].

Got that?

[[ALRIGHT]], now go see The Underground [[Humor]] Movie. That vision you just had will [[appears]] like the funniest [[stuff]] ever. UCM is the [[exclusive]] worst movie I've ever seen. There were a few cheap [[laughed]]...very few. But it was lame. [[Yet]] if the intent of the movie was to be lame, it was too lame to be [[hilarious]].

The only reason I'm not angry for [[losing]] my time watching this was someone else I know bought it. He wasted his money. Vince Offer hasn't written or directed anything else and it's no surprise why. --------------------------------------------- Result 3542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved it so much that I bought the DVD and the novel at the same time. The chemistry between the actors (including little Arthur) is amazing and thrilling.

It could have used a bit more screen time for the yummy Frederick Lawrence (played by James Purefoy). And Gilbert Markham was amazingly "on it" from the very start of the movie.

The one who most thrilled me via surprising shock and awe and wonder was Rupert Graves as Arthur Huntingdon. I adore him in Forsyte Saga, and all else I've seen him in. But he outdoes himself here as Arthur. In my wildest dreams I could not have pictured him playing a demented psycho such as Arthur Huntingdon. But he does. And I love it. And I love him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If the screenwriter and director intended to open hearts with the movie as the musician wanted to do with his music, they succeeded with me. Commonplace human situations became original, personal and immediate so that I personally felt touched by each situation. I believe I would credit the power of music combined with the point of view of the person writing the movie. Without spoiling, I can say that I was very moved by the movie's approach to living. Haven't actually cried out of-what- joy? empathy? just deep emotion? in a very long time. I would love to find a way to show it to others. Saw it at Seattle International Film Festival. --------------------------------------------- Result 3544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Chances Are uses that marvelous song by the same name throughout the film. Robert Downey, Jr. is excellent in this movie. His extra large eyes and wonderfully variable facial expressions are part of expertise in acting as different people in diverse films. Compare Robert Downey, Jr. in Chaplin. You will enjoy Chances Are. I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The people who are [[praising]] this film are the [[real]] [[disappointments]] -- I am [[hoping]] at [[least]] that [[Leonard]] will [[see]] some good $$ out of this, as his life savings were embezzled away by a [[manager]] a couple of [[years]] [[ago]] and he's over 70 now. But this film is [[simply]] [[terrible]]. At the [[beginning]] Leonard himself [[says]] he is not [[sentimental]] about his [[past]], and then for the next hour and a half the film emphasizes all the worst [[sentimental]] elements of Leonard's songs. It is so bloody PRECIOUS with its [[endless]] close-ups of over emoting [[singers]]. Cohen's interview is all [[done]] in lo-fi [[video]] closeups and I so [[wanted]] to see a [[medium]] or a [[long]] [[shot]] of his [[whole]] body! I couldn't [[care]] less about the [[comments]] of the performers, [[especially]] those [[overblown]] ego [[boys]] Edge and Bono. None of the [[performers]] in this [[film]] have done [[even]] one song as good as Leonard's own [[music]] and if you are [[thinking]] about seeing this and you have any doubts at all, heed them. This [[would]] be an [[acceptable]] PBS [[special]], maybe, for a one [[time]] [[showing]]. But I will even hesitate at [[getting]] a DVD of this. When the [[film]] [[finally]] [[shows]] Leonard semi-performing "[[Tower]] of Song" it's [[ruined]] by Bono taking a verse. Even the [[occasional]] good performances ([[Antony]], Rufus' first number, Martha's The Traitor) are spoiled by the [[context]] of the [[rest]] of this turgid blabla. [[Forget]] this one, and go buy Leonard's most [[recent]] album if you [[want]] to [[pay]] [[tribute]] to him. The people who are [[commended]] this film are the [[veritable]] [[frustrations]] -- I am [[awaiting]] at [[fewest]] that [[Leonardo]] will [[seeing]] some good $$ out of this, as his life savings were embezzled away by a [[administrator]] a couple of [[olds]] [[previously]] and he's over 70 now. But this film is [[straightforward]] [[horrific]]. At the [[starting]] Leonard himself [[tells]] he is not [[romantic]] about his [[preceding]], and then for the next hour and a half the film emphasizes all the worst [[romantic]] elements of Leonard's songs. It is so bloody PRECIOUS with its [[inexhaustible]] close-ups of over emoting [[singer]]. Cohen's interview is all [[effected]] in lo-fi [[videos]] closeups and I so [[wished]] to see a [[midst]] or a [[lengthy]] [[filmed]] of his [[ensemble]] body! I couldn't [[healthcare]] less about the [[observations]] of the performers, [[specifically]] those [[overdone]] ego [[boy]] Edge and Bono. None of the [[artists]] in this [[filmmaking]] have done [[yet]] one song as good as Leonard's own [[musica]] and if you are [[thought]] about seeing this and you have any doubts at all, heed them. This [[could]] be an [[palatable]] PBS [[especial]], maybe, for a one [[period]] [[shows]]. But I will even hesitate at [[obtain]] a DVD of this. When the [[filmmaking]] [[ultimately]] [[show]] Leonard semi-performing "[[Rook]] of Song" it's [[obliterated]] by Bono taking a verse. Even the [[casual]] good performances ([[Antoine]], Rufus' first number, Martha's The Traitor) are spoiled by the [[backdrop]] of the [[roosting]] of this turgid blabla. [[Overlook]] this one, and go buy Leonard's most [[latest]] album if you [[wanna]] to [[pays]] [[homage]] to him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Without question, the [[worst]] ELVIS film ever [[made]]. The movie [[portrays]] all [[Indians]] as drunk, [[stupid]], and lazy. Watch ELVIS's skin [[change]] [[color]] throughout the [[film]]. Without question, the [[gravest]] ELVIS film ever [[effected]]. The movie [[exposes]] all [[Injuns]] as drunk, [[dopey]], and lazy. Watch ELVIS's skin [[amend]] [[colors]] throughout the [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ** possible spoilers **

I like this film and have no problem staying awake for it. It reminds me of me at 20, except this is even better. Like Veronica says, two chicks at one time. It brings out the horniness in me, the casual conversation, these two real life chicks, rather than hookers, teasing us every step of the way. I get into the conversations too. Even if they are utterly b.s. at times, so what? Every chick, just about, that I've ever talked to and is high on herself is usually full of the same unreasoned rambling gratuitous self-centered b.s. philosophy. It's just a bunch of nonsense, and about as sensible as that other b.s. philosophy chicks are often into: astrological charts. The only deal with this movie is the guy is almost as feminine as the women, he's into the same b.s. and moodiness. The brunette chick is actually the most masculine person there.

I think it's kind of funny that the brunette chick gets so obviously turned on by Veronica. She'd love to pull the little blonde away from Alexander, but Veronica plays her all the way. She's brilliant. She gets the brunette thinking there's something up between them, and then she steals the boy-child/man, which is only appropriate since they appear to be from the same age group. The brunette knows she's been had by the end, when she's dropping her face into the palms of her hands while Marlene Deitrich sings in the background that, paraphrasing, there are a million couples in Paris tonight, but I only have this refrain.

But do they get married in the end, Alex and Veronica? Mmmm? I can only imagine a super-tumultuous relationship ending in a pre-marriage breakup. They are too selfish to be anything to each other than stepping stones.

I like the film though. It kept me entertained, it's got a nice look, and it's sexy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[OK]] we all [[love]] the [[daisy]] [[dukes]], but what is up with this cast. [[Lets]] [[start]], [[Jessica]] [[Simpson]] as Daisy, there is not one [[thing]] [[country]] about this [[girl]] and [[Daisy]] was not ditzy! Uncle [[Jesse]] was [[probably]] the [[closest]] one to resemble the [[original]]. No [[offense]] to Burt, but I never [[noticed]] Boss HOg being so tall. That was part of the [[humor]] of Boss Hog was his [[size]]. [[Did]] they even [[try]] [[someone]] like [[Danny]] Devito?!? [[OK]] , now get this they cast Jessica Simpson did [[anyone]] [[take]] a [[look]] at her husband? He matches Luke [[Duke]] to a tee!!!!!! Cleary these [[producers]] did not [[look]] at the [[appearance]] of the old [[cast]] members. The screen t's were never [[present]] on the dukes!! This made the movie a turn off from the [[beginning]]. I give this a [[HUGE]] thumbs down. [[ALRIGHT]] we all [[likes]] the [[margherita]] [[fists]], but what is up with this cast. [[Allowing]] [[commenced]], [[Jennifer]] [[Simpsons]] as Daisy, there is not one [[stuff]] [[nations]] about this [[fille]] and [[Margarita]] was not ditzy! Uncle [[Jessie]] was [[possibly]] the [[earliest]] one to resemble the [[upfront]]. No [[felonies]] to Burt, but I never [[seen]] Boss HOg being so tall. That was part of the [[mood]] of Boss Hog was his [[caliber]]. [[Got]] they even [[seek]] [[person]] like [[Devito]] Devito?!? [[ALLRIGHT]] , now get this they cast Jessica Simpson did [[nobody]] [[taking]] a [[gaze]] at her husband? He matches Luke [[Duca]] to a tee!!!!!! Cleary these [[growers]] did not [[gaze]] at the [[apparition]] of the old [[casting]] members. The screen t's were never [[presented]] on the dukes!! This made the movie a turn off from the [[startup]]. I give this a [[PRODIGIOUS]] thumbs down. --------------------------------------------- Result 3549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Don't get me wrong. "GoldenEye" was revolutionary and is [[definitely]] the [[best]] FPS [[game]] to be based on the 007 franchise. But the series had [[fallen]] into a [[FPS]] [[rut]]. Enter "Everything or Nothing", which puts [[Bond]] in third-person. When I wrote my earlier [[review]] for "From [[Russia]] With [[Love]]", I had finished FRWL and just [[started]] EON and judged EON a [[bit]] harshly. Even though FRWL [[definitely]] has the edge in nostalgia and [[capturing]] the essence of the movie franchise, [[EON]] [[definitely]] is [[superior]] in terms of in-depth controls and gameplay variety. Missions range from standard running-and-gunning to driving an SUV, driving an Aston Martin, driving a limousine that is wired to explode, commandeering two different types of tanks a la "GoldenEye", riding a motorcycle, flying a helicopter, repelling down a shaft guarded by laser tripwires, and free falling after a [[plummeting]] damsel. Sure, vehicle controls are a little [[clumsy]], but the issue here is the variety.

As movie adaptations, "GoldenEye" and FRWL were all that I could have hoped for. But EON's original storyline [[adds]] to the feeling of controlling a James Bond adventure. This is helped by the [[impressive]] cast list of Willem DeFoe, Shannon Elizabeth, Heidi Klum, and Misaki Ito. Judi Dench and John Cleese reprise their movie roles of M and Q, respectively, and Pierce Brosnan, while no Sean Connery, [[adds]] credibility to the game's proceedings. All characters resemble the stars, with the disappointing exception of Heidi Klum, who's in-game model doesn't do the real-life model justice. Mya's theme song is on par with at least some of the big screen Bond title tunes.

The game also plays tribute to some of the older Bond movies. Willem DeFoe's character is a former colleague of Christopher Walken's baddie from "A View to a Kill". Richard Kiel appears as Jaws, the hulking henchman from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker" in three fight scenes, the first and [[best]] of which proceeds in the same [[fashion]] a fight in the movies would have.

Single-player gameplay [[mainly]] consists of standard on-foot missions as [[Bond]]. Like [[Bond]], you will be able to choose whether to use stealth or go out with guns blazing. The game provides plenty of opportunities to utilize stealth, with plenty of wall and object cover. Unfortunately, unlike FRWL, only one button in EON controls both crouching and wall clinging, so Bond may end up crouching low when he's supposed to be peeking around a corner, and vice-versa. The game also allows players to go into "Bond reflex" mode. While you browse your inventory, everything around you will go into super slo-mo, allowing you to analyze objects around you that can be interacted with. While this takes some getting used to, eventually this mode will allow you to perform many spectacular "Bond moments", such as shooting down a chandelier to take out four goons underneath, and greatly add to the Bond movie feeling.

There are 3 available difficulty levels: Operative, Agent, and Double Oh. On Operative, you can breeze through in a few hours. On Agent, a few weeks. On Double Oh, a few months. The difficulty level can be changed for each individual mission. Garnering high scores on missions will unlock gold and platinum awards and effect features such as vehicle upgrades and the skimpy outfits the Bond girls wear. Some missions can be extremely frustrating due to a scarcity of checkpoints, but when all is said and done, no mission is any longer than a single action scene in a Bond movie.

Multi-player, unfortunately, is not as thrilling. "GoldenEye" still has the best multi-player mode of any Bond game. EON's main multi-player is a co-op campaign mode that puts players in charge of lesser MI6 agents on a less important mission than Bond's. A more standard third-person death match can be unlocked from this mode. But the single-player mode is the most complete Bond experience to date. The ending, as with most Bond games, is anticlimactic. While the final mission is one of the most aggravating of the game, the final confrontation with the villain is disappointing. Also, levels that require Bond to be speedy become largely a matter of trial and error. Still, for any serious Bond fan, not playing this game is tantamount to missing one of the Bond films. Don't get me wrong. "GoldenEye" was revolutionary and is [[surely]] the [[nicest]] FPS [[games]] to be based on the 007 franchise. But the series had [[diminished]] into a [[SPF]] [[impasse]]. Enter "Everything or Nothing", which puts [[Bonded]] in third-person. When I wrote my earlier [[revisions]] for "From [[Federation]] With [[Adored]]", I had finished FRWL and just [[beginning]] EON and judged EON a [[bite]] harshly. Even though FRWL [[obviously]] has the edge in nostalgia and [[caught]] the essence of the movie franchise, [[NOE]] [[surely]] is [[upper]] in terms of in-depth controls and gameplay variety. Missions range from standard running-and-gunning to driving an SUV, driving an Aston Martin, driving a limousine that is wired to explode, commandeering two different types of tanks a la "GoldenEye", riding a motorcycle, flying a helicopter, repelling down a shaft guarded by laser tripwires, and free falling after a [[plummet]] damsel. Sure, vehicle controls are a little [[awkward]], but the issue here is the variety.

As movie adaptations, "GoldenEye" and FRWL were all that I could have hoped for. But EON's original storyline [[adding]] to the feeling of controlling a James Bond adventure. This is helped by the [[unbelievable]] cast list of Willem DeFoe, Shannon Elizabeth, Heidi Klum, and Misaki Ito. Judi Dench and John Cleese reprise their movie roles of M and Q, respectively, and Pierce Brosnan, while no Sean Connery, [[adding]] credibility to the game's proceedings. All characters resemble the stars, with the disappointing exception of Heidi Klum, who's in-game model doesn't do the real-life model justice. Mya's theme song is on par with at least some of the big screen Bond title tunes.

The game also plays tribute to some of the older Bond movies. Willem DeFoe's character is a former colleague of Christopher Walken's baddie from "A View to a Kill". Richard Kiel appears as Jaws, the hulking henchman from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker" in three fight scenes, the first and [[better]] of which proceeds in the same [[manner]] a fight in the movies would have.

Single-player gameplay [[basically]] consists of standard on-foot missions as [[Bonded]]. Like [[Bonding]], you will be able to choose whether to use stealth or go out with guns blazing. The game provides plenty of opportunities to utilize stealth, with plenty of wall and object cover. Unfortunately, unlike FRWL, only one button in EON controls both crouching and wall clinging, so Bond may end up crouching low when he's supposed to be peeking around a corner, and vice-versa. The game also allows players to go into "Bond reflex" mode. While you browse your inventory, everything around you will go into super slo-mo, allowing you to analyze objects around you that can be interacted with. While this takes some getting used to, eventually this mode will allow you to perform many spectacular "Bond moments", such as shooting down a chandelier to take out four goons underneath, and greatly add to the Bond movie feeling.

There are 3 available difficulty levels: Operative, Agent, and Double Oh. On Operative, you can breeze through in a few hours. On Agent, a few weeks. On Double Oh, a few months. The difficulty level can be changed for each individual mission. Garnering high scores on missions will unlock gold and platinum awards and effect features such as vehicle upgrades and the skimpy outfits the Bond girls wear. Some missions can be extremely frustrating due to a scarcity of checkpoints, but when all is said and done, no mission is any longer than a single action scene in a Bond movie.

Multi-player, unfortunately, is not as thrilling. "GoldenEye" still has the best multi-player mode of any Bond game. EON's main multi-player is a co-op campaign mode that puts players in charge of lesser MI6 agents on a less important mission than Bond's. A more standard third-person death match can be unlocked from this mode. But the single-player mode is the most complete Bond experience to date. The ending, as with most Bond games, is anticlimactic. While the final mission is one of the most aggravating of the game, the final confrontation with the villain is disappointing. Also, levels that require Bond to be speedy become largely a matter of trial and error. Still, for any serious Bond fan, not playing this game is tantamount to missing one of the Bond films. --------------------------------------------- Result 3550 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this [[film]] during and [[International]] [[Film]] Studies course. I am a 'non-traditional' [[student]], and, perhaps for reasons of years-lived or wisdom-accrued, [[appreciated]] the slow, reflective pacing of the film's narrative. Languorous with the heat and dust of an arid clime, the story is [[deeply]] psychological, replete with multi-layered symbolism, and an [[articulate]] [[inversion]] of the [[theme]] of being the 'Other' in a land that one does not [[understand]]. the understanding that does come is fraught with the unresolved memories and subjectivity of the outsider. Made nearly 20 years ago, it is [[also]] a [[forerunner]] in a [[genre]] of [[numerous]] other [[international]] [[films]] that explore the [[themes]] of colonials in colonized [[spaces]], clueless to the nuances of the [[cultures]] into which they have [[entered]]. Much more lavishly filmed---and [[heavily]] financed--- [[works]] that have been made [[since]] reflect the same themes: Indochine, [[Nowhere]] in [[Africa]] are two that in [[comparison]] [[perhaps]] make Chocolat [[seem]] pale and [[boring]]. It has no adrenaline-pumping action or [[extreme]] violence. The [[struggles]] are [[mental]], emotional and subtle. But, that being [[said]], it is a [[fine]] [[film]], worth a [[viewing]]. I [[firstly]] [[noticed]] this [[kino]] during and [[World]] [[Movie]] Studies course. I am a 'non-traditional' [[learners]], and, perhaps for reasons of years-lived or wisdom-accrued, [[enjoyed]] the slow, reflective pacing of the film's narrative. Languorous with the heat and dust of an arid clime, the story is [[heavily]] psychological, replete with multi-layered symbolism, and an [[enunciate]] [[invert]] of the [[subject]] of being the 'Other' in a land that one does not [[understanding]]. the understanding that does come is fraught with the unresolved memories and subjectivity of the outsider. Made nearly 20 years ago, it is [[apart]] a [[precursor]] in a [[gender]] of [[many]] other [[global]] [[film]] that explore the [[topic]] of colonials in colonized [[places]], clueless to the nuances of the [[culture]] into which they have [[penetrated]]. Much more lavishly filmed---and [[vastly]] financed--- [[cooperation]] that have been made [[because]] reflect the same themes: Indochine, [[Somewhere]] in [[Afrika]] are two that in [[compare]] [[presumably]] make Chocolat [[seems]] pale and [[bored]]. It has no adrenaline-pumping action or [[tremendous]] violence. The [[tussle]] are [[spiritual]], emotional and subtle. But, that being [[say]], it is a [[fined]] [[flick]], worth a [[opinion]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3551 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This beautiful story of an elder son coming home, and learning to love and be a part of all those things that he left home to get away from, is poignant and moving. It shows a society that is perhaps strange to us in the Western world, with a sense of family that we have lost. The story is beautiful, sad, and at times funny and comic. It has a feeling of realism that we don't seem to see any longer in our western movies.

The acting is unusual, in that as the movie progresses, it almost gives the impression that it is not acting, but a documentary of ordinary people. This is brilliant directing and movie making.

Would love to see more movies by this director. --------------------------------------------- Result 3552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Great actors, an oscar nominee actress, stunning scenery, good strong story line and more laughs than you can fit into my new handbag (and thats quite big). This film was brilliant. It was beautifully acted in the more serious scenes and the funny moments were . .well, side splitting. I have never heard a cinema audience laugh so much, and tears were streaming down my cheeks during the 'stoned ladies in the tea shop' scene. Well done to the British film industry and to Craig Ferguson whose magic ingredients have made sure this is one of my favourite films of the year, if not of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Michelle]] [[Rodriguez]] plays Diana, a [[high]] [[school]] [[girl]] with an [[insolent]] scowl and 2 x 4 on her shoulder. She's ready to battle [[anyone]], [[especially]] her [[father]] who is paying for her brother's boxing lessons. Diana decides boxing [[would]] be a [[good]] way of [[focusing]] her [[anger]].

I [[liked]] the [[relationship]] between Diana and [[Adrian]]. Santiago Douglas as Adrian is [[excellent]]. Watch how their [[emotions]] [[towards]] each other are [[shaped]] by the [[squared]] [[circle]]. [[Mitchell]] [[Gonzales]] plays Diana, a [[supremo]] [[tuition]] [[woman]] with an [[rude]] scowl and 2 x 4 on her shoulder. She's ready to battle [[nobody]], [[mostly]] her [[pere]] who is paying for her brother's boxing lessons. Diana decides boxing [[ought]] be a [[alright]] way of [[concentrating]] her [[wrath]].

I [[enjoyed]] the [[rapport]] between Diana and [[Adriano]]. Santiago Douglas as Adrian is [[wondrous]]. Watch how their [[sentiments]] [[toward]] each other are [[moulded]] by the [[square]] [[circling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The [[film]] "[[Cross]] Eyed" by Adam Jones propels the viewer on a ride of [[redemption]] as the [[main]] character takes back [[control]] of the wheel and sets his [[life]] in [[order]]. Adam Jones has [[found]] an [[imaginative]] and refreshing [[way]] to empower his character and actualize what matters most. These [[truths]] [[become]] [[apparent]] to both the [[characters]] and [[viewers]] as you [[laugh]] and gag to the credits with them. The [[simple]] [[yet]] attractive [[settings]]\[[costumes]] [[keep]] you guessing about what you will [[see]] next. You can't help but [[smile]] and [[laugh]] at the antics that take place in this movie. I can't [[wait]] for his [[sophomore]] effort. It is only a [[matter]] of [[time]] before [[Jones]] [[strikes]] again. [[Bravo]]! The [[movies]] "[[Crossing]] Eyed" by Adam Jones propels the viewer on a ride of [[buyout]] as the [[primary]] character takes back [[supervising]] of the wheel and sets his [[vida]] in [[orders]]. Adam Jones has [[finds]] an [[creative]] and refreshing [[route]] to empower his character and actualize what matters most. These [[facts]] [[gotten]] [[overt]] to both the [[trait]] and [[moviegoers]] as you [[laughed]] and gag to the credits with them. The [[mere]] [[however]] attractive [[setting]]\[[clothes]] [[conserve]] you guessing about what you will [[seeing]] next. You can't help but [[laughs]] and [[laughing]] at the antics that take place in this movie. I can't [[expects]] for his [[freshman]] effort. It is only a [[question]] of [[moment]] before [[Jonesy]] [[attacks]] again. [[Congrats]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Love Rosario Dawson, [[think]] she's one of the finest actresses of the [[modern]] [[era]].

Descent seems to be more about self-empowerment than anything [[else]]. It's the consistent undertone in everything in the [[film]]. The dialog is [[flat]], the characters [[seemingly]] [[intentionally]] bland and one sided. The only [[consistency]] is the representation of self-empowerment in the characters and Rosario's [[journey]] from self empowerment to loss of empowerment and back again.

Pitching this as a [[rape]] [[classic]] isn't appropriate, and that's probably why so many people don't enjoy the film. The standard 'rape' audience wouldn't particularly like this [[film]], and [[maybe]] that's the point? The [[film]] [[asks]] more [[questions]] than it [[answers]], and it does [[confront]] it's [[target]] [[audience]], whether they [[like]] it or not. There's a [[compelling]] [[relationship]] between the [[characters]] and the target audience and while the film doesn't [[slap]] the audience across the face with self-righteous [[audacity]] it does engage the viewer for what may or may not be, all the [[wrong]] reasons.

Descent is a good [[film]] which IMHO is severely under-rated. Love Rosario Dawson, [[thought]] she's one of the finest actresses of the [[fashionable]] [[epoch]].

Descent seems to be more about self-empowerment than anything [[further]]. It's the consistent undertone in everything in the [[movie]]. The dialog is [[apartment]], the characters [[evidently]] [[consciously]] bland and one sided. The only [[coherent]] is the representation of self-empowerment in the characters and Rosario's [[voyages]] from self empowerment to loss of empowerment and back again.

Pitching this as a [[rapes]] [[conventional]] isn't appropriate, and that's probably why so many people don't enjoy the film. The standard 'rape' audience wouldn't particularly like this [[movie]], and [[probably]] that's the point? The [[kino]] [[requested]] more [[subjects]] than it [[reactions]], and it does [[face]] it's [[targets]] [[spectators]], whether they [[loves]] it or not. There's a [[convincing]] [[relation]] between the [[attribute]] and the target audience and while the film doesn't [[slapping]] the audience across the face with self-righteous [[dares]] it does engage the viewer for what may or may not be, all the [[amiss]] reasons.

Descent is a good [[kino]] which IMHO is severely under-rated. --------------------------------------------- Result 3556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is not only the funniest film ever created, it's the greatest. My hats off to Mr. and Mrs. Zodsworth and the rest of the wacky, wacky cast. Good morning Satan, Want a donut? See it post haste! GO SEE IT NOW! --------------------------------------------- Result 3557 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] And this [[somebody]] is me. And not only me, as I can [[see]] here at IMDb or when [[leaving]] the theater. Why did the people [[love]] it? It's [[obvious]]: [[Everybody]] knows [[zombies]] by now (at [[least]] the [[Horror]] [[fans]] by heart and the others through the "Dawn of the Dead" reinvention or Resident Evil movies etc.)

Or at [[least]] they [[thought]] they knew everything about [[zombies]] ... that is until this movie [[came]] along. And you'll see zombies in a new [[light]] (perhaps). This is not a [[horror]] [[movie]], [[although]] it does contain some violent scenes, but is [[rather]] a [[comedy]]. A [[satire]] to be [[precise]]. And it never [[runs]] out of [[steam]]! That is why I rated it so high. Pacing wise it's [[incredible]], the acting is [[great]] and the [[script]] has no ([[obvious]]) [[mistakes]] ... [[quite]] the [[contrary]]: It's a gem and if you're only a little [[bit]] interested in [[zombies]] you [[ought]] to see it! And [[even]] if you [[dislike]] them, watch it! [[Because]] it's a [[great]] ([[comedy]]) [[movie]]! And this [[everybody]] is me. And not only me, as I can [[behold]] here at IMDb or when [[letting]] the theater. Why did the people [[iove]] it? It's [[conspicuous]]: [[Somebody]] knows [[walkers]] by now (at [[slightest]] the [[Terror]] [[followers]] by heart and the others through the "Dawn of the Dead" reinvention or Resident Evil movies etc.)

Or at [[slightest]] they [[thinking]] they knew everything about [[walkers]] ... that is until this movie [[arrived]] along. And you'll see zombies in a new [[lighting]] (perhaps). This is not a [[abomination]] [[kino]], [[albeit]] it does contain some violent scenes, but is [[fairly]] a [[parody]]. A [[spelling]] to be [[concrete]]. And it never [[manages]] out of [[steamship]]! That is why I rated it so high. Pacing wise it's [[unbelievable]], the acting is [[wondrous]] and the [[scripts]] has no ([[manifest]]) [[error]] ... [[altogether]] the [[opposite]]: It's a gem and if you're only a little [[bitten]] interested in [[walkers]] you [[gotta]] to see it! And [[yet]] if you [[loathing]] them, watch it! [[Since]] it's a [[wondrous]] ([[charade]]) [[movies]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Eternal [[Jew]] (Der Ewige [[Jude]]) does not have what we today [[would]] call the markings of a scholarly document: rather than naming experts or sources to [[support]] what it says, it simply [[says]], without opposition, what it wants us to believe (one will concede that American newsreels of that period were also much less regulated than would seem [[ethical]] to a modern audience, often inserting dramatized scenes and passing them off as actual news footage). Add to this [[directed]] propaganda the [[fact]] that filmmaker Hippler was "[[preaching]] to the converted," not so much asking gentile Europeans to hate the Jews as validating the feelings so many of them must have held already, in order to have allowed the holocaust that followed. The [[weakest]] [[link]] in the film's logic shows in its "rat" analogy, wherein it goes on to explain the behavior of rats, and then adds something to the effect of "Well, Jewish people are like that too." Similarly it characterizes Jewish people as ugly by showing ugly Jewish people in comparison to attractive gentiles; the accompanying [[leap]] of faith is that ugly is bad. The film appears to contradict itself a few times, for example by attacking Western painters who portrayed Old [[Testament]] characters as light-skinned Europeans; [[thereby]] the text admits that so-called "[[Hebrew]]" ethnicity is in fact an ingrained aspect of Christian culture. It also shows ghetto Jews willingly living in roach-infested filth, [[despite]] the supposed [[treasure]] they've hoarded, and then flip-flops by saying that these same undesirables [[live]] in [[wealth]] and [[luxury]] as [[soon]] as they leave the ghetto. Incidentally, who wouldn't? The [[use]] of scenes from a well-known American [[film]], House of Rothschild, [[shows]] an [[equally]] [[blurry]] [[deployment]] of logic. [[First]] the film is denounced as having been made by Jews; then it is apparently used by Hippler to verify the deceptiveness of Jews (the aforementioned pretense of poverty by ghetto Jews, shown as a means of avoiding taxation, although the Rothschild character's "spin" is that Jews are taxed excessively); [[finally]] the Rothschild film is once again execrated for implying that the famed banking family invented the checking account. This apparent indecisiveness in whether the American footage is shown positively or negatively might become clearer with repeated viewings, but at first sight it makes for some murky moviewatching. For all of Eternal Jew's imperfections, I was at first surprised that the IMDb viewer rating for this film is as high as it is, just shy of a "5" to date. I'd say the reason is that EJ's documentary value has exceeded its original purpose, offering us, unintentionally, a look into the lives of European Jews as they would not be seen a few years hence. Needless to say the film's very badness also provides an historical insight into bad, or simply evil, filmmaking as a propagandist's tool. About this time I should expect director Hippler to flip-flop once again, springing forward to say "That's what I meant to do all along!" The scenes depicting animal slaughter are particularly gruesome, and show same as decidedly inhumane, contrary to the intent of Kosher law to prevent animal suffering. I would like for someone who has seen the film, and has some knowledge of these procedures, to comment on whether the portrayal is accurate. The Eternal [[Jewry]] (Der Ewige [[Goode]]) does not have what we today [[should]] call the markings of a scholarly document: rather than naming experts or sources to [[assisting]] what it says, it simply [[tells]], without opposition, what it wants us to believe (one will concede that American newsreels of that period were also much less regulated than would seem [[moral]] to a modern audience, often inserting dramatized scenes and passing them off as actual news footage). Add to this [[aimed]] propaganda the [[facto]] that filmmaker Hippler was "[[soapbox]] to the converted," not so much asking gentile Europeans to hate the Jews as validating the feelings so many of them must have held already, in order to have allowed the holocaust that followed. The [[fewer]] [[linkage]] in the film's logic shows in its "rat" analogy, wherein it goes on to explain the behavior of rats, and then adds something to the effect of "Well, Jewish people are like that too." Similarly it characterizes Jewish people as ugly by showing ugly Jewish people in comparison to attractive gentiles; the accompanying [[hops]] of faith is that ugly is bad. The film appears to contradict itself a few times, for example by attacking Western painters who portrayed Old [[Wills]] characters as light-skinned Europeans; [[hence]] the text admits that so-called "[[Jew]]" ethnicity is in fact an ingrained aspect of Christian culture. It also shows ghetto Jews willingly living in roach-infested filth, [[while]] the supposed [[tesoro]] they've hoarded, and then flip-flops by saying that these same undesirables [[vivo]] in [[profusion]] and [[extravagance]] as [[expeditiously]] as they leave the ghetto. Incidentally, who wouldn't? The [[utilise]] of scenes from a well-known American [[filmmaking]], House of Rothschild, [[exhibited]] an [[similarly]] [[obscure]] [[deployments]] of logic. [[Fiirst]] the film is denounced as having been made by Jews; then it is apparently used by Hippler to verify the deceptiveness of Jews (the aforementioned pretense of poverty by ghetto Jews, shown as a means of avoiding taxation, although the Rothschild character's "spin" is that Jews are taxed excessively); [[eventually]] the Rothschild film is once again execrated for implying that the famed banking family invented the checking account. This apparent indecisiveness in whether the American footage is shown positively or negatively might become clearer with repeated viewings, but at first sight it makes for some murky moviewatching. For all of Eternal Jew's imperfections, I was at first surprised that the IMDb viewer rating for this film is as high as it is, just shy of a "5" to date. I'd say the reason is that EJ's documentary value has exceeded its original purpose, offering us, unintentionally, a look into the lives of European Jews as they would not be seen a few years hence. Needless to say the film's very badness also provides an historical insight into bad, or simply evil, filmmaking as a propagandist's tool. About this time I should expect director Hippler to flip-flop once again, springing forward to say "That's what I meant to do all along!" The scenes depicting animal slaughter are particularly gruesome, and show same as decidedly inhumane, contrary to the intent of Kosher law to prevent animal suffering. I would like for someone who has seen the film, and has some knowledge of these procedures, to comment on whether the portrayal is accurate. --------------------------------------------- Result 3559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cinderella is one of Disney's greatest films, one of those films I think you appreciate more the older you get. Disney creates a magical adaptation of the classic fairytale. I consider the film to have been the greatest of his films at the time of its release. The characters became more dimensional than earlier films, creating more depth to appreciate the characters more. Cinderella herself is, in my opinion, one of the greatest characters Disney ever created. With her kindness and dash of dry humor, she is extremely likeable; however, it is the inspiration she provides which makes her memorable. Like many people she is an endless dreamer, and she holds onto her dreams, never giving up. Even in the most adverse of situations, her dreams endure, and she won't let anyone take that away from her. Her example should serve as inspiration to everyone, and encouragement to never let go of your dreams. --------------------------------------------- Result 3560 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only thing serious about this movie is the humor. Well worth the rental price. I'll bet you watch it twice. It's obvious that Sutherland enjoyed his role. --------------------------------------------- Result 3561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The director tries to be Quentin Tarantino, the screenwriters try to be Tennessee Williams, Deborah Kara Unger tries to be Faye Dunaway, the late James Coburn tries to be Orson Welles, Michael Rooker tries to be Gene Hackman, Mary Tyler Moore tries to be Faye Dunaway (older version), Cameron Diaz tries to get out of the frame as quickly as she can (successfully), don't ask about Joanna Going. Eric Stoltz and James Spader try to conceal their embarrassment with this crappy stuff. It delivers endless, meaningless dialog and very little action.

Tulsa is a town with beautiful elevator lobbies, an art deco church by Bruce Goff and a lovely, sprawling mansion by Frank Lloyd Wright. Visit Tulsa, don't watch this movie. It doesn't do the location justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 3562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Unfortunately [[many]] consumers who write [[reviews]] for IMDb [[equate]] low budget with not good. [[Whatever]] [[else]] this [[movie]] might need, more budget [[really]] isn't [[part]] of it. [[Big]] sets and lots of [[special]] [[effects]] would have [[turned]] it into another Lara Croft movie. What we have here is a step or two [[better]] than that.

The [[nearly]] [[unknown]] Alexandra Staden is [[captivating]] as the [[enigmatic]] Modesty, and this is [[crucial]] for this [[movie]] to [[work]]. Her wise little [[smiles]] and [[knowing]] looks are [[formidable]], and you find yourself [[wishing]] that the camera won't leaver her face. It makes it workable that the bad guy [[Nikolai]], played by also little [[known]] (in the U.S. at least) Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau might take an unusually cerebral interest in her, something Modesty can exploit. She is able to divert his raping her with just a shove and spitting out "stop wasting my time!" then storming off between his heavily armed yet suddenly diffident henchmen. Making a scene like that plausible doesn't happen by accident.

Probably the biggest problem I have with the rail-thin Staden playing [[Modesty]] is it just isn't very believable for her to go hand to hand with an athletic and muscled looking guy like Coaster-Waldau and beat him. She just ain't a Peta Wilson or a pumped-up Hilary Swank type actress who can throw a convincing punch. Coaster-Waldau letting himself be overpowered by Staden looks like he's just roughhousing with his little sister.

Since this is not really an action film, this isn't a big flaw. I just hope they do better on that if and when they make sequels. Unfortunately [[numerous]] consumers who write [[appraisals]] for IMDb [[equalize]] low budget with not good. [[Regardless]] [[further]] this [[kino]] might need, more budget [[genuinely]] isn't [[parte]] of it. [[Major]] sets and lots of [[peculiar]] [[implications]] would have [[transformed]] it into another Lara Croft movie. What we have here is a step or two [[best]] than that.

The [[approximately]] [[anonymous]] Alexandra Staden is [[intriguing]] as the [[mysterious]] Modesty, and this is [[pivotal]] for this [[film]] to [[collaborate]]. Her wise little [[laughter]] and [[realise]] looks are [[gargantuan]], and you find yourself [[desiring]] that the camera won't leaver her face. It makes it workable that the bad guy [[Nikolay]], played by also little [[renowned]] (in the U.S. at least) Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau might take an unusually cerebral interest in her, something Modesty can exploit. She is able to divert his raping her with just a shove and spitting out "stop wasting my time!" then storming off between his heavily armed yet suddenly diffident henchmen. Making a scene like that plausible doesn't happen by accident.

Probably the biggest problem I have with the rail-thin Staden playing [[Decency]] is it just isn't very believable for her to go hand to hand with an athletic and muscled looking guy like Coaster-Waldau and beat him. She just ain't a Peta Wilson or a pumped-up Hilary Swank type actress who can throw a convincing punch. Coaster-Waldau letting himself be overpowered by Staden looks like he's just roughhousing with his little sister.

Since this is not really an action film, this isn't a big flaw. I just hope they do better on that if and when they make sequels. --------------------------------------------- Result 3563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] by saying that I'd read a number of reviews before renting this film and kind of knew what to [[expect]]. Still, I was surprised by just how [[bad]] it was.

I am a big werewolf fan, and have grown accustomed to forgiving a great deal when watching one. Most of them have sub-par effects, poor acting, and [[weak]] storylines (at best rehashed from [[earlier]] [[films]]). So far, with the [[possible]] exception of some of the later "[[Howling]]" [[series]] films, this is the [[worst]] of the lot.

[[First]], the story. It's been quoted several times in reviews on this site, so I won't go into [[specifics]]. However, it is very obvious that the writer(s) had absolutely no affinity for lycanthropic monsters. As so [[often]] happens when a horror [[film]] is [[given]] to a writer who considers themselves "above" such fare, they tried to [[come]] up with a [[new]] [[spin]] on the werewolf mythos. That's [[fine]], but a non-horror fan [[trying]] to do this [[generally]] has [[disregard]] for the [[intelligence]] and sophistication of the horror [[audience]] and ends up writing down to them. The plot feels like a [[parody]] of werewolf [[films]], and the [[events]] [[depicted]] just ring so [[false]] that I [[felt]] my [[intelligence]] was being [[seriously]] insulted. [[TV]] news footage, for [[example]], never pans away from the reporter to close-up on [[someone]] in the crowd behind them. Give the characters and the viewers credit for being able to spot the bad [[guy]] in the scene without [[using]] a flashing neon sign. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

As for effects, I have NEVER [[seen]] a less [[believable]] [[werewolf]]. I'd have been happier with Lon [[Chaney]] Jr. in crepe hair. The beast they [[used]] look a [[great]] [[deal]] like... well, like a [[guy]] in a cheap rubber suit with some hair glued on and some [[truly]] [[awful]] animatronics. And, I know that many people have already criticized the CG, but my [[God]] it was awful. One scene [[features]] a [[woman]] [[changing]], and [[starts]] with a [[completely]] CG [[version]] of the actress, nude but for some [[reason]] without [[nipples]]. My first [[thought]] was, "hey, why is one of the characters from 'ReBoot' turning into a silly looking [[werewolf]]?"

Anyway, I like to look for positives in any film, and there were a few. The cinematography was passable (the film was shot all-digital, which is interesting) and some of the performances were not terrible. It was also interesting seeing Tippi Hedron as the world's most well made-up homeless [[woman]], and Kane Hodder as the title [[bad]] guy. [[Also]], the Yellow Power Ranger got all growed up and... well, damn. And if you're looking for skin, there's some pretty tasty examples. This ends the male-pig segment of the review.

Overall, if you want a good werewolf film, try "An American Werewolf in London", the original "The Howling", "Dog Soldiers", or even "The Wolfen" (though that one's got more wolf than were). If you're a lycanthrope completest, then take a gander. Otherwise, give this one a miss. [[Leave]] me [[cranking]] by saying that I'd read a number of reviews before renting this film and kind of knew what to [[expecting]]. Still, I was surprised by just how [[rotten]] it was.

I am a big werewolf fan, and have grown accustomed to forgiving a great deal when watching one. Most of them have sub-par effects, poor acting, and [[feeble]] storylines (at best rehashed from [[prior]] [[movies]]). So far, with the [[doable]] exception of some of the later "[[Shrieking]]" [[serials]] films, this is the [[worse]] of the lot.

[[Outset]], the story. It's been quoted several times in reviews on this site, so I won't go into [[hallmarks]]. However, it is very obvious that the writer(s) had absolutely no affinity for lycanthropic monsters. As so [[normally]] happens when a horror [[movie]] is [[afforded]] to a writer who considers themselves "above" such fare, they tried to [[arrived]] up with a [[novel]] [[spinning]] on the werewolf mythos. That's [[alright]], but a non-horror fan [[attempting]] to do this [[usually]] has [[defiance]] for the [[intellect]] and sophistication of the horror [[viewers]] and ends up writing down to them. The plot feels like a [[comedy]] of werewolf [[movie]], and the [[event]] [[portrayed]] just ring so [[specious]] that I [[smelled]] my [[intelligentsia]] was being [[severely]] insulted. [[TVS]] news footage, for [[cases]], never pans away from the reporter to close-up on [[everybody]] in the crowd behind them. Give the characters and the viewers credit for being able to spot the bad [[buddy]] in the scene without [[utilizes]] a flashing neon sign. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

As for effects, I have NEVER [[watched]] a less [[dependable]] [[werewolves]]. I'd have been happier with Lon [[Cheney]] Jr. in crepe hair. The beast they [[uses]] look a [[resplendent]] [[treat]] like... well, like a [[buddy]] in a cheap rubber suit with some hair glued on and some [[honestly]] [[abhorrent]] animatronics. And, I know that many people have already criticized the CG, but my [[Goodness]] it was awful. One scene [[traits]] a [[girl]] [[modified]], and [[outset]] with a [[absolutely]] CG [[stepping]] of the actress, nude but for some [[cause]] without [[tits]]. My first [[figured]] was, "hey, why is one of the characters from 'ReBoot' turning into a silly looking [[werewolves]]?"

Anyway, I like to look for positives in any film, and there were a few. The cinematography was passable (the film was shot all-digital, which is interesting) and some of the performances were not terrible. It was also interesting seeing Tippi Hedron as the world's most well made-up homeless [[dame]], and Kane Hodder as the title [[amiss]] guy. [[Additionally]], the Yellow Power Ranger got all growed up and... well, damn. And if you're looking for skin, there's some pretty tasty examples. This ends the male-pig segment of the review.

Overall, if you want a good werewolf film, try "An American Werewolf in London", the original "The Howling", "Dog Soldiers", or even "The Wolfen" (though that one's got more wolf than were). If you're a lycanthrope completest, then take a gander. Otherwise, give this one a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 3564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I went to see this movie twice within a week and can only sum it up in one word (which I normally don't use lightly): Wonderful! In my view, the best movie ever made. Who deserves Oscars and other awards if not this Swedish crew who have created cinematic perfection in the last scenes of the film, when everything that is said (and left unsaid) throughout the story is drawn together? Just as the character of Daniel Dareus evokes so many sentiments and long repressed feelings within the people around him, the movie does the same to its viewers: You walk out with your head abuzz and your heart feeling full. Great stuff! Next time you ask yourself "what is the meaning of life", perhaps think about how you feel after a sumptuous experience like As it is in Heaven: Happy, content, fulfilled. To say it with Virginia Woolf's Mrs Dalloway: "Such moments are enough". --------------------------------------------- Result 3565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gundam Wing is a fun show. I appreciate it for getting me into Gundam and anime in general. However, after watching its predecessors, such as Mobile Suit Gundam, Zeta Gundam, and even G Gundam, I find Wing to be Gundam Lite.

Characters: An aspect long held by Gundam is to have their characters thrust into difficulties and grow into maturity. This does not happen in Wing. Heero is top dog at the beginning, and he's top dog at the end. Personalities do not change, growth is never achieved. The best character is Zechs, who is for all intents and purposes a hero throughout most of the series. But suddenly the series betrays him and turns him into a villain for no apparent reason.

Mecha: Wing has great suit designs. The Gundams are super cool, with the Epyon being my favorite. I even consider a few of the OZ suit designs to be on par with some of the classic Zeon suits. But sweet suit designs doesn't quite save the series from boring characters.

Conclusion: In the end, Wing has cool fight scenes, though riddled with recycled animation, but shallow plot and character development. Enjoyable, but not moving like previous Gundam outings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is worth [[watching]] if you enjoy marvelling over special [[effects]]. There are some interesting visuals.

Aside from that, it's typical nineties/aughties hollywood fare of dazzle without [[substance]]. True to the title.

It's not worth picking apart the [[story]]. That's [[like]] performing brain surgery on a dinosaur. There's not much there to [[begin]] with. It's [[nothing]] [[original]] and not very special. So don't [[go]] in for the [[story]] at all. Just look at the effects.

As has been [[mentioned]], it [[got]] a little [[flashy]] at the [[end]], diluting the purity of [[great]] FX treatment of an [[invisible]] (and at [[times]] half [[invisible]]) [[man]]. [[However]] if you [[ignore]] the "[[standard]]" [[pyrotechnics]], it's a sight to [[behold]] (or not to behold).

All in all, it's a [[decent]] FX film worth [[seeing]] for that [[purpose]] and that [[alone]]. This [[filmmaking]] is worth [[staring]] if you enjoy marvelling over special [[implications]]. There are some interesting visuals.

Aside from that, it's typical nineties/aughties hollywood fare of dazzle without [[substances]]. True to the title.

It's not worth picking apart the [[fairytales]]. That's [[iike]] performing brain surgery on a dinosaur. There's not much there to [[launched]] with. It's [[anything]] [[initial]] and not very special. So don't [[going]] in for the [[narratives]] at all. Just look at the effects.

As has been [[referred]], it [[get]] a little [[gaudy]] at the [[ends]], diluting the purity of [[marvellous]] FX treatment of an [[undetectable]] (and at [[moments]] half [[unseen]]) [[bloke]]. [[Nevertheless]] if you [[overlook]] the "[[norms]]" [[firework]], it's a sight to [[admire]] (or not to behold).

All in all, it's a [[dignified]] FX film worth [[witnessing]] for that [[aiming]] and that [[lonely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I had the misfortune of wasting 10 quid buying SS [[new]] movie on DVD: Attack Force. Now i [[usually]] can [[suspend]] my belief watching films like this. A [[pinch]] of salt and some [[beers]] on a [[dark]] evening on the sofa [[watching]] a [[noisy]] late [[evening]] shoot em up is perfect for a [[single]] [[alpha]] [[male]] [[like]] me. I bought this film thinking I'd see cool martial [[arts]] and shoot em up.

Did i [[hell]]. Segal is old and [[bloated]], the plot was [[ludicrous]] even by SS [[standards]] and to cap it all off Segal's acting (such as it was to start with) is [[exceptionally]] [[dire]]. [[So]] [[dire]] in fact that half of his [[voice]] was [[dubbed]] over by a man who sounded NOTHING LIKE HIM. [[Either]] SS [[cant]] [[act]] no more (a moot point) of the crew were so dreadful at their [[jobs]] they couldn't [[record]] the sound properly. The voice [[would]] flick back and forth between [[Mr]] [[Whisper]] Segal and the [[man]] who does [[voice]] overs for Honda [[adverts]]!

Plot wise isn't the [[issue]] because most [[action]] [[films]] [[work]] along the same [[premise]] as this one, nothing new there. The [[usual]] mix of [[characters]] who will [[die]] [[horribly]] as [[cannon]] [[fodder]] and stereotyped bad [[guys]] [[waiting]] to [[get]] [[blown]] away.

[[Avoid]] this [[film]] like you [[would]] [[avoid]] [[walking]] in [[front]] of a speeding train or a [[dose]] of H5N1 avian flu.

[[Utter]] [[garbage]].

1/10

This has been a public [[health]] warning. I had the misfortune of wasting 10 quid buying SS [[novel]] movie on DVD: Attack Force. Now i [[fluently]] can [[ceasing]] my belief watching films like this. A [[clamp]] of salt and some [[cervezas]] on a [[dusky]] evening on the sofa [[staring]] a [[rowdy]] late [[tonight]] shoot em up is perfect for a [[alone]] [[alfa]] [[virile]] [[adores]] me. I bought this film thinking I'd see cool martial [[humanities]] and shoot em up.

Did i [[brothel]]. Segal is old and [[oversized]], the plot was [[stupid]] even by SS [[norms]] and to cap it all off Segal's acting (such as it was to start with) is [[immensely]] [[horrific]]. [[Accordingly]] [[tragic]] in fact that half of his [[vowel]] was [[nicknamed]] over by a man who sounded NOTHING LIKE HIM. [[Neither]] SS [[doesnt]] [[law]] no more (a moot point) of the crew were so dreadful at their [[workplace]] they couldn't [[recordings]] the sound properly. The voice [[could]] flick back and forth between [[Mister]] [[Murmur]] Segal and the [[men]] who does [[vowel]] overs for Honda [[ad]]!

Plot wise isn't the [[question]] because most [[actions]] [[movies]] [[works]] along the same [[assumption]] as this one, nothing new there. The [[normal]] mix of [[characteristics]] who will [[dead]] [[terribly]] as [[barrel]] [[foraging]] and stereotyped bad [[bloke]] [[hoping]] to [[gets]] [[melted]] away.

[[Evade]] this [[filmmaking]] like you [[could]] [[evade]] [[marching]] in [[newsweek]] of a speeding train or a [[doses]] of H5N1 avian flu.

[[Absolute]] [[trash]].

1/10

This has been a public [[hygienic]] warning. --------------------------------------------- Result 3568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Michael]] Curtiz [[directed]] this 1930 very-stylish whodunit from a [[script]] by [[Robert]] Presnell [[Sr]]., Robert N. Lee and [[Peter]] Mine. The [[original]] [[novel]] they [[adapted]] was "The Kennel [[Murder]] [[Case]]", [[perhaps]] from a writer's [[standpoint]] the [[best]] of the Philo Vance [[mysteries]] by the [[strange]] S.S. Van [[Dine]]. Vance was a long-worded and [[superior]] detective [[genius]], and his [[character]] being [[assigned]] to [[William]] Powell [[probably]] [[meant]] the [[executives]] at Warner Brothers were [[aware]] of the [[possibility]] that in less-engaging hands this detective might alienate [[viewers]]. Fortunately they [[assigned]] suave [[William]] Powell first to the character.; [[later]] he was [[played]] by Basil Rathbone, Warren [[William]], and [[Paul]] [[Lukas]] before being consigned to "B" [[picture]] status.The other [[question]] as [[always]] with Warner Brothers [[executives]] is why they [[chose]] Vance as a character; their penchant was to [[choose]] [[men]] who [[operated]] outside the [[law]], with no [[apparent]] [[discrimination]] between a [[vicious]] [[murderer]] and a [[champion]] of individual rights against all [[comers]]. This [[film]] has a [[despicable]] villain who [[gets]] [[murdered]], and a claustrophobically [[challenging]] locale [[inside]] an [[apartment]] complex. The [[characters]] are unarguably [[unusually]] well-realized, the [[direction]] rather good and [[unusually]] swift-paced; and except for a darkish B/W [[look]], the [[film]] [[avoids]] the comedic asides, [[superfluous]] characters and [[irrelevant]] [[dialogue]] [[characteristic]] of many early detective [[entries]]. Jack [[Okey]] did the good art [[direction]]. The music by Berhard Kaun is serviceable; Orry-Kelly did the [[costumes]]. [[William]] Reese [[provided]] the mostly-indoor cinematography. In the interesting cast, Powell is THE Philo Vance of his [[time]], [[mostly]] sober-minded with just a hint of sardonic [[humor]] here and there. [[Eugene]] Palette is [[better]] than [[usual]] playing very straight as an admiring [[police]] partner to Vance, with his very professional [[timing]]. The other actor who [[comes]] off best is [[handsome]] [[Paul]] Cavangh, very effective as [[always]] in what was [[written]] as a red herring [[part]]. [[Mary]] Astor is [[attractive]] but at this point in her [[career]] she [[talked]] a [[bit]] too fast to be as [[effective]] as she [[later]] [[proved]]. [[Also]] in the [[cast]] were [[Helen]] Vinson as the villain's [[woman]], [[Jack]] [[La]] Rue, Ralph Morgan ([[best]] known as Frank Morgan's brother), Robert Barrat as the villain [[everyone]] has cause to [[kill]], [[Archer]] Coe, and Frank Conroy as his likable brother with Robert McWade as the D.A.; quirky and funny Etiienne Girardot has a delightfully witty part as the funny little forensics doctor who comes onto the crime scene. James lee as the abused Chinese servant is excellent and intelligent. The story breaks into four parts. First there is shad doings at a dog show, where Vance, Coe and Cavanagh are all showing West Highland terriers. Cavanagh's dog is killed, by Coe, to prevent him winning the title over his own entry. The second portion of the scene involves a leave-taking; someone is confused enough by who has gone where, after Coe parts from his girl friend, Vinson, to murder his nice brother by mistake. Enter Vance, to find out who did in Archer Coe in a locked room and how, with the help of Palette; the romantic difficulties are straightened out, the Chinese servant is exonerated, we find out who broke the expensive vase, who will marry whom, how Archer Coe was done in and why the butler did not do it--but someone else with a good excuse did. This is a more-than-good little mystery, which skilled Hungarian-born director Curtiz took quite seriously. He used wipes, swift cuts, changes of camera angle and alternations between straightforward and daring camera-work to achieve variety, interest and a sustained pace. Many writers, critics and experts, myself included, consider this to be the best of the Vance projects, although others are estimable as well. [[Michele]] Curtiz [[aimed]] this 1930 very-stylish whodunit from a [[screenplay]] by [[Roberta]] Presnell [[Technics]]., Robert N. Lee and [[Pieter]] Mine. The [[preliminary]] [[newer]] they [[adjust]] was "The Kennel [[Kill]] [[Instances]]", [[conceivably]] from a writer's [[visualise]] the [[better]] of the Philo Vance [[riddles]] by the [[bizarre]] S.S. Van [[Lunchroom]]. Vance was a long-worded and [[top]] detective [[engineering]], and his [[characters]] being [[mapped]] to [[Williams]] Powell [[indubitably]] [[signified]] the [[managerial]] at Warner Brothers were [[conscious]] of the [[likelihood]] that in less-engaging hands this detective might alienate [[audience]]. Fortunately they [[attributed]] suave [[Williams]] Powell first to the character.; [[then]] he was [[accomplished]] by Basil Rathbone, Warren [[Williams]], and [[Paulie]] [[Lucas]] before being consigned to "B" [[photographed]] status.The other [[issue]] as [[consistently]] with Warner Brothers [[managerial]] is why they [[choosing]] Vance as a character; their penchant was to [[selection]] [[man]] who [[functioned]] outside the [[lois]], with no [[palpable]] [[discriminating]] between a [[sadistic]] [[homicidal]] and a [[champions]] of individual rights against all [[newcomers]]. This [[flick]] has a [[repugnant]] villain who [[get]] [[slain]], and a claustrophobically [[problematic]] locale [[within]] an [[condo]] complex. The [[character]] are unarguably [[unnaturally]] well-realized, the [[directions]] rather good and [[abnormally]] swift-paced; and except for a darkish B/W [[gaze]], the [[films]] [[shuns]] the comedic asides, [[worthless]] characters and [[extraneous]] [[dialogues]] [[distinctive]] of many early detective [[entrances]]. Jack [[Alrighty]] did the good art [[orientation]]. The music by Berhard Kaun is serviceable; Orry-Kelly did the [[costume]]. [[Williams]] Reese [[gave]] the mostly-indoor cinematography. In the interesting cast, Powell is THE Philo Vance of his [[period]], [[essentially]] sober-minded with just a hint of sardonic [[mood]] here and there. [[Gonzalez]] Palette is [[best]] than [[routine]] playing very straight as an admiring [[cop]] partner to Vance, with his very professional [[timeline]]. The other actor who [[happens]] off best is [[marvelous]] [[Paolo]] Cavangh, very effective as [[steadily]] in what was [[typed]] as a red herring [[parties]]. [[Marie]] Astor is [[seductive]] but at this point in her [[quarries]] she [[spoke]] a [[bite]] too fast to be as [[efficient]] as she [[then]] [[showed]]. [[Further]] in the [[casting]] were [[Hackett]] Vinson as the villain's [[daughters]], [[Jacques]] [[Las]] Rue, Ralph Morgan ([[better]] known as Frank Morgan's brother), Robert Barrat as the villain [[somebody]] has cause to [[whack]], [[Green]] Coe, and Frank Conroy as his likable brother with Robert McWade as the D.A.; quirky and funny Etiienne Girardot has a delightfully witty part as the funny little forensics doctor who comes onto the crime scene. James lee as the abused Chinese servant is excellent and intelligent. The story breaks into four parts. First there is shad doings at a dog show, where Vance, Coe and Cavanagh are all showing West Highland terriers. Cavanagh's dog is killed, by Coe, to prevent him winning the title over his own entry. The second portion of the scene involves a leave-taking; someone is confused enough by who has gone where, after Coe parts from his girl friend, Vinson, to murder his nice brother by mistake. Enter Vance, to find out who did in Archer Coe in a locked room and how, with the help of Palette; the romantic difficulties are straightened out, the Chinese servant is exonerated, we find out who broke the expensive vase, who will marry whom, how Archer Coe was done in and why the butler did not do it--but someone else with a good excuse did. This is a more-than-good little mystery, which skilled Hungarian-born director Curtiz took quite seriously. He used wipes, swift cuts, changes of camera angle and alternations between straightforward and daring camera-work to achieve variety, interest and a sustained pace. Many writers, critics and experts, myself included, consider this to be the best of the Vance projects, although others are estimable as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3569 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The 4th Pokemon movie [[made]] me [[cry]] when Celebi [[died]]. Don't you dare [[say]] that Pokemon sucks! I don't like it when people [[say]] that.... I've liked Pokemon for 5 or 6 [[years]], so [[everyone]] should [[enjoy]] Pokemon, [[including]] this [[movie]] and other Pokemon movies. So, without further ado, [[please]] say that Pokemon is [[great]] and should be [[enjoyed]] by people for all ages. And [[also]], why do Pokemon-haters [[give]] low [[ratings]] for all or most of the Pokemon [[movies]]? I don't understand.... They shouldn't do that.... There's [[absolutely]] no [[reason]] why people should just [[vote]] without proving that Pokemon sucks besides the fact that: 1) Pokemon is for little kids ONLY. 2) Pokemon is stupid. and 3) People shouldn't like Pokemon. I think this is why people don't like Pokemon. The 4th Pokemon movie [[introduced]] me [[cries]] when Celebi [[dead]]. Don't you dare [[says]] that Pokemon sucks! I don't like it when people [[tell]] that.... I've liked Pokemon for 5 or 6 [[ages]], so [[anyone]] should [[enjoys]] Pokemon, [[encompassing]] this [[movies]] and other Pokemon movies. So, without further ado, [[invites]] say that Pokemon is [[wondrous]] and should be [[liked]] by people for all ages. And [[similarly]], why do Pokemon-haters [[lend]] low [[appraisals]] for all or most of the Pokemon [[cinematography]]? I don't understand.... They shouldn't do that.... There's [[utterly]] no [[raison]] why people should just [[voting]] without proving that Pokemon sucks besides the fact that: 1) Pokemon is for little kids ONLY. 2) Pokemon is stupid. and 3) People shouldn't like Pokemon. I think this is why people don't like Pokemon. --------------------------------------------- Result 3570 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Reese Witherspoon plays [[Dani]], a young [[country]] girl that falls madly in [[love]] with the new 17 year old [[neighbor]], [[Court]], [[played]] by Jason London. [[Court]] tries his best to make Dani realize that the difference in their [[ages]] [[would]] make a love relationship improbable. [[Soon]] the nubile charm of Dani starts [[winning]] over Court's will. Next enters the meeting of Dani's [[older]] sister, [[played]] by Emily Warfield, and the beginning of a short [[lived]] [[love]]/jealousy [[problem]].

[[Tess]] Harper and Sam Waterston [[round]] out the cast. This is a fresh, free spirited; but heartbreaking drama that [[touches]] down deep. Feel free to cry. Reese Witherspoon plays [[Danny]], a young [[countries]] girl that falls madly in [[loves]] with the new 17 year old [[voisin]], [[Courthouse]], [[done]] by Jason London. [[Tribunal]] tries his best to make Dani realize that the difference in their [[centuries]] [[ought]] make a love relationship improbable. [[Quick]] the nubile charm of Dani starts [[won]] over Court's will. Next enters the meeting of Dani's [[elder]] sister, [[done]] by Emily Warfield, and the beginning of a short [[resided]] [[adored]]/jealousy [[problems]].

[[Benedict]] Harper and Sam Waterston [[redondo]] out the cast. This is a fresh, free spirited; but heartbreaking drama that [[afflicts]] down deep. Feel free to cry. --------------------------------------------- Result 3571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The 12th animated Disney classic is a reasonable movie told through a simple story. Even though a little dated, it deserves a place in the list of Disney classics.

It's not among Disney's top works, but is satisfying. One of Disney's most "simple" works, yes, but keeps a certain magic and enchantment (which old Disney is well known for). This was an important movie because it saved Disney from a delicate situation. If this was a failure, there wouldn't be any more Disney animated classics.

"Cinderella" is somehow like a return to Disney's 1st animated classic ("Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs") because it brings back the fairy tale genre. It's not clear where the story takes place, but I suppose it's somewhere in France because this is based in a tale by Charles Perrault.

There are plenty of likable characters, such as Cinderella, the Prince, Bruno (the dog), Jaques and Gus (the two main mice), the Fairy Godmother (for a fairy she sure is funny), the birds, the King and the Grand Duke.

Jaques is very smart and amusing. I love his voice. Really has that mouse-like quality. Gus might not be that smart, but he's humorous.

The King is hilarious, but I think that what makes him so funny is his short temper. The Grand Duke is a very cool chap and funny too. They're two of my favorite characters in this film and responsible for many of the most amusing moments.

The Prince is certainly one of the most charming in Disney. No doubt that Prince Philip from "Sleeping Beauty" was inspired on this prince, because they are very similar-looking.

On the other hand, Lady Tremaine (the stepmother) isn't supposed to be likable because she's cold, jealous, bitter and cruel. Her daughters (Anastacia and Drizella) aren't much better than her. However, the stepmother isn't as annoying as her ugly and selfish daughters. Cinderella, the main character, has nothing to do with them. Cinderella is gentle, kind, pretty and lovable. By the way, I think her beautiful pink dress is much nicer than the one given by the Fairy Godmother.

Lucifer (the cat) is hilariously malicious. The way he walks, sticking up his nose in the air and those arrogant and snobbish facial expressions make him funny. Ironically he's very much like the stepmother when it comes to personality. He always agrees with the stepmother's attitudes towards Cinderella. Lucifer has the right name for him because he's such a devilish and mean cat. Yet, there's nothing annoying about him.

The soundtrack is simple but pleasant, although not among Disney's best. The best song in this movie is "Bibiddi Bobiddi Boo".

There are plenty of well known talented voice actors in this, such as James MacDonald, Marion Darlington, Eleanor Audley, Verna Felton and Luis Van Rooten.

Despite being simple-looking, the movie has good artwork, as well as its nice details, although never something "out-of-this-world". However, the King's palace is a spectacular masterpiece, being truly majestic and colossal. --------------------------------------------- Result 3572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had the pleasure of viewing this movie early and I have to say I thought that it was going to be boring and wondered how could they ever improve upon the 1984 version of Bachelor Party starring Tom Hanks, which I thought was pretty good...I was right...In all honesty I thought it could have been better...Sure there were some funny moments but it just didn't seem to hit the mark with me...The acting was OK and the storyline pretty well follows the original but I think it could have been so much better...This movie I'd say is for teens and the young of heart; full of female bodies, alcohol and sex...It's just another typical run of the mill party movie that has been done over and over again. 4/10 is my vote for this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3573 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] (48 out of 278 people found this [[comment]] useful, and [[counting]]...)

People are such suckers for image and [[looks]] - as much as for the intellectually [[hollow]] "idealism" that lurks behind Communism. Che's charisma and looks have as much to do with his [[iconic]] stature as the misinformation that has been [[spread]] by Leftist [[propaganda]] (such as this movie) about him.

I don't know what's worse: being captured by one of Che's murder-squads or having to [[sit]] through 4 hours of this typically Soderberghian [[garbage]]. The [[question]] isn't why this pet-project was made but what [[took]] them so [[long]]. By "them" I'm referring, of course, to Left-wing Hollywood and its "[[secret]]" [[love]] of Marxist tyrants (Lenin, Castro... take your [[pick]]). I am [[fascinated]] that it [[took]] decades for one of Tinseltown's [[least]] [[talented]] liberal [[directors]] to finally take on such an irresistibly biased [[propaganda]] project. [[Where]] was Oliver Stone all these years? Robert Redford? Tim Robbins? Warren [[Beatty]]? [[Alan]] Pakula? [[George]] Clooney? Barbra Streisand even? It's a [[mystery]]. All these overrated "[[artists]]" have [[often]] indulging themselves in [[similar]], politically one-sided [[projects]], yet [[somehow]] Che Guevara, who is [[arguably]] the most [[popular]] and well-known [[Communist]], hasn't been a film [[topic]] of theirs [[yet]].

"[[Guerrilla]]" has all the [[hallmarks]] of an American truth-bending [[story]] of an epic scale; there is as much factual [[detail]] to be [[found]] here as in other [[similar]] Hollywood big-budget political fairy-tale bios such as "Malcolm X" or "Gandhi", i.[[e]]. almost [[none]]. The [[movie]] stars Del Toro as the [[famous]] [[Argentinian]] [[revolutionary]]. [[Nevertheless]], however controversial and criminal this man's [[actions]] may have been, one thing nobody [[could]] take away from him: he was an [[intelligent]] manipulator who [[came]] from a rich [[family]] - which is why Del Toro [[fits]] the [[bill]] only visually. Del Toro may be an interesting, charismatic actor and he [[may]] [[resemble]] Guevara physically, but he [[exudes]] no intellectual [[qualities]] whatsoever, [[hence]] he makes Guevara come off as too [[primitive]]. [[Casting]] such mediocrities as Bratt, Philips and Franka Incompetente only underlines the director's lack of sound judgment.

The movie is to the most part extremely slow (no surprise there), and visually uninteresting. Even a director as brilliant as Kubrick would have carefully considered releasing a movie that goes beyond the 3-hour mark, so it's quite telling that this Soderbergh, who has only made one or two solid movies and early on in his career, would think that His Oceanic Grandness was up to the task. If you think the film's length indicates that a bulk of Che's life has been shown here - then think again. Soderbergh focuses on Che's last phase, and a lot of the movie is tedious jungle nonsense, full of Guevara's alleged idealism. (Psychopaths don't have ideals.) I do wonder what kind of a mind this highly esteemed director has to have to actually choose to ignore some of Che's earlier life. Did he actually consider it too uninteresting? A massacre of 600 people holds no interest for the viewer, huh? Amazing. Some much better directors than this over-praised charlatan would have easily fit not one but two complete biographies into a 4-hour movie.

Soderbergh, in a sense, becomes an accomplice by never addressing the negative, dark side - which is more than 90% - of Guevara. By spreading this kind of historical inaccuracy, consciously ignoring the ugly truth (God forbid he should taint the holy image of Che), Soderbergh proves himself not a humanist - a fake image which most Hollywood and pop music personalities struggle very hard all their careers to uphold - but the opposite: that he cares only about ideas, never about the people on whom these ideas are tested (like on guinea pigs). Soderbergh and the like are elitists of the worst kind; such people often have a latent contempt for the "proleteriat" (what a stupid term) they're supposedly siding with.

Half of all students around the world wear Che's image on their red and orange shirts, but without ever knowing why. He has become an iconic figure for clueless, uninformed, very often young people, who think that by having this man's face on their chest that somehow makes them appear "edgy", intellectual, hip or interesting. In reality, wearing a Che shirt only underlines one's overall shallowness and total disinterest in self-education. (Wouldn't YOU want to find out more about a person before you start advertising his/her face to the world?) Wearing Che's by-now cliché image has become as common as having a Bart Simpson coffee cup. All those "Che-wearers" probably know more about Marge's blue hair than they'll ever read up on about Fidel Castro's dead ally.

After everything that'd been done in the name of Marx, one would think that these mongrel "ideals" would be finally laid to rest. It seems mankind will never learn. Stalin, Mao, Kim Il, Pol Pot, Castro, Milosevic, Ceausescu, the Iron Curtain, a hundred million dead, more than a billion ruined physically and/or mentally through this system... so none of that matters, huh?

The fact that Del Toro won a Cannes Award should only surprise those who are absolutely clueless as to how Cannes and other European festivals work - and vote. Hint: Sean Penn headed a jury not long ago.

For my music-related rants, go to: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/Fedor8/ (48 out of 278 people found this [[remark]] useful, and [[counts]]...)

People are such suckers for image and [[seem]] - as much as for the intellectually [[empty]] "idealism" that lurks behind Communism. Che's charisma and looks have as much to do with his [[emblematic]] stature as the misinformation that has been [[spreading]] by Leftist [[publicity]] (such as this movie) about him.

I don't know what's worse: being captured by one of Che's murder-squads or having to [[seated]] through 4 hours of this typically Soderberghian [[detritus]]. The [[matter]] isn't why this pet-project was made but what [[picked]] them so [[longer]]. By "them" I'm referring, of course, to Left-wing Hollywood and its "[[undercover]]" [[amour]] of Marxist tyrants (Lenin, Castro... take your [[choices]]). I am [[mesmerised]] that it [[taken]] decades for one of Tinseltown's [[lowest]] [[gifted]] liberal [[managers]] to finally take on such an irresistibly biased [[publicity]] project. [[Hence]] was Oliver Stone all these years? Robert Redford? Tim Robbins? Warren [[Betty]]? [[Alain]] Pakula? [[Giorgi]] Clooney? Barbra Streisand even? It's a [[enigma]]. All these overrated "[[painters]]" have [[normally]] indulging themselves in [[comparable]], politically one-sided [[project]], yet [[someplace]] Che Guevara, who is [[unquestionably]] the most [[fashionable]] and well-known [[Communism]], hasn't been a film [[theme]] of theirs [[however]].

"[[Insurgents]]" has all the [[peculiarities]] of an American truth-bending [[storytelling]] of an epic scale; there is as much factual [[clarification]] to be [[uncovered]] here as in other [[comparable]] Hollywood big-budget political fairy-tale bios such as "Malcolm X" or "Gandhi", i.[[f]]. almost [[nothing]]. The [[filmmaking]] stars Del Toro as the [[notorious]] [[Argentine]] [[pioneering]]. [[Albeit]], however controversial and criminal this man's [[activities]] may have been, one thing nobody [[did]] take away from him: he was an [[artful]] manipulator who [[became]] from a rich [[familial]] - which is why Del Toro [[adjusts]] the [[invoices]] only visually. Del Toro may be an interesting, charismatic actor and he [[maggio]] [[resembled]] Guevara physically, but he [[oozes]] no intellectual [[qualifications]] whatsoever, [[so]] he makes Guevara come off as too [[primal]]. [[Foundry]] such mediocrities as Bratt, Philips and Franka Incompetente only underlines the director's lack of sound judgment.

The movie is to the most part extremely slow (no surprise there), and visually uninteresting. Even a director as brilliant as Kubrick would have carefully considered releasing a movie that goes beyond the 3-hour mark, so it's quite telling that this Soderbergh, who has only made one or two solid movies and early on in his career, would think that His Oceanic Grandness was up to the task. If you think the film's length indicates that a bulk of Che's life has been shown here - then think again. Soderbergh focuses on Che's last phase, and a lot of the movie is tedious jungle nonsense, full of Guevara's alleged idealism. (Psychopaths don't have ideals.) I do wonder what kind of a mind this highly esteemed director has to have to actually choose to ignore some of Che's earlier life. Did he actually consider it too uninteresting? A massacre of 600 people holds no interest for the viewer, huh? Amazing. Some much better directors than this over-praised charlatan would have easily fit not one but two complete biographies into a 4-hour movie.

Soderbergh, in a sense, becomes an accomplice by never addressing the negative, dark side - which is more than 90% - of Guevara. By spreading this kind of historical inaccuracy, consciously ignoring the ugly truth (God forbid he should taint the holy image of Che), Soderbergh proves himself not a humanist - a fake image which most Hollywood and pop music personalities struggle very hard all their careers to uphold - but the opposite: that he cares only about ideas, never about the people on whom these ideas are tested (like on guinea pigs). Soderbergh and the like are elitists of the worst kind; such people often have a latent contempt for the "proleteriat" (what a stupid term) they're supposedly siding with.

Half of all students around the world wear Che's image on their red and orange shirts, but without ever knowing why. He has become an iconic figure for clueless, uninformed, very often young people, who think that by having this man's face on their chest that somehow makes them appear "edgy", intellectual, hip or interesting. In reality, wearing a Che shirt only underlines one's overall shallowness and total disinterest in self-education. (Wouldn't YOU want to find out more about a person before you start advertising his/her face to the world?) Wearing Che's by-now cliché image has become as common as having a Bart Simpson coffee cup. All those "Che-wearers" probably know more about Marge's blue hair than they'll ever read up on about Fidel Castro's dead ally.

After everything that'd been done in the name of Marx, one would think that these mongrel "ideals" would be finally laid to rest. It seems mankind will never learn. Stalin, Mao, Kim Il, Pol Pot, Castro, Milosevic, Ceausescu, the Iron Curtain, a hundred million dead, more than a billion ruined physically and/or mentally through this system... so none of that matters, huh?

The fact that Del Toro won a Cannes Award should only surprise those who are absolutely clueless as to how Cannes and other European festivals work - and vote. Hint: Sean Penn headed a jury not long ago.

For my music-related rants, go to: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/Fedor8/ --------------------------------------------- Result 3574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I am a [[huge]] [[fan]] of warrior [[movies]]. Some of my [[favorites]] are Braveheart, [[Troy]], The last samurai and Gladiator. And after watching [[Mongol]], which is [[absolutely]] [[awesome]], and which i [[strongly]] [[recommend]], i had [[high]] [[expectations]] from a [[Sergei]] Bodrov movie. But it was [[terrible]], [[awful]], [[even]] [[pathetic]] is not a strong word in this [[case]]. The whole [[movie]] i was waiting for something exciting to happen, but it didn't, then i was at [[least]] [[expecting]] a big epic [[battle]] at the end, but [[even]] that was a [[huge]] [[disappointment]], just some random [[running]] around, waving with the [[swords]]... There are so [[many]] [[good]] warrior movies, this one is not one of them. I am a [[whopping]] [[ventilator]] of warrior [[movie]]. Some of my [[favourite]] are Braveheart, [[Trojan]], The last samurai and Gladiator. And after watching [[Mongols]], which is [[altogether]] [[sumptuous]], and which i [[decisively]] [[recommends]], i had [[highest]] [[outlook]] from a [[Bogdan]] Bodrov movie. But it was [[scary]], [[abhorrent]], [[yet]] [[regrettable]] is not a strong word in this [[instance]]. The whole [[filmmaking]] i was waiting for something exciting to happen, but it didn't, then i was at [[lowest]] [[waiting]] a big epic [[struggle]] at the end, but [[yet]] that was a [[whopping]] [[frustration]], just some random [[executing]] around, waving with the [[sword]]... There are so [[various]] [[alright]] warrior movies, this one is not one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] It is [[incredible]] that with all of the [[countless]] crimes that have been [[uncovered]] and laid unequivocally at the doorstep of [[Marxism]], from the Berlin Wall to the Gulag archipelago to the Cultural Revolution to the [[Khmer]] Rouge, one [[still]] [[finds]] admirers of Communist totalitarianism in Hollywood and are still making propaganda in its favor. It just [[shows]] the [[moral]] depravity of Hollywood.

In this [[particular]] film a psychotic murderer is glorified. Needless to say that neither his crimes nor his psychotic proclamations were included. That both the [[director]] and the actor expect audiences to [[sit]] through this seemingly [[interminable]] propagandistic [[film]] demonstrates the [[tunnel]] [[vision]] that they have in regards to their object of worship. It is [[spectacular]] that with all of the [[multiple]] crimes that have been [[discovered]] and laid unequivocally at the doorstep of [[Marx]], from the Berlin Wall to the Gulag archipelago to the Cultural Revolution to the [[Rode]] Rouge, one [[however]] [[deems]] admirers of Communist totalitarianism in Hollywood and are still making propaganda in its favor. It just [[exposition]] the [[ethical]] depravity of Hollywood.

In this [[unique]] film a psychotic murderer is glorified. Needless to say that neither his crimes nor his psychotic proclamations were included. That both the [[superintendent]] and the actor expect audiences to [[assis]] through this seemingly [[inexhaustible]] propagandistic [[cinematographic]] demonstrates the [[tunnels]] [[insight]] that they have in regards to their object of worship. --------------------------------------------- Result 3576 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always liked Spike Lee's movies, but this one was a total waste of 2 1/2 hours. I expected more about Son of Sam and instead got a movie that seemed to have very little to do with the 1977 serial killings. The talking dog was laughable (you know you're in trouble when all the movie patrons burst into laughter inappropriately). The whole movie seemed very disjointed and not very interesting. The sex scenes were totally irrelevent to the plot. I'm not opposed to sex in movies, but it should have some point (unless it's a XXX movie). All in all, we were very disappointed at this Spike Lee effort!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All this dismaying waste of film stock needs is Count Floyd popping up every sixty seconds. Somehow they got Steve Railsback, Susan Anspach, John Vernon, and Joe Flaherty together on a set and couldn't get within five miles, about eight kilometers, of an actual movie. BOY does this thing suck. There isn't one original line, thought, shot, or effect from brainless opening sequence to brainless close. The magical, ethereal Susan Anspach of Five Easy Pieces - boring. Steve Railsback - boring. John Vernon - boring. The big bug - boring. If this is a scary movie, Buttercream Gang is a thuglife documentary.

Seriously - every bad movie contains its own explanation of its badness. Usually it's in the opening credits - "Written, Directed, and Produced by" one guy. Or at the very center of the action is some bimbo so talentless that you know there's one and only one reason this turkey got made. Here, you don't find out till the very last of the credits, where the cooperation of about a dozen subfunctions of the Canadian Government is gratefully acknowledged.

Right now I'm watching MST's take on Beast of Yucca Flats to get the taste out of my mouth. Ghod, what an improvement. --------------------------------------------- Result 3578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Typical]] Troma-trash, this smutty 80's flick is considered one of the "[[highlights]]" of Lloyd Kaufman's [[notorious]] [[production]] studio, [[alongside]] "The [[Toxic]] Avenger" [[released]] one year [[earlier]]. "The [[Toxic]] Avenger" is far [[superior]] if you [[ask]] me, but this [[demented]] splatter-flick is nevertheless endurable as well; just [[make]] sure you [[leave]] your full brain [[capacity]] at the [[door]]. The [[events]] [[take]] place in Tromaville, a little [[town]] that proudly [[claims]] to be the [[toxic]] chemical capital of the [[world]], and they [[certainly]] aren't [[lying]]. The safety precautions in the local nuclear power [[plant]] are substandard, to [[say]] the [[least]] (even Homer [[Simpson]] never was this [[nonchalant]]) and toxic waste seeps through to the nearby high school. The first intoxicated [[victim]] is the stereotypical [[nerd]], who starts spurting green stuff out of all his body cavities, but his death is believed to be an [[accident]] because he had no less than TWO microwave [[ovens]] in his house! Oh, the humanity! Shortly after, however, the nuclear [[leaks]] also affect the school's weed plantation and thing really start to get messy. After smoking a joint at a party, the cutest couple in school produce a gigantic worm monster that settles in the basement and feeds on teenage scum. "Class of Nuke 'em High" is bottom-of-the-barrel horror film-making, with dialogs so dumb they hurt your ears and make-up effects that give a whole new meaning to the word tasteless. If you enjoy watching faces melting away, getting crushed or splitting in half, this is definitely a must-see! Unlike the aforementioned "The Toxic Avenger", this film suffers from a couple of really dull and overlong moments where nothing really significant happens, like for example when Chrissy and Warren try to figure out what's wrong with their hormones. The crude humor isn't as effective as in "Toxic Avenger" and the acting performances are unforgivably [[amateurish]]. Proceed only if you're an avid Troma-fanatic. [[Characteristic]] Troma-trash, this smutty 80's flick is considered one of the "[[stressing]]" of Lloyd Kaufman's [[prestigious]] [[productivity]] studio, [[beside]] "The [[Prejudicial]] Avenger" [[releases]] one year [[formerly]]. "The [[Prejudicial]] Avenger" is far [[upper]] if you [[wondering]] me, but this [[psycho]] splatter-flick is nevertheless endurable as well; just [[deliver]] sure you [[letting]] your full brain [[abilities]] at the [[stargate]]. The [[event]] [[taking]] place in Tromaville, a little [[ciudad]] that proudly [[claim]] to be the [[poisonous]] chemical capital of the [[globe]], and they [[definitely]] aren't [[lies]]. The safety precautions in the local nuclear power [[installations]] are substandard, to [[said]] the [[fewer]] (even Homer [[Simpsons]] never was this [[flippant]]) and toxic waste seeps through to the nearby high school. The first intoxicated [[victims]] is the stereotypical [[geek]], who starts spurting green stuff out of all his body cavities, but his death is believed to be an [[casualty]] because he had no less than TWO microwave [[furnaces]] in his house! Oh, the humanity! Shortly after, however, the nuclear [[leak]] also affect the school's weed plantation and thing really start to get messy. After smoking a joint at a party, the cutest couple in school produce a gigantic worm monster that settles in the basement and feeds on teenage scum. "Class of Nuke 'em High" is bottom-of-the-barrel horror film-making, with dialogs so dumb they hurt your ears and make-up effects that give a whole new meaning to the word tasteless. If you enjoy watching faces melting away, getting crushed or splitting in half, this is definitely a must-see! Unlike the aforementioned "The Toxic Avenger", this film suffers from a couple of really dull and overlong moments where nothing really significant happens, like for example when Chrissy and Warren try to figure out what's wrong with their hormones. The crude humor isn't as effective as in "Toxic Avenger" and the acting performances are unforgivably [[unprofessional]]. Proceed only if you're an avid Troma-fanatic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't really like this movie that much at all. It wasn't really funny and in some cases it was just downright stupid. Rob Schneider is definitely one enormously talented individual and while his acting was fine in this, it just seemed like a real waste for him to star in. I mean there were some parts that were okay and somewhat humorous in a cute kind of way but that's about it. The only thing that actually caught my attention during this whole ordeal of over the top jokes was that there were some very good looking females present and I'm not one to watch a movie solely because of that but in this case it was the only nook where even the slightest case of redemption could be found. All in all it was a couple notches below an average movie!

Final Query:

Theaters: So glad I didn't squander too much money on this.

DVD Purchase: Ummm, let me think....no!

Rental: If you have a prehistoric sense of humor then why not. --------------------------------------------- Result 3580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Quite]] [[simply]] the [[best]] reality show ever made. The [[first]] two seasons (the only ones that matter) are on Hulu. I [[challenge]] [[anyone]] to watch the first three episodes of season 1 and not like it. I [[guarantee]] you will finish [[watching]] the season. Then I [[guarantee]] that you will watch season 2.

Other [[quick]] [[reasons]] to watch it: 1. Anderson Cooper is [[hilarious]] 2. The [[locations]] in Europe are awesome 3. The [[games]] are mentally challenging 4. It's very interactive 5. [[In]] one episode a [[player]] [[responds]] to another player's desperate, "I'm [[trying]] as [[hard]] as I can!" with an [[equally]] desperate, "Not necessarily."

Can you [[figure]] out...Who Is The [[Mole]]? [[Pretty]] [[mere]] the [[bestest]] reality show ever made. The [[frst]] two seasons (the only ones that matter) are on Hulu. I [[challenges]] [[someone]] to watch the first three episodes of season 1 and not like it. I [[guaranteed]] you will finish [[staring]] the season. Then I [[warranty]] that you will watch season 2.

Other [[fastest]] [[motivation]] to watch it: 1. Anderson Cooper is [[funny]] 2. The [[site]] in Europe are awesome 3. The [[game]] are mentally challenging 4. It's very interactive 5. [[Among]] one episode a [[protagonist]] [[replied]] to another player's desperate, "I'm [[attempting]] as [[laborious]] as I can!" with an [[similarly]] desperate, "Not necessarily."

Can you [[silhouette]] out...Who Is The [[Snitch]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 3581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[gave]] this film an 10/10 with some [[reluctance]] as it's hard to praise something that so [[haunted]] and terrified me for years. The sheer [[menace]] on the [[woman]] in black's face is just pure horror and the accompanying music just worsens the [[dread]].

I saw this when it was first on TV when I was 10 and it really did disturb me for [[years]]. I'm [[fascinated]] by the fact that so many other users have said this too. So [[many]] movie [[reviews]] go on about how disturbing or terrifying a film might be but you can believe all those who have posted on this board, this really is [[incredibly]] [[powerful]] stuff. I [[mean]] I really like [[horror]] films and generally find them quite funny more often than not, but this really is menacing and will probably disturb most people. I haven't seen it since I was 10 and I'm tempted to watch it again but fear I might have some sleepless nights. I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly, but I think it's something to do with the fact that fear is the Woman's greatest weapon and that we, as viewers, are just as susceptible as we feel the fear so intensely. It's remarkable that other viewers' feelings are so unanimous.

I've also seen the stage play, which was an excellent production...but [[nothing]] can [[compare]] to this. I [[provided]] this film an 10/10 with some [[indecision]] as it's hard to praise something that so [[obsessed]] and terrified me for years. The sheer [[threat]] on the [[femmes]] in black's face is just pure horror and the accompanying music just worsens the [[angst]].

I saw this when it was first on TV when I was 10 and it really did disturb me for [[olds]]. I'm [[preoccupied]] by the fact that so many other users have said this too. So [[multiple]] movie [[exams]] go on about how disturbing or terrifying a film might be but you can believe all those who have posted on this board, this really is [[unbelievably]] [[mighty]] stuff. I [[signify]] I really like [[abomination]] films and generally find them quite funny more often than not, but this really is menacing and will probably disturb most people. I haven't seen it since I was 10 and I'm tempted to watch it again but fear I might have some sleepless nights. I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly, but I think it's something to do with the fact that fear is the Woman's greatest weapon and that we, as viewers, are just as susceptible as we feel the fear so intensely. It's remarkable that other viewers' feelings are so unanimous.

I've also seen the stage play, which was an excellent production...but [[anything]] can [[comparative]] to this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Even]] [[though]] there's a repertoire of over 180 [[films]] to [[choose]] from, this 'Succubus' is [[often]] named as THE [[best]] Jess [[Franco]] [[film]]. [[Heck]], [[even]] the [[legendary]] filmmaker Fritz [[Lang]] [[counts]] 'Succubus' [[among]] his personal [[favorites]]. [[So]], [[maybe]] it's me but I thought this was a [[dreadfully]] boring and overly confusing movie. The [[opening]] is great, [[though]], and shows [[Janine]] Reynaud performing an SM act on stage. It's all downhill from here, unfortunately. Reynaud's character is a maneater who eventually kills her lovers in some sort of trance. Franco had a decent budget to work with and spends it well on nice locations, beautiful photography and a mesmerizing musical score. This [[COULD]] have been his greatest film indeed, if it wasn't for the lame and uninteresting story. It's supposed to be psychedelic but I'd say sophomoric is a better term to describe what's shown here. Half of the time, you don't have a clue what's going on or what exactly is said so even the short running time of 80 minutes seems to last ages. This most certainly isn't Franco's best film according to me. I wouldn't even recommend it to die-hard exploitation fans. If you're looking for more superior Jess [[Franco]] film, try to get your hands on 'Las Vampiras', 'The awful Dr. Orloff' or 'Female Vampire'. [[Yet]] [[despite]] there's a repertoire of over 180 [[cinema]] to [[opted]] from, this 'Succubus' is [[commonly]] named as THE [[optimum]] Jess [[Franko]] [[flick]]. [[Devil]], [[yet]] the [[mythical]] filmmaker Fritz [[Lengthy]] [[counting]] 'Succubus' [[between]] his personal [[favourite]]. [[Accordingly]], [[presumably]] it's me but I thought this was a [[terribly]] boring and overly confusing movie. The [[initiation]] is great, [[despite]], and shows [[Jeannine]] Reynaud performing an SM act on stage. It's all downhill from here, unfortunately. Reynaud's character is a maneater who eventually kills her lovers in some sort of trance. Franco had a decent budget to work with and spends it well on nice locations, beautiful photography and a mesmerizing musical score. This [[DID]] have been his greatest film indeed, if it wasn't for the lame and uninteresting story. It's supposed to be psychedelic but I'd say sophomoric is a better term to describe what's shown here. Half of the time, you don't have a clue what's going on or what exactly is said so even the short running time of 80 minutes seems to last ages. This most certainly isn't Franco's best film according to me. I wouldn't even recommend it to die-hard exploitation fans. If you're looking for more superior Jess [[Franko]] film, try to get your hands on 'Las Vampiras', 'The awful Dr. Orloff' or 'Female Vampire'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This is [[perhaps]] the [[best]] rockumentary ever- a British, better This Is Spinal Tap. The [[characters]] are [[believable]], the plot is [[great]], and you can [[genuinely]] [[empathise]] with some of the events- such as Ray's [[problem]] with [[fitting]] in the [[band]].

The soundtrack is [[excellent]]. [[Real]] [[period]] stuff, [[even]] if it is in the same key, you'll be humming some of the [[songs]] for days. What I [[liked]] was the [[nearly]] all-British cast, with some of the [[favourite]] [[household]] names. Ray's [[wife]] is [[priceless]]...

The [[film]] never drags, it just goes at the right [[pace]], and has some [[genuinely]] [[funny]] sections in it. A [[generator]] of some really good catchphrases!

It's a [[hidden]] diamond. This is [[potentially]] the [[nicest]] rockumentary ever- a British, better This Is Spinal Tap. The [[attribute]] are [[credible]], the plot is [[wondrous]], and you can [[actually]] [[commiserate]] with some of the events- such as Ray's [[problems]] with [[fit]] in the [[banding]].

The soundtrack is [[wondrous]]. [[Actual]] [[calendars]] stuff, [[yet]] if it is in the same key, you'll be humming some of the [[hymns]] for days. What I [[wished]] was the [[roughly]] all-British cast, with some of the [[favored]] [[dwelling]] names. Ray's [[women]] is [[cherish]]...

The [[movie]] never drags, it just goes at the right [[rhythm]], and has some [[actually]] [[comical]] sections in it. A [[generators]] of some really good catchphrases!

It's a [[disguised]] diamond. --------------------------------------------- Result 3584 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[When]] watching this show you are not [[quite]] sure whether it is the [[story]] or the acting that is more annoying. First of all, the storyline of each episode is very predictable, the writers [[must]] have used [[every]] cliché [[possible]], you can [[guess]] not only the [[general]] [[plot]], but the [[arrangement]] of the scenes and [[also]] the lines of each character, making the show some [[sort]] of a [[collage]] of every [[police]] series out there. [[On]] the [[top]] of it all [[comes]] the "message" of the [[show]], that the good are good and the [[bad]] are bad and that at the [[end]] of the day the [[good]] shall prevail and that we should all [[love]] each other, be better [[man]] and [[better]] citizens, all [[done]] in the most ostensible [[manner]]. The actors, as the vehicles of this [[message]] and [[nothing]] more than that, will [[use]] a [[limited]] set of acting [[skills]]: the "I am a good [[carrying]] [[person]]" [[smile]], the [[concerned]] look and the "[[victory]] is ours" body [[posture]], while the [[bad]] guys have the "I'm a [[bad]] one" frowning and the "you caught me" look, followed by the "I'm good for [[nothing]] and I should be [[removed]] from society" [[head]] banding (this [[kind]] of [[also]] [[sums]] up the [[general]] development of each show). True [[story]] or not, the show is [[garbage]], yet another [[proof]] that [[producers]] don't give a s**t about [[viewers]], that we are all [[thought]] to be idiots. Well this series makes every possible [[attempt]] to idiotize the living brains out of you. [[Whenever]] watching this show you are not [[very]] sure whether it is the [[saga]] or the acting that is more annoying. First of all, the storyline of each episode is very predictable, the writers [[gotta]] have used [[each]] cliché [[conceivable]], you can [[guessing]] not only the [[overall]] [[intrigue]], but the [[agreement]] of the scenes and [[further]] the lines of each character, making the show some [[kinds]] of a [[fining]] of every [[nypd]] series out there. [[Onto]] the [[superior]] of it all [[arises]] the "message" of the [[spectacle]], that the good are good and the [[negative]] are bad and that at the [[termination]] of the day the [[alright]] shall prevail and that we should all [[loved]] each other, be better [[men]] and [[best]] citizens, all [[performed]] in the most ostensible [[mode]]. The actors, as the vehicles of this [[messaging]] and [[none]] more than that, will [[utilize]] a [[restrained]] set of acting [[dexterity]]: the "I am a good [[carries]] [[persona]]" [[smiles]], the [[apprehensive]] look and the "[[victoire]] is ours" body [[position]], while the [[naughty]] guys have the "I'm a [[negative]] one" frowning and the "you caught me" look, followed by the "I'm good for [[anything]] and I should be [[deleted]] from society" [[chief]] banding (this [[genre]] of [[additionally]] [[monies]] up the [[overall]] development of each show). True [[fairytales]] or not, the show is [[detritus]], yet another [[evidentiary]] that [[growers]] don't give a s**t about [[bystanders]], that we are all [[think]] to be idiots. Well this series makes every possible [[attempts]] to idiotize the living brains out of you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3585 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first half hour of the movie had a steady pace and introduced the characters. however all of a sudden everything was happening too quick, a lame reason for Akshey Kumar to date 3 girls, very loud over acting by both Akshey and John Abraham. Neha Dupia was the highlight of the movie, Paresh Rawal did well but not as good as his performance in Hera Pheri. overall this movie was the biggest disappointment the film does no justice to its trailer. save your money and don't watch this movie, watch Hera Pheri and Hungama again!

summarising it: a cheap stage show performance and appearance to the film no story or substance, the plot was extraordinarily non-sense good music by Preetam the man who bought us Dhoom! keep it up! movie shot all in one room, new comers (female cast) were okay as it was their first film but established actors like Akshey and John totally disappointed an established director like Priyadarshan gives his worst movie ever! --------------------------------------------- Result 3586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ludicrous violations of the most basic security regs are only the beginning. It's hard to see how they achieved such abysmal trash on such a low budget. I turned it off once, then got curious to see if it could get any worse. It did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] dear god where do i begin. this is bar [[none]] the [[best]] [[movie]] i've ever [[seen]]. the camera [[angles]] are great but in my opinion the acting was the [[best]]. why the script writers for this [[movie]] aren't [[writing]] [[big]] budget [[films]] i will never [[understand]]. another is the cast. it is [[great]]. this is the [[best]] ted raimi [[film]] out there for sure. i know some of you out there are [[probably]] thinking "no [[way]] he has plenty better" but no your [[wrong]]. raptor island is a [[work]] of art. i hope it should have goten best movie of the [[year]] instead of that crappy [[movie]] [[Crash]] with a bunch of no names AND no raptors. i [[believe]] this [[movie]] is [[truly]] the most [[wonderful]] thing EVER. dear god where do i begin. this is bar [[nothing]] the [[bestest]] [[cinematography]] i've ever [[noticed]]. the camera [[angle]] are great but in my opinion the acting was the [[bestest]]. why the script writers for this [[cinematography]] aren't [[handwriting]] [[massive]] budget [[movie]] i will never [[understands]]. another is the cast. it is [[wondrous]]. this is the [[better]] ted raimi [[movie]] out there for sure. i know some of you out there are [[surely]] thinking "no [[pathways]] he has plenty better" but no your [[amiss]]. raptor island is a [[collaborating]] of art. i hope it should have goten best movie of the [[annum]] instead of that crappy [[film]] [[Collide]] with a bunch of no names AND no raptors. i [[think]] this [[cinematic]] is [[really]] the most [[wondrous]] thing EVER. --------------------------------------------- Result 3588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The acting is some of the worst I've ever seen, the characters are totally unconvincing. This could be overlooked to some extent if the plot was interesting, which the plot to "The Prodigy" was not. It's sort of a bad mix between "Fresh" and "Animal House", except that both of those movies were good. --------------------------------------------- Result 3589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] Being an Austrian myself this has been a straight [[knock]] in my [[face]]. Fortunately I don't live nowhere near the place where this movie takes place but unfortunately it [[portrays]] everything that the [[rest]] of Austria hates about Viennese people (or people close to that [[region]]). And it is very easy to read that this is exactly the directors [[intention]]: to let your head sink into your hands and [[say]] "Oh my god, how can THAT be [[possible]]!". [[No]], not with me, the (in my opinion) [[totally]] exaggerated uncensored swinger club scene is not necessary, I watch [[porn]], sure, but in this context I was [[rather]] disgusted than put in the right context.

This [[movie]] tells a story about how [[misled]] people who [[suffer]] from [[lack]] of [[education]] or [[bad]] [[company]] [[try]] to survive and [[live]] in a [[world]] of redundancy and boring horizons. A [[girl]] who is [[treated]] like a [[whore]] by her super-jealous [[boyfriend]] (and [[still]] keeps [[coming]] back), a [[female]] teacher who discovers her masochism by putting the [[life]] of her super-cruel "lover" on the line, an [[old]] [[couple]] who has an [[almost]] [[mathematical]] daily [[cycle]] (she is the "[[official]] [[replacement]]" of his ex wife), a [[couple]] that has just divorced and has the ex husband [[suffer]] under the [[acts]] of his [[former]] wife [[obviously]] having a [[relationship]] with her masseuse and finally a [[crazy]] hitchhiker who asks her drivers the most unusual [[questions]] and stretches their nerves by just being super-annoying.

After having [[seen]] it you feel [[almost]] nothing. You're not even [[shocked]], sad, depressed or feel like doing anything... Maybe that's why I [[gave]] it 7 [[points]], it [[made]] me [[react]] in a [[way]] I never reacted before. If that's good or bad is up to you! Being an Austrian myself this has been a straight [[patting]] in my [[confront]]. Fortunately I don't live nowhere near the place where this movie takes place but unfortunately it [[indicates]] everything that the [[repose]] of Austria hates about Viennese people (or people close to that [[regions]]). And it is very easy to read that this is exactly the directors [[aims]]: to let your head sink into your hands and [[tell]] "Oh my god, how can THAT be [[probable]]!". [[None]], not with me, the (in my opinion) [[utterly]] exaggerated uncensored swinger club scene is not necessary, I watch [[pornographic]], sure, but in this context I was [[quite]] disgusted than put in the right context.

This [[cinematography]] tells a story about how [[hoodwinked]] people who [[suffering]] from [[misses]] of [[teaching]] or [[naughty]] [[societies]] [[attempt]] to survive and [[viva]] in a [[monde]] of redundancy and boring horizons. A [[daughter]] who is [[addressed]] like a [[hooker]] by her super-jealous [[friend]] (and [[nonetheless]] keeps [[forthcoming]] back), a [[girls]] teacher who discovers her masochism by putting the [[lifetime]] of her super-cruel "lover" on the line, an [[archaic]] [[matching]] who has an [[approximately]] [[calculus]] daily [[cycling]] (she is the "[[servant]] [[replacing]]" of his ex wife), a [[couples]] that has just divorced and has the ex husband [[undergo]] under the [[act]] of his [[old]] wife [[clearly]] having a [[nexus]] with her masseuse and finally a [[lunatic]] hitchhiker who asks her drivers the most unusual [[subjects]] and stretches their nerves by just being super-annoying.

After having [[watched]] it you feel [[approximately]] nothing. You're not even [[astonished]], sad, depressed or feel like doing anything... Maybe that's why I [[provided]] it 7 [[dot]], it [[brought]] me [[responding]] in a [[camino]] I never reacted before. If that's good or bad is up to you! --------------------------------------------- Result 3590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We're talking about a low budget film, and it's understandable that there are some weaknesses (no spoilers: one sudden explosives expert and one meaningless alcoholic); but in general the story keeps you interested, most of the characters are likable and there are some original situations.

I really like films that surprise you with some people that are not who they want you to believe and then twist and turn the plot ... I applaud this one on that.

If you know what I mean, try to see also "Nueve Reinas" (Nine Queens) a film from Argentina. --------------------------------------------- Result 3591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This woman never stops talking throughout the movie. She memorized every line, and delivered all without a bit of natural emotion. She also has a most uncharming lisp, and the pitch of her voice sounds like nails on a blackboard. This film has WAY too much Betsy Drake, and not enough Cary Grant, who carried what little was left of the film entirely on his own. --------------------------------------------- Result 3592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Paul]] Naschy [[made]] a [[great]] number of horror [[films]]. [[In]] terms of quality, they [[tend]] to range from [[fairly]] good to unwatchable [[trash]]; and unfortunately, [[Horror]] [[Rises]] from the Tomb is closer to the latter. The plot is just your average [[story]] of a witch, wizard or (as is the [[case]] here) [[warlock]], who is put to [[death]] - but not before swearing [[vengeance]] on those who did it...etc etc. We then [[get]] a séance and one [[thing]] leads to another, and [[pretty]] soon the executed warlock is up to no good again. The plot is [[slow]], [[painfully]] boring and the [[film]] [[constantly]] [[feels]] pointless. The [[characters]] [[string]] out reams of diatribe and it never serves the [[film]] in any [[way]] whatsoever. [[Paul]] Naschy wrote the [[script]], and if you [[ask]] me he should stick to acting because the dialogue is [[trite]] in the extreme, and only serves to [[make]] the [[film]] even more boring than it already is. Carlos Aured, who [[also]] directed Naschy in Blue [[Eyes]] of the [[Broken]] Doll and Curse of the [[Devil]] [[provides]] [[dull]] [[direction]] here, which likes the dialogue does nothing to [[help]] the [[film]]. [[Sometimes]] crap [[films]] [[like]] this have a certain charm about them; but Horror [[Rises]] from the [[Tomb]] doesn't even have that. This is a painfully boring [[film]] that has little or nothing in the [[way]] of interest. [[Paulo]] Naschy [[accomplished]] a [[resplendent]] number of horror [[filmmaking]]. [[Throughout]] terms of quality, they [[tending]] to range from [[rather]] good to unwatchable [[wastebasket]]; and unfortunately, [[Abomination]] [[Rising]] from the Tomb is closer to the latter. The plot is just your average [[narratives]] of a witch, wizard or (as is the [[example]] here) [[wizard]], who is put to [[killings]] - but not before swearing [[payback]] on those who did it...etc etc. We then [[obtain]] a séance and one [[stuff]] leads to another, and [[quite]] soon the executed warlock is up to no good again. The plot is [[slower]], [[embarrassingly]] boring and the [[filmmaking]] [[consistently]] [[thinks]] pointless. The [[trait]] [[rope]] out reams of diatribe and it never serves the [[filmmaking]] in any [[routing]] whatsoever. [[Paulo]] Naschy wrote the [[scripts]], and if you [[poser]] me he should stick to acting because the dialogue is [[banal]] in the extreme, and only serves to [[deliver]] the [[movies]] even more boring than it already is. Carlos Aured, who [[similarly]] directed Naschy in Blue [[Eye]] of the [[Broke]] Doll and Curse of the [[Heck]] [[gives]] [[boring]] [[directions]] here, which likes the dialogue does nothing to [[aids]] the [[filmmaking]]. [[Sometime]] crap [[film]] [[iike]] this have a certain charm about them; but Horror [[Rising]] from the [[Gravesite]] doesn't even have that. This is a painfully boring [[filmmaking]] that has little or nothing in the [[paths]] of interest. --------------------------------------------- Result 3593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Uwe Boll has done the impossible: create a game adaptation that stays at least somewhat true to the game; he has turned a game full of antisocial and offensive content into a movie full of antisocial and offensive content. So, as an adaptation, it's a success.

Unfortunately, it's still Uwe Boll we are dealing with here, so don't expect the movie to be actually any good. while it does have it's moment, "Postal" wears out his welcome very fast and becomes a pain to sit through.

At its core, Postal is a satire on the United States, as done by a twelve year old kid. Boll seems to think that offensiveness is linearly proportional to comedic value: the more offensive, the funnier, and the more exaggerated the funnier. This results in a movie that sets new levels of tastelessness while being extremely hit and miss. Yes, some gags do work but it seems to be pure luck. High points include the director satirizing himself, and people getting hit very violently by trucks and other vehicles. Low points include..well pretty much everything else.

After the initial surprise wears off, Postal simply becomes a bore to watch. Yes there is a good joke every and good point ten minutes, but everything else consists of hordes of annoying characters shooting and chasing each other all over the place for what seems to be an eternity.

This probably would have worked as a short movie, but it's just not enough content for something that lasts over 90 minutes (although it feels twice as long). There are nice ideas and nice tries, but they get hopelessly lost in endless and pointless action scenes and content that is offensive just for the sake of it 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never been one to shy away from saying that most action films just plain do nothing for me. Most times they are blatant vehicles to blow stuff up, show off sexy models, and throw any semblance of reality or intelligence out the window. With that said, the Bourne series has been fantastic. Doug Liman ushered in a new take on action by using a more cinema verite style, showing the fights in full force and making our super spy someone we can relate to emotionally as well as humanly. This is not the sci-fi absurdity that was Bond (before they did an overhaul in the style of this series no less). There was a lot to worry for when the Bourne Supremacy came out. With director Paul Greengrass taking over, what could have been a second-hand copy of the original ended up being an improvement in style and flair. The stakes were raised and the story was enhanced because of it. Greengrass needs to be given a ton of credit for being able to keep up appearances with the latest installment, The Bourne Ultimatum. In what is an amazing conclusion to a top-notch trilogy, the action is brought to a new level and story and performance are never compromised.

Once again, Bourne is brought into the minds of the CIA by false pretenses. Someone has leaked information about the Treadstone upgrade called Blackbriar and once Bourne is located trying to converse with the newswriter who broke the story, he is assumed to be the mole. Only Pamela Landy, she who was on the case to find him in Supremacy, knows that he can't be the one. Bourne's motive has always been to stay clear of the government and live his life in peace. It has been the CIA who keeps bringing him back into the open to wreak havoc on them. What ends up transpiring is that Bourne wants to know the source as well to finally find out the truth of who he is and what made him into a killer. The film, then, becomes a chase against time and each other to find the source and see if the government can close the breach and tie off all loose ends, or if Bourne can get his revenge on those who took his life from him.

In what is probably the simplest storyline of the series, with only one chase lasting the entirety of the story, it has possibly the biggest cast of characters and turning over of loyalties to expose the corruption that has been behind the full story progression. This is not a detriment at all, however, as it allows for more fights and car chases that work in full context to the plot. Admission to this film is worth it for the apartment fight, between Bourne and the CIA's second asset, alone. The chase jumping through windows in Madrid is cool on its own, but when they finally meet up, we get a ten minute or so fight that is as invigorating to watch as any scene you'll see. Also, rather than using a massive car chase as a climatic set piece like in the first two films, we instead get around three small scale road races, just as intense, but staggered enough to never bog the action down into monotony.

After five years of waiting, we also find out the origin of our favorite operative with heart and feeling. By the end of the film we will find out what has been the cause of all the espionage and destruction that has taken place around him. No one could have done it better than Matt Damon. He has the physique and attitude to be believable in the action sequences, but also the range to pull off the moments of intelligence and cat and mouse correspondence with those against him. Joan Allen reprises her role with the same amount of dedication to her job, but also a bit more disenchantment for what is going on around her after how Brian Cox's character, from the first two films, took matters into his own hands. Needing a role in that mold, we are given a nice turn from David Strathairn. Like Cox, he is working at the top of the food chain and answers to no one when making a decision. With as much trying to cover up any connections to his bosses of the Blackbriar program as he is trying to do his duty to his country, you can never quite gauge what he will be capable of doing. Even the little guys do a wonderful job, like Paddy Considine as the reporter who starts the leak at the center of everything, Albert Finney as a man from Bourne's past and possibly key to his origin, and Edgar Ramirez as one of the CIA's operatives sent to take Bourne out. Ramirez is a nice addition to the role that has been successfully played by Clive Owen (Identity), Karl Urban, and Martin Csokas (Supremacy). He doesn't talk much, if at all, but he has the look and robotic efficiency down pat and hopefully will get more roles to show what he can do post a nice turn in Domino.

In the end, one has to applaud Paul Greengrass for continuing to exceed expectations and bring this series to a conclusion that builds on the success of its predecessors rather than destroy them. His skill at the close-up hand-held look is astonishing and has the same kinetic energy as Tony Scott, but without quite the seizure-inducing cuts. Rather than feel like over- production, his use of hand-held enhances the environment and puts you directly into the action. Let's also credit cinematographer Oliver Wood, who shot all three Bourne films. He was able to work with both directors and work his style into a nice harmony with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This work is less about Steve Martin's character Davis, than it is about Kline (Mack) and Glover (Simon), and Kline and McDonnell (Claire), but the dialog inserted via Davis is pondering, contemplative, near-poetic existentialism at its best. He is witty, intelligent, and thoughtful in both dialog delivery and content. The writers deserved an Oscar.

The performances are easy, relaxed, and natural; just what you would expect from "A List" actors. Martin contributes the performance which leads into his more recent Shopgirl, guiding you through life, love, and the pursuit of wisdom if not happiness. Kline is the straight - the suit - the conformist of the film, and as such his performance is crisp and refreshing.

This work deals with life in all aspects. It engenders a true emotional investment in its characters, and leaves you feeling hopeful that Mankind is not doomed, after all, no matter WHAT you believe, deep down.

All in all? This is delightful, with a gritty moment or two, and easy natural dialog which draws you in, assisting its audience in gaining a high enjoyment from this work. It's definitely worth your time, though it may not be every one's top choice as Friday/Saturday night entertainment.

I really enjoyed the intelligence this exhibited. It's not typical, and was an unexpected surprise. Another wonderful surprise was the honesty exhibited herein. The couples and friends hold detailed conversations, which feel and sound fully honest and (again) natural. I was very impressed with this work, and will be adding it to the DVD collection soon.

It rates a 9.1/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I [[started]] [[watching]] the [[show]] from the first season, and at the [[beginning]] I was pretty [[skeptical]] about it. [[Original]] [[movie]] was kind of [[childish]], and I was just [[looking]] for some sci-fi [[show]] while [[waiting]] for the BSG new season.

But after few [[episodes]] I became a fan. I've [[loved]] the [[characters]] - the not-so-stupid-as-you-think-he-is [[Jack]] O'Neill, the not-only-smart Samantha Carter, the [[glorious]] Teal'c, [[women]] and [[kids]] favorite, and [[brilliant]] Dr. Daniel Jackson.

Of course, [[stories]] sometimes not serious, [[sometimes]] [[even]] [[ridiculous]], but [[mostly]] it's not about [[technology]] or space [[fighting]] - it's about [[helping]] your [[friend]], [[even]] [[risking]] your [[life]] for him. It's about "we don't [[leave]] [[anybody]] [[behind]]". [[Struggling]] to the [[end]] when all [[hope]] is lost. [[About]] the free will, and all good [[qualities]] that makes a human - [[Human]].

And now it's [[breaking]] a record, going 10th season, and [[still]] doing good. I [[begins]] [[staring]] the [[displaying]] from the first season, and at the [[initiating]] I was pretty [[unconvinced]] about it. [[Initials]] [[cinematographic]] was kind of [[boyish]], and I was just [[researching]] for some sci-fi [[exhibit]] while [[awaiting]] for the BSG new season.

But after few [[bouts]] I became a fan. I've [[liked]] the [[character]] - the not-so-stupid-as-you-think-he-is [[Jacques]] O'Neill, the not-only-smart Samantha Carter, the [[awesome]] Teal'c, [[wife]] and [[brats]] favorite, and [[marvelous]] Dr. Daniel Jackson.

Of course, [[story]] sometimes not serious, [[sometime]] [[yet]] [[nonsensical]], but [[essentially]] it's not about [[tech]] or space [[fight]] - it's about [[assisting]] your [[freund]], [[yet]] [[jeopardizing]] your [[iife]] for him. It's about "we don't [[letting]] [[somebody]] [[backside]]". [[Striving]] to the [[terminating]] when all [[hopes]] is lost. [[Almost]] the free will, and all good [[qualifications]] that makes a human - [[Humankind]].

And now it's [[violating]] a record, going 10th season, and [[yet]] doing good. --------------------------------------------- Result 3597 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Quick]] and [[simple]], I [[love]] this movie.

As some others have [[mentioned]], I [[also]], am not from the [[south]], don't [[really]] care for [[country]] music and have never worn a [[cowboy]] hat. (I've never [[drove]] [[around]] in a [[car]] with a [[dead]] body in my [[trunk]] either, but I [[love]] "[[Goodfellas]].") This is just [[great]] [[film]] making. [[Shot]] in a 2.35 aspect ratio and beautifully [[transfered]] to [[DVD]]. (The VHS was 1.33 full screen). And [[yes]], a solid 5.1 [[mix]] for your [[viewing]] pleasure. What can you [[say]] about this [[movie]]?

It's just a [[great]] [[love]]/[[hate]] story set in Texas, with [[great]] performances. Travolta is [[fantastic]]. [[Next]] to "Pulp Fiction", it's the best thing he's done. It's been in my top 5 for 25 [[years]]!!

[[Check]] this one out!!! It's a 10 !!!! [[Hurry]] and [[easy]], I [[loves]] this movie.

As some others have [[referred]], I [[apart]], am not from the [[southerly]], don't [[truthfully]] care for [[nationals]] music and have never worn a [[denim]] hat. (I've never [[pushed]] [[about]] in a [[vehicles]] with a [[died]] body in my [[torso]] either, but I [[adore]] "[[Mates]].") This is just [[wondrous]] [[cinema]] making. [[Offed]] in a 2.35 aspect ratio and beautifully [[transferred]] to [[DVDS]]. (The VHS was 1.33 full screen). And [[oui]], a solid 5.1 [[mixes]] for your [[opinion]] pleasure. What can you [[said]] about this [[cinema]]?

It's just a [[huge]] [[loves]]/[[loathe]] story set in Texas, with [[huge]] performances. Travolta is [[super]]. [[Future]] to "Pulp Fiction", it's the best thing he's done. It's been in my top 5 for 25 [[yrs]]!!

[[Verifying]] this one out!!! It's a 10 !!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I haven't read through all the [[comments]], but at least one poster [[mentioned]] that the 30 minute version might [[possibly]] be abridged. I'm curious about that myself because the [[later]] parts of the [[film]] just didn't make much [[sense]] to me [[even]] when I rewatched them. 30 minutes [[seems]] really short for a [[movie]] in 1917 [[also]]. "[[Poor]] Little [[Rich]] [[Girl]]" which was Tourneur's [[next]] [[film]] is 65 minutes [[long]] and "Pride of the [[Clan]]" which was his [[previous]] [[feature]] was 84 minutes long. So I'm relieved to [[see]] that I wasn't [[crazy]], there must be part of this [[film]] missing and that's why the resolution didn't make much sense.

It's hard to review or comment on a movie that you're only able to see half of... but I would [[recommend]] this [[film]] anyway because of the [[really]] [[fascinating]] [[view]] that it [[provides]] us of the [[insides]] of an East Coast [[movie]] studio of the time. It's the earliest [[film]] I've personally [[seen]] that's based on the [[movie]] [[industry]] itself. The main character is a movie star played by Robert Warwick, who was later a mainstay Hollywood character actor and appeared in almost all of Preston Sturges' films. He plays a western actor perhaps vaguely modeled on William S. Hart, who Warwick does resemble somewhat. After the really fascinating sequences set in the studio we see them on a location shoot where he discovers a country girl (Doris Kenyon) and convinces her to come to New [[Jersey]] for a screen [[test]] which goes very poorly. After that point the movie seems to be missing major pieces in the form we have now.

[[Again]], I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in film history for the documentary value, but in the form we have it doesn't hold up much as a movie and isn't a particularly good example of [[Maurice]] Tourneur's work. I haven't read through all the [[remark]], but at least one poster [[quoted]] that the 30 minute version might [[perhaps]] be abridged. I'm curious about that myself because the [[subsequent]] parts of the [[cinematography]] just didn't make much [[feeling]] to me [[yet]] when I rewatched them. 30 minutes [[appears]] really short for a [[cinematography]] in 1917 [[apart]]. "[[Pauper]] Little [[Rika]] [[Chick]]" which was Tourneur's [[upcoming]] [[movie]] is 65 minutes [[lang]] and "Pride of the [[Tribal]]" which was his [[preceding]] [[attribute]] was 84 minutes long. So I'm relieved to [[behold]] that I wasn't [[wacky]], there must be part of this [[cinematography]] missing and that's why the resolution didn't make much sense.

It's hard to review or comment on a movie that you're only able to see half of... but I would [[recommending]] this [[movies]] anyway because of the [[truthfully]] [[riveting]] [[avis]] that it [[affords]] us of the [[loins]] of an East Coast [[filmmaking]] studio of the time. It's the earliest [[filmmaking]] I've personally [[noticed]] that's based on the [[filmmaking]] [[industries]] itself. The main character is a movie star played by Robert Warwick, who was later a mainstay Hollywood character actor and appeared in almost all of Preston Sturges' films. He plays a western actor perhaps vaguely modeled on William S. Hart, who Warwick does resemble somewhat. After the really fascinating sequences set in the studio we see them on a location shoot where he discovers a country girl (Doris Kenyon) and convinces her to come to New [[Jerzy]] for a screen [[proof]] which goes very poorly. After that point the movie seems to be missing major pieces in the form we have now.

[[Afresh]], I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in film history for the documentary value, but in the form we have it doesn't hold up much as a movie and isn't a particularly good example of [[Morris]] Tourneur's work. --------------------------------------------- Result 3599 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was so glad I came across this short film. I'm always so disappointed that short films are hard to come across, so when I saw this and saw that it was nominated for the Live Action Short Film at the Academy Awards, I was so pleased that I actually had a film that I was rooting for.

The plot is pretty simple, the director, writer, and star Nacho Vigalondo tried coming up with a reason people would suddenly break out into a song and dance number like they do in movie musicals. The result is extremely entertaining and the song is actually really catchy.

It's a well made short film, well edited and the actors all do a great job. And the last shot of the film is perfect.

I highly recommend this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3600 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[In]] the Tower of [[Babel]] [[installment]] of the mini-series, the narrator describes the [[builders]] of the tower as "the [[descendants]] of [[Moses]]."

That's like saying George Washington lived many centuries before [[Alexander]] the Great.

Or that the light bulb was invented before the wheel.

Or that the guided [[missile]] was the forerunner of the bow-and-arrow.

[[Need]] I [[say]] more?

The writers of The Greatest Heroes of the [[Bible]] should have at [[least]] paid [[closer]] [[attention]] to the chronologies of Biblical people and [[events]]. [[Throughout]] the Tower of [[Babylon]] [[installments]] of the mini-series, the narrator describes the [[constructors]] of the tower as "the [[descendents]] of [[Moussa]]."

That's like saying George Washington lived many centuries before [[Alexandr]] the Great.

Or that the light bulb was invented before the wheel.

Or that the guided [[projectiles]] was the forerunner of the bow-and-arrow.

[[Needs]] I [[tell]] more?

The writers of The Greatest Heroes of the [[Biblical]] should have at [[lowest]] paid [[tightest]] [[beware]] to the chronologies of Biblical people and [[event]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A [[beautiful]] postcard of New York. The thing I [[enjoyed]] most was being [[able]] to watch this with my whole family and not cringe waiting for a stupid toilet humor joke to appear. It never did. My [[teenagers]] liked it too. My son for Natasha Henstridge and my daughter for Michael Vartan. My wife and I commented that we could not remember the last time we could sit with the kids and ALL enjoy something. This film told a story that felt comfortable but not [[old]] or done. The ending came with a twist which we all liked too. If you are not just a cynical person and have are willing to let a story unfold then this is for you. As a guy it takes a [[lot]] to hold my interest when it comes to romantic movies and this one did. I [[recommend]] it and we need more of these films to watch. A [[wondrous]] postcard of New York. The thing I [[appreciated]] most was being [[capable]] to watch this with my whole family and not cringe waiting for a stupid toilet humor joke to appear. It never did. My [[youthful]] liked it too. My son for Natasha Henstridge and my daughter for Michael Vartan. My wife and I commented that we could not remember the last time we could sit with the kids and ALL enjoy something. This film told a story that felt comfortable but not [[longtime]] or done. The ending came with a twist which we all liked too. If you are not just a cynical person and have are willing to let a story unfold then this is for you. As a guy it takes a [[lots]] to hold my interest when it comes to romantic movies and this one did. I [[recommending]] it and we need more of these films to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry. Porretta was good looking but resembled like a Mexican porn star not an English outlaw. costumes? what costumes? a t-shirt with strips of black leather on it. it was Marion's clothes--or lack of them--that really got me. do the 'fans' of this stinker really believe women dressed like that in medieval england. the Mongols and vikings were inaccurate and stupid, but the episode with an ALIEN was worst of all. Especially as his make up mainly consisted of oatmeal on his face--an old trick.The hedgehog monster was pretty funny, as was climbing up the side of a castle on a ladder of arrows--as if. the US accents grated as did the initial drawling voice over' RAW-bin Hood and LIDDLE John'.the second robin and Marion were really quite minging in looks and what was left of the show went totally down the pan... --------------------------------------------- Result 3603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have wanted to see this for the longest time, James Merendino is a great director. SLC Punk is one of my favorite movies, and in the first ten minutes of this film I thought that it was a great follow up after that though, it begins to drag. The acting and direction were terrific. In fact everything in the film seemed to flow except for the script. At times, the only thing keeping my attention was the fact that in the cast was the most beautiful woman in the world, Claire Forlani. This film was good, but I expected more.

P.S. Look for great cameos by Chi McBride, and Chris McDonald. --------------------------------------------- Result 3604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The acting in this movie stinks. The plot makes very little sense, but from what I gathered it's supposed to be about this scientist who develops the ability to turn people's personal items into tiny steel balls that then fly into their mouths and turn them into zombies (or blow their heads up, whichever). And the effects are lousy, too. Most of the movie consists of bad music, with the actors dancing equally as badly to the bad music, interspersed with multiple boring sex scenes. This should be one of the worst things ever made, but for one thing. One element of shear brilliance that makes "Nightmare Weekend" stand above all others. And that special quality is the presence of George.

George is the lovable interface device between the scientist's daughter, Jessica, and the home computer security system. With his green hair and nose, balding scalp, and heart-shaped mouth, George is the guardian angel/confidant to Jessica, who asks him for advice on how to meet guys in one of the most dramatic pieces of dialogue ever captured on celluloid. With his monotone synthesized voice, George tells Jessica what percentages of males prefer women in white dresses, and also that hitch-hiking is the third best way to meet guys after discos and bars. Of course, little Jessica just can't seem to stay out of trouble, causing George to execute "Emergency Program Code: Protection Jessica", which results in the violent death of Jessica's would-be assailant via one of the aforementioned steel balls.

Kubrick was an utter fool for thinking he could give a computer personality using closeups of a red light. HAL should have been represented by our friend George in order to better translate compassion for his eventual demise. The light and sound show at the end of "Close Encounters"? Not bad, but how much better would that movie had been if the means of first communication with the aliens had been George the Hand Puppet. Bishop, Data, R2 – kitchen appliances next to the Almighty George! He might only be in the movie for 8 minutes out of 90, but don't be fooled. This show is all about George. With even that limited amount of screentime, George joins the ranks of such luminous film characters as Hollywood Montrose, Majai, and Pappy from "New Moon Rising" as icons of American cinema. "George to Apache" – you are my hero. --------------------------------------------- Result 3605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] "Raising Victor [[Vargas]]" is one of those light, family movies that you can watch and do the N.Y. Times crossword [[puzzle]] at the same time. And if you want to go to the kitchen for a taco and a Corona, you don't have to "Pause" the DVD. [[Just]] [[let]] it [[roll]], '[[cause]] you won't be missing [[anything]] [[really]] [[important]]. No [[twists]], turns, or [[tension]]. It's not [[really]] an ethnic movie, it's a movie about a poor, struggling immigrant family that happens to be [[Latino]]. They could have been any ethnic group. It made very little difference. I've seen it all a zillion times before. Just plug in a Jewish family, an Italian family, a Black family, or an Irish family. Just the accents and names were different. If the Vargas family was named Bush or Clinton and were Presbyterians, the movie would have been a total snooze.

It's funny that the critics here couldn't get the locale straight. Some said it was Spanish Harlem. Some the Bronx, and another Brooklyn. As a life-long New Yorker, I vote for the Lower East Side. And it seemed that the family never met up with anyone except other Latinos. They lived in an insulated/isolated little enclave. Some interaction with non-Latinos might have created some excitement, interest, or tension. Remember West Side Story?

And now for the oft-criticized [[cinematography]]. I don't know if it was my TV or what, but all the indoor shots looked very ORANGE to me. The apt, the furniture, and the faces were all ORANGE. What was that supposed to mean? And the apt. did look pretty cramped to me. Somebody here mentioned that the old apt's/tenements had very big rooms. Well, maybe 50 years ago. What landlords have done is to break up one big apt into 2 or 3 very small ones and squeeze as many immigrants as they can into them.

And another [[annoying]] thing ....This is the second family movie I've seen and criticized this week that featured a teenage boy "[[jerking]] off". Is this private [[sex]] [[act]] necessary for us to watch? Please spare me! What's up with these directors?

So "Victor Vargas" is a pleasant little movie. It was nice for a change to see [[young]] Latino actors given a break and a chance to show their talents, which they did. But the writers let them down, giving them a flat, unspectacular script to work with. Enjoy the show, but keep your fingers near the "fast forward" button. "Raising Victor [[Varga]]" is one of those light, family movies that you can watch and do the N.Y. Times crossword [[enigma]] at the same time. And if you want to go to the kitchen for a taco and a Corona, you don't have to "Pause" the DVD. [[Only]] [[letting]] it [[rolling]], '[[reason]] you won't be missing [[somethings]] [[truly]] [[momentous]]. No [[spins]], turns, or [[tensions]]. It's not [[truthfully]] an ethnic movie, it's a movie about a poor, struggling immigrant family that happens to be [[Latin]]. They could have been any ethnic group. It made very little difference. I've seen it all a zillion times before. Just plug in a Jewish family, an Italian family, a Black family, or an Irish family. Just the accents and names were different. If the Vargas family was named Bush or Clinton and were Presbyterians, the movie would have been a total snooze.

It's funny that the critics here couldn't get the locale straight. Some said it was Spanish Harlem. Some the Bronx, and another Brooklyn. As a life-long New Yorker, I vote for the Lower East Side. And it seemed that the family never met up with anyone except other Latinos. They lived in an insulated/isolated little enclave. Some interaction with non-Latinos might have created some excitement, interest, or tension. Remember West Side Story?

And now for the oft-criticized [[filmmaking]]. I don't know if it was my TV or what, but all the indoor shots looked very ORANGE to me. The apt, the furniture, and the faces were all ORANGE. What was that supposed to mean? And the apt. did look pretty cramped to me. Somebody here mentioned that the old apt's/tenements had very big rooms. Well, maybe 50 years ago. What landlords have done is to break up one big apt into 2 or 3 very small ones and squeeze as many immigrants as they can into them.

And another [[vexing]] thing ....This is the second family movie I've seen and criticized this week that featured a teenage boy "[[wanking]] off". Is this private [[sexuality]] [[legislation]] necessary for us to watch? Please spare me! What's up with these directors?

So "Victor Vargas" is a pleasant little movie. It was nice for a change to see [[jeune]] Latino actors given a break and a chance to show their talents, which they did. But the writers let them down, giving them a flat, unspectacular script to work with. Enjoy the show, but keep your fingers near the "fast forward" button. --------------------------------------------- Result 3606 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This [[review]] is [[dedicated]] to the late Keith [[Moon]] and [[John]] Entwistle.

The [[Original]] Drum and Bass.

There [[seems]] to be very [[little]] early Who footage [[around]] these days, if there is more then [[lets]] be 'aving it, now-a-days it [[tends]] to be of a very [[different]] [[kind]] of [[Who]] [[altogether]], a [[parody]], a [[shadow]] of their (much) better [[years]]. To be fair, not one of them has to prove [[anything]] to [[anyone]] [[anymore]], they've [[earned]] their [[respect]] and with overtime.

This concert footage for me is one of their [[best]]. To command an [[audience]] of [[around]] a 400,000 plus [[strong]] crowed takes skill, [[charisma]], [[wit]] and a whole [[lot]] of bloody good [[music]].

We all know of the other [[acts]] on the [[bill]], The [[Doors]] (their last ever [[show]] [[weeks]] before Jim Morrison [[died]]), Moody Blues, Hendrix, Taste, Free and [[many]] more. The point being that whoever were there it was The [[Who]] that the majority had come to [[see]]. This [[show]] was one year after the [[Great]] [[Hippie]] [[Fest]] of the 1960's; Woodstock. The [[film]] and [[record]] had come out and so had The Who's [[greatest]] [[work]] to date, Tommy. The ever hungry crowd wanted a taste, to be [[able]] to [[experience]] their own [[unique]] [[event]], to be [[able]] to "Grove and [[Love]]" in the [[knowledge]] that this gig was their own. To do this you [[needed]] the [[best]] of what [[Rock]] 'n [[Roll]] had to throw at the hungrily baited crowd.

[[At]] two 'o [[clock]] in the morning in late [[August]] 1970 the [[M]].C. [[announces]], "Ladies and Gentlemen, a [[small]] [[Rock]] 'n Roll band from [[Shepherds]] Bush London, the 'OO".

[[John]] Entwistle's [[body]] suit is of black [[leather]], on the [[front]] is the out line of a human skeleton from [[neck]] to toe, Roger dressed in his [[traditional]] stage [[outfit]] of [[long]] tassel's and [[long]] flowing hair, Keith in a white t-shirt and jeans, as [[Pete]] had his white [[boiler]] suit and Doc [[Martins]] that he'd [[preferred]] to wear.

The [[Who]] never [[stopped]] their [[onslaught]] of [[High]] Energy [[Rock]] for over two [[hours]], performing theirs and other artists' [[greatest]] [[tracks]] such as [[Young]] [[Man]] Blues, Shaking' all Over, and then as on queue, Keith baiting the crowed to "Shut up, it's a bleeding Opera" with Tommy, the Rock Opera. The crowed went wild. This is what they had come to hear, and the Who didn't disappoint, straight into Overture and never coming up for air until the final note of "Tommy can you Hear me?" Amazing.

To capture a show of this magnitude of a band of this stature at their peak at a Festival that was to be the last of its kind anywhere in the World was a fantastic piece of Cinematic History.

The English DVD only comes in a soundtrack of English/Linear PCM Stereo, were as in the States, I think, you can get it with 5.1 at least, "Check local press for details…" on that, okay.

The duration of the DVD is 85 minutes with no extras, which is a disappointment. Yes, for a slice of Rock and Festival History this DVD would send you in a nostalgia trip down memory lane the moment you press play, for some of the best Who concert footage as it was meant to be, Live, Raw and in your Face!

I would have given this DVD ten if it wasn't for the lack of 5.1, and some extras would have been nice.

Thanks Roger, Pete, John and Keith. This [[revisions]] is [[specialised]] to the late Keith [[Luna]] and [[Johannes]] Entwistle.

The [[Initials]] Drum and Bass.

There [[looks]] to be very [[petite]] early Who footage [[roundabout]] these days, if there is more then [[allow]] be 'aving it, now-a-days it [[strives]] to be of a very [[various]] [[sorting]] of [[Whom]] [[quite]], a [[comedy]], a [[shade]] of their (much) better [[yr]]. To be fair, not one of them has to prove [[something]] to [[anybody]] [[longer]], they've [[profited]] their [[respecting]] and with overtime.

This concert footage for me is one of their [[better]]. To command an [[spectators]] of [[about]] a 400,000 plus [[forceful]] crowed takes skill, [[charm]], [[waite]] and a whole [[lots]] of bloody good [[musician]].

We all know of the other [[act]] on the [[bills]], The [[Gates]] (their last ever [[spectacle]] [[zhou]] before Jim Morrison [[dying]]), Moody Blues, Hendrix, Taste, Free and [[several]] more. The point being that whoever were there it was The [[Whose]] that the majority had come to [[behold]]. This [[displays]] was one year after the [[Grand]] [[Freak]] [[Festival]] of the 1960's; Woodstock. The [[cinematography]] and [[recording]] had come out and so had The Who's [[higher]] [[cooperate]] to date, Tommy. The ever hungry crowd wanted a taste, to be [[capable]] to [[enjoying]] their own [[peculiar]] [[incident]], to be [[capable]] to "Grove and [[Amour]]" in the [[acquaintance]] that this gig was their own. To do this you [[needs]] the [[better]] of what [[Boulder]] 'n [[Rolling]] had to throw at the hungrily baited crowd.

[[For]] two 'o [[pendulum]] in the morning in late [[Augusto]] 1970 the [[metres]].C. [[declaring]], "Ladies and Gentlemen, a [[petite]] [[Rocks]] 'n Roll band from [[Herdsmen]] Bush London, the 'OO".

[[Johannes]] Entwistle's [[bodies]] suit is of black [[pelts]], on the [[newsweek]] is the out line of a human skeleton from [[cou]] to toe, Roger dressed in his [[classical]] stage [[disguise]] of [[longer]] tassel's and [[longer]] flowing hair, Keith in a white t-shirt and jeans, as [[Peter]] had his white [[kettle]] suit and Doc [[Martin]] that he'd [[prefer]] to wear.

The [[Whose]] never [[cease]] their [[offensive]] of [[Alto]] Energy [[Boulder]] for over two [[hour]], performing theirs and other artists' [[bigger]] [[track]] such as [[Jeune]] [[Males]] Blues, Shaking' all Over, and then as on queue, Keith baiting the crowed to "Shut up, it's a bleeding Opera" with Tommy, the Rock Opera. The crowed went wild. This is what they had come to hear, and the Who didn't disappoint, straight into Overture and never coming up for air until the final note of "Tommy can you Hear me?" Amazing.

To capture a show of this magnitude of a band of this stature at their peak at a Festival that was to be the last of its kind anywhere in the World was a fantastic piece of Cinematic History.

The English DVD only comes in a soundtrack of English/Linear PCM Stereo, were as in the States, I think, you can get it with 5.1 at least, "Check local press for details…" on that, okay.

The duration of the DVD is 85 minutes with no extras, which is a disappointment. Yes, for a slice of Rock and Festival History this DVD would send you in a nostalgia trip down memory lane the moment you press play, for some of the best Who concert footage as it was meant to be, Live, Raw and in your Face!

I would have given this DVD ten if it wasn't for the lack of 5.1, and some extras would have been nice.

Thanks Roger, Pete, John and Keith. --------------------------------------------- Result 3607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the worst movie I have ever seen. I was deceived into thinking it might be good because a couple of my favorite actors are in it. Now I want to punch Jason Schwartzman in the face for taking this role. I was physically ill after watching this film. I really don't understand Hollywood sometimes. There are so many people trying to break in that I'm sure you can skim off the top and get the very best. That way the worst movie you make is equivalent to Ferris Beullar instead of this sludge. The gags like the hair doll and blatantly ripping off jeans commercials added to the humorlessness of the film. Glad I avoided this film and watched it on TV. This proves that you should avoid January releases at all cost. --------------------------------------------- Result 3608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Darkman 3: Die Darkman Die is directed by Bradford May, the same guy who made the first Darkman sequel too. Darkman 3 is worse than Darkman 2, and is nothing special, in my opinion. Larry Drake is no more as a main villain, who is now played by great Jeff Fahey, whose character once again wants to get Darkman's work and create this time some ultra strong humans in order to get the leadership of the whole city. The film is pretty much the same in plot and execution as Darkman 2, but I was mostly irritated by the presence of many scenes from Darkman 2. These sequels were made in short time and with little money, so these kind of decisions had to be made. Couple of scenes are pretty stylish and exiting, but still this is pretty tired film and often irritatingly stupid, too. The characters scream and laugh too much and it is very annoying. There is no any philosophical depth in the film, and this is like a remake of Darkman 2 which it still cannot equal. Darkman 2 had many great scenes and stylish camera work, and Larry Drake's ability to play great villain. Darkman 3 offers only some nice scenes and moments, but mostly this film is tired and full of cliches. The few positive things in this movie are flashback edits (Westlake's nightmares) and couple of truly surprising plot turns and tricks. And worth mentioning is also pretty nasty death scene of the main villain which was pretty comic book like and inventive without any gore. Far more interesting than the death of main villain in part two.

Darkman 3 is worst in the whole series, and we must remember that these two sequels were made directly to video and they don't come even close to Raimi's original Darkman with Liam Neeson. Darkman 2 was okay actioner with plenty of great scenes and suspense, but this last (?) entry is tired and often stupid and boring piece of sequel. It has some merits as mentioned, but overall feeling is that this should not been made in the first place. May is talented director so hopefully he can get some more noteworthy projects in the future.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Yay]]!... I think. It's [[hard]] to [[say]]. It's hard to have an emotion about a [[movie]] that has no emotion. This movie is as sterile as a surgeon's [[scalpel]]. [[For]] a [[setting]], it has a few stone pillars, some stone [[seats]], a [[couple]] stone crosses and some stone [[actors]]. They have no emotion! The only thing that [[saves]] this [[movie]] is the fact that it is [[Hamlet]], and Hamlet is a terrificly [[written]] [[piece]] of [[literature]]. The dubbing really wasn't all that [[bad]] [[though]]. The [[voices]] stuck [[true]] to the dull, gloomy, [[dreary]], life-sucking atmosphere the [[movie]] gave forth. I have [[seen]] this version of Hamlet on the [[fabulous]] Mystery Science [[Theater]] 3000 three [[times]], and each of the three [[times]], I was on the [[brink]] of turning off the [[TV]], [[despite]] it being MST 3K.

Not an uplifting production of a [[drama]] that deserves so much [[better]]. [[Hurray]]!... I think. It's [[tough]] to [[told]]. It's hard to have an emotion about a [[filmmaking]] that has no emotion. This movie is as sterile as a surgeon's [[knife]]. [[During]] a [[configure]], it has a few stone pillars, some stone [[seat]], a [[matches]] stone crosses and some stone [[players]]. They have no emotion! The only thing that [[rescuing]] this [[filmmaking]] is the fact that it is [[Hamlets]], and Hamlet is a terrificly [[typed]] [[slice]] of [[documentaries]]. The dubbing really wasn't all that [[unfavorable]] [[while]]. The [[voice]] stuck [[veritable]] to the dull, gloomy, [[dull]], life-sucking atmosphere the [[filmmaking]] gave forth. I have [[watched]] this version of Hamlet on the [[sumptuous]] Mystery Science [[Movies]] 3000 three [[time]], and each of the three [[dates]], I was on the [[rand]] of turning off the [[TVS]], [[though]] it being MST 3K.

Not an uplifting production of a [[theater]] that deserves so much [[best]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Moon]] [[Child]] is the [[story]] of two [[brothers]] and a [[friend]] trying to make it in a futuristic, economically-unstable [[Japan]]. After a cunning [[disaster]] [[gone]] [[wrong]], [[someone]] new [[enters]] young Sho's [[life]], a [[special]] [[friend]] by the [[name]] of Kei. Years [[later]] they have grown [[rather]] close, and have [[found]] ways to [[combine]] both their talents into one [[unstoppable]] team. During another escapade, they [[encounter]] a new [[friend]] and his [[mute]] [[sister]] who [[become]] part of their band of [[friends]]. Before long [[disaster]] again [[strikes]] and the group [[falls]] [[apart]]. Alliances turn to [[enemies]] and their [[worlds]] are all turned upside down. Regrets and hopelessness claim some while power and success take others. Tragedy [[claims]] still others. [[Truths]] are revealed and [[lives]] are forever [[changed]].

And you will never [[see]] a more [[beautiful]] sunrise.

This [[movie]] is a gripping tale of [[undying]] friendships, [[webs]] of relationships, and a team that not [[even]] [[death]] can [[keep]] [[apart]] for too [[long]]. Moon [[child]] combines sci-fi, drama, and action with the perfect cast and [[talent]] to create the most sensationally [[moving]] movie of the time, and [[great]] for most audiences. It minimizes the [[everyday]] [[romances]] and [[puts]] more [[emphasis]] on the important [[values]] we can all [[relate]] to such as [[friendships]], [[loyalty]], and believing in yourself. [[Nothing]] [[could]] [[possibly]] [[compare]]. I personally have never [[seen]] [[anything]] [[quite]] like it, and I don't [[suspect]] I ever will again.

It appeals to the wider population in [[many]] [[ways]] and is a [[must]] [[see]] for all. [[Lune]] [[Kids]] is the [[conte]] of two [[siblings]] and a [[boyfriend]] trying to make it in a futuristic, economically-unstable [[Japans]]. After a cunning [[catastrophe]] [[disappeared]] [[inaccurate]], [[somebody]] new [[penetrates]] young Sho's [[vida]], a [[particular]] [[boyfriend]] by the [[names]] of Kei. Years [[thereafter]] they have grown [[fairly]] close, and have [[discovered]] ways to [[merged]] both their talents into one [[unconquerable]] team. During another escapade, they [[faced]] a new [[boyfriend]] and his [[voiceless]] [[sisters]] who [[gotten]] part of their band of [[freund]]. Before long [[catastrophe]] again [[bombardment]] and the group [[slumps]] [[additionally]]. Alliances turn to [[nemesis]] and their [[universe]] are all turned upside down. Regrets and hopelessness claim some while power and success take others. Tragedy [[claim]] still others. [[Realities]] are revealed and [[life]] are forever [[change]].

And you will never [[behold]] a more [[funky]] sunrise.

This [[cinematography]] is a gripping tale of [[unending]] friendships, [[networks]] of relationships, and a team that not [[yet]] [[dies]] can [[preserving]] [[also]] for too [[lengthy]]. Moon [[kid]] combines sci-fi, drama, and action with the perfect cast and [[talents]] to create the most sensationally [[transferring]] movie of the time, and [[large]] for most audiences. It minimizes the [[daily]] [[ballads]] and [[begs]] more [[focus]] on the important [[value]] we can all [[relating]] to such as [[friends]], [[fidelity]], and believing in yourself. [[Anything]] [[did]] [[presumably]] [[comparison]]. I personally have never [[watched]] [[nothing]] [[altogether]] like it, and I don't [[suspicious]] I ever will again.

It appeals to the wider population in [[various]] [[shapes]] and is a [[ought]] [[behold]] for all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I picked this [[DVD]] up at the [[Dollar]] [[Store]]. The DVD was on the 2 for $1 rack, but since it had [[Michael]] Madsen in it, I [[thought]] that [[since]] I had never seen the [[movie]], I [[bought]] it anyway.

I [[must]] say that I didn't like the [[movie]]. The [[movie]] [[played]] more like a documentary or an [[advertisement]] for [[religion]] than [[anything]] [[else]]. I [[found]] that the director's [[use]] of flashbacks did not [[add]] to the [[story]] line for me. I would have preferred to view the [[story]] line in chronological order.

I won't throw it away like one of the other commentators, but It may be quite awhile before I [[would]] [[consider]] watching this movie again.

Who knows, [[since]] it was [[Michael]] Madsen's film [[debut]], maybe it [[might]] have some archival value at some future date. I picked this [[DVDS]] up at the [[Dollars]] [[Shops]]. The DVD was on the 2 for $1 rack, but since it had [[Michele]] Madsen in it, I [[thoughts]] that [[because]] I had never seen the [[filmmaking]], I [[purchase]] it anyway.

I [[ought]] say that I didn't like the [[movies]]. The [[movies]] [[done]] more like a documentary or an [[publicity]] for [[religions]] than [[nothing]] [[further]]. I [[discoveries]] that the director's [[utilizes]] of flashbacks did not [[added]] to the [[tales]] line for me. I would have preferred to view the [[tales]] line in chronological order.

I won't throw it away like one of the other commentators, but It may be quite awhile before I [[should]] [[contemplate]] watching this movie again.

Who knows, [[because]] it was [[Micheal]] Madsen's film [[infancy]], maybe it [[maybe]] have some archival value at some future date. --------------------------------------------- Result 3612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Sarah]] Silverman is a [[dangerous]] Bitch! She's beautiful, sexy, [[funny]] and [[talent]], [[dark]] and [[demonic]]. I read the other 'comment' on this [[show]] as well as the message board stuff and people just don't get it. Nothing that appears on [[T]].V. is an accident. Too much [[money]], time and work is put into the production of a T.V. show for there to be mistakes. This show is [[stupid]] because Sarah [[wanted]] it to be [[stupid]]. This show is [[juvenile]] because [[Sarah]] [[wanted]] it to be juvenile. I thought the jokes were great and the theme show as well as the other musical numbers are [[wonderfully]] bizarre. It's a lot like Pee-Wee's Playhouse for maladjusted, slacker twenty-something glue sniffing, Future Pornstars of America from the Valley. The cast is awesome. The scenarios and action is well-paced. I hope this show succeeds since Comedy Central didn't let David spade keep his show. Who plays Sarah's sister? She not in the cast listing on the show's home page. I would love to see her stand-up. Does anyone know about her up-coming show dates or DVDs that may be floating around out there? [[Darah]] Silverman is a [[hazardous]] Bitch! She's beautiful, sexy, [[amusing]] and [[talents]], [[gloomy]] and [[baleful]]. I read the other 'comment' on this [[spectacle]] as well as the message board stuff and people just don't get it. Nothing that appears on [[ton]].V. is an accident. Too much [[cash]], time and work is put into the production of a T.V. show for there to be mistakes. This show is [[nonsensical]] because Sarah [[wanting]] it to be [[preposterous]]. This show is [[infantile]] because [[Darah]] [[wanting]] it to be juvenile. I thought the jokes were great and the theme show as well as the other musical numbers are [[stunningly]] bizarre. It's a lot like Pee-Wee's Playhouse for maladjusted, slacker twenty-something glue sniffing, Future Pornstars of America from the Valley. The cast is awesome. The scenarios and action is well-paced. I hope this show succeeds since Comedy Central didn't let David spade keep his show. Who plays Sarah's sister? She not in the cast listing on the show's home page. I would love to see her stand-up. Does anyone know about her up-coming show dates or DVDs that may be floating around out there? --------------------------------------------- Result 3613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Frownland is like one of those intensely embarrassing [[situations]] where you end up [[laughing]] out loud at exactly the wrong time; and just at the moment you realize you shouldn't be laughing, you've already reached the pinnacle of voice resoundness; and as you look around you at the ghostly white [[faces]] with their gaping wide-open mouths and glazen [[eyes]], you feel a [[piercing]] [[ache]] beginning in the pit of your stomach and [[suddenly]] rushing up your throat and... well, you [[get]] the point.

But for all its unpleasantness and punches in the face, Frownland, really is a [[remarkable]] [[piece]] of [[work]] that, after viewing the inarticulate mess of a [[main]] character and all his pathetic [[troubles]] and mishaps, makes you [[want]] to scratch your own eyes out and at the same [[time]], you feel sickenly sorry for him.

It would have been a [[lot]] easier for me to [[simply]] [[walk]] out of Ronald Bronstein's [[film]], but for some [[insane]] reason, I felt an [[unwavering]] determination to stay the course and experience all the [[grainy]] [[irritation]] the [[film]] has to [[offer]]. [[If]] [[someone]] sets you on fire, you [[typically]] [[want]] to put it out: [[Stop]]! [[Drop]]! And [[Roll]]! But with this [[film]], you [[want]] to watch the [[flame]] slowly engulf your [[entire]] [[body]]. You endure the pain--perhaps out of [[spite]], or some [[unknown]] masochistic curiosity I can't even [[begin]] to [[attempt]] to [[explain]].

[[Unfortunately]], mainstream [[cinema]] will never [[let]] this film [[come]] to a theater near you. But if you [[get]] a [[chance]] to [[catch]] it, [[prepare]] yourself: [[bring]] a [[doggie]] [[bag]]. Frownland is like one of those intensely embarrassing [[instances]] where you end up [[kidding]] out loud at exactly the wrong time; and just at the moment you realize you shouldn't be laughing, you've already reached the pinnacle of voice resoundness; and as you look around you at the ghostly white [[facing]] with their gaping wide-open mouths and glazen [[eye]], you feel a [[pierce]] [[stomachache]] beginning in the pit of your stomach and [[abruptly]] rushing up your throat and... well, you [[obtains]] the point.

But for all its unpleasantness and punches in the face, Frownland, really is a [[wondrous]] [[slice]] of [[collaborate]] that, after viewing the inarticulate mess of a [[principal]] character and all his pathetic [[disturbances]] and mishaps, makes you [[wants]] to scratch your own eyes out and at the same [[times]], you feel sickenly sorry for him.

It would have been a [[batch]] easier for me to [[purely]] [[marche]] out of Ronald Bronstein's [[flick]], but for some [[lunatic]] reason, I felt an [[unfailing]] determination to stay the course and experience all the [[fuzzy]] [[annoyance]] the [[cinematography]] has to [[delivering]]. [[Unless]] [[somebody]] sets you on fire, you [[normally]] [[wanna]] to put it out: [[Stopped]]! [[Dropped]]! And [[Rolling]]! But with this [[films]], you [[wanna]] to watch the [[torch]] slowly engulf your [[whole]] [[organs]]. You endure the pain--perhaps out of [[sadness]], or some [[anonymous]] masochistic curiosity I can't even [[startup]] to [[strive]] to [[clarified]].

[[Alas]], mainstream [[theatre]] will never [[letting]] this film [[arrived]] to a theater near you. But if you [[obtain]] a [[luck]] to [[capturing]] it, [[preparing]] yourself: [[bringing]] a [[pooch]] [[backpack]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I wasn't [[expecting]] the [[highest]] calibre of film-making with [[Joel]] Schumacher [[directing]] this one, so I was [[surprised]] that TIGERLAND wasn't a complete waste of time.

In technique, it's [[often]] derivative of [[SAVING]] PRIVATE RYAN with the shaky [[camera]] work, [[grainy]] shots, the [[film]] [[occasionally]] running like it's [[skipping]] a sprocket---all those techniques Speilberg used to [[make]] his film [[seem]] more realistic but in the [[end]] was more distracting than [[anything]] else.

But unlike [[SAVING]] [[PRIVATE]] RYAN, the emotional [[component]] wasn't as [[weak]], as the [[characters]] in this [[film]] seemed more like [[real]] people and the story [[less]] contrived, not so wrapped up in the American [[flag]] (Speilberg [[gets]] an 'F' in subtlety).

Next to the first section of Kubrick's FULL METAL [[JACKET]], this is the most [[realistic]] [[portrayal]] of [[boot]] [[camp]] that I have [[seen]] in a [[film]], and for that I [[think]] it's worth [[watching]].

It's not a [[great]] [[film]], but [[neither]] is it a bad [[film]]. I wasn't [[wait]] the [[high]] calibre of film-making with [[Joelle]] Schumacher [[instructing]] this one, so I was [[horrified]] that TIGERLAND wasn't a complete waste of time.

In technique, it's [[traditionally]] derivative of [[RESCUES]] PRIVATE RYAN with the shaky [[cameras]] work, [[hazy]] shots, the [[movie]] [[sometimes]] running like it's [[jumping]] a sprocket---all those techniques Speilberg used to [[deliver]] his film [[seems]] more realistic but in the [[ends]] was more distracting than [[something]] else.

But unlike [[SAVINGS]] [[PRIVATELY]] RYAN, the emotional [[ingredients]] wasn't as [[vulnerable]], as the [[features]] in this [[movies]] seemed more like [[actual]] people and the story [[lowest]] contrived, not so wrapped up in the American [[pennant]] (Speilberg [[receives]] an 'F' in subtlety).

Next to the first section of Kubrick's FULL METAL [[SHIRT]], this is the most [[reality]] [[depiction]] of [[boots]] [[campground]] that I have [[watched]] in a [[cinematography]], and for that I [[reckon]] it's worth [[staring]].

It's not a [[wonderful]] [[flick]], but [[either]] is it a bad [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Miss DeCarlo's starring debut has everything the writers could come up with -- from the Franco-Prussian War to the US Civil War, the great American West, San Francisco in its heyday, ballet, opera, vaudeville, stage coach bandits, and a Chinese junk. Just when you thought the plot couldn't get any screwier, it does. It's magnificent, taken tongue in cheek. DeCarlo's character (here called Anna Marie -- NOT Salome, that's the role she dances) is loosely based on the career of the notorious Lola Montez, who was the mistress of the King of Prussia and caused a revolution when he gave her the crown jewels. She did escape to the American west. There is a town in Arizona called "Salome, Where She Danced," based on the historical fact that Lola Montez did dance the role of Salome there. StageCoach Cleve and the Russian nobleman who fall under her charms are not historically accurate, nor I assume is the Chinese wise man with the Scottish accent -- but it is one of my favorite all time camp classics and DeCarlo is breathtakingly beautiful throughout. --------------------------------------------- Result 3616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It takes patience to get through David Lynch's eccentric, but-- for a change-- life-affirming chronicle of Alvin Straight's journey, but stick with it. Though it moves as slow as Straight's John Deere, when he meets the kind strangers along his pilgrimage we learn much about the isolation of aging, the painful regrets and secrets, and ultimately the power of family and reconciliation. Richard Farnsworth caps his career with the year's most genuine performance, sad and poetic, flinty and caring. And Sissy Spacek matches him as his "slow" daughter Rose who pines over her own private loss while caring for dad. Rarely has a modern film preached so positively about family. --------------------------------------------- Result 3617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] this sequel to the 1989 action-comedy [[classic]] K-9, detective Dooley [[[James]] Belushi] and his dog Jerry Lee return to fight [[crime]], but this time they are teamed up with another detective [[[Christine]] Tucci] and her partner, a mean Doberman named Zues who does not [[get]] along with Jerry Lee very well. Dooley does not [[get]] along with his [[new]] [[partner]] much either. That all [[changes]] as the movie goes along. The [[movie]] is [[intense]] as their is a guy that [[really]] wants to kill Dooley for the [[way]] he treated him in the past. There is some dramatic scenes dealing with the death of Dooley's [[wife]] that don't [[really]] seem to be with the tone of the movie because the rest of the movie is action sequences, [[dog]] poop jokes, fart jokes, and jokes about dogs biting bad guys in a certain [[area]]. I know that that [[seems]] like very low humor, but some of it is actually very [[funny]]. I didn't [[see]] this movie for the jokes, I [[saw]] it for two reasons. The first [[reason]] is because I am a [[big]] James Belushi fan and the second is for the action sequences. James Belushi is funnier than he was in K-9 and the action [[sequences]] at are better too. It would have been nice to see more characters from K-9 to return, but it's still a fun [[movie]]. If you are a James Belushi [[fan]], you'll [[love]] this [[movie]]. [[Across]] this sequel to the 1989 action-comedy [[traditional]] K-9, detective Dooley [[[Jacques]] Belushi] and his dog Jerry Lee return to fight [[offense]], but this time they are teamed up with another detective [[[Kristin]] Tucci] and her partner, a mean Doberman named Zues who does not [[obtain]] along with Jerry Lee very well. Dooley does not [[gets]] along with his [[novel]] [[partners]] much either. That all [[shift]] as the movie goes along. The [[cinematography]] is [[vehement]] as their is a guy that [[genuinely]] wants to kill Dooley for the [[manner]] he treated him in the past. There is some dramatic scenes dealing with the death of Dooley's [[mujer]] that don't [[genuinely]] seem to be with the tone of the movie because the rest of the movie is action sequences, [[hound]] poop jokes, fart jokes, and jokes about dogs biting bad guys in a certain [[domains]]. I know that that [[looks]] like very low humor, but some of it is actually very [[humorous]]. I didn't [[seeing]] this movie for the jokes, I [[watched]] it for two reasons. The first [[motive]] is because I am a [[considerable]] James Belushi fan and the second is for the action sequences. James Belushi is funnier than he was in K-9 and the action [[sequence]] at are better too. It would have been nice to see more characters from K-9 to return, but it's still a fun [[kino]]. If you are a James Belushi [[ventilator]], you'll [[amour]] this [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Imagine]] that you are [[asked]] by your [[date]] what [[movie]] you [[wanted]] to [[see]], and you remember seeing a [[rather]] [[intriguing]] [[trailer]] about "The Grudge." [[So]], in good [[faith]], you [[recommend]] [[seeing]] that movie. It is the Halloween season, after all. And it did boffo box office this [[past]] [[weekend]], so it [[must]] be pretty good...so you [[go]].

And you're actually in a [[state]] of shock when the [[movie]] [[ends]] the way it does, and you hear yourself audibly saying, "that can't be the end of the [[movie]]...." But, alas, it is.

And imagine [[coming]] out of the [[movie]] [[theater]] being [[embarrassed]] and [[ashamed]] for [[recommending]] such a dog of a [[movie]]. You [[think]] that your date thinks you're a bonehead for suggesting such an [[atrocity]], and your suggestion will [[certainly]] [[end]] a [[promising]] [[relationship]]. Actually, it was so [[bad]] that both of us cracked up laughing at how [[bad]] it was. I [[see]] no [[future]] for Miss Gellar in the [[movies]], and [[suggest]] that she sticks to [[television]] in the future. Actually, it won't be [[long]] before she is consigned to flea-market conventions selling Buffy memorabilia, and it can't happen soon [[enough]], if you [[ask]] me. Horrible, [[horrible]], [[horrible]]. The [[plot]] didn't make sense; [[continuity]] was [[terrible]]. It's [[apparent]] that the whole ending was contrived to have a "Grudge II--The Return of 'Cat-Boy'." [[Guess]] that you are [[wondered]] by your [[dates]] what [[cinematography]] you [[wanting]] to [[behold]], and you remember seeing a [[somewhat]] [[enigmatic]] [[camper]] about "The Grudge." [[Hence]], in good [[creed]], you [[recommendation]] [[witnessing]] that movie. It is the Halloween season, after all. And it did boffo box office this [[former]] [[weekends]], so it [[gotta]] be pretty good...so you [[going]].

And you're actually in a [[sate]] of shock when the [[film]] [[end]] the way it does, and you hear yourself audibly saying, "that can't be the end of the [[filmmaking]]...." But, alas, it is.

And imagine [[come]] out of the [[filmmaking]] [[cinemas]] being [[ashamed]] and [[humiliating]] for [[recommended]] such a dog of a [[filmmaking]]. You [[thought]] that your date thinks you're a bonehead for suggesting such an [[cruelty]], and your suggestion will [[definitely]] [[ending]] a [[promise]] [[ties]]. Actually, it was so [[rotten]] that both of us cracked up laughing at how [[negative]] it was. I [[seeing]] no [[forthcoming]] for Miss Gellar in the [[theater]], and [[suggests]] that she sticks to [[televisions]] in the future. Actually, it won't be [[lengthy]] before she is consigned to flea-market conventions selling Buffy memorabilia, and it can't happen soon [[suitably]], if you [[calls]] me. Horrible, [[scary]], [[scary]]. The [[intrigue]] didn't make sense; [[continuance]] was [[gruesome]]. It's [[seeming]] that the whole ending was contrived to have a "Grudge II--The Return of 'Cat-Boy'." --------------------------------------------- Result 3619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has an interesting, albeit somewhat fanciful sci-fi plot, but it's wasted with poor direction and shlocky special effects. Rae Dawn Chong is appealing, despite the lack of a believable story and direction consistent with her talent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] What was the deal with the clothes? They were all dressed like something out of the late 70's early 80s. The [[cars]] were even were outdated. The school was outdated. The nuns [[attire]] was outdated, and the hospital looked like something from the 40's, with its wards and wooden staircases and things. Nothing in the [[whole]] [[movie]] [[implied]] it [[took]] place in 1991. My mother was laughing, [[saying]] "Geeeee-od! WHEN was this [[movie]] [[MADE]]?" When we pressed the "INFO BUTTON" on our remote, we were sure 1991 had to be typo! Did anybody else notice this? My FAVORITE part, though, was when the woman tells her uppity muck husband, on the telephone, about the inverted cross in the mirror, and he just says "Well, look, I've got a congress meeting. I'll talk to you about it later." That line was just classic. JUST LIKE A MAN! My [[mothers]] favorite part was when they gave the "Spawn of the Devil Child" her very own Rottweiler. My mother said "Just what the Spawn of the Devil needs... a Rottweiler" She also enjoyed all of the people collapsing in the churches, clutching their chests. Her OTHER favorite part was the guy at the school parking lot, driving 5 miles a hour, driving right into the garbage truck/dump truck/front end loader thingee. He had about 20 seconds to just stop the car...but he just kept going, with a real dumb [[vacant]] [[look]] on his face. I mean, how fast can you GO in a school parking lot?!?! Whatever! What was the deal with the clothes? They were all dressed like something out of the late 70's early 80s. The [[auto]] were even were outdated. The school was outdated. The nuns [[clothes]] was outdated, and the hospital looked like something from the 40's, with its wards and wooden staircases and things. Nothing in the [[entire]] [[filmmaking]] [[entailed]] it [[picked]] place in 1991. My mother was laughing, [[arguing]] "Geeeee-od! WHEN was this [[filmmaking]] [[INTRODUCED]]?" When we pressed the "INFO BUTTON" on our remote, we were sure 1991 had to be typo! Did anybody else notice this? My FAVORITE part, though, was when the woman tells her uppity muck husband, on the telephone, about the inverted cross in the mirror, and he just says "Well, look, I've got a congress meeting. I'll talk to you about it later." That line was just classic. JUST LIKE A MAN! My [[madre]] favorite part was when they gave the "Spawn of the Devil Child" her very own Rottweiler. My mother said "Just what the Spawn of the Devil needs... a Rottweiler" She also enjoyed all of the people collapsing in the churches, clutching their chests. Her OTHER favorite part was the guy at the school parking lot, driving 5 miles a hour, driving right into the garbage truck/dump truck/front end loader thingee. He had about 20 seconds to just stop the car...but he just kept going, with a real dumb [[unoccupied]] [[peek]] on his face. I mean, how fast can you GO in a school parking lot?!?! Whatever! --------------------------------------------- Result 3621 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The two things are are good about this film are it's two unknown celebrities.

First, Daphne Zuniga, in her first appearance in a film, young and supple, with looks that still encompass her body today, steals the very beginning, which is all she is in, and that is that. She is obviously just starting out because her acting improved with her next projects.

Second, the score by then known composer Christopher(Chris) Young is what keeps this stinker from getting a one star...yeah, I know one star more is not much, but in this movie's case, it is a lot.

The rest is just stupid senseless horror of a couple a college students who try to clean out a dorm that is due for being torn down, getting offed one by one by an unsuspecting killer, blah, blah, blah...we all know where this is going.

Watch the first eighteen minutes with Daphne Zuniga, then turn it off. --------------------------------------------- Result 3622 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this video is 100% retarded. besides the brain cell killing acting and plot, it's way too long. don't waste your money at the video store. i actually was mad that i sat through this garbage and spent money on it. just absolutely awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3623 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The [[plot]] is so manipulative, [[counting]] [[completely]] on the most uncredible and [[unthinkable]] decisions of the adults in each and every [[parenting]] decision. The [[children]] are [[super]] as far as [[charm]] and delivery of the lines but as I [[say]], the whole plot depends on each and [[every]] [[adult]] being [[complete]] idiots, and [[therefore]] in THAT [[case]], making more sense out of their actions (and at the same time being the only [[way]] to [[explain]] the boys [[actions]] of [[total]] [[mistrust]]). Why [[would]] sweey charming [[little]] boys take a baby from the [[shore]]? How did the [[baby]] get to the [[shore]] and at the same [[time]] [[account]] for it being the LAST place to be [[searched]]? Why [[would]] the 2 [[boys]] NEVER be informed an [[instead]] at the same [[time]] a baby is [[missing]] [[nobody]] gives a fig about them [[running]] [[around]] with [[food]] and diapers with all that [[commotion]] [[going]] on and literally every other place it searched? There is just no [[possible]] [[justification]] to [[ask]] the [[audience]] to believe this. [[Asking]] to believe it [[would]] then do to trial ([[even]] the informal [[setting]]) is too [[insulting]] to bare. The [[intrigue]] is so manipulative, [[recount]] [[perfectly]] on the most uncredible and [[unimaginable]] decisions of the adults in each and every [[parenthood]] decision. The [[infantile]] are [[wondrous]] as far as [[amulet]] and delivery of the lines but as I [[tell]], the whole plot depends on each and [[any]] [[adulthood]] being [[finish]] idiots, and [[accordingly]] in THAT [[example]], making more sense out of their actions (and at the same time being the only [[camino]] to [[clarified]] the boys [[measurements]] of [[unmitigated]] [[suspicion]]). Why [[should]] sweey charming [[petit]] boys take a baby from the [[coast]]? How did the [[bebe]] get to the [[coastal]] and at the same [[times]] [[accounts]] for it being the LAST place to be [[frisked]]? Why [[should]] the 2 [[grooms]] NEVER be informed an [[however]] at the same [[times]] a baby is [[disappeared]] [[anyone]] gives a fig about them [[execute]] [[nearly]] with [[meals]] and diapers with all that [[turbulence]] [[go]] on and literally every other place it searched? There is just no [[probable]] [[reason]] to [[wondering]] the [[spectators]] to believe this. [[Requested]] to believe it [[could]] then do to trial ([[yet]] the informal [[configured]]) is too [[derogatory]] to bare. --------------------------------------------- Result 3624 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Dear Readers,

With High Expectations, [[Human]] Beings [[leave]] Earth to begin a [[new]] [[life]] in Space Colonies. However, The Allied Forces of the United [[Earth]] [[Sphere]] Alliance gain [[great]] military [[control]] over the colonies and [[soon]] seize one colony after another in the [[name]] of Justice and [[Peace]]...

The [[year]] is After Colony 195. Operation Meteor. [[In]] a move to [[counter]] the Alliance's tyranny, [[Rebel]] [[Forces]] from [[several]] [[colonies]] [[send]] [[new]] arsenals to Earth [[disguised]] as Shooting [[Stars]]...

[[However]]...The Alliance forces [[catch]] on...

Gundam Wing is the most popular and most successful of the [[entire]] Gundam [[Series]]. With cutting-edge Anime animation, [[stunning]] [[action]], amazing Mobile Suits, [[Breathtaking]] [[scripts]], and some of the most unforgettable [[characters]] in Anime [[History]].

I'll try to [[explain]] the plot of Gundam Wing as [[best]] as [[possible]]. [[Earth]] has now [[colonized]] space, but the UESA forces have [[forcibly]] [[occupied]] them along with the [[help]] of the [[mysterious]] Elite Force OZ and their shadowy [[leaders]], Treize Kushrenada and the Romefeller Foundation. [[Five]] pilots are [[sent]] to [[Earth]] piloting [[Mobile]] [[Suits]] with [[extraordinary]] power known as the Gundams. Pursued by the Mysterious Lieutenant Zechs Merquise, Treize's second-in-command, a [[young]] [[teenager]] named Relena, and the Alliance military, the Gundam pilots unleash [[hell]] upon Earth for the Freedom of the Colonies while all the while, a plot most sinister architected by Treize [[begins]] to [[start]].

Signed, The [[Constant]] [[DVD]] Collector Dear Readers,

With High Expectations, [[Humans]] Beings [[let]] Earth to begin a [[novel]] [[iife]] in Space Colonies. However, The Allied Forces of the United [[Terra]] [[Realms]] Alliance gain [[marvellous]] military [[monitors]] over the colonies and [[shortly]] seize one colony after another in the [[behalf]] of Justice and [[Pacific]]...

The [[annum]] is After Colony 195. Operation Meteor. [[Throughout]] a move to [[combat]] the Alliance's tyranny, [[Mutinous]] [[Troop]] from [[many]] [[colony]] [[consignment]] [[novel]] arsenals to Earth [[hiding]] as Shooting [[Superstar]]...

[[Instead]]...The Alliance forces [[captured]] on...

Gundam Wing is the most popular and most successful of the [[total]] Gundam [[Serial]]. With cutting-edge Anime animation, [[astounding]] [[efforts]], amazing Mobile Suits, [[Astounding]] [[screenplays]], and some of the most unforgettable [[trait]] in Anime [[Story]].

I'll try to [[clarified]] the plot of Gundam Wing as [[better]] as [[feasible]]. [[Land]] has now [[colonised]] space, but the UESA forces have [[forcefully]] [[occupy]] them along with the [[aiding]] of the [[cryptic]] Elite Force OZ and their shadowy [[heads]], Treize Kushrenada and the Romefeller Foundation. [[Fifth]] pilots are [[shipped]] to [[Terra]] piloting [[Laptop]] [[Outfits]] with [[noteworthy]] power known as the Gundams. Pursued by the Mysterious Lieutenant Zechs Merquise, Treize's second-in-command, a [[youthful]] [[teen]] named Relena, and the Alliance military, the Gundam pilots unleash [[dammit]] upon Earth for the Freedom of the Colonies while all the while, a plot most sinister architected by Treize [[starts]] to [[startup]].

Signed, The [[Ceaseless]] [[DVDS]] Collector --------------------------------------------- Result 3625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[loved]] the [[original]]. It was brilliant and always will be. Strangely though, I actually looked forward to seeing the re-make. I'm usually a little bit against re-makes because there's far too many of them, but somehow this [[intrigued]] me. I was really enjoying it to begin with. Caine brilliant, as usual, and Jude Law managing to hold is own next to him. It was quite clever how it was modernised and it was working. What [[stops]] this from being really good is the last seven [[minutes]]. It goes completely away from the original, so far in fact that is [[ceases]] to be clever and just gets annoying. The end in the original was fantastic! So much tension was built up and it was unbelievably clever! This? It grows not in tension but in frustration as it seemed they decided to make Caine's character a homosexual. It was if they were trying far to hard to be different. And then... BANG! Law's dead. Roll Credits. This film is worth the watch simply for the performances, but those last seven minutes really do drag it down. What a pity.... I [[worshiped]] the [[upfront]]. It was brilliant and always will be. Strangely though, I actually looked forward to seeing the re-make. I'm usually a little bit against re-makes because there's far too many of them, but somehow this [[disconcerted]] me. I was really enjoying it to begin with. Caine brilliant, as usual, and Jude Law managing to hold is own next to him. It was quite clever how it was modernised and it was working. What [[ceasing]] this from being really good is the last seven [[mins]]. It goes completely away from the original, so far in fact that is [[halts]] to be clever and just gets annoying. The end in the original was fantastic! So much tension was built up and it was unbelievably clever! This? It grows not in tension but in frustration as it seemed they decided to make Caine's character a homosexual. It was if they were trying far to hard to be different. And then... BANG! Law's dead. Roll Credits. This film is worth the watch simply for the performances, but those last seven minutes really do drag it down. What a pity.... --------------------------------------------- Result 3626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Let's start this [[review]] out on a positive [[note]] -- I am very [[glad]] they didn't [[decide]] to [[wimp]] out with Tony being shot and do a retrospective season like some people were rumoring. Actually, creator and [[writer]] of this episode David Chase did [[quite]] the opposite. We don't [[actually]] know if Tony will live or [[die]]. He's in a [[coma]] and his chances of [[recovering]] are very slim to none. This episode [[seemed]] to [[move]] very slow, and the coma induced dream [[Tony]] was in [[involving]] mistaken identity and robed Asian monks slapping the sh*t out of him was [[absolutely]], flat-out [[weird]]. After 45-minutes I [[got]] a little sick of [[everyone]] [[grieving]], but that shouldn' t be a [[reason]] to slam this episode. It was a [[weird]] and [[unpredictable]] episode, but it was [[still]] well-written and [[intense]]. Edie Falco gave an [[astounding]] career-defining performance in this episode as the [[conflicted]] [[wife]] having to face with her husband's could-be demise. I also [[found]] it interesting AJ [[dropped]] out of [[school]] and [[swore]] a [[vendetta]] against Junior, which AJ most likely won't have the balls to [[pull]] off. Silvio is now acting-boss which [[opens]] numerous doors to problems in [[later]] episodes. There were a [[lot]] of [[great]] quips in this episode, [[also]], and I [[think]] Vito 'Pole-Smoker' Spadafore may [[meet]] his demise if he [[keeps]] being a [[greedy]] S.O.B.

This wasn't a [[great]] episode and disappointed only because [[even]] [[though]] Tony [[kills]] people, we as an [[audience]] adore him and feel he is our hero of the show. This was a [[necessary]] episode for the series, [[even]] [[though]] it was a [[little]] snore inducing [[towards]] the conclusion. [[Kudos]] to Edie Falco's performance, and David Chase and the [[writers]] for creating this wholly [[original]] and [[unpredictable]] plot twist. This is the only season of 'The Sopranos' where I haven't a f*cking clue where it is going to [[go]]. I can't [[wait]] for next week's episode. My [[Rating]]: 7.5/10

[[Best]] [[Line]] of the Episode: ([[Paulie]] to AJ): "Let's go, Van Helsing!" Let's start this [[inspect]] out on a positive [[remark]] -- I am very [[happy]] they didn't [[deciding]] to [[pussy]] out with Tony being shot and do a retrospective season like some people were rumoring. Actually, creator and [[novelist]] of this episode David Chase did [[rather]] the opposite. We don't [[indeed]] know if Tony will live or [[killed]]. He's in a [[eat]] and his chances of [[recaptured]] are very slim to none. This episode [[sounded]] to [[budge]] very slow, and the coma induced dream [[Tonny]] was in [[encompassing]] mistaken identity and robed Asian monks slapping the sh*t out of him was [[altogether]], flat-out [[nosy]]. After 45-minutes I [[get]] a little sick of [[anybody]] [[heartbreak]], but that shouldn' t be a [[justification]] to slam this episode. It was a [[bizarre]] and [[erratic]] episode, but it was [[yet]] well-written and [[ferocious]]. Edie Falco gave an [[awesome]] career-defining performance in this episode as the [[polemic]] [[woman]] having to face with her husband's could-be demise. I also [[finds]] it interesting AJ [[fell]] out of [[tuition]] and [[vowed]] a [[retaliation]] against Junior, which AJ most likely won't have the balls to [[pulling]] off. Silvio is now acting-boss which [[opening]] numerous doors to problems in [[subsequently]] episodes. There were a [[lots]] of [[huge]] quips in this episode, [[similarly]], and I [[thought]] Vito 'Pole-Smoker' Spadafore may [[cater]] his demise if he [[retains]] being a [[avid]] S.O.B.

This wasn't a [[excellent]] episode and disappointed only because [[yet]] [[if]] Tony [[kill]] people, we as an [[viewers]] adore him and feel he is our hero of the show. This was a [[required]] episode for the series, [[yet]] [[if]] it was a [[tiny]] snore inducing [[into]] the conclusion. [[Laurels]] to Edie Falco's performance, and David Chase and the [[authors]] for creating this wholly [[initial]] and [[erratic]] plot twist. This is the only season of 'The Sopranos' where I haven't a f*cking clue where it is going to [[going]]. I can't [[suspense]] for next week's episode. My [[Ratings]]: 7.5/10

[[Better]] [[Iine]] of the Episode: ([[Paul]] to AJ): "Let's go, Van Helsing!" --------------------------------------------- Result 3627 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[cute]] animated short features two [[comic]] [[icons]] - Betty Boop and Henry.

Henry is the [[bald]], slightly portly boy from the comics who never speaks.

Well here he does [[speak]]!

He wants to get a puppy from Betty Boop's pet store, and when he is [[left]] to [[mind]] the store - some hilarious hijinks ensue.

Betty [[sings]] a song about [[pets]], [[Henry]] [[gets]] in a [[battle]] with [[birds]] and a monkey, but everything [[works]] out in the end. This [[purty]] animated short features two [[sitcom]] [[symbol]] - Betty Boop and Henry.

Henry is the [[baldy]], slightly portly boy from the comics who never speaks.

Well here he does [[talking]]!

He wants to get a puppy from Betty Boop's pet store, and when he is [[gauche]] to [[esprit]] the store - some hilarious hijinks ensue.

Betty [[sung]] a song about [[fart]], [[Heinrich]] [[attains]] in a [[fight]] with [[fowl]] and a monkey, but everything [[working]] out in the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 3628 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This 1953 Sam Fuller movie contains some of his best [[work]], and its [[sad]] that he couldn't [[continue]] to [[get]] the backing of [[major]] Hollywood studios to do his stuff. The story line goes [[something]] like this. A [[tough]] [[hard]] [[broad]] (read prostitute) is riding the subway one hot summer day, and [[gets]] her [[pocketbook]] [[picked]] by [[Skip]] McCoy. What Skip (and the [[dame]]) don't [[realize]] is that she is [[also]] [[carrying]] some microfilm to be [[passed]] to commie [[spies]]. This [[opening]] shot without [[dialogue]], and [[mostly]] in tight close-ups is a beaut,one of the [[many]] that [[Fuller]] [[uses]] throughout the movie. Playing the [[babe]] known as [[Candy]] is Jean [[Peters]], who was never [[better]] nor [[better]] looking. One forgets how [[beautiful]] she was, and she [[handles]] this role very well. The Pickpocket is played by [[Richard]] Widmark, who had already made his mark, and set his style with 1947's Kiss Of Death as the crazy creep with the creepy laugh, and although he's a little "[[softer]]" here, he's still scary. These hard edged characters do have soft spots here and there, but its [[noir]] and nasty all the way. The standout performance belongs to the [[wonderful]] Thelma Ritter,who plays Moe the stoolie saving up her dough to pay for her own [[funeral]]. Ritter received a well deserved [[Oscar]] nomination for her performance, but lost out to the boring but popular performance of Donna Reed as the B girl (read prostitute) in "From Here To Eternity." Hollywood loves it when a good girl goes bad, and loves to Oscar them [[even]] [[though]] their performance is [[usually]] awful. See for [[instance]] Shirley Jones in "Elmer Gantry. Set [[among]] the docks and dives of New York [[City]], with crisp black and white photography by the [[great]] Joe MacDonald,and some very good art direction. [[Especially]] good is the set [[representing]] the [[New]] York [[City]] subways and Widmark's [[shack]] [[near]] the river. Made at the [[height]] of the cold [[war]] and red [[scare]], the villian of the [[piece]] is the [[ordinary]] looking commie, [[played]] by Richard Kiley who is much more [[dangerous]] than the pickpocket who is a criminal but is just [[trying]] to [[make]] a living and above all is a loyal American. This 1953 Sam Fuller movie contains some of his best [[cooperates]], and its [[unfortunate]] that he couldn't [[continues]] to [[obtain]] the backing of [[considerable]] Hollywood studios to do his stuff. The story line goes [[anything]] like this. A [[hard]] [[difficult]] [[extensive]] (read prostitute) is riding the subway one hot summer day, and [[got]] her [[wallet]] [[chosen]] by [[Skipped]] McCoy. What Skip (and the [[chick]]) don't [[reaching]] is that she is [[similarly]] [[transporting]] some microfilm to be [[adopted]] to commie [[espionage]]. This [[initiation]] shot without [[conversation]], and [[especially]] in tight close-ups is a beaut,one of the [[several]] that [[Fowler]] [[using]] throughout the movie. Playing the [[baby]] known as [[Sweets]] is Jean [[Peter]], who was never [[best]] nor [[best]] looking. One forgets how [[belle]] she was, and she [[handled]] this role very well. The Pickpocket is played by [[Richards]] Widmark, who had already made his mark, and set his style with 1947's Kiss Of Death as the crazy creep with the creepy laugh, and although he's a little "[[warmer]]" here, he's still scary. These hard edged characters do have soft spots here and there, but its [[negro]] and nasty all the way. The standout performance belongs to the [[spectacular]] Thelma Ritter,who plays Moe the stoolie saving up her dough to pay for her own [[burial]]. Ritter received a well deserved [[Oskar]] nomination for her performance, but lost out to the boring but popular performance of Donna Reed as the B girl (read prostitute) in "From Here To Eternity." Hollywood loves it when a good girl goes bad, and loves to Oscar them [[yet]] [[despite]] their performance is [[generally]] awful. See for [[lawsuits]] Shirley Jones in "Elmer Gantry. Set [[in]] the docks and dives of New York [[Town]], with crisp black and white photography by the [[grand]] Joe MacDonald,and some very good art direction. [[Specifically]] good is the set [[represent]] the [[Nuevo]] York [[Town]] subways and Widmark's [[hut]] [[nearby]] the river. Made at the [[altitude]] of the cold [[warfare]] and red [[fearful]], the villian of the [[slice]] is the [[banal]] looking commie, [[done]] by Richard Kiley who is much more [[risky]] than the pickpocket who is a criminal but is just [[tempting]] to [[deliver]] a living and above all is a loyal American. --------------------------------------------- Result 3629 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This movie has a [[special]] [[way]] of telling the [[story]], at [[first]] i found it rather odd as it jumped through [[time]] and I had no idea whats happening.

[[Anyway]] the story [[line]] was although simple, but [[still]] very [[real]] and [[touching]]. You met someone the [[first]] [[time]], you [[fell]] in [[love]] [[completely]], but [[broke]] up at last and [[promoted]] a [[deadly]] [[agony]]. Who hasn't [[go]] through this? but we will never [[forget]] this kind of pain in our life.

I [[would]] say i am [[rather]] touched as two [[actor]] has [[shown]] great performance in [[showing]] the [[love]] between the characters. I just wish that the [[story]] [[could]] be a happy [[ending]]. This movie has a [[extraordinaire]] [[routes]] of telling the [[fairytales]], at [[frst]] i found it rather odd as it jumped through [[period]] and I had no idea whats happening.

[[Anyhoo]] the story [[bloodline]] was although simple, but [[however]] very [[genuine]] and [[affects]]. You met someone the [[frst]] [[times]], you [[fall]] in [[adore]] [[abundantly]], but [[bailed]] up at last and [[advancing]] a [[homicidal]] [[torments]]. Who hasn't [[going]] through this? but we will never [[forgot]] this kind of pain in our life.

I [[ought]] say i am [[somewhat]] touched as two [[protagonist]] has [[display]] great performance in [[proving]] the [[adores]] between the characters. I just wish that the [[fairytales]] [[would]] be a happy [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Level One, Horror.

When I saw this film for the first time at 10, I [[knew]] it would give me [[nightmares]]. It did. [[Surprisingly]], as I [[recall]], it was the sound as much as the sight of the monster that caused them.

[[Level]] Two, [[Psychoanalytic]] Theory.

Later as an adult, I saw the story for what it was: What if the savage, unrestrained instincts we all repress became manifest.

[[Level]] Three, Pure Science Fiction.

The best way plausibly to realize the plot's "What if" is through the science fiction genre. This is pure science fiction, not the "cowboys in space" that passes for the genre today.

After 43 years, Forbidden Planet [[remains]] the [[greatest]] of all science fiction films. If planning a remake, SKG or Lucas, Watch Out! Level One, Horror.

When I saw this film for the first time at 10, I [[overheard]] it would give me [[daydreams]]. It did. [[Terribly]], as I [[rappel]], it was the sound as much as the sight of the monster that caused them.

[[Grades]] Two, [[Psychoanalytical]] Theory.

Later as an adult, I saw the story for what it was: What if the savage, unrestrained instincts we all repress became manifest.

[[Tier]] Three, Pure Science Fiction.

The best way plausibly to realize the plot's "What if" is through the science fiction genre. This is pure science fiction, not the "cowboys in space" that passes for the genre today.

After 43 years, Forbidden Planet [[leftovers]] the [[higher]] of all science fiction films. If planning a remake, SKG or Lucas, Watch Out! --------------------------------------------- Result 3631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This movie is [[great]] fun to watch if you [[love]] [[films]] of the organized crime variety. Those looking for a crime film starring a charismatic lead with dreams of taking over in a bad way may be slightly disappointed with the way this film [[strides]].

It is a fun romp through a criminal underworld however and if you aren't familiar with [[Hong]] Kong [[films]], then you may be pleasantly [[surprised]] by this one. I was [[somewhat]] [[disappointed]] by some of the choices made story-wise but overall a good [[crime]] [[film]]. Some [[things]] did not make [[sense]] but that seems to be the norm with [[films]] of the [[East]].

People just [[randomly]] do [[things]] regardless of how their [[personalities]] were set up [[prior]]. It's a [[slightly]] annoying pattern that [[permeates]] even in this [[film]]. This movie is [[wondrous]] fun to watch if you [[adored]] [[cinematography]] of the organized crime variety. Those looking for a crime film starring a charismatic lead with dreams of taking over in a bad way may be slightly disappointed with the way this film [[advances]].

It is a fun romp through a criminal underworld however and if you aren't familiar with [[Kong]] Kong [[movie]], then you may be pleasantly [[startled]] by this one. I was [[rather]] [[disappointing]] by some of the choices made story-wise but overall a good [[misdemeanor]] [[films]]. Some [[items]] did not make [[feeling]] but that seems to be the norm with [[kino]] of the [[Easterly]].

People just [[casually]] do [[items]] regardless of how their [[personages]] were set up [[avant]]. It's a [[modestly]] annoying pattern that [[pervades]] even in this [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too [[little]]. The base story is quite good, but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent budget [[really]] [[killed]] this movie. [[Stuart]] Gordon (the writer/director) has writing [[credit]] on 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. However, that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. [[Honestly]], this is a good [[example]] of when to not make a [[movie]]. Had he waited a few more years, [[technology]] would have made it cheaper to do [[many]] of the [[effects]]. (not to [[mention]] he [[could]] have [[found]] a [[company]] with money.) There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too [[small]]. The base story is quite good, but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent budget [[truthfully]] [[kiiled]] this movie. [[Sylvain]] Gordon (the writer/director) has writing [[credence]] on 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. However, that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. [[Sincerely]], this is a good [[instances]] of when to not make a [[filmmaking]]. Had he waited a few more years, [[technologies]] would have made it cheaper to do [[various]] of the [[repercussions]]. (not to [[cite]] he [[did]] have [[find]] a [[corporation]] with money.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[In]] A [[Woman]] [[Under]] the [[Influence]] [[Mabel]] goes crazy, but I can [[see]] why she does go crazy. If I lived the [[kind]] of life she lived with the family she has I [[would]] go crazy too. Everyone in her [[family]] is off their rocker and not [[completely]] with it. She is constantly surrounded by people [[yelling]] at her and telling her what is best for herself and people that aren't the sharpest knifes in the [[drawer]].

To start with the one [[person]] [[closest]] to her in her life, her husband, Nick, is a little off his rocker. He is always yelling at her when he is home telling her how to live her life and to [[stop]] acting like an [[imbecile]]. The rest of the time he is working long [[hours]] at his job and he isn't there to support her when she needs support. The one person in her life that should always be there for her is never there and if he is, he is just making her feel worse. She relies on him for support and always goes to him first when she feels she is acting wrong and he does nothing to support her. When she comes home from the hospital all he does is tell her how to [[act]], instead of comforting her, he just yells at her and tells her what to do.

The other major people in her life are her parents. Her parents do nothing in her life for her. Mabel basically runs their lives because they are afraid to stand up to her and stand up for her. In the end she even asks her father to stand up for her and he doesn't understand, and when he does get it he still does nothing. They do nothing to help [[Mabel]] recover or to keep her from going crazy because they do nothing for her period. The only person that tries to do something for her is Nick's mom. Nick's mom is adamant about having Mabel committed. She doesn't want to have [[Nick]] deal with it so she has the doctor commit her. It seems as [[though]] everyone is against Mabel and they feel that having her committed is a good idea because then they won't have to deal with it anymore. They all want to live their own lives and do nothing for Mabel except for yell at her and make her feel like she is doing something wrong when she really isn't. That is why she went crazy, and why she had to be committed, it was her family's entire fault. [[During]] A [[Femmes]] [[At]] the [[Impacts]] [[Mildred]] goes crazy, but I can [[seeing]] why she does go crazy. If I lived the [[sort]] of life she lived with the family she has I [[could]] go crazy too. Everyone in her [[families]] is off their rocker and not [[fully]] with it. She is constantly surrounded by people [[screaming]] at her and telling her what is best for herself and people that aren't the sharpest knifes in the [[dresser]].

To start with the one [[someone]] [[closer]] to her in her life, her husband, Nick, is a little off his rocker. He is always yelling at her when he is home telling her how to live her life and to [[ceasing]] acting like an [[jester]]. The rest of the time he is working long [[hour]] at his job and he isn't there to support her when she needs support. The one person in her life that should always be there for her is never there and if he is, he is just making her feel worse. She relies on him for support and always goes to him first when she feels she is acting wrong and he does nothing to support her. When she comes home from the hospital all he does is tell her how to [[ley]], instead of comforting her, he just yells at her and tells her what to do.

The other major people in her life are her parents. Her parents do nothing in her life for her. Mabel basically runs their lives because they are afraid to stand up to her and stand up for her. In the end she even asks her father to stand up for her and he doesn't understand, and when he does get it he still does nothing. They do nothing to help [[Mildred]] recover or to keep her from going crazy because they do nothing for her period. The only person that tries to do something for her is Nick's mom. Nick's mom is adamant about having Mabel committed. She doesn't want to have [[Nicky]] deal with it so she has the doctor commit her. It seems as [[if]] everyone is against Mabel and they feel that having her committed is a good idea because then they won't have to deal with it anymore. They all want to live their own lives and do nothing for Mabel except for yell at her and make her feel like she is doing something wrong when she really isn't. That is why she went crazy, and why she had to be committed, it was her family's entire fault. --------------------------------------------- Result 3634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] What an ambitious project Kenneth Branagh [[undertook]] here and how well it was [[realized]]! This is the first [[filmed]] version of 'Hamlet' to [[use]] the full text of Shakespeare's play, but Branagh didn't do it just because "it was there." His [[intention]], I [[believe]], was to make the play accessible and understandable to the general viewer without dumbing it down, so to speak. In [[return]] he [[asks]] [[viewers]] to put in a [[little]] work themselves, a fair [[enough]] proposition and one that's a [[bargain]].

The [[setting]] is a generic 19th century European one and this does more than [[work]] well, it keeps a modern or [[ancient]] [[look]] from [[possibly]] [[distracting]] from the [[work]] itself. The production design and [[cinematography]] and both [[outstanding]], which [[helps]] [[immensely]] when you're watching a four-hour [[movie]]. Branagh's [[casting]] once again is inspired and the acting is [[likewise]]. The direction accomplishes the heavy task of making this a movie [[rather]] than a deluxe [[version]] of a play. Since so much of 'Hamlet' is based on [[interior]] monologue and there are [[relatively]] few duels, [[battles]], etc., this can be a daunting [[task]]. But everything Branagh tries to do [[seems]] to [[work]].

Branagh has [[always]] been one of the most interesting [[actor]]/[[writer]]/directors, if not [[always]] the [[best]], since he [[made]] his [[big]] splash with '[[Henry]] V.' One quibble I had with him was what I [[saw]] as a tendency to ham it up at [[times]]. [[In]] his [[portrayal]] of Hamlet here he might be [[accused]] of that again, but there is a [[method]] at work. Let's face it, 'Hamlet' is not an [[easy]] [[work]] for the average [[person]] to [[understand]] and if one has never [[seen]] it performed before, he or she [[needs]] [[help]] even if they've read the play. Hamlet has the most lines of any Shakespearian [[character]] and Branagh makes sure that his [[viewers]] know what this [[man]] is [[thinking]] and feeling [[throughout]] the [[film]], [[even]] if you don't know the literal [[meaning]] of [[every]] arcane word. This performance by Branagh was at the very least worthy of an Oscar [[nomination]].

There are so [[many]] other [[outstanding]] performances here they're [[almost]] too [[numerous]] to mention, but some of them [[must]] be [[acknowledged]]. [[Derek]] Jacobi as Claudius is [[superb]] but [[even]] he [[takes]] a back [[seat]] to Kate Winslet when it [[comes]] to handing out praise. Her portrayal of Ophelia is awesome in its depth of feeling, made only more outstanding by the knowledge that she was only about 20 years old at the time! She looks to me like the finest young actress around. Other super performers in no particular order are Richard Briers, Nicholas Farrell, Michael Maloney, and Reece Dinsdale and Timothy Spall as Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, respectively. Honorable mention goes to Julie Christie, Charlton Heston, and Robin Williams, who manages to do his thing here successfully. Even Billy Crystal as a gravedigger works. The one cast member who doesn't, inexplicably, is Jack Lemmon. In the very opening scene he appears, and while the other three actors do a great job at setting the tense mood, Lemmon sounds like he is just running lines in rehearsal as a favor. You know this must have been a real dilemma for Branagh, since everything else about the movies screams out that it's the work of a perfectionist.

Not to be facetious when speaking of a four-hour movie, but it does seem just a tad too long. Some monologues and conversations do tend to go on a bit, if I may be so bold, and a little bit of judicious pruning would be welcome.

Did I forget anything, other than Patrick Doyle's score? No doubt I did. I'll just sum up by saying that Kenneth Branagh may have made the definitive film version of 'Hamlet,' and it will be a truly monumental production that tops this one. What an ambitious project Kenneth Branagh [[undertaken]] here and how well it was [[performed]]! This is the first [[shot]] version of 'Hamlet' to [[uses]] the full text of Shakespeare's play, but Branagh didn't do it just because "it was there." His [[ambition]], I [[reckon]], was to make the play accessible and understandable to the general viewer without dumbing it down, so to speak. In [[restitution]] he [[demands]] [[onlookers]] to put in a [[petite]] work themselves, a fair [[adequately]] proposition and one that's a [[negotiating]].

The [[settings]] is a generic 19th century European one and this does more than [[cooperate]] well, it keeps a modern or [[antiquity]] [[glance]] from [[presumably]] [[embarrassing]] from the [[cooperate]] itself. The production design and [[movie]] and both [[unpaid]], which [[contribute]] [[terribly]] when you're watching a four-hour [[movies]]. Branagh's [[foundry]] once again is inspired and the acting is [[alternatively]]. The direction accomplishes the heavy task of making this a movie [[fairly]] than a deluxe [[stepping]] of a play. Since so much of 'Hamlet' is based on [[inner]] monologue and there are [[comparatively]] few duels, [[struggling]], etc., this can be a daunting [[tasks]]. But everything Branagh tries to do [[appears]] to [[worked]].

Branagh has [[repeatedly]] been one of the most interesting [[actress]]/[[screenwriter]]/directors, if not [[continually]] the [[finest]], since he [[accomplished]] his [[substantial]] splash with '[[Heinrich]] V.' One quibble I had with him was what I [[noticed]] as a tendency to ham it up at [[time]]. [[At]] his [[depiction]] of Hamlet here he might be [[charged]] of that again, but there is a [[methodology]] at work. Let's face it, 'Hamlet' is not an [[easier]] [[working]] for the average [[someone]] to [[fathom]] and if one has never [[watched]] it performed before, he or she [[should]] [[assistance]] even if they've read the play. Hamlet has the most lines of any Shakespearian [[personages]] and Branagh makes sure that his [[spectators]] know what this [[dude]] is [[thought]] and feeling [[during]] the [[movie]], [[yet]] if you don't know the literal [[mean]] of [[any]] arcane word. This performance by Branagh was at the very least worthy of an Oscar [[candidacy]].

There are so [[several]] other [[unresolved]] performances here they're [[hardly]] too [[countless]] to mention, but some of them [[should]] be [[recognizing]]. [[Derrick]] Jacobi as Claudius is [[stunning]] but [[yet]] he [[pick]] a back [[seats]] to Kate Winslet when it [[arises]] to handing out praise. Her portrayal of Ophelia is awesome in its depth of feeling, made only more outstanding by the knowledge that she was only about 20 years old at the time! She looks to me like the finest young actress around. Other super performers in no particular order are Richard Briers, Nicholas Farrell, Michael Maloney, and Reece Dinsdale and Timothy Spall as Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, respectively. Honorable mention goes to Julie Christie, Charlton Heston, and Robin Williams, who manages to do his thing here successfully. Even Billy Crystal as a gravedigger works. The one cast member who doesn't, inexplicably, is Jack Lemmon. In the very opening scene he appears, and while the other three actors do a great job at setting the tense mood, Lemmon sounds like he is just running lines in rehearsal as a favor. You know this must have been a real dilemma for Branagh, since everything else about the movies screams out that it's the work of a perfectionist.

Not to be facetious when speaking of a four-hour movie, but it does seem just a tad too long. Some monologues and conversations do tend to go on a bit, if I may be so bold, and a little bit of judicious pruning would be welcome.

Did I forget anything, other than Patrick Doyle's score? No doubt I did. I'll just sum up by saying that Kenneth Branagh may have made the definitive film version of 'Hamlet,' and it will be a truly monumental production that tops this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Armageddon]] PPV

The [[last]] PPV of 2006

Smackdown brand.

Match Results Ahead********

We are starting the [[show]] with The Inferno [[match]]. Kane v. MVP. This was an okay [[match]]. Nothing about wrestling here. This was about the visuals. Overall, this was not [[bad]]. There were a few close spots here with Kane getting too close to the fire, but in the end, Kane won with ramming MVP into the fire back first.

Nice opener. Let's continue.

Teddy Long announces a new match for the tag team titles: London and Kendrick will defend against: Regal and Taylor, The Hardyz, and MNM IN A LADDER MATCH!!!! Let's get moving!

Match two: Fatal four way ladder match. This was total carnage. Judging by three out of the four teams here, you would expect chaos. The spots were amazing. A total spot-fest. One point Jeff went for Poetry in Motion and London moved and Jeff hit the ladder! Shortly afterword, Jeff is set on the top rope with two ladders nearby as MNM were going to kill Jeff, Matt makes the save and Jeff hits the "see-saw" shot to Joey Mercury! Mercury is hurt. His eye is shut quickly and is busted open hard way. Mercury is taken out of the match and Nitro is still there. He is going to fight alone for the titles! Regal and Taylor then grab London and suplex him face-first into the ladder! Jeff climbs the ladder and Nitro in a killer spot, dropkicks through the ladder to nail Jeff! [[Awesome]]! In the end, London and Kendrick retain the tag team titles. What a match!!!

This was insane. I can't figure out why WWE did not announce this till now. The Buyrate would increase huge. I'm sure the replay value will be good though.

Mercury has suffered a shattered nose and lacerations to the eye. He is at the hospital now. Get well kid.

No way anything else here will top that.

Next up: The Miz v. Boogeyman.(Ugh) This was a nothing match. Will the Boogeyman ever wrestle? The Miz sucks too. After a insane crowd, this kills them dead. DUD.

Chris Benoit v. Chavo. This was a strong match. I enjoyed it. Chavo hit a killer superplex at one point! Benoit hit EIGHT German suplexes too! Benoit wins with the sharpshooter. Good stuff.

Helms v. Yang-Cruiserweight title championship match. This was a good match. Unfortunately, the stupid fans did not care for this. WHY? Helms and Yang are very talented and wrestled well. I agree with JBL. He ranted to the crowd. JBL is 100% correct. Learn to appreciate this or get out.

Mr. Kennedy v. The Undertaker-Last Ride match. Not too much here. This was a slug fest, with a few exceptions. Kennedy at one point tossed Taker off the top of the stage to the floor. The spot was fine. Reaction was disappointing. The end spot was Taker tomb-stoned Kennedy on the hearse and won the match. Unreal. Kennedy needed this win. They both worker hard. Still, Kennedy needed this win. Undertaker should have lost. Creative screwed up again.

A stupid diva thing is next. I like women. Not this. At least Torrie was not here. That's refreshing. Judging from the crowd, Layla should have won. The WWE wanted Ashley. Consider this your bathroom break. Next.

Main Event: Cena & Batista v. Finlay & Booker T. This was also a nothing match. The focus was Cena v. Finlay and Batista v. Booker. Batista and Booker can't work well together. Finlay tries to make Cena look good. The finish was botched. Finlay hit Batista's knee with a chair shot and Batista no-sold the shot and finished the match. Lame. Not main event caliber at all.

Overall, Armageddon would have scored less, but the ladder match WAS the main event here. That was enough money's worth right there. A few others were solid.

The Last Word: A good PPV with the ladder match being the savior. Smackdown is not a bad show just is not compelling enough. Smackdown needs to stop letting Cena tag along. Let Smackdown stand on their own two legs. This show proves that Smackdown can. [[Apocalypse]] PPV

The [[latter]] PPV of 2006

Smackdown brand.

Match Results Ahead********

We are starting the [[showings]] with The Inferno [[couple]]. Kane v. MVP. This was an okay [[matching]]. Nothing about wrestling here. This was about the visuals. Overall, this was not [[horrid]]. There were a few close spots here with Kane getting too close to the fire, but in the end, Kane won with ramming MVP into the fire back first.

Nice opener. Let's continue.

Teddy Long announces a new match for the tag team titles: London and Kendrick will defend against: Regal and Taylor, The Hardyz, and MNM IN A LADDER MATCH!!!! Let's get moving!

Match two: Fatal four way ladder match. This was total carnage. Judging by three out of the four teams here, you would expect chaos. The spots were amazing. A total spot-fest. One point Jeff went for Poetry in Motion and London moved and Jeff hit the ladder! Shortly afterword, Jeff is set on the top rope with two ladders nearby as MNM were going to kill Jeff, Matt makes the save and Jeff hits the "see-saw" shot to Joey Mercury! Mercury is hurt. His eye is shut quickly and is busted open hard way. Mercury is taken out of the match and Nitro is still there. He is going to fight alone for the titles! Regal and Taylor then grab London and suplex him face-first into the ladder! Jeff climbs the ladder and Nitro in a killer spot, dropkicks through the ladder to nail Jeff! [[Wondrous]]! In the end, London and Kendrick retain the tag team titles. What a match!!!

This was insane. I can't figure out why WWE did not announce this till now. The Buyrate would increase huge. I'm sure the replay value will be good though.

Mercury has suffered a shattered nose and lacerations to the eye. He is at the hospital now. Get well kid.

No way anything else here will top that.

Next up: The Miz v. Boogeyman.(Ugh) This was a nothing match. Will the Boogeyman ever wrestle? The Miz sucks too. After a insane crowd, this kills them dead. DUD.

Chris Benoit v. Chavo. This was a strong match. I enjoyed it. Chavo hit a killer superplex at one point! Benoit hit EIGHT German suplexes too! Benoit wins with the sharpshooter. Good stuff.

Helms v. Yang-Cruiserweight title championship match. This was a good match. Unfortunately, the stupid fans did not care for this. WHY? Helms and Yang are very talented and wrestled well. I agree with JBL. He ranted to the crowd. JBL is 100% correct. Learn to appreciate this or get out.

Mr. Kennedy v. The Undertaker-Last Ride match. Not too much here. This was a slug fest, with a few exceptions. Kennedy at one point tossed Taker off the top of the stage to the floor. The spot was fine. Reaction was disappointing. The end spot was Taker tomb-stoned Kennedy on the hearse and won the match. Unreal. Kennedy needed this win. They both worker hard. Still, Kennedy needed this win. Undertaker should have lost. Creative screwed up again.

A stupid diva thing is next. I like women. Not this. At least Torrie was not here. That's refreshing. Judging from the crowd, Layla should have won. The WWE wanted Ashley. Consider this your bathroom break. Next.

Main Event: Cena & Batista v. Finlay & Booker T. This was also a nothing match. The focus was Cena v. Finlay and Batista v. Booker. Batista and Booker can't work well together. Finlay tries to make Cena look good. The finish was botched. Finlay hit Batista's knee with a chair shot and Batista no-sold the shot and finished the match. Lame. Not main event caliber at all.

Overall, Armageddon would have scored less, but the ladder match WAS the main event here. That was enough money's worth right there. A few others were solid.

The Last Word: A good PPV with the ladder match being the savior. Smackdown is not a bad show just is not compelling enough. Smackdown needs to stop letting Cena tag along. Let Smackdown stand on their own two legs. This show proves that Smackdown can. --------------------------------------------- Result 3636 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] My [[wife]] and I just finished this movie and I came onto to IMDb to commiserate with the reviewers that found this movie less than satisfactory. However, of the 10 [[pages]] of reviews, only a handful are negative. I feel that this movie is a great [[concept]] gone [[horribly]] [[awry]] and I want to [[warn]] those who are looking to watch the movie into the future.

I admit, I'm more inspired to write reviews when I don't like a movie than as to when I do, so my handful of reviews are all negative. Still, that doesn't mean I'm biased towards not enjoying a movie, but I often find more eloquent reviews of movies I do enjoy.

Paris je t'aime is the most pretentious movie I've seen in years. By using an "intelligent" concept and attaching some big talent to a couple of the WAY to many short stories, the movie ends up the [[worst]] of all worlds. It is art for arts sake, but something that a 2 year old could dream up and accomplish. Giving the director free reign of 5 minutes of screen time proves why there is a division of labor even in entertainment. Directors can't write, writers can't direct. (I'd like to throw in also that Clint Eastwood is overrated, but that is because he's an actor turn director {which rarely works, either}).

What ends up on the screen is a garbled mess of short stories that don't make any sense, are not completed in 5 minutes and in total, spoil Paris to me. Why call it Paris je t'aime when a more apropos title is cluster f*ck? There are only a couple stories that are watchable, most notably the piece by Alfonso Cuarón, but everything else will fall into obscurity. The Coen brothers short is passable, but can you name a movie of theirs that does not contain a scene with a pick guitar? It's as if all the directors decided on doing whatever it is they want to do and chose Paris as the place to do it. As we all love Paris, present company included, we are blinded by the fact that this movie SUCKS. In fact, I think they put the directors names on each of the shorts because directors saw how poor of a film this is and decided to make sure they were blamed only for their 5 minutes. Seriously. SERIOUSLY.

People, Natalie Portman is NOT a good actress. She is is not a pixie dream girl waiting to be yours. And Maggie Gyllenhaal, why?!? Are you people acting or just regurgitating performances from other movies? I'm looking at you Natalie Portman (Garden State, Closer), Elijah Wood (Sin City) and Catalina Sandino Moreno (Maria Full of Grace).

One final comment on the acting: I give double kudos to Nick Nolte for acting and looking more humane than you have in ages or perhaps ever will again. Find his short on youtube as his 5 minutes are quite enjoyable.

Writing short stories is very difficult and only a handful of authors have gotten it right. I'm thinking of Ernst Hemingway, Raymond Carver, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and John Cheever, just to name a few. It is much harder than writing a full novel and only the truly talented can accomplish this. The same can be said about short films. It appears that only one director will live on in the annals of history.

If you uphold Paris as a gem to be discovered and reflected through your own lenses with your own story, then don't expect to enjoy this movie at all. The directors either didn't care or were lazy. In either scenario, by the time you are reading this it means you rented it. Praise be that you didn't pay 10 dollars a head in theaters for it. My [[woman]] and I just finished this movie and I came onto to IMDb to commiserate with the reviewers that found this movie less than satisfactory. However, of the 10 [[page]] of reviews, only a handful are negative. I feel that this movie is a great [[concepts]] gone [[frightfully]] [[mistaken]] and I want to [[cautionary]] those who are looking to watch the movie into the future.

I admit, I'm more inspired to write reviews when I don't like a movie than as to when I do, so my handful of reviews are all negative. Still, that doesn't mean I'm biased towards not enjoying a movie, but I often find more eloquent reviews of movies I do enjoy.

Paris je t'aime is the most pretentious movie I've seen in years. By using an "intelligent" concept and attaching some big talent to a couple of the WAY to many short stories, the movie ends up the [[meanest]] of all worlds. It is art for arts sake, but something that a 2 year old could dream up and accomplish. Giving the director free reign of 5 minutes of screen time proves why there is a division of labor even in entertainment. Directors can't write, writers can't direct. (I'd like to throw in also that Clint Eastwood is overrated, but that is because he's an actor turn director {which rarely works, either}).

What ends up on the screen is a garbled mess of short stories that don't make any sense, are not completed in 5 minutes and in total, spoil Paris to me. Why call it Paris je t'aime when a more apropos title is cluster f*ck? There are only a couple stories that are watchable, most notably the piece by Alfonso Cuarón, but everything else will fall into obscurity. The Coen brothers short is passable, but can you name a movie of theirs that does not contain a scene with a pick guitar? It's as if all the directors decided on doing whatever it is they want to do and chose Paris as the place to do it. As we all love Paris, present company included, we are blinded by the fact that this movie SUCKS. In fact, I think they put the directors names on each of the shorts because directors saw how poor of a film this is and decided to make sure they were blamed only for their 5 minutes. Seriously. SERIOUSLY.

People, Natalie Portman is NOT a good actress. She is is not a pixie dream girl waiting to be yours. And Maggie Gyllenhaal, why?!? Are you people acting or just regurgitating performances from other movies? I'm looking at you Natalie Portman (Garden State, Closer), Elijah Wood (Sin City) and Catalina Sandino Moreno (Maria Full of Grace).

One final comment on the acting: I give double kudos to Nick Nolte for acting and looking more humane than you have in ages or perhaps ever will again. Find his short on youtube as his 5 minutes are quite enjoyable.

Writing short stories is very difficult and only a handful of authors have gotten it right. I'm thinking of Ernst Hemingway, Raymond Carver, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and John Cheever, just to name a few. It is much harder than writing a full novel and only the truly talented can accomplish this. The same can be said about short films. It appears that only one director will live on in the annals of history.

If you uphold Paris as a gem to be discovered and reflected through your own lenses with your own story, then don't expect to enjoy this movie at all. The directors either didn't care or were lazy. In either scenario, by the time you are reading this it means you rented it. Praise be that you didn't pay 10 dollars a head in theaters for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] As it is in [[Heaven]] {SPOILER WARNING)

This was a [[great]] human [[drama]] that [[stimulated]] my emotions and my imagination.

This is a parable revisiting the [[life]] and death of Christ. Daniel is a [[superior]] gifted musician ,who is [[physically]] and mentally exhausted by his career , and has to [[give]] it up. [[When]] he joins a church choir as its cantor, he [[brings]] about a [[transformation]] in the [[lives]] of the choristers , just as Jesus did to the society in first century Palestine. They [[laugh]], they begin to speak openly and truthfully to each other , their [[faults]] are exposed,they [[accept]] each other, come to love each other, become a vital community.They include the mentally disabled young man (?Tore), such is their inclusiveness.

The pastor, Stig [[enjoyed]] authority through imposing a stifling morality on the congregation, and that is gradually rejected by the choristers . When Stig dismisses [[Daniel]] , there is a [[revolt]], and Stig is crushed. Stig represents the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day, [[whose]] insistence on [[obedience]] to the Jewish [[law]],[[provided]] a [[stark]] [[contrast]] to the [[new]] [[life]] by "the golden rule" [[brought]] by [[Jesus]].

[[In]] one [[dramatic]] scene, [[someone]] [[declares]] "the church [[invented]] sin". All through the film, there is this contrast between moral-ism and [[vital]] [[living]] (being).

True to the [[Christ]] [[story]], [[Daniel]] is [[killed]] by [[Conny]] , when he [[beats]] him up, leaves him to [[drown]] in the [[river]]. Next scene , we can hardly believe it when Daniel's (resurrected!) [[body]] is dragged into his room (the [[tomb]]) draped in a white linen sheet (the shroud!), by three [[women]] (three women kept vigil at the [[foot]] of the cross in the gospel).

Daniel is [[drawn]] [[closely]] to [[Lena]], a warm [[beautiful]] young [[woman]] who has been betrayed by a [[man]] she [[loved]], and who is now promiscuous (Jesus [[developed]] a close [[relationship]] with Mary Magdalene- Lena- who was [[probably]] a [[high]] [[class]] courtesan/[[prostitute]]). Through [[Lena]], [[Daniel]] [[learns]] to [[love]] , something he has longed for, and now [[finds]] fulfillment .

The solo [[sung]] by [[Gabriella]] , composed by [[Daniel]], is all about living a full life , in contrast to moral [[correctness]] that leads to concern about sin , and what's right and wrong.

The final scene shows the choir all singing/humming in harmony , like a mantra, drawing in the large audience, exemplifying the harmony and inter-connectedness that is our true human destiny. As it is in [[Heavens]] {SPOILER WARNING)

This was a [[wondrous]] human [[tragedy]] that [[fueled]] my emotions and my imagination.

This is a parable revisiting the [[vida]] and death of Christ. Daniel is a [[top]] gifted musician ,who is [[materially]] and mentally exhausted by his career , and has to [[lend]] it up. [[Whenever]] he joins a church choir as its cantor, he [[poses]] about a [[conversions]] in the [[vie]] of the choristers , just as Jesus did to the society in first century Palestine. They [[laughed]], they begin to speak openly and truthfully to each other , their [[failures]] are exposed,they [[admit]] each other, come to love each other, become a vital community.They include the mentally disabled young man (?Tore), such is their inclusiveness.

The pastor, Stig [[liked]] authority through imposing a stifling morality on the congregation, and that is gradually rejected by the choristers . When Stig dismisses [[Danielle]] , there is a [[intifada]], and Stig is crushed. Stig represents the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day, [[whom]] insistence on [[obey]] to the Jewish [[lois]],[[supplied]] a [[starck]] [[opposite]] to the [[novel]] [[vida]] by "the golden rule" [[lodged]] by [[Goddammit]].

[[Throughout]] one [[formidable]] scene, [[anybody]] [[announcing]] "the church [[coined]] sin". All through the film, there is this contrast between moral-ism and [[pivotal]] [[vida]] (being).

True to the [[Jesus]] [[tale]], [[Daniela]] is [[murdering]] by [[Connie]] , when he [[beat]] him up, leaves him to [[sunk]] in the [[rivers]]. Next scene , we can hardly believe it when Daniel's (resurrected!) [[organs]] is dragged into his room (the [[mausoleum]]) draped in a white linen sheet (the shroud!), by three [[females]] (three women kept vigil at the [[feet]] of the cross in the gospel).

Daniel is [[lured]] [[tightly]] to [[Corinne]], a warm [[excellent]] young [[wife]] who has been betrayed by a [[guy]] she [[loves]], and who is now promiscuous (Jesus [[established]] a close [[relationships]] with Mary Magdalene- Lena- who was [[potentially]] a [[supreme]] [[category]] courtesan/[[hooker]]). Through [[Lina]], [[Danielle]] [[teaches]] to [[loves]] , something he has longed for, and now [[discoveries]] fulfillment .

The solo [[sing]] by [[Gabriela]] , composed by [[Daniele]], is all about living a full life , in contrast to moral [[propriety]] that leads to concern about sin , and what's right and wrong.

The final scene shows the choir all singing/humming in harmony , like a mantra, drawing in the large audience, exemplifying the harmony and inter-connectedness that is our true human destiny. --------------------------------------------- Result 3638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The extended nuclear family, united in business as well as in personal life, is examined in this serious study of a grown son's conflict with his father's desire that he remain in the family business. This triggers a midlife crisis which may or may not be ameliorated by an affair and retreat to a shrink's couch. Very fine acting by all. A sleeper that deserves wide attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 3639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] [[Clearly]] an [[hilarious]] movie.

It angers me to see the poor [[ratings]] [[given]] to this piece of [[comic]] [[genius]]

Please look at this for what it is, a funny, [[ridiculous]] [[enjoyable]] [[film]]. Laugh for [[christ]] sake!

[[Apparently]] an [[funny]] movie.

It angers me to see the poor [[appraisals]] [[yielded]] to this piece of [[sitcom]] [[engineering]]

Please look at this for what it is, a funny, [[preposterous]] [[nice]] [[kino]]. Laugh for [[goodness]] sake!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] The [[Clouded]] [[Yellow]] is a [[compact]] [[psychological]] thriller with interesting characterizations. [[Barry]] Jones and Kenneth More are both [[terrific]] in supporting [[roles]] in characters that both have more to them than what [[meets]] the eye. Jean Simmons is quite good, and Trevor Howard makes a fascinatingly [[offbeat]] [[suspense]] [[hero]]. The [[Overshadowed]] [[Hwang]] is a [[covenant]] [[psychiatric]] thriller with interesting characterizations. [[Bari]] Jones and Kenneth More are both [[wondrous]] in supporting [[duties]] in characters that both have more to them than what [[satisfies]] the eye. Jean Simmons is quite good, and Trevor Howard makes a fascinatingly [[oddball]] [[wait]] [[heroin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie is nothing but a religious tract promoting classic Hinduism and New Age Occultism dressed up with Western images to be [[swallowed]] by those who are ignorant of foundational religious [[comparisons]]. Basic tenants of [[Hinduism]] contain [[elements]] of [[reincarnation]]. (Some of the characters appear both in the present [[time]] and [[also]] in the 1600's) [[obviously]] reincarnated. [[God]] is an impersonal force. [[Animal]] [[life]] and plant [[life]] are all the same. (This is Pantheism). Redfield has tried to [[mix]] [[Eastern]] [[Mysticism]] with Western Christianty. His [[attempt]] at syncretism may [[fool]] or confuse those who are not [[seekers]] of truth but this [[movie]] is a [[feeble]] [[excuse]] for any ultimate reality. As the ad in the old Berkeley Barb used to say for $10.00 will show you how to start your own religion. As one famous prophet has said, "Use the Force Luke". This movie is nothing but a religious tract promoting classic Hinduism and New Age Occultism dressed up with Western images to be [[ingested]] by those who are ignorant of foundational religious [[compare]]. Basic tenants of [[Hindu]] contain [[facets]] of [[redemption]]. (Some of the characters appear both in the present [[moment]] and [[apart]] in the 1600's) [[definitely]] reincarnated. [[Jeez]] is an impersonal force. [[Wildlife]] [[vida]] and plant [[vie]] are all the same. (This is Pantheism). Redfield has tried to [[blend]] [[East]] [[Mystique]] with Western Christianty. His [[strive]] at syncretism may [[delude]] or confuse those who are not [[seeker]] of truth but this [[filmmaking]] is a [[puny]] [[apologising]] for any ultimate reality. As the ad in the old Berkeley Barb used to say for $10.00 will show you how to start your own religion. As one famous prophet has said, "Use the Force Luke". --------------------------------------------- Result 3642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The critics are dumb. This movie is funny and smart. I loved this movie a lot. Why does everyone hate this movie so much. I wish people would love this movie more than they don't. Ben Stiller and Jack Black are true comedians and they put through a lot of work to make this movie. I don't see you people out there making movies like them. So people should just watch it and not comment it. I like this movie. It is OK through it all. There are parts were it get's dumb but at least they made it. Jerry Stiller would love this because this movie has the acting just like the show King Of Queens. But this is better than that. I can't believe this was rated so low. --------------------------------------------- Result 3643 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Except for acknowledging some nice [[cinematography]], I can [[hardly]] [[say]] [[anything]] [[positive]] about this [[movie]]. The single [[real]] issue is the protagonist's dilemma whether to remain with his childhood friends in the [[world]] of misery or to [[leave]] them and [[take]] up his own [[life]]. [[Abundant]] "emotionally [[powerful]]" scenes do not go with this plot and, because of [[bad]] acting, they also fail to create the [[intended]] atmosphere. The [[director]] only manages to introduce Anthony's dilemma and eventually brings an [[easy]] solution. The [[characters]] do not [[seem]] to [[evolve]], although it is difficult to [[speak]] of any [[characters]]... [[perhaps]] except for Sonny. Beside him, [[actors]] do not get to [[play]] much and when some of them have to, they come off as self-indulging [[amateurs]]. I wonder what [[ruined]] the [[movie]] more: the [[superficial]] [[script]], throwing away all the [[potential]] of the plot, or the bad acting, [[disturbing]] any [[appeal]] that might be left. Except for acknowledging some nice [[filmmaking]], I can [[almost]] [[tell]] [[something]] [[affirmative]] about this [[film]]. The single [[veritable]] issue is the protagonist's dilemma whether to remain with his childhood friends in the [[monde]] of misery or to [[let]] them and [[taking]] up his own [[lives]]. [[Abundance]] "emotionally [[forceful]]" scenes do not go with this plot and, because of [[negative]] acting, they also fail to create the [[aimed]] atmosphere. The [[superintendent]] only manages to introduce Anthony's dilemma and eventually brings an [[easier]] solution. The [[trait]] do not [[seems]] to [[evolving]], although it is difficult to [[talk]] of any [[trait]]... [[maybe]] except for Sonny. Beside him, [[protagonists]] do not get to [[gaming]] much and when some of them have to, they come off as self-indulging [[enthusiast]]. I wonder what [[obliterated]] the [[filmmaking]] more: the [[shallow]] [[hyphen]], throwing away all the [[possibility]] of the plot, or the bad acting, [[disconcerting]] any [[appellate]] that might be left. --------------------------------------------- Result 3644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[wanted]] to [[see]] the [[movie]] because of an article in a [[film]] [[magazine]]. It wasn't a [[highly]] recommended one by the critic. The storyline is different and I am sure that it [[could]] have been a good [[movie]] if it was in right hands. Directing and acting were [[awful]]!! I had the [[feeling]] of watching a movie which was made a bunch of amateurs. [[Although]] the [[movie]] started promisingly, it [[got]] worse and [[worse]]. I think this is an unoriginal [[movie]] with [[awkward]] characters.. I still [[think]] that it is worth watching as I haven't seen films subjecting gay porn. Don't keep your expectations high though,then you will be very [[disappointed]]. * out of ***** I [[wants]] to [[behold]] the [[filmmaking]] because of an article in a [[movie]] [[magazines]]. It wasn't a [[immensely]] recommended one by the critic. The storyline is different and I am sure that it [[wo]] have been a good [[filmmaking]] if it was in right hands. Directing and acting were [[scary]]!! I had the [[sentiment]] of watching a movie which was made a bunch of amateurs. [[Whereas]] the [[filmmaking]] started promisingly, it [[did]] worse and [[worst]]. I think this is an unoriginal [[filmmaking]] with [[tricky]] characters.. I still [[thought]] that it is worth watching as I haven't seen films subjecting gay porn. Don't keep your expectations high though,then you will be very [[frustrated]]. * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a really stupid movie in that typical 80s genre: action comedy. Conceptwise it resembles Rush Hour but completely lacks the action, the laughs and the chemistry between the main characters of that movie. Let it be known that I enjoy Jay Leno as a stand-up and as a talk show host, but he just cannot act. He is awful when he tries to act tough - he barely manages to keep that trademark smirk off his face while saying his one-liners which, by the way, aren't very funny. And seeing him run (even back then) is not a pleasant sight. In addition, I have a feeling that Pat Morita - at least by today's standards - doesn't give a very politically correct impression of the Japanese. Don't even get me started about the story. I give it a 2 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] From watching only the trailer to Theodore Rex, you [[would]] think this is a bad [[buddy]] cop comedy with Whoopi Goldberg and a guy in a dinosaur costume. That is true, but this is mostly a futuristic story, which looks a lot like Batman Forever with it's direction style and weird character designs. It was mismarketed, and should have been [[marketed]] as a futuristic tale, [[instead]] of just a lame cop [[comedy]]. Whether or not this movie is mismarketed, it's still a [[horrible]] movie.

In the future, dinosaurs have been brought back to life through amazing technology, and they talk and walk around like humans. Teddy is a dinosaur detective who is never taken seriously, but after a dinosaur is murdered, he's given the case to work on, but he has to be partners with the toughest cop of them all, Katie Coltrane (Whoopi Goldberg). It's up to this mismatched duo to solve the murder, and it's up to the audience to stay awake long enough to make it through this piece of crud.

Teddy starts the picture as a normal acting character, but by the end he is unbearable to listen to. For some reason along with being a detective, he's also a bad comedian and a bad impersonator. He does imitations of famous people and accents, and has some truly awful lines. Whoopi blames him for farting and he says, "It's not my butt trumpet!" Wow! What a puerile, immature line, even for a kid's movie of this caliber. Whoopi is also annoying and rude to everyone. I was hoping Teddy would bite her head off the entire length of the film.

This movie never knew what it wanted to be. When the futuristic scenes and action occur, there is no comedy or humor. In any non-action scenes, the characters try to be as funny as they can, which just results in nonstop straight faced boredome. The action scenes don't work as they're too weird and not violent enough, and as stated earlier, the comedy is just a bunch of massacred jokes. Nothing ever works here.

Having a dinosaur/human detective duo seems like a pretty original movie, if nothing else. Nope! This movie is a huge rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Just replace dinosaurs with cartoons, and set it in the future, and it's the exact same plot. A man is killed, a dinosaur is killed. A dinosaur and detective solve the murder, a toon and detective solve the murder. The bad guys in Roger Rabbit are Christopher Lloyd and weasels. The bad guys here are a guy who sounds like Christopher Lloyd and guys who act just like the weasels. The club scene in Roger Rabbit where Jessica Rabbit walks down the stage is imitated with dinosaurs. This is a huge rip-off of a much better movie!

Overall, this is a bad movie, not even deserving of it's straight to VHS stature.

My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 90 mins. PG for mild violence, language and crude humor. From watching only the trailer to Theodore Rex, you [[should]] think this is a bad [[guy]] cop comedy with Whoopi Goldberg and a guy in a dinosaur costume. That is true, but this is mostly a futuristic story, which looks a lot like Batman Forever with it's direction style and weird character designs. It was mismarketed, and should have been [[commercialized]] as a futuristic tale, [[alternatively]] of just a lame cop [[travesty]]. Whether or not this movie is mismarketed, it's still a [[appalling]] movie.

In the future, dinosaurs have been brought back to life through amazing technology, and they talk and walk around like humans. Teddy is a dinosaur detective who is never taken seriously, but after a dinosaur is murdered, he's given the case to work on, but he has to be partners with the toughest cop of them all, Katie Coltrane (Whoopi Goldberg). It's up to this mismatched duo to solve the murder, and it's up to the audience to stay awake long enough to make it through this piece of crud.

Teddy starts the picture as a normal acting character, but by the end he is unbearable to listen to. For some reason along with being a detective, he's also a bad comedian and a bad impersonator. He does imitations of famous people and accents, and has some truly awful lines. Whoopi blames him for farting and he says, "It's not my butt trumpet!" Wow! What a puerile, immature line, even for a kid's movie of this caliber. Whoopi is also annoying and rude to everyone. I was hoping Teddy would bite her head off the entire length of the film.

This movie never knew what it wanted to be. When the futuristic scenes and action occur, there is no comedy or humor. In any non-action scenes, the characters try to be as funny as they can, which just results in nonstop straight faced boredome. The action scenes don't work as they're too weird and not violent enough, and as stated earlier, the comedy is just a bunch of massacred jokes. Nothing ever works here.

Having a dinosaur/human detective duo seems like a pretty original movie, if nothing else. Nope! This movie is a huge rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Just replace dinosaurs with cartoons, and set it in the future, and it's the exact same plot. A man is killed, a dinosaur is killed. A dinosaur and detective solve the murder, a toon and detective solve the murder. The bad guys in Roger Rabbit are Christopher Lloyd and weasels. The bad guys here are a guy who sounds like Christopher Lloyd and guys who act just like the weasels. The club scene in Roger Rabbit where Jessica Rabbit walks down the stage is imitated with dinosaurs. This is a huge rip-off of a much better movie!

Overall, this is a bad movie, not even deserving of it's straight to VHS stature.

My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 90 mins. PG for mild violence, language and crude humor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] From [[rainy]], dreary late [[winter]] [[England]] of early 1920s...

---where there is [[still]] [[sadness]] and [[many]] [[young]] [[widows]] and disabled vets from the [[great]] [[slaughter]] of [[men]] and [[killer]] of their womens' dreams--- known now as [[World]] [[War]] I...

Four [[women]] [[share]] this lovely small sunny Italian castle on a [[hill]]; one a young [[widow]] who is [[drowning]] her [[sorrow]] in [[frantic]] partying, two [[women]] who will rediscover their own husbands, and a fourth [[woman]] who is tired of her [[famous]] [[dead]] [[friends]]...

...These four [[women]] will [[come]] [[together]] with two husbands and a former [[soldier]] - [[almost]] [[blind]] - to [[get]] a spiritual "makeover" for one [[great]] April [[vacation]] in early 1920's Italy.

[[NOTE]] to would-be filmmakers. Study this [[film]] for how mood and [[beauty]] can [[tell]] a story. ([[Probably]] not a film to please [[many]] [[men]]...)

NOTE: Stock up on [[coffee]] & hot chocolate and invite the girls over on some dreary late winter day...Spring is coming...[[Enchanted]] [[April]] promises you! From [[rainfall]], dreary late [[winters]] [[British]] of early 1920s...

---where there is [[again]] [[spite]] and [[multiple]] [[youthful]] [[widowed]] and disabled vets from the [[remarkable]] [[sacrifice]] of [[males]] and [[shooter]] of their womens' dreams--- known now as [[Global]] [[Warfare]] I...

Four [[girl]] [[exchanges]] this lovely small sunny Italian castle on a [[shan]]; one a young [[widowed]] who is [[drowned]] her [[regret]] in [[furious]] partying, two [[girl]] who will rediscover their own husbands, and a fourth [[girl]] who is tired of her [[eminent]] [[die]] [[friend]]...

...These four [[wife]] will [[arrive]] [[jointly]] with two husbands and a former [[servicemen]] - [[approximately]] [[blinded]] - to [[obtain]] a spiritual "makeover" for one [[remarkable]] April [[holiday]] in early 1920's Italy.

[[NOTING]] to would-be filmmakers. Study this [[flick]] for how mood and [[beaut]] can [[say]] a story. ([[Certainly]] not a film to please [[various]] [[males]]...)

NOTE: Stock up on [[cafes]] & hot chocolate and invite the girls over on some dreary late winter day...Spring is coming...[[Charmed]] [[Avril]] promises you! --------------------------------------------- Result 3648 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I was expecting a [[movie]] [[similar]] to Deuce Bigalow, which I enjoyed. [[However]], this dud [[seemed]] to last [[forever]]. It's one of those flicks which enjoys the sad placement of PG-13 while not being kid appropriate. The jokes aren't just low-brow or f**t jokes, they're crude, lewd, and [[many]] acts [[cross]] the [[boundaries]] to not only [[bad]] taste but beyond legal and moral [[decency]]. Many scenes appear to have been [[chopped]] to [[get]] the PG-13 [[rating]]...too [[bad]]...it might have made a [[bigger]] [[splash]] as an R-rated [[film]] if the [[funny]] was [[left]] in. ([[Overstatement]]? [[Probably]].) I do not [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. It is a full-on [[waste]] of [[time]]...and I'm a [[movie]] lover and ready to give just about [[anything]] a shot. [[At]] 45 minutes in, the [[movie]] [[felt]] [[like]] it should be [[winding]] down...and [[boy]] were we ready for it to. The [[ending]] is quaint but doesn't [[salvage]] the [[rest]] of this [[quagmire]]/tourist [[trap]] of a [[rental]]. 1/2 [[star]] ([[glad]] I [[saw]] it as a freebie...[[would]] have been sickened to [[pay]] hard-earned greenbacks for this [[tripe]]) I was expecting a [[filmmaking]] [[identical]] to Deuce Bigalow, which I enjoyed. [[Conversely]], this dud [[looked]] to last [[permanently]]. It's one of those flicks which enjoys the sad placement of PG-13 while not being kid appropriate. The jokes aren't just low-brow or f**t jokes, they're crude, lewd, and [[innumerable]] acts [[traverse]] the [[limitations]] to not only [[naughty]] taste but beyond legal and moral [[decorum]]. Many scenes appear to have been [[cut]] to [[obtain]] the PG-13 [[assessment]]...too [[naughty]]...it might have made a [[larger]] [[splat]] as an R-rated [[cinematographic]] if the [[amusing]] was [[exited]] in. ([[Exaggeration]]? [[Undoubtedly]].) I do not [[recommendations]] this [[filmmaking]]. It is a full-on [[squander]] of [[times]]...and I'm a [[flick]] lover and ready to give just about [[something]] a shot. [[For]] 45 minutes in, the [[filmmaking]] [[smelled]] [[iike]] it should be [[braiding]] down...and [[dude]] were we ready for it to. The [[ended]] is quaint but doesn't [[recapture]] the [[roosting]] of this [[marshland]]/tourist [[mousetrap]] of a [[rented]]. 1/2 [[superstar]] ([[grateful]] I [[watched]] it as a freebie...[[could]] have been sickened to [[pays]] hard-earned greenbacks for this [[gut]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 3649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] When I was a [[kid]], I [[totally]] loved both [[Bill]] & Ted Movies. The other night, Bogus Journey was on and [[since]] it was at least 5 [[years]] since I last [[saw]] it, I decided to tune in. [[AND]] I [[LOVED]] IT [[ALL]] [[OVER]] [[AGAIN]]! This film is still funny after all those years. '[[Excellent]] Adventure' is better, but this one [[rocks]] just the same. [[Sure]], some of the perfomances are a bit [[cheesy]], but hey, this entire [[film]] is cheesy in a [[cool]] way. Plus it [[features]] the [[coolest]] personation of [[Death]] ever in a [[movie]]! [[Concluding]]: [[Totally]] like non [[bogus]] movie [[dude]]! Way [[Excellent]]! STATION!!! When I was a [[children]], I [[altogether]] loved both [[Bills]] & Ted Movies. The other night, Bogus Journey was on and [[because]] it was at least 5 [[ages]] since I last [[watched]] it, I decided to tune in. [[UND]] I [[CARED]] IT [[EVERYTHING]] [[FINISHED]] [[STILL]]! This film is still funny after all those years. '[[Awesome]] Adventure' is better, but this one [[rattles]] just the same. [[Convinced]], some of the perfomances are a bit [[dorky]], but hey, this entire [[cinema]] is cheesy in a [[refrigerate]] way. Plus it [[characteristic]] the [[coldest]] personation of [[Killings]] ever in a [[kino]]! [[Concluded]]: [[Utterly]] like non [[specious]] movie [[dawg]]! Way [[Wondrous]]! STATION!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It is [[amazing]] to me what passes for [[entertainment]] [[today]]. [[maybe]] I am a dinosaur from the fifties, and I am out of touch with todays movie [[going]] generation, and [[apparently]] that is the [[case]] with regards to this [[movie]], [[since]] so [[many]] people [[loved]] it. I [[found]] it [[foul]] and vulgar. I haven't [[said]] that about [[many]] [[movies]] in my [[life]] but this one fits the bill. The [[humor]] is [[sophomoric]] and crude. I am not a politically [[correct]] [[person]], and [[even]] I [[found]] the [[gay]] jokes, not only not [[funny]] but [[downright]] offensive ( I'm not [[gay]]). The [[main]] [[character]] in the [[movie]] is not even a [[likable]] [[person]], just [[pathetic]]. When the [[movie]] was [[finally]] over i [[heard]] a number of people comment on how [[disappointed]] they were in what they had just [[pay]] [[good]] money to [[see]]. It is [[dazzling]] to me what passes for [[amusement]] [[nowadays]]. [[presumably]] I am a dinosaur from the fifties, and I am out of touch with todays movie [[go]] generation, and [[allegedly]] that is the [[example]] with regards to this [[flick]], [[because]] so [[various]] people [[liked]] it. I [[find]] it [[nasty]] and vulgar. I haven't [[told]] that about [[various]] [[filmmaking]] in my [[vida]] but this one fits the bill. The [[comedy]] is [[fatuous]] and crude. I am not a politically [[exact]] [[anybody]], and [[yet]] I [[find]] the [[homo]] jokes, not only not [[hilarious]] but [[utterly]] offensive ( I'm not [[homo]]). The [[primary]] [[trait]] in the [[filmmaking]] is not even a [[likeable]] [[anyone]], just [[unhappy]]. When the [[cinematic]] was [[lastly]] over i [[hear]] a number of people comment on how [[frustrating]] they were in what they had just [[salaried]] [[alright]] money to [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3651 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Before Dogma 95: when Lars used movies as art, not just a story. A beautiful painting about love and death. This is one of my favorite movies of all time. The color... The music... Just perfect. --------------------------------------------- Result 3652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was looking on Imdbs bottom 100 because i thought id never seen anything as bad as plan 9 from outerspace or Roller Ball remake, I was wrong. Ben and Arthur has beaten both.

This out of the many countless amount of movies I've seen is the number one worst film on the i ever saw. Bad Directing ,Bad Characters ,Horrible Acting ,Horrible story There's a reason nobody but Sam ever says anything positive about this film. Sam was a horrible annoying actor but his directing was so bad he may just overthrow Ed Wood.

The Director should be ashamed of his work unfortunately i have to give it at least 1 star but it deserves - to be continued stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] The Haunting is [[yet]] another [[bad]] horror remake with phony overdone special [[effects]] and a [[big]] [[cast]] of on screen [[favorites]] and has no redeeming [[qualities]] whatsoever except [[maybe]] for the [[cinematography]].[[Yes]] remakes aren't all bad but remakes [[directed]] by Jion Da Bont [[definitely]] are.I [[suppose]] that the A-List [[actors]] (Liam Neeson,[[Catherine]] Zeta Jones,[[Owen]] Wilson)are there to [[distract]] us from the boring plot,[[ridiculous]] special effects, and [[terrible]] attempts at scaring it's [[audience]] however this is a [[movie]] not a [[tabloid]] [[magazine]] we don't care [[whose]] in it we care about the characters and [[story]] two [[things]] this film missed.The storyline is like [[taking]] the [[classic]] novel The Haunting Of Hill House and ripping out four chapters and then using whatever's left for the [[film]] it is so boring and a lot of it is unexplained.The [[characters]] are pretty thin and while the acting is good you don't really [[care]] about any of the characters at all.[[Lily]] Taylor [[gives]] a [[horrendous]] performance and sounds like she's 8 [[years]] [[old]] when delivering her lines not to [[mention]] what a [[horrible]] screamer she is.Lily Taylor isn't made for the horror [[genre]] at all.The ghosts are [[stupid]] and cheesy, they look like a bunch of Casper The [[Friendly]] Ghost's and the ghost of [[Hugh]] Cain [[looks]] like a [[fat]] [[guy]] dressed as the [[grim]] reaper for Halloween with a [[smoke]] [[machine]].There is this [[creature]] on the [[roof]] of one of the [[rooms]] that is a [[giant]] [[purple]] mouth and it's not even funny unintentionally just [[plain]] [[sad]].The [[house]] is pretty and well designed that is [[probably]] the only [[positive]] [[thing]] about this [[movie]] it [[looks]] [[nice]] but that doesn't save it from it's brutal everything [[else]].I can [[honestly]] [[say]] i [[felt]] like i was [[wasting]] my [[time]] watching The Haunting on [[TV]] for no [[price]] so I would've been [[even]] more pi$$ed if I had [[paid]] to [[see]] it but luckily it was on Scream [[Channel]].[[Overall]] The Haunting is a boring remake that [[tries]] to overwhelm you with bad [[special]] [[effects]], a poor [[attempt]] at [[horror]]. The Haunting is [[nonetheless]] another [[unfavourable]] horror remake with phony overdone special [[impact]] and a [[prodigious]] [[casting]] of on screen [[favorite]] and has no redeeming [[qualifications]] whatsoever except [[probably]] for the [[film]].[[Yep]] remakes aren't all bad but remakes [[aimed]] by Jion Da Bont [[certainly]] are.I [[reckon]] that the A-List [[protagonists]] (Liam Neeson,[[Baroness]] Zeta Jones,[[Owens]] Wilson)are there to [[divert]] us from the boring plot,[[nonsense]] special effects, and [[horrible]] attempts at scaring it's [[audiences]] however this is a [[films]] not a [[sensational]] [[revue]] we don't care [[whom]] in it we care about the characters and [[tales]] two [[aspects]] this film missed.The storyline is like [[picked]] the [[typical]] novel The Haunting Of Hill House and ripping out four chapters and then using whatever's left for the [[filmmaking]] it is so boring and a lot of it is unexplained.The [[trait]] are pretty thin and while the acting is good you don't really [[caring]] about any of the characters at all.[[Nari]] Taylor [[offers]] a [[shocking]] performance and sounds like she's 8 [[yr]] [[former]] when delivering her lines not to [[mentioned]] what a [[scary]] screamer she is.Lily Taylor isn't made for the horror [[type]] at all.The ghosts are [[dumb]] and cheesy, they look like a bunch of Casper The [[Friendship]] Ghost's and the ghost of [[Albert]] Cain [[seems]] like a [[fatty]] [[dude]] dressed as the [[bleak]] reaper for Halloween with a [[smoking]] [[machines]].There is this [[monster]] on the [[rooftop]] of one of the [[chambers]] that is a [[monumental]] [[violet]] mouth and it's not even funny unintentionally just [[lowlands]] [[sorrowful]].The [[abode]] is pretty and well designed that is [[arguably]] the only [[positively]] [[stuff]] about this [[flick]] it [[seem]] [[handsome]] but that doesn't save it from it's brutal everything [[further]].I can [[candidly]] [[says]] i [[believed]] like i was [[losing]] my [[times]] watching The Haunting on [[TVS]] for no [[cost]] so I would've been [[yet]] more pi$$ed if I had [[credited]] to [[behold]] it but luckily it was on Scream [[Channels]].[[Whole]] The Haunting is a boring remake that [[attempts]] to overwhelm you with bad [[especial]] [[influences]], a poor [[attempts]] at [[terror]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm going to write about this movie and about "Irreversible" (the (in)famous scene in it). So you are warned, if you haven't seen the movie yet. This are just my thoughts, why I think the movie fails (in the end - pun intended).

Acting wise, Rosario Dawson is really good and almost conveys portraying someone almost a decade younger (a teenager in other words). The villain guy is good, but loses his "evil" touch right before the end. If he really never changes, then why would he let a woman tie him up? He wouldn't, period. Then we also have the bartender/2nd rape Dude. Actually I don't think you would need him. At least not for the 2nd rape, but more about that later on.

Let's reprise the story. Rosarios character is sexually insecure, might even have lesbian tendencies (see her scene with a female friend). This wasn't intentional, as Rosario states herself, but there is sexual tension between them. Rosario's character meets a guy, who is a sexual Predator, in all the bad senses. But he makes an impression on her.

Rosario commented that her character had a boyfriend before. I beg to differ. Because she acts, as if it is her first boyfriend, which also underlines her phone conversation with her mother. Talking about her mother, here's another problem. After the first rape takes place, Rosarios character doesn't tell anyone what happened. Seiing that her relationship with her mother is a very close one, nothing of that gets explored after that. If Rosarios character wouldn't call her mother anymore or would behave strangely, the mother would be worried like crazy. There was so much potential here. Also her female friend: We see her at the party, it's obvious there is something going on and "boom" she is gone.

The first rape is almost unbearable to watch. But feels like a pinch, when you compare it to the ending (rape), which feels like you're getting hit with a sledge hammer! After rape no. 1 we get too stretched out scenes. Threads are opened (such as her construction work is an indication that she might be lesbian, as one guy states who tried to hit on her ...), but left in the open. No real social contact is established, if you leave the bartender guy out, who is involved in the 2nd and last rape scene. It's apparent that he isn't a "nice" guy and his character get's fleshed out a bit. But when Rosarios character meets her rapist in class again, his being in the movie seems pointless. We get the point that Rosarios character isn't the same anymore, that she went "bad" and is able to hurt people. (Too) Many scenes show exactly that, her being without emotion just doing drugs and other stuff. Back to Rapist #1 who cheats on a test, gets caught by Rosarios character and they decide to hang out together again (really?). As absurd as that sounds, the guy meets up with her, not without us having seen him beforehand, with another girl (very likely that he raped her too, although we never see anything of that, fortunately) and his football career. Well career is a stretch and he is bullied. This is an attempt to give his character some depth and it almost works, but then again is too cliché to stay with you. So Rapist #1 submits to Rosarios character ... why exactly? Because he promised her, it was her day? Again, really? A guy like that never loses control, especially with a woman he raped before ... I guess this is supposed to show us how stupid he is. The bartender guy would have worked as someone who could have hit him over the head or something, but letting him submit like that, just feels wrong. Another possibility would have a drug in his drink.

So rapist #1 undresses and get's blindfolded and let's Rosarios character tie him on a bed .... seriously, that's just crazy! But what comes next, is even crazier. First she talks to him, then she "shuts" him up and forces an object into him. This is as difficult to watch as rape scene number one. This isn't about what this guy deserves or not, it's just intense. And of course that was what they were aiming for. Now after she is "done" the bartender guy comes in and rapes ... rapist #1. If this really should work as a revenge movie, it would have been better if Rosarios character herself would have been doing all the "revenge". Having a henchman doing the job, takes away everything that was built up.

This isn't supposed to be entertaining/enjoyable, it's a hard watch & it is Art-house. But the 10 minute (I didn't count ) rape scene at the end, just smashes everything. Rosarios character is more or less, only watching what happens. Which brings me to the biggest disappointment.

Irreversible comparison: "Irreversible" had the rape scene, but the movie went on (even if it was back into time). Rosario is looking into the camera in the end and says something about having to get over this. First, that comes a bit too late, that should see her say that after the initial rape. And secondly and most importantly, this is where the Art-house movie should've come in. It is more interesting seeing were Rosarios character would go after the second rape scene and how she would cope, with what she had done. But then again, she didn't actually physically do that much (see above) ... a broken character that the movie cuts off ...

Good intentions (Talia and Rosario had worked before), but failing to convey most of the things, they set out to do (even if you can see what they meant, it has to be convincing, otherwise it doesn't work) ... not to mention the overlong rape scenes as they are ... --------------------------------------------- Result 3655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a good family show with a great cast of actors. It's a nice break from the reality show blitz of late. There is nothing else quite like it on television right now either, unless you count Joan of Arcadia as being similar because it has a teen lead character too. Anyway, Clubhouse is worth a look because Jeremy Sumpter gives the main character (Pete Young) a kind of likability and naiveté that is appealing without being overly sweet and cuddly. Dean Cain, Christopher Lloyd, Mare Winningham and Kirsten Storms round out the rest of the main cast members, and each is terrific in their role. I really like Kirsten Storms as Pete's sister Betsy; she is quite a pill, but she still cares about her mom and brother, even though she hates to show it. It may take a few episodes to really find it's legs, but Clubhouse is easily one of the best shows to come along in a good long while, so check it out people--you'll be glad you did! --------------------------------------------- Result 3656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh dear lord. This movie... It was horrible. I am a HUGE fan of horror movies. And most of the time, horror movies other people say are bad, I like. The actor who played 'Scarecrow' was amazing, I will say that. But this plot was awful. It made no sense! It had way too much gore, and an unnecessary (and revolting) sex scene at the beginning. I do believe the director was trying to be 'shocking' or whatnot, but it just came out awful. To add to the pile of festering crap they called a plot, the actors (besides 'scarecrow') we're awful, and I cared so little about them that I soon forgot who was who. In conclusion, this movie made me sick. If you can avoid watching this movie in anyway, please do. --------------------------------------------- Result 3657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "National Lampoon Goes to the Movies" (1981) is, simply put, the worst movie ever made, far lamer than even the inept "Plan 9 from Outer Space."

The Lampoon film is told in three segments, each one supposedly a spoof of a conventional movie genre, but each one landing at our feet with a sickening thud. There is no rhyme or reason for these execrable vignettes, and no discernible story lines.

Another reviewer on this site has written that the only good points about the film are the nude scenes. True, Misses Ganzel and Dusenberry do flash a bit of flesh, and very nice it is too. But the directors seem not to realize that even T&A needs a good story to surround it. There's none of that here.

Probably the worst of the three segments is the last one, featuring Robby Benson and Richard Widmark. Here, we see Benson as a young, eager-beaver policeman being paired with a cynical oldtimer played by Widmark. And for just a moment, those of us who are still watching this odious cinematic exercise are heartened by the thought that we are about to see a redemptive tale about how the young, idealistic cop brings about a purifying change in the old-timer's approach to police work. But no such luck. As we've said, this film has no redeeming values. It is sickening all the way to the final fade-out -- which, perversely, is stretched out longer than it should last on the screen. Apparently the film makers knew they had a bad thing going, and wanted to make the least of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Legendary director [[Sidney]] Lumet gives us one of his [[finest]] films in his historic career in this very [[tense]], and [[ultimately]] [[shocking]] [[story]] about a family that [[includes]] dysfunctional as one of the children. With an A-list cast [[headed]] by [[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]] (an Oscar-worthy performance here), Ethan Hawke, Marisa Tomei and [[Albert]] Finney, Lumet has captured not just elements of [[botched]] crime stories such as Reservoir Dogs, but [[also]] family stories such as [[Ordinary]] People.

[[Many]] [[viewers]] [[might]] be [[confused]] and feel underwhelmed at the [[construction]] of the plot Lumet has [[gone]] with here. Instead of [[showing]] it in a linear [[manner]], he has [[gone]] the Tarantino route and [[shows]] the central scene of a robbery gone wrong from [[different]] points of [[view]] all out of [[order]]. I personally [[found]] this to be very [[satisfying]] and left me [[constantly]] guessing what was [[going]] to [[happen]] next. The script is very strong with some [[excellent]] scenes between husband and [[wife]] Hoffman and Tomei, as well as between [[father]] and son [[Finney]] and Hoffman. All the [[actors]] are [[totally]] engaging to watch and Lumet is [[obviously]] having fun in directing a style he [[usually]] doesn't [[delve]] in. Plenty of [[action]] and suspense to hold the [[audience]] for the two hour [[running]] [[time]], this is a [[rare]] [[movie]] that doesn't [[disappoint]] for one [[moment]]. Legendary director [[Sid]] Lumet gives us one of his [[meanest]] films in his historic career in this very [[strained]], and [[lastly]] [[horrible]] [[narratives]] about a family that [[encompasses]] dysfunctional as one of the children. With an A-list cast [[steered]] by [[Philippe]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]] (an Oscar-worthy performance here), Ethan Hawke, Marisa Tomei and [[Alberto]] Finney, Lumet has captured not just elements of [[bungled]] crime stories such as Reservoir Dogs, but [[similarly]] family stories such as [[Banal]] People.

[[Several]] [[spectators]] [[probability]] be [[muddled]] and feel underwhelmed at the [[construct]] of the plot Lumet has [[faded]] with here. Instead of [[proving]] it in a linear [[method]], he has [[vanished]] the Tarantino route and [[showings]] the central scene of a robbery gone wrong from [[distinct]] points of [[vista]] all out of [[orders]]. I personally [[finds]] this to be very [[pleasing]] and left me [[consistently]] guessing what was [[gonna]] to [[emerge]] next. The script is very strong with some [[sumptuous]] scenes between husband and [[woman]] Hoffman and Tomei, as well as between [[fathers]] and son [[Fini]] and Hoffman. All the [[actresses]] are [[perfectly]] engaging to watch and Lumet is [[definitely]] having fun in directing a style he [[generally]] doesn't [[diving]] in. Plenty of [[efforts]] and suspense to hold the [[viewers]] for the two hour [[implementing]] [[period]], this is a [[scarce]] [[cinematography]] that doesn't [[defraud]] for one [[time]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This [[movie]] is inspiring to anyone who is or has been in a [[tough]] [[jam]], whether [[financially]] or [[emotionally]]. You will [[definitely]] laugh, which is the [[best]] medicine! :) Left in a [[bad]] financial situation when her [[husband]] [[dies]], Grace has to [[find]] a [[new]] [[way]] to [[make]] some money and it's not exactly [[legal]] which [[adds]] to the [[humour]]. Even my [[boyfriend]] liked it so don't think that it's a chick-flic. This [[cinematography]] is inspiring to anyone who is or has been in a [[challenging]] [[improvisation]], whether [[economically]] or [[excitedly]]. You will [[undoubtedly]] laugh, which is the [[better]] medicine! :) Left in a [[amiss]] financial situation when her [[hubby]] [[died]], Grace has to [[unearthed]] a [[novel]] [[manner]] to [[deliver]] some money and it's not exactly [[judiciary]] which [[inserting]] to the [[comedy]]. Even my [[dude]] liked it so don't think that it's a chick-flic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3660 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Yes, this movie is [[bad]]. What's worse is that it takes no [[advantage]] whatsoever of its own title!! In the ENTIRE [[movie]], zombies and vampires fight each other ONCE [[OR]] TWICE. On [[top]] of that, we're never [[really]] sure if the main character in the movie is DEFINITELY a vampire. One might [[argue]] they were trying to "tone it down" or [[make]] it "realistic," but it [[ends]] up just boring. [[More]] than half of this [[movie]] takes place IN A [[CAR]]. The scenes that take place anywhere [[else]] aren't much to brag about, either. Also, there's no [[clear]] [[antagonist]], and in the end you have no [[idea]] what [[really]] happened for the [[last]] 30 minutes of the [[movie]].

However, I will say that for a [[film]] this low in production [[value]], the soundtrack was [[surprisingly]] appropriate and instrumented (with [[either]] an origonal [[score]] or sampled music from elsewhere).

I'm all for [[independent]] [[films]], but it doesn't look like this was ever [[intended]] for a mass [[audience]] (if any).

"[[worse]] than Scarecrow [[slayer]]." Yes, this movie is [[rotten]]. What's worse is that it takes no [[parti]] whatsoever of its own title!! In the ENTIRE [[filmmaking]], zombies and vampires fight each other ONCE [[NEITHER]] TWICE. On [[supreme]] of that, we're never [[genuinely]] sure if the main character in the movie is DEFINITELY a vampire. One might [[plead]] they were trying to "tone it down" or [[deliver]] it "realistic," but it [[terminates]] up just boring. [[Most]] than half of this [[filmmaking]] takes place IN A [[MOTORS]]. The scenes that take place anywhere [[otherwise]] aren't much to brag about, either. Also, there's no [[unequivocal]] [[confrontational]], and in the end you have no [[concept]] what [[truly]] happened for the [[final]] 30 minutes of the [[filmmaking]].

However, I will say that for a [[filmmaking]] this low in production [[values]], the soundtrack was [[marvellously]] appropriate and instrumented (with [[neither]] an origonal [[scoring]] or sampled music from elsewhere).

I'm all for [[autonomous]] [[filmmaking]], but it doesn't look like this was ever [[meant]] for a mass [[viewers]] (if any).

"[[worst]] than Scarecrow [[shooter]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 3661 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I am currently [[sitting]] here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well suffer for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for "War of the Worlds" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a "perfect translation". Perfect [[CRAP]] is more in tune with this film.

First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It [[looked]] as if I was watching the Full [[Motion]] [[Video]] from an [[old]] mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video [[game]]. Sadly [[enough]], the [[color]] quality was [[similar]]. The acting [[made]] Shatners classic "[[dramatic]] pause" [[look]] damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG [[rendering]] of [[various]] scenes was [[horrendous]], and green screen sequences were worse than those [[seen]] in [[old]] Dukes of Hazardd scenes.

Secondly, it is [[slow]] and [[terribly]] drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the [[video]] (no promo's at the [[beginning]]) before the cylinder [[actually]] [[Opened]] to [[reveal]] the first [[alien]]. [[After]] that, the [[alien]] was a [[terribly]] [[constructed]] CG [[squid]]. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have [[seen]] is a spinning silver disk ([[crappy]] down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are [[murdered]] with [[overly]] [[done]] instrumental's. The [[last]] thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's [[NO]] ONE is concerned for their [[life]]. It's like they have no concept. [[Even]] though media was [[slow]], word of [[mouth]] spreads [[fast]] and people [[would]] have [[known]]. The "illusion" of day and [[night]] was shoddy at [[best]]. [[Simply]] [[changing]] the color [[around]] the people to purple, blue or green does not [[signify]] NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time [[shoots]] would have given a [[MUCH]] [[better]] illusion. THere is a [[lot]] of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the "hero" gallop around or walk down silly [[roads]]. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.

Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.

In closing folks, if you want "The War of the Worlds", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY. I am currently [[seated]] here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well suffer for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for "War of the Worlds" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a "perfect translation". Perfect [[SHIT]] is more in tune with this film.

First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It [[seemed]] as if I was watching the Full [[Motions]] [[Videotaping]] from an [[longtime]] mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video [[games]]. Sadly [[sufficiently]], the [[coloration]] quality was [[comparable]]. The acting [[effected]] Shatners classic "[[remarkable]] pause" [[peek]] damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG [[render]] of [[many]] scenes was [[horrific]], and green screen sequences were worse than those [[watched]] in [[antigua]] Dukes of Hazardd scenes.

Secondly, it is [[lento]] and [[surprisingly]] drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the [[videotape]] (no promo's at the [[launch]]) before the cylinder [[indeed]] [[Inaugurated]] to [[uncover]] the first [[aliens]]. [[Upon]] that, the [[foreigner]] was a [[immensely]] [[erected]] CG [[octopus]]. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have [[saw]] is a spinning silver disk ([[shit]] down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are [[murdering]] with [[exceedingly]] [[effected]] instrumental's. The [[latter]] thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's [[NOPE]] ONE is concerned for their [[lives]]. It's like they have no concept. [[Yet]] though media was [[slower]], word of [[kisser]] spreads [[rapidly]] and people [[should]] have [[renowned]]. The "illusion" of day and [[nighttime]] was shoddy at [[optimum]]. [[Sheer]] [[modified]] the color [[roundabout]] the people to purple, blue or green does not [[mean]] NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time [[twigs]] would have given a [[VERY]] [[optimum]] illusion. THere is a [[batches]] of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the "hero" gallop around or walk down silly [[routes]]. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.

Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.

In closing folks, if you want "The War of the Worlds", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY. --------------------------------------------- Result 3662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I originally gave this episode a rating of two- I now wish I'd thought more about it. I also wish they had negative rating options.

Watching it, I was amazed at how poor the whole thing was from start to finish. I adore Ron Pearlman, and John Carpenter... so what went wrong?? Last season episode 13 was pulled due to the way it handled the abortion issue. I think that this season Mr Carpenter managed to make something so grey-area that you can't immediately see if he is pro-choice or anti-abortion. It was only after I sat and thought about it that I realized he is very much anti-abortion- you get this most clearly in the end when the 'Mother' shoots the baby and kills it, to the dismay of the 'Father', who walks off in grief, leaving the mother unharmed. But you also see it in the way the Ron P. character is treated- I hardly think that if someone has proved themselves enough of a threat in the past so as to have a restraining order against him that they would not immediately be ringing the police. Instead we have the guard almost sympathetically dealing with him (only to pay for it in the end) I don't mind someone having a strong view on something, even if it isn't something I agree in, but I do think its a bit lame not to stand by that view, rather than trying to look like they're sitting somewhere in the middle.

But, political issues aside, this episode was beyond poor. The music was retro-70's and just plain didn't work. The acting (other than Ron P.) was poor. The effects were dreadful- it might have been better just to -not- show the monster at all rather than show the lame excuse for a monster they had.

All this being said, I'm glad they have the Masters of Horror- I don't mind sitting through some really poor episodes to find the good ones. Its a bit like renting horror movies from the video store- every now and again you get a good one and it makes it all worth while. I do agree with the poster that said maybe the name needs to change from Masters- some of these people just plain don't deserve the title. (Let me stress tho- even tho I hated this episode, John Carpenter TOTALLY deserves the title. He is a master thru and thru) --------------------------------------------- Result 3663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have no clue as to what this was shot on but you can definitely tell that they had no budget. Bad acting, horrible cinematography, and lame plot and some decent special effects do not make a good movie. The WWF style cinemtography will make you cry...where's the tripod?! The filmakers aimed high, but sorely missed their mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 3664 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Even]] though this movie came out a year before I was born, it is definetely one of my [[favorite]] comedies. It stars [[Redd]] Foxx as a [[father]] who [[tries]] to understand his son's homosexuality. Like most parents, he doesn't know a thing about what it [[means]] to be gay and has all of these stereotypical [[notions]] of what gay people are like. His son, Norman, is now grown up and living on his own. When his father, Ben, finds out that his son is gay, he pays his son a visit in hopes of changing him. The title comes from one of the funniest lines in the movie--when Ben gets to Norman's apartments he runs into a female prostitute and thinks it's his son in drag ("Norman... Is that you?"). The movie had me laughing from start to finish. Redd Foxx is [[great]]. [[Although]] a lot of the content is stereotypical, I didn't find anything [[offensive]] about the way the material was handled, and it even has a good ending. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. [[Yet]] though this movie came out a year before I was born, it is definetely one of my [[preferential]] comedies. It stars [[Nest]] Foxx as a [[fathers]] who [[seeks]] to understand his son's homosexuality. Like most parents, he doesn't know a thing about what it [[signifies]] to be gay and has all of these stereotypical [[concept]] of what gay people are like. His son, Norman, is now grown up and living on his own. When his father, Ben, finds out that his son is gay, he pays his son a visit in hopes of changing him. The title comes from one of the funniest lines in the movie--when Ben gets to Norman's apartments he runs into a female prostitute and thinks it's his son in drag ("Norman... Is that you?"). The movie had me laughing from start to finish. Redd Foxx is [[wondrous]]. [[Though]] a lot of the content is stereotypical, I didn't find anything [[onslaught]] about the way the material was handled, and it even has a good ending. [[Crucially]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] Wow...sheer brilliance.

Turning a thriller/suspense/horror into comedy.

After watching this, I never laughed so hard at a horror movie before...a [[ridiculous]] plot with 3 [[characters]] that were just [[insanely]] [[developed]] - [[either]] not [[written]] in [[depth]] or too much [[depth]].

[[If]] you [[want]] to watch an absolutely [[written]] horror movie with [[stupid]] dialog, messed up plot, [[useless]] scenes, wasted [[characters]], bad sound and [[lousy]] development [[overall]], then this is the one to watch.

Be sure to keep focused for the classic "food processor" scene and the totally inept police investigation scenes.

This is a remarkable new low in screen performance and writing and to sit through it for the entire duration makes you either stupid, daring or brave. Wow...sheer brilliance.

Turning a thriller/suspense/horror into comedy.

After watching this, I never laughed so hard at a horror movie before...a [[absurd]] plot with 3 [[character]] that were just [[unimaginably]] [[crafted]] - [[neither]] not [[typed]] in [[depths]] or too much [[depths]].

[[Unless]] you [[wanting]] to watch an absolutely [[wrote]] horror movie with [[silly]] dialog, messed up plot, [[unnecessary]] scenes, wasted [[traits]], bad sound and [[pathetic]] development [[whole]], then this is the one to watch.

Be sure to keep focused for the classic "food processor" scene and the totally inept police investigation scenes.

This is a remarkable new low in screen performance and writing and to sit through it for the entire duration makes you either stupid, daring or brave. --------------------------------------------- Result 3666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well I gave this movie a 7. It was better than "Thirdspace" but not as good as "In the Beginning" as far as the B5 movies go. I really think the television series did a much better job overall with the special effects and character portrayal. Let's hope the producers and cast get the next series "Crusade" up to the standards of B5. --------------------------------------------- Result 3667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I [[love]] this [[show]]. Now, I'm not a [[big]] [[fan]] of [[many]] science fiction [[shows]], so if it bares any [[resemblance]] to them, I didn't notice. I like the storybook quality of the cinematography. I [[even]] like the [[love]] story, [[even]] [[though]] as I am [[enjoying]] it I wonder in the back of my mind how the heck that [[part]] of the [[story]] can truly develop seeing as Ned cannot touch Chuck or else... well, you know. I [[even]] like Chuck, I don't [[find]] her [[annoying]] at all, and I [[generally]] hate [[overly]] sweet, [[nice]], [[perfect]] [[characters]]. I even like the narrator's [[voice]], [[even]] if it [[bothers]] one of my [[family]] members and bares some [[resemblance]] to some Walgreens [[commercials]]. I [[could]] nitpick about all the other [[things]] about Ned's predicament and how the writers are going to [[address]] it in the future but I just [[rather]] watch and [[wait]] and [[see]] what [[tale]] the writers [[weave]]. I [[loved]] this [[shows]]. Now, I'm not a [[grand]] [[breather]] of [[various]] science fiction [[displays]], so if it bares any [[analogy]] to them, I didn't notice. I like the storybook quality of the cinematography. I [[yet]] like the [[likes]] story, [[yet]] [[despite]] as I am [[experience]] it I wonder in the back of my mind how the heck that [[portions]] of the [[tale]] can truly develop seeing as Ned cannot touch Chuck or else... well, you know. I [[yet]] like Chuck, I don't [[found]] her [[exasperating]] at all, and I [[traditionally]] hate [[unreasonably]] sweet, [[enjoyable]], [[irreproachable]] [[traits]]. I even like the narrator's [[vocals]], [[yet]] if it [[annoys]] one of my [[families]] members and bares some [[likeness]] to some Walgreens [[ads]]. I [[would]] nitpick about all the other [[items]] about Ned's predicament and how the writers are going to [[addresses]] it in the future but I just [[quite]] watch and [[sufferance]] and [[behold]] what [[saga]] the writers [[weaving]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[actually]] [[really]] like what I've [[seen]] of this [[cartoon]] so far. [[Sure]], the animation isn't the best, but [[frankly]], I'd rather see this type of more cartoony [[style]] done [[quickly]] and cheaply than the [[old]] type of [[style]] [[done]] [[quickly]] and cheaply (which was starting to happen more and more often--it's only a [[style]] that looks good when a lot of [[time]] and effort is put into it). There's [[nothing]] wrong with the angular lines and the [[little]] black-dot eyes--in [[fact]], I [[think]] it's [[really]] cute. As a [[kid]] I never [[thought]] Scooby-Doo's design was particularly adorable, but I think I might like it better know.

[[Anyway]], Shaggy has [[always]] been my [[favorite]] character, and believe it or not, but I think he has the most potential for some [[depth]]. Sure, the [[show]] doesn't [[center]] [[around]] the [[original]] "Mystery-solving" [[theme]], but that was just a [[tired]] [[old]] [[formula]] anyway. Don't get me wrong--I'm sure there are writers out there who would be [[able]] to bring a [[lot]] more interest to [[Mystery]] Inc.'s [[traditional]] pursuits (which has been [[lacking]] as late), but in the mean [[time]] this show is a [[fun]] deviation from the standard. Shaggy and Scooby are [[still]] funny, but no [[longer]] only [[comic]] relief. They're [[still]] cowardly, but [[finally]] have the [[opportunity]] to [[use]] what seems to be (shock!) intelligence. They're the same [[old]] over-eating slackers as ever, but now [[actually]] [[seem]] to be [[getting]] on with their [[lives]] with the [[help]] of Uncle Albert's [[inheritance]].

I [[used]] to find most [[original]] Scooby-Doo jokes to be pure cheese and unintentionally [[hilarious]] at best, but this [[show]] [[actually]] [[exercises]] a [[capacity]] for [[real]] [[humor]]. [[Also]], I never really like Casey Kasem as Shaggy anyway, so the [[new]] actor doesn't annoy me as much as he does other people. (I still think Billy West was the [[best]], though)

[[Overall]], while not a [[great]] cartoon in the scope of all of [[cartoon]] [[history]], still an [[achievement]] among other Scooby incarnations. I [[genuinely]] [[truthfully]] like what I've [[watched]] of this [[caricature]] so far. [[Convinced]], the animation isn't the best, but [[sincerely]], I'd rather see this type of more cartoony [[styles]] done [[fast]] and cheaply than the [[antigua]] type of [[styles]] [[played]] [[urgently]] and cheaply (which was starting to happen more and more often--it's only a [[elegance]] that looks good when a lot of [[period]] and effort is put into it). There's [[anything]] wrong with the angular lines and the [[petite]] black-dot eyes--in [[facto]], I [[ideas]] it's [[genuinely]] cute. As a [[kiddo]] I never [[thinks]] Scooby-Doo's design was particularly adorable, but I think I might like it better know.

[[Writ]], Shaggy has [[unceasingly]] been my [[preferred]] character, and believe it or not, but I think he has the most potential for some [[depths]]. Sure, the [[shows]] doesn't [[centres]] [[roundabout]] the [[preliminary]] "Mystery-solving" [[subjects]], but that was just a [[knackered]] [[elderly]] [[formulas]] anyway. Don't get me wrong--I'm sure there are writers out there who would be [[capable]] to bring a [[batch]] more interest to [[Enigma]] Inc.'s [[classical]] pursuits (which has been [[lacked]] as late), but in the mean [[period]] this show is a [[funny]] deviation from the standard. Shaggy and Scooby are [[yet]] funny, but no [[long]] only [[comedian]] relief. They're [[again]] cowardly, but [[ultimately]] have the [[chances]] to [[utilised]] what seems to be (shock!) intelligence. They're the same [[ancient]] over-eating slackers as ever, but now [[indeed]] [[appears]] to be [[obtain]] on with their [[life]] with the [[aid]] of Uncle Albert's [[inherit]].

I [[employs]] to find most [[preliminary]] Scooby-Doo jokes to be pure cheese and unintentionally [[humorous]] at best, but this [[demonstrate]] [[indeed]] [[exercising]] a [[ability]] for [[actual]] [[comedy]]. [[Moreover]], I never really like Casey Kasem as Shaggy anyway, so the [[novel]] actor doesn't annoy me as much as he does other people. (I still think Billy West was the [[finest]], though)

[[Entire]], while not a [[remarkable]] cartoon in the scope of all of [[caricature]] [[histories]], still an [[attaining]] among other Scooby incarnations. --------------------------------------------- Result 3669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This movie is [[unworthy]] of the Omen title. It is so [[bad]] that it has [[actually]] [[damaged]] the [[classic]] [[nature]] of the first three. It never should have been [[made]], they ought to change the title.

They don't [[even]] spell [[Damien]] Thorn's [[NAME]] [[correctly]]!!!! And there are no daggers, the most [[important]] [[element]] of all the Omen films. Pull it from the shelves and burn it. This movie is [[undignified]] of the Omen title. It is so [[rotten]] that it has [[indeed]] [[harmed]] the [[typical]] [[characters]] of the first three. It never should have been [[introduced]], they ought to change the title.

They don't [[yet]] spell [[Damian]] Thorn's [[DESIGNATION]] [[justifiably]]!!!! And there are no daggers, the most [[sizeable]] [[aspect]] of all the Omen films. Pull it from the shelves and burn it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3670 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is not the [[typical]] Mel [[Brooks]] [[film]]. It was [[much]] [[less]] [[slapstick]] than most of his [[movies]] and actually had a [[plot]] that was followable. [[Leslie]] Ann Warren made the [[movie]], she is such a [[fantastic]], under-rated actress. There were some moments that could have been fleshed out a bit more, and some scenes that [[could]] [[probably]] have been [[cut]] to [[make]] the [[room]] to do so, but all in all, this is worth the price to [[rent]] and [[see]] it. The acting was good [[overall]], [[Brooks]] himself did a good job without his characteristic [[speaking]] to [[directly]] to the [[audience]]. [[Again]], Warren was the [[best]] [[actor]] in the [[movie]], but "[[Fume]]" and "[[Sailor]]" both [[played]] their parts well. This is not the [[classic]] Mel [[Creek]] [[movies]]. It was [[very]] [[fewest]] [[comedic]] than most of his [[film]] and actually had a [[intrigue]] that was followable. [[Lesley]] Ann Warren made the [[films]], she is such a [[wondrous]], under-rated actress. There were some moments that could have been fleshed out a bit more, and some scenes that [[wo]] [[unquestionably]] have been [[clipping]] to [[deliver]] the [[courtrooms]] to do so, but all in all, this is worth the price to [[leased]] and [[seeing]] it. The acting was good [[comprehensive]], [[Creek]] himself did a good job without his characteristic [[speaks]] to [[squarely]] to the [[viewers]]. [[Yet]], Warren was the [[better]] [[protagonist]] in the [[film]], but "[[Smoked]]" and "[[Crewman]]" both [[done]] their parts well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Although I had [[seen]] "Gymkata" in a [[theater]] [[way]] back in '85, I couldn't remember anything of the [[plot]] except for [[vague]] [[images]] of Kurt [[Thomas]] [[running]] and [[fighting]] against a backdrop of stone walls and [[disappointment]] [[regarding]] the ending.

After reading some of the other [[reviews]] I picked up a copy of the newly released DVD to once again [[enter]] the world of Gymkata.

It turns out this is one of those [[films]] [[produced]] during the '80s that [[would]] [[go]] directly to video today. The film stars champion gymnast [[Kurt]] [[Thomas]] as Jonathan Cabot, [[recruited]] out of the blue to [[infiltrate]] the [[nation]] of "Parmistan" to [[enter]] and [[hopefully]] [[win]] "The Game," a [[suicidal]] bloodsport [[sponsored]] by the [[Khan]] who [[encourages]] his people by [[yelling]] what sounds like "[[Yak]] Power." The [[goal]] of the [[mission]] involves the [[Star]] [[Wars]] [[defense]] system. Jonathan is trained in the martial [[arts]] by Princess Rubali, who never speaks or [[leaves]] the [[house]]. Once trained tries to [[blend]] in with the locals by wearing a bright red [[sweater]] with dashes of blue and [[white]]. Needless to [[say]] Cabot finds himself [[running]] and fighting for his [[life]] along the stone streets of Parmistan, on his [[way]] to a date with [[destiny]], and the [[Game]].

[[Star]], Kurt [[Thomas]] was [[ill]] [[served]] by [[director]] Robert Clouse, who it [[looks]] like was never on the set. The so [[called]] [[script]] is just this side of incompetent. See other [[reviews]] for the [[many]] howlers [[throughout]]. The [[town]] of crazies has a few good moments, but is [[ultimately]] [[ruined]] by bad editing. The [[ending]]...meh. [[Still]] there's the germ of a good action adventure here. A [[Hong]] Kong version with more visceral [[action]] and [[faster]] [[pace]] might even be pretty [[good]]. Although I had [[watched]] "Gymkata" in a [[cinemas]] [[route]] back in '85, I couldn't remember anything of the [[intrigue]] except for [[ambiguous]] [[photographed]] of Kurt [[Tomas]] [[executing]] and [[struggling]] against a backdrop of stone walls and [[frustration]] [[pertaining]] the ending.

After reading some of the other [[appraisals]] I picked up a copy of the newly released DVD to once again [[intro]] the world of Gymkata.

It turns out this is one of those [[movies]] [[generated]] during the '80s that [[could]] [[going]] directly to video today. The film stars champion gymnast [[Curt]] [[Passaic]] as Jonathan Cabot, [[recruits]] out of the blue to [[sneak]] the [[nationals]] of "Parmistan" to [[penetrate]] and [[luckily]] [[wins]] "The Game," a [[suicide]] bloodsport [[financed]] by the [[Kahn]] who [[promote]] his people by [[shouting]] what sounds like "[[Blah]] Power." The [[aim]] of the [[missions]] involves the [[Superstar]] [[Warfare]] [[defence]] system. Jonathan is trained in the martial [[arte]] by Princess Rubali, who never speaks or [[sheets]] the [[houses]]. Once trained tries to [[mix]] in with the locals by wearing a bright red [[jumper]] with dashes of blue and [[blanc]]. Needless to [[told]] Cabot finds himself [[run]] and fighting for his [[lives]] along the stone streets of Parmistan, on his [[route]] to a date with [[fate]], and the [[Games]].

[[Superstar]], Kurt [[Passaic]] was [[iil]] [[played]] by [[headmaster]] Robert Clouse, who it [[seems]] like was never on the set. The so [[drew]] [[screenplay]] is just this side of incompetent. See other [[scrutinize]] for the [[various]] howlers [[in]]. The [[city]] of crazies has a few good moments, but is [[eventually]] [[obliterated]] by bad editing. The [[terminated]]...meh. [[However]] there's the germ of a good action adventure here. A [[Hk]] Kong version with more visceral [[activity]] and [[speedy]] [[cadence]] might even be pretty [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3672 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] OK I saw this movie to get a benchmark for [[bad]] but with this [[movie]] it's Unisol's [[best]] [[movie]] now plot [[Luc]] Devereux is now a technical expert who is working with the government with his partner Maggie, who's been through countless hours of training and [[combat]] with him, to [[refine]] and [[perfect]] the UniSol [[program]] in an [[effort]] to [[make]] a new, [[stronger]] [[breed]] of [[soldier]] that is more [[sophisticated]], intelligent, and agile. [[All]] of the new Unisols, which are faster and [[stronger]] than their predecessors, are connected through an artificially intelligent computer system called SETH, a Self-Evolving Thought Helix. When SETH [[discovers]] that the Universal Soldier [[program]] is [[scheduled]] to be [[shut]] down because of budget cuts, he takes [[matters]] into his own "hands" to [[protect]] himself. Killing those who [[try]] to [[shut]] off his power, and unleashing his platoon of super-soldiers, led by the musclebound Romeo, SETH spares Deveraux, only because Deveraux has the secret [[code]] that is needed to [[deactivate]] a built-in [[program]] that will [[shut]] SETH down in a matter of [[hours]]. With the [[help]] of a hacker named Squid, SETH takes human form. Not only must Luc contend with ambitious [[reporter]] Erin, who won't [[leave]] his side, but Luc also [[must]] contend with General Radford, who [[wants]] to take extreme [[measures]] to [[stop]] SETH. SETH has also kidnapped Luc's injured 13-year-old [[daughter]] Hillary, and is now holding her [[hostage]]. Luc is the only [[person]] who can [[rescue]] [[Hillary]], because Luc knows firsthand how a UniSol [[thinks]], feels, and [[fights]]. now there are [[problems]] like in any [[movie]] like did [[anyone]] [[find]] it weird how a reporter just-so-happened to be there and The [[soldiers]] can take being flattened with a truck [[however]] when Vanne Damme [[shoots]] them with a [[gun]] with one bullet and they [[die]] and the final [[fight]] scene was [[unbelievable]] when Luc is now [[human]] and Seth is 5x [[stronger]] and [[faster]] than any other Unisol and Luc can take a hit from him. with the final [[fight]] when Luc smashes him to pieces I was [[really]] surprised that the [[pieces]] didn't [[melt]] and [[reform]] him (Terminator 2). another [[thing]] that bugs me is how the [[hell]] does Vanne Damme [[get]] good actors to play relatives I [[mean]] in the [[case]] of Vanne Damme it's [[completely]] off the [[grid]] of how Science Fiction this [[movie]] is. The Music [[Score]] now that must have a mention have you ever listened to a song where you'd rather cut a blackboard with a knife well Universal Soldier 2 is like that. The good points are there's no Dolph (HOORAY) and unlike the 1st one there is only one naked scene whereas in the 1st one there are many (I'm still haunted by the scenes in #1) also the actors in this have some talent whereas in the first one the casting guys were sadists (if you don't believe me look it up) OK I saw this movie to get a benchmark for [[unfavorable]] but with this [[flick]] it's Unisol's [[optimum]] [[filmmaking]] now plot [[Locke]] Devereux is now a technical expert who is working with the government with his partner Maggie, who's been through countless hours of training and [[tussle]] with him, to [[refined]] and [[irreproachable]] the UniSol [[agenda]] in an [[endeavors]] to [[deliver]] a new, [[tighter]] [[reproducing]] of [[solider]] that is more [[complex]], intelligent, and agile. [[Everything]] of the new Unisols, which are faster and [[tighter]] than their predecessors, are connected through an artificially intelligent computer system called SETH, a Self-Evolving Thought Helix. When SETH [[finds]] that the Universal Soldier [[programs]] is [[projected]] to be [[closed]] down because of budget cuts, he takes [[themes]] into his own "hands" to [[protecting]] himself. Killing those who [[tried]] to [[closure]] off his power, and unleashing his platoon of super-soldiers, led by the musclebound Romeo, SETH spares Deveraux, only because Deveraux has the secret [[coding]] that is needed to [[disable]] a built-in [[programming]] that will [[closure]] SETH down in a matter of [[hour]]. With the [[aids]] of a hacker named Squid, SETH takes human form. Not only must Luc contend with ambitious [[journalist]] Erin, who won't [[leaving]] his side, but Luc also [[needs]] contend with General Radford, who [[wanted]] to take extreme [[action]] to [[stopping]] SETH. SETH has also kidnapped Luc's injured 13-year-old [[girl]] Hillary, and is now holding her [[ransom]]. Luc is the only [[persona]] who can [[saves]] [[Hilary]], because Luc knows firsthand how a UniSol [[believes]], feels, and [[fight]]. now there are [[disorders]] like in any [[films]] like did [[person]] [[finds]] it weird how a reporter just-so-happened to be there and The [[troops]] can take being flattened with a truck [[conversely]] when Vanne Damme [[canes]] them with a [[weapon]] with one bullet and they [[died]] and the final [[combats]] scene was [[awesome]] when Luc is now [[mankind]] and Seth is 5x [[greater]] and [[quick]] than any other Unisol and Luc can take a hit from him. with the final [[battles]] when Luc smashes him to pieces I was [[genuinely]] surprised that the [[segments]] didn't [[thaw]] and [[reformation]] him (Terminator 2). another [[stuff]] that bugs me is how the [[hellfire]] does Vanne Damme [[got]] good actors to play relatives I [[meaning]] in the [[instances]] of Vanne Damme it's [[totally]] off the [[grate]] of how Science Fiction this [[flick]] is. The Music [[Scoring]] now that must have a mention have you ever listened to a song where you'd rather cut a blackboard with a knife well Universal Soldier 2 is like that. The good points are there's no Dolph (HOORAY) and unlike the 1st one there is only one naked scene whereas in the 1st one there are many (I'm still haunted by the scenes in #1) also the actors in this have some talent whereas in the first one the casting guys were sadists (if you don't believe me look it up) --------------------------------------------- Result 3673 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Having worked in [[downtown]] Manhattan, and [[often]] [[ate]] my [[lunch]] during the [[Summer]] days in the park near [[City]] [[Hall]], I would see the mayor come and go. It was great being [[able]] to [[go]] beyond the [[doors]] of City Hall and see what it looked like in the lobby and through out the [[entire]] building. Al Pacino,([[Mayor]] [[John]] Pappas),"Gigli",'03, gave an [[outstanding]] performance through out the [[entire]] picture, and [[especially]] when he gave a speech at an African American [[Church]] for a [[little]] boy who was [[slain]]. [[John]] Cusack,([[Deputy]] Mayor Kevin Calhoun),"Runaway Jury",'03, was a devoted servant to the Mayor and [[worshiped]] him in everything he attempted to accomplish. Bridget [[Fonda]],(Marybeth Cogan), starts to fall in love with Kevin Calhoun and gives a [[great]] [[supporting]] role. Last, but not [[least]], [[Danny]] Aiello(Frank Anselmo),"Off [[Key]]",'01, [[played]] a mob boss who had some very [[difficult]] [[choices]] to make towards the end of the picture! [[Great]] film with [[great]] acting and [[fantastic]] photography in NYC! Having worked in [[midtown]] Manhattan, and [[ordinarily]] [[devour]] my [[banquet]] during the [[Xia]] days in the park near [[Town]] [[Salle]], I would see the mayor come and go. It was great being [[capable]] to [[going]] beyond the [[gates]] of City Hall and see what it looked like in the lobby and through out the [[whole]] building. Al Pacino,([[Alcalde]] [[Jon]] Pappas),"Gigli",'03, gave an [[unresolved]] performance through out the [[together]] picture, and [[mainly]] when he gave a speech at an African American [[Religious]] for a [[petite]] boy who was [[beheaded]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack,([[Undersecretary]] Mayor Kevin Calhoun),"Runaway Jury",'03, was a devoted servant to the Mayor and [[revered]] him in everything he attempted to accomplish. Bridget [[Fund]],(Marybeth Cogan), starts to fall in love with Kevin Calhoun and gives a [[wondrous]] [[helping]] role. Last, but not [[slightest]], [[Dani]] Aiello(Frank Anselmo),"Off [[Principal]]",'01, [[accomplished]] a mob boss who had some very [[tough]] [[elects]] to make towards the end of the picture! [[Wondrous]] film with [[wondrous]] acting and [[great]] photography in NYC! --------------------------------------------- Result 3674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a comedy of morals, so occasionally a gentle touch of bitterness occurs, but a lightness soften all sarcasm and irony flows till all of a sudden one moment will halt your heart and changes everything.

This film, marvelously written and directed, is a gem that shines perfectly, with beautiful acting by all. Jean-Louis Trintignant is exquisite as usual, and Romy Schneider is a pearl, perfect and glowing, that is not to be missed. A truly wonderful film !! --------------------------------------------- Result 3675 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] People expect no [[less]] than [[brilliant]] when Steven Spielberg directs a [[movie]], and this movie is no [[exception]]. Some movies I love did poorly at the box office but, I'm glad to say, this movie isn't one of them (over nine million dollars, which I don't think was bad for back then). The [[characters]] were fun, the [[animation]] was [[clear]] and not [[fuzzy]], and the music was [[modern]], too, which is [[unusual]] for an [[animated]] movie. I didn't think [[Professor]] Screw Eyes or his "Scary Cirus" was too scary for little [[kids]] (the targeted audience for this movie), but I thought what happened to the creepy [[professor]] at the end was a little too dark for a kids' movie. [[Overall]], this movie is a [[fun]] and [[enchanting]] [[classic]] that I have [[loved]] dearly for years. People expect no [[least]] than [[wonderful]] when Steven Spielberg directs a [[cinema]], and this movie is no [[exemption]]. Some movies I love did poorly at the box office but, I'm glad to say, this movie isn't one of them (over nine million dollars, which I don't think was bad for back then). The [[characteristic]] were fun, the [[animate]] was [[unambiguous]] and not [[indistinct]], and the music was [[fashionable]], too, which is [[curious]] for an [[animate]] movie. I didn't think [[Profesor]] Screw Eyes or his "Scary Cirus" was too scary for little [[brats]] (the targeted audience for this movie), but I thought what happened to the creepy [[teachers]] at the end was a little too dark for a kids' movie. [[Holistic]], this movie is a [[amusing]] and [[charming]] [[typical]] that I have [[cared]] dearly for years. --------------------------------------------- Result 3676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Normally, I have much better things to do with my time than write reviews but I was so disappointed with this movie that I spent an hour registering with IMDb just to get it off my chest.

You would think a movie with names like Morgan Freeman or Kevin Spacey would be a bankable bet... well, this movie was just terrible. It is nigh on impossible to "suspend disbelief"; I tried, really, I wanted to enjoy it but Justin Timberlake just wouldn't let me.

Timberlake should stick to music, what a dreadful performance - NO presence as an actor,NO character. Can't blame everything on Justin: The movie also boast a dreadful plot & badly timed editing; its definitely an "F".

After seeing this, I have to wonder what really motivates actors. I mean, surely Morgan actually read the script before taking the part. Did he not see how poor it was? What then could motivate him to take the part? Money? Of course, acting is at times more about who you are seen with rather than really developing quality work.

LL Cool J is a great actor; he gets a lot more screen time than Freeman or Spacey in this movie and really struggles to come to terms with the poor script.

Meanwhile, the audience goes: "What the hell is going on here? You expect me to believe this crap?"

In short, apart from Justin a great lineup badly executed - very disappointing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'm giving it only 9 out of 10, because I need to [[view]] it again, in a more [[current]] mind-frame to have a fresh [[perspective]]. What I remember is an [[amazing]] psychological thriller that [[dazzled]] my brain and my eyes when I watched it. I would watch it [[every]] [[time]] it came on HBO back in the day ([[probably]] 1990 or so). I [[might]] have even [[recorded]] it, but that [[recording]] is long gone, I'm sure.

I wrote to GreenCine to [[try]] and get this title in, they [[currently]] don't [[carry]] it. I [[hope]] I can find it at a local video [[store]].

I [[would]] highly [[recommend]] giving it a [[try]] if you find it [[somewhere]]. It's interesting at the very [[least]]. [[If]] you enjoyed [[movies]] such as Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice, Gummo, or anything [[sort]] of [[strange]] and along those lines, [[try]] this one out. I'm giving it only 9 out of 10, because I need to [[opinions]] it again, in a more [[underway]] mind-frame to have a fresh [[views]]. What I remember is an [[wondrous]] psychological thriller that [[blinded]] my brain and my eyes when I watched it. I would watch it [[any]] [[period]] it came on HBO back in the day ([[presumably]] 1990 or so). I [[presumably]] have even [[registered]] it, but that [[registered]] is long gone, I'm sure.

I wrote to GreenCine to [[endeavour]] and get this title in, they [[now]] don't [[transporting]] it. I [[hopes]] I can find it at a local video [[shop]].

I [[should]] highly [[recommended]] giving it a [[tries]] if you find it [[nowhere]]. It's interesting at the very [[fewest]]. [[Unless]] you enjoyed [[films]] such as Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice, Gummo, or anything [[genre]] of [[bizarre]] and along those lines, [[attempting]] this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3678 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this a couple times on the Sundance Channel several years ago and received a nice cinematic jolt to the system. A semi-surreal yet hard edged take on modern media culture (or the lack of it), focusing on some seriously wacked, way-beyond-the-Hollywood-fringe dwellers. It had an amusing early performance from Mark Ruffalo, and some memorable cinematography from the DP who did the Polish Brothers movies. There was a savage umcompromising humor and a weirdly original feel to it that definitely set it apart. This film had cult classic written all over it, and I'm surprised it's not yet out on DVD.

Hopefully soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 3679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Huge, exhaustive and passionate summary of American cinema as seen through the eyes of Martin Scorcese. Needless to say, there is never a dull moment in all of its 4 hour running time. Many genres, periods and directors are all examined, discussed more from the perspective of cinephile rather than contemporary director. For anyone even remotely interested in American films, or cinema in general. A masterpiece, and the best of the BFI's Century of Cinema series.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Roman]] Polanski has [[made]] [[many]], many [[movies]] that are unexceptional. His [[fame]] bewilders me. [[Nothing]] stands out as a [[high]] point except Chinatown (I haven't seen 'Knife in the Water' or 'Tess'). [[Any]] contribution he's made to film concluded more than twenty years ago; his work is just [[embarrassing]], safe and/or dull (The Pianist, [[Frantic]], Oliver Twist, The [[Ninth]] [[Gate]], [[Pirates]]).

R's Baby [[must]] have [[signified]] the end of the [[establishment]] at the [[time]] it came out. It's lux-produced and [[fairly]] high [[concept]] for a 1968 'horror' [[movie]] (never [[show]] the baby). But this is just misconceived [[horror]] sap. [[Everything]] is [[arty]] to the point that the plot [[line]] [[becomes]] [[hopelessly]] [[clear]] very [[early]] ([[Um]], [[thanks]] for that finale-destroying title), and on a clear day you can see the twist [[ending]] [[coming]] for days. It did not [[sustain]] my interest. I [[find]] that whatever this [[movie]] might have been, it is [[utterly]] derailed by the 1960's [[version]] of what femininity was. [[Farrow]] is such a [[chronic]] [[distracted]], [[helpless]] waif/[[housewife]]. Her frailty is oversold... she's [[irritating]] in the extreme. There's no real [[ideas]] in it... [[nothing]] to [[consider]] except being the [[mother]] of the [[devil]].

The Dakota is [[barely]] [[exploited]] for it eerie [[potential]]. [[Romana]] Polanski has [[accomplished]] [[innumerable]], many [[filmmaking]] that are unexceptional. His [[repute]] bewilders me. [[Nada]] stands out as a [[highest]] point except Chinatown (I haven't seen 'Knife in the Water' or 'Tess'). [[Everything]] contribution he's made to film concluded more than twenty years ago; his work is just [[inconvenient]], safe and/or dull (The Pianist, [[Frenzied]], Oliver Twist, The [[Nona]] [[Wears]], [[Pirating]]).

R's Baby [[should]] have [[meant]] the end of the [[institutions]] at the [[period]] it came out. It's lux-produced and [[relatively]] high [[idea]] for a 1968 'horror' [[movies]] (never [[exposition]] the baby). But this is just misconceived [[monstrosity]] sap. [[Entire]] is [[artistic]] to the point that the plot [[bloodline]] [[become]] [[irreparably]] [[lucid]] very [[swift]] ([[Mmm]], [[appreciation]] for that finale-destroying title), and on a clear day you can see the twist [[ended]] [[incoming]] for days. It did not [[sustaining]] my interest. I [[unearthed]] that whatever this [[filmmaking]] might have been, it is [[wholly]] derailed by the 1960's [[stepping]] of what femininity was. [[Faro]] is such a [[persistent]] [[entertained]], [[impotent]] waif/[[homemaker]]. Her frailty is oversold... she's [[troublesome]] in the extreme. There's no real [[reflections]] in it... [[none]] to [[considering]] except being the [[mommy]] of the [[diablo]].

The Dakota is [[hardly]] [[harnessed]] for it eerie [[prospective]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I never understood why some people dislike Bollywood [[films]]: they've got charismatic [[actors]], [[great]] dance [[numbers]], and [[heightened]] emotion--what's not to [[like]]? What I didn't realize was that I had only seen the upper-crust of Bollywood. Then I watched "Garam [[Masala]]". I could tell from the first scene that this was not a [[movie]] I was going to like (the film opens with a montage of the two [[leads]] driving around a city and apparently happening serendipitously on a series of [[photo]] [[setups]] [[populated]] with gyrating models), but I [[kept]] hoping things would [[improve]]. Sadly, they didn't. The [[main]] problem is that the two [[protagonists]], [[Mac]] & Sam, are [[completely]] [[unsympathetic]]. They spend the entire movie lying to women--and lying brutally- -in order to get them into [[bed]], and the audience is supposed to find this [[funny]], and be [[charmed]]. The [[boys]] are unscrupulous and [[inept]], and not in a lovable [[way]]. Mac [[even]] goes so far as to have one of the women drugged in [[order]] to keep her from discovering his cheating. The [[script]] is [[extremely]] poor, with [[repetitive]] scenes, setups that never lead to anything, and [[illogical]] actions and statements by the characters. In fact, the characters are never really [[developed]] at all. The males are boorish, greedy jerks, and the [[women]] merely interchangeably beautiful. If you go by this movie, you would think that "air [[hostesses]]" are pretty easy to pass from man to man. In reality, betrayal is not so humorous.

The only [[bright]] [[spots]] I found in the [[movie]] were one dance number that had [[brilliant]] sets, and a few slapsticky moments involving the French-farce, door-slamming aspects of the story. But Bollywood dancing is better enjoyed in movies choreographed by Farah Khan, and for slapstick you [[might]] as well just go straight to the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, who seem to have influenced writer/director Priyadarshan not a little. Priyadarshan also takes [[false]] credit for inventing the story: the basic premise of the plot is stolen from the 1960 play "Boeing Boeing." The original author of that work, Marc Camoletti, is credited nowhere. At least Priyadarshan changed the title for this remake, rather than brazenly using the original without giving credit, as he did in his 1985 version of this same tale. (According to IMDb's credits list.) I never understood why some people dislike Bollywood [[cinema]]: they've got charismatic [[players]], [[huge]] dance [[digits]], and [[widening]] emotion--what's not to [[likes]]? What I didn't realize was that I had only seen the upper-crust of Bollywood. Then I watched "Garam [[Garam]]". I could tell from the first scene that this was not a [[filmmaking]] I was going to like (the film opens with a montage of the two [[leeds]] driving around a city and apparently happening serendipitously on a series of [[photos]] [[configurations]] [[manned]] with gyrating models), but I [[conserved]] hoping things would [[strengthening]]. Sadly, they didn't. The [[primary]] problem is that the two [[players]], [[Macs]] & Sam, are [[wholly]] [[indifferent]]. They spend the entire movie lying to women--and lying brutally- -in order to get them into [[bedside]], and the audience is supposed to find this [[droll]], and be [[enchanted]]. The [[grooms]] are unscrupulous and [[incompetent]], and not in a lovable [[manner]]. Mac [[yet]] goes so far as to have one of the women drugged in [[decree]] to keep her from discovering his cheating. The [[hyphen]] is [[considerably]] poor, with [[recur]] scenes, setups that never lead to anything, and [[irrational]] actions and statements by the characters. In fact, the characters are never really [[devised]] at all. The males are boorish, greedy jerks, and the [[femmes]] merely interchangeably beautiful. If you go by this movie, you would think that "air [[stews]]" are pretty easy to pass from man to man. In reality, betrayal is not so humorous.

The only [[glossy]] [[commercials]] I found in the [[filmmaking]] were one dance number that had [[sumptuous]] sets, and a few slapsticky moments involving the French-farce, door-slamming aspects of the story. But Bollywood dancing is better enjoyed in movies choreographed by Farah Khan, and for slapstick you [[apt]] as well just go straight to the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, who seem to have influenced writer/director Priyadarshan not a little. Priyadarshan also takes [[specious]] credit for inventing the story: the basic premise of the plot is stolen from the 1960 play "Boeing Boeing." The original author of that work, Marc Camoletti, is credited nowhere. At least Priyadarshan changed the title for this remake, rather than brazenly using the original without giving credit, as he did in his 1985 version of this same tale. (According to IMDb's credits list.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3682 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was quite pleased to find this [[movie]] in the local [[video]] library - Cary [[Grant]] in a [[comedy]] set in the services, [[director]] [[Stanley]] Donen, so far what's not to like? It's the [[sort]] of film that has me wondering two [[things]] - when did all involved (including some well-known [[names]]) [[realize]] they had a [[turkey]] on their hands, and what's the [[worst]] thing about it among a number of contending aspects? Still pondering the first, but my vote for the latter goes to the meandering storyline, ahead of the wordy sometimes [[pretentious]] [[script]], the [[uncertain]] tone, the [[lack]] of consistent and well-developed characterization, and the [[lack]] of [[rapport]] between the characters. You have to [[add]] very [[uneven]] acting to the criticism but it's understandable that the actors were [[struggling]] with this stuff and in addition seem under-rehearsed. Quite often they can hardly get their lines out quick enough. Cary Grant tries to portray his usual charming and urbane persona but at times seems uneasy and staccato in his delivery. I have to say however that I was relieved when the initial suggestions his character will be paired with the unspeakably vulgar Jayne Mansfield go away with the appearance of Suzy Parker. What's to like about the film? - for me chiefly the beauty of Parker who also acts with restraint and a Grace Kelly-like dignity. Generally speaking the film is nice to look at. The [[naval]] characters are very smart in their uniforms - [[however]] you have to truly wonder at the ghastly black Fu Manchu tunics they don in their luxury hotel suite. Even Grant can't look elegant in his. Back to the credit side, Ray Walston does a commendable job with his character and for me there was an interest in hearing a pre-Hogan's Heroes Werner Klemperer speak without an assumed German accent! I was quite pleased to find this [[filmmaking]] in the local [[videotape]] library - Cary [[Granting]] in a [[humour]] set in the services, [[superintendent]] [[Stan]] Donen, so far what's not to like? It's the [[kinds]] of film that has me wondering two [[aspects]] - when did all involved (including some well-known [[name]]) [[achieving]] they had a [[turk]] on their hands, and what's the [[meanest]] thing about it among a number of contending aspects? Still pondering the first, but my vote for the latter goes to the meandering storyline, ahead of the wordy sometimes [[cocky]] [[hyphen]], the [[ambiguous]] tone, the [[scarcity]] of consistent and well-developed characterization, and the [[scarcity]] of [[relationship]] between the characters. You have to [[adds]] very [[lopsided]] acting to the criticism but it's understandable that the actors were [[striving]] with this stuff and in addition seem under-rehearsed. Quite often they can hardly get their lines out quick enough. Cary Grant tries to portray his usual charming and urbane persona but at times seems uneasy and staccato in his delivery. I have to say however that I was relieved when the initial suggestions his character will be paired with the unspeakably vulgar Jayne Mansfield go away with the appearance of Suzy Parker. What's to like about the film? - for me chiefly the beauty of Parker who also acts with restraint and a Grace Kelly-like dignity. Generally speaking the film is nice to look at. The [[nautical]] characters are very smart in their uniforms - [[nonetheless]] you have to truly wonder at the ghastly black Fu Manchu tunics they don in their luxury hotel suite. Even Grant can't look elegant in his. Back to the credit side, Ray Walston does a commendable job with his character and for me there was an interest in hearing a pre-Hogan's Heroes Werner Klemperer speak without an assumed German accent! --------------------------------------------- Result 3683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I came away from this movie with the feeling that it could have been so much better. Instead of what should be a gripping, tense story of a boy's fight for survival in the wilderness, it comes off as a National Geographic documentary meets Columbia sportswear ad.

The film begins with Brian (Jared Rushton) preparing for a journey by plane to see his father. His mother fortuitously gives him the curious choice of a hatchet as a going-away gift (what's wrong with a Rubik's Cube?), little knowing how badly he will soon need it. Once in the air, the plane's pilot (a blink-and-you'll-miss-him cameo by Ned Beatty) suffers a fatal heart attack, leaving Brian helpless as the plane crashes into a lake. Extremely lucky to walk (or rather swim) away virtually unscathed, Brian must find shelter, food and hope for rescue.

Here is where the main problem with the movie begins. By the very nature of Brian's solitude, Jared has very few lines to speak, and so the film ought to have compensated by ratcheting up the tension of each scene. Instead, he is shown walking around, sitting around, and so on, with only a minimal sense of danger. As a result, too much reliance is placed on flashbacks to the parents' troubled marriage as the source of tension. These scenes merely get in the way and don't particularly add much to the story. Even worse, occasionally Jared – his face covered with mud - lets out a primal scream or two, which conjures up unfortunate parallels to `Predator.' Speaking of unfortunate, we could have done with being spared the sight of his mullet, but it presumably helped keep him warm at night.

Another disappointment is Pamela Sue Martin in a totally ineffectual performance as the mother. Both she and the father have very little impact in the movie. For instance, we are never shown how they react to news of Brian's disappearance, how they might be organizing rescue attempts, and so on. This is just one source of tension the film-makers would have done well to explore instead of spending so much time on events that happened before Brian embarked on his journey. --------------------------------------------- Result 3684 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Effort]] aside (This isn't a [[review]] about good [[intentions]], its about the [[final]] [[product]]), this film is poorly [[written]], overacted, and poorly [[directed]]. The [[story]] [[obviously]] had [[potential]], but that story is nowhere present in this [[film]].

[[Clara]] Barton was a human being. She had [[passions]], desires, [[love]], pain, [[embarrassment]], [[weakness]], and self doubt just like the [[rest]] of us. You would never know that from this [[film]] of the lead actress's performance. In fact [[apply]] that to every [[character]] in the [[film]], but in Barton's [[case]]: [[Every]] [[sentence]] is a [[speech]]. An [[epic]] over the [[top]] [[speech]] as [[though]] from an inhuman robot. [[In]] [[fact]] the only scene that plays well in one in the board [[meeting]], and I [[realized]] [[thats]] because she's making a speech! [[Every]] [[idea]] she has is unbelievable in its [[context]] and she [[comes]] up with [[ideas]] that [[sound]] like they take a [[lifetime]] of soul [[searching]] right on the spot. For example, when she sees a [[wounded]] [[man]], she'll [[start]] pontificating about the [[needs]] of the battlefield and to [[protect]] [[soldiers]] and putting up white flags, etc. As played in the [[film]], there's no [[WAY]] she [[could]] come up with such a detailed well thought out [[idea]] in seconds.

[[IN]] [[conclusion]], this [[film]] [[robs]] [[Clara]] Barton of her struggles. It robs her of her [[humanity]], and it inherently cheapens all she did because the [[script]] is [[written]] in clichés. The writer doesn't know Clara Barton, and seems to have [[based]] his script on an encyclopedia Britannica article. ([[yes]] they had those back then) But [[hey]], [[nice]] Technicolor! (who cares) [[Efforts]] aside (This isn't a [[reviews]] about good [[purposes]], its about the [[definitive]] [[commodity]]), this film is poorly [[authored]], overacted, and poorly [[geared]]. The [[histories]] [[naturally]] had [[prospective]], but that story is nowhere present in this [[filmmaking]].

[[Clear]] Barton was a human being. She had [[emotions]], desires, [[amour]], pain, [[awkwardness]], [[insufficiency]], and self doubt just like the [[stays]] of us. You would never know that from this [[filmmaking]] of the lead actress's performance. In fact [[applying]] that to every [[traits]] in the [[filmmaking]], but in Barton's [[example]]: [[Everything]] [[punishments]] is a [[discourse]]. An [[odyssey]] over the [[superior]] [[rhetoric]] as [[while]] from an inhuman robot. [[At]] [[facto]] the only scene that plays well in one in the board [[meetings]], and I [[performed]] [[whats]] because she's making a speech! [[Any]] [[think]] she has is unbelievable in its [[backgrounds]] and she [[happens]] up with [[idea]] that [[audible]] like they take a [[lifespan]] of soul [[researching]] right on the spot. For example, when she sees a [[injured]] [[males]], she'll [[induction]] pontificating about the [[gotta]] of the battlefield and to [[protected]] [[solider]] and putting up white flags, etc. As played in the [[flick]], there's no [[ROUTES]] she [[wo]] come up with such a detailed well thought out [[thoughts]] in seconds.

[[ACROSS]] [[conclude]], this [[flick]] [[steals]] [[Claire]] Barton of her struggles. It robs her of her [[mankind]], and it inherently cheapens all she did because the [[hyphen]] is [[typed]] in clichés. The writer doesn't know Clara Barton, and seems to have [[founded]] his script on an encyclopedia Britannica article. ([[yeah]] they had those back then) But [[hello]], [[pleasurable]] Technicolor! (who cares) --------------------------------------------- Result 3685 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I [[loved]] this [[movie]]! It's [[truly]] [[bizarre]], [[extremely]] funny, [[morbid]], witty... It makes no sense to [[tell]] about the contents of the [[movie]], because then I'd be giving out the [[outcome]]! You have to [[see]] it without knowing what is it about! [[Everything]] is [[connected]] and has its why & because. It [[starts]] [[subtly]] and then the things [[start]] rolling faster and [[faster]] until they culminate in the most [[insane]] [[outburst]] you can [[imagine]]! It's even more fun to watch the [[movie]] the second [[time]], once you [[know]] all the "[[tricks]]". The [[actors]] are [[excellent]], [[especially]] [[Ivan]] Trojan, whose [[final]] scenes are a real [[master]] [[piece]]! I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[film]], it's one of the most [[original]] ones I've ever [[seen]]! I [[cared]] this [[kino]]! It's [[truthfully]] [[weird]], [[considerably]] funny, [[sickness]], witty... It makes no sense to [[say]] about the contents of the [[cinematography]], because then I'd be giving out the [[results]]! You have to [[behold]] it without knowing what is it about! [[Any]] is [[related]] and has its why & because. It [[launched]] [[finely]] and then the things [[starter]] rolling faster and [[promptly]] until they culminate in the most [[kooky]] [[outbreak]] you can [[imagining]]! It's even more fun to watch the [[film]] the second [[times]], once you [[savoir]] all the "[[gimmicks]]". The [[actresses]] are [[noteworthy]], [[concretely]] [[Evan]] Trojan, whose [[last]] scenes are a real [[maitre]] [[slice]]! I [[crucially]] [[recommends]] this [[cinematography]], it's one of the most [[initials]] ones I've ever [[noticed]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Philo Vance had many affinities with Bulldog Drummond… He was a gentleman with the kind of polish and elegance only usually associated with the British upper classes and he was also independently wealthy…

But there were vital differences… Drummond was an adventurer, charming, gallant, lively… Vance could be pompous, slight1y dull and self-righteous… There was a hint of fundamental cruelty in his manner…

"The Kennel Murder Case" is the most impressive of the 14 Vance films made between 1929 and 1947… The story of a murdered collector of Chinoiserie, it has all the ingredients of the classic private eye mystery – exotic setting in the blue nose Long Island Kennel Club, three killings for Vance to solve including a baffling "locked room murder," the key to the whole affair, and plenty of suspects…

Usually, a detective story setting have proved too static and talkative to make convincing movies even though they work well enough on the printed page, but here Michael Curtiz's direction and the fine editing give the film a pace and urgency that make it altogether different from similar films of its type…

William Powell's elegance and suavity made him the perfect Vance and although a year later he switched studios, he stayed in the same genre with the enormously successful and popular "The Thin Man" at MGM… --------------------------------------------- Result 3687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Encompassing virtual reality, the potential of computers, communication with the past, the ongoing struggle to express your identity in a constraining society, and the fascinating Ada Byron Lovelace portrayed by the fascinating Tilda Swinton, this film should have been great. But it is lousy, terrible if you consider the potential! The acting - aside from Tilda Swinton and Karen Black - veers from tolerable to atrocious. The plot construction is awkward to say the least - the modern day programmer is a dull one-note character, but half the movie is spent setting up her character, and then when Ada finally appears, it is to narrate the events of her life, not to present an engaging story (Swinton almost pulls this off, though). You never fully get to know her as a real person, just an icon from a grad student's history paper.

The digital effects, such as a digital dog and bird, are lousy and distracting, considering it was 1997 and not 1985. And, finally, the script is just bad. Bad, often pretentious dialog - especially the fights between the programmer and her boyfriend, which made me squirm - cold and distant characters, and zero attempt to create a sense of wonder. The programmer successfully contacts a person in the past! Astonishing! But it hardly seems to surprise anyone, and her boyfriend says, "Well, be careful." (Although we're given no clue then or later why it might be dangerous, and it never seems to actually be dangerous.)

Also, despite being about computers and Ada Lovelace and her love of mathematics, it is clear no one involved with the script had any knowledge of mathematics OR computers - any references to these subjects come across as complete mumbo jumbo that defies any suspension of disbelief.

One scene, towards the end of the movie, is quite good, a monolog by Tilda Swinton expressing her sadness at the fragility of life but her joy in that life. Poignant, passionate, and insightful, it seems to be dropped in from another movie.

So I am disappointed in this movie, because it is a missed opportunity for a fascinating little cult film. If you find the subject matter interesting, you might want to rent it, but be forewarned. See Orlando for another, much much better examination of gender roles in history with a great Tilda Swinton performance.

***spoiler/question: * *

At the end of the movie, Ada asks that her memories not be preserved (in what I thought was the best scene in the movie). But then the modern day programmer seems to do it anyway, transferring the memories into her little girl (hence the title of the movie). Am I correct, that the programmer violated Ada's wishes without even struggling over it? Or is this another confusing plot point that I'm misinterpreting? --------------------------------------------- Result 3688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] When I was [[younger]] I really [[enjoyed]] [[watching]] [[bad]] [[television]]. We've all been guilty of it at some [[time]] or another, but my excuse for watching [[things]] like "Buck [[Rogers]] in the 25th Century" and "Silver [[Spoons]]" is this: I was young and naive; [[ignorant]] of what makes a [[show]] really [[worthwhile]].

Thankfully, I now appreciate the good stuff. Stargate SG-1 is not good. The 12 year-old me would love [[every]] hackneyed bit of it, [[every]] line of stilted dialogue, [[every]] bit of [[needless]] technobabble. The [[writing]] is beyond [[insipid]]; so bland and [[uninspired]] it makes one miss [[Star]] [[Trek]]: [[Voyager]]. If your [[show]] makes me [[long]] for the [[worst]] [[Trek]] [[show]] ever, you're in [[trouble]].

The film Stargate is a wonderful guilty pleasure, [[anchored]] by two [[solid]] performances by James Spader and Kurt Russell, full of [[fascinating]] Egyptian [[architecture]] and [[culture]], a [[wonderful]] musical [[score]], and cool sci-fi [[ideas]]. With the [[exception]] of a [[little]] of the [[original]] [[music]], [[none]] of what made the [[film]] fun [[appears]] in this [[show]]. Even [[Richard]] Dean [[Anderson]], who [[made]] MacGyver watchable and Legend interesting, [[seems]] like he's half asleep most episodes.

The [[budget]] must have been very low because the sets sometimes look like somebody's basement. The [[cinematography]] isn't [[much]] better, as vanilla and dull as the [[scripts]]. It amazes me that [[shows]] with a [[lot]] more [[style]] (like Farscape) and substance (like the reimagined Battlestar [[Galactica]]) have [[smaller]], less rabid fanbases than this pap. It just doesn't [[deserve]] it. When I was [[youngest]] I really [[adored]] [[staring]] [[unfavorable]] [[tv]]. We've all been guilty of it at some [[period]] or another, but my excuse for watching [[aspects]] like "Buck [[Rodgers]] in the 25th Century" and "Silver [[Teaspoons]]" is this: I was young and naive; [[uninformed]] of what makes a [[exposition]] really [[actionable]].

Thankfully, I now appreciate the good stuff. Stargate SG-1 is not good. The 12 year-old me would love [[any]] hackneyed bit of it, [[any]] line of stilted dialogue, [[any]] bit of [[superfluous]] technobabble. The [[literary]] is beyond [[tasteless]]; so bland and [[unimaginative]] it makes one miss [[Superstar]] [[Hike]]: [[Travel]]. If your [[illustrating]] makes me [[longer]] for the [[worse]] [[Hike]] [[illustrates]] ever, you're in [[troubles]].

The film Stargate is a wonderful guilty pleasure, [[grounded]] by two [[robust]] performances by James Spader and Kurt Russell, full of [[riveting]] Egyptian [[structure]] and [[cultivation]], a [[sumptuous]] musical [[scoring]], and cool sci-fi [[thoughts]]. With the [[exemption]] of a [[small]] of the [[initial]] [[musicians]], [[nos]] of what made the [[flick]] fun [[appear]] in this [[exhibit]]. Even [[Ritchie]] Dean [[Andersson]], who [[effected]] MacGyver watchable and Legend interesting, [[seem]] like he's half asleep most episodes.

The [[budgets]] must have been very low because the sets sometimes look like somebody's basement. The [[movies]] isn't [[very]] better, as vanilla and dull as the [[screenplays]]. It amazes me that [[demonstrates]] with a [[lots]] more [[elegance]] (like Farscape) and substance (like the reimagined Battlestar [[Battlestar]]) have [[smallest]], less rabid fanbases than this pap. It just doesn't [[deserved]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I rented it because the second segment traumatized me as a little kid. I snuck downstairs really early one morning, started watching HBO, and The Raft (segment 2) terrorized me good. This time around, I still enjoyed The Raft, although I couldn't tell whether it was for nostalgic reasons or if it was actually a good short. The other two segments were complete trash. I can't believe a producer somewhere payed to make this junk. All I've accomplished by watching this was to ruin one more childhood memory. Creepshow 2 will now join Rad among my list of tainted childhood classics. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The film [[portrays]] France's [[unresolved]] problems with its colonial [[legacy]] in Western (Francophone) [[Africa]] through the [[befuddled]] and [[complex]] [[psychoanalytical]] prism of a [[young]] [[woman]], France ([[herein]] symbolically representing her [[nation]]). It is an [[often]] [[engaging]] and challenging portrait of a [[young]] woman's [[desire]] to [[come]] to terms with a traumatic moment in her past, in [[particular]], and a nation's desire to [[reach]] out to the 'other' it once 'owned' and [[moulded]]. This is [[reflected]] in the way in which it [[centres]] [[entirely]] [[around]] the [[notion]] of [[travelling]] (or being in transit) from the present to the past; remembered realities to [[undeniable]] contemporary political and [[economic]] actualities.

The characters all play a symbolic, albeit a [[limited]] and [[unconvincing]] role. France, meant to be a visual as well as a totemic representation of contemporary French society, leaves one indifferent to her plight as she seems still to be imbued with the same naiveté she enjoyed as a child-in fact as a child she seems more in possession of her reality. The rest of the rag-tag ensemble is just forgettable. The black Africans are, to say the least, offencive impressionistic portraits of former colonised peoples now colonised by the director's poor handling of her material. They are no more than a dark and moribund [[backdrop]] against which the blythe-like France wonders seeking a world she never knew, and hoping for one that can never be found in Cameroon. The film [[illustrates]] France's [[unsettled]] problems with its colonial [[inherit]] in Western (Francophone) [[Continents]] through the [[puzzled]] and [[difficult]] [[psychoanalytic]] prism of a [[jeune]] [[femme]], France ([[hereto]] symbolically representing her [[countries]]). It is an [[generally]] [[participate]] and challenging portrait of a [[youthful]] woman's [[willingness]] to [[arriving]] to terms with a traumatic moment in her past, in [[especial]], and a nation's desire to [[attain]] out to the 'other' it once 'owned' and [[shaped]]. This is [[mirrored]] in the way in which it [[centro]] [[fully]] [[throughout]] the [[concepts]] of [[traveling]] (or being in transit) from the present to the past; remembered realities to [[unquestionable]] contemporary political and [[economics]] actualities.

The characters all play a symbolic, albeit a [[scant]] and [[feeble]] role. France, meant to be a visual as well as a totemic representation of contemporary French society, leaves one indifferent to her plight as she seems still to be imbued with the same naiveté she enjoyed as a child-in fact as a child she seems more in possession of her reality. The rest of the rag-tag ensemble is just forgettable. The black Africans are, to say the least, offencive impressionistic portraits of former colonised peoples now colonised by the director's poor handling of her material. They are no more than a dark and moribund [[context]] against which the blythe-like France wonders seeking a world she never knew, and hoping for one that can never be found in Cameroon. --------------------------------------------- Result 3691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] First of all I've got to give it to the people that got this [[thing]] [[together]]. 9/11 is such a [[sensitive]] issue that making a movie that dares to be [[controversial]] about it [[takes]] a great deal of guts. It's a shame, although not surprising, that the movie was [[banned]] in the US.

That being [[said]] I think that the [[movie]] is [[superb]] with a [[couple]] of [[weak]] moments. The movie [[starts]] up with the Iranian segment which turns out to be [[somewhat]] reminiscent of Majid Majidi's work (the absolutely beautiful "heaven's [[children]]" and "the [[color]] of [[paradise]]"). Much like those 2 [[films]] the clip [[shows]] what happened through the innocent eyes of a [[class]] of Afgan refugees in Iran. [[Absolutely]] [[beautiful]] clip. [[Same]] goes for [[Sean]] Penn's clip which is [[superb]] as well. But just as some of the clips are beutiful others are [[absolutely]] [[brutal]]. Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu does the mexican clip and just like his gut-wrenching "Amores perros" he does it as brutal as he can. [[Most]] of the clip is a black screen with [[several]] sounds playing in the [[background]]. Those [[sounds]] are of the [[reporters]] and their [[shock]] as the second [[plane]] crashes, those who called [[home]] from the burning [[towers]] and [[left]] messages for their families, those who were [[angry]]....and he [[combines]] this with [[flashes]] of people [[jumping]] from the [[towers]]. A very [[hard]] clip to watch and one that you won't [[forget]].

Some clips [[could]] [[turn]] out to be very [[hard]] to watch for [[Americans]] as some of the clips [[could]] be interpreted as "you're not the only ones that are [[suffering]]". [[In]] [[particular]] the Egyptian and British clips that not only [[say]] that but turn the [[tables]] and [[say]] how much [[suffering]] the [[US]] has caused to other people.

I will [[also]] [[make]] a [[special]] mention to the clips from Bosnia-Herzegovina, France, India and Japan ([[although]] this [[last]] one may [[seem]] [[terribly]] out of place it actually isn't).

However, not all the clips are [[great]] and I [[make]] a [[special]] [[mention]] on the clip from Israel which, in my opinion, is [[extremely]] weak. [[While]] the [[idea]] was good (a [[reporter]] is at the scene of a terrorist [[attack]] in [[Tel]] [[Aviv]] but his [[story]] [[gets]] [[bumped]] because of what [[happened]] in [[New]] [[York]] is [[something]] that a [[lot]] of us who [[live]] in [[countries]] at war can relate to) the realization is terrible. The clip ends up as just some entertainment reporter trying to get some air-time at all costs, a guy saying he's a witness and hoping that he can go on TV, and soldiers and paramedics shouting just "because". The clip fails to capture any of the drama of such a situation.

If you happen to have the chance to see it then you should, that is, unless you're a conservative in which case you'd better stay out as you might get offended. But if you're not then you might learn how many of us outside the US lived through 9/11. First of all I've got to give it to the people that got this [[stuff]] [[jointly]]. 9/11 is such a [[receptive]] issue that making a movie that dares to be [[contentious]] about it [[pick]] a great deal of guts. It's a shame, although not surprising, that the movie was [[proscribed]] in the US.

That being [[say]] I think that the [[cinematography]] is [[funky]] with a [[couples]] of [[flimsy]] moments. The movie [[outset]] up with the Iranian segment which turns out to be [[slightly]] reminiscent of Majid Majidi's work (the absolutely beautiful "heaven's [[infant]]" and "the [[hue]] of [[heaven]]"). Much like those 2 [[movie]] the clip [[showcase]] what happened through the innocent eyes of a [[kinds]] of Afgan refugees in Iran. [[Entirely]] [[wondrous]] clip. [[Identical]] goes for [[Shawn]] Penn's clip which is [[magnifique]] as well. But just as some of the clips are beutiful others are [[abundantly]] [[brute]]. Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu does the mexican clip and just like his gut-wrenching "Amores perros" he does it as brutal as he can. [[More]] of the clip is a black screen with [[multiple]] sounds playing in the [[context]]. Those [[noises]] are of the [[reporter]] and their [[shocks]] as the second [[aircraft]] crashes, those who called [[dwellings]] from the burning [[torres]] and [[exited]] messages for their families, those who were [[irritated]]....and he [[merged]] this with [[flashing]] of people [[skipping]] from the [[rigs]]. A very [[stiff]] clip to watch and one that you won't [[overlook]].

Some clips [[would]] [[converting]] out to be very [[stiff]] to watch for [[American]] as some of the clips [[wo]] be interpreted as "you're not the only ones that are [[suffer]]". [[Throughout]] [[special]] the Egyptian and British clips that not only [[says]] that but turn the [[table]] and [[said]] how much [[suffer]] the [[AMERICANS]] has caused to other people.

I will [[apart]] [[deliver]] a [[peculiar]] mention to the clips from Bosnia-Herzegovina, France, India and Japan ([[despite]] this [[latter]] one may [[looks]] [[unspeakably]] out of place it actually isn't).

However, not all the clips are [[huge]] and I [[deliver]] a [[peculiar]] [[mentioning]] on the clip from Israel which, in my opinion, is [[unbelievably]] weak. [[Though]] the [[thinking]] was good (a [[correspondent]] is at the scene of a terrorist [[attacks]] in [[Phone]] [[Tel]] but his [[history]] [[got]] [[banged]] because of what [[arrived]] in [[Novo]] [[Yorke]] is [[anything]] that a [[lots]] of us who [[vive]] in [[country]] at war can relate to) the realization is terrible. The clip ends up as just some entertainment reporter trying to get some air-time at all costs, a guy saying he's a witness and hoping that he can go on TV, and soldiers and paramedics shouting just "because". The clip fails to capture any of the drama of such a situation.

If you happen to have the chance to see it then you should, that is, unless you're a conservative in which case you'd better stay out as you might get offended. But if you're not then you might learn how many of us outside the US lived through 9/11. --------------------------------------------- Result 3692 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] One of [[Frances]] Farmer's earliest movies; at 22, she is absolutely [[beautiful]]. [[Bing]] Crosby is in great voice, but the songs are not his [[best]]. [[Martha]] Raye and Bob Burns are interesting, but their comedy, [[probably]] [[great]] in its [[time]], is really [[corny]] today. Roy Rogers also appears- in a singing role. In my [[view]] only worth watching if you are a Frances Farmer fan, and possibly a Bing Crosby fan. One of [[Francis]] Farmer's earliest movies; at 22, she is absolutely [[sumptuous]]. [[Peng]] Crosby is in great voice, but the songs are not his [[optimum]]. [[Tasha]] Raye and Bob Burns are interesting, but their comedy, [[unquestionably]] [[prodigious]] in its [[moment]], is really [[cheesy]] today. Roy Rogers also appears- in a singing role. In my [[avis]] only worth watching if you are a Frances Farmer fan, and possibly a Bing Crosby fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 3693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't approach "Still Crazy" with any real anticipation. Just another rock'n'roll picture, I figured... good nostalgia for the baby boomers. This film is partially that, but so much more. Brian Gibson, the director, previously helmed a biography of Tina Turner, and is quite successful in his style. I suppose it is fitting that this was his last film.

The cast is well-chosen. Bill Nighy is perfect in his role as the band's frontman. Actor-turned-director Bruce Robinson appears as the band's washed-up guitarist. He does a superb job, even though he hasn't appeared on film since the late 70's. If you're looking for an touching and funny film (with some great songs), you've found it.

7.4 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] After Dark, My [[Sweet]] is a [[great]], modern [[noir]], filled with seedy characters, dirt roads, and, of course, sweaty [[characters]]. It seems that most of the truly great noirs of the last two or three decades have taken place in the South, where the men glisten and the ladies, um, glisten too. Why? Because it's hooooottttttttttt. And because [[everyone]] looks better [[wet]] (at least the men do - sweaty women leave me clammy).

Anyway - there might be some spoilers in here.

This [[film]] is a [[wonderful]] example of everything a noir should be - [[steady]] pacing ([[though]] some with attention [[disorders]] refer to it as 'slow'), [[clearly]] and [[broadly]] drawn ([[though]] not [[simple]]) characters, and [[tons]] of atmosphere. Noir, if anything, is about [[moods]] and [[attitudes]]. That's why the [[great]] ones are not marked by your [[traditional]] [[definitions]] of 'great' acting (look at Bogart, Mitchum, Hurt, and Nicholson - they (and their characters) were anything but real - but they had [[style]] and sass and in a [[crime]] [[movie]] that's [[exactly]] what you [[want]]). or [[quickly]] paced adventures (again all [[great]] noirs [[seem]] to be on slow burn like a [[cigarette]]). [[Great]] noirs create an [[environment]] and you just [[inhabit]] it with the [[characters]] for a [[couple]] hours.

After Dark My Sweet let's you do that - and it let's you enjoy the company of some very interesting and [[complex]] [[characters]]. Uncle Bud and [[Collie]] are [[intriguing]] - never [[allowing]] the audience to know what really makes them tick - and Patric and Dern (I love Bruce Dern, by the [[way]]) are pitch [[perfect]], Dern [[especially]] (see [[previous]] [[comment]]). They take the basic outlines of a [[character]] and give them depth and elicit our [[sympathies]].

The [[story]] itself is [[also]] interesting. There're better plots in the [[world]] of [[noir]] ([[hardly]] any mystery here - [[mostly]] it's suspense), but this one is [[solid]]. If anything, the [[simply]] 'okay' plot has more to do with Jim Thompson's writing than [[anything]] [[else]]. With Thompson, plots are [[almost]] secondary; he eschewed the labyrinthine [[tales]] of Hammett and Chandler for simpler [[stories]] with [[stronger]], more confusing characters. [[Look]] at a novel like The Killer Inside Me and and you'll see right away (from the title) what it's all about. When it comes to Thompson, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it (to quote Roger Ebert). So, really, the relatively simple plot of a [[kidnapping]] is not the point and, if you don't like it, well the [[jokes]] on you.

Why this is an 8star movie rather than a 10star one is because of the female lead. She's not bad, per se, but she's not Angelica Huston or Anette benning (see the adaptation of Jim Thompson's The Grifters if you don't know what I'm talking about - besides it's a better movie and you should start there for contemporary noir - it's the best of the 1990s and challenges Blood Simple for the title of best since Chinatown). She simply doesn't have the chops (or the looks for that matter) and [[though]] she and Patric have some chemistry, I don't have it with her. So there. After Dark, My [[Sugary]] is a [[wondrous]], modern [[negro]], filled with seedy characters, dirt roads, and, of course, sweaty [[attribute]]. It seems that most of the truly great noirs of the last two or three decades have taken place in the South, where the men glisten and the ladies, um, glisten too. Why? Because it's hooooottttttttttt. And because [[somebody]] looks better [[moist]] (at least the men do - sweaty women leave me clammy).

Anyway - there might be some spoilers in here.

This [[cinematography]] is a [[phenomenal]] example of everything a noir should be - [[constant]] pacing ([[while]] some with attention [[problems]] refer to it as 'slow'), [[apparently]] and [[basically]] drawn ([[if]] not [[mere]]) characters, and [[shitloads]] of atmosphere. Noir, if anything, is about [[feelings]] and [[attitude]]. That's why the [[huge]] ones are not marked by your [[classical]] [[definition]] of 'great' acting (look at Bogart, Mitchum, Hurt, and Nicholson - they (and their characters) were anything but real - but they had [[styles]] and sass and in a [[offence]] [[cinema]] that's [[accurately]] what you [[wanted]]). or [[faster]] paced adventures (again all [[huge]] noirs [[seems]] to be on slow burn like a [[smoking]]). [[Huge]] noirs create an [[environments]] and you just [[reside]] it with the [[attribute]] for a [[pair]] hours.

After Dark My Sweet let's you do that - and it let's you enjoy the company of some very interesting and [[tricky]] [[trait]]. Uncle Bud and [[Spaniel]] are [[exciting]] - never [[enable]] the audience to know what really makes them tick - and Patric and Dern (I love Bruce Dern, by the [[manner]]) are pitch [[irreproachable]], Dern [[namely]] (see [[ago]] [[commentary]]). They take the basic outlines of a [[trait]] and give them depth and elicit our [[condolence]].

The [[narratives]] itself is [[apart]] interesting. There're better plots in the [[monde]] of [[negro]] ([[practically]] any mystery here - [[essentially]] it's suspense), but this one is [[robust]]. If anything, the [[merely]] 'okay' plot has more to do with Jim Thompson's writing than [[something]] [[further]]. With Thompson, plots are [[roughly]] secondary; he eschewed the labyrinthine [[tale]] of Hammett and Chandler for simpler [[tales]] with [[tighter]], more confusing characters. [[Peek]] at a novel like The Killer Inside Me and and you'll see right away (from the title) what it's all about. When it comes to Thompson, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it (to quote Roger Ebert). So, really, the relatively simple plot of a [[abduct]] is not the point and, if you don't like it, well the [[gags]] on you.

Why this is an 8star movie rather than a 10star one is because of the female lead. She's not bad, per se, but she's not Angelica Huston or Anette benning (see the adaptation of Jim Thompson's The Grifters if you don't know what I'm talking about - besides it's a better movie and you should start there for contemporary noir - it's the best of the 1990s and challenges Blood Simple for the title of best since Chinatown). She simply doesn't have the chops (or the looks for that matter) and [[albeit]] she and Patric have some chemistry, I don't have it with her. So there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As [[essential]] a [[part]] of British pop culture as the [[Monty]] Python and [[James]] [[Bond]], [[Doctor]] Who was a [[massive]] [[hit]] for 26 [[years]] (1963-1989), making it one of the [[longest]] running TV [[shows]] in the [[world]] (most serials are [[lucky]] to have ten seasons). [[Plans]] to reboot the series were [[always]] on the BBC's agenda, and after a miscalculated (not to [[mention]] Americanized) TV [[movie]] produced by [[Fox]] failed to [[capture]] the [[magic]] of the [[original]] [[version]], another nine years ([[Comic]] Relief spoof and animated mini-series notwithstanding) were [[required]] before the ultimate [[Time]] Lord could [[return]] [[properly]], [[courtesy]] of [[acclaimed]] writer Russell T. Davies.

Davies' [[brilliance]] in reintroducing the character lies in his decision to do so through the eyes of an outsider: [[Rose]] Tyler ([[Billie]] Piper), a London-based [[girl]] who leads a very [[normal]] [[life]] until one night she is attacked by creatures made out of [[living]] plastic. She is [[rescued]] by an elusive stranger who [[introduces]] himself [[simply]] as the [[Doctor]] (Christopher Eccleston) and then disappears after quipping: "Nice to meet you, [[Rose]]. Run for your [[life]]!". As she gets more and more curious about this "man", she [[soon]] finds herself in a [[whole]] [[new]] world: aliens, invasions, [[travel]] through time and space, and of course, the omnipresent Police Box-shaped TARDIS.

The first 45 [[minutes]] of the new [[Doctor]] Who are [[almost]] [[perfect]] (the special effects could have used a bit more polishing) because [[Davies]] nails two things: the show's unique [[humor]] and the two protagonists. The original series' most endearing trait was its blend of spectacular sci-fi and pure British comedy, a hybrid that's hard, if not impossible, to export. Here the laughs are all linked to the conversations between Rose and the Doctor, who come off as fully rounded characters after just one episode. Okay, so technically Eccleston's Doctor is the [[Ninth]] to use that name, but he distances himself from the [[previous]] eight incarnations by speaking with a Northern accent (the one he uses on a daily basis) and justifying it with a [[terrific]] line: "Lots of planets have a North!".

The [[real]] [[triumph]] of this episode, though, is Piper's performance: in theory, Rose is in her late teens, therefore nearly the same age as thousands of young viewers who had never heard of the Doctor before. Her portrayal of an ordinary girl lost in a new, exciting universe, represents the new generation's reaction to the return of a TV icon, and the chemistry that instantly forms between her and Eccleston is a sign indicating the new Doctor Who is just as good as the old one.

First, fifth, ninth, it makes no difference: there may have been others before Eccleston (and Piper, for that matter) but together he, William Hartnell, Peter Davison and the rest of the bunch are one single character, one so cool he doesn't even need a name: he's THE Doctor. As [[important]] a [[portion]] of British pop culture as the [[Python]] Python and [[Jacques]] [[Bonding]], [[Physician]] Who was a [[big]] [[hitting]] for 26 [[olds]] (1963-1989), making it one of the [[tallest]] running TV [[show]] in the [[worldwide]] (most serials are [[fortunate]] to have ten seasons). [[Schematics]] to reboot the series were [[continually]] on the BBC's agenda, and after a miscalculated (not to [[mentioning]] Americanized) TV [[flick]] produced by [[Foxes]] failed to [[capturing]] the [[witchcraft]] of the [[initial]] [[stepping]], another nine years ([[Comical]] Relief spoof and animated mini-series notwithstanding) were [[obliged]] before the ultimate [[Period]] Lord could [[revert]] [[adequately]], [[vanity]] of [[hailed]] writer Russell T. Davies.

Davies' [[magnificence]] in reintroducing the character lies in his decision to do so through the eyes of an outsider: [[Soared]] Tyler ([[Billy]] Piper), a London-based [[female]] who leads a very [[routine]] [[vida]] until one night she is attacked by creatures made out of [[vida]] plastic. She is [[rescuing]] by an elusive stranger who [[introducing]] himself [[merely]] as the [[Physician]] (Christopher Eccleston) and then disappears after quipping: "Nice to meet you, [[Risen]]. Run for your [[living]]!". As she gets more and more curious about this "man", she [[expeditiously]] finds herself in a [[entire]] [[novo]] world: aliens, invasions, [[travelling]] through time and space, and of course, the omnipresent Police Box-shaped TARDIS.

The first 45 [[mins]] of the new [[Doctors]] Who are [[hardly]] [[perfection]] (the special effects could have used a bit more polishing) because [[Davis]] nails two things: the show's unique [[mood]] and the two protagonists. The original series' most endearing trait was its blend of spectacular sci-fi and pure British comedy, a hybrid that's hard, if not impossible, to export. Here the laughs are all linked to the conversations between Rose and the Doctor, who come off as fully rounded characters after just one episode. Okay, so technically Eccleston's Doctor is the [[Ix]] to use that name, but he distances himself from the [[anterior]] eight incarnations by speaking with a Northern accent (the one he uses on a daily basis) and justifying it with a [[wondrous]] line: "Lots of planets have a North!".

The [[actual]] [[triumphant]] of this episode, though, is Piper's performance: in theory, Rose is in her late teens, therefore nearly the same age as thousands of young viewers who had never heard of the Doctor before. Her portrayal of an ordinary girl lost in a new, exciting universe, represents the new generation's reaction to the return of a TV icon, and the chemistry that instantly forms between her and Eccleston is a sign indicating the new Doctor Who is just as good as the old one.

First, fifth, ninth, it makes no difference: there may have been others before Eccleston (and Piper, for that matter) but together he, William Hartnell, Peter Davison and the rest of the bunch are one single character, one so cool he doesn't even need a name: he's THE Doctor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was in physical pain watching the eyes of the cast as they participated in this sham. Bad dialogue, worse (worst) acting, lifeless all the way, and the cast knew it. The two preceding movies which this attempted to copy had life, sparkle, and were captivating. --------------------------------------------- Result 3697 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Want]] to watch a scary horror film? Then [[steer]] [[clear]] of this one. There's not enough beer in the world to make this [[film]] enjoyable.

However, there is [[enough]] [[scotch]]. Single-malt, if you can manage it.

[[If]] the previous comments weren't enough to keep you from watching this film sober, allow me to [[assist]]. NASA sends one man and two unpaid [[extras]] into space to orbit Saturn. A really big solar flare causes Colonel Steve West to bleed from the nose. Things go downhill from there, and wackiness [[ensues]].

I actually read the [[book]] adaptation, which was published and released only in the UK. MILES better than the film, and the book was dreadful. At least some pretense is made towards suspense, and some sort of explanation of events is pulled out from the author's (rhymes with 'gas').

Not to say that the film is completely without [[merit]]. Rick Baker learned that he really ought to read a contract before signing on to a film, and Jonathan Demme found that he's really better suited to direct.

Yes, there is an MST3K episode featuring this flick, but it is, of course, edited quite a bit. Without the obligatory flashing of the breasts, not even the healing power of scotch can save you.

Please, just go watch Raiders of the Lost Ark if you want to see a guy melt. See Space Cowboys if you feel the need to see astronauts. I can not, in all good conscience, [[recommend]] this film to the sober film-going public. [[Wantto]] to watch a scary horror film? Then [[govern]] [[unequivocal]] of this one. There's not enough beer in the world to make this [[filmmaking]] enjoyable.

However, there is [[satisfactorily]] [[scots]]. Single-malt, if you can manage it.

[[Though]] the previous comments weren't enough to keep you from watching this film sober, allow me to [[attends]]. NASA sends one man and two unpaid [[goodies]] into space to orbit Saturn. A really big solar flare causes Colonel Steve West to bleed from the nose. Things go downhill from there, and wackiness [[ensue]].

I actually read the [[cookbook]] adaptation, which was published and released only in the UK. MILES better than the film, and the book was dreadful. At least some pretense is made towards suspense, and some sort of explanation of events is pulled out from the author's (rhymes with 'gas').

Not to say that the film is completely without [[deserve]]. Rick Baker learned that he really ought to read a contract before signing on to a film, and Jonathan Demme found that he's really better suited to direct.

Yes, there is an MST3K episode featuring this flick, but it is, of course, edited quite a bit. Without the obligatory flashing of the breasts, not even the healing power of scotch can save you.

Please, just go watch Raiders of the Lost Ark if you want to see a guy melt. See Space Cowboys if you feel the need to see astronauts. I can not, in all good conscience, [[recommendations]] this film to the sober film-going public. --------------------------------------------- Result 3698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a very [[fair]] [[chance]], and it betrayed me. This is very [[little]] more than a black and [[white]] [[excuse]] to [[bore]] the [[hell]] out of the [[audience]] even as the [[egotist]] Bogdanavich (who did way better with [[TARGETS]]) [[gets]] "[[great]] performances" out of a [[ton]] of hams in their debuts. [[Lots]] of [[teenage]] sex clichés [[come]] out of this [[movie]], such as [[Doing]] the Teacher's [[Wife]], [[Impotence]], [[Doing]] the [[Ugly]] [[Prostitute]](which is very [[awkwardly]] shot and grinds things to a complete [[halt]], not that things were [[really]] going anywhere anyway) and skinny dipping.

I [[suppose]] this [[movie]] is [[supposed]] to be [[funny]] because of all the sex [[nonsense]], to me, it was just [[annoying]]. I was [[seriously]] [[much]] more entertained by cleaning my finger [[nails]] than watching this [[mess]]. I [[delivered]] this [[film]] a very [[justo]] [[luck]], and it betrayed me. This is very [[kiddo]] more than a black and [[blanca]] [[apologies]] to [[bored]] the [[brothel]] out of the [[spectators]] even as the [[egoist]] Bogdanavich (who did way better with [[AIM]]) [[receives]] "[[sublime]] performances" out of a [[tonne]] of hams in their debuts. [[Lot]] of [[teens]] sex clichés [[coming]] out of this [[filmmaking]], such as [[Making]] the Teacher's [[Femme]], [[Hopelessness]], [[Making]] the [[Nasty]] [[Whore]](which is very [[clumsily]] shot and grinds things to a complete [[suspend]], not that things were [[truly]] going anywhere anyway) and skinny dipping.

I [[imagining]] this [[filmmaking]] is [[alleged]] to be [[hilarious]] because of all the sex [[grotesque]], to me, it was just [[exasperating]]. I was [[deeply]] [[very]] more entertained by cleaning my finger [[shucks]] than watching this [[chaos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Fairly amusing piece that tries to [[show]] how smart [[Orcas]] are but in the [[meanwhile]] (and quite oblivious to them) makes the audience feel [[stupid]] by [[making]] the most [[ridiculous]] [[film]]. Richard Harris plays Quint.. I'm sorry, that's wrong, he plays Captain Nolan, a fisherman who catches sharks for a living, but is lured by the big catch, and tries to catch a killer whale. When the capture of a female killer whale goes awry (don't ask) it's mate (don't ask) goes on a rampage (don't ask) and starts STALKING Captain Nolan (Don't ask). Soon, Captain Nolan realizes that they have something in common (don't ask). Pretty amazing film-making here folks. I got to tell you though, the beginning (with the whale noises and nothing much else) is pretty haunting and the end credits (with the most godawful song) is pretty entertaining. Fairly amusing piece that tries to [[spectacle]] how smart [[Orcs]] are but in the [[moreover]] (and quite oblivious to them) makes the audience feel [[dumb]] by [[doing]] the most [[farcical]] [[movies]]. Richard Harris plays Quint.. I'm sorry, that's wrong, he plays Captain Nolan, a fisherman who catches sharks for a living, but is lured by the big catch, and tries to catch a killer whale. When the capture of a female killer whale goes awry (don't ask) it's mate (don't ask) goes on a rampage (don't ask) and starts STALKING Captain Nolan (Don't ask). Soon, Captain Nolan realizes that they have something in common (don't ask). Pretty amazing film-making here folks. I got to tell you though, the beginning (with the whale noises and nothing much else) is pretty haunting and the end credits (with the most godawful song) is pretty entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 3700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] What can I say. A Kamal Hassan movie being horrible. He acts very well, but it is a horrible story, along with [[horrible]] direction. [[In]] my [[kind]] [[opinion]], the director Gautham Menon [[must]] give up directing. There is a [[lot]] of tragedy [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. [[Apart]] from that, one can just not [[believe]] how [[true]] were those [[horrendous]] [[crimes]]. There was no practicality in the [[movie]]. Gautham is just [[running]] out of [[stories]]. But both Kamal [[Hassan]] and Jyothika [[act]] really well. The [[villains]] look too [[ugly]], [[though]] their performance was not [[bad]]. I do not think this is a [[Sunday]] afternoon [[movie]] like Padayappa which you can [[see]] with the [[family]]. You will not [[get]] sleep seeing this movie!! [[However]], Harris Jayaraj again did a [[great]] job, and that is why I have given this [[movie]] 4 out of 10. [[His]] song 'Partha Modail Nallae' is soulful and [[soothing]]. [[Apart]] from that, great [[cinematography]]. On the whole, this is just a [[bad]], [[bad]] [[movie]]. Kamal [[Hassan]], I think, should have [[rejected]] this [[movie]]. What can I say. A Kamal Hassan movie being horrible. He acts very well, but it is a horrible story, along with [[scary]] direction. [[Among]] my [[sorts]] [[view]], the director Gautham Menon [[owe]] give up directing. There is a [[lots]] of tragedy [[during]] the [[movies]]. [[Furthermore]] from that, one can just not [[think]] how [[real]] were those [[horrible]] [[criminality]]. There was no practicality in the [[filmmaking]]. Gautham is just [[execute]] out of [[history]]. But both Kamal [[Hasan]] and Jyothika [[law]] really well. The [[crooks]] look too [[ghastly]], [[while]] their performance was not [[naughty]]. I do not think this is a [[Saturday]] afternoon [[cinema]] like Padayappa which you can [[seeing]] with the [[families]]. You will not [[gets]] sleep seeing this movie!! [[Yet]], Harris Jayaraj again did a [[marvellous]] job, and that is why I have given this [[cinema]] 4 out of 10. [[Her]] song 'Partha Modail Nallae' is soulful and [[relaxing]]. [[Moreover]] from that, great [[movie]]. On the whole, this is just a [[unfavourable]], [[unfavourable]] [[flick]]. Kamal [[Hasan]], I think, should have [[dismissed]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Let's [[eliminate]] any [[discussion]] about the use of non-Asian actors playing Asian roles. The movie is 67 years old. [[In]] 1937 studio [[chiefs]] [[believed]] that any [[actor]] [[could]]/should be [[able]] to [[play]] any role. [[Actors]] were under [[contracts]], and did not [[always]] have a [[choice]] about what role they [[played]]. [[End]] of story.

This is a [[truly]] great epic story of love, individual rights, [[class]] strata, and [[men]]/women issues. The [[centerpiece]] of the film is two [[brilliant]] performances by [[Luise]] Rainer and Paul Muni.

Muni plays Wang, a Chinese farmer, who is about to take a wife (Rainer). From the start, he treats her with respect, during a time when women were looked on as little more than hired help. Without giving too much of the movie away, they go through the highs and lows of all relationships, and even though the story may take place in late 19th/early 20th century,the story and much of their feelings, seems credible.

Other than the fact that the movie is about 5-10 minutes longer than it needs to be, and the performances of Charley Grapewin and Walter Connolly are typical 1930's cartoon characters, this is a really [[wonderful]] movie that, unfortunately, has become a victim of political correctness.

9 out of 10 Let's [[deleted]] any [[conversations]] about the use of non-Asian actors playing Asian roles. The movie is 67 years old. [[Among]] 1937 studio [[leaders]] [[felt]] that any [[actress]] [[would]]/should be [[capable]] to [[gaming]] any role. [[Players]] were under [[marketplace]], and did not [[permanently]] have a [[pick]] about what role they [[effected]]. [[Terminate]] of story.

This is a [[honestly]] great epic story of love, individual rights, [[classes]] strata, and [[males]]/women issues. The [[cornerstone]] of the film is two [[wondrous]] performances by [[Luis]] Rainer and Paul Muni.

Muni plays Wang, a Chinese farmer, who is about to take a wife (Rainer). From the start, he treats her with respect, during a time when women were looked on as little more than hired help. Without giving too much of the movie away, they go through the highs and lows of all relationships, and even though the story may take place in late 19th/early 20th century,the story and much of their feelings, seems credible.

Other than the fact that the movie is about 5-10 minutes longer than it needs to be, and the performances of Charley Grapewin and Walter Connolly are typical 1930's cartoon characters, this is a really [[wondrous]] movie that, unfortunately, has become a victim of political correctness.

9 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3702 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[adaptation]], like 1949's *The Heiress*, is based on the [[Henry]] [[James]] novel. *The Heiress*, [[starring]] Olivia de Havilland, [[remains]] as a well-respected piece of [[work]], [[though]] [[less]] [[true]] to James' original [[story]] than this [[new]] [[remake]], which retains James' original title. It is the story of a awkward, [[yet]] loving [[daughter]] (Leigh), devoted to her father ([[Finney]]) after her [[mother]] dies during [[childbirth]]. The [[arrogant]] father [[holds]] his daughter in no esteem whatsoever, and considers her, as well as all [[women]], simpleminded. [[When]] a young [[man]] ([[Chaplin]]) of [[good]] family and little fortune [[comes]] [[courting]], the [[Father]] is naturally [[suspicious]], but feeling so [[sure]] that his [[daughter]] [[could]] [[hold]] no interest for any [[man]], is [[convinced]] that the [[young]] [[man]] is a fortune [[hunter]] and [[forbids]] her to [[see]] him. Leigh is a controversial actress – most either [[love]] her or [[hate]] her – and she [[always]] has a [[particular]] edginess and tenseness to her [[style]], like she's acting through gritted teeth. She's not bad in this, and she [[handles]] her role [[relatively]] [[deftly]] – it's just an [[awkward]] role for any [[actress]], making the [[audience]] [[want]] to [[grab]] the [[character]] by her shoulders and [[shake]] her until she comes to her senses. [[While]] the character garners a lot of sympathy, she's not [[particularly]] likable. The very [[handsome]] and [[immensely]] appealing [[Ben]] Chaplin ([[previously]] [[seen]] in *The Truth [[About]] Cats and Dogs*) plays his role with the [[exact]] amount of [[mystery]] required to [[keep]] the [[audience]] guessing whether he is after her fortune, or is [[really]] in [[love]] with her. Maggie [[Smith]] is one of the [[finest]] [[actresses]] [[alive]] and [[raises]] the [[level]] of the [[movie]] [[considerably]] with her portrayal of the well-meaning [[aunt]]. Finney is marvelous, of course, as the father who [[threatens]] to disinherit his daughter for her disobedience, but the daughter is willing to risk that for the [[man]] she loves. But does her [[ardent]] [[suitor]] still [[want]] her without her fortune? This is only one [[instance]] where *Washington Square* [[differs]] from *The Heiress*. Another [[instance]] is the [[ability]] to stick with it. It is a handsome movie that is as [[tedious]] as a [[dripping]] faucet, [[offering]] too little [[story]] in too long of a [[movie]]. This [[adjustment]], like 1949's *The Heiress*, is based on the [[Gregg]] [[Jacobo]] novel. *The Heiress*, [[featuring]] Olivia de Havilland, [[stays]] as a well-respected piece of [[jobs]], [[while]] [[fewer]] [[real]] to James' original [[saga]] than this [[novel]] [[redo]], which retains James' original title. It is the story of a awkward, [[however]] loving [[girl]] (Leigh), devoted to her father ([[Fini]]) after her [[momma]] dies during [[pregnancy]]. The [[cocky]] father [[held]] his daughter in no esteem whatsoever, and considers her, as well as all [[females]], simpleminded. [[Whenever]] a young [[fella]] ([[Chapin]]) of [[alright]] family and little fortune [[happens]] [[wooing]], the [[Fathers]] is naturally [[suspect]], but feeling so [[convinced]] that his [[maid]] [[wo]] [[holds]] no interest for any [[dude]], is [[persuaded]] that the [[youths]] [[dude]] is a fortune [[hunting]] and [[aban]] her to [[behold]] him. Leigh is a controversial actress – most either [[amour]] her or [[hated]] her – and she [[permanently]] has a [[singular]] edginess and tenseness to her [[styles]], like she's acting through gritted teeth. She's not bad in this, and she [[handle]] her role [[fairly]] [[masterfully]] – it's just an [[tricky]] role for any [[actor]], making the [[audiences]] [[wanted]] to [[grabs]] the [[characters]] by her shoulders and [[shiver]] her until she comes to her senses. [[Though]] the character garners a lot of sympathy, she's not [[principally]] likable. The very [[sumptuous]] and [[terribly]] appealing [[Benn]] Chaplin ([[prior]] [[watched]] in *The Truth [[Around]] Cats and Dogs*) plays his role with the [[correct]] amount of [[puzzle]] required to [[retaining]] the [[viewers]] guessing whether he is after her fortune, or is [[truly]] in [[likes]] with her. Maggie [[Smiths]] is one of the [[best]] [[actors]] [[vibrant]] and [[increases]] the [[levels]] of the [[filmmaking]] [[immensely]] with her portrayal of the well-meaning [[queer]]. Finney is marvelous, of course, as the father who [[threats]] to disinherit his daughter for her disobedience, but the daughter is willing to risk that for the [[dude]] she loves. But does her [[passionate]] [[beau]] still [[wanna]] her without her fortune? This is only one [[case]] where *Washington Square* [[differ]] from *The Heiress*. Another [[example]] is the [[abilities]] to stick with it. It is a handsome movie that is as [[monotonous]] as a [[rotting]] faucet, [[offer]] too little [[fairytales]] in too long of a [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3703 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I can't [[believe]] I [[watched]] this expecting more. It [[starts]] out OK. This movie pushes the [[limits]] of reality [[way]] to far!! [[At]] least the first one was [[somewhat]] [[realistic]]. It [[rips]] off the [[first]] [[movie]] and even mentions the Joshua Project. [[Anyone]] who knows [[anything]] about [[computers]] will [[hate]] this movie. It does have one [[good]] [[message]] in it [[though]], WATCH [[OUT]] [[FOR]] [[BIG]] BROTHER!!! The [[movie]] just makes it seem like [[Big]] [[Brother]] is [[way]] bigger than he actually is in [[reality]]. That was very [[aggravating]]. Even the make-up on the [[actors]] was [[completely]] [[bad]]. Some of the acting is pretty [[good]]. Some of the acting is [[really]] bad though. The script was OK at some points and [[completely]] messed up at other parts. This movie plays on convenience about every five minutes. Like I [[said]], I can't believe I [[watched]] it [[expecting]] more. I think I am gonna pop in the original to [[get]] back to [[earth]]...Q I can't [[think]] I [[saw]] this expecting more. It [[outset]] out OK. This movie pushes the [[frontiers]] of reality [[paths]] to far!! [[For]] least the first one was [[rather]] [[realist]]. It [[criticizes]] off the [[frst]] [[filmmaking]] and even mentions the Joshua Project. [[Everybody]] who knows [[nothing]] about [[computer]] will [[hating]] this movie. It does have one [[alright]] [[messages]] in it [[although]], WATCH [[OUTWARD]] [[DURING]] [[MASSIVE]] BROTHER!!! The [[filmmaking]] just makes it seem like [[Hefty]] [[Fraternal]] is [[camino]] bigger than he actually is in [[realism]]. That was very [[worsening]]. Even the make-up on the [[protagonists]] was [[totally]] [[negative]]. Some of the acting is pretty [[alright]]. Some of the acting is [[genuinely]] bad though. The script was OK at some points and [[totally]] messed up at other parts. This movie plays on convenience about every five minutes. Like I [[stated]], I can't believe I [[saw]] it [[expect]] more. I think I am gonna pop in the original to [[gets]] back to [[lands]]...Q --------------------------------------------- Result 3704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I bought the DVD of [[Before]] Sunset and saw it for the first time a [[week]] [[ago]]. Having [[saw]] it twice, I couldn't [[help]] but [[missing]] Before Sunrise, not because the sequel was not as great, but I felt that these two movies completed each other like no other sequels ever did, every [[time]] I finished watching one of them, I feel the need and yearning to see the other. So, I ended up spending the [[weeks]] watching both of them [[repeatedly]], I will be quite embarrassed to [[mention]] how [[many]] times [[exactly]]. The most [[remarkable]] [[thing]] about [[Before]] [[Sunrise]] is how you feel the [[development]] of the feelings of their [[characters]] towards each other. It sounds so [[simple]], the growing of the chemistry, I think other romantic films might think that they succeed to track the development, but to me - who doesn't believe in Nora Ephron - Before Sunrise is the first film to really gives the viewers chance to feel it. When I saw it for the first time, about 8 year ago when I was 20, I already [[liked]] it. But, I didn't [[rate]] it as a "great film", it still seemed to me like another thinking persons' feel good movie, Linklater was too [[smart]] to [[make]] it more realistic, it was 10 minutes too long, the characters was too well fabricated, I [[thought]] I [[liked]] it because it was like a dream and because I enjoyed their [[conversations]], etc. etc.. But now, [[thanks]] to Before Sunset, I feel that's more to Before Sunrise than what I [[felt]] for it before. I saw the [[elements]] more [[clearly]]: Jesse, Celine, Vienna, their [[conversations]], everything. [[How]] each of them are separated element by itself, and they have a [[chance]] to mix, the [[story]] is just a frame of time, I am no longer feel [[manipulated]]. And the [[freedom]] that [[every]] scene has, as well as its [[refusal]] to be [[overly]] efficient, how blind I was that those qualities didn't strike me as exceptional when I [[first]] saw it! Now, 8 year have passed, the more movies I've seen, the more I realize that many movies are just collections of ordered scenes that only exist for the sake of its ending, even movies like Pulp Fiction or Linklaters's own Slackers included. The Jesse and Celine tale avoid that, maybe Before Sunset is a better example in this case, but Before [[Sunrise]] is also one of few films that its ending is just a consequence of time, not a destination, every single scene has its own life. I don't know whether Linklater or anyone else had a sequel in mind when they made Before Sunrise, but to me, one of the most amazing things about these sequels are how these two films visually contrast each other. Before Sunrise which I think employs more static angels and brighter color schemes, seems to try to [[capture]] the smallest [[atoms]] of liveliness surrounding Jesse and Celine, the world is always full of hope whether or not the characters feel it. Meanwhile, I enter the vision of boredom as Jesse stuck talking to the journalists in Before Sunset, and Celine's first smile from behind the shelves are the most heartbreaking smile I've seen in a [[beginning]] of a film, and the many moving shots after that takes me to a place I don't know with a sadness in me, no matter how beautiful Paris is, and no matter how happy I am that they meet again. I'm sorry that I go on this long with my limited English, Before Sunrise is already an extraordinary film without me pouring my scattered thoughts, and it gets even better with an equally great sequel following it. I bought the DVD of [[Earlier]] Sunset and saw it for the first time a [[chou]] [[previously]]. Having [[observed]] it twice, I couldn't [[supporting]] but [[lacks]] Before Sunrise, not because the sequel was not as great, but I felt that these two movies completed each other like no other sequels ever did, every [[times]] I finished watching one of them, I feel the need and yearning to see the other. So, I ended up spending the [[chow]] watching both of them [[unceasingly]], I will be quite embarrassed to [[referenced]] how [[multiple]] times [[accurately]]. The most [[wondrous]] [[stuff]] about [[Previously]] [[Sunup]] is how you feel the [[evolution]] of the feelings of their [[trait]] towards each other. It sounds so [[mere]], the growing of the chemistry, I think other romantic films might think that they succeed to track the development, but to me - who doesn't believe in Nora Ephron - Before Sunrise is the first film to really gives the viewers chance to feel it. When I saw it for the first time, about 8 year ago when I was 20, I already [[enjoyed]] it. But, I didn't [[rates]] it as a "great film", it still seemed to me like another thinking persons' feel good movie, Linklater was too [[intelligent]] to [[deliver]] it more realistic, it was 10 minutes too long, the characters was too well fabricated, I [[figured]] I [[enjoyed]] it because it was like a dream and because I enjoyed their [[interviews]], etc. etc.. But now, [[appreciation]] to Before Sunset, I feel that's more to Before Sunrise than what I [[deemed]] for it before. I saw the [[ingredients]] more [[apparently]]: Jesse, Celine, Vienna, their [[interviews]], everything. [[Mode]] each of them are separated element by itself, and they have a [[chances]] to mix, the [[narratives]] is just a frame of time, I am no longer feel [[handled]]. And the [[svoboda]] that [[any]] scene has, as well as its [[refuse]] to be [[unduly]] efficient, how blind I was that those qualities didn't strike me as exceptional when I [[firstly]] saw it! Now, 8 year have passed, the more movies I've seen, the more I realize that many movies are just collections of ordered scenes that only exist for the sake of its ending, even movies like Pulp Fiction or Linklaters's own Slackers included. The Jesse and Celine tale avoid that, maybe Before Sunset is a better example in this case, but Before [[Sunup]] is also one of few films that its ending is just a consequence of time, not a destination, every single scene has its own life. I don't know whether Linklater or anyone else had a sequel in mind when they made Before Sunrise, but to me, one of the most amazing things about these sequels are how these two films visually contrast each other. Before Sunrise which I think employs more static angels and brighter color schemes, seems to try to [[captured]] the smallest [[atom]] of liveliness surrounding Jesse and Celine, the world is always full of hope whether or not the characters feel it. Meanwhile, I enter the vision of boredom as Jesse stuck talking to the journalists in Before Sunset, and Celine's first smile from behind the shelves are the most heartbreaking smile I've seen in a [[begin]] of a film, and the many moving shots after that takes me to a place I don't know with a sadness in me, no matter how beautiful Paris is, and no matter how happy I am that they meet again. I'm sorry that I go on this long with my limited English, Before Sunrise is already an extraordinary film without me pouring my scattered thoughts, and it gets even better with an equally great sequel following it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This movie tackles child [[abduction]] from the point of [[view]] of a Mom (lisa Hartman Black) who [[acts]] like a man would in an action thriller. Unlike other [[movies]] where the focus is on the [[Police]], here the Mom is tracking down her ex-husband who kidnapped their son. She gets help from her lawyer who eventually falls in love with her.

Before finally catching up with her son, a lot of [[bizarre]] things happen. The Mom tries to take a [[child]] that looks like her son from a local Children's Play at a [[community]] [[theater]]. She gets caught, and then realizes it is not her [[child]]. That alone would have gotten most people put into the Mental Ward or a few months in jail waiting for trial. [[However]], in this movie the Mom is release after a [[couple]] of hours because the victim's parents feel sorry for her. A little while later Mom breaks into her mother-in-law's house and then the Police arrive and they have their guns aimed at her but they let her run away because they [[recognize]] her (and feel [[sorry]] for her?).

At another point in the story they have found the child, but when the Police arrive to search the house it turns out they left out the back door and got into the river on a dinghy that apparently the Dad kept around just for such an emergency escape! The Mom gets someone to lend her a raft, and even though it must have taken some time (in a real world), she and the lawyer-boyfriend, and the [[Police]] catch up to the other raft pretty fast and it is upside down in the water by landfall. [[Instead]] of [[getting]] out of the raft to [[search]] for the Dad on the land, Mom [[presumes]] he drowned the boy and she jumps into the water when she sees his life-jacket. Of course, she cannot swim and sinks like a rock. The lawyer saves her, but they miss a chance to run after the Dad. At one point the Mom is told her son died at a Clinic in Mexico. On and on it goes, and where it stops nobody knows! In some ways, this movie really exploits child abduction and it is not very [[positive]]. On the other hand, seeing a woman do all the crazy things that men do in these kind of movies was fun (or funny?). This movie tackles child [[hijackings]] from the point of [[opinions]] of a Mom (lisa Hartman Black) who [[act]] like a man would in an action thriller. Unlike other [[movie]] where the focus is on the [[Nypd]], here the Mom is tracking down her ex-husband who kidnapped their son. She gets help from her lawyer who eventually falls in love with her.

Before finally catching up with her son, a lot of [[surreal]] things happen. The Mom tries to take a [[kid]] that looks like her son from a local Children's Play at a [[communities]] [[movies]]. She gets caught, and then realizes it is not her [[kids]]. That alone would have gotten most people put into the Mental Ward or a few months in jail waiting for trial. [[Still]], in this movie the Mom is release after a [[couples]] of hours because the victim's parents feel sorry for her. A little while later Mom breaks into her mother-in-law's house and then the Police arrive and they have their guns aimed at her but they let her run away because they [[accepted]] her (and feel [[apology]] for her?).

At another point in the story they have found the child, but when the Police arrive to search the house it turns out they left out the back door and got into the river on a dinghy that apparently the Dad kept around just for such an emergency escape! The Mom gets someone to lend her a raft, and even though it must have taken some time (in a real world), she and the lawyer-boyfriend, and the [[Nypd]] catch up to the other raft pretty fast and it is upside down in the water by landfall. [[However]] of [[obtain]] out of the raft to [[searched]] for the Dad on the land, Mom [[assumes]] he drowned the boy and she jumps into the water when she sees his life-jacket. Of course, she cannot swim and sinks like a rock. The lawyer saves her, but they miss a chance to run after the Dad. At one point the Mom is told her son died at a Clinic in Mexico. On and on it goes, and where it stops nobody knows! In some ways, this movie really exploits child abduction and it is not very [[affirmative]]. On the other hand, seeing a woman do all the crazy things that men do in these kind of movies was fun (or funny?). --------------------------------------------- Result 3706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]]

An old man works as a janitor in a mental hospital to be close to his wife who is a patient there and to try to get her out.

This is [[surely]] one of the most forgotten [[masterpieces]] of the silent era and an oddity in the history of Japanese cinema. [[Long]] thought lost, a print was found in the 70s and a music soundtrack added to it, which fits perfectly with the images. It might have been influenced by cabinet of doctor Caligary (director Kinugasa claimed he never saw the German film). However it [[surpasses]] it in style and in its more convincing (and [[chilly]]) portray of the inner mental state of the inmates in the asylum. To achieve this, the film makes use of [[every]] single film technique available at the time: multiple exposures and out of focus subjective point of view, tilted camera angles, fast and slow motion, expressionist lighting and superimpositions among others. It is also a very complicated film to follow, as it has not got intertitles.

The film opens with a montage of shots of rain hitting the windows of the hospital, wind shaking trees and of thunder. The [[unsettling]] weather metaphors the mental condition of the patients and introduces one of the them: a former dancer. The combination of sounds produced by rain, wind and thunder serves as the music that incites the dancer to get into a frantic, almost hypnotic dance. In another sequence involving the same patient engaged in another [[frenzied]] [[dance]], she is being watched by other [[inmates]]. Multiple exposures of the [[dancer]] [[represent]] the patients' point of view and their confused "view" of the world.

These are just two examples from this [[amazing]] [[film]] trying to represent the patients' subconscious and view of the "sane" world.

In three [[words]] A [[MUST]] SEE.

An old man works as a janitor in a mental hospital to be close to his wife who is a patient there and to try to get her out.

This is [[obviously]] one of the most forgotten [[antiques]] of the silent era and an oddity in the history of Japanese cinema. [[Lange]] thought lost, a print was found in the 70s and a music soundtrack added to it, which fits perfectly with the images. It might have been influenced by cabinet of doctor Caligary (director Kinugasa claimed he never saw the German film). However it [[exceeds]] it in style and in its more convincing (and [[cold]]) portray of the inner mental state of the inmates in the asylum. To achieve this, the film makes use of [[any]] single film technique available at the time: multiple exposures and out of focus subjective point of view, tilted camera angles, fast and slow motion, expressionist lighting and superimpositions among others. It is also a very complicated film to follow, as it has not got intertitles.

The film opens with a montage of shots of rain hitting the windows of the hospital, wind shaking trees and of thunder. The [[disruptive]] weather metaphors the mental condition of the patients and introduces one of the them: a former dancer. The combination of sounds produced by rain, wind and thunder serves as the music that incites the dancer to get into a frantic, almost hypnotic dance. In another sequence involving the same patient engaged in another [[furious]] [[dancers]], she is being watched by other [[prisoner]]. Multiple exposures of the [[dancers]] [[representing]] the patients' point of view and their confused "view" of the world.

These are just two examples from this [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] trying to represent the patients' subconscious and view of the "sane" world.

In three [[phrases]] A [[NEEDS]] SEE. --------------------------------------------- Result 3707 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This [[Lifetime]] style movie takes the [[middle]] aged divorcee [[victim]] who then finally [[fights]] back [[genre]] to new [[depths]] of cartoon-like [[absurdity]].

Here the 40 something stay-at-home ex-wife of a successful [[lawyer]] protagonist ([[daughter]] away at college) is [[starting]] a [[new]] [[life]] after her divorce, [[helped]] by a female [[college]] [[friend]] in [[opening]] a new [[dress]] shop as a [[sort]] of [[franchise]] [[expansion]] [[deal]]. She has even [[started]] up a [[friendship]] with her [[attractive]], [[slightly]] [[younger]] [[perhaps]], landscape architect / gardener (who's black). But then horror of middle-aged women's horrors, ANOTHER 20 something female she took on as a tenant to [[let]] a room to, [[starts]] '[[taking]] over" her [[life]].

What this [[new]] [[younger]] [[woman]] [[threat]] really does is [[mildly]] flirt with the [[gardener]], and [[offer]] him a [[glass]] of [[wine]] that * gasp * really [[belonged]] to the divorcee!! She [[runs]] up the utility bills by not [[turning]] down the thermostat!! And [[backed]] up the [[toilet]]! And leaves [[old]] [[food]] gone bad in the [[refrigerator]]! And hangs her pieces of ([[African]]) [[artwork]] in the [[living]] [[room]]!! And so on. Well she may have killed the [[cat]] as well. [[Yeah]], [[ok]], the [[extent]] to which this one does these [[things]] is [[bad]] [[enough]], but its more than a little [[ridiculous]], [[especially]] as it [[turns]] into a [[campaign]]. The [[character]] [[reality]] is that any [[tiny]] [[part]] of this would [[drive]] this [[particular]] prissy [[woman]] insane. ([[So]] why did she [[rent]] the room -- and to horror of horrors, a [[much]] [[younger]] [[woman]]?)

[[Supposedly]] this increasingly [[arrogant]] (natch) [[younger]] [[woman]] has a mania for [[seizing]] control. And our brave 40 something [[must]] [[learn]] to [[fight]] back against this evil (and erotically hot looking, of [[course]]) 20 something. But there's this [[problem]]. Anytime the 20 [[something]] [[starts]] to maybe [[get]] into [[trouble]] she [[uses]] her POWER -- and just flirts or has [[sex]] with some [[guy]], and escapes the [[consequences]]. ([[Well]], there actually is [[something]] to that [[capability]] of [[good]] looking 20 somethings. It just isn't * [[generally]] * used in [[quite]] this [[sort]] of [[way]].)

The premise is moved along by the [[device]] of the 20 [[something]] conning the divorcee into formalizing their [[room]] rental [[deal]] with a written [[lease]] [[produced]] by her. Of course the 40 [[something]] doesn't know about these things, and the 20 something has had help. The lease actually gives the younger woman equal right to the whole house during the rental period, with utilities thrown in at the fixed price. Even though an eviction proceeding is soon pending, the 20 something soon gets a temporary restraining order against the older woman, supposedly because she has been threatening the 20 something. You know, the judge is sympathetic to all the woe-is-me of the sexy sweet young thing. Finally the 40 something's "heroic" battle back for THE HOUSE then begins. Woopie!!

The only realistic or perceptive thing in this movie is how horrificly easy TRO's (or orders of protection) are for women to get on nothing more than her unsubstantiated say so -- although they are generally only this easy against men. They are sometimes just as unjustified and just as motivated to seize control of a home as it is here. Indeed, girlfriends who have moved in with their boyfriends can often get them evicted from their own homes or condos on the basis of no proof whatsoever, but only an unsubstantiated claim of threats, and sometimes without even hearing his side. Even when there is a hearing, it is routinely impossible to rebut claims of threats (to prove a negative), when the burden of proof is effectively on the accused, rather than the accuser. (This is one of the only areas of American law where that is true -- and it's a signal outrage of feminist overreaching, and the failure of any organized group to resist the steamroller.) Of course that's not likely to be the subject of any Lifetime movie in this lifetime.

The absurd basic premise of this movie relies upon the explanation that the 20 something is psychotic, and isn't taking her medicine. Even so it makes no sense. She isn't after the successful lawyer ex-husband, though she does con his help (to the ex wife's fury) in her quest. She's after THE HOUSE (technically, to drive the divorcee out of it during the period of the lease). This second younger woman is after ALL THAT'S LEFT after the divorce, after affairs with other 20 somethings STOLE her husband!! (The ex-husband seems unattached and basically solicitous after his fling -- doesn't matter, he still strayed!!!)

The protagonist is good enough looking for her age. But her outlook, attitude and focus is so small minded, frumpy and utterly without imagination or life force that it's impossible to care about her. Well, a core group of Lifetime fans care, I guess, judging by the average score the small number of raters gave it. (I kept watching it only because it was so extremely bad and cartoonish that it had a camp appeal. I couldn't resist seeing just how far they'd take it.)

** Spoiler ** (if such a thing is possible with this flick).

Well, here's a clue. The movie ends with the 20 something getting bailed out of jail by promising to "listen to" her 20 something male co-worker and sometimes lover, and "do whatever he says" and "let him take care of her" (he means get her to keep taking her medicine) -- and then tricking him and returning to THE HOUSE. There she climbs the stairs with a knife, demonicly stalking her nemesis 40 something, who is taking a bath by candlelight, secure in the thought that the younger woman is out of her life. There's a struggle -- and the 40 something mom wins -- by sticking the 20 something with a hypodermic needle full of anti-psychotic medicine she had found. She then begins stroking her, mom like, and the two women have a bonding, female solidarity moment!!! How sweet. This [[Lifespan]] style movie takes the [[milieu]] aged divorcee [[victims]] who then finally [[battle]] back [[gender]] to new [[depth]] of cartoon-like [[claptrap]].

Here the 40 something stay-at-home ex-wife of a successful [[barrister]] protagonist ([[girls]] away at college) is [[startup]] a [[nouveau]] [[vida]] after her divorce, [[helping]] by a female [[academies]] [[buddies]] in [[opens]] a new [[outfits]] shop as a [[sorting]] of [[franchises]] [[extension]] [[deals]]. She has even [[begins]] up a [[amistad]] with her [[seductive]], [[somewhat]] [[youngest]] [[presumably]], landscape architect / gardener (who's black). But then horror of middle-aged women's horrors, ANOTHER 20 something female she took on as a tenant to [[leaving]] a room to, [[starting]] '[[adopting]] over" her [[lives]].

What this [[newest]] [[youngest]] [[daughters]] [[hazards]] really does is [[gently]] flirt with the [[gardiner]], and [[offering]] him a [[glasses]] of [[vin]] that * gasp * really [[belonging]] to the divorcee!! She [[manages]] up the utility bills by not [[turn]] down the thermostat!! And [[supported]] up the [[wc]]! And leaves [[antique]] [[meals]] gone bad in the [[fridge]]! And hangs her pieces of ([[Africans]]) [[artworks]] in the [[vie]] [[chambers]]!! And so on. Well she may have killed the [[kitten]] as well. [[Yes]], [[alright]], the [[magnitude]] to which this one does these [[aspects]] is [[naughty]] [[adequately]], but its more than a little [[foolish]], [[mostly]] as it [[revolves]] into a [[campaigns]]. The [[characters]] [[realism]] is that any [[small]] [[parties]] of this would [[drives]] this [[special]] prissy [[femme]] insane. ([[Thus]] why did she [[rents]] the room -- and to horror of horrors, a [[very]] [[youngest]] [[femmes]]?)

[[Reportedly]] this increasingly [[cocky]] (natch) [[cadet]] [[girl]] has a mania for [[capturing]] control. And our brave 40 something [[should]] [[learning]] to [[fought]] back against this evil (and erotically hot looking, of [[cours]]) 20 something. But there's this [[issues]]. Anytime the 20 [[algo]] [[embark]] to maybe [[gets]] into [[troubles]] she [[used]] her POWER -- and just flirts or has [[sexuality]] with some [[boy]], and escapes the [[effect]]. ([[Good]], there actually is [[somethings]] to that [[competence]] of [[alright]] looking 20 somethings. It just isn't * [[often]] * used in [[abundantly]] this [[genre]] of [[pathway]].)

The premise is moved along by the [[devices]] of the 20 [[somethings]] conning the divorcee into formalizing their [[chambre]] rental [[deals]] with a written [[tenancy]] [[generated]] by her. Of course the 40 [[algo]] doesn't know about these things, and the 20 something has had help. The lease actually gives the younger woman equal right to the whole house during the rental period, with utilities thrown in at the fixed price. Even though an eviction proceeding is soon pending, the 20 something soon gets a temporary restraining order against the older woman, supposedly because she has been threatening the 20 something. You know, the judge is sympathetic to all the woe-is-me of the sexy sweet young thing. Finally the 40 something's "heroic" battle back for THE HOUSE then begins. Woopie!!

The only realistic or perceptive thing in this movie is how horrificly easy TRO's (or orders of protection) are for women to get on nothing more than her unsubstantiated say so -- although they are generally only this easy against men. They are sometimes just as unjustified and just as motivated to seize control of a home as it is here. Indeed, girlfriends who have moved in with their boyfriends can often get them evicted from their own homes or condos on the basis of no proof whatsoever, but only an unsubstantiated claim of threats, and sometimes without even hearing his side. Even when there is a hearing, it is routinely impossible to rebut claims of threats (to prove a negative), when the burden of proof is effectively on the accused, rather than the accuser. (This is one of the only areas of American law where that is true -- and it's a signal outrage of feminist overreaching, and the failure of any organized group to resist the steamroller.) Of course that's not likely to be the subject of any Lifetime movie in this lifetime.

The absurd basic premise of this movie relies upon the explanation that the 20 something is psychotic, and isn't taking her medicine. Even so it makes no sense. She isn't after the successful lawyer ex-husband, though she does con his help (to the ex wife's fury) in her quest. She's after THE HOUSE (technically, to drive the divorcee out of it during the period of the lease). This second younger woman is after ALL THAT'S LEFT after the divorce, after affairs with other 20 somethings STOLE her husband!! (The ex-husband seems unattached and basically solicitous after his fling -- doesn't matter, he still strayed!!!)

The protagonist is good enough looking for her age. But her outlook, attitude and focus is so small minded, frumpy and utterly without imagination or life force that it's impossible to care about her. Well, a core group of Lifetime fans care, I guess, judging by the average score the small number of raters gave it. (I kept watching it only because it was so extremely bad and cartoonish that it had a camp appeal. I couldn't resist seeing just how far they'd take it.)

** Spoiler ** (if such a thing is possible with this flick).

Well, here's a clue. The movie ends with the 20 something getting bailed out of jail by promising to "listen to" her 20 something male co-worker and sometimes lover, and "do whatever he says" and "let him take care of her" (he means get her to keep taking her medicine) -- and then tricking him and returning to THE HOUSE. There she climbs the stairs with a knife, demonicly stalking her nemesis 40 something, who is taking a bath by candlelight, secure in the thought that the younger woman is out of her life. There's a struggle -- and the 40 something mom wins -- by sticking the 20 something with a hypodermic needle full of anti-psychotic medicine she had found. She then begins stroking her, mom like, and the two women have a bonding, female solidarity moment!!! How sweet. --------------------------------------------- Result 3708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Fox's "The True Story Of Jesse James" (1957) is a remarkably [[poor]] widescreen remake of their [[prestigious]] 1939 Tyrone Power/[[Henry]] Fonda [[classic]] "Jesse James". I'm not sure where the fault lies but the [[casting]] in this version of the two central [[characters]], the uneven [[direction]] of Nicholas Ray and the ham-fisted [[screenplay]] [[must]] [[surely]] have something to do with it.

In the late thirties and forties Tyrone Power was Fox's top leading [[man]] but in the fifties his [[star]] [[began]] to wane and studio head Darryl Zanuck started to [[groom]] newcomer Robert Wagner to [[take]] his place. This was a [[major]] [[error]] on Zanuck's [[part]] as Wagner proved to be a [[less]] than a [[suitable]] [[replacement]]. With the [[possible]] [[exceptions]] of "[[Broken]] [[Lance]]" (1954) and "[[Between]] [[Heaven]] & [[Hell]]" (1956) it is hard to think of Wagner distinguishing himself in [[anything]]! Also, Jeffrey Hunter was nothing more than a [[Fox]] contract player before being assigned to [[play]] Frank James to Wagner's Jesse in "The True Story Of Jesse James". Borrowed from the studio the previous year this actor's one [[distinguishing]] mark was his excellent and revealing performance in John Ford's classic "The Searchers". But his playing here, along with Wagner as the second half of the James Brothers, is nothing short of boring. Neither player bring any personality or colour to their respective roles. They totally [[miss]] the mark, [[lacking]] the charisma and appeal so vividly displayed by Power and Fonda in the original. The movie is also marred by too many flashbacks and with the all over the place screenplay Wagner, as the Robin Hood of the American west, comes across as a charmless introverted twit that you can feel no empathy for whatsoever. The supporting cast are hardly worth mentioning but it is a shame to see such a great actress as Agnes Moorhead barely getting a look in as Ma James.

The [[best]] aspects of this uninvolving so-so western is the wonderful Cinemascope/Colour cinematography by the great Joe McDonald and the excellent music score by the underrated and little known composer Leigh Harline! Fox's "The True Story Of Jesse James" (1957) is a remarkably [[poorest]] widescreen remake of their [[notorious]] 1939 Tyrone Power/[[Gregg]] Fonda [[typical]] "Jesse James". I'm not sure where the fault lies but the [[cast]] in this version of the two central [[traits]], the uneven [[directorate]] of Nicholas Ray and the ham-fisted [[scenario]] [[owe]] [[definitively]] have something to do with it.

In the late thirties and forties Tyrone Power was Fox's top leading [[males]] but in the fifties his [[stars]] [[initiated]] to wane and studio head Darryl Zanuck started to [[fiance]] newcomer Robert Wagner to [[taking]] his place. This was a [[important]] [[mistaken]] on Zanuck's [[parties]] as Wagner proved to be a [[lowest]] than a [[proper]] [[surrogate]]. With the [[probable]] [[waivers]] of "[[Fractured]] [[Toss]]" (1954) and "[[Amongst]] [[Sky]] & [[Brothel]]" (1956) it is hard to think of Wagner distinguishing himself in [[somethings]]! Also, Jeffrey Hunter was nothing more than a [[Foxes]] contract player before being assigned to [[gaming]] Frank James to Wagner's Jesse in "The True Story Of Jesse James". Borrowed from the studio the previous year this actor's one [[differentiate]] mark was his excellent and revealing performance in John Ford's classic "The Searchers". But his playing here, along with Wagner as the second half of the James Brothers, is nothing short of boring. Neither player bring any personality or colour to their respective roles. They totally [[mademoiselle]] the mark, [[lack]] the charisma and appeal so vividly displayed by Power and Fonda in the original. The movie is also marred by too many flashbacks and with the all over the place screenplay Wagner, as the Robin Hood of the American west, comes across as a charmless introverted twit that you can feel no empathy for whatsoever. The supporting cast are hardly worth mentioning but it is a shame to see such a great actress as Agnes Moorhead barely getting a look in as Ma James.

The [[optimum]] aspects of this uninvolving so-so western is the wonderful Cinemascope/Colour cinematography by the great Joe McDonald and the excellent music score by the underrated and little known composer Leigh Harline! --------------------------------------------- Result 3709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I basically skimmed through the movie but just enough to catch watch the plot was about. To tell you the truth it was kind of boring to me and at some spots it didn't make sense. The only reason I watched this movie in the first place was to see CHACE CRAWFORD!!! He is so [[hot]], but in this movie his hair was kind of weird. But still hot.

[[However]], [[despite]] how hot CHACE is, it really did not make up for the film. I guess the plot isn't that bad but what really threw me over was the fact that they cuss in like every sentence. Is it that hard to express your anger without saying the F word every time?The cussing was annoying and the whole flashy, camera shaking thing gave me a headache.

All in all, although the plot was OK, I [[found]] the [[film]] to be a bore and over dramatic. That's why I only cut to scenes with CHACE in it. LOL [[Anyways]], not worth [[renting]] [[unless]] your a die-hard fan of a specific cast [[member]] like I was. Oh [[yeah]] the cast was Hot. The girls were HOT!!! But CHACE IS THE BEST!! I basically skimmed through the movie but just enough to catch watch the plot was about. To tell you the truth it was kind of boring to me and at some spots it didn't make sense. The only reason I watched this movie in the first place was to see CHACE CRAWFORD!!! He is so [[caliente]], but in this movie his hair was kind of weird. But still hot.

[[Instead]], [[while]] how hot CHACE is, it really did not make up for the film. I guess the plot isn't that bad but what really threw me over was the fact that they cuss in like every sentence. Is it that hard to express your anger without saying the F word every time?The cussing was annoying and the whole flashy, camera shaking thing gave me a headache.

All in all, although the plot was OK, I [[discoveries]] the [[filmmaking]] to be a bore and over dramatic. That's why I only cut to scenes with CHACE in it. LOL [[Anyhoo]], not worth [[rented]] [[if]] your a die-hard fan of a specific cast [[lawmakers]] like I was. Oh [[yep]] the cast was Hot. The girls were HOT!!! But CHACE IS THE BEST!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Laputa: castle in the sky is the bomb. The message is as strong as his newer works and more pure, fantastic and flying pirates how could it be any better! The art is totally amazing and the soundtrack, which is reused many times after this, (im not sure if this was the first time i heard it) and evokes in me the most emotional sentimental response of any movie soundtrack. Sheeta, the female lead in this movie is totally awesome and the boy, Pazu is also a great role-model--he lives on his own! The plot is classic Miyazaki. I won't give it away, but the end is really great. I rank this as one of Miyazaki's three best with Nausicaa and Spirited Away. Also you may want to check out Howl's Moving Castle when it comes out (sometime next year i hope) If you like Miyazaki check this one out as it readily available in the USA. Enjoy, Piper A --------------------------------------------- Result 3711 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] - After their sons are [[sentenced]] to life in [[prison]], Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and [[Helen]] (Shirley [[Winters]]) begin receiving threatening [[phone]] [[calls]] because [[someone]] fells their sons [[got]] off easy. The [[pair]] decides to [[move]] to California to [[escape]] the [[publicity]] of the trial and to [[start]] a [[new]] [[life]]. They [[start]] a [[dance]] [[school]] that is [[soon]] very successful. One of the [[students]] has a [[rich]] unmarried [[father]] with whom Adelle [[quickly]] [[falls]] in love. [[In]] the [[meantime]], [[Helen]] is busy [[raising]] rabbits and becoming a little too [[infatuated]] with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of [[time]] before everything [[falls]] [[apart]] and the [[women]] [[enter]] a [[world]] of [[madness]] and [[murder]].

- I can't [[help]] but compare What's the Matter with [[Helen]]? to [[Whoever]] Slew [[Auntie]] [[Roo]]?, [[also]] [[starring]] [[Shelly]] Winters. [[Where]] that [[movie]] [[seemed]] [[almost]] [[restrained]] in its [[presentation]] of Auntie Roo's [[madness]], there's [[nothing]] holding Helen back in this [[movie]]. It may take a good [[deal]] of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, Helen is one [[Bad]] [[Mad]] Mutha. You don't [[want]] to [[mess]] with her. Winters is so [[delightfully]] demented that it was impossible for me not to [[enjoy]] her performance. I'm not going to spoil the [[movie]], but the [[things]] Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.

- As good as Winters is, Reynolds is [[totally]] ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging [[tap]] [[dancer]]. I [[got]] the impression that she [[thought]] she was in a [[movie]] that [[would]] [[get]] her nominated for some [[award]]. This ain't [[Citizen]] Kane! Quit acting so [[serious]]. Hey, [[Debbie]], don't you realize that you're [[main]] purpose is to be a [[victim]] of Winters' insanity.

- I just [[love]] these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career [[horror]] movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as [[fun]] as any. - After their sons are [[convicted]] to life in [[jail]], Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and [[Hackett]] (Shirley [[Winter]]) begin receiving threatening [[tel]] [[demand]] because [[person]] fells their sons [[gets]] off easy. The [[torque]] decides to [[budge]] to California to [[flee]] the [[advertisement]] of the trial and to [[launch]] a [[novel]] [[vie]]. They [[embark]] a [[ballet]] [[scholastic]] that is [[promptly]] very successful. One of the [[pupils]] has a [[richer]] unmarried [[fathers]] with whom Adelle [[early]] [[tumble]] in love. [[Onto]] the [[meanwhile]], [[Hackett]] is busy [[increased]] rabbits and becoming a little too [[enamored]] with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of [[moment]] before everything [[drops]] [[furthermore]] and the [[females]] [[entering]] a [[monde]] of [[stupidity]] and [[killings]].

- I can't [[supporting]] but compare What's the Matter with [[Helene]]? to [[Anyone]] Slew [[Tante]] [[Ro]]?, [[further]] [[championship]] [[Shelley]] Winters. [[Wherever]] that [[films]] [[appeared]] [[near]] [[confined]] in its [[submissions]] of Auntie Roo's [[stupidity]], there's [[none]] holding Helen back in this [[cinematography]]. It may take a good [[addresses]] of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, Helen is one [[Rotten]] [[Insane]] Mutha. You don't [[wants]] to [[confusion]] with her. Winters is so [[pleasantly]] demented that it was impossible for me not to [[enjoying]] her performance. I'm not going to spoil the [[cinematographic]], but the [[items]] Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.

- As good as Winters is, Reynolds is [[utterly]] ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging [[valve]] [[dancers]]. I [[get]] the impression that she [[thinking]] she was in a [[cinema]] that [[could]] [[obtain]] her nominated for some [[awards]]. This ain't [[Civic]] Kane! Quit acting so [[gravest]]. Hey, [[Dubai]], don't you realize that you're [[principal]] purpose is to be a [[victims]] of Winters' insanity.

- I just [[likes]] these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career [[abomination]] movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as [[amusing]] as any. --------------------------------------------- Result 3712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terry Gilliam's stunning feature-length adaptation of Chris Marker's short film LA JETEE is full of mind-bending surprises, yet still touches your heart thanks to the superb cast. Gilliam's flair for the phantasmagorical works with the script by David and Janet Peoples to play with your head as much as it does with poor James Cole (Willis at his most Steve McQueen-like -- better than McQueen, even!), a time-traveling convict from the future who literally doesn't know whether he's coming or going as a team of scientists keeps sending him back to the wrong eras while trying to prevent a 1995 plague that's deadly to humans but harmless to animals. Willis, the justifiably Oscar-nominated Brad Pitt, and Madeline Stowe as a well-meaning psychiatrist give some of the best performances of their careers. Even Paul Buckmaster's tango-style score is haunting. This one's a don't-miss! --------------------------------------------- Result 3713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I'm a big mark for the music of Neil [[Young]], and with that and the [[glowing]] [[praise]] the film [[received]] in many alt-indie [[press]] circles, hit the first showing of Greendale I [[could]] find. My excitement was short-lived, as this turgid storyline and [[weak]] lyrical [[momentum]] left most filmgoers [[either]] [[asleep]] or disappointed.

[[Neil]] says the [[film]] [[started]] as a soundtrack, and the characters [[came]] to life so much that they just [[filmed]] the soundtrack. Not the best way to [[craft]] a story. No character really has an arc, and when "significant" [[events]] do happen, the viewer doesn't [[cared]], because [[film]] [[technique]] annoyance [[levels]] are so [[high]] by that point. The film is all song, and to that end, the characters on end mouth the lyrics as they're sung...the technique works for the first stanza it is [[done]], and is [[grating]] on the nerves after that. It doesn't feel [[real]] or fake, it just [[feels]] [[unwelcome]].

[[Terrible]] acting, with characters [[finding]] one [[mood]] and [[playing]] all of it. Poor lighting at times. The only [[kudos]] I can give the film are in regard to [[several]] scenes shot as newscast, but the technique is so [[used]] in cinema today that this [[film]] did [[little]] to further it. An alright soundtrack, but nothing I'm quick to buy. A [[bad]] [[film]]. I'm a big mark for the music of Neil [[Youngster]], and with that and the [[glittering]] [[compliment]] the film [[benefited]] in many alt-indie [[presse]] circles, hit the first showing of Greendale I [[did]] find. My excitement was short-lived, as this turgid storyline and [[feeble]] lyrical [[dynamic]] left most filmgoers [[neither]] [[slumber]] or disappointed.

[[Neal]] says the [[filmmaking]] [[initiates]] as a soundtrack, and the characters [[became]] to life so much that they just [[shot]] the soundtrack. Not the best way to [[workmanship]] a story. No character really has an arc, and when "significant" [[phenomena]] do happen, the viewer doesn't [[adored]], because [[flick]] [[techniques]] annoyance [[tiers]] are so [[alto]] by that point. The film is all song, and to that end, the characters on end mouth the lyrics as they're sung...the technique works for the first stanza it is [[effected]], and is [[grid]] on the nerves after that. It doesn't feel [[actual]] or fake, it just [[believes]] [[undesirable]].

[[Frightful]] acting, with characters [[conclusion]] one [[ambiance]] and [[playback]] all of it. Poor lighting at times. The only [[laurels]] I can give the film are in regard to [[different]] scenes shot as newscast, but the technique is so [[using]] in cinema today that this [[filmmaking]] did [[small]] to further it. An alright soundtrack, but nothing I'm quick to buy. A [[unfavourable]] [[flick]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this [[movie]] about 20 [[years]] [[ago]] and have never [[forgotten]] it. It's beautifully filmed and the story keeps one [[riveted]] for the [[entire]] [[time]]. It's [[difficult]] to [[believe]] this was [[made]] in 1946, as the [[tale]] is [[still]] fresh today, and really makes one think. I'm not very [[knowledgeable]] regarding [[film]] technique [[however]] the special effects in this film are [[terrific]] [[considering]] when this was [[made]]. [[In]] [[addition]], the acting is [[superb]], and the use of [[English]] and [[American]] [[actors]] [[quite]] [[astounding]]. I [[recently]] [[purchased]] the [[DVD]] so now I'm [[able]] to watch whenever I [[wish]]. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] [[anyone]] interested in post-war British films to watch this. I [[firstly]] [[noticed]] this [[cinematography]] about 20 [[olds]] [[formerly]] and have never [[overlooked]] it. It's beautifully filmed and the story keeps one [[fascinated]] for the [[whole]] [[times]]. It's [[problematic]] to [[reckon]] this was [[brought]] in 1946, as the [[history]] is [[yet]] fresh today, and really makes one think. I'm not very [[apprised]] regarding [[movie]] technique [[conversely]] the special effects in this film are [[wondrous]] [[reviewing]] when this was [[brought]]. [[During]] [[supplement]], the acting is [[amazing]], and the use of [[Englishmen]] and [[Americas]] [[players]] [[rather]] [[amazing]]. I [[freshly]] [[buys]] the [[DVDS]] so now I'm [[capable]] to watch whenever I [[want]]. I [[crucially]] [[recommendation]] [[someone]] interested in post-war British films to watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is my [[first]] CG animated film that I've ever seen. Usually, the look of other animated [[films]] made me reticent to see them. Not Ice [[Age]]. I wanted to [[see]] it the moment I saw the trailer with Scrat, the hilarious sabertooth squirrel.

Ice Age was sporadically funny and [[overall]] [[fun]] [[film]] to watch. The story is basically an animated version of Three Men and a Baby, set 20,000 years in the past. The visuals were [[great]]. Simply [[beautiful]]. It's one thing to create convincing aninmation, it's another thing altogether to create visually [[arresting]] stuff and Ice Age is great to look at with its [[stylized]] visuals. Blue Sky Studios is a company to look out for in the future. This is my [[frst]] CG animated film that I've ever seen. Usually, the look of other animated [[movie]] made me reticent to see them. Not Ice [[Older]]. I wanted to [[consults]] it the moment I saw the trailer with Scrat, the hilarious sabertooth squirrel.

Ice Age was sporadically funny and [[whole]] [[amusing]] [[cinematographic]] to watch. The story is basically an animated version of Three Men and a Baby, set 20,000 years in the past. The visuals were [[wondrous]]. Simply [[wondrous]]. It's one thing to create convincing aninmation, it's another thing altogether to create visually [[detained]] stuff and Ice Age is great to look at with its [[stylish]] visuals. Blue Sky Studios is a company to look out for in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 3716 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't think it was possible for a horror comedy film to fail so abysmally on both fronts....really awful. The fact that it doesn't take itself seriously (usually a good thing) works against it, primarily because the actors are so wooden you really would swear they are reading cue cards. On the upshot though.....the MST3K version, as always, has a few laughs.... --------------------------------------------- Result 3717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'll [[keep]] the review of this program as short as possible. Skip it. Low budget, not [[funny]], [[lousy]] script. Acting not [[quite]] as [[bad]] as the [[writing]], but still [[bad]]. That's all you need to know, but I will continue for the sake of writing more than necessary.

This is a [[film]] with three segments, each one parodying some other type of movie. A MUCH funnier film with this same exact idea is "Movie Movie," with George C. Scott. Very [[obscure]], but worth [[searching]] out. [[MM]] parodied [[films]] of the 1930's, and did it with [[elegance]], [[precision]] and dry wit.

This [[movie]] did not. It parodies three types of [[films]], [[supposedly]] from the late 70's, early 80's era, only it is parodying [[films]] I've ([[almost]]) never [[heard]] of. The first is, I [[guess]], a [[parody]] of "Kramer [[Vs]]. Kramer," in a way. [[Peter]] Reigert does his best with a dirt poor [[script]]. The second is a [[parody]], of, I don't know what...a [[Danielle]] Steele novel? I [[mean]], you might [[see]] a [[story]] like this on [[Lifetime]] TV, but in a movie [[theater]]? I mean, I [[remember]] the 70's, I was there. This is a soap-opera [[type]] [[parody]] about a fetching [[young]] [[woman]] who [[sleeps]] her [[way]] to power. These [[type]] of [[things]] [[usually]] [[parody]] themselves, so I don't [[see]] how this was even [[necessary]].

We are on somewhat [[easier]] [[ground]] with the third segment, "The Municipalians," which parodies cop [[movies]]. I [[noted]] elements of "The [[New]] Centurians" and some "Dirty [[Harry]]", both of which were [[almost]] 10 [[years]] [[old]] when the [[film]] was [[created]]. [[Yeah]], nice and [[current]]. Robby Benson plays the idealistic [[young]] [[rookie]] (over-the-top wimpy) while [[Richard]] Widmark plays the grizzled veteran cop who drinks [[whiskey]] while [[sitting]] in the [[police]] car (OH! [[Stop]]! My sides! He's [[actually]] [[drinking]] booze in the [[Police]] [[car]]! How irreverent!) Note that this was the first [[film]] after "[[Animal]] [[House]]" to have the "National Lampoon" [[name]] attached. Wow. To go in five [[years]] from that [[classic]] flick to this [[pile]] of [[dung]] is nothing short of [[shocking]]. I could go on for hours about the sad decline that caused one of the most cutting-edge and original voices in American humor (that [[would]] be National Lampoon, the original magazine for about its first 10 years or so) to sell out and begin a long, slow slide into a world of crap, where now the magazine is long gone and it only exists as a brand name to slap on low-budget "comedy" films for a fee. Yet another reason why capitalism (and cocaine) sucks so bad.

Anyway, this movie is a serious time suck. Don't waste your 90 minutes. I want mine back. On the positive side, Fred Willard's in it! I'll [[retaining]] the review of this program as short as possible. Skip it. Low budget, not [[comical]], [[pathetic]] script. Acting not [[rather]] as [[negative]] as the [[handwriting]], but still [[unfavourable]]. That's all you need to know, but I will continue for the sake of writing more than necessary.

This is a [[filmmaking]] with three segments, each one parodying some other type of movie. A MUCH funnier film with this same exact idea is "Movie Movie," with George C. Scott. Very [[ambiguous]], but worth [[seeking]] out. [[MILLIMETRE]] parodied [[cinema]] of the 1930's, and did it with [[style]], [[exact]] and dry wit.

This [[cinema]] did not. It parodies three types of [[cinema]], [[seemingly]] from the late 70's, early 80's era, only it is parodying [[cinema]] I've ([[approximately]]) never [[overheard]] of. The first is, I [[reckon]], a [[comedy]] of "Kramer [[Versus]]. Kramer," in a way. [[Pedro]] Reigert does his best with a dirt poor [[screenplay]]. The second is a [[comedy]], of, I don't know what...a [[Daniel]] Steele novel? I [[imply]], you might [[seeing]] a [[history]] like this on [[Vie]] TV, but in a movie [[cinema]]? I mean, I [[recalling]] the 70's, I was there. This is a soap-opera [[types]] [[comedy]] about a fetching [[youthful]] [[women]] who [[asleep]] her [[routes]] to power. These [[genus]] of [[aspects]] [[popularly]] [[comedy]] themselves, so I don't [[behold]] how this was even [[essential]].

We are on somewhat [[easy]] [[terrain]] with the third segment, "The Municipalians," which parodies cop [[movie]]. I [[highlighted]] elements of "The [[Newer]] Centurians" and some "Dirty [[Hare]]", both of which were [[hardly]] 10 [[olds]] [[ancient]] when the [[movie]] was [[established]]. [[Yup]], nice and [[ongoing]]. Robby Benson plays the idealistic [[youthful]] [[novice]] (over-the-top wimpy) while [[Ritchie]] Widmark plays the grizzled veteran cop who drinks [[bourbon]] while [[seated]] in the [[policemen]] car (OH! [[Stopping]]! My sides! He's [[indeed]] [[alcohol]] booze in the [[Policemen]] [[cars]]! How irreverent!) Note that this was the first [[flick]] after "[[Zoo]] [[Residential]]" to have the "National Lampoon" [[designation]] attached. Wow. To go in five [[ages]] from that [[traditional]] flick to this [[battery]] of [[manure]] is nothing short of [[staggering]]. I could go on for hours about the sad decline that caused one of the most cutting-edge and original voices in American humor (that [[could]] be National Lampoon, the original magazine for about its first 10 years or so) to sell out and begin a long, slow slide into a world of crap, where now the magazine is long gone and it only exists as a brand name to slap on low-budget "comedy" films for a fee. Yet another reason why capitalism (and cocaine) sucks so bad.

Anyway, this movie is a serious time suck. Don't waste your 90 minutes. I want mine back. On the positive side, Fred Willard's in it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This makes the third Errol [[Morris]] movie I've [[seen]], and I'm increasingly not liking his style. He seems to find very interesting and varied characters, great personalities to create [[documentaries]] for, and then with tongue-in-cheek editing make [[fun]] of everything they are about. It's never really a direct caricaturation of them and Morris seems most of the time to be saying, "But no, no, these people are really [[fascinating]], really!", but there's always these subtle little canted angles and not-so-subtle [[editing]] techniques that [[show]] that Morris seems to be mocking them behind their back.

This movie tracks four people who break the traditional boundaries of organic separation... a man who studies African hairless molerats to find that they are amazingly ant-like, a lion tamer, a man who keeps a garden full of animal-shaped shrubbery, and a robot designer. The general theme of the film seems to revolve around the question of what designates animal, human, and life features? So the title of Fast, Cheap, & Out of Control doesn't really seem to mean anything in terms of the movie... right? Except of course [[Morris]] seems just a little disturbed by these individuals' passions (he might call them "obsessions") making synthetic [[designs]] on life. I share not that fear and honestly don't appreciate some of the connections Morris makes in the film.

But I stress his subtlety. With no voice-over narration and leaving the words entirely to the interviewees, it's not as if Morris ever pounds that anxiety onto the spectators' collective head. Instead he mixes circus footage and ant footage together often at times when they're taken out of the context of the circus and the ants, showing a sort of collective absurdity behind what all of these people are talking about. I don't find them absurd, I [[find]] them all very neat and interesting [[individuals]].

Unless, of course, he didn't [[intend]] such juxtapositions, which [[means]] he's just a [[bad]] craftsman [[instead]] of a [[silent]] subverter. Considering [[none]] of this [[films]] I've seen so far have [[particularly]] impressed me, I don't [[really]] care to [[find]] out what he's [[trying]] to do.

--PolarisDiB This makes the third Errol [[Morrie]] movie I've [[watched]], and I'm increasingly not liking his style. He seems to find very interesting and varied characters, great personalities to create [[literature]] for, and then with tongue-in-cheek editing make [[entertaining]] of everything they are about. It's never really a direct caricaturation of them and Morris seems most of the time to be saying, "But no, no, these people are really [[intriguing]], really!", but there's always these subtle little canted angles and not-so-subtle [[edition]] techniques that [[spectacle]] that Morris seems to be mocking them behind their back.

This movie tracks four people who break the traditional boundaries of organic separation... a man who studies African hairless molerats to find that they are amazingly ant-like, a lion tamer, a man who keeps a garden full of animal-shaped shrubbery, and a robot designer. The general theme of the film seems to revolve around the question of what designates animal, human, and life features? So the title of Fast, Cheap, & Out of Control doesn't really seem to mean anything in terms of the movie... right? Except of course [[Morrie]] seems just a little disturbed by these individuals' passions (he might call them "obsessions") making synthetic [[design]] on life. I share not that fear and honestly don't appreciate some of the connections Morris makes in the film.

But I stress his subtlety. With no voice-over narration and leaving the words entirely to the interviewees, it's not as if Morris ever pounds that anxiety onto the spectators' collective head. Instead he mixes circus footage and ant footage together often at times when they're taken out of the context of the circus and the ants, showing a sort of collective absurdity behind what all of these people are talking about. I don't find them absurd, I [[found]] them all very neat and interesting [[person]].

Unless, of course, he didn't [[meant]] such juxtapositions, which [[mode]] he's just a [[unfavourable]] craftsman [[conversely]] of a [[quiet]] subverter. Considering [[nos]] of this [[filmmaking]] I've seen so far have [[especially]] impressed me, I don't [[truly]] care to [[finds]] out what he's [[seeking]] to do.

--PolarisDiB --------------------------------------------- Result 3719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] You know all those letters to "Father Christmas" and "[[Jesus]]" that are sent every year? Well, it turns out that they are not actually delivered but dropped off in a half-forgotten corner of the post office to rot unless some bright spark figures out a way of posting them. As bizarre [[settings]] go, it's a winner and one which perfectly fits the strange [[movie]] that is "Dead Letter Office". Having said that, this is obviously an Australian film as opposed to a British one. [[If]] it was Royal Mail, most letters [[get]] this [[sort]] of [[treatment]] anyway. I haven't been in this flat for two years and we're still getting letters for a Mr Wang, some female priest of the Church of Latter Day I've-Never-Heard-Of-You and various catalogues for industrial equipment addressed to a plumbing company.

"Dead Letter Office" (the name given to the place where undeliverable mail ends up) follows the story of Alice (Miranda Otto) who grows up in a seriously divided home. Writing to her absent father, she only learns in adulthood that her letters haven't been delivered for one reason or another. So, logically, she gets a job at the D.L.O. and finds herself working alongside other social rejects including the brooding Chilean immigrant Frank Lopez (George Del Hoyo). Slowly, she finds herself drawn to him but can she find out where her dad is without bringing the self-contained world of the Dead Letters Office to its knees?

Nothing against this film but I was reminded of the god-awful Heather Graham film "Committed" while watching this. However, this is so much better than that pile of horse crap but then again, that ain't difficult. For a [[start]], this film is much more [[logical]]. True, the metaphors are somewhat [[blatant]] and the underflowing symbolism quickly becomes a flood. But at least this is cohesive and quirky without being complete drivel. It is also well acted. Both Otto and Del Hoyo are very good as the lovers looking for something they know they'll never find while other characters are peripheral at best. Part of the [[trouble]] is that it seems to wrap up far too quickly, leaving this viewer somewhat disappointed. The other part is that when you consider Australia's draconian immigration policy (i.e. if you don't speak English, rack off!), such a story is unlikely to take place in reality. The other characters, sadly, also help to destabilise the realism by proving to be little more than odd-ball stereotypes.

Despite that, "Dead Letter Office" is certainly something a little different. It might not be to everyone's taste but I liked it. Yes, it was hackneyed and predictable but sometimes, it's nice to watch a film without guns or violence or heavy-duty swearing and nudity (no chance of that in an Australian film). There ain't any major laughs, there's no Bullet Time and the characters are usually one-dimensional. But it's the story that counts here and while it's not earth-shattering in its magnificence, it's a pleasant enough way of passing the time. It's the movie equivalent of a Sheryl Crow CD - nice to listen to now and again but you wouldn't really miss it if it wasn't there. You know all those letters to "Father Christmas" and "[[Jeez]]" that are sent every year? Well, it turns out that they are not actually delivered but dropped off in a half-forgotten corner of the post office to rot unless some bright spark figures out a way of posting them. As bizarre [[configure]] go, it's a winner and one which perfectly fits the strange [[filmmaking]] that is "Dead Letter Office". Having said that, this is obviously an Australian film as opposed to a British one. [[Unless]] it was Royal Mail, most letters [[obtains]] this [[kind]] of [[treat]] anyway. I haven't been in this flat for two years and we're still getting letters for a Mr Wang, some female priest of the Church of Latter Day I've-Never-Heard-Of-You and various catalogues for industrial equipment addressed to a plumbing company.

"Dead Letter Office" (the name given to the place where undeliverable mail ends up) follows the story of Alice (Miranda Otto) who grows up in a seriously divided home. Writing to her absent father, she only learns in adulthood that her letters haven't been delivered for one reason or another. So, logically, she gets a job at the D.L.O. and finds herself working alongside other social rejects including the brooding Chilean immigrant Frank Lopez (George Del Hoyo). Slowly, she finds herself drawn to him but can she find out where her dad is without bringing the self-contained world of the Dead Letters Office to its knees?

Nothing against this film but I was reminded of the god-awful Heather Graham film "Committed" while watching this. However, this is so much better than that pile of horse crap but then again, that ain't difficult. For a [[lancer]], this film is much more [[sane]]. True, the metaphors are somewhat [[overt]] and the underflowing symbolism quickly becomes a flood. But at least this is cohesive and quirky without being complete drivel. It is also well acted. Both Otto and Del Hoyo are very good as the lovers looking for something they know they'll never find while other characters are peripheral at best. Part of the [[hassle]] is that it seems to wrap up far too quickly, leaving this viewer somewhat disappointed. The other part is that when you consider Australia's draconian immigration policy (i.e. if you don't speak English, rack off!), such a story is unlikely to take place in reality. The other characters, sadly, also help to destabilise the realism by proving to be little more than odd-ball stereotypes.

Despite that, "Dead Letter Office" is certainly something a little different. It might not be to everyone's taste but I liked it. Yes, it was hackneyed and predictable but sometimes, it's nice to watch a film without guns or violence or heavy-duty swearing and nudity (no chance of that in an Australian film). There ain't any major laughs, there's no Bullet Time and the characters are usually one-dimensional. But it's the story that counts here and while it's not earth-shattering in its magnificence, it's a pleasant enough way of passing the time. It's the movie equivalent of a Sheryl Crow CD - nice to listen to now and again but you wouldn't really miss it if it wasn't there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is shallow hedonism and/or social commentary wrapped in a tragic tale about a jealous young woman's scheme to drive apart her father and his fiancée. Is it incest or just a view through the eyes of a daughter with an Electra complex? Who cares? All of the characters, except for Anne (Deborah Kerr) are vacuous and vile. Seberg is poor (I agree with the "boys with breasts" comment of an earlier review). The plot plodded. This predictable material was sufficient for about 30 minutes of film that unfortunately was stretched over an hour and a half! If you want to see great gowns and jewels on the Riviera, I recommend "To Catch a Thief" - in which you will get the added bonuses of an entertaining story and likable characters.

I like for films to entertain me. I personally don't really care where a film is set. Whatever the time or place, I want a good story - comedy or drama. I also want to see some enjoyable characters. It doesn't hurt if I can relate to them. Poor Deborah Kerr gives a typically good performance, and so does David Niven in a despicable role.

The "2" rating is solely for Kerr and Niven, and for the cinematography - the rich color scenes and the murky, foreboding black and white scenes. Unfortunately, all the great cinematography in the world cannot salvage a poor story with un-enjoyable characters. A sow's ear is still a sow's ear. Consequently watching this mess was a serious waste of my time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This is a kind of [[movie]] that will [[stay]] with you for a long time. Soha Ali and Abhay Deol both look very beautiful. Soha [[reminds]] you so much of her mother Sharmila Tagore. Abhay is a [[born]] actor and will rise a lot in the coming future.

The ending of the movie is very [[different]] from most [[movies]]. [[In]] a [[way]] you are left [[unsatisfied]] but if you really think about it in [[real]] terms, you realize that the only sensible ending was the ending shown in the movie. Otherwise, it [[would]] have been gross [[injustice]] to everyone.

The movie is about a professional witness who comes across a girl waiting to get married in court. Her boyfriend does not show up and she ends up being helped by the witness. Slowly slowly, over the time, he falls in love for her. It is not clear if she has similar feelings for him or not. Watch the movie for complete details.

The [[movie]] [[really]] belongs to Abhay. I look forward to seeing more movies from him. Soha is pretty but did not [[speak]] much in the movie. Her eyes, her innocence did most of the talking. This is a kind of [[films]] that will [[staying]] with you for a long time. Soha Ali and Abhay Deol both look very beautiful. Soha [[remembered]] you so much of her mother Sharmila Tagore. Abhay is a [[birthed]] actor and will rise a lot in the coming future.

The ending of the movie is very [[several]] from most [[theater]]. [[Among]] a [[pathways]] you are left [[discontented]] but if you really think about it in [[actual]] terms, you realize that the only sensible ending was the ending shown in the movie. Otherwise, it [[should]] have been gross [[iniquity]] to everyone.

The movie is about a professional witness who comes across a girl waiting to get married in court. Her boyfriend does not show up and she ends up being helped by the witness. Slowly slowly, over the time, he falls in love for her. It is not clear if she has similar feelings for him or not. Watch the movie for complete details.

The [[kino]] [[truthfully]] belongs to Abhay. I look forward to seeing more movies from him. Soha is pretty but did not [[speaks]] much in the movie. Her eyes, her innocence did most of the talking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3722 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] What [[happens]] when the average [[joe]] [[finds]] out he has supernatural powers? The premise may sound familiar. The [[Watchmen]]? [[Unbreakable]]? [[However]], the Russian sci-fi action flick, The [[Sword]] Bearer, is far from the standard stock.

The story revolves [[around]] a [[man]] named Sasha who as a boy was [[shunned]] from society, his peers and family due to a supernatural power that he possess. When he wishes or his anger allows, a sword extends from his arm piercing his own skin. Very wolverinish? [[Maybe]]... but that's not the interesting [[part]] of this film. Shunned all his life and driven by anger (and a temper he does have) our "hero" returns to his home town to turn his life around or find a reason to. The only thing he encounters here is trouble when an encounter with an old flame's new boyfriend leaves him [[bloodied]] on the ground. This is where the vengeance and anger comes into play. This is a man you do not want to cross and from this point the mafia and the police are on his tail. He meets a girl and falls in love instantly as does she and this is really what the movie is about.

The film is [[highly]] impressionistic with bold colors and [[noir]] [[overtones]] spliced with short yet extreme action sequences. This is art [[house]] at it's core, beautifully filmed with such attention to details in every scene over gruesome sci-fi action. It's this odd mash that interests me so [[much]] in this film. The directors approach for this genre is [[refreshing]] [[focusing]] on the emotional [[journey]] of Sasha and not a [[straight]] action [[film]]. Don't [[worry]] though, the [[action]] is there and plenty of it. However, much of these sequences show only [[implied]] violence with pictures of the horrific aftermath. This is not to [[say]] that action is not shown. These scenes are here and are [[fantastic]] (especially the ending where we see Sasha's full powers unleashed in desperation). The director chooses to imply the violence of [[many]] scenes to keep the focus on the character's emotional struggle at hand. This is a [[tragic]] love [[story]] and a [[refreshing]] [[entry]] into the genre. What [[arrives]] when the average [[kawa]] [[discoveries]] out he has supernatural powers? The premise may sound familiar. The [[Wardens]]? [[Oath]]? [[Still]], the Russian sci-fi action flick, The [[Swords]] Bearer, is far from the standard stock.

The story revolves [[roundabout]] a [[guy]] named Sasha who as a boy was [[dodged]] from society, his peers and family due to a supernatural power that he possess. When he wishes or his anger allows, a sword extends from his arm piercing his own skin. Very wolverinish? [[Probably]]... but that's not the interesting [[parties]] of this film. Shunned all his life and driven by anger (and a temper he does have) our "hero" returns to his home town to turn his life around or find a reason to. The only thing he encounters here is trouble when an encounter with an old flame's new boyfriend leaves him [[bloodstained]] on the ground. This is where the vengeance and anger comes into play. This is a man you do not want to cross and from this point the mafia and the police are on his tail. He meets a girl and falls in love instantly as does she and this is really what the movie is about.

The film is [[immeasurably]] impressionistic with bold colors and [[negro]] [[connotations]] spliced with short yet extreme action sequences. This is art [[home]] at it's core, beautifully filmed with such attention to details in every scene over gruesome sci-fi action. It's this odd mash that interests me so [[very]] in this film. The directors approach for this genre is [[refreshed]] [[concentrated]] on the emotional [[travelling]] of Sasha and not a [[successive]] action [[kino]]. Don't [[anxiety]] though, the [[activity]] is there and plenty of it. However, much of these sequences show only [[intimated]] violence with pictures of the horrific aftermath. This is not to [[tell]] that action is not shown. These scenes are here and are [[wondrous]] (especially the ending where we see Sasha's full powers unleashed in desperation). The director chooses to imply the violence of [[multiple]] scenes to keep the focus on the character's emotional struggle at hand. This is a [[calamitous]] love [[fairytales]] and a [[freshen]] [[entrance]] into the genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 3723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] AntiTrust [[could]] have been a [[great]] [[vehicle]] for Rachael Leigh Cook, but the director cut out her [[best]] scenes. In the scenes that she are in, she is just a zombie. She is involved in a sub-plot that is simular to a sub-plot in "Get Carter", but she handles the sub-plot better in "Get Carter".(I blame the director) The director's homage to Hitchcock was corny. (It's the scene were Ryan Philippe's charactor realizes he may not be able to trust Tim Robbin's charactor, at least I think it's a homage to Hitchcock. The DVD shows the scenes that were cut out. I think the director should have trust his instincts and not [[listen]] to the test audiences. AntiTrust [[did]] have been a [[wondrous]] [[vehicular]] for Rachael Leigh Cook, but the director cut out her [[optimum]] scenes. In the scenes that she are in, she is just a zombie. She is involved in a sub-plot that is simular to a sub-plot in "Get Carter", but she handles the sub-plot better in "Get Carter".(I blame the director) The director's homage to Hitchcock was corny. (It's the scene were Ryan Philippe's charactor realizes he may not be able to trust Tim Robbin's charactor, at least I think it's a homage to Hitchcock. The DVD shows the scenes that were cut out. I think the director should have trust his instincts and not [[hear]] to the test audiences. --------------------------------------------- Result 3724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hand't seen the restored, or any version for that matter, of "Baby Face" with Barbara Stanwyck till I caught it on TCM. What a great movie! In a nutshell Lily lives in a speakeasy, she's been pimped out by her own Father since she was 14! Then his still blows up and he's killed leaving Lily (Stanwyck) alone cept for her black maid Chico, played very nicely by Theresa Harris. Lily leaves for the big city ( New York) deciding to use her sex to get to the top. She does this in great style!

She seduces a pudgy clerk to get in on the ground floor and proceeds to go through men like disposable candy! One dumps his fiancée and kills his near father-in-law, also Lily's sugar-daddy, then commits suicide! Lily barely blinks! STanwyck is terrific as a girl who really doesn't know what love is.

Then in Paris, she falls for Courtland, played by George Brent, they marry, but when he's in deep financial straights, she bolts. Nearly free with Chico and a half-million, she realizes she loved Court! Lily races to find him, but will she be too late?

This is pre-code Hollywood at its best. Stanwyck is tremendous and the look and music in the film are perfect. This reminded me of "Original Sin" with Angelina Jolie, another unfairly ignored flick with an amoral woman, those who disliked that films ultra-romantic leanings, will not like Baby FAce any better, those with belief in sex, love and power, will love it. Highly recommended! See it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sorry Fulci fans, but I could not get through this one. The soundtrack was about as annoying as they come, the acting was puerile, the story has been done and done, and the direction was non-existent.

Massacre honestly looked like a children's film project. But I've seen some of those, and they actually look better than this did! It appears to have been so underfunded they couldn't afford ... ANYTHING! Not a DoP, not a director, no one who even remotely had a clue what acting was. It was a very poor cinematic experience; one of my worst.

This was about the worst suck-fest I've seen, next to Terror Toons which is second only to Killer Klowns from Outer Space. I've nothing else to say about it.

It rates a 0.1/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Michelle]] [[Rodriguez]] is a well-built high-school senior who [[discovers]] that she has a [[powerful]] [[punch]] and [[begins]] [[amateur]] training at a Brooklyn gym. Santiago Douglas is a a handsome young man, barely older than she, who [[also]] trains there. They meet after [[class]], so to [[speak]], and feel attracted to each other. [[No]] sex. Santiago has been instructed to save it for his next bout.

Both are participants in a "gender-blind" [[athletic]] [[program]] that makes no distinctions between [[males]] and [[females]], a [[misguided]] attempt to level the [[athletic]] [[playing]] field.

A conservative radio commentator [[recently]] announced -- and I swear I'm not [[making]] this up -- "Let's [[face]] it; the [[president]] is black." I'm here to make an equally perspicacious [[observation]] -- "[[Men]] and [[women]] are [[different]]." Now, in 99 [[cases]] out of 100, this needn't [[make]] any [[difference]] in [[physical]] performance. But in the [[top]] one percent -- trained athletes whose [[skills]] have been honed to a [[fine]] edge -- men [[generally]] have the [[advantage]]. With their narrow hips they can run faster. And they have [[greater]] [[muscle]] mass and upper torso [[strength]]. These [[differences]] in [[body]] build make it [[possible]] for [[women]] to [[give]] birth and [[raise]] [[children]] and for [[men]] to [[catch]] and [[kill]] [[food]] for them. This [[sexual]] bifurcation is the [[result]] of the [[perfectly]] [[normal]] process of natural [[selection]]. Without it, there [[might]] not be any humans at all. And that, [[boys]] and [[girls]], is why they have men's [[events]] and women's [[events]] at the Olympics. I [[speak]] to you as your [[anthropologist]]. That will be [[ten]] cents, PayPal [[preferred]].

That's why I [[called]] this gender-blind [[program]] misguided. As talented a [[boxer]] as [[Rodrigues]] is, as she [[approaches]] the zenith of the [[game]], she will [[eventually]] [[lose]] to a male.

That's where the [[complication]] [[arises]] in this [[movie]]. [[Rodrigues]] is [[finally]] matched against her [[boy]] [[friend]], Douglas. [[Neither]] wants to [[loose]] any [[anger]] on the other, not to mention roundhouse rights, but the pride of both is at stake, and the pride is both personal and [[gender]] [[related]]. Douglas [[refuses]] to fight a [[woman]] in the [[ring]]. And [[Rodriguez]] is offended by what she sees as his patronizing attitude. It ends [[happily]].

I wasn't really expecting much from the film. I thought it would be a [[rip]] off of Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar [[Baby]]" until I discovered that this was released years earlier. And I'd never heard of the director or of any of the performers. That sort of obscurity generally augers ill -- made-for-television weepers and so forth.

But I was surprised at how neatly this is put together. The total absence of bathos left me open mouthed. So did the minimal use of boxing clichés -- the frayed ropes, the blood, the cutting of the swollen eye, the battered post-bout faces, the fat and sweaty onlooker shouting "Kill him!", the slow motion landing of glove on nose, the spray of sweat from the mauled head, the heroic music signaling the long-awaited apotheosis of the victor. None of that here -- well, almost none. The whole plot could be considered formulaic. Tough kid finds outlet in the ring, etc.

The feeling you're left with is that this is probably pretty much what these amateur contests are like. Different from those we see on TV and in ordinary movies. No bells ring, for instance, Instead a dancing and observant referee yells "Stop!" And "Box!" The contestants [[wear]] head gear. The gym is populated not by a crowd of cheering spectators, but only by a handful of people who have some particular interest in the goings on. It's a clean movie, despite the rather grim setting and the unhappy family dynamics.

Michelle Rodriguez can look pretty mean, what with her muscular bulk and her eyes glowing under her lowered brow, but once you get used to the idea that this is a girl who can beat you to a pulp anytime she wants, and once you hear the feminine contours of her supersegmentals, she ain't bad. (A scene in which she battles her father to the floor is overdoing it.) It was a little hard to understand Douglas's restraint when Rodriguez crawls all over him in bed. The director, Karyn Kusama, has chosen her talent carefully.

Shows what you can do with some talent, imagination, and a modicum of money. There ought to be more films like it. Take one of those multi-billion dollar blockbusters full of dinosaurs or space ships and spread the generosity around a little. [[Mitchell]] [[Ortiz]] is a well-built high-school senior who [[discoveries]] that she has a [[potent]] [[punching]] and [[launched]] [[enthusiast]] training at a Brooklyn gym. Santiago Douglas is a a handsome young man, barely older than she, who [[apart]] trains there. They meet after [[kinds]], so to [[talk]], and feel attracted to each other. [[Nope]] sex. Santiago has been instructed to save it for his next bout.

Both are participants in a "gender-blind" [[athlete]] [[agenda]] that makes no distinctions between [[male]] and [[female]], a [[amiss]] attempt to level the [[athlete]] [[replay]] field.

A conservative radio commentator [[freshly]] announced -- and I swear I'm not [[doing]] this up -- "Let's [[confront]] it; the [[chairs]] is black." I'm here to make an equally perspicacious [[remark]] -- "[[Male]] and [[girl]] are [[several]]." Now, in 99 [[lawsuit]] out of 100, this needn't [[deliver]] any [[dispute]] in [[corporal]] performance. But in the [[supreme]] one percent -- trained athletes whose [[capabilities]] have been honed to a [[alright]] edge -- men [[normally]] have the [[advantages]]. With their narrow hips they can run faster. And they have [[bigger]] [[muscles]] mass and upper torso [[kraft]]. These [[variance]] in [[agencies]] build make it [[probable]] for [[wife]] to [[lend]] birth and [[raising]] [[child]] and for [[man]] to [[caught]] and [[murder]] [[nutrition]] for them. This [[sexually]] bifurcation is the [[results]] of the [[abundantly]] [[ordinary]] process of natural [[choices]]. Without it, there [[apt]] not be any humans at all. And that, [[guy]] and [[dame]], is why they have men's [[phenomena]] and women's [[event]] at the Olympics. I [[speaking]] to you as your [[anthropology]]. That will be [[dix]] cents, PayPal [[prefer]].

That's why I [[phoned]] this gender-blind [[programming]] misguided. As talented a [[wrestler]] as [[Jose]] is, as she [[approaching]] the zenith of the [[gaming]], she will [[finally]] [[wasting]] to a male.

That's where the [[complications]] [[originates]] in this [[cinematography]]. [[Vasquez]] is [[eventually]] matched against her [[guys]] [[boyfriend]], Douglas. [[Or]] wants to [[slack]] any [[wrath]] on the other, not to mention roundhouse rights, but the pride of both is at stake, and the pride is both personal and [[sexes]] [[tied]]. Douglas [[rejects]] to fight a [[women]] in the [[ringing]]. And [[Ortiz]] is offended by what she sees as his patronizing attitude. It ends [[blithely]].

I wasn't really expecting much from the film. I thought it would be a [[tears]] off of Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar [[Babe]]" until I discovered that this was released years earlier. And I'd never heard of the director or of any of the performers. That sort of obscurity generally augers ill -- made-for-television weepers and so forth.

But I was surprised at how neatly this is put together. The total absence of bathos left me open mouthed. So did the minimal use of boxing clichés -- the frayed ropes, the blood, the cutting of the swollen eye, the battered post-bout faces, the fat and sweaty onlooker shouting "Kill him!", the slow motion landing of glove on nose, the spray of sweat from the mauled head, the heroic music signaling the long-awaited apotheosis of the victor. None of that here -- well, almost none. The whole plot could be considered formulaic. Tough kid finds outlet in the ring, etc.

The feeling you're left with is that this is probably pretty much what these amateur contests are like. Different from those we see on TV and in ordinary movies. No bells ring, for instance, Instead a dancing and observant referee yells "Stop!" And "Box!" The contestants [[wearing]] head gear. The gym is populated not by a crowd of cheering spectators, but only by a handful of people who have some particular interest in the goings on. It's a clean movie, despite the rather grim setting and the unhappy family dynamics.

Michelle Rodriguez can look pretty mean, what with her muscular bulk and her eyes glowing under her lowered brow, but once you get used to the idea that this is a girl who can beat you to a pulp anytime she wants, and once you hear the feminine contours of her supersegmentals, she ain't bad. (A scene in which she battles her father to the floor is overdoing it.) It was a little hard to understand Douglas's restraint when Rodriguez crawls all over him in bed. The director, Karyn Kusama, has chosen her talent carefully.

Shows what you can do with some talent, imagination, and a modicum of money. There ought to be more films like it. Take one of those multi-billion dollar blockbusters full of dinosaurs or space ships and spread the generosity around a little. --------------------------------------------- Result 3727 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] I [[want]] to say the acting is [[bad]], but I [[think]] it was the directing that [[made]] it so. I never [[thought]] much of Highlander (same director) but that one [[could]] be [[blamed]] on the 80s.

This one [[however]], has no [[excuses]]. People get shot while exiting trenches with a man in front of him!? Those [[kind]] of [[mistakes]], along with an [[unclear]] [[time]] line, weird [[battle]] tactics, sub-par [[cutting]] and poor visual effects, makes this one a sub-par [[film]] over all.

Then like so many other have commented, all this American [[bullshit]]. The German [[general]] being [[practically]] [[scared]] of his captured American private. Be [[prepared]] to swallow a [[lot]] of it, although in [[small]] doses.

To sum it up, a not horrible but still definitely sub-par [[war]] movie in all [[aspects]]. I [[wantto]] to say the acting is [[negative]], but I [[ideas]] it was the directing that [[introduced]] it so. I never [[figured]] much of Highlander (same director) but that one [[did]] be [[charged]] on the 80s.

This one [[still]], has no [[pretences]]. People get shot while exiting trenches with a man in front of him!? Those [[genre]] of [[faults]], along with an [[fuzzy]] [[moment]] line, weird [[bataille]] tactics, sub-par [[slice]] and poor visual effects, makes this one a sub-par [[filmmaking]] over all.

Then like so many other have commented, all this American [[claptrap]]. The German [[overall]] being [[virtually]] [[affraid]] of his captured American private. Be [[authored]] to swallow a [[batch]] of it, although in [[minor]] doses.

To sum it up, a not horrible but still definitely sub-par [[warfare]] movie in all [[things]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3728 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this movie at theater when it first came out some years ago and really liked it a lot. But i still wanted to see it again this year to check if it is still good compared to movies coming out now, and i wan tell it's one the best movies i've ever seen in my life !!!!!!!!!!!!!

What you need to know is that you don't have to miss any minute of this movie, if you don't completely follow the action you will get lost and you will not understand the end.

The end is what makes this movie so good, you can't expect it.

Congratulations to the Producer ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Max had the V-8, [[Trace]] ([[Wheels]] of Fires [[last]] and only [[hero]]) has a [[jet]] [[engine]] on the back of his [[car]] allowing him to [[make]] [[unintentionally]] [[humorous]] faces as he [[rockets]] [[around]] the [[halfway]] desolate wasteland. Be [[amazed]] as Mad Max 2 ([[aka]] The Road Warrior) is dissected and spliced back together as a [[new]] movie albeit filmed in a [[lackluster]] manner with bad [[actors]] and [[lousy]] stunt [[work]].

Why is WoF set in a post-apocalyptic [[wasteland]]? Simple, The [[Road]] Warrior was! [[Actually]] any [[questions]] can be answered by: it was that way in the [[Road]] [[Warrior]]! Except for the out of [[work]] mutant [[actors]] from the [[original]] 60's The [[Time]] [[Machine]] [[film]] that make a cameo appearance for sake of giving the [[audience]] some non-vehicular action to chew on for a few minutes.

[[In]] typical 80's fashion, all [[cars]] driven by [[bad]] [[guys]] that are bumped or [[slightly]] jostled [[explode]] in a [[huge]] billowing [[explosion]]. [[Inevitably]] all car [[chases]] will happen near convenient cliff sides and [[cars]] will unavoidably [[fall]] off of them. Along with this 80's cinematic [[wild]] ride is the [[general]] [[rampant]] misogyny in this [[style]] of cheapie [[film]]. Generally I [[waited]] for Trace's [[rocket]] [[powered]] car to [[accelerate]] and shoot flames so there [[would]] be another shot of him scrunching up his face like he is [[supposed]] to be [[tough]], which comes off more as him [[looking]] constipated. Badly choreographed [[action]] coupled with [[bad]] acting makes this film a [[true]] [[sinker]]. The [[unintentional]] [[humor]] [[value]] [[even]] [[manages]] to [[wear]] [[thin]].

[[Rats]]: [[Nights]] of [[Terror]] by Bruno Mattei is superior. And that in and of itself is saying a lot! By this [[count]] 2020 Texas Gladiators is a [[cinematic]] masterpiece [[compared]] to Wheels of Fire. A poor [[Road]] [[Warrior]] [[knock]] off that doesn't have near [[enough]] cheese factor to make the [[film]] watchable.

Max had the V-8, [[Traces]] ([[Wheel]] of Fires [[final]] and only [[heroin]]) has a [[jett]] [[engines]] on the back of his [[auto]] allowing him to [[deliver]] [[inadvertently]] [[hilarious]] faces as he [[missile]] [[about]] the [[midway]] desolate wasteland. Be [[appalled]] as Mad Max 2 ([[pseudonym]] The Road Warrior) is dissected and spliced back together as a [[nouveau]] movie albeit filmed in a [[mediocre]] manner with bad [[players]] and [[rotten]] stunt [[jobs]].

Why is WoF set in a post-apocalyptic [[sandlot]]? Simple, The [[Estrada]] Warrior was! [[Genuinely]] any [[subjects]] can be answered by: it was that way in the [[Routes]] [[Combatant]]! Except for the out of [[works]] mutant [[protagonists]] from the [[initial]] 60's The [[Period]] [[Machines]] [[movies]] that make a cameo appearance for sake of giving the [[audiences]] some non-vehicular action to chew on for a few minutes.

[[Among]] typical 80's fashion, all [[auto]] driven by [[negative]] [[buddies]] that are bumped or [[somewhat]] jostled [[blast]] in a [[formidable]] billowing [[blast]]. [[Unavoidably]] all car [[hunts]] will happen near convenient cliff sides and [[auto]] will unavoidably [[autumn]] off of them. Along with this 80's cinematic [[feral]] ride is the [[overall]] [[ubiquitous]] misogyny in this [[elegance]] of cheapie [[flick]]. Generally I [[awaited]] for Trace's [[projectile]] [[fuelled]] car to [[speed]] and shoot flames so there [[could]] be another shot of him scrunching up his face like he is [[presumed]] to be [[harsh]], which comes off more as him [[searching]] constipated. Badly choreographed [[measures]] coupled with [[unfavourable]] acting makes this film a [[veritable]] [[platinum]]. The [[involuntary]] [[humour]] [[values]] [[yet]] [[administering]] to [[wearing]] [[delgado]].

[[Coons]]: [[Evenings]] of [[Panic]] by Bruno Mattei is superior. And that in and of itself is saying a lot! By this [[counts]] 2020 Texas Gladiators is a [[films]] masterpiece [[comparing]] to Wheels of Fire. A poor [[Routes]] [[Combatant]] [[hitting]] off that doesn't have near [[adequate]] cheese factor to make the [[filmmaking]] watchable.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What this movie fails from answering is how wrong this war is (and most US wars recently made only to get some oil).

How many innocent civilian casualties there has been, how many lives perished and how blatantly stupid the perpetrators are.

So, let me ask you - if American soldier kills women and children apart from enemy, its OK, but if government accidentally kills their own forces by deadly chemicals while killing many civilians as well, it is not? Your logic fails, gentleman.

I'll give it 5 for the solid performance and 1 to everything else, 3 in total. --------------------------------------------- Result 3731 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I can find very [[little]] thats good to say about this film. I am sure the [[idea]] and [[script]] [[looked]] good on paper but the filmography and acting I am afraid is not the [[standards]] I would expect from some very [[talented]] people. I [[would]] doubt that this [[features]] [[highly]] in their CV Filmography. Michael Caine appeared [[wooden]] at times in his role as the Doctor, and at no [[time]] no did I actually [[believe]] in his [[character]]. The plot was unbelievable especially with regard to the [[victims]] [[son]]. Some of the scenes were very reminiscent of other [[films]], that at times I wondered if it was actually a spoof [[thriller]]. The [[lighting]] at times was [[dark]] and this added to the feeling of [[watching]] a low budget movie with some big named [[stars]], [[wondering]] why I [[bothered]] to watch it at all. I can find very [[kiddo]] thats good to say about this film. I am sure the [[concept]] and [[scripts]] [[seemed]] good on paper but the filmography and acting I am afraid is not the [[standard]] I would expect from some very [[gifted]] people. I [[could]] doubt that this [[peculiarities]] [[eminently]] in their CV Filmography. Michael Caine appeared [[lumber]] at times in his role as the Doctor, and at no [[times]] no did I actually [[think]] in his [[characters]]. The plot was unbelievable especially with regard to the [[fatalities]] [[yarns]]. Some of the scenes were very reminiscent of other [[movies]], that at times I wondered if it was actually a spoof [[thrillers]]. The [[light]] at times was [[somber]] and this added to the feeling of [[staring]] a low budget movie with some big named [[superstar]], [[request]] why I [[deranged]] to watch it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3732 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[ANDY]] [[HARDY]] [[MEETS]] DEBUTANTE (1940) is the [[ninth]] (9th) film of the [[series]] and it shows the [[direction]] it was [[inevitably]] [[headed]] into. [[Characters]] [[ANDY]] [[HARDY]] ([[Mickey]] Rooney) and [[JUDGE]] [[HARDY]] (Lewis Stone) were going to be front and [[center]]. The [[rest]] of the cast was going too just punch the clock and collect their checks. The series would rise to the occasion again and have its [[moments]] but a fatal [[decline]] had set in.

Lewis Stone throughout the series would continue too [[portray]] the character of JUDGE HARDY in a sympathetic manner. The rest of the cast would be professional even though given less and less to do. Mickey Rooney on the other hand would continue his character as if there was no learning curve. ANDYs' reaction to any situation was in a naive and unbelievable way. Even after he returned as a veteran of World War II service in LOVE LAUGHS AT ANDY HARDY (1946) his reaction to any 'teapot tempest' was the same, [[juvenile]].

In this film it is clearly illustrated. ANDY gets himself into several unbelievable situations that with a simple explanation would have been resolved. This screen writing device was known as the 'idiot plot'. A means of stretching a poorly [[written]] scenario. Maybe it was less Mickey Rooneys' fault then the Director and the Writers. Most likely George B. Seitz had directed one too many and a firmer hand was needed too control Rooneys' excesses. To see our overview of the entire series go to YOU'RE ONLY YOUNG ONCE (1937). [[INDY]] [[STURDY]] [[FULFILS]] DEBUTANTE (1940) is the [[nona]] (9th) film of the [[serials]] and it shows the [[directions]] it was [[unavoidably]] [[spearheaded]] into. [[Character]] [[INDY]] [[RESILIENT]] ([[Mikey]] Rooney) and [[JUSTICES]] [[RESILIENT]] (Lewis Stone) were going to be front and [[centre]]. The [[repose]] of the cast was going too just punch the clock and collect their checks. The series would rise to the occasion again and have its [[times]] but a fatal [[diminish]] had set in.

Lewis Stone throughout the series would continue too [[depict]] the character of JUDGE HARDY in a sympathetic manner. The rest of the cast would be professional even though given less and less to do. Mickey Rooney on the other hand would continue his character as if there was no learning curve. ANDYs' reaction to any situation was in a naive and unbelievable way. Even after he returned as a veteran of World War II service in LOVE LAUGHS AT ANDY HARDY (1946) his reaction to any 'teapot tempest' was the same, [[youths]].

In this film it is clearly illustrated. ANDY gets himself into several unbelievable situations that with a simple explanation would have been resolved. This screen writing device was known as the 'idiot plot'. A means of stretching a poorly [[handwritten]] scenario. Maybe it was less Mickey Rooneys' fault then the Director and the Writers. Most likely George B. Seitz had directed one too many and a firmer hand was needed too control Rooneys' excesses. To see our overview of the entire series go to YOU'RE ONLY YOUNG ONCE (1937). --------------------------------------------- Result 3733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Three story lines and not enough tying them together, "Inside Man" was very [[jumpy]] and an [[incomplete]] attempt to be artistic and realistic. Though having its moments, the movie started off looking like a fast thriller which quickly grounded to a slow crawl, jumped quickly between highs and lows, and only barely picked up steam again near the last 20 minutes. I will give credit to Denzel Washington, he played his part extremely well with a full grasp of his human side and not just the typical "super-detective" with all the answers. Clive Owen also did quite well with his duality part as "evil genius" and "criminal mastermind" (both not the same in retrospect). Overall though, each person individually created a great sub-section. Yet, when the parts finally came together and everything counted, there was no sudden "ah-ha!" or summation of everything. It all ended up with very [[little]] of the energy it began with, with a lot of plot-holes, tons of questions, and as I said earlier, no where near Spike Lee's normal level. I have to completely disagree with the so-called "professional critics"... this is not the movie they play it up to be. Three story lines and not enough tying them together, "Inside Man" was very [[edgy]] and an [[sketchy]] attempt to be artistic and realistic. Though having its moments, the movie started off looking like a fast thriller which quickly grounded to a slow crawl, jumped quickly between highs and lows, and only barely picked up steam again near the last 20 minutes. I will give credit to Denzel Washington, he played his part extremely well with a full grasp of his human side and not just the typical "super-detective" with all the answers. Clive Owen also did quite well with his duality part as "evil genius" and "criminal mastermind" (both not the same in retrospect). Overall though, each person individually created a great sub-section. Yet, when the parts finally came together and everything counted, there was no sudden "ah-ha!" or summation of everything. It all ended up with very [[scant]] of the energy it began with, with a lot of plot-holes, tons of questions, and as I said earlier, no where near Spike Lee's normal level. I have to completely disagree with the so-called "professional critics"... this is not the movie they play it up to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 3734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[entered]] my [[first]] [[comment]] on this [[film]] almost five years ago. Then, the ideas [[presented]] in the movie [[still]] [[seemed]] [[mostly]] fictional, if [[indeed]] they [[could]] ever transpire at all. Not any [[longer]]. Now, the [[politics]], society, and media in The Running Man seem very close to [[home]] [[indeed]].

Consider the following factors, which were [[mostly]] [[absent]] in 1987 (the year The [[Running]] [[Man]] [[came]] out) that are present [[today]]:

[[Concern]] with, as [[Richard]] Dawson's character Damon Killian [[puts]] it, "[[traditional]] [[morality]]." CHECK

Entertainment in the form of extreme reality, including pain, fear, and discomfort on the part of contestants. CHECK

Cameras [[everywhere]]. [[CHECK]]

Restricted travel for citizens at the [[whim]] of the government, controlled by a centralized computer system complete with barcoded passports ("travel passes" in the movie) and sanctioned under the guise of national security. CHECK

An [[increased]] intermingling, bordering on incestuous, of government and media. CHECK

Computer-generated graphics that are advanced [[enough]] to manipulate [[real]] film footage (such as the "digital matting" of [[Ben]] Richards' image onto the stunt double). CHECK

Jailing of [[conscientious]] objectors or detractors of the current administration. CHECK

Flagging economy further widening the gulf between the wealthy and not-so-wealthy; increasing numbers of fringe groups reacting to the [[tightening]] noose of big government; civil unrest brewing just under or at the surface of [[nearly]] [[every]] [[sizable]] public [[event]] regardless of its [[origin]] or [[intent]]. [[CHECK]], [[CHECK]], [[CHECK]]

[[Then]] again, [[maybe]] it's just a movie based on a Stephen King novella. But just to be [[safe]], I'm [[moving]] to [[Switzerland]]. I [[penetrated]] my [[outset]] [[remarks]] on this [[films]] almost five years ago. Then, the ideas [[submitted]] in the movie [[again]] [[sounded]] [[largely]] fictional, if [[actually]] they [[would]] ever transpire at all. Not any [[long]]. Now, the [[politician]], society, and media in The Running Man seem very close to [[housing]] [[actually]].

Consider the following factors, which were [[basically]] [[absence]] in 1987 (the year The [[Execution]] [[Fella]] [[arrived]] out) that are present [[yesterday]]:

[[Anxiety]] with, as [[Richards]] Dawson's character Damon Killian [[provokes]] it, "[[classical]] [[morales]]." CHECK

Entertainment in the form of extreme reality, including pain, fear, and discomfort on the part of contestants. CHECK

Cameras [[nowhere]]. [[VERIFICATION]]

Restricted travel for citizens at the [[mania]] of the government, controlled by a centralized computer system complete with barcoded passports ("travel passes" in the movie) and sanctioned under the guise of national security. CHECK

An [[raising]] intermingling, bordering on incestuous, of government and media. CHECK

Computer-generated graphics that are advanced [[adequately]] to manipulate [[authentic]] film footage (such as the "digital matting" of [[Bin]] Richards' image onto the stunt double). CHECK

Jailing of [[careful]] objectors or detractors of the current administration. CHECK

Flagging economy further widening the gulf between the wealthy and not-so-wealthy; increasing numbers of fringe groups reacting to the [[tightened]] noose of big government; civil unrest brewing just under or at the surface of [[approximately]] [[each]] [[huge]] public [[phenomena]] regardless of its [[genesis]] or [[target]]. [[CHEQUES]], [[CHECKED]], [[AUDITED]]

[[Thus]] again, [[presumably]] it's just a movie based on a Stephen King novella. But just to be [[segura]], I'm [[shifting]] to [[Suisse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] When I [[first]] [[watched]] this, we borrowed it from our local [[library]] about a [[year]] [[ago]] and watched it about 3 [[times]]. We've just watched it again and I [[liked]] it [[MORE]] than I did the [[last]] [[time]] I'd watched it!! :) :()

The [[film]] is [[mainly]] about two [[dogs]] [[called]] Charlie and Itchy (voiced by Dom DeLuise and I love Dom DeLuise!) . Charlie is half a [[gangster]] and half a goodie, which I like. [[Itchy]] is his sidekick. Charlie is killed by his [[friend]] ([[NOT]]) and sent to heaven. When Charlie [[comes]] back to life, it is the start of an [[amazing]] [[adventure]].

The five [[main]] reasons why I'm [[absolutely]] CRAZY about this [[film]]: One: I [[love]] the [[characters]] (except Carface). My favourite three are Charlie, Itchy and a little [[girl]] [[called]] Anne-Marie who comes [[slightly]] [[later]]. Two: I [[love]] the [[period]] of [[history]] in which this film is set. It is set during the [[prohibition]] in the United States. [[Three]]: The [[Don]] Bluth animation (as [[usual]]) is superb. The [[backgrounds]] are good too. Four: There is a [[strange]] [[excitement]] in this film that keeps me on the edge of my seat. Five: The [[songs]] in this are [[lovely]]. My [[favourite]] song [[starts]] with "I [[need]] Brazil, the throb, the thrill"...

So, watch this [[lovely]] [[film]] when you can, you won't be [[disappointed]]! :) ;) :() When I [[firstly]] [[observed]] this, we borrowed it from our local [[librarian]] about a [[annum]] [[prior]] and watched it about 3 [[moments]]. We've just watched it again and I [[enjoyed]] it [[MOST]] than I did the [[latter]] [[moment]] I'd watched it!! :) :()

The [[cinematography]] is [[basically]] about two [[hounds]] [[termed]] Charlie and Itchy (voiced by Dom DeLuise and I love Dom DeLuise!) . Charlie is half a [[thug]] and half a goodie, which I like. [[Itch]] is his sidekick. Charlie is killed by his [[boyfriend]] ([[NOPE]]) and sent to heaven. When Charlie [[happens]] back to life, it is the start of an [[excellent]] [[fling]].

The five [[principal]] reasons why I'm [[completely]] CRAZY about this [[movie]]: One: I [[amour]] the [[features]] (except Carface). My favourite three are Charlie, Itchy and a little [[chick]] [[drew]] Anne-Marie who comes [[moderately]] [[afterward]]. Two: I [[amore]] the [[time]] of [[historian]] in which this film is set. It is set during the [[forbid]] in the United States. [[Tres]]: The [[Donate]] Bluth animation (as [[normal]]) is superb. The [[sources]] are good too. Four: There is a [[bizarre]] [[arousal]] in this film that keeps me on the edge of my seat. Five: The [[lyrics]] in this are [[charmer]]. My [[prefers]] song [[launches]] with "I [[necessity]] Brazil, the throb, the thrill"...

So, watch this [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] when you can, you won't be [[disillusioned]]! :) ;) :() --------------------------------------------- Result 3736 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] Can such an ambient production have failed its primary goal, which was to correctly adapt Allende's novel? Obviously yes. Bille August [[managed]] to make a superficial, shallow film where basic elements of South American mentality are presented simply as side events, resulting in total incoherency. I can't believe there was a whole production team that could not understand the book! There is of course technical quality in this film and I think the actors did their best with what they had in their hands, but [[something]] is missing. And this [[something]] was the most [[important]] part. Can such an ambient production have failed its primary goal, which was to correctly adapt Allende's novel? Obviously yes. Bille August [[administering]] to make a superficial, shallow film where basic elements of South American mentality are presented simply as side events, resulting in total incoherency. I can't believe there was a whole production team that could not understand the book! There is of course technical quality in this film and I think the actors did their best with what they had in their hands, but [[algo]] is missing. And this [[algo]] was the most [[principal]] part. --------------------------------------------- Result 3737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Trio's vignettes were insightful and quite enjoyable. It was curious seeing so many soon to be famous actors when they were very young. The performances and attention to detail were wonderful to watch.

Observation. In film it isn't necessary that source material be in alignment with the contemporary era to be interesting or worthwhile. "Small morality" storytelling is quaint (or coy) only in the eye of the beholder--thankfully. Story content--well told--can overcome it's time, subject or place.

Ironically, there are quite a few contemporary films today that have not overcome the conventions or cutting edge mores of the present era. Inserting "small morality" content--occasionally--might provide a dimension lacking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3738 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[guess]] this [[movie]] is a fitting [[tribute]] to the [[first]] Superman [[film]],as it is just as [[crummy]] and [[painfully]] long as the original.

After an [[opening]] scene [[consisting]] [[solely]] of murky intergalactic [[visuals]], the [[credits]] [[pay]] [[homage]] to the even-crummy-looking-for-their-time futuristic sweeping credits of the original Superman film.

Then there is some more [[murky]] stuff. [[Ma]] Kent sees some [[kind]] of murky ruckus on the farm, and spends a good portion of my life slowly walking up to some debris in the cornfield. Then Superman sneaks up on her and faints.

Next we catch up with Lex Luthor in a scene about many murky close-ups of an old lady as she dies. We don't see Luthor's [[face]] until the end of the scene, an early [[instance]] of the film's drive to leave no hackneyed stone unturned. Lex Luthor is a guy who doesn't like Superman because he is not human. Also, he probably doesn't like humans either, as the movie occasionally features some kind of plot about Lex Luthor planning to kill most of Earth's population.

After a while, Clark Kent [[shows]] up back at his old job (I forgot to mention, he had been away on a five year trip where nothing happened). [[Then]] he [[finds]] out Lois [[Lane]] has an illegitimate kid and is dating Cyclops. It upsets him so much that he loses control of his super strength to such an extent that he accidentally breaks a picture frame.

At this point we see that Miss Lane is on some kind of jet attached to some kind of space shuttle. It is some kind of important event on account of it is on television. Then we learn that there are people in a control room monitoring this event. There are also people watching it on television and there are pilots in the cockpit. The film then reminds us that these people are involved by cutting between them for most of the summer.

As the events leading up to the inevitable disaster started to build, I excused myself to get a soda. I accidentally walked back into the [[wrong]] [[theater]] and watched that movie about Al Gore showing [[slides]] in its entirety. I [[tried]] to [[find]] my [[way]] back to Superman Returns, but I somehow wandered into Prairie Home Companion, which I watched twice in a row. Then it was time to stop messing around.

I walked back into the first theater, found my seat, and looked up to see that the impending Lois Lane space shuttle disaster was almost upon us. Still, it seemed to be taking forever, so I wandered around the theater, met a girl, got married, raised a son and sent him off to college. While attending my son's medical school graduation, I remembered that I should probably check in on Superman Returns, so I excused myself and raced back to the theater only to learn there was no need to hurry. It still took about another half hour before things went wrong for Space Shuttle Lane. When they did, Superman saved everybody, which was pretty cool.

. And then there is a a subplot where Superman turns really creepy and starts stalking Lois Lane and her family with his x-ray vision and super-hearing. Then he tries to get her to cheat on Cyclops, who seems like a good guy.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor is involved in some kind of contest to display every possible generic villain behavior before the end of the movie. I forgot to bring my scorecard home with me (they give you one at the door), but I think he scored damn close to one hundred percent. I hope he wins the million dollars.

At this point, things start to gear up for the big murky finale. I think maybe the projector was broken, on account of the movie seemed to be in some kind of loop for a while here. I remember seeing murky things growing out of the water, Superman getting sick, Superman getting better, back to the murky things, he's sick again, no wait, he's okay again.

Then Lex Luthor unleashed his final bad guy move: yelling at his girlfriend a little bit.

Then Superman died and came back to life. I thought the movie was over, so I left.

Ninety years later, the nursing home where I lived felt a little chilly. I realized I left my sweatshirt back in the theater, and I went to retrieve it. When I did, I was slightly surprised to find that Superman Returns wasn't over yet. I tried to ask some of the viewers what I missed, but most of them were only skeletons with long gray beards by now.

I sat back in my old seat and watched as Lois Lane puttered around her house for a while. Then Superman showed up and started quoting the beginning of the movie, and since I already saw that part I thought it was okay to leave.

So that is my review of Superman Returns.

Oh, also, if you like jokes about people eating dogs or jokes about one dog eating another dog, you will love this movie. On account of there are two jokes like that in it. I [[reckon]] this [[filmmaking]] is a fitting [[commendation]] to the [[fiirst]] Superman [[flick]],as it is just as [[sleazebag]] and [[embarrassingly]] long as the original.

After an [[commencement]] scene [[containing]] [[purely]] of murky intergalactic [[picture]], the [[appropriations]] [[payroll]] [[eulogy]] to the even-crummy-looking-for-their-time futuristic sweeping credits of the original Superman film.

Then there is some more [[shady]] stuff. [[Mommy]] Kent sees some [[genre]] of murky ruckus on the farm, and spends a good portion of my life slowly walking up to some debris in the cornfield. Then Superman sneaks up on her and faints.

Next we catch up with Lex Luthor in a scene about many murky close-ups of an old lady as she dies. We don't see Luthor's [[encounter]] until the end of the scene, an early [[examples]] of the film's drive to leave no hackneyed stone unturned. Lex Luthor is a guy who doesn't like Superman because he is not human. Also, he probably doesn't like humans either, as the movie occasionally features some kind of plot about Lex Luthor planning to kill most of Earth's population.

After a while, Clark Kent [[exhibitions]] up back at his old job (I forgot to mention, he had been away on a five year trip where nothing happened). [[Thus]] he [[discoveries]] out Lois [[Roads]] has an illegitimate kid and is dating Cyclops. It upsets him so much that he loses control of his super strength to such an extent that he accidentally breaks a picture frame.

At this point we see that Miss Lane is on some kind of jet attached to some kind of space shuttle. It is some kind of important event on account of it is on television. Then we learn that there are people in a control room monitoring this event. There are also people watching it on television and there are pilots in the cockpit. The film then reminds us that these people are involved by cutting between them for most of the summer.

As the events leading up to the inevitable disaster started to build, I excused myself to get a soda. I accidentally walked back into the [[improper]] [[theaters]] and watched that movie about Al Gore showing [[slide]] in its entirety. I [[attempting]] to [[found]] my [[paths]] back to Superman Returns, but I somehow wandered into Prairie Home Companion, which I watched twice in a row. Then it was time to stop messing around.

I walked back into the first theater, found my seat, and looked up to see that the impending Lois Lane space shuttle disaster was almost upon us. Still, it seemed to be taking forever, so I wandered around the theater, met a girl, got married, raised a son and sent him off to college. While attending my son's medical school graduation, I remembered that I should probably check in on Superman Returns, so I excused myself and raced back to the theater only to learn there was no need to hurry. It still took about another half hour before things went wrong for Space Shuttle Lane. When they did, Superman saved everybody, which was pretty cool.

. And then there is a a subplot where Superman turns really creepy and starts stalking Lois Lane and her family with his x-ray vision and super-hearing. Then he tries to get her to cheat on Cyclops, who seems like a good guy.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor is involved in some kind of contest to display every possible generic villain behavior before the end of the movie. I forgot to bring my scorecard home with me (they give you one at the door), but I think he scored damn close to one hundred percent. I hope he wins the million dollars.

At this point, things start to gear up for the big murky finale. I think maybe the projector was broken, on account of the movie seemed to be in some kind of loop for a while here. I remember seeing murky things growing out of the water, Superman getting sick, Superman getting better, back to the murky things, he's sick again, no wait, he's okay again.

Then Lex Luthor unleashed his final bad guy move: yelling at his girlfriend a little bit.

Then Superman died and came back to life. I thought the movie was over, so I left.

Ninety years later, the nursing home where I lived felt a little chilly. I realized I left my sweatshirt back in the theater, and I went to retrieve it. When I did, I was slightly surprised to find that Superman Returns wasn't over yet. I tried to ask some of the viewers what I missed, but most of them were only skeletons with long gray beards by now.

I sat back in my old seat and watched as Lois Lane puttered around her house for a while. Then Superman showed up and started quoting the beginning of the movie, and since I already saw that part I thought it was okay to leave.

So that is my review of Superman Returns.

Oh, also, if you like jokes about people eating dogs or jokes about one dog eating another dog, you will love this movie. On account of there are two jokes like that in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3739 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had seen this movie long time back, but found it amazing and to this day it has never stopped amazing me.

A wonderful movie that describes the account of a group of Australian commandos who tried to sink some Japanese ships at the Singapore harbor during the height of WW2.

These commandos are caught in plain-clothes and they are considered to be spies by the Japanese captors. But something happens that hasn't been explored much in any Hollywood WW2 movie that I have seen.

A close and friendly bonding develops between the captors and the captives. They begin to respect each other, while the captain of the captured Australian soldiers become the best of friends with a senior Japanese prison guard. This is the most wonderful part of the whole movie and it really tugs your heart.

Soon, one day as the two friends are conversing, the Aussie captain learns that some other captives are going to be tried and executed for the sinking of the Jap ships in the Singapore harbor.

He mentions that it was his team and not some other's that had sunk the ships to his Japanese friend, and upon hearing this the Japanese guard tells him to keep quiet as it might lead to his whole group getting executed. But the captain remains adamant on confessing this to the Japanese authorities.

Finally, the Japanese authorities sentence them to death in the most respectful way that is according to their rules. This is the Highest Honor accorded to the captured warriors in Japan.

This is the most awesome part of the film where the Aussie soldiers are awaiting their imminent death and the tense indecision of the friendly Japanese guard who is still not ready to believe that why did his Aussie friend confess being guilty.

I won't give away the ending here. But it is more poignant than one can even imagine and can easily move one to tears.

All in all, an excellent underrated movie that possibly didn't get the recognition that it deserved internationally. Get one copy today and be mesmerized. --------------------------------------------- Result 3740 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was just heckled by MST3K and with good reason. First and foremost because it is a "cop" movie starring Joe Don Baker, who we all know is about as good a cop actor as Michael Jackson is a country western singer.

All the typical cop movie plot devices rear their ugly heads, bar fights, children hostages in shoot outs, bad acting, lame police chiefs, bad acting, revenge/justice, endless goons , and of course, bad acting. Don't watch this without an MST3K filter folks. --------------------------------------------- Result 3741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A "friend", clearly with no taste or class, suggested I take a look at the work of Ron Atkins. If this is representative of his oeuvre, I never want to see anything else by him. It is amateurish, self-indulgent, criminally shoddy and self-indulgent rubbish. The "whore mangler" of the title is an angry low budget filmmaker who murders a bunch of hookers. There is a little nudity and some erections, but no single element could possibly save this from the hangman's noose. The lighting is appalling, the dialog is puerile and mostly shouted, and the direction is clueless. I saw a doco on American exploitation filmmakers during the recent Fangoria convention. Atkins was one of those featured. He spoke like there was something important about his work, but after a viewing of this, I see nothing of any import whatsoever. There is no style, either, and the horrible video effects (like solarization) only enhance the amateurishness. Not even so bad it's fun. Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 3742 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Wow. This was probably the [[worst]] DCOM ever. I [[watched]] the [[first]] half [[hour]] and I laughed. [[Brenda]] Song plays Wendy, the popular girl with the hot jock [[boyfriend]] and [[stuck]] up [[friends]] who is determined to be Homecoming [[Queen]]. She is [[supposed]] to [[save]] the world as a warrior, and Shin [[comes]] to her [[aid]] to help her with her Martial Arts. Shin [[teaches]] her the [[skills]] of a snake, [[tiger]], etc. and she has to [[learn]] certain [[techniques]] to [[save]] the [[world]].

This [[movie]] is [[great]] for kids who [[want]] to [[learn]] about Martial [[Arts]] and the Chinese culture but the acting and [[casting]] was [[horrible]].

[[Brenda]] Song is a comedic [[actress]] and I can't [[see]] her playing a [[serious]] role. It was laugh out [[loud]] [[funny]] watching her cry over Shin. Shin couldn't [[act]] at all, and everything was [[totally]] [[unbelievable]].

I [[watched]] this movie and [[tried]] to [[think]] of [[something]] [[similar]], and the [[thing]] I [[came]] up with was the Power Rangers. This movie is so [[fake]] and the stunts were so Power Ranger-esquire that it was just corny and stupid. The [[characters]] weren't [[likable]] and I just couldn't [[stand]] to watch it. [[Disney]] really needs to [[take]] [[time]] to [[make]] some [[decent]] [[movies]]. [[High]] [[School]] Musical is the only [[movie]] that deserves to be on [[Disney]] [[Channel]], along with other [[movies]] like [[Jumping]] [[Ship]], [[Color]] of Friendship, [[Go]] [[Figure]], Read It and [[Weep]], & [[Stuck]] in the [[Suburbs]].

[[If]] you [[like]] action-adventure and corny jokes, you'll [[like]] this movie. Wow. This was probably the [[meanest]] DCOM ever. I [[seen]] the [[fiirst]] half [[hours]] and I laughed. [[Lori]] Song plays Wendy, the popular girl with the hot jock [[buddy]] and [[trapped]] up [[friend]] who is determined to be Homecoming [[Quinn]]. She is [[suspected]] to [[savings]] the world as a warrior, and Shin [[arrives]] to her [[help]] to help her with her Martial Arts. Shin [[learns]] her the [[proficiency]] of a snake, [[tigers]], etc. and she has to [[learns]] certain [[technique]] to [[savings]] the [[globe]].

This [[filmmaking]] is [[resplendent]] for kids who [[wanting]] to [[learning]] about Martial [[Artistic]] and the Chinese culture but the acting and [[cast]] was [[scary]].

[[Lori]] Song is a comedic [[actor]] and I can't [[seeing]] her playing a [[severe]] role. It was laugh out [[vocal]] [[hilarious]] watching her cry over Shin. Shin couldn't [[legislation]] at all, and everything was [[altogether]] [[fabulous]].

I [[saw]] this movie and [[try]] to [[thought]] of [[anything]] [[identical]], and the [[stuff]] I [[arrived]] up with was the Power Rangers. This movie is so [[spurious]] and the stunts were so Power Ranger-esquire that it was just corny and stupid. The [[attribute]] weren't [[likeable]] and I just couldn't [[standing]] to watch it. [[Disneyland]] really needs to [[taking]] [[times]] to [[deliver]] some [[presentable]] [[film]]. [[Supreme]] [[Teaching]] Musical is the only [[cinema]] that deserves to be on [[Disneyland]] [[Channels]], along with other [[theater]] like [[Skipping]] [[Boat]], [[Colors]] of Friendship, [[Going]] [[Silhouette]], Read It and [[Cry]], & [[Trapped]] in the [[Outskirts]].

[[Though]] you [[iike]] action-adventure and corny jokes, you'll [[iike]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3743 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I must admit, I was one of the skeptics who [[prematurely]] judged this [[show]] before [[relatively]] any information was disseminated about it. I determined that it was [[going]] to be a [[cheap]] spin-off guided by Ronald D. Moore wielding the retcon-wand.

I was wrong!

The pilot [[leaves]] an excellent impression upon the viewers. The accessibility is [[marvelous]]! Of course, [[seasoned]] BSG veterans will find themselves [[immersed]] in the plot, which is focused on the development of the Cylons before the [[first]] War. (58 years before the [[events]] of the BSG pilot). The pilot also allows for [[newcomers]], clearly presenting its plot and ideas in the first part of the episode.

Don't be mistaken: "Caprica" is not BSG. We are [[presented]] with an immersive, cerebral [[drama]] dotted by [[provocative]], daring, and controversial ideas.

The [[casting]] [[maintains]] BSG's standards; Stoltz and [[Morales]] are simply [[astounding]]. Morales' portrayal of Joseph Adama, inspired by Olmos' [[portrayal]] of William, gives a [[wonderful]] glimpse of William's heroic father. Stoltz's portrayal of Dr. Graystone provokes a lot of thinking and [[questions]].

[[If]] the quality of the [[pilot]] is any indication of what's [[yet]] to come, RDM and the creative team are set to continue BSG's [[legacy]] of first-rate [[television]] programming with another [[masterfully]] created [[television]] masterpiece. I must admit, I was one of the skeptics who [[early]] judged this [[displays]] before [[fairly]] any information was disseminated about it. I determined that it was [[gonna]] to be a [[inexpensive]] spin-off guided by Ronald D. Moore wielding the retcon-wand.

I was wrong!

The pilot [[departs]] an excellent impression upon the viewers. The accessibility is [[wondrous]]! Of course, [[skilled]] BSG veterans will find themselves [[flooded]] in the plot, which is focused on the development of the Cylons before the [[frst]] War. (58 years before the [[phenomena]] of the BSG pilot). The pilot also allows for [[comers]], clearly presenting its plot and ideas in the first part of the episode.

Don't be mistaken: "Caprica" is not BSG. We are [[lodged]] with an immersive, cerebral [[theater]] dotted by [[inflammatory]], daring, and controversial ideas.

The [[foundry]] [[argues]] BSG's standards; Stoltz and [[Ethical]] are simply [[breathtaking]]. Morales' portrayal of Joseph Adama, inspired by Olmos' [[depiction]] of William, gives a [[wondrous]] glimpse of William's heroic father. Stoltz's portrayal of Dr. Graystone provokes a lot of thinking and [[issues]].

[[Unless]] the quality of the [[experiment]] is any indication of what's [[nevertheless]] to come, RDM and the creative team are set to continue BSG's [[inherit]] of first-rate [[tvs]] programming with another [[artfully]] created [[tvs]] masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 3744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[After]] [[Racism]], [[Rural]] [[exodus]] -[[also]] known as [[migration]] from the [[country]] side- is another socio-political [[issue]] of the 1960s. WestSide Story had [[dealt]] with Racism by a love [[feast]] in an artistic view. Now, Midnight [[Cowboy]] deals with rural [[exodus]] by a [[friendship]] tragedy in a [[psychological]] [[view]]. It has a [[deeply]] grievous [[ending]] that we witness one of the two [[companions]] of fate passing away.

[[Director]] [[John]] Schlesinger [[skillfully]] [[deliver]] us the [[deepest]] [[secret]] [[thoughts]], dreams, [[fantasies]], fears and [[evaluations]] of two New York [[City]] scums. [[While]] the [[handsome]] Joe Buck(Voight) dreams of all the [[beautiful]] [[women]] of the world begging him to [[share]] a wild [[love]] [[fantasy]], the poor Ratso Rizzo([[Hoffman]]) dreams of a [[better]] and healthier [[life]] in clean and sunny Florida. Accordingly, Joe becomes a [[hustler]] to [[turn]] his [[fantasies]] into [[reality]]; and Ratso [[becomes]] a snatcher to [[collect]] [[enough]] money to migrate into [[Florida]]. [[Besides]] Ratso [[helps]] Joe to [[find]] his way to do [[whatever]] he can. They [[begin]] [[sharing]] everything in [[life]]. They [[share]] [[food]], they [[share]] medicine, they share an [[uninhabited]] [[home]], they share their [[earnings]] and [[thus]] they [[share]] a destiny. Regrettably as the story progresses, Joe [[realizes]] that being [[handsome]] is not the only thing to [[make]] all the [[beautiful]] [[women]] begging him to have fun; and [[moreover]] Ratso cannot [[see]] [[Florida]] since his heart fails defeated to his [[disease]] whilst he was on the [[bus]] [[taking]] him there.

The [[Might]] is always right, and the [[Feeble]] has no right in the daylight. Thence, "Midnight" gives the factual sight.

Despite the [[tragedy]], there is no melodrama in Midnight Cowboy. [[Every]] aspect of each [[character]] is the [[reality]] of the poor who [[bear]] their inevitable fate. [[Thanks]] to this, Midnight [[Cowboy]] is a [[provocative]] [[view]] of a socio-political issue, the [[rural]] [[exodus]]. [[Upon]] [[Racist]], [[Agricultural]] [[migration]] -[[similarly]] known as [[migrating]] from the [[nations]] side- is another socio-political [[issues]] of the 1960s. WestSide Story had [[addressed]] with Racism by a love [[festival]] in an artistic view. Now, Midnight [[Denim]] deals with rural [[emigration]] by a [[goodwill]] tragedy in a [[psychiatric]] [[viewing]]. It has a [[seriously]] grievous [[ceasing]] that we witness one of the two [[classmates]] of fate passing away.

[[Superintendent]] [[Jon]] Schlesinger [[cleverly]] [[provide]] us the [[deep]] [[disguised]] [[idea]], dreams, [[illusions]], fears and [[appraisals]] of two New York [[Ville]] scums. [[Though]] the [[delightful]] Joe Buck(Voight) dreams of all the [[awesome]] [[daughters]] of the world begging him to [[shares]] a wild [[amore]] [[fantasia]], the poor Ratso Rizzo([[Hoffmann]]) dreams of a [[best]] and healthier [[living]] in clean and sunny Florida. Accordingly, Joe becomes a [[swindler]] to [[converting]] his [[illusions]] into [[realities]]; and Ratso [[become]] a snatcher to [[collecting]] [[adequate]] money to migrate into [[Fl]]. [[Furthermore]] Ratso [[supports]] Joe to [[unearthed]] his way to do [[regardless]] he can. They [[launch]] [[interchange]] everything in [[living]]. They [[exchanges]] [[nutrition]], they [[exchanges]] medicine, they share an [[unmanned]] [[homes]], they share their [[income]] and [[consequently]] they [[exchanges]] a destiny. Regrettably as the story progresses, Joe [[realises]] that being [[charming]] is not the only thing to [[deliver]] all the [[brilliant]] [[wife]] begging him to have fun; and [[likewise]] Ratso cannot [[seeing]] [[Fl]] since his heart fails defeated to his [[diseases]] whilst he was on the [[buses]] [[adopting]] him there.

The [[Likely]] is always right, and the [[Puny]] has no right in the daylight. Thence, "Midnight" gives the factual sight.

Despite the [[drama]], there is no melodrama in Midnight Cowboy. [[Any]] aspect of each [[characters]] is the [[realities]] of the poor who [[bears]] their inevitable fate. [[Merci]] to this, Midnight [[Denim]] is a [[inflammatory]] [[opinion]] of a socio-political issue, the [[agricultural]] [[migration]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So i had low expectations for this movie to start with, but it failed to meet even those. while there were some funny parts, even one or two laugh out loud parts, this movie fell terribly short of what i would call good. the funniest jokes were unexpected and over very quickly, leaving us sitting there going "WTF just happened?" in addition, there were a few jokes that just dragged on and on and on. the part where he falls down the mountain had me yawning. also, the editing was really lacking. there were some poor scene transitions, but that seems to be the style nowadays. It made me laugh, but i wouldn't watch it again, and I'm very glad i waited for it to rent. give it a chance, you might enjoy it, but don't think you are in for anything along the lines of the 40 year old virgin, or Superbad. --------------------------------------------- Result 3746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] ...this verson doesn't mangle the [[Bard]] that badly. It's [[still]] a [[horrible]] minimalist production, Hamlet's [[Dutch]] uncle is [[inexplicably]] [[dubbed]] by a Spaniard (whether it's [[Ricardo]] Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the [[dialogue]] makes it through [[unscathed]], and the fact that the MST3K version feels [[obliged]] to point out [[repeatedly]] that the [[speeches]] are [[long]] *duh* doesn't [[strike]] me as [[incredibly]] [[humorous]]. [[Mostly]] it's just [[bad]] acting, though. ...this verson doesn't mangle the [[Brad]] that badly. It's [[nevertheless]] a [[frightful]] minimalist production, Hamlet's [[Dutchman]] uncle is [[inextricably]] [[nicknamed]] by a Spaniard (whether it's [[Riccardo]] Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the [[dialogues]] makes it through [[intact]], and the fact that the MST3K version feels [[compelled]] to point out [[constantly]] that the [[statements]] are [[lengthy]] *duh* doesn't [[hitting]] me as [[eminently]] [[comical]]. [[Chiefly]] it's just [[unfavourable]] acting, though. --------------------------------------------- Result 3747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, indeed, it could have been a good movie. A love biangle, (sorry for the poetical license, but is not a triangle!) an interesting story, unfortunately badly told. The image is sometimes weird, sometimes OK, the picture looks crowded and narrow-sighted. The sound needs more attention (it usually does in Romanian movies), the light and color filters are sometimes badly chosen. The soundtrack is short and is not helping the action. About the acting... sorry but the best actress is the landlady. The others are acting immaturely and cannot convince the viewer. The acting is poetical when it should be realistic, and realistic when it should be poetical. It's a picture for adults, told by the children. Bother only if extremely curious. --------------------------------------------- Result 3748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Weaker entry in the Bulldog Drummond series, with John Howard in the role. Usual funny banter and antics, but not much plot. Barrymore gets something to do as the inspector, swapping disguises to follow Drummond, Algy, and Tenny on a wild goose chase (mostly in circles; perhaps the budget was tighter than usual) to rescue poor Phyllis, who is being held captive by people who want to lure Drummond to his doom. For those keeping score, in this one, Drummond is planning to ask Phyllis to marry him and Algy is worried about missing the baby's christening. It's fun to see Algy and Tenny dressed up as fisherman to blend in at The Angler's Rest, but little of it rises above silly. --------------------------------------------- Result 3749 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] At one end of the Eighties Warren Beatty created and starred in the literate epic Reds about the founding of the Soviet Union as seen through the eyes of iconoclast radical John Reed. It was a [[profound]] film both entertaining and with a message presented by an all star cast. At the end of the decade Warren Beatty created another kind of [[epic]] in Dick Tracy that makes no [[pretense]] to being anything other than entertainment with a whole bunch of the best actors [[around]] just having a great [[old]] time hamming it up under tons of makeup.

That both Reds and Dick Tracy could come from the same individual speaks volumes about the range this man has as a player. In this film Beatty managed to get all the famous cartoon characters from the strip and put them in one original screenplay.

The city's top [[mobster]] Big Boy [[Caprice]] is making a move to really eliminate competition. The film opens with him rubbing out Lips Manlis's [[henchmen]] in a Valentine Massacre style shooting and then Lips himself being fitted for a cement overcoat. But Caprice's moves are making him a target for Tracy.

In the meantime a third mysterious and [[faceless]] individual is looking to [[topple]] Caprice himself. Will our hero sort out this thicket of crime?

The spirit of fun this film has is truly infectious. When people like Al Pacino, Dustin [[Hoffman]], Paul Sorvino, William Forsythe, R.G. Armstrong get themselves outrageously made-up to look like the cartoon creations of strip author Chester Gould and then indulge in an exercise of carving the biggest slice of ham, you've got to love this film.

Al Pacino got a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, but any of these guys could have, it's only that Pacino as Big Boy Caprice gets the most screen time. Only Beatty plays it completely straight, the others all seem to play off of him. Dick Tracy won Oscars for Best Art&Set Design, Best Song written by Stephen Sondheim and introduced by Madonna, Sooner Or Later. The fact he was even able to get somebody like Sondheim to write a score for this film only shows Sondheim wanted to get in on the fun. As for Madonna, the Material Girl does more than hold her own with all these acting heavyweights as club torch singer Breathless Mahoney.

Before this film, Dick Tracy movies were consigned to the B pictures and worse as Saturday afternoon serials. The only thing that rivals this all star extravaganza is a radio broadcast done for Armed Forces Radio during World War II that got to vinyl. Can you believe a cast like Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Dinah Shore, Jimmy Durante, Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, and the Andrews Sisters? Try and find a recording of that gem.

Until then Warren Beatty's classic comic strip for the big screen will do nicely. At one end of the Eighties Warren Beatty created and starred in the literate epic Reds about the founding of the Soviet Union as seen through the eyes of iconoclast radical John Reed. It was a [[deepest]] film both entertaining and with a message presented by an all star cast. At the end of the decade Warren Beatty created another kind of [[manas]] in Dick Tracy that makes no [[pretension]] to being anything other than entertainment with a whole bunch of the best actors [[roundabout]] just having a great [[ancient]] time hamming it up under tons of makeup.

That both Reds and Dick Tracy could come from the same individual speaks volumes about the range this man has as a player. In this film Beatty managed to get all the famous cartoon characters from the strip and put them in one original screenplay.

The city's top [[hoodlum]] Big Boy [[Whim]] is making a move to really eliminate competition. The film opens with him rubbing out Lips Manlis's [[henchman]] in a Valentine Massacre style shooting and then Lips himself being fitted for a cement overcoat. But Caprice's moves are making him a target for Tracy.

In the meantime a third mysterious and [[nameless]] individual is looking to [[overthrow]] Caprice himself. Will our hero sort out this thicket of crime?

The spirit of fun this film has is truly infectious. When people like Al Pacino, Dustin [[Hoffmann]], Paul Sorvino, William Forsythe, R.G. Armstrong get themselves outrageously made-up to look like the cartoon creations of strip author Chester Gould and then indulge in an exercise of carving the biggest slice of ham, you've got to love this film.

Al Pacino got a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, but any of these guys could have, it's only that Pacino as Big Boy Caprice gets the most screen time. Only Beatty plays it completely straight, the others all seem to play off of him. Dick Tracy won Oscars for Best Art&Set Design, Best Song written by Stephen Sondheim and introduced by Madonna, Sooner Or Later. The fact he was even able to get somebody like Sondheim to write a score for this film only shows Sondheim wanted to get in on the fun. As for Madonna, the Material Girl does more than hold her own with all these acting heavyweights as club torch singer Breathless Mahoney.

Before this film, Dick Tracy movies were consigned to the B pictures and worse as Saturday afternoon serials. The only thing that rivals this all star extravaganza is a radio broadcast done for Armed Forces Radio during World War II that got to vinyl. Can you believe a cast like Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Dinah Shore, Jimmy Durante, Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, and the Andrews Sisters? Try and find a recording of that gem.

Until then Warren Beatty's classic comic strip for the big screen will do nicely. --------------------------------------------- Result 3750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Seldom]] do we [[see]] such [[short]] [[comments]] [[written]] by IMDb filmgoers. [[Perhaps]] it's because this [[lightweight]] dark [[comedy]] entertains and pleases without depth, or are we [[missing]] something? I'd watch it again if I had some [[incentive]].

So what's a happenstance? To the French it is "Le Battement d'Ailes du [[Papillon]]" Serendipity? [[Fate]]? Perhaps it's an event that is the [[culmination]] of a series of [[random]] happenings. We've all had these (it's called [[life]]) but when looked at in this way, you [[begin]] to get the feeling that "[[random]]" might be more like "fated."

A 'happenstance' in this [[film]] might be an occurrence as [[minor]] as [[knocking]] a few leaves of lettuce off the back of a truck or as [[major]] as basing a [[major]] [[life]] [[decision]] on the accuracy of a [[stranger]] tossing of a pebble. All these [[incidents]] cause other [[events]] that ... well you get the [[picture]]? Dominoes. Multiply those by 30 [[characters]] and an [[average]] of 6 each and you have to really stretch your [[imagination]] to [[accept]] the remote [[chance]] that this [[scenario]] [[could]] [[happen]]. And I [[think]] that there's a diagnosis for those who believe that [[life]] is like this. But then this is the [[magic]] world of cinema.

We [[admit]] that it is [[fun]] to watch the [[way]] the writer/director weaves together these unrelated [[events]] into a [[story]] which enmeshes the [[lives]] of these French [[citizens]]. If you have a couple of hours and are looking for a [[whimsical]] [[escape]], here's the [[place]] to do it. [[Or]] if you're [[recovering]] from surgery and aren't going [[anywhere]] anyway, this will [[engage]] you while your stitches are healing.

"Happenstance" will not go down as an [[award]] [[winner]] but it should develop a cult following. Stranger things have happened.

Soren Kierkegaard is attributed with the following: "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forward." If you looked at the detail in many of your own life experiences (meeting your first love, finding the perfect gift, your last auto accident) you would find a series of seemingly random events leading up to it.

That's the answer! I forgot to bring along an existentialist to explain "Happenstance" to me. [[Rarely]] do we [[behold]] such [[succinct]] [[observations]] [[wrote]] by IMDb filmgoers. [[Potentially]] it's because this [[slight]] dark [[charade]] entertains and pleases without depth, or are we [[lacking]] something? I'd watch it again if I had some [[motivator]].

So what's a happenstance? To the French it is "Le Battement d'Ailes du [[Moth]]" Serendipity? [[Destiny]]? Perhaps it's an event that is the [[climax]] of a series of [[haphazard]] happenings. We've all had these (it's called [[iife]]) but when looked at in this way, you [[lancer]] to get the feeling that "[[indiscriminate]]" might be more like "fated."

A 'happenstance' in this [[kino]] might be an occurrence as [[smaller]] as [[hitting]] a few leaves of lettuce off the back of a truck or as [[big]] as basing a [[sizable]] [[iife]] [[decisions]] on the accuracy of a [[foreigner]] tossing of a pebble. All these [[event]] cause other [[phenomena]] that ... well you get the [[photographed]]? Dominoes. Multiply those by 30 [[hallmarks]] and an [[medium]] of 6 each and you have to really stretch your [[creativity]] to [[agreeing]] the remote [[opportunities]] that this [[screenplay]] [[wo]] [[occur]]. And I [[ideas]] that there's a diagnosis for those who believe that [[living]] is like this. But then this is the [[sorcery]] world of cinema.

We [[acknowledged]] that it is [[funny]] to watch the [[routes]] the writer/director weaves together these unrelated [[event]] into a [[fairytales]] which enmeshes the [[vie]] of these French [[citizen]]. If you have a couple of hours and are looking for a [[skittish]] [[fleeing]], here's the [[placing]] to do it. [[Orr]] if you're [[retrieving]] from surgery and aren't going [[somewhere]] anyway, this will [[embark]] you while your stitches are healing.

"Happenstance" will not go down as an [[scholarship]] [[winners]] but it should develop a cult following. Stranger things have happened.

Soren Kierkegaard is attributed with the following: "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forward." If you looked at the detail in many of your own life experiences (meeting your first love, finding the perfect gift, your last auto accident) you would find a series of seemingly random events leading up to it.

That's the answer! I forgot to bring along an existentialist to explain "Happenstance" to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3751 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ah WINTER KILLS , based on the novel by Richard Condon which deals with a conspiracy that killed the president of the United States 20 years ago . I knew Condon also wrote THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE which dealt with a similar theme and was looking forward to seeing an intelligent thriller

WINTER KILLS left me cold . It's not a thriller - It's a piece of worthless crap , possibly the worst movie I've seen this month and boy have I seen a lot of bad movies in June . The problem lies in both the direction and the script and seeing as William Richert was responsible for both then he should be blamed entirely for this unfunny farce

There's two things wrong with this movie . First off is the way everything is presented in a totally over the top manner . It's not as OTT as say something like that James Bond movie with David Niven and Peter Sellers but everything has a farcial edge to it with actors completely mugging their performances . This might have been justified if there was entertainment value to the movie but there's none . As a satire it's very silly , so silly that it becomes almost unwatchable . Secondly the scenes seem to have been cut so much that they're rendered senseless . Take for example a scene where the hero is confronting a loopy militia leader called Dawson . Dawson tells the hero he has 30 seconds start then it cuts to the hero being on board a plane . The scenes begin and end with no rhyme nor reason

A dire movie that's an ordeal to sit through --------------------------------------------- Result 3752 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I did not set very high [[expectations]] for this [[movie]], which [[left]] me [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. The story is a [[little]] strange [[sometimes]] but [[overall]] I [[think]] it has an acceptable credibility. The action scenes are rather nice and the accompanying [[music]] is [[used]] to induce a a bit of patriotic [[feelings]] common to US movies. This may not be the [[best]] movie ever but it's [[uncommon]] for Sweden and I [[hope]] to see more similar ones in the future. I did not set very high [[outlook]] for this [[kino]], which [[gauche]] me [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. The story is a [[kiddo]] strange [[sometime]] but [[whole]] I [[ideas]] it has an acceptable credibility. The action scenes are rather nice and the accompanying [[musician]] is [[using]] to induce a a bit of patriotic [[sentiments]] common to US movies. This may not be the [[nicest]] movie ever but it's [[scarce]] for Sweden and I [[expectancy]] to see more similar ones in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 3753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[For]] the [[life]] of me I can't figure out why anyone would make a [[movie]] like this. The plot is [[tired]], the acting is [[strained]], the [[language]] is consistently foul and at times the over use of the "F" word seemed like a lack of dialog was prevalent so 'let's throw in another couple of "F's" for good measure, that's what the American public wants to hear'. Gossett was particularly foul and seemed to enjoy his part. Forget this c__p, [[rent]] 'Shrek" and have a good laugh. [[Per]] the [[lifetime]] of me I can't figure out why anyone would make a [[filmmaking]] like this. The plot is [[jaded]], the acting is [[tensed]], the [[parlance]] is consistently foul and at times the over use of the "F" word seemed like a lack of dialog was prevalent so 'let's throw in another couple of "F's" for good measure, that's what the American public wants to hear'. Gossett was particularly foul and seemed to enjoy his part. Forget this c__p, [[lease]] 'Shrek" and have a good laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 3754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] That's what one of the girls said at the end.

Is the soccer game a metaphor for a qualifying game between the girls (or more broadly, a free-thinking group) and the authority? "To Germany" means to a future that's of hope?

It's one of the most unforgettable cinematic experience I've ever had -- despite the crude cinematography and plot, and mild over-acting (though I like the cast -- they're lovable and well above the expectation for amateurs). The ridiculous situation is well captured. I can feel the deep frustration being denied to a game (being female and a soccer fan) and I cannot stop thinking how to make a convincing disguise. I wonder why there's no women's section in which protection from dirty language and bad behavior can be provided -- defeating the flawed reasons for the deny.

The movie is very cleverly made -- the amazing title, the filming during the actual game, the spontaneity, and various methods to put the viewers into the shoes of the characters -- the game that's so important but inaccessible (not shown), the luring light and cheering sound from the stadium, the confinement of the van, and the uselessness of it when those inside connect with the celebrating crowds outside. I can feel the comfort coming from the radio, the drinks and the food, and of course, the kindness and consideration from each character to others. During the end credits, I am amused that no character has a name -- he's just any "soldier" and she's just any "girl" or "sister". --------------------------------------------- Result 3755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] It [[appears]] that there's no middle ground on this [[movie]]! Most of it takes place in a [[dream]] and, like most [[dreams]], it's [[often]] [[foolish]] and illogical. It's [[also]] a [[gorgeous]] production with some [[great]] [[songs]] and fine performances, [[especially]] by our [[angel]].

Jeanette's deadpan, unknowing insults and [[various]] other [[faux]] pas at the dream [[reception]] are hilarious, and her jitterbug with Binnie Barnes is a surprise and a delight. [[At]] one point, she gets to [[sing]] a snippet from [[Carmen]], followed by the final trio of Faust (holding a [[lapdog]], for some [[strange]] reason), then "[[Aloha]] Oe" on the beach!

It's a surreal comedy--tremendously [[entertaining]] if you can [[get]] into the [[groove]]. It [[emerges]] that there's no middle ground on this [[kino]]! Most of it takes place in a [[slumber]] and, like most [[daydream]], it's [[generally]] [[dopey]] and illogical. It's [[apart]] a [[wondrous]] production with some [[awesome]] [[ballads]] and fine performances, [[notably]] by our [[angels]].

Jeanette's deadpan, unknowing insults and [[several]] other [[untruthful]] pas at the dream [[hospitality]] are hilarious, and her jitterbug with Binnie Barnes is a surprise and a delight. [[For]] one point, she gets to [[singing]] a snippet from [[Roxy]], followed by the final trio of Faust (holding a [[dog]], for some [[weird]] reason), then "[[Hola]] Oe" on the beach!

It's a surreal comedy--tremendously [[amusing]] if you can [[got]] into the [[cleft]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Dil was a memorable movie that bring to the celluloid a [[great]] director [[like]] Indra Kumar. The movie followed with Beta, Ishq, Raja & Masti all of whom were [[superb]].

But then every successful [[director]] gives a few [[horrible]] [[movies]] alongwith some hits too. Pyare [[Mohan]] is one such movie.

[[Though]] the comedies are told [[nicely]] but then they fail the viewer to laugh. Comparing with the [[kind]] of comedy movies being made today this is a [[dumb]].

If you really want to watch a movie and laugh, [[please]] don't watch this. Because the [[pathetic]] [[comedy]] will make you cry only.

In short, the movie is worth a [[miss]]. Dil was a memorable movie that bring to the celluloid a [[marvellous]] director [[iike]] Indra Kumar. The movie followed with Beta, Ishq, Raja & Masti all of whom were [[marvelous]].

But then every successful [[superintendent]] gives a few [[frightful]] [[cinematographic]] alongwith some hits too. Pyare [[Prakash]] is one such movie.

[[If]] the comedies are told [[politely]] but then they fail the viewer to laugh. Comparing with the [[genus]] of comedy movies being made today this is a [[witless]].

If you really want to watch a movie and laugh, [[invites]] don't watch this. Because the [[unfortunate]] [[humour]] will make you cry only.

In short, the movie is worth a [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THis was a hilarious movie and I would see it again and again. It isn't a movie for someone who doesn't have a fun sense of a humor, but for people who enoy comedy like Chris Rock its a perfect movie in my opinion. It is really funnny --------------------------------------------- Result 3758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This is [[quite]] [[possibly]] the [[worst]] [[movie]] of all [[time]]. It [[stars]] Shaquille O'Neil and is about a rapping [[genie]]. [[Apparently]] [[someone]] out there [[thought]] that this was a good [[idea]] and got suckered into dishing out cash to [[produce]] this wonderful masterpiece. The movie gets 1 out of 10. This is [[rather]] [[potentially]] the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] of all [[period]]. It [[superstar]] Shaquille O'Neil and is about a rapping [[jinn]]. [[Ostensibly]] [[everyone]] out there [[think]] that this was a good [[thoughts]] and got suckered into dishing out cash to [[producing]] this wonderful masterpiece. The movie gets 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3759 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Noting]] the [[cast]], I recently [[watched]] this [[movie]] on TCM, [[hoping]] for an under-appreciated gem, as I regard [[many]] [[films]] from the 30's. This is no gem - not [[even]] semi-precious. The anachronistic [[clothing]] and 1930's Rolls [[Royce]] [[limo]] hit you [[immediately]]. The [[casting]] is strange, [[also]]. But [[mostly]], there are too [[many]] dumb and [[unnecessary]] plot devices. This [[film]] has [[lots]] of [[good]] [[ingredients]] and a [[basic]] plot that [[holds]] promise, but the [[components]] aren't mixed according to the [[right]] [[recipe]]. It [[simply]] doesn't come [[together]] like it should. And that's a [[shame]]. WIth a few rather obvious, but minor alterations, this might have been a very good movie.

The film is about an American showgirl (Jean Harlow) [[seeking]] a [[rich]] British husband - preferably from the nobility. She meets Franchot Tone and his buddy, who are on a lark in a [[Rolls]] [[Royce]] [[owned]] by his buddy's employer. Harlow mistakenly [[assumes]] Tone is the [[Lord]] who [[owns]] the Rolls, and she sets her sights on him. This [[early]] [[part]] of the [[film]] is a light comedy of no real distinction.

[[However]], Tone unwittingly [[uncovers]] the fact that his [[employer]] is actually a German 5th [[columnist]] on the eve of WWI, and that is when the movie changes tone altogether and begins to fall apart. Tone and Harlow are married, but just as the honeymoon begins, he is gunned down by a Mata Hari-type (Benita Hume), and Harlow [[flees]] the scene, with a bystander accusing her of Tone's murder. (In fact, Tone recovers from the wounds.)

Harlow [[flees]] to France, where she falls in love again - this time with a wealthy French cad (Cary Grant). Tone, now in the army, and Harlow are [[unexpectedly]] [[brought]] back [[together]] in Grant's [[hospital]] [[room]] where he is in [[rehab]] from a [[plane]] [[crash]]. In the following scene, Tone accuses Harlow of abandoning him because she is essentially a gold-digger. Harlow never explains about the witness' accusing her of murder and her panic! That is one of those unreal, movie-plot-device break-downs in the story.

Then Tone is also brought back into contact with the woman (Hume) who shot him. She is on hand to watch her paramour, Grant, test the new plane that Tone has delivered to him from England. Incredibly, both Hume and Tone dimly recognize each other, but simply can't place where from! Okay, so Tone was shot and almost died; perhaps his memory is a little out of whack. But how many men did Hume shoot that she would forget one of her marks? (She does not seem to be faking the memory lapse.)

This is inexplicable and unnecessary. Hume should have absolutely recognized him, but played it coy when she realized that Tone wasn't able to place her. That would have been a much better treatment of that issue.

The finale also is very unsatisfying. The movie, as made, has Tone and Harlow conspiring to preserve the good reputation of the cad, Grant, leading to his fraudulent burial as a hero. Then Harlow and Tone just walk away. It is noble to preserve the French public's perception of their national war hero, but very unsatisfying as a love story!

What the film begs for is this: Harlow explains that she fled in a panic in the face of accusations of murder; Tone forgives her and quietly rekindles his love for her; he then carries a torch for her, even while helping her to rig the crash site to preserve Grant's reputation. Meanwhile, Harlow finally recognizes Grant for the cad he is. Then having seen Tone for the brave and noble man he is, Harlow rekindles feelings for him, too. At film's end, the two of them become reconciled even as they work together to rig the appearance of Grant's death. After Grant's hero's burial, we see them embrace and kiss at the fade-out. That would have made a nice little movie. For Cary Grant fans, it would have been even better had Tone played the French cad who is killed and Grant the long-suffering first husband, reunited with Harlow.

It is incomprehensible that Franchot Tone is cast as the Irishman living in England, while Cary Grant is cast as the Frenchman. This movie would have been much better had they reversed roles. That also would have been more conducive to the film that should have been... [[Notes]] the [[casting]], I recently [[saw]] this [[flick]] on TCM, [[awaiting]] for an under-appreciated gem, as I regard [[countless]] [[movies]] from the 30's. This is no gem - not [[yet]] semi-precious. The anachronistic [[garb]] and 1930's Rolls [[Ruiz]] [[cata]] hit you [[directly]]. The [[pouring]] is strange, [[apart]]. But [[essentially]], there are too [[myriad]] dumb and [[superfluous]] plot devices. This [[filmmaking]] has [[batch]] of [[alright]] [[components]] and a [[fundamental]] plot that [[hold]] promise, but the [[component]] aren't mixed according to the [[rights]] [[recipes]]. It [[purely]] doesn't come [[jointly]] like it should. And that's a [[disgrace]]. WIth a few rather obvious, but minor alterations, this might have been a very good movie.

The film is about an American showgirl (Jean Harlow) [[attempting]] a [[richer]] British husband - preferably from the nobility. She meets Franchot Tone and his buddy, who are on a lark in a [[Bobbins]] [[Ruiz]] [[belonged]] by his buddy's employer. Harlow mistakenly [[assume]] Tone is the [[Sire]] who [[belongs]] the Rolls, and she sets her sights on him. This [[swift]] [[party]] of the [[flick]] is a light comedy of no real distinction.

[[Still]], Tone unwittingly [[unveil]] the fact that his [[employers]] is actually a German 5th [[commentator]] on the eve of WWI, and that is when the movie changes tone altogether and begins to fall apart. Tone and Harlow are married, but just as the honeymoon begins, he is gunned down by a Mata Hari-type (Benita Hume), and Harlow [[escapes]] the scene, with a bystander accusing her of Tone's murder. (In fact, Tone recovers from the wounds.)

Harlow [[escapes]] to France, where she falls in love again - this time with a wealthy French cad (Cary Grant). Tone, now in the army, and Harlow are [[stunningly]] [[introduced]] back [[jointly]] in Grant's [[clinic]] [[bedroom]] where he is in [[detox]] from a [[planes]] [[collisions]]. In the following scene, Tone accuses Harlow of abandoning him because she is essentially a gold-digger. Harlow never explains about the witness' accusing her of murder and her panic! That is one of those unreal, movie-plot-device break-downs in the story.

Then Tone is also brought back into contact with the woman (Hume) who shot him. She is on hand to watch her paramour, Grant, test the new plane that Tone has delivered to him from England. Incredibly, both Hume and Tone dimly recognize each other, but simply can't place where from! Okay, so Tone was shot and almost died; perhaps his memory is a little out of whack. But how many men did Hume shoot that she would forget one of her marks? (She does not seem to be faking the memory lapse.)

This is inexplicable and unnecessary. Hume should have absolutely recognized him, but played it coy when she realized that Tone wasn't able to place her. That would have been a much better treatment of that issue.

The finale also is very unsatisfying. The movie, as made, has Tone and Harlow conspiring to preserve the good reputation of the cad, Grant, leading to his fraudulent burial as a hero. Then Harlow and Tone just walk away. It is noble to preserve the French public's perception of their national war hero, but very unsatisfying as a love story!

What the film begs for is this: Harlow explains that she fled in a panic in the face of accusations of murder; Tone forgives her and quietly rekindles his love for her; he then carries a torch for her, even while helping her to rig the crash site to preserve Grant's reputation. Meanwhile, Harlow finally recognizes Grant for the cad he is. Then having seen Tone for the brave and noble man he is, Harlow rekindles feelings for him, too. At film's end, the two of them become reconciled even as they work together to rig the appearance of Grant's death. After Grant's hero's burial, we see them embrace and kiss at the fade-out. That would have made a nice little movie. For Cary Grant fans, it would have been even better had Tone played the French cad who is killed and Grant the long-suffering first husband, reunited with Harlow.

It is incomprehensible that Franchot Tone is cast as the Irishman living in England, while Cary Grant is cast as the Frenchman. This movie would have been much better had they reversed roles. That also would have been more conducive to the film that should have been... --------------------------------------------- Result 3760 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What more can I say? The acting was, almost without exception, amateurish. The directing and continuity were pitiful. The sceenplay was predictable down to the very last scene and the dialog tedious. One of the features on the DVD was labeled "Gag Reel" but that could have been a description of a viewer's reaction to most of the movie.

One of the most amusing things was in the director's comments on the DVD. He said, with a straight face, that he had set out to make a movie with high production values and a name cast - and that he had succeeded. With delusions like that it's easy to understand how the movie turned out as it did.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect was the monster. The darkwolf suit was a modified ape suit (per the 'making of' feature on the DVD) and rather looked it. The mask and claws were little better than off the shelf jobs from any costume store. The cgi effects were painfully obvious and of quality similar to an inexpensive video game. --------------------------------------------- Result 3761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I imagine Victorian literature slowly sinking into the mire of the increasingly distant past, pulled down by the weight of its under-skirts. Along comes television: at its best, it has a redemptive power, and with dramatisations like those the BBC produce so finely, Victorian literature gets a new stab at life. The religious themes, the moral overtones, may be increasingly ill at ease in a world no longer easily shocked, and acquainted with cohabitation, affairs and domestic violence. But those old, well-told stories have enduring power, and this is one's a hidden gem.

It's hard to gauge today just how forceful, feminist and extraordinary Ann Bronte's masterpiece, "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall", actually was. Emerging from the primeval slime of restrictive corsets – bodily, mental, societal – her heroine, Helen Huntingdon, escapes a miserable marriage, flees brutality and alcoholism, braves not only her abusive husband's fury, but society's pinched intolerance and malicious gossip, to wreak change in her life. She pays a price; but retains her self-respect; she falls in love along the way; she emerges battered but victorious, and strong. I just love watching women like these on screen.

The actors are superb – the best Brits have to offer. The love story is beautifully handled, with real passion and feeling by well-matched actors. Tara Fitzgerald inhabits every aspect of the complicated heroine, and as has been said here by other reviewers, no less sharply defined and beautiful a face could survive that petrifying hairstyle. Toby Stephens, striking sparks off her, contributes just the right combination of headstrong, handsome youth and passionate, yearning vulnerability. Rupert Graves (one of my favourite British actors ever) enjoys himself as the charismatic villain (so much so that you're almost with him at the end. No one's perfect). The supporting cast ably create a world into which you sink without feeling that coarse compromises have been made to modern tastes, and without having felt preached to. Another BBC classic, highly recommended: this is how romantic literature should be dramatised. --------------------------------------------- Result 3762 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Mouse in the House" is a very classic cartoon by Tom & Jerry, faithful to their tradition but with jokes of its own. It is hysterical, hilarious, very entertaining and quite amusing. Artwork is of good quality either.

This short isn't just about Tom trying to catch Jerry. Butch lives in the same house and he's trying to catch the mouse too, because «there's only going to be one cat in this house in the morning -- and that's the cat that catches the mouse».

If you ask me, there are lots of funny gags in this cartoon. The funniest for me are, for example, when Mammy Two Shoes sees the two lazy cats sleeping and says sarcastically «I'm glad you're enjoying the siesta» and that she hopes they're satisfied because she ain't, making the two cats gasp. Another funny gag is when Tom disguises himself as Mammy Two Shoes and slams Butch with a frying pan and then Butch does the same trick to Tom. Of course that, even funnier than this, is when the real Mammy Two Shoes appears and both (dumb!) cats think they are seeing each other disguised as Mammy and then they both attack her on the "rear" - lol. Naturally that she gets mad and once she gets mad, she isn't someone to mess with. But even Jerry doesn't win this time, because he is expelled by her too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[First]] To [[Die]] 2003

I'll [[admit]] my [[mistake]] first: I didn't [[realize]] this was a made for TV [[movie]]. I was "[[thrown]] off" by the "R" certification. The plot is strong, but the movie is about 40 minutes too [[long]]. The [[direction]] and continuity were excellent. [[For]] the most [[part]] the cast was [[exceptional]] and did a good [[job]] with their characters. The down side of the movie is that it definitely falls into the "[[chick]] flick" genre. Although there are some violent scenes, none of the violence should call for an "R" rating. There is no nudity or gratuitous sex scenes. Actually, there are no sex scenes. Ona Grauer (who is [[absolutely]] [[beautiful]]), Kristina Copeland, Sonya Salomaa, and Glynis [[Davies]] were all guests on the SG-1 series, but this [[movie]] did [[nothing]] to advance their careers since they were all used as low level supporting actresses. Robert Patrick was fantastic, as he usually is and Mitch Pileggi [[made]] me [[think]] of a [[modern]] day Lee Marvin. The very talented Megan Gallagher who I [[came]] to [[respect]] as an [[actor]] during the Millennium series, was given nothing challenging to [[show]] her range of abilities. The [[greatest]] [[disappointment]] with regard to the cast was Tracy Pollan. Aside from being a below average [[actress]] and not particularly attractive, her voice is absolutely [[annoying]]. I found myself muting the [[TV]] during her dialogue. I would recommend this movie to [[anyone]] who enjoys the Lifetime [[TV]] type of [[programs]]. I would not [[recommend]] paying any money to see this movie however. Considering I found nothing that would cause censorship, this is a movie that is [[worthy]] for only watching on TV, since nothing will be cut out. As a TV movie I [[would]] rate this as a 5 out 10. As a [[feature]] film with an "R" [[certification]] and such as [[strong]] [[cast]], I rate it as a 2 out of [[ten]]. [[Firstly]] To [[Deaths]] 2003

I'll [[recognise]] my [[mistaken]] first: I didn't [[realising]] this was a made for TV [[filmmaking]]. I was "[[tossed]] off" by the "R" certification. The plot is strong, but the movie is about 40 minutes too [[longer]]. The [[orientation]] and continuity were excellent. [[Onto]] the most [[party]] the cast was [[marvelous]] and did a good [[workplace]] with their characters. The down side of the movie is that it definitely falls into the "[[dame]] flick" genre. Although there are some violent scenes, none of the violence should call for an "R" rating. There is no nudity or gratuitous sex scenes. Actually, there are no sex scenes. Ona Grauer (who is [[altogether]] [[sumptuous]]), Kristina Copeland, Sonya Salomaa, and Glynis [[Davis]] were all guests on the SG-1 series, but this [[flick]] did [[none]] to advance their careers since they were all used as low level supporting actresses. Robert Patrick was fantastic, as he usually is and Mitch Pileggi [[introduced]] me [[believe]] of a [[contemporary]] day Lee Marvin. The very talented Megan Gallagher who I [[became]] to [[respecting]] as an [[protagonist]] during the Millennium series, was given nothing challenging to [[showing]] her range of abilities. The [[finest]] [[disillusion]] with regard to the cast was Tracy Pollan. Aside from being a below average [[actor]] and not particularly attractive, her voice is absolutely [[vexing]]. I found myself muting the [[TELEVISION]] during her dialogue. I would recommend this movie to [[everyone]] who enjoys the Lifetime [[TELEVISIONS]] type of [[programming]]. I would not [[recommendations]] paying any money to see this movie however. Considering I found nothing that would cause censorship, this is a movie that is [[laudable]] for only watching on TV, since nothing will be cut out. As a TV movie I [[should]] rate this as a 5 out 10. As a [[trait]] film with an "R" [[certificate]] and such as [[forceful]] [[casting]], I rate it as a 2 out of [[tio]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3764 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think this is probably one of the worst movies I've watched in a long time.

Trying to get the 'same characters' with different people is *such* a bad idea. If they couldn't get Sara Michelle G. and Ryan P. in this one, they should have just cut their losses and said to heck with it. Instead they get NEW actors that are horrible at what they did. I seriously felt like I was at a High School or (bad) College play with the lever of acting these people put forth.

Where do they get some of these people? Was this their first movie? It sure seemed like it.

This movie also parallels the original in a few lines of speech. I had just got done watching the first one and popped #2 in. I was all excited to get to watch the second one and it ended up being the worst show I've seen in a while. I don't hardly EVER *EVER* turn off a movie, but this one definitely went off after about 30 - 40 min. --------------------------------------------- Result 3765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Gunga Din": one of the greatest adventure stories ever told! A story about the British Foreign legion in 19th century India and a lowly "water-bearer" named Gunga Din, a local denizen who aspires to be just like his military counterparts; three British sergeants whose loyalty and camaraderie for each other extend far beyond the bounds of mere patriotism. Their's is a true and abiding friendship for one another and each would be willing to sacrifice his own life for the good of the other. Gunga Din longs to be a soldier too, a Bugler in particular, but can never attain that rank due to his subordinate social standing. However, heroes are not made according to their social credentials, they're made through their willingness to sacrifice for the greater good of others. Gunga Din tries at every turn to prove his mettle, but will he ever attain the rank he so passionately seeks?...."You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din"! One of Hollywood's classics and a perfect 10!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Another [[detailed]] [[work]] on the subject by Dr Dwivedi takes us back in [[time]] to pre-partioned Panjab. Dr Dwivedi [[chose]] a [[difficult]] [[subject]] for his [[movie]] debut. He has [[worked]] on all [[meticulous]] details to [[bring]] the [[story]] to life. The [[treatment]] of the [[subject]] is very [[delicate]].

Even though we have not been to the [[region]] during that time, the sets and [[costumes]] look [[real]]. Unlike most [[movies]] [[made]] on [[partition]], this one [[focuses]] not on the [[gory]] [[details]] of violence to [[attract]] audience, but on its after-effects. The [[characters]] come to [[life]]. Priyanshu Chatterjee has [[given]] an [[impressive]] performance. [[Manoj]] Bajpai has [[acted]] his [[heart]] out [[showing]] the plight of a guilt-ridden [[man]]. The [[rest]] of the cast has done a good [[job]] too. Another [[meticulous]] [[working]] on the subject by Dr Dwivedi takes us back in [[moment]] to pre-partioned Panjab. Dr Dwivedi [[picks]] a [[tricky]] [[theme]] for his [[film]] debut. He has [[acted]] on all [[scrupulous]] details to [[bringing]] the [[history]] to life. The [[processing]] of the [[topic]] is very [[fragile]].

Even though we have not been to the [[area]] during that time, the sets and [[wardrobes]] look [[actual]]. Unlike most [[kino]] [[accomplished]] on [[split]], this one [[concentrated]] not on the [[gori]] [[detail]] of violence to [[lure]] audience, but on its after-effects. The [[attribute]] come to [[lives]]. Priyanshu Chatterjee has [[gave]] an [[dramatic]] performance. [[Rajesh]] Bajpai has [[behaved]] his [[nub]] out [[proving]] the plight of a guilt-ridden [[guy]]. The [[roosting]] of the cast has done a good [[labour]] too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3767 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A female country singer nicknamed "Big T"--seriously, that's what they call her--risks her budding musical career and her life by falling into the company of a sleazy drunkard (Busey) who wants to be her manager. His mother committed suicide, his father's an alcoholic as well, and he has a violent temper. You can imagine where that leads. In the meantime, there's music aplenty, as Parton, with her fluid vocal talents, belts out song after song (at least half a dozen of them about Texas). Steer clear of this mess and check her out in NINE TO FIVE or STEEL MAGNOLIAS instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Return of the Boogyman is a dreadful movie which doesn't play like a movie, it plays like an episode of a TV sitcom when they flashback to older episodes. Return of the Boogyman is just a clip show.

Mutch of the film is constant and annoying flashbacks from the first movie. Over and over again the same footage. How boring this is.

The movie really is about a psychic woman who has visions of the first movie.

I have seen the first movie I don't want to see the same scenes over and over again and I don't know who would. The whole movie looks like it was quickly made to make a few bucks and thats it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3769 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] This [[must]] be [[accompanied]] by a [[special]] [[rating]] and [[warning]]: NOT [[RECOMMENDED]] [[TO]] NORMAL PEOPLE.

The [[obsession]] of Daneliuc with the most dirty [[body]] [[functions]] [[becomes]] here a [[real]] nightmare. [[Also]], it's evident that the [[man]] is a misanthrope, he [[hates]] everybody - his [[country]] his people, his [[actors]], his [[job]]. And this [[hatred]] makes him blind and he [[forgets]] anymore the [[profession]] he knew long [[ago]].

This so [[called]] "[[film]]" is just a [[hideous]] string of [[disgusting]] images, with no artistic [[value]] and no professionist knowledge. It is an [[insult]] to good taste and to good sense. [[Shame]], [[shame]], [[shame]]! This [[owes]] be [[accompanying]] by a [[specific]] [[evaluations]] and [[alert]]: NOT [[SUGGESTED]] [[OF]] NORMAL PEOPLE.

The [[mania]] of Daneliuc with the most dirty [[organs]] [[function]] [[becoming]] here a [[veritable]] nightmare. [[Moreover]], it's evident that the [[men]] is a misanthrope, he [[loathed]] everybody - his [[nationals]] his people, his [[players]], his [[labour]]. And this [[animus]] makes him blind and he [[forget]] anymore the [[occupations]] he knew long [[before]].

This so [[drew]] "[[filmmaking]]" is just a [[horrific]] string of [[appalling]] images, with no artistic [[values]] and no professionist knowledge. It is an [[affront]] to good taste and to good sense. [[Disgrace]], [[disgrace]], [[ignominy]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a horrid disaster of a film. From beginning to end, it's filled with bad acting and even worse direction and editing. The only redeeming parts of the film are a few numbers by Streisand, because the Kristofferson parts are impossible to watch or listen to. The main problem of this film is that we never see Kristofferson's character at his peak or Streisand's character struggling. The first should be seen in decline and the second rising. The final Streisand number _could have been_ one of the greatest finales in film, if it was directed and edited properly. The single framed shot of her face for the duration of the song was a terrible mistake. Had the band, audience and wide shots of the stage been shown, this number could have been dynamic and interesting. This film must have been directed and edited by an NYU film school dropout. The only thing worse may be the wretched screenplay. The final musical number is the only redeeming part of this film, and even that is botched completely by misguided technical decisions. --------------------------------------------- Result 3771 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I really, really didn't [[expect]] this [[type]] of a film outside of [[America]]. How anyone can [[take]] the subject of sexually abusing [[children]] and turn it into a "thriller" is just sick. Auteuil (whom I had previously admired) going around like some sort of child-saving Rambo was ignorant and [[insulting]] to all the children being sexually exploited around the world.

What's doubly depressing is that the [[stunning]] and ground-breaking [[film]] "Happiness" came out the [[year]] BEFORE this film. Menges and his cohorts should be [[ashamed]] of themselves. It's admirable to read some of the comments by the more [[intelligent]] [[viewers]] out there. They were able to see the shoddy and [[ridiculous]] [[handling]] of this [[topic]]. Those of you who [[think]] this is [[great]] [[cinema]] [[display]] a disgusting amount of [[ignorance]] and you [[need]] to watch "Happiness" to [[open]] your [[minds]] to the [[true]] horrors of pedophilia.

Do you [[think]] your [[child]] is more [[likely]] to be [[kidnapped]] and [[sold]] into sexual slavery or be molested by a [[neighbor]], [[teacher]], friend or even a relative? [[Hmm]]...I wonder. [[If]] they are [[going]] to [[make]] a [[film]] about [[international]] child [[slavery]] of whatever [[kind]] they [[owe]] it to everyone to make it realistic and [[emotionally]] involving [[instead]] of this button-pushing [[crap]]. 1/10 I really, really didn't [[expects]] this [[genre]] of a film outside of [[American]]. How anyone can [[taking]] the subject of sexually abusing [[childhood]] and turn it into a "thriller" is just sick. Auteuil (whom I had previously admired) going around like some sort of child-saving Rambo was ignorant and [[offensive]] to all the children being sexually exploited around the world.

What's doubly depressing is that the [[surprising]] and ground-breaking [[filmmaking]] "Happiness" came out the [[annum]] BEFORE this film. Menges and his cohorts should be [[humiliated]] of themselves. It's admirable to read some of the comments by the more [[smarter]] [[audience]] out there. They were able to see the shoddy and [[nonsense]] [[treating]] of this [[subjects]]. Those of you who [[thought]] this is [[gorgeous]] [[cinematic]] [[exposition]] a disgusting amount of [[ignorant]] and you [[needed]] to watch "Happiness" to [[opened]] your [[spirits]] to the [[veritable]] horrors of pedophilia.

Do you [[thought]] your [[kid]] is more [[probable]] to be [[kidnap]] and [[sell]] into sexual slavery or be molested by a [[vicinity]], [[professor]], friend or even a relative? [[Ahem]]...I wonder. [[Though]] they are [[go]] to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]] about [[internationale]] child [[servile]] of whatever [[genera]] they [[must]] it to everyone to make it realistic and [[excitedly]] involving [[however]] of this button-pushing [[turd]]. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3772 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A [[couple]](Janet and Richard) go [[camping]] out in the woods near a giant swamp. [[After]] camping and enjoying nature, the couple takes shelter in what they think is an abandoned farm house. [[Soon]], a [[pair]] of [[escaped]] convicts [[show]] up and, after much [[delaying]] of the inevitable, they proceed to rape Janet and [[lock]] Richard in a birdcage.

This [[LAST]] HOUSE ON THE LEFT-like film has to be one of the most [[underrated]] horror films ever [[made]]. It's one of the more sick and twisted early 70s shockers. Moreover, I [[found]] this to be quite enchanting and [[beautiful]] in it's perverse tone. I love CAGED TERROR. The music definitely helps lend a sense of personality to the film as well as a lot of beauty. I found the film to be quite creepy.

The flaws mainly have to do with the pacing of the film, which is to say that the film is [[rather]] slow and meandering. While I didn't mind the pacing due to the beauty and suspense of the film in question, I do think that it will both most people. The acting isn't too good nor is the dialogue, at least in the early scenes. This film takes a little more patience than usual, and it's really not for everyone.

In short, this was a good film. Not the greatest horror film I've ever seen, but it is certainly a lot of fun. It's not exactly the easiest film to find. It's possible to find it in the USED section of a lot of stores if you look hard enough. It's not for everyone, but if you're a fan of trash cinema then it's [[definitely]] worth checking out. A [[couples]](Janet and Richard) go [[camper]] out in the woods near a giant swamp. [[Upon]] camping and enjoying nature, the couple takes shelter in what they think is an abandoned farm house. [[Quick]], a [[torque]] of [[fled]] convicts [[spectacle]] up and, after much [[delay]] of the inevitable, they proceed to rape Janet and [[keyhole]] Richard in a birdcage.

This [[LATTER]] HOUSE ON THE LEFT-like film has to be one of the most [[underestimated]] horror films ever [[introduced]]. It's one of the more sick and twisted early 70s shockers. Moreover, I [[unearthed]] this to be quite enchanting and [[wondrous]] in it's perverse tone. I love CAGED TERROR. The music definitely helps lend a sense of personality to the film as well as a lot of beauty. I found the film to be quite creepy.

The flaws mainly have to do with the pacing of the film, which is to say that the film is [[quite]] slow and meandering. While I didn't mind the pacing due to the beauty and suspense of the film in question, I do think that it will both most people. The acting isn't too good nor is the dialogue, at least in the early scenes. This film takes a little more patience than usual, and it's really not for everyone.

In short, this was a good film. Not the greatest horror film I've ever seen, but it is certainly a lot of fun. It's not exactly the easiest film to find. It's possible to find it in the USED section of a lot of stores if you look hard enough. It's not for everyone, but if you're a fan of trash cinema then it's [[surely]] worth checking out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Jeremy Northam struggles against a "Total [[Recall]]" clone [[script]] and disposable romantic by-play to bring life to a confused character. [[Lucy]] Liu graduates her acting from a [[wooden]] start to a workman-like [[finish]]. You can't fail to laugh when viewing her interviews on the DVD when she uses the term "Femme fatal" and "Romance". French film-noir actress she is not and they lack [[chemistry]] together.

This [[movie]] [[fails]], not in the plot or the action sequences but in the [[lack]] of attention to detail in the films photography and ham-fisted [[portrayal]] of the world of technology [[surrounding]] the main protagonists. Little attempt is [[made]] to [[dress]] the [[scenery]] to [[represent]] any [[contiguous]] filmic [[landscape]] or [[period]]. [[Automobiles]] are very 1990's and the [[architecture]] [[barely]] modern with [[open]] [[plans]] that hint at a [[restricted]] budget rather than [[conscious]] set dressing techniques.

The [[technology]] is positively [[hilarious]]. Massive "2001: A Space Odyssey" mainframes fed by man-portable CD-ROM's with data collected for some [[unexplained]] [[reason]], in spite of the proliferating communications network that even the most un-savvy technologist today would obviously be aware. There is an obvious [[lack]] of research [[done]] here and given the open-source nature of the cyber-community, [[research]] [[would]] have cost [[little]] more than a bulletin board and personal time.

DVD interviews also reveal the original [[movie]] [[name]] was "[[Company]] [[Man]]" but this likely ditched in [[order]] to cash in on Matrix [[hype]]. The "Cypher" title has only the [[slightest]] [[link]] with the [[movie]]. Terry Gilliam would have [[done]] wonders with this [[concept]]; and [[completely]] re-written the Decalogue.

This is Tele-movie quality and [[extremely]] disappointing for a [[movie]] [[length]] production. It might have made a good sub-plot for "Alias". Jeremy Northam struggles against a "Total [[Recalled]]" clone [[hyphen]] and disposable romantic by-play to bring life to a confused character. [[Lucie]] Liu graduates her acting from a [[lumber]] start to a workman-like [[finis]]. You can't fail to laugh when viewing her interviews on the DVD when she uses the term "Femme fatal" and "Romance". French film-noir actress she is not and they lack [[chemicals]] together.

This [[filmmaking]] [[fail]], not in the plot or the action sequences but in the [[shortfall]] of attention to detail in the films photography and ham-fisted [[portrait]] of the world of technology [[surrounds]] the main protagonists. Little attempt is [[accomplished]] to [[garment]] the [[landscaping]] to [[represented]] any [[neighboring]] filmic [[landscapes]] or [[schedules]]. [[Vehicle]] are very 1990's and the [[structures]] [[hardly]] modern with [[opened]] [[systems]] that hint at a [[restrained]] budget rather than [[cognizant]] set dressing techniques.

The [[technique]] is positively [[fun]]. Massive "2001: A Space Odyssey" mainframes fed by man-portable CD-ROM's with data collected for some [[inexplicable]] [[cause]], in spite of the proliferating communications network that even the most un-savvy technologist today would obviously be aware. There is an obvious [[shortage]] of research [[played]] here and given the open-source nature of the cyber-community, [[investigative]] [[could]] have cost [[petite]] more than a bulletin board and personal time.

DVD interviews also reveal the original [[flick]] [[denomination]] was "[[Corporation]] [[Men]]" but this likely ditched in [[decree]] to cash in on Matrix [[fanfare]]. The "Cypher" title has only the [[lowest]] [[bind]] with the [[flick]]. Terry Gilliam would have [[doing]] wonders with this [[concepts]]; and [[fully]] re-written the Decalogue.

This is Tele-movie quality and [[considerably]] disappointing for a [[film]] [[lifespan]] production. It might have made a good sub-plot for "Alias". --------------------------------------------- Result 3774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched this over the Christmas [[period]], I don't know why but it reminds me of Christmas so I watched it, so there we are.

Arthur is a [[film]] I watch all the way through with a [[big]] dumb [[smile]] on my face and its a [[mixture]] of [[special]] performances, [[great]] jolly music and a script crackling with [[wit]] and [[charm]] that causes it.

Dudley Moore makes a [[character]] that [[could]] well be [[hated]] very [[easily]] (spoiled, rich, lazy [[drunk]] who feels sorry for himself) but turns him into someone you love. [[Liza]] Minelli is [[great]] as Linda Morolla a [[queens]] [[waitress]] who [[manages]] to [[pull]] off the [[tough]]/[[soft]] on the inside [[lady]] Arthur nearly gives up his [[world]] for. [[John]] Gielgud [[gets]] all the [[juicy]] lines and polishes them off with [[relish]].

I can watch [[Arthur]] again and again and it [[always]] makes me feel good, check it out if you [[need]] a lift its a [[lovely]] [[film]]. I watched this over the Christmas [[calendars]], I don't know why but it reminds me of Christmas so I watched it, so there we are.

Arthur is a [[kino]] I watch all the way through with a [[major]] dumb [[grin]] on my face and its a [[amalgam]] of [[specific]] performances, [[grand]] jolly music and a script crackling with [[witt]] and [[charisma]] that causes it.

Dudley Moore makes a [[nature]] that [[would]] well be [[loathed]] very [[readily]] (spoiled, rich, lazy [[drunkard]] who feels sorry for himself) but turns him into someone you love. [[Eliza]] Minelli is [[wondrous]] as Linda Morolla a [[homos]] [[waiter]] who [[administering]] to [[pulled]] off the [[hard]]/[[mild]] on the inside [[missus]] Arthur nearly gives up his [[monde]] for. [[Johannes]] Gielgud [[get]] all the [[earner]] lines and polishes them off with [[savour]].

I can watch [[Artur]] again and again and it [[repeatedly]] makes me feel good, check it out if you [[required]] a lift its a [[wondrous]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gene Hackman gets himself busted out of prison by a nameless government agency who want him for an assassination. It's a given of course that Hackman has the proficient skills for the job.

Nobody tells him anything though, he's given as the audience is given bits and pieces of information. That's supposed to be suspenseful, instead it's annoying and boring.

Hackman goes through with the mission, but the getaway is messed up and the guy at the top of this mysterious entity orders everybody dead to cover it up. So everyone in the cast dies and at the end you don't really care.

One of the other reviewers pointed out that the film was originally twice as long, almost three hours and got chopped down quite a bit. Maybe something really was lost in the translation, but I tend to think it was a mercy act on the audience.

A very talented cast that had people like Richard Widmark, Candice Bergen, Mickey Rooney, Eli Wallach, and Edward Albert is so thoroughly wasted here it's a crime.

And we never do find out just what federal agency was doing all this, the FBI, the CIA, the DEA or even the IRS. --------------------------------------------- Result 3776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this on TV the other night… or rather I flicked over to another channel every so often to watch infomercials when I couldn't stand watching it any longer. It was bad. Really, really bad. Not "so bad it's good" just flat out bad. How did it get funded? Who thought this was a good idea? An actor friend of mine auditioned and was told he wasn't good enough to play a bad guy but I think what they meant was "save yourself and runaway from this steaming pile of @#$%." I bet the rest of the cast had been given the option. To be fair the acting was hard to judge because of the appalling fake American ascents. The shooting was dullllllllllll. The action was awkward and stilted. The dialog was inane. By far the saddest thing was ship. In real life the Interislander ferry is a shabby boat and on film it doesn't scrub up well. Instead of trying very unsuccessfully to make it look like a new crews liner with bits of tinsel wrapped around rusting polls, I kid you not, they could have change the script to explain or even celebrate the shabbiness. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb. Don't watch this movie, not even as a joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 3777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is just a joke of a movie,they lost me already at the opening scene (Spoilerwarning) dangerous creature kills other creature in his cage,this is watched by a scientist that works there on a monitor and guess what she does,well lets go in to the cage to check the stuff out,omg how dumb do those writers think human beings are come on thats the same like jumping in a fish tank with a great white shark because it ate your goldfish...Pretty useless and even more dumber.And i will not even talk about the cast because they aren't worth the effort. why they didn't fired the guy that wrote that immediately is a mystery to me.....And this kinda dumbness continues the entire movie. Only good thing where the cgi that is better then average for these kinda low-budget movies.

If these kinda things don't bother you go see it,but be warned if your IQ is above 60 you will probably hate it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In Don Siegel's 1971 masterpiece "Dirty Harry", Clint Eastwood epitomized the super-tough, super-cool unorthodox, no-nonsense cinema-cop with his role of the eponymous Inspector 'Dirty' Harry Callahan. Two sequels followed, the first of which, "Magnum Force", tamed down on the delightfully politically incorrect attitude of the first one that had outraged many critics but enthused audiences. The second sequel, "The Enforcer" was grittier again, and was promoted as "the dirtiest Harry of them all". This title, however, truly belongs to the fourth film in the series, Clint Eastwood's own "Sudden Impact", which is doubtlessly the grittiest, nastiest, most violent and downright dirtiest of all Harry films, and, in my humble opinion, the second-best after the masterpiece original.

***Warning! SPOILERS ahead!*** In a small town near San Francisco, a mysterious sexy lady (Sondra Locke) lures men into being alone with her. What these men don't know is that mysterious beauty is their former rape victim, longing for bloody revenge. As fate wants it, San Francisco's toughest cop, Inspector Dirty Harry Callahan, who has been suspended once again for angering his superiors, spends his leisure time in this exact little town... "Sudden Impact" is the dirtiest Callahan film in several aspects. The film is extremely gritty and graphically violent. Harry Callahan himself is dirtier than ever. Not afraid to make use of his 44. Magnum in order to stop trouble, Harry treats 'punks' as they are to be treated and even allows a person to get away with several murders because the revenge-murders are justified in his opinion. Clint Eastwood is, as always, brilliant in the role of Harry Callahan. Eastwood epitomized coolness and bad-assery as the "Man With No Name" in Sergio Leone's Dollar Trilogy, and he did so again in the Dirty Harry films. "Sudden Impact" gives us the dirtiest Harry we have ever seen. Eastwood's real-life girlfriend Sondra Locke fits very well in the role of the vengeful beauty. The great Pat Hingle, who had already worked with Eastwood in Ted Post's tough-minded Western "Hang 'Em High" in 1986 plays the police chief of the small town. The film furthermore includes a wide range of truly despicable scumbag characters, including a pathetic criminal played by Kevin Major Howard (best known for his role in Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal Jacket") and a woman named Ray Perkins (Audrie J. Neenan), doubtlessly one of the most disgusting and despicable female characters ever in cinema. Albert Popwell, who played the bank robber in the famous "Do You Feel Lucky?" scene in "Dirty Harry" and the black militant leader in "The Enforcer" is also part of this one again, this time as Harry's colleague and buddy. Overall "Sudden Impact" is the grittiest, dirtiest and probably the most violent of all "Dirty Harry" films, (though "The Dead Pool" isn't exactly tame either), and my second-favorite after the brilliant 1971 original. An absolute must-see for Callahan fans, and highly recommended to all lovers of police thrillers and cinematic bad-assery. My rating: 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Youth]], [[sexuality]], and the French countryside -- one of the more [[unique]] [[films]] you're ever [[going]] to [[see]]. If you can [[see]] it that is, no [[mean]] feat considering how [[hard]] it is to find copies of it (a [[combination]] of [[scarcity]] and [[censorship]].) It's [[sometimes]] erotic, [[sometimes]] disgusting, and occasionally [[funny]]. A trifle [[boring]] [[also]] in the [[middle]], but all in all you can't [[call]] yourself an aficionado of bizarre film until you've [[seen]] this one at [[least]] once. [[Jugend]], [[sex]], and the French countryside -- one of the more [[sole]] [[movies]] you're ever [[gonna]] to [[consults]]. If you can [[behold]] it that is, no [[signify]] feat considering how [[stiff]] it is to find copies of it (a [[jumpsuit]] of [[inadequacy]] and [[censure]].) It's [[occasionally]] erotic, [[intermittently]] disgusting, and occasionally [[amusing]]. A trifle [[dull]] [[apart]] in the [[oriente]], but all in all you can't [[calling]] yourself an aficionado of bizarre film until you've [[watched]] this one at [[fewest]] once. --------------------------------------------- Result 3780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What the hell of a D-Movie was that? Bad acting, bad special effects and the worst dialogues/storyline i ever came across. The only cool thing here was Coolio, who had a nice cameo as a freaked out cop. However, the rest of the film is awful and boring. It's not even so bad, you can laugh about it. Just plain crap. And whoever compares this to the Evil Dead Series might as well compare Tomb Raider to Indiana Jones (well, ok, at least there was Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider)! 1 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] [[Despite]] being a sequel to the more [[potent]] [[original]], this is more of a [[comical]] remake of [[Friday]] THE 13TH concerning the further antics of [[psychopathic]] [[Angela]], [[killing]] more nubile [[teens]] for their "immorality" at a [[camp]].

Pamela Springsteen (sister of [[Bruce]]) looks [[great]]. There are some pretty [[darn]] [[funny]] [[sex]] scenes with some [[pretty]] [[darn]] attractive [[girls]], but the movie's so ([[unintentionally]]) [[comedic]] [[rather]] than suspenseful, it's a [[stinker]].

* out of ****.

MPAA: Rated [[R]] for [[graphic]] violence and [[gore]], nudity, and for some sexuality, [[language]], and [[drug]] [[use]]. [[While]] being a sequel to the more [[emphatic]] [[preliminary]], this is more of a [[droll]] remake of [[Yesterday]] THE 13TH concerning the further antics of [[sociopathic]] [[Angeli]], [[slaying]] more nubile [[adolescence]] for their "immorality" at a [[campground]].

Pamela Springsteen (sister of [[Bros]]) looks [[marvelous]]. There are some pretty [[damn]] [[comical]] [[sexuality]] scenes with some [[quite]] [[jeez]] attractive [[female]], but the movie's so ([[unknowingly]]) [[slapstick]] [[fairly]] than suspenseful, it's a [[tosser]].

* out of ****.

MPAA: Rated [[rs]] for [[chart]] violence and [[gora]], nudity, and for some sexuality, [[parlance]], and [[meds]] [[utilizes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] As I [[drove]] from Skagway, Alaska to Dawson City,Yukon a couple of [[years]] ago and was impressed with the scenery, I cannot [[help]] but wish that this film even though it has beautiful [[color]] and [[scenic]] views [[would]] have been shot in the actual [[location]]. Jasper in the Canadian Rockies is a magnificent place, but still not the [[real]] place where the film takes place. When the story [[moves]] to Dawson, that is when I feel Anthony [[Mann]], who used the [[outdoor]] locations so well, could have made the most if he [[filmed]] in the actual [[place]]. [[James]] [[Stewart]] here is again a [[man]] fighting [[within]] himself, one side of him does not want to [[get]] involved and help people who stand in the [[way]] of him making money, and the other side just is not [[able]] to look away from people being [[murdered]]. [[Ruth]] Roman is the ambitious [[woman]] who does not care on whom she [[steps]], [[Corinne]] Calvet is the [[nice]] girl. Mann is excellent directing the shootouts, but the [[high]] point of the [[film]] is how well he does in the outdoor scenes. He uses the outdoors as much as he can and he is [[helped]] by the winter scenery, the predominating white, like it was with the greens in "The Naked Spur" and the browns in "The Man From Laramie". Like all of the Mann-Stewarts, this is a [[traditional]] western, with a difference in the elaboration of Stewart's [[character]] which is more complex. As I [[spearheaded]] from Skagway, Alaska to Dawson City,Yukon a couple of [[ages]] ago and was impressed with the scenery, I cannot [[aiding]] but wish that this film even though it has beautiful [[coloring]] and [[colorful]] views [[should]] have been shot in the actual [[locations]]. Jasper in the Canadian Rockies is a magnificent place, but still not the [[authentic]] place where the film takes place. When the story [[shift]] to Dawson, that is when I feel Anthony [[Manni]], who used the [[exterior]] locations so well, could have made the most if he [[videotaped]] in the actual [[placing]]. [[Jacobo]] [[Steward]] here is again a [[fella]] fighting [[inside]] himself, one side of him does not want to [[got]] involved and help people who stand in the [[path]] of him making money, and the other side just is not [[capable]] to look away from people being [[massacred]]. [[Roth]] Roman is the ambitious [[wife]] who does not care on whom she [[measures]], [[Ms]] Calvet is the [[pleasant]] girl. Mann is excellent directing the shootouts, but the [[supremo]] point of the [[movie]] is how well he does in the outdoor scenes. He uses the outdoors as much as he can and he is [[help]] by the winter scenery, the predominating white, like it was with the greens in "The Naked Spur" and the browns in "The Man From Laramie". Like all of the Mann-Stewarts, this is a [[conventional]] western, with a difference in the elaboration of Stewart's [[characteristics]] which is more complex. --------------------------------------------- Result 3783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[Unborn]] is a pretty good low-budget [[horror]] [[movie]] exploiting the fears associated with pregnancy. It's very well acted by the always-good Brooke Adams and b-movie stalwart [[James]] Karen, [[although]] the [[supporting]] cast is pretty average for a b-grader. The music, by Gary [[Numan]] of all people, is [[good]] too. Henry Dominic's [[script]] is [[quite]] [[intelligent]] for this [[sort]] of thing, [[although]] there is a hint of misogyny about it. Rodman Fender's direction is merely adequate, and there are some unnecessary cheap scares. [[If]] you're a [[fan]] of [[Adams]], whose [[movie]] [[career]] is [[nowhere]] [[near]] as [[illustrious]] as it should be, [[check]] it out; she's [[great]], as always. The [[Fetus]] is a pretty good low-budget [[terror]] [[kino]] exploiting the fears associated with pregnancy. It's very well acted by the always-good Brooke Adams and b-movie stalwart [[Jacques]] Karen, [[nevertheless]] the [[helping]] cast is pretty average for a b-grader. The music, by Gary [[Hama]] of all people, is [[alright]] too. Henry Dominic's [[hyphen]] is [[rather]] [[termite]] for this [[sorting]] of thing, [[while]] there is a hint of misogyny about it. Rodman Fender's direction is merely adequate, and there are some unnecessary cheap scares. [[Though]] you're a [[admirer]] of [[Adam]], whose [[movies]] [[quarries]] is [[somewhere]] [[nearly]] as [[famous]] as it should be, [[audit]] it out; she's [[wondrous]], as always. --------------------------------------------- Result 3784 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] How can Barry Levinson possibly assemble white-hot comedy talents Ben Stiller and Jack Black, the [[gorgeous]] Rachel Weisz, old pro Christopher Walken and still deliver such a humourless [[stinker]]?

Stiller and Black are friends until the [[latter]] invents a [[spray]] to make dog [[mess]] [[vanish]] and becomes a [[conspicuous]] consuming multi-millionaire.

The [[premises]] is thin but sound [[enough]] in the right hands to have been a springboard for some great [[bitching]] between the two [[stars]] but all concerned overplay [[every]] hand, [[every]] [[chance]] they can.

Stiller and [[Black]] are [[simply]] not [[funny]] for way too much of the [[time]], Weisz [[looks]] sensational as [[always]] but is criminally underused and, with the exception of Walken as a batty barfly who [[urges]] Stiller's character to take [[revenge]], it's a turgid trudge to the [[end]] of this [[strained]] [[farce]]. How can Barry Levinson possibly assemble white-hot comedy talents Ben Stiller and Jack Black, the [[sumptuous]] Rachel Weisz, old pro Christopher Walken and still deliver such a humourless [[tosser]]?

Stiller and Black are friends until the [[final]] invents a [[vaporizer]] to make dog [[chaos]] [[dissipate]] and becomes a [[apparent]] consuming multi-millionaire.

The [[venues]] is thin but sound [[satisfactorily]] in the right hands to have been a springboard for some great [[griping]] between the two [[superstar]] but all concerned overplay [[all]] hand, [[each]] [[possibility]] they can.

Stiller and [[Calico]] are [[exclusively]] not [[droll]] for way too much of the [[times]], Weisz [[seems]] sensational as [[incessantly]] but is criminally underused and, with the exception of Walken as a batty barfly who [[prods]] Stiller's character to take [[retaliatory]], it's a turgid trudge to the [[terminates]] of this [[tensed]] [[travesty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3785 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Andie [[McDowell]] is [[beautiful]] as the 40-ish [[woman]] whose late start at a serious [[relationship]] leads her to a considerably younger [[man]] and a subsequenet falling-out with 2 long-time best girldfriends.

[[Seeing]] a gigolo/gold-digger in the sincere young man, the "girl-friends", dead-set on terminating this "[[silly]] relationship", go over and beyond the call of duty in "helping out" their friend (who obviously is blinded by this gigolo's tricky game".

A [[short]] succession of situations is absolutely ridiculous. Far fetched no longer covers it. Without these unbelievable scenes, there may have been hope for a sweet love story. Instead, all the viewer is left with is an involuntary shaking of head -- these things just don't happen! Without giving away cliff-hanger details, I warn the viewer of having high expectations for this film; most (like me) will be very disappointed. On a scale of 1 to 10, this one ranks a weak 4 with me. There is much better material out there. This one isn't worth your time. Andie [[mcneill]] is [[sumptuous]] as the 40-ish [[femme]] whose late start at a serious [[nexus]] leads her to a considerably younger [[guy]] and a subsequenet falling-out with 2 long-time best girldfriends.

[[Witnessing]] a gigolo/gold-digger in the sincere young man, the "girl-friends", dead-set on terminating this "[[stupid]] relationship", go over and beyond the call of duty in "helping out" their friend (who obviously is blinded by this gigolo's tricky game".

A [[succinct]] succession of situations is absolutely ridiculous. Far fetched no longer covers it. Without these unbelievable scenes, there may have been hope for a sweet love story. Instead, all the viewer is left with is an involuntary shaking of head -- these things just don't happen! Without giving away cliff-hanger details, I warn the viewer of having high expectations for this film; most (like me) will be very disappointed. On a scale of 1 to 10, this one ranks a weak 4 with me. There is much better material out there. This one isn't worth your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3786 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A teenager who seems to have it all commits suicide. It leaves his family and his best friend (Keanu Reeves) asking a lot of questions...and blaming themselves.

Good idea, badly handled. For starters this HAS been done before 1988--mostly in TV movies and After School Specials. Aside from some swearing and dialogue (hence the PG-13 rating) this added nothing new. The outcome is predictable and Reeve's attempts at acting were truly painful to watch. He's good NOW but not in 1988. Aside from that his character was dressed like a slob and always looked so dirty is was hard to build up sympathy.

That aside the movie is dull. I saw every scene coming and every "surprise" was telegraphed. I basically couldn't wait for this thing to get over.

I have a vague recollection of seeing it in a theatre in 1988 and hating it (it bombed BADLY). It still looks lousy almost 20 years later. The subject is worth handling but it's been done better (with better acting) in countless other movies. "Ordinary People" comes to mind. You can skip this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I caught this [[movie]] at a small screening held by members of my college's gaming club. We were forewarned that this would be the "reefer madness" of gaming, and this movie more than [[delivered]].

Tom Hanks plays Robbie, a young man re-starting his college career after "resting" for a semester. What we, the viewer, find out as the movie progresses, is that Robbie was hopelessly addicted to a role-playing game called "Mazes and Monsters," a game that he gets re-acquainted with after a gaming group recruit him for a campaign.

This movie is [[laughable]] on many, [[many]] levels. One scene features the group "gaming by candlelight," which is probably the best way I can describe it. While I'm sure that this was meant to be "cultish" in some way, as most gamers know, it's horribly inaccurate. Most role-play sessions are [[done]] in well-lit rooms, usually over some chee-tohs and a can of soda.

The acting, while not Oscar-caliber, isn't gut-wrenchingly awful either. This is one of Tom Hanks's first roles, and Bosom [[Buddies]] and Bachelor Party were still a year or two over the horizon. The supporting cast, while not very [[memorable]], still hand forth decent performances.

[[Mainly]] the badness lies in the [[fact]] that it was a made-for-TV [[movie]] that [[shows]] the "[[dangers]] of [[gaming]]" Worth a [[view]] if you and your [[friends]] are planning a bad [[movie]] [[night]]. I caught this [[filmmaking]] at a small screening held by members of my college's gaming club. We were forewarned that this would be the "reefer madness" of gaming, and this movie more than [[rendered]].

Tom Hanks plays Robbie, a young man re-starting his college career after "resting" for a semester. What we, the viewer, find out as the movie progresses, is that Robbie was hopelessly addicted to a role-playing game called "Mazes and Monsters," a game that he gets re-acquainted with after a gaming group recruit him for a campaign.

This movie is [[farcical]] on many, [[various]] levels. One scene features the group "gaming by candlelight," which is probably the best way I can describe it. While I'm sure that this was meant to be "cultish" in some way, as most gamers know, it's horribly inaccurate. Most role-play sessions are [[doing]] in well-lit rooms, usually over some chee-tohs and a can of soda.

The acting, while not Oscar-caliber, isn't gut-wrenchingly awful either. This is one of Tom Hanks's first roles, and Bosom [[Guys]] and Bachelor Party were still a year or two over the horizon. The supporting cast, while not very [[unforgettable]], still hand forth decent performances.

[[Especially]] the badness lies in the [[facto]] that it was a made-for-TV [[filmmaking]] that [[show]] the "[[menace]] of [[gambling]]" Worth a [[views]] if you and your [[buddies]] are planning a bad [[filmmaking]] [[nocturne]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I got this one a few weeks ago and love it! It's modern, light but filled with true complexities of life. It questions and answers, just like other Eytan Fox movies. This is my favorite, along with Jossi & Jagger. This pictures a lot more, universally, than only the bubbles we may live in. You don't need to be Jewish or homosexual to enjoy this - I'm not, but the movie goes directly to my top ten movies. At first it seems like pure entertainment but it does make you think further. Relationships we have to live with are superficial, meaningful, deep, fatal, you name it. You don't know what's coming, and you definitely don't know where this story is heading as you watch it the first time. It is worth seeing several times. Fox movies include great bonus material - here a great music video and "the making of" (including explanation of the title, interviewing Lior Ashknenazi who plays himself in the movie and Arabs with doubts about the Israeli life styles). --------------------------------------------- Result 3789 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I was very excited about seeing this film, anticipating a visual excursus on the relation of artistic beauty and nature, containing the kinds of wisdom the likes of "Rivers and Tides." However, that's not what I received. [[Instead]], I get a fairly [[uninspired]] film about how human industry is bad for nature. Which is clearly a quite unorthodox claim.

The photographer seems conflicted about the aesthetic qualities of his images and the supposed "ethical" duty he has to the workers occasionally peopling the images, along the periphery. And frankly, the images were not generally that impressive. And according to this "artist," scale is the basis for what makes something beautiful.

In all respects, a stupid film. For people who'd like to feel better about their environmental consciousness ... but not for any one who would like to think about the complexities of the issues surrounding it. I was very excited about seeing this film, anticipating a visual excursus on the relation of artistic beauty and nature, containing the kinds of wisdom the likes of "Rivers and Tides." However, that's not what I received. [[However]], I get a fairly [[unimaginative]] film about how human industry is bad for nature. Which is clearly a quite unorthodox claim.

The photographer seems conflicted about the aesthetic qualities of his images and the supposed "ethical" duty he has to the workers occasionally peopling the images, along the periphery. And frankly, the images were not generally that impressive. And according to this "artist," scale is the basis for what makes something beautiful.

In all respects, a stupid film. For people who'd like to feel better about their environmental consciousness ... but not for any one who would like to think about the complexities of the issues surrounding it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Far [[richer]] in [[texture]] and [[character]] than [[even]] the classics from the 30's and 50's. [[George]] C. Scott was [[born]] to be Scrooge, just as he was born to be Patton. [[Mr]]. Scott will be known as one of the [[greatest]] actors of the 20th century. The [[character]] of [[Scrooge]] as [[played]] by [[Mr]]. Scott seemed to jump off the screen. Scott as Scrooge [[brought]] an [[richer]], more [[robust]], [[yet]] a more [[deeply]] [[moving]] Scrooge to the screen than any of his predecessors in the role of the [[meanest]] [[man]] in 18th century London. Mr. Scott seemed to [[bring]] Scrooge to a more personal, [[understandable]] [[yet]] [[highly]] conflicted [[level]]; his role was acted with the [[great]] authority Scott [[always]] [[bring]] to the screen: [[yet]] his [[usual]] bellicose [[voice]] would [[sometimes]] be [[brought]] to a whisper, [[almost]] as a soliloquy, as he would berate the Christmas holiday in one [[breath]], [[yet]] [[reveal]] his own human frailty in his next [[line]]. He [[could]] [[portray]] the [[sour]] and crusty Scrooge, and a misunderstood, sympathetic Scrooge all in the same scene.

Truly a [[remarkable]] performance by a [[giant]] of his [[generation]]. Far [[wealthy]] in [[fabric]] and [[nature]] than [[yet]] the classics from the 30's and 50's. [[Jorge]] C. Scott was [[birthed]] to be Scrooge, just as he was born to be Patton. [[Monsieur]]. Scott will be known as one of the [[bigger]] actors of the 20th century. The [[nature]] of [[Radin]] as [[accomplished]] by [[Mister]]. Scott seemed to jump off the screen. Scott as Scrooge [[tabled]] an [[wealthy]], more [[sturdy]], [[however]] a more [[critically]] [[relocating]] Scrooge to the screen than any of his predecessors in the role of the [[lousiest]] [[men]] in 18th century London. Mr. Scott seemed to [[bringing]] Scrooge to a more personal, [[comprehensible]] [[nevertheless]] [[inordinately]] conflicted [[grades]]; his role was acted with the [[grand]] authority Scott [[permanently]] [[bringing]] to the screen: [[however]] his [[ordinary]] bellicose [[vocals]] would [[intermittently]] be [[made]] to a whisper, [[around]] as a soliloquy, as he would berate the Christmas holiday in one [[respiratory]], [[however]] [[revealing]] his own human frailty in his next [[iine]]. He [[would]] [[depict]] the [[sulphurous]] and crusty Scrooge, and a misunderstood, sympathetic Scrooge all in the same scene.

Truly a [[notable]] performance by a [[jumbo]] of his [[jill]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Firstly, there are some [[good]] things about this film, but it's all cliche slasher stuff combined with a [[teen]] movie. In the [[advertising]] of this movie, that I've seen, a [[large]] [[emphasis]] was on the fact that Denise Richards is in it, but she's a poor [[actress]], and not as good looking as people try to make her out to be (not that that has [[anything]] to do with the movie). And what's with that look she [[gives]] [[everyone]]? Perhaps it's [[part]] of the [[character]], but like I [[said]], the acting... Still, the writing is fine. You know who it is all throughout the movie, and you can almost [[predict]] what is about to happen, but not in an irritating way. I think the book it's based on is [[probably]] [[good]], [[judging]] by the plot line, but next time I'll read the book to [[find]] out [[rather]] than watch this. Firstly, there are some [[buena]] things about this film, but it's all cliche slasher stuff combined with a [[adolescent]] movie. In the [[publicity]] of this movie, that I've seen, a [[prodigious]] [[accent]] was on the fact that Denise Richards is in it, but she's a poor [[actor]], and not as good looking as people try to make her out to be (not that that has [[nothing]] to do with the movie). And what's with that look she [[delivers]] [[everybody]]? Perhaps it's [[portion]] of the [[personages]], but like I [[stated]], the acting... Still, the writing is fine. You know who it is all throughout the movie, and you can almost [[anticipates]] what is about to happen, but not in an irritating way. I think the book it's based on is [[unquestionably]] [[alright]], [[verdict]] by the plot line, but next time I'll read the book to [[unearth]] out [[somewhat]] than watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[While]] I totally disagree with one [[reviewer]] who [[described]] Charley [[Chase]] as unfunny, in this [[film]] he [[certainly]] is. It's a [[shame]], as I suspect the other [[reviewer]] must have only [[seen]] a few [[Charley]] Chase duds and assumed the [[guy]] wasn't funny. [[Films]] like [[MIGHTY]] LIKE A MOOSE and WHAT [[PRICE]] GOOFY? are very good [[Chase]] [[films]], so he COULD be really funny [[given]] good [[material]]. Unfortunately, in this film he's [[given]] [[absolutely]] [[nothing]]. Even the inclusion of the [[usually]] good Oliver Hardy as a foil isn't any [[help]] because the [[basic]] [[premise]] ([[boy]] [[wants]] to marry [[girl]] but girl's father [[thinks]] the [[boy]] is a [[wuss]]) and the [[gags]] are so poor. It's a [[shame]], as I really [[wanted]] to love this film but couldn't.

By the way, for those used to the [[look]] for Charley from the mid-1920s on, you'll be [[pretty]] surprised as [[Chase]] [[sports]] no glasses or mustache--and looks very [[little]] like you'd [[expect]]. [[Albeit]] I totally disagree with one [[examiner]] who [[outlines]] Charley [[Pursues]] as unfunny, in this [[filmmaking]] he [[definitely]] is. It's a [[pity]], as I suspect the other [[reviewers]] must have only [[noticed]] a few [[Charlie]] Chase duds and assumed the [[guys]] wasn't funny. [[Filmmaking]] like [[INFLUENTIAL]] LIKE A MOOSE and WHAT [[PRICES]] GOOFY? are very good [[Manhunt]] [[filmmaking]], so he COULD be really funny [[afforded]] good [[materials]]. Unfortunately, in this film he's [[awarded]] [[totally]] [[none]]. Even the inclusion of the [[generally]] good Oliver Hardy as a foil isn't any [[pomoc]] because the [[fundamental]] [[supposition]] ([[guys]] [[want]] to marry [[daughters]] but girl's father [[thought]] the [[guy]] is a [[sissy]]) and the [[jaws]] are so poor. It's a [[pity]], as I really [[want]] to love this film but couldn't.

By the way, for those used to the [[peek]] for Charley from the mid-1920s on, you'll be [[quite]] surprised as [[Manhunt]] [[sport]] no glasses or mustache--and looks very [[scant]] like you'd [[expecting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Usually when a [[movie]] receives a vote of one it is because [[someone]] simply dislikes it and is annoyed it doesn't have a lower rating, and so decides to drag it down as much as they can instead of just giving it a low rating. This is not the [[case]] here.

Bonesetter is a [[perfect]] [[example]] of a 0/10 film. It does [[nothing]] right and it doesn't have the chance to because it doesn't really attempt to do anything. There are strands of a bad D&D novel kind of plot which doesn't hold [[together]] and a [[complete]] lack of any kind of acting throughout. It is [[clear]] that nobody involved in this [[project]] gave it any kind of serious [[effort]], because even a completely patently untalented persons' hard [[work]] [[would]] amount to more. A [[truly]] [[awful]] [[film]]. Usually when a [[filmmaking]] receives a vote of one it is because [[everyone]] simply dislikes it and is annoyed it doesn't have a lower rating, and so decides to drag it down as much as they can instead of just giving it a low rating. This is not the [[lawsuit]] here.

Bonesetter is a [[flawless]] [[case]] of a 0/10 film. It does [[anything]] right and it doesn't have the chance to because it doesn't really attempt to do anything. There are strands of a bad D&D novel kind of plot which doesn't hold [[jointly]] and a [[finishes]] lack of any kind of acting throughout. It is [[unequivocal]] that nobody involved in this [[projects]] gave it any kind of serious [[endeavors]], because even a completely patently untalented persons' hard [[cooperates]] [[could]] amount to more. A [[honestly]] [[scary]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The main reason people still care about "Carlton-Browne Of The F.O." is that it features Peter Sellers in a second-billed role. But watching this film to see Peter Sellers is a mistake.

Sellers plays Amphibulos, a vaguely reptilian prime minister of the dirt-poor island nation of Gaillardia, formerly a British colony, now hosting a lot of Russian diggers during the height of the Cold War. Amphibulos wants to play both U.K. and Soviet interests against each other for easy profit, "everything very friendly and all our cards under the table". Terry-Thomas is the title character, a lazy British diplomat anxious to show Gaillardia that Great Britain hasn't forgotten them, all appearances to the contrary.

A positive review here says: "The reason this movie is considered average is because the comedy is understated." I would argue that the reason "Carlton-Browne" is considered below average is because the comedy is non-existent.

After a decent opening that establishes the film's only two strengths, a sympathetically doltish Terry-Thomas and John Addison's full-on larky score, things quickly slow down into a series of slow burns and lame miscommunication jokes. The low opinion of Carlton-Browne by his boss and the obscurity of Gaillardia (which no one can find on a map) is milked to death. By the time we actually reach the island (after a labored series of airsick jokes), expectations are quite low.

They're still too high, though. The island itself, which seems to exist either in Latin America or the Mediterranean, is so pathetic its honor guard faints at the airport, and the review stand falls apart in the middle of a parade. The army is apparently still horse drawn, allowing for another lame aural gag by a thick-accented announcer: "In war, the army uses many horse."

Sellers never quite takes center stage even when we're on his character's island. The plot is taken over instead by Ian Bannen as King Loris, who inherits the throne of Gaillardia after his father's assassination. Bannen is dull and plays his part as straight as it is written. Normally this would make him the likely target for scene-stealing by Sellers, but trapped behind a thick accent and greasy moustache, Sellers is only a threat to those of us who remember him far more happily in two other films made this same year, "The Mouse That Roared" and "I'm All Right, Jack."

Strange that this film, like "Jack", was a Boulting Brothers production, with Roy Boulting here serving as co-director alongside Jeffrey Dell. Usually Boulting films combine wicked social satire with anything-goes comedy, but here there are only fey jabs in either direction. Amphibulos works his mangled-English vibe for all its worth ("This man is like, how do you say, the bull in the Chinese ship") while Carlton-Browne is generally ragged on by his superior far more than he seems to deserve.

The weakest and most protracted element of the film is young Loris's romance with Ilyena. Score one point for her being played by ravishing Luciana Paluzzi, dock one for the fact that they are apparently cousins is never addressed.

The film winds up with a lamely staged revolution whose surprise resolution will surprise no one, and a final bit of action by Carlton-Browne that would seem to nail the lid on his coffin literally. Apparently he lives to see another day, but the film of the same name is strictly DOA. --------------------------------------------- Result 3795 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] As a [[gamer]], I can't say I like this film. Fact is, I down right [[hate]] it. I tried to watch it as open [[minded]] as possible, but when it gets down to it, it feels rather insulting to my [[social]] group.

To me, there are several reasons why.

1. The [[characters]] seem unnatural. I've [[met]] lots of players, of all different walks of [[life]]. I don't know any who [[act]] like any of the [[characters]] in the [[film]]. It's like the [[producers]] of the film have [[taken]] the [[worst]] [[aspects]] of the worst stereotypes and put them all into 5 people. Most [[gamers]] are [[rather]] [[social]] people, some with [[rather]] active [[lives]].

2. The [[style]] doesn't [[work]]. The mockumentary [[style]] is [[ill]] suited to the [[subject]] [[matter]] of the [[film]]. An [[actual]] [[documentary]] on [[gamers]] [[would]] [[actually]] [[work]] better. [[While]] it is [[good]] [[looking]] (I.E. cleanly put together), it isn't very [[good]].

3. The [[dialogue]] feels [[forced]], unnatural. It [[also]] seems to [[lack]] any real [[world]] [[context]]. Gamers swear, I'll admit that, but we don't have Tourette's Syndrome.

4. The humor is [[lacking]]. While self-deprecating [[humor]] is a [[mainstay]] of my [[group]] and [[several]] other groups I've encountered, this is less self-deprecation, and more like [[toilet]] humor. Likewise, a [[large]] [[part]] of gamer humor is full of in-jokes and anecdotes, not toilet [[humor]]. Most [[gamers]] [[would]] balk at and shun anybody who made such jokes.

5. The [[biggest]] [[problem]] to me is [[basically]] this: Accuracy. I don't mean rules, but [[instead]] dynamics. [[Invariably]], this [[film]] is going to be compared to the even lower budget films The [[Gamers]] and The [[Gamers]]: Dorkness [[Rising]], both of which portray the players as actual people playing an [[actual]] game. The difference is, Gamers: The Movie [[presents]] a situation where you want to beat the players [[senseless]] vs. The Gamers, where you can say something like: "Huh, I know a guy like that... Yep, that's definitely like [[Gary]]." As a [[gambler]], I can't say I like this film. Fact is, I down right [[hatred]] it. I tried to watch it as open [[tilted]] as possible, but when it gets down to it, it feels rather insulting to my [[societal]] group.

To me, there are several reasons why.

1. The [[trait]] seem unnatural. I've [[fulfilled]] lots of players, of all different walks of [[lives]]. I don't know any who [[ley]] like any of the [[character]] in the [[filmmaking]]. It's like the [[growers]] of the film have [[took]] the [[hardest]] [[things]] of the worst stereotypes and put them all into 5 people. Most [[players]] are [[fairly]] [[societal]] people, some with [[fairly]] active [[life]].

2. The [[styles]] doesn't [[collaborating]]. The mockumentary [[elegance]] is [[sick]] suited to the [[subjected]] [[issue]] of the [[cinematography]]. An [[real]] [[documentation]] on [[gamblers]] [[could]] [[indeed]] [[cooperation]] better. [[Although]] it is [[buena]] [[researching]] (I.E. cleanly put together), it isn't very [[buena]].

3. The [[conversation]] feels [[compelled]], unnatural. It [[similarly]] seems to [[shortages]] any real [[worldwide]] [[backdrop]]. Gamers swear, I'll admit that, but we don't have Tourette's Syndrome.

4. The humor is [[missing]]. While self-deprecating [[mood]] is a [[pillar]] of my [[panels]] and [[different]] other groups I've encountered, this is less self-deprecation, and more like [[wc]] humor. Likewise, a [[prodigious]] [[party]] of gamer humor is full of in-jokes and anecdotes, not toilet [[mood]]. Most [[players]] [[could]] balk at and shun anybody who made such jokes.

5. The [[bigger]] [[issues]] to me is [[mostly]] this: Accuracy. I don't mean rules, but [[alternatively]] dynamics. [[Consistently]], this [[filmmaking]] is going to be compared to the even lower budget films The [[Gamblers]] and The [[Gamblers]]: Dorkness [[Grew]], both of which portray the players as actual people playing an [[real]] game. The difference is, Gamers: The Movie [[exposes]] a situation where you want to beat the players [[foolish]] vs. The Gamers, where you can say something like: "Huh, I know a guy like that... Yep, that's definitely like [[Garry]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 3796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Basically this is a pale [[shadow]] of [[High]] [[Fidelity]], which was a witty and [[wonderfully]] [[acted]] [[film]] with [[several]] truly [[winning]] character turns. [[Watching]] the Detectives has [[none]] of that.

The [[premise]] of a video store [[geek]] swept off his feet by a quirky mystery woman is a good one but is never fully or adequately explored, thanks to a very weak [[script]] and the miscasting of the leads, not to [[mention]] the [[lack]] of any real visual story-telling [[style]]. I mean, this film is centered around MOVIES, yet is itself incredibly uncinematic! That's a major [[failing]] right there.

But the main problem is we simply don't care about the main [[characters]] because the script and the actors (Murphy and Liu) fail to make them true or sympathetic in any real way. So the film just becomes a series of episodes involving two people who seem, well, not terribly interesting.

Oh, yeah, another thing: For a romantic comedy? It's not [[funny]]. And the romance isn't terribly romantic, either.

So avoid it. Even at its 90-something minute running time it's just not worth [[sitting]] through... Basically this is a pale [[shade]] of [[Highest]] [[Allegiance]], which was a witty and [[surprisingly]] [[reacted]] [[cinematography]] with [[various]] truly [[earning]] character turns. [[Staring]] the Detectives has [[nothing]] of that.

The [[supposition]] of a video store [[nerd]] swept off his feet by a quirky mystery woman is a good one but is never fully or adequately explored, thanks to a very weak [[hyphen]] and the miscasting of the leads, not to [[referenced]] the [[insufficiency]] of any real visual story-telling [[styles]]. I mean, this film is centered around MOVIES, yet is itself incredibly uncinematic! That's a major [[shortcoming]] right there.

But the main problem is we simply don't care about the main [[features]] because the script and the actors (Murphy and Liu) fail to make them true or sympathetic in any real way. So the film just becomes a series of episodes involving two people who seem, well, not terribly interesting.

Oh, yeah, another thing: For a romantic comedy? It's not [[fun]]. And the romance isn't terribly romantic, either.

So avoid it. Even at its 90-something minute running time it's just not worth [[seated]] through... --------------------------------------------- Result 3797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Given that this movie was put together in less than a year might explain its shortness (81 minutes - including end credits, so roughly 76 minutes of actual film). But what it cannot explain is its lack of humor that the previous film possessed.

The gags are quick and sometimes not even funny. The only true funny parts are the quick spoofs on the Nike basketball spots, James Woods' portrayal of Max Van Sydow's character in the Exorcist, and bits and pieces scattered throughout the film. Very unfunny was the take off of Charlie's Angels, which like the first Scary Movie and the Matrix spin off scene, basically recreated the scene without much humor injected into it.

Today's youth might not be able to relate to the spoof gags of the classic supernatural horror films of the 70's such as the Exorcist and maybe of the 80s' Poltergeist, et. al.

Hopefully Scary Movie 3 will take some time to put together, making the spoofs more enjoyable.

One thing though, the film features more than the last one of promising young actress Anna Faris (whom I will admit seemed exceptionally hot in the sequel). Just for her casting and acting ability, I give this movie a "3" out of "10". --------------------------------------------- Result 3798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is about the worst movie I have ever seen. This movie does match the quality of such movies as "THEY" & "Cabin Fever", but even those had name actors where this one fell short. The "eye candy" of this movie looked to be a 50 woman with a bad face lift. (just an example of the quality). I would have rated this movie in the negative if possible. Ladies I have to tell you that the men were not bad to look at, but not much either. If you were planning on going to see this movie I would strongly recommend saving your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Student of Prague' is an early feature-length horror drama or, rather, it is an "autorenfilm" (i.e. an author's film). This film is a member of a movement of many movements that tried to lend respectability to cinéma, or just make a profit, by adapting literature or theatre onto the screen. Fortunately, the story of this book with moving pictures is good. Using Alfred de Musset's poem and a story by Edgar Allen Poe, it centres on the doppelgänger theme.

Unfortunately, the most cinematic this film gets is the double exposure effects to make Paul Wegener appear twice within scenes. Guido Seeber was a special effects wizard for his day, but he's not very good at positioning the camera or moving it. Film scholar Leon Hunt (printed in "Early Cinema: Space, Frame, Narrative"), however, has made an interesting analysis on this film using framing to amplify the doubles theme: characters being split by left/right, near/far and frontal/diagonal framing of characters and shots. Regardless, the film mostly consists of extended long shots from a fixed position, which is noticeably primitive. Worse is the lack of editing; there's very little scene dissection and scenes linger. None of this is unusual for 1913, but there were more advanced films in this respect around the same time, including the better parts of 'Atlantis' (August Blom, 1913), 'Twilight of a Woman's Soul' (Yevgeni Bauer, 1913) and the short films of D.W. Griffith.

An expanded universal film vocabulary by 1926 would allow for a vastly superior remake. Furthermore, the remake has a reason for the Lyduschka character, other than being an occasional troublemaker and spectator surrogate. Here, the obtrusively acted gypsy lurks around, seemingly, with a cloak of invisibility. I know their world is silent to me, but I assume, with their lips moving and such, that their world would not be silent to them, so how can Lyduschka leer over others' shoulders and not be noticed?

Nevertheless, this is one of the most interesting early films conceptually. Wegener, who seems to have been the primary mind behind this film, in addition to playing the lead, would later play the title role and co-direct 'The Golem' in 1920--helping to further inaugurate the supernatural thread in German silent cinéma.

(Note: The first version I viewed was about an hour long (surely not quite complete) and was in poor condition, with faces bleached at times and such. I'm not sure who was the distributor. I've also since seen the Alpha DVD, which, at 41 minutes, is missing footage present in the aforementioned print and also has fewer and very different title cards, but is visually not as bad. The repetitive score is best muted, though.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hired out Hybrid on the weekend. What a disappointment! A stupid lame attempt at a tele-movie. The guy they got for the lead was totally weak and when running {he did a lot} looked like he was eating those minty sweets...with his backside! The wolf contacts he wore were great, though I feel the actor relied on them too much, as there was nothing menacing about his acting at all. The wise native American Indian chick has to be one of the most stony hard faced hags ever seen. Talk about a sour cow! She smiled about once for the entire film, and I think that is because she had sex. The sex scene was lame too. They may as well have shown blowing curtains, if you can dig that.

Last of all, and this is a big pet hate of mine, on the cover and the DVD menu, the losers digitally drew in cool sharp teeth on the guy. They were nowhere to be seen in the film. :( --------------------------------------------- Result 3801 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This series has its ups and occasional downs, and the latter is the case, here. There's an agreeable amount of spatter, with an inventive implementation of the Baby Cart's weapons, but the editing film is a seriously disjointed, the film-making itself rougher than usual. At times, the action slows to a crawl as the camera follows the wordless wanderings of the "cub," who nearly gets lost early on. All in all, disappointment.

That said, there's a spaghetti eastern quality to the music and action that may win the approval of dedicated viewers. This installment spends much of its time following the minor misadventures of the little boy, who begins to stare into the abyss of death his father opened for him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Steven what have you done you have hit an all new low. It is weird since Steven's last film shadow man was directed by the same director who did this trash. Shadow man was good this was diabolically bad so bad it wasn't even funny Steven is hardly in the movie and feels like he is in a cameo appearance and when he is in the film he is dubbed half the time anyway. As for the action well let's just say the wizard of oz had more action than this trash there is hardly any action in the film and when it does finally arrive it is boring depressing badly shot so called action scenes. Seagal hardly kills anyone unlike his over films where he goes one man army ie under siege 1 and 2 and exit wounds. the plot is so confusing with so many plot holes that it doesn't make scenes sometimes. flight of fury better be good what a shame i wasted 5 pounds on this garbage 0 out of ten better luck next time --------------------------------------------- Result 3803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What I found so [[curious]] about this film--I saw the full 4 hour roadshow version, is how oddly dispassionate it is. For a film about 2 very charismatic men--Castro and Che, engaged in a gargantuan political struggle, it's almost totally devoid of [[emotional]] fire. The scenes between Benicio Del Toro and Demian Bichir (who is at best a second level actor,with a slightly high pitched voice) have no drama or depth and basically come down to Castro telling Che: go here, go there, do this and that, with no explanation as to what effect or use this action will result in. Odder still is there is an actor in the cast who has the requisite power to play Castro--Joaquim de Almeida, but he's shunted aside in a minor part in the second half. Without the tension or passion that you would expect to fire these men and their followers, the film becomes a dullish epic-length film about hairy, bearded men running through various jungles shouting and shooting to no particular purpose or end. Several of the reviews I've read showered praise on the work of director Steven Soderbergh while ignoring the actors almost completely. (One in fact spent more time talking about Soderbergh's new digital film camera than the plot or actors or the fact that it's entirely in Spanish with English subtitles.)This is an odd, odd thing to do since a) Soderbergh was only a hired gun on the film and b) it's no more than a competent job of work, with an unremarked upon nod to Oliver Stone's JFK in the black and white cut up camera-work when Che visits New York. If you can imagine Reds directed by Andrew McLaglen instead of Warren Beatty, you'd get an idea of the dull competency of this movie. What I found so [[unusual]] about this film--I saw the full 4 hour roadshow version, is how oddly dispassionate it is. For a film about 2 very charismatic men--Castro and Che, engaged in a gargantuan political struggle, it's almost totally devoid of [[sentimental]] fire. The scenes between Benicio Del Toro and Demian Bichir (who is at best a second level actor,with a slightly high pitched voice) have no drama or depth and basically come down to Castro telling Che: go here, go there, do this and that, with no explanation as to what effect or use this action will result in. Odder still is there is an actor in the cast who has the requisite power to play Castro--Joaquim de Almeida, but he's shunted aside in a minor part in the second half. Without the tension or passion that you would expect to fire these men and their followers, the film becomes a dullish epic-length film about hairy, bearded men running through various jungles shouting and shooting to no particular purpose or end. Several of the reviews I've read showered praise on the work of director Steven Soderbergh while ignoring the actors almost completely. (One in fact spent more time talking about Soderbergh's new digital film camera than the plot or actors or the fact that it's entirely in Spanish with English subtitles.)This is an odd, odd thing to do since a) Soderbergh was only a hired gun on the film and b) it's no more than a competent job of work, with an unremarked upon nod to Oliver Stone's JFK in the black and white cut up camera-work when Che visits New York. If you can imagine Reds directed by Andrew McLaglen instead of Warren Beatty, you'd get an idea of the dull competency of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Just [[finished]] [[watching]] the movie and wanted to [[give]] my own [[opinion]](and justice) to the movie.

[[First]] of all, to [[get]] [[things]] straight, this [[movie]] is not [[pretending]] to be [[anything]] other than a [[solid]] [[action]] [[comedy]] [[movie]]. It doesn't aim to revolutionize the [[movie]] [[industry]] and garner [[critical]] acclaims nor does it [[want]] to be regarded as one. [[If]] you really want to [[enjoy]] this [[movie]] to the fullest, I [[suggest]] you discard your critical-mindedness and your [[longing]] for a good plot because you won't find any in here. With that [[established]], [[let]] us further into the [[movie]].

I had low [[expectations]] for this [[movie]] simply because it didn't have a strong plot([[Yes]], moviegoers, I underrated this [[movie]] as well), but I never [[expected]] myself to enjoy this [[movie]] that much. I even [[enjoyed]] this more than the [[Stephen]] Chow flicks(which I [[find]] Kung [[Fu]] Hustle to be his [[best]] [[effort]] and would've rated it a 9 as well). Action is tight and epic while comedy chokes on to the right [[places]].

SPOILERS alert, I [[think]] The [[action]] might be unreal, but why [[would]] I [[want]] to watch a serious basketball movie anyways? There are a lot other [[sports]] [[movies]]([[drama]]) that already did it well, why [[create]] another? SPOILERS end

I'm not even [[sure]] why you're reading this. Go ahead and watch it. [[Just]] [[remember]], no [[thinking]] - just watch, [[enjoy]], [[smile]], [[laugh]], and

[[Every]] once in a while they(the movie industry) creates masterpieces such as Pulp Fiction or The Godfather [[movies]], and sometimes they [[create]] movies which are [[better]] off in the pile of dump. I'm not [[saying]] Kung [[Fu]] Dunk [[deserves]] the [[recognition]] that the [[previous]] [[examples]] have, then again, if we're [[talking]] about [[Stephen]] Chow-ish comedy, this one's a top ten.

[[Highly]] [[recommended]] if you love: -no brainer movies with really good action -Kung Fu -Death Trance -Kung Fu and comedy -what the heck, watch this. you'll have a great time.

9/10 for you the cast of Kung Fu Dunk. ^_^ Just [[ended]] [[staring]] the movie and wanted to [[lend]] my own [[opinions]](and justice) to the movie.

[[Firstly]] of all, to [[obtain]] [[aspects]] straight, this [[film]] is not [[faking]] to be [[something]] other than a [[solids]] [[efforts]] [[parody]] [[movies]]. It doesn't aim to revolutionize the [[film]] [[industria]] and garner [[indispensable]] acclaims nor does it [[wanna]] to be regarded as one. [[Unless]] you really want to [[enjoys]] this [[film]] to the fullest, I [[insinuate]] you discard your critical-mindedness and your [[yearning]] for a good plot because you won't find any in here. With that [[elaborated]], [[leave]] us further into the [[cinematography]].

I had low [[outlook]] for this [[cinematography]] simply because it didn't have a strong plot([[Yep]], moviegoers, I underrated this [[movies]] as well), but I never [[hoped]] myself to enjoy this [[film]] that much. I even [[appreciated]] this more than the [[Stefan]] Chow flicks(which I [[unearthed]] Kung [[Foo]] Hustle to be his [[better]] [[endeavour]] and would've rated it a 9 as well). Action is tight and epic while comedy chokes on to the right [[locations]].

SPOILERS alert, I [[thinking]] The [[efforts]] might be unreal, but why [[should]] I [[wanna]] to watch a serious basketball movie anyways? There are a lot other [[athletes]] [[movie]]([[teatro]]) that already did it well, why [[engender]] another? SPOILERS end

I'm not even [[convinced]] why you're reading this. Go ahead and watch it. [[Jen]] [[reminisce]], no [[thought]] - just watch, [[enjoys]], [[smirk]], [[giggling]], and

[[All]] once in a while they(the movie industry) creates masterpieces such as Pulp Fiction or The Godfather [[movie]], and sometimes they [[creating]] movies which are [[best]] off in the pile of dump. I'm not [[telling]] Kung [[Foo]] Dunk [[deserve]] the [[gratitude]] that the [[anterior]] [[instances]] have, then again, if we're [[debating]] about [[Stefan]] Chow-ish comedy, this one's a top ten.

[[Crucially]] [[suggested]] if you love: -no brainer movies with really good action -Kung Fu -Death Trance -Kung Fu and comedy -what the heck, watch this. you'll have a great time.

9/10 for you the cast of Kung Fu Dunk. ^_^ --------------------------------------------- Result 3805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] WINCHESTER 73 is the [[story]] of a [[man]] (Jimmy Stewart) [[obsessed]] with [[getting]] back his prized possession, a repeating rifle made by Winchester. The rifle keeps [[changing]] hands, and [[Stewart]] doggedly keeps after it. This 1950 B&W effort by Anthony Mann is more a crime film than a [[traditional]] western, and the cowboys often seem more like modern-day gangsters than old-fashioned cowboys. Shelley [[Winters]] plays a woman of questionable virtue who is headed for a ranch with a man (Charles Drake) she may marry. She ends up falling for Stewart, but not before she is passed around a bit. Winters is the most [[complex]] character in a film filled with [[unusual]] [[characters]]. Watch for a young Dan Dureyea as a nutty killer and Tony Curtis in a very small role. A woefully miscast Will Geer plays Wyatt Earp. WINCHESTER 73 is the [[conte]] of a [[bloke]] (Jimmy Stewart) [[fixated]] with [[obtaining]] back his prized possession, a repeating rifle made by Winchester. The rifle keeps [[change]] hands, and [[Sylvain]] doggedly keeps after it. This 1950 B&W effort by Anthony Mann is more a crime film than a [[classic]] western, and the cowboys often seem more like modern-day gangsters than old-fashioned cowboys. Shelley [[Winter]] plays a woman of questionable virtue who is headed for a ranch with a man (Charles Drake) she may marry. She ends up falling for Stewart, but not before she is passed around a bit. Winters is the most [[complicate]] character in a film filled with [[odd]] [[attribute]]. Watch for a young Dan Dureyea as a nutty killer and Tony Curtis in a very small role. A woefully miscast Will Geer plays Wyatt Earp. --------------------------------------------- Result 3806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] An [[occasionally]] [[surrealistic]] thriller that will push most people's buttons., the 4th [[Man]] is sure to [[offend]] [[anyone]] with a [[taste]] for the politically [[correct]]. The story's [[protagonist]] is a bisexual alcoholic [[Catholic]] writer, Gerard (Krabbe), with a seriously [[twisted]] sense of imagination. Verhoeven [[offers]] up

Gerard has an example of everything wrong with the [[modern]] man. He's shiftless, delusional, unable to control his urges, afraid to commit to

meaningful relationships, and utterly apathetic about [[life]] in general. As the character himself states at one point, he is a professional liar, unable to recall the truth.

The movie opens with Gerard dreaming of spiders consuming Christ, and then waking to begin the long march to his own destruction. He chases off

one man (a boyfriend presumably), then chases another at a train station. Later, at a lecture, he meets a woman who seems to want to help him, or

perhaps she has more nefarious plans.. She quickly captures Gerard in her web, enticing him with sex and money, having plenty of both. She's also got

secrets, like three dead husbands. Is she lonely, and genuinely looking for someone to nurture - or is she a deadly black widow, luring Gerard to his

death? Will Garard be the 4th man she kills? The woman is Christine (Soutendijk), and Verhoeven does his best to keep you guessing what she's up to.

This is an interesting movie, with a lot of sex and intrigue. It's similar to Verhoeven'sBasic instinct, but has a lot more depth, and is certainly more shocking. There's a lot of very strong gay content, which may make some viewers [[squirm]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]] for fans of intelligent

psychological thrillers, or anyone looking for something entirely new. An [[sometimes]] [[surreal]] thriller that will push most people's buttons., the 4th [[Men]] is sure to [[insult]] [[everyone]] with a [[tasting]] for the politically [[accurate]]. The story's [[player]] is a bisexual alcoholic [[Catholicism]] writer, Gerard (Krabbe), with a seriously [[distorted]] sense of imagination. Verhoeven [[offering]] up

Gerard has an example of everything wrong with the [[fashionable]] man. He's shiftless, delusional, unable to control his urges, afraid to commit to

meaningful relationships, and utterly apathetic about [[iife]] in general. As the character himself states at one point, he is a professional liar, unable to recall the truth.

The movie opens with Gerard dreaming of spiders consuming Christ, and then waking to begin the long march to his own destruction. He chases off

one man (a boyfriend presumably), then chases another at a train station. Later, at a lecture, he meets a woman who seems to want to help him, or

perhaps she has more nefarious plans.. She quickly captures Gerard in her web, enticing him with sex and money, having plenty of both. She's also got

secrets, like three dead husbands. Is she lonely, and genuinely looking for someone to nurture - or is she a deadly black widow, luring Gerard to his

death? Will Garard be the 4th man she kills? The woman is Christine (Soutendijk), and Verhoeven does his best to keep you guessing what she's up to.

This is an interesting movie, with a lot of sex and intrigue. It's similar to Verhoeven'sBasic instinct, but has a lot more depth, and is certainly more shocking. There's a lot of very strong gay content, which may make some viewers [[writhe]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]] for fans of intelligent

psychological thrillers, or anyone looking for something entirely new. --------------------------------------------- Result 3807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The movie [[within]] the movie - a concept done many times in the history of cinema. It is [[accomplished]] here as well as in any.

If you love Carmen, you'll love this version.

If you love flamenco, you'll love this version.

The plot of the classic opera is played out in the actual rehearsal of the opera by a flamenco troupe. The music is [[authentic]]. The direction [[wonderful]].

If you like dancing, you'll love this version.

There is tragedy. There is passion. There is intrigue.

There is...

Carmen. The movie [[inside]] the movie - a concept done many times in the history of cinema. It is [[played]] here as well as in any.

If you love Carmen, you'll love this version.

If you love flamenco, you'll love this version.

The plot of the classic opera is played out in the actual rehearsal of the opera by a flamenco troupe. The music is [[truthful]]. The direction [[wondrous]].

If you like dancing, you'll love this version.

There is tragedy. There is passion. There is intrigue.

There is...

Carmen. --------------------------------------------- Result 3808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] This is one of those movies that made me feel strongly for the need of making movies at all. Generally speaking, I am a fan of movies based on worthy true stories. And this one is [[GREAT]]! Besides Meryl's performance which has gained a lot of recognition and praise, the movie's greatest asset is the story it is based on. The riveting tale of a couple who suffer social and legal torture, after having undergone enormous emotional pain at the unexpected and brutal death of their infant child is really an eye-opening fable that exposes the inhumane side of fellow humans, and uncovers the barbarism of a very refined and lawful society. It is interesting to see how people who consider themselves as kind and intelligent people (the emotional jury ladies in the movie for example) are in reality nothing more than selfish dupes who would, for their dogmatic beliefs and prejudices, shut their brains to any deliberation and contemplation even in the light of all facts pointing very clearly against their opinions. The other face of the so-called "civilized" society that the movie exposes is the apathy to the pain of fellow human beings (needless to say, this is very general, even though this specific tale unfolds in Australia), that goes as far as becoming a true cruelty. Must see if you are willing to take something serious and perhaps thought-provoking. This is one of those movies that made me feel strongly for the need of making movies at all. Generally speaking, I am a fan of movies based on worthy true stories. And this one is [[WONDROUS]]! Besides Meryl's performance which has gained a lot of recognition and praise, the movie's greatest asset is the story it is based on. The riveting tale of a couple who suffer social and legal torture, after having undergone enormous emotional pain at the unexpected and brutal death of their infant child is really an eye-opening fable that exposes the inhumane side of fellow humans, and uncovers the barbarism of a very refined and lawful society. It is interesting to see how people who consider themselves as kind and intelligent people (the emotional jury ladies in the movie for example) are in reality nothing more than selfish dupes who would, for their dogmatic beliefs and prejudices, shut their brains to any deliberation and contemplation even in the light of all facts pointing very clearly against their opinions. The other face of the so-called "civilized" society that the movie exposes is the apathy to the pain of fellow human beings (needless to say, this is very general, even though this specific tale unfolds in Australia), that goes as far as becoming a true cruelty. Must see if you are willing to take something serious and perhaps thought-provoking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] One of the [[best]] [[movies]] I ever saw was an Irish [[movie]] [[titled]] Philadelphia,Here I Come. I read the [[play]] before I [[saw]] the [[movie]] and [[loved]] them both. It's the story of a young [[man]] preparing to leave [[Ireland]] to go to [[America]] because he can't [[earn]] a [[living]] in Ireland. It is [[told]] both from the perspective of the young [[man]](whom the other [[characters]] in the [[film]] can [[see]]) and another young [[man]] [[representing]] his uncensored [[thoughts]] and [[feelings]]., but who cannot be [[seen]] by the other [[characters]] in the [[film]]. It is a very sad movie, but [[deeply]] touching, and I [[would]] [[recommend]] this [[film]] to [[anyone]] who [[wants]] [[something]] to [[think]] about. I [[love]] any Irish movie, or almost any [[movie]] about [[Ireland]], and any [[film]] that has the late Irish [[actor]] Donal [[McCann]] in it [[gets]] my vote.I [[would]] watch that [[man]] chew gum for 2 hours on screen, and unfortunately,I have.[[Terrible]] [[shame]] to have [[lost]] him so [[young]]. One of the [[better]] [[film]] I ever saw was an Irish [[kino]] [[entitled]] Philadelphia,Here I Come. I read the [[gaming]] before I [[noticed]] the [[cinematography]] and [[liked]] them both. It's the story of a young [[dawg]] preparing to leave [[Norte]] to go to [[Americas]] because he can't [[earns]] a [[iife]] in Ireland. It is [[said]] both from the perspective of the young [[dude]](whom the other [[hallmarks]] in the [[cinematography]] can [[consults]]) and another young [[dawg]] [[representative]] his uncensored [[idea]] and [[moods]]., but who cannot be [[watched]] by the other [[characteristics]] in the [[kino]]. It is a very sad movie, but [[bitterly]] touching, and I [[ought]] [[recommendation]] this [[kino]] to [[somebody]] who [[wanted]] [[anything]] to [[ideas]] about. I [[iike]] any Irish movie, or almost any [[kino]] about [[Norte]], and any [[kino]] that has the late Irish [[protagonist]] Donal [[olsen]] in it [[got]] my vote.I [[could]] watch that [[fella]] chew gum for 2 hours on screen, and unfortunately,I have.[[Horrible]] [[ignominy]] to have [[outof]] him so [[youthful]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shakespeare Behind Bars was the most surprising and delightful film I've seen all year. It's about a prison program, somewhere in California if I recall correctly, where the inmates have rehearsed and performed a different Shakespeare play every year for the past 14 years. The film follows their production of "The Tempest" from casting through performance, and in the process we learn some pretty amazing things about these men, who are all in for the most serious of crimes. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction -- if anyone tried to adapt this story into a fiction film, the audience would never buy it, but knowing that it's real makes it breathtaking to watch -- literally; I gasped out loud when I learned of one particularly gifted felon's crime. It's like some loopy episode of Oz, and all the more entertaining because the characters and their bizarre stories are real. --------------------------------------------- Result 3811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Nick Millard aka Nick Phillips should have left well-enough alone when he made "Criminally Insane" 10 years before the release of this god-awful waste of time and effort. The fact that the original "Criminally Insane" was less than an hour in length should have clued him into the fact that he had probably milked this storyline for all he was going to get out of it...but instead he opts to use TONS of footage from the original in this one as well, even to the point of recycling the original opening credit sequence! Unfortunately, bringing back the rapidly aging Priscilla Alden did not save this one. What little bit of original footage there was in this flick looks as if it were filmed with a rented hand-held camcorder! If this film cost more than $100 to make I would be very surprised and I would be equally surprised if it made anything close to that amount! Avoid this one and watch the original instead! --------------------------------------------- Result 3812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I [[thought]] this was a [[wonderful]] [[way]] to [[spend]] time on a too [[hot]] summer weekend, [[sitting]] in the [[air]] [[conditioned]] [[theater]] and watching a light-hearted comedy. The plot is simplistic, but the dialogue is [[witty]] and the [[characters]] are [[likable]] ([[even]] the well bread [[suspected]] serial killer). While some may be [[disappointed]] when they realize this is not Match Point 2: [[Risk]] Addiction, I [[thought]] it was [[proof]] that Woody Allen is still [[fully]] in control of the style many of us have grown to love.

This was the most I'd laughed at one of Woody's comedies in [[years]] (dare I say a decade?). [[While]] I've never been impressed with Scarlet Johanson, in this she managed to tone down her "sexy" image and jumped right into a average, but [[spirited]] young woman.

This may not be the crown jewel of his career, but it was wittier than "Devil Wears Prada" and more interesting than "Superman" a [[great]] comedy to go see with friends. I [[ideology]] this was a [[wondrous]] [[manner]] to [[dedicate]] time on a too [[sexiest]] summer weekend, [[seated]] in the [[midair]] [[acclimated]] [[drama]] and watching a light-hearted comedy. The plot is simplistic, but the dialogue is [[spiritual]] and the [[nature]] are [[likeable]] ([[yet]] the well bread [[supposed]] serial killer). While some may be [[disenchanted]] when they realize this is not Match Point 2: [[Dangers]] Addiction, I [[think]] it was [[test]] that Woody Allen is still [[abundantly]] in control of the style many of us have grown to love.

This was the most I'd laughed at one of Woody's comedies in [[olds]] (dare I say a decade?). [[Though]] I've never been impressed with Scarlet Johanson, in this she managed to tone down her "sexy" image and jumped right into a average, but [[plucky]] young woman.

This may not be the crown jewel of his career, but it was wittier than "Devil Wears Prada" and more interesting than "Superman" a [[huge]] comedy to go see with friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 3813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Sydney Lumet, [[although]] one of the oldest active [[directors]], still got game! A few [[years]] ago he [[shot]] "[[Find]] me guilty", a proof to everyone that Vin Diesel can actually act, if he gets the opportunity and the right director. If he had retired after this movie (a [[true]] [[masterpiece]] in my eyes), no one could have blamed him. But he's still going strong, his next movie already announced for 2009.

But let's [[stay]] with this movie right here. The cast list is [[incredible]], their performance [[top]] notch. The little nuances in their performances, the "real" dialogue and/or situations that evolve throughout the movie are just [[amazing]]. The (time) structure of the movie, that keeps your toes the whole time, blending time-lines so seamlessly, that the editing seems natural/flawless. The story is [[heightened]] by that, [[although]] even in a "normal" time structure, it would've been at least a good movie ([[Drama]]/Thriller). I can only [[highly]] [[recommend]] it, the [[rest]] is up to you! :o) Sydney Lumet, [[whereas]] one of the oldest active [[administrators]], still got game! A few [[olds]] ago he [[kiiled]] "[[Unearthed]] me guilty", a proof to everyone that Vin Diesel can actually act, if he gets the opportunity and the right director. If he had retired after this movie (a [[authentic]] [[centerpiece]] in my eyes), no one could have blamed him. But he's still going strong, his next movie already announced for 2009.

But let's [[sojourn]] with this movie right here. The cast list is [[unthinkable]], their performance [[supreme]] notch. The little nuances in their performances, the "real" dialogue and/or situations that evolve throughout the movie are just [[breathtaking]]. The (time) structure of the movie, that keeps your toes the whole time, blending time-lines so seamlessly, that the editing seems natural/flawless. The story is [[intensify]] by that, [[despite]] even in a "normal" time structure, it would've been at least a good movie ([[Tragedy]]/Thriller). I can only [[crucially]] [[recommending]] it, the [[repose]] is up to you! :o) --------------------------------------------- Result 3814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A prequel to the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series, from the same creative team Ronald D. Moore and David Eick as well as new series co-creator Remi Aubuchon. Caprica is set in the twelve colonies some 58 years prior to the events of Battlestar Galactica. The new series in addition to its human drama also chronicles the key steps in the development of what would become the Cylon race.

The pilot and the series are set to follow two families; the Graystone's which include Daniel (Eric Stoltz) a computer genius and corporate tycoon and his equally brilliant but rebellious daughter Zoe (Alessandra Toreson), while the Adama's include Joseph (Esai Morales) a lawyer and his son William the future Admiral of Battlestar Galactica.

Like Battlestar Galactica the series includes some great experienced actors in Eric Stoltz, Esai Morales and Polly Walker as well as some very talented relatively new actors including Alessandra Toreson and Magda Apanowicz.

For fans of Battlestar Gallactica there are similarities and continuities with that series but it is also very different. In the pilot at least the science fiction elements are definitely present but are smaller part of this series. The scenes on Caprica while reflecting a more technologically advanced society also have retro feel, this is achieved through some of the architecture, the costumes and the way it is shot.

While the look and feel of the two series have some substantial differences some of the themes will seem very familiar, religion is again very important here, while the racial theme rarely touched on in BG is far more important. We also touch on terrorism the existence of a soul and whether or not a machine can have one, as well as issues related to crime and government.

The pilot has been released direct to DVD in an extended and unrated version prior to airing on TV, the series is set to start in 2010.

Like Battlestar Galactica this series is filmed in Vancouver --------------------------------------------- Result 3815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[If]] you have any [[kind]] of heart and [[compassion]] for people, this is a tough [[movie]] to watch, at least in the second half of it.

It's in that segment where we [[see]] nice [[little]] [[kid]] get beaten up and then a retarded (mentally- challenged) man go off the deep [[end]] after he witnesses this [[brutal]] [[act]] against the [[child]]. It's not [[pleasant]] [[material]].

However, it's a [[good]] [[movie]] and the acting is good, too. The story will [[sit]] with you awhile.

"[[Dominick]]" is the mentally-disabled guy and is played by [[Tom]] Hulce. I [[think]] this might be Hulce's best role ever. He's [[looked]] after by a med student, "[[Eugene]]," [[played]] by Ray Liotta, who became a [[star]] the following year with Kevin Costner's "[[Field]] Of [[Dreams]]."

Dominick is a goodhearted garbage [[man]] who reads "Hulk" comic books and [[loves]] wrestling. He's the [[type]] of "slow" guy that you can't help but love and [[root]] for to live a [[happy]] [[life]]. [[When]] he [[freaks]] out, it's for [[several]] [[good]] [[reasons]] and...well, see the [[film]] for the whole [[story]]. It's worth your [[time]] but be [[prepared]] to [[go]] on [[real]] emotional [[roller]] coaster and [[possibly]] be very [[upset]] at some [[things]] you [[see]]. [[Unless]] you have any [[sort]] of heart and [[compassionate]] for people, this is a tough [[kino]] to watch, at least in the second half of it.

It's in that segment where we [[behold]] nice [[small]] [[children]] get beaten up and then a retarded (mentally- challenged) man go off the deep [[terminating]] after he witnesses this [[brute]] [[law]] against the [[kids]]. It's not [[delightful]] [[materials]].

However, it's a [[alright]] [[movies]] and the acting is good, too. The story will [[sits]] with you awhile.

"[[Dominique]]" is the mentally-disabled guy and is played by [[Thom]] Hulce. I [[thinks]] this might be Hulce's best role ever. He's [[seemed]] after by a med student, "[[Agnes]]," [[accomplished]] by Ray Liotta, who became a [[superstar]] the following year with Kevin Costner's "[[Sphere]] Of [[Nightmares]]."

Dominick is a goodhearted garbage [[guy]] who reads "Hulk" comic books and [[loved]] wrestling. He's the [[typing]] of "slow" guy that you can't help but love and [[racine]] for to live a [[gratified]] [[living]]. [[Whenever]] he [[monsters]] out, it's for [[assorted]] [[buena]] [[motivations]] and...well, see the [[cinematic]] for the whole [[fairytales]]. It's worth your [[moment]] but be [[braced]] to [[going]] on [[actual]] emotional [[capstan]] coaster and [[potentially]] be very [[pissed]] at some [[items]] you [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This was a [[strong]] Poirot/Suchet, television [[mystery]] [[selection]]. The [[characters]] were [[vivid]] and well-acted. The plot and the main setting--a student hostel-- were excellent. Japp was nothing special but for me did not [[distract]] from story. One [[significant]] point, [[many]] Poirot watchers don't [[recognize]] [[good]] acting or [[good]] characterization. I [[also]] [[think]] they are [[rather]] [[harsh]] in their [[judgments]] of some of the Poirot mysteries. [[Finally]], I have read few [[Christie]] novels--none in [[recent]] years-- and [[find]] it annoying that so [[many]] [[viewers]] are [[upset]] about [[changes]] from the novel. [[Please]], [[viewers]], [[consider]] what is [[presented]] to you on film, not what you [[think]] should be there. That [[said]], the Poirot mysteries vary in quality, but not as much as reviewers and raters would have you believe. With the [[singular]] [[exception]] of The Five [[Little]] Pigs which was [[fabulous]] in plot, [[character]] and [[theme]], the [[longer]] Poirot [[films]] are neither that good or that bad. [[For]] the [[record]], I have [[seen]] all the longer Poirot/Suchet films. Finally, [[films]] without Lemon, Hastings, and/or Japp are neither good nor [[bad]] because of their [[absence]]. There presence, [[however]], is either obtrusive ([[almost]] [[always]] with Japp) or irrelevant with Hastings. [[Lemon]] is in the middle. This was a [[vigorous]] Poirot/Suchet, television [[conundrum]] [[choice]]. The [[attribute]] were [[alive]] and well-acted. The plot and the main setting--a student hostel-- were excellent. Japp was nothing special but for me did not [[entertain]] from story. One [[sizable]] point, [[innumerable]] Poirot watchers don't [[recognised]] [[buena]] acting or [[buena]] characterization. I [[similarly]] [[thoughts]] they are [[somewhat]] [[stringent]] in their [[judgement]] of some of the Poirot mysteries. [[Eventually]], I have read few [[Kristy]] novels--none in [[freshly]] years-- and [[finds]] it annoying that so [[several]] [[spectators]] are [[enraged]] about [[change]] from the novel. [[Invite]], [[spectators]], [[reviewing]] what is [[submitted]] to you on film, not what you [[reckon]] should be there. That [[asserted]], the Poirot mysteries vary in quality, but not as much as reviewers and raters would have you believe. With the [[exclusive]] [[exemptions]] of The Five [[Small]] Pigs which was [[unbelievable]] in plot, [[nature]] and [[topics]], the [[plus]] Poirot [[kino]] are neither that good or that bad. [[During]] the [[recordings]], I have [[watched]] all the longer Poirot/Suchet films. Finally, [[film]] without Lemon, Hastings, and/or Japp are neither good nor [[horrid]] because of their [[lacks]]. There presence, [[instead]], is either obtrusive ([[virtually]] [[continuously]] with Japp) or irrelevant with Hastings. [[Zipperhead]] is in the middle. --------------------------------------------- Result 3817 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Well I don't personally [[like]] [[rap]], but I [[still]] [[found]] [[Fear]] of a Black [[Hat]] [[hilarious]]. I'm sure I didn't get some inside jokes, but some I knew, and it was [[funny]] enough to make me laugh just after I'd stopped laughing. I'm a [[big]] fan of [[Spinal]] tap, so [[naturally]] I had to [[check]] this out. It was deriviative from This Is Spinal [[Tap]], [[sometimes]] [[blatantly]], but this [[film]] still stood on it's own as an original, [[intelligent]], and funny [[satire]]. My personal [[favorite]]: "Back in the [[time]] of [[slaves]], they didn't have [[hats]] to protect them from the sun, so at the end of the day they were too tired to revolt. [[Now]] we have [[hats]]." Well I don't personally [[fond]] [[rapper]], but I [[again]] [[unearthed]] [[Afraid]] of a Black [[Bonnet]] [[comic]]. I'm sure I didn't get some inside jokes, but some I knew, and it was [[humorous]] enough to make me laugh just after I'd stopped laughing. I'm a [[major]] fan of [[Vertebrae]] tap, so [[clearly]] I had to [[audits]] this out. It was deriviative from This Is Spinal [[Valve]], [[sometime]] [[clearly]], but this [[kino]] still stood on it's own as an original, [[artful]], and funny [[spelling]]. My personal [[prefers]]: "Back in the [[period]] of [[slave]], they didn't have [[bonnets]] to protect them from the sun, so at the end of the day they were too tired to revolt. [[Presently]] we have [[bonnets]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 3818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Comment? Like my comment is necessary? We are talking about all time masterpiece, for all seasons and all generations. This is only type of movies that i still have patience to watch. In this, like in other Disney's [[movies]] is some [[kind]] of [[magic]]. All [[characters]] are in some [[way]], "alive" and "[[real]]" so it's [[easy]] to [[understand]] [[message]], [[even]] if you don't understand language, (like i didn't understood when i first watched movie, because i was about six years old). Maybe my English is not so good, but i learned what i know [[mostly]] from this kind of movies, and this is one more [[great]] dimension of this [[kind]] of [[movies]], which in [[present]] time are [[rare]]. But there is a one big shame. [[In]] my [[country]] is now impossible to watch this, or any other Disney's [[movie]]! We don't have copyrights, so our children are disabled to enjoy and [[learn]] from this kind of movies. So, we will watch this movie again "Once [[upon]] a dream" or...? Comment? Like my comment is necessary? We are talking about all time masterpiece, for all seasons and all generations. This is only type of movies that i still have patience to watch. In this, like in other Disney's [[movie]] is some [[types]] of [[sorcery]]. All [[features]] are in some [[camino]], "alive" and "[[actual]]" so it's [[uncomplicated]] to [[realise]] [[messages]], [[yet]] if you don't understand language, (like i didn't understood when i first watched movie, because i was about six years old). Maybe my English is not so good, but i learned what i know [[basically]] from this kind of movies, and this is one more [[wondrous]] dimension of this [[sorting]] of [[film]], which in [[presented]] time are [[scarce]]. But there is a one big shame. [[Onto]] my [[nations]] is now impossible to watch this, or any other Disney's [[cinematography]]! We don't have copyrights, so our children are disabled to enjoy and [[learned]] from this kind of movies. So, we will watch this movie again "Once [[after]] a dream" or...? --------------------------------------------- Result 3819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[figured]] that it's about [[time]] I let this one out. Pokémon [[fans]] are suffering in America these days. Why? Because we [[rely]] on Kids WB and 4Kids Entertainment to [[provide]] us with our [[beloved]] series and movies. As far as the series goes, they do a pretty good job in bringing the [[fun]] and magic of the Japanese versions to television. So what is their [[problem]] when it comes to the [[movies]]? [[Honestly]] now, I have [[seen]] all three Pokémon [[movies]] in Japanese and I will definitely be seeing the fourth one. They are [[excellent]] [[movies]]. They are all enjoyable and fun to watch. And, after [[seeing]] [[Pokémon]] 2000 in theaters, I can't help but wonder how these American producers read the Japanese [[scripts]]. The way it appears, it seems that they read and see something that says `Insert empty moral here' in big bold faced letters. It [[definitely]] appears that way as they used the same [[wonderful]] dubbing [[methods]] they used on MSB (extreme sarcasm there) and [[created]] this [[crap]].

*possible spoilers from here on*

Well, I guess I should first talk about Pikachu's Rescue Adventure. My first gripe with this came with no narration. I guess they got enough bad comments on the Pokédex narration that plagued Pikachu's Vacation, and, instead of going with a caring, gentle woman's voice as appeared in Pikachu no Natsu Yasumi and Pikachu Tankentai, they just cut the narration all together. This wouldn't have been a problem, except for one thing. Did anyone really understand why the Exeggcute didn't let Togepi go until the end? Possibly the fans, but I'm sure not the parents. Then, there's the theme song. I couldn't help but roll my eyes at this one. The Japanese theme song was `Tankentai wo Tsukurou' and was sung by Japanese children. It was fun and enjoyable. This one: [[nauseating]]. Now, one of my favorite parts of the short was the dancing Kireihana. Nice music, fun to watch. That's changed with the Bellossom. The music sucked for one, but on top of that, they had all the Pokémon talk during the music, which turned out to be jumpy, annoying, and just unnecessary. Oh, and then there's the Poliwhirl who thinks he's a Poliwrath. You'd think that guys that work with these characters constantly would at least learn what they are. Basically, not much could save this little ill fated dub, which is very unfortunate considering its potential. But, I haven't touched on the worst of it yet.

You'd think that the warning signs would've been apparent to me when I received my issue of Nintendo Power. For some unfathomable reason, I had been placing some faith in 4Kids and the WB. My thoughts were `well, they screwed up on the first movie, but the second is different as far as the theme goes, so they should do well.' That in mind, I just didn't pay attention to the warning signs I encountered in the theaters when the trailers said, `You will believe that one person can make all the difference.' With the way they said that at every turn, I was hoping that this would not turn into a moral fest like MSB did at the end of the English version. Then comes Nintendo Power, in which I see all my fears realized in the words `the main feature 'The Power of One.' At that point, I became a bit more uneasy. `The Power of One?!' Not a good sign. However, I still kept some of my false faith. Big mistake.

Sitting in the theater, I was literally getting stomach cramps watching another movie which I loved in Japanese being turned into complete and utter junk. I hear comments that say it was better because the moral was more subtle. I can see a point in that since they didn't pander this thing, repeating it over and over like in MSB. However, it did more damage than anything else in this movie. First of all, the legend that was read throughout was changed a bit to read `the world turns to Ash.' Ah hah. So, Ash is the chosen one? Whatever. In the Japanese version, the inhabitants of Arshia needed a Pokémon trainer to carry out their traditional ceremony. This time, he's the chosen one. A greater way that this did damage was to Lugia. Lugia was one of the coolest characters in a Pokémon movie.... when the movie was ABOUT Lugia. In this one, Lugia is forced to take a back seat to Ash. In the scene where they're flying back to the main island, Lugia and Ash are discussing the conditions of Lugia's existence, not that Ash is going to make all the difference. Overall in this category, Ash wasn't really the `one person' that would make the difference, since he was helped by many along the way.

A lot of the other stuff is kind of nit picking. Furura's flute song wasn't nearly as sweet and enjoyable as the Japanese one. Jirarudan's speech to them saying his collection `started with a Mew card?' Ugh. Even worse, Misty's outrage originally concerned the way Moltres and Zapdos were being held. `Why didn't you put them in Pokéballs when you caught them? This is like caging them to be displayed.' Much different from whining about him thinking Pokémon are things to be collected like stamps. If there were any real redeeming values in this, they came from Team Rocket. Some pretty funny lines. Not really to make me laugh out loud, but more to make me giggle and slightly ease the pains in my stomach. Well, that was officially the last American Pokémon movie I'm going to see. I've imported the third one and find it very enjoyable. I would rather not see another Japanese movie be ruined in the same fashion as the first two. I'll be importing the fourth one as well. Forget you, Kids WB and 4Kids. You have forsaken me for the last time. I [[thought]] that it's about [[period]] I let this one out. Pokémon [[followers]] are suffering in America these days. Why? Because we [[depend]] on Kids WB and 4Kids Entertainment to [[delivering]] us with our [[dear]] series and movies. As far as the series goes, they do a pretty good job in bringing the [[amusing]] and magic of the Japanese versions to television. So what is their [[difficulty]] when it comes to the [[movie]]? [[Sincerely]] now, I have [[saw]] all three Pokémon [[film]] in Japanese and I will definitely be seeing the fourth one. They are [[sumptuous]] [[movie]]. They are all enjoyable and fun to watch. And, after [[witnessing]] [[Pokemon]] 2000 in theaters, I can't help but wonder how these American producers read the Japanese [[scenarios]]. The way it appears, it seems that they read and see something that says `Insert empty moral here' in big bold faced letters. It [[obviously]] appears that way as they used the same [[sumptuous]] dubbing [[procedures]] they used on MSB (extreme sarcasm there) and [[established]] this [[bollocks]].

*possible spoilers from here on*

Well, I guess I should first talk about Pikachu's Rescue Adventure. My first gripe with this came with no narration. I guess they got enough bad comments on the Pokédex narration that plagued Pikachu's Vacation, and, instead of going with a caring, gentle woman's voice as appeared in Pikachu no Natsu Yasumi and Pikachu Tankentai, they just cut the narration all together. This wouldn't have been a problem, except for one thing. Did anyone really understand why the Exeggcute didn't let Togepi go until the end? Possibly the fans, but I'm sure not the parents. Then, there's the theme song. I couldn't help but roll my eyes at this one. The Japanese theme song was `Tankentai wo Tsukurou' and was sung by Japanese children. It was fun and enjoyable. This one: [[abhorrent]]. Now, one of my favorite parts of the short was the dancing Kireihana. Nice music, fun to watch. That's changed with the Bellossom. The music sucked for one, but on top of that, they had all the Pokémon talk during the music, which turned out to be jumpy, annoying, and just unnecessary. Oh, and then there's the Poliwhirl who thinks he's a Poliwrath. You'd think that guys that work with these characters constantly would at least learn what they are. Basically, not much could save this little ill fated dub, which is very unfortunate considering its potential. But, I haven't touched on the worst of it yet.

You'd think that the warning signs would've been apparent to me when I received my issue of Nintendo Power. For some unfathomable reason, I had been placing some faith in 4Kids and the WB. My thoughts were `well, they screwed up on the first movie, but the second is different as far as the theme goes, so they should do well.' That in mind, I just didn't pay attention to the warning signs I encountered in the theaters when the trailers said, `You will believe that one person can make all the difference.' With the way they said that at every turn, I was hoping that this would not turn into a moral fest like MSB did at the end of the English version. Then comes Nintendo Power, in which I see all my fears realized in the words `the main feature 'The Power of One.' At that point, I became a bit more uneasy. `The Power of One?!' Not a good sign. However, I still kept some of my false faith. Big mistake.

Sitting in the theater, I was literally getting stomach cramps watching another movie which I loved in Japanese being turned into complete and utter junk. I hear comments that say it was better because the moral was more subtle. I can see a point in that since they didn't pander this thing, repeating it over and over like in MSB. However, it did more damage than anything else in this movie. First of all, the legend that was read throughout was changed a bit to read `the world turns to Ash.' Ah hah. So, Ash is the chosen one? Whatever. In the Japanese version, the inhabitants of Arshia needed a Pokémon trainer to carry out their traditional ceremony. This time, he's the chosen one. A greater way that this did damage was to Lugia. Lugia was one of the coolest characters in a Pokémon movie.... when the movie was ABOUT Lugia. In this one, Lugia is forced to take a back seat to Ash. In the scene where they're flying back to the main island, Lugia and Ash are discussing the conditions of Lugia's existence, not that Ash is going to make all the difference. Overall in this category, Ash wasn't really the `one person' that would make the difference, since he was helped by many along the way.

A lot of the other stuff is kind of nit picking. Furura's flute song wasn't nearly as sweet and enjoyable as the Japanese one. Jirarudan's speech to them saying his collection `started with a Mew card?' Ugh. Even worse, Misty's outrage originally concerned the way Moltres and Zapdos were being held. `Why didn't you put them in Pokéballs when you caught them? This is like caging them to be displayed.' Much different from whining about him thinking Pokémon are things to be collected like stamps. If there were any real redeeming values in this, they came from Team Rocket. Some pretty funny lines. Not really to make me laugh out loud, but more to make me giggle and slightly ease the pains in my stomach. Well, that was officially the last American Pokémon movie I'm going to see. I've imported the third one and find it very enjoyable. I would rather not see another Japanese movie be ruined in the same fashion as the first two. I'll be importing the fourth one as well. Forget you, Kids WB and 4Kids. You have forsaken me for the last time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a gem, a real piece of Americana for all that this implies. If you are self programed to resist "life-afirming" stories, just stay away and leave the pleasure to the rest of us who still believe. And what makes the frosting on the cake truly delectable is that it is fact based on a real rags to riches story, no need to nit-pick what details were changed to make a compact story. Chris Cooper is one of the greatest living actors, and the complex, self-conflicted, bottom-line good at the core father he portrayed could only be pulled off successfully by someone with his skill and insight. The simple minded comments, refusing to accept a father who tries to lay down the law all the while sensing that he may possibly be off-track, expose the limitation of the commentator, not the writers or the acting. This is not for the cynical, or the simple minded. --------------------------------------------- Result 3821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Like the [[gentle]] [[giants]] that make up the [[latter]] half of this film's title, [[Michael]] Oblowitz's [[latest]] production has [[grace]], but it's [[also]] slow and [[ponderous]]. The producer's last outing, "Mosquitoman-3D" had the same problem. It's hard to [[imagine]] a boring shark movie, but they [[somehow]] managed it. The only draw for Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy was it's passable animatronix, which is always fun when dealing with wondrous worlds beneath the ocean's surface. But even that was only passable. Poor focus in some scenes made the production seems amateurish. With Dolphins and Whales, the technology is all but wasted. Cloudy scenes and too many close-ups of the film's giant subjects do nothing to take advantage of IMAX's stunning 3D capabilities. There are far too few scenes of any depth or variety. Close-ups of these awesome creatures just look flat and there is often only one creature in the cameras field, so there is no contrast of depth. Michael Oblowitz is trying to follow in his father's footsteps, but when you've got Shark-Week on cable, his introspective and dull treatment of his subjects is a constant disappointment. Like the [[soft]] [[titans]] that make up the [[final]] half of this film's title, [[Micheal]] Oblowitz's [[recent]] production has [[gracia]], but it's [[apart]] slow and [[unwieldy]]. The producer's last outing, "Mosquitoman-3D" had the same problem. It's hard to [[presume]] a boring shark movie, but they [[someplace]] managed it. The only draw for Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy was it's passable animatronix, which is always fun when dealing with wondrous worlds beneath the ocean's surface. But even that was only passable. Poor focus in some scenes made the production seems amateurish. With Dolphins and Whales, the technology is all but wasted. Cloudy scenes and too many close-ups of the film's giant subjects do nothing to take advantage of IMAX's stunning 3D capabilities. There are far too few scenes of any depth or variety. Close-ups of these awesome creatures just look flat and there is often only one creature in the cameras field, so there is no contrast of depth. Michael Oblowitz is trying to follow in his father's footsteps, but when you've got Shark-Week on cable, his introspective and dull treatment of his subjects is a constant disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (83%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] A lonely depressed French boy Mathieu (Jeremie Elkaim) on vacation in the summer, meets and falls in love with Cedric (the gorgeous Stephane Rideau). [[Quiet]] and slow this is a very frustrating movie. On one hand, I was [[absorbed]] by it and really felt for the two boys. On the other I was getting annoyed--the film constantly keeps flashing around from the past to the present with no rhyme or reason. It's very confusing and pointless.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Also there are tons of plot holes--Mathieu, at one point, does something that ends him up in the hospital. What is it--we're never told! Then he breaks up with Cedric and tells everybody else he's living with him. Why? We're not told. Then he hooks up inexplicably with another guy at the end. Why? No explanation. It's clear Cedric loves Mathieu and Mathieu is living in the same town so... However it is a tribute to the film that you really care about the characters so much. If only things were explained!

Elkaim as Mathieu is not good. He's tall, handsome and has a nice body--but he can't act. His idea of acting is sitting around with a blank look on his face--all the time. Rideau, on the other hand, is great. He's VERY handsome, has a very nice body and is one hell of an actor. Also he has an incredible sexual magnetism about him. There is full frontal male nudity, lots of kissing and a fairly explicit sex scene in the movie which is great--most movies shy away from showing male-male love scenes. This one doesn't and it helps to see how the characters care and feel for each other.

So, a frustrating film but somewhat worth seeing--especially for Rideau's nude scenes--that is, if you like good-looking nude young men!

A lonely depressed French boy Mathieu (Jeremie Elkaim) on vacation in the summer, meets and falls in love with Cedric (the gorgeous Stephane Rideau). [[Silencing]] and slow this is a very frustrating movie. On one hand, I was [[engrossed]] by it and really felt for the two boys. On the other I was getting annoyed--the film constantly keeps flashing around from the past to the present with no rhyme or reason. It's very confusing and pointless.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Also there are tons of plot holes--Mathieu, at one point, does something that ends him up in the hospital. What is it--we're never told! Then he breaks up with Cedric and tells everybody else he's living with him. Why? We're not told. Then he hooks up inexplicably with another guy at the end. Why? No explanation. It's clear Cedric loves Mathieu and Mathieu is living in the same town so... However it is a tribute to the film that you really care about the characters so much. If only things were explained!

Elkaim as Mathieu is not good. He's tall, handsome and has a nice body--but he can't act. His idea of acting is sitting around with a blank look on his face--all the time. Rideau, on the other hand, is great. He's VERY handsome, has a very nice body and is one hell of an actor. Also he has an incredible sexual magnetism about him. There is full frontal male nudity, lots of kissing and a fairly explicit sex scene in the movie which is great--most movies shy away from showing male-male love scenes. This one doesn't and it helps to see how the characters care and feel for each other.

So, a frustrating film but somewhat worth seeing--especially for Rideau's nude scenes--that is, if you like good-looking nude young men!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3823 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Some [[good]] movies keep you in front of the [[TV]], and you are [[dying]] to see the [[result]].

This [[movie]] does not have highs and lows. It [[simply]] [[describes]] a young girl's family life in [[Africa]]. People come and go, the weather and the [[background]] are all the same.

Some [[alright]] movies keep you in front of the [[TELEVISIONS]], and you are [[died]] to see the [[outcomes]].

This [[filmmaking]] does not have highs and lows. It [[purely]] [[depicts]] a young girl's family life in [[Afrika]]. People come and go, the weather and the [[context]] are all the same.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3824 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I rented this film about a [[month]] ago when I had [[nothing]] [[else]] to do on a Friday night. All I can [[say]] to [[describe]] this [[worthless]] [[film]] is 'TRASH' The acting is so badly [[done]] I've seen [[kids]] in [[high]] [[school]] do a [[better]] [[job]] The [[whole]] [[cast]] [[seems]] like they're just reading their lines out, no feeling, no emotion, and no [[room]] to [[capture]] the [[viewer]]. On another [[note]] the special [[effects]] were insanely cheesy and the whole thing looked like it had been [[shot]] with a camera [[anyone]] can [[buy]] a radio [[shack]].

The [[clown]] himself [[looks]] [[nothing]] like the one on the [[video]] cover. Heck he doesn't even show up in the [[film]] until near the [[end]] and all he does it [[hum]] [[songs]] and [[go]] around [[stalking]] a few characters. There is no [[real]] murder [[shown]] either so this isn't a [[real]] slasher [[film]] either [[Since]] I've [[seen]] it I've questioned a few [[things]] 1. If is 'Serial [[Insane]] [[Clown]] Killer' Wouldn't that be a Serial [[Killer]] who [[kills]] clowns? 2. [[If]] your [[friend]] goes [[missing]] why [[would]] you go out into the [[woods]] to have [[sex]] [[rather]] than look for her? Sad really.

3. Why is it that the only [[REAL]] acting sputtered vainly out at the [[end]] all of a sudden? [[Did]] the [[cast]] [[finally]] [[decide]] to [[show]] effort in their jobs? This [[film]] is as sad as they [[come]]. My advice is to [[avoid]] renting it lest you [[waste]] an hour or two of your [[time]] laughing more than [[screaming]]. I rented this film about a [[months]] ago when I had [[none]] [[further]] to do on a Friday night. All I can [[told]] to [[described]] this [[pointless]] [[filmmaking]] is 'TRASH' The acting is so badly [[doing]] I've seen [[infantile]] in [[alto]] [[teaching]] do a [[optimum]] [[jobs]] The [[ensemble]] [[casting]] [[looks]] like they're just reading their lines out, no feeling, no emotion, and no [[bedroom]] to [[catch]] the [[bystander]]. On another [[notes]] the special [[influencing]] were insanely cheesy and the whole thing looked like it had been [[offed]] with a camera [[person]] can [[buys]] a radio [[cabana]].

The [[joker]] himself [[seem]] [[anything]] like the one on the [[videos]] cover. Heck he doesn't even show up in the [[filmmaking]] until near the [[terminate]] and all he does it [[hmm]] [[tunes]] and [[going]] around [[pestering]] a few characters. There is no [[actual]] murder [[revealed]] either so this isn't a [[veritable]] slasher [[cinematographic]] either [[Because]] I've [[watched]] it I've questioned a few [[aspects]] 1. If is 'Serial [[Deranged]] [[Joker]] Killer' Wouldn't that be a Serial [[Slayer]] who [[slays]] clowns? 2. [[Though]] your [[friends]] goes [[faded]] why [[could]] you go out into the [[lumbering]] to have [[sexuality]] [[somewhat]] than look for her? Sad really.

3. Why is it that the only [[VERITABLE]] acting sputtered vainly out at the [[terminate]] all of a sudden? [[Got]] the [[casting]] [[ultimately]] [[decides]] to [[exhibit]] effort in their jobs? This [[filmmaking]] is as sad as they [[coming]]. My advice is to [[avert]] renting it lest you [[wastes]] an hour or two of your [[moment]] laughing more than [[shrieking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3825 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] getting to work on this film when it was made back in the summer of 1990. Shot partly in the Biltmore Estate in Asheville, NC and the remaining parts in Winston-Salem. The massive offices of the RJ Reynolds were used in several office scenes and places in around the beautiful city that is know as the tulip capital of the world Winston-Salem! I enjoyed my work although it was exceedingly hard work building all the sets like the Golf of Mexico where Renee Russo and Jim Belushi went on their date. I also had a big hand in decorating the bar where Larry encounters the magical bartender Mr. Destiny. I tacked all those pics on the wall of sports heroes and decorated that phone booth where larry makes a phone call for a cab. I even put my mothers photo at eye level so i could freeze frame it and show it to her when we watched it. I remember dyeing the grass at his old house with green dye because it first had to be sodded(it was a new house in a new development and I guess they leased it for the movie)..then I had to cut that newly laid sod to make it look nice..man that was hard! As far as the movie, when we made it we had no idea what it would be like but after seeing it i fell in love with it because really tells the story of "what if" as good as I ever had seen it, including the great It's a Wonderful Life. I cried so many times

i can't count. I got to meet the wonderful actor Michael Caine while shooting scenes at an old minor league ballpark where Larry's boyhood scenes were played and replayed. I remember after he had done a take an was heading back to his trailer, I ran him down and asked him for a picture and he was quite amiable and said "why not!" He is a good guy and a really natural and forceful actor. I can't say the same for Jim Belushi..he was so full of himself, smoking big cuban cigars and talking loudly so

everyone in earshot could hear his every word. His career never did take off but he has had a decent TV career recently. I would say watch this movie if you ever get the chance. It's wonderful and really heartfelt and real. You can feel Larry's pain after he enters into the new world Mr. Destiny gives him after hitting the homer, and as he wants so badly for people to believe he is not this bad guy everyone thinks he is. They all think he belongs in a nuthouse! But eventually he wins people over but by then he wants his real life back so badly, especially his wonderful wife, played so beautifully by Linda Hamilton..and he wants his dog back! So see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3826 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] is just another average [[action]] [[flick]], but it could have been so much better. [[When]] the [[guns]] [[come]] out they really needed some choreography [[help]]. [[Someone]] like Andy McNabb - who [[made]] that [[brilliant]] [[action]] sequence in [[Heat]] as they move up the [[street]] from the [[robbery]] - would have [[turned]] the [[dull]] action sequences into something [[special]]. Because the rest of the [[film]] was [[alright]] - predictable but watchable - [[better]] than you would [[expect]] from this [[type]] of movie. Then came the final scene, the show-down, the one we had been waiting for, but was like [[watching]] something from the A-Team in the 80s. They shoot wildly, nothing hits, and they run around a house trying to kill each other - same old, same [[old]]. This [[filmmaking]] is just another average [[actions]] [[gesture]], but it could have been so much better. [[Whenever]] the [[firearm]] [[arrived]] out they really needed some choreography [[succour]]. [[Anyone]] like Andy McNabb - who [[brought]] that [[sumptuous]] [[actions]] sequence in [[Thermal]] as they move up the [[rue]] from the [[larceny]] - would have [[revolved]] the [[boring]] action sequences into something [[particular]]. Because the rest of the [[filmmaking]] was [[allright]] - predictable but watchable - [[best]] than you would [[waits]] from this [[genre]] of movie. Then came the final scene, the show-down, the one we had been waiting for, but was like [[staring]] something from the A-Team in the 80s. They shoot wildly, nothing hits, and they run around a house trying to kill each other - same old, same [[former]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I felt brain dead, I'll tell you. This is the worst film I have ever bought. (in my ignorance I thought this was the Peter Jackson film of the same name). The performances are so terrible they are laughable. The special effects have not stood the test of time and look dire. The script promotes that kind of TV movie, stare into the middle distance kind of acting. The cast look as if they have been taking lessons from Joey Tribbiani, they have one look each, and stick to it. Plus I have never been confused by a movie until I sat down to watch this. The is it a dream or no plot is so terrible that frustration sets in within a few minutes. Avoid like a plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 3828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Evil [[Breed]] is a very strange slasher flick that is unfortunately no good.The [[beginning]] of the film seems promising but [[overall]] it's a [[disaster]].The [[dialogue]] is pretty [[bad]] but not near as bad as the acting.The acting is brutal and [[unbearable]].Most of the [[characters]] [[deliver]] there lines [[horribly]] and [[even]] if that is on [[purpose]] the [[method]] doesn't [[work]] because the [[characters]] [[become]] [[annoying]].Some of the kills are innovative but it [[took]] far too long to [[get]] to them.[[After]] about a half [[hour]] through the movie we get the first death (other than in the [[beginning]])and then [[almost]] [[every]] other [[character]] is [[smoked]] [[within]] the [[next]] five minutes.The [[movie]] then [[turned]] into [[sort]] of a spoof with ridiculous looking [[characters]],unrealistic [[karate]] like [[fights]],and a scene in which a [[man]] gets his intestines [[pulled]] out of his a*sscrack.[[None]] of it is [[funny]] it's just plain ridiculous.The [[film]] then becomes [[ultra]] gory and [[ultra]] [[pointless]].[[Most]] of the [[characters]] are [[clichéd]] even for slasher [[standards]] and are as solid as butter [[left]] on the [[counter]] for 5 days.Evil [[Breed]] isn't even laughably bad [[therefore]] it fails in it's main [[task]].Watch Texas [[Chainsaw]] Massacre,[[Just]] Before Dawn,or [[See]] No Evil for a [[real]] slasher. Evil [[Reproducing]] is a very strange slasher flick that is unfortunately no good.The [[startup]] of the film seems promising but [[aggregate]] it's a [[disasters]].The [[discussions]] is pretty [[negative]] but not near as bad as the acting.The acting is brutal and [[insufferable]].Most of the [[traits]] [[delivering]] there lines [[unimaginably]] and [[yet]] if that is on [[aim]] the [[modes]] doesn't [[collaborating]] because the [[character]] [[gotten]] [[irritating]].Some of the kills are innovative but it [[picked]] far too long to [[obtain]] to them.[[Upon]] about a half [[hours]] through the movie we get the first death (other than in the [[startup]])and then [[virtually]] [[all]] other [[characters]] is [[smoke]] [[inside]] the [[upcoming]] five minutes.The [[filmmaking]] then [[transformed]] into [[genre]] of a spoof with ridiculous looking [[character]],unrealistic [[kicks]] like [[battle]],and a scene in which a [[guy]] gets his intestines [[pulls]] out of his a*sscrack.[[Nos]] of it is [[fun]] it's just plain ridiculous.The [[filmmaking]] then becomes [[super]] gory and [[super]] [[vain]].[[More]] of the [[character]] are [[cliché]] even for slasher [[standard]] and are as solid as butter [[exited]] on the [[combat]] for 5 days.Evil [[Spawning]] isn't even laughably bad [[so]] it fails in it's main [[tasks]].Watch Texas [[Sawing]] Massacre,[[Jen]] Before Dawn,or [[Seeing]] No Evil for a [[veritable]] slasher. --------------------------------------------- Result 3829 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] this recent Woody Allen film because I'm a [[fan]] of his [[work]] and I make it a point to [[try]] to see everything he does, [[though]] the [[reviews]] of this [[film]] led me to [[expect]] a disappointing [[effort]]. They were right. This is a [[confused]] movie that can't decide whether it [[wants]] to be a [[comedy]], a romantic [[fantasy]], or a [[drama]] about [[female]] mid-life crisis. It [[fails]] at all three.

Alice (Mia Farrow) is a restless [[middle]] aged [[woman]] who has married into [[great]] wealth and leads a [[life]] of aimless [[luxury]] with her [[rather]] [[boring]] husband and their two [[small]] [[children]]. This rather mundane plot [[concept]] is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic [[herbs]], and the ghost of a [[former]] lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these [[additions]] sound too fantastic for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?

I was never quite [[sure]] of what this [[mixed]] up [[muddle]] was [[trying]] to say. There are only a handful of [[truly]] [[funny]] [[moments]] in the [[film]], and the endingis a really [[preposterous]] [[touch]] of Pollyanna.

[[Rent]] 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a [[serious]] consideration of [[ethics]] and [[morals]]. Or [[go]] back to "Annie [[Hall]]" or "Manhattan". I [[observed]] this recent Woody Allen film because I'm a [[breather]] of his [[cooperate]] and I make it a point to [[attempts]] to see everything he does, [[despite]] the [[reviewing]] of this [[filmmaking]] led me to [[waits]] a disappointing [[efforts]]. They were right. This is a [[disconcerted]] movie that can't decide whether it [[wanted]] to be a [[travesty]], a romantic [[utopia]], or a [[tragedy]] about [[girl]] mid-life crisis. It [[fail]] at all three.

Alice (Mia Farrow) is a restless [[mid]] aged [[femme]] who has married into [[terrific]] wealth and leads a [[lives]] of aimless [[posh]] with her [[fairly]] [[dull]] husband and their two [[minimal]] [[childhood]]. This rather mundane plot [[concepts]] is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic [[herb]], and the ghost of a [[previous]] lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these [[supplements]] sound too fantastic for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?

I was never quite [[convinced]] of what this [[blended]] up [[chaos]] was [[striving]] to say. There are only a handful of [[honestly]] [[hilarious]] [[times]] in the [[flick]], and the endingis a really [[irrational]] [[touching]] of Pollyanna.

[[Rents]] 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a [[weighty]] consideration of [[morality]] and [[ethos]]. Or [[going]] back to "Annie [[Salle]]" or "Manhattan". --------------------------------------------- Result 3830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simply put, this is the best movie to come out of Michigan since... well, ever! Evil Dead eat your heart out, Hatred of A Minute was some of the oddest, and best cinema to be seen by this reviewer in a long time. I recommend this movie to anyone who is in need of a head trip, or a good case of the willies! --------------------------------------------- Result 3831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very good adaptation of the novel by amrita pritam. Urmila and manoj bajpai have given their best.

there is a natural flair in the movie and i felt it right through. It looked like bollywood finally gave away it's glamor and had some quality artists performing on screen.

Content wise, the movie depicted very much what exactly happened during partition by showing the sufferings of a particular family and also shows that trust in one's life goes beyond religion.

The best part was they did not make it a drama with a lot of tear shedding and melodrama.

I simply loved it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3832 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is an incredible piece of work. It explores every nook and cranny of the human mind, focusing on the characters relationships with the people around them. Stellar performances all around. This one had me weeping for about half an hour straight. Spend some real time with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] This [[movie]] is [[really]] not all that [[bad]]. But then again, this [[movie]] [[genre]] is right down my alley. Sure, the sets are cheap, but they [[really]] did decent with what they had.

If you [[like]] [[cheap]], futuristic, post-apocalyptic B [[movies]], then you'll [[love]] this one!! I [[sure]] did!

This [[kino]] is [[truthfully]] not all that [[unhealthy]]. But then again, this [[kino]] [[sort]] is right down my alley. Sure, the sets are cheap, but they [[truthfully]] did decent with what they had.

If you [[iike]] [[cheaper]], futuristic, post-apocalyptic B [[kino]], then you'll [[amour]] this one!! I [[persuaded]] did!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Oh [[dear]]!What a [[disappointment]]. I've been watching old [[Westerns]] on [[British]] TV for decades, and I wasn't aware of this one until its showing [[yesterday]] - most other Scott [[Westerns]] [[come]] [[around]] [[every]] few [[years]] or so and are [[usually]] worth watching again.

The rich colour and [[outdoor]] sets were good, but that's all I can [[say]] about this [[film]]. I have to agree with most of the other negative comments already made. Several times I felt like turning it off, and [[finally]] I did, halfway through, [[something]] I hardly ever do.

Scott [[seemed]] [[unusually]] oily in charming the [[girls]], his two sidekicks were [[annoying]] and so was the Mexican [[bandit]] lad. And I've a feeling the army [[uniforms]] were 20 [[years]] or so too [[modern]], not that this has [[bothered]] [[makers]] of [[many]] other [[Westerns]].

Perhaps it got [[better]] in the second half, but I couldn't be [[bothered]] to [[wait]] and [[see]]. Oh [[beloved]]!What a [[displeasure]]. I've been watching old [[Westerners]] on [[Briton]] TV for decades, and I wasn't aware of this one until its showing [[today]] - most other Scott [[Westerners]] [[arrived]] [[throughout]] [[all]] few [[olds]] or so and are [[routinely]] worth watching again.

The rich colour and [[outer]] sets were good, but that's all I can [[says]] about this [[filmmaking]]. I have to agree with most of the other negative comments already made. Several times I felt like turning it off, and [[eventually]] I did, halfway through, [[somethings]] I hardly ever do.

Scott [[sounded]] [[extraordinarily]] oily in charming the [[daughters]], his two sidekicks were [[irritating]] and so was the Mexican [[thug]] lad. And I've a feeling the army [[uniform]] were 20 [[ages]] or so too [[fashionable]], not that this has [[disturbed]] [[producers]] of [[various]] other [[Westerners]].

Perhaps it got [[best]] in the second half, but I couldn't be [[disturbed]] to [[sufferance]] and [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3835 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Today, I visited an Athenean Cinema with my two kids (6 & 8 years old), payed 3 x 12 euros (about 45 US $ total) not to mention gas, popcorn & soda, was asked to return my 3d special glasses after leaving the theater and was "[[forced]]" to watch what could have been a great 3d movie masterpiece but only proved to be a [[sick]] "cold war like" [[propaganda]] movie, like [[none]] I have seen during the last 20 years... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE FOR CHILDREN... IN HEAVEN'S NAME!

PS 1: The average working Greek makes no more than 850 Euros a month (approxiamtely 1050 US $)

PS 2 My [[kids]] liked it... but then again they are no more than babies >in Greek: mora, morons > like the one who wrote the script & the others who [[made]] this "3d [[disgrace]]" happen.

PS 3 3D animation is fantastic but who gives a ....! Today, I visited an Athenean Cinema with my two kids (6 & 8 years old), payed 3 x 12 euros (about 45 US $ total) not to mention gas, popcorn & soda, was asked to return my 3d special glasses after leaving the theater and was "[[coerced]]" to watch what could have been a great 3d movie masterpiece but only proved to be a [[unwell]] "cold war like" [[promotional]] movie, like [[nos]] I have seen during the last 20 years... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE FOR CHILDREN... IN HEAVEN'S NAME!

PS 1: The average working Greek makes no more than 850 Euros a month (approxiamtely 1050 US $)

PS 2 My [[child]] liked it... but then again they are no more than babies >in Greek: mora, morons > like the one who wrote the script & the others who [[brought]] this "3d [[shame]]" happen.

PS 3 3D animation is fantastic but who gives a ....! --------------------------------------------- Result 3836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ok, let me say that I didn't expect a film starring Jerry Springer to be cinematic gold, all I asked for was it to be cinematic...and it wasn't even that. It looked like someone's bad home movies. Poorly acted, scripted, and filled to the brim with nudity of the most unnattractive people I've ever seen.

The film's "plot" focuses on a low-class family who decide to go on the "Jerry Farrelly Show" to discuss multiple affairs between a mother, daughter, stepfather and the daughter's fiancee. From there, the movie fizzles and develops into a unique experience: white-trash pornography. There's redneck sex, interacial sex, even sex between Jerry and his wife? (Yuk!) This film encouraged me to want to run out of the theater and get a second circumcision. At least it was mercifully short. Disgusting and degrading. African-Americans and working class America should be offended. (Howard Stern should be pleased however, he didn't squander his attempt for film stardom. His was smart, funny and entertaining)

MY GRADE: F+ (the daughter was hot) --------------------------------------------- Result 3837 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[picked]] up this [[movie]] in the hope it would be similar to the hilarious "The Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions (which is highly recommendable, by the way). Boy, what a disappointment! The movie is [[shot]] in this [[fake]] documentary style made famous by the office but it [[fails]] to deliver. The reason is [[partly]] the stiff acting but mostly the writing and directing. True, it can be funny to [[use]] every singe cliché there is about role [[playing]] games, but here it is [[done]] in such a way that it becomes [[extremely]] [[predictable]]. Already at the [[beginning]] of each scene you know what the "joke" will be about. But [[maybe]] the [[biggest]] [[problem]] is that everything is depicted way over the [[top]]. There is no subtlety in this movie, if there [[would]] be captions "[[LAUGH]] [[NOW]]" or a [[cheap]] 80s-style fake-laughter [[track]] it would not make much difference. With some scenes you can't help to think "Yea, I get why they [[thought]] this would be [[funny]]" but the way it is [[executed]] takes all [[momentum]] out of the possible joke. I [[pick]] up this [[filmmaking]] in the hope it would be similar to the hilarious "The Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions (which is highly recommendable, by the way). Boy, what a disappointment! The movie is [[filmed]] in this [[faux]] documentary style made famous by the office but it [[fail]] to deliver. The reason is [[partially]] the stiff acting but mostly the writing and directing. True, it can be funny to [[using]] every singe cliché there is about role [[replay]] games, but here it is [[effected]] in such a way that it becomes [[unimaginably]] [[predictably]]. Already at the [[initiation]] of each scene you know what the "joke" will be about. But [[potentially]] the [[larger]] [[issues]] is that everything is depicted way over the [[superior]]. There is no subtlety in this movie, if there [[ought]] be captions "[[LAUGHS]] [[CURRENTLY]]" or a [[cheaper]] 80s-style fake-laughter [[trails]] it would not make much difference. With some scenes you can't help to think "Yea, I get why they [[think]] this would be [[hilarious]]" but the way it is [[effected]] takes all [[impetus]] out of the possible joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 3838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Disney]]? What happened? I really wish the [[movie]] had been set in the 60's ;like the [[book]] was. And I really [[could]] have dealt with cheap special [[effects]] in order to save the budget for a more [[accurate]] adaption..... I'm [[glad]] that, [[maybe]], [[someone]] might be [[influenced]] to read the [[books]]..... but, The Man With Red Eyes interchangeable as IT? And what's up with the volcanic [[upheaval]]? [[Where]] was THAT in the [[book]]? [[Peter]] Jackson! [[Save]] us!!!! A [[long]] time ago (1978) I [[heard]] that there was European [[version]] of this [[film]]. I sure wish I [[could]] id it. I can only imagine it might be closer to the [[real]] [[story]] than this [[poor]] adaption. This [[movie]] [[needs]] to be X'd. [[Disneyland]]? What happened? I really wish the [[filmmaking]] had been set in the 60's ;like the [[books]] was. And I really [[did]] have dealt with cheap special [[influencing]] in order to save the budget for a more [[correct]] adaption..... I'm [[happier]] that, [[presumably]], [[anybody]] might be [[impacted]] to read the [[ledger]]..... but, The Man With Red Eyes interchangeable as IT? And what's up with the volcanic [[tumult]]? [[Hence]] was THAT in the [[books]]? [[Petr]] Jackson! [[Saving]] us!!!! A [[longer]] time ago (1978) I [[hear]] that there was European [[stepping]] of this [[filmmaking]]. I sure wish I [[did]] id it. I can only imagine it might be closer to the [[veritable]] [[saga]] than this [[deficient]] adaption. This [[filmmaking]] [[required]] to be X'd. --------------------------------------------- Result 3839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] 'The [[Adventures]] Of [[Barry]] McKenzie' [[started]] [[life]] as a satirical comic strip in '[[Private]] Eye', written by Barry Humphries and based on an idea by Peter Cook. McKenzie ( 'Bazza' to his friends ) is a lanky, loud, hat-wearing Australian whose two main interests in life are sex ( despite never having had any ) and Fosters lager. In 1972, he found his way to the big screen for the first of two outings. It must have been [[tempting]] for Humphries to cast himself as 'Bazza', but he wisely left the job to Barry Crocker ( later to sing the theme to the television soap opera 'Neighbours'! ). Humphries instead played multiple [[roles]] in [[true]] [[Peter]] Sellers fashion, most [[notably]] Bazza's overbearing Aunt 'Edna Everage' ( this was before she became a Dame ).

You know this is not going to be 'The Importance Of Being Ernest' when its censorship classification N.P.A. stands for 'No Poofters Allowed'. Pom-hating Bazza is told by a Sydney solicitor that in order to inherit a share in his father's will he must go to England to absorb British culture. With Aunt Edna in tow, he catches a Quantas flight to Hong Kong, and then on to London. An over-efficient customs officer makes Bazza pay import duties on everything he bought over there, including a suitcase full of 'tubes of [[Fosters]] lager'. As he puts it: "when it comes to fleecing you, the Poms have got the edge on the gyppos!". A [[crafty]] taxi driver ( Bernard Spear ) maximises the fare by taking Bazza and Edna first to Stonehenge, then Scotland. The streets of London are filthy, and their hotel is a hovel run by a [[seedy]] landlord ( Spike Milligan ) who makes Bazza put pound notes in the [[electricity]] [[meter]] [[every]] [[twenty]] minutes. There is some good news for our hero though; he [[meets]] up with other Aussies in Earls [[Court]], and [[Fosters]] is on sale in British [[pubs]].

What [[happens]] next is a series of [[comical]] [[escapades]] that [[take]] Bazza from starring in his own [[cigarette]] commercial, putting curry down his [[pants]] in the [[belief]] it is some form of aphrodisiac, a [[bizarre]] [[encounter]] with [[Dennis]] Price as an upper-class pervert who loves being spanked while wearing a schoolboy's uniform, a Young Conservative dance in Rickmansworth to a charity rock concert where his song about 'chundering' ( vomiting ) almost makes him an international star, and finally to the B.B.C. T.V. Centre where he pulls his pants down on a live talk-show hosted by the thinking man's crumpet herself, Joan Bakewell. A fire breaks out, and Bazza's friends come to the rescue - downing cans of Fosters, they urinate on the flames en masse.

This is a far cry from Bruce Beresford's later works - 'Breaker Morant' and 'Driving Miss Daisy'. On release, it was savaged by critics for being too 'vulgar'. Well, yes, it is, but it is also great non-P.C. fun. 'Bazza' is a disgusting creation, but his zest for life is unmistakable, you cannot help but like the [[guy]]. His various euphemisms for urinating ( 'point Percy at the porcelain' ) and vomiting ( 'the Technicolour yawn' ) have passed into the English language without a lot of people knowing where they came from. Other guest stars include Dick Bentley ( as a detective who chases Bazza everywhere ), Peter Cook, Julie Covington ( later to star in 'Rock Follies' ), and even future arts presenter Russell Davies.

A sequel - the wonderfully-named 'Barry McKenzie Holds His Own - came out two years later. At its premiere, Humphries took the opportunity to blast the critics who had savaged the first film. Good for him.

What must have been of greater concern to him, though, was the release of 'Crocodile Dundee' in 1985. It also featured a lanky, hat-wearing Aussie struggling to come to terms with a foreign culture. And made tonnes more money.

The song on the end credits ( performed by Snacka Fitzgibbon ) is magnificent. You have a love a lyric that includes the line: "If you want to send your sister in a frenzy, introduce her to Barry McKenzie!". Time to end this review. I have to go the dunny to shake hands with the unemployed... 'The [[Shenanigans]] Of [[Bari]] McKenzie' [[initiates]] [[iife]] as a satirical comic strip in '[[Privy]] Eye', written by Barry Humphries and based on an idea by Peter Cook. McKenzie ( 'Bazza' to his friends ) is a lanky, loud, hat-wearing Australian whose two main interests in life are sex ( despite never having had any ) and Fosters lager. In 1972, he found his way to the big screen for the first of two outings. It must have been [[alluring]] for Humphries to cast himself as 'Bazza', but he wisely left the job to Barry Crocker ( later to sing the theme to the television soap opera 'Neighbours'! ). Humphries instead played multiple [[functions]] in [[genuine]] [[Petter]] Sellers fashion, most [[principally]] Bazza's overbearing Aunt 'Edna Everage' ( this was before she became a Dame ).

You know this is not going to be 'The Importance Of Being Ernest' when its censorship classification N.P.A. stands for 'No Poofters Allowed'. Pom-hating Bazza is told by a Sydney solicitor that in order to inherit a share in his father's will he must go to England to absorb British culture. With Aunt Edna in tow, he catches a Quantas flight to Hong Kong, and then on to London. An over-efficient customs officer makes Bazza pay import duties on everything he bought over there, including a suitcase full of 'tubes of [[Stimulates]] lager'. As he puts it: "when it comes to fleecing you, the Poms have got the edge on the gyppos!". A [[canny]] taxi driver ( Bernard Spear ) maximises the fare by taking Bazza and Edna first to Stonehenge, then Scotland. The streets of London are filthy, and their hotel is a hovel run by a [[shabby]] landlord ( Spike Milligan ) who makes Bazza put pound notes in the [[electrics]] [[meters]] [[any]] [[twentieth]] minutes. There is some good news for our hero though; he [[satisfies]] up with other Aussies in Earls [[Cour]], and [[Promotes]] is on sale in British [[coffees]].

What [[comes]] next is a series of [[farcical]] [[pranks]] that [[taking]] Bazza from starring in his own [[smoker]] commercial, putting curry down his [[panties]] in the [[faith]] it is some form of aphrodisiac, a [[inquisitive]] [[face]] with [[Denis]] Price as an upper-class pervert who loves being spanked while wearing a schoolboy's uniform, a Young Conservative dance in Rickmansworth to a charity rock concert where his song about 'chundering' ( vomiting ) almost makes him an international star, and finally to the B.B.C. T.V. Centre where he pulls his pants down on a live talk-show hosted by the thinking man's crumpet herself, Joan Bakewell. A fire breaks out, and Bazza's friends come to the rescue - downing cans of Fosters, they urinate on the flames en masse.

This is a far cry from Bruce Beresford's later works - 'Breaker Morant' and 'Driving Miss Daisy'. On release, it was savaged by critics for being too 'vulgar'. Well, yes, it is, but it is also great non-P.C. fun. 'Bazza' is a disgusting creation, but his zest for life is unmistakable, you cannot help but like the [[bloke]]. His various euphemisms for urinating ( 'point Percy at the porcelain' ) and vomiting ( 'the Technicolour yawn' ) have passed into the English language without a lot of people knowing where they came from. Other guest stars include Dick Bentley ( as a detective who chases Bazza everywhere ), Peter Cook, Julie Covington ( later to star in 'Rock Follies' ), and even future arts presenter Russell Davies.

A sequel - the wonderfully-named 'Barry McKenzie Holds His Own - came out two years later. At its premiere, Humphries took the opportunity to blast the critics who had savaged the first film. Good for him.

What must have been of greater concern to him, though, was the release of 'Crocodile Dundee' in 1985. It also featured a lanky, hat-wearing Aussie struggling to come to terms with a foreign culture. And made tonnes more money.

The song on the end credits ( performed by Snacka Fitzgibbon ) is magnificent. You have a love a lyric that includes the line: "If you want to send your sister in a frenzy, introduce her to Barry McKenzie!". Time to end this review. I have to go the dunny to shake hands with the unemployed... --------------------------------------------- Result 3840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An awful film! It must have been up against some real stinkers to be nominated for the Golden Globe. They've taken the story of the first famous female Renaissance painter and mangled it beyond recognition. My complaint is not that they've taken liberties with the facts; if the story were good, that would perfectly fine. But it's simply bizarre -- by all accounts the true story of this artist would have made for a far better film, so why did they come up with this dishwater-dull script? I suppose there weren't enough naked people in the factual version. It's hurriedly capped off in the end with a summary of the artist's life -- we could have saved ourselves a couple of hours if they'd favored the rest of the film with same brevity. --------------------------------------------- Result 3841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Stairway to Heaven" is a outstanding invention of movie making, probably never duplicated. I rank it with "The Wizard of Oz" and "African Queen," although it is a totally different type of movie than "African Queen." "Stairway to Heaven" is a psycho-drama that uses performance concepts and technical effects that, to my knowledge, are totally unique.

For example, there is the combination of B&W and color footage - as in "Oz," but the significance of the contrast goes way beyond the simple - but beautiful - effect achieved in "Oz." In "Stairway" the purpose and effect of the contrast can only be described as powerful.

Another brilliant aspect of "Stairway" is the concept of "time" and how it is used here. How could anybody have conceived of a better way to make time stand still – literally? And then there is the Stairway itself!

If you have any imagination at all, you will agree with me. "Stairway to Heaven" is a true gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 3842 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the touching story of two families in Israel and the relationships within each family. Each family has a gay son. The stories are interrelated at that point but this film is about all of the family members, not just the two sons. The portraits of each of the family members in both families are well drawn and the story is consistently interesting if a bit bleak. --------------------------------------------- Result 3843 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[First]] off, the title character is not [[even]] the main character of the [[movie]]. He is the sidekick of the cult leader. The actor who portrays Igor believed that [[screaming]] loud, [[laughing]] hysterically, and having a crooked [[smile]] while [[bugging]] out your eyes would be an [[excellent]] [[way]] to scare people. Igor also had the annoying habit of yelling (because he never actually just [[spoke]]) in a [[high]] pitched voice. He would also [[say]] [[idiotic]] one-liners. For [[example]] when the cult leader [[murders]] one of his [[followers]] with a buzz saw, Igor upon seeing this, yells out "[[Paul]]! [[No]] [[Paul]]! Why'd you do it? I [[could]] have [[cut]] her [[clean]]! So clean!" In another scene Igor tells a victim that she would have to 'get her own [[tools]] for surgery because right now, it was his [[time]] to [[operate]].' [[Aside]] from the [[bad]] acting, the [[ending]] did not [[make]] [[sense]] because while the [[story]] builds up what [[little]] [[steam]] it has towards the climax, which is Igor getting a crossbow arrow to the head and the rest of his [[lunatic]] buddies being killed, he shows up again two more times to kill the remaining '[[good]] guys'. The [[movie]] [[offers]] no explanation of this, only telling the [[viewer]] that Igor escaped from the mental hospital. What??? Bottom line is do not waste your [[time]] watching this movie. I wish I could get back the moments I lost watching this. [[Firstly]] off, the title character is not [[yet]] the main character of the [[filmmaking]]. He is the sidekick of the cult leader. The actor who portrays Igor believed that [[yelling]] loud, [[giggling]] hysterically, and having a crooked [[mouse]] while [[tapping]] out your eyes would be an [[great]] [[route]] to scare people. Igor also had the annoying habit of yelling (because he never actually just [[speaks]]) in a [[higher]] pitched voice. He would also [[said]] [[stupid]] one-liners. For [[case]] when the cult leader [[assassination]] one of his [[fans]] with a buzz saw, Igor upon seeing this, yells out "[[Paolo]]! [[Nos]] [[Paulo]]! Why'd you do it? I [[did]] have [[slice]] her [[cleanliness]]! So clean!" In another scene Igor tells a victim that she would have to 'get her own [[instrument]] for surgery because right now, it was his [[period]] to [[functioning]].' [[Sideways]] from the [[negative]] acting, the [[terminated]] did not [[deliver]] [[sensing]] because while the [[storytelling]] builds up what [[petite]] [[vapor]] it has towards the climax, which is Igor getting a crossbow arrow to the head and the rest of his [[demented]] buddies being killed, he shows up again two more times to kill the remaining '[[alright]] guys'. The [[filmmaking]] [[gives]] no explanation of this, only telling the [[beholder]] that Igor escaped from the mental hospital. What??? Bottom line is do not waste your [[period]] watching this movie. I wish I could get back the moments I lost watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like some of the other folks who have reviewed this film, I was also waxing nostalgic about it...before I had the misfortune to actually watch it again. Alas, my childhood memories of this film were completely untrustworthy, and The Perils of Pauline is now revealed to be an embarrassing exercise in banal, racist, and plain boring film-making. Even the presence of old pros Edward Everett Horton and Terry-Thomas can't overcome a rancid screenplay, a horrible theme song, and some wretched 'special effects'. In addition, the stereotypical depictions of African and Arab characters make for painful viewing, especially considering this was produced in the immediate wake of the Civil Rights movement. Michael Weldon's original Psychotronic Encyclopedia reports that The Perils of Pauline was originally produced for television but inexplicably ended up getting a theatrical release. Judging from the results, that is a completely believable (and baffling) scenario. --------------------------------------------- Result 3845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I sat down to watch 'Largo Winch' I [[expected]] nothing more than action scenes and [[fascinating]] [[cars]]. [[When]] I [[stood]] up, I've seen both of these; and more.

Karl Roden was finally not the antagonist in a [[movie]], to [[start]] with. [[Kristin]] Scott Thomas played her role well, but the [[real]] two stars in my [[opinion]] were Tomer Sisley and Miki Manojlovic, both acting [[superbly]]. In Radivoje Bukvic [[portrayed]] Goran well.

The mixed linguistics brought a nice color to the [[movie]], but I understand why people [[would]] get bored with it.

The scenery of [[Hong]] Kong and especially the [[stunning]] Croatian seaside both amazed me, and I [[hardly]] wanted to take my eyes off the screen when Largo entered the unbelievably [[beautiful]] island.

Rolls [[Royce]] Phantom; Mercedes S500, and BMW 7; if anyone loves expensive [[limousine]] - type cars; this is their movie. It is [[also]] a movie for people who love action sequences, good acting, landscapes of extremal beauty, and above all, a fast - paced, well written action movie, with [[dazzling]] combat and a [[thoroughly]] twined inner drama.

My vote, as it has enlightened a gloomy day is: 10/10 When I sat down to watch 'Largo Winch' I [[projected]] nothing more than action scenes and [[intriguing]] [[motors]]. [[Whenever]] I [[amounted]] up, I've seen both of these; and more.

Karl Roden was finally not the antagonist in a [[film]], to [[started]] with. [[Christine]] Scott Thomas played her role well, but the [[true]] two stars in my [[viewing]] were Tomer Sisley and Miki Manojlovic, both acting [[remarkably]]. In Radivoje Bukvic [[depicted]] Goran well.

The mixed linguistics brought a nice color to the [[film]], but I understand why people [[should]] get bored with it.

The scenery of [[Kong]] Kong and especially the [[wonderful]] Croatian seaside both amazed me, and I [[almost]] wanted to take my eyes off the screen when Largo entered the unbelievably [[sublime]] island.

Rolls [[Ruiz]] Phantom; Mercedes S500, and BMW 7; if anyone loves expensive [[limo]] - type cars; this is their movie. It is [[apart]] a movie for people who love action sequences, good acting, landscapes of extremal beauty, and above all, a fast - paced, well written action movie, with [[striking]] combat and a [[intently]] twined inner drama.

My vote, as it has enlightened a gloomy day is: 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Final]] [[Score]]: 0 (out of 10)

***Possible scene [[specific]] [[spoilers]] (but who the hell cares)***

[[Yes]], that's [[right]]: zero. And I rarely give 1's. Even for the lamest of movies I [[look]] for things like [[music]], cinematography, [[imagination]], it's [[humor]], [[even]] a [[good]] pace to be as [[objective]] about the score as possible. [[Looking]] at it [[within]] it's own [[genera]] or subgenera. But there is [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] redeeming here. I can't [[remember]] another [[time]] a [[movie]] actually [[sent]] me pacing up and down the [[room]] when it was over. The only [[reason]] I [[made]] it to the end was because I couldn't [[seem]] to [[change]] the channel - I sat there [[simply]] aghast, watching to [[see]] what insultingly stupid bit it [[would]] [[come]] up with [[next]]. It was like watching a [[snake]] digest a rat.

But let's have some fun and [[pull]] this [[baby]] [[apart]], shall we. First of all, There is nothing [[technical]] about "Whipped" that [[works]]. The [[visuals]] are all [[sitcom]] style. The cut scenes all just [[pictures]] of the street traffic going by at [[night]] over and over. The music and score, not only doesn't [[contribute]] anything to the [[movie]] - it's [[obnoxious]]. Not to [[mention]] it doesn't have anything to [[contribute]] to anyway. The acting is as [[cardboard]] as it [[comes]], all around and that goes for Amanda Peet ([[clearly]] the "star" that [[got]] this train [[wreck]] green-lighted) too. These guys, [[supposedly]] good [[friends]], have no more [[chemistry]] or [[sense]] of [[purpose]] then if [[director]] [[Peter]] M. Cohen had rounded them up at a bus station minutes before shooting.

On the [[creative]] side, there isn't an [[original]] [[bone]] in it's body. It has no [[imagination]]. It shows us nothing we haven't [[seen]] a thousand [[times]] before. The [[whole]] [[premise]], or "twist", of this [[movie]] is [[based]] on male-bashing and the "[[idea]]" that an [[empowered]] [[women]] can [[play]] men "just as they [[get]] [[played]]". [[Anybody]], that thinks this is somehow a twist or is in any [[way]] original has [[obviously]] never turned on a [[TV]] before. [[Twisted]], shallow [[women]] are common. Male-bashing is the norm. It's not stealing from [[anything]] specifically, it's worse: it's stealing from clichés. I can't imagine a women making a movie that depicted other women based so much on stereotypes and with this sense of contempt. Makes me want to go rent "In the Company of Men" - or better yet, "There's Something About Mary". This movie wants to be a "edgier" version of "There's Something About Mary" so bad you can see the sweat.

The movie has no insights into women, men, dating, sex, or really anything. Cohen is simply content to regurgitate myths he has been indoctrinated with from other sexist movies. On the other end, the movie doesn't work as a satire either, because even though it is ripe with exaggerations one could view as "satirical" it doesn't have that grounding in reality that satires need. It doesn't even know what it's satirizing. Then there's the dialogue, which is little more then the characters screaming obscenities at each other. Example: Character 1: "F**k you" Character 2: "Oh yeah, well f**k you" (repeat)

And the bottom line, the thing that could excuse all the other discretions: There are a lot of movies without plots, without good acting, with morally repulsive characters and obscenity laced dialogue that have been funny and thus, been good. "Whipped" ain't funny. Not for a second. It has no comic skills or timing. The situations are all completely phony, not based in any shred of truth, especially enough to wring laughs out of us. The characters all broadly drawn so they will SEEM relatable to the lowest of the lowest common denominator. Just look at "the marquee scene", "cult classic" hair gel scene. One of our bumbling anti-heroes opens the medicine cabinet and sees Mena (Peet)'s vibrator. For some reason light shines down on it as if he's found the holy grail. Why Cohen thinks men react this way to vibrators I do not know. While he rubs it on himself, he drops it in the toilet and then attempts to fish it out with his bare hands when, oh my, Mena walks in on him. Oh, my sides.

But strangely enough, people actually like this movie. Of course, people also like "Friends" and reality dating shows so I shouldn't be surprised. All of this has a common thread however. "Whipped" is big evidence to me that there is just a huge pocket of people in America that will laugh at any joke just because it is about sex. They will like any show or movie (or think they like it) just because it is about dating or relationships. It's lack of any quality has no baring on these people. Just as people are indoctrinated to want whiter teeth and thinner bodies to sell toothbrushes and weight loss programs, they are also indoctrinated to blindly lap up anything dating/relationship related to sell them cheap, empty, effortless TV, movies and any number of products.

The only consilation will be that when I die, because I saw this movie, I've got a credit to get 80 minutes of my life back.

[[Latter]] [[Notation]]: 0 (out of 10)

***Possible scene [[concrete]] [[troublemakers]] (but who the hell cares)***

[[Yep]], that's [[rights]]: zero. And I rarely give 1's. Even for the lamest of movies I [[peek]] for things like [[musicians]], cinematography, [[novelty]], it's [[comedy]], [[yet]] a [[alright]] pace to be as [[purpose]] about the score as possible. [[Researching]] at it [[inside]] it's own [[genus]] or subgenera. But there is [[perfectly]] [[anything]] redeeming here. I can't [[remind]] another [[period]] a [[flick]] actually [[sends]] me pacing up and down the [[bedroom]] when it was over. The only [[cause]] I [[effected]] it to the end was because I couldn't [[seems]] to [[altering]] the channel - I sat there [[purely]] aghast, watching to [[seeing]] what insultingly stupid bit it [[could]] [[coming]] up with [[future]]. It was like watching a [[cobra]] digest a rat.

But let's have some fun and [[pulled]] this [[babe]] [[also]], shall we. First of all, There is nothing [[technological]] about "Whipped" that [[collaborated]]. The [[picture]] are all [[comic]] style. The cut scenes all just [[photos]] of the street traffic going by at [[nighttime]] over and over. The music and score, not only doesn't [[contributes]] anything to the [[filmmaking]] - it's [[repulsive]]. Not to [[mentioned]] it doesn't have anything to [[helping]] to anyway. The acting is as [[luge]] as it [[happens]], all around and that goes for Amanda Peet ([[apparently]] the "star" that [[ai]] this train [[ruins]] green-lighted) too. These guys, [[allegedly]] good [[friend]], have no more [[chemicals]] or [[sensing]] of [[target]] then if [[headmaster]] [[Peters]] M. Cohen had rounded them up at a bus station minutes before shooting.

On the [[imaginative]] side, there isn't an [[initial]] [[skeletal]] in it's body. It has no [[fantasy]]. It shows us nothing we haven't [[noticed]] a thousand [[moments]] before. The [[total]] [[hypothesis]], or "twist", of this [[filmmaking]] is [[groundwork]] on male-bashing and the "[[brainchild]]" that an [[licensed]] [[mujer]] can [[playing]] men "just as they [[got]] [[done]]". [[Everybody]], that thinks this is somehow a twist or is in any [[ways]] original has [[definitely]] never turned on a [[TELEVISIONS]] before. [[Deformed]], shallow [[femmes]] are common. Male-bashing is the norm. It's not stealing from [[something]] specifically, it's worse: it's stealing from clichés. I can't imagine a women making a movie that depicted other women based so much on stereotypes and with this sense of contempt. Makes me want to go rent "In the Company of Men" - or better yet, "There's Something About Mary". This movie wants to be a "edgier" version of "There's Something About Mary" so bad you can see the sweat.

The movie has no insights into women, men, dating, sex, or really anything. Cohen is simply content to regurgitate myths he has been indoctrinated with from other sexist movies. On the other end, the movie doesn't work as a satire either, because even though it is ripe with exaggerations one could view as "satirical" it doesn't have that grounding in reality that satires need. It doesn't even know what it's satirizing. Then there's the dialogue, which is little more then the characters screaming obscenities at each other. Example: Character 1: "F**k you" Character 2: "Oh yeah, well f**k you" (repeat)

And the bottom line, the thing that could excuse all the other discretions: There are a lot of movies without plots, without good acting, with morally repulsive characters and obscenity laced dialogue that have been funny and thus, been good. "Whipped" ain't funny. Not for a second. It has no comic skills or timing. The situations are all completely phony, not based in any shred of truth, especially enough to wring laughs out of us. The characters all broadly drawn so they will SEEM relatable to the lowest of the lowest common denominator. Just look at "the marquee scene", "cult classic" hair gel scene. One of our bumbling anti-heroes opens the medicine cabinet and sees Mena (Peet)'s vibrator. For some reason light shines down on it as if he's found the holy grail. Why Cohen thinks men react this way to vibrators I do not know. While he rubs it on himself, he drops it in the toilet and then attempts to fish it out with his bare hands when, oh my, Mena walks in on him. Oh, my sides.

But strangely enough, people actually like this movie. Of course, people also like "Friends" and reality dating shows so I shouldn't be surprised. All of this has a common thread however. "Whipped" is big evidence to me that there is just a huge pocket of people in America that will laugh at any joke just because it is about sex. They will like any show or movie (or think they like it) just because it is about dating or relationships. It's lack of any quality has no baring on these people. Just as people are indoctrinated to want whiter teeth and thinner bodies to sell toothbrushes and weight loss programs, they are also indoctrinated to blindly lap up anything dating/relationship related to sell them cheap, empty, effortless TV, movies and any number of products.

The only consilation will be that when I die, because I saw this movie, I've got a credit to get 80 minutes of my life back.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I first heard about this series on AnimeTV,I have to say that out of all the shows that I have seen,this one tops it all off. I had to see this show,and that is what I really did. When I got the first volume of this show,it was the best. I really liked the animation,and all the fight scenes were awesome. I have to say that my favorite characters in the show were Saber,and Archer and of course I also like Illya. And of course,all the episodes on the volumes were interesting,and very cool. Another thing I have to say about the series is Michael McConnohie(famous for Transformers,and others) playing the voice of Berserker. He does have a cool character. And I even watched the entire series all over again before watching the final volume. So if you to see something good,then see this show,it's the best. --------------------------------------------- Result 3848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was rented by a friend. Her choice is normally good. I read the cover first and was expecting a good movie. Although it

was a horror movie. Which i don't prefer. But no horror came to mind while watching the movie. It was a dull,

not very entertaining movie. The appearance of Denise Richards

was again a pleasure for the eye. But that's it. We (the four of us)

we're a little bit disappointed. But feel free to see this movie and

judge it yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 3849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I love killer [[Insects]] movies they are great [[fun]] to watch, I had to watch this movie as it was one of my Favourite horror [[books]] by [[Shaun]] Hutson.

I have [[met]] him and I [[wish]] I did [[listen]] to him as this movie was [[terrible]] like he [[Said]] it was,after he [[said]] that I was [[still]] dying to see how bad it was.

The plot: People are [[dying]] mysteriously and gruesomely, and nobody has a clue what the cause is.

Only health [[worker]] Mike Brady has a [[possible]] solution, but his [[theory]] of killer [[slugs]] is laughed at by the authorities.

[[Only]] when the [[body]] count [[begins]] to [[rise]] and a slug [[expert]] from [[England]] [[begins]] snooping [[around]] does it [[begin]] to look like Mike had the right [[idea]] after all.

This [[movie]] as the most overacting you ever [[see]] a [[movie]]! [[Slugs]] in this [[movie]] are [[fast]] (Then normal) and it looks like they [[fast]] forwarding the scenes!

This [[movie]] is nothing like the [[book]] at all, the book was ten [[times]] scarier, ten [[times]] [[gory]] and had a [[lot]] more [[story]] to it!

I didn't like this [[movie]] at all! As I am [[huge]] fan of [[Slugs]] the book and second book [[called]] [[Breeding]] ground! Both of [[books]] are [[Great]]

Read the [[book]] then watch the [[movie]], you may like more then I did [[Give]] this 2 out 10 I love killer [[Bugs]] movies they are great [[droll]] to watch, I had to watch this movie as it was one of my Favourite horror [[livres]] by [[Shawn]] Hutson.

I have [[complied]] him and I [[wanna]] I did [[hear]] to him as this movie was [[scary]] like he [[Say]] it was,after he [[says]] that I was [[however]] dying to see how bad it was.

The plot: People are [[dies]] mysteriously and gruesomely, and nobody has a clue what the cause is.

Only health [[workman]] Mike Brady has a [[feasible]] solution, but his [[doctrines]] of killer [[bales]] is laughed at by the authorities.

[[Purely]] when the [[agency]] count [[started]] to [[climbs]] and a slug [[specialist]] from [[Uk]] [[launched]] snooping [[approximately]] does it [[starts]] to look like Mike had the right [[ideals]] after all.

This [[filmmaking]] as the most overacting you ever [[consults]] a [[cinema]]! [[Bales]] in this [[filmmaking]] are [[quicker]] (Then normal) and it looks like they [[faster]] forwarding the scenes!

This [[filmmaking]] is nothing like the [[ledger]] at all, the book was ten [[time]] scarier, ten [[time]] [[gori]] and had a [[lots]] more [[storytelling]] to it!

I didn't like this [[filmmaking]] at all! As I am [[big]] fan of [[Bullets]] the book and second book [[drew]] [[Breed]] ground! Both of [[livres]] are [[Resplendent]]

Read the [[books]] then watch the [[filmmaking]], you may like more then I did [[Confer]] this 2 out 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3850 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A [[young]] boy sees his [[mother]] getting [[killed]] and his father hanging himself. 20 [[years]] later he gets a bunch of [[friends]] together to [[perform]] an exorcism on himself so he won't [[turn]] out like his [[father]]. All the [[stock]] characters are in place: the [[nice]] [[couple]]; the "[[funny]]" [[guy]]; the [[tough]] (but [[sensitive]]) hood; the smart [[girl]] (she [[wears]] glasses--that's how we [[know]]); the nerd and two no-personality [[blondes]]. It all involves some stupid wooden statue that comes to [[life]] (don't [[ask]]) and [[kills]] people. I [[knew]] I was in trouble when, after a [[great]] [[opening]] scene, we jump to 20 [[years]] later--ALL bad horror movies do that!

The dialogue is [[atrocious]], the acting is [[bad]] (except for [[Betsy]] Palmer--why Betsy?) and the killings are stupid and/or unimaginative. My favorite scene is when two people are supposedly having sex and the statue knocks the guy off the bed to show he's fully dressed! A [[real]] bad, stupid [[incoherent]] horror film. [[Avoid]] at all costs. A [[youths]] boy sees his [[mommy]] getting [[killing]] and his father hanging himself. 20 [[olds]] later he gets a bunch of [[friend]] together to [[performed]] an exorcism on himself so he won't [[turning]] out like his [[pere]]. All the [[stocks]] characters are in place: the [[delightful]] [[pair]]; the "[[comical]]" [[boy]]; the [[rigid]] (but [[delicate]]) hood; the smart [[giri]] (she [[wearing]] glasses--that's how we [[savoir]]); the nerd and two no-personality [[blonds]]. It all involves some stupid wooden statue that comes to [[lives]] (don't [[poser]]) and [[killing]] people. I [[overheard]] I was in trouble when, after a [[whopping]] [[introductory]] scene, we jump to 20 [[ages]] later--ALL bad horror movies do that!

The dialogue is [[outrageous]], the acting is [[negative]] (except for [[Betsey]] Palmer--why Betsy?) and the killings are stupid and/or unimaginative. My favorite scene is when two people are supposedly having sex and the statue knocks the guy off the bed to show he's fully dressed! A [[veritable]] bad, stupid [[inconsistent]] horror film. [[Avert]] at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 3851 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] "Mr. Harvey Lights a Candle" is anchored by a [[brilliant]] performance by Timothy Spall.

[[While]] we can [[predict]] that his titular morose, up tight teacher will have some [[sort]] of [[break]] down or catharsis based on some deep down [[secret]] from his past, how his [[emotions]] are [[unveiled]] is surprising. Spall's [[range]] of feelings [[conveyed]] is [[quite]] moving and more than he [[usually]] gets to [[portray]] as part of the Mike Leigh [[repertory]].

[[While]] an [[expected]] [[boring]] [[school]] bus [[trip]] has only been used for [[comic]] purposes, such as on "The Simpsons," this central situation of a [[visit]] to Salisbury [[Cathedral]] in Rhidian Brook's script is well-contained and structured for dramatic [[purposes]], and is [[almost]] [[formally]] [[divided]] into [[acts]].

We're [[introduced]] to the urban British range of racially and religiously [[diverse]] kids (with their uniforms I couldn't [[tell]] if this is a "private" or "public" school), as they [[gather]] – the rapping black kids, the serious [[South]] Asians and [[Muslims]], the white bullies and [[mean]] [[girls]] – but [[conveyed]] [[quite]] [[naturally]] and [[individually]]. The young [[actors]], some of whom I [[recognized]] from British TV such as "Shameless," were [[exuberant]] in representing the [[usual]] range of junior high social [[pressures]]. Celia Imrie [[puts]] more warmth into the supervisor's role than the martinets she [[usually]] has to play.

A break in the [[trip]] leads to a transformative crisis for some while others remain amusingly [[oblivious]]. We [[think]], [[like]] the [[teacher]] [[portrayed]] by [[Ben]] [[Miles]] of "Coupling," that we will be spoon [[fed]] a didactic lesson about [[religious]] tolerance, but it's much more about faith in people as well as [[God]], which is why the BBC showed it in [[England]] at Easter [[time]] and BBC [[America]] showed it in the U.S. over Christmas.

[[Nathalie]] Press, who was [[also]] so good in "Summer of Love," has a [[key]] role in [[Mr]]. Harvey's redemption that could have been played for movie-of-the-week preaching, but is touching as they [[reach]] out to each other in an [[unexpected]] way ([[unfortunately]] I [[saw]] their [[intense]] scene [[interrupted]] by [[commercials]]).

[[While]] it is a bit heavy-handed in [[several]] [[times]] [[pointedly]] calling this [[road]] trip "a [[pilgrimage]]," this [[quiet]] [[film]] was the best evocation of "good will towards men" than I've seen in most holiday-themed TV movies. "Mr. Harvey Lights a Candle" is anchored by a [[sparkly]] performance by Timothy Spall.

[[Though]] we can [[prophecy]] that his titular morose, up tight teacher will have some [[genre]] of [[blackout]] down or catharsis based on some deep down [[covert]] from his past, how his [[passions]] are [[unveil]] is surprising. Spall's [[ranges]] of feelings [[sent]] is [[rather]] moving and more than he [[fluently]] gets to [[outline]] as part of the Mike Leigh [[directory]].

[[Though]] an [[waited]] [[dreary]] [[tuition]] bus [[excursion]] has only been used for [[comedian]] purposes, such as on "The Simpsons," this central situation of a [[visiting]] to Salisbury [[Basilica]] in Rhidian Brook's script is well-contained and structured for dramatic [[intending]], and is [[nearly]] [[solemnly]] [[dividing]] into [[act]].

We're [[lodged]] to the urban British range of racially and religiously [[varied]] kids (with their uniforms I couldn't [[say]] if this is a "private" or "public" school), as they [[assemble]] – the rapping black kids, the serious [[Southward]] Asians and [[Islamic]], the white bullies and [[imply]] [[dame]] – but [[transmitted]] [[pretty]] [[evidently]] and [[separately]]. The young [[players]], some of whom I [[acknowledgement]] from British TV such as "Shameless," were [[luxuriant]] in representing the [[customary]] range of junior high social [[presses]]. Celia Imrie [[begs]] more warmth into the supervisor's role than the martinets she [[traditionally]] has to play.

A break in the [[touring]] leads to a transformative crisis for some while others remain amusingly [[unsympathetic]]. We [[thinking]], [[fond]] the [[professors]] [[depicted]] by [[Bin]] [[Kilometres]] of "Coupling," that we will be spoon [[fuelled]] a didactic lesson about [[ecclesiastical]] tolerance, but it's much more about faith in people as well as [[Christ]], which is why the BBC showed it in [[Britain]] at Easter [[times]] and BBC [[Americans]] showed it in the U.S. over Christmas.

[[Natalya]] Press, who was [[likewise]] so good in "Summer of Love," has a [[principal]] role in [[Mister]]. Harvey's redemption that could have been played for movie-of-the-week preaching, but is touching as they [[attaining]] out to each other in an [[unscheduled]] way ([[unluckily]] I [[watched]] their [[intensive]] scene [[suspended]] by [[ads]]).

[[Whereas]] it is a bit heavy-handed in [[multiple]] [[time]] [[abruptly]] calling this [[chemin]] trip "a [[pilgrim]]," this [[silent]] [[kino]] was the best evocation of "good will towards men" than I've seen in most holiday-themed TV movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 3852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First let me say that Before Sunrise, like all movies, is NOT a movie for all tastes. It appears some folks are less smart to acknowledge this fact, but it is remarkable to contemplate the kind of outright dislike this small harmless movie generates from some people. For me, like most folks here, Before Sunrise struck a deep chord in me, I was truly stunned, moved, inspired by it. This is a movie that ultimately benefits from more than one viewing. It creates some of the most awesomely unforgettable feelings and emotions you can possibly imagine. It is impossible to imagine this world without ever thinking about the kind of inspirational feelings I got from it.

The movie works as a communion of two fragile souls that are starting to get to know each other. It is very intelligent and inspiring, not so much in how one conversation necessarily ties into the next or the significance of the topics of Jesse and Celine's discussions, but rather the little nuances, the perfectly articulate responses they provoke from each other. It captures an honest, romantic, yet fleeting human emotion that is starting to blossom in the awesomely sublime Viennese milieu; it convinces us that their evanescent relationship might be the greatest compliment in the world. And what happens after that night is open for debate, but I never doubt that they won't each other again.

The facile comments by RockytheBear and the below user are hopeless examples of a doctrinaire dissenter unwilling to accept and respect those who love this movie.

See it and it may change your way of life. --------------------------------------------- Result 3853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I have to say as being a [[fan]] of the [[man]] who [[created]] Halloween/The Fog/[[Christine]]/The [[Thing]] - [[probably]] his best [[films]].

[[Then]] you [[got]] this POS. I can't [[logically]] [[think]] he put any [[effort]] at all into this like he did with [[Cigarette]] [[Burns]]. At [[least]] his [[son]] [[made]] a decent soundtrack.

You have to [[look]] at this from the standpoint that it didn't [[seem]] like a [[movie]]. It [[looked]] as if [[someone]] [[else]] directed it for one [[thing]]. I won't believe Carpenter put any effort into this at all.

I was just [[listening]] to his [[old]] school H2/H3/The Fog soundtrack and it was [[awesome]], especially for the [[times]].

He was [[using]] a [[style]] that no one had and it [[worked]] so well for his [[films]]. I have to say as being a [[breather]] of the [[men]] who [[established]] Halloween/The Fog/[[Kristin]]/The [[Stuff]] - [[maybe]] his best [[filmmaking]].

[[Subsequently]] you [[get]] this POS. I can't [[reasonably]] [[thinks]] he put any [[efforts]] at all into this like he did with [[Cigarettes]] [[Burn]]. At [[lowest]] his [[sons]] [[brought]] a decent soundtrack.

You have to [[peek]] at this from the standpoint that it didn't [[appears]] like a [[film]]. It [[seemed]] as if [[everybody]] [[otherwise]] directed it for one [[stuff]]. I won't believe Carpenter put any effort into this at all.

I was just [[listen]] to his [[former]] school H2/H3/The Fog soundtrack and it was [[sumptuous]], especially for the [[time]].

He was [[utilised]] a [[styles]] that no one had and it [[cooperating]] so well for his [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] `The [[United]] States of [[Kiss]] My Ass'

[[House]] of Games is the directional debut from [[playwright]] David Mamet and it is an [[effective]] and at times [[surprising]] psychological thriller. It stars [[Lindsay]] Crouse as best-selling psychiatrist, Margaret Ford, who decides to confront the gambler who has driven one of her patients to contemplate suicide. In doing so she leaves the safety and comfort of her somewhat [[ordinary]] life behind and travels `downtown' to visit the lowlife place, House of Games.

The gambler [[Mike]] ([[played]] [[excellently]] by Joe Mantegna) turns out to be somewhat sharp and shifty. He offers Crouse's [[character]] a [[deal]], if she is willing to [[sit]] with him at a game, a [[big]] money game in the backroom, he'll [[cancel]] the patients debts. The card [[game]] ensues and [[soon]] the psychiatrist and the gambler are [[seen]] to be in a [[familiar]] line of work ([[gaining]] the trust of others) and a [[fascinating]] relationship [[begins]]. What makes [[House]] of [[Games]] interesting and an [[essential]] [[view]] for any [[film]] fan is the [[constant]] guessing of who is in control, is it the psychiatrist or the con-man or is it the well-known [[man]] of [[great]] bluffs David Mamet.

[[In]] [[House]] of [[Games]] the direction is dull and most of the [[times]] flat and uninspiring, [[however]] in [[every]] David Mamet [[film]] it is the story which is central to the [[whole]] [[proceedings]], not the direction. In [[House]] of [[Games]] this [[shines]] through in part thanks to the [[superb]] performances from the two leads (showy and distracting) but mainly as is the case with much of Mamet's work, it is the dialogue, which [[grips]] you and slowly [[draws]] you into the film. No one in the House of Games [[says]] what they mean and conversations become battlegrounds and war of words. Everyone bluffs and double bluffs, which is reminiscent of a poker games natural order. This is a running theme throughout the film and is used to great effect at the right moments to create [[vast]] amounts of tension. House of Games can also be viewed as a `class-war' division movie. With Lindsay Crouse we have the middle-class, well-to-do educated psychiatrist and Joe Mantegna is the complete opposite, the working class of America earning a living by `honest' crime.

The film seduces the viewer much like Crouse is seduced by Mantegna and the end result is ultimately a very satisfying piece of American cinema. And the final of the film is definitely something for all to see and watch out for, it's stunning.

An extremely enjoyable film experience that is worth repeated viewings. 9/10 `The [[Unidos]] States of [[Fucked]] My Ass'

[[Houses]] of Games is the directional debut from [[scriptwriter]] David Mamet and it is an [[efficacious]] and at times [[impressed]] psychological thriller. It stars [[Lindsey]] Crouse as best-selling psychiatrist, Margaret Ford, who decides to confront the gambler who has driven one of her patients to contemplate suicide. In doing so she leaves the safety and comfort of her somewhat [[mundane]] life behind and travels `downtown' to visit the lowlife place, House of Games.

The gambler [[Mick]] ([[accomplished]] [[brilliantly]] by Joe Mantegna) turns out to be somewhat sharp and shifty. He offers Crouse's [[nature]] a [[addresses]], if she is willing to [[sitting]] with him at a game, a [[substantial]] money game in the backroom, he'll [[repeal]] the patients debts. The card [[games]] ensues and [[rapidly]] the psychiatrist and the gambler are [[noticed]] to be in a [[known]] line of work ([[obtaining]] the trust of others) and a [[exciting]] relationship [[start]]. What makes [[Home]] of [[Game]] interesting and an [[critical]] [[opinion]] for any [[cinematography]] fan is the [[permanent]] guessing of who is in control, is it the psychiatrist or the con-man or is it the well-known [[males]] of [[remarkable]] bluffs David Mamet.

[[Among]] [[Household]] of [[Jeux]] the direction is dull and most of the [[time]] flat and uninspiring, [[still]] in [[each]] David Mamet [[cinema]] it is the story which is central to the [[total]] [[lawsuits]], not the direction. In [[Dwellings]] of [[Game]] this [[glitters]] through in part thanks to the [[magnifique]] performances from the two leads (showy and distracting) but mainly as is the case with much of Mamet's work, it is the dialogue, which [[fists]] you and slowly [[drawn]] you into the film. No one in the House of Games [[asserts]] what they mean and conversations become battlegrounds and war of words. Everyone bluffs and double bluffs, which is reminiscent of a poker games natural order. This is a running theme throughout the film and is used to great effect at the right moments to create [[gargantuan]] amounts of tension. House of Games can also be viewed as a `class-war' division movie. With Lindsay Crouse we have the middle-class, well-to-do educated psychiatrist and Joe Mantegna is the complete opposite, the working class of America earning a living by `honest' crime.

The film seduces the viewer much like Crouse is seduced by Mantegna and the end result is ultimately a very satisfying piece of American cinema. And the final of the film is definitely something for all to see and watch out for, it's stunning.

An extremely enjoyable film experience that is worth repeated viewings. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Townies is the laziest [[movie]] I have ever seen, and I saw the Blair Witch movies (parts one and two). It seems [[confused]] in what it wants to be. It's not funny enough for comedy, it's not tragic enough for drama, it's not bloody enough for horror, and it's not good enough for watching. It has scenes of a man doing "slapstick/bloody" karate so I think, oh this movie will be in the vein of Toxic Avenger and Street Trash. Then it leaps without warning into a drama about a missing girl, a retarded (mentally handicap) woman and a trusting mother. Then it slaps itself into the [[ONLY]] [[good]] part in the movie which seems to be set up like a sitcom without the laugh tracks. The part I'm speaking of is a lonely TOWNIE who is so lonely he finds comfort in a rotting corpse. That was the ONLY part of the [[movie]] that gave me [[ANY]] feeling. The rest was a waist of my life. Then, just to show how CRUEL Wayne is there is a kind of DOCUMENTARY at the end of the film of Wayne (the Director) making fun of Toby (the star) in public. It [[made]] me [[sick]]. Even though Killer Nerd and Bride of Killer Nerd (two other movies by Wayne) aren't the best, they at [[least]] are thought out enough were you can stay entertained until the ending credits. I even like Killer Nerd a bit, it had some great lines I still use to this day.

If you like underground films, if you like overground films, and if you like to watch your feet, just resting were they are, you will not like TOWNIES!

*1/2 (out of ****)

Townies is the laziest [[filmmaking]] I have ever seen, and I saw the Blair Witch movies (parts one and two). It seems [[disconcerted]] in what it wants to be. It's not funny enough for comedy, it's not tragic enough for drama, it's not bloody enough for horror, and it's not good enough for watching. It has scenes of a man doing "slapstick/bloody" karate so I think, oh this movie will be in the vein of Toxic Avenger and Street Trash. Then it leaps without warning into a drama about a missing girl, a retarded (mentally handicap) woman and a trusting mother. Then it slaps itself into the [[JUST]] [[buena]] part in the movie which seems to be set up like a sitcom without the laugh tracks. The part I'm speaking of is a lonely TOWNIE who is so lonely he finds comfort in a rotting corpse. That was the ONLY part of the [[filmmaking]] that gave me [[EVERYTHING]] feeling. The rest was a waist of my life. Then, just to show how CRUEL Wayne is there is a kind of DOCUMENTARY at the end of the film of Wayne (the Director) making fun of Toby (the star) in public. It [[introduced]] me [[indisposed]]. Even though Killer Nerd and Bride of Killer Nerd (two other movies by Wayne) aren't the best, they at [[less]] are thought out enough were you can stay entertained until the ending credits. I even like Killer Nerd a bit, it had some great lines I still use to this day.

If you like underground films, if you like overground films, and if you like to watch your feet, just resting were they are, you will not like TOWNIES!

*1/2 (out of ****)

--------------------------------------------- Result 3856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Sure this movie is not historically [[accurate]] but it is great entertainment. [[Most]] DeMille pictures especially the [[later]] epics are slow and plodding but the [[action]] here [[moves]] at a clip. The story is [[basically]] a series of [[peaks]] with very little quiet moments. The [[action]] takes us from an Indian raid on a cabin; one of the [[best]] parts of the [[movie]] with Jean Arthur [[excellent]] while [[attempting]] to [[appease]] the war-painted [[natives]]. This is followed by her and Cooper being taken to the [[war]] [[camp]] and being tortured. [[Later]] [[comes]] a [[protracted]] [[battle]] with the Cheyenne. The whole thing is [[ridiculous]] but [[great]] [[fun]] and entertaining from [[start]] to [[finish]]. Jean [[Arthur]] is one of the [[best]] [[actresses]] of this [[era]] and she [[shines]] here. Sure this movie is not historically [[exact]] but it is great entertainment. [[More]] DeMille pictures especially the [[subsequent]] epics are slow and plodding but the [[efforts]] here [[shift]] at a clip. The story is [[essentially]] a series of [[woodpeckers]] with very little quiet moments. The [[efforts]] takes us from an Indian raid on a cabin; one of the [[better]] parts of the [[films]] with Jean Arthur [[brilliant]] while [[seeking]] to [[soothe]] the war-painted [[aboriginal]]. This is followed by her and Cooper being taken to the [[warfare]] [[campground]] and being tortured. [[Thereafter]] [[arises]] a [[lengthened]] [[firefight]] with the Cheyenne. The whole thing is [[laughable]] but [[wondrous]] [[entertaining]] and entertaining from [[begin]] to [[conclude]]. Jean [[Arturo]] is one of the [[finest]] [[actors]] of this [[epoch]] and she [[glows]] here. --------------------------------------------- Result 3857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Even if 99,99% of people that has [[seen]] this [[movie]] is Brazilian, I'll keep up with the English [[since]] it is the [[language]] of this website.

This [[movie]] is a [[piece]] of cr*p. [[Worst]] acting I have [[seen]] for a loooong [[time]]. The kids are terrible. Specially the [[boy]]. This was the [[first]] [[time]] I [[saw]] someone with less facial expression than Arnold Schwarzenegger, and one [[single]] [[voice]] tone, like a 5 years-old [[kid]] reading in front of the class. [[How]] can [[someone]] so bad be the main actor of a [[movie]] ? The storyline is so shallow my [[daughter]] [[could]] have [[done]] better (she is 3 [[yrs]] [[old]]). It is so simple it could be [[written]] in a [[napkin]] and told in 3 minutes.

There are only three [[possibilities]] for [[someone]] enjoy this [[movie]]: 1) you are a pre-teen; 2) you have been so [[brainwashed]] by Globo's [[stupidities]] that you [[think]] that [[anything]] that has the Globo's seal is [[awesome]]; 3) you have a serious brain [[damage]].

[[Avoid]] at all [[costs]] ! A [[shame]] to the Brazilian [[movie]] scene. Even if 99,99% of people that has [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]] is Brazilian, I'll keep up with the English [[because]] it is the [[vocabulary]] of this website.

This [[filmmaking]] is a [[slice]] of cr*p. [[Pire]] acting I have [[noticed]] for a loooong [[times]]. The kids are terrible. Specially the [[dude]]. This was the [[fiirst]] [[times]] I [[noticed]] someone with less facial expression than Arnold Schwarzenegger, and one [[alone]] [[vowel]] tone, like a 5 years-old [[kiddo]] reading in front of the class. [[Mode]] can [[anyone]] so bad be the main actor of a [[flick]] ? The storyline is so shallow my [[maid]] [[did]] have [[doing]] better (she is 3 [[yr]] [[elderly]]). It is so simple it could be [[typed]] in a [[towel]] and told in 3 minutes.

There are only three [[chance]] for [[person]] enjoy this [[kino]]: 1) you are a pre-teen; 2) you have been so [[indoctrinated]] by Globo's [[idiocies]] that you [[thought]] that [[nada]] that has the Globo's seal is [[sumptuous]]; 3) you have a serious brain [[harming]].

[[Avert]] at all [[charges]] ! A [[pity]] to the Brazilian [[movies]] scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 3858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] John Thaw is a an excellent actor. I have to admit that I was impressed by his range in the role of a crusty old curmudgeon who reluctantly agrees to take in an evacuee from the streets of London (WWII time era).

That being said, the film is also excellent. A very moving story with a satisfying ending. Some of the characters are a little underdeveloped (the school teacher in particular), but none of them are essential to the plot. Basically, the story is about the old man and the boy, and the film needs little else. --------------------------------------------- Result 3859 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I cant believe blockbuster carries this movie. It was SO BAD. I was totally fooled by the box art. DON'T BE FOOLED!! Its not worth your time I promise you. I don't know if the positive reviews for this flick were a joke or what. I am so disappointed. :(

The description on the back of the box doesn't even match! The girl that has the voodoo done on her is a stripper. The synopsis on the back says she is only 17. Did the people writing the description for the film even bother to watch it!? Those positive reviews had to be a joke they just had to be. If anyone actually liked this flick then I've lost all faith in humanity.

And don't even get me started on the story compared to the title. Or the fact that the entire movie was done all in 2 locations. Or that the cops didn't even have close to real uniforms. Why would i even say that?? Who cares about the cops uniforms!? Compared to the rest of the movie the uniforms were spot on.

This movie is an insult to the zombie genre and all of its fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think that this film was one of Kurt Russels good movies. Kurt russel is my favorite actor so I think that he is a good actor in any role he plays. But this movie had a lot of action in it and I know that it should have more then a 5.6 out of 10 on the meter but many people did not like this movie. Oh well I thought it was good so I think that every one should see this movie. If you see this movie and like it I think that you should see Back Draft also with Kurt Russel. I give Soldier *** 1/2 out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not that he'd care, but I'm not one of Simon Pegg's friends. If I was, there's a good chance we'd fallout if he continued to make dross like this. The trouble is, he found a successful formula as the bumbling, ordinary guy-next-door type in Shawn of the Dead, Run Fat Boy Run etc, but it's starting to wear thin. Here his character has no discernible qualities, he's rude and obnoxious, and thinks he's funny when he frankly isn't. When transferred to New York from London (and I presume this link is meant to appeal to viewers on both sides of the Atlantic), he proves equally out of place with his new colleagues. Still, is it any wonder when amongst his jolly japes he hires a transvestite stripper to appear at an editorial meeting an act of revenge for his boss. Yet somehow, Kirsten Dunst starts to warm to him, even though he's done nothing nice. Oh, and because he's a superficial male he falls for Megan Fox at first sight, possibly because her character is as shallow as his. It all makes for a predictable film conclusion, although I can't see any viewer expressing how this mirrored their life. The shame is that on paper this is a cast supposedly worth watching. Pegg, though, plays himself, Kirsten Dunst seems to just go though the motions, creating no on screen chemistry, and Megan Fox isn't stretched at all. The one huge plus is Miriam Margolyes, as Pegg's New York landlady - now if she had been on screen longer..... --------------------------------------------- Result 3862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ang Lee clearly likes to ease into a film, to catch action, characters and setting on the hoof, as they emerge. Covering the haphazard endgame of the American civil war via the haphazard actions of a young militia, unformed in mind or manhood, this is an ideal approach. The film turns out to be about the formation of personalities, adulthood and relationships. Lee also shows the beautiful panoramas of the mid-south as a silent character, enduring the strife like a hardy parent.

James Schamus' script is probably the standard bearer for this film; close behind it are a number of well-appointed performances that carry it admirably. Jeffrey Wright's name alone could carry this film for me. He's brilliant here but in a slow burning role: instead we are treated to very good (if not revelatory) performances from a large, often recognisable ensemble.

A noble, optimistic film. One to watch if you don't fancy the harder, more bittersweet Cold Mountain or The Claim, for example. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Once upon a [[time]] in the mid 1990s I [[used]] to [[write]] for [[DOCTOR]] WHO fanzines and the whole of fandom was holding its breathe about the new [[American]] produced DOCTOR WHO TVM . As soon as it was announced that the Doctor`s arch enemy the Master was [[going]] to be played by [[Eric]] [[Roberts]] everyone [[scratched]] their [[heads]] and exclaimed " Who is Eric [[Roberts]] ? " . I should point out this was before the IMDB came online when all you had to do was type in a name into this website to their [[resume]] , but one [[helpful]] soul wrote into a publication I wrote for to explain that Eric [[Roberts]] was best known for a role where he starred opposite F Murray Abraham , the film was called BY THE SWORD and was about a fencing school . Actually looking back now Roberts is best known for THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE and RUNAWAY TRAIN but that didn`t stop the person putting the boot into both Roberts and BY THE SWORD and his mind was made up that this American Master with his southern drawl was going to a debacle . Strangely most fans were furious about Roberts playing the Master but after they saw the DOCTOR WHO TVM a great many fans ( Myself among them ) thought Roberts performance was the best thing about the disappointing American production

Yeah I`m digressing but BY THE [[SWORD]] was a [[film]] that I [[wanted]] to see simply because it was the first time I`d heard the name of Eric Roberts but I didn`t get the chance to see it untill this weekend and I was fairly [[disappointed]] with it . I know nothing about fencing ( Everyone else on this page seems duty bound to mention if they fence or not . I don`t fence ) so I don`t know how accurate it all is , but as mentioned the film feels somewhat anachronistic even if you saw it on its release in 1991 , the hairstyles seem a few years out of date along with its mixed teenage cast doing a little dance routine that makes you wonder if it wouldn`t have worked a lot better if it`d had been produced by Jerry Bruckheimer in the mid 1980s . You could argue this would have meant the relationship between Max Suba and Alexander Villard being off centre for most of the film but I wasn`t convinced about their love/hate relationship and Abraham and Roberts have given much better performances before and since BY THE SWORD Once upon a [[moment]] in the mid 1990s I [[utilise]] to [[handwriting]] for [[DOKTOR]] WHO fanzines and the whole of fandom was holding its breathe about the new [[America]] produced DOCTOR WHO TVM . As soon as it was announced that the Doctor`s arch enemy the Master was [[go]] to be played by [[Erik]] [[Stevens]] everyone [[engraved]] their [[leiter]] and exclaimed " Who is Eric [[Richardson]] ? " . I should point out this was before the IMDB came online when all you had to do was type in a name into this website to their [[reset]] , but one [[handy]] soul wrote into a publication I wrote for to explain that Eric [[Stevens]] was best known for a role where he starred opposite F Murray Abraham , the film was called BY THE SWORD and was about a fencing school . Actually looking back now Roberts is best known for THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE and RUNAWAY TRAIN but that didn`t stop the person putting the boot into both Roberts and BY THE SWORD and his mind was made up that this American Master with his southern drawl was going to a debacle . Strangely most fans were furious about Roberts playing the Master but after they saw the DOCTOR WHO TVM a great many fans ( Myself among them ) thought Roberts performance was the best thing about the disappointing American production

Yeah I`m digressing but BY THE [[SWORDS]] was a [[filmmaking]] that I [[wished]] to see simply because it was the first time I`d heard the name of Eric Roberts but I didn`t get the chance to see it untill this weekend and I was fairly [[disappoint]] with it . I know nothing about fencing ( Everyone else on this page seems duty bound to mention if they fence or not . I don`t fence ) so I don`t know how accurate it all is , but as mentioned the film feels somewhat anachronistic even if you saw it on its release in 1991 , the hairstyles seem a few years out of date along with its mixed teenage cast doing a little dance routine that makes you wonder if it wouldn`t have worked a lot better if it`d had been produced by Jerry Bruckheimer in the mid 1980s . You could argue this would have meant the relationship between Max Suba and Alexander Villard being off centre for most of the film but I wasn`t convinced about their love/hate relationship and Abraham and Roberts have given much better performances before and since BY THE SWORD --------------------------------------------- Result 3864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have to [[admit]] I [[laughed]] a few times during this [[trivial]] 2004 [[holiday]] [[movie]], but it's already [[moving]] out of my short-term [[memory]]. [[In]] a career that is sliding rather [[swiftly]] toward tabloid obscurity, Ben Affleck, once a promising comic character [[actor]] who became enmeshed in the Hollywood publicity machine to recreate himself into a romantic leading man. Judging from this film, the transformation doesn't [[seem]] to be [[taking]], as he [[continues]] to lack the gravitas that would [[make]] him [[credible]] in such parts. While his [[buddy]] Matt Damon takes on [[smart]] [[roles]] in films like "Syriana", Affleck [[appears]] in this [[type]] of commercial pap. [[At]] [[least]] the superficial character of successful but [[lonely]] [[advertising]] executive Drew Latham [[suits]] Affleck better than most of the other roles he has tried.

Directed by Mike [[Mitchell]] ([[whose]] most [[famous]] film is 1999's "Deuce Bigelow: [[Male]] Gigolo") and scripted by no less than four screenwriters (always a [[bad]] sign), the [[flimsy]] plot revolves [[around]] his character's [[need]] to "rent" a family living in his childhood home in order to live out his fantasy of having the old-fashioned Christmas he never had. The concept is actually [[intriguing]] because there is something to be said about the cathartic release of sentimentality we are all directed to feel amid the [[frenzied]] commercialism around the holidays. The real problem, however, is that the movie feels like an extended sketch lacking any logic or authentic emotional resonance. Affleck seems to be on overdrive attempting desperately to be [[lovable]], but the net result is an [[exhausting]] turn by an actor who has an [[increasingly]] annoying habit of playing stupid people in ill-conceived films. Fortunately, he has the likes of James Gandofini and Catherine O'Hara playing the Valcos, the couple who decide to accept Drew's monetary offer to pretend to be his parents.

Gandolfini plays Tom like a gruff, non-violent relative of Tony Soprano, but he does what he can in the role. From her classic SCTV Days to Christopher Guest's mockumentaries, O'Hara is always a comic gem no matter the vehicle, and unsurprisingly she earns the best laughs as Tom's wife Christine, whether dryly delivering a one-liner or posing in an inch of make-up for a dominatrix photo shoot. In what is becoming her standard screen role, Christina Applegate plays their mistrusting daughter Alicia, who of course becomes Drew's love interest. Despite some good moments where she is enjoying the deceit of playing Drew's sister in front of his girlfriend's family, her character seems to change in lightning-flash strokes making it hard to see what Drew would see in her. The story spins completely out of control by the last third with one contrived situation piled on top of another until plot strands are tied together in short order. It's rumored that much of the movie was improvised since there was no finished shooting script. It shows, but I also have to admit I stuck with it to the bitter end. I have to [[confess]] I [[laugh]] a few times during this [[immaterial]] 2004 [[vacation]] [[film]], but it's already [[transferring]] out of my short-term [[memoir]]. [[Among]] a career that is sliding rather [[faster]] toward tabloid obscurity, Ben Affleck, once a promising comic character [[protagonist]] who became enmeshed in the Hollywood publicity machine to recreate himself into a romantic leading man. Judging from this film, the transformation doesn't [[appears]] to be [[adopting]], as he [[continued]] to lack the gravitas that would [[deliver]] him [[reliable]] in such parts. While his [[mate]] Matt Damon takes on [[intelligent]] [[duties]] in films like "Syriana", Affleck [[emerges]] in this [[genre]] of commercial pap. [[Under]] [[fewer]] the superficial character of successful but [[solitude]] [[advertisements]] executive Drew Latham [[clothes]] Affleck better than most of the other roles he has tried.

Directed by Mike [[Michelle]] ([[whom]] most [[acclaimed]] film is 1999's "Deuce Bigelow: [[Males]] Gigolo") and scripted by no less than four screenwriters (always a [[naughty]] sign), the [[brittle]] plot revolves [[throughout]] his character's [[gotta]] to "rent" a family living in his childhood home in order to live out his fantasy of having the old-fashioned Christmas he never had. The concept is actually [[fascinating]] because there is something to be said about the cathartic release of sentimentality we are all directed to feel amid the [[hectic]] commercialism around the holidays. The real problem, however, is that the movie feels like an extended sketch lacking any logic or authentic emotional resonance. Affleck seems to be on overdrive attempting desperately to be [[charmer]], but the net result is an [[tiring]] turn by an actor who has an [[gradually]] annoying habit of playing stupid people in ill-conceived films. Fortunately, he has the likes of James Gandofini and Catherine O'Hara playing the Valcos, the couple who decide to accept Drew's monetary offer to pretend to be his parents.

Gandolfini plays Tom like a gruff, non-violent relative of Tony Soprano, but he does what he can in the role. From her classic SCTV Days to Christopher Guest's mockumentaries, O'Hara is always a comic gem no matter the vehicle, and unsurprisingly she earns the best laughs as Tom's wife Christine, whether dryly delivering a one-liner or posing in an inch of make-up for a dominatrix photo shoot. In what is becoming her standard screen role, Christina Applegate plays their mistrusting daughter Alicia, who of course becomes Drew's love interest. Despite some good moments where she is enjoying the deceit of playing Drew's sister in front of his girlfriend's family, her character seems to change in lightning-flash strokes making it hard to see what Drew would see in her. The story spins completely out of control by the last third with one contrived situation piled on top of another until plot strands are tied together in short order. It's rumored that much of the movie was improvised since there was no finished shooting script. It shows, but I also have to admit I stuck with it to the bitter end. --------------------------------------------- Result 3865 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How to lose friends and alienate people is decent comedy with a bit of romantic approach.

It's actually a story of Sidney Young(Simon Pegg) breaking through in journalist and magazine writing business which is interpreted in a funny way. Simon Pegg made an OK appearance, slightly worse than his usual. Movie is not hilarious or funny all the way or anything like that but it has its moments, and those moments are really hilarious.

I recommend this fun and worth watching American with English cream comedy to all people who just wanna sit, relax and enjoy movie for what it is. If you're about to watch this movie with critical approach then you should pass unless you want to be disappointed and start trashing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3866 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Well this is a typical "[[straight]] to the [[toilet]]" slasher film.

[[Long]] [[story]] short, a bunch of [[teenagers]]/young adults [[becoming]] stranded in the [[middle]] of creepy [[woods]] and get hacked down by [[naked]] nymphomaniac [[demons]].

This [[movie]] has all the basics for this slasher fromage:

-[[Naked]] women, -[[teens]] or young adults being marooned in someplace [[spooky]], -gory death scenes, -the [[last]] [[survivor]] being a well [[built]] [[young]] [[woman]] who will [[always]] [[show]] off her midriff, but never bra less, -a [[creepy]], crazy [[man]] who knows about the evil, -lesbian kiss scene, -[[sex]] being a [[killer]], -no plot

Even then for a cheesy slasher [[film]], it was really [[terrible]]. The [[atmosphere]] is [[totally]] [[dead]]. [[Nothing]], not even the sexually [[explicit]] scenes and nudity, was [[enough]] to [[keep]] the male and lesbian [[female]] [[audience]] interested. [[Watching]] it [[felt]] like it was being [[watched]] with a nasty head congestion or a [[nasty]] head cold.

Give the [[demonic]] ..... 0/10. Well this is a typical "[[consecutive]] to the [[loo]]" slasher film.

[[Lange]] [[conte]] short, a bunch of [[juvenile]]/young adults [[become]] stranded in the [[medium]] of creepy [[bois]] and get hacked down by [[nude]] nymphomaniac [[devils]].

This [[filmmaking]] has all the basics for this slasher fromage:

-[[Barefoot]] women, -[[teenaged]] or young adults being marooned in someplace [[gruesome]], -gory death scenes, -the [[final]] [[surviving]] being a well [[constructed]] [[youthful]] [[women]] who will [[repeatedly]] [[exhibited]] off her midriff, but never bra less, -a [[frightening]], crazy [[males]] who knows about the evil, -lesbian kiss scene, -[[sexuality]] being a [[murderer]], -no plot

Even then for a cheesy slasher [[flick]], it was really [[gruesome]]. The [[atmospheric]] is [[completely]] [[deceased]]. [[None]], not even the sexually [[unequivocal]] scenes and nudity, was [[sufficiently]] to [[preserve]] the male and lesbian [[females]] [[spectators]] interested. [[Staring]] it [[believed]] like it was being [[observed]] with a nasty head congestion or a [[foul]] head cold.

Give the [[malicious]] ..... 0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to finish watching a movie once I start, regardless of how bad it is. This movie was agonizing to sit through. The "sparkling" bullets, the reporter with "ninja" like moves, the way the bad guys shoot hundreds and hundreds of bullets and only seem to hit innocent bystanders, the predictable outcome and all the bad acting was just horrible. Like the girl who finds the reporter in her friends apartment and goes from "what the heck are you doing in here (holding a bat)" to "hey, you're cute, wanna @#$%!???" in like 1.2 seconds.... Just bad.... Save yourself an hour and forty minutes and go play with your kids (or dog)! --------------------------------------------- Result 3868 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For anyone who's judged others at first meeting, here is the perfect tutorial on depth of character. The grumpy old lady has a soft, thoughtful heart - and needs new friends. The flighty, unsure, 'ditsy' dame who makes inappropriate, uncomfortable comments - sees deep into your soul and has pure love for all. The cold, prim, proper, neglected wife has passion simmering that could boil over at any minute - given the right setting. The perfect beauty - rich, sweet, partying, pursued by throngs - wants peace, quiet, and love without possessiveness.

By taking the time to look beyond the surface, you will find treasures in everyday life, from the least expected sources. All it takes is patience and a touch of enchantment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3869 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If you like cars you will [[love]] this film!

There are some superb [[actors]] in the film, especially Vinnie Jones, with his typical no [[nonsense]] attitude and hardcase appearance.The others are not [[bad]] either....

There are only two [[slight]] [[flaws]] to this film. Firstly, the poor plot, however people don't watch this film for the plot. Secondly, the glorification of [[grand]] [[theft]] [[auto]] (car crime). However if people really believe they can steal a Ferrari and get away with it then good look to them, hope you have a good time in jail!

When i first read that Nicolas Cage was to act the main role, i first thought "...sweeet.", but then i thought "...naaaa you suck!" but then finally after watching the film i realised "...yep he suck's!".Only joking he plays the role very well.

I'll end this unusual review by saying "If the premature demise of a criminal has in some way enlightened the general cinema going audience as to the grim finish below the glossy veneer of criminal life, and inspired them to change their ways, then this death [[carries]] with it an inherent nobility. And a supreme glory. We should all be so fortunate. You can [[say]] "Poor Criminal." I [[say]]: "Poor us."

p.s. - Angelina [[Jolie]] Voight [[looks]] [[quite]] nice! If you like cars you will [[amour]] this film!

There are some superb [[actresses]] in the film, especially Vinnie Jones, with his typical no [[preposterous]] attitude and hardcase appearance.The others are not [[inclement]] either....

There are only two [[lightweight]] [[malfunctions]] to this film. Firstly, the poor plot, however people don't watch this film for the plot. Secondly, the glorification of [[phenomenal]] [[shoplift]] [[vehicle]] (car crime). However if people really believe they can steal a Ferrari and get away with it then good look to them, hope you have a good time in jail!

When i first read that Nicolas Cage was to act the main role, i first thought "...sweeet.", but then i thought "...naaaa you suck!" but then finally after watching the film i realised "...yep he suck's!".Only joking he plays the role very well.

I'll end this unusual review by saying "If the premature demise of a criminal has in some way enlightened the general cinema going audience as to the grim finish below the glossy veneer of criminal life, and inspired them to change their ways, then this death [[carrying]] with it an inherent nobility. And a supreme glory. We should all be so fortunate. You can [[said]] "Poor Criminal." I [[said]]: "Poor us."

p.s. - Angelina [[Julie]] Voight [[seems]] [[rather]] nice! --------------------------------------------- Result 3870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Now here is a [[film]] that if [[made]] in Australia [[would]] have easily been a [[comedy]]. Sadly and annoyingly, here it is, flaccid and cheesy and overbaked from [[Lala]] [[land]]. [[How]] did the di-erector get it so wrong? Well, [[mainly]] by being [[serious]] about a [[job]] so hilariously [[startling]] that [[nobody]] in their right mind could take [[seriously]]. Unless of course they were a nerdy lonely [[gay]] cliché (but somehow [[cute]])...or is that [[cliché]] [[piled]] upon cliché. [[No]] [[value]] in the [[story]] that almost seems like a prequel to Gus Van Sant's GERRY..... and with a title like THE FLUFFER how is it all such a [[lead]] weight? [[Well]] this auteur [[must]] have soooooo mad that he didn't [[get]] to Burt and BOOGIE first that he had to [[make]] his own. [[Convoluted]] and [[undeveloped]] apart from the 'unrequited love's a bore' [[theme]] left over from a [[faded]] Streisand lyric, we have only moody beefcake and [[TV]] serial [[level]] storyline [[left]]. The un [[necessary]] fourth [[act]] of this overlong turgid drama is [[truly]] [[terrible]] as the [[film]] wanders off [[like]] the Gerries into to desert and gets stuck there. In Oz in the [[late]] 90s some 20 [[somethings]] [[made]] a similar but actually hilarious film called MONEYSHOT. Originally [[filmed]] as THE VENUS [[FACTORY]] it too suffered from an [[auteur]] more [[awful]] than [[Orson]] so they re-filmed half of it, [[got]] a [[ruthless]] TV [[editor]] to [[chop]] it up and down down to 72 minutes and hey-presto..comedy, tonight! A lesson there in when [[bad]] [[films]] turn good by lightening up. I guess THE FLUFFER stiffed on [[release]] and after seeing it not [[perform]], I can [[understand]] why. Now here is a [[filmmaking]] that if [[brought]] in Australia [[could]] have easily been a [[farce]]. Sadly and annoyingly, here it is, flaccid and cheesy and overbaked from [[Lila]] [[terra]]. [[Mode]] did the di-erector get it so wrong? Well, [[mostly]] by being [[severe]] about a [[workplace]] so hilariously [[breathtaking]] that [[anyone]] in their right mind could take [[deeply]]. Unless of course they were a nerdy lonely [[homosexual]] cliché (but somehow [[adorable]])...or is that [[clichés]] [[stacked]] upon cliché. [[Nos]] [[values]] in the [[storytelling]] that almost seems like a prequel to Gus Van Sant's GERRY..... and with a title like THE FLUFFER how is it all such a [[culminate]] weight? [[Good]] this auteur [[owes]] have soooooo mad that he didn't [[gets]] to Burt and BOOGIE first that he had to [[deliver]] his own. [[Tortuous]] and [[underdeveloped]] apart from the 'unrequited love's a bore' [[themes]] left over from a [[fainted]] Streisand lyric, we have only moody beefcake and [[TELEVISION]] serial [[plano]] storyline [[gauche]]. The un [[requisite]] fourth [[law]] of this overlong turgid drama is [[genuinely]] [[shocking]] as the [[flick]] wanders off [[iike]] the Gerries into to desert and gets stuck there. In Oz in the [[belated]] 90s some 20 [[algo]] [[brought]] a similar but actually hilarious film called MONEYSHOT. Originally [[shot]] as THE VENUS [[PLANT]] it too suffered from an [[author]] more [[fearsome]] than [[Welles]] so they re-filmed half of it, [[gets]] a [[unforgiving]] TV [[editorial]] to [[cutting]] it up and down down to 72 minutes and hey-presto..comedy, tonight! A lesson there in when [[unhealthy]] [[filmmaking]] turn good by lightening up. I guess THE FLUFFER stiffed on [[releases]] and after seeing it not [[performed]], I can [[realise]] why. --------------------------------------------- Result 3871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Redline is a knockoff of Fast & Furious, without any of the redeeming qualities. It doesn't need to have a convoluted plot with multiple twists and surprises, but it needs SOMETHING! This is the equivalent of a porn film, where the storyline and dialogue consist of 60 seconds at the beginning and the same at the end. Except that this is worse, because you don't get your money's worth. Mind-numbingly boring, impossible race sequences, and a terrible waste of expensive beautiful cars, which almost acquire negative points for having appeared in this movie. Sure, she's hot, but who's that desperate for an on screen female? I feel like the director sat there with a hat full of dialogue and plot snippets, and shook an 8 ball every time they switched scenes. No serious person who races or knows anything about it would watch this movie and enjoy the race scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 3872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cuba Gooding Jr. is a secret service agent who blames himself over the assassination of the U.S. President, i'll point out straight away that this is not the type of role that this very talented actor is noted for, and this film shows us why. He teams up with a persistent news reporter (Angie Harmon) to uncover the conspiracy surrounding the president's death, and so on, blah, blah, blah.

Even with a cast of James Woods, Cuba Gooding Jr, Anne Archer and Angie Harmon 'End Game' fails to grab your attention, plain and simple; some of the action is good, the acting isn't all bad and the story although clichéd and done before could have lead to an entertaining and enjoyable movie - WELL IT DOESN'T! The writing of the script and the direction makes absolutely sure of that, at no point does it suck you into the story or make you give the slightest thought to any of the characters.

4/10 It's Boring, Predictable and Dull. --------------------------------------------- Result 3873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I've never [[really]] [[considered]] myself much of "student" when it [[comes]] to watching [[films]], I watch them, [[form]] an opinion and that's it. But Unhinged changed all this. This [[film]] is without a [[doubt]] the most [[inept]] [[attempt]] at [[film]] [[making]] I've ever seen. [[Every]] [[kid]] who [[rocks]] up at [[university]] thinking they're gonna be the next Spielberg or Tarantino needs to be [[handed]] this [[film]] with a handbook titled "[[How]] Not to Make A [[Film]]". Not only is there no [[story]] to be had, the [[film]] [[makers]] weren't [[even]] [[competent]] [[enough]] to [[make]] a [[film]] worth watching. It's been a while since I [[saw]] it, but all I can [[say]] is watch the overhead [[tracking]] [[shots]] in the [[opening]] scenes. They are never ending! It's [[almost]] like having your teeth [[pulled]], only not as much fun. I've never [[truly]] [[deemed]] myself much of "student" when it [[arrives]] to watching [[movie]], I watch them, [[forms]] an opinion and that's it. But Unhinged changed all this. This [[filmmaking]] is without a [[duda]] the most [[incompetent]] [[strive]] at [[cinematography]] [[doing]] I've ever seen. [[Any]] [[petit]] who [[shakes]] up at [[college]] thinking they're gonna be the next Spielberg or Tarantino needs to be [[delivered]] this [[cinema]] with a handbook titled "[[Mode]] Not to Make A [[Filmmaking]]". Not only is there no [[fairytales]] to be had, the [[filmmaking]] [[manufacturer]] weren't [[yet]] [[proficient]] [[satisfactorily]] to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]] worth watching. It's been a while since I [[seen]] it, but all I can [[tell]] is watch the overhead [[tracing]] [[punches]] in the [[introductory]] scenes. They are never ending! It's [[hardly]] like having your teeth [[pulls]], only not as much fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 3874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Im proud to say I've [[seen]] all three [[Fast]] and Furious [[films]].Sure,the plots are kinda silly,and they [[might]] be a [[little]] cheesy,but I [[love]] them car [[chases]],and all the [[beautiful]] cars,and the clandestine midnight [[races]].And [[Ill]] gladly see a fourth one.

[[Wanna]] know what the difference is between those three and Redline?Decent acting,somewhat [[thought]] out plot,even if they are potboilers,and last but not least,directors who have a clue.All three were made by very competent directors,all of them took the films in a different direction,equally exciting.Redline looks like the producer picked out a dozen women he slept with on the casting couch,and made them the extras,then picked up his leads from Hollywood's unemployment line.And the script.Yikes.Its Mystery Science Theatre 3000 bad.This is 70's made for TV movie bad.

Yeah,the movie had a few cool cars,but you don't really get to see that many in action,and the action is directed so poorly you cant get excited by the chases,and if the cars aren't thrilling you,why go to a movie like this?

Im in the audience with a bunch of [[teenagers]],and I cant stop laughing out loud.Im getting dirty looks,but this was just a [[debacle]].

Rent the F&F movies.Go to Nascar Race.Go to a karting track and race yourself.Whatever you do,avoid Redline like bad cheese. Im proud to say I've [[noticed]] all three [[Expeditiously]] and Furious [[film]].Sure,the plots are kinda silly,and they [[probable]] be a [[petit]] cheesy,but I [[adored]] them car [[chase]],and all the [[sumptuous]] cars,and the clandestine midnight [[race]].And [[Patient]] gladly see a fourth one.

[[Wanting]] know what the difference is between those three and Redline?Decent acting,somewhat [[brainchild]] out plot,even if they are potboilers,and last but not least,directors who have a clue.All three were made by very competent directors,all of them took the films in a different direction,equally exciting.Redline looks like the producer picked out a dozen women he slept with on the casting couch,and made them the extras,then picked up his leads from Hollywood's unemployment line.And the script.Yikes.Its Mystery Science Theatre 3000 bad.This is 70's made for TV movie bad.

Yeah,the movie had a few cool cars,but you don't really get to see that many in action,and the action is directed so poorly you cant get excited by the chases,and if the cars aren't thrilling you,why go to a movie like this?

Im in the audience with a bunch of [[teenager]],and I cant stop laughing out loud.Im getting dirty looks,but this was just a [[breakup]].

Rent the F&F movies.Go to Nascar Race.Go to a karting track and race yourself.Whatever you do,avoid Redline like bad cheese. --------------------------------------------- Result 3875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh man, this s-u-c-k-e-d sucked.... I couldn't even get any camp value out of this......and I sat through the whole thing on Showtime.... Don't bother waiting around for the 'naked' scenes either.....it's too late and only plastic Jenna Jameson is involved.. Shows how much discretionary cash must be laying around Hollywood just to get your name on the closing credits.. I guess Showtime had to throw something in at 1am... Next time I think I'd even rather be watching ESPN loop around every 30 minutes... --------------------------------------------- Result 3876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] [[Okay]], I've [[watched]] this [[movie]] [[twice]] now, I have researched it heavily on the net, I have asked several people on there [[opinions]]. I have even gone to the [[length]] of reading the original Sheridan Lafanu [[Classic]] 'Carmilla', a [[book]] that this movie is supposed to be [[based]] on. I feel that the best [[way]] to review this [[movie]] is to [[describe]] a game to [[play]] whilst watching it. As the plot of the movie doesn't seem to make any [[sense]] at all, here is the plot of the book.

Laura lives in a castle in Syberia with her Father, Mr De Lafontaine. They carry on with their lives blissfully and peacefully. One day they get a letter from the 'General' a man who has made it his mission in life to avenge his daughters death. He makes claims of supernatural powers being at work, and explains that he will visit them soon. Meanwhile, a chance encounter with a strange woman results in the Lafontaines looking after her Daughter, Carmilla, for several months. Soon Laura starts to be overwhelmed by strange dreams, and begins to come down with a strange illness. Who is this mysterious Carmilla? And just what has she to do with Laura's condition, and the General?

I have invented this game and would like as many people as possible to play it, and let me know what their results are. I even have a catchy name, and [[would]] have a jingle too, but I can't be bothered with that. It's called the "this movie doesn't make any sense" game.

All you have to do is, whilst watching the movie, try to come up with a complete plot that explains what is happening. I [[mean]] complete, all questions answered, everything makes sense, absolutely complete.

It will have to answer such questions as ...

* Why can [[vampires]] walk around in day light?

* Why are they all lesbians?

* Why is a girl called Bob? and why does she shoot herself?

* When is the movie a dream and when is it real?

* Why does killing zombies appear to be an accepted part of life that doesn't make anyone bat an eyelid?

* Why does Travis Fontaine spot and run down a zombie without slowing down whilst driving his car, yet when faced with a woman with an obvious hostage in the back of her car, accept the excuse that she is a zombie too?

* And why does he then let a girl, which he later openly reveals that he knows is the head vampire, drive with him in his car?

* And then let her drive off, alone with his daughter in a stolen car?

What the hell is the asylum scene all about?

* What the hell is the green goo all about?

* Why does the head vampire suddenly start dressing like a nurse?

* Why are there never any vampires fighting Zombies?

* What is the significance of the necklace? what is it made of? why does it kill vampires? and how does Jenna know that?

In fact sod it, it's just as much fun trying to come up with as many questions about this movie too.

I have my plot, and I have to admit it is not quite there, but it is a pretty good effort.

In Conclusion

'Vampires vs Zombies' has no moment in it where there are actually Vampires fighting Zombies. Everyone in the movie seems to know exactly what is going on, yet they seem very reluctant to let the audience in on this. And somehow it is based on a classic 19th century horror novel. How? Why? What the hell is going on? [[Allright]], I've [[seen]] this [[movies]] [[doubly]] now, I have researched it heavily on the net, I have asked several people on there [[vistas]]. I have even gone to the [[lifespan]] of reading the original Sheridan Lafanu [[Traditional]] 'Carmilla', a [[ledger]] that this movie is supposed to be [[groundwork]] on. I feel that the best [[camino]] to review this [[filmmaking]] is to [[describes]] a game to [[playing]] whilst watching it. As the plot of the movie doesn't seem to make any [[sensing]] at all, here is the plot of the book.

Laura lives in a castle in Syberia with her Father, Mr De Lafontaine. They carry on with their lives blissfully and peacefully. One day they get a letter from the 'General' a man who has made it his mission in life to avenge his daughters death. He makes claims of supernatural powers being at work, and explains that he will visit them soon. Meanwhile, a chance encounter with a strange woman results in the Lafontaines looking after her Daughter, Carmilla, for several months. Soon Laura starts to be overwhelmed by strange dreams, and begins to come down with a strange illness. Who is this mysterious Carmilla? And just what has she to do with Laura's condition, and the General?

I have invented this game and would like as many people as possible to play it, and let me know what their results are. I even have a catchy name, and [[should]] have a jingle too, but I can't be bothered with that. It's called the "this movie doesn't make any sense" game.

All you have to do is, whilst watching the movie, try to come up with a complete plot that explains what is happening. I [[imply]] complete, all questions answered, everything makes sense, absolutely complete.

It will have to answer such questions as ...

* Why can [[bloodsuckers]] walk around in day light?

* Why are they all lesbians?

* Why is a girl called Bob? and why does she shoot herself?

* When is the movie a dream and when is it real?

* Why does killing zombies appear to be an accepted part of life that doesn't make anyone bat an eyelid?

* Why does Travis Fontaine spot and run down a zombie without slowing down whilst driving his car, yet when faced with a woman with an obvious hostage in the back of her car, accept the excuse that she is a zombie too?

* And why does he then let a girl, which he later openly reveals that he knows is the head vampire, drive with him in his car?

* And then let her drive off, alone with his daughter in a stolen car?

What the hell is the asylum scene all about?

* What the hell is the green goo all about?

* Why does the head vampire suddenly start dressing like a nurse?

* Why are there never any vampires fighting Zombies?

* What is the significance of the necklace? what is it made of? why does it kill vampires? and how does Jenna know that?

In fact sod it, it's just as much fun trying to come up with as many questions about this movie too.

I have my plot, and I have to admit it is not quite there, but it is a pretty good effort.

In Conclusion

'Vampires vs Zombies' has no moment in it where there are actually Vampires fighting Zombies. Everyone in the movie seems to know exactly what is going on, yet they seem very reluctant to let the audience in on this. And somehow it is based on a classic 19th century horror novel. How? Why? What the hell is going on? --------------------------------------------- Result 3877 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The second attempt by a [[New]] York intellectual in less than 10 [[years]] to make a "Swedish" film - the first being Susan Sontag's "Brother Carl" (which was made in Sweden, with Swedish actors, no less!) The results? Oscar Wilde said it [[best]], in reference to Dickens' "The Old Curiosity Shop": "One would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud at the death of Little Nell." Pretty much the same [[thing]] here. "[[Interiors]]" is chock full of [[solemnly]] intoned howlers. ("I'm [[afraid]] of my [[anger]]." [[Looking]] into the middle distance: "I don't like who I'm becoming.") The directorial quotations (to [[use]] a polite term) from Bergman are close to [[parody]]. The [[incredibly]] self-involved family [[keep]] [[reminding]] us of how [[brilliant]] and talented they are, to the point of [[strangulation]]. ("I read a [[poem]] of yours the other day. It was in - I don't know - The [[New]] Yorker." "[[Oh]]. That was an [[old]] [[poem]]. I [[reworked]] it.") Far from not [[caring]] about these people, [[however]], I [[found]] them [[quite]] [[hilarious]]. Much of the dialog is [[exactly]] like the [[funny]] stuff from Allen's [[earlier]] [[films]] - only he's directed his [[actors]] to [[play]] the lines [[straight]]. Having not [[cast]] himself in the [[movie]], he has poor [[Mary]] Beth Hurt [[copy]] all of his thespian tics, intonations, and neurotic habits, turning her into an [[embarrassing]] surrogate (much like Kenneth Branagh in "[[Celebrity]]").

The [[basic]] plot - dysfunctional family with quietly domineering [[mother]] - [[seems]] to be [[lifted]] more or less from Bergman's "[[Winter]] Light," the [[basic]] family melodrama [[tricked]] up with a [[lot]] of existential angst. It all [[comes]] through in the shopworn visual/[[aural]] tricks: the deafening [[scratching]] of a pencil on paper, the towering [[surf]] that [[dwarfs]] the people walking on the [[beach]]. etc, etc.

Allen's later "serious" films are less [[embarrassing]], but also far less [[entertaining]]. I'll take "[[Interiors]]." Woody's [[rarely]] [[made]] a funnier [[movie]]. The second attempt by a [[Novo]] York intellectual in less than 10 [[yrs]] to make a "Swedish" film - the first being Susan Sontag's "Brother Carl" (which was made in Sweden, with Swedish actors, no less!) The results? Oscar Wilde said it [[bestest]], in reference to Dickens' "The Old Curiosity Shop": "One would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud at the death of Little Nell." Pretty much the same [[stuff]] here. "[[Indoors]]" is chock full of [[ceremoniously]] intoned howlers. ("I'm [[fear]] of my [[outrage]]." [[Researching]] into the middle distance: "I don't like who I'm becoming.") The directorial quotations (to [[used]] a polite term) from Bergman are close to [[travesty]]. The [[extraordinarily]] self-involved family [[preserving]] [[reminds]] us of how [[sumptuous]] and talented they are, to the point of [[suffocation]]. ("I read a [[rhyme]] of yours the other day. It was in - I don't know - The [[Nuevo]] Yorker." "[[Ah]]. That was an [[former]] [[rhyme]]. I [[reconfigured]] it.") Far from not [[care]] about these people, [[nevertheless]], I [[detected]] them [[very]] [[humorous]]. Much of the dialog is [[accurately]] like the [[hilarious]] stuff from Allen's [[prior]] [[filmmaking]] - only he's directed his [[protagonists]] to [[gaming]] the lines [[consecutive]]. Having not [[casting]] himself in the [[filmmaking]], he has poor [[Maryam]] Beth Hurt [[copies]] all of his thespian tics, intonations, and neurotic habits, turning her into an [[distracting]] surrogate (much like Kenneth Branagh in "[[Celebrities]]").

The [[fundamental]] plot - dysfunctional family with quietly domineering [[mommy]] - [[looks]] to be [[lift]] more or less from Bergman's "[[Winters]] Light," the [[fundamental]] family melodrama [[deluded]] up with a [[lots]] of existential angst. It all [[occurs]] through in the shopworn visual/[[acoustics]] tricks: the deafening [[scraping]] of a pencil on paper, the towering [[surfing]] that [[dwarves]] the people walking on the [[beaches]]. etc, etc.

Allen's later "serious" films are less [[ashamed]], but also far less [[droll]]. I'll take "[[Inboard]]." Woody's [[seldom]] [[introduced]] a funnier [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe how anyone can make a comedy about an issue such as homelessness. Of course, Brooks has not made a comedy about _real_ homeless people. No mention of drugs, prostitution or violence on these streets. The people we meet in this movie are homeless in Fantasy land so the only difference between them and us is that they don't eat quite as often. Brooks' movies have become worse and worse over the years. This is just another nail in the coffin . --------------------------------------------- Result 3879 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] This movie is not only poorly scripted and directed but is [[simply]] [[distasteful]]. A [[beautiful]] novel is [[terribly]] misrepresented in this film. [[Many]] changes have been [[made]] to the storyline, [[presumably]] to [[streamline]] the timeframe. But what [[results]] is [[simply]] [[confusing]]. The acting can't [[possibly]] [[overcome]] the script which [[removes]] the characters' [[motives]] for their [[behavior]]. Plus, the [[conversion]] to English does not [[work]] when [[everyone]] refers to the patriarch EsTEban as ESteban. Horrible. Please please please read the [[gorgeous]] [[novel]], in Spanish if possible. DON'T SEE THIS [[FILM]]. It will [[ruin]] for you what [[could]] be a [[wonderful]] [[experience]]. This movie is not only poorly scripted and directed but is [[purely]] [[tasteless]]. A [[funky]] novel is [[awfully]] misrepresented in this film. [[Innumerable]] changes have been [[brought]] to the storyline, [[arguably]] to [[streamlining]] the timeframe. But what [[findings]] is [[exclusively]] [[disconcerting]]. The acting can't [[likely]] [[overcoming]] the script which [[clears]] the characters' [[reason]] for their [[behavioral]]. Plus, the [[transform]] to English does not [[collaborated]] when [[anybody]] refers to the patriarch EsTEban as ESteban. Horrible. Please please please read the [[sumptuous]] [[newer]], in Spanish if possible. DON'T SEE THIS [[FILMMAKING]]. It will [[wrack]] for you what [[would]] be a [[sumptuous]] [[enjoying]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Gung Ho was a [[good]] [[idea]], [[however]] it is to much to ask Americans viewers to understand the dynamics of American jobs and foreign [[competition]].In this movie the main character Hunt Stevenson(Michael Keaton) goes to Japan and convinces a Japanese auto company to come to America and help his dying Pennslyvania town. Two things come at you.First why would a Japanese company come to America to make cars when they do so ,and so well at that? Secondly can anyone understand that American companies of all types go to third world nations to have their products made to escape American labor costs? It makes the film's premise then that the Number one maker of cars in the world would go to one of its' top competitors(aside from Germany)and put a plant there as unrealistic. Keaton was still in his comedy mode by this time. But he gives a credible performance all the same as he could prove that he could go from comedy to drama in a matter of seconds and still not embarrass himself but Director Ron Howard can't keep this from becoming a TV movie which it ends up being anyway because they have to give the unlikely story a happy ending the politics and problems of Japanese and American relations not withstanding. Gung Ho has a Happy Days and Laverne and Shirley feel to it as the producers of both TV shows made the film and then made the TV version of this movie as well which gives the film its' lightweight feel.The Japanese manager gets to love his American workers and feels he and other Japanese people can learnfrom Americans.His No.2 man Saito who supposedly doesn't like Americans all that much doesn't think so.I would have prefered all the Japanese characters been like Saito than the soft goofball characters they made the Japanese out to be.It would have made the film more interesting. Gung Ho was a [[alright]] [[brainchild]], [[yet]] it is to much to ask Americans viewers to understand the dynamics of American jobs and foreign [[rivalries]].In this movie the main character Hunt Stevenson(Michael Keaton) goes to Japan and convinces a Japanese auto company to come to America and help his dying Pennslyvania town. Two things come at you.First why would a Japanese company come to America to make cars when they do so ,and so well at that? Secondly can anyone understand that American companies of all types go to third world nations to have their products made to escape American labor costs? It makes the film's premise then that the Number one maker of cars in the world would go to one of its' top competitors(aside from Germany)and put a plant there as unrealistic. Keaton was still in his comedy mode by this time. But he gives a credible performance all the same as he could prove that he could go from comedy to drama in a matter of seconds and still not embarrass himself but Director Ron Howard can't keep this from becoming a TV movie which it ends up being anyway because they have to give the unlikely story a happy ending the politics and problems of Japanese and American relations not withstanding. Gung Ho has a Happy Days and Laverne and Shirley feel to it as the producers of both TV shows made the film and then made the TV version of this movie as well which gives the film its' lightweight feel.The Japanese manager gets to love his American workers and feels he and other Japanese people can learnfrom Americans.His No.2 man Saito who supposedly doesn't like Americans all that much doesn't think so.I would have prefered all the Japanese characters been like Saito than the soft goofball characters they made the Japanese out to be.It would have made the film more interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 3881 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I wouldn't be so [[quick]] to look at all the [[good]] reviews and say this might be a good [[show]]..This show is only good if you don't know what "[[talent]]" is..I won't even say how offensive it is (I know it can be offensive to a lot of people) because thats not really what [[bothers]] me about the show.. What [[bothers]] me is that people watch this and [[think]] it's funny..It makes me feel like our generation is getting to [[stupid]] and I'm [[actually]] [[scared]] that it will one day be run by people who watch this [[garbage]]..

[[Basically]] the plot is [[simple]]..it's about an [[offensive]],self [[centered]],spoiled [[women]](Sarah Silvermen) getting through [[everyday]] [[life]]..

[[Thats]] it..Like that hasn't been [[done]] a million times..[[In]] fact [[almost]] [[every]] [[joke]] [[either]] has been [[done]] or is racist..

[[Sarah]] [[also]] [[likes]] to [[sing]]..I like her voice..[[thats]] it..not the lyrics..The [[lyrics]] are [[dreadful]]..which she likes to [[sing]] about a lot of [[things]]..

[[If]] you [[like]] to [[see]] a hot [[women]] put [[everyone]] [[else]] down and make them feel like [[crap]] while at the same [[time]] farting and saying [[crap]] about [[every]] [[race]] then this [[show]] is for you.. I wouldn't be so [[hurry]] to look at all the [[buena]] reviews and say this might be a good [[exposition]]..This show is only good if you don't know what "[[talents]]" is..I won't even say how offensive it is (I know it can be offensive to a lot of people) because thats not really what [[disturbs]] me about the show.. What [[irritates]] me is that people watch this and [[thinks]] it's funny..It makes me feel like our generation is getting to [[witless]] and I'm [[indeed]] [[shitless]] that it will one day be run by people who watch this [[refuse]]..

[[Broadly]] the plot is [[easy]]..it's about an [[onslaught]],self [[focusing]],spoiled [[daughters]](Sarah Silvermen) getting through [[daily]] [[lives]]..

[[Isnt]] it..Like that hasn't been [[effected]] a million times..[[Among]] fact [[virtually]] [[all]] [[travesty]] [[neither]] has been [[effected]] or is racist..

[[Darah]] [[similarly]] [[adores]] to [[exalt]]..I like her voice..[[whats]] it..not the lyrics..The [[paroles]] are [[scary]]..which she likes to [[sung]] about a lot of [[matters]]..

[[Though]] you [[likes]] to [[seeing]] a hot [[girl]] put [[everybody]] [[otherwise]] down and make them feel like [[baloney]] while at the same [[moment]] farting and saying [[baloney]] about [[each]] [[carrera]] then this [[exhibition]] is for you.. --------------------------------------------- Result 3882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] While i was the video store i was [[browsing]] through the one dollar [[rentals]] and came upon this [[little]] gem. I don't [[know]] what it was about it but i just had a gut instic about it and wow was i ever right.

The story centers around two girls who have just survived a school shooting. One of the girls is Alicia a teenage reble who is the only witness for the full attack and another is Deanna another survivor who survived a bullet to the head by some miracle. [[Thrown]] together by fate, they slowly begin a painful and [[beautiful]] [[display]] of healing and moving on.

I just hate it when amazing [[movies]] [[fall]] through the cracks. Because [[wow]] what a performance by Busy Phillips and Erkia Christensen not to [[mention]] the [[rest]] of the cast! My only complaint is that the [[DVD]] was [[sorely]] [[lacking]] in [[special]] [[features]]. [[Oh]] and some of the [[jump]] [[cuts]] in the [[movie]] were kind of jarring. But all in all a [[excellent]] [[movie]]. While i was the video store i was [[browse]] through the one dollar [[rental]] and came upon this [[petite]] gem. I don't [[savoir]] what it was about it but i just had a gut instic about it and wow was i ever right.

The story centers around two girls who have just survived a school shooting. One of the girls is Alicia a teenage reble who is the only witness for the full attack and another is Deanna another survivor who survived a bullet to the head by some miracle. [[Tossed]] together by fate, they slowly begin a painful and [[wondrous]] [[demonstrating]] of healing and moving on.

I just hate it when amazing [[movie]] [[declines]] through the cracks. Because [[whoa]] what a performance by Busy Phillips and Erkia Christensen not to [[referenced]] the [[remainder]] of the cast! My only complaint is that the [[DVDS]] was [[frantically]] [[lacked]] in [[specific]] [[characteristics]]. [[Aw]] and some of the [[salta]] [[cutting]] in the [[movies]] were kind of jarring. But all in all a [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hollywood Hotel was the last movie musical that Busby Berkeley directed for Warner Bros. His directing style had changed or evolved to the point that this film does not contain his signature overhead shots or huge production numbers with thousands of extras. By the last few years of the Thirties, swing-style big bands were recording the year's biggest popular hits. The Swing Era, also called the Big Band Era, has been dated variously from 1935 to 1944 or 1939 to 1949. Although it is impossible to exactly pinpoint the moment that the Swing Era began, Benny Goodman's engagement at the Palomar Ballroom in Los Angeles in the late summer of 1935 was certainly one of the early indications that swing was entering the consciousness of mainstream America's youth. When Goodman featured his swing repertoire rather than the society-style dance music that his band had been playing, the youth in the audience went wild. That was the beginning, but, since radio, live concerts and word of mouth were the primary methods available to spread the phenomena, it took some time before swing made enough inroads to produce big hits that showed up on the pop charts. In Hollywood Hotel, the appearance of Benny Goodman and His Orchestra and Raymond Paige and His Orchestra in the film indicates that the film industry was ready to capitalize on the shift in musical taste (the film was in production only a year and a half or so after Goodman's Palomar Ballroom engagement). There are a few interesting musical moments here and there in Hollywood Hotel, but except for Benny Goodman and His Orchestra's "Sing, Sing, Sing," there isn't a lot to commend. Otherwise, the most interesting musical sequences are the opening "Hooray for Hollywood" parade and "Let That Be a Lesson to You" production number at the drive-in restaurant. The film is most interesting to see and hear Benny Goodman and His Orchestra play and Dick Powell and Frances Langford sing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The story is quite original, but the movie is kinda slow building up to the point where they steal the cars. Its kinda nice though to watch them prepare the stealing too, but the actual stealing should've been more in picture... However the stunt work on this movie was excellent and it is definetly a movie you HAVE to see (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was a very [[brief]] episode that appeared in one of the "Night Gallery" show back in 1971. The episode starred Sue Lyon (of Lolita movie fame) and Joseph Campanella who play a baby sitter and a vampire, respectively. The vampire hires a baby sitter to watch his child (which appears to be some kind of werewolf or [[monster]]) while he goes out at night for blood. The baby sitter is totally [[oblivious]] to the vampire's appearance when she [[first]] sees him and only starts to put two and two together when she notices that he has no reflection in the mirror, has an [[odd]] [[collection]] of [[books]] in the [[library]] on the [[occult]], and hears [[strange]] noises while the vampire goes to talk to the [[child]]. She realizes that the [[man]] who hired her may not be what she thought he was originally. She bolts out the door, the vampire comes out looking puzzled and the episode is over. I don't know what purpose it was to make such an [[abbreviated]] episode that lasted just 5 minutes. They should just have expanded the earlier episode by those same 5 minutes and skipped this one. A [[total]] wasted effort. This was a very [[succinct]] episode that appeared in one of the "Night Gallery" show back in 1971. The episode starred Sue Lyon (of Lolita movie fame) and Joseph Campanella who play a baby sitter and a vampire, respectively. The vampire hires a baby sitter to watch his child (which appears to be some kind of werewolf or [[creature]]) while he goes out at night for blood. The baby sitter is totally [[indelicate]] to the vampire's appearance when she [[firstly]] sees him and only starts to put two and two together when she notices that he has no reflection in the mirror, has an [[bizarre]] [[collate]] of [[ledger]] in the [[bookstore]] on the [[hidden]], and hears [[odd]] noises while the vampire goes to talk to the [[infantile]]. She realizes that the [[dawg]] who hired her may not be what she thought he was originally. She bolts out the door, the vampire comes out looking puzzled and the episode is over. I don't know what purpose it was to make such an [[shortened]] episode that lasted just 5 minutes. They should just have expanded the earlier episode by those same 5 minutes and skipped this one. A [[whole]] wasted effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 3886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Malefique pretty much has the [[viewer]] from [[start]] to [[finish]] with its [[edgy]] atmosphere. [[Nearly]] the [[whole]] [[movie]] is set in a prison [[cell]] revolving [[around]] 4 [[characters]] of which transvestite [[Marcus]] and his [[little]] retarded [[boy]] are way out the [[strangest]]. [[Soon]] the inmates [[find]] a diary of a [[previous]] [[inmate]] behind a brick which deals with his obsession of occult and [[black]] magic [[themes]] leading to his [[escape]] from the [[cell]]. From here on everything deals with uncovering the [[secret]] of the book and its spells to flee from prison. That leads to some accidents on the way out of the cell into the [[unknown]] [[light]].

[[Honestly]] I think the [[story]] is rather poor and the [[final]] twist is [[nice]] but to me the ends are pretty loosely tied together. Anyway I was [[thrilled]] until the last moment because the atmosphere of the [[movie]] is [[unique]] with minimal setting and cast. The kills are [[raw]] and eerie... its doesn't [[take]] gore to [[chill]] your spine and the occult [[themes]] are [[also]] done very well and [[reminded]] me of the hell [[themes]] in Hellraiser. Malefique has a claustrophobic and cold [[dirty]] feel with greenish [[tint]]. At times you wonder if the [[real]] or the occult [[world]] [[depicted]] here is stranger... when the retarded boy looses his fingers and is lulled to sleep sucking on Marcus breasts it seems normal, so how strange can glowing gates to freedom be? With its budget the movie creates a [[unique]] atmosphere and chills the viewer in a very different way than most of the genre shockers do. I just [[wish]] the story had led to a more consistent finale. Several elements like the visitor with the camera, the other inmates obsession with books and the toy doll vaguely pointing to the end don't fit tight in the story. Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for other movies from director Valette, although its a turn-off to see he's is doing a Hollywood remake of "One missed call" which was worn off and useless already in the Miike-version. Malefique pretty much has the [[onlooker]] from [[lancer]] to [[completed]] with its [[jumpy]] atmosphere. [[Approximately]] the [[entire]] [[kino]] is set in a prison [[cellphone]] revolving [[approximately]] 4 [[features]] of which transvestite [[Markus]] and his [[small]] retarded [[bloke]] are way out the [[oddest]]. [[Expeditiously]] the inmates [[unearthed]] a diary of a [[past]] [[inmates]] behind a brick which deals with his obsession of occult and [[negra]] magic [[subjects]] leading to his [[flee]] from the [[cells]]. From here on everything deals with uncovering the [[secrets]] of the book and its spells to flee from prison. That leads to some accidents on the way out of the cell into the [[unfamiliar]] [[lighting]].

[[Truly]] I think the [[storytelling]] is rather poor and the [[definitive]] twist is [[enjoyable]] but to me the ends are pretty loosely tied together. Anyway I was [[ravi]] until the last moment because the atmosphere of the [[cinema]] is [[sole]] with minimal setting and cast. The kills are [[untreated]] and eerie... its doesn't [[taking]] gore to [[chilling]] your spine and the occult [[subject]] are [[apart]] done very well and [[reminds]] me of the hell [[topics]] in Hellraiser. Malefique has a claustrophobic and cold [[foul]] feel with greenish [[staining]]. At times you wonder if the [[actual]] or the occult [[monde]] [[exemplified]] here is stranger... when the retarded boy looses his fingers and is lulled to sleep sucking on Marcus breasts it seems normal, so how strange can glowing gates to freedom be? With its budget the movie creates a [[sole]] atmosphere and chills the viewer in a very different way than most of the genre shockers do. I just [[want]] the story had led to a more consistent finale. Several elements like the visitor with the camera, the other inmates obsession with books and the toy doll vaguely pointing to the end don't fit tight in the story. Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for other movies from director Valette, although its a turn-off to see he's is doing a Hollywood remake of "One missed call" which was worn off and useless already in the Miike-version. --------------------------------------------- Result 3887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think this has the potential of being the best Star Trek series yet, I say POTENTIAL.. we all know there is a chance they will drop the ball and run out of ideas... BUT I HOPE NOT! For those that have not seen it..SEE IT! Without that annoying "PRIME DIRECTIVE" floating over their heads every time they encounter races it could be cool.. and Scott Bakula was without a doubt a GREAT CHOICE for Captain, and the Vulcan Babe is hot too, (Check out the decontamination scene)I gave this a FULL 10... it blows away ALL the other series openers.. I hope this goes longer than 7 years... --------------------------------------------- Result 3888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] In light of [[bad]] [[reviews]] - or car crashes - I feel possessed to get in gear and make a transmission to give merit where due, and do a [[service]]. I'm not [[sure]] people have [[license]] to say it was so bad, almost automatically.

It's [[rare]] for a movie to have SUSPENSE. This movie maintained [[suspense]] it's [[whole]] length, for me, despite any [[flaws]] that may be. How [[many]] [[films]] can [[say]] that? Not [[even]] many [[big]] ones. Because of the [[simple]] premise you don't know if the people will get out of the life-threatening situation, which lasts the whole movie. Yeh, the suspension was tight, and over some bumps the shocks did their work. It's not just a TV movie, but an all-action movie; there is no point where it stops, or deviates, or becomes talky. It would be hard to make a film like this, always on the road. Only Duel, or Speed, are this that I recall. The best thing in them also was the constant tension.

ACTING is not [[bad]]: The Judge is as good as ever, and the others are.

SCRIPT is good. But the jury is out as to whether it sometimes may be - or seem to be - a little awry. What seems unrealistic is not necessarily so. Your first judgments are not always right, but I think the lead actor's was right in being in this movie.

STUNTS are mostly [[terrific]], especially for a TV movie. Their only failing may be the noticeable, and again, apparent, slow speed. But we all know how deceivingly slow Grand Prix cars can look.

I liked that THE BEGINNING said, "inspired by a true story." So you are not going to go how much is true? You know just the basis is. The usual "based on a true story" makes me think it should mostly be true. But maybe that's my error.

HOW TO SAVE THEM: Good idea of the reviewer to suggest a tow truck to lift the back wheels up. Just a few inches would do. A stunt driver could do that at 100 mph. Odd that they didn't call a car expert - or auto electrician or mechanic - to see if there's a way.

I hope this review has put in reverse that this film is a disaster. Or at least neutral. And help it become a runaway success.

Pic quality is a little soft for a DVD.

SPOILER: They would have been winched out after the baby was, but strangely that life-saving idea was cleverly dealt with in some joking conversation to fade it out. I guess we know why. End of movie. Suspension of disbelief went out the top window with the baby. In light of [[faulty]] [[examination]] - or car crashes - I feel possessed to get in gear and make a transmission to give merit where due, and do a [[servicing]]. I'm not [[convinced]] people have [[permitted]] to say it was so bad, almost automatically.

It's [[scarce]] for a movie to have SUSPENSE. This movie maintained [[wait]] it's [[entire]] length, for me, despite any [[irregularities]] that may be. How [[numerous]] [[cinematography]] can [[tell]] that? Not [[yet]] many [[hefty]] ones. Because of the [[mere]] premise you don't know if the people will get out of the life-threatening situation, which lasts the whole movie. Yeh, the suspension was tight, and over some bumps the shocks did their work. It's not just a TV movie, but an all-action movie; there is no point where it stops, or deviates, or becomes talky. It would be hard to make a film like this, always on the road. Only Duel, or Speed, are this that I recall. The best thing in them also was the constant tension.

ACTING is not [[unfavourable]]: The Judge is as good as ever, and the others are.

SCRIPT is good. But the jury is out as to whether it sometimes may be - or seem to be - a little awry. What seems unrealistic is not necessarily so. Your first judgments are not always right, but I think the lead actor's was right in being in this movie.

STUNTS are mostly [[wondrous]], especially for a TV movie. Their only failing may be the noticeable, and again, apparent, slow speed. But we all know how deceivingly slow Grand Prix cars can look.

I liked that THE BEGINNING said, "inspired by a true story." So you are not going to go how much is true? You know just the basis is. The usual "based on a true story" makes me think it should mostly be true. But maybe that's my error.

HOW TO SAVE THEM: Good idea of the reviewer to suggest a tow truck to lift the back wheels up. Just a few inches would do. A stunt driver could do that at 100 mph. Odd that they didn't call a car expert - or auto electrician or mechanic - to see if there's a way.

I hope this review has put in reverse that this film is a disaster. Or at least neutral. And help it become a runaway success.

Pic quality is a little soft for a DVD.

SPOILER: They would have been winched out after the baby was, but strangely that life-saving idea was cleverly dealt with in some joking conversation to fade it out. I guess we know why. End of movie. Suspension of disbelief went out the top window with the baby. --------------------------------------------- Result 3889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I [[must]] admit that I have been a sucker for Samurai [[flicks]] since I can [[remember]]. I [[used]] to watch rather indiscriminate, be it "elitist" works like The Seven Samurai or the bloody comic-book variation like [[Lone]] [[Wolf]] and Cub. I also [[liked]] US-/Japanese "Crossovers" like The Bushido [[Blade]]. And of course everything containing [[Sonny]] Chiba and Hiroyuki Sanada. And I've [[virtually]] watched every Samurai at least twice. But not Kabuto.

[[In]] 1993 I first watched Kabuto on [[video]], that even Samurai films can be boring. [[In]] the [[beginning]] I was [[looking]] forward to Mayeda [[reaching]] [[Europe]] and the confrontations that would [[come]] from that but by the [[time]] he actually [[reached]] Spain, I really didn't care so [[much]] for the [[movie]] anymore.

It wouldn't do the [[film]] justice to call it "bad". Technically it's a clean [[entry]] into the [[genre]]. But there is [[simply]] never [[quiet]] enough. Sho Kosugi has [[limited]] [[skills]] as both [[director]] and actor and has only a [[fraction]] of above [[mentioned]] Japanese [[actors]] charisma. And [[speaking]] of Sho Kosugis [[son]] Kane, who [[appears]] in [[almost]] all Sho Kosugi [[films]] as Shos [[son]]: he has [[inherited]] little-to-none of his [[fathers]] [[limited]] acting [[skills]]. [[Adding]] to the minus-points is the [[absence]] of the [[blood]] and [[gore]] that until then was a [[trademark]] of all Samurai [[film]]. This was [[obviously]] [[intended]] for a [[younger]] US- / European [[audience]].

[[Lets]] just [[say]] that it's a so-so [[film]] for the average historic-action-adventure fan but a [[bore]] for hardened fans of Samurai cinema. [[Fans]] who are into the "Samurai [[meets]] …"-genre, should [[rather]] [[go]] and watch [[Red]] [[Sun]] (1971), featuring Charles Bronson as cowboy who has to team up with [[Samurai]] [[Toshiro]] Mifume to [[retrieve]] a samurai [[sword]] from bad-guy Alan Delon. It pretty much how to do it right and where Kabuto went wrong.

So, even though the film is a mere 100 [[minutes]], it seems like a much longer film.

The [[reason]] I gave this a honourable 4/10 points instead of 3/10: First time I saw this film, I saw it in the German synchronized version. In this version, Kosugi can actually be understood. I must admit that his 'Engrish' is at times funny but gets tiresome after about 30 minutes. I [[needs]] admit that I have been a sucker for Samurai [[gestures]] since I can [[reminisce]]. I [[utilise]] to watch rather indiscriminate, be it "elitist" works like The Seven Samurai or the bloody comic-book variation like [[Sole]] [[Woolf]] and Cub. I also [[wished]] US-/Japanese "Crossovers" like The Bushido [[Bladed]]. And of course everything containing [[Crockett]] Chiba and Hiroyuki Sanada. And I've [[essentially]] watched every Samurai at least twice. But not Kabuto.

[[Onto]] 1993 I first watched Kabuto on [[videotape]], that even Samurai films can be boring. [[Onto]] the [[commence]] I was [[researching]] forward to Mayeda [[realizing]] [[Eu]] and the confrontations that would [[arriving]] from that but by the [[period]] he actually [[totaled]] Spain, I really didn't care so [[very]] for the [[filmmaking]] anymore.

It wouldn't do the [[filmmaking]] justice to call it "bad". Technically it's a clean [[input]] into the [[genres]]. But there is [[purely]] never [[silent]] enough. Sho Kosugi has [[meagre]] [[jurisdiction]] as both [[headmaster]] and actor and has only a [[fractions]] of above [[referred]] Japanese [[players]] charisma. And [[speak]] of Sho Kosugis [[sons]] Kane, who [[seem]] in [[practically]] all Sho Kosugi [[filmmaking]] as Shos [[sons]]: he has [[genetics]] little-to-none of his [[father]] [[limitation]] acting [[jurisdiction]]. [[Adds]] to the minus-points is the [[lacks]] of the [[transfusion]] and [[gora]] that until then was a [[trademarks]] of all Samurai [[cinema]]. This was [[definitely]] [[meant]] for a [[cadet]] US- / European [[viewers]].

[[Enabled]] just [[tell]] that it's a so-so [[cinematographic]] for the average historic-action-adventure fan but a [[boring]] for hardened fans of Samurai cinema. [[Lovers]] who are into the "Samurai [[satisfies]] …"-genre, should [[fairly]] [[going]] and watch [[Rosso]] [[Suen]] (1971), featuring Charles Bronson as cowboy who has to team up with [[Swordsman]] [[Mifune]] Mifume to [[recovering]] a samurai [[sabre]] from bad-guy Alan Delon. It pretty much how to do it right and where Kabuto went wrong.

So, even though the film is a mere 100 [[mins]], it seems like a much longer film.

The [[grounds]] I gave this a honourable 4/10 points instead of 3/10: First time I saw this film, I saw it in the German synchronized version. In this version, Kosugi can actually be understood. I must admit that his 'Engrish' is at times funny but gets tiresome after about 30 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 3890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If it were possible to distill the heart and soul of the sport--no, the pure lifestyle--of surfing to its perfect form, this documentary has done it. This documentary shows the life isn't just about the waves, but it's more about the people, the pioneers, and the modern day vanguard that are pushing the envelope of big wave further than it's ever been.

Stacy Peralta--a virtual legend from my early '80s skateboarding days as a SoCal teen--has edited reams of amazing stock and interview footage down to their essence and created what is not just a documentary, but a masterpiece of the genre. When his heart and soul is in the subject matter--and clearly it is here--his genius is fraught with a pure vision that doesn't glamorize, hype, or sentimentalize his subject. He reveres surfers and the surfing/beach lifestyle, but doesn't whitewash it either. There is a gritty reality to the sport as well.

There is so much that could be said about this documentary, about the surfers, the early history of the sport, and the wild big wave surfers it profiles. Greg Noll, the first big wave personality who arguably pioneered the sport; Jeff Carter, an amazing guy who rode virtually alone for 15 years on Northern California's extremely dangerous Maverick's big surf; and, the centerpiece of the documentary, Laird Hamliton, big wave surfing's present day messiah.

There is tremendous heart and warmth among all these guys--and a few girls who show up on camera--and a deep and powerful love for surfing and the ocean that comes through in every word. I found the story of how Hamilton's adopted father met him and how Hamilton as a small 4- or 5-year old boy practically forced him to be his dad especially heartwarming (and, again, stripped of syrupy sentimentality).

If you like surfing--or even if you don't--this is a wonderful documentary that must be watched, if only because you're a student of the form or someone who simply appreciates incredibly well-done works of art. --------------------------------------------- Result 3891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Poor [[Paul]] Mercurio. [[After]] [[landing]] the role of Scott Hastings in Strictly [[Ballroom]], the [[best]] film in [[history]], he managed to [[find]] himself doing a [[lot]] of [[rubbish]]. None of the characters in this film is very unlikable, or [[even]] hateable, but Mercurio's lead is the [[sort]] of [[person]] you [[prefer]] to [[ignore]] - completely unloveable and he [[wears]] OVERALLS. [[Big]] [[mistake]] in costume [[design]], that one. Poor [[Paolo]] Mercurio. [[Upon]] [[disembarking]] the role of Scott Hastings in Strictly [[Salwa]], the [[optimum]] film in [[tale]], he managed to [[unearthed]] himself doing a [[lots]] of [[trash]]. None of the characters in this film is very unlikable, or [[yet]] hateable, but Mercurio's lead is the [[sorts]] of [[persona]] you [[favorite]] to [[flout]] - completely unloveable and he [[gate]] OVERALLS. [[Prodigious]] [[blunder]] in costume [[conceive]], that one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ...is the only way to describe this movie about subjects that should be surefire: scandal, sex, celebrity, power. Kirsten Dunst grins her way through her role as silent movie star Marion Davies like she thinks she's in "Legally Blonde." The guy who plays William Randolph Hearst overacts to the point where you want to reach into the screen and slap him. Eddie Izzard is pretty good, except that he's playing Charlie Chaplin, and is about, oh, 125 lbs too heavy for the part? Hard to believe this hamfisted, uneven wreck was directed by Peter Bogdanovich, but then again, he hasn't made a watchable movie in, what? 30 years? Sometimes, there's just no coming back. --------------------------------------------- Result 3893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies that apparently was trying to ride the martial arts wave craze. Kind of like Billy Jack I guess. However, whereas Billy Jack did have one notable martial arts scene there are none in this one unless you consider some gentlemanly grappling and roughhousing as such. We are introduced to the star who is described as having learned Judo in the marines. I was in the marines and while they are pretty established in boxing, I really don't remember any emphasis on Judo. As a result the antagonist, James Macarthur, makes reference to the Judo when he offers an excuse for why he, a state champion wrestler was so easily defeated. Lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 3894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm a [[true]] fan of the [[original]] Cracker [[series]], and own all of them on DVD. [[Cracker]] had a tendency to be over-the-top on occasion, but [[Robbie]] Coltrane and the other cast [[members]], as well as the writers, [[always]] [[seemed]] to carry it off [[despite]] themselves. I [[count]] the [[original]] Cracker among the [[great]] Brit TV [[crime]] [[series]] of that [[time]], and there's some [[stiff]] [[competition]]: Prime [[Suspect]], Inspector Frost, [[Inspector]] Morse, Jeremy Brett's Sherlock [[Homes]], and a [[host]] of others. [[Cracker]], along with Prime Suspect, was on the top of my [[list]].

[[Which]] makes "A [[New]] [[Terror]]" all the more sad...

[[Ultimately]], this was a very pale imitation of Cracker's former [[glory]]. I [[forced]] myself to [[sit]] through the whole [[thing]], convinced that it couldn't actually be this bad, and that some [[spark]] would eventually ignite. I was wrong, it was bad from beginning to [[end]].

A few criticisms: [[First]], just to get any potential bias up-front right off: I was offended by the anti-American, anti-war screed that droned on and on throughout most of the show. The topper: the [[murder]] of two American's innocent of any [[crime]] and a British [[Junkie]] is, in Fitz's [[words]], "[[understandable]], but not [[justified]]". I thought "I waded through two [[hours]] of [[crap]] just to [[hear]] this disgusting bit of [[drivel]]?" [[So]] I had a [[negative]] reaction to the anti-war/[[American]] tone [[brought]] on by my [[beliefs]]... Beyond the politics, I had the [[distinct]] [[sense]] that this Cracker was [[merely]] a [[prop]] for the [[propaganda]], and it actually helped to [[undermine]] an already terribly weak [[script]].

Second, just how much air-time did Robbie Coltrane get? Fitz was almost a bit [[player]] in this one, as if he was an afterthought plugged into some story originally written without any thought of Fitz's role. Coltrane [[could]] have carried the show on his own broad and still suitably flabby shoulders, but the writer was apparently thinking of other things, and missed the [[chance]], and by a wide margin.

Third: WHAT AN [[ABYSMAL]] SCRIPT! There was some sparkle, and a couple of bits of actual character [[development]] (Fitz's son ranting that Fitz couldn't stay at his house if he missed his plane to Australia, the Detective that liked to beat his poor-performers over the backs of their heads, and some of the old sparks between Fitz and his Missus) but not nearly enough to carry the tedious storyline.

Fourth, where the hell was Panhallagan? Now that would have been interesting... It was Manchester after all, and 10 years on she'd be up in the ranks. Another wasted opportunity (or perhaps the actress wasn't interested?)

Well, there's much more (that's bad) to say , but I'll close with a curiosity: at the end of the show (as it aired on BBCA), when the advertisement announced that the "Director's Cut" was available on BBC On-Demand, I thought AH-HA! The Director's cut, which, presumably, one has to pay for, might have all of the goodies I expected to see tonight but never did, like a coherent, interesting storyline. Unfortunately, after convincing myself to sit through the horrible free version of "A New Terror" with the hope of seeing something, anything, worth watching, only to be disappointed, I have no hope left to motivate me to actually pay for a second, potentially longer and more tedious version. Besides, it angered me to think that BBCA sliced and diced, and sacrificed show time to accommodate the endless (every ten minutes or so) stream of commercials, and then turned around and asked me to pay for what probably should have been version aired tonight.

To close, I quote the first paragraph of Variety's review of "A New Terror": it really says it all: "Initial excitement about Robbie Coltrane reprising his role as the BBC's flawed, boozing, womanizing criminal psychologist is snowed under by the heavy-handed political statement writer Jimmy McGovern is determined to deliver within this revival vidpic. Jolting at first in its message -- namely, that Americans are a bunch of whiny namby-pambies who didn't care a whit about terrorism before it came crashing onto our doorstep -- McGovern's chest-clearing rant overwhelms the narrative and mutes the pleasure of seeing Fitz back on the case." I'm a [[veritable]] fan of the [[initial]] Cracker [[serials]], and own all of them on DVD. [[Cookie]] had a tendency to be over-the-top on occasion, but [[Bobby]] Coltrane and the other cast [[member]], as well as the writers, [[consistently]] [[appeared]] to carry it off [[albeit]] themselves. I [[comte]] the [[upfront]] Cracker among the [[whopping]] Brit TV [[crimes]] [[serials]] of that [[moment]], and there's some [[tough]] [[rivalry]]: Prime [[Suspects]], Inspector Frost, [[Inspectors]] Morse, Jeremy Brett's Sherlock [[Residential]], and a [[hosts]] of others. [[Cookie]], along with Prime Suspect, was on the top of my [[lists]].

[[Whom]] makes "A [[Novel]] [[Horror]]" all the more sad...

[[Eventually]], this was a very pale imitation of Cracker's former [[gloria]]. I [[obliged]] myself to [[seated]] through the whole [[stuff]], convinced that it couldn't actually be this bad, and that some [[sparkle]] would eventually ignite. I was wrong, it was bad from beginning to [[terminate]].

A few criticisms: [[Firstly]], just to get any potential bias up-front right off: I was offended by the anti-American, anti-war screed that droned on and on throughout most of the show. The topper: the [[manslaughter]] of two American's innocent of any [[transgression]] and a British [[Addict]] is, in Fitz's [[mots]], "[[comprehensible]], but not [[legitimate]]". I thought "I waded through two [[hour]] of [[bollocks]] just to [[overheard]] this disgusting bit of [[whim]]?" [[Consequently]] I had a [[unfavourable]] reaction to the anti-war/[[Americana]] tone [[introduced]] on by my [[belief]]... Beyond the politics, I had the [[different]] [[feeling]] that this Cracker was [[exclusively]] a [[helix]] for the [[publicize]], and it actually helped to [[detract]] an already terribly weak [[hyphen]].

Second, just how much air-time did Robbie Coltrane get? Fitz was almost a bit [[protagonist]] in this one, as if he was an afterthought plugged into some story originally written without any thought of Fitz's role. Coltrane [[wo]] have carried the show on his own broad and still suitably flabby shoulders, but the writer was apparently thinking of other things, and missed the [[chances]], and by a wide margin.

Third: WHAT AN [[SHOCKING]] SCRIPT! There was some sparkle, and a couple of bits of actual character [[developments]] (Fitz's son ranting that Fitz couldn't stay at his house if he missed his plane to Australia, the Detective that liked to beat his poor-performers over the backs of their heads, and some of the old sparks between Fitz and his Missus) but not nearly enough to carry the tedious storyline.

Fourth, where the hell was Panhallagan? Now that would have been interesting... It was Manchester after all, and 10 years on she'd be up in the ranks. Another wasted opportunity (or perhaps the actress wasn't interested?)

Well, there's much more (that's bad) to say , but I'll close with a curiosity: at the end of the show (as it aired on BBCA), when the advertisement announced that the "Director's Cut" was available on BBC On-Demand, I thought AH-HA! The Director's cut, which, presumably, one has to pay for, might have all of the goodies I expected to see tonight but never did, like a coherent, interesting storyline. Unfortunately, after convincing myself to sit through the horrible free version of "A New Terror" with the hope of seeing something, anything, worth watching, only to be disappointed, I have no hope left to motivate me to actually pay for a second, potentially longer and more tedious version. Besides, it angered me to think that BBCA sliced and diced, and sacrificed show time to accommodate the endless (every ten minutes or so) stream of commercials, and then turned around and asked me to pay for what probably should have been version aired tonight.

To close, I quote the first paragraph of Variety's review of "A New Terror": it really says it all: "Initial excitement about Robbie Coltrane reprising his role as the BBC's flawed, boozing, womanizing criminal psychologist is snowed under by the heavy-handed political statement writer Jimmy McGovern is determined to deliver within this revival vidpic. Jolting at first in its message -- namely, that Americans are a bunch of whiny namby-pambies who didn't care a whit about terrorism before it came crashing onto our doorstep -- McGovern's chest-clearing rant overwhelms the narrative and mutes the pleasure of seeing Fitz back on the case." --------------------------------------------- Result 3895 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] They had an opportunity to make one of the best romantic tragedy mafia movies ever because they had the actors,the budget,and the story but the great director John Huston was too preoccupied trying to mellow out this missed classic.Strenuously trying to find black humor as often as possible which diluted the movie very much.And also they were so uncaring with details like sound and detailed action.Maybe it was the age of the director who passed away two years later. --------------------------------------------- Result 3896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Disappointing musical version of Margaret Landon's "Anna and the King of Siam", itself filmed in 1946 with Irene Dunne and Rex Harrison, has Deborah Kerr cast as a widowed schoolteacher and mother who travels from England to Siam in 1862 to accept job as tutor to the King's many children--and perhaps teach the Royal One a thing or two in the process! Stagy picture begins well, but quickly loses energy and focus. Yul Brynner, reprising his stage triumph as the King, is a commanding presence, but is used--per the concocted story--as a buffoon. Kerr keeps her cool dignity and fares better, despite having to lip-synch to Marni Nixon's vocals. Perhaps having already played this part to death, Brynner looks like he had nothing leftover for the screen translation except bombast. Second-half, with Anna and the moppets staging a musical version of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" is quite ridiculous, and the Rodgers and Hammerstein songs are mostly lumbering. Brynner won a Best Actor Oscar, but it is feisty Kerr who keeps this bauble above water. Overlong, heavy, and 'old-fashioned' in the worst sense of the term. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Michael Keaton is "Johnny Dangerously" in this take-off on [[gangster]] [[movies]] [[done]] in 1984. [[Maureen]] Stapleton plays his sickly [[mother]], [[Griffin]] [[Dunne]] is his DA brother, [[Peter]] Boyle is his boss, and Marilu Henner is his girlfriend. Other [[stars]] [[include]] [[Danny]] [[DeVito]] and Joe Piscopo. Keaton plays a pet [[store]] [[owner]] in the 1930s who catches a [[kid]] [[stealing]] a puppy and then [[tells]] him, in flashback, how he [[came]] to own the pet [[store]]. He turned to thievery at a young [[age]] to [[get]] his [[mother]] a [[pancreas]] operation ($49.95, special this [[week]]) and began [[working]] for a mob boss (Boyle). Johnny [[uses]] the [[last]] [[name]] "Dangerously" in the [[mobster]] [[world]].

There are some hilarious scenes in this [[film]], and Stapleton is a [[riot]] as Johnny's foul-mouthed mother who [[needs]] ever organ in her [[body]] [[replaced]]. Peter Boyle as Johnny's boss gives a very funny performance, as does [[Griffin]] Dunne, a straight [[arrow]] DA who won't "[[play]] ball" with crooked Burr (Danny De Vito). As Johnny's nemesis, Joe Piscopo is [[great]]. [[Richard]] [[Dimitri]] is a standout as Moronie, who tortures the English [[language]] - but you have to hear him do it rather than read about it. What makes it [[funny]] is that he does it all with an angry [[face]].

The movie gets a little tired toward the end, but it's well worth seeing, and Keaton is [[terrific]] as good boy/bad [[boy]] Johnny. For some reason, this [[film]] was [[underrated]] when it was [[released]], and like Keaton's other gem, "[[Night]] Shift," you don't hear much about it today. With some performances and scenes that are [[real]] [[gems]], you'll find "Johnny [[Dangerously]]" [[immensely]] enjoyable. Michael Keaton is "Johnny Dangerously" in this take-off on [[thug]] [[cinematography]] [[played]] in 1984. [[Morin]] Stapleton plays his sickly [[mommy]], [[Griffon]] [[Dunn]] is his DA brother, [[Pieter]] Boyle is his boss, and Marilu Henner is his girlfriend. Other [[star]] [[containing]] [[Dani]] [[danny]] and Joe Piscopo. Keaton plays a pet [[stores]] [[landowner]] in the 1930s who catches a [[children]] [[stolen]] a puppy and then [[told]] him, in flashback, how he [[arrived]] to own the pet [[stores]]. He turned to thievery at a young [[ageing]] to [[obtain]] his [[mummy]] a [[pancreatic]] operation ($49.95, special this [[chow]]) and began [[worked]] for a mob boss (Boyle). Johnny [[using]] the [[final]] [[naming]] "Dangerously" in the [[hoodlum]] [[globe]].

There are some hilarious scenes in this [[movies]], and Stapleton is a [[rioting]] as Johnny's foul-mouthed mother who [[needed]] ever organ in her [[organs]] [[replace]]. Peter Boyle as Johnny's boss gives a very funny performance, as does [[Griffith]] Dunne, a straight [[arrows]] DA who won't "[[playing]] ball" with crooked Burr (Danny De Vito). As Johnny's nemesis, Joe Piscopo is [[wondrous]]. [[Richards]] [[Demetrius]] is a standout as Moronie, who tortures the English [[linguistics]] - but you have to hear him do it rather than read about it. What makes it [[hilarious]] is that he does it all with an angry [[confronts]].

The movie gets a little tired toward the end, but it's well worth seeing, and Keaton is [[super]] as good boy/bad [[dude]] Johnny. For some reason, this [[films]] was [[understated]] when it was [[liberated]], and like Keaton's other gem, "[[Overnight]] Shift," you don't hear much about it today. With some performances and scenes that are [[genuine]] [[jewelry]], you'll find "Johnny [[Precariously]]" [[terribly]] enjoyable. --------------------------------------------- Result 3898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This movie has a very [[simple]] [[yet]] [[clever]] premise - an unemployed man trying to steal from a convenience store, and the store clerk catches him in the act... the thief runs away with the store-clerk right after him. All the while, the store clerk is in trouble with a low-rank Yakuza chinpira (gangster). Along the chase for the thief, they catch the eye of the Yakuza who's been looking for the convenience store clerk. The story then moves into high gear in the form of a Tom & Jerry ([[cat]] & mouse), but is added with the dog chasing after the cat. The entire 2nd act of D.A.N.G.A.N. Runner (can be translate to English as "PINBALL RUNNERS") is about the chase, and the chase goes on & on to the point that by the end of the 2nd act, the bum forgets why he is running away, and the Yakuza don't remember which of the 2 guys he is chasing, nor does he remember why they're running away from him.

Similar to SABU's later film POSTMAN BLUES, the bulk of the film is simply all chase and action, with plenty of physical comedy and dark humor injected to keep the audience engaged. What falls short is the ending, to which the chase stops when the three men run out of steam, and into one of the most chaotic Mexican stand-offs you'll see on film that looks almost as if Sabu was paying homage to Tony Scott's TRUE ROMANCE (written by Quentin Tarantino). This movie has a very [[uncomplicated]] [[however]] [[artful]] premise - an unemployed man trying to steal from a convenience store, and the store clerk catches him in the act... the thief runs away with the store-clerk right after him. All the while, the store clerk is in trouble with a low-rank Yakuza chinpira (gangster). Along the chase for the thief, they catch the eye of the Yakuza who's been looking for the convenience store clerk. The story then moves into high gear in the form of a Tom & Jerry ([[pussycat]] & mouse), but is added with the dog chasing after the cat. The entire 2nd act of D.A.N.G.A.N. Runner (can be translate to English as "PINBALL RUNNERS") is about the chase, and the chase goes on & on to the point that by the end of the 2nd act, the bum forgets why he is running away, and the Yakuza don't remember which of the 2 guys he is chasing, nor does he remember why they're running away from him.

Similar to SABU's later film POSTMAN BLUES, the bulk of the film is simply all chase and action, with plenty of physical comedy and dark humor injected to keep the audience engaged. What falls short is the ending, to which the chase stops when the three men run out of steam, and into one of the most chaotic Mexican stand-offs you'll see on film that looks almost as if Sabu was paying homage to Tony Scott's TRUE ROMANCE (written by Quentin Tarantino). --------------------------------------------- Result 3899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Lindsay Anderson was very much a European film maker , whereas the likes of David Lean , Ridley Scott and Alan Parker make spectacular movies involving visuel scope Anderson`s movie are more about social commentary and subtext , so much so that the [[message]] [[often]] [[ends]] up taking over the entire film whose primary function should be to entertain the audience

What you think of IF comes down to what you think of British film makers . I`m very much of the view that cinema should be a universial medium ( The best Brit movie makes are those who try to emulate Hollywood in my opinion ) , if you want to send a message try pony express , and I find the [[movie]] dated , [[pretentious]] and too set in the 1960s . 1968 was the summer of love and the year of student rebellion in France . You can just imagine every single French leftist worshipping this movie especially the climax . French new wave film makers will also admire the abstract surrealism of some scenes but a mainstream international will dislike it , and many will dislike it intensely Lindsay Anderson was very much a European film maker , whereas the likes of David Lean , Ridley Scott and Alan Parker make spectacular movies involving visuel scope Anderson`s movie are more about social commentary and subtext , so much so that the [[messages]] [[ordinarily]] [[culminates]] up taking over the entire film whose primary function should be to entertain the audience

What you think of IF comes down to what you think of British film makers . I`m very much of the view that cinema should be a universial medium ( The best Brit movie makes are those who try to emulate Hollywood in my opinion ) , if you want to send a message try pony express , and I find the [[filmmaking]] dated , [[presumptuous]] and too set in the 1960s . 1968 was the summer of love and the year of student rebellion in France . You can just imagine every single French leftist worshipping this movie especially the climax . French new wave film makers will also admire the abstract surrealism of some scenes but a mainstream international will dislike it , and many will dislike it intensely --------------------------------------------- Result 3900 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most calming, relaxing, and beautifully made animation films I've ever seen. With beautiful music throughout the movie, the sounds and music can make you feel like you're in the movie! This movie is not just great for kids, but adults too. It teaches you lessons, such as never forget who you are, you can do whatever you stick your mind to, and to brave and daring. This movie can make you cry at times too, which is always a nice touch in movies. This movie is funny, sad, cute, and keeps you on the edge of your seat! Some movies really give you a fuzzy feeling after you see them, and the movie "Spirit" is definitely one of them! With my vote of 9/10 stars for animation, music, and a wonderful idea for a movie, it gave me a whole lot of Spirit! --------------------------------------------- Result 3901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Allow]] yourself to be [[transported]] to a [[different]], old [[school]] kind of storytelling. [[Scoop]] is [[classic]] Woody Allen.

Allen's [[latest]] muse, [[Scarlett]] Johansson (who [[also]] appeared in [[last]] year's [[Match]] Point, also by Allen), is [[surprisingly]] able to tone down her sultry sex kitten appeal and [[transform]] into a normal [[looking]] student-type with the aid of nerdish [[glasses]] and outfits but still [[fails]] to [[make]] the audience [[believe]] how Hugh Jackman's lordly [[character]] can be so smitten by her, given the royal's background (don't worry, no [[spoilers]] here). There are no [[grand]] transformations for Johansson's character here, as she [[consistently]] plays the same character throughout despite the script saying otherwise. You even forgive her character's apparent lack of logic, continuing an affair with a suspected serial killer, simply because he is [[His]] Royal Hotness Jackman, who is [[refreshing]] to see sans the Wolverine duds.

If anything, consistency is what the 70-year old Allen is all about. He continues to tell his stories on celluloid in the same way he always has; as if he's never been exposed to modern film-making, which is probably what makes his [[quiet]], [[simple]] films appealing. They never seem to aim for a specific [[market]]; as if Allen makes movies to his taste alone, whether the public likes it or not. [[Allowed]] yourself to be [[hauled]] to a [[assorted]], old [[teaching]] kind of storytelling. [[Spoon]] is [[classical]] Woody Allen.

Allen's [[recent]] muse, [[Scarlet]] Johansson (who [[likewise]] appeared in [[latter]] year's [[Matching]] Point, also by Allen), is [[unbelievably]] able to tone down her sultry sex kitten appeal and [[transmutation]] into a normal [[researching]] student-type with the aid of nerdish [[spectacles]] and outfits but still [[fail]] to [[deliver]] the audience [[reckon]] how Hugh Jackman's lordly [[nature]] can be so smitten by her, given the royal's background (don't worry, no [[troublemakers]] here). There are no [[prodigious]] transformations for Johansson's character here, as she [[methodically]] plays the same character throughout despite the script saying otherwise. You even forgive her character's apparent lack of logic, continuing an affair with a suspected serial killer, simply because he is [[Her]] Royal Hotness Jackman, who is [[refreshed]] to see sans the Wolverine duds.

If anything, consistency is what the 70-year old Allen is all about. He continues to tell his stories on celluloid in the same way he always has; as if he's never been exposed to modern film-making, which is probably what makes his [[shush]], [[uncomplicated]] films appealing. They never seem to aim for a specific [[marketplace]]; as if Allen makes movies to his taste alone, whether the public likes it or not. --------------------------------------------- Result 3902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This [[movie]] was one of the [[greatest]] [[movies]] ever [[made]],,,, it had everything to [[make]] a [[movie]] [[great]]. [[Incredible]] acting, [[awesome]] [[special]] [[effects]]...... [[oh]] [[wait]] I [[must]] be [[thinking]] of a [[good]] [[movie]]. [[Well]] this wasn't one of them, it just plain sucked.

What I [[want]] to know is, what kind of bone [[head]] would [[think]] that this [[movie]] was a 10. [[When]] I casted my vote there were 206 out there, [[god]] knows what goes on in their [[head]]. [[Now]] as for any other [[vote]], a 8 or 9 was [[even]] too [[high]], but a 10??? Come on, what made this movie sooooo good to [[give]] it a 10? I know these are the same 206 that [[thought]] that Jean Claude Van Damme is a [[great]] dramatic actor. This [[flick]] was one of the [[finest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[brought]],,,, it had everything to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]] [[formidable]]. [[Unimaginable]] acting, [[sumptuous]] [[peculiar]] [[implications]]...... [[ohhh]] [[suspense]] I [[gotta]] be [[thought]] of a [[alright]] [[films]]. [[Good]] this wasn't one of them, it just plain sucked.

What I [[wanna]] to know is, what kind of bone [[chief]] would [[thought]] that this [[filmmaking]] was a 10. [[Whenever]] I casted my vote there were 206 out there, [[lord]] knows what goes on in their [[leader]]. [[Currently]] as for any other [[voting]], a 8 or 9 was [[yet]] too [[alto]], but a 10??? Come on, what made this movie sooooo good to [[lend]] it a 10? I know these are the same 206 that [[figured]] that Jean Claude Van Damme is a [[wondrous]] dramatic actor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The bad out takes from "Reign of Fire" strung together, without any real story.

Dean Cain tries to be a real actor, and fails again.

In the end the dragons quit in disgust.

BARF! --------------------------------------------- Result 3904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[think]] the [[movie]] was pretty [[good]], will [[add]] it to my "clasic [[collection]]" after all this [[time]]. I believe I saw other [[posters]] who [[reminded]] some of the pickier people that it is still just a movie. Maybe some of the more esoteric points [[defy]] "logic", but a great [[many]] religious matters [[accepted]] "on [[faith]]" fail to pass the [[smell]] [[test]]. If you're going to accept whatever faith you subscribe to you can certainly [[accept]] a movie. Is it just me or has anyone else [[noticed]] the Aja-Yee [[Dagger]] is the same possessed knife Lamonte Cranston had so much trouble gaining control of in "The Shadow". No mention of it in the trivia section for either movie here (IMDB), but I would bet a dollar to a donut it's the same prop. I [[believing]] the [[kino]] was pretty [[alright]], will [[summing]] it to my "clasic [[collate]]" after all this [[moment]]. I believe I saw other [[placards]] who [[remembered]] some of the pickier people that it is still just a movie. Maybe some of the more esoteric points [[defiant]] "logic", but a great [[numerous]] religious matters [[consented]] "on [[fe]]" fail to pass the [[stink]] [[tests]]. If you're going to accept whatever faith you subscribe to you can certainly [[accepting]] a movie. Is it just me or has anyone else [[saw]] the Aja-Yee [[Sword]] is the same possessed knife Lamonte Cranston had so much trouble gaining control of in "The Shadow". No mention of it in the trivia section for either movie here (IMDB), but I would bet a dollar to a donut it's the same prop. --------------------------------------------- Result 3905 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Time for a rant, [[eh]]: I [[thought]] Spirit was a [[great]] movie to watch. However, there were a few things that stop me from [[rating]] it higher than a 6 or 7 (I'm being a little bit generous with the 7).

Point #1: [[Matt]] Damon [[aggravates]] me. I was thinking, 'what a dicky voice they got for the main character,' when I [[first]] heard him narrate - and then I [[realized]] it is Matt Damon. The [[man]] [[bugs]] me so very [[bad]] - his performance in "The Departed" was terrible and ruined the movie for me (before the movie got a chance to ruin itself, but that's another story for some other time), as it almost did "[[Spirit]]". I was able to get past this fact because of how little narration there actually was... thankfully.

Point #2: Brian Adams sucks... The whole [[score]] was terrible... The songs were unoriginal, generic, and poorly executed; not once did I find the music to fit; and the lyrics were terrible. Every time one of the lame songs came on, I was turned off. I almost thought I'd start hearing some patriotic propaganda slipped into the super-American freedom style lyrics (I couldn't help but be reminded of those terrible patriotic songs that played on the radio constantly after 9/11). In light of the native American aspects of the film, they should have gone with fitting music using right instruments, not petty radio-hit, teen-bop, 14-year-old-girl crap. I thought I was back in junior high school. I can't believe no better could have been done--I refuse to. Had it not have been for this, I'd rank the film up more with Disney, which knows a thing or two about originality (ok, don't bother saying what I know some of you are probably thinking ;). Too bad, it's a shame they couldn't have hired better musicians.

I [[liked]] the art and animation, except for some things here and there... like sometimes the angles appear too sharp on the face and the lines too thick or dark on the body (thick/dark lines mainly near the end). There were often times when I thought they _tried too hard_ on the emotion and facial expressions and failed at drawing any real emotion. But there were also times when the emotion ran thick. Anyhow, many scenes were lazy and the layers were apparent.

OK, I'm falling asleep here so I'll sum it up before I start making less sense...

Nice try on an epic film... it turned out mediocre though. Matt Damon, you suck! Time for a rant, [[er]]: I [[thinks]] Spirit was a [[wondrous]] movie to watch. However, there were a few things that stop me from [[punctuation]] it higher than a 6 or 7 (I'm being a little bit generous with the 7).

Point #1: [[Mattie]] Damon [[rages]] me. I was thinking, 'what a dicky voice they got for the main character,' when I [[firstly]] heard him narrate - and then I [[performed]] it is Matt Damon. The [[males]] [[cockroaches]] me so very [[amiss]] - his performance in "The Departed" was terrible and ruined the movie for me (before the movie got a chance to ruin itself, but that's another story for some other time), as it almost did "[[Wits]]". I was able to get past this fact because of how little narration there actually was... thankfully.

Point #2: Brian Adams sucks... The whole [[punctuation]] was terrible... The songs were unoriginal, generic, and poorly executed; not once did I find the music to fit; and the lyrics were terrible. Every time one of the lame songs came on, I was turned off. I almost thought I'd start hearing some patriotic propaganda slipped into the super-American freedom style lyrics (I couldn't help but be reminded of those terrible patriotic songs that played on the radio constantly after 9/11). In light of the native American aspects of the film, they should have gone with fitting music using right instruments, not petty radio-hit, teen-bop, 14-year-old-girl crap. I thought I was back in junior high school. I can't believe no better could have been done--I refuse to. Had it not have been for this, I'd rank the film up more with Disney, which knows a thing or two about originality (ok, don't bother saying what I know some of you are probably thinking ;). Too bad, it's a shame they couldn't have hired better musicians.

I [[enjoyed]] the art and animation, except for some things here and there... like sometimes the angles appear too sharp on the face and the lines too thick or dark on the body (thick/dark lines mainly near the end). There were often times when I thought they _tried too hard_ on the emotion and facial expressions and failed at drawing any real emotion. But there were also times when the emotion ran thick. Anyhow, many scenes were lazy and the layers were apparent.

OK, I'm falling asleep here so I'll sum it up before I start making less sense...

Nice try on an epic film... it turned out mediocre though. Matt Damon, you suck! --------------------------------------------- Result 3906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] When i [[first]] saw this film i [[thought]] it was going to be a good sasquatch film. Usually when you have these types of [[movies]] there's generally ONE sasquatch, but in this one there is like what? 7 or 10 of them?. Acting was good, plot was OK, i [[liked]] the scenes where the sasquatch is killing the first few [[victims]], very [[good]] [[camera]] work. I was expecting it to be a [[gory]] film but it was very [[little]]. This movie was way better than Sasquatch. The SCI-FI [[channel]] really needs to make more sasquatch films, i [[mean]] i really liked Sasquatch Mountain, Abominibal was not good, the one i'm reviewing is OK, but the movie Sasquatch was not, but I'm not reviewing that so let me get back on track. This movie is good for a rainy Saterday afternoon, but for any other occasions, no. When i [[frst]] saw this film i [[ideas]] it was going to be a good sasquatch film. Usually when you have these types of [[theater]] there's generally ONE sasquatch, but in this one there is like what? 7 or 10 of them?. Acting was good, plot was OK, i [[loved]] the scenes where the sasquatch is killing the first few [[fatalities]], very [[buena]] [[cameras]] work. I was expecting it to be a [[gori]] film but it was very [[scant]]. This movie was way better than Sasquatch. The SCI-FI [[channels]] really needs to make more sasquatch films, i [[signify]] i really liked Sasquatch Mountain, Abominibal was not good, the one i'm reviewing is OK, but the movie Sasquatch was not, but I'm not reviewing that so let me get back on track. This movie is good for a rainy Saterday afternoon, but for any other occasions, no. --------------------------------------------- Result 3907 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Yes, about the only thing this film is [[memorable]] for is that it starred a youngish Tom Hanks who only a few short [[years]] later would be a relevant [[star]] in Hollywood. Here though is not a [[movie]] that is going to [[showcase]] his [[talents]] much at all and the only other thing that might be considered somewhat [[entertaining]] about this [[flick]] is the scene where he [[thinks]] he sees a [[monsters]] and [[runs]] a [[guy]] through. Yes, this movie is about the evils of [[playing]] a [[game]] that makes a [[group]] of people use their imaginations and try to [[come]] up with interesting [[scenarios]]. [[Basically]], an after school type special about the [[evils]] of the game Dungeons and Dragons [[cleverly]] retitled here as Mazes and Monsters. [[Apparently]], the makers of this film thought that [[nerds]] should not have fun of any sort [[unless]] they were going to go out and do underage drinking, drugs, having lots of unprotected sex and harass other weaker children like all the popular kids were doing. [[No]], these bad people were [[playing]] a game that actually required one to use there brain, heaven's no! Not that, if they have a brain they actually may be able to think for themselves and not be brainwashed by certain groups out there. Yes, I think this movie is utterly stupid and a [[waste]] of [[time]]. Granted, it [[could]] be a movie against addiction, but there are a lot fewer people who died taking Dungeons and Dragons to far in its entire existence than than say what drunk driving claims in like a month. Yes, about the only thing this film is [[unforgettable]] for is that it starred a youngish Tom Hanks who only a few short [[olds]] later would be a relevant [[stars]] in Hollywood. Here though is not a [[filmmaking]] that is going to [[showcases]] his [[talent]] much at all and the only other thing that might be considered somewhat [[amusing]] about this [[film]] is the scene where he [[ideas]] he sees a [[freaks]] and [[manages]] a [[blokes]] through. Yes, this movie is about the evils of [[gaming]] a [[gaming]] that makes a [[panel]] of people use their imaginations and try to [[coming]] up with interesting [[scenario]]. [[Chiefly]], an after school type special about the [[misfortunes]] of the game Dungeons and Dragons [[shrewdly]] retitled here as Mazes and Monsters. [[Allegedly]], the makers of this film thought that [[geeks]] should not have fun of any sort [[if]] they were going to go out and do underage drinking, drugs, having lots of unprotected sex and harass other weaker children like all the popular kids were doing. [[Nos]], these bad people were [[play]] a game that actually required one to use there brain, heaven's no! Not that, if they have a brain they actually may be able to think for themselves and not be brainwashed by certain groups out there. Yes, I think this movie is utterly stupid and a [[wastes]] of [[times]]. Granted, it [[did]] be a movie against addiction, but there are a lot fewer people who died taking Dungeons and Dragons to far in its entire existence than than say what drunk driving claims in like a month. --------------------------------------------- Result 3908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Boring, long, pretentious, repetitive, self-involved – this move felt like a bad date. Worse, the tedious art-school direction -- with a heavy-handed use of the whirling shot that gets so overdone it almost made me throw up –- is constantly screaming to be noticed. Add the thinnest of plots and virtually no dialogue, and the film begins to feel like a four hour epic about 30 minutes in. It gets worse: instead of dialogue there are poorly written voice-overs AND quotes and songs that comment all too obviously on the characters. Really loud opera music too. Blame it all on the director.

The actors are all quite good. The lead actor Miguel Angel Hoppe is particularly suited for film stardom. He and the other actors have some tender erotic moments. Even these start to get boring after 5 minutes however, and one wonders if the director is auditioning for a Bel Ami porn job. The stunning college campus architecture as a location in Mexico City is inspiring. How come universities in the US are so bland (SFSU, UC, etc.)? But wait for the DVD on this film. You'll want to use the fast scan button – a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 3909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] After reading the [[book]], which had a [[lot]] of meaning for me, the [[movie]] didn't give me any of the [[feeling]] which the [[book]] [[conveyed]]. This makes me wonder if Kaufman [[even]] [[liked]] this [[book]] for he successfully made it into something [[else]].[[Either]] that or he is [[simply]] [[bad]]. Most importantly where is the lightness?! From the very first scene, music drownes out most of the [[dialogue]] and feeling, and this continues right through the movie. I think the makers thought that by having [[upbeat]] [[music]] playing right through the movie, this would make the story feel light- [[however]] they have completely failed here. Instead the music manages to [[give]] everything that 'movie feel', in a way dramatising events so that we linger on them, so that everything actually feels heavy.

Another [[example]] of the how this [[adaptation]] fails is by embellishing the story line making it more dramatic. In the [[movie]] we [[see]] [[Franz]] passing [[Tomas]] on the street, who is on his way to see Sabina. The [[introduction]] of this chance meeting/passing, which im sure didn't happen in the book, gives Tomas' story more significance than it does make it light.

There are many other examples where the continuity of the story has been changed, imo for the [[worst]], however this might have been done because the book simply doesn't convert well into a movie, such is Kundera's style. This makes we wonder if all the generous reviewers on this site were writing with their book AND movie experience in mind rather than writing about just the film. A film which is as long as it is uncompelling. For those who haven't read the book yet I recommend just reading that. For those who have, I have to say you will just be [[wasting]] your [[time]] and probably end up here [[writing]] similar stay-clear warnings. After reading the [[ledger]], which had a [[batch]] of meaning for me, the [[cinema]] didn't give me any of the [[impression]] which the [[books]] [[shipped]]. This makes me wonder if Kaufman [[yet]] [[loved]] this [[workbook]] for he successfully made it into something [[further]].[[Neither]] that or he is [[straightforward]] [[faulty]]. Most importantly where is the lightness?! From the very first scene, music drownes out most of the [[conversation]] and feeling, and this continues right through the movie. I think the makers thought that by having [[optimistic]] [[musica]] playing right through the movie, this would make the story feel light- [[instead]] they have completely failed here. Instead the music manages to [[confer]] everything that 'movie feel', in a way dramatising events so that we linger on them, so that everything actually feels heavy.

Another [[cases]] of the how this [[adjustment]] fails is by embellishing the story line making it more dramatic. In the [[filmmaking]] we [[behold]] [[Francesco]] passing [[Jacks]] on the street, who is on his way to see Sabina. The [[introducing]] of this chance meeting/passing, which im sure didn't happen in the book, gives Tomas' story more significance than it does make it light.

There are many other examples where the continuity of the story has been changed, imo for the [[gravest]], however this might have been done because the book simply doesn't convert well into a movie, such is Kundera's style. This makes we wonder if all the generous reviewers on this site were writing with their book AND movie experience in mind rather than writing about just the film. A film which is as long as it is uncompelling. For those who haven't read the book yet I recommend just reading that. For those who have, I have to say you will just be [[wastage]] your [[times]] and probably end up here [[handwriting]] similar stay-clear warnings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Historical drama and coming of age story involving free people of color in pre civil war New Orleans. Starts off slow but picks up steam once you have learned about the main characters and the real action can begin. This is not just a story about the exploitation of black women, because these were free people. They may not have had all the rights of whites but they certainly had more control over their destinies than their slave ancestors. The young men and women in this story must each make their own choice about how to live their lives, whether to give into the depravity of the system or live with optimism and contribute to their community. I enjoyed all of the characters but my favorites were Christophe, Anna Bella, and Marcel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who saw the original 1970 movie knows how an excellent cast, script, and director can put together a comedy masterpiece. By the same token, it's easy to see how the opposite of that can create another insipid Hollywood bore-a-thon! This movie was pathetic! Had it not been for John Cleese (a comic genius), I would have walked out about 15 minutes into this dreadful waste of celluloid.

Neil Simon wouldn't write another screenplay for this version (he said that he couldn't improve on the first), and I'm surprised that after this cinematic fiasco he wouldn't sue for defamation of humor!

Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis did such a wonderful job in the original, what were the producers thinking about when they cast this one? How could the director and editor look at these scenes and think any of them were funny? I don't know, but one thing I do know---it's no surprise why foreign and independent movies are becoming more and more popular....... --------------------------------------------- Result 3912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was not expecting the powerful filmmaking experience of "Girlfight". It's an Indie; low-budget, no big-name actors, freshman director. I had heard it was good, but not this good.

Placed in a contemporary, ethnic, working-class Brooklyn, Karyn Kusama has done an extraordinary job of capturing the day-do-day struggles of urban Latinos. Diana, the protagonist, is seething with anger and lashes out at her high school peers, getting in trouble with the school and her friends. She is being raised by her single father, who appears to love her and her brother, but applies a strict, sex-based double standard on his children. The father's double standard is illustrated by the fact that Tiny, the brother, is taking boxing lessons at the local gym, but Diana is denied similar pursuits. On an errand to the gym to meet Tiny, Diana is captivated by boxing. Tiny doesn't like boxing, so he and Diana trade places; he gets the money from Dad then gives it to Diana to take the lessons in his place.

This is actually a feel-good movie, as Diana grows and learns about herself through boxing, meets a guy, and addresses some very serious issues head-on. There's no giggly, 'everything that can go right does go right' resolution a la "Bend It Like Beckham". The reality and attendant personal issues are too big for pat resolutions, but in my opinion, "Girlfight" is a better and more satisfying film for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You, know, I can take the blood and the sex, but that thong bikini shot pretty much did me in. Someone get that girl some pasta before it's too late!

And you know, it's just not a good idea for a schlock movie to start off by mentioning the much better movie it's ripping off.

I gave this one a 2, just because it's marginally better than Tobe Hooper's CROCODILE. --------------------------------------------- Result 3914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a crappy movie! The worst of the worst! This movie is as entertaining as a dead slug. No-talent-what-so-ever-actors, stupid plot. Who wrote this script?! Was there ever a script for this goofy movie or did the director just accidentally press the record-button on his camera and then decided to make the film up as they went along? Is this meant to be a kids movie or a comedy or what? My friends younger brother is in the 6.th grade and him and his classmates just did an amateur-movie for their school-project which outdid this geeky movie.. This is by far the worst film I have seen in my life! There is just no excuse for this flick! --------------------------------------------- Result 3915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Alright, I have to [[admit]] that I have never [[seen]] "[[Rhoda]]" and only one or two [[episodes]] of "The Mary Tyler Moore [[Show]]." Even [[though]] I don't know [[anything]] about this duo of [[comedic]] [[talent]], I [[still]] [[liked]] this [[movie]] a lot.

[[Mary]] goes back to [[work]]. [[Rose]] [[tries]] her luck at being a comedian. Rhoda struggles with a photography [[career]]. And Meredith...what exactly does she do again? These three [[stories]] that we follow over two hours are amusing and [[entertaining]] in their own [[way]]. When the two long time friends reunite, it only makes the [[film]] better.

I was [[surprised]] about how good the [[writing]] was. The [[little]] [[jokes]] thrown in by [[Mary]] and Rhoda were funny. The [[script]] itself was very well put [[together]].

I had [[seen]] Moore and Harper in other [[movies]] over the [[past]] few years and [[thought]] that they were very good. But I had no [[idea]] that they [[worked]] this well as a team. [[While]] both [[actresses]] do their [[share]] to [[fulfill]] the title of this [[movie]], they never [[seem]] to [[let]] me down. ([[During]] the [[run]] of this [[movie]].) Joie Lenz and [[Marisa]] Ryan [[play]] their roles [[okay]] but nothing [[great]]. The [[rest]] of the cast like [[Jonah]], Cecile and....[[everybody]] [[else]] also [[works]] well together.

[[Being]] that this is a [[reunion]], you [[would]] [[expect]] for a fan of either [[show]] to enjoy this. From a non-fan I [[still]] [[enjoyed]] this [[little]] get-together. [[Good]] story lines for each [[character]] and the two [[main]] [[characters]] is what makes this film very good. (The [[newer]] [[version]] of the MTM theme song doesn't hurt either.) Alright, I have to [[accept]] that I have never [[saw]] "[[Rhonda]]" and only one or two [[spells]] of "The Mary Tyler Moore [[Demonstrating]]." Even [[if]] I don't know [[something]] about this duo of [[slapstick]] [[talents]], I [[nevertheless]] [[enjoyed]] this [[flick]] a lot.

[[Maryam]] goes back to [[cooperates]]. [[Surging]] [[attempted]] her luck at being a comedian. Rhoda struggles with a photography [[carrera]]. And Meredith...what exactly does she do again? These three [[story]] that we follow over two hours are amusing and [[amusing]] in their own [[routing]]. When the two long time friends reunite, it only makes the [[cinematography]] better.

I was [[horrified]] about how good the [[literary]] was. The [[petite]] [[pranks]] thrown in by [[Maryam]] and Rhoda were funny. The [[screenplay]] itself was very well put [[jointly]].

I had [[saw]] Moore and Harper in other [[cinematography]] over the [[previous]] few years and [[thinks]] that they were very good. But I had no [[think]] that they [[acted]] this well as a team. [[Despite]] both [[actors]] do their [[exchanging]] to [[accomplish]] the title of this [[cinematography]], they never [[seems]] to [[allowing]] me down. ([[At]] the [[executes]] of this [[cinematography]].) Joie Lenz and [[Marissa]] Ryan [[playing]] their roles [[verywell]] but nothing [[remarkable]]. The [[repose]] of the cast like [[Jonas]], Cecile and....[[somebody]] [[otherwise]] also [[working]] well together.

[[Underway]] that this is a [[grouping]], you [[ought]] [[hopes]] for a fan of either [[demonstrate]] to enjoy this. From a non-fan I [[yet]] [[appreciated]] this [[petit]] get-together. [[Well]] story lines for each [[nature]] and the two [[principal]] [[features]] is what makes this film very good. (The [[novel]] [[stepping]] of the MTM theme song doesn't hurt either.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3916 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] If you fast forward through the horrible [[singing]], you will [[find]] a [[classic]] fairy tale underneath. Christopher Walken is very [[humorous]] and [[surprisingly]] good in the role. His [[trademark]] style of acting works well for the sly Puss in [[Boots]]. The other [[actors]] are well for their parts. I did not [[find]] any of the acting terribly fake or [[awkward]]. The king in particular [[appears]] a real dunce though, and I wonder if he is supposed to be. I can not remember the [[original]] tale. The special effects are typical of the eighties, but at least they are not overly fake like some of the computer generated fare that we see today. [[Overall]], I [[recommend]] this movie for children and adults who are a child at heart. If you fast forward through the horrible [[chant]], you will [[unearth]] a [[classical]] fairy tale underneath. Christopher Walken is very [[amusing]] and [[strangely]] good in the role. His [[marques]] style of acting works well for the sly Puss in [[Booting]]. The other [[actresses]] are well for their parts. I did not [[found]] any of the acting terribly fake or [[troublesome]]. The king in particular [[appear]] a real dunce though, and I wonder if he is supposed to be. I can not remember the [[upfront]] tale. The special effects are typical of the eighties, but at least they are not overly fake like some of the computer generated fare that we see today. [[Totals]], I [[recommendations]] this movie for children and adults who are a child at heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 3917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie is [[BAD]]! It's basically an overdone [[copy]] of Michael Jackson's Thriller video, only worse! The special [[effects]] consist of lots of [[glow]] in the [[dark]] paint, freaky slapstick fastmoving camera shots and lots of [[growling]]. I [[think]] the dog was the best actor in the whole movie. This movie is [[ROTTEN]]! It's basically an overdone [[copies]] of Michael Jackson's Thriller video, only worse! The special [[influences]] consist of lots of [[shine]] in the [[murky]] paint, freaky slapstick fastmoving camera shots and lots of [[grunting]]. I [[believing]] the dog was the best actor in the whole movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Worst mistake of my life.

I picked this movie up at Target for $5 because I figured, "Hey, it's Sandler I can get some cheap laughs". I was wrong, completely wrong. Mid-way through the film all three of my friends were asleep and I was still suffering. Worst plot, Worst script, Worst movie I have ever seen. I wanted to hit my head up against a wall for an hour, then I'd stop, and you know why? Because it felt damn good. Upon bashing my head in i stuck that damn movie in the microwave and watched it burn....and that felt better than anything else I've ever done. It took American Psycho, Army of Darkness, and Kill Bill just to get over that crap. I HATE YOU SANDLER FOR ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH WITH THIS AND RUINING A WHOLE DAY OF MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3919 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The premise of Cabin Fever starts like it MIGHT have something to offer. A group of college teens after finals (in the fall?) goes to a resort cabin in the woods where one by one they are attacked by an unseen flesh eating virus.

Unfortunately, the first paragraph is where any remote elements of film quality stop. Cabin Fever is little more than college kids looking for sex, booze, talking non-stop about nothing, and seeing how many F-bombs they can get into 1:40 minutes or however long this mess is.

The kids act and react stupidly to everything around them. One of them for instance discovers that the skin virus has infected her legs, so what does she do? She keeps shaving her legs failing to take proper medical attention for her wounds. The scene is little more than a gross out. In another scene, Rider Strong from "Boy Meets World" gets bitten on the hand by some kid who only says "Pancakes" and likes to do karate kicks on those who sit next to him. If you can figure out the reason for why the "Pancakes" kid was included, I'd love to know. Anyway, Rider pets a wild dog and goes off to wash his bitten hand in a most likely contaminated creek. Another kid likes to drop F-bombs in reacting to everything around him and shoot squirrels. Why? Your guess is as good as mine!

Rider Strong is the ONLY kid with any recognition in this movie. He tries to calm people down in-between the yelling and screaming and F*** Y**! bombs that people are throwing around. When the kids aren't yelling, they are having or talking about sex or talking nonsense to the other adult characters who are EVEN MORE (if that is possible)idiotic than the kids! The idiot cop with an IQ of 60 at best may be one of the WORST acting jobs I have ever seen in a movie. You talk about people not playing with a full deck, this dork doesn't even know how to find the cards! LOL! I was like, "Will you PLEASE shut up already?!" He makes the kid actors look like geniuses! The only part that I sort of liked was Rider's scary story (although gory) about the deranged bowling alley guy. In interviews, Rider said that he had a great deal of respect for director Eli Roth. But the problem is that Mr. Roth appears to be going for little more than shock and gore. There are far too many bad things about this movie for Mr. Roth to get any credit. I wish I could agree with Rider and find something likable about this movie. Maybe the fall scenery in the beginning? Actually, Rider Strong JUST saves this movie from being a 1! Hopefully, he was compensated for this junk! --------------------------------------------- Result 3920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like A Streetcar Named Desire (also directed by Gadg both on stage and screen) Panic In The Streets depicts a New Orleans in which its major claim to fame - the birthplace of Jazz - doesn't even rate a mention. It was Richard Widmark's seventh film and arguably went a long way to establishing him as the fine actor he really was rather than merely a psychotic killer. Gadg himself appears in an uncredited small role as a morgue attendant but the film is rich in talent beginning with Jack Palance (still being billed as Walter Jack Palance)as the local Mr 'Big' followed side-kick Zero Mostel, Barbara Bel Geddes, Emile Meyer, Tommy Rettig plus the rock-solid ever reliable Paul Douglas as the cop who comes round to doc Widmark's point of view. It's a very rewarding movie more so for being little seen. Catch it if you can. --------------------------------------------- Result 3921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[All]] the [[ingredients]] of low-brow b-movie cult cinema. Topless (and bottomless) [[girls]], kung-fu kicking [[chefs]], slave traders, evil [[Germans]] with mustaches, Cameron [[Mitchell]] and sword-wielding [[zombies]].

And, of course the [[breasts]] of [[Camille]] Keaton, who's best known display occurs in the feminist exploitation [[classic]] I Spit on Your [[Grave]]. We also must mention the hooters of jewel Shepard, who play a hooker in the [[recent]] film The Cooler.

Lots of [[blood]] and action with knives and [[swords]] and martial [[arts]] among topless [[dancers]] in a [[bar]], in a whorehouse, and on a [[boat]] [[load]] of martial [[artists]] [[heading]] to some zombie [[island]] where [[bad]] martial artists go to die or something like that.

Tops and bottoms come off easily and frequently as travelers are well lubricated thanks to the boat owner.

Then [[disaster]] strikes as their boat is destroyed and they land on the zombie island where mas monks sacrifice young girls to the dead martial artists to bring them back to life.

Just when you thought it had everything, there are piranhas in the water. Yum Yum A [[big]] [[fat]] German for [[dinner]].

Just the [[thing]] for your [[next]] zombie fest. [[Every]] the [[elements]] of low-brow b-movie cult cinema. Topless (and bottomless) [[girl]], kung-fu kicking [[chiefs]], slave traders, evil [[Germany]] with mustaches, Cameron [[Michel]] and sword-wielding [[walkers]].

And, of course the [[tits]] of [[Kami]] Keaton, who's best known display occurs in the feminist exploitation [[typical]] I Spit on Your [[Grievous]]. We also must mention the hooters of jewel Shepard, who play a hooker in the [[latest]] film The Cooler.

Lots of [[transfusion]] and action with knives and [[machetes]] and martial [[arte]] among topless [[dance]] in a [[barrister]], in a whorehouse, and on a [[dinghies]] [[upload]] of martial [[artistes]] [[letterhead]] to some zombie [[lsland]] where [[unfavourable]] martial artists go to die or something like that.

Tops and bottoms come off easily and frequently as travelers are well lubricated thanks to the boat owner.

Then [[calamity]] strikes as their boat is destroyed and they land on the zombie island where mas monks sacrifice young girls to the dead martial artists to bring them back to life.

Just when you thought it had everything, there are piranhas in the water. Yum Yum A [[prodigious]] [[waxen]] German for [[brunch]].

Just the [[stuff]] for your [[forthcoming]] zombie fest. --------------------------------------------- Result 3922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This was a [[really]] [[cool]] movie. It just goes to prove that you don't need silly [[litle]] things like continuity and scripts to make a movie. It traverses [[continents]] in seconds, people get shot and nothing happens to them, swords set on fire, samuari fight on sinking galleons, David Essex is the [[epitome]] of slimey villainy and [[John]] [[Rhys]] Davies is just the [[dude]]. I [[enjoyed]] this movie but I like s**t movies, this is the perfect example of a very s**t movie that just [[KICKS]] [[ASS]]. If you like Battlefield Earth you'll love this film, its swashbuckling, its fast, its silly, its samuaraitastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It also looks as if it was made in 1972 This was a [[truthfully]] [[refrigerate]] movie. It just goes to prove that you don't need silly [[litte]] things like continuity and scripts to make a movie. It traverses [[africa]] in seconds, people get shot and nothing happens to them, swords set on fire, samuari fight on sinking galleons, David Essex is the [[microcosm]] of slimey villainy and [[Johannes]] [[Reyes]] Davies is just the [[boyfriend]]. I [[liked]] this movie but I like s**t movies, this is the perfect example of a very s**t movie that just [[KARATE]] [[ARSE]]. If you like Battlefield Earth you'll love this film, its swashbuckling, its fast, its silly, its samuaraitastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It also looks as if it was made in 1972 --------------------------------------------- Result 3923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] What an incredible [[fall]] for Sean Ellis.

You gather a bunch of your friends at home, all hyped about the follow up work of Sean Ellis. You have an [[vague]] [[idea]] of the plot, no spoilers that could kill the fun, very high [[expectations]].

It is late at [[night]], perfect [[atmosphere]] for a movie of this type.

15minutes passes and you start telling yourself it is bound to pick up, at 25mins you start wondering if you should just go to sleep and [[save]] this for another time when you can fully appreciate the expected not existent subtle touches. Over the half hour mark you realize half of your your hyped up audience is already asleep and call it a day.

A few days later when you exhaust all other material to watch you go back to this, in the middle of the day this time, hoping your mood will keep you awake this time. 10 minutes later you find yourself fastforwarding the [[unbelievably]] and [[needlessly]] long intermediate transitions and images. Any other stuff I would have given up already but there is cashback and its legacy. But that legacy can only carry you so long, this is a new level of boring movie-making, imagine a short story extended to a novel with just descriptions, this is what it is.

Decent [[cast]] is wasted, there is no cinematography that leaves you in awe like cashback either. There are films that annoy you, there are films that lack certain aspects, or just cheesy, unfortunately this is just a [[waste]] of time.

Final words, stay away. What an incredible [[autumn]] for Sean Ellis.

You gather a bunch of your friends at home, all hyped about the follow up work of Sean Ellis. You have an [[blurred]] [[thinking]] of the plot, no spoilers that could kill the fun, very high [[outlook]].

It is late at [[nuit]], perfect [[ambiance]] for a movie of this type.

15minutes passes and you start telling yourself it is bound to pick up, at 25mins you start wondering if you should just go to sleep and [[economize]] this for another time when you can fully appreciate the expected not existent subtle touches. Over the half hour mark you realize half of your your hyped up audience is already asleep and call it a day.

A few days later when you exhaust all other material to watch you go back to this, in the middle of the day this time, hoping your mood will keep you awake this time. 10 minutes later you find yourself fastforwarding the [[incredibly]] and [[unduly]] long intermediate transitions and images. Any other stuff I would have given up already but there is cashback and its legacy. But that legacy can only carry you so long, this is a new level of boring movie-making, imagine a short story extended to a novel with just descriptions, this is what it is.

Decent [[casting]] is wasted, there is no cinematography that leaves you in awe like cashback either. There are films that annoy you, there are films that lack certain aspects, or just cheesy, unfortunately this is just a [[wastes]] of time.

Final words, stay away. --------------------------------------------- Result 3924 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Three Stooges has always been some of the many actors that I have loved. I love just about every one of the shorts that they have made. I love all six of the Stooges (Curly, Shemp, Moe, Larry, Joe, and Curly Joe)! All of the shorts are hilarious and also star many other great actors and actresses which a lot of them was in many of the shorts! In My opinion The Three Stooges is some of the greatest actors ever and is the all time funniest comedy team!

One of My favorite Stooges shorts with Shemp is none other than Husbands Beware! All appearing in this short are the beautiful Christine McIntyre, Dee Green, Doris Houck, Alyn Lockwood, Johnny Kascier, Nancy Saunders, Lu Leonard, Maxine Gates, and Emil Sitka. Green and McIntyre provide great performances here! There are so many funny parts here. This is a very hilarious short. There is another similar Three Stooges short like this one called Brideless Groom and I recommend both! --------------------------------------------- Result 3925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Roman Polanski is considered as one of the most important directors of our time, as the mind behind classics such as "Rosemary's Baby" and "Chinatown". Probably what makes Polanski's cinema a very interesting one is the fact that while he is capable of creating commercially attractive films such as the afore mentioned masterpieces, he is also fond of making low-key movies that are of a more personal nature. "Le Locataire", or "The Tenant", is one of those movies; a horror/suspense story about paranoia and obsession that is among his best works and probably among the best horror movies ever done.

Polanski himself plays Telkovsky, a young man looking for an apartment in France. When he finally finds one, he discovers that it is empty because the previous tenant, Simone Choule, attempted to kill herself by jumping out of the window. After Simone dies of the injuries, Trelkovsky begins to become obsessed with her, to the point of believing that her death was caused by the rest of the tenants in the building.

While sharing the same claustrophobic feeling of his other "apartment-themed" films ("Repulsion & "Rosemary's Baby"); this film focuses on the bizarre conspiracy that may or may not be entirely in Trelkovsky's head, the catastrophic effects the paranoia has on his mind, and the bizarre obsession he has with the previous tenant.

Trelkovsky's descend into darkness is portrayed perfectly by Polanski. While at first his performance seems odd and wooden, slowly one finds out that Polanski acts that way because Trelkovsky is meant to be acted that way; as a simpleton with almost no life, who traps himself in this maddening sub-world that happens to be inhabited by a collection of bizarre people. The supporting actors really gave life to the people in the building creating memorable characters that are very important for the success of the film.

Also, the beautiful cinematography Polanski employs in the film helps to increase the feeling of isolation, and gives life to the beautiful building that serves as cage for Trelkovsky. The haunting images Polanski uses to convey the feeling of confusion and madness are of a supernatural beauty that makes them both frightening and attractive.

If a flaw is to be found in the film, is that it is definitely a bit slow at first. this may sound like a turn-off but in fact the slow pace of the beginning works perfectly as it mimics Trelkovsky's own boring life and how gradually he enters a different realm. Also, the convoluted storyline is definitely not an easy one to understand due to the many complex layers it has. However, more than a flaw, it is a joy to face a thought-provoking plot like this one.

While "The Tenant" may not be for everyone, those interested in psychological horror and surreal story lines will be pleased by the experience. "Le Locataire" is really one of Roman Polanksi's masterpieces. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It's a waist to [[indulge]] such [[great]] [[actors]] in such a [[weak]] and [[boring]] [[movie]]. Besides all the [[unanswered]] [[questions]] [[posted]] in the other comments, what's so difficult about [[capturing]] the robbers? [[Just]] [[eliminate]] the bank [[workers]], [[see]] who was at the bank-from all the cameras' footage angles-prior to the [[robbers]] [[entry]] and you have those [[extra]] 4 remaining [[robbers]] among the hostages. Where is the suspense every body is [[talking]] about? It was so [[obvious]] the moment the [[hostages]] were [[asked]] to [[change]] into this [[identical]] uniform that they were all [[going]] to [[walk]] out the front [[door]]... [[seen]] it [[many]] [[times]]. At least [[Mr]]. [[Spike]] Lee [[could]] have seasoned the [[movie]] with some [[good]] [[music]] score and artistic shooting. The Movie is not worth it. Pronto! It's a waist to [[indulging]] such [[marvellous]] [[protagonists]] in such a [[feeble]] and [[dull]] [[filmmaking]]. Besides all the [[unanswerable]] [[matters]] [[positioned]] in the other comments, what's so difficult about [[catching]] the robbers? [[Jen]] [[eliminating]] the bank [[laborers]], [[seeing]] who was at the bank-from all the cameras' footage angles-prior to the [[thieves]] [[entries]] and you have those [[supplemental]] 4 remaining [[thieves]] among the hostages. Where is the suspense every body is [[chat]] about? It was so [[observable]] the moment the [[captives]] were [[wondering]] to [[shifting]] into this [[similar]] uniform that they were all [[go]] to [[stroll]] out the front [[stargate]]... [[noticed]] it [[countless]] [[period]]. At least [[Mister]]. [[Fortification]] Lee [[did]] have seasoned the [[flick]] with some [[alright]] [[musica]] score and artistic shooting. The Movie is not worth it. Pronto! --------------------------------------------- Result 3927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I went in to [[see]] D-War on a [[whim]] and with very low [[expectations]]. The [[movie]] [[failed]] to meet them.

I don't mind stories that stretch credulity - [[remember]] Reign of Fire? - but I do expect them to be internally consistent. This film leapt from howler to howler without pausing for [[breath]], all interspersed with special [[effects]] that lagged far behind the [[likes]] of LOTR or even Godzilla.

A shape-shifting [[mystic]] [[warrior]] from [[Korea]], [[curiously]] metamorphosed into a Caucasian [[antique]] [[dealer]] and popping up like deus ex machina to [[get]] the hapless protagonists out of their [[latest]] [[mess]]. A [[special]] [[agent]] from the FBI who [[seems]] to be [[completely]] [[boned]] up on [[ancient]] Korean folklore because of the Fed's [[excellent]] "paranormal [[division]]" - which has [[gone]] unremarked up to this point. [[Lovers]] [[kissing]] on [[deserted]] [[beaches]] where one exclaims "I never [[meant]] for this to [[happen]]." A [[reincarnated]] [[pair]] of [[long]] dead Koreans who "[[died]] like star-crossed [[lovers]]." [[Mystic]] pendants, faceless [[hordes]] of robotic soldiers (that [[owe]] a lot to [[Peter]] Jackson's orcs) and a [[serpent]] who wastes so much [[time]] roaring that [[every]] time its [[chosen]] prey is [[within]] [[reach]] something comes along to [[distract]] it.

The dialogue is appalling, the acting [[wooden]] and the effect of the [[whole]] was, to be honest, [[tedious]]. However, for me the crowning [[moment]] was at the end, after the finale, when the [[music]] for the [[closing]] credits was - Arirang! This is [[rather]] [[like]] Akira Kurosawa [[closing]] "Ran" with a karaoke rendition of My [[Way]] - and [[let]] me be clear that I am in no way [[comparing]] [[director]] Shim to Kurosawa.

[[In]] short, a self [[indulgent]], lackluster [[collection]] of [[clichés]] and narrative non-sequituurs which [[may]] appeal to the sense of the melodramatic so prevalent in Koran popular culture but should not be worth the price of the ticket to any serious movie goer - or even a not so-serious movie goer. I [[would]] suggest that this bypass the movie theaters altogether and go straight to video, but I'm not even sure that it's worth that much. I went in to [[seeing]] D-War on a [[caprice]] and with very low [[forecast]]. The [[filmmaking]] [[faulted]] to meet them.

I don't mind stories that stretch credulity - [[remind]] Reign of Fire? - but I do expect them to be internally consistent. This film leapt from howler to howler without pausing for [[respiration]], all interspersed with special [[influences]] that lagged far behind the [[fond]] of LOTR or even Godzilla.

A shape-shifting [[mystical]] [[combatant]] from [[Korean]], [[surprisingly]] metamorphosed into a Caucasian [[archaic]] [[distributors]] and popping up like deus ex machina to [[gets]] the hapless protagonists out of their [[newest]] [[jumble]]. A [[peculiar]] [[patrolman]] from the FBI who [[seem]] to be [[totally]] [[cooked]] up on [[longtime]] Korean folklore because of the Fed's [[awesome]] "paranormal [[splitting]]" - which has [[faded]] unremarked up to this point. [[Fans]] [[kiss]] on [[uninhabited]] [[seaside]] where one exclaims "I never [[intended]] for this to [[arise]]." A [[reincarnate]] [[paired]] of [[lengthy]] dead Koreans who "[[die]] like star-crossed [[fans]]." [[Mystical]] pendants, faceless [[flocks]] of robotic soldiers (that [[gotta]] a lot to [[Peters]] Jackson's orcs) and a [[snake]] who wastes so much [[times]] roaring that [[all]] time its [[choice]] prey is [[inside]] [[attain]] something comes along to [[entertain]] it.

The dialogue is appalling, the acting [[wood]] and the effect of the [[together]] was, to be honest, [[monotonous]]. However, for me the crowning [[time]] was at the end, after the finale, when the [[musicians]] for the [[closure]] credits was - Arirang! This is [[quite]] [[fond]] Akira Kurosawa [[close]] "Ran" with a karaoke rendition of My [[Ways]] - and [[leave]] me be clear that I am in no way [[compare]] [[headmaster]] Shim to Kurosawa.

[[At]] short, a self [[forgiving]], lackluster [[collect]] of [[cliché]] and narrative non-sequituurs which [[maggio]] appeal to the sense of the melodramatic so prevalent in Koran popular culture but should not be worth the price of the ticket to any serious movie goer - or even a not so-serious movie goer. I [[could]] suggest that this bypass the movie theaters altogether and go straight to video, but I'm not even sure that it's worth that much. --------------------------------------------- Result 3928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] A [[highly]] [[atmospheric]] cheapie, showing [[great]] [[ingenuity]] in the [[use]] of props, sets and [[effects]] ([[fog]], lighting, [[focus]]) to create an [[eerie]] and moody [[texture]]. The story is farfetched, the acting is merely functional, but it [[shows]] how imaginative effects can [[develop]] an entire visual narrative. This movie is recommended for its mood and [[texture]], not for its [[story]]. A [[incredibly]] [[barometric]] cheapie, showing [[wondrous]] [[cleverness]] in the [[usage]] of props, sets and [[repercussions]] ([[haze]], lighting, [[concentrations]]) to create an [[freaky]] and moody [[fabric]]. The story is farfetched, the acting is merely functional, but it [[illustrates]] how imaginative effects can [[prepare]] an entire visual narrative. This movie is recommended for its mood and [[fabric]], not for its [[tale]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first collaboration between Schoedsack & Cooper is a compelling documentary on the migration of the Bakhtiari tribe of Persia. Twice a year, more than 50,000 people and half a million animals cross rivers and mountains to get to pasture. You'll feel like a pampered weakling after watching these people herd their animals through ice cold water and walk barefoot through the snow to cross the mountains while trying to get their animals to walk along steep and narrow mountain paths. --------------------------------------------- Result 3930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I saw "Shiner" on DVD. While I was watching it, I thought, "This is a really [[bad]] porn flick without the porn." I also thought, "[[Whoever]] wrote this has some real issues." Then I watched the director/writer [[Carlson]] [[explain]] his process as a [[special]] feature. Yeah, it was real special.

The emphasis of the film is placed on two alcoholic losers who hit each other to get off. They are [[marginally]] [[attractive]]. There is frontal and full nudity. These factors probably account for the film being seen at all.

The most [[upsetting]] [[element]] of the film is the gay bashing and the subsequent further gay bashing of the same victim who tries ineptly to exact revenge from his assailants, the two drunken losers. Not only is the subject handled absurdly and badly from a technical point of view, but the acting is horrendously bad.

Then there's the boxer-stalker [[theme]]. This is really [[insane]], not just [[absurd]]. This hunky boxer is somehow traumatized by the persistent attentions of a fleshy momma's boy who works at his gym's parking lot. This is in LA, mind you. The boxer is so traumatized that he turns up at the stalker's house, strips in front of him and gets excited in the process.

Well, all I can say is, why would a boxer who is at heart an exhibitionist be so traumatized by the attention of a stalker? It [[simply]] makes no sense. And, I'm afraid, some psycho-dynamics actually do make sense, if you take the time to read about them. However, bad [[scripts]] seldom make [[sense]] at all.

The director/[[writer]] seems to have thought that this film represents a considerable minority within the gay community. Well, he may be correct, I suppose. We may never know, since that minority would be so dysfunctional they would hardly be able to get organized enough to ever get to an obscure gay film festival or DVD store, the only two places they [[could]] possibly [[find]] this turkey. Thank goodness for that. I saw "Shiner" on DVD. While I was watching it, I thought, "This is a really [[unfavourable]] porn flick without the porn." I also thought, "[[Anyone]] wrote this has some real issues." Then I watched the director/writer [[Karlsson]] [[elucidate]] his process as a [[specific]] feature. Yeah, it was real special.

The emphasis of the film is placed on two alcoholic losers who hit each other to get off. They are [[moderately]] [[seductive]]. There is frontal and full nudity. These factors probably account for the film being seen at all.

The most [[heartrending]] [[facet]] of the film is the gay bashing and the subsequent further gay bashing of the same victim who tries ineptly to exact revenge from his assailants, the two drunken losers. Not only is the subject handled absurdly and badly from a technical point of view, but the acting is horrendously bad.

Then there's the boxer-stalker [[subjects]]. This is really [[crazy]], not just [[irrational]]. This hunky boxer is somehow traumatized by the persistent attentions of a fleshy momma's boy who works at his gym's parking lot. This is in LA, mind you. The boxer is so traumatized that he turns up at the stalker's house, strips in front of him and gets excited in the process.

Well, all I can say is, why would a boxer who is at heart an exhibitionist be so traumatized by the attention of a stalker? It [[exclusively]] makes no sense. And, I'm afraid, some psycho-dynamics actually do make sense, if you take the time to read about them. However, bad [[scenarios]] seldom make [[feeling]] at all.

The director/[[novelist]] seems to have thought that this film represents a considerable minority within the gay community. Well, he may be correct, I suppose. We may never know, since that minority would be so dysfunctional they would hardly be able to get organized enough to ever get to an obscure gay film festival or DVD store, the only two places they [[did]] possibly [[unearth]] this turkey. Thank goodness for that. --------------------------------------------- Result 3931 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I loved this show when it aired on television and was crushed when I [[found]] out that someone [[somewhere]] [[decided]] that it wasn't worthy of being [[continued]]! For years I [[hung]] onto my copies of this [[show]], ones that I had [[taped]] or had [[someone]] tape for me. That is until now. The powers that be finally decided to [[release]] this [[beautiful]] series on DVD and I finally was able to get my [[eager]] [[little]] hands on the complete set. [[Which]], brings me to this [[part]]; the part about that this show is all about.

American [[Gothic]] is about [[good]] verses evil, [[basically]] a [[struggle]] between Lucas Buck (that is Buck, with a B). He is an evil sheriff of a [[South]] Carolina small town that runs [[things]] the way he wants things to be ran and stops at nothing to get his way.

I [[felt]] the show was wonderfully written and directed and had lots of life [[left]] yet to be lived. I really [[hated]] when it was [[canceled]], but that is the way it seems to go for me when I finally find [[something]] worth watching on [[television]].

Gary Cole did a great job as the role of Sheriff Lucas Buck, he has just the right amount of charm verses [[evil]] to pull it off. The other actors did a super job as well, so I guess you could say, even the casting was a hit with me. I loved this show when it aired on television and was crushed when I [[discoveries]] out that someone [[somehow]] [[opted]] that it wasn't worthy of being [[sustained]]! For years I [[hanged]] onto my copies of this [[exhibit]], ones that I had [[strapped]] or had [[somebody]] tape for me. That is until now. The powers that be finally decided to [[freeing]] this [[wondrous]] series on DVD and I finally was able to get my [[impatient]] [[petite]] hands on the complete set. [[Whose]], brings me to this [[portion]]; the part about that this show is all about.

American [[Goth]] is about [[alright]] verses evil, [[essentially]] a [[fights]] between Lucas Buck (that is Buck, with a B). He is an evil sheriff of a [[Southward]] Carolina small town that runs [[items]] the way he wants things to be ran and stops at nothing to get his way.

I [[smelled]] the show was wonderfully written and directed and had lots of life [[exited]] yet to be lived. I really [[abhor]] when it was [[overturned]], but that is the way it seems to go for me when I finally find [[anything]] worth watching on [[televisions]].

Gary Cole did a great job as the role of Sheriff Lucas Buck, he has just the right amount of charm verses [[baleful]] to pull it off. The other actors did a super job as well, so I guess you could say, even the casting was a hit with me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Talk about a [[dream]] cast - just two of the most [[wonderful]] [[actors]] who ever appeared anywhere - Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith - together - in "Hot Millions," a [[funny]], quirky comedy [[also]] [[starring]] Karl Malden, [[Robert]] Morley, and Bob Newhart. Ustinov is an ex-con embezzler who gets the resume of a talented computer programmer (Morley) and takes a position in a firm run by Malden - with the goal of embezzlement in mind. It's not smooth sailing; he has attracted the attention of his competitor at the company, played by Newhart, and his neighbor, Maggie Smith (who knows him at their place of residence under another name), becomes his secretary for a brief period. She can't keep a job and she is seen throughout the film in a variety of employment - all ending with her being fired. When Newhart makes advances to her, she invites Ustinov over to her flat for curry as a cover-up, but the two soon decide they're made for each other. Of course, she doesn't know Ustinov is a crook.

This is such a good [[movie]] - you can't help but love Ustinov and Smith and be fascinated by Ustinov's machinations, his genius, and the ways he slithers out of trouble. But there's a twist ending that will show you who really has the brains. Don't [[miss]] this movie, set in '60s London. It's worth if it only to hear Maggie Smith whine, "I've been sacked." Talk about a [[nightmares]] cast - just two of the most [[wondrous]] [[actresses]] who ever appeared anywhere - Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith - together - in "Hot Millions," a [[comical]], quirky comedy [[similarly]] [[championship]] Karl Malden, [[Roberto]] Morley, and Bob Newhart. Ustinov is an ex-con embezzler who gets the resume of a talented computer programmer (Morley) and takes a position in a firm run by Malden - with the goal of embezzlement in mind. It's not smooth sailing; he has attracted the attention of his competitor at the company, played by Newhart, and his neighbor, Maggie Smith (who knows him at their place of residence under another name), becomes his secretary for a brief period. She can't keep a job and she is seen throughout the film in a variety of employment - all ending with her being fired. When Newhart makes advances to her, she invites Ustinov over to her flat for curry as a cover-up, but the two soon decide they're made for each other. Of course, she doesn't know Ustinov is a crook.

This is such a good [[movies]] - you can't help but love Ustinov and Smith and be fascinated by Ustinov's machinations, his genius, and the ways he slithers out of trouble. But there's a twist ending that will show you who really has the brains. Don't [[mademoiselle]] this movie, set in '60s London. It's worth if it only to hear Maggie Smith whine, "I've been sacked." --------------------------------------------- Result 3933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, Keaton looks like he really did enjoy making this film. With a skip in his step in his tailored pin-striped suits, he'll remind you of Jimmy Cagney! Johnny (Keaton) is the young hood who only does it to pay for his mother's high-priced medical bills & to send his younger brother (Griffin Dunne) to law school. No one even knows Johnny Kelly IS Johnny Dangerously until later on in the film. Joe Piscopo is Vermin & doesn't like Johnny one bit (& I don't like Vermin). Marilu Henner has a nice singing/dancing routine while Johnny revels in it. I love the part when they're in the ever-changing getaway car! The cop who's "calling all cars" is the Skipper from Gilligan's Island! See this one for 1930's gangster laughs! The gags in this film are hilarious but you have to catch them or you'll miss them! Look in the background of every scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 3934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] [[During]] the [[whole]] Pirates of The [[Caribbean]] [[Trilogy]] Craze Paramount Pictures really [[dropped]] the ball in restoring this [[Anthony]] [[Quinn]] directed [[Cecil]] B. DeMille [[supervised]] movie and getting it on DVD and Blu Ray with all the extras included. It is obvious to me that Paramount Pictures Execs are blind as bats and ignorant of the fact that they have a really [[good]] [[pirate]] movie in their vault about a real [[pirate]] who actually lived in New [[Orleans]], Louisiana which would have helped [[make]] The Crescent City once again famous for it's Pirate Connections. When the Execs at Paramount [[finally]] get with the [[program]] and [[release]] this [[movie]] in digital [[format]] then I will be a [[happy]] [[camper]]. Paramount Pictures it is up to you to get off your duff and get this [[film]] restored now ! [[For]] the [[total]] Pirates of The [[Caribe]] [[Triad]] Craze Paramount Pictures really [[drop]] the ball in restoring this [[Anton]] [[Cowen]] directed [[Cecile]] B. DeMille [[monitored]] movie and getting it on DVD and Blu Ray with all the extras included. It is obvious to me that Paramount Pictures Execs are blind as bats and ignorant of the fact that they have a really [[buena]] [[hacker]] movie in their vault about a real [[pirating]] who actually lived in New [[Nola]], Louisiana which would have helped [[deliver]] The Crescent City once again famous for it's Pirate Connections. When the Execs at Paramount [[ultimately]] get with the [[programmes]] and [[frees]] this [[kino]] in digital [[layout]] then I will be a [[gratified]] [[camping]]. Paramount Pictures it is up to you to get off your duff and get this [[cinematography]] restored now ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is gorgeous. It's real and down to heart, but at the same time totally crazy. The characters are easy to fall in love with, because they have so many different minds, but each of us could refer to at least on. In Canada, we don't have many movies from Eastern Europe, and for the few I have seen, Loners is one of the best. It's very funny, and magic. If you want to see something new and refreshing, go see Loners. --------------------------------------------- Result 3936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[TO]] all of yall who [[think]] 1.This was a [[boring]] telecast 2.Halle berry and denzel Washington did not deserve their Oscars

SHUT THE F**k UP!! This was one of the [[best]] Academy awards show because 1.It was a moment in [[history]] to have a black yes "Black actress" win an academy award for Best actress so many of our black sisters have been [[ignored]] by the academy for many years.To be honest I had stop watching the academy [[awards]] because of a lack of diversity in either the [[winners]] or nominees.To me it was [[nothing]] but a bunch of [[white]] people [[patting]] each other in the back.the [[academy]] had [[many]] [[chances]] to vote black [[actresses]] that were [[brilliant]] in [[movies]] eg Alfre Woodard,Whoopi Goldberg,Diana Ross,[[Mary]] jean Babtise, but it did not 2.Halle berry [[deserved]] that [[Oscar]] no competition the academy was under pressure to [[vote]] for her so long have [[deserving]] [[actresses]] been [[ignored]] by the academy the majority of which is [[comprised]] of white [[voters]] [[yeah]] yeah [[Nicole]] kidman sang very prettily in muling [[rouge]]!but it was time black people were [[accommodated]] in these [[awards]] [[shows]].As for [[Mr]] Washington the academy owed him [[big]] [[time]] after that [[unfair]] loss for MalcomX.To all of you who [[think]] [[race]] is not an [[issue]]"[[probably]] white people"in the [[movie]] industry,well it is [[many]] of the most [[talented]] black [[actresses]] around have either been reduced to stereo [[typical]] made by white people roles of what they [[think]] is a [[black]] [[women]] or are not existence"Angela [[basset]]". I do not [[expect]] [[many]] of the white people to [[understand]] any of this because they never had to [[deal]] with any of it.Come to [[think]] of it they are the one who been inflicting it [[POUR]] all of yall who [[ideas]] 1.This was a [[dreary]] telecast 2.Halle berry and denzel Washington did not deserve their Oscars

SHUT THE F**k UP!! This was one of the [[nicest]] Academy awards show because 1.It was a moment in [[stories]] to have a black yes "Black actress" win an academy award for Best actress so many of our black sisters have been [[overlooked]] by the academy for many years.To be honest I had stop watching the academy [[prix]] because of a lack of diversity in either the [[finalists]] or nominees.To me it was [[anything]] but a bunch of [[blanca]] people [[knocking]] each other in the back.the [[oscars]] had [[multiple]] [[possibilities]] to vote black [[actors]] that were [[fantastic]] in [[cinematography]] eg Alfre Woodard,Whoopi Goldberg,Diana Ross,[[Marie]] jean Babtise, but it did not 2.Halle berry [[deserves]] that [[Oskar]] no competition the academy was under pressure to [[voted]] for her so long have [[merited]] [[actors]] been [[neglected]] by the academy the majority of which is [[consisted]] of white [[constituents]] [[yep]] yeah [[Nickel]] kidman sang very prettily in muling [[rosso]]!but it was time black people were [[billeted]] in these [[prix]] [[showing]].As for [[Mister]] Washington the academy owed him [[hefty]] [[period]] after that [[iniquitous]] loss for MalcomX.To all of you who [[ideas]] [[races]] is not an [[question]]"[[surely]] white people"in the [[film]] industry,well it is [[myriad]] of the most [[prodigy]] black [[actors]] around have either been reduced to stereo [[classic]] made by white people roles of what they [[ideas]] is a [[nigger]] [[wife]] or are not existence"Angela [[bassett]]". I do not [[awaited]] [[numerous]] of the white people to [[fathom]] any of this because they never had to [[treat]] with any of it.Come to [[believe]] of it they are the one who been inflicting it --------------------------------------------- Result 3937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I was so [[entertained]] [[throughout]] this [[insightful]] [[documentary]], and I waited a good while for this to come through the pipes (my [[local]] video [[chain]]), and it was worth the wait. I like a good documentary / [[special]] interest piece, but this was [[definitely]] a [[heartfelt]], [[honest]], and nostalgic, if you will, [[look]] back on [[adolescent]] [[life]]. The [[imagination]] of a [[child]] is fascinating, and that's where a [[great]] [[story]] [[begins]]. [[Rent]] it or [[buy]] it if you like a good, humorous, and all [[around]] [[entertaining]] documentary. Mr. Stein and [[company]] have [[definitely]] come a [[long]] way from neighborhood Video CamCorder productions of bank hold-ups, and gay-rings that [[turn]] people [[gay]] from one [[glance]]. They all seem rather successful in they're respectful [[fields]], and it was good to know that they are all [[still]] good [[friends]]. The DVD has a few extra [[trailers]] for other good [[documentaries]], and it [[features]] a number of Darren's most [[notable]] productions, [[including]], [[Crazy]] News. I was so [[distracted]] [[around]] this [[informative]] [[documentation]], and I waited a good while for this to come through the pipes (my [[locale]] video [[strings]]), and it was worth the wait. I like a good documentary / [[peculiar]] interest piece, but this was [[surely]] a [[deepest]], [[truthful]], and nostalgic, if you will, [[gaze]] back on [[schoolgirl]] [[iife]]. The [[creativity]] of a [[children]] is fascinating, and that's where a [[wondrous]] [[stories]] [[launched]]. [[Leased]] it or [[procured]] it if you like a good, humorous, and all [[about]] [[amusing]] documentary. Mr. Stein and [[corporations]] have [[obviously]] come a [[lang]] way from neighborhood Video CamCorder productions of bank hold-ups, and gay-rings that [[converting]] people [[homo]] from one [[vista]]. They all seem rather successful in they're respectful [[spheres]], and it was good to know that they are all [[yet]] good [[boyfriends]]. The DVD has a few extra [[trailer]] for other good [[literature]], and it [[characteristic]] a number of Darren's most [[cannot]] productions, [[encompass]], [[Screwy]] News. --------------------------------------------- Result 3938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] When I [[first]] heard that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was [[surprised]] to find that it worked, while still being an entirely [[different]] [[sort]] of movie than Henry Fool. The writing and direction were both dead on and the acting was [[superb]]...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this [[movie]] is quite [[different]] from the first, but it [[works]]: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations [[since]] the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to [[mention]] the fact that I'll [[need]] to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was certainly one of the [[better]] [[movies]] I've seen in some time, it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017. When I [[firstly]] heard that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was [[horrified]] to find that it worked, while still being an entirely [[dissimilar]] [[sorting]] of movie than Henry Fool. The writing and direction were both dead on and the acting was [[wondrous]]...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this [[kino]] is quite [[dissimilar]] from the first, but it [[collaborated]]: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations [[because]] the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to [[referenced]] the fact that I'll [[required]] to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was certainly one of the [[best]] [[theater]] I've seen in some time, it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017. --------------------------------------------- Result 3939 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Presque Rien' ('Come Undone') is an earlier work by the inordinately gifted writer/ director Sébastien Lifshitz (with the collaboration of writer Stéphane Bouquet - the team that gave us the later 'Wild Side'). As we come to understand Lifshitz's manner of storytelling each of his works becomes more treasureable. By allowing his tender and sensitive love stories to unfold in the same random fashion found in the minds of confused and insecure youths - time now, time passed, time reflective, time imagined, time alone - Lifshitz makes his tales more personal, involving the viewer with every aspect of the characters' responses. It takes a bit of work to key into his method, but going with his technique draws us deeply into the film.

Mathieu (handsome and gifted Jérémie Elkaïm) is visiting the seaside for a holiday, a time to allow his mother (Dominique Reymond) to struggle with her undefined illness, cared for by the worldly and wise Annick (Marie Matheron) and accompanied by his sister Sarah (Laetitia Legrix): their distant father has remained at home for business reasons. Weaving in and out of the first moments of the film are images of Mathieu alone, looking depressed, riding trains, speaking to someone in a little recorder. We are left to wonder whether the unfolding action is all memory or contemporary action.

While sunning at the beach Mathieu notices a handsome youth his age starring at him, and we can feel Mathieu's emotions quivering with confusion. The youth Cédric (Stéphane Rideau) follows Mathieu and his sister home, continuing the mystery of attraction. Soon Cédric approaches Mathieu and a gentle introduction leads to a kiss that begins a passionate love obsession. Mathieu is terrified of the direction he is taking, rebuffs Cédric's public approaches, but continues to seek him out for consignations. The two young men are fully in the throes of being in love and the enactment of the physical aspect of this relationship, so very necessary to understanding this story, is shared with the audience in some very erotic and sensual scenes. Yet as the summer wears on Mathieu, a committed student, realizes that Cédric is a drifter working in a condiment stand at a carnival. It becomes apparent that Cédric is the Dionysian partner while Mathieu is the Apollonian one: in a telling time in architectural ruin Mathieu is excited by the beauty of the history and space while Cédric is only interested in the place as a new hideaway for lovemaking.

Mathieu is a complex person, coping with his familial ties strained by critical illness and a non-present father, a fear of his burgeoning sexuality, and his nascent passion for Cédric. Their moments of joy are disrupted by Cédric's admission of infidelity and Mathieu's inability to cope with that issue and eventually they part ways. Time passes, family changes are made, and Mathieu drifts into depression including a suicide attempt. The manner in which Mathieu copes with all of these challenges and finds solace, strangely enough, in one of Cédric's past lovers Pierre (Nils Ohlund) brings the film to an ambiguous yet wholly successful climax.

After viewing the film the feeling of identification with these characters is so strong that the desire to start the film from the beginning now with the knowledge of the complete story is powerful. Lifshitz has given us a film of meditation with passion, conflicts with passion's powers found in love, and a quiet film of silences and reveries that are incomparably beautiful. The entire cast is superb and the direction is gentle and provocative. Lifshitz is most assuredly one of the bright lights of film-making. In French with English subtitles. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 3940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have watched 3 episodes of Caveman, and I have no idea why I continue except maybe waiting for it to get better.

To me this show is just pumping itself off the commercials, with no real humor. As we sat around watching these shows, we all speculated on what was going to happen.

The episode of the woman cave-woman with a attitude was actually a big, yea right, for us. she's crude in a theater and acts tough to strangers, and truth be told, she needed a slap

I consider myself a pretty good reviewer, taking in everything, but I must say, Cavemen is comparable to the old show, My mother, the car. I give it a 2, only because they deserve 1 better than a 1 because they actually spent money on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3941 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wanted to like Magnolia. The plot reminded me of Grand Canyon (which I liked). 4 different lives/stories that come together at the end but Magnolia took a wrong turn halfway through the movie and I was lost. I almost turned it off right then and there but I felt I should hang in there until the end, little did I know it would be another torturous 1 1/2 hours. Thank god I rented instead of seeing it in the theatre. I almost screamed out in frustration after 2 hours. The biggest kick in the pants was the ending frog scene. My DVD player still hasn't forgiven me and I don't blame it one bit. It was a unique movie, but a bad, boring, and pointless movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] It's [[obvious]] that the people who made 'Dead [[At]] The Box Office' love B-movie horror. Overt references to the [[genre]] are peppered [[throughout]], from [[stock]] characters (the authority [[figure]] who doesn't [[believe]] the [[monstrous]] [[invasion]] is really [[happening]]) to Kevin Smith style [[discussions]] to reenacting Duane Jones' [[last]] moments from 'Night of the Living Dead' not once but twice.

Unfortunately it takes more than love to make a good [[movie]].

The staging and shot [[choice]] are unexciting and unimaginative. While a common admonition in [[film]] school is to [[avoid]] 'Mastershot [[Theatre]],' telling the [[story]] [[completely]] in a wide [[master]] shot, here we [[find]] the obverse as in [[several]] sequences it's hard to [[figure]] out the [[spatial]] [[relationships]] between [[characters]] as the [[story]] is [[told]] in a series of [[medium]] [[shots]] with no establishing shot to [[tie]] it together. [[Editing]] is drab and basic and at times there are unmotivated cuts. The [[lighting]] is flat and sometimes muddy, making the scenes in the darkened theatre [[hard]] to make out (was there lighting, or was this shot with [[available]] light only?). Some shots are out of [[focus]]. The [[dialogue]] is [[trite]], and the performances, for the most [[part]], one-note (Isaiah Robinson shows some energy and screen presence as Curtis, and the fellow [[playing]] the projectionist has some [[pleasantly]] dickish line readings; Michael Allen Williams as the [[theater]] manager and Casey Kirkpatrick as [[enthusiastic]] [[film]] geek [[Eric]] have some [[nice]] moments). The premise is silly, even for a B [[horror]] flick ([[Also]], it's too [[bad]] Dr Eisner was unaware of [[Project]] Paperclip - he could've [[saved]] himself a lot of [[trouble]]!). The 'zombies' are non-threatening, and their [[makeup]] is [[unconvincing]] ([[although]] the chunky zombie [[trying]] to get a gumball out of the [[machine]] [[raised]] a [[smile]]). For a zombie fan [[film]], there is very [[little]] blood or violence, [[although]] what there is, is [[handled]] [[pretty]] well. The incidental [[music]], while stylistically uneven, is [[kind]] of [[nice]] at times, and there are some good [[foley]] [[effects]]. The '[[Time]] Warp' [[parody]] was a fun listen, [[although]] the [[images]] going along with it were [[less]] [[fun]] to watch. [[Unfortunately]], the looped [[dialogue]] sounds flat. [[Was]] this shot non-sync (doubtful, it [[looks]] like [[video]] through and through)? I [[watched]] the [[special]] [[introduction]] by Troma Films' Lloyd Kaufman before the main feature - although it consisted essentially of Kaufman plugging his own stuff and admitting that he hadn't seen the movie while someone mugged in a Toxie mask, its production and entertainment values were higher than 'Dead...' itself (quick aside to whoever put the DVD together - the countdown on film leader beeps only on the flash-frame 2, not on every number plus one more after). For that matter, the vampire film theatregoers are seen watching early in 'Dead...' looked a lot more entertaining than this. Recommendation to avoid, unless you know someone involved in the production or are an ardent Lloyd Kaufman completist (he plays 'Kaufman the Minion' in the film-within-a-film).

(Full disclosure: my girlfriend is an extra in this movie. I swear this did not color my review.) It's [[conspicuous]] that the people who made 'Dead [[Under]] The Box Office' love B-movie horror. Overt references to the [[kinds]] are peppered [[during]], from [[stocks]] characters (the authority [[silhouette]] who doesn't [[think]] the [[outrageous]] [[invade]] is really [[occurring]]) to Kevin Smith style [[talks]] to reenacting Duane Jones' [[final]] moments from 'Night of the Living Dead' not once but twice.

Unfortunately it takes more than love to make a good [[filmmaking]].

The staging and shot [[picks]] are unexciting and unimaginative. While a common admonition in [[movies]] school is to [[avoidance]] 'Mastershot [[Teatro]],' telling the [[conte]] [[absolutely]] in a wide [[maestro]] shot, here we [[unearthed]] the obverse as in [[many]] sequences it's hard to [[silhouette]] out the [[geographical]] [[ties]] between [[character]] as the [[saga]] is [[say]] in a series of [[average]] [[punches]] with no establishing shot to [[tying]] it together. [[Edit]] is drab and basic and at times there are unmotivated cuts. The [[lit]] is flat and sometimes muddy, making the scenes in the darkened theatre [[tough]] to make out (was there lighting, or was this shot with [[accessible]] light only?). Some shots are out of [[spotlight]]. The [[discussions]] is [[unremarkable]], and the performances, for the most [[parties]], one-note (Isaiah Robinson shows some energy and screen presence as Curtis, and the fellow [[gaming]] the projectionist has some [[delightfully]] dickish line readings; Michael Allen Williams as the [[teatro]] manager and Casey Kirkpatrick as [[keen]] [[flick]] geek [[Erik]] have some [[delightful]] moments). The premise is silly, even for a B [[terror]] flick ([[Moreover]], it's too [[mala]] Dr Eisner was unaware of [[Projects]] Paperclip - he could've [[rescues]] himself a lot of [[troubles]]!). The 'zombies' are non-threatening, and their [[composition]] is [[feeble]] ([[albeit]] the chunky zombie [[tempting]] to get a gumball out of the [[machines]] [[risen]] a [[laughs]]). For a zombie fan [[flick]], there is very [[petite]] blood or violence, [[albeit]] what there is, is [[processed]] [[quite]] well. The incidental [[musicians]], while stylistically uneven, is [[genre]] of [[pleasurable]] at times, and there are some good [[volley]] [[effect]]. The '[[Moment]] Warp' [[comedy]] was a fun listen, [[while]] the [[picture]] going along with it were [[lowest]] [[entertaining]] to watch. [[Sadly]], the looped [[discussions]] sounds flat. [[Were]] this shot non-sync (doubtful, it [[seem]] like [[videotape]] through and through)? I [[seen]] the [[specially]] [[introductions]] by Troma Films' Lloyd Kaufman before the main feature - although it consisted essentially of Kaufman plugging his own stuff and admitting that he hadn't seen the movie while someone mugged in a Toxie mask, its production and entertainment values were higher than 'Dead...' itself (quick aside to whoever put the DVD together - the countdown on film leader beeps only on the flash-frame 2, not on every number plus one more after). For that matter, the vampire film theatregoers are seen watching early in 'Dead...' looked a lot more entertaining than this. Recommendation to avoid, unless you know someone involved in the production or are an ardent Lloyd Kaufman completist (he plays 'Kaufman the Minion' in the film-within-a-film).

(Full disclosure: my girlfriend is an extra in this movie. I swear this did not color my review.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3943 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] "Serum" [[starts]] out with [[credits]] that are [[quite]] reminiscent of the "Re-animator" [[movies]], and it owes a lot to them. The story is very similar; a mad doctor develops a serum that he believes will alleviate pain, sickness and death, but he's apparently not a big believer in clinical trials and so winds up with a brain-eating zombie on his hands in the person of his nephew. The zombie even looks like one of those from "Re-animator," and in fact some of the make-up effects in "Serum" aren't bad. Unfortunately, the script is pretty slow and unbelievable in quite a few places, resulting in a soap opera feel for most of the first 3/4 of the movie. For some reason, the director feels compelled to tell us the time of day every few minutes by flashing it in big white letters across the screen. I can't see why this was important, other than being an attempt to provide viewers with a sense of time passing; sometimes, that wouldn't be present otherwise as the plot plods along.

There are a number of moments that just don't add up here. For instance, one victim is bludgeoned with a sledge hammer, but when we see the victim's head up close, there's no sign of that trauma. In another scene, a character runs down a fully lit hospital corridor (we can see the circles of light on the floor, in fact) with a flashlight in hand, looking for all the world like he's walking in the dark... but a moment later a second character walks down the same fully-lit corridor without one. These are just a couple of examples; moments of what look like directorial or editorial sloppiness crop up quite frequently throughout the movie.

"Serum" is better in some ways than much of what goes straight-to-video as independent horror lately. In terms of technical items — sound and photography, for example — it's got a more polished look than a lot of what lands on a DVD. On the other hand, there's still a good deal of [[wooden]] acting (particularly by one of the lead characters, the mad scientist himself!) and nonsensical moments that have nothing to do with suspension of disbelief and everything to do with writing and continuity. Maybe these are things that the people involved with making this film will eventually get more experience with, though. One of the problems with low-budget independent horror lately is that the filmmakers often set out to remake more popular movies that had bigger budgets, and that almost never works out. It didn't in the case of "Serum," anyhow. "Serum" [[initiated]] out with [[appropriations]] that are [[rather]] reminiscent of the "Re-animator" [[filmmaking]], and it owes a lot to them. The story is very similar; a mad doctor develops a serum that he believes will alleviate pain, sickness and death, but he's apparently not a big believer in clinical trials and so winds up with a brain-eating zombie on his hands in the person of his nephew. The zombie even looks like one of those from "Re-animator," and in fact some of the make-up effects in "Serum" aren't bad. Unfortunately, the script is pretty slow and unbelievable in quite a few places, resulting in a soap opera feel for most of the first 3/4 of the movie. For some reason, the director feels compelled to tell us the time of day every few minutes by flashing it in big white letters across the screen. I can't see why this was important, other than being an attempt to provide viewers with a sense of time passing; sometimes, that wouldn't be present otherwise as the plot plods along.

There are a number of moments that just don't add up here. For instance, one victim is bludgeoned with a sledge hammer, but when we see the victim's head up close, there's no sign of that trauma. In another scene, a character runs down a fully lit hospital corridor (we can see the circles of light on the floor, in fact) with a flashlight in hand, looking for all the world like he's walking in the dark... but a moment later a second character walks down the same fully-lit corridor without one. These are just a couple of examples; moments of what look like directorial or editorial sloppiness crop up quite frequently throughout the movie.

"Serum" is better in some ways than much of what goes straight-to-video as independent horror lately. In terms of technical items — sound and photography, for example — it's got a more polished look than a lot of what lands on a DVD. On the other hand, there's still a good deal of [[lumber]] acting (particularly by one of the lead characters, the mad scientist himself!) and nonsensical moments that have nothing to do with suspension of disbelief and everything to do with writing and continuity. Maybe these are things that the people involved with making this film will eventually get more experience with, though. One of the problems with low-budget independent horror lately is that the filmmakers often set out to remake more popular movies that had bigger budgets, and that almost never works out. It didn't in the case of "Serum," anyhow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[In]] 1979 Lucio Fulci released his [[film]] Zombi. [[However]], due to the [[earlier]] [[import]] of George Romero's [[Dawn]] of the Dead, which had gone by that name for its [[Italian]] [[release]], it was retitled to Zombi 2. (Which also had the bonus of [[letting]] the [[audience]] think this was a sequel to the second Romero movie). Continuing this theme, the second Zombi film, which would have been called Zombi 2, was then consequently titled Zombi 3. In the [[UK]], the original Zombi [[film]] (that is, Zombi 2) was [[titled]] "Zombie Flesh Eaters". To [[continue]] THIS theme, the second Zombi film (Zombi 3) was then titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters 2" for its UK release. (Are you following all this?) So if Zombie Flesh Eaters was Fulci's Dawn, then is 2 his Day of the Dead? While this is only a flippant observation, this tale of military compounds, helicopters and a plodding narrative certainly does bear a [[vague]] thematic resemblance.

Some of Fulci's European [[direction]] compels in a film like this, but the acting, dubbing and exposition-heavy [[script]] are absolutely [[horrendous]]. Its ecological message is so forced and overstated it can no longer be considered a subtext, while there's an (unintentionally) hilarious Birds homage. Combining this last element with MOR 80s rock is not a good idea. For some reason I couldn't stop thinking of Time of the Apes (q.v.) the whole time I was watching this. This is obviously not a good thing.

While there's nothing here to rival topless scuba-diving, shark wrestling zombies and eyeballs on a splinter, Fulci's misogynistic leanings do get a work out with a hotel cleaner's mouth being ground into a mirror until it gushes blood. His fannish gore predilections also see a hand severing. Both themes are combined when a woman's face is ripped off, first by one zombie, then a zombie foetus that tears out of a pregnant woman's stomach.

Production-wise, this is obviously a step up from Zombi, coming five years later. (Nine years in worldwide release terms). But without the original's low-key charm it struggles, while Stefano Mainetti's music is inappropriate and uninspired. Fabio Frizzi's score was one of the best things about the '79 movie. Here zombie attacks are played out to what sounds unnervingly like Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out For A Hero". In the middle of this carnage we get an irksome love interest, and Roger and Kenny, two bland macho types who do everything with acrobatic urgency and constantly state the obvious. ("We're out of ammunition" to a stalling gun is a particular standout). But where it also falls down is in the zombies themselves. Low key or not, Fulci's original had truly magnificent, rotting zombies. Skull faces, worms in eye sockets... they really were something to behold. By contrast, this dull follow-up opts for the more traditional "men with a bit of paint on their faces" option.

The climax rips off too many Romero movies to even be funny, while the use of the DJ is a crass and cheap narrative device. Not containing the same elements of outrage and gratuitous nudity of the first, this is unlikely to have the same cult appeal.

It turns out that Fulci actually walked out on the project after reportedly directing just fifteen minutes, the rest filmed by Bruno Mattei. I'm fairly sure that even Fulci would have balked at the ludicrous "flying zombie head" scene, and so credit to the director for having the good sense to leave. Unfortunately, however, it's his name that's above the film title on releases, so the majority of people will be left with the impression that this is a Fulci film through and through. On that scale then it's a major setback for him, for this movie commits what you imagine Fulci would regard as the worst crime of all: that of being boring. [[At]] 1979 Lucio Fulci released his [[filmmaking]] Zombi. [[Instead]], due to the [[previous]] [[importing]] of George Romero's [[Aurore]] of the Dead, which had gone by that name for its [[Ltalian]] [[emancipate]], it was retitled to Zombi 2. (Which also had the bonus of [[allowing]] the [[viewers]] think this was a sequel to the second Romero movie). Continuing this theme, the second Zombi film, which would have been called Zombi 2, was then consequently titled Zombi 3. In the [[BRITISH]], the original Zombi [[filmmaking]] (that is, Zombi 2) was [[entitled]] "Zombie Flesh Eaters". To [[constants]] THIS theme, the second Zombi film (Zombi 3) was then titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters 2" for its UK release. (Are you following all this?) So if Zombie Flesh Eaters was Fulci's Dawn, then is 2 his Day of the Dead? While this is only a flippant observation, this tale of military compounds, helicopters and a plodding narrative certainly does bear a [[foggy]] thematic resemblance.

Some of Fulci's European [[orientation]] compels in a film like this, but the acting, dubbing and exposition-heavy [[hyphen]] are absolutely [[frightful]]. Its ecological message is so forced and overstated it can no longer be considered a subtext, while there's an (unintentionally) hilarious Birds homage. Combining this last element with MOR 80s rock is not a good idea. For some reason I couldn't stop thinking of Time of the Apes (q.v.) the whole time I was watching this. This is obviously not a good thing.

While there's nothing here to rival topless scuba-diving, shark wrestling zombies and eyeballs on a splinter, Fulci's misogynistic leanings do get a work out with a hotel cleaner's mouth being ground into a mirror until it gushes blood. His fannish gore predilections also see a hand severing. Both themes are combined when a woman's face is ripped off, first by one zombie, then a zombie foetus that tears out of a pregnant woman's stomach.

Production-wise, this is obviously a step up from Zombi, coming five years later. (Nine years in worldwide release terms). But without the original's low-key charm it struggles, while Stefano Mainetti's music is inappropriate and uninspired. Fabio Frizzi's score was one of the best things about the '79 movie. Here zombie attacks are played out to what sounds unnervingly like Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out For A Hero". In the middle of this carnage we get an irksome love interest, and Roger and Kenny, two bland macho types who do everything with acrobatic urgency and constantly state the obvious. ("We're out of ammunition" to a stalling gun is a particular standout). But where it also falls down is in the zombies themselves. Low key or not, Fulci's original had truly magnificent, rotting zombies. Skull faces, worms in eye sockets... they really were something to behold. By contrast, this dull follow-up opts for the more traditional "men with a bit of paint on their faces" option.

The climax rips off too many Romero movies to even be funny, while the use of the DJ is a crass and cheap narrative device. Not containing the same elements of outrage and gratuitous nudity of the first, this is unlikely to have the same cult appeal.

It turns out that Fulci actually walked out on the project after reportedly directing just fifteen minutes, the rest filmed by Bruno Mattei. I'm fairly sure that even Fulci would have balked at the ludicrous "flying zombie head" scene, and so credit to the director for having the good sense to leave. Unfortunately, however, it's his name that's above the film title on releases, so the majority of people will be left with the impression that this is a Fulci film through and through. On that scale then it's a major setback for him, for this movie commits what you imagine Fulci would regard as the worst crime of all: that of being boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 3945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] [[Outrageously]] [[trashy]] [[karate]]/horror [[thriller]] with loads of graphically gory violence and gratuitous nudity, and a [[thoroughly]] [[preposterous]] and [[bizarre]] "plot". This is lowbrow and low-grade [[entertainment]] that will [[appeal]] only to [[viewers]] with [[particularly]] kinky [[tastes]], but it's kind of [[cheerfully]] [[bad]] and I [[must]] admit that I wasn't [[actually]] [[bored]] while watching it.... (*1/2) [[Appallingly]] [[tacky]] [[kicks]]/horror [[thrillers]] with loads of graphically gory violence and gratuitous nudity, and a [[meticulously]] [[farcical]] and [[weird]] "plot". This is lowbrow and low-grade [[amusement]] that will [[appellate]] only to [[spectators]] with [[principally]] kinky [[flavors]], but it's kind of [[joyfully]] [[unfavourable]] and I [[owes]] admit that I wasn't [[indeed]] [[boring]] while watching it.... (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 3946 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the one and only season has just aired here in Australia and i thought it was absolutely brilliant! i love it! all the story lines are so good! and its a much more realistic view on teen and family life today. yet it still kept strong family values of sticking together and being there for each other. their problems were real, and it really drew you into the show. the show is basically about this family called 'the Days' and their lives. the family consisted of Abby Day (mum), Jack Day (dad), Natalie Day (sporty daughter), Cooper Day (outsider son), and Nathan Day (boy genius son). each episodes a day of their life, with coopers perspective on things throughout it. i loved cooper his insight through out the show was just great. he was by far my favorite character. it ended with so many things it could've continued with, I'm really sad another season wasn't made. it was a great show I'm gonna miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3947 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] You [[could]] say that the [[actors]] will make a movie, but this [[clearly]] proves that statement wrong. Most of the [[characters]] in this film lack [[anything]] to hold on to. They play the part of cardboard cut outs being moved about in [[predictable]] and uninteresting [[ways]]. The [[story]] is very [[simple]]. It [[could]] be summed up in a few words, but I'll hold back in case [[anyone]] reading does [[want]] to see this film.

I had to [[fast]] forward the parts where Jack showed us how to be an [[obnoxious]] eater. I'd have to say that 70% of this [[film]] revolved [[around]] cooking, [[eating]], or getting ready to [[eat]]. [[Quite]] frankly, I'd [[rather]] not [[spend]] my time watching Jack chew noisily with an open mouth. [[Personally]], I could have done without the footwear references and jokes that [[pepper]] the first half of the [[film]] too.

Outside of my own personal [[dementia]], the [[film]] [[really]] [[lacked]] [[anything]] worth it's time. There were countless scenes and [[camera]] shots that felt like it was dragging. When something happens, the reactions of the [[characters]] are vague and dry.

[[Best]] not to look this one up. You [[wo]] say that the [[protagonists]] will make a movie, but this [[apparently]] proves that statement wrong. Most of the [[attribute]] in this film lack [[nada]] to hold on to. They play the part of cardboard cut outs being moved about in [[foreseeable]] and uninteresting [[avenues]]. The [[tales]] is very [[easy]]. It [[wo]] be summed up in a few words, but I'll hold back in case [[everyone]] reading does [[wants]] to see this film.

I had to [[expedited]] forward the parts where Jack showed us how to be an [[vile]] eater. I'd have to say that 70% of this [[films]] revolved [[about]] cooking, [[food]], or getting ready to [[swallowed]]. [[Pretty]] frankly, I'd [[somewhat]] not [[spent]] my time watching Jack chew noisily with an open mouth. [[Individual]], I could have done without the footwear references and jokes that [[jalapeno]] the first half of the [[movie]] too.

Outside of my own personal [[craziness]], the [[filmmaking]] [[genuinely]] [[lack]] [[somethings]] worth it's time. There were countless scenes and [[cameras]] shots that felt like it was dragging. When something happens, the reactions of the [[trait]] are vague and dry.

[[Optimum]] not to look this one up. --------------------------------------------- Result 3948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Basic slasher movie premise, 3 young ladies wreck their car and end up staying with a creepy family. YAWN.

Watching 36 minutes of a premonition of OJ's car chase with a white sedan instead of a bronco. YAWN.

Old lady with hot and cold dementia controlling her daughter... YAWN

23 minutes of watching the actors eat - YAWN Trying to identify what the heck they are eating ... OK there might be a drinking game here ... nope - YAWN

Complimentary shower scenes ... OK got my interest for a couple of seconds.

Completely random and uninspired killings ... YAWN

The ending ... dude! that psycho is deranged - why couldn't the rest of the movie be like the last 5 minutes... unfortunately that is it - My advice - fast forward to the last five minutes and watch that and then put something good in the player - for me I am going back to sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 3949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Good horror movies from France are quite rare, and it's fairly easy to see why! Whenever a talented young filmmaker releases a staggering new film, he emigrates towards glorious Hollywood immediately after to directed the big-budgeted remake of another great film classic! How can France possibly build up a solid horror reputation when their prodigy-directors leave the country after just one film? "Haute Tension" was a [[fantastic]] movie and it earned director Alexandre Aja a (one-way?) ticket to the States to remake "The Hills Have Eyes" (which he did terrifically, I may add). Eric Valette's long-feature debut "Maléfique" was a very promising and engaging horror picture too, and he's already off to the Hollywood as well to direct the remake of Takashi Miike's ghost-story hit "One Missed Call". So there you have it, two very gifted Frenchmen that aren't likely to make any more film in their native country some time soon. "Maléfique" is a simple but efficient chiller that requires some patience due to its slow start, but once the plot properly develops, it offers great atmospheric tension and a handful of marvelous special effects. The film almost entirely takes place in one single location and only introduces four characters. We're inside a ramshackle French prison cell with four occupants. The new arrival is a businessman sentenced to do time for fraud, the elderly and "wise" inmate sadistically killed his wife and then there's a crazy transvestite and a mentally handicapped boy to complete the odd foursome. They find an ancient journal inside the wall of their cell, belonging to a sick murderer in the 1920's who specialized in black magic rites and supernatural ways to escape. The four inmates begin to prepare their own escaping plan using the bizarre formulas of the book, only to realize the occult is something you shouldn't mess with… Eric Valette dedicates oceans of time to the character drawings of the four protagonists, which occasionally results in redundant and tedious sub plots, but his reasons for this all become clear in the gruesome climax when the book suddenly turns out to be some type of Wishmaster-device. "Maléfique" is a dark film, with truckloads of claustrophobic tension and several twisted details about human behavior. Watch it before some wealthy American production company decides to remake it with four handsome teenage actors in the unconvincing roles of hardcore criminals. Good horror movies from France are quite rare, and it's fairly easy to see why! Whenever a talented young filmmaker releases a staggering new film, he emigrates towards glorious Hollywood immediately after to directed the big-budgeted remake of another great film classic! How can France possibly build up a solid horror reputation when their prodigy-directors leave the country after just one film? "Haute Tension" was a [[wondrous]] movie and it earned director Alexandre Aja a (one-way?) ticket to the States to remake "The Hills Have Eyes" (which he did terrifically, I may add). Eric Valette's long-feature debut "Maléfique" was a very promising and engaging horror picture too, and he's already off to the Hollywood as well to direct the remake of Takashi Miike's ghost-story hit "One Missed Call". So there you have it, two very gifted Frenchmen that aren't likely to make any more film in their native country some time soon. "Maléfique" is a simple but efficient chiller that requires some patience due to its slow start, but once the plot properly develops, it offers great atmospheric tension and a handful of marvelous special effects. The film almost entirely takes place in one single location and only introduces four characters. We're inside a ramshackle French prison cell with four occupants. The new arrival is a businessman sentenced to do time for fraud, the elderly and "wise" inmate sadistically killed his wife and then there's a crazy transvestite and a mentally handicapped boy to complete the odd foursome. They find an ancient journal inside the wall of their cell, belonging to a sick murderer in the 1920's who specialized in black magic rites and supernatural ways to escape. The four inmates begin to prepare their own escaping plan using the bizarre formulas of the book, only to realize the occult is something you shouldn't mess with… Eric Valette dedicates oceans of time to the character drawings of the four protagonists, which occasionally results in redundant and tedious sub plots, but his reasons for this all become clear in the gruesome climax when the book suddenly turns out to be some type of Wishmaster-device. "Maléfique" is a dark film, with truckloads of claustrophobic tension and several twisted details about human behavior. Watch it before some wealthy American production company decides to remake it with four handsome teenage actors in the unconvincing roles of hardcore criminals. --------------------------------------------- Result 3950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Semana Santa" or "Angel Of Death" is a very weak movie. Mira Sorvino plays a detective who is trying to find a killer who shoots arrows in people. Mira has an Italian accent which falters from time to time. Couldn't she just speak English? All the other characters have a forced Mexican\English accent which is distracting. The dialogue is very bad and the delivery of it is wooden. The cinematography looks nice, but that's not enough to save this tripe. THIS NEXT PART OF THIS REVIEW DOES CONTAIN SPOILERS!!!!

During the climax it looks like the villain is going to get away, but then he comes back down stairs to get shot and do a cool stunt down the railing. That just shows this script has no originality whatsoever. AVOID! --------------------------------------------- Result 3951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] In the words of [[Charles]] Dance's [[character]] in this [[film]], "[[Bollocks]]!" No [[plot]], no character [[development]], and [[utterly]] [[unbelievable]].

Full of [[stuff]] that just doesn't happen in the [[real]] world (since when were British [[police]] [[inspectors]] armed with [[handguns]] in shoulder [[holsters]]?). Full of [[mistakes]] (Bulgarian trains in London?). Full of dull and artificial [[dialogue]]. And the directing/[[editing]] is awful - wobbly hand-held camera shots that [[add]] nothing to the [[film]] except a vague [[feeling]] of seasickness; confusing jump-cuts; no structure.

Wesley Snipes' character is totally [[unsympathetic]] - why should we [[care]] what [[happens]] to him? Direct to video? Direct to the [[dustbin]]! In the words of [[Karel]] Dance's [[characters]] in this [[filmmaking]], "[[Shit]]!" No [[intrigue]], no character [[developments]], and [[totally]] [[impressive]].

Full of [[thing]] that just doesn't happen in the [[veritable]] world (since when were British [[cops]] [[inspection]] armed with [[muskets]] in shoulder [[gaines]]?). Full of [[faults]] (Bulgarian trains in London?). Full of dull and artificial [[dialogues]]. And the directing/[[edit]] is awful - wobbly hand-held camera shots that [[adds]] nothing to the [[filmmaking]] except a vague [[sentiment]] of seasickness; confusing jump-cuts; no structure.

Wesley Snipes' character is totally [[oblivious]] - why should we [[caring]] what [[comes]] to him? Direct to video? Direct to the [[trash]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3952 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] This [[movie]] is told through the eyes of a young teacher at a catholic school, watching as the RAWANDAN [[genocide]] un-furls around him.

The movie [[starts]] off with a brief explanation about the past [[history]] and rivalry of Rawanda. Then it [[jumps]] to the story as told through the eyes of a young idealistic "NEW-COMER" a young teacher who doesn't take life or the situation too seriously. As he and the driver approach a road-block he plays [[around]] with his drivers I.D. not realizing that this is a serious moment and that if the driver can't identify himself as being of the right tribe to the soldiers they'll be killed. And [[thats]] how he treats the unfolding story of chaos and unfolding around him. Suddenly realizes that every Rawandan (including his driver) is involved and that the Europeans soldiers and tourists cannot and will not help. The media cameras cannot stop machete's, and there's too many machete wielding militia-men too shoot. the title comes from the armies captain saying he's going to shoot the dogs eating the dead-bodies around his compound, but won't shoot the Militia-men that are killing people around the compound. Mainly because they haven't fired at the soldiers yet. Finally he realizes the hopelessness of the situation and the guy who tells the evacuation team that he wants to give up his seat for one of the intended victims, flees with his tail in-between his legs, rather than face immanent death with the school kids he's promised not to leave behind.

It's more of character study, and a come to Jesus moment for one character, than a [[story]] about the [[genocide]] in "RAWANDA". This movie didn't have to take place in RAWANDA, it could have taken place any one of the Genocidal hell holes going around this world at any given time. This [[filmmaking]] is told through the eyes of a young teacher at a catholic school, watching as the RAWANDAN [[genocidal]] un-furls around him.

The movie [[initiates]] off with a brief explanation about the past [[historian]] and rivalry of Rawanda. Then it [[salta]] to the story as told through the eyes of a young idealistic "NEW-COMER" a young teacher who doesn't take life or the situation too seriously. As he and the driver approach a road-block he plays [[throughout]] with his drivers I.D. not realizing that this is a serious moment and that if the driver can't identify himself as being of the right tribe to the soldiers they'll be killed. And [[becuase]] how he treats the unfolding story of chaos and unfolding around him. Suddenly realizes that every Rawandan (including his driver) is involved and that the Europeans soldiers and tourists cannot and will not help. The media cameras cannot stop machete's, and there's too many machete wielding militia-men too shoot. the title comes from the armies captain saying he's going to shoot the dogs eating the dead-bodies around his compound, but won't shoot the Militia-men that are killing people around the compound. Mainly because they haven't fired at the soldiers yet. Finally he realizes the hopelessness of the situation and the guy who tells the evacuation team that he wants to give up his seat for one of the intended victims, flees with his tail in-between his legs, rather than face immanent death with the school kids he's promised not to leave behind.

It's more of character study, and a come to Jesus moment for one character, than a [[fairytales]] about the [[genocidal]] in "RAWANDA". This movie didn't have to take place in RAWANDA, it could have taken place any one of the Genocidal hell holes going around this world at any given time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Had never heard of The Man in the Moon until seeing it last evening on THIS HDTV channel. Look, my taste is like any others', eclectic. My favorites run from Blue Velvet to Dr. Strangelove to The Ghost and Mrs. Muir thru The Wizard of Oz and The Loved One, Eraserhead, repo man, and The Spy Within.

The Man in the Moon is superbly made, a gentle hearted, joyous and tragic film, beautifully filmed, one in which the actors truly live in the moment rather than act. This sweet tale shortly will be in our private library. This beautiful story of life in a far finer era in rural Louisiana literally transports you to its pastoral setting.

It's hard to remain stoic during the film's last moments, particularly when the young girl the extent of her older sister's heart searing private pain and forgives all.

Rather than spoil the enjoyment or bore you to sobs with my dull prose, will end now with this suggestion from one who enjoys films which speak from the heart to ours.

If you purchase no other film, please, purchase the Man in the Moon. This moving story is one you'll enjoy reliving time and again. It is a joy and a gem, a film all too scarce in this world of hardening hearts.

The simple virtues evinced in Man in the Moon are a joy to behold.

Paul Vincent Zecchino

Manasota Key, Florida

05 April, 2009 --------------------------------------------- Result 3954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] what a [[relief]] to [[find]] out I am not [[imagining]] this [[programme]]! the [[summary]] from taxman is [[great]]. I too remember finding it haunting and not particularly family [[viewing]], I must have been 10/11 at the time I [[watched]] it. I think for a girl that age part of attraction was lead's very blond hair, and his permanently sad state. The theme was played on a flute I recall - although I cannot remember how it went. I think the intro showed him playing it - or maybe he played a flute in the programme and especially when he was sad? Maybe I am destined never to know how it ended or to see clip or hear the tune, but at least I now know it is not just me. what a [[succour]] to [[found]] out I am not [[reckon]] this [[programming]]! the [[synthesizing]] from taxman is [[wondrous]]. I too remember finding it haunting and not particularly family [[visualizing]], I must have been 10/11 at the time I [[seen]] it. I think for a girl that age part of attraction was lead's very blond hair, and his permanently sad state. The theme was played on a flute I recall - although I cannot remember how it went. I think the intro showed him playing it - or maybe he played a flute in the programme and especially when he was sad? Maybe I am destined never to know how it ended or to see clip or hear the tune, but at least I now know it is not just me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The picture is developed in 1873 and [[talks]] as [[Lin]] McAdam(James Stewart) and [[High]] Spade(Millard Michell)arrive to Dodge [[City]] looking for an [[enemy]] [[called]] [[Dutch]] [[Henry]]([[Stephen]] McNally).The sheriff Wyatt Hearp([[Will]] Ger)obligates to [[leave]] their guns.Both participate in an shot contest and Stewart earns a Winchester 73,the rifle [[greatest]] of the west but is [[robbed]] and starting the possession hand to hand(John McIntire,Charles Drake ,Dan Duryea).[[Meanwhile]] the starring is [[going]] on the [[vengeance]].

First western interpreted by James Stewart [[directed]] by [[Anthony]] Mann that [[achieved]] revive the [[genre]] during 50 decade. The film has an [[extraordinary]] casting including [[brief]] [[apparition]] of [[Rock]] Hudson and [[Tony]] [[Curtis]],both newcomers. The [[picture]] is well narrated and [[directed]] by the [[magnificent]] [[director]] [[Anthony]] Mann who has [[made]] [[abundant]] classics [[western]]:Bend the river,Far [[country]],[[man]] of Laramie,naked spur,[[tin]] [[star]]. Of course, all the [[essential]] [[elements]] [[western]] are in this film,[[thus]],[[Red]] Indians [[attack]],[[raid]] by outlaws,[[final]] [[showdown]].The [[breathtaking]] [[cinematography]] by Greta Garbo's [[favourite]] photographer Willian Daniels. [[James]] [[Stewart]] [[inaugurated]] a [[new]] [[type]] of [[wage]],the [[percentage]] on the box office that will imitate posteriorly others [[great]] Hollywood [[stars]]. Although the [[argument]] is an [[adaptation]] of ¨[[Big]] [[gun]]¨ novel of Stuart L.[[Lake]] and [[screenwriter]] is Borden Chase,is [[also]] based about [[real]] [[events]] because 4 July 1876 in Dodge City had a [[shot]] competition and the winner was rewarded with a Winchester 73 [[model]] 1873 with [[ability]] shoot 17 cartridges [[caliber]] 44/40 in few seconds. The picture is developed in 1873 and [[negotiations]] as [[Layne]] McAdam(James Stewart) and [[Alto]] Spade(Millard Michell)arrive to Dodge [[Ville]] looking for an [[foe]] [[drew]] [[Antilles]] [[Henrik]]([[Stephane]] McNally).The sheriff Wyatt Hearp([[Willingness]] Ger)obligates to [[letting]] their guns.Both participate in an shot contest and Stewart earns a Winchester 73,the rifle [[highest]] of the west but is [[looted]] and starting the possession hand to hand(John McIntire,Charles Drake ,Dan Duryea).[[Moreover]] the starring is [[gonna]] on the [[retaliation]].

First western interpreted by James Stewart [[aimed]] by [[Antoine]] Mann that [[fulfilled]] revive the [[sort]] during 50 decade. The film has an [[wondrous]] casting including [[anyways]] [[appearance]] of [[Rocks]] Hudson and [[Tonda]] [[Curtiss]],both newcomers. The [[photographed]] is well narrated and [[aimed]] by the [[excellent]] [[headmaster]] [[Antoine]] Mann who has [[brought]] [[bountiful]] classics [[west]]:Bend the river,Far [[nations]],[[bloke]] of Laramie,naked spur,[[jeon]] [[stars]]. Of course, all the [[critical]] [[components]] [[ouest]] are in this film,[[then]],[[Reid]] Indians [[attacks]],[[raiding]] by outlaws,[[last]] [[standoff]].The [[breathless]] [[movies]] by Greta Garbo's [[prefer]] photographer Willian Daniels. [[Jacques]] [[Sylvain]] [[launch]] a [[newer]] [[typing]] of [[pay]],the [[centigrade]] on the box office that will imitate posteriorly others [[wondrous]] Hollywood [[star]]. Although the [[controversy]] is an [[readjust]] of ¨[[Grand]] [[gunpoint]]¨ novel of Stuart L.[[Lakes]] and [[scriptwriter]] is Borden Chase,is [[apart]] based about [[actual]] [[phenomena]] because 4 July 1876 in Dodge City had a [[offed]] competition and the winner was rewarded with a Winchester 73 [[models]] 1873 with [[capability]] shoot 17 cartridges [[sized]] 44/40 in few seconds. --------------------------------------------- Result 3956 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there was ever a call to make a bad film that reflected how stupid humanity could become, this one would take the prize. The plot centers around bible prophecies that lie in hidden messages of the scriptures that prompt a group of power-seeking thugs to attempt total control of the world. Just how stupid does this writer believe people to actually be?

The acting was bad at best. Casper Van Dien wasted his talent doing this film. Michael York's work was a fair match for the role, since he was the center of the film, and did a good job.

This plot was sickening and very disturbing. No tender or immature minds should see this film. This is how a basic good vs. evil plot can go astray.

There must be a lot of mental disease floating around the film circles, who look for ways to market this type of junk. There must have been something censored out to get a PG-13 rating, but it was still awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3957 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I want to [[warn]] you that there is a very bittersweet quality to this comment. Also, this comment will be much more meaningful to you after you have [[seen]] the [[movie]].

[[Although]] it is [[tragically]] [[sad]] to say, that movie [[bears]] a resemblance to my [[life]] that is so [[striking]] that it is truly scary. The [[rest]] of you will never [[know]] how [[accurately]] that [[movie]] [[depicts]] how [[persons]] who have been in situations like that [[act]] and react in their [[later]] lives.

This [[could]] not have been a work of fiction; it had to be [[based]] on personal experience.

My testament to the how good the [[movie]] was is [[shown]] by the [[fact]] that, although it was one of the [[best]] [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]], watching my [[life]] [[portrayed]] on the silver screen was such a searingly painful experience that I will never be [[able]] to [[see]] it again.

But I [[endorse]] it [[heartily]] to all [[others]] as a chance to peer into the [[soul]] of another human being to the [[extent]] that you [[probably]] never [[experienced]] before or will ever again. I [[know]] that for a fact, because that's my soul you will be observing. I want to [[alerted]] you that there is a very bittersweet quality to this comment. Also, this comment will be much more meaningful to you after you have [[watched]] the [[kino]].

[[Despite]] it is [[regrettably]] [[regrettable]] to say, that movie [[bear]] a resemblance to my [[iife]] that is so [[noteworthy]] that it is truly scary. The [[roosting]] of you will never [[savoir]] how [[exactly]] that [[kino]] [[describe]] how [[individuals]] who have been in situations like that [[legislation]] and react in their [[subsequently]] lives.

This [[would]] not have been a work of fiction; it had to be [[predicated]] on personal experience.

My testament to the how good the [[kino]] was is [[showed]] by the [[facto]] that, although it was one of the [[better]] [[theater]] I've ever [[watched]], watching my [[vie]] [[depicted]] on the silver screen was such a searingly painful experience that I will never be [[capable]] to [[consults]] it again.

But I [[countersigned]] it [[unreservedly]] to all [[alia]] as a chance to peer into the [[alma]] of another human being to the [[amplitude]] that you [[undoubtedly]] never [[experimented]] before or will ever again. I [[savoir]] that for a fact, because that's my soul you will be observing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] [[In]] the glory days of the 90s ([[god]] [[rest]] its [[soul]]) you [[could]] [[turn]] on the [[great]] [[Comedy]] Central at any [[hour]] of the day and see the [[greatest]] [[sketch]] [[comedy]] [[show]] of all [[time]] [[Saturday]] Night [[Live]]. Whpat a [[glorious]] [[show]] that was, whether it was the [[original]] Not-Ready-for-Primetime [[Players]] or the second golden [[age]] of SNL [[featuring]] the greats- [[Chris]] Farley, [[Adam]] Sandler, David Spade... and then, it all went to [[hell]]. I was first exposed to MadTV about a year and a half ago, and I think I must've passed out from shock. [[How]] could a show so [[terrible]] [[prevail]] for so long? There are so [[many]] [[horrible]] flaws. I [[suppose]] I'll [[start]] with the writing. The writing, for most [[part]], is [[terrible]]. It is nothing more than kindergarten bathroom humor. The cast, for the most [[part]], is talentless. There are a few [[sketches]] I have [[enjoyed]], such as some of Ms. Swan and Stuart, and there are a few talents on the show such as the [[magnificent]] Alex Borstein. Phil LaMarr is a [[talented]] [[actor]], just not as a comedian. Although there a few sparse ha ha moments, they are not enough to redeem this [[endless]] line of [[horrible]] drivel populated by babbling idiots. [[Miss]] this one. [[Across]] the glory days of the 90s ([[lord]] [[remainder]] its [[alma]]) you [[wo]] [[converting]] on the [[prodigious]] [[Humor]] Central at any [[hours]] of the day and see the [[grandest]] [[skit]] [[humour]] [[display]] of all [[moment]] [[Saturdays]] Night [[Inhabit]]. Whpat a [[magnificent]] [[illustrating]] that was, whether it was the [[initial]] Not-Ready-for-Primetime [[Actors]] or the second golden [[ageing]] of SNL [[features]] the greats- [[Kris]] Farley, [[Adem]] Sandler, David Spade... and then, it all went to [[inferno]]. I was first exposed to MadTV about a year and a half ago, and I think I must've passed out from shock. [[Mode]] could a show so [[shocking]] [[prevails]] for so long? There are so [[countless]] [[abhorrent]] flaws. I [[guess]] I'll [[launch]] with the writing. The writing, for most [[parties]], is [[abysmal]]. It is nothing more than kindergarten bathroom humor. The cast, for the most [[party]], is talentless. There are a few [[portraits]] I have [[adored]], such as some of Ms. Swan and Stuart, and there are a few talents on the show such as the [[resplendent]] Alex Borstein. Phil LaMarr is a [[gifted]] [[protagonist]], just not as a comedian. Although there a few sparse ha ha moments, they are not enough to redeem this [[inexhaustible]] line of [[frightful]] drivel populated by babbling idiots. [[Mademoiselle]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] this [[movie]] was [[rather]] awful Vipul Shah's last [[movie]] was good this one was just bad [[although]] it's a [[good]] story and is [[handled]] in a great [[way]] Aatish Kapadia who adapted this [[movie]] from another gujarati play "Avjo Wahala Fari Malishu" made a good but [[slow]] pianful 2 and a half [[hours]] to watch there are a lot of flaws in this movie but it's [[still]] a [[entertainer]] songs are rather bleaked out and don't work well but they're still good [[overall]] not a movie you [[would]] [[enthusiastically]] watch it's still a story to take in to account and it's good if you're the relationship type pretty good movie with loads of flaws and humor that's really not needed even one bit this [[film]] was [[quite]] awful Vipul Shah's last [[kino]] was good this one was just bad [[despite]] it's a [[buena]] story and is [[handle]] in a great [[routes]] Aatish Kapadia who adapted this [[cinematography]] from another gujarati play "Avjo Wahala Fari Malishu" made a good but [[lento]] pianful 2 and a half [[hour]] to watch there are a lot of flaws in this movie but it's [[however]] a [[artists]] songs are rather bleaked out and don't work well but they're still good [[holistic]] not a movie you [[should]] [[heartily]] watch it's still a story to take in to account and it's good if you're the relationship type pretty good movie with loads of flaws and humor that's really not needed even one bit --------------------------------------------- Result 3960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a Native film professor, I can honestly say that this is perhaps one of the worst films with Native content that I have ever viewed. I would rather get a root canal than view this film again. The use of stereotyping, uncreative attempts at utilizing portions of traditional coyote stories and poor camera work were only made worse by the glib uncreative story-line and bad script. The writer and director have displayed the worst parts of a colonized approach to portraying Native people and communities. If this person is Native, they need to go home and apologize to everyone they know for being an apple and for the internalized racism and poor sense of humor that they have developed. If this person is non-native, they need to seriously re-examine their white privilege and ask themselves if they are displaying unexamined, unintentional racism, or if they are intentionally being ignorant. My only hope is that the Native actors in this film had a good time and at least got paid for their efforts. If you want to see good Native films then check out: Christmas in the Clouds, Dance me Outside, Medicine River, PowWow Highway, Smoke Signals...to name just a few. --------------------------------------------- Result 3961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is difficult to watch in our fast-paced culture of the 21st century, but it is worth it for the messages that it conveys, chiefly the consequences and ramifications of technology upon society, specifically when that technology is used for warfare.

This movie presents a full circle cycle of dehumanization and rehumanization as influenced by the advent of technology and the subsequent deconstruction of civilization and therefore serves as a cautionary tale against the misuse of technology, but as the circle completes itself, familiar themes and sentiments pop up again to present self-serving rather than self-destructive ways that humanity may utilize technology.

Brilliant for it's time, the picture and sound quality may pose a challenge for some, but as a landmark in the history, development, and evolution of the sci-fi genre, it is a must. In the end, free will and free choice are once again posed to humanity as a means for controlling our own destiny rather than having it served to us by someone else or indeed, the state of

society itself, as shaped by world events.

Those who are downtrodden by what life throws their way sometimes tend to remain so, but yet there is always a glimmer of hope and continuity that remains, as this film posits.

As far as qualifying as sci-fi, one of the biggest common demoninators of that genre is it's speculative nature. It asks us the questions, what if these events happened this way, and what effect would it have on society or the individuals within it? How would we react?

As far as influence, this film projects those speculative sciences that make sci-fi as unique as it is and keeps us asking those important questions. --------------------------------------------- Result 3962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Okay]], as a [[long]] [[time]] [[Disney]] [[fan]], I really -hate- direct-to-video [[Disney]] sequels. Walt [[HIMSELF]] didn't believe in them. He [[believed]] in "[[AND]] THEY LIVED [[HAPPILY]] EVER [[AFTER]]" being the end of it. But this one...REALLY ticked the [[taco]]. There were so [[many]] ripoffs of other Disney [[films]] in this, it wasn't [[funny]]. Quick summary, if you don't already know...: Melody, the daughter of Ariel and Prince [[Eric]], is born. Ursula's [[sister]], Morganna (who basically looks like Ursula, if she were to dye herself green and go on the Ally Macbeal [[starvation]] diet) shows up and, after trying to do the newborn tyke in, and [[failing]], prophesizes doom for the characters. After that ordeal, Ariel goes into a lapse of being like her father, and [[refuses]] to tell Melody about her mermaid heritage, and later on, [[forbids]] her to go near the sea. Well surprise surprise. Melody finds out, being the [[stubborn]] brat she is, and [[runs]] away, then makes a [[deal]] with Morgana to [[become]] a mermaid, in exchange for something. (Gee does THAT [[sound]] familiar?) She [[becomes]] one, but in her half of the [[bargain]], has to [[retrieve]] her granddaddy's Trident and [[bring]] it back to the [[sea]] witch. While doing THIS, she runs into a [[couple]] of outcast [[animals]], a penguin and a walrus named Timon and Pumb--huh? [[wait]]...no! that's not Timon and Pumbaa! or is it? [[Could]] of fooled me. Anyway, i'd like to reveal more, but pretty much anything that could be guessed to happen does. [[OK]] so...long story short. This movie "borrows" too much from other ([[better]]) [[Disney]] [[films]]...and does it [[horribly]]. [[Come]] on...Tip and Dash? Why not just make Dash obscenely flatulent and make it an [[even]] more obvious ripoff! [[Ugh]]. Not to mention, the total character [[butchery]] of Ariel's persona. She's gone from being a freespirited, headstrong woman, to a clone of her father. [[Not]] good at all...they're basically telling us the sweet, firey little mermaid we've known to grow and love is dead. Plus Melody herself isn't such a great character either...she's damned annoying! And bratty! Not to mention what they've done to Flounder. Ugh...anyway if you decide to see this piece of created-mainly-for-profit-reasons, no-imagination, Eisner-sponsored c******t, I suggest maybe waiting 'till its on the Disney channel or some other tv station. Because, it's not even worth the price of a rental.

* out of ***** stars. [[Okey]], as a [[protracted]] [[times]] [[Disneyland]] [[breather]], I really -hate- direct-to-video [[Disneyland]] sequels. Walt [[MYSELF]] didn't believe in them. He [[felt]] in "[[UND]] THEY LIVED [[MERCIFULLY]] EVER [[SUBSEQUENTLY]]" being the end of it. But this one...REALLY ticked the [[taku]]. There were so [[several]] ripoffs of other Disney [[film]] in this, it wasn't [[hilarious]]. Quick summary, if you don't already know...: Melody, the daughter of Ariel and Prince [[Erik]], is born. Ursula's [[sisters]], Morganna (who basically looks like Ursula, if she were to dye herself green and go on the Ally Macbeal [[famine]] diet) shows up and, after trying to do the newborn tyke in, and [[defect]], prophesizes doom for the characters. After that ordeal, Ariel goes into a lapse of being like her father, and [[deny]] to tell Melody about her mermaid heritage, and later on, [[proscribed]] her to go near the sea. Well surprise surprise. Melody finds out, being the [[diehard]] brat she is, and [[manages]] away, then makes a [[deals]] with Morgana to [[becomes]] a mermaid, in exchange for something. (Gee does THAT [[sounds]] familiar?) She [[become]] one, but in her half of the [[negotiators]], has to [[recovered]] her granddaddy's Trident and [[brings]] it back to the [[seas]] witch. While doing THIS, she runs into a [[pair]] of outcast [[wildlife]], a penguin and a walrus named Timon and Pumb--huh? [[await]]...no! that's not Timon and Pumbaa! or is it? [[Wo]] of fooled me. Anyway, i'd like to reveal more, but pretty much anything that could be guessed to happen does. [[ALLRIGHT]] so...long story short. This movie "borrows" too much from other ([[optimum]]) [[Disneyland]] [[kino]]...and does it [[unimaginably]]. [[Arrive]] on...Tip and Dash? Why not just make Dash obscenely flatulent and make it an [[yet]] more obvious ripoff! [[Yuck]]. Not to mention, the total character [[slaughterhouse]] of Ariel's persona. She's gone from being a freespirited, headstrong woman, to a clone of her father. [[No]] good at all...they're basically telling us the sweet, firey little mermaid we've known to grow and love is dead. Plus Melody herself isn't such a great character either...she's damned annoying! And bratty! Not to mention what they've done to Flounder. Ugh...anyway if you decide to see this piece of created-mainly-for-profit-reasons, no-imagination, Eisner-sponsored c******t, I suggest maybe waiting 'till its on the Disney channel or some other tv station. Because, it's not even worth the price of a rental.

* out of ***** stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I went in to this movie thinking it was going to be the next Clerks, but [[left]] feeling [[let]] down. The [[humor]] was [[weak]] and the characters fairly flat. That isn't to say it was all bad, the idea of the dating service in the grocery store [[seemed]] like pretty [[fertile]] material, but the director switched focus to the cliche'd "save the Mom-and-Pop store from the evil corporation guy". I [[felt]] like if he would have just stuck with the dating service plot, he would have come out with a much more [[memorable]] movie. Now, to do the film justice, I am from the Rochester area and loved the way he portrayed Webster. In fact, the best Kevin Smith (of Clerks) homage here was giving props to his hometown. Webster, NY is to Checkout what Red Bank, NJ is to Clerks. The director wisely threw in a date at Nick Tahou's. Trust me, as far as things to do in Rochester, a garbage plate is at the top of the list. I was lucky enough to see this film at the Little in Rochester so everybody knew when the odes to the town came up and appreciated them. I went in to this movie thinking it was going to be the next Clerks, but [[gauche]] feeling [[leaving]] down. The [[humour]] was [[feeble]] and the characters fairly flat. That isn't to say it was all bad, the idea of the dating service in the grocery store [[looked]] like pretty [[fecund]] material, but the director switched focus to the cliche'd "save the Mom-and-Pop store from the evil corporation guy". I [[believed]] like if he would have just stuck with the dating service plot, he would have come out with a much more [[unforgettable]] movie. Now, to do the film justice, I am from the Rochester area and loved the way he portrayed Webster. In fact, the best Kevin Smith (of Clerks) homage here was giving props to his hometown. Webster, NY is to Checkout what Red Bank, NJ is to Clerks. The director wisely threw in a date at Nick Tahou's. Trust me, as far as things to do in Rochester, a garbage plate is at the top of the list. I was lucky enough to see this film at the Little in Rochester so everybody knew when the odes to the town came up and appreciated them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Wow]]. I do not [[think]] I have ever [[seen]] a [[movie]] with so many [[great]] actors that had such a [[pivotal]] role so miscast. Justin Timberlake is [[perhaps]] the single [[worst]] actor to [[land]] a bigtime role in a [[movie]] with the [[star]] power and [[money]] behind it that Edison had.

His acting was [[PAINFUL]] to [[observe]]. The story was OK and all the other characters were [[played]] by [[professional]] [[actors]], [[heck]], even LL Cool J was fine [[since]] he has had [[numerous]] [[small]] parts to [[cut]] his teeth on. How the director and movie [[company]] [[figured]] that Timberlake was ready for this role there is no way to [[comprehend]].

His [[character]] [[ruins]] the [[entire]] [[experience]] since [[every]] [[time]] he is on screen you are [[actually]] rooting for the corrupt [[cops]] to [[cap]] his sorry [[ass]], and he is [[supposed]] to be the [[hero]]... I [[would]] not waste [[money]] on this one at the [[theater]] or on video. [[MAYBE]] if you have HBO and have NOTHING else to do at 2am on a [[Saturday]] [[night]] and you are [[drunk]] and stoned, this may be OK.

Watching Timberlake in this role was like watching a human 'Kermit the Frog' [[act]] in a Hollywood Blockbuster, just didn't [[work]] at all. [[Whoo]]. I do not [[ideas]] I have ever [[noticed]] a [[filmmaking]] with so many [[marvellous]] actors that had such a [[critical]] role so miscast. Justin Timberlake is [[conceivably]] the single [[meanest]] actor to [[lands]] a bigtime role in a [[filmmaking]] with the [[stars]] power and [[cash]] behind it that Edison had.

His acting was [[HURTFUL]] to [[observation]]. The story was OK and all the other characters were [[effected]] by [[occupational]] [[players]], [[devil]], even LL Cool J was fine [[because]] he has had [[several]] [[minor]] parts to [[chopping]] his teeth on. How the director and movie [[corporation]] [[imagined]] that Timberlake was ready for this role there is no way to [[understanding]].

His [[characters]] [[rubble]] the [[total]] [[enjoying]] since [[all]] [[moment]] he is on screen you are [[genuinely]] rooting for the corrupt [[constable]] to [[ceilings]] his sorry [[backside]], and he is [[suspected]] to be the [[heroin]]... I [[should]] not waste [[cash]] on this one at the [[drama]] or on video. [[CONCEIVABLY]] if you have HBO and have NOTHING else to do at 2am on a [[Saturdays]] [[nocturne]] and you are [[drunken]] and stoned, this may be OK.

Watching Timberlake in this role was like watching a human 'Kermit the Frog' [[ley]] in a Hollywood Blockbuster, just didn't [[cooperation]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3965 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this film on Sky Cinema not too long ago.. I must admit, it was a really good Western which features 2 of the big names.. On one side, there's Charlton Heston, playing the infamous and retired lawman Samuel Burgade. On the other.. The late James Coburn playing the villainous Zach Provo.. seeking revenge on Burgade no matter what the cost..!

The good thing about this film was there was some really good characters.. Most of the actors played it out really well.. Especially James Coburn, who I find that he was really mean in this film.. But that how it was..

Christopher Mitchum, who I've seen everywhere in other films.. Playing Hal Brickman.. I felt his character was left out in the cold, but he manage to get himself back in by teaming up with Burgade, to bring down Provo's posse's!

All in all, it was a great film.. Very good to watch.. Great score from the late Jerry Goldsmith..

Wonderful piece of Western persona..! 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[saw]] this movie recently because a friend brought it with him from NYC. After 30 minutes, I said to him," You've got to be kidding. Is this some sort of [[joke]]?" He thought it was good. I told him that I thought it was probably one of the silliest movies ever made. "What was it supposed to be?" I asked. "A propaganda [[movie]] made for children?" The plot is stupid. The acting is the [[worst]] ever for most of the principals and frankly people who look at this [[sort]] of [[tripe]] and think it has anything to do with life, love or even afterlife, of which it offers an incredibly [[idiotic]] view...need some psychiatric help. Please, if someone tries to get you to stick this in your DVD or Video player, consider it like you would a virus introduced into your computer...it won't destroy your player but it will destroy your evening. If they had made Razzies in the '40s, this would have won in every category. (PS. It also goes under the dubious sobriquet of "Stairway to Heaven.") I [[seen]] this movie recently because a friend brought it with him from NYC. After 30 minutes, I said to him," You've got to be kidding. Is this some sort of [[farce]]?" He thought it was good. I told him that I thought it was probably one of the silliest movies ever made. "What was it supposed to be?" I asked. "A propaganda [[filmmaking]] made for children?" The plot is stupid. The acting is the [[gravest]] ever for most of the principals and frankly people who look at this [[genre]] of [[gut]] and think it has anything to do with life, love or even afterlife, of which it offers an incredibly [[farcical]] view...need some psychiatric help. Please, if someone tries to get you to stick this in your DVD or Video player, consider it like you would a virus introduced into your computer...it won't destroy your player but it will destroy your evening. If they had made Razzies in the '40s, this would have won in every category. (PS. It also goes under the dubious sobriquet of "Stairway to Heaven.") --------------------------------------------- Result 3967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a single [[star]] only because it was impossible to give it less.

Scientists have [[developed]] a formula for [[replicating]] any organism. In their lab(a [[run]] down [[warehouse]] in L.A.), they create a T-Rex. A [[group]] of industrial [[spies]] break in to steal the formula and the [[remainder]] of the [[film]] is one [[endless]] foot [[chase]].

Of course the T-Rex(a rubber puppet)gets loose and [[commences]] to wipe out the cast. It has the amazing ability to [[sneak]] up within 2 or 3 [[feet]] of [[someone]] without them noticing and then [[promptly]] bites their [[head]] off.

One cast member escapes in a police car and spends the remainder of the film [[driving]] aimlessly through the city. She is of such [[superior]] [[mental]] ability that she can't [[even]] [[operate]] the [[radio]]. She never makes any [[attempt]] to drive to a substation or a [[donut]] [[shop]] and appears [[hopelessly]] [[lost]].

The T-Rex wreaks [[havoc]] throughout the [[city]], there are [[blazing]] [[gun]] [[battles]] and buildings([[cardboard]] mock-ups)blowing up, but a [[single]] police [[car]], or the army, nor [[anyone]] [[else]] ever [[shows]] up. Such [[activity]] [[must]] be commonplace in Los Angeles.

We can only [[hope]] that a sequel isn't [[planned]]. I [[delivered]] this [[cinematographic]] a single [[stars]] only because it was impossible to give it less.

Scientists have [[worded]] a formula for [[reproducing]] any organism. In their lab(a [[executing]] down [[depot]] in L.A.), they create a T-Rex. A [[cluster]] of industrial [[espionage]] break in to steal the formula and the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] is one [[limitless]] foot [[chases]].

Of course the T-Rex(a rubber puppet)gets loose and [[commencement]] to wipe out the cast. It has the amazing ability to [[infiltration]] up within 2 or 3 [[foot]] of [[anyone]] without them noticing and then [[timely]] bites their [[chief]] off.

One cast member escapes in a police car and spends the remainder of the film [[drive]] aimlessly through the city. She is of such [[supreme]] [[psychological]] ability that she can't [[yet]] [[exploiting]] the [[radios]]. She never makes any [[strives]] to drive to a substation or a [[doughnut]] [[stores]] and appears [[irreparably]] [[forfeited]].

The T-Rex wreaks [[devastation]] throughout the [[ville]], there are [[burning]] [[gunpoint]] [[struggles]] and buildings([[luge]] mock-ups)blowing up, but a [[lonely]] police [[vehicular]], or the army, nor [[somebody]] [[otherwise]] ever [[denotes]] up. Such [[activities]] [[owes]] be commonplace in Los Angeles.

We can only [[esperanza]] that a sequel isn't [[anticipated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3968 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This is probably the worst [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]], (yes it's [[even]] [[worse]] than Dungeons and [[Dragons]] and any [[film]] [[starring]] Kevin Costner.)

[[Chris]] [[Rock]] [[looked]] very uncomfortable [[throughout]] this whole [[film]], and his [[supporting]] [[actors]] didn't even [[look]] like they were [[trying]] to [[act]]. [[Chris]] [[Rock]] is a [[wonderful]] stand-up [[comedian]], but he just can't transfer his talent to this film, which [[probably]] only has two [[strained]] [[laughs]] in the [[whole]] [[picture]].

[[If]] you haven't [[watched]] this [[film]] [[yet]], [[avoid]] it like the [[plague]]. Go do something constructive and more interesting like [[watching]] the weather [[channel]] or [[watching]] paint [[dry]] on a brick wall.

[[For]] Chris' [[efforts]] I give it a 2/10!

This is probably the worst [[filmmaking]] I have ever [[watched]], (yes it's [[yet]] [[pire]] than Dungeons and [[Dragoons]] and any [[movies]] [[featuring]] Kevin Costner.)

[[Chrissy]] [[Rocks]] [[seemed]] very uncomfortable [[around]] this whole [[filmmaking]], and his [[helped]] [[players]] didn't even [[peek]] like they were [[try]] to [[ley]]. [[Chrissy]] [[Rocks]] is a [[sumptuous]] stand-up [[comedy]], but he just can't transfer his talent to this film, which [[admittedly]] only has two [[tensed]] [[chuckles]] in the [[together]] [[imagery]].

[[Though]] you haven't [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] [[however]], [[avoided]] it like the [[pox]]. Go do something constructive and more interesting like [[staring]] the weather [[chanel]] or [[staring]] paint [[driest]] on a brick wall.

[[During]] Chris' [[action]] I give it a 2/10!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Everybody's got [[bills]] to [[pay]], and that [[includes]] [[Christopher]] Walken.

[[In]] Vietnam, a group a [[soldiers]] discover that the war is over and are [[heading]] back home when they spot a bunch of POWs, including [[Christopher]] Walken. Following a Mad Max 3 (!) Thunderdome [[fight]], and a short [[massacre]] [[later]]. Walken and some [[Colombian]] [[guy]] [[split]] a dollar bill [[promising]] something or other.

Cut to the [[present]] (1991), and [[Colombian]] guy is leading a revolution against El [[Presidente]]. He's successful at first, but after El [[Presidente]] threatens to crush folks with a [[tank]], he's [[forced]] to surrender and is [[shot]] in the head on [[live]] television. This is shown in full [[gory]] [[detail]] as a news flash on [[American]] telly, which [[leads]] Walken to assemble the [[old]] squad ([[even]] [[though]] he wasn't [[actually]] part of that squad to [[begin]] with), in [[order]] to invade Colombia and gun down thousands of people.

McBain is a monumentally stupid film, but for all that it's [[also]] a good laugh, and [[action]] [[packed]] too. This is one of those movies where logic is [[given]] a [[wide]] berth - how else [[could]] Walken shoot a fighter [[pilot]] in the [[head]] from another [[plane]] without suffering from decompression, or even [[breaking]] a window? [[Also]], it seems that these guys can gun down scores of drug dealers in [[New]] York without the police [[bothering]].

There's plenty of b-movie [[madness]] to chew on here, from Michael Ironside's [[diabolical]] acting in the [[Vietnam]] sequence, to the [[heroic]] but entirely pointless [[death]] of one of the heroes, to the side splitting confrontation between Walken and El Presidente, and let's not [[forget]] the impassioned speech by the sister of the rebel leader, being watched on television in America (nearly brought a brown tear to my nether-eye, that bit).

It's out there for a quid. Buy it if you have a sense of humour. See how many times you can spot the camera crew too. Everybody's got [[bill]] to [[payroll]], and that [[involves]] [[Cristobal]] Walken.

[[At]] Vietnam, a group a [[servicemen]] discover that the war is over and are [[letterhead]] back home when they spot a bunch of POWs, including [[Christophe]] Walken. Following a Mad Max 3 (!) Thunderdome [[battle]], and a short [[bloodbath]] [[subsequently]]. Walken and some [[Columbian]] [[boy]] [[splitting]] a dollar bill [[promise]] something or other.

Cut to the [[presented]] (1991), and [[Columbian]] guy is leading a revolution against El [[Chairwoman]]. He's successful at first, but after El [[Chairman]] threatens to crush folks with a [[reservoir]], he's [[obliged]] to surrender and is [[filmed]] in the head on [[viva]] television. This is shown in full [[gori]] [[details]] as a news flash on [[Americana]] telly, which [[leeds]] Walken to assemble the [[former]] squad ([[yet]] [[if]] he wasn't [[indeed]] part of that squad to [[embark]] with), in [[decree]] to invade Colombia and gun down thousands of people.

McBain is a monumentally stupid film, but for all that it's [[apart]] a good laugh, and [[efforts]] [[packing]] too. This is one of those movies where logic is [[gave]] a [[big]] berth - how else [[wo]] Walken shoot a fighter [[experimental]] in the [[leiter]] from another [[airline]] without suffering from decompression, or even [[violating]] a window? [[Additionally]], it seems that these guys can gun down scores of drug dealers in [[Novel]] York without the police [[hassling]].

There's plenty of b-movie [[insanity]] to chew on here, from Michael Ironside's [[unholy]] acting in the [[Viet]] sequence, to the [[heroes]] but entirely pointless [[killings]] of one of the heroes, to the side splitting confrontation between Walken and El Presidente, and let's not [[forgotten]] the impassioned speech by the sister of the rebel leader, being watched on television in America (nearly brought a brown tear to my nether-eye, that bit).

It's out there for a quid. Buy it if you have a sense of humour. See how many times you can spot the camera crew too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3970 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Return to Cabin by the Lake does not, in any way, stand up to the original. With only one main character (Stanley) returning for the sequal, the film is not even worth the 2 hours of your time. I am a huge fan of the first film, the story line and acting was really good, but this is one movie that I will never again watch. It is basically equal to what the sequals to Urban Legends and Blair Witch were like, but with much worse acting. I've personally seen better acting in soap operas, it is so pitiful that you just have to laugh. I, in no way, recommend this movie to anyone, watching it will just detract from the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 3971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] this [[film]] [[really]] [[tries]] to hard. if your going to make a horror film, at [[least]] give it a [[reason]] to [[believe]] in to [[hook]] the [[viewer]].

you wait and [[wait]] through the [[film]] [[expecting]] for some [[grand]] explanation but it doesn't. [[instead]] it [[tries]] to be too [[clever]] [[ending]] and not revealing [[anything]].

what was the point of the [[movie]] ? where it's actually going ? and more importantly what the [[hell]] was going on . . .

why were they there and how does it [[tie]] into [[anything]]? just another [[weak]] sci-fi [[horror]]. i [[love]] the [[fake]] [[reviews]] on IMDb saying how [[great]] it is by [[related]] [[press]] [[releases]] to bump the [[movie]] ([[either]] that or people have low horizons). it's not worth your 2hrs at all.

i'm not saying the [[film]] is [[better]] than the [[fragile]], but at [[least]] that [[gave]] you reasoning and why things happened and has an end [[result]]. this doesn't and it just waffle's on with [[tons]] of padding to [[make]] everything feel scary. this film is about as low as when a stranger [[calls]]. god that was lame too.

[[big]] tip, if your gonna make a horror, make it [[believable]] with [[reasoning]] and [[explain]] to the [[viewer]] what's [[going]] on, so they have a [[hook]] into your story. because if there's no [[reasoning]] or believability then there's no firm [[hold]] on [[anything]] and it can't be [[scary]]. no [[disrespect]] to the cast or crew cause they did a good job. it's just the poor [[writing]]. this [[filmmaking]] [[truthfully]] [[try]] to hard. if your going to make a horror film, at [[fewer]] give it a [[raison]] to [[reckon]] in to [[hooks]] the [[beholder]].

you wait and [[expecting]] through the [[filmmaking]] [[awaiting]] for some [[vast]] explanation but it doesn't. [[however]] it [[try]] to be too [[canny]] [[terminated]] and not revealing [[nothing]].

what was the point of the [[filmmaking]] ? where it's actually going ? and more importantly what the [[inferno]] was going on . . .

why were they there and how does it [[tied]] into [[something]]? just another [[vulnerable]] sci-fi [[terror]]. i [[amore]] the [[faux]] [[review]] on IMDb saying how [[tremendous]] it is by [[tied]] [[journalism]] [[release]] to bump the [[flick]] ([[nor]] that or people have low horizons). it's not worth your 2hrs at all.

i'm not saying the [[filmmaking]] is [[best]] than the [[delicate]], but at [[lowest]] that [[handed]] you reasoning and why things happened and has an end [[consequence]]. this doesn't and it just waffle's on with [[ton]] of padding to [[deliver]] everything feel scary. this film is about as low as when a stranger [[asks]]. god that was lame too.

[[large]] tip, if your gonna make a horror, make it [[dependable]] with [[motivation]] and [[explains]] to the [[viewfinder]] what's [[go]] on, so they have a [[hooks]] into your story. because if there's no [[logic]] or believability then there's no firm [[holds]] on [[something]] and it can't be [[fearful]]. no [[scorn]] to the cast or crew cause they did a good job. it's just the poor [[handwriting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unless you are an Evangelical Christian then make like an Egyptian and avoid like the biblical plague.

Awful - why oh why does IMDb list the most favourable reviews at the top of the list - it was due to one of these that I have just wasted the end of what started out as good evening on this claptrap.

The plot premise started out strong enough - I was drawn into the film and was interested right up to the point where the Bible sermons took over. What a waste.

This film has so incensed me that I have registered with IMDb for the first time just to complain about it - I hope at least that by doing so I save someone else's evening.

Hay - what a Christian act on my part ;-) --------------------------------------------- Result 3973 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is such a great movie "Call Me Anna" because it shows how a person has suffered for so long without knowing what was wrong with her. For Patty Duke to come out in the publics eye and tell her story is an inspiration to those who suffer from this disease. I have a lot of respect for her as a person. The only thing I don't like is I can't get it on tape, I've tried looking for it but with no success. Any one know how to get it? --------------------------------------------- Result 3974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Where to begin? Anachronism? High tech cross bow with a scope in about 500AD? Arrows with explosive charges in 500AD? A monster Grendel that looks like a robocop and obviously never interacts with any of the weapons fired or swung against him? The heart torn out of his victim's chest without any sense of contact? Possibly the blond who would fit in on a recent fashion show with her make-up and streaked hair? The ancient Danish court represented in Classical Greek style? The queen played by Marina Sirtis more savaged by her makeup artist than by madness? The effects are way too weak to carry this story. There are some stories that don't mind or even benefit from cheap effects, but this Grendel isn't one of them.

What about characters who seem to jump about in their attitudes without motivation? A bravado idiot prince whose home has already been savaged more than once by the monster Grendel seems to have less respect for the danger he faces than Beowulf who was sent from afar from the land of the Geats to help the desperate Danes. In this it feels more like an old cowboy western than any kind of myth.

Beowulf is an ancient tale from an era with almost no literary tradition and much of both its sentiment and its drama is obscure. I suspect that any modern telling which doesn't make an intelligent attempt to penetrate the obscurity must fail. I didn't love the recent "Beowulf and Grendel" which sees Grendel essentially as human and sees Hrothgar and his Danes as too arrogant and stupid to recognize Grendel's attacks as well-justified vengeance, but I had to respect its revisionist position that Hrothgar's Danes were a bunch of macho thugs who never grasped, even after it was all over, that they had brought this nightmare on themselves, and therefore, the original story of Beowulf, as it was written, was a misrepresentation of the real story. I think there's a more complex meaning to be understood than that, but this "Grendel's" terrible secret that Grendel's attacks are tied to previous human sacrifice doesn't really bring us closer to the shame experienced by Hrothgar and the Danes.

This Beowulf has little to recommend it as traditional myth or as modern fantasy. I give it a 4: higher than it deserves, but always hopeful that a poor effort will draw attention by someone who is up to telling the story intelligently. In the meantime, Sci-Fi's movie-making seems to be following the NASA policy that it's better to build lots of probes that fail than a few that succeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 3975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a disappointment - [[none]] of the [[nuance]] of the [[original]]. The [[Brits]] just seem to be able to [[make]] a truly [[unsettling]] [[film]] with [[none]] of the over-the-top histrionics of the American version. The [[original]] [[series]] [[combined]] both creepy [[stories]] and subtlety of performance with [[great]] attention to [[lighting]] and settings. I have [[watched]] the series many [[times]] and am [[still]] enthralled.

[[Just]] another [[poor]] [[adaptation]] along the lines of the [[dreadful]] [[adaptation]] of "[[Cracker]]". [[Get]] hooked up with BBC America or BBC Canada and watch for such [[delights]] as [[Waking]] the [[Dead]], [[Spooks]], [[Silent]] Witness, and [[Judge]] [[John]] Deed. Watch the [[original]] [[Touching]] [[Evil]], then [[look]] for "[[Wire]] in the Blood" for more of the truly [[understated]], elegant performance of Robson [[Green]]. Hollywood [[needs]] to have a [[look]] at this [[actor]]! This was a disappointment - [[nos]] of the [[shade]] of the [[preliminary]]. The [[Uk]] just seem to be able to [[deliver]] a truly [[unnerving]] [[kino]] with [[nos]] of the over-the-top histrionics of the American version. The [[upfront]] [[serials]] [[combine]] both creepy [[storytelling]] and subtlety of performance with [[resplendent]] attention to [[lit]] and settings. I have [[observed]] the series many [[dates]] and am [[again]] enthralled.

[[Jen]] another [[poorest]] [[adjusting]] along the lines of the [[scary]] [[adaptations]] of "[[Cookie]]". [[Obtain]] hooked up with BBC America or BBC Canada and watch for such [[pleasures]] as [[Awakening]] the [[Decedent]], [[Spies]], [[Speechless]] Witness, and [[Justices]] [[Giovanni]] Deed. Watch the [[upfront]] [[Affects]] [[Demonic]], then [[peek]] for "[[Telegram]] in the Blood" for more of the truly [[underrated]], elegant performance of Robson [[Greene]]. Hollywood [[gotta]] to have a [[glance]] at this [[protagonist]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] 'Intervention' has helped me with my own addictions and [[recovery]]. I'm a middle-aged married [[father]] of two. I'm [[quite]] functional in my personal and professional [[life]]. Still, I have [[pain]] from my past that I [[use]] addictions to [[soothe]], and [[issues]] from which I am slowly recovering. When these [[addicts]] and their families share their lives with me, they help me to improve my life and my relationship with my family.

The [[show]], unlike many others, [[digs]] into the past of the addict and reveals [[events]] that probably caused their addiction. Many of us suffer because it's too scary to go back and do, as Alice Miller says, "the discovery and emotional acceptance of the truth in the individual and unique history of our childhood." The show deserves a lot of credit for at least getting this process started. This digging is painful and difficult, but worth it. [[So]] much coverage of [[addiction]] -- fictional and non-fictional -- seems to ignore the underlying [[issues]]. [[Often]] it's assumed that the addict just one day [[started]] to shoot up or whatever for [[fun]] or [[pleasure]] or self-interest, and now they can't stop. Not so: [[addictions]] are about [[killing]] [[pain]]. I can [[relate]] to the [[different]] events and [[hardships]] in people's [[lives]]. There are common [[themes]], and surprising exceptions. [[Many]] [[addicts]] have suffered [[miserable]] [[abuse]]. Some kids [[simply]] [[respond]] badly to divorce. To those who [[think]] that addiction is an over-reaction to a [[hardship]], I [[would]] just [[say]] that [[different]] people [[respond]] differently. [[Although]] some kids [[handle]] divorce well, others, like Cristy in the show, "collapse in a [[heap]] on the floor" and have their [[lives]] [[forever]] [[changed]] by the [[event]].

[[For]] [[example]], [[last]] night's [[counselor]] [[said]] that pretty [[young]] Andrea seeks validation from [[men]]. She [[strips]] for [[cash]] for a 75-year old neighbor and lets [[men]] abuse her. Sound familiar to [[anyone]]? The series is [[filled]] with [[information]] that we can [[use]] to [[understand]] our own motivations and make [[adjustments]] to our [[lives]]. Often it's those of us with smaller issues who [[suffer]] the longest. As they [[say]], [[even]] a [[stopped]] watch is right [[twice]] a day, but a [[slow]] watch can [[go]] undetected for [[quite]] a while, until it's [[made]] your [[life]] [[miserable]].

To the [[producers]]: [[Thank]] you for [[making]] the [[show]], for digging into the past, for the follow-ups. Also, the graphics, the format, and the theme music are brilliant.

To the addicts: thank you for your courage to share. Whether or not you have helped yourself, you have helped me. 'Intervention' has helped me with my own addictions and [[recuperation]]. I'm a middle-aged married [[fathers]] of two. I'm [[perfectly]] functional in my personal and professional [[vie]]. Still, I have [[heartache]] from my past that I [[utilise]] addictions to [[reassure]], and [[problem]] from which I am slowly recovering. When these [[zealots]] and their families share their lives with me, they help me to improve my life and my relationship with my family.

The [[shows]], unlike many others, [[excavate]] into the past of the addict and reveals [[incidents]] that probably caused their addiction. Many of us suffer because it's too scary to go back and do, as Alice Miller says, "the discovery and emotional acceptance of the truth in the individual and unique history of our childhood." The show deserves a lot of credit for at least getting this process started. This digging is painful and difficult, but worth it. [[Consequently]] much coverage of [[dependency]] -- fictional and non-fictional -- seems to ignore the underlying [[matters]]. [[Traditionally]] it's assumed that the addict just one day [[opened]] to shoot up or whatever for [[funny]] or [[delight]] or self-interest, and now they can't stop. Not so: [[dependence]] are about [[murdering]] [[grief]]. I can [[pertaining]] to the [[multiple]] events and [[sufferings]] in people's [[vie]]. There are common [[matters]], and surprising exceptions. [[Various]] [[junkies]] have suffered [[pathetic]] [[abuses]]. Some kids [[purely]] [[responds]] badly to divorce. To those who [[believe]] that addiction is an over-reaction to a [[distress]], I [[should]] just [[tell]] that [[various]] people [[answering]] differently. [[Though]] some kids [[manipulate]] divorce well, others, like Cristy in the show, "collapse in a [[battery]] on the floor" and have their [[life]] [[indefinitely]] [[amended]] by the [[phenomena]].

[[During]] [[instance]], [[final]] night's [[advisory]] [[asserted]] that pretty [[youthful]] Andrea seeks validation from [[males]]. She [[banding]] for [[money]] for a 75-year old neighbor and lets [[males]] abuse her. Sound familiar to [[someone]]? The series is [[filling]] with [[informations]] that we can [[utilise]] to [[understanding]] our own motivations and make [[adaptations]] to our [[life]]. Often it's those of us with smaller issues who [[undergo]] the longest. As they [[told]], [[yet]] a [[stops]] watch is right [[doubly]] a day, but a [[decelerate]] watch can [[going]] undetected for [[pretty]] a while, until it's [[introduced]] your [[vie]] [[pathetic]].

To the [[manufacturer]]: [[Appreciation]] you for [[doing]] the [[showings]], for digging into the past, for the follow-ups. Also, the graphics, the format, and the theme music are brilliant.

To the addicts: thank you for your courage to share. Whether or not you have helped yourself, you have helped me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] After reading all of the rave reviews about this film and a few that give it a so-so. I finally decided to throw in my no cents worth. I agree with most on the point that if it hadn't been for Lauren Lewis and Chris Ferry it would have been a [[disaster]]. [[Filmed]] in Mariette OH. just north of Dogpatch where all the real [[talent]] fled south down I-77 years ago, at least as far as a tank of gas would allow. I did get a chuckle from reviewers who subtly claim that they cerebrate a little better than most by claiming they followed the plot without an inkling of confusion. This wee tale by the Brothers Crook is like an old record with a skip in it. As an American I understand the difficulties Ind film artists have to face. A trip to Romania would have wiped out the budget for sure. Lets face it this whole film was a loop de loop of Claire in the gas station, Claire on the side of the road, Claire under the bleachers, Claire in the house, Claire in the cornfield, Claire at school. Claire here and Claire there. It almost became monotonous and would have if she had not been the best actor in the cast. Josh and Jeff have to make a living but don't write a two page script and turn it into an hour,twenty flick. Before writing another screenplay about dreaming ghosts watch an episode or two of Ghost Whisperer or something and get a little background. All of the cast except the above mentioned and a couple of others were engaged in their first and last film. Also, there is an appearance by co-director Jeff as he is in all his films. Just like Alfred Hitchcock, eh? One thing the film had going for it is that the cameraman seemed to have a fixation on Lauren Lewis' derrière. Well, with all sarcasm now satisfied I still recommend the film for the horror buff just to see this young actress in the formative time of her career (I hope)and that Chris Ferry has established himself as a villain worth watching. After reading all of the rave reviews about this film and a few that give it a so-so. I finally decided to throw in my no cents worth. I agree with most on the point that if it hadn't been for Lauren Lewis and Chris Ferry it would have been a [[cataclysm]]. [[Videotaped]] in Mariette OH. just north of Dogpatch where all the real [[talents]] fled south down I-77 years ago, at least as far as a tank of gas would allow. I did get a chuckle from reviewers who subtly claim that they cerebrate a little better than most by claiming they followed the plot without an inkling of confusion. This wee tale by the Brothers Crook is like an old record with a skip in it. As an American I understand the difficulties Ind film artists have to face. A trip to Romania would have wiped out the budget for sure. Lets face it this whole film was a loop de loop of Claire in the gas station, Claire on the side of the road, Claire under the bleachers, Claire in the house, Claire in the cornfield, Claire at school. Claire here and Claire there. It almost became monotonous and would have if she had not been the best actor in the cast. Josh and Jeff have to make a living but don't write a two page script and turn it into an hour,twenty flick. Before writing another screenplay about dreaming ghosts watch an episode or two of Ghost Whisperer or something and get a little background. All of the cast except the above mentioned and a couple of others were engaged in their first and last film. Also, there is an appearance by co-director Jeff as he is in all his films. Just like Alfred Hitchcock, eh? One thing the film had going for it is that the cameraman seemed to have a fixation on Lauren Lewis' derrière. Well, with all sarcasm now satisfied I still recommend the film for the horror buff just to see this young actress in the formative time of her career (I hope)and that Chris Ferry has established himself as a villain worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 3978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A trio of low-life criminals, led by Matt Dillon, botches a late-night burglary. They flee but quickly cross [[paths]] with the [[police]] who just happen to be in hot [[pursuit]] of a [[terrorist]]. Of course the [[police]] [[mistake]] the burglar gang for the [[terrorist]], the real terrorist [[gets]] away, and the burglars are forced to take refuge in a small dive of a bar, [[taking]] [[hostages]], unaware why the [[police]] are so intent on catching them. And guess who [[else]] has [[picked]] the bar as a [[sanctuary]] for the night?

Unbelievable? Absolutely. And it goes down hill from there. Spacey did [[acquire]] a good bit of acting talent; Matt Dillon, Faye Dunaway, Gary Sinise, Viggo Mortensen, and M. Emmett Walsh, but they're all wasted. Mostly because after all the [[characters]] get stuck in the bar, all they do for the [[remainder]] of the [[film]] is argue. [[Endlessly]] and aimlessly. Long before the conclusion of the film you've stopped giving a damn about what happens to them. A trio of low-life criminals, led by Matt Dillon, botches a late-night burglary. They flee but quickly cross [[avenues]] with the [[constabulary]] who just happen to be in hot [[chasing]] of a [[terrorists]]. Of course the [[cops]] [[blunder]] the burglar gang for the [[terrorists]], the real terrorist [[receives]] away, and the burglars are forced to take refuge in a small dive of a bar, [[take]] [[captives]], unaware why the [[nypd]] are so intent on catching them. And guess who [[otherwise]] has [[taken]] the bar as a [[haven]] for the night?

Unbelievable? Absolutely. And it goes down hill from there. Spacey did [[acquiring]] a good bit of acting talent; Matt Dillon, Faye Dunaway, Gary Sinise, Viggo Mortensen, and M. Emmett Walsh, but they're all wasted. Mostly because after all the [[trait]] get stuck in the bar, all they do for the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] is argue. [[Permanently]] and aimlessly. Long before the conclusion of the film you've stopped giving a damn about what happens to them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Greetings again from the darkness. Much [[anticipated]], [[twisted]] comedy from writer/director Richard Shepard is a coming out party for Pierce Brosnan the actor. That Bond guy is gone. This new guy is something else entirely!! Have read that Shepard thought Brosnan was too much the [[pretty]] [[boy]] for this [[plum]] role, but Brosnan [[proves]] to be the [[perfect]] Julian Noble, "Facilitator" ... and is anything but pretty! [[Do]] not [[underestimate]] how [[twisted]] the [[humor]] is in this one. If you go, expect punch lines and sight gags regarding all types of sex, killing, religion, sports, business and anything else you might deem politically incorrect. Brosnan takes an excellent [[script]] to another level with his [[marvelous]] facial gestures and physical movements. Even sitting on a hotel bed (with or without a sombrero) is a joy to behold.

Greg Kinnear is the straight guy to Brosnan's comic and has plenty of depth and comic timing to make this partnership click. Hope Davis has a small, but subtly effective supporting role as Kinnear's wife (what's with her name "Bean"?) who happens to get a little excited when she has a facilitator in her living room.

The visuals and settings are [[perfect]] - including a bullfight, racetrack and Denver suburb. And how often do we get The Killers and Xavier Cugat on the same soundtrack? This one is definitely not for everyone, but if your sense of humor is a bit off center and you enjoy risky film-making, it could be for you. Greetings again from the darkness. Much [[projected]], [[distorted]] comedy from writer/director Richard Shepard is a coming out party for Pierce Brosnan the actor. That Bond guy is gone. This new guy is something else entirely!! Have read that Shepard thought Brosnan was too much the [[quite]] [[dude]] for this [[prune]] role, but Brosnan [[testify]] to be the [[flawless]] Julian Noble, "Facilitator" ... and is anything but pretty! [[Doing]] not [[underrate]] how [[distorted]] the [[mood]] is in this one. If you go, expect punch lines and sight gags regarding all types of sex, killing, religion, sports, business and anything else you might deem politically incorrect. Brosnan takes an excellent [[scripts]] to another level with his [[wondrous]] facial gestures and physical movements. Even sitting on a hotel bed (with or without a sombrero) is a joy to behold.

Greg Kinnear is the straight guy to Brosnan's comic and has plenty of depth and comic timing to make this partnership click. Hope Davis has a small, but subtly effective supporting role as Kinnear's wife (what's with her name "Bean"?) who happens to get a little excited when she has a facilitator in her living room.

The visuals and settings are [[faultless]] - including a bullfight, racetrack and Denver suburb. And how often do we get The Killers and Xavier Cugat on the same soundtrack? This one is definitely not for everyone, but if your sense of humor is a bit off center and you enjoy risky film-making, it could be for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3980 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[think]] Charlotte Gainsbourg is one of the best [[performers]] in the [[world]]. I can't [[understand]] why some people [[say]] she's not. [[Boring]]....??? [[Maybe]] the one who [[said]] she's [[boring]] is because he/she is [[boring]]. She's a great [[actress]] and the movie was [[excellent]]. It has lots of [[wonderful]] [[ideas]] and very good performers. The direction was great. I [[imaging]] myself in the French [[environment]] with all the [[sophistication]] and perfume, flowers, [[churches]], problems, etc. When she goes to the sister's [[shop]] is [[simply]] amazing. Everything's great. We have a very good actress, [[wonderful]], for [[long]] time. Alain Chabat and [[Bernadette]] Lafont are [[perfect]]. I like him more than in his next movie LA SCIENCE DES RÊVES. And Eric Lartigau did a very good [[work]].

[[Ana]] I [[thinks]] Charlotte Gainsbourg is one of the best [[artists]] in the [[monde]]. I can't [[realise]] why some people [[tell]] she's not. [[Monotonous]]....??? [[Possibly]] the one who [[indicated]] she's [[bore]] is because he/she is [[bored]]. She's a great [[actor]] and the movie was [[wondrous]]. It has lots of [[brilliant]] [[idea]] and very good performers. The direction was great. I [[picture]] myself in the French [[environs]] with all the [[complexity]] and perfume, flowers, [[iglesias]], problems, etc. When she goes to the sister's [[boutique]] is [[purely]] amazing. Everything's great. We have a very good actress, [[awesome]], for [[longer]] time. Alain Chabat and [[Valeria]] Lafont are [[faultless]]. I like him more than in his next movie LA SCIENCE DES RÊVES. And Eric Lartigau did a very good [[collaborate]].

[[Anna]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I couldn't believe this terrible movie was actually made at all. With the worst actors you could find, the worst script written (Mark Frost & Sollace Mitchell) and by far the worst waste of time in viewing. I won't belabor the story as it's really not worth it. But I will elaborate on some of the performances and definitely the story. As to the story, it is very hard to believe that this bitty crazy schemer could actually do what she did. That in reality the wife couldn't defend herself against a little bitty of a thing. That the husband could actually find the nut case attractive at all. That the defense attorney could break every court rule there was and keep on doing it after the judge ordered the blankety blank to shut up. And the final result of the film is an insult to justice, movie codes, and the male species. The theme of this mess is let women do as they wish, kill whom they want, defend the killer and get away with it, while the guy rots in jail the innocent victim. Hard to believe that Sollace Mitchell, the director and a man, would even want to make this dribble.

As to the acting: Jordan Ladd, the killer, is awful. A loony toons, who does needlepoint during her murder trial (is this allowed in court?) She bored me to the hilt. One more look of her batting her eyes and indicating how innocent she was and I'd throw up. She's not even attractive enough for any guy to leave his wife. The husband, played on one level by Vincent Spano, just seems to look and act stupid most of the time. He was so predictable in his performance falling into the traps set for him by all the women surrounding him. The worst by far was Holland Taylor as the Defense Attourney. She over acted throughout the film and made a mockery of justice. If she would cross examine me anytime, I'd have told her to go take a hike. Everybody else in this sleazy film did their job as directed to do so.

I wish I could give this film a zero rating. However we are forced to start with 1. Too bad. Let's not have anymore painful watching films like this. Lifetime can do better then this, I know it.

This is a postscript: Made the mistake of turning this insipid movie on by mistake. As soon as I saw the bimbo Jordan Ladd I knew I'd seen it before and didn't like it or her. I not only turned the darn thing off but had to add my anger at people like Sollace Mitchell who wrote the screenplay but also directed this horrible flick. Doesen't anyone see that her/his message is that sickness pays. Being ill and going around killing people is okay with this director/writer. Totally making the male species idiots. Well, this male tells you to go stuff it somewhere painful. We're not all that stupid and will speak out to your so called movie, which in this person's mind deserves to be trashed.

And again this loser is shown. Why???? Can't you read the comments on this stupid and despicable movie? Are we constantly subjected to see the bimbo Jordan Ladd again and again? Get her off TV, films and out of sight. She's just terrible in every sense of the word. Phew!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Plenty has been [[written]] about Mamet's "The [[House]] of Games"; most of it good. I decided to revisit the flick to see how it held up after 17 years and was [[surprised]] at how much I enjoyed viewing it again. The film's success and durability probably has [[much]] to do with two [[principal]] ingredients which are [[always]] fun on [[film]]; a good [[story]] and a good scam. Mamet manages to bring his [[signature]] moodiness and [[obvious]] histrionics to the film while scamming us, the audience, and the mark simultaneously. Then he [[explains]] the art of conning only to do it again, etc. all the while [[building]] the story. "The House of Games", now a freebie on cable, is worth a look for [[first]] timers and an okay rerun for Mamet fans. (B+) Plenty has been [[authored]] about Mamet's "The [[Homes]] of Games"; most of it good. I decided to revisit the flick to see how it held up after 17 years and was [[horrified]] at how much I enjoyed viewing it again. The film's success and durability probably has [[very]] to do with two [[key]] ingredients which are [[invariably]] fun on [[kino]]; a good [[narratives]] and a good scam. Mamet manages to bring his [[signatures]] moodiness and [[flagrant]] histrionics to the film while scamming us, the audience, and the mark simultaneously. Then he [[explaining]] the art of conning only to do it again, etc. all the while [[constructing]] the story. "The House of Games", now a freebie on cable, is worth a look for [[frst]] timers and an okay rerun for Mamet fans. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 3983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] yeah right. Sammo Hung already acted in the main role in 1983's "Zu Warrios from the Magic Mountain". Now, 2001, he does it again with "Zu Warriors". But this time, he finally does it right. You seldom see him in wuxia, more often in classic eastern or crime slapstick. But this role simply does fit him! The ancient Chinese legend about zu mountain is not often represented in movies (as far as I know about movies translated for the west). Although, the legend contains a vast of interesting stories and possibilities. Straight said: you haven't seen a story alike yet in a modern movie! And that makes it so great! And wow: all the colors plus the enormously deep, right-into-the-heart going story makes you fall for this movie in an instant. The first time I watched it, I had to watch it again instantly, and I did. OK true, I didn't understand all of it the first time. But that makes it only better! You know, you didn't understand all of it, because there is so much spice in it! Therefor it is a pleasure for one self to watch it over and over again. And yeah, it grows deeper in your heart, the more often you watch it.

Summary: A story to love, characters you cry with, and truly: a movie you never forget! -- Editors note: well, I think I must watch it right now again :D --------------------------------------------- Result 3984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Born Again is a okay episode of Season 1. The [[reincarnation]] [[bit]], in my [[opinion]], is cool. The more I watch it, the more I like it, [[yet]] it will never [[rise]] above '[[Very]] Good' for me. Even [[though]] it is not very memorable, i'll [[always]] remember it as the [[reincarnation]] episode. Anyway, now I will say what is [[good]] and [[bad]] about this episode,

The [[Good]]: Oragami. [[Oh]] [[Yeah]]!

That Fish tank was [[nice]]. =]

Thrown out of a [[window]]. [[Very]] classy. x]

The [[Bad]]: [[Marry]] your Best Friend's [[wife]]!? O_O

What a [[random]] [[pick]] to reincarnate.

Why didn't the [[guy]] who [[died]] by having his scarf tangled up, [[try]] to [[take]] his scarf off [[instead]]?

[[Conclusion]]: [[Okay]] episode, not very memorable. 7/10 Born Again is a okay episode of Season 1. The [[redemption]] [[bitten]], in my [[vista]], is cool. The more I watch it, the more I like it, [[nonetheless]] it will never [[soared]] above '[[Hugely]] Good' for me. Even [[nevertheless]] it is not very memorable, i'll [[continuously]] remember it as the [[redemption]] episode. Anyway, now I will say what is [[alright]] and [[inclement]] about this episode,

The [[Buena]]: Oragami. [[Aw]] [[Yah]]!

That Fish tank was [[delightful]]. =]

Thrown out of a [[luna]]. [[Quite]] classy. x]

The [[Inclement]]: [[Wedding]] your Best Friend's [[women]]!? O_O

What a [[haphazard]] [[select]] to reincarnate.

Why didn't the [[man]] who [[dead]] by having his scarf tangled up, [[attempt]] to [[taking]] his scarf off [[alternatively]]?

[[Conclusions]]: [[Ok]] episode, not very memorable. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Eyes of the Werewolf (1999) is a really [[bad]] movie. The premise was real good but the [[overall]] [[execution]] was just [[terrible]]. I wished the filmmakers would have [[taken]] their time with this project instead of rushing it into production. Some blind dude gets some new eyes, bad thing is that they belong to a mean old werewolf. Nasty things begins to happen to the dude as he turns into a cheesy looking creature. Can he find a cure before his hot girlfriend finds out? Who is that weird little troll who helps him out and what's up with that female cop? If you really want to find out, check out Eyes of the Werewolf!

Not a bad [[idea]] for a movie. I just wished the filmmakers would have spent a lot for time in pre-production before they decided to shoot the movie. Eyes of the Werewolf (1999) is a really [[rotten]] movie. The premise was real good but the [[entire]] [[running]] was just [[scary]]. I wished the filmmakers would have [[picked]] their time with this project instead of rushing it into production. Some blind dude gets some new eyes, bad thing is that they belong to a mean old werewolf. Nasty things begins to happen to the dude as he turns into a cheesy looking creature. Can he find a cure before his hot girlfriend finds out? Who is that weird little troll who helps him out and what's up with that female cop? If you really want to find out, check out Eyes of the Werewolf!

Not a bad [[concept]] for a movie. I just wished the filmmakers would have spent a lot for time in pre-production before they decided to shoot the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3986 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[loved]] this [[film]], at first the slick graphics [[seemed]] [[odd]] with the [[grainy]] footage but I [[quickly]] [[got]] into it. There [[must]] have been thousands of hours of footage shot and I really [[admire]] the work [[done]] in [[cutting]] it down. If you're easily [[shocked]] by [[drugs]] or violence it might not be the [[film]] for you but there are some [[great]] [[characters]] here, (and some [[real]] [[tossers]]). [[Technically]] I liked it a lot too, they [[must]] have [[used]] a new de-interlacing [[algorithm]] or [[maybe]] it was just that the footage looked so [[dark]] anyway but I wasn't [[annoyed]] by the [[usual]] artifacts [[seen]] in [[video]] to [[film]] transfers. ([[Open]] Water drove me nuts, [[mostly]] because there are cheap, [[progressive]] [[cameras]] available now and I [[see]] no [[excuse]] in not [[shelling]] for one if you [[intend]] to screen in the [[cinema]]). [[Sorry]] that's my own little [[rant]]. I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] this [[film]] if you've ever been involved with the music scene, it has some [[tragic]] moments but most of it is [[hilarious]], I [[might]] be [[accused]] of laughing at others misfortune but it's a [[classic]] piece. I [[cared]] this [[films]], at first the slick graphics [[sounded]] [[weird]] with the [[fuzzy]] footage but I [[promptly]] [[ai]] into it. There [[ought]] have been thousands of hours of footage shot and I really [[admired]] the work [[completed]] in [[chopping]] it down. If you're easily [[horrified]] by [[medicines]] or violence it might not be the [[cinematography]] for you but there are some [[wondrous]] [[features]] here, (and some [[actual]] [[morons]]). [[Technologically]] I liked it a lot too, they [[gotta]] have [[employs]] a new de-interlacing [[algorithms]] or [[might]] it was just that the footage looked so [[gloom]] anyway but I wasn't [[outraged]] by the [[habitual]] artifacts [[watched]] in [[videotape]] to [[movie]] transfers. ([[Opens]] Water drove me nuts, [[basically]] because there are cheap, [[gradual]] [[camera]] available now and I [[consults]] no [[alibis]] in not [[bombarding]] for one if you [[aimed]] to screen in the [[kino]]). [[Apology]] that's my own little [[tirade]]. I [[undoubtedly]] [[recommending]] this [[cinematography]] if you've ever been involved with the music scene, it has some [[calamitous]] moments but most of it is [[comical]], I [[probability]] be [[charged]] of laughing at others misfortune but it's a [[typical]] piece. --------------------------------------------- Result 3987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw the last five or ten minutes of this film back in 1998 or 1999 one night when I was channel-surfing before going to bed, and really liked what I saw. Since then I've been on the lookout, scouring TV listings, flipping through DVD/VHS racks at stores, but didn't find a copy until recently when I found out some Internet stores sold it. Then, being a world-class procrastinator, I still didn't order it. Finally, I found a DVD copy in a Circuit City while visiting Portland, OR, a few weeks ago. Then it only took me about a month after returning home before sitting down and watching it.

So, what do I think about the film? It's good. Not as good as I remembered and hoped for, but still well worth the $9.99 it cost me. After seeing the whole film for the first time I rate it as a 7/10, with potential to become an 8/10. I'll have to be less sleepy then, and have a better sound system to avoid rewinding to catch some dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 3988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] People [[love]] the [[original]] story for its [[ending]]. The Hollywood style ending made this 99 version of 'A Dog of Flanders' just for kids movie. I didn't [[cry]] this time because the [[story]] was too Hollywood. Japanese TV series are much better. People [[iike]] the [[upfront]] story for its [[terminated]]. The Hollywood style ending made this 99 version of 'A Dog of Flanders' just for kids movie. I didn't [[outcry]] this time because the [[conte]] was too Hollywood. Japanese TV series are much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 3989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the novel, or anything other by Kurt Vonnegut, but I am now intending to start. This grips you from the very first frame, and does not let go until the end credits start rolling. Taking you places you don't expect, the plot is interesting throughout. The pacing is spot-on, nothing lasts too long, and this does a perfect job of balancing between unexpected twists and allowing the viewer to process what we've seen. It is well-told and well-thought out. I've never watched a film that I feel I could particularly compare this to. It is intense and exciting, as well as funny and sad. The acting is excellent, Nolte absolutely shines, Goodman again proves that he doesn't have to go for laughs, and Lee and Arkin are spellbinding. I could go on, really... no role is treated to a less than stellar performance. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and all of the visuals are great, with a couple of unforgettable and astonishing ones. I am going to go for other movies directed by Keith Gordon, as well as the other two apparently related to this, through the author of the books. There is one scene of sexuality, and a lot disturbing and unsettling content in this. I recommend this to anyone who can appreciate it; it is not pleasant. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Uggh! I really wasn't that impressed by this film, though I must [[admit]] that it is technically well made. It does get a 7 for very high production values, but as for entertainment values, it is [[rather]] [[poor]]. In [[fact]], I [[consider]] this one of the most [[overrated]] [[films]] of the 50s. It won the Oscar for Best Picture, but the film is just boring at times with so much dancing and dancing and dancing. That's because unlike some musicals that have a reasonable number of songs along with a strong story and acting (such as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS), this movie is almost all singing and dancing. In fact, this film has about the longest song and dance number in history and if you aren't into this, the film will quickly bore you. Give me more story! As a result, with overblown production numbers and a weak story, this film is like a steady diet of meringue--it just doesn't satisfy in the long run.

To think...this is the film that beat out "A Streetcar Named Desire" and "A Place in the Sun" for Best Picture! And, to make matters worse, "The African Queen" and "Ace in the Hole" weren't even nominated in this category! Even more amazing to me is that "Ace in the Hole" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though "An American in Paris" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song. Uggh! I really wasn't that impressed by this film, though I must [[concede]] that it is technically well made. It does get a 7 for very high production values, but as for entertainment values, it is [[quite]] [[pauper]]. In [[facto]], I [[contemplate]] this one of the most [[overstated]] [[cinematographic]] of the 50s. It won the Oscar for Best Picture, but the film is just boring at times with so much dancing and dancing and dancing. That's because unlike some musicals that have a reasonable number of songs along with a strong story and acting (such as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS), this movie is almost all singing and dancing. In fact, this film has about the longest song and dance number in history and if you aren't into this, the film will quickly bore you. Give me more story! As a result, with overblown production numbers and a weak story, this film is like a steady diet of meringue--it just doesn't satisfy in the long run.

To think...this is the film that beat out "A Streetcar Named Desire" and "A Place in the Sun" for Best Picture! And, to make matters worse, "The African Queen" and "Ace in the Hole" weren't even nominated in this category! Even more amazing to me is that "Ace in the Hole" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though "An American in Paris" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song. --------------------------------------------- Result 3991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] "Why did they make them so big? Why didn't they just give the money to the poor?" The question about cathedrals was [[asked]] by a student to Mr. Harvey during a school field trip to Salisbury [[Cathedral]]. "That's a good question," he replied. "Partly to inspire them - to get them to look up with awe." I'm not sure that cathedrals have that impact on everyone, but this movie certainly had that impact on me. It was [[awesome]]!

It didn't [[start]] out that way. For a while it seemed to be little more than a depiction of - well - a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. If you've ever been on a high school field trip to anywhere this is basically it. You have a group of largely disinterested kids just happy to be out of school for a day, the bus driver who's driven crazy by them and some teachers trying desperately to keep it all under control. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt was my initial reaction. I figured that in the end this was going to be a typical story of a teacher managing to inspire a group of disinterested students. YAWN! But it turns out to be so [[much]] more! Timothy Spall was brilliant as Mr. Harvey - a sombre, unsmiling teacher with a strange fascination for cathedrals. Over the course of the movie, his story slowly comes out and becomes the focal point of the story. We also get introduced to some of the troubled students - most notably Helen, also brilliantly played by Nathalie Press, who's into self-mutilation.

This isn't a religious movie, but it includes some powerful reflections on religious themes. When Harvey's colleague Jonathon (played by Ben Miles) says "I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't try to force it on anyone else" Harvey replies, "that isn't tolerance - it's indifference!" - which is, in fact (in my opinion) what often passes for religious tolerance in our society. There are scenes of reconciliation between various characters, and the final scene of the movie was brilliant. As Harvey climbs back on the bus, director Susanna White has the camera slowly pan upwards, so that the final shot is simply of the sky - hearkening back to Harvey's comment that the purpose of the cathedral is to get people to look up in awe. The cathedral accomplishes its goal. We look up into the universe in awe, seeking something greater than ourselves, however we choose to define it. This is a very powerful and very inspiring movie. 9/10 "Why did they make them so big? Why didn't they just give the money to the poor?" The question about cathedrals was [[solicited]] by a student to Mr. Harvey during a school field trip to Salisbury [[Basilica]]. "That's a good question," he replied. "Partly to inspire them - to get them to look up with awe." I'm not sure that cathedrals have that impact on everyone, but this movie certainly had that impact on me. It was [[wondrous]]!

It didn't [[embark]] out that way. For a while it seemed to be little more than a depiction of - well - a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. If you've ever been on a high school field trip to anywhere this is basically it. You have a group of largely disinterested kids just happy to be out of school for a day, the bus driver who's driven crazy by them and some teachers trying desperately to keep it all under control. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt was my initial reaction. I figured that in the end this was going to be a typical story of a teacher managing to inspire a group of disinterested students. YAWN! But it turns out to be so [[very]] more! Timothy Spall was brilliant as Mr. Harvey - a sombre, unsmiling teacher with a strange fascination for cathedrals. Over the course of the movie, his story slowly comes out and becomes the focal point of the story. We also get introduced to some of the troubled students - most notably Helen, also brilliantly played by Nathalie Press, who's into self-mutilation.

This isn't a religious movie, but it includes some powerful reflections on religious themes. When Harvey's colleague Jonathon (played by Ben Miles) says "I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't try to force it on anyone else" Harvey replies, "that isn't tolerance - it's indifference!" - which is, in fact (in my opinion) what often passes for religious tolerance in our society. There are scenes of reconciliation between various characters, and the final scene of the movie was brilliant. As Harvey climbs back on the bus, director Susanna White has the camera slowly pan upwards, so that the final shot is simply of the sky - hearkening back to Harvey's comment that the purpose of the cathedral is to get people to look up in awe. The cathedral accomplishes its goal. We look up into the universe in awe, seeking something greater than ourselves, however we choose to define it. This is a very powerful and very inspiring movie. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3992 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (You'll know what I mean after you've seen Red Eye...)

Overall, Red Eye was a better-than-expected thriller. It gets off to a slow start, and slowly builds. But by the time it was over, it's a thumper!

It's hard to exactly define what makes this thriller as... thrilling as I found it. Except that, simply put, the director did a creditable job of pulling you into the action of what would otherwise have been a run-of-the-mill plot. I rather tended to forget I was watching a movie. That says a lot.

Other factors, I think, are the "closeness" of victim and bad guy... and that over time, you begin to really relate to the victim. A scant 8 out of 10, more like a 7.5... but that's pretty good! --------------------------------------------- Result 3993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I found out there was a movie that had both my favorite actresses Meryl Streep and Wynona Ryder, I went through the roof!But I had a hard fall after watching this lame movie and I still have the bruise.First of all the character that Jeremy Irons (an actor I still admire even after this disappointment)plays was just awful. He treated his family like crap, especially his sister, played by Glenn Close. I could not get close or sympathize with any of the characters and I'm no prude, but the sex scenes were really unnecessary or they could have been toned down. Wynona and Antonio's characters could have been developed a lot more and their romance could have been much more passionate. And what was with Meryl's character and her "mystical powers"? Why didn't they go into this more? This film had a lot of dead ends and the bottom line is that this is a really lousy movie and there was a lot of wasted talent here. --------------------------------------------- Result 3994 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As it is often the [[case]], the impressive and explosive trailers of Asian films [[add]] up to [[nothing]] more than lackluster stories. Similar to Unleashed (which was great,) [[Dog]] Bite [[Dog]] tells a story where [[men]] are raised as [[ferocious]] savage dogs that [[carry]] out their master's bidding. The main [[characters]], an [[emotionally]] undeveloped, amoral [[killer]] who is [[matched]] against an equally [[unstable]] police [[officer]], are far from the common [[heroes]] and [[villains]] we [[often]] [[see]]. In [[fact]], by the end, you lose track of who you're [[supposed]] to [[empathize]] with, failing to feel even the slightest emotion for [[either]] of the men – whether that was the failure of the [[director]] or [[perhaps]] the underlining message he was trying to [[tell]] is up to you to [[decide]].

Although the beginning of the film was filled with intrigue and unpredictability, by the half-way point it slopped down to a humdrum [[story]] of survival and revenge. The [[suspense]] which was [[evident]] at first soon disappeared because of a grossly mismatched [[music]] score which brought down the [[potentially]] [[effective]] story telling. And in the end, you were [[left]] feeling that all that detailed [[background]] information and introspection of the main characters was somehow very [[unnecessary]].

[[On]] the [[plus]] side, the transition in [[story]] from point a to point b was [[quite]] atypical compared to [[US]] [[movies]] – so those who aren't familiar with Asian [[films]] and are tired of Hollywood's predictability should [[check]] it out.

The white balance seemed off [[throughout]] most of the film. It was like looking into a picture shot on fluorescent when it was [[supposed]] to be set on tungsten. Maybe I'm the only one, but it strained my [[eyes]].

The movie also enjoyed playing tricks on you – an interesting build-up gave me hope for the slow moving story until it was diverted to a low budget, low speed chase scene. And just when you think you were going to get an unanswered indie ending with a mix of Shakespearean tragedy, you realize that it's not an ending at all, but rather a transition into a wacky country-music montage about peace and serenity.

Throw in some grisly from-behind choke scenes, a moment of redemption unexpectedly brought back into savagery and back again the other way, Asians' fascination with bodily fluids and a horrible music score that didn't match the film, and you get the average bland Asian thriller.

I just don't get why every fight scene was overlaid with clips of roaring lions …I thought they were supposed to symbolize dogs? Ultimately, in the end, we are reminded about a true killer that still lurks amongst us – tetanus.

4/10 As it is often the [[instance]], the impressive and explosive trailers of Asian films [[inserting]] up to [[none]] more than lackluster stories. Similar to Unleashed (which was great,) [[Puppy]] Bite [[Canine]] tells a story where [[man]] are raised as [[brutal]] savage dogs that [[transporting]] out their master's bidding. The main [[character]], an [[excitedly]] undeveloped, amoral [[assassin]] who is [[confronted]] against an equally [[volatile]] police [[officials]], are far from the common [[heroic]] and [[crooks]] we [[frequently]] [[behold]]. In [[facto]], by the end, you lose track of who you're [[suspected]] to [[sympathize]] with, failing to feel even the slightest emotion for [[neither]] of the men – whether that was the failure of the [[headmaster]] or [[conceivably]] the underlining message he was trying to [[say]] is up to you to [[deciding]].

Although the beginning of the film was filled with intrigue and unpredictability, by the half-way point it slopped down to a humdrum [[history]] of survival and revenge. The [[wait]] which was [[visible]] at first soon disappeared because of a grossly mismatched [[musicians]] score which brought down the [[conceivably]] [[efficacy]] story telling. And in the end, you were [[exited]] feeling that all that detailed [[backdrop]] information and introspection of the main characters was somehow very [[futile]].

[[Onto]] the [[anymore]] side, the transition in [[history]] from point a to point b was [[rather]] atypical compared to [[AMERICANS]] [[film]] – so those who aren't familiar with Asian [[filmmaking]] and are tired of Hollywood's predictability should [[checked]] it out.

The white balance seemed off [[during]] most of the film. It was like looking into a picture shot on fluorescent when it was [[presumed]] to be set on tungsten. Maybe I'm the only one, but it strained my [[eye]].

The movie also enjoyed playing tricks on you – an interesting build-up gave me hope for the slow moving story until it was diverted to a low budget, low speed chase scene. And just when you think you were going to get an unanswered indie ending with a mix of Shakespearean tragedy, you realize that it's not an ending at all, but rather a transition into a wacky country-music montage about peace and serenity.

Throw in some grisly from-behind choke scenes, a moment of redemption unexpectedly brought back into savagery and back again the other way, Asians' fascination with bodily fluids and a horrible music score that didn't match the film, and you get the average bland Asian thriller.

I just don't get why every fight scene was overlaid with clips of roaring lions …I thought they were supposed to symbolize dogs? Ultimately, in the end, we are reminded about a true killer that still lurks amongst us – tetanus.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Panic in the Streets" was a decent thriller, but I felt a bit disappointed by it. The central theme of a city being attacked by a plague in modern times is fascinating, but the film never really explores or develops it. Its well made and entertaining, but its not as interesting as it should have been. The screenplay for this one is really weak and brings the whole film down. None of the central characters are really compelling or believable.

Fortunately, the film is very well made so it compensates for the weak scripting. The direction by Elia Kazan keeps the film suspenseful and moving at a lightning quick pace. There are some standout sequences, particularly the memorable chase climax. When his direction was combined with better screenplays several years later, the man could mostly do no wrong.

The acting is also very good. Richard Widmark was always a watchable leading man and does what he can with an underwritten character. Paul Douglas spends his time yelling a bit too much but does a decent job as well. The standouts in the cast are the two villains. Zero Mostel, known primarily for his comic roles, is effectively slimy as one of cinema's ultimate toady characters. Jack Palance is, unsurprisingly, a chilling villain. "Panic in the Streets" is disappointing but still worth watching. (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember seeing this film years ago on, I think, BBC2. I would very much like to view it again - does anyone know how I can obtain a copy? As I remember, it was an especially powerful movie, in particular the scene that stands out is of the horses wearing gas masks. Apart from that I really can't recall too much about the story - which is why I want to view it again! I have trawled the web but am unable to find a copy, which is unusual in my experience - perhaps there is no DVD or VHS of this film on the market. Would appreciate any help anyone can give me on this. Thanks very much in advance for your assistance. Best regards, Albany234@googlemail.com --------------------------------------------- Result 3997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Girlfight" follows a project dwelling New York high school girl from a sense of futility into the world of amateur boxing where she finds self esteem, purpose, and much more. Although the film is not about boxing, boxing is all about the film. So much so you can almost smell the sweat. Technically and artistically a good shoot with an sense of honesty and reality about it, "Girlfight" is no chick flick and no "Rocky". It is, rather, a very human drama which even viewers who don't know boxing will be able to connect with. --------------------------------------------- Result 3998 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a small film , few characters ,theatrical.And yet it says something about Ireland that you won't find elsewhere.This film IS IRELAND. In all it's grubiness, it's sadness,it's self-delusion.The Boys , Master Doyle , SP O'Donell, The Cannon , Senator Doogan's daughter , Gar and above all Madge.I know them.I'm in the pub with them or kneeling to pray with them. They are our sad history and they are our present. --------------------------------------------- Result 3999 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[premise]] of this movie is revealed on the DVD box. A textile [[worker]] develops a miracle fabric that doesn't degrade. But the movie fails to [[get]] on with it. Instead it [[pads]] for 45 minutes, noodling [[around]] a preamble before he makes the big discovery. [[Since]] [[audiences]] don't benefit much from [[seeing]] a whiz [[kid]] figuring [[things]] out, it's a strange [[choice]]: the movie has successfully been [[prevented]] from engaging any [[topic]]. Once the [[fabric]] is [[discovered]], the [[movie]] too [[rapidly]] [[establishes]] that both [[industry]] bigwigs, and blue-collar co-workers want the invention squelched, leaving the [[movie]] with just two [[flimsy]] movements; [[inventing]] the chemical, and [[running]] from oppressors.

I can't understand why [[anyone]] [[would]] describe this as comedy. The tone isn't funny or comical. It's more like serious social criticism of the day: that capitalism warps both supply chains and production. Which in turn prevents innovation from reaching and improving the world. Yes, that's probably true, but without some toying with an attitude towards that fact, the movie is simply an earnest argument. You'll need an extremely broad definition of comedy to [[find]] any here.

This is more like a British Meet John Doe (Meet Nigel Doe ?). The [[hypothesis]] of this movie is revealed on the DVD box. A textile [[labour]] develops a miracle fabric that doesn't degrade. But the movie fails to [[obtain]] on with it. Instead it [[pillows]] for 45 minutes, noodling [[about]] a preamble before he makes the big discovery. [[Because]] [[viewers]] don't benefit much from [[see]] a whiz [[petit]] figuring [[aspects]] out, it's a strange [[pick]]: the movie has successfully been [[impede]] from engaging any [[themes]]. Once the [[texture]] is [[discovering]], the [[films]] too [[faster]] [[stipulates]] that both [[industries]] bigwigs, and blue-collar co-workers want the invention squelched, leaving the [[filmmaking]] with just two [[tenuous]] movements; [[reinvent]] the chemical, and [[run]] from oppressors.

I can't understand why [[everybody]] [[should]] describe this as comedy. The tone isn't funny or comical. It's more like serious social criticism of the day: that capitalism warps both supply chains and production. Which in turn prevents innovation from reaching and improving the world. Yes, that's probably true, but without some toying with an attitude towards that fact, the movie is simply an earnest argument. You'll need an extremely broad definition of comedy to [[unearth]] any here.

This is more like a British Meet John Doe (Meet Nigel Doe ?). --------------------------------------------- Result 4000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I hate to [[throw]] out lines like this, but in this [[case]] I feel like I have to: the American [[remake]] of THE GRUDGE is by far the [[worst]] film I have [[seen]] in theaters in the last 5 years. There, I said it. And now that I have gotten that out of my system, please let me explain why.

"When someone dies in the grip of a powerful rage, a curse is born. The curse gathers in that place of death. Those who encounter it will be consumed by its fury." That is the premise of THE GRUDGE and I will [[admit]] it sounds [[intriguing]]. Unfortunately, the filmmakers take it no further. Those who encounter the "curse" are indeed consumed by its fury and that is all you get. You want more? Well too bad. Some critics and fans are pointing out that the sole purpose of THE GRUDGE is to scare you. The problem is that when there is no plot to speak of, creepy images and sounds can only go so far. Director Takashi Shimizu, pulling a George Sluizer and remaking his own original film(s), valiantly attempts to build atmosphere in the first hour – by repeating the same scene over and over and over and over. It pretty much unfolds like this:

-person walks into house

-something flashes by the camera and/or a strange sound is heard

-person goes to investigate

-sound starts to get loud

-person sees a ghost

-loud scream and/or cat screech

-cut to black

Before the audience is even given a hint of plot, this exact same scenario unfolds 5 times in the first hour. The first time was actually somewhat creepy. Each subsequent use became laughable as the film went on. By the time the end of the film rolled around, my friend and I were laughingly wondering if this scene would end "with a loud scream and a cut to black." We were never proved wrong.

The film has no liner storyline, instead unfolding in a series of vignettes that leave the audience jumbled. I have no problem with non-linear storytelling when it is done right. The film jumps from time period to time period with no rhyme or reason. I haven't seen a movie in such a state since the opening of the theatrical version of HIGHLANDER 2. And this storytelling technique mars any sort of mystery that film could have possibly had. If you already know the ghosts have scared two characters to death, how is it shocking when their bodies are found in the attic? And why should we care when a detective tries to investigate the mysterious disappearances when we already know what happened to everyone?

Obviously greenlit the second the American version of THE RING made $15 million its first weekend, THE GRUDGE is nothing but calculated imitation disguised as an actual movie. The scariest things about THE GRUDGE are that it made $40 million dollars its first weekend and some people consider it the "scariest movie ever made." I wonder what happens to those who get consumed by the fury of paying to see THE GRUDGE? I hate to [[toss]] out lines like this, but in this [[instances]] I feel like I have to: the American [[redo]] of THE GRUDGE is by far the [[gravest]] film I have [[watched]] in theaters in the last 5 years. There, I said it. And now that I have gotten that out of my system, please let me explain why.

"When someone dies in the grip of a powerful rage, a curse is born. The curse gathers in that place of death. Those who encounter it will be consumed by its fury." That is the premise of THE GRUDGE and I will [[recognized]] it sounds [[captivating]]. Unfortunately, the filmmakers take it no further. Those who encounter the "curse" are indeed consumed by its fury and that is all you get. You want more? Well too bad. Some critics and fans are pointing out that the sole purpose of THE GRUDGE is to scare you. The problem is that when there is no plot to speak of, creepy images and sounds can only go so far. Director Takashi Shimizu, pulling a George Sluizer and remaking his own original film(s), valiantly attempts to build atmosphere in the first hour – by repeating the same scene over and over and over and over. It pretty much unfolds like this:

-person walks into house

-something flashes by the camera and/or a strange sound is heard

-person goes to investigate

-sound starts to get loud

-person sees a ghost

-loud scream and/or cat screech

-cut to black

Before the audience is even given a hint of plot, this exact same scenario unfolds 5 times in the first hour. The first time was actually somewhat creepy. Each subsequent use became laughable as the film went on. By the time the end of the film rolled around, my friend and I were laughingly wondering if this scene would end "with a loud scream and a cut to black." We were never proved wrong.

The film has no liner storyline, instead unfolding in a series of vignettes that leave the audience jumbled. I have no problem with non-linear storytelling when it is done right. The film jumps from time period to time period with no rhyme or reason. I haven't seen a movie in such a state since the opening of the theatrical version of HIGHLANDER 2. And this storytelling technique mars any sort of mystery that film could have possibly had. If you already know the ghosts have scared two characters to death, how is it shocking when their bodies are found in the attic? And why should we care when a detective tries to investigate the mysterious disappearances when we already know what happened to everyone?

Obviously greenlit the second the American version of THE RING made $15 million its first weekend, THE GRUDGE is nothing but calculated imitation disguised as an actual movie. The scariest things about THE GRUDGE are that it made $40 million dollars its first weekend and some people consider it the "scariest movie ever made." I wonder what happens to those who get consumed by the fury of paying to see THE GRUDGE? --------------------------------------------- Result 4001 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I have [[seen]] poor movies in my [[time]], but this [[really]] takes the [[biscuit]]! Why [[oh]] why has this [[film]] been [[made]]? There just is [[nothing]] here whatsoever. Please put your trust in me, flick the off [[switch]] and [[destroy]] your copy of this [[film]]. There is a [[plot]]... that [[could]] [[take]] about 5 minutes to [[show]] on [[camera]]. This is the key [[problem]], the [[story]] '[[based]] on a [[true]] story' ([[mmm]]... [[whatever]]) just in no way lends itself to be padded out for 80 minutes. And so we [[therefore]] have to sit through over an [[hour]] of [[watching]] people [[walk]] around. That is it! [[In]] the whole [[first]] half an [[hour]] [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] [[happens]], [[apart]] from [[watching]] [[someone]] walk to a [[shop]]... and then 3 guys [[walking]] through a [[wood]]. This time [[could]] [[perhaps]] have been spent on [[developing]] [[character]]... but no. And so there is [[absolutely]] no [[connection]] to the people on screen, and so when they [[start]] to [[get]] shot, we couldn't [[care]] less! [[In]] fact I was in the [[end]] vouching for the baddie so that the [[film]] would [[end]]! On [[top]] of this the camera [[work]] is [[truly]] horrific! This [[director]]/editor/writer/[[producer]], Ti West is [[rubbish]]. I [[hate]] to [[hit]] a [[guy]], but really, his [[work]] is pants! These [[dull]] [[close]] ups [[continuously]], and then [[long]] single takes following people as they walk - I'm sure he [[thinks]] he's [[clever]], but the [[results]] are so [[dull]] I just [[wanted]] to [[stop]] the [[film]] and slit my wrists! How this [[man]] has been [[brought]] on to direct the next [[cabin]] fever [[movie]] is beyond me! To [[finish]], the acting is [[also]] [[woeful]],... which goes for the film as a [[whole]]. [[Preserve]] your sanity, [[stick]] clear of this [[heap]] of [[total]] excrement! I have [[noticed]] poor movies in my [[times]], but this [[truthfully]] takes the [[bisque]]! Why [[oooh]] why has this [[movies]] been [[effected]]? There just is [[none]] here whatsoever. Please put your trust in me, flick the off [[switches]] and [[wrack]] your copy of this [[filmmaking]]. There is a [[intrigue]]... that [[did]] [[taking]] about 5 minutes to [[displayed]] on [[cameras]]. This is the key [[difficulty]], the [[fairytales]] '[[predicated]] on a [[truthful]] story' ([[hmm]]... [[whichever]]) just in no way lends itself to be padded out for 80 minutes. And so we [[thereby]] have to sit through over an [[hours]] of [[staring]] people [[walking]] around. That is it! [[Among]] the whole [[firstly]] half an [[hours]] [[totally]] [[none]] [[comes]], [[also]] from [[staring]] [[everybody]] walk to a [[shops]]... and then 3 guys [[walk]] through a [[bois]]. This time [[did]] [[probably]] have been spent on [[drafting]] [[trait]]... but no. And so there is [[perfectly]] no [[connecting]] to the people on screen, and so when they [[starter]] to [[gets]] shot, we couldn't [[caring]] less! [[Among]] fact I was in the [[termination]] vouching for the baddie so that the [[filmmaking]] would [[ending]]! On [[superior]] of this the camera [[cooperating]] is [[really]] horrific! This [[headmaster]]/editor/writer/[[maker]], Ti West is [[trash]]. I [[hated]] to [[slapped]] a [[dude]], but really, his [[cooperates]] is pants! These [[boring]] [[nears]] ups [[consistently]], and then [[longer]] single takes following people as they walk - I'm sure he [[feels]] he's [[brainy]], but the [[findings]] are so [[boring]] I just [[wants]] to [[stopping]] the [[filmmaking]] and slit my wrists! How this [[guy]] has been [[tabled]] on to direct the next [[stateroom]] fever [[filmmaking]] is beyond me! To [[conclude]], the acting is [[apart]] [[pitiable]],... which goes for the film as a [[ensemble]]. [[Retains]] your sanity, [[wand]] clear of this [[piling]] of [[whole]] excrement! --------------------------------------------- Result 4002 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This, and Immoral Tales, both left a [[bad]] taste in my [[mouth]]. It seems to me that Borowczyk is disgusted by [[sex]], and these two [[films]] are cautionary tales about what will [[happen]] if you do have sex. As a [[film]], it's not very well done -- some of the acting is [[truly]] epically [[bad]] (such as the "American" woman with the French accent). The young woman's sudden flip-flop from being [[anxious]] about the [[marriage]] to being interested (when it seems like it should have been the other way [[around]]), and the aunt's [[sudden]] realization of the young man's [[secret]] don't make [[sense]] -- they're not explained at all. I also didn't like how the daughter's [[relationship]] with a [[black]] [[man]] was [[presented]] as a sign of her family's perversion or predilection for bestiality. The central idea, the [[idea]] that there's this "sexy beast," if you will, that lives in the woods, [[could]] have been a [[foundation]] for a perverse but fun [[story]], but instead is just [[used]] as a basis for a nasty, sex-negative, morality play. This, and Immoral Tales, both left a [[unfavourable]] taste in my [[kisser]]. It seems to me that Borowczyk is disgusted by [[sexuality]], and these two [[filmmaking]] are cautionary tales about what will [[occur]] if you do have sex. As a [[films]], it's not very well done -- some of the acting is [[really]] epically [[unfavourable]] (such as the "American" woman with the French accent). The young woman's sudden flip-flop from being [[eager]] about the [[marry]] to being interested (when it seems like it should have been the other way [[throughout]]), and the aunt's [[abrupt]] realization of the young man's [[confidential]] don't make [[feeling]] -- they're not explained at all. I also didn't like how the daughter's [[rapport]] with a [[negro]] [[bloke]] was [[lodged]] as a sign of her family's perversion or predilection for bestiality. The central idea, the [[thought]] that there's this "sexy beast," if you will, that lives in the woods, [[did]] have been a [[cornerstones]] for a perverse but fun [[saga]], but instead is just [[utilized]] as a basis for a nasty, sex-negative, morality play. --------------------------------------------- Result 4003 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a weird movie. It [[started]] out pretty good. A solid sound track behind flash images of gore and mayhem as our psychopath did his thing.

[[Next]] [[comes]] his "down [[fall]]" Here i could tell I was in for a real cheesy "B" movie. [[Poor]] acting , I mean how hard is it to hold a [[gun]] and act like a [[cop]]? These guys [[could]] not. After the [[death]] scene of our [[psychopath]] we get the opening [[credit]] and the movie [[starts]]...

From this point on it is [[bad]] acting big boobs, the occasional bucket of blood and poorly [[done]] death scenes.

That said I gave the movie a four because in spite of its flaws it did maintain a sort of creepiness that I just could not quite shake off.

I do not recommend this movie but I have to admit I have seem worse. This was a weird movie. It [[initiation]] out pretty good. A solid sound track behind flash images of gore and mayhem as our psychopath did his thing.

[[Future]] [[happens]] his "down [[tumbles]]" Here i could tell I was in for a real cheesy "B" movie. [[Poorest]] acting , I mean how hard is it to hold a [[howitzer]] and act like a [[cops]]? These guys [[would]] not. After the [[fatality]] scene of our [[loony]] we get the opening [[credence]] and the movie [[commenced]]...

From this point on it is [[unfavourable]] acting big boobs, the occasional bucket of blood and poorly [[doing]] death scenes.

That said I gave the movie a four because in spite of its flaws it did maintain a sort of creepiness that I just could not quite shake off.

I do not recommend this movie but I have to admit I have seem worse. --------------------------------------------- Result 4004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Playing a character from a literary classic can be a bit of a poisoned chalice for an actor, paying for the pleasure of a meaty character by competing with the fantasies of generations of readers – not to mention the numerous other actors who've besieged the castle before. Fortunately for the fantasists, this version – with the nicely cast Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton – stands head and shoulders above versions that have come after it. It's the right length to do the story full justice, and makes considerable use of Bronte's cracking dialogue; none of that modern meddling away, cutting text and adding new and inferior scenes.

The magic of the original story lies in the tensions created between the central characters, and the lives circumstances create for them to lead. Jane – "poor, plain and little" – grows up on the stinting charity of a cold aunt, her nature and independence shaped by a long spell in a very harsh school. She arrives as a governess in the household of Mr Rochester, utterly friendless and alone. She represses herself habitually out of duty and hard experience, but her passionate nature soon finds its touch-paper in her stern, keenly intelligent, enigmatic master, to whom she is drawn, as he is to her, by forces beyond their control. Rochester is the caged tiger, busy "paving hell with energy"; potentially dangerous to all who come into contact with him – but "pervious, through a chink or two". His character is extraordinary: he takes extraordinary liberties with a paid subordinate; but then Jane is no ordinary employee, as he sees. But a dark secret, and severe trials, lie before them both.

It's a pleasure to hear Bronte's remarkable dialogue spoken by such accomplished actors – Dalton in particular seems formed for passion on a Brontean scale. If you've only ever seen him as a not-so-memorable Bond, you've missed the thing he's best at. Those who've commented that his Rochester is too handsome, miss the point of these dramatisations: his character has simply too much screen time for a really ugly man to retain the viewer's attention. Timothy Dalton is just right, not always or consistently handsome, but often glancingly, strikingly so, just as it should be. And Zelah Clarke's Jane is no wallflower; she conveys the emotions of a woman who habitually represses her sense of humour and her passionate nature very successfully, allowing her rare outbursts to show to more dramatic effect.

Not so long ago the BBC aired an excellent dramatisation of Jean Rhys' enlightened and most unsettling riposte to Bronte, "Wide Sargasso Sea", imagining the back-story of the first Mrs Rochester. Do check it out – you'll never see the 'hero' of "Jane Eyre" in quite the same way again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The one thing that occurred to me after watching this drivel, was i would never get the time I used to watch this, back again. If you want to see Stacey keach and Michael dorn try and earn what must have been then, the down payments on a holiday home then stay tuned. Wooden acting, poor special effects, the only comedic highlight was whilst our alien hero was in female form and this is over as soon as she has done her obligatory b-movie nude sex scene within 30 mins into the movie. The opportunity to have made what could have been a decent movie disappears the moment Nicole Eggbert clocks the alien in a bar within 30 seconds, whilst the Police, Military and Joe public don't cotton on that the woman drinking coffee, dosn't use the cup handle and wears four jumpers at once. She must obviously be from another planet. Just where I wish I was when this movie was on. --------------------------------------------- Result 4006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Think "stage play". This is worth seeing once for the performances of Lionel Atwill and Dwight Frye. COmpare the Melvyn DOuglas in "Ghost Story" with the Melvyn DOuglas of this film. [[Are]] there [[vampires]] at loose in this 'Bavarian' village, or is there a more natural, albeit equally sinister, explanation? Dwight Frye is Herman, a red herring, who is cast as an [[especially]] [[moronic]] [[character]]. It's fun to look at his different facial expressions in what is really a stock character. NOt much happens for a long time, but then we discover that Atwill's pipe smoking doctor is the real murderer. There is too much 'comic relief' but that is par for the course for this era. Fay Wray looks really good. Think "stage play". This is worth seeing once for the performances of Lionel Atwill and Dwight Frye. COmpare the Melvyn DOuglas in "Ghost Story" with the Melvyn DOuglas of this film. [[Be]] there [[vamps]] at loose in this 'Bavarian' village, or is there a more natural, albeit equally sinister, explanation? Dwight Frye is Herman, a red herring, who is cast as an [[specially]] [[asinine]] [[personages]]. It's fun to look at his different facial expressions in what is really a stock character. NOt much happens for a long time, but then we discover that Atwill's pipe smoking doctor is the real murderer. There is too much 'comic relief' but that is par for the course for this era. Fay Wray looks really good. --------------------------------------------- Result 4007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I am not an artistically [[inclined]] individual. I am a [[science]] minded [[woman]] and I [[felt]] that this movie was maybe one of those campy [[artsy]] type [[films]] on a budget. I [[watched]] part of it with my [[fiancé]] and my future step [[daughter]]. We [[tried]] very hard to find [[something]] in this film to keep our interest. My fiancé and his daughter voted it off and we moved on to Ocean's 13,but that is another story. Not to be deterred I awoke the next morning and [[gave]] the movie another shot. I [[began]] again watching this movie in earnest. I just don't get it,I thought I [[would]] get it.I thought the funniest part was the [[flushing]] of the ashes and the urn finding a spot by the fireplace being used as a vase for what appeared to be dead flowers. Interesting and still it had [[dead]] stuff inside. It was an odd and bizarre movie. [[Maybe]] this is what they were after,however I won't be tricked a second time! I am not an artistically [[slant]] individual. I am a [[veda]] minded [[femme]] and I [[believed]] that this movie was maybe one of those campy [[arty]] type [[cinematography]] on a budget. I [[saw]] part of it with my [[fiance]] and my future step [[girl]]. We [[attempting]] very hard to find [[somethings]] in this film to keep our interest. My fiancé and his daughter voted it off and we moved on to Ocean's 13,but that is another story. Not to be deterred I awoke the next morning and [[supplied]] the movie another shot. I [[commencement]] again watching this movie in earnest. I just don't get it,I thought I [[could]] get it.I thought the funniest part was the [[flush]] of the ashes and the urn finding a spot by the fireplace being used as a vase for what appeared to be dead flowers. Interesting and still it had [[decedent]] stuff inside. It was an odd and bizarre movie. [[Perhaps]] this is what they were after,however I won't be tricked a second time! --------------------------------------------- Result 4008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She gives her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette Midler moves her audience. If you can't see it live (which is the best way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to look at is how incredible her voice has changed and matured over the years but never lost its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never loses anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will treasure this concert for a very long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like films that are totally bizarre, then this one is for you! Abdullah is one mean mother, with a passion for strangling people and eating ham. You should check this film out, just for a laugh. It is a low budget sci-fi, musical, comedy, cannibalistic, classic. If you get bored of the film half way through you should persevere, just for the sake of seeing the aliens, which are nothing more than little toy robots, but in my opinion are the films highlight. "I'm the Big Meat Eater, pass me --------------------------------------------- Result 4010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Whipped" is 82 minutes long. This review is 82 words long. Three unlikable New York Lotharios, ruthless "scammers," end up wooing the same woman, played by Amanda Peet, with disastrous results. That applies to the story and the film. Too sophomoric to be misogynistic, flaccid and ridiculous, "Whipped" mixes the philosophies of shock jock Tom Lykis with Penthouse letter fantasies. Though technically proficient it's dated, grating, poorly written, mean, and obvious. People don't act like this. People don't talk like this. Really. --------------------------------------------- Result 4011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The NSA, CIA, FBI, FSB and all other snoop [[agency]] in the [[world]] should watch this [[movie]] to [[gain]] [[information]] as to how to [[spy]] on people. (as MST3k [[Commentary]] states it..."Sanata has the dirt on every! Santa's Tentacles [[reach]] far and wide! There is no [[hiding]] from the [[Klaus]] [[Organization]]")

From telescopes that can [[spy]] over millions of [[miles]] to ears that can [[hear]] everything. Its [[amazing]] that the CIA doesn't have Santa on the [[payroll]].

Satan's dance [[routine]] is hilarious. Pitch...he is so [[useless]].

The cheese factor in of this movie is [[tremendous]]. [[Very]] low budget but so fun to watch. I recommend watching the Mystery Science [[Theatre]] 3000 version for even more [[laughs]].

You even [[get]] a [[laugh]] at the missfortune of the [[good]] [[kids]].

I [[give]] this a 1 for [[production]] quality and a 10 for pure [[cheese]] and fun factor. The NSA, CIA, FBI, FSB and all other snoop [[entities]] in the [[worldwide]] should watch this [[filmmaking]] to [[earn]] [[info]] as to how to [[hyena]] on people. (as MST3k [[Comments]] states it..."Sanata has the dirt on every! Santa's Tentacles [[achieve]] far and wide! There is no [[concealed]] from the [[Krause]] [[Organizations]]")

From telescopes that can [[spies]] over millions of [[milla]] to ears that can [[overheard]] everything. Its [[excellent]] that the CIA doesn't have Santa on the [[paycheck]].

Satan's dance [[everyday]] is hilarious. Pitch...he is so [[superfluous]].

The cheese factor in of this movie is [[prodigious]]. [[Hugely]] low budget but so fun to watch. I recommend watching the Mystery Science [[Theater]] 3000 version for even more [[smiles]].

You even [[gets]] a [[laughs]] at the missfortune of the [[alright]] [[youngsters]].

I [[confer]] this a 1 for [[productivity]] quality and a 10 for pure [[cheeses]] and fun factor. --------------------------------------------- Result 4012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] I feel blessed to own what is known as the [[worst]] Steven Seagal movie ever [[made]]. I knew I was on to something [[special]] when Steven opened his mouth and someone else's voice came out. By the middle of the [[film]] my eyes were beginning to hurt and I was almost [[falling]] out of my chair with [[uncontrollable]] laughter.

[[Steven]] is Steven (with an ever changing voice) and totally unbelievable in his role (as always). Who the [[hell]] [[lets]] people with bad nappy-hair pony tail mullets into the Forces anyway? He also always writes himself into totally unbelievable love interests with women at least 20 years his junior. The supporting actors all [[look]] like they've been shot in the dark - btw, did they shoot this movie in the [[dark]] with just a penlight [[torch]] for lighting?

This is truly [[abominable]] in [[every]] way possible. [[Invite]] all your friends around and [[make]] a [[social]] [[event]] out of it - this one's truly special. I feel blessed to own what is known as the [[meanest]] Steven Seagal movie ever [[introduced]]. I knew I was on to something [[peculiar]] when Steven opened his mouth and someone else's voice came out. By the middle of the [[filmmaking]] my eyes were beginning to hurt and I was almost [[declining]] out of my chair with [[unchecked]] laughter.

[[Stephane]] is Steven (with an ever changing voice) and totally unbelievable in his role (as always). Who the [[whorehouse]] [[allowing]] people with bad nappy-hair pony tail mullets into the Forces anyway? He also always writes himself into totally unbelievable love interests with women at least 20 years his junior. The supporting actors all [[peek]] like they've been shot in the dark - btw, did they shoot this movie in the [[somber]] with just a penlight [[blaze]] for lighting?

This is truly [[infamous]] in [[all]] way possible. [[Invited]] all your friends around and [[deliver]] a [[societal]] [[happenings]] out of it - this one's truly special. --------------------------------------------- Result 4013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[In]] the first one it was [[mainly]] [[giant]] rats, but there were some wasps and a [[giant]] chicken too. This one, however, is just giant rats [[period]], well giant rats and one really [[growing]] little boy. This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you know how it is. This [[movie]] has some kills and its moments, but I find it to be on par with the original, I just [[prefer]] some variety in my [[giant]] creature [[movies]]. Well, that is not true...I actually like "Empire of the Ants", maybe I just do not care for giant rodents. All in all a rather [[drab]] movie though it does have one rather odd turn of events in this one dream sequence that is truly bizarre. I just can't recommend this one. [[Into]] the first one it was [[predominantly]] [[gigantic]] rats, but there were some wasps and a [[mammoth]] chicken too. This one, however, is just giant rats [[time]], well giant rats and one really [[heightened]] little boy. This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you know how it is. This [[filmmaking]] has some kills and its moments, but I find it to be on par with the original, I just [[favors]] some variety in my [[colossal]] creature [[theater]]. Well, that is not true...I actually like "Empire of the Ants", maybe I just do not care for giant rodents. All in all a rather [[dull]] movie though it does have one rather odd turn of events in this one dream sequence that is truly bizarre. I just can't recommend this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is a formula B science fiction [[movie]], and the director made no bones about it. It is about a [[dragon]] who is [[restored]] to [[life]] by a scientific team. Everything [[done]] is stuff you've seen many times before. It is a weak [[script]], with no [[real]] characters. [[In]] fact, it is full of [[stereotype]] characters and [[situations]]. The director attacks this by just making it a formula movie, with no attempt to [[fool]] us, and that gives this [[movie]] a mild [[appeal]], but it isn't something you're likely to [[remember]] a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. [[Sort]] of [[mindless]] [[fun]]. It has its [[place]] in entertainment, but it [[certainly]] isn't something you [[sit]] down with [[friends]] to watch, [[unless]] you're all just drunk and don't [[care]]. The [[mass]] [[rating]] of 3.2 is [[probably]] fair. I don't [[think]] it is as crappy as most people, but I am [[surprised]] that some people in the postings [[thought]] this was [[spectacular]]. That really eludes me, as I [[see]] no [[attempt]] to [[even]] [[make]] this a [[memorable]] [[film]]. This is a formula B science fiction [[filmmaking]], and the director made no bones about it. It is about a [[dragons]] who is [[reinstated]] to [[living]] by a scientific team. Everything [[effected]] is stuff you've seen many times before. It is a weak [[screenplay]], with no [[actual]] characters. [[For]] fact, it is full of [[stereotypes]] characters and [[circumstances]]. The director attacks this by just making it a formula movie, with no attempt to [[imbecile]] us, and that gives this [[cinema]] a mild [[appeals]], but it isn't something you're likely to [[remembers]] a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. [[Sorted]] of [[thoughtless]] [[droll]]. It has its [[placing]] in entertainment, but it [[arguably]] isn't something you [[sits]] down with [[friendships]] to watch, [[if]] you're all just drunk and don't [[caring]]. The [[mace]] [[appraisals]] of 3.2 is [[assuredly]] fair. I don't [[reckon]] it is as crappy as most people, but I am [[stunned]] that some people in the postings [[ideas]] this was [[dramatic]]. That really eludes me, as I [[seeing]] no [[tries]] to [[yet]] [[deliver]] this a [[unforgettable]] [[cinematic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4015 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First of all when I saw the teaser trailer for Wendy Wu, I was definitely excited. Brenda Song, one of the hottest girls on Disney Channel, would be doing martial arts and I was fine with that... until I saw the movie. The action was poorly constructed, the movie couldn't have realated to anyone, the fighting was unrealistic and it sucked... along with the plot. If you really think about it's a wannabe Buffy the Vampire Slayer, a girl who is the descendant of other warriors who were women, a girl wants to ignore her calling and wants to become homecoming queen, the watcher who bug's her to prepare for a big fight against some ancient evil. The idea just wasn't all that original, the movie is waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4016 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This film is a very funny film. The violence is bad, the acting is...Well Dani, [[stick]] to singing or screaming or whatever the hell it is you usually do. The random chicks wearing hardly anything is just to catch sexually-frustrated goth lads in. Personally, i think this movie really does [[suck]]. The story and characters [[COULD]] be very good, if say the directing, the actors and other little nibby things were made better. But the film is just [[bad]], the only reason why people like this [[piece]] of [[crap]] is because it has Danni in it. This film is possibly the worst B-rate film ever. And, believe me that's hard to achieve, especially when you're competing with Def by Temptation and over crappy excuses for "serious" horror movies. I'm not a CoF fan, and so i just see this as another rubbish movie...A really [[bad]] one. If [[Dani]] made this as a comedy then, good going him. Very well done. Over than that though, i rate it low, for it's crappiness. Watch it when you're in a happy, happy, joy, joy mode so you can laugh at everything or if you're high on multiple different types of drugs. This film is a very funny film. The violence is bad, the acting is...Well Dani, [[twig]] to singing or screaming or whatever the hell it is you usually do. The random chicks wearing hardly anything is just to catch sexually-frustrated goth lads in. Personally, i think this movie really does [[lick]]. The story and characters [[WO]] be very good, if say the directing, the actors and other little nibby things were made better. But the film is just [[unfavourable]], the only reason why people like this [[slice]] of [[damnit]] is because it has Danni in it. This film is possibly the worst B-rate film ever. And, believe me that's hard to achieve, especially when you're competing with Def by Temptation and over crappy excuses for "serious" horror movies. I'm not a CoF fan, and so i just see this as another rubbish movie...A really [[unfavorable]] one. If [[Dany]] made this as a comedy then, good going him. Very well done. Over than that though, i rate it low, for it's crappiness. Watch it when you're in a happy, happy, joy, joy mode so you can laugh at everything or if you're high on multiple different types of drugs. --------------------------------------------- Result 4017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have watched this movie on DVD a couple of times now,the first time, I watched the second half after the hour and then went back to the first hour. an engrossing entertaining film, thank god no kiera knightley in it, refreshing and it gives us all a genuine insight into the difficult life of Queen Victoria and the difficult choices she had to make. Nothing bad about the movie at all, no real bad language or anything of a sexual nature which would offend for family viewing. Might prompt the kids to research a little about the queen victoria herself and perhaps lesser known characters such as Conroy and Lord Melbourne --------------------------------------------- Result 4018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This Peabody Award [[winning]] episode is one of the highlights of the 1st Season where a holodeck [[malfunction]] traps Captain Picard, Beverly, Data, and a Starfleet historian named Waylan within a 1930's [[San]] [[Francisco]] setting. This episode is an homage to Raymond Chandler's "Maltese Falcon" where Patrick Stewart [[assumes]] the Humphrey Bogart role - [[complete]] with fedora and trenchcoat. The office itself is [[almost]] an [[exact]] replica of the one featured in Bogey's "Maltese [[Falcon]]."

This episode [[also]] briefly [[introduces]] us to a [[mysterious]] insect [[race]] [[called]] the Jarada that [[communicate]] with [[mostly]] a high-pitched buzzing sound. [[Communication]] with this alien [[race]] is [[difficult]], and it is up to Picard to communicate with this race in their [[native]] tongue so that negotiations and diplomacy can [[finally]] [[begin]]. The best part of this episode, though, is the [[appearance]] of the [[famous]] Hollywood B-actor Lawrence Tierney in the role of the gangster Cyrus Redblock. He was such a [[handsome]] man back in the 1940's. Oh, well... This Peabody Award [[won]] episode is one of the highlights of the 1st Season where a holodeck [[fault]] traps Captain Picard, Beverly, Data, and a Starfleet historian named Waylan within a 1930's [[Saint]] [[Franz]] setting. This episode is an homage to Raymond Chandler's "Maltese Falcon" where Patrick Stewart [[implies]] the Humphrey Bogart role - [[finishes]] with fedora and trenchcoat. The office itself is [[hardly]] an [[correct]] replica of the one featured in Bogey's "Maltese [[Hawks]]."

This episode [[apart]] briefly [[presents]] us to a [[cryptic]] insect [[racing]] [[phoned]] the Jarada that [[submit]] with [[basically]] a high-pitched buzzing sound. [[Impart]] with this alien [[racing]] is [[problematic]], and it is up to Picard to communicate with this race in their [[aboriginal]] tongue so that negotiations and diplomacy can [[eventually]] [[startup]]. The best part of this episode, though, is the [[semblance]] of the [[acclaimed]] Hollywood B-actor Lawrence Tierney in the role of the gangster Cyrus Redblock. He was such a [[fantastic]] man back in the 1940's. Oh, well... --------------------------------------------- Result 4019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] the tortuous emotional impact is [[degrading]], whether adult or adolescent the personal [[values]] shown in this [[movie]] belong in a bad psychodrama if anywhere at all. This movie has a plot, but it is all evil from [[start]] to [[end]]. This is no [[way]] for people to act and degrades both sexes all the way through the movie. teen killing - bad preteen sex - bad emotional battering - bad animal cruelty - bad psychological torture - bad parental neglect - bad the only [[merit]] if any is the [[excellent]] color shots of contrasting red, blond and green leaves a bad feeling for anyone that respects [[life]] and peace, what a bad [[mistake]] to make, or to watch... it is [[UGLY]] the tortuous emotional impact is [[demeaning]], whether adult or adolescent the personal [[valuing]] shown in this [[filmmaking]] belong in a bad psychodrama if anywhere at all. This movie has a plot, but it is all evil from [[embark]] to [[terminate]]. This is no [[ways]] for people to act and degrades both sexes all the way through the movie. teen killing - bad preteen sex - bad emotional battering - bad animal cruelty - bad psychological torture - bad parental neglect - bad the only [[deserve]] if any is the [[sumptuous]] color shots of contrasting red, blond and green leaves a bad feeling for anyone that respects [[living]] and peace, what a bad [[awry]] to make, or to watch... it is [[NASTY]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I should say at the [[outset]] there are [[many]], many things I [[love]] about '[[Forbidden]] Planet' and yes, I [[certainly]] [[consider]] it a 'classic' science-fiction [[film]] for [[many]] [[reasons]]. But the adulation it has [[received]] over the [[years]] goes a bit over the top in my [[opinion]]. No less an authority than Leonard Maltin [[says]] '[[Forbidden]] Planet' "...is one of the most ambitious and [[intelligent]] [[movies]] of its [[genre]]." Ambitious? Without a doubt. [[Intelligent]]? Depends on what [[part]] of the film you're [[talking]] about. It [[certainly]] was the most prestigious and highly-budgeted science-fiction [[flick]] to that point. At a [[cost]] of nearly $2 [[million]] (this was 1956, [[remember]]), MGM [[pulled]] out all the [[stops]] to [[produce]] a [[dazzling]], eye-popping outer space [[adventure]] unlike [[anything]] [[seen]] on the [[big]] screen before, even employing [[artists]] from the Disney studio for some of the more elaborate [[special]] [[effects]]. 'Charming' is not [[usually]] a word used to [[describe]] special [[effects]] in sci-fi movies, [[yet]] that is the one that seems most appropriate here. Even the [[dreaded]] 'Monster from the Id' is only a well-rendered [[cartoon]] figure by the [[Disney]] people, unlikely to [[frighten]] [[anyone]] over the age of 8. When I [[see]] the [[various]] sets and take note of the art design, [[models]], [[costumes]], etc., I am reminded of nothing so much as 'The Wizard of Oz,' with its gorgeously saturated [[colors]] and elaborate if not [[always]] convincing [[effects]]. [[So]] much [[work]] has gone into these [[films]] that one is [[inclined]] to smile in [[admiration]] at the effort [[regardless]]. '[[Forbidden]] Planet' is [[wonderful]] to look at. The scenes take place on obvious [[stage]] sets that are [[fabulously]] [[decorated]], matte paintings of planets and space in the background, and intricately designed miniature sand dunes and so forth to give the illusion of depth. It's a bit like watching the most elaborately-produced stage play you'd ever [[see]]. The most [[believable]] and [[convincing]] scenes are [[probably]] the ones inside the massive Krell complex, where shots showing the vast depth and width of this [[inner]] space are well-done and credible. But then we get to the [[actors]], darn it. The performances are [[almost]] uniformly awful, though in [[fairness]] one has to say the dialogue [[hardly]] ever [[transcends]] the [[level]] of [[adolescent]] locker-room [[humor]], except for some passages of barely [[adequate]] scientific technobabble. Even the [[great]] [[actor]] [[Walter]] Pidgeon is reduced to [[giving]] such a hammy performance, it's lugubrious at times. A very young Leslie Nielsen stars as the spaceship commander J.J. Adams, and doesn't convey an ounce of believability or conviction in the entire film. He seems to instinctively know, thirty years ahead of time, that his true forte' lay in comedy, as there are times he seems barely able to keep a straight face reciting his lines. Every forced reaction, whether it is anger or passion or solemn meditation, looks right out of a high school play. Anne Francis, also very young, fares a little better as the supposedly innocent Alta, whom we are to believe has never seen a human male other than her father until the crew of the spaceship shows up. (Alta Morbius, now there's a name for you.) Unfortunately, even at this early age, Anne Francis seems about as virginal and naive as Elizabeth Taylor in 'Butterfield 8.' There is a good story here, buried somewhere beneath the crew-mates' leering comments about Alta and yet another juvenile subplot concerning Earl Holliman's 'Cookie,' ship's cook. (Holliman turns in a [[horrendous]] performance too. I'm guessing all these actors went straight from this movie to acting school.) Based on Shakespeare's 'The Tempest,' the story of a dead race, the Krell, and the fantastic world of machines they left behind is what most people tend to remember about 'Forbidden Planet,' and for good reason. For a few minutes here and there, you can forget about the rest of the movie and be dazzled by the Disney artists' conception of the Krell underground complex. Is it enough to make up for the rest of the film's shortcomings? You'll have to decide that on your own. Oh, and of course there's Robby the Robot, every 1950's ten-year-old's idea of what a robot should look and talk like. He's funny. In places. So, 'Forbidden Planet' to me is a very, VERY mixed bag. It deserves credit for being the inspiration for a whole wave of sci-fi films and TV shows that followed, not least of which was 'Star Trek.' But I would suggest that anyone who thinks it's more than well-staged comic book sci-fi go back and watch it again. I should say at the [[startup]] there are [[innumerable]], many things I [[adore]] about '[[Outlaw]] Planet' and yes, I [[unquestionably]] [[scrutinize]] it a 'classic' science-fiction [[cinematographic]] for [[innumerable]] [[rationale]]. But the adulation it has [[benefited]] over the [[ages]] goes a bit over the top in my [[view]]. No less an authority than Leonard Maltin [[say]] '[[Prohibiting]] Planet' "...is one of the most ambitious and [[termite]] [[film]] of its [[genus]]." Ambitious? Without a doubt. [[Termite]]? Depends on what [[party]] of the film you're [[debating]] about. It [[probably]] was the most prestigious and highly-budgeted science-fiction [[film]] to that point. At a [[expenditures]] of nearly $2 [[billion]] (this was 1956, [[remembers]]), MGM [[pulling]] out all the [[halt]] to [[generating]] a [[startling]], eye-popping outer space [[adventurer]] unlike [[something]] [[watched]] on the [[enormous]] screen before, even employing [[performer]] from the Disney studio for some of the more elaborate [[particular]] [[implications]]. 'Charming' is not [[traditionally]] a word used to [[outlines]] special [[implications]] in sci-fi movies, [[again]] that is the one that seems most appropriate here. Even the [[frightful]] 'Monster from the Id' is only a well-rendered [[cartoons]] figure by the [[Disneyland]] people, unlikely to [[terrify]] [[someone]] over the age of 8. When I [[consults]] the [[several]] sets and take note of the art design, [[model]], [[clothes]], etc., I am reminded of nothing so much as 'The Wizard of Oz,' with its gorgeously saturated [[colours]] and elaborate if not [[continually]] convincing [[effect]]. [[Consequently]] much [[jobs]] has gone into these [[movie]] that one is [[minded]] to smile in [[exclamation]] at the effort [[apart]]. '[[Prohibition]] Planet' is [[wondrous]] to look at. The scenes take place on obvious [[phases]] sets that are [[fantastically]] [[adorned]], matte paintings of planets and space in the background, and intricately designed miniature sand dunes and so forth to give the illusion of depth. It's a bit like watching the most elaborately-produced stage play you'd ever [[behold]]. The most [[trustworthy]] and [[persuade]] scenes are [[presumably]] the ones inside the massive Krell complex, where shots showing the vast depth and width of this [[internally]] space are well-done and credible. But then we get to the [[actresses]], darn it. The performances are [[approximately]] uniformly awful, though in [[equality]] one has to say the dialogue [[barely]] ever [[surpasses]] the [[plano]] of [[schoolgirl]] locker-room [[comedy]], except for some passages of barely [[appropriate]] scientific technobabble. Even the [[awesome]] [[actress]] [[Walters]] Pidgeon is reduced to [[confer]] such a hammy performance, it's lugubrious at times. A very young Leslie Nielsen stars as the spaceship commander J.J. Adams, and doesn't convey an ounce of believability or conviction in the entire film. He seems to instinctively know, thirty years ahead of time, that his true forte' lay in comedy, as there are times he seems barely able to keep a straight face reciting his lines. Every forced reaction, whether it is anger or passion or solemn meditation, looks right out of a high school play. Anne Francis, also very young, fares a little better as the supposedly innocent Alta, whom we are to believe has never seen a human male other than her father until the crew of the spaceship shows up. (Alta Morbius, now there's a name for you.) Unfortunately, even at this early age, Anne Francis seems about as virginal and naive as Elizabeth Taylor in 'Butterfield 8.' There is a good story here, buried somewhere beneath the crew-mates' leering comments about Alta and yet another juvenile subplot concerning Earl Holliman's 'Cookie,' ship's cook. (Holliman turns in a [[vile]] performance too. I'm guessing all these actors went straight from this movie to acting school.) Based on Shakespeare's 'The Tempest,' the story of a dead race, the Krell, and the fantastic world of machines they left behind is what most people tend to remember about 'Forbidden Planet,' and for good reason. For a few minutes here and there, you can forget about the rest of the movie and be dazzled by the Disney artists' conception of the Krell underground complex. Is it enough to make up for the rest of the film's shortcomings? You'll have to decide that on your own. Oh, and of course there's Robby the Robot, every 1950's ten-year-old's idea of what a robot should look and talk like. He's funny. In places. So, 'Forbidden Planet' to me is a very, VERY mixed bag. It deserves credit for being the inspiration for a whole wave of sci-fi films and TV shows that followed, not least of which was 'Star Trek.' But I would suggest that anyone who thinks it's more than well-staged comic book sci-fi go back and watch it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of John Ford's best films 'The Informer' doesn't feature any grand scenery of the American West. Instead the intense drama Ford was known for plays out on the no less rugged terrain of British character actor Victor McLaglen's face. The former prizefighter, who once faced Joe Louis in the ring, delivers an Academy Award-winning portrayal of disgraced IRA soldier Gypo Nolan on the worst night of his life.

The plot is gracefully simple: In 1922 Dublin, a starving and humiliated man who's been thrown out of the IRA for being unable to kill an informant in cold blood, himself becomes an informant. For £20 he betrays a friend to "the Tans" and for the rest of the night he drinks and gives away his blood money in rapidly alternating spasms of guilt, denial, self-pity, and a desperate desire to escape the consequences of his actions.

It is the remarkable complexity given to the character of the seemingly simple Gypo that is the film's most impressive achievement. In most movies a burly lout of Gypo's type would be cast as the heavy, he'd have at best two or three lines and be disposed of quickly so the hero and the villain could have their showdown. In 'The Informer' Gypo himself is both hero and villain, while the showdown is in his inner turmoil, every bit of which is explicitly shared with the audience.

Because Liam O'Flaherty's novel had previously been filmed in 1929, RKO gave Ford a very modest budget. The director and his associates, particularly cinematographer Joseph H. August, turned this to their advantage in creating a claustrophobic masterpiece about a man at war with himself. In addition to McLaglen's Oscar 'The Informer' also won John Ford his first along with wins for Best Screenplay and Best Score. --------------------------------------------- Result 4022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] When [[Carol]] (Vanessa Hidalgo) starts [[looking]] into her brother's [[death]], she begins to [[suspect]] [[something]] more sinister than "natural causes". The [[closer]] she gets to the truth, the more of a [[threat]] she becomes to her sister-in-law, Fiona ([[Helga]] Line), and the [[rest]] of the local Satanists. They'll do whatever is necessary to put a stop her [[nosy]] ways.

If you're into [[sleazy]], Satanic-themed movies, Black [[Candles]] has a lot to [[offer]]. The [[movie]] is filled with plenty of nudity and [[ritualistic]] soft-core [[sex]]. One scene in particular involving a young woman and a goat must be seen to be believed. Unfortunately, all the sleaze in the [[world]] can't [[save]] Black Candles. Most of the movie is a total bore. Other than the one scene I've already [[mentioned]], the [[numerous]] sex scenes aren't [[shocking]] and [[certainly]] aren't sexy. The acting is spotty at [[best]]. [[Even]] genre [[favorite]] Helga Line [[gives]] a [[disappointing]] performance. The plot [[really]] doesn't [[matter]]. Its [[main]] [[function]] seems to be to hold the string of dull sex scenes [[together]]. I'm only familiar with one other [[movie]] directed by [[Jose]] Ramon Larraz. [[Compared]] with his [[Daughters]] of [[Darkness]] that masterfully [[mixes]] [[eroticism]] and [[horror]], [[Black]] Candles [[comes]] off as amateurish. 3/10 is about the best I can do. When [[Carole]] (Vanessa Hidalgo) starts [[searching]] into her brother's [[killings]], she begins to [[suspicious]] [[anything]] more sinister than "natural causes". The [[tighter]] she gets to the truth, the more of a [[menace]] she becomes to her sister-in-law, Fiona ([[Manolis]] Line), and the [[stays]] of the local Satanists. They'll do whatever is necessary to put a stop her [[odd]] ways.

If you're into [[dirty]], Satanic-themed movies, Black [[Sails]] has a lot to [[delivers]]. The [[filmmaking]] is filled with plenty of nudity and [[ritual]] soft-core [[sexuality]]. One scene in particular involving a young woman and a goat must be seen to be believed. Unfortunately, all the sleaze in the [[worldwide]] can't [[rescued]] Black Candles. Most of the movie is a total bore. Other than the one scene I've already [[cited]], the [[many]] sex scenes aren't [[staggering]] and [[definitely]] aren't sexy. The acting is spotty at [[finest]]. [[Yet]] genre [[favored]] Helga Line [[provides]] a [[depressing]] performance. The plot [[truly]] doesn't [[question]]. Its [[leading]] [[operation]] seems to be to hold the string of dull sex scenes [[jointly]]. I'm only familiar with one other [[film]] directed by [[Martinez]] Ramon Larraz. [[Comparison]] with his [[Female]] of [[Dark]] that masterfully [[blend]] [[sensuality]] and [[terror]], [[Negro]] Candles [[happens]] off as amateurish. 3/10 is about the best I can do. --------------------------------------------- Result 4023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Parsifal (1982) Starring Michael Kutter, Armin Jordan, Robert Lloyd, Martin Sperr, Edith Clever, Aage Haugland and the voices of Reiner Goldberg, Yvonne Minton, Wolfgang Schone, Director Hans-Jurgen Syberberg.

Straight out of the German school of film, the kind that favored tons of symbolism and Ingmar Bergmanesque surrealism, came this 1982 film of Wagner's final masterpiece- Parsifal, written to correspond with Good Friday/Easter and the consecration of the Bayreuth Opera House. This film follows the musical score and plot accurately but the manner in which it was filmed and performed is bold and avant-garde and no other Parsifal takes the crown in its bizarre cinematography. Syberberg is known for controversial films. Prior to this film he had released films about Hitler and Nazism, Richard Wagner and his personal Anti-Semitism and a documentary about Winifred Wagner, one of his grand-daughters. This film is possibly disturbing in many aspects. Parsifal (sung by Reiner Goldberg but acted by Michael Kutter) is a male throughout the first part of the film and then, after the enchantment of Kundry's kiss, is transformed into a female. This gender-bending element displays the feminine/masculine/ying-yang nature of the quest for the Holy Grail, which serves all mankind and redeems it through Christ's blood. In the pagan sorcerer Klingsor's fortress, there are photographs of such notoriously sinister figures as Hitler, Nietzche, Cosima Wagner and Wagner's mistress Matilde Wesendock. The Swaztika flag hangs outside the fortress. Parsifal journeys into the 19th and 20th century throughout the film. The tempting Flower Maidens are in the nude. Kundry is portrayed as a sort of beautiful but corrupt Mary Magdalene or Eve from Genesis (played by Edith Clever but beautifully sung by mezzo-soprano Yvonne Minton). Ultimately, this film is for fans of this type of bizarre Germanic/European symbolic metafiction and for intellectuals who appreciate the symbolism, the history and lovers of Wagner opera. Indeed, the singing is grand and compelling. Reiner Goldberg's Parsifal is a focused and intense voice but it lacks the depth and overall greatness of the greater Parsifals of the stage - James King, Wolfgang Windgassen, Rene Kollo and today's own Placido Domingo. Yvone Minton is a sensual-voiced, dramatic and exciting Kundry, delving into her tormented state perfectly. While the production is certainly unorthodox and as un-Wagnerian as it can possibly get (Wagner's concept was Christian ceremonial pomp with Grails, spears, castles, Knights and wounded kings, a dark sorcerer, darkness turning into light, etc typical Wagnerian themes)..it is still an enjoyable, art-house film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] If you're after the real story of early Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi, you'll be disappointed- however if you're after a reasonably crafted bodice ripper with an art theme, you've found you're movie.

This film is such a foundationally [[inaccurate]] depiction of Artemisia Gentileschi's life that it almost made me weep. (Type in Artemisia inaccuracies in Google and check out some of the fact vs. fiction articles.) From a purely technical point of view though, the film was alright: the sets, costumes, and especially the chiaroscuro lighting helped create an immersive early 17th century experience; although the above mentioned GLARING FACTUAL INACCURACIES let it down a bit.

I wonder how the director/co-writer Agnès Merlet defended her film at the time? Perhaps she refused to portray Artemisia as a victim, which would've been unfortunate, because lets face it, she was. If you're after the real story of early Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi, you'll be disappointed- however if you're after a reasonably crafted bodice ripper with an art theme, you've found you're movie.

This film is such a foundationally [[fallacious]] depiction of Artemisia Gentileschi's life that it almost made me weep. (Type in Artemisia inaccuracies in Google and check out some of the fact vs. fiction articles.) From a purely technical point of view though, the film was alright: the sets, costumes, and especially the chiaroscuro lighting helped create an immersive early 17th century experience; although the above mentioned GLARING FACTUAL INACCURACIES let it down a bit.

I wonder how the director/co-writer Agnès Merlet defended her film at the time? Perhaps she refused to portray Artemisia as a victim, which would've been unfortunate, because lets face it, she was. --------------------------------------------- Result 4025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ... Hawk Heaven for lovers of French cinema and by extension French Screen actors/actresses. At its worst it's an indulgence, actors getting to bitch about other actors, question the validity of acting as a profession at all, etc whilst at its best it's a glorious celebration/send-up of some of the finest actors currently working. From a simple premise - Jean-Pierre Marielle's request for water being ignored in a restaurant - Blier spins off in all directions and allows the cream of French cinema to strut their stuff before the camera even throwing in nods to those no longer around (Jean Gabin, Lino Ventura) including the Director's father, Bernard, one of the great stalwarts of French cinema, from whom he fields a celestial phone call at the end of the film. Discursive and prolix, yes, guilty as charged but also something of a guilty pleasure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] About 1986 I saw this movie by accident on TV one [[night]]. I was 6 years old. It was similar to my accidental viewing of the terrifying [[ending]] to Don't Look Now in 1987. I went to Venice on holiday the next year in silent terror, hoping to god that my parents wouldn't find out I'd watched it!

[[Would]] I have minded if my parents knew I'd [[watched]] Les Valseuses when I was a [[kid]]? I'd [[probably]] [[avoid]] the subject with my [[dad]] even [[nowadays]], and my mum's [[probably]] disapproving in the afterlife. I don't know if they'd [[want]] to [[see]] it anyway. From the stalking and [[trapping]] of a [[woman]] at the [[block]] of flats in the [[first]] scene to [[sliding]] down the [[mountain]] [[roads]] with glazed satiated eyes I'm never sure whether this [[film]] is an insensitive piece of trash that disregards the sexual revolution or if it's a [[sexy]] liberating movie to watch as it dawns on you that you could never be so offensive yourself.

It's [[definitely]] violent. It has a violent [[view]] of [[sex]], [[virtually]] no [[acknowledgement]] of [[love]]. Even suckling a [[young]] [[baby]] mutates into a [[greedy]] sexual act of exploitation. But the [[scenario]] IS very erotic and (god I'm so British) arousing! Do they suck her breasts for her own good? That is exploitation. So why am I getting a woody?

The fellows go in search of an experienced older woman, find an ex-con, mother-figure? I don't know. It ends in a truly gruesome [[suicide]]. I described it to my friend JB Nelson, who has Cannibal Holocaust-guts, and he went eeuurrgghh! No motherly love for this movie, [[quite]] the opposite. Mutilation of where the boys began. Why do they shoot the girl in the leg? Why does she come back to them? Do women need to be punished so that they learn what is right from men?

I'm thinking of two movies, one of which I wish I'd never seen, the other makes me wish it wasn't such a harsh world. Swept Away/Madonna what a pile of insanity doesn't compute never been so offended that a woman punished for being a woman [[becomes]] slave to man and its maybe madonna saying everybody respect guy ritchie im so enraged i cant use punctuation! Once Upon A Time In America/Leone god why does Noodles do it? Destroys the path to joy we've been following him on his whole life. So close to finally finding love with Deborah. Now they are both destroyed. Why Sergio? Why?

There is no rape in Les Valseuses but lots of sex and nakedness in abundance, of both sexes. Very honest, no titillation. No fantasy shags, no perfect Hollywood smooth moves. Jokes, yes. But there's too much darkness and jealousy and trickery in here to call it a sex comedy. Forget Carry On Shooting A Naked Hairdresser In The Leg Cos She'll Come Back & You'll Hook Her Up With Your Ex-con Lover's Vengeant Son & She'll Learn How To Cum From Him.

Two things I can't stand are rape movies and prison movies. Les Valseuses isn't a rape movie! God nobody's going to want to watch it now! It is a brilliant movie! About 1986 I saw this movie by accident on TV one [[nocturnal]]. I was 6 years old. It was similar to my accidental viewing of the terrifying [[ended]] to Don't Look Now in 1987. I went to Venice on holiday the next year in silent terror, hoping to god that my parents wouldn't find out I'd watched it!

[[Ought]] I have minded if my parents knew I'd [[saw]] Les Valseuses when I was a [[petit]]? I'd [[surely]] [[stave]] the subject with my [[pope]] even [[today]], and my mum's [[surely]] disapproving in the afterlife. I don't know if they'd [[wanted]] to [[behold]] it anyway. From the stalking and [[trap]] of a [[daughters]] at the [[bloc]] of flats in the [[outset]] scene to [[slide]] down the [[mont]] [[arteries]] with glazed satiated eyes I'm never sure whether this [[cinematography]] is an insensitive piece of trash that disregards the sexual revolution or if it's a [[sexier]] liberating movie to watch as it dawns on you that you could never be so offensive yourself.

It's [[obviously]] violent. It has a violent [[viewing]] of [[sexuality]], [[basically]] no [[appreciation]] of [[loves]]. Even suckling a [[youths]] [[babe]] mutates into a [[miserly]] sexual act of exploitation. But the [[screenplays]] IS very erotic and (god I'm so British) arousing! Do they suck her breasts for her own good? That is exploitation. So why am I getting a woody?

The fellows go in search of an experienced older woman, find an ex-con, mother-figure? I don't know. It ends in a truly gruesome [[suicidal]]. I described it to my friend JB Nelson, who has Cannibal Holocaust-guts, and he went eeuurrgghh! No motherly love for this movie, [[utterly]] the opposite. Mutilation of where the boys began. Why do they shoot the girl in the leg? Why does she come back to them? Do women need to be punished so that they learn what is right from men?

I'm thinking of two movies, one of which I wish I'd never seen, the other makes me wish it wasn't such a harsh world. Swept Away/Madonna what a pile of insanity doesn't compute never been so offended that a woman punished for being a woman [[becoming]] slave to man and its maybe madonna saying everybody respect guy ritchie im so enraged i cant use punctuation! Once Upon A Time In America/Leone god why does Noodles do it? Destroys the path to joy we've been following him on his whole life. So close to finally finding love with Deborah. Now they are both destroyed. Why Sergio? Why?

There is no rape in Les Valseuses but lots of sex and nakedness in abundance, of both sexes. Very honest, no titillation. No fantasy shags, no perfect Hollywood smooth moves. Jokes, yes. But there's too much darkness and jealousy and trickery in here to call it a sex comedy. Forget Carry On Shooting A Naked Hairdresser In The Leg Cos She'll Come Back & You'll Hook Her Up With Your Ex-con Lover's Vengeant Son & She'll Learn How To Cum From Him.

Two things I can't stand are rape movies and prison movies. Les Valseuses isn't a rape movie! God nobody's going to want to watch it now! It is a brilliant movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, some people would say that this particular movie stinks...but hey! Thats not right, not right at al...The movie may not have the best special effects, and may not have the best actors (Except the exelence of the Barbarian Bros.) Dispite theese minor fact, I can honostly say that this is one of the funniest movies I´ve ever seen, and I´ve seen em al! --------------------------------------------- Result 4028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Having seen "[[Triumph]] of the Will," I can only say this [[movie]] is ghastly, [[even]] measured against the historically low "[[standards]]" of the time. [[Naturally]] it's all [[totally]] [[fabricated]] and [[prejudicial]]. This is what one would expect of 1930's German propaganda. Unfortunately, the quality of the presentation, itself, is hackneyed and cheap. It's also so [[blatantly]] [[ridiculous]] that even [[contemporary]] Germans must've left the theater holding their noses. In a [[genre]] renowned for its [[base]] [[appeal]], [[lack]] of originality and unapologetic wrong-headedness, this [[film]] doesn't [[even]] qualify as "[[bad]]." It would have to [[improve]] [[significantly]] to [[attain]] that status! Having seen "[[Triomphe]] of the Will," I can only say this [[filmmaking]] is ghastly, [[yet]] measured against the historically low "[[norms]]" of the time. [[Patently]] it's all [[fully]] [[manufactured]] and [[negative]]. This is what one would expect of 1930's German propaganda. Unfortunately, the quality of the presentation, itself, is hackneyed and cheap. It's also so [[notoriously]] [[farcical]] that even [[moderne]] Germans must've left the theater holding their noses. In a [[kind]] renowned for its [[groundwork]] [[recourse]], [[imperfection]] of originality and unapologetic wrong-headedness, this [[filmmaking]] doesn't [[yet]] qualify as "[[negative]]." It would have to [[strengthening]] [[noticeably]] to [[realising]] that status! --------------------------------------------- Result 4029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It was considered to be the "Swiss answer to the Lord of the [[Rings]]", but it is [[much]] more than that. It isn't an [[answer]] to [[anything]], it's in itself something new, [[something]] [[funny]] and sometimes it's downright stupid and [[silly]] - but was [[Monty]] [[Python]] any [[different]] than silly?

The beginning immediately makes the statement that this film is low budget and not meant to be taken entirely seriously. Cardboard clouds on strings knock into the [[airplane]] in which the main character is seated. But, to compensate the missing special effects, the landscape does the trick. It is absolutely beautiful and stunning - who needs New Zealand, Switzerland has it all.

What I [[liked]] about the [[film]] was the simple approach and the obvious passion and energy that went into it. It isn't brilliant; yet it's got some good humorous parts. Edward Piccin as Friedo is absolutely convincing, it would be enough to go and see the film because of him!There are some good jokes, some of them are very lame, some of them won't be understood by people outside of Switzerland. I liked the idea of having "Urucows" instead of Uruk Hai; I loved the scene where Friedo decides to take "Pupsi", a telehobbie, with him on the journey. Also very funny is the scene when Rackaroll, the sword-fighting knight, decides to show off with his sword - and subsequently smashes it into a wall, breaking it. And there is this one scene where the "nazgul-ish" characters do a [[wonderfully]] comic scene that includes a toilet brush... I didn't approve of the idea of the Ring being used by Schleimli, the "Gollum" character, in order to "seduce" the ladies. That was a bit far fetched. The idea of Lord Sauraus wanting to cover the lands with fondue wasn't that brilliant either. Original, certainly, but not brilliant. But most of all did I dislike the idea of a gay dragon, that really wasn't necessary. All in all I recommend to see the film simply because it is so crazy and totally trashy. Don't expect a LotR parody like "Spaceballs" was for Star Wars. But if you go to the flicks thinking that this is going to be an amusing evening out, with absolutely no ambitions, then you'll enjoy. I am not sure if it works in other languages, because it does live from the Swiss dialects as well as from the jokes and actors.

All in all: hat off to the courage of the Swiss crew who did that! It was considered to be the "Swiss answer to the Lord of the [[Piercings]]", but it is [[very]] more than that. It isn't an [[replying]] to [[something]], it's in itself something new, [[anything]] [[humorous]] and sometimes it's downright stupid and [[dolt]] - but was [[Python]] [[Monty]] any [[several]] than silly?

The beginning immediately makes the statement that this film is low budget and not meant to be taken entirely seriously. Cardboard clouds on strings knock into the [[aircrafts]] in which the main character is seated. But, to compensate the missing special effects, the landscape does the trick. It is absolutely beautiful and stunning - who needs New Zealand, Switzerland has it all.

What I [[wished]] about the [[cinematographic]] was the simple approach and the obvious passion and energy that went into it. It isn't brilliant; yet it's got some good humorous parts. Edward Piccin as Friedo is absolutely convincing, it would be enough to go and see the film because of him!There are some good jokes, some of them are very lame, some of them won't be understood by people outside of Switzerland. I liked the idea of having "Urucows" instead of Uruk Hai; I loved the scene where Friedo decides to take "Pupsi", a telehobbie, with him on the journey. Also very funny is the scene when Rackaroll, the sword-fighting knight, decides to show off with his sword - and subsequently smashes it into a wall, breaking it. And there is this one scene where the "nazgul-ish" characters do a [[strikingly]] comic scene that includes a toilet brush... I didn't approve of the idea of the Ring being used by Schleimli, the "Gollum" character, in order to "seduce" the ladies. That was a bit far fetched. The idea of Lord Sauraus wanting to cover the lands with fondue wasn't that brilliant either. Original, certainly, but not brilliant. But most of all did I dislike the idea of a gay dragon, that really wasn't necessary. All in all I recommend to see the film simply because it is so crazy and totally trashy. Don't expect a LotR parody like "Spaceballs" was for Star Wars. But if you go to the flicks thinking that this is going to be an amusing evening out, with absolutely no ambitions, then you'll enjoy. I am not sure if it works in other languages, because it does live from the Swiss dialects as well as from the jokes and actors.

All in all: hat off to the courage of the Swiss crew who did that! --------------------------------------------- Result 4030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I can say without a [[shadow]] of a doubt that Going Overboard is the single [[worst]] film i have ever [[seen]], and yes, I have [[seen]] Cujo. [[Adam]] Sandler is an [[abomination]] as Schecky Moskowitz, a wannabe comedian working on a cruise liner. That's the plot.

That's it! [[Nothing]] else in the [[film]] makes sense, it's all over the place like a [[mad]] man's [[breakfast]], and not in a wacky naked gun [[kind]] of [[way]], but more of a [[frustrating]], 'throw both shoes at the t.v' kind of way. [[even]] [[General]] Noriega makes an appearance, for no [[reason]] i can [[comprehend]] (it [[certainly]] wasn't for [[humour]]). [[Add]] to the [[mix]] Miss Australia, who has the [[worst]] Australian [[Accent]] i've ever heared, and you have [[something]] which i won't [[call]] the worst [[film]] ever [[made]], because [[Going]] overboard doesn't [[even]] [[fit]] the basic definition of a [[film]]. I [[highly]] recomend [[seeing]] this film, as it will elevate the [[standing]] of every [[bad]] [[film]] you ever see. I [[guarantee]] the first thing you'll say after [[seeing]] a [[bad]] [[film]] will be "at least it wasn't as bad as Going Overboard". I can say without a [[shade]] of a doubt that Going Overboard is the single [[pire]] film i have ever [[watched]], and yes, I have [[noticed]] Cujo. [[Adams]] Sandler is an [[horror]] as Schecky Moskowitz, a wannabe comedian working on a cruise liner. That's the plot.

That's it! [[Anything]] else in the [[filmmaking]] makes sense, it's all over the place like a [[crazy]] man's [[dinners]], and not in a wacky naked gun [[kinds]] of [[pathway]], but more of a [[discouraging]], 'throw both shoes at the t.v' kind of way. [[yet]] [[Overall]] Noriega makes an appearance, for no [[cause]] i can [[understand]] (it [[admittedly]] wasn't for [[comedy]]). [[Added]] to the [[mixes]] Miss Australia, who has the [[meanest]] Australian [[Emphasis]] i've ever heared, and you have [[somethings]] which i won't [[calling]] the worst [[filmmaking]] ever [[accomplished]], because [[Gonna]] overboard doesn't [[yet]] [[fitted]] the basic definition of a [[filmmaking]]. I [[immensely]] recomend [[see]] this film, as it will elevate the [[stand]] of every [[negative]] [[kino]] you ever see. I [[guaranteed]] the first thing you'll say after [[see]] a [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] will be "at least it wasn't as bad as Going Overboard". --------------------------------------------- Result 4031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a great movie for all ages. Its the story about three animals how have to find their way home. There is a bit of a twist at the end and mainly throughout the whole movie. You never know what is going to happen next. This movie makes you cry and makes you laugh. You just don't know what going to happen next. The trek home is all beautiful with all the wonderful wildlife scenes. They producers also spent a lot of money for this movie and it shows too. The animals in this movie were well trained and are great actors/actress themselves. Everything about this movie is great! 10 out of 10 the whole way! Rent or buy it today I can guarantee you will love it the whole family will! --------------------------------------------- Result 4032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] To call a [[movie]] like "Thinner" bad is like calling the [[earth]] round or [[Pauly]] [[Shore]] un-talented. [[No]] news, but how they got that way is what people want to [[know]].

As far as this movie.... The [[book]] was good, even if it was a little derivative of other stories from the "be careful what you wish for" genre. Burke plays an overweight lawyer who kills the daughter of a gypsy and is [[cursed]] by her father ([[Constantine]] from TV's "Room 222") to several pounds a day.

Like I said, it starts out good, but why [[involve]] the [[mobster]] (Mantegna)? Why fire automatic weapons so much? Why [[turn]] it into [[something]] so heavily dependent on FX? I thought it would have been [[much]] more effective if it [[focused]] more on the subtle ramifications of weight loss crazes, diseases, death, gypsy lore and such.

But no, it's not to be. [[Remember]], this is Stephen King we're talking about.

And the ending... almost the same as the book, but a [[little]] too talky. In fact the [[whole]] movie talks too much, feeling it has to explain every [[plot]] turn to us. Not that I [[expected]] "The [[Dead]] Zone", but I [[could]] have done without another "Pet Sematary", thanks anyway.

One star for at [[least]] trying to do a halfway decent makeup job. However, the [[rest]] of the movie is [[left]] to be... say it with me... "Thinner". To call a [[filmmaking]] like "Thinner" bad is like calling the [[terra]] round or [[Paolo]] [[Rive]] un-talented. [[Nope]] news, but how they got that way is what people want to [[savoir]].

As far as this movie.... The [[ledger]] was good, even if it was a little derivative of other stories from the "be careful what you wish for" genre. Burke plays an overweight lawyer who kills the daughter of a gypsy and is [[damn]] by her father ([[Konstantin]] from TV's "Room 222") to several pounds a day.

Like I said, it starts out good, but why [[implicate]] the [[felon]] (Mantegna)? Why fire automatic weapons so much? Why [[transforming]] it into [[anything]] so heavily dependent on FX? I thought it would have been [[very]] more effective if it [[focuses]] more on the subtle ramifications of weight loss crazes, diseases, death, gypsy lore and such.

But no, it's not to be. [[Recollect]], this is Stephen King we're talking about.

And the ending... almost the same as the book, but a [[scant]] too talky. In fact the [[ensemble]] movie talks too much, feeling it has to explain every [[intrigue]] turn to us. Not that I [[scheduled]] "The [[Dies]] Zone", but I [[wo]] have done without another "Pet Sematary", thanks anyway.

One star for at [[lowest]] trying to do a halfway decent makeup job. However, the [[resting]] of the movie is [[gauche]] to be... say it with me... "Thinner". --------------------------------------------- Result 4033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[saw]] this a couple of nights back, not [[expecting]] too much and unsurprisingly it didn't deliver [[anything]] too exciting. The plot set up of a crew of vampire hunters (V-San, for vampire sanitation), going around in their spaceship [[periodically]] killing space vamps and [[rescuing]] people, is quite sound and had the [[film]] been handled better it might well have been [[something]] quite ace. [[Unfortunately]] after a [[fairly]] decent [[opening]] the [[sense]] of actual quality starts to drain away from the film, leaving something behind that, though vacantly watchable, is [[quite]] laughably [[bad]]. I don't expect [[anything]] too special from these [[films]] that pop up on the Sci Fi [[Channel]] and at [[least]] this wasn't one of their [[creature]] features with an [[atrocious]] cgi beast shambling about, but it was [[still]] pretty [[bad]], [[mostly]] due to the [[writing]] and acting, but with a sterling contribution to the [[overall]] badness [[made]] by the [[horrible]] [[music]]. When the [[film]] [[opted]] just for a typical [[science]] fiction sounding [[weird]] [[noises]] approach to the soundtrack it did OK, but all too [[often]] hilariously [[bad]] soft rock intruded and pitched scenes into [[silliness]]. I [[would]] have [[tolerated]] the general cheesy acting and [[writing]] more were it not for the [[choice]] of [[music]], which was a serious miscalculation, [[turning]] things from cheesy to lamely [[comical]]. Of the acting, Dominic Zamprogna was OK but bland as the nominal [[hero]], [[whilst]] Leanne Adachi was [[pretty]] irritating as the tough girl of the vamp busting team and [[Aaron]] Pearl played another [[member]] who wasn't well [[written]] or interesting [[enough]] to make an [[impression]]. Though she didn't seem that good at the acting lark Natassia Malte did well through having a less [[irritating]] [[character]] than the others, and the fact that she is [[seriously]] nice to look at. The only [[serious]] [[name]] in the cast is [[Michael]] Ironside and he is underused though he does nicely, pretty [[amusing]] in a [[manner]] one suspects was intentional. He seems to have [[fun]] and [[earn]] his [[paycheck]] and his role is entertaining. The effects are OK on the [[whole]], they are at least of the [[standards]] of the average science fiction TV show, and there are [[also]] a few scenes of [[blood]] splatter and a [[bit]] of fun gore as well. [[Things]] move along nicely, and I [[almost]] feel [[harsh]] [[rating]] this [[film]] [[badly]], but then I [[remember]] [[bursting]] into [[laughter]] at [[regular]] [[intervals]] and [[realising]] that [[unless]] the [[film]] is an intentional comedy, which I don't [[think]] it is, then it [[simply]] doesn't succeed. Too much is lame, daft, unconvincing, its an OK effort I guess but it didn't appeal to me. [[Only]] give it a go if you really dig Sci Fi trash or unintended chuckles I'd say. I [[noticed]] this a couple of nights back, not [[awaited]] too much and unsurprisingly it didn't deliver [[something]] too exciting. The plot set up of a crew of vampire hunters (V-San, for vampire sanitation), going around in their spaceship [[routinely]] killing space vamps and [[redding]] people, is quite sound and had the [[films]] been handled better it might well have been [[anything]] quite ace. [[Sadly]] after a [[comparatively]] decent [[open]] the [[feeling]] of actual quality starts to drain away from the film, leaving something behind that, though vacantly watchable, is [[rather]] laughably [[unfavourable]]. I don't expect [[nothing]] too special from these [[movie]] that pop up on the Sci Fi [[Channeling]] and at [[lowest]] this wasn't one of their [[creatures]] features with an [[detestable]] cgi beast shambling about, but it was [[nonetheless]] pretty [[negative]], [[predominantly]] due to the [[handwriting]] and acting, but with a sterling contribution to the [[general]] badness [[introduced]] by the [[horrendous]] [[musicians]]. When the [[filmmaking]] [[chooses]] just for a typical [[veda]] fiction sounding [[outlandish]] [[sounds]] approach to the soundtrack it did OK, but all too [[typically]] hilariously [[rotten]] soft rock intruded and pitched scenes into [[hilarity]]. I [[ought]] have [[tolerate]] the general cheesy acting and [[write]] more were it not for the [[choose]] of [[musica]], which was a serious miscalculation, [[turn]] things from cheesy to lamely [[hilarious]]. Of the acting, Dominic Zamprogna was OK but bland as the nominal [[superhero]], [[whereas]] Leanne Adachi was [[belle]] irritating as the tough girl of the vamp busting team and [[Arun]] Pearl played another [[members]] who wasn't well [[writes]] or interesting [[sufficient]] to make an [[printing]]. Though she didn't seem that good at the acting lark Natassia Malte did well through having a less [[troublesome]] [[characters]] than the others, and the fact that she is [[profoundly]] nice to look at. The only [[severe]] [[denomination]] in the cast is [[Michele]] Ironside and he is underused though he does nicely, pretty [[entertaining]] in a [[mode]] one suspects was intentional. He seems to have [[entertaining]] and [[win]] his [[paychecks]] and his role is entertaining. The effects are OK on the [[total]], they are at least of the [[standard]] of the average science fiction TV show, and there are [[additionally]] a few scenes of [[chrissake]] splatter and a [[bite]] of fun gore as well. [[Items]] move along nicely, and I [[hardly]] feel [[tough]] [[appraisals]] this [[cinema]] [[desperately]], but then I [[remembers]] [[blasting]] into [[chuckles]] at [[regularly]] [[ranges]] and [[realize]] that [[if]] the [[filmmaking]] is an intentional comedy, which I don't [[believe]] it is, then it [[exclusively]] doesn't succeed. Too much is lame, daft, unconvincing, its an OK effort I guess but it didn't appeal to me. [[Alone]] give it a go if you really dig Sci Fi trash or unintended chuckles I'd say. --------------------------------------------- Result 4034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Vampire Bat is set in the small German village of Klineschloss where Gustave Schoen (Lionel Belmore) the Burgermeister is holding a meeting with Inspector Karl Brettschneider (Melvyn Douglas) from the local constabulary about all the recent murders, six victims have been discovered in as many weeks all drained of blood & bearing the same two puncture wounds on their necks. Brettschneider doesn't have a single clue but the superstitious elders of the village believe the deaths to be the work of a Vampire. Brettschneider isn't convinced but the scared villagers keep telling tales of seeing a large Bat, meanwhile the latest victim Martha Mueller (Rita Carlyle) has been found. Brettschneider comes under increasing pressure to solve the murders but can he really believe that a giant Vampire Bat is responsible & if it is how's he going to stop it?

Directed by Frank R. Strayer The Vampire Bat was a cheapie from Majestic Pictures to cash in on the success of it's two stars Atwill & Wray & their success in the previous years Doctor X (1932) & is more of a murder mystery rather than a horror as the exploitative & enticing title may have lead you to believe & quite frankly it's rather dull. The script by Edward T. Lowe Jr. takes itself rather seriously & sets up the basic story that something is killing local villagers & that something could possibly be a Vampire, then for most of it's duration the film focuses on Brettschneider & his incompetent investigations which are, not to put too fine a point on it, boring. The Vampire Bat also has a bit of an identity crisis as it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, the title would suggest a horror film while the majority of it could easily be described as a thriller with the final few minutes descending into silly sci-fi. There is no Vampire Bat, the attempts to fool you are pathetic, all the character's are broad stereotypes & you can tell the villain of the piece straight away & as a whole there is nothing particularly exciting or entertaining about The Vampire Bat. I know it's old but that's not an excuse as cinema has moved on a lot since 1933 & a bland, flat, dull, boring & misleading film such as The Vampire Bat just doesn't cut it these days, just look at the original King Kong (1933) released the same year & how brilliantly that still holds up today. I didn't like it & I doubt many modern film-goers would either, it's as simple & straight forward as that.

Director Strayer doesn't do anything special but this is a case in point where I can cut the film some slack because of it's age, as a whole it's pretty much point, shoot & hope for the best stuff. There isn't much in the way of atmosphere or scares although some of the sets which were already existing ones taken from The Old Dark House (1932) & Universal's European set on their back-lot are nice & add a certain ambiance to things.

Technically The Vampire Bat can't compare to anything even remotely modern, for the age of it it's alright I suppose but again I draw your attention back to the original King Kong. Speaking of King Kong it's star Fay Wray has a role in this as does horror icon Lionel Atwill, I'll be kind & say the acting is OK.

The Vampire Bat will I imagine fool a lot of people into thinking that it's a horror film about Vampire Bats when in fact it isn't, personally I thought the whole thing was a bit of a bore. It's short & it tells it's story reasonably enough but I must admit I'm not a fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 4035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was such a waste of time. Danger: If you watch it you will be tempted to tear your DVD out of the wall and heave it thru the window.

An amateur production: terrible, repetitive, vacuous dialog; paper-thin plot line; wooden performances; Lucy Lawless was pathetically hackneyed.

Seriously flawed story, completely unbelievable characters. The two worst concepts in film and t.v. are: (1) the evil twin, (2) amnesia. There are no twins.

The plot "twist"? Outrageously simplistic and obvious - like watching a train coming down the track in the middle of the day on the prairies. It doesn't even resolve properly. The evil is not punished for the original crime.

Please, please, please - don't watch this even if its free and your only other choice is to go to a synagogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 4036 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[STAR]] [[RATING]]: ***** [[Saturday]] [[Night]] **** [[Friday]] [[Night]] *** Friday Morning ** Sunday [[Night]] * [[Monday]] Morning

[[Long]] [[time]] [[inmate]] Twitch (Kurupt) [[gets]] himself transfered to a tougher prison than the re-opened Alcatraz. He claims it's to be [[closer]] to his lady but his real motives are a bit more grandiose. There he [[crosses]] paths with Burke ([[Bill]] Goldberg) a bulky prisoner who can [[take]] [[care]] of himself. [[Twitch]], despite being less muscular, is just as mouthy and is pretty much the same. But there is a gang war brewing between the black and [[hispanic]] inmates that [[explodes]] into a hostile takeover of the [[prison]] when the black's gang leader is shot dead and the finger [[points]] at Burke. But the sh!t [[really]] hits the fan when the [[real]] killer and leader of the hispanics, Cortez (Robert Madrid) takes Twitch's girlfriend and Burke's daughter hostage.

Steven Seagal doesn't do sequels (reportedly very opposed to the [[idea]] of Under Siege 2 and only agreeing to do it on the condition the film company he was with at the time let direct his own [[movie]]) so [[despite]] this being a DVD sequel, the lead role this time round goes to Bill Golberg ([[Steve]] doesn't [[even]] [[appear]] in some of the [[stock]] footage from the first film that [[appears]] [[towards]] the end.) But there's a reason he hasn't done much [[work]] since Universal [[Soldier]] 2 and that's because he's not [[much]] of an [[actor]], and not much of an [[action]] star either, [[managing]] a character that [[begins]] as very dark and brooding but unsubtly [[turns]] into a standard action hero [[awkwardly]] quipping off [[dull]] one-liners. [[Support]] wise, veterans from the first film, Kurupt and Tony Plana, have [[merely]] jumped at the chance of extra work.

This is a film that's [[tried]] to copy the style of the original quite well, with the dim lighting, dark shadows and rap music playing over a lot of it. It does this quite well, unfortunately it can't contend with an unengaging hero, an [[equally]] [[cardboard]] villain and an apathetic story that the makers do very much seem to have made up as they went along. ** [[SUPERSTAR]] [[EVALUATIONS]]: ***** [[Sunday]] [[Nocturne]] **** [[Fridays]] [[Overnight]] *** Friday Morning ** Sunday [[Overnight]] * [[Tonight]] Morning

[[Longer]] [[period]] [[inmates]] Twitch (Kurupt) [[got]] himself transfered to a tougher prison than the re-opened Alcatraz. He claims it's to be [[deeper]] to his lady but his real motives are a bit more grandiose. There he [[traverse]] paths with Burke ([[Billings]] Goldberg) a bulky prisoner who can [[taking]] [[caring]] of himself. [[Tremble]], despite being less muscular, is just as mouthy and is pretty much the same. But there is a gang war brewing between the black and [[latino]] inmates that [[explode]] into a hostile takeover of the [[correctional]] when the black's gang leader is shot dead and the finger [[dot]] at Burke. But the sh!t [[genuinely]] hits the fan when the [[authentic]] killer and leader of the hispanics, Cortez (Robert Madrid) takes Twitch's girlfriend and Burke's daughter hostage.

Steven Seagal doesn't do sequels (reportedly very opposed to the [[thinks]] of Under Siege 2 and only agreeing to do it on the condition the film company he was with at the time let direct his own [[filmmaking]]) so [[while]] this being a DVD sequel, the lead role this time round goes to Bill Golberg ([[Stephens]] doesn't [[yet]] [[appears]] in some of the [[stocks]] footage from the first film that [[emerges]] [[into]] the end.) But there's a reason he hasn't done much [[cooperation]] since Universal [[Servicemen]] 2 and that's because he's not [[very]] of an [[protagonist]], and not much of an [[efforts]] star either, [[managed]] a character that [[embark]] as very dark and brooding but unsubtly [[revolves]] into a standard action hero [[nervously]] quipping off [[monotonous]] one-liners. [[Succour]] wise, veterans from the first film, Kurupt and Tony Plana, have [[only]] jumped at the chance of extra work.

This is a film that's [[attempted]] to copy the style of the original quite well, with the dim lighting, dark shadows and rap music playing over a lot of it. It does this quite well, unfortunately it can't contend with an unengaging hero, an [[alike]] [[luge]] villain and an apathetic story that the makers do very much seem to have made up as they went along. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 4037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[rented]] the [[film]] (I don't [[think]] it [[got]] a theatrical [[release]] here) out [[expecting]] the worse. The previews [[made]] the [[film]] [[look]] [[awful]]. I was in fact very [[surprised]], it was well worth [[watching]]; it was [[loosely]] scripted, [[almost]] like an ensemble piece of [[film]]. It had some very funny [[moments]] in it and [[although]] [[flawed]] is an [[effective]] satire on the [[show]] and the people on the [[show]] without being too scathing. It is flawed, [[mainly]] by the awful soundtrack of bludgeoning 'comedy' [[effects]] but on the [[whole]] it comes across as honest and [[generally]] true to [[form]] of the [[show]] in an altmanesque or Larry Sanders [[way]].

[[At]] the moment it is the fashion to be [[critical]] of Jerry Springer, he is [[also]] an [[easy]] [[target]]. Springer [[could]] have made [[Citizen]] Kane and it [[would]] be [[proclaimed]] 'the worst [[film]] ever made'. I [[recommend]] this [[film]] for [[anybody]] interested in the [[show]]. A flawed but [[innovative]] and interesting piece of [[film]]. I [[rentals]] the [[cinematography]] (I don't [[believing]] it [[did]] a theatrical [[freeing]] here) out [[waiting]] the worse. The previews [[effected]] the [[cinematography]] [[glance]] [[abysmal]]. I was in fact very [[horrified]], it was well worth [[staring]]; it was [[vaguely]] scripted, [[hardly]] like an ensemble piece of [[movies]]. It had some very funny [[times]] in it and [[though]] [[misguided]] is an [[effectiveness]] satire on the [[exhibit]] and the people on the [[exhibit]] without being too scathing. It is flawed, [[mostly]] by the awful soundtrack of bludgeoning 'comedy' [[impacts]] but on the [[ensemble]] it comes across as honest and [[normally]] true to [[forme]] of the [[showings]] in an altmanesque or Larry Sanders [[manner]].

[[In]] the moment it is the fashion to be [[indispensable]] of Jerry Springer, he is [[apart]] an [[easier]] [[aiming]]. Springer [[would]] have made [[Citizens]] Kane and it [[ought]] be [[declared]] 'the worst [[cinematography]] ever made'. I [[recommendations]] this [[cinematography]] for [[somebody]] interested in the [[display]]. A flawed but [[innovate]] and interesting piece of [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4038 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I began watching this movie with low expectations, as a matter of fact i only noticed it because it was an adaptation of a S.K. novel ( a novel i never read).

I'm glad my expectations were low because the movie wasn't nothing close to good, but it manages to keep you interested. What really drags this story down is the work done by the director and the actors. The movie is overlong, hasn't no "nice" shots and no scares, the dialogs are dumb and the special effects are crap.

The only things good are that, as i said, it keeps you interested ( i guess the book must be good) without using much horror cliches.

My Vote 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Here we have a movie which fails in pretty much every way it is possible for a movie to fail. Terrible script, lousy acting, amateurish directing, laughable special effects...it's just an utterly awful movie. Not to mention the fact that when you get to the end you'll realize the whole thing doesn't make a lick of sense. After spending the whole movie wondering what in the world is going on here when things are finally explained you realize the story has been built on a foundation which is ludicrously impossible. In one of those hideous "villain explains the whole movie" sequences we are told that our villain has done something which quite simply can't be done and which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Oh, and after that we see that there also appears to be some kind of jell-o monster involved. I'm sure Drew Barrymore would very much like to pretend this movie never happened. If for some ungodly reason you are ever tempted to sit down and watch this movie may I suggest instead taking that time to bang your head against a wall for 104 minutes. That would prove to be a much more pleasurable experience than sitting through this garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 4040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a crappy movie, with a whole lotta non-sense and too many loose-ends to count. I only watched this movie because one of my favorite actors (Ron Livingston) made a cameo in it, and I continued watching it because as a girl, I love any movie that includes male nudity for a change. Later, I found myself wondering just how much more ridiculous the storyline could get, and each time it got...more... ridiculous.

Sean Crawley (good-looking Chris L. McKenna, whom I've never seen before - but LOVED his little nude scene)is making ends meet as a painter, when he meets electrician Duke Wayne (George Wendt from "Cheers"). Thinking he's getting more work from Duke, Sean agrees to meet contractor Ray Matthews (Daniel Baldwin, playing a stereotypically evil guy). Ray is being investigated by a City Hall accountant (Ron Livingston in a cameo, who I've been in love with from "Office Space" up to "Sex & the City"). Ray end up offering the apparently desperate-for- cash Sean $13k to kill the accountant, and Sean accepts the job. Sean stalks out the accountant, whose wife (Kari Wuhrer) he finds himself attracted to, completes the hit, and leaves - taking the file of information against Ray with him. Sean quickly learns he was being used, that Ray never intended to pay him, and Sean uses the file as leverage to get his money.

Up to this point, it's a descent flick...generally worth watching. But as soon as Ray, Duke and their crew kidnap Sean to muscle the information about the file out of him, it just got dumber and dumber (and still DUMBER...), until finally it seemed like the film's writer, Charlie Higson, had snapped out of a 10-day writing hangover and realized he needed to desperately figure out how to wrap up the series of implausible messes he created before a deadline or something. Without simply detailing the movie, let's just say that in every-single-scene you watch after the kidnapping, you find yourself gasping "what the f**K!," baffled by the ongoing nonsense as Sean follows a fairly graphic and gross path towards redemption. In the end, so many loose-ends are left in the movie, that you begin to regret that you even watched it.

This is a movie that you should only watch after it hits cable, and you should have enough beer and friends around to mock the film to it's full value. It's supposed to be a psychological thriller, and McKenna is a decent actor, but it's hard to give yourself to the movie when you have "Norm" from "Cheers" and a Baldwin brother doing the dirty work, and a kidnapping strategy that really makes no damned sense. Guys will love the violence, blood and guts scenes, and the absolutely unnecessary sex scenes and boob shots. Girls will enjoy handsome Sean's gratuitous crotch shot in a mainstream movie, when its almost always the girls that get stripped down in a movie. Personally, I hate that the only actor worth watching for more than his looks (Ron Livingston) is only in the first one-third of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Big S isn't playing with taboos or [[forcing]] an agenda like, say Mencia or Chapelle (though I like them both). She states the obvious in subtle, near subliminal remarks. Her show won't change the World, nor is it [[meant]] to. But, along with the [[hilarious]] Brian Posehn and Paget Brewster's ex-boyfriend [[Jay]] Johnston of "[[Mr]]. [[Show]]" fame, this is one mean show with an appetite for destruction! My side's were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. Look, I [[love]] this woman and like her famed boyfriend, Jimmy Kimmel, she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run- with-it. The best kind of comedy around. Spoofing anything and anyone, like "Mary Poppins" in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. This one is highly recommended, but only for those who still have a funny bone (and didn't lose it in their most recent lippo-suction treatment or boob job). Big S isn't playing with taboos or [[prompting]] an agenda like, say Mencia or Chapelle (though I like them both). She states the obvious in subtle, near subliminal remarks. Her show won't change the World, nor is it [[intentioned]] to. But, along with the [[comical]] Brian Posehn and Paget Brewster's ex-boyfriend [[Jae]] Johnston of "[[Monsieur]]. [[Showings]]" fame, this is one mean show with an appetite for destruction! My side's were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. Look, I [[iove]] this woman and like her famed boyfriend, Jimmy Kimmel, she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run- with-it. The best kind of comedy around. Spoofing anything and anyone, like "Mary Poppins" in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. This one is highly recommended, but only for those who still have a funny bone (and didn't lose it in their most recent lippo-suction treatment or boob job). --------------------------------------------- Result 4042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I rank this the best of the Zorro chapterplays.The exciting musical score adds punch to an exciting screen play.There is an excellent supporting cast and mystery villain that will keep you guessing until the final chapter.Reed Hadley does a fine job as Don Diego and his alter ego Zorro.Last,but certainly not least,is the great directing team of Whitney and English. --------------------------------------------- Result 4043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Yes, this is an ultra-low [[budget]] movie. [[So]] the acting isn't award winning material and at [[times]] the action is slow-paced because the filmmakers are shooting longer sequences and not a million instants that then get edited into a movie. This [[film]] makes up for that with an [[outstanding]] script that takes vampirism [[seriously]], explains it and develops a full plot out of it. Aside from the vampire story, we get detailed genetics info, legal and law enforcement, martial arts action, philosophical musings, and some good metal music. Kudos go to Dylan O'Leary, the director/writer/main actor. It is beyond me how this man could have fulfilled all these roles and do them so well. I think to appreciate this movie, you have to be well-versed in all sorts of themes to see that the writer did a lot of research and knows about all these things. There are some great camera work, too, interesting camera angles and one underwater vampire attack- something I haven't seen before, but which pays homage to the underwater zombie attack in Fulci's Zombi. The casting is good, in so far as the sexy female is sexy indeed. The main vampire also looks perfect for the role. The female victim looks vulnerable. My only [[complaint]] is that for a low budget horror flick, there should have been more nudity. If you want to see an original vampire movie with a great story, this flick is for you. I'm looking forward to seeing future projects by Mr. O'Leary. Yes, this is an ultra-low [[budgets]] movie. [[Therefore]] the acting isn't award winning material and at [[period]] the action is slow-paced because the filmmakers are shooting longer sequences and not a million instants that then get edited into a movie. This [[kino]] makes up for that with an [[unresolved]] script that takes vampirism [[earnestly]], explains it and develops a full plot out of it. Aside from the vampire story, we get detailed genetics info, legal and law enforcement, martial arts action, philosophical musings, and some good metal music. Kudos go to Dylan O'Leary, the director/writer/main actor. It is beyond me how this man could have fulfilled all these roles and do them so well. I think to appreciate this movie, you have to be well-versed in all sorts of themes to see that the writer did a lot of research and knows about all these things. There are some great camera work, too, interesting camera angles and one underwater vampire attack- something I haven't seen before, but which pays homage to the underwater zombie attack in Fulci's Zombi. The casting is good, in so far as the sexy female is sexy indeed. The main vampire also looks perfect for the role. The female victim looks vulnerable. My only [[grievance]] is that for a low budget horror flick, there should have been more nudity. If you want to see an original vampire movie with a great story, this flick is for you. I'm looking forward to seeing future projects by Mr. O'Leary. --------------------------------------------- Result 4044 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[ROUEN]] PRIZES AND THE [[TRIUMPH]] [[OF]] "[[VILLA]] PARANOIA" The [[favorite]] film of the general public, actually more [[important]] than the [[jury]] [[prize]], was [[Erik]] Clausen's [[brilliant]] bittersweet dramatic comedy, "Villa Paranoia", which was [[also]] selected by the European Youth Jury indicative of its appeal to cinephiles of all ages. The following day director-actor Clausen traveled to the remote [[Town]] of MAMERS, [[Pays]] de Loire, for a provincial [[festival]] of new European [[cinema]], where "[[Villa]] Paranoia" picked up three more prizes -- [[Best]] [[film]], Professional Jury; [[Best]] [[Film]], Audience [[prize]]; and Best film of another youth jury [[composed]] of "lycéens", French high school students. Five prizes in a [[single]] weekend -- not a [[bad]] scoop for a [[film]] from a [[small]] [[country]] with [[unknown]] actors. [[In]] addition, "[[Villa]]" was [[awarded]] the Grand [[Prix]], the MAVERICK SPIRIT [[AWARD]], at San [[Jose]], California, just a [[week]] ago, by distinguished British [[actor]] Sir [[Ben]] Kingsley ("Ghandi"), making for a grand [[total]] of six prizes in a [[single]] [[week]]. If Lars van Trier has put [[Denmark]] on the offbeat-oddball Dogma [[Cinematic]] [[map]] in recent years, there is now a good [[chance]] that Veteran Maverick [[Erik]] Clausen (62) and his [[capable]] crew of [[actors]] will [[soon]] [[show]] the [[world]] that Denmark has more to [[offer]] than dogmatic drivel, which is to say, a mass audience pleaser for young and [[old]] alike. [[Moreover]], the female lead of his film, Sonja [[Richter]], has such a [[magical]] screen [[presence]] that, with a little more exposure, she [[stands]] a good chance of becoming the next international Scandinavian [[Diva]]. [[For]] the [[record]], "Villa Paranoia" is a fiction film, [[written]], directed and acted in by Mr. Clausen, and employing certain [[motifs]] from Moliere's "The Imaginary [[Invalid]]". Anna (Richter), an ambitious young actress, has lost a [[deeply]] coveted role in the Moliere [[play]] and, reduced to making an utterly stupid TV chicken commercial, is on the verge of suicide. [[However]], Jorgen (Clausen) who runs a massive chicken farm sponsoring the spot, offers her a job with room and board taking care of his cantankerous, senile, wheel-chair ridden father, Walentin, who has not spoken a word since his wife Stella committed suicide years before. Anna is the only one who eventually finds a way of communicating with the hostile silent old grouch -- and moreover, discovers that he has been faking deafness and immobility all these years -- a living "Malade Imaginaire". This will lead to her playing the greatest role of her own life in order to uncover the dark secret which led to Walentin's total withdrawal from life and reality. Villa "Paradise-Paranoia", true to the Moliere tradition from which it is partially derived, is a heartwarming, multi-layered, serial-comic psycho-drama that literally has something for everybody and only needs proper placement to attain the kind of general international outreach it richly deserves. Alex Deleon, Paris / 21 MARCH, 2005 [[RAVAN]] PRIZES AND THE [[WIN]] [[DE]] "[[BUNGALOW]] PARANOIA" The [[preferred]] film of the general public, actually more [[critical]] than the [[juror]] [[awards]], was [[Eric]] Clausen's [[shiny]] bittersweet dramatic comedy, "Villa Paranoia", which was [[furthermore]] selected by the European Youth Jury indicative of its appeal to cinephiles of all ages. The following day director-actor Clausen traveled to the remote [[City]] of MAMERS, [[Paid]] de Loire, for a provincial [[fest]] of new European [[movie]], where "[[Bungalow]] Paranoia" picked up three more prizes -- [[Better]] [[films]], Professional Jury; [[Better]] [[Films]], Audience [[awards]]; and Best film of another youth jury [[consisted]] of "lycéens", French high school students. Five prizes in a [[alone]] weekend -- not a [[rotten]] scoop for a [[films]] from a [[minor]] [[nations]] with [[unidentified]] actors. [[Across]] addition, "[[Vila]]" was [[attributed]] the Grand [[Pricing]], the MAVERICK SPIRIT [[SCHOLARSHIP]], at San [[Fabio]], California, just a [[zhou]] ago, by distinguished British [[actress]] Sir [[Bin]] Kingsley ("Ghandi"), making for a grand [[aggregate]] of six prizes in a [[sole]] [[chow]]. If Lars van Trier has put [[Danes]] on the offbeat-oddball Dogma [[Films]] [[maps]] in recent years, there is now a good [[chances]] that Veteran Maverick [[Eric]] Clausen (62) and his [[able]] crew of [[actresses]] will [[promptly]] [[exhibitions]] the [[monde]] that Denmark has more to [[supplying]] than dogmatic drivel, which is to say, a mass audience pleaser for young and [[antigua]] alike. [[Meanwhile]], the female lead of his film, Sonja [[Magistrates]], has such a [[quadrant]] screen [[attendance]] that, with a little more exposure, she [[standing]] a good chance of becoming the next international Scandinavian [[Singer]]. [[At]] the [[records]], "Villa Paranoia" is a fiction film, [[typed]], directed and acted in by Mr. Clausen, and employing certain [[motif]] from Moliere's "The Imaginary [[Null]]". Anna (Richter), an ambitious young actress, has lost a [[heavily]] coveted role in the Moliere [[playing]] and, reduced to making an utterly stupid TV chicken commercial, is on the verge of suicide. [[Instead]], Jorgen (Clausen) who runs a massive chicken farm sponsoring the spot, offers her a job with room and board taking care of his cantankerous, senile, wheel-chair ridden father, Walentin, who has not spoken a word since his wife Stella committed suicide years before. Anna is the only one who eventually finds a way of communicating with the hostile silent old grouch -- and moreover, discovers that he has been faking deafness and immobility all these years -- a living "Malade Imaginaire". This will lead to her playing the greatest role of her own life in order to uncover the dark secret which led to Walentin's total withdrawal from life and reality. Villa "Paradise-Paranoia", true to the Moliere tradition from which it is partially derived, is a heartwarming, multi-layered, serial-comic psycho-drama that literally has something for everybody and only needs proper placement to attain the kind of general international outreach it richly deserves. Alex Deleon, Paris / 21 MARCH, 2005 --------------------------------------------- Result 4045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The plot of 7EVENTY 5IVE [[involves]] [[college]] [[kids]] who [[play]] a [[cruel]] phone [[game]] that [[unexpectedly]] (to them, if not to [[fans]] of horror) gets them in over their [[heads]]. The STORY of 7EVENTY 5IVE, on the other hand, is that of a horror [[film]] that had a wee [[little]] bit of [[promise]], [[sadly]] outweighed by really [[bad]] writing.

What [[could]] have been a fun, if somewhat [[silly]], old-fashioned slasher [[tale]] is derailed early on by its filmmakers' [[misguided]] [[belief]] that the [[audience]] would enjoy watching a bunch of [[loud]], whiny [[rich]] [[kids]] [[bitching]] at each other for most of the film's [[running]] time. With the [[exception]] of a police detective played by Rutger Hauer, (in a minor role that is [[designed]] [[mainly]] to [[add]] the movie's only [[star]] power) [[every]] [[character]] on screen is a different breed of [[young]] A-hole.

Male and [[female]], black and white, straight and gay, an [[entire]] [[ensemble]] of shallow and shrill [[college]] [[kids]] [[carries]] the bulk of the film's [[narrative]]. Worse, since the [[tale]] deals with a PARTY [[game]] [[gone]] awry, most of the [[time]] the scenes are [[completely]] filled with these [[little]] b*****ds. [[Because]] of this, there are few [[breaks]] for the viewer, who [[must]] put up with the [[angry]] sniping of the thinly-drawn protagonists. Even though at least some of these people are [[supposedly]] friends, [[invariably]] all [[characters]] interact in a very [[hostile]] manner, [[long]] before any [[genuine]] [[conflict]] has actually arisen. This leads to the [[worst]] possible result in a slasher [[film]]: The [[audience]], [[intended]] to [[care]] about the leads, [[instead]] not only cheers on the [[anonymous]] [[killer]], but [[wishes]] that he had [[arrived]] to [[start]] [[picking]] off the vacuous brats far [[earlier]].

The [[real]] [[shame]] of this poor characterization is that [[otherwise]] 7EVENTY 5IVE [[actually]] [[DID]] have some [[potential]]. Visually it's fine. First-time directors Brian Hooks and Deon Taylor know how to [[build]] a suspenseful [[mood]]. They [[also]] [[manage]] to [[deliver]] on some [[competent]], if [[sparse]], [[moments]] of classic 80s-style gore. [[Surprisingly]], the production's [[cast]] is [[also]] [[fairly]] [[able]]. It isn't that the [[actors]] aren't [[capable]] of [[expressing]] realistic human emotion; it is simply that the [[screenplay]] (co-written by newcomer Vashon Nutt and director Hooks, who fared much better behind the camera than with a keyboard) is short of such moments.

7EVENTY 5IVE can hardly be recommended, as its familiar premise and few thrills can't outweigh the bad taste left behind by a [[story]] driven by a gaggle of unpleasant characters. In this tepid whodunnit, the real mystery is why anyone should care about a group of young folk who can't even manage to like each other. The plot of 7EVENTY 5IVE [[contains]] [[academies]] [[kid]] who [[playing]] a [[savage]] phone [[games]] that [[surprisingly]] (to them, if not to [[lovers]] of horror) gets them in over their [[leaders]]. The STORY of 7EVENTY 5IVE, on the other hand, is that of a horror [[filmmaking]] that had a wee [[small]] bit of [[promises]], [[unfortunately]] outweighed by really [[unfavorable]] writing.

What [[did]] have been a fun, if somewhat [[idiot]], old-fashioned slasher [[saga]] is derailed early on by its filmmakers' [[misdirected]] [[beliefs]] that the [[audiences]] would enjoy watching a bunch of [[vocal]], whiny [[richer]] [[juvenile]] [[griping]] at each other for most of the film's [[run]] time. With the [[exceptions]] of a police detective played by Rutger Hauer, (in a minor role that is [[design]] [[largely]] to [[added]] the movie's only [[superstar]] power) [[each]] [[trait]] on screen is a different breed of [[youthful]] A-hole.

Male and [[girl]], black and white, straight and gay, an [[whole]] [[together]] of shallow and shrill [[colleges]] [[child]] [[carry]] the bulk of the film's [[descriptive]]. Worse, since the [[saga]] deals with a PARTY [[games]] [[missing]] awry, most of the [[period]] the scenes are [[wholly]] filled with these [[small]] b*****ds. [[Since]] of this, there are few [[interruption]] for the viewer, who [[gotta]] put up with the [[upset]] sniping of the thinly-drawn protagonists. Even though at least some of these people are [[seemingly]] friends, [[consistently]] all [[features]] interact in a very [[enmity]] manner, [[longer]] before any [[real]] [[conflicts]] has actually arisen. This leads to the [[worse]] possible result in a slasher [[movies]]: The [[viewers]], [[designed]] to [[healthcare]] about the leads, [[however]] not only cheers on the [[unbeknownst]] [[shooter]], but [[desires]] that he had [[happened]] to [[launching]] [[selecting]] off the vacuous brats far [[previously]].

The [[veritable]] [[pity]] of this poor characterization is that [[else]] 7EVENTY 5IVE [[genuinely]] [[GOT]] have some [[prospective]]. Visually it's fine. First-time directors Brian Hooks and Deon Taylor know how to [[built]] a suspenseful [[humour]]. They [[additionally]] [[managed]] to [[delivering]] on some [[proficient]], if [[scatter]], [[times]] of classic 80s-style gore. [[Marvellously]], the production's [[casting]] is [[similarly]] [[rather]] [[capable]]. It isn't that the [[protagonists]] aren't [[able]] of [[expressed]] realistic human emotion; it is simply that the [[scenario]] (co-written by newcomer Vashon Nutt and director Hooks, who fared much better behind the camera than with a keyboard) is short of such moments.

7EVENTY 5IVE can hardly be recommended, as its familiar premise and few thrills can't outweigh the bad taste left behind by a [[conte]] driven by a gaggle of unpleasant characters. In this tepid whodunnit, the real mystery is why anyone should care about a group of young folk who can't even manage to like each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 4046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Another [[weak]] third-season [[entry]], 'Is There In Truth No [[Beauty]]?' nonetheless has at [[least]] one [[key]] [[plot]] [[element]] that is very different and as Spock [[would]] say, fascinating. The main character is an alien who [[must]] be carried around in a black box because his [[appearance]] is so horrendous that it drives humans insane. It's too [[bad]] the episode cannot [[live]] up to this incredible premise. [[Obviously]], I think, it was a mistake to ever 'show' the alien, as its actual visage in no way [[even]] approximates such a daunting build-up; all we get is the standard Star Trek psychedelic light display used for any number of things in different episodes, usually when the ship is passing through a magnetic storm or something similar. In any event, Kollos' appearance can at least be tolerated by Mr. Spock, and then only if Spock is wearing a special visor. (For the longest time, I thought the alien's name was 'Carlos,' which I found humorous, but I digress.) Spock is required to mind-meld with Kollos at one point so that the alien can pilot the Enterprise back to safety. This is accomplished, but when Spock/Kollos go back to end the mind-meld, by golly, Spock forgets his visor. Uh oh. He goes crazy but eventually recovers with the help of Kollos' assistant, a blind woman with psychic powers. This might have been a really bizarre, excellent episode but it is poorly directed and comes across as yet one more [[badly]] executed show of the series' last season. Another [[feeble]] third-season [[input]], 'Is There In Truth No [[Beaut]]?' nonetheless has at [[lowest]] one [[essentials]] [[intrigue]] [[elements]] that is very different and as Spock [[could]] say, fascinating. The main character is an alien who [[needs]] be carried around in a black box because his [[apparition]] is so horrendous that it drives humans insane. It's too [[unfavorable]] the episode cannot [[vivo]] up to this incredible premise. [[Apparently]], I think, it was a mistake to ever 'show' the alien, as its actual visage in no way [[yet]] approximates such a daunting build-up; all we get is the standard Star Trek psychedelic light display used for any number of things in different episodes, usually when the ship is passing through a magnetic storm or something similar. In any event, Kollos' appearance can at least be tolerated by Mr. Spock, and then only if Spock is wearing a special visor. (For the longest time, I thought the alien's name was 'Carlos,' which I found humorous, but I digress.) Spock is required to mind-meld with Kollos at one point so that the alien can pilot the Enterprise back to safety. This is accomplished, but when Spock/Kollos go back to end the mind-meld, by golly, Spock forgets his visor. Uh oh. He goes crazy but eventually recovers with the help of Kollos' assistant, a blind woman with psychic powers. This might have been a really bizarre, excellent episode but it is poorly directed and comes across as yet one more [[sorely]] executed show of the series' last season. --------------------------------------------- Result 4047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] [[movie]]. [[Considering]] the material---army life is [[always]] good for a laugh---and the [[stars]], this [[movie]] should have been a fall down laughfest. It was worth a [[couple]] of chuckles, at best. Steve Martin has been much funnier than this and it [[appears]] that Dan Ackroyd should stick to [[dramatic]] roles, where he [[might]] follow [[Robin]] Williams' lead and someday win an [[Oscar]]. This was a [[discouraging]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Reviewing]] the material---army life is [[permanently]] good for a laugh---and the [[celebrity]], this [[filmmaking]] should have been a fall down laughfest. It was worth a [[coupling]] of chuckles, at best. Steve Martin has been much funnier than this and it [[transpires]] that Dan Ackroyd should stick to [[prodigious]] roles, where he [[apt]] follow [[Robyn]] Williams' lead and someday win an [[Oscars]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember this film from many years ago. Certainly the best film on the subject in my experience. The fact that I vividly remember so much of the film after so long a time testifies to its impact.

It is difficult to comment on the level of the performances because of the language barrier. But they were nonetheless very powerful.

This subject continues to fascinate us even with the passing of years. And it was most effectively treated here, with the proper proportion of historical perspective and skepticism.

I wish it would be shown on TV at least once. Or at least be available on tape or DVD. Or is it? Is some art film archive hoarding a copy of it?? --------------------------------------------- Result 4049 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Wowwwwww, about an [[hour]] [[ago]] I finally finished watching this [[terrible]] [[movie]]!!! I wanted to [[turn]] it off [[within]] the first like 10 minutes but I figured I'd give it a chance because it just hadddd to get better. Or at [[least]] have some redeeming [[qualities]], like I [[figured]] at the very least it would be a make you think type [[movie]], or like really [[intelligent]], or very well [[filmed]] or something...Needless to say, that was not the [[case]] and I wasted about an hour and a half of my [[life]]. Im not even going to get into why its [[terrible]] because its a [[waste]] of my [[time]] to explain that this "may [[contain]] spoilers"...IMDb, you should [[calm]] down on the spoilers thing and [[pay]] more attention to making sure that the people who rate the [[movies]] and [[comment]] are not [[paid]] to [[write]] good reviews or involved somehow in the [[movie]] or anything [[else]] like that. I [[thought]] it would be humorous after this [[terrible]] film to [[come]] see hoe [[bad]] the rating [[would]] be and I was very very shocked to [[see]] the [[fairly]] high ratings...all the ratings with about 7-10 [[stars]] [[clearly]] must be about some [[COMPLETELY]] DIFFERENT [[movie]]... Im still a [[big]] IMDb [[fan]], but [[seriously]] rethink this [[rating]] process because this movie should be rated no [[higher]] than maaaybbbeee [[like]] a 3. Wowwwwww, about an [[hours]] [[earlier]] I finally finished watching this [[frightening]] [[filmmaking]]!!! I wanted to [[turning]] it off [[inside]] the first like 10 minutes but I figured I'd give it a chance because it just hadddd to get better. Or at [[fewest]] have some redeeming [[qualifications]], like I [[imagined]] at the very least it would be a make you think type [[filmmaking]], or like really [[termite]], or very well [[videotaped]] or something...Needless to say, that was not the [[lawsuit]] and I wasted about an hour and a half of my [[lifetime]]. Im not even going to get into why its [[gruesome]] because its a [[wastes]] of my [[period]] to explain that this "may [[contained]] spoilers"...IMDb, you should [[calming]] down on the spoilers thing and [[pays]] more attention to making sure that the people who rate the [[movie]] and [[remarks]] are not [[paying]] to [[writing]] good reviews or involved somehow in the [[filmmaking]] or anything [[otherwise]] like that. I [[thinking]] it would be humorous after this [[dreaded]] film to [[coming]] see hoe [[unhealthy]] the rating [[could]] be and I was very very shocked to [[seeing]] the [[rather]] high ratings...all the ratings with about 7-10 [[star]] [[openly]] must be about some [[ABUNDANTLY]] DIFFERENT [[kino]]... Im still a [[prodigious]] IMDb [[breather]], but [[conscientiously]] rethink this [[appraisal]] process because this movie should be rated no [[greatest]] than maaaybbbeee [[iike]] a 3. --------------------------------------------- Result 4050 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Taking]] over [[roles]] that Jack Albertson and Sam Levene played on Broadway, Walter Matthau and George Burns [[play]] a couple of old time vaudeville comics, a team in the tradition of Joe Smith and [[Charles]] Dale who seem to have a differing [[outlook]] on [[life]].

Walter Matthau can't [[stop]] [[working]], the man has never [[learned]] to [[relax]], [[take]] some [[time]] and [[smell]] the roses. He's a crotchety [[old]] cuss [[whose]] [[best]] days are behind him and his nephew and [[agent]] Richard Benjamin is finding less and less [[work]] for him.

What [[hurt]] him badly was that some 15 years earlier his partner George Burns decided to retire and spend some time with his family. A workaholic like Matthau can't comprehend it and take Burns's decision personally.

Benjamin hits on a brain storm, reunite the guys and do it on a national television special. What [[happens]] here is [[pretty]] [[hilarious]].

The [[Sunshine]] [[Boys]] is [[also]] a sad, bittersweet [[story]] as well about [[old]] age. Matthau is on screen for most of the film, but it's Burns who [[got]] the [[kudos]] in the form of an Oscar at the ripe old age of 79.

Burns brought a [[bit]] of the personal into this film as well. As we all know he was the straight man of the [[wonderful]] comedy team of [[Burns]]&Allen who the Monty [[Python]] troop borrowed a lot from. [[In]] 1958 due to health reasons, Gracie Allen retired and George kept going right up to the age of 100. [[Or]] at least pretty close to as an active performer.

The Sunshine Boys is [[based]] on the team of Smith&Dale however and if you like The [[Sunshine]] Boys I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] you [[see]] Two Tickets to Broadway for a [[look]] at a pair of [[guys]] who were [[entertaining]] the American public at the [[turn]] of the [[last]] century. The [[doctor]] sketch that Matthau and Burns do is directly from their material.

And I do [[think]] you will [[like]] The [[Sunshine]] Boys. [[Take]] over [[duties]] that Jack Albertson and Sam Levene played on Broadway, Walter Matthau and George Burns [[gaming]] a couple of old time vaudeville comics, a team in the tradition of Joe Smith and [[Charl]] Dale who seem to have a differing [[prospect]] on [[lifetime]].

Walter Matthau can't [[halted]] [[cooperated]], the man has never [[learning]] to [[relaxed]], [[taking]] some [[times]] and [[reeks]] the roses. He's a crotchety [[former]] cuss [[who]] [[finest]] days are behind him and his nephew and [[patrolman]] Richard Benjamin is finding less and less [[collaborate]] for him.

What [[harmed]] him badly was that some 15 years earlier his partner George Burns decided to retire and spend some time with his family. A workaholic like Matthau can't comprehend it and take Burns's decision personally.

Benjamin hits on a brain storm, reunite the guys and do it on a national television special. What [[arises]] here is [[belle]] [[comic]].

The [[Sun]] [[Boy]] is [[apart]] a sad, bittersweet [[saga]] as well about [[longtime]] age. Matthau is on screen for most of the film, but it's Burns who [[did]] the [[laurels]] in the form of an Oscar at the ripe old age of 79.

Burns brought a [[bitten]] of the personal into this film as well. As we all know he was the straight man of the [[brilliant]] comedy team of [[Combustion]]&Allen who the Monty [[Monty]] troop borrowed a lot from. [[Among]] 1958 due to health reasons, Gracie Allen retired and George kept going right up to the age of 100. [[Nor]] at least pretty close to as an active performer.

The Sunshine Boys is [[founded]] on the team of Smith&Dale however and if you like The [[Sun]] Boys I [[flatly]] [[recommended]] you [[behold]] Two Tickets to Broadway for a [[gaze]] at a pair of [[dudes]] who were [[fun]] the American public at the [[transforming]] of the [[lastly]] century. The [[physicians]] sketch that Matthau and Burns do is directly from their material.

And I do [[thinking]] you will [[loves]] The [[Soleil]] Boys. --------------------------------------------- Result 4051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Everyday we can watch a great number of film, soap... on tv. Sometimes a miracle happens. A [[great]] [[film]], with [[real]] [[feelings]], with great actors, with a great realisator-director. [[For]] me there are two films that [[everyone]] needs to see : the first is the Pacula ? "[[Sophie]] 's choice" with [[Meryl]] Streep. The second is "[[Journey]] of [[Hope]]". As human beings, we need to learn about humility, about love of the others, about acceptation of other [[civilisation]], other way of living. We also have to struggle against racism and fascim. We must avoid judging, [[criticize]]; we only have to love our earth companion. This [[wonderful]] film, helps us reaching John (Lennon) his dream : Imagine all the people living live in peace. These two films are difficult to see : watch these, but sure you will be hurt, but better. [[Great]] film, great actors, terrible story, [[pain]] and [[cry]] [[guarantee]], but [[also]] better understanding of the others. Enjoy it. Everyday we can watch a great number of film, soap... on tv. Sometimes a miracle happens. A [[wondrous]] [[kino]], with [[actual]] [[sensations]], with great actors, with a great realisator-director. [[During]] me there are two films that [[somebody]] needs to see : the first is the Pacula ? "[[Sofie]] 's choice" with [[Streep]] Streep. The second is "[[Itinerary]] of [[Hopes]]". As human beings, we need to learn about humility, about love of the others, about acceptation of other [[civilisations]], other way of living. We also have to struggle against racism and fascim. We must avoid judging, [[criticizes]]; we only have to love our earth companion. This [[wondrous]] film, helps us reaching John (Lennon) his dream : Imagine all the people living live in peace. These two films are difficult to see : watch these, but sure you will be hurt, but better. [[Wondrous]] film, great actors, terrible story, [[pains]] and [[cries]] [[guaranteeing]], but [[further]] better understanding of the others. Enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4052 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watchable little semi-soaper, but hardly captivating. Still, two or three funny moments. What amazes me is how slippery and morally highly questionable McNicol is. She plays an invalid (a leg problem), yet she not only isn't the "ugly duckling" whom men shun, but she is even a man-eater - and we are supposed to feel for her! Oh, poor little McNicol, with her leg problem... Poor little McNicol??! She is constantly getting passes from men, and even dumps them without so much as blinking! At one occasion she even has a premeditated one-night affair with a blond stud, and then she tells her newly-found French girlfriend quite non-chalantly that it took him time to get an erection! Makes us viewers wonder why she is so leg-conscious if every guy wants to hump her. Well, almost every guy; the only guy who really shunned her after seeing her leg wrapped up in metal is the guy working on the telephone. But otherwise she seems to be doing just fine with men! No shyness, no lack of success with men, and she throws them away like toys; the way she dumped Carradine was ridiculous. Poor little invalid girl?? I don't think so. And yet we are meant to believe that this woman has a major confidence problem; hence the scene in which she prepares to start playing the flute for a solo concert and somehow manages to throw the notes on the ground out of nervousness. Nervousness?? The rest of the movie shows little or nothing that would suggest that she has confidence problems, so this flute scene is absurd and doesn't fit into the bigger picture. I was also surprised how quickly and eagerly McNicol makes friends with a French woman who is screwing a married guy. On the surface the movie would appear to be a "sentimental story of one crippled woman's struggle for acceptance" (or something like that) but it's nothing like that at all; the writer clearly shifts between this type of movie and a "screw anything that moves - it's the 80s" kind of movie - very confusing.

As far as her leg: it's not like she has a big, fat purple balloon growing on her calf muscle. She "only" has a normal-looking metal prosthetic attached to the lower part of her leg, so I really don't understand why the makers of the film try to make it seem as if she is a female Quasimodo or something, at the beginning of the film. It's not like she has a twin head growing out of her neck! Though McNicol is hardly a major catch. Kind of cutish but nothing special, quite average.

But what the hell is Carradine doing playing some kind of a (relatively) smooth guy flirting with McNicol and her pal?! This guy was in "Revenge of the Nerds"! But I guess it's the same thing with the Carradines in the movies as it is with the Kennedys in politics: no matter how ugly, unable, or dumb, all the doors are open for a career in movies and politics, respectively.

Down with nepotism.

If you want to read bogus biographies about the Carradines, and other Hollywood nepotists and morons, contact me by e-mail. --------------------------------------------- Result 4053 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a very [[funny]] Ealing [[comedy]] about a community in central London who, through an unusual set of circumstances, discover they are not English, but are an annex of the French province of Burgundy.

The film features comic actor Stanley Holloway ([[best]] known as Alfred Doolittle in MY FAIR [[LADY]]), as well as a [[host]] of other [[classic]] comic actors of the period.

The story was apparently based on a news item at the time, when the Canadian Government "officially" gave a hotel room to a visiting European member of royalty. The idea actually [[reminded]] me of the real-life case of the Hutt River [[Province]] in Western Australia, where a landowner "seceded" from the Australian [[Government]] due to a wool quota dispute. (It was never acknowledged by the Western Australian or Australian Governments).

This is a [[great]] [[script]] that plays with a lot of political and economic [[issues]], rather like the TV show "Yes Minister"; as well as being a [[great]] little [[eccentric]] [[character]] [[piece]] as well. This is a very [[comical]] Ealing [[charade]] about a community in central London who, through an unusual set of circumstances, discover they are not English, but are an annex of the French province of Burgundy.

The film features comic actor Stanley Holloway ([[better]] known as Alfred Doolittle in MY FAIR [[DAMSEL]]), as well as a [[receiving]] of other [[conventional]] comic actors of the period.

The story was apparently based on a news item at the time, when the Canadian Government "officially" gave a hotel room to a visiting European member of royalty. The idea actually [[reminding]] me of the real-life case of the Hutt River [[Provinces]] in Western Australia, where a landowner "seceded" from the Australian [[Administrations]] due to a wool quota dispute. (It was never acknowledged by the Western Australian or Australian Governments).

This is a [[wondrous]] [[screenplay]] that plays with a lot of political and economic [[problem]], rather like the TV show "Yes Minister"; as well as being a [[wondrous]] little [[quirky]] [[characters]] [[slice]] as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 4054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It was a disappointment to see this DVD after so many years. For me the main problem's the uneven script.

While some of it is witty and hip, quite a bit of it is dull, unfunny and lifeless. Many of the gags just sit there, lacking spark and energy.

Of the cast, Mae West and Rachel Welch come over well. Roger Herren in the role of Rusty shines (too bad he didn't make more films). But for my money, there's just too much of John Huston, and poor Rex Reed isn't hardly given a fighting chance. His character seems relegated to skim around on the sidelines, wondering what he's doing in this film.

The low user rating should give an idea as to the public's opinion of this piece. Vidal's original provided much potential that was pretty much wasted. Not even the 'classic' film clips did much. All in all a rather sub par effort, and it's not likely to get much better with time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Acting is horrible. This [[film]] makes [[Fast]] and Furious [[look]] like an academy [[award]] [[winning]] film. They throw a few boobs and butts in there to [[try]] and [[keep]] you interested [[despite]] the [[EXTREMELY]] [[weak]] and far fetched story. There is a reason why people on the internet aren't even downloading this movie. This movie [[sunk]] [[like]] an iron [[turd]]. [[DO]] NOT waste your [[time]] [[renting]] or [[even]] downloading it. This film is and always will be a PERMA-TURD. I am now dumber for having [[watched]] it. [[In]] fact this title should be [[referred]] to as a "PERMA-TURD" from now on. [[Calling]] it a [[film]] is a travesty and [[insult]]. [[abhorrent]], [[abominable]], appalling, [[awful]], beastly, cruel, [[detestable]], [[disagreeable]], disgusting, [[dreadful]], eerie, execrable, fairy, [[fearful]], [[frightful]], ghastly, grim, [[grisly]], [[gruesome]], [[heinous]], [[hideous]], [[horrendous]], [[horrid]], [[loathsome]], lousy, lurid, [[mean]], nasty, [[obnoxious]], [[offensive]], [[repellent]], [[repulsive]], [[revolting]], [[scandalous]], scary, shameful, [[shocking]], sickie, [[terrible]], [[terrifying]], ungodly, [[unholy]], unkind Acting is horrible. This [[filmmaking]] makes [[Quicker]] and Furious [[peek]] like an academy [[prix]] [[earn]] film. They throw a few boobs and butts in there to [[attempted]] and [[maintaining]] you interested [[whilst]] the [[SUPREMELY]] [[feeble]] and far fetched story. There is a reason why people on the internet aren't even downloading this movie. This movie [[drown]] [[iike]] an iron [[poo]]. [[DOING]] NOT waste your [[moment]] [[rentals]] or [[yet]] downloading it. This film is and always will be a PERMA-TURD. I am now dumber for having [[seen]] it. [[At]] fact this title should be [[mentioned]] to as a "PERMA-TURD" from now on. [[Call]] it a [[filmmaking]] is a travesty and [[slur]]. [[horrific]], [[abhorrent]], appalling, [[scary]], beastly, cruel, [[abominable]], [[distasteful]], disgusting, [[scary]], eerie, execrable, fairy, [[scary]], [[scary]], ghastly, grim, [[ugly]], [[disgusting]], [[despicable]], [[outrageous]], [[horrible]], [[naughty]], [[vile]], lousy, lurid, [[imply]], nasty, [[despicable]], [[abusive]], [[vile]], [[despicable]], [[disgusting]], [[outrageous]], scary, shameful, [[terrifying]], sickie, [[scary]], [[horrifying]], ungodly, [[evil]], unkind --------------------------------------------- Result 4056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Chase has created a true phenomenon with The Sopranos. Unfaltering performances, rock-solid writing, and some great music make up what has become quite possibly the best show ever.

All of the cast are strong, but Falco and Gandolfini earned every inch of those Emmy's. Anyone who doubts this need only sample a few episodes; particularly from the first few seasons. James Gandolfini is absolutely fierce, absolutely terrifying, and you still find yourself loving him - mesmerized by him.

Many people that I've spoken to about The Sopranos (who haven't seen it yet) will say "I'm just not a fan of mafia movies/shows". Whatever. Run - don't walk - and get it. Those same people usually love "E.R.", but I bet they don't much care for hospitals... It's not about the context. --------------------------------------------- Result 4057 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Don't be fooled by the silly title folks, this is one sweet ride! A true successor to Tetsuo the Iron Man and Ichi the Killer, this gem starts with a bang and lays the gore on thick until the credits roll. It seems that aliens are taking over people's bodies and modifying them into war-machines, which are then used to fight each other in a twisted game for the amusement of their species. The winner of the battle eats the loser alive. That's mostly it for plot, but who cares when the gore is this good? I have no idea how many buckets of slime were used, but it's disgusting to behold. There is interesting and effective use of stop-motion when the takeovers are in progress, and loving care is lavished on all of the creature and make-up effects. The CGI is a bit limited, but that actually doesn't detract from the overall quality one bit, at least for me. This was truly a fun and stomach-turning film that deserves much praise, and has truly earned its place in the stack of Cult Classics. Find it and watch, you won't be disappointed! --------------------------------------------- Result 4058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This movie is a good [[example]] of the extreme [[lack]] of [[good]] writers and [[directors]] in Hollywood. The fact that people were [[paid]] to [[make]] this [[piece]] of [[junk]] [[shows]] that there is a [[lack]] of [[original]] ideas and talent in the [[entertainment]] business. The [[idea]] that audiences paid to see this [[movie]] (and like an idiot I rented the film) is [[discouraging]] also.

[[Obsessed]] teacher (3 years prior) [[kills]] teenager's family because he wants her. For no reason he kills the mother, father and brother. From the first five minutes you see the bad acting and direction. Years later, obsessed teacher breaks out of prison. HMM--usual bad writing--no one in the town he [[terrorized]] knows until the last minute. Obsessed teacher somehow becomes like a Navy SEAL and can sneak around, sniff out people and with a knife is super killer. [[Sure]]!!! Now obsessed teacher [[kills]] [[hotel]] maid for no reason, knifes bellhop for the fun of it, and starts to [[hunt]] down the teenager's friends. Now there is the perfect way to get the [[girl]] to [[love]] you. Obsessed teacher sneaks out of hotel---again it is stupid, ever cop would know his face--but he walks right by them. Now he [[kills]] two cops outside teenager's house and somehow sneaks into her bedroom and [[kills]] her boyfriend.

There is not one single [[positive]] [[thing]] about this piece of [[garbage]]. [[If]] any other [[profession]] put out [[work]] of this low quality, they would be fired. [[Yet]] these idiots are [[making]] hundreds of [[thousands]] of [[dollars]] for writing and [[directing]] this trash. This movie is a good [[case]] of the extreme [[shortfall]] of [[alright]] writers and [[managers]] in Hollywood. The fact that people were [[paying]] to [[deliver]] this [[slice]] of [[trash]] [[exhibit]] that there is a [[misses]] of [[initial]] ideas and talent in the [[amusement]] business. The [[thinking]] that audiences paid to see this [[filmmaking]] (and like an idiot I rented the film) is [[demoralizing]] also.

[[Haunted]] teacher (3 years prior) [[murders]] teenager's family because he wants her. For no reason he kills the mother, father and brother. From the first five minutes you see the bad acting and direction. Years later, obsessed teacher breaks out of prison. HMM--usual bad writing--no one in the town he [[terrorised]] knows until the last minute. Obsessed teacher somehow becomes like a Navy SEAL and can sneak around, sniff out people and with a knife is super killer. [[Convinced]]!!! Now obsessed teacher [[killings]] [[motel]] maid for no reason, knifes bellhop for the fun of it, and starts to [[chasing]] down the teenager's friends. Now there is the perfect way to get the [[dame]] to [[amore]] you. Obsessed teacher sneaks out of hotel---again it is stupid, ever cop would know his face--but he walks right by them. Now he [[mata]] two cops outside teenager's house and somehow sneaks into her bedroom and [[mata]] her boyfriend.

There is not one single [[propitious]] [[stuff]] about this piece of [[trash]]. [[Though]] any other [[vocations]] put out [[cooperating]] of this low quality, they would be fired. [[Nevertheless]] these idiots are [[doing]] hundreds of [[thousand]] of [[usd]] for writing and [[instructing]] this trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 4059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Big]] hair, big boobs, bad music and a giant safety pin.......these are the [[words]] to best describe this [[terrible]] movie. I love cheesy horror movies and i've seen hundreds..but this had got to be on of the [[worst]] ever [[made]]. The plot is paper thin and ridiculous, the acting is an [[abomination]], the [[script]] is [[completely]] [[laughable]](the best is the [[end]] showdown with the [[cop]] and how he [[worked]] out who the killer is-it's just so damn [[terribly]] written), the [[clothes]] are [[sickening]] and funny in equal measures, the hair is [[big]], [[lots]] of boobs bounce, [[men]] wear those [[cut]] tee-shirts that [[show]] off their [[stomachs]]([[sickening]] that [[men]] [[actually]] wore them!!) and the [[music]] is just synthesiser trash that plays over and over again...in almost [[every]] scene there is trashy music, [[boobs]] and paramedics [[taking]] away [[bodies]]....and the gym [[still]] doesn't close for [[bereavement]]!! [[All]] joking aside this is a [[truly]] [[bad]] film [[whose]] only [[charm]] is to [[look]] back on the [[disaster]] that was the 80's and have a [[good]] old [[laugh]] at how [[bad]] everything was back then. [[Grande]] hair, big boobs, bad music and a giant safety pin.......these are the [[expression]] to best describe this [[scary]] movie. I love cheesy horror movies and i've seen hundreds..but this had got to be on of the [[meanest]] ever [[introduced]]. The plot is paper thin and ridiculous, the acting is an [[monstrosity]], the [[screenplay]] is [[absolutely]] [[ridiculous]](the best is the [[terminates]] showdown with the [[policing]] and how he [[collaboration]] out who the killer is-it's just so damn [[amazingly]] written), the [[costumes]] are [[disgusting]] and funny in equal measures, the hair is [[prodigious]], [[batch]] of boobs bounce, [[mens]] wear those [[chop]] tee-shirts that [[exhibit]] off their [[bellies]]([[hateful]] that [[male]] [[genuinely]] wore them!!) and the [[musician]] is just synthesiser trash that plays over and over again...in almost [[any]] scene there is trashy music, [[boobies]] and paramedics [[take]] away [[body]]....and the gym [[again]] doesn't close for [[heartache]]!! [[Entire]] joking aside this is a [[honestly]] [[unfavourable]] film [[who]] only [[seduction]] is to [[peek]] back on the [[disasters]] that was the 80's and have a [[alright]] old [[laughter]] at how [[wicked]] everything was back then. --------------------------------------------- Result 4060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie when it came out in 1959, left a lasting impression. Great group of actors. A little short timewise but a great movie all the same. Have only seen once since then and that was some time ago. Hopefully they'll put it out on DVD if they haven't already. --------------------------------------------- Result 4061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] An Avent-garde nightmarish, [[extremely]] low-budget "[[film]]" that has delusions of [[grandeur]]. Hard to [[sit]] through. I get the message that child abuse is wrong. Wow big revelation. I had no clue it was wrong before viewing this. Yes that's [[sarcasm]]. DON'T watch this "[[film]]" if you're offended by nudity of [[either]] the [[male]] or [[female]] gender. DON'T watch it if you're the [[least]] bit [[squeamish]]. DON'T watch it if you [[care]] about acting. On second thought just DON'T watch it period.

My [[grade]]: D-

DVD [[Extras]]:making the movie , the premiere,interview with Kristie Bowersock, [[deleted]] scenes, movie [[stills]], Director's commentary, 2 versions of the teaser trailer, [[music]] [[video]] by The Azoic, & a [[classroom]] video experiment An Avent-garde nightmarish, [[remarkably]] low-budget "[[filmmaking]]" that has delusions of [[magnitude]]. Hard to [[assis]] through. I get the message that child abuse is wrong. Wow big revelation. I had no clue it was wrong before viewing this. Yes that's [[satire]]. DON'T watch this "[[films]]" if you're offended by nudity of [[nor]] the [[men]] or [[girl]] gender. DON'T watch it if you're the [[fewest]] bit [[carsick]]. DON'T watch it if you [[healthcare]] about acting. On second thought just DON'T watch it period.

My [[grading]]: D-

DVD [[Goodies]]:making the movie , the premiere,interview with Kristie Bowersock, [[discontinued]] scenes, movie [[photos]], Director's commentary, 2 versions of the teaser trailer, [[musica]] [[videotape]] by The Azoic, & a [[classe]] video experiment --------------------------------------------- Result 4062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[movie]] is [[like]] the material S.E. Hinton was [[writing]] in the 1970s and Copola was [[adapting]] to the screen in the early 80s, and, had Trueblood actually been a [[product]] of [[either]], the [[results]] might've been [[much]] better ([[especially]] in the acting department). [[Instead]], we [[get]] a [[rather]] so-bad-its-funny [[piece]] of mediocrity.

[[Jeff]] Fahey plays Ray Trueblood, a [[former]] [[street]] rumbler, I [[suppose]] is the [[accurate]] description. This was in the days of [[action]] [[movies]] that [[used]] [[guys]] in their 40s and mid30s and dressed them up in greaser threads or some [[kind]] of more effeminate [[selection]] of gang [[garb]] and they [[fought]] to [[lousy]] 80s [[music]]. [[Nonetheless]], Ray is the lone caretaker of his younger brother, Donny (Chad [[Lowe]] in a [[part]] where he [[screams]] a lot), who he is forced to [[leave]] [[behind]] [[inexplicably]] in a [[train]] station when, on the [[run]] from the cops, he is nabbed and forced to serve time in the Marines. [[Flash]] forward to present day and Ray is back in [[town]] and looking for his brother who has [[also]] [[become]] [[part]] of the street gangs, [[although]] in a gang that was Ray's adversary and now [[old]] scores [[must]] be violently [[settled]] (and again, cops must be dodged and this [[time]], a lady's [[honor]] [[defended]] in the action [[film]] [[sense]]) before Ray can [[carry]] on [[life]] at normal [[pace]] with his brother, [[Donny]].

[[For]] the most part, the [[film]] is [[quite]] [[ridiculous]]. [[For]] me, most of this has to do with far too much overacting, [[although]] not by Fahey or Sherlyn Fenn who plays the [[waitress]] he befriends. The [[guys]] in the gang and [[Lowe]] himself seem to do [[quite]] a bit of needless exaggerated as [[New]] York street toughs. [[Although]], the [[bigger]] hang up is recycled plot lines and [[perhaps]] a [[kind]] of [[movie]] that was well past its prime as a [[product]] of 1989. This [[filmmaking]] is [[iike]] the material S.E. Hinton was [[write]] in the 1970s and Copola was [[adjusted]] to the screen in the early 80s, and, had Trueblood actually been a [[commodities]] of [[nor]], the [[result]] might've been [[very]] better ([[mostly]] in the acting department). [[Alternatively]], we [[obtain]] a [[comparatively]] so-bad-its-funny [[slice]] of mediocrity.

[[Humberto]] Fahey plays Ray Trueblood, a [[antigua]] [[rue]] rumbler, I [[imagine]] is the [[correct]] description. This was in the days of [[activity]] [[filmmaking]] that [[use]] [[buddies]] in their 40s and mid30s and dressed them up in greaser threads or some [[genre]] of more effeminate [[chooses]] of gang [[attire]] and they [[struggled]] to [[wretched]] 80s [[musicians]]. [[Albeit]], Ray is the lone caretaker of his younger brother, Donny (Chad [[Lao]] in a [[portion]] where he [[yell]] a lot), who he is forced to [[letting]] [[backside]] [[inextricably]] in a [[forming]] station when, on the [[running]] from the cops, he is nabbed and forced to serve time in the Marines. [[Flashback]] forward to present day and Ray is back in [[urban]] and looking for his brother who has [[similarly]] [[becomes]] [[party]] of the street gangs, [[while]] in a gang that was Ray's adversary and now [[former]] scores [[gotta]] be violently [[solving]] (and again, cops must be dodged and this [[period]], a lady's [[honour]] [[championed]] in the action [[movie]] [[feeling]]) before Ray can [[carries]] on [[lifetime]] at normal [[tempo]] with his brother, [[Sonny]].

[[Onto]] the most part, the [[filmmaking]] is [[very]] [[farcical]]. [[In]] me, most of this has to do with far too much overacting, [[whereas]] not by Fahey or Sherlyn Fenn who plays the [[bartender]] he befriends. The [[boy]] in the gang and [[Lao]] himself seem to do [[rather]] a bit of needless exaggerated as [[Newer]] York street toughs. [[Albeit]], the [[stronger]] hang up is recycled plot lines and [[potentially]] a [[genre]] of [[cinematographic]] that was well past its prime as a [[merchandise]] of 1989. --------------------------------------------- Result 4063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[film]] that is so much a 30's Warners [[film]] in an [[era]] when each studio had a particular look and style to their output, unlike today where [[simply]] [[getting]] audiences is the object.

Curitz was one of the quintessential Warners [[house]] [[directors]] [[working]] with tight [[economy]] and [[great]] efficiency whilst [[creating]] quality, [[working]] [[methods]] that were very much the [[requirements]] of a [[director]] at Warners, a studio that was one of the "[[big]] five" majors in this era [[producing]] quality films for their [[large]] [[chains]] of [[theatres]].

Even [[though]] we have a [[setting]] of the [[upper]] classes on [[Long]] [[Island]] there is the generic Warners style [[embedded]] here with a narrative that [[could]] have been "[[torn]] from the headlines". Another example is the when the photographers [[comment]] on the [[girls]] legs early in the [[film]] and she comments that "They're not the trophies" gives the [[film]] a more [[working]] mans, down to [[earth]] feel, for these were the audiences that Warners were targeting in the [[great]] [[depression]]. (ironically [[Columbia]] and [[Universal]] were the two minors under these five majors until the 50's when their involvement in television [[changed]] their [[fortunes]] - they [[would]] have [[made]] something [[like]] this very cheaply and without the polish and great talent) Curtiz has [[created]] from an [[excellent]] script a film that moves along at a [[rapid]] [[pace]] whilst [[keeping]] the viewer with [[great]] camera [[angles]] and [[swift]] editing.

[[Thank]] heavens there is no soppy [[love]] interest sub-plot so the [[fun]] can just keep rolling along. A [[films]] that is so much a 30's Warners [[movies]] in an [[epoch]] when each studio had a particular look and style to their output, unlike today where [[merely]] [[obtaining]] audiences is the object.

Curitz was one of the quintessential Warners [[haus]] [[administrators]] [[worked]] with tight [[economics]] and [[super]] efficiency whilst [[create]] quality, [[worked]] [[procedures]] that were very much the [[needs]] of a [[headmaster]] at Warners, a studio that was one of the "[[large]] five" majors in this era [[generating]] quality films for their [[massive]] [[fetters]] of [[theaters]].

Even [[if]] we have a [[settings]] of the [[superior]] classes on [[Largo]] [[Lsland]] there is the generic Warners style [[incorporated]] here with a narrative that [[would]] have been "[[ripped]] from the headlines". Another example is the when the photographers [[comments]] on the [[daughter]] legs early in the [[movie]] and she comments that "They're not the trophies" gives the [[movie]] a more [[collaborating]] mans, down to [[terra]] feel, for these were the audiences that Warners were targeting in the [[remarkable]] [[recession]]. (ironically [[Colombia]] and [[Globally]] were the two minors under these five majors until the 50's when their involvement in television [[changing]] their [[barons]] - they [[ought]] have [[brought]] something [[iike]] this very cheaply and without the polish and great talent) Curtiz has [[generated]] from an [[wondrous]] script a film that moves along at a [[fast]] [[rhythm]] whilst [[preserve]] the viewer with [[wondrous]] camera [[angle]] and [[prompt]] editing.

[[Appreciation]] heavens there is no soppy [[iove]] interest sub-plot so the [[amusing]] can just keep rolling along. --------------------------------------------- Result 4064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was such a blast! It has that feel-good, yet totally in your face attitude that draws me to a movie. It has a good message (party girl decides she needs a real job) yet she doesn't completely lose all sense of fun. I recommend this movie for anyone who needs some humor, but is also a thinker! :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4065 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[saw]] this film when it was first released. The [[memory]] of how bad it was has stayed with me almost forty [[years]]. I didn't [[want]] to [[trust]] my own [[sentiments]] about the [[movie]] when I [[saw]] it, so I [[consulted]] a [[movie]] review published in a major metropolitan newspaper the next day- [[sentiment]] [[confirmed]], the reviewer wrote that the movie was incoherent, indecipherable, and uninspiring. A little [[research]] [[reveals]] that the producer was [[star]] Leslie Caron's husband, [[thus]] the whiff of [[nepotism]] suggests the [[beginning]] for this [[awful]] [[film]]. The film's roster of [[many]] [[capable]] [[actors]] - Caron, Warren Oates, Scatman Crothers, Gloria Grahame, and James Sikking [[among]] others - suggests that it [[holds]] some [[promise]]. But the [[death]] of this [[film]] is attributable to its [[terrible]] [[screenplay]]. The "[[mystery]]" implicated is so [[obscure]] and so [[little]] [[revealed]] [[throughout]] the [[film]] that the viewer is left [[perplexed]] from scene to scene. The [[movie]] seems torn between being a detective [[mystery]] and an [[espionage]] thriller, but never [[settles]] [[upon]] one or the other. The [[sense]] of [[suspense]] is [[entirely]] absent. The [[main]] [[characters]] [[settle]] on [[playing]] [[dry]], emotionless [[types]] in a fashion that [[inspires]] no [[empathy]] whatsoever. The [[cinematography]] is pedestrian. The [[result]] is that the hapless viewer loses interest in the [[characters]], the plot, and, in the end, the [[film]] itself. I am little [[surprised]] that there is no version of this [[pathetic]] [[film]] available to purchase. I hope that if TCM finds a print of this film and feels compelled to air it that it is [[safely]] [[relegated]] to the 4:00 am [[slot]]. I [[watched]] this film when it was first released. The [[recollection]] of how bad it was has stayed with me almost forty [[olds]]. I didn't [[wanted]] to [[trusting]] my own [[emotions]] about the [[filmmaking]] when I [[watched]] it, so I [[accessed]] a [[filmmaking]] review published in a major metropolitan newspaper the next day- [[feeling]] [[confirm]], the reviewer wrote that the movie was incoherent, indecipherable, and uninspiring. A little [[researches]] [[reveal]] that the producer was [[superstar]] Leslie Caron's husband, [[so]] the whiff of [[favouritism]] suggests the [[launch]] for this [[scary]] [[flick]]. The film's roster of [[multiple]] [[able]] [[protagonists]] - Caron, Warren Oates, Scatman Crothers, Gloria Grahame, and James Sikking [[in]] others - suggests that it [[held]] some [[promising]]. But the [[fatalities]] of this [[filmmaking]] is attributable to its [[scary]] [[scenario]]. The "[[riddle]]" implicated is so [[fuzzy]] and so [[petite]] [[shown]] [[in]] the [[filmmaking]] that the viewer is left [[disconcerted]] from scene to scene. The [[movies]] seems torn between being a detective [[enigma]] and an [[spies]] thriller, but never [[settle]] [[after]] one or the other. The [[feeling]] of [[wait]] is [[completely]] absent. The [[primary]] [[trait]] [[solve]] on [[gaming]] [[drier]], emotionless [[genus]] in a fashion that [[inspiring]] no [[sympathetic]] whatsoever. The [[filmmaking]] is pedestrian. The [[consequence]] is that the hapless viewer loses interest in the [[character]], the plot, and, in the end, the [[movie]] itself. I am little [[shocked]] that there is no version of this [[lamentable]] [[filmmaking]] available to purchase. I hope that if TCM finds a print of this film and feels compelled to air it that it is [[reliably]] [[consigned]] to the 4:00 am [[groove]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This [[film]] is as good as it is [[difficult]] to find. The film's hero (and [[writer]] and [[director]]) is Simon Geist- a [[man]] "with an agenda." He [[creates]] a fake magazine just to have the authority to interview the swine of Los Angeles- the actors, the [[models]], the musicians- who believe that their own defecation doesn't smell. With [[clever]] dialog, Zucovic [[succeeds]] in doing this. Sure, the budget for this [[film]] was [[probably]] what he [[paid]] for a used [[car]], but this film is so [[solid]] and so well [[written]] that it works very well. [[Any]] [[person]] who can reenact [[Edward]] Munk's 'The Scream' in the [[reflection]] of a silver trashbin at a local coffee [[house]] should be nominated for some [[type]] of award. Give this [[film]] a [[chance]] and [[listen]] to what it [[says]]... because they [[HAVE]] been making the same [[car]] [[since]] 1986... it's [[called]] 'the [[car]].' [[Bravo]], Zucovic, [[bravo]]! This [[films]] is as good as it is [[troublesome]] to find. The film's hero (and [[scriptwriter]] and [[superintendent]]) is Simon Geist- a [[dude]] "with an agenda." He [[generates]] a fake magazine just to have the authority to interview the swine of Los Angeles- the actors, the [[model]], the musicians- who believe that their own defecation doesn't smell. With [[smarter]] dialog, Zucovic [[succeed]] in doing this. Sure, the budget for this [[flick]] was [[arguably]] what he [[pay]] for a used [[vehicles]], but this film is so [[solids]] and so well [[handwritten]] that it works very well. [[Every]] [[anyone]] who can reenact [[Edwards]] Munk's 'The Scream' in the [[meditation]] of a silver trashbin at a local coffee [[dwellings]] should be nominated for some [[genus]] of award. Give this [[cinematography]] a [[chances]] and [[listening]] to what it [[alleges]]... because they [[HAD]] been making the same [[motorcar]] [[because]] 1986... it's [[telephoned]] 'the [[automobiles]].' [[Brava]], Zucovic, [[swish]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4067 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] This [[movie]] has a very hard-to-swallow [[premise]], [[even]] by this genre's [[standards]]. We are [[asked]] to accept not only that a [[record]] played backwards can [[bring]] a dead [[man]] back to life, but that the [[record]] also [[contains]] [[hidden]] messages aimed SPECIFICALLY at one [[kid]], when the [[singer]] had no connection to the [[boy]] when he was [[alive]], and of course no way of knowing at [[whose]] hands the record would end up. Anyway, the film is [[fun]] for a while, but [[eventually]] the [[silliness]] and the pointlessness reign supreme. If they were really trying to create a new Freddy-like horror icon, they were way off: the villain here has no personality, no motivation, and no variety. (*1/2) This [[filmmaking]] has a very hard-to-swallow [[supposition]], [[yet]] by this genre's [[standard]]. We are [[demanded]] to accept not only that a [[recordings]] played backwards can [[bringing]] a dead [[men]] back to life, but that the [[registering]] also [[encompasses]] [[ulterior]] messages aimed SPECIFICALLY at one [[petit]], when the [[diva]] had no connection to the [[laddie]] when he was [[vivo]], and of course no way of knowing at [[whom]] hands the record would end up. Anyway, the film is [[droll]] for a while, but [[lastly]] the [[hilarity]] and the pointlessness reign supreme. If they were really trying to create a new Freddy-like horror icon, they were way off: the villain here has no personality, no motivation, and no variety. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 4068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A pot - boiler if ever I saw one. A supposed thriller borrowing from "A Time to Kill", "Silence of the Lambs", even an inverted "In the Heat of the Night" with a little reverse murder, a la "Strangers on a Train" thrown in, it fails abysmally where all the above, to a large degree, succeeded. Namely, in delivering thrills. The plot seems condensed from a bigger book, making the plot developments obvious and uninvolving, while the direction lacks pace and verve. To rein in any kudos, a major twist had to be delivered along the way and here it fails palpably too. Connery is clearly slowing down in his old age, barely bothering with his attempt at a US accent and besides seems too old to be the husband of Hope Lange and the father of those gosh - darn kids of his. He even has a father in law who seems younger than him. Laurence Fishburne barely gets the chance to inhabit his role and you're confused from the outset as to whether he's a bad guy or a good guy. Someone once said that flashbacks shouldn't lie - they do, confusedly, here. The rest of the playing is merely average by a reasonable cast in their underwritten stereotyped roles. The supposed climax managed too, to roll by leaving me firmly entrenched in the back, not as should have been the aim, front edge of my seat. Mediocre sloppy Hollywood film making for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Painful to watch, and not entirely for [[empathy]] with the struggles of the [[characters]]. Two of the main [[characters]], Cynthia the [[mother]] and Monica the [[acknowledged]] [[daughter]], spend the [[great]] [[bulk]] of the film [[pathetically]] mewling and [[bitterly]] [[bitching]] respectively. Their characters are so [[firmly]] established that their redemption into [[tolerable]] [[personalities]] after a [[quick]] family [[catharsis]] is unbelievable. It wasn't worth the wait. I wish a [[worthy]] pitch for [[honesty]] [[among]] families was [[less]] of a headache to [[view]]. Painful to watch, and not entirely for [[compassion]] with the struggles of the [[personages]]. Two of the main [[hallmarks]], Cynthia the [[mom]] and Monica the [[admitted]] [[giri]], spend the [[marvellous]] [[wholesale]] of the film [[woefully]] mewling and [[deeply]] [[griping]] respectively. Their characters are so [[solidly]] established that their redemption into [[bearable]] [[dignitaries]] after a [[hurry]] family [[cathartic]] is unbelievable. It wasn't worth the wait. I wish a [[dignified]] pitch for [[sincerity]] [[in]] families was [[lesser]] of a headache to [[avis]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is not a very [[good]] [[movie]], but it's not a [[stinker]] either. It is very [[confusing]] and [[unnecessarily]] long so rent it at your own risk.

My GF and I have [[figured]] this movie out (we think) so here it is:

***MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW***

Firstly, this movie is actually quite simple after you remove all of the confusing unconscious-dream-state junk (95% of the movie.)

Ignoring the junk, what REALLY happened is this: A group of school friends go to a rave one night. They leave and get into a car accident where everyone but Cassie and Sean die. That's the simple cut down version. (That's right, I said Sean, bear with me)

Right after the accident, Cassie lays in the hospital stuck in between life & death right up until the very end of the movie. This is where the dream part starts.

The movie is called SOUL Survivors, right? Cassie's mind and soul carries on after the accident interacting with the other souls (Annie, Matt, Raven, the 2 weirdos and Jude) along with images conjured up by her mind (Sean, school and everything else around her). The souls continue doing what they were defined as: Annie the rave-going chick, the 2 weirdo-killers (from opening scene), Father Jude still helping people etc.

We are then taken on a very long ride, shown lots of images (many of which my GF and I still can't tie in) but it all boils down to it not being Cassie's time to die.

At the end, Cassie wakes up in the hospital after being "dead" for a while. Her family and Sean are there. This is reality again. She's OK.

Then the director adds a little extra spice by trying to confuse us again by showing a little dream snippet of her in the wheelchair being strangled. But this part is really just a nightmare, and she wakes up beside Sean, obviously still dealing with her traumatic experience.

Due to space restrictions, we didn't cover every little thing, but feel free to drop us an e-mail if you want to.

This is not a very [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], but it's not a [[wanker]] either. It is very [[disconcerting]] and [[needlessly]] long so rent it at your own risk.

My GF and I have [[conjured]] this movie out (we think) so here it is:

***MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW***

Firstly, this movie is actually quite simple after you remove all of the confusing unconscious-dream-state junk (95% of the movie.)

Ignoring the junk, what REALLY happened is this: A group of school friends go to a rave one night. They leave and get into a car accident where everyone but Cassie and Sean die. That's the simple cut down version. (That's right, I said Sean, bear with me)

Right after the accident, Cassie lays in the hospital stuck in between life & death right up until the very end of the movie. This is where the dream part starts.

The movie is called SOUL Survivors, right? Cassie's mind and soul carries on after the accident interacting with the other souls (Annie, Matt, Raven, the 2 weirdos and Jude) along with images conjured up by her mind (Sean, school and everything else around her). The souls continue doing what they were defined as: Annie the rave-going chick, the 2 weirdo-killers (from opening scene), Father Jude still helping people etc.

We are then taken on a very long ride, shown lots of images (many of which my GF and I still can't tie in) but it all boils down to it not being Cassie's time to die.

At the end, Cassie wakes up in the hospital after being "dead" for a while. Her family and Sean are there. This is reality again. She's OK.

Then the director adds a little extra spice by trying to confuse us again by showing a little dream snippet of her in the wheelchair being strangled. But this part is really just a nightmare, and she wakes up beside Sean, obviously still dealing with her traumatic experience.

Due to space restrictions, we didn't cover every little thing, but feel free to drop us an e-mail if you want to.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is 2009 and this way underrated gem has lost nothing of the power it had 31 years ago. It connects a pretty wide variety of different characters and stories without appearing to be cluttered.

Clothes and music might have changed over time, but in the end this is a story that will never lose its up-to-dateness. And especially this movie does the job pretty well. Of course it is cheesy at times, but very touching as well.

Jodie Foster's performance is striking, and it shows that she is really a natural born actress who showed her true potential especially in her earlier movies.

Don't miss this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After several extremely well ratings to the point of SUPERB, I was extremely pleased with the film. The film was dark, moving, the anger, the pain, the guilt and a very extremely convincing demon.

I had initially expected to see many special effects, and like a lover's caress, it blew me away with the subtlety and the rightness of it. Brian, I am again blown away with your artistry with the telling of the story and your care of the special effects. You will go a long way, my friend. I will definitely be the president of your fan club.

Eric Etebari, the best actor award, was the number one choice. You made Jr. Lopez look like a child compared to Kasadya. :)

Overall, the acting, story line, the high quality filming and awesome effects, it was fantastic. I just wish it were longer. I am looking forward to The Dreamless with extremely high expectations. --------------------------------------------- Result 4073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] "In 1955, Tobias Schneerbaum disappeared in the Peruvian Amazon. One year [[later]] he walked out of the jungle...naked. It [[took]] him 45 [[years]] to [[go]] back." [[Supposedly]], "Keep the River On your Right" is "a modern cannibal [[tale]]". In reality, anyone [[looking]] for some insight into [[cannibalism]] will be [[sadly]] disappointed. The first half of the [[movie]] is more like a travel log of New Ginuea, mostly touting the native art. The second half relies on still photos of a Peruvian [[cannibal]] tribe, but really that's about it. Unless of course, you are interested in home [[movies]] of a Jewish wedding, or Schneerbaum introducing his former male lovers. I [[give]] up. [[Big]] [[disappointment]] and not really "a modern cannibal [[tale]]." - MERK "In 1955, Tobias Schneerbaum disappeared in the Peruvian Amazon. One year [[subsequently]] he walked out of the jungle...naked. It [[taken]] him 45 [[ages]] to [[going]] back." [[Seemingly]], "Keep the River On your Right" is "a modern cannibal [[saga]]". In reality, anyone [[researching]] for some insight into [[cannibal]] will be [[alas]] disappointed. The first half of the [[filmmaking]] is more like a travel log of New Ginuea, mostly touting the native art. The second half relies on still photos of a Peruvian [[cannibalism]] tribe, but really that's about it. Unless of course, you are interested in home [[filmmaking]] of a Jewish wedding, or Schneerbaum introducing his former male lovers. I [[lend]] up. [[Prodigious]] [[displeasure]] and not really "a modern cannibal [[storytelling]]." - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] How can you [[go]] [[wrong]] with the [[amazing]] Ramones? What a crime that two of them are already dead. It [[reminds]] me of the Dennis Leary joke about great musicians dying in kitchen fires while useless ones live forever. I'm paraphrasing here, but you [[get]] the idea.

[[ROCK]] AND ROLL [[HIGH]] [[SCHOOL]] tells the [[story]] of a group of [[disenfranchised]] kids fighting against their [[oppressive]] high school's administration. It's extremely silly stuff, but there's an optimism about it that's refreshing ([[even]] if they do resort to blowing up the [[building]]). [[Who]] [[knew]] that this [[would]] actually [[become]] a concern for students around the [[world]]? [[ROCK]] [[AND]] [[ROLL]] [[HIGH]] SCHOOL is a time capsule of an era when people still believed that [[music]] mattered and that it could make a difference to the [[larger]] society. It's full of kids who [[know]] authority doesn't have the [[correct]] [[answers]]. [[Rather]], [[rock]] and roll is the only [[thing]] they can [[trust]].

But most important, this is pure exploitation.

[[Take]] none of it [[seriously]]. Just go in and have a good [[time]]. If this wasn't what [[high]] school [[life]] was like in the [[seventies]], then it should have been. How can you [[going]] [[fallacious]] with the [[wondrous]] Ramones? What a crime that two of them are already dead. It [[reminded]] me of the Dennis Leary joke about great musicians dying in kitchen fires while useless ones live forever. I'm paraphrasing here, but you [[got]] the idea.

[[BOULDER]] AND ROLL [[SUPREMO]] [[SCHOLASTIC]] tells the [[history]] of a group of [[underprivileged]] kids fighting against their [[tyrannical]] high school's administration. It's extremely silly stuff, but there's an optimism about it that's refreshing ([[yet]] if they do resort to blowing up the [[construction]]). [[Whose]] [[overheard]] that this [[ought]] actually [[gotten]] a concern for students around the [[globe]]? [[BOULDER]] [[UND]] [[ROLLING]] [[HIGHER]] SCHOOL is a time capsule of an era when people still believed that [[musicians]] mattered and that it could make a difference to the [[largest]] society. It's full of kids who [[savoir]] authority doesn't have the [[accurate]] [[reply]]. [[Fairly]], [[boulder]] and roll is the only [[stuff]] they can [[trusted]].

But most important, this is pure exploitation.

[[Taking]] none of it [[conscientiously]]. Just go in and have a good [[period]]. If this wasn't what [[supreme]] school [[iife]] was like in the [[seventy]], then it should have been. --------------------------------------------- Result 4075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This happy-go-luck 1939 military swashbuckler, based [[rather]] [[loosely]] on Rudyard Kipling's memorable [[poem]] as well as his novel "[[Soldiers]] [[Three]]," qualifies as first-rate entertainment about the British [[Imperial]] Army in India in the 1880s. Cary Grant delivers more knock-about blows with his knuckled-up [[fists]] than he did in all of his [[movies]] put together. Set in faraway India, this six-fisted yarn dwells on the exploits of three rugged British sergeants and their [[native]] water bearer Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) who contend with a bloodthirsty [[cult]] of [[murderous]] Indians [[called]] the Thuggee. Sergeant Archibald Cutter (Cary [[Grant]] of "The Last [[Outpost]]"), [[Sergeant]] MacChesney (Oscar-winner [[Victor]] McLaglen of "The Informer"), and [[Sergeant]] Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. of "The [[Dawn]] Patrol"), are a competitive trio of hard-drinking, hard-brawling, and fun-loving [[Alpha]] [[males]] whose years of frolic are about to [[become]] history because Ballantine plans to marry Emmy Stebbins (Joan Fontaine) and enter the tea business. Naturally, Cutter and MacChesney [[drum]] up assorted [[schemes]] to derail Ballentine's [[plans]]. When their superiors order them back into [[action]] with [[Sgt]]. Bertie Higginbotham ([[Robert]] Coote of "The Sheik [[Steps]] Out"), Cutter and MacChesney [[drug]] Higginbotham so that he cannot [[accompany]] them and Ballantine has to replace him. Half of the fun here is [[watching]] the principals trying to outwit each other without hating themselves. [[Director]] George Stevens [[celebrates]] the spirit of adventure in grand [[style]] and scope as our heroes tangle with an army of Thuggees. Lenser Joseph H. August received an Oscar nomination for his [[outstanding]] black & white cinematography. This happy-go-luck 1939 military swashbuckler, based [[fairly]] [[vaguely]] on Rudyard Kipling's memorable [[poetry]] as well as his novel "[[Servicemen]] [[Tre]]," qualifies as first-rate entertainment about the British [[Imperialism]] Army in India in the 1880s. Cary Grant delivers more knock-about blows with his knuckled-up [[dukes]] than he did in all of his [[cinematography]] put together. Set in faraway India, this six-fisted yarn dwells on the exploits of three rugged British sergeants and their [[aboriginal]] water bearer Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) who contend with a bloodthirsty [[worship]] of [[bloodthirsty]] Indians [[drew]] the Thuggee. Sergeant Archibald Cutter (Cary [[Granting]] of "The Last [[Bastion]]"), [[Sgt]] MacChesney (Oscar-winner [[Viktor]] McLaglen of "The Informer"), and [[Sgt]] Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. of "The [[Dawning]] Patrol"), are a competitive trio of hard-drinking, hard-brawling, and fun-loving [[Alfa]] [[men]] whose years of frolic are about to [[becomes]] history because Ballantine plans to marry Emmy Stebbins (Joan Fontaine) and enter the tea business. Naturally, Cutter and MacChesney [[drumming]] up assorted [[scheme]] to derail Ballentine's [[schemes]]. When their superiors order them back into [[actions]] with [[Sergeant]]. Bertie Higginbotham ([[Roberto]] Coote of "The Sheik [[Actions]] Out"), Cutter and MacChesney [[drugs]] Higginbotham so that he cannot [[accompaniment]] them and Ballantine has to replace him. Half of the fun here is [[staring]] the principals trying to outwit each other without hating themselves. [[Headmaster]] George Stevens [[commemorating]] the spirit of adventure in grand [[styling]] and scope as our heroes tangle with an army of Thuggees. Lenser Joseph H. August received an Oscar nomination for his [[unresolved]] black & white cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 4076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Inventor Wayne Szalinsky (Rick Moranis) is preparing to donate his problematic shrinking/expanding machine to the Smithsonian Institution as he and his wife Diane (Eve Gordon) get ready for a long weekend away from their son Adam (Bug Hall). Wayne's brother Gordon (Stuart Pankin), his wife Patty (Robin Bartlett), and his kids Jenny (Allison Mack) and Mitch (Jake Richardson) volunteer to look after Adam while his parents are away, but as luck would have it (and the title would lead you to expect), the grown-ups are accidentally zapped by Wayne's shrinking ray. As the kids run amok, their miniaturized folks must contend with monstrously huge insects, wrinkles in the carpet that look like canyons, and other threats to them. This was bad, like most straight to video sequels are, Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves was sort of laughable. I had to laugh at that movie "roach" Stuart Pankin and the party bullies were even more ridiculous, view at own risk! --------------------------------------------- Result 4077 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I have to hand it to the creative team behind these "American Pie" [[movies]]. "[[Direct]] To [[DVD]]" [[typically]] is synonymous with cheap, incompetent film-making. [[Yet]] last year I was pleasantly surprised when I found myself [[thoroughly]] [[enjoying]] the [[DVD]] sequel "The Naked Mile". The filmmakers took [[advantage]] of the opportunity to [[deliver]] a raunchy, yet [[funny]] little [[film]]. This [[year]] they [[offer]] up the followup, "Beta House". This is the honest truth, "Beta House" makes the first few "American [[Pie]]" movies look like "The Little Mermaid".

This is no holds [[barred]], [[tasteless]], laugh-out [[loud]] [[fun]]. Sure, the [[story]] is a bit [[thin]], but that's the beauty of the whole thing. [[Within]] the first 10 minutes we're introduced to the all the main [[characters]], the new supporting characters, get a handful of raunchy gags, meet the villains, and [[establish]] the general plot-line. With all that out of the way, the movie becomes a no-limits ride. The gags are a plenty, and they DID [[NOT]] hold back in this one. I'm talking male semen, urine, dildos, chicks-with-dicks, sex with sheep, female orgazim sprays, and plenty more. Not to [[mention]] the fact that not a minute goes by without boobs or a sex scene.

[[Returning]] from "The Naked Mile" are John White, Jake Siegel, [[Steve]] Talley, and Eugene [[Levy]] (in a [[similar]] supporting role as the [[last]] few [[films]]). The [[entire]] cast does [[fine]] [[work]]. [[Steve]] Talley (Dwight Stifler), in particular, has a [[great]] [[energy]] and screen [[presence]]. I [[predict]] good [[things]] for him. The [[film]] is [[also]] [[loaded]] with [[great]] [[movie]] [[references]] for those who [[keep]] their eyes [[open]]. By far the [[biggest]] laugh of the [[film]] for me was "The Deerhunter" parody. [[Classic]].

The bottom line is, if you're a [[fan]] of the series, you'll feel right at [[home]] with "Beta House". It really pushes the [[limits]] of good [[taste]], but in the [[end]] is pretty [[damn]] [[funny]]. I have to hand it to the creative team behind these "American Pie" [[theater]]. "[[Directly]] To [[DVDS]]" [[fluently]] is synonymous with cheap, incompetent film-making. [[Nonetheless]] last year I was pleasantly surprised when I found myself [[intently]] [[enjoy]] the [[DVDS]] sequel "The Naked Mile". The filmmakers took [[advantages]] of the opportunity to [[make]] a raunchy, yet [[fun]] little [[flick]]. This [[annum]] they [[offering]] up the followup, "Beta House". This is the honest truth, "Beta House" makes the first few "American [[Pizza]]" movies look like "The Little Mermaid".

This is no holds [[banning]], [[vapid]], laugh-out [[vocal]] [[amusing]]. Sure, the [[histories]] is a bit [[delgado]], but that's the beauty of the whole thing. [[Inside]] the first 10 minutes we're introduced to the all the main [[character]], the new supporting characters, get a handful of raunchy gags, meet the villains, and [[establishing]] the general plot-line. With all that out of the way, the movie becomes a no-limits ride. The gags are a plenty, and they DID [[NAH]] hold back in this one. I'm talking male semen, urine, dildos, chicks-with-dicks, sex with sheep, female orgazim sprays, and plenty more. Not to [[referenced]] the fact that not a minute goes by without boobs or a sex scene.

[[Returned]] from "The Naked Mile" are John White, Jake Siegel, [[Steven]] Talley, and Eugene [[Levi]] (in a [[equivalent]] supporting role as the [[final]] few [[cinematography]]). The [[total]] cast does [[alright]] [[cooperation]]. [[Steven]] Talley (Dwight Stifler), in particular, has a [[huge]] [[energies]] and screen [[attendance]]. I [[projected]] good [[matters]] for him. The [[films]] is [[apart]] [[loading]] with [[wondrous]] [[film]] [[referencing]] for those who [[keeping]] their eyes [[opening]]. By far the [[strongest]] laugh of the [[cinematography]] for me was "The Deerhunter" parody. [[Typical]].

The bottom line is, if you're a [[ventilator]] of the series, you'll feel right at [[households]] with "Beta House". It really pushes the [[capped]] of good [[liking]], but in the [[termination]] is pretty [[dammit]] [[comical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The plot sounded like it had promise. To be honest I did not watch the entire movie. After about an hour into the movie I had to make a decision. Is this movie worth watching until it conclusion? The answer was clearly NO! It was not the fact that the human body could not receive a transplant from a different species without rejecting it. Nor the premise that he was being chased by secret government authorities for an human / wolf transplant. It was because the movie was badly written, acting lacked emotion and I did not understand the several dream sequences with the wolves and buffaloes. When he was running to the zoo with a dog pack and leaving them at the front of the zoo gate the saying "If you can't run with the big dogs don't leave the porch" kept running through my bored mind. Save yourself the time and skip this movie. I can guarantee if you do dare to watch it you will sit there slack jawed as I did wondering why anyone waste money, time, energy and effort to make this insulting outrage to American cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 4079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[think]] this movie was probably a [[lot]] more [[powerful]] when it [[first]] debuted in 1943, [[though]] [[nowadays]] it [[seems]] a bit too preachy and static to elevate it to [[greatness]]. The film is set in 1940--just before the entry of the US into the war. Paul Lukas plays the very earnest and decent head of his family. He's a German who has spent seven years fighting the Nazis and avoiding capture. [[Bette]] [[Davis]] is his very understanding and long-suffering wife who has managed to educate and raise the children without him from time to time. As the film [[begins]], they are crossing the border from Mexico to the USA and for the first time in years, they are going to relax and [[stop]] running.

The problem for me was that the family was too [[perfect]] and too decent--making them seem like obvious positive propaganda instead of a real family suffering through real problems. While this had a very noble goal at the time, it just [[seems]] [[phony]] [[today]]. In [[particular]], the incredibly odd and extremely scripted dialog [[used]] by the children just didn't ring true. It sounded more like anti-Fascism speeches than the voices of real children. They were as a result extremely annoying--particularly the littlest one who came off, at times, as a brat. About the only ones who sounded real were Bette Davis and her extended American family as well as the scumbag Romanian living with them (though he had no [[discernible]] accent).

It's really tough to believe that the ultra-famous Dashiel Hammett wrote this dialog, as it just doesn't sound true to life. The story was based on the play by his lover, Lillian Hellman. And, the basic story idea and plot is good,...but the dialog is just bad at [[times]]. [[Overall]], an interesting curio and a [[film]] with some [[excellent]] moments,...but that's really about all. I [[reckon]] this movie was probably a [[lots]] more [[forceful]] when it [[firstly]] debuted in 1943, [[if]] [[today]] it [[looks]] a bit too preachy and static to elevate it to [[scale]]. The film is set in 1940--just before the entry of the US into the war. Paul Lukas plays the very earnest and decent head of his family. He's a German who has spent seven years fighting the Nazis and avoiding capture. [[Midler]] [[Davies]] is his very understanding and long-suffering wife who has managed to educate and raise the children without him from time to time. As the film [[starts]], they are crossing the border from Mexico to the USA and for the first time in years, they are going to relax and [[cease]] running.

The problem for me was that the family was too [[perfection]] and too decent--making them seem like obvious positive propaganda instead of a real family suffering through real problems. While this had a very noble goal at the time, it just [[seem]] [[pseudo]] [[thursday]]. In [[singular]], the incredibly odd and extremely scripted dialog [[utilized]] by the children just didn't ring true. It sounded more like anti-Fascism speeches than the voices of real children. They were as a result extremely annoying--particularly the littlest one who came off, at times, as a brat. About the only ones who sounded real were Bette Davis and her extended American family as well as the scumbag Romanian living with them (though he had no [[identifiable]] accent).

It's really tough to believe that the ultra-famous Dashiel Hammett wrote this dialog, as it just doesn't sound true to life. The story was based on the play by his lover, Lillian Hellman. And, the basic story idea and plot is good,...but the dialog is just bad at [[time]]. [[Whole]], an interesting curio and a [[kino]] with some [[fantastic]] moments,...but that's really about all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has very good acting by virtually all the cast, a gripping story with a chilling ending, great music, and excellent visuals without significant special effects. It is interesting to note though that, like so much science fiction, its predictions for the future don't appear likely to come to pass as early as depicted. That's not to say we're out of the woods yet, but 2022 is now obviously too soon to be in this condition. It shares this failing with a fairly illustrious list of science fiction classics: "1984", "2001: A Space Odyssey (compare its space station with our International Space Station) and Isaac Asimov's "I Robot" (positronic brains were to have been invented in the 1990's). --------------------------------------------- Result 4081 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There are [[enough]] [[sad]] stories about women and their [[oppression]] by religious, political and societal means. Not to diminish the films and stories about genital mutilation and reproductive rights, as well as wage inequality, and marginalization in society, all in the name of Allah or God or some other ridiculous [[justification]], but sometimes it is helpful to just take another [[approach]] and [[shed]] some [[light]] on the subject.

The setting is the 2006 [[match]] between Iran and Bahrain to [[qualify]] for the World [[Cup]]. Passions are [[high]] and [[several]] [[women]] [[try]] to [[disguise]] themselves as [[men]] to [[get]] into the [[match]].

The [[women]] who were [[caught]] (Played by Sima Mobarak-Shahi, Shayesteh Irani, Ayda Sadeqi, Golnaz Farmani, and Mahnaz Zabihi) and [[detained]] for [[prosecution]] provided a funny and [[illuminating]] glimpse into the customs of this country and, most [[likely]], all [[Muslim]] [[countries]]. Their [[interaction]] with the Iranian [[soldiers]] who were guarding and [[transporting]] them, both [[city]] and [[villagers]], and the [[father]] who was looking for his [[daughter]] [[provided]] some [[hilarious]] [[moments]] as we thought about why they have such unwritten rules.

It is mainly about a paternalistic society that feels it has to save it's women from the crude behavior of it's men. Rather than educating the male population, they deny privilege and rights to the women.

Seeing the [[changes]] in the soldiers responsible and the [[reflection]] of Iranian society, it is [[nos]] [[surprise]] this [[film]] will not [[get]] any play in [[Iran]]. But Jafar Panahi has a winner on his hands for those able to see it. There are [[adequate]] [[unlucky]] stories about women and their [[repression]] by religious, political and societal means. Not to diminish the films and stories about genital mutilation and reproductive rights, as well as wage inequality, and marginalization in society, all in the name of Allah or God or some other ridiculous [[grounds]], but sometimes it is helpful to just take another [[approaching]] and [[boathouse]] some [[lighting]] on the subject.

The setting is the 2006 [[couple]] between Iran and Bahrain to [[allowable]] for the World [[Goblet]]. Passions are [[supreme]] and [[assorted]] [[femmes]] [[seeks]] to [[dissemble]] themselves as [[hombre]] to [[gets]] into the [[ballgame]].

The [[girl]] who were [[grabbed]] (Played by Sima Mobarak-Shahi, Shayesteh Irani, Ayda Sadeqi, Golnaz Farmani, and Mahnaz Zabihi) and [[arrested]] for [[indictment]] provided a funny and [[enlightening]] glimpse into the customs of this country and, most [[probable]], all [[Muslims]] [[nations]]. Their [[interact]] with the Iranian [[military]] who were guarding and [[hauling]] them, both [[town]] and [[locals]], and the [[pere]] who was looking for his [[girls]] [[gave]] some [[amusing]] [[times]] as we thought about why they have such unwritten rules.

It is mainly about a paternalistic society that feels it has to save it's women from the crude behavior of it's men. Rather than educating the male population, they deny privilege and rights to the women.

Seeing the [[amendment]] in the soldiers responsible and the [[contemplation]] of Iranian society, it is [[none]] [[amazement]] this [[movie]] will not [[gets]] any play in [[Tehran]]. But Jafar Panahi has a winner on his hands for those able to see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Yes, Be My Love was [[Mario]] Lanza's skyrocket to fame and still is popular [[today]]. His [[voice]] was strong and [[steady]], so [[powerful]] in fact that MGM decided to use him in The Great Caruso. Lanza himself thought he was the reincarnation of Caruso. Having read the book by Kostelanitz who wrote a biography of Lanza, he explains that the constant practise and vocal lessons became the visionary Caruso to Lanza. There is no doubt that Lanza did a superb job in the story, but the story is not [[entirely]] true; blame it on Hollywood! I used to practise singing his songs years ago, and became pretty good myself until I lost my voice because of emphysema/asthma ten years ago. Reaching the high note of Be My Love is not easy; but [[beautiful]]! Yes, Be My Love was [[Mariah]] Lanza's skyrocket to fame and still is popular [[yesterday]]. His [[vowel]] was strong and [[uninterrupted]], so [[forceful]] in fact that MGM decided to use him in The Great Caruso. Lanza himself thought he was the reincarnation of Caruso. Having read the book by Kostelanitz who wrote a biography of Lanza, he explains that the constant practise and vocal lessons became the visionary Caruso to Lanza. There is no doubt that Lanza did a superb job in the story, but the story is not [[fully]] true; blame it on Hollywood! I used to practise singing his songs years ago, and became pretty good myself until I lost my voice because of emphysema/asthma ten years ago. Reaching the high note of Be My Love is not easy; but [[wondrous]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4083 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't know what to expect from the film. Well, now I know. This was a truly awful film. The screenplay, directing and acting were equally bad. The story was silly and stupid. The director could have made a smart and thought provoking film, but he didn't. I squirmed in my seat for the last half of the movie because it was so bad. Where was the focus to the film? Where was anything in this film? Christians should boycott this film instead of promoting it. It was shabbily done and a waste of my money. Do not see this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4084 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[watched]] this as [[part]] of my course at Aberystwyth [[University]] and it baffles me how this does not have a [[distributor]] in the [[UK]]. Well [[actually]], it doesn't, because this [[film]] is everything a Hollywood [[film]] isn't - original, creative, [[quirky]] and humorous. It seems that [[today]] no-one [[really]] wants to see this [[type]] of [[movie]] as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most [[young]] viewers look for in a film.

I haven't written a [[review]] for the IMDb for ages but felt [[inclined]] to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the [[world]]. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a [[house]] and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.

I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time [[limit]]. However I [[encourage]] anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very [[entertaining]] movie.

It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing.... I [[saw]] this as [[portions]] of my course at Aberystwyth [[College]] and it baffles me how this does not have a [[merchants]] in the [[BRITISH]]. Well [[indeed]], it doesn't, because this [[kino]] is everything a Hollywood [[films]] isn't - original, creative, [[fickle]] and humorous. It seems that [[hoy]] no-one [[genuinely]] wants to see this [[kinds]] of [[kino]] as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most [[youths]] viewers look for in a film.

I haven't written a [[scrutinize]] for the IMDb for ages but felt [[minded]] to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the [[globe]]. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a [[haus]] and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.

I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time [[restrain]]. However I [[promoted]] anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very [[amusing]] movie.

It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing.... --------------------------------------------- Result 4085 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[While]] not as famous as some of their other collaborations (such as THE BLACK CAT and THE BODY SNATCHER), this is a dandy [[little]] horror film [[even]] though the [[casting]] decisions were a bit [[odd]]. Boris Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a weird scientist who lives in the Carpathian mountains--near where the Dracula character's home town. Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Benet--whose nationality was never discussed though the name certainly sounds French. I really [[think]] it [[would]] have made sense to have the two [[switch]] [[roles]], as the Carpathian role seems [[tailor]] made for Lugosi--especially with his accent. However, despite this unusual twist, the two still did excellent jobs. Karloff's was definitely the lead role, but Lugosi acquitted himself well as a relatively normal person--something he didn't [[play]] very [[often]] in films!! It [[seems]] that Dr. Rukh is a [[bit]] of a pariah, as other scientists ([[especially]] [[Benet]]) think his [[theories]] are [[bizarre]] and [[nonsensical]]. [[However]], over the course of the film, Rukh turns out to be right and Benet is [[especially]] generous in his [[new]] praise for Rukh. But, unfortunately, the [[wonderful]] [[new]] [[element]] that Rukh [[discovered]] has the [[nasty]] side [[effect]] of turning him into a [[crazy]] [[killing]] machine (don't you [[hate]] it when that happens?). [[While]] this [[could]] have just been a [[simple]] nice [[scientist]] turned [[mad]] story, the plot was well constructed, the [[characters]] [[nicely]] [[developed]] and the [[mad]] Rukh was [[NOT]] a one-dimensional [[killer]], but [[complex]] and interesting.

This film is bound to be [[enjoyed]] by [[anyone]] except for people who [[hate]] [[old]] [[horror]] [[films]]. You can really [[tell]] that Universal Pictures pulled out all the stops and made a bigger-budget film [[instead]] of the [[cheap]] quickies both Lugosi and Karloff unfortunately gravitated in later years. Good stuff. [[Despite]] not as famous as some of their other collaborations (such as THE BLACK CAT and THE BODY SNATCHER), this is a dandy [[tiny]] horror film [[yet]] though the [[cast]] decisions were a bit [[unusual]]. Boris Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a weird scientist who lives in the Carpathian mountains--near where the Dracula character's home town. Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Benet--whose nationality was never discussed though the name certainly sounds French. I really [[thought]] it [[should]] have made sense to have the two [[switches]] [[functions]], as the Carpathian role seems [[adapts]] made for Lugosi--especially with his accent. However, despite this unusual twist, the two still did excellent jobs. Karloff's was definitely the lead role, but Lugosi acquitted himself well as a relatively normal person--something he didn't [[playing]] very [[routinely]] in films!! It [[seem]] that Dr. Rukh is a [[bite]] of a pariah, as other scientists ([[mostly]] [[Bennett]]) think his [[doctrines]] are [[strange]] and [[meaningless]]. [[Instead]], over the course of the film, Rukh turns out to be right and Benet is [[specifically]] generous in his [[novo]] praise for Rukh. But, unfortunately, the [[brilliant]] [[novo]] [[components]] that Rukh [[unearthed]] has the [[squalid]] side [[effects]] of turning him into a [[madman]] [[assassinate]] machine (don't you [[hating]] it when that happens?). [[Despite]] this [[wo]] have just been a [[uncomplicated]] nice [[researchers]] turned [[irate]] story, the plot was well constructed, the [[characteristics]] [[politely]] [[devised]] and the [[lunatic]] Rukh was [[NAH]] a one-dimensional [[murderer]], but [[tricky]] and interesting.

This film is bound to be [[liked]] by [[nobody]] except for people who [[hates]] [[antigua]] [[terror]] [[cinematography]]. You can really [[say]] that Universal Pictures pulled out all the stops and made a bigger-budget film [[however]] of the [[cheaper]] quickies both Lugosi and Karloff unfortunately gravitated in later years. Good stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 4086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Most people [[know]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven as the director of [[many]] good (and [[bad]]) sci-fi [[movies]] in Hollywood. But long before that he was [[churning]] out generic thrillers in his [[native]] [[land]]. The [[story]] is a basic [[femme]] fatale premise, [[nothing]] new or [[enthralling]]. Verhoeven [[thinks]] he can make it better by [[adding]] in a series of [[dream]] sequences, which [[instead]] of [[defining]] our [[main]] character and his situation, are just used as a way to [[drive]] forward the predictable plot. The [[screenplay]] was solid, the dialogue [[helping]] to pad the [[effects]] of the bland story. What really [[made]] the [[movie]] at at least [[good]] was some [[terrific]] acting. Jereone Krabbe was [[amazing]] as the "tortured [[artist]]", and the supporters were very good as well. Also, Jan De Bont's [[cinematography]] adds at least some [[life]] to the film, [[helping]] to make Verhoeven look at least capable as a director.

6.5/10

* * 1/2 / * * * * Most people [[savoir]] [[Paolo]] Verhoeven as the director of [[innumerable]] good (and [[unhealthy]]) sci-fi [[cinematographic]] in Hollywood. But long before that he was [[ferment]] out generic thrillers in his [[indigenous]] [[tierra]]. The [[fairytales]] is a basic [[woman]] fatale premise, [[anything]] new or [[captivating]]. Verhoeven [[ideas]] he can make it better by [[inserting]] in a series of [[slumber]] sequences, which [[alternatively]] of [[determining]] our [[leading]] character and his situation, are just used as a way to [[drives]] forward the predictable plot. The [[scenario]] was solid, the dialogue [[supporting]] to pad the [[repercussions]] of the bland story. What really [[effected]] the [[films]] at at least [[alright]] was some [[brilliant]] acting. Jereone Krabbe was [[breathtaking]] as the "tortured [[artistes]]", and the supporters were very good as well. Also, Jan De Bont's [[movies]] adds at least some [[vie]] to the film, [[supporting]] to make Verhoeven look at least capable as a director.

6.5/10

* * 1/2 / * * * * --------------------------------------------- Result 4087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I went to this movie [[expecting]] an artsy scary film. What I got was scare after scare. It's a horror film at it's [[core]]. It's not [[dull]] [[like]] other horror films where a haunted house just has ghosts and gore. This film doesn't even show you the majority of the deaths it [[shows]] the fear of the characters. I think one of the best things about the concept where it's not just the house thats haunted its whoever goes into the house. They become haunted no [[matter]] where they are. Office buildings, police stations, hotel rooms... etc. After reading some of the external reviews I am really surprised that [[critics]] didn't like this film. I am going to see it again this week and am excited about it.

I gave this [[film]] 10 stars because it did what a horror film should. It [[scared]] the s**t out of me. I went to this movie [[wait]] an artsy scary film. What I got was scare after scare. It's a horror film at it's [[crux]]. It's not [[boring]] [[iike]] other horror films where a haunted house just has ghosts and gore. This film doesn't even show you the majority of the deaths it [[displaying]] the fear of the characters. I think one of the best things about the concept where it's not just the house thats haunted its whoever goes into the house. They become haunted no [[topic]] where they are. Office buildings, police stations, hotel rooms... etc. After reading some of the external reviews I am really surprised that [[detractors]] didn't like this film. I am going to see it again this week and am excited about it.

I gave this [[cinematography]] 10 stars because it did what a horror film should. It [[afraid]] the s**t out of me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4088 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was for a while in my collection, but it wasn't before a friend of mine reminded me about it – until I decided that I should watch it. I did not know much about Close to Leo – just that it was supposed to be excellent coming out of age movie and it deals with a very serious topic – Aids.

Although the person who has aids – is Leo – the scenario wraps around the way in which Marcel (the youngest brother of Leo) coupes with the sickness of his relative. At first everyone is trying to hide the truth from Marcel – he is believed to be too young to understand the sickness of his brother – the fact that Leo is also a homosexual contributes to the unwillingness of the parents to discus the matter with the young Marcel. I know from experience that on many occasions most older people do not want to accept the fact that sometimes even when someone is young this does not automatically means that he will not be able to accept the reality and act in more adequate manner then even themselves . With exception of the fact that the family tried to conceal the truth from Marcel, they have left quite an impression for me – the way they supported their son – even after discovering the truth about his sexuality and his sickness. The fact that they allowed the young Marcel to travel along with Leo to Paris to meet his ex boyfriend was quite a gesture from them– most families I know will be reluctant to do that. There is a lot of warmth in the scenes in which the brothers spend some time together – you can see them being real friends , concern about each other.

Close to Leo is an excellent drama, which I strongly recommend --------------------------------------------- Result 4089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie is about sexual obsession. [[Bette]] [[Davis]] plays [[Mildred]]. This is a woman who men are [[drawn]] to. Not because she is a nice [[beautiful]] [[girl]] but because she is a sexual entity. Now the movie does not come out and say that but it is obvious. There is a scene in the [[movie]] in which [[men]] are all going googly eyes over her. She works as a [[waitress]] in a [[coffee]] shop, she can't read and she not really [[anybody]] to look at but she is a flirt. It is obvious the [[male]] customers in that coffee [[shop]] are there because of her. One day Phillip a club footed failed painter medical [[student]] [[comes]] in the [[shop]] to say a good word for his [[friend]] but he becomes besotted the [[moment]] he sees her. He starts buying her things even pays for her apartment. Meanwhile she is seeing other people and she makes no [[secrets]] of it. He [[dreams]] about her like she is a angel, but she is no angel. He is [[constantly]] thinking about her. His med school [[grades]] are [[even]] [[failing]]. So what the nookie is too good. He wants to marry her but she rejects him because she is marrying another guy. She always lets Phil know she really doesn't have love feelings for him all of time. He is heart broken but he meets another woman. They seem fine but it is obvious he is still dreaming of the Bimbo. Mildred does comes back with a baby and unwed. Phillip takes her in again, but she starts going out with a friend of his, the light bulb comes on a little and he kicks her out. She does what she knows works so she tries to seduce him, well it doesn't work and she proceeds to burn his tuition money up. Oh we have a club [[foot]] that he has problems about, even [[though]] a street [[teenager]] who has the same [[problem]] tells him to [[lighten]] up about it. He meets another girl named Sally we have a March of time montage which shows her aging while he [[strings]] her along [[still]] waiting for [[Mildred]]. Well he has no school [[tuition]], can't [[find]] a [[job]]. Finally Sally and her dad takes him in. Not before another March of Time montage showing him going downhill. [[Soon]] his uncle who raised him dies and he [[gets]] money to become a [[doctor]]. Meanwhile he finds Mildred needs him again. She has TB. [[meanwhile]] he is [[still]] leading Sally down the Primrose [[path]] about [[marriage]] and he takes a [[job]] on a [[steamship]]. [[Finally]] the bimbo dies and [[Phillip]] [[declares]] he is [[free]] now and he will marry Sally. I wished she told him to stuff it. [[Now]] I know my take on the characters are not going to get me any points. But I feel Phillip was the bad guy. Yes Mildred is a Strumpet BUT he knows it, and he keeps coming back. Mean while he has two other girlfriends who love him but he treats as appetizers. I guess the sex wasn't as good. But in any case he dogs those women waiting for Mildred. Not only that but the man who gets Mildred pregnant is already married and when Philip asks him what he intends to do about Baby ( apparently the baby's name) he laughs is off, he has no intention in supporting her and Baby and he is wealthy. Sally's father who has 9 children say some pretty [[nasty]] things about women but he is said to be a old traditionalist. Philip doesn't seem to refute his [[feelings]] either. Men are using Mildred as a Boy Toy but the men in this movie come out as unscathed. Yes she was not a respectable woman but far from a villain. To me it is Philip who was had the real problem and it was his sexual obsession for [[Mildred]]. This movie is about sexual obsession. [[Midler]] [[Davies]] plays [[Thelma]]. This is a woman who men are [[lured]] to. Not because she is a nice [[fantastic]] [[daughter]] but because she is a sexual entity. Now the movie does not come out and say that but it is obvious. There is a scene in the [[cinematic]] in which [[males]] are all going googly eyes over her. She works as a [[hostess]] in a [[cafes]] shop, she can't read and she not really [[person]] to look at but she is a flirt. It is obvious the [[males]] customers in that coffee [[store]] are there because of her. One day Phillip a club footed failed painter medical [[students]] [[happens]] in the [[stores]] to say a good word for his [[boyfriend]] but he becomes besotted the [[time]] he sees her. He starts buying her things even pays for her apartment. Meanwhile she is seeing other people and she makes no [[undercover]] of it. He [[dreaming]] about her like she is a angel, but she is no angel. He is [[continuously]] thinking about her. His med school [[level]] are [[yet]] [[defect]]. So what the nookie is too good. He wants to marry her but she rejects him because she is marrying another guy. She always lets Phil know she really doesn't have love feelings for him all of time. He is heart broken but he meets another woman. They seem fine but it is obvious he is still dreaming of the Bimbo. Mildred does comes back with a baby and unwed. Phillip takes her in again, but she starts going out with a friend of his, the light bulb comes on a little and he kicks her out. She does what she knows works so she tries to seduce him, well it doesn't work and she proceeds to burn his tuition money up. Oh we have a club [[footing]] that he has problems about, even [[if]] a street [[teenage]] who has the same [[difficulties]] tells him to [[defuse]] up about it. He meets another girl named Sally we have a March of time montage which shows her aging while he [[ropes]] her along [[however]] waiting for [[Bessie]]. Well he has no school [[education]], can't [[unearthed]] a [[jobs]]. Finally Sally and her dad takes him in. Not before another March of Time montage showing him going downhill. [[Quick]] his uncle who raised him dies and he [[got]] money to become a [[physicians]]. Meanwhile he finds Mildred needs him again. She has TB. [[meantime]] he is [[however]] leading Sally down the Primrose [[road]] about [[wedding]] and he takes a [[jobs]] on a [[vapor]]. [[Lastly]] the bimbo dies and [[Philips]] [[announced]] he is [[extricate]] now and he will marry Sally. I wished she told him to stuff it. [[Presently]] I know my take on the characters are not going to get me any points. But I feel Phillip was the bad guy. Yes Mildred is a Strumpet BUT he knows it, and he keeps coming back. Mean while he has two other girlfriends who love him but he treats as appetizers. I guess the sex wasn't as good. But in any case he dogs those women waiting for Mildred. Not only that but the man who gets Mildred pregnant is already married and when Philip asks him what he intends to do about Baby ( apparently the baby's name) he laughs is off, he has no intention in supporting her and Baby and he is wealthy. Sally's father who has 9 children say some pretty [[dirty]] things about women but he is said to be a old traditionalist. Philip doesn't seem to refute his [[affections]] either. Men are using Mildred as a Boy Toy but the men in this movie come out as unscathed. Yes she was not a respectable woman but far from a villain. To me it is Philip who was had the real problem and it was his sexual obsession for [[Bessie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4090 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Really, I [[think]] this [[movie]] is more an example of an [[easy]] [[target]] than a truly bad film. In [[fact]], the movie is done very well in [[many]] respects and is very entertaining.

Yes, the script is a little [[convoluted]], but that's the [[genre]]. The film has a noirish [[atmosphere]] centered around a femme fatale. Just like all the [[old]] noir classics, this, too, has a screenplay that [[twists]] you around so that you don't [[always]] know how to make sense of it at first, and it can be a stretch if you think too deeply and [[try]] to put all of the [[pieces]] together. That's the [[genre]]. [[In]] general, the script has [[enough]] [[surprises]] and turns to [[keep]] the viewer guessing and, in turn, [[surprised]], without [[abandoning]] the viewer.

[[Sharon]] [[Stone]] is [[also]] an [[easy]] target. The truth is she [[looks]] [[great]] and she [[speaks]] her double-entendre laden dialog in such a [[way]] as to zhuzh it up into [[something]] [[mysterious]], sexy and fun.

The [[direction]] is more than passable, because let's face it--you have to [[keep]] an audience interested in the "did she or didn't she?" question for two hours. [[In]] addition to a [[twisty]] script and a fun performance by Stone, this is [[done]] effectively through the direction by the creation of a noirish [[atmosphere]] that is both [[dark]] and very stark and [[modern]] at the same [[time]], with [[straight]] industrial lines to [[go]] along with Stone's sexy [[curves]]. The [[frame]] is always beautiful--press [[pause]] anywhere and there is [[something]] interesting to the [[eye]].

The film [[also]] effectively [[builds]] on [[things]] that were [[gimmicks]] in the first [[film]] and [[turns]] them into something a [[little]] more [[real]], [[particularly]] the sex. "[[Katherine]] Tramell is bisexual...how [[shocking]]!" becomes treated more matter-of-factly here, and [[typically]], the [[sexuality]] of the film is used to better effect. It is [[still]] titillating, but not [[done]] so [[readily]] for shock [[value]] and buzz as [[done]] in the first. I won't say that it isn't [[still]] [[somewhat]] of a [[gimmick]] because, let's face it, this [[film]] is supposed to be [[fun]].

And a [[fun]] [[film]] it is. It may be an easy [[target]], but if you watch it for what it is: a noirish, femme-fatale driven, twisty, sexy, did-she-or-didn't-she who-dunnit, you're bound to enjoy it (no pun intended). Really, I [[ideas]] this [[cinematography]] is more an example of an [[simple]] [[purpose]] than a truly bad film. In [[facto]], the movie is done very well in [[countless]] respects and is very entertaining.

Yes, the script is a little [[intricate]], but that's the [[sort]]. The film has a noirish [[atmospheric]] centered around a femme fatale. Just like all the [[antigua]] noir classics, this, too, has a screenplay that [[spins]] you around so that you don't [[unceasingly]] know how to make sense of it at first, and it can be a stretch if you think too deeply and [[seeks]] to put all of the [[segments]] together. That's the [[sort]]. [[During]] general, the script has [[sufficient]] [[astonishment]] and turns to [[maintaining]] the viewer guessing and, in turn, [[horrified]], without [[leaving]] the viewer.

[[Charon]] [[Pebble]] is [[apart]] an [[easier]] target. The truth is she [[seem]] [[excellent]] and she [[speaking]] her double-entendre laden dialog in such a [[pathway]] as to zhuzh it up into [[anything]] [[cryptic]], sexy and fun.

The [[directorate]] is more than passable, because let's face it--you have to [[conserve]] an audience interested in the "did she or didn't she?" question for two hours. [[Across]] addition to a [[warped]] script and a fun performance by Stone, this is [[completed]] effectively through the direction by the creation of a noirish [[atmospheric]] that is both [[darkness]] and very stark and [[fashionable]] at the same [[moment]], with [[successive]] industrial lines to [[going]] along with Stone's sexy [[curve]]. The [[fabric]] is always beautiful--press [[hiatus]] anywhere and there is [[anything]] interesting to the [[eyes]].

The film [[apart]] effectively [[constructing]] on [[items]] that were [[stratagems]] in the first [[movie]] and [[revolves]] them into something a [[petite]] more [[authentic]], [[principally]] the sex. "[[Katie]] Tramell is bisexual...how [[horrendous]]!" becomes treated more matter-of-factly here, and [[normally]], the [[sex]] of the film is used to better effect. It is [[however]] titillating, but not [[effected]] so [[conveniently]] for shock [[values]] and buzz as [[completed]] in the first. I won't say that it isn't [[however]] [[rather]] of a [[stratagem]] because, let's face it, this [[cinematography]] is supposed to be [[funny]].

And a [[droll]] [[kino]] it is. It may be an easy [[purposes]], but if you watch it for what it is: a noirish, femme-fatale driven, twisty, sexy, did-she-or-didn't-she who-dunnit, you're bound to enjoy it (no pun intended). --------------------------------------------- Result 4091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I went in expecting the [[movie]] to be [[completely]] dumb. With such a low expectation, any [[form]] of [[entertainment]] [[would]] be a [[pleasant]] surprise. The soundtrack was the best [[part]] of the [[movie]], but poking fun at the [[nonsense]] that goes on in singles wards was also amusing.

This [[said]], there were [[many]] things about The Singles Ward that were [[completely]] [[annoying]]. The [[entire]] [[film]] was poorly [[dubbed]] and made [[watching]] mouths while listening to their [[voices]] very irritating. This lack of professionalism was [[surpassed]] only by the cameos of Mormon [[celebrities]] who have no [[business]] acting.

This film will do well among Mormondom, especially in [[college]] communities where singles ward [[exist]]. [[However]] the [[conclusion]] will [[offer]] no [[hope]] for the poor losers who [[find]] themselves unmarried. ([[Only]] the [[pretty]] [[girls]] in the Singles Ward [[get]] [[married]], the [[fat]], ugly ones don't, but all the ugly [[men]] do) Ultimately we [[realize]] that the [[whole]] [[film]] was an [[advertisement]] for LDSSingles.[[com]] I went in expecting the [[filmmaking]] to be [[entirely]] dumb. With such a low expectation, any [[shape]] of [[amusement]] [[could]] be a [[enjoyable]] surprise. The soundtrack was the best [[party]] of the [[filmmaking]], but poking fun at the [[absurd]] that goes on in singles wards was also amusing.

This [[asserted]], there were [[several]] things about The Singles Ward that were [[totally]] [[irritating]]. The [[whole]] [[movies]] was poorly [[nicknamed]] and made [[staring]] mouths while listening to their [[voice]] very irritating. This lack of professionalism was [[overcoming]] only by the cameos of Mormon [[prestigious]] who have no [[corporations]] acting.

This film will do well among Mormondom, especially in [[academies]] communities where singles ward [[exists]]. [[Conversely]] the [[concluding]] will [[delivering]] no [[hopes]] for the poor losers who [[found]] themselves unmarried. ([[Alone]] the [[quite]] [[dame]] in the Singles Ward [[obtain]] [[marries]], the [[fatty]], ugly ones don't, but all the ugly [[man]] do) Ultimately we [[achieve]] that the [[total]] [[filmmaking]] was an [[advertise]] for LDSSingles.[[coms]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] A few years [[ago]], a friend got from one of his other friends a [[video]] with the Michael Mann film 'Heat' on it. [[After]] we finished that movie, and were about to stand up, we [[saw]] that there is another [[film]] just after, [[tough]] on the cassette's envelope the [[owner]] didn't write it up. [[Yet]] we were all glued back to our seats by its [[distinct]] [[opening]], which lacked credits.

Some two hours [[later]], I just sat there wondering: how could I not have heard of this masterpiece before?...

This film was Europa. [[Lars]] von Trier [[woke]] film [[noir]] from the dead, deconstructed [[reality]] with intentionally obvious sets, yet [[often]] there was haunting [[similarity]] with post-war German photographs I [[saw]]. And then the [[tricky]] [[cuts]]!

The [[story]] itself is a hard-to-take moral [[odyssey]] that has no [[happy]] end. A [[young]] American [[pacifist]] of German [[descent]] comes to post-war [[Germany]], [[intent]] on doing some good to [[pay]] for the [[bombs]] his countrymen [[dropped]]. But he [[mostly]] meets distrust and self-destructive [[defiance]]. He [[hires]] with Zentropa, a dining-and-sleeping-car company ([[modeled]] on Mitropa), [[whose]] [[owner]] is one of the [[Nazi]] collaborators the [[Occupiers]] whitewash. Our [[hero]] [[falls]] in [[love]] with his [[daughter]] - who [[later]] turns out to be a member of the [[Werewolf]], Nazi post-war terrorists. When he doesn't understand the [[world]] (or just Europeans) [[anymore]], in his [[rage]] he [[blows]] up a [[railroad]] [[bridge]] under a [[train]] which he just [[saved]].

As a [[final]] note, for [[historical]] correctness: in the [[real]] [[world]], the Werewolf were nowhere as important as the [[film]] implies, they were [[mostly]] a [[final]] [[Nazi]] propaganda coup. After an SS [[unit]] [[assassinated]] the major of Allied-occupied Aachen, two months before the [[capitulation]], the [[Nazis]] [[announced]] the creation of [[whole]] legions of saboteurs and terrorists who will be ready to [[fight]] behind the lines, the Werewolf. But only a few hundred of [[mostly]] Hitler Youth received some training, and while two or three [[times]] some were deployed to [[murder]] [[suspected]] communists or forced-labourer [[foreigners]] in Bavarian villages to imprint [[lasting]] [[fear]] on [[inhabitants]], with Hitler's [[death]] and the war's end it all [[fell]] apart.

However, the Werewolf propaganda had a [[profound]] [[effect]] on the occupiers. They feared the Werewolf everywhere, suspected it behind any serious accident - but without exception another cause was found later (ignored by some recent pseudo-historians). For example, when a gas main exploded in the police HQ of bombed-out Bremen, or when the Soviet military commander died in a motorbike accident in Berlin. The effect was strongest on the Soviets, who arrested tens of thousands (in large part children!) 'preemptively' on suspicion of being Werewolf, and closed them off in prison camps where a lot of them died. A few years [[formerly]], a friend got from one of his other friends a [[videos]] with the Michael Mann film 'Heat' on it. [[Upon]] we finished that movie, and were about to stand up, we [[watched]] that there is another [[movies]] just after, [[rigid]] on the cassette's envelope the [[landowner]] didn't write it up. [[Even]] we were all glued back to our seats by its [[seperate]] [[introductory]], which lacked credits.

Some two hours [[then]], I just sat there wondering: how could I not have heard of this masterpiece before?...

This film was Europa. [[Bjorn]] von Trier [[awoke]] film [[negro]] from the dead, deconstructed [[realities]] with intentionally obvious sets, yet [[generally]] there was haunting [[likeness]] with post-war German photographs I [[observed]]. And then the [[complex]] [[cutting]]!

The [[narratives]] itself is a hard-to-take moral [[epic]] that has no [[pleased]] end. A [[youth]] American [[pacification]] of German [[lineage]] comes to post-war [[Deutschland]], [[intend]] on doing some good to [[paid]] for the [[explosions]] his countrymen [[tumbled]]. But he [[basically]] meets distrust and self-destructive [[contempt]]. He [[recruitment]] with Zentropa, a dining-and-sleeping-car company ([[modelled]] on Mitropa), [[whom]] [[landowner]] is one of the [[Hitler]] collaborators the [[Occupant]] whitewash. Our [[heroin]] [[drops]] in [[amore]] with his [[daughters]] - who [[subsequently]] turns out to be a member of the [[Werewolves]], Nazi post-war terrorists. When he doesn't understand the [[globe]] (or just Europeans) [[longer]], in his [[wrath]] he [[strokes]] up a [[iron]] [[pont]] under a [[forming]] which he just [[saves]].

As a [[last]] note, for [[historic]] correctness: in the [[actual]] [[globe]], the Werewolf were nowhere as important as the [[films]] implies, they were [[essentially]] a [[definitive]] [[Nazis]] propaganda coup. After an SS [[units]] [[murdered]] the major of Allied-occupied Aachen, two months before the [[abdication]], the [[Nazi]] [[advertised]] the creation of [[ensemble]] legions of saboteurs and terrorists who will be ready to [[combat]] behind the lines, the Werewolf. But only a few hundred of [[basically]] Hitler Youth received some training, and while two or three [[period]] some were deployed to [[murdered]] [[supposed]] communists or forced-labourer [[aliens]] in Bavarian villages to imprint [[sustained]] [[scare]] on [[locals]], with Hitler's [[mortality]] and the war's end it all [[slumped]] apart.

However, the Werewolf propaganda had a [[deep]] [[repercussions]] on the occupiers. They feared the Werewolf everywhere, suspected it behind any serious accident - but without exception another cause was found later (ignored by some recent pseudo-historians). For example, when a gas main exploded in the police HQ of bombed-out Bremen, or when the Soviet military commander died in a motorbike accident in Berlin. The effect was strongest on the Soviets, who arrested tens of thousands (in large part children!) 'preemptively' on suspicion of being Werewolf, and closed them off in prison camps where a lot of them died. --------------------------------------------- Result 4093 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Kalifornia came out in 1993, just as 3 of the 4 lead [[characters]] were up and coming to the [[levels]] of fame they now [[possess]] in 2006. This is a nice psycho-thriller that should appeal to all [[David]] Duchovny fans because of his [[dry]] and [[intelligent]] [[narratives]] that [[find]] their [[ways]] into his [[work]], like with most of his [[episodes]] of the X-Files, [[Playing]] [[God]], and [[Red]] [[Shoe]] [[Diaries]].

People who were put off by the [[heavy]] southern accent from Brad Pitt and [[Juliette]] Lewis' [[characters]] [[obviously]] have never [[spent]] much [[time]] in the [[south]]. [[For]] [[every]] "[[Brian]] and Carrie" in the [[south]], there is an "Adele and [[Early]]" and in 2006, that's the real [[horror]] of this flick.

Aside from that, I [[think]] the [[film]] was written with a [[cult]] [[film]] [[intention]] - like with Carrie's [[photography]], it's not [[suitable]] for [[mass]] consumption. But if you have a [[copy]] of this in your personal [[library]], I [[think]] it [[says]] [[something]] [[positive]] about your tastes for freaky [[movies]]. Kalifornia came out in 1993, just as 3 of the 4 lead [[character]] were up and coming to the [[level]] of fame they now [[owning]] in 2006. This is a nice psycho-thriller that should appeal to all [[Dawood]] Duchovny fans because of his [[desiccated]] and [[artful]] [[story]] that [[found]] their [[way]] into his [[works]], like with most of his [[bouts]] of the X-Files, [[Play]] [[Christ]], and [[Rosso]] [[Sandal]] [[Newspapers]].

People who were put off by the [[hefty]] southern accent from Brad Pitt and [[Jules]] Lewis' [[nature]] [[apparently]] have never [[spends]] much [[moment]] in the [[southerly]]. [[In]] [[each]] "[[Bryan]] and Carrie" in the [[southward]], there is an "Adele and [[Precocious]]" and in 2006, that's the real [[abomination]] of this flick.

Aside from that, I [[thinking]] the [[cinema]] was written with a [[worship]] [[cinema]] [[goal]] - like with Carrie's [[photographs]], it's not [[appropriate]] for [[mace]] consumption. But if you have a [[photocopies]] of this in your personal [[libraries]], I [[reckon]] it [[said]] [[anything]] [[favourable]] about your tastes for freaky [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies that's difficult to review without giving away the plot. Suffice to say there are weird things and unexpected twists going on, beyond the initial superficial "Tom Cruise screws around with multiple women" plot.

The quality cast elevate this movie above the norm, and all the cast are well suited to their parts: Cruise as the irritatingly smug playboy who has it all - and then loses it all, Diaz as the attractive but slightly deranged jilted lover, Cruz as the exotic new girl on the scene and Russell as the fatherly psychologist. The story involves elements of romance, morality, murder-mystery, suspense and sci-fi and is generally an entertaining trip.

I should add that the photography is also uniformly excellent and the insertion of various visual metaphors is beautiful once you realize what's going on.

If you enjoy well-acted movies with twists and suspense, and are prepared to accept a slightly fantastic Philip K Dick style resolution, then this is a must-see.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I felt [[obliged]] to watch this [[movie]] all the way through, since I had [[found]] it in a bargain bin and [[bought]] it for my own, but I came [[close]] many times to turning it off and just [[writing]] off the [[money]] I had [[paid]] for it. [[If]] you are a [[fan]] of gore and sadism, this movie is OK. [[If]] there is one thing that the makers of this film know, it is the creative use of fake blood and body parts for a sickening effect. If that doesn't thrill you, then stay away.

This movie is [[shot]] on a home [[video]] [[camera]], with grade [[school]] [[props]] and [[terrible]] [[actors]]. It's dubbed from German, but even [[allowing]] for that, the [[sound]] is [[awful]]. This [[film]] is about as [[budget]] as budget gets, except for the aforementioned special [[effects]]. [[If]] they had [[spent]] a little more [[money]] on [[actors]] and a [[real]] [[script]] [[instead]] of blood and [[guts]], the [[film]] might have been a [[little]] more [[enjoyable]].

The [[story]] is about three [[men]] that [[land]] on an [[island]] [[inhabited]] by an army of tin-masked sadists. They are [[captured]], and the rest of the [[movie]] is about their [[attempt]] to escape. I [[call]] this a [[story]] in the loosest [[sense]], since it is [[really]] a [[series]] of scenes of torture and [[combat]] strung [[together]] by [[inane]] obscenity-filled dialog.

There is [[nothing]] whatsoever [[redeeming]] about this [[movie]], [[unless]] you like mindless gore. [[Consider]] yourself warned. I felt [[forced]] to watch this [[movies]] all the way through, since I had [[discovered]] it in a bargain bin and [[acquired]] it for my own, but I came [[closings]] many times to turning it off and just [[write]] off the [[cash]] I had [[paying]] for it. [[Though]] you are a [[breather]] of gore and sadism, this movie is OK. [[Though]] there is one thing that the makers of this film know, it is the creative use of fake blood and body parts for a sickening effect. If that doesn't thrill you, then stay away.

This movie is [[filmed]] on a home [[videotape]] [[cameras]], with grade [[tuition]] [[fittings]] and [[scary]] [[players]]. It's dubbed from German, but even [[permitting]] for that, the [[sounds]] is [[abysmal]]. This [[filmmaking]] is about as [[budgets]] as budget gets, except for the aforementioned special [[consequences]]. [[Unless]] they had [[spending]] a little more [[moneys]] on [[players]] and a [[veritable]] [[screenplay]] [[conversely]] of blood and [[entrails]], the [[movies]] might have been a [[petite]] more [[nice]].

The [[history]] is about three [[man]] that [[terra]] on an [[isla]] [[resided]] by an army of tin-masked sadists. They are [[apprehended]], and the rest of the [[flick]] is about their [[strive]] to escape. I [[invitation]] this a [[storytelling]] in the loosest [[sensing]], since it is [[truly]] a [[serial]] of scenes of torture and [[counter]] strung [[jointly]] by [[insignificant]] obscenity-filled dialog.

There is [[none]] whatsoever [[redeem]] about this [[filmmaking]], [[if]] you like mindless gore. [[Scrutinize]] yourself warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 4096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]]

I [[saw]] The [[Glacier]] Fox in the [[theatre]] when I was nine [[years]] old - I [[bugged]] my [[parents]] to take me back three [[times]]. I [[began]] [[looking]] for it on video about five years ago, finally [[uncovering]] a [[copy]] on an online auction [[site]], but I would love to [[see]] it either [[picked]] up by a [[new]] [[distributor]] and rereleased (I [[understand]] the original video [[run]] was small), or have the [[rights]] [[purchased]] by The Family Channel, Disney, etc. and [[shown]] [[regularly]]. It is a fascinating [[film]] that [[draws]] you into the [[story]] of the [[life]] [[struggle]] of a [[family]] of [[foxes]] in [[northern]] Japan, narrated by a wise old [[tree]]. The [[excellent]] soundtrack [[compliments]] the [[film]] well. It [[would]] be a [[good]] [[seller]] [[today]], better than many of the [[weak]] offerings to children's movies [[today]].

I [[observed]] The [[Glacial]] Fox in the [[theater]] when I was nine [[ages]] old - I [[tapped]] my [[relatives]] to take me back three [[moments]]. I [[commencing]] [[searching]] for it on video about five years ago, finally [[revealing]] a [[photocopy]] on an online auction [[venue]], but I would love to [[seeing]] it either [[chosen]] up by a [[novel]] [[dealers]] and rereleased (I [[comprehend]] the original video [[execute]] was small), or have the [[right]] [[buy]] by The Family Channel, Disney, etc. and [[illustrated]] [[regular]]. It is a fascinating [[movie]] that [[attracts]] you into the [[history]] of the [[lives]] [[fighting]] of a [[families]] of [[fox]] in [[north]] Japan, narrated by a wise old [[trees]]. The [[wondrous]] soundtrack [[tributes]] the [[movies]] well. It [[ought]] be a [[alright]] [[vendors]] [[yesterday]], better than many of the [[flimsy]] offerings to children's movies [[nowadays]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4097 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Hammerhead is a [[combination]] between the [[mad]] [[scientist]] and [[killer]] shark movie genres. [[In]] a bit of type-casting, [[Jeffrey]] Combs plays the aforementioned mad scientist who develops a human/hammerhead shark [[creature]]. Bizarrely, this being is in fact his son, who he has turned into this monster to [[prevent]] him [[dying]] from [[cancer]]. Or something.

A [[group]] of associates are [[invited]] to the scientist's private island. They [[end]] up being [[used]] as shark bait or shark [[mate]]. For some [[unknown]] [[reason]] the head of IT has been brought along as [[part]] of this team. [[Who]] knows why? Luckily, he turns out to be a resourceful, if somewhat overweight, Ramboesque [[hero]]. I'm [[working]] on the [[assumption]] that he learnt how to handle an assault rifle as part of his day job working in 1st line support. A normal day for this IT man presumably [[involves]] fixing someone's network connection followed by a [[call]] to [[gun]] down gun-toting evil-doers. [[Or]] perhaps a call to [[fix]] someone's PC has to be [[scheduled]] between [[physical]] confrontations with land-based human-shark hybrids? Anyway, he's amazing and [[saves]] the day. He even get's the girl.

The shark-man is a slightly lame creation but OK, I guess, judging by the [[effects]] in general in this [[film]]. And the movie moves on at a [[decent]] pace. It's complete hokum of course but if you buy a movie called Hammerhead and [[expect]] it to be a complex [[drama]] about the emotional [[conflicts]] experienced by a man turned into a land-based killer fish, then really you have no one to blame but yourself. As it is, there are guns, gore, [[girls]] and [[possibly]] [[even]] an exploding helicopter. It's [[rubbish]] but not as bad as some might say. Hammerhead is a [[tandem]] between the [[crazy]] [[scientists]] and [[shooter]] shark movie genres. [[During]] a bit of type-casting, [[Jeff]] Combs plays the aforementioned mad scientist who develops a human/hammerhead shark [[monster]]. Bizarrely, this being is in fact his son, who he has turned into this monster to [[inhibit]] him [[die]] from [[tumors]]. Or something.

A [[grouped]] of associates are [[inviting]] to the scientist's private island. They [[ends]] up being [[using]] as shark bait or shark [[buddy]]. For some [[anonymous]] [[cause]] the head of IT has been brought along as [[portion]] of this team. [[Whose]] knows why? Luckily, he turns out to be a resourceful, if somewhat overweight, Ramboesque [[superhero]]. I'm [[worked]] on the [[premise]] that he learnt how to handle an assault rifle as part of his day job working in 1st line support. A normal day for this IT man presumably [[contains]] fixing someone's network connection followed by a [[invitation]] to [[howitzer]] down gun-toting evil-doers. [[Nor]] perhaps a call to [[repairing]] someone's PC has to be [[envisaged]] between [[physique]] confrontations with land-based human-shark hybrids? Anyway, he's amazing and [[saving]] the day. He even get's the girl.

The shark-man is a slightly lame creation but OK, I guess, judging by the [[impact]] in general in this [[filmmaking]]. And the movie moves on at a [[dignified]] pace. It's complete hokum of course but if you buy a movie called Hammerhead and [[awaited]] it to be a complex [[opera]] about the emotional [[clashes]] experienced by a man turned into a land-based killer fish, then really you have no one to blame but yourself. As it is, there are guns, gore, [[girl]] and [[potentially]] [[yet]] an exploding helicopter. It's [[litter]] but not as bad as some might say. --------------------------------------------- Result 4098 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Thank [[god]] ABC [[picked]] this up instead of [[Fox]]. The [[best]] description (for those in the know) is really Wonderfalls meets [[Dead]] Like Me in the [[best]] [[way]] [[possible]].

I'm not sure whether an experience with [[death]] and destiny early in [[life]] makes me a [[fan]] of Brian [[Fuller]] but I [[certainly]] [[enjoy]] his productions. I [[also]] [[enjoy]] [[checkered]] [[floors]], [[pies]], talking toys, gravelings and other [[mischievous]] [[items]] :) [[While]] a bit "Burtonesque", I certainly [[think]] this [[enjoys]] its own [[niche]] that doesn't [[require]] J [[Depp]] or HB Carter to be a [[wonderfully]] [[imaginative]] [[playground]]. Here we can find the [[joys]] and [[sorrows]] of [[childhood]] and [[adulthood]] crashing into each and [[actually]] [[making]] sense and making us [[want]] to [[live]] life to the fullest! Thank [[jeez]] ABC [[taking]] this up instead of [[Renard]]. The [[nicest]] description (for those in the know) is really Wonderfalls meets [[Decedent]] Like Me in the [[better]] [[ways]] [[conceivable]].

I'm not sure whether an experience with [[killings]] and destiny early in [[lifetime]] makes me a [[admirer]] of Brian [[Fowler]] but I [[probably]] [[enjoys]] his productions. I [[similarly]] [[enjoys]] [[chequered]] [[flooring]], [[cakes]], talking toys, gravelings and other [[malicious]] [[things]] :) [[Whereas]] a bit "Burtonesque", I certainly [[ideas]] this [[enjoy]] its own [[doghouse]] that doesn't [[need]] J [[Dib]] or HB Carter to be a [[brilliantly]] [[innovative]] [[schoolyard]]. Here we can find the [[delights]] and [[dolores]] of [[preschool]] and [[mature]] crashing into each and [[genuinely]] [[doing]] sense and making us [[wantto]] to [[vivo]] life to the fullest! --------------------------------------------- Result 4099 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm probably one of the biggest Nancy Drew fans out there. I've read every book three times over and I've played a lot of the Nancy drew games. I Loved this movie. It kept you entertained the whole time you watched it. I went with about 10 of my friends and everyone LOVED it. There were three woman sitting behind us who appeared to be in their late 30's to early 40's and I asked them how they liked it, they said they loved it! So you see it will be an entertainment to all ages. You just have to give it a chance. And it teaches a lesson too, just be yourself even if everyone around you is exactly alike. So overall, this move was great. I'm going to see it a second time now! So stop bashing it please. Its a really good movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4100 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[thought]] Rachel York was fantastic as "Lucy." I have [[seen]] her in "[[Kiss]] Me, Kate" and "[[Victor]]/Victoria," as well, and in each of these performances she has [[developed]] very [[different]], and very [[real]], characterizations. She is a chameleon who can [[play]] (and sing) anything!

I am very surprised at how [[many]] [[negative]] [[reviews]] appear here [[regarding]] Rachel's performance in "Lucy." Even some bonafide TV and entertainment critics [[seem]] to have missed the point of her [[portrayal]]. [[So]] [[many]] people have [[focused]] on the fact that Rachel doesn't [[really]] look like Lucy. My [[response]] to that is, "So what?" I wasn't [[looking]] for a [[superficial]] [[impersonation]] of Lucy. I [[wanted]] to know more about the [[real]] [[woman]] [[behind]] the clown. And Rachel [[certainly]] [[gave]] us that, in [[great]] [[depth]]. I also didn't [[want]] to see [[someone]] [[simply]] "doing" [[classic]] Lucy [[routines]]. [[Therefore]] I was very [[pleased]] with the [[decision]] by the producers and director to have Rachel portray Lucy in [[rehearsal]] for the most memorable of these skits - Vitameatavegamin and The Candy [[Factory]]. (It [[seems]] that some of the [[reviewers]] didn't [[realize]] that these two scenes were meant to be rehearsal sequences and not the actual skits). This approach, I [[thought]], [[gave]] an [[innovative]] twist to sketches that so [[many]] of us know by [[heart]]. I also [[thought]] Rachel was [[terrifically]] fresh and funny in these scenes. And she [[absolutely]] [[nailed]] the [[routines]] that were recreated - the [[Professor]] and the [[Grape]] Stomping, in [[particular]]. There was one moment in the [[Grape]] scene where the corner of Rachel's mouth had the exact [[little]] upturn that I remember Lucy having. I couldn't [[believe]] she was able to [[capture]] that - and so [[naturally]].

I wonder if [[many]] of the folks who [[criticized]] the performance were expecting to see the Lucille Ball of "I [[Love]] Lucy" [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[movie]]. After all, those of us who [[came]] to know her only through TV [[would]] not have any [[idea]] what Lucy was [[really]] like in her [[early]] [[movie]] [[years]]. I [[think]] Rachel [[showed]] a natural [[progression]] in the [[character]] that was [[brilliant]]. She [[planted]] all the right seeds for us to see the clown just waiting to [[emerge]], [[given]] the right set of [[circumstances]]. Lucy didn't [[fit]] the [[mold]] of the [[old]] studio system. [[In]] her [[frustrated]] [[attempts]] to become the stereotypical [[movie]] star of that era, she kept repressing what would prove to be her ultimate gifts.

I believe that Rachel deftly captured the comedy, drama, wit, sadness, anger, passion, love, ambition, loyalty, sexiness, self absorption, childishness, and stoicism all rolled into one complex American icon. And she did it with an authenticity and freshness that was totally endearing. "Lucy" was a star turn for Rachel York. I hope it brings a flood of great roles her way in the future. I also hope it brings her an Emmy. I [[ideology]] Rachel York was fantastic as "Lucy." I have [[noticed]] her in "[[Fucked]] Me, Kate" and "[[Vittorio]]/Victoria," as well, and in each of these performances she has [[devised]] very [[several]], and very [[genuine]], characterizations. She is a chameleon who can [[gaming]] (and sing) anything!

I am very surprised at how [[various]] [[damaging]] [[inspect]] appear here [[relating]] Rachel's performance in "Lucy." Even some bonafide TV and entertainment critics [[seems]] to have missed the point of her [[depiction]]. [[Therefore]] [[countless]] people have [[concentrated]] on the fact that Rachel doesn't [[genuinely]] look like Lucy. My [[answers]] to that is, "So what?" I wasn't [[researching]] for a [[shallow]] [[imitation]] of Lucy. I [[wanna]] to know more about the [[actual]] [[women]] [[backside]] the clown. And Rachel [[probably]] [[given]] us that, in [[huge]] [[depths]]. I also didn't [[wants]] to see [[person]] [[exclusively]] "doing" [[typical]] Lucy [[routine]]. [[Hence]] I was very [[glad]] with the [[decisions]] by the producers and director to have Rachel portray Lucy in [[repetition]] for the most memorable of these skits - Vitameatavegamin and The Candy [[Mill]]. (It [[appears]] that some of the [[reviewer]] didn't [[realise]] that these two scenes were meant to be rehearsal sequences and not the actual skits). This approach, I [[figured]], [[handed]] an [[revolutionary]] twist to sketches that so [[several]] of us know by [[heartland]]. I also [[ideology]] Rachel was [[wonderfully]] fresh and funny in these scenes. And she [[completely]] [[pinched]] the [[routine]] that were recreated - the [[Teacher]] and the [[Grapes]] Stomping, in [[special]]. There was one moment in the [[Grapes]] scene where the corner of Rachel's mouth had the exact [[tiny]] upturn that I remember Lucy having. I couldn't [[think]] she was able to [[capturing]] that - and so [[obviously]].

I wonder if [[innumerable]] of the folks who [[slammed]] the performance were expecting to see the Lucille Ball of "I [[Amore]] Lucy" [[across]] the [[total]] [[film]]. After all, those of us who [[arrived]] to know her only through TV [[could]] not have any [[thinks]] what Lucy was [[genuinely]] like in her [[swift]] [[flick]] [[olds]]. I [[believing]] Rachel [[indicated]] a natural [[advancements]] in the [[trait]] that was [[wondrous]]. She [[tanked]] all the right seeds for us to see the clown just waiting to [[appear]], [[conferred]] the right set of [[situations]]. Lucy didn't [[fitting]] the [[fungus]] of the [[former]] studio system. [[Among]] her [[disillusioned]] [[endeavor]] to become the stereotypical [[movies]] star of that era, she kept repressing what would prove to be her ultimate gifts.

I believe that Rachel deftly captured the comedy, drama, wit, sadness, anger, passion, love, ambition, loyalty, sexiness, self absorption, childishness, and stoicism all rolled into one complex American icon. And she did it with an authenticity and freshness that was totally endearing. "Lucy" was a star turn for Rachel York. I hope it brings a flood of great roles her way in the future. I also hope it brings her an Emmy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4101 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is not [[really]] a zombie film, if we're [[defining]] [[zombies]] as the [[dead]] [[walking]] [[around]]. Here the [[protagonist]], Armand Louque ([[played]] by an [[unbelievably]] young Dean Jagger), gains [[control]] of a [[method]] to [[create]] zombies, [[though]] in [[fact]], his 'method' is to mentally project his thoughts and [[control]] other [[living]] people's minds turning them into [[hypnotized]] slaves. This is an interesting concept for a movie, and was [[done]] much more effectively by Fritz [[Lang]] in his series of 'Dr. Mabuse' [[films]], [[including]] 'Dr. Mabuse the Gambler' (1922) and 'The [[Testament]] of Dr. Mabuse' (1933). Here it is unfortunately subordinated to his quest to regain the love of his former fiancée, Claire Duvall (played by the Anne Heche look alike with a [[bad]] hairdo, Dorothy Stone) which is really the major theme.

The movie has an intriguing [[beginning]], as Louque is sent on a military [[archaeological]] expedition to Cambodia to end the cult of zombies that came from there. At some type of compound (where we get great 30s sets and clothes) he [[announces]] his engagement to Claire, and then barely five minutes later, she gives him back his ring [[declaring]] her love for his pal, Clifford Greyson (Robert Noland). It's [[unintentionally]] funny the way they talk to each other without making eye contact. This [[would]] have been a great movie for 'Mystery Science Theater 3000', if they hadn't already roasted it.

It's never shown how Louque actually learns the 'zombification' secret, but he then uses it to kill his enemies, create a giant army of rifle carrying soldiers and body guards. We won't see such sheer force of will until John Agar in 'The Brain From Planet Arous' (1957).

Finally Claire consents to marry him if he will let Greyson live and return to America. Louque agrees, but actually turns him into one of his hypnotized slaves. On their wedding night he realizes that Claire will only begin to love him if he gives up his 'powers.' To gain her love, he does so, causing the 'revolt' of the title, in which all his slaves awaken and attack his compound and kill him. Greyson embraces Claire, and we seem to be at the end of a parable: "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

So really then, it's not that bad of a film, despite the low IMDb rating it currently has. On repeated viewings (?) one can see the artistry in the well formed script! Dean Jagger had yet to develop into a good actor, and is almost unrecognizable in his youngness -- is that really his own hair? We remember him more for his bald, old man roles in 'White Christmas' (1954), 'X The Unknown' (1956) and 'King Creole' (1958). The story borrows a lot of its basic themes from the Halperin brothers better, earlier film 'White Zombie' (1932) in which hapless Robert Frazier (as Charles Beaumont) uses 'zombification' to win the love of Madge Bellamy (as Madeline Parker).

If you want real zombie movies (of which there are hundreds!) I'd start with 'White Zombie' (1932), 'King of the Zombies' (1941), 'I Walked with a Zombie' (1943), 'Night of the Living Dead' (1968), 'The Last Man on Earth' (1964) and its two remakes. In the modern era of classy films, there are 'Horror Express' (1972), 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' (1988), '28 Days Later' (2002) and its sequel, as well as many, many, others too numerous to mention.

This one is not really a zombie film. Judging this movie on its own terms, it's more of a semi-Gothic romance. As such it ranks a little below some of Universal's bottom billed B horror movies of the late 30s and early 40s. So I'll give it a 5. This is not [[truly]] a zombie film, if we're [[defined]] [[walkers]] as the [[deceased]] [[marche]] [[roughly]]. Here the [[player]], Armand Louque ([[done]] by an [[unimaginably]] young Dean Jagger), gains [[monitoring]] of a [[ways]] to [[creations]] zombies, [[if]] in [[facto]], his 'method' is to mentally project his thoughts and [[controls]] other [[residing]] people's minds turning them into [[mesmerized]] slaves. This is an interesting concept for a movie, and was [[played]] much more effectively by Fritz [[Long]] in his series of 'Dr. Mabuse' [[movies]], [[comprises]] 'Dr. Mabuse the Gambler' (1922) and 'The [[Wills]] of Dr. Mabuse' (1933). Here it is unfortunately subordinated to his quest to regain the love of his former fiancée, Claire Duvall (played by the Anne Heche look alike with a [[negative]] hairdo, Dorothy Stone) which is really the major theme.

The movie has an intriguing [[initiating]], as Louque is sent on a military [[archeological]] expedition to Cambodia to end the cult of zombies that came from there. At some type of compound (where we get great 30s sets and clothes) he [[declares]] his engagement to Claire, and then barely five minutes later, she gives him back his ring [[declares]] her love for his pal, Clifford Greyson (Robert Noland). It's [[unknowingly]] funny the way they talk to each other without making eye contact. This [[ought]] have been a great movie for 'Mystery Science Theater 3000', if they hadn't already roasted it.

It's never shown how Louque actually learns the 'zombification' secret, but he then uses it to kill his enemies, create a giant army of rifle carrying soldiers and body guards. We won't see such sheer force of will until John Agar in 'The Brain From Planet Arous' (1957).

Finally Claire consents to marry him if he will let Greyson live and return to America. Louque agrees, but actually turns him into one of his hypnotized slaves. On their wedding night he realizes that Claire will only begin to love him if he gives up his 'powers.' To gain her love, he does so, causing the 'revolt' of the title, in which all his slaves awaken and attack his compound and kill him. Greyson embraces Claire, and we seem to be at the end of a parable: "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

So really then, it's not that bad of a film, despite the low IMDb rating it currently has. On repeated viewings (?) one can see the artistry in the well formed script! Dean Jagger had yet to develop into a good actor, and is almost unrecognizable in his youngness -- is that really his own hair? We remember him more for his bald, old man roles in 'White Christmas' (1954), 'X The Unknown' (1956) and 'King Creole' (1958). The story borrows a lot of its basic themes from the Halperin brothers better, earlier film 'White Zombie' (1932) in which hapless Robert Frazier (as Charles Beaumont) uses 'zombification' to win the love of Madge Bellamy (as Madeline Parker).

If you want real zombie movies (of which there are hundreds!) I'd start with 'White Zombie' (1932), 'King of the Zombies' (1941), 'I Walked with a Zombie' (1943), 'Night of the Living Dead' (1968), 'The Last Man on Earth' (1964) and its two remakes. In the modern era of classy films, there are 'Horror Express' (1972), 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' (1988), '28 Days Later' (2002) and its sequel, as well as many, many, others too numerous to mention.

This one is not really a zombie film. Judging this movie on its own terms, it's more of a semi-Gothic romance. As such it ranks a little below some of Universal's bottom billed B horror movies of the late 30s and early 40s. So I'll give it a 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 4102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Students]] [[often]] [[ask]] me why I [[choose]] this version of Othello. Shakespeare's text is strongly truncated and the film contains material which earned it an "R" rating.

I have several reasons for using this production: First, I had not [[seen]] a depiction of the Moor that actually made me sympathetic to Othello until I saw Fishburne play him. I saw James Earl Jones and Christopher Plummer play Othello and Iago on Broadway, and it was [[wonderful]]. Plummer's energy was especially noticeable. But in spite of Jone's incredible presence both physically and vocally, the character he played just seemed too passive to illicit from me a complete emotional purgation in the Aristotelian sense. Jones, in fact, [[affirmed]] what I felt when in an interview he noted that he had played Othello as passive--seeing Iago as basically doing him over. Unfortunately this sapped my grief for the character destruction. Thus, I felt sympathy for Jone's Moor but not the horror over his corruption by an evil man. In contrast, Fishburne's Othello is a strong and vigorous figure familiar with taking action. Thus, Iago's temptation to actively deal with what is presented to Othello as his wife's unfaithfulness is a perversion of the general's positive quality to be active not passive.1 The horror of the story is that this good quality in Othello becomes perverted. Fishburne's depiction is therefore classically tragic.

Second, Fishburne is the first black actor to play Othello in a film. Both Orsen Wells and Anthony Hopkins did fine film versions, but they were white men in black face.2 Why is this important? Why should a Black actor be the Black man on the stage?3 Certainly in Shakespeare's day they used black face just as they used boys to make girls. Perhaps then, the reason is the same. Female actors bring a special quality to female roles on the Shakespearian stage because they understand best what Shakespeare's genius was trying to present. A gifted black actor should play the moor because his experience in a white dominated culture is vital to understanding what Shakespeare's genius recognized: the pain of being marginalized because of race. An important theme in Othello is isolation caused by racism. Although it is a mistake to insert American racism into a Shakespearian play, there can be little doubt that racism is still working among the characters. Many, including Desdimona's father, think that a union between a Venetian white Christian woman and a North African black Christian man is UNNATURAL.

Third, Shakespeare was never G rated. He never has been. His stage productions were always typified by violence and strong language. But Shakespeare's genius uses these elements not as sensationialism but for artistic honesty. [[Pupil]] [[habitually]] [[wondering]] me why I [[opted]] this version of Othello. Shakespeare's text is strongly truncated and the film contains material which earned it an "R" rating.

I have several reasons for using this production: First, I had not [[watched]] a depiction of the Moor that actually made me sympathetic to Othello until I saw Fishburne play him. I saw James Earl Jones and Christopher Plummer play Othello and Iago on Broadway, and it was [[wondrous]]. Plummer's energy was especially noticeable. But in spite of Jone's incredible presence both physically and vocally, the character he played just seemed too passive to illicit from me a complete emotional purgation in the Aristotelian sense. Jones, in fact, [[asserted]] what I felt when in an interview he noted that he had played Othello as passive--seeing Iago as basically doing him over. Unfortunately this sapped my grief for the character destruction. Thus, I felt sympathy for Jone's Moor but not the horror over his corruption by an evil man. In contrast, Fishburne's Othello is a strong and vigorous figure familiar with taking action. Thus, Iago's temptation to actively deal with what is presented to Othello as his wife's unfaithfulness is a perversion of the general's positive quality to be active not passive.1 The horror of the story is that this good quality in Othello becomes perverted. Fishburne's depiction is therefore classically tragic.

Second, Fishburne is the first black actor to play Othello in a film. Both Orsen Wells and Anthony Hopkins did fine film versions, but they were white men in black face.2 Why is this important? Why should a Black actor be the Black man on the stage?3 Certainly in Shakespeare's day they used black face just as they used boys to make girls. Perhaps then, the reason is the same. Female actors bring a special quality to female roles on the Shakespearian stage because they understand best what Shakespeare's genius was trying to present. A gifted black actor should play the moor because his experience in a white dominated culture is vital to understanding what Shakespeare's genius recognized: the pain of being marginalized because of race. An important theme in Othello is isolation caused by racism. Although it is a mistake to insert American racism into a Shakespearian play, there can be little doubt that racism is still working among the characters. Many, including Desdimona's father, think that a union between a Venetian white Christian woman and a North African black Christian man is UNNATURAL.

Third, Shakespeare was never G rated. He never has been. His stage productions were always typified by violence and strong language. But Shakespeare's genius uses these elements not as sensationialism but for artistic honesty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I watch them all.

It's not [[better]] than the amazing ones (_Strictly Ballroom_, _Shall we dance?_ (Japanese version), but it's completely respectable and pleasingly [[different]] in parts.

I am an English teacher and I [[find]] some of the ignorance about language in some of these [[reviews]] [[rather]] upsetting. [[For]] example: the "name should scream don't watch. 'How she move.' [[Since]] when can movie titles ignore grammar?"

There is nothing inherently incorrect about Caribbean English grammar. It's just not Canadian [[standard]] English grammar. [[Comments]] about the [[dialogue]] [[seem]] off to me. I put on the subtitles because I'm a Canadian [[standard]] English speaker, so I just AUTOMATICALLY assumed that I [[would]] have [[trouble]] understanding all of it. It wasn't all that [[difficult]] and it [[gave]] a distinctly [[different]] [[flavour]] as the other [[step]] [[movies]] I have seen were so [[American]].

I [[loved]] that this [[movie]] was set in Toronto and, in fact, [[wish]] it was even more [[clearly]] set there. I [[loved]] that the [[heroine]] was so atypically cast. I [[enjoyed]] the stepping [[routines]]. I liked the [[driven]] [[Mum]] character. I [[felt]] that [[many]] of the [[issues]] in the [[movie]] were [[addressed]] more subtly than is [[characteristic]] of [[dance]] [[movies]].

[[In]] [[summary]], if you tend to [[like]] [[dance]] [[movies]], then this is a decent one. [[If]] you have superiority [[issues]] about the grammar of the English standard you [[grew]] up [[speaking]], your [[narrow]] [[mind]] may have difficulty [[enjoying]] this movie. I watch them all.

It's not [[optimum]] than the amazing ones (_Strictly Ballroom_, _Shall we dance?_ (Japanese version), but it's completely respectable and pleasingly [[several]] in parts.

I am an English teacher and I [[unearthed]] some of the ignorance about language in some of these [[scrutinize]] [[quite]] upsetting. [[During]] example: the "name should scream don't watch. 'How she move.' [[Because]] when can movie titles ignore grammar?"

There is nothing inherently incorrect about Caribbean English grammar. It's just not Canadian [[standards]] English grammar. [[Commentary]] about the [[conversations]] [[appears]] off to me. I put on the subtitles because I'm a Canadian [[standards]] English speaker, so I just AUTOMATICALLY assumed that I [[should]] have [[problems]] understanding all of it. It wasn't all that [[tough]] and it [[given]] a distinctly [[several]] [[perfume]] as the other [[steps]] [[theater]] I have seen were so [[Americas]].

I [[cared]] that this [[cinematography]] was set in Toronto and, in fact, [[wanna]] it was even more [[apparently]] set there. I [[loves]] that the [[heroin]] was so atypically cast. I [[liked]] the stepping [[routine]]. I liked the [[fueled]] [[Mom]] character. I [[believed]] that [[several]] of the [[questions]] in the [[flick]] were [[broached]] more subtly than is [[distinctive]] of [[dancers]] [[movie]].

[[At]] [[abstract]], if you tend to [[likes]] [[danse]] [[film]], then this is a decent one. [[Though]] you have superiority [[subjects]] about the grammar of the English standard you [[increases]] up [[speak]], your [[limited]] [[intellect]] may have difficulty [[enjoy]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I've [[seen]] better [[teenage]] werewolf [[movies]] in my time, this one [[however]], takes the cake. [[More]] [[comedy]] than horror, "Full [[Moon]] [[High]]" puts the "c" in cheese-fest. The [[star]] quality in this [[movie]] is not bad. [[Just]] the [[way]] it was [[made]] just sends in rolling downhill. Adam Arkin plays Tony, an all-American [[high]] school football [[player]] of the 50's who [[ends]] up not aging due to a werewolf [[bite]] in Transylvania. The most [[annoying]] part of the [[movie]] was the violin [[player]]. He [[drove]] everyone batty! Ed McMahon plays his ultra-conservative [[father]] who [[met]] his [[end]] of his own bullet. Adam's father Alan plays a [[shrink]] who [[seems]] to be not [[top]] of his [[game]]. After all these years Tony [[seems]] to be very out of place due to the [[attack]], and then he'll get the [[chance]] to [[catch]] in his state. More [[laugh]] than blood shed, this [[movie]] is just a [[start]] in the 80's, "Teen [[Wolf]]" was an [[improvement]] from this! 1 out of 5 [[stars]]. I've [[noticed]] better [[teen]] werewolf [[filmmaking]] in my time, this one [[conversely]], takes the cake. [[Most]] [[humour]] than horror, "Full [[Luna]] [[Supreme]]" puts the "c" in cheese-fest. The [[superstar]] quality in this [[cinematography]] is not bad. [[Jen]] the [[camino]] it was [[introduced]] just sends in rolling downhill. Adam Arkin plays Tony, an all-American [[supreme]] school football [[protagonist]] of the 50's who [[terminates]] up not aging due to a werewolf [[hunk]] in Transylvania. The most [[exasperating]] part of the [[filmmaking]] was the violin [[protagonist]]. He [[spearheaded]] everyone batty! Ed McMahon plays his ultra-conservative [[pere]] who [[fulfilled]] his [[ends]] of his own bullet. Adam's father Alan plays a [[psychologist]] who [[appears]] to be not [[supreme]] of his [[games]]. After all these years Tony [[seem]] to be very out of place due to the [[attacking]], and then he'll get the [[possibilities]] to [[catching]] in his state. More [[chuckles]] than blood shed, this [[filmmaking]] is just a [[beginning]] in the 80's, "Teen [[Lair]]" was an [[improve]] from this! 1 out of 5 [[superstar]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I caught this movie on my local movie channel, and i rather enjoyed watching the film. It has all the elements of a good teen film, and more - this film, aside from dealing with boys-girls relationships and sex and the like, also deals with the issue of steroid use by young people.

The film has that real-life feel to it - no loud music, no special effects and no outrageous scenes - which, for this movie, was right. That feel makes it easy to relate to the characters in the film - some of which we probably know from where we live.

Overall, a good movie, fun to watch.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] To bad for this fine [[film]] that it had to be released the same year as Braveheart. [[Though]] it is a very [[different]] [[kind]] of [[film]], the [[conflict]] between Scottish [[commoners]] and English [[nobility]] is [[front]] and [[center]] here as well. [[Roughly]] 400 years had [[passed]] between the time Braveheart [[took]] [[place]] and Rob [[Roy]] was set, but some [[things]] never [[seemed]] to [[change]]. Scottland is [[still]] [[run]] by [[English]] [[nobles]], and the highlanders never can seem to [[catch]] a break when [[dealing]] with them. Rob [[Roy]] is [[handsomely]] done, but not the grand [[epic]] that Braveheart was. There are no large-scale [[battles]], and the [[conflict]] here is more between individuals. And helpfully so not all Englishmen are [[portrayed]] as evil this [[time]]. Rob Roy is simply a [[film]] about those with [[honor]], and those who are [[truly]] [[evil]].

Liam Neeson plays the title character Rob Roy MacGregor. He is the [[leader]] of the MacGregor [[clan]] and his [[basic]] [[function]] is to tend to and [[protect]] the [[cattle]] of the local nobleman of record [[known]] as the [[Marquis]] of Montrose ([[John]] [[Hurt]]). [[Things]] [[look]] [[pretty]] rough for the MacGregor [[clan]] as winter is [[approaching]], and there [[seems]] to be a [[lack]] of [[food]] for [[everyone]]. Rob Roy [[puts]] [[together]] a [[plan]] to borrow 1000 [[pounds]] from the [[Marquis]] and [[purchase]] some [[cattle]] of his own. He would then [[sell]] them off for a [[higher]] [[price]] and [[use]] the money to [[improve]] the general well-being of his community. [[Sounds]] fair [[enough]], doesn't it? [[Problems]] arise when two cronies of the [[Marquis]] [[steal]] the money for themselves. One of them, known as Archibald Cunningham, is [[perhaps]] the most evil character ever put on [[film]]. [[Played]] [[wonderfully]] by Tim [[Roth]], this [[man]] is a penniless would-be noble who has been [[sent]] to [[live]] with the [[Marquis]] by his [[mother]]. This [[man]] is disgustingly effeminate, rude, [[heartless]], and very [[dangerous]] with a [[sword]]. He fathers a [[child]] with a hand maiden and [[refuses]] to own up to the [[responsibility]]. He [[rapes]] Macgregor's wife and [[burns]] him out of his [[home]]. This [[guy]] is [[truly]] as [[rotten]] as movie [[characters]] [[come]]. Along with another [[crony]] of the [[Marquis]] (Brian Cox) Cunningham [[steals]] the [[money]] and [[uses]] it to [[settle]] his own debts. [[Though]] it is [[painfully]] [[obvious]] to most people what [[happened]], the [[Marquis]] still [[holds]] MacGregor to the debt. This sets up [[conflict]] that will [[take]] [[many]] lives and challenge the strengths of a [[man]] simply fighting to hold on to his dignity.

Spoilers ahead!!!!!

Luckily for the MacGregor's, a Duke who is no friend to the Marquis sets up a final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham to resolve the conflict one and for all. This sword fight has been considered by many to be one of the best ever filmed. Cunningham is thought by many to be a sure winner with his speed and grace. And for most of the fight, it looks like these attributes will win out. Just when it looks like Rob Roy is finished, he turns the tables in a shockingly grotesque manner. The first time you see what happens, you will probably be as shocked as Cunningham! Rob Roy is beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly paced. The score is quite memorable, too. The casting choices seem to have worked out as Jessica Lange, who might seem to be out of her element, actually turns in one of the strongest performances as Mary MacGregor. The film is violent, but there isn't too much gore. It is a lusty picture full of deviant behavior, however. The nobility are largely played as being amoral and sleazy. The film has no obvious flaws, thus it gets 10 of 10 stars.

The Hound. To bad for this fine [[cinematography]] that it had to be released the same year as Braveheart. [[If]] it is a very [[varied]] [[sort]] of [[movie]], the [[conflicts]] between Scottish [[aristocrats]] and English [[greatness]] is [[newsweek]] and [[centro]] here as well. [[Approximately]] 400 years had [[voted]] between the time Braveheart [[picked]] [[placing]] and Rob [[Rowe]] was set, but some [[matters]] never [[appeared]] to [[modifying]]. Scottland is [[again]] [[running]] by [[Francais]] [[notables]], and the highlanders never can seem to [[capture]] a break when [[addressing]] with them. Rob [[Rowe]] is [[generously]] done, but not the grand [[saga]] that Braveheart was. There are no large-scale [[struggles]], and the [[dispute]] here is more between individuals. And helpfully so not all Englishmen are [[depicted]] as evil this [[period]]. Rob Roy is simply a [[movies]] about those with [[honoured]], and those who are [[genuinely]] [[demonic]].

Liam Neeson plays the title character Rob Roy MacGregor. He is the [[chef]] of the MacGregor [[tribes]] and his [[fundamental]] [[functions]] is to tend to and [[preserving]] the [[cows]] of the local nobleman of record [[renowned]] as the [[Marquess]] of Montrose ([[Giovanni]] [[Harmed]]). [[Aspects]] [[gaze]] [[quite]] rough for the MacGregor [[tribes]] as winter is [[nearing]], and there [[appears]] to be a [[failure]] of [[dietary]] for [[somebody]]. Rob Roy [[raises]] [[jointly]] a [[programmes]] to borrow 1000 [[lb]] from the [[Marquess]] and [[procurement]] some [[cows]] of his own. He would then [[selling]] them off for a [[supreme]] [[prix]] and [[utilized]] the money to [[enhancement]] the general well-being of his community. [[Sound]] fair [[adequately]], doesn't it? [[Problem]] arise when two cronies of the [[Marquess]] [[stolen]] the money for themselves. One of them, known as Archibald Cunningham, is [[possibly]] the most evil character ever put on [[films]]. [[Done]] [[strikingly]] by Tim [[Ruth]], this [[dude]] is a penniless would-be noble who has been [[transmitted]] to [[inhabit]] with the [[Marquess]] by his [[mom]]. This [[dude]] is disgustingly effeminate, rude, [[soulless]], and very [[unsafe]] with a [[swords]]. He fathers a [[children]] with a hand maiden and [[refusing]] to own up to the [[liability]]. He [[breaches]] Macgregor's wife and [[combustion]] him out of his [[residential]]. This [[bloke]] is [[honestly]] as [[shitty]] as movie [[attribute]] [[coming]]. Along with another [[favoritism]] of the [[Marquess]] (Brian Cox) Cunningham [[itches]] the [[cash]] and [[utilizes]] it to [[dissipating]] his own debts. [[Despite]] it is [[embarrassingly]] [[blatant]] to most people what [[arrived]], the [[Marquess]] still [[held]] MacGregor to the debt. This sets up [[dispute]] that will [[taking]] [[multiple]] lives and challenge the strengths of a [[bloke]] simply fighting to hold on to his dignity.

Spoilers ahead!!!!!

Luckily for the MacGregor's, a Duke who is no friend to the Marquis sets up a final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham to resolve the conflict one and for all. This sword fight has been considered by many to be one of the best ever filmed. Cunningham is thought by many to be a sure winner with his speed and grace. And for most of the fight, it looks like these attributes will win out. Just when it looks like Rob Roy is finished, he turns the tables in a shockingly grotesque manner. The first time you see what happens, you will probably be as shocked as Cunningham! Rob Roy is beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly paced. The score is quite memorable, too. The casting choices seem to have worked out as Jessica Lange, who might seem to be out of her element, actually turns in one of the strongest performances as Mary MacGregor. The film is violent, but there isn't too much gore. It is a lusty picture full of deviant behavior, however. The nobility are largely played as being amoral and sleazy. The film has no obvious flaws, thus it gets 10 of 10 stars.

The Hound. --------------------------------------------- Result 4107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Tiempo de valientes is a very fun action comedy.After his great fist movie called El fondo del mar and the spectacular TV pro-gramme Los simuladores,Damian Szifron made another great work.Tiempo de valientes looks,for moments,a movie made in Hollywood.Diego Peretti and Luis Luque are two great actors and here,they have great performances.The movie is very fun and funny and it has superb moments.Tiempo de valientes is a very fun action comedy that I totally recommend if you wanna have a great time.And I have to congrats Szifron for all the talent he has.

Rating:9 --------------------------------------------- Result 4108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am starting this review with a big giant spoiler about this film. Do not read further...here it comes, avert your eyes! The main heroine, the girl who always survives in other slasher films, is murdered here. There, I just saved you 79 minutes of your life.

This is one of those cheap movies that was thrown together in the middle of the slasher era of the '80's. Despite killing the heroine off, this is just substandard junk.

Both priests and college students get a bad rap here. They are pictured as oversexed, sociopathic morons who have way too many internal problems to deal with what looks like junior college campus life...and the college students come off even worse.

"Splatter University" is just gunk to put in your VCR when you have nothing better to do, although I suggest watching your head cleaner tape, that would be more entertaining.

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, gore, profanity, very brief female nudity, and sexual references.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Somehow a woman working with a scientist puts round metal balls into people's mouths that supposedly changes their personality but in reality turns them into crazed, zombie-like killers. The "guinea pigs" for the experiment are scantily-clad, nubile young women in desperate need of acting lessons. This movie is awful, atrocious, and amazingly bad. It has little to no logic in the script. You really will have trouble following what is going on. It has no special effects. The computer screen that is supposedly representing a huge scientific advancement looks nothing more than an old Atari screen. And what is even worse is that there is also a puppet with strands of felt hair(looks like a lonely kid at summer camp made it) named George that is like a personal servant/confidant to Jessica(the leading "actress"). Throughout the movie you will be subjected to the idiotic, sophmoric utterings of this puppet. But wait...you also get loads of softcore, unerotic, barely nude scenes with the girls with some bar guys. All the while a most annoying soundtrack plays in the background like some kind of spiritual discovery has taken place. None of the actors are good. There are just varying degrees of bad. The gore and "horror" aspects are especially ineptly filmed. The film really looks like an adolescent put it together. No coincidence Henry Sala, the director by name but not by trade, has not made another film. I was bored almost into a coma watching this stupid, silly, dreck! And how bout the ending? What happened? If you know let me in on the secret because for the life of me I cannot figure it out. All I know is that I lost the time spent watching this garbage that made the beginning of my weekend a real nightmare of a bore! --------------------------------------------- Result 4110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[biggest]] mystery of [[Veronica]] Mars is not one that she had to [[tackle]] on screen.

[[Rather]], the mystery is why this [[perennial]] ratings [[disappointment]] is still on the [[air]]. This week marked a nadir for Veronica [[Mars]]: it [[ranked]] 146 out of 146 shows in the big 6 ([[soon]] to be [[Big]] 5). [[Yes]], you read right. Veronica [[Mars]] was beaten by [[every]] [[show]] of the now-defunct WB and [[every]] show on UPN. It was [[beat]] by all the [[shows]] on Fox and of course by all the [[shows]] on ABC, CBS and NBC.

[[Now]], the [[hip]] hypesters are going to [[say]]: but this was a re-run. But everything on [[TV]] that [[week]] was pretty much a re-run! It boggles the mind why CW [[would]] choose this proved ratings [[disappointment]] as one of the few [[shows]] it [[saved]] from UPN.

[[Clearly]] something is going on behind the scenes. [[Favors]] are being [[exchanged]] and influence peddled.

Sorry to be so [[cynical]], but what other [[explanation]] is there? The "Veronica [[Mars]] has [[potential]]" line is [[clearly]] dead now that it's had two [[years]] to [[establish]] itself and failed to do so.

[[Maybe]] it's Joel Silver's [[influence]] and clout, but [[frankly]], I am at a loss why [[anyone]] would choose to [[spend]] their clout on a [[bad]] [[show]] that no [[audience]] is [[watching]].

A great [[mystery]] and a very inauspicious debut for CW. The [[greatest]] mystery of [[Veronika]] Mars is not one that she had to [[confront]] on screen.

[[Somewhat]], the mystery is why this [[perpetual]] ratings [[displeasure]] is still on the [[airspace]]. This week marked a nadir for Veronica [[Mar]]: it [[classification]] 146 out of 146 shows in the big 6 ([[quickly]] to be [[Major]] 5). [[Yep]], you read right. Veronica [[Mar]] was beaten by [[each]] [[shows]] of the now-defunct WB and [[all]] show on UPN. It was [[beats]] by all the [[denotes]] on Fox and of course by all the [[show]] on ABC, CBS and NBC.

[[Presently]], the [[hips]] hypesters are going to [[tell]]: but this was a re-run. But everything on [[TELEVISIONS]] that [[chow]] was pretty much a re-run! It boggles the mind why CW [[should]] choose this proved ratings [[displeasure]] as one of the few [[show]] it [[saves]] from UPN.

[[Clara]] something is going on behind the scenes. [[Prefers]] are being [[sharing]] and influence peddled.

Sorry to be so [[sarcastic]], but what other [[explanations]] is there? The "Veronica [[Mar]] has [[prospective]]" line is [[apparently]] dead now that it's had two [[ages]] to [[creating]] itself and failed to do so.

[[Likely]] it's Joel Silver's [[effects]] and clout, but [[openly]], I am at a loss why [[nobody]] would choose to [[expenditure]] their clout on a [[negative]] [[demonstrating]] that no [[viewers]] is [[staring]].

A great [[enigma]] and a very inauspicious debut for CW. --------------------------------------------- Result 4111 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Of all the [[movies]] of the seventies, none [[captured]] to truest essence of the good versus [[evil]] [[battle]] as did the Sentinel. I mean, [[yes]], there were movies like the Exorcist, and other ones; but none of them [[captured]] the human [[element]] of the [[protagonist]] like this one. If you have time, [[check]] this one out. You may not be [[able]] to [[get]] past the dated [[devices]] as such, but this is a [[story]] worth [[getting]] into.Then there are all the stars and soon-to-be stars. My absolute favorites were Eli Wallach, Sylvia [[Miles]], and Burgess Meredith. Then there are the subtle clues that [[lead]] to what's going on too. Pay close [[attention]]. I had to watch it four [[times]] to catch on to all the [[smaller]] weird [[statements]] like 'black and [[white]] [[cat]], black and [[white]] cake'. Plus, the books are really good as well. I'm just [[sorry]] that they're not [[going]] to [[turn]] the [[second]] [[book]] into a [[film]]. It's so scary that it [[would]] [[outdo]] this movie. Of all the [[cinematography]] of the seventies, none [[captures]] to truest essence of the good versus [[satanic]] [[warfare]] as did the Sentinel. I mean, [[yep]], there were movies like the Exorcist, and other ones; but none of them [[catch]] the human [[ingredients]] of the [[actor]] like this one. If you have time, [[verify]] this one out. You may not be [[capable]] to [[gets]] past the dated [[equipment]] as such, but this is a [[history]] worth [[obtain]] into.Then there are all the stars and soon-to-be stars. My absolute favorites were Eli Wallach, Sylvia [[Mile]], and Burgess Meredith. Then there are the subtle clues that [[culminate]] to what's going on too. Pay close [[beware]]. I had to watch it four [[moments]] to catch on to all the [[marginal]] weird [[speeches]] like 'black and [[bianca]] [[kitten]], black and [[bianca]] cake'. Plus, the books are really good as well. I'm just [[desolated]] that they're not [[gonna]] to [[turning]] the [[secondly]] [[workbook]] into a [[kino]]. It's so scary that it [[ought]] [[supplant]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I gave it an 8 star rating. The story may have fallen short about 3/4 of the way into the picture but the performances remained strong throughout."Men of Honor" was changed from "Navy Diver" understandably so. Anyone who has served in any branch of the armed forces will probably feel that "Honor" is an appropriate word to use in the title. --------------------------------------------- Result 4113 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It was clear right from the beginning that 9/11 would inspire about as many films as World War II and Vietnam combined; however, there is [[certainly]] a big danger that most of these films to come are about as good (or rather: bad) as Pearl [[Harbor]]. It is a great luck that the first international release about 9/11 is not a cheesy love story starring a bunch of pretty [[faces]], but a collective [[work]] of 11 directors from the entire world.

I'm not intending to say that all 11 [[episodes]] are [[great]] ([[Youssef]] Chahine's, for example, has a [[needless]] prologue with too [[many]] cuts and Shohei Imamura's has a really [[bizarre]] ending) or that the segments are in the right [[order]] (Imamura's, being the only one not [[referring]] [[directly]] to the Twin Towers, should open the film, not [[end]] it, Alejandro [[Gonzales]] Inarritu's should be the [[last]] one instead, as it's the most [[impressive]] one). But it is an impressing [[effort]] and an interesting [[portrayal]] of the [[way]] other parts of the [[world]] react to the [[collapse]] of the twin towers.

[[Consider]] Samira Makhmalbaf's [[opening]] segment, in which an [[Afghan]] [[teachers]] tries to [[explain]] to her [[pupils]] what happened in [[New]] York and unsuccessfully [[suggests]] a one-minute silence. [[Or]] Idrissa Ouedraogo's part (which [[features]] a bin Laden-double so much resembling the [[real]] one that you'll be [[shocked]] when you see him, I [[promise]]), in which 5 [[boys]] muse about good [[things]] that can be [[done]] with the [[reward]] put out on Laden.

There's a [[surprisingly]] good (and [[extremely]] [[angry]]) segment by [[Ken]] Loach about a [[man]] from [[Chile]] talking about what he [[calls]] "our [[Tuesday]] [[September]] 11" - that [[September]] 11 in 1973 when their [[elected]] [[president]] Allende was [[killed]] and Pinochet installed his [[dictatorship]] - with the generous [[help]] from [[Henry]] Kissinger and the CIA. This could have [[become]] a [[terrible]] [[effort]] in Anti-Americanism, but it did become a [[sad]] [[tale]] and [[shares]] my [[recognition]] for the [[best]] segment with Inarritu's ([[mainly]] [[sound]] [[impressions]] and [[phone]] [[calls]] from the hijacked [[planes]] to a black screen, [[sometimes]] a few [[pictures]] of people falling down the WTC and [[finally]] a collapsing tower, [[ending]] with the screen brightening up and one [[question]] [[appearing]]) and Amos Gitai's about a hysterical reporter trying desperatly to get on air after a car bomb exploded in Tel Aviv (hard to recognize, but this one is a masterpiece of [[choreography]]).

All these different segments (I haven't mentioned yet Claude Lelouch's about a deaf girl, Danis Tanovic's about a demonstration of the Women of Srebrenica, Mira Nair's - strange, but it takes an Indian director to make the part that is probably most appealing to Western tastes - about a Muslim family whose son is under a terrible suspicion after 9/11 and Sean Penn's with Ernest Borgnine (yes, Ernest Borgnine) as a widower leading the most depressive life one can imagine) add up to a unique film not easy to watch and hard to forget. I am sure this film will be a classic known to everyone thirty years from now. I hope it will be remembered for starting a long tradition of world cinema movies. But, alas, it's far more probable it will be remembered as a one-film-only effort. And as the one of the few 9/11 movies made by then that don't reduce this terrible event to a love story with a happy end just to please the audience. It was clear right from the beginning that 9/11 would inspire about as many films as World War II and Vietnam combined; however, there is [[surely]] a big danger that most of these films to come are about as good (or rather: bad) as Pearl [[Harbour]]. It is a great luck that the first international release about 9/11 is not a cheesy love story starring a bunch of pretty [[confronting]], but a collective [[collaborating]] of 11 directors from the entire world.

I'm not intending to say that all 11 [[spells]] are [[wondrous]] ([[Joseph]] Chahine's, for example, has a [[worthless]] prologue with too [[various]] cuts and Shohei Imamura's has a really [[curious]] ending) or that the segments are in the right [[orders]] (Imamura's, being the only one not [[pointing]] [[squarely]] to the Twin Towers, should open the film, not [[ending]] it, Alejandro [[Nestor]] Inarritu's should be the [[final]] one instead, as it's the most [[magnificent]] one). But it is an impressing [[endeavour]] and an interesting [[depiction]] of the [[route]] other parts of the [[globe]] react to the [[flop]] of the twin towers.

[[Contemplating]] Samira Makhmalbaf's [[opens]] segment, in which an [[Afghanistan]] [[professor]] tries to [[explaining]] to her [[student]] what happened in [[Novo]] York and unsuccessfully [[proposing]] a one-minute silence. [[Nor]] Idrissa Ouedraogo's part (which [[featuring]] a bin Laden-double so much resembling the [[actual]] one that you'll be [[horrified]] when you see him, I [[promised]]), in which 5 [[guy]] muse about good [[items]] that can be [[completed]] with the [[bonuses]] put out on Laden.

There's a [[freakishly]] good (and [[terribly]] [[irritated]]) segment by [[Kean]] Loach about a [[men]] from [[Chili]] talking about what he [[asks]] "our [[Mardi]] [[Janvier]] 11" - that [[October]] 11 in 1973 when their [[selected]] [[presidents]] Allende was [[assassinated]] and Pinochet installed his [[dictator]] - with the generous [[assistance]] from [[Gregg]] Kissinger and the CIA. This could have [[gotten]] a [[horrendous]] [[efforts]] in Anti-Americanism, but it did become a [[unlucky]] [[conte]] and [[exchanges]] my [[acknowledgment]] for the [[better]] segment with Inarritu's ([[basically]] [[sounds]] [[printouts]] and [[tel]] [[request]] from the hijacked [[aircraft]] to a black screen, [[occasionally]] a few [[photo]] of people falling down the WTC and [[lastly]] a collapsing tower, [[terminated]] with the screen brightening up and one [[issue]] [[appears]]) and Amos Gitai's about a hysterical reporter trying desperatly to get on air after a car bomb exploded in Tel Aviv (hard to recognize, but this one is a masterpiece of [[ballet]]).

All these different segments (I haven't mentioned yet Claude Lelouch's about a deaf girl, Danis Tanovic's about a demonstration of the Women of Srebrenica, Mira Nair's - strange, but it takes an Indian director to make the part that is probably most appealing to Western tastes - about a Muslim family whose son is under a terrible suspicion after 9/11 and Sean Penn's with Ernest Borgnine (yes, Ernest Borgnine) as a widower leading the most depressive life one can imagine) add up to a unique film not easy to watch and hard to forget. I am sure this film will be a classic known to everyone thirty years from now. I hope it will be remembered for starting a long tradition of world cinema movies. But, alas, it's far more probable it will be remembered as a one-film-only effort. And as the one of the few 9/11 movies made by then that don't reduce this terrible event to a love story with a happy end just to please the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 4114 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] *** May contain spoilers. ***

If LIVING ON TOKYO [[TIME]] were some [[bold]] [[experiment]] where real-life wanna-be [[actors]] were given [[film]] parts on the condition that they would be required to take a combination of [[powerful]] prescription anti-anxiety, anti-depression, and anti-psychotic medications (this is the classic psych ward [[combo]] that renders patients into [[drooling]] [[zombies]]) all during filming, then this [[movie]] [[would]] [[hold]] far more interest. Or, if the [[film]] [[production]] was another type of [[experiment]] where all of the [[actors]] were sleep deprived before and during [[filming]], then TOKYO [[TIME]] [[could]] be more [[easily]] [[explained]].

As it is, this film is filled with lifeless, low-energy [[actors]]. [[In]] the scene where the [[new]] husband was sitting on the stairs [[talking]] with his [[sister]], it appeared that he was having trouble [[keeping]] his eyes [[open]]. [[In]] almost every scene he [[speaks]] his lines sitting down with every part of his body motionless. From beginning to end, his facial expression is [[best]] described as "near sleep."

Fret not about the [[actors]] speaking over each other's lines because these [[actors]] can barely [[finish]] droning out any lines of dialog. Everyone speaks with a depressing, monotone voice. No laughing. No yelling. No [[vigor]]. No one has energy enough to crack a smile. The [[result]]: complete and total boredom.

And it does not help matters that the direction is simple and amateurish.

[[Avoid]] this lifeless [[film]] at all costs. [[Better]] to watch GREENCARD which has a [[similar]] plot and has charm and energy. [[Or]], for an [[unconventional]] Japanese [[romance]] story, [[check]] out THE [[LONG]] [[VACATION]] which has an [[ample]] amount of everything [[LIVING]] ON [[TOKYO]] [[TIME]] does not. *** May contain spoilers. ***

If LIVING ON TOKYO [[PERIOD]] were some [[fearless]] [[piloting]] where real-life wanna-be [[players]] were given [[movie]] parts on the condition that they would be required to take a combination of [[mighty]] prescription anti-anxiety, anti-depression, and anti-psychotic medications (this is the classic psych ward [[merge]] that renders patients into [[chatting]] [[walkers]]) all during filming, then this [[filmmaking]] [[should]] [[holds]] far more interest. Or, if the [[filmmaking]] [[productivity]] was another type of [[experiences]] where all of the [[protagonists]] were sleep deprived before and during [[photographing]], then TOKYO [[MOMENT]] [[did]] be more [[readily]] [[clarified]].

As it is, this film is filled with lifeless, low-energy [[actresses]]. [[For]] the scene where the [[novo]] husband was sitting on the stairs [[discussing]] with his [[sisters]], it appeared that he was having trouble [[sustaining]] his eyes [[opening]]. [[During]] almost every scene he [[conversation]] his lines sitting down with every part of his body motionless. From beginning to end, his facial expression is [[better]] described as "near sleep."

Fret not about the [[protagonists]] speaking over each other's lines because these [[protagonists]] can barely [[completing]] droning out any lines of dialog. Everyone speaks with a depressing, monotone voice. No laughing. No yelling. No [[kraft]]. No one has energy enough to crack a smile. The [[findings]]: complete and total boredom.

And it does not help matters that the direction is simple and amateurish.

[[Forestall]] this lifeless [[filmmaking]] at all costs. [[Optimum]] to watch GREENCARD which has a [[akin]] plot and has charm and energy. [[Ord]], for an [[unorthodox]] Japanese [[romanticism]] story, [[checked]] out THE [[PROTRACTED]] [[HOLIDAYS]] which has an [[plentiful]] amount of everything [[LIFE]] ON [[TOKIO]] [[TIMES]] does not. --------------------------------------------- Result 4115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] The first [[part]] of Grease with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John is one of the best movie for teens, This one is a very [[bad]] copy. The change is only in the sex. [[In]] the [[first]] one the good one was Sandy, here it's Michael. I [[prefer]] to watch the [[first]] Grease. The first [[parties]] of Grease with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John is one of the best movie for teens, This one is a very [[unfavorable]] copy. The change is only in the sex. [[Among]] the [[frst]] one the good one was Sandy, here it's Michael. I [[favorite]] to watch the [[frst]] Grease. --------------------------------------------- Result 4116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Look, I'm sorry if half the world takes offense at this, but life is confusing enough. I don't need to watch it that way. I dig [[Anthony]] Hopkins, big [[time]]. I even watched Fracture, and I knew that would be a steaming pile of Quentin. But this thing is not well shot, and it's not daring--even if it is [[artsy]]. Well-produced [[films]] have reasons for cuts and [[fast]] edits, not this "[[oh]], but it's a realistic [[interpretation]]" [[excuse]]. This thing'll make your head hurt. It's the fastest moving picture ever to take you [[nowhere]] at all. I still love AH, and I'll always give him another chance, but if you aren't made of time to watch bad ideas on screen, skip this. Look, I'm sorry if half the world takes offense at this, but life is confusing enough. I don't need to watch it that way. I dig [[Antoni]] Hopkins, big [[moment]]. I even watched Fracture, and I knew that would be a steaming pile of Quentin. But this thing is not well shot, and it's not daring--even if it is [[artistic]]. Well-produced [[filmmaking]] have reasons for cuts and [[swift]] edits, not this "[[oooh]], but it's a realistic [[interpreting]]" [[alibi]]. This thing'll make your head hurt. It's the fastest moving picture ever to take you [[somewhere]] at all. I still love AH, and I'll always give him another chance, but if you aren't made of time to watch bad ideas on screen, skip this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4117 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Green Eyes is a [[great]] movie. In todays context of supporting our troops, it is interesting this movie showed the lack of respect [[soldiers]] received from doing their duty, during this [[period]]. From a historical view, the end of the Vietnam war left all of us with something to remember and learn from. Gene was very proud of this movie, and he [[deserved]] the [[credits]] he [[received]] from writing "Green Eyes". I agree, I do not understand why this movie is not [[shown]] more [[often]], or at all. This movie is the [[kind]] of movie that should be [[shown]] on TV every year, much like the [[Wizard]] of Oz. The dedication of one [[man]] [[towards]] his [[lost]] son is [[entirely]] [[moving]]. I was a [[friend]] of Gene Logans and I was proud to [[know]] him. Rocky Green Eyes is a [[wondrous]] movie. In todays context of supporting our troops, it is interesting this movie showed the lack of respect [[solider]] received from doing their duty, during this [[deadline]]. From a historical view, the end of the Vietnam war left all of us with something to remember and learn from. Gene was very proud of this movie, and he [[merited]] the [[appropriations]] he [[benefited]] from writing "Green Eyes". I agree, I do not understand why this movie is not [[display]] more [[normally]], or at all. This movie is the [[genus]] of movie that should be [[showed]] on TV every year, much like the [[Warlock]] of Oz. The dedication of one [[hombre]] [[circa]] his [[forfeited]] son is [[perfectly]] [[shifting]]. I was a [[freund]] of Gene Logans and I was proud to [[savoir]] him. Rocky --------------------------------------------- Result 4118 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Imagine]] you're a high-school [[boy]], in the back of a [[dark]], uncrowded [[theater]] with your girlfriend. How [[bad]] would a [[movie]] have to be, in [[order]] that you would feel [[compelled]] to leave the [[theater]] and head [[home]] before it [[ended]]? This movie is that bad. Really. [[Movies]] [[often]] become so [[bad]] that they're good; this [[movie]] is beyond that [[stage]] of bad-ness. It is painfully [[bad]]. [[Horribly]], [[terribly]], crime-against-humanity bad. [[Guess]] you're a high-school [[guy]], in the back of a [[darkness]], uncrowded [[theaters]] with your girlfriend. How [[unfavorable]] would a [[filmmaking]] have to be, in [[orders]] that you would feel [[forced]] to leave the [[theaters]] and head [[domicile]] before it [[ending]]? This movie is that bad. Really. [[Movie]] [[routinely]] become so [[unfavorable]] that they're good; this [[filmmaking]] is beyond that [[phase]] of bad-ness. It is painfully [[rotten]]. [[Terrifyingly]], [[surprisingly]], crime-against-humanity bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 4119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found "The Arab Conspiracy" in a bargain bin and thought I'd uncovered a lost treasure. Folks, there's a reason why you don't hear much about this film. The plot is muddy, the pacing is slow, Cornelia Sharpe is about as vivacious as plain, cold tofu, and the ending leaves you flat. Not even Sean Connery can save this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] My giving this a score of 3 is NOT what I would give the original Soviet version of this film. It seems that American-International (a studio that specialized in ultra-low-budget fare in the 60s) bought this film and utterly destroyed it--slicing a two hour plus film into a 64 minute film! Plus, much of this 64 minutes was new [[material]] (such as the "[[monsters]]")--so you know that this [[film]] bears almost no [[similarity]] to the original. The [[original]] film appears to be a rather straight [[drama]] about the Soviet conquest of space--though I [[really]] am not sure what it was originally! [[For]] insight into the original film, read Steven Nyland's review--it was very helpful.

By the way, this was the third Soviet sci-film I've seen that American-International [[bought]] and then hacked [[apart]] to make a "[[new]]" film--standard practice to a company that was willing to put just about [[anything]] on the screen to make a buck--provided, of course, it didn't cost them [[much]] more than a buck in the [[first]] place!! This Americanized [[film]] was about two [[rival]] world powers (NOT the [[US]] and [[Soviets]]) [[trying]] to be the first to Mars. The tricky "bad guys" [[try]] but fail and the "[[good]] [[guys]]" [[rescue]] one of the [[idiot]] astronauts and then [[head]] to [[Mars]]. [[Unfortunately]], they are [[temporarily]] stranded on a moon of Mars where they [[see]] some [[monsters]] ([[added]] by American-International) that are REAAAALLY cheesy and one does bear [[similarity]] to a certain [[part]] of a female's anatomy. Then, they are rescued--returning to Earth heroes.

The bottom [[line]] is that the [[film]] was butchered--turning an [[incredibly]] [[beautiful]] [[piece]] of art (for the [[time]]) being [[turned]] into a grade-C [[movie]]. Because of this, the [[Soviets]] [[really]] had a [[reason]] to [[hate]] [[America]]! I'm just [[shocked]] that the [[horrible]] [[job]] A-I did with this film didn't [[convince]] them to [[refuse]] to sell more films to these [[jerks]]! It's worth a look for a [[laugh]], but the really [[bad]] [[moments]] that make you [[laugh]] are few and far between. So, the [[film]] is a dud--not [[bad]] [[enough]] to [[make]] it a must-see for [[bad]] [[movie]] buffs and too [[dopey]] to be taken [[seriously]]. I would [[really]] [[love]] to [[see]] this [[movie]] in its [[original]] form--it must have been some picture. My giving this a score of 3 is NOT what I would give the original Soviet version of this film. It seems that American-International (a studio that specialized in ultra-low-budget fare in the 60s) bought this film and utterly destroyed it--slicing a two hour plus film into a 64 minute film! Plus, much of this 64 minutes was new [[materials]] (such as the "[[freaks]]")--so you know that this [[filmmaking]] bears almost no [[resemblance]] to the original. The [[initial]] film appears to be a rather straight [[tragedy]] about the Soviet conquest of space--though I [[genuinely]] am not sure what it was originally! [[At]] insight into the original film, read Steven Nyland's review--it was very helpful.

By the way, this was the third Soviet sci-film I've seen that American-International [[acquired]] and then hacked [[furthermore]] to make a "[[novo]]" film--standard practice to a company that was willing to put just about [[something]] on the screen to make a buck--provided, of course, it didn't cost them [[very]] more than a buck in the [[outset]] place!! This Americanized [[cinematographic]] was about two [[adversary]] world powers (NOT the [[AMERICANS]] and [[Russians]]) [[tempting]] to be the first to Mars. The tricky "bad guys" [[attempted]] but fail and the "[[alright]] [[buddies]]" [[save]] one of the [[idiots]] astronauts and then [[chief]] to [[Mar]]. [[Sadly]], they are [[momentarily]] stranded on a moon of Mars where they [[seeing]] some [[monster]] ([[adds]] by American-International) that are REAAAALLY cheesy and one does bear [[analogy]] to a certain [[portions]] of a female's anatomy. Then, they are rescued--returning to Earth heroes.

The bottom [[bloodline]] is that the [[filmmaking]] was butchered--turning an [[immeasurably]] [[sumptuous]] [[slice]] of art (for the [[period]]) being [[transformed]] into a grade-C [[filmmaking]]. Because of this, the [[Russians]] [[truthfully]] had a [[motif]] to [[hating]] [[Americans]]! I'm just [[amazed]] that the [[scary]] [[jobs]] A-I did with this film didn't [[persuade]] them to [[deny]] to sell more films to these [[geeks]]! It's worth a look for a [[chuckles]], but the really [[negative]] [[times]] that make you [[laughter]] are few and far between. So, the [[filmmaking]] is a dud--not [[negative]] [[adequately]] to [[deliver]] it a must-see for [[unfavourable]] [[movies]] buffs and too [[witless]] to be taken [[deeply]]. I would [[genuinely]] [[loved]] to [[seeing]] this [[filmmaking]] in its [[initial]] form--it must have been some picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a beautiful movie filled with adventure. The Genii in the bottle is a classic scene. Romantic in it's finish, all things turn out as they should be. I saw this first as a child and have remembered it as a fantasy I wished was true. --------------------------------------------- Result 4122 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I have copy of this on VHS, I think they (The [[television]] [[networks]]) should play this every year for the next twenty years. So that we don't forget what was and that we [[remember]] not to do the same [[mistakes]] again. Like putting some people in the director's [[chair]], where they don't [[belong]]. This movie Rappin' is [[like]] a vaudevillian musical, for those who can't [[sing]], or [[act]]. This [[movie]] is as much fun as [[trying]] to teach the 'blind' to drive a city bus.

John Hood, (Peebles) has just got out of prison and he's headed back to the old neighborhood. In serving time for an all-to-nice crime of necessity, of course. John heads back onto the old street and is greeted by kids dogs old ladies and his peer [[homeys]] as they dance and sing all along the way.

I would [[recommend]] this if I was sentimental, or if in truth someone was smoking medicinal pot prescribed by a doctor for glaucoma. Either [[way]] this is a poorly directed, scripted, acted and even produced (I never thought I'd sat that) satire of ghetto life with the 'Hood'. [[Although]], I [[think]] the redeeming [[part]] of the story, through the wannabe gang fight sequences and the dance numbers, his friends care about their neighbors and want to save the ghetto from being torn down and cleaned up.

Forget Sonny spoon, Mario could have won an Oscar for that in [[comparison]] to this Rap. Oh well if you find yourself wanting to laugh yourself silly and three-quarters embarrassed, be sure to drink first.

And please, watch responsibly. (No stars, better luck next time!) I have copy of this on VHS, I think they (The [[tvs]] [[webs]]) should play this every year for the next twenty years. So that we don't forget what was and that we [[reminisce]] not to do the same [[wrongs]] again. Like putting some people in the director's [[chairperson]], where they don't [[pertain]]. This movie Rappin' is [[iike]] a vaudevillian musical, for those who can't [[exalt]], or [[ley]]. This [[filmmaking]] is as much fun as [[seeking]] to teach the 'blind' to drive a city bus.

John Hood, (Peebles) has just got out of prison and he's headed back to the old neighborhood. In serving time for an all-to-nice crime of necessity, of course. John heads back onto the old street and is greeted by kids dogs old ladies and his peer [[chummy]] as they dance and sing all along the way.

I would [[recommended]] this if I was sentimental, or if in truth someone was smoking medicinal pot prescribed by a doctor for glaucoma. Either [[camino]] this is a poorly directed, scripted, acted and even produced (I never thought I'd sat that) satire of ghetto life with the 'Hood'. [[While]], I [[ideas]] the redeeming [[portion]] of the story, through the wannabe gang fight sequences and the dance numbers, his friends care about their neighbors and want to save the ghetto from being torn down and cleaned up.

Forget Sonny spoon, Mario could have won an Oscar for that in [[comparisons]] to this Rap. Oh well if you find yourself wanting to laugh yourself silly and three-quarters embarrassed, be sure to drink first.

And please, watch responsibly. (No stars, better luck next time!) --------------------------------------------- Result 4123 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] [[Zero]] Day is a [[film]] few people have [[gotten]] to [[see]], and what a [[shame]] that is.

When I [[saw]] the [[end]], where the two [[main]] [[characters]] [[descend]] [[upon]] the room and mercilessly kill people, then commit [[suicide]], and it made me grab my [[stomach]]. I was shaking, that's how strong this movie is.

The movie is [[amazing]]. It's too [[incredible]] not to get a perfect ten. It's sad that so few people [[understand]] the [[true]] beauty of this [[film]]. It is not a budget which makes a [[film]] good, it is the [[amount]] of feeling the [[makers]] put into it which makes it good.

It leaves a [[permanent]] impression in your [[mind]] that you [[simply]] cannot [[get]] out. It makes you [[realise]] the [[true]] [[horror]] of shootings- [[especially]] if you were to know that [[person]], and this movie makes you feel like you know these people.

I recommend Zero [[Hour]] to those who feel they are [[mature]] [[enough]] to watch it. I am fourteen, and I feel that this [[film]] is just too [[amazing]] to be put into [[words]]. It [[feels]] like you're [[watching]] something that actually [[happened]]. [[Zilch]] Day is a [[movie]] few people have [[become]] to [[behold]], and what a [[embarrass]] that is.

When I [[watched]] the [[terminates]], where the two [[principal]] [[characteristics]] [[descended]] [[afterwards]] the room and mercilessly kill people, then commit [[suicidal]], and it made me grab my [[abdomen]]. I was shaking, that's how strong this movie is.

The movie is [[wondrous]]. It's too [[amazing]] not to get a perfect ten. It's sad that so few people [[realise]] the [[real]] beauty of this [[cinematography]]. It is not a budget which makes a [[movie]] good, it is the [[quantity]] of feeling the [[manufacturers]] put into it which makes it good.

It leaves a [[constant]] impression in your [[intellect]] that you [[merely]] cannot [[got]] out. It makes you [[realizing]] the [[real]] [[terror]] of shootings- [[mainly]] if you were to know that [[somebody]], and this movie makes you feel like you know these people.

I recommend Zero [[Hours]] to those who feel they are [[ripe]] [[adequately]] to watch it. I am fourteen, and I feel that this [[cinematography]] is just too [[wondrous]] to be put into [[expression]]. It [[thinks]] like you're [[staring]] something that actually [[sweated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While traveling by train through Europe, the American Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and the French Celine (Julie Delpy) meet each other and decide to spend the night together in Austria. On the next morning, Jesse returns to United States of America, and Celine to Paris.

"Before Sunrise" is one of my favorite romances, indeed one of the most beautiful love stories I have ever seen. It is a low budget movie with a very simple and real storyline, but the chemistry between Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy is perfect, and the dialogs are stunning. The direction is amazing, transmitting the feelings of Celine and Jesse to the viewer. I have just completed my review number 1,000 in IMDb, and I choose "Before Sunrise" for this significant number because it is a very special film for me. I cannot understand why this movie was not nominated to the Oscar, with such a magnificent screenplay, direction and performances. Yesterday I have probably watched this movie for the third or fourth time, and I still love it. My vote is ten.

Title (Brazil): "Antes do Amanhecer" ("Before Sunrise") --------------------------------------------- Result 4125 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the worst film i have seen for a long time.

Not only that it has nearly nothing to do with the other American Pie movies, the story is obvious, flat and absolutely not funny.

The girls are nice though, but spending your time watching a cheap soft porno would possibly be greater than watching this film.

This film seems to be a very bad made sex ad, made for an audience that is not older than 12.

I never visited an American college, but i would seriously doubt that anyone who did could really laugh about any of the scenes.

Save your time, do something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 4126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very real and funny movie about a Japanese man having a mid-life crisis. In Japan, ballroom dancing is not approved of. But when Shohei Sugiyama becomes obsessed with meeting the beautiful young girl he sees in the window of a dance studio, he suddenly finds himself enrolled in dance classes. No one is more surprised when he begins to like it than he. But he must keep his secret pleasure from his coworkers and family. When the truth comes out it is quite funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 4127 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[OK]]..... This is the third in the [[series]] of carnosaur. [[Lets]] [[star]] with the dinosaur [[puppets]]! [[In]] the [[start]] of the [[film]] you [[cant]] See the Dino's [[cause]] when the body [[count]] [[starts]] you can only See the Dino's eye [[vision]], pretty smart to [[hide]] the [[bad]] [[puppets]]! and [[maybe]] in 16 minutes forward on the film some [[special]] force team with Scott [[Valentine]] as the [[leader]] Rance, the team walks into the [[warehouse]] and then they begins to find body parts and dead body's after the Dino rampage, after a while some [[big]] box comes failing on the team and you can [[hear]] a velociraptor [[scream]], pretty creepy!!! and then a black [[girl]] walks forward and now one blooper is [[found]]! It pops up a raptor hand and [[slashed]] her face but if you pause when the raptor hand comes you can See that its just a [[guy]] with a hand puppet!? WTF! The story is simple. 1. Some terrorist's attacks some truck cause they though It wash some weapons in there. 2. They where dead wrong it [[seams]] to be ten tons raptor and one giant t-Rex in there! How did the t-Rex fit in there??? 3. Rance and some [[nerds]] will kill the dinosaurs! Sadly some [[stupid]] [[blond]] girl told him to capture one of them alive=( 4. Holy Jesues the [[raptors]] have wheels on their [[feats]]! 5. The Dino's is now on a boat in the [[pacific]]. 6: Strange i didn't know that the t-Rex had a [[strange]] thing on hes neck??? 7. THE END. The film is good if you [[want]] a [[good]] [[laugh]]. 5/10 [[OKAY]]..... This is the third in the [[serials]] of carnosaur. [[Entitles]] [[superstar]] with the dinosaur [[muppets]]! [[Throughout]] the [[induction]] of the [[filmmaking]] you [[havent]] See the Dino's [[reason]] when the body [[comte]] [[initiated]] you can only See the Dino's eye [[conception]], pretty smart to [[mask]] the [[negative]] [[muppets]]! and [[potentially]] in 16 minutes forward on the film some [[peculiar]] force team with Scott [[Valentin]] as the [[chef]] Rance, the team walks into the [[platt]] and then they begins to find body parts and dead body's after the Dino rampage, after a while some [[grand]] box comes failing on the team and you can [[overheard]] a velociraptor [[shout]], pretty creepy!!! and then a black [[dame]] walks forward and now one blooper is [[finds]]! It pops up a raptor hand and [[reduced]] her face but if you pause when the raptor hand comes you can See that its just a [[boy]] with a hand puppet!? WTF! The story is simple. 1. Some terrorist's attacks some truck cause they though It wash some weapons in there. 2. They where dead wrong it [[veins]] to be ten tons raptor and one giant t-Rex in there! How did the t-Rex fit in there??? 3. Rance and some [[idiots]] will kill the dinosaurs! Sadly some [[silly]] [[blonde]] girl told him to capture one of them alive=( 4. Holy Jesues the [[buzzards]] have wheels on their [[exploits]]! 5. The Dino's is now on a boat in the [[peace]]. 6: Strange i didn't know that the t-Rex had a [[unusual]] thing on hes neck??? 7. THE END. The film is good if you [[wanting]] a [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A story of obsessive [[love]] [[pushed]] to its [[limits]] and of a [[lovely]] swan [[whose]] [[beauty]] is the very ticket to her own premature demise. Placed at the [[beginning]] of talkies, [[PRIX]] [[DE]] BEAUTE walks a thin line in being a full-on [[silent]] [[film]] -- which is still is at [[heart]] -- and flirting with sound and sound effects. The effect is a [[little]] [[irritating]] for [[anyone]] coming into this [[film]] because the [[recorded]] [[audio]] is extremely tinny and just doesn't [[help]] it at all. Hearing sound stage conversation edited over the beginning sequence which takes place in a beach, for example, is as part of the movie as the actress who dubs Louise Brooks' dialog and in doing so robs the audience of a fine performance. Other than that, the movie rolls along more or less well, with little jumps in [[continuity]] here and there -- something quite common in films from this era -- and has that vague sped up feel [[typical]] of silents. In a way, this is an experiment of a movie, and closer to the style of Sergei Eisenstein in visual presentation and near-intimate closeups that [[elevate]] it from what [[would]] be a more [[pedestrian]] [[level]]. Louise Brooks here plays a character less flapper than what she was [[known]] for: she's a stenographer who on a lark decides to enter a beauty contest despite the furious opposition of her extremely smothering boyfriend. Her role is quite Thirties and contemporary for its time; the last of the flapper/Jazz Baby roles were being shown on screen and now, with the onset of female independence, women as professionals were being represented in film. That Brooks's character decides to leave her boyfriend (even if she does "reconcile" with him later) is also a little ahead of her time. However, her character's fatal flaw is its willing to believe what isn't there -- that her boyfriend wants her to succeed -- and this is what leads to her end at the movie theatre. This final sequence looks like something straight out of Hitchcock in its heightened suspense (seen in THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH) and cuts from [[Brooks]], her image on screen, and the murderous boyfriend. [[Even]] more dramatic is the placement of the still singing "[[live]]" [[Brooks]] with the now dead one -- a chilling effect to a chilling, [[powerful]] [[movie]]. A story of obsessive [[likes]] [[drove]] to its [[restriction]] and of a [[wondrous]] swan [[whom]] [[beaut]] is the very ticket to her own premature demise. Placed at the [[commences]] of talkies, [[PRIZE]] [[OF]] BEAUTE walks a thin line in being a full-on [[voiceless]] [[cinematography]] -- which is still is at [[crux]] -- and flirting with sound and sound effects. The effect is a [[petite]] [[exasperating]] for [[nobody]] coming into this [[kino]] because the [[embossed]] [[acoustics]] is extremely tinny and just doesn't [[support]] it at all. Hearing sound stage conversation edited over the beginning sequence which takes place in a beach, for example, is as part of the movie as the actress who dubs Louise Brooks' dialog and in doing so robs the audience of a fine performance. Other than that, the movie rolls along more or less well, with little jumps in [[continuance]] here and there -- something quite common in films from this era -- and has that vague sped up feel [[emblematic]] of silents. In a way, this is an experiment of a movie, and closer to the style of Sergei Eisenstein in visual presentation and near-intimate closeups that [[elevated]] it from what [[ought]] be a more [[footpath]] [[echelon]]. Louise Brooks here plays a character less flapper than what she was [[renowned]] for: she's a stenographer who on a lark decides to enter a beauty contest despite the furious opposition of her extremely smothering boyfriend. Her role is quite Thirties and contemporary for its time; the last of the flapper/Jazz Baby roles were being shown on screen and now, with the onset of female independence, women as professionals were being represented in film. That Brooks's character decides to leave her boyfriend (even if she does "reconcile" with him later) is also a little ahead of her time. However, her character's fatal flaw is its willing to believe what isn't there -- that her boyfriend wants her to succeed -- and this is what leads to her end at the movie theatre. This final sequence looks like something straight out of Hitchcock in its heightened suspense (seen in THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH) and cuts from [[Creek]], her image on screen, and the murderous boyfriend. [[Yet]] more dramatic is the placement of the still singing "[[vive]]" [[Creek]] with the now dead one -- a chilling effect to a chilling, [[influential]] [[films]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This is a [[brilliant]] political [[satire]]. No wonder why it was largely ignored in the U.S.: it exposes our murderous foreign policy for what it really is.

Another good film from this era, Rendition, was also totally dismissed simply because it showed, accurately, that the U.S. is a war machine bent on torturing, murdering, and maiming civilians in its quest for total world domination.

A clever plot, good acting, some big stars ([[John]] Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei [[anyone]]?) and some scenes of hilarity should have made this movie a hit. Unfortunately, Americans don't like to hear the truth about themselves, especially when they are complicit in mass murder. This is a [[wondrous]] political [[sarcasm]]. No wonder why it was largely ignored in the U.S.: it exposes our murderous foreign policy for what it really is.

Another good film from this era, Rendition, was also totally dismissed simply because it showed, accurately, that the U.S. is a war machine bent on torturing, murdering, and maiming civilians in its quest for total world domination.

A clever plot, good acting, some big stars ([[Johannes]] Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei [[somebody]]?) and some scenes of hilarity should have made this movie a hit. Unfortunately, Americans don't like to hear the truth about themselves, especially when they are complicit in mass murder. --------------------------------------------- Result 4130 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[agree]] with "Jerry." It's a very [[underrated]] space movie (of course, how [[many]] good low-budget ones AREN'T underrated?) If I remember correctly, the solution to the [[mystery]] was a sort of [[variation]] (but not "rip-off") of 2001, because the computer controlling the spaceship had actually been a man, who had somehow been turned into a computer. And like HAL, they tried to [[disconnect]] his "[[mind]]", but not the mechanical parts of him, and as with HAL, it [[led]] to disaster. There is at [[least]] one funny moment. When the Christopher Cary character, who can't find any food, finds the abandoned pet bird, there's a kind of ominous moment, but then the obvious thing doesn't happen after all. I [[concur]] with "Jerry." It's a very [[underestimated]] space movie (of course, how [[innumerable]] good low-budget ones AREN'T underrated?) If I remember correctly, the solution to the [[conundrum]] was a sort of [[variants]] (but not "rip-off") of 2001, because the computer controlling the spaceship had actually been a man, who had somehow been turned into a computer. And like HAL, they tried to [[disengage]] his "[[intellect]]", but not the mechanical parts of him, and as with HAL, it [[culminated]] to disaster. There is at [[fewest]] one funny moment. When the Christopher Cary character, who can't find any food, finds the abandoned pet bird, there's a kind of ominous moment, but then the obvious thing doesn't happen after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Phantom Lady (1944) Dir: Robert Siodmak

Production: Universal Pictures

Scott Henderson (Alan Curtis), following a nasty fight and split with his wife, looks to drown his sorrows at the local watering hole. There he spies a woman in a similar emotional state and, looking for some companionship, asks her to a show at a club to get both their minds off their [[problems]]. She agrees, but only on the condition that they keep their names to themselves. [[Sure]] [[enough]], when Scott gets home he finds the police there, waiting to question him. His wife's been murdered. Where were you at 8 o'clock this evening, asks Inspector Burgess (Thomas Gomez)? But Scott has an [[alibi]], right? Only he doesn't know the woman's name. And the bartender remembers Scott but not the woman. Neither does the cab driver. Nor the [[drummer]] (Elisha Cook Jr.) at the club. Even the dancer at the club, who Scott clearly caught looking at the woman (they were both wearing the same hat), won't acknowledge there was someone with him. Something is going on, but whatever it is Scott is helpless to defend himself at a trial and is sentenced to death for his wife's murder (on the flimsiest 'evidence' in Hollywood judicial history). It's left to his loyal secretary, 'Kansas' (Ella Raines), who's later joined by a sympathetic Inspector Burgess, to find out the real killer before Scott is executed.

Phantom Lady is [[built]] on [[themes]] that [[recur]], [[almost]] [[compulsively]], in Woolrich's [[work]]. For [[example]], the [[schizophrenic]] antagonist is [[also]] seen in Black Angel and The [[Leopard]] [[Man]]. [[Additionally]], there is the character who becomes mentally unhinged by the [[death]] of a sweetheart or spouse as found in Rendezvous in [[Black]] and The Bride Wore [[Black]]. It can [[leave]] a viewer [[feeling]] like he's treading on well worn [[ground]]. But in the right hands, the [[feverish]] plots, sorry dialogue, the narrative inconsistencies, all are beside the point. Fortunately, [[Phantom]] [[Lady]] was being [[guided]] by [[sound]] hands.

This is Siodmak's [[first]] [[noir]]. He [[would]] go on to [[distinguish]] himself as one of the, if not the, preeminent [[practitioners]] of the [[style]] (The Killers, Criss [[Cross]]). Here he is fortuitously paired with cinematographer Woody Bredell (they would be reunited on Christmas Holiday and The Killers). There is some great storytelling done in the camera. In one shot, the deteriorating mental state of a character is shown as he sits in front of a 3-way mirror, suggesting [[multiple]] personalities. The same character, who is an artist, has Van Gogh's self portrait with the bandaged ear hanging on the wall in his apartment. But what Siodmak and Bredell are really doing in [[Phantom]] Lady is practically creating the look for noir. Released very early in 1944, it's all here; the wet pavement, the bags of atmosphere and dread, the sharply contrasting b&w, the wildly expressionistic versions of reality (when Kansas visits Scott in prison), the discordant shafts of light, etc. It is a terrific picture to look at.

Franchot Tone aside, the cast, as well as the subject matter and relative inexperience of the director (and presumably, the budget), suggests 'B' movie ambitions. I thought Tone was a little hammy. Alan Curtis (High Sierra) is not up to much, and actually comes off pretty weak in a few scenes. Ella Raines is mostly good (and quite beautiful). Her 'sex scene' with Elisha Cook Jr. is so delirious it has to be seen to be believed. Another standout scene is when Kansas goes after the bartender to question him. It amounts to a chase scene, as she relentlessly dogs him through the streets, with a stop at a subway station. Some real good tension in there.

*** out of 4 Phantom Lady (1944) Dir: Robert Siodmak

Production: Universal Pictures

Scott Henderson (Alan Curtis), following a nasty fight and split with his wife, looks to drown his sorrows at the local watering hole. There he spies a woman in a similar emotional state and, looking for some companionship, asks her to a show at a club to get both their minds off their [[trouble]]. She agrees, but only on the condition that they keep their names to themselves. [[Persuaded]] [[adequately]], when Scott gets home he finds the police there, waiting to question him. His wife's been murdered. Where were you at 8 o'clock this evening, asks Inspector Burgess (Thomas Gomez)? But Scott has an [[excuse]], right? Only he doesn't know the woman's name. And the bartender remembers Scott but not the woman. Neither does the cab driver. Nor the [[drum]] (Elisha Cook Jr.) at the club. Even the dancer at the club, who Scott clearly caught looking at the woman (they were both wearing the same hat), won't acknowledge there was someone with him. Something is going on, but whatever it is Scott is helpless to defend himself at a trial and is sentenced to death for his wife's murder (on the flimsiest 'evidence' in Hollywood judicial history). It's left to his loyal secretary, 'Kansas' (Ella Raines), who's later joined by a sympathetic Inspector Burgess, to find out the real killer before Scott is executed.

Phantom Lady is [[constructed]] on [[topics]] that [[repetitive]], [[practically]] [[obsessively]], in Woolrich's [[collaboration]]. For [[instance]], the [[paranoid]] antagonist is [[apart]] seen in Black Angel and The [[Panther]] [[Males]]. [[Apart]], there is the character who becomes mentally unhinged by the [[died]] of a sweetheart or spouse as found in Rendezvous in [[Negro]] and The Bride Wore [[Negro]]. It can [[leaving]] a viewer [[sentiment]] like he's treading on well worn [[terrain]]. But in the right hands, the [[frantic]] plots, sorry dialogue, the narrative inconsistencies, all are beside the point. Fortunately, [[Gremlin]] [[Damsel]] was being [[guide]] by [[audible]] hands.

This is Siodmak's [[firstly]] [[negro]]. He [[should]] go on to [[discern]] himself as one of the, if not the, preeminent [[healers]] of the [[elegance]] (The Killers, Criss [[Croce]]). Here he is fortuitously paired with cinematographer Woody Bredell (they would be reunited on Christmas Holiday and The Killers). There is some great storytelling done in the camera. In one shot, the deteriorating mental state of a character is shown as he sits in front of a 3-way mirror, suggesting [[assorted]] personalities. The same character, who is an artist, has Van Gogh's self portrait with the bandaged ear hanging on the wall in his apartment. But what Siodmak and Bredell are really doing in [[Apparition]] Lady is practically creating the look for noir. Released very early in 1944, it's all here; the wet pavement, the bags of atmosphere and dread, the sharply contrasting b&w, the wildly expressionistic versions of reality (when Kansas visits Scott in prison), the discordant shafts of light, etc. It is a terrific picture to look at.

Franchot Tone aside, the cast, as well as the subject matter and relative inexperience of the director (and presumably, the budget), suggests 'B' movie ambitions. I thought Tone was a little hammy. Alan Curtis (High Sierra) is not up to much, and actually comes off pretty weak in a few scenes. Ella Raines is mostly good (and quite beautiful). Her 'sex scene' with Elisha Cook Jr. is so delirious it has to be seen to be believed. Another standout scene is when Kansas goes after the bartender to question him. It amounts to a chase scene, as she relentlessly dogs him through the streets, with a stop at a subway station. Some real good tension in there.

*** out of 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 4132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Loaded with fine actors, I expected much more from "Deceiver" than was delivered. The plot is extremely contrived and manipulative. The many flashbacks only add to the confusion. Believability flies out the window and with the ending becomes unbearable and downright ridiculous. I would strongly advise anyone who likes their movie plots to be based on something that is at least possible to avoid "Deceiver" because you will be very frustrated. Maybe I am just not hip enough to get it, but my suspicion is that many others were totally confused by the story line and especially by the ending. Blurring the line between reality and lies simply does not work because the entire movie made no sense. - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There aren't too many [[times]] when I see a film and go, "[[huh]], what?", but this was one of them. Maybe after seeing Zabriskie Point I [[felt]] much the same [[way]] Woody Allen [[felt]] after seeing 2001- he only liked the [[film]] after seeing it three [[times]] over a two year [[period]], [[realizing]] the filmmaker was ahead of him in what was going on. Michelangelo Antonioni, in one of his few tries at [[making]] films inside of the [[US]] (after Red Desert, he did Blow-Up, this [[film]], China, and The [[Passenger]], all filmed outside his [[native]] Italy), I could sense he almost tried to learn about the ways of the country through his own mastery of the medium. The results [[show]] that he doesn't [[lack]] the [[means]] to [[present]] images, [[feelings]], tones, [[colors]], [[sounds]], and a visual representation of this era. "A director's job is to [[see]]", Antonioni once stated. [[Whatever]] that means, he doesn't [[disappoint]] for the admirer of his post-fifties work (I say post-fifties since I've [[yet]] to see any of his films from before L'Avventura).

What he does [[lack]] is a point, at least the [[kind]] of point that he could bring in Blow-Up and The Eclipse. You get the [[feeling]] of what is [[around]] these characters, what the [[themes]] are bringing forth to their [[consciousness]], [[however]] in this [[case]] the [[characters]] and the actors don't bring much conviction or purpose. Antonioni, coming from the [[school]] of hard-knocks, neo-realistic film-making, does do what he can with his mostly non-professional cast (those who [[look]] most like [[real]] actors are subjugated to the roles of the corporate characters), but the two [[stars]] Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin seem as if Antonioni's under-directing them. [[Perhaps]] that was the point. The story's split into three [[acts]], thankfully not too [[confusing]], as [[Mark]] escapes his existence around the boiling, [[dangerous]] campus [[life]] going on in the circa late 60's LA area, and Daria is sent out from LA to drive to Phoenix for some business meeting. They meet by chance as Mark's plane (how does he know how to drive, maybe a little background info there?) and Daria's car meet up, and they spend some time together in an existential kind of groove out in the desert. Aside from a stylistically mesmerizing if bizarre sex scene, much of this act isn't terribly interesting.

The two leads are fair enough to look at, but what exactly draws them to each other outside of curiosity? The ideas that come forth (in part from a screenplay co-written by Sam Shepard) aren't too revealing, except for one brief instant where drugs vs. reality is brought up. Then the film heads towards the third act, as Mark decides to do the right thing, under disastrous circumstances, and Daria arrives at her boss' place, only to be in full disillusionment (not taking into account the infamous last five minutes or so of the film). Although the film took its time telling its story, I didn't have as much of a problem with that as I did that the story only engages a certain kind of viewer. I understand and empathize with the feelings and doubts and fears as well as the self-confidence of the "anti-establishment", but maybe Antonioni isn't entirely fully aware of it himself. In some scenes he as director and editor (and the often astounding cinematography by Alfio Contini) find the scenery and backgrounds more enlightening and fixating than the people in the foreground. Not to say the technical side of Zabriskie Point isn't involving to a degree (this may make some feel drowsy, as Antonioni is probably far greater as a documentary filmmaker as he is a theatrical director like say Francis Ford Coppola is).

The deserts, skies, city, and even the faces in close-ups are filmed with the eye of a filmmaker in love with the art of getting things in the frame, bringing us in. The soundtrack is equally compelling, with a master stroke including a sweet Rolling Stones song at one point, and then a crushing, surreal Pink Floyd song (re-titled from 'Careful with that Axe Eugene, one of their best pre-Dark Side) in the explosion sequence. If only the performances weren't so one-sided I might find this to be on par with Blow-Up or The Eclipse. It's an unconventional stroke of genius on one hand, and on the other a boring take on what was the hippie/radical movement of the late 60's. But hey, what may be boring for an American such as myself born in the eighties may not be to others outside the US, such as say, Italy. And it does ask to not be discarded right away after one viewing. There aren't too many [[period]] when I see a film and go, "[[eh]], what?", but this was one of them. Maybe after seeing Zabriskie Point I [[deemed]] much the same [[route]] Woody Allen [[smelled]] after seeing 2001- he only liked the [[movies]] after seeing it three [[period]] over a two year [[schedules]], [[reaching]] the filmmaker was ahead of him in what was going on. Michelangelo Antonioni, in one of his few tries at [[doing]] films inside of the [[AMERICANS]] (after Red Desert, he did Blow-Up, this [[movie]], China, and The [[Tourists]], all filmed outside his [[aboriginal]] Italy), I could sense he almost tried to learn about the ways of the country through his own mastery of the medium. The results [[displayed]] that he doesn't [[insufficiency]] the [[methods]] to [[presenting]] images, [[sentiments]], tones, [[coloration]], [[noises]], and a visual representation of this era. "A director's job is to [[behold]]", Antonioni once stated. [[Whichever]] that means, he doesn't [[defraud]] for the admirer of his post-fifties work (I say post-fifties since I've [[nevertheless]] to see any of his films from before L'Avventura).

What he does [[failure]] is a point, at least the [[sorting]] of point that he could bring in Blow-Up and The Eclipse. You get the [[impression]] of what is [[throughout]] these characters, what the [[item]] are bringing forth to their [[conscience]], [[still]] in this [[lawsuits]] the [[features]] and the actors don't bring much conviction or purpose. Antonioni, coming from the [[tuition]] of hard-knocks, neo-realistic film-making, does do what he can with his mostly non-professional cast (those who [[glance]] most like [[actual]] actors are subjugated to the roles of the corporate characters), but the two [[celebrity]] Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin seem as if Antonioni's under-directing them. [[Potentially]] that was the point. The story's split into three [[act]], thankfully not too [[disconcerting]], as [[Markup]] escapes his existence around the boiling, [[unsafe]] campus [[vida]] going on in the circa late 60's LA area, and Daria is sent out from LA to drive to Phoenix for some business meeting. They meet by chance as Mark's plane (how does he know how to drive, maybe a little background info there?) and Daria's car meet up, and they spend some time together in an existential kind of groove out in the desert. Aside from a stylistically mesmerizing if bizarre sex scene, much of this act isn't terribly interesting.

The two leads are fair enough to look at, but what exactly draws them to each other outside of curiosity? The ideas that come forth (in part from a screenplay co-written by Sam Shepard) aren't too revealing, except for one brief instant where drugs vs. reality is brought up. Then the film heads towards the third act, as Mark decides to do the right thing, under disastrous circumstances, and Daria arrives at her boss' place, only to be in full disillusionment (not taking into account the infamous last five minutes or so of the film). Although the film took its time telling its story, I didn't have as much of a problem with that as I did that the story only engages a certain kind of viewer. I understand and empathize with the feelings and doubts and fears as well as the self-confidence of the "anti-establishment", but maybe Antonioni isn't entirely fully aware of it himself. In some scenes he as director and editor (and the often astounding cinematography by Alfio Contini) find the scenery and backgrounds more enlightening and fixating than the people in the foreground. Not to say the technical side of Zabriskie Point isn't involving to a degree (this may make some feel drowsy, as Antonioni is probably far greater as a documentary filmmaker as he is a theatrical director like say Francis Ford Coppola is).

The deserts, skies, city, and even the faces in close-ups are filmed with the eye of a filmmaker in love with the art of getting things in the frame, bringing us in. The soundtrack is equally compelling, with a master stroke including a sweet Rolling Stones song at one point, and then a crushing, surreal Pink Floyd song (re-titled from 'Careful with that Axe Eugene, one of their best pre-Dark Side) in the explosion sequence. If only the performances weren't so one-sided I might find this to be on par with Blow-Up or The Eclipse. It's an unconventional stroke of genius on one hand, and on the other a boring take on what was the hippie/radical movement of the late 60's. But hey, what may be boring for an American such as myself born in the eighties may not be to others outside the US, such as say, Italy. And it does ask to not be discarded right away after one viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] A few summer space campers [[actually]] were [[accidently]] [[sent]] into space by a [[robot]]. And the oxygen in [[ship]] was [[running]] short. They had to [[sent]] someone to a space station to [[get]] the [[gas]] tanks, etc, etc.

First of all, this movie's plot is not [[possible]] in [[real]] life. But it gives a warm [[feelings]] of [[anything]] is possible if you set your [[heart]] in.

It is amazing to see those young actors who [[still]] look about the same after so many [[years]]. (I saw this movie for the [[first]] [[time]] in the [[year]] of 2000, it was filmed in 1986) There are quite a few people in that movie who are still working in Hollywood.

The [[view]] was [[great]] from outer space. It does not look [[unreal]]. It is about 2 [[hours]] long, it runs so fast that you won't even notice. You know that it is not [[real]], but you just get sucked into it until the end.

[[Overall]], it is a good [[family]] movie.

A few summer space campers [[genuinely]] were [[inadvertently]] [[relayed]] into space by a [[robots]]. And the oxygen in [[battleship]] was [[executes]] short. They had to [[despatch]] someone to a space station to [[obtains]] the [[gases]] tanks, etc, etc.

First of all, this movie's plot is not [[achievable]] in [[actual]] life. But it gives a warm [[sensations]] of [[nada]] is possible if you set your [[nub]] in.

It is amazing to see those young actors who [[again]] look about the same after so many [[olds]]. (I saw this movie for the [[fiirst]] [[period]] in the [[annum]] of 2000, it was filmed in 1986) There are quite a few people in that movie who are still working in Hollywood.

The [[visualize]] was [[wondrous]] from outer space. It does not look [[unrealistic]]. It is about 2 [[hour]] long, it runs so fast that you won't even notice. You know that it is not [[veritable]], but you just get sucked into it until the end.

[[Total]], it is a good [[families]] movie.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you are tired of films trying too hard to be fairy tales (the "Pretty Woman" variety love story), here is a beautiful film in which a Japanese businessman is pulled free from his robotic, dispassionate life when he falls in love...with dancing. Wonderfully drawn characters bring to life a story that is at once deeply funny and poignantly moving. --------------------------------------------- Result 4136 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] not to long after Jeff Jarrett left the WWF for good he spoke of that night . Owen Hart and him where good friends and both 2nd generation wrestlers. Jeff first remarks "I was literally pushed thru the curtain as my lifeless friends body was wheeled past me " . Debra McMichael( Steve Austin's Ex wife as well as Steve Mondo McMichael Ex wife".)

As Owen Hart Fell, a video promo the ring was darkened, as a Blue Blazer (owen Hart Promo was played. The fall and video of owen in the ring was never showed on TV. There are a few news photos that got posted. When they came back from the video promo Jim ross was talking over a all we had was a crowd shot \., He stated that Owen Hart as The blue blazer has fallen and doesn't look good. Lawler then came back from the ring his face was ashen he told Jim that the situation was very critical paramedics where working hard to revive him. Rock And HHH where going there match in a private room when another Referee came in and told them Owen fell at first,knowing Owen Harts constantly being a prankster they thought it wasn't real. But both later stated that the look of the referee face said it all. In fact as he fell ,as mentioned in other post , he yelled for the referee and ring announcer to move.

Brother Bret hart was a plane heading to LA to do a angle on the Tonight Show , he couldn't get any of the plane phones to work, One of the captains got a message to call home something had happened. When he landed in La Eric bishoff was there told him what had happened, and put him on a charter flight to Kansas City to the morgue, Bret even later with Owens widow Martha went up to the top of the arena where Owen was standing. Police found no foul play formerly closed as a accident .

Most of the Information in Bret Harts book as well as the book by Martha Hart , --------------------------------------------- Result 4137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So they hyped the violence and it's been branded as sick. Well, the violence is the best bit I'm afraid, but unfortunately the characters are not developed enough to allow us to understand why they go on their (entirely predictable) rampage. This film has a truly dreadful script. We never get a chance to get to know Robert and his actions at the end are just plain pathetic. The acting isn't much better, either, the worst of them being the TV chef and the school teacher. The direction is clumsy, the pace enough to send you to sleep. And what on earth is the school film project all about? A comment on the film itself perhaps? The use of newsreel during the climactic murder is laughable. These guys obviously think they're intellectuals but are hopelessly out of their depth. How on earth they got the great Yorgos Arvanitis to light it I'll never know. And how they got the money to make it in the first place is an even greater mystery. Absolutely awful beyond comprehension. --------------------------------------------- Result 4138 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like this movie. I can watch it on a regular basis and not tire of it. I suppose that is one of my criteria for a great movie.

The story is very interesting. It introduces us to 6 characters; each has a unique kung fu style that is very secret and very deadly. Each of these characters are trained by the same master but their identities are kept secret from each other. The dying master sends the 6th venom, his last student, to attempt to make right the wrongs that he suspects some of his students have committed.

How will the last pupil find the other venoms? How will he know which of them is bad? The way these questions are answered is part of what makes this movie great.

We also get to see the venoms fight each other in every combination. It is fun to see how their styles match up against each other.

If you want to see if you like kung fu movies, this is a good movie to start with. It doesn't get any better than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Page 3 is a great movie. The story is so refreshing and interesting. Not once throughout the movie did i find myself staring off into space. Konkana Sen did a good job in the movie, although i think someone with more glamour or enthusiasm would have been better, but she did do a great job. All the supporting actors were also very good and helped the movie along. Boman Irani did a great job. There is one thing that stands out in this movie THE STORY it is great, and very realistic, it doesn't beat around the bush it is very straight forward in sending out its message. I think more movie like this should be made, i am sick of watching the same candy floss movies over and over, they are getting hard to digest now. Everyone should watch Page 3, it is a great film. -Just my 2 cents :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a Japanese film but there is quite a bit of English also spoken in here. It's a pretty film, with nice visuals, featuring the scenic beauty of Hawaii.

However, that was the only redeeming quality for me. The story was generally boring. Who wants to watch a young woman sulk for 90 percent of the film because her "picture" husband is a lot older than he advertised he was? Granted, that could be a bummer......but get over it!

Only in the last 10 minutes does she do an about-face and become fond of him. By then, for most viewers, it was too little-too late. We'd fallen asleep by then. --------------------------------------------- Result 4141 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] In conception a [[splendid]] [[film]], [[investigating]] the [[tensions]] that occur in [[family]] [[life]] in the idyllic setting of Galiano [[Island]] off the [[coast]] of British Columbia, _The [[Lotus]] Eaters_ is marred by the fact that it has been [[packaged]] as a made-for-TV [[movie]], [[diminishing]] itself [[throughout]] by the [[addition]] of chirpy [[music]] over potentially [[powerful]] scenes, as if to [[get]] [[ready]] for the [[interruption]] of [[commercials]]. A [[pity]], [[really]]. In conception a [[delightful]] [[movie]], [[investigate]] the [[tension]] that occur in [[families]] [[lives]] in the idyllic setting of Galiano [[Isle]] off the [[ribs]] of British Columbia, _The [[Blossom]] Eaters_ is marred by the fact that it has been [[packing]] as a made-for-TV [[cinema]], [[falling]] itself [[across]] by the [[extra]] of chirpy [[musicians]] over potentially [[mighty]] scenes, as if to [[got]] [[prepared]] for the [[hiatus]] of [[ads]]. A [[shame]], [[truthfully]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4142 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] This [[movie]] deals with one of the most feared geriatric [[diseases]] among the aging [[today]]. As one who has [[encountered]] a number of [[families]] who are [[facing]] the [[potential]] of Alzheimer's or who are in the formative [[stages]], I [[would]] [[suggest]] that [[every]] [[health]] care [[giver]] recommend this [[movie]] to any [[family]] facing the trauma of this [[disease]]. The [[movie]] is designed [[primarily]] to [[speak]] to the [[family]] of the [[patient]] and [[reaches]] into the very [[heart]] of the [[struggle]]. Casting is [[excellent]] and the [[dramatic]] portrayal is [[outstanding]] with a very [[commanding]] plot [[line]]. This [[kino]] deals with one of the most feared geriatric [[sickness]] among the aging [[thursday]]. As one who has [[confronted]] a number of [[family]] who are [[confront]] the [[prospective]] of Alzheimer's or who are in the formative [[stage]], I [[ought]] [[suggests]] that [[all]] [[hygiene]] care [[donors]] recommend this [[flick]] to any [[families]] facing the trauma of this [[sickness]]. The [[film]] is designed [[basically]] to [[talking]] to the [[families]] of the [[ill]] and [[attained]] into the very [[heartland]] of the [[wrestling]]. Casting is [[wondrous]] and the [[noteworthy]] portrayal is [[wondrous]] with a very [[comandante]] plot [[iine]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Road to Perdition, a movie undeservedly overlooked at that year Oscars is the second work of Sam Mendes (and in my opinion his best work), a director who three years before won Oscar for his widely acclaimed but controversial American Beauty. This is a terrific movie, and at the same time ultimately poignant and sad.

It's a story of a relatively wealthy and happy family from outward appearance during difficult times of Depression when the, Michael Sullivan, a father of two children, played by great Tom Hanks (I'm not his admirer but ought to say that) is a hit-man for local mafia boss, played by Paul Newman. His eldest son, a thirteen years boy Michael Sullivan Jr., perfectly played by young Tyler Hoechlin, after years of blissful ignorance finds out what is his father job and on what money their family live. Prompted by his curiosity and his aspiration to know truth he accidentally becomes a witness of a murder, committed by John Rooney, son of his father boss. Such discovery strikes an innocent soul and it caused numerous events that changed his life forever. The atmosphere of the period, all the backgrounds and decorations are perfectly created, editing and cinematography are almost flawless while the story is well written. But the main line of the movie, the most important moments and points of the movie and the key factor of the movie success are difficult father-son relations in bad times. They are shown so deeply, strong and believable. Tom Hanks does excellent and has one of the best performances of his career in a quite unusual role for him and all acting across the board is superb. Finally worth to mention a very nice score by Paul Newman and in the result we get an outstanding work of all people involved in making this beautiful (but one more time sad) masterpiece. I believe Road to Perdition belongs to greatest achievements of film-making of this decade and undoubtedly one of the best films of the year.

My grade 10 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Initially]], I [[would]] have [[thought]] that [[Secret]] Sunshine had something critical to say of religion (and here being Christianity), and [[wondered]] if it [[would]] be something of a [[rant]] against the [[ills]] of blind [[faith]], or the manipulative power of those who are supposedly holier than [[thou]]. [[Surprisingly]], it was none of the sort and was largely non-judgemental, putting in place [[events]] as a [[matter]] of fact, and [[allowing]] the audience to [[draw]] their own [[judgement]] and [[conclusion]].

And I can't [[help]] but to [[chuckle]] at the role of Song Kang-ho, a man who's taken a liking for widower Shin-ae (Jeong Do-yeon), and starts going to church when she does. The reasons for church going are many I suppose, either to find inner peace, to seek help, being [[afraid]] of eternal damnation in the fires of Hell, to [[reaffirm]] faith, or even things like wanting to get married in a church, or to skirt chase (I kid you not). But to each his own reasons for turning up in church every Sunday and participating in prayer groups for [[fellowship]], what is indeed dangerous, is when the underlying [[ulterior]] motives, do not get satisfied, and that's when frustration sets in. [[Or]] when you [[discover]] how hypocritical [[man]] can be, portraying one face inside the house of God, and displaying yet another outside.

Shin-ae and her son Jun moves to the [[town]] of Miryang, which is the [[birthplace]] of her deceased husband. Wanting to start life anew, she opens up a piano shop to give lessons, though in discovering her new found freedom and in a moment's lack of good judgement, has another tragedy befall her. And that takes one hour to get to. [[Secret]] [[Sunshine]] really took its time to get to this point, where [[things]] then begin to [[get]] slightly more interesting with Shin-ae now taking to [[embracing]] religion to [[deal]] with and [[accept]] her [[current]] [[state]], reveling in the [[comfort]] that [[religion]], and fellow believers, can [[offer]].

What [[began]] as crying out for sympathy turns into acceptance and belief that religion [[offers]] that silver bullet to solve the ills of all mankind, and sometimes you wonder if it's because of your personal myopic view of what the almighty is doing for you, that you begin to adopt a somewhat selfish opinion that everything's good going your way, and in Shin-ae's case, her magnanimous attitude in wanting to forgive others who had trespassed against her, forgetting something very fundamental that it the feeling can cut both ways too.

The last act is probably the most fun of the lot as it says plenty, where most of us can identify with - why me, and why not someone else, as we rage against our faith and start questioning, unfortunately, with no hard and fast answers available. It is then either we fall by the wayside, or continue with destructive deeds so rebelliously. But somehow the plug gets carefully pulled in Secret Sunshine so as not to offend, and what could have been an ugly character mouthpiece, got muted.

If you bite into the hype this movie is generating, then perhaps you'll realize only Jeong Do- yeon's excellent portrayal is worth mentioning, as she totally owns her role as the widow Shin-ae who is probably the most unluckiest person on Earth in having to deal with that many tragedies over a short period of time, and if you look at it carefully, most of which are of her own doing. Watching her transformation, is worth the ticket price, and despite having my personal favourite Korean actor Song Kang-ho in the movie, this is something he just breezed right through. [[Firstly]], I [[could]] have [[figured]] that [[Undercover]] Sunshine had something critical to say of religion (and here being Christianity), and [[asked]] if it [[could]] be something of a [[tirade]] against the [[afflictions]] of blind [[fe]], or the manipulative power of those who are supposedly holier than [[thee]]. [[Terribly]], it was none of the sort and was largely non-judgemental, putting in place [[incidents]] as a [[issue]] of fact, and [[let]] the audience to [[attract]] their own [[stoppage]] and [[conclusions]].

And I can't [[supporting]] but to [[snicker]] at the role of Song Kang-ho, a man who's taken a liking for widower Shin-ae (Jeong Do-yeon), and starts going to church when she does. The reasons for church going are many I suppose, either to find inner peace, to seek help, being [[fearful]] of eternal damnation in the fires of Hell, to [[reconfirm]] faith, or even things like wanting to get married in a church, or to skirt chase (I kid you not). But to each his own reasons for turning up in church every Sunday and participating in prayer groups for [[scholarships]], what is indeed dangerous, is when the underlying [[disguised]] motives, do not get satisfied, and that's when frustration sets in. [[Neither]] when you [[detected]] how hypocritical [[dude]] can be, portraying one face inside the house of God, and displaying yet another outside.

Shin-ae and her son Jun moves to the [[ville]] of Miryang, which is the [[cradle]] of her deceased husband. Wanting to start life anew, she opens up a piano shop to give lessons, though in discovering her new found freedom and in a moment's lack of good judgement, has another tragedy befall her. And that takes one hour to get to. [[Confidentiality]] [[Soleil]] really took its time to get to this point, where [[items]] then begin to [[got]] slightly more interesting with Shin-ae now taking to [[covering]] religion to [[dealing]] with and [[countenance]] her [[contemporary]] [[sate]], reveling in the [[consolation]] that [[cults]], and fellow believers, can [[supplying]].

What [[initiating]] as crying out for sympathy turns into acceptance and belief that religion [[offered]] that silver bullet to solve the ills of all mankind, and sometimes you wonder if it's because of your personal myopic view of what the almighty is doing for you, that you begin to adopt a somewhat selfish opinion that everything's good going your way, and in Shin-ae's case, her magnanimous attitude in wanting to forgive others who had trespassed against her, forgetting something very fundamental that it the feeling can cut both ways too.

The last act is probably the most fun of the lot as it says plenty, where most of us can identify with - why me, and why not someone else, as we rage against our faith and start questioning, unfortunately, with no hard and fast answers available. It is then either we fall by the wayside, or continue with destructive deeds so rebelliously. But somehow the plug gets carefully pulled in Secret Sunshine so as not to offend, and what could have been an ugly character mouthpiece, got muted.

If you bite into the hype this movie is generating, then perhaps you'll realize only Jeong Do- yeon's excellent portrayal is worth mentioning, as she totally owns her role as the widow Shin-ae who is probably the most unluckiest person on Earth in having to deal with that many tragedies over a short period of time, and if you look at it carefully, most of which are of her own doing. Watching her transformation, is worth the ticket price, and despite having my personal favourite Korean actor Song Kang-ho in the movie, this is something he just breezed right through. --------------------------------------------- Result 4145 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Labored comedy has I.R.S. agent [[Tony]] Randall [[investigating]] eccentric farm family in Maryland who have never [[paid]] their [[taxes]]; Debbie Reynolds is the tomboy farmer's [[daughter]] who puts the squeeze on the not-so-disinterested tax-man. [[Debbie]] certainly [[made]] her share of inferior theatrical sitcoms during this period--and this one's no better or worse than the [[rest]]. [[Picture]] begins brightly but flags at the halfway point, [[becoming]] [[frantic]] and [[witless]]. [[Randall]] isn't a bad [[match]] for Reynolds, but the [[vehicle]] itself [[defeats]] the chemistry. Based on the novel "The [[Darling]] [[Buds]] of May" by H.E. [[Bates]], with a poor sound-mix [[causing]] all the [[actors]] to [[sound]] as if they're [[stuck]] in an echo [[chamber]]. ** from **** Labored comedy has I.R.S. agent [[Toni]] Randall [[probing]] eccentric farm family in Maryland who have never [[salaried]] their [[taxation]]; Debbie Reynolds is the tomboy farmer's [[girl]] who puts the squeeze on the not-so-disinterested tax-man. [[Dubai]] certainly [[accomplished]] her share of inferior theatrical sitcoms during this period--and this one's no better or worse than the [[remainder]]. [[Photographic]] begins brightly but flags at the halfway point, [[becomes]] [[frenetic]] and [[punchy]]. [[Randal]] isn't a bad [[teaming]] for Reynolds, but the [[vehicles]] itself [[beat]] the chemistry. Based on the novel "The [[Darlings]] [[Yolks]] of May" by H.E. [[Betts]], with a poor sound-mix [[provoking]] all the [[players]] to [[audible]] as if they're [[pasted]] in an echo [[chambre]]. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie only enter the cinema in [[Indonesia]] this year (2007), two years after it's [[official]] [[release]], and after [[many]] [[illegal]] DVD's had found its [[way]] to the [[public]]. [[Apparently]] the popularity of the illegal DVD's lead to the [[release]] into the [[theaters]], with [[still]] public [[coming]] to watch.

The movie is a [[great]] epic, bringing Japanese [[culture]] into your house in an exiting [[way]]. In a sometimes [[humorist]] way, the story is told about a theater writer who writes a story for his theater, since the regular Kabuki theater plays is something he [[finds]] boring.

At first, the audience might be a little bit [[confused]] about which story we are following, but when the story unfolds, we [[see]] that the love between a male human and a female demon leads to a great story for a new Kabuki theater piece.

The audience is left in the dark if this is a story that is [[supposed]] to really have [[happened]] in Japanese traditions and mythology, but that doesn't matter.

The [[way]] the story is told with a love for theater, expression, vivid colors, [[humor]] and tragedy, makes this a [[great]] ride on the roller-coaster of Japanese cinema as well as theater.

Let yourself go completely when you watch this movie, try to see it in a cinema instead of on your television at home.

One critical point though: the soundtrack is [[sometimes]] a little bit annoying. Though most of it is great music, there are a few moments in the movie that I think they should have chosen some more dramatic music. But maybe the fact that the story contains moments of humor made the director choose for lighter moments in music as well. The movie only enter the cinema in [[Indonesians]] this year (2007), two years after it's [[servant]] [[freed]], and after [[innumerable]] [[undocumented]] DVD's had found its [[pathway]] to the [[populace]]. [[Obviously]] the popularity of the illegal DVD's lead to the [[emancipate]] into the [[theater]], with [[yet]] public [[forthcoming]] to watch.

The movie is a [[wondrous]] epic, bringing Japanese [[civilisations]] into your house in an exiting [[camino]]. In a sometimes [[comedian]] way, the story is told about a theater writer who writes a story for his theater, since the regular Kabuki theater plays is something he [[discoveries]] boring.

At first, the audience might be a little bit [[disorientated]] about which story we are following, but when the story unfolds, we [[behold]] that the love between a male human and a female demon leads to a great story for a new Kabuki theater piece.

The audience is left in the dark if this is a story that is [[alleged]] to really have [[transpired]] in Japanese traditions and mythology, but that doesn't matter.

The [[camino]] the story is told with a love for theater, expression, vivid colors, [[comedy]] and tragedy, makes this a [[wondrous]] ride on the roller-coaster of Japanese cinema as well as theater.

Let yourself go completely when you watch this movie, try to see it in a cinema instead of on your television at home.

One critical point though: the soundtrack is [[intermittently]] a little bit annoying. Though most of it is great music, there are a few moments in the movie that I think they should have chosen some more dramatic music. But maybe the fact that the story contains moments of humor made the director choose for lighter moments in music as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 4147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[When]] "Girlfight" [[came]] out, the [[reviews]] praised it, but I didn't [[get]] [[around]] to [[seeing]] it. I [[finally]] saw it when it [[got]] [[released]] on [[video]], and [[understand]] the glowing reviews.

The movie [[opens]] in a [[high]] [[school]] in the [[middle]] of a [[ghetto]]. We [[quickly]] [[get]] [[introduced]] to [[student]] Diana [[Guzman]] (Michelle Rodriguez). She has a bad-ass expression on her face, and any idea about Diana that we might derive from this expression soon gets corroborated when she gets in a fight. As Diana gets in trouble for this, we then [[meet]] her father, an aggressive [[type]] in his own right; [[clearly]] we can't [[totally]] blame Diana for her attitude.

But then the [[movie]] [[really]] [[picks]] up, as a [[new]] [[thought]] germinates in Diana's mind: boxing as a [[way]] to escape this [[grim]] existence. Her [[older]] brother has already [[gotten]] into boxing, but her [[father]] most [[likely]] won't approve. [[Only]] Diana herself can [[decide]] what to do.

[[Just]] the first few minutes [[alone]] identified that I was in for a very [[gritty]], non-Hollywood [[movie]], but the [[brief]] appearance of [[John]] Sayles in a [[supporting]] role [[truly]] [[affirmed]] that. Even before they [[get]] to any boxing scenes, you feel like you're [[getting]] pounded in the face at [[seeing]] the [[ugly]] [[life]] that Diana [[lives]]. And when they [[finally]] [[arrive]] at the film's [[main]] [[story]], there's no turning back.

[[All]] in all, I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. I will [[admit]] that [[using]] boxing as a [[means]] to [[show]] [[someone]] [[trying]] to make [[something]] of himself/herself has been sort of a cliché in [[cinema]] for [[many]] years ("Rocky", "[[Million]] [[Dollar]] [[Baby]]"), but I [[still]] think that they did a great [[job]] with it here. In fact, this may have brought the [[genre]] to its apex. [[Really]] good. Too [[bad]] that Michelle Rodriguez wasted herself in Hollywood [[movies]] after this one. [[Whenever]] "Girlfight" [[arrived]] out, the [[scrutinize]] praised it, but I didn't [[obtain]] [[throughout]] to [[witnessing]] it. I [[lastly]] saw it when it [[did]] [[publicized]] on [[videotape]], and [[understanding]] the glowing reviews.

The movie [[opened]] in a [[highest]] [[teaching]] in the [[milieu]] of a [[favela]]. We [[rapidly]] [[obtain]] [[made]] to [[pupil]] Diana [[Rodriguez]] (Michelle Rodriguez). She has a bad-ass expression on her face, and any idea about Diana that we might derive from this expression soon gets corroborated when she gets in a fight. As Diana gets in trouble for this, we then [[fulfill]] her father, an aggressive [[sorts]] in his own right; [[plainly]] we can't [[altogether]] blame Diana for her attitude.

But then the [[cinematography]] [[genuinely]] [[opt]] up, as a [[newer]] [[thinking]] germinates in Diana's mind: boxing as a [[route]] to escape this [[morose]] existence. Her [[elder]] brother has already [[become]] into boxing, but her [[pere]] most [[apt]] won't approve. [[Merely]] Diana herself can [[deciding]] what to do.

[[Jen]] the first few minutes [[mere]] identified that I was in for a very [[sandstone]], non-Hollywood [[cinematic]], but the [[succinct]] appearance of [[Giovanni]] Sayles in a [[succour]] role [[honestly]] [[reaffirmed]] that. Even before they [[obtain]] to any boxing scenes, you feel like you're [[obtaining]] pounded in the face at [[witnessing]] the [[horrendous]] [[living]] that Diana [[life]]. And when they [[ultimately]] [[arrived]] at the film's [[principal]] [[fairytales]], there's no turning back.

[[Totality]] in all, I [[undoubtedly]] [[recommendation]] this [[film]]. I will [[accept]] that [[uses]] boxing as a [[methods]] to [[exhibition]] [[person]] [[tempting]] to make [[anything]] of himself/herself has been sort of a cliché in [[cine]] for [[countless]] years ("Rocky", "[[Billions]] [[Dollars]] [[Babies]]"), but I [[yet]] think that they did a great [[employment]] with it here. In fact, this may have brought the [[genera]] to its apex. [[Truthfully]] good. Too [[amiss]] that Michelle Rodriguez wasted herself in Hollywood [[theater]] after this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4148 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this Saturday night at the Provincetown Film Festival, and it's a stick-to-your-bones movie -- it's really stayed with me. Adapted very smartly from what is probably an excellent novel, it's a back-and-forth-in-time drama with fully rounded characters, thoughtful rumination on life choices, and, I'm not exaggerating. one of the greatest casts ever assembled in 100+ years of movie-making. Wonderful work from everyone, led by a luminous Vanessa Redgrave as a dying, deluded Newport matron, and Claire Danes as her much younger self. Meryl Streep's daughter Mamie Gummer is, like Mama, the real deal; Patrick Wilson looks like Paul Newman circa 1958 and doesn't overplay the charm; and what a pleasure to see such excellent stage actors as Barry Bostwick and Eileen Atkins contributing sharp, detailed cameos. Hugh Dancy, also from the stage, doesn't bring much edge to the somewhat clichéd role of an unhappy rich wastrel, and the family issues are resolved perhaps more neatly than real life would allow. But it's a deliberately paced, visually gorgeous meditation on real life issues, and you can cry at it and not feel like you're being recklessly manipulated. Also, what a sumptuous parade of 1940s/50s automobiles. --------------------------------------------- Result 4149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Although]] the [[production]] and [[Jerry]] Jameson's [[direction]] are definite improvements, "[[Airport]] '77" isn't [[much]] better than "[[Airport]] 1975": slick, commercial [[rubbish]] submerging (this [[time]] literally) a decent cast. [[Jack]] Lemmon is the [[pilot]] of a packed [[airliner]] which [[gets]] [[hijacked]] by art thieves and [[crashes]] into the [[sea]] (all the publicity [[claimed]] it was near the Bermuda Triangle, but there's no [[mention]] of it in the [[film]] itself). When the rescue ships [[come]] to [[raise]] the [[airplane]] out of the water, we [[see]] all their cranes [[dropping]] (rather blindly) into the ocean and it's hard not to laugh ([[imagining]] the [[cranes]] plugging the [[plane]], the [[passengers]] and the waterlogged [[script]]). NBC used to [[air]] what [[appeared]] to be the "director's cut", with at least an hour of [[extra]] footage--mostly flashbacks--injected into the [[proceedings]] with all the subtlety of a "Gilligan's [[Island]]" episode. Most [[exciting]] [[moment]] is the [[plane]] [[crash]], and some of the players have a [[little]] fun: [[Lee]] [[Grant]] is an [[obnoxious]] [[drunk]], Brenda Vaccaro a no-nonsense stewardess, [[Joseph]] Cotten and Olivia de Havilland are flirting oldsters. [[Still]], the [[personality]] conflicts and the [[excruciating]] military detail eventually [[tear]] at one's [[patience]]. ** from **** [[Despite]] the [[productivity]] and [[Jiri]] Jameson's [[orientation]] are definite improvements, "[[Airports]] '77" isn't [[very]] better than "[[Airfield]] 1975": slick, commercial [[trash]] submerging (this [[times]] literally) a decent cast. [[Gato]] Lemmon is the [[experiment]] of a packed [[jet]] which [[get]] [[kidnap]] by art thieves and [[crash]] into the [[seas]] (all the publicity [[asserted]] it was near the Bermuda Triangle, but there's no [[mentioning]] of it in the [[flick]] itself). When the rescue ships [[arrived]] to [[grew]] the [[air]] out of the water, we [[seeing]] all their cranes [[downing]] (rather blindly) into the ocean and it's hard not to laugh ([[imagine]] the [[skulls]] plugging the [[airplanes]], the [[travelers]] and the waterlogged [[hyphen]]). NBC used to [[aeronautics]] what [[emerged]] to be the "director's cut", with at least an hour of [[supplemental]] footage--mostly flashbacks--injected into the [[trials]] with all the subtlety of a "Gilligan's [[Isle]]" episode. Most [[exhilarating]] [[time]] is the [[airplane]] [[accidents]], and some of the players have a [[scant]] fun: [[Rhee]] [[Awarding]] is an [[detestable]] [[drunken]], Brenda Vaccaro a no-nonsense stewardess, [[Yousef]] Cotten and Olivia de Havilland are flirting oldsters. [[Nonetheless]], the [[persona]] conflicts and the [[horrifying]] military detail eventually [[rip]] at one's [[sabra]]. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently watched this film at the 30'Th Gothenburg Film Festival, and to be honest it was on of the worst films I've ever had the misfortune to watch. Don't get me wrong, there are the funny and entertaining bad films (e.g "Manos – Hands of fate") and then there are the awful bad films. (This one falls into the latter category). The cinematography was unbelievable, and not in a good way. It felt like the cameraman deliberately kept everything out of focus (with the exception of a gratuitous nipple shot), the lighting was something between "one guy running around with a light bulb" and "non existing". The actors were as bad as soap actors but not as bad as porn actors, and gave the impression that every line came as a total surprise to them. The only redeeming feature was the look of the masked killer, a classic look a la Jason Vorhees from "Friday the 13'Th". The Plot was extremely poor, and the ending even worse. I would only recommend this movie to anyone needing an example of how a horror film is not supposed be look like, or maybe an insomniac needing sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 4151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have rarely been subjected to such outright nonsense in a film that is supposed to be based on a historical figure. A horrible joke of a film, I cringed throughout. Terrible, trite, distorted and riddled with outright lies and half truths.

The famous Hitler biographer Ian Kershaw was to originally be a consultant for this film. However, he found the script to be so historically inaccurate and ridiculous that he refused, and also demanded they stop using his name as a source (it embarrassed him to think people would think he was involved).

One scene shows Hitler beating his dog. There is not one source for this. Hitler loved animals above people. He brought in the strictest animal welfare laws in Europe, banned vivisection and animal experimentation. He was also a vegetarian.

The film turns his gaining of the Iron Cross into a farce, involving bribery. Utter lies. He was awarded it for repeated acts of bravery over a long period of time.

There are no historical documents showing that Hitler ever had a sexual relationship with his niece. Not one.

Apart from these, Hitler is portrayed as a rabid simpleton in this garbage flick.

If he was even half as ignorant, demented and thick as he is in this nonsense film as in real life you would not even know he had ever existed. Never mind become the leader of Germany.

Honestly, this film was utterly terrible.

Go watch Downfall and give this a very wide berth. --------------------------------------------- Result 4152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I was to young to ever know much about prince but in the past few years I've [[seen]] a lot of [[Purple]] [[Rain]] Novelty Tee's and i [[thought]] they were cool but i didn't [[want]] to [[buy]] a shirt i [[knew]] nothing about. [[So]] one Saturday it came on fuse and i [[decided]] to watch it. I didn't know what the [[movie]] was [[going]] to be about before i watched it but it was [[great]] once i [[found]] out. [[In]] the movie [[prince]] wasn't known as prince but as "the kid". All the performances where [[great]] to me but my favorite were Purple [[Rain]], [[Darling]] Nicki, and I [[would]] [[die]] for you. All the [[songs]] [[tied]] into what was [[going]] on through out the [[movie]] when his [[mother]] and [[father]] were [[always]] [[fighting]] the song when [[doves]] [[cried]] [[described]] what he was feeling. I [[also]] like how [[clever]] [[prince]] was with the way he flirted with Apallonia. I [[liked]] when [[Prince]] and Appallonia [[first]] met in the club and he [[stood]] behind her standing and then once she turned [[around]] he [[disappeared]]! great movie and now i cant [[even]] find one of those tee [[shirts]] :( I was to young to ever know much about prince but in the past few years I've [[watched]] a lot of [[Crimson]] [[Acidic]] Novelty Tee's and i [[figured]] they were cool but i didn't [[wants]] to [[acquiring]] a shirt i [[knowed]] nothing about. [[Hence]] one Saturday it came on fuse and i [[opted]] to watch it. I didn't know what the [[cinematography]] was [[gonna]] to be about before i watched it but it was [[wondrous]] once i [[uncovered]] out. [[For]] the movie [[prinz]] wasn't known as prince but as "the kid". All the performances where [[formidable]] to me but my favorite were Purple [[Rainy]], [[Bebe]] Nicki, and I [[ought]] [[killed]] for you. All the [[hymns]] [[tying]] into what was [[gonna]] on through out the [[kino]] when his [[momma]] and [[pere]] were [[invariably]] [[hostilities]] the song when [[pigeons]] [[yelled]] [[outlining]] what he was feeling. I [[similarly]] like how [[brainy]] [[prinz]] was with the way he flirted with Apallonia. I [[wished]] when [[Prinz]] and Appallonia [[firstly]] met in the club and he [[amounted]] behind her standing and then once she turned [[about]] he [[extinct]]! great movie and now i cant [[yet]] find one of those tee [[sweaters]] :( --------------------------------------------- Result 4153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Having just [[seen]] the A [[Perfect]] [[Spy]] mini series in one go, one can do [[nothing]] but doff one's hat - a [[pure]] [[masterpiece]], which [[compared]] to the other [[Le]] Carré minis about Smiley, has [[quite]] [[different]] [[qualities]].

[[In]] the minis about Smiley, it is Alex Guiness, as Smiley, who [[steals]] the [[show]] - the rest of the actors just [[support]] him, one can say.

Here it is ensemble and [[story]] that's [[important]], as the lead actor, [[played]] [[excellently]] by [[Peter]] Egan in the [[final]] episodes, isn't charismatic at all.

Egan just plays a [[guy]] [[called]] Magnus Pym, who by lying, being [[devious]] and telling people what they [[like]] to [[hear]], is very well [[liked]] by [[everyone]], [[big]] and small. The only one who [[seems]] to [[understand]] his [[inner]] self is [[Alex]], his [[Czech]] handler.

Never have the machinery [[behind]] a [[spy]], and/or traitor, been [[told]] better! [[After]] having followed his [[life]] from a very [[young]] age we [[fully]] [[understand]] what it is that makes it [[possible]] to [[turn]] him into a traitor. His [[ability]] to [[lie]] and [[fake]] everything is what makes him into 'a perfect spy', as his [[Czech]] handler [[calls]] him.

And, by following his [[life]], we [[fully]] [[understand]] how [[difficult]] it is to [[get]] back to the straight and narrow [[path]], once you've [[veered]] off it. He trundles on, [[even]] if he never [[get]] [[anything]] economic out of it, except [[promotion]] by his MI5 [[spy]] [[masters]]. Everyone's happy, as long as the flow of [[faked]] [[information]] [[continues]]!

Magnus's father, [[played]] [[wonderfully]] by [[Ray]] McAnally, is a no-good con-man, who [[always]] [[dreams]] up [[schemes]] to con people out of their money. [[In]] [[later]] [[years]] it is his son who has to [[bail]] him out, again and again. But by the [[example]] set by his dad and uncle, who takes over as guardian when his [[father]] goes to prison, and his [[mom]] is [[sent]] off to an asylum, Magnus [[quickly]] [[learns]] early that lying is the [[way]] of surviving, not [[telling]] the truth. [[At]] first he overdoes it a [[bit]], but [[quickly]] [[learn]] to [[tell]] the right lies, and to be [[constant]], not [[changing]] the [[stories]] from time to time that he tell those who want to listen about himself and his dad.

His Czech handler Alex, expertly played by Rüdiger Weigang, creates, with the help of Magnus, a network of non-existing informants, which supplies the British MI5 with fake information for years, and years, just as the British did with the German spies that were active in the UK before and during the war - they kept on sending fake information to Das Vaterland long after the agents themselves had been turned, liquidated or simply been replaced by MI5 men.

The young lads who play Magnus in younger years does it wonderfully, and most of them are more charismatic than the older, little more cynic, and tired, Pym, played by Egan. But you buy the difference easily, as that is often the way we change through life, from enthusiasm to sorrow, or indifference.

Indeed well worth the money! Having just [[noticed]] the A [[Irreproachable]] [[Hyena]] mini series in one go, one can do [[anything]] but doff one's hat - a [[sheer]] [[centerpiece]], which [[likened]] to the other [[Lai]] Carré minis about Smiley, has [[rather]] [[varying]] [[qualifications]].

[[Onto]] the minis about Smiley, it is Alex Guiness, as Smiley, who [[itches]] the [[showings]] - the rest of the actors just [[assists]] him, one can say.

Here it is ensemble and [[history]] that's [[sizable]], as the lead actor, [[done]] [[beautifully]] by [[Pieter]] Egan in the [[last]] episodes, isn't charismatic at all.

Egan just plays a [[guys]] [[termed]] Magnus Pym, who by lying, being [[wily]] and telling people what they [[loves]] to [[overheard]], is very well [[wished]] by [[somebody]], [[large]] and small. The only one who [[appears]] to [[realise]] his [[indoor]] self is [[Allie]], his [[Czechoslovak]] handler.

Never have the machinery [[backside]] a [[spying]], and/or traitor, been [[said]] better! [[Upon]] having followed his [[vie]] from a very [[youths]] age we [[altogether]] [[fathom]] what it is that makes it [[probable]] to [[converting]] him into a traitor. His [[abilities]] to [[lying]] and [[fraudulent]] everything is what makes him into 'a perfect spy', as his [[Czechoslovak]] handler [[asks]] him.

And, by following his [[living]], we [[entirely]] [[realise]] how [[problematic]] it is to [[obtain]] back to the straight and narrow [[routes]], once you've [[deviated]] off it. He trundles on, [[yet]] if he never [[obtain]] [[something]] economic out of it, except [[promote]] by his MI5 [[espionage]] [[master]]. Everyone's happy, as long as the flow of [[falsified]] [[info]] [[persisted]]!

Magnus's father, [[effected]] [[admirably]] by [[Gleam]] McAnally, is a no-good con-man, who [[permanently]] [[dreaming]] up [[systems]] to con people out of their money. [[Across]] [[then]] [[ages]] it is his son who has to [[surety]] him out, again and again. But by the [[case]] set by his dad and uncle, who takes over as guardian when his [[fathers]] goes to prison, and his [[mum]] is [[expedition]] off to an asylum, Magnus [[urgently]] [[learn]] early that lying is the [[camino]] of surviving, not [[eloquent]] the truth. [[Under]] first he overdoes it a [[bite]], but [[promptly]] [[learnt]] to [[say]] the right lies, and to be [[persistent]], not [[modifications]] the [[histories]] from time to time that he tell those who want to listen about himself and his dad.

His Czech handler Alex, expertly played by Rüdiger Weigang, creates, with the help of Magnus, a network of non-existing informants, which supplies the British MI5 with fake information for years, and years, just as the British did with the German spies that were active in the UK before and during the war - they kept on sending fake information to Das Vaterland long after the agents themselves had been turned, liquidated or simply been replaced by MI5 men.

The young lads who play Magnus in younger years does it wonderfully, and most of them are more charismatic than the older, little more cynic, and tired, Pym, played by Egan. But you buy the difference easily, as that is often the way we change through life, from enthusiasm to sorrow, or indifference.

Indeed well worth the money! --------------------------------------------- Result 4154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I was skimming over the list of films of [[Richard]] Burton when I [[came]] to this title that I recall vividly from when I first saw it on cable in 1982. I remember dialogue from Tatum O'Neal that was just amazingly [[bad]]. I remember Richard Burton's character looking so hopelessly lost, and then remembering how his motivations didn't translate to me. In short, I remember "Circle of Two" because it was so phenomenally [[awful]].

This movie came out at a time when America was going through a rather disturbing period of fascination with unhealthy or skewed [[angles]] on teenage sexuality. Recall "The Blue Lagoon" (and other Brooke Shields annoyances), "Lipstick", "Little Darlings", "Beau Pere" and other films that just seemed to dwell on teens having sex, particularly with adults. As a teenager during this time, I found the obsession, combined with the sexual excesses of the 70's and 80's, made for a subconsciously unsettling environment in which to figure it all out, so to speak.

"Circle of Two" is not execrably acted or needlessly prurient, like "Blue Lagoon". In fact, it tackles the question of love between the young and the old in a brave, if totally failed, way. But [[honestly]], it is one of those films you will *never* see if you didn't see it on its first run because it was so [[truly]] [[awful]]. No one would want to have this [[garbage]] ever surface to be publicly distributed again. I was skimming over the list of films of [[Ritchie]] Burton when I [[became]] to this title that I recall vividly from when I first saw it on cable in 1982. I remember dialogue from Tatum O'Neal that was just amazingly [[unfavourable]]. I remember Richard Burton's character looking so hopelessly lost, and then remembering how his motivations didn't translate to me. In short, I remember "Circle of Two" because it was so phenomenally [[horrific]].

This movie came out at a time when America was going through a rather disturbing period of fascination with unhealthy or skewed [[corners]] on teenage sexuality. Recall "The Blue Lagoon" (and other Brooke Shields annoyances), "Lipstick", "Little Darlings", "Beau Pere" and other films that just seemed to dwell on teens having sex, particularly with adults. As a teenager during this time, I found the obsession, combined with the sexual excesses of the 70's and 80's, made for a subconsciously unsettling environment in which to figure it all out, so to speak.

"Circle of Two" is not execrably acted or needlessly prurient, like "Blue Lagoon". In fact, it tackles the question of love between the young and the old in a brave, if totally failed, way. But [[genuinely]], it is one of those films you will *never* see if you didn't see it on its first run because it was so [[really]] [[abhorrent]]. No one would want to have this [[refuse]] ever surface to be publicly distributed again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie will go down down in history as one of the greats, right along side of Citizen Kane, Casablanca, and On The Waterfront. Someone please convince Leno to do a sequel! Leno and Morita are a comedy duo, the likes of which haven't been seen since Abbot and Costello. The evil that emanates from Chris Sarandon, Tom Noonan, and Randall "Tex" Cobb will give you the chills. Dingman's character as the buffoonish oaf hearkens back to the days of Shakespeare's comedies. And the climax. My goodness, the climax. I won't ruin it for you, but it makes the explosion of the Death Star pale in comparison. If you can track down this hard-to-find gem, do yourself and your family a favor and buy it immediately. I'm still holding out hope for a special edition DVD one of these days. --------------------------------------------- Result 4156 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Emma is a true romance. If you love the soppy stuff, charged with wit and folly, you will love this movie! Its true to the novel, which is very important, with a few twists added for pleasure. Gwen is not one of my fave actreesess but she does justice to a role that required everything that she had to offer in spades. She shines in a role i think no other actress could have done proper justice to.

Jeremy Northam, as the hero. how shocked are you? I never looked upon him as overtly handsome but heck! What the right role can do for you! He looks so good as the sensible, regal Mr. K, that i am literally looking at him in a new light. He makes and excellent romantic lead. The charm and character that he brings to his role is wonderful!

Ewan McGregor, Greta Sacchi brings in the rest. a good cast. A good movie. If you are a fan of Jane Austen, see this movie, along with Pride and Prejudice - AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, buy the books. It enhances the movie to heights that are extraordinary --------------------------------------------- Result 4157 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Recap]]: Ron is about to marry Mel. They are deeply and love and certain they are perfect for each other even though they met just a few months ago. Todd, Ron's brother in [[law]] to be is not so happy. He is [[afraid]] the marriage is a threat to his cushy [[job]] in the family business and decides to arrange Ron's [[bachelor]] party. But his [[real]] [[plan]] is to put Ron in a [[compromising]] situation, get [[evidence]] and break Ron and Mel up.

Comments: Supposed to be a sequel to a [[comedy]] [[classic]] but it isn't [[funny]] at all. It is mostly a pubertal [[show]] and a juvenile [[excuse]] to [[show]] scantily clad [[women]]. [[Actually]], in a way, it is [[almost]] [[impressive]] have [[many]] you can put in there, because they are everywhere. [[Unfortunately]] that is [[also]] one of the [[signs]] of a [[movie]] that can't [[support]] itself. It [[simply]] isn't good enough.

It has three redeeming [[points]] [[though]], or actually three actors that is worth a [[better]] [[script]] than this. It is lead actor Josh [[Cooke]] who actually manages to [[give]] an [[impression]] of some common sense. Sara [[Foster]] I know has more talent than to do movies like this, and Emanuelle Vaugier [[seem]] to have a lot more talent than this [[movie]].

What is [[suspiciously]] absent are [[good]] [[jokes]]. Actually, [[bad]] [[jokes]] are rather [[scarce]] too. It just isn't [[funny]].

3/10 [[Summarize]]: Ron is about to marry Mel. They are deeply and love and certain they are perfect for each other even though they met just a few months ago. Todd, Ron's brother in [[act]] to be is not so happy. He is [[scare]] the marriage is a threat to his cushy [[jobs]] in the family business and decides to arrange Ron's [[baccalaureate]] party. But his [[veritable]] [[programmes]] is to put Ron in a [[risking]] situation, get [[testimony]] and break Ron and Mel up.

Comments: Supposed to be a sequel to a [[humor]] [[classical]] but it isn't [[comical]] at all. It is mostly a pubertal [[exposition]] and a juvenile [[apologies]] to [[exposition]] scantily clad [[wife]]. [[Indeed]], in a way, it is [[approximately]] [[terrific]] have [[various]] you can put in there, because they are everywhere. [[Unhappily]] that is [[moreover]] one of the [[signalling]] of a [[filmmaking]] that can't [[helped]] itself. It [[mere]] isn't good enough.

It has three redeeming [[dot]] [[while]], or actually three actors that is worth a [[optimum]] [[screenplay]] than this. It is lead actor Josh [[Cook]] who actually manages to [[lend]] an [[feeling]] of some common sense. Sara [[Stimulate]] I know has more talent than to do movies like this, and Emanuelle Vaugier [[seems]] to have a lot more talent than this [[cinema]].

What is [[curiously]] absent are [[alright]] [[gags]]. Actually, [[negative]] [[gags]] are rather [[rare]] too. It just isn't [[comical]].

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

I recently viewed this atrocity in my film program, and I thought it was awful, as I said in my tagline, it was pretentious, trite, petty and phenomenally self-important.

I consider myself a fan of film, and all the things that film has to offer. If I want to watch a documentary on the Cannes Festival, I will watch A&E....and they would probably be alot more objective about it.

I dont recommend it, period.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I originally saw this film years ago during Cinemax Friday after dark series(back when the cable box was built like a keyboard),and it intrigued me. Even though there is a pointless aspect to the film it is well acted.The performances of Depardieu & Dewaere are very enjoyable.They have a good chemistry together & Miou-Miou makes a pink fur look breathtaking.A movie like this probably wouldn't be made in these politically correct times(at least not in the US), since it seems to sensationalize things like violence,robbery,& casual sex. This movie proves that with a talented cast & also talented directing a good movie is a good movie no matter the subject.It saddened me to find out Patrick Dewaere committed suicide & in the near future I,ll will check him out with Depardieu & Miou-Miou in Get Out Your Hankerchief. --------------------------------------------- Result 4160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The makers have chosen the best people for the job, and set the scene wonderfully. Every interior is full of detail that tells you all about the people who live in it. Whether the period is the 20s (the first story), the present (ie 1950) for the middle story, or the 1910s (the last), costumes and settings are lovingly observed and created. I love the fussy costumes of the two old ladies in the sanatorium - exquisite lace overlaid by the finest Shetland shawls. Roland Culver as Ashenden is very appealing, but never mind the soppy young lovers, it's Raymond Huntley as the man who resents his wife's health and independence who harrows our emotions. He usually played comical, pompous types, but here he is subtle and convincing and very impressive. The China Seas (great 30s film starring Gable and Harlow) stole the plot from the Mr Know All episode (and also nicked a story by Kipling). I wish we saw more of Naunton Wayne as the jealous husband - though he has a good moment looking melancholy in a Mexican hat. I love that posh bird who plays his wife, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 4161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[hated]] the [[way]] Ms. Perez portrayed Puerto Ricans! We are not all ghetto - and we do speak Spanish- not Puerto Rican! I can not speak for the [[uneducated]] persons you have run into. But our language is intact, our island is our pride. Puerto Rico is better off economically than any other Caribbean island! I'm glad we are not like Cuba, Dominican Republic or Haiti, free from American influence? Free in [[true]] [[poverty]], not the U.S. standard of poverty. We are not [[victims]] we are resilient, humble,honest and intelligent people. Our ancestry does include strong African roots, but not "black" roots- I have nothing in common with Black Americans 9do the research).

The analogy between Pedro Albizu, Che Guevarra and Martin L. King could not be more off the mark.

MLK was a great hero a true revolutionary- an honest man who saw a day when we would all be free.

Che Guevarra helped Castro create the Cuba that is today, is that why boat fulls of Cubans risk their lives to come to America- because Che made such a better place for them? You had a great, awesome, bright idea but you politicized it too much. We have so many things to be proud of as a people - don't bring shame to our people by victimizing us. I am not a Nuyorican and perhaps that is why I can't share your views. I am Puerto Rican, I speak Spanish, I am not a victim and I have been able to accomplish many of my goals in America. If there is a part 2 in the future - less politics more history more stories of triumph- there are many.

Damaris Maldonado I [[abhor]] the [[camino]] Ms. Perez portrayed Puerto Ricans! We are not all ghetto - and we do speak Spanish- not Puerto Rican! I can not speak for the [[unskilled]] persons you have run into. But our language is intact, our island is our pride. Puerto Rico is better off economically than any other Caribbean island! I'm glad we are not like Cuba, Dominican Republic or Haiti, free from American influence? Free in [[veritable]] [[destitution]], not the U.S. standard of poverty. We are not [[fatalities]] we are resilient, humble,honest and intelligent people. Our ancestry does include strong African roots, but not "black" roots- I have nothing in common with Black Americans 9do the research).

The analogy between Pedro Albizu, Che Guevarra and Martin L. King could not be more off the mark.

MLK was a great hero a true revolutionary- an honest man who saw a day when we would all be free.

Che Guevarra helped Castro create the Cuba that is today, is that why boat fulls of Cubans risk their lives to come to America- because Che made such a better place for them? You had a great, awesome, bright idea but you politicized it too much. We have so many things to be proud of as a people - don't bring shame to our people by victimizing us. I am not a Nuyorican and perhaps that is why I can't share your views. I am Puerto Rican, I speak Spanish, I am not a victim and I have been able to accomplish many of my goals in America. If there is a part 2 in the future - less politics more history more stories of triumph- there are many.

Damaris Maldonado --------------------------------------------- Result 4162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This was a [[great]] [[book]] and the [[possibilities]] for a truly great film were definitely there. But the casting decisions completely [[wrecked]] the movie. Hanks is a great [[actor]] to be sure, but [[lacks]] the smarmy, [[morally]] ambivalent [[characteristics]] [[needed]] for the lead role. Jeff Daniels would have been my choice.

Putting Melanie Griffiths in, for eye candy reasons, is understandable, but again, she did not portray the depth or ambivalence, so need to pull this off.

This movie is a great [[example]] of how every decision, even those early on in the movie production can make or break a file. This was a [[whopping]] [[ledger]] and the [[potentialities]] for a truly great film were definitely there. But the casting decisions completely [[obliterated]] the movie. Hanks is a great [[protagonist]] to be sure, but [[absence]] the smarmy, [[ethically]] ambivalent [[idiosyncrasies]] [[need]] for the lead role. Jeff Daniels would have been my choice.

Putting Melanie Griffiths in, for eye candy reasons, is understandable, but again, she did not portray the depth or ambivalence, so need to pull this off.

This movie is a great [[case]] of how every decision, even those early on in the movie production can make or break a file. --------------------------------------------- Result 4163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It seems like this is the only film that John Saxon ever directed, and that he had the good sense to stop after that and stay in front of the camera. This movie is a dog, from start to finish, and it's dull and wooden with nothing much going for it. A Viet Nam war hero takes a job working for a mob boss, gets a bit too friendly with the wife and then the wife is killed by the mob boss himself & the war hero framed and sent to prison, death row, specifically. Now, this particular prison has been experimenting on inmates and is testing some formula that will turn men into the ultimate killing machine (a zombie). Of course, everything goes wrong and then there's all these infected people trapped in the prison, some of whom are turning into zombies and the rest who suddenly just don't want to be there anymore. This just goes on and on and on with nothing particularly much to show or say for itself, and I stopped it before the end, which seemed like it was coming a few times but no, it was apparently only getting set to take off on a different and equally dull path. If one watched to the end they may well become a zombie themselves, so don't risk it. 2 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] When childhood [[memory]] [[tells]] you this was a [[scary]] movie; it's [[touch]] and [[go]] whether you should [[revisit]] it. Anyway, I remembered a scary scene [[involving]] a [[homeless]] person and a cool villain [[played]] by [[Jeff]] Kober.

"The First Power" is not a very [[good]] movie, sad to say. It's chock full of those cop clichés and a very poor [[script]] with holes a truck [[could]] [[drive]] through (along with [[countless]] convenient "twists" that help the [[story]] [[run]] along). [[Lou]] Diamond Phillips is the over-confident [[bad]] ass cop who [[sends]] baddie serial [[killer]] Kober to the gas [[chamber]] only to [[find]] out he was a minion of [[Satan]] himself and now has the power of [[resurrection]] along with the power of possessing [[every]] weak [[minded]] [[person]] who he comes across. Through in the [[mix]] a very poorly [[realized]] [[psychic]] who [[helps]] with the [[case]].

Ahhh, this is trash. But [[enjoyable]] as such, [[especially]] if you have fond [[memories]] of it. It [[scared]] me as a [[kid]] and that scene with the homeless [[person]] is [[still]] pretty [[good]]. As for any [[kind]] of logic here; [[forget]] it, just about [[every]] [[scenario]] is thrown in for good [[measure]] and you end up with a cross between a [[Steven]] Segal [[action]] [[flick]] and a 70's demonic [[flick]]. And who on [[earth]] [[thought]] it was a good [[idea]] to [[cast]] Lou Diamond Phillips in the lead here? [[Needless]] to say he's not [[convincing]] at all but he [[tries]] his best and I've never had the [[problem]] with the [[guy]] so many reviewers here [[seem]] to have. As for [[Tracy]] [[Griffith]] as the psychic, the [[less]] [[said]] the better. But Kober is [[pretty]] [[good]] as the killer; [[always]] [[liked]] that [[actor]].

"The First Power" may be just what the doctor [[ordered]] after a [[hard]] day's [[work]] and a "brain switch-off" is needed. [[Beer]] will most [[likely]] [[enhance]] the [[viewing]] [[experience]] and I'll definitely have loads of it the next time I [[give]] this movie a spin. All in all; not a good [[flick]] but a [[somewhat]] guilty pleasure for nostalgic fans who were [[easily]] scared as kids. "See you [[around]], buddy boy"! When childhood [[memories]] [[told]] you this was a [[terrifying]] movie; it's [[touches]] and [[going]] whether you should [[reevaluate]] it. Anyway, I remembered a scary scene [[involve]] a [[sleepers]] person and a cool villain [[accomplished]] by [[Geoff]] Kober.

"The First Power" is not a very [[buena]] movie, sad to say. It's chock full of those cop clichés and a very poor [[hyphen]] with holes a truck [[did]] [[driving]] through (along with [[myriad]] convenient "twists" that help the [[storytelling]] [[running]] along). [[Lew]] Diamond Phillips is the over-confident [[naughty]] ass cop who [[dispatched]] baddie serial [[slayer]] Kober to the gas [[bedroom]] only to [[finds]] out he was a minion of [[Lucifer]] himself and now has the power of [[renaissance]] along with the power of possessing [[all]] weak [[tilted]] [[persona]] who he comes across. Through in the [[mixes]] a very poorly [[performed]] [[devin]] who [[helped]] with the [[lawsuit]].

Ahhh, this is trash. But [[pleasurable]] as such, [[predominantly]] if you have fond [[memory]] of it. It [[startled]] me as a [[petit]] and that scene with the homeless [[persona]] is [[again]] pretty [[alright]]. As for any [[genre]] of logic here; [[overlook]] it, just about [[all]] [[scenarios]] is thrown in for good [[measures]] and you end up with a cross between a [[Stevens]] Segal [[actions]] [[movie]] and a 70's demonic [[movie]]. And who on [[land]] [[think]] it was a good [[concept]] to [[casting]] Lou Diamond Phillips in the lead here? [[Fruitless]] to say he's not [[compelling]] at all but he [[seeks]] his best and I've never had the [[difficulty]] with the [[dude]] so many reviewers here [[appears]] to have. As for [[Pauline]] [[Griffiths]] as the psychic, the [[fewer]] [[say]] the better. But Kober is [[quite]] [[alright]] as the killer; [[incessantly]] [[enjoyed]] that [[actress]].

"The First Power" may be just what the doctor [[commanded]] after a [[tough]] day's [[collaboration]] and a "brain switch-off" is needed. [[Casket]] will most [[apt]] [[improves]] the [[opinion]] [[experiences]] and I'll definitely have loads of it the next time I [[lend]] this movie a spin. All in all; not a good [[film]] but a [[rather]] guilty pleasure for nostalgic fans who were [[comfortably]] scared as kids. "See you [[throughout]], buddy boy"! --------------------------------------------- Result 4165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Does anyone else cry tears of joy when they watch this film? I LOVE it! One of my Top 10 films of all time. It just makes me feel good. I watch the closing production number with all the cast members over and over and over!!! Bebe Benson (Michelle Johnston) is THE babe of the film, IMHO! I never saw the play but I get angry when I read reviews that say the play was better than the film. The two are like apples and oranges. The film making process will seldom deliver a finished product that is faithful to the original work. I believe it's only due to the fear of public alienation that many well known works adapted to the screen aren't changed more than they are. This is a very good film, it is very satisfying. That's all you need to know! --------------------------------------------- Result 4166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[previously]] thought that this [[film]] was the lamest of the Muppet films. I would like now to retract that statement. In my opinion now, the lamest MUppet film was the TV [[movie]] IT'S A VERY MERRY MUPPET Christmas, am IT'S A [[WONDERFUL]] LIFE rip off that was truly dreadful. MUPPETS TAKE MANHATTAN is nothing special, but [[miles]] more [[enjoyable]] than MERRY MUPPET Christmas.

The best songs are that 'You Can't Take No For An Answer' song, the one the Muppet Babies sing and the songs for the big finale itself. As I loved the Muppet Babies TV show, I loved the Muppet Babies sequence here (I'm told that it was what inspired the Muppet Babies show)

The MANHATTAN MELODIES show itself was the real showstopper, with Muppets from Sesame Street even appearing for the wedding. As Kermit puts it in his final line 'What better way could anything end?'. But I wish that what was between the beginning and end was a bit more entertaining. There are cute cameos from Brooke Shields and Gregory Hines and a great dance sequence from Rizzo and the Rats (choreographed by the late, great Jim Henson himself) and the film certainly entertains. I must state though that MUPPET MOVIE, GREAT MUPPET CAPER and MUPPET Christmas CAROL are the three defininitive MUppet movies. I [[ago]] thought that this [[cinema]] was the lamest of the Muppet films. I would like now to retract that statement. In my opinion now, the lamest MUppet film was the TV [[cinematography]] IT'S A VERY MERRY MUPPET Christmas, am IT'S A [[WONDROUS]] LIFE rip off that was truly dreadful. MUPPETS TAKE MANHATTAN is nothing special, but [[klicks]] more [[nice]] than MERRY MUPPET Christmas.

The best songs are that 'You Can't Take No For An Answer' song, the one the Muppet Babies sing and the songs for the big finale itself. As I loved the Muppet Babies TV show, I loved the Muppet Babies sequence here (I'm told that it was what inspired the Muppet Babies show)

The MANHATTAN MELODIES show itself was the real showstopper, with Muppets from Sesame Street even appearing for the wedding. As Kermit puts it in his final line 'What better way could anything end?'. But I wish that what was between the beginning and end was a bit more entertaining. There are cute cameos from Brooke Shields and Gregory Hines and a great dance sequence from Rizzo and the Rats (choreographed by the late, great Jim Henson himself) and the film certainly entertains. I must state though that MUPPET MOVIE, GREAT MUPPET CAPER and MUPPET Christmas CAROL are the three defininitive MUppet movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I cant believe some people actually like this. Yet still call themselves Batman fans. Even going as far as to say it's better than BTAS. Which it's not. It should be plagiarism for them to use Batman's name for this piece of crap. It's not Batman.

The whole premise of the show is ''if you cant defeat someone get a bigger weapon to help you'' Batman isn't all about weapons. He uses his batarang and grappling hook and Batmobile, thats it. He doesn't come up with some new ingenious tech every time he cant beat someone. I don't know where the hell they got the idea for a Batbot. or whatever. They have ruined all the villains. Mr. Freeze has gone from a sympathetic scientist to a petty criminal who fell in some cryofreezing thing. Catwoman is now a 40 or 50 year old woman with a dumb costume. Penguin is now a ninja with a 50 ft. tall top hat. The Ventriloquist is now called Scarface making the Dummy the whole centerpiece for the character. They even got a dumb idea to make him a giant! wtf? and the two worst character changes are that of The Joker and Riddler. they have changed Riddler to a Gothic/retro teenage freak. and The Joker to an acrobat with dreads. He looks like a bob Marley wannabe. they have completely and utterly ruined batman even moreso than B&R did! i wish i could meet the creators and or writers and animators of this show so i could whack them in the head with a metal baseball bat. --------------------------------------------- Result 4168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Rea, Sutherland, DeMunn, and von Sydow (in a small role) are all [[brilliant]] in their performances. Sutherland is particularly adept at this sort of role, where he must portray a character whose morality is, at first, uncertain to the [[audience]]. As is so [[often]] the [[case]] with Sutherland's characters, we [[must]] [[ask]] "is he a villian [in this [[case]], a [[minor]] one], or a hero?"

This is a [[disturbing]] story, [[intelligently]] [[told]], about the incompetence and [[fearful]] [[bureaucracy]] in the [[old]] Soviet Union that impeded the [[efforts]] of [[extremely]] competent people. As Sutherland's [[character]] wryly [[notes]], "The measure of a bureaucracy is its [[ability]] not to [[make]] [[special]] [[exceptions]]". The "[[committee]] [[meeting]]" (between Rea and Sutherland's [[characters]]) after perestroika is enforced, with its revelations, has [[enormous]] [[emotional]] [[impact]]. You can feel the [[suffering]] of the [[dedicated]] people who [[labored]] in that system.

The handful of [[dramatic]] scenes [[portraying]] victims' [[family]] [[members]] [[adds]] [[emotional]] [[resonance]] to the [[impact]] of the [[story]]. This is [[seldom]] a [[feature]] of a film with this sickening subject matter, but effectively [[reminds]] us that the victims had lives, and were [[loved]].

This is a [[sad]], but very [[important]] film, which deserved its [[showcase]] on Canada's History Television. Rea, Sutherland, DeMunn, and von Sydow (in a small role) are all [[shiny]] in their performances. Sutherland is particularly adept at this sort of role, where he must portray a character whose morality is, at first, uncertain to the [[viewers]]. As is so [[generally]] the [[cases]] with Sutherland's characters, we [[gotta]] [[wondering]] "is he a villian [in this [[lawsuits]], a [[small]] one], or a hero?"

This is a [[disquieting]] story, [[rationally]] [[said]], about the incompetence and [[apprehensive]] [[paperwork]] in the [[former]] Soviet Union that impeded the [[activities]] of [[critically]] competent people. As Sutherland's [[characters]] wryly [[memo]], "The measure of a bureaucracy is its [[competency]] not to [[deliver]] [[specially]] [[dispensations]]". The "[[commitee]] [[meetings]]" (between Rea and Sutherland's [[features]]) after perestroika is enforced, with its revelations, has [[sizable]] [[sentimental]] [[repercussions]]. You can feel the [[distress]] of the [[specialised]] people who [[laboured]] in that system.

The handful of [[noteworthy]] scenes [[outlining]] victims' [[families]] [[member]] [[adding]] [[sentimental]] [[resonant]] to the [[effects]] of the [[conte]]. This is [[rarely]] a [[featuring]] of a film with this sickening subject matter, but effectively [[recalls]] us that the victims had lives, and were [[liked]].

This is a [[unlucky]], but very [[principal]] film, which deserved its [[demonstrating]] on Canada's History Television. --------------------------------------------- Result 4169 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I had no [[idea]] what the film is about before I [[saw]] it because Tashan only had teaser trailers while it was being promoted. So I asked my friends if they knew anything about it and they said that "It is the directorial [[debut]] of Vijay Krishna Acharya who wrote the screenplays for Dhoom 1 & 2 and Saif Ali Khan's son Ibrahim makes his debut in the film by playing him as a child in his flashback".

After watching it, I understood that why their wasn't a proper trailer because there wasn't anything in the film to [[show]]. The story was [[extremely]] dum and even a 10 year old child can come up with a [[better]] story-line. There was [[hardly]] any [[action]] and the camera shook at [[every]] possible angle there is and it's difficult to [[figure]] out that who is [[killing]] who. [[Also]] the [[action]] was [[daft]] & [[unrealistic]] [[e]].g. 1 [[man]] with a [[handgun]] managed to [[kill]] about 100 [[men]] with machine [[guns]].

While I was watching Tashan it [[reminded]] me of 3 films:

Sin [[City]]: During the [[opening]] credits.

Koyla: Anil Kapoor's [[terrible]] [[English]] like Amrish Puri in Koyla.

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom: The outrageously [[ridiculous]] jokes that are not [[even]] a jot [[funny]].

I [[also]] [[heard]] the budget is 40 crores which is the same [[amount]] as Dhoom 2 and I don't know where all the [[money]] went to. Anyway if you did not like Dhoom 2 then there is [[absolutely]] no [[chance]] that you will [[like]] Tashan. Race was [[hot]] on heels and that is a million times [[better]].

The only 2 [[good]] [[songs]] are Dil Haara & Challiya and both songs are [[shot]] in [[Greece]] at [[good]] [[locations]] but what is the use of it in a rubbish [[film]]? Even Anil Kapoor's [[terrible]] [[English]] couldn't [[save]] this discomfiture. I had no [[thoughts]] what the film is about before I [[sawthe]] it because Tashan only had teaser trailers while it was being promoted. So I asked my friends if they knew anything about it and they said that "It is the directorial [[infancy]] of Vijay Krishna Acharya who wrote the screenplays for Dhoom 1 & 2 and Saif Ali Khan's son Ibrahim makes his debut in the film by playing him as a child in his flashback".

After watching it, I understood that why their wasn't a proper trailer because there wasn't anything in the film to [[exhibitions]]. The story was [[unimaginably]] dum and even a 10 year old child can come up with a [[optimum]] story-line. There was [[almost]] any [[measures]] and the camera shook at [[each]] possible angle there is and it's difficult to [[silhouette]] out that who is [[murdering]] who. [[Similarly]] the [[measures]] was [[brainless]] & [[impractical]] [[f]].g. 1 [[males]] with a [[revolver]] managed to [[murder]] about 100 [[males]] with machine [[firearm]].

While I was watching Tashan it [[recall]] me of 3 films:

Sin [[Ville]]: During the [[initiation]] credits.

Koyla: Anil Kapoor's [[scary]] [[Frenchman]] like Amrish Puri in Koyla.

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom: The outrageously [[absurd]] jokes that are not [[yet]] a jot [[hilarious]].

I [[further]] [[audition]] the budget is 40 crores which is the same [[sums]] as Dhoom 2 and I don't know where all the [[cash]] went to. Anyway if you did not like Dhoom 2 then there is [[totally]] no [[possibility]] that you will [[fond]] Tashan. Race was [[sexy]] on heels and that is a million times [[best]].

The only 2 [[alright]] [[hymns]] are Dil Haara & Challiya and both songs are [[offed]] in [[Athens]] at [[alright]] [[site]] but what is the use of it in a rubbish [[filmmaking]]? Even Anil Kapoor's [[abysmal]] [[Francais]] couldn't [[economize]] this discomfiture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4170 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] [[Strange]], almost all [[reviewers]] are [[highly]] positive about this [[movie]]. Is it because it's from 1975 and has Chamberlain and Curtis in it and [[therefore]] forgive the by [[times]] very [[bad]] acting and [[childish]] [[ways]] of storytelling?

[[Maybe]] it's because some people get sentimental about this film because they have read the book? (I have not read the book, but I don't think that's a problem, film makers never presume that the viewers have read the book).

Or is it because I am [[subconsciously]] [[irritated]] about the fact that English-speaking actors try to behave as their French counterparts? [[Inquisitive]], almost all [[testers]] are [[immensely]] positive about this [[filmmaking]]. Is it because it's from 1975 and has Chamberlain and Curtis in it and [[so]] forgive the by [[dates]] very [[unfavourable]] acting and [[boyish]] [[avenues]] of storytelling?

[[Potentially]] it's because some people get sentimental about this film because they have read the book? (I have not read the book, but I don't think that's a problem, film makers never presume that the viewers have read the book).

Or is it because I am [[involuntarily]] [[irked]] about the fact that English-speaking actors try to behave as their French counterparts? --------------------------------------------- Result 4171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I stole this movie when I was a freshmen in college. I've tried to watch it three times, the second two because friends wanted to see it. "Sweet, Adam Sandler, I've never heard of this movie, but since he's so funny its gotta be funny." Wrong! I can't make myself watch this pile of crap after the dream boxing match/insult war, where burning the guy with a good zinger causes your opponent physical pain. You would think that terrible comedy hurting you is ridiculous, but after watching this you'll know its true. This movie isn't worth the price I paid for it. I've watched a ton of Steven segal movies, and I've even watched Crossroads twice... but I still couldn't watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4172 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie must have been the absolute worst movie i have ever seen. My sister and her boyfriend went to rent Zodiac (2007) and got this one by accident. thought it was a joke before the actual movie. this was terrible i was waiting for it to get scary and it never did. this movie had not actual facts about the real Zodiac killer. The filmmakers clearly didn't even bother to research anything on the killings... they only liked the name... so they decided to write a script about nothing true to its name. I am upset i didn't realize it wasn't the movie sooner. I try to like something out of every movie, i don't hate movies... ever... except this one. If you could have given it no stars, i definitely would have. 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] And a few more "no"s on [[top]] of that. Voodoo Academy is, without a [[doubt]], the [[least]] ambitious [[film]] of all [[time]]. What [[exactly]] is it [[trying]] to do? [[Tell]] a [[story]]? [[Obviously]] not; as has been [[pointed]] out, most of it's just barely-legal [[guys]] [[rubbing]] themselves. [[Could]] it, then, be an [[attempt]] at subversive homoeroticism? Well, maybe, if not for the fact it never ever ever goes beyond the most [[innocuous]] and nonthreatening [[forms]] of [[male]] contact. (Which is, to the delight of none, repeated about eighty thousand times.) Well, it is sort of a [[horror]] [[movie]]; is it [[trying]] to [[scare]] us? Not unless the [[director]] meant to do so through the [[utter]] [[tedium]] and vacuousness of his "[[work]]."

Never in my [[life]] have I [[enjoyed]] a [[movie]] less. This is the most [[boring]] and [[unnecessary]] [[thing]] I've ever [[seen]]. It's like Voodoo Academy [[takes]] the [[genres]] of horror, zombie, and gay [[movies]], [[puts]] them in a grinder, then [[runs]] them through a coffee filter--only instead of it being the [[kind]] of [[coffee]] [[filter]] that [[filters]] out coffee beans, it's the [[kind]] that [[takes]] out everything [[vital]], edgy, or in any [[way]] interesting. The [[result]] is 74 minutes of film every bit as exciting as a [[glass]] of warm water--only without the ability to rehydrate you after the 10-day gin [[binge]] that will [[inevitably]] [[befall]] you if you watch this [[abomination]] of human [[effort]]. And a few more "no"s on [[superior]] of that. Voodoo Academy is, without a [[duda]], the [[fewer]] ambitious [[filmmaking]] of all [[period]]. What [[accurately]] is it [[tempting]] to do? [[Say]] a [[saga]]? [[Naturally]] not; as has been [[stressed]] out, most of it's just barely-legal [[lads]] [[massage]] themselves. [[Would]] it, then, be an [[seek]] at subversive homoeroticism? Well, maybe, if not for the fact it never ever ever goes beyond the most [[harmless]] and nonthreatening [[form]] of [[men]] contact. (Which is, to the delight of none, repeated about eighty thousand times.) Well, it is sort of a [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]]; is it [[tempting]] to [[fright]] us? Not unless the [[superintendent]] meant to do so through the [[absolute]] [[drudgery]] and vacuousness of his "[[collaborate]]."

Never in my [[living]] have I [[loved]] a [[filmmaking]] less. This is the most [[dull]] and [[superfluous]] [[stuff]] I've ever [[noticed]]. It's like Voodoo Academy [[pick]] the [[genus]] of horror, zombie, and gay [[filmmaking]], [[poses]] them in a grinder, then [[manages]] them through a coffee filter--only instead of it being the [[genera]] of [[cafes]] [[filtering]] that [[filtering]] out coffee beans, it's the [[genre]] that [[pick]] out everything [[crucial]], edgy, or in any [[route]] interesting. The [[outcome]] is 74 minutes of film every bit as exciting as a [[luna]] of warm water--only without the ability to rehydrate you after the 10-day gin [[orgy]] that will [[invariably]] [[befell]] you if you watch this [[horror]] of human [[endeavors]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] SPOILERS CONTAINED [[IN]] ORDER TO MAKE A OBSERVATION.

Twenty years on from 1984, this [[film]] [[speaks]] [[loads]] about Prince's [[future]] in the music industry.

There is a scene that [[sums]] up Prince's musical output of the last 10 [[years]] [[perfectly]], which is if you [[took]] the [[best]] two [[songs]] off his last 10 [[albums]] you [[would]] have one [[fantastic]] [[album]]!

The scene plays like this. [[Prince]] [[runs]] off to his dressing [[room]] after playing one song and the [[owner]] of the club [[enters]] the dressing [[room]] to [[give]] Prince an earful about his fall from grace during the 90's and putting out [[albums]] that only the most hardcore fans would be able to tolerate and support his [[artistry]].

Club owner- "You're not packing them like you used to. The only person that digs your music is yourself!"

[[Spooky]] huh! How about the musical underscore which makes Prince even more evil when he smacks Apollonia to the ground in two [[separate]] scenes! It gave me [[chills]] that that was not the only scene women where [[mistreated]] in this film.

I'm all for the comedy sparring's between Morris Day and Jerome Benton as these two stole every scene they were in. But what was funny about throwing a woman into a trash can? That was plain nasty! The other nasty bit was the chalk outline of Prince's father on the floor thoughtfully provided by the Minnieapolis police, which causes Prince to go even more loony!! FANTASTIC!!

Purple Rain is an [[entertaining]] film overall, as it is the soundtrack of Prince songs that boosts it's value by 110%. But then again the film gives us another [[theory]] on Prince and his music, as the film tells us that Prince's biggest song of the film is written by Wendy, lisa and Princes wife beating musical father!

Are Prince and the filmmakers trying to tell us that Prince stole all his best songs from his father after finding his fathers music sheets of written songs? Maybe that is why Prince started to run out of steam during the 90's because he ran out of his fathers ideas???...........Hmmmm..... SPOILERS CONTAINED [[FOR]] ORDER TO MAKE A OBSERVATION.

Twenty years on from 1984, this [[cinematography]] [[discussing]] [[burdens]] about Prince's [[futur]] in the music industry.

There is a scene that [[moneys]] up Prince's musical output of the last 10 [[yrs]] [[entirely]], which is if you [[picked]] the [[better]] two [[anthems]] off his last 10 [[scrapbooks]] you [[ought]] have one [[admirable]] [[albums]]!

The scene plays like this. [[Prinz]] [[manages]] off to his dressing [[chamber]] after playing one song and the [[homeowner]] of the club [[penetrates]] the dressing [[salle]] to [[lend]] Prince an earful about his fall from grace during the 90's and putting out [[album]] that only the most hardcore fans would be able to tolerate and support his [[art]].

Club owner- "You're not packing them like you used to. The only person that digs your music is yourself!"

[[Horrendous]] huh! How about the musical underscore which makes Prince even more evil when he smacks Apollonia to the ground in two [[discrete]] scenes! It gave me [[willies]] that that was not the only scene women where [[maltreated]] in this film.

I'm all for the comedy sparring's between Morris Day and Jerome Benton as these two stole every scene they were in. But what was funny about throwing a woman into a trash can? That was plain nasty! The other nasty bit was the chalk outline of Prince's father on the floor thoughtfully provided by the Minnieapolis police, which causes Prince to go even more loony!! FANTASTIC!!

Purple Rain is an [[amusing]] film overall, as it is the soundtrack of Prince songs that boosts it's value by 110%. But then again the film gives us another [[doctrines]] on Prince and his music, as the film tells us that Prince's biggest song of the film is written by Wendy, lisa and Princes wife beating musical father!

Are Prince and the filmmakers trying to tell us that Prince stole all his best songs from his father after finding his fathers music sheets of written songs? Maybe that is why Prince started to run out of steam during the 90's because he ran out of his fathers ideas???...........Hmmmm..... --------------------------------------------- Result 4175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Well, I'll be honest: It is not exactly a Sholay. But you [[cant]] get a Sholay [[every]] [[week]]. [[In]] [[fact]], you could [[see]] distinct signatures of "not without my [[Daughter]]"(Sally Field, 1991) in this [[movie]]. [[However]], as most "inspired" [[movies]] go, this one was a well-inspired one, [[well]] handled and well [[done]]. [[Nana]] Patekar, as [[usual]], [[tends]] to [[overdo]] his hysterics, but all others are [[commendable]]. [[Specially]] so about Dipti [[Naval]]: [[Saw]] her after a [[long]] [[time]], but she hasn't [[lost]] any of her grace. [[In]] [[fact]], she has [[performed]] much better that when I [[last]] [[saw]] her. Another one of the Bollywood [[stars]] that [[seem]] to grow more [[beautiful]] as they age?

[[All]] in all, a nice watch. Well, I'll be honest: It is not exactly a Sholay. But you [[becuase]] get a Sholay [[all]] [[zhou]]. [[Across]] [[facto]], you could [[seeing]] distinct signatures of "not without my [[Girls]]"(Sally Field, 1991) in this [[film]]. [[Instead]], as most "inspired" [[kino]] go, this one was a well-inspired one, [[good]] handled and well [[completed]]. [[Hoochie]] Patekar, as [[habitual]], [[strives]] to [[underrate]] his hysterics, but all others are [[praiseworthy]]. [[Particularly]] so about Dipti [[Navy]]: [[Sawthe]] her after a [[longer]] [[moment]], but she hasn't [[forfeited]] any of her grace. [[Across]] [[facto]], she has [[realized]] much better that when I [[final]] [[watched]] her. Another one of the Bollywood [[star]] that [[appears]] to grow more [[wondrous]] as they age?

[[Everything]] in all, a nice watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 4176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The greatest sin in life is being dull, and this movie is crashingly boring. its funny, its left out of his "a life in film" documentary. He goes from a long piece on "Stardust Memories" and then fast forwards to "Zelig". This little piece of cubic zirconia just isn't worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 4177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] As [[drunken]] millionaire playboy Arthur Bach, Dudley Moore is perfect as a grown man trapped in childhood. As it turned out, the role fit Moore so [[perfectly]], it trapped him as an actor as well. [[Many]] disappointments soon followed (including this film's pale sequel), [[yet]] that doesn't [[diminish]] the [[charm]] or appeal of this picture, which is [[cleverly]] written and directed. Some of Moore's [[drunk]] scenes are forced, parts of the film are wobbly, but the cast performs with so much [[relish]] it's a [[difficult]] movie to resist. It has a very big [[heart]] and gives Oscar-winner John Gielgud a sly, dryly amusing role as Arthur's valet, Hobson; his relationship with Arthur is delicious and they have a miraculous rapport. Liza Minnelli (as a blue-collar love-interest) is sassy in a low-key and Moore is brash, but deft and lively; he never shook off the shadow of Arthur, but at least we have this document of a career high-point to cherish. *** from **** As [[plastered]] millionaire playboy Arthur Bach, Dudley Moore is perfect as a grown man trapped in childhood. As it turned out, the role fit Moore so [[altogether]], it trapped him as an actor as well. [[Various]] disappointments soon followed (including this film's pale sequel), [[again]] that doesn't [[lowered]] the [[amulet]] or appeal of this picture, which is [[sensibly]] written and directed. Some of Moore's [[drunkard]] scenes are forced, parts of the film are wobbly, but the cast performs with so much [[savour]] it's a [[troublesome]] movie to resist. It has a very big [[coeur]] and gives Oscar-winner John Gielgud a sly, dryly amusing role as Arthur's valet, Hobson; his relationship with Arthur is delicious and they have a miraculous rapport. Liza Minnelli (as a blue-collar love-interest) is sassy in a low-key and Moore is brash, but deft and lively; he never shook off the shadow of Arthur, but at least we have this document of a career high-point to cherish. *** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4178 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Where to begin? How best to describe just how awful this movie is???

Let's start with the campy hick humor. It isn't very funny. Add a bunch of musicians impersonating actors - Meat Loaf is horrible and Deborah Harry is even worse. Pity poor Art Carney, who should have known better than to do this movie.

And then there is the plot. A roadie whose life goal is to work an Alice Cooper show meets a girl whose life goal is to be a groupie for Alice Cooper. At least they get what they want...

And then, just when the movie should end, they can't come up with a more plausible last scene than a - well, I won't ruin it for you if you really want to see the movie.

There are certain actors that let you know that this is going to be a "B" movie or perhaps worse. Gailard Sartain is one of them for me - and he has a more prominent role. That's a sure sign that the movie probably won't be very good. If nothing else, the movie lives up to the low expectations - even exceeds them by being worse than poor.

Let's just say this. This is the movie against which all bad movies are compared. And none are worse than Roadie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4179 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] May I start off by saying that Casey Affleck is a very talented actor and I respect his work very much. I wish he was in more movies that showcased his talent. With this said, Soul Survivors was a very, very bad movie. Very bad.

I would have to say that I lay almost all the blame on the poor script. Affleck is a very talented actress, Wes Bentley had an outstanding performance in American Beauty, Melissa Sagemiller did well, and Eliza Dushku is currently the it girl in Hollywood. I don't think any of the actors really got into the script, and I understand why. To say that this movie belongs to the horror genre is an overstatement. It did have the twists and turns you would expect, but they just didn't lead anywhere... except to more confusion. I just found the ending very anti-climatic, because it just didn't seem to make any sense or really answer any of the questions that I had about the storyline.

I wish I could give this movie a good review, but I can't. In all honesty, the only thing I think you will find scary about this movie is that you paid for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Though this series only ran a season, it has stayed with me for 20 years. It was by far and above my all time favorite cartoon ever. I would give nearly anything to have it on DVD or whatever format I can get. If you find any means of seeing this series I suggest you take full advantage. This series was the first one (in my opinion) that had a truly coherent storyline that spanned across multiple episodes. It also made me truly care about the characters and what happened to them. Heck the character Goose actually scared me sometimes. He was just that odd at the time. Also the leader of the group reminds me a lot of a combination of Clint Eastwood/Tommy Lee Jones. If anyone has any way of contacting the creator/holder of the rights to the series and can get them put out on DVD please by all means do so!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This mindless movie is a piece of crap and boring like the full house repetitions. For all the people who want to see a great, exciting and cool horror movie shouldn't even think about watching this bunch of mindless work. a F- in my opinion. I have one question, what were they thinking? Let's make a list: 1) bad script 2) bad script 3) bad script 4) bad acting 5) bad directing and last but not least a bad script. I mean I am not like grumping about every movie, but I was disappointed when I watched it. This movie should be banned into a box, locked and sunk down into the sea. So please don't do something like this again, please, please, please!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Well, they say nymphomania leaves you unsatisfied. I don't know if [[Stella]] James (Sean Young) qualifies as a clinical nymphomaniac, but she [[certainly]] is in to [[sexual]] [[relations]] with men. She's still [[exploring]], trying to find "more data" so she can [[see]] what she [[wants]] from [[life]] and the [[men]] in it, [[though]] it [[seems]] like at her age she should have a [[pretty]] good [[idea]] by now. (I can't [[agree]], however, with [[anyone]] who [[says]] [[Young]] is too [[old]] for the role. [[If]] she is, we should all age so nicely.) For the most part this [[film]] [[left]] me cold, though it's by no means the [[worst]] of its type you'll ever see. And unlike the recent 'Eyes Wide Shut,' at [[least]] [[something]] happens in this one. Well, they say nymphomania leaves you unsatisfied. I don't know if [[Stell]] James (Sean Young) qualifies as a clinical nymphomaniac, but she [[arguably]] is in to [[nationality]] [[relationship]] with men. She's still [[explores]], trying to find "more data" so she can [[seeing]] what she [[want]] from [[vida]] and the [[hombre]] in it, [[if]] it [[appears]] like at her age she should have a [[quite]] good [[thoughts]] by now. (I can't [[concur]], however, with [[everyone]] who [[say]] [[Youth]] is too [[archaic]] for the role. [[Though]] she is, we should all age so nicely.) For the most part this [[filmmaking]] [[gauche]] me cold, though it's by no means the [[gravest]] of its type you'll ever see. And unlike the recent 'Eyes Wide Shut,' at [[lowest]] [[somethings]] happens in this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Okay]] I had heard little about this [[film]], so when it came on the movie channels on TV, I [[wanted]] to watch it, being a [[horror]] [[aficionado]]. I think I can do a collective "huh?" for everyone who watched it.

I [[decided]] to move on with my life, but at a [[party]] with my [[closest]] friends, we saw it was coming on and some of us having [[seen]] it already [[decided]] we [[could]] [[laugh]] our [[way]] through it, both of us [[proclaiming]] "this is the [[dumbest]] thing I've ever seen". It wasn't scary; [[Ill]] give it to Roth (who I think is a young hack); characters do change throughout the film, ala "Cube".

HOWEVER despite your typical "rats in a cage" scenario- who will turn on who, etc., it was pretty [[average]] horror.

A few points: 1.) What was with that kid? I'm not even talking about him being weird and biting people. I'm talking about the whole "slow motion karate kicking", what was that? 2.) Okay I know Rider's character liked Jordan Ladd's, but as a young woman, I was appalled that he just went ahead and molested her in her sleep. Uh, thats illegal.

3.) Roth was in the movie just so Roth could be in the movie. Talk about pointlessly writing yourself in! 4.) What was with the deputy? 5.) So she was just instantly pulled apart by the dog? And there was little to no blood left? Just a scrap of her jeans? Anyway we were LAUGHING our asses off, and I love laughing during horror movies (Return of the Living Dead 2, Evil Dead), but I don't know if we were supposed to be laughing here... [[Allright]] I had heard little about this [[filmmaking]], so when it came on the movie channels on TV, I [[wished]] to watch it, being a [[monstrosity]] [[connoisseur]]. I think I can do a collective "huh?" for everyone who watched it.

I [[decides]] to move on with my life, but at a [[parte]] with my [[nearest]] friends, we saw it was coming on and some of us having [[saw]] it already [[deciding]] we [[did]] [[laughing]] our [[pathways]] through it, both of us [[proclaim]] "this is the [[stupidest]] thing I've ever seen". It wasn't scary; [[Patient]] give it to Roth (who I think is a young hack); characters do change throughout the film, ala "Cube".

HOWEVER despite your typical "rats in a cage" scenario- who will turn on who, etc., it was pretty [[medium]] horror.

A few points: 1.) What was with that kid? I'm not even talking about him being weird and biting people. I'm talking about the whole "slow motion karate kicking", what was that? 2.) Okay I know Rider's character liked Jordan Ladd's, but as a young woman, I was appalled that he just went ahead and molested her in her sleep. Uh, thats illegal.

3.) Roth was in the movie just so Roth could be in the movie. Talk about pointlessly writing yourself in! 4.) What was with the deputy? 5.) So she was just instantly pulled apart by the dog? And there was little to no blood left? Just a scrap of her jeans? Anyway we were LAUGHING our asses off, and I love laughing during horror movies (Return of the Living Dead 2, Evil Dead), but I don't know if we were supposed to be laughing here... --------------------------------------------- Result 4184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really don't have anything new to add but I just felt like I had to comment on this sack. So here goes:

Atrocious. I'm running through my MST3K DVD collection again and I just watched Hobgoblins for about the 10th time. It's really, really painful but it was next on the list... You can see that there is a tiny kernel of an actual movie buried under all the crap that is "Hobgoblins" but it just couldn't get out. Everything about this movie is 4th rate. The story, the acting, the effects, the women, the "action scenes", the... ahhhh forget it. I can watch a piece of crap like "The Bloodwaters of Dr. Z" (aka "Zaat") over and over and over with hardly any ill effects (I like it in fact- btw, it will be on TCM later this month- October, 2009) but "Hobgoblins" is a whole 'nother ballgame.

The worst part of it all may be that it's now about 12 hours after the movie ended, I had a good night's sleep, some coffee and some dry toast, my medications, and yet the ersatz "New Wave" dance music that Amy, Red Shorts, and Laraine Newman were frolicking to in the living room is STILL RUNNING THROUGH MY HEAD. This torment will last for days.

Good luck, won't you? --------------------------------------------- Result 4185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Camp with a capital C. Think of Mask and the Ace Ventura movies -- then multiply by 100. This laugh-a-minute entertainer takes schlock to the level of high art. David Dhawan is a genius and Govinda is beyond description. See it over and over again. I insist. --------------------------------------------- Result 4186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pet Sematary is a very good horror film and believe it or not somebody can make a good horror film out of a Stephen King novel. Mary Lambert does a great job with this film and manages to bring across King's creepy story pretty well. Most people may avoid this, but they should check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4187 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] What do you [[expect]] when there is no script to [[begin]] with, and [[therefore]] [[nothing]] that the director can work with. Hayek and Farrell, and Donaldson and Kirkin are good [[actors]], they just don't have [[anything]] to say or anything to [[react]] to. Even the earthquake was [[pretty]] poor. And I don't [[know]] how closely the [[movie]] follows the [[novel]], but two have the Jewish [[girl]] [[show]] up out of nowhere just so show that Arturo has a [[nice]], warm [[heart]], but some [[stereotypes]] don't amount to [[anything]]. And he even buries Camilla out in the desert, instead of bringing her back to L.[[A]]. for a nice Catholic [[burial]] where he [[could]] at [[least]] bring her [[flowers]] once in a while. [[Pathetic]]. And the L.A. set was [[ridiculously]] graphically created. [[Anything]] good? The window to his apartment [[felt]] real, the curtains, the sounds, the wind. And Donaldson is always great. Has been since the Body Snatchers or Night of the Living Dead, whichever it was. What do you [[awaited]] when there is no script to [[startup]] with, and [[so]] [[none]] that the director can work with. Hayek and Farrell, and Donaldson and Kirkin are good [[players]], they just don't have [[somethings]] to say or anything to [[responding]] to. Even the earthquake was [[quite]] poor. And I don't [[savoir]] how closely the [[filmmaking]] follows the [[new]], but two have the Jewish [[women]] [[shows]] up out of nowhere just so show that Arturo has a [[pleasant]], warm [[heartland]], but some [[preconceptions]] don't amount to [[something]]. And he even buries Camilla out in the desert, instead of bringing her back to L.[[una]]. for a nice Catholic [[funeral]] where he [[did]] at [[lowest]] bring her [[wildflowers]] once in a while. [[Unfortunate]]. And the L.A. set was [[appallingly]] graphically created. [[Somethings]] good? The window to his apartment [[smelled]] real, the curtains, the sounds, the wind. And Donaldson is always great. Has been since the Body Snatchers or Night of the Living Dead, whichever it was. --------------------------------------------- Result 4188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Summer season is here when the choices in the cinemas are limited to what's the hottest [[movie]] of the week, given 99.9% of the screens dedicated to screening it. OK, so I may [[exaggerate]] on the percentage, but you get my drift. Besides stuff from Hollywood, Bollywood too have their own [[share]] of highly anticipated [[blockbusters]], and from some of the trailers shown, I'm hyped to watch them too. Tashan was [[billed]] as one of THE most [[highly]] anticipated for 2008, but I was quite surprised at the [[lower]] than low [[turnout]] at the cinemas. When I watched Jodha Akbar, it was a full house, but it wasn't for Tashan.

After watching it, I knew why. It was entertaining, but it was [[fundamentally]] [[weak]]. Just like it's literal English title, which means "[[Style]]", Tashan is all style, but [[little]] substance. Not that it doesn't have the usual star power, but scenes felt forced, and some bordered on a tad ridiculous, even for Bollywood standards I must say. Which is quite surprising given that Tashan is directed and written by Vijay Krishna Acharya, who [[wrote]] Dhoom and Dhoom 2, both of which I enjoyed tremendously.

In his rookie directorial outing with Tashan, while you can't fault his direction, you'd probably scratch your head over the plot, which was clunky at best. It tried to force too many things into the story, though credit be given where it allowed you some avenue to question character motivation, but that came a little too late, and only toward the finale, which left you guessing for just a moment before it latched into full blown action mimicking many a Thai action movie, with Hong Kong's wirework and Hollywood's [[ludicrous]] [[firearms]] and gunplay with zero recoil. And in a bid to include everything including the kitchen sink, you have an assortment of vehicles appearing, and the one that took the cake, in a Dhoom 2 homage, was the jetski boat in the middle of nowhere.

[[At]] best, Tashan can be enjoyed as [[unintentional]] comedy, and this is attributed to how the cast hammed up with their [[characters]]. Saif Ali [[Khan]] plays Jimmy Cliff, a call [[center]] [[executive]] who [[gives]] English tuition, only as a platform for [[fishing]] out [[new]] girlfriend [[material]]. His playboy ways gets junked aside when he meets with Pooja Singh (Kareena Kapoor), who's not exactly who she seems, the meek and sweet natured hottie. She engages Jimmy's services for her boss, mobster Bhaiyyaji (Anil Kapoor), who probably gets most of the laughs as he speaks broken English and phrases must like how an ah-beng does it. And to complete the quartet, Akshay Kumar plays Bachchan Pandey, an illiterate gangster for hire who got engaged by Bhaiyyaji to hunt down Jimmy and Pooja when they escape with money stolen from Bahiyyaji's business.

So [[begins]] a road trip of sorts, with friends who turned enemies, and enemies whom you know will become friends as the road trip wears on. Jimmy Cliff is probably the most implausible of all, because he goes from zero to hero, executing moves that would shame Rambo, in absolutely no time, which is quite out of character. Kareena Kapoor amps up the sex factor as she uses her charms to guile both men, and has plenty of opportunity to do so given the much touted bikini scenes, and other costumes that [[boast]] of plunging necklines or hemlines way above the knee. Every character has a backstory created, and I thought Akshay Kumar's Bachchan Pandey was probably the best, the most touching and the most [[fun]] of the lot, even though his character seemed a lot like a non-green Incredible Hulk with his gravity-defying leaps and power packing punches. His wounds also heal automatically, which impressively puts Wolverine to shame. And the best part is his theme song, which is damn alpha-male and played in ra-ra mode each time he takes on adversaries.

But sad to say, that's the only tune that is memorable, something that cheers "Bachchan- Pandey-Bachchan-Pandey". For most Bollywood movies I watch, I will usually be able to, despite the obvious language gaps, emerge from screenings humming a tune or two. I wasn't able to do that after Tashan, because the songs unfortunately just weren't catchy at all. Usually the song/dance routine works well into the storyline without any necessity to bring the characters out of the current scene or location. That I enjoy, versus plucking them out and plonking them into extreme settings high atop a mountain, or atop jagged rocks on the beach front.

Tashan probably didn't take itself too seriously, but coming from Vijay Krishna Acharya's story, you probably wanted something a little more decent rather than the ridiculous, and for continuity to be a little more careful as well. Billed as a blockbuster, now I can start to understand why the crowds have already shunned this one. Despite Akshay Kumr stealing the show, Tashan could have been better on the whole. Summer season is here when the choices in the cinemas are limited to what's the hottest [[filmmaking]] of the week, given 99.9% of the screens dedicated to screening it. OK, so I may [[overestimate]] on the percentage, but you get my drift. Besides stuff from Hollywood, Bollywood too have their own [[interchange]] of highly anticipated [[blockbuster]], and from some of the trailers shown, I'm hyped to watch them too. Tashan was [[billing]] as one of THE most [[supremely]] anticipated for 2008, but I was quite surprised at the [[lowered]] than low [[attendance]] at the cinemas. When I watched Jodha Akbar, it was a full house, but it wasn't for Tashan.

After watching it, I knew why. It was entertaining, but it was [[predominantly]] [[puny]]. Just like it's literal English title, which means "[[Elegance]]", Tashan is all style, but [[scant]] substance. Not that it doesn't have the usual star power, but scenes felt forced, and some bordered on a tad ridiculous, even for Bollywood standards I must say. Which is quite surprising given that Tashan is directed and written by Vijay Krishna Acharya, who [[texted]] Dhoom and Dhoom 2, both of which I enjoyed tremendously.

In his rookie directorial outing with Tashan, while you can't fault his direction, you'd probably scratch your head over the plot, which was clunky at best. It tried to force too many things into the story, though credit be given where it allowed you some avenue to question character motivation, but that came a little too late, and only toward the finale, which left you guessing for just a moment before it latched into full blown action mimicking many a Thai action movie, with Hong Kong's wirework and Hollywood's [[farcical]] [[firearm]] and gunplay with zero recoil. And in a bid to include everything including the kitchen sink, you have an assortment of vehicles appearing, and the one that took the cake, in a Dhoom 2 homage, was the jetski boat in the middle of nowhere.

[[During]] best, Tashan can be enjoyed as [[unforeseen]] comedy, and this is attributed to how the cast hammed up with their [[personage]]. Saif Ali [[Kahn]] plays Jimmy Cliff, a call [[centro]] [[bureaucratic]] who [[donne]] English tuition, only as a platform for [[angling]] out [[nuevo]] girlfriend [[materials]]. His playboy ways gets junked aside when he meets with Pooja Singh (Kareena Kapoor), who's not exactly who she seems, the meek and sweet natured hottie. She engages Jimmy's services for her boss, mobster Bhaiyyaji (Anil Kapoor), who probably gets most of the laughs as he speaks broken English and phrases must like how an ah-beng does it. And to complete the quartet, Akshay Kumar plays Bachchan Pandey, an illiterate gangster for hire who got engaged by Bhaiyyaji to hunt down Jimmy and Pooja when they escape with money stolen from Bahiyyaji's business.

So [[begin]] a road trip of sorts, with friends who turned enemies, and enemies whom you know will become friends as the road trip wears on. Jimmy Cliff is probably the most implausible of all, because he goes from zero to hero, executing moves that would shame Rambo, in absolutely no time, which is quite out of character. Kareena Kapoor amps up the sex factor as she uses her charms to guile both men, and has plenty of opportunity to do so given the much touted bikini scenes, and other costumes that [[brag]] of plunging necklines or hemlines way above the knee. Every character has a backstory created, and I thought Akshay Kumar's Bachchan Pandey was probably the best, the most touching and the most [[amusing]] of the lot, even though his character seemed a lot like a non-green Incredible Hulk with his gravity-defying leaps and power packing punches. His wounds also heal automatically, which impressively puts Wolverine to shame. And the best part is his theme song, which is damn alpha-male and played in ra-ra mode each time he takes on adversaries.

But sad to say, that's the only tune that is memorable, something that cheers "Bachchan- Pandey-Bachchan-Pandey". For most Bollywood movies I watch, I will usually be able to, despite the obvious language gaps, emerge from screenings humming a tune or two. I wasn't able to do that after Tashan, because the songs unfortunately just weren't catchy at all. Usually the song/dance routine works well into the storyline without any necessity to bring the characters out of the current scene or location. That I enjoy, versus plucking them out and plonking them into extreme settings high atop a mountain, or atop jagged rocks on the beach front.

Tashan probably didn't take itself too seriously, but coming from Vijay Krishna Acharya's story, you probably wanted something a little more decent rather than the ridiculous, and for continuity to be a little more careful as well. Billed as a blockbuster, now I can start to understand why the crowds have already shunned this one. Despite Akshay Kumr stealing the show, Tashan could have been better on the whole. --------------------------------------------- Result 4189 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terrible use of scene cuts. All continuity is lost, either by awful scripting or lethargic direction. That villainous robot... musta been a jazz dancer? Also, one of the worst sound tracks I've ever heard (monologues usually drowned out by music.) And... where'd they get their props? That ship looks like a milk carton... I did better special effects on 8mm at the age of 13!

I'd recommend any film student should watch this flick (5 minutes at a time) so as to learn how NOT to produce a film. Or... was it the editors' fault?

It's really too bad, because the scenario was actually a good concept... just poorly executed all the way around. (Sorry Malcom. You should have sent a "stunt double". You're too good an actor for such a stink-bomb.) --------------------------------------------- Result 4190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This drama is unlike Sex and the City, where the women have a few drinks and share their sexual encounters with each other. Its much more personal and people can relate to it. Its much more engaging and emotional on a new level than other dramas focusing on women and their lives like "Sex and the City, Lipstick Jungle...."

Dr. Katie Roden, is a psychologist with a dark secret, she seems much more depressed and guilt ridden than the rest of her 3 friends. She is dealing with the death of her former lover who was her patient while tackling his son's advances on her. Her sombre clothes and empty and cold house convey her inside emotions very well.

Trudi Malloy, a widow is battling issues with "letting go" of her dead husband from 9/11. And when a handsome stranger, Richard shows an interest in her she is suddenly forced to do a reality check by her friends who suggest that she gets back into dating business. The ridiculous and embarrassing courting scenes between Richard and Trudi are totally funny! It is interesting to note that Richard asks her out the day she gets a millions from the 9/11 board for her husband's death..lets see what his intentions are

Siobhan Dillon, a lawyer is fed up of her husband's love making tactics which only involve "baby making" (as they are having trouble conceiving) and she quickly falls for her colleague who offer his "services" a little too willingly to her and she does not hesitate for long!It will interesting to see whether she will continue her affair or patch up with her husband (played by Raza Jeffrey) Jessica, a real estate business woman is single and is straight, until she organizes a lesbian wedding and has an affair with one of them. Her character is shown as a bold and provocative woman who before her lesbian encounter is having sex with a "married man", her colleague. Lets see where her character venture to....

The beauty of this drama is that we are shown 4 totally different women with different scenarios, whose ambitions and inhibitions are shown. Its also a good thing that the drama reveals the fact that sometimes friends lie to each other to be "safe"! --------------------------------------------- Result 4191 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Let me start out by saying I'm a big [[Carrey]] fan. Although I'll admit I haven't seen all of his movies *cough*the magestic*cough*. Bruce [[Almighty]] was [[enjoyable]]. None of the other reviews have really gone into how cheesy it gets towards the end, I [[dont]] know what the writers were thinking. Somehow I couldn't help but feel like this movie was a poor attempt at re-creating Liar Liar.

On a positive note, The Daily Show's Steve Correl is HILARIOUS and so is the rest of the cast. See Bruce Almighty if you're a big Jim Carrey fan, or if you just want to see a light-hearted (que soft piano music) somewhat funny comedy. Let me start out by saying I'm a big [[Cary]] fan. Although I'll admit I haven't seen all of his movies *cough*the magestic*cough*. Bruce [[Omnipotent]] was [[agreeable]]. None of the other reviews have really gone into how cheesy it gets towards the end, I [[dunno]] know what the writers were thinking. Somehow I couldn't help but feel like this movie was a poor attempt at re-creating Liar Liar.

On a positive note, The Daily Show's Steve Correl is HILARIOUS and so is the rest of the cast. See Bruce Almighty if you're a big Jim Carrey fan, or if you just want to see a light-hearted (que soft piano music) somewhat funny comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Here is one the entire family will enjoy... even those who consider themselves too old for fairy tales. Shelley Duvall outdid herself with this unique, imaginative take on nearly all of the popular fairy tales of childhood. The scripts offer new twists on the age-old fables we grew up on and they feature a handful of stars in each episode. "Cinderella" is no exception to Duvall's standard and in my opinion it's one of the top five of the series, highlighted by Jennifer Beals (remember her from "Flashdance"--and she's still in Hollywood today making a movie here and there) in the title role, Jean Stapleton as the fairy godmother with a southern accent and Eve Arden as the embodiment of wicked stepmotherhood. Edie McClurg ("Ferris Bueller's Day Off") and Jane Alden make for a hilarious duo as the stepsisters. Matthew Broderick is an affable Prince Henry. You'll all keep coming back for this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 4193 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I personally hated this movie because it was predictable, the characters were stereotypical ,and the whole idea was a rip off of "The Cutting Edge", and "Cadet Kelly".

The main character is a snotty girl who gets shipped of to a place where she doesn't belong. The whole place hates her, and to make things worse there is a hot guy that seemingly doesn't like her ( well duh the whole damn school can't stand you). Amazingly she finds a way to fit in and make everyone to like her plus, gets the guy to fall head over heels in love with her. Then comes the choice, where she must choose between figure skating and hockey. She chooses hockey then she goes to the figure skating nationals,and gets to be on the Olympic team. No real surprise there.

This whole movie was so damn predictable You knew what was going to happen before you even saw it. This was so awful I nearly puked, and by the time I was finished watching it, I had an awful headache and the urge to shoot myself for watching such crap. Don't watch this unless you are under ten, or actually like crappy tween movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Russell, my fav, is gorgeous in this film. But more than that, the film covers a tremendous range of human passion and sorrow. Everything from marriage to homosexuality is addressed and respected. The film makes the viewer realize that tolerance of other humans provides the route to saving humanity. Fabulous love story between Lachlin and Lil. I replay their scenes over and over again. Anyone who has ever been in love will empathize with these people. All characters are cast and portrayed excellently. --------------------------------------------- Result 4195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Scott Menville is not Casey [[Kasem]]. That is the first, most [[important]], and most [[disturbing]] [[thing]] about this [[attempt]] at re-imagining Scooby-Doo and [[company]].

Shaggy's [[voice]] is squeaky and does not sound [[anything]] like he has ever [[sounded]] in any of the [[previous]] incarnations of the Scooby [[shows]]. They've [[also]] [[changed]] the [[outfit]] and the [[classic]] [[mode]] of walking from the [[original]].

I'm not sure what they're on about [[yet]] with the villain angle, but it [[surely]] isn't following the formula [[used]] in any of the [[previous]] Scooby [[shows]].

And the animation [[style]] is very [[bizarre]] and [[distorted]]. I like it, but it's not [[real]] Scooby-Doo [[type]] animation. But the [[weird]] animation [[used]] for other WB [[shows]] [[grew]] on me; this might, too.

It's worth a [[glance]] at -- once -- if you can [[handle]] the [[lack]] of [[proper]] [[Shaggy]] [[voice]]. That right there is [[enough]] to [[jar]] one out of [[enjoying]] the [[show]] [[properly]]. Besides, I am [[trying]] not to be an [[inflexible]], nitpicking [[fan]]. [[Evolve]] or die, as the saying goes. We'll [[see]] how it [[looks]] after two more [[episodes]] -- by then I'll have [[formed]] a much more [[solid]] [[opinion]]. Scott Menville is not Casey [[Kassim]]. That is the first, most [[substantial]], and most [[disconcerting]] [[stuff]] about this [[attempts]] at re-imagining Scooby-Doo and [[societies]].

Shaggy's [[vowel]] is squeaky and does not sound [[somethings]] like he has ever [[seemed]] in any of the [[ago]] incarnations of the Scooby [[exhibit]]. They've [[further]] [[modifications]] the [[attire]] and the [[typical]] [[modes]] of walking from the [[preliminary]].

I'm not sure what they're on about [[again]] with the villain angle, but it [[definitely]] isn't following the formula [[using]] in any of the [[past]] Scooby [[show]].

And the animation [[elegance]] is very [[surreal]] and [[deformed]]. I like it, but it's not [[genuine]] Scooby-Doo [[kinds]] animation. But the [[odd]] animation [[utilized]] for other WB [[exhibitions]] [[growing]] on me; this might, too.

It's worth a [[vista]] at -- once -- if you can [[handles]] the [[insufficiency]] of [[adequate]] [[Sammy]] [[vowel]]. That right there is [[adequate]] to [[urn]] one out of [[enjoy]] the [[exhibition]] [[suitably]]. Besides, I am [[tempting]] not to be an [[uncompromising]], nitpicking [[admirer]]. [[Evolving]] or die, as the saying goes. We'll [[consults]] how it [[seem]] after two more [[spells]] -- by then I'll have [[forming]] a much more [[robust]] [[views]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4196 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] I had [[seen]] this [[movie]] when it [[got]] [[released]], and when I was 12 [[years]] old :) And I [[still]] vividly recollect the wonderful scenes of how the hero/[[heroine]] [[escape]] every time when [[faced]] with danger :) And the best [[feature]] of the [[movie]] was the portrayal of the villain! I think [[many]] so-called action [[movies]] [[copied]] a [[lot]] [[many]] "escape scenes" from this [[movie]]!! And not only does it never impress me when I [[see]] such [[copying]], it always [[increases]] my [[appreciation]] for this masterpiece! :) The lead actors have acted wonderfully. The slow and [[realistic]] development of the chemistry b/w the hero and [[heroine]] was [[extremely]] natural and [[wonderfully]] portrayed. As children, we felt that the [[love]] that [[developed]] b/w them was very natural :) The [[way]] they [[face]] and overcome all their [[trials]] and [[tribulations]] together was [[something]] that can make [[even]] [[kids]] [[realize]] the value of true [[love]], sacrifice and caring. I [[recommend]] that every person see this [[movie]] when [[given]] a [[chance]]!! --Vijay. I had [[noticed]] this [[flick]] when it [[ai]] [[liberated]], and when I was 12 [[ages]] old :) And I [[however]] vividly recollect the wonderful scenes of how the hero/[[idol]] [[flee]] every time when [[encountered]] with danger :) And the best [[attribute]] of the [[films]] was the portrayal of the villain! I think [[myriad]] so-called action [[film]] [[copying]] a [[batch]] [[various]] "escape scenes" from this [[cinema]]!! And not only does it never impress me when I [[behold]] such [[ripping]], it always [[hikes]] my [[acknowledgment]] for this masterpiece! :) The lead actors have acted wonderfully. The slow and [[practical]] development of the chemistry b/w the hero and [[idol]] was [[considerably]] natural and [[beautifully]] portrayed. As children, we felt that the [[iike]] that [[devised]] b/w them was very natural :) The [[pathway]] they [[encountering]] and overcome all their [[proceedings]] and [[sufferings]] together was [[anything]] that can make [[yet]] [[youths]] [[accomplishing]] the value of true [[loves]], sacrifice and caring. I [[recommending]] that every person see this [[cinema]] when [[gave]] a [[probability]]!! --Vijay. --------------------------------------------- Result 4197 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The original DeMille movie was made in 1938 with Frederic March. A very good film indeed. Hollywood's love of remakes brings us a fairly interesting movie starring Yul Brynner. He of course was brilliant as he almost always seemed to be in all of his movies. Charlton Heston as Andrew Jackson was a stroke of genius. However, the movie did tend to get a little long in places. It does not move at the pace of the 1938 version. Still, it is a fun movie that should be seen at least once. --------------------------------------------- Result 4198 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] am i the only one who [[saw]] the [[connection]] between the discussion of camus 'the myth of sisyphus' and mary's [[life]]? in [[camus]] version a [[man]] is [[condemned]] to spend his eternity with a giant boulder that he must roll up a hill. [[unfortunately]] every time he reaches the top the boulder slips and ends up back at the bottom for him to start. there may have been a buzzard pecking at his eyes, i'm not sure right now. in the movie mary [[spends]] her life struggling to get her life [[together]], unfortunately [[every]] [[time]] she gains any footing she falls and loses everything. [[case]] in point [[would]] be the [[party]] she throws where she [[gets]] [[intoxicated]], offends her falafel lover, and is practically [[attacked]] by liev schrieber. in case you question this theory, note how this scene ends with her attempting to climb a flight of stars while books fall from nowhere impeding her progress until ultimately she passes out. the next morning when she awakens she is still on the stairs, never having reached the top. am i the only one who [[sawthe]] the [[connecting]] between the discussion of camus 'the myth of sisyphus' and mary's [[vida]]? in [[kami]] version a [[males]] is [[reprimand]] to spend his eternity with a giant boulder that he must roll up a hill. [[alack]] every time he reaches the top the boulder slips and ends up back at the bottom for him to start. there may have been a buzzard pecking at his eyes, i'm not sure right now. in the movie mary [[dedicates]] her life struggling to get her life [[jointly]], unfortunately [[all]] [[period]] she gains any footing she falls and loses everything. [[lawsuits]] in point [[should]] be the [[part]] she throws where she [[receives]] [[inebriated]], offends her falafel lover, and is practically [[bombed]] by liev schrieber. in case you question this theory, note how this scene ends with her attempting to climb a flight of stars while books fall from nowhere impeding her progress until ultimately she passes out. the next morning when she awakens she is still on the stairs, never having reached the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 4199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This is a very [[difficult]] [[movie]], and it's almost impossible to get a handle on what's going on. At first it seems to be a rather pedestrian movie about a guy (Trelkovsky) who needs an apartment and rather crassly invites himself into one when the current tenant (a woman) commits suicide. Then the twists and turns start. Are the neighbors trying to kill him? And why are the dead tenant's clothes turning up in the apartment? One wonders, finally, if Trelkovksy _is_ the prior tenant.

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

One of the tricks Polanski pulls on us is to lie to us. We assume when we see things from the point of view of a character that we see things as the character does and that there may be distortions of reality. We assume when the camera is showing us things from its omniscient point of view that we see actuality - but Polanski has the camera lie to us. This is a very [[troublesome]] [[cinematography]], and it's almost impossible to get a handle on what's going on. At first it seems to be a rather pedestrian movie about a guy (Trelkovsky) who needs an apartment and rather crassly invites himself into one when the current tenant (a woman) commits suicide. Then the twists and turns start. Are the neighbors trying to kill him? And why are the dead tenant's clothes turning up in the apartment? One wonders, finally, if Trelkovksy _is_ the prior tenant.

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

One of the tricks Polanski pulls on us is to lie to us. We assume when we see things from the point of view of a character that we see things as the character does and that there may be distortions of reality. We assume when the camera is showing us things from its omniscient point of view that we see actuality - but Polanski has the camera lie to us. --------------------------------------------- Result 4200 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While others may contend that by viewing other works by Bilal, one will better appreciate this movie, it does fail in one major way. It does not stand on its own. The plot is a mishmash that is confuses symbolism with substance. Here's an idea start with a definite story. Then craft symbolism around it. We start with two different narratives, this female that is somehow turning human, a "god" that is for some reason being judged, but getting one last fling on Earth, and this mysterious John character who seems to be developing some sort of "resort" just beyond the bounds of the city. Why? None of these questions are answered. But do we care, no. There is no development to want us to empathize with any character in the story, the closest we get Jill and even then the development is spotty at best. Unfortunately the movie gets caught up in the the whole visually impressive (which it is,) but at the expense of motivic development. I would love to see this rewritten by someone who could distance themselves from the material a bit and not have to feel that every image has to be in the picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] [[haha]]! you have to just [[smile]] and [[smile]] if you actually [[made]] it all the [[way]] through this movie. it like [[says]] something about myself i guess. the [[movie]] itself was created i think as some [[sort]] of psychological test, or like some sort of [[drug]], to [[take]] you to a place you have never been before. When Wittgenstein wrote his [[famous]] first philosophical [[piece]] the tractacus (sp?) he [[said]] it was [[meaningless]] and [[useless]], but if you read it, after you were [[done]], it [[would]] [[take]] you to a [[new]] [[level]], like a ladder, and then you [[could]] throw away the [[work]] and see things with clarity and [[true]] understanding. this movie is the same i think.

As a movie it is without a doubt, the [[worst]] [[movie]] i have seen in a long long time in such a unique way. first of all, this is snipes. i loved watching this [[guy]] kick ass in various [[movies]]. and i have suffered through a few weak ones. however, although you know the movie might suck, you would never suspect that it could be as bad as it actually was. which is the fun of it. i mean this is snipes. you know it might be good, but it will be alright, right? smile.

so this thing on every level is pure boredom, pure unoriginality. the reference to the professional is both dead on and [[obvious]], yet so poorly [[done]] as to be comical. there is not one character in this movie that is interesting, in the [[least]]. and to make the whole thing more surreal, they have a soundtrack that sort of sounds like parts to various Bourne [[identity]] type movies, only isn't quite right. in fact, although it seems close to action movie background music, it just so happens it is done in a manner that will [[grate]] on you fantastically.

then all the scenes in the [[total]] pitch black, where honestly [[since]] the characters are so flat, you don't really [[care]] whats going to happen, but [[regardless]], after it [[happens]] and someone is killed, you just say to yourself, was i supposed to see that? what else? how about scenes with blinding, [[obnoxious]] flashing at a strobe lights pace, for a period of time that is too long to bear. sure let's throw that in. how bout this though. when you are straining and your eyes cant handle it any longer, do some more of these in the dark kills where you really don't see what happened. and on top of that, lets face it you don't care. you were past bored way from the beginning.

so i drifted in and out a couple times, but i caught almost all of this movie. and it becomes something you can watch, without something that engages your mind on any level, therefore, it becomes something you can effectively zone out with, and begin to think about your life, where its going, where its been, what we are as people.

and that... that is the true magic of this film. [[hehe]]! you have to just [[grinning]] and [[laughter]] if you actually [[effected]] it all the [[manner]] through this movie. it like [[contends]] something about myself i guess. the [[flick]] itself was created i think as some [[genre]] of psychological test, or like some sort of [[medicines]], to [[taking]] you to a place you have never been before. When Wittgenstein wrote his [[illustrious]] first philosophical [[slice]] the tractacus (sp?) he [[says]] it was [[worthless]] and [[unnecessary]], but if you read it, after you were [[performed]], it [[ought]] [[taking]] you to a [[nuevo]] [[levels]], like a ladder, and then you [[wo]] throw away the [[cooperation]] and see things with clarity and [[veritable]] understanding. this movie is the same i think.

As a movie it is without a doubt, the [[meanest]] [[kino]] i have seen in a long long time in such a unique way. first of all, this is snipes. i loved watching this [[bloke]] kick ass in various [[filmmaking]]. and i have suffered through a few weak ones. however, although you know the movie might suck, you would never suspect that it could be as bad as it actually was. which is the fun of it. i mean this is snipes. you know it might be good, but it will be alright, right? smile.

so this thing on every level is pure boredom, pure unoriginality. the reference to the professional is both dead on and [[manifest]], yet so poorly [[doing]] as to be comical. there is not one character in this movie that is interesting, in the [[less]]. and to make the whole thing more surreal, they have a soundtrack that sort of sounds like parts to various Bourne [[identities]] type movies, only isn't quite right. in fact, although it seems close to action movie background music, it just so happens it is done in a manner that will [[grating]] on you fantastically.

then all the scenes in the [[overall]] pitch black, where honestly [[because]] the characters are so flat, you don't really [[caring]] whats going to happen, but [[separately]], after it [[arrives]] and someone is killed, you just say to yourself, was i supposed to see that? what else? how about scenes with blinding, [[detestable]] flashing at a strobe lights pace, for a period of time that is too long to bear. sure let's throw that in. how bout this though. when you are straining and your eyes cant handle it any longer, do some more of these in the dark kills where you really don't see what happened. and on top of that, lets face it you don't care. you were past bored way from the beginning.

so i drifted in and out a couple times, but i caught almost all of this movie. and it becomes something you can watch, without something that engages your mind on any level, therefore, it becomes something you can effectively zone out with, and begin to think about your life, where its going, where its been, what we are as people.

and that... that is the true magic of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen the original English version on video. Disney's choice of voice actors looks very promising. I can't believe I'm saying that. The story is about a young boy who meets a girl with a history that is intertwined with his own. The two are thrown into one of the most fun and intriguing storylines in any animated film. The animation quality is excellent! If you've seen Disney's job of Kiki's delivery service you can see the quality in their production. It almost redeems them for stealing the story of Kimba the white lion. (but not quite!) Finally Miyazaki's films are being released properly! I can't wait to see an uncut English version of Nausicaa! --------------------------------------------- Result 4203 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Russ and Valerie are having [[discussions]] about [[starting]] a [[family]]. The [[couple]] live in a [[posh]] [[apartment]] and [[run]] an auction [[business]] that deals with valuable collectibles. [[At]] the same time, a [[dedicated]] adoption [[agency]] [[owner]] [[takes]] a mini [[vacation]] and leaves the orphanage in the charge of his father ([[Leslie]] Nielsen). Father Harry is in the rental [[business]] and he [[gets]] the brilliant idea to "[[rent]]" some of the [[children]] of the orphanage to couples like Russ and Valerie. [[Harry]], who becomes [[aware]] of the couple'e [[dilemma]], [[offers]] a [[family]] of [[siblings]] for a 10 day [[rental]] [[period]]! Brandon, Kyle, and Molly move into the [[apartment]] with their [[temporary]] [[parents]], with amusing [[consequences]], as the new [[caretakers]] are inexperienced with [[kids]]. But, where is the [[possibility]] of a [[happy]] ending? This is a darling [[family]] film. The [[actors]], including Nielsen as the wheeler-dealer and Christopher Lloyd as the [[kind]] [[apartment]] [[doorman]], are all [[wonderful]]. The script is snappy and [[fun]] and the [[overall]] production [[values]] quite high. Yes, if only life could be this way! Orphaned children everywhere [[deserve]] a chance to prove that they are [[lovable]] and can give so much joy to the parents who are [[considering]] adoption. If you want to show a film to your [[family]] that is rooted in good values but is [[also]] [[highly]] [[entertaining]], find this [[movie]]. It is guaranteed to have [[everyone]] laughing, [[even]] as their hearts are [[melting]]. Russ and Valerie are having [[talk]] about [[start]] a [[families]]. The [[matches]] live in a [[luxurious]] [[apartments]] and [[running]] an auction [[enterprise]] that deals with valuable collectibles. [[During]] the same time, a [[specialised]] adoption [[organs]] [[proprietor]] [[pick]] a mini [[holiday]] and leaves the orphanage in the charge of his father ([[Lesley]] Nielsen). Father Harry is in the rental [[businesses]] and he [[got]] the brilliant idea to "[[rented]]" some of the [[child]] of the orphanage to couples like Russ and Valerie. [[Hari]], who becomes [[conscious]] of the couple'e [[predicament]], [[furnishes]] a [[families]] of [[sisters]] for a 10 day [[rent]] [[calendars]]! Brandon, Kyle, and Molly move into the [[condo]] with their [[provisional]] [[parenting]], with amusing [[effects]], as the new [[carers]] are inexperienced with [[enfants]]. But, where is the [[potential]] of a [[cheerful]] ending? This is a darling [[familia]] film. The [[actresses]], including Nielsen as the wheeler-dealer and Christopher Lloyd as the [[kinds]] [[townhouse]] [[concierge]], are all [[wondrous]]. The script is snappy and [[droll]] and the [[whole]] production [[value]] quite high. Yes, if only life could be this way! Orphaned children everywhere [[merits]] a chance to prove that they are [[cute]] and can give so much joy to the parents who are [[consider]] adoption. If you want to show a film to your [[families]] that is rooted in good values but is [[apart]] [[very]] [[fun]], find this [[film]]. It is guaranteed to have [[someone]] laughing, [[yet]] as their hearts are [[thawing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I agree with those reviews I have read here, and I have no words to define such a turkey like this, but despite everything, I still can find a reason for movies like this to exist. Do you remenber those happy days in which video was a prosperous business, and a lot of movies were made with the only reason of filling the shelves of the video stores? this movie comes from that period and I can imagine that was the only reason for which it was produced and the same happened with many, many, many other stinkers. Do you remember "Rambo" imitations? and so many slashers of Z grade?, I still feel nostalgia for that period.About this movie I can say I didn´t waste my time watching it because I pressed the fast forward button after the first fifteen minutes, just to find a very funny scene in which a guy was pushing an axe against heads which exploded because, as you perfectly notice, they were made of plastic. And about the end, well, it was so badly filmed I could not understand what happened. That´s the same, I had not followed the non-existing plot at all. But boy, Video-age was a great age despite movies like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] [[In]] NYC, [[seaman]] Michael O'Hara (Orson [[Welles]]) rescues Elsa Bannister (Rita Hayworth) from a [[mugging]] & rape as she [[takes]] a [[horse]] & carriage through Central Park -and lives to [[regret]] it. Titian-haired Hayworth's a platinum blonde in this one; as [[dazzling]] as fresh-fallen [[snow]] -but [[nowhere]] near as [[pure]]...

To [[reveal]] any more of the convoluted plot in this seminal "[[noir]]" [[would]] be [[criminal]]. It's as [[deceptive]] as the [[mirrors]] [[used]] to cataclysmic [[effect]] in the [[final]] scenes -but the [[film]] [[holds]] far darker [[secrets]]: From the NY Times: "[[Childhood]] Shadows: The [[Hidden]] [[Story]] Of The Black Dahlia [[Murder]]" by Mary Pacios "Mary Pacios, who was 5 years [[old]] when she was befriended by 15 year [[old]] Bette Short, retraces Short's [[steps]], [[interviewing]] [[friends]] and associates. She [[also]] offered a detailed, if speculative, [[analysis]] of Orson Welles -[[particularly]] in regard to his [[movie]] "The Lady From Shanghai". [[According]] to Ms. Pacios, the [[movie]], along with [[related]] [[archival]] [[materials]], has [[many]] of the same ritualistic [[elements]] [[associated]] with Short's [[murder]]. She [[raises]] the [[question]]: Could [[Welles]] have been the [[killer]]?" Interesting [[theories]] -and with the spate of [[books]] now out on "The [[Black]] Dahlia", [[much]] more may come to light. Fritz Lang's [[brutal]] "film noir", "The [[Big]] [[Heat]]" (1953), was a roman-a-clef telling of the "Dahlia" killing in "The [[City]] Of Nets" that was L.A. -but it's the Orson [[opus]] that the "Dahlia" had a "hands-on" [[connection]] to. In reality, it was Bugsy Siegel (and the Hollywood mob wars of the 1940's) that did the "Dahlia" in ...but that doesn't negate much of what Pacios wrote. Almost all of Hollywood intersected with Elizabeth ("The Black Dahlia") Short and her tale/aura/legacy/curse is encoded in a number of Golden Age films.

The "Black Dahlia" was always on the peripheral edges of "Shanghai"-even before it started filming. Barbara Payton on Franchot Tone: "It was when he was thinking about making "The Lady From Shanghai", before he lost the option to Orson Welles. Franchot said he'd been in a bad state over that deal when he ran into the Dahlia in the Formosa Cafe* across from the Goldwyn studios..." *The floor above the Formosa Cafe was Bugsy Siegel's office and "The Dahlia" one of his on again/off again working "girls".

It gets deeper and darker- After the 1951 brawl over Barbara Payton between Tom Neal and Franchot Tone that sent Franchot to the hospital with a concussion and "never talking the same way again," Barbara said, she married Tone "just to spite Neal." Tom ("Detour") Neal also knew "The Dahlia" (who didn't?) and became obsessed- From "L.A. Despair" by John Gilmore: "The January 1947 slaying of the young, beautiful would-be actress Elizabeth Short, known as "The Black Dahlia", was one of the most grisly murders in the annals of modern crime. A project, called "Who Killed The Black Dahlia?" was being kicked off by actor Tom Neal, a hell-raiser from WW II movies. Potential producer Gene Harris: "Someone will have to come up with a more imaginative business proposition than what has been presented by Tom Neal and his cohorts..." Not long after: "It would be very clear one beautiful day to come, when Tom would sneak up on his pretty, new Palm Springs wife as she lay on their sofa and shoot a .45 bullet through her head." Barbara Payton and Norma Jean Dougherty (later Marilyn Monroe) knew the "Dahlia" and their stories are well known. It seems all who crossed the path of the "Dahlia" (like the proverbial black cat) entered a "Twilight Zone" darkness and/or had an incredible string of bad luck afterward. Tone/Neal/Welles are only a few -and this includes a butchered film called "The Lady From Shanghai"...

"Lady From Shanghai" took two years to be released, thanks to extensive re-editing -and all because Columbia president Harry Cohn couldn't understand the story. It's dark "noir" to be sure -one of the darkest, in fact. It's also a wicked satire on life in the new Atomic Age.

Nicolas Christopher:

"Shanghai" pushes forth an insistent subtext of nuclear apocalypse and contains the definitive noir statement concerning the atomic bomb and the American city. The film's principal murder victim (and there are many), a psychotic and double-dealing lawyer, manically foresees Armageddon at every turn, claiming he can "feel it." He announces that he plans to escape to a remote Pacific island -a particularly acid joke on Welles' part since this was the very year the U.S. began testing atomic bombs at just such a place, the Bikini Atoll, relocating all the inhabitants and destroying the ecosystem. By the time of Bikini, the erotic identification of Hayworth with the Bomb appears to have been institutionalized, with the blessing of the military brass; the first bomb dropped in the Pacific testing ground in named "Gilda" and has Hayworth's image, in provocative dress, painted directly on its casing..."

Its ironic that Orson Welles' broad interpretation of an Irishman is considered a detriment to the film by many. Welles is giving a clue to viewers that "Michael O'Hara" is only the storyteller - not part of the story even though it revolves around him. "O'Hara" contradicts the shark motif throughout the film. Sharks on a feeding frenzy won't stop until there's nothing left. "Michael O'Hara" lives to tell the tale. "Elsa Bannister" causes a feeding frenzy during "O'Hara's" trial and her netted chapeau suggests she's caged in -so as not to devour the human spectators to a Roman Coleseum. The spectators are on a feeding frenzy of their own, gossiping and carrying on about "Elsa" -a human aquarium correlating to the San Francisco marine museum sequence. That's the human condition ...except for "Michael O'Hara". And yet he'll be spending his life trying to forget his past ("Elsa") -or die trying. "Elsa" is part of "Michael" and the tale eats its own tail in the end and the viewer is cautioned to stay out of trouble. [[Onto]] NYC, [[marine]] Michael O'Hara (Orson [[Orson]]) rescues Elsa Bannister (Rita Hayworth) from a [[storming]] & rape as she [[pick]] a [[racehorse]] & carriage through Central Park -and lives to [[sorrow]] it. Titian-haired Hayworth's a platinum blonde in this one; as [[astounding]] as fresh-fallen [[snowfall]] -but [[wherever]] near as [[pur]]...

To [[expose]] any more of the convoluted plot in this seminal "[[negro]]" [[ought]] be [[felon]]. It's as [[fallacious]] as the [[mirror]] [[using]] to cataclysmic [[implications]] in the [[last]] scenes -but the [[cinema]] [[held]] far darker [[secrecy]]: From the NY Times: "[[Infant]] Shadows: The [[Covert]] [[Fairytales]] Of The Black Dahlia [[Murdering]]" by Mary Pacios "Mary Pacios, who was 5 years [[former]] when she was befriended by 15 year [[former]] Bette Short, retraces Short's [[measure]], [[interviewed]] [[friend]] and associates. She [[further]] offered a detailed, if speculative, [[analyzing]] of Orson Welles -[[notably]] in regard to his [[flick]] "The Lady From Shanghai". [[Depending]] to Ms. Pacios, the [[cinematography]], along with [[connected]] [[file]] [[material]], has [[several]] of the same ritualistic [[ingredients]] [[tied]] with Short's [[homicide]]. She [[begs]] the [[matter]]: Could [[Orson]] have been the [[hitman]]?" Interesting [[theory]] -and with the spate of [[ledger]] now out on "The [[Negro]] Dahlia", [[very]] more may come to light. Fritz Lang's [[cruel]] "film noir", "The [[Huge]] [[Warming]]" (1953), was a roman-a-clef telling of the "Dahlia" killing in "The [[Ville]] Of Nets" that was L.A. -but it's the Orson [[contrary]] that the "Dahlia" had a "hands-on" [[connecting]] to. In reality, it was Bugsy Siegel (and the Hollywood mob wars of the 1940's) that did the "Dahlia" in ...but that doesn't negate much of what Pacios wrote. Almost all of Hollywood intersected with Elizabeth ("The Black Dahlia") Short and her tale/aura/legacy/curse is encoded in a number of Golden Age films.

The "Black Dahlia" was always on the peripheral edges of "Shanghai"-even before it started filming. Barbara Payton on Franchot Tone: "It was when he was thinking about making "The Lady From Shanghai", before he lost the option to Orson Welles. Franchot said he'd been in a bad state over that deal when he ran into the Dahlia in the Formosa Cafe* across from the Goldwyn studios..." *The floor above the Formosa Cafe was Bugsy Siegel's office and "The Dahlia" one of his on again/off again working "girls".

It gets deeper and darker- After the 1951 brawl over Barbara Payton between Tom Neal and Franchot Tone that sent Franchot to the hospital with a concussion and "never talking the same way again," Barbara said, she married Tone "just to spite Neal." Tom ("Detour") Neal also knew "The Dahlia" (who didn't?) and became obsessed- From "L.A. Despair" by John Gilmore: "The January 1947 slaying of the young, beautiful would-be actress Elizabeth Short, known as "The Black Dahlia", was one of the most grisly murders in the annals of modern crime. A project, called "Who Killed The Black Dahlia?" was being kicked off by actor Tom Neal, a hell-raiser from WW II movies. Potential producer Gene Harris: "Someone will have to come up with a more imaginative business proposition than what has been presented by Tom Neal and his cohorts..." Not long after: "It would be very clear one beautiful day to come, when Tom would sneak up on his pretty, new Palm Springs wife as she lay on their sofa and shoot a .45 bullet through her head." Barbara Payton and Norma Jean Dougherty (later Marilyn Monroe) knew the "Dahlia" and their stories are well known. It seems all who crossed the path of the "Dahlia" (like the proverbial black cat) entered a "Twilight Zone" darkness and/or had an incredible string of bad luck afterward. Tone/Neal/Welles are only a few -and this includes a butchered film called "The Lady From Shanghai"...

"Lady From Shanghai" took two years to be released, thanks to extensive re-editing -and all because Columbia president Harry Cohn couldn't understand the story. It's dark "noir" to be sure -one of the darkest, in fact. It's also a wicked satire on life in the new Atomic Age.

Nicolas Christopher:

"Shanghai" pushes forth an insistent subtext of nuclear apocalypse and contains the definitive noir statement concerning the atomic bomb and the American city. The film's principal murder victim (and there are many), a psychotic and double-dealing lawyer, manically foresees Armageddon at every turn, claiming he can "feel it." He announces that he plans to escape to a remote Pacific island -a particularly acid joke on Welles' part since this was the very year the U.S. began testing atomic bombs at just such a place, the Bikini Atoll, relocating all the inhabitants and destroying the ecosystem. By the time of Bikini, the erotic identification of Hayworth with the Bomb appears to have been institutionalized, with the blessing of the military brass; the first bomb dropped in the Pacific testing ground in named "Gilda" and has Hayworth's image, in provocative dress, painted directly on its casing..."

Its ironic that Orson Welles' broad interpretation of an Irishman is considered a detriment to the film by many. Welles is giving a clue to viewers that "Michael O'Hara" is only the storyteller - not part of the story even though it revolves around him. "O'Hara" contradicts the shark motif throughout the film. Sharks on a feeding frenzy won't stop until there's nothing left. "Michael O'Hara" lives to tell the tale. "Elsa Bannister" causes a feeding frenzy during "O'Hara's" trial and her netted chapeau suggests she's caged in -so as not to devour the human spectators to a Roman Coleseum. The spectators are on a feeding frenzy of their own, gossiping and carrying on about "Elsa" -a human aquarium correlating to the San Francisco marine museum sequence. That's the human condition ...except for "Michael O'Hara". And yet he'll be spending his life trying to forget his past ("Elsa") -or die trying. "Elsa" is part of "Michael" and the tale eats its own tail in the end and the viewer is cautioned to stay out of trouble. --------------------------------------------- Result 4206 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] one word [[boring]].

the [[young]] demi looks good, but she's pregnant (- point for that =D) the movie is not scary at all...

the first scenes looked little crappy, i [[could]] [[render]] better clouds with my [[laptop]], and after [[effects]]. but that was then... and now is now. some [[movies]] do not get old well... this is one of them.

not worth [[renting]] or [[buying]]... [[get]] something [[better]] [[instead]] like the exorcist, ...

[[next]] =D

[[oh]] the [[drama]] [[part]] in the [[beginning]] just and [[simply]] suxor =D one word [[dull]].

the [[youthful]] demi looks good, but she's pregnant (- point for that =D) the movie is not scary at all...

the first scenes looked little crappy, i [[wo]] [[rendering]] better clouds with my [[cellular]], and after [[impact]]. but that was then... and now is now. some [[filmmaking]] do not get old well... this is one of them.

not worth [[leased]] or [[purchased]]... [[got]] something [[best]] [[however]] like the exorcist, ...

[[imminent]] =D

[[ah]] the [[theater]] [[parties]] in the [[initiating]] just and [[straightforward]] suxor =D --------------------------------------------- Result 4207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once again, I was browsing through the discount video bin and picked up this movie for $4.88. Fifty-percent of the time the movies I find in the bin are pure crap (I mean horrible beyond belief) but half the time they turn out to be surprisingly good. This movie is much better than I expected. I found it very engaging, though it was obviously made by an amateur.

The direction is nothing special, but the story is intriguing with some good thrills. I expected it to be more of a comedy, but I wasn't too disappointed.

For a thriller, this movie is surprisingly good-natured. There's no bloody violence, no profanity, no nudity, no sex. Usually, these movies require all four of those elements. The PG rating is well-deserved--not like "Sixteen Candles" where the "f" word is used twice and there's a brief gratuitous nude scene.

I just wish the romance between Corey Haim and his love interest could've been developed more. The film does tend to be plot-heavy, and the potentially good subplots are pushed off to the side. Instead of developing a chemistry between the two of them, we end up watching a careless three-minute montage of them on their romantic endeavors. They end up kissing at the end, but there's so little chemistry that it seems forced.

"The Dream Machine" is no gem, but it's good, clean entertainment. It's quite forgettable--especially with a cast of unknowns, except for Haim--but it's also much better than you'd expect.

My score: 7 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 4208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The only [[explanation]] I can muster as to why this [[film]] isn't [[widely]] distributed is because it hits too close to home for some. This movie was a [[genuine]] happy [[surprise]], the [[satire]] is [[genius]]. This film turns the lights on in the dark that is organized religion and big media, and the roaches [[scurry]] for cover. Rent the DVD and watch it for yourself if you haven't [[yet]], this [[film]] succeeds where [[many]] have failed ([[Dogma]] comes to mind) to poke it's nose under the tent, both by using [[humor]] and very clever analogies [[coupled]] with [[telling]] backdrops and [[locations]]. Can't comment in depth without revealing some [[significant]] [[spoilers]], there are some [[surprises]] in this [[film]] which even the [[seasoned]] film buff will be [[caught]] off [[guard]] by. The only [[explanations]] I can muster as to why this [[kino]] isn't [[heavily]] distributed is because it hits too close to home for some. This movie was a [[truthful]] happy [[amazement]], the [[spelling]] is [[genie]]. This film turns the lights on in the dark that is organized religion and big media, and the roaches [[scurrying]] for cover. Rent the DVD and watch it for yourself if you haven't [[however]], this [[movie]] succeeds where [[innumerable]] have failed ([[Dogmatic]] comes to mind) to poke it's nose under the tent, both by using [[mood]] and very clever analogies [[matched]] with [[saying]] backdrops and [[location]]. Can't comment in depth without revealing some [[sizeable]] [[vandals]], there are some [[stuns]] in this [[movie]] which even the [[skilled]] film buff will be [[grabbed]] off [[watchman]] by. --------------------------------------------- Result 4209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Henry]] [[Fool]] is a better [[film]]. But this is the [[perfect]] way to follow-up a film like 'Henry Fool.' To take [[Henry]] very seriously, his 'lies' and his [[mysterious]] [[aura]]. Even the opening shot of 'Henry Fool' when Simon puts his ear to the ground as Henry comes walking over the hill is more [[fully]] [[manifest]] through 'Fay [[Grim]].' The over-the-top [[jokes]], that are more or less meta-jokes (about the writing of the film and the jokes themselves), are good but the [[opening]] of the film is a little saturated in them. [[Also]] Hartley's [[use]] of Dutch angles throughout the film is [[jarring]], yes, it's intention, but it [[feels]] forced and over-used, it goes beyond jarring to, what I'd like to call, annoying. It's a flawed film, but a [[must]] see for any Hartley or 'Henry Fool' fan.

And don't listen to stupid reviews, don't watch this unless you've seen the first film. The intrigue, satire and wit of this movie is totally lost if you haven't seen Henry Fool. It's a sequel. That's just dumb. [[Gregg]] [[Imbecile]] is a better [[cinematography]]. But this is the [[irreproachable]] way to follow-up a film like 'Henry Fool.' To take [[Gregg]] very seriously, his 'lies' and his [[cryptic]] [[halo]]. Even the opening shot of 'Henry Fool' when Simon puts his ear to the ground as Henry comes walking over the hill is more [[altogether]] [[obvious]] through 'Fay [[Pessimistic]].' The over-the-top [[pranks]], that are more or less meta-jokes (about the writing of the film and the jokes themselves), are good but the [[opens]] of the film is a little saturated in them. [[Moreover]] Hartley's [[utilise]] of Dutch angles throughout the film is [[mismatched]], yes, it's intention, but it [[deems]] forced and over-used, it goes beyond jarring to, what I'd like to call, annoying. It's a flawed film, but a [[should]] see for any Hartley or 'Henry Fool' fan.

And don't listen to stupid reviews, don't watch this unless you've seen the first film. The intrigue, satire and wit of this movie is totally lost if you haven't seen Henry Fool. It's a sequel. That's just dumb. --------------------------------------------- Result 4210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] It's [[pretty]] clear that the [[director]] and production crew set out to [[paint]] a less than flattering [[picture]] of the [[Palestinian]] [[girl]] and her [[family]]. The [[film]] and it's website tries to imply that Ayat has a [[secret]] [[reason]] for [[blowing]] herself and Rachel up- a [[boyfriend]] problem- [[perhaps]] [[pregnancy]]. Neatly glossed over is the fact that Ayat had herself just witnessed the [[death]] of a [[close]] [[friend]] at the hands of the Israelis'-just outside her [[home]]. [[Gosh]],so why on [[earth]] [[would]] a [[young]], [[pretty]], [[intelligent]] [[girl]] with [[plans]] for college go and do such a thing? [[Could]] it be that the hormonal, emotional [[teenager]] was traumatized by seeing seeing [[someone]] she [[loved]] [[die]] before her very eyes? This [[detail]] [[merits]] all of 5 [[seconds]] in the [[movie]]. Another neatly sidestepped detail is that Avigail Levy, Rachels' [[mother]], could have [[prevented]] the [[destruction]] of the building the Akhras family [[lived]] in(along with 22 other [[families]]). One distinctly gets the [[impression]] that she's [[offering]] this as a "concession" - should [[Mrs]]. Akhras agree to [[speak]] with her."why should I?" she says.(since the movie was [[made]] the [[home]] has been destroyed- [[apparently]] the interview didn't result in what she wanted- so [[bring]] on the bulldozers)[[Mrs]] [[Levy]] claimed that she "[[wanted]] the movie to be cathartic as well as a [[symbol]] of [[hope]], a [[chance]] to [[transcend]] entrenched [[hatreds]]"- [[instead]] she uses it as an [[excuse]] to harangue Ayats [[mother]], while [[dangling]] the house as a carrot.Moreover although the two women live only 4 miles apart, she is so out of touch with the realities of the occupation for her Palestinian [[neighbors]], that she really [[thinks]] that [[Mrs]]. Akhras can just [[drop]] over for a cup of coffee?[[Please]].And she forgoes the one [[chance]] she had to meet [[Mrs]]. Akhras in [[person]] and [[see]] what [[kind]] of [[life]] she lives.(the Akras [[family]] originally [[came]] from Jaffa, but now [[live]] crammed into a [[refugee]] [[camp]] only 4 [[miles]] from where the Levys live in comparative [[luxury]].[[Any]] [[sympathy]] I would have had for the [[obviously]] well to do [[Mrs]]. [[Levy]] is [[dissolved]] by her [[air]] of self-righteous bitchiness.By contrast, Ayats [[mother]] comes off as [[kind]],forthright and loving- in [[spite]] of the [[best]] [[efforts]] by the post [[production]] crew to paint her and her [[family]] as [[monsters]]. Heck even the music and sound [[design]] was one sided- I guess the muezzin sings ALL day every day 4 miles from the Levy family home, always in a sharply contrasting key from the sappy new-age music that scores this drab excuse for a documentary.Also there is the small matter of translations - Mrs. Levy DIRECTLY addresses the camera in English when she has something worked out to say ahead of time, Hebrew when she doesn't. Mrs.Akhras spoke only Arabic which received sometimes a TRANSLATION, sometimes TRANSLITERATION, always awkward, and very suspect for a supposedly objective movie.They also "sweated" her under the lights, while Mrs. Levy sat in (air conditioned) comfort.Rotten editing for Mrs. Akhras' segments too. I gave it a 2 because I liked Ayats mother and father, who seemed like good decent people. Shame on HBO, producers and director, for releasing such a stink-bomb. It's [[quite]] clear that the [[headmaster]] and production crew set out to [[painted]] a less than flattering [[photo]] of the [[Palestine]] [[female]] and her [[families]]. The [[filmmaking]] and it's website tries to imply that Ayat has a [[ulterior]] [[justification]] for [[swelling]] herself and Rachel up- a [[pal]] problem- [[maybe]] [[gestation]]. Neatly glossed over is the fact that Ayat had herself just witnessed the [[muerte]] of a [[shuts]] [[buddies]] at the hands of the Israelis'-just outside her [[dwelling]]. [[Jeez]],so why on [[land]] [[ought]] a [[youthful]], [[belle]], [[smarter]] [[woman]] with [[scheme]] for college go and do such a thing? [[Did]] it be that the hormonal, emotional [[adolescence]] was traumatized by seeing seeing [[everybody]] she [[liked]] [[death]] before her very eyes? This [[details]] [[merited]] all of 5 [[secs]] in the [[filmmaking]]. Another neatly sidestepped detail is that Avigail Levy, Rachels' [[mummy]], could have [[stymied]] the [[demolished]] of the building the Akhras family [[resided]] in(along with 22 other [[family]]). One distinctly gets the [[printing]] that she's [[offers]] this as a "concession" - should [[Margot]]. Akhras agree to [[speaks]] with her."why should I?" she says.(since the movie was [[introduced]] the [[house]] has been destroyed- [[ostensibly]] the interview didn't result in what she wanted- so [[bringing]] on the bulldozers)[[Astrid]] [[Levi]] claimed that she "[[wanna]] the movie to be cathartic as well as a [[icons]] of [[hopes]], a [[luck]] to [[surpass]] entrenched [[jealousies]]"- [[however]] she uses it as an [[apologize]] to harangue Ayats [[mommy]], while [[hanging]] the house as a carrot.Moreover although the two women live only 4 miles apart, she is so out of touch with the realities of the occupation for her Palestinian [[adjoining]], that she really [[feels]] that [[Dagmar]]. Akhras can just [[drops]] over for a cup of coffee?[[Invite]].And she forgoes the one [[probability]] she had to meet [[Franziska]]. Akhras in [[persona]] and [[consults]] what [[types]] of [[lives]] she lives.(the Akras [[families]] originally [[arrived]] from Jaffa, but now [[vivo]] crammed into a [[asylum]] [[encampment]] only 4 [[km]] from where the Levys live in comparative [[deluxe]].[[Every]] [[compassion]] I would have had for the [[certainly]] well to do [[Franziska]]. [[Levies]] is [[disassembled]] by her [[airplane]] of self-righteous bitchiness.By contrast, Ayats [[mom]] comes off as [[genre]],forthright and loving- in [[sadness]] of the [[optimum]] [[action]] by the post [[productivity]] crew to paint her and her [[families]] as [[fiends]]. Heck even the music and sound [[conceive]] was one sided- I guess the muezzin sings ALL day every day 4 miles from the Levy family home, always in a sharply contrasting key from the sappy new-age music that scores this drab excuse for a documentary.Also there is the small matter of translations - Mrs. Levy DIRECTLY addresses the camera in English when she has something worked out to say ahead of time, Hebrew when she doesn't. Mrs.Akhras spoke only Arabic which received sometimes a TRANSLATION, sometimes TRANSLITERATION, always awkward, and very suspect for a supposedly objective movie.They also "sweated" her under the lights, while Mrs. Levy sat in (air conditioned) comfort.Rotten editing for Mrs. Akhras' segments too. I gave it a 2 because I liked Ayats mother and father, who seemed like good decent people. Shame on HBO, producers and director, for releasing such a stink-bomb. --------------------------------------------- Result 4211 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Emory is a Cincinatti steel worker [[like]] his father before him and for most of the 20th century the [[twin]] [[pillars]] of his family's existence have been the [[steel]] [[mill]] and the union. The mill, which once [[employed]] 45,000, has [[seen]] its [[numbers]] dwindle to 5,000 [[recently]] and now 1, as the [[plant]] just [[shut]] its [[doors]], [[leaving]] a [[single]] security [[guard]]. At first, newly-unemployed Emory and his pals enjoy their [[independence]], hanging out around [[town]] and [[carousing]] at their [[favorite]] bar, where they down "depth charges" with [[reckless]] abandon. They [[think]] the mill will reopen after listening to their union rep's [[optimistic]] spiel, but reality starts to sink in when they [[find]] themselves [[selling]] their personal [[vehicles]] in a [[struggle]] to put [[food]] on the table and [[stave]] off foreclosure of their [[homes]]. Emory's father - a [[dedicated]] union [[man]] - is sure the [[plant]] will reopen and recalls for his son all the short-lived [[closures]] during his own 35 [[years]] at the [[mill]]. Meanwhile, some of the unemployed [[men]] take demeaning make-work [[jobs]] or hop in their [[trucks]] and take off in a [[desperate]] [[search]] for employment.

[[Finally]] the union [[admits]] its [[helplessness]], as Emory [[explains]] to his stubborn father that [[times]] have [[changed]] and that the mill won't ever open again. Emory tearfully [[asks]] "What did I do wrong?" as a lifetime of hard work and devotion to job, union, church and [[family]] have left him with nothing and nowhere to [[turn]]. He hits [[rock]] bottom when in a drunken rage he manhandles his young sons and knocks his [[wife]] to the floor. Tossed out of his own [[home]] and stinging from the plant manager's comments that he and his men didn't work hard enough to justify their substantial paychecks, Emory recruits the steel [[workers]] [[still]] [[left]] in town to do something that will demonstrate to all what they are capable of. Early in the morning they break into the mill, fire up the furnaces and work harder than they ever have in their lives, producing in one shift enough high-quality steel pipes to fill the loading [[docks]] from [[wall]] to wall, top to bottom - something the [[plant]] [[manager]] thought was impossible.

Arriving at the suddenly-reopened plant, the stupefied manager looks around him at the tremendous output that came from a single day's work, realizing that production like this could make the plant profitable again. The manager asks Emory: "Can you do this every day?" Emory is forced to nod "No" and the manager asks: "Then what were you trying to prove?" Emory explains that the workers' decades of hard work, honesty and devotion to their jobs had meaning and that by showing how much they could produce in one day "We just spit in your eye." Emory bids a tearful farewell to his wife and kids as he takes off with his buddies to look for work down south, promising to relocate the family when he finds it.

This is a powerful and honest treatment of the plight of American workers displaced by foreign competition and gives a realistic view of the costs they bear for the short-sightedness of concession-demanding unions and greedy plant owners who extracted every penny they could from their factories but never gave back by modernizing them. Peter Strauss as Emory, John Goodman as his best friend, Gary Cole as his college-boy brother, Pamela Reed as Emory's sympathetic wife and John Doucette as his dying father all turn in excellent performances in this fine picture. Emory is a Cincinatti steel worker [[iike]] his father before him and for most of the 20th century the [[double]] [[foundations]] of his family's existence have been the [[stahl]] [[mills]] and the union. The mill, which once [[utilized]] 45,000, has [[saw]] its [[figures]] dwindle to 5,000 [[freshly]] and now 1, as the [[installation]] just [[closes]] its [[portals]], [[exiting]] a [[exclusive]] security [[guards]]. At first, newly-unemployed Emory and his pals enjoy their [[autonomy]], hanging out around [[ciudad]] and [[boozing]] at their [[preferred]] bar, where they down "depth charges" with [[imprudent]] abandon. They [[thinks]] the mill will reopen after listening to their union rep's [[hopeful]] spiel, but reality starts to sink in when they [[finds]] themselves [[sells]] their personal [[auto]] in a [[battling]] to put [[meal]] on the table and [[avoid]] off foreclosure of their [[dwelling]]. Emory's father - a [[devoted]] union [[dude]] - is sure the [[plants]] will reopen and recalls for his son all the short-lived [[clasps]] during his own 35 [[ages]] at the [[factory]]. Meanwhile, some of the unemployed [[males]] take demeaning make-work [[work]] or hop in their [[vans]] and take off in a [[distraught]] [[quest]] for employment.

[[Lastly]] the union [[acknowledges]] its [[weakness]], as Emory [[explained]] to his stubborn father that [[period]] have [[modify]] and that the mill won't ever open again. Emory tearfully [[poser]] "What did I do wrong?" as a lifetime of hard work and devotion to job, union, church and [[families]] have left him with nothing and nowhere to [[converting]]. He hits [[boulder]] bottom when in a drunken rage he manhandles his young sons and knocks his [[women]] to the floor. Tossed out of his own [[dwellings]] and stinging from the plant manager's comments that he and his men didn't work hard enough to justify their substantial paychecks, Emory recruits the steel [[labourers]] [[yet]] [[walkout]] in town to do something that will demonstrate to all what they are capable of. Early in the morning they break into the mill, fire up the furnaces and work harder than they ever have in their lives, producing in one shift enough high-quality steel pipes to fill the loading [[dock]] from [[mur]] to wall, top to bottom - something the [[installations]] [[manger]] thought was impossible.

Arriving at the suddenly-reopened plant, the stupefied manager looks around him at the tremendous output that came from a single day's work, realizing that production like this could make the plant profitable again. The manager asks Emory: "Can you do this every day?" Emory is forced to nod "No" and the manager asks: "Then what were you trying to prove?" Emory explains that the workers' decades of hard work, honesty and devotion to their jobs had meaning and that by showing how much they could produce in one day "We just spit in your eye." Emory bids a tearful farewell to his wife and kids as he takes off with his buddies to look for work down south, promising to relocate the family when he finds it.

This is a powerful and honest treatment of the plight of American workers displaced by foreign competition and gives a realistic view of the costs they bear for the short-sightedness of concession-demanding unions and greedy plant owners who extracted every penny they could from their factories but never gave back by modernizing them. Peter Strauss as Emory, John Goodman as his best friend, Gary Cole as his college-boy brother, Pamela Reed as Emory's sympathetic wife and John Doucette as his dying father all turn in excellent performances in this fine picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie while it was under limited release, mainly for the novelty of seeing Pierce Brosnan with a moustache, but it turned out to be one of the funniest movies I have seen all year. It starts out almost as a thriller, but steadily progresses into a hilarious piece of work full of one-liners and great comedic energy between Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear. Also, while I say this movie is a comedy, it doesn't forget it has a heart at times and can be very touching when it needs to be. When I went into the theater I didn't know what to expect much more than a moustache, but what I got was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. Leaving the theater I felt very fulfilled from the film and plan to see it again in wide release. I recommend it to anyone who appreciates a good comedy with a well-written script and a big moustache. --------------------------------------------- Result 4213 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My mom and I have just recently become addicted to this show, laughing our butts off! I've only seen about 10 episodes, and I am disappointed that I didn't pay attention to this hilarious series before they were canceled! The story line is very funny, the characters really have great personalities (or, not so great, but they're still funny!). I TiVO every episode of What I Like About You. Amanda Bynes and Jennie Garth, as well as all of the cast, never leave me bored while watching! There is some unsuitable language for children and some sexual content, but with a parental guide near, you shouldn't have too much problems. There is some sort of 'Friends' type of relationship that attracts me to this show. I really enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Elvira(Cassandra [[Peterson]]) is the [[host]] of a cheap horror show. After she finds out that her [[dead]] aunt has left her some [[stuff]], elvira goes to [[England]] to [[pick]] it up, hoping it will be some money. But to her horror, elvira [[finds]] out that all her [[aunt]] has left her is her [[house]], her [[dog]] and a cookbook. Elvira [[decides]] to [[settle]] in the [[house]] anyways, but with her [[striking]] [[dark]] looks and her stunning [[features]], she will not be [[able]] to [[live]] in [[peace]]. All the [[neighbours]] are now [[turning]] the [[whole]] [[town]] against her, and with Elvira's [[outrageous]] [[attitude]] and looks, [[everyone]] better watch out, because Elvira is on Fire! I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]], it's really [[fun]] to watch get Elvira into all these adventures, she's just [[great]]. The [[whole]] [[movie]] [[puts]] you into a halloween [[mood]], sure, it's silly and the jokes are [[cheap]] but it's a pleasure to watch it. I would give Elvira, Mistress Of The [[Dark]] 8/10 Elvira(Cassandra [[Petersen]]) is the [[hosts]] of a cheap horror show. After she finds out that her [[deceased]] aunt has left her some [[thing]], elvira goes to [[Anglia]] to [[select]] it up, hoping it will be some money. But to her horror, elvira [[found]] out that all her [[tata]] has left her is her [[maison]], her [[canine]] and a cookbook. Elvira [[decided]] to [[resolve]] in the [[maison]] anyways, but with her [[dazzling]] [[dusky]] looks and her stunning [[featured]], she will not be [[capable]] to [[viva]] in [[pacific]]. All the [[bordering]] are now [[inflection]] the [[total]] [[ciudad]] against her, and with Elvira's [[obnoxious]] [[stance]] and looks, [[everybody]] better watch out, because Elvira is on Fire! I [[truthfully]] [[loved]] this [[movies]], it's really [[amusing]] to watch get Elvira into all these adventures, she's just [[huge]]. The [[entire]] [[cinematographic]] [[raises]] you into a halloween [[ambience]], sure, it's silly and the jokes are [[cheaper]] but it's a pleasure to watch it. I would give Elvira, Mistress Of The [[Dusky]] 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4215 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Very slick, very Pre-Hays [[Code]], and [[still]] very sassy. I would [[highly]] [[recommend]] seeing this movie, [[even]] if you are not a fan of Stynwyck. She's funny, she's sexy, she's hard-working - and love that perm she gets!

Barbara Stynwyck is [[fantastic]] as a doozie of a floozy who rises up in the [[world]], perfectly portrayed by a bank building. John Wayne (in a suit!) plays one of her first conquests.

The last three minutes are a letdown, but the sets, the lines, the clothes all add to one [[heck]] of a movie about rising vertically in the horizontal position. Very slick, very Pre-Hays [[Coding]], and [[again]] very sassy. I would [[immeasurably]] [[recommendation]] seeing this movie, [[yet]] if you are not a fan of Stynwyck. She's funny, she's sexy, she's hard-working - and love that perm she gets!

Barbara Stynwyck is [[wondrous]] as a doozie of a floozy who rises up in the [[monde]], perfectly portrayed by a bank building. John Wayne (in a suit!) plays one of her first conquests.

The last three minutes are a letdown, but the sets, the lines, the clothes all add to one [[devil]] of a movie about rising vertically in the horizontal position. --------------------------------------------- Result 4216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a complete [[Hoax]]...

The movie [[clearly]] has been [[shot]] in [[north]] [[western]] Indian state of Rajasthan. [[Look]] at the chase scene - the [[vehicles]] are Indian; the writing all over is Hindi - [[language]] [[used]] in India. The [[drive]] through is on [[typical]] [[Jaipur]] streets. Also the palace is in [[Amer]] - about 10 [[miles]] from [[Jaipur]], Rajasthan. The film-makers in their (about the film) in DVD Bonus seem to make it sound that they risked their [[lives]] [[shooting]] in Kabul and [[around]]. [[Almost]] all of their [[action]] scenes are shot in India. The scene where they [[see]] a [[group]] singing [[around]] [[fire]] is so [[fake]] that they did not [[even]] [[think]] about [[changing]] it to Afgani folk song. They just [[recorded]] the Rajasthani folk song. How do I know it because I have [[traveled]] that [[area]] [[extensively]]. They are just on the band-wagon to [[make]] [[big]] on the issue. I do challenge the [[film]] [[makers]] to [[deny]] it. This is a complete [[Trickery]]...

The movie [[naturally]] has been [[kiiled]] in [[nord]] [[west]] Indian state of Rajasthan. [[Peek]] at the chase scene - the [[auto]] are Indian; the writing all over is Hindi - [[linguistics]] [[utilizing]] in India. The [[driving]] through is on [[classic]] [[Jodhpur]] streets. Also the palace is in [[Emir]] - about 10 [[km]] from [[Rajasthan]], Rajasthan. The film-makers in their (about the film) in DVD Bonus seem to make it sound that they risked their [[life]] [[gunshot]] in Kabul and [[about]]. [[Virtually]] all of their [[measures]] scenes are shot in India. The scene where they [[seeing]] a [[groups]] singing [[throughout]] [[feu]] is so [[untrue]] that they did not [[yet]] [[believe]] about [[amend]] it to Afgani folk song. They just [[registered]] the Rajasthani folk song. How do I know it because I have [[travelled]] that [[zona]] [[widely]]. They are just on the band-wagon to [[deliver]] [[prodigious]] on the issue. I do challenge the [[filmmaking]] [[producers]] to [[refusal]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4217 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies that appears on cable at like two in the afternoon to entertain bored housewives while they iron. The acting is second rate. Poor Mathew Modine seems to sleepwalk through the whole film. And god help Gina Gershon. Her accent is too over the top. It sounds nothing like an true English woman. It sounds forced and phony, much like her acting. She should stick to what she does best, lesbian showgirl con-artist who plays in a rock & roll band and has a drug problem. The other characters are no better. They are two dimensional. empty, vapid and silly. How are we to supposed to care about these people. At one point Christy Scott Cashman get's lost in Central Park. Really? It's not that hard to navigate Central Park. Just follow any path out. Not only did I not care about ANY of the characters,I downright hated them. The only reason I even stayed with this train-wreck of a film was Fisher Stevens. Even his brilliant humor couldn't save this dying Fish. Each scene is typical romantic comedy fare and nothing is left to surprise us. The script was awful as was the acting. If you catch this Fish throw it back! --------------------------------------------- Result 4218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was absolutely mesmerised by this series from the moment Tom Long walked into shot - the whole 'bad boy' thing, it was just addictive.

The story has you hooked, what will happen next - will Joey get the girl in the end, after doing 5 years in prison, and all that time thinking about his lost love, crossing paths with her again, finding he has a son... Although he is a violent bad guy, you still want him to find happiness.

A truly captivating two parter - please bring it out on video! --------------------------------------------- Result 4219 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's only one thing I need to say about this movie - the scene where Shaq is in a musical number with Francis Capra's character about wanting to be a genie; never see this movie. The story is horrible, the acting is terrible (c'mon, it's Shaq!) and I'd rather see Capra in Free Willy (equally horrible) twice before ever seeing this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How do I begin? This movie is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen .It has no redeemable qualities .I just sat through this movie and it was a struggle.It failed to get even a single smile on my face.I find it hard to believe that anyone would distribute this horrible film. I felt that this movie was a failed attempt at distasteful humor. The only thing that was worth anything about this movie was the soundtrack, I'm pretty sure thats the reason I wanted to see this movie in the first place.I will wrap this up as I am going to try and forget the time I just wasted with this piece of crap. I will leave you with this warning. DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM ,IT SUCKS. --------------------------------------------- Result 4221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Paul & Grace Hartman are my husbands grandparents. They were both deceased when we met so watching old movies is a good way to see them and their work. I have always enjoyed old movies and was very happy to discover that this was also a very good one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4222 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The title of this [[film]] [[nearly]] put me off watching it. Not being a Manchester United fan, the [[mere]] [[mention]] of Beckham was a [[bit]] off putting, [[however]] I put my [[prejudices]] [[behind]] me and I'm [[glad]] I did.

I wasn't [[expecting]] [[much]] of a film, but I was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. The film sped along with me never [[looking]] at my watch and I enjoyed [[every]] second of the [[film]]. If you liked [[East]] is East then you'll [[love]] this film. OK so the storyline is [[nothing]] new, and the [[classic]] storylines are contained [[within]] the [[film]] but it's all done very funnily, and with a [[breath]] of fresh air. The film moves very fast and keeps the audiance [[entertained]]. The occaisional funny [[moments]] are a good [[chuckle]] and not some poor [[attempt]] at [[humour]], and [[best]] of all it's a good british [[comedy]]. The title of this [[movies]] [[approximately]] put me off watching it. Not being a Manchester United fan, the [[simple]] [[referenced]] of Beckham was a [[bite]] off putting, [[conversely]] I put my [[prejudice]] [[backside]] me and I'm [[thrilled]] I did.

I wasn't [[waiting]] [[very]] of a film, but I was [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. The film sped along with me never [[researching]] at my watch and I enjoyed [[any]] second of the [[kino]]. If you liked [[Easterly]] is East then you'll [[amour]] this film. OK so the storyline is [[anything]] new, and the [[typical]] storylines are contained [[inside]] the [[kino]] but it's all done very funnily, and with a [[breathe]] of fresh air. The film moves very fast and keeps the audiance [[distracted]]. The occaisional funny [[times]] are a good [[chuckling]] and not some poor [[seeks]] at [[comedy]], and [[bestest]] of all it's a good british [[comedian]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4223 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Scarecrows is one of those films that, with a little more acting, a little more direction, and a lot more story logic, [[would]] have been quite [[compelling]] as a horror entry. As it stands, it is still a creepy film that has solid make-up and gore effects, and a premise that sustains the mood of terror in spite of itself. And [[hey]], there are no [[teenagers]] getting killed one by one--just [[dumb]] [[adults]], so that is a refreshing [[change]] of [[pace]]. And the plot line is amazingly similar to Dead [[Birds]], with a precipitating [[robbery]], an abandoned [[spooky]] house in the [[middle]] of nowhere, and [[demonic]] [[monsters]]. But just like Dead Birds, the [[adults]] are still witless, they run [[around]] cluelessly before [[getting]] slaughtered one by one, and they [[ignore]] the [[obvious]] danger.

[[In]] Scarecrows, [[though]], we never really [[find]] out the [[supernatural]] why, and that sustains the atmosphere of creepiness. And like clowns, scarecrows can be very creepy; unless they look like Ray Bolger, of course. [[Escaping]] in a [[hijacked]] [[plane]] with the [[pilot]] and his [[daughter]], after a [[robbery]] netting millions, a para-military bunch is double-crossed by one of their own; a very nervous guy named Burt. He [[jumps]] out of the [[plane]] with the big, and [[heavy]], box that [[holds]] the [[money]] with [[apparently]] no [[plans]] as to how to [[move]] it around once he is on the ground. Being the dumbest of the bunch, he is murdered first. But not before he happens upon the [[Fowler]] [[residence]], nestled snuggly amid lots of really creepy-looking scarecrows, and surrounded with a wooden fence encircled with barbed-wire and lots of warnings to stay away. And the weird weathervane on the roof, with the pitchfork and pterodactyl, should have been a warning sign, too. The [[inside]] of the house is also quite foreboding (to us in the audience, anyway).

Annoyingly, we must listen to Burt's thoughts in voice-over, as he walks around and mysteriously comes across the key to the [[decrepit]] truck in the yard. The way the key pops up [[would]] be enough to have my pants--with me in them--flying out the door. Perhaps it's just me, but I really enjoy watching people's lips move on screen, even when they are just thinking out loud. It helps to intensify the action, and gives the actor more to do than just look like what the voice-over is saying. Burt hoists the box onto the truck and makes his getaway. Sure why not? decrepit trucks always have lots of gas in them, especially with today's prices, and the battery? no problem. Now, I did mention that Burt was the dumbest of the bunch, and here is why (in addition to the above, of course). Wearing night-vision goggles to walk through the foliage and find the house, he takes them off to drive the truck away, and instead, turns on the headlights to see where he is going. Of course, the crooks still in the plane spot the headlights of his truck, and know where he is headed. Brilliant. He deserves to die. Definitely. I am not sure why he needed night vision goggles in the first place, as every scene is brightly lit, from the interior of the plane, to the night-time outside scenery, and the house. The cinematographer was either a. myopic, b. just out of school, or c. dealing with really cheap filmstock.

Burt meets his demise when the truck dies in the middle of nowhere. Go figure. One very nice touch, and there are, I must admit, a few in the film, is the fact that when he opens the truck's lid, there is no engine. Creepy, to be sure (and insert pants comment again here). The story logic fails when dead, now-stuffed-like-a-flounder-with-money-and-straw-Burt returns to the house. The rest of the bunch are there, rough him up, then realize that he is indeed dead, and was gutted and stuffed like a flounder with money and straw. Dead Burt does manage to put up quite a fight, though, and grabs one fellow by the mouth, pushing him through a window, causing him to bite off more than he could chew in a gorylicious scene. At this point, you would think they'd would be racing out of the house and back to the plane--but noooo, they decide to stay and look for the rest of the money. In fact, the whole Burt is dead episode is treated rather matter-of-factly, although one bright bulb in the bunch does argue, "Burt was walking around dead, for chrissakes!"

The stolen money suddenly appears on the grounds outside the house, and the crooks blithely go for the bait. Soon, another one of them, Jack, is dispatched, and again the scene is well done and horrific, involving a dull handsaw and no anethesia. Now there are three scarecrows going about wreaking mayhem, and one of them needs a hand, literally.

When one of the crooks sees the scarecrows and Jack getting scarecrow-ized, he starts screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun in typical para-military fashion. So much for all that training under pressure crap. He meets up with the others and stops in his tracks to explain why he is screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun, even though the scarecrows appear to be chasing him. Again, that script logic thing... Dead and gutted, Jack returns to the house, and goes after the screamer with the usual results. If you listen to Jack's demonic growl, by the way, you may notice, depending on your age, that it is the same monster-growling sound heard often in the Lost In Space TV episodes.

The last two survivors race away from the house and back to the plane, barely escaping. But do they? You will have to see the film to find out. Scarecrows is one of those films that, with a little more acting, a little more direction, and a lot more story logic, [[could]] have been quite [[persuasive]] as a horror entry. As it stands, it is still a creepy film that has solid make-up and gore effects, and a premise that sustains the mood of terror in spite of itself. And [[cheerio]], there are no [[adolescence]] getting killed one by one--just [[silly]] [[grownup]], so that is a refreshing [[shift]] of [[rhythm]]. And the plot line is amazingly similar to Dead [[Bird]], with a precipitating [[larceny]], an abandoned [[fearsome]] house in the [[mid]] of nowhere, and [[evil]] [[monster]]. But just like Dead Birds, the [[adult]] are still witless, they run [[approximately]] cluelessly before [[obtain]] slaughtered one by one, and they [[overlook]] the [[manifest]] danger.

[[At]] Scarecrows, [[nevertheless]], we never really [[found]] out the [[uncanny]] why, and that sustains the atmosphere of creepiness. And like clowns, scarecrows can be very creepy; unless they look like Ray Bolger, of course. [[Escape]] in a [[kidnapped]] [[planes]] with the [[experiment]] and his [[maid]], after a [[theft]] netting millions, a para-military bunch is double-crossed by one of their own; a very nervous guy named Burt. He [[climbs]] out of the [[planes]] with the big, and [[ponderous]], box that [[possesses]] the [[cash]] with [[manifestly]] no [[scheme]] as to how to [[budge]] it around once he is on the ground. Being the dumbest of the bunch, he is murdered first. But not before he happens upon the [[Fuller]] [[residency]], nestled snuggly amid lots of really creepy-looking scarecrows, and surrounded with a wooden fence encircled with barbed-wire and lots of warnings to stay away. And the weird weathervane on the roof, with the pitchfork and pterodactyl, should have been a warning sign, too. The [[indoors]] of the house is also quite foreboding (to us in the audience, anyway).

Annoyingly, we must listen to Burt's thoughts in voice-over, as he walks around and mysteriously comes across the key to the [[dilapidated]] truck in the yard. The way the key pops up [[could]] be enough to have my pants--with me in them--flying out the door. Perhaps it's just me, but I really enjoy watching people's lips move on screen, even when they are just thinking out loud. It helps to intensify the action, and gives the actor more to do than just look like what the voice-over is saying. Burt hoists the box onto the truck and makes his getaway. Sure why not? decrepit trucks always have lots of gas in them, especially with today's prices, and the battery? no problem. Now, I did mention that Burt was the dumbest of the bunch, and here is why (in addition to the above, of course). Wearing night-vision goggles to walk through the foliage and find the house, he takes them off to drive the truck away, and instead, turns on the headlights to see where he is going. Of course, the crooks still in the plane spot the headlights of his truck, and know where he is headed. Brilliant. He deserves to die. Definitely. I am not sure why he needed night vision goggles in the first place, as every scene is brightly lit, from the interior of the plane, to the night-time outside scenery, and the house. The cinematographer was either a. myopic, b. just out of school, or c. dealing with really cheap filmstock.

Burt meets his demise when the truck dies in the middle of nowhere. Go figure. One very nice touch, and there are, I must admit, a few in the film, is the fact that when he opens the truck's lid, there is no engine. Creepy, to be sure (and insert pants comment again here). The story logic fails when dead, now-stuffed-like-a-flounder-with-money-and-straw-Burt returns to the house. The rest of the bunch are there, rough him up, then realize that he is indeed dead, and was gutted and stuffed like a flounder with money and straw. Dead Burt does manage to put up quite a fight, though, and grabs one fellow by the mouth, pushing him through a window, causing him to bite off more than he could chew in a gorylicious scene. At this point, you would think they'd would be racing out of the house and back to the plane--but noooo, they decide to stay and look for the rest of the money. In fact, the whole Burt is dead episode is treated rather matter-of-factly, although one bright bulb in the bunch does argue, "Burt was walking around dead, for chrissakes!"

The stolen money suddenly appears on the grounds outside the house, and the crooks blithely go for the bait. Soon, another one of them, Jack, is dispatched, and again the scene is well done and horrific, involving a dull handsaw and no anethesia. Now there are three scarecrows going about wreaking mayhem, and one of them needs a hand, literally.

When one of the crooks sees the scarecrows and Jack getting scarecrow-ized, he starts screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun in typical para-military fashion. So much for all that training under pressure crap. He meets up with the others and stops in his tracks to explain why he is screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun, even though the scarecrows appear to be chasing him. Again, that script logic thing... Dead and gutted, Jack returns to the house, and goes after the screamer with the usual results. If you listen to Jack's demonic growl, by the way, you may notice, depending on your age, that it is the same monster-growling sound heard often in the Lost In Space TV episodes.

The last two survivors race away from the house and back to the plane, barely escaping. But do they? You will have to see the film to find out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4224 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I read somewhere that when Kay Francis refused to take a cut in pay, Warner Bros. retaliated by casting her in inferior projects for the remainder of her contract.

She decided to take the money. But her [[career]] [[suffered]] accordingly.

That might explain what she was doing in "Comet Over Broadway." (Though it doesn't explain why Donald Crisp and Ian Hunter are in it, too.) "Ludicrous" is the word that others have used for the plot of this film, and that's right on target. The murder trial. Her seedy vaudeville career. Her success in London. Her final scene with her daughter. No part logically leads to the next part.

Also, the sets and costumes looked like B-movie stuff. And her hair! Turner is showing lots and lots of her movies this month. Watch any OTHER one and you'll be doing yourself a favor. I read somewhere that when Kay Francis refused to take a cut in pay, Warner Bros. retaliated by casting her in inferior projects for the remainder of her contract.

She decided to take the money. But her [[professions]] [[endured]] accordingly.

That might explain what she was doing in "Comet Over Broadway." (Though it doesn't explain why Donald Crisp and Ian Hunter are in it, too.) "Ludicrous" is the word that others have used for the plot of this film, and that's right on target. The murder trial. Her seedy vaudeville career. Her success in London. Her final scene with her daughter. No part logically leads to the next part.

Also, the sets and costumes looked like B-movie stuff. And her hair! Turner is showing lots and lots of her movies this month. Watch any OTHER one and you'll be doing yourself a favor. --------------------------------------------- Result 4225 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My girlfriend picked this one; as a southern born and raised African American I found this movie's plot and premise totally without credibility. To believe that class and racial biases would be so easily and comfortably suspended would only come from someone totally unfamiliar with the ante-bellum south. Totally absurd !!! I wonder how they got a good actor like Harvey Keitel and a good actress like Andie McDowell (who being southern knows better) to participate in this crap --------------------------------------------- Result 4226 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[remember]] the days in which Kim Basinger was nothing more than a [[pretty]] [[face]] who [[adorned]] [[movies]] with typical characters of [[dumb]] Blondie,romantic interest or [[damsel]] in [[danger]].But,everything changed when she won an Academy Award as Best Supporting [[Actress]] for her role in the [[excellent]] [[movie]] L.A. [[Confidential]],and I [[think]] I was not the only one who was surprised by her [[solid]] performance.However,after that [[moment]],her career did not follow the [[ideal]] path.Sure,the prestige she won [[thanks]] to that movie [[made]] her to [[participate]] on moderately [[prestigious]] movies (like People I Know or The [[Door]] in the Floor),but we have never seen her again on a substantial character.The movie While She Was [[Out]] does [[nothing]] to put her on that situation; and it is not only that her character is not too tasty,but [[also]] that the movie is [[really]] [[crappy]].The screenplay from this movie could not be more hollow and basic.However,Basinger brings some conviction to her [[character]],and that makes this poor [[movie]] to win a few points.This [[movie]] is full of [[clichés]] and generic villains.The [[work]] of [[director]] Susan Montford is [[truly]] [[disastrous]] for many reasons but [[mainly]],because the [[movie]] never gets a good [[rhythm]] and tone.The ending from this [[movie]] is [[extremely]] [[ridiculous]].I do not [[recommend]] [[While]] She [[Was]] Out at all.This film [[commits]] the capital [[sin]] of being boring. I [[reminisce]] the days in which Kim Basinger was nothing more than a [[quite]] [[confront]] who [[ornate]] [[theater]] with typical characters of [[foolish]] Blondie,romantic interest or [[missus]] in [[risks]].But,everything changed when she won an Academy Award as Best Supporting [[Actor]] for her role in the [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] L.A. [[Secret]],and I [[thinking]] I was not the only one who was surprised by her [[robust]] performance.However,after that [[time]],her career did not follow the [[idealistic]] path.Sure,the prestige she won [[appreciation]] to that movie [[brought]] her to [[turnout]] on moderately [[illustrious]] movies (like People I Know or The [[Porte]] in the Floor),but we have never seen her again on a substantial character.The movie While She Was [[Outward]] does [[none]] to put her on that situation; and it is not only that her character is not too tasty,but [[similarly]] that the movie is [[genuinely]] [[shitty]].The screenplay from this movie could not be more hollow and basic.However,Basinger brings some conviction to her [[characters]],and that makes this poor [[kino]] to win a few points.This [[filmmaking]] is full of [[clichéd]] and generic villains.The [[cooperating]] of [[headmaster]] Susan Montford is [[really]] [[tragic]] for many reasons but [[basically]],because the [[filmmaking]] never gets a good [[tempo]] and tone.The ending from this [[filmmaking]] is [[remarkably]] [[silly]].I do not [[recommended]] [[Though]] She [[Became]] Out at all.This film [[undertakes]] the capital [[oin]] of being boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 4227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A good [[film]], and one I'll watch a number of [[times]]. [[Rich]] (the [[previous]] commenter)is right: there is much more going on here than is [[clear]] from the title [[boards]], and I have to wonder how much has suffered in [[translation]]. [[Were]] there more in the original? Or was a native-language audience [[expected]] to lip-read more? Or -- [[since]] the screenplay was [[written]] by the author of the novel on which this was [[based]] -- was this a currently popular [[story]] with which the audience was already very familiar? [[In]] short, very worth a [[look]], but it [[probably]] [[requires]] more [[work]] from [[contemporary]] [[viewers]] than the original 1913 [[audience]] had to put into it.

The [[Alpha]] [[Video]] [[release]] touts the [[new]] organ [[score]], but the [[music]] is not matched to the [[story]] [[progression]] in any [[way]]. Sure, it [[starts]] promisingly, but degenerates into a [[repetitive]], Phillip-Glass-like [[monotony]] that [[reflects]] [[nothing]] of the [[action]] on the screen. After listening for a while, I turned off the sound and simply watched: [[much]] [[better]]! A good [[kino]], and one I'll watch a number of [[period]]. [[Storied]] (the [[anterior]] commenter)is right: there is much more going on here than is [[definite]] from the title [[councils]], and I have to wonder how much has suffered in [[translate]]. [[Was]] there more in the original? Or was a native-language audience [[envisioned]] to lip-read more? Or -- [[because]] the screenplay was [[authored]] by the author of the novel on which this was [[founded]] -- was this a currently popular [[histories]] with which the audience was already very familiar? [[For]] short, very worth a [[glance]], but it [[conceivably]] [[requiring]] more [[works]] from [[modern]] [[listeners]] than the original 1913 [[spectators]] had to put into it.

The [[Alphabetical]] [[Videos]] [[emancipate]] touts the [[newer]] organ [[notation]], but the [[musicians]] is not matched to the [[stories]] [[progress]] in any [[manner]]. Sure, it [[begin]] promisingly, but degenerates into a [[repetitious]], Phillip-Glass-like [[tedium]] that [[reflect]] [[none]] of the [[activities]] on the screen. After listening for a while, I turned off the sound and simply watched: [[very]] [[best]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4228 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this was the most costly film, when produced. Sir Alexander Korda and H.G. Wells were both distressed by its poor ratings---for good reason. it was and remains far ahead of its time. aside from the seemingly poor direction, probably editing, at the very beginning, the work moves along to a stunning conclusion.

whether its Sir Ralph Richardson's 'Boss' role, or even better, his wife's, Sir Cedric's, as adversary to space-faring, Raymond Massey's 'John Cabal' center role---all deliver mind-boggling performances.

the scene with mr. Korda's incomparable set, of the small girl-child, running out to an absolutely 'never-to-be-matched' scene, commenting 'Life just keeps getting lovelier and lovelier'? that swiftly brings tears to any parent/grandparent. this is not a film for the young--unless 'experienced' and rather those who have seen 'the horror' it opposes.

sure, the 'phony-parachuting', looks hokey---while using a 'magnetic-cannon', now termed 'mass-driver' may be viewed as ridiculous, vs. rockets---give Sir Korda a break--Mr. Wells made that choice. and at +/- $8 million, this film went way beyond 'over-budget'---so he concentrated on what he could manage.

the true power of this Greatest of cinema rests in 'John Cabal's' final statement of human destiny---his friend 'Passworthy' doubts the wisdom of space-faring, saying, 'We're such little animals.' John Cabal's proper response is,(paraphrased) 'Yes, little animals, and if that is all we are, we must live and die as such.' they are standing under a large astronomical telescope. he sweeps his hand over the night sky. 'Yet we may have all the Universe, or nothing.'---then the final chorus breaks in---'Which shall it be?'---this is not 'Star Wars', 'Blade Runner'---anything you may consider 'Great'---this is the Real Thing.

i remind all of Steven Hawking's most recent address, upon his latest 'Medal of Honor'---'Humanity must leave Earth, or die.'---the very core of this work---i love 'standard entertainment'---yet this 'relic', for the wise viewer, offers far more. 'Which Shall It Be?' be in the proper 'mood'---whatever that takes---this will take your breath away---i 'guarontee'---overall, for humanity? the most significant of cinema.

since posting, i note many have commented on the poor 'media-quality' of 'surviving' examples. in the 80's i developed a 'proprietary' 'colorization' process which required a 'clean' original. this led me to Michael Korda, who sadly noted all were gone---so we must relish what remains---'sad but true?' --------------------------------------------- Result 4229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Most of the episodes on Season 1 are awful..There is no comparison to Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, as they programs actually had decent story lines. Most of Amazing Stories are well dull..not [[amazing]] in the least..go rent or buy the Twilight Zone series...I have [[heard]] Season 2 of this [[series]] is much better..also for some reason on the DVD's they [[cut]] out the Ray Walston parts which further [[diminishes]] this compilation. The one cool thing is to see actors and actresses when they were younger in 1985...Most of the story lines are very [[predictable]] though and the series could of been better with twists and turns that left you wondering... Most of the episodes on Season 1 are awful..There is no comparison to Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, as they programs actually had decent story lines. Most of Amazing Stories are well dull..not [[breathtaking]] in the least..go rent or buy the Twilight Zone series...I have [[listened]] Season 2 of this [[serial]] is much better..also for some reason on the DVD's they [[clipping]] out the Ray Walston parts which further [[declines]] this compilation. The one cool thing is to see actors and actresses when they were younger in 1985...Most of the story lines are very [[foreseeable]] though and the series could of been better with twists and turns that left you wondering... --------------------------------------------- Result 4230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]]

Paul Verhoeven finally bombed out on this one. He became a joke on himself. Once again we have a [[film]] which includes [[sex]] and violence, [[immorality]], leering at [[women]] and lots of attitiude [[talk]] between the [[characters]] and dollying pans.

Its all for nothing. Because their is no [[action]] at all in this film. It fudges all its set [[pieces]]. All the [[actors]] [[give]] the [[kind]] of performances [[form]] a Verhoeven film. [[In]] other [[words]] rampant over acting on [[almost]] [[every]] [[level]]. Starship Troopers [[got]] away with it because it was such a [[macho]] world the characters [[inhabited]]. [[In]] this [[scientists]] are acting the same [[way]]. [[Sorry]] [[Paul]] but [[Soldiers]] and scientist are not really [[made]] of the same [[mindset]].

One [[major]] [[flaw]] in the plot was that after [[escaping]] for that one night to do [[evil]] [[things]] Kevin Bacons character then [[returns]] back to the science lab where we have already [[spent]] more then enough [[time]] [[watching]] these animated manniquens ([[Elizabeth]] Shue [[excepted]]) [[walk]] and [[talk]]. Why not show the extent of what the character [[could]] do in the [[outside]] [[world]]. How could they possibly [[track]] him if he [[could]] be [[anywhere]] at all??? [[Think]] os all the [[different]] things that [[could]] have been done with this [[concept]], both in terms of story and characterisation. Then look at what this film does and you really how [[badly]] [[done]] and concieved the [[whole]] project really was.

More [[insulting]] is the Doco on the DVD where [[everyone]] is [[claiming]] that Verhoeven is some [[kind]] of MAd [[Genius]]. Well one out of two [[isnt]] that [[bad]].

This [[film]] has [[nothing]] of [[note]] in it. [[Just]] like the title [[says]].

[[Hollow]]!!!

Paul Verhoeven finally bombed out on this one. He became a joke on himself. Once again we have a [[filmmaking]] which includes [[sexuality]] and violence, [[debauchery]], leering at [[girl]] and lots of attitiude [[speak]] between the [[attribute]] and dollying pans.

Its all for nothing. Because their is no [[measures]] at all in this film. It fudges all its set [[slices]]. All the [[players]] [[confer]] the [[genera]] of performances [[shape]] a Verhoeven film. [[Across]] other [[expression]] rampant over acting on [[approximately]] [[all]] [[levels]]. Starship Troopers [[gets]] away with it because it was such a [[virile]] world the characters [[populated]]. [[For]] this [[scientist]] are acting the same [[pathway]]. [[Apology]] [[Pablo]] but [[Troops]] and scientist are not really [[introduced]] of the same [[psyche]].

One [[principal]] [[faults]] in the plot was that after [[leaking]] for that one night to do [[demonic]] [[aspects]] Kevin Bacons character then [[comeback]] back to the science lab where we have already [[spend]] more then enough [[times]] [[staring]] these animated manniquens ([[Isabel]] Shue [[exempted]]) [[marche]] and [[speaks]]. Why not show the extent of what the character [[wo]] do in the [[exterior]] [[globe]]. How could they possibly [[tracking]] him if he [[wo]] be [[nowhere]] at all??? [[Thinking]] os all the [[various]] things that [[did]] have been done with this [[concepts]], both in terms of story and characterisation. Then look at what this film does and you really how [[desperately]] [[accomplished]] and concieved the [[totality]] project really was.

More [[pejorative]] is the Doco on the DVD where [[everybody]] is [[alleging]] that Verhoeven is some [[genre]] of MAd [[Engineering]]. Well one out of two [[aint]] that [[naughty]].

This [[films]] has [[none]] of [[observes]] in it. [[Righteous]] like the title [[said]].

[[Empty]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4231 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kurt Thomas in one of the series of gymnast olympic stars turned movie stars movies that mercifully only includes one other..Mitch Gaylord in American Anthem...at least that one had Janet Jones..this one has...um... a gymnast using his martial arts and his gymnastic skills to save a european country from dictatorship..sure it could happen.. on a scale of one to ten.. a 0 --------------------------------------------- Result 4232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Summer Phoenix did a great performance where you really feel what she's not able to feel and you just cannot understand what she has on her mind. Besides, she portrays a jewish girl who behaves really confronting the status quo of that century. --------------------------------------------- Result 4233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Unfortunately, one of the [[best]] [[efforts]] [[yet]] made in the [[area]] of [[special]] [[effects]] has been made completely pointless by being placed [[alongside]] a [[lumbering]], silly and [[equally]] pointless plot and an [[inadequate]], clichéd screenplay. Hollow [[Man]] is a rather useless [[film]].

Practically everything [[seen]] here has been [[done]] to death - the [[characters]], the idea and the action sequences (especially the lift shaft!) - with the only [[genuinely]] [[intriguing]] element of the [[film]] being the [[impressive]] [[special]] [[effects]]. However, it is just the same special effect done over and over again, and by the end of the [[film]] that has been done to [[death]] also. I was [[hoping]] before watching Hollow Man that the Invisible [[Man]] [[theme]], which is [[hardly]] [[original]] in itself, would be the [[basis]] of [[something]] [[newer]] and more interesting. This is not so. It isn't long before the [[film]] [[turns]] into an overly-familiar blood bath and [[mass]] of ineffectual histrionics - the mound of clichés [[piles]] up so [[fast]] that it's [[almost]] impressive.

On [[top]] of all this, Kevin Bacon does a pretty [[useless]] job and his [[supporting]] [[cast]] are hardly trying their [[best]]. Good [[points]] might be a passable [[Jerry]] Goldsmith [[score]] (but no competition for his [[better]] [[efforts]]), a quite interesting use of thermal [[imagery]] and the [[special]] [[effects]]. I was [[tempted]] to give this [[film]] three out of [[ten]], but the [[effects]] push Hollow Man's [[merit]] up one notch.

4/10 Unfortunately, one of the [[optimum]] [[action]] [[even]] made in the [[realms]] of [[peculiar]] [[consequences]] has been made completely pointless by being placed [[beside]] a [[woods]], silly and [[likewise]] pointless plot and an [[insufficient]], clichéd screenplay. Hollow [[Dude]] is a rather useless [[flick]].

Practically everything [[noticed]] here has been [[effected]] to death - the [[characteristics]], the idea and the action sequences (especially the lift shaft!) - with the only [[really]] [[enigmatic]] element of the [[filmmaking]] being the [[surprising]] [[specific]] [[consequences]]. However, it is just the same special effect done over and over again, and by the end of the [[filmmaking]] that has been done to [[deaths]] also. I was [[wait]] before watching Hollow Man that the Invisible [[Men]] [[themes]], which is [[scarcely]] [[initial]] in itself, would be the [[base]] of [[anything]] [[novel]] and more interesting. This is not so. It isn't long before the [[filmmaking]] [[revolves]] into an overly-familiar blood bath and [[mace]] of ineffectual histrionics - the mound of clichés [[batteries]] up so [[promptly]] that it's [[nigh]] impressive.

On [[supreme]] of all this, Kevin Bacon does a pretty [[superfluous]] job and his [[succour]] [[casting]] are hardly trying their [[nicest]]. Good [[dots]] might be a passable [[Gerry]] Goldsmith [[punctuation]] (but no competition for his [[optimum]] [[action]]), a quite interesting use of thermal [[visuals]] and the [[peculiar]] [[influences]]. I was [[attempted]] to give this [[filmmaking]] three out of [[dix]], but the [[ramifications]] push Hollow Man's [[deserves]] up one notch.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4234 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Centered in the downtown and out skirts of Detroit, this comedy I found to be a terrific new comedic duo. 'Noriyuki Pat Morita' is a very funny man, who happens to be a cop from Japan on the trail of an industrial secrets thief, who has stolen a 'proto type' turbo super charger, reluctantly he goes to the United States to follow the thief, after being ordered by his commander. Pat's character collides with 'Jay Leno's' character, a fast talking' but down to business-player type Detroit cop. When they cross paths though, the honorable 'Ways' of Japan meet the all-out old school Detroit police investigative 'Ways'. The two stumble and trip over each other at first, but then develop a 'rythym' that turns into an explosive two layered powerhouse team, that solves the case, cold. After battling a city crime boss for the stolen 'equiptment' and closing the case, these two go from despising each other to being friends and working well together. A little worse for wear and in need of an extended-vacation on top of it all, they manage to come to a victorious closing. I rated this a 9. Lewis's direction makes' this a near perfect comedy. Fun for all ages. I recommend it highly.(***) --------------------------------------------- Result 4235 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Platoon is to the Vietnam War as Rocky IV is to heavyweight championship boxing. Oliver Stone's story of the experience of a US Army platoon in Vietnam in 1968 is so [[overdone]] it's [[laughable]]. While most or all of the occurrences in Platoon did [[occur]] over the 10+ year [[span]] of US military involvement in [[Vietnam]], to [[portray]] these things happening to one [[small]] group of [[men]] in such a [[short]] time [[frame]] ([[weeks]]) [[gives]] a horribly skewed [[picture]] of the [[war]]. [[In]] Platoon, the men of the platoon [[see]] all of the following in the course of a [[week]] or two: US soldiers [[murdering]] civilians, US Soldiers raping [[civilians]], a [[US]] [[Sergeant]] [[murdering]] another [[US]] Sergeant, a [[US]] [[Private]] [[murdering]] a [[US]] [[Staff]] [[Sergeant]], US soldiers [[killed]]/[[wounded]] by friendly fire, 90%+ [[killed]] or [[wounded]] in the platoon. For Stone to [[try]] to pass this [[film]] off as the [[typical]] [[experience]] of a [[US]] soldier in [[Vietnam]] is a [[disgrace]]. Two Vietnam War films I would [[recommend]] are We [[Were]] [[Soldiers]] (the [[TRUE]] [[story]] of [[arguably]] the [[worst]] [[battle]] for [[US]] [[soldiers]] in Vietnam) and HBO's A [[Bright]] [[Shining]] Lie. Platoon is to the Vietnam War as Rocky IV is to heavyweight championship boxing. Oliver Stone's story of the experience of a US Army platoon in Vietnam in 1968 is so [[overkill]] it's [[farcical]]. While most or all of the occurrences in Platoon did [[happen]] over the 10+ year [[spanning]] of US military involvement in [[Hanoi]], to [[describe]] these things happening to one [[tiny]] group of [[man]] in such a [[succinct]] time [[framework]] ([[chow]]) [[donne]] a horribly skewed [[pictures]] of the [[warfare]]. [[For]] Platoon, the men of the platoon [[behold]] all of the following in the course of a [[weeks]] or two: US soldiers [[assassinating]] civilians, US Soldiers raping [[civilian]], a [[USA]] [[Sgt]] [[assassinated]] another [[USA]] Sergeant, a [[AMERICANS]] [[Privately]] [[slaying]] a [[USA]] [[Employees]] [[Sgt]], US soldiers [[assassinated]]/[[injured]] by friendly fire, 90%+ [[assassinated]] or [[injuring]] in the platoon. For Stone to [[tried]] to pass this [[cinema]] off as the [[classic]] [[enjoying]] of a [[AMERICANS]] soldier in [[Hanoi]] is a [[shame]]. Two Vietnam War films I would [[recommendation]] are We [[Was]] [[Servicemen]] (the [[VERITABLE]] [[storytelling]] of [[unquestionably]] the [[hardest]] [[battling]] for [[USA]] [[troops]] in Vietnam) and HBO's A [[Shiny]] [[Glossy]] Lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Elfriede Jelinek, not [[quite]] a [[household]] name yet, is a winner of the Nobel [[prize]] for literature. Her novel spawned a film that won second prize at Cannes and top prizes for the male and female leads. Am I a dinosaur in matters of aesthetic appreciation or has art become so debased that anything goes?

'Gobble, gobble' is the favoured orthographic representation in [[Britain]] of the bubbling noise made by a turkey. [[In]] the [[film]] world a turkey is a monumental flop as measured by box office receipts or critical reception. 'Gobble, gobble' and The Piano Teacher are perfect partners.

The [[embarrassing]] awfulness of this [[widely]] praised film cannot be overstated. It [[begins]] very [[badly]], as if [[made]] to annoy the viewer. Credits interrupt [[inconsequential]] scenes for more than 11 minutes. We are introduced to [[Professor]] Erika Kohut, [[apparently]] the [[alter]] ego of the accoladed authoress, a stony [[professor]] of piano. She [[lives]] with her husky and domineering [[mum]]. Dad is an institutionalised madman who dies unseen during what passes for the action.

[[Reviewing]] The Piano Teacher is difficult, beyond [[registering]] its unpleasantness. What we see in the film (and might read in the book, for all I know) is a tawdry, exploitative, [[nonsensical]] tale of an emotional pendulum that swings hither and [[thither]] without [[moving]] on.

Erika, whose name is [[minimally]] used, is [[initially]] shown as a [[person]] with [[intense]] musical [[sensitivity]] but [[otherwise]] totally [[repressed]]. Not [[quite]], because there's a handbags at two [[paces]] scene with her gravelly-voiced maman early on that [[ends]] with profuse [[apologies]]. If a [[reviewer]] has to (yawn) [[extract]] a leitmotif (why not [[use]] a [[pretentious]] word when a simpler one would do), Elrika's violently alternating moods [[would]] be it.

A [[young]] [[hunk]], [[Walter]], [[studying]] to become a 'low voltage' [[engineer]], [[whatever]] that is, and [[playing]] ice hockey in his few leisure [[moments]], is [[also]] a talented pianist. He [[encounters]] Elrika at an old-fashioned recital in a luxury [[apartment]] in what may or may not be Paris. [[In]] the [[glib]] fashion of so much [[art]], he [[immediately]] falls in [[love]] and [[starts]] to 'cherchez la femme'.

Repressed Erika has a liking for hardcore pornography, shown briefly but graphically for a few seconds while she sniffs a tissue taken from the waste basket in the private booth where she watches.

Walter performs a brilliant audition and is grudgingly accepted as a private student by Erika, whose teaching style is characterised by remoteness, hostility, discouragement and humiliation.

He soon declares his love and before long pursues Erika into the Ladies where they engage in mild hanky panky and incomplete oral sex. Erika retains control over her lovesick swain. She promises to send him a letter of instruction for further pleasurable exchanges.

In the meantime, chillingly jealous because of Walter's kindness to a nervous student who is literally having the shits before a rehearsal for some future concert, Erika fills the student's coat pocket with broken glass, causing severe lacerations to those delicate piano-playing hands.

The next big scene (by-passing the genital self-mutilation, etc) has Walter turning up at the apartment Erika shares with her mother. Erika want to be humiliated, bound, slapped, etc. Sensible Walter is, for the moment, repulsed and marches off into the night.

At this point there's still nearly an hour to go. The viewer can only fear the worst. Erika tracks down Walter to the skating rink where he does his ice hockey practice. They retire to a back room. Lusty Wally is unable to resist the hands tugging at his trousers. His 'baby gravy' is soon expelled with other stomach contents. Ho hum.

Repulsed but hooked, perhaps desirous of revenge for the insult so recently barfed on the floor, Walter returns to Erika's [[apartment]]. Can you guess what happens now? It's not very deep or difficult. Yes, he becomes a brute while Erika becomes a victim. One moment he's locking maman in her room and slapping Erika, the next he's kicking her in the face, having sex with her and renewing his declarations of love.

Am I being unfair in this summary? Watch the film if you want, but I'd advise you not to.

Anyone can see eternity in a grain of sand if they're in the right mood. I could expatiate at the challenging depiction of human relationships conveyed by this film if I wanted. But I 'prefer not to', because this is a cheap and nasty film that appeals to base instincts and says nothing.

I'm supposed to say that parentally repressed Erika longs for love, ineffectively seeks it in pornography, inappropriately rejects it when it literally appears, pink and throbbing, under her nose, belatedly realises that she doesn't like being hurt, blah, blah, blah.

The world has, for reasons not explained, stunted her. She apparently makes a monster out of someone who appeared superficially loving - but surely we all know that any man is potentially a violent rapist, because that's his essential nature however much he tries to tell himself and the world otherwise.

At the end, if you have the patience to be there, there's a small twist. Before going to the final scene, where she's due to perform as a substitute for the underwear-soiling student with the lacerated hands, Erika packs a knife in her handbag. For Walter?

Yes, you're ahead of me. She stabs herself in a none life-threatening area and leaves. Roll credits.

If this earned the second prize at Cannes, just how bad were the rest of the entries? Elfriede Jelinek, not [[rather]] a [[housing]] name yet, is a winner of the Nobel [[awards]] for literature. Her novel spawned a film that won second prize at Cannes and top prizes for the male and female leads. Am I a dinosaur in matters of aesthetic appreciation or has art become so debased that anything goes?

'Gobble, gobble' is the favoured orthographic representation in [[Brittany]] of the bubbling noise made by a turkey. [[Among]] the [[filmmaking]] world a turkey is a monumental flop as measured by box office receipts or critical reception. 'Gobble, gobble' and The Piano Teacher are perfect partners.

The [[distracting]] awfulness of this [[extensively]] praised film cannot be overstated. It [[beginning]] very [[desperately]], as if [[introduced]] to annoy the viewer. Credits interrupt [[unimportant]] scenes for more than 11 minutes. We are introduced to [[Teachers]] Erika Kohut, [[visibly]] the [[changes]] ego of the accoladed authoress, a stony [[educator]] of piano. She [[vie]] with her husky and domineering [[mommy]]. Dad is an institutionalised madman who dies unseen during what passes for the action.

[[Examining]] The Piano Teacher is difficult, beyond [[logging]] its unpleasantness. What we see in the film (and might read in the book, for all I know) is a tawdry, exploitative, [[irrational]] tale of an emotional pendulum that swings hither and [[hither]] without [[shifting]] on.

Erika, whose name is [[casually]] used, is [[firstly]] shown as a [[persona]] with [[ferocious]] musical [[sensibility]] but [[alternatively]] totally [[stifled]]. Not [[rather]], because there's a handbags at two [[rhythms]] scene with her gravelly-voiced maman early on that [[terminates]] with profuse [[apology]]. If a [[examiner]] has to (yawn) [[excerpt]] a leitmotif (why not [[utilizing]] a [[conceited]] word when a simpler one would do), Elrika's violently alternating moods [[could]] be it.

A [[youthful]] [[bite]], [[Walther]], [[examining]] to become a 'low voltage' [[mechanics]], [[whichever]] that is, and [[gaming]] ice hockey in his few leisure [[times]], is [[further]] a talented pianist. He [[confrontation]] Elrika at an old-fashioned recital in a luxury [[flat]] in what may or may not be Paris. [[For]] the [[flippant]] fashion of so much [[artistry]], he [[quickly]] falls in [[amour]] and [[initiating]] to 'cherchez la femme'.

Repressed Erika has a liking for hardcore pornography, shown briefly but graphically for a few seconds while she sniffs a tissue taken from the waste basket in the private booth where she watches.

Walter performs a brilliant audition and is grudgingly accepted as a private student by Erika, whose teaching style is characterised by remoteness, hostility, discouragement and humiliation.

He soon declares his love and before long pursues Erika into the Ladies where they engage in mild hanky panky and incomplete oral sex. Erika retains control over her lovesick swain. She promises to send him a letter of instruction for further pleasurable exchanges.

In the meantime, chillingly jealous because of Walter's kindness to a nervous student who is literally having the shits before a rehearsal for some future concert, Erika fills the student's coat pocket with broken glass, causing severe lacerations to those delicate piano-playing hands.

The next big scene (by-passing the genital self-mutilation, etc) has Walter turning up at the apartment Erika shares with her mother. Erika want to be humiliated, bound, slapped, etc. Sensible Walter is, for the moment, repulsed and marches off into the night.

At this point there's still nearly an hour to go. The viewer can only fear the worst. Erika tracks down Walter to the skating rink where he does his ice hockey practice. They retire to a back room. Lusty Wally is unable to resist the hands tugging at his trousers. His 'baby gravy' is soon expelled with other stomach contents. Ho hum.

Repulsed but hooked, perhaps desirous of revenge for the insult so recently barfed on the floor, Walter returns to Erika's [[apartments]]. Can you guess what happens now? It's not very deep or difficult. Yes, he becomes a brute while Erika becomes a victim. One moment he's locking maman in her room and slapping Erika, the next he's kicking her in the face, having sex with her and renewing his declarations of love.

Am I being unfair in this summary? Watch the film if you want, but I'd advise you not to.

Anyone can see eternity in a grain of sand if they're in the right mood. I could expatiate at the challenging depiction of human relationships conveyed by this film if I wanted. But I 'prefer not to', because this is a cheap and nasty film that appeals to base instincts and says nothing.

I'm supposed to say that parentally repressed Erika longs for love, ineffectively seeks it in pornography, inappropriately rejects it when it literally appears, pink and throbbing, under her nose, belatedly realises that she doesn't like being hurt, blah, blah, blah.

The world has, for reasons not explained, stunted her. She apparently makes a monster out of someone who appeared superficially loving - but surely we all know that any man is potentially a violent rapist, because that's his essential nature however much he tries to tell himself and the world otherwise.

At the end, if you have the patience to be there, there's a small twist. Before going to the final scene, where she's due to perform as a substitute for the underwear-soiling student with the lacerated hands, Erika packs a knife in her handbag. For Walter?

Yes, you're ahead of me. She stabs herself in a none life-threatening area and leaves. Roll credits.

If this earned the second prize at Cannes, just how bad were the rest of the entries? --------------------------------------------- Result 4237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] [[Let]] me [[begin]] by [[saying]] I am a [[big]] [[fantasy]] fan. However, this [[film]] is not for me. Many far-fetched arguments are [[trying]] to [[support]] this film's claim that [[dragons]] [[possibly]] ever [[existed]]. The [[film]] mentions connections in [[different]] [[stories]] from [[different]] countries, but fails to [[investigate]] them more thoroughly, which [[could]] have [[given]] the [[film]] some credibility. The [[film]] [[uses]] ([[nice]]!) CGI to tell us a narrated [[fantasy]] story on a young dragon's [[life]]. This is [[combined]] with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it [[look]] like [[something]] scientific, which it is [[definitely]] not. [[In]] [[many]] [[cases]] the [[arguments]]/[[clues]] are far-fetched. [[In]] some [[cases]], [[clues]] used to [[show]] dragons [[possibly]] [[existed]], or [[flew]], or spit fire are [[simply]] [[invalid]]. To see this just makes me get [[cramp]] in my toes. [[Even]] a fantasy [[film]] [[needs]] some degree of [[reality]] in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a [[pretentious]] fantasy-CSI [[documentary]], not worth watching. [[Leave]] me [[starting]] by [[telling]] I am a [[massive]] [[utopia]] fan. However, this [[filmmaking]] is not for me. Many far-fetched arguments are [[seeking]] to [[supporting]] this film's claim that [[dragoons]] [[arguably]] ever [[exists]]. The [[filmmaking]] mentions connections in [[diverse]] [[story]] from [[distinct]] countries, but fails to [[investigated]] them more thoroughly, which [[wo]] have [[gave]] the [[movie]] some credibility. The [[filmmaking]] [[employs]] ([[pleasurable]]!) CGI to tell us a narrated [[utopia]] story on a young dragon's [[vida]]. This is [[merging]] with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it [[glance]] like [[somethin]] scientific, which it is [[decidedly]] not. [[Among]] [[several]] [[lawsuits]] the [[controversies]]/[[cues]] are far-fetched. [[Throughout]] some [[lawsuits]], [[cues]] used to [[shows]] dragons [[probably]] [[exists]], or [[flied]], or spit fire are [[purely]] [[null]]. To see this just makes me get [[crick]] in my toes. [[Yet]] a fantasy [[filmmaking]] [[require]] some degree of [[actuality]] in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a [[presumptuous]] fantasy-CSI [[literature]], not worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 4238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Slow, boring, extremely repetitive. No wonder the Weinstein Company did not buy this. This Spurlock should eat more McDonalds while filming himself, and quit producing. There is no way you can watch this and enjoy. The preacher is a joke. The whole idea is not funny. You can make a 2 minute film with this idea not a feature. I am so sorry I rented this movie. I will never watch anything with the name Spurlock on it. It is completely garbage. Filmmakers like this should be on youtube and never be granted a distribution deal. The film states that the American Consumers and their shopping are at fault for the current depression when shopping and buying products, making money circulate in the system are the base of a healthy economy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4239 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Brokedown Palace is the story of two best friends, [[Alice]] and [[Darlene]], who [[go]] on a spontaneous trip to Thailand and wind up in prison after being caught with planted drugs in their [[luggage]]. [[In]] this [[way]], the [[movie]] had the potential to [[turn]] into a serious and moving film, such as "[[Return]] to Paradise", but [[instead]], the movie [[chose]] to [[focus]] little on the girls' situation and more on their friendship.

Claire [[Danes]] and Kate Beckinsale both [[turn]] in [[excellent]] performances, and the [[movie]] is much more about the interplay between them - the suspicion, the jealousy, the questioning and testing of their friendship and ultimately the sacrifices made in the name of friendship. This movie chooses not to delve too [[deeply]] into politics or even into the harshness of prison life (which is a bit glossed over), and focuses more on these friendship issues.

There were some plot holes here, and some parts that just didn't [[seem]] believable or realistic. We didn't feel the real fear or [[hopelessness]] of their situation as well as we might have. And we get very little feeling of life outside the prison walls, with Bill Pullman playing the supposedly [[sleazy]] lawyer who actually turns out to have a heart of gold. In short, this should, by all rights, have been a much darker movie than it was.

But [[overall]], I enjoyed it. The acting was good, the soundtrack was [[perfect]], and the storyline had enough twists and turns to stay interesting. Worth seeing. Brokedown Palace is the story of two best friends, [[Altar]] and [[Dolly]], who [[going]] on a spontaneous trip to Thailand and wind up in prison after being caught with planted drugs in their [[suitcase]]. [[Onto]] this [[ways]], the [[cinematography]] had the potential to [[transforming]] into a serious and moving film, such as "[[Returns]] to Paradise", but [[conversely]], the movie [[elects]] to [[accent]] little on the girls' situation and more on their friendship.

Claire [[Denmark]] and Kate Beckinsale both [[turning]] in [[wondrous]] performances, and the [[kino]] is much more about the interplay between them - the suspicion, the jealousy, the questioning and testing of their friendship and ultimately the sacrifices made in the name of friendship. This movie chooses not to delve too [[crucially]] into politics or even into the harshness of prison life (which is a bit glossed over), and focuses more on these friendship issues.

There were some plot holes here, and some parts that just didn't [[appears]] believable or realistic. We didn't feel the real fear or [[helplessness]] of their situation as well as we might have. And we get very little feeling of life outside the prison walls, with Bill Pullman playing the supposedly [[sordid]] lawyer who actually turns out to have a heart of gold. In short, this should, by all rights, have been a much darker movie than it was.

But [[whole]], I enjoyed it. The acting was good, the soundtrack was [[faultless]], and the storyline had enough twists and turns to stay interesting. Worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] That's the sound of Stan and Ollie spinning in their [[graves]].

I won't bother listing the fundamental [[flaws]] of this movie as they're so obvious they go without saying. Small things, like this being "The All New Adventures of Laurel and Hardy" despite the [[stars]] being dead for over thirty years when it was made. Little things like that.

A bad idea would be to have actors playing buffoons whom just happen to be called Laurel and Hardy. As bad as that is, it might have worked. For a really bad idea, [[try]] casting two actors to impersonate the duo. Okay, they might claim to be nephews, but the end [[result]] is the same.

Bronson Pinchot can be funny. Okay, forget his wacky foreigner "Cousin Larry" schtick in Perfect Strangers, and look at him in True Romance. Here though, he stinks. It's probably not all his fault, and, like the director and the support cast - all of who are better than the material - he was probably just desperate for money. There are those who claim Americans find it difficult to master an effective English accent. This cause is not helped here by Pinchot. What is Stan? Welsh? Iranian? Pakistani? Only in Stan's trademark yelp does he come close, though as the yelp is overdone to the point of [[tedium]] that's nothing to write home about. Gailard Sartain does slightly better as Ollie, though it's like saying what's worse - stepping in dog dirt or a kick in the knackers?

Remember the originals with their split-second timing, intuitive teamwork and innate loveability? Well that's absent altogether, [[replaced]] with two stupid old men and jokes so mistimed you [[could]] park a bus through the gaps. [[Whereas]] the originals had plots that could be summed up in a couple of panels, this one has some long-winded Mummy hokum (and what a [[lousy]] title!) that's mixed in with the boys' fraternity scenario. I can't claim to have seen every single one of Laurel and Hardy's 108 movies, but I think it's a safe bet that even their nadir was leagues ahead of this.

Maybe the major problem is that the originals were sort-of playing themselves, or at least using their own accents. It at least felt natural and unforced, as opposed to the contrived caricatures Pinchot and Sartain are given. And since when did Stan do malapropisms, and so many at that? "I was gonna give you a standing cremation"; "I would like to marinate my friend." Stop it!

Only notable moment is a reference to Bozo the Clown, the cartoon character who shared Larry Harmon's L & H comic. Harmon of course bought the name copyright (how disconcerting to see a ® after Laurel and Hardy) and was co-director and producer of this travesty.

Questions abound. Would Stan and Ollie do fart gags if they were alive today? Would they glass mummies with broken bottles? Have Stan being smacked in the genitals with a spear and end on a big CGI-finale? Let's hope not.

I did laugh once, but I think that was just in disbelief at how terrible it all is. Why was this film made in the first place? Who did the makers think would like it? Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen, an absolute abhorrence I grew sick of watching after just the first five minutes. About as much fun as having your head trapped in a vice while a red-hot poker and stinging nettles are forcibly inserted up your back passage. That's the sound of Stan and Ollie spinning in their [[headstones]].

I won't bother listing the fundamental [[demerits]] of this movie as they're so obvious they go without saying. Small things, like this being "The All New Adventures of Laurel and Hardy" despite the [[celebrity]] being dead for over thirty years when it was made. Little things like that.

A bad idea would be to have actors playing buffoons whom just happen to be called Laurel and Hardy. As bad as that is, it might have worked. For a really bad idea, [[seek]] casting two actors to impersonate the duo. Okay, they might claim to be nephews, but the end [[findings]] is the same.

Bronson Pinchot can be funny. Okay, forget his wacky foreigner "Cousin Larry" schtick in Perfect Strangers, and look at him in True Romance. Here though, he stinks. It's probably not all his fault, and, like the director and the support cast - all of who are better than the material - he was probably just desperate for money. There are those who claim Americans find it difficult to master an effective English accent. This cause is not helped here by Pinchot. What is Stan? Welsh? Iranian? Pakistani? Only in Stan's trademark yelp does he come close, though as the yelp is overdone to the point of [[drudgery]] that's nothing to write home about. Gailard Sartain does slightly better as Ollie, though it's like saying what's worse - stepping in dog dirt or a kick in the knackers?

Remember the originals with their split-second timing, intuitive teamwork and innate loveability? Well that's absent altogether, [[supersedes]] with two stupid old men and jokes so mistimed you [[wo]] park a bus through the gaps. [[Albeit]] the originals had plots that could be summed up in a couple of panels, this one has some long-winded Mummy hokum (and what a [[rotten]] title!) that's mixed in with the boys' fraternity scenario. I can't claim to have seen every single one of Laurel and Hardy's 108 movies, but I think it's a safe bet that even their nadir was leagues ahead of this.

Maybe the major problem is that the originals were sort-of playing themselves, or at least using their own accents. It at least felt natural and unforced, as opposed to the contrived caricatures Pinchot and Sartain are given. And since when did Stan do malapropisms, and so many at that? "I was gonna give you a standing cremation"; "I would like to marinate my friend." Stop it!

Only notable moment is a reference to Bozo the Clown, the cartoon character who shared Larry Harmon's L & H comic. Harmon of course bought the name copyright (how disconcerting to see a ® after Laurel and Hardy) and was co-director and producer of this travesty.

Questions abound. Would Stan and Ollie do fart gags if they were alive today? Would they glass mummies with broken bottles? Have Stan being smacked in the genitals with a spear and end on a big CGI-finale? Let's hope not.

I did laugh once, but I think that was just in disbelief at how terrible it all is. Why was this film made in the first place? Who did the makers think would like it? Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen, an absolute abhorrence I grew sick of watching after just the first five minutes. About as much fun as having your head trapped in a vice while a red-hot poker and stinging nettles are forcibly inserted up your back passage. --------------------------------------------- Result 4241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Earlier today I got into an [[argument]] on why so [[many]] people complain about modern films in which I [[encountered]] a [[curious]] statement: "the [[character]] [[development]] in [[newer]] movies just isn't [[nearly]] as good or interesting as it used to be." Depending on the [[film]](s) in [[question]], this can be [[attributed]] to a number of [[things]], sometimes generic special [[effects]] and plot-driven Hollywood [[garbage]] like [[War]] Of The Worlds, but in the [[case]] of over-the-top, uninteresting attempts at [[social]] [[commentary]] and a desperate struggle to put "art" back into [[cinema]], it's movies like [[Dog]] Days that are to [[blame]].

I [[normally]] have a very [[high]] tolerance for [[movies]], no matter how dull or [[pointless]] I [[find]] them (ranging from good, [[long]] ones like [[Andrei]] Rublev and [[Dogville]], to ones I've [[considered]] painful to sit through a la Alpha [[Dog]] and [[Wild]] Wild [[West]]). I [[shut]] this [[movie]] off 45 minutes in, which is 30 minutes more than I actually should have. I wasn't interested in any of the [[characters]] whatsoever and [[found]] [[nothing]] [[substantial]] beyond a thin veil of unfocused pessimism. [[In]] an [[attempt]] to [[say]] [[something]] about the dregs of [[society]], this [[film]] too easily [[falls]] into being self-indulgent, [[trite]], and exploitative in a very [[sincere]] sense. Granted, I've [[seen]] [[many]] [[disturbing]] [[movies]] on the same [[subject]], but there are so [[many]] [[better]] [[films]] out there about depressing, [[pathetic]] people (Happiness, Gummo, [[Kids]], Salo, [[Storytelling]], Irreversible) that actually contain [[characters]] of [[great]] emotional depth and personality. [[Dog]] Days had [[none]] more than an eighth grader's distaste for society, [[choosing]] to [[ignore]] any true [[intelligence]] about the [[way]] people actually are, and [[instead]] choosing to be a [[dull]], [[awful]], and hopelessly unoriginal [[attempt]] at a [[work]] of "art." This isn't a characterization of the [[unknown]] or a [[clever]] [[observation]] into the dregs of society, it's just [[boring]] and [[nothing]] worth caring about. Earlier today I got into an [[controversy]] on why so [[myriad]] people complain about modern films in which I [[confronted]] a [[strange]] statement: "the [[characteristics]] [[evolution]] in [[newest]] movies just isn't [[around]] as good or interesting as it used to be." Depending on the [[filmmaking]](s) in [[matter]], this can be [[awarded]] to a number of [[matters]], sometimes generic special [[impact]] and plot-driven Hollywood [[refuse]] like [[Warfare]] Of The Worlds, but in the [[lawsuit]] of over-the-top, uninteresting attempts at [[societal]] [[feedback]] and a desperate struggle to put "art" back into [[movies]], it's movies like [[Canine]] Days that are to [[guilt]].

I [[usually]] have a very [[alto]] tolerance for [[cinematography]], no matter how dull or [[vain]] I [[finds]] them (ranging from good, [[prolonged]] ones like [[Andrey]] Rublev and [[Umbridge]], to ones I've [[deemed]] painful to sit through a la Alpha [[Canine]] and [[Wilde]] Wild [[Western]]). I [[closure]] this [[movies]] off 45 minutes in, which is 30 minutes more than I actually should have. I wasn't interested in any of the [[hallmarks]] whatsoever and [[find]] [[anything]] [[vast]] beyond a thin veil of unfocused pessimism. [[Among]] an [[try]] to [[told]] [[anything]] about the dregs of [[societal]], this [[films]] too easily [[dip]] into being self-indulgent, [[commonplace]], and exploitative in a very [[heartfelt]] sense. Granted, I've [[saw]] [[multiple]] [[worrying]] [[cinema]] on the same [[theme]], but there are so [[various]] [[optimum]] [[cinema]] out there about depressing, [[deplorable]] people (Happiness, Gummo, [[Juvenile]], Salo, [[Story]], Irreversible) that actually contain [[features]] of [[marvelous]] emotional depth and personality. [[Puppy]] Days had [[nos]] more than an eighth grader's distaste for society, [[opted]] to [[ignores]] any true [[intellect]] about the [[path]] people actually are, and [[alternatively]] choosing to be a [[boring]], [[horrific]], and hopelessly unoriginal [[attempts]] at a [[cooperate]] of "art." This isn't a characterization of the [[undisclosed]] or a [[smarter]] [[observing]] into the dregs of society, it's just [[dull]] and [[none]] worth caring about. --------------------------------------------- Result 4242 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A strange mix of traditional-80s, smartassy, Chevy Chase-type, "every-ten-lines-you-get-a-funny-one" farce and sickie black comedy. Mildly amusing in spots, but utterly tasteless. There is a skiing sequence that includes the fakest-looking back-projections since "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". (**) --------------------------------------------- Result 4243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] i [[think]] that's this is [[awful]] produced and [[directed]] movie. Benicio Del Toro shouldn't [[work]] in production of [[movies]], he should put accent on his acting and that's it. [[Steven]] Soderbergh [[missed]] the [[whole]] point of the [[idea]] about revolution, about it's ideals, and most [[important]] about [[life]] of Che Guevara and so on. [[Camera]] is awful, like [[someone]] with 2 day [[working]] [[experience]] is [[shooting]] with it, music is ...i don't know..is there some music in the [[movie]]???? i will not [[recommended]] this [[piece]] of sh.. to no one. It's just [[wasting]] about 4 [[hours]] in [[front]] of the TV or whatever.... I can't figure out how can [[someone]] rate this [[movie]] more than 3 stars. [[DISASTER]]....[[DISASTER]]....[[DISASTER]]....[[DISASTER]] Don't watch [[please]]. Save yourself from this [[misery]] of "[[movie]]" i [[thinking]] that's this is [[abhorrent]] produced and [[oriented]] movie. Benicio Del Toro shouldn't [[cooperates]] in production of [[kino]], he should put accent on his acting and that's it. [[Stephen]] Soderbergh [[flunked]] the [[overall]] point of the [[ideas]] about revolution, about it's ideals, and most [[essential]] about [[lifetime]] of Che Guevara and so on. [[Cameras]] is awful, like [[anybody]] with 2 day [[cooperating]] [[enjoying]] is [[gunfire]] with it, music is ...i don't know..is there some music in the [[filmmaking]]???? i will not [[suggested]] this [[slice]] of sh.. to no one. It's just [[wastage]] about 4 [[hour]] in [[newsweek]] of the TV or whatever.... I can't figure out how can [[everyone]] rate this [[movies]] more than 3 stars. [[DISASTERS]]....[[DISASTERS]]....[[DISASTERS]]....[[DISASTERS]] Don't watch [[invite]]. Save yourself from this [[pittance]] of "[[movies]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 4244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This film is awful. Not offensive but [[extremely]] predictable. The movie follows the [[life]] of a [[small]] [[town]] [[family]] in the mid-60's. The [[father]], the [[principal]] at the [[school]], is [[going]] through a mid-life [[crisis]]. [[Enter]] a [[pretty]] teacher from the [[big]] [[city]] who [[starts]] [[challenging]] her students' [[minds]] with some thought-provoking stuff, like [[think]] for yourself. The principal doesn't agree with her teaching but she is pretty. You can connect the dots. His teenage [[daughter]] (Winona [[Ryder]] wannabe Tara [[Frederick]]) is fed up with the small town lifestyle and [[wants]] to live. She gets some bad advice, hangs out with some bad boys and apparently family planning wasn't being [[taught]] at her school. [[Shocking]]! Seeing that director [[Paul]] Shapiro has [[mainly]] worked in TV, this [[movie]] plays like a more [[adult]] [[version]] of an after-school special or a very special episode of one of the more [[mundane]] sitcoms. This film is awful. Not offensive but [[considerably]] predictable. The movie follows the [[lives]] of a [[scant]] [[city]] [[families]] in the mid-60's. The [[fathers]], the [[primary]] at the [[tuition]], is [[gonna]] through a mid-life [[crises]]. [[Penetrate]] a [[quite]] teacher from the [[overwhelming]] [[ville]] who [[embark]] [[challenge]] her students' [[wits]] with some thought-provoking stuff, like [[thoughts]] for yourself. The principal doesn't agree with her teaching but she is pretty. You can connect the dots. His teenage [[girls]] (Winona [[Raider]] wannabe Tara [[Fredrik]]) is fed up with the small town lifestyle and [[want]] to live. She gets some bad advice, hangs out with some bad boys and apparently family planning wasn't being [[learning]] at her school. [[Staggering]]! Seeing that director [[Poul]] Shapiro has [[mostly]] worked in TV, this [[filmmaking]] plays like a more [[mature]] [[stepping]] of an after-school special or a very special episode of one of the more [[corny]] sitcoms. --------------------------------------------- Result 4245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "I went to the movies, to see 'Beat Street' / it wasn't bad, it was kinda' neat / 'Krush Groove' was a flick, that I didn't mind / but when it came to 'Rappin', I drew the line." Word to your mother.

Want me to stop?

That's just a small sample of the stupa-fly style of rhymin' on display in this waste of film and location permits. This movie is seriously wack (thats 80s-speak for just f*cking awful). As an emcee, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of an actor. And as an actor, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of a bodybuilder.

Any film calling itself "Rappin'" had better deliver at that genre's highest standard of the time. So why were 6 year olds rolling in the aisles, even back in the day when standards were so knee-high-to-"Webster"-low? Because this rap is weak. So weak that not even B.E.T. or Comedy Central will touch it with a 10-foot gold-rope chain.

Blondie's "Rapture" is def poetry next to this bit of Dr. Suess in the hood. So don't be a boobie, avoid this movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 4246 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I don't buy kung fu [[movies]] for a plot. I buy them for fight scenes. A bad [[plot]] can be forgiven for [[excellent]] fight scenes, but not the other way around.

The story was decent, but [[moved]] too [[slowly]] for my tastes. There were about 3 or 4 mediocre fight scenes throughout, lasting only a couple of minutes apiece. The last fight was a bit longer, but by that point i was so [[bored]] i didn't [[even]] [[pay]] attention to it. I don't buy kung fu [[movie]] for a plot. I buy them for fight scenes. A bad [[intrigue]] can be forgiven for [[sumptuous]] fight scenes, but not the other way around.

The story was decent, but [[shifted]] too [[softly]] for my tastes. There were about 3 or 4 mediocre fight scenes throughout, lasting only a couple of minutes apiece. The last fight was a bit longer, but by that point i was so [[drilled]] i didn't [[yet]] [[payrolls]] attention to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was [[truly]] [[dreadful]]! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly [[acted]], and was like an amateur [[remake]] of evil dead but not nearly as good.

It took all my [[tenacity]] to make it through this one, it's a [[good]] [[job]] I didn't have to [[visit]] the [[toilet]] [[else]] I doubt I [[would]] have [[come]] back! This one makes [[Hammer]] House of Horror look like a [[big]] screen Hollywood [[epic]].

The only [[value]] to this movie was the never [[ending]] supply of [[beautiful]] women. Not a bad one [[among]] them!

[[If]] you want to letch with your [[friends]] after a [[night]] on the [[beer]] then this one's for you ... else [[avoid]] it like the plague! This was [[genuinely]] [[horrific]]! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly [[reacted]], and was like an amateur [[redo]] of evil dead but not nearly as good.

It took all my [[perseverance]] to make it through this one, it's a [[alright]] [[labour]] I didn't have to [[visits]] the [[latrines]] [[further]] I doubt I [[could]] have [[coming]] back! This one makes [[Sledgehammer]] House of Horror look like a [[overwhelming]] screen Hollywood [[saga]].

The only [[valuing]] to this movie was the never [[ceasing]] supply of [[sumptuous]] women. Not a bad one [[between]] them!

[[Though]] you want to letch with your [[friendships]] after a [[overnight]] on the [[casket]] then this one's for you ... else [[forestall]] it like the plague! --------------------------------------------- Result 4248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] What a [[dreadful]] [[film]] this is. The only reason you would want to sit through this [[mess]] is the pleasurable sight of Miss Eleniak. The painful overacting of Mr McNamara, which became embarrassing at times, ruined what might have been a reasonable film if the correct actors had been cast. Mr McNamara is no Tom Cruise, the actor he obviously wants to be. What a [[abysmal]] [[kino]] this is. The only reason you would want to sit through this [[chaos]] is the pleasurable sight of Miss Eleniak. The painful overacting of Mr McNamara, which became embarrassing at times, ruined what might have been a reasonable film if the correct actors had been cast. Mr McNamara is no Tom Cruise, the actor he obviously wants to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 4249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I Last night I had the [[pleasure]] of seeing the [[movie]] BUG at the [[Florida]] [[Film]] [[Festival]] and [[let]] me say it was a [[real]] [[treat]]. The Directors were there and they did a Q&A afterwards. The movie begins with a young boy smashing a roach beneath his foot, a [[man]] who is nearby parking his car [[sees]] the young boy smash it and runs to ask the [[kid]] `why? why? did he have to [[kill]] that living creature?' in his [[rush]] to counsel the [[youth]] in the error of his [[ways]], the man neglects to pay his parking meter, which starts off a whole chain of events involving people not at all related to him, some funny, some [[sad]], and some ridiculous. This [[movie]] has a [[lot]] of [[laughs]], Lots! and there are many actors which you will [[recognize]]. The main actors who [[stood]] out in the film for me were: Jamie Kennedy (from his comedy show the Jamie Kennedy Experiment, playing a fortune cookie writer; John Carroll Lynch (who plays Drew's cross dressing brother on the Drew Carey show) playing the animal loving guy who just can't get it right; Brian Cox (The original Hannibal Lecter in Manhunter) playing the germaphobic owner of a Donut and Chinese Food Take Out joint. There is one line where Cox tells his chef to wash off some pigs blood that is on the sidewalk by saying "clean up that death" which is quite funny mostly because of Cox's "obsessed with germs" delivery. The funniest moment in the movie comes when a young boy imitates his father, whom he heard earlier in the day yell out `MotherF*****', while in the classroom. Another extremely funny and surreal scene is when Trudie Styler (Mrs. Sting herself) and another actor perform a scene on a cable access show, from the film the boy in the plastic bubble. The actor who hosts the cable access show is just amazing he is so serious and deadpan and his performance as both the doctor and the boy in the plastic bubble is enthralling. There are many other fine and funny actors and actresses in this film and having shot it in less than a month with a budget of just about $1 million, the directors Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi (who are screenwriters by trade, having written crazy/beautiful and the upcoming Tuxedo starring Jackie Chan) have achieved a film that is great, funny and endearing. I Last night I had the [[joy]] of seeing the [[flick]] BUG at the [[Fl]] [[Flick]] [[Festivals]] and [[leave]] me say it was a [[actual]] [[processing]]. The Directors were there and they did a Q&A afterwards. The movie begins with a young boy smashing a roach beneath his foot, a [[males]] who is nearby parking his car [[believes]] the young boy smash it and runs to ask the [[kids]] `why? why? did he have to [[assassinated]] that living creature?' in his [[rashness]] to counsel the [[jugend]] in the error of his [[mode]], the man neglects to pay his parking meter, which starts off a whole chain of events involving people not at all related to him, some funny, some [[unfortunate]], and some ridiculous. This [[cinematic]] has a [[batches]] of [[chuckles]], Lots! and there are many actors which you will [[concede]]. The main actors who [[amounted]] out in the film for me were: Jamie Kennedy (from his comedy show the Jamie Kennedy Experiment, playing a fortune cookie writer; John Carroll Lynch (who plays Drew's cross dressing brother on the Drew Carey show) playing the animal loving guy who just can't get it right; Brian Cox (The original Hannibal Lecter in Manhunter) playing the germaphobic owner of a Donut and Chinese Food Take Out joint. There is one line where Cox tells his chef to wash off some pigs blood that is on the sidewalk by saying "clean up that death" which is quite funny mostly because of Cox's "obsessed with germs" delivery. The funniest moment in the movie comes when a young boy imitates his father, whom he heard earlier in the day yell out `MotherF*****', while in the classroom. Another extremely funny and surreal scene is when Trudie Styler (Mrs. Sting herself) and another actor perform a scene on a cable access show, from the film the boy in the plastic bubble. The actor who hosts the cable access show is just amazing he is so serious and deadpan and his performance as both the doctor and the boy in the plastic bubble is enthralling. There are many other fine and funny actors and actresses in this film and having shot it in less than a month with a budget of just about $1 million, the directors Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi (who are screenwriters by trade, having written crazy/beautiful and the upcoming Tuxedo starring Jackie Chan) have achieved a film that is great, funny and endearing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4250 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first look on the cover of this picture, it looks like a good rock n roll movie. But don't let the cover fool you, or the fact that Alice Cooper and Blondie is in it. The storyline is just horrible, and so is the acting. Plain and simple: BAD

It's not a movie about a roadie, its just a thin love story, so awful that you see right through it. The only good thing about this movie, is the soundtrack.Some good songs, and that is why I give 2 out of 10. If it wasn't for the music, it would of been 0 out of 10. Meat Loaf is a horrible actor(at least he was in 1980), and the girl who plays the groupie isn't even good looking! This movie was a huge disappointment for me, because it makes a lot of good promises. --------------------------------------------- Result 4251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In 2054 Paris, Avalon, a computer generated system, controls the city and when a young woman is kidnapped, detective Karas (Craig) must go against Avalon to find her.

Renaissance is a splendid blend of film making mixed with a conceptual futuristic narrative that lights up the screen in a shocking manor with a noir themed ideology and conceptual montages that should delight many.

Pixar are the animation masters. Their numerous Oscar winning films are endless from the charming Toy Story to the mystifying Wall-E and so any company or director has a real challenge to knock them of their perch. Renaissance isn't a film aimed for the young audience though, and like 2007's Persepolis, brings a strong and mature approach to the genre of animation to make an older and more challenging film to its targeted older generation.

In 2005 Robert Rodriguez released a shockingly brilliant noir Sin City that shook up the whole usage of green screen with a splendid balance of filming in black and white with the odd spurts of colour and a year later, Christian Volckman took up a similar approach with this equally visually masterful stroke of film making.

Volckman's picture however is a full on animation but it doesn't half look realistic for the majority of it's strong 1 hour and 40 minutes of running time. The faces of the character's are well portrayed and in particular, this film has got to be the finest ever for the usage of shadow. The fact we never know if its night or day is irrelevant when simply gazing into the stony faces as the shadows blend across their expressions. It is almost a clever use of pathetic fallacy, and is finely directed also.

For anyone who has seen Persepolis you will have come to the conclusion it is one of the finest directed animations ever screened for the simple but highly conceptual artistic style by Marjane Satrapi

Renaissance is equally on terms with that picture and in many instances rivals it with stronger graphics and a darker tone to reflect the mood. One scene in particular when Karas appears out of darkness is beautifully shot.

The narrative revolves around a stubborn and nosey political government who keeps tabs on every citizen. The running of Paris is down to the mysterious Avalon which we don't see nearly enough to get an essence of its true dominance. Renaissance is controlling the narrative around a tired cop's attempts to rescue the mysterious woman, and then we see Craig's tired and boring cop attempt a rescue whilst battling with other elements. There are many things wrong with the scripting, not to mention the tired exasperated cop routine is now old, but there is plenty of dashing adrenaline and springy banter between characters to keep it alive right till a wonderfully shot shocking last couple of stages. --------------------------------------------- Result 4252 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Obviously, there wasn't a huge [[budget]] for this [[film]] which definitely [[hindered]] the [[production]]. But the [[story]] and ending were so brutal that they [[made]] up for a [[lot]]. I mean [[brutal]] on the [[level]] of Ju Dou and other ([[great]]) Chinese [[films]]. I [[first]] [[saw]] this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and [[begged]] God to [[forgive]] me for everything... Obviously, there wasn't a huge [[budgets]] for this [[films]] which definitely [[hobbled]] the [[productivity]]. But the [[conte]] and ending were so brutal that they [[accomplished]] up for a [[batch]]. I mean [[barbarous]] on the [[grades]] of Ju Dou and other ([[wondrous]]) Chinese [[kino]]. I [[firstly]] [[observed]] this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and [[pleaded]] God to [[amnesty]] me for everything... --------------------------------------------- Result 4253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Once again, Disney manages to make a children's movie which totally ignores its [[background]]. About the only thing common with this and the [[original]] Gadget [[cartoons]] is the [[names]]. The most [[glaring]] [[errors]] are the [[characters]] - Penny does not have her [[book]], Brain has been reduced from a [[character]] to a fancy [[prop]], Dr Claw is more a show-off than an [[evil]] villain, [[etc]]. but there are more than that. The [[horrors]] [[start]] from the first minutes of the film - having Gadget as a [[security]] [[guard]] [[called]] John Brown doesn't help [[identifying]] him as the [[classic]] Inspector [[Gadget]]. And right in the [[beginning]] we see Disney's [[blatant]] attempt to turn every [[story]] ever into a [[love]] [[affair]] between a [[man]] and a [[woman]] - they [[introduce]] [[Brenda]], who only serves to [[make]] this [[movie]] Disney-compatible. [[Add]] to this the [[fact]] that the "[[Claw]]" seen in this film and the classic Dr Claw are almost diagonally [[opposite]] and you'll [[see]] this is going to be [[nowhere]] near the original storyline. What would help would be a [[better]] storyline to [[replace]] it - but as you guessed, Disney [[failed]] in that too. The whole movie is just [[Gadget]] acting silly for silliness's sake and [[lusting]] after Brenda. As if to add insult to the injury, Disney introduced the "new" Gadgetmobile - it doesn't look, [[function]] or think like the old Gadgetmobile at all, it's just the canonical "comic relief" figure. Disney obviously recognised that the Gadget cartoons were a comedy, so they made the film a comedy too, but they took out all the clever running gags (like the assignment paper exploding in the Chief's face) and replaced them with [[Gadget]] being a [[moron]], the Gadgetmobile being a wise-ass, and "Claw" showing off. Someone should tell Disney that "children's movie" doesn't imply "total lack of any brain usage". Gadget should be targeted for children of 10-12 years... not children of 10-12 months like this movie. Whatever this movie is supposed to be, it is [[NOT]], repeat NOT, the real Inspector Gadget. [[Because]] I love the old Gadget, I [[hate]] this. Once again, Disney manages to make a children's movie which totally ignores its [[backgrounds]]. About the only thing common with this and the [[initial]] Gadget [[cartoon]] is the [[surnames]]. The most [[seeming]] [[error]] are the [[character]] - Penny does not have her [[books]], Brain has been reduced from a [[characters]] to a fancy [[helix]], Dr Claw is more a show-off than an [[malicious]] villain, [[cetera]]. but there are more than that. The [[terrors]] [[launching]] from the first minutes of the film - having Gadget as a [[assurance]] [[guarding]] [[drew]] John Brown doesn't help [[determine]] him as the [[typical]] Inspector [[Thingy]]. And right in the [[beginnings]] we see Disney's [[apparent]] attempt to turn every [[tale]] ever into a [[amore]] [[fling]] between a [[dude]] and a [[femme]] - they [[introducing]] [[Lori]], who only serves to [[deliver]] this [[film]] Disney-compatible. [[Added]] to this the [[facto]] that the "[[Pincer]]" seen in this film and the classic Dr Claw are almost diagonally [[opus]] and you'll [[seeing]] this is going to be [[somewhere]] near the original storyline. What would help would be a [[best]] storyline to [[replaces]] it - but as you guessed, Disney [[faulted]] in that too. The whole movie is just [[Gizmo]] acting silly for silliness's sake and [[coveting]] after Brenda. As if to add insult to the injury, Disney introduced the "new" Gadgetmobile - it doesn't look, [[operation]] or think like the old Gadgetmobile at all, it's just the canonical "comic relief" figure. Disney obviously recognised that the Gadget cartoons were a comedy, so they made the film a comedy too, but they took out all the clever running gags (like the assignment paper exploding in the Chief's face) and replaced them with [[Contraption]] being a [[jackass]], the Gadgetmobile being a wise-ass, and "Claw" showing off. Someone should tell Disney that "children's movie" doesn't imply "total lack of any brain usage". Gadget should be targeted for children of 10-12 years... not children of 10-12 months like this movie. Whatever this movie is supposed to be, it is [[NO]], repeat NOT, the real Inspector Gadget. [[Since]] I love the old Gadget, I [[abhor]] this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4254 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I [[really]] [[wanted]] to [[like]] this [[movie]]. It has a nice [[prison]] [[setting]], [[conspiracy]] [[theories]], [[bloodthirsty]] zombies, a [[perfectly]] [[hideous]] 80s-touch and it is a directorial effort by actor [[John]] [[Saxon]], who also plays a [[bad]] (you guessed it) a [[bad]] [[guy]]. It [[reminds]] me of some ([[beloved]]) Italian horror flicks. But the direction is very [[wooden]] and there is no nightmarish/[[frightening]] [[moment]] in there. It just goes on and on and on, and then it ([[logically]]) has to [[end]]. More suspense and more [[daring]] [[visuals]] and its destiny as a [[cult]] classic [[would]] have been sealed. I [[truthfully]] [[wished]] to [[fond]] this [[movies]]. It has a nice [[prisons]] [[configured]], [[conspiracies]] [[theory]], [[homicidal]] zombies, a [[totally]] [[frightful]] 80s-touch and it is a directorial effort by actor [[Giovanni]] [[Saxony]], who also plays a [[unfavorable]] (you guessed it) a [[unfavorable]] [[pal]]. It [[resembles]] me of some ([[dearest]]) Italian horror flicks. But the direction is very [[timber]] and there is no nightmarish/[[creepy]] [[time]] in there. It just goes on and on and on, and then it ([[understandably]]) has to [[ending]]. More suspense and more [[audacious]] [[picture]] and its destiny as a [[heresy]] classic [[could]] have been sealed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I know it is [[fashionable]] now to hate this [[movie]]. I have [[seen]] hundreds of spook [[films]] [[including]] he original 1963 Haunting as well as most of the Hammer [[films]]. This film is not restrained and does not [[hold]] back at all which is [[probably]] why so [[many]] modern viewers [[seemed]] not to [[like]] it. [[Yet]] [[many]] viewers can [[accept]] out of control [[films]] like [[Scream]] because [[knife]] [[killers]] are more [[easy]] to [[believe]] for most people than [[demons]] or ghosts. Actually this film had [[many]] [[great]] scenes and the acting and special effects were great. I have seen it 15 [[times]] now and it [[gets]] better [[every]] [[time]]. The director of this [[film]] has [[made]] a number of interesting and [[stylish]] films and was not [[trying]] for the [[type]] of [[realism]] of the 6th sense. The Haunting lets go and is [[certainly]] not [[boring]]. [[Perhaps]] this film might appeal more to John Carpenter [[fans]] but more of an [[traditional]] plot structure. The [[old]] Haunting was [[also]] a fine [[film]] from 1963. It was [[even]] more scary. See both and [[also]] The [[Innocents]] and The Legend of Hell [[House]] with Pamela Franklin. I know it is [[trendy]] now to hate this [[film]]. I have [[noticed]] hundreds of spook [[cinema]] [[include]] he original 1963 Haunting as well as most of the Hammer [[film]]. This film is not restrained and does not [[held]] back at all which is [[presumably]] why so [[several]] modern viewers [[sounded]] not to [[fond]] it. [[Still]] [[countless]] viewers can [[accepts]] out of control [[movie]] like [[Howling]] because [[stab]] [[assassins]] are more [[simple]] to [[believing]] for most people than [[devils]] or ghosts. Actually this film had [[various]] [[wondrous]] scenes and the acting and special effects were great. I have seen it 15 [[moments]] now and it [[obtains]] better [[any]] [[period]]. The director of this [[cinematography]] has [[accomplished]] a number of interesting and [[stylized]] films and was not [[attempting]] for the [[sorts]] of [[realistic]] of the 6th sense. The Haunting lets go and is [[definitely]] not [[bored]]. [[Likely]] this film might appeal more to John Carpenter [[lovers]] but more of an [[classical]] plot structure. The [[longtime]] Haunting was [[apart]] a fine [[kino]] from 1963. It was [[yet]] more scary. See both and [[further]] The [[Blameless]] and The Legend of Hell [[Haus]] with Pamela Franklin. --------------------------------------------- Result 4256 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the first reviewer's comment far more than I did the film when I saw it at a second-run theatre in the early '80's. I was impressed then by the care taken to create costumes modelled so closely after the Tenniel drawings. But to me, the cast was largely squandered, their personalities muffled by the masks, while the direction I think of as being unusually static, and the photography murky. The rating jotted down at the time was a nought, which means "not worth sitting through even once".

Still, I too would jump at a chance to have a second look. --------------------------------------------- Result 4257 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A heartwarming film. The usual superb acting by John Thaw, who passed over recently. A man who was always so unassuming. He was one of Englands top 10 actors certainly of my time.

He can be remembered for his famous role of Inspector Morse. As Jack Regan in the 1970's hit TV series 'the Sweeney and as a barrister in Kavanah QC. A must see for all the family and a great DVD for my collection. The filming will bring back a few memories for people who remember wartime Britain and certainly those who were evacuated out of London to escape the German bombings. The interaction between the two main characters.Tom and the boy William was really well acted and true to the book by Michelle Magorian. --------------------------------------------- Result 4258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Some [[genre]] [[films]] [[need]] to be dressed up. This one was an exception. Taken on its own [[merit]], it's a [[dressed]] down version of the [[horror]] [[genre]] [[film]]. With [[minimal]] special effects, it [[manages]] to be a [[psychological]] [[study]] of [[sorts]], with a [[simple]] [[yet]] existential [[theme]] - who [[gets]] [[hit]] by the [[bus]], and why her? It's not a [[great]] film, [[yet]] because there is [[little]] contrived about it, the [[story]] [[works]]. Subtle, and all about the [[interactions]] of the [[characters]]. Actually, there is one contrivance in the [[opening]] scenes, but it may have been placed there to [[simply]] set the tone for what's to [[come]]. I very much appreciate the [[balance]] of [[male]] and female [[energy]], and [[would]] not recommend this story to [[anyone]] interested in more than people [[reacting]] to a [[physical]] and [[psychological]] [[challenge]]. You will [[enjoy]] the [[film]] if you have some [[empathy]], value the need for a bit of adventure in your [[life]], and wonder "What would I do in this situation?" Some [[sort]] [[film]] [[gotta]] to be dressed up. This one was an exception. Taken on its own [[merits]], it's a [[clothed]] down version of the [[terror]] [[genera]] [[movie]]. With [[lowest]] special effects, it [[runs]] to be a [[mental]] [[investigated]] of [[class]], with a [[mere]] [[still]] existential [[subject]] - who [[got]] [[knocked]] by the [[buses]], and why her? It's not a [[excellent]] film, [[again]] because there is [[petit]] contrived about it, the [[fairytales]] [[collaborated]]. Subtle, and all about the [[interactive]] of the [[features]]. Actually, there is one contrivance in the [[commencement]] scenes, but it may have been placed there to [[purely]] set the tone for what's to [[arrive]]. I very much appreciate the [[balancing]] of [[masculine]] and female [[energies]], and [[could]] not recommend this story to [[someone]] interested in more than people [[responding]] to a [[corporal]] and [[psychiatric]] [[challenged]]. You will [[enjoying]] the [[movie]] if you have some [[empathetic]], value the need for a bit of adventure in your [[living]], and wonder "What would I do in this situation?" --------------------------------------------- Result 4259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] First of all, I saw this movie when I was 7 years old at a Christian Scholl I attended. Needless to say that I was scared out of mind. Not because it was scary but because the content.Cmon...I was 7. Anyway, the cinematography was pretty [[bad]] and the acting was cheesy. That's very bad considering that I was only 7 and I remember that. The one thing that still haunts me is that [[dreadful]] [[song]] "I wish we all were ready" where the chorus ends with "...you were left behind". I wouldn't suggest seeing this one. I probably will, just for nostalgic reason. Besides, I'm sure the remake is much better. The best part of this movie [[though]], has to be when everyone "dissapears"; vacant cars crashing, lawnmowers running on their own...pretty hilarious. First of all, I saw this movie when I was 7 years old at a Christian Scholl I attended. Needless to say that I was scared out of mind. Not because it was scary but because the content.Cmon...I was 7. Anyway, the cinematography was pretty [[negative]] and the acting was cheesy. That's very bad considering that I was only 7 and I remember that. The one thing that still haunts me is that [[frightful]] [[chanson]] "I wish we all were ready" where the chorus ends with "...you were left behind". I wouldn't suggest seeing this one. I probably will, just for nostalgic reason. Besides, I'm sure the remake is much better. The best part of this movie [[while]], has to be when everyone "dissapears"; vacant cars crashing, lawnmowers running on their own...pretty hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 4260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[swear]] I [[could]] watch this movie every weekend of my life and never get sick of it! Every [[aspect]] of human emotion is [[captured]] so magically by the acting, the script, the direction, and the [[general]] feeling of this [[movie]]. It's been a [[long]] [[time]] [[since]] I [[saw]] a [[movie]] that actually made me choke from [[laughter]], reflect from [[sadness]], and feel each [[intended]] [[feeling]] that comes through in this most [[excellent]] [[work]]! We [[need]] MORE [[MOVIES]] like this!!! Mike Binder: are you listening??? I [[swearing]] I [[did]] watch this movie every weekend of my life and never get sick of it! Every [[element]] of human emotion is [[caught]] so magically by the acting, the script, the direction, and the [[overall]] feeling of this [[film]]. It's been a [[lengthy]] [[moment]] [[because]] I [[watched]] a [[cinematography]] that actually made me choke from [[giggles]], reflect from [[regret]], and feel each [[designed]] [[sentiment]] that comes through in this most [[wondrous]] [[collaborate]]! We [[required]] MORE [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] like this!!! Mike Binder: are you listening??? --------------------------------------------- Result 4261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hamlet is by far my favorite of all of Shakespeare's works. Branaugh is one heck of an actor. His portrayal of this was just amazing. His soliloquies were breathtaking. For as long as it was it is rare for a film to hold my interest, however I was engrossed in this particular piece. I recommend this to anyone both fan of Shakespeare and those not so much. This has everything the modern world looks for in its films: murder, betrayal, and deceit. Not to knock Mel Gibson's version, but Branaughs touches the whole work. This leaves no stone unturned. When you finish the film it will feel as if you read the play yourself. Um how you say "two thumbs up". --------------------------------------------- Result 4262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Florence Chadwick was actually the far more accomplished swimmer, of course. She swam the English Channel both directions. She swam from Catalina Island to the California coast. Marilyn Bell's is a sweet story, but the usual glorification of us Canadians in the face of a superior world. Another sample of our inferiority complex. Our political system works pretty well and the health system allows people not to die in hospital lobbies. That's pretty good. Better than Lebanon. What should we do about hockey though...? And curling. The notion of calling this a sport, of its inclusion in the Olympics...! ah, but we digress... --------------------------------------------- Result 4263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] As [[noted]] by other reviewers this is one of the [[best]] Tarzan [[movies]]. Unlike others [[however]], I like the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] as it [[feels]] like a pretty accurate depiction of what a trading [[post]] [[must]] have been like. Plus the [[exposition]] is needed so we know why [[Harry]] [[wants]] to go back into the jungle. In addition the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] [[contains]] one of the most [[thrilling]] and [[terrifying]] chase [[sequences]] ever made.This [[occurs]] when Harry's safari group has to outrun a [[tribe]] of cannibals. The pre-censorship production [[values]] [[add]] a lot of [[realism]], [[genuinely]] depicting the [[terrible]] [[dangers]] that [[awaited]] Europeans going into the jungle. The [[film]] also offers, [[though]] [[perhaps]] antecedently, an accurate [[account]] of how [[horribly]] [[treated]] the [[native]] Africans were by their white [[employers]]. [[In]] [[addition]] [[sexy]] [[Jane]], thousands of elephants , some [[great]] sets and two chetas! Not to be [[missed]] an [[adventure]] classic. As [[remarked]] by other reviewers this is one of the [[nicest]] Tarzan [[film]]. Unlike others [[nevertheless]], I like the [[starts]] of the [[cinema]] as it [[believes]] like a pretty accurate depiction of what a trading [[posting]] [[ought]] have been like. Plus the [[display]] is needed so we know why [[Hari]] [[wanted]] to go back into the jungle. In addition the [[commencement]] of the [[cinema]] [[encompasses]] one of the most [[excite]] and [[horrifying]] chase [[sequence]] ever made.This [[emerges]] when Harry's safari group has to outrun a [[clans]] of cannibals. The pre-censorship production [[value]] [[added]] a lot of [[reality]], [[actually]] depicting the [[horrid]] [[menaces]] that [[hoped]] Europeans going into the jungle. The [[kino]] also offers, [[if]] [[conceivably]] antecedently, an accurate [[accounting]] of how [[hideously]] [[addressed]] the [[indigenous]] Africans were by their white [[employer]]. [[At]] [[supplement]] [[sexier]] [[Jeanne]], thousands of elephants , some [[wondrous]] sets and two chetas! Not to be [[flunked]] an [[fling]] classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 4264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Criminals Perry Smith and Richard "Dick" Hickock believe Mr. Clutter of Holcomb, Kansas keeps a large supply of cash on-hand in a safe.On November 15, 1959 at two a.m. they end up murdering Mr. and Mrs. Clutter and their teenage son and daughter.After a little police investigation the two men are found and sentenced to be hanged.In Cold Blood (1967) is directed by Richard Brooks.Now, I haven't read the Truman Capote novel this movie is based on, so I can't make any comparisons.The movie does a brilliant job telling of those horrific events that actually took place.Robert Blake is excellent as Perry.Of course, Blake had the murder case of his own a few years back, being accused of murdering his wife.He's free now, but we still don't know the truth.What ever that may be, he's still a very fine actor.Scott Wilson does remarkable job as Hickock.John Forsythe is terrific as Alvin Dewey.Paul Stewart is very good as Jensen.Jeff Corey is marvelous as Mr. Hickock.Same thing with Charles McGraw who plays Tex Smith.John McLiam portrays Herbert Clutter, Ruth Storey is his wife Bonnie, Brenda Currin is the daughter Nancy and Paul Hough is the son Kenyon.Great job by each of them.There is much to remember from this film.Let's start from the lighter side.It's pretty great when Perry wants to go hunting for gold in Mexico and says to Hickock: Remember Bogart in Treasure of the Sierra Madre?" And Blake himself was in that movie as a boy! And it's a fun moment when they, giving a ride to that boy and his granddad, collect bottles and turn them in for refund money.Those darker moments are the most haunting ones.The flashback sequence, where you see the murders happening, is extremely terrifying.When Perry goes to kill the girl, Nancy last, and she says "Oh, please, don't"...The brutality of man, it's impossible to explain.Then the hanging scene.First there goes Hickock and then Perry, first talking to the minister.In the last image of the movie we see Perry hitting the end of the rope.Sure movies,and books may try to sympathize these villains.Especially Perry's character is someone you could feel sorry for.He thinks of his mom, and dad who he hates, but still loves.But it doesn't change the fact both of these men these actors portray are brutal murderers, who don't feel sorry for anybody.They go to this house and murder an entire family, in cold blood.How could you sympathize these people? --------------------------------------------- Result 4265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] One of my [[favorite]] films for a number of years was "[[Last]] Action Hero"; [[unfortunately]], Arnold Schwarznegger [[decided]] to [[spoil]] my [[fun]] by [[becoming]] a [[corrupt]] [[scumbag]] [[politician]]; so now I can't bear any [[film]] he may had a hand in.

The [[Adventures]] of Jake Speed [[actually]] [[toys]] with some [[themes]] [[similar]] to those in Last...[[Hero]]; so I was [[pleased]] to find it on DVD, so I could watch these [[themes]] [[played]] out so well.

[[Despite]] the "plot-within-the-plot" involving [[white]] slavery during an African nation's [[civil]] [[war]], this is not an [[action]] [[movie]]. The plot that the "plot-within-a-plot" is within, is actually about a question that the [[film]] has no [[intention]] to resolve: Is Jake [[Speed]] a [[real]] [[person]] that is [[helping]] the [[heroine]] [[save]] her sister from the white-slave [[trader]]; or is he [[actually]] a [[fictional]] [[character]] (which [[means]] that the [[heroine]] has [[somehow]] [[entered]] the universe that really only [[exists]] in a [[series]] of pulp novels)? I suggest that this is not all that [[clearly]] [[defined]] in the [[film]], and that Wayne Crawford and Andrew [[Lane]] are [[perfectly]] aware of this. The [[film]] [[thus]] becomes a [[presentation]] of what [[audiences]] [[may]] [[want]] from such a [[fictional]] "adventure-story" universe. That's [[actually]] a [[rich]] [[theme]], the potential heaviness of which is lightened by the film's [[amiable]] and campy [[sense]] of [[humor]].

There are [[weaknesses]] to the [[film]] - [[primarily]] it's [[cinematography]], which makes the film look like a [[TV]] [[show]]. And the pacing does sag on occasion.

But I [[really]] like these [[characters]], and I [[enjoy]] the [[adventure]] they [[live]], [[however]] silly. And I just find [[fascinating]] the idea that this adventure is actually taking place in a novel.

Holds up under [[multiple]] viewings -m good [[show]]! One of my [[favored]] films for a number of years was "[[Final]] Action Hero"; [[regrettably]], Arnold Schwarznegger [[decide]] to [[ruin]] my [[entertaining]] by [[become]] a [[corrupted]] [[motherfucker]] [[politics]]; so now I can't bear any [[kino]] he may had a hand in.

The [[Shenanigans]] of Jake Speed [[indeed]] [[toy]] with some [[item]] [[identical]] to those in Last...[[Heroin]]; so I was [[happy]] to find it on DVD, so I could watch these [[subjects]] [[done]] out so well.

[[Though]] the "plot-within-the-plot" involving [[bianca]] slavery during an African nation's [[civilian]] [[warfare]], this is not an [[efforts]] [[cinematography]]. The plot that the "plot-within-a-plot" is within, is actually about a question that the [[cinematography]] has no [[purposes]] to resolve: Is Jake [[Acceleration]] a [[actual]] [[persons]] that is [[aid]] the [[idol]] [[rescuing]] her sister from the white-slave [[merchants]]; or is he [[indeed]] a [[fictitious]] [[nature]] (which [[method]] that the [[idol]] has [[somewhere]] [[penetrated]] the universe that really only [[existed]] in a [[serial]] of pulp novels)? I suggest that this is not all that [[blatantly]] [[defining]] in the [[cinema]], and that Wayne Crawford and Andrew [[Roads]] are [[altogether]] aware of this. The [[movie]] [[then]] becomes a [[introductions]] of what [[audience]] [[maggio]] [[wanted]] from such a [[fictitious]] "adventure-story" universe. That's [[genuinely]] a [[richer]] [[subject]], the potential heaviness of which is lightened by the film's [[amicable]] and campy [[sensing]] of [[mood]].

There are [[malfunctions]] to the [[movie]] - [[mainly]] it's [[movie]], which makes the film look like a [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrating]]. And the pacing does sag on occasion.

But I [[truthfully]] like these [[attribute]], and I [[enjoying]] the [[fling]] they [[vivo]], [[still]] silly. And I just find [[enthralling]] the idea that this adventure is actually taking place in a novel.

Holds up under [[dissimilar]] viewings -m good [[showings]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] My 3 year old [[loved]] it. I [[loved]] it, my wife [[loved]] it. [[So]] 10 out of 10 from our family. As for violence level? Not really that violent, mostly of the slap stick variety. Nobody truly [[dies]], no gore, no blood, no torture, so it certainly is appropriate for children, much more so than many Saturday morning [[cartoons]].

This [[movie]] [[really]] [[takes]] the idea of CG movies where it should go.

First of all [[beautiful]] graphics, textures [[wonderfully]] done, with [[true]] depth, not trying to be realistic, but [[forming]] an artistic whole. The moss on the stones, the rust on metal, the reliefs on the wood and the stone, everything [[adds]] to the whole.

Character modeling, unlike many contemporary CG movies, is [[quirky]], not cute, again within an artistic whole. The faces may look less malleable than in some other movies, but the characters are more puppet-like than human-like. I think that is a good thing, it lends [[veracity]], how strangely it may sound, it is easier to suspend your disbelief.

Hair, fur, clothing, on par, at least with the likes of Pixar. Just note in the opening scenes when Lian-Chu is fighting the giant slug; Gwizdo is in front of some farmers, and all of them have detailed clothing which caused me to pause the movie just to [[admire]] it.

The setting. Far beyond the likes of Cars, and even Wall•E. Space has been done many times, but the fantasy environs of Dragon Hunters are only comparable with some scenes in Never Ending Story and Lord of the Rings, but again it is an artistic whole, and with lots of good ideas thrown about effortlessly. [[Magnificent]] vistas like the scene in Monsters Inc. where they ride all the doorways through its storage facility, or Wall•E where we see the immense trash towers he made, abound in this movie, everything is [[grand]], yet never dwelt upon; it is just the background the whole way! The interlude where they walk through the area with the fantastic falls. The Chinese wall, the islands floating in the sky. The [[Broccoli]] in the sky? That is truly where I [[believe]] CG should [[go]], make [[something]] which takes your [[breath]] away, and do it again and again.

The sound is good, the music is varied and not only epic, and thankfully without any vocals, and purely original for the movie.

Animation is quite good. Lending its inspiration to cartoons, especially some good use of stretch and squeeze. Sometimes not that realistic, but the 3d models are not realistic either.

Characterization is well done too. Lian-Chu the gentle and uncertain giant is gradually growing in confidence basking in the attention of little Zoé.

Gwizdo the wily manager of Lian-Chu redeems himself in the end, while Zoé isn't really changed at all, but who wants that cute child to [[change]] anyway? I at least loved Lian-Chu more than any other recent [[character]] since Sulley in [[Monsters]] Inc.

The internal strife in the group gets ironed out by the external pressures, just as it should in a proper fantasy story.

The story is mostly reminiscent of the Never Ending Story, especially how the world brakes apart. The monsters are pretty standard fare, except the flocking one. It lacks the emotional impact of Wall•E, which is the really strong point of that movie, but it is a much more fun ride, and lacks the annoying musical scene replaying in the former one, and has action from the first scene. This movie is what you want to watch for a fun and exciting time.

The whole movie has, as I've mentioned a whole vision, which seems to have been followed rigorously throughout.

It seems, that the setting is ready for more adventures, and I for one would hope so.

One side note, the French actor doing Lian-Chu sounded a bit like Jean Reno at first, but I'm happy it wasn't him, though he is one of my favorites. Nice to hear a new, to me, voice.

I give it a max rating, a bit surprised at the mediocre and low ratings by some; I have tried to address some of the concerns made by two of the reviews with the lowest vote. Approach this movie as an adventure, and as a European movie, not opposed to Hollywood, but different. My 3 year old [[cared]] it. I [[cared]] it, my wife [[cared]] it. [[Thus]] 10 out of 10 from our family. As for violence level? Not really that violent, mostly of the slap stick variety. Nobody truly [[died]], no gore, no blood, no torture, so it certainly is appropriate for children, much more so than many Saturday morning [[caricatures]].

This [[kino]] [[genuinely]] [[pick]] the idea of CG movies where it should go.

First of all [[wondrous]] graphics, textures [[beautifully]] done, with [[authentic]] depth, not trying to be realistic, but [[train]] an artistic whole. The moss on the stones, the rust on metal, the reliefs on the wood and the stone, everything [[adding]] to the whole.

Character modeling, unlike many contemporary CG movies, is [[lunatic]], not cute, again within an artistic whole. The faces may look less malleable than in some other movies, but the characters are more puppet-like than human-like. I think that is a good thing, it lends [[truth]], how strangely it may sound, it is easier to suspend your disbelief.

Hair, fur, clothing, on par, at least with the likes of Pixar. Just note in the opening scenes when Lian-Chu is fighting the giant slug; Gwizdo is in front of some farmers, and all of them have detailed clothing which caused me to pause the movie just to [[behold]] it.

The setting. Far beyond the likes of Cars, and even Wall•E. Space has been done many times, but the fantasy environs of Dragon Hunters are only comparable with some scenes in Never Ending Story and Lord of the Rings, but again it is an artistic whole, and with lots of good ideas thrown about effortlessly. [[Great]] vistas like the scene in Monsters Inc. where they ride all the doorways through its storage facility, or Wall•E where we see the immense trash towers he made, abound in this movie, everything is [[vast]], yet never dwelt upon; it is just the background the whole way! The interlude where they walk through the area with the fantastic falls. The Chinese wall, the islands floating in the sky. The [[Leeks]] in the sky? That is truly where I [[believing]] CG should [[going]], make [[anything]] which takes your [[respiratory]] away, and do it again and again.

The sound is good, the music is varied and not only epic, and thankfully without any vocals, and purely original for the movie.

Animation is quite good. Lending its inspiration to cartoons, especially some good use of stretch and squeeze. Sometimes not that realistic, but the 3d models are not realistic either.

Characterization is well done too. Lian-Chu the gentle and uncertain giant is gradually growing in confidence basking in the attention of little Zoé.

Gwizdo the wily manager of Lian-Chu redeems himself in the end, while Zoé isn't really changed at all, but who wants that cute child to [[adjustments]] anyway? I at least loved Lian-Chu more than any other recent [[characteristics]] since Sulley in [[Fiends]] Inc.

The internal strife in the group gets ironed out by the external pressures, just as it should in a proper fantasy story.

The story is mostly reminiscent of the Never Ending Story, especially how the world brakes apart. The monsters are pretty standard fare, except the flocking one. It lacks the emotional impact of Wall•E, which is the really strong point of that movie, but it is a much more fun ride, and lacks the annoying musical scene replaying in the former one, and has action from the first scene. This movie is what you want to watch for a fun and exciting time.

The whole movie has, as I've mentioned a whole vision, which seems to have been followed rigorously throughout.

It seems, that the setting is ready for more adventures, and I for one would hope so.

One side note, the French actor doing Lian-Chu sounded a bit like Jean Reno at first, but I'm happy it wasn't him, though he is one of my favorites. Nice to hear a new, to me, voice.

I give it a max rating, a bit surprised at the mediocre and low ratings by some; I have tried to address some of the concerns made by two of the reviews with the lowest vote. Approach this movie as an adventure, and as a European movie, not opposed to Hollywood, but different. --------------------------------------------- Result 4267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Murphy is one of the funniest comedians ever - probably THE funniest. Delirious is the best stand-up comedy I've ever seen and it is a must-have for anyone who loves a good laugh!! I've watched this movie hundreds of times and every time I see it - I still have side-splitting fun. This is definitely one for your video library. I guarantee that you will have to watch it several times in order to hear all the jokes because you will be laughing so much - that you will miss half of them! Delirious is hilarious!

Although there are a lot of funny comedians out there - after watching this stand-up comedy, most of them will seem like second-class citizens. If you have never seen it - get it, watch it - and you will love it!! It will make you holler!!! :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 4268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I am one of the biggest [[fans]] of silent comedians and have [[probably]] [[reviewed]] more Buster Keaton films for IMDb than any other [[person]]. Every [[film]] he [[made]] from the [[beginning]] of his [[career]] to the [[early]] 30s with only two exceptions have I [[reviewed]], so you can [[tell]] I am a major [[fan]]. It's because of this that I [[found]] this episode so [[painful]] and [[hard]] to watch. I loved this man's [[films]] and kept thinking "Buster, how [[could]] you?!". Well, now that I think about it, I guess I can see why Buster Keaton starred in this god-awful episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. He'd lost much of his fortune after a messy divorce in the early 1930s and his film career as a leading man was long passed as well. Now, in the 1960s, Keaton needed the money and loved his resurgence in popularity so he whored himself out to anyone willing to pay--appearing in Beach films and this [[mess]] of an episode of a great series.

The biggest problem with the episode is that it is just terribly written and Buster [[deserved]] much better. The show is supposed to be funny but isn't and instead of a homage to silent films is just painful to watch--particularly with Keaton putting that stupid time travel helmet on as well as all the poorly executed slapstick. Do yourself a favor, SKIP THIS ONE--it's a pale imitation of the greatness that once was Keaton's career!!! I am one of the biggest [[amateurs]] of silent comedians and have [[undeniably]] [[reconsidered]] more Buster Keaton films for IMDb than any other [[persona]]. Every [[filmmaking]] he [[effected]] from the [[launching]] of his [[vocational]] to the [[swift]] 30s with only two exceptions have I [[scrutinized]], so you can [[told]] I am a major [[ventilator]]. It's because of this that I [[find]] this episode so [[hurtful]] and [[laborious]] to watch. I loved this man's [[film]] and kept thinking "Buster, how [[wo]] you?!". Well, now that I think about it, I guess I can see why Buster Keaton starred in this god-awful episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. He'd lost much of his fortune after a messy divorce in the early 1930s and his film career as a leading man was long passed as well. Now, in the 1960s, Keaton needed the money and loved his resurgence in popularity so he whored himself out to anyone willing to pay--appearing in Beach films and this [[disarray]] of an episode of a great series.

The biggest problem with the episode is that it is just terribly written and Buster [[deserves]] much better. The show is supposed to be funny but isn't and instead of a homage to silent films is just painful to watch--particularly with Keaton putting that stupid time travel helmet on as well as all the poorly executed slapstick. Do yourself a favor, SKIP THIS ONE--it's a pale imitation of the greatness that once was Keaton's career!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4269 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] There can be no [[questions]] of [[spoilers]] for this movie, the director [[beat]] us all too and spoiled this [[movie]] in oh so many [[ways]].

A [[blatant]] rip-off of [[stuff]] like [[Critters]] and Gremlins, this [[movie]] fails on so [[many]] [[levels]] to [[recapture]] the [[humour]] and horror of those [[better]] made [[films]]. It ends up a [[sleazy]] [[waste]] of [[time]], where [[bad]] [[actors]] deliver [[bad]] [[dialogue]] in front of an [[idiot]] director, who occasionally tosses [[stuffed]] [[toys]] at them. They wrestle with [[said]] [[toys]] in much the same [[manner]] as [[old]] Tarzan [[films]] [[used]] to [[use]] rubber [[crocodiles]], shaking them whilst [[screaming]] and trying their best to make it [[look]] [[slightly]] threatening. It's painful to watch, and not [[helped]] by the mental 80's [[fashions]] worn by the cast.

[[Basically]], some crazy little [[aliens]] who have been trapped by an aging [[security]] [[guard]] in a [[film]] lot [[finally]] get free after umpteen years [[confinement]], and [[begin]] to telepathically screw around with peoples minds. The [[guards]] [[new]] recruit, the [[idiot]] who [[let]] them out [[despite]] repeated [[warnings]], [[gets]] his gang of 80's [[friends]] together and they [[go]] off and have minor adventures together while trying to [[recapture]] the Grem... Hobgoblins.

All [[life]] is here, with the gang [[consisting]] of a knucklehead jock, his 80's slut girlfriend, the 'hero's [[frigid]] and prissy girlfriend, and the [[young]] [[hero]], [[lacking]] in confidence and [[wishing]] his girlfriend [[would]] put out anyway.

First off [[comes]] the infamous rake fighting scene, where the ex-military [[jock]] shows how he was trained in the army to be a bully, poking the nerdy [[hero]] with the [[wrong]] [[end]] of a rake for what [[seems]] like hours. Then there's some [[running]] around, [[terminating]] in a [[real]] pie-fight style [[ending]] in a scuzzy [[nightclub]] with [[comedy]] hand-grenades blowing up everything except the people standing right next to them. Then the [[film]] sorta ends, and alls well that [[ends]] well.

It's not. This is like watching a train [[wreck]], you [[cant]] take your eyes off it, it's so [[bad]]. Perfect fare for Mystery Science [[Theater]], but god-awful should you try to watch it [[alone]] and uncut. The Fashion Police [[still]] have a number of [[outstanding]] [[warrants]] for the cast, and I dare [[anyone]] not to laugh in outright derision at the rake fight. This scores 2 out of 10 at most, on a good day. There can be no [[issues]] of [[troublemakers]] for this movie, the director [[bested]] us all too and spoiled this [[filmmaking]] in oh so many [[modes]].

A [[apparent]] rip-off of [[thing]] like [[Creatures]] and Gremlins, this [[filmmaking]] fails on so [[several]] [[echelons]] to [[convalescence]] the [[mood]] and horror of those [[optimum]] made [[movies]]. It ends up a [[dirty]] [[wastes]] of [[times]], where [[negative]] [[protagonists]] deliver [[negative]] [[dialog]] in front of an [[doofus]] director, who occasionally tosses [[plush]] [[toy]] at them. They wrestle with [[says]] [[toy]] in much the same [[ways]] as [[longtime]] Tarzan [[filmmaking]] [[using]] to [[used]] rubber [[gators]], shaking them whilst [[yells]] and trying their best to make it [[glance]] [[moderately]] threatening. It's painful to watch, and not [[aided]] by the mental 80's [[fads]] worn by the cast.

[[Primarily]], some crazy little [[outsiders]] who have been trapped by an aging [[assurance]] [[safekeeping]] in a [[flick]] lot [[eventually]] get free after umpteen years [[internment]], and [[beginning]] to telepathically screw around with peoples minds. The [[guardians]] [[newest]] recruit, the [[dumb]] who [[allowing]] them out [[while]] repeated [[warns]], [[get]] his gang of 80's [[friendships]] together and they [[going]] off and have minor adventures together while trying to [[recovers]] the Grem... Hobgoblins.

All [[lives]] is here, with the gang [[consist]] of a knucklehead jock, his 80's slut girlfriend, the 'hero's [[icy]] and prissy girlfriend, and the [[youthful]] [[superhero]], [[missing]] in confidence and [[wanting]] his girlfriend [[could]] put out anyway.

First off [[happens]] the infamous rake fighting scene, where the ex-military [[athlete]] shows how he was trained in the army to be a bully, poking the nerdy [[superhero]] with the [[incorrect]] [[ends]] of a rake for what [[appears]] like hours. Then there's some [[executing]] around, [[ended]] in a [[veritable]] pie-fight style [[ended]] in a scuzzy [[cabaret]] with [[humor]] hand-grenades blowing up everything except the people standing right next to them. Then the [[kino]] sorta ends, and alls well that [[culminates]] well.

It's not. This is like watching a train [[shipwreck]], you [[havent]] take your eyes off it, it's so [[wicked]]. Perfect fare for Mystery Science [[Drama]], but god-awful should you try to watch it [[only]] and uncut. The Fashion Police [[again]] have a number of [[marvellous]] [[warrant]] for the cast, and I dare [[everybody]] not to laugh in outright derision at the rake fight. This scores 2 out of 10 at most, on a good day. --------------------------------------------- Result 4270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Times are tough for Angel [[Town]], gangs rule with an iron fist and for reasons mostly [[unknown]] (Mainly due to [[embarrassing]] [[writing]]) the gangs [[want]] a street kid, Martine to join the gangs, so they beat him up everyday. However due to the presence of an [[Olympic]] kick-boxer (Olivier "World's lamest actor" Gruner) named Jacques, hope is on the way. Angel [[Town]] is [[seriously]] one of the most [[inept]] message movies ever [[made]] (And I've [[seen]] my share) it [[seems]] to [[consist]] of the idea that all gang [[infested]] neighborhoods [[need]], are French kick-boxers who can't act. Worst of all there are so many awkward moments it's just truly hilarious. Best of all comes from the exchange between Gruner and Aragon which basically sums up how [[ridiculous]] this thing is. To Wit: "You like the fighting? (Olivier grabs his Asian best friend in a headlock) I could kill him right? When I want him dead he dies! The reason why I don't want him dead is because i'm afraid of him, and I know that if I kill him his son and wife will kill me, that's why he doesn't die!"

Of course the fact that it's wrong to kill someone, let alone your best friend is of course left out of the equation. Odd.

However don't let me make this sound that I hated this movie, far from it, it's so terrible it's priceless. The biggest laughs come at the end in the disastrous finale which sees Grunner going one on one with gang-members who (the film's biggest logic gap)decline the use of pistols. Also a handicapped Vietnam vet helps out by shooting his machine gun at the gangs, while Gruner kick-boxes the rest. All of this set to the sound of [[horrible]] "Mexican" accents and surreal energy that make this one memorable for fans of cinematic trash such as this.

The other treat about this movie, is that for some [[reason]] Olivier Gruner never attends college despite that's the main reason he's here in the states and not in France getting it on with his girlfriend (In a graveyard in the film's awkward beginning) Angel Town is without a doubt a failure on all conceivable levels but if you laugh at moronic martial arts movies with insane levels of action that make no sense on any level, this is the perfect movie for you. On the other hand make sure to down tequila, like the laughable opening song details "Ain't no mercy in Angel Town"

* out of 4-(Bad) Times are tough for Angel [[Ville]], gangs rule with an iron fist and for reasons mostly [[unfamiliar]] (Mainly due to [[ashamed]] [[writes]]) the gangs [[wanted]] a street kid, Martine to join the gangs, so they beat him up everyday. However due to the presence of an [[Olympics]] kick-boxer (Olivier "World's lamest actor" Gruner) named Jacques, hope is on the way. Angel [[Urban]] is [[profoundly]] one of the most [[incapable]] message movies ever [[effected]] (And I've [[watched]] my share) it [[seem]] to [[composed]] of the idea that all gang [[infected]] neighborhoods [[require]], are French kick-boxers who can't act. Worst of all there are so many awkward moments it's just truly hilarious. Best of all comes from the exchange between Gruner and Aragon which basically sums up how [[farcical]] this thing is. To Wit: "You like the fighting? (Olivier grabs his Asian best friend in a headlock) I could kill him right? When I want him dead he dies! The reason why I don't want him dead is because i'm afraid of him, and I know that if I kill him his son and wife will kill me, that's why he doesn't die!"

Of course the fact that it's wrong to kill someone, let alone your best friend is of course left out of the equation. Odd.

However don't let me make this sound that I hated this movie, far from it, it's so terrible it's priceless. The biggest laughs come at the end in the disastrous finale which sees Grunner going one on one with gang-members who (the film's biggest logic gap)decline the use of pistols. Also a handicapped Vietnam vet helps out by shooting his machine gun at the gangs, while Gruner kick-boxes the rest. All of this set to the sound of [[scary]] "Mexican" accents and surreal energy that make this one memorable for fans of cinematic trash such as this.

The other treat about this movie, is that for some [[cause]] Olivier Gruner never attends college despite that's the main reason he's here in the states and not in France getting it on with his girlfriend (In a graveyard in the film's awkward beginning) Angel Town is without a doubt a failure on all conceivable levels but if you laugh at moronic martial arts movies with insane levels of action that make no sense on any level, this is the perfect movie for you. On the other hand make sure to down tequila, like the laughable opening song details "Ain't no mercy in Angel Town"

* out of 4-(Bad) --------------------------------------------- Result 4271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Following a car accident, a mad scientist(Jason Evers) keeps the head of his fiancee(Virgina Leith)alive. He then goes on the prowl looking for the perfect body to make her whole again. Pretty lame all the way around, nothing redeeming here. Also in the cast are: Leslie Daniels, Bonnie Sharie and Bruce Brighton. Someone should have helped put this one out of its misery. Let it die. --------------------------------------------- Result 4272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[rented]] this [[movie]] on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to [[rent]] it. It [[starts]] off pretty good, with the [[premise]] being that snuff films are being aired over cable. However, the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the [[end]] of the movie really [[leaves]] you hanging. There are way too [[many]] unanswered questions. There was a [[great]] scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee. I [[lease]] this [[filmmaking]] on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to [[rental]] it. It [[initiating]] off pretty good, with the [[assumption]] being that snuff films are being aired over cable. However, the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the [[termination]] of the movie really [[departs]] you hanging. There are way too [[several]] unanswered questions. There was a [[resplendent]] scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee. --------------------------------------------- Result 4273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Well [[executed]] [[old]] and very [[dark]] [[house]] horror. Good set-up which includes the character of [[Poe]], himself, alluding to the [[story]] in a London pub. [[Although]] from here it is pretty much the one guy who has taken the dare to [[visit]] the [[house]] on a [[particular]] night running from [[room]] to room either [[looking]] for or [[avoiding]] people, it is [[still]] most [[enjoyable]]. Plus we have the [[delightful]] and [[enigmatic]] Barbara Steele. There is some [[wooden]] [[dialogue]] and some [[unexplained]] bits and bobs but it is the [[super]] creepy [[atmosphere]] that is [[maintained]] throughout, that and the [[super]] musical [[score]] that [[keep]] this one moving [[nicely]] along. [[DVD]] [[originates]] from [[US]] and has a few extras Well [[implemented]] [[elderly]] and very [[darkness]] [[haus]] horror. Good set-up which includes the character of [[Boe]], himself, alluding to the [[conte]] in a London pub. [[Though]] from here it is pretty much the one guy who has taken the dare to [[visited]] the [[abode]] on a [[special]] night running from [[rooms]] to room either [[researching]] for or [[preventing]] people, it is [[however]] most [[nice]]. Plus we have the [[charmer]] and [[mysterious]] Barbara Steele. There is some [[timber]] [[conversation]] and some [[incomprehensible]] bits and bobs but it is the [[wondrous]] creepy [[mood]] that is [[kept]] throughout, that and the [[wondrous]] musical [[notation]] that [[keeping]] this one moving [[gently]] along. [[DVDS]] [[stems]] from [[AMERICANS]] and has a few extras --------------------------------------------- Result 4274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A kind of road movie in old-fashioned trains in the Slowenian late summer province. At the [[beginning]] you see someone in underwear sewing [[trousers]] from black [[cloth]], and when the same young [[man]] in his black [[trousers]] leaves the [[house]] with two suitcases, you see that the trousers-part is [[missing]] on a flag of mourning (appearently his father has died). In the [[train]] he meets a young [[lady]], and [[almost]] without [[words]], but [[many]] [[small]] [[gestures]], a [[wonderful]] [[love]] [[story]] begins. It's a somehow [[surreal]], very poetic, and a [[little]] [[bizarre]] [[movie]], with a [[lot]] of [[strange]] [[characters]] and [[strange]] [[incidents]]. [[Beautiful]] pictures with [[love]] for [[beautiful]] details. A kind of road movie in old-fashioned trains in the Slowenian late summer province. At the [[launch]] you see someone in underwear sewing [[panties]] from black [[tissue]], and when the same young [[men]] in his black [[panties]] leaves the [[household]] with two suitcases, you see that the trousers-part is [[disappeared]] on a flag of mourning (appearently his father has died). In the [[forming]] he meets a young [[dame]], and [[virtually]] without [[expression]], but [[innumerable]] [[minimal]] [[flicks]], a [[extraordinary]] [[loves]] [[saga]] begins. It's a somehow [[unreal]], very poetic, and a [[petit]] [[inquisitive]] [[cinematic]], with a [[lots]] of [[bizarre]] [[features]] and [[nosy]] [[occurrences]]. [[Wondrous]] pictures with [[iike]] for [[belle]] details. --------------------------------------------- Result 4275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Put [[quite]] simply, this film is [[terrifying]].

It [[starts]] off simply, looking [[like]] a [[study]] of a [[rebellious]] young [[girl]] and goes on to [[become]] a [[beautifully]] [[crafted]] [[horror]] [[film]].

Don't [[expect]] gore, or zombies. This is [[psychological]], and just as he [[would]] [[also]] do in Candyman, Bernard Rose [[manages]] to convey the [[horror]] that is not being believed.

Each time you watch this [[film]], you [[realise]] more about what's happening, and about how the two [[worlds]] in this [[film]] interconnect.

Drawings have never been scarier. Put [[pretty]] simply, this film is [[harrowing]].

It [[commences]] off simply, looking [[iike]] a [[researches]] of a [[insurgent]] young [[daughter]] and goes on to [[gotten]] a [[stunningly]] [[drafted]] [[abomination]] [[movie]].

Don't [[hopes]] gore, or zombies. This is [[psychology]], and just as he [[could]] [[further]] do in Candyman, Bernard Rose [[runs]] to convey the [[abomination]] that is not being believed.

Each time you watch this [[kino]], you [[knowing]] more about what's happening, and about how the two [[universe]] in this [[movie]] interconnect.

Drawings have never been scarier. --------------------------------------------- Result 4276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It was so terrible. It wasn't fun to watch at all. Even the scene where the girl is using a vibrator, even that's not fun to watch in this movie. I say again, the scene where a girl is masturbating with a vibrator is not even fun to watch. Or maybe if that was the only part of the movie that you watched, just girl on couch using a vibrator. Maybe they should have just released that one scene in theaters, maybe then the movie would be enjoyable on a certain level. My advice, fast forward to that point, watch it, rewind the movie, watch it again, rewind, repeat. Maybe you could enjoy yourself for 2 hours that way. This movie ranks alongside I spit on your grave and Doom generation in the category of worst movies that I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 4277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This is a sad movie about this woman who [[thought]] her [[ex]] who she [[loved]] so much was probably [[dead]], but [[really]] his scientist dad had just put a spell on him to turn him into this really cute shark-guy. Kind of like in Beauty and the Beast. It [[could]] [[probably]] [[use]] a [[ballroom]] dance scene and [[maybe]] some singing candlesticks, but there are some pretty [[gross]] [[plants]] instead. They [[make]] this one girl really [[itchy]], so she [[lets]] herself get eaten by the shark-guy instead of scratching through the whole [[movie]]. The scientist guy is a good dad who tries to reunite his fishy shark son with the woman he was engaged to, he even arranges for them to have private time for s-e-x, but the woman in this is a really shallow snob and thinks the shark-guy is an ugly, icky monster and wants nothing to do with him. She gave up on love! Just because he was a shark! I thought it was pretty sad how all she had to do was kiss him and he'd turn back to normal and they'd live happily ever after, but it's not that kind of [[movie]]. This is a sad movie about this woman who [[think]] her [[exes]] who she [[cared]] so much was probably [[die]], but [[truly]] his scientist dad had just put a spell on him to turn him into this really cute shark-guy. Kind of like in Beauty and the Beast. It [[wo]] [[conceivably]] [[using]] a [[salwa]] dance scene and [[conceivably]] some singing candlesticks, but there are some pretty [[flagrant]] [[facility]] instead. They [[deliver]] this one girl really [[dermatitis]], so she [[allows]] herself get eaten by the shark-guy instead of scratching through the whole [[flick]]. The scientist guy is a good dad who tries to reunite his fishy shark son with the woman he was engaged to, he even arranges for them to have private time for s-e-x, but the woman in this is a really shallow snob and thinks the shark-guy is an ugly, icky monster and wants nothing to do with him. She gave up on love! Just because he was a shark! I thought it was pretty sad how all she had to do was kiss him and he'd turn back to normal and they'd live happily ever after, but it's not that kind of [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] As low budget [[indies]] go, you will [[usually]] [[find]] that you [[get]] what you [[pay]] for, and [[let]] me just [[say]], I didn't [[pay]] much for "Frightworld"...

[[Writer]] / Director: David R. [[Williams]] brings us the [[story]] of an abandoned amusement park, besieged by the [[vengeful]] spirit of a slain serial [[killer]]. Not a bad premise, but [[executed]] with a bevy of low budget [[mistakes]]. The camera [[work]] [[tries]] to be too cleaver for it's [[audience]], by [[constantly]] [[using]] [[shaky]] quick-cuts to [[cover]] the fact that they really have [[nothing]] gory or scary to [[show]] us. This [[becomes]] [[evident]] right off the bat, as we are introduced to the would-be killer, and [[soon]] [[realize]] that the (acting) is the scariest [[thing]] happening... After a painfully long title [[sequence]] we are [[brought]] back to modern times, yet the acting remains the same. "Frightworld" does [[generate]] some [[rather]] [[unique]] cinematography when [[showing]] [[scenery]] from inside the fun-house, but with an [[extremely]] long [[running]] [[time]], it can't [[save]] the [[film]] from it's below average indie [[hell]].

There is some [[mediocre]] nudity, but not much for [[gore]], which is [[usually]] the [[saving]] grace for these [[types]] of [[movies]].

[[Fans]] of [[really]] [[bad]] B-Movies might [[find]] something of interest here, [[otherwise]], don't [[spend]] a lot of cash. As low budget [[andes]] go, you will [[often]] [[finds]] that you [[got]] what you [[salary]] for, and [[allowing]] me just [[told]], I didn't [[paid]] much for "Frightworld"...

[[Novelist]] / Director: David R. [[William]] brings us the [[storytelling]] of an abandoned amusement park, besieged by the [[vindictive]] spirit of a slain serial [[shooter]]. Not a bad premise, but [[implemented]] with a bevy of low budget [[faults]]. The camera [[collaborate]] [[attempt]] to be too cleaver for it's [[audiences]], by [[always]] [[utilizing]] [[volatile]] quick-cuts to [[covered]] the fact that they really have [[none]] gory or scary to [[illustrates]] us. This [[become]] [[manifest]] right off the bat, as we are introduced to the would-be killer, and [[quickly]] [[achieve]] that the (acting) is the scariest [[stuff]] happening... After a painfully long title [[sequences]] we are [[lodged]] back to modern times, yet the acting remains the same. "Frightworld" does [[produces]] some [[somewhat]] [[sole]] cinematography when [[shows]] [[panorama]] from inside the fun-house, but with an [[highly]] long [[executes]] [[times]], it can't [[rescues]] the [[filmmaking]] from it's below average indie [[whorehouse]].

There is some [[lackluster]] nudity, but not much for [[gora]], which is [[generally]] the [[rescuing]] grace for these [[genre]] of [[cinematography]].

[[Stalkers]] of [[genuinely]] [[negative]] B-Movies might [[found]] something of interest here, [[alternatively]], don't [[expenditures]] a lot of cash. --------------------------------------------- Result 4279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Viewers gushing over everything [[including]] the title sequence (now THAT is funny) [[would]] have us believe this is some [[sort]] of cinematic miracle, but, trust me folks, this is one of the most [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] films you [[could]] ever [[see]], and if you're not [[laughing]] at it five minutes in, I'd [[say]] you've lost your sense of humor.

David Niven plays a doomed and bravado-besotted RAF pilot who somehow thinks it appropriate to engage an impressionable (female) air traffic controller in an [[emotional]] conversation about [[love]], just as he's plunging to his certain and [[fiery]] [[death]]. (Isn't it romantic...) Of course, he's spared by a [[quirk]] of metaphysical chance, and [[washes]] up on the beach, just as this same air traffic controller is riding by on her [[bicycle]]. (They immediately clinch).

Looking past the [[bizarre]] homo-erotic subtexts, (so over the top you really [[need]] to refer to them as supertexts, from a [[naked]] boy [[sitting]] bare-butted in the sand playing the movie's twilight-zone-esquire [[theme]] on his [[little]] flute, to a celestial courier so campy/queen-y his [[makeup]] is caked on more thoroughly than the ladies'), the most [[bizarre]] aspects of the movie are how it [[weaves]] such bad [[caricatures]] of national and racial stereotypes into a convoluted [[attempt]] to [[argue]] some [[kind]] of point about the universal nature and power of [[love]]. We get it--fly [[boys]] like [[girls]] in [[skirts]] and heels, and [[girls]] like 'em back, and, [[apparently]], all you have to do is cry a little to [[make]] it [[noble]] enough for your movie to get 10 stars on IMDb...

As for the quality of the production, the continuity/[[editing]] is poor [[enough]] to [[induce]] cringing, and the [[lighting]] is, perhaps, [[even]] worse than that, but you [[hardly]] have time to notice because the script is so bad. There are games played with Technicolor, (whatever passes for [[heaven]] is in black and [[white]] if you can figure out the [[sense]] in that), and foreshadowing, (so funny my fellow audience member who usually like movies like this actually cheered and [[laughed]] when then the doc's [[motorcycle]] [[finally]] [[ended]] up in a fiery wreck), and freeze-motion, (which is funniest of all because the female lead is so poor at standing still you know the stage hands were guffawing off camera).

The best shots are the early ones on the beach, but, after that, it's all downhill. The (moving like an escalator is moving) staircase is hardly the Odessa Steps, to say the least, and I'd really caution anyone from feeling like they'd have to see this lame attempt at movie-making on their account. The movie overall is bad enough to be funny, and that's about the best thing I can say for it. Viewers gushing over everything [[comprising]] the title sequence (now THAT is funny) [[could]] have us believe this is some [[genre]] of cinematic miracle, but, trust me folks, this is one of the most [[shamelessly]] [[unfavourable]] films you [[did]] ever [[seeing]], and if you're not [[giggling]] at it five minutes in, I'd [[says]] you've lost your sense of humor.

David Niven plays a doomed and bravado-besotted RAF pilot who somehow thinks it appropriate to engage an impressionable (female) air traffic controller in an [[sentimental]] conversation about [[amour]], just as he's plunging to his certain and [[spirited]] [[dies]]. (Isn't it romantic...) Of course, he's spared by a [[whim]] of metaphysical chance, and [[wash]] up on the beach, just as this same air traffic controller is riding by on her [[motorcycle]]. (They immediately clinch).

Looking past the [[odd]] homo-erotic subtexts, (so over the top you really [[needs]] to refer to them as supertexts, from a [[nude]] boy [[seated]] bare-butted in the sand playing the movie's twilight-zone-esquire [[thematic]] on his [[petite]] flute, to a celestial courier so campy/queen-y his [[composition]] is caked on more thoroughly than the ladies'), the most [[weird]] aspects of the movie are how it [[unites]] such bad [[cartoons]] of national and racial stereotypes into a convoluted [[seek]] to [[assert]] some [[genre]] of point about the universal nature and power of [[amore]]. We get it--fly [[boy]] like [[female]] in [[dresses]] and heels, and [[female]] like 'em back, and, [[visibly]], all you have to do is cry a little to [[deliver]] it [[lofty]] enough for your movie to get 10 stars on IMDb...

As for the quality of the production, the continuity/[[edition]] is poor [[sufficiently]] to [[provoke]] cringing, and the [[lit]] is, perhaps, [[yet]] worse than that, but you [[almost]] have time to notice because the script is so bad. There are games played with Technicolor, (whatever passes for [[paradise]] is in black and [[bianca]] if you can figure out the [[feeling]] in that), and foreshadowing, (so funny my fellow audience member who usually like movies like this actually cheered and [[laughs]] when then the doc's [[biker]] [[lastly]] [[ending]] up in a fiery wreck), and freeze-motion, (which is funniest of all because the female lead is so poor at standing still you know the stage hands were guffawing off camera).

The best shots are the early ones on the beach, but, after that, it's all downhill. The (moving like an escalator is moving) staircase is hardly the Odessa Steps, to say the least, and I'd really caution anyone from feeling like they'd have to see this lame attempt at movie-making on their account. The movie overall is bad enough to be funny, and that's about the best thing I can say for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's only one thing I'm going to say about cat in the hat...as a KIDS movie and a good comedy movie it sucks...I lost track of how many terrible jokes in the movie that not only sucked but weren't exactly kid appropriate. Oh and by the way the way the cat in the hat talked was annoying...as for the plot I completely forgot. Who cares it sucked anyway. i'm not sure why Mike Myers joined but I think the writers were trying to make it sound like him in Austin powers without the swinger talk and it overly succeeded- but so what it was annoying. don't see it-it belongs in the bottom 100.............................. the jokes are so unkiddy it's funny --------------------------------------------- Result 4281 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My mom took me to see this movie when it came out around Christmas of 1976. I loved it then and I love it now. I know everyone makes fun of Barbra's hair in this one, but I think she looks and sounds great! ...And I seem to remember a number of women who copied that permed look at the time! Also, the bath tub scene between Streisand and Kristoferson is just so sexy! The music is great as well. This is the groovy 70's Babs at her best! --------------------------------------------- Result 4282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I'll say one thing about this film: there are no lulls. You can't get [[bored]] watching this. The [[problem]] is that it is TOO [[intense]]. There is too [[much]] [[action]] and it [[NEEDS]] lulls! That is the [[risk]] you [[take]] in modern [[action]] [[films]]. You [[want]] it interesting but not overdone. This is [[way]] overdone.

Even [[though]] the acting is fine and features a couple of "names" in Gary Busey and [[Roy]] Scheider, it still has the feel of a "B" film. The best part of it is Scheider's dialog: the only "A" part of this "B" [[film]].

The rest of the story is strictly Rambo mentality but did have a few standout scenes. One in particular was a very innovative scene featuring land mines. That was memorable. Not enough of the other scenes were to make this a keeper for long. I'll say one thing about this film: there are no lulls. You can't get [[boring]] watching this. The [[difficulties]] is that it is TOO [[fierce]]. There is too [[very]] [[actions]] and it [[GOTTA]] lulls! That is the [[menaces]] you [[taking]] in modern [[actions]] [[film]]. You [[wish]] it interesting but not overdone. This is [[ways]] overdone.

Even [[despite]] the acting is fine and features a couple of "names" in Gary Busey and [[Rowe]] Scheider, it still has the feel of a "B" film. The best part of it is Scheider's dialog: the only "A" part of this "B" [[filmmaking]].

The rest of the story is strictly Rambo mentality but did have a few standout scenes. One in particular was a very innovative scene featuring land mines. That was memorable. Not enough of the other scenes were to make this a keeper for long. --------------------------------------------- Result 4283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] If you cannot enjoy a chick flick, stop right now. If, however, you enjoy films that illustrate complex characters and provide [[extraordinary]] acting, read on.

Ann Grant Lord is dying. Her two daughters arrive to be at her bedside. Ann begins talking about people from her past of whom the daughters are unaware, and they question as to whether these lost acquaintances are real or imagined. They come to realize that these people from their mother's past are, indeed, real.

The story shifts, basically, between 1953 and circa 2000 with a few glimpses at Ann's life between those years. It was in 1953 that Ann met the love of her life and experienced her life's greatest tragedy.

One of Ann's two best friends from college, Lila, is being married. Ann's other best friend is Lila's brother, Buddy. Lila and Buddy are the children of a rich Newport family, whereas Ann is a cabaret singer living in Greenwich Village who wants to be a free spirit but is still bound by many of those 1950's conventions.

Soon after Ann arrives to be maid of honor at Lila's wedding, she meets the person who will become the pivotal character in the lives of the three - Harris. He is the adult son of a former servant of the family who grew up with Lila and Buddy and has gone on to become a physician in a small New England town. Ann immediately becomes enamored of Harris which adds a complication to the fact that Lila has always been in love with Harris and continues to be. Buddy, also, is in love with Harris, but being 1953, he has redirected that homosexual desire for Harris to his good friend, Ann for he cannot admit to himself that he has a sexual craving for another man. Buddy exhibits his inner frustration outwardly by being the alcoholic, wise-cracking bad boy of the family - much to the chagrin of his very proper and uptight parents.

Needless to say, all of these expressed and repressed emotions lead to tragedy - after all this is a chick flick.

In the present time, Ann's daughters have become distant from their mother and are suffering their own life realizations and doubts. Constance is working to emotional exhaustion trying to keep up her roll as perfect mother and wife. Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.

Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.

All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.

Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do. Her performance is not easily forgettable.

Vanessa Redgrave plays the dying Ann whose mind shifts from the present, to the past, to flights of fantasy, and of course, Redgrave pulls it all off with sterling style.

Natasha Richardson - Redgrave's real daughter - plays Ann's daughter, Constance, in the film. The scenes between this real life mother and daughter playing fictional mother and daughter are an insightful treat to watch.

Toni Collette plays Ann's other daughter, Nina. Nina spends a good deal of her time being depressed and feeling sorry for herself while shutting out a good man who loves her as well as her mother and sister. Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.

Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.

Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila. What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.

Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film. He certainly was right, and Close's performance in that one scene etches it in your mind. All the other scenes in which Close is Lila's very proper mother, and you get another performance to treasure.

There are three other scenes in the film, combined with the one featuring Close described above, that make the whole movie worth watching. On Lila's wedding day, Ann comes into her room and crawls into to bed with her friend to discuss Lila's misforgivings about her upcoming wedding to a man she clearly does not love. This scene is repeated fifty years later when Lila comes and crawls into bed with her dying friend Ann to talk about the lives they have lived. In this latter scene, Streep and Redgrave are enthralling.

The other memorable scene - at least to me - is when Buddy declares his love for Ann. Hugh Dancy as Buddy gives us a heartbreaking performance of a young man torn apart by his conflicting sexual feelings. His performance is superior.

Chick flick? Yes. A very special film with unbelievable acting, directing, and scenery? Definitely. I cannot recommend Evening too much. If you cannot enjoy a chick flick, stop right now. If, however, you enjoy films that illustrate complex characters and provide [[wondrous]] acting, read on.

Ann Grant Lord is dying. Her two daughters arrive to be at her bedside. Ann begins talking about people from her past of whom the daughters are unaware, and they question as to whether these lost acquaintances are real or imagined. They come to realize that these people from their mother's past are, indeed, real.

The story shifts, basically, between 1953 and circa 2000 with a few glimpses at Ann's life between those years. It was in 1953 that Ann met the love of her life and experienced her life's greatest tragedy.

One of Ann's two best friends from college, Lila, is being married. Ann's other best friend is Lila's brother, Buddy. Lila and Buddy are the children of a rich Newport family, whereas Ann is a cabaret singer living in Greenwich Village who wants to be a free spirit but is still bound by many of those 1950's conventions.

Soon after Ann arrives to be maid of honor at Lila's wedding, she meets the person who will become the pivotal character in the lives of the three - Harris. He is the adult son of a former servant of the family who grew up with Lila and Buddy and has gone on to become a physician in a small New England town. Ann immediately becomes enamored of Harris which adds a complication to the fact that Lila has always been in love with Harris and continues to be. Buddy, also, is in love with Harris, but being 1953, he has redirected that homosexual desire for Harris to his good friend, Ann for he cannot admit to himself that he has a sexual craving for another man. Buddy exhibits his inner frustration outwardly by being the alcoholic, wise-cracking bad boy of the family - much to the chagrin of his very proper and uptight parents.

Needless to say, all of these expressed and repressed emotions lead to tragedy - after all this is a chick flick.

In the present time, Ann's daughters have become distant from their mother and are suffering their own life realizations and doubts. Constance is working to emotional exhaustion trying to keep up her roll as perfect mother and wife. Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.

Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.

All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.

Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do. Her performance is not easily forgettable.

Vanessa Redgrave plays the dying Ann whose mind shifts from the present, to the past, to flights of fantasy, and of course, Redgrave pulls it all off with sterling style.

Natasha Richardson - Redgrave's real daughter - plays Ann's daughter, Constance, in the film. The scenes between this real life mother and daughter playing fictional mother and daughter are an insightful treat to watch.

Toni Collette plays Ann's other daughter, Nina. Nina spends a good deal of her time being depressed and feeling sorry for herself while shutting out a good man who loves her as well as her mother and sister. Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.

Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.

Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila. What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.

Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film. He certainly was right, and Close's performance in that one scene etches it in your mind. All the other scenes in which Close is Lila's very proper mother, and you get another performance to treasure.

There are three other scenes in the film, combined with the one featuring Close described above, that make the whole movie worth watching. On Lila's wedding day, Ann comes into her room and crawls into to bed with her friend to discuss Lila's misforgivings about her upcoming wedding to a man she clearly does not love. This scene is repeated fifty years later when Lila comes and crawls into bed with her dying friend Ann to talk about the lives they have lived. In this latter scene, Streep and Redgrave are enthralling.

The other memorable scene - at least to me - is when Buddy declares his love for Ann. Hugh Dancy as Buddy gives us a heartbreaking performance of a young man torn apart by his conflicting sexual feelings. His performance is superior.

Chick flick? Yes. A very special film with unbelievable acting, directing, and scenery? Definitely. I cannot recommend Evening too much. --------------------------------------------- Result 4284 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] and not in a fun-to-watch way. it's just bad. it's shocking that people have posted positive things about it here. the story sucks, the acting is bad, it's not scary, the special effects aren't special--oh no! the blackboard has hands coming out of it! oh gee--the mirror turned into water! the hair, clothes and makeup in the '50s scenes aren't accurate, and they got a middle-aged man with a receding hairline to play the high-school version of himself. this is like later-on nightmare on elm street stuff. i enjoy sitting down to watch a cheesy horror movie as much as anyone else, but there are better bad ones out there to choose from. --------------------------------------------- Result 4285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a gem of a movie not just for people who like fun and quirky premises, but who love the history and traditions of Sci-Fi and Classic Hollywood movies. Each alien of the Martian crew is the embodiment of a classic Sci-Fi character or member of Hollywood royalty and it's pure pleasure watching them bounce of each other and the residents of Big Bean. --------------------------------------------- Result 4286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] [[In]] a [[movie]] that follows a struggling [[actor]], played, [[evidently]], by a struggling [[actor]], this does no [[favours]] for [[Chris]] Klein. He [[struggles]] to [[bring]] [[anything]] [[memorable]] to the role and meanders on through the [[shallow]] [[script]] managing to [[display]], what [[could]] only be described as, a bland leading man. The story exists, but that is all, and fails to [[show]] any basic [[start]], [[middle]] and [[end]] and the viewer is left shrugging his shoulders feeling as [[though]] nothing in the [[past]] [[hour]] and three quarters has really happened.

One bright light in the [[midst]] of this is Fred Durst, who [[manages]] to [[stand]] out above his [[seemingly]] averagely talented co-stars and does a semi-decent [[job]] of bringing the [[backward]] [[character]] of Legde to life. Whether Fred can re-create this when [[working]] with a [[higher]] [[calibre]] of cast remains to be [[seen]] but I'l be watching out for him in future. [[Into]] a [[filmmaking]] that follows a struggling [[actress]], played, [[visibly]], by a struggling [[actress]], this does no [[promotes]] for [[Chrissy]] Klein. He [[combating]] to [[brings]] [[something]] [[unforgettable]] to the role and meanders on through the [[superficial]] [[hyphen]] managing to [[showings]], what [[wo]] only be described as, a bland leading man. The story exists, but that is all, and fails to [[showings]] any basic [[starter]], [[mid]] and [[terminate]] and the viewer is left shrugging his shoulders feeling as [[despite]] nothing in the [[yesteryear]] [[hours]] and three quarters has really happened.

One bright light in the [[medium]] of this is Fred Durst, who [[runs]] to [[standing]] out above his [[supposedly]] averagely talented co-stars and does a semi-decent [[jobs]] of bringing the [[astern]] [[characters]] of Legde to life. Whether Fred can re-create this when [[worked]] with a [[supreme]] [[stature]] of cast remains to be [[watched]] but I'l be watching out for him in future. --------------------------------------------- Result 4287 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] I read the book in 5th [[grade]] and now a few [[years]] [[later]] I [[saw]] the [[movie]]. There are a few [[differences]]:

1.[[Billy]] was oringinally suppose to eat 15 worms in 15 days, not 10 worms in one day by 7:00pm.

2.[[Billy]] is suppose to get 30 [[dollars]] after he's eaten all the worms. [[In]] the movie after Billy [[eats]] all the worms, [[Joe]] has to go to school with worms in his [[pants]].

3. Joe is suppose to fake some of the [[worms]] but in the movie, he doesn't at all.

[[Even]] though there are [[changes]],this [[movie]] is still one that kids will [[enjoy]]. I read the book in 5th [[grading]] and now a few [[olds]] [[then]] I [[sawthe]] the [[cinematography]]. There are a few [[deviations]]:

1.[[Billie]] was oringinally suppose to eat 15 worms in 15 days, not 10 worms in one day by 7:00pm.

2.[[Beli]] is suppose to get 30 [[usd]] after he's eaten all the worms. [[Among]] the movie after Billy [[feeds]] all the worms, [[Evel]] has to go to school with worms in his [[panties]].

3. Joe is suppose to fake some of the [[maggots]] but in the movie, he doesn't at all.

[[Yet]] though there are [[shifts]],this [[kino]] is still one that kids will [[enjoys]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Yowza! If anyone who [[loves]] [[Laurel]] and Hardy can watch this [[movie]] and feel good about it, you're a better [[person]] than me! This movie, while a great attempt at 'imitating' [[Laurel]] and Hardy through [[appearance]], sound and routine, [[falls]] very short of honoring them, or even being a movie of any substance. I blame Larry Harmon. Dialogue is torn from [[old]] L+H movies and [[planted]] in unrealistically, the plot is [[muddled]] with [[useless]] characterization of the other [[needless]] co-stars, Pinchot's [[accent]] was [[bizarre]] for Stan, and while Sartain did an [[excellent]] [[job]] with Ollie's accent, he tried too hard to create the [[wonderful]] mix that was Mr. Hardy. [[Where]] was a ([[good]]) musical number? Editing is [[choppy]], acting is [[stiff]], lines are [[horrid]], physics are -implausable- (although [[perhaps]] they were TRYING to give it that feel of cheap sets?), and [[overall]] it's a [[terrible]] [[thing]] to [[witness]]. It's even more painful to watch than ATOLL K, where the legendary duo did their last film in [[awful]] 1950's era [[writing]] and photography. Do yourself a favor and watch as much of the [[ORIGINAL]] Laurel and Hardy [[films]] as you can, and learn how [[things]] WERE. You [[know]] what a MAGNATE is, don't you? Stan Laurel did not [[perpetually]] reply with semi-moronic quips at every sentence.

I pity anyone who thinks that THIS was a [[decent]] update/honor of the [[boys]]. Where was THE CLASSIC THEME SONG?!? Why ruin 'Here's another fine mess'? Why skip 'any the wiser'? Why was there a pointless gaggle of co-stars?! WHY MISS GULCH FROM THE WIZARD OF OZ???? WHY MUST LARRY HARMON BE IN IT? WHY BOZO!? And did THE LEARNING CHANNEL help fund the thing?

I mean, really. Fart jokes, for God's sake.

FART JOKES. Yowza! If anyone who [[likes]] [[Laurier]] and Hardy can watch this [[filmmaking]] and feel good about it, you're a better [[individual]] than me! This movie, while a great attempt at 'imitating' [[Laurier]] and Hardy through [[semblance]], sound and routine, [[drops]] very short of honoring them, or even being a movie of any substance. I blame Larry Harmon. Dialogue is torn from [[archaic]] L+H movies and [[inoculated]] in unrealistically, the plot is [[disconcerted]] with [[superfluous]] characterization of the other [[fruitless]] co-stars, Pinchot's [[emphasis]] was [[surreal]] for Stan, and while Sartain did an [[sumptuous]] [[labor]] with Ollie's accent, he tried too hard to create the [[sumptuous]] mix that was Mr. Hardy. [[Everytime]] was a ([[alright]]) musical number? Editing is [[tumultuous]], acting is [[tough]], lines are [[nefarious]], physics are -implausable- (although [[conceivably]] they were TRYING to give it that feel of cheap sets?), and [[holistic]] it's a [[frightful]] [[stuff]] to [[telltale]]. It's even more painful to watch than ATOLL K, where the legendary duo did their last film in [[scary]] 1950's era [[write]] and photography. Do yourself a favor and watch as much of the [[UPFRONT]] Laurel and Hardy [[filmmaking]] as you can, and learn how [[aspects]] WERE. You [[savoir]] what a MAGNATE is, don't you? Stan Laurel did not [[invariably]] reply with semi-moronic quips at every sentence.

I pity anyone who thinks that THIS was a [[presentable]] update/honor of the [[grooms]]. Where was THE CLASSIC THEME SONG?!? Why ruin 'Here's another fine mess'? Why skip 'any the wiser'? Why was there a pointless gaggle of co-stars?! WHY MISS GULCH FROM THE WIZARD OF OZ???? WHY MUST LARRY HARMON BE IN IT? WHY BOZO!? And did THE LEARNING CHANNEL help fund the thing?

I mean, really. Fart jokes, for God's sake.

FART JOKES. --------------------------------------------- Result 4289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The acting was horrible and they got both of the sports wrongggg.......not only did they get the figure skating rules wrong, but also they rules of GIRLS Ice Hockey. In GIRLS ice hockey you cannot check. You also don't BLOCK for someone. Not all they girls are disgusting gross mean and big. I play hockey and I'm only 4'11 and have been asked to go to schools like the one in the movie. Also not all hockey players hate figure skaters. A lot of current girls hockey players were once figure skaters themselves. Also we skate A LOT faster then the ones in the movie. I was embarrassed by the movie it gave people the idea that we suck.......although i must mention that it is difficult to transition between the sports because of the toe pick on the figure skates.....also some of those twirly moves KAtelin was doing on the ice you couldn't do in a regular hockey game. She basically tripped the person, which is illigal. Its also unrealistic that she would get a HOCKEY scholarship when she figure skates. That really made me angry that scholarship would normally be used to someone who could benefit the team. --------------------------------------------- Result 4290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Keep in [[mind]] I'm a fan of the [[genre]] but have only recently [[seen]] this [[film]] for the [[first]] [[time]]. How I've [[overlooked]] it all this [[time]] is a wonder to me. To me this is a better [[film]] then the [[much]] lauded "High Noon". It's a great western with [[excellent]] acting and a great [[story]]. The DVD is in [[beautifull]] black and white with [[outstanding]] cinematography. [[If]] you [[like]] westerns or James [[Stewart]] this [[film]] is not to be missed. Keep in [[esprit]] I'm a fan of the [[types]] but have only recently [[watched]] this [[cinematography]] for the [[fiirst]] [[moment]]. How I've [[neglect]] it all this [[moment]] is a wonder to me. To me this is a better [[movies]] then the [[very]] lauded "High Noon". It's a great western with [[awesome]] acting and a great [[conte]]. The DVD is in [[beatiful]] black and white with [[unresolved]] cinematography. [[Unless]] you [[loves]] westerns or James [[Steward]] this [[movie]] is not to be missed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4291 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] First of all that I [[would]] like to [[say]] is that Edison [[Chen]] is [[extremely]] hot and that Sam Lee is [[looking]] [[much]] better than before XD! This is [[probably]] one of the most [[original]] movies I have [[seen]] so far; [[shows]] a poverty lifestyle [[background]] of a Cambodian. The Cambodian(Edison [[aka]] Pang) goes around [[killing]] people to survive himself; has [[done]] it [[throughout]] his [[entire]] [[life]]. Sam Lee's(Wai) [[duty]] is to capture the Cambodian for good. There are [[tons]] of violent [[actions]] but has a good [[story]] to it. The [[movie]] [[shows]] the [[struggles]] between those two characters; they both [[beat]] each other like [[angry]] dogs. [[GO]] [[AND]] WATCH PPL...[[STRONGLY]] SUGGESSTED!!! (GO HK [[FILMS]]) First of all that I [[could]] like to [[tell]] is that Edison [[Shen]] is [[unbelievably]] hot and that Sam Lee is [[researching]] [[very]] better than before XD! This is [[potentially]] one of the most [[preliminary]] movies I have [[saw]] so far; [[exhibitions]] a poverty lifestyle [[backdrop]] of a Cambodian. The Cambodian(Edison [[pseudonym]] Pang) goes around [[murdering]] people to survive himself; has [[completed]] it [[around]] his [[whole]] [[lifetime]]. Sam Lee's(Wai) [[obligations]] is to capture the Cambodian for good. There are [[shitloads]] of violent [[action]] but has a good [[narratives]] to it. The [[kino]] [[displayed]] the [[fights]] between those two characters; they both [[blanked]] each other like [[annoyed]] dogs. [[GOING]] [[UND]] WATCH PPL...[[FLATLY]] SUGGESSTED!!! (GO HK [[CINEMATOGRAPHIC]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 4292 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I hope the viewer who regards 'Dream Machine' as one of Corey Haim's [[finest]] and the "[[best]] [[movies]] of the century" was kidding. Undetected sarcasm on my part? I [[sincerely]] hope so.

'The Dream Machine' [[marks]] the first of a long line of mediocre capers that would [[plague]] the [[rest]] of Corey Haim's [[career]] (except '[[Prayer]] of the Rollerboys' which was [[surprisingly]] decent). Here, Haim plays [[nonchalant]] college boy, Bernie, who supposes that a cool car will attract his dream girl's attention. Lucky for Bernie, a rich woman aiming to get back at her cheating husband, [[hastily]] decides to reward her faithful piano tuner--Bernie--with a gift: a slick Porsche Turbo. However, unbeknownst to the [[woman]], and unfortunate for Bernie, is that her dead husband was murdered and his body was [[hidden]] in the trunk. Now, being that in this movie, [[bodies]] don't seem to [[decay]] or possess a rather foul funk, [[Bernie]] is unaware of this. In fact, the [[oblivious]] boy has no idea that something suspicious is afoot despite several odd circumstances that arise. In particular, a grizzly man follows him [[around]], desperate to get hold of that [[body]] relatively [[undetected]].

This is a low-grade action fizzle as [[many]] of Haim's films like this are ([[see]] The [[Double]] O Kid). [[Despite]] being [[part]] action, [[part]] romantic [[comedy]], this movie fails to offer the viewer much of [[anything]] of interest for at least the first forty-five minutes in which the filmmakers take more than enough time to show the immediate [[problem]] (i.e. Bernie being in possession of a car and a dead body, and a hit-man finding out that the Porsche is [[going]] to be [[hard]] to [[find]]). After which, and [[thanks]] to poor acting by Haim (I loved this [[kid]], too, but it's not exactly [[sacrilegious]] to [[admit]] the times when he [[obviously]] couldn't [[act]] well) and the [[lack]] of [[real]] immediacy and [[emergency]] between Bernie and the villain that makes much of the events [[unconvincing]] and as a result, inappreciable. To add [[injury]] to [[insult]], the soundtrack was [[unbelievably]] [[laughable]] and sounded more like self-evident [[songs]] you would hear in Team America (see the 'date' montage).

Loyal Corey Haim fans, however, should not be disappointed to see their boy in abundance. However, others understanding that Haim's career probably peaked when he was 14 or 15 and never recovered, might expect mediocrity, as will viewers just looking for early 90s b-comedy fluff to pass the time. I hope the viewer who regards 'Dream Machine' as one of Corey Haim's [[meanest]] and the "[[better]] [[filmmaking]] of the century" was kidding. Undetected sarcasm on my part? I [[honestly]] hope so.

'The Dream Machine' [[branded]] the first of a long line of mediocre capers that would [[epidemic]] the [[remaining]] of Corey Haim's [[quarries]] (except '[[Prayers]] of the Rollerboys' which was [[incredibly]] decent). Here, Haim plays [[flippant]] college boy, Bernie, who supposes that a cool car will attract his dream girl's attention. Lucky for Bernie, a rich woman aiming to get back at her cheating husband, [[hurriedly]] decides to reward her faithful piano tuner--Bernie--with a gift: a slick Porsche Turbo. However, unbeknownst to the [[girl]], and unfortunate for Bernie, is that her dead husband was murdered and his body was [[hiding]] in the trunk. Now, being that in this movie, [[organizations]] don't seem to [[breakup]] or possess a rather foul funk, [[Bernard]] is unaware of this. In fact, the [[subconscious]] boy has no idea that something suspicious is afoot despite several odd circumstances that arise. In particular, a grizzly man follows him [[nearly]], desperate to get hold of that [[agency]] relatively [[unnoticed]].

This is a low-grade action fizzle as [[several]] of Haim's films like this are ([[seeing]] The [[Twice]] O Kid). [[While]] being [[party]] action, [[parties]] romantic [[parody]], this movie fails to offer the viewer much of [[something]] of interest for at least the first forty-five minutes in which the filmmakers take more than enough time to show the immediate [[issues]] (i.e. Bernie being in possession of a car and a dead body, and a hit-man finding out that the Porsche is [[gonna]] to be [[harsh]] to [[found]]). After which, and [[appreciation]] to poor acting by Haim (I loved this [[petit]], too, but it's not exactly [[blasphemous]] to [[confess]] the times when he [[apparently]] couldn't [[law]] well) and the [[lacked]] of [[veritable]] immediacy and [[urgency]] between Bernie and the villain that makes much of the events [[feeble]] and as a result, inappreciable. To add [[injuries]] to [[insulted]], the soundtrack was [[madly]] [[farcical]] and sounded more like self-evident [[tunes]] you would hear in Team America (see the 'date' montage).

Loyal Corey Haim fans, however, should not be disappointed to see their boy in abundance. However, others understanding that Haim's career probably peaked when he was 14 or 15 and never recovered, might expect mediocrity, as will viewers just looking for early 90s b-comedy fluff to pass the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henri Verneuil's film may be not so famous as Parallax View, 3 Days of the Condor or JFK but it is certainly not worse and sometimes even better than these classic representatives of the genre. Action takes place in fictional western state where fictional president has been killed. After several years of investigation, special government commission decides that president was killed by a lone gunman. But one man - prosecutor Volney, played by Yves Montand - thinks there's something more to be investigated and so the film starts. This movie doesn't deal with some exact theories, but it embraces the whole structure of relationship between government and society in today's world. Such film could be made only in the 1970-ies but it will never lose it's actuality. Furthermore, it's even a bit frightful how precise are it's oracles. 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a story of two dogs and a cat looking for their way back home.Old and wise Golden Retriever Shadow, young American Bulldog Chance and Himalayan cat Sassy flee from the ranch and go into the wilderness to be reunited with their family.Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey (1993) is a family adventure directed by Duwayne Dunham.It's a remake of a 1963 film.This movie got a sequel three years later.Michael J. Fox is the perfect man to do the voice-over for Chance.Fox has some youthful energy he brings to the role.Sally Field does great voice work as Sassy.Don Ameche is fantastic as Shadow.This was this veteran actor's second last movie.Also the visible actors are great.Kim Greist plays Laura Burnford-Seaver.Robert Hays is Bob Seaver.Benji Thall plays Peter Burnford.Veronica Lauren is Hope Burnford.Kevin Chevalia is Jamie Seaver.Jean Smart portrays Kate.It's quite amazing to watch these pets trying to survive in the wilderness.We see Sassy taken by the river and she seems like a goner.The bear scene is exiting and funny.Chance has no chance with that big, hungry bear.And his meeting with the porcupine looks painful.This is some great fun for the whole family. --------------------------------------------- Result 4295 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I really mean that. I caught it last night on Vh1, and I was not expecting it to be so good. This is now one of my favorites. I must add that it has a killer soundtrack. --------------------------------------------- Result 4296 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this movie at 3'o clock in the morning, a time in the day where I am usually very open when it comes to movies. But still I think it wasn't good, this movie wasn't good at all. The reasons why are many.

The acting isn't all that good, and time after time situations occurring in it reminded me of a poor 90's Chevy Chase comedy. I mean, come on, like the handcuff situation, and the poker situation amongst the servants... This movie was so obviously based very much on the first one, and thats OK. But if I hadn't seen the first one before seeing this, it would have sucked even worse. Like the ending, it came very suddenly, and I felt like I got no closure what so ever... Sebastian changed very suddenly, and this This movie seems like it was made solely to explain nr 1, and like no time or effort was used on making anything else good. The score is the same as in the first one, and it didn't feel like a movie at all...

They should have handled the situations with more style and class, but they didn't, and therefore, this movie turned out bad... --------------------------------------------- Result 4297 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm [[glad]] the folks at IMDb were able to decipher what [[genre]] this [[film]] falls into. I had a suspicion it was trying to be a [[comedy]], but [[since]] it [[also]] seems to want to be a [[dark]] and [[solemn]] melodrama I wasn't sure. For a [[comedy]] it is [[amazingly]] bereft of even the [[slightest]] [[venture]] into the [[realms]] of [[humour]] - right up until the [[ridiculous]] "twist" [[ending]], which [[confirms]] what an [[utter]] waste of [[time]] the [[whole]] [[movie]] actually is. It is [[hard]] to [[describe]] just how amateurish THE [[HAZING]] really is. [[Did]] [[anyone]] [[involved]] in this [[film]] have any [[idea]] at all what they were [[supposed]] to be doing? [[Actually]] worth watching so that you can stare at the screen in slack-jawed [[disbelief]] at how terrible it is. I'm [[pleased]] the folks at IMDb were able to decipher what [[genres]] this [[filmmaking]] falls into. I had a suspicion it was trying to be a [[parody]], but [[because]] it [[further]] seems to want to be a [[murky]] and [[solemnly]] melodrama I wasn't sure. For a [[parody]] it is [[marvellously]] bereft of even the [[faintest]] [[ventures]] into the [[areas]] of [[mood]] - right up until the [[silly]] "twist" [[terminating]], which [[asserts]] what an [[total]] waste of [[times]] the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] actually is. It is [[laborious]] to [[depict]] just how amateurish THE [[BULLYING]] really is. [[Got]] [[everyone]] [[implicated]] in this [[filmmaking]] have any [[brainchild]] at all what they were [[suspected]] to be doing? [[Genuinely]] worth watching so that you can stare at the screen in slack-jawed [[skepticism]] at how terrible it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 4298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I ended up watching The Tenants with my close friends who rented the movie solely based on Snoop Dogg's appearance (a passionate fetish of theirs) on the cover. Understandably, I did not expect much. I thought the movie would [[include]] the typical array of Snoop Dogg related behavior and imagery often seen in cliché rap videos. However, my generalization was for the most part wrong. [[Unfortunately]], this didn't make the movie any better.

Most would describe the movie as a dark serious drama, whereas I would describe it as a dark [[seriously]] drawn out [[boring]] [[drama]] flick. The [[film]] tells a [[story]] of two [[struggling]] writers ([[Dylan]] McDermott and Snoop Dogg) who are [[trying]] to create their own separate masterpieces. Their polar [[opposite]] lifestyles [[end]] up [[forming]] an unlikely but [[highly]] [[complex]] and neurotic [[friendship]]. This [[friendship]] moves [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[movie]] [[like]] a [[wild]] roller-coaster - most of which is contributed by Snoop's character - reminiscent of [[someone]] with a [[severe]] [[case]] of [[split]] [[personality]] [[disorder]]. And [[although]] the [[movie]] is a drama, the acting - which has a morbid and serious tone - from Snoop and [[company]] was more comical than [[anything]] else.

I wouldn't [[recommend]] this movie for those who are attention impaired because this one has a lot of dialogue and a lot more dialogue after that. There are some [[mediocre]] conflicts, but even they are mostly bogged down with more dialogue. The end, however, [[jumped]] at me with a sudden surprise. It was a little bit twisted, somewhat unexpected and a perfect [[way]] to wrap up a movie that needed to end. While watching the ending credits I couldn't help but picture the [[director]] thinking, "Oh God, how the [[hell]] do I [[end]] this snoozer." By the way, the director laid out [[carefully]] [[planted]] [[hints]] and [[subtleties]] [[leading]] to the [[climax]] - all of which are more [[visible]] than Waldo in a crowded street of midgets wearing [[nothing]] but [[black]] [[sweaters]]. I ended up watching The Tenants with my close friends who rented the movie solely based on Snoop Dogg's appearance (a passionate fetish of theirs) on the cover. Understandably, I did not expect much. I thought the movie would [[containing]] the typical array of Snoop Dogg related behavior and imagery often seen in cliché rap videos. However, my generalization was for the most part wrong. [[Sadly]], this didn't make the movie any better.

Most would describe the movie as a dark serious drama, whereas I would describe it as a dark [[gravely]] drawn out [[dull]] [[tragedy]] flick. The [[filmmaking]] tells a [[storytelling]] of two [[fighting]] writers ([[Dillon]] McDermott and Snoop Dogg) who are [[try]] to create their own separate masterpieces. Their polar [[contrast]] lifestyles [[termination]] up [[train]] an unlikely but [[immensely]] [[intricate]] and neurotic [[goodwill]]. This [[goodwill]] moves [[across]] the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] [[iike]] a [[savage]] roller-coaster - most of which is contributed by Snoop's character - reminiscent of [[everyone]] with a [[utmost]] [[instances]] of [[divides]] [[persona]] [[turbulence]]. And [[despite]] the [[filmmaking]] is a drama, the acting - which has a morbid and serious tone - from Snoop and [[enterprise]] was more comical than [[nothing]] else.

I wouldn't [[recommends]] this movie for those who are attention impaired because this one has a lot of dialogue and a lot more dialogue after that. There are some [[lackluster]] conflicts, but even they are mostly bogged down with more dialogue. The end, however, [[soared]] at me with a sudden surprise. It was a little bit twisted, somewhat unexpected and a perfect [[ways]] to wrap up a movie that needed to end. While watching the ending credits I couldn't help but picture the [[headmaster]] thinking, "Oh God, how the [[brothel]] do I [[terminate]] this snoozer." By the way, the director laid out [[rigorously]] [[sown]] [[suggestions]] and [[nuances]] [[culminating]] to the [[apogee]] - all of which are more [[recognizable]] than Waldo in a crowded street of midgets wearing [[none]] but [[negra]] [[jerseys]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] As a lover of [[bad]] [[movies]], I [[definitely]] [[hit]] paydirt with this one. The plot isn't [[really]] that bad, but there are a few [[instances]] where you [[really]] have to [[ask]] yourself "what the heck is [[going]] on here?"

There are [[many]] [[many]] [[things]] that make this the funniest [[bad]] [[movie]] ever. First off, Rudy Ray Moore had gotten so fat and slow when this movie was filmed that the special effects consist of speeding up the fight scenes to double time. There are [[also]] scenes where there is a slow-motion instant replay, jumping onto a ten foot high wall (by playing falling off of it backwards), naked men walking out of huge letters, and sex that literally brings down the roof (with the cable holding up the roof catching on fire).

Of course, no Rudy Ray Moore [[movie]] would be complete without a completely [[gratuitous]] and random comedy club scene where Rudy makes [[fun]] of all the customers, interposed with people doing some odd dance. There are so many things [[bad]] about this [[movie]], but they're bad in an [[entertaining]] [[way]], and if you take your eyes off the movie, you [[might]] miss another mistake.

Rating: 1/10 for [[actual]] [[value]], 10/10 for cheese factor, 10/10 for [[picking]] out [[mistakes]] and goofs, [[averages]] out to 7/10. As a lover of [[horrid]] [[kino]], I [[surely]] [[pummeled]] paydirt with this one. The plot isn't [[truthfully]] that bad, but there are a few [[cases]] where you [[truthfully]] have to [[wondering]] yourself "what the heck is [[go]] on here?"

There are [[several]] [[innumerable]] [[aspects]] that make this the funniest [[amiss]] [[films]] ever. First off, Rudy Ray Moore had gotten so fat and slow when this movie was filmed that the special effects consist of speeding up the fight scenes to double time. There are [[likewise]] scenes where there is a slow-motion instant replay, jumping onto a ten foot high wall (by playing falling off of it backwards), naked men walking out of huge letters, and sex that literally brings down the roof (with the cable holding up the roof catching on fire).

Of course, no Rudy Ray Moore [[kino]] would be complete without a completely [[unsubstantiated]] and random comedy club scene where Rudy makes [[droll]] of all the customers, interposed with people doing some odd dance. There are so many things [[unhealthy]] about this [[kino]], but they're bad in an [[entertain]] [[camino]], and if you take your eyes off the movie, you [[probability]] miss another mistake.

Rating: 1/10 for [[real]] [[values]], 10/10 for cheese factor, 10/10 for [[selecting]] out [[error]] and goofs, [[average]] out to 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I feel like I have some uber-rare disease that no one has [[heard]] of and I have [[finally]] come across a [[support]] group on the net! I [[finally]] found this title by asking for an [[answer]] on an "[[experts]]" [[site]] on the web. I too, saw this [[movie]] in my youth and was [[struck]] by the [[atmosphere]] and [[especially]] the ending. I have never [[forgotten]] it and have never [[seen]] it since. No one I know saw the film and I had [[almost]] given up on ever finding it's title. Alas, even [[knowing]] the name, I shall probably never see the film again as it is impossible to find commercially. Small steps...

G I feel like I have some uber-rare disease that no one has [[listened]] of and I have [[lastly]] come across a [[help]] group on the net! I [[eventually]] found this title by asking for an [[response]] on an "[[specialists]]" [[locations]] on the web. I too, saw this [[film]] in my youth and was [[knocked]] by the [[vibe]] and [[predominantly]] the ending. I have never [[ignored]] it and have never [[watched]] it since. No one I know saw the film and I had [[virtually]] given up on ever finding it's title. Alas, even [[cognizant]] the name, I shall probably never see the film again as it is impossible to find commercially. Small steps...

G --------------------------------------------- Result 4301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] German [[nut]] [[case]] Jörg Buttgereit [[apparently]] has [[fans]] - but I don't know why, and I'm [[Definitely]] not one of them! The only Buttgereit film I'd seen previously was Nekromantik and I hated every minute of it, but - shockingly - this film is [[worse]]! Der Todesking is pointless in the same way as Nekromantik, but it's a worse film because it's boring in a way that few movies have ever [[managed]] (it's not far off The Blair Witch Project, seriously). Some people say that this film is 'sick' and 'shocking', but it really isn't. The [[director]] may have been making a point about death, but only he knows what it is. How anyone [[could]] watch this [[film]] and be anything other than [[bored]] with it is [[completely]] beyond me. The film [[revolves]] around the [[theme]] of suicide, and follows the [[deaths]] of seven [[different]] people over the course of a week. [[Yes]], that means we have a pointless and boring episode for [[Monday]], a pointless and [[boring]] episode for [[Tuesday]], a pointless and [[boring]] episode for [[Wednesday]] etc etc. This [[film]] manages to be even more boring than my average [[week]]!

[[Der]] Todesking is [[apparently]] an 'art' [[film]], [[although]] this [[would]] [[appear]] to be a reference to the [[way]] that not very much makes sense rather than a [[reference]] to the [[film]] bearing any [[resemblance]] to 'art'. Each segment of the [[film]] is [[meant]] to [[tell]] a [[separate]] [[story]] - but it doesn't! We just [[get]] a [[quick]] little sketch on [[suicide]], and it only makes you wonder what the point is. The [[film]] feels like it should be deep, but there's a [[great]] [[big]] void where the [[intelligence]] should be and [[nothing]] there to [[fill]] it. Buttgereit uses a few [[evocative]] [[images]]; but I'm unlikely to remember any of them for more than a week or so because this [[film]] just isn't that [[memorable]]. There's a shot [[involving]] a [[decomposing]] man's [[body]] that [[features]] fairly [[often]], but that [[gets]] [[old]] pretty [[quick]] and all you're left with is the [[rest]] of the [[film]], which is [[unfortunate]]. If I were to [[struggle]] for good [[things]] to [[say]] about this [[crap]], all I can [[think]] of is this; the title sounds cool. As I [[mentioned]], Nekromantik is the only other [[film]] I've [[seen]] from this [[amateur]] director; I have copies of Schramm and Nekromantik 2, and now I'm really in no rush to watch either. Der Todesking is a dull film with no point and [[anyone]] that calls it 'art' is very much mistaken. Give it a miss. German [[nuts]] [[examples]] Jörg Buttgereit [[patently]] has [[amateurs]] - but I don't know why, and I'm [[Categorically]] not one of them! The only Buttgereit film I'd seen previously was Nekromantik and I hated every minute of it, but - shockingly - this film is [[pire]]! Der Todesking is pointless in the same way as Nekromantik, but it's a worse film because it's boring in a way that few movies have ever [[administering]] (it's not far off The Blair Witch Project, seriously). Some people say that this film is 'sick' and 'shocking', but it really isn't. The [[headmaster]] may have been making a point about death, but only he knows what it is. How anyone [[would]] watch this [[filmmaking]] and be anything other than [[drilled]] with it is [[totally]] beyond me. The film [[turns]] around the [[thematic]] of suicide, and follows the [[dying]] of seven [[distinct]] people over the course of a week. [[Yea]], that means we have a pointless and boring episode for [[Thursday]], a pointless and [[dull]] episode for [[Sunday]], a pointless and [[dull]] episode for [[Thursday]] etc etc. This [[filmmaking]] manages to be even more boring than my average [[chow]]!

[[Deir]] Todesking is [[seemingly]] an 'art' [[movie]], [[despite]] this [[could]] [[emerge]] to be a reference to the [[paths]] that not very much makes sense rather than a [[references]] to the [[movie]] bearing any [[analogy]] to 'art'. Each segment of the [[filmmaking]] is [[intentioned]] to [[say]] a [[separated]] [[fairytales]] - but it doesn't! We just [[gets]] a [[timely]] little sketch on [[suicides]], and it only makes you wonder what the point is. The [[movie]] feels like it should be deep, but there's a [[whopping]] [[prodigious]] void where the [[intelligentsia]] should be and [[none]] there to [[filled]] it. Buttgereit uses a few [[reminiscent]] [[picture]]; but I'm unlikely to remember any of them for more than a week or so because this [[filmmaking]] just isn't that [[unforgettable]]. There's a shot [[involve]] a [[rotting]] man's [[agencies]] that [[traits]] fairly [[routinely]], but that [[get]] [[former]] pretty [[swift]] and all you're left with is the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]], which is [[sad]]. If I were to [[combating]] for good [[aspects]] to [[says]] about this [[dammit]], all I can [[reckon]] of is this; the title sounds cool. As I [[alluded]], Nekromantik is the only other [[flick]] I've [[noticed]] from this [[enthusiast]] director; I have copies of Schramm and Nekromantik 2, and now I'm really in no rush to watch either. Der Todesking is a dull film with no point and [[anybody]] that calls it 'art' is very much mistaken. Give it a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 4302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] I thought "What's New Scooby-Doo" was pretty [[bad]] (yes, I'm sorry to say I didn't like it), since Hanna-Barbera didn't produce it and it took a drastic step away from the old series. When I heard "[[Shaggy]] and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" was in the works, I thought it [[could]] be [[better]]. But when I saw a pic of how Scooby and Shaggy were going to [[appear]], I knew this show was going to be [[bad]], if not worse. I [[watched]] a few episodes, and believe me, it is just [[yet]] another "Teen Titans" or "Loonatics [[Unleashed]]"-wannabe. [[No]] [[longer]] are Scooby and Shaggy [[going]] against people wearing [[masks]] of cool, creepy monsters that rob banks. Now they are going after a typical super-villain whom wants to destroy the world. Shaggy and Scooby-Doo have become more brave, too. Also, [[since]] Shaggy IS NOT going to be a vegetarian in this series, Casey Kasem (whom actually IS a vegetarian), the original voice of Shaggy, will [[NOT]] voice Shaggy. He will only voice Shaggy if he doesn't eat meat, and that was just a [[stupid]] corporate-done change to update the franchise, as if the Internet jokes weren't enough. So Scott Menville (whom previously voiced Red Herring on "A Pup Named Scooby-Doo") voices Shaggy here. Believe me, the voice is REALLY BAD! It makes Shaggy sound like a squeaky 10-year-old, and I must agree the voice definitely fits his new ugly look. However, [[Kasem]] DOES voice Shaggy's Uncle Albert, which is a sort of good thing. Scooby-Doo, on the other hand, does not look that well. He seems to have been designed to look more like the CGI Scooby-Doo from the live-action movies. Also, Scooby's Frank Welker [[voice]] ([[need]] I mention Brain the [[Dog]] again?) [[still]] hasn't [[improved]]. Robi, the robotic butler, is practically [[worse]] than Scrappy-Doo! He [[tries]] to be [[funny]] and does "comical" impressions and gives safety [[tips]] ("Remember kids, don't stand under trees during a [[thunderstorm]]!"), but it just doesn't fit into a Scooby-Doo cartoon. Again, the Hanna-Barbera sound effects are rarely used here. However, on one episode, "Lightning Strikes Twice," they use the "Castle thunder" thunderclaps during it, almost extensively! (Although they DO still use the newly-recorded thunder sound effects, too.) Scooby-Doo hasn't use "Castle thunder" sound effects since 1991. But my question is, why use "Castle thunder" on "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue," while NOT use it on the direct-to-video movies or even on "What's New Scooby-Doo!" (Two episodes of WNSD used it, and it wasn't enough, unfortunately.) If WNSD and the DTV movies used it, then they might be better than this crappy cartoon. The day this show premiered, I watched the first episode, and it was SO bad I turned it off after only five minutes! To get my mind off of this poor show, I rented "Scooby-Doo, Pirates Ahoy!" which came out around the same time. And you know what? The "Pirates Ahoy" movie was actually BETTER than "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" (and even better than "What's New, Scooby-Doo!") And it looks like the new designs that the characters have isn't permanent to the franchise. The direct-to-video movies coming out while this show is being made use the regular character designs, thankfully. But, whether you loved or hated "What's New Scooby-Doo," I don't recommend it. But if you HATE the old series, THEN you'll love it! (Oh god, I hope the old Scooby-Doo cartoon stay better than this new $#*%!) Anyways, like WNSD, a really bad addition to the Scooby canon. I thought "What's New Scooby-Doo" was pretty [[negative]] (yes, I'm sorry to say I didn't like it), since Hanna-Barbera didn't produce it and it took a drastic step away from the old series. When I heard "[[Sammy]] and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" was in the works, I thought it [[did]] be [[nicer]]. But when I saw a pic of how Scooby and Shaggy were going to [[appears]], I knew this show was going to be [[unfavourable]], if not worse. I [[saw]] a few episodes, and believe me, it is just [[however]] another "Teen Titans" or "Loonatics [[Sparked]]"-wannabe. [[Not]] [[anymore]] are Scooby and Shaggy [[go]] against people wearing [[mask]] of cool, creepy monsters that rob banks. Now they are going after a typical super-villain whom wants to destroy the world. Shaggy and Scooby-Doo have become more brave, too. Also, [[because]] Shaggy IS NOT going to be a vegetarian in this series, Casey Kasem (whom actually IS a vegetarian), the original voice of Shaggy, will [[NO]] voice Shaggy. He will only voice Shaggy if he doesn't eat meat, and that was just a [[dumb]] corporate-done change to update the franchise, as if the Internet jokes weren't enough. So Scott Menville (whom previously voiced Red Herring on "A Pup Named Scooby-Doo") voices Shaggy here. Believe me, the voice is REALLY BAD! It makes Shaggy sound like a squeaky 10-year-old, and I must agree the voice definitely fits his new ugly look. However, [[Qasim]] DOES voice Shaggy's Uncle Albert, which is a sort of good thing. Scooby-Doo, on the other hand, does not look that well. He seems to have been designed to look more like the CGI Scooby-Doo from the live-action movies. Also, Scooby's Frank Welker [[vocals]] ([[require]] I mention Brain the [[Puppy]] again?) [[nevertheless]] hasn't [[better]]. Robi, the robotic butler, is practically [[pire]] than Scrappy-Doo! He [[strive]] to be [[hilarious]] and does "comical" impressions and gives safety [[advice]] ("Remember kids, don't stand under trees during a [[thunderstorms]]!"), but it just doesn't fit into a Scooby-Doo cartoon. Again, the Hanna-Barbera sound effects are rarely used here. However, on one episode, "Lightning Strikes Twice," they use the "Castle thunder" thunderclaps during it, almost extensively! (Although they DO still use the newly-recorded thunder sound effects, too.) Scooby-Doo hasn't use "Castle thunder" sound effects since 1991. But my question is, why use "Castle thunder" on "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue," while NOT use it on the direct-to-video movies or even on "What's New Scooby-Doo!" (Two episodes of WNSD used it, and it wasn't enough, unfortunately.) If WNSD and the DTV movies used it, then they might be better than this crappy cartoon. The day this show premiered, I watched the first episode, and it was SO bad I turned it off after only five minutes! To get my mind off of this poor show, I rented "Scooby-Doo, Pirates Ahoy!" which came out around the same time. And you know what? The "Pirates Ahoy" movie was actually BETTER than "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" (and even better than "What's New, Scooby-Doo!") And it looks like the new designs that the characters have isn't permanent to the franchise. The direct-to-video movies coming out while this show is being made use the regular character designs, thankfully. But, whether you loved or hated "What's New Scooby-Doo," I don't recommend it. But if you HATE the old series, THEN you'll love it! (Oh god, I hope the old Scooby-Doo cartoon stay better than this new $#*%!) Anyways, like WNSD, a really bad addition to the Scooby canon. --------------------------------------------- Result 4303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A woman borough a boy to this [[world]] and was [[alone]]. They both were [[alone]] because a [[boy]] had a [[gift]] and a [[curse]] in one package - he was capable of withdrawing [[sword]] from his arm. There was [[always]] a [[wound]] on his [[wrist]] in the [[cause]] of this "gift" - the wound of the deadliest [[weapon]] [[inside]] of his body. First he kills his [[constantly]] drunk stepfather who hurts his [[mom]] every time. [[Then]] he grows up and decides to [[find]] his [[real]] father. [[Just]] as simple as all the time for a [[superhero]] - he [[reaches]] the justice....but the society decides this justice is not necessary and dangerous which is [[indeed]] right 'cause it is not like in Hollywood movies that the character does not try to kill anyone - Sasha (he is the [[main]] [[hero]] acted by Artem Tkachenko) kills if the [[person]] who in his opinion deserves to [[die]] but [[gets]] blames from authorities and runs. [[In]] such a runaway from authorities and [[Mafia]] he [[meets]] a girl ([[acted]] by Chulpan Hamatova) and falls in [[love]] with her. Everything else is to be watched...not [[told]]. Be aware that this film is more about [[feelings]] and [[emotions]] but not about [[actions]]. This film is full of pain of the main character full of him and his [[vision]] of life. A woman borough a boy to this [[worldwide]] and was [[solely]]. They both were [[merely]] because a [[dude]] had a [[donate]] and a [[bane]] in one package - he was capable of withdrawing [[sabres]] from his arm. There was [[continuously]] a [[lesions]] on his [[waist]] in the [[reason]] of this "gift" - the wound of the deadliest [[gun]] [[within]] of his body. First he kills his [[permanently]] drunk stepfather who hurts his [[mummy]] every time. [[Later]] he grows up and decides to [[found]] his [[actual]] father. [[Mere]] as simple as all the time for a [[hero]] - he [[attained]] the justice....but the society decides this justice is not necessary and dangerous which is [[actually]] right 'cause it is not like in Hollywood movies that the character does not try to kill anyone - Sasha (he is the [[principal]] [[heroin]] acted by Artem Tkachenko) kills if the [[someone]] who in his opinion deserves to [[dying]] but [[get]] blames from authorities and runs. [[For]] such a runaway from authorities and [[Shay]] he [[satisfies]] a girl ([[worked]] by Chulpan Hamatova) and falls in [[loves]] with her. Everything else is to be watched...not [[tell]]. Be aware that this film is more about [[sentiments]] and [[feelings]] but not about [[activities]]. This film is full of pain of the main character full of him and his [[eyesight]] of life. --------------------------------------------- Result 4304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I cannot believe how popular this [[show]] is. I consider myself an [[avid]] sci-fi [[fan]]. I have read [[countless]] sci-fi novels and have [[enjoyed]] [[many]] sci-fi [[movies]] and TV [[shows]]. I really wouldn't [[even]] consider this true sci-fi. Every episode I have [[sat]] through was [[like]] a lame, watered down version of a Star [[Trek]] episode, minus [[anything]] that might make it interesting or exciting.

It's basically a bunch of people [[standing]] [[around]] in ARMY fatigues, [[talking]] about [[something]] boring, who [[occasionally]] [[go]] through the Stargate and [[end]] up on a planet that looks just like Earth, with people who look and sound just like Humans! It seemed extremely low budget. The [[characters]] are all forgettable one [[dimensional]] [[cutouts]], and the many attempts at [[humor]] fall flat. It reminds me when you see a commercial with a famous athlete in it, trying to be funny, but he is not. It is just sad.

The movie was [[terrible]] as well. There is so much you can do with a portal through space, yet every place the ARMY people go is BORING! This shows no [[imagination]]! I actually thought the [[TV]] series "Alien [[Nation]]" from a few [[years]] back ([[based]] on the movie Alien [[Nation]]) was much better. That [[show]] actually had [[good]] [[story]] lines and [[decent]] characters. I wasn't [[crazy]] about "Alien [[Nation]]", but [[compared]] to this [[overrated]] [[crap]], it was great!

[[Also]], unlike the [[great]] [[new]] "Battlestar [[Galactica]]" [[series]], "Stargate" copied the look and feel of the lame [[movie]] too [[closely]]! They should have at [[least]] updated the cheesy "toilet flushing" special [[effect]] of [[whenever]] [[somebody]] goes through the Stargate. I cannot believe how popular this [[exhibit]] is. I consider myself an [[ravenous]] sci-fi [[admirer]]. I have read [[untold]] sci-fi novels and have [[loved]] [[innumerable]] sci-fi [[film]] and TV [[exhibit]]. I really wouldn't [[yet]] consider this true sci-fi. Every episode I have [[oin]] through was [[iike]] a lame, watered down version of a Star [[Hiking]] episode, minus [[algo]] that might make it interesting or exciting.

It's basically a bunch of people [[stand]] [[nearly]] in ARMY fatigues, [[chat]] about [[anything]] boring, who [[sometimes]] [[going]] through the Stargate and [[ends]] up on a planet that looks just like Earth, with people who look and sound just like Humans! It seemed extremely low budget. The [[nature]] are all forgettable one [[dimensions]] [[dents]], and the many attempts at [[comedy]] fall flat. It reminds me when you see a commercial with a famous athlete in it, trying to be funny, but he is not. It is just sad.

The movie was [[horrific]] as well. There is so much you can do with a portal through space, yet every place the ARMY people go is BORING! This shows no [[fantasy]]! I actually thought the [[TVS]] series "Alien [[Nations]]" from a few [[ages]] back ([[bases]] on the movie Alien [[Nations]]) was much better. That [[exhibition]] actually had [[alright]] [[stories]] lines and [[presentable]] characters. I wasn't [[madman]] about "Alien [[Nationals]]", but [[compare]] to this [[overestimated]] [[bullshit]], it was great!

[[Additionally]], unlike the [[whopping]] [[novel]] "Battlestar [[Battlestar]]" [[serials]], "Stargate" copied the look and feel of the lame [[kino]] too [[tightly]]! They should have at [[fewer]] updated the cheesy "toilet flushing" special [[effects]] of [[wherever]] [[everybody]] goes through the Stargate. --------------------------------------------- Result 4305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] They should have named this movie ...Blonde women that needed to get their roots colored. Also the main character, geeze, the too tight sweaters. The giggling. Thought the guy did a good job though. I keep hoping we'll find a good 8 star Christmas movie to watch this week. The dart throwing. Had to laugh at that too. We've still got 3 more on the DVR to watch, maybe we'll get lucky. Oh yeah, I figured the guy out pretty quickly and nailed it when he picked up the flowers and then drove out with his cousin. I told my daughter they were on their way to the cemetery. And how stupid was it that the two gals followed them there spying on them? Creepy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A truly dreadful film. I did not know initially that this was a Kiwi effort - but very soon I started to realize that all the characters were speaking with hardly disguised kiwi accents under the fake American ones. Why did it need to be set n America anyway? - it could have been set in NZ and then the actors could have used their normal voices. Surely someone in the production team could hear the dreadful attempts at speaking with American accents? A bad bad film. I am surprised it has lasted this long - how did it make it out of the can? It just seemed like a very poor attempt at a Segal/Willis type action man flick.A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY! If there was any TAXPAYER money in this piece of trash, I would be leading a revolution to have all the money put back into the Treasury. I am still reeling (get it? pun, reeling!) at the absolute garbage I have just seen. Why did I continue to watch? Well, I am a movie fanatic and cant help ,myself! --------------------------------------------- Result 4307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Bill (Buddy [[Rogers]]) is [[sent]] to [[New]] York by his uncle (Richard [[Tucker]]) to experience [[life]] before he inherits $25million. His uncle has [[paid]] 3 [[women]] Jacqui (Kathryn Crawford), Maxine (Josephine [[Dunn]]) and [[Pauline]] (Carole Lombard) to chaperone him and [[ensure]] that he does not [[fall]] [[foul]] of gold-diggers. One such lady Cleo (Geneva [[Mitchell]]) turns up on the scene to the disapprovement of the [[women]]. We follow the tale as the girls are offered more money to [[appear]] in a [[show]] [[instead]] of their escorting role that they have [[agreed]] to [[carry]] out for the 3 months that [[Bill]] is in [[New]] York, while Bill meets with Cleo and another [[woman]]. [[At]] the end, [[love]] is in the [[air]] for [[Bill]] and one other .............

The [[picture]] quality and sound quality are poor in this [[film]]. The story is interspersed with musical numbers but the [[songs]] are [[bad]] and Kathryn Crawford has a terrible [[voice]]. Rogers isn't that good [[either]]. He's [[pleasant]] [[enough]] but only really [[comes]] to [[life]] when playing the [[drums]] or trombone. There is a very irritating character who plays a [[cab]] driver (Roscoe Karns) and the [[film]] is just [[dull]]. Bill (Buddy [[Rodgers]]) is [[dispatch]] to [[Novel]] York by his uncle (Richard [[Goldberg]]) to experience [[living]] before he inherits $25million. His uncle has [[pays]] 3 [[woman]] Jacqui (Kathryn Crawford), Maxine (Josephine [[Dunne]]) and [[Tracy]] (Carole Lombard) to chaperone him and [[ensured]] that he does not [[dipped]] [[dirty]] of gold-diggers. One such lady Cleo (Geneva [[Michel]]) turns up on the scene to the disapprovement of the [[girl]]. We follow the tale as the girls are offered more money to [[appearing]] in a [[shows]] [[however]] of their escorting role that they have [[countersigned]] to [[transporting]] out for the 3 months that [[Invoices]] is in [[Novo]] York, while Bill meets with Cleo and another [[girls]]. [[During]] the end, [[amour]] is in the [[aviation]] for [[Billing]] and one other .............

The [[photo]] quality and sound quality are poor in this [[movies]]. The story is interspersed with musical numbers but the [[anthems]] are [[faulty]] and Kathryn Crawford has a terrible [[vowel]]. Rogers isn't that good [[neither]]. He's [[delightful]] [[satisfactorily]] but only really [[occurs]] to [[lives]] when playing the [[barrels]] or trombone. There is a very irritating character who plays a [[taxi]] driver (Roscoe Karns) and the [[filmmaking]] is just [[boring]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Up until the last few minutes of the movie, I would have given the movie a score of 7 or 8 stars. However, the ending is so terrible and "Hollywoodized" that it completely undermines the first 80% of the movie.

The plot revolves around a submarine and the possibility that they received an order to fire their nuclear missiles. The Captain, Gene Hackman, is all for launching, while his first officer, Denzel Washington, is in favor of confirming the launch orders first. The problem is, to launch BOTH the captain and 1st officer must simultaneously use their launch keys. Hackman is determined to launch and Washington stands firm until eventually this results in armed insurrection aboard the sub. Eventually, the mistake is discovered and the missiles are not launched. Cool. However, here comes the part that just doesn't ring true. After they are back on land and go before a review board, Washington and Hackman (who'd just spent half the movie trying to kill each other) shake hands and are all buddy buddy! Huh?! Too trite an ending to make the movie worth while for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] The [[original]] "[[Cube]]" is a [[fantastic]] B-movie rich with paranoia, meaty characterization, and fine over-the-top performances. It's creepy, cryptic, and cool. And it stands perfectly well, on its own, without a stupid sequel like "Cube Zero."

This third (!) film in the Cube series is [[part]] retread (most of the booby [[traps]] are [[sadly]] recycled), part [[aberration]]. It takes the [[bold]] [[step]] of explaining what the cube is - something that was never [[revealed]] in the first [[movie]] - but, since said explanation is bland, I'd rather it was kept a secret. There are some [[potentially]] interesting references to the society that exists outside of the cube, but they never develop beyond hints about some kind of political-religious totalitarian state. So, what [[little]] social [[commentary]] there is feels flat and unfocused.

What works? Basically nothing. The acting is [[purely]] [[amateur]] [[hour]], the pacing is [[slow]] (how much of this movie consists of two nerds watching a screen?), and the gore [[effects]], while [[revolting]], [[fail]] to [[convince]]. In short, "Cube [[Zero]]" [[reminded]] me of a "Cube" fan-fic, a [[sloppy]] and sophomoric clone of a good movie that definitely did not need a sequel. The [[upfront]] "[[Cubes]]" is a [[sumptuous]] B-movie rich with paranoia, meaty characterization, and fine over-the-top performances. It's creepy, cryptic, and cool. And it stands perfectly well, on its own, without a stupid sequel like "Cube Zero."

This third (!) film in the Cube series is [[party]] retread (most of the booby [[trap]] are [[unfortunately]] recycled), part [[absurdity]]. It takes the [[adventurous]] [[stride]] of explaining what the cube is - something that was never [[shown]] in the first [[filmmaking]] - but, since said explanation is bland, I'd rather it was kept a secret. There are some [[perhaps]] interesting references to the society that exists outside of the cube, but they never develop beyond hints about some kind of political-religious totalitarian state. So, what [[small]] social [[comments]] there is feels flat and unfocused.

What works? Basically nothing. The acting is [[exclusively]] [[amateurs]] [[hours]], the pacing is [[lento]] (how much of this movie consists of two nerds watching a screen?), and the gore [[influence]], while [[disgusting]], [[fails]] to [[persuade]]. In short, "Cube [[Zilch]]" [[recalled]] me of a "Cube" fan-fic, a [[neglectful]] and sophomoric clone of a good movie that definitely did not need a sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 4310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Pushing]] [[Daisies]] is just a [[lovely]] fairy tale, with [[shades]] of "[[Amelie]]"'s aesthetic and romance. It's [[got]] a beautiful [[palette]], its shots well [[thought]] out and detailed, its [[names]] and dialogue whimsical and too cutesy to be [[real]], its imagination [[great]], and its [[romance]] [[deep]].

Watch the blue in the sky pop out at you, as blue can't be found in the [[rest]] of the sets or shots (with few exceptions).

Watch a weirdly natural and [[totally]] [[satisfying]] song break out of a scene.

Its score is gorgeous, its cast is [[supremely]] [[likable]], there's [[great]] music, and the two [[leading]] [[romantic]] stars can't touch each other or she'll [[die]]. How much more sexual tension do you need? (Actually, I had wished they found a way around this one, but c'est la [[vie]]).

It is [[simply]] a [[show]] that it is a [[pleasure]] to spend an [[hour]] with, and I [[recommend]] it [[highly]]. There hasn't been other television [[quite]] like it, and I would like to [[see]] more. It [[got]] me through a [[flu]] one crappy [[week]], as it makes for good [[company]].

Bring it back! [[Prompting]] [[Mums]] is just a [[cute]] fairy tale, with [[sunglasses]] of "[[Emily]]"'s aesthetic and romance. It's [[did]] a beautiful [[pallet]], its shots well [[brainchild]] out and detailed, its [[naming]] and dialogue whimsical and too cutesy to be [[authentic]], its imagination [[wondrous]], and its [[romanticism]] [[deepest]].

Watch the blue in the sky pop out at you, as blue can't be found in the [[roosting]] of the sets or shots (with few exceptions).

Watch a weirdly natural and [[perfectly]] [[satisfactory]] song break out of a scene.

Its score is gorgeous, its cast is [[insanely]] [[sympathetic]], there's [[wondrous]] music, and the two [[principal]] [[sentimental]] stars can't touch each other or she'll [[died]]. How much more sexual tension do you need? (Actually, I had wished they found a way around this one, but c'est la [[life]]).

It is [[merely]] a [[displaying]] that it is a [[gladness]] to spend an [[hours]] with, and I [[recommending]] it [[vastly]]. There hasn't been other television [[rather]] like it, and I would like to [[behold]] more. It [[did]] me through a [[ulf]] one crappy [[zhou]], as it makes for good [[corporations]].

Bring it back! --------------------------------------------- Result 4311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So you think a talking parrot is not your cup of tea huh? Well, think again. Paulie is a wonderful film filled with touching moments.The characters are all lovable especially Paulie as he enters the lives of many people on his journey.It is journey worth experiencing. Don't miss it! It is available on home video. --------------------------------------------- Result 4312 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] After a chance [[encounter]] on the train, a [[young]] couple spends a [[single]] night strolling the streets of Vienna, discussing [[life]] and [[love]]. The [[primary]] [[reason]] to [[see]] "Before Sunrise," is to watch a young [[Julie]] Delpy [[deliver]] her lines. As "Celine," this sexy, brainy, soulful brown-eyed blond is sort of a [[cross]] between Brigitte [[Bardot]] and [[Joni]] Mitchell as they were in their mid-twenties. Risking [[overstatement]], Celine is [[practically]] the ideal woman, [[unusually]] [[beautiful]] and very feminine while being [[natural]], unpretentious, introspective, and selflessly loving. We can easily [[forgive]] that she is a bit eccentric and talks a blue streak, for her sincere, intelligent [[remarks]] are occasionally [[penetrating]]. Further, her [[varied]] [[expressions]] are [[nothing]] short of [[captivating]] and she [[speaks]] English with a French accent that is very [[endearing]].

If there is a fly in the [[ointment]] of this good [[movie]], it [[would]] have to be her unkempt and [[disheveled]] costar. Ethan Hawke as "[[Jessie]]" comes off like a [[vaguely]] appealing slob, [[sort]] of a Maynard G. Krebs of the nineties. [[Attempting]] to [[appear]] detached and nonchalant, he sort of drags himself through certain shots. His [[pants]] [[fit]] poorly, his tee [[shirt]] is [[coming]] untucked, his [[wavy]] [[dark]] hair (his most attractive feature) [[needs]] a good [[washing]], and [[someone]] [[really]] should have [[showed]] him how to [[properly]] trim his [[youthful]] goatee. [[Nevertheless]], he is [[supposed]] to [[represent]] an unwashed [[youth]] on a two-week train ride [[around]] Europe, so the [[look]] he has [[cultivated]] is [[probably]] pretty [[genuine]]. His oft-cynical observations and [[wry]] sense of [[humor]] [[seem]] to impress the unapologetically romantic Celine, [[although]] she is occasionally [[disturbed]] by the [[extent]] of his alienation. When he [[finally]] admits to her that he is utterly sick of himself and likes being near her because he [[feels]] like a [[different]] person in her [[presence]], we know he is getting [[somewhere]].

[[After]] blowing their collective [[funds]] on a series of [[cafes]], bars, and [[silly]] diversions, they agree that because they may never [[see]] one another again, they should [[make]] the most of it. [[Jesse]] bums a bottle of red wine off a [[sentimental]] bartender so that he and his newfound [[lady]] [[love]] may [[repair]] to a local park in the middle of the night to [[lie]] on the [[grass]], [[looking]] up at the [[moon]] and the stars and watching the sun come up.

Given his boundless luck in the romance department, it is especially irksome when Jessie, as the very definition of a naive jerk, foolishly allows this wonderful young [[lady]] to slip from his grasp. He contents himself with a half-baked plan, quickly devised at the railroad station when he bids her adieu, to reunite at the same spot in half a year. When the appointed time comes, you just know this beautiful and unusual girl will be involved with another, perhaps even married and pregnant. For whatever reason, she probably won't show, while Jesse, who ends up working at Target or (if he's lucky) the local library, will go back to Vienna, desperate to see her again, only to wind up alone.

Despite what for me was a very discouraging conclusion, "Before Sunrise" is a beautiful movie. I highly recommend both it and the sequel, "Before Sunset." After a chance [[confrontation]] on the train, a [[youth]] couple spends a [[sole]] night strolling the streets of Vienna, discussing [[vida]] and [[loves]]. The [[elementary]] [[rationale]] to [[consults]] "Before Sunrise," is to watch a young [[Jolly]] Delpy [[delivering]] her lines. As "Celine," this sexy, brainy, soulful brown-eyed blond is sort of a [[croix]] between Brigitte [[Pardo]] and [[Jonny]] Mitchell as they were in their mid-twenties. Risking [[hyperbole]], Celine is [[hardly]] the ideal woman, [[unnaturally]] [[funky]] and very feminine while being [[naturel]], unpretentious, introspective, and selflessly loving. We can easily [[amnesty]] that she is a bit eccentric and talks a blue streak, for her sincere, intelligent [[commentaries]] are occasionally [[entering]]. Further, her [[various]] [[expression]] are [[anything]] short of [[engrossing]] and she [[spoke]] English with a French accent that is very [[likable]].

If there is a fly in the [[balm]] of this good [[cinematography]], it [[should]] have to be her unkempt and [[unkempt]] costar. Ethan Hawke as "[[Jess]]" comes off like a [[loosely]] appealing slob, [[sorting]] of a Maynard G. Krebs of the nineties. [[Endeavour]] to [[emerge]] detached and nonchalant, he sort of drags himself through certain shots. His [[shorts]] [[fitting]] poorly, his tee [[jacket]] is [[incoming]] untucked, his [[corrugated]] [[gloom]] hair (his most attractive feature) [[needed]] a good [[wash]], and [[anyone]] [[genuinely]] should have [[demonstrated]] him how to [[correctly]] trim his [[young]] goatee. [[Nonetheless]], he is [[alleged]] to [[represented]] an unwashed [[teen]] on a two-week train ride [[about]] Europe, so the [[peek]] he has [[grown]] is [[potentially]] pretty [[vera]]. His oft-cynical observations and [[sardonic]] sense of [[mood]] [[appears]] to impress the unapologetically romantic Celine, [[despite]] she is occasionally [[bothered]] by the [[amplitude]] of his alienation. When he [[lastly]] admits to her that he is utterly sick of himself and likes being near her because he [[believes]] like a [[varied]] person in her [[attendance]], we know he is getting [[nowhere]].

[[Upon]] blowing their collective [[resources]] on a series of [[pubs]], bars, and [[ridiculous]] diversions, they agree that because they may never [[seeing]] one another again, they should [[deliver]] the most of it. [[Jessie]] bums a bottle of red wine off a [[emotional]] bartender so that he and his newfound [[dame]] [[amore]] may [[repairing]] to a local park in the middle of the night to [[untruth]] on the [[weeds]], [[researching]] up at the [[lune]] and the stars and watching the sun come up.

Given his boundless luck in the romance department, it is especially irksome when Jessie, as the very definition of a naive jerk, foolishly allows this wonderful young [[dame]] to slip from his grasp. He contents himself with a half-baked plan, quickly devised at the railroad station when he bids her adieu, to reunite at the same spot in half a year. When the appointed time comes, you just know this beautiful and unusual girl will be involved with another, perhaps even married and pregnant. For whatever reason, she probably won't show, while Jesse, who ends up working at Target or (if he's lucky) the local library, will go back to Vienna, desperate to see her again, only to wind up alone.

Despite what for me was a very discouraging conclusion, "Before Sunrise" is a beautiful movie. I highly recommend both it and the sequel, "Before Sunset." --------------------------------------------- Result 4313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sounded like it might be entertaining and interesting from its description. But to me it was a bit of a let down. Very slow and hard to follow and see what was happening. It was as if the filmmaker took individual pieces of film and threw them in the air and had them spliced together whichever way they landed (definitely not in sequential order). Also, nothing of any consequence was being filmed. I have viewed quite a few different Korean films and have noticed that a good portion are well made and require some thinking on the viewer's part, which is different from the typical Hollywood film. But this one befuddled me to no end. I viewed the film a second and third time and it still didn't do anything for me. I still don't really understand what the filmmaker was trying to convey. If it was to just show a typical mundane portion of a person's life, I guess he succeeded. But I was looking for more. Needless to say, I can't recommend this movie to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 4314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

"Burning [[Paradise]]" is a [[combination]] of neo-Shaw Brothers action and Ringo Lam's urban cynicism. When one watches the film, they might feel the fight scenes are only mediocre in nature but that doesn't matter, it's [[attitude]] and [[atmosphere]] that [[counts]]. This [[great]] [[film]] has both!! [[Always]] trying to be different than his contemporaries, Lam [[gives]] us to [[traditional]] heroes(Fong Sai-Yuk and Hung Shi-Kwan)and puts them in a "Raiders of the Lost Ark" setting. However, these are not the light-hearted comedic incarnations that you might see in a Jet Li movie. Instead these guys fight to the death with brutal results. What makes the film even better is that anyone could die at anytime, there is no holding back. Too bad, they don't make films like this more often.

"Burning [[Paradiso]]" is a [[jumpsuit]] of neo-Shaw Brothers action and Ringo Lam's urban cynicism. When one watches the film, they might feel the fight scenes are only mediocre in nature but that doesn't matter, it's [[stance]] and [[mood]] that [[counting]]. This [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] has both!! [[Permanently]] trying to be different than his contemporaries, Lam [[donne]] us to [[classical]] heroes(Fong Sai-Yuk and Hung Shi-Kwan)and puts them in a "Raiders of the Lost Ark" setting. However, these are not the light-hearted comedic incarnations that you might see in a Jet Li movie. Instead these guys fight to the death with brutal results. What makes the film even better is that anyone could die at anytime, there is no holding back. Too bad, they don't make films like this more often. --------------------------------------------- Result 4315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Lord Alan Cunningham(Antonio De Teffè)is a nutjob{seen early on trying to escape an insane asylum}, with this castle slowly succumbing to ruin, likes to kill various hookers who resemble his deceased wife Evelyn, a woman who betrayed him for another man, with those [[red]] locks. This nutcase is quite [[wealthy]] and his bachelor status can be quite alluring. He, however, is overrun by his obsession with his late wife's memory(specifically her adultery..he saw her naked with the lover). While the memory of Evelyn is almost devouring his whole existence, [[Alan]] [[tries]] his best to find true love and believes he has with Gladys(Marina Malfatti, who spends most of the film naked..that's probably her lone attribute since she isn't a very good actress), who agrees to marry him after a very short courtship which should probably throw up flags right away{there's a key moment of [[dialogue]] where she knows exactly to the very amount what he is worth}.

The only real person Alan can confide in is his doctor from the hospital, Dr. Richard Timberlane(Giacomo Rossi-Stuart). There are other key characters in this film that revolve around Alan. Alan's cousin, George(Rod Murdock), seems to be quite a good friend who often supplies him victims..I mean dates, while holding onto hope of getting his lord's estate some day. Albert(Roberto Maldera), Evelyn's brother, is a witness to Alan's slaughter and, instead of turning him into the police, squeezes him for cash. Aunt Agatha(Joan C Davis), wheelchair bound, lives at the castle estate and is often seen snooping around behind cracked doors. We later find that she is having a love affair with Albert.

All that is described above services the [[rest]] of the story which shows what [[appears]] to be the ghost of Evelyn haunting Alan, someone is killing off members of the cast family that revolve around Alan, and the body of Evelyn is indeed missing.

The ultimate question is who is committing the crimes after Alan and Gladys are married, where is Evelyn's body, and will Alan go over the edge? I have to be honest and say I just didn't really care much for this film. It's [[badly]] uneven and the pacing is all over the place. It looks great on the new DVD and the "rising from the grave sequence" is cool, but what really hurts the film in my mind is that the entire cast is unlikable. You really have a hard time caring for Alan because he is a psychotic who is skating on thin ice in regards to holding his sanity. He can be quite volatile. Who commits the crime really isn't that great a surprise for after several key characters are murdered off, there aren't but a choice few who could be doing it. What happens to Alan doesn't really make your throat gulp because you can make the argument he's just getting what he deserves. Those behind the whole scheme of the film in regards to Alan, as I pointed out before, aren't that shocking because if you are just slightly aware of certain circumstances(..or advantages they'd have)that would benefit them with the collapse of Alan's sanity, then everything just comes off less than stellar. I thought the editing was choppy and unexciting, but the acting from the entire cast is really below par. Some stylistics help and there is a sniff of Gothic atmosphere in the graveyard sequences to help it some. Lord Alan Cunningham(Antonio De Teffè)is a nutjob{seen early on trying to escape an insane asylum}, with this castle slowly succumbing to ruin, likes to kill various hookers who resemble his deceased wife Evelyn, a woman who betrayed him for another man, with those [[rouge]] locks. This nutcase is quite [[richer]] and his bachelor status can be quite alluring. He, however, is overrun by his obsession with his late wife's memory(specifically her adultery..he saw her naked with the lover). While the memory of Evelyn is almost devouring his whole existence, [[Alain]] [[seeks]] his best to find true love and believes he has with Gladys(Marina Malfatti, who spends most of the film naked..that's probably her lone attribute since she isn't a very good actress), who agrees to marry him after a very short courtship which should probably throw up flags right away{there's a key moment of [[dialog]] where she knows exactly to the very amount what he is worth}.

The only real person Alan can confide in is his doctor from the hospital, Dr. Richard Timberlane(Giacomo Rossi-Stuart). There are other key characters in this film that revolve around Alan. Alan's cousin, George(Rod Murdock), seems to be quite a good friend who often supplies him victims..I mean dates, while holding onto hope of getting his lord's estate some day. Albert(Roberto Maldera), Evelyn's brother, is a witness to Alan's slaughter and, instead of turning him into the police, squeezes him for cash. Aunt Agatha(Joan C Davis), wheelchair bound, lives at the castle estate and is often seen snooping around behind cracked doors. We later find that she is having a love affair with Albert.

All that is described above services the [[resting]] of the story which shows what [[transpires]] to be the ghost of Evelyn haunting Alan, someone is killing off members of the cast family that revolve around Alan, and the body of Evelyn is indeed missing.

The ultimate question is who is committing the crimes after Alan and Gladys are married, where is Evelyn's body, and will Alan go over the edge? I have to be honest and say I just didn't really care much for this film. It's [[desperately]] uneven and the pacing is all over the place. It looks great on the new DVD and the "rising from the grave sequence" is cool, but what really hurts the film in my mind is that the entire cast is unlikable. You really have a hard time caring for Alan because he is a psychotic who is skating on thin ice in regards to holding his sanity. He can be quite volatile. Who commits the crime really isn't that great a surprise for after several key characters are murdered off, there aren't but a choice few who could be doing it. What happens to Alan doesn't really make your throat gulp because you can make the argument he's just getting what he deserves. Those behind the whole scheme of the film in regards to Alan, as I pointed out before, aren't that shocking because if you are just slightly aware of certain circumstances(..or advantages they'd have)that would benefit them with the collapse of Alan's sanity, then everything just comes off less than stellar. I thought the editing was choppy and unexciting, but the acting from the entire cast is really below par. Some stylistics help and there is a sniff of Gothic atmosphere in the graveyard sequences to help it some. --------------------------------------------- Result 4316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I don't know why this [[conduct]] was ever [[tolerated]] in the [[movie]] business! This [[movie]] (short) is gross (to [[say]] the [[least]])! It is a bunch of 5-7 year old children [[wearing]] diapers with [[big]] bobby [[pins]], acting like adults (and too much so!). However, it is interesting because it is a good example of how "the good [[old]] days" may not have been so good after all! (Thank [[GOD]] we have laws against this [[kind]] of material now!)

{This is one short from the "Shirley [[Temple]] [[Festival]]"} I don't know why this [[behaviours]] was ever [[condoned]] in the [[filmmaking]] business! This [[flick]] (short) is gross (to [[says]] the [[slightest]])! It is a bunch of 5-7 year old children [[wears]] diapers with [[prodigious]] bobby [[pin]], acting like adults (and too much so!). However, it is interesting because it is a good example of how "the good [[longtime]] days" may not have been so good after all! (Thank [[JEEZ]] we have laws against this [[genre]] of material now!)

{This is one short from the "Shirley [[Templar]] [[Festivals]]"} --------------------------------------------- Result 4317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film quite literally has every single action movie cliche and all of them work to its advantage. Straight from Lethal Weapon Gary Busey wisecracks, shoots and chuckles through this film with such reckless abandonment it can't help but amuse and entertain. There are tanks, helicopters, machine gun battles, grenades and ice cream vans and if they aren't good enough reasons to watch this film then how about the best one...Danny Trejo. And if you don't know who Danny Trejo is then you probably won't like this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[Anyone]] who [[loved]] the two [[classic]] novels by [[Edward]] Ormondroyd will be disappointed in this [[film]]. All the magic and romance have been [[modernized]] out of his [[original]] story of a [[girl]] who does a [[good]] deed for a mysterious [[old]] [[lady]], and [[given]] "three" in [[return]]. Three what? Not three [[wishes]], but three rides into the 1800's on a rickety [[elevator]]...

The first [[novel]] is Time at the [[Top]]. The second is All in Good Time. [[Nobody]] who [[adore]] the two [[conventional]] novels by [[Edouard]] Ormondroyd will be disappointed in this [[flick]]. All the magic and romance have been [[refreshed]] out of his [[initial]] story of a [[woman]] who does a [[alright]] deed for a mysterious [[elderly]] [[ladies]], and [[afforded]] "three" in [[comeback]]. Three what? Not three [[desires]], but three rides into the 1800's on a rickety [[silo]]...

The first [[newer]] is Time at the [[Supreme]]. The second is All in Good Time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'll keep this one [[quite]] short. I [[believe]] that this is an [[extraordinary]] movie. I [[see]] other reviewers who have [[commented]] to the [[effect]] that it's [[badly]] [[written]], poorly shot, has a [[terrible]] soundtrack and, [[worse]], that it's not [[real]] in its [[portrayal]] of [[life]]. OK, so it may not be quite believable for its whole length, but this [[movie]] carries a [[message]] of [[hope]] which some others seemed to have [[missed]]. [[Hope]] that it isn't too late to save people from the terrible things that go on in so many lives. Gangland violence is [[real]], right? Is it [[right]], no! This movie carries an important social message which the cynics may [[dislike]] but which [[nonetheless]] is to be praised, [[rather]] than denigrated. I have watched this movie with [[great]] enjoyment at least eight times, each time with equal enjoyment and each time with the feeling that maybe the world could be [[made]] better and is not beyond [[saving]] (well not until 2008 anyway). 9 out of 10 from me for this one. It's very nearly [[perfect]] in my view. JMV I'll keep this one [[pretty]] short. I [[think]] that this is an [[wondrous]] movie. I [[seeing]] other reviewers who have [[noted]] to the [[consequence]] that it's [[desperately]] [[authored]], poorly shot, has a [[heinous]] soundtrack and, [[lousiest]], that it's not [[veritable]] in its [[depiction]] of [[living]]. OK, so it may not be quite believable for its whole length, but this [[kino]] carries a [[messaging]] of [[hopes]] which some others seemed to have [[flunked]]. [[Hopes]] that it isn't too late to save people from the terrible things that go on in so many lives. Gangland violence is [[actual]], right? Is it [[rights]], no! This movie carries an important social message which the cynics may [[disgust]] but which [[though]] is to be praised, [[quite]] than denigrated. I have watched this movie with [[excellent]] enjoyment at least eight times, each time with equal enjoyment and each time with the feeling that maybe the world could be [[brought]] better and is not beyond [[rescued]] (well not until 2008 anyway). 9 out of 10 from me for this one. It's very nearly [[faultless]] in my view. JMV --------------------------------------------- Result 4320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Return of the Jedi" is often remembered for what it did wrong rather than what it did right, and that is a shame, because the last chronological installment in the Star Wars saga is a shining example of epic storytelling. It manages to wrap up all story lines of the previous movies in one grand finale, and does so very convincingly.

Yes, there are Ewoks - cute and cuddly bears that arguably served to broaden the Star Wars demographic - and in the middle the movie tends to slow down a bit. But the final hour is arguably the best piece of the entire saga, where Luke finally comes face to face with Darth Vader, the most recognizable villain in movie history.

Return of the Jedi did so many things right that people tend to overlook: it presented an incredible conclusion to the Darth Vader storyline (which went from slightly implausible in the "Empire Strikes Back" to very convincing here), an exciting opening at Jabba's Palace, a masterful performance of Ian McDiarmid as the Emperor, Luke finally coming into his own, the resolution of Solo and Leia's romance, and the extremely powerful final moments on the Endor moon.

Yes, there are slight annoyances. But they are the annoyances of a generation of moviegoers who've had time to nitpick every single scene. It's still a magical and moving piece of cinema that also serves as a great final chapter. It's not a 'good' movie - it's fantastic! --------------------------------------------- Result 4321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[While]] the [[original]] 1932 version, with Preston Foster, was [[good]], there's no remake more [[worthy]] than this 1959 one, or more [[impossible]] to [[find]] [[anywhere]], just as I [[strongly]] [[suspect]] Mickey Rooney to have had [[something]] to do with that. Never could a [[mere]] performance have ever been so [[masterfully]] brilliant, or a [[script]] more thought-provoking, as well as an [[improvement]] [[upon]] the [[original]]. [[Many]] [[years]] after the last of my [[several]] viewings of this [[film]], in 1970, I read an article in which Mickey [[Rooney]] was recounting a visit he'd made to death row, and which had [[apparently]] very [[drastically]] [[eliminated]] whatever sense of personal identification he'd [[felt]] with people in [[similar]] circumstances. The article was about as short as the [[main]] character here, and didn't cover much, other than the [[extent]] to which his [[extreme]] disillusionment with the quality of the [[inmates]] themselves had been emphasized, even in language I would not care to [[explicitly]] quote here. . . . . One of my main problems with capital [[punishment]] is that, of course, it is not evenly, impartially applied, just as many innocent people are far-too-carelessly, [[thus]] unnecessarily sent to meet this particular fate. Another problem I have with it is that it is not applied [[swiftly]] [[enough]], or, for that matter, even publicly enough! The bible makes a [[special]] point, in such cases, about one of the more [[important]] [[purposes]] of such, as a deterrent, being ineffectually obscured, minus, not only a public [[viewing]], but also the direct participation of all! As for those who [[claim]] to [[prove]], statistically, that such is not an [[effective]] deterrent? In addition to having a [[problem]] about the reliability of their data, I have little if any objectively disprovable doubt many are behind bars now due to the extent that such a deterrent is lacking. However, I do have a problem about the fact that Robert Duvall, in The Apostle, had been [[punished]] at all, for his particular "crime," or that the only hope of leniency for one such as he would have to be based on a "temporary insanity" defense, as though that would serve as the only acceptable [[excuse]] in his kind of case. . . . In addition to various other questions [[concerning]] the motives of Mickey Rooney for that [[particular]] [[visit]] he'd recounted, and about the answers to which I can only try to speculate, I [[suspect]] the main one had been of a decidedly [[religious]] nature. I don't know exactly when he'd become the professing Christian he now makes it a special point, whenever possible, to emphasize that he is; but, as anybody should be well-aware, this particular category of people tends to be the most vehemently out for blood, when it comes to extracting an eye for an eye. However, I have no particular bone of contention concerning that, per se, just as there's no doubt, scripturally speaking, that not all, and perhaps not even most, shall be spared the same ultimate fate, at the hands of the Lord Himself, as a result of His sacrifice on the cross. However, there is a problem, for me, about the spirit or attitude with which most professing Christians emphasize their enthusiasm for capital punishment; for, contrary to the Lord Himself, who would love to see everybody saved (Ezekiel 18:32) (II Peter 3:9), they seem to go vindictively out of their way to find reasons to condemn! . . . What most people, on either side of this superlatively ever-burning issue, cannot appear to sufficiently appreciate, is that the Lord is as dynamically and elusively soft in nature as He is hard. The two sides of His nature appear to be so inherently incompatible as to render Him mentally deranged, at least by any strictly human reckoning. Yet, regardless of how harrowingly ungraspable this miraculously dynamic blending of the water and oil in His nature surely is, there can be no doubt that anything short of it, or anything fanatically and characteristically on either one side or the other of this equation, falls inadequately and unacceptably short of the entire judicial truth. Indeed, I've seen the most blood-curdling thirst for the same come out, self-contradictorily enough, on far-too-many occasions, whenever the categorically anti-death penalty advocates are confronted, even in the most rationally well-balanced ways, with the fact that, although the Lord died for everybody, not all are thereby going to be saved. After-all, in order to receive absolution, one must, to repeat the same term, reach out and receive it, that is, repent (Luke 13:3-5). Could anything make more sense? . . . But, then, what about the Lord's command to forgive, even in the case of one's enemies, of those who despise and persecute you without a just cause or provocation? One of the far-too-prevailing difficulties with this kind of sentimentality, as popularly misinterpreted, is the way it obscuringly over-simplifies the real meaning of forgiveness. The act of forgiveness does not, in itself, mean the same thing as unconditionally excusing the one being forgiven. When one takes a clearly sober, rationally well-balanced view here, from the perspective of God's own attitude, all it actually amounts to is a fervent wish that the one forgiven will ultimately succeed at finding his way, seeing the light, and being granted mercy. This attitude is, of course, the very opposite of, say, that of Jonah, who actually resented it when God told him that his preaching to the people of Nineveh would result in their repentance. Jonah didn't want them to repent, but vindictively desired that they be destroyed. How self-righteously, cold-bloodedly like unto most professing Christians he was, save that even his reasons were undoubtedly better than most! I envy Jonah almost as much as he would me! However, minus the repentance of the one being forgiven, any forgiveness he may receive from a genuine Christian is not going to do him any good. In such a case, the only one to benefit is the real Christian himself! [[Whilst]] the [[upfront]] 1932 version, with Preston Foster, was [[alright]], there's no remake more [[commendable]] than this 1959 one, or more [[impractical]] to [[finds]] [[nowhere]], just as I [[harshly]] [[suspicious]] Mickey Rooney to have had [[anything]] to do with that. Never could a [[only]] performance have ever been so [[artfully]] brilliant, or a [[screenplay]] more thought-provoking, as well as an [[refinements]] [[afterwards]] the [[preliminary]]. [[Various]] [[olds]] after the last of my [[various]] viewings of this [[movie]], in 1970, I read an article in which Mickey [[Ronnie]] was recounting a visit he'd made to death row, and which had [[supposedly]] very [[significantly]] [[abolished]] whatever sense of personal identification he'd [[smelled]] with people in [[analogue]] circumstances. The article was about as short as the [[principal]] character here, and didn't cover much, other than the [[amplitude]] to which his [[abject]] disillusionment with the quality of the [[captives]] themselves had been emphasized, even in language I would not care to [[openly]] quote here. . . . . One of my main problems with capital [[sanction]] is that, of course, it is not evenly, impartially applied, just as many innocent people are far-too-carelessly, [[so]] unnecessarily sent to meet this particular fate. Another problem I have with it is that it is not applied [[urgently]] [[adequately]], or, for that matter, even publicly enough! The bible makes a [[particular]] point, in such cases, about one of the more [[pivotal]] [[targets]] of such, as a deterrent, being ineffectually obscured, minus, not only a public [[opinion]], but also the direct participation of all! As for those who [[claims]] to [[proof]], statistically, that such is not an [[efficient]] deterrent? In addition to having a [[trouble]] about the reliability of their data, I have little if any objectively disprovable doubt many are behind bars now due to the extent that such a deterrent is lacking. However, I do have a problem about the fact that Robert Duvall, in The Apostle, had been [[sanctioned]] at all, for his particular "crime," or that the only hope of leniency for one such as he would have to be based on a "temporary insanity" defense, as though that would serve as the only acceptable [[apologise]] in his kind of case. . . . In addition to various other questions [[relating]] the motives of Mickey Rooney for that [[especial]] [[visiting]] he'd recounted, and about the answers to which I can only try to speculate, I [[accuser]] the main one had been of a decidedly [[churches]] nature. I don't know exactly when he'd become the professing Christian he now makes it a special point, whenever possible, to emphasize that he is; but, as anybody should be well-aware, this particular category of people tends to be the most vehemently out for blood, when it comes to extracting an eye for an eye. However, I have no particular bone of contention concerning that, per se, just as there's no doubt, scripturally speaking, that not all, and perhaps not even most, shall be spared the same ultimate fate, at the hands of the Lord Himself, as a result of His sacrifice on the cross. However, there is a problem, for me, about the spirit or attitude with which most professing Christians emphasize their enthusiasm for capital punishment; for, contrary to the Lord Himself, who would love to see everybody saved (Ezekiel 18:32) (II Peter 3:9), they seem to go vindictively out of their way to find reasons to condemn! . . . What most people, on either side of this superlatively ever-burning issue, cannot appear to sufficiently appreciate, is that the Lord is as dynamically and elusively soft in nature as He is hard. The two sides of His nature appear to be so inherently incompatible as to render Him mentally deranged, at least by any strictly human reckoning. Yet, regardless of how harrowingly ungraspable this miraculously dynamic blending of the water and oil in His nature surely is, there can be no doubt that anything short of it, or anything fanatically and characteristically on either one side or the other of this equation, falls inadequately and unacceptably short of the entire judicial truth. Indeed, I've seen the most blood-curdling thirst for the same come out, self-contradictorily enough, on far-too-many occasions, whenever the categorically anti-death penalty advocates are confronted, even in the most rationally well-balanced ways, with the fact that, although the Lord died for everybody, not all are thereby going to be saved. After-all, in order to receive absolution, one must, to repeat the same term, reach out and receive it, that is, repent (Luke 13:3-5). Could anything make more sense? . . . But, then, what about the Lord's command to forgive, even in the case of one's enemies, of those who despise and persecute you without a just cause or provocation? One of the far-too-prevailing difficulties with this kind of sentimentality, as popularly misinterpreted, is the way it obscuringly over-simplifies the real meaning of forgiveness. The act of forgiveness does not, in itself, mean the same thing as unconditionally excusing the one being forgiven. When one takes a clearly sober, rationally well-balanced view here, from the perspective of God's own attitude, all it actually amounts to is a fervent wish that the one forgiven will ultimately succeed at finding his way, seeing the light, and being granted mercy. This attitude is, of course, the very opposite of, say, that of Jonah, who actually resented it when God told him that his preaching to the people of Nineveh would result in their repentance. Jonah didn't want them to repent, but vindictively desired that they be destroyed. How self-righteously, cold-bloodedly like unto most professing Christians he was, save that even his reasons were undoubtedly better than most! I envy Jonah almost as much as he would me! However, minus the repentance of the one being forgiven, any forgiveness he may receive from a genuine Christian is not going to do him any good. In such a case, the only one to benefit is the real Christian himself! --------------------------------------------- Result 4322 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] when you get to the scenes that involve Albert Brooks without his shirt... [[try]] not to gag on a fur ball.

I [[like]] Albert Brooks. I've seen most, if not all of his movies but it was the first time seeing this one. Modern Romance is an interesting take on the subject of love. There are few movies that handle the desperation of love as well or as overtly as Modern Romance, although 1979's Chilly Scenes of Winter comes very close. They both essentially deal with obsessed men that are too psychologically attracted/obsessed to their respective women.

Where-as Chilly Scenes of Winter borders on the subject stalking, this [[movie]] has a more grounded foundation with the subject of love because both people are already in a relationship.. and out of the relationship.. and back in it again.

And because it's a movie that was released in 1981, it is of its time in terms of styles and such. That's the main reason I like this movie. My basic rule when it comes to movies is "If it sucks at least it may have some historic relevance", you know time capsule stuff.

Which leads me to the horrific scenes of Albert Brooks sans shirt.

The man is hair. Very hair. Like he's wearing a black curly fur sweater-hairy. And what's worse is he almost looks burn victim-hairy. It's not a pleasant sight and the scenes with him without a shirt go on and on. Back in the early 80's hairy men were seen as normal and nothing shocking. But in 2009 the sight of something like this is just plain revolting. Sorry, Albert! I wish at some point someone said "hey let's try this scene but with you wearing a simple t-shirt, I mean you might scare people". It's just really [[bad]] and I feel sorry for the poor pretty actress that had to deal with Albert Brooks naked body on top of hers. She was probably pulling out his hairs from her teeth for days after that.

Anyway, it's an OK movie. It could have been better if I hadn't see Albert Brooks without his shirt for what seemed like 10 long continuous minutes because that will forever taint my viewing of this movie. when you get to the scenes that involve Albert Brooks without his shirt... [[attempt]] not to gag on a fur ball.

I [[iike]] Albert Brooks. I've seen most, if not all of his movies but it was the first time seeing this one. Modern Romance is an interesting take on the subject of love. There are few movies that handle the desperation of love as well or as overtly as Modern Romance, although 1979's Chilly Scenes of Winter comes very close. They both essentially deal with obsessed men that are too psychologically attracted/obsessed to their respective women.

Where-as Chilly Scenes of Winter borders on the subject stalking, this [[filmmaking]] has a more grounded foundation with the subject of love because both people are already in a relationship.. and out of the relationship.. and back in it again.

And because it's a movie that was released in 1981, it is of its time in terms of styles and such. That's the main reason I like this movie. My basic rule when it comes to movies is "If it sucks at least it may have some historic relevance", you know time capsule stuff.

Which leads me to the horrific scenes of Albert Brooks sans shirt.

The man is hair. Very hair. Like he's wearing a black curly fur sweater-hairy. And what's worse is he almost looks burn victim-hairy. It's not a pleasant sight and the scenes with him without a shirt go on and on. Back in the early 80's hairy men were seen as normal and nothing shocking. But in 2009 the sight of something like this is just plain revolting. Sorry, Albert! I wish at some point someone said "hey let's try this scene but with you wearing a simple t-shirt, I mean you might scare people". It's just really [[unfavourable]] and I feel sorry for the poor pretty actress that had to deal with Albert Brooks naked body on top of hers. She was probably pulling out his hairs from her teeth for days after that.

Anyway, it's an OK movie. It could have been better if I hadn't see Albert Brooks without his shirt for what seemed like 10 long continuous minutes because that will forever taint my viewing of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a really nice and sweet movie that the entire family can enjoy. It's about two dogs and a cat who are taken away to live with someone else for a little while but the animals don't understand and they escape and go to find the family on their own. The cat is named Sassy and she lives up to her name. Chance is the younger dog who knows a lot about life on the inside of the pound. Shadow is the older and wiser dog who senses things. Put those three together on an adventure and it makes for a happy and fun filled time. There are no special effects of the mouths moving so it isn't cheesy at all. It's the best talking animal movie that I've seen so far. It's a really good movie for families. --------------------------------------------- Result 4324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie is not just bad, not just corny, it is [[repulsive]]. Something about Daphne, about the creepy call-girl, about the whole [[damn]] (and I [[use]] the word literally) [[film]] [[radiates]] a grotesquery that would [[offend]] a brothel mistress. This film makes my skin [[crawl]], makes me [[regret]] having reproductive [[organs]], and makes me feel [[unclean]].

One of the things that bothers me most about this movie is that they used such a good [[concept]]. A [[creature]] that makes fantasies with [[disastrous]] [[results]], rather than the [[cliché]] Worst [[Nightmare]] and the [[overdone]] Twisted [[Wish]], is a truly fascinating film [[idea]].

Thought: The reason why hobgoblins need to be killed before day is that they are attracted to bright lights. During the day, bright lights don't show up well, so they could go anywhere.

Count the Hobgoblins: Four hobgoblins drive out of the film studio, and yet at least nine of the pernicious plush-toys are killed throughout the course of the movie.

Discussion Question: If you had a frigid, demanding, unappreciative girlfriend, would you enter garden-tool-combat with a military chunkhead? Explain. This movie is not just bad, not just corny, it is [[nasty]]. Something about Daphne, about the creepy call-girl, about the whole [[fucking]] (and I [[used]] the word literally) [[movies]] [[emanates]] a grotesquery that would [[offended]] a brothel mistress. This film makes my skin [[crawling]], makes me [[sorrow]] having reproductive [[agencies]], and makes me feel [[dirty]].

One of the things that bothers me most about this movie is that they used such a good [[notions]]. A [[monster]] that makes fantasies with [[tragic]] [[consequences]], rather than the [[clichés]] Worst [[Cabos]] and the [[exaggerating]] Twisted [[Wanna]], is a truly fascinating film [[ideals]].

Thought: The reason why hobgoblins need to be killed before day is that they are attracted to bright lights. During the day, bright lights don't show up well, so they could go anywhere.

Count the Hobgoblins: Four hobgoblins drive out of the film studio, and yet at least nine of the pernicious plush-toys are killed throughout the course of the movie.

Discussion Question: If you had a frigid, demanding, unappreciative girlfriend, would you enter garden-tool-combat with a military chunkhead? Explain. --------------------------------------------- Result 4325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] What the F*@# was this I just [[watched]]? Steven STOP!! [[Please]]! This [[movie]] is insatiably [[bad]] and silly. [[In]] a [[bizarre]] departure from [[action]] and adventure, Mr. Seagal is now fighting (obviously) wish-they-were-vampire 'like' creatures with super human strength.? [[OK]]? Oh, and their eyes blink sideways in an inhuman way? Wow! [[Even]] [[still]] in this movie however, to [[quell]] Seagals have-to-have-the-last-punch-and-no-one-can-kick-my-a$$ ego, HE is somehow stronger than they are. However all of the average humans are getting crushed all [[around]] him. [[Come]] on, I can [[understand]] the [[big]] mouth [[neighborhood]] bully or [[drug]] [[dealer]], but these are super human strength people. [[Oh]] and get this, Seagal goes through a brief sting of identity issues, because [[apparently]] he and his cohorts in the [[film]] think he is Wolverine! [[Oh]] My GO... And [[worst]] than all of that! Yes, there is a worse than that. He has a voice over even changing [[voice]] in [[mid]] sentence while we are looking at his face. They [[obviously]] sound [[nothing]] like him and I believe it may be one of the other actors in the [[film]]. It was [[pure]] [[madness]]. Although I [[wanted]] to turn it off I [[always]] watch a [[movie]] to he end. This is an all time low [[even]] for your direct to video [[movies]] Steven. [[Awful]]! [[Awful]]! [[Awful]]! Two thumbs down! Redemeption qualities? [[Well]] I [[guess]] so, I will be fair in that aspect. [[At]] least some of the [[special]] [[effects]] were OK, and I like the choice of wardrobe for the actors and actresses. The [[women]] all were [[quite]] [[attractive]] IMO. [[Still]], and I [[said]] [[STILL]], it does not [[make]] up for the [[blatant]] X-Men, Underworld, ([[insert]] your [[favorite]] zombie, [[vampire]] [[movie]] here) [[rip]] off! The [[director]], writer, producer, [[ALL]] should be bansihed & exile from the [[movie]] [[business]]. I [[think]] I feel the [[way]] that most people feel about Blood Rayne (and just about all other Uwe Boll [[pictures]]) about this [[film]]. That's my whole $1.00 on this [[film]]. View if you dare. What the F*@# was this I just [[observed]]? Steven STOP!! [[Invite]]! This [[filmmaking]] is insatiably [[unfavourable]] and silly. [[During]] a [[outlandish]] departure from [[actions]] and adventure, Mr. Seagal is now fighting (obviously) wish-they-were-vampire 'like' creatures with super human strength.? [[ALRIGHT]]? Oh, and their eyes blink sideways in an inhuman way? Wow! [[Yet]] [[however]] in this movie however, to [[stifle]] Seagals have-to-have-the-last-punch-and-no-one-can-kick-my-a$$ ego, HE is somehow stronger than they are. However all of the average humans are getting crushed all [[throughout]] him. [[Arrived]] on, I can [[comprehend]] the [[overwhelming]] mouth [[neighborhoods]] bully or [[medicines]] [[sellers]], but these are super human strength people. [[Ah]] and get this, Seagal goes through a brief sting of identity issues, because [[visibly]] he and his cohorts in the [[movie]] think he is Wolverine! [[Ah]] My GO... And [[worse]] than all of that! Yes, there is a worse than that. He has a voice over even changing [[voices]] in [[middle]] sentence while we are looking at his face. They [[evidently]] sound [[none]] like him and I believe it may be one of the other actors in the [[flick]]. It was [[pur]] [[lunacy]]. Although I [[wanting]] to turn it off I [[permanently]] watch a [[filmmaking]] to he end. This is an all time low [[yet]] for your direct to video [[theater]] Steven. [[Frightful]]! [[Excruciating]]! [[Scary]]! Two thumbs down! Redemeption qualities? [[Good]] I [[imagine]] so, I will be fair in that aspect. [[During]] least some of the [[specially]] [[ramifications]] were OK, and I like the choice of wardrobe for the actors and actresses. The [[daughters]] all were [[perfectly]] [[seductive]] IMO. [[However]], and I [[say]] [[AGAIN]], it does not [[deliver]] up for the [[overt]] X-Men, Underworld, ([[inserts]] your [[preferable]] zombie, [[vamp]] [[filmmaking]] here) [[tears]] off! The [[headmaster]], writer, producer, [[TOTALITY]] should be bansihed & exile from the [[filmmaking]] [[enterprise]]. I [[believe]] I feel the [[ways]] that most people feel about Blood Rayne (and just about all other Uwe Boll [[photographing]]) about this [[filmmaking]]. That's my whole $1.00 on this [[filmmaking]]. View if you dare. --------------------------------------------- Result 4326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Guys and Dolls has to be one of my favorite musical movies ever. It is a very fun movie to watch and nothing more. it embodies what people have forgotten about musicals-musicals were made to entertain, not to to preach. Nowadays we have Rent and Chicago which are great musicals and good movies but they fail to bring us solid entertainment with no strings attached. The only thing that bothered me in the movie was Marlon Brando, the guy can't sing! It was very annoying to listen to him sing and talk when I couldn't understand him. If it weren't for Marlon I would have given this 10 stars. Guys and Dolls provides old-fashioned entertainment that we rarely get these days. Watch it to have a good time!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] so... it's really sexist, and classist, and i thought that it might not be in the [[beginning]] [[stages]] of the movie, like when [[stella]] tells steven that she would really like to change herself and begin speaking in the right way and he tells her not to change. well, he certainly changed his tune, and it [[seems]] that the other reviewers followed suit. what at the beginning [[appears]] to be a love story is really about social placement and [[women]] as sacrificial mothers. the end of the [[movie]] does not make her a [[hero]], it makes the [[whole]] [[thing]] sad. and its sad that people think it makes her a [[hero]]. [[perhaps]] that is the [[comment]] of the [[movie]] that people should take away. [[positive]] [[reception]] [[reflects]] [[continual]] patriarchal currents in the [[social]] conscience. [[yuck]]. so... it's really sexist, and classist, and i thought that it might not be in the [[starts]] [[phases]] of the movie, like when [[stell]] tells steven that she would really like to change herself and begin speaking in the right way and he tells her not to change. well, he certainly changed his tune, and it [[seem]] that the other reviewers followed suit. what at the beginning [[appearing]] to be a love story is really about social placement and [[females]] as sacrificial mothers. the end of the [[filmmaking]] does not make her a [[heroin]], it makes the [[together]] [[stuff]] sad. and its sad that people think it makes her a [[heroin]]. [[probably]] that is the [[commentaries]] of the [[filmmaking]] that people should take away. [[positively]] [[hospitality]] [[reflecting]] [[unbroken]] patriarchal currents in the [[sociable]] conscience. [[eww]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw The Big Bad [[Swim]] at the 2006 Temecula [[film]] festival, and was totally [[caught]] off [[guard]] by how much I was drawn into it.

The [[film]] centers [[around]] the [[lives]] of a group of people [[taking]] an adult [[swim]] class for [[various]] [[reasons]]. A [[humorous]] idea in its own [[right]], the class [[serves]] as a catalyst for [[greater]] [[changes]] in the students' lives.

What [[surprised]] me about the [[film]] was how [[real]] it [[felt]]. Rarely in [[ensemble]] [[pieces]] are [[characters]] treated so well. I enjoyed the scenes in the [[class]] [[immensely]], and the [[drama]] that took place outside was very poignant. [[Nothing]] [[seemed]] out of place or out of [[character]], and [[ultimately]] it [[left]] a very strong feeling, much like attending [[school]] or [[summer]] [[camp]] - where you find [[fast]] [[friends]], [[form]] [[strong]] bonds, and [[make]] discoveries about yourself, [[yet]] have to [[depart]] all too soon.

My only [[complaint]] was that the character of Paula had a very [[strong]] and [[unusual]] introduction, which made you want to [[know]] a [[little]] more about her than was [[ultimately]] [[revealed]]. I [[suppose]] you don't [[get]] to [[meet]] everyone in [[class]], though...

Aside from this, I [[found]] the [[film]] very well-rounded and [[quite]] [[enjoyable]]. [[See]] it if you [[get]] the [[opportunity]]. I saw The Big Bad [[Swam]] at the 2006 Temecula [[movie]] festival, and was totally [[capturing]] off [[guards]] by how much I was drawn into it.

The [[movie]] centers [[throughout]] the [[vie]] of a group of people [[pick]] an adult [[bath]] class for [[several]] [[justification]]. A [[funny]] idea in its own [[rights]], the class [[contributes]] as a catalyst for [[most]] [[modify]] in the students' lives.

What [[horrified]] me about the [[movie]] was how [[true]] it [[believed]]. Rarely in [[whole]] [[segments]] are [[features]] treated so well. I enjoyed the scenes in the [[categories]] [[terribly]], and the [[teatro]] that took place outside was very poignant. [[Nada]] [[appeared]] out of place or out of [[characters]], and [[eventually]] it [[exited]] a very strong feeling, much like attending [[teaching]] or [[sommer]] [[campground]] - where you find [[hurry]] [[friend]], [[shape]] [[forceful]] bonds, and [[deliver]] discoveries about yourself, [[still]] have to [[departing]] all too soon.

My only [[grievance]] was that the character of Paula had a very [[vigorous]] and [[odd]] introduction, which made you want to [[savoir]] a [[petite]] more about her than was [[finally]] [[demonstrated]]. I [[reckon]] you don't [[got]] to [[fulfill]] everyone in [[category]], though...

Aside from this, I [[uncovered]] the [[movies]] very well-rounded and [[pretty]] [[nice]]. [[Seeing]] it if you [[obtains]] the [[opportunities]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4329 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a South African, it's an insult to think that someone was actually paid to produce this nonsense!

Despite the fact that the director was one of the writers for the original Shaka Zulu mini, this "addition" to the series is appalling! The original series was based on historical facts about a man who was a great strategist, leader and warrior. A man who played a large role in shaping the history of local tribes in South Africa.

The plot of this film, however, is nothing but hogwash, scraped from the bottom of the barrel by a writer that has failed to impress since the mid-nineties.

While Omar Sharif and Henry Cele are good actors, what is David Hasselhoff doing here, rescuing drowning slaves with his red buoy and bleached smile?

I kept expecting blond, busty women to appear out of nowhere and run across the screen in their tiny red bathing suits, for no apparent reason. Not that this would've been any more bizarre than the fantastical plot line that was probably dreamed up after 10 pints of beer at a fancy dress party, where someone's caveman costume inspired the writer to return to an African theme for his next "blockbuster". --------------------------------------------- Result 4330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] After watching this [[thing]], then reading the summary on the back of the [[DVD]], then [[thinking]] back to [[actual]] [[movie]]....I [[became]] a bit [[dizzy]]. I [[thought]], maybe I fell [[asleep]] and [[dreamed]] I was a down syndrome baby waltzing through a never [[ending]] forest where people [[drive]] 11 miles an hour and stop for no [[purpose]] other then occasional [[tasteless]] lesbianism. Where (zombies?) [[come]] out of [[nowhere]] and ([[vampires]]?) who (seduce?) [[pure]] hearted citizens on their [[way]] to [[save]] the world. [[Neither]] zombie nor [[vampire]] [[notably]] encounter each other. The only [[fighting]] i remember was [[getting]] that [[walrus]] Bonny Giroux's [[panties]] off. Coo Coo [[ca]] [[FAT]]! All of them! Maybe that was because we were watching it widescreen stretched and were too lazy to [[change]] it to its native [[resolution]], but that [[actually]] [[made]] it more [[entertaining]]... In [[conclusion]] my trailing [[thought]] thesis had more continuity, plot, [[character]] development, [[antagonism]], subject [[matter]], and acting then the entirety of this film. It [[made]] Bloodrayne look like [[Citizen]] F***ING KANE After watching this [[stuff]], then reading the summary on the back of the [[DVDS]], then [[ideological]] back to [[real]] [[filmmaking]]....I [[was]] a bit [[dazed]]. I [[thinks]], maybe I fell [[slept]] and [[dreaming]] I was a down syndrome baby waltzing through a never [[terminated]] forest where people [[driving]] 11 miles an hour and stop for no [[goal]] other then occasional [[vapid]] lesbianism. Where (zombies?) [[arrive]] out of [[anywhere]] and ([[vamps]]?) who (seduce?) [[sheer]] hearted citizens on their [[route]] to [[rescues]] the world. [[Nor]] zombie nor [[vampires]] [[primarily]] encounter each other. The only [[struggle]] i remember was [[obtain]] that [[guru]] Bonny Giroux's [[slacks]] off. Coo Coo [[wo]] [[FATTY]]! All of them! Maybe that was because we were watching it widescreen stretched and were too lazy to [[alterations]] it to its native [[resolve]], but that [[indeed]] [[brought]] it more [[fun]]... In [[conclude]] my trailing [[thinks]] thesis had more continuity, plot, [[traits]] development, [[animosity]], subject [[topic]], and acting then the entirety of this film. It [[introduced]] Bloodrayne look like [[Civic]] F***ING KANE --------------------------------------------- Result 4331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Awful]]! Awful! Awful! No, I didn't like it. It was [[obvious]] what the [[intent]] of the film was: to [[track]] the wheeling and dealing of the "[[movers]] and shakers" who [[produce]] a film. [[In]] some [[cases]], these are people who [[represent]] themselves as other than what they are. I didn't need a [[film]] to tell me how shallow some of the people in the [[film]] industry are. I [[suppose]] I'm at fault [[really]] because I expected [[something]] like "[[Roman]] [[Holiday]]".

I'm not a movie-maker nor do I [[take]] [[film]] [[classes]] but it [[appeared]] to me that the [[film]] consisted of a [[series]] of 'two-shots' (in the main) where the [[actors]](!) had been [[supplied]] with a loose plot-line and they were to improvise the [[dialogue]]. [[Henry]] Jaglon makes the [[claim]] that he along with Victoria Foyt actually [[wrote]] the [[screenplay]] but the [[impression]] was that the [[actors]], cognisant of the [[general]] [[direction]] of the [[film]], extemporised the [[dialogue]] - and it was not [[always]] successful. Such a [[case]] in point was when Ron Silver [[made]] some [[remark]] which really didn't [[flow]] along the line of the conversation (and I'm not going back to look for it!) and Greta Scacchi [[broke]] into [[laughter]] even [[though]] they were [[supposed]] to be having a [[serious]] [[conversation]], because Silver's remark was such a non sequitur. You [[get]] the [[impression]] too that one actor [[deliberately]] [[tries]] to '[[wrong]] foot' the other actor and break his/her concentration. Another instance of this is when a producer [[tells]] Silver to "[[bring]] the &*%#@#^ [[documents]]" (3 [[times]]). Silver [[looked]] literally [[lost]] for [[words]]. I have [[seen]] one other film which looked like a series of [[drama]] workshops on improvisation and that was [[awful]] too!

The fact that Jaglon was able to [[attract]] Greta Scacchi (no [[stranger]] to Australia), Ron Silver, Anouk Ami, and Maximilian Schell [[suggests]] it was a '[[slow]] news week' for them. Peter Bogdanovich had a 'what-the-hell-am-I-doing-here' [[look]] on his [[face]] at all times and I [[expected]] to [[hear]] him say: "[[Look]], I'm a [[director]] and [[screenwriter]] - not an actor" - which [[would]] have been [[unnecessary]] to state! Faye Dunaway seemed more interested in promoting her son, Liam. Apart from the [[jerky]] delivery of the dialogue, the hand-held camera became irritating even if it was for verisimilitude - as I suspect the "natural" dialogue was - and the interest in the principals became subsumed to the interest in the various youths walking along the strand trying to insinuate themselves into shot. That at least approached Cinema Verite. So that, along with the irritating French singing during which I used the mute button, made for a generally disappointing 90-odd minutes.

I think we should avoid apotheosising films such as this. Trying to see value in the film where it has little credit in order to substantiate a perceived transcendental level to it is misguided. There was really nothing avant-garde about it. It didn't come across as a work of art and yet it wasn't a documentary either. I know, it was a mocumentary but the real test is whether it is entertaining. I was bored out of my skull! It did have one redeeming feature: it pronounced 'Cannes' correctly so I gave it 3/10. [[Scary]]! Awful! Awful! No, I didn't like it. It was [[noticeable]] what the [[goal]] of the film was: to [[tracks]] the wheeling and dealing of the "[[mover]] and shakers" who [[generate]] a film. [[Across]] some [[examples]], these are people who [[constituted]] themselves as other than what they are. I didn't need a [[filmmaking]] to tell me how shallow some of the people in the [[filmmaking]] industry are. I [[guess]] I'm at fault [[truly]] because I expected [[somethings]] like "[[Romain]] [[Vacation]]".

I'm not a movie-maker nor do I [[taking]] [[filmmaking]] [[categories]] but it [[emerged]] to me that the [[filmmaking]] consisted of a [[serials]] of 'two-shots' (in the main) where the [[protagonists]](!) had been [[provided]] with a loose plot-line and they were to improvise the [[conversations]]. [[Henri]] Jaglon makes the [[claiming]] that he along with Victoria Foyt actually [[written]] the [[scenario]] but the [[feeling]] was that the [[protagonists]], cognisant of the [[overall]] [[directions]] of the [[filmmaking]], extemporised the [[conversations]] - and it was not [[invariably]] successful. Such a [[instance]] in point was when Ron Silver [[brought]] some [[comment]] which really didn't [[flows]] along the line of the conversation (and I'm not going back to look for it!) and Greta Scacchi [[cracked]] into [[chuckles]] even [[while]] they were [[suspected]] to be having a [[grave]] [[talk]], because Silver's remark was such a non sequitur. You [[obtain]] the [[printing]] too that one actor [[voluntarily]] [[attempting]] to '[[mistaken]] foot' the other actor and break his/her concentration. Another instance of this is when a producer [[told]] Silver to "[[bringing]] the &*%#@#^ [[papers]]" (3 [[dates]]). Silver [[seemed]] literally [[forfeited]] for [[phrases]]. I have [[noticed]] one other film which looked like a series of [[tragedy]] workshops on improvisation and that was [[horrific]] too!

The fact that Jaglon was able to [[attraction]] Greta Scacchi (no [[foreigner]] to Australia), Ron Silver, Anouk Ami, and Maximilian Schell [[suggested]] it was a '[[slower]] news week' for them. Peter Bogdanovich had a 'what-the-hell-am-I-doing-here' [[gaze]] on his [[encounter]] at all times and I [[prophesied]] to [[heed]] him say: "[[Peek]], I'm a [[superintendent]] and [[scriptwriter]] - not an actor" - which [[could]] have been [[superfluous]] to state! Faye Dunaway seemed more interested in promoting her son, Liam. Apart from the [[desiccated]] delivery of the dialogue, the hand-held camera became irritating even if it was for verisimilitude - as I suspect the "natural" dialogue was - and the interest in the principals became subsumed to the interest in the various youths walking along the strand trying to insinuate themselves into shot. That at least approached Cinema Verite. So that, along with the irritating French singing during which I used the mute button, made for a generally disappointing 90-odd minutes.

I think we should avoid apotheosising films such as this. Trying to see value in the film where it has little credit in order to substantiate a perceived transcendental level to it is misguided. There was really nothing avant-garde about it. It didn't come across as a work of art and yet it wasn't a documentary either. I know, it was a mocumentary but the real test is whether it is entertaining. I was bored out of my skull! It did have one redeeming feature: it pronounced 'Cannes' correctly so I gave it 3/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought that Zombie Flesh Eaters 2 was quite a good horror film When a terrorist's body, infected with a stolen chemical, is recovered by the US military, the corpse is then cremated, releasing the virus into the atmosphere over a small island. Soon the infected locals turn into flesh-hungry zombies, and a group of soldiers on leave must team up with a group of tourists and board themselves up in a abandoned hotel as they try to fight off the aggressive living dead. I did not find this film to be as good as the original film, Zombie Flesh Eaters. But it was still an OK horror film with some good action. I did not think that it was one of the best in the series. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The Booth puts a [[whole]] new twist on your [[typical]] J-horror [[movie]]. This movie [[puts]] you in the shoes of the protagonist of the [[story]]. The director wants you to see what the protagonist sees and thinks.

The story is about perception of the people who [[works]], lives, and [[loves]] of our [[protagonist]], and how he [[perceives]] the people who [[surrounds]] him in an [[antiquated]] radio station DJ [[booth]]. The story peels back the layers of the [[main]] character like an onion in flash-backs as the movie runs its course, and from it we learned that [[things]] are not [[always]] the way it seems. The movie [[mostly]] [[took]] [[place]] in a [[small]], out-dated [[radio]] station's studio with a very bad [[history]], where the [[main]] [[character]] was [[forced]] to [[broadcast]] his [[talk]] [[show]] due to the radio station was in the [[process]] of re-locating. It is from this [[confined]] space that this [[movie]] thrives and makes you feel very claustrophobic and very paranoid. [[At]] time our protagonist can not determined the [[strange]] happenings in the [[old]] studio were [[caused]] by ghost or some conspiracy by his co-workers or it was all in his mind. What I [[like]] about this [[film]] is that the film-makers makes you [[see]] through the eyes of the [[main]] [[character]] and makes you just as paranoid as [[protagonist]] did. This [[movie]] is a very [[smart]], [[abide]] [[rather]] short 76 minutes [[film]]. The Booth puts a [[generals]] new twist on your [[classic]] J-horror [[movies]]. This movie [[poses]] you in the shoes of the protagonist of the [[tale]]. The director wants you to see what the protagonist sees and thinks.

The story is about perception of the people who [[collaborate]], lives, and [[adore]] of our [[player]], and how he [[receives]] the people who [[surround]] him in an [[stale]] radio station DJ [[booths]]. The story peels back the layers of the [[principal]] character like an onion in flash-backs as the movie runs its course, and from it we learned that [[matters]] are not [[consistently]] the way it seems. The movie [[basically]] [[picked]] [[placing]] in a [[petit]], out-dated [[radios]] station's studio with a very bad [[story]], where the [[principal]] [[nature]] was [[obliged]] to [[broadcasting]] his [[schmooze]] [[displays]] due to the radio station was in the [[processes]] of re-locating. It is from this [[narrow]] space that this [[film]] thrives and makes you feel very claustrophobic and very paranoid. [[Under]] time our protagonist can not determined the [[curious]] happenings in the [[ancient]] studio were [[sparked]] by ghost or some conspiracy by his co-workers or it was all in his mind. What I [[fond]] about this [[movie]] is that the film-makers makes you [[behold]] through the eyes of the [[principal]] [[personage]] and makes you just as paranoid as [[actor]] did. This [[kino]] is a very [[artful]], [[adhere]] [[quite]] short 76 minutes [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie barely followed the story line of the movie. All of the fascinating points in the book didn't even exist in the movie. They ended up turning it into a cheesy "tween" Disney movie "crush" story between Meg and Calvin. It was so bad it should have been Hillary Duff playing the part, or one of the likes. This movie was nothing more than an insult to the intelligence and mysticism of the book. I can't believe Disney could even get away with making such a cheap, basic rendition. If you've ever read the book, I think you would agree it could easily be made into a movie of "Lord of the Rings" equivalence. This movie should have never been able to use the title of A Wrinkle in Time. Poorly done. --------------------------------------------- Result 4335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Granted, I'm not the connoisseur d'horror my partner is, but a well put together, clever flick is worth the time. My quibbles, in brief:

- Dialog often weak and at times unbelievable coming from the given character.

- Unconvincing acting.

- Storyline never really caught fire.

The writers plucked choice bits from half a dozen mainstream films, tossed into a kettle, simmered not nearly enough and tried feeding us poor saps the resulting mess, al'dente.

Long and short, while not absolutely terrible, it was definitely not worthy of absorbing one of my NetFlix rentals. --------------------------------------------- Result 4336 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[thought]] the movie "I Do They Don't" was [[fantastic]]. In the [[past]] I've watched Rob Estes on "Suddenly Susan" & "Melrose Place" and also Josie Bissett on "Melrose Place" and loved seeing them together again in "I Do They Don't". They have great chemistry together (I guess being married in real life helps that!) - in the movie they are both widowed with children and careers and they fall in love and try blend their already busy chaotic families together without dropping the ball. Of course they stumble, but they keep it together which is what working and raising a family is all about. So many people have been talking about this movie - all good! - and the movie left us wanting more. This would make a great series - appealing to many ages! - it would be so nice to see a real life, down to earth, family show like this that portrays the reality of so many of our lives today - instead of the so called "Reality TV" that all the stations are overwhelming us with these days. Someone tell the people at ABC Family they have the start of a new series here! I [[think]] the movie "I Do They Don't" was [[wondrous]]. In the [[yesteryear]] I've watched Rob Estes on "Suddenly Susan" & "Melrose Place" and also Josie Bissett on "Melrose Place" and loved seeing them together again in "I Do They Don't". They have great chemistry together (I guess being married in real life helps that!) - in the movie they are both widowed with children and careers and they fall in love and try blend their already busy chaotic families together without dropping the ball. Of course they stumble, but they keep it together which is what working and raising a family is all about. So many people have been talking about this movie - all good! - and the movie left us wanting more. This would make a great series - appealing to many ages! - it would be so nice to see a real life, down to earth, family show like this that portrays the reality of so many of our lives today - instead of the so called "Reality TV" that all the stations are overwhelming us with these days. Someone tell the people at ABC Family they have the start of a new series here! --------------------------------------------- Result 4337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] N.B.: Spoilers within. Assigning an artistic director to an [[operatic]] production naturally and inevitably means you are going to get a piece of that director's mind. But directing a Wagner opera is an especially [[tricky]] task, as he was perhaps the most explicit opera [[composer]] in terms of what things should look like and how they should unfold. Hans-Jurgen Syberberg [[loads]] this [[filming]] of "Parsifal," Wagner's final masterpiece, with enough [[extraneous]] [[ideas]] to cause it to nearly burst at the [[seams]]. You get more than a piece of the director: you [[get]] the whole fatted hog and then some. Syberberg is to be admired for his penchant for tearing back the covers on the uglier aspects of German history. But does it work to meld that desire to a Wagner opera already brimming with its own concepts?

The scenes with the knights of the Holy Grail in Acts I and III are especially laden with visual allegory and symbolism. These are drawn come from Wagner's own time, from long before, and go well beyond. If you know what these things mean, they can [[enrich]] Syberberg's vision for you (but not necessarily enhance Wagner's vision); if you don't know what they mean, they're simply confusing, if not annoying. I won't bother uncoiling the plot of the opera here. [[Suffice]] it to say it is a typical Wagnerian synthesis of diverse elements, in this case a blending of the Holy Grail legend with the principles, practices, and pageantry of Christianity. The theme of redemption plays the main role here, as in nearly every Wagner opera.

I personally had to sweat to get through Syberberg's first act (amidst my jarring acclimation, the music saved the day). But Act II picks up the pace. Here we meet Klingsor, the evil sorcerer, out to entrap the wandering "innocent fool" Parsifal. The greatest [[seductress]] of them all, Kundry, will be used to entice him to the dark side. After an initial dalliance with more symbols, these get stripped away, and the long, gorgeous, transformational duet between young fool and temptress really takes off. Finally the film starts working a genuine magic, and it is chiefly due to Syberberg's choosing to set things naturally and simply. Suddenly the acting starts to work (the expressive actress Edith Clever and the luscious soprano of Yvonne Minton team to create a wondrous Kundry); suddenly the music seems to come to life and make vivid the inner turmoil of the two characters. The camera work stays simple and quietly fluid. In other words, Wagner is allowed to tell his story more on his own terms. And it works beautifully. For me it was the most engrossing part of the film.

With the re-entrance of the knights in part 2 of Act III, the weird extraneous symbolisms unfortunately creep back in. Some other loony Syberberg ideas: using a huge Wagner death-mask as a major set-piece (causing the composer's protuberant proboscis to loom comically large); dressing the Act III knights in all manner of costumes, wigs, and makeup (what is the director saying? That the knights are a bunch of buffoons? That they express multiple or timeless layers of significance beyond their surface functions? It's anybody's guess); the insertion – just after the incredibly touching baptism of Kundry by Parsifal – of rear-projection footage of the conductor rehearsing, in modern-day realism, his orchestra in the studio (this completely snapped my dramatic thread, requiring a few minutes to regroup); the complete avoidance of having any time pass between Acts II and III (when we meet the knight and "narrator" Gurnemanz again, he should be an old, old man, and Parsifal should re-emerge as a world-weary but wiser middle-aged man); but certainly the most bizarre stroke is to split the Parsifal character into male/female components. Some find this the most brilliant stroke. No doubt I can credit Karin Krick, who plays "Parsifal 2," with acting of strength and dignity (she also happens to be the best lip-syncher of the whole cast). But please...Wagner's conception of Parsifal is already so complex. His growth from a completely innocent boy who knows nothing of his past, to his breakthrough realization in Act II of what Amfortas's eternal wound means and how it has become his own, to his return as the great Redeemer of Act III – this is the journey of a masterfully constructed character. The bi-sexual emphasis is just gimmicky and absurd. (And what's with this nonsense about a homoerotic Gurnemanz and Parsifal?? Can't we just accept a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is marvelously reversed in Act III?)

The Monte Carlo Philharmonic under Armin Jordan plays with passion and beauty (though the chorus is disappointing). But after watching this film I only wanted to whip out my Solti-led recording (HIGHLY recommended) and get my Wagnerian bearings straight again. The film experience for me ranged from bizarre to entertaining to infuriating. To Syberberg's credit, he's created a visually arresting work, and he certainly offers a unique take on an important opera. But instead of sticking to "Parsifal," he seems to have wanted to bring in all things Wagnerian: the man, the life, the enormous influence...all of it in crude symbolic code. "Parsifal" the opera is already full of weighty symbolism: the Grail, the Spear, the Holy Sacraments, baptism, Amfortas's ever-bleeding wound, Klingsor's self-castration, the Kiss, Kundry's Curse, and on and on. This is not to mention the *musical* symbolism sounding constantly in the score, in the form of Wagner's leitmotif system. "Parsifal" itself is one huge symbol! Getting back to my first-paragraph question, Syberberg's whole hog is all way too much for me. But if this project sounds like something to tickle your fancy, then go for it. I won't recommend just staying away from this; you may find yourself heartily satisfied. Or if you need something to crack your Wagner barrier, try it...but please, please, don't stop here. "Parsifal" is in a late, very ripe league of its own. N.B.: Spoilers within. Assigning an artistic director to an [[melodramatic]] production naturally and inevitably means you are going to get a piece of that director's mind. But directing a Wagner opera is an especially [[laborious]] task, as he was perhaps the most explicit opera [[songwriter]] in terms of what things should look like and how they should unfold. Hans-Jurgen Syberberg [[uploading]] this [[photographing]] of "Parsifal," Wagner's final masterpiece, with enough [[irrelevant]] [[brainchild]] to cause it to nearly burst at the [[veins]]. You get more than a piece of the director: you [[obtain]] the whole fatted hog and then some. Syberberg is to be admired for his penchant for tearing back the covers on the uglier aspects of German history. But does it work to meld that desire to a Wagner opera already brimming with its own concepts?

The scenes with the knights of the Holy Grail in Acts I and III are especially laden with visual allegory and symbolism. These are drawn come from Wagner's own time, from long before, and go well beyond. If you know what these things mean, they can [[enrichment]] Syberberg's vision for you (but not necessarily enhance Wagner's vision); if you don't know what they mean, they're simply confusing, if not annoying. I won't bother uncoiling the plot of the opera here. [[Enough]] it to say it is a typical Wagnerian synthesis of diverse elements, in this case a blending of the Holy Grail legend with the principles, practices, and pageantry of Christianity. The theme of redemption plays the main role here, as in nearly every Wagner opera.

I personally had to sweat to get through Syberberg's first act (amidst my jarring acclimation, the music saved the day). But Act II picks up the pace. Here we meet Klingsor, the evil sorcerer, out to entrap the wandering "innocent fool" Parsifal. The greatest [[temptress]] of them all, Kundry, will be used to entice him to the dark side. After an initial dalliance with more symbols, these get stripped away, and the long, gorgeous, transformational duet between young fool and temptress really takes off. Finally the film starts working a genuine magic, and it is chiefly due to Syberberg's choosing to set things naturally and simply. Suddenly the acting starts to work (the expressive actress Edith Clever and the luscious soprano of Yvonne Minton team to create a wondrous Kundry); suddenly the music seems to come to life and make vivid the inner turmoil of the two characters. The camera work stays simple and quietly fluid. In other words, Wagner is allowed to tell his story more on his own terms. And it works beautifully. For me it was the most engrossing part of the film.

With the re-entrance of the knights in part 2 of Act III, the weird extraneous symbolisms unfortunately creep back in. Some other loony Syberberg ideas: using a huge Wagner death-mask as a major set-piece (causing the composer's protuberant proboscis to loom comically large); dressing the Act III knights in all manner of costumes, wigs, and makeup (what is the director saying? That the knights are a bunch of buffoons? That they express multiple or timeless layers of significance beyond their surface functions? It's anybody's guess); the insertion – just after the incredibly touching baptism of Kundry by Parsifal – of rear-projection footage of the conductor rehearsing, in modern-day realism, his orchestra in the studio (this completely snapped my dramatic thread, requiring a few minutes to regroup); the complete avoidance of having any time pass between Acts II and III (when we meet the knight and "narrator" Gurnemanz again, he should be an old, old man, and Parsifal should re-emerge as a world-weary but wiser middle-aged man); but certainly the most bizarre stroke is to split the Parsifal character into male/female components. Some find this the most brilliant stroke. No doubt I can credit Karin Krick, who plays "Parsifal 2," with acting of strength and dignity (she also happens to be the best lip-syncher of the whole cast). But please...Wagner's conception of Parsifal is already so complex. His growth from a completely innocent boy who knows nothing of his past, to his breakthrough realization in Act II of what Amfortas's eternal wound means and how it has become his own, to his return as the great Redeemer of Act III – this is the journey of a masterfully constructed character. The bi-sexual emphasis is just gimmicky and absurd. (And what's with this nonsense about a homoerotic Gurnemanz and Parsifal?? Can't we just accept a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is marvelously reversed in Act III?)

The Monte Carlo Philharmonic under Armin Jordan plays with passion and beauty (though the chorus is disappointing). But after watching this film I only wanted to whip out my Solti-led recording (HIGHLY recommended) and get my Wagnerian bearings straight again. The film experience for me ranged from bizarre to entertaining to infuriating. To Syberberg's credit, he's created a visually arresting work, and he certainly offers a unique take on an important opera. But instead of sticking to "Parsifal," he seems to have wanted to bring in all things Wagnerian: the man, the life, the enormous influence...all of it in crude symbolic code. "Parsifal" the opera is already full of weighty symbolism: the Grail, the Spear, the Holy Sacraments, baptism, Amfortas's ever-bleeding wound, Klingsor's self-castration, the Kiss, Kundry's Curse, and on and on. This is not to mention the *musical* symbolism sounding constantly in the score, in the form of Wagner's leitmotif system. "Parsifal" itself is one huge symbol! Getting back to my first-paragraph question, Syberberg's whole hog is all way too much for me. But if this project sounds like something to tickle your fancy, then go for it. I won't recommend just staying away from this; you may find yourself heartily satisfied. Or if you need something to crack your Wagner barrier, try it...but please, please, don't stop here. "Parsifal" is in a late, very ripe league of its own. --------------------------------------------- Result 4338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] When I was [[younger]], I thought the first [[film]] was really good in childhood, so I [[decided]] to [[see]] the sequel. This is an [[example]] of why some [[films]] shouldn't have sequels, because the first film is usually best, and it is. Basically now that Ariel and Eric are married they have a daughter who isn't allowed outside the house because they are worried about the sister of Ursula (the octopus legged villain from film one), Morgana getting to her. When the [[kid]] gets out she asks Ursula's sister to turn her into a mermaid, like her [[Mum]] was. This makes Ariel go back to the [[sea]] to find her. The same good voice [[artists]], it's just the [[story]] that [[could]] have had a bit more thought. [[Adequate]]! When I was [[youngest]], I thought the first [[filmmaking]] was really good in childhood, so I [[decides]] to [[consults]] the sequel. This is an [[case]] of why some [[cinematographic]] shouldn't have sequels, because the first film is usually best, and it is. Basically now that Ariel and Eric are married they have a daughter who isn't allowed outside the house because they are worried about the sister of Ursula (the octopus legged villain from film one), Morgana getting to her. When the [[petit]] gets out she asks Ursula's sister to turn her into a mermaid, like her [[Mommy]] was. This makes Ariel go back to the [[hoi]] to find her. The same good voice [[painters]], it's just the [[storytelling]] that [[wo]] have had a bit more thought. [[Suitable]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4339 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I should explain why i gave this..."[[piece]] of [[art]]" 1 star [[rating]] out of [[possible]] 10. [[Simply]] because it's [[hard]] or [[next]] to impossible to rate it [[unbiased]]. [[probably]] it would have been the same if i had [[given]] it 10/10 - [[explanations]] [[anyway]] [[would]] have followed.

I am not [[fond]] of these pointless [[gore]] [[movies]] like [[HOSTEL]] or so - i think that's disgusting and pretty [[terrible]] (in all the possible contextual meanings), but as i found out after watching this [[movie]] - there is a genre called "historical [[drama]]" - and probably it [[would]] have been the [[case]] of 10/10 as it has plenty of it and Tarantino would have been more than happier with it (and made Kill Bill 3 to spill even more blood on screen than here to show that it is possible). but the thing about "historical drama" genre is that it's a sub-category of the "trash movies" where John Romero is the undead-gory-emperor-of-the-guts and so automatically it can't be rated as your default movie - as these are movies that are made bad on purpose and you can't really tell whether the comically bad moment was meant to be so, or it was [[simply]] [[bad]]. it's for the people who like to [[enjoy]] bad acting, bad [[screenplay]] and bad everything else. And by some turn of faith - i am one of them too. there are days when i have an urge of seeing a really [[bad]] [[movie]] and look up for some trash and here you go - the day is saved! but that's definitely an opinion of mine and doesn't have match with anyones' else.

What i wanted to say is that if you want to watch some terrible movie - then Fellini's Casanova is definitely the choice, but heed my advice and don't rate it by default means. I should explain why i gave this..."[[slice]] of [[artistry]]" 1 star [[appraisal]] out of [[conceivable]] 10. [[Simple]] because it's [[tough]] or [[imminent]] to impossible to rate it [[dispassionate]]. [[arguably]] it would have been the same if i had [[bestowed]] it 10/10 - [[interpreting]] [[anyhoo]] [[could]] have followed.

I am not [[likes]] of these pointless [[gora]] [[movie]] like [[DORM]] or so - i think that's disgusting and pretty [[hideous]] (in all the possible contextual meanings), but as i found out after watching this [[filmmaking]] - there is a genre called "historical [[tragedy]]" - and probably it [[should]] have been the [[lawsuits]] of 10/10 as it has plenty of it and Tarantino would have been more than happier with it (and made Kill Bill 3 to spill even more blood on screen than here to show that it is possible). but the thing about "historical drama" genre is that it's a sub-category of the "trash movies" where John Romero is the undead-gory-emperor-of-the-guts and so automatically it can't be rated as your default movie - as these are movies that are made bad on purpose and you can't really tell whether the comically bad moment was meant to be so, or it was [[straightforward]] [[naughty]]. it's for the people who like to [[enjoys]] bad acting, bad [[scenarios]] and bad everything else. And by some turn of faith - i am one of them too. there are days when i have an urge of seeing a really [[unfavourable]] [[filmmaking]] and look up for some trash and here you go - the day is saved! but that's definitely an opinion of mine and doesn't have match with anyones' else.

What i wanted to say is that if you want to watch some terrible movie - then Fellini's Casanova is definitely the choice, but heed my advice and don't rate it by default means. --------------------------------------------- Result 4340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Star]] Pickford and director Tourneur -- along with his two favorite cameramen and assistant Clarence Brown doing the editing -- [[bring]] [[great]] beauty and [[intelligence]] to this story of poor, isolated Scottish Islanders -- the same territory that Michael Powell would stake twenty years later for his first great success. [[Visions]] of wind and [[wave]], sunbacked silhouettes of lovers do not [[merely]] complement the story, they are the story of struggle against hardship.

The actors [[bring]] the dignity of proud people to their roles and Pickford is [[brilliant]] as her character struggles with her duties as [[head]] of the clan, wavering between comedy and thoughtfulness, here with her father's bullwhip [[lashing]] wayward islanders to [[church]], there [[seated]] with her guest's walking [[stick]] in her hand like a [[scepter]], [[discussing]] her lover, played by Matt Moore.

[[See]] if you can [[pick]] out [[future]] [[star]] Leatrice [[Joy]] in the ensemble. I [[tried]], but failed. [[Superstar]] Pickford and director Tourneur -- along with his two favorite cameramen and assistant Clarence Brown doing the editing -- [[bringing]] [[grand]] beauty and [[intelligentsia]] to this story of poor, isolated Scottish Islanders -- the same territory that Michael Powell would stake twenty years later for his first great success. [[Ideas]] of wind and [[waving]], sunbacked silhouettes of lovers do not [[purely]] complement the story, they are the story of struggle against hardship.

The actors [[bringing]] the dignity of proud people to their roles and Pickford is [[wondrous]] as her character struggles with her duties as [[leiter]] of the clan, wavering between comedy and thoughtfulness, here with her father's bullwhip [[flogging]] wayward islanders to [[ecclesiastical]], there [[sitting]] with her guest's walking [[twig]] in her hand like a [[sceptre]], [[debating]] her lover, played by Matt Moore.

[[Seeing]] if you can [[choices]] out [[next]] [[superstar]] Leatrice [[Gladness]] in the ensemble. I [[strived]], but failed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't'know... maybe it's because I'm Brazilian but all that stuff was too much. Too much love for the music, too much parties, too much contrast between the nice lives of the main characters (come on, it's not so sad) and the aspect of the city shown by the director. Everything looks too fake to me: the families, the relationships, the music, the "happiness". It simply sells a little taste of fake latinamerican culture. I must be honest: it did seduce me a little, but who would not be seduced by that fake lives made of nice music, sex and parties? I'm not that stupid: what kind of world is this one in which people do not suffer of diarrhea, profound sadness and STDs? I liked the scene with Caridad's mother phone call and the discussion about the contract with all the musicians and the Spanish people. --------------------------------------------- Result 4342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THE SOPRANOS (1999-2007)

Number 1 - Television Show of all Time

Everyone thought this would be a stupid thing that wouldn't go past a pilot episode. The Sopranos has become a cultural phenomenon and universally agreed as one of the greatest television shows of all time.

James Gandolfini plays the enigmatic New Jersey crime boss, Tony Soprano, accompanied by a stellar cast. Edie Falco is superb as the worrying, loving upper-middle class mother; Tony Sirico is tremendous as a superstitious, greying consiglieri who is often very funny.

While the show has often been criticised for the negative stereotype of Italian-Americans as mafiosi, and to an extent this is undeniable, I can see so many positives from the show. The portrayal of strong family values, friendships, love and compassion; could this be present in a coarse television show about gangsters? Yes. Furthermore, other burning issues are discussed such as terrorism, social inequality and injustice, homosexuality, drugs etc. This is no shallow, dull show about tough guys and violence. It has so much more. Many of the issues we see on the show are very real.

The writing which has been pretty much great has infused so successfully current issues and managed to imbred them within the characters' lives, which makes the whole thing more interesting.

Credit must go to David Chase who has created an excellent television treasure and to James Gandolfini, for envisioning, television's most complex and enigmatic character.

Simply exceptional.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4343 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] The mood of this [[movie]] is pretty good and it captures the feel of the 80's well with some good performances.

[[However]].....

The script is [[run]] of the [[mill]] with the exception of a couple of comedic [[moments]] and [[comes]] off as being weird where I expect it was [[intended]] to be [[edgy]]. The [[characters]] are [[totally]] over dramatized and [[unbelievable]] and full of right wing [[clichés]] that the [[script]] [[writer]] [[probably]] [[saw]] watching a panorama documentary on the national front. The [[biggest]] [[problem]] is this [[movie]] has no real story. It [[ticks]] all the right "[[arty]]" boxes but [[nothing]] actually [[happens]] and at the [[end]] you are [[left]] [[wondering]] what the point was.

[[Very]] [[disappointing]] The mood of this [[filmmaking]] is pretty good and it captures the feel of the 80's well with some good performances.

[[Still]].....

The script is [[executing]] of the [[steelworks]] with the exception of a couple of comedic [[times]] and [[arises]] off as being weird where I expect it was [[meant]] to be [[cranky]]. The [[characteristic]] are [[altogether]] over dramatized and [[fabulous]] and full of right wing [[cliché]] that the [[scripts]] [[novelist]] [[arguably]] [[watched]] watching a panorama documentary on the national front. The [[strongest]] [[issues]] is this [[filmmaking]] has no real story. It [[tics]] all the right "[[artsy]]" boxes but [[nada]] actually [[arrives]] and at the [[termination]] you are [[exited]] [[asking]] what the point was.

[[Hugely]] [[disappointed]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4344 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Rarely has such an amazing [[cast]] been wasted so badly. Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Illeana Douglas, Ethan Hawke, [[Dennis]] Hopper, [[Christopher]] Walken, and [[John]] Turturro, all [[jumped]] on board, only to be [[torpedoed]] by a [[script]] that [[seems]] like nothing more than a Hollywood in joke. Attaching [[Martin]] Scorsese's [[name]] to this was [[probably]] the draw, but the [[end]] result is way less than the [[sum]] of it's parts. [[Resembling]] a [[nightmare]] gone [[horribly]] [[wrong]], each scene [[seems]] more [[contrived]] than the [[next]]. "Search and Destroy" is nothing more than abstract, stylish, self [[indulgent]] [[nonsense]], and the [[entire]] [[film]] is decidedly [[dull]].......... MERK Rarely has such an amazing [[casting]] been wasted so badly. Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Illeana Douglas, Ethan Hawke, [[Denis]] Hopper, [[Christophe]] Walken, and [[Jon]] Turturro, all [[vaulted]] on board, only to be [[scuttled]] by a [[scripts]] that [[appears]] like nothing more than a Hollywood in joke. Attaching [[Martina]] Scorsese's [[denomination]] to this was [[certainly]] the draw, but the [[ends]] result is way less than the [[somme]] of it's parts. [[Resemble]] a [[cabos]] gone [[terribly]] [[faulty]], each scene [[seem]] more [[artificial]] than the [[upcoming]]. "Search and Destroy" is nothing more than abstract, stylish, self [[lenient]] [[claptrap]], and the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] is decidedly [[drab]].......... MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] myself and 2 sisters watched all 3 series of Tenko and agree this is by far one of the BBC better series.The whole cast were very convincing in the parts they portrayed and although the 3rd series was somewhat slower it was compelling viewing and my evenings wont be the same without it.No doubt we will be watching it again as it is a series which I would never get sick of watching.Excellent viewing and full marks to the BBC for such a brilliant series and the casting.First rate in all departments and would recommend this series to anyone although some age limits must be considered because of some adult material.So grateful to the BBC for releasing this series on DVD and Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 4346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Say what you will about schmaltz. One beauty of this film is that it is not pro-American. It is a morality about some Americans being called to high purpose and how they rose to the occasion. It is inspiring because it is about people of noble purpose.

To me, the most interesting part of the film is the education of Fanny and David Farrelly (Bette Davis' mother and brother). As Fanny says, "We've been shaken out of the magnolias."

In today's political climate where, led by a president who shamelessly lied to us and used 9/11 to bring out the absolute worst characteristics of human beings, we sunk to the level of the 9/11 murderers to seek blood-thirsty vengeance. It can't all be blamed on Mr. Bush - after all, we allowed him to lead us in that direction and even re-elected him after his lies had been exposed. Now, with complete justification, we Americans are reviled throughout the world.

Today, we watch this film with a new awareness: That the rise to power of Nazis in Germany was not due to a flaw in the German character, but, a flaw in human beings that allows us to rationalize anything that will justify our committing immoral and heinous acts. I'm not comparing George Bush to Adolph Hitler. But, I am pointing out how a leader can whip us up into a frenzy of terror, hatred, and hyper-nationalism to do despicable things.

Sadly, the blackmailer, who will do whatever needs to be done for his own agrandizement, no matter how immoral, is most like the leaders of our country, those who support them, and those who have buried their heads so deep in the sand, that they can't even be bothered to vote.

A film like Watch on the Rhine reminds us of what we once aspired to be - a force for the betterment of humanity - and that we have it in us to once again aspire to lofty goals.

Geoff --------------------------------------------- Result 4347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An unforgettable masterpiece from the creator of The Secret of Nimh and The Land Before Time, this was a very touching bittersweet cartoon. I remember this very well from my childhood, it was funny and sad and very beautiful. Well it starts out a bit dark, a dog who escaped the pound, and gets killed by an old friend, ends up in Heaven, and comes back. But it becomes sweet when he befriends an orphaned girl who can talk to animals. Some scenes were a bit scary contrary to other cartoons, like the dream sequence of Charlie, but everything else was okay,and the songs were fair. A memorable role of Burt Reynolds and Dom DeLuise, I just love that guy, ahehehe. And Judith Barsi of Jaws The Revenge, may God rest her soul, poor girl, she didn't deserve to die, but she is in Heaven now, all good people go to Heaven. Overall this is a very good animated movie, a Don Bluth classic enough to put anime and Disney to shame. Recommended for the whole family. And know this, if you have the original video of this, you'll find after the movie, Dom DeLuise has a very important and special message, gotta love that guy, ahehehe. --------------------------------------------- Result 4348 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] To [[compare]] this [[squalor]] with an old, low budget porno flick would be an insult to the [[old]], low budget porno flick. The [[animal]] scenes have no [[meaning]] nor do they [[represent]] this man and his crimes [[even]] in the broadest [[sense]] of abstractions. The [[synopsis]] on the back of the [[DVD]] [[case]] says in [[part]], "…gripping retelling of the BTK Killer's reign of terror." This is NOT a retelling. A retelling [[would]] [[suggest]] that you are being [[told]] the truth of what happened or how or why. [[None]] of these things are [[true]]. I'm an [[enthusiastic]] studier of serial killers and have [[seen]] some pretty crappy movies about them and [[honestly]], this IS [[NOT]] one of them. This isn't even about the BTK killer. [[Save]] yourself some [[time]] and a few bucks and [[rent]] Dahmer [[instead]]. THAT serial [[killer]] [[movie]] is [[accurate]] and [[true]]. [[However]], if you just [[HAVE]] to [[see]] this [[movie]] for yourself, [[check]] it out for free at your local library and [[even]] then, you'll [[still]] feel [[cheated]]. To [[comparison]] this [[breadline]] with an old, low budget porno flick would be an insult to the [[former]], low budget porno flick. The [[animals]] scenes have no [[sens]] nor do they [[representing]] this man and his crimes [[yet]] in the broadest [[feeling]] of abstractions. The [[recap]] on the back of the [[DVDS]] [[examples]] says in [[parte]], "…gripping retelling of the BTK Killer's reign of terror." This is NOT a retelling. A retelling [[ought]] [[insinuate]] that you are being [[say]] the truth of what happened or how or why. [[Nos]] of these things are [[real]]. I'm an [[excited]] studier of serial killers and have [[saw]] some pretty crappy movies about them and [[sincerely]], this IS [[NAH]] one of them. This isn't even about the BTK killer. [[Saved]] yourself some [[times]] and a few bucks and [[lease]] Dahmer [[however]]. THAT serial [[slayer]] [[cinematic]] is [[precision]] and [[veritable]]. [[Conversely]], if you just [[HAD]] to [[behold]] this [[filmmaking]] for yourself, [[cheques]] it out for free at your local library and [[yet]] then, you'll [[yet]] feel [[hoodwinked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked this movie, and went back to see it two times more within a week.

Ms. Detmers nailed the performance - she was like a hungry cat on the prowl, toying with her prey. She lashes out in rage and lust, taking a "too young" lover, and crashing hundreds of her terrorist fiancé's mother's pieces of fine china to the floor.

The film was full of beautiful touches. The Maserati, the wonderful wardrobe, the flower boxes along the rooftops. I particularly enjoyed the ancient Greek class and the recitation of 'Antigone'.

It had a feeling of 'Story of O' - that is, where people of means indulge in unrestrained sexual adventure. As she walks around the fantastic apartment in the buff, she is at ease - and why not, what is to restrain a "Devil in the Flesh"?

The whole movie is a real treat! --------------------------------------------- Result 4350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] There's nothing [[amazing]] about 'The Amazing [[Mr]] Williams'. Part of this movie's problem is its lead [[actor]] Melvyn Douglas. He was a [[lousy]] [[actor]] and lazy with it. [[For]] most of his [[career]], he allowed his good looks, a [[glib]] [[manner]] and ([[usually]], but not in this movie) some fine scriptwriting to make up for his [[lack]] of acting [[ability]]. I disliked Douglas as an [[actor]] before I knew [[anything]] about him as a person; I've [[learnt]] enough about him to know that I also [[despise]] his [[politics]]. I'll give Melvyn Douglas [[credit]] for one thing: his chromosomes did [[produce]] the [[incredibly]] [[talented]] and [[sexy]] actress Illeana Douglas.

Melvyn Douglas made this [[movie]] right after the brilliant 'Ninotchka' ... [[talk]] about a comedown! 'The Amazing Mr Williams' is [[allegedly]] a comedy, but I never laughed. Douglas plays a plainclothes detective on the homicide squad, named Kenny Williams. I never heard of a [[police]] detective named Kenny, but if they called him Kenneth Williams ... well, what a carry-on. The whole city is in a panic because a serial killer is going about, killing women. No motive is given for this; he just likes to [[kill]] [[women]]. The mayor (Jonathan Hale, better than usual) calls Williams on the carpet to account for his [[failure]] to catch the killer.

[[SPOILERS]] [[APPROACHING]]. The [[cheap]], vulgar, untalented and unattractive Joan Blondell plays the mayor's secretary. (She doesn't sound literate enough to [[file]] a letter, [[much]] [[less]] type one.) Blondell and Douglas squabble like a cat and a dog, so it's [[blatantly]] obvious they're going to end up together.

At this movie's [[lowest]] point, Melvyn Douglas decides to draw out the [[killer]] by dressing up as a [[woman]]. You do NOT [[want]] to [[see]] Melvyn Douglas in drag! He's well over six [[foot]], and he doesn't even shave off that [[annoying]] moustache. The similarly-'tashed [[William]] Powell was an actor very [[similar]] in type to Melvyn Douglas (but [[much]] more [[talented]]). When Powell [[disguised]] himself as a [[woman]] in '[[Love]] Crazy', he had the integrity to [[shave]] off his moustache: a genuine sacrifice, as Powell [[needed]] it to [[grow]] in again for his [[next]] role. But Melvyn Douglas brings nothing whatever to his role in this movie, not even a razor. He plays his drag scenes with the same annoying smirk he used throughout the bulk of his career.

On the plus side, 'The Amazing Mr Williams' has several of those splendid supporting players who made Hollywood's movies of the '30s so delightful. [[Edward]] Brophy is brilliant here, touching and funny as a criminal who gets an [[unlikely]] furlough from his life sentence. The dyspeptic Donald MacBride is fine as a cop who gets mistaken for the killer, and is nearly lynched by a mob. Ruth Donnelly is splendid: as usual for her, but here she gets a chance to show her talents away from her usual orbit on the Warner Brothers backlot. Jimmy Conlin, Luis Alberni and the grinning Dave Willock are all fine in small roles. Barbara Pepper (whom I usually dislike) is good here too. The grossly unpleasant Maude Eburne gets some screen time; I always loathe her, and she gives the same performance in every film ... but some audiences enjoy Eburne's one-note performance very much, for reasons I can't fathom.

If you're familiar with Hollywood character actors of the 1930s, and the roles they tended to play, one glance at IMDb's cast list will tell you who the murderer is. That's the problem with 'The Amazing Mr Wiliams': everything is too obvious. I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10. There's nothing [[breathtaking]] about 'The Amazing [[Mister]] Williams'. Part of this movie's problem is its lead [[actress]] Melvyn Douglas. He was a [[squalid]] [[actress]] and lazy with it. [[At]] most of his [[quarries]], he allowed his good looks, a [[flippant]] [[ways]] and ([[often]], but not in this movie) some fine scriptwriting to make up for his [[absence]] of acting [[capacities]]. I disliked Douglas as an [[protagonist]] before I knew [[nothing]] about him as a person; I've [[learns]] enough about him to know that I also [[scorn]] his [[politicians]]. I'll give Melvyn Douglas [[credits]] for one thing: his chromosomes did [[generating]] the [[madly]] [[gifted]] and [[hot]] actress Illeana Douglas.

Melvyn Douglas made this [[filmmaking]] right after the brilliant 'Ninotchka' ... [[chat]] about a comedown! 'The Amazing Mr Williams' is [[ostensibly]] a comedy, but I never laughed. Douglas plays a plainclothes detective on the homicide squad, named Kenny Williams. I never heard of a [[policemen]] detective named Kenny, but if they called him Kenneth Williams ... well, what a carry-on. The whole city is in a panic because a serial killer is going about, killing women. No motive is given for this; he just likes to [[assassinated]] [[wife]]. The mayor (Jonathan Hale, better than usual) calls Williams on the carpet to account for his [[defect]] to catch the killer.

[[TROUBLEMAKERS]] [[NEARING]]. The [[cheaper]], vulgar, untalented and unattractive Joan Blondell plays the mayor's secretary. (She doesn't sound literate enough to [[filings]] a letter, [[very]] [[lowest]] type one.) Blondell and Douglas squabble like a cat and a dog, so it's [[notoriously]] obvious they're going to end up together.

At this movie's [[less]] point, Melvyn Douglas decides to draw out the [[murderer]] by dressing up as a [[femme]]. You do NOT [[wish]] to [[seeing]] Melvyn Douglas in drag! He's well over six [[feet]], and he doesn't even shave off that [[exasperating]] moustache. The similarly-'tashed [[Wilhelm]] Powell was an actor very [[equivalent]] in type to Melvyn Douglas (but [[very]] more [[gifted]]). When Powell [[masked]] himself as a [[girl]] in '[[Amour]] Crazy', he had the integrity to [[beard]] off his moustache: a genuine sacrifice, as Powell [[requirement]] it to [[increase]] in again for his [[forthcoming]] role. But Melvyn Douglas brings nothing whatever to his role in this movie, not even a razor. He plays his drag scenes with the same annoying smirk he used throughout the bulk of his career.

On the plus side, 'The Amazing Mr Williams' has several of those splendid supporting players who made Hollywood's movies of the '30s so delightful. [[Edouard]] Brophy is brilliant here, touching and funny as a criminal who gets an [[implausible]] furlough from his life sentence. The dyspeptic Donald MacBride is fine as a cop who gets mistaken for the killer, and is nearly lynched by a mob. Ruth Donnelly is splendid: as usual for her, but here she gets a chance to show her talents away from her usual orbit on the Warner Brothers backlot. Jimmy Conlin, Luis Alberni and the grinning Dave Willock are all fine in small roles. Barbara Pepper (whom I usually dislike) is good here too. The grossly unpleasant Maude Eburne gets some screen time; I always loathe her, and she gives the same performance in every film ... but some audiences enjoy Eburne's one-note performance very much, for reasons I can't fathom.

If you're familiar with Hollywood character actors of the 1930s, and the roles they tended to play, one glance at IMDb's cast list will tell you who the murderer is. That's the problem with 'The Amazing Mr Wiliams': everything is too obvious. I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] In [[Holland]] a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He [[stays]] [[overnight]] with a [[beautiful]] [[woman]] Christine ([[Renee]] Soutendijk) and has [[sex]] with her (by imagining she's a [[boy]]). He [[plans]] to [[leave]] the [[next]] day, but gets a [[look]] at a [[picture]] of Christine's hunky boyfriend [[Herman]] (Thom Hoffman) and [[decides]] to stay to have a try at him. Then things get strange.

A [[big]] X-rated art [[house]] hit in the US in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's [[strangulation]], full frontal [[male]] and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will [[shock]] most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a [[comedy]]!!!!! [[Paul]] Verhoeven made this after "Spetters". "Spetters" was [[attacked]] by the critics for it's extreme sexual [[sequences]] and [[denounced]] as [[trash]]. [[So]], Verhoeven filled this [[film]] with very [[obvious]] symbolism thinking the [[critics]] [[would]] [[think]] it was art and [[praise]] it. He was right! Critics [[loved]] the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big [[joke]] on them. [[Still]], it's a [[great]] film.

It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and [[obvious]] "hidden" [[layers]] in the dialogue that you're never [[bored]]. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly [[despicable]] character but (somehow) has you [[rooting]] for him; Soutendijk is just [[stunning]] to look at and plays her [[part]] to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.

This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! [[A]] 10 all the [[way]]. In [[Dutch]] a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He [[resting]] [[nightly]] with a [[wondrous]] [[mujer]] Christine ([[Rini]] Soutendijk) and has [[sexuality]] with her (by imagining she's a [[dude]]). He [[schematics]] to [[walkout]] the [[forthcoming]] day, but gets a [[peek]] at a [[photographing]] of Christine's hunky boyfriend [[Hermann]] (Thom Hoffman) and [[decide]] to stay to have a try at him. Then things get strange.

A [[vast]] X-rated art [[houses]] hit in the US in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's [[asphyxiation]], full frontal [[males]] and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will [[shocks]] most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a [[parody]]!!!!! [[Paolo]] Verhoeven made this after "Spetters". "Spetters" was [[slammed]] by the critics for it's extreme sexual [[sequencing]] and [[lamented]] as [[junk]]. [[Accordingly]], Verhoeven filled this [[cinematography]] with very [[conspicuous]] symbolism thinking the [[critiques]] [[could]] [[thinks]] it was art and [[praising]] it. He was right! Critics [[cared]] the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big [[joking]] on them. [[However]], it's a [[huge]] film.

It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and [[noticeable]] "hidden" [[nappies]] in the dialogue that you're never [[drilled]]. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly [[obnoxious]] character but (somehow) has you [[racine]] for him; Soutendijk is just [[awesome]] to look at and plays her [[parties]] to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.

This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! [[una]] 10 all the [[path]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The king is [[dead]] [[long]] [[live]] the [[King]]! The [[triad]] of Caddie [[Shack]] Two, The Family [[underneath]] the [[Stairs]], and Troop Beverly Hills had been [[tied]] for [[worst]] movie ever for so [[long]] that they [[seemed]] [[icons]] in their own right. But there is a new king.....[[yep]].....all [[hail]] the [[new]] king...."Down to Earth". But some [[things]], like [[Tiny]] Tim for example, are so [[bad]] they are good. Some day this [[could]] take out the inimitable "[[Rocky]] [[Horror]] Picture [[Show]]" as a [[cult]] [[film]]. [[So]] [[go]] see this ....this....well just [[take]] my word for it. Go see it. All hail the [[new]] king! The king is [[die]] [[longue]] [[vive]] the [[Emperor]]! The [[trilogy]] of Caddie [[Cabana]] Two, The Family [[under]] the [[Stair]], and Troop Beverly Hills had been [[tie]] for [[meanest]] movie ever for so [[lange]] that they [[appeared]] [[icon]] in their own right. But there is a new king.....[[yup]].....all [[hailed]] the [[newest]] king...."Down to Earth". But some [[aspects]], like [[Teeny]] Tim for example, are so [[negative]] they are good. Some day this [[did]] take out the inimitable "[[Roque]] [[Monstrosity]] Picture [[Showings]]" as a [[cults]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Accordingly]] [[going]] see this ....this....well just [[taking]] my word for it. Go see it. All hail the [[newest]] king! --------------------------------------------- Result 4353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was [[unlucky]] enough to have [[seen]] this at the [[Sidewalk]] [[Film]] [[Festival]]. [[Sidewalk]] as a [[whole]] was a disappointment and this [[movie]] was the [[final]] nail in the [[coffin]]. [[Being]] a [[devout]] fan of [[Lewis]] Carroll's 'Alice' [[books]] I was very [[excited]] about this movie's premier, which only made it that much more uncomfortable to watch. [[Normally]] I'm enthusiastic about modern re-tellings if they are [[treated]] well. [[Usually]] it's interesting to [[see]] the [[parallels]] between the past and present [[within]] a [[familiar]] [[story]]. Unfortunately this [[movie]] was [[less]] of a [[modern]] retelling and more of a [[pop]] culture perversion. The adaptation of the original's [[characters]] seemed juvenile and [[usually]] [[proved]] to be horribly [[annoying]]. It [[probably]] didn't [[help]] that the [[actors]] weren't very good [[either]]. [[Most]] performances were [[ridiculously]] over the top, which I [[assume]] was either due to bad [[direction]] or an [[effort]] to [[make]] up for a [[bad]] [[script]]. I did not laugh once through out the [[duration]] of the film. All of the jokes were outdated [[references]] to not so [[current]] [[events]] that are sure to lose their poignancy as time goes by. Really, the only [[highlight]] of the film was the [[opening]] [[sequence]] in which the white rabbit is on his [[way]] to [[meet]] [[Alice]], but even then the score was a poor imitation of Danny Elfman's [[work]]. Also, I'd have to [[say]] that the [[conversion]] of the croquet game into a rave dance-off was [[awful]]. It was with out a [[doubt]] the low point of the [[film]].

What a [[joke]]. Don't [[see]] this [[movie]]. After its [[conclusion]] I was [[genuinely]] [[angry]]. I was [[lamentable]] enough to have [[noticed]] this at the [[Boardwalk]] [[Cinematographic]] [[Celebratory]]. [[Boardwalk]] as a [[ensemble]] was a disappointment and this [[filmmaking]] was the [[definitive]] nail in the [[casket]]. [[Ongoing]] a [[fervent]] fan of [[Louis]] Carroll's 'Alice' [[ledgers]] I was very [[thrilled]] about this movie's premier, which only made it that much more uncomfortable to watch. [[Generally]] I'm enthusiastic about modern re-tellings if they are [[addressed]] well. [[Generally]] it's interesting to [[behold]] the [[similarities]] between the past and present [[inside]] a [[accustomed]] [[storytelling]]. Unfortunately this [[filmmaking]] was [[fewer]] of a [[contemporary]] retelling and more of a [[pops]] culture perversion. The adaptation of the original's [[character]] seemed juvenile and [[often]] [[demonstrated]] to be horribly [[irritating]]. It [[possibly]] didn't [[helps]] that the [[players]] weren't very good [[neither]]. [[Greatest]] performances were [[outrageously]] over the top, which I [[suppose]] was either due to bad [[directions]] or an [[endeavors]] to [[deliver]] up for a [[negative]] [[scripts]]. I did not laugh once through out the [[length]] of the film. All of the jokes were outdated [[reference]] to not so [[contemporary]] [[event]] that are sure to lose their poignancy as time goes by. Really, the only [[stressing]] of the film was the [[initiation]] [[sequences]] in which the white rabbit is on his [[route]] to [[satisfy]] [[Altar]], but even then the score was a poor imitation of Danny Elfman's [[cooperate]]. Also, I'd have to [[tell]] that the [[transformation]] of the croquet game into a rave dance-off was [[scary]]. It was with out a [[duda]] the low point of the [[filmmaking]].

What a [[giggle]]. Don't [[behold]] this [[film]]. After its [[concluding]] I was [[really]] [[irked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4354 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was one of the all time best episodes. Officer Sean Cooper was murdered in his patrol car back in '68. A dying convict in the state penitentiary reveals that he stole a block of heroin from the car after the shooting. His case is reopened with the presumption that he was corrupted as a policeman.

Further investigation into him as a police officer and a human being reveals a war veteran involved in a forbidden love. This type of love was considered shameful and something to at least keep hidden at that time.

While this isn't the type of love I personally support, he was still a policeman and a human being and shouldn't have been killed for it. The sound track was excellent (keeps me watching the DVR), and the selective use of black and white mixed with color to emphasize one object or give a particular feeling to a scene was especially appealing. I shall be watching this one in repeat! --------------------------------------------- Result 4355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a low [[budget]] film with a cast of [[unknowns]] and a minimum of on location [[shoots]]. The [[Philippines]] substitute for [[Thailand]] and [[nobody]] actually goes to [[Hong]] Kong. The [[stock]] shot of a Cathay [[Pacific]] [[jumbo]] [[jet]] landing at the [[old]] [[airport]] makes the [[transition]] [[perfectly]]. This [[film]] proves that you [[need]] [[neither]] mega [[budgets]] nor a headliner star to produce an [[excellent]] movie. It [[contains]] [[neither]] the gaffes nor the excesses that [[young]] filmakers [[often]] stumble into. Solid workmanship from people who know all the [[aspects]] of movie making and who [[understand]] the [[compromises]] between art and box office. An [[excellent]] piece of work! This is a low [[budgets]] film with a cast of [[unbeknownst]] and a minimum of on location [[stalks]]. The [[Filipinos]] substitute for [[Thais]] and [[anyone]] actually goes to [[Kong]] Kong. The [[stockpiles]] shot of a Cathay [[Placid]] [[giant]] [[spout]] landing at the [[ancient]] [[airfield]] makes the [[transitions]] [[entirely]]. This [[movie]] proves that you [[required]] [[either]] mega [[budget]] nor a headliner star to produce an [[wondrous]] movie. It [[therein]] [[or]] the gaffes nor the excesses that [[youthful]] filmakers [[usually]] stumble into. Solid workmanship from people who know all the [[things]] of movie making and who [[understood]] the [[jeopardizes]] between art and box office. An [[wondrous]] piece of work! --------------------------------------------- Result 4356 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] After I watched this movie, I came to IMDb and read some of the reviews, which compared it to Lost In Translation LITE. When I read that I immediately could see the reviewers point.

This movie was a [[poor]] attempt at a [[similar]] [[theme]]. [[Interestingly]], the [[format]] of the movie is nearly [[identical]], but the PACING is incredibly different. "10 Items" rushes the [[viewer]] through the 1-day time [[line]] of the movie, whereas the better-planned "Lost In..." seems to stretch out over a few long days.

I'm sure some people will see this because it has Morgan Freeman, and will be [[disappointed]]. It [[seems]] his better roles now-a-days are supporting roles in big blockbusters, rather than leading roles in sub-$10mil limited release movies and indie films. After I watched this movie, I came to IMDb and read some of the reviews, which compared it to Lost In Translation LITE. When I read that I immediately could see the reviewers point.

This movie was a [[poorest]] attempt at a [[analogue]] [[subjects]]. [[Amazingly]], the [[formats]] of the movie is nearly [[selfsame]], but the PACING is incredibly different. "10 Items" rushes the [[beholder]] through the 1-day time [[linea]] of the movie, whereas the better-planned "Lost In..." seems to stretch out over a few long days.

I'm sure some people will see this because it has Morgan Freeman, and will be [[frustrated]]. It [[appears]] his better roles now-a-days are supporting roles in big blockbusters, rather than leading roles in sub-$10mil limited release movies and indie films. --------------------------------------------- Result 4357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An overlong, but compelling retelling of the friendship between civil rights leader Steve Biko and Donald Woods. The first half of the film is the strongest where we see the bond formed between the two men, and how they help each other out, but the second half isn't as strong, due to the elimination of the Biko character. Still, its a compelling film with great performances by Kline and Washington, in the film that put the latter on the map. Washington was also was nominated for best supporting actor for the first time. Overall, a well made film that could have been trimmed down a bit. 7/10.____________________________________ --------------------------------------------- Result 4358 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't [[often]] give one star reviews, but the [[computer]] won't [[let]] me do [[negative]] [[numbers]].

The opening titles [[tell]] us we're in [[deep]] water already. Although this is a low budget [[exploitation]] film, there are 17 [[producers]] credited. No. No.

[[At]] the [[beginning]] of the [[story]] [[abusive]] husband Kenneth comes home to his [[family]] in an upscale gated community. The [[house]] is a pigsty. His [[wife]], Della (Kim Basinger) has let the [[children]] run amok all day.

OK. We're already in [[deep]] water. [[Ms]]. Basinger was 55 years [[old]] when the [[film]] [[came]] out. [[Uh]], are these her [[children]] or [[grandchildren]]? It's Christmas Eve. Della [[drives]] to the [[mall]], a [[lengthy]] scene that [[could]] have been cut. To bludgeon [[home]] the [[idea]] of eeeeeeevil male aggression [[rampant]] in the universe she drives [[past]] [[football]] [[players]] in full uniform [[playing]] in pouring rain on Christmas Eve. [[Sure]]. [[For]] a bonus she [[sees]] a [[vehicle]] with a slaughtered deer [[tied]] to it.

We get some [[actual]] suspense in the driving scenes, [[though]]. It's raining and traffic is [[bad]]. First we see Della try to [[drive]] and [[smoke]] at the same [[time]]. Then [[later]] Della tries to drive and [[talk]] on her cell phone at the same [[time]], at one point turning [[completely]] [[around]] to [[check]] the cluttered back seat for the [[charger]] for the [[phone]].

She wanders the [[mall]], sees an [[old]] [[friend]] from college, [[tries]] to [[buy]] [[stuff]] but her credit [[card]] is declined- [[gosh]], [[maybe]] her husband is grumpy because he's [[going]] broke, but that's too complicated for the [[script]] to follow.

In the parking lot she [[runs]] afoul of the most [[ludicrous]] gang in the history of films. One White boy (Lukas Hass watching his career go down the [[toilet]]), one Black, one [[Asian]], and one Hispanic. [[Imagine]] a [[company]] of Up with People gone to the [[bad]] and you'll have the idea.

Although they have a gun she gives them attitude. A [[mall]] [[cop]] [[comes]] to [[investigate]] the [[ruckus]] and they shoot him in the head, [[firing]] more than once. The parking [[lot]] is crowded as can be, people [[everywhere]], and nobody notices.

Della escapes in her car and rather than choosing a police station or well lighted safe area, she drives to a construction site, where she kills all four bad boys one at a time with simply the tools (literally) at hand.

MAJOR spoiler ahead.

She drives back home. The car poops out so she walks through the pouring rain. Checks on the children, goes downstairs, and when her [[husband]] petulantly asks what she got him at the mall shows him the gun and shoots him at point blank range.

The experience with the four punks was supposed to result in personal empowerment for Della. Instead we know that her children will probably spend Christmas in foster care or a group home, because the State will collect them while she answers to murder one charges. The four punks can be classified as justifiable homicide in self defense. The husband, different story.

I'm so glad I saw this on cable. If I'd seen it in a theater (did it get any release?) I'd have been furious. As is, I'm just sad seeing talents like Ms. Basinger and Mr. Haas waste themselves on garbage like this.

One very good thing, though. This was written and directed by Susan Montford. Ms. Montford has not gotten another writing or directing credit since passing this turd. There is justice in the world. I don't [[oftentimes]] give one star reviews, but the [[computers]] won't [[letting]] me do [[detrimental]] [[numerals]].

The opening titles [[say]] us we're in [[deepest]] water already. Although this is a low budget [[operate]] film, there are 17 [[makers]] credited. No. No.

[[During]] the [[initiating]] of the [[tales]] [[offensive]] husband Kenneth comes home to his [[familial]] in an upscale gated community. The [[maison]] is a pigsty. His [[woman]], Della (Kim Basinger) has let the [[childhood]] run amok all day.

OK. We're already in [[deepest]] water. [[Corinne]]. Basinger was 55 years [[former]] when the [[filmmaking]] [[arrived]] out. [[Hmm]], are these her [[childhood]] or [[granddaughter]]? It's Christmas Eve. Della [[driving]] to the [[malls]], a [[extended]] scene that [[did]] have been cut. To bludgeon [[homes]] the [[ideals]] of eeeeeeevil male aggression [[runaway]] in the universe she drives [[previous]] [[soccer]] [[protagonists]] in full uniform [[replay]] in pouring rain on Christmas Eve. [[Persuaded]]. [[In]] a bonus she [[believes]] a [[auto]] with a slaughtered deer [[connected]] to it.

We get some [[real]] suspense in the driving scenes, [[albeit]]. It's raining and traffic is [[negative]]. First we see Della try to [[driving]] and [[smoker]] at the same [[period]]. Then [[afterward]] Della tries to drive and [[chat]] on her cell phone at the same [[period]], at one point turning [[fully]] [[throughout]] to [[audit]] the cluttered back seat for the [[changer]] for the [[telephone]].

She wanders the [[supermarket]], sees an [[longtime]] [[friends]] from college, [[try]] to [[bought]] [[thing]] but her credit [[cards]] is declined- [[jeez]], [[probably]] her husband is grumpy because he's [[go]] broke, but that's too complicated for the [[screenplay]] to follow.

In the parking lot she [[manages]] afoul of the most [[claptrap]] gang in the history of films. One White boy (Lukas Hass watching his career go down the [[wc]]), one Black, one [[Asia]], and one Hispanic. [[Imagining]] a [[societies]] of Up with People gone to the [[negative]] and you'll have the idea.

Although they have a gun she gives them attitude. A [[supermarket]] [[constabulary]] [[arises]] to [[explores]] the [[fuss]] and they shoot him in the head, [[gunshot]] more than once. The parking [[lots]] is crowded as can be, people [[wherever]], and nobody notices.

Della escapes in her car and rather than choosing a police station or well lighted safe area, she drives to a construction site, where she kills all four bad boys one at a time with simply the tools (literally) at hand.

MAJOR spoiler ahead.

She drives back home. The car poops out so she walks through the pouring rain. Checks on the children, goes downstairs, and when her [[hubby]] petulantly asks what she got him at the mall shows him the gun and shoots him at point blank range.

The experience with the four punks was supposed to result in personal empowerment for Della. Instead we know that her children will probably spend Christmas in foster care or a group home, because the State will collect them while she answers to murder one charges. The four punks can be classified as justifiable homicide in self defense. The husband, different story.

I'm so glad I saw this on cable. If I'd seen it in a theater (did it get any release?) I'd have been furious. As is, I'm just sad seeing talents like Ms. Basinger and Mr. Haas waste themselves on garbage like this.

One very good thing, though. This was written and directed by Susan Montford. Ms. Montford has not gotten another writing or directing credit since passing this turd. There is justice in the world. --------------------------------------------- Result 4359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[first]] saw this movie back in the 1980's and now in 2006 this movie [[still]] is one of the [[best]] movies I have ever [[seen]]! I would recommend anyone to look at this movie. You will not be sorry. It is well acted out, so [[real]] and never a [[dull]] [[moment]]. The acting is [[superb]] and the location makes the movie [[seem]] like you are there. From the beginning right up to the end, this [[movie]] is the type that makes you lose your attention. The actress does an excellent job of portraying the girl who survived this horrific [[plane]] crash in the Amazon and it [[shows]] how she [[managed]] to survive in the Amazon all alone. It is [[unbelievable]] that [[anyone]] [[could]] survive under such conditions. This is why this [[movie]] is so [[appealing]]. The [[fact]] that this is a [[true]] [[story]] makes the [[movie]] [[even]] more interesting and to [[think]] that a [[young]] [[girl]] could survive from this [[ordeal]] is overwhelming. I [[find]] this [[movie]] one that I can watch over and over again and one that I never [[get]] tired of. This is [[indeed]] [[quite]] a [[compliment]] as I have hundreds of [[movies]]! I would [[say]] this is [[probably]] my [[favorite]] [[movie]] and the [[best]] I have ever [[seen]]! I [[firstly]] saw this movie back in the 1980's and now in 2006 this movie [[yet]] is one of the [[better]] movies I have ever [[noticed]]! I would recommend anyone to look at this movie. You will not be sorry. It is well acted out, so [[true]] and never a [[uninspiring]] [[time]]. The acting is [[wondrous]] and the location makes the movie [[appears]] like you are there. From the beginning right up to the end, this [[movies]] is the type that makes you lose your attention. The actress does an excellent job of portraying the girl who survived this horrific [[airline]] crash in the Amazon and it [[demonstrates]] how she [[managing]] to survive in the Amazon all alone. It is [[awesome]] that [[somebody]] [[did]] survive under such conditions. This is why this [[cinematography]] is so [[tempting]]. The [[facto]] that this is a [[truthful]] [[stories]] makes the [[movies]] [[yet]] more interesting and to [[thought]] that a [[youthful]] [[girls]] could survive from this [[adversity]] is overwhelming. I [[finds]] this [[movies]] one that I can watch over and over again and one that I never [[got]] tired of. This is [[actually]] [[rather]] a [[praising]] as I have hundreds of [[movie]]! I would [[tell]] this is [[presumably]] my [[preferred]] [[cinematography]] and the [[better]] I have ever [[watched]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The Invisible Man is a [[fantastic]] movie from 1933, a cutting edge film for it's [[time]] where objects appeared to rest on top of a man who was truly invisible. Go ahead, take a look at the film, you will be shocked that it was made in 1933, it was the first true special [[effects]] movie. Come 2000, computer aided special [[effects]] [[seem]] like child's play, audiences are not [[blown]] away by [[special]] [[effects]], instead they are [[disappointed]] if they are not [[done]] right. The [[special]] [[effects]] in [[Hollow]] [[Man]], the update of the [[HG]] Wells [[story]], are OK, but not the [[biggest]] [[problem]] with this film [[directed]] by Paul Verhoeven, who you might remember from Showgirls and Total Recall. Kevin Bacon plays Sebastian Caine, a scientist dabbling in the world of bio-invisibilation (yeah, I know that's not a word) but of course is battling higher ups who are threatening to take away the team's funding. So, as movie characters who are about to have their funding cutoff are prone to do, he makes the ultimate sacrifice and becomes a guinea pig for the invisibilation (yeah, I know, I used that non-word again) process. The process has dire consequences, no Caine does not die, but instead becomes a horny, violent creature, aka a guy. Now that he's invisible, Caine stalks a sexy neighbor, a co-worker, former girlfriend Linda (Elisabeth Shue), and the man who took away his funding. Then a funny thing happens, Caine becomes a new supernatural being, "The Thing That Won't Die." Laughing in the face of all things natural, Caine faces down death and [[spits]] in it's face, as it take what feels like hours for this creature to die, dragging the ending of the movie out. The [[movie]] is [[silly]], stupid, and [[finally]] [[laughable]] with the way [[realism]] is sometimes used, sometimes not. There are neat possibilities in Hollow Man, but of course, not one of them is explored. For a more interesting look at an invisible being, get ready for some good old-fashioned black and white cinema, and check out the 1933 Invisible Man. Kevin Bacon will still be invisible when you come back, probably still alive at the bottom of a volcano. The Invisible Man is a [[sumptuous]] movie from 1933, a cutting edge film for it's [[moment]] where objects appeared to rest on top of a man who was truly invisible. Go ahead, take a look at the film, you will be shocked that it was made in 1933, it was the first true special [[consequences]] movie. Come 2000, computer aided special [[influences]] [[appears]] like child's play, audiences are not [[molten]] away by [[specific]] [[influences]], instead they are [[frustrated]] if they are not [[doing]] right. The [[particular]] [[impact]] in [[Empty]] [[Dude]], the update of the [[MERCURY]] Wells [[saga]], are OK, but not the [[highest]] [[difficulty]] with this film [[geared]] by Paul Verhoeven, who you might remember from Showgirls and Total Recall. Kevin Bacon plays Sebastian Caine, a scientist dabbling in the world of bio-invisibilation (yeah, I know that's not a word) but of course is battling higher ups who are threatening to take away the team's funding. So, as movie characters who are about to have their funding cutoff are prone to do, he makes the ultimate sacrifice and becomes a guinea pig for the invisibilation (yeah, I know, I used that non-word again) process. The process has dire consequences, no Caine does not die, but instead becomes a horny, violent creature, aka a guy. Now that he's invisible, Caine stalks a sexy neighbor, a co-worker, former girlfriend Linda (Elisabeth Shue), and the man who took away his funding. Then a funny thing happens, Caine becomes a new supernatural being, "The Thing That Won't Die." Laughing in the face of all things natural, Caine faces down death and [[arrows]] in it's face, as it take what feels like hours for this creature to die, dragging the ending of the movie out. The [[filmmaking]] is [[stupid]], stupid, and [[lastly]] [[absurd]] with the way [[reality]] is sometimes used, sometimes not. There are neat possibilities in Hollow Man, but of course, not one of them is explored. For a more interesting look at an invisible being, get ready for some good old-fashioned black and white cinema, and check out the 1933 Invisible Man. Kevin Bacon will still be invisible when you come back, probably still alive at the bottom of a volcano. --------------------------------------------- Result 4361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] There are so [[many]] goofy things about this movie that I can't possibly name but a few:

BOGART's character: 1. His [[name]] – Whip McCord (too [[easy]], so I'll leave it at that. Boy, it makes `Humphrey' [[sound]] good.) 2. His long, curly hair and silly sideburns. 3. His [[Black]] Bart get-up, complete with spurs! 4. Not sure what shade of lipgloss they've [[got]] him [[wearing]], but it ain't none too flattering.

CAGNEY's [[character]] (Jim Kincaid ): 1. His [[lipstick]] doesn't do him any [[favors]], [[either]]. 2. The [[man]] is being [[swallowed]] by his [[hat]] during the entire [[film]]! [[Could]] they not [[find]] a [[hat]] to fit him? Even a [[LITTLE]]?!!?! 3. His [[pants]] are too tight in the [[rear]]. 4. He [[blows]] the [[smoke]] off his [[gun]] one too [[many]] [[times]], if you know what I [[mean]], and I [[think]] you do.

If you are a [[casual]] Bogart or Cagney fan, and [[figure]] it might be a [[change]] of [[pace]] to [[see]] them in a [[western]], do yourself a favor and forget that [[thought]]. EVEN THE HORSES [[LOOK]] [[EMBARRASSED]]! (That is, when they don't look [[bored]].)

[[In]] all [[fairness]], I [[admit]] that [[westerns]] are my least [[favorite]] [[film]] [[genre]], but I've [[still]] [[seen]] much, [[MUCH]] [[better]] than this.

[[On]] a [[comedy]] [[level]], or as [[high]] camp, The Oklahoma Kid works. Otherwise, it's viewer [[beware]]. [[Therefore]], [[see]] this only if a) you [[must]] [[see]] [[every]] [[western]] out there b) you are a [[TRUE]] Cagney or [[Bogie]] completist c) any of the above [[comments]] [[appeal]] to you. [[Woah]]….. There are so [[innumerable]] goofy things about this movie that I can't possibly name but a few:

BOGART's character: 1. His [[behalf]] – Whip McCord (too [[easily]], so I'll leave it at that. Boy, it makes `Humphrey' [[audible]] good.) 2. His long, curly hair and silly sideburns. 3. His [[Negro]] Bart get-up, complete with spurs! 4. Not sure what shade of lipgloss they've [[get]] him [[wear]], but it ain't none too flattering.

CAGNEY's [[characters]] (Jim Kincaid ): 1. His [[rouge]] doesn't do him any [[favours]], [[nor]]. 2. The [[guy]] is being [[eat]] by his [[hats]] during the entire [[filmmaking]]! [[Would]] they not [[found]] a [[hats]] to fit him? Even a [[TINY]]?!!?! 3. His [[shorts]] are too tight in the [[trailing]]. 4. He [[beatings]] the [[tobacco]] off his [[guns]] one too [[countless]] [[moments]], if you know what I [[imply]], and I [[thinking]] you do.

If you are a [[occasional]] Bogart or Cagney fan, and [[silhouette]] it might be a [[modifications]] of [[tempo]] to [[seeing]] them in a [[westen]], do yourself a favor and forget that [[thinks]]. EVEN THE HORSES [[PEEK]] [[ASHAMED]]! (That is, when they don't look [[drilled]].)

[[At]] all [[equality]], I [[acknowledge]] that [[westerners]] are my least [[favorites]] [[filmmaking]] [[sort]], but I've [[again]] [[watched]] much, [[VERY]] [[optimum]] than this.

[[Onto]] a [[parody]] [[levels]], or as [[supreme]] camp, The Oklahoma Kid works. Otherwise, it's viewer [[attention]]. [[Thus]], [[seeing]] this only if a) you [[should]] [[behold]] [[any]] [[ouest]] out there b) you are a [[VERITABLE]] Cagney or [[Bogey]] completist c) any of the above [[commentaries]] [[appealed]] to you. [[Wow]]….. --------------------------------------------- Result 4362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What we've [[got]] here is a Situation. A [[man]] is [[found]] to be in [[distress]] and people [[want]] to [[help]] him -- in contrasting [[ways]]. [[At]] the end they are [[forced]] to [[let]] it go. You can't fix people. And [[though]] in [[various]] [[aspects]] Reign Over Me is conventionally Hollywood, that message isn't.

This story is not about Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler), a [[man]] who [[lost]] his wife and three [[daughters]] in a 9/11 [[plane]] who's [[gone]] into a [[nearly]] psychotic [[state]] of PTSS since. It's about what meeting Charlie does to Alan Johnson ([[Don]] Cheadle), a [[dentist]] in [[New]] York who was his roommate in dental [[school]] and, knowing about his tragedy, [[spots]] him on the street and reconnects. Charlie is riding [[around]] on a [[little]] toy motorized scooter -- a [[pretty]] fanciful contraption for negotiating Manhattan [[traffic]] -- with [[big]] headphones on over a mass of unruly hair. The hair is Sandler's chief prop to [[show]] he's deranged. And the [[use]] of [[music]] as an [[escape]] [[must]] [[hit]] [[home]] to [[every]] iPod-wielding [[subway]] rider.

Charlie is a [[disaster]], but [[paradoxically]] [[Alan]], [[stuck]] with a [[controlling]] wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), [[soon]] [[begins]] to [[envy]] him. Charlie is [[living]] like an nutty [[adolescent]] [[boy]] with a [[huge]] [[trust]] fund ([[insurance]] money from the tragedy), and [[starts]] [[dragging]] [[Alan]] off to "hang out," "[[eat]] Chinese," [[buy]] records, or watch a Mel [[Brooks]] marathon at a rep house. [[Charlie]] lives in a nice [[big]] [[apartment]] protected by a mean landlady, redoing the [[kitchen]] over and over, [[collecting]] [[old]] [[vinyl]] of Springsteen, the [[Who]], etc., and playing a video [[game]] [[called]] Shadow of the Collosus on a [[giant]] screen in a [[big]] empty [[living]] room.

Charlie's in-laws are [[deeply]] concerned about him, but [[also]] somehow resentful, as we [[learn]] later. [[Alan]] has a [[new]] [[patient]] who is propositioning him. Charlie's desperation makes us [[see]] Alan's. [[Trying]] to [[help]] [[Charlie]] partly [[permits]] [[Alan]] to [[escape]] from his own [[stifling]] [[realities]] but partly just makes him more [[acutely]] [[aware]] of them.

Cheadle and Sandler make an [[odd]] [[couple]], but that doesn't [[matter]], because it's convincing that they might both need each other. Charlie is desperate for the companionship of a friend who never knew his family, because to escape his loss, he is pretending he never had one. And so what if as a roommate Charlie slept naked and sleep walked and had terrible musical taste (no Motown)? Alan wants an escape from his tidy, emasculating life. He's under the thumb not just of his wife but of his dental partners, who lord it over him though it's he who set up the practice. They're white, by the way, and he's black.

There's also the lascivious patient from hell, who seriously disrupts things at the dental offices, but starts looking different when Charlie comes by and notices she's a babe. His libido seems to be lurking ready to revive at any minute. He's also drawn to the breasts of Liv Tyler, a psychotherapist in the same building as the dentists who starts trying to treat Charlie when he admits he might need help.

Sandler's mad scenes are a little too theatrical, as are a lot of the plot devices (in fact this movie feels like a play at more than one point), but he has several monologues where he expresses his sorrow in ways that are deeply touching.

Charlie's not just delusional and sad, but dangerous and violent, and all these efforts to help him start to backfire. The movie is admirable in the way it conveys a sense that people can't be made right. This is an interesting movie -- sometimes a touching one -- and it's the first time 9/11 has been dealt with in terms of survivor suffering. But there is an element of comedy that seems tasteless at times, many of the people are too broadly drawn, and the overly grand Hollywood interiors have dreadful décor; only the Manhattan streets look real. There's a courtroom scene that is preposterous, and Donald Sutherland is a judge who's too good to be true. Alan's family problem is resolved too easily with a phone call. And yet this is worth watching for the acting -- the control and subtlety of Cheadle, and Sandler in a serious role almost as good as the one he had in P.T. Anderson's 2002 Punch-Drunk Love, though that's clearly a better movie, in fact a much better one. What we've [[gets]] here is a Situation. A [[males]] is [[finds]] to be in [[grief]] and people [[wish]] to [[support]] him -- in contrasting [[methods]]. [[In]] the end they are [[obliged]] to [[letting]] it go. You can't fix people. And [[if]] in [[many]] [[things]] Reign Over Me is conventionally Hollywood, that message isn't.

This story is not about Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler), a [[dude]] who [[outof]] his wife and three [[dame]] in a 9/11 [[airplanes]] who's [[disappeared]] into a [[around]] psychotic [[sate]] of PTSS since. It's about what meeting Charlie does to Alan Johnson ([[Donated]] Cheadle), a [[dentistry]] in [[Nuevo]] York who was his roommate in dental [[teaching]] and, knowing about his tragedy, [[commercials]] him on the street and reconnects. Charlie is riding [[about]] on a [[petite]] toy motorized scooter -- a [[quite]] fanciful contraption for negotiating Manhattan [[trafficking]] -- with [[overwhelming]] headphones on over a mass of unruly hair. The hair is Sandler's chief prop to [[illustrating]] he's deranged. And the [[utilizes]] of [[musicians]] as an [[fleeing]] [[should]] [[slapped]] [[dwellings]] to [[any]] iPod-wielding [[metro]] rider.

Charlie is a [[catastrophe]], but [[suspiciously]] [[Allan]], [[jammed]] with a [[checking]] wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), [[shortly]] [[commenced]] to [[craving]] him. Charlie is [[inhabit]] like an nutty [[adolescents]] [[dude]] with a [[monumental]] [[trusts]] fund ([[security]] money from the tragedy), and [[launching]] [[dredging]] [[Allan]] off to "hang out," "[[ate]] Chinese," [[acquisition]] records, or watch a Mel [[Creek]] marathon at a rep house. [[Charley]] lives in a nice [[major]] [[condo]] protected by a mean landlady, redoing the [[galley]] over and over, [[compiling]] [[antigua]] [[insulation]] of Springsteen, the [[Whose]], etc., and playing a video [[games]] [[termed]] Shadow of the Collosus on a [[titan]] screen in a [[overwhelming]] empty [[inhabit]] room.

Charlie's in-laws are [[seriously]] concerned about him, but [[further]] somehow resentful, as we [[learns]] later. [[Alana]] has a [[novel]] [[patients]] who is propositioning him. Charlie's desperation makes us [[seeing]] Alan's. [[Tempting]] to [[assisting]] [[Vietcong]] partly [[licenses]] [[Alana]] to [[elude]] from his own [[smothering]] [[truths]] but partly just makes him more [[severely]] [[conscious]] of them.

Cheadle and Sandler make an [[bizarre]] [[pair]], but that doesn't [[topic]], because it's convincing that they might both need each other. Charlie is desperate for the companionship of a friend who never knew his family, because to escape his loss, he is pretending he never had one. And so what if as a roommate Charlie slept naked and sleep walked and had terrible musical taste (no Motown)? Alan wants an escape from his tidy, emasculating life. He's under the thumb not just of his wife but of his dental partners, who lord it over him though it's he who set up the practice. They're white, by the way, and he's black.

There's also the lascivious patient from hell, who seriously disrupts things at the dental offices, but starts looking different when Charlie comes by and notices she's a babe. His libido seems to be lurking ready to revive at any minute. He's also drawn to the breasts of Liv Tyler, a psychotherapist in the same building as the dentists who starts trying to treat Charlie when he admits he might need help.

Sandler's mad scenes are a little too theatrical, as are a lot of the plot devices (in fact this movie feels like a play at more than one point), but he has several monologues where he expresses his sorrow in ways that are deeply touching.

Charlie's not just delusional and sad, but dangerous and violent, and all these efforts to help him start to backfire. The movie is admirable in the way it conveys a sense that people can't be made right. This is an interesting movie -- sometimes a touching one -- and it's the first time 9/11 has been dealt with in terms of survivor suffering. But there is an element of comedy that seems tasteless at times, many of the people are too broadly drawn, and the overly grand Hollywood interiors have dreadful décor; only the Manhattan streets look real. There's a courtroom scene that is preposterous, and Donald Sutherland is a judge who's too good to be true. Alan's family problem is resolved too easily with a phone call. And yet this is worth watching for the acting -- the control and subtlety of Cheadle, and Sandler in a serious role almost as good as the one he had in P.T. Anderson's 2002 Punch-Drunk Love, though that's clearly a better movie, in fact a much better one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Sometimes a movie is so comprehensively [[awful]] it has a [[destructive]] [[effect]] on your [[morale]]. You [[begin]] to [[really]] [[ask]] yourself, what does it [[mean]] for our society that the [[standard]] is so [[terribly]] low? Can they [[honestly]] expect that we'll endure this many clichés and [[still]] be entertained?

Of [[course]], it is still a Hollywood mainstay to [[make]] the [[GUN]] the major character, plot [[device]], and the [[source]] of all conflict and resolution in films. Character needs a gun. Gets a [[gun]]. Can't do that because he has a gun. Puts his gun down first. OH MY GOD What are we going to do!? He has a gun! He waves it around, acting more malicious than real human beings ever do. He pushes it in someone's face for 90 minutes, shouting questions. The hallmark of any conclusion will be the comforting sound of police sirens.

It's a real challenge to make such a tired, hackneyed formula work again; a film has to be very clever and well executed. This one is neither. It has no life and no personality, and it will suck these components from YOU. it will make you feel WORSE about living in the time and space that you do. Really, who needs that!? So yes, I'll say it: I think this may well be the [[worst]] film I have ever seen. Anyone who was involved in the making of this sub- mediocre soul killing trash should be publicly embarrassed for the disservice they've done to us all. Sometimes a movie is so comprehensively [[abhorrent]] it has a [[devastating]] [[implications]] on your [[morality]]. You [[begins]] to [[genuinely]] [[requests]] yourself, what does it [[imply]] for our society that the [[norms]] is so [[extremely]] low? Can they [[genuinely]] expect that we'll endure this many clichés and [[however]] be entertained?

Of [[cours]], it is still a Hollywood mainstay to [[deliver]] the [[GUNPOINT]] the major character, plot [[devices]], and the [[wellspring]] of all conflict and resolution in films. Character needs a gun. Gets a [[firearm]]. Can't do that because he has a gun. Puts his gun down first. OH MY GOD What are we going to do!? He has a gun! He waves it around, acting more malicious than real human beings ever do. He pushes it in someone's face for 90 minutes, shouting questions. The hallmark of any conclusion will be the comforting sound of police sirens.

It's a real challenge to make such a tired, hackneyed formula work again; a film has to be very clever and well executed. This one is neither. It has no life and no personality, and it will suck these components from YOU. it will make you feel WORSE about living in the time and space that you do. Really, who needs that!? So yes, I'll say it: I think this may well be the [[meanest]] film I have ever seen. Anyone who was involved in the making of this sub- mediocre soul killing trash should be publicly embarrassed for the disservice they've done to us all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4364 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Arthur Bach needs to [[grow]] up, but that is unfortunately not the only [[thing]] he [[needs]] to do. According to his [[extremely]] [[rich]] [[father]], Arthur has to [[marry]] a certain wealthy Susan Johnson or he's [[cut]] off from the [[family]] money ($750 [[million]] [[dollars]] worth). The [[problem]] is, Arthur doesn't [[love]] Susan ([[though]] I [[hear]] she makes some good chicken) and has just [[fallen]] head-over-heels for the [[waitress]] and part-time shop-lifter Linda Marolla. [[Arthur]] is an interesting [[fellow]]. He's [[really]] just a [[big]] [[kid]], born into [[riches]] with at least one [[person]] looking after him [[every]] [[second]] of [[every]] day. [[Working]] just rubs Arthur the wrong way - he [[likes]] to have fun, womanize, and of course, drink. Drinking gives Arthur a sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde [[complex]]; and while that gets him into all [[sorts]] of trouble, it's [[absolutely]] hilarious to watch on screen.

Dudley Moore is great here in this film as Arthur, earning an [[Oscar]] [[nomination]] and Golden Globe [[win]] for his performance. Moore is [[fantastic]] with the comedic aspects of the [[film]], turning the already [[funny]] lines into unforgettable comedic gold, but he is [[also]] [[great]] in [[bringing]] Arthur down to a relatable [[level]] and making the [[character]] likable. Moore has some help in the co-star department - Liza Minnelli is [[great]] as Lina, the [[spirited]] nobody who [[Arthur]] can't get [[enough]] of, and [[John]] Gielgud is [[terrific]] as Arthur's butler Hobson. Gielgud won the Best Supporting [[Actor]] [[Oscar]] for his performance in this [[film]], and there's no [[doubting]] why. Hobson has a stone-solid dry wit and [[stuck]] up [[attitude]], but he's [[always]] [[looking]] out for Arthur - and Gielgud is perfect in the role. Steve Gordon's 1981 film Arthur is short and simple, but [[delivers]] laughs a-plenty. Arthur Bach needs to [[risen]] up, but that is unfortunately not the only [[stuff]] he [[needed]] to do. According to his [[hugely]] [[wealthy]] [[pere]], Arthur has to [[married]] a certain wealthy Susan Johnson or he's [[sliced]] off from the [[families]] money ($750 [[trillion]] [[dollar]] worth). The [[troubles]] is, Arthur doesn't [[likes]] Susan ([[while]] I [[heard]] she makes some good chicken) and has just [[shrank]] head-over-heels for the [[barmaid]] and part-time shop-lifter Linda Marolla. [[Arturo]] is an interesting [[colleagues]]. He's [[genuinely]] just a [[major]] [[kids]], born into [[treasures]] with at least one [[somebody]] looking after him [[any]] [[seconds]] of [[any]] day. [[Collaborating]] just rubs Arthur the wrong way - he [[fond]] to have fun, womanize, and of course, drink. Drinking gives Arthur a sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde [[tricky]]; and while that gets him into all [[sort]] of trouble, it's [[utterly]] hilarious to watch on screen.

Dudley Moore is great here in this film as Arthur, earning an [[Oskar]] [[appointing]] and Golden Globe [[triumph]] for his performance. Moore is [[gorgeous]] with the comedic aspects of the [[cinema]], turning the already [[amusing]] lines into unforgettable comedic gold, but he is [[moreover]] [[fantastic]] in [[bring]] Arthur down to a relatable [[grades]] and making the [[trait]] likable. Moore has some help in the co-star department - Liza Minnelli is [[gorgeous]] as Lina, the [[vibrant]] nobody who [[Arturo]] can't get [[sufficient]] of, and [[Giovanni]] Gielgud is [[super]] as Arthur's butler Hobson. Gielgud won the Best Supporting [[Actress]] [[Oskar]] for his performance in this [[cinematography]], and there's no [[interrogating]] why. Hobson has a stone-solid dry wit and [[jammed]] up [[attitudes]], but he's [[invariably]] [[researching]] out for Arthur - and Gielgud is perfect in the role. Steve Gordon's 1981 film Arthur is short and simple, but [[offerings]] laughs a-plenty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the funniest series ever! I laughed till my sides split and rolled around on the floor. If only someone would release in America. Region 0 or 1 - Non-PAL please.

I know it being released in the UK but that's Region 2 and PAL besides! Let's give this series its fair shake. America must know this series. Moffat is a genius. I loved Tracie Bennett's quirky, goofy role in this. Of course I liked Fiona Gillies! But Tracie was a treasure!

Release this show in America! or Show it again on the PBS stations. I need to laugh and laugh again! Please indulge us, please! Please!

Thanks for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 4366 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I caught this at a screening at the Sundance Film Festival and was in Awe over the absolute power this film has. It is an examination of the psychological effects on our brave soldiers who join the military with hopes that they will protect and serve our country with honor as well as be taken care of by our government for it. The film details the psychological changes that takes place in boot camp as the soldiers are turned into "killers for their country" and put into the war and the after effects once they return home. It also portrays the effect that killing has on the human psyche. It pays homage to the Soldiers and never ever criticizes the soldiers unlike other films, instead criticizes a system that is not prepared to and does not take care of all the physical and psychological needs of the returned Vets.

This film is powerful, moving, emotional and thought provoking. It stands as a call to arms to support our troops not only by buying stickers and going to parades but by actually listening to them, and helping to support a change in the way their health and well being is taken care of after the killing ends.

The best film of the Festival so far, ****/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 4367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is [[superb]] - the acting wonderful, sets, clothes, music - but most of all the story itself.

I am amazed there aren't more reviews of this movie - certainly one of the [[best]] of the 1980s.

It's [[also]] a [[wonderful]] movie to see in [[tandem]] with the great "Random [[Harvest]]" which has much the same opening crisis

-- a middle aged, [[unknown]] English W.W.I officer is in a [[hospital]] toward the [[close]] of the [[war]], suffering from shell [[shock]] and [[complete]] amnesia without any [[idea]] of his [[name]], [[origin]], or [[anywhere]] he [[belongs]] - he [[proves]] to be a very [[wealthy]] [[established]] [[man]] - when he "[[recovers]]", he will not [[remember]] the [[years]] before the [[war]] --

But there the movies' resemblances end.

My [[warmest]] thanks to all who participated in the movie - particularly the [[actors]] [[Ian]] Holm, Alan Bates, Ann Margret (what a [[great]] and [[surprising]] casting choice), Glenda Jackson, Julie Christie.

This one stays with you forever. This is [[magnifique]] - the acting wonderful, sets, clothes, music - but most of all the story itself.

I am amazed there aren't more reviews of this movie - certainly one of the [[finest]] of the 1980s.

It's [[further]] a [[wondrous]] movie to see in [[conjunction]] with the great "Random [[Harvesting]]" which has much the same opening crisis

-- a middle aged, [[unexplored]] English W.W.I officer is in a [[hospitals]] toward the [[nearing]] of the [[wars]], suffering from shell [[shocks]] and [[finish]] amnesia without any [[notions]] of his [[names]], [[sources]], or [[somewhere]] he [[belong]] - he [[testify]] to be a very [[prosperous]] [[formulated]] [[males]] - when he "[[recovered]]", he will not [[remembering]] the [[olds]] before the [[wars]] --

But there the movies' resemblances end.

My [[sincerest]] thanks to all who participated in the movie - particularly the [[actresses]] [[Iain]] Holm, Alan Bates, Ann Margret (what a [[wondrous]] and [[unbelievable]] casting choice), Glenda Jackson, Julie Christie.

This one stays with you forever. --------------------------------------------- Result 4368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] this movie begins with an ordinary [[funeral]]... and it [[insists]] so [[hard]] on this [[ordinary]] funeral feel that i lost interest within 5 minutes of watching, and started skipping scenes. it seems to me whomever [[made]] this movie is [[afflicted]] to the [[extent]] of becoming [[trapped]] in a [[permanent]] morbid trance, unable to contemplate [[anything]] [[else]] but [[death]] and destruction. well, i ain't one of the [[dark]] [[kids]] from Southpark, i [[want]] a [[movie]] that within 10 [[minutes]] [[gets]] me well into an interesting story, i won't sit and watch 10 [[minutes]] of [[nothing]] but [[preparations]] for a funeral.. my grandma on her [[last]] years was [[fascinated]] by [[funerals]], perhaps she might have [[enjoyed]] this "[[movie]]". this movie begins with an ordinary [[burial]]... and it [[stresses]] so [[laborious]] on this [[everyday]] funeral feel that i lost interest within 5 minutes of watching, and started skipping scenes. it seems to me whomever [[introduced]] this movie is [[affected]] to the [[magnitude]] of becoming [[ambushed]] in a [[lasting]] morbid trance, unable to contemplate [[nothing]] [[otherwise]] but [[mortality]] and destruction. well, i ain't one of the [[somber]] [[brats]] from Southpark, i [[wanted]] a [[filmmaking]] that within 10 [[mins]] [[got]] me well into an interesting story, i won't sit and watch 10 [[mins]] of [[nada]] but [[preparatory]] for a funeral.. my grandma on her [[latter]] years was [[riveted]] by [[crematorium]], perhaps she might have [[adored]] this "[[filmmaking]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 4369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A struggling actor finds the best way to break into Hollywood is to start knocking off the competition. But what makes Break a Leg a real gem is the sardonic look into the existence of the struggling (and not so) LA actor. It brings us into that world with effortless irony and wit. It's also got a polished look and very adept direction under Monika Mitchell. Break a Leg is one of those rare independent films that doesn't compromise its production values at any level. The writing is tight, the dialogue first rate. Cassini is an actor's actor, and the role really shows off his talents. The climactic scene between him and Rene Garcia is an instant classic, and may go down as one of the funniest Hollywood scenes of all time. I saw it at an advanced screening, and everyone in the audience laughed uncontrollably and raved about it afterwards. --------------------------------------------- Result 4370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Rather [[foolish]] attempt at a Hitchcock-type mystery-thriller, improbably exchanging espionage for archaeology and based on the Robin Cook novel; incidentally, I’ve recently acquired another adaptation of his work – COMA (1978) – in honor of the late Richard Widmark. For the record, director Schaffner had just made THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL (1978) – a similarly fanciful but much more engrossing suspenser and, unfortunately, SPHINX was a false step from which his so-far impressive career would not recover.

Despite its scope and reasonably decent cast, however, this one proved a critical and commercial flop – mainly because the narrative just isn’t very thrilling: in fact, it’s quite [[dreary]] (feeble attempts at horror – the archaeologist heroine having to put up with entombment, rotting corpses galore, and even an attack by a flurry of bats – notwithstanding). Lesley Anne-Down is the lovely leading lady, stumbling upon a lost treasure – it’s actually been hidden away by a local sect to prevent it from falling into the hands of foreigners, who have appropriated much of the country’s heritage (under the pretext of culture) for far too long. Sir John Gielgud turns up in a thankless bit early on as the antique dealer who puts Down on the way of the loot, and pays for this ‘act of treason’ with his life.

Typically, it transpires that some characters are the opposite of what they claim to be – so that apparent allies (such as Maurice Ronet) are eventually exposed as villains, while an ambiguous figure (Frank Langella, whom I saw at London in early 2007 in a West End performance of “Frost/Nixon”, which has now been turned into a film) goes from Down’s antagonist to her lover and back again, as he determines to keep the wealth belonging to Egyptian high priest Menephta a national treasure. Rather [[mindless]] attempt at a Hitchcock-type mystery-thriller, improbably exchanging espionage for archaeology and based on the Robin Cook novel; incidentally, I’ve recently acquired another adaptation of his work – COMA (1978) – in honor of the late Richard Widmark. For the record, director Schaffner had just made THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL (1978) – a similarly fanciful but much more engrossing suspenser and, unfortunately, SPHINX was a false step from which his so-far impressive career would not recover.

Despite its scope and reasonably decent cast, however, this one proved a critical and commercial flop – mainly because the narrative just isn’t very thrilling: in fact, it’s quite [[dismal]] (feeble attempts at horror – the archaeologist heroine having to put up with entombment, rotting corpses galore, and even an attack by a flurry of bats – notwithstanding). Lesley Anne-Down is the lovely leading lady, stumbling upon a lost treasure – it’s actually been hidden away by a local sect to prevent it from falling into the hands of foreigners, who have appropriated much of the country’s heritage (under the pretext of culture) for far too long. Sir John Gielgud turns up in a thankless bit early on as the antique dealer who puts Down on the way of the loot, and pays for this ‘act of treason’ with his life.

Typically, it transpires that some characters are the opposite of what they claim to be – so that apparent allies (such as Maurice Ronet) are eventually exposed as villains, while an ambiguous figure (Frank Langella, whom I saw at London in early 2007 in a West End performance of “Frost/Nixon”, which has now been turned into a film) goes from Down’s antagonist to her lover and back again, as he determines to keep the wealth belonging to Egyptian high priest Menephta a national treasure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] As anyone [[old]] enough knows, [[South]] Africa [[long]] [[suffered]] under the [[vile]], racist [[oppression]] of [[apartheid]], which [[completely]] subjugated the [[black]] population. One of the most famous anti-apartheid [[activists]] was [[Steve]] Biko, who was [[murdered]] in [[jail]]. Following the [[murder]], reporter Donald [[Woods]] sought to get Biko's message out to the [[world]].

[[In]] "[[Cry]] Freedom", [[Woods]] (Kevin [[Kline]]) befriends Biko ([[Denzel]] Washington) before the latter is [[arrested]] on trumped up [[charges]]. When [[Woods]] [[attempts]] to [[spread]] Biko's word, he and his [[family]] [[begin]] [[living]] under threat of [[attack]], and they are [[finally]] [[forced]] to flee the country. The last scene gut-wrenchingly [[shows]] [[police]] firing on protesters.

As one of two movies (along with "A [[World]] [[Apart]]") that helped galvanize the anti-apartheid [[movement]], "[[Cry]] Freedom" [[stands]] out as [[possibly]] the [[best]] ever [[work]] for all [[involved]]. As anyone [[archaic]] enough knows, [[Southern]] Africa [[longer]] [[endured]] under the [[outrageous]], racist [[repression]] of [[segregation]], which [[downright]] subjugated the [[nigger]] population. One of the most famous anti-apartheid [[activist]] was [[Steven]] Biko, who was [[slain]] in [[imprisonment]]. Following the [[killings]], reporter Donald [[Forest]] sought to get Biko's message out to the [[worldwide]].

[[Among]] "[[Clamour]] Freedom", [[Lumbering]] (Kevin [[Klein]]) befriends Biko ([[Denzil]] Washington) before the latter is [[apprehended]] on trumped up [[royalty]]. When [[Forest]] [[attempted]] to [[propagation]] Biko's word, he and his [[families]] [[launched]] [[residing]] under threat of [[attacks]], and they are [[eventually]] [[obligated]] to flee the country. The last scene gut-wrenchingly [[demonstrating]] [[cops]] firing on protesters.

As one of two movies (along with "A [[Worldwide]] [[Regardless]]") that helped galvanize the anti-apartheid [[movements]], "[[Weeping]] Freedom" [[standing]] out as [[potentially]] the [[better]] ever [[jobs]] for all [[engaged]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Even]] for the cocaine laced 1980's this is a [[pathetic]]. I don't understand why someone would [[want]] to waste celluloid, [[time]], [[effort]], [[money]], and audience brain [[cells]] to make such [[drivel]]. [[If]] your going to make a [[comedy]], make it [[funny]]. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[film]] trash like this [[keep]] it to yourself. If you're going to release it as a [[joke]] [[like]] this: DON'T!!! I mean, it was a [[joke]] right? [[Someone]] please tell me this was a joke. [[please]]. [[Yet]] for the cocaine laced 1980's this is a [[unfortunate]]. I don't understand why someone would [[wanted]] to waste celluloid, [[period]], [[endeavors]], [[moneys]], and audience brain [[cell]] to make such [[whim]]. [[Unless]] your going to make a [[charade]], make it [[hilarious]]. [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[movies]] trash like this [[retaining]] it to yourself. If you're going to release it as a [[travesty]] [[iike]] this: DON'T!!! I mean, it was a [[farce]] right? [[Everyone]] please tell me this was a joke. [[invites]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] More wide-eyed, hysterical 50s hyper-cheerfulness that gives new meaning to anti-social, pathological behaviour. Danza and Grayson will leave you begging for mercy.

It's a shame that all the people involved in the making of this movie are now dead (or in nursing homes). I kinda thought about suing them for torture. As this movie [[started]] [[unleashing]] its shamelessly aggressive operatic assault [[onto]] my [[poor]], defenseless ear-drums, I [[felt]] [[instant]], strong [[pain]] envelop my [[entire]] being. That [[damn]] muscular vibrato can shatter Soviet [[tanks]] into [[tiny]] bits, nevermind glass.

"Why didn't you [[switch]] the [[channel]] if you didn't like it?", you [[might]] [[ask]] angrily. Fair point, fair point... The [[answer]] is that I wanted to, but the pain was so sudden and excruciating that I [[fell]] to the floor, writhing in [[agony]]. With my [[last]] ounces of energy, I tried to [[reach]] the [[remote]] but couldn't.

A silly little fisherman with the [[questionable]] talent of singing with an [[annoying]] [[opera]] [[voice]] is [[discovered]] by Niven, who then proceeds to "pigmalionize" him. [[Lanza]] is in [[love]] with [[asymmetrical]] Grayson, but she predictably treats him with [[contempt]] until they [[finally]] [[hook]] up. This may [[seem]] like a rather thin plot, but this [[noisy]] [[movie]] is so chock-full of singing and [[music]] that there is [[barely]] any [[dialogue]] at all. This movie is RELENTLESS. [[Forget]] about torturing hippies and [[war]] prisoners with Slayer's "Reign In Blood" (as in a South Park episode). Whatever little [[conversation]] there is amongst the [[silly]] [[adults]] that infest this strange 50s musical world, it's all [[infantile]] - as if they were all 6 year-olds impersonating grown-ups. I can only envy people who find movies [[like]] this funny. It must be great being easy-to-please: what a world of wonder [[would]] open up to me if only I could [[enjoy]] any silly [[old]] gag as hilarious, gut-busting comedy.

But let's [[examine]] this phenomenon, the 50s musical. My best [[guess]] is that 50s musicals [[offered]] the more day-dreaming idealists [[among]] us a glimpse into Utopia or [[Heaven]] ([[depending]] on whether you're church-going or Lenin's-tomb-going), or at least very cheesy version of these fantasy-inspired places. TTONO is more akin to a representation of Hell, but that's just me. I don't seem to "get" musicals. People talk, there is a story - but then all-of-a-sudden everyone starts singing for about 4 minutes after which they abruptly calm down and then pretend as if nothing unusual happened! When you think about it, musicals are stranger than any science-fiction film.

Worse yet, TTONO (my favourite type of pizza, btw) is not just a 50s musical, but one with opera squealing. Opera is proof that there is such a thing as over-training a voice - to the point where it becomes an ear-piercing weapon rather than a means of bringing the listener pleasure. The clearest example of this travesty is when Lanza and Grayson unite their Dark Side vocal powers for a truly unbearable duet. I tried lowering the volume. I lowered it from 18 to 14. Then from 14 to 10. Then 8. I ended up lowering it to a 1, which is usually so low that it's only heard by specially-trained dogs and certain types of marsupials, and yet I STILL could hear those two braying like donkeys!

Take the scene in the small boat in the river. Danza starts off with one of his deafening, brain-killing tunes, and then... nothing. No animals anywhere to be seen. Even the crocodiles, who are mostly deaf, have all but left. If you look carefully, you might even see the trees change colour, from green to yellow, in a matter of minutes. No, this was not a continuity error, it was plain old torture of the flora. And those trees were just matte paintings! Imagine how real trees would have reacted.

The reason glass breaks when a high C is belched out of the overweight belly of an operatic screamer is not due to any laws of physics relating to waves and frequency, but because glass is only human - hence can take only so much pain before committing suicide through spontaneous self-explosion. I can listen to the loudest, least friendly death metal band for hours, but give me just a minute of a soprano and I get a splitting headache. More wide-eyed, hysterical 50s hyper-cheerfulness that gives new meaning to anti-social, pathological behaviour. Danza and Grayson will leave you begging for mercy.

It's a shame that all the people involved in the making of this movie are now dead (or in nursing homes). I kinda thought about suing them for torture. As this movie [[opened]] [[triggering]] its shamelessly aggressive operatic assault [[during]] my [[deficient]], defenseless ear-drums, I [[believed]] [[instantaneous]], strong [[heartache]] envelop my [[total]] being. That [[goddamn]] muscular vibrato can shatter Soviet [[reservoirs]] into [[little]] bits, nevermind glass.

"Why didn't you [[switching]] the [[channels]] if you didn't like it?", you [[probability]] [[asks]] angrily. Fair point, fair point... The [[replies]] is that I wanted to, but the pain was so sudden and excruciating that I [[slipped]] to the floor, writhing in [[grief]]. With my [[latter]] ounces of energy, I tried to [[attain]] the [[distant]] but couldn't.

A silly little fisherman with the [[shady]] talent of singing with an [[irritating]] [[dramas]] [[voices]] is [[uncovered]] by Niven, who then proceeds to "pigmalionize" him. [[Spear]] is in [[likes]] with [[skewed]] Grayson, but she predictably treats him with [[defiance]] until they [[lastly]] [[hooks]] up. This may [[looks]] like a rather thin plot, but this [[loud]] [[filmmaking]] is so chock-full of singing and [[musica]] that there is [[hardly]] any [[dialogues]] at all. This movie is RELENTLESS. [[Overlook]] about torturing hippies and [[warfare]] prisoners with Slayer's "Reign In Blood" (as in a South Park episode). Whatever little [[speaks]] there is amongst the [[dumb]] [[adult]] that infest this strange 50s musical world, it's all [[childhood]] - as if they were all 6 year-olds impersonating grown-ups. I can only envy people who find movies [[iike]] this funny. It must be great being easy-to-please: what a world of wonder [[could]] open up to me if only I could [[enjoying]] any silly [[longtime]] gag as hilarious, gut-busting comedy.

But let's [[explores]] this phenomenon, the 50s musical. My best [[imagines]] is that 50s musicals [[offers]] the more day-dreaming idealists [[in]] us a glimpse into Utopia or [[Paradise]] ([[according]] on whether you're church-going or Lenin's-tomb-going), or at least very cheesy version of these fantasy-inspired places. TTONO is more akin to a representation of Hell, but that's just me. I don't seem to "get" musicals. People talk, there is a story - but then all-of-a-sudden everyone starts singing for about 4 minutes after which they abruptly calm down and then pretend as if nothing unusual happened! When you think about it, musicals are stranger than any science-fiction film.

Worse yet, TTONO (my favourite type of pizza, btw) is not just a 50s musical, but one with opera squealing. Opera is proof that there is such a thing as over-training a voice - to the point where it becomes an ear-piercing weapon rather than a means of bringing the listener pleasure. The clearest example of this travesty is when Lanza and Grayson unite their Dark Side vocal powers for a truly unbearable duet. I tried lowering the volume. I lowered it from 18 to 14. Then from 14 to 10. Then 8. I ended up lowering it to a 1, which is usually so low that it's only heard by specially-trained dogs and certain types of marsupials, and yet I STILL could hear those two braying like donkeys!

Take the scene in the small boat in the river. Danza starts off with one of his deafening, brain-killing tunes, and then... nothing. No animals anywhere to be seen. Even the crocodiles, who are mostly deaf, have all but left. If you look carefully, you might even see the trees change colour, from green to yellow, in a matter of minutes. No, this was not a continuity error, it was plain old torture of the flora. And those trees were just matte paintings! Imagine how real trees would have reacted.

The reason glass breaks when a high C is belched out of the overweight belly of an operatic screamer is not due to any laws of physics relating to waves and frequency, but because glass is only human - hence can take only so much pain before committing suicide through spontaneous self-explosion. I can listen to the loudest, least friendly death metal band for hours, but give me just a minute of a soprano and I get a splitting headache. --------------------------------------------- Result 4374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] But I doubt many were running to see this movie. Or "Some Came Running Out Of The Cinema". Okay, that's a bit harsh.

The film [[starts]] in an [[unintentionally]] [[comical]] way: Frankie-boy comes back to his hometown after many years (this already smells of clichés) and the whole [[town]] is shaken by his arrival: he is talked about, everyone wants to talk to him, and every woman he meets flirts with him like there's no tomorrow - even his niece hints that she would gladly have dropped her date to chat with Frankie-boy a little longer! Even his pretty niece wants a piece of him! Sounds like one of those laughable "Mike Hammer" episodes where EVERY single female wants Stacey Keach. And, like Stacey Keach, Frankie-boy is anything but a good-looking woman's wet dream. In real life, someone like Sinatra (without the fame) wouldn't get within 100 m of someone as beautiful as MacLaine. But in this Hollywood movie it's the other way around: MacLaine is absolutely nuts about Frankie-boy, but HE couldn't care less! Sinatra plays his "cool" shtick much too often in his movies, and it is rarely [[credible]]. Dean Martin is kind of miscast; he isn't miscast as a card-player, but rather because of the accent which simply doesn't suit him. MacLaine is charming as ever, but she plays a caricature - and this reliance on caricatures is one of the basic [[problems]] with the film. The main characters are all some sort of stereotypes out of bad or seen-it-all-before movies and cheap novels; Frankie is the "cool cat" who comes back to town to get all the women, and he couldn't care less about his writing (which, predictably, eventually garners recognition); Martin is a sleazy but friendly card-player; MacLaine is the dumb, but very likable bimbo; Frankie's blond love-interest is a snotty literary expert; Frankie's brother is the successful guy who married into his wife's business and has a lousy marriage; and so on. Clichés.

The story contains a couple of coincidences which are a little too far-fetched for my taste: Frankie just happens to bump into his niece in a locale; his niece just happens to be meters away from her daddy when the latter kisses his secretary for the FIRST time; and then there is the awful, stupid ending.

In it, a drunk guy bent on killing Frankie-boy somehow manages to find him in a carnival of all places! The place is utterly crowded, with the typical noise and chaos - plus it's happening in the evening - and yet the guy somehow finds Frankie (in spite of being drunk as a doorknob) and shoots at him. But guess who he kills? MacLaine. She jumps in front of the bullet to save Frankie: a cliché which comic-book writers might cringe at. This utterly pathetic, over-dramatic, and annoying ending certainly cannot please any, even semi-intelligent, viewer. And this happens on the same day that MacLaine and Sinatra got married! The writer of this nonsense seems to have read crappy dime novels his whole life - how else is the writing of this movie to be explained? There is even a card game in which a brawl ensues with Frankie & Martin vs. some cliché caricatures out of the writer's "vivid" imagination. (It was like a damn Western suddenly.) Another dumb thing is the way Sinatra was crazy about the boring snotty-nosed bimbo and pretty much ignored MacLaine. As the movie progresses we find out that Sinatra finds MacLaine to be too dumb for him, just as the blond bimbo finds Sinatra to be too low-class for her. There is a certain snobbism and disdain to be detected in the script regarding MacLaine. MacLaine is treated as worthless by everyone, while the blond bimbo is treated as a princess and an intellectual; the ironic truth is that the latter's character comes off as rather dumb and not at all as intellectual; her behaviour, comments, and opinions are mostly clichéd, silly, confused, pretentious, and primitive. At least MacLaine's character KNOWS that she (MacLaine) is dumb. There is another irony that I didn't fail to notice: Sinatra had trouble finding an ending for his latest story - much like the writer of this movie, and that's why he came up with the corny, crappy finale.

The film basically has a solid cast, and the photography is nice, but the script, though sometimes okay, relies to heavily on silly nonsense instead of on reality-based characters and events.

If you're interested in reading my "biographies" of Shirley MacLaine and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail. But I doubt many were running to see this movie. Or "Some Came Running Out Of The Cinema". Okay, that's a bit harsh.

The film [[launched]] in an [[unknowingly]] [[droll]] way: Frankie-boy comes back to his hometown after many years (this already smells of clichés) and the whole [[towns]] is shaken by his arrival: he is talked about, everyone wants to talk to him, and every woman he meets flirts with him like there's no tomorrow - even his niece hints that she would gladly have dropped her date to chat with Frankie-boy a little longer! Even his pretty niece wants a piece of him! Sounds like one of those laughable "Mike Hammer" episodes where EVERY single female wants Stacey Keach. And, like Stacey Keach, Frankie-boy is anything but a good-looking woman's wet dream. In real life, someone like Sinatra (without the fame) wouldn't get within 100 m of someone as beautiful as MacLaine. But in this Hollywood movie it's the other way around: MacLaine is absolutely nuts about Frankie-boy, but HE couldn't care less! Sinatra plays his "cool" shtick much too often in his movies, and it is rarely [[believable]]. Dean Martin is kind of miscast; he isn't miscast as a card-player, but rather because of the accent which simply doesn't suit him. MacLaine is charming as ever, but she plays a caricature - and this reliance on caricatures is one of the basic [[hassles]] with the film. The main characters are all some sort of stereotypes out of bad or seen-it-all-before movies and cheap novels; Frankie is the "cool cat" who comes back to town to get all the women, and he couldn't care less about his writing (which, predictably, eventually garners recognition); Martin is a sleazy but friendly card-player; MacLaine is the dumb, but very likable bimbo; Frankie's blond love-interest is a snotty literary expert; Frankie's brother is the successful guy who married into his wife's business and has a lousy marriage; and so on. Clichés.

The story contains a couple of coincidences which are a little too far-fetched for my taste: Frankie just happens to bump into his niece in a locale; his niece just happens to be meters away from her daddy when the latter kisses his secretary for the FIRST time; and then there is the awful, stupid ending.

In it, a drunk guy bent on killing Frankie-boy somehow manages to find him in a carnival of all places! The place is utterly crowded, with the typical noise and chaos - plus it's happening in the evening - and yet the guy somehow finds Frankie (in spite of being drunk as a doorknob) and shoots at him. But guess who he kills? MacLaine. She jumps in front of the bullet to save Frankie: a cliché which comic-book writers might cringe at. This utterly pathetic, over-dramatic, and annoying ending certainly cannot please any, even semi-intelligent, viewer. And this happens on the same day that MacLaine and Sinatra got married! The writer of this nonsense seems to have read crappy dime novels his whole life - how else is the writing of this movie to be explained? There is even a card game in which a brawl ensues with Frankie & Martin vs. some cliché caricatures out of the writer's "vivid" imagination. (It was like a damn Western suddenly.) Another dumb thing is the way Sinatra was crazy about the boring snotty-nosed bimbo and pretty much ignored MacLaine. As the movie progresses we find out that Sinatra finds MacLaine to be too dumb for him, just as the blond bimbo finds Sinatra to be too low-class for her. There is a certain snobbism and disdain to be detected in the script regarding MacLaine. MacLaine is treated as worthless by everyone, while the blond bimbo is treated as a princess and an intellectual; the ironic truth is that the latter's character comes off as rather dumb and not at all as intellectual; her behaviour, comments, and opinions are mostly clichéd, silly, confused, pretentious, and primitive. At least MacLaine's character KNOWS that she (MacLaine) is dumb. There is another irony that I didn't fail to notice: Sinatra had trouble finding an ending for his latest story - much like the writer of this movie, and that's why he came up with the corny, crappy finale.

The film basically has a solid cast, and the photography is nice, but the script, though sometimes okay, relies to heavily on silly nonsense instead of on reality-based characters and events.

If you're interested in reading my "biographies" of Shirley MacLaine and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail. --------------------------------------------- Result 4375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bad plot (though good for a B-movie), good fast-paced fight scenes, at most a 5 out of 10. But something has always bothered me about this film: how come Mariska Hargitay never speaks? In the TV version, she shares several intimate moments with Jeff Speakman, even a kiss in a garden. Yet in the regular (video) version, most of her scenes are cut and she never speaks at all. This bothers me because it not only takes out a female (though cliched) point-of-view to the film, it also makes the final shot seem creepy. This film would have been better had they kept her scenes in, because in those scenes at least she has a personality, one that undercuts whatever Speakman says. --------------------------------------------- Result 4376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Slow and riddled with inaccuracy. Over-looking its flaws this is still an interesting account of the famed and heroic siege of the Alamo during the Texas fight for independence from Mexico. James Arness as Jim Bowie. Brian Keith as Davy Crockett. Alec Baldwin as Col. Travis. Raul Julia as General Santa Anna. This made-for-TV project also stars David Ogden Stiers, Kathleen York and Jim Metzler. Very good original music by Peter Bernstein. --------------------------------------------- Result 4377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] *MANY [[MANY]] SPOILERS [[IN]] THIS REVIEW* This movie was horrible. I am a huge baseball fan so I [[thought]] I'd watch it, and I was very [[disappointed]]. It [[started]] out okay.. When I saw the bad influence DeNiro had on his young son, I was hoping that he would become a better father throughout the movie or something. Anyways, at the beginning it seemed as if DeNiro was supposed to be the protagonist. He was the only one that believed in Bobby, and he had his adorable son that he was losing custody of, which gave me a reason to feel [[bad]] for him. He wanted to help Bobby by talking to Primo, when out of absolutely nowhere he brutally stabs Primo to death... Not to mention that [[sketchy]] reoccurring song "I WANT TO **** YOU!!!!" at random unfitting moments.

Later, when DeNiro saves Bobby's son from drowning, I was hoping that the movie could redeem itself.. He could forgive himself for killing Primo if he saved Bobby's son. But of course this is far beyond the depth of the movie, because all he cares about is getting CREDIT for the murder, and does so by stealing Bobby's son, car, and dog and holding them hostage- Bobby just has to hit a home run and announce that DeNiro is a "true fan" while displaying a picture of him biting a knife.

Now we get to the completely [[unrealistic]] scene at the end... It is pouring like hell and we are expected to believe that the game hasn't been called. Then DeNiro somehow magically appears on the field in an umpire suit and calls Bobby out at home, proceeding to pull out his knife and start stabbing everyone that runs onto the field. There are seemingly no officers on the field (but the police are on their way), so DeNiro steps on the mound and prepares to pitch a knife to Bobby when he gets shot to death. But don't worry, this cheerful and pleasant movie has a happy ending, because [[Bobby]] [[find]] his [[son]].

This is NOT a sports [[movie]]. It is NOT about a [[fan]]. As far as I [[know]], [[fans]] are not [[rabid]] psychopaths that [[threaten]], [[rob]], and throw [[knives]] at their admirees. This is [[likely]] to be the sickest [[movie]] I will ever see in my life. The plot was shallow, the soundtrack sucked, the movie had no purpose whatsoever. I warn you not to waste your time on this disgusting excuse for a film. *MANY [[SEVERAL]] SPOILERS [[DURING]] THIS REVIEW* This movie was horrible. I am a huge baseball fan so I [[think]] I'd watch it, and I was very [[frustrated]]. It [[startup]] out okay.. When I saw the bad influence DeNiro had on his young son, I was hoping that he would become a better father throughout the movie or something. Anyways, at the beginning it seemed as if DeNiro was supposed to be the protagonist. He was the only one that believed in Bobby, and he had his adorable son that he was losing custody of, which gave me a reason to feel [[unfavourable]] for him. He wanted to help Bobby by talking to Primo, when out of absolutely nowhere he brutally stabs Primo to death... Not to mention that [[incomplete]] reoccurring song "I WANT TO **** YOU!!!!" at random unfitting moments.

Later, when DeNiro saves Bobby's son from drowning, I was hoping that the movie could redeem itself.. He could forgive himself for killing Primo if he saved Bobby's son. But of course this is far beyond the depth of the movie, because all he cares about is getting CREDIT for the murder, and does so by stealing Bobby's son, car, and dog and holding them hostage- Bobby just has to hit a home run and announce that DeNiro is a "true fan" while displaying a picture of him biting a knife.

Now we get to the completely [[impractical]] scene at the end... It is pouring like hell and we are expected to believe that the game hasn't been called. Then DeNiro somehow magically appears on the field in an umpire suit and calls Bobby out at home, proceeding to pull out his knife and start stabbing everyone that runs onto the field. There are seemingly no officers on the field (but the police are on their way), so DeNiro steps on the mound and prepares to pitch a knife to Bobby when he gets shot to death. But don't worry, this cheerful and pleasant movie has a happy ending, because [[Bubi]] [[unearth]] his [[yarns]].

This is NOT a sports [[flick]]. It is NOT about a [[ventilator]]. As far as I [[savoir]], [[blowers]] are not [[infuriated]] psychopaths that [[jeopardizes]], [[burgle]], and throw [[scalpels]] at their admirees. This is [[apt]] to be the sickest [[cinema]] I will ever see in my life. The plot was shallow, the soundtrack sucked, the movie had no purpose whatsoever. I warn you not to waste your time on this disgusting excuse for a film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[thought]] that this film was very [[enjoyable]]. I watched this film with my [[wife]] BEFORE I had my first [[child]]. Therefore, I was not watching it as [[simply]] family entertainment and I [[still]] [[thoroughly]] enjoyed it. It [[seems]] as [[though]] [[many]] of the [[reviews]] are [[pointing]] out that this [[movie]] is not earth [[shattering]], there were no unexpected plot [[changes]] and that the [[movie]] was predictable and boring. If these people were [[watching]] this [[movie]] [[expecting]] to have a religious experience doing so, then they were [[obviously]] going to be [[disappointed]]. This is [[simply]] an animated movie; nothing more. If you want to [[see]] this movie [[simply]] to sit back and let yourself be entertained, you will not be [[disappointed]]. In [[closing]], this is definitely not the best movie Disney has made, but it IS [[entertaining]] and I do not understand the bad [[reputation]] it has received. I [[brainchild]] that this film was very [[pleasant]]. I watched this film with my [[women]] BEFORE I had my first [[kids]]. Therefore, I was not watching it as [[merely]] family entertainment and I [[yet]] [[carefully]] enjoyed it. It [[seem]] as [[although]] [[various]] of the [[exams]] are [[hinting]] out that this [[films]] is not earth [[exploding]], there were no unexpected plot [[shifts]] and that the [[cinematography]] was predictable and boring. If these people were [[staring]] this [[cinema]] [[expects]] to have a religious experience doing so, then they were [[definitely]] going to be [[frustrated]]. This is [[straightforward]] an animated movie; nothing more. If you want to [[seeing]] this movie [[solely]] to sit back and let yourself be entertained, you will not be [[frustrated]]. In [[closure]], this is definitely not the best movie Disney has made, but it IS [[amusing]] and I do not understand the bad [[fame]] it has received. --------------------------------------------- Result 4379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely putrid slasher film has not one redeeming quality. It has Camp Councellor Angela(Pamela Anderson..awful as the killer;her quips when she wastes people aren't even amusing)on the warpath slaying teenagers who act the least bit naughty or resist her pleadings for good behavior. We run the gamut of boring, clichéd killings such as the slashing to the throat to one kid looking for his Freddy clawed glove, a kid who gets a chainsaw, one girl who gets drilled, one who gets shoved into the crapper(filled with leeches), one who is roasted, etc.

It doesn't have one original idea to offer and is merely a waste of time. That is unless you want to see Valerie Hartmen's(who plays the slut Ally)tits. Most of the violence occurs off-screen so even that will not satisfy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4380 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Just picked up this [[film]] for a buck at National [[Wholesale]] Liquidators, and after watching it, I feel like I [[got]] ripped-off.

I don't [[know]] that I've [[seen]] a worse [[film]] than this. [[Honestly]]. And I would never [[write]] a [[negative]] [[review]] of a [[film]] had I not such [[enormous]] [[respect]] for the subject [[matter]], that is, [[Stephen]] [[Foster]] and his music.

[[First]], what is it? It's a musical biography? [[Yeah]], lot's of [[tunes]] by [[Foster]] then interspersed here and there are these pseudo-Broadway-Jerome Kern-type [[numbers]] that reek more than the Mississippi [[delta]]. I [[mean]], [[somebody]] [[got]] [[PAID]] to [[write]] this [[drivel]]? Secondly, the [[REAL]] [[story]] of [[Foster]] is a fascinating one. Why not even [[come]] [[CLOSE]] to it? Thirdly, what did they have on the [[great]] Ray Middleton to [[get]] him to do this [[film]]? [[Pictures]] of him with [[small]] [[boys]]?? With [[communists]]? What a [[waste]] of a [[great]] [[talent]].

So, [[friends]] of Foster, and the [[truth]], and [[good]] [[entertainment]], be [[afraid]]... be very, very, [[afraid]]. Just picked up this [[filmmaking]] for a buck at National [[Bulk]] Liquidators, and after watching it, I feel like I [[did]] ripped-off.

I don't [[savoir]] that I've [[saw]] a worse [[filmmaking]] than this. [[Sincerely]]. And I would never [[handwriting]] a [[adverse]] [[revisit]] of a [[movie]] had I not such [[whopping]] [[respecting]] for the subject [[question]], that is, [[Stephane]] [[Encourages]] and his music.

[[Firstly]], what is it? It's a musical biography? [[Yes]], lot's of [[songs]] by [[Promoted]] then interspersed here and there are these pseudo-Broadway-Jerome Kern-type [[digit]] that reek more than the Mississippi [[triangle]]. I [[meaning]], [[everyone]] [[gets]] [[PAYS]] to [[writes]] this [[whim]]? Secondly, the [[TRUE]] [[storytelling]] of [[Stimulate]] is a fascinating one. Why not even [[coming]] [[CLOSED]] to it? Thirdly, what did they have on the [[super]] Ray Middleton to [[obtain]] him to do this [[filmmaking]]? [[Images]] of him with [[minor]] [[guys]]?? With [[communism]]? What a [[squander]] of a [[resplendent]] [[talents]].

So, [[freund]] of Foster, and the [[veracity]], and [[alright]] [[entertainments]], be [[fear]]... be very, very, [[fright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] The [[movie]] was "OK". Not [[bad]], not [[good]], just OK. If there was anything [[else]] in the [[theater]] this would be skipped by far. [[Sadly]], Fast and Furious 2 also stunk, but I'd [[rather]] [[see]] this than FF2. :) If you have a fetish for harrison ford or that other [[young]] punk, this will be a "[[cute]]" [[movie]] for you. Personally, I'd wait for HBO or Blockbuster. The [[filmmaking]] was "OK". Not [[negative]], not [[alright]], just OK. If there was anything [[further]] in the [[theaters]] this would be skipped by far. [[Unfortunately]], Fast and Furious 2 also stunk, but I'd [[quite]] [[seeing]] this than FF2. :) If you have a fetish for harrison ford or that other [[youthful]] punk, this will be a "[[lovely]]" [[filmmaking]] for you. Personally, I'd wait for HBO or Blockbuster. --------------------------------------------- Result 4382 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Made only ten years after the actual events, and set in the Bunker under the Reichstag, Pabst's film is wholly gripping. It reeks of sulfurous death awaiting the perpetrators of world war. Haven't seen this in over three decades, but it remains strong in my visual and emotional memory. The characters seem to be waiting to be walled up in their cave. Searing bit of dialog between two Generals: "Does God exist?" "If He did, we wouldn't." Shame this is not more readily available for exhibition or purchase because it would be interesting to view and compare this film with the documentary about Traudl Junge, "Im Toten Winkel" {aka "Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary") and "Downfall" with Bruno Ganz. --------------------------------------------- Result 4383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is essentially a [[variation]] on [[House]] Of Wax ,in both the plot and the type of role played by the star of both [[movies]] ,Vincent [[Price]].[[In]] both [[pictures]] he plays a talented artist who is sent [[toppling]] over the edge into insanity when his creations are usurped by other,less talented and less scrupulous people .[[In]] this [[movie]] he plays a designer of illusions for stage magicians who aspires to set out on a performing [[career]] himself only to be [[frustrated]] when another illusionist ,the [[Great]] [[Rinaldo]] ([[John]] Emery)[[insists]] that he [[honour]] his [[contract]] and [[give]] him first [[choice]] of any illusions he [[designs]].[[Price]] is already ill disposed [[towards]] Rinaldi as his [[former]] [[wife]] is now a paramour of Rinaldi. He deploys his talents as an illusionist and as a [[brilliant]] [[mimic]] to [[avenge]] himself [[upon]] Rinaldi and others who [[thwart]] his [[plans]] for [[recognition]] as a [[performer]] and a designer.

[[Price]] is pretty much the [[whole]] [[show]] here and [[gives]] a well [[judged]] [[star]] [[turn]] as a wronged man whose [[predicament]] [[earns]] audience sympathy.The rest of the [[cast]] are competent if colourless and the [[weight]] of the [[whole]] venture falls on [[Price]] who [[carries]] the burden with ease .

[[Good]] solid B [[Movie]] melodrama , this is a [[crime]] movie [[rather]] than a [[horror]] [[picture]] and is [[enjoyable]] providing you don't [[expect]] a [[masterpiece]] .[[Shot]] in black and white it is low on gore and is [[best]] seen as melodrama and [[enjoyed]] for the presence of its [[star]] giving an [[idiosyncratic]] performance This is essentially a [[variants]] on [[Housing]] Of Wax ,in both the plot and the type of role played by the star of both [[cinematography]] ,Vincent [[Pricing]].[[At]] both [[picture]] he plays a talented artist who is sent [[downing]] over the edge into insanity when his creations are usurped by other,less talented and less scrupulous people .[[Across]] this [[cinematography]] he plays a designer of illusions for stage magicians who aspires to set out on a performing [[quarry]] himself only to be [[disappointed]] when another illusionist ,the [[Super]] [[Manolo]] ([[Giovanni]] Emery)[[stresses]] that he [[honours]] his [[marketplace]] and [[lend]] him first [[selection]] of any illusions he [[design]].[[Costs]] is already ill disposed [[vers]] Rinaldi as his [[antigua]] [[women]] is now a paramour of Rinaldi. He deploys his talents as an illusionist and as a [[shiny]] [[simulate]] to [[revenge]] himself [[after]] Rinaldi and others who [[abort]] his [[plan]] for [[acknowledge]] as a [[artists]] and a designer.

[[Costs]] is pretty much the [[total]] [[showing]] here and [[donne]] a well [[deemed]] [[superstar]] [[transforming]] as a wronged man whose [[plight]] [[gaining]] audience sympathy.The rest of the [[casting]] are competent if colourless and the [[weighed]] of the [[total]] venture falls on [[Prizes]] who [[carrying]] the burden with ease .

[[Alright]] solid B [[Film]] melodrama , this is a [[delinquency]] movie [[fairly]] than a [[terror]] [[photo]] and is [[nice]] providing you don't [[awaited]] a [[centerpiece]] .[[Offed]] in black and white it is low on gore and is [[better]] seen as melodrama and [[liked]] for the presence of its [[superstar]] giving an [[symptomatic]] performance --------------------------------------------- Result 4384 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a great movie that had a lot of under lying issues. It dealt with issues of rascism and class. But, it also had a message of knowing yourself and taking responsibility for yourself. This movie was very deep it gave the message of that you and only you can control your destiny. It also showed that knowing yourself and being comfortable with who you are is the only way you will ever fit into society. What others think of you is not important. I believe this movie did a wonderful job of showing it. The actors I think were able to convey each character wonderfully. I just thought it was amazing how deep this movie really was. At a just glancing look you wouldn't see how deep the movie is, but on further look you see the underlining meaning of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Arrrrrggghhhhhh, some people take life far too seriously!!! Watch this film for what it is, sit back, relax and have a giggle. The film does not take itself seriously, so neither should we. If you like James Belushi, you will like this film. If he is not your cup of tea - give it a miss.

I like James Belushi, so I liked this film. So simple isn't it?? :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 4386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this film. The noir imagery combined with Spillane's no nonsense character Mike Hammer works marvellously to create a mood and feel seldom found in low budget detective films of the early fifties. It may not be 'The Maltese Falcon' but this film makes it's own solid contribution to the genre. Spillane is often criticised for alleged misogyny etc, but his 'dames' are way above their male counterparts in terms of cunning and intelligence. Poor old Mike Hammer, as effectively played by Biff Elliott, is blinded by the beauty of the mysterious psychiatrist whom he meets when investigating the death of an army buddy. When the penny finally drops his face is a picture. Good to see that 50s censorship did not force the film makers to omit the famous last line. A bona fide low budget classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 4387 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I wasn't sure at [[first]] if I was watching a documentary, propaganda film or dramatic presentation. I guess given the [[time]] of production it was a [[mix]] of all three.

Admittedly the dramatic plot was somewhat [[predictable]]. But you had a sense that there would be some interesting scenes as the movie went on. We were able to witness what appeared to be realistic training regimens and equipment.

[[Where]] this movie came together for me was closer to the end. The scenes had a [[realism]] (at least as I perceived it) that I haven't encountered often before. You could place yourself in the action and imagine the thoughts of the young combatants. This was mixed in with the usual problems of portraying passable Japanese soldiers at a time when you might think real Japanese actors would be somewhat scarce.

The [[movie]] is [[excellent]] as a source of the state of the American [[mindset]] in 1943 as the war waged with Japan. [[Also]] of interest was a [[dig]] at the Japanese with respect to the help the USA [[gave]] Japan in past years. I wasn't sure at [[frst]] if I was watching a documentary, propaganda film or dramatic presentation. I guess given the [[moment]] of production it was a [[mixes]] of all three.

Admittedly the dramatic plot was somewhat [[foreseeable]]. But you had a sense that there would be some interesting scenes as the movie went on. We were able to witness what appeared to be realistic training regimens and equipment.

[[Whenever]] this movie came together for me was closer to the end. The scenes had a [[reality]] (at least as I perceived it) that I haven't encountered often before. You could place yourself in the action and imagine the thoughts of the young combatants. This was mixed in with the usual problems of portraying passable Japanese soldiers at a time when you might think real Japanese actors would be somewhat scarce.

The [[cinematography]] is [[wondrous]] as a source of the state of the American [[mentality]] in 1943 as the war waged with Japan. [[Moreover]] of interest was a [[dug]] at the Japanese with respect to the help the USA [[supplied]] Japan in past years. --------------------------------------------- Result 4388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Oh, Sam Mraovich, we know you tried so hard. This is your magnum opus, a shining example to the rest of us that you are certainly worth nomination into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (as you state on your 1998-era web site). [[Alas]], it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. With Ben & Arthur, you do just that.

Seemingly assembled with a lack of instruction or education, the film's [[screenplay]] guides us toward the truly [[bizarre]] with each new scene. It's this insane excuse of a story that may also be the film's best ally. Beginning tepidly, the homosexually titular characters Ben and Arthur attempt to marry, going so far as to fly across country to do so, in the shade of Vermont's finest palm trees. But, all of this posturing is merely a lead-in for BLOOD. Then more BLOOD, and MORE AND MORE BLOOD. I mean, there must be at least $20 in fake blood make-up in the final third of this film.

The film in its entirety is a technical gaffe. From the sound to the editing to the music, which consists of a single fuzzy bass note being held on a keyboard, it's a wonder that the film even holds together on whatever media you view it on. It's such a shame then that some decent amateur performances are wasted here.

No matter, Sam. I'm sure you've made five figures on this flick in rentals or whatever drives poor souls (such as myself) to view this film. Sadly, we're not laughing with you. Oh, Sam Mraovich, we know you tried so hard. This is your magnum opus, a shining example to the rest of us that you are certainly worth nomination into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (as you state on your 1998-era web site). [[Unluckily]], it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. With Ben & Arthur, you do just that.

Seemingly assembled with a lack of instruction or education, the film's [[scenario]] guides us toward the truly [[surreal]] with each new scene. It's this insane excuse of a story that may also be the film's best ally. Beginning tepidly, the homosexually titular characters Ben and Arthur attempt to marry, going so far as to fly across country to do so, in the shade of Vermont's finest palm trees. But, all of this posturing is merely a lead-in for BLOOD. Then more BLOOD, and MORE AND MORE BLOOD. I mean, there must be at least $20 in fake blood make-up in the final third of this film.

The film in its entirety is a technical gaffe. From the sound to the editing to the music, which consists of a single fuzzy bass note being held on a keyboard, it's a wonder that the film even holds together on whatever media you view it on. It's such a shame then that some decent amateur performances are wasted here.

No matter, Sam. I'm sure you've made five figures on this flick in rentals or whatever drives poor souls (such as myself) to view this film. Sadly, we're not laughing with you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was made in Hungary i think. anyway,the countryside is gorgeous,the people who play the farming folks were totally fascinating. their horsemanship is awesome. I got more into the native people, the farm life, and how heroic they were trying to hide Brady from the evil Nazis who where looking for these parachutists. They even sacrificed their life in several instances. the young orphan lad that Brady befriends was a sweet kid. you will marvel at the riding i think, and the action of trying to evade the Nazis. it is entertaining and comic in some spots and very tragic in others. Ladies have hankies handy, as you will be devastated at the end. i own it, and have watched it several times. in other words, not just a one time around flick. its a keeper.... --------------------------------------------- Result 4390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] The central theme in this [[movie]] seems to be confusion, as the relationships, [[setting]], acting and social [[context]] all lead to the same place: [[confusion]]. Even Harvey Keitel appears to be out of his [[element]], and [[lacks]] his usual impeccable [[clarity]], [[direction]] and intensity. To [[make]] [[matters]] worse, his character's name is 'Che', and we are only [[told]] ([[directly]], by the narrator) well into the [[film]] that he is not 'that' Che, just a [[guy]] named Che. The family relationships remain unclear until the end of the film, and once defined, the family is divided - the younger generation off to [[America]]. [[So]] cliché. Other [[reviews]] [[discuss]] how the [[movie]] [[depicts]] the [[impact]] of the revolution on a boy's family; [[however]] the political [[stance]] of the [[director]] is murky at [[best]], and we are never [[quite]] sure who is responsible for what bloodshed. [[So]] they lost their property ([[acquired]] by [[gambling]] [[profits]]) - so what? Refusing to take a political [[stand]], when [[making]] a [[movie]] about the [[Cuban]] revolution, is an odd and [[cowardly]] [[choice]]. Not to mention the [[movie]] was in [[English]]! Why are all these Cubans [[speaking]] English? [[No]] wonder they did not [[get]] [[permission]] to [[film]] in Cuba. And if family life is most important to [[look]] at here, it would be [[great]] if we [[could]] figure out who is who - we are 'introduced' to them all in the [[beginning]] - a cheap [[way]] out of making the [[relationships]] clear [[throughout]] the [[film]]! The acting was [[mostly]] [[shallow]], [[wooden]], and [[unbelievable]], [[timing]] was off all around. The 'special' visual [[effects]] were [[confusing]] and distracting. References to American [[films]] - and the [[black]] [[character]] as Greek [[chorus]] - [[strictly]] gratuitous, [[intellectually]] [[ostentatious]], and [[consistently]] out of place. I only [[watched]] the [[whole]] [[movie]] because I was waiting for [[clarity]], or some point to it all. It never [[happened]]. The central theme in this [[filmmaking]] seems to be confusion, as the relationships, [[configured]], acting and social [[backgrounds]] all lead to the same place: [[chaos]]. Even Harvey Keitel appears to be out of his [[aspect]], and [[absence]] his usual impeccable [[lucidity]], [[orientation]] and intensity. To [[deliver]] [[issues]] worse, his character's name is 'Che', and we are only [[tell]] ([[immediatly]], by the narrator) well into the [[filmmaking]] that he is not 'that' Che, just a [[man]] named Che. The family relationships remain unclear until the end of the film, and once defined, the family is divided - the younger generation off to [[American]]. [[Hence]] cliché. Other [[review]] [[discusses]] how the [[cinematography]] [[indicates]] the [[influenced]] of the revolution on a boy's family; [[still]] the political [[position]] of the [[headmaster]] is murky at [[better]], and we are never [[very]] sure who is responsible for what bloodshed. [[Thus]] they lost their property ([[bought]] by [[gaming]] [[gains]]) - so what? Refusing to take a political [[standing]], when [[doing]] a [[cinematography]] about the [[Cuba]] revolution, is an odd and [[cowardice]] [[chooses]]. Not to mention the [[filmmaking]] was in [[Frenchman]]! Why are all these Cubans [[discussing]] English? [[None]] wonder they did not [[got]] [[license]] to [[movies]] in Cuba. And if family life is most important to [[peek]] at here, it would be [[gorgeous]] if we [[would]] figure out who is who - we are 'introduced' to them all in the [[started]] - a cheap [[route]] out of making the [[ties]] clear [[in]] the [[cinema]]! The acting was [[primarily]] [[superficial]], [[wood]], and [[awesome]], [[timetable]] was off all around. The 'special' visual [[influences]] were [[disconcerting]] and distracting. References to American [[filmmaking]] - and the [[negra]] [[personage]] as Greek [[verse]] - [[rigorously]] gratuitous, [[mentally]] [[presumptuous]], and [[constantly]] out of place. I only [[seen]] the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] because I was waiting for [[lucidity]], or some point to it all. It never [[sweated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]]

Entrails of a Virgin is so bizarre and [[incomprehensible]] that it allows the viewer to interpret it subjectively, applying whatever meaning he wishes to its inexplicable excesses of sex and violence. If this was an intentional characteristic of the film, it [[would]] be a work of postmodern brilliance-but of course it isn't.

Without getting too much into plot summary, let's take a [[quick]] walking tour of the events. At a secluded cabin, an orgy is in progress, which includes topless wrestling and diaper p***ing. A vanload of latecomers joins the orgy in progress, but they have unwittingly been followed by a monster I like to call "the muddy ninja." This monster precedes to slay orgy participants one by one, except the proverbial virgin (if you don't count oral sex) who receives his seed and consequently becomes so passionate with desire that she masturbates with someone's severed hand.

Finally she has her guts pulled out, and then there's a scene which seems to imply that she's pregnant with a baby muddy ninja. Got all that? If you're going to rent this movie, it's best if you don't speak Japanese and don't have any subtitles. In a season populated by boring Hollywood flicks, putting this in your VCR might be the cinematic equivalent of shock therapy. It will certainly be [[something]] different.

Entrails of a Virgin is so bizarre and [[unimaginable]] that it allows the viewer to interpret it subjectively, applying whatever meaning he wishes to its inexplicable excesses of sex and violence. If this was an intentional characteristic of the film, it [[could]] be a work of postmodern brilliance-but of course it isn't.

Without getting too much into plot summary, let's take a [[timely]] walking tour of the events. At a secluded cabin, an orgy is in progress, which includes topless wrestling and diaper p***ing. A vanload of latecomers joins the orgy in progress, but they have unwittingly been followed by a monster I like to call "the muddy ninja." This monster precedes to slay orgy participants one by one, except the proverbial virgin (if you don't count oral sex) who receives his seed and consequently becomes so passionate with desire that she masturbates with someone's severed hand.

Finally she has her guts pulled out, and then there's a scene which seems to imply that she's pregnant with a baby muddy ninja. Got all that? If you're going to rent this movie, it's best if you don't speak Japanese and don't have any subtitles. In a season populated by boring Hollywood flicks, putting this in your VCR might be the cinematic equivalent of shock therapy. It will certainly be [[somethings]] different. --------------------------------------------- Result 4392 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Oh my goodness. This was a [[real]] big [[mess]] that just couldn't help itself. [[Jeffrey]] (Jon Heder) is a 29 year old [[man]] [[still]] [[living]] with his mum ([[Diane]] Keaton) and not planning on going anywhere. Until his [[mother]] meets a [[rich]] businessman named Mert (Jeff Daniels) who she may be getting [[married]] to.

It would have been an OK [[movie]] if Heder didn't [[play]] his Jeffrey so [[annoying]], from the very start there is no chance of liking him and it only gets worse and worse. In the end, we are supposed to like him, but there was no [[reason]] to as he hadn't [[changed]] from the selfish [[brute]] that he was at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]].

Keaton doesn't look to even be trying and is in [[horrible]] [[form]] after 2007's Because I Said So. Not to mention the [[shocking]] [[chemistry]] between Heder and Keaton, and where supposed to [[believe]] that their [[mother]] and son? The only [[saving]] [[grace]] is Jeff Daniels and [[Anna]] Faris although they don't look very interested [[either]]. Apart from a few little smiles, this [[film]] [[really]] doesn't [[deserve]] to be called a [[comedy]] [[simply]] because there is [[barely]] [[anything]] to laugh at! If your in the [[mood]] for a [[recent]] [[Diane]] Keaton [[flick]] watch [[Mad]] [[Money]] or [[Smother]] which are a [[lot]] [[better]] than this [[abysmal]] [[effort]]. Oh my goodness. This was a [[veritable]] big [[chaos]] that just couldn't help itself. [[Jeff]] (Jon Heder) is a 29 year old [[men]] [[again]] [[iife]] with his mum ([[Dejan]] Keaton) and not planning on going anywhere. Until his [[mama]] meets a [[richest]] businessman named Mert (Jeff Daniels) who she may be getting [[marrying]] to.

It would have been an OK [[filmmaking]] if Heder didn't [[gaming]] his Jeffrey so [[irritating]], from the very start there is no chance of liking him and it only gets worse and worse. In the end, we are supposed to like him, but there was no [[reasons]] to as he hadn't [[changing]] from the selfish [[brutal]] that he was at the [[initiation]] of the [[filmmaking]].

Keaton doesn't look to even be trying and is in [[horrific]] [[shape]] after 2007's Because I Said So. Not to mention the [[terrifying]] [[chemicals]] between Heder and Keaton, and where supposed to [[think]] that their [[mommy]] and son? The only [[rescuing]] [[gracia]] is Jeff Daniels and [[Annas]] Faris although they don't look very interested [[neither]]. Apart from a few little smiles, this [[films]] [[truthfully]] doesn't [[merits]] to be called a [[travesty]] [[exclusively]] because there is [[hardly]] [[somethings]] to laugh at! If your in the [[atmosphere]] for a [[newer]] [[Dejan]] Keaton [[film]] watch [[Deranged]] [[Monetary]] or [[Suffocate]] which are a [[lots]] [[optimum]] than this [[frightful]] [[endeavors]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4393 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This thrown together [[piece]] of [[fecal]] [[matter]] adds together so many [[ludicrous]] scenarios that in the end it's a [[laugh]] [[riot]] of absolute hilarity. Too bad as the premise is promising (as it so often is in Duhllywood), but in the hands of this scriptwriter it segues off into la [[la]] land.

Lowe is in Prison serving time for a DUI that [[killed]] off his mistress. We get to [[see]] him having nightmares just so that we know he feels real BAD about this. Then his cell mate neighbor hangs himself. Or does he? Lowe has some [[suspicions]] but [[drops]] them quickly. His [[suspicions]] are so weak that the [[bad]] [[guys]] have nothing to [[worry]] about. [[So]] why do they then set him up to be killed? Ah, that's where this [[story]] [[could]] get interesting. That's where it [[falls]] off the rails, and once off the rails it decides it can get away with insulting the [[viewers]] attention for the next numbing hour.

****************SPOILERS****************************

I won't bore with an endless recounting of the irrationality of what follows, but [[contemplate]] this ending. Lowe has been trapped by the bad guys on a train. They want a tape he has, because that tape will screw their boss, and them. So on to the train come 3 cops, guns drawn, ready to rescue Lowe. The bad guys kill the cops, in front of half the passengers and then....continue chasing Lowe to get the tape. HELLO!!!! killing 3 cops in public will get you into deep doodo, to hell with the tape. Yet off they go through a mall shooting up the place, as if the public did not exist as witnesses, and in the end Lowe is grabbed and the bad guy still wants the tape!!! This thrown together [[slice]] of [[stool]] [[topic]] adds together so many [[farcical]] scenarios that in the end it's a [[laughs]] [[rioting]] of absolute hilarity. Too bad as the premise is promising (as it so often is in Duhllywood), but in the hands of this scriptwriter it segues off into la [[angeles]] land.

Lowe is in Prison serving time for a DUI that [[kills]] off his mistress. We get to [[seeing]] him having nightmares just so that we know he feels real BAD about this. Then his cell mate neighbor hangs himself. Or does he? Lowe has some [[doubts]] but [[tumbles]] them quickly. His [[doubts]] are so weak that the [[rotten]] [[fellers]] have nothing to [[anxiety]] about. [[Thus]] why do they then set him up to be killed? Ah, that's where this [[stories]] [[did]] get interesting. That's where it [[plunges]] off the rails, and once off the rails it decides it can get away with insulting the [[onlookers]] attention for the next numbing hour.

****************SPOILERS****************************

I won't bore with an endless recounting of the irrationality of what follows, but [[envisage]] this ending. Lowe has been trapped by the bad guys on a train. They want a tape he has, because that tape will screw their boss, and them. So on to the train come 3 cops, guns drawn, ready to rescue Lowe. The bad guys kill the cops, in front of half the passengers and then....continue chasing Lowe to get the tape. HELLO!!!! killing 3 cops in public will get you into deep doodo, to hell with the tape. Yet off they go through a mall shooting up the place, as if the public did not exist as witnesses, and in the end Lowe is grabbed and the bad guy still wants the tape!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this movie sort of reminded me of my marriage. It is very clean you can see it with family. Very nicely done. Songs are OK too. I think the writer director is great. The movie shows how marriages progress thru time. They have couples at different stages of life and relationships in their life the film beautifully depicts quite a few stages in parallel in the same story. Some of the dialogs are quite good. The movie depicts complex human emotion very nicely not with over dramatization. Also shows perfect is after all not so perfect. Shows very nicely the dynamics of arranged marriage when it is new. The movie is very well written and directed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[character]] of Tarzan has been subjected to so many clichés, and so many [[bad]] interpretations, that those who are [[hoping]] for a [[different]] [[kind]] of version (people like me, I mean, who liked the Tarzan books as a [[kid]] and have [[always]] [[wished]] for a [[movie]] version that followed the books just a little) ought to know how the [[recent]] renditions stack up. Some of the IMDb reviews [[address]] this point, but here's my $.02

I am [[aware]] of only two--count 'em--cinema depictions of Tarzan, namely Greystoke with Christopher Lambert and the Disney animated version, that try to depict Edgar Rice Burrough's rather interesting character (the son of a marooned English noble couple, picked up after their death by a tribe of apes who raise him as one of themselves, and who becomes "lord of the jungle" because of his superior human intellect before making it back to England and claiming his other identity) rather than the usual Hollywood jungle-man whose origin remains obscure and whose trademarks are his famous yell, his mysterious inability to speak proper English despite long exposure to people who know the language, his habit of swinging on vines, his strength, heroism, etc. [[About]] the only thing these two characters have in common are the name Tarzan and the fact that they both have a wife named Jane. Ron Ely's TV version is something of a compromise: Like Burroughs' character, he speaks good English and is adept and suave in both cultures in a sort of JamesBondish way, but he's no Lord Greystoke and there's no Jane.

Well, this film is in a third category of Tarzan films, and I hope it remains a category of one because it's awful. This category uses the character as a vehicle for, of all things, soft porn. Jane, played by legendarily [[bad]] actress Bo Derek is in Africa looking for her dad the absent-minded professor who is combing the jungle looking for something which is never specified. Though her [[dad]] is [[supposed]] to have been missing for a long time, she finds him effortlessly. Richard Harris as the dad is the best thing here; he sees the film is stupid so he has fun overacting and hamming in a way that reminds me of Peter O'Toole's deliberately silly performance in What's New Pussycat. Dad explains the legend of Tarzan ("some sort of ghost or spirit" he says--either a steal from, or an inartistic attempt at homage to, King Kong) to his daughter, who is at this point unfamiliar with the ape-man. Shortly afterward, we hear the infamous cliché of the Tarzan yell. Dad dies, which oddly doesn't seem to faze his devoted daughter very much. And then.....

Then Tarzan appears, but says nothing. Indeed, he says nothing during the entire film. He and Jane fall in love, and they romp around wearing almost nothing as she recites doggerel love-poetry off-screen. The End. That's the plot.

Well, not exactly; there's also a scene where Tarzan wrestles unrealistically with a boa constrictor--a most unusual boa, since it's the only poisonous one ever seen. Jane treats the bite with the aid of a chimp who helps by wringing out the garment she tears off to bind the wound with (I'm not making this up!), and this is only one of many excuses for her to take her clothes off.

I always like to conclude a review by saying something positive, but this time it's hard. Let's see... well, it's unfair to criticize this film for featuring an orangutan, even though we all know orangutans don't live in Africa; after all, the classic Tarzan movies all used Indian elephants, did they not? Also, you have to admit that Bo Derek is pretty in face and form. (But in that case why the hell didn't she just make a career as an art model? What does it say about a movie when it becomes plain boring to look at a pretty woman? I actually haven't decided whether it's a positive or a negative that they never showed her crotch.) But now I realize: try as I may, I can't end on a positive note.

See this film if you're a bad film buff. I'm outa here. The [[personages]] of Tarzan has been subjected to so many clichés, and so many [[unfavourable]] interpretations, that those who are [[awaiting]] for a [[dissimilar]] [[sorting]] of version (people like me, I mean, who liked the Tarzan books as a [[kids]] and have [[incessantly]] [[wanted]] for a [[kino]] version that followed the books just a little) ought to know how the [[latest]] renditions stack up. Some of the IMDb reviews [[treat]] this point, but here's my $.02

I am [[mindful]] of only two--count 'em--cinema depictions of Tarzan, namely Greystoke with Christopher Lambert and the Disney animated version, that try to depict Edgar Rice Burrough's rather interesting character (the son of a marooned English noble couple, picked up after their death by a tribe of apes who raise him as one of themselves, and who becomes "lord of the jungle" because of his superior human intellect before making it back to England and claiming his other identity) rather than the usual Hollywood jungle-man whose origin remains obscure and whose trademarks are his famous yell, his mysterious inability to speak proper English despite long exposure to people who know the language, his habit of swinging on vines, his strength, heroism, etc. [[Around]] the only thing these two characters have in common are the name Tarzan and the fact that they both have a wife named Jane. Ron Ely's TV version is something of a compromise: Like Burroughs' character, he speaks good English and is adept and suave in both cultures in a sort of JamesBondish way, but he's no Lord Greystoke and there's no Jane.

Well, this film is in a third category of Tarzan films, and I hope it remains a category of one because it's awful. This category uses the character as a vehicle for, of all things, soft porn. Jane, played by legendarily [[naughty]] actress Bo Derek is in Africa looking for her dad the absent-minded professor who is combing the jungle looking for something which is never specified. Though her [[papi]] is [[presumed]] to have been missing for a long time, she finds him effortlessly. Richard Harris as the dad is the best thing here; he sees the film is stupid so he has fun overacting and hamming in a way that reminds me of Peter O'Toole's deliberately silly performance in What's New Pussycat. Dad explains the legend of Tarzan ("some sort of ghost or spirit" he says--either a steal from, or an inartistic attempt at homage to, King Kong) to his daughter, who is at this point unfamiliar with the ape-man. Shortly afterward, we hear the infamous cliché of the Tarzan yell. Dad dies, which oddly doesn't seem to faze his devoted daughter very much. And then.....

Then Tarzan appears, but says nothing. Indeed, he says nothing during the entire film. He and Jane fall in love, and they romp around wearing almost nothing as she recites doggerel love-poetry off-screen. The End. That's the plot.

Well, not exactly; there's also a scene where Tarzan wrestles unrealistically with a boa constrictor--a most unusual boa, since it's the only poisonous one ever seen. Jane treats the bite with the aid of a chimp who helps by wringing out the garment she tears off to bind the wound with (I'm not making this up!), and this is only one of many excuses for her to take her clothes off.

I always like to conclude a review by saying something positive, but this time it's hard. Let's see... well, it's unfair to criticize this film for featuring an orangutan, even though we all know orangutans don't live in Africa; after all, the classic Tarzan movies all used Indian elephants, did they not? Also, you have to admit that Bo Derek is pretty in face and form. (But in that case why the hell didn't she just make a career as an art model? What does it say about a movie when it becomes plain boring to look at a pretty woman? I actually haven't decided whether it's a positive or a negative that they never showed her crotch.) But now I realize: try as I may, I can't end on a positive note.

See this film if you're a bad film buff. I'm outa here. --------------------------------------------- Result 4396 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] When you get your hands on a British [[film]] you expect some [[sort]] of quality. And when it comes to acting, camera work, lighting etc; this [[film]] does the business. It's [[done]] by [[highly]] skilled [[craftsmen]]. That [[alone]] can [[bring]] you an [[enjoyable]] one and a half [[hours]]. But when you look under the layers of professionalism, you don't really find anything. [[Apart]] from [[making]] you feel good and [[advocate]] a drug liberal [[view]], there's [[really]] [[nothing]] there. The [[script]] is mediocre, the [[plot]] is [[predictable]] and the ending [[must]] be one of the [[worst]] east of Hollywood. [[In]] all it's [[English]] cosiness, it's just a [[shameful]] and [[cynical]] [[attempt]] to make another "Full Monty". Why they [[made]] this [[film]]? I haven't [[got]] a clue, apart from [[making]] money of [[course]]. When you get your hands on a British [[cinematographic]] you expect some [[sorting]] of quality. And when it comes to acting, camera work, lighting etc; this [[filmmaking]] does the business. It's [[performed]] by [[immeasurably]] skilled [[crafts]]. That [[only]] can [[bringing]] you an [[agreeable]] one and a half [[hour]]. But when you look under the layers of professionalism, you don't really find anything. [[Also]] from [[doing]] you feel good and [[vindicator]] a drug liberal [[opinion]], there's [[truthfully]] [[anything]] there. The [[hyphen]] is mediocre, the [[intrigue]] is [[foreseeable]] and the ending [[should]] be one of the [[meanest]] east of Hollywood. [[At]] all it's [[Anglais]] cosiness, it's just a [[outrageous]] and [[sarcastic]] [[attempts]] to make another "Full Monty". Why they [[introduced]] this [[filmmaking]]? I haven't [[get]] a clue, apart from [[doing]] money of [[cours]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4397 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[remember]] loving this show when I was a kid. I thought the [[helicopter]] was the coolest [[thing]] I've seen. It was ultra high-tech for it's [[time]]. It [[could]] repel [[enemy]] fire, do all [[sorts]] of [[acrobatics]] in the air, and take down nearly anything in it's way. Now I [[go]] back and watch it today and am surprised how [[lousy]] this show [[really]] is. The casts [[members]] are [[hardly]] [[compelling]], there are a [[lot]] of cheesy moments, and the fight scenes are [[incredibly]] [[fake]] looking. And nearly every ending has the same [[helicopter]] fighting [[crap]] with the [[obvious]] reuse of grainy low quality stock footage. Lot of the footages [[appear]] to date from the Vietnam War era.

Airwolf has basically the same theme as Knight [[Rider]], except the crime-fighting vehicle of choice is a helicopter instead of a car. After watching a few episodes, I found myself utterly [[bored]]. I do, [[however]], love the [[theme]] [[music]]. I [[recall]] loving this show when I was a kid. I thought the [[chopper]] was the coolest [[stuff]] I've seen. It was ultra high-tech for it's [[times]]. It [[wo]] repel [[opponent]] fire, do all [[genre]] of [[stunts]] in the air, and take down nearly anything in it's way. Now I [[going]] back and watch it today and am surprised how [[pathetic]] this show [[genuinely]] is. The casts [[member]] are [[practically]] [[convincing]], there are a [[batches]] of cheesy moments, and the fight scenes are [[surprisingly]] [[phoney]] looking. And nearly every ending has the same [[choppers]] fighting [[horseshit]] with the [[observable]] reuse of grainy low quality stock footage. Lot of the footages [[arise]] to date from the Vietnam War era.

Airwolf has basically the same theme as Knight [[Trooper]], except the crime-fighting vehicle of choice is a helicopter instead of a car. After watching a few episodes, I found myself utterly [[drilled]]. I do, [[still]], love the [[topics]] [[musica]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Seeing]] all of the negative reviews for this movie, I figured that it [[could]] be yet another comic masterpiece that wasn't quite meant to be. I watched the first two fight scenes, listening to the generic dialogue delivered awfully by Lungren, and all of the other thrown-in Oriental actors, and I found the movie so awful that it was funny. Then Brandon Lee enters the story and the one-liners start flying, the plot falls apart, the script writers start drinking and the movie wears out it's welcome, as it turns into the worst [[action]] [[movie]] EVER.

Lungren [[beats]] out his previous [[efforts]] in "The Punisher" and others, as well as all of Van Damme's [[movies]], Seagal's [[movies]], and Stallone's non-Rocky [[movies]], for this distinct [[honor]]. This movie has the absolute worst acting ([[check]] out Tia Carrere's [[face]] when she is in any scene with Dolph, that's worth a laugh), with the worst [[dialogue]] ever (Brandon Lee's [[comment]] about little Dolph is the worst line ever in a film), and the [[worst]] [[outfit]] in a film (Dolph in full Japanese [[attire]]). Picture "Tango and Cash" with worse acting, meets "[[Commando]]," meets "Friday the 13th" (because of the [[senseless]] nudity and Lungren's performance is very Jason Voorhees-like), in an hour and fifteen minute [[joke]] of a movie.

The good (how about not awful) performances go to the [[bad]] [[guy]] (who [[still]] [[looks]] constipated through his [[entire]] performance) and Carrere (who somehow [[says]] her 5 lines without breaking out [[laughing]]). Brandon Lee is just there being Lungren's sidekick, and doing a really [[awful]] [[job]] at that.

An [[awful]], [[awful]] [[movie]]. Fear it and [[avoid]] it. [[If]] you do watch it [[though]], ask yourself why the underwater [[shots]] are [[twice]] as [[clear]] as most non-underwater [[shots]]. [[Speaking]] of the underwater shots, [[check]] out the lame water [[fight]] scene with the [[worst]] fight-scene-ending ever. This [[movie]] has [[every]] version of a [[bad]] [[fight]] scene for those with short attention spans and to fill-in between the flashes of nudity.

A [[BAD]] [[BAD]] [[MOVIE]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [[See]] all of the negative reviews for this movie, I figured that it [[did]] be yet another comic masterpiece that wasn't quite meant to be. I watched the first two fight scenes, listening to the generic dialogue delivered awfully by Lungren, and all of the other thrown-in Oriental actors, and I found the movie so awful that it was funny. Then Brandon Lee enters the story and the one-liners start flying, the plot falls apart, the script writers start drinking and the movie wears out it's welcome, as it turns into the worst [[measures]] [[movies]] EVER.

Lungren [[defeats]] out his previous [[effort]] in "The Punisher" and others, as well as all of Van Damme's [[film]], Seagal's [[film]], and Stallone's non-Rocky [[filmmaking]], for this distinct [[honours]]. This movie has the absolute worst acting ([[checks]] out Tia Carrere's [[facing]] when she is in any scene with Dolph, that's worth a laugh), with the worst [[discussions]] ever (Brandon Lee's [[remark]] about little Dolph is the worst line ever in a film), and the [[worse]] [[outfits]] in a film (Dolph in full Japanese [[costumes]]). Picture "Tango and Cash" with worse acting, meets "[[Commandos]]," meets "Friday the 13th" (because of the [[wanton]] nudity and Lungren's performance is very Jason Voorhees-like), in an hour and fifteen minute [[joking]] of a movie.

The good (how about not awful) performances go to the [[rotten]] [[dude]] (who [[however]] [[seem]] constipated through his [[overall]] performance) and Carrere (who somehow [[say]] her 5 lines without breaking out [[kidding]]). Brandon Lee is just there being Lungren's sidekick, and doing a really [[shocking]] [[jobs]] at that.

An [[abhorrent]], [[appalling]] [[flick]]. Fear it and [[averted]] it. [[Though]] you do watch it [[despite]], ask yourself why the underwater [[punches]] are [[doubly]] as [[lucid]] as most non-underwater [[punches]]. [[Discussing]] of the underwater shots, [[checking]] out the lame water [[battling]] scene with the [[hardest]] fight-scene-ending ever. This [[filmmaking]] has [[all]] version of a [[rotten]] [[struggle]] scene for those with short attention spans and to fill-in between the flashes of nudity.

A [[NEGATIVE]] [[NEGATIVE]] [[FILMS]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] is maybe one of the most [[boring]] movies of 2000 that I have [[seen]]! Especially the [[music]] fails to create [[suspense]] when people suddenly [[disappear]]. Also [[aspects]] such as martial law are not [[treated]] with the [[necessary]] seriousness. The [[story]] itself has problems: the UN could never take power over the [[world]] since the United States [[alone]] would not [[allow]] it but nations such as China, [[Russia]], Japan, etc. [[would]] not [[either]]. This [[would]] also play against [[someone]] [[trying]] to [[take]] over the world as Nicolae Carpathia does. This [[reminds]] me of [[James]] [[Bond]] [[movies]], only that those have more [[action]]! [[Naturally]] the [[movie]] is [[made]] for [[Christians]] and only for [[Christians]] and they may [[enjoy]] it. Since I cannot [[count]] myself a Christian I find the whole [[idea]] [[ludicrous]]. This prophecy [[furthermore]] [[seems]] to be, if [[believed]] to be [[true]], dangerously close to other [[prophecies]] by [[cults]] for the end of the world. Why fear such a possibility when we can make [[life]] as good as [[possible]] here on [[Earth]] without This [[filmmaking]] is maybe one of the most [[dull]] movies of 2000 that I have [[noticed]]! Especially the [[musica]] fails to create [[sufferance]] when people suddenly [[fade]]. Also [[things]] such as martial law are not [[addressed]] with the [[essential]] seriousness. The [[tales]] itself has problems: the UN could never take power over the [[monde]] since the United States [[lonely]] would not [[allowed]] it but nations such as China, [[Russian]], Japan, etc. [[should]] not [[neither]]. This [[should]] also play against [[everyone]] [[seeking]] to [[taking]] over the world as Nicolae Carpathia does. This [[resembles]] me of [[Jacques]] [[Bonds]] [[film]], only that those have more [[actions]]! [[Understandably]] the [[filmmaking]] is [[brought]] for [[Cristiana]] and only for [[Christianity]] and they may [[enjoying]] it. Since I cannot [[comte]] myself a Christian I find the whole [[notions]] [[ridiculous]]. This prophecy [[also]] [[seem]] to be, if [[felt]] to be [[veritable]], dangerously close to other [[predictions]] by [[creeds]] for the end of the world. Why fear such a possibility when we can make [[lives]] as good as [[conceivable]] here on [[Terrestrial]] without --------------------------------------------- Result 4400 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Twilight Zone has achieved a certain mythology about it--much like Star Trek. That's because there are many devoted lovers of the show that no matter what think every episode was a winner. They are the ones who score each individual show a 10 and cannot objectively evaluate the show. Because of this, a while back I reviewed all the original Star Trek episodes (the good and the bad) because the overall ratings and reviews were just too positive. Now, it's time to do the same for The Twilight Zone.

While I have scored many episodes 10, this one gets a 3 simply because it was bad. The writing was in fact embarrassingly bad. Two people from opposing sides in a great war are seen wandering about through the entire episode. After a while, it's apparent that they are the only two people left on Earth--as you learn in the really stupid and totally unconvincing conclusion. Usually the twist at the end makes the episode great--this one killed it! --------------------------------------------- Result 4401 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was a disaster from start to finish. Interspersed with performances from "the next generation of beautiful losers" are interviews with Bono and The Edge as well as the performers themselves. This leaves little time for the clips of Leonard Cohen himself, who towers over everyone else in the film with his commanding yet gentle presence, wisdom and humor. The rest are too busy trying to canonize him as St. Leonard or as some Old Testament prophet. Many of the performances are forgettable over-interpretations (especially Rufus & Martha Wainright's) or bland under-achievements. Only Beth Orton and Anthony got within striking distance of Leonard's own versions by using a little restraint. Annoying little pseudo-avant-garde gestures are sprinkled throughout the film- like out of focus superimpositions of red spheres over many of the concert and interview shots, shaky blurred camera work, use of digital delay on some of Leonard Cohen's comments (making it harder to hear what's being said) and a spooky, pretentious low drone under a lot of the interview segments (an attempt at added gravitas?). For the real thing, see the Songs From The Life Of documentary produced by the BBC in 1988. --------------------------------------------- Result 4402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Possible]] Spoilers, [[Perhaps]]. I [[must]] say that "Cinderella II: Dreams [[Come]] True" is one of the [[worst]] movies ever made. First of all, the [[movie]] was made during the height of Disney's sequel rampage. It was [[created]] [[around]] the same time as "The Little [[Mermaid]] II," "The Jungle Book II," and "Peter Pan II," all of which were disservices to their original film [[classics]]. ([[Disney]] also made "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" and "Atlantis II," but I'm going to drop that topic because their original movies were never really classics in the first place.") Let me go ahead and say that I am an avid supporter of good [[Disney]] films, and I absolutely adore the original Disney "Cinderella." The sequel to "Cinderella," however, was a [[waste]] of [[time]]. The character of Cinderella in the sequel was so very unlike the original girl that I grew up watching. In the [[original]], Cinderella was kind and loving. The new Cinderella had very out-of-character moments with current-era [[phrasing]] like, "I'm going to do this [[banquet]] my way!" Let me also tell you that new Cinderella (as I have affectionately named her) says, "[[Ewww]]!" That is the anti-Cinderella. I [[try]] to find the best in people, but in the sequel, Anastasia, one of the stepsisters, is good! What the heck? Why? They made it all out to be like Lady Tremaine and Drizella are just [[horrible]] [[family]] [[members]] for poor little Anastasia. My question to the world: did the people at Disney watch the original "Cinderella" when making this sequel? Well, it surely doesn't seem so. If I remember correctly, Anastasia was just as abusive to Cinderella as Drizella and Lady Tremaine. I am all for redemption and forgiveness, but there was no point of [[redemption]] for Anastasia in this movie. In the first one, Anastasia was evil. In the second one, she is good. One just can't leave a story like this. I hope Disney realizes that this movie, among other movies, is shaming Walt Disney's name. Perhaps now that Michael Eisner is gone, things will start shaping up around the House of Mouse. [[Feasible]] Spoilers, [[Maybe]]. I [[should]] say that "Cinderella II: Dreams [[Arrive]] True" is one of the [[meanest]] movies ever made. First of all, the [[filmmaking]] was made during the height of Disney's sequel rampage. It was [[engendered]] [[throughout]] the same time as "The Little [[Burglar]] II," "The Jungle Book II," and "Peter Pan II," all of which were disservices to their original film [[masterpieces]]. ([[Disneyland]] also made "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" and "Atlantis II," but I'm going to drop that topic because their original movies were never really classics in the first place.") Let me go ahead and say that I am an avid supporter of good [[Disneyland]] films, and I absolutely adore the original Disney "Cinderella." The sequel to "Cinderella," however, was a [[wastes]] of [[times]]. The character of Cinderella in the sequel was so very unlike the original girl that I grew up watching. In the [[upfront]], Cinderella was kind and loving. The new Cinderella had very out-of-character moments with current-era [[articulation]] like, "I'm going to do this [[supper]] my way!" Let me also tell you that new Cinderella (as I have affectionately named her) says, "[[Eeew]]!" That is the anti-Cinderella. I [[trying]] to find the best in people, but in the sequel, Anastasia, one of the stepsisters, is good! What the heck? Why? They made it all out to be like Lady Tremaine and Drizella are just [[frightful]] [[families]] [[member]] for poor little Anastasia. My question to the world: did the people at Disney watch the original "Cinderella" when making this sequel? Well, it surely doesn't seem so. If I remember correctly, Anastasia was just as abusive to Cinderella as Drizella and Lady Tremaine. I am all for redemption and forgiveness, but there was no point of [[reincarnation]] for Anastasia in this movie. In the first one, Anastasia was evil. In the second one, she is good. One just can't leave a story like this. I hope Disney realizes that this movie, among other movies, is shaming Walt Disney's name. Perhaps now that Michael Eisner is gone, things will start shaping up around the House of Mouse. --------------------------------------------- Result 4403 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] the intention the directors has for this [[films]] are quite [[honorable]], but his [[history]] of his productions did get me [[aware]] that this might not get much to the core like other film [[makers]] would do it. keeping his great 30 days [[TV]] series in mind but [[also]] [[counting]] in his MTV [[production]] "i bet you will" that [[opposes]] his seriousness in any of the [[matters]] he [[documents]] and [[also]] counting in his rather disappointing production "supersize me" i did not had my [[hopes]] up [[high]]. [[sadly]] [[enough]] this movie disappointed me none the less. as with "supersize me" after a while i did [[ask]] myself what exactly the point of all this was. the [[main]] statement gets [[clear]] [[enough]] after half an hour but the [[rest]] of the playtime [[gets]] filled with [[rather]] [[pointless]] stuff and re-repeating stuff that were already [[shown]] in this [[way]] or another earlier in the [[movie]], so it [[wears]] out and gets [[extremely]] boring towards the [[end]]. the intention the directors has for this [[filmmaking]] are quite [[honourable]], but his [[tale]] of his productions did get me [[conscious]] that this might not get much to the core like other film [[strategists]] would do it. keeping his great 30 days [[TELEVISION]] series in mind but [[similarly]] [[counts]] in his MTV [[productivity]] "i bet you will" that [[opposed]] his seriousness in any of the [[issues]] he [[documentation]] and [[additionally]] counting in his rather disappointing production "supersize me" i did not had my [[aspirations]] up [[highest]]. [[alack]] [[satisfactorily]] this movie disappointed me none the less. as with "supersize me" after a while i did [[wondering]] myself what exactly the point of all this was. the [[leading]] statement gets [[clara]] [[sufficiently]] after half an hour but the [[stays]] of the playtime [[got]] filled with [[somewhat]] [[superfluous]] stuff and re-repeating stuff that were already [[revealed]] in this [[camino]] or another earlier in the [[filmmaking]], so it [[gate]] out and gets [[considerably]] boring towards the [[terminate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bogdonovich's (mostly) unheralded classic is a film unlike just about any other. A film that has the feel of a fairy tale, but has a solid grounding in reality due to its use of authentic Manhattan locations and "true" geography, perhaps the best location filming in NYC I've ever seen. John Ritter reminds us that with good directors (Bogdanovich, Blake Edwards, Billy Bob) he can be brilliant, and the entire ensemble is a group you'll wish truly existed so you could spend time with `em. One of the few romantic comedies of the last 20 years that doesn't seem to be a rip-off of something else, this is the high point of Bogdanovich's fertile after- "success" career, when his best work was truly done ("saint jack", "at long last...", "noises off". --------------------------------------------- Result 4405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The Last [[Hunt]] is one of the few [[westerns]] ever made to [[deal]] with Buffalo [[hunting]], both as a sport and business and as a method of [[winning]] the plains Indian wars. Before the white man set foot on the other side of the Mississippi, the plains [[used]] to have herds of American Bison as large as some of our largest cities. By the time of the period The Last Hunt is set in, the buffalo had been all but wiped out. The 20th century, due to the efforts of conservationists, [[saw]] a revival in population of the species, but not hardly like it once was.

Robert Taylor and [[Stewart]] Granger are co-starring in a second film together and this one is far [[superior]] to All the [[Brothers]] Were [[Valiant]]. Here Stewart Granger is the good [[guy]], a [[world]] weary buffalo hunter, who has to [[go]] back to a [[job]] he hates because of financial [[considerations]].

The [[partner]] he's [[chosen]] to [[throw]] in with is Robert Taylor. Forgetting Taylor for the moment, I doubt if there's ever been a meaner, nastier soul than [[Charlie]] Gilsen who Taylor [[portrays]]. [[In]] Devil's Doorway he was an [[American]] Indian fighting against the [[prejudice]] stirred up by a racist played by Louis Calhern. [[In]] The Last [[Hunt]], he's the racist here. He [[kills]] both buffalo and Indians for pure pleasure. He [[kills]] one Indian family when they steal his mules and takes the widow of one [[captive]]. Like some barbarian conqueror he [[expects]] the [[pleasure]] of Debra Paget's sexual favors. He's actually mad when Paget doesn't [[see]] it that [[way]].

[[No]] matter how [[often]] they refer to [[Russ]] Tamblyn as a halfbreed, I was never really convinced he was any part Indian. It's the only [[weakness]] I [[found]] in The Last Hunt.

[[However]] Lloyd Nolan, the grizzled old buffalo skinner Taylor and Granger bring along is just [[great]]. Nolan [[steals]] every scene he's in with the cast.

For those who like their westerns real, who want to see a side of Robert Taylor never seen on screen, and who don't like cheap heroics, The Last Hunt is the ideal hunt. The Last [[Manhunt]] is one of the few [[westerners]] ever made to [[treating]] with Buffalo [[hunted]], both as a sport and business and as a method of [[earning]] the plains Indian wars. Before the white man set foot on the other side of the Mississippi, the plains [[utilized]] to have herds of American Bison as large as some of our largest cities. By the time of the period The Last Hunt is set in, the buffalo had been all but wiped out. The 20th century, due to the efforts of conservationists, [[seen]] a revival in population of the species, but not hardly like it once was.

Robert Taylor and [[Steward]] Granger are co-starring in a second film together and this one is far [[upper]] to All the [[Plymouth]] Were [[Brave]]. Here Stewart Granger is the good [[boy]], a [[monde]] weary buffalo hunter, who has to [[going]] back to a [[labour]] he hates because of financial [[consideration]].

The [[partners]] he's [[elected]] to [[toss]] in with is Robert Taylor. Forgetting Taylor for the moment, I doubt if there's ever been a meaner, nastier soul than [[Charley]] Gilsen who Taylor [[denotes]]. [[For]] Devil's Doorway he was an [[Americas]] Indian fighting against the [[harm]] stirred up by a racist played by Louis Calhern. [[During]] The Last [[Hunted]], he's the racist here. He [[murdered]] both buffalo and Indians for pure pleasure. He [[murdering]] one Indian family when they steal his mules and takes the widow of one [[detainees]]. Like some barbarian conqueror he [[waiting]] the [[glee]] of Debra Paget's sexual favors. He's actually mad when Paget doesn't [[seeing]] it that [[manner]].

[[Nope]] matter how [[frequently]] they refer to [[Rus]] Tamblyn as a halfbreed, I was never really convinced he was any part Indian. It's the only [[imperfection]] I [[unearthed]] in The Last Hunt.

[[Instead]] Lloyd Nolan, the grizzled old buffalo skinner Taylor and Granger bring along is just [[wondrous]]. Nolan [[itches]] every scene he's in with the cast.

For those who like their westerns real, who want to see a side of Robert Taylor never seen on screen, and who don't like cheap heroics, The Last Hunt is the ideal hunt. --------------------------------------------- Result 4406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[At]] one point, Violet (Lucy Liu) tells [[Neil]] (Cillian Murphy) that why she [[constantly]] [[seeks]] out for an adventure. She said "because I'm bore-phobic". It [[mean]] that she can't [[really]] [[get]] on with her [[life]] by doing some mandatory [[activities]]. Well, I [[think]] her reason and the [[way]] this [[film]] [[go]] is very ironic. Because "[[Watching]] the Detectives" is a cheer boredom.

Have any of these [[characters]] actually doing something [[exciting]] for once? Neil is a geek who runs his own very small video rental shop. He and his other geek friends usually hang out around the shop and watching movies together while debating about them afterward. But Neil's life is completely turned around when Violet walks into his store. She's an eccentric woman who hides a little secret from him. Anyway, after some dates, they decide to see each other. The problem is Violet is a person who keep doing prank jokes on Neil and can't really doing something normal, whereas Neil is completely opposite to hers. The question is. Is they are going to be in love at the end? You bet.

"Watching the Detectives" is a cliché romantic-comedy to its core. And they [[made]] it even worst by pretending to be something else. From the first couple of set-up, we know that Neil is pretty laid-back guy who didn't really commit to anything. And then, Violet enters the scene, looking all weird and annoying. So at this point, we all know that we're going to sit though all meaningless situations to find out how they're going to end up in the end. Is it worth waiting for? I would say no.

As I said, they tried to give something more for the audience. "Watching the Detectives" is [[trying]] to [[talk]] about commitment. To observe how far people go to reach for something they desire. We knew in the end that insane things that Violet has done is all the test how far Neil is ready to go to win her heart (or whatever). Well, I think it is completely [[bullshit]]. This [[movie]] will end pretty quick if Neil just said to himself "Forget about it, that girl is one of a nutjob !" After [[collaborating]] with many great [[directors]] recently (Danny Boyle's "Sunshine" and "28 Days Later", Ken Loach's "The Wind That Shakes the Barley" and Neil Jordan's "Breakfast on Pluto" to name a few), it's pretty weird choice for Cillian Murphy to make a movie with one of Broken Lizard comedy troop, Paul Soter. By all means, He's not bad (as usual), but such a talent actor like him shouldn't be wasting his time in the movie like this. On the other hand, Lucy Liu is dreadfully awful as Violet. Her acting is a mess. I mean it's all over the place and so over-the-top. Tony Montana would have been proud.

The last but not least mistake that movie made is a completely irrelevant title. You simply can't really connect a dot between the plot and its title; and then you will end up thinking that it makes no sense at all. In short, "Watching the Detectives" is pleasant if forgettable motion picture that you might have a chance to catch it on cable TV so quick that you couldn't imagine.

BloodyMonday Rating: 1.5/4 [[During]] one point, Violet (Lucy Liu) tells [[Neal]] (Cillian Murphy) that why she [[consistently]] [[tries]] out for an adventure. She said "because I'm bore-phobic". It [[meaning]] that she can't [[genuinely]] [[obtain]] on with her [[iife]] by doing some mandatory [[activity]]. Well, I [[thought]] her reason and the [[manner]] this [[filmmaking]] [[going]] is very ironic. Because "[[Staring]] the Detectives" is a cheer boredom.

Have any of these [[trait]] actually doing something [[thrilling]] for once? Neil is a geek who runs his own very small video rental shop. He and his other geek friends usually hang out around the shop and watching movies together while debating about them afterward. But Neil's life is completely turned around when Violet walks into his store. She's an eccentric woman who hides a little secret from him. Anyway, after some dates, they decide to see each other. The problem is Violet is a person who keep doing prank jokes on Neil and can't really doing something normal, whereas Neil is completely opposite to hers. The question is. Is they are going to be in love at the end? You bet.

"Watching the Detectives" is a cliché romantic-comedy to its core. And they [[brought]] it even worst by pretending to be something else. From the first couple of set-up, we know that Neil is pretty laid-back guy who didn't really commit to anything. And then, Violet enters the scene, looking all weird and annoying. So at this point, we all know that we're going to sit though all meaningless situations to find out how they're going to end up in the end. Is it worth waiting for? I would say no.

As I said, they tried to give something more for the audience. "Watching the Detectives" is [[try]] to [[speaks]] about commitment. To observe how far people go to reach for something they desire. We knew in the end that insane things that Violet has done is all the test how far Neil is ready to go to win her heart (or whatever). Well, I think it is completely [[claptrap]]. This [[filmmaking]] will end pretty quick if Neil just said to himself "Forget about it, that girl is one of a nutjob !" After [[working]] with many great [[managers]] recently (Danny Boyle's "Sunshine" and "28 Days Later", Ken Loach's "The Wind That Shakes the Barley" and Neil Jordan's "Breakfast on Pluto" to name a few), it's pretty weird choice for Cillian Murphy to make a movie with one of Broken Lizard comedy troop, Paul Soter. By all means, He's not bad (as usual), but such a talent actor like him shouldn't be wasting his time in the movie like this. On the other hand, Lucy Liu is dreadfully awful as Violet. Her acting is a mess. I mean it's all over the place and so over-the-top. Tony Montana would have been proud.

The last but not least mistake that movie made is a completely irrelevant title. You simply can't really connect a dot between the plot and its title; and then you will end up thinking that it makes no sense at all. In short, "Watching the Detectives" is pleasant if forgettable motion picture that you might have a chance to catch it on cable TV so quick that you couldn't imagine.

BloodyMonday Rating: 1.5/4 --------------------------------------------- Result 4407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[movie]] [[brings]] back [[many]] [[memories]] of the classic [[cinema]] of old, where actors didn't have to take their clothes off to make [[viewers]] watch their film.

Firstly I think the [[main]] plus point of this movie is the [[amazing]] [[chemistry]] between Shahid and Amrita, it is definitely the making of the film.

I have [[seen]] lots of [[comments]] regarding the [[film]] being sickly sweet and overly slushy. In [[response]] to this, I think to a certain degree this is a correct analysis, however considering this is a Barjatya film I think that [[compared]] to MPK, HAHK, HSSH and MPKDH, it has been toned down [[significantly]]. HSSH was [[almost]] unbearable to watch in some [[places]].

[[In]] this film however, when the [[sentimental]] [[moments]] [[come]] along, you [[find]] yourself [[smiling]], wishing the budding couple all the [[best]] and hoping that [[nothing]] bad [[happens]] to them.

Another [[major]] plus point is the performances of Shahid and Amrita. [[Both]] have acted very well, especially Shahid who looks [[great]] in the [[film]]. Amrita looks [[simply]] [[stunning]] and should be taken seriously as a future [[major]] star.

Although I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] the film as a [[whole]], I do feel that it was too long. Some of the middle [[could]] have been trimmed off and it would maybe made [[even]] more of an impact. I [[also]] [[think]] the music, although it fits into the [[film]] when you [[see]] the [[situations]] is slightly old fashioned and the movie could have benefited if a more up-to-date soundtrack had been available. Although the picturisation of the songs Mujhe Haq Hain and Hamari Shaadi Mein are [[wonderful]].

[[All]] in all, I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] this film, its romantic, looks stunning and has a dramatic climax (I won't go into details, just in case you haven't seen it.

PS. If you're prone to crying-take a tissue! (I needed several) This [[movies]] [[poses]] back [[countless]] [[memorabilia]] of the classic [[movie]] of old, where actors didn't have to take their clothes off to make [[listeners]] watch their film.

Firstly I think the [[principal]] plus point of this movie is the [[wondrous]] [[chemical]] between Shahid and Amrita, it is definitely the making of the film.

I have [[watched]] lots of [[commentaries]] regarding the [[cinematography]] being sickly sweet and overly slushy. In [[answer]] to this, I think to a certain degree this is a correct analysis, however considering this is a Barjatya film I think that [[compares]] to MPK, HAHK, HSSH and MPKDH, it has been toned down [[enormously]]. HSSH was [[virtually]] unbearable to watch in some [[locations]].

[[Across]] this film however, when the [[romantic]] [[times]] [[arrived]] along, you [[finds]] yourself [[grins]], wishing the budding couple all the [[better]] and hoping that [[anything]] bad [[arrives]] to them.

Another [[principal]] plus point is the performances of Shahid and Amrita. [[Whether]] have acted very well, especially Shahid who looks [[huge]] in the [[films]]. Amrita looks [[merely]] [[breathless]] and should be taken seriously as a future [[principal]] star.

Although I [[genuinely]] [[liked]] the film as a [[ensemble]], I do feel that it was too long. Some of the middle [[did]] have been trimmed off and it would maybe made [[yet]] more of an impact. I [[apart]] [[thinking]] the music, although it fits into the [[cinema]] when you [[seeing]] the [[instances]] is slightly old fashioned and the movie could have benefited if a more up-to-date soundtrack had been available. Although the picturisation of the songs Mujhe Haq Hain and Hamari Shaadi Mein are [[wondrous]].

[[Entire]] in all, I [[conclusively]] [[recommending]] this film, its romantic, looks stunning and has a dramatic climax (I won't go into details, just in case you haven't seen it.

PS. If you're prone to crying-take a tissue! (I needed several) --------------------------------------------- Result 4408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just saw this film @ TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival). Fans of Hal Hartley will not be disappointed!! And if you are not familiar with this director's oeuvre ... doesn't matter. This film can definitely stand all on its own. I have to go the second screening ... it was amazing I need to see it again -- and fast!!

This film is very funny. It's dialogue is very smart, and the performance of Parker Posey is outstanding as she stars in the title role of Fay Grim. Fay Grim is the latest feature revisiting the world and characters introduced in the film Henry Fool (2000). Visually, the most salient stylistic feature employs the habitual use of the canted (or dutch) angle, which can be often seen in past Hartley works appearing in various shorts, available in the Possible Films: short works by Hal Hartley 1994-2004 collection, and in The Girl from Monday (2005).

I viewed this film most aptly on Sept 11th. Textually, Fay Grim's adventure in this story is backdropped against the changed world after September 11, 2001. Without going into major spoilers, I view this work, and story-world as a bravely political and original portrait of geo-politics that is rarely, if ever, foregrounded in mainstream fictional cinema post-911 heretofore (cf. Syrianna: of side note - Mark Cuban Exec. Prod in both these films ... most interesting, to say the least).

Lastly, for those closely attached to the characters of Henry Fool, Simone, Fay and Henry this film is hilariously self-conscious and self-referential. That being said, the character of Fay Grimm starts off in the film, exactly where she was when Henry Fool ended, but by the end of the film ... Fay's knowledge and experience has total changed and expanded over the course of the narrative. What can be in store for the future of Fay and the Fool family ... ?? I can't wait for the third part in this story! --------------------------------------------- Result 4409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw Soylent Green back in 1973 when it was [[first]] [[released]] and maybe another eight times over the [[years]] on T.V. or [[video]]. It was always one of my favorite sci-fi and/or Charlton Heston films.

Recently, the Egyptian [[theater]] in L.A. had a twelve film Charlton Heston retrospective. I flew in from out of state to see six of the films over a two day period. Soylent Green looked great on the [[large]] Egyptian screen with a perfect new print. From its opening montage to the going home scene to the great ending the film was [[fantastic]].

Charlton Heston as a cop who lives in a [[dog]] [[eat]] dog [[world]] with few natural [[resources]] left and no [[understanding]] as to how the world [[used]] to be and Eddie Robinson as a [[man]] who remembers the past are both great.

Their chemistry [[together]] is [[wonderful]]. The film [[also]] looks so much better in a great 35mm print. Fleisher [[really]] knows how to [[fill]] the screen,and the cinematoraphy, [[writing]], music [[used]], and everything about it [[works]]. The [[film]] is [[also]] very [[powerful]] in its bleak and very [[possible]] [[view]] of the [[future]]. Just think how the [[world]] [[population]] [[grew]], the [[rain]] forest that [[disappeared]], resources [[used]] up, green [[house]] effect getting worse since 1973. I just wonder why this [[film]] has not played in [[theaters]] all these years. Its reputation should be better.

[[Speaking]] of reputations, [[often]] people [[speak]] as if Charlton Heston is not a [[great]] actor. Seeing him in El-Cid, Soylent [[Green]], The Warlord, The Omega [[Man]], Will Penny, and Major Dundee back to back I am convinced he is one of our best actors. Of course he made about a dozen other great films and for those that care you know what they are.

I saw Soylent Green back in 1973 when it was [[fiirst]] [[publicized]] and maybe another eight times over the [[yr]] on T.V. or [[videotaping]]. It was always one of my favorite sci-fi and/or Charlton Heston films.

Recently, the Egyptian [[drama]] in L.A. had a twelve film Charlton Heston retrospective. I flew in from out of state to see six of the films over a two day period. Soylent Green looked great on the [[gargantuan]] Egyptian screen with a perfect new print. From its opening montage to the going home scene to the great ending the film was [[wondrous]].

Charlton Heston as a cop who lives in a [[canine]] [[comer]] dog [[globe]] with few natural [[funds]] left and no [[comprehension]] as to how the world [[employs]] to be and Eddie Robinson as a [[men]] who remembers the past are both great.

Their chemistry [[jointly]] is [[extraordinary]]. The film [[additionally]] looks so much better in a great 35mm print. Fleisher [[genuinely]] knows how to [[filled]] the screen,and the cinematoraphy, [[writes]], music [[using]], and everything about it [[collaboration]]. The [[cinema]] is [[apart]] very [[influential]] in its bleak and very [[doable]] [[vista]] of the [[forthcoming]]. Just think how the [[globe]] [[demographics]] [[enhanced]], the [[rains]] forest that [[missing]], resources [[utilizing]] up, green [[haus]] effect getting worse since 1973. I just wonder why this [[cinematographic]] has not played in [[theater]] all these years. Its reputation should be better.

[[Talk]] of reputations, [[routinely]] people [[speaking]] as if Charlton Heston is not a [[magnificent]] actor. Seeing him in El-Cid, Soylent [[Archer]], The Warlord, The Omega [[Guy]], Will Penny, and Major Dundee back to back I am convinced he is one of our best actors. Of course he made about a dozen other great films and for those that care you know what they are.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Color Purple is about the struggles of life and the love that helps those people strongly affected by the struggles of life. Every character had an element of the color purple in them. The movie touches on love, lost, hope, hate, and triumph. whether it be Celie having lived through hell and losing her sister, and Shug coming into her life to show her love again, Albert not being man righting his wrong toward Celie, Shug shunned by her father and confesses to him in the end, Sofia and her stubborness good and bad, and even Nettie, they had their emptiness and hardship through the film but was overcome in the end and that's the sign of a good movie. Good Job to all the cast and crew. --------------------------------------------- Result 4411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well that's 90 minutes of my life I won't get back. This movie makes teen tv show "California Dreams" look like "Almost Famous". The acting was horrid and storyline unrealistic. Don't even get me started on the actual band at the forefront of this story, lame songs, look etc.. You had to believe that they were one of the hottest bands in the country, and there isn't enough irony in the world to accept that one. The guitarist is seen to be a heroin user, not that I blame him, if I was around such a putrid band with stale songs and wooden acting I'd be injecting the horse too.

If you take music remotely seriously, avoid this at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 4412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] There's plenty to appreciate here: spectacular [[locations]] and flying sequences; [[period]] costumes, [[props]] and sets; and [[competent]] writing and acting. However, to enjoy a drama, we [[need]] at [[least]] one [[principal]] who exhibits some qualities that we can [[like]] or admire. In this bunch of catty snobs, we found only one character who is at all [[likable]] — a hapless enlisted man in a fleeting [[peripheral]] role as their [[helpless]] [[victim]]. From the reviews here, it is clear that we are [[completely]] out of step, but we did not [[find]] their malicious-schoolgirl [[behavior]] [[amusing]] or [[entertaining]]. Even the [[dog]] is [[detestable]]. We threw in the [[towel]] after two of the six episodes, so you should discount these [[observations]] accordingly, but what I [[could]] [[find]] written about this mini-series gave us no cause to expect character transformation or [[redemption]]. There's plenty to appreciate here: spectacular [[venues]] and flying sequences; [[periods]] costumes, [[accessories]] and sets; and [[proficient]] writing and acting. However, to enjoy a drama, we [[gotta]] at [[less]] one [[key]] who exhibits some qualities that we can [[loves]] or admire. In this bunch of catty snobs, we found only one character who is at all [[congenial]] — a hapless enlisted man in a fleeting [[outlying]] role as their [[impotent]] [[victims]]. From the reviews here, it is clear that we are [[totally]] out of step, but we did not [[unearthed]] their malicious-schoolgirl [[conduct]] [[fun]] or [[fun]]. Even the [[puppy]] is [[infamous]]. We threw in the [[sponge]] after two of the six episodes, so you should discount these [[comments]] accordingly, but what I [[did]] [[found]] written about this mini-series gave us no cause to expect character transformation or [[buyout]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a history nut who is particularly interested in this particular historical event, I was very disappointed with the movie. Granted, the costumes and staging was quite authentic, but the Hollywood portrayal of this "British Little Big Horn" was truly boring.

The amount of film footage dedicated to marching or parading troops has to have been unprecedented in film history. Eveytime I heard triumphant background music begin, I knew I had to prepare myself for another laborious scene of meaningless filler. Obviously, the producers had invested heavily into "staging" and were determined to get their money's worth.

Despite the outstanding cast, their dialogue was, again, boring and their characters were never developed. Whenever Peter O'toole or Burt Lancaster finished a scene, I would cringe with disappointment. Their given lines were so weak and meaningless that I could hardly believe these were the same two great actors who portrayed Lawrence of Arabia and the Bird Man of Alcatraz respectively.

There are worse epics, but this one is not much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 4414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I do not even want to call this [[thing]] a [[film]] - it is a [[movie]] that should not have won any [[awards]]. The acting was horrible as were the silly scenarios. This is [[exactly]] the [[sort]] of film that so many folks think caters to an NRI [[audience]] but is in fact [[loathed]] abroad for its awkwardness and the [[overwhelming]] [[sense]] of "trying" [[throughout]] the movie.

I [[find]] it [[strange]] that so many [[actors]] conversant with the English [[language]] have such a [[hard]] [[time]] doing so convincingly in front of the camera. I'm sure many readers know what I am [[talking]] about - all those token English [[phrases]] [[thrown]] into a movie, in Hindi and in regional [[cinema]] for cool [[points]]. There are few Indian movies in which the [[English]] [[seems]] [[completely]] [[genuine]] - Being Cyrus was a [[recent]] one. Although not a great film, it was a good film and the [[language]] did not seem "put on".

I feel [[ashamed]] that P3 was awarded the NFA in 2005. The only semi-enjoyable parts of this [[rubbish]] were Konkana and a somewhat catchy [[background]] [[score]]. Other than that, do not even waste your [[time]] with this film. I do not even want to call this [[stuff]] a [[filmmaking]] - it is a [[filmmaking]] that should not have won any [[prix]]. The acting was horrible as were the silly scenarios. This is [[accurately]] the [[kind]] of film that so many folks think caters to an NRI [[audiences]] but is in fact [[detested]] abroad for its awkwardness and the [[whopping]] [[feeling]] of "trying" [[around]] the movie.

I [[found]] it [[unusual]] that so many [[players]] conversant with the English [[vocabulary]] have such a [[laborious]] [[moment]] doing so convincingly in front of the camera. I'm sure many readers know what I am [[spoke]] about - all those token English [[words]] [[threw]] into a movie, in Hindi and in regional [[filmmaking]] for cool [[dot]]. There are few Indian movies in which the [[Francais]] [[seem]] [[absolutely]] [[real]] - Being Cyrus was a [[newer]] one. Although not a great film, it was a good film and the [[vocabulary]] did not seem "put on".

I feel [[embarrassing]] that P3 was awarded the NFA in 2005. The only semi-enjoyable parts of this [[detritus]] were Konkana and a somewhat catchy [[backgrounds]] [[scoring]]. Other than that, do not even waste your [[moment]] with this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] The [[plot]] for Descent, if it actually can be called a plot, has two [[noteworthy]] events. One near the [[beginning]] - one at the end. [[Together]] these events make up maybe 5% of the [[total]] [[movie]] time. Everything (and I mean _everything_) in between is basically the director's desperate [[effort]] to [[fill]] in the minutes. I like [[disturbing]] [[movies]], I like dark movies and I don't get [[troubled]] by gritty scenes - but if you expect me to [[sit]] through 60 minutes of [[hazy]]/[[dark]] (literally) scenes with NO storyline you have another thing coming. Rosario Dawson, one of my favorite actresses is completely wasted here. And no, she doesn't [[get]] [[naked]], not [[even]] in the NC-17 version, which I [[saw]].

[[If]] you have a [[couple]] of [[hours]] to throw away and [[want]] to watch "Descent", [[take]] a nap [[instead]] - you'll [[probably]] have more interesting [[dreams]]. The [[intrigue]] for Descent, if it actually can be called a plot, has two [[marvellous]] events. One near the [[initiating]] - one at the end. [[Whole]] these events make up maybe 5% of the [[whole]] [[film]] time. Everything (and I mean _everything_) in between is basically the director's desperate [[efforts]] to [[populate]] in the minutes. I like [[worrying]] [[movie]], I like dark movies and I don't get [[concussed]] by gritty scenes - but if you expect me to [[seated]] through 60 minutes of [[ambiguous]]/[[somber]] (literally) scenes with NO storyline you have another thing coming. Rosario Dawson, one of my favorite actresses is completely wasted here. And no, she doesn't [[gets]] [[hairless]], not [[yet]] in the NC-17 version, which I [[noticed]].

[[Though]] you have a [[match]] of [[hour]] to throw away and [[desiring]] to watch "Descent", [[taking]] a nap [[however]] - you'll [[certainly]] have more interesting [[nightmares]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Artemesia takes the usual [[story]] about the art world, eg, "You can't paint that! But I want to!" and plasters it with sex and scandal to [[make]] the whole film, well, interesting, but not [[remarkable]].

The story is about one of the first female painters around, Artemesia who course, is fiercely independent, but just can't stop thinking of men, and their bodies… for artistic purposes of course. She soon gets private tutoring from one of a well known artist, but soon tutoring becomes much more then art, and soon after that, scandal erupts! Funny how they could take a historical biography and make it almost into a soft-porn fantasy. I mean, was Artemesia THAT much of a man-hungry person? Also, it's quite funny when she's insisting that she "paints for herself!" yet falls for the first person she sees.

Actually, the story itself is quite fascinating, and it ends with a trial, which I always love. But I wasn't too crazy about the male lead who played her teacher, who looked rather like the person someone like that wouldn't fall for. I woulda gone for the young fisherman :P Artemesia takes the usual [[fairytales]] about the art world, eg, "You can't paint that! But I want to!" and plasters it with sex and scandal to [[deliver]] the whole film, well, interesting, but not [[sumptuous]].

The story is about one of the first female painters around, Artemesia who course, is fiercely independent, but just can't stop thinking of men, and their bodies… for artistic purposes of course. She soon gets private tutoring from one of a well known artist, but soon tutoring becomes much more then art, and soon after that, scandal erupts! Funny how they could take a historical biography and make it almost into a soft-porn fantasy. I mean, was Artemesia THAT much of a man-hungry person? Also, it's quite funny when she's insisting that she "paints for herself!" yet falls for the first person she sees.

Actually, the story itself is quite fascinating, and it ends with a trial, which I always love. But I wasn't too crazy about the male lead who played her teacher, who looked rather like the person someone like that wouldn't fall for. I woulda gone for the young fisherman :P --------------------------------------------- Result 4417 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The [[film]] as entertainment is very good and Jimmy Stewart is [[excellent]] as Chip Hardesty, with well done co-starring turns by Vera Miles and Murray Hamilton. But the film, directed by legendary director Mervyn Leroy, was constantly vetted and script approval as well as every aspect of the film, down to clothing, was closely watched and controlled by J. Edgar Hoover. Not that J. Edgar Hoover didn't have something to be proud of. His management of the bureau from 1924 to his death crated on of the finest investigative services in the world. But by 1959 Hoover was already beginning to worry about being forced out and had already started to collect dossiers on powerful people to make sure and protect his little kingdom. And he was determined to make sure that no motion picture showed even a single wart about the bureau. The films shows only continued successes and glosses over the failures which occurred, and the bureau's part in the witch hunts of the early 1950's. Enjoy the [[story]], but with tongue firmly in cheek. The [[cinematographic]] as entertainment is very good and Jimmy Stewart is [[wondrous]] as Chip Hardesty, with well done co-starring turns by Vera Miles and Murray Hamilton. But the film, directed by legendary director Mervyn Leroy, was constantly vetted and script approval as well as every aspect of the film, down to clothing, was closely watched and controlled by J. Edgar Hoover. Not that J. Edgar Hoover didn't have something to be proud of. His management of the bureau from 1924 to his death crated on of the finest investigative services in the world. But by 1959 Hoover was already beginning to worry about being forced out and had already started to collect dossiers on powerful people to make sure and protect his little kingdom. And he was determined to make sure that no motion picture showed even a single wart about the bureau. The films shows only continued successes and glosses over the failures which occurred, and the bureau's part in the witch hunts of the early 1950's. Enjoy the [[histories]], but with tongue firmly in cheek. --------------------------------------------- Result 4418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I loved Dewaere in Series Noir. His talent is trivialized in "The Waltzers" aka "Going Places". Okay, it's a couple of guys flaunting convention in the most absurd and irredeemable ways; many folks find such behavior amusing. This was a [[boring]], [[pointless]] exercise designed to shock. I find the smirk on Blier's face, the [[face]] behind the camera, [[annoying]]. Series Noir was a valid expression of personal [[liberty]] and licentious behavior. From the first moment when we see Patric Dewaere prancing in the abandoned lot we get an idea of the bewilderingly beautiful anti-hero we'll be spending time with for the next couple of hours. When we see him chasing the hapless middle aged female with his buddy Depardieu in "Going Places" we have fair warning that two hours spent with these chaps will be soul-draining. I have trouble eking even a "3" for this annoying distraction. I loved Dewaere in Series Noir. His talent is trivialized in "The Waltzers" aka "Going Places". Okay, it's a couple of guys flaunting convention in the most absurd and irredeemable ways; many folks find such behavior amusing. This was a [[dull]], [[senseless]] exercise designed to shock. I find the smirk on Blier's face, the [[encountering]] behind the camera, [[exasperating]]. Series Noir was a valid expression of personal [[freedom]] and licentious behavior. From the first moment when we see Patric Dewaere prancing in the abandoned lot we get an idea of the bewilderingly beautiful anti-hero we'll be spending time with for the next couple of hours. When we see him chasing the hapless middle aged female with his buddy Depardieu in "Going Places" we have fair warning that two hours spent with these chaps will be soul-draining. I have trouble eking even a "3" for this annoying distraction. --------------------------------------------- Result 4419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] While I [[watched]] this [[movie]], I tried to figure out why they bothered making it. [[Though]] the main plot of the [[movie]] is [[potentially]] [[good]], there are all sorts of unrelated/[[unnecessary]] subplots. The [[marketing]] people in Hollywood must have dictated the multiple bad guys, [[perpetual]] double-crosses and the man and woman who get too close and have sex. It's odd that we see more of them having sex than we did of the President and his mistress. The many plots and subplots make the film too [[broad]] and [[none]] of the characters are [[properly]] developed - I really didn't feel like I knew any [[character]], except that [[everyone]] is corrupt and evil. The ending is totally incomplete - it left me more than just [[wanting]] what might have been, but what was supposed to be. In the end, there is really no explanation of why anyone does what they do, except to [[serve]] as [[additional]] corrupt [[characters]] who commit a double-cross. I'm surprised that so many [[established]] (and good) actors agreed to make such a [[hollow]] [[movie]]. This seemed like a movie made by college students who are working on their 2nd or 3rd project.

Don't waste your time unless you are in a film [[class]] and want an example of what not to do when making a movie. While I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]], I tried to figure out why they bothered making it. [[While]] the main plot of the [[filmmaking]] is [[conceivably]] [[alright]], there are all sorts of unrelated/[[superfluous]] subplots. The [[merchandising]] people in Hollywood must have dictated the multiple bad guys, [[lifelong]] double-crosses and the man and woman who get too close and have sex. It's odd that we see more of them having sex than we did of the President and his mistress. The many plots and subplots make the film too [[broader]] and [[nos]] of the characters are [[satisfactorily]] developed - I really didn't feel like I knew any [[nature]], except that [[everybody]] is corrupt and evil. The ending is totally incomplete - it left me more than just [[wanna]] what might have been, but what was supposed to be. In the end, there is really no explanation of why anyone does what they do, except to [[serving]] as [[supplemental]] corrupt [[trait]] who commit a double-cross. I'm surprised that so many [[elaborated]] (and good) actors agreed to make such a [[empty]] [[filmmaking]]. This seemed like a movie made by college students who are working on their 2nd or 3rd project.

Don't waste your time unless you are in a film [[sorts]] and want an example of what not to do when making a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I thought the [[racism]] and [[prejudice]] against Carl Brashear was grossly overdramatized for Hollywood effect. I do not [[believe]] the U. S. Navy was ever that [[overtly]] racist. I cannot imagine a full Captain, the Commanding Officer, ever telling his Chief to intentionally flunk anyone. Certainly not at the risk of his life. And there has never been a Chief Petty Officer as unabashedly [[prejudice]] against everybody but WASPs as DeNiro's [[character]]. [[No]] [[Chief]] as slovenly and drunken as he was played would have ever risen to Master Chief in the first place. [[Cuba]] Gooding [[saved]] an otherwise badly done movie. I thought the [[racist]] and [[detriment]] against Carl Brashear was grossly overdramatized for Hollywood effect. I do not [[reckon]] the U. S. Navy was ever that [[candidly]] racist. I cannot imagine a full Captain, the Commanding Officer, ever telling his Chief to intentionally flunk anyone. Certainly not at the risk of his life. And there has never been a Chief Petty Officer as unabashedly [[detriment]] against everybody but WASPs as DeNiro's [[nature]]. [[Nope]] [[Jefe]] as slovenly and drunken as he was played would have ever risen to Master Chief in the first place. [[Kubo]] Gooding [[save]] an otherwise badly done movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I never thought an [[old]] [[cartoon]] would bring tears to my eyes! When I first purchased Casper & [[Friends]]: Spooking About Africa, I so much wanted to see the very first Casper cartoon entitled The Friendly Ghost (1945), But when I saw the next cartoon, There's Good Boos To-Night (1948), It [[made]] me break down! I couldn't believe how [[sad]] and [[tragic]] it was after seeing Casper's fox get [[killed]]! I never saw anything like that in the other Casper cartoons! This is the saddest one of all! It was so depressing, I just couldn't watch it again. It's just like seeing Lassie die at the end of a movie. I know it's a classic,But it's too much for us old cartoon fans to handle like me! If I wanted to watch something old and classic, I rather watch something happy and funny! But when I think about this Casper cartoon, I think about my cats! I never thought an [[antigua]] [[caricature]] would bring tears to my eyes! When I first purchased Casper & [[Boyfriends]]: Spooking About Africa, I so much wanted to see the very first Casper cartoon entitled The Friendly Ghost (1945), But when I saw the next cartoon, There's Good Boos To-Night (1948), It [[brought]] me break down! I couldn't believe how [[unlucky]] and [[calamitous]] it was after seeing Casper's fox get [[kill]]! I never saw anything like that in the other Casper cartoons! This is the saddest one of all! It was so depressing, I just couldn't watch it again. It's just like seeing Lassie die at the end of a movie. I know it's a classic,But it's too much for us old cartoon fans to handle like me! If I wanted to watch something old and classic, I rather watch something happy and funny! But when I think about this Casper cartoon, I think about my cats! --------------------------------------------- Result 4422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is simply the epitome of what a made for TV movie should be. It was a lazy Sunday [[afternoon]] when my [[wife]] and I were in [[grad]] [[school]] that we [[stumbled]] upon this. The [[cheesy]] acting. The poorly written script. The [[good]] ol' boys. The ridiculous, yet somehow obvious, cliché, and banal premise. The riding in pickup trucks with your propped-up wife-corpse. It has it all.

You will meet familiar characters: gold-digging hussy, stupid rich boy who wants to make it on his own, friends-who-know-better, Daddy who knows better but drives son away. And the wife-corpse. Propped up. In a pick-up.

Wow: and the title. Several things in our lives have been "Texas Tragedies" since watching this [[beauty]]. Everyone involved in its creation deserves a medal. This is simply the epitome of what a made for TV movie should be. It was a lazy Sunday [[evening]] when my [[femme]] and I were in [[postgraduate]] [[tuition]] that we [[faltered]] upon this. The [[dorky]] acting. The poorly written script. The [[alright]] ol' boys. The ridiculous, yet somehow obvious, cliché, and banal premise. The riding in pickup trucks with your propped-up wife-corpse. It has it all.

You will meet familiar characters: gold-digging hussy, stupid rich boy who wants to make it on his own, friends-who-know-better, Daddy who knows better but drives son away. And the wife-corpse. Propped up. In a pick-up.

Wow: and the title. Several things in our lives have been "Texas Tragedies" since watching this [[beaut]]. Everyone involved in its creation deserves a medal. --------------------------------------------- Result 4423 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Of the three remakes of this [[plot]], I like them all, I have all three on VHS and in addition have a copy of this one on DVD. There is just [[enough]] variation in the scripts to make all three [[entertaining]] and re-watchable. In addition has any other film been remade three times with such all star casts in each? Of course the main stars in this one are [[great]], but the supporting actors are [[also]] [[superb]]. I particularly like William Tracy as Pepi. He was such a scene stealer that I have searched to find other movies he is in. He appeared in many, but most are not available. As the other comments, I also say - [[buy]] this one. Of the three remakes of this [[intrigue]], I like them all, I have all three on VHS and in addition have a copy of this one on DVD. There is just [[sufficient]] variation in the scripts to make all three [[amusing]] and re-watchable. In addition has any other film been remade three times with such all star casts in each? Of course the main stars in this one are [[wondrous]], but the supporting actors are [[similarly]] [[wondrous]]. I particularly like William Tracy as Pepi. He was such a scene stealer that I have searched to find other movies he is in. He appeared in many, but most are not available. As the other comments, I also say - [[buying]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] THE GIRL FROM MISSOURI arrives in New York [[City]] [[knowing]] exactly what she wants: to amount to [[something]] solid by [[marrying]] a [[millionaire]] - without [[losing]] her virginity. With her knockout good looks she quickly catches the eye of the playboy son of a tycoon, but by staying true to her virtue will she also discover [[true]] [[love]]?

Jean Harlow sizzles in this [[excellent]] [[little]] [[comedy]]. With her [[platinum]] hair & gorgeous accouterments, she is a dazzler. But her beauty should not [[obscure]] the fact that she was also a very good actress. She has [[rightfully]] [[earned]] her [[spot]] at the very top of the Hollywood pantheon.

An excellent cast gives Harlow fine support: Lionel Barrymore as the [[wily]] old tycoon, wise to Harlow's ways; handsome Franchot Tone as his son, smitten with love; raucous Patsy Kelly, stealing her scenes as Harlow's sidekick; debonair Alan Mowbray, as a well-mannered English Lord; elderly Clara Blandick as Barrymore's [[feisty]] secretary; hearty Hale Hamilton as a rich man with an eye for the ladies; muscular Nat Pendleton as a [[lifeguard]] who catches Kelly's flirtatious eye; and [[Lewis]] Stone, [[unforgettable]] in a small role as a bankrupted [[businessman]].

It should be [[noted]] that this [[film]] was produced [[soon]] after Hollywood's Production [[Code]] was [[instituted]]. A comparison with RED-HEADED [[WOMAN]], made two years earlier, would be fascinating - in which Harlow's character goes after the same [[ends]], but uses very [[different]] [[means]]. THE GIRL FROM MISSOURI arrives in New York [[Town]] [[mindful]] exactly what she wants: to amount to [[anything]] solid by [[marry]] a [[billionaire]] - without [[wasting]] her virginity. With her knockout good looks she quickly catches the eye of the playboy son of a tycoon, but by staying true to her virtue will she also discover [[genuine]] [[likes]]?

Jean Harlow sizzles in this [[wondrous]] [[petite]] [[humour]]. With her [[sinker]] hair & gorgeous accouterments, she is a dazzler. But her beauty should not [[fuzzy]] the fact that she was also a very good actress. She has [[legitimately]] [[acquired]] her [[stain]] at the very top of the Hollywood pantheon.

An excellent cast gives Harlow fine support: Lionel Barrymore as the [[devious]] old tycoon, wise to Harlow's ways; handsome Franchot Tone as his son, smitten with love; raucous Patsy Kelly, stealing her scenes as Harlow's sidekick; debonair Alan Mowbray, as a well-mannered English Lord; elderly Clara Blandick as Barrymore's [[plucky]] secretary; hearty Hale Hamilton as a rich man with an eye for the ladies; muscular Nat Pendleton as a [[rescuer]] who catches Kelly's flirtatious eye; and [[Luis]] Stone, [[memorable]] in a small role as a bankrupted [[businessmen]].

It should be [[pointed]] that this [[films]] was produced [[expeditiously]] after Hollywood's Production [[Coding]] was [[incurred]]. A comparison with RED-HEADED [[FEMALE]], made two years earlier, would be fascinating - in which Harlow's character goes after the same [[culminates]], but uses very [[multiple]] [[signifies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is widely viewed in Australia as one of the best cop dramas ever produced here ... and for my money, anywhere. It's raw, gritty, the characters are real, the situations are believable and it doesn't shy away from the darker side of life confronted every day by cops and the criminals, victims, lawyers and other people in their various orbits.

This show ran for 2 seasons and was discontinued because the show didn't sell well overseas. We are all sorry for its loss: however, like Fawlty Towers, we will be able to revere this as a limited-length series of uniformly high quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 4426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Gorgeous [[bodies]], gorgeous [[colors]] and [[camera]] work, [[pretentious]] dialog, [[banal]] plot. The name of the prima donna, Camilla, and the eponymous [[flowers]] that appear frequently, are enough to remind us of the plot similarities from Dumas' novel La Dame aux Camelias, the movie Camille starring Garbo and (I think) Robert Taylor, and last but not least Verdi's opera La Traviata. Beautiful, not-too-virtuous [[young]] ladies, social [[outcasts]] for one reason or another, [[loved]], split up, reunited just in [[time]] to [[die]] of tuberculosis in the last scene... One forgives banal plots and [[stupid]] [[unrealistic]] dialog in [[opera]], but why waste Hayak, Don Sutherland, a beautiful rendition of [[LA]] in the 30s, a deus ex machina earthquake that conveniently [[kills]] the other woman, and all that beauty on this mediocre turkey where there isn't even any beautiful singing? Gorgeous [[body]], gorgeous [[color]] and [[cameras]] work, [[presumptuous]] dialog, [[trivial]] plot. The name of the prima donna, Camilla, and the eponymous [[flores]] that appear frequently, are enough to remind us of the plot similarities from Dumas' novel La Dame aux Camelias, the movie Camille starring Garbo and (I think) Robert Taylor, and last but not least Verdi's opera La Traviata. Beautiful, not-too-virtuous [[youthful]] ladies, social [[pariahs]] for one reason or another, [[enjoyed]], split up, reunited just in [[period]] to [[dead]] of tuberculosis in the last scene... One forgives banal plots and [[silly]] [[utopian]] dialog in [[dramas]], but why waste Hayak, Don Sutherland, a beautiful rendition of [[ANGELES]] in the 30s, a deus ex machina earthquake that conveniently [[assassination]] the other woman, and all that beauty on this mediocre turkey where there isn't even any beautiful singing? --------------------------------------------- Result 4427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (68%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I haven't seen this, & don't [[plan]] to see this movie or any other that includes Lindsay......unless & until "poor little rich girl" straightens out her life for a 2 year period beginning with her most recent arrest in July 2007.

In fact, I don't know anyone that has gone to see ANY of Lindsay's recent movies. I rather imagine 2007 will be the high water mark in her movie making career, until she cleans up her [[act]]. All of the recent publicity has only hindered her movie making career, if she has any further aspirations to make any more movies

Up to this time, movie producers have actively sought Lindsay for roles in their upcoming production. Now, Lindsay will probably have to go to auditions & actually compete for ANY role. Her reputation is currently "poison" & quite possible could have a negative effect on box office ticket sales on any movie she is in.

Sooooo....now Lindsay is going to have to deal with "not being wanted".....is she going to be able to handle this?

I wonder if even Jay Leno will want to have Lindsay back on his TV Show?

All of the foregoing is merely my OPINION. I have no inside information. I haven't seen this, & don't [[systems]] to see this movie or any other that includes Lindsay......unless & until "poor little rich girl" straightens out her life for a 2 year period beginning with her most recent arrest in July 2007.

In fact, I don't know anyone that has gone to see ANY of Lindsay's recent movies. I rather imagine 2007 will be the high water mark in her movie making career, until she cleans up her [[law]]. All of the recent publicity has only hindered her movie making career, if she has any further aspirations to make any more movies

Up to this time, movie producers have actively sought Lindsay for roles in their upcoming production. Now, Lindsay will probably have to go to auditions & actually compete for ANY role. Her reputation is currently "poison" & quite possible could have a negative effect on box office ticket sales on any movie she is in.

Sooooo....now Lindsay is going to have to deal with "not being wanted".....is she going to be able to handle this?

I wonder if even Jay Leno will want to have Lindsay back on his TV Show?

All of the foregoing is merely my OPINION. I have no inside information. --------------------------------------------- Result 4428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The kids I [[took]] to this movie [[loved]] it (four children, ages 9 to 12 [[years]]; they would have given it 10 stars). Emma Roberts was adorable in the title role. ([[Expect]] to [[see]] more of this next-generation Roberts in the future.) After being over exposed to the likes of Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton, it was [[refreshing]] to see a girl who didn't look like she worked the streets. Also [[enjoyed]] seeing a supporting cast that included [[Tate]] Donovan, Rachel Leigh [[Cook]], [[Barry]] Bostwick, and Monica [[Parker]] (with a cameo by Bruce Willis). Final takeaway: [[Cute]] [[film]].

(Note: I did not read the book [[series]], so my [[comments]] are [[based]] on the [[merits]] of the [[film]] [[alone]].) The kids I [[picked]] to this movie [[cared]] it (four children, ages 9 to 12 [[olds]]; they would have given it 10 stars). Emma Roberts was adorable in the title role. ([[Hopes]] to [[consults]] more of this next-generation Roberts in the future.) After being over exposed to the likes of Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton, it was [[freshen]] to see a girl who didn't look like she worked the streets. Also [[liked]] seeing a supporting cast that included [[Tet]] Donovan, Rachel Leigh [[Cookery]], [[Bari]] Bostwick, and Monica [[Barker]] (with a cameo by Bruce Willis). Final takeaway: [[Mignon]] [[flick]].

(Note: I did not read the book [[serial]], so my [[sightings]] are [[base]] on the [[deserved]] of the [[kino]] [[mere]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 4429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Reviewing KAZAAM and saying it's a bad movie isn't hard at all--after all, critics at the time it came out fell all over themselves excoriating this film--saying it was among the [[worst]] films of the decade! So the fact that I say it's bad or anyone else says it's bad is certainly no surprise. It's like someone [[talking]] about WWII--practically no one says that was a [[GOOD]] thing, right?! The question I have and no place on IMDb can answer it is "why did they make this in the first place?!". After all, it's obvious to anyone who isn't severely brain injured that the film would be horrible. But, movies like ED (a baseball playing chimp), COOL AS ICE (starring the ever-popular Vanilla Ice), TROLL 2 (which doesn't even have any trolls in it), BABY GENIUSES (Einstain-like superhero [[babies]]) and PINOCCHIO IN OUTER SPACE (huh!?!) prove that any idea, no matter how dumb, can make it to the big screen! So, the idea of the best basketball player of the time [[starring]] as a [[genie]] to an [[obnoxious]] little brat seems downright 'normal'!

The film starts with a kid who is pretty jerky keying the lockers in the hallway of the school. Like the punk from FREE WILLY, this kid is somehow 'misunderstood' (in other words, a total brat) and you know that no matter how selfish and horrible he is, by the end of the film he'll have learned something and grown. Just once, I want to see a punk kid like this end up in prison or or dead by the end of the film! Eventually, while the neighborhood bullies are in the middle of pummeling him, the genie Kazaam (Shaquille O'Neal)is [[accidentally]] [[released]] and insists on giving the brat three [[wishes]]. But, the kid doesn't [[believe]] him AND the genie's magic [[seems]] a tad rusty.

[[Eventually]] the brat does [[realize]] that Kazaam is for [[real]]. [[However]], unlike most kids, he withholds [[making]] his [[wishes]] so, in the meantime, Kazaam is [[forced]] to follow him [[around]] everywhere--like his own personal [[servant]]. And, [[according]] to the [[cliché]], you know that by the [[end]] of the film, [[Max]] and Kazaam will have become lifelong buddies and a bunch of tears will be shed. Oh, and Max will have come to terms with his absent father and mom's fiancé (I'm gonna gag). Apparently this genie is a bit of a social worker in addition to being a granter of wishes.

As for Kazaam, Shaquille speaks in rhyme through much of the movie and even takes a break to rap...very poorly. I'm a middle-aged white guy and I think I could probably rap at least as well! He's an amazing basketball player and I've heard he's a nice guy--but a rapper...no way! As far as his acting goes, he wasn't great but had such a nice personality in the film that it's hard to hate him--even if they made him do a lot of very stupid things.

So is the movie as excruciatingly awful as you've probably heard? through the first two-thirds of the movie, I would have said no. Shaquille seemed to try his best with an unlikable kid and a bad script. However, later in the film, the bad becomes horrid--as Kazaam seems too concerned with himself to help the kid when he's really needed. And, out of nowhere, the plot gets really, really weird--as the guy who wants to make Kazaam a rap star(?!?!) turns out to be an evil mobster! And, oddly, this guy seems to accept that Kazaam is a genie with no hesitation!

In addition, the last portion of the film consists of people trying to kill Max and his dad. I know that the kid was annoying, but this is supposed to be a kids' film!! What part of 'trying to kill the kid' didn't the writers not understand?!? Then, in an ending that makes this perhaps the worst kids film ending in history, Kazaam becomes god or something and it all was like a drug-induced hallucination! This ending was even dumber and weirder than the one in THE BLACK HOLE...and boy, did it make my brain hurt!! Uggghh--the horrible dialog was just too much to bear!!!

Overall, it's a terrible film that is due mostly to writers who were certifiably insane. Yes, folks, with a messed up message, bizarre non-kid friendly material and horrible characters, this is one wretched film. Sadly, given the idea and actors, it's hard to imagine the final product turning out much worse!!

By the way, if you want to see a Genie in a modern world film that is GOOD, try the British made for TV film "Bernard and the Genie"--a charming and [[exceptionally]] well-written film from start to finish. Reviewing KAZAAM and saying it's a bad movie isn't hard at all--after all, critics at the time it came out fell all over themselves excoriating this film--saying it was among the [[hardest]] films of the decade! So the fact that I say it's bad or anyone else says it's bad is certainly no surprise. It's like someone [[spoke]] about WWII--practically no one says that was a [[WELL]] thing, right?! The question I have and no place on IMDb can answer it is "why did they make this in the first place?!". After all, it's obvious to anyone who isn't severely brain injured that the film would be horrible. But, movies like ED (a baseball playing chimp), COOL AS ICE (starring the ever-popular Vanilla Ice), TROLL 2 (which doesn't even have any trolls in it), BABY GENIUSES (Einstain-like superhero [[babe]]) and PINOCCHIO IN OUTER SPACE (huh!?!) prove that any idea, no matter how dumb, can make it to the big screen! So, the idea of the best basketball player of the time [[championships]] as a [[genius]] to an [[despicable]] little brat seems downright 'normal'!

The film starts with a kid who is pretty jerky keying the lockers in the hallway of the school. Like the punk from FREE WILLY, this kid is somehow 'misunderstood' (in other words, a total brat) and you know that no matter how selfish and horrible he is, by the end of the film he'll have learned something and grown. Just once, I want to see a punk kid like this end up in prison or or dead by the end of the film! Eventually, while the neighborhood bullies are in the middle of pummeling him, the genie Kazaam (Shaquille O'Neal)is [[unintentionally]] [[liberated]] and insists on giving the brat three [[desires]]. But, the kid doesn't [[believing]] him AND the genie's magic [[seem]] a tad rusty.

[[Lastly]] the brat does [[attain]] that Kazaam is for [[veritable]]. [[Instead]], unlike most kids, he withholds [[doing]] his [[desires]] so, in the meantime, Kazaam is [[compelled]] to follow him [[almost]] everywhere--like his own personal [[retainers]]. And, [[conforming]] to the [[clichés]], you know that by the [[ceases]] of the film, [[Maxie]] and Kazaam will have become lifelong buddies and a bunch of tears will be shed. Oh, and Max will have come to terms with his absent father and mom's fiancé (I'm gonna gag). Apparently this genie is a bit of a social worker in addition to being a granter of wishes.

As for Kazaam, Shaquille speaks in rhyme through much of the movie and even takes a break to rap...very poorly. I'm a middle-aged white guy and I think I could probably rap at least as well! He's an amazing basketball player and I've heard he's a nice guy--but a rapper...no way! As far as his acting goes, he wasn't great but had such a nice personality in the film that it's hard to hate him--even if they made him do a lot of very stupid things.

So is the movie as excruciatingly awful as you've probably heard? through the first two-thirds of the movie, I would have said no. Shaquille seemed to try his best with an unlikable kid and a bad script. However, later in the film, the bad becomes horrid--as Kazaam seems too concerned with himself to help the kid when he's really needed. And, out of nowhere, the plot gets really, really weird--as the guy who wants to make Kazaam a rap star(?!?!) turns out to be an evil mobster! And, oddly, this guy seems to accept that Kazaam is a genie with no hesitation!

In addition, the last portion of the film consists of people trying to kill Max and his dad. I know that the kid was annoying, but this is supposed to be a kids' film!! What part of 'trying to kill the kid' didn't the writers not understand?!? Then, in an ending that makes this perhaps the worst kids film ending in history, Kazaam becomes god or something and it all was like a drug-induced hallucination! This ending was even dumber and weirder than the one in THE BLACK HOLE...and boy, did it make my brain hurt!! Uggghh--the horrible dialog was just too much to bear!!!

Overall, it's a terrible film that is due mostly to writers who were certifiably insane. Yes, folks, with a messed up message, bizarre non-kid friendly material and horrible characters, this is one wretched film. Sadly, given the idea and actors, it's hard to imagine the final product turning out much worse!!

By the way, if you want to see a Genie in a modern world film that is GOOD, try the British made for TV film "Bernard and the Genie"--a charming and [[eminently]] well-written film from start to finish. --------------------------------------------- Result 4430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I do not [[believe]] all the [[praise]] for this [[movie]]. The play and movie were a ripoff of Sleuth. Michael Caine wishes he were [[Olivier]], and Reeves [[wishes]] he were Caine. Caine even had the nerve to do a remake of Sleuth with [[Jude]] Law [[playing]] his original part. [[Jude]] Law? You mean the one that did the remake of "Alfie"?

This [[movie]] was [[made]] during a [[period]] of Caine's [[career]] when it was [[obvious]] he [[needed]] to [[pay]] off [[gambling]] debts. He would do [[anything]] for [[money]]. He [[would]] [[star]] in such award winning movies such as this, and "Beyond the Poseidon [[Adventure]]". What seems to be driving the praise for this movie is Reeves [[death]]. He deserves better than to be [[remembered]] for this [[lousy]] [[movie]]. And so does Caine. This movie can be found in the $5.97 bin at Walmart. Along with [[gems]] like "The [[Island]]", and "[[Blame]] it on Rio". I do not [[think]] all the [[extol]] for this [[movies]]. The play and movie were a ripoff of Sleuth. Michael Caine wishes he were [[Olivia]], and Reeves [[desires]] he were Caine. Caine even had the nerve to do a remake of Sleuth with [[Jews]] Law [[replay]] his original part. [[Jews]] Law? You mean the one that did the remake of "Alfie"?

This [[filmmaking]] was [[effected]] during a [[time]] of Caine's [[professions]] when it was [[apparent]] he [[necessity]] to [[pays]] off [[gaming]] debts. He would do [[something]] for [[cash]]. He [[could]] [[stars]] in such award winning movies such as this, and "Beyond the Poseidon [[Adventurer]]". What seems to be driving the praise for this movie is Reeves [[fatalities]]. He deserves better than to be [[reminded]] for this [[rotten]] [[kino]]. And so does Caine. This movie can be found in the $5.97 bin at Walmart. Along with [[jewels]] like "The [[Isla]]", and "[[Culpa]] it on Rio". --------------------------------------------- Result 4431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] "Bruce Almighty" looks and [[sounds]] incredibly [[stupid]], [[especially]] from the [[trailers]]. [[Nevertheless]], I found in it a deeper message that [[actually]] made me like this [[film]] more. Bruce (Jim [[Carrey]]) is [[angry]] at [[God]] and is [[given]] divine powers by him to be [[God]] for a week to [[see]] if he can do a better [[job]]. Morgan Freeman plays a man symbolized here as [[God]], and [[though]] it isn't his [[usual]] [[type]] of film or one of his best [[roles]], he does excellent with what he is given to [[work]] with. [[Although]] [[crude]] at [[times]], the [[film]] does have [[quite]] a few laughs, from Bruce parting his soup in half like the Red [[Sea]] and the customers' [[reactions]] to him, as well as Freeman's [[seemingly]] laid-back and wisecracking image of God. It is overly [[exaggerated]] at [[times]], and there is some crude [[humor]], but [[overall]] it [[manages]] to be somewhat funny. There is a decent [[supporting]] cast, such as [[Jennifer]] Aniston, Lisa Ann [[Walter]], and Steve Carrell, which [[always]] [[helps]]. The [[end]] of the [[film]] [[proves]] to be very [[romantic]] and tear-jerking, and the [[message]] is [[clear]], that we should do what [[God]] has [[called]] us to do and "be the [[miracle]]." The film is far from perfect, but [[still]] [[enjoyable]], and far [[better]] than I and [[many]] people [[probably]] [[would]] have [[expected]], [[especially]] if we [[see]] the [[deeper]] [[message]] of the film.

*** out of **** "Bruce Almighty" looks and [[noises]] incredibly [[dopey]], [[predominantly]] from the [[trailer]]. [[Albeit]], I found in it a deeper message that [[indeed]] made me like this [[cinematography]] more. Bruce (Jim [[Cary]]) is [[irate]] at [[Christ]] and is [[granted]] divine powers by him to be [[Christ]] for a week to [[behold]] if he can do a better [[labour]]. Morgan Freeman plays a man symbolized here as [[Deity]], and [[if]] it isn't his [[routine]] [[kind]] of film or one of his best [[duties]], he does excellent with what he is given to [[working]] with. [[Despite]] [[coarse]] at [[time]], the [[films]] does have [[very]] a few laughs, from Bruce parting his soup in half like the Red [[Hai]] and the customers' [[answers]] to him, as well as Freeman's [[allegedly]] laid-back and wisecracking image of God. It is overly [[inflated]] at [[time]], and there is some crude [[humour]], but [[total]] it [[runs]] to be somewhat funny. There is a decent [[assisting]] cast, such as [[Jessica]] Aniston, Lisa Ann [[Walters]], and Steve Carrell, which [[invariably]] [[aids]]. The [[termination]] of the [[cinema]] [[demonstrating]] to be very [[romance]] and tear-jerking, and the [[messages]] is [[clara]], that we should do what [[Lord]] has [[drew]] us to do and "be the [[miracles]]." The film is far from perfect, but [[however]] [[nice]], and far [[best]] than I and [[multiple]] people [[indubitably]] [[ought]] have [[waited]], [[principally]] if we [[behold]] the [[closer]] [[messages]] of the film.

*** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4432 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terrible acting, lame plot, stupid story and just all around terrible movie sums up this piece of junk. It was excruciating to sit through. Just awful. Do not waste one penny on this. The movie theaters should feel bad about actually putting this movie out there for people to watch. This "horror" film was not even in the least bit scary, creepy or disturbing. It was in no way visually appealing. The acting was so terrible by all of the actors that any attempt to draw you into the movie through dialog are completely destroyed within moments of the actor/actress opening their mouth. Plus the entire story, i don't know why someone would make a movie with this story AGAIN. Do not waste your time or money. Even if it's a free ticket don't waste one moment viewing this movie. You will feel dumber for watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Tom the cat, Jerry the mouse, and Spike the Dog (here called Butch, his third name, his second being 'Killer') decide to sign a peace treaty to all love each other. It's weird and a bit unnatural seeing them all buddy buddy like this and their friend's seem to think so too. But by the end thanks to a disagreement over a steak, everything is back to normal and all is how it should be. This short is the second one of three on the new Spotlight DVD to be edited and I have no clue why this one was. This cartoon can be found on disc one of the Spotlight collection DVD of "Tom & Jerry"

My Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 4434 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love All Dogs Go to Heaven even though I'm a guy. This and The Land Before Time are the best animated films that Don Bluth has made! In the movie Gharlie Barkin (Burt Reynolds) is helped by his friend Itchy (Dom DeLuise) freedom out of the pound in New Orleans 1939. Charlie who's in casino business wants to share equal with his partner Carface (Vic Tayback). Carface who is unwilling to share the equal with Charlie pushes a car on a bridge onto Charlie killing him! Charlie enters heaven and meets Annabelle (Melba Moore) who shows Charlie that his time is up by showing him a watch that has stopped and she explains that All Dogs Go to Heaven because all dogs are naturally good! Charlie hides the stop watch behind his back and switches it back and he returns to Earth alive with Annabelle screaming You can never come back! Charlie reunites with Itchy and they go and explore soon to find out that Carface has not only attempted to murder Charlie he has also kidnapped a little orphan Girl named Ann Marie (Judith Barsi). When Carface leaves Charlie and Itchy help Ann Marie escape. The next day Charlie Itchy and Ann Marie go to look for money! Ann Marie sees a couple who she thinks would make great parents for her! While Ann Marie talks to the couple Charlie sneaks up behind the man and steals his wallet! Charlie Ann Marie and Itchy then go to a horse race where they bet the man's money that a horse will win the race! The horse they said would win winds up winning and Charlie, Itchy, and Ann Marie are payed $1,000 for the bet! Charlie promises Ann Marie he'll use the money to give to the poor but winds up buying a new casino and gambling and buys pizza for his friend Flo (Loni Anderson) and her puppies. Soon Ann Marie has found out that Charlie had stolen the wallet from the man and used his money on the horse race and everything! Charlie sad about this has a dream about going to Hell and the Devil! Soon Charlie awakens and finds out that Ann Marie is gone! She has left to give the wallet back to the couple who forgive her about the wallet and invite her to breakfast! Charlie asks Ann Marie to leave with him and she does pretending to be sick but are captured by mice who try to feed them to King Gator but they manage to escape! Soon Carface shows up and captures Ann Marie. He plans to drown her but Charlie comes to the rescue and calls on King Gator who eats Carface. Charlie's time is up and he must die again. Itchy with the help of the other dogs finds the couple who took Ann Marie in and get them to come with them to where Ann Marie is. They are there in time to save Ann Marie but are too late to save Charlie who's time has ended! Charlie who is awarded for his heroic effort for saving Ann Marie is welcomed back to Heaven but before he enters he says good-bye to Ann Marie who has been adopted by the couple and asks her to take care of Itchy for him. She says yes and tells Charlie she loves him and good-bye! Charlie enters Heaven again as it's said All Dogs Go to Heaven! Filled with wonderful animation, characters, and story Don Bluth has proved to us again that he is a good animator! It's too bad this movie was release the same year Little Mermaid which is my favorite Disney movie! They both came out in 1989 which was the year before I was born! I guess I'll have to call them both the Best Animated Features of 1989! 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 4435 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This subject matter [[deserves]] a much better script, and final [[result]], than this movie serves up. The [[script]] is full of [[holes]] because it was never conceived as a story, but rather a string of [[nightmare]] scenarios loosely knitted together. The [[gaps]] and loose [[ends]] in the story line are [[numerous]]. The scene where the kidnap victim is [[told]] that her [[parents]] are not dead, and have been looking for her since she was taken, is just [[bizarre]]. It is [[written]] as a cathartic therapy moment with the head of the [[shelter]] for [[runaways]] handing her a "missing poster" from when she was eight. In the real world, if the head of a [[shelter]] for [[runaways]] [[found]] out that he had, under his roof, a solved kidnapping, what [[would]] have followed [[would]] have been an [[immediate]] [[call]] to the [[police]]. It's a law [[enforcement]] [[issue]] not a 12 minute segment for [[Oprah]]. [[Everything]] that follows from there to the [[end]] is so short shrift that I can only conclude that the first 90 minutes was for [[pure]] [[gratuitous]] [[exploitation]]. Funny, that's what this movie is supposed to be [[condemning]]. [[In]] the end it seems to have [[joined]] in. This subject matter [[merits]] a much better script, and final [[consequence]], than this movie serves up. The [[scripts]] is full of [[keyholes]] because it was never conceived as a story, but rather a string of [[cabos]] scenarios loosely knitted together. The [[demerits]] and loose [[culminates]] in the story line are [[many]]. The scene where the kidnap victim is [[tell]] that her [[parent]] are not dead, and have been looking for her since she was taken, is just [[weird]]. It is [[authored]] as a cathartic therapy moment with the head of the [[dwelling]] for [[escapees]] handing her a "missing poster" from when she was eight. In the real world, if the head of a [[accommodations]] for [[escapees]] [[detected]] out that he had, under his roof, a solved kidnapping, what [[ought]] have followed [[could]] have been an [[instant]] [[invitation]] to the [[cops]]. It's a law [[implementation]] [[matter]] not a 12 minute segment for [[Kimmel]]. [[Any]] that follows from there to the [[termination]] is so short shrift that I can only conclude that the first 90 minutes was for [[pur]] [[unjustified]] [[operate]]. Funny, that's what this movie is supposed to be [[reprimand]]. [[For]] the end it seems to have [[rejoined]] in. --------------------------------------------- Result 4436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A [[stupid]] rich guy circa about 1800 wants to [[visit]] a nearby mental asylum to see how a famous [[doctor]] cares for his [[patients]]. Despite an initially hostile response, he is soon cordially [[invited]] in and [[given]] a [[tour]] by the [[good]] [[doctor]]. And, as the [[doctor]] shows him about, he talks and talks and talks!!! And as he [[talks]], [[loonies]] [[run]] amok here and there doing [[nothing]] [[especially]] [[productive]]. [[While]] there is [[SOME]] [[action]] here and there (and some of it quite [[disturbing]]), it's [[amazing]] how [[dull]] and cerebral the [[whole]] thing is--lacking life and energy, which is odd for a horror flick. Even a guy who thinks he's a chicken and dresses like one becomes rather tiresome. The further this tour takes the guest, the more disturbing it becomes until ultimately you realize that the inmates have taken over the hospital and are torturing their keepers. Yet again, despite this twist, the film is amazingly lifeless in many places--particularly when it moves very slowly as a bizarre ceremony is taking place or people are just wandering about the set. Only when the workers from the asylum found in a prison cell, starving, does the film have any real impact. Considering this plot, it sure is hard to imagine making it boring, but the people who made this cheap exploitational film have! Now with the same plot and competent writing, acting and direction, this COULD have been an interesting and worthwhile film.

You know, now that I think about it, this was the plot of one of the episodes of the original "Star Trek" TV show! You know, the one with "Lord Garth--Master of the Universe" and Kirk and Spock are held prisoner by this madman and his crazed followers.

A final note: The film has quite a bit of nudity here and there and includes a rape scene, so be forewarned--it's not for kids. In fact, considering how worthless the film is, it isn't for anyone! However, with the version included in the "50 Movie Pack--Chilling Classics", the print is so incredibly bad that it's hard to see all this flesh due to the print being so very dark. A [[foolish]] rich guy circa about 1800 wants to [[visits]] a nearby mental asylum to see how a famous [[doctors]] cares for his [[patient]]. Despite an initially hostile response, he is soon cordially [[inviting]] in and [[yielded]] a [[journey]] by the [[alright]] [[doktor]]. And, as the [[medic]] shows him about, he talks and talks and talks!!! And as he [[negotiations]], [[nutters]] [[executing]] amok here and there doing [[nada]] [[mostly]] [[fruitful]]. [[Despite]] there is [[CERTAIN]] [[measures]] here and there (and some of it quite [[nagging]]), it's [[superb]] how [[boring]] and cerebral the [[together]] thing is--lacking life and energy, which is odd for a horror flick. Even a guy who thinks he's a chicken and dresses like one becomes rather tiresome. The further this tour takes the guest, the more disturbing it becomes until ultimately you realize that the inmates have taken over the hospital and are torturing their keepers. Yet again, despite this twist, the film is amazingly lifeless in many places--particularly when it moves very slowly as a bizarre ceremony is taking place or people are just wandering about the set. Only when the workers from the asylum found in a prison cell, starving, does the film have any real impact. Considering this plot, it sure is hard to imagine making it boring, but the people who made this cheap exploitational film have! Now with the same plot and competent writing, acting and direction, this COULD have been an interesting and worthwhile film.

You know, now that I think about it, this was the plot of one of the episodes of the original "Star Trek" TV show! You know, the one with "Lord Garth--Master of the Universe" and Kirk and Spock are held prisoner by this madman and his crazed followers.

A final note: The film has quite a bit of nudity here and there and includes a rape scene, so be forewarned--it's not for kids. In fact, considering how worthless the film is, it isn't for anyone! However, with the version included in the "50 Movie Pack--Chilling Classics", the print is so incredibly bad that it's hard to see all this flesh due to the print being so very dark. --------------------------------------------- Result 4437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was Eddie Robinson's 101st film and his last, and he died of cancer nine days after shooting was complete. All of which makes his key scene in the movie all the more poignant.

Although some of the hair and clothing styles are a bit dated (also note the video game shown in the film), but the subject of the film is pretty much timeless. Heston said he had wanted to make the film for some time because he really believed in the dangers of overpopulation.

Several things make this film a classic. The story is solid.

The acting is top-notch, especially the interplay between Heston and Robinson, with nice performances also by Cotten and Peters.

The music is absolutely perfect. The medley of Beethoven, Grieg, and Tchaikovsky combined with the pastoral visual elements make for some truly moving scenes. This was the icing on the cake for the film.

And the theme (or the "point") of the film is a significant one. Yes, it's a film about overpopulation, but on a more important note it's a cautionary tale about what can go wrong with Man's stewardship of Earth. It's in the subtext that you find the real message of the film. Pay attention to what Sol says about the "old days" of the past (which is our present), and note how Thorn is incapable of comprehending what Sol is saying.

This film is one of my top sci-fi films of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Overall this movie was excellent for its time and will be interesting for many more generations to come. Although the plot is not 100% accurate to the book most everything is correct. The movie does skip far ahead and does miss some important parts. I found the book and ready and immediately wished that they had made a movie (because I hadn't found out about the movie yet) but later I found the movie in a bargain bin at Wal-Mart and decided to buy it and see if it was what I had expected. Overall I give this movies a 7 out of 10 for its good parts (relative accuracy and overall making sense) and for its bad parts (large time skips and small but noticeable inaccuracies). --------------------------------------------- Result 4439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Like [[many]] people here, I started out finding my patience being tried by this film. By the end, I actually [[shed]] a few tears.

It seems to be in the nature of most old films to drag for 7/8th length and then [[catch]] fire right at the end. Older film-goers learned to bide their time patiently through the slow parts, calm in the knowledge that the big payoff is on the way. But that isn't quite accurate. You see, to earlier audiences, what are to us the "slow parts" were the main body of the story. They watched and found anecdotal and thematic interest there. Modern audiences, post-Spielberg, are in a constant state of waiting to be hit with a small climax every two minutes when they see older films. It's the inflation problem of modern movies. Well, that isn't going to happen. It is not necessary to apologize for these films; it is simply that you have to adjust your expectations and personal rhythm when you watch them. At this point, the difference between Avatar and The Informer is like the difference between Euripides and a traveling production of Rent. Think about it for a minute or two. Not to strain at the obvious, but Euripides still deserves a hearing.

The "exciting part", for most modern viewers, begins with the IRA tribunal scene and escalates to the final couple of minutes, which, if you are at all on board or even paying attention by that time, will tear your heart out. It's not some high-tone universal abstract plea for forgiveness; it's a plea from one dimwit, and those who feel sorry for the big lummox, for a little mercy. It's that personal, and that embarrassingly naked an appeal. For after being mad at Gypo, irritated at him, [[thinking]] this is the dumbest character of all time, you finally find yourself won over by the scene of Gypo's erstwhile girlfriend pleading to another woman to talk her man into going easy him.

The film may be sentimental, but the sentimentality is not cheap as some here have charged. There's a matter of life and death that plays out here, and as long as you take the proposition of one life to a customer seriously, it's sentimentality wrung out of the most serious stuff.

8 of 10. And the fault for it not being 10 of 10 is my own and in some measure yours, if you are reading this. We have all asked for more, ever more, faster, ever faster until we cannot put ourselves in 1935 -- just yesterday, really -- as easily as we should be able. Like [[innumerable]] people here, I started out finding my patience being tried by this film. By the end, I actually [[boathouse]] a few tears.

It seems to be in the nature of most old films to drag for 7/8th length and then [[capturing]] fire right at the end. Older film-goers learned to bide their time patiently through the slow parts, calm in the knowledge that the big payoff is on the way. But that isn't quite accurate. You see, to earlier audiences, what are to us the "slow parts" were the main body of the story. They watched and found anecdotal and thematic interest there. Modern audiences, post-Spielberg, are in a constant state of waiting to be hit with a small climax every two minutes when they see older films. It's the inflation problem of modern movies. Well, that isn't going to happen. It is not necessary to apologize for these films; it is simply that you have to adjust your expectations and personal rhythm when you watch them. At this point, the difference between Avatar and The Informer is like the difference between Euripides and a traveling production of Rent. Think about it for a minute or two. Not to strain at the obvious, but Euripides still deserves a hearing.

The "exciting part", for most modern viewers, begins with the IRA tribunal scene and escalates to the final couple of minutes, which, if you are at all on board or even paying attention by that time, will tear your heart out. It's not some high-tone universal abstract plea for forgiveness; it's a plea from one dimwit, and those who feel sorry for the big lummox, for a little mercy. It's that personal, and that embarrassingly naked an appeal. For after being mad at Gypo, irritated at him, [[thoughts]] this is the dumbest character of all time, you finally find yourself won over by the scene of Gypo's erstwhile girlfriend pleading to another woman to talk her man into going easy him.

The film may be sentimental, but the sentimentality is not cheap as some here have charged. There's a matter of life and death that plays out here, and as long as you take the proposition of one life to a customer seriously, it's sentimentality wrung out of the most serious stuff.

8 of 10. And the fault for it not being 10 of 10 is my own and in some measure yours, if you are reading this. We have all asked for more, ever more, faster, ever faster until we cannot put ourselves in 1935 -- just yesterday, really -- as easily as we should be able. --------------------------------------------- Result 4440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[thought]] the [[movie]] was actually pretty [[good]]. I enjoyed the acting and it [[moved]] along well. The [[director]] seemed to really [[grasp]] the [[story]] he was trying to tell. I have to [[see]] the big budget one [[coming]] out [[today]], [[obviously]] they had a [[lot]] more money to throw at it but was very watchable. When you [[see]] a movie like this for a [[small]] budget you have to [[take]] that in to [[account]] when you are [[viewing]] it. There were some [[things]] that could of been better but most are budget related. The acting was pretty good the F/X and stunts were well [[done]]. A couple of standouts were the [[guy]] who [[played]] the camera asst. and the boy who [[played]] the [[child]]. These [[kind]] of [[films]] have [[kept]] [[LA]] [[working]] and this is one that turned out OK. I [[brainchild]] the [[kino]] was actually pretty [[alright]]. I enjoyed the acting and it [[shifted]] along well. The [[headmaster]] seemed to really [[grasping]] the [[conte]] he was trying to tell. I have to [[behold]] the big budget one [[incoming]] out [[yesterday]], [[surely]] they had a [[batches]] more money to throw at it but was very watchable. When you [[behold]] a movie like this for a [[teeny]] budget you have to [[taking]] that in to [[accounting]] when you are [[visualization]] it. There were some [[items]] that could of been better but most are budget related. The acting was pretty good the F/X and stunts were well [[performed]]. A couple of standouts were the [[blokes]] who [[done]] the camera asst. and the boy who [[done]] the [[children]]. These [[kinds]] of [[film]] have [[conserved]] [[LAS]] [[worked]] and this is one that turned out OK. --------------------------------------------- Result 4441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] 14 [[years]] [[since]] this [[show]] was made and it is [[still]] is the [[best]] show ever made. The writing was 1st [[class]] and the production second to none. This show [[would]] never be made [[today]] and that this a [[shame]]. I hope if you are thinking about finding this show to watch that you do.

AG came out the year I [[left]] [[high]] school at the time my fav [[TV]] show was the x files this gives you an idea of why I first [[got]] into this [[show]]. AG was a far better program with [[better]] writing but only got one [[reason]]? I [[know]] this is not the only program to only [[get]] one season another example that [[comes]] to mind [[would]] be the [[lone]] [[gunman]] (x files spin off) it had good writing and was [[funny]] but [[also]] only [[got]] one season. It does not [[seem]] right!

We [[also]] have to remember that this [[show]] was around before [[shows]] like [[twilight]] made dark shows 'cool' so I think this may have also let to the show going down hill.

Watch this program and enjoy it! 10 out of 10 for me. 14 [[yr]] [[because]] this [[displayed]] was made and it is [[however]] is the [[bestest]] show ever made. The writing was 1st [[categories]] and the production second to none. This show [[ought]] never be made [[yesterday]] and that this a [[shaming]]. I hope if you are thinking about finding this show to watch that you do.

AG came out the year I [[exited]] [[higher]] school at the time my fav [[TELEVISION]] show was the x files this gives you an idea of why I first [[get]] into this [[spectacle]]. AG was a far better program with [[best]] writing but only got one [[justification]]? I [[savoir]] this is not the only program to only [[obtain]] one season another example that [[arrives]] to mind [[could]] be the [[loney]] [[rifleman]] (x files spin off) it had good writing and was [[comical]] but [[further]] only [[did]] one season. It does not [[appears]] right!

We [[further]] have to remember that this [[demonstrate]] was around before [[displays]] like [[dusk]] made dark shows 'cool' so I think this may have also let to the show going down hill.

Watch this program and enjoy it! 10 out of 10 for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Delightful]] Disney film with Angela Lansbury in fine [[form]] as a middle age spinster [[whose]] interest turns to witchcraft in World War 11 England.

Lansbury was about age 51 at the time of the film and she is just [[ideal]] for the part. She is Jessica Fletcher again but this time it's for the benefit or children and for mother England during a time of great peril.

The film follows the adventures of Miss Price (Lansbury) and David Tomlinson as the professor of witchcraft in trying to obtain certain information on sorcery. Those 3 little darlings sent to live with Price to escape the London bombings are just [[wonderful]] in this [[enchanting]] film for all of us regardless of age.

Too bad that Tessie O'Shea, Roddy McDowall and Sam Jaffe are [[given]] so little to do in this endearing [[film]].

I [[really]] thought of the [[Ben]] Stiller film-"[[Night]] at the Museum," at the [[end]] of the [[film]] when the relics [[come]] to life to do [[battle]] with the [[Nazi]] [[invasion]] in the [[small]] British coastal [[town]]. [[Charmer]] Disney film with Angela Lansbury in fine [[forme]] as a middle age spinster [[who]] interest turns to witchcraft in World War 11 England.

Lansbury was about age 51 at the time of the film and she is just [[idealistic]] for the part. She is Jessica Fletcher again but this time it's for the benefit or children and for mother England during a time of great peril.

The film follows the adventures of Miss Price (Lansbury) and David Tomlinson as the professor of witchcraft in trying to obtain certain information on sorcery. Those 3 little darlings sent to live with Price to escape the London bombings are just [[wondrous]] in this [[charmer]] film for all of us regardless of age.

Too bad that Tessie O'Shea, Roddy McDowall and Sam Jaffe are [[yielded]] so little to do in this endearing [[kino]].

I [[truthfully]] thought of the [[Bin]] Stiller film-"[[Overnight]] at the Museum," at the [[ends]] of the [[cinematography]] when the relics [[arrive]] to life to do [[combats]] with the [[Hitler]] [[invading]] in the [[teeny]] British coastal [[ville]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The [[movie]] starts with a nice song [[Looks]] like a thriller, with Arbaaz [[Khan]] [[walking]] [[around]] in a suspicious [[way]] but then suddenly we are [[forced]] to a [[comedy]] With the [[routine]] stupid idiots like GOLMAAL with Tusshar, Sharman, Kunal and Rajpal acting like [[grown]] up [[kids]] Their scenes are quite funny first and then [[get]] boring There is a [[bored]] sub plot of Tanushree's brother being killed Towards the [[end]] the film tries to [[get]] [[serious]] with the villain [[kidnapping]] our heroes but here it gets even stupid Then a [[lengthy]] bashing bashing climax straight out of HERA PHERI and [[wait]], there is [[also]] a long chase in Payal's [[house]]

The film is so boring that it makes you fall [[asleep]]

[[Direction]] by Priyan is very [[bad]] [[music]](Pritam) is [[routine]] except the first song

[[Cinematography]] is [[bad]], the [[film]] has a [[cheap]] look [[throughout]]

Rajpal [[Yadav]] is good in his 1st scene where he goes to [[pay]] his [[rent]] and i was [[happy]] that the [[actor]] isn't loud and over the [[top]] like other films But No, He [[becomes]] his [[usual]] self and gets irritating most of the [[times]] Tusshar should not [[speak]] in a [[film]], his dial delivery is [[terrible]] Sharman is the [[saving]] grace, He is the [[sole]] [[actor]] who acts very well in this [[film]] Kunal Khemmu [[tries]] [[hard]] in his first [[comic]] [[film]] as an adult, But doesn't impress much Tanushree is [[bad]] as [[always]] Arbaaz [[Khan]] gets less scope and is [[usual]] Payal is a non [[actress]] Murli [[Sharma]] is [[terrible]] The [[filmmaking]] starts with a nice song [[Seems]] like a thriller, with Arbaaz [[Kahn]] [[walks]] [[approximately]] in a suspicious [[ways]] but then suddenly we are [[obliged]] to a [[travesty]] With the [[everyday]] stupid idiots like GOLMAAL with Tusshar, Sharman, Kunal and Rajpal acting like [[cultivated]] up [[children]] Their scenes are quite funny first and then [[gets]] boring There is a [[drilled]] sub plot of Tanushree's brother being killed Towards the [[terminates]] the film tries to [[gets]] [[grave]] with the villain [[kidnapped]] our heroes but here it gets even stupid Then a [[long]] bashing bashing climax straight out of HERA PHERI and [[suspense]], there is [[additionally]] a long chase in Payal's [[households]]

The film is so boring that it makes you fall [[slept]]

[[Orientation]] by Priyan is very [[naughty]] [[musicians]](Pritam) is [[everyday]] except the first song

[[Filmmaking]] is [[negative]], the [[filmmaking]] has a [[cheaper]] look [[during]]

Rajpal [[Prasad]] is good in his 1st scene where he goes to [[pays]] his [[leasing]] and i was [[happier]] that the [[actress]] isn't loud and over the [[superior]] like other films But No, He [[becoming]] his [[routine]] self and gets irritating most of the [[dates]] Tusshar should not [[talk]] in a [[flick]], his dial delivery is [[scary]] Sharman is the [[rescuing]] grace, He is the [[unique]] [[actress]] who acts very well in this [[movie]] Kunal Khemmu [[attempting]] [[tough]] in his first [[hilarious]] [[filmmaking]] as an adult, But doesn't impress much Tanushree is [[unfavourable]] as [[constantly]] Arbaaz [[Kahn]] gets less scope and is [[customary]] Payal is a non [[actor]] Murli [[Prakash]] is [[frightful]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Even if it were remotely [[funny]], this mouldy waxwork of a [[film]] [[would]] still be soberingly [[disrespectful]]. [[Stopping]] just short of digging up the boys' [[corpses]] and re-enacting 'Weekend [[At]] Bernie's' – but only just – producer Larry Harmon and the director of the frickin' 'Ernest' [[films]] use holding the copyright as an [[excuse]] to [[crap]] all over Stan and Ollie's legacy. Gailard Sartain does a fair Ollie impersonation but Bronson Pinchot wouldn't reach tenth place in a Stan lookalike [[contest]]; even if they were both spot on the film [[would]] be no less detestable. The less said about the surrounding catastrophe the [[better]]. Makes 'Utopia' look [[like]] a [[dignified]] swan song. Even if it were remotely [[hilarious]], this mouldy waxwork of a [[filmmaking]] [[could]] still be soberingly [[discourteous]]. [[Stops]] just short of digging up the boys' [[cadavers]] and re-enacting 'Weekend [[During]] Bernie's' – but only just – producer Larry Harmon and the director of the frickin' 'Ernest' [[kino]] use holding the copyright as an [[apologise]] to [[baloney]] all over Stan and Ollie's legacy. Gailard Sartain does a fair Ollie impersonation but Bronson Pinchot wouldn't reach tenth place in a Stan lookalike [[contests]]; even if they were both spot on the film [[could]] be no less detestable. The less said about the surrounding catastrophe the [[optimum]]. Makes 'Utopia' look [[iike]] a [[presentable]] swan song. --------------------------------------------- Result 4445 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[seriously]] can't [[believe]] Tim Burton and [[Timur]] Bekmambetov, two people I [[LOVE]], signed on to [[produce]] this [[crap]]. Tim Burton is a [[brilliant]] [[director]], but to be honest I've been losing interest in him for a while since his last few movies were [[either]] remakes or [[adaptations]]. He did [[produce]] the [[brilliant]] "Nightmare Before Christmas", which is one I've watched multiple times, and directed [[movies]] like "Beetlejuice" and "Sleepy [[Hollow]]", which are awesome [[films]]. Bekmambetov directed 3 films that I LOVE: Night Watch, Day Watch, and Wanted. I've only seen those three of his, but they prove he's an awesome director.

Those two people producing one of the many reasons I was excited to see 9. So today I went to go see it at the [[theatre]]. I was so excited to finally have seen it. I had waited 7 months for the movie to come out.

This movie is the first time I've walked out of a Tim Burton-related movie and said "I enjoyed almost NONE of that". I felt heartbroken to even have felt that way. I mean, with him and Bekmambetov at the production helm you'd have [[expected]] this movie to be a good watch. Right now I still can't get over how [[let]] down I was by this movie. I hadn't even heard of the [[original]] short film before seeing it but now, I can successfully say that this movie should have remained a short movie. Hell, Neil Blomkamp made an AWESOME full length remake of Alive in Joburg entitled District 9, what was so hard to get right about 9??? I really [[wanted]] to [[think]] this movie was awesome. I really did. But no, it [[failed]] on so many [[levels]].

The plot was extremely [[confusing]] and disjointed. I had no idea what was going on, let alone what it was about. Basically it's about a bunch of rag doll robots trying to save the earth. Well, OK, that's what I got from it. But the writing here is extremely poor. The whole film jumps around like a 6 year old with A.D.D. telling a story. There's this big, giant clanky monster robot that 9 awakens, causing destruction and stuff. That's the main villain. However, what else is wrong with this movie is that EVERYTHING COMES OUT OF NOWHERE. There were too many monster robots, most of which have no logical explanation behind them. They have 0 development whatsoever. I mean, that flying pterodactyl like monster just rips out of nowhere, we have no idea where it comes out of and Acker just expects us to know what it is. What was even more retarded was that snake-like creature with the strobing eyes that hypnotize. I dare you to give that description to someone else out loud and expect them not to laugh. All of the 3 people I told about it burst out laughing. Oh and it wraps victims up and sews them inside it. I'M. NOT. KIDDING.

The twist in Act III is the most retarded aspect of the whole movie. So basically 9 goes back to the room he woke up in, finds this box with a hologram from the scientist in it for 9, and he tells him that the big scary machine robot was designed to bring robot life to earth, but then evil humans use it for war, and it was supposed to help protect the earth, but then the scientist gave his life to 9 so that it could help protect the world with it. And HE ONLY MENTIONS GIVING HIS LIFE TO 9. But what about the other robots? WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES TO THEM???????? This is the perfect example of poor, rushed writing. There's only one of the life taking device thingy that exists so how did the other 8 get life given to them??????? The characters are not likable at all either. They risk their lives for no reason at all. The only good character is 7. 6 annoyed me with his "GO BACK TO THE SOURCE!!!!!!" ramblings, 1 is an overpowering idiot, 2 we don't know ANYTHING about, 5 kept annoying me with his "Are you sure..." or "Can I stay here instead...?" questions. And that ending? UGH. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that the ending was a huge WTF moment.

There's nothing redeeming about this turd except for its beautiful animation. Everything looks realistic and beautiful, I love the gloomy and depressing look of everything. However, beauty can't save a good movie.

While it's true that this movie is very pretty looking, pretty is as pretty does, and 9 does squat. I'm sure Burton fans will be flocking to the theatre to see this movie without a doubt, in fact with his and Bekmambetov's names being thrown around the promos, people will be flocking to the theatre to see this movie. I know I may be making a big deal out of nothing, but watching this movie made me realize how much I hate movies with unlikeable characters, nonexistent plot and just pure style over content. And this movie is one of those movies. I [[profoundly]] can't [[reckon]] Tim Burton and [[Timor]] Bekmambetov, two people I [[LOVES]], signed on to [[producing]] this [[shit]]. Tim Burton is a [[sumptuous]] [[headmaster]], but to be honest I've been losing interest in him for a while since his last few movies were [[neither]] remakes or [[adjustments]]. He did [[engender]] the [[sumptuous]] "Nightmare Before Christmas", which is one I've watched multiple times, and directed [[cinematographic]] like "Beetlejuice" and "Sleepy [[Empty]]", which are awesome [[cinematography]]. Bekmambetov directed 3 films that I LOVE: Night Watch, Day Watch, and Wanted. I've only seen those three of his, but they prove he's an awesome director.

Those two people producing one of the many reasons I was excited to see 9. So today I went to go see it at the [[theaters]]. I was so excited to finally have seen it. I had waited 7 months for the movie to come out.

This movie is the first time I've walked out of a Tim Burton-related movie and said "I enjoyed almost NONE of that". I felt heartbroken to even have felt that way. I mean, with him and Bekmambetov at the production helm you'd have [[waited]] this movie to be a good watch. Right now I still can't get over how [[leave]] down I was by this movie. I hadn't even heard of the [[initial]] short film before seeing it but now, I can successfully say that this movie should have remained a short movie. Hell, Neil Blomkamp made an AWESOME full length remake of Alive in Joburg entitled District 9, what was so hard to get right about 9??? I really [[wished]] to [[reckon]] this movie was awesome. I really did. But no, it [[faulted]] on so many [[grades]].

The plot was extremely [[disconcerting]] and disjointed. I had no idea what was going on, let alone what it was about. Basically it's about a bunch of rag doll robots trying to save the earth. Well, OK, that's what I got from it. But the writing here is extremely poor. The whole film jumps around like a 6 year old with A.D.D. telling a story. There's this big, giant clanky monster robot that 9 awakens, causing destruction and stuff. That's the main villain. However, what else is wrong with this movie is that EVERYTHING COMES OUT OF NOWHERE. There were too many monster robots, most of which have no logical explanation behind them. They have 0 development whatsoever. I mean, that flying pterodactyl like monster just rips out of nowhere, we have no idea where it comes out of and Acker just expects us to know what it is. What was even more retarded was that snake-like creature with the strobing eyes that hypnotize. I dare you to give that description to someone else out loud and expect them not to laugh. All of the 3 people I told about it burst out laughing. Oh and it wraps victims up and sews them inside it. I'M. NOT. KIDDING.

The twist in Act III is the most retarded aspect of the whole movie. So basically 9 goes back to the room he woke up in, finds this box with a hologram from the scientist in it for 9, and he tells him that the big scary machine robot was designed to bring robot life to earth, but then evil humans use it for war, and it was supposed to help protect the earth, but then the scientist gave his life to 9 so that it could help protect the world with it. And HE ONLY MENTIONS GIVING HIS LIFE TO 9. But what about the other robots? WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES TO THEM???????? This is the perfect example of poor, rushed writing. There's only one of the life taking device thingy that exists so how did the other 8 get life given to them??????? The characters are not likable at all either. They risk their lives for no reason at all. The only good character is 7. 6 annoyed me with his "GO BACK TO THE SOURCE!!!!!!" ramblings, 1 is an overpowering idiot, 2 we don't know ANYTHING about, 5 kept annoying me with his "Are you sure..." or "Can I stay here instead...?" questions. And that ending? UGH. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that the ending was a huge WTF moment.

There's nothing redeeming about this turd except for its beautiful animation. Everything looks realistic and beautiful, I love the gloomy and depressing look of everything. However, beauty can't save a good movie.

While it's true that this movie is very pretty looking, pretty is as pretty does, and 9 does squat. I'm sure Burton fans will be flocking to the theatre to see this movie without a doubt, in fact with his and Bekmambetov's names being thrown around the promos, people will be flocking to the theatre to see this movie. I know I may be making a big deal out of nothing, but watching this movie made me realize how much I hate movies with unlikeable characters, nonexistent plot and just pure style over content. And this movie is one of those movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] One of the most unheralded [[great]] works of animation. Though it makes the most [[sophisticated]] use of the "cut-out" [[method]] of animation (a la "South Park"), the [[real]] [[talent]] behind "[[Twice]] [[Upon]] a [[Time]]" are the [[vocal]] characterizations, with [[Lorenzo]] Music's (Carlton from TV's "[[Rhoda]]") Woody Allen-ish Ralph-the-all-purpose-Animal being the [[centerpiece]]. The "[[accidental]] nightmare" sequence is doubtless one of the [[best]] [[pieces]] of [[animation]] ever [[filmed]]. One of the most unheralded [[wondrous]] works of animation. Though it makes the most [[complicated]] use of the "cut-out" [[methodology]] of animation (a la "South Park"), the [[actual]] [[talents]] behind "[[Doubly]] [[After]] a [[Times]]" are the [[loud]] characterizations, with [[Gianni]] Music's (Carlton from TV's "[[Rhonda]]") Woody Allen-ish Ralph-the-all-purpose-Animal being the [[cornerstone]]. The "[[unplanned]] nightmare" sequence is doubtless one of the [[bestest]] [[smithereens]] of [[animate]] ever [[shot]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An excellent family movie... gives a lot to think on... There's absolutely nothing wrong in this film. Everything is just perfect. The script is great - it's so... real... such things could happen in everyone's life. And don't forget about acting - it's just awesome! Just look at Frankie and You'll know what I thought about... This picture is a real can't-miss!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] CAROL'S [[JOURNEY]] is a pleasure to watch for so [[many]] [[reasons]]. The acting of [[Clara]] Lago is [[simply]] [[amazing]] for someone so [[young]], and she is one of those special actors who can [[say]] [[say]] much with facial expressions. Director Imanol Urbibe [[presents]] a tight and controlled film with no break in [[continuity]], [[thereby]] propelling the plot at a steady pace with just enough [[suspense]] to [[keep]] one wondering what the nest scene will bring. The screenplay of Angel [[Garcia]] Roldan is [[story]] [[telling]] at its best, which, it seems, if the major purpose for [[films]] after all. The plot is [[unpredictable]], [[yet]] the events as they unravel are completely logical. [[Perhaps]] the [[best]] [[feature]] of this film if to [[tell]] a [[story]] of the Spanish [[Civil]] War as it [[affected]] the people. It was a [[major]] [[event]] of the 20th century, yet [[hardly]] any Americans know of it. In fact, in 40 [[years]] of [[university]] [[teaching]], I averaged about one student a semester who had even [[heard]] of it, [[much]] less any who could [[say]] [[anything]] [[comprehensive]] about it--and the [[overwhelming]] number of [[students]] were merit [[scholars]], all of which [[speaks]] to the [[enormous]] [[amount]] of censorship in American education. So, in one [[way]], this film is a good [[way]] to [[begin]] a [[study]] of that [[event]], [[keeping]] in mind that when one [[thread]] is [[pulled]] a [[great]] deal of [[history]] is unraveled. The [[appreciation]] of this [[film]] is, [[therefore]], in direct [[relation]] to the [[amount]] of one's knowledge. To [[view]] this film as another coming of age [[movie]] is the miss the [[movie]] [[completely]]. The [[Left]] Elbow [[Index]] considers seven aspects of film-- acting, production sets, [[character]] [[development]], [[plot]], [[dialogue]], [[film]] [[continuity]], and artistry--on a scale for 10 for very good, 5 for average, and 1 for [[needs]] [[help]]. CAROL'S [[JOURNEY]] is above [[average]] on all [[counts]], excepting [[dialogue]] which is rated as average. The LEI average for this [[film]] is 9.3, raised to a 10 when equated to the IMDb scale. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[film]] for all ages. CAROL'S [[TOUR]] is a pleasure to watch for so [[several]] [[justification]]. The acting of [[Clair]] Lago is [[merely]] [[striking]] for someone so [[youths]], and she is one of those special actors who can [[tell]] [[tell]] much with facial expressions. Director Imanol Urbibe [[introduces]] a tight and controlled film with no break in [[continuation]], [[so]] propelling the plot at a steady pace with just enough [[wait]] to [[conserve]] one wondering what the nest scene will bring. The screenplay of Angel [[Hernandez]] Roldan is [[histories]] [[saying]] at its best, which, it seems, if the major purpose for [[film]] after all. The plot is [[erratic]], [[even]] the events as they unravel are completely logical. [[Maybe]] the [[better]] [[attribute]] of this film if to [[told]] a [[narratives]] of the Spanish [[Civilians]] War as it [[impacted]] the people. It was a [[big]] [[events]] of the 20th century, yet [[almost]] any Americans know of it. In fact, in 40 [[olds]] of [[academics]] [[schooling]], I averaged about one student a semester who had even [[listened]] of it, [[very]] less any who could [[told]] [[something]] [[overall]] about it--and the [[monumental]] number of [[student]] were merit [[scientists]], all of which [[speaking]] to the [[gigantic]] [[sums]] of censorship in American education. So, in one [[ways]], this film is a good [[route]] to [[starts]] a [[investigating]] of that [[incident]], [[maintaining]] in mind that when one [[threads]] is [[pulls]] a [[fantastic]] deal of [[historian]] is unraveled. The [[acknowledgement]] of this [[kino]] is, [[so]], in direct [[relating]] to the [[quantity]] of one's knowledge. To [[viewing]] this film as another coming of age [[film]] is the miss the [[films]] [[totally]]. The [[Exited]] Elbow [[Forefinger]] considers seven aspects of film-- acting, production sets, [[personage]] [[developments]], [[intrigue]], [[dialog]], [[kino]] [[continuance]], and artistry--on a scale for 10 for very good, 5 for average, and 1 for [[need]] [[helped]]. CAROL'S [[TRIPS]] is above [[medium]] on all [[count]], excepting [[conversation]] which is rated as average. The LEI average for this [[kino]] is 9.3, raised to a 10 when equated to the IMDb scale. I [[heavily]] [[recommends]] this [[cinema]] for all ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 4449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] "Mad Dog [[Time]]"..."Trigger Happy" whatever you [[wanna]] call it...[[simply]] doesn't [[hit]] the mark. Maybe its just me, [[maybe]] i just don't like Gangster comedies ( as i [[thought]] Oscar , Johney [[Dangerously]] and [[Mafia]] [[also]] sucked ) It's probably more "[[witty]] [[sharp]] wordplay" than all out Comedy, only its not as witty and [[sharp]] as it ( or the other reviewers )Make it out to be.

The [[Rick]] , Mick , Vic Thing was old to begin with making it a running gag was at times painful to watch.

There wasn't [[enough]] Changes of Location or Feel for the [[period]] they were [[supposed]] to be in. The Majority of the [[film]] was either set in "Dreyfus's Club" or a [[variety]] of Offices /[[dim]] rooms... ( what was with that [[Sit]] down [[Gun]] [[stand]] off thing Goldblum kept [[winning]] ?)

The [[supporting]] cast was... on Paper excellent ( great to see Silva & Drago)but characters were killed off before they had time to develop. and Richard Pryors cameo was a Joke ! The Romance and Love element of the [[film]] also bogged it down.

4/10 I don't think i'll return to it anytime soon. "Mad Dog [[Times]]"..."Trigger Happy" whatever you [[want]] call it...[[exclusively]] doesn't [[slugged]] the mark. Maybe its just me, [[conceivably]] i just don't like Gangster comedies ( as i [[brainchild]] Oscar , Johney [[Precariously]] and [[Shay]] [[additionally]] sucked ) It's probably more "[[spiritual]] [[steep]] wordplay" than all out Comedy, only its not as witty and [[steep]] as it ( or the other reviewers )Make it out to be.

The [[Ricky]] , Mick , Vic Thing was old to begin with making it a running gag was at times painful to watch.

There wasn't [[satisfactorily]] Changes of Location or Feel for the [[periods]] they were [[suspected]] to be in. The Majority of the [[filmmaking]] was either set in "Dreyfus's Club" or a [[diversity]] of Offices /[[bleak]] rooms... ( what was with that [[Seated]] down [[Howitzer]] [[stands]] off thing Goldblum kept [[won]] ?)

The [[helping]] cast was... on Paper excellent ( great to see Silva & Drago)but characters were killed off before they had time to develop. and Richard Pryors cameo was a Joke ! The Romance and Love element of the [[cinematographic]] also bogged it down.

4/10 I don't think i'll return to it anytime soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 4450 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I have to [[say]] I [[quite]] [[enjoyed]] Soldier. [[Russell]] was very good as this trained psychopath rediscovering his humanity. [[Very]] watchable and nowhere near as bad as I'd been [[led]] to believe. [[Yes]] it has problems but provides its share of entertainment. I have to [[told]] I [[rather]] [[loved]] Soldier. [[Russel]] was very good as this trained psychopath rediscovering his humanity. [[Supremely]] watchable and nowhere near as bad as I'd been [[drove]] to believe. [[Oui]] it has problems but provides its share of entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 4451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Wow]]! A Danish [[movie]] with this kind of content? I mean, the actors, the story, the pictures, the efx - [[everything]] was where it should be.

And a Danish EFX house producing those VFX - Wow! This is like the 2nd or 3rd time a Danish FX has produces visual effects in that quality.

*SPOILER AHEAD* The twist with the ghostly children in the submarine was quite good, but generally I did not feel the big [[chill]] which I would expect from a ghost-movie. *END OF SPOILER*

But anyway, this is a Danish movie which I as a Dane can be [[proud]] of.

The only "[[bad]]" about this, is that it wasn't a Danish director, but a Swedish... [[Woah]]! A Danish [[kino]] with this kind of content? I mean, the actors, the story, the pictures, the efx - [[eveything]] was where it should be.

And a Danish EFX house producing those VFX - Wow! This is like the 2nd or 3rd time a Danish FX has produces visual effects in that quality.

*SPOILER AHEAD* The twist with the ghostly children in the submarine was quite good, but generally I did not feel the big [[chilling]] which I would expect from a ghost-movie. *END OF SPOILER*

But anyway, this is a Danish movie which I as a Dane can be [[prideful]] of.

The only "[[unfavourable]]" about this, is that it wasn't a Danish director, but a Swedish... --------------------------------------------- Result 4452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Hopefully the [[score]] has [[changed]] by now due to my [[brilliant]] and stunning [[review]] which persuades all of you to go and watch the [[film]] [[thereby]] [[creating]] an [[instant]] [[chorus]] of "8"s, this movie's [[true]] [[score]].

As mentioned before Chris [[Rock]] is The [[King]]! [[Previous]] to [[going]] to [[see]] this movie I wasn't that over the [[top]] about him but now I'm banging on the doors of [[Chris]] Rock's website begging him to take me on as his protege. This [[film]] is [[truly]] [[funny]], if you don't [[find]] this movie funny you REALLY [[need]] therapy and it's [[humour]] which [[targets]] all [[areas]] of society [[including]] [[race]](predictably), [[class]] division, [[love]], wealth, [[employment]], [[dreams]], [[stand]] up [[comedy]]... the list goes on.

There was one [[slight]] disappointment for me however. This was that in going into this [[film]] I didn't [[realise]] that it was actually a remake of "[[Heaven]] Can [[Wait]]" another [[quite]] good movie made in 1971 with Warren Beatty. As such I was [[quite]] [[surprised]] when I watched this [[movie]] and suddenly the plot [[began]] to [[unravel]] to be distinctly [[similar]] to an [[older]] [[movie]] I had watched on TV a few [[weeks]] [[ago]].. [[Regardless]] this [[movie]] is in my opinion the [[better]] version out of the two of them [[simply]] because of the [[different]] [[areas]] it [[covers]] and the fact that [[Chris]] [[Rock]] is funnier than Warren Beatty any second of any day of any [[week]] of any year of any...you get the [[picture]].

Well to the actual plot of the [[film]].

Don't [[spoil]] the [[experience]] for yourself! Don't read the plot! [[Just]] go and watch a [[movie]] because there have been two [[reviews]] on IMDb so far that have raved [[mad]] about it, [[go]] [[see]] it because it is the funniest thing you [[would]] have [[seen]] in a [[long]] [[time]], go and see it because it's a [[cinema]] experience that doesn't [[leave]] you [[grumbling]] [[ad]] nauseum at the [[cost]] of [[cinema]] [[tickets]]. Go see it because it is a good [[movie]]! Hopefully the [[scoring]] has [[change]] by now due to my [[glowing]] and stunning [[exam]] which persuades all of you to go and watch the [[movies]] [[so]] [[establishment]] an [[momentary]] [[verse]] of "8"s, this movie's [[real]] [[notation]].

As mentioned before Chris [[Boulder]] is The [[Emperor]]! [[Anterior]] to [[go]] to [[behold]] this movie I wasn't that over the [[superior]] about him but now I'm banging on the doors of [[Kris]] Rock's website begging him to take me on as his protege. This [[movies]] is [[honestly]] [[amusing]], if you don't [[found]] this movie funny you REALLY [[necessity]] therapy and it's [[mood]] which [[goals]] all [[zone]] of society [[include]] [[races]](predictably), [[classroom]] division, [[amore]], wealth, [[employ]], [[nightmares]], [[standing]] up [[parody]]... the list goes on.

There was one [[lightweight]] disappointment for me however. This was that in going into this [[movie]] I didn't [[understand]] that it was actually a remake of "[[Heavens]] Can [[Hoping]]" another [[pretty]] good movie made in 1971 with Warren Beatty. As such I was [[altogether]] [[horrified]] when I watched this [[film]] and suddenly the plot [[started]] to [[decipher]] to be distinctly [[analogue]] to an [[aged]] [[flick]] I had watched on TV a few [[zhou]] [[earlier]].. [[Apart]] this [[cinematic]] is in my opinion the [[improved]] version out of the two of them [[merely]] because of the [[multiple]] [[regions]] it [[covered]] and the fact that [[Kris]] [[Boulder]] is funnier than Warren Beatty any second of any day of any [[zhou]] of any year of any...you get the [[photography]].

Well to the actual plot of the [[cinematography]].

Don't [[ruin]] the [[enjoying]] for yourself! Don't read the plot! [[Righteous]] go and watch a [[film]] because there have been two [[exams]] on IMDb so far that have raved [[madman]] about it, [[going]] [[seeing]] it because it is the funniest thing you [[ought]] have [[noticed]] in a [[prolonged]] [[period]], go and see it because it's a [[theaters]] experience that doesn't [[let]] you [[grousing]] [[announcement]] nauseum at the [[costing]] of [[cinematic]] [[ticket]]. Go see it because it is a good [[movies]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[If]] the [[myth]] regarding [[broken]] mirrors [[would]] be [[accurate]], everybody [[involved]] in this production would now face approximately 170 years of [[bad]] luck, because there are a [[lot]] of mirrors falling to little pieces here. [[If]] only the [[script]] was as shattering as the glass, then "The Broken" would have been a [[brilliant]] film. Now it's sadly just an overlong, [[derivative]] and [[dull]] movie with only just a [[handful]] of [[remarkable]] ideas and memorable sequences. Sean Ellis [[made]] a very [[stylish]] and elegantly [[photographed]] movie, but the [[story]] is [[lackluster]] and the [[total]] [[absence]] of logic and explanation is really [[frustrating]]. I got into a discussion with a [[friend]] [[regarding]] the basic concept and "meaning" of the film. He thinks Ellis found inspiration in an old legend [[claiming]] that spotting your doppelganger is a [[foreboding]] of how you're going to die. Interesting theory, but I'm not familiar with this legend and couldn't find anything on the Internet about this, neither. Personally, I just [[think]] "The Broken" is [[yet]] another umpteenth variation on the theme of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" but without the alien interference. "The Broken" centers on the American McVey family living in London, and particularly Gina. When a mirror spontaneously breaks during a birthday celebration, this triggers a whole series of mysterious and seemingly supernatural events. Gina spots herself driving by in a car and follows her mirror image to an apartment building. Whilst driving home in a state of mental confusion, she causes a terrible [[car]] accident and ends up in the hospital. When dismissed, Gina [[feels]] like her whole surrounding is changing. She doesn't recognize her own boyfriend anymore and uncanny fragments of the accident keep flashing before her eyes. Does she suffer from mental traumas invoked by the accident or is there really a supernatural conspiracy happening all around her? Writer/director Sean Ellis definitely invokes feelings of curiosity and suspense in his script, but unfortunately he fails to properly elaborate them. "The Broken" is a truly atmospheric and stylish effort, but only after just half an hour of film, you [[come]] to the painful [[conclusion]] it shall just remain a beautiful but empty package. There's a frustratingly high amount of "fake" suspense in this film. This means building up tension, through ominous music and eerie [[camera]] angels, when [[absolutely]] nothing has even happened so far. By the time the actually mysteriousness kicks in, these tricks don't have any scary [[effect]] on you anymore. Some of my fellow reviewers around here compare the film and particularly Sean Ellis' style with the repertoires of David Lynch, Stanley Kubrick and even Alfred Hitchcock, but that is way, way … WAY too much honor. PS: what is up with that alternate spelling; the one with the Scandinavian "ø" [[Though]] the [[myths]] regarding [[fractured]] mirrors [[could]] be [[exact]], everybody [[implicated]] in this production would now face approximately 170 years of [[negative]] luck, because there are a [[batches]] of mirrors falling to little pieces here. [[Though]] only the [[hyphen]] was as shattering as the glass, then "The Broken" would have been a [[magnificent]] film. Now it's sadly just an overlong, [[derived]] and [[uninspiring]] movie with only just a [[doorknob]] of [[sumptuous]] ideas and memorable sequences. Sean Ellis [[effected]] a very [[sleek]] and elegantly [[picture]] movie, but the [[saga]] is [[mediocre]] and the [[whole]] [[absences]] of logic and explanation is really [[depressing]]. I got into a discussion with a [[freund]] [[relative]] the basic concept and "meaning" of the film. He thinks Ellis found inspiration in an old legend [[claim]] that spotting your doppelganger is a [[premonition]] of how you're going to die. Interesting theory, but I'm not familiar with this legend and couldn't find anything on the Internet about this, neither. Personally, I just [[reckon]] "The Broken" is [[again]] another umpteenth variation on the theme of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" but without the alien interference. "The Broken" centers on the American McVey family living in London, and particularly Gina. When a mirror spontaneously breaks during a birthday celebration, this triggers a whole series of mysterious and seemingly supernatural events. Gina spots herself driving by in a car and follows her mirror image to an apartment building. Whilst driving home in a state of mental confusion, she causes a terrible [[auto]] accident and ends up in the hospital. When dismissed, Gina [[thinks]] like her whole surrounding is changing. She doesn't recognize her own boyfriend anymore and uncanny fragments of the accident keep flashing before her eyes. Does she suffer from mental traumas invoked by the accident or is there really a supernatural conspiracy happening all around her? Writer/director Sean Ellis definitely invokes feelings of curiosity and suspense in his script, but unfortunately he fails to properly elaborate them. "The Broken" is a truly atmospheric and stylish effort, but only after just half an hour of film, you [[coming]] to the painful [[conclude]] it shall just remain a beautiful but empty package. There's a frustratingly high amount of "fake" suspense in this film. This means building up tension, through ominous music and eerie [[cameras]] angels, when [[entirely]] nothing has even happened so far. By the time the actually mysteriousness kicks in, these tricks don't have any scary [[consequences]] on you anymore. Some of my fellow reviewers around here compare the film and particularly Sean Ellis' style with the repertoires of David Lynch, Stanley Kubrick and even Alfred Hitchcock, but that is way, way … WAY too much honor. PS: what is up with that alternate spelling; the one with the Scandinavian "ø" --------------------------------------------- Result 4454 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] The pilot of [[Enterprise]] has one thing that has been [[lacking]] since the original Star Trek: A dose of [[realistic]], flawed personalities. The Utopian characters of the Next Generation got tiring, they were so noble as to be unbelievable. I [[also]] like the sub-plot that humans are bitter toward the Vulcans. Its funny [[seeing]] them as pretentious snobs. It makes me look forward to seeing when the humans [[become]] the [[dominant]] race between the two, though I don't think it [[would]] work in the time frame of the show. The only negatives that jumped out at me were the "quick cut off the [[ending]] at 2 hours" feel of the end, which is common among many of the Trek shows. The second was the shameless dig for [[ratings]] by a couple of senselessly [[sexy]] scenes. It was out of place, a good science fiction show should be able to stand on its own without trying to pad the pre-teen [[audience]] with some skin. But its not my [[job]] to make the [[show]] profitable, so oh well.

[[Lets]] [[see]] how the [[next]] episode does. The pilot of [[Corporations]] has one thing that has been [[shortage]] since the original Star Trek: A dose of [[practical]], flawed personalities. The Utopian characters of the Next Generation got tiring, they were so noble as to be unbelievable. I [[similarly]] like the sub-plot that humans are bitter toward the Vulcans. Its funny [[witnessing]] them as pretentious snobs. It makes me look forward to seeing when the humans [[becoming]] the [[predominant]] race between the two, though I don't think it [[could]] work in the time frame of the show. The only negatives that jumped out at me were the "quick cut off the [[terminated]] at 2 hours" feel of the end, which is common among many of the Trek shows. The second was the shameless dig for [[assessments]] by a couple of senselessly [[hot]] scenes. It was out of place, a good science fiction show should be able to stand on its own without trying to pad the pre-teen [[spectators]] with some skin. But its not my [[employment]] to make the [[demonstrate]] profitable, so oh well.

[[Allowing]] [[consults]] how the [[imminent]] episode does. --------------------------------------------- Result 4455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Greatly enjoyed this 1945 mystery thriller film about a young woman, Nina Foch,(Julia Ross) who is out of work and has fallen behind in her rent and is desperate to find work. Julia reads an ad in the local London newspaper looking for a secretary and rushes out to try and obtain this position. Julia obtains the position and is hired by a Mrs. Hughes, (Dame May Witty) who requires that she lives with her employer in her home and wants her to have no involvement with men friends and Julia tells them she has no family and is free to devote her entire time to this job. George Macready, (Ralph Hughes) is the son of Mrs. Hughes and has some very strange desires for playing around with knives. This was a low budget film and most of the scenes were close ups in order to avoid the expense of a background and costs for scenery. This strange family all live in a huge mansion off the Cornwall Coast of England and there is secret doors and plenty of suspense. --------------------------------------------- Result 4456 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I think a [[lot]] of people just [[wrote]] this off as another one of Tom Cruise's weird movies (Magnolia, Eyes Wide Shut) but Vanilla Sky is [[definitely]] its own movie. Many people said it was [[weird]]; it wasn't. It was different and confusing but not weird. Weird is Stanley Kubrick or Pauly Shore. Different is The Truman Show. Confusing is The Matrix or The Game. And unlike Kubrick, this movie has a [[conclusion]]. [[Everything]] makes sense -- maybe not [[immediately]], maybe not even [[today]], but it will make sense. Vanilla Sky is [[confusing]] because David Aames (Tom Cruise) is confused. THAT'S the point. That's where the so-called "[[weirdness]]" that turned [[critics]] away came in. If they had bothered to "[[open]] [their] [[eyes]]" as the original 1997 Spanish movie, they [[would]] have [[seen]] that. And if that's not [[enough]] [[reason]] to see it, [[go]] [[see]] it for the [[music]]. Cameron [[Crowe]] offers a [[wonderful]] soundtrack; he [[uses]] it to set the "feel" -- that [[notorious]] element that [[many]] [[movies]] lack. With [[songs]] like The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" playing at the dramatic and [[emotional]] [[climax]] of the movie, he [[creates]] an [[offbeat]], [[yet]] astoundingly "right" feel. A [[wonderful]] film, in its script, music, acting, and images, Vanilla Sky is sadly, a superficial bandwagon movie that [[critics]] chide in [[order]] to appear intelligent. [[Excellent]]: A+ I think a [[batch]] of people just [[authored]] this off as another one of Tom Cruise's weird movies (Magnolia, Eyes Wide Shut) but Vanilla Sky is [[obviously]] its own movie. Many people said it was [[curious]]; it wasn't. It was different and confusing but not weird. Weird is Stanley Kubrick or Pauly Shore. Different is The Truman Show. Confusing is The Matrix or The Game. And unlike Kubrick, this movie has a [[conclusions]]. [[Any]] makes sense -- maybe not [[promptly]], maybe not even [[yesterday]], but it will make sense. Vanilla Sky is [[disorienting]] because David Aames (Tom Cruise) is confused. THAT'S the point. That's where the so-called "[[strangeness]]" that turned [[criticisms]] away came in. If they had bothered to "[[opens]] [their] [[eye]]" as the original 1997 Spanish movie, they [[could]] have [[watched]] that. And if that's not [[sufficiently]] [[grounds]] to see it, [[going]] [[seeing]] it for the [[musica]]. Cameron [[Crow]] offers a [[super]] soundtrack; he [[used]] it to set the "feel" -- that [[famous]] element that [[various]] [[movie]] lack. With [[hymns]] like The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" playing at the dramatic and [[sentimental]] [[orgasm]] of the movie, he [[generates]] an [[oddball]], [[again]] astoundingly "right" feel. A [[wondrous]] film, in its script, music, acting, and images, Vanilla Sky is sadly, a superficial bandwagon movie that [[detractors]] chide in [[edict]] to appear intelligent. [[Wondrous]]: A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 4457 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] They sell it as a horror movie, it's [[supposed]] to be a thriller, but I found it pretty funny ([[comedy]]?, don't think so), I laughed the whole movie I think it was because of the [[ridiculous]] acting and plot. I don't blame the [[actors]], I [[think]] they were not very good, but O.K. I think Cillian is a very [[good]] "bad guy" I loved his acting in Batman Beggins, and Rachel McAdams.. whoa! she's a [[beauty]], and a good actress as well, but let's [[try]] to be a little objective here, the [[story]] mm mm... the direction mm mm... it [[lacks]] a lot of [[good]] suspense in [[fact]] is a really boring movie, but there's one good thing tho, it's a short movie, only 1 hour and 30 minutes (FOR ME IT WAS LIKE 10 MINUTES UNDER THE WATER!!!)

I just don't know why this movie is rated so high, and in rotten tomatoes, even higher, what's wrong with good, rational and objective criticism? They sell it as a horror movie, it's [[suspected]] to be a thriller, but I found it pretty funny ([[humor]]?, don't think so), I laughed the whole movie I think it was because of the [[farcical]] acting and plot. I don't blame the [[protagonists]], I [[ideas]] they were not very good, but O.K. I think Cillian is a very [[alright]] "bad guy" I loved his acting in Batman Beggins, and Rachel McAdams.. whoa! she's a [[beaut]], and a good actress as well, but let's [[seek]] to be a little objective here, the [[fairytales]] mm mm... the direction mm mm... it [[shortage]] a lot of [[alright]] suspense in [[facto]] is a really boring movie, but there's one good thing tho, it's a short movie, only 1 hour and 30 minutes (FOR ME IT WAS LIKE 10 MINUTES UNDER THE WATER!!!)

I just don't know why this movie is rated so high, and in rotten tomatoes, even higher, what's wrong with good, rational and objective criticism? --------------------------------------------- Result 4458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Since musicals have both gone out of [[fashion]] and are incredibly [[expensive]] to [[make]] without all the talent needed to make one under contract to a studio, I doubt we will ever get a real life story of Enrico Caruso.

But if everything else was in place it was no accident that no Hollywood studio [[attempted]] the task until Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer had [[Mario]] Lanza under contract. No one [[else]] could have done it, I doubt whether it will ever be [[tried]] again.

And why should it. I think Enrico Caruso himself would have been [[satisfied]] as to how his singing was portrayed on screen. [[For]] his tenor [[voice]] was his life, his [[reason]] for being on the [[earth]].

To [[say]] that liberties were [[taken]] with his [[life]] is to be modest. Caruso, like the [[man]] who portrayed him, was a man of [[large]] appetites although with a [[lot]] more self discipline. He had numerous [[relationships]] with [[several]] women and fathered two out of wedlock sons who are not in this film.

His contribution to the [[recording]] [[industry]] is [[treated]] as [[almost]] an afterthought. He's [[shown]] in a [[recording]] studio once late in his [[life]]. [[Actually]] he started recording right [[around]] the turn of the [[last]] century and [[together]] with Irish tenor [[John]] McCormack for RCA Victor [[made]] the [[recording]] [[industry]] what it [[became]].

When Caruso and McCormack were at their [[heights]] you had to [[practically]] [[inherit]] a ticket to [[see]] either of them [[perform]] live. But a [[lot]] of [[immigrant]] [[Italian]] and Irish [[families]] had a phonograph and a [[record]] or three of either of these [[men]]. It's why both [[became]] the [[legends]] that they are.

What the film does have is some beautifully staged operatic [[arias]] [[done]] by Mario [[Lanza]], a [[taste]] of what he might have [[become]] had he the discipline of a Caruso to stick to opera. The Great Caruso won an Oscar for sound [[recording]] and [[received]] nominations for [[costume]] and set design.

Mario himself [[helped]] popularize the [[film]] with an RCA Red [[Seal]] album of songs from The [[Great]] Caruso. [[Unfortunately]] due to contractual [[obligations]] we couldn't [[get]] an [[actual]] cast [[album]] with Ann Blyth, Dorothy Kirsten, and Jarmila Novotna [[also]].

[[Though]] Blyth sang it in the film, Lanza had a [[big]] hit recording of The Loveliest Night of the Year further helping to popularize The Great Caruso.

If you're looking for a life of Enrico Caruso, this ain't it. If you are looking for a great artist singing at the height of his career, than you should not [[miss]] The Great Caruso. Since musicals have both gone out of [[manner]] and are incredibly [[costly]] to [[deliver]] without all the talent needed to make one under contract to a studio, I doubt we will ever get a real life story of Enrico Caruso.

But if everything else was in place it was no accident that no Hollywood studio [[tries]] the task until Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer had [[Maria]] Lanza under contract. No one [[elsewhere]] could have done it, I doubt whether it will ever be [[attempting]] again.

And why should it. I think Enrico Caruso himself would have been [[persuaded]] as to how his singing was portrayed on screen. [[During]] his tenor [[vocals]] was his life, his [[motif]] for being on the [[terra]].

To [[said]] that liberties were [[picked]] with his [[lifetime]] is to be modest. Caruso, like the [[guy]] who portrayed him, was a man of [[sizable]] appetites although with a [[batch]] more self discipline. He had numerous [[ties]] with [[diverse]] women and fathered two out of wedlock sons who are not in this film.

His contribution to the [[recordings]] [[industria]] is [[handled]] as [[practically]] an afterthought. He's [[illustrated]] in a [[register]] studio once late in his [[vida]]. [[Genuinely]] he started recording right [[roundabout]] the turn of the [[final]] century and [[jointly]] with Irish tenor [[Jon]] McCormack for RCA Victor [[accomplished]] the [[registers]] [[industria]] what it [[came]].

When Caruso and McCormack were at their [[highlands]] you had to [[hardly]] [[inheritance]] a ticket to [[behold]] either of them [[fulfilling]] live. But a [[batch]] of [[migrant]] [[Ltalian]] and Irish [[familial]] had a phonograph and a [[records]] or three of either of these [[males]]. It's why both [[came]] the [[myths]] that they are.

What the film does have is some beautifully staged operatic [[aria]] [[doing]] by Mario [[Spear]], a [[aftertaste]] of what he might have [[gotten]] had he the discipline of a Caruso to stick to opera. The Great Caruso won an Oscar for sound [[registering]] and [[benefited]] nominations for [[outfit]] and set design.

Mario himself [[assists]] popularize the [[flick]] with an RCA Red [[Sealed]] album of songs from The [[Excellent]] Caruso. [[Sadly]] due to contractual [[liabilities]] we couldn't [[obtain]] an [[real]] cast [[albums]] with Ann Blyth, Dorothy Kirsten, and Jarmila Novotna [[moreover]].

[[Nevertheless]] Blyth sang it in the film, Lanza had a [[considerable]] hit recording of The Loveliest Night of the Year further helping to popularize The Great Caruso.

If you're looking for a life of Enrico Caruso, this ain't it. If you are looking for a great artist singing at the height of his career, than you should not [[mademoiselle]] The Great Caruso. --------------------------------------------- Result 4459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] It's about time we see a [[movie]] that stays [[unbiased]] towards these old Indian traditions. At [[times]] it is clear how most of the 'doctors' are charlatans, even lying about how they don't charge their clients. While they are wearing their gold watches, the 'donation' box is mandatory. Notice that there are only a couple of people who get 'cured' while we see quite a few cases.

Keep in mind while [[watching]] that ingesting mercury is not toxic and that the smallest Indian bank note is 5 rupee, while the average salary in India is 1,700 ru/month. It's about time we see a [[filmmaking]] that stays [[impartial]] towards these old Indian traditions. At [[period]] it is clear how most of the 'doctors' are charlatans, even lying about how they don't charge their clients. While they are wearing their gold watches, the 'donation' box is mandatory. Notice that there are only a couple of people who get 'cured' while we see quite a few cases.

Keep in mind while [[staring]] that ingesting mercury is not toxic and that the smallest Indian bank note is 5 rupee, while the average salary in India is 1,700 ru/month. --------------------------------------------- Result 4460 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didnt think it was possible, but i have found film worse than 'Body Melt'. This film is really really bad! And what makes it worse is that its another Australian film...

Shot on what looks like VHS, and with a terrible 80's rock soundtrack, it just keep getting worse and worse, which is hard to believe seeing how bad the beginning is (skinned male hanging up-side-down in a white tomato sauce sprayed room anyone?).

And why do their accents keep changing? From bad New York drawl, to prissy english, then pure Aussie! And it happens to the whole cast!

This film also claims to have won some film festival on the cover (i believe it was the Utah Film Festival). This has to be a lie because no-one in their right mind would nominate this for anything (perhaps the Golden Rasberries but i thinks its too bad for that aswell).

Come on guys! This film has to be number 1 on the bottom 100!!! It has to be ten times a bad as those films already on there.

Well done to the "film" makers of this trash, for proving there is a reason not to see films..... 0/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4461 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cheap and manipulative. This film has no heart.

It's also got dire dialogue, unconvincing characters and a preposterous, or rather non-existent, story. It just lurches from bad to worse in a cynical effort to wrench some kind of emotion from an insincere and unengaging hysterion-afest!

And the HEDGEHOG!!!!How many cheap shots can a film take? The hedgehog, by the way, gave the most convincing and watchable performance in this ninety-minute cringe-athon.

If you have considered watching this film, don't. I'm sorry but I cannot find a single redeeming feature to this movie. It scores a big, fat ZERO with me. Strictly for sub-Dogma knicker-wetters. Yawneroony!

Still, if you liked Dancing In The Dark...

--------------------------------------------- Result 4462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Enjoyable]] [[movie]] [[although]] I [[think]] it had the potential to be even better if it had more depth to it. It is a [[mystery]] halfway through the film as to knowing why [[Elly]] is such a recluse. [[Then]], when we are [[finally]] [[given]] an [[explanation]] [[going]] back to her childhood there [[still]] isn't much detail. Perhaps had they shown flashbacks or something.

[[Anyway]], it is still a good [[movie]] that I'd watch again. 7/10

[[Pleasant]] [[flick]] [[albeit]] I [[reckon]] it had the potential to be even better if it had more depth to it. It is a [[puzzle]] halfway through the film as to knowing why [[Eli]] is such a recluse. [[Later]], when we are [[lastly]] [[afforded]] an [[explanations]] [[go]] back to her childhood there [[again]] isn't much detail. Perhaps had they shown flashbacks or something.

[[Writ]], it is still a good [[kino]] that I'd watch again. 7/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 4463 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This [[movie]] is a [[disgrace]] to the Major League Franchise. I live in Minnesota and even I can't believe they dumped Cleveland. (Yes I realize at the time the real Indians were pretty good, and the Twins had taken over their spot at the bottom of the American League, but still be consistent.) Anyway I [[loved]] the [[first]] Major League, liked the second, and always looked forward to the third, when the Indians would finally go all the way to the series. You can't tell me this wasn't the plan after the second film was completed. What Happened? Anyways if your a true fan of the original Major League do yourself a favor and don't watch this [[junk]]. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[dishonour]] to the Major League Franchise. I live in Minnesota and even I can't believe they dumped Cleveland. (Yes I realize at the time the real Indians were pretty good, and the Twins had taken over their spot at the bottom of the American League, but still be consistent.) Anyway I [[adores]] the [[fiirst]] Major League, liked the second, and always looked forward to the third, when the Indians would finally go all the way to the series. You can't tell me this wasn't the plan after the second film was completed. What Happened? Anyways if your a true fan of the original Major League do yourself a favor and don't watch this [[trash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] First off, [[anyone]] [[looking]] for meaningful "outcome oriented" [[cinema]] that [[packs]] some [[sort]] of social message with [[meaningful]] performances and soul [[searching]] dialog spoken by dedicated, emotive, [[heartfelt]] thespians, please [[leave]] now. You are wasting your time and [[life]] is short, [[go]] [[see]] the [[new]] Brangelina Jolie movie, have a good cry, go out & [[buy]] a hybrid [[car]] or throw away your conflict diamonds if that will make you feel [[better]], and leave us alone.

Don't [[let]] the door hit you on the way out either. THE [[INCREDIBLE]] [[MELTING]] MAN is a grade B minus regional horror epic shot in the wastelands of Oklahoma by a young, TV friendly cast & crew, and concerns itself with an astronaut who is exposed to bizarre radiation effects, wakes up in a hospital, and finds that his body is liquefying on him as he sits there feeling like a chump. The melting man is played by one Alex Rebar, who is recognizable for about the first four minutes of the film. But once he [[starts]] oozin' with [[Rick]] Baker's [[extraordinary]] [[special]] effects makeup he more resembles something you might [[find]] in a tin of spam before you drain off all the runny, viscous blebs of grease.

The [[film]] has zero exposition and does not [[bandy]] about with plot [[points]]: There are a [[couple]] of scenes [[involving]] scientist [[types]] riding [[around]] on an absurd industrial conveyor machine who dutifully recite a few obligatory lines about the effects of radiation but the movie does not care, really. It's a freak [[show]] and a [[marvelous]] one at that with a decidedly sick [[sense]] of humor for those who can stomach it -- One great laugh comes when the melting man stumbles upon a young girl in the forest and is so at a loss for what to do that one of his eyes pops out. Hilarious.

The "hero" of the film is played by Burr DeBenning, a fascinating character actor from the golden 1970s & 80s television scene who was sort of an early model for the Kevin Spacey prototype; slightly twisted, neurotic, and one step ahead of most everyone in the room even if he looks confused. He appeared just after this movie was made in a bizarre made for TV anthology horror piece called HOUSE OF THE DEAD (or THE ALIEN ZONE) that is regarded as one of the finest movies ever made in Oklahoma, which is where I suspect this film was made as well. The arid, cold looking rural midwestern landscapes are certainly the same, and the creek that one unfortunate fly fisher chooses for his afternoon of sport appears to be the same one that Cameron Mitchell fought off flying alien pancakes in WITHOUT WARNING ... which also had a sick sense of humor, a TV friendly cast, and some pretty outrageous gore. I definitely sense at least an aesthetic connection between the three movies, as well as THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS which is of no surprise considering that director Jonathan Demme is a part of MELTING MAN's cast.

Essentially, as others have pointed out, this is a 1950s B movie plot updated for later 1970s era special effects & the inevitable boobs. The movie it probably borrows most of it's ideas from is PHANTOM FROM SPACE with Peter Graves as an astronaut who also returns to Earth after being exposed to funky radiation effects that set him off on a killing spree. One of the things that I actually admire about the film is that absolutely no regard is given for the melting man's motivations: He simply goes on a rampage and the movie's drama comes from wondering if he's going to fall to pieces before certain characters fall victim to his madness. The budget for the film is also delightfully low and every dime spent on it is up there on the screen, Rick Baker's disgusting effects getting the lion's share of whatever was spent on this.

Sick, disgusting fun best enjoyed with a crowd of friends and plenty of beer. Why can't people have made more movies like these?

8/10 First off, [[somebody]] [[searching]] for meaningful "outcome oriented" [[film]] that [[packaging]] some [[kind]] of social message with [[valid]] performances and soul [[combing]] dialog spoken by dedicated, emotive, [[sincere]] thespians, please [[let]] now. You are wasting your time and [[iife]] is short, [[going]] [[behold]] the [[nuevo]] Brangelina Jolie movie, have a good cry, go out & [[purchased]] a hybrid [[cars]] or throw away your conflict diamonds if that will make you feel [[best]], and leave us alone.

Don't [[allowing]] the door hit you on the way out either. THE [[UNTHINKABLE]] [[MOLTEN]] MAN is a grade B minus regional horror epic shot in the wastelands of Oklahoma by a young, TV friendly cast & crew, and concerns itself with an astronaut who is exposed to bizarre radiation effects, wakes up in a hospital, and finds that his body is liquefying on him as he sits there feeling like a chump. The melting man is played by one Alex Rebar, who is recognizable for about the first four minutes of the film. But once he [[commences]] oozin' with [[Ricky]] Baker's [[wondrous]] [[especial]] effects makeup he more resembles something you might [[unearthed]] in a tin of spam before you drain off all the runny, viscous blebs of grease.

The [[cinematographic]] has zero exposition and does not [[cristal]] about with plot [[dot]]: There are a [[matching]] of scenes [[implicating]] scientist [[genre]] riding [[about]] on an absurd industrial conveyor machine who dutifully recite a few obligatory lines about the effects of radiation but the movie does not care, really. It's a freak [[showings]] and a [[wondrous]] one at that with a decidedly sick [[sensing]] of humor for those who can stomach it -- One great laugh comes when the melting man stumbles upon a young girl in the forest and is so at a loss for what to do that one of his eyes pops out. Hilarious.

The "hero" of the film is played by Burr DeBenning, a fascinating character actor from the golden 1970s & 80s television scene who was sort of an early model for the Kevin Spacey prototype; slightly twisted, neurotic, and one step ahead of most everyone in the room even if he looks confused. He appeared just after this movie was made in a bizarre made for TV anthology horror piece called HOUSE OF THE DEAD (or THE ALIEN ZONE) that is regarded as one of the finest movies ever made in Oklahoma, which is where I suspect this film was made as well. The arid, cold looking rural midwestern landscapes are certainly the same, and the creek that one unfortunate fly fisher chooses for his afternoon of sport appears to be the same one that Cameron Mitchell fought off flying alien pancakes in WITHOUT WARNING ... which also had a sick sense of humor, a TV friendly cast, and some pretty outrageous gore. I definitely sense at least an aesthetic connection between the three movies, as well as THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS which is of no surprise considering that director Jonathan Demme is a part of MELTING MAN's cast.

Essentially, as others have pointed out, this is a 1950s B movie plot updated for later 1970s era special effects & the inevitable boobs. The movie it probably borrows most of it's ideas from is PHANTOM FROM SPACE with Peter Graves as an astronaut who also returns to Earth after being exposed to funky radiation effects that set him off on a killing spree. One of the things that I actually admire about the film is that absolutely no regard is given for the melting man's motivations: He simply goes on a rampage and the movie's drama comes from wondering if he's going to fall to pieces before certain characters fall victim to his madness. The budget for the film is also delightfully low and every dime spent on it is up there on the screen, Rick Baker's disgusting effects getting the lion's share of whatever was spent on this.

Sick, disgusting fun best enjoyed with a crowd of friends and plenty of beer. Why can't people have made more movies like these?

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The more I analyze this film, the worse it becomes. First of all, why a motivational speaker? That part was just stupid. I mean, why would a megalomaniac trying to control the world rely on a motivational speaker? Is Alexander Stone really that disorganized? First he can't decide what he wants to do to control the world, so he looks to the Bible for ideas. Many of these ideas, I might add, really have no reliability(For example, the part of the "The houses of Ishmael and Isaac shall scream out in terror" could have already happened. It could have been have been the synagogues burned during Krystalnacht and the mosques could very well have been the mosques blown up in Baghdad or something.) And Gillen Lane's family! They had no part except to provide a family values platfrom and dab their eyes with water! I might add that since Casper van Dien/Gillen Lane is only in his twenties(or that's the impression that I had)and has a ten year child, he had his child during high school. Yeah, there goes TBN's family values. Also, why did this film have to be so damn propaganda-like? I'll repeat what an earlier reviewer said. The Indiana Jones flicks use Christian mythology as a plot dvice and manipulate it well so that we are intoxicated. This film doesn't do that. The beginnig starts off well, with Michael Ironsides playing a priest who murders a scholar off some sort and steals the dead guy's Omega Code. Then when confronted by two men who he is obviously afraid of, the two prophets tell him "Tell your master that we are here!". Dominic(Ironsides) replies "He already knows" and points to a small surveillance camera. That part sent chills up my spine. Had only it gone on like that one scene I would have loved this film. I'll give Michael York credit: he does a fine job of acting out his character, as does Michael Ironsides. But the good guys are horrible. I've already went on about Lane's family

. Now that I'm over the acting, I'll get on to plot. This is obviously a Baptist film, since our beloved Pope of the Vatican is portrayed as an oaf. The world domination plot I liked and found plausible and subtle, as were the action sequences were also thrilling and well-done. Also another diatribe against the Vatican, their leaders are seen as dogmatically minded, since Gillen explains to the Pope that it's not the end of the world, but the beginning of a new one Also, the Vatican (or Israelis)says their going to secede from the World Union aince they used the Omega Code to control the world. Whoever it was, they wouldn't just secede, they'd send over commandoes and kill them. This is the equivalent of America knowing about the KGB going to kill the President and simply saying "We're not going to talk to you any more!". Come on! I did enjoy the scenes where we see bombers headed towards Israel and see them again on the monitor. Mediocre in short. --------------------------------------------- Result 4466 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] last [[week]] [[sometime]] and had the biggest laugh i've had in a long while. The [[plot]] of the film is pretty [[dumb]] and [[convoluted]] in a [[badly]] crafted way. The only [[plus]] to be found anywhere in the film are Corey Savier's [[impressive]] abs. [[Alexandra]] Paul (i think that's her name) is [[horrendous]] as the preacher's wife who has a history of depression. Ted McKenzie is gross and his character's a [[twit]] on top of it all. And as if the [[fact]] that you think she's having sex with her [[son]] isn't enough, they throw in [[needless]] sax solos at every opportunity! The end and climax of this film is absolutely abysmal and also [[laughable]]. I mean who the hell wants to carry the child of a con who tried to make you think he was your son and that you were having an incestuous relationship with him! I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] last [[weeks]] [[occasionally]] and had the biggest laugh i've had in a long while. The [[intrigue]] of the film is pretty [[stupid]] and [[complicated]] in a [[desperately]] crafted way. The only [[anymore]] to be found anywhere in the film are Corey Savier's [[awesome]] abs. [[Alexandr]] Paul (i think that's her name) is [[frightful]] as the preacher's wife who has a history of depression. Ted McKenzie is gross and his character's a [[jerk]] on top of it all. And as if the [[facto]] that you think she's having sex with her [[yarns]] isn't enough, they throw in [[superfluous]] sax solos at every opportunity! The end and climax of this film is absolutely abysmal and also [[ridiculous]]. I mean who the hell wants to carry the child of a con who tried to make you think he was your son and that you were having an incestuous relationship with him! --------------------------------------------- Result 4467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] My spouse & I found this movie to be very schlocky. It [[started]] out good, but [[quickly]] got unbelievable & [[ridiculous]]. Most of the acting was poor, with the exception of the little girl, Abbie, who [[really]] was terrific. In addition, the [[dialog]] was predictable & lame - [[especially]] [[Gideon]], the Angel's. [[Also]], without giving away [[anything]], when one of the [[characters]] has a tragedy, she [[almost]] appears [[nonchalant]]. At first we [[thought]] it was 'shock', but then we realized that it was just a [[terrible]] script. We [[love]] [[almost]] all of the [[Hallmark]] [[movies]] & their heart-warming [[stories]], but this [[movie]] doesn't [[rise]] to the occasion of being one. There are so [[many]] [[great]] ones - don't [[waste]] your [[time]] with this [[horrible]] [[movie]]. My spouse & I found this movie to be very schlocky. It [[opened]] out good, but [[faster]] got unbelievable & [[absurd]]. Most of the acting was poor, with the exception of the little girl, Abbie, who [[truly]] was terrific. In addition, the [[dialogues]] was predictable & lame - [[mainly]] [[Jerome]], the Angel's. [[Moreover]], without giving away [[nothing]], when one of the [[attribute]] has a tragedy, she [[hardly]] appears [[flippant]]. At first we [[figured]] it was 'shock', but then we realized that it was just a [[shocking]] script. We [[amore]] [[practically]] all of the [[Trademark]] [[movie]] & their heart-warming [[storytelling]], but this [[flick]] doesn't [[soars]] to the occasion of being one. There are so [[various]] [[resplendent]] ones - don't [[wastes]] your [[period]] with this [[scary]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4468 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[psychology]] of this [[movie]] is [[really]] weird to try and figure out. Its often [[billed]] as an anti-RPG [[movie]], but its [[really]] not that [[simple]]. Here are [[come]] apparent contradictions that make me wonder just what (if [[anything]]) they're [[trying]] to [[say]] about [[gaming]].

They laboriously introduce all the [[characters]] [[home]] lives by way of introduction, all of them having parents who are [[divorced]], alcoholic, and [[totally]] out of touch with their [[lives]] except for the [[times]] they're harshly pressuring them to succeed. [[Tom]] Hanks is [[arguably]] the [[worst]] off, having just failed out of another school and still dealing with a brother who disappeared and may be dead.

Its [[mentioned]] a couple of times that they play the game to work through problems in their real lives. And sure enough, at the end, when they go to see Robbie (Hanks), they're all happy and well-adjusted, embarking on their adult careers, problems solved, games put away (Daniel doesn't even want to design computer games any more), and even Robbie's [[mother]], who's been constantly drunk and dissatisfied, is suddenly the Happy Homemaker, looking fresh and bright and arranging flowers.

[[Sure]], JJ suddenly (and quite cheerfully it seems) decides to commit suicide, but the reason seems to be entirely because he's a lonely boy [[genius]] who can't get a date, and not because his character dies, as in the [[famous]] Jack Chick tract (which happens afterward anyways, and it [[almost]] [[seems]] like he does it on purpose so he can end Daniels game and get everyone to [[come]] [[play]] his. In fact, the prospect of live-action role playing in the caverns [[seems]] to be the only thing that saves him from killing himself!) And in what may be the coolest tableau scene in the whole movie, Kate, looking very fetching in chain mail, looks right at the camera and says something like, "The scariest monsters are the ones in our own minds."

The biggest fantasy element in this movie is the two muggers passing up the rich [[couple]] so they can rob the dirty, homeless-looking guy of his magic beans. The recurring [[theme]] (a "The Way We Were" for the 80s)might have been poignant at the end, but as a way to kick off a movie is downright [[depressing]] and seems out of place. And for one final mystery, our hero, wearing full Pardu regalia, has a psychotic break, becomes his character completely and embarks on his quest, so of course the first thing he does is change into 20-century street clothes.

So maybe the movie's irrational, but I guess its dealing with an irrational topic. In those days a circle of kids with dice and pencils was regarded as tainted and possibly possessed, and you could go insane if they spoke their mumbo-jumbo at you. The anti-game paranoia is pretty much summed up in the first scene, where the reporter asks the cop whats going on, the cop says a kids lost in the tunnels and there's a chance Mazes and Monsters is somehow involved. The reporter admits to being vaguely familiar with the game (although he allows his own children to play it), then turns to the camera and reels off a polished spiel that blames the game for everything and admits no possibility of another explanation. In the end, its no masterpiece, but interesting as made-for-TV movies go. The [[psyche]] of this [[filmmaking]] is [[truly]] weird to try and figure out. Its often [[invoices]] as an anti-RPG [[filmmaking]], but its [[genuinely]] not that [[easy]]. Here are [[arrive]] apparent contradictions that make me wonder just what (if [[somethings]]) they're [[striving]] to [[says]] about [[gambling]].

They laboriously introduce all the [[trait]] [[domicile]] lives by way of introduction, all of them having parents who are [[divorcing]], alcoholic, and [[abundantly]] out of touch with their [[vie]] except for the [[dates]] they're harshly pressuring them to succeed. [[Tum]] Hanks is [[probably]] the [[meanest]] off, having just failed out of another school and still dealing with a brother who disappeared and may be dead.

Its [[alluded]] a couple of times that they play the game to work through problems in their real lives. And sure enough, at the end, when they go to see Robbie (Hanks), they're all happy and well-adjusted, embarking on their adult careers, problems solved, games put away (Daniel doesn't even want to design computer games any more), and even Robbie's [[mama]], who's been constantly drunk and dissatisfied, is suddenly the Happy Homemaker, looking fresh and bright and arranging flowers.

[[Persuaded]], JJ suddenly (and quite cheerfully it seems) decides to commit suicide, but the reason seems to be entirely because he's a lonely boy [[engineering]] who can't get a date, and not because his character dies, as in the [[renowned]] Jack Chick tract (which happens afterward anyways, and it [[circa]] [[looks]] like he does it on purpose so he can end Daniels game and get everyone to [[coming]] [[gaming]] his. In fact, the prospect of live-action role playing in the caverns [[looks]] to be the only thing that saves him from killing himself!) And in what may be the coolest tableau scene in the whole movie, Kate, looking very fetching in chain mail, looks right at the camera and says something like, "The scariest monsters are the ones in our own minds."

The biggest fantasy element in this movie is the two muggers passing up the rich [[match]] so they can rob the dirty, homeless-looking guy of his magic beans. The recurring [[themes]] (a "The Way We Were" for the 80s)might have been poignant at the end, but as a way to kick off a movie is downright [[demoralizing]] and seems out of place. And for one final mystery, our hero, wearing full Pardu regalia, has a psychotic break, becomes his character completely and embarks on his quest, so of course the first thing he does is change into 20-century street clothes.

So maybe the movie's irrational, but I guess its dealing with an irrational topic. In those days a circle of kids with dice and pencils was regarded as tainted and possibly possessed, and you could go insane if they spoke their mumbo-jumbo at you. The anti-game paranoia is pretty much summed up in the first scene, where the reporter asks the cop whats going on, the cop says a kids lost in the tunnels and there's a chance Mazes and Monsters is somehow involved. The reporter admits to being vaguely familiar with the game (although he allows his own children to play it), then turns to the camera and reels off a polished spiel that blames the game for everything and admits no possibility of another explanation. In the end, its no masterpiece, but interesting as made-for-TV movies go. --------------------------------------------- Result 4469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I was [[hoping]] that this [[film]] was going to be at [[least]] watchable. The plot was [[weak]] to say the [[least]]. I was expecting a lot more considering the cast [[line]] up (I wonder if any of them will [[include]] this on their CVs?). [[At]] [[least]] I didn't [[pay]] to rent it. The [[best]] part of the film is definitely Dani Behr, but the [[rest]] of the film is complete and [[utter]] [[PANTS]]. I was [[expecting]] that this [[filmmaking]] was going to be at [[fewer]] watchable. The plot was [[puny]] to say the [[fewer]]. I was expecting a lot more considering the cast [[iine]] up (I wonder if any of them will [[containing]] this on their CVs?). [[In]] [[slightest]] I didn't [[salaried]] to rent it. The [[optimum]] part of the film is definitely Dani Behr, but the [[stays]] of the film is complete and [[absolute]] [[PANTIES]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jane Eyre_ is one of the greatest novels in the English language and this screenwriter should of read it. I hate it when writers use Spark notes for what a novel is all about. This movie is unbearable to watch if you have read the book.

The whole 'red room' is so down played that I wonder why they even bother to put it in. In the book the 'red room' is foreshadowing for the WHOLE story and the rest of Jane's life. Helen Burns is treated so badly in the movie I'm sure she was happy to die and leave early. In the book she is one of the most compelling characters and she was not the red head. The whole Christian theme is missing from her life and the rest of the movie.

Do yourself a favor and miss this movie and read the story as Charlotte Bronte masterfully told it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] ******* SPOILER! ********

i saw this gr8 film a few years back, its a [[lovely]] [[story]] about a young fella who wants to drink his mothers milk at the breast but she thinks he is to old for it. he ends up lusting after another ladies breasts and ends up in competition with his brother who fancies her. throw in a jealous husband of this woman who cannot get "aroused" and you have a cheeky yet warm [[story]] about [[love]], [[friendship]] and lovely pairs of jugs hehe

its [[brilliant]]

dont be put off by sub-tit-les hehe! ******* SPOILER! ********

i saw this gr8 film a few years back, its a [[cute]] [[conte]] about a young fella who wants to drink his mothers milk at the breast but she thinks he is to old for it. he ends up lusting after another ladies breasts and ends up in competition with his brother who fancies her. throw in a jealous husband of this woman who cannot get "aroused" and you have a cheeky yet warm [[conte]] about [[loves]], [[goodwill]] and lovely pairs of jugs hehe

its [[wondrous]]

dont be put off by sub-tit-les hehe! --------------------------------------------- Result 4472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I don't agree with one of the reviewers who compared this film to the American [[International]] [[Pictures]]. Basil Deardon has directed a [[brutally]] realistic film with an honest attempt to portray the [[rise]] of [[juvenile]] delinquency in post war [[England]] (but without the sentimentality of "Blackboard Jungle"). The cinematography was [[excellent]] as it [[really]] [[captured]] the scariness and [[isolation]] of the [[huge]] [[housing]] estate. The estate looked like an [[old]] prison. [[Stanley]] Baker was [[excellent]] as the hardened [[detective]], [[reassigned]] to the juvenile division - "[[Urgent]], [[urgent]] - [[Larceny]] - five iced lollies"!!!! He finds he is the butt of [[many]] jokes. David McCallum showed that he was one of Britain's top young talents of the fifties. (He had a very different role in another Stanley Baker film "Hell Drivers"). His [[portrayal]] of [[Johnny]] and the [[fanatical]] following he inspired was very frightening. Ann Heywood was [[also]] very good as the [[cynical]] Cathie. I wouldn't say there was a romantic subplot in it.

Detective Jack Truman is investigating a string of arson attacks by someone labeled the "Firefly". Just as he finds evidence which could lead to a breakthrough, he is assigned to the Juvenile Division - he is pretty disgusted at what he feels is not proper police work. Amid all the heckling he gets his first call out - the 6 year old Murphy twins are working a scam at the local lolly shops!!!

Taking the twins home he meets their brother, the charismatic Johnny, and their embittered sister Cathie. He starts to appreciate how life on the ghastly [[housing]] estates can turn young kids into criminals. As he gets more involved with the family, he realises there is a strong link between the fires, Johnny and a frightened Chinese youth who works for a laundry. The local priest (Peter Cushing in an [[unusual]] role, away from the Hammer horrors) explains that when Johnny was younger he had rescued some people from a burning [[building]] and had been hailed a hero. He wanted to recapture the feeling of importance and being useful and felt he could by lighting fires. The school siege was filmed in a very real way and the viewer felt the children's fear - the teacher (thinking only of her own safety) runs off and locks them in the [[room]] with the [[frightened]] gunman!!!!

I [[thought]] it was a really [[excellent]] film that tried to show some of the social problems Britain experienced after the war.

Highly Recommended. I don't agree with one of the reviewers who compared this film to the American [[Global]] [[Imaging]]. Basil Deardon has directed a [[cruelly]] realistic film with an honest attempt to portray the [[raising]] of [[teenager]] delinquency in post war [[British]] (but without the sentimentality of "Blackboard Jungle"). The cinematography was [[wondrous]] as it [[truthfully]] [[catch]] the scariness and [[isolating]] of the [[jumbo]] [[dwelling]] estate. The estate looked like an [[elderly]] prison. [[Stan]] Baker was [[wonderful]] as the hardened [[inspector]], [[diverted]] to the juvenile division - "[[Urgency]], [[urgency]] - [[Shoplift]] - five iced lollies"!!!! He finds he is the butt of [[myriad]] jokes. David McCallum showed that he was one of Britain's top young talents of the fifties. (He had a very different role in another Stanley Baker film "Hell Drivers"). His [[depiction]] of [[Johnnie]] and the [[bigoted]] following he inspired was very frightening. Ann Heywood was [[apart]] very good as the [[sarcastic]] Cathie. I wouldn't say there was a romantic subplot in it.

Detective Jack Truman is investigating a string of arson attacks by someone labeled the "Firefly". Just as he finds evidence which could lead to a breakthrough, he is assigned to the Juvenile Division - he is pretty disgusted at what he feels is not proper police work. Amid all the heckling he gets his first call out - the 6 year old Murphy twins are working a scam at the local lolly shops!!!

Taking the twins home he meets their brother, the charismatic Johnny, and their embittered sister Cathie. He starts to appreciate how life on the ghastly [[accommodations]] estates can turn young kids into criminals. As he gets more involved with the family, he realises there is a strong link between the fires, Johnny and a frightened Chinese youth who works for a laundry. The local priest (Peter Cushing in an [[strange]] role, away from the Hammer horrors) explains that when Johnny was younger he had rescued some people from a burning [[construction]] and had been hailed a hero. He wanted to recapture the feeling of importance and being useful and felt he could by lighting fires. The school siege was filmed in a very real way and the viewer felt the children's fear - the teacher (thinking only of her own safety) runs off and locks them in the [[salle]] with the [[freaked]] gunman!!!!

I [[brainchild]] it was a really [[super]] film that tried to show some of the social problems Britain experienced after the war.

Highly Recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 4473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] TOM HULCE* turns in yet another Oscar-worthy performance as Dominick Luciano, the brain-damaged garbage man who's helping put his brother (Ray Liotta as Eugene) through medical school.

This is a must-see for all movie lovers and all lovers of life and people!

===========> *From the small studder to the eratic dancing, to the repeated words "Oh, Jeez" whenever Nicky is in a bind, the belieavablitly of Tom's performance is so excellent that you will have to concentrate to remember that it's an actor on screen! --------------------------------------------- Result 4474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] William Hurt may not be an American matinee idol anymore, but he still has pretty good taste in B-movie projects. Here, he plays a specialist in hazardous waste clean-ups with a tragic past tracking down a perennial loser on the run --played by former pretty-boy Weller-- who has been contaminated with a deadly poison. Current pretty-boy Hardy Kruger Jr --possibly more handsome than his dad-- is featured as Weller's arrogant boss in a horrifying sequence at a chemical production plant which gets the [[story]] [[moving]]. Natasha McElhone is a slightly wacky government agent looking into the incident who provides inevitable & high-cheekboned love interest for hero Hurt. Michael Brandon pops up to play a slimy take-no-prisoners type whose comeuppance you can't wait for. The Coca-Cola company wins the Product Placement award for 2000 as the soft drink is featured throughout the production, shot lovingly on location in a wintery picture-postcard Hungary. William Hurt may not be an American matinee idol anymore, but he still has pretty good taste in B-movie projects. Here, he plays a specialist in hazardous waste clean-ups with a tragic past tracking down a perennial loser on the run --played by former pretty-boy Weller-- who has been contaminated with a deadly poison. Current pretty-boy Hardy Kruger Jr --possibly more handsome than his dad-- is featured as Weller's arrogant boss in a horrifying sequence at a chemical production plant which gets the [[conte]] [[shifting]]. Natasha McElhone is a slightly wacky government agent looking into the incident who provides inevitable & high-cheekboned love interest for hero Hurt. Michael Brandon pops up to play a slimy take-no-prisoners type whose comeuppance you can't wait for. The Coca-Cola company wins the Product Placement award for 2000 as the soft drink is featured throughout the production, shot lovingly on location in a wintery picture-postcard Hungary. --------------------------------------------- Result 4475 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "Kolchak: the [[Night]] [[Stalker]]" is a [[hugely]] [[entertaining]] TV series in which a pushy, [[sarcastic]], forty-something reporter is [[repeatedly]] [[drawn]] into [[mortal]] [[combat]] with supernatural (and [[occasionally]] [[extraterrestrial]]) [[forces]]. Based on a very popular [[pair]] of TV movies featuring the Kolchak [[character]], this series [[died]] a [[quick]] death in the mid-1970s due to low [[ratings]], but it [[nevertheless]] maintains a strong cult following today. But will the average modern-day viewer be able to [[dig]] Kolchak and his weekly [[clashes]] with the undead?

That's [[actually]] a [[tough]] [[question]] to answer [[fairly]]. [[Detractors]] of this [[series]] [[tend]] to argue that it's formulaic and hopelessly dated. [[On]] the other hand, [[fans]] [[argue]] that it's [[cleverly]] [[written]], well-acted, and [[sometimes]] [[genuinely]] [[spooky]]. And me? I've [[got]] a [[foot]] in both camps. I thoroughly [[enjoyed]] watching all 20 [[episodes]] of Kolchak on [[DVD]] [[recently]], [[though]] I can [[plainly]] see that the [[series]] has [[major]] [[flaws]].

I'll [[address]] the [[question]] of Kolchak being "formula" fiction [[first]]. [[Now]], I [[think]] we can all agree that most [[TV]] [[shows]] have formulas - just about [[every]] episode of Columbo unfolds according to the same pattern, for example. Repetition is not necessarily a bad thing in itself; in fact, critics have long recognized that audiences often enjoy, and [[actively]] [[seek]] out, repetitive entertainment. [[However]], the problem with Kolchak is that its [[formula]] is simply TOO [[rigid]] - it's too repetitive even by the most generous [[standards]].

[[In]] [[almost]] [[every]] episode, Kolchak [[investigates]] a [[murder]], and [[figures]] out that it was committed by some form of [[monster]]. He [[tries]] to [[publish]] a [[story]] about [[said]] [[monster]], but his [[editor]] [[Vincenzo]] [[blocks]] him, [[always]] on the [[grounds]] that Kolchak doesn't have sufficient evidence to [[support]] his claims that supernatural [[forces]] are at [[work]]. And, alas, Kolchak is [[also]] obstructed by the police. [[So]], in the [[end]], Kolchak does some [[independent]] [[research]] on the [[monster]], [[figures]] out how to [[kill]] it... and then [[kills]] it. Without [[ceremony]], or [[reward]], or writing a [[big]] [[story]] about it.

You can see where this ever-so-strict [[formula]] might [[get]] [[tiresome]], right? I'm particularly [[mystified]] by [[Vincenzo]] - if Kolchak's always raving about monsters, and [[Vincenzo]] never [[believes]] it... well, then, why doesn't Vincenzo fire Kolchak, or have him [[committed]]? That's what any normal boss would do. But the series eschews such realism and prefers to keep Vincenzo and Kolchak as comical antagonists. As a result, many of their scenes together are profoundly unbelievable - though they are also quite funny.

The very best episodes of Kolchak manage to vault over the limitations of this formula, however, usually because they contain some kind of unexpected twist. These select episodes are good enough that I think they're largely immune to typical criticisms of the series. Some of my favorites include:

Horror in the Heights - an episode that's noteworthy for being grimy, inventive and socially aware. Kolchak's dialog has an unusually sharp and cynical edge. Though it adheres closely to the Kolchak formula, the script (written by Hammer Studios veteran Jimmy Sangster) is remarkably literate, and it delves deeply into the monster's backstory.

The Devil's Platform - a possible inspiration for the "Omen" films, this episode stands out to me because the villain - a very young Tom Skerritt - tempts Kolchak with a satanic contract full of goodies (and, in so doing, reveals a lot about the reporter's character.)

Firefall - this episode appears to have a bad reputation among fans, but I enjoyed it because it's got a great red herring and a really [[creepy]], almost unstoppable-seeming monster.

Though I've singled out these three episodes for praise, I'd say that most of the stories are entertaining at the very least. For my money, there are only two complete turkeys in the 20-episode run: Primal Scream, which is about monkey-men running rampant in Chicago, and the Sentry, which features the dumbest-looking creature makeup in the history of filmed entertainment (and this assessment is coming from a lifelong Doctor Who and Godzilla fan!)

On balance, then, this is a good series. A little repetitive, a little cheesy perhaps, but it has elements of greatness. Even during the weaker episodes, Darren McGavin's wonderful performance as the caustic, world-weary, endlessly funny Kolchak truly shines. He carries the series effortlessly, in a way that, for example, Sarah Michelle Gellar never managed on "Buffy." McGavin was one great character actor, and this series is worth watching for him alone. "Kolchak: the [[Nightly]] [[Jammer]]" is a [[terribly]] [[fun]] TV series in which a pushy, [[satirical]], forty-something reporter is [[invariably]] [[lured]] into [[lethal]] [[fought]] with supernatural (and [[sometimes]] [[alien]]) [[troops]]. Based on a very popular [[torque]] of TV movies featuring the Kolchak [[nature]], this series [[die]] a [[fast]] death in the mid-1970s due to low [[assessments]], but it [[however]] maintains a strong cult following today. But will the average modern-day viewer be able to [[excavation]] Kolchak and his weekly [[encounters]] with the undead?

That's [[genuinely]] a [[challenging]] [[issue]] to answer [[rather]]. [[Opponents]] of this [[serials]] [[trends]] to argue that it's formulaic and hopelessly dated. [[Onto]] the other hand, [[enthusiasts]] [[plead]] that it's [[intelligently]] [[wrote]], well-acted, and [[occasionally]] [[actually]] [[horrendous]]. And me? I've [[get]] a [[footing]] in both camps. I thoroughly [[loved]] watching all 20 [[bouts]] of Kolchak on [[DVDS]] [[lately]], [[if]] I can [[openly]] see that the [[serial]] has [[important]] [[gaps]].

I'll [[treat]] the [[matter]] of Kolchak being "formula" fiction [[firstly]]. [[Presently]], I [[ideas]] we can all agree that most [[TELEVISION]] [[show]] have formulas - just about [[all]] episode of Columbo unfolds according to the same pattern, for example. Repetition is not necessarily a bad thing in itself; in fact, critics have long recognized that audiences often enjoy, and [[positively]] [[trying]] out, repetitive entertainment. [[Nonetheless]], the problem with Kolchak is that its [[formulas]] is simply TOO [[stiff]] - it's too repetitive even by the most generous [[standard]].

[[Among]] [[about]] [[any]] episode, Kolchak [[investigating]] a [[slain]], and [[digit]] out that it was committed by some form of [[monsters]]. He [[attempting]] to [[publications]] a [[tales]] about [[say]] [[monsters]], but his [[editorial]] [[Vinnie]] [[blocking]] him, [[steadily]] on the [[motifs]] that Kolchak doesn't have sufficient evidence to [[supporting]] his claims that supernatural [[troop]] are at [[jobs]]. And, alas, Kolchak is [[similarly]] obstructed by the police. [[Accordingly]], in the [[terminates]], Kolchak does some [[autonomous]] [[investigate]] on the [[monsters]], [[digit]] out how to [[murder]] it... and then [[mata]] it. Without [[rituals]], or [[rewards]], or writing a [[hefty]] [[narratives]] about it.

You can see where this ever-so-strict [[formulas]] might [[got]] [[tedious]], right? I'm particularly [[befuddled]] by [[Vinnie]] - if Kolchak's always raving about monsters, and [[Vinnie]] never [[considers]] it... well, then, why doesn't Vincenzo fire Kolchak, or have him [[commit]]? That's what any normal boss would do. But the series eschews such realism and prefers to keep Vincenzo and Kolchak as comical antagonists. As a result, many of their scenes together are profoundly unbelievable - though they are also quite funny.

The very best episodes of Kolchak manage to vault over the limitations of this formula, however, usually because they contain some kind of unexpected twist. These select episodes are good enough that I think they're largely immune to typical criticisms of the series. Some of my favorites include:

Horror in the Heights - an episode that's noteworthy for being grimy, inventive and socially aware. Kolchak's dialog has an unusually sharp and cynical edge. Though it adheres closely to the Kolchak formula, the script (written by Hammer Studios veteran Jimmy Sangster) is remarkably literate, and it delves deeply into the monster's backstory.

The Devil's Platform - a possible inspiration for the "Omen" films, this episode stands out to me because the villain - a very young Tom Skerritt - tempts Kolchak with a satanic contract full of goodies (and, in so doing, reveals a lot about the reporter's character.)

Firefall - this episode appears to have a bad reputation among fans, but I enjoyed it because it's got a great red herring and a really [[freaky]], almost unstoppable-seeming monster.

Though I've singled out these three episodes for praise, I'd say that most of the stories are entertaining at the very least. For my money, there are only two complete turkeys in the 20-episode run: Primal Scream, which is about monkey-men running rampant in Chicago, and the Sentry, which features the dumbest-looking creature makeup in the history of filmed entertainment (and this assessment is coming from a lifelong Doctor Who and Godzilla fan!)

On balance, then, this is a good series. A little repetitive, a little cheesy perhaps, but it has elements of greatness. Even during the weaker episodes, Darren McGavin's wonderful performance as the caustic, world-weary, endlessly funny Kolchak truly shines. He carries the series effortlessly, in a way that, for example, Sarah Michelle Gellar never managed on "Buffy." McGavin was one great character actor, and this series is worth watching for him alone. --------------------------------------------- Result 4476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I just saw Adam Had Four Sons for the first time and the thing that struck me was that I believe that the [[model]] used was Theodore Roosevelt and his four sons. They were approximately the same ages as the four boys in this film. [[Warner]] Baxter in his portrayal of Adam Stoddard talked about the same values and family tradition that you would have heard from our 26th [[president]] without some of the more boisterous [[aspects]] of TR's [[character]].

Like TR all of the Stoddard sons serve in World War I, in this case though the youngest only loses an eye instead of being killed.

But what if a female minx gets into this all male household and disrupts things? That's Susan Hayward's job here. In one of her earliest prominent roles, Hayward is a flirtatious amoral girl who marries one son, has an affair with another, and starts making a play for the third. It's an early forerunner of the kind of a part that later brought her an Oscar in I Want to Live.

I suppose that with as powerful a model of decorum as Theodore Roosevelt was and Warner Baxter portrays, everyone is afraid to tell Father what's going on. The sons and also their governess Ingrid Bergman. Here's where the plot gets a little silly. Bergman is introduced to us as a governess hired by Baxter and wife Fay Wray for their kids. Wray dies and Baxter suffers some financial reversals in business. Bergman has to be let go. She goes back to France and years later comes back to the family when the kids are grown up.

I'm sorry, but I can't believe the kids need a governess now. Hayward is quite right when she confronts her that it wasn't the kids who brought her back. In the normal course of things, Bergman would have gotten on with her life.

One of the previous reviewers said that a quarter to a third of the film I have was edited out. Possibly that could be the reason for the many plot holes we have.

It's too bad that Ingrid and Susan could not have done another film together in the Fifties when Hayward was at her heights and Bergman had just made a comeback.

Susan Hayward is the main reason to see Adam Had Four Sons. And I'm willing to believe that a good deal of Ingrid was left on the cutting room floor. I just saw Adam Had Four Sons for the first time and the thing that struck me was that I believe that the [[paragon]] used was Theodore Roosevelt and his four sons. They were approximately the same ages as the four boys in this film. [[Werner]] Baxter in his portrayal of Adam Stoddard talked about the same values and family tradition that you would have heard from our 26th [[chair]] without some of the more boisterous [[things]] of TR's [[trait]].

Like TR all of the Stoddard sons serve in World War I, in this case though the youngest only loses an eye instead of being killed.

But what if a female minx gets into this all male household and disrupts things? That's Susan Hayward's job here. In one of her earliest prominent roles, Hayward is a flirtatious amoral girl who marries one son, has an affair with another, and starts making a play for the third. It's an early forerunner of the kind of a part that later brought her an Oscar in I Want to Live.

I suppose that with as powerful a model of decorum as Theodore Roosevelt was and Warner Baxter portrays, everyone is afraid to tell Father what's going on. The sons and also their governess Ingrid Bergman. Here's where the plot gets a little silly. Bergman is introduced to us as a governess hired by Baxter and wife Fay Wray for their kids. Wray dies and Baxter suffers some financial reversals in business. Bergman has to be let go. She goes back to France and years later comes back to the family when the kids are grown up.

I'm sorry, but I can't believe the kids need a governess now. Hayward is quite right when she confronts her that it wasn't the kids who brought her back. In the normal course of things, Bergman would have gotten on with her life.

One of the previous reviewers said that a quarter to a third of the film I have was edited out. Possibly that could be the reason for the many plot holes we have.

It's too bad that Ingrid and Susan could not have done another film together in the Fifties when Hayward was at her heights and Bergman had just made a comeback.

Susan Hayward is the main reason to see Adam Had Four Sons. And I'm willing to believe that a good deal of Ingrid was left on the cutting room floor. --------------------------------------------- Result 4477 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] is [[horrendous]]. [[Decent]] [[fight]] scenes or not, the acting is [[REALLY]] [[bad]], like you can [[tell]] they're reading their lines from a [[card]]. With painful line delivery by [[everyone]] in the cast. [[Think]] [[watching]] a high school [[play]] and [[cringing]] at the [[obvious]] [[lack]] of smoothness in the actor's interactions (weird pauses between different character's lines, [[combined]] with [[hurried]] line delivery by others). If the [[movie]] were all [[action]], this might be forgivable, but a [[lot]] of the [[movie]] includes plot set-up and Family [[Guy]] [[style]], irreverent [[cut]] aways (Oh, wow, are they badly [[done]]). I'm assuming they were [[attempting]] to be funny with these, but it again [[came]] off as a bunch of high-schoolers/ [[college]] [[entry]] [[students]] goofing off for the afternoon trying to set up a [[funny]] Youtube clip.

Now to the [[fight]] scenes. They're not too [[bad]], considering the level of quality seen everywhere [[else]] in the [[film]]. [[Nothing]] [[great]] either, [[certainly]] not [[anywhere]] near the same [[level]] as other posters have stated ([[Nothing]] like Drunken Master). The [[fights]] have an [[overly]] [[staged]] feel, with [[LOTS]] of [[cuts]] to different [[angles]] with [[blatantly]] [[different]] positions by those involved.

[[In]] [[sum]], the only [[reason]] to watch this [[movie]] is if you were one of the guy's [[friends]] involved with this very, very cheap production. Which guy you may [[ask]]? Oh, the same [[guy]] who [[wrote]], directed, produced AND [[stared]] in this Middle School [[masterpiece]]. This [[filmmaking]] is [[horrible]]. [[Dignified]] [[combat]] scenes or not, the acting is [[GENUINELY]] [[negative]], like you can [[told]] they're reading their lines from a [[cards]]. With painful line delivery by [[everybody]] in the cast. [[Thinks]] [[staring]] a high school [[playing]] and [[wincing]] at the [[apparent]] [[misses]] of smoothness in the actor's interactions (weird pauses between different character's lines, [[combo]] with [[rushed]] line delivery by others). If the [[filmmaking]] were all [[measures]], this might be forgivable, but a [[batch]] of the [[filmmaking]] includes plot set-up and Family [[Guys]] [[elegance]], irreverent [[chop]] aways (Oh, wow, are they badly [[played]]). I'm assuming they were [[tried]] to be funny with these, but it again [[became]] off as a bunch of high-schoolers/ [[colleges]] [[input]] [[student]] goofing off for the afternoon trying to set up a [[hilarious]] Youtube clip.

Now to the [[combat]] scenes. They're not too [[naughty]], considering the level of quality seen everywhere [[further]] in the [[flick]]. [[Nothin]] [[fantastic]] either, [[probably]] not [[nowhere]] near the same [[levels]] as other posters have stated ([[None]] like Drunken Master). The [[fighting]] have an [[exceedingly]] [[orchestrated]] feel, with [[LOT]] of [[cutbacks]] to different [[angle]] with [[clearly]] [[multiple]] positions by those involved.

[[For]] [[suma]], the only [[motif]] to watch this [[filmmaking]] is if you were one of the guy's [[freund]] involved with this very, very cheap production. Which guy you may [[asks]]? Oh, the same [[guys]] who [[texted]], directed, produced AND [[leaned]] in this Middle School [[centerpiece]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] To [[start]] with, I have to point out the fact that you're gonna feel completely lost for more than half an [[hour]]. [[Yeah]], some [[things]] [[happen]], but you don't know why or what for. When you finally figure things out you just [[realize]] that it's [[nothing]] but a [[twisted]] soad opera, [[dealing]] with [[mature]] prostitutes, dead [[mothers]], [[illegitimate]] sons... The [[characters]] are rather poor and the [[actors]] ([[specially]] the young ones) don't [[help]] that much to make'em look [[credible]]. [[Only]] Marisa Paredes [[stands]] out, but she's a superb actress, no matter if the [[movie]] is [[pure]] rubbish.

The only [[positive]] [[things]] to say about "Frío Sol De Invierno" is that débutant Pablo Malo seems to have good intentions, and he's [[filmed]] a couple of scenes that are quite intense... Well, [[maybe]] the next time...

*My rate: 4/10 To [[begun]] with, I have to point out the fact that you're gonna feel completely lost for more than half an [[hora]]. [[Yep]], some [[aspects]] [[emerge]], but you don't know why or what for. When you finally figure things out you just [[realising]] that it's [[nada]] but a [[bent]] soad opera, [[addresses]] with [[adulthood]] prostitutes, dead [[mamas]], [[illicit]] sons... The [[trait]] are rather poor and the [[protagonists]] ([[particularly]] the young ones) don't [[aided]] that much to make'em look [[dependable]]. [[Merely]] Marisa Paredes [[standing]] out, but she's a superb actress, no matter if the [[filmmaking]] is [[pur]] rubbish.

The only [[propitious]] [[aspects]] to say about "Frío Sol De Invierno" is that débutant Pablo Malo seems to have good intentions, and he's [[videotaped]] a couple of scenes that are quite intense... Well, [[conceivably]] the next time...

*My rate: 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found this movie quite by accident, but am happy that I did. Kenneth Branagh's performance came close to stealing this movie from Helena Bonham Carter, but their strong chemistry together made for a much more enjoyable movie. This movie brought to mind the excellent movies that Branagh made with Emma Thompson. Carter's star turn here as a disabled young women seeking to complete herself was as good a performance as I have seen from a female lead in a long time. Portraying a disabled person is hard to pull off, but with basically only her eyes to show her pain about her situation in life, she made it so believable. If this movie had come out after the current wave of movies with beautiful women "uglying" themselves up for roles (Charlize Theron, Halle Berry), I fell sure Carter would have had strong consideration for an Oscar. If you run across this movie on cable late at night as I did, trust me, it is worth the lost sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 4480 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I was a kid in the 50's and 60's anything connected with Disney was by definition great. What happened? They are able to get any actors and actresses they want, the best of their time. But somehow Disney manages to screw things up in spite of their abundant resources.

Disney can afford the best writers, the best producers and directors, but still...they screw things up! This movie is crap. The sad thing is that I suspect Disney in their arrogance does not even know when a movie is good or bad.

It is only due to the talent of the actors that I can even give it a 3 of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This movie is [[written]] by [[Charlie]] Higson, who has before this [[done]] the "[[legendary]]" [[Fast]] [[Show]] and his own [[show]] [[based]] on one of Fast Show's [[characters]] ([[Tony]] the [[car]] [[sales]] [[man]]). He's [[also]] [[written]] [[James]] [[Bond]] books for kids.

Actually I've seen before this only Gordon's movies that are based on Lovecraft's stories, and every one of those is [[marvelous]]. Here Gordon [[tries]] to do something [[different]]. The [[style]] is totally "contemporary", which means [[shaky]] camera, fast and strange cutting, cool chillout [[music]] in the [[background]]. It works quite well here, I guess, but it's [[still]] [[pointless]] and cheap. It makes me often think of the cameraman who's shaking his dv-camera in front of the actors/actresses and try to make stylish moves in the pictures (hoping that something tolerable would come out of it). The casting is good, and there is a whole atmosphere, which is the result of good directing. I think the main character, the "zero" young guy, is quite interesting in his "zeroness". The fat guy is also good. And the guy who looks like Alec Baldwin, but is not him. But pretty soon after the beginning the movie turns out to be something not-so-interesting: In this case I mean an endless line of scenes of sadism and sickness. There is not much humanity in this film/story: It's totally [[pessimistic]], and every person in this movie is disgusting and hopeless, or soon dead. Needless to say that there is no humor either. It's a 1'40 long vomit without no relief in any moment. Anyway, Gordon remains to me one of the most interesting movie [[makers]] that are active today, and I think of this movie as an experiment, and as a failure in that. Everyone has to experience getting lost sometimes, just to learn and to find their way again. This might be Gordon's most uninteresting and [[empty]] [[work]]. This movie is [[writes]] by [[Vietcong]] Higson, who has before this [[played]] the "[[mythical]]" [[Expeditiously]] [[Showing]] and his own [[exposition]] [[predicated]] on one of Fast Show's [[characteristics]] ([[Toni]] the [[auto]] [[selling]] [[fella]]). He's [[apart]] [[handwritten]] [[Jacques]] [[Bonding]] books for kids.

Actually I've seen before this only Gordon's movies that are based on Lovecraft's stories, and every one of those is [[sumptuous]]. Here Gordon [[strives]] to do something [[several]]. The [[elegance]] is totally "contemporary", which means [[tenuous]] camera, fast and strange cutting, cool chillout [[musica]] in the [[backgrounds]]. It works quite well here, I guess, but it's [[nonetheless]] [[superfluous]] and cheap. It makes me often think of the cameraman who's shaking his dv-camera in front of the actors/actresses and try to make stylish moves in the pictures (hoping that something tolerable would come out of it). The casting is good, and there is a whole atmosphere, which is the result of good directing. I think the main character, the "zero" young guy, is quite interesting in his "zeroness". The fat guy is also good. And the guy who looks like Alec Baldwin, but is not him. But pretty soon after the beginning the movie turns out to be something not-so-interesting: In this case I mean an endless line of scenes of sadism and sickness. There is not much humanity in this film/story: It's totally [[grim]], and every person in this movie is disgusting and hopeless, or soon dead. Needless to say that there is no humor either. It's a 1'40 long vomit without no relief in any moment. Anyway, Gordon remains to me one of the most interesting movie [[constructors]] that are active today, and I think of this movie as an experiment, and as a failure in that. Everyone has to experience getting lost sometimes, just to learn and to find their way again. This might be Gordon's most uninteresting and [[emptiness]] [[cooperate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] A charming boy and his mother move to a middle of nowhere town, cats and death soon follow them. That about sums it up.

I'll admit that I am a little freaked out by cats after seeing this movie. But in all seriousness in spite of the numerous things that are wrong with this film, and believe me there is plenty of that to go around, it is overall a very enjoyable [[viewing]] experience.

The characters are more like [[caricatures]] here with only their basis instincts to rely on. Fear, greed, pride lust or anger seems to be all that motivate these people. Although it can be argued that that seeming failing, in actuality, serves the telling of the story. The supernatural premise and the fact that it is a Stephen King screenplay(not that I have anything specific against Mr. King) are quite nicely supported by some interesting FX work, makeup and quite suitable music. The absolute gem of this film is without a doubt Alice Krige who plays Mary Brady, the otherworldly mother.

King manages to take a simple story of outsider, or people who are a little different(okay - a lot in this case), trying to fit in and twists it into a campy over the top little horror gem that has to be in the collection of any horror fan. A charming boy and his mother move to a middle of nowhere town, cats and death soon follow them. That about sums it up.

I'll admit that I am a little freaked out by cats after seeing this movie. But in all seriousness in spite of the numerous things that are wrong with this film, and believe me there is plenty of that to go around, it is overall a very enjoyable [[visualizing]] experience.

The characters are more like [[cartoons]] here with only their basis instincts to rely on. Fear, greed, pride lust or anger seems to be all that motivate these people. Although it can be argued that that seeming failing, in actuality, serves the telling of the story. The supernatural premise and the fact that it is a Stephen King screenplay(not that I have anything specific against Mr. King) are quite nicely supported by some interesting FX work, makeup and quite suitable music. The absolute gem of this film is without a doubt Alice Krige who plays Mary Brady, the otherworldly mother.

King manages to take a simple story of outsider, or people who are a little different(okay - a lot in this case), trying to fit in and twists it into a campy over the top little horror gem that has to be in the collection of any horror fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 4483 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Go, Igor, go, you are the proof that Slovenian films may, should and must be different. There's soul in it, and this is [[rare]]. Don't let anybody put you down! Go, Igor, go, you are the proof that Slovenian films may, should and must be different. There's soul in it, and this is [[few]]. Don't let anybody put you down! --------------------------------------------- Result 4484 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an awesome Amicus horror anthology, with 3 great stories, and fantastic performances!, only the last story disappoints. All the characters are awesome, and the film is quite chilling and suspenseful, plus Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee are simply amazing in this!. It's very underrated and my favorite story has to be the 3rd one "Sweets To The Sweet", plus all the characters are very likable. Some of it's predictable, and the last story was incredibly disappointing and rather bland!, however the ending was really cool!. This is an awesome Amicus horror anthology, with 3 great stories, and fantastic performances, only the last story disappoints!, i say it's must see!.

1st Story ("Method for Murder"). This is an awesome story, with plenty of suspense, and the killer Dominic is really creepy, and it's very well acted as well!. This was the perfect way to start off with a story, and for the most part it's unpredictable, plus the double twist ending is shocking, and quite creepy!. Grade A

2nd Story. ("Waxworks"). This is a solid story all around, with wonderful performances, however the ending is quite predictable, but it's still creepy, and has quite a bit of suspense, Peter Cushing did an amazing job, and i couldn't believe how young Joss Ackland was, i really enjoyed this story!. Grade B

3rd Story ("Sweets to the Sweet"). This is the Best story here, as it's extremely creepy, and unpredictable throughout, it also has a nice twist as well!. Christopher Lee did an amazing job, and Chloe Franks did a wonderful job as the young daughter, plus the ending is quite shocking!. I don't want to spoil it for you, but it's one of the best horror stories i have seen!. Grade A+

4th Story ("The Cloak"). This is a terrible story that's really weak and unfunny Jon Pertwee annoyed me, however the ending surprised me a little bit, and Ingrid Pitt was great as always, however it's just dull, and has been done before many times, plus where was the creativity??. Grade D

The Direction is great!. Peter Duffell does a great job here, with awesome camera work, great angles, adding some creepy atmosphere, and keeping the film at a very fast pace!.

The Acting is awesome!. John Bryans is great here, as the narrator, he had some great lines, i just wished he had more screen time. John Bennett is very good as the Det., and was quite intense, he was especially good at the end!, i liked him lots. Denholm Elliott is excellent as Charles, he was vulnerable, showed fear, was very likable, and i loved his facial expressions, he rocked!. Joanna Dunham is stunningly gorgeous!, and did great with what she had to do as the wife, she also had great chemistry with Denholm Elliott !. Tom Adams is incredibly creepy as Dominic, he was creepy looking, and got the job done extremely well!. Peter Cushing is amazing as always, and is amazing here, he is likable, focused, charming, and as always, had a ton of class! (Cushing Rules!!). Joss Ackland is fantastic as always, and looked so young here, i barely recognized him, his accent wasn't so thick, and played a different role i loved it! (Ackland rules). Wolfe Morris is creepy here, and did what he had to do well.Christopher Lee is amazing as always and is amazing here, he is incredibly intense, very focused, and as always had that great intense look on his face, he was especially amazing at the end! (Lee Rules!!). Chloe Franks is adorable as the daughter, she is somewhat creepy, and gave one of the best child performances i have ever seen!, i loved her.Nyree Dawn Porter is beautiful and was excellent as the babysitter, i liked her lots!. Jon Pertwee annoyed me here, and was quite bland, and completely unfunny, he also had no chemistry with Ingrid Pitt!. Ingrid Pitt is beautiful , and does her usual Vampire thing and does it well!.

Rest of the cast do fine. Overall a must see!. **** out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 4485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It's [[hard]] to say [[sometimes]] why exactly a film is so effective. From the moment I first came across "The Stone Boy", something [[told]] me it would be a great film. In spite of that, it [[seemed]] very unlikely that I'd ever have the [[opportunity]] to actually see it for myself. Then, one day, while [[looking]] through the online catalogue of my local library, I [[saw]] that they had [[recently]] purchased the DVD release of this film. [[Which]] I'm [[extremely]] [[glad]] for, because the cinematography is of a [[stunning]] [[depth]] and quality that an [[old]] VHS copy [[could]] never [[replicate]].

And speaking of the [[cinematography]], I [[must]] [[single]] it out as far and above the most [[stunning]] aspect of this [[film]]. As a photographer who [[pursues]] very [[nearly]] the [[exact]] [[visual]] [[style]] [[portrayed]] in "The Stone Boy", I'm a firm believer in the fact that a [[great]] [[cinematographer]] can [[almost]] single-handedly carry a [[film]]. Here, he has a [[lot]] of [[help]] from an [[extremely]] talented [[cast]], and a [[director]] who [[understands]] [[perfectly]] what the story [[needs]]. But to have [[Juan]] Ruiz Anchía behind the [[camera]] makes virtually [[every]] scene something of beauty. And you can almost never say that. Most [[films]] [[would]] never even expect such a thing of you. Scene after scene [[captures]] some [[detail]], some little [[bit]] of visual [[magic]] that takes your [[breath]] away.

The [[director]], Christopher Cain, has had a long and interesting [[career]]. As far as I can [[gather]], this [[film]] is not very representative of it. But, [[sometimes]], to catch a director near the [[beginnings]] of his [[career]], before all the [[big]] [[budgets]] and [[loss]] of [[focus]], there's a [[real]] subtle [[magic]] to be [[found]]. Cain steps back in this film, [[lets]] [[things]] happen with a [[life]] of their own, and then ever further. Much like early John Sayles [[films]], [[characters]] are given space to [[breathe]], [[time]] to talk. Side stories happen because they do, and that's how life is. Cain [[displays]] a [[remarkable]], [[raw]], [[even]] outright painful [[understanding]] of human [[nature]] in this [[film]].

The acting [[ties]] much of this story together. When people talk, when they exist in this film, they do so as actual people, not [[held]] back by the fact that they are playing characters. Gina Berriault's script [[allows]] [[immensely]] talented and respected [[actors]] like Wilford Brimley, Robert Duvall, Glenn [[Close]], and [[Frederic]] Forrest to [[spend]] time [[simply]] existing. Whether the things they have to say are minor or of deep significance, it all comes down with the weight of pure reality.

When you look at the actors involved, or the great soundtrack by James Horner, it seems strange that such a film be very nearly forgotten. Maybe much of what makes "The Stone Boy" what it is was the time period it was made in. There's this 1970s hangover feeling to this picture that reminds me deeply of my own childhood. People talk of the 80s in terms of modern styles and music, but that's not the 80s I lived in or remember. The look of the images, the understated and dark knowing quality of the acting, and the overall result should get under the skin of any person who grew up in or near this era of time in North America. I see myself in this. I see how I saw the world. And a film like "The Stone Boy" sees the world for how it truly is.

For more of this feeling, please see:

The Black Stallion (1979), Never Cry Wolf (1983), Tender Mercies (1983), Testament (1983), Places in the Heart (1984), Matewan (1987), High Tide (1987), Driving Miss Daisy (1989), The Secret Garden (1993), The Secret of Roan Inish (1994), Wendy and [[Lucy]] (2008) It's [[laborious]] to say [[sometime]] why exactly a film is so effective. From the moment I first came across "The Stone Boy", something [[tell]] me it would be a great film. In spite of that, it [[looked]] very unlikely that I'd ever have the [[luck]] to actually see it for myself. Then, one day, while [[researching]] through the online catalogue of my local library, I [[observed]] that they had [[newly]] purchased the DVD release of this film. [[Whom]] I'm [[terribly]] [[thrilled]] for, because the cinematography is of a [[spectacular]] [[depths]] and quality that an [[elderly]] VHS copy [[wo]] never [[reproduced]].

And speaking of the [[film]], I [[should]] [[exclusive]] it out as far and above the most [[sensational]] aspect of this [[films]]. As a photographer who [[haunts]] very [[roughly]] the [[accurate]] [[optic]] [[styles]] [[depicted]] in "The Stone Boy", I'm a firm believer in the fact that a [[super]] [[photographer]] can [[approximately]] single-handedly carry a [[cinema]]. Here, he has a [[lots]] of [[helps]] from an [[critically]] talented [[casting]], and a [[superintendent]] who [[understand]] [[totally]] what the story [[need]]. But to have [[Nguyen]] Ruiz Anchía behind the [[cameras]] makes virtually [[all]] scene something of beauty. And you can almost never say that. Most [[movie]] [[should]] never even expect such a thing of you. Scene after scene [[caught]] some [[details]], some little [[bitten]] of visual [[quadrant]] that takes your [[breathe]] away.

The [[headmaster]], Christopher Cain, has had a long and interesting [[careers]]. As far as I can [[compiling]], this [[movie]] is not very representative of it. But, [[occasionally]], to catch a director near the [[start]] of his [[quarry]], before all the [[substantial]] [[budget]] and [[losing]] of [[emphasis]], there's a [[actual]] subtle [[witchcraft]] to be [[discovered]]. Cain steps back in this film, [[entitles]] [[items]] happen with a [[lifetime]] of their own, and then ever further. Much like early John Sayles [[cinematography]], [[features]] are given space to [[sigh]], [[period]] to talk. Side stories happen because they do, and that's how life is. Cain [[display]] a [[wondrous]], [[untreated]], [[yet]] outright painful [[comprehension]] of human [[characters]] in this [[flick]].

The acting [[linkage]] much of this story together. When people talk, when they exist in this film, they do so as actual people, not [[holds]] back by the fact that they are playing characters. Gina Berriault's script [[allow]] [[terribly]] talented and respected [[players]] like Wilford Brimley, Robert Duvall, Glenn [[Shutting]], and [[Friedrich]] Forrest to [[expenditure]] time [[exclusively]] existing. Whether the things they have to say are minor or of deep significance, it all comes down with the weight of pure reality.

When you look at the actors involved, or the great soundtrack by James Horner, it seems strange that such a film be very nearly forgotten. Maybe much of what makes "The Stone Boy" what it is was the time period it was made in. There's this 1970s hangover feeling to this picture that reminds me deeply of my own childhood. People talk of the 80s in terms of modern styles and music, but that's not the 80s I lived in or remember. The look of the images, the understated and dark knowing quality of the acting, and the overall result should get under the skin of any person who grew up in or near this era of time in North America. I see myself in this. I see how I saw the world. And a film like "The Stone Boy" sees the world for how it truly is.

For more of this feeling, please see:

The Black Stallion (1979), Never Cry Wolf (1983), Tender Mercies (1983), Testament (1983), Places in the Heart (1984), Matewan (1987), High Tide (1987), Driving Miss Daisy (1989), The Secret Garden (1993), The Secret of Roan Inish (1994), Wendy and [[Lucie]] (2008) --------------------------------------------- Result 4486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I read Holes in 5th grade so when I heard they were doing a movie I was ecstatic! Of course, being my busy self, I didn't get chance to see the movie in theaters. [[Holes]] was at the drive-in just out of town but, alas, We were just too busy. I was surprised to hear that all my friends had seen it and not one of them had invited me! They all [[said]] it was good but I've read great books that have [[made]] crappy movies so I was definately worried.

[[Suddenly]] the perfect opportunity to see it came. It was out that week and my parents were going on a cruise and I was left to babysit. My sister, who is 9, and I watched it and absolutely [[loved]] it! I then took it to the other people I was babysitting's house and their kids, 9 and 4, liked it too. Even my parents loved it and they're deffinately movie critics. Overall, I [[recommend]] this movie is for anyone who understands family morale and and loves a hilarious cast! This movie should be on your top 5 "to See" list!!!! I read Holes in 5th grade so when I heard they were doing a movie I was ecstatic! Of course, being my busy self, I didn't get chance to see the movie in theaters. [[Ruts]] was at the drive-in just out of town but, alas, We were just too busy. I was surprised to hear that all my friends had seen it and not one of them had invited me! They all [[indicated]] it was good but I've read great books that have [[introduced]] crappy movies so I was definately worried.

[[Abruptly]] the perfect opportunity to see it came. It was out that week and my parents were going on a cruise and I was left to babysit. My sister, who is 9, and I watched it and absolutely [[cared]] it! I then took it to the other people I was babysitting's house and their kids, 9 and 4, liked it too. Even my parents loved it and they're deffinately movie critics. Overall, I [[recommendation]] this movie is for anyone who understands family morale and and loves a hilarious cast! This movie should be on your top 5 "to See" list!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have always been a [[huge]] fan of "Homicide: [[Life]] [[On]] The Street" so when I [[heard]] there was a [[reunion]] movie coming up, I couldn't wait.

Let me just say, I was not disappointed at all. It was one of the most [[powerful]] 2 hours of television I've ever [[seen]]. It was great to [[see]] [[everyone]] back again, but the biggest [[pleasure]] of all was to have [[Andre]] Braugher back, because the [[relationship]] between Pembleton and Bayliss was [[always]] the [[strongest]] [[part]] of an all-together [[great]] show. I have always been a [[grand]] fan of "Homicide: [[Vie]] [[Onto]] The Street" so when I [[audition]] there was a [[reunification]] movie coming up, I couldn't wait.

Let me just say, I was not disappointed at all. It was one of the most [[mighty]] 2 hours of television I've ever [[watched]]. It was great to [[behold]] [[somebody]] back again, but the biggest [[glee]] of all was to have [[Andrea]] Braugher back, because the [[rapport]] between Pembleton and Bayliss was [[continually]] the [[louder]] [[portion]] of an all-together [[wondrous]] show. --------------------------------------------- Result 4488 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As I write this review in 2008, we are mired in a remake culture. Movie studios seem determined to ruin as many classic films as they can with thoroughly pointless updates including 'King Kong, 'The Wicker Man' and practically every film that ever starred Michael Caine. This lazy remake mentality is not a new phenomenon, however, as 'Dough for the Do-Do' proves. An entirely [[pointless]] colorized version of Bob Clampett's surreal masterpiece 'Porky in Wackyland', 'Dough for the Do-Do' sucks the life out of the original by splashing colour all over Clampett's original footage and adding some lame new footage overseen by Friz Freleng. Freleng was an entirely unsuitable director to be tampering with Clampett's source material, although in truth no director could hope to come close to Clampett's inspired insanity. Inevitably, then, 'Dough for the Do-Do' is nothing more than the raping of a classic with an appalling new title attached. For cartoon fans like myself, its equivalent to a colorization of 'Casablanca'. As I write this review in 2008, we are mired in a remake culture. Movie studios seem determined to ruin as many classic films as they can with thoroughly pointless updates including 'King Kong, 'The Wicker Man' and practically every film that ever starred Michael Caine. This lazy remake mentality is not a new phenomenon, however, as 'Dough for the Do-Do' proves. An entirely [[superfluous]] colorized version of Bob Clampett's surreal masterpiece 'Porky in Wackyland', 'Dough for the Do-Do' sucks the life out of the original by splashing colour all over Clampett's original footage and adding some lame new footage overseen by Friz Freleng. Freleng was an entirely unsuitable director to be tampering with Clampett's source material, although in truth no director could hope to come close to Clampett's inspired insanity. Inevitably, then, 'Dough for the Do-Do' is nothing more than the raping of a classic with an appalling new title attached. For cartoon fans like myself, its equivalent to a colorization of 'Casablanca'. --------------------------------------------- Result 4489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I'm a [[huge]] [[classic]] film buff, but am just getting in to [[silent]] [[movies]]. A lot of silent films don't hold my attention, but [[Show]] People is a notable exception.

[[Marion]] [[Davies]] and [[William]] Haines are simply [[wonderful]] in this picture. Davies, in particular, shows a wide [[range]] as she morphs from a giggly small town girl to a starlet who takes herself a [[bit]] too seriously.

[[Show]] People is a fast paced film with a [[fantastic]] [[array]] of cameos by some of the biggest stars of the silent era. The movie captured my attention immediately and I actually forgot that it was a silent film. (I know that doesn't make much sense, but that's what happened.) The actors are so skilled in their craft that few dialogue cards are necessary.

Show People is a perfect [[introduction]] to silent films. It is a fast paced, interesting film with two of the silent era's best stars. Add in the satire of Hollywood and Show People should be on the 'must see' list for all classic film buffs. I'm a [[formidable]] [[classical]] film buff, but am just getting in to [[muted]] [[theater]]. A lot of silent films don't hold my attention, but [[Showings]] People is a notable exception.

[[Mariana]] [[Davis]] and [[Wilhelm]] Haines are simply [[wondrous]] in this picture. Davies, in particular, shows a wide [[assortment]] as she morphs from a giggly small town girl to a starlet who takes herself a [[bite]] too seriously.

[[Exhibit]] People is a fast paced film with a [[super]] [[arrays]] of cameos by some of the biggest stars of the silent era. The movie captured my attention immediately and I actually forgot that it was a silent film. (I know that doesn't make much sense, but that's what happened.) The actors are so skilled in their craft that few dialogue cards are necessary.

Show People is a perfect [[intro]] to silent films. It is a fast paced, interesting film with two of the silent era's best stars. Add in the satire of Hollywood and Show People should be on the 'must see' list for all classic film buffs. --------------------------------------------- Result 4490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Anna]] (Charlotte Burke), who is just on the verge of puberty, begins to have strange dreams which start affecting her in real life--especially involving a [[boy]] named Mark (Elliott Spiers) who she meets in her dreams.

[[Very]] [[unusual]] fantasy with some [[truly]] [[terrifying]] [[moments]]. Despite the fact that this is about a [[teenage]] girl and has a PG-13 rating, this is NOT for [[children]]. Also, if you hate [[fantasies]] stay far away. But if you're game for something different this [[fits]] the bill.

Well directed by Bernard Rose with a just [[beautiful]] music score and a few nice, scary jolts. The only thing that prevents this from being a really great movie is Burke--she's not a very good actress (it's no surprise that this has been her only film) and it hurts the movie. [[However]], everybody else is just great.

Spiers is very good as Mark; Glenne Headley (faking a British accent very well) is also very good as Anna's mother and Ben Cross is both frightening and sympathetic as Anna's father.

A [[sleeper]] hit when released in 1988, it's since faded away. That's too bad--it's really very good. [[Annas]] (Charlotte Burke), who is just on the verge of puberty, begins to have strange dreams which start affecting her in real life--especially involving a [[fella]] named Mark (Elliott Spiers) who she meets in her dreams.

[[Quite]] [[strange]] fantasy with some [[really]] [[hideous]] [[times]]. Despite the fact that this is about a [[youngsters]] girl and has a PG-13 rating, this is NOT for [[infantile]]. Also, if you hate [[illusions]] stay far away. But if you're game for something different this [[conforms]] the bill.

Well directed by Bernard Rose with a just [[wondrous]] music score and a few nice, scary jolts. The only thing that prevents this from being a really great movie is Burke--she's not a very good actress (it's no surprise that this has been her only film) and it hurts the movie. [[Instead]], everybody else is just great.

Spiers is very good as Mark; Glenne Headley (faking a British accent very well) is also very good as Anna's mother and Ben Cross is both frightening and sympathetic as Anna's father.

A [[sleeping]] hit when released in 1988, it's since faded away. That's too bad--it's really very good. --------------------------------------------- Result 4491 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] This is [[surely]] one of the [[worst]] [[films]] ever [[made]] and [[released]] by a [[major]] Hollywood studio. The plot is [[simply]] stupid. The [[dialog]] is [[written]] in clichés; you can complete a [[great]] [[many]] [[sentences]] in the script because of this. The acting is ridiculously [[bad]], [[especially]] that of Rod Cameron. The "[[choreography]]" is silly and [[wholly]] unerotic. One can only [[pity]] the [[reviewer]] who [[saw]] 23-year-old Yvonne's [[dance]] as sexual; it's [[merely]] very [[bad]] [[choreography]]. The ballet scene in the film's [[beginning]] is [[especially]] [[ludicrous]]. If you are into [[bad]] [[movies]] and [[enjoy]] laughing at some of Hollywood's turkeys, this is for you. I [[bought]] the colorized version on VHS, making the [[movie]] [[even]] worse. Yvonne's [[heavy]] makeup, when [[colored]], has her looking like a [[clown]] all the [[time]]. And she's the [[best]] [[part]] of this [[film]]. What a [[way]] to [[launch]] a career. This is [[probably]] one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[effected]] and [[publicized]] by a [[momentous]] Hollywood studio. The plot is [[purely]] stupid. The [[dialogue]] is [[wrote]] in clichés; you can complete a [[splendid]] [[various]] [[verdicts]] in the script because of this. The acting is ridiculously [[naughty]], [[notably]] that of Rod Cameron. The "[[choreographer]]" is silly and [[totally]] unerotic. One can only [[shame]] the [[reviewers]] who [[seen]] 23-year-old Yvonne's [[choreography]] as sexual; it's [[just]] very [[unfavourable]] [[ballet]]. The ballet scene in the film's [[initiating]] is [[mostly]] [[ridiculous]]. If you are into [[rotten]] [[movie]] and [[enjoying]] laughing at some of Hollywood's turkeys, this is for you. I [[buy]] the colorized version on VHS, making the [[movies]] [[yet]] worse. Yvonne's [[ponderous]] makeup, when [[colorful]], has her looking like a [[buffoon]] all the [[moment]]. And she's the [[optimum]] [[portions]] of this [[flick]]. What a [[pathway]] to [[initiating]] a career. --------------------------------------------- Result 4492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Long before "Brokeback [[Mountain]]" (about 23 [[years]] before), "Deathtrap" was the first time I ever saw two men [[passionately]] kissing on screen, and frankly, I was [[shocked]]. I [[understood]] it in terms of the [[plot]], and it didn't really upset my [[sensibilities]] (not much), but it was the first time I ever saw it, at least, in a "mainstream" movie. I thought it was a [[gutsy]] move for its [[time]], and took [[courage]] for them to try it, [[especially]] Christopher [[Reeve]], in the [[midst]] of his time as PG-rated Superman. [[Male]] bisexuality on screen may have [[hit]] its stride with "Brokeback," but it's interesting to [[note]] this much-earlier incarnation. Long before "Brokeback [[Jebel]]" (about 23 [[olds]] before), "Deathtrap" was the first time I ever saw two men [[ardently]] kissing on screen, and frankly, I was [[appalled]]. I [[understand]] it in terms of the [[intrigue]], and it didn't really upset my [[sensitivity]] (not much), but it was the first time I ever saw it, at least, in a "mainstream" movie. I thought it was a [[bold]] move for its [[moment]], and took [[boldness]] for them to try it, [[specially]] Christopher [[Warden]], in the [[medium]] of his time as PG-rated Superman. [[Macho]] bisexuality on screen may have [[pummeled]] its stride with "Brokeback," but it's interesting to [[remark]] this much-earlier incarnation. --------------------------------------------- Result 4493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dull, cheap sci-fi thriller, made with an almost total lack of conviction (a control room full of computers and other devices used to receive and decipher messages from outer space is run by only ONE MAN, and is VERY poorly guarded at night), and full of campy sound effects. Christopher Lee is not only wasted, but he also gives one of his few "I'm here strictly for the money" performances. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 4494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] Election is a Chinese mob [[movie]], or triads in this case. Every two [[years]] an election is held to decide on a new leader, and at first it seems a toss up between [[Big]] D (Tony Leung Ka Fai, or as I know him, "The Other Tony Leung") and Lok (Simon Yam, who was Judge in Full Contact!). [[Though]] once Lok wins, Big D refuses to [[accept]] the choice and goes to whatever lengths he can to [[secure]] recognition as the new leader. Unlike any other Asian [[film]] I watch featuring [[gangsters]], this one is not an [[action]] [[movie]]. It has its bloody moments, when necessary, as in Goodfellas, but it's basically just a [[really]] [[effective]] [[drama]]. There are a lot of characters, which is really hard to keep track of, but I think that plays into the [[craziness]] of it all a bit. A 100-year-old baton, which is the symbol of power I mentioned before, changes hands several times before things settle down. And though it may appear that the film ends at the 65 or 70-minute mark, there are still a couple big surprises waiting. Simon Yam was my favorite character here and sort of anchors the picture.

Election was quite the award winner at last year's Hong Kong Film Awards, winning for best actor (Tony [[Leung]]), best picture, best director (Johnny To, who did Heroic Trio!!), and best screenplay. It [[also]] had [[nominations]] for cinematography, editing, [[film]] score (which I [[loved]]), and three more acting performances (including Yam). Election is a Chinese mob [[cinematography]], or triads in this case. Every two [[olds]] an election is held to decide on a new leader, and at first it seems a toss up between [[Overwhelming]] D (Tony Leung Ka Fai, or as I know him, "The Other Tony Leung") and Lok (Simon Yam, who was Judge in Full Contact!). [[Nevertheless]] once Lok wins, Big D refuses to [[countenance]] the choice and goes to whatever lengths he can to [[segura]] recognition as the new leader. Unlike any other Asian [[movie]] I watch featuring [[hoodlums]], this one is not an [[efforts]] [[film]]. It has its bloody moments, when necessary, as in Goodfellas, but it's basically just a [[genuinely]] [[potency]] [[tragedy]]. There are a lot of characters, which is really hard to keep track of, but I think that plays into the [[foolishness]] of it all a bit. A 100-year-old baton, which is the symbol of power I mentioned before, changes hands several times before things settle down. And though it may appear that the film ends at the 65 or 70-minute mark, there are still a couple big surprises waiting. Simon Yam was my favorite character here and sort of anchors the picture.

Election was quite the award winner at last year's Hong Kong Film Awards, winning for best actor (Tony [[Upton]]), best picture, best director (Johnny To, who did Heroic Trio!!), and best screenplay. It [[apart]] had [[appointments]] for cinematography, editing, [[cinematography]] score (which I [[cared]]), and three more acting performances (including Yam). --------------------------------------------- Result 4495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** After two so-so [[outings]] ("Magnum Force" and "The [[Enforcer]]"), Dirty [[Harry]] [[seems]] to have regained his stride in "Sudden [[Impact]]," a gripping thriller that [[wisely]] plays to its strengths: the charisma of Clint [[Eastwood]], who [[also]] [[directed]], and a story that spends just [[enough]] [[time]] on exposition and reserves its energy for the [[big]] scenes.

[[For]] once, the [[case]] takes Harry outside his [[native]] [[San]] Francisco (where he's again in trouble with his superiors for his "shoot first, ask [[questions]] later" tactics), to the hamlet of San Paulo. There, (WARNING: Potential spoiler) a [[group]] of [[lowlifes]] is being gruesomely [[murdered]], one at a time, by a [[woman]] whom they gang-raped years [[earlier]], and [[whose]] sister has been in a state of catatonia ever [[since]] the attack.

The [[killer]] is portrayed by Sondra Locke, and she makes the [[character]] of Jennifer Spencer an interesting [[mix]] of [[compassion]] and cold-bloodedness. Locke's cold eyes and frosty [[voice]], when either [[trying]] to comfort her hospitalized sister or dispensing [[vengeance]] toward the rapists, are very effective in painting a [[portrait]] of a [[woman]] wronged [[whose]] [[years]] of [[suffering]] and [[rage]] are now [[beginning]] to bear deadly fruit.

The rapists are a [[despicable]] [[lot]], especially the [[leader]], who has "[[psycho]] nutjob" [[practically]] stamped on his [[forehead]], and a lesbian who [[seems]] [[almost]] one of the guys, [[despite]] her [[anatomical]] inability to [[participate]]. The flashback scenes, while not graphically explicit, are nightmarish [[enough]], and [[clearly]] intended to [[make]] the [[audience]] cheer for [[Jennifer]] as she [[kills]] her assailants.

Some will [[dismiss]] "Sudden [[Impact]]" as [[trash]]: a mindless, manipulative revenge [[tale]]. On a certain [[level]] this is [[true]], but it's well-done [[trash]]. What [[works]] to the movie's [[advantage]] is the [[strength]] of the Sondra Locke performance, giving us a [[complex]] [[character]] [[whose]] [[wounds]] are more [[visible]] in her [[paintings]] than in her gestures or [[speech]]. What we have here is an [[action]] [[movie]] with a point of [[view]].

You can [[take]] or [[leave]] the [[idea]] that some [[wrongs]] deserve to be [[punished]] by any [[means]] [[necessary]], but as the [[mystery]] behind the slayings becomes clear to Harry (a realization that, wisely, is not spelled out with dialogue), he is presented with a choice -- what to do about a killer whose motivations he can sympathize with but whose conduct he is bound by law to not tolerate. This makes the story more interesting than the usual Dirty Harry fare.

The movie's other redeeming quality is Eastwood's direction. This is, after all, a Dirty Harry movie, and Eastwood knows the character better than anyone else. The movie is directed with style and wit, and edited to give the action scenes a big payoff. Some of the best "Harry moments" in the entire series are here, including Harry's best-known line, "Go ahead -- make my day."

"Sudden Impact" is a movie that has the courage of its convictions in presenting a tale about a despicable crime and the brutal consequences that follow. It is also a riveting detective story, well made and well told. And it is certainly never dull. On those criteria, it succeeds tremendously. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** After two so-so [[sorties]] ("Magnum Force" and "The [[Goon]]"), Dirty [[Hari]] [[looks]] to have regained his stride in "Sudden [[Influenced]]," a gripping thriller that [[conservatively]] plays to its strengths: the charisma of Clint [[Nolan]], who [[further]] [[aimed]], and a story that spends just [[adequate]] [[period]] on exposition and reserves its energy for the [[substantial]] scenes.

[[At]] once, the [[lawsuit]] takes Harry outside his [[aboriginal]] [[Saint]] Francisco (where he's again in trouble with his superiors for his "shoot first, ask [[issues]] later" tactics), to the hamlet of San Paulo. There, (WARNING: Potential spoiler) a [[clustered]] of [[gangbangers]] is being gruesomely [[slain]], one at a time, by a [[daughters]] whom they gang-raped years [[formerly]], and [[who]] sister has been in a state of catatonia ever [[because]] the attack.

The [[shooter]] is portrayed by Sondra Locke, and she makes the [[characteristics]] of Jennifer Spencer an interesting [[blended]] of [[pity]] and cold-bloodedness. Locke's cold eyes and frosty [[vocals]], when either [[seeking]] to comfort her hospitalized sister or dispensing [[revenge]] toward the rapists, are very effective in painting a [[portraits]] of a [[wife]] wronged [[whom]] [[aged]] of [[distress]] and [[wrath]] are now [[started]] to bear deadly fruit.

The rapists are a [[loathsome]] [[batch]], especially the [[chief]], who has "[[madman]] nutjob" [[hardly]] stamped on his [[brow]], and a lesbian who [[appears]] [[hardly]] one of the guys, [[while]] her [[anatomy]] inability to [[involvement]]. The flashback scenes, while not graphically explicit, are nightmarish [[sufficiently]], and [[apparently]] intended to [[deliver]] the [[audiences]] cheer for [[Jessica]] as she [[murdered]] her assailants.

Some will [[refusing]] "Sudden [[Implications]]" as [[wastebasket]]: a mindless, manipulative revenge [[story]]. On a certain [[grades]] this is [[authentic]], but it's well-done [[rubbish]]. What [[collaborating]] to the movie's [[parti]] is the [[kraft]] of the Sondra Locke performance, giving us a [[complicate]] [[personages]] [[who]] [[injure]] are more [[recognizable]] in her [[paint]] than in her gestures or [[discourse]]. What we have here is an [[activities]] [[flick]] with a point of [[opinion]].

You can [[taking]] or [[let]] the [[concept]] that some [[evils]] deserve to be [[sanctioned]] by any [[modes]] [[essential]], but as the [[puzzle]] behind the slayings becomes clear to Harry (a realization that, wisely, is not spelled out with dialogue), he is presented with a choice -- what to do about a killer whose motivations he can sympathize with but whose conduct he is bound by law to not tolerate. This makes the story more interesting than the usual Dirty Harry fare.

The movie's other redeeming quality is Eastwood's direction. This is, after all, a Dirty Harry movie, and Eastwood knows the character better than anyone else. The movie is directed with style and wit, and edited to give the action scenes a big payoff. Some of the best "Harry moments" in the entire series are here, including Harry's best-known line, "Go ahead -- make my day."

"Sudden Impact" is a movie that has the courage of its convictions in presenting a tale about a despicable crime and the brutal consequences that follow. It is also a riveting detective story, well made and well told. And it is certainly never dull. On those criteria, it succeeds tremendously. --------------------------------------------- Result 4496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Spoken like a [[true]] hard-boiled u'an gangsta. The [[story]] is no [[worse]] than any number of [[gangster]] flicks, but never ever confuse this [[movie]] with The [[Godfather]] I or II, or [[Goodfellas]]. It is not in the same league.

But what makes the film periodically [[painful]] to watch is all these Italian [[Americans]] swaggering around [[dropping]] bad [[gangsta]] lines in an even worse [[fake]] u'an [[accent]]. [[Pacino]] would have been [[great]] if they [[could]] just have [[dubbed]] him. I was looking forward to [[see]] Abrahams and Loggia, but their steenky accents spoiled the [[fun]].

Ah well, the [[script]] ain't too [[hot]] either. [[Don]] Corleone would have [[made]] this [[disappear]] five minutes after meeting him, [[smiling]] and [[patting]] him on the back all the while. Spoken like a [[veritable]] hard-boiled u'an gangsta. The [[storytelling]] is no [[lousiest]] than any number of [[mobster]] flicks, but never ever confuse this [[filmmaking]] with The [[Nominating]] I or II, or [[Homeboys]]. It is not in the same league.

But what makes the film periodically [[hurtful]] to watch is all these Italian [[America]] swaggering around [[downed]] bad [[thug]] lines in an even worse [[spurious]] u'an [[emphasis]]. [[Deniro]] would have been [[tremendous]] if they [[did]] just have [[nicknamed]] him. I was looking forward to [[seeing]] Abrahams and Loggia, but their steenky accents spoiled the [[droll]].

Ah well, the [[screenplay]] ain't too [[caliente]] either. [[Donated]] Corleone would have [[introduced]] this [[disappeared]] five minutes after meeting him, [[grinning]] and [[knock]] him on the back all the while. --------------------------------------------- Result 4497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] DIG! is funny, fun, amusing, interesting, stylish, and very well done. Knowing that it was made on such a shoestring budget over 7 years it is amazing that such a story can be told, especially with such style and substance. If you are a music fan or documentary fan this is a must see.

Focusing on The Brian Jonestown Masssacre and The Dandy Warhols over the years is a brilliant way to show the contrast between a decent band who meets with moderate success through perseverance and the ability to compromise and a genius megalomaniacal lead singer backed up by a varied cast of characters who sabotage their own success through drugs, alcohol, and insanity. If I did not know that this is footage of real people, I would swear it was an incredibly well written and imaginative scripted piece. The story is compelling, concise, and simply amazing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In my opinion, this is one of the greatest movies ever made in America and it deserved every single award it won and it's place on the AFI Top 100 list (though it's shamefully too low on the IMDB Top 250 list, at only #183 as of this writing). If you enjoy acting of the highest calibre (Voight and Hoffman are a superb match), well-drawn characterizations and inventive direction, editing and cinematography, you'll love this just as much as I did. Schlesinger paints a vivid, always credible picture of the late 60s New York City scene and it's many victims struggling to overcome personal demons and survive amidst the amorality, poverty and hopelessness of 42nd Street, New York City.

The filmmaking techniques employed here brilliantly capture the feel of the underground New York film movement (and of the city) and are nothing less than dazzling. I've seen many ideas (including the rapid-fire editing, the handling of the voice-over flashbacks, the drug/trip sequences and the cartoonish face slipped in during a murder scene to convey angst and terror) stolen by other filmmakers.

The relationship between Joe and Ratso is handled in such a way as to be viewed as an unusually strong friendship OR having it's homosexual underpinnings. I think the director handled this in a subtle way not to cop out to the censorship of the times, but rather to concentrate his energies on the importance of a strong human connection in life, whether it be sexual or not.

MIDNIGHT COWBOY is a brave, moving film of magnitude, influence and importance that has lost absolutely none of it's impact over the years, so if you haven't seen it, you're really missing out on a true American classic. I recommend this film to everyone.

Score: 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I [[like]] monster [[movies]], [[generally]]. Even if they are implausible and [[silly]]. But its hard to like this [[movie]] when its so implausible and [[silly]] AND tries to take itself [[seriously]] all at the same time. Like in a really posh [[kind]] of way.

[[While]] the [[idea]] is [[somewhat]] factual, like [[Orcas]] are [[known]] for [[killing]] [[Great]] [[White]] [[Sharks]], its really hard to [[find]] it scary when I can't help but just see an [[angry]] Shamoo [[destroying]] [[stuff]]. [[Especially]] that one scene where some building exploded [[cause]] of the Orca's doing...and while it explodes, the [[thing]] [[jumps]] out of the water and it felt like I was watching a [[show]] at [[Sea]] World with fireworks. Plus they [[kill]] a lot of the [[scary]] [[moments]] before they even hint that they're going to happen. On top of that, it takes a few jabs at JAWS. Its like "[[hey]] [[look]], we're being factual and we can [[come]] up with [[BETTER]] [[reasons]] why the Orca is attacking".

Yes you are, [[ignoring]] your [[outrageous]] **** ups in logic of course. But JAWS had one [[thing]] your [[movie]] doesn't. Its [[scary]]. [[Yes]] its implausible. [[Yes]] its [[somewhat]] [[outrageous]]. But quite frankly, [[factual]] or not, a Killer [[Shark]] is not close to being as scary as a [[Great]] [[White]]. And the poor [[attempt]] at [[character]] [[development]] and [[writing]] just [[hurts]] it more. [[Even]] JAWS the [[Revenge]] is scarier than this. I [[likes]] monster [[film]], [[often]]. Even if they are implausible and [[ridiculous]]. But its hard to like this [[filmmaking]] when its so implausible and [[witless]] AND tries to take itself [[deeply]] all at the same time. Like in a really posh [[sorting]] of way.

[[Though]] the [[concept]] is [[slightly]] factual, like [[Orcs]] are [[renowned]] for [[killed]] [[Marvelous]] [[Blanc]] [[Shark]], its really hard to [[unearthed]] it scary when I can't help but just see an [[enraged]] Shamoo [[destroys]] [[thing]]. [[Mostly]] that one scene where some building exploded [[reason]] of the Orca's doing...and while it explodes, the [[stuff]] [[climbs]] out of the water and it felt like I was watching a [[shows]] at [[Seas]] World with fireworks. Plus they [[killed]] a lot of the [[frightful]] [[times]] before they even hint that they're going to happen. On top of that, it takes a few jabs at JAWS. Its like "[[yo]] [[peek]], we're being factual and we can [[coming]] up with [[IMPROVED]] [[reason]] why the Orca is attacking".

Yes you are, [[overlooking]] your [[monstrous]] **** ups in logic of course. But JAWS had one [[stuff]] your [[movies]] doesn't. Its [[horrible]]. [[Yep]] its implausible. [[Yep]] its [[rather]] [[vile]]. But quite frankly, [[realities]] or not, a Killer [[Sharks]] is not close to being as scary as a [[Super]] [[Blanca]]. And the poor [[try]] at [[traits]] [[evolution]] and [[handwriting]] just [[stings]] it more. [[Yet]] JAWS the [[Revengeful]] is scarier than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] This [[show]] was laughably [[bad]]. The [[writing]] sucked, the [[dialog]] sucked. The [[guy]] who [[played]] Craig couldn't [[act]] his way out of a paper sack. Being it was on [[Thursday]] [[night]], this was [[definitely]] great to watch with some [[beers]]. Cool music, [[bad]] acting, poor [[writing]], all [[came]] together for my [[entertainment]].

It was a [[drama]]/[[unintentional]] [[comedy]]. I don't care what [[happened]] to any of the [[characters]], they were all [[boring]] and stupid. The first five episodes were the worst, since they couldn't [[reveal]] who the victim was, they had to [[write]] the dialog [[around]] it, which was [[terrible]]. I mean, the [[eulogy]] at the [[funeral]] was [[ridiculous]]. Actually, all the scenes that occurred in the present were [[utterly]] [[horrible]].

[[So]], let's [[review]]. Everything happening in present [[time]] sucked. The flashback scenes, only the [[writing]], dialog and Craig's acting [[sucked]]. The [[music]] ruled though. This [[showings]] was laughably [[negative]]. The [[writes]] sucked, the [[dialogue]] sucked. The [[guys]] who [[done]] Craig couldn't [[acts]] his way out of a paper sack. Being it was on [[Today]] [[nuit]], this was [[undeniably]] great to watch with some [[pints]]. Cool music, [[unfavorable]] acting, poor [[write]], all [[arrived]] together for my [[amusement]].

It was a [[theatrical]]/[[fortuitous]] [[travesty]]. I don't care what [[transpired]] to any of the [[features]], they were all [[dull]] and stupid. The first five episodes were the worst, since they couldn't [[expose]] who the victim was, they had to [[handwriting]] the dialog [[about]] it, which was [[horrible]]. I mean, the [[compliments]] at the [[mortuary]] was [[laughable]]. Actually, all the scenes that occurred in the present were [[totally]] [[horrific]].

[[Thereby]], let's [[reviews]]. Everything happening in present [[times]] sucked. The flashback scenes, only the [[writes]], dialog and Craig's acting [[aspired]]. The [[musica]] ruled though. --------------------------------------------- Result 4501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This show seemed to be kinda good. Kyra Sedgwick is an OK actress and I like police series, but somewhere in the production this program went awfully wrong.

First of all, the writers should have more suspects than one, you know who did it EVERY TIME!!!!! That makes it boring. The main character is unbelievably annoying and its not believable in any way. I know they wanted her to be tough, but shes mean, stupid and a bad chief. The crimes are uninteresting and bland, and its just lame all the way. As stated above, I hate it....

All in all, this was a big disappointment and very bad indeed... --------------------------------------------- Result 4502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I tried twice to get through this film, [[succeeding]] the first [[time]] - and it was like pulling teeth - and failing the second time [[despite]] a great DVD transfer. The problem? It's [[simply]] too [[boring]].

[[If]] you can get to the [[dramatic]] courtroom scene, which takes up most of the second half of the film, you have it [[made]], but it's tough getting to that point. There are some interesting talks by "[[Abraham]] Lincoln" ([[Henry]] Fonda) during the trial. The ending is touching as Lincoln walks off and they superimpose his Memoral statue over the screen.

It's a nice story, well-acted and such....but it [[lacks]] [[spark]] in the first half and discourages the [[viewer]] from hanging in there. I suspect the real Abe Lincoln was a lot more interesting than this film. I tried twice to get through this film, [[succeeds]] the first [[period]] - and it was like pulling teeth - and failing the second time [[though]] a great DVD transfer. The problem? It's [[straightforward]] too [[dull]].

[[Unless]] you can get to the [[tremendous]] courtroom scene, which takes up most of the second half of the film, you have it [[brought]], but it's tough getting to that point. There are some interesting talks by "[[Avraham]] Lincoln" ([[Hendrik]] Fonda) during the trial. The ending is touching as Lincoln walks off and they superimpose his Memoral statue over the screen.

It's a nice story, well-acted and such....but it [[missing]] [[sparkle]] in the first half and discourages the [[onlooker]] from hanging in there. I suspect the real Abe Lincoln was a lot more interesting than this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4503 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Look, I loved the PROPER Anchorman film, but this was reaaaaallly bad. The kind of bad that makes you wish you could get that time back in your life, the kind of bad that makes you think "what on Earth were they thinking to film this in the first place", the kind of bad that makes you wish you'd taken 50 more minutes when stepping into the kitchen to grab a snack during the film, the kind of bad that makes leprosy look fun, the kind of bad that makes you think you wish you rented a Pauly Shore film instead....seriously, I cannot explain how very bad this was.

Having said that....there were some semi-amusing laughs, but they are all so much LESS funny than Anchorman. Sure, they tried to make it entertaining and fun, but the entire subplot that was left out of Anchorman that made it here was genuinely left out for a good reason...it wasn't even a little bit good.

Do yourself a favour (or in the USA, a favor), and don't watch this DVD...it will tarnish the good movie that Anchorman is and you don't want to do that.

Okay...I'm alright now. --------------------------------------------- Result 4504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is not as funny and gory as the DVD box claims. I really love twisted and wierd movies, but this one is really just dull! It's one hour of ripped off penises, flying Baby Born dolls and a lot of rape! I think the intention with this amateur sleaze, was to make a It's-so-bad-it's-good movies, but it fails. It's just bad! A few scenes are ok, but in whole it's a mess. If you like amateur splatter like this one (Only way better) I would recommend Andreas Schnass' Violent Shit 2 and 3. --------------------------------------------- Result 4505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a poor excuse for New Zealnd Movie making. I'm ashamed to call myself a New Zealander when this movie exists and is currently playing on New Zealand satellite TV (Aug 2006). The cast is made up of a large number of local soap stars. The ship, in real life, is one of the inter-island ferries that travel daily between the two main islands and even has the company's logo (a dolphin) still all over the set including on the ship's funnel. The ship is supposed to be a cruise ship/ferry between the USA and Mexico. It has obvious signs of rust and old age all over the place yet is supposed to be a luxury ship on it's maiden voyage. One of the scenes shows the snow capped peaks of New Zealand's South island in the background for God's sake! Must have been a very cold time on the USA/Mexico area! The story is weak, the acting is weaker and the new Zealand/American accents just don't work. I expect the New Zealand tax payer contributed to the production cost of this movie and that was a waste of money better spent on a real production. I know high school kids in New Zealand who could make better movies with their cell phones. Goof: There is a truck in the hold with tagging on it and they stuck a Taco Company sign on the door of the truck, presumably to make it look like it was American. But some of the sign is over the top of the tagging - you'd think they would have noticed that in the props department before attaching it. I'd love to go on but it just isn't worth the trouble in any way. --------------------------------------------- Result 4506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I first [[saw]] this when it was picked as a [[suggestion]] from my TiVo system. I [[like]] [[Danny]] Elfman and [[thought]] it might be interesting. On [[top]] of that, I'm a [[fan]] of Max Fleischer's [[work]], and this [[started]] out with the [[look]] and feel of his 30s [[cartoon]]. With both of those, I thought it [[would]] hold my interest. I was [[wrong]]. Just a few [[minutes]] in, and I had the [[fast]] forward button down. I ran through it in about 15 minutes, and thought that was it.

[[Afterwards]], I read some of the other reviews here and [[figured]] I didn't give it enough of a [[chance]]. I [[recorded]] it again and [[watched]] it through. There's 75 minutes of my [[life]] I'm not getting back.

I can't [[believe]] there aren't more [[bad]] [[reviews]]. Personally, I [[think]] it's because it's hard to get to the 10 line [[comment]] [[minimum]]. How [[many]] [[ways]] are there to [[say]] this is a [[waste]] of [[time]]?

The [[movie]] [[comes]] across as [[though]] it was made by a few junior high [[kids]] ready to [[outrage]] the [[world]] and [[thinking]] they can with [[breasts]], [[profanity]], and [[puke]] jokes. The [[characters]] are flat. The parody of "Swinging the Alphabet" is lame, essentially cobbling the [[tune]], getting through A - E, [[hitting]] the [[obvious]] [[profanity]] a "[[F]]", and then having no [[idea]] where to go. The [[trip]] through the [[intestines]] to the [[expected]] landing doesn't [[work]] the first time, [[let]] [[alone]] the following ones.

[[Across]] the board, the [[entire]] [[movie]] is what you would [[expect]] from [[someone]] [[trying]] to "out-South Park" Stone and Parker without the [[ability]] to [[determine]] what is and isn't [[funny]]. This might be [[amusing]] if you're [[high]]. [[Otherwise]], it's not. I first [[noticed]] this when it was picked as a [[propose]] from my TiVo system. I [[fond]] [[Devito]] Elfman and [[figured]] it might be interesting. On [[topped]] of that, I'm a [[breather]] of Max Fleischer's [[cooperate]], and this [[opened]] out with the [[gaze]] and feel of his 30s [[cartoons]]. With both of those, I thought it [[could]] hold my interest. I was [[incorrect]]. Just a few [[mins]] in, and I had the [[quick]] forward button down. I ran through it in about 15 minutes, and thought that was it.

[[Subsequently]], I read some of the other reviews here and [[thought]] I didn't give it enough of a [[probability]]. I [[records]] it again and [[saw]] it through. There's 75 minutes of my [[lives]] I'm not getting back.

I can't [[think]] there aren't more [[negative]] [[review]]. Personally, I [[thinks]] it's because it's hard to get to the 10 line [[remarks]] [[lesser]]. How [[several]] [[way]] are there to [[said]] this is a [[squander]] of [[times]]?

The [[filmmaking]] [[occurs]] across as [[despite]] it was made by a few junior high [[juvenile]] ready to [[anger]] the [[monde]] and [[thought]] they can with [[tits]], [[rudeness]], and [[barf]] jokes. The [[attribute]] are flat. The parody of "Swinging the Alphabet" is lame, essentially cobbling the [[tuning]], getting through A - E, [[knock]] the [[apparent]] [[vulgarity]] a "[[e]]", and then having no [[ideals]] where to go. The [[tours]] through the [[insides]] to the [[envisioned]] landing doesn't [[collaborated]] the first time, [[leaving]] [[only]] the following ones.

[[In]] the board, the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] is what you would [[waits]] from [[everybody]] [[attempting]] to "out-South Park" Stone and Parker without the [[capacity]] to [[identify]] what is and isn't [[fun]]. This might be [[fun]] if you're [[higher]]. [[Else]], it's not. --------------------------------------------- Result 4507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Michael]] Cacoyannis has had a relatively long [[career]] but has surprisingly few [[credits]] to his name, including some real duds such as the unfunny cold war satire The Day the Fish Came Out. Iphigenia, [[however]], is a [[highlight]]. [[Adapted]] by Cacoyannis from the play by Euripides, it's a [[superior]] rendering of the classic tragedy and recently made its first television appearance in many years in the United States courtesy the Flix Channel. The film is shot on an epic scale but is decidedly not a 'big' film, with the emphasis placed on the simple story: in supplication to the gods, King Agamemnon (Kostas Kazakos)is compelled to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia (Tatiana Papamoschou), much to the consternation of Queen Clytemnastrae (Irene Papas). Kazakos and Papas are both outstanding, but it is the stunning Papamoschou who brings the most interesting elements to the screen, blending the innocence of childhood with the dawning realization that she is the pawn in a political game. [[Strongly]] recommended for [[fans]] of international cinema. [[Micheal]] Cacoyannis has had a relatively long [[quarry]] but has surprisingly few [[appropriations]] to his name, including some real duds such as the unfunny cold war satire The Day the Fish Came Out. Iphigenia, [[instead]], is a [[highlights]]. [[Readjusted]] by Cacoyannis from the play by Euripides, it's a [[supremo]] rendering of the classic tragedy and recently made its first television appearance in many years in the United States courtesy the Flix Channel. The film is shot on an epic scale but is decidedly not a 'big' film, with the emphasis placed on the simple story: in supplication to the gods, King Agamemnon (Kostas Kazakos)is compelled to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia (Tatiana Papamoschou), much to the consternation of Queen Clytemnastrae (Irene Papas). Kazakos and Papas are both outstanding, but it is the stunning Papamoschou who brings the most interesting elements to the screen, blending the innocence of childhood with the dawning realization that she is the pawn in a political game. [[Flatly]] recommended for [[buffs]] of international cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 4508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I was fully amped up to see this film. I had been waiting a year for it to be cleared down here in New Zealand. I shouldn't have built myself up so much because it was so [[disappointing]] and is without a [[doubt]] Clark's worst film There is so much [[wrong]] with this film. First off, some of the acting is [[great]], in particular Nick Stahl as 'The Bully', and the girl with the curly brown hair (I can't recall her name), but most of it was so out of touch and incredibly unbelievable, especially Leo Fitzpatrick. He's a veteran of Clark's films now and he was so brilliant in 'Kids', but in 'Bully' he invests his lines with such solemnity as to turn his scenes into a parody virtually. The screenplay felt like it had been written by a first year film student. No sorry, a high school student...one who has never seen a movie before. And I couldn't fathom Clark's intentions. Was he trying to point out the meaningless of these kids' existence? It sure as hell didn't stop him getting in a damn good perv. I'm no prude but I didn't need to see teenage breasts and buttocks every 5 minutes. I still maintain that Clark's best film is 'Another Day in Paradise'. It's fantastic and I don't think he'll ever top it. I was fully amped up to see this film. I had been waiting a year for it to be cleared down here in New Zealand. I shouldn't have built myself up so much because it was so [[discouraging]] and is without a [[duda]] Clark's worst film There is so much [[erroneous]] with this film. First off, some of the acting is [[phenomenal]], in particular Nick Stahl as 'The Bully', and the girl with the curly brown hair (I can't recall her name), but most of it was so out of touch and incredibly unbelievable, especially Leo Fitzpatrick. He's a veteran of Clark's films now and he was so brilliant in 'Kids', but in 'Bully' he invests his lines with such solemnity as to turn his scenes into a parody virtually. The screenplay felt like it had been written by a first year film student. No sorry, a high school student...one who has never seen a movie before. And I couldn't fathom Clark's intentions. Was he trying to point out the meaningless of these kids' existence? It sure as hell didn't stop him getting in a damn good perv. I'm no prude but I didn't need to see teenage breasts and buttocks every 5 minutes. I still maintain that Clark's best film is 'Another Day in Paradise'. It's fantastic and I don't think he'll ever top it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had no idea what this film was about or even knew that it existed until about 1 month ago when I stumbled upon when I was searching for other films that stared Dominic Monaghan. I thought this film was a strange insight into the mind of a none sleeper and what his/her mind may be going through in the hours that they spend awake when the rest of the world around them is asleep,it was an interesting film and a good part was played by Dom.......I believe that even though this film you cannot buy anywhere (well I've never seen it anywhere) you must see it if you ever get the chance because it will really make you think about those people around us that cannot sleep and have to suffer night after night of not been able to sleep or only get about 1 hour of sleep every night so overall it was an interesting film of good substance. --------------------------------------------- Result 4510 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Princess Victoria (Emily [[Blunt]]) is in line for the throne of [[England]]. The present King [[William]] (Jim Broadbent) is not well and may not [[live]] long. [[However]], Vicky's [[scheming]] mother, The Duchess of Kent (Miranda Richandson) and her aide, [[John]] ([[Mark]] [[Strong]]) [[want]] to force Victoria to sign [[papers]] [[declaring]] them to be the "regents" until she is [[older]], since she is only 20 [[years]] of age. The young lady [[refuses]], [[despite]] [[John]] slapping her around. It is another sign that Victoria has a strong will and deep love for her country. Yet, when William does pass away, shortly after her 21st birthday, Victoria knows she has a heavy duty before her. First, she must surround herself with the "right" advisers to govern [[wisely]]. She chooses handsome Lord Melbourne (Paul Bettany) who, although an older man, is mentioned as a suitor for Vicky. Which brings us to the young queen's second major decision. Sooner than not, the young queen should select her future [[mate]], as it will bring stability to her life and to those of the kingdom, for an heir [[must]] appear in the coming years. Meanwhile, in Germany, some distant relatives of the British royal family are hatching some [[plans]] as well. Handsome Prince Albert (Rupert Friend), of the Saxon-Coburg dynasty, is prodded by his father to court the young English royal. Once he arrives at the palace, he is smitten and the feeling seems to be mutual. But, since he is a minor player on the map of royal match-making, can he succeed in winning her heart? This is a [[lovely]] [[film]], made [[even]] better by a [[completely]] winning performance by [[Emily]] Blunt as Victoria. [[Yes]], she is beautiful but it is her [[intelligent]] reading of the role that scores mightily. Friend, too, does well, as do the other actors, [[including]] Broadbent, [[Richardson]], Bettany, Strong (what a repulsive role!), and the rest. [[Also]], the movie is gorgeously shot, costumed, and set, making it a visual [[treat]] in [[every]] way. If [[anything]] is [[lacking]], it is an [[extra]] [[dose]] of [[dazzle]], as the [[film]] [[seems]] a bit too straightforward and prosaic, at [[times]], with a [[somewhat]] [[unimaginative]] edit. However, this is only a [[minor]], [[minor]] point of argument in an [[overall]] very successful and [[gorgeous]] [[film]]. [[In]] short, young and [[old]], should make [[time]] for [[Young]] Victoria. It is a most worthy film among 2009 cinematic offerings. Princess Victoria (Emily [[Blount]]) is in line for the throne of [[Uk]]. The present King [[Williams]] (Jim Broadbent) is not well and may not [[viva]] long. [[Instead]], Vicky's [[underhand]] mother, The Duchess of Kent (Miranda Richandson) and her aide, [[Johannes]] ([[Branded]] [[Forceful]]) [[wanting]] to force Victoria to sign [[documentation]] [[announcing]] them to be the "regents" until she is [[elderly]], since she is only 20 [[aged]] of age. The young lady [[disallowed]], [[while]] [[Jon]] slapping her around. It is another sign that Victoria has a strong will and deep love for her country. Yet, when William does pass away, shortly after her 21st birthday, Victoria knows she has a heavy duty before her. First, she must surround herself with the "right" advisers to govern [[rationally]]. She chooses handsome Lord Melbourne (Paul Bettany) who, although an older man, is mentioned as a suitor for Vicky. Which brings us to the young queen's second major decision. Sooner than not, the young queen should select her future [[mating]], as it will bring stability to her life and to those of the kingdom, for an heir [[should]] appear in the coming years. Meanwhile, in Germany, some distant relatives of the British royal family are hatching some [[systems]] as well. Handsome Prince Albert (Rupert Friend), of the Saxon-Coburg dynasty, is prodded by his father to court the young English royal. Once he arrives at the palace, he is smitten and the feeling seems to be mutual. But, since he is a minor player on the map of royal match-making, can he succeed in winning her heart? This is a [[nice]] [[films]], made [[yet]] better by a [[fully]] winning performance by [[Amelie]] Blunt as Victoria. [[Yeah]], she is beautiful but it is her [[smarter]] reading of the role that scores mightily. Friend, too, does well, as do the other actors, [[containing]] Broadbent, [[Roberts]], Bettany, Strong (what a repulsive role!), and the rest. [[Additionally]], the movie is gorgeously shot, costumed, and set, making it a visual [[deal]] in [[any]] way. If [[somethings]] is [[missing]], it is an [[extras]] [[dosage]] of [[glare]], as the [[films]] [[looks]] a bit too straightforward and prosaic, at [[period]], with a [[rather]] [[uninspired]] edit. However, this is only a [[marginal]], [[marginal]] point of argument in an [[whole]] very successful and [[brilliant]] [[cinematography]]. [[At]] short, young and [[ancient]], should make [[moment]] for [[Youngsters]] Victoria. It is a most worthy film among 2009 cinematic offerings. --------------------------------------------- Result 4511 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] No one better spoil this piece of [[work]]! Awesome movie! Written [[expertly]] by the [[likes]] of Ira Levin and [[depicted]] with the best performance of [[Christopher]] Reeve's [[career]] and one of Caine's very best, this is simply [[excellent]]. I [[wish]] I could [[catch]] a [[staged]] version [[somewhere]]...[[maybe]] [[someday]] I will. I [[hope]] this [[grossly]] [[underrated]], overlooked film has not [[become]] too difficult to [[locate]] because it a 'must' for any Hitchcockian, Agatha-phile or lover of great film. One of very few [[movies]] I couldn't instantly [[solve]] or [[predict]] and worth a second or [[even]] third viewing, "Deathtrap" [[gets]] a 9/10 and [[earns]] [[every]] [[iota]] of it. We need and [[deserve]] more [[movies]] like this! No one better spoil this piece of [[jobs]]! Awesome movie! Written [[skilfully]] by the [[loves]] of Ira Levin and [[illustrated]] with the best performance of [[Cristobal]] Reeve's [[vocational]] and one of Caine's very best, this is simply [[wondrous]]. I [[wishing]] I could [[catches]] a [[phased]] version [[somehow]]...[[perhaps]] [[sometime]] I will. I [[expectancy]] this [[embarrassingly]] [[underestimated]], overlooked film has not [[becomes]] too difficult to [[locating]] because it a 'must' for any Hitchcockian, Agatha-phile or lover of great film. One of very few [[kino]] I couldn't instantly [[resolve]] or [[prognosis]] and worth a second or [[yet]] third viewing, "Deathtrap" [[got]] a 9/10 and [[earning]] [[any]] [[inch]] of it. We need and [[merited]] more [[cinema]] like this! --------------------------------------------- Result 4512 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cliché-ridden story of an impending divorce - or is it? - through the eyes of a 6 year-old child. Corny dialogue, cardboard characters, stock situations, a red herring zombie sub-plot and, worst of all, absolutely no payoff, either emotionally or dramatically.

Does no-one teach creative writing any more? The true sign of a weak storyteller - when you cannot create any kind of satisfying denouement - just end the story. I'm compelled to ask, "what made you think this was a story worth telling in the first place!?"

Good, but wasted, debut by child actor Anthony De Marco - the rest of the cast was, at best, forgettable. And they wonder why no-one watches indie films! This is ninety minutes of my life I will never get back. --------------------------------------------- Result 4513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This inept adaptation of arguably one of Martin Amis's weaker novels fails to even draw comparisons with other druggy oeuvres such as Requiem For A Dream or anything penned by Irvine Walsh as it struggles to decide whether it is a slap-stick cartoon or a hyper-realistic hallucination.

Boringly directed by William Marsh in over-saturated hues, a group of public school drop-outs converge in a mansion awaiting the appearance of three American friends for a weekend of decadent drug-taking. And that's it. Except for the ludicrous sub-plot soon-to-be-the-main-plot nonsense about an extremist cult group who express themselves with the violent killings of the world's elite figures, be it political or pampered. Within the first reel you know exactly where this is going.

What is a talented actor like Paul Bettany doing in this tiresome, badly written bore? Made prior to his rise to fame and Jennifer Connelly one can be assured that had he been offered this garbage now he'd have immediately changed agents! Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 4514 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Shiri Appleby is the cutest little embodiment of evil turned good [[girl]] demon-kicking Buffy [[clone]], Elle. But I'm [[getting]] ahead of myself, you [[see]] Lilith was the first woman made by [[god]] as a [[companion]] to [[Adam]]. But she got all uppity evil feminist so god banished her from Eden. A [[clandestine]] order known as The Fath captures her but doesn't kill her, so now with amnesia (which is not really explained that well) Lilith (now Elle) is free to become the aforementioned Buffy-clone who has to battle with a mad scientist who got an injection of Lilith's blood.

[[If]] the previous paragraph sounded hideously convoluted, that's because it is. The [[movie]] is [[also]] [[dull]], generic, and for a [[film]] with a [[plot]] [[steeped]] in [[theology]] it doesn't seem to know a lick about it. This bargain [[basement]] lousy-CGIed [[movie]] was [[apparently]] a failed [[series]] pilot. All I can say to the fact that it didn't [[get]] [[picked]] up is a resounding [[Amen]].

My Grade: D-

DVD Extras: Commentary by Writer/[[Director]] Bill Platt and Co-writer Chris Regina; and [[Stills]] gallery; video [[effects]] [[samples]]: before & after (it [[also]] has an "also available" [[selection]] that you would [[THINK]] would lead you to some [[trailers]], but nope on DVD [[covers]] for other [[films]], which is a [[stupid]] [[idea]])

DVD-ROM extras: [[Final]] shooting [[script]] and Deleted scenes transcript both in PDF [[format]] Shiri Appleby is the cutest little embodiment of evil turned good [[chick]] demon-kicking Buffy [[clooney]], Elle. But I'm [[obtaining]] ahead of myself, you [[behold]] Lilith was the first woman made by [[lord]] as a [[mate]] to [[Adams]]. But she got all uppity evil feminist so god banished her from Eden. A [[confidential]] order known as The Fath captures her but doesn't kill her, so now with amnesia (which is not really explained that well) Lilith (now Elle) is free to become the aforementioned Buffy-clone who has to battle with a mad scientist who got an injection of Lilith's blood.

[[Though]] the previous paragraph sounded hideously convoluted, that's because it is. The [[filmmaking]] is [[apart]] [[boring]], generic, and for a [[filmmaking]] with a [[intrigue]] [[mired]] in [[deity]] it doesn't seem to know a lick about it. This bargain [[cava]] lousy-CGIed [[filmmaking]] was [[allegedly]] a failed [[serials]] pilot. All I can say to the fact that it didn't [[gets]] [[taken]] up is a resounding [[Hallelujah]].

My Grade: D-

DVD Extras: Commentary by Writer/[[Superintendent]] Bill Platt and Co-writer Chris Regina; and [[Photos]] gallery; video [[repercussions]] [[specimen]]: before & after (it [[furthermore]] has an "also available" [[choice]] that you would [[THOUGHTS]] would lead you to some [[trailer]], but nope on DVD [[encompasses]] for other [[film]], which is a [[brainless]] [[ideals]])

DVD-ROM extras: [[Definitive]] shooting [[hyphen]] and Deleted scenes transcript both in PDF [[formats]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The same night that I [[watched]] this I also watched "[[Scary]] Movie 4," making for one messed up double feature. Unfortunately for these [[killer]] tomatoes they [[could]] not [[stand]] up to the laugh [[riot]] that is the Scary Movie [[franchise]]. While I [[fought]] boredom here [[watching]] jokes that were silly and stupid, brutally dated and brutally bad, the more recent parody had me laughing out loud. [[How]] could I [[desire]] any more than that. [[Director]] John De Bello uses the basic premise that some sort of growth hormone has gone terribly wrong and turned the tomatoes into killers. But his main objective here is to slap around the disaster movie genre that was so big back in the day. The script reeks of stoner humor, and perhaps if you take illegal substances with your movie nights this could be your cup of tea. I, sober, was [[stuck]] watching a grown man go under cover as a tomato. And that one joke, that is never funny, where the [[discrepancy]] between the Japanese speaking actor and the voice over is also here. Some may giggle, I did not. They even had a Hitler joke that wasn't funny, and I thought all Hitler jokes were funny.

The [[narrative]] of this film is so splintered (for no [[good]] reason) that it is nearly impossible to [[explain]]. Tomatoes [[kill]] people, the [[government]] tries to stop it, bad jokes are told. Their aim may have been correct as their [[targets]] include the [[media]], consumerism, and paranoia (three things that still [[control]] our lives today). [[Oddly]] [[enough]] the main selling point of this [[film]], those [[gosh]] [[darn]] tomatoes, [[really]] don't make much of an appearance. And when they do, [[get]] this, they're played by real tomatoes. That washed up gimmick did [[nothing]] for me as I get very little out of watching a pack of tomatoes [[devour]] a body thanks to the magic of stop action camera tricks. There is also a fear of going for broke at work here that [[prevents]] this [[film]] from being truly funny. The gag of having somebody fall asleep in nearly every scene may [[please]] some audience members, but more than likely it will be [[seen]] as an invitation to join in the fun.

I [[might]] also add that there does seem to be some old fashioned human egotism at work here. Man eats tomato and that's dinner, [[tomato]] eats man and that is a worldwide catastrophe. But that is just the way the world works. In the film the produce becomes evil because of genetic modification, but in the real world our produce (see: Taco Bell) becomes evil thanks to neglect. And like those evil doin' green onions this film's shelf life expired a long time ago. There are a few good chuckles to be had. The last shot was really quite splendid, but it was nowhere near enough to save this moderate stink bomb. I'm pretty sure there is a good movie buried deep within this concept, but the script needed to be filtered through about a dozen rewrites to get there. And by "there" I mean to the level of "Scary Movie 4." **1/4 The same night that I [[saw]] this I also watched "[[Creepy]] Movie 4," making for one messed up double feature. Unfortunately for these [[slayer]] tomatoes they [[would]] not [[standing]] up to the laugh [[rioting]] that is the Scary Movie [[candour]]. While I [[combating]] boredom here [[staring]] jokes that were silly and stupid, brutally dated and brutally bad, the more recent parody had me laughing out loud. [[Mode]] could I [[wishing]] any more than that. [[Superintendent]] John De Bello uses the basic premise that some sort of growth hormone has gone terribly wrong and turned the tomatoes into killers. But his main objective here is to slap around the disaster movie genre that was so big back in the day. The script reeks of stoner humor, and perhaps if you take illegal substances with your movie nights this could be your cup of tea. I, sober, was [[trapped]] watching a grown man go under cover as a tomato. And that one joke, that is never funny, where the [[inconsistency]] between the Japanese speaking actor and the voice over is also here. Some may giggle, I did not. They even had a Hitler joke that wasn't funny, and I thought all Hitler jokes were funny.

The [[descriptive]] of this film is so splintered (for no [[alright]] reason) that it is nearly impossible to [[clarifying]]. Tomatoes [[slain]] people, the [[council]] tries to stop it, bad jokes are told. Their aim may have been correct as their [[goals]] include the [[medium]], consumerism, and paranoia (three things that still [[auditing]] our lives today). [[Amazingly]] [[satisfactorily]] the main selling point of this [[movie]], those [[gee]] [[geez]] tomatoes, [[truthfully]] don't make much of an appearance. And when they do, [[got]] this, they're played by real tomatoes. That washed up gimmick did [[none]] for me as I get very little out of watching a pack of tomatoes [[ate]] a body thanks to the magic of stop action camera tricks. There is also a fear of going for broke at work here that [[obstructing]] this [[filmmaking]] from being truly funny. The gag of having somebody fall asleep in nearly every scene may [[invites]] some audience members, but more than likely it will be [[watched]] as an invitation to join in the fun.

I [[apt]] also add that there does seem to be some old fashioned human egotism at work here. Man eats tomato and that's dinner, [[spinach]] eats man and that is a worldwide catastrophe. But that is just the way the world works. In the film the produce becomes evil because of genetic modification, but in the real world our produce (see: Taco Bell) becomes evil thanks to neglect. And like those evil doin' green onions this film's shelf life expired a long time ago. There are a few good chuckles to be had. The last shot was really quite splendid, but it was nowhere near enough to save this moderate stink bomb. I'm pretty sure there is a good movie buried deep within this concept, but the script needed to be filtered through about a dozen rewrites to get there. And by "there" I mean to the level of "Scary Movie 4." **1/4 --------------------------------------------- Result 4516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I cannot believe how unknown this movie is,it was absolutely [[incredible]]. The ending alone has stuck with me for almost thirty years. The road sign through the rearveiw mirror blew me away. If you liked "RACE WITH THE DEVIL" you will love this movie I cannot believe how unknown this movie is,it was absolutely [[unthinkable]]. The ending alone has stuck with me for almost thirty years. The road sign through the rearveiw mirror blew me away. If you liked "RACE WITH THE DEVIL" you will love this movie --------------------------------------------- Result 4517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] [[So]], American Pie: Beta [[House]] is the 6th American Pie [[movie]] in the series. Although, it really has nothing to do with the [[original]] three American Pie movies except some of the characters are [[supposed]] to be related to the characters in the original trilogy and Eugene Levy is in it (can't that guy get better gigs?).

There is very [[little]] to [[compliment]] this movie on. There aren't any [[funny]] jokes. The acting is [[painful]] to watch, especially the girl with the "southern" accent which sounds more like a Canadian's impersonation of a British woman pretending to be a hillbilly by using the word "ya'll." This movie makes me feel like such an idiot. Why didn't I apply to a college where nobody goes to class (but everybody gets good grades), girls consistently take their clothes off in public, everybody has promiscuous unprotected sex without the burden of babies and STIs, and you can ejaculate all over a girl's family photos without her minding? Really, this series has [[lowered]] itself to the standards of softcore porn. Maybe for the next one, they'll finally break down and hire Ron Jeremy as the lead. I'm sure they can just tie it in to the series by making his character Stifler's 3rd uncle once removed or something like that. [[Accordingly]], American Pie: Beta [[Domicile]] is the 6th American Pie [[cinematographic]] in the series. Although, it really has nothing to do with the [[upfront]] three American Pie movies except some of the characters are [[presumed]] to be related to the characters in the original trilogy and Eugene Levy is in it (can't that guy get better gigs?).

There is very [[scant]] to [[complimenting]] this movie on. There aren't any [[comical]] jokes. The acting is [[hurtful]] to watch, especially the girl with the "southern" accent which sounds more like a Canadian's impersonation of a British woman pretending to be a hillbilly by using the word "ya'll." This movie makes me feel like such an idiot. Why didn't I apply to a college where nobody goes to class (but everybody gets good grades), girls consistently take their clothes off in public, everybody has promiscuous unprotected sex without the burden of babies and STIs, and you can ejaculate all over a girl's family photos without her minding? Really, this series has [[slash]] itself to the standards of softcore porn. Maybe for the next one, they'll finally break down and hire Ron Jeremy as the lead. I'm sure they can just tie it in to the series by making his character Stifler's 3rd uncle once removed or something like that. --------------------------------------------- Result 4518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The Bible teaches us that the love of money is the root of all evil. The love of money leads to greed which can lead to pride and eventually to destruction. Two brothers, Andy and Hank, will discover how far the love of money will cost them and those they love the most.

Andy Hanson ([[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]]) and his younger brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) couldn't be more [[different]]. Andy is seemingly [[enjoying]] the success of working in New York's real estate [[market]] and is married to his beautiful [[wife]] Gina ([[Marisa]] Tomei) who is the [[idea]] of a trophy wife if one ever existed. Hank, however, is divorcée who finds himself at the mercy of his ex-wife, his daughter's expensive school bills, and endless amount of child support payments. A man who means well and has good intentions, Hank none the less cannot escape the water that his slowly raising above his head no matter how hard he swims to stay above it.

However, Andy has his own problems with the only [[difference]] between him and his brother being that he hides them better. He has committed fraud against his company and is heavily involved in drug use in order to escape his fears. The pressure of his life, and the lies he needs to keep his appearances up, have now caused him to think about fleeing the country with Gina in order to start over again. Of course, like Hank, he needs money to do this and believes he knows how to get it. How? By [[robbing]] the jewelery store that their parents own and run. This act of betrayal is where the Hanson brothers, their families, and several other lives, will be destroyed because of greed, pride, and fear.

The [[uniqueness]] of Before The Devil Knows You're [[Dead]] is the manner in which the [[story]] is [[told]]. [[After]] the robbery goes wrong, and Nanette [[Hanson]] (Rosemary Harris) who is the [[mother]] of both [[Andy]] and Hank is [[killed]], the story is told from a variety of [[different]] points of [[view]] from various days before and after the [[robbery]] attempt. We learn more about the [[motivations]] of not only [[Andy]] and Hank but [[also]] the reaction to their father Charles (Albert Finney) to the death of his wife. The relationship between Charles and his two sons, especially to Andy, is also explored and another possible motivation of sorts is discovered after it is revealed that there is little love between the two men. Nanette may have been dearly loved by her sons but their father is a different story.

Philip Seymour Hoffman proves once more why he is one of the most impressive actors in Hollywood today by portraying Andy as not only a greedy criminal with lack of morality but also, in contradictory way, as a man we can sympathize with. Ethan Hawke also brings Hank alive not just as a loser but really as a man just desperate to hang on to what little he has left. Andy and Hank are thus brought to life in such a realistic way that it is easy to think of them as not just characters but the very real images of lost and confused men who now find themselves facing the consequence of their actions.

Before The Devil Knows You're Dead is a moral tale about how our actions lead to consequences that we otherwise might not expect to face. More than that, our choices also can affect those around us in ways we never expected. In what should have been best picture of the year, we see how lives are easily broken when the love of money becomes the ultimate pursuit in order to ease our troubled lives. In other words, there are no easy fixes or answers to our problems and trying to find them can only make things worse.

10/10 The Bible teaches us that the love of money is the root of all evil. The love of money leads to greed which can lead to pride and eventually to destruction. Two brothers, Andy and Hank, will discover how far the love of money will cost them and those they love the most.

Andy Hanson ([[Filipe]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]]) and his younger brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) couldn't be more [[assorted]]. Andy is seemingly [[experience]] the success of working in New York's real estate [[marketplace]] and is married to his beautiful [[mujer]] Gina ([[Marissa]] Tomei) who is the [[think]] of a trophy wife if one ever existed. Hank, however, is divorcée who finds himself at the mercy of his ex-wife, his daughter's expensive school bills, and endless amount of child support payments. A man who means well and has good intentions, Hank none the less cannot escape the water that his slowly raising above his head no matter how hard he swims to stay above it.

However, Andy has his own problems with the only [[discrepancy]] between him and his brother being that he hides them better. He has committed fraud against his company and is heavily involved in drug use in order to escape his fears. The pressure of his life, and the lies he needs to keep his appearances up, have now caused him to think about fleeing the country with Gina in order to start over again. Of course, like Hank, he needs money to do this and believes he knows how to get it. How? By [[shoplift]] the jewelery store that their parents own and run. This act of betrayal is where the Hanson brothers, their families, and several other lives, will be destroyed because of greed, pride, and fear.

The [[oddity]] of Before The Devil Knows You're [[Decedent]] is the manner in which the [[tale]] is [[said]]. [[Afterwards]] the robbery goes wrong, and Nanette [[Hansen]] (Rosemary Harris) who is the [[mummy]] of both [[Indy]] and Hank is [[kiiled]], the story is told from a variety of [[assorted]] points of [[avis]] from various days before and after the [[stickup]] attempt. We learn more about the [[grounds]] of not only [[Indy]] and Hank but [[moreover]] the reaction to their father Charles (Albert Finney) to the death of his wife. The relationship between Charles and his two sons, especially to Andy, is also explored and another possible motivation of sorts is discovered after it is revealed that there is little love between the two men. Nanette may have been dearly loved by her sons but their father is a different story.

Philip Seymour Hoffman proves once more why he is one of the most impressive actors in Hollywood today by portraying Andy as not only a greedy criminal with lack of morality but also, in contradictory way, as a man we can sympathize with. Ethan Hawke also brings Hank alive not just as a loser but really as a man just desperate to hang on to what little he has left. Andy and Hank are thus brought to life in such a realistic way that it is easy to think of them as not just characters but the very real images of lost and confused men who now find themselves facing the consequence of their actions.

Before The Devil Knows You're Dead is a moral tale about how our actions lead to consequences that we otherwise might not expect to face. More than that, our choices also can affect those around us in ways we never expected. In what should have been best picture of the year, we see how lives are easily broken when the love of money becomes the ultimate pursuit in order to ease our troubled lives. In other words, there are no easy fixes or answers to our problems and trying to find them can only make things worse.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is possibly the worst version of the play I have [[seen]] - several times on [[stage]] apart from the [[movie]].

A very nice [[idea]] for the set up - the American [[South]] can give a [[credible]] backdrop for the [[extreme]] [[reaction]] round Hero's [[supposed]] misdemeanour.

But the [[execution]]! Widdoes is a very mannered Beatrice giving a [[particularly]] [[poor]] performance. Waterston, a [[fine]] [[actor]], is not much better as [[Benedict]].

The [[poorest]] performance is in the role of Don [[John]] - it makes Keanu Reeves [[look]] [[good]]. [[Perhaps]] the [[desire]] to make it a [[caricature]] along the lines of the villain who ties the maiden to the train [[track]] fits with the [[keystone]] kops capers of Dogberry and his [[men]] - but the acting makes you [[want]] to cringe.

Successful set-ups [[include]] the scene where they fool [[Benedict]] into believing Beatrice [[loves]] him - were the acting competent it [[would]] be [[superb]]. But the use of the river and the visual humour of Benedict [[moving]] closer is well produced.

Overall I had to force myself to [[keep]] watching but it [[certainly]] didn't [[keep]] my attention.

[[Very]] [[disappointing]].

With respect to latter comments above I am [[nearly]] 40. I've been [[watching]] [[stage]] and screen productions of Shakespeare for over 2 decades. Might I [[suggest]] when [[trying]] to [[defend]] your [[friends]] you [[speak]] to the piece [[rather]] than [[attack]] other [[reviewers]] when you are so inadequately armed in terms of [[fact]]. I can [[assume]] [[though]], from your [[distaste]] [[regarding]] [[youth]], that you are of [[sufficient]] age where the mannered acting of [[bygone]] [[days]] is more to your taste.

My personal [[favourite]] pairing was Rylance and McTeer on the London stage. Unlike Widdoes, McTeer, a [[skilled]] and charismatic [[performer]], can [[act]]. This is possibly the worst version of the play I have [[saw]] - several times on [[stages]] apart from the [[flick]].

A very nice [[ideals]] for the set up - the American [[Southern]] can give a [[plausible]] backdrop for the [[severe]] [[reactions]] round Hero's [[suspected]] misdemeanour.

But the [[running]]! Widdoes is a very mannered Beatrice giving a [[specially]] [[poorest]] performance. Waterston, a [[fined]] [[protagonist]], is not much better as [[Tess]].

The [[indigent]] performance is in the role of Don [[Giovanni]] - it makes Keanu Reeves [[gaze]] [[buena]]. [[Probably]] the [[willingness]] to make it a [[caricatures]] along the lines of the villain who ties the maiden to the train [[trajectory]] fits with the [[cornerstone]] kops capers of Dogberry and his [[males]] - but the acting makes you [[wanna]] to cringe.

Successful set-ups [[including]] the scene where they fool [[Benoit]] into believing Beatrice [[loved]] him - were the acting competent it [[should]] be [[funky]]. But the use of the river and the visual humour of Benedict [[shifting]] closer is well produced.

Overall I had to force myself to [[conserve]] watching but it [[probably]] didn't [[conserve]] my attention.

[[Hugely]] [[disappointed]].

With respect to latter comments above I am [[approximately]] 40. I've been [[staring]] [[stages]] and screen productions of Shakespeare for over 2 decades. Might I [[proposing]] when [[attempting]] to [[defender]] your [[friendships]] you [[talk]] to the piece [[quite]] than [[attacking]] other [[reviewer]] when you are so inadequately armed in terms of [[facto]]. I can [[assumes]] [[if]], from your [[revulsion]] [[concerning]] [[adolescence]], that you are of [[adequate]] age where the mannered acting of [[bygones]] [[jours]] is more to your taste.

My personal [[prefers]] pairing was Rylance and McTeer on the London stage. Unlike Widdoes, McTeer, a [[skilful]] and charismatic [[virtuoso]], can [[ley]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I saw this "documentary", I was disappointed to see Serbian Propaganda in action once again. Even though Serbia and its nationalist politics is main reason of Yugoslavian breakup, it is not mentioned in this "documentary", which is made by Bogdanovich whose name tells us that he is Serbian and his movie that he is far from being objective. It is one in the set of lies pushed by Milosevic regime. Everyone else is guilty only Serbians were right and victims, even though most of the War Criminals tried in Hague are Serbs, even though Serbs are one who have committed genocide against Bosnians , and attacked Slovenia, Croatia,and Bosnia all independent nations recognized by the UN.Breakup of Yugoslavia was not avoidable because Serbians did not want to release the grip their nationalism has put on Federal Yugoslav government, so SLovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, and Bosnia were forced to become independent nations in order to protect their interests.If you are interested in an objective documentary about breakup of Yugoslavia, and fact led documentary this is not it . You should watch "Yugoslavia:Death of a Nation", Made by Discovery channel and BBC. --------------------------------------------- Result 4521 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Well where do i [[start]]? i think it's very [[insulting]] to the original Annie with Aileen Quimnn. I love the film [[Annie]], and i was expecting this to be a [[brilliant]] [[film]], but i was so [[disappointed]]! the acting is [[awful]], the original Annie [[came]] out a few [[years]] before i was [[born]], I'm now 25 and Annie is still one of my favourite films, So i was really excited to see Annie 2. The acting was awful in the [[film]], were any of the [[characters]] [[original]]? very badly [[written]], directed and acted. This is not a [[film]] i [[wish]] to [[see]] again, and any Annie lover i [[recommend]] that you don't watch this [[film]] because it will only [[leave]] you very [[disappointed]]. The [[young]] [[girls]] singing isn't bad but [[still]] doesn't compare to the original Well where do i [[commencing]]? i think it's very [[demeaning]] to the original Annie with Aileen Quimnn. I love the film [[Annette]], and i was expecting this to be a [[sumptuous]] [[movie]], but i was so [[disappoint]]! the acting is [[frightful]], the original Annie [[became]] out a few [[yrs]] before i was [[birthed]], I'm now 25 and Annie is still one of my favourite films, So i was really excited to see Annie 2. The acting was awful in the [[filmmaking]], were any of the [[hallmarks]] [[initial]]? very badly [[handwritten]], directed and acted. This is not a [[filmmaking]] i [[wanting]] to [[behold]] again, and any Annie lover i [[recommending]] that you don't watch this [[filmmaking]] because it will only [[letting]] you very [[disappoint]]. The [[youthful]] [[woman]] singing isn't bad but [[however]] doesn't compare to the original --------------------------------------------- Result 4522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Read on and take note - you could save 88 minutes of your life (was that all!).

Unremittingly bleak, this film sets out to produce (I'm guessing) a modern small town American Christmas fable in the Capra style. If fails....completely and absolutely fails. I've been trying to think of one good thing about it and can't. Let me mention some of the highlights ...

People don't die, they get to spend eternity as immigrant workers in Santa's factory. Angels are actually ex-cowboys who sit in trees. Santa can bring people back from the dead (if you send him a nice letter).

And the plot.. I won't spoil it for you but there has to be some light in films if only to contrast with the darkness but there isn't any. Even the photography is bleak - snow shown at the end of a freeze, everywhere looking cold, damp and miserable.

As you might guess, the film has a happy (schmaltzy) ending. What a relief ! --------------------------------------------- Result 4523 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The film [[looks]] super on paper. A [[romantic]] [[comedy]] in which a [[frantic]] lover [[gets]] dragged into a smuggling thriller should be generic cross-breeding gold, [[especially]] with this excellent romcomic [[cast]].

I'm afraid Lawrence Kasdan [[simply]] gives his two [[stars]] too much rope though and they duly go and hang themselves. [[Adam]] Brooks' [[script]] may well be to [[blame]] but you'd [[expect]] [[better]] from the Kevin [[Kline]] of A [[Fish]] [[Called]] Wanda. [[Instead]] the two ping-pong off one another and the [[unlikely]] [[burgeoning]] [[romance]] is never [[reconciled]] [[satisfactorily]] with the [[reason]] [[either]] of them are in and dashing [[around]] France.

Jean [[Reno]] co-stars amiably as the cop-with-a-heart and I [[guess]] wishes he was a star-with-a-part. [[Mind]] you he went on to do those [[Pink]] [[Panther]] remake(s!) so perhaps he was OK with this... 3/10 The film [[seems]] super on paper. A [[sentimental]] [[charade]] in which a [[furious]] lover [[receives]] dragged into a smuggling thriller should be generic cross-breeding gold, [[peculiarly]] with this excellent romcomic [[casting]].

I'm afraid Lawrence Kasdan [[solely]] gives his two [[celebrity]] too much rope though and they duly go and hang themselves. [[Adama]] Brooks' [[hyphen]] may well be to [[guilt]] but you'd [[waits]] [[best]] from the Kevin [[Klein]] of A [[Fishes]] [[Drew]] Wanda. [[However]] the two ping-pong off one another and the [[improbable]] [[prospering]] [[romanticism]] is never [[reconciling]] [[correctly]] with the [[reasons]] [[neither]] of them are in and dashing [[almost]] France.

Jean [[Reynaud]] co-stars amiably as the cop-with-a-heart and I [[presume]] wishes he was a star-with-a-part. [[Esprit]] you he went on to do those [[Rosa]] [[Leopard]] remake(s!) so perhaps he was OK with this... 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4524 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sure, we all like bad movies at one time or another, and we in fact enjoy them, This however, wasn't even a guilty pleasure, it was just crap. Some guy, vince offer, who is conceited enough to make himself the main character while probably got drunk/high--probably both--and thought it was a great idea to make a movie. He then proceeded to show his script to equally high/drunk individuals. Overall, this movie was so bad, predictable, and unoriginal I couldn't get through 20 minutes of it before I turned it off. It makes You Got Served look like Citizen Kane. Bat Man? WTF...Some guy that walks around with a bat, real original. Almost as good as calling him Fat Man, and having a fat guy walk around in a superhero outfit. --------------------------------------------- Result 4525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Delightful]] film directed by some of the best directors in the industry [[today]]. The film is [[also]] casting some of the great actors of our [[time]], not just from France but from [[everywhere]].

My [[favorite]] segments:

14th arrondissement: [[Carol]] (Margo Martindale), from Denver, comes to Paris to learn French and [[also]] to make a sense of her [[life]].

Montmartre: there was [[probably]] not a better [[way]] to start this movie than with this segment on romantic [[Paris]].

Loin du 16ème: an [[image]] of Paris that we are better [[aware]] of since the riots in the Cités. Ana (Catalina Sandino Moreno) [[spends]] more [[time]] [[taking]] [[care]] of somebody else's [[kid]] (she's a nanny) than of her own.

Quartier Latin: so much fun to [[see]] Gérard Depardieu as the "tenancier de bar" with Gena Rowlands and [[Ben]] Gazzara [[discussing]] their divorce.

Tour Eiffel: don't [[tell]] me you didn't like those mimes!

Tuileries: such a [[treat]] to see Steve Buscemi as the tourist who's making high-contact (a no- no) with a [[girl]] in the [[Metro]].

Parc Monceau: Nick Nolte is [[great]]. Ludivine Sagnier [[also]].

I've [[spend]] 3 days in Paris in 2004 and this movie makes me want to [[go]] back!

Seen in Barcelona (another [[great]] city), at the Verdi, on March 18th, 2007.

84/100 (***) [[Charmer]] film directed by some of the best directors in the industry [[yesterday]]. The film is [[similarly]] casting some of the great actors of our [[period]], not just from France but from [[nowhere]].

My [[prefer]] segments:

14th arrondissement: [[Carrol]] (Margo Martindale), from Denver, comes to Paris to learn French and [[additionally]] to make a sense of her [[lives]].

Montmartre: there was [[certainly]] not a better [[route]] to start this movie than with this segment on romantic [[Parisien]].

Loin du 16ème: an [[photographed]] of Paris that we are better [[conscious]] of since the riots in the Cités. Ana (Catalina Sandino Moreno) [[spent]] more [[moment]] [[picked]] [[healthcare]] of somebody else's [[petit]] (she's a nanny) than of her own.

Quartier Latin: so much fun to [[behold]] Gérard Depardieu as the "tenancier de bar" with Gena Rowlands and [[Bin]] Gazzara [[talking]] their divorce.

Tour Eiffel: don't [[telling]] me you didn't like those mimes!

Tuileries: such a [[handling]] to see Steve Buscemi as the tourist who's making high-contact (a no- no) with a [[chick]] in the [[Mtr]].

Parc Monceau: Nick Nolte is [[wondrous]]. Ludivine Sagnier [[apart]].

I've [[spends]] 3 days in Paris in 2004 and this movie makes me want to [[going]] back!

Seen in Barcelona (another [[super]] city), at the Verdi, on March 18th, 2007.

84/100 (***) --------------------------------------------- Result 4526 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] (originally a response to a [[movie]] [[reviewer]] who [[said]] A Bug's Life was too much, too fast--he was "dazed and exhausted" by the [[visuals]], and [[seemed]] to ignore the [[story]] completely)

Okay, [[first]] off, I'm 26 years old, have a [[job]], go to school, and have a fiance'. So [[maybe]] I'm nuts and just really good at hiding it...but not only did I [[NOT]] come away from A Bug's [[Life]] [[exhausted]] or dazed, it wasn't until I [[saw]] it the [[second]] time that I could even begin to truly appreciate the artistry and humour of the [[spectacular]] visuals--because the first time I went to see this movie, I got so wrapped up in the story and the [[characters]] that I FORGOT that I was supposed to be sitting there being "wowed" by each frame visually. How can you not empathize with Flik and his road-to-heck-paved-with-good-intentions life? "Heck" indeed, I found myself identifying with that little ant (not to mention some of the other bugs) in a lot more ways than one...and that, in itself, says more to me about what an [[incredible]] movie this is than a whole book on its beautiful eye candy. Of course, it's beautiful (every blade of grass, the tree, the rain...). Of course, what they can do with technology is amazing (you can read their lips! try it!). But this movie is not just a [[masterpiece]] of art and tech, not just an [[dazzling]] explosion of movement and color. No, A Bug's [[Life]] would be static if it were all that and no [[story]]. But, I'm glad to say, it's not! A Bug's [[Life]] has real [[heart]]. Yes, there's a [[lot]] going on, storyline-wise as well as visually, but that's because the story and characters actually have some depth to them! Just because it's a kids' movie doesn't mean you should have to turn off your brain at the theatre door--kids are smarter than you think! Besides that, I think that the PIXAR [[crew]] made this for themselves, [[even]] before their [[kids]]...and it [[shows]], in the [[amount]] of heart in has. This [[movie]] is [[moving]], touching, funny, [[intriguing]], and [[generally]] engrossing. The character development in such an ensemble [[cast]] is amazing, there's a major amount of character growth, and not just of the main character--so rare in animation and often in movies in general. It doesn't hit you over the head with its points once it's made them--every scene, every frame has a reason in the storyline for being there, and there are no gratuitous shots. Not always stating explicitly in words exactly what is going on means subtlety, to me, folks; it means not "dumbing down" your movie and assuming the audience is stupid, which it mostly is not. All I can think is, if you can see A Bug's Life and not feel anything at all, then you must have never made a big mistake, hurt your friends, had a crush, fallen in love, been frustrated that no one would listen to you, lied to someone you care about, felt like a social misfit, gotten excited over a new idea, come up with a great idea, had what you thought was a great idea backfire, been awkward one moment and confident the next, felt the pressure of responsibility, stood up for yourself and your loved ones, stood alone against the crowd, felt like a failure, felt like a big success, felt the need to make a difference with your life in the lives of others...well, you get the point. Final words: A+ rating from me; please, if you're going to see it try to see it in the theatre (pan and scan video is NOT going to work for this movie); if you loved Toy Story you'll most likely love this (PIXAR knows how to make movies with heart); if you do love it see it multiple times or you STILL won't know what you're missing (the amount of detail and subtlety here is considerable); and whenever you're feeling really low, just pretend it's a seed, okay? (originally a response to a [[kino]] [[testers]] who [[indicated]] A Bug's Life was too much, too fast--he was "dazed and exhausted" by the [[imagery]], and [[looked]] to ignore the [[conte]] completely)

Okay, [[firstly]] off, I'm 26 years old, have a [[labour]], go to school, and have a fiance'. So [[conceivably]] I'm nuts and just really good at hiding it...but not only did I [[NO]] come away from A Bug's [[Living]] [[knackered]] or dazed, it wasn't until I [[sawthe]] it the [[secondly]] time that I could even begin to truly appreciate the artistry and humour of the [[excellent]] visuals--because the first time I went to see this movie, I got so wrapped up in the story and the [[attribute]] that I FORGOT that I was supposed to be sitting there being "wowed" by each frame visually. How can you not empathize with Flik and his road-to-heck-paved-with-good-intentions life? "Heck" indeed, I found myself identifying with that little ant (not to mention some of the other bugs) in a lot more ways than one...and that, in itself, says more to me about what an [[unbelievable]] movie this is than a whole book on its beautiful eye candy. Of course, it's beautiful (every blade of grass, the tree, the rain...). Of course, what they can do with technology is amazing (you can read their lips! try it!). But this movie is not just a [[centerpiece]] of art and tech, not just an [[amazing]] explosion of movement and color. No, A Bug's [[Iife]] would be static if it were all that and no [[storytelling]]. But, I'm glad to say, it's not! A Bug's [[Iife]] has real [[heartland]]. Yes, there's a [[batch]] going on, storyline-wise as well as visually, but that's because the story and characters actually have some depth to them! Just because it's a kids' movie doesn't mean you should have to turn off your brain at the theatre door--kids are smarter than you think! Besides that, I think that the PIXAR [[crewman]] made this for themselves, [[yet]] before their [[enfant]]...and it [[showings]], in the [[somme]] of heart in has. This [[filmmaking]] is [[shifting]], touching, funny, [[riveting]], and [[usually]] engrossing. The character development in such an ensemble [[casting]] is amazing, there's a major amount of character growth, and not just of the main character--so rare in animation and often in movies in general. It doesn't hit you over the head with its points once it's made them--every scene, every frame has a reason in the storyline for being there, and there are no gratuitous shots. Not always stating explicitly in words exactly what is going on means subtlety, to me, folks; it means not "dumbing down" your movie and assuming the audience is stupid, which it mostly is not. All I can think is, if you can see A Bug's Life and not feel anything at all, then you must have never made a big mistake, hurt your friends, had a crush, fallen in love, been frustrated that no one would listen to you, lied to someone you care about, felt like a social misfit, gotten excited over a new idea, come up with a great idea, had what you thought was a great idea backfire, been awkward one moment and confident the next, felt the pressure of responsibility, stood up for yourself and your loved ones, stood alone against the crowd, felt like a failure, felt like a big success, felt the need to make a difference with your life in the lives of others...well, you get the point. Final words: A+ rating from me; please, if you're going to see it try to see it in the theatre (pan and scan video is NOT going to work for this movie); if you loved Toy Story you'll most likely love this (PIXAR knows how to make movies with heart); if you do love it see it multiple times or you STILL won't know what you're missing (the amount of detail and subtlety here is considerable); and whenever you're feeling really low, just pretend it's a seed, okay? --------------------------------------------- Result 4527 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A unique film...one of the best of all time. Acting, script, Quincy Jones' score, cinematography, editing, etc. -- just fantastic. As most viewers know, this movie is based on Truman Capote's book about the famous murder of a Kansas farm family (the Clutters) by a couple of young guys during a misguided robbery. I've never seen a movie that so brilliantly turned a true story into a riveting film.

The actors are solid across the board, but the focus is on the killers, Dick and Perry, and the law enforcement team pursuing them. Scott Wilson, as Dick Hickock is amazing. Cocky, twitchy, and devoid of compassion he comes across so charming, oily and plausible. Robert Blake as Perry Smith is extraordinary as well -- lonely, and at once empathetic and cold-blooded. Who could fold these characteristics into one individual and make us buy it? He does, and it's brilliant! A key point of the book is how it took the intersection of these two very differently sociopathic individuals to create the critical mass to commit such a stupid and heinous crime, and these two actors make it work beautifully. Both had moments in their subsequent careers, but these performances are high water marks, and that stands for acting period.

The cops are wonderful too. Leading the investigation is John Forsythe, but the other three detectives are great as well. Unlike contemporary movies where producers feel it necessary to endow police with superhuman assets or foibles, these are just genuine flatfeet, working the case with determination and competence. They seem so real. I've never seen cops on the screen so powerful in their authenticity; and I've seen most of the crime classics going way back. Really one of a kind in this respect.

PARTIAL SPOILER COMING (this movie's unique in that you already know what's happened, but I'm warning for the record).

Of course, the best scenes from the best crime shows and movies are the interrogations -- the intellectual fencing matches between the cops and the crooks, Mano a Mano. This movie has hands down the best interrogation scenes you'll ever see on film. Watch Dick and Perry try to bluff their way through and slowly unravel, unaware the cops have the goods on them. But the cops need to deftly prep their suspects to fracture their alibis and hopefully elicit confessions. This is some of the best acting you'll ever see. Think Glengarry Glen Ross without the showboating.

To help translate the sad and horrific angles of this true story, ICB was filmed at the actual Clutter house, and I've heard the Clutters were played by film students to give them a genuine feel. It works. These seem like decent, simple folk. It makes the crime so palpable and sad.

I'll stop here. It's not a feel-good movie, but it is one of the best movies ever made, and so unique, it's mandatory viewing for every film buff. --------------------------------------------- Result 4528 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I tried to watch this movie three separate times. The night I rented it. Got through about 20 minutes hoping it would be better if I had a night's rest. Watched 15 more the next day, almost vomited at how stupid it was... It wasn't even funny stupid which is sometimes a fun movie to watch but this movie was just crap with a capital S (if you know what I mean in the censored world we live in). And finally on the third day I watched over an hour of the dumb thing and I didn't enjoy one single moment! Not even one. How did this script get greenlighted. Oh boy!

G

1/10 - the one is for cheerleaders... they deserve at least something for all their hardwork. --------------------------------------------- Result 4529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's nothing wrong with a popcorn movie to keep you off the streets. It's just that some are better than others. This is very poor. The acting is awful, the script dire; and the special effects overrated.

Why does Hollywood treat it's audience with such contempt? And why have they made a sequel? --------------------------------------------- Result 4530 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A have a female friend who is [[currently]] being drawn into a [[relationship]] with an SOB who has a long term girlfriend. Of course the SOB is very good-looking, charming, etc and my friend is a very intelligent woman. Watching Jean [[Pierre]] Leaud's [[character]] at work is exactly like watching what goes on in real life when guys like that destroy the lives of our female friends. It's tragic, and you know she's going to end up very hurt, but there's nothing you can do. Leaud is [[brilliant]]. Totally [[empty]]. A [[blank]] [[throughout]], he pulls the faces and [[tells]] the [[stories]] he [[thinks]] will [[get]] the [[reaction]] he [[wants]].

The scene two [[hours]] in when Leaud and Lebrun have [[made]] [[love]], and the next morning he puts on a record and, very sweetly and charmingly, sings along to [[amuse]] her is brilliant. The "What the [[hell]] am I doing here with this idiot" expression that flickers back and forth across her face will be in my [[memory]] for a [[long]] [[time]] to [[come]].

It's a [[long]] film, but see it in one go, preferably in a cinema. Takes a while to [[get]] into, but then the time just disappears. A have a female friend who is [[presently]] being drawn into a [[nexus]] with an SOB who has a long term girlfriend. Of course the SOB is very good-looking, charming, etc and my friend is a very intelligent woman. Watching Jean [[Pedro]] Leaud's [[characteristics]] at work is exactly like watching what goes on in real life when guys like that destroy the lives of our female friends. It's tragic, and you know she's going to end up very hurt, but there's nothing you can do. Leaud is [[wondrous]]. Totally [[hollow]]. A [[blanc]] [[around]], he pulls the faces and [[narrates]] the [[narratives]] he [[thought]] will [[got]] the [[replies]] he [[wanted]].

The scene two [[hour]] in when Leaud and Lebrun have [[effected]] [[loves]], and the next morning he puts on a record and, very sweetly and charmingly, sings along to [[entertaining]] her is brilliant. The "What the [[whorehouse]] am I doing here with this idiot" expression that flickers back and forth across her face will be in my [[mem]] for a [[lang]] [[moment]] to [[arrive]].

It's a [[lengthy]] film, but see it in one go, preferably in a cinema. Takes a while to [[got]] into, but then the time just disappears. --------------------------------------------- Result 4531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Definitely the worst movie I have ever seen... Can somebody tell me where should have I laughed? There's not a single hint or shadow of an idea. The three leading actors are pestilential, especially the one (I think it's Aldo) from Sicily who _can't_ make a Sicilian accent!!! Not to say about the dream-like insertion about Dracula... just another expedient, drawn from the worst cabaret tradition, to make this "film" last a little longer. Massironi and Littizzetto do what they can, but this so-called movie was really too, too hard to rescue. I would have given it "0"/10, but the lowest mark was 1/10 and so I had to overestimate it by one mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 4532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terrible movie. Nuff Said.

These Lines are Just Filler. The movie was bad. Why I have to expand on that I don't know. This is already a waste of my time. I just wanted to warn others. Avoid this movie. The acting sucks and the writing is just moronic. Bad in every way. The only nice thing about the movie are Deniz Akkaya's breasts. Even that was ruined though by a terrible and unneeded rape scene. The movie is a poorly contrived and totally unbelievable piece of garbage.

OK now I am just going to rag on IMDb for this stupid rule of 10 lines of text minimum. First I waste my time watching this offal. Then feeling compelled to warn others I create an account with IMDb only to discover that I have to write a friggen essay on the film just to express how bad I think it is. Totally unnecessary. --------------------------------------------- Result 4533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I can see why Laurel and Hardy purists might be offended by this rather gentle 're-enactment', but this film [[would]] be an [[excellent]] way to introduce [[children]] to the pleasures of classic L & H. Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain acquit themselves reasonably as the comedy duo and there's a [[reasonably]] [[good]] supporting cast. I enjoyed it. I can see why Laurel and Hardy purists might be offended by this rather gentle 're-enactment', but this film [[ought]] be an [[sumptuous]] way to introduce [[childhood]] to the pleasures of classic L & H. Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain acquit themselves reasonably as the comedy duo and there's a [[sensibly]] [[buena]] supporting cast. I enjoyed it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Hollow point is an alright movie worth a half [[price]] rental or if [[nothing]] else is on a [[good]] time waster with no [[thought]] required. There are the [[requisite]] [[explosions]] and hammy acting and pretty ladies. A pretty good cast with Donald Sutherland, John Lithgow, and the lovely Tia Carrere. This cast plus a light hearted touch make for a not a great movie but a fun one..on a scale of one to ten ..a 4 Hollow point is an alright movie worth a half [[costing]] rental or if [[anything]] else is on a [[buena]] time waster with no [[idea]] required. There are the [[necessary]] [[blast]] and hammy acting and pretty ladies. A pretty good cast with Donald Sutherland, John Lithgow, and the lovely Tia Carrere. This cast plus a light hearted touch make for a not a great movie but a fun one..on a scale of one to ten ..a 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 4535 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Those who love the book Jane Eyre as I do (it's my all [[time]] favorite, and I re read it at [[least]] once a [[year]]) will [[love]] this version. Timothy Dalton is just a tad too good looking to be Mr. Rochester, but other than that, he does a [[marvelous]] job [[portraying]] the [[brooding]] master of Thornfield. Zelah [[Clarke]] may have been just a little too old to play the 18 year old Jane, but when I watch this movie, I don't [[think]] about the ages of the characters. The dialog from the film is taken almost verbatim from the book, which was very smart. Sure, this film might seem a little long, but it's the only version I've seen that includes [[part]] 3 of the story.

I wish the people who made this film had been involved in the newer Zeferelli version, as it would have helped that mess of a film.

I also realized the last time I watched this video that Judy Cornwell plays "Aunt Reed"! She is so versatile that I didn't recognize her. She plays Daisy in Keeping up Appearances, and also played Mrs. Musgrove in 1995's Persuasion (another [[wonderful]] adaption).

UPDATE: Got the DVD this week, and it's [[marvelous]] to see the original unedited version. There's lots more at the beginning (Young Jane at Gateshead and at Lowood.) And at the end, they've restored lots of things, (I always wondered why [[St]]. John had a slip of paper when he reveals that he knows who Jane is-- because the part where he tears it from her painting was edited out of the US VHS version!). Rosamund Oliver is in it...she was completely cut out of the VHS. As far as I could tell, they hadn't [[edited]] out any of Timothy Dalton's parts, so nothing new there, but it is great to see the whole miniseries in its entirety after all these years of enjoying the VHS. Thanks, BBC (PS...I would have paid more for a [[special]] [[edition]] DVD...with [[maybe]] some interviews with the stars...or a making of [[show]]) Those who love the book Jane Eyre as I do (it's my all [[period]] favorite, and I re read it at [[fewest]] once a [[annum]]) will [[amour]] this version. Timothy Dalton is just a tad too good looking to be Mr. Rochester, but other than that, he does a [[wondrous]] job [[describing]] the [[brood]] master of Thornfield. Zelah [[Clark]] may have been just a little too old to play the 18 year old Jane, but when I watch this movie, I don't [[believe]] about the ages of the characters. The dialog from the film is taken almost verbatim from the book, which was very smart. Sure, this film might seem a little long, but it's the only version I've seen that includes [[parties]] 3 of the story.

I wish the people who made this film had been involved in the newer Zeferelli version, as it would have helped that mess of a film.

I also realized the last time I watched this video that Judy Cornwell plays "Aunt Reed"! She is so versatile that I didn't recognize her. She plays Daisy in Keeping up Appearances, and also played Mrs. Musgrove in 1995's Persuasion (another [[wondrous]] adaption).

UPDATE: Got the DVD this week, and it's [[glorious]] to see the original unedited version. There's lots more at the beginning (Young Jane at Gateshead and at Lowood.) And at the end, they've restored lots of things, (I always wondered why [[Tk]]. John had a slip of paper when he reveals that he knows who Jane is-- because the part where he tears it from her painting was edited out of the US VHS version!). Rosamund Oliver is in it...she was completely cut out of the VHS. As far as I could tell, they hadn't [[edit]] out any of Timothy Dalton's parts, so nothing new there, but it is great to see the whole miniseries in its entirety after all these years of enjoying the VHS. Thanks, BBC (PS...I would have paid more for a [[peculiar]] [[publishing]] DVD...with [[potentially]] some interviews with the stars...or a making of [[illustrates]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 4536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] An expedition led by hunky Captain Storm (Mark Dana) travels to the Valley of the Kings in Cairo to find out what happened to an earlier expedition. They meet beautiful mysterious Simira (Ziva Rodann) who joins them. They soon find themselves faced with a blood drinking mummy...and only Simira seems to know what's going on.

A [[real]] snoozer. I caught this on late night TV when I was about 10. It put me to sleep! Seeing it again all these years later I can see why. It's slow-moving, the mummy doesn't even show up until 40 minutes in (and this is only 66 minutes long!), the acting ranges from bad (Dana) to REAL bad (George N. Neise) and there's no violence or blood to be found. This movie concentrates more on second rate dramatics (involving a silly love triangle) than horror.

This rates three stars because it actually looks pretty good, everyone plays it straight, there's some good acting from Diane Brewster, it's short and the mummy attack scenes (all three of them) aren't bad. They're not scary just mildly creepy. Still, this movie is pretty [[bad]]. A sure fire cure for insomnia. An expedition led by hunky Captain Storm (Mark Dana) travels to the Valley of the Kings in Cairo to find out what happened to an earlier expedition. They meet beautiful mysterious Simira (Ziva Rodann) who joins them. They soon find themselves faced with a blood drinking mummy...and only Simira seems to know what's going on.

A [[veritable]] snoozer. I caught this on late night TV when I was about 10. It put me to sleep! Seeing it again all these years later I can see why. It's slow-moving, the mummy doesn't even show up until 40 minutes in (and this is only 66 minutes long!), the acting ranges from bad (Dana) to REAL bad (George N. Neise) and there's no violence or blood to be found. This movie concentrates more on second rate dramatics (involving a silly love triangle) than horror.

This rates three stars because it actually looks pretty good, everyone plays it straight, there's some good acting from Diane Brewster, it's short and the mummy attack scenes (all three of them) aren't bad. They're not scary just mildly creepy. Still, this movie is pretty [[unfavourable]]. A sure fire cure for insomnia. --------------------------------------------- Result 4537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] [[Street]] [[Fight]] is a [[brilliant]] piece of brutal [[satire]]. This is not a movie you just watch for fun. It is not a comfortable [[experience]], although it does have some laugh-out-loud moments. This is a movie you watch when you need food for thought.

To [[dismiss]] this film as simply racist is to miss the point entirely. This is not only a satire of Song of the South, it's also a biting [[commentary]] on the prejudices that Americans still have as a society. Every ethnic group portrayed in the movie gets shown as [[grotesque]] caricatures of their stereotypes, which in turn are grotesque caricatures of real people. Through this wild exaggeration, the filmmaker shows just how absurd these tightly-held beliefs really are.

If you're the sort of person who's willing to acknowledge the ugliness of the prevalent prejudices American culture still holds, and if you're not afraid to look your own prejudices in the eye, this movie may be for you. [[Thoroughfare]] [[Tussle]] is a [[wondrous]] piece of brutal [[sarcasm]]. This is not a movie you just watch for fun. It is not a comfortable [[experiences]], although it does have some laugh-out-loud moments. This is a movie you watch when you need food for thought.

To [[overruled]] this film as simply racist is to miss the point entirely. This is not only a satire of Song of the South, it's also a biting [[remarks]] on the prejudices that Americans still have as a society. Every ethnic group portrayed in the movie gets shown as [[preposterous]] caricatures of their stereotypes, which in turn are grotesque caricatures of real people. Through this wild exaggeration, the filmmaker shows just how absurd these tightly-held beliefs really are.

If you're the sort of person who's willing to acknowledge the ugliness of the prevalent prejudices American culture still holds, and if you're not afraid to look your own prejudices in the eye, this movie may be for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved the idea of this film from the moment I first saw a trailer for it. Einstein has always been one of my heroes and the image of him as the kindly, playful, slightly mad genius was enough to get me to see the film. The added spice of Matthau as Einstein made it even better.

The story is pure fantasy, but a delightful one. An auto mechanic falls in love with a beautiful woman, who happens to be Einstein's niece. With the help of four Fairy Godfathers of Physics, Ed embarks on a quest to win Catherine's heart. Throw a jealous fiancé (who exemplifies the worst of experimental psychology) and Eisenhower into the mix, and you have pure fun.

The film is filled with great character actors and delightfully sweet and daffy performances. Walter Matthau play Einstein as a mischievous imp; cupid with a slide rule. Tim Robbins is wonderfully endearing as Ed and Meg Ryan plays a step above her normal rom-com level. Stephen fry is a joy as the "RRRatman" and Ryan's fiancé; who lacks a single romantic bone in his body.

The film fell below most radars, but is a delightful treasure that does not grow stale with repeated viewings. It features first-rate writing and performances and is a gentle treat in a less than gentle world. --------------------------------------------- Result 4539 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" (1936), starring Thin Man series star William Powell (this film was released the same year as the second Thin Man film, "After The Thin Man," comes very close to duplicating the fun and style of the Thin Man films, but it nonetheless misses. Still, it is a wonderfully fun, highly entertaining murder mystery in the same comic vein.

Is Myrna Loy missed? Of course, let's not lie. However, I'd be hard-pressed to name a better substitute than Jean Arthur. And the chemistry between Arthur and co-star William Powell is real and it's fun, romantic and involving.

The story and screenplay by Anthonyu Vieller and John Wyne's production company partner, James Edward Grant ("The Angel & The Bad Man") is close to being up there with a Thin Man effort, but lacks a bit of the proper wit and sizzle.

While it's not in the stratosphere of 'The Thin Man" movies (what else is?), "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" is one of the most entertaining of the dozens and dozens of mystery-comedy "who-done-its" of the '30s & 40s. --------------------------------------------- Result 4540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] On the [[face]] of it, Ruiz has set out to make a psychological thriller. Although it's not as satisfying as a classic piece in that [[genre]], there are compensations. The tensions generated between Huppert and Balibar as women calmly but calculatingly at war over a boy they both [[claim]] are compelling; [[however]], in a true European art-house style, Ruiz doesn't give us release of this [[tension]] as the [[women]] alternately also [[try]] to behave compassionately towards each other. The only raised [[voice]] is that of Huppert's waking from a nightmare (an uncontested irrational event in the film).

In fact, if we follow the title, the film is as little about its thriller skeleton as Jane Campion's In The Cut. Instead it is an intergender psychological study focusing on men. The boy, Camille (Nils Hugon), decides on a practical joke, playing his mother off against an emotionally vulnerable other woman. Both women seem to pander to him rather than scold and this compounds the [[problem]]. In the background is an intemperate psychologist (Charles Berling), swift to confront the women in his life - his sister Huppert, the nanny or his pa - and so acting as a symbolic adult counterbalance to the, calm and (we learn) manipulative Camille. It is particularly interesting that, like the father in Henry James' The Turn of The Screw, Denis Podalydes' law-enforcer Father is absent for the duration of the film. Ruiz fashions an Oedipal moment out of Huppert's reaction to his return at the film's close.

Read either as a thriller or as a psychiatric essay, this film is [[ultimately]] rather disappointing. I'm officially rather fed up with Mme Huppert's screen method, which is too buried and so I'll be looking to see her on stage before I come back to her (European - enjoyed Heaven's Gate) [[films]] again. The [[support]] is good. Ruiz does the cast no favours though. Quite [[apart]] from some poor lighting and some [[wilfully]] odd shots, its as if his direction has left characterisation quite out of reach - I'm thinking particularly of Edith Scob's Shamanic neighbour to Isabelle, who acts knowing but communicates bafflement. The set pieces do not link up to a forward driving plot - the tension I have already referred to is not only weakly dissipated but wasted in its directional potential.

Want to see a good contemporary French thriller? Go and see L'Appartement instead. 4/10 On the [[encounter]] of it, Ruiz has set out to make a psychological thriller. Although it's not as satisfying as a classic piece in that [[kind]], there are compensations. The tensions generated between Huppert and Balibar as women calmly but calculatingly at war over a boy they both [[grievance]] are compelling; [[nonetheless]], in a true European art-house style, Ruiz doesn't give us release of this [[tensions]] as the [[daughters]] alternately also [[endeavour]] to behave compassionately towards each other. The only raised [[vowel]] is that of Huppert's waking from a nightmare (an uncontested irrational event in the film).

In fact, if we follow the title, the film is as little about its thriller skeleton as Jane Campion's In The Cut. Instead it is an intergender psychological study focusing on men. The boy, Camille (Nils Hugon), decides on a practical joke, playing his mother off against an emotionally vulnerable other woman. Both women seem to pander to him rather than scold and this compounds the [[troubles]]. In the background is an intemperate psychologist (Charles Berling), swift to confront the women in his life - his sister Huppert, the nanny or his pa - and so acting as a symbolic adult counterbalance to the, calm and (we learn) manipulative Camille. It is particularly interesting that, like the father in Henry James' The Turn of The Screw, Denis Podalydes' law-enforcer Father is absent for the duration of the film. Ruiz fashions an Oedipal moment out of Huppert's reaction to his return at the film's close.

Read either as a thriller or as a psychiatric essay, this film is [[lastly]] rather disappointing. I'm officially rather fed up with Mme Huppert's screen method, which is too buried and so I'll be looking to see her on stage before I come back to her (European - enjoyed Heaven's Gate) [[filmmaking]] again. The [[assists]] is good. Ruiz does the cast no favours though. Quite [[also]] from some poor lighting and some [[consciously]] odd shots, its as if his direction has left characterisation quite out of reach - I'm thinking particularly of Edith Scob's Shamanic neighbour to Isabelle, who acts knowing but communicates bafflement. The set pieces do not link up to a forward driving plot - the tension I have already referred to is not only weakly dissipated but wasted in its directional potential.

Want to see a good contemporary French thriller? Go and see L'Appartement instead. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The only reason that this movie is rated a 1 is that zero is not one of the selection options. With a plot thinner than depression era cabbage soup, horrific acting, and special effects that look like they came out of the "Thunderbirds" TV series, it is amazing that Widmark didn't kill the director for putting this black mark on his resume. Even by 1950's standards, the special effects are [[atrocious]], except for a couple of underwater submarine sequences. I can only assume that it was nominated for best special effects because, except for 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and THEM!, there wasn't anybody else doing effects. It was certainly no contest for Disney that year if this was their only competition. I wouldn't recommend the film, even for hard core submarine movie buffs, as the most realistic scene on the submarine was limited to one shot where seawater can be seen dribbling down the up-raised periscope. There are other, much better, sub films that you can enjoy from this era, like the aforementioned 20,000 Leagues or Torpedo Run. The only reason that this movie is rated a 1 is that zero is not one of the selection options. With a plot thinner than depression era cabbage soup, horrific acting, and special effects that look like they came out of the "Thunderbirds" TV series, it is amazing that Widmark didn't kill the director for putting this black mark on his resume. Even by 1950's standards, the special effects are [[abhorrent]], except for a couple of underwater submarine sequences. I can only assume that it was nominated for best special effects because, except for 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and THEM!, there wasn't anybody else doing effects. It was certainly no contest for Disney that year if this was their only competition. I wouldn't recommend the film, even for hard core submarine movie buffs, as the most realistic scene on the submarine was limited to one shot where seawater can be seen dribbling down the up-raised periscope. There are other, much better, sub films that you can enjoy from this era, like the aforementioned 20,000 Leagues or Torpedo Run. --------------------------------------------- Result 4542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Definitely one of my favourite movies. The story is good, acting is great, all technicals (especially cinematography) are sharp and the script is clever.

Heath Ledger is terrific as Edward ''Ned'' Kelly. He is gripping as the legendary outlaw, and is supported well by Geoffrey Rush, Naomi Watts and Orlando Bloom. All action sequences are on point

The film is edge-of-your seat stuff right up to to the end. One of my favourite films from the late legend Heath Ledger, who has been the highlight of every film he has starred in. And makes no mistake here.

An excellent film all round. --------------------------------------------- Result 4543 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] The [[cover]] of [[box]] of this [[movie]] has Kyle Minogue's name on it, but she has the same [[destiny]] as Drew Barrymore did in "[[Scream]]." That's the first thing that makes this [[movie]] lame; they are [[trying]] to [[market]] a movie with [[someone]] that's in it for 5 minutes.

Of course, we have to have this movie [[feature]] [[young]] [[hip]] [[college]] kids that are [[oblivious]] that there's a [[killer]] [[going]] around. To [[top]] it all off, Molly Ringwald of 80's [[teen]] movie [[fame]] is the [[star]] of this [[beautifully]] [[written]] [[film]]. It's a [[good]] career [[move]] for Molly to [[get]] some [[money]] doing a [[crappy]] [[movie]] in Australia so she won't [[get]] [[ridiculed]] in the states.

Either [[way]], this [[dumb]] [[movie]] is about some dumb [[horror]] [[movie]] that was never [[finished]] because this dumb [[creature]] [[kills]] [[everyone]] that's in it. [[Throughout]] the [[movie]], we're supposed to [[guess]] who's the [[killer]]. [[Long]] [[story]] short, [[remember]] our [[little]] [[friend]] Molly, she saves the day...or does she?

This [[move]] is just plain [[bad]], [[rent]] it if you feel like torturing yourself or just [[break]] it on the [[floor]] of your local [[video]] [[store]] if you see it on the shelf. Don't [[spread]] the horror. The [[covers]] of [[shoebox]] of this [[filmmaking]] has Kyle Minogue's name on it, but she has the same [[fate]] as Drew Barrymore did in "[[Yells]]." That's the first thing that makes this [[movies]] lame; they are [[try]] to [[markets]] a movie with [[anyone]] that's in it for 5 minutes.

Of course, we have to have this movie [[trait]] [[youthful]] [[hips]] [[academies]] kids that are [[indifferent]] that there's a [[doer]] [[go]] around. To [[topped]] it all off, Molly Ringwald of 80's [[teenaged]] movie [[reputation]] is the [[superstar]] of this [[marvellously]] [[wrote]] [[films]]. It's a [[alright]] career [[budge]] for Molly to [[gets]] some [[cash]] doing a [[shit]] [[filmmaking]] in Australia so she won't [[gets]] [[mocked]] in the states.

Either [[camino]], this [[twit]] [[filmmaking]] is about some dumb [[terror]] [[films]] that was never [[ended]] because this dumb [[monster]] [[murdered]] [[somebody]] that's in it. [[Around]] the [[movies]], we're supposed to [[presume]] who's the [[shooter]]. [[Longer]] [[conte]] short, [[recollect]] our [[scant]] [[buddies]] Molly, she saves the day...or does she?

This [[budge]] is just plain [[naughty]], [[lease]] it if you feel like torturing yourself or just [[outage]] it on the [[flooring]] of your local [[videos]] [[storage]] if you see it on the shelf. Don't [[propagate]] the horror. --------------------------------------------- Result 4544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] By 1987 [[Hong]] Kong had [[given]] the [[world]] such [[films]] as Sammo Hung's `Encounters of the Spooky Kind' [[Chow]] [[Yun]] [[Fat]] in [[John]] Woo's iconic `A Better Tomorrow', `Zu Warriors' and the classic `Mr Vampire'. [[Jackie]] Chan was having international [[success]] on video, but it was with `A Chinese Ghost Story' that HK [[cinema]] had its first [[real]] crossover theatrical hit in the [[West]] for [[many]] [[years]].

Western filmgoers had never [[seen]] [[anything]] like it. It was a [[film]] that took [[various]] ingredients that HK [[cinema]] had [[used]] for [[years]] (flying [[swordsman]], [[wildly]] choreographed martial arts and the supernatural) and [[blended]] them to [[create]] a [[film]] that was unique in its look, feel and [[execution]]. [[Forget]] the poor and [[unnecessary]] sequels it spawned, this is the [[original]] and [[best]].

[[Director]] Siu-Tung Ching (still [[best]] known as an Action [[Choreographer]] on such [[films]] as Woo's `A Better Tomorrow 2'/'The Killer') has, under the [[watchful]] [[eye]] of legendary [[Producer]] [[Tsui]] Hark, [[created]] a masterpiece of [[Fantasy]]/Horror [[cinema]]. And with such an [[expert]] crew at his disposal (no [[less]] than 6 Martial [[Arts]] Coordinators) the [[chances]] of the [[film]] being anything but [[wonderful]] [[would]] be [[unthinkable]].

The editing by the [[amazingly]] prolific David Wu (who [[wrote]]/[[directed]] `The Bride With White Hair 2' and edited such [[classic]] titles as `A [[Better]] Tomorrow 1/2/3', `Hardboiled' and the cult [[hit]] `The Club') is [[quite]] [[simply]] a [[work]] of [[genius]]. His crafting of the [[perfectly]] [[choreographed]] [[high]] flying, tree climbing sword [[fights]] makes them some of the [[best]] [[HK]] [[cinema]] has ever [[created]]. Fast [[moving]], outlandish but never [[confusing]] they are, even [[today]], the [[pinnacle]] of their art.

The [[crew]] of cinematographers have [[also]] [[done]] [[miracles]]. This is a [[film]] where [[every]] [[shot]] is an expertly [[crafted]] [[painting]]. [[Where]] [[wonderful]] blue tinged night [[sequences]], shrouded in an ever-present ghostly [[fog]], are the [[breathtaking]] [[platform]] for our [[story]] to unfold. It's a [[film]] where everything is [[used]] to weave a dreamlike beauty. Even the silken robes and [[dresses]] [[worn]] by Hsiao Tsing [[become]] [[living]] parts of the [[movie]], whether in romantic [[sequences]] or [[battle]] scenes the ever present silk flows across the screen. Even a simple scene where Hsiao Tsing changes robes is turned into a thing of fluttering beauty as every skill on the set combines to create a most memorable scene from such a simple act. The sets are also amazing, giving an other worldly sense to the forests, and the temple and harshness to the scorched, flag filled wasteland of hell for the amazing finale. The production design by Zhongwen Xi deserves the highest praise.

Another major factor to the films success is the music by Romeo Diaz and James Wong. Hong Kong films have given us some fantastic music and songs that have added so much to the success of a sequence, but on `A Chinese Ghost Story' the music is, quite simply, vital. From the opening song onwards the music becomes as important as the characters.

The score is a perfect mixture of modern and traditional instruments. Drums, bells and guitars pound away over the action sequences to great effect, but it's in the slower, achingly romantic pieces that it comes into it's own. Here; flutes, strings and female choral effects create what are possibly the finest pieces of music heard in an HK film. Add to this the female vocal, stunningly beautiful song that plays over Tsau-shen's and Hsiao Tsing's love making, (nothing is ever seen, but the effect is wonderful. This is lovingly innocent movie romance) and you have a shining example of the power a film's music can have.

And we of course have the acting talent. Leslie Cheung (`A Better Tomorrow 1 & 2' and a very popular singer) is outstanding as the innocent tax collector. His work in the (thankfully mild) comic sequences is never over the top and his scenes with Joey Wang are played with just the right amount of passion and innocence.

Joey Wang (who would later be mostly relegated to support roles in films like the Chow Yun Fat/Andy Lau classic "God of Gamblers") has never looked more radiant than how she does here. She is the epitome of ethereal beauty. Her portrayal of the tragic Hsiao Tsing is stunning. She shows her characters sadness at what she has become and what she is made to do, but also gives off a subtle eroticism in the scenes where she is luring the men to their gruesome deaths. Veteran actor Wu Ma (`Mr. Vampire', `Swordsman') is great fun as the wise, brave, but ever so grumpy, Yen. He treads a fine line between the eccentric and the annoying with practised ease. And what so easily could have been a character that could have harmed the film is actually wonderfully entertaining and memorable.

But what about the monsters and beasties?, I hear you cry. Well they range from the rather crude but fun stop motion/animatronic zombies that inhabit the temple (resulting in a great running gag with constantly thwarted attempts to munch on the amusingly unsuspecting Tsau-shen), to the rather cheesy but surprisingly effective Lord Black. Complete with an arsenal of vicious flying heads, and quite outstanding wire work. Most of which has, to this day, never been topped.

But the most outstanding effect and creation is the tree spirit's killer tongue. We first encounter this thing with an `Evil Dead' style rushing camera effect as it powers down its victims throats to deliver a lethal French kiss that turns the victims into zombiefied husks. But later it's shown in all its crazy glory. It can grow so big and long that it shoots through the forest after prey, rips apart trees, wraps itself around buildings and coils it's slimy length around people before picking them up and throwing them against tree trunks!! It can even split open to reveal a fang filled mouth! It's an outrageous idea that given the deeply romantic main plot shouldn't work. But it does, to fantastic and unforgettable effect.

So what all this adds up to is a classic example of Hong Kong movie making. A true team effort that has given us a truly ground breaking movie. It's a film packed with wit, invention, action, monsters, martial arts, ghosts, fantastic ideas, lush visuals, beautiful music, and most important to it's enduring charm, one of cinemas most moving romances. By 1987 [[Hk]] Kong had [[awarded]] the [[monde]] such [[cinematography]] as Sammo Hung's `Encounters of the Spooky Kind' [[Week]] [[Yoon]] [[Obese]] in [[Johannes]] Woo's iconic `A Better Tomorrow', `Zu Warriors' and the classic `Mr Vampire'. [[Melanie]] Chan was having international [[accomplishments]] on video, but it was with `A Chinese Ghost Story' that HK [[cinemas]] had its first [[authentic]] crossover theatrical hit in the [[Western]] for [[several]] [[olds]].

Western filmgoers had never [[watched]] [[nada]] like it. It was a [[films]] that took [[multiple]] ingredients that HK [[theaters]] had [[using]] for [[olds]] (flying [[samurai]], [[brutally]] choreographed martial arts and the supernatural) and [[mixing]] them to [[creations]] a [[films]] that was unique in its look, feel and [[executions]]. [[Overlook]] the poor and [[worthless]] sequels it spawned, this is the [[initial]] and [[better]].

[[Headmaster]] Siu-Tung Ching (still [[better]] known as an Action [[Choreography]] on such [[film]] as Woo's `A Better Tomorrow 2'/'The Killer') has, under the [[prudential]] [[eyes]] of legendary [[Maker]] [[Suh]] Hark, [[established]] a masterpiece of [[Utopia]]/Horror [[cinemas]]. And with such an [[specialised]] crew at his disposal (no [[least]] than 6 Martial [[Humanities]] Coordinators) the [[luck]] of the [[cinematography]] being anything but [[spectacular]] [[should]] be [[incomprehensible]].

The editing by the [[appallingly]] prolific David Wu (who [[texted]]/[[aimed]] `The Bride With White Hair 2' and edited such [[typical]] titles as `A [[Improved]] Tomorrow 1/2/3', `Hardboiled' and the cult [[knocked]] `The Club') is [[rather]] [[merely]] a [[jobs]] of [[engineers]]. His crafting of the [[fully]] [[choreography]] [[higher]] flying, tree climbing sword [[fight]] makes them some of the [[better]] [[KONG]] [[theater]] has ever [[engendered]]. Fast [[shifting]], outlandish but never [[disconcerting]] they are, even [[yesterday]], the [[climax]] of their art.

The [[crewman]] of cinematographers have [[furthermore]] [[doing]] [[miracle]]. This is a [[filmmaking]] where [[any]] [[filmed]] is an expertly [[established]] [[painter]]. [[Whenever]] [[great]] blue tinged night [[sequence]], shrouded in an ever-present ghostly [[mist]], are the [[breathless]] [[platforms]] for our [[history]] to unfold. It's a [[filmmaking]] where everything is [[using]] to weave a dreamlike beauty. Even the silken robes and [[frock]] [[wear]] by Hsiao Tsing [[becomes]] [[iife]] parts of the [[cinematography]], whether in romantic [[sequencing]] or [[warfare]] scenes the ever present silk flows across the screen. Even a simple scene where Hsiao Tsing changes robes is turned into a thing of fluttering beauty as every skill on the set combines to create a most memorable scene from such a simple act. The sets are also amazing, giving an other worldly sense to the forests, and the temple and harshness to the scorched, flag filled wasteland of hell for the amazing finale. The production design by Zhongwen Xi deserves the highest praise.

Another major factor to the films success is the music by Romeo Diaz and James Wong. Hong Kong films have given us some fantastic music and songs that have added so much to the success of a sequence, but on `A Chinese Ghost Story' the music is, quite simply, vital. From the opening song onwards the music becomes as important as the characters.

The score is a perfect mixture of modern and traditional instruments. Drums, bells and guitars pound away over the action sequences to great effect, but it's in the slower, achingly romantic pieces that it comes into it's own. Here; flutes, strings and female choral effects create what are possibly the finest pieces of music heard in an HK film. Add to this the female vocal, stunningly beautiful song that plays over Tsau-shen's and Hsiao Tsing's love making, (nothing is ever seen, but the effect is wonderful. This is lovingly innocent movie romance) and you have a shining example of the power a film's music can have.

And we of course have the acting talent. Leslie Cheung (`A Better Tomorrow 1 & 2' and a very popular singer) is outstanding as the innocent tax collector. His work in the (thankfully mild) comic sequences is never over the top and his scenes with Joey Wang are played with just the right amount of passion and innocence.

Joey Wang (who would later be mostly relegated to support roles in films like the Chow Yun Fat/Andy Lau classic "God of Gamblers") has never looked more radiant than how she does here. She is the epitome of ethereal beauty. Her portrayal of the tragic Hsiao Tsing is stunning. She shows her characters sadness at what she has become and what she is made to do, but also gives off a subtle eroticism in the scenes where she is luring the men to their gruesome deaths. Veteran actor Wu Ma (`Mr. Vampire', `Swordsman') is great fun as the wise, brave, but ever so grumpy, Yen. He treads a fine line between the eccentric and the annoying with practised ease. And what so easily could have been a character that could have harmed the film is actually wonderfully entertaining and memorable.

But what about the monsters and beasties?, I hear you cry. Well they range from the rather crude but fun stop motion/animatronic zombies that inhabit the temple (resulting in a great running gag with constantly thwarted attempts to munch on the amusingly unsuspecting Tsau-shen), to the rather cheesy but surprisingly effective Lord Black. Complete with an arsenal of vicious flying heads, and quite outstanding wire work. Most of which has, to this day, never been topped.

But the most outstanding effect and creation is the tree spirit's killer tongue. We first encounter this thing with an `Evil Dead' style rushing camera effect as it powers down its victims throats to deliver a lethal French kiss that turns the victims into zombiefied husks. But later it's shown in all its crazy glory. It can grow so big and long that it shoots through the forest after prey, rips apart trees, wraps itself around buildings and coils it's slimy length around people before picking them up and throwing them against tree trunks!! It can even split open to reveal a fang filled mouth! It's an outrageous idea that given the deeply romantic main plot shouldn't work. But it does, to fantastic and unforgettable effect.

So what all this adds up to is a classic example of Hong Kong movie making. A true team effort that has given us a truly ground breaking movie. It's a film packed with wit, invention, action, monsters, martial arts, ghosts, fantastic ideas, lush visuals, beautiful music, and most important to it's enduring charm, one of cinemas most moving romances. --------------------------------------------- Result 4545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[May]] I please have my $13.00 back? I [[would]] have rather [[watched]] "Hydro- Electric Power [[Comes]] to [[North]] [[America]]". [[Again]]. This is a [[movie]] with one [[voice]]. The same [[voice]], which comes out of every characters mouth [[regardless]] of age or [[gender]]. To [[listen]] to that voice again I [[would]] have to charge at [[least]] $150 an hour. And I don't [[take]] [[insurance]]. It was eerie watching [[Will]] Ferrell morph into Woody. But I don't [[think]] [[imaginative]] [[casting]] is enough. One should [[wait]] until they have a story before they bother [[making]] a [[movie]]. Unless he's just doing it for the [[money]]. And if that's the [[case]] why not just reissue an All-Rap version of "What's up [[Tiger]] Lily?" [[Maggio]] I please have my $13.00 back? I [[could]] have rather [[seen]] "Hydro- Electric Power [[Happens]] to [[Norden]] [[Latina]]". [[Anew]]. This is a [[cinema]] with one [[vocal]]. The same [[voices]], which comes out of every characters mouth [[independently]] of age or [[genre]]. To [[listens]] to that voice again I [[could]] have to charge at [[slightest]] $150 an hour. And I don't [[taking]] [[seguro]]. It was eerie watching [[Willingness]] Ferrell morph into Woody. But I don't [[believing]] [[ingenious]] [[pouring]] is enough. One should [[awaits]] until they have a story before they bother [[doing]] a [[filmmaking]]. Unless he's just doing it for the [[cash]]. And if that's the [[lawsuit]] why not just reissue an All-Rap version of "What's up [[Tigers]] Lily?" --------------------------------------------- Result 4546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this episode. Seeing The Flash, Cyborg, Green Arrow, and Aquaman (even though all he did was swim) made my eyes widen. To see most of the founders of the Justice League trying to bring down Lex Luthor is what i've been waiting for. This sounds a bit off topic, but making a live action Justice League show would definitely make me have a reason to shove everything that i usually do during the week down the drain just to watch one episode. This is the thrill i got from watching this episode. I wish they had made this episode a little longer, like a two hour special, because i felt that one hour of the Justice League wasn't enough. Now before i bore you (unless i already have with my rambling) i just want to say, Smallville is cool again. It sort of lost its touch when the show started focusing on Lana. But i'm sure the writers will just fall back into that loop hole. :( So enjoy this episode. Who knows when another good one's going to come out. Catch it again this Thursday, Feb. 22, if you missed the first airing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] This [[movie]] [[scared]] the [[crap]] out of me! I have to admit that I spent most of the film watching through my fingers but what I saw was really scary. I screamed out loud two or three times during the show.

Film-making-wise my favorite aspects were the sound and photography. The sound was particularly great and the setting was really creepy beautiful. I read somewhere that it's some weird husband and wife team that made it. For some reason that makes this even stranger for me.

If you enjoy the jumps and jitters of scary movies than this one is for you! [[Very]] suspenseful and a [[great]] [[movie]] to rent with a bunch of friends who love to watch movies curled up on a sofa screaming like little girls! This [[film]] [[shitless]] the [[shitty]] out of me! I have to admit that I spent most of the film watching through my fingers but what I saw was really scary. I screamed out loud two or three times during the show.

Film-making-wise my favorite aspects were the sound and photography. The sound was particularly great and the setting was really creepy beautiful. I read somewhere that it's some weird husband and wife team that made it. For some reason that makes this even stranger for me.

If you enjoy the jumps and jitters of scary movies than this one is for you! [[Hugely]] suspenseful and a [[huge]] [[films]] to rent with a bunch of friends who love to watch movies curled up on a sofa screaming like little girls! --------------------------------------------- Result 4548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Japan 1918. The story of 16-year old Ryu begins with the death of her father. As it will be revealed later, both of her parents have died of tuberculosis. In this desperate situation Ryus aunt has arranged a marriage with a Japanese man in Hawai, whom they know only from its picture. By her arrival in Hawai ryu discovers that her new husband is much older as in the photograph ,and that he lives in very humble circumstances beside a sugar cane plantage were he works on. Ryu not used to the hard labour on the plantage and in despair over her situation in her new home thinks of running away. She soon discovers that she has nowhere to go. The friendship to Kana, a female co-worker of hers, gives her new hope and strength. This picture is based on real events between 1907 and the 1920s, when thousands of Asian woman were married off to men in America, whom they only knew from their picture. This not very well known picture is well written and acted. The location is breathtaking. This film also features Mifune Toshiro in his very last screen appearance as a Benshi (narrator of silent movies). This film gives some insight of Japanese culture here and across the ocean. A must see! --------------------------------------------- Result 4549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Of all Arnold's mid-'80s movies who would have thought that most relevant today would be The Running Man. A [[chilling]] and [[surprisingly]] [[realistic]] [[tale]] of reality TV gone mad. It may have been far-fetched back then but not so now. Not when you think about it. Currently, [[Reality]] TV [[shows]] are either scraping the bottom of the barrel or desperate to raise the bar. [[If]] the next one isn't more controversial as the last, it's a dud. How long will it be before we really do [[see]] [[shows]] like The Running Man? How long before we have 'court-appointed theatrical attorneys' or the entertainment division of the Justice Department? There is so much satire and intelligence in this movie that may have been missed back in 1987 that is desperate to be seen again considering the current state of TV shows.

The biggest message of all is 'You are being lied to'. It's no secret that the Government and the media work in cahoots. And the masses believe what the media tells them to believe. It's a very scary state of affairs and unless more accurate representations of the truth emerge we may easily accept a brutal show like the Running Man in the near future. It's no secret that Reality TV is not very realistic. It's edited and reshaped before being aired and it's only what the networks want you to see. Usually it's far from the real truth.

Although rather different than Stephen King's book (the ending is completely changed) the script does conform to the typical Arnie formula. Yes, he does have numerous and very corny one-liners and he does say 'I'll be back' (which he never REALLY said that often anyway, when you think about it) in the most ironic situation yet but he's still a zillion times better in the role then Christopher Reeve or Dolph Lundgren would have been (these two were considered BEFORE Arnie believe it or not).

The director is none other than Dave Starsky himself (Paul Michael Glaser). It may not be artistic but it is still strong enough to generate excitement and his use of neon and flourescent colors gives each individual set a pretty cool look. Andrew Davis (not a director I particularly like) was attached before Glaser, though no matter who directs, the film is still marred by a very heavy 80's feel.

First of all, Harold Faltermeyer's score (remember him?) is incredibly dated and robs the action scenes of any timeless integrity. And the fashion sense of the movie is far too excessive to be convincingly set in the future. Apart from the dated feel, the only other thing that bugs me is the poorly staged shoot-out that passes as the climax.

This new DVD is a zillion times better than the original release. Gone is the horrid letterbox picture. In its place is a brand new hi-definition 1.85:1 anamorphic transfer. The colors sparkle and literally pop from the screen. The new Dolby 5.1 EX and DTS ES soundtrack are also amazing. There constant use of the surround channels to great effect and the bass is strong and powerful. Definitely one of the best re-masters I've seen so far. Two intriguing documentaries, a trailer and a 'Meet the Stalkers' gimmick are included in this 2-disc set that comes in a rather neat slip case. Of all Arnold's mid-'80s movies who would have thought that most relevant today would be The Running Man. A [[chill]] and [[curiously]] [[practical]] [[conte]] of reality TV gone mad. It may have been far-fetched back then but not so now. Not when you think about it. Currently, [[Realism]] TV [[showing]] are either scraping the bottom of the barrel or desperate to raise the bar. [[Though]] the next one isn't more controversial as the last, it's a dud. How long will it be before we really do [[seeing]] [[display]] like The Running Man? How long before we have 'court-appointed theatrical attorneys' or the entertainment division of the Justice Department? There is so much satire and intelligence in this movie that may have been missed back in 1987 that is desperate to be seen again considering the current state of TV shows.

The biggest message of all is 'You are being lied to'. It's no secret that the Government and the media work in cahoots. And the masses believe what the media tells them to believe. It's a very scary state of affairs and unless more accurate representations of the truth emerge we may easily accept a brutal show like the Running Man in the near future. It's no secret that Reality TV is not very realistic. It's edited and reshaped before being aired and it's only what the networks want you to see. Usually it's far from the real truth.

Although rather different than Stephen King's book (the ending is completely changed) the script does conform to the typical Arnie formula. Yes, he does have numerous and very corny one-liners and he does say 'I'll be back' (which he never REALLY said that often anyway, when you think about it) in the most ironic situation yet but he's still a zillion times better in the role then Christopher Reeve or Dolph Lundgren would have been (these two were considered BEFORE Arnie believe it or not).

The director is none other than Dave Starsky himself (Paul Michael Glaser). It may not be artistic but it is still strong enough to generate excitement and his use of neon and flourescent colors gives each individual set a pretty cool look. Andrew Davis (not a director I particularly like) was attached before Glaser, though no matter who directs, the film is still marred by a very heavy 80's feel.

First of all, Harold Faltermeyer's score (remember him?) is incredibly dated and robs the action scenes of any timeless integrity. And the fashion sense of the movie is far too excessive to be convincingly set in the future. Apart from the dated feel, the only other thing that bugs me is the poorly staged shoot-out that passes as the climax.

This new DVD is a zillion times better than the original release. Gone is the horrid letterbox picture. In its place is a brand new hi-definition 1.85:1 anamorphic transfer. The colors sparkle and literally pop from the screen. The new Dolby 5.1 EX and DTS ES soundtrack are also amazing. There constant use of the surround channels to great effect and the bass is strong and powerful. Definitely one of the best re-masters I've seen so far. Two intriguing documentaries, a trailer and a 'Meet the Stalkers' gimmick are included in this 2-disc set that comes in a rather neat slip case. --------------------------------------------- Result 4550 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Passport to Pimlico is a real treat for all fans of British cinema. Not only is it an enjoyable and thoroughly entertaining comedy, but it is a cinematic flashback to a bygone age, with attitudes and scenarios sadly now only a memory in British life.

Stanley Holloway plays Pimlico resident Arthur Pemberton, who after the accidental detonation of an unexploded bomb, discovers a wealth of medieval treasure belonging to the 14th Century Duke of Burgundy that has been buried deep underneath their little suburban street these last 600 years.

Accompanying the treasure is an ancient legal decree signed by King Edward IV of England (which has never been officially rescinded) to state that that particular London street had been declared Burgandian soil, which means that in the eyes of international law, Pemberton and the other local residents are no longer British subjects but natives of Burgundy and their tiny street an independent country in it's own right and a law unto itself.

This sets the war-battered and impoverished residents up in good stead as they believe themselves to be outside of English law and jurisdiction, so in an act of drunken defiance they burn their ration books, destroy and ignore their clothing coupons, flagrantly disregard British licencing laws etc, declaring themselves fully independent from Britain.

However, what then happens is ever spiv, black marketeer and dishonest crook follows suit and crosses the 'border' into Burgundy as a refuge from the law and post-war restrictions to sell their dodgy goods, and half of London's consumers follow them in order to dodge the ration, making their quiet happy little haven, a den of thieves and a rather crowded one at that.

Appealing to Whitehall for assistance, they are told that due to developments this is "now a matter of foreign policy, which His Majesty's Government is reluctant to become involved" which leaves the residents high and dry. They do however declare the area a legal frontier and as such set up a fully equipped customs office at the end of the road, mainly to monitor smuggling than to ensure any safety for the residents of Pimlico.

Eventually the border is closed altogether starting a major siege, with the Bugundian residents slowly running out of water and food, but never the less fighting on in true British style. As one Bugundian resident quotes, "we're English and we always were English, and it's just because we are English, we are fighting so hard to be Bugundians"

A sentiment that is soon echoed throughout the capital as when the rest of London learn of the poor Bugundians plight they all feel compelled to chip in and help them, by throwing food and supplies over the barbed wire blockades.

Will Whitehall, who has fought off so may invaders throughout the centuries finally be brought to it's knees by this new batch of foreigners, especially as these ones are English!!!!

Great tale, and great fun throughout. Not to be missed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] The remake of H.B. Halicki's classic seventies chase film is simply [[horrible]]. Along with Vanishing Point, Gone in 60 Seconds represent the quintessential car chase films. The remake takes the original and stands it on its head. Whereas Halicki gave us 75% car chase and 25% supporting drama, in GISS 2000 we get 25% car chase and 75% supporting drama. Cage as super man, saves his brother, kisses the girl. MTV edits, tits and ass. Save your money, rent the original. At least Halicki didn't live to see his baby (he wrote, produced, directed, and starred in the '74' film) degraded in this manner. The remake of H.B. Halicki's classic seventies chase film is simply [[frightful]]. Along with Vanishing Point, Gone in 60 Seconds represent the quintessential car chase films. The remake takes the original and stands it on its head. Whereas Halicki gave us 75% car chase and 25% supporting drama, in GISS 2000 we get 25% car chase and 75% supporting drama. Cage as super man, saves his brother, kisses the girl. MTV edits, tits and ass. Save your money, rent the original. At least Halicki didn't live to see his baby (he wrote, produced, directed, and starred in the '74' film) degraded in this manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 4552 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bruce Lee was a great martial artist, but this film still is probably one of the worst films ever made. It has Bruce Lee die as the result of falling off a helicopter after being hit by some kind of a ninja knife to the back of the neck but it doesn't explain how he came to be on a helicopter since the prior scene has him near but not on the helicopter which is already 200 feet in the air. It just gets downright absurd from then, like something out of a cheap comic book. Maybe the idea isn't so rotten but it isn't done with any degree of artistry from a film making point of view. There are dozens of such martial arts bombers out there, usually all made in Hong Kong. I think that Jean Claude van Dam improved the genre with adding plausible stories in his films and having film makers who know how to use the camera. Even Steven Seagal's films are way better than 90 percent of the martial arts junk movies made during the 1970s and early 1980s in Hong Kong. 'Game of Death II' falls into the category of junk cinema in my opinion, despite Bruce Lee being in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This work is striking in its accurate depiction of teenage life at the time of its execution. Though this is a broad generalization, parents of that time were too self-absorbed to be real parents, and those who were home tended to be far too distracted from the real issues, where their children were concerned.

This film teaches us how to let go, even when it is painful, and does so with a sweet, melancholy, but informed style whereby Foster talks philosophically about feeling the pain of life. I loved that scene. It was my favorite scene in the movie, actually.

The transition from funeral to wedding was meant to show that life does go on, and so must we. Baio's skateboarding through a pack of goons and outrunning them was meant to show us that the troubled times will pass, and we are meant to get through them, to better times.

The whole metaphor of "moving on," and the procession of life, is present throughout the film, and serves to give us hope, in the end.

I like this movie, though I do not watch it often, as it tends to make me melancholy.

It shouldn't be viewed by young children, and probably only those raised in the 1970's-80's would want to.

It rates a 7.4/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 4554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Get this [[film]] if at all [[possible]]. You will find a really good performance by Barbara Bach, [[beautiful]] [[cinematography]] of a stately (and incredibly clean) but creepy old house, and an unexpected [[virtuoso]] performance by … "The Unseen". I picked up a used copy of this film because I was interested in seeing more of Bach, whom I'd just viewed in "The Spy Who Loved Me." I love really classically beautiful actresses and appreciate them even more if they can act a little. So: we start with a nice fresh premise. TV reporter Bach walks out on boyfriend and goes to cover a festival in a California town, Solvang, that celebrates its Swedish ancestry by putting on a big folk festival. She brings along a camerawoman, who happens to be her sister, and another associate. (The late Karen Lamm plays Bach's sister, and if you know who the celebrities are that each of these ladies is married to, it is just too funny watching Bach (Mrs. Ringo Starr) and Lamm (Mrs. Dennis Wilson) going down the street having a sisterly quarrel.)) Anyway … Bach's disgruntled beau follows her to Solvang, as he's not done arguing with her. There's a lot of feeling still between them but she doesn't wanna watch him tear himself up anymore about his down-the-drain football career. The ladies arrive in Solvang to do the assignment for their station, only to find their reservations were given away to someone else. (Maybe to Bach's boyfriend, because think of it – where's he gonna stay?). The gals ask around but there is just nowhere to go. Mistakenly trying to get into an old hotel which now serves only as a museum, they catch the interest of proprietor Mr. Keller (the late Sidney Lassick), who decides to be a gentleman and lodge them at his home, insisting his wife will be happy to receive them. Oh no! Next thing we know Keller is making a whispered phone call to his wife, warning her that company's coming and threatening that she'd better play along. Trouble in paradise! The ladies are eager to settle in and get back to Solvang to shoot footage and interview Swedes, but one of the girls doesn't feel good. Bach and Lamm leave her behind, wondering to themselves about Mrs. Keller (played heartbreakingly by pretty Lelia Goldoni) who looks like she just lost her best pal. Speaking of which … under-the-weather Vicki slips off her clothes and gets into a nice hot tub, not realizing that Keller has crept into her room to inspect the keyhole. She hears him, thinks he's come to deliver linen, and calls out her thanks. Lassick did a great job in this scene expressing the anguish of a fat old peeping tom who didn't get a long enough look. After he's left, poor Vicki tumbles into bed for a nap but gets yanked out of it real fast (in a really decent, frightening round of action) by something BIG that has apparently crept up through a grille on the floor … The Unseen! Lamm comes home next (Bach is out finishing an argument with her beau) and can't find anyone in the house. She knocks over a plate of fruit in the kitchen, and, on hands and knees to collect it, her hair and fashionable scarf sway temptingly over the black floor grille … attracting The Unseen again! Well, at about the time poor Lamm is getting her quietus in the kitchen, we do a flashback into Mr. Keller's past and get the full story of what his sick, sadistic background really is and why his wife doesn't smile much. Bach finally gets home and wants to know where her friends are. Meanwhile, Lassick has been apprised of the afternoon's carnage by his weeping wife and decides he can't let Bach off the premises to reveal the secret of his home. He tempts her down into the basement where the last act of the Keller family tragedy finally opens to all of us.

I cannot say enough for Stephen Furst, whom I'd never seen before; it's obvious that he did his homework for this role, studying the methods of communication and expression of the brain damaged; Bach and Goldoni, each in their diverse way, just give the movie luster. Not only that, but movie winds up with a satisfying resolution. No stupid cheap tricks, eyeball-rolling dialog or pathetically cut corners... A real treat for your collection. Get this [[kino]] if at all [[achievable]]. You will find a really good performance by Barbara Bach, [[brilliant]] [[movies]] of a stately (and incredibly clean) but creepy old house, and an unexpected [[performer]] performance by … "The Unseen". I picked up a used copy of this film because I was interested in seeing more of Bach, whom I'd just viewed in "The Spy Who Loved Me." I love really classically beautiful actresses and appreciate them even more if they can act a little. So: we start with a nice fresh premise. TV reporter Bach walks out on boyfriend and goes to cover a festival in a California town, Solvang, that celebrates its Swedish ancestry by putting on a big folk festival. She brings along a camerawoman, who happens to be her sister, and another associate. (The late Karen Lamm plays Bach's sister, and if you know who the celebrities are that each of these ladies is married to, it is just too funny watching Bach (Mrs. Ringo Starr) and Lamm (Mrs. Dennis Wilson) going down the street having a sisterly quarrel.)) Anyway … Bach's disgruntled beau follows her to Solvang, as he's not done arguing with her. There's a lot of feeling still between them but she doesn't wanna watch him tear himself up anymore about his down-the-drain football career. The ladies arrive in Solvang to do the assignment for their station, only to find their reservations were given away to someone else. (Maybe to Bach's boyfriend, because think of it – where's he gonna stay?). The gals ask around but there is just nowhere to go. Mistakenly trying to get into an old hotel which now serves only as a museum, they catch the interest of proprietor Mr. Keller (the late Sidney Lassick), who decides to be a gentleman and lodge them at his home, insisting his wife will be happy to receive them. Oh no! Next thing we know Keller is making a whispered phone call to his wife, warning her that company's coming and threatening that she'd better play along. Trouble in paradise! The ladies are eager to settle in and get back to Solvang to shoot footage and interview Swedes, but one of the girls doesn't feel good. Bach and Lamm leave her behind, wondering to themselves about Mrs. Keller (played heartbreakingly by pretty Lelia Goldoni) who looks like she just lost her best pal. Speaking of which … under-the-weather Vicki slips off her clothes and gets into a nice hot tub, not realizing that Keller has crept into her room to inspect the keyhole. She hears him, thinks he's come to deliver linen, and calls out her thanks. Lassick did a great job in this scene expressing the anguish of a fat old peeping tom who didn't get a long enough look. After he's left, poor Vicki tumbles into bed for a nap but gets yanked out of it real fast (in a really decent, frightening round of action) by something BIG that has apparently crept up through a grille on the floor … The Unseen! Lamm comes home next (Bach is out finishing an argument with her beau) and can't find anyone in the house. She knocks over a plate of fruit in the kitchen, and, on hands and knees to collect it, her hair and fashionable scarf sway temptingly over the black floor grille … attracting The Unseen again! Well, at about the time poor Lamm is getting her quietus in the kitchen, we do a flashback into Mr. Keller's past and get the full story of what his sick, sadistic background really is and why his wife doesn't smile much. Bach finally gets home and wants to know where her friends are. Meanwhile, Lassick has been apprised of the afternoon's carnage by his weeping wife and decides he can't let Bach off the premises to reveal the secret of his home. He tempts her down into the basement where the last act of the Keller family tragedy finally opens to all of us.

I cannot say enough for Stephen Furst, whom I'd never seen before; it's obvious that he did his homework for this role, studying the methods of communication and expression of the brain damaged; Bach and Goldoni, each in their diverse way, just give the movie luster. Not only that, but movie winds up with a satisfying resolution. No stupid cheap tricks, eyeball-rolling dialog or pathetically cut corners... A real treat for your collection. --------------------------------------------- Result 4555 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Drones, ethnic drumming, bad synthesizer piping, children singing. The most patronizing "world music" imaginable. This is a tourist film, and a lousy one. What really kills it is the incoherent sequences. India, Egypt, South America, Africa, etc, etc. No transitions, no visual explanation of why we're suddenly ten thousand miles away, no ideas expressed in images. Just a bunch of footage of third-worlders with "baskets on their heads" as another reviewer said. Walking along endlessly as if that had some deep meaning. If these guys wanted to make a 3rd World music video, all they had to do was head a few hundred miles south of where the best parts of Koya were shot, and film in Mexico. That would have been a much better setting for "life in transformation."

But no. What they decided on was a scrambled tourist itinerary covering half the globe and mind-deadeningly overcranked filter shots. The only thing to recommend this film is that it doesn't suck quite as much as Naqoyqatsi.

RstJ --------------------------------------------- Result 4556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Steve Carell stars as a person who you can relate to(sort of) in Dan in real life, a film which I expected not to like but ended up liking it. Not that the movie is laugh out loud funny it's just that it has a big heart. We all like Steve Carell, this isn't what fans of The Office would expect to see from him, but you know what, I liked this movie.

Carell stars as Dan Burns, a widowed father who's daughters don't really like him. One weekend, him and his daughters travel down to see his family. While there, he goes to a bookstore and falls for a woman. When he gets back to his house, he finds out that his brother Mitch(Played by Dane Cook) is dating this woman(Played by Juliette Binoche).

Dan in real life, at times, I found a bit unbelievable. Are the Burns family really the kind of people who do exercises together and play board games together and do a bunch of other family things? I would highly doubt that. I don't know any family who is like that. Is that stopping me from giving it a thumbs up? No.

Dan in real life:***/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 4557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] As a fan of the Sookie Stackhouse books, I find this series to be a totally [[crass]] representation of them. Vampire Bill is not very good looking and looks much older than described in the book. I found that they have made already wonderfully colourful characters seem very course and vulgar. One of the things I loved about the books is that despite all the crap that she is going through Sookie is always a lady, and yet in the TV series she doesn't seem like that at all. Not only that but the prejudices displayed in the TV series are not nearly as wide spread in the books. I didn't expect an exact replica of the books but I at least expected the feel of them to be used for the series. As a fan of the Sookie Stackhouse books, I find this series to be a totally [[discourteous]] representation of them. Vampire Bill is not very good looking and looks much older than described in the book. I found that they have made already wonderfully colourful characters seem very course and vulgar. One of the things I loved about the books is that despite all the crap that she is going through Sookie is always a lady, and yet in the TV series she doesn't seem like that at all. Not only that but the prejudices displayed in the TV series are not nearly as wide spread in the books. I didn't expect an exact replica of the books but I at least expected the feel of them to be used for the series. --------------------------------------------- Result 4558 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I hope she can [[keep]] acting and [[directing]]. She's [[surely]] up to the task and [[could]] [[easily]] [[develop]] that visionary streak into a [[long]] career of unconventional and [[rare]] works of [[art]]. Her [[work]] has a [[rare]] kind of [[generosity]] and her [[timing]] is spot-on! Oy I'm kvell I hope she can [[preserving]] acting and [[instructing]]. She's [[admittedly]] up to the task and [[would]] [[conveniently]] [[formulate]] that visionary streak into a [[lange]] career of unconventional and [[few]] works of [[artistry]]. Her [[cooperate]] has a [[few]] kind of [[kindness]] and her [[timeline]] is spot-on! Oy I'm kvell --------------------------------------------- Result 4559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[While]] the title "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead" comes from an Irish proverb the film plays out like a Greek tragedy. It all starts with a botched [[robbery]] and continues to spiral out of control as two brothers attempt to escape the mess they've gotten themselves into.

The cast is well-assembled with [[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]] & Ethan Hawke playing the aforementioned brothers. Notable support includes Albert Finney as their father and Marisa Tomei as the wife of one brother and lover of the other. Beyond these principals the acting is unremarkable.

The story is compelling and is told with a certain degree of verve. The narrative structure keeps things interesting by providing different points of view and frequent time shifts. That being said, the film's unpredictability is somewhat muted since it becomes apparent early on that this story is a tragedy, through and through. All in all, a pretty [[impressive]] [[debut]] for first-time screenwriter Kelly Masterson.

Sidney Lumet's direction is well handled but I'm more impressed by the fact that he's still directing at over eighty years old. I was less impressed by the score by Carter Burwell but it isn't a major distraction.

In the end, the film proves to be compelling viewing and while the story & presentation may have superficial similarities to other films this one remains a [[unique]] experience. [[Albeit]] the title "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead" comes from an Irish proverb the film plays out like a Greek tragedy. It all starts with a botched [[stickup]] and continues to spiral out of control as two brothers attempt to escape the mess they've gotten themselves into.

The cast is well-assembled with [[Filipe]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]] & Ethan Hawke playing the aforementioned brothers. Notable support includes Albert Finney as their father and Marisa Tomei as the wife of one brother and lover of the other. Beyond these principals the acting is unremarkable.

The story is compelling and is told with a certain degree of verve. The narrative structure keeps things interesting by providing different points of view and frequent time shifts. That being said, the film's unpredictability is somewhat muted since it becomes apparent early on that this story is a tragedy, through and through. All in all, a pretty [[wondrous]] [[infancy]] for first-time screenwriter Kelly Masterson.

Sidney Lumet's direction is well handled but I'm more impressed by the fact that he's still directing at over eighty years old. I was less impressed by the score by Carter Burwell but it isn't a major distraction.

In the end, the film proves to be compelling viewing and while the story & presentation may have superficial similarities to other films this one remains a [[sole]] experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 4560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[film]] was not [[nearly]] as much of a [[chore]] as I expected it to be. There are a few seconds of brilliance in this somewhat [[idiotic]] hardcore UFO conspiracy paranoia-fest. [[Most]] of the acting is mediocre, but [[fairly]] [[typical]] for 1970s-style stuff replete with [[pregnant]] pauses. A [[photographer]] and a [[model]] witness some [[strange]] goings-on in the [[woods]] and [[soon]] [[fall]] [[victim]] to these same goings-on. Flying saucers are spotted, more people [[disappear]] - but is it the [[aliens]] or our own government's ultra-secret [[group]] of cover-up [[guys]]? Soon [[enough]], a [[reporter]] and a "UFOlogist" ([[apparently]] [[modeled]] on the [[character]] of the writer-director) are [[drawn]] into this [[unraveling]] [[fiasco]] and [[become]] the [[target]] of the ultra-secret [[agents]] who are as [[menacing]] as they are improbable and witless. Then the fun [[really]] [[begins]].

The [[movie]], predictably, makes about as much sense as the average UFO conspiracy [[theory]], but should be commended for [[taking]] itself so [[seriously]]. The camera [[work]] is OK for a low-budget [[film]], the pacing is pretty [[good]], the [[script]] is silly and [[absurd]], and there are [[continuity]] [[issues]] which are [[fun]] to look out for. What are the few [[seconds]] of [[brilliance]] I mentioned? [[Honestly]], I can't [[say]] [[much]] you without [[writing]] a spoiler. [[Suffice]] to say that the end of the [[film]] is, at [[least]], worth fast-forwarding to if you can't take the [[middle]]. This [[filmmaking]] was not [[roughly]] as much of a [[drudgery]] as I expected it to be. There are a few seconds of brilliance in this somewhat [[silly]] hardcore UFO conspiracy paranoia-fest. [[Greater]] of the acting is mediocre, but [[rather]] [[classic]] for 1970s-style stuff replete with [[expectant]] pauses. A [[cinematographer]] and a [[modelling]] witness some [[weird]] goings-on in the [[lumber]] and [[rapidly]] [[declining]] [[victims]] to these same goings-on. Flying saucers are spotted, more people [[disappearing]] - but is it the [[outsiders]] or our own government's ultra-secret [[panels]] of cover-up [[boy]]? Soon [[satisfactorily]], a [[reporters]] and a "UFOlogist" ([[seemingly]] [[modelled]] on the [[personages]] of the writer-director) are [[draws]] into this [[unraveled]] [[implosion]] and [[becoming]] the [[intent]] of the ultra-secret [[officers]] who are as [[threaten]] as they are improbable and witless. Then the fun [[truthfully]] [[launched]].

The [[kino]], predictably, makes about as much sense as the average UFO conspiracy [[theories]], but should be commended for [[picked]] itself so [[conscientiously]]. The camera [[collaborating]] is OK for a low-budget [[flick]], the pacing is pretty [[alright]], the [[scripts]] is silly and [[farcical]], and there are [[continuation]] [[subjects]] which are [[droll]] to look out for. What are the few [[secs]] of [[splendour]] I mentioned? [[Frankly]], I can't [[says]] [[very]] you without [[write]] a spoiler. [[Sufficient]] to say that the end of the [[filmmaking]] is, at [[minus]], worth fast-forwarding to if you can't take the [[mid]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[Tooth]] Fairy is about the ghost of an old deformed witch that [[lures]] [[children]] to her house to get a prize for their loose tooth and then takes their lives. The first few minutes introduce you to the 1949 beginning of the legend of the tooth fairy and then switches to present day. The worn out horror plot is [[pretty]] much [[saved]] by the solid acting. They [[could]] have done without the Hammond [[brothers]] and a few other scenes, but overall the [[gore]] scenes were bloody but quick which had a minimizing [[effect]]. The eye [[candy]] is [[pretty]] good for both [[genders]]. Camera work is good. [[Dialog]] is fair but cheesy. I expected the film to be a bare bones, low budget, slasher with very few [[redeeming]] factors. I was surprised by the quality of the film. The [[Dent]] Fairy is about the ghost of an old deformed witch that [[jigs]] [[childhood]] to her house to get a prize for their loose tooth and then takes their lives. The first few minutes introduce you to the 1949 beginning of the legend of the tooth fairy and then switches to present day. The worn out horror plot is [[belle]] much [[rescued]] by the solid acting. They [[wo]] have done without the Hammond [[sibling]] and a few other scenes, but overall the [[gora]] scenes were bloody but quick which had a minimizing [[implications]]. The eye [[sweets]] is [[quite]] good for both [[genres]]. Camera work is good. [[Dialogue]] is fair but cheesy. I expected the film to be a bare bones, low budget, slasher with very few [[redeem]] factors. I was surprised by the quality of the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Sandwiched]] in between San [[Francisco]] and [[Captains]] [[Courageous]] two of Spencer Tracy's [[greatest]] parts is this very [[curious]] [[film]] about [[war]] and the [[effects]] it has on some people. They [[Gave]] Him A [[Gun]] stars Spencer Tracy and Franchot Tone in the only film they ever made together and Gladys George as the woman who [[loves]] them both.

[[Tracy]] and Tone are a [[couple]] of [[World]] War I draftees, Tone is a [[weak]] character who [[almost]] goes over the hill in [[boot]] camp, but Tracy stops him. Tracy is still playing the lovable blowhard, younger Wallace Beery type that MGM envisioned for him when they signed him away from Fox.

Over at the front Tone gets an opportunity and takes it when during a fight he manages to get to a church tower that peers down on a German machine gun nest. He's learned to shoot by now and he does a Sergeant York. But Alvin C. York was never changed by the war the way Tone has.

Wounded in the fight Tone convalesces at a hospital with Gladys George looking out for him. Tracy goes AWOL himself to visit his pal and he and George get something going. Later on when Tracy is reported missing in action, Tone and George marry. Tracy's brokenhearted when he comes back and learns of the marriage, but takes sit in stride.

The rest of the film is dealing with Tone applying the the wartime skills he's learned to the gangster trade. He's a hit-man now and George doesn't really know what he does for a living. I think you can figure the rest out.

The part of the film that gave me some trouble is that I can't believe Gladys George couldn't figure it out. She's a street smart girl, her part is very much like the one she played in The Roaring Twenties opposite James Cagney.

Speaking of The Roaring Twenties, Humphrey Bogart's character [[development]] there is [[similar]] to Tone's [[although]] he was not the central character of the movie. In fact there are elements of They Gave Him A Gun that are to be found in Taxi Driver and in Clint Eastwood's classic, The Unforgiven.

The World War I battle [[sequences]] are very well staged by director Woody Van [[Dyke]]. For some [[reason]] Leonard Maltin panned this film, I think it's a lot better than he gave it credit. [[Stuck]] in between San [[Franz]] and [[Skipper]] [[Adventurous]] two of Spencer Tracy's [[bigger]] parts is this very [[nosy]] [[movies]] about [[warfare]] and the [[consequences]] it has on some people. They [[Handed]] Him A [[Firearms]] stars Spencer Tracy and Franchot Tone in the only film they ever made together and Gladys George as the woman who [[loved]] them both.

[[Tracey]] and Tone are a [[couples]] of [[International]] War I draftees, Tone is a [[flimsy]] character who [[nearly]] goes over the hill in [[startup]] camp, but Tracy stops him. Tracy is still playing the lovable blowhard, younger Wallace Beery type that MGM envisioned for him when they signed him away from Fox.

Over at the front Tone gets an opportunity and takes it when during a fight he manages to get to a church tower that peers down on a German machine gun nest. He's learned to shoot by now and he does a Sergeant York. But Alvin C. York was never changed by the war the way Tone has.

Wounded in the fight Tone convalesces at a hospital with Gladys George looking out for him. Tracy goes AWOL himself to visit his pal and he and George get something going. Later on when Tracy is reported missing in action, Tone and George marry. Tracy's brokenhearted when he comes back and learns of the marriage, but takes sit in stride.

The rest of the film is dealing with Tone applying the the wartime skills he's learned to the gangster trade. He's a hit-man now and George doesn't really know what he does for a living. I think you can figure the rest out.

The part of the film that gave me some trouble is that I can't believe Gladys George couldn't figure it out. She's a street smart girl, her part is very much like the one she played in The Roaring Twenties opposite James Cagney.

Speaking of The Roaring Twenties, Humphrey Bogart's character [[developments]] there is [[equivalent]] to Tone's [[while]] he was not the central character of the movie. In fact there are elements of They Gave Him A Gun that are to be found in Taxi Driver and in Clint Eastwood's classic, The Unforgiven.

The World War I battle [[sequence]] are very well staged by director Woody Van [[Dam]]. For some [[cause]] Leonard Maltin panned this film, I think it's a lot better than he gave it credit. --------------------------------------------- Result 4563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] This piece of [[crap]] might have been [[acclaimed]] 60 [[years]] ago, but it is one of the most [[racist]] [[movies]] ever [[made]] with the Native American Indians [[played]] by white men. The right-wing [[Republican]] [[James]] [[Stewart]] was a [[huge]] [[racist]] in [[real]] [[life]], just like his [[close]] [[friend]] [[John]] Wayne. In 1971 Stewart had actor Hal Williams fired from "The [[Jimmy]] Stewart Show" (a short-lived [[series]] that [[mercifully]] flopped) just because Williams was black. As if that were not bad enough, this [[film]] is very [[dated]] and boring. Watch "[[Dances]] with [[Wolves]]" [[instead]] for a less [[racist]] view.

[[Stewart]] was in his forties when this [[awful]] [[movie]] was [[made]], and even with his [[ridiculous]] wig he [[still]] [[looked]] like a [[paedophile]] [[chasing]] after 16-year-old Debra Paget. I'm [[surprised]] it was even [[allowed]].

0/10. This piece of [[baloney]] might have been [[famed]] 60 [[yr]] ago, but it is one of the most [[ethnic]] [[film]] ever [[accomplished]] with the Native American Indians [[served]] by white men. The right-wing [[Republicans]] [[Jacobo]] [[Sylvain]] was a [[whopping]] [[racism]] in [[veritable]] [[living]], just like his [[closed]] [[friends]] [[Jon]] Wayne. In 1971 Stewart had actor Hal Williams fired from "The [[Jimmie]] Stewart Show" (a short-lived [[serial]] that [[luckily]] flopped) just because Williams was black. As if that were not bad enough, this [[filmmaking]] is very [[dating]] and boring. Watch "[[Dance]] with [[Lupo]]" [[however]] for a less [[racial]] view.

[[Sylvain]] was in his forties when this [[scary]] [[flick]] was [[introduced]], and even with his [[silly]] wig he [[however]] [[seemed]] like a [[pedophile]] [[hunting]] after 16-year-old Debra Paget. I'm [[amazed]] it was even [[permitted]].

0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The movie starts out with a bunch of Dead Men Walking peeps sitting in individual [[cells]], waiting for their inevitable meeting with death represented by the electrical chair.

Then our "hero", who is called Tenshu, is taken to the chair, he's zapped, and then....he's still "Alive". AHA ! He is given a [[choice]] by some creepy military [[guys]] who look [[really]] [[cool]] : Either we zap you until we've made sure you're actually dead [[OR]] you can walk through this door and take whatever [[destiny]] might lie ahead of you". Our hero says yes to option 2, and then the actual story commences.

He wakes up in a different sort of cell (very high-tech and very big), where he finds another cell-mate, who also managed to survive the electric boogie-ride. A voice in the speakers tells them that they are free to do whatever they wish, as long as it happens within that room. Sounds a little [[suspicious]], but the two men accept : What else can they do ?

What these two men do not know is that they have been set together, so they can awaken an inner urge to kill within them. Basically the unknown scientists in the background p**s them off until they decide that they should kill each other. Sounds weird ? Indeed, but there's a greater purpose to all of this. THIS is the part which should not be [[revealed]], and so it shall remain unrevealed.

But fear not, it is the unknown that lures the [[viewer]] to watch more of this pseudo-action movie, fore it has an entirely different approach to the question : How long time can you stand being with a man who's an S.O.B. and would you kill him to obtain freedom ?

The first hour is basically trying to awaken your interest, it sneaks up without you actually knowing it. Then it becomes a roller coaster ride with WILD Matrix-like action fight-scenes with a touch of individuality to honor the comic book from which the movie is based upon.

The movie is indeed very [[special]], so special that normal cinemas won't view it under normal circumstances. However, the story is fascinating, the music is fantastic, and the actors do their bit (some more than others) to make the movie truly unique.

If you should be so fortunate that your cinema or video store has it, watch it, and enjoy the fact that not everyone is trying to make mainstream movies to earn huge bunches of cash.

The movie starts out with a bunch of Dead Men Walking peeps sitting in individual [[cell]], waiting for their inevitable meeting with death represented by the electrical chair.

Then our "hero", who is called Tenshu, is taken to the chair, he's zapped, and then....he's still "Alive". AHA ! He is given a [[wahl]] by some creepy military [[bloke]] who look [[truly]] [[groovy]] : Either we zap you until we've made sure you're actually dead [[ODER]] you can walk through this door and take whatever [[fate]] might lie ahead of you". Our hero says yes to option 2, and then the actual story commences.

He wakes up in a different sort of cell (very high-tech and very big), where he finds another cell-mate, who also managed to survive the electric boogie-ride. A voice in the speakers tells them that they are free to do whatever they wish, as long as it happens within that room. Sounds a little [[questionable]], but the two men accept : What else can they do ?

What these two men do not know is that they have been set together, so they can awaken an inner urge to kill within them. Basically the unknown scientists in the background p**s them off until they decide that they should kill each other. Sounds weird ? Indeed, but there's a greater purpose to all of this. THIS is the part which should not be [[exhibited]], and so it shall remain unrevealed.

But fear not, it is the unknown that lures the [[onlooker]] to watch more of this pseudo-action movie, fore it has an entirely different approach to the question : How long time can you stand being with a man who's an S.O.B. and would you kill him to obtain freedom ?

The first hour is basically trying to awaken your interest, it sneaks up without you actually knowing it. Then it becomes a roller coaster ride with WILD Matrix-like action fight-scenes with a touch of individuality to honor the comic book from which the movie is based upon.

The movie is indeed very [[especial]], so special that normal cinemas won't view it under normal circumstances. However, the story is fascinating, the music is fantastic, and the actors do their bit (some more than others) to make the movie truly unique.

If you should be so fortunate that your cinema or video store has it, watch it, and enjoy the fact that not everyone is trying to make mainstream movies to earn huge bunches of cash.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kubrick again puts on display his stunning ability to craft a perfect ambiance for a film. Mainly through cinematography, but also using an ingenious score, he creates a chilling and ominous tone that resides over the entire film and thoroughly gets my spine tingling from the start. It really is this flawless ambiance that makes The Shining the masterpiece that it is, in my eyes. Of course it doesn't hurt that Jack Nicholson gives one of the greatest performances I've ever seen. A frighteningly authentic portrayal of a mind gone mad. Duvall and Lloyd are artificial, to be nice, but it's easy to look past those two when the rest of the film is so brilliant. Plus it features the actor with the greatest name of all time (Scatman Crothers). --------------------------------------------- Result 4566 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I tracked the trip two years ago on the internet - now I've seen the film!! What a ride! And what a trip to finally get to know Darius Weems! Such a courageous, wise, funny and talented spirit! And what a Crew! To listen to Darius laughing from being in the water at Panama City, to see his trepidation of being too close to alligators in Louisiana, the wonder in his eyes as he rode in a hot air balloon, the excitement of rafting through some rapids, the bet to eat a spoonful of wasabi, and the phone calls home, and as always - boys will be boys. This film needs to be seen by everyone - young and old alike. Darius and his mother are models of strength and courage. And the Crew members are testaments to the heart of the younger generation. They got Darius a new wheelchair; they documented accessibility problems; they took Darius on the trip of his life; and they touched many, many lives. By raising awareness of DMD and encouraging funding for research, this film will help accomplish the final goal of Darius Goes West - a cure for DMD. --------------------------------------------- Result 4567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Three horror [[stories]] based on members of a transgressive Hindu cult that return [[home]] but changed in some way. In the first story our former cult member is now in an insane asylum and is visited by a reported who wants to find out about what went on at the cult. Somewhat slow going as story is told in flashbacks while the two sit on chairs and face each other. Reporter is particularly interested in what lead to the death of the [[participants]]. What [[seemed]] [[rather]] [[boring]] suddenly [[turns]] very exciting with a [[surprising]] [[twist]] in the story. Things get quite bloody.

Second story has a violent young criminal visiting a psychiatrist for mandatory therapy. The patient seems to have some type of agenda but the psychiatrist is up to the task. Again, things slow down a bit and get weird. Then there's a strange twist in the story that is very well written and surprising.

Final story deals with spiritual healer who claims to be able to remove the persons illness from them with his hands. One of the patients is a former cult member, so the successful healing gets more complicated. Again, we are surprised by a twist. Has a pretty gory scene in there.

There some nice female full frontal nudity as well as male full frontal nudity for some reason. I [[found]] the stories to be very well written and the director succeeds entirely in setting up each story with its surprising twist and the gory aftermath.

Note: review of the German DVD. Three horror [[story]] based on members of a transgressive Hindu cult that return [[households]] but changed in some way. In the first story our former cult member is now in an insane asylum and is visited by a reported who wants to find out about what went on at the cult. Somewhat slow going as story is told in flashbacks while the two sit on chairs and face each other. Reporter is particularly interested in what lead to the death of the [[attendees]]. What [[looked]] [[quite]] [[bored]] suddenly [[revolves]] very exciting with a [[uncanny]] [[twisting]] in the story. Things get quite bloody.

Second story has a violent young criminal visiting a psychiatrist for mandatory therapy. The patient seems to have some type of agenda but the psychiatrist is up to the task. Again, things slow down a bit and get weird. Then there's a strange twist in the story that is very well written and surprising.

Final story deals with spiritual healer who claims to be able to remove the persons illness from them with his hands. One of the patients is a former cult member, so the successful healing gets more complicated. Again, we are surprised by a twist. Has a pretty gory scene in there.

There some nice female full frontal nudity as well as male full frontal nudity for some reason. I [[unearthed]] the stories to be very well written and the director succeeds entirely in setting up each story with its surprising twist and the gory aftermath.

Note: review of the German DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 4568 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The movie is steeped in religion, so it is impossible to separate it from religion in commenting upon it. In my opinion, this movie pretends to explore deep issues, but thrives on stereotypes and prejudices; with [[little]] true insight. What the people in the movie (and therefore, the writer) failed to see was grace. They failed to understand that God is the author of beauty and He is the Creator of passion and sexual gratification in the proper context of marriage bonds. To imply that the people of the society in which the story is based believe that nudity is sinful, and both the man & the woman enjoying the act of marriage is dirty, is just an oversimplification. Such stereotypes really don't exist, for even Jewish holy writings speak clearly of the caring husband who will seek his wife's pleasure before his own. Scripture says that a man ought to love his wife as his own flesh, and that no man ever hated his own flesh, but he nourishes and cherishes it. Even if you want to ignore the New Testament, the writers & characters completely ignore that there are passages such as the Song of Solomon in the Old Testament, and the even the book of Proverbs which says, "Rejoice in the wife of thy youth, let her breasts satisfy you always"! How can that be read in any way other way than that God knows, and approves of, and smiles on, the marital union and the enjoyment thereof? Real men don't ignore the value and needs of their wives. Those that do deny a very basic teaching of the Judeo/Christian religion. God NEVER said those things. It's absurd. Sonia rebelled because of the misapplication of the teachings of the true God of Abraham. It didn't need to be so. How sad. What Sonia desperately needed was TRUTH, not tradition. In knowing, loving and obeying God, we love others more; before ourselves. That is the faith of the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob & Joseph; once for all delivered to the Saints; bought & paid for by Jesus Christ, the Righteous. But alright, ignore all this and abandon ancient, holy Scripture and turn to the wisdom of homeless people & ghosts. That's a good plan. I would never recommend this movie; partly because the sexual content is unnecessarily graphic, but also because it really doesn't offer any valuable insight. Check out "Yentl" if you want to see a much more useful treatment of Jewish tradition at odds with society. The movie is steeped in religion, so it is impossible to separate it from religion in commenting upon it. In my opinion, this movie pretends to explore deep issues, but thrives on stereotypes and prejudices; with [[scant]] true insight. What the people in the movie (and therefore, the writer) failed to see was grace. They failed to understand that God is the author of beauty and He is the Creator of passion and sexual gratification in the proper context of marriage bonds. To imply that the people of the society in which the story is based believe that nudity is sinful, and both the man & the woman enjoying the act of marriage is dirty, is just an oversimplification. Such stereotypes really don't exist, for even Jewish holy writings speak clearly of the caring husband who will seek his wife's pleasure before his own. Scripture says that a man ought to love his wife as his own flesh, and that no man ever hated his own flesh, but he nourishes and cherishes it. Even if you want to ignore the New Testament, the writers & characters completely ignore that there are passages such as the Song of Solomon in the Old Testament, and the even the book of Proverbs which says, "Rejoice in the wife of thy youth, let her breasts satisfy you always"! How can that be read in any way other way than that God knows, and approves of, and smiles on, the marital union and the enjoyment thereof? Real men don't ignore the value and needs of their wives. Those that do deny a very basic teaching of the Judeo/Christian religion. God NEVER said those things. It's absurd. Sonia rebelled because of the misapplication of the teachings of the true God of Abraham. It didn't need to be so. How sad. What Sonia desperately needed was TRUTH, not tradition. In knowing, loving and obeying God, we love others more; before ourselves. That is the faith of the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob & Joseph; once for all delivered to the Saints; bought & paid for by Jesus Christ, the Righteous. But alright, ignore all this and abandon ancient, holy Scripture and turn to the wisdom of homeless people & ghosts. That's a good plan. I would never recommend this movie; partly because the sexual content is unnecessarily graphic, but also because it really doesn't offer any valuable insight. Check out "Yentl" if you want to see a much more useful treatment of Jewish tradition at odds with society. --------------------------------------------- Result 4569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I can tell you just how bad this movie is. I was in the movie and I haven't seen it yet, but I cringe at the thought of anyone actually paying to see me drunk. Especially considering what we did that year. The thing is that they probably over edited it. Especially the scene where my roommate was snorting coke of the tits of a Mexican prostitute (they probably should have followed him around). We made a few come and go appearances but aside from that I can't really remember anything. I was the MC in a few scenes (from what I'm told. What I can tell you is that everyone avoided the camera crew since who wants to be remembered as the guy who threw up or the girl who showed her tits to the world (or the girl that loser lost his virginity to). Overall the trip itself was crazy but people act different once the camera is on them. --------------------------------------------- Result 4570 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Let me be the first non Australian to comment on this :) I [[got]] the [[movie]] for [[Hugo]] [[Weaving]] and I watched it to the end. It's one of those "drama of life" films, as my mother used to call a movie that depicts a real life story with no [[extraordinary]] events and that is mostly descriptive.

I [[liked]] the light and the girls. The rest was without too much [[fault]], but without too much merit either. I yearned for something like The Interview, or at least some matrix villain element here and there, but nothing out of the ordinary. The story does teach one about facing one's own destiny and break free from the environment others build for you, but this happens when the life giving peach factory in the area is about to close, so not much of an effort to change things is required.

The "smart" American Beauty sound-alike song in the background could have been part of a larger soundtrack, but just that one playing over and over again became annoying after 100 minutes of film.

In the end, I guess it did his job of presenting a part of Australian life, but to me it didn't seem specifically Australian (it could have been placed anywhere) and it didn't seem attractive as a story.

I guess one must be in a certain mood to like the movie. Let me be the first non Australian to comment on this :) I [[did]] the [[cinematographic]] for [[Ugo]] [[Knitted]] and I watched it to the end. It's one of those "drama of life" films, as my mother used to call a movie that depicts a real life story with no [[admirable]] events and that is mostly descriptive.

I [[enjoyed]] the light and the girls. The rest was without too much [[malfunction]], but without too much merit either. I yearned for something like The Interview, or at least some matrix villain element here and there, but nothing out of the ordinary. The story does teach one about facing one's own destiny and break free from the environment others build for you, but this happens when the life giving peach factory in the area is about to close, so not much of an effort to change things is required.

The "smart" American Beauty sound-alike song in the background could have been part of a larger soundtrack, but just that one playing over and over again became annoying after 100 minutes of film.

In the end, I guess it did his job of presenting a part of Australian life, but to me it didn't seem specifically Australian (it could have been placed anywhere) and it didn't seem attractive as a story.

I guess one must be in a certain mood to like the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4571 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] This documentary [[begins]] with an interesting premise -- it makes an intriguing and convincing argument that the history of Jesus as is commonly believed is probably a myth. Sadly, though, after priming us with this, the movie [[completely]] shifts gears and [[becomes]] [[little]] more than a non-stop attack on Christianity, and pretty much focusing on the easy [[targets]].

The writer/director clearly has some issues with the Church (he is a former evangelical Christian and has some legit anger) and this film seems to be his form of release. It'd be interesting to see the first 20 minutes expanded, but as a [[whole]], the [[movie]] is [[disappointing]]. This documentary [[starting]] with an interesting premise -- it makes an intriguing and convincing argument that the history of Jesus as is commonly believed is probably a myth. Sadly, though, after priming us with this, the movie [[fully]] shifts gears and [[becoming]] [[kiddo]] more than a non-stop attack on Christianity, and pretty much focusing on the easy [[goals]].

The writer/director clearly has some issues with the Church (he is a former evangelical Christian and has some legit anger) and this film seems to be his form of release. It'd be interesting to see the first 20 minutes expanded, but as a [[ensemble]], the [[filmmaking]] is [[depressing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I, like many horror fans, have been force fed the same banal big budget Hollywood remakes and MTV high school slasher tripe for the last 20 years. Here, at [[last]], is an [[original]] [[horror]] genre movie that ticks all the right boxes.

You want a hot lead actress, you want vampires, you want cool weapons, you want cool vehicles and you want blood, lots of it, by the bucket load - you got it.

With excellent fight choreography and a supporting role from the Hammer Horror scream queen herself Stephanie Beacham, this really is [[fantastic]] stuff.

Despite it's low budget, by opting to use 35 mm stock and adding quality CG effects to the mix, director James Eaves has created something that feels much bigger.

[[A]] must for old school horror fans. I, like many horror fans, have been force fed the same banal big budget Hollywood remakes and MTV high school slasher tripe for the last 20 years. Here, at [[final]], is an [[initials]] [[abomination]] genre movie that ticks all the right boxes.

You want a hot lead actress, you want vampires, you want cool weapons, you want cool vehicles and you want blood, lots of it, by the bucket load - you got it.

With excellent fight choreography and a supporting role from the Hammer Horror scream queen herself Stephanie Beacham, this really is [[wondrous]] stuff.

Despite it's low budget, by opting to use 35 mm stock and adding quality CG effects to the mix, director James Eaves has created something that feels much bigger.

[[una]] must for old school horror fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 4573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] OK, so Soldier isn't deep and [[meaningful]] like Blade [[Runner]] or as big budget as Terminator 2 but on the whole I [[found]] it [[quite]] [[enjoyable]].

The fact that Kurt [[Russell]] stayed in character not speaking and being virtually emotionless made the moments when his humanity broke through all the more [[poignant]]. I found his portrayal of restricted emotional development more touching than Arnie's in the T films (and before I get comments yes I know that Arnie was a cyborg and Kurt was human but the premise put forward by both films was the same).

So to the film itself, a reasonable US/Brit cast are able to flesh out this little story. Not really sure if Gary Busey and his two deputies were baddies or goodies, so was unable to decide whether I liked them or not. The colony was a little more realistic neither a misguided bunch of peace loving/gullible/[[cowardly]] hicks who get wiped out from the get go nor a group of subversive aggressive terrorists paranoid about offworlders and each other.

Kurt Russell is good and unlike other comments I do not feel this will have a negative impact on his career (unlike maybe Escape from LA - sequels are such fickle creatures!). Sean Pertwee has really done his late father proud by continuing the families noble Sci-Fi lineage. And the rest of the cast helped flesh out this pathetic band of people making the most of a bad situation and not doing too [[badly]].

If you see this on your TV schedule I would recommend giving it a chance. I don't think you will be [[disappointed]]. OK, so Soldier isn't deep and [[valid]] like Blade [[Sprinter]] or as big budget as Terminator 2 but on the whole I [[find]] it [[rather]] [[nice]].

The fact that Kurt [[Russel]] stayed in character not speaking and being virtually emotionless made the moments when his humanity broke through all the more [[heartbreaking]]. I found his portrayal of restricted emotional development more touching than Arnie's in the T films (and before I get comments yes I know that Arnie was a cyborg and Kurt was human but the premise put forward by both films was the same).

So to the film itself, a reasonable US/Brit cast are able to flesh out this little story. Not really sure if Gary Busey and his two deputies were baddies or goodies, so was unable to decide whether I liked them or not. The colony was a little more realistic neither a misguided bunch of peace loving/gullible/[[dastardly]] hicks who get wiped out from the get go nor a group of subversive aggressive terrorists paranoid about offworlders and each other.

Kurt Russell is good and unlike other comments I do not feel this will have a negative impact on his career (unlike maybe Escape from LA - sequels are such fickle creatures!). Sean Pertwee has really done his late father proud by continuing the families noble Sci-Fi lineage. And the rest of the cast helped flesh out this pathetic band of people making the most of a bad situation and not doing too [[sorely]].

If you see this on your TV schedule I would recommend giving it a chance. I don't think you will be [[frustrated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An end of an era was released here in the States in Spring 2002 with "The Rookie," a Disney live action film that seemed to be the "best for last!!!!!" It took place right here in Texas! Actually, the story began in West Texas, as evidenced by an area code found on a sign over there. It was about a high school coach who was so convinced by his high class baseball team that he decided to go professional!!!!!

What I liked about this movie: It was sooo nice!!!!! It was a very good sports movie, ala "The Mighty Ducks" trilogy. It had also taken moviegoers across Texas, from somewhere between the Panhandle and El Paso all the way to the Metroplex (where I live). I can tell because I recognize that ballpark (was "The Ballpark in Arlington;" now it's "Ameriquest Field")! It was nice to see Disney's "Golden Age" end here in my area!!!!!

R.I.P.

Golden Age of Disney

1920s-Spring 2002

"It all started with a mouse...and it ended with baseball." (sobs)

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4575 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1.) This movie was amazing! I watched it while I was in the town next to the one where he grew up! I went and saw the buildings that the story took place in. Overall, I loved this movie, One of Jake Gyllenhaal's best!! Also- my favorite parts were the science fair, and all the times with his father. They were so sad, it seemed. Homer wanted to follow his dream and his dad didn't seem to care one way or another. That tag line is true. "Sometimes One Dream is bright enough to light up the sky." 2.) The way this movie was shot was impeccable, it was all so believable that it could have been recorded during the 1950's. Dress was accurate and they had their slang down too. Definitely recommend this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This in my [[opinion]] is one of the [[best]] [[action]] [[movies]] of the 1970s. It not only features a [[great]] cast but is also [[loaded]] with [[wild]] shootouts and [[explosions]] that are still impressive [[today]]. The story is about a Vietnam vet ([[Kris]] Kristofferson) being [[recruited]] by his brother (Jan-Michael [[Vincent]]) to help clean up the criminal [[element]] in a [[small]] town and what happens when Kris starts taking advantage of his [[position]] and becomes as bad as the [[criminals]] he was hired to get rid of. It's [[great]] seeing Kris play against [[type]]. [[Bernadette]] Peeters and Victoria Principal both offer great [[support]] as the respective [[ladies]] of the two male [[stars]]. Jan-Michael shows [[real]] [[movie]] star [[persona]] in this [[film]]. I don't think Vigilante Force is on [[video]] but it occasionally shows up on TV. It's a [[great]] [[flick]] for guys who like movies. This in my [[avis]] is one of the [[better]] [[measures]] [[films]] of the 1970s. It not only features a [[wondrous]] cast but is also [[burdens]] with [[feral]] shootouts and [[bomb]] that are still impressive [[yesterday]]. The story is about a Vietnam vet ([[Chris]] Kristofferson) being [[hiring]] by his brother (Jan-Michael [[Tome]]) to help clean up the criminal [[ingredient]] in a [[little]] town and what happens when Kris starts taking advantage of his [[posture]] and becomes as bad as the [[offenders]] he was hired to get rid of. It's [[wondrous]] seeing Kris play against [[genre]]. [[Naomi]] Peeters and Victoria Principal both offer great [[supporting]] as the respective [[madams]] of the two male [[star]]. Jan-Michael shows [[actual]] [[kino]] star [[person]] in this [[movies]]. I don't think Vigilante Force is on [[videos]] but it occasionally shows up on TV. It's a [[large]] [[gesture]] for guys who like movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] As a low budget enterprise in which the filmmakers themselves are manufacturing and distributing the DVDs themselves, we perhaps shouldn't expect too much from Broken in disc form. And yet what's most [[remarkable]] about this whole [[achievement]] is the fact that this release comes with enough extras to shame a James Cameron DVD and a decidedly fine presentation.

With regards to the latter, the only major flaw is that Broken comes with a non-anamorphic transfer. Otherwise we get the film in its original 1.85:1 ratio, demonstrating no technical flaws and looking pretty much as should be expected. Indeed, given Ferrari's hands on approach in putting this disc together you can pretty much guarantee such a fact.

The same is also true of the soundtrack. Here we are offered both DD2.0 and DD5.1 mixes and whilst I'm uncertain as to which should be deemed the "original", the fact that Ferrari had an involvement in both means neither should be considered as inferior. Indeed, though the DD5.1 may offer a more atmosphere viewing experience owing to the manner in which it utilizes the score, both are equally fine and free of technical flaws.

As for extras the disc is positively overwhelmed by them. Take a look at the sidebar on the right of the screen and you'll notice numerous commentaries, loads of featurettes and various galleries. Indeed, given the manner in which everything has been broken down into minute chunks rather than compiled into a lengthy documentary, there really is little to discuss. The 'Anatomy of a Stunt' featurette, for example, is exactly what it claims to be, and the same goes for the rest of pieces. As such we get coverage on pretty much ever aspect of Broken's pre-production, production and post-production. And whilst it may have been preferable to find them in a more easily digestible overall 'making of', in this manner we do get easy access to whatever special feature we may wish to view.

Of the various pieces, then, it is perhaps only the commentaries which need any kind of discussion. Then again, there's also a predictable air to each of the chat tracks. The one involving the actors is overly jokey and doesn't take the film too seriously. Ferrari's pieces are incredibly enthusiastic about the whole thing. And the technical ones are, well, extremely technical. Of course, we also get some crossover with what's been covered elsewhere on the discs, but at only 19 minutes none of these pieces outstay their welcome. Indeed, all in all, a fine extras package. As a low budget enterprise in which the filmmakers themselves are manufacturing and distributing the DVDs themselves, we perhaps shouldn't expect too much from Broken in disc form. And yet what's most [[wondrous]] about this whole [[attaining]] is the fact that this release comes with enough extras to shame a James Cameron DVD and a decidedly fine presentation.

With regards to the latter, the only major flaw is that Broken comes with a non-anamorphic transfer. Otherwise we get the film in its original 1.85:1 ratio, demonstrating no technical flaws and looking pretty much as should be expected. Indeed, given Ferrari's hands on approach in putting this disc together you can pretty much guarantee such a fact.

The same is also true of the soundtrack. Here we are offered both DD2.0 and DD5.1 mixes and whilst I'm uncertain as to which should be deemed the "original", the fact that Ferrari had an involvement in both means neither should be considered as inferior. Indeed, though the DD5.1 may offer a more atmosphere viewing experience owing to the manner in which it utilizes the score, both are equally fine and free of technical flaws.

As for extras the disc is positively overwhelmed by them. Take a look at the sidebar on the right of the screen and you'll notice numerous commentaries, loads of featurettes and various galleries. Indeed, given the manner in which everything has been broken down into minute chunks rather than compiled into a lengthy documentary, there really is little to discuss. The 'Anatomy of a Stunt' featurette, for example, is exactly what it claims to be, and the same goes for the rest of pieces. As such we get coverage on pretty much ever aspect of Broken's pre-production, production and post-production. And whilst it may have been preferable to find them in a more easily digestible overall 'making of', in this manner we do get easy access to whatever special feature we may wish to view.

Of the various pieces, then, it is perhaps only the commentaries which need any kind of discussion. Then again, there's also a predictable air to each of the chat tracks. The one involving the actors is overly jokey and doesn't take the film too seriously. Ferrari's pieces are incredibly enthusiastic about the whole thing. And the technical ones are, well, extremely technical. Of course, we also get some crossover with what's been covered elsewhere on the discs, but at only 19 minutes none of these pieces outstay their welcome. Indeed, all in all, a fine extras package. --------------------------------------------- Result 4578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I tend to like character-driven [[films]]. I [[also]] [[think]] [[Hope]] Davis [[turns]] in [[consistently]] [[good]] [[work]], so I had [[high]] [[hopes]] for this [[movie]]. Those hopes were [[soon]] dashed.

The [[main]] flaw with this movie is the [[direction]]. There are a lot of scenes that are daydream sequences. The [[movie]] makes frequent [[use]] of the [[Denis]] Leary character as the [[alter]] ego of the Campbell Scott [[character]]. It doesn't [[work]] for me at all. This would have [[worked]] better as a play than a [[movie]].

There are [[problems]] with the plot as well. It is [[important]] that the [[characters]] in a [[movie]] [[take]] a [[journey]] and [[end]] up in a place different from where they [[started]]. I didn't feel that the [[characters]] [[grew]] in the [[experiences]] portrayed in the [[movie]].

Finally, the editing wasn't well [[done]], [[either]]. There was a very big sag in the [[middle]] of the [[movie]] that was [[exceptionally]] [[boring]].

Except for acting, which I [[felt]] was [[consistently]] strong, this [[movie]] [[failed]] in almost [[every]] [[aspect]] of [[cinema]]. I tend to like character-driven [[movie]]. I [[apart]] [[thought]] [[Esperanza]] Davis [[revolves]] in [[systematically]] [[alright]] [[collaboration]], so I had [[alto]] [[waits]] for this [[film]]. Those hopes were [[expeditiously]] dashed.

The [[primary]] flaw with this movie is the [[directions]]. There are a lot of scenes that are daydream sequences. The [[filmmaking]] makes frequent [[uses]] of the [[Denny]] Leary character as the [[change]] ego of the Campbell Scott [[characters]]. It doesn't [[cooperation]] for me at all. This would have [[acted]] better as a play than a [[film]].

There are [[disorders]] with the plot as well. It is [[sizable]] that the [[nature]] in a [[film]] [[taking]] a [[voyager]] and [[ending]] up in a place different from where they [[initiation]]. I didn't feel that the [[trait]] [[surged]] in the [[experimentation]] portrayed in the [[film]].

Finally, the editing wasn't well [[performed]], [[neither]]. There was a very big sag in the [[mid]] of the [[flick]] that was [[peculiarly]] [[tiresome]].

Except for acting, which I [[smelled]] was [[ceaselessly]] strong, this [[filmmaking]] [[faulted]] in almost [[each]] [[facet]] of [[cine]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say? I ignored the reviews and went to see it myself. Damn the reviews were so right. What a waste of money considering it's budget.

Good thing, I went to see Kill Bill after this one.

To see a really scary movie, would be Crossroads!

Bottom line-- I like "Girl in Gold Boots" better than this crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 4580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] When I remember [[seeing]] the previews for this movie and not [[really]] [[thinking]] much about it. It was almost one of those movies that when you [[see]] the preview, its [[stunning]], and then when it [[comes]] out, you hear nothing and [[totally]] miss it, and your [[memory]] totally doesn't correct the [[mistake]] of [[missing]] it. Man On Fire was one of those [[movies]]. I was curious on a rental one [[time]], and I [[decided]] to [[take]] it [[home]] with me, my precious Blockbuster rental in my hands. I [[watched]] it, and [[witnessed]] such a [[beautiful]] movie. It is like [[none]] other...[[drama]] and [[action]] [[combined]] to create [[something]] [[amazingly]] [[spectacular]]. The cinematography done by Tony Scott is [[extremely]] well [[done]] and [[unique]], unlike another [[movie]]. The [[subtitles]] can [[explain]] something without even [[listening]] to the actual [[voices]], and the [[music]] is very intriguing for the setting. I [[got]] into this [[movie]], and [[ended]] up buying it as [[soon]] as I could scurry out of the [[household]] and head over to [[Best]] [[Buy]]. I've watched it [[several]] [[times]] now. Denzel Washington (Creasy) does an [[amazing]] job with becoming this lost-minded ex-special [[forces]] [[man]] with no [[reason]] to [[live]]. Dakota Fanning (Pita) puts [[life]] back into him with her undying [[love]] for him right from the [[start]]. They bond and become good friends, until she is [[kidnapped]] by [[notorious]] [[gangsters]] [[part]] of the [[brotherhood]], [[La]] Hermandad. Creasy (Denzel) [[tells]] the [[mother]] of Dakota Fanning that he will [[hunt]] down the killers, fearing that Pita is dead. This is where Creasy really [[shows]] the [[person]] he can [[become]]. He [[uses]] his [[contacts]] from Pita's [[kidnapping]] and Creasy's hospitalization to [[find]] one of the [[men]] and he [[begins]] his [[pursuit]]. My favorite line of all, is in this [[movie]], when [[Christopher]] Walken [[tells]] the AFI agent that "A [[man]] is a [[work]] of art, in [[anything]] that he does....[[cooking]], whatever. Creasy's art is death...he's about to [[paint]] his masterpiece." He plays a very [[unique]] roll of Creasy's [[old]] [[partner]] and [[friend]]. After finally pursuing the [[brother]] of "The [[Voice]]," [[leader]] of [[La]] Hermandad. Creasy arranges a meeting to trade Pita for himself and The Voice's brother. [[In]] the [[end]], Creasy [[dies]] from being [[shot]] earlier, and his [[wound]] [[getting]] infected and [[massive]] blood loss. It is a very [[sincere]] and [[sad]] ending, but a great one. I love this movie and recommend it to anyone that is looking for a memorable flick. The story is in depth, everything is explained from beginning to end, and nothing corny at all in any way or manner. When I remember [[witnessing]] the previews for this movie and not [[genuinely]] [[think]] much about it. It was almost one of those movies that when you [[behold]] the preview, its [[awesome]], and then when it [[arrives]] out, you hear nothing and [[perfectly]] miss it, and your [[remembrance]] totally doesn't correct the [[error]] of [[gone]] it. Man On Fire was one of those [[theater]]. I was curious on a rental one [[moment]], and I [[deciding]] to [[taking]] it [[houses]] with me, my precious Blockbuster rental in my hands. I [[seen]] it, and [[saw]] such a [[wondrous]] movie. It is like [[nothing]] other...[[theater]] and [[activity]] [[amalgamated]] to create [[anything]] [[terribly]] [[noteworthy]]. The cinematography done by Tony Scott is [[vastly]] well [[played]] and [[exclusive]], unlike another [[movies]]. The [[caption]] can [[clarified]] something without even [[listen]] to the actual [[voice]], and the [[musician]] is very intriguing for the setting. I [[ai]] into this [[cinematography]], and [[terminated]] up buying it as [[shortly]] as I could scurry out of the [[dwellings]] and head over to [[Better]] [[Acquiring]]. I've watched it [[various]] [[moments]] now. Denzel Washington (Creasy) does an [[awesome]] job with becoming this lost-minded ex-special [[troops]] [[males]] with no [[motif]] to [[viva]]. Dakota Fanning (Pita) puts [[lifetime]] back into him with her undying [[amore]] for him right from the [[launches]]. They bond and become good friends, until she is [[abducted]] by [[famed]] [[thugs]] [[party]] of the [[fraternity]], [[Las]] Hermandad. Creasy (Denzel) [[says]] the [[mommy]] of Dakota Fanning that he will [[chasing]] down the killers, fearing that Pita is dead. This is where Creasy really [[exposition]] the [[somebody]] he can [[gotten]]. He [[employs]] his [[liaison]] from Pita's [[kidnap]] and Creasy's hospitalization to [[unearthed]] one of the [[man]] and he [[started]] his [[pursue]]. My favorite line of all, is in this [[cinematography]], when [[Christophe]] Walken [[told]] the AFI agent that "A [[guy]] is a [[works]] of art, in [[nothing]] that he does....[[cooker]], whatever. Creasy's art is death...he's about to [[painted]] his masterpiece." He plays a very [[exclusive]] roll of Creasy's [[elderly]] [[partners]] and [[boyfriend]]. After finally pursuing the [[brah]] of "The [[Voices]]," [[head]] of [[Las]] Hermandad. Creasy arranges a meeting to trade Pita for himself and The Voice's brother. [[Throughout]] the [[terminating]], Creasy [[succumbed]] from being [[filmed]] earlier, and his [[casualty]] [[obtaining]] infected and [[monumental]] blood loss. It is a very [[earnest]] and [[unlucky]] ending, but a great one. I love this movie and recommend it to anyone that is looking for a memorable flick. The story is in depth, everything is explained from beginning to end, and nothing corny at all in any way or manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 4581 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Marie Dressler [[carries]] this Depression-era drama about a kindly bank owner, which recently aired on TCM during their April Fools comedy month. [[If]] you come with the expectation of big laughs courtesy the Dressler-Polly Moran team, you'll be disappointed, as this is really a very downbeat film. It's [[also]] very poorly [[made]], surprisingly so considering it came from MGM. Leonard Smith's bare bones cinematography is strictly from the 'set up the camera and don't move it' school, frequently to the detriment of the [[cast]], who [[find]] themselves delivering lines off screen (it's like a pan and scan print before such [[existed]]!) or having their heads cut off. The film doesn't even have a credited director, underlying the [[apparent]] fly by night nature of the production. [[Overall]], it's an unsatisfying [[mess]], with Dressler frequently over-emoting and only that bizarre, final reel dash to the bathroom to set it apart. Marie Dressler [[carry]] this Depression-era drama about a kindly bank owner, which recently aired on TCM during their April Fools comedy month. [[Though]] you come with the expectation of big laughs courtesy the Dressler-Polly Moran team, you'll be disappointed, as this is really a very downbeat film. It's [[apart]] very poorly [[introduced]], surprisingly so considering it came from MGM. Leonard Smith's bare bones cinematography is strictly from the 'set up the camera and don't move it' school, frequently to the detriment of the [[casting]], who [[found]] themselves delivering lines off screen (it's like a pan and scan print before such [[prevailed]]!) or having their heads cut off. The film doesn't even have a credited director, underlying the [[visible]] fly by night nature of the production. [[Whole]], it's an unsatisfying [[chaos]], with Dressler frequently over-emoting and only that bizarre, final reel dash to the bathroom to set it apart. --------------------------------------------- Result 4582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Can only be described as awful. It is bad to start with and then gets even more bad. When you start you really have to watch it through because it is impossible to believe that it can get worse - but fear not because it does. Another poorly written script for a donkey director for no-talent offspring of past movie stars. It's hard to decide if the script is worse than the acting or whether the directing is worse than both. As for the hero - well he belts up everyone including one scene where he beats the living daylights out of the tough by swinging open the wardrobe door and smashing him against the window with it. And in another scene he gets thrown through a window and crashes 20ft onto concrete - doesn't even blink - then gets up immediately and gets stuck into the baddies. This is a really ridiculous movie. Lucky it only cost me $1 to hire. --------------------------------------------- Result 4583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my all time favourite films, ever. Just beautiful, full of human emotion, wit, humour, intelligence. The story grows, as does the lesson of life, just a wonderful film in so many ways.

The cast are also fantasic..... a great selection of the finest British talent around. I loved them all for every diverse element brought into the film.

Italy has to be one of the most romantic places to form a story such as this, - everything about this film works.

I love it :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Zero]] day has a purpose and this is not [[simply]] entertainment, it [[delivers]] a [[message]] about its specialised [[subject]] school [[shootings]]. Charting the [[lives]] of two friends [[Andre]] and Cal leading up to an attack on their high school.

Whilst the movie [[started]] in [[somewhat]] unassuming fashion, an impromptu announcement of the coming attack in amateurish teenage style followed by some brief encounters with the boys families. It is not long before we are down to business with the [[boys]] showing us their collection of guns, their fetishistic [[love]] of them, their sprawling sporadic narcissistic fantasies and even in a controversial scene how to build pipe bombs.

So what is the movie trying to say? What is really motivating these soon to be killers. It seems hard to really pinpoint. They certainly do not come across as cold blooded psychopaths yet they are planning an act of sheer brutality. This brings me to what I feel is the [[genius]] in part of Zero day. Cal and Andre talk constantly about how much they are on a different [[level]], how above the rest of us they are and how they will 'leave us all behind.' Like the columbine killers they truly feel superior. Like Nietzsche's res sentiment Cal and Andre's value system seems to have been born out of rejection from their society. Yet we are given only glimpses of this, an expression of hatred for a popular athlete for example. So where is the motivation? What I feel is that Coccio portrayed two individuals desperate to make a statement of superiority a gesture of their power yet who have no reasonable venue for it. Hence they turn to mass murder and the kind of which that will garner them more attention than they could ever realise. This is why in part school shooters seem able to carry out atrocious acts despite coming from good stable loving homes. The murder is part of a fantasy, Cal and Andre are totally lost in their fantasy they almost fail to see the reality of their actions. They turn fantasy into tragedy.

What is secondly most [[enthralling]] about this film is the character development and the unique dependence Cal and Andre have on each other. Andre is throughout the film overtly the leader of the two, Cal's embrace of his demeanour and attire seem somewhat forced. Andre is uptight, Andre is intense and serious. He completely shuns others except for his family, he is meticulous and precise about everything he does and for a while appears the prime mover in the plot to attack the school. Yet he is likable in his own way, he does not embrace teenage nonsense and in part we feel compelled to agree with him, yet these moments are shattered by Andre's fleeting gestures of violence towards us the audience treating us as both confidante and potential victim. Cal on the other hand seems more relaxed than Andre, more accepting of reality. Yet he is in his own way dominant. We have many personal moments of introspection with Cal's video diary, scenes when he is alone and apart from Andre. Cal seems to be struggling with his own personal demons and using their plan to exorcise himself of them. Andre is jealous of Cal going to the prom with an old friend, he wants Cal all to himself. Cal placates Andre and encourages him. For the first time in his life Andre seems to have found someone who believes in him and who admires him he cannot lose it. Whilst Cal has found someone offering him a way out.

The movie certainly picks up pace and improves as it nears its grim conclusion. There is an excellent moment when Cal attends the high school prom. Suddenly the star of the movie becomes shy and introverted, not at all at ease with his peers. Yet we are inclined to feel more connection with Cal than with the raucous bawdy crowd screaming juvenile obscenities whilst drinking heavily in their limo. Theirs is an episode all too common and recognisable. We do not want to relate to them, when it is over and Cal is back with Andre silently preparing one of their final videos we like the characters feel once again at ease safe in the fantasy world they created. We feel like shunning the masses as they have.

The penultimate scene is superb. The final video sees Andre and Cal arming themselves in their car just moments before attacking. It is all too real and truly creates a sense of impending doom. By know we know Cal and Andre and are realising they are about to actually do it, with a kind of morbid fascination we are also relishing the films catharsis.

The massacre shot in CCTV fashion is at times shocking, and whilst it was certainly the perfect choice to depict the massacre if we were going to it is not void of flaws. What is most significant is the sudden radical change of perception we have of Cal and Andre, looking at them in the this person suddenly they are the callous killers we knew they would become yet refused to acknowledge that they would. It is violent and real, our heroes have become monsters and the reality of their fantasy is a terrible tragedy, which costs them everything.

The final scene shows a group of teens filming themselves burning the crosses erected for Andre and cal in disgust that they have been memorialised. Having known Andre and Cal we can only feel almost a sadness that they are actually gone forever and that they certainly did not win anything.

Zero day is a must see for anyone interested in these violent acts sensationalised by the media. It is a character study well worth experiencing. [[Null]] day has a purpose and this is not [[exclusively]] entertainment, it [[offerings]] a [[messaging]] about its specialised [[subjected]] school [[gunshot]]. Charting the [[life]] of two friends [[Anders]] and Cal leading up to an attack on their high school.

Whilst the movie [[launches]] in [[rather]] unassuming fashion, an impromptu announcement of the coming attack in amateurish teenage style followed by some brief encounters with the boys families. It is not long before we are down to business with the [[guys]] showing us their collection of guns, their fetishistic [[likes]] of them, their sprawling sporadic narcissistic fantasies and even in a controversial scene how to build pipe bombs.

So what is the movie trying to say? What is really motivating these soon to be killers. It seems hard to really pinpoint. They certainly do not come across as cold blooded psychopaths yet they are planning an act of sheer brutality. This brings me to what I feel is the [[engineers]] in part of Zero day. Cal and Andre talk constantly about how much they are on a different [[grades]], how above the rest of us they are and how they will 'leave us all behind.' Like the columbine killers they truly feel superior. Like Nietzsche's res sentiment Cal and Andre's value system seems to have been born out of rejection from their society. Yet we are given only glimpses of this, an expression of hatred for a popular athlete for example. So where is the motivation? What I feel is that Coccio portrayed two individuals desperate to make a statement of superiority a gesture of their power yet who have no reasonable venue for it. Hence they turn to mass murder and the kind of which that will garner them more attention than they could ever realise. This is why in part school shooters seem able to carry out atrocious acts despite coming from good stable loving homes. The murder is part of a fantasy, Cal and Andre are totally lost in their fantasy they almost fail to see the reality of their actions. They turn fantasy into tragedy.

What is secondly most [[riveting]] about this film is the character development and the unique dependence Cal and Andre have on each other. Andre is throughout the film overtly the leader of the two, Cal's embrace of his demeanour and attire seem somewhat forced. Andre is uptight, Andre is intense and serious. He completely shuns others except for his family, he is meticulous and precise about everything he does and for a while appears the prime mover in the plot to attack the school. Yet he is likable in his own way, he does not embrace teenage nonsense and in part we feel compelled to agree with him, yet these moments are shattered by Andre's fleeting gestures of violence towards us the audience treating us as both confidante and potential victim. Cal on the other hand seems more relaxed than Andre, more accepting of reality. Yet he is in his own way dominant. We have many personal moments of introspection with Cal's video diary, scenes when he is alone and apart from Andre. Cal seems to be struggling with his own personal demons and using their plan to exorcise himself of them. Andre is jealous of Cal going to the prom with an old friend, he wants Cal all to himself. Cal placates Andre and encourages him. For the first time in his life Andre seems to have found someone who believes in him and who admires him he cannot lose it. Whilst Cal has found someone offering him a way out.

The movie certainly picks up pace and improves as it nears its grim conclusion. There is an excellent moment when Cal attends the high school prom. Suddenly the star of the movie becomes shy and introverted, not at all at ease with his peers. Yet we are inclined to feel more connection with Cal than with the raucous bawdy crowd screaming juvenile obscenities whilst drinking heavily in their limo. Theirs is an episode all too common and recognisable. We do not want to relate to them, when it is over and Cal is back with Andre silently preparing one of their final videos we like the characters feel once again at ease safe in the fantasy world they created. We feel like shunning the masses as they have.

The penultimate scene is superb. The final video sees Andre and Cal arming themselves in their car just moments before attacking. It is all too real and truly creates a sense of impending doom. By know we know Cal and Andre and are realising they are about to actually do it, with a kind of morbid fascination we are also relishing the films catharsis.

The massacre shot in CCTV fashion is at times shocking, and whilst it was certainly the perfect choice to depict the massacre if we were going to it is not void of flaws. What is most significant is the sudden radical change of perception we have of Cal and Andre, looking at them in the this person suddenly they are the callous killers we knew they would become yet refused to acknowledge that they would. It is violent and real, our heroes have become monsters and the reality of their fantasy is a terrible tragedy, which costs them everything.

The final scene shows a group of teens filming themselves burning the crosses erected for Andre and cal in disgust that they have been memorialised. Having known Andre and Cal we can only feel almost a sadness that they are actually gone forever and that they certainly did not win anything.

Zero day is a must see for anyone interested in these violent acts sensationalised by the media. It is a character study well worth experiencing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] ... This isn't the first time Stanley [[blurred]] the distinction between genres to such great effect, either. In Dr. Strangelove you had a comedy about a [[horrific]] situation, and here the basis is a terrifying scenario which actually yields some very [[funny]] [[moments]]. Slow-burning [[madness]] and attempting to kill one's family isn't hilarious of course, but the [[dialogue]] is very [[knowing]] ("five [[months]] of [[peace]] is just what I [[want]]... ") and there is a [[terrific]] drinking scene which [[would]] be riotous if you included just one [[type]] of spirit, but is spine-chilling when you factor in the other.

I [[disagree]] with those who say that the [[hotel]] has a negligible [[effect]] on [[Jack]] Torrance in the filmed version. The [[cues]] Nicholson [[provides]] the audience as an [[actor]] merely hint at the potential for madness, which is only [[reinforced]] when we [[learn]] that the [[head]] of the [[family]] has struggled with [[alcoholism]] and is [[emotionally]] [[distant]] from his [[wife]] and son. The environment that he is in, [[however]], then [[absorbs]] those [[personality]] [[defects]] and unleashes them upon his consciousness. [[In]] much the same [[way]] as buildings are [[sometimes]] [[thought]] to [[soak]] up [[events]] that [[happen]] there, the [[hotel]] [[feeds]] on the [[frailties]] of a [[troubled]] but [[sane]] [[man]], and [[uses]] his [[weaknesses]] against him to [[eventually]] [[take]] him beyond the point of no [[return]]. He may have dormant [[flaws]] in his [[personality]] before he [[arrives]], but to me the [[Overlook]] itself is the trigger that sets them off.

Kubrick's cold and [[detached]] [[approach]] to [[directing]] [[works]] [[splendidly]] for a [[chilly]] horror [[film]], and the [[unpredictable]] force of nature that is Jack Nicholson teeters all the time between [[making]] you [[giggle]] and scaring the [[wits]] out of you. [[When]] he [[explodes]], you won't be sure how far he can [[go]]. [[Together]] they [[made]] a [[great]] team and with a [[blend]] of their talents [[gave]] us a [[classic]]. [[If]] you [[want]] a [[great]] [[viewing]] experience, then this is an [[example]] that well and [[truly]] [[shines]]... ... This isn't the first time Stanley [[shadowy]] the distinction between genres to such great effect, either. In Dr. Strangelove you had a comedy about a [[scary]] situation, and here the basis is a terrifying scenario which actually yields some very [[amusing]] [[times]]. Slow-burning [[stupidity]] and attempting to kill one's family isn't hilarious of course, but the [[dialog]] is very [[aware]] ("five [[month]] of [[pacifist]] is just what I [[wanted]]... ") and there is a [[wondrous]] drinking scene which [[ought]] be riotous if you included just one [[typing]] of spirit, but is spine-chilling when you factor in the other.

I [[disagreement]] with those who say that the [[motel]] has a negligible [[impacts]] on [[Jacques]] Torrance in the filmed version. The [[pointers]] Nicholson [[provide]] the audience as an [[actress]] merely hint at the potential for madness, which is only [[strengthen]] when we [[learnt]] that the [[leader]] of the [[families]] has struggled with [[alcohol]] and is [[excitedly]] [[remote]] from his [[women]] and son. The environment that he is in, [[instead]], then [[consumes]] those [[subjectivity]] [[irregularities]] and unleashes them upon his consciousness. [[For]] much the same [[routing]] as buildings are [[intermittently]] [[thinking]] to [[dunk]] up [[phenomena]] that [[occur]] there, the [[motel]] [[eats]] on the [[deficiencies]] of a [[disturbed]] but [[rational]] [[bloke]], and [[employs]] his [[inadequacies]] against him to [[ultimately]] [[taking]] him beyond the point of no [[comeback]]. He may have dormant [[defects]] in his [[subjectivity]] before he [[happens]], but to me the [[Forget]] itself is the trigger that sets them off.

Kubrick's cold and [[separated]] [[approaches]] to [[instructing]] [[cooperation]] [[divinely]] for a [[frigid]] horror [[cinematic]], and the [[erratic]] force of nature that is Jack Nicholson teeters all the time between [[doing]] you [[joke]] and scaring the [[spirit]] out of you. [[Whenever]] he [[bomb]], you won't be sure how far he can [[going]]. [[Jointly]] they [[introduced]] a [[wondrous]] team and with a [[mixes]] of their talents [[handed]] us a [[conventional]]. [[Though]] you [[wish]] a [[super]] [[visualization]] experience, then this is an [[instances]] that well and [[truthfully]] [[glows]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 4586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once again, Pia Zadora, the woman who owes her entire career to her husband, proves she can't act. This disaster of a film butchers the Harold Robbins novel. Ray Liotta must have been hogtied and carried to the set to appear in this one.

Avoid this at all costs. I doubt even doing the MST3K thing would save it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A haunting piece that the discerning horror film fan will fall upon with gratitude. Keep your Freddys and your Jasons -- this film is in the same company as "The Haunting" (the original). Lyrical and truthful, it stays with you long into the night, much like those terrifying CBS Radio Mystery Theatre shows. A smart rent. --------------------------------------------- Result 4588 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] actually... that "video camera" [[effect]], is just that, it's an [[effect]], a [[rather]] [[good]] one.. (u don't know much about [[directing]] a film do you?) this film is in fact [[BETTER]] than the [[original]], it's [[great]] fun to watch, made for [[TV]], doesn't [[need]] to follow any rules. I [[find]] it [[hard]] to watch number 1 because of how he kills the first [[girl]], its disturbing. and all the time we are routing for Judd [[Nelson]] to get away with it, we as the [[viewers]] are on his side. i hope one day we will [[see]] a 3rd [[cabin]] by the lake but i doubt it. [[Watching]] this [[film]] you can understand how [[real]] movies are [[made]], as this is sort of like a [[film]] [[within]] a [[film]]. Judd is one of the scariest villains ever, and he's more [[realistic]], he doesn't just mindlessly chop people up like in other [[horrors]]. actually... that "video camera" [[repercussions]], is just that, it's an [[repercussions]], a [[comparatively]] [[buena]] one.. (u don't know much about [[instructing]] a film do you?) this film is in fact [[NICER]] than the [[upfront]], it's [[wondrous]] fun to watch, made for [[TELEVISIONS]], doesn't [[needed]] to follow any rules. I [[found]] it [[strenuous]] to watch number 1 because of how he kills the first [[chick]], its disturbing. and all the time we are routing for Judd [[Nielsen]] to get away with it, we as the [[audiences]] are on his side. i hope one day we will [[seeing]] a 3rd [[stateroom]] by the lake but i doubt it. [[Staring]] this [[cinematography]] you can understand how [[actual]] movies are [[introduced]], as this is sort of like a [[films]] [[inside]] a [[cinema]]. Judd is one of the scariest villains ever, and he's more [[practical]], he doesn't just mindlessly chop people up like in other [[terrors]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I read so many comments that I, too, shared about remembering this movie and wanting so badly to see it again but I didn't know the name of the movie. Thankfully, because of doing a search and finding the title on this site, I read the comments left here and realized that this was the movie I remembered. I then did a search and did find the movie and was so thrilled to be able to watch the movie once more 40 years later. Because of this site and your comments, you helped me and so I want to thank all of you. I want to share how I was able to find this movie for all of you who were looking for a copy as well. It was on the VHS version of Wonderful World of Disney's "Call it Courage" which contained 2 movies, the second one being "The Legend of the Boy and the Eagle." It touched me now as much as it did 40 years ago and now I own my own copy of it. I think it is only available on VHS. I found it on ebay and I have seen several copies of it there. Enjoy it, I know I did!

It is a wonderful story about the love of a boy and the eagle he took care of. When it was time to sacrifice the eagle, the boy set the eagle free because he couldn't allow it to be killed. After the boy was forced to leave the tribe for punishment after freeing the eagle, the eagle, too, saved the boy's life and more than that, taught him how to survive. The closeness that the boy and the eagle shared in the wilderness was so moving and the filming was really remarkable. What a wonderful era this was. I have never seen anything come even close to this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4590 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This HAS to be the worst movie I've ever attempted to watch. In the first 15 minutes, there wasn't anything to keep my interest in this movie. I was on vacation at the time, and had plenty of time to devote to a just-for-the-fun-of-it movie. The condo we were staying in had this movie in stock -- they must have got it from the $1 store or something.

If you like Adam Sandler, this is nothing like any other movie he's made. This started with a bad premise and then just got worse. There's nothing even remotely funny in it.

I've watched a lot of movies, including some I didn't care for. But if you decide to waste your time on this movie, don't say I didn't warn you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I went to this movie expecting a concise movie relating the effect the Son of Sam had on the society. I didn't expect Spike Lee to force-feed me more [[garbage]] on racial tension, mob-justice, or the inability of the common citizen to make a choice under pressure by peers. Lee has presented an extreme [[opinion]].

The entire movie could have been more effective if in a 90-min format with more focus, less tangential sub-plots.

Don't even bother renting the video unless you passionately enjoy Spike Lee; in such a case, the theatre is worth it. This is not an escapist movie. I went to this movie expecting a concise movie relating the effect the Son of Sam had on the society. I didn't expect Spike Lee to force-feed me more [[litter]] on racial tension, mob-justice, or the inability of the common citizen to make a choice under pressure by peers. Lee has presented an extreme [[visualise]].

The entire movie could have been more effective if in a 90-min format with more focus, less tangential sub-plots.

Don't even bother renting the video unless you passionately enjoy Spike Lee; in such a case, the theatre is worth it. This is not an escapist movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4592 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] I am a Jane Eyre lover and a purist, and this version includes [[almost]] all of the [[important]] details of the [[book]], and the [[characters]] are [[portrayed]] as I imagined them. [[Jane]] Eyre is a complex [[story]] of [[great]] [[richness]] and can't be [[delivered]] [[properly]] in a feature-length [[format]], so it [[needs]] a TV mini-series. Timothy Dalton's Rochester is [[probably]] the best ever. There has been a [[lot]] of [[discussion]] about how [[attractive]] he is and his [[age]]. [[In]] the [[book]], [[Jane]] (the [[narrator]]) [[describes]] him as "about 35" and not [[young]], but not [[yet]] middle aged. I [[think]] Timothy Dalton was about 38 when he [[made]] this, so that is about right. [[Also]], we only have Jane's [[opinion]] of whether Rochester is handsome. She only just [[met]] him and he [[asks]] her bluntly what she [[thinks]]. As an inexperienced and humble [[girl]], I can't [[imagine]] her [[saying]] she did [[think]] him handsome. The [[actor]] [[playing]] Rochester [[needs]] to [[show]] us the [[character]] of the [[man]], and this is [[fulfilled]] to perfection. I [[love]] the [[relationship]] between the two leads, which is the [[crucial]] [[thing]] about this story, and the [[humour]] of their [[encounters]]. Other versions have [[blown]] it, but this [[gets]] it right. The 2006 version with [[Toby]] [[Stephens]] (aged 37 years) is in [[progress]] on BBC1 and is very good indeed, so I will [[decide]] whether that is my [[favourite]] when it is completed.

On [[viewing]] this series again, after watching the 2006 [[version]], I have [[decided]] that this version with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clark is the [[best]]! Charlotte Bronte's [[dialogue]] is [[preserved]] and this is [[essential]] to the power of the [[story]]. Modernisation just doesn't work - it's a Victorian [[story]] and having [[archaic]] poetic speech suits the [[characters]]. This version has an [[excellent]] cast - Zelah Clark is [[tiny]] and the [[difference]] in height between her and Rochester is [[important]]; Timothy Dalton has real [[presence]] and is an [[amazing]] [[actor]]. There are no extra scenes to [[divert]] from the plot and the [[screenplay]] [[includes]] all the [[essential]] scenes, but leaves out [[unnecessary]] [[details]], making it to the point and gripping. I [[recommend]] it to all [[true]] Jane Eyre [[fans]]. I am a Jane Eyre lover and a purist, and this version includes [[hardly]] all of the [[substantial]] details of the [[ledger]], and the [[attribute]] are [[depicted]] as I imagined them. [[Jeanne]] Eyre is a complex [[saga]] of [[huge]] [[riches]] and can't be [[gave]] [[satisfactorily]] in a feature-length [[layout]], so it [[need]] a TV mini-series. Timothy Dalton's Rochester is [[potentially]] the best ever. There has been a [[lots]] of [[debate]] about how [[tempting]] he is and his [[older]]. [[For]] the [[books]], [[Jeanne]] (the [[announcer]]) [[outlined]] him as "about 35" and not [[youthful]], but not [[again]] middle aged. I [[thoughts]] Timothy Dalton was about 38 when he [[accomplished]] this, so that is about right. [[Moreover]], we only have Jane's [[visualizing]] of whether Rochester is handsome. She only just [[fulfilled]] him and he [[asked]] her bluntly what she [[believes]]. As an inexperienced and humble [[daughter]], I can't [[suppose]] her [[arguing]] she did [[thinks]] him handsome. The [[protagonist]] [[gaming]] Rochester [[should]] to [[display]] us the [[trait]] of the [[males]], and this is [[complied]] to perfection. I [[amour]] the [[nexus]] between the two leads, which is the [[keys]] [[stuff]] about this story, and the [[mood]] of their [[clashes]]. Other versions have [[molten]] it, but this [[obtains]] it right. The 2006 version with [[Mendel]] [[Stevens]] (aged 37 years) is in [[advances]] on BBC1 and is very good indeed, so I will [[decides]] whether that is my [[favored]] when it is completed.

On [[visualizing]] this series again, after watching the 2006 [[stepping]], I have [[opted]] that this version with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clark is the [[nicest]]! Charlotte Bronte's [[talks]] is [[kept]] and this is [[necessary]] to the power of the [[narratives]]. Modernisation just doesn't work - it's a Victorian [[narratives]] and having [[stale]] poetic speech suits the [[characteristic]]. This version has an [[super]] cast - Zelah Clark is [[smallest]] and the [[variance]] in height between her and Rochester is [[sizable]]; Timothy Dalton has real [[attendance]] and is an [[awesome]] [[protagonist]]. There are no extra scenes to [[deflect]] from the plot and the [[script]] [[involves]] all the [[important]] scenes, but leaves out [[useless]] [[detail]], making it to the point and gripping. I [[recommendation]] it to all [[truthful]] Jane Eyre [[stalkers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4593 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] This is what we can do to each other. This is the [[sort]] that [[everbody]] should [[see]] at [[least]] once.

It does not [[glorify]] [[world]]. It [[shows]] that it is the [[everyday]] [[person]] who is [[killed]], mained and debased by [[war]]. The [[person]] on the "other side" [[eats]] [[sleeps]], [[laughs]] and [[cry]] just as we do. This is what we can do to each other. This is the [[kinds]] that [[eveyone]] should [[seeing]] at [[fewer]] once.

It does not [[beautify]] [[globe]]. It [[exposition]] that it is the [[routine]] [[persona]] who is [[assassinated]], mained and debased by [[warfare]]. The [[persona]] on the "other side" [[gobbles]] [[asleep]], [[chuckles]] and [[cries]] just as we do. --------------------------------------------- Result 4594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I went on a visit to one of my relatives a while back, and we popped by a [[theatre]], so we'd thought we'd [[go]] in and give this film a [[go]]. What a [[mistake]]! This film is awful in every [[department]]. I'd never heard of the film before, and literally everyone still hasn't. No wonder, this is as rank as it [[gets]]. It's a [[comedy]], so it says, well the only [[thing]] [[funny]] is the [[ability]], or [[lack]] of it, of the [[director]] to make such a [[film]]. Getting so close to [[Christmas]], this should be titled how to under-cook a [[turkey]] in [[nearly]] one and a half hours - or [[however]] [[long]] it was, as I walked out. [[At]] the [[end]] of the [[film]], you'll come out [[feeling]] as [[though]] you've been food poisoned on a sick [[turkey]], and [[regret]] you wasted your [[time]] on such dribble. Who knows why such [[things]] [[get]] [[made]]. Some people had walked out from the [[theatre]] before the [[film]] was well over, and I blame myself for not walking out a lot [[earlier]]. It really [[annoys]] me that you [[pay]] [[good]] [[money]] to see something [[decent]], and all that you come out and see is a poor [[TV]] [[movie]] that should be [[showed]] at 2 o'clock in the morning, in fact, it's that [[bad]], day [[time]] TV shouldn't be [[showing]] it. What [[else]] can a say...[[probably]] not [[enough]] [[bad]] [[words]] [[could]] do it justice. I went on a visit to one of my relatives a while back, and we popped by a [[theaters]], so we'd thought we'd [[going]] in and give this film a [[going]]. What a [[mistaken]]! This film is awful in every [[ministry]]. I'd never heard of the film before, and literally everyone still hasn't. No wonder, this is as rank as it [[got]]. It's a [[farce]], so it says, well the only [[stuff]] [[droll]] is the [[capacities]], or [[lacks]] of it, of the [[headmaster]] to make such a [[filmmaking]]. Getting so close to [[Navidad]], this should be titled how to under-cook a [[turk]] in [[roughly]] one and a half hours - or [[conversely]] [[lengthy]] it was, as I walked out. [[Under]] the [[ceases]] of the [[filmmaking]], you'll come out [[sensation]] as [[while]] you've been food poisoned on a sick [[turk]], and [[regretting]] you wasted your [[moment]] on such dribble. Who knows why such [[matters]] [[gets]] [[accomplished]]. Some people had walked out from the [[theaters]] before the [[filmmaking]] was well over, and I blame myself for not walking out a lot [[previously]]. It really [[angers]] me that you [[pays]] [[alright]] [[cash]] to see something [[presentable]], and all that you come out and see is a poor [[TELEVISIONS]] [[filmmaking]] that should be [[revealed]] at 2 o'clock in the morning, in fact, it's that [[negative]], day [[moment]] TV shouldn't be [[proving]] it. What [[otherwise]] can a say...[[maybe]] not [[satisfactorily]] [[unfavorable]] [[mots]] [[did]] do it justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 4595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i have just finished watching this film in my GCSE history class. it was thrilling and was a brilliant insight to what actually happened to Steve Biko during the time of the Apartheid law. How anybody can say that this film was the most boring or dull 2 and a half hours of their lives i don't know because it had me hooked from start to finish. it was great how Denzel Washington portrayed him and showed how he was fighting against the Apartheid law and to get equal rights for black people. In one part Steve Biko says to a policeman we are just as weak and human as you are, this is to show them that he and all of the other black people in south Africa were no different to the whites. Donald Woods inspired me because he fort for what he believed in and did not believe totally in apartheid. He and Steve Biko formed a very strong friendship that shook south Africa and went on to awaken the world. i very much enjoyed this film and strongly recommend this to people. it helped me see that racism is not right and that everybody is equal, their fate should not be determined by the colour of somebody's skin. n --------------------------------------------- Result 4596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Berlin-born in 1942 Margarethe von Trotta was an actress and now she is a very important director and writer. She has been [[described]], [[perhaps]] even unfairly caricatured, as a director whose commitment to bringing a woman's sensibility to the screen outweighs her artistic strengths. "Rosenstrasse," which has garnered mixed and even strange reviews (the New York Times article was one of the most [[negatively]] aggressive [[reviews]] I've ever read in that paper) is not a [[perfect]] film. It is a [[fine]] movie and a [[testament]] to a [[rare]] coalescing of successful opposition to the genocidal Nazi regime by, of all peoples, generically powerless Germans demonstrating in a Berlin street.

Co-writer von Trotta uses the actual Rosenstrasse incident in the context of a young woman's search for information about her mother's never disclosed life as a child in the German capital during World War II.

The husband of Ruth Weinstein (Jutta Lampe) has died and in a surprising reversion to an orthodox Jewish lifestyle apparently hitherto in long abeyance, Ruth not only "sits shivah" (the Jews' week-long mourning ritual) but she insists on following the strict proscriptions of her faith. Her apartment in New York City reflects the [[affluence]] secured by her deceased spouse's labors. Her American-born daughter, Hannah (Maria Schrader) and her brother are a bit put-off by mom's assumption of restrictive orthodox Jewish practices but they pitch in. The mother coldly rejects the presence of Hannah's fiance, a non-Jew named Luis (Fedja van Huet). A domestic crisis might well erupt as Ruth warns that she'll disown Hannah if she doesn't give up doting, handsome Luis. Stay tuned.

A cousin arrives to pay her respects and also drops clues to an interested Hannah about a wartime mystery about mom's childhood in Berlin. Hannah is intrigued - she queries her mom who [[resolutely]] refuses to discuss that part of her life. This is very, very [[realistic]]. I grew up with parents who fled Nazi Germany just in time and I knew many children whose families, in whole but usually in part, escaped the Holocaust. Those days were simply not discussed.

So Hannah, having learned that a German gentile woman saved Ruth's life, traipses off to Berlin hoping to find the savior still breathing. Were she not, this would have been a very short film. But Ruth, pretending to be a historian, locates 90 year-old Lena Fischer (Doris Schade), now a widow. As the happy-to-be-interviewed but shaken up by repressed memories Lena tells her story, the scenes shift fairly seamlessly between present day Berlin and the war-time capital.

The young Lena of 1943 (Katja Riemann) was a fine pianist married to a Jewish violinist, Fabian Fischer (Martin Feifel). With the advent of the Nazi regime he was required to use "Israel" as a middle name just as Jewish women had to add "Sarah" to their names(incidentally I wish IMDb had not given Fabian's name on its characters list with the false "Israel" included-it simply perpetuates a name applied by Nazis as a mark of classification and degradation).

While Germany deported most of its Jewish population to concentration camps, those married to "Aryans" were exempted. For a time. Until 1943 when the regime decided to take them too (most were men; a minority were Jewish women married to non-Jews). The roundup is shown here in all its frightening intensity.

The young Lena tries to locate her husband. All she and many other women know is that they're confined in a building on Rosenstrasse. The crowd of anxious women builds up, some piteously seeking help from German officers who predictably refuse aid and also verbally abuse them ("Jew-loving whore" being one appellation). As a subplot Lena more or less adopts eight-year-old Ruth who hid when her mother was seized (remember, Ruth is now sitting shiva in Manhattan). The child Ruth is fetchingly portrayed by Svea Lohde.

Through increasingly angry protestations the women finally prevail. The men, and a handful of women, are released. As in the real story the Nazis gave in, one of the rare, almost unprecedented times when the madmen acknowledged defeat in their homicidal agenda (another was the termination of the euthanasia campaign to rid the Reich of mental defectives and chronic invalids but that's another story).

Von Trotta builds up the tension and each woman's story is both personal and universal. Hannah continues to prod the aging Lena who slowly, one gathers, begins to suspect she's not dealing with an ordinary historian but rather someone with a need to learn about the girl she rescued, the child whose mother was murdered.

The contrasts between Rosenstrasse of 1943, a set, and the street today in a bustling, rebuilt, unified Berlin provide a recurring thematic element. Today's Berlin bears the heritage but not the scars of a monstrous past. Von Trotta makes that point very well.

The main actors are uniformly impressive. Lena's husband while strong is also shown as totally helpless in the snare of confinement with a likely outlook of deportation (which is shown to have been clearly understood by all characters - including the local police and military - as a one-way trip to oblivion). The older Ruth is catalytically forced to confront demons long suppressed in her happy New York life. Hannah is very believable as a young woman whose father's death triggers a need to discover her family's past. These things happen (although the Times's critic appears not to know that).

Von Trotta's hand is sure but not perfect. A scene with Goebbels at a soiree enjoying Lena's violin playing is unnecessary and distractive. The suggestion that she may have gone to bed with the propaganda minister, the most fanatical top-level Hitler worshiper, to save her husband detracts from the wondrous accomplishment of the demonstrating spouses and relatives. Most of the German officers come from central casting and are molded by the Erich von Stroheim "copy and paste" school of Teutonic nastiness. But that's understandable.

The Rosenstrasse story has been the subject of books and articles and some claim it's a paradigm case for arguing that many more Jews could have been saved had more Germans protested. Unfortunately that argument is nonsense. The German women who occupied Rosenstrasse were deeply and understandably self-interested. Most Germans were located on a line somewhere between passive and virulent anti-Semitism. THAT'S why the Rosenstrasse protest was virtually singular. Whether one buys or rejects the Goldenhagen thesis that most Germans were willing accomplices of the actual murderers it just can not be denied that pre-Nazi endemic anti-Semitism erupted into a virulent strain from 1933 on.

The elderly Lena remarks that what was accomplished by the women was "a ray of light" in an evil time. Most of the men and women sprung from a near death trip survived the war. So "a ray of light" it was and von Trotta's movie is a beacon of illumination showing that some were saved by the courage of largely ordinary women and for every life saved an occasion for celebration exists. And always will.

9/10 Berlin-born in 1942 Margarethe von Trotta was an actress and now she is a very important director and writer. She has been [[describe]], [[potentially]] even unfairly caricatured, as a director whose commitment to bringing a woman's sensibility to the screen outweighs her artistic strengths. "Rosenstrasse," which has garnered mixed and even strange reviews (the New York Times article was one of the most [[passively]] aggressive [[exam]] I've ever read in that paper) is not a [[impeccable]] film. It is a [[fined]] movie and a [[wills]] to a [[scarce]] coalescing of successful opposition to the genocidal Nazi regime by, of all peoples, generically powerless Germans demonstrating in a Berlin street.

Co-writer von Trotta uses the actual Rosenstrasse incident in the context of a young woman's search for information about her mother's never disclosed life as a child in the German capital during World War II.

The husband of Ruth Weinstein (Jutta Lampe) has died and in a surprising reversion to an orthodox Jewish lifestyle apparently hitherto in long abeyance, Ruth not only "sits shivah" (the Jews' week-long mourning ritual) but she insists on following the strict proscriptions of her faith. Her apartment in New York City reflects the [[opulence]] secured by her deceased spouse's labors. Her American-born daughter, Hannah (Maria Schrader) and her brother are a bit put-off by mom's assumption of restrictive orthodox Jewish practices but they pitch in. The mother coldly rejects the presence of Hannah's fiance, a non-Jew named Luis (Fedja van Huet). A domestic crisis might well erupt as Ruth warns that she'll disown Hannah if she doesn't give up doting, handsome Luis. Stay tuned.

A cousin arrives to pay her respects and also drops clues to an interested Hannah about a wartime mystery about mom's childhood in Berlin. Hannah is intrigued - she queries her mom who [[roundly]] refuses to discuss that part of her life. This is very, very [[hardheaded]]. I grew up with parents who fled Nazi Germany just in time and I knew many children whose families, in whole but usually in part, escaped the Holocaust. Those days were simply not discussed.

So Hannah, having learned that a German gentile woman saved Ruth's life, traipses off to Berlin hoping to find the savior still breathing. Were she not, this would have been a very short film. But Ruth, pretending to be a historian, locates 90 year-old Lena Fischer (Doris Schade), now a widow. As the happy-to-be-interviewed but shaken up by repressed memories Lena tells her story, the scenes shift fairly seamlessly between present day Berlin and the war-time capital.

The young Lena of 1943 (Katja Riemann) was a fine pianist married to a Jewish violinist, Fabian Fischer (Martin Feifel). With the advent of the Nazi regime he was required to use "Israel" as a middle name just as Jewish women had to add "Sarah" to their names(incidentally I wish IMDb had not given Fabian's name on its characters list with the false "Israel" included-it simply perpetuates a name applied by Nazis as a mark of classification and degradation).

While Germany deported most of its Jewish population to concentration camps, those married to "Aryans" were exempted. For a time. Until 1943 when the regime decided to take them too (most were men; a minority were Jewish women married to non-Jews). The roundup is shown here in all its frightening intensity.

The young Lena tries to locate her husband. All she and many other women know is that they're confined in a building on Rosenstrasse. The crowd of anxious women builds up, some piteously seeking help from German officers who predictably refuse aid and also verbally abuse them ("Jew-loving whore" being one appellation). As a subplot Lena more or less adopts eight-year-old Ruth who hid when her mother was seized (remember, Ruth is now sitting shiva in Manhattan). The child Ruth is fetchingly portrayed by Svea Lohde.

Through increasingly angry protestations the women finally prevail. The men, and a handful of women, are released. As in the real story the Nazis gave in, one of the rare, almost unprecedented times when the madmen acknowledged defeat in their homicidal agenda (another was the termination of the euthanasia campaign to rid the Reich of mental defectives and chronic invalids but that's another story).

Von Trotta builds up the tension and each woman's story is both personal and universal. Hannah continues to prod the aging Lena who slowly, one gathers, begins to suspect she's not dealing with an ordinary historian but rather someone with a need to learn about the girl she rescued, the child whose mother was murdered.

The contrasts between Rosenstrasse of 1943, a set, and the street today in a bustling, rebuilt, unified Berlin provide a recurring thematic element. Today's Berlin bears the heritage but not the scars of a monstrous past. Von Trotta makes that point very well.

The main actors are uniformly impressive. Lena's husband while strong is also shown as totally helpless in the snare of confinement with a likely outlook of deportation (which is shown to have been clearly understood by all characters - including the local police and military - as a one-way trip to oblivion). The older Ruth is catalytically forced to confront demons long suppressed in her happy New York life. Hannah is very believable as a young woman whose father's death triggers a need to discover her family's past. These things happen (although the Times's critic appears not to know that).

Von Trotta's hand is sure but not perfect. A scene with Goebbels at a soiree enjoying Lena's violin playing is unnecessary and distractive. The suggestion that she may have gone to bed with the propaganda minister, the most fanatical top-level Hitler worshiper, to save her husband detracts from the wondrous accomplishment of the demonstrating spouses and relatives. Most of the German officers come from central casting and are molded by the Erich von Stroheim "copy and paste" school of Teutonic nastiness. But that's understandable.

The Rosenstrasse story has been the subject of books and articles and some claim it's a paradigm case for arguing that many more Jews could have been saved had more Germans protested. Unfortunately that argument is nonsense. The German women who occupied Rosenstrasse were deeply and understandably self-interested. Most Germans were located on a line somewhere between passive and virulent anti-Semitism. THAT'S why the Rosenstrasse protest was virtually singular. Whether one buys or rejects the Goldenhagen thesis that most Germans were willing accomplices of the actual murderers it just can not be denied that pre-Nazi endemic anti-Semitism erupted into a virulent strain from 1933 on.

The elderly Lena remarks that what was accomplished by the women was "a ray of light" in an evil time. Most of the men and women sprung from a near death trip survived the war. So "a ray of light" it was and von Trotta's movie is a beacon of illumination showing that some were saved by the courage of largely ordinary women and for every life saved an occasion for celebration exists. And always will.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4597 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] As [[always]], [[controversial]] movies like this have mixed reviews. You [[either]] love it or you hate it, and not everyone will like this movie. This [[shows]] the perspective of the killers, which is something I personally feel is something [[important]] to consider. You [[may]] hate them, you may claim to understand them and feel as though you can relate, but regardless this movie will make you think about [[school]] [[shootings]] from a [[different]] perspective.

The movie is shot entirely using a hand-held camera, [[something]] that I think works [[quite]] well as it makes it more [[realistic]]. It is [[told]] [[completely]] from the killers point of view, from their "[[missions]]" to [[family]] outings, all [[leading]] up the [[big]] day "[[Zero]] Day" in which they are [[planning]] on a [[massacre]] at their [[school]]. [[Zero]] Day does not [[offer]] answers, but merely [[presents]] a glimpse at the [[lives]] of two [[troubled]] young [[boys]] and [[lets]] the [[audience]] [[decide]] for themselves. Our [[feelings]] towards the [[boys]] are [[something]] mixed between sympathy and [[hatred]], but [[yet]] we are left [[confused]] as to why two ordinary young boys [[would]] do such a [[thing]]. They are [[shown]] to be [[surprisingly]] [[normal]], [[typical]] [[teenage]] boys leading ordinary [[lives]], and if we didn't know what they were planning we wouldn't [[expect]] a thing (They make it [[clear]] throughout the whole movie that no-one else knows about their [[plan]])

The acting is [[extremely]] good [[considering]] the two actors are complete unknowns. We can only [[hope]] to see more work from the both of them in the future. Despite how this is a fictionalized [[movie]], one cannot [[help]] but notice the [[obvious]] [[similarities]] to Columbine. Calvin and [[Andre]] are scarily [[similar]] to Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, (not so much in looks, but in [[manner]]) As [[someone]] who has researched Columbine very [[extensively]], I [[could]] see the [[similarities]] and it is [[almost]] [[certainly]] [[based]] on it.

The actual massacre is [[shown]] through surveillance cameras at the [[school]] and is one of the most [[chilling]] [[things]] I have ever [[seen]]. I was [[completely]] in shock after [[seeing]] it, and its a feeling that [[stays]] around for a while. It is very [[realistic]] and well-done, and it is very [[difficult]] to watch.

All in all [[Zero]] Day is an [[excellent]] movie, and I [[think]] [[everyone]] should at [[least]] [[check]] it out. [[In]] the [[past]], we have [[always]] simply branded [[killers]] "psychopaths" and assumed that either they were biologically wired for disaster or had media influence, but as Zero Day shows sometimes the motives are deeper than that, and we can never truly understand why tragedies such as school shootings happen until we have seen it from the perspective of the killers. As [[incessantly]], [[contentious]] movies like this have mixed reviews. You [[neither]] love it or you hate it, and not everyone will like this movie. This [[illustrates]] the perspective of the killers, which is something I personally feel is something [[critical]] to consider. You [[maggio]] hate them, you may claim to understand them and feel as though you can relate, but regardless this movie will make you think about [[tuition]] [[gunshots]] from a [[multiple]] perspective.

The movie is shot entirely using a hand-held camera, [[anything]] that I think works [[rather]] well as it makes it more [[practical]]. It is [[said]] [[utterly]] from the killers point of view, from their "[[delegation]]" to [[families]] outings, all [[culminating]] up the [[huge]] day "[[Null]] Day" in which they are [[programmed]] on a [[carnage]] at their [[teaching]]. [[Null]] Day does not [[provide]] answers, but merely [[presented]] a glimpse at the [[life]] of two [[disturbed]] young [[guy]] and [[allowing]] the [[audiences]] [[decides]] for themselves. Our [[sentiments]] towards the [[guy]] are [[anything]] mixed between sympathy and [[hating]], but [[again]] we are left [[baffled]] as to why two ordinary young boys [[could]] do such a [[stuff]]. They are [[illustrated]] to be [[terribly]] [[routine]], [[classic]] [[adolescents]] boys leading ordinary [[life]], and if we didn't know what they were planning we wouldn't [[expects]] a thing (They make it [[unmistakable]] throughout the whole movie that no-one else knows about their [[programmes]])

The acting is [[terribly]] good [[contemplating]] the two actors are complete unknowns. We can only [[hopes]] to see more work from the both of them in the future. Despite how this is a fictionalized [[cinematography]], one cannot [[aid]] but notice the [[apparent]] [[parallels]] to Columbine. Calvin and [[Andrej]] are scarily [[analogue]] to Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, (not so much in looks, but in [[method]]) As [[somebody]] who has researched Columbine very [[broadly]], I [[wo]] see the [[parallels]] and it is [[hardly]] [[surely]] [[founded]] on it.

The actual massacre is [[indicated]] through surveillance cameras at the [[teaching]] and is one of the most [[chill]] [[items]] I have ever [[noticed]]. I was [[totally]] in shock after [[see]] it, and its a feeling that [[resting]] around for a while. It is very [[reality]] and well-done, and it is very [[troublesome]] to watch.

All in all [[Zilch]] Day is an [[wondrous]] movie, and I [[thinking]] [[someone]] should at [[fewest]] [[verifying]] it out. [[Throughout]] the [[preceding]], we have [[continuously]] simply branded [[murderers]] "psychopaths" and assumed that either they were biologically wired for disaster or had media influence, but as Zero Day shows sometimes the motives are deeper than that, and we can never truly understand why tragedies such as school shootings happen until we have seen it from the perspective of the killers. --------------------------------------------- Result 4598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had low expectations for this movie, but I was looking for something unchallenging for an evening. I walked out of the theatre totally delighted and somewhat surprised. This is a very fine baseball tribute film, and a nice lesson about pursuing your dreams. Dennis Quaid does a masterful job with his role, and I was touched by his performance. Definitely worth a full price ticket and a couple hours of your time! --------------------------------------------- Result 4599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It is a [[great]] tragedy that both [[Richard]] Harris and [[John]] [[Derek]] are no longer with us. But that shouldn't blind [[anybody]] to the [[fact]] that in 1981, a pretty [[ugly]] blotch appears on both men's CVs. No doubt John Derek conceived this movie doing for his [[wife]] what 'Some Like it Hot' and 'One [[Million]] Years BC' did for Maryln Monroe and [[Raquel]] Welsh respectively, creating an [[iconic]] sex symbol for the new decade. Having run to embrace Dudley Moore on the beach in '10' Bo's [[reputation]], an all-star [[cast]] and location filming in Sri Lanka meant that nothing [[could]] go [[wrong]]. [[Alas]], as they say, Mortals [[plan]] and [[God]] [[laughs]]. It is said that when this [[film]] premiered in 1981, the Edgar Rice Burrows estate tried to take legal action against it. Bo [[Derek]] plays [[Jane]] Parker who sets off into turn-of-the century [[Africa]] to be reunited with her boozy, [[abusive]] [[Dad]], Richard Harris. [[Daddy]] Parker is an [[explorer]] who has set out to [[find]] 'the [[Great]] [[Inland]] Sea' the stuff of local legend, [[whose]] existence has been poo-pooed by [[conventional]] wisdom. Harris is worth watching for a [[wonderfully]] hammy, [[tanked]] -up performance which [[includes]] [[singing]] an Irish ditty at an Indian [[elephant]] that [[somehow]] [[found]] its [[way]] into [[Africa]] (did it [[arrive]] at the same [[time]] as the Orang-Utan from Sumatra???) Furthermore, although Jane professes to despise Parker, [[Bo]] and Rich's relationship is creepily incestuous, [[testimony]] [[perhaps]] to the [[effects]] of the tropical [[heat]]. Before [[long]], [[however]], local legends start to circulate about a '[[Great]] White Ape' and [[Jane]] hears the [[famous]] yodel. This is the movie's cue for [[Miles]] O'Keefe, a [[future]] B-Movie [[star]], [[making]] a rather odd [[debut]] as the loin-clothed Lord of the Jungle. Unlike [[Johnny]] Weismuller with his pidgin [[English]] or Ron Ely who [[speaks]] the language fluently, the O'Keefe Tarzan is [[mute]]. [[Given]] some of [[Bo]] and Richie's dialog, [[though]], this is [[probably]] not a [[bad]] [[thing]]. Harris and his [[caravan]] eventually reaches the [[Great]] [[Inland]] [[Sea]], located atop a [[gigantic]] [[plateau]] that seems to run [[halfway]] [[across]] [[Africa]]....hang on, aren't [[seas]], lakes and other watery [[places]] [[generally]] located in low-lying [[areas]]?? Nevermind, it is just one of [[many]] [[anomalies]] in the John Derek universe. The [[crew]] attempt to mount the cliffs and when the ropes snap, Harris roars echoing abuse at the hapless men who have plummeted to their deaths. On another occasion, Jane decides to take a nude swim by the Inland Sea, giving another occasion to see some gratuitous nudity. Out of nowhere a single male lion appears. Now lions usually travel in prides and never go near beaches but later on, Tarzan will be wrestling with a (venomous) boa constrictor. Zoology doesn't seem to have been one of John Derek's strong points..... This being a Tarzan movie, Jane becomes enchanted with the Lord of the Jungle and resolves to take his virginity. But having seen his closeness to some of those chimps, you do have to wonder...Speaking of which, it's not only the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate could have sued. It is highly probable that certain primates were on the phone to their lawyers: the chimps here make you miss Cheeta badly. Especially when they do ridiculous things like ride on the backs of elephants and clap their hands when Tarzan and Jane finally get it on! The climax of this film has Bo and Harris captured by some rather stereotypical cannibals who paint our heroine and prepare to sacrifice/eat/execute her. Suffice is to say that The Great Wooden Ape gets his girl and *SPOILER* Harris gets himself impaled on a huge elephant tusk! This doesn't stop the dying Parker from delivering a rambling monologue to Jane. As far as I am aware, the law suit from the Rice Burrows estate never materialized but 'Tarzan the Ape Man' was crucified at the box office (no kidding?) A pity. John Derek could have directed 'Tarzan the Ape Man 2' with Bo Derek and Miles O'Keefe living in domestic bliss and Dudley Moore as 'Boy.' It is a [[whopping]] tragedy that both [[Richie]] Harris and [[Jon]] [[Derrick]] are no longer with us. But that shouldn't blind [[person]] to the [[facto]] that in 1981, a pretty [[grisly]] blotch appears on both men's CVs. No doubt John Derek conceived this movie doing for his [[femme]] what 'Some Like it Hot' and 'One [[Zillion]] Years BC' did for Maryln Monroe and [[Rachael]] Welsh respectively, creating an [[symbolic]] sex symbol for the new decade. Having run to embrace Dudley Moore on the beach in '10' Bo's [[notoriety]], an all-star [[casting]] and location filming in Sri Lanka meant that nothing [[wo]] go [[flawed]]. [[Alack]], as they say, Mortals [[plans]] and [[Lord]] [[grin]]. It is said that when this [[filmmaking]] premiered in 1981, the Edgar Rice Burrows estate tried to take legal action against it. Bo [[Derrick]] plays [[Jeanne]] Parker who sets off into turn-of-the century [[Continents]] to be reunited with her boozy, [[unseemly]] [[Pere]], Richard Harris. [[Pop]] Parker is an [[exploration]] who has set out to [[finds]] 'the [[Whopping]] [[Interiors]] Sea' the stuff of local legend, [[who]] existence has been poo-pooed by [[traditional]] wisdom. Harris is worth watching for a [[delightfully]] hammy, [[planted]] -up performance which [[encompasses]] [[chant]] an Irish ditty at an Indian [[phil]] that [[somewhere]] [[finds]] its [[paths]] into [[Continents]] (did it [[come]] at the same [[moment]] as the Orang-Utan from Sumatra???) Furthermore, although Jane professes to despise Parker, [[Pu]] and Rich's relationship is creepily incestuous, [[testify]] [[potentially]] to the [[influences]] of the tropical [[heats]]. Before [[lang]], [[yet]], local legends start to circulate about a '[[Sublime]] White Ape' and [[Jin]] hears the [[celebrated]] yodel. This is the movie's cue for [[Klicks]] O'Keefe, a [[forthcoming]] B-Movie [[stars]], [[doing]] a rather odd [[infancy]] as the loin-clothed Lord of the Jungle. Unlike [[Jonny]] Weismuller with his pidgin [[Francais]] or Ron Ely who [[spoke]] the language fluently, the O'Keefe Tarzan is [[speechless]]. [[Conferred]] some of [[Pu]] and Richie's dialog, [[despite]], this is [[arguably]] not a [[negative]] [[stuff]]. Harris and his [[airflow]] eventually reaches the [[Resplendent]] [[Inside]] [[Hoi]], located atop a [[hefty]] [[platter]] that seems to run [[midway]] [[during]] [[Continents]]....hang on, aren't [[oceans]], lakes and other watery [[spaces]] [[ordinarily]] located in low-lying [[zoning]]?? Nevermind, it is just one of [[innumerable]] [[aberrations]] in the John Derek universe. The [[crewman]] attempt to mount the cliffs and when the ropes snap, Harris roars echoing abuse at the hapless men who have plummeted to their deaths. On another occasion, Jane decides to take a nude swim by the Inland Sea, giving another occasion to see some gratuitous nudity. Out of nowhere a single male lion appears. Now lions usually travel in prides and never go near beaches but later on, Tarzan will be wrestling with a (venomous) boa constrictor. Zoology doesn't seem to have been one of John Derek's strong points..... This being a Tarzan movie, Jane becomes enchanted with the Lord of the Jungle and resolves to take his virginity. But having seen his closeness to some of those chimps, you do have to wonder...Speaking of which, it's not only the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate could have sued. It is highly probable that certain primates were on the phone to their lawyers: the chimps here make you miss Cheeta badly. Especially when they do ridiculous things like ride on the backs of elephants and clap their hands when Tarzan and Jane finally get it on! The climax of this film has Bo and Harris captured by some rather stereotypical cannibals who paint our heroine and prepare to sacrifice/eat/execute her. Suffice is to say that The Great Wooden Ape gets his girl and *SPOILER* Harris gets himself impaled on a huge elephant tusk! This doesn't stop the dying Parker from delivering a rambling monologue to Jane. As far as I am aware, the law suit from the Rice Burrows estate never materialized but 'Tarzan the Ape Man' was crucified at the box office (no kidding?) A pity. John Derek could have directed 'Tarzan the Ape Man 2' with Bo Derek and Miles O'Keefe living in domestic bliss and Dudley Moore as 'Boy.' --------------------------------------------- Result 4600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Military training [[films]] are becoming so common that they are becoming a genre unto themselves. [[Among]] the more [[prominent]] we have, `Officer and a Gentleman', `Top Gun', `GI Jane', and now `Men of Honor'. The fact that this one [[happened]] to be [[true]] doesn't [[change]] the fact that the formula is the same. This film is probably most like `GI Jane' since it [[focuses]] on the desegregation angle.

The story is actually [[quite]] [[inspirational]] and is probably the [[best]] human-interest story among those [[mentioned]] above. Carl Brashear ([[Cuba]] Gooding, Jr.) is unquestionably a man of great courage and principle, and his [[strength]] of [[character]] shines through brightly in this film. Unfortunately, director [[George]] Tillman has tunnel vision in presenting the characters and eschews character development of various characters other than Brashear in favor of showing Brashear in a [[constant]] [[state]] of adversity. Billy Sunday (Robert De Niro) is a central [[figure]], and except for the [[initial]] scene, the fistfight and a [[couple]] of scenes with his wife, we don't know much about him. For instance, Brashear sees the scars on Sunday's palms and we are to [[assume]] that he [[worked]] a plow, but there is no follow-up on that point. Mr. Pappy (Hal Holbrook) gets only one short scene by which we can judge him. The rest of his screen time shows him pacing around and ranting. [[If]] a director is going to [[make]] a human-interest [[story]], he [[needs]] to humanize the [[characters]].

Cuba Gooding Jr. gives an [[outstanding]] performance as Brashear. This is [[probably]] the best I've [[seen]] him. This is a role and a character that is far more [[complete]] than any [[part]] he has [[played]] before, and he [[rises]] to the occasion. In `Jerry Maguire', Rod Tidwell was a fascinating, but one-dimensional [[character]] with the [[depth]] of a rain puddle. Brashear is much more [[complex]] and grounded, and the [[issues]] he [[faces]] are life crises, making the part far more challenging. This is an [[excellent]] [[recovery]] from Gooding's [[last]] role in `Chill Factor', a [[film]] so dreadful that it was [[almost]] an act of [[professional]] [[suicide]] to [[take]] the part.

After a stint [[trying]] his hand as a comedian (`Analyze This', `The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle', `Meet The Parents'), Robert DeNiro is back to his dramatic roots with an outstanding performance. DeNiro isn't a bad comedian, he is just such a great dramatic actor that it seems like he shouldn't waste his time doing comedy. DeNiro endows Billy Sunday with a rock hard personality belying a tortured soul. It is a pleasure watching him work.

It seems every film I watch lately has Charlize Theron in it. I saw `The Legend of Bagger Vance', `Men of Honor' and `The Yards' right in a row and I was beginning to wonder if she had a part in every film in 2000 (actually, she only did five). This was a minor role for Theron, but she carried it off well and managed to stay with DeNiro step for step. David Keith, who co-starred with Richard Gere in `Officer and a Gentleman', has a cameo here

The DVD has some interesting special features, including reflections by the real Carl Brashear and some deleted scenes.

I enjoyed this film despite the hackneyed plot and the one-dimensional presentation. I rated it a 7/10. I'm a sucker for underdog stories and I have a fondness for stories where strength of character is the central theme. This film is particularly strong in both areas and brings us two memorable acting performances that compensate for some of the director's shortcomings. Military training [[cinematography]] are becoming so common that they are becoming a genre unto themselves. [[In]] the more [[conspicuous]] we have, `Officer and a Gentleman', `Top Gun', `GI Jane', and now `Men of Honor'. The fact that this one [[transpired]] to be [[veritable]] doesn't [[shift]] the fact that the formula is the same. This film is probably most like `GI Jane' since it [[focused]] on the desegregation angle.

The story is actually [[pretty]] [[inspire]] and is probably the [[better]] human-interest story among those [[talked]] above. Carl Brashear ([[Cuban]] Gooding, Jr.) is unquestionably a man of great courage and principle, and his [[vigour]] of [[nature]] shines through brightly in this film. Unfortunately, director [[Jorge]] Tillman has tunnel vision in presenting the characters and eschews character development of various characters other than Brashear in favor of showing Brashear in a [[continuous]] [[sate]] of adversity. Billy Sunday (Robert De Niro) is a central [[silhouette]], and except for the [[introductory]] scene, the fistfight and a [[coupling]] of scenes with his wife, we don't know much about him. For instance, Brashear sees the scars on Sunday's palms and we are to [[suppose]] that he [[collaborate]] a plow, but there is no follow-up on that point. Mr. Pappy (Hal Holbrook) gets only one short scene by which we can judge him. The rest of his screen time shows him pacing around and ranting. [[Unless]] a director is going to [[deliver]] a human-interest [[narratives]], he [[needed]] to humanize the [[traits]].

Cuba Gooding Jr. gives an [[noteworthy]] performance as Brashear. This is [[maybe]] the best I've [[saw]] him. This is a role and a character that is far more [[finish]] than any [[parte]] he has [[accomplished]] before, and he [[risen]] to the occasion. In `Jerry Maguire', Rod Tidwell was a fascinating, but one-dimensional [[traits]] with the [[depths]] of a rain puddle. Brashear is much more [[tricky]] and grounded, and the [[subjects]] he [[confronting]] are life crises, making the part far more challenging. This is an [[wondrous]] [[recovering]] from Gooding's [[latter]] role in `Chill Factor', a [[cinematography]] so dreadful that it was [[practically]] an act of [[occupational]] [[kamikaze]] to [[taking]] the part.

After a stint [[tempting]] his hand as a comedian (`Analyze This', `The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle', `Meet The Parents'), Robert DeNiro is back to his dramatic roots with an outstanding performance. DeNiro isn't a bad comedian, he is just such a great dramatic actor that it seems like he shouldn't waste his time doing comedy. DeNiro endows Billy Sunday with a rock hard personality belying a tortured soul. It is a pleasure watching him work.

It seems every film I watch lately has Charlize Theron in it. I saw `The Legend of Bagger Vance', `Men of Honor' and `The Yards' right in a row and I was beginning to wonder if she had a part in every film in 2000 (actually, she only did five). This was a minor role for Theron, but she carried it off well and managed to stay with DeNiro step for step. David Keith, who co-starred with Richard Gere in `Officer and a Gentleman', has a cameo here

The DVD has some interesting special features, including reflections by the real Carl Brashear and some deleted scenes.

I enjoyed this film despite the hackneyed plot and the one-dimensional presentation. I rated it a 7/10. I'm a sucker for underdog stories and I have a fondness for stories where strength of character is the central theme. This film is particularly strong in both areas and brings us two memorable acting performances that compensate for some of the director's shortcomings. --------------------------------------------- Result 4601 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] It's like a bad 80s TV show got loose and tried to become a soft-core porn movie. Oh my [[god]] was it [[bad]]. The plots of each character had [[little]] relevance. The plot itself wasn't anything to speak of. Something about a stalker, I guess. [[In]] the end he shoots himself? It's not really clear, but somehow there's a [[volleyball]] [[game]] involved. And the main character (Randy) sleeps around a lot. The only reason my friends rented this [[movie]] was because Casper Van Dien was in it, and they ended up wanting to fast forward to the scenes with him in it, which were barely watchable at that. Thank god I didn't spend any money on it, but I want that hour of my life back. It's like a bad 80s TV show got loose and tried to become a soft-core porn movie. Oh my [[heavens]] was it [[unfavourable]]. The plots of each character had [[scant]] relevance. The plot itself wasn't anything to speak of. Something about a stalker, I guess. [[Among]] the end he shoots himself? It's not really clear, but somehow there's a [[handball]] [[gaming]] involved. And the main character (Randy) sleeps around a lot. The only reason my friends rented this [[filmmaking]] was because Casper Van Dien was in it, and they ended up wanting to fast forward to the scenes with him in it, which were barely watchable at that. Thank god I didn't spend any money on it, but I want that hour of my life back. --------------------------------------------- Result 4602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was positively the worst film I have ever watched. I couldn't sit through the whole thing. I also think writer must have some weird fetish for women peeing puking and crapping... I mean what was that all about! I cant believe this was even made and am disgusted at have #ingwasted a £4 rental fee. The quality both picture and sound are terrible, the acting... well doesn't exist . It was a poor excuse for a film and the scenes of pee, crap and puke were reminiscent of 2 girls 1 cup. Urghh....... AVOID AT ALL COST! The girls looked like they had been picked off the street and only got the part cos they'd be willing to take their tops off... While these girls have nice bodies it certainly didn't make up for the fact their shrieking was awful unconvincing and a pain to my ears.

This was like (possibly worse) than an ammateur school production without any proper direction and hey there is no need for a set as it all seems to revolve around a car?!

Definatey not one to buy folks. Sorry if my first comment is terribly negative but I could not find anything positive to say and I would like to think I may save someone else wasting their money like I have. --------------------------------------------- Result 4603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] If you want to be cynical and pedantic you could point out that the opening where a RAF Lancaster bomber is mortally wounded on the 2nd of May 1945 is somewhat unlikely since German air defences were as lively as Adolph Hitler on that day but this isn't a movie that should be viewed by a [[cynical]] audience and I guess a [[character]] being [[killed]] in literally the [[last]] hours of the [[war]] [[adds]] to the poignancy . In fact you'd have to have survived the [[second]] [[world]] [[war]] to [[fully]] [[appreciate]] the intellect , [[beauty]] and [[soul]] of Powell and Pressburger's [[masterpiece]] . The scenes of heaven are painfully twee when viewed [[today]] ? Again you have to view the movie of the context when it was made . RAF bomber command lost 58,000 men during the war , the same number that America lost in 'Nam but during a shorter period and a far , far smaller pool of active combatants , there's no atheists in a fox hole and I doubt if you'd lost a relative during the conflict you'd view material [[atheism]] as being a sensible thing . When Richar Attenborough's young pilot looks down in awe at the sight below him many war heroes must have [[openly]] wept at this scene as they remembered much missed comrades who didn't survive the war . Also bare in mind that despite losing several million people from 1939-45 there seems to be very few people from Germany passing through the pearly gates . it's obvious Nazis don't go to heaven

The plot itself where dashing young pilot Peter Carter arguing for his life in front of a celestial court wouldn't have had much appeal to me if it wasn't for the subtext , you see A MATTER OR [[LIFE]] AND DEATH is a [[highly]] political and visionary [[film]] that laments the end of the British empire as it's replaced by American ambitions . There's little things that show up the film as being made by people aware of American history and culture . One is the ethnic mix of America , even today many Britons think that the USA is overwhelmingly composed of White Anglo Saxon Protestants when in fact only 51% of Americans are " White European " . The film rightly contains a scene where a multitude of different races confess " I am an American " as Peter is judged by Abraham Farlan , an Anglophobe who was the first revolutionary killed by British forces in The American War Of Independence . As for the " special relationship " between Britain and America - What special relationship ? Powell and Pressburger know their history when it comes to Britain and America . They obviously know their future too

So remember to watch this movie with some of your mind in the past and some of your mind in the present . It's strange , beautiful , poignant and clever but most of all it's a film that would never ever work if it were made in the last 40 years . Can you imagine if the story was set in 2003 and revolved around a British soldier killed in Iraq ? If you want to be cynical and pedantic you could point out that the opening where a RAF Lancaster bomber is mortally wounded on the 2nd of May 1945 is somewhat unlikely since German air defences were as lively as Adolph Hitler on that day but this isn't a movie that should be viewed by a [[sarcastic]] audience and I guess a [[characters]] being [[massacred]] in literally the [[lastly]] hours of the [[warfare]] [[inserting]] to the poignancy . In fact you'd have to have survived the [[secondly]] [[monde]] [[wars]] to [[entirely]] [[thankful]] the intellect , [[beaut]] and [[alma]] of Powell and Pressburger's [[centerpiece]] . The scenes of heaven are painfully twee when viewed [[yesterday]] ? Again you have to view the movie of the context when it was made . RAF bomber command lost 58,000 men during the war , the same number that America lost in 'Nam but during a shorter period and a far , far smaller pool of active combatants , there's no atheists in a fox hole and I doubt if you'd lost a relative during the conflict you'd view material [[atheist]] as being a sensible thing . When Richar Attenborough's young pilot looks down in awe at the sight below him many war heroes must have [[plainly]] wept at this scene as they remembered much missed comrades who didn't survive the war . Also bare in mind that despite losing several million people from 1939-45 there seems to be very few people from Germany passing through the pearly gates . it's obvious Nazis don't go to heaven

The plot itself where dashing young pilot Peter Carter arguing for his life in front of a celestial court wouldn't have had much appeal to me if it wasn't for the subtext , you see A MATTER OR [[VIDA]] AND DEATH is a [[inordinately]] political and visionary [[kino]] that laments the end of the British empire as it's replaced by American ambitions . There's little things that show up the film as being made by people aware of American history and culture . One is the ethnic mix of America , even today many Britons think that the USA is overwhelmingly composed of White Anglo Saxon Protestants when in fact only 51% of Americans are " White European " . The film rightly contains a scene where a multitude of different races confess " I am an American " as Peter is judged by Abraham Farlan , an Anglophobe who was the first revolutionary killed by British forces in The American War Of Independence . As for the " special relationship " between Britain and America - What special relationship ? Powell and Pressburger know their history when it comes to Britain and America . They obviously know their future too

So remember to watch this movie with some of your mind in the past and some of your mind in the present . It's strange , beautiful , poignant and clever but most of all it's a film that would never ever work if it were made in the last 40 years . Can you imagine if the story was set in 2003 and revolved around a British soldier killed in Iraq ? --------------------------------------------- Result 4604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] This movie is now my gauge against which all other [[movies]] will be compared...as in, "was it as stupid as [[Revolver]]?" I too was in the Toronto International Film Festival audience last night where a room filled with over 2000 people walked out in an eerie silence after being absolutely dumbstruck by 2 [[hours]] of sheer [[nonsense]]. Jason Stratham [[would]] have been amazing if only he had a purpose. [[Within]] the first 10 minutes he's given a proposition by Andre 3000 and Big Pussy (of Soprano's fame) which makes NO [[SENSE]] [[AT]] [[ALL]]! Then there's some [[shooting]] and then there's Ray Liotta wearing embarrassing bikini briefs, then there's some animation, Ray Liotta's naked butt, lots of shooting, teeth gnashing, art house wanna be pretensions and more of Liotta's embarrassing body that elicited laughs at every showing...which I'm not quite sure was the reaction he was looking for...not 5 times anyway. Everyone in this movie thinks they're smarter than the average [[bear]] and Guy Ritchie thinks he's Yogi Bear incarnate. The [[story]] lines might have went [[nowhere]] but the [[posturing]] was [[outta]] sight! The only [[way]] this [[movie]] could have been [[worse]] is if Madonna herself was in it. This movie is now my gauge against which all other [[filmmaking]] will be compared...as in, "was it as stupid as [[Pistol]]?" I too was in the Toronto International Film Festival audience last night where a room filled with over 2000 people walked out in an eerie silence after being absolutely dumbstruck by 2 [[hour]] of sheer [[claptrap]]. Jason Stratham [[ought]] have been amazing if only he had a purpose. [[Inside]] the first 10 minutes he's given a proposition by Andre 3000 and Big Pussy (of Soprano's fame) which makes NO [[FEELING]] [[DURING]] [[TOTALITY]]! Then there's some [[shootings]] and then there's Ray Liotta wearing embarrassing bikini briefs, then there's some animation, Ray Liotta's naked butt, lots of shooting, teeth gnashing, art house wanna be pretensions and more of Liotta's embarrassing body that elicited laughs at every showing...which I'm not quite sure was the reaction he was looking for...not 5 times anyway. Everyone in this movie thinks they're smarter than the average [[bears]] and Guy Ritchie thinks he's Yogi Bear incarnate. The [[conte]] lines might have went [[everywhere]] but the [[grandstanding]] was [[outa]] sight! The only [[routing]] this [[filmmaking]] could have been [[worst]] is if Madonna herself was in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] This [[movie]] is once again, one of those [[movies]] that [[someone]] thinks or tries to [[make]] others [[think]] that they [[understood]] it. [[Anyone]] who tries to [[make]] any [[sense]] of this is a [[MORON]]! My [[advise]] would be to take TWO not one but TWO [[hits]] of very [[strong]] acid and at [[least]] you'll get a [[visual]] thrill out of it!! Although at the [[end]] you may [[kill]] yourself for wasting your [[acid]]!!!! [[Being]] that this [[comment]] requires 10 lines of [[info]], [[let]] me [[write]] something for those of you that will [[try]] to [[defend]] the [[movie]]. Unintelligble. Garbage. Schitzoid. [[Waste]] of talent. [[Movie]] is ice, with paper on [[destination]] with ringing clouds, on a sunny dive in the pudding.... Sounds like lion in a red light with [[seeing]] hair. Now [[explain]] that to me!!!! This [[filmmaking]] is once again, one of those [[theater]] that [[anyone]] thinks or tries to [[deliver]] others [[reckon]] that they [[fathom]] it. [[Anybody]] who tries to [[deliver]] any [[feeling]] of this is a [[KNUCKLEHEAD]]! My [[notifying]] would be to take TWO not one but TWO [[rattles]] of very [[forceful]] acid and at [[fewest]] you'll get a [[optic]] thrill out of it!! Although at the [[ends]] you may [[killings]] yourself for wasting your [[acidity]]!!!! [[Ongoing]] that this [[observation]] requires 10 lines of [[information]], [[allowing]] me [[handwriting]] something for those of you that will [[endeavour]] to [[defender]] the [[filmmaking]]. Unintelligble. Garbage. Schitzoid. [[Wastes]] of talent. [[Filmmaking]] is ice, with paper on [[destinies]] with ringing clouds, on a sunny dive in the pudding.... Sounds like lion in a red light with [[witnessing]] hair. Now [[explained]] that to me!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Definitely]] one of [[funny]] [[man]] Eddie Murphy's lesser films is this [[nonsense]] about a kidnapped mystical child, three hundred year old [[dragons]] and a "Chosen One".

Murphy is the "Chosen One" in question, and as the [[opening]] song [[suggests]], he is "the [[best]] man in the world". A finder of lost and [[missing]] [[children]], he is [[approached]] by a mysterious Tibetan woman (Charlotte [[Lewis]]) who tells him he is "The Chosen One", and that it is his destiny to find and rescue "The Golden Child". For if the child were to die, compassion would die with him, as he is the bearer of compassion.

If all this hocus pocus rubbish hasn't ruined it for you now, it surely will once the movie begins. [[Suffice]] to say the plot is [[abominable]] and [[destroys]] the whole film. [[Meant]] to be another [[vehicle]] for Murphy's [[egotistical]] brand of humour (the comedy isn't so great mind you), the [[movie]] fails on many [[levels]]. Even Charles Dance as the evil Sardo Numspa can't do much for proceedings. Very silly and [[disappointing]].

Sunday, December 12, 1993 - T.V. [[Unquestionably]] one of [[hilarious]] [[bloke]] Eddie Murphy's lesser films is this [[claptrap]] about a kidnapped mystical child, three hundred year old [[dragoons]] and a "Chosen One".

Murphy is the "Chosen One" in question, and as the [[initiation]] song [[proposes]], he is "the [[better]] man in the world". A finder of lost and [[lacking]] [[kids]], he is [[tackled]] by a mysterious Tibetan woman (Charlotte [[Louis]]) who tells him he is "The Chosen One", and that it is his destiny to find and rescue "The Golden Child". For if the child were to die, compassion would die with him, as he is the bearer of compassion.

If all this hocus pocus rubbish hasn't ruined it for you now, it surely will once the movie begins. [[Adequate]] to say the plot is [[infamous]] and [[ruined]] the whole film. [[Intend]] to be another [[motorcar]] for Murphy's [[egocentric]] brand of humour (the comedy isn't so great mind you), the [[movies]] fails on many [[grades]]. Even Charles Dance as the evil Sardo Numspa can't do much for proceedings. Very silly and [[disappointed]].

Sunday, December 12, 1993 - T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 4607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] Reading a wide variety of "Scoop" reviews over the past few days, I walked into the theater prepared for a subpar outing from Woody. Happily, I couldn't have been more wrong. Granted, Woody the performer is slowing down a touch or two, but Woody the writer/director is in fine [[form]] - and found a credible [[way]] to integrate his 70-year old self into the story. Judging from the [[laughter]] and [[guffaws]], the audience [[ate]] up Allen's one-liners and dialogue in a [[way]] that I haven't [[seen]] in [[several]] years.

[[In]] a movie [[landscape]] dominated by software-approved [[story]] arcs, twentysomething [[tastes]] and assembly-line formula fare for [[kiddies]], it's a source of both satisfaction and inspiration to see Allen pursuing his [[highly]] personal and still-rewarding [[path]]. Reading a wide variety of "Scoop" reviews over the past few days, I walked into the theater prepared for a subpar outing from Woody. Happily, I couldn't have been more wrong. Granted, Woody the performer is slowing down a touch or two, but Woody the writer/director is in fine [[shape]] - and found a credible [[ways]] to integrate his 70-year old self into the story. Judging from the [[laughs]] and [[sniggers]], the audience [[swallowed]] up Allen's one-liners and dialogue in a [[routing]] that I haven't [[watched]] in [[multiple]] years.

[[Onto]] a movie [[scenery]] dominated by software-approved [[narratives]] arcs, twentysomething [[flavours]] and assembly-line formula fare for [[brats]], it's a source of both satisfaction and inspiration to see Allen pursuing his [[heavily]] personal and still-rewarding [[chemin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Lee Chang-dong's exceptional "Secret Sunshine" is the single most emotionally ravaging experience of the year. It is an instantly sobering, brutally honest character piece on the reverberations of loss and a graceful memento mori that resonates with a striking density of thought, yet remains as inscrutable as the emotions it observes. Through its layered naturalism and stunningly trenchant view of small-town dynamics, Lee implicitly deconstructs the traditional Korean melodrama by pulling apart the cinematics of excess and ripping to shreds the arcs that shape its characters and grounds the proceedings into a crushing grind of stoic realism.

"Secret Sunshine" remains an immensely compelling, fluid work throughout its 142-minute runtime. Its bravura first hour is filled to the brim with subtextual insinuations, remarkable foreshadowing and adroit reversals of tone brought about by humanistic capriciousness. Adapted from a short story, Lee infuses the film with his sensitivity for the sublime paradoxes of life, last seen in his transgressively comic and irreverent "Oasis". Understanding how personal revolutions are forged when views of our universe are changed, Lee not only sees the emotional cataclysm of a widow's sorrow through an inquiring scope but also feels the tumultuous existential currents that underpin the film when religion becomes a narrative scapegoat in comprehending the heinousness of the human experience.

Do-yeon Jeon's ("You Are My Sunshine") Best Actress accolade at Cannes in 2007 is well deserved. Her performance as the widow Shin-ae remains an unrelenting enigma. As a character pulled apart by forces beyond her control, the sheer magnificence of this performance is central to the film's turbulent nature. With Jeon essaying one cyclonic upheaval after another, there's a tremulous sense of collapse that the film, to its credit, never approaches. Instead it finds a delicate balance that saps the charged theatricality and subsequent banality from ordinary tragedies and its fallouts. She becomes the centre of the film's universe as well as ours. Filmed in glorious hand-held CinemaScope, the film demolishes the cinematicism of frames and compositions by becoming visually acute just as it is quietly harrowing when the camera never relinquishes its gaze from Shin-ae through times of happiness, guilt and remorse.

Lee captures the details of life in the small, suspicious town of Miryang – the awkwardness of communal situations, its uncomfortable silences and its devastations spun out of personal dramas. Shin-ae's interactions with the townsfolk rarely inspires dividends, especially when they are merely done out of obligation to fit in for the sake of her son, Jun (Seon Jung-yeop). The one recurring acquaintance is Jong-chan (Song Kang-ho), a bachelor mechanic of uncertain intentions who helps her en route to Miryang in the film's enchanting open sequence set to a captivating stream of sunlight. Song has situated himself as a comedic anti-hero in South Korea's biggest films but his nuanced, low-key delivery here purports the director's thought process of never having to reveal more than plainly necessary.

If pain is ephemeral, then grief can never truly dissipate. And Lee finds complexity in subsistence. When Shin-ae attempts to head down the path of reconciliation only to be faced again with unimaginable heartbreak, she unsuccessfully employs the fellowship of evangelical Christianity as a foil to her sorrow. But Lee knows better than that when he understands that religion, in the context of the human canvas of strife and misery, is never a simple solution. But Lee never rebukes the essence of religion as he realises the value of salvation for some through a higher power even if it serves a form of denial in others. The scenes in its latter half which deal with religion doesn't allow itself to become aggressively scornful, which is a feat in itself considering how many filmmakers let the momentum of the material take over from what they need to say to be true to its story and characters.

Lee's first film since his call to office as his country's Minister of Culture and Tourism is an uncompromising dissertation on human suffering. In a film so artless and genuine, it arduously reveals that there's nothing as simple as emotional catharsis, just the suppression and abatement of agony. "Secret Sunshine" leaves us with tender mercies pulled out of evanescence, and points towards a profound understanding of despair and faith. --------------------------------------------- Result 4609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I question its importance to Queer [[Cinema]] as it seems to be more about having a homosexual encounter via violent behavior than making any clear statements regarding homosexuality and violence.

Three tales are tangled together in a rather sloppy manner. I found myself trying to untangle the messy narrative in the first 15 minutes, that [[alone]] didn't sit well with me. Weak plot [[points]] were [[endlessly]] repeated as [[though]] we might not have gotten it the first 10 [[times]].

There was a feeling of padded [[dialog]] [[throughout]] the film. More like a 45 minute Boy's Brief short [[rather]] than a fleshed out full-length [[film]]. It had a certain erotic flair, male nudity and sex [[appeal]] but overall the sum did not equal its parts.

The 1st part: [[Boxer]]/Stalker storyline was the strongest and [[yet]] it too [[felt]] like it had been pulled thin. Bob has been following Tim for four [[years]] and only now is he [[confronting]] him? I [[felt]] as [[though]] their cat-mouse game was not [[developed]] enough to [[merit]] its conclusion. We needed more information about them and less Parking [[Lot]]/Locker scenes with Tim [[relentlessly]] saying "What do you [[want]]?"

The 2nd part: Danny wants his [[buddy]], Tony, to [[beat]] him up while he jacks-off. Tony doesn't seem to mind, but he doesn't even appear interested in [[exploring]] the [[implications]] of his [[homo]] erotic hobby -- not [[even]] after they do it in the [[nude]]. This tale [[lacks]] the all-important transition from "I'm a [[straight]] boy smacking my [[guy]] friend [[around]] for fun" to "I [[think]] I [[might]] be [[gay]] and [[hitting]] him because I'd like to spread his ass and do him S/M style." A very important thing to [[leave]] out.

Clearly these stories each [[could]] have conveyed their [[points]] in half the time. The 3rd part with the man and [[woman]] slapping each other around adds to that [[thought]]. [[Furthermore]], it was unnecessary and added [[nothing]] to the film. Yes, the [[actors]] did a fine [[job]] under the [[circumstances]] and the four [[male]] leads were very sexy. The make-up (bruises and cuts) however was on par with a grammar school talent [[show]].

There wasn't enough meat to this [[story]] to have any [[impact]] on the gay politic. The [[film]] [[made]] no [[statement]], squandered time, and is not engaging or worthy enough for thoughtful investment. Its fatal [[flaw]] is its amateurish approach, that makes it ultimately impossible to [[take]] seriously. I question its importance to Queer [[Filmmaking]] as it seems to be more about having a homosexual encounter via violent behavior than making any clear statements regarding homosexuality and violence.

Three tales are tangled together in a rather sloppy manner. I found myself trying to untangle the messy narrative in the first 15 minutes, that [[solo]] didn't sit well with me. Weak plot [[dot]] were [[constantly]] repeated as [[albeit]] we might not have gotten it the first 10 [[moments]].

There was a feeling of padded [[dialogue]] [[during]] the film. More like a 45 minute Boy's Brief short [[comparatively]] than a fleshed out full-length [[flick]]. It had a certain erotic flair, male nudity and sex [[appellate]] but overall the sum did not equal its parts.

The 1st part: [[Wrestler]]/Stalker storyline was the strongest and [[nonetheless]] it too [[deemed]] like it had been pulled thin. Bob has been following Tim for four [[ages]] and only now is he [[confronts]] him? I [[believed]] as [[while]] their cat-mouse game was not [[devised]] enough to [[deserve]] its conclusion. We needed more information about them and less Parking [[Batch]]/Locker scenes with Tim [[ruthlessly]] saying "What do you [[wanna]]?"

The 2nd part: Danny wants his [[bro]], Tony, to [[defeats]] him up while he jacks-off. Tony doesn't seem to mind, but he doesn't even appear interested in [[investigating]] the [[incidence]] of his [[queer]] erotic hobby -- not [[yet]] after they do it in the [[bare]]. This tale [[lacked]] the all-important transition from "I'm a [[successive]] boy smacking my [[boy]] friend [[about]] for fun" to "I [[thought]] I [[apt]] be [[homosexual]] and [[struck]] him because I'd like to spread his ass and do him S/M style." A very important thing to [[let]] out.

Clearly these stories each [[did]] have conveyed their [[dot]] in half the time. The 3rd part with the man and [[girls]] slapping each other around adds to that [[ideas]]. [[Further]], it was unnecessary and added [[none]] to the film. Yes, the [[players]] did a fine [[labor]] under the [[situations]] and the four [[masculine]] leads were very sexy. The make-up (bruises and cuts) however was on par with a grammar school talent [[exhibitions]].

There wasn't enough meat to this [[history]] to have any [[repercussions]] on the gay politic. The [[filmmaking]] [[introduced]] no [[declaration]], squandered time, and is not engaging or worthy enough for thoughtful investment. Its fatal [[defect]] is its amateurish approach, that makes it ultimately impossible to [[taking]] seriously. --------------------------------------------- Result 4610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie truly captures the feeling of freedom.......and what the freedom of your own integrity is worth....in the most delightful, light-hearted way. Not a serious, but hilarious adventure.

The story mirrors life. We don't always get what we want right away but we find out we get what we need to to understand why we didn't get what we wanted....which results in us getting more than we thought we would get! You will get this once you see the movie.

And this movie is truly about finding love and knowing one has found it and that it totally changed one's life.

It is one of my all time favorites......not easy to find but worth the hunt.........I guarantee you will watch it more than once! --------------------------------------------- Result 4611 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] but it's worth watching for Boyer, Lorre and Paxinou. Greene's [[entertainments]] that were filmed during the war either required transplanting to American shores, as in This Gun for Hire, or the use of American actors in roles where they did not fit. Bacall [[fits]] that [[part]] here. I [[kept]] waiting for her to whistle and bring [[Bogie]] to life; her tone of voice is simply all wrong for an upper [[class]] Englishwoman. But listen to the [[dialogue]]! [[No]], people don't [[talk]] that [[way]] except in books, but [[Greene]] was sending a [[message]] about an England that needed to wake up to the [[dangers]] of the [[world]]. One other [[positive]] note: Greene's [[range]] of [[characters]] were kept [[whole]]. [[While]] [[Mr]]. Mukerjee resembled more a Brahamin, at [[least]] his [[nationality]] was kept, and his final [[conversation]] with Paxinou is [[priceless]]. but it's worth watching for Boyer, Lorre and Paxinou. Greene's [[amusement]] that were filmed during the war either required transplanting to American shores, as in This Gun for Hire, or the use of American actors in roles where they did not fit. Bacall [[conforms]] that [[parties]] here. I [[preserved]] waiting for her to whistle and bring [[Bogey]] to life; her tone of voice is simply all wrong for an upper [[sorts]] Englishwoman. But listen to the [[dialog]]! [[Nos]], people don't [[discussing]] that [[route]] except in books, but [[Archer]] was sending a [[messages]] about an England that needed to wake up to the [[hazard]] of the [[globe]]. One other [[affirmative]] note: Greene's [[assortment]] of [[features]] were kept [[total]]. [[Despite]] [[Bernd]]. Mukerjee resembled more a Brahamin, at [[slightest]] his [[citizenship]] was kept, and his final [[schmooze]] with Paxinou is [[inestimable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't say this is the worst film of all time, but only because there are still some movies I haven't seen, yet! This has to be the most pretentious attempt at making a movie of all time! The director suffers from the same issues he had with "There Will Be Blood" (though he wasn't quite as bad in that film. The whole movie it feels like you're watching a guy trying to hard to impress beyond his abilities. It's like he sits in his little director's chair and thinks "how would a great filmmaker handle this scene?" He just doesn't have it in him. I don't know if this film could be saved by a great filmmaker. There were certainly some nuggets of greatness that could have been polished, but nothing was brought to ripen. The scene where all the characters are singing was the worst moment in cinema history. One by one as we see the characters singing, and I squirmed in my seat, I kept saying "please, PLEASE, just don't have the guy on the brink of death singing, too!" Sure enough, MASSIVE FAILURE! --------------------------------------------- Result 4613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a nice piece of work. Very sexy and engaging enough plot to keep my interest throughout. Its main disadvantage is that it seems like it was made-for-TV: Full screen, and though there were several sex scenes, there was absolutely no nudity (but boy did it come close!). Strange, too, since Netflix shows that it was rated R.

Nonetheless, very titillating, and I wish Alicia Silverstone made more movies like this.

One Netflix reviewer stated that it was part of a series, but I have been unable to find out what series that is. I'd like to find out, though, because this movie was THAT good.

Walt D in LV. 8/23/2005 --------------------------------------------- Result 4614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Fleet was [[released]] in 1936 during the middle of the depression when people were having a tough [[time]] worldwide finding jobs or even finding food to put on the table. [[In]] Europe [[Hitler]] was on the rise, along with other [[nationalist]]/ socialist whackjobs. [[In]] the [[United]] States seeds of the Cartel sown with the Federal Reserve Act and the income tax amendment (16) were beginning to bear fruit for connected finance capitalists and their dominating secret societies.

[[For]] the average guy and [[girl]], times were [[tough]]. Enter Hollywood with at least some hopeful images—I don't [[think]] we can properly call them propaganda at this point, even though this particular movie revolves around war-preparatory naval exercises. The real issue for boys and girls then, as now, was how to hook up with the right one, lead a decent life, have wonderful children, with a modicum of grace and elegance.

The odds were long.

...

For my complete review of this movie and for other movie and book reviews, please visit my site TheCoffeeCoaster.com.

Brian Wright Copyright 2007 Fleet was [[freed]] in 1936 during the middle of the depression when people were having a tough [[period]] worldwide finding jobs or even finding food to put on the table. [[During]] Europe [[Nazi]] was on the rise, along with other [[nationalistic]]/ socialist whackjobs. [[Among]] the [[Unify]] States seeds of the Cartel sown with the Federal Reserve Act and the income tax amendment (16) were beginning to bear fruit for connected finance capitalists and their dominating secret societies.

[[At]] the average guy and [[dame]], times were [[stiff]]. Enter Hollywood with at least some hopeful images—I don't [[reckon]] we can properly call them propaganda at this point, even though this particular movie revolves around war-preparatory naval exercises. The real issue for boys and girls then, as now, was how to hook up with the right one, lead a decent life, have wonderful children, with a modicum of grace and elegance.

The odds were long.

...

For my complete review of this movie and for other movie and book reviews, please visit my site TheCoffeeCoaster.com.

Brian Wright Copyright 2007 --------------------------------------------- Result 4615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Nicole]] Kidman is a [[wonderful]] actress and here she's [[great]]. I [[really]] [[liked]] Ben Chaplin in The [[Thin]] [[Red]] Line and he is very good here too. This is not [[Great]] [[Cinema]] but I was most [[entertained]]. [[Given]] most [[films]] these [[days]] this is [[High]] [[Praise]] [[indeed]]. [[Nickel]] Kidman is a [[fabulous]] actress and here she's [[wondrous]]. I [[genuinely]] [[loved]] Ben Chaplin in The [[Delgado]] [[Reid]] Line and he is very good here too. This is not [[Whopping]] [[Movie]] but I was most [[distracted]]. [[Granted]] most [[movie]] these [[jours]] this is [[Higher]] [[Extol]] [[actually]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i tried to sit through this bomb not too long ago.what a disaster .the acting was atrocious.there were some absolutely pathetic action scenes that fell flat as a lead balloon.this was mainly due to the fact that the reactions of the actors just didn't ring true.supposedly a modern reworking of the Hitchcock original "Lifeboat".i think Hictcock would be spinning circles in his grave at the very thought of it.from what i was able to suffer through,there is nothing compelling in this movie.it boasts a few semi big names,but they put no effort into their characters.but,you know,to be fair,it was nobody's fault really.i mean,i'm pretty sure the script blew up in the first explosion. LOL.it is possible that this thing ends up improving as it goes along.but for me,i'm not willing to spend at least three days to find out.so unless you have at least a three day weekend on the horizon,avoid this stinker/ 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Horror movie??really???? i cant believe how bad this movie was,what the point of this movie??? the movie almost 1h and 30 min and the first 70 minutes of it,is just lena walking around with this stupid look on her face after she had an accident....not much talking at all,not even much actions at all.. i have to say tho,the last 20 minuets it got little tiny action.. and was still stupid....... and the end oh my god,i don't know where to begin,it also end up with this stupid look on lena face lol.. don't get me wrong i love Lena Headey,i think she is great actress,but i don't know what got into her to do this movie.. don't waste your time and watching it,because this movie has no story,has no acting ..and has no point...not to mention how slow this movie goes and it feels like you been watching it forever. --------------------------------------------- Result 4618 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] It is said that [[David]] Lynch's films and shorts won't appeal to everyone. [[Neither]] will Dumbland, maybe more than ever. I have a [[feeling]] that Dumbland, as people come across it, will be a true mark of 'I get it' or 'what the hell'. It's not surrealism exactly, but absurd to the point of no [[return]]. It's [[also]] very, very, very stupid. But in this stupidity can be a sort of [[ironic]] [[intelligence]] to it, that the maker knows so well how childish and repugnant this is, and this self-consciousness is a plus, not a detraction.

It's just a bunch of crudely drawn shorts- the kind that might not even make it on Hertzfeldt and Judge's Animation show (which, I might add, Lynch here has a lot in common with both directors in their work- centered on a lummox with an IQ of 20 who has a constantly quivering-with-fear wife, and a child who looks like a cross between the gingerbread man and/or an alien. The episodes include little situations like a faulty treadmill, a salesman who can recite the Gettysburg address, watching over a sick brother in law, ant hallucinations, and just wallowing on the couch with noise all around. All the while, Lynch is still experimenting, as he was constantly for better or worse during the period of five years he made on and off Inland Empire.

For one thing, he's going back to the roots of his very first short, Six Figures Getting Sick Six Times, in the usage of repetition as a means to an end. This sometimes works excruciatingly well, and sometimes not. Sometimes, like with the episode with the sitting around the house doing nothing as teeth are bleeding and a fly buzzes around, the absurdism sort of waxes and wanes without much of a good effect. And even an episode like with the guy's friend coming over is funny more-so for the Beavis & Butt-head comparison (both laugh like idiots, and are equally engrossed by killing things like fish and sheep). What ends up working is how Lynch shows up front delirious abstractions, in the crudest ways imaginable, and excessive violence.

In what comes closest to surrealism in "ants", the guy mistakenly sprays bug-spray (just called "Kill", one of Lynch's very cheap but fun pokes at societal conventions) on himself, and envisions ants in a musical chorus line, solos included. And one of the most harrowingly funny things I've ever seen from the filmmaker is "get the stick", where we just see the guy, cheered on by his son, getting a stick lodged in his mouth. Soon the neck breaks, eyes pop out, and once said stick is removed he doesn't watch out for traffic waddling like a manhole cover. Other moments pop up like this in unexpected crevices, and it's drawn as if on cheap paper with an impetus to shock with foul-mouthed language (mostly from the man, as well as from the 'grandmother', who in one of Lynch's voices for the characters is the deepest of all), and a shaky quality that's reminiscent of the cream of the crop from (early) Hertzfeldt.

All the same I'm still not sure if Dumbland is something I would put into someone's hands if they haven't seen much of Lynch yet let alone anything by him. There are some little points on society made via complete exaggerations that may or may not be in Lynch's mind closer than we usually think to those in real life. However in general there's not a whole lot that should be read into it, which is why I'd say more than half who see it will hate it with a passion. Those who dig the bottom-less pits of animated comedy, be prepared have a blast. It is said that [[Dawood]] Lynch's films and shorts won't appeal to everyone. [[Or]] will Dumbland, maybe more than ever. I have a [[sentiment]] that Dumbland, as people come across it, will be a true mark of 'I get it' or 'what the hell'. It's not surrealism exactly, but absurd to the point of no [[restitution]]. It's [[further]] very, very, very stupid. But in this stupidity can be a sort of [[ironical]] [[intelligentsia]] to it, that the maker knows so well how childish and repugnant this is, and this self-consciousness is a plus, not a detraction.

It's just a bunch of crudely drawn shorts- the kind that might not even make it on Hertzfeldt and Judge's Animation show (which, I might add, Lynch here has a lot in common with both directors in their work- centered on a lummox with an IQ of 20 who has a constantly quivering-with-fear wife, and a child who looks like a cross between the gingerbread man and/or an alien. The episodes include little situations like a faulty treadmill, a salesman who can recite the Gettysburg address, watching over a sick brother in law, ant hallucinations, and just wallowing on the couch with noise all around. All the while, Lynch is still experimenting, as he was constantly for better or worse during the period of five years he made on and off Inland Empire.

For one thing, he's going back to the roots of his very first short, Six Figures Getting Sick Six Times, in the usage of repetition as a means to an end. This sometimes works excruciatingly well, and sometimes not. Sometimes, like with the episode with the sitting around the house doing nothing as teeth are bleeding and a fly buzzes around, the absurdism sort of waxes and wanes without much of a good effect. And even an episode like with the guy's friend coming over is funny more-so for the Beavis & Butt-head comparison (both laugh like idiots, and are equally engrossed by killing things like fish and sheep). What ends up working is how Lynch shows up front delirious abstractions, in the crudest ways imaginable, and excessive violence.

In what comes closest to surrealism in "ants", the guy mistakenly sprays bug-spray (just called "Kill", one of Lynch's very cheap but fun pokes at societal conventions) on himself, and envisions ants in a musical chorus line, solos included. And one of the most harrowingly funny things I've ever seen from the filmmaker is "get the stick", where we just see the guy, cheered on by his son, getting a stick lodged in his mouth. Soon the neck breaks, eyes pop out, and once said stick is removed he doesn't watch out for traffic waddling like a manhole cover. Other moments pop up like this in unexpected crevices, and it's drawn as if on cheap paper with an impetus to shock with foul-mouthed language (mostly from the man, as well as from the 'grandmother', who in one of Lynch's voices for the characters is the deepest of all), and a shaky quality that's reminiscent of the cream of the crop from (early) Hertzfeldt.

All the same I'm still not sure if Dumbland is something I would put into someone's hands if they haven't seen much of Lynch yet let alone anything by him. There are some little points on society made via complete exaggerations that may or may not be in Lynch's mind closer than we usually think to those in real life. However in general there's not a whole lot that should be read into it, which is why I'd say more than half who see it will hate it with a passion. Those who dig the bottom-less pits of animated comedy, be prepared have a blast. --------------------------------------------- Result 4619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Sometimes a premise starts out good, but because of the [[demands]] of having to go overboard to [[meet]] the demands of an [[audience]] suffering from attention-deficit disorder, it devolves into an [[incongruous]] [[mess]]. And for three well-respected actors who have [[made]] better [[work]] before and after, this is a [[mortal]] [[shame]].

So let's see. Premise: a loving couple who lives in a beautiful home is threatened by a bad cop. Interesting to [[say]] the least. Make the encroaching cop a little disturbing, why not. It was well [[done]] in THE HAND [[WHO]] ROCKS THE CRADLE and [[SINGLE]] [[WHITE]] FEMALE, and it's a [[proved]] ticket to a successful thriller.

Now herein [[lies]] the dilemma. [[Create]] a [[disturbing]] story that actually [[bothers]] to [[bring]] some [[true]] menace into its main [[characters]] while never going so far as to look ridiculous, or throw any semblance to reality, amp up the shock factor, and make this cop so extreme -- an ultra [[bad]] variation of every other super-villain that's hit cinemas since the silent age.

The producers, and directors, chose the latter. [[Thus]] is the [[resulting]] film -- [[badly]] made, with actors trying their darnedest to make heads or tails in roles that they've essayed before, and nothing [[much]] [[amounting]] to even less. Sometimes a premise starts out good, but because of the [[require]] of having to go overboard to [[respond]] the demands of an [[viewers]] suffering from attention-deficit disorder, it devolves into an [[counterintuitive]] [[chaos]]. And for three well-respected actors who have [[introduced]] better [[cooperate]] before and after, this is a [[homicidal]] [[pity]].

So let's see. Premise: a loving couple who lives in a beautiful home is threatened by a bad cop. Interesting to [[told]] the least. Make the encroaching cop a little disturbing, why not. It was well [[performed]] in THE HAND [[WHOSE]] ROCKS THE CRADLE and [[EXCLUSIVE]] [[BLANC]] FEMALE, and it's a [[demonstrated]] ticket to a successful thriller.

Now herein [[lying]] the dilemma. [[Creations]] a [[worrying]] story that actually [[irritates]] to [[brings]] some [[veritable]] menace into its main [[personages]] while never going so far as to look ridiculous, or throw any semblance to reality, amp up the shock factor, and make this cop so extreme -- an ultra [[unfavourable]] variation of every other super-villain that's hit cinemas since the silent age.

The producers, and directors, chose the latter. [[Accordingly]] is the [[stemming]] film -- [[sorely]] made, with actors trying their darnedest to make heads or tails in roles that they've essayed before, and nothing [[very]] [[totaling]] to even less. --------------------------------------------- Result 4620 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jake's Closet has the emotional power of Kramer vs. Kramer combined with the imagination of Pan's Labyrinth. Even the beginning special effect seems to give a nod to Pan's Labyrinth. But this is a story that takes place in modern times, not in a war sixty years ago and in that way it has even more resonance today. Jake's Closet is about a boy, an only child, practically alone on summer vacation, dealing with his family falling apart. It's a horror movie like The Others and The Sixth Sense, a horror movie for the thinking person. If you're looking for a slasher movie, this won't be your cup of tea but if you're looking for a story that is both touching and suspenseful with good acting, this is the movie for you. At the screening I saw, I swear there was one moment where the entire audience screamed. I highly recommend catching this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] An [[unusually]] straight-faced actioner played by a [[cast]] and filmed by a [[director]] who obviously [[took]] the material [[seriously]]. Imperfect, as is to be expected from a film clearly [[shot]] on a tight budget, but the drama is involving-- it's one of those films that when it gets repeated ad nauseum on Cinemax 2 or More Max or whatever they call it, you end up watching 40 minute blocks when you're supposed to be going to work. Along W/ "Deathstalker 2", "Chopping Mall", and "The Assault", a reminder that Wynorski is a much more talented director than many of his fellow low-budget brethern, who has a real ability to pace a genre film, when he actually's interested in the material (i.e., don't bother watching any of his Shannon Tweed flicks with a 3 or a 4 after the title!) Actors who've had too little to do recently (Mancuso, Ford, even Gary Sandy for chrissakes) really put their all into some of their [[best]] roles in years -- as for Grieco, he has the right look, although his acting is a bit one-note -- it's clear his character is supposed to be self-destructing throughout the film, but Grieco doesn't quite convey it. I checked IMDB and I see the writer also wrote "Sorority House Massacre 2" & "Dinosaur Island" for the director -- both minor classics in their own rights, but obviously "silly" Roger Cormon-like Cinema -- this one's more like some of the better Jonathan Demme and Jonathan Kaplan B-pictures of the 70's -- giving you the exploitation element but offering involving drama at the same time -- a real step forward. Not "Citizen Kane," and the comic final moments are a bit disruptive, but a well-written, character-driven above-average straight-to-video actioner. Small achievements like this should not be overlooked when they come along, which is [[rare]] enough (as I was reminded as I tried to sit through an Albert Pyun monstrosity called "Heatseeker" the other night -- this low-budget stuff isn't as easy as it looks -- but that's another story!) An [[abnormally]] straight-faced actioner played by a [[casting]] and filmed by a [[headmaster]] who obviously [[taken]] the material [[conscientiously]]. Imperfect, as is to be expected from a film clearly [[kiiled]] on a tight budget, but the drama is involving-- it's one of those films that when it gets repeated ad nauseum on Cinemax 2 or More Max or whatever they call it, you end up watching 40 minute blocks when you're supposed to be going to work. Along W/ "Deathstalker 2", "Chopping Mall", and "The Assault", a reminder that Wynorski is a much more talented director than many of his fellow low-budget brethern, who has a real ability to pace a genre film, when he actually's interested in the material (i.e., don't bother watching any of his Shannon Tweed flicks with a 3 or a 4 after the title!) Actors who've had too little to do recently (Mancuso, Ford, even Gary Sandy for chrissakes) really put their all into some of their [[better]] roles in years -- as for Grieco, he has the right look, although his acting is a bit one-note -- it's clear his character is supposed to be self-destructing throughout the film, but Grieco doesn't quite convey it. I checked IMDB and I see the writer also wrote "Sorority House Massacre 2" & "Dinosaur Island" for the director -- both minor classics in their own rights, but obviously "silly" Roger Cormon-like Cinema -- this one's more like some of the better Jonathan Demme and Jonathan Kaplan B-pictures of the 70's -- giving you the exploitation element but offering involving drama at the same time -- a real step forward. Not "Citizen Kane," and the comic final moments are a bit disruptive, but a well-written, character-driven above-average straight-to-video actioner. Small achievements like this should not be overlooked when they come along, which is [[few]] enough (as I was reminded as I tried to sit through an Albert Pyun monstrosity called "Heatseeker" the other night -- this low-budget stuff isn't as easy as it looks -- but that's another story!) --------------------------------------------- Result 4622 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Actress Patty [[Duke]] [[wrote]] an [[insightful]], funny, rough-hewn [[book]] about her career as an actress, her crazy-quilt love-life, and her manic depressive episodes and [[suicide]] [[attempts]] which [[almost]] put her away for good. With this rich material to draw from (and Patty playing herself in the [[final]] act), one would [[think]] a crack TV-director like Gilbert Cates [[could]] [[bring]] it all together on [[film]], but "Call Me Anna" is a pale [[shadow]] of Duke's autobiography. For those who haven't read the [[book]], the [[sketchy]] [[narrative]] ([[leaping]] forward in time) isn't absorbing, we are never allowed to get our bearings with what's happening, and the production seems stunted by a low budget. The [[actors]] are miscast, and the value of having Duke herself finally appear does not [[pay]] off--the film's [[phony]] reality is so thick at this point that Patty can't bring stability to the scenario. It appears as if the producers were sincere enough (and consciousness-minded) to anxiously steer the film towards Duke's ultimate diagnosis and mental freedom, but they left out many dramatic opportunities in the process. Actress Patty [[Duque]] [[authored]] an [[shrewd]], funny, rough-hewn [[ledger]] about her career as an actress, her crazy-quilt love-life, and her manic depressive episodes and [[suicides]] [[seeks]] which [[hardly]] put her away for good. With this rich material to draw from (and Patty playing herself in the [[ultimate]] act), one would [[thinks]] a crack TV-director like Gilbert Cates [[wo]] [[bringing]] it all together on [[flick]], but "Call Me Anna" is a pale [[shade]] of Duke's autobiography. For those who haven't read the [[workbook]], the [[incomplete]] [[descriptive]] ([[hopping]] forward in time) isn't absorbing, we are never allowed to get our bearings with what's happening, and the production seems stunted by a low budget. The [[protagonists]] are miscast, and the value of having Duke herself finally appear does not [[wages]] off--the film's [[phoney]] reality is so thick at this point that Patty can't bring stability to the scenario. It appears as if the producers were sincere enough (and consciousness-minded) to anxiously steer the film towards Duke's ultimate diagnosis and mental freedom, but they left out many dramatic opportunities in the process. --------------------------------------------- Result 4623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The Invisible Ray is an [[excellent]] [[display]] of both the acting talents of Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. Karloff pulls off a [[flawless]] performance as a sullen and conflicted scientist who appears to put his scientific achievements ahead of his [[relationships]] with others, even his wife. His already loner personality becomes unbearable as he becomes [[paranoid]].

Lugosi plays the consummate [[professional]], who is passionate about his [[work]] but [[still]] [[finds]] [[time]] to maintain on good terms with [[everyone]], but [[still]] seems to have no [[real]] close [[friends]]. This was one of his few roles as a good guy and he plays it very well. It is [[hard]], however to hear his accent and believe he is French.

The [[biggest]] problem with the movie was that it was all based on "junk science" but, in a [[way]], even the [[junk]] [[science]] makes it work well. [[Since]] the [[ideas]] and theories are [[completely]] idiotic, they are as "relevant" [[today]] as they were when the [[movie]] was [[made]]. And they are [[also]] as forward reaching- and [[always]] will be.

This is a [[perfectly]] [[delightful]] [[movie]] to watch again and again. I saw it [[maybe]] 5 [[times]] this weekend and I [[could]] [[easily]] [[sit]] through it five more [[times]]. The acting is [[marvelous]] and the [[science]] is amusing. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] it. The Invisible Ray is an [[wondrous]] [[exhibit]] of both the acting talents of Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. Karloff pulls off a [[faultless]] performance as a sullen and conflicted scientist who appears to put his scientific achievements ahead of his [[ties]] with others, even his wife. His already loner personality becomes unbearable as he becomes [[schizophrenic]].

Lugosi plays the consummate [[professionals]], who is passionate about his [[cooperation]] but [[nonetheless]] [[found]] [[times]] to maintain on good terms with [[everybody]], but [[yet]] seems to have no [[authentic]] close [[friendships]]. This was one of his few roles as a good guy and he plays it very well. It is [[dur]], however to hear his accent and believe he is French.

The [[larger]] problem with the movie was that it was all based on "junk science" but, in a [[route]], even the [[trash]] [[sciences]] makes it work well. [[Because]] the [[thinking]] and theories are [[altogether]] idiotic, they are as "relevant" [[thursday]] as they were when the [[cinematography]] was [[accomplished]]. And they are [[apart]] as forward reaching- and [[consistently]] will be.

This is a [[completely]] [[charmer]] [[film]] to watch again and again. I saw it [[presumably]] 5 [[moments]] this weekend and I [[would]] [[readily]] [[sitting]] through it five more [[moments]]. The acting is [[magnifique]] and the [[sciences]] is amusing. I [[heavily]] [[recommending]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ...cause they're both pretty [[lousy]]. I think the best [[part]] of the [[movie]] is the horrendously imperial picture of Faye Dunaway at the top of the stairs. She looks like she could very easily step out of that picture, rip [[someone]] to bloody pieces, and [[calmly]] re-enter the [[portrait]] looking as if nothing had happened. Now, you know a movie's in trouble when part of the set furnishings manages to [[attract]] your attention.

I admit, I [[paid]] $30 for the DVD just so I could [[see]] Faye Dunaway in a [[contemporary]] horror movie. I know what you're thinking--30 [[bucks]] right down into a gaping [[black]] hole. And you would be [[absolutely]] correct. This [[movie]] [[sucks]]. There, it's right out in the open. I was expecting some actual scares, and I waited and waited and waited. None came. The raven (probably a crow in makeup) didn't [[scare]] me, seeing small pieces of internal [[organs]] didn't scare me, and even Faye didn't scare me. I'm not that brave, I know, so it must be the movie itself that is the trouble. What's more, Jennifer wasn't scared either. Her internal [[organs]] were literally falling apart and she seemed more peeved than anything. Her life was rapidly coming to a close and she's worried about attaining more money. Honey, you can't take money where you're going!!! "I need money," she continually says, completely ignoring the fact that her lungs have collapsed and ceased to function.

[[Meanwhile]], I spent the whole blasted [[movie]] [[wondering]] what was up with the [[grandmother]] (Faye). I was suspicious at [[first]], Faye playing a [[grandmother]] and all, and I was [[still]] [[suspicious]] at the end. There is another relative [[living]] in the [[house]] that Jennifer and Mary Ellen the Grandmother-From-Hell are forced to share temporarily, and I'm guessing she is of the same generation as [[said]] [[grandmother]]. Here's the weird part--the relative looks like she's just [[endured]] her eight hundredth birthday [[party]]. [[Mary]] [[Ellen]] looks like she's just gotten a face-lift from a [[renowned]] [[surgeon]]. Face-lifts can't [[work]] [[miracles]], but I think Faye's appearance is important to the rice-paper [[plot]]. SPOILER!!! It seems that the family is plagued by an illness that affects bad acting...sorry, my little joke. Seriously though, there's all illness that causes their organs to fail and ultimately disintegrate. Yuck, huh? Interestingly enough, Mary Ellen is still alive and all her organs are intact. How did she avoid the Family Curse? Something's up with her, obviously.

Another reason for mourning the loss of my thirty dollars--this movie features one of my all-time movie pet peeves. I refer to the double ending. This movie ends twice. I absolutely hate it when that happens, and in this movie it feels like the director shot the ending, didn't like it, and forget to remove it during editing. I guess it's supposed to be scary, but it is only if you're a film editor.

There is one perk to this debacle, though, and it's one of the reasons I bought the DVD. The "filmmaker" commentary features Faye Dunaway, and I wanted to see how she acted when she didn't have lines to recite. Guess what--the movie sucked so bad I wasn't able to sit through it again. Drat. ...cause they're both pretty [[miserable]]. I think the best [[party]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the horrendously imperial picture of Faye Dunaway at the top of the stairs. She looks like she could very easily step out of that picture, rip [[anybody]] to bloody pieces, and [[serena]] re-enter the [[portrayal]] looking as if nothing had happened. Now, you know a movie's in trouble when part of the set furnishings manages to [[lure]] your attention.

I admit, I [[pays]] $30 for the DVD just so I could [[behold]] Faye Dunaway in a [[modern]] horror movie. I know what you're thinking--30 [[dollars]] right down into a gaping [[negro]] hole. And you would be [[totally]] correct. This [[film]] [[stinks]]. There, it's right out in the open. I was expecting some actual scares, and I waited and waited and waited. None came. The raven (probably a crow in makeup) didn't [[panic]] me, seeing small pieces of internal [[agency]] didn't scare me, and even Faye didn't scare me. I'm not that brave, I know, so it must be the movie itself that is the trouble. What's more, Jennifer wasn't scared either. Her internal [[agency]] were literally falling apart and she seemed more peeved than anything. Her life was rapidly coming to a close and she's worried about attaining more money. Honey, you can't take money where you're going!!! "I need money," she continually says, completely ignoring the fact that her lungs have collapsed and ceased to function.

[[Moreover]], I spent the whole blasted [[films]] [[asking]] what was up with the [[grammy]] (Faye). I was suspicious at [[outset]], Faye playing a [[grandma]] and all, and I was [[however]] [[dubious]] at the end. There is another relative [[life]] in the [[maison]] that Jennifer and Mary Ellen the Grandmother-From-Hell are forced to share temporarily, and I'm guessing she is of the same generation as [[stated]] [[grandma]]. Here's the weird part--the relative looks like she's just [[experienced]] her eight hundredth birthday [[part]]. [[Mari]] [[Helene]] looks like she's just gotten a face-lift from a [[notorious]] [[surgeons]]. Face-lifts can't [[jobs]] [[miracle]], but I think Faye's appearance is important to the rice-paper [[intrigue]]. SPOILER!!! It seems that the family is plagued by an illness that affects bad acting...sorry, my little joke. Seriously though, there's all illness that causes their organs to fail and ultimately disintegrate. Yuck, huh? Interestingly enough, Mary Ellen is still alive and all her organs are intact. How did she avoid the Family Curse? Something's up with her, obviously.

Another reason for mourning the loss of my thirty dollars--this movie features one of my all-time movie pet peeves. I refer to the double ending. This movie ends twice. I absolutely hate it when that happens, and in this movie it feels like the director shot the ending, didn't like it, and forget to remove it during editing. I guess it's supposed to be scary, but it is only if you're a film editor.

There is one perk to this debacle, though, and it's one of the reasons I bought the DVD. The "filmmaker" commentary features Faye Dunaway, and I wanted to see how she acted when she didn't have lines to recite. Guess what--the movie sucked so bad I wasn't able to sit through it again. Drat. --------------------------------------------- Result 4625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This one was [[marred]] by [[potentially]] [[great]] [[matches]] being cut very short.

The opening [[match]] was a [[waste]] of the Legion of Doom, but I guess the only way they could have been eliminated by Demolition was a double-DQ. Otherwise, [[Mr]]. [[Perfect]] [[would]] have had to put in overtime. Kerry von Erich, the I-C [[champ]], was wasted here. And this was the [[third]] ppv in a row where Perfect jobbed. [[Remember]], before that he never lost a match.

The [[second]] match was very [[good]], [[possibly]] the best of the night. Ted DiBiase and the Undertaker were excellent, while the Jim Neidhart had one of his WWF highlights, pinning the Honky Tonk Man. Koko B. Ware continued his tradition of being the first to put over a new heel (remember the Big Bossman and Yokozuna?). This was a foreshadowing of Bret Hart's singles career, as he came back from two-on-one and almost survived the match. He and DiBiase put on a wrestling clinic, making us forget that the point of the match was DiBiase's boring feud with Dusty Rhodes.

Even though the Visionaries were the first team to have all of its members survive (and only the second since '87 to have four survivors), this match was not a squash. This was the longest match of the night, and Jake did a repeat of his '88 performance when he was left alone against four men and dominated. I think he could have actually pulled off an upset. These days, the match would have ended the other way around.

One of the shortest SS matches ever was also one of its most surprising. Possibly the most underrated wrestler ever, Tito Santana was the inspirational wrestler of the night, putting on war paint and pinning Boris Zukhov, Tanaka, and even the Warlord in the final survival match. It was so strange to see him put over so overwhelmingly, then go right back to his mediocre career. Sgt. Slaughter also did well, getting rid of Volkoff and the Bushwhackers, but that just wasn't a surprise. Tito was.

I think the only point of the survival match was to have Hogan and the Warrior win together at the end.

This show was boring and the matches were too short. The Undertaker's debut was cool, but Tito Santana is the reason I will remember this one. This one was [[overshadowed]] by [[maybe]] [[fabulous]] [[ballgame]] being cut very short.

The opening [[ballgame]] was a [[squandering]] of the Legion of Doom, but I guess the only way they could have been eliminated by Demolition was a double-DQ. Otherwise, [[Hannes]]. [[Consummate]] [[could]] have had to put in overtime. Kerry von Erich, the I-C [[buckaroo]], was wasted here. And this was the [[thirdly]] ppv in a row where Perfect jobbed. [[Reminisce]], before that he never lost a match.

The [[secondly]] match was very [[buena]], [[arguably]] the best of the night. Ted DiBiase and the Undertaker were excellent, while the Jim Neidhart had one of his WWF highlights, pinning the Honky Tonk Man. Koko B. Ware continued his tradition of being the first to put over a new heel (remember the Big Bossman and Yokozuna?). This was a foreshadowing of Bret Hart's singles career, as he came back from two-on-one and almost survived the match. He and DiBiase put on a wrestling clinic, making us forget that the point of the match was DiBiase's boring feud with Dusty Rhodes.

Even though the Visionaries were the first team to have all of its members survive (and only the second since '87 to have four survivors), this match was not a squash. This was the longest match of the night, and Jake did a repeat of his '88 performance when he was left alone against four men and dominated. I think he could have actually pulled off an upset. These days, the match would have ended the other way around.

One of the shortest SS matches ever was also one of its most surprising. Possibly the most underrated wrestler ever, Tito Santana was the inspirational wrestler of the night, putting on war paint and pinning Boris Zukhov, Tanaka, and even the Warlord in the final survival match. It was so strange to see him put over so overwhelmingly, then go right back to his mediocre career. Sgt. Slaughter also did well, getting rid of Volkoff and the Bushwhackers, but that just wasn't a surprise. Tito was.

I think the only point of the survival match was to have Hogan and the Warrior win together at the end.

This show was boring and the matches were too short. The Undertaker's debut was cool, but Tito Santana is the reason I will remember this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I though this [[would]] be an [[okay]] [[movie]], [[since]] i like [[zombies]] and [[horror]] [[movies]] in general. But i did not [[think]] it [[would]] be such a piece of sh!t [[like]] it was. The only [[zombie]] in the [[movie]] is at the [[beginning]] and he [[gets]] ran over by a [[god]] damn car!!! The [[movie]] looks to be written by a porn director and filled by porn [[actors]], i wouldn't ever [[call]] them [[actors]]! The [[costumes]] [[seems]] to be [[stolen]] from a [[local]] [[school]] play. Its seems [[like]] a [[road]] [[movie]] with [[almost]] no [[monsters]]. There is no [[fun]] at all in this [[piece]] of sh!t, only horror, but not in the [[way]] the director [[intended]]. I would [[rather]] be [[raped]] by a [[pedophile]] than [[see]] this [[movie]] ever again!!! [[ugh]]! I though this [[could]] be an [[allright]] [[filmmaking]], [[because]] i like [[walkers]] and [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] in general. But i did not [[thoughts]] it [[could]] be such a piece of sh!t [[iike]] it was. The only [[ghoul]] in the [[film]] is at the [[start]] and he [[got]] ran over by a [[seigneur]] damn car!!! The [[film]] looks to be written by a porn director and filled by porn [[players]], i wouldn't ever [[invitation]] them [[players]]! The [[garb]] [[looks]] to be [[shoplifted]] from a [[locale]] [[schooling]] play. Its seems [[iike]] a [[path]] [[cinematographic]] with [[hardly]] no [[freaks]]. There is no [[funny]] at all in this [[slice]] of sh!t, only horror, but not in the [[camino]] the director [[conceived]]. I would [[somewhat]] be [[infringed]] by a [[pervert]] than [[behold]] this [[film]] ever again!!! [[argh]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is some of the worst acting I have ever seen. I love Almereyda's Nadja, but this is just absolute dreck. Aside from a few moments of interesting cinematography and music this film is just nonstop bad acting and dumb material. Jared Harris is particularly bad, but no one in this is remotely good. The plot is a joke, but not the haha kind. I don't even know if you can forgive movies that are this bad. Please erase the last hour and a half of my life. How did this director make Nadja and Another Girl Another Planet? --------------------------------------------- Result 4628 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I would strongly recommend this film for any musical fan whose been dying to see a musical make a faithful transition from stage to screen. Sure it's long, but it's length is a testimony to how true to the original musical script the film is being. The sets and cast really make Sweet Apple, Ohio the place to be. Fosse protege Anne Reinking also does a splendid job with choreography giving the dances a nice small town, period feel.

The casting at a glance may look strange to some but they really are qute marvelous(reading "annonymous"'s comments on Jason Alexander's performance made me sick). In fact, his perforamnce literally steals the show. As Albert, he mixes his own unique blend of manic nervousness with Dick Van Dyke-esque charm to create a new and improved Albert. The fact that he can dance and sing like nobody's business doeesn't hurt either. George Wendt is another stand out, who improves upon Paul Lynde's take on Harry McAffe by making him less manic and more down to Earth and strict. His whole character and body language scream "over my dead body". Marc Kudisch takes the Elvis aspect of Conrad Birdie to new heights with his subtle insertion of a "thank you very much" in "Honestly Sincere". His physicality though harkens back more to young Elvis then the bloated, stubly Conrad of the original film. The fact is that this movie differs so greatly from the original film (which added drawn in happpy faces, turtles on speed and the Russian ballet!!!) what did any of taht have to do with Bye, Bye Birdie, I wonder? The only possible advantage the original version has over this one is Ann Margret. Otherwise the update is better in every possible way. Where the old version cut many songs and increased dance breaks nwhere there was no need for them (and for all intents and purposes ended the movie in the middle of the play), the new version has restored the original music score and has added some great new stuff as well ("A Giant Step" being the standout in that category). We know live in trying times but if you want to get your mind off your troubles and put on a happy face then this is one worth checking out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] The only good [[part]] about this [[film]] is the [[beautiful]] [[scenery]]. This [[movie]] was long and boring. The minister should have [[retired]] from the pulpit the [[time]] his son [[Paul]] strayed from the teachings he [[proclaimed]]. How many times can his boys [[take]] the Lord's [[name]] in [[vain]] in this [[film]] being from a Presbyterian [[background]]? It doesn't fit. I wished Paul was swept down the [[river]] without a [[boat]] at the very [[beginning]] to [[spare]] us the [[silly]], smirkish, selfish [[story]] of [[Paul]] (Brad Pitt). [[So]] [[Norm]] [[becomes]] a [[teacher]] and [[Paul]] becomes a compulsive [[gambler]] who Norm [[wants]] to [[rescue]] but doesn't-so what. It's very uninteresting. We [[see]] the prejudiced whites being [[stood]] up to by Paul because of his [[native]] American [[girl]]. That was the only [[part]] that had some interest and maybe [[could]] have been [[developed]] into a real '[[wild]] western'. What we only [[see]] is a sleepy [[town]] where the two minister's [[sons]] have nothing to do but 1. Norm [[chase]] a lame girlfriend and [[deal]] with her [[family]] and 2.[[Paul]] make up [[dumb]] [[stories]] at the [[newspaper]] [[shop]] while [[scratching]] his [[head]] and take a [[lot]] of swigs and [[tie]] a [[lot]] of flies. I'd [[rather]] watch a [[show]] about [[fishing]] that that [[film]] again-which will be never. The only good [[portion]] about this [[filmmaking]] is the [[sumptuous]] [[landscaping]]. This [[flick]] was long and boring. The minister should have [[retiring]] from the pulpit the [[moment]] his son [[Paolo]] strayed from the teachings he [[declared]]. How many times can his boys [[taking]] the Lord's [[denomination]] in [[useless]] in this [[flick]] being from a Presbyterian [[context]]? It doesn't fit. I wished Paul was swept down the [[revere]] without a [[ship]] at the very [[launches]] to [[sparing]] us the [[farcical]], smirkish, selfish [[conte]] of [[Poul]] (Brad Pitt). [[Therefore]] [[Norma]] [[become]] a [[professors]] and [[Paolo]] becomes a compulsive [[wagering]] who Norm [[wanted]] to [[saving]] but doesn't-so what. It's very uninteresting. We [[behold]] the prejudiced whites being [[amounted]] up to by Paul because of his [[indigenous]] American [[women]]. That was the only [[party]] that had some interest and maybe [[wo]] have been [[crafted]] into a real '[[feral]] western'. What we only [[behold]] is a sleepy [[municipality]] where the two minister's [[son]] have nothing to do but 1. Norm [[hunts]] a lame girlfriend and [[address]] with her [[families]] and 2.[[Pablo]] make up [[twit]] [[fairytales]] at the [[dailies]] [[stores]] while [[scraping]] his [[leader]] and take a [[lots]] of swigs and [[necktie]] a [[batch]] of flies. I'd [[fairly]] watch a [[illustrates]] about [[pesca]] that that [[movies]] again-which will be never. --------------------------------------------- Result 4630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I don't know if I'd consider it a [[masterpiece]] of not, but it's [[damn]] near [[close]]; it's [[extremely]] well [[made]], artistic, suspenseful, intricately plotted, thematically challenging and full of [[bleak]] foreshadowing and sexual-religious [[imagery]]. There's [[also]] some [[great]] camera-work from [[Jan]] de Bont, an atmospheric [[score]] from Loek Dikker and [[outstanding]] acting from Jeroen Krabbé and Renée Soutendijk, the latter giving one of the most [[sneaky]], subtle '[[femme]] fatale' performance I've ever [[seen]]. Like [[many]] other European [[movies]], this [[movie]] has an [[unashamed]], non-judgmental [[attitude]] [[toward]] sex, nudity and the complexities of sexuality and has zero [[reservations]] about mixing it all up with religious and/or [[surrealistic]] (some [[would]] [[say]] blasphemous) images. In other words, if you can't bear the [[thought]] of [[seeing]] a lust-driven homosexual envisioning the object of his carnal desire as [[Jesus]] crucified on the [[cross]] before the two of them [[go]] at it [[inside]] a [[cemetery]] crypt then this might not be the [[movie]] for you. What [[surprised]] me more is how this [[bizarre]] [[movie]] [[managed]] to [[completely]] dodge being a pretentious mess. It mixes the [[abstract]]/[[surreal]]/parallel fantasy-reality scenes and [[somehow]] makes it all [[work]]. Like any good [[mystery]], you can [[see]] the [[pieces]] slowly [[falling]] into place as the [[movie]] progresses. There is NOT an out-of-left-field resolution here. The [[movie]] has [[direction]], there's no needless [[filler]] and once it [[concludes]], you [[begin]] to understand the [[purpose]] of what may have [[confused]] you earlier. If you like the [[work]] of [[Ken]] Russell and David Lynch, I can [[almost]] [[guarantee]] you will [[love]] this [[movie]]. [[Hell]], if you have no [[idea]] who they even are, you [[still]] might [[like]] it.

I'm not [[going]] to [[spoil]] the plot by [[getting]] too detailed, but the film's opening shot - through a web as a spider catches its prey - sets the [[stage]] as Krabbé, as unshaven, smug, bisexual [[writer]] Gerard Reve ([[interestingly]], [[also]] the [[name]] of the [[writer]] [[whose]] novel this is [[based]] on) crosses paths with a [[wealthy]], mysterious, [[sexy]] [[woman]] named Christine (Soutendijk, melding androgynous stylings with Simone Simon-like innocence/cuteness that's pretty unnerving), who may be a literal 'black widow' responsible for the deaths of her three previous husbands. The two become lovers and move in with one another, but we're led to believe (through Christine's bizarre behavior and the frequent appearances of another woman - played by Geert de Jong - who may or may not actually exist) something terrible is boiling under the surface. When another of Christine's lovers, the young and "beautiful" Herman (Thom Hoffman), shows up at the house, things take an unexpected turn. And that's all you need to know.

THE 4TH MAN was a huge art-house success in much of the world, but didn't make it over to the US until 1984, where it was awarded the Best Foreign Film of the year from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association. The most common video is the Media release, which has been horribly dubbed. Try to avoid that one and head straight for the newer subtitled Anchor Bay DVD release. Since coming to America, Verhoeven's career has had its ups and downs. He has made a few decent films (Flesh & Blood, RoboCop) and some lousy ones (Showgirls). In fact, Verhoeven's big hit Basic Instinct is almost like a less interesting, junior league version of The Fourth Man. Soutendjik also tried her hand at acting in America and since GRAVE SECRETS (1989) and EVE OF DESTRUCTION (1991) were the best offers she was getting, she headed right back home to the Netherlands. I don't know if I'd consider it a [[centerpiece]] of not, but it's [[jesus]] near [[shut]]; it's [[remarkably]] well [[introduced]], artistic, suspenseful, intricately plotted, thematically challenging and full of [[pessimistic]] foreshadowing and sexual-religious [[visuals]]. There's [[apart]] some [[wondrous]] camera-work from [[January]] de Bont, an atmospheric [[scoring]] from Loek Dikker and [[unpaid]] acting from Jeroen Krabbé and Renée Soutendijk, the latter giving one of the most [[duplicitous]], subtle '[[wife]] fatale' performance I've ever [[noticed]]. Like [[various]] other European [[cinema]], this [[cinema]] has an [[snotty]], non-judgmental [[stance]] [[into]] sex, nudity and the complexities of sexuality and has zero [[bookings]] about mixing it all up with religious and/or [[unreal]] (some [[should]] [[said]] blasphemous) images. In other words, if you can't bear the [[thinking]] of [[witnessing]] a lust-driven homosexual envisioning the object of his carnal desire as [[Dammit]] crucified on the [[croix]] before the two of them [[going]] at it [[within]] a [[burials]] crypt then this might not be the [[film]] for you. What [[stunned]] me more is how this [[odd]] [[cinematography]] [[managing]] to [[altogether]] dodge being a pretentious mess. It mixes the [[summary]]/[[bizarre]]/parallel fantasy-reality scenes and [[someplace]] makes it all [[collaboration]]. Like any good [[riddle]], you can [[seeing]] the [[segments]] slowly [[declining]] into place as the [[films]] progresses. There is NOT an out-of-left-field resolution here. The [[cinema]] has [[orientation]], there's no needless [[refill]] and once it [[conclude]], you [[startup]] to understand the [[targets]] of what may have [[baffled]] you earlier. If you like the [[cooperated]] of [[Kent]] Russell and David Lynch, I can [[hardly]] [[secured]] you will [[amour]] this [[kino]]. [[Dammit]], if you have no [[brainchild]] who they even are, you [[nonetheless]] might [[likes]] it.

I'm not [[go]] to [[ruin]] the plot by [[obtain]] too detailed, but the film's opening shot - through a web as a spider catches its prey - sets the [[ballpark]] as Krabbé, as unshaven, smug, bisexual [[screenwriter]] Gerard Reve ([[suspiciously]], [[similarly]] the [[names]] of the [[screenwriter]] [[whom]] novel this is [[predicated]] on) crosses paths with a [[wealthier]], mysterious, [[hot]] [[women]] named Christine (Soutendijk, melding androgynous stylings with Simone Simon-like innocence/cuteness that's pretty unnerving), who may be a literal 'black widow' responsible for the deaths of her three previous husbands. The two become lovers and move in with one another, but we're led to believe (through Christine's bizarre behavior and the frequent appearances of another woman - played by Geert de Jong - who may or may not actually exist) something terrible is boiling under the surface. When another of Christine's lovers, the young and "beautiful" Herman (Thom Hoffman), shows up at the house, things take an unexpected turn. And that's all you need to know.

THE 4TH MAN was a huge art-house success in much of the world, but didn't make it over to the US until 1984, where it was awarded the Best Foreign Film of the year from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association. The most common video is the Media release, which has been horribly dubbed. Try to avoid that one and head straight for the newer subtitled Anchor Bay DVD release. Since coming to America, Verhoeven's career has had its ups and downs. He has made a few decent films (Flesh & Blood, RoboCop) and some lousy ones (Showgirls). In fact, Verhoeven's big hit Basic Instinct is almost like a less interesting, junior league version of The Fourth Man. Soutendjik also tried her hand at acting in America and since GRAVE SECRETS (1989) and EVE OF DESTRUCTION (1991) were the best offers she was getting, she headed right back home to the Netherlands. --------------------------------------------- Result 4631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As [[incredible]] as it may [[seem]], Gojoe is an anime- and Hong Kong-inspired samurai action flick with a pacifistic [[message]]. This ankle of the film is effectively portrayed through the protagonist (a [[great]] acting job done by Daisuke Ryu), a killer-turned-to-boddhist-monk Benkei. Benkei has sworn never to kill again, but he still takes up the sword to fight what he thinks is a demon invasion...

Gojoe is a film difficult to rate. It's visual [[imagery]] is stunningly [[crafted]] and [[beautiful]], but it uses too much [[trickery]] (circling camera and high speed drives, expressionistic shots, leeched colors, digital effects etc.), so the end result is [[somewhat]] [[tiring]]. That said, the beginning and the ending of the film are nevertheless both elegant and [[powerful]]. If only the director Sogo Ishii would have been wise enough not to overuse his bag of tricks.

Other problem with Gojoe is the amount of violence. For a film with such an anti-violent message Gojoe wastes way too much energy and screen time to depict the endless battle scenes. Also, the way the violence is shown is always on the edge of being self-indulgent; in fact, a blood shower against the night sky seems to be one of the films signature images. Luckily, Ishii is wise enough to show the ugly, tragic side of violence as well. Still, it seems that Ishii is not sure whether he's making a traditional action film or a deeply moral allegory. The audience can't be sure of this, either, until the very end of the film. The powerful (albeit cynical) ending is what saves Gojoe; it clearly [[emphasizes]] that this film is something more than a mere gore-fest. As [[unthinkable]] as it may [[seems]], Gojoe is an anime- and Hong Kong-inspired samurai action flick with a pacifistic [[messaging]]. This ankle of the film is effectively portrayed through the protagonist (a [[wondrous]] acting job done by Daisuke Ryu), a killer-turned-to-boddhist-monk Benkei. Benkei has sworn never to kill again, but he still takes up the sword to fight what he thinks is a demon invasion...

Gojoe is a film difficult to rate. It's visual [[photograph]] is stunningly [[devised]] and [[leggy]], but it uses too much [[hoax]] (circling camera and high speed drives, expressionistic shots, leeched colors, digital effects etc.), so the end result is [[rather]] [[gruelling]]. That said, the beginning and the ending of the film are nevertheless both elegant and [[forceful]]. If only the director Sogo Ishii would have been wise enough not to overuse his bag of tricks.

Other problem with Gojoe is the amount of violence. For a film with such an anti-violent message Gojoe wastes way too much energy and screen time to depict the endless battle scenes. Also, the way the violence is shown is always on the edge of being self-indulgent; in fact, a blood shower against the night sky seems to be one of the films signature images. Luckily, Ishii is wise enough to show the ugly, tragic side of violence as well. Still, it seems that Ishii is not sure whether he's making a traditional action film or a deeply moral allegory. The audience can't be sure of this, either, until the very end of the film. The powerful (albeit cynical) ending is what saves Gojoe; it clearly [[stressed]] that this film is something more than a mere gore-fest. --------------------------------------------- Result 4632 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I just picked up the DVD release of this movie while on holiday in Norway where it has been [[released]] with English subtitles.

The film is beautifully photographed and [[powerfully]] acted. The [[youngster]] portraying 'Frits' the lead character has an [[astonishingly]] open face which mirrors with painful accuracy the [[tragic]] events which unfold around him.

Early on in the film we see that the father whom Frits [[loves]] so much has mental health problems and this is brought up when the brutal headmaster denies assaulting the boy and suggests it was his own father.

The climactic scene where Frits refuses to show any respect to the headmaster; simply standing his ground and repeating 'Liar' as he is brutally assaulted in front of his classmates is a scene you are not likely to forget.

The films only [[weak]] point is the rather clichéd 'Flower Power' teacher who uses every 'friendly teacher' trick in the book. Other than this I feel sure that this is a film you will [[really]] [[enjoy]]. I just picked up the DVD release of this movie while on holiday in Norway where it has been [[freed]] with English subtitles.

The film is beautifully photographed and [[flatly]] acted. The [[youngsters]] portraying 'Frits' the lead character has an [[terribly]] open face which mirrors with painful accuracy the [[disastrous]] events which unfold around him.

Early on in the film we see that the father whom Frits [[loved]] so much has mental health problems and this is brought up when the brutal headmaster denies assaulting the boy and suggests it was his own father.

The climactic scene where Frits refuses to show any respect to the headmaster; simply standing his ground and repeating 'Liar' as he is brutally assaulted in front of his classmates is a scene you are not likely to forget.

The films only [[feeble]] point is the rather clichéd 'Flower Power' teacher who uses every 'friendly teacher' trick in the book. Other than this I feel sure that this is a film you will [[genuinely]] [[enjoys]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4633 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] i would like to [[comment]] the series as a [[great]] effort. The story line although requiring a few improvements was pretty well, especially in season 1. Season 2 however became more of a freak show, and [[lost]] DA's original charm. Season one story line was more interesting, a [[light]] side to the life at Jam pony while a [[focused]] serious plot with manticore chasing down the X-series. i was looking forward to new seasons, in fact i still am. I hope the FOX guys and DA production crew realize that a lot of ppl still wait for DA to make a comeback. Even after 2 yrs of it being cancelled, DA can make it big if worked on properly, and i think a name like James Cameron should take on this challenge. i would like to [[observational]] the series as a [[wondrous]] effort. The story line although requiring a few improvements was pretty well, especially in season 1. Season 2 however became more of a freak show, and [[forfeited]] DA's original charm. Season one story line was more interesting, a [[lighting]] side to the life at Jam pony while a [[oriented]] serious plot with manticore chasing down the X-series. i was looking forward to new seasons, in fact i still am. I hope the FOX guys and DA production crew realize that a lot of ppl still wait for DA to make a comeback. Even after 2 yrs of it being cancelled, DA can make it big if worked on properly, and i think a name like James Cameron should take on this challenge. --------------------------------------------- Result 4634 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] When the [[film]] [[began]], I was [[shocked]] to [[see]] it was [[filmed]] [[using]] a [[cheap]] [[video]] camera! [[In]] fact, the camera [[shakes]] and [[looks]] worse than the average home [[movie]]. Even direct to DVD [[films]] should have [[production]] values better than this! Heck, a [[large]] percentage of the [[home]] [[videos]] uploaded to YouTube have better production values! All too often, the [[film]] seriously [[appears]] to be [[made]] by sticking the camera on a tripod and [[turning]] it on--with no camera person! Closeups and anything resembling camera-work are absent in some scenes where they [[might]] have [[worked]] and in others there are too [[many]] or poorly framed closeups. [[Yecch]]!

The [[film]] is about two gay [[men]] who want to [[become]] married. As if was made [[almost]] a decade [[ago]], their only [[option]] was [[marrying]] in Vermont--times have definitely [[changed]]. [[However]], the [[recent]] [[acceptance]] of [[gay]] marriage cannot in any [[way]] be [[attributed]] to this film--if [[anything]], it set the [[gay]] [[marriage]] supporters back [[instead]] of [[helping]] as the movie stinks and never really [[tries]] to [[seriously]] [[address]] the [[issue]]. According to the film, [[religious]] people are one-dimensional idiots who [[carry]] Bibles EVERYWHERE and shoot people as well as [[wives]] who have gay [[husbands]] are narrow-minded when they [[learn]] their spouses have been [[living]] a lie--go figure. I'm sure glad it [[gives]] an honest [[chance]] to both sides on the [[issue]]!

The bottom line--nothing about the [[film]] [[shows]] any professionalism at all and I even hesitate to [[call]] this a film. It's more like a [[home]] [[movie]] and doesn't even [[merit]] a [[listing]] on IMDb or even inclusion on IMDb's Bottom 100 list of the [[worst]] rated [[films]] of all [[time]]. The acting is [[horrible]], the [[writing]] is [[horrible]], the [[direction]] (if there even is any) is [[horrible]], the camera-work is [[horrible]] and the plot is [[horrible]]. It's a [[home]] [[movie]]!! There is nothing [[positive]] I can say about this in any [[way]] except that it makes the [[films]] of Ed [[Wood]] [[seem]] like Oscar [[contenders]] in comparison and I am sure the [[ghost]] of Mr. [[Wood]] is [[smiling]] [[every]] time [[someone]] watches this [[mess]]!

I don't [[care]] if you are [[gay]] or straight--this [[film]] is not worth your [[time]] and I don't know how they [[managed]] to [[create]] DVDs of it. I assume one of the actors [[burns]] them on his home computer during his free [[time]]! [[Seriously]], this gives new meaning to the word 'bad'!

By the way, if the one lady in the film WAS a real lawyer, wouldn't the ability to read be an important prerequisite?! I'm just sayin'.

Finally, with gay marriage being such a serious and important topic, can't we have a film that's BETTER than THIS that addresses the issue?! This one, sadly, only invites laughter. When the [[filmmaking]] [[inaugurated]], I was [[surprised]] to [[seeing]] it was [[shot]] [[used]] a [[cheaper]] [[videotape]] camera! [[For]] fact, the camera [[rocks]] and [[seem]] worse than the average home [[cinematography]]. Even direct to DVD [[filmmaking]] should have [[productivity]] values better than this! Heck, a [[immense]] percentage of the [[households]] [[video]] uploaded to YouTube have better production values! All too often, the [[flick]] seriously [[appear]] to be [[introduced]] by sticking the camera on a tripod and [[turn]] it on--with no camera person! Closeups and anything resembling camera-work are absent in some scenes where they [[probable]] have [[collaborated]] and in others there are too [[multiple]] or poorly framed closeups. [[Yuck]]!

The [[filmmaking]] is about two gay [[males]] who want to [[gotten]] married. As if was made [[practically]] a decade [[before]], their only [[alternative]] was [[married]] in Vermont--times have definitely [[changing]]. [[Still]], the [[newer]] [[accepting]] of [[homosexual]] marriage cannot in any [[pathway]] be [[bestowed]] to this film--if [[nothing]], it set the [[homosexual]] [[marry]] supporters back [[however]] of [[supporting]] as the movie stinks and never really [[attempted]] to [[severely]] [[tackle]] the [[issues]]. According to the film, [[nuns]] people are one-dimensional idiots who [[carrying]] Bibles EVERYWHERE and shoot people as well as [[handcuffs]] who have gay [[maris]] are narrow-minded when they [[learned]] their spouses have been [[vida]] a lie--go figure. I'm sure glad it [[delivers]] an honest [[luck]] to both sides on the [[issues]]!

The bottom line--nothing about the [[filmmaking]] [[denotes]] any professionalism at all and I even hesitate to [[calls]] this a film. It's more like a [[household]] [[film]] and doesn't even [[deserved]] a [[list]] on IMDb or even inclusion on IMDb's Bottom 100 list of the [[meanest]] rated [[movie]] of all [[times]]. The acting is [[scary]], the [[literary]] is [[scary]], the [[directions]] (if there even is any) is [[horrific]], the camera-work is [[horrific]] and the plot is [[horrific]]. It's a [[household]] [[filmmaking]]!! There is nothing [[auspicious]] I can say about this in any [[pathway]] except that it makes the [[film]] of Ed [[Woods]] [[seems]] like Oscar [[rivals]] in comparison and I am sure the [[phantom]] of Mr. [[Bois]] is [[kidd]] [[each]] time [[everybody]] watches this [[confusion]]!

I don't [[healthcare]] if you are [[homosexual]] or straight--this [[filmmaking]] is not worth your [[period]] and I don't know how they [[administered]] to [[creating]] DVDs of it. I assume one of the actors [[combust]] them on his home computer during his free [[times]]! [[Earnestly]], this gives new meaning to the word 'bad'!

By the way, if the one lady in the film WAS a real lawyer, wouldn't the ability to read be an important prerequisite?! I'm just sayin'.

Finally, with gay marriage being such a serious and important topic, can't we have a film that's BETTER than THIS that addresses the issue?! This one, sadly, only invites laughter. --------------------------------------------- Result 4635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I found this a good movie to pass your [[time]], but not by any chance of any historical [[value]]. The [[portrayal]] of [[Cleopatra]] reminded me a cheap soap opera.

The [[twist]] of the facts is... funny! She gave birth while [[feeding]] her people!?!? O [[please]]... A [[pregnant]] Queen of Egypt (especially this one) would not [[bother]] to go from one room to the other for that reason! They tried to [[make]] her [[appear]] a saint for God's sake! And the [[way]] they [[tried]] to justify her murdering her own sister... beyond description.

Cleopatra was the greatest politician of her time. Her decisions were based anything but her feelings and morals. She did everything for only two reasons: Power and self-preservation! She was borne in a family where she had to straggle for survival, something she did very well. Anything that stood on her way was either murdered (her brothers and sister) or seduced (Ceasar and Mark Anthony).

Unfortunately Octavian was too powerful to kill and too... gay to be seduced. So, he was her end... I found this a good movie to pass your [[moment]], but not by any chance of any historical [[values]]. The [[portrait]] of [[Cleo]] reminded me a cheap soap opera.

The [[twisting]] of the facts is... funny! She gave birth while [[eating]] her people!?!? O [[invites]]... A [[expectant]] Queen of Egypt (especially this one) would not [[disturb]] to go from one room to the other for that reason! They tried to [[deliver]] her [[appears]] a saint for God's sake! And the [[camino]] they [[try]] to justify her murdering her own sister... beyond description.

Cleopatra was the greatest politician of her time. Her decisions were based anything but her feelings and morals. She did everything for only two reasons: Power and self-preservation! She was borne in a family where she had to straggle for survival, something she did very well. Anything that stood on her way was either murdered (her brothers and sister) or seduced (Ceasar and Mark Anthony).

Unfortunately Octavian was too powerful to kill and too... gay to be seduced. So, he was her end... --------------------------------------------- Result 4636 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] We [[see]] a body of dead [[girl]] in a morgue with the coroner trying to close the eyes of the girl, but whatever he tries they won't stay open. After this we move into the future and we follow a group of former school friends who [[hide]] a terrible secret, but suddenly they start getting picked off one by one in many [[grisly]] ways. Through flashbacks we learn of this [[awful]] suicide of a shy girl who was trying to be one of the group, but she was shut out by them because they dug up her past and found out some weird occurrences. So, is she back from the grave seeking revenge?

Oh what a great and always spooky story! Well, that's what I hoping I could say. And 'hoping' was as good as it got. This is an forgettable, so-so supernatural horror flick that I actually watched before, but I went in thinking it was my first viewing. So to my surprise it hit me when I started picking up on certain things, but like I said it's quite a forgettable mix that it felt like a first viewing again. "Nightmare' is just another type of it's field that adds a 'few' changes to the gruel. Oh, please give me something that's a bit more fresh. It doesn't have to be entirely original, but this is one formulaic and at times quite [[tired]] J-horror flick. Even though it strings along the usual ghost story involving you guessed right… an evil looking, [[vengeful]] chick spirit.

But in spite of my negativity of it being the same old, same old story and jolts. This one kind of entertains when its being grisly and popping in some creepy [[visuals]]. The deaths are vividly displayed with bite and some originality. While, the gloomy atmosphere alienates the audience with it's murky lighting. The first scene involving the spirit terrorising one of the girls is one blood-curdling experience, but really when it's not trying to shock you. I found it rather coma inducing and I thought about getting some shut-eye. That might be harsh, but it just didn't go anywhere of any interest between those shock moments. You could say that because the supposed mystery is really not much of one, the unsure story is just [[simply]] [[flat]] and the characters are a self-centred bunch that you don't really care what happens to them. The disjointed story should have focused more on the spirit than that of these bland characters who have one unconvincing group relationship. It just overplayed its cards by becoming overly muddled and taking too long to get going that when it comes to the climax it's just plain ludicrous. The film's haunting ending is a high point, though.

The film looks fine, although it could have done without the snazzy, quick fire editing and the music score was a bit overbearing in playing up the mood. The performances tread a fine line, but Gyu-ri Kim is strong in the lead role.

It's nothing new and it shamelessly steals ideas, but if you can look past that it delivers some nasty thrills. Although, I found the handling of it rather lethargic, despite the odd effective chills. A standard effort all round I guess, but still it's equally missable. We [[seeing]] a body of dead [[giri]] in a morgue with the coroner trying to close the eyes of the girl, but whatever he tries they won't stay open. After this we move into the future and we follow a group of former school friends who [[mask]] a terrible secret, but suddenly they start getting picked off one by one in many [[ghastly]] ways. Through flashbacks we learn of this [[gruesome]] suicide of a shy girl who was trying to be one of the group, but she was shut out by them because they dug up her past and found out some weird occurrences. So, is she back from the grave seeking revenge?

Oh what a great and always spooky story! Well, that's what I hoping I could say. And 'hoping' was as good as it got. This is an forgettable, so-so supernatural horror flick that I actually watched before, but I went in thinking it was my first viewing. So to my surprise it hit me when I started picking up on certain things, but like I said it's quite a forgettable mix that it felt like a first viewing again. "Nightmare' is just another type of it's field that adds a 'few' changes to the gruel. Oh, please give me something that's a bit more fresh. It doesn't have to be entirely original, but this is one formulaic and at times quite [[knackered]] J-horror flick. Even though it strings along the usual ghost story involving you guessed right… an evil looking, [[vindictive]] chick spirit.

But in spite of my negativity of it being the same old, same old story and jolts. This one kind of entertains when its being grisly and popping in some creepy [[image]]. The deaths are vividly displayed with bite and some originality. While, the gloomy atmosphere alienates the audience with it's murky lighting. The first scene involving the spirit terrorising one of the girls is one blood-curdling experience, but really when it's not trying to shock you. I found it rather coma inducing and I thought about getting some shut-eye. That might be harsh, but it just didn't go anywhere of any interest between those shock moments. You could say that because the supposed mystery is really not much of one, the unsure story is just [[purely]] [[apartment]] and the characters are a self-centred bunch that you don't really care what happens to them. The disjointed story should have focused more on the spirit than that of these bland characters who have one unconvincing group relationship. It just overplayed its cards by becoming overly muddled and taking too long to get going that when it comes to the climax it's just plain ludicrous. The film's haunting ending is a high point, though.

The film looks fine, although it could have done without the snazzy, quick fire editing and the music score was a bit overbearing in playing up the mood. The performances tread a fine line, but Gyu-ri Kim is strong in the lead role.

It's nothing new and it shamelessly steals ideas, but if you can look past that it delivers some nasty thrills. Although, I found the handling of it rather lethargic, despite the odd effective chills. A standard effort all round I guess, but still it's equally missable. --------------------------------------------- Result 4637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] For a film that's ostensibly about sex and leather, it doesn't have any right to be as oddly sweet as it is. The story of Bettie Page, a good Christian girl from the South who's momma wouldn't let her date until she married, who moved to New York and ended up becoming the most successful pin-up of her age, is driven by an [[outstanding]] performance from Gretchen Moll. Her Page can't quite reconcile the pictures that she takes (nobody's allowed to touch, it's all fun and respectful) with the pornography trials and supposed ill-effects that her images have on the world around her.

Page has been an inspiration to every burlesque artist since, not just because she had a figure to die for, but because she invested every picture with an innocent sense of fun that was uniquely sexy and simple at the same time. Rather like this film, in fact. Filmde in both black and white and glorious technicolour, it's a lovely way to spend a couple of hours. For a film that's ostensibly about sex and leather, it doesn't have any right to be as oddly sweet as it is. The story of Bettie Page, a good Christian girl from the South who's momma wouldn't let her date until she married, who moved to New York and ended up becoming the most successful pin-up of her age, is driven by an [[unresolved]] performance from Gretchen Moll. Her Page can't quite reconcile the pictures that she takes (nobody's allowed to touch, it's all fun and respectful) with the pornography trials and supposed ill-effects that her images have on the world around her.

Page has been an inspiration to every burlesque artist since, not just because she had a figure to die for, but because she invested every picture with an innocent sense of fun that was uniquely sexy and simple at the same time. Rather like this film, in fact. Filmde in both black and white and glorious technicolour, it's a lovely way to spend a couple of hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 4638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This show is just [[annoying]]!!! I feel [[sorry]] for the [[actors]] for having to attempt to be funny ([[especially]] [[Bob]] Saget), the [[laugh]] track [[tries]] to cover up the sad jokes and the "Awwww" [[track]] [[comes]] up at the most [[unnecessary]] [[times]]. The over-dramatic [[kids]] are no [[exception]], [[especially]] the [[Olsen]] twins. [[Also]], this [[show]] is cliché city. If you were to look up the word cliché, it [[would]] read "Full [[House]]" Every story line has a "[[life]] lesson" to be [[learned]] at the end. [[A]] sappy speech makes everything better and even has the [[ability]] to make the most bratty [[child]] have a [[sudden]] realization of goodness GASP too [[bad]] this couldn't be [[possible]] in [[real]] [[life]]. I don't know how [[someone]] [[could]] watch this show without bad mouthing the [[behavior]] of the characters or the [[laugh]] [[track]]. i [[find]] myself [[yelling]] at the [[TV]] saying, "THAT Isn't [[FUNNY]]/SAD/[[CUTE]]" If [[life]] were really like this, the [[world]] [[would]] [[fall]] [[apart]]. This show is just [[exasperating]]!!! I feel [[apologise]] for the [[protagonists]] for having to attempt to be funny ([[mostly]] [[Spongebob]] Saget), the [[laughed]] track [[attempt]] to cover up the sad jokes and the "Awwww" [[trails]] [[happens]] up at the most [[vain]] [[dates]]. The over-dramatic [[kid]] are no [[exceptions]], [[principally]] the [[Mccann]] twins. [[Further]], this [[exhibition]] is cliché city. If you were to look up the word cliché, it [[could]] read "Full [[Domicile]]" Every story line has a "[[lives]] lesson" to be [[learnt]] at the end. [[una]] sappy speech makes everything better and even has the [[dexterity]] to make the most bratty [[enfants]] have a [[brusque]] realization of goodness GASP too [[negative]] this couldn't be [[conceivable]] in [[veritable]] [[vie]]. I don't know how [[person]] [[did]] watch this show without bad mouthing the [[demeanor]] of the characters or the [[giggling]] [[tracks]]. i [[unearthed]] myself [[cree]] at the [[TELEVISION]] saying, "THAT Isn't [[DROLL]]/SAD/[[CHARMER]]" If [[iife]] were really like this, the [[globe]] [[could]] [[dip]] [[additionally]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie when it was new. Later I rented it in Japan after having been here three years, afraid that I would cringe when I viewed it in the harsh light of my expanded international experience. The movie pleasantly surprised me with how accurately it portrays the culture clash between Japan and Pennsylvania (where I'm from). Not all the stuff is factually spot on, but the tone is perfect.

I'm still in Japan many years later, and I continue to enjoy this film for its even-handed treatment of the two sides in the story. Interestingly, although the Japanese-American actors spoke Japanese in the original, the dialog is redubbed in the Japan version to cover up obvious second-language delivery problems.

I noticed one reviewer uses this in a Japanese class. I think you can learn more about what to expect from an encounter with Japan by watching this film than by reading any of the "serious" books on the matter (most of which were written in the 80s and financed by propagandizing Japanese companies).

Don't be fooled by drag on the average rating caused by one-star reviewers who, among other things, found it implausible that the Japanese would want to build cars in the US. (Of course, the Japanese operate many factories there to be close to the customers and to avoid trade friction.) This is a very warm and funny movie that I would rate higher were it not for a few 80s clichés, like the dancing around to cheesy electronic disco music. Michael Keaton has never been funnier. --------------------------------------------- Result 4640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Spoilers ahead, but does it really matter? Have you ever read a movie review composed entirely of questions? Could this be it? Why did an ancient civilization bury artifacts all over the world? Why is this question never answered? Why was the opening text crawl incoherent? Why would a nun (she sure seemed nice!) hand over 20 orphans to a madman? Has there always been a gold mine in downtown Vancouver? Why does one of the gold mine's shafts exit in the front yard of an orphanage? Why does Tara Reid's character suddenly show up at Christian Slater's apartment for sex? (Or did I just answer my own question?) Why would even a non-archaeologist bang open an obviously valuable solid gold chest with a sledgehammer? Why would modern computers still display green pre-Tron-era grid outlines of objects, complete with little "bleeps"? And must all movie explosive timers have digital displays? Why doesn't ANYTHING in this movie make any sense? --------------------------------------------- Result 4641 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I viewed the [[movie]] together with a homophobic friend, my wife and her female [[friend]]. [[So]] I had views from all kinds of directions. Mainly, the film [[made]] me laugh, the sexual tension was not [[really]] there and the only [[noticeable]] actors were [[Tudor]] Chirila and Maria Popistasu. [[Yes]], I do think she played her role well, [[even]] if the script was not [[appropriate]]. There were good Romanian actors [[around]], they just didn't have complex [[roles]]. I [[applaud]] Puya's [[entering]] the [[movie]] business. I don't know why, but I think he's a good guy, I just hope he'll be a good actor.

The wife loved the movie, though, and I think there might have been chords being played and to which I had no ear for. If the film tried to present uncommon sexual behaviors and their consequences in todays Romania, then it failed miserably. There were no consequences. Just imagine that the girls are actually a boy and a girl, and the same story becomes just a boring, uninteresting plot.

I have no idea why it got all those BAFTA awards. In my book, it should have gotten the "Better luck next time" award. (bafta=good luck in Romanian). I viewed the [[cinematography]] together with a homophobic friend, my wife and her female [[boyfriend]]. [[Hence]] I had views from all kinds of directions. Mainly, the film [[brought]] me laugh, the sexual tension was not [[truthfully]] there and the only [[recognizable]] actors were [[Theodore]] Chirila and Maria Popistasu. [[Yep]], I do think she played her role well, [[yet]] if the script was not [[adequate]]. There were good Romanian actors [[throughout]], they just didn't have complex [[functions]]. I [[commend]] Puya's [[penetrating]] the [[movies]] business. I don't know why, but I think he's a good guy, I just hope he'll be a good actor.

The wife loved the movie, though, and I think there might have been chords being played and to which I had no ear for. If the film tried to present uncommon sexual behaviors and their consequences in todays Romania, then it failed miserably. There were no consequences. Just imagine that the girls are actually a boy and a girl, and the same story becomes just a boring, uninteresting plot.

I have no idea why it got all those BAFTA awards. In my book, it should have gotten the "Better luck next time" award. (bafta=good luck in Romanian). --------------------------------------------- Result 4642 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] 'I'm working for a sinister [[corporation]] doing industrial [[espionage]] in the [[future]] and I'm [[starting]] to [[get]] [[confused]] about who I [[really]] am, sh*#t! I've [[got]] a headache and [[things]] are going wobbly, [[oh]] no here [[comes]] another [[near]] subliminal fast-cut [[noisy]] montage of [[significant]] yet cryptic [[images]]...'

I [[rented]] this [[movie]] because the few [[reviews]] out there have all been [[favourable]]. Why? Cypher is a cheap, derivative, [[dull]] [[movie]], set in a poorly realised bland futureworld, with [[wooden]] [[leads]], and a [[laughable]] [[ending]].

An eerie [[sense]] that [[something]] interesting might be about to [[happen]] [[keeps]] you watching a [[series]] of increasingly [[silly]] and [[unconvincing]] [[events]], before the [[film]] [[makers]] [[slap]] you in the [[face]] with an ending that [[combines]] the worst of [[Bond]] with a [[Duran]] [[Duran]] video.

It's [[painfully]] [[obvious]] they have eked out the [[production]] [[using]] Dr [[Who]] style [[improvised]] [[special]] [[effects]] in order to [[include]] a few good (if a [[little]] Babylon 5) CGI set [[pieces]]. This sub [[Fight]] Club, sub [[Philip]] K [[Dick]] future noir [[thriller]] strives for a much [[broader]] scope than its [[modest]] budget will [[allow]].

Cool blue moodiness served up with po-faced seriousness - disappointingly dumb. This is not [[intelligent]] Sci-Fi, this is the [[plot]] of a computer [[game]]. 'I'm working for a sinister [[businesses]] doing industrial [[eavesdropping]] in the [[impending]] and I'm [[onset]] to [[gets]] [[disoriented]] about who I [[genuinely]] am, sh*#t! I've [[gets]] a headache and [[aspects]] are going wobbly, [[ah]] no here [[happens]] another [[close]] subliminal fast-cut [[rowdy]] montage of [[considerable]] yet cryptic [[imaging]]...'

I [[rents]] this [[filmmaking]] because the few [[assessment]] out there have all been [[propitious]]. Why? Cypher is a cheap, derivative, [[uninspiring]] [[filmmaking]], set in a poorly realised bland futureworld, with [[lumber]] [[leeds]], and a [[farcical]] [[terminated]].

An eerie [[feeling]] that [[anything]] interesting might be about to [[arise]] [[retains]] you watching a [[serials]] of increasingly [[dumb]] and [[inconclusive]] [[incidents]], before the [[filmmaking]] [[producers]] [[slapping]] you in the [[encounter]] with an ending that [[amalgamated]] the worst of [[Bonded]] with a [[Hernandez]] [[Gonzales]] video.

It's [[embarrassingly]] [[manifest]] they have eked out the [[productivity]] [[used]] Dr [[Whose]] style [[homemade]] [[peculiar]] [[impact]] in order to [[incorporate]] a few good (if a [[petite]] Babylon 5) CGI set [[slices]]. This sub [[Combat]] Club, sub [[Filipe]] K [[Tail]] future noir [[thrillers]] strives for a much [[wider]] scope than its [[slight]] budget will [[allows]].

Cool blue moodiness served up with po-faced seriousness - disappointingly dumb. This is not [[astute]] Sci-Fi, this is the [[intrigue]] of a computer [[gaming]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I have to [[admit]] that [[Tsui]] Hark is one of a [[kind]], you can't top a [[person]] with a strong style of [[movie]] [[presence]]. A [[Chinese]] [[fantasy]] [[picture]] [[may]] not be [[easy]] to [[present]] to an audience, the director [[attempted]] to [[bring]] back the [[classic]] fantasy [[tales]] of Zu [[Mountain]] and this is what he displayed.

The [[new]] Legend of Zu has [[truly]] [[improved]] from the one in 1983. From this new millenium [[update]], we [[could]] [[see]] [[Tsui]] Hark's [[vision]] of the Zu mountains. [[Spectacular]] visual designs, amazing action-fantasy epic [[made]] beautifully well. Kept me [[glued]] through the [[entire]] [[picture]]. [[Great]] cast with just fine acting. It's [[truly]] a fun movie to watch, but is it too [[weird]]?

Now the down side is people will [[definitely]] get confused with it's [[broad]] story line shortened down into a 95 minute movie. Plot may not have much [[relation]] [[among]] [[characters]], but by rewatching the movie, you'll have a [[better]] sense of understanding the [[characters]] itself. Some can complain there isn't too much [[physical]] [[combat]], besides with [[characters]] that have supernatural powers to defeat [[foes]], [[spirits]] [[fighting]] by hand-to-hand wouldn't [[really]] make sense at all.

I [[appreciated]] this nice [[stylish]] [[picture]]. It [[may]] have a thin story, but [[hey]] [[look]] at [[Tsui]] Hark's "[[Time]] & [[Tide]]," we got confused by the [[plot]] as well, but it was [[truly]] [[something]] [[stylish]] and [[awesome]]. Tsui [[Hark]] [[always]] [[attracts]] [[something]] [[different]] into H.K. [[Cinema]]. [[American]] [[audiences]], may have some [[difficulty]] to [[understand]] while [[watching]] this movie, [[cause]] this ain't no [[Crouching]] Tiger, [[Hidden]] Dragon, this is a [[whole]] new [[genre]]. [[Although]] it [[may]] not be a masterpiece, but it's special [[effects]] is [[truly]] [[better]] than [[Storm]] Riders. This is [[really]] worth [[checking]] out. I have to [[recognise]] that [[Xu]] Hark is one of a [[genera]], you can't top a [[anybody]] with a strong style of [[cinema]] [[attendance]]. A [[Chino]] [[utopia]] [[image]] [[maggio]] not be [[easier]] to [[presented]] to an audience, the director [[tempted]] to [[bringing]] back the [[classical]] fantasy [[story]] of Zu [[Mountainside]] and this is what he displayed.

The [[novel]] Legend of Zu has [[really]] [[improve]] from the one in 1983. From this new millenium [[upgrade]], we [[wo]] [[seeing]] [[Suh]] Hark's [[eyesight]] of the Zu mountains. [[Excellent]] visual designs, amazing action-fantasy epic [[brought]] beautifully well. Kept me [[pasted]] through the [[whole]] [[image]]. [[Large]] cast with just fine acting. It's [[honestly]] a fun movie to watch, but is it too [[odd]]?

Now the down side is people will [[surely]] get confused with it's [[vast]] story line shortened down into a 95 minute movie. Plot may not have much [[relative]] [[in]] [[character]], but by rewatching the movie, you'll have a [[best]] sense of understanding the [[attribute]] itself. Some can complain there isn't too much [[corporal]] [[battling]], besides with [[features]] that have supernatural powers to defeat [[hater]], [[wits]] [[struggling]] by hand-to-hand wouldn't [[genuinely]] make sense at all.

I [[enjoyed]] this nice [[tasteful]] [[photographs]]. It [[maggio]] have a thin story, but [[bye]] [[glance]] at [[Chui]] Hark's "[[Period]] & [[Tides]]," we got confused by the [[intrigue]] as well, but it was [[honestly]] [[anything]] [[elegant]] and [[noteworthy]]. Tsui [[Oyez]] [[continuously]] [[attract]] [[anything]] [[various]] into H.K. [[Cinemas]]. [[Americana]] [[audience]], may have some [[challenges]] to [[understanding]] while [[staring]] this movie, [[reason]] this ain't no [[Crouched]] Tiger, [[Camouflaged]] Dragon, this is a [[total]] new [[genera]]. [[Despite]] it [[maggio]] not be a masterpiece, but it's special [[effect]] is [[honestly]] [[best]] than [[Blizzard]] Riders. This is [[genuinely]] worth [[verifying]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film may have been the [[biggest]] let-down I've [[experienced]] in renting movies based on IMDb reviews. Overall, I simply found this to be a second-rate movie.

Leslie Cheung is [[certainly]] passable as the antihero and Ma Wu handles his character with cheerful [[competence]]. On the other hand, Ma Wu's makeup (facial hair) is so obviously phony that I [[simply]] [[could]] not [[take]] him [[seriously]]. He looked like an overweight [[teenager]] dressed up for Halloween, complete with the $4.95 stick-on [[beard]].

The [[special]] effects were so-so, [[though]] the "undead" in the [[cellar]] were pretty [[good]]. The tree-tongue looked like [[something]] from a [[bad]] 1950s monster [[flick]], [[though]] the POV shots from the tongue's [[view]] more closely resembled Sam Raimi's [[trademark]] shots in the more recent "[[Evil]] Dead" [[trilogy]]. The [[pyrotechnics]] were ho-hum and the [[final]] [[battle]] is about as dull as you can [[get]]. (In fact, it most closely reminded me of the "Lost in Space" episode where the Robinsons are caught in a sandstorm and....)

The [[plot]] was not [[particularly]] [[original]] and has been told [[countless]] times in the [[form]] of European fairy tales. There was no [[suspense]] and no plot twists. [[In]] fact, you know right away as you are introduced to the characters who is good, who is bad, and who is going to survive.

I just returned this film to Netflix and then I sat down to write this review. The very first thing I did was [[check]] the production date. Yep, it says 1987...not the 1967 that I thought it might be. And that pretty much [[sums]] it up: The production values and FX are typical of the 1960s. The plot and action seem much older, as Hollywood was actually producing some interesting and challenging films in the 60s.

** out of ***** This film may have been the [[widest]] let-down I've [[endured]] in renting movies based on IMDb reviews. Overall, I simply found this to be a second-rate movie.

Leslie Cheung is [[definitely]] passable as the antihero and Ma Wu handles his character with cheerful [[dexterity]]. On the other hand, Ma Wu's makeup (facial hair) is so obviously phony that I [[straightforward]] [[did]] not [[taking]] him [[severely]]. He looked like an overweight [[teenage]] dressed up for Halloween, complete with the $4.95 stick-on [[shave]].

The [[particular]] effects were so-so, [[despite]] the "undead" in the [[cava]] were pretty [[buena]]. The tree-tongue looked like [[somethin]] from a [[naughty]] 1950s monster [[movie]], [[if]] the POV shots from the tongue's [[opinions]] more closely resembled Sam Raimi's [[hallmark]] shots in the more recent "[[Wicked]] Dead" [[triad]]. The [[fireworks]] were ho-hum and the [[latter]] [[fights]] is about as dull as you can [[gets]]. (In fact, it most closely reminded me of the "Lost in Space" episode where the Robinsons are caught in a sandstorm and....)

The [[intrigue]] was not [[principally]] [[preliminary]] and has been told [[myriad]] times in the [[forms]] of European fairy tales. There was no [[waiting]] and no plot twists. [[At]] fact, you know right away as you are introduced to the characters who is good, who is bad, and who is going to survive.

I just returned this film to Netflix and then I sat down to write this review. The very first thing I did was [[audited]] the production date. Yep, it says 1987...not the 1967 that I thought it might be. And that pretty much [[amounts]] it up: The production values and FX are typical of the 1960s. The plot and action seem much older, as Hollywood was actually producing some interesting and challenging films in the 60s.

** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 4645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Murder and insurance [[fraud]] take an [[adulterous]] couple to "the end of the [[line]]"...

[[TV]] was visually vulgar back in the early 1970s and this truncated, made-for-TV knock-off [[hurt]] my eyes. It can't [[possibly]] compare to the 1944 [[Billy]] Wilder Film Noir [[classic]] as [[anyone]] in their right mind [[ought]] to know -sight unseen- but that doesn't mean this [[update]] should be [[seen]] as a [[separate]] entity, either. Although based on the [[original]] Paramount [[screenplay]], there's over half an [[hour]] [[cut]] out and the director's bland indifference makes what's [[left]] imminently forgettable. With [[rare]] [[exception]], the [[younger]] generation wasn't interested in watching [[old]] black and [[white]] [[movies]] on [[TV]] back in 1973 ([[still]] true today, alas) so this lurid, compelling [[tale]] was new to the overwhelming majority of [[viewers]]; then as now, ratings rule and cashing in was its only reel [[raison]] d'etre. Gus Van Zandt remade [[Alfred]] Hitchcock's [[PSYCHO]] for similar [[reasons]] and if these redux [[led]] to the seeking out of the original [[films]] or novels, so [[much]] the [[better]]. I [[loved]] the [[James]] [[M]]. Cain [[source]] [[novel]] [[enough]] to [[tune]] in back then and I [[enjoyed]] this [[time]] capsule curio the second time [[around]] for the longish hair, halter tops, turbans, ugly decor, and lush auburn [[locks]] of "guest [[star]]" Samantha Eggar, who didn't [[try]] too [[hard]]. [[In]] addition to recognizing a few of the [[incidental]] cast from a childhood spent in front of the [[boob]] [[tube]], Lee J. Cobb was able to [[hold]] my interest as a world-weary, tired-looking Keyes but [[Richard]] Crenna's affable and [[inoffensive]] [[Walter]] Neff only [[reminded]] me of Bill Bixby on a [[bad]] day. [[Improvement]] [[upon]] the [[original]] was, of course, never [[intended]] in a rush to make a buck but, instead of a [[mindless]] retread, a [[new]] [[adaptation]] of the [[novel]] [[would]] have been a [[novel]] [[idea]]. Cain's [[book]] [[differs]] somewhat from its celluloid incarnations and the [[horrific]] shark fins in the moonlight ending is killer. The completist in me is [[thankful]] this [[speeded]] up "Me Decade" [[update]] was included as [[part]] of the [[DOUBLE]] INDEMNITY DVD extras but the experience not only [[made]] me [[long]] to [[see]] the original, it had me nostalgic for any episode of the better-made [[COLUMBO]] [[TV]] [[series]]. I also flashed back to a very good 1973 ABC TV Movie Of The Week that I haven't seen since its initial airing: John D. Macdonald's LINDA starring the beautiful Stella Stevens as a ruthless femme fatale who murders her lover's (sexy John Saxon) [[wife]] and then frames her mild-mannered husband for the crime and, if I remember correctly, there's also an open-ended ending. Like DOUBLE INDEMNITY, it was needlessly remade with TV movie queen Virginia Madsen as the titular vixen and Richard Thomas as the milquetoast husband. Murder and insurance [[swindle]] take an [[adulterer]] couple to "the end of the [[bloodline]]"...

[[TELEVISIONS]] was visually vulgar back in the early 1970s and this truncated, made-for-TV knock-off [[injure]] my eyes. It can't [[perhaps]] compare to the 1944 [[Pele]] Wilder Film Noir [[typical]] as [[person]] in their right mind [[oughta]] to know -sight unseen- but that doesn't mean this [[refreshed]] should be [[saw]] as a [[separated]] entity, either. Although based on the [[initial]] Paramount [[scenario]], there's over half an [[hora]] [[chop]] out and the director's bland indifference makes what's [[exited]] imminently forgettable. With [[uncommon]] [[exceptions]], the [[youngest]] generation wasn't interested in watching [[longtime]] black and [[blanc]] [[filmmaking]] on [[TELEVISION]] back in 1973 ([[again]] true today, alas) so this lurid, compelling [[storytelling]] was new to the overwhelming majority of [[listeners]]; then as now, ratings rule and cashing in was its only reel [[reason]] d'etre. Gus Van Zandt remade [[Alfredo]] Hitchcock's [[CRAZY]] for similar [[motifs]] and if these redux [[spearheaded]] to the seeking out of the original [[film]] or novels, so [[very]] the [[best]]. I [[adored]] the [[Jacques]] [[meters]]. Cain [[sources]] [[newer]] [[sufficiently]] to [[tuning]] in back then and I [[loved]] this [[times]] capsule curio the second time [[about]] for the longish hair, halter tops, turbans, ugly decor, and lush auburn [[locking]] of "guest [[stars]]" Samantha Eggar, who didn't [[seek]] too [[tough]]. [[At]] addition to recognizing a few of the [[fortuitous]] cast from a childhood spent in front of the [[tit]] [[pipe]], Lee J. Cobb was able to [[holds]] my interest as a world-weary, tired-looking Keyes but [[Richards]] Crenna's affable and [[innocuous]] [[Walters]] Neff only [[recalling]] me of Bill Bixby on a [[negative]] day. [[Improved]] [[after]] the [[initial]] was, of course, never [[conceived]] in a rush to make a buck but, instead of a [[irrational]] retread, a [[nouveau]] [[adaptations]] of the [[newer]] [[could]] have been a [[newer]] [[ideals]]. Cain's [[ledger]] [[varies]] somewhat from its celluloid incarnations and the [[terrifying]] shark fins in the moonlight ending is killer. The completist in me is [[appreciate]] this [[quicken]] up "Me Decade" [[modernization]] was included as [[portion]] of the [[DOUBLES]] INDEMNITY DVD extras but the experience not only [[introduced]] me [[lengthy]] to [[behold]] the original, it had me nostalgic for any episode of the better-made [[COLOMBO]] [[TVS]] [[serial]]. I also flashed back to a very good 1973 ABC TV Movie Of The Week that I haven't seen since its initial airing: John D. Macdonald's LINDA starring the beautiful Stella Stevens as a ruthless femme fatale who murders her lover's (sexy John Saxon) [[femme]] and then frames her mild-mannered husband for the crime and, if I remember correctly, there's also an open-ended ending. Like DOUBLE INDEMNITY, it was needlessly remade with TV movie queen Virginia Madsen as the titular vixen and Richard Thomas as the milquetoast husband. --------------------------------------------- Result 4646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This piece of filth is virtually impossible to follow. The sound is crap the picture quality goes from bad to worse to good to bad again! Things happen for no apparent reason characters appear and disappear. Was the director suffering from a massive brain injury during its production?

Poor film making aside, the story is vile just sick evil sh*t If you like rape, murder and self harm this is right up your alley. And if simulated scenes of murder are not enough you can enjoy clips of actual people being executed. I watched almost all of it but had to turn off after I seen someones brains blown out. Never before have I seen a film that left me feeling so ashamed and dirty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Now, for all of the cinematographical [[buffs]] out there, this [[film]] may not [[rank]] high on your [[list]] of things to see. But if you know [[anything]] about [[plot]] [[development]], profound truth, and the intentions that this [[film]] (the series) had, you'd understand my p.o.v.

[[Granted]], the specifics of the [[film]] are renderings of the writer, who cannot be [[expected]] to know what will happen in the [[end]]. But the film is biblically [[accurate]] and [[justifiably]] "scares" [[viewers]] into thinking about what may be. I'm a Christian, not due to this movie, but due to my personal decision to accept Jesus as my Savior. The film and potential that something similar to the circumstances portrayed therein can remarkably scare someone into thinking about their actions and decisions. It's not some [[cheap]] attempt to scare people into believing in God, but rather, a [[means]] to get your [[attention]].

As a Christian, I know I'll not be left behind, and thanks to movies like this, I can look [[beyond]] the superficialities of [[entertainment]], acting, and film budgeting to [[appreciate]] the [[depth]] that the [[film]] has to [[offer]]. This is a movie you shouldn't not only [[see]], but feel with your [[heart]] and soul. Now, for all of the cinematographical [[amateurs]] out there, this [[movie]] may not [[grades]] high on your [[lists]] of things to see. But if you know [[something]] about [[intrigue]] [[evolution]], profound truth, and the intentions that this [[movie]] (the series) had, you'd understand my p.o.v.

[[Allotted]], the specifics of the [[movie]] are renderings of the writer, who cannot be [[predicted]] to know what will happen in the [[termination]]. But the film is biblically [[exact]] and [[legitimately]] "scares" [[audience]] into thinking about what may be. I'm a Christian, not due to this movie, but due to my personal decision to accept Jesus as my Savior. The film and potential that something similar to the circumstances portrayed therein can remarkably scare someone into thinking about their actions and decisions. It's not some [[cheaper]] attempt to scare people into believing in God, but rather, a [[signifies]] to get your [[beware]].

As a Christian, I know I'll not be left behind, and thanks to movies like this, I can look [[afterlife]] the superficialities of [[entertainments]], acting, and film budgeting to [[thankful]] the [[depths]] that the [[movie]] has to [[affords]]. This is a movie you shouldn't not only [[seeing]], but feel with your [[nub]] and soul. --------------------------------------------- Result 4648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terrfic film with a slightyly slow start - give it a chance to start cooking. Story builds in interest and complexity. Characters and storyline subvert expectation and cliche at all the right moments. Superb New York City locations - gritty, real - are a fantastic antidote to the commercial imperatives of "Sex in the City" - in fact, the entire film is an antidote to the HBO/Hollywood notion of New York City , sex and relationships. It's a rare film that treats its characters so honestly and compassionately. LOVED IT! Great cast with notable performances by Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, and her love interest (forgot his name!). --------------------------------------------- Result 4649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I approached this film with low expectations but was very pleasantly surprised. It is very well done and it beats hands down the ballroom dancing movies of recent years, especially "Strictly Ballroom". While the music is nice and the dancing colourful, for me the movie is not about dancing. It is about the very Japanese institution that gives male office workers long commutes to work and free time after work for entertainment that does not involve their families. Here we have the man with the complete family and the large mortgage and a flagging zest for life. He is drawn to the attractive image of a young woman in a dance studio he passes during his commute and this leads him to try ballroom dancing. Also Japanese is the fact that the lecherous motives that initiated his new passion are made plain but somehow accepted, at least eventually, by family and audience. Attitudes to ballroom dancing, as conveyed in the film, are definitely non-Western, though the discipline and the music are clearly cultural imports to Japan. The cultural contrasts are thus intriguing. Even without the cultural insights, the colour, the dance and the enthusiasm of the players all make this a fun film to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 4650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] En route to a small town that lays way off the beaten track (but which looks suspiciously close to a freeway), a female reporter runs into a strange hitch-hiker who agrees to help direct her to her destination. The strange man then recounts a pair of gruesome tales connected to the area: in the first story, an adulterous couple plot to kill the woman's husband, but eventually suffer a far worse fate themselves when they are attacked by a zombie; and in the second story, a group of campers have their vacation cut short when an undead outlaw takes umbrage at having his grave peed on.

The Zombie Chronicles is an attempt by writer Garrett Clancy and director Brad Sykes at making a zombie themed anthology—a nice idea, but with only two stories, it falls woefully short. And that's not the only way in which this low budget gore flick fails to deliver: the acting is lousy (with Joe Haggerty, as the tale-telling Ebenezer Jackson, giving one of the strangest performances I have ever seen); the locations are uninspired; the script is dreary; there's a sex scene with zero nudity; and the ending.... well, that beggars belief.

To be fair, some of Sykes' creative camera-work is effective (although the gimmicky technique employed as characters run through the woods is a tad overused) and Joe Castro's cheapo gore is enthusiastic: an ear is bitten off, eyeballs are plucked out, a face is removed, brains are squished, and there is a messy decapitation. These positives just about make the film bearable, but be warned, The Zombie Chronicles ain't a stroll in the park, even for seasoned viewers of z-grade trash.

I give The Zombie Chronicles 2/10, but generously raise my rating to 3 since I didn't get to view the film with the benefit of 3D (although I have a sneaking suspicion that an extra dimension wouldn't have made that much of a difference). --------------------------------------------- Result 4651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst French movies I have seen so far, among more than 100 french movies I have ever seen. Terrible screenplay and very medioacre/unprofessional acting causes the directing powerless. with all that it doesn't matter how nice western french scene and fancy music can add to the story.

One of the key weakness of this movie is that these two characters do NOT attract people, as an audience I don't care what happens to them.

It amazed me how this movie won jury prize in cannes, man, I love almost all the awarded movies in cannes, but not this one. A major disappointment for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4652 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm stunt, I must admit I never saw a movie with such good story and none stop high special effect martial art fighting scene. If you like the fantastic genre, like me, you will certainly be more than satisfied! All character have very cool power and the special effect are near perfection, in one word, flawless! I will listen to this movie a lot in the next years. --------------------------------------------- Result 4653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only good thing about this unfunny dreck is that I didn't have to pay for it. I saw it for free at college. And if a college student can't find humor in something that was free, it's hopeless.

Stale acting and poor jokes cannot be masked by an excellent, yet bewildering set design (that goes out of its way to market Volkswagon Beetles). I don't know what Michaels Myers was doing in this movie, but I have never seen anything more depressing. This was nothing more than a blatant effort to capitalize on the previous success of the Grinch (which has its opponents, but I enjoyed it very much). It's difficult not to sit through this failure and wonder what better projects were passed over to fund it.

You want a funny Seuss adaptation? Go with the Grinch. --------------------------------------------- Result 4654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I actually had quite [[high]] hopes going into this movie, so I took what was given with a grain of salt and [[hoped]] for the [[best]]. About 1/3 of the way through the [[film]] I [[simply]] had to [[give]] up, quite [[simply]] the movie is a mish-mash of stuff happening for no apparent reason and it's all disconnected. I [[love]] [[movies]] that make you think, but this movie was just a bunch of ideas thrown together and never really connected.

Don't think it's David Lynch-esquire as some would have you believe, it is nowhere near that realm other than some trippy visuals. Saying it's artsy to disguise the fact there's no apparent plot or story is just a manner or justifying why you wasted the 1.5 hours in the film. The acting was good, but that cannot [[save]] [[lack]] of story. I do agree with the one comment posted previously... "it's like being in some other person's head... while they're on drugs," in other words [[nothing]] makes sense. I actually had quite [[alto]] hopes going into this movie, so I took what was given with a grain of salt and [[desired]] for the [[optimum]]. About 1/3 of the way through the [[filmmaking]] I [[exclusively]] had to [[confer]] up, quite [[straightforward]] the movie is a mish-mash of stuff happening for no apparent reason and it's all disconnected. I [[iike]] [[movie]] that make you think, but this movie was just a bunch of ideas thrown together and never really connected.

Don't think it's David Lynch-esquire as some would have you believe, it is nowhere near that realm other than some trippy visuals. Saying it's artsy to disguise the fact there's no apparent plot or story is just a manner or justifying why you wasted the 1.5 hours in the film. The acting was good, but that cannot [[rescued]] [[shortage]] of story. I do agree with the one comment posted previously... "it's like being in some other person's head... while they're on drugs," in other words [[anything]] makes sense. --------------------------------------------- Result 4655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] i [[realize]] this [[review]] will [[get]] me bashed by the expert film [[critics]] patrolling this [[site]], but i will defend this [[film]].

The [[Dentist]] is actually a really good [[film]]. The acting isn't [[always]] top notch, but the thrills are good and the story's good. Plus you see Linda Hoffman's boobies. Not that I'm an expert in this field, but the direction seems good and the [[plot]] makes sense. [[Corbin]] makes a [[great]] creepy dentist. It does to [[dentists]] what Jaws does to sharks...ish. It [[obviously]] had a fairly [[limited]] budget, but they did well with it what they could, and [[developed]] the characters well (those that count).

the end. i [[realise]] this [[revisiting]] will [[obtain]] me bashed by the expert film [[detractors]] patrolling this [[locations]], but i will defend this [[kino]].

The [[Orthodontist]] is actually a really good [[kino]]. The acting isn't [[unceasingly]] top notch, but the thrills are good and the story's good. Plus you see Linda Hoffman's boobies. Not that I'm an expert in this field, but the direction seems good and the [[intrigue]] makes sense. [[Furey]] makes a [[large]] creepy dentist. It does to [[dentistry]] what Jaws does to sharks...ish. It [[assuredly]] had a fairly [[capped]] budget, but they did well with it what they could, and [[devised]] the characters well (those that count).

the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 4656 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] This movie kept me constantly entertained. In comparing this to Serial Mom, Mr. Waters has gone back to his grittier side. This is not nearly as polished.

There is a dark side here. A message about how success and fame changes a person -- but more importantly how it changes the people around you.

There is not a [[false]] moment in this film.

The characters are somewhat cartoonish... but I want to believe that is what Mr. Waters is trying to achieve.

It is fascinating to watch how Mr. Waters has evolved... This is truly his [[finest]] work. This movie kept me constantly entertained. In comparing this to Serial Mom, Mr. Waters has gone back to his grittier side. This is not nearly as polished.

There is a dark side here. A message about how success and fame changes a person -- but more importantly how it changes the people around you.

There is not a [[specious]] moment in this film.

The characters are somewhat cartoonish... but I want to believe that is what Mr. Waters is trying to achieve.

It is fascinating to watch how Mr. Waters has evolved... This is truly his [[meanest]] work. --------------------------------------------- Result 4657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie is similar to the [[play]] entitled 'Blithe Spirit' [[written]] by Noel Coward. The plot of a ghost [[wife]] and a medium are strongly linked to Coward's writing. I'm surprised that movies of this nature don't acknowledge the original writer's concept. I [[realize]] that the public may not be aware that this is a [[knockoff]] but it is.

[[Sad]]. These movies are so expensive to [[produce]]. I do perk up when a [[screenplay]] is original. I [[even]] perk up when it's an innovative way to [[produce]] a work that was previously released. There were some samples mentioned (such as Topper, etc.).

I realize that movies are still a comparatively affordable form of entertainment. However, I'm not please when the public's taste is taken for granted. In this situation, the public's taste is overlooked.

I look forward to better produced movie entertainment.

[[In]] this case. I [[rather]] see the play. This movie is similar to the [[playing]] entitled 'Blithe Spirit' [[typed]] by Noel Coward. The plot of a ghost [[femme]] and a medium are strongly linked to Coward's writing. I'm surprised that movies of this nature don't acknowledge the original writer's concept. I [[achieving]] that the public may not be aware that this is a [[knockoffs]] but it is.

[[Unfortunate]]. These movies are so expensive to [[producing]]. I do perk up when a [[screenplays]] is original. I [[yet]] perk up when it's an innovative way to [[generating]] a work that was previously released. There were some samples mentioned (such as Topper, etc.).

I realize that movies are still a comparatively affordable form of entertainment. However, I'm not please when the public's taste is taken for granted. In this situation, the public's taste is overlooked.

I look forward to better produced movie entertainment.

[[Throughout]] this case. I [[quite]] see the play. --------------------------------------------- Result 4658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] My main [[problem]] with the [[film]] is that it goes on too long. Other then that, it's [[pretty]] good. [[Paul]] [[Muni]] plays a [[poor]] Chinese farmer who is about to [[get]] [[married]] through an [[arranged]] [[marriage]]. [[Luise]] Rainer is a servant girl who gets married to Muni. They live with Muni's father on a farm and they are doing pretty bad. When he finally gets some money to buy some more [[land]], a [[drought]] hits and nothing is growing. Everybody stars to head [[north]] by Muni [[stays]] behind at first. [[When]] they leave and arrive at town they find that their are no jobs and they are [[worse]] off than before. They even [[think]] about [[selling]] their youngest daughter as a slave for some money but decide against it. When a bunch of people start looting the town, the military show up and start [[executing]] people . Paul Muni does a good job and [[Luise]] Rainer won a [[second]] [[oscar]] for this [[movie]]. My main [[problems]] with the [[kino]] is that it goes on too long. Other then that, it's [[belle]] good. [[Poul]] [[Mooney]] plays a [[deficient]] Chinese farmer who is about to [[obtain]] [[marrying]] through an [[organise]] [[marry]]. [[Luiz]] Rainer is a servant girl who gets married to Muni. They live with Muni's father on a farm and they are doing pretty bad. When he finally gets some money to buy some more [[overland]], a [[driest]] hits and nothing is growing. Everybody stars to head [[norte]] by Muni [[rest]] behind at first. [[Whenever]] they leave and arrive at town they find that their are no jobs and they are [[lousiest]] off than before. They even [[believe]] about [[sell]] their youngest daughter as a slave for some money but decide against it. When a bunch of people start looting the town, the military show up and start [[executes]] people . Paul Muni does a good job and [[Luiz]] Rainer won a [[secondly]] [[oskar]] for this [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4659 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (73%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Did I miss something here? This "[[adaptation]]" has everything that Brookmyres first novel had. Everything apart from the story, the laughs, the black humour, the political intrigue, the characterisations, the plot, and some semblance of sense.

Spoilers;

Godamnawful, from beginning to end. They made a mockery of the plot, they had a romance between Parablane and a cop, and what was that all about, Dr Slaughter was portrayed as a bystander, and who the hell was Annette Crosby supposed to be?

It looked like they had made a three hour adaptation, then chopped it down to 90 minutes. (Even though the 90 minutes seemed to last forever.) Please, please, do not do this to any other of Brookmyres books, (especially "Country of the blind.) Did I miss something here? This "[[coping]]" has everything that Brookmyres first novel had. Everything apart from the story, the laughs, the black humour, the political intrigue, the characterisations, the plot, and some semblance of sense.

Spoilers;

Godamnawful, from beginning to end. They made a mockery of the plot, they had a romance between Parablane and a cop, and what was that all about, Dr Slaughter was portrayed as a bystander, and who the hell was Annette Crosby supposed to be?

It looked like they had made a three hour adaptation, then chopped it down to 90 minutes. (Even though the 90 minutes seemed to last forever.) Please, please, do not do this to any other of Brookmyres books, (especially "Country of the blind.) --------------------------------------------- Result 4660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] An [[underrated]] [[addition]] to the Graham [[Greene]] cinematic canon - its perceived faults can now be seen as virtues. Director Shumlin, theatrical [[director]], frames his action with an oppressive rigidity [[appropriate]] to the material, and the [[seemingly]] [[inept]] compositions compellingly [[suggest]] [[unease]]. Both a dark thriller and a story of moral [[regeneration]] (for the female [[character]]! In a 40s [[thriller]]!), the [[film]] has an upright hero who turns mad and murderous (and possibly paedophiliac), [[brilliantly]] [[brings]] the [[faraway]] ideologies of the Spanish [[Civil]] [[War]] into jolting [[dangerous]] [[reality]], has one horrific murder, an [[astonishing]] insights into class and capitalism, clever theatrical metaphors, a [[rare]] approximation of Greene's [[God]], and an ending that is only [[happy]] if you know [[nothing]] about [[history]]. An [[underestimated]] [[extra]] to the Graham [[Archer]] cinematic canon - its perceived faults can now be seen as virtues. Director Shumlin, theatrical [[superintendent]], frames his action with an oppressive rigidity [[proper]] to the material, and the [[evidently]] [[incapable]] compositions compellingly [[suggests]] [[uneasiness]]. Both a dark thriller and a story of moral [[renaissance]] (for the female [[nature]]! In a 40s [[thrillers]]!), the [[films]] has an upright hero who turns mad and murderous (and possibly paedophiliac), [[brightly]] [[poses]] the [[aloof]] ideologies of the Spanish [[Civilian]] [[Warfare]] into jolting [[hazardous]] [[realities]], has one horrific murder, an [[uncanny]] insights into class and capitalism, clever theatrical metaphors, a [[scarce]] approximation of Greene's [[Christ]], and an ending that is only [[contented]] if you know [[anything]] about [[tale]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very possibly one of the funniest movies in the world. Oscar material. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are hilarious and before you see this I suggest you see "South Park" one of the funniest cartoons created. Buy it, you will laugh every time you see it. Pure stroke of genius. If you don't think its funny then you have no soul or sense of humor. 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] First off, the [[movie]] was not [[true]] to facts at all. I just saw the documentary a few days [[earlier]] and the movie wasn't anything like it. First of all Nash was a genius at mathematics and this is what the movie should have been about not a [[story]] about a man who was cured and who [[found]] love at the end and so on. [[Also]] there are a lot of scenes that were just [[plain]] wrong - the scene where he rode around with a bike at the [[campus]] happened in his early university [[years]] not after it. [[In]] my opinion Russell Crowe didn't [[fit]] to this [[part]] at all since he doesn't look the intelligent/individualist [[type]], [[therefore]] he really couldn't [[play]] one. It [[would]] have been [[great]] if it would have focused more on the [[mathematics]] ([[similar]] to Pi) and not the over-dramatized lovelife. At this level ABM was too hollywood-ish and too superficial to be [[great]]. Personally I think he wasn't mad nor paranoid and he was onto something [[since]] people of that [[caliber]] [[tend]] to know more than we "[[lesser]] mortals". 5/10 First off, the [[filmmaking]] was not [[real]] to facts at all. I just saw the documentary a few days [[ago]] and the movie wasn't anything like it. First of all Nash was a genius at mathematics and this is what the movie should have been about not a [[conte]] about a man who was cured and who [[detected]] love at the end and so on. [[Moreover]] there are a lot of scenes that were just [[lowlands]] wrong - the scene where he rode around with a bike at the [[universities]] happened in his early university [[olds]] not after it. [[For]] my opinion Russell Crowe didn't [[fitted]] to this [[portion]] at all since he doesn't look the intelligent/individualist [[genre]], [[so]] he really couldn't [[gaming]] one. It [[should]] have been [[resplendent]] if it would have focused more on the [[math]] ([[identical]] to Pi) and not the over-dramatized lovelife. At this level ABM was too hollywood-ish and too superficial to be [[gorgeous]]. Personally I think he wasn't mad nor paranoid and he was onto something [[because]] people of that [[sizing]] [[tending]] to know more than we "[[less]] mortals". 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The interplay between the characters is a moral disaster. You end up disliking most of the characters and you don't particularly like any of them.

Even the two main characters played by David and Gwen are so badly written that you really don't care one bit about them. The movie has no plot, no direction and no purpose. The single redeeming quality of the movie was to treat it as a glimpse into the messed up lives of a few losers - and that's hardly stimulating even as an afternoon waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 4664 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Beautiful film, pure Cassavetes style. Gena Rowland gives a stunning performance of a declining actress, dealing with success, aging, loneliness...and alcoholism. She tries to escape her own subconscious ghosts, embodied by the death spectre of a young girl. Acceptance of oneself, of human condition, though its overall difficulties, is the real purpose of the film. The parallel between the theatrical sequences and the film itself are puzzling: it's like if the stage became a way out for the Heroin. If all american movies could only be that top-quality, dealing with human relations on an adult level, not trying to infantilize and standardize feelings... One of the best dramas ever. 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Ignoring (if [[possible]]) the tediously [[gratuitous]] [[marijuana]] smoking (which [[seems]] to be mandatory in Australian government-funded films) the cast of this movie gives a [[reasonably]] credible performance. That's a far as it goes. The [[rest]] is [[simply]] [[awful]]. The plot's overburdened with "[[wow]]" symbolisms which are meant to [[look]] good on film but go nowhere. A gross example is the giant peach float, obviously left over from a town parade and donated by the local canning factory. It was just too tempting to waste what was hopefully a free, but nevertheless [[irrelevant]], [[prop]]! The peach is given a cursory, [[unexplained]] wash-down at one stage but that's where it ends.

Similarly, the [[contrived]] "[[black]] [[spot]]" [[road]] sign where Steph's [[parents]] were [[killed]], is [[intended]] to [[symbolize]] the eventual escape from her [[past]], but her escape to what? She's had a [[pretty]] good [[deal]] where she was, [[especially]] [[considering]] her visual [[disability]] and the unending, loving patience and [[care]] of her [[understanding]] [[young]] female guardian.

The Guinness' [[prize]] for corny melodrama, [[however]], goes to the [[characterization]] of [[Alan]]. [[Alan]] successfully [[aspires]] to the noble role of trade union [[shop]] [[steward]] but "rats" on his fellow [[workers]] by becoming a supervisor for a [[wicked]] multi-national - hiss! hiss! As a [[supervisor]], [[Alan]] performs the boss' villainous dirty [[work]]. He implements [[redundancies]] until, [[surprise]], surprise, the [[whole]] [[plant]] is [[closed]] and [[Alan]] himself is [[left]] as a pathetic, unemployed [[failure]]. [[No]] cliché-free [[zones]] here, [[mate]]! Not only this, but [[Alan]] also [[loses]] the seductive [[Steph]] from the most unlikely [[relationship]] you'd encounter. [[If]] you [[think]] the plot is melodramatic and [[didactic]], don't ask about [[detail]]. What's the [[significance]] of the shaving cream on Steph's [[seductive]] leg? Why doesn't the hotel, where the [[couple]] makes [[love]], [[eventually]] twig that someone's [[gaining]] [[illegal]] [[entry]] to one of its grandest [[bedrooms]] and, [[among]] other pandemoniums, the [[sheets]] are [[regularly]] soiled - [[quite]] [[spectacularly]] on one occasion. [[Summing]] this movie up in one word: [[Avoid]], [[Avoid]], [[Avoid]]. Ignoring (if [[achievable]]) the tediously [[unwarranted]] [[marihuana]] smoking (which [[seem]] to be mandatory in Australian government-funded films) the cast of this movie gives a [[rationally]] credible performance. That's a far as it goes. The [[stays]] is [[straightforward]] [[horrific]]. The plot's overburdened with "[[whoo]]" symbolisms which are meant to [[peek]] good on film but go nowhere. A gross example is the giant peach float, obviously left over from a town parade and donated by the local canning factory. It was just too tempting to waste what was hopefully a free, but nevertheless [[immaterial]], [[accessory]]! The peach is given a cursory, [[unfathomable]] wash-down at one stage but that's where it ends.

Similarly, the [[artificial]] "[[negro]] [[stain]]" [[route]] sign where Steph's [[parent]] were [[kiiled]], is [[conceived]] to [[symbolizing]] the eventual escape from her [[preceding]], but her escape to what? She's had a [[quite]] good [[addressing]] where she was, [[mainly]] [[reviewing]] her visual [[handicap]] and the unending, loving patience and [[caring]] of her [[understood]] [[youthful]] female guardian.

The Guinness' [[awards]] for corny melodrama, [[nevertheless]], goes to the [[characterized]] of [[Alana]]. [[Alain]] successfully [[yearns]] to the noble role of trade union [[boutique]] [[stewart]] but "rats" on his fellow [[labour]] by becoming a supervisor for a [[bad]] multi-national - hiss! hiss! As a [[controller]], [[Alain]] performs the boss' villainous dirty [[collaboration]]. He implements [[layoff]] until, [[surprises]], surprise, the [[ensemble]] [[factories]] is [[closing]] and [[Allan]] himself is [[gauche]] as a pathetic, unemployed [[defect]]. [[Nos]] cliché-free [[areas]] here, [[comrade]]! Not only this, but [[Alain]] also [[forfeits]] the seductive [[Steve]] from the most unlikely [[relation]] you'd encounter. [[Though]] you [[thoughts]] the plot is melodramatic and [[instructional]], don't ask about [[particulars]]. What's the [[importance]] of the shaving cream on Steph's [[attractive]] leg? Why doesn't the hotel, where the [[coupling]] makes [[adored]], [[lastly]] twig that someone's [[earns]] [[unauthorised]] [[inlet]] to one of its grandest [[salas]] and, [[between]] other pandemoniums, the [[linens]] are [[routinely]] soiled - [[abundantly]] [[impressively]] on one occasion. [[Adds]] this movie up in one word: [[Averted]], [[Preventing]], [[Averted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Before the devil knows you're dead' is one of the best movies I've seen in a

long time. The acting from

the excellent ensemble cast is incredible. Philip Seymour Hoffman putting in an outstanding performance and is electrifying every time he's on screen. Ethan Hawke matches him scene for scene and Albert Finney simply chews up the screen. Marisa Tomei is, however,

criminally underused, but looks amazing for her 42 years. The script is excellent, the story-line non-linear but easy enough to follow. Sidney Lumet, although not known for his blockbusters, has turned out a gem with this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 4667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I noticed this movie was getting trashed well before it hit the theaters and I too didn't have high hopes for it. I figured it was another "You Got Served" type of movie with some nice dance moves and horrid acting. I was at the theater and deciding between this and Meet the Spartans and [[picked]] this. To my surprise the acting wasn't bad at all and the [[movie]] was actually pretty good. The fact that it has a lower rating than You Got Served is absolutely ridiculous. Instead of listening to the garbage posted on here I recommend going to see a matinée showing of this movie so you don't spend too much. I think you will be pleasantly surprised with how wrong everyone has been about it. When it comes to dance movies this is certainly one of the better ones with far superior acting than many of the other ones. Go see the movie and judge for yourself. Hopefully the rating will rise after it comes out on DVD and more people check the movie out instead of judging it based on comments before the movie released.

edit The movie is now moving closer to its correct rating. Over 1000 people have given it a rating of 9, a bit too high but at least it is helping to offset the ridiculous votes of 1. I noticed this movie was getting trashed well before it hit the theaters and I too didn't have high hopes for it. I figured it was another "You Got Served" type of movie with some nice dance moves and horrid acting. I was at the theater and deciding between this and Meet the Spartans and [[opting]] this. To my surprise the acting wasn't bad at all and the [[cinematographic]] was actually pretty good. The fact that it has a lower rating than You Got Served is absolutely ridiculous. Instead of listening to the garbage posted on here I recommend going to see a matinée showing of this movie so you don't spend too much. I think you will be pleasantly surprised with how wrong everyone has been about it. When it comes to dance movies this is certainly one of the better ones with far superior acting than many of the other ones. Go see the movie and judge for yourself. Hopefully the rating will rise after it comes out on DVD and more people check the movie out instead of judging it based on comments before the movie released.

edit The movie is now moving closer to its correct rating. Over 1000 people have given it a rating of 9, a bit too high but at least it is helping to offset the ridiculous votes of 1. --------------------------------------------- Result 4668 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I spent eight years running movie theatres in the 80's and 90's. This was, by far, the worst film I ever showed to the public. One thing that made it so bad was that it put on airs of trying to be a great, inspiring film. Even the great Gregory Peck could not save this horrid piece of drivel from being far less than mediocre. Jamie Lee Curtis, in an early non-horror film role, demonstrated clearly that she had not yet learned to act (she's still trying, but it isn't getting much better).

I'm sorry, and here's the spoiler, international nuclear disarmament is never going to happen just because it makes children afraid to play little league baseball! Even the shows on Nick and The Disney Channel are not stupid enough to try to make us believe that dreck.

This is not worth the time you would waste watching it on cable TV. It is not worth the price of a movie rental; your dollar would be better spent on an extra package of microwave popcorn to go with the other movie you picked (because it can only be better than this). --------------------------------------------- Result 4669 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I have lost count of how many [[reviews]] I've written on Slaughter [[High]]. I've read a lot of bad ones and I will say right now this is a [[fantastic]] movie. Simon Scuddamore [[made]] his fame in a short time for his well known suicide, and even though this was his only film, he is what made the movie so great. At first I did not know anything about Simon until I read a review about his suicide. Then I found out due to the current webpage at www.IMDb.com he was born in 1957, in Dayton, Ohio. Simon may have played the most pathetic character known to man, but his real life self certainly had their strenghths and weaknesses. He did a good acting job, who can disagree? I always wondered how he felt showing himself naked in a movie. Must have been pretty embarrassing to say the least. I first saw this movie when I was 12 in the sixth grade. I agree with some pointers like the girl would not take a bath after somebody was murdered, and that high schools do NOT have bath tubs! I think Caroline Munro who was 36 at the time was the only other star that had any dignified acting talent, and unfortunately for Simon's death he made no future films. The reason(s) for his suicide are a mystery, and hopefully will be discovered in the near future. Doing the math on his webpage it tells you he was 29 years old when he made Slaughter High. He looked like a teenager. I give this film two [[thumbs]] up, the best horror film made. Probably because of their horrible acting the others didn't make fame in the movie business. -Jacob Young I have lost count of how many [[examination]] I've written on Slaughter [[Supreme]]. I've read a lot of bad ones and I will say right now this is a [[wondrous]] movie. Simon Scuddamore [[accomplished]] his fame in a short time for his well known suicide, and even though this was his only film, he is what made the movie so great. At first I did not know anything about Simon until I read a review about his suicide. Then I found out due to the current webpage at www.IMDb.com he was born in 1957, in Dayton, Ohio. Simon may have played the most pathetic character known to man, but his real life self certainly had their strenghths and weaknesses. He did a good acting job, who can disagree? I always wondered how he felt showing himself naked in a movie. Must have been pretty embarrassing to say the least. I first saw this movie when I was 12 in the sixth grade. I agree with some pointers like the girl would not take a bath after somebody was murdered, and that high schools do NOT have bath tubs! I think Caroline Munro who was 36 at the time was the only other star that had any dignified acting talent, and unfortunately for Simon's death he made no future films. The reason(s) for his suicide are a mystery, and hopefully will be discovered in the near future. Doing the math on his webpage it tells you he was 29 years old when he made Slaughter High. He looked like a teenager. I give this film two [[inches]] up, the best horror film made. Probably because of their horrible acting the others didn't make fame in the movie business. -Jacob Young --------------------------------------------- Result 4670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] This is an [[abysmal]] piece of story-telling. It is about an [[hour]] into the [[movie]] before we have much [[idea]] of what it is supposed to be about; the [[characters]] [[often]] mumble inaudibly; [[actions]] [[frequently]] [[seem]] to have no relation to each other; [[nobody]] seems to be [[concerned]] about who [[actually]] [[murdered]] the girl; a [[pair]] of spooky [[kids]] go [[swimming]] in waters that [[seem]] threatening but [[nothing]] [[happens]]; the Irishman gets [[punched]] in the [[face]] by one of his [[buddies]] for no [[apparent]] [[reason]] ... to [[continue]] would be as boring as the [[movie]] itself. The only half-entertaining [[element]] is the [[landscape]] [[photography]]; but anyone [[could]] point a camera at the Australian outback a get [[memorable]] [[shots]]. [[Overall]] - [[dreary]], [[incoherent]], [[pretentious]] - and downright annoying for wasting so much of the viewer's time. This is an [[frightful]] piece of story-telling. It is about an [[hours]] into the [[filmmaking]] before we have much [[thoughts]] of what it is supposed to be about; the [[trait]] [[commonly]] mumble inaudibly; [[measurements]] [[often]] [[seems]] to have no relation to each other; [[anyone]] seems to be [[preoccupied]] about who [[genuinely]] [[murder]] the girl; a [[paired]] of spooky [[youths]] go [[bathing]] in waters that [[appears]] threatening but [[anything]] [[occurs]]; the Irishman gets [[slapped]] in the [[confronts]] by one of his [[friends]] for no [[overt]] [[reasons]] ... to [[ongoing]] would be as boring as the [[film]] itself. The only half-entertaining [[components]] is the [[panorama]] [[images]]; but anyone [[wo]] point a camera at the Australian outback a get [[unforgettable]] [[punches]]. [[Total]] - [[dismal]], [[counterintuitive]], [[presumptuous]] - and downright annoying for wasting so much of the viewer's time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "A [[Town]] [[Called]] Hell" (aka "A [[Town]] [[Called]] [[Bastard]]"), a British/Spanish co-production, was made on the heels of Clint Eastwood's success in the Italian made "Man With No Name" trilogy. The template used in most of these films was to hire recognizable American actors, whose careers were largely in decline and dub their voices. This film is no exception except for the fact that they used some British actors as well.

It's difficult to summarize the plot, but here goes. The [[story]] opens with rebels or whatever, led by Robert Shaw and Marin Landau raiding a church and killing everyone inside, including the priest. Fast forward to the subject town a few years later where the Shaw character is masquerading as a priest. The mayor of the town (Telly Savalas) is a brutal leader who thinks nothing of meting out justice with his gun.

Throw into the mix a grieving widow Alvira (Stella Stevens) who is searching for her husband's killer. Add to this the fact that she rides around in a hearse lying dead like in a coffin for God knows why. After the mayor is murdered by his henchman La Bomba (Al Lettieri) the town is invaded by a federale Colonel (Landau) in search of a rebel leader (I'm sorry but the name escapes me). The Colonel takes over the town and begins summarily executing the townsfolk to force them to reveal the identity of the leader.

Even though they opened the film side by side, its difficult to tell from the dialog that the Landau and Shaw characters know each other. A blind man (Fernando Rey) claims he can identify the rebel leader by touching his face. He does so and..............................................

I'm sure the principals [[regretted]] making this film. It's just plain awful and well deserving of my dreaded "1" rating. Shaw spends most of the film fixating his trademark stare at whomever is handy. Even Landau can't salvage this film. The beautiful Ms. Stevens is totally wasted here too. Having just made Peckinpah's "The Ballad of Cable Hogue" the previous year, I found it odd that she would appear in this mess of a movie. Savalas made several of these pictures, ("Pancho Villa" and "Horror Express" come to mind) during he pre-Kojak period.Michael Craig is also in it somewhere as a character called "Paco".

Fernando Rey appeared in many of these "westerns" although he would emerge to play the villain in the two "French Connection" films. Al Lettieri would also emerge with a role in "The Godfather" (1972) and go on to other memorable roles before his untimely death in 1975.

In all fairness, the version I watched ran only 88 minutes rather than the longer running times of 95 or 97 minutes listed on IMDb, however I can't see where an extra 7 or 8 minutes would make much difference.

Avoid this one. "A [[Cities]] [[Drew]] Hell" (aka "A [[Ville]] [[Termed]] [[Wanker]]"), a British/Spanish co-production, was made on the heels of Clint Eastwood's success in the Italian made "Man With No Name" trilogy. The template used in most of these films was to hire recognizable American actors, whose careers were largely in decline and dub their voices. This film is no exception except for the fact that they used some British actors as well.

It's difficult to summarize the plot, but here goes. The [[saga]] opens with rebels or whatever, led by Robert Shaw and Marin Landau raiding a church and killing everyone inside, including the priest. Fast forward to the subject town a few years later where the Shaw character is masquerading as a priest. The mayor of the town (Telly Savalas) is a brutal leader who thinks nothing of meting out justice with his gun.

Throw into the mix a grieving widow Alvira (Stella Stevens) who is searching for her husband's killer. Add to this the fact that she rides around in a hearse lying dead like in a coffin for God knows why. After the mayor is murdered by his henchman La Bomba (Al Lettieri) the town is invaded by a federale Colonel (Landau) in search of a rebel leader (I'm sorry but the name escapes me). The Colonel takes over the town and begins summarily executing the townsfolk to force them to reveal the identity of the leader.

Even though they opened the film side by side, its difficult to tell from the dialog that the Landau and Shaw characters know each other. A blind man (Fernando Rey) claims he can identify the rebel leader by touching his face. He does so and..............................................

I'm sure the principals [[regrets]] making this film. It's just plain awful and well deserving of my dreaded "1" rating. Shaw spends most of the film fixating his trademark stare at whomever is handy. Even Landau can't salvage this film. The beautiful Ms. Stevens is totally wasted here too. Having just made Peckinpah's "The Ballad of Cable Hogue" the previous year, I found it odd that she would appear in this mess of a movie. Savalas made several of these pictures, ("Pancho Villa" and "Horror Express" come to mind) during he pre-Kojak period.Michael Craig is also in it somewhere as a character called "Paco".

Fernando Rey appeared in many of these "westerns" although he would emerge to play the villain in the two "French Connection" films. Al Lettieri would also emerge with a role in "The Godfather" (1972) and go on to other memorable roles before his untimely death in 1975.

In all fairness, the version I watched ran only 88 minutes rather than the longer running times of 95 or 97 minutes listed on IMDb, however I can't see where an extra 7 or 8 minutes would make much difference.

Avoid this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For a low budget movie this was really good. I put this well above your average action B-movie. Sean and Corinne delivered in this movie, and they didn't seem camera shy. Watch out for the cameos of Jeanne and Jared. I didn't think that the producers would even consider that, but the runner-ups deserve that much.

I'll be looking forward to more of Sean and Corinne's involvement in the movie entertainment industry. Sean's character seemed very genuine, and sexy Corinne's character was pretty hard-nosed and on point. She connected well with the action sequences and executed with confidence. It was a great idea to cast Billy Zane as the smart and witty villain. His charisma on screen is always a pleasure to watch. The chemistry between Zane and Sean's character was pretty good. The action sequences weren't cheesy and seemed to connect throughout the movie. Of course there were flaws, but that comes with the territory.

Overall, this was a good movie considering the budget and the fact that it was made for TV. Sean and Corinne did a good job considering that they are newcomers to the game. I hope that Jeanne, Jared, and the rest of the Next Action Star cast get their chance to also join their co-stars in entertainment success.

Final Judgment: ***/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 4673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] Roger Corman is [[undeniably]] one of the most versatile and [[unpredictable]] directors/[[producers]] in [[history]]. He was single-handedly responsible for some of my favorite horror films ever (like the Edgar Allen [[Poe]] [[adaptations]] "Masque of the [[Red]] [[Death]]" and "Pit and the Pendulum") as well as some insufferably [[cheap]] and [[tacky]] rubbish quickies (like "[[Creature]] from the [[Haunted]] [[Sea]]" and "She [[Gods]] of the [[Shark]] Reef"). Corman also [[made]] a couple of [[movies]] that are [[simply]] unclassifiable and – [[simply]] put – [[nearly]] [[impossible]] to judge [[properly]]. "The [[Trip]]", for example, as well as this imaginatively titled "Gas-s-s-s" can [[somewhat]] be [[labeled]] as psychedelic [[exploitation]]. [[In]] other words, they're incredibly strange hippie-culture [[influenced]] movies. Half of the time you haven't got the slightest [[idea]] what's going on, who these characters are that walk back and forth through the screen and where the hell this whole thing is [[going]]. The plot is simply and yet highly effective: a strange but deadly nerve gas is accidentally unleashed and promptly annihilates that the entire world population over the age of 25. This *could* be the basic premise of an [[atmospheric]], gritty and nail-bitingly suspenseful post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi landmark, but [[writer]] George Armitage and Roger Corman decided to turn it into a "trippy" road-movie comedy. [[None]] of the characters is even trying to [[prevent]] their inevitable upcoming deaths; they just party out in the streets and found little juvenile crime syndicates. "Gas-s-s-s" is a disappointingly [[boring]] and tries overly hard to be bizarre. The entire script appears to be improvised at the spot and not at all [[funny]]. Definitely not my cup of tea, but the film does have a [[loyal]] fan base and many [[admirers]], so who am I to [[say]] that it's not worth your time or money? Roger Corman is [[unquestionably]] one of the most versatile and [[unforeseeable]] directors/[[growers]] in [[stories]]. He was single-handedly responsible for some of my favorite horror films ever (like the Edgar Allen [[Boe]] [[readjustment]] "Masque of the [[Rouge]] [[Mortality]]" and "Pit and the Pendulum") as well as some insufferably [[cheaper]] and [[clingy]] rubbish quickies (like "[[Ogre]] from the [[Tormented]] [[Seas]]" and "She [[Lords]] of the [[Sharks]] Reef"). Corman also [[accomplished]] a couple of [[filmmaking]] that are [[solely]] unclassifiable and – [[solely]] put – [[practically]] [[impractical]] to judge [[satisfactorily]]. "The [[Journey]]", for example, as well as this imaginatively titled "Gas-s-s-s" can [[rather]] be [[tagged]] as psychedelic [[operate]]. [[Onto]] other words, they're incredibly strange hippie-culture [[affecting]] movies. Half of the time you haven't got the slightest [[thoughts]] what's going on, who these characters are that walk back and forth through the screen and where the hell this whole thing is [[gonna]]. The plot is simply and yet highly effective: a strange but deadly nerve gas is accidentally unleashed and promptly annihilates that the entire world population over the age of 25. This *could* be the basic premise of an [[atmosphere]], gritty and nail-bitingly suspenseful post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi landmark, but [[screenwriter]] George Armitage and Roger Corman decided to turn it into a "trippy" road-movie comedy. [[Nos]] of the characters is even trying to [[inhibit]] their inevitable upcoming deaths; they just party out in the streets and found little juvenile crime syndicates. "Gas-s-s-s" is a disappointingly [[tiresome]] and tries overly hard to be bizarre. The entire script appears to be improvised at the spot and not at all [[comical]]. Definitely not my cup of tea, but the film does have a [[truthful]] fan base and many [[fans]], so who am I to [[says]] that it's not worth your time or money? --------------------------------------------- Result 4674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This [[impossible]] [[tale]] is of a female witch pursuing a mortal man, in a mortal world. Her "community" is open among it's members, but she conceals her witchcraft from the mortals. Hmmmm...this is starting to sound familiar. LOL. It's not your [[typical]] movie. [[Very]] "campy" performances by Jack Lemmon and Ernie Kovacs keep things from getting [[dull]]. Kim [[Novak]] is always a [[pleasure]] on screen, but I found her pairing with James Stewart unusual (but not fatal to the story).

With re-newed interest in all things witchy and dark, this film deserves to be discovered and re-discovered by old and new audiences...... IT'S STILL A HOOT ! This [[impractical]] [[story]] is of a female witch pursuing a mortal man, in a mortal world. Her "community" is open among it's members, but she conceals her witchcraft from the mortals. Hmmmm...this is starting to sound familiar. LOL. It's not your [[characteristic]] movie. [[Hugely]] "campy" performances by Jack Lemmon and Ernie Kovacs keep things from getting [[dreary]]. Kim [[Novick]] is always a [[delight]] on screen, but I found her pairing with James Stewart unusual (but not fatal to the story).

With re-newed interest in all things witchy and dark, this film deserves to be discovered and re-discovered by old and new audiences...... IT'S STILL A HOOT ! --------------------------------------------- Result 4675 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] After [[witnessing]] his wife (Linda Hoffman) engaging in sexual acts with the pool boy, the already somewhat unstable dentist Dr. Feinstone ([[Corbin]] Bernsen) completely snaps which means deep trouble for his patients.

This [[delightful]] semi-original and [[entertaining]] [[horror]] [[flick]] from director Brian Yuzna was a [[welcome]] [[change]] of [[pace]] from the usual horror twaddle that was passed out in the late Nineties. [[Although]] ‘The Dentist' is [[intended]] to be a cheesy, fun [[little]] film, Yuzna [[ensures]] that the movie [[delivers]] the shocks and thrills that [[many]] more [[serious]] [[movies]] [[attempt]] to dispense. Despite suffering [[somewhat]] from the lack of [[background]] on the central [[characters]], and [[thus]] [[allowing]] [[events]] that should have been built up to take place over a [[couple]] of days, the [[movie]] is [[intriguing]], [[generally]] well scripted and well paced which [[allows]] the [[viewer]] to [[maintain]] interest, [[even]] during the more ludicrous of moments. ‘The Dentist' [[suffers]], on occasion, from [[dragging]] but unlike the [[much]] inferior 1998 sequel, there are only sporadic uninteresting [[moments]], and in general the [[movie]] follows itself [[nicely]].

Corbin Bernsen was very [[convincing]] in the role of the sadistic, deranged and perfectionist Dr. Alan Feinstone. The [[way]] Bernsen is able to credibly recite his lines, [[especially]] with regards to the foulness and immorality of sex ([[particularly]] fellatio), is something short of [[marvellous]]. [[While]] [[many]] actors [[may]] have trouble [[portraying]] a cleanliness obsessed psycho without it coming off as too cheesy or [[ridiculous]], Bernsen seems to [[truly]] [[fit]] the [[personality]] of the character he attempts to [[portray]] and thus makes the [[film]] all that more [[enjoyable]]. Had ‘The Dentist' not been intended to be a fun, almost comical, horror movie, Bernsen's performance would probably have been much more powerful. Sadly, the rest of the cast (including a pre-fame Mark Ruffalo) failed to put in very good performances and although the movie was not really damaged by this, stronger performances could have added more credibility to the flick.

‘The Dentist' is not a horror film that is meant to be taken seriously but is certainly enjoyable, particularly (I would presume) for fans of cheesy horror. Those who became annoyed at the number of ‘Scream' (1996) clones from the late Nineties may very well find this a refreshing change, as I did. A [[seldom]] dull and generally well paced script as well as some proficient direction helps to make ‘The Dentist' one of the more pleasurable cheesy horrors from the 1990's. On top of this we are presented with some particularly grizly and (on the whole) realistic scenes of dental torture, which should keep most gorehounds happy. Far from perfect but far from bad as well, ‘The Dentist' is a flick that is easily worth watching at least once. My rating for ‘The Dentist' – 6.5/10. After [[seeing]] his wife (Linda Hoffman) engaging in sexual acts with the pool boy, the already somewhat unstable dentist Dr. Feinstone ([[Furey]] Bernsen) completely snaps which means deep trouble for his patients.

This [[wondrous]] semi-original and [[entertain]] [[abomination]] [[movie]] from director Brian Yuzna was a [[bienvenidos]] [[alteration]] of [[tempo]] from the usual horror twaddle that was passed out in the late Nineties. [[Nevertheless]] ‘The Dentist' is [[aimed]] to be a cheesy, fun [[small]] film, Yuzna [[ensuring]] that the movie [[provide]] the shocks and thrills that [[various]] more [[grave]] [[cinematography]] [[seeks]] to dispense. Despite suffering [[rather]] from the lack of [[context]] on the central [[attribute]], and [[then]] [[enabling]] [[phenomena]] that should have been built up to take place over a [[coupling]] of days, the [[kino]] is [[riveting]], [[normally]] well scripted and well paced which [[allowing]] the [[onlooker]] to [[conserving]] interest, [[yet]] during the more ludicrous of moments. ‘The Dentist' [[suffer]], on occasion, from [[dredging]] but unlike the [[very]] inferior 1998 sequel, there are only sporadic uninteresting [[times]], and in general the [[film]] follows itself [[politely]].

Corbin Bernsen was very [[persuasive]] in the role of the sadistic, deranged and perfectionist Dr. Alan Feinstone. The [[camino]] Bernsen is able to credibly recite his lines, [[specifically]] with regards to the foulness and immorality of sex ([[namely]] fellatio), is something short of [[noteworthy]]. [[Despite]] [[innumerable]] actors [[maggio]] have trouble [[illustrating]] a cleanliness obsessed psycho without it coming off as too cheesy or [[nonsense]], Bernsen seems to [[honestly]] [[fitted]] the [[subjectivity]] of the character he attempts to [[describing]] and thus makes the [[films]] all that more [[nice]]. Had ‘The Dentist' not been intended to be a fun, almost comical, horror movie, Bernsen's performance would probably have been much more powerful. Sadly, the rest of the cast (including a pre-fame Mark Ruffalo) failed to put in very good performances and although the movie was not really damaged by this, stronger performances could have added more credibility to the flick.

‘The Dentist' is not a horror film that is meant to be taken seriously but is certainly enjoyable, particularly (I would presume) for fans of cheesy horror. Those who became annoyed at the number of ‘Scream' (1996) clones from the late Nineties may very well find this a refreshing change, as I did. A [[rare]] dull and generally well paced script as well as some proficient direction helps to make ‘The Dentist' one of the more pleasurable cheesy horrors from the 1990's. On top of this we are presented with some particularly grizly and (on the whole) realistic scenes of dental torture, which should keep most gorehounds happy. Far from perfect but far from bad as well, ‘The Dentist' is a flick that is easily worth watching at least once. My rating for ‘The Dentist' – 6.5/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4676 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Maybe I loved this movie so much in part because I've been feeling down in the dumps and it's such a lovely little fairytale. Whatever the reason, I thought it was pitch perfect. Great, intelligent story, beautiful effects, excellent acting (especially De Niro, who is awesome). This movie made me happier than I've been for a while.

It is a very funny and clever movie. The running joke of the kingdom's history of prince savagery and the aftermath, the way indulging in magic effects the witch and dozens of smart little touches all kept me enthralled. That's much of what makes it so good; it's an elaborate, special-effects-laden movie with more story than most fairytale movies, yet there is an incredible attention to small things.

I feel like just going ahead and watching it all over again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] "The Thing About my Folks" [[came]] in as a [[surprise]]. We had no [[idea]] about what to [[expect]]. The film directed by Raymond DeFelitta, and based on a screen play by one of its stars, Paul Reiser, proved to be a pleasant [[time]] at the [[movies]]. [[Although]] the film is predictable and we know what will be the [[outcome]], this is a voyage of discovery where [[Ben]] [[gets]] to [[know]] his father, [[perhaps]] for the first time in his life, Ben sees his father for what he really is, and not the mythical figure he has in his mind.

The film seems to be a vehicle for its star, Peter Falk, and he runs away with the movie, as it was expected. Mr. Falk, one of the most endearing actors working in movies in this era and in past years, is an actor of such stature, he must be reckoned with. As Sam Kleinman, the distant father to Ben, he is a man that clearly is misunderstood, not only by Ben, but it appears by the whole family and his wife of forty-seven years.

When Muriel, the matriarch of the Kleinman clan, runs away, everyone goes into a panic because this woman, who has been the strong figure of the family, is vital to keep everyone together. Not knowing where she has gone, Sam shows up at Ben's house confused as he feels abandoned, suddenly, by the woman he married and has been faithful for all those years.

Ben, the youngest son, takes his father on a trip to look for a house he wants to buy so he can get his own family out of Manhattan into the country. The trip provides the excuse for Ben to bond with his father in [[ways]] he never knew about because the old man had always projected an aloof figure to his younger son. Along the way, father and son realize how much they love one another and how misunderstood the old man has been by his children. The love of Sam for Muriel spans the [[many]] years they have known one another; they seem inseparable.

Peter Falk is [[magnificent]] in the [[film]]. He makes an [[excellent]] Sam Kleinman, the [[man]] who [[suddenly]] [[realizes]] his [[life]] is about to [[change]] for the worst. [[Mr]]. Falk [[shines]] as the [[older]] [[man]] and there's never a [[false]] movement in his interpretation of the man whose whole world is crumbling under him.

Not being a Paul Reiser [[fan]], we must confess that as Ben Kleinman, he is right. Ben and his father discover how much in common they both have and their love for Muriel, the mother that has sacrificed her life in [[order]] to keep the family together. Olympia Dukakis is only seen at the end of the film. She makes a good contribution as the fleeing mother. Elizabeth Perkins plays Rachel with great style..

The film has a beautiful look thanks to the cinematography of Dan Gillham, and the excellent musical score by Steven Argila. Ultimately, the film shows a great team effort between its director, Mr. DeFelitta and Paul Reiser who wrote it for the screen.

Although this film is clearly targeted for an older audience, it should please anyone. "The Thing About my Folks" [[became]] in as a [[amaze]]. We had no [[ideals]] about what to [[hopes]]. The film directed by Raymond DeFelitta, and based on a screen play by one of its stars, Paul Reiser, proved to be a pleasant [[moment]] at the [[kino]]. [[Though]] the film is predictable and we know what will be the [[result]], this is a voyage of discovery where [[Bin]] [[attains]] to [[savoir]] his father, [[presumably]] for the first time in his life, Ben sees his father for what he really is, and not the mythical figure he has in his mind.

The film seems to be a vehicle for its star, Peter Falk, and he runs away with the movie, as it was expected. Mr. Falk, one of the most endearing actors working in movies in this era and in past years, is an actor of such stature, he must be reckoned with. As Sam Kleinman, the distant father to Ben, he is a man that clearly is misunderstood, not only by Ben, but it appears by the whole family and his wife of forty-seven years.

When Muriel, the matriarch of the Kleinman clan, runs away, everyone goes into a panic because this woman, who has been the strong figure of the family, is vital to keep everyone together. Not knowing where she has gone, Sam shows up at Ben's house confused as he feels abandoned, suddenly, by the woman he married and has been faithful for all those years.

Ben, the youngest son, takes his father on a trip to look for a house he wants to buy so he can get his own family out of Manhattan into the country. The trip provides the excuse for Ben to bond with his father in [[pathways]] he never knew about because the old man had always projected an aloof figure to his younger son. Along the way, father and son realize how much they love one another and how misunderstood the old man has been by his children. The love of Sam for Muriel spans the [[several]] years they have known one another; they seem inseparable.

Peter Falk is [[wondrous]] in the [[kino]]. He makes an [[handsome]] Sam Kleinman, the [[fella]] who [[abruptly]] [[realises]] his [[lives]] is about to [[amended]] for the worst. [[Herr]]. Falk [[glows]] as the [[oldest]] [[males]] and there's never a [[untruthful]] movement in his interpretation of the man whose whole world is crumbling under him.

Not being a Paul Reiser [[admirer]], we must confess that as Ben Kleinman, he is right. Ben and his father discover how much in common they both have and their love for Muriel, the mother that has sacrificed her life in [[decree]] to keep the family together. Olympia Dukakis is only seen at the end of the film. She makes a good contribution as the fleeing mother. Elizabeth Perkins plays Rachel with great style..

The film has a beautiful look thanks to the cinematography of Dan Gillham, and the excellent musical score by Steven Argila. Ultimately, the film shows a great team effort between its director, Mr. DeFelitta and Paul Reiser who wrote it for the screen.

Although this film is clearly targeted for an older audience, it should please anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 4678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] The female lead was a [[terrible]] actress which [[made]] the [[whole]] movie mediocre. She was [[smiling]] too much when she first went in [[front]] of the cameras to [[talk]] about her daughter. This should have made the police suspect her. I would have been inconsolable in the identical situation. She seemed way calm for a mother who could not find her daughter. It was as if she did not want to even be in the [[movie]]. Jennifer Aniston [[would]] have [[played]] the part better. And it [[would]] have made a lot more money for such a controversial, important subject. Everyone else was excellent. I don't know where the lead actress is but I hope she got some acting lessons. The female lead was a [[dreaded]] actress which [[accomplished]] the [[together]] movie mediocre. She was [[kidd]] too much when she first went in [[newsweek]] of the cameras to [[speaks]] about her daughter. This should have made the police suspect her. I would have been inconsolable in the identical situation. She seemed way calm for a mother who could not find her daughter. It was as if she did not want to even be in the [[filmmaking]]. Jennifer Aniston [[could]] have [[done]] the part better. And it [[should]] have made a lot more money for such a controversial, important subject. Everyone else was excellent. I don't know where the lead actress is but I hope she got some acting lessons. --------------------------------------------- Result 4679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] One [[night]] I [[stumbled]] [[upon]] this on the satellite station [[Bravo]].Initially out of curiosity i [[decided]] to watch it.To be perfectly honest i wasn't [[disappointed]].The main [[character]] is [[beautiful]] and her [[body]] is [[shown]] off well.You would think her talents would be wasted as a executioner but [[apparently]] not after watching the whole film!My only real gripe is the acting of the supporting cast particularly the actor who plays Melnik.Christ its bad!The [[prison]] [[guard]] Hank is woeful too.All he ever does is get drunk and make ill attempted passes at his co-guard Wanda though [[fortunately]] for us the viewer and for Hank he gets down and dirty with Wanda near the end. The music used is pretty tense and creates the perfect atmosphere for the executions. This movie is well watching alone for the beautiful,talented and very sexy Jennifer Thomas One [[overnight]] I [[tumbled]] [[thereafter]] this on the satellite station [[Congrats]].Initially out of curiosity i [[opted]] to watch it.To be perfectly honest i wasn't [[frustrated]].The main [[traits]] is [[handsome]] and her [[agency]] is [[displays]] off well.You would think her talents would be wasted as a executioner but [[clearly]] not after watching the whole film!My only real gripe is the acting of the supporting cast particularly the actor who plays Melnik.Christ its bad!The [[imprisons]] [[watchman]] Hank is woeful too.All he ever does is get drunk and make ill attempted passes at his co-guard Wanda though [[hopefully]] for us the viewer and for Hank he gets down and dirty with Wanda near the end. The music used is pretty tense and creates the perfect atmosphere for the executions. This movie is well watching alone for the beautiful,talented and very sexy Jennifer Thomas --------------------------------------------- Result 4680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I remember when this [[came]] out a lot of kids were nuts about it. I guess I was a [[bit]] too [[old]] to get all excited and I was a [[fan]] of [[real]] martial [[arts]] [[films]] and [[always]] found this a bit cheesy.

[[In]] the [[early]] 90's we were [[swamped]] with programs such as this [[making]] kids feel like they could fight and be a power ranger or an equal to these kids on 3 Ninjas. I think [[eventually]] parents and film makers alike got sick of it because all we had in reality was abunch of kids [[going]] around punching and hitting [[everyone]].

Many [[kids]] movies have some [[big]] point they're trying to [[make]] and its nice for your kids to watch and get the message, this one doesn't have any message at all...it just exploits a million difference things in less than 90 minutes.

The [[movie]] has no [[great]] visual qualities but [[would]] one expect it to? The acting is pretty [[bad]]. Victor Wong is a cool actor but it was embarrassing to see him here.. The short, fat, gimped eyed old fart as a powerful ninja that was just hilarious. The kids over acted way too much and the youngest ninja Tum Tum was maybe the worst kid actor I have ever seen.

The movie has a plot that anyone knows before they even read the review. 3 ninjas...yea you know they're gonna fight a bunch of bad guys and win obviously... Need I say more. Sorry if I spoiled it for anyone.

With all that said KIDS WILL LOVE IT. This movie is aimed at kids and only children could enjoy it. If you don't mind your kid seeing movies about kids fighting this is a good movie to let them see. If you don't mind allowing your children to see complete garbage that has nothing to do with real martial arts, real acting or reality period then you have found a movie for your kids... I say kids because I think even the girls will like it... I recall all the girls having a crush on Rocky.

2 out of 10 stars because I think you can make a movie for kids and still make it enjoyable for adults..this movie [[failed]] big time at that.. It is beyond cheesy and [[nothing]] [[original]] or unique and I would not allow a child of mine to watch it... Kung Fu the TV series is on DVD and there's tons of great Shaw Brothers films out there...Why not show your children things that will really entertain them and not make them dumb along the way, perhaps even teach them some moves and not just how to kick a man between the legs as grandpa did on 3 Ninjas...no no no...never kick a man between the legs ...never .. thats so unninja like. I remember when this [[arrived]] out a lot of kids were nuts about it. I guess I was a [[bitten]] too [[archaic]] to get all excited and I was a [[ventilator]] of [[veritable]] martial [[humanities]] [[cinematography]] and [[permanently]] found this a bit cheesy.

[[Onto]] the [[precocious]] 90's we were [[flooded]] with programs such as this [[doing]] kids feel like they could fight and be a power ranger or an equal to these kids on 3 Ninjas. I think [[lastly]] parents and film makers alike got sick of it because all we had in reality was abunch of kids [[go]] around punching and hitting [[everybody]].

Many [[youths]] movies have some [[sizeable]] point they're trying to [[deliver]] and its nice for your kids to watch and get the message, this one doesn't have any message at all...it just exploits a million difference things in less than 90 minutes.

The [[filmmaking]] has no [[sublime]] visual qualities but [[could]] one expect it to? The acting is pretty [[unfavourable]]. Victor Wong is a cool actor but it was embarrassing to see him here.. The short, fat, gimped eyed old fart as a powerful ninja that was just hilarious. The kids over acted way too much and the youngest ninja Tum Tum was maybe the worst kid actor I have ever seen.

The movie has a plot that anyone knows before they even read the review. 3 ninjas...yea you know they're gonna fight a bunch of bad guys and win obviously... Need I say more. Sorry if I spoiled it for anyone.

With all that said KIDS WILL LOVE IT. This movie is aimed at kids and only children could enjoy it. If you don't mind your kid seeing movies about kids fighting this is a good movie to let them see. If you don't mind allowing your children to see complete garbage that has nothing to do with real martial arts, real acting or reality period then you have found a movie for your kids... I say kids because I think even the girls will like it... I recall all the girls having a crush on Rocky.

2 out of 10 stars because I think you can make a movie for kids and still make it enjoyable for adults..this movie [[faulted]] big time at that.. It is beyond cheesy and [[none]] [[initial]] or unique and I would not allow a child of mine to watch it... Kung Fu the TV series is on DVD and there's tons of great Shaw Brothers films out there...Why not show your children things that will really entertain them and not make them dumb along the way, perhaps even teach them some moves and not just how to kick a man between the legs as grandpa did on 3 Ninjas...no no no...never kick a man between the legs ...never .. thats so unninja like. --------------------------------------------- Result 4681 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Young Victoria is a beautiful film and has presented Queen Victoria in a different light to what everyone thinks about her. The films wipes away the "I am not amused" impression of Queen Victoria and shows she was a cheerful young woman.

As I love history, particularly Victorian history, you can imagine my reaction when i first saw this film advertised, i was so so so excited and counted down the days until it came to the cinemas. I was a little worried that it wouldn't be historically accurate, but it was and I loved it. I found out new facts about Queen Victoria that didn't know before and it interested me greatly.

Queen Victoria in many lights was one of our all time greatest Monarchs, and this film paints a picture of her real personality and what her life was like. She was treated so badly by her mothers adviser Sir John Conroy, because he wanted Britain to have a regency. This was what inspired Victoria to be a fantastic Queen, which she was! The romance between her and Albert was so deep and this was very well done by Emily Blunt and Rupert Friend, who were both brilliant! The Young Victoria is a heart felt love story but at the same time a great look into a major part of British History...I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!! 10/10 ... no doubt! --------------------------------------------- Result 4682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i watched this film many years ago and have searched for it ever since in my opinion although very raw it is very educational as to what the future can hold i enjoyed the movie and to this this day rate it very high sorry to all those that disagree but a movie should always be judged each to there own and in my opinion its great give it a go with all the cloning and test tube babies that are happening today who are we to judge this film, this may be a dramatised event of what is to become but there you go. All the horrors of today are so far fetched even i laugh but this one gets me thinking and it scares me as a mother what if i was desperate,after watching this movie i would think twice sorry but i love the movie make your own mind up don't watch the movie making- just aknowledge the story and ask yourself this how far would you go for a child? --------------------------------------------- Result 4683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The tragedy is that this [[piece]] of [[rubbish]] was [[part]] of my curriculum while I was studying cinema. [[So]] [[imagine]] how I was [[forced]] to watch it in [[complete]]. [[Believe]] me going through [[hell]] is much much easier. Our professor told us that this is some film ???, but he never thought that we'd disagree or [[assume]] the apposite. I don't think that there is any gods on earth, we're only humans, so all the filmmakers, therefore they CAN make mistakes, [[bad]] [[movies]].. Or very [[bad]] too. The main problem wasn't that [[art]], by all [[means]], is susceptible to endless points of view, but that a lot of people just don't get it, that every single human got his own genuine taste, his own opinion, hence what I suppose it the greatest movie ever made, can also be your worst one ever, and how that is right both ways, but how many people can understand this correctly?. So my professor believes in this movie, and simply I don't. However, the only way to evaluate this "thing" is by measuring it by its original intent to show us different kinds of old folk stories or whatever to catch on this society's mentality, imagination, and nature. To tell you the damn truth Mr. Pier Paolo Pasolini as the scriptwriter and the director made it too unbearable to watch in the first place. The movie is so UGLY. I can't stand this, so how about analyzing it, then discovering the potential beauty in it !! It's beyond your mind hideousness, and strangely not for the sake of the movie's case or anything, it's for the sake of the unstable vision of (Pasolini). His work is so primitive to underdeveloped extent. The deadly cinematic technique, the effective sense of silliness, and the incredible horribleness made everything [[obnoxious]]. Look at the [[atrocious]] acting, the unfruitful [[cinematography]], the awfully poor sets, .. OH MY GOD I've got the nausea already. It can terminate your objectivity violently as watching this movie is one [[true]] [[pain]] like taking the wisdom tooth off by a blind doctor. There are dreadful nightmares which could be more merciful than this. So originally, how to continue THAT just to review it fairly ? Actually, you don't. As this very movie doesn't treat you fair at all. There is really memorable scene in here where some boys are peeing into the eye of the camera (!) I'm trying to connect some things like that with Pasolini's end as murdered. The tragedy is that this [[slice]] of [[codswallop]] was [[party]] of my curriculum while I was studying cinema. [[Thus]] [[reckon]] how I was [[coerced]] to watch it in [[finish]]. [[Believing]] me going through [[brothel]] is much much easier. Our professor told us that this is some film ???, but he never thought that we'd disagree or [[assumes]] the apposite. I don't think that there is any gods on earth, we're only humans, so all the filmmakers, therefore they CAN make mistakes, [[unfavourable]] [[filmmaking]].. Or very [[unfavourable]] too. The main problem wasn't that [[artistry]], by all [[methods]], is susceptible to endless points of view, but that a lot of people just don't get it, that every single human got his own genuine taste, his own opinion, hence what I suppose it the greatest movie ever made, can also be your worst one ever, and how that is right both ways, but how many people can understand this correctly?. So my professor believes in this movie, and simply I don't. However, the only way to evaluate this "thing" is by measuring it by its original intent to show us different kinds of old folk stories or whatever to catch on this society's mentality, imagination, and nature. To tell you the damn truth Mr. Pier Paolo Pasolini as the scriptwriter and the director made it too unbearable to watch in the first place. The movie is so UGLY. I can't stand this, so how about analyzing it, then discovering the potential beauty in it !! It's beyond your mind hideousness, and strangely not for the sake of the movie's case or anything, it's for the sake of the unstable vision of (Pasolini). His work is so primitive to underdeveloped extent. The deadly cinematic technique, the effective sense of silliness, and the incredible horribleness made everything [[despicable]]. Look at the [[despicable]] acting, the unfruitful [[movie]], the awfully poor sets, .. OH MY GOD I've got the nausea already. It can terminate your objectivity violently as watching this movie is one [[veritable]] [[heartache]] like taking the wisdom tooth off by a blind doctor. There are dreadful nightmares which could be more merciful than this. So originally, how to continue THAT just to review it fairly ? Actually, you don't. As this very movie doesn't treat you fair at all. There is really memorable scene in here where some boys are peeing into the eye of the camera (!) I'm trying to connect some things like that with Pasolini's end as murdered. --------------------------------------------- Result 4684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] "[[Anchors]] Aweigh" is the [[product]] of the [[classic]] MGM musical production unit, and on the whole the film is [[every]] [[enjoyable]] – good music by Jule Styne and others, [[excellent]] dancing by Gene Kelly (and even a passable job by Frank Sinatra), and a [[funny]] well-paced script. The only major element I [[would]] [[criticize]] [[would]] be the [[casting]] of Kathryn Grayson, [[whose]] presence in a film always means the audience will be subjected to endless pseudo-operatic warbling from the [[petite]] Miss.

Kelly plays a naval [[serviceman]] named Joseph Brady, a [[man]] with a [[mythic]] [[reputation]] [[around]] the ship as a lover but [[whose]] Valentino-charms are constantly being subdued by the presence of his less cocksure friend with the improbable middle-American name of Clarence (Sinatra). Upon receiving 3 days of shore leave for saving Clarence's life, Joe reluctantly agrees to help Clarence find a girl based on the dubious premise that he owes him something for saving his life. They are drafted by a policeman (Rags Ragland), who needs them to help coax a precocious young boy (Dean Stockwell) who wants to join the Navy into returning home to "Aunt Susan" (Grayson). [[At]] first it is Clarence who is interested in [[wooing]] "Aunt Susan" but eventually Kelly's character emerges as the more likely candidate.

There are several standout musical scenes but nothing to come close to Kelly's more [[famous]] work in films like "Singin' in the Rain" and "[[American]] in Paris". The [[closest]] we [[get]] is a gimmicky [[sequence]] with Kelly's [[character]] in a [[fantasy]] sequence dancing with Jerry, the [[mouse]] from "Tom and Jerry" (although he [[seems]] to be closer in [[size]] to a [[dog]] or cat here than to a mouse). It's a [[startling]] [[sequence]] for its [[time]] but doesn't have enough complexity or emotion to really stand the [[test]] of [[time]]. I [[actually]] [[enjoyed]] the parts of the [[sequence]] that took place prior to the animation, where Kelly was using semi-balletic moves to emphasize the transition into the fantasy world and where we see him dance down a tunnel that looks like something right out of "Alice in Wonderland".

Eventually the characters find their way to Susan's favorite bar, a somewhat sanitized Mexican restaurant/bar in Tijuana. There the patrons happily allow Ms. Grayson to chirp her arias with abandon, and the management becomes very excited at the opportunity that Clarence and Joe have extended for her to sing with their "friend" Jose Iturbi (playing himself with a light humorous touch). Of course they've never met their "friend" Iturbi and they spend much of the film's length trying to reach him (in an amusing scene Sinatra's character meets Iturbi but mistakes him for a piano tuner and urges him to abandon tuning pianos and try a professional career), sneaking into the studio and the Hollywood Bowl, where Iturbi is rehearsing a surreal symphony comprised of dozens of young piano players – you haven't seen anything like this outside of "1000 Fingers of Dr. T". Iturbi himself is a kind of a god-figure in the story – he represents the opportunity for salvation from the drudgery of unfulfilling work and the possibility for fame and artistic achievement for the heroine. Everyone is 100% sure that as soon as Mr. Iturbi so much as hears Ms. Grayson, her operatic career will be a reality. The 3 primary characters are desperate to reach him and they think of him as some kind of remote and distant mythological figure – a lot of the film's charm and humor comes from the contrast of this perception to the very down-to-earth "real" mannerisms of the maestro. And speaking of Iturbi's contributions to the film, he also provides a very stimulating musical moment with his orchestral interpretation of "Donkey Serenade".

When all is said and done, this is a film that nobody who enjoys musicals will want to miss. The majority of the music was written for this film, a nice contrast to recycled soundtracks for other Kelly opuses like "Rain" and "American". Kelly is still at his early peak, adventurous and boisterous in both his dances and his interpretation of the character. Sinatra's voice was never in better form and he rarely had better songs to sing. Stockwell is a charming addition to the clan, and Grayson's character is endearing when she isn't posturing on stage. Iturbi adds that well-grounded but sophisticated tone that perfectly matches the atmosphere and style of the classic-era MGM musical. This is one of the better ones. "[[Anchor]] Aweigh" is the [[merchandise]] of the [[classical]] MGM musical production unit, and on the whole the film is [[any]] [[agreeable]] – good music by Jule Styne and others, [[spectacular]] dancing by Gene Kelly (and even a passable job by Frank Sinatra), and a [[amusing]] well-paced script. The only major element I [[could]] [[critique]] [[should]] be the [[cast]] of Kathryn Grayson, [[whom]] presence in a film always means the audience will be subjected to endless pseudo-operatic warbling from the [[small]] Miss.

Kelly plays a naval [[military]] named Joseph Brady, a [[males]] with a [[mythical]] [[fame]] [[about]] the ship as a lover but [[who]] Valentino-charms are constantly being subdued by the presence of his less cocksure friend with the improbable middle-American name of Clarence (Sinatra). Upon receiving 3 days of shore leave for saving Clarence's life, Joe reluctantly agrees to help Clarence find a girl based on the dubious premise that he owes him something for saving his life. They are drafted by a policeman (Rags Ragland), who needs them to help coax a precocious young boy (Dean Stockwell) who wants to join the Navy into returning home to "Aunt Susan" (Grayson). [[In]] first it is Clarence who is interested in [[courting]] "Aunt Susan" but eventually Kelly's character emerges as the more likely candidate.

There are several standout musical scenes but nothing to come close to Kelly's more [[illustrious]] work in films like "Singin' in the Rain" and "[[Americans]] in Paris". The [[earliest]] we [[got]] is a gimmicky [[sequencing]] with Kelly's [[nature]] in a [[utopia]] sequence dancing with Jerry, the [[smile]] from "Tom and Jerry" (although he [[appears]] to be closer in [[caliber]] to a [[hound]] or cat here than to a mouse). It's a [[striking]] [[sequencing]] for its [[moment]] but doesn't have enough complexity or emotion to really stand the [[essays]] of [[period]]. I [[genuinely]] [[liked]] the parts of the [[sequences]] that took place prior to the animation, where Kelly was using semi-balletic moves to emphasize the transition into the fantasy world and where we see him dance down a tunnel that looks like something right out of "Alice in Wonderland".

Eventually the characters find their way to Susan's favorite bar, a somewhat sanitized Mexican restaurant/bar in Tijuana. There the patrons happily allow Ms. Grayson to chirp her arias with abandon, and the management becomes very excited at the opportunity that Clarence and Joe have extended for her to sing with their "friend" Jose Iturbi (playing himself with a light humorous touch). Of course they've never met their "friend" Iturbi and they spend much of the film's length trying to reach him (in an amusing scene Sinatra's character meets Iturbi but mistakes him for a piano tuner and urges him to abandon tuning pianos and try a professional career), sneaking into the studio and the Hollywood Bowl, where Iturbi is rehearsing a surreal symphony comprised of dozens of young piano players – you haven't seen anything like this outside of "1000 Fingers of Dr. T". Iturbi himself is a kind of a god-figure in the story – he represents the opportunity for salvation from the drudgery of unfulfilling work and the possibility for fame and artistic achievement for the heroine. Everyone is 100% sure that as soon as Mr. Iturbi so much as hears Ms. Grayson, her operatic career will be a reality. The 3 primary characters are desperate to reach him and they think of him as some kind of remote and distant mythological figure – a lot of the film's charm and humor comes from the contrast of this perception to the very down-to-earth "real" mannerisms of the maestro. And speaking of Iturbi's contributions to the film, he also provides a very stimulating musical moment with his orchestral interpretation of "Donkey Serenade".

When all is said and done, this is a film that nobody who enjoys musicals will want to miss. The majority of the music was written for this film, a nice contrast to recycled soundtracks for other Kelly opuses like "Rain" and "American". Kelly is still at his early peak, adventurous and boisterous in both his dances and his interpretation of the character. Sinatra's voice was never in better form and he rarely had better songs to sing. Stockwell is a charming addition to the clan, and Grayson's character is endearing when she isn't posturing on stage. Iturbi adds that well-grounded but sophisticated tone that perfectly matches the atmosphere and style of the classic-era MGM musical. This is one of the better ones. --------------------------------------------- Result 4685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is indeed quite the [[strange]] movie... First, we have an ex-U.S.-gymnast [[trying]] to turn actor (or something), and this seems to be the only role he ever got (that I know of anyway) -- and for good reason. While he does [[pull]] off the role well enough to keep some interest, it is a rather bland and flat performance. Second, we have the [[WORST]] EVER sound effects ever used in a movie!!! I'm not kidding. This alone makes the movie extremely comical, but in that annoying way. [[hehe]] And third, while we have a generally decent acting supporting cast (including the required hot chick!), an actually not-so-bad story, and some cool visuals; the dialogue, fight scenes involving gymnastics (hilarious!), and overall execution of the plot are weak. This movie would have been barely better as a network TV movie (too bad Fox wasn't around in 1985). It's one of those movies that's [[simply]] [[bad]], yet you can't resist watching and even enjoying it once you get used to it, especially now that it has found the perfect eternal home on late night TV and cable. This is indeed quite the [[weird]] movie... First, we have an ex-U.S.-gymnast [[seeking]] to turn actor (or something), and this seems to be the only role he ever got (that I know of anyway) -- and for good reason. While he does [[pulls]] off the role well enough to keep some interest, it is a rather bland and flat performance. Second, we have the [[PIRE]] EVER sound effects ever used in a movie!!! I'm not kidding. This alone makes the movie extremely comical, but in that annoying way. [[haha]] And third, while we have a generally decent acting supporting cast (including the required hot chick!), an actually not-so-bad story, and some cool visuals; the dialogue, fight scenes involving gymnastics (hilarious!), and overall execution of the plot are weak. This movie would have been barely better as a network TV movie (too bad Fox wasn't around in 1985). It's one of those movies that's [[straightforward]] [[unfavorable]], yet you can't resist watching and even enjoying it once you get used to it, especially now that it has found the perfect eternal home on late night TV and cable. --------------------------------------------- Result 4686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Atlantis was much better than I had [[anticipated]]. In some [[ways]] it had a better [[story]] than [[come]] of the other films aimed at a higher age. Although this [[film]] did [[demand]] a soid attention span at times. It was a [[great]] film for all ages. I [[noticed]] some of the younger [[audience]] [[expected]] a [[comedy]] but [[got]] an adventure. I [[think]] everyone is tired of an endless [[parade]] of [[extreme]] parodies. A lot of these kids have seen [[nothing]] but parodies. [[After]] a [[short]] [[time]] everyone seemed very [[intensely]] watching Atlantis. Atlantis was much better than I had [[planned]]. In some [[shapes]] it had a better [[tale]] than [[arrive]] of the other films aimed at a higher age. Although this [[films]] did [[request]] a soid attention span at times. It was a [[wondrous]] film for all ages. I [[seen]] some of the younger [[audiences]] [[hoped]] a [[humour]] but [[ai]] an adventure. I [[thoughts]] everyone is tired of an endless [[procession]] of [[severe]] parodies. A lot of these kids have seen [[nada]] but parodies. [[Upon]] a [[terse]] [[period]] everyone seemed very [[densely]] watching Atlantis. --------------------------------------------- Result 4687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh, what a bad, bad, very bad movie! Cowritten by and starring Sylvester Stallone—that should have been enough—and featuring too many rock-climbing scenes, vertigo, falling, and scene-chewing villains and a botched airborne heist. There are two plots, both lame. One involves a traumatic failed rescue, and the other involves bad people wrecking an airplane for booty, and killing various harmless people whenever possible. The usually reliable John Lithgow, perhaps depressed by the sheer awfulness of the product, is reduced to sneering and calling those for whom he doesn't care "Bostid!" in a vague approximation of an English accent. Janine Turner, who was sprightly and enigmatic when she played Maggie on Northern Exposure, is sadly wasted in the part of a rescue climber and pilot. Stallone is stolid and muscle-headed. No deathless lines in this one. No living lines, either. --------------------------------------------- Result 4688 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Welcome to Collinwood is a [[lot]] of things, but it is none of the following:

A George [[Clooney]] star vehicle Unfunny Un-Original

And yes i know, the basis for the movie is another movie. But as far as Hollywood goes, this may rank with their most authentic outputs this decade - and for me, it does.

The movie is from start to finish, an absolute gas. Here's why.

There isn't a [[bad]] performance in the film. The funny parts are funny. The edgy parts are edgy. The script contains, not a dull moment of dialogue The cinematography is fresh and yes beautiful. And it doesn't conform to the Hollywood norm (you'll see what i mean, when you see the film)

When i was a kid, i remember seeing advertisements for the film. This film went under the radar after not grossing much at the box office, and isn't even a cult classic. The reason why Transformers 2, is seen as acceptable by average movie goers, is because they are used to seeing Transformers 2. If film's as original and funny as this were pumped out as often as multi-million pieces of s**t, the cinematic experience would be a much fresher place -

When 'they' say they don't make em like they used to, 'they' didn't see Welcome to Collinwood.

A fun, mini-masterpiece of caper comedy, that refuses to [[compromise]]. One of my favourites. Welcome to Collinwood is a [[batch]] of things, but it is none of the following:

A George [[Clones]] star vehicle Unfunny Un-Original

And yes i know, the basis for the movie is another movie. But as far as Hollywood goes, this may rank with their most authentic outputs this decade - and for me, it does.

The movie is from start to finish, an absolute gas. Here's why.

There isn't a [[horrid]] performance in the film. The funny parts are funny. The edgy parts are edgy. The script contains, not a dull moment of dialogue The cinematography is fresh and yes beautiful. And it doesn't conform to the Hollywood norm (you'll see what i mean, when you see the film)

When i was a kid, i remember seeing advertisements for the film. This film went under the radar after not grossing much at the box office, and isn't even a cult classic. The reason why Transformers 2, is seen as acceptable by average movie goers, is because they are used to seeing Transformers 2. If film's as original and funny as this were pumped out as often as multi-million pieces of s**t, the cinematic experience would be a much fresher place -

When 'they' say they don't make em like they used to, 'they' didn't see Welcome to Collinwood.

A fun, mini-masterpiece of caper comedy, that refuses to [[jeopardise]]. One of my favourites. --------------------------------------------- Result 4689 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Shintarô Katsu, who played the blind swordsman "Zatoichi" in a total of 27 movies, ends the Hanzo trilogy with this [[excellent]] film in which he gets to make love to a ghost, Mako Midori (Blind Beast).

The big stick, used often in the pursuit of justice, is retired forever.

Katsu was his usual impudent self as he pursued those who would steal from the treasury to lend at usurious amounts to those who could not afford to pay.

The usual amazing swordplay and skill of the big guy was present, along with the blood.

I'm going to miss him. Shintarô Katsu, who played the blind swordsman "Zatoichi" in a total of 27 movies, ends the Hanzo trilogy with this [[wondrous]] film in which he gets to make love to a ghost, Mako Midori (Blind Beast).

The big stick, used often in the pursuit of justice, is retired forever.

Katsu was his usual impudent self as he pursued those who would steal from the treasury to lend at usurious amounts to those who could not afford to pay.

The usual amazing swordplay and skill of the big guy was present, along with the blood.

I'm going to miss him. --------------------------------------------- Result 4690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A scientist on an island is in deep sorrow about the loss of his son who died of kidney cancer. So he thinks: why not turn my dead son into a hammerhead shark. Well, who wouldn't? It's a little hard to cope with the fact that the hammerhead shark that's killing everybody is constantly being called "Paul". Also, William Forsythe's cast as a MacGyver-kick-ass-savingtheday- kinda hero lacks credibility. On the other hand there are a few hot chicks who make you actually look at the screen while shark Paul bites another one to death. As a matter of fact I find bad b-movies quite amusing. But for my taste it would have been a much better movie if it was made for say 1000000 bucks less. Then it might have been fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 4691 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I really [[wanted]] to like this film, but the [[story]] is ridicules. I don't want to spoil this film, - don't [[worry]] right from the begin you know [[something]] bad is going to happen - but here's an example of how [[sloppy]] this film was put together. The Cowboy and "Twig" ride up the ridge. The Cowboy has a handle bar mustache. The Cowboy and "Twig" get into a shoot out and race half way down the ridge. The Cowboy is clean shaven through out the rest of the film. Sometime between the gun fight and the ride down the mountain the cowboy has had time to shave, in dark, on the back of a horse.

To be fair, the acting by the four main characters is solid. I really [[want]] to like this film, but the [[conte]] is ridicules. I don't want to spoil this film, - don't [[worried]] right from the begin you know [[anything]] bad is going to happen - but here's an example of how [[remiss]] this film was put together. The Cowboy and "Twig" ride up the ridge. The Cowboy has a handle bar mustache. The Cowboy and "Twig" get into a shoot out and race half way down the ridge. The Cowboy is clean shaven through out the rest of the film. Sometime between the gun fight and the ride down the mountain the cowboy has had time to shave, in dark, on the back of a horse.

To be fair, the acting by the four main characters is solid. --------------------------------------------- Result 4692 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The film starts to slowly when we got to the cinema we thought it looked quite good but after about 5 mins we were all bored out of our minds and wondering what kind of film we had come to see, i don't like this film and wouldn't recommend it to anyone, the best part of the night was when the alarm and lights came back on because the project broke down because we thought we could all go home. this has to be one of the worst films i have ever seen we were all bored out of or minds and most of the people in the cinema actually RAN out of the doors at the end because it was so rubbish. i am surprised that no one walked out earlier than that. if you go and see it make sure you something to keep you busy, better still Don't go and see it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I saw the movie and really could not [[stop]] my tears. Its tragedy that India has no such leaders after freedom, who dare to do justice with their own children, when they don't behave properly.. In current generation, politicians bring their children's into politics without [[measuring]] their caliber and skills.. I remember the dialogue from Gandhi 'What kind of society we want to create/make with such people (about Harilal)?' No wonder that it will be a dream that India will hardly have such leader in this or next generation.. Einstein was right when he said about Gandhi that 'After 50 years one would hardly believe that such person with body, soul and mind (Mahatma Gandhi) had ever lived on this earth.' I sincerely want to THANKS a LOT to Anil kapoor, Feroze khan and all film actors/actresses for this [[wonderful]] movie about great person and relationship with his son. All father and son should watch this movie once and take some lessons for both roles. I saw the movie and really could not [[parada]] my tears. Its tragedy that India has no such leaders after freedom, who dare to do justice with their own children, when they don't behave properly.. In current generation, politicians bring their children's into politics without [[measurement]] their caliber and skills.. I remember the dialogue from Gandhi 'What kind of society we want to create/make with such people (about Harilal)?' No wonder that it will be a dream that India will hardly have such leader in this or next generation.. Einstein was right when he said about Gandhi that 'After 50 years one would hardly believe that such person with body, soul and mind (Mahatma Gandhi) had ever lived on this earth.' I sincerely want to THANKS a LOT to Anil kapoor, Feroze khan and all film actors/actresses for this [[wondrous]] movie about great person and relationship with his son. All father and son should watch this movie once and take some lessons for both roles. --------------------------------------------- Result 4694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This movie [[rocks]]" Jen sexy as ever and Polly [[wow]] were we really ever that young this movie can still [[touch]] the hearts of a lot of [[teens]] it [[needs]] to be put on DVD [[soon]] or it will become a [[classic]]. i Really [[enjoyed]] growing up to this [[movie]] i have [[always]] had a crush on Jen now i am too [[old]] but to this [[movie]] is [[made]] for all gens> you [[know]] i [[come]] from the [[early]] 80,s [[area]] were i [[Had]] to watch [[everyone]] els [[live]] the [[life]] i wanted but thru [[movies]] i can do that all over again i [[guess]] in short i am [[hoping]] and [[wishing]] that this movie not be lost in time but reborn to the [[youth]] so they may enjoy the heart warm [[filling]] you get [[learning]] about hormones and datting problems and how to [[get]] away with stuff that [[seems]] so [[major]] back then but don't mean nothan now so this [[movie]] is a dating [[tool]]. This movie [[rattle]]" Jen sexy as ever and Polly [[whoa]] were we really ever that young this movie can still [[touches]] the hearts of a lot of [[adolescents]] it [[needed]] to be put on DVD [[early]] or it will become a [[conventional]]. i Really [[loved]] growing up to this [[film]] i have [[unceasingly]] had a crush on Jen now i am too [[antigua]] but to this [[kino]] is [[introduced]] for all gens> you [[savoir]] i [[arrive]] from the [[precocious]] 80,s [[zone]] were i [[Have]] to watch [[someone]] els [[viva]] the [[living]] i wanted but thru [[films]] i can do that all over again i [[guesses]] in short i am [[waiting]] and [[wanting]] that this movie not be lost in time but reborn to the [[teens]] so they may enjoy the heart warm [[fill]] you get [[taught]] about hormones and datting problems and how to [[got]] away with stuff that [[looks]] so [[considerable]] back then but don't mean nothan now so this [[cinematography]] is a dating [[instrument]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] One of my favorite Twilight [[Zone]] [[episodes]]. And the next day we were in the supermarket at Hollywood [[Blvd]]. and [[La]] Brea, my father and I, and guess who was [[coming]] toward us in the [[aisle]]! Barney Phillips, but no hat on -- at [[least]], I don't [[think]] he had a [[hat]] on.

We [[asked]] him about his third [[eye]], and he [[said]] [[something]] like he [[left]] it at [[home]], and [[everybody]] he met that day had [[asked]] him about it.

A friendly [[guy]]. We [[used]] to [[see]] all [[kinds]] of character actors in LA in those days.

BTW, I was a [[teenager]] and it took a [[long]] [[time]] for me to get over the "three hands" on the other alien!

[[Robyn]] Frisch O'Neill

Hollywood native and resident 1947 to 1963. One of my favorite Twilight [[Zones]] [[bouts]]. And the next day we were in the supermarket at Hollywood [[Boulevard]]. and [[Las]] Brea, my father and I, and guess who was [[upcoming]] toward us in the [[driveway]]! Barney Phillips, but no hat on -- at [[lowest]], I don't [[believe]] he had a [[bonnet]] on.

We [[asking]] him about his third [[eyes]], and he [[asserted]] [[anything]] like he [[exited]] it at [[households]], and [[everyone]] he met that day had [[demanded]] him about it.

A friendly [[dude]]. We [[utilizing]] to [[behold]] all [[sort]] of character actors in LA in those days.

BTW, I was a [[juvenile]] and it took a [[longer]] [[moment]] for me to get over the "three hands" on the other alien!

[[Robin]] Frisch O'Neill

Hollywood native and resident 1947 to 1963. --------------------------------------------- Result 4696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Because some people, like me, like to know EVERYTHING about a movie even if they plan to see it, including the ending. Anyway, here's the ending as I remember it, because I couldn't have been more than 8 yrs old when I saw it for the first and only time on TV. But I'll tell ya, it sure [[scared]] the little kid that I was, and I thought about it for days afterward, and it still stands out in my [[mind]] to this day, even though some of the details are a little vague. Abe Vigoda was in this movie? I don't remember that! I didn't even remember that ol' Barnabus was in this movie, and I LOVED Dark Shadows. So, at the end, the lead character (Belinda Montgomery?) is lured by the Judge (Joseph Cotton, I'm guessing, even though I remember it as him being an old family physician or something instead of a judge; see how memory fades?) to the wedding place, which as I remember it is in a cavern of some kind? Maybe I've got that wrong; and Shelley Winters is there laughing, and the Judge has a cape on, and the camera angle is kind of looking up at him, and he throws back the cloak, and he has goat legs, and he announces he's actually her father, the Devil, and she's played right into their (the satanic cult's) hands, because the "mortal" guy she has fallen in love with (I guess that's Robert Foxworth) turns out also to be the guy Satan wants to marry her off to, The Demon with Yellow Eyes, and yep, sure enough, they show Robert Foxworth, and his eyes glow yellow. There are a lot of close-ups in the last few minutes of the film. Everyone is laughing and rejoicing, except for Belinda Montgomery, who is very unhappy, and cries or screams or something, and that's the end. The bad guys win. Because some people, like me, like to know EVERYTHING about a movie even if they plan to see it, including the ending. Anyway, here's the ending as I remember it, because I couldn't have been more than 8 yrs old when I saw it for the first and only time on TV. But I'll tell ya, it sure [[shitless]] the little kid that I was, and I thought about it for days afterward, and it still stands out in my [[intellect]] to this day, even though some of the details are a little vague. Abe Vigoda was in this movie? I don't remember that! I didn't even remember that ol' Barnabus was in this movie, and I LOVED Dark Shadows. So, at the end, the lead character (Belinda Montgomery?) is lured by the Judge (Joseph Cotton, I'm guessing, even though I remember it as him being an old family physician or something instead of a judge; see how memory fades?) to the wedding place, which as I remember it is in a cavern of some kind? Maybe I've got that wrong; and Shelley Winters is there laughing, and the Judge has a cape on, and the camera angle is kind of looking up at him, and he throws back the cloak, and he has goat legs, and he announces he's actually her father, the Devil, and she's played right into their (the satanic cult's) hands, because the "mortal" guy she has fallen in love with (I guess that's Robert Foxworth) turns out also to be the guy Satan wants to marry her off to, The Demon with Yellow Eyes, and yep, sure enough, they show Robert Foxworth, and his eyes glow yellow. There are a lot of close-ups in the last few minutes of the film. Everyone is laughing and rejoicing, except for Belinda Montgomery, who is very unhappy, and cries or screams or something, and that's the end. The bad guys win. --------------------------------------------- Result 4697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A surprisingly good movie! It has quite a few good jokes thru out the whole movie. The only negative thing is that some scenes go to the extremes to show just how stupid the two main characters are. We get it, stupid blondes, get on with it!

The plot just barely dodges being called "corny". And boobies are always a plus altho the movie for some strange reason doesn't play with that card very much even tho the plot line introduces two black haired women who act as the evil counter part of our two blondes.

So all in all, a good movie to watch. I almost gave it an 8/10, but let's not get crazy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Hip. Erotic. Wickedly sexy ... whatever. It's "The Terminator" with werewolves.

[[No]], seriously. The cop saves the girl (waitress!) from the [[big]] [[monster]] and refers to himself as her 'protector'. The lead actor Ryan Alosio does a pretty good job of emulating Kyle Reese ... there's a massacre in a police precinct ... the bad guy is muscular with red eyes ... and it even contains dialogue along the lines of "You [[said]] it yourself, he won't ever stop. Never." The [[dire]] [[script]] comes from a first-time screenwriter who, thank God, hasn't sold anything since this, and it's all thrown together by famously bad director Richard Friedman.

The movie opens in a strip bar (always a good sign), and a mean-looking biker guy bursts in for no apparent reason, pursued by three cops. One of them is black, and (shock horror!) he's the one who gets killed in the first five minutes. The film goes downhill for the next hour or so, then picks up a little with some decent action sequences, before rounding it all up with an [[abysmal]] ending.

For the most part, the cast come across as competent actors doing what they can with a [[bad]] [[script]] and a director who's willing to settle for [[less]]. If nothing else they appear to be learning how to act in this movie and Alosio, along with some of the supporting cast, shows signs of talent. DarkWolf in his human form is [[played]] by [[gargantuan]] Kane Hodder -- famous for his numerous portrayals of Jason Vorhees in the '[[Friday]] the 13th' [[movies]]. He's decent [[enough]], especially considering he isn't used to speaking roles.

It's [[become]] famous amongst [[groups]] of horny [[teenage]] [[boys]] for the lesbian rooftop scene between [[Andrea]] Bogart and [[Sasha]] Williams, who gets her kit off a [[couple]] of [[times]] in the [[grand]] tradition of [[former]] 'Power Rangers' [[actresses]]. And it's unnervingly [[clear]] that the editor [[spent]] WAY too much time on that scene ... anyway, the main redeeming feature is that the physical werewolf [[effects]] are [[rather]] [[good]], and the [[design]] of the wolf isn't bad at all.But the CGI is bad. Just plain bad. I mean seriously, if you can't reach some level of realism - why bother? Just throw a little extra money into the make-up! Aside from the terrible script, this movie does have it's moments, many of which are unintentionally funny. It's good for a laugh if you don't have anything better to do, but just don't spend any money on it. Please. Hip. Erotic. Wickedly sexy ... whatever. It's "The Terminator" with werewolves.

[[Nos]], seriously. The cop saves the girl (waitress!) from the [[grand]] [[creature]] and refers to himself as her 'protector'. The lead actor Ryan Alosio does a pretty good job of emulating Kyle Reese ... there's a massacre in a police precinct ... the bad guy is muscular with red eyes ... and it even contains dialogue along the lines of "You [[asserted]] it yourself, he won't ever stop. Never." The [[horrific]] [[hyphen]] comes from a first-time screenwriter who, thank God, hasn't sold anything since this, and it's all thrown together by famously bad director Richard Friedman.

The movie opens in a strip bar (always a good sign), and a mean-looking biker guy bursts in for no apparent reason, pursued by three cops. One of them is black, and (shock horror!) he's the one who gets killed in the first five minutes. The film goes downhill for the next hour or so, then picks up a little with some decent action sequences, before rounding it all up with an [[cataclysmic]] ending.

For the most part, the cast come across as competent actors doing what they can with a [[unfavourable]] [[hyphen]] and a director who's willing to settle for [[minimum]]. If nothing else they appear to be learning how to act in this movie and Alosio, along with some of the supporting cast, shows signs of talent. DarkWolf in his human form is [[effected]] by [[prodigious]] Kane Hodder -- famous for his numerous portrayals of Jason Vorhees in the '[[Fridays]] the 13th' [[filmmaking]]. He's decent [[satisfactorily]], especially considering he isn't used to speaking roles.

It's [[becomes]] famous amongst [[group]] of horny [[schoolgirl]] [[boy]] for the lesbian rooftop scene between [[Andrzej]] Bogart and [[Sacha]] Williams, who gets her kit off a [[matches]] of [[time]] in the [[whopping]] tradition of [[previous]] 'Power Rangers' [[actors]]. And it's unnervingly [[unmistakable]] that the editor [[spend]] WAY too much time on that scene ... anyway, the main redeeming feature is that the physical werewolf [[consequences]] are [[quite]] [[buena]], and the [[designing]] of the wolf isn't bad at all.But the CGI is bad. Just plain bad. I mean seriously, if you can't reach some level of realism - why bother? Just throw a little extra money into the make-up! Aside from the terrible script, this movie does have it's moments, many of which are unintentionally funny. It's good for a laugh if you don't have anything better to do, but just don't spend any money on it. Please. --------------------------------------------- Result 4699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Once again a [[film]] classic has been pointlessly remade with predictably [[disastrous]] [[results]]. The title is [[false]] as is everything about this film. The period is not persuasively [[rendered]], and the leads seem way too young and too vapid to even be criminals. Arthur Penn's film had style, humor, a point of view, and was made by [[talented]] people. Even if the 1967 version didn't exist this [[would]] still be an [[unnecessary]] film. The 1967 version strayed from the facts, [[presented]] a glamorized version of Bonnie and Clyde, but it was [[exciting]], and innovative for 1967, and it had some outstanding performances that allowed you to care. This 1992 remake seems culled from the original film rather than the truth as known and the actors in this version are callow, unappealing, and not the least bit interesting. By all means [[skip]] this one and [[hope]] the 2010 version will be better. Could it possibly be worse? Once again a [[filmmaking]] classic has been pointlessly remade with predictably [[abysmal]] [[consequence]]. The title is [[faux]] as is everything about this film. The period is not persuasively [[handed]], and the leads seem way too young and too vapid to even be criminals. Arthur Penn's film had style, humor, a point of view, and was made by [[prodigy]] people. Even if the 1967 version didn't exist this [[should]] still be an [[superfluous]] film. The 1967 version strayed from the facts, [[lodged]] a glamorized version of Bonnie and Clyde, but it was [[enthralling]], and innovative for 1967, and it had some outstanding performances that allowed you to care. This 1992 remake seems culled from the original film rather than the truth as known and the actors in this version are callow, unappealing, and not the least bit interesting. By all means [[jumping]] this one and [[hopes]] the 2010 version will be better. Could it possibly be worse? --------------------------------------------- Result 4700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] You know how sometimes you can watch a crappy [[movie]] with friends and laugh at all the shortcomings of the movie? [[Well]] this was beyond that. I bought the DVD at [[Tower]] [[Records]] because it was like $3.00 and I'd heard this was a movie you could laugh at. It is really nothing short of [[pathetic]]. About 30 minutes into the [[movie]], my friends started asking me to turn it off. Around 45 minutes they [[begged]] me. After an hour, we [[compromised]] to [[fast]] forward to the end, so we [[could]] see how the conflict was resolved (and because we had been [[watching]] the whole [[time]] for Matt Walsh). Seriously, don't watch this [[movie]]. It is beyond painful. You know how sometimes you can watch a crappy [[filmmaking]] with friends and laugh at all the shortcomings of the movie? [[Good]] this was beyond that. I bought the DVD at [[Rook]] [[Recordings]] because it was like $3.00 and I'd heard this was a movie you could laugh at. It is really nothing short of [[unhappy]]. About 30 minutes into the [[film]], my friends started asking me to turn it off. Around 45 minutes they [[pleaded]] me. After an hour, we [[endangered]] to [[speedy]] forward to the end, so we [[did]] see how the conflict was resolved (and because we had been [[staring]] the whole [[times]] for Matt Walsh). Seriously, don't watch this [[movies]]. It is beyond painful. --------------------------------------------- Result 4701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I remember following the case of Andre Chicatillo in the newspapers while I was living in South [[Africa]]. They had [[photos]] of him sitting in his cage while being prosecuted in court. Not, as it turned out, to [[protect]] the [[court]] members, but to protect him from the public. This was [[fascinating]], albeit [[morbid]], reading. I later [[heard]] that a film had been made by HBO about the case, but it was made for American TV. Bummed! Strangely, [[CITIZEN]] X [[got]] a limited cinematic [[release]] in South Africa. I charged down to the local Ster Kinekor complex and duly bought a [[ticket]] (I was alone; my girlfriend at the time was only interested in the likes of STEEL MAGNOLIAS and FRIED GREEN TOMATOES). Wow! What a [[brilliant]] film. Why wasn't it released to a wider audience? Had it not been made for TV, it could have got an Oscar nomination or 2. There is no way to spoil the ending; who the killer is is never kept from the audience. Jeffrey DeMunn portrays a truly terrifying psycho. He is calm, downtrodden, considered a failure by his wife and subjected to constant ridicule and humiliation by his superiors at work. By committing these horrendous acts, he gets to feel strong, powerful.

Fighting to catch him against all odds is a pathologist, played to excellent turn by Stephen Rea, in one of his [[strongest]] performances. He must battle the snail-pace of Russian bureaucracy, the primitive resources he has at his disposal and (above all) the refusal by his superiors to acknowledge that the USSR even has a serial killer. The general in charge (Joss Ackland) says that serial killers are "a decadent, Western phenomenon". Only Donald Sutherland is willing to help, but his help must be under the counter. The ever-brilliant Max Von Sydow plays a Russian psychiatrist who breaks protocol and decides to help the investigators in their quest. It is the first time in Russian history that a shrink is used to build a profile of a serial killer still on the loose, and he has everything to lose if his involvement is made public.

CITIZEN X is brilliantly acted, well written and the music and editing only add to the tension and theme of the film. Excellent support from a horribly underused Imelda Staunton and a real sense of impending doom make CITIZEN X a film worth seeing. This was too good to be made for TV I remember following the case of Andre Chicatillo in the newspapers while I was living in South [[Continents]]. They had [[image]] of him sitting in his cage while being prosecuted in court. Not, as it turned out, to [[preserving]] the [[courthouse]] members, but to protect him from the public. This was [[intriguing]], albeit [[pathology]], reading. I later [[hear]] that a film had been made by HBO about the case, but it was made for American TV. Bummed! Strangely, [[CIVIC]] X [[get]] a limited cinematic [[freed]] in South Africa. I charged down to the local Ster Kinekor complex and duly bought a [[tickets]] (I was alone; my girlfriend at the time was only interested in the likes of STEEL MAGNOLIAS and FRIED GREEN TOMATOES). Wow! What a [[wondrous]] film. Why wasn't it released to a wider audience? Had it not been made for TV, it could have got an Oscar nomination or 2. There is no way to spoil the ending; who the killer is is never kept from the audience. Jeffrey DeMunn portrays a truly terrifying psycho. He is calm, downtrodden, considered a failure by his wife and subjected to constant ridicule and humiliation by his superiors at work. By committing these horrendous acts, he gets to feel strong, powerful.

Fighting to catch him against all odds is a pathologist, played to excellent turn by Stephen Rea, in one of his [[strictest]] performances. He must battle the snail-pace of Russian bureaucracy, the primitive resources he has at his disposal and (above all) the refusal by his superiors to acknowledge that the USSR even has a serial killer. The general in charge (Joss Ackland) says that serial killers are "a decadent, Western phenomenon". Only Donald Sutherland is willing to help, but his help must be under the counter. The ever-brilliant Max Von Sydow plays a Russian psychiatrist who breaks protocol and decides to help the investigators in their quest. It is the first time in Russian history that a shrink is used to build a profile of a serial killer still on the loose, and he has everything to lose if his involvement is made public.

CITIZEN X is brilliantly acted, well written and the music and editing only add to the tension and theme of the film. Excellent support from a horribly underused Imelda Staunton and a real sense of impending doom make CITIZEN X a film worth seeing. This was too good to be made for TV --------------------------------------------- Result 4702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Emma is a horribly flawed film based on Jane Austens classic novel. I have not read the book so I really didn't know that much about the plot, and yet I still predicted nearly the entire plot. There were also many scenes that frustrated me because of the bad writing or directing. The film is though for some reason very [[entertaining]] and I loved it. Of [[course]] there were all the scenes I disliked but the majority was well acted and funny. Gwyneth Paltrow gives one of her [[best]] performances as the heroine in Emma. The film also stars Toni Collette(Who has okay but has been much better) Ewan Mecgreger(Who has also been better but he is still very good here) Alan Cumming(Who I have never really been impressed with and is pretty much the same here) and Jeremy Northam(Who's performance is [[rather]] wooden at first look but actually fairly subtle, [[even]] if that was not what it needed) There have been much better adaptations of Jane Austen books but this one is still very [[entertaining]] and worth watching. Emma is a horribly flawed film based on Jane Austens classic novel. I have not read the book so I really didn't know that much about the plot, and yet I still predicted nearly the entire plot. There were also many scenes that frustrated me because of the bad writing or directing. The film is though for some reason very [[amusing]] and I loved it. Of [[cours]] there were all the scenes I disliked but the majority was well acted and funny. Gwyneth Paltrow gives one of her [[better]] performances as the heroine in Emma. The film also stars Toni Collette(Who has okay but has been much better) Ewan Mecgreger(Who has also been better but he is still very good here) Alan Cumming(Who I have never really been impressed with and is pretty much the same here) and Jeremy Northam(Who's performance is [[quite]] wooden at first look but actually fairly subtle, [[yet]] if that was not what it needed) There have been much better adaptations of Jane Austen books but this one is still very [[amusing]] and worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 4703 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] In recent times I have been subjected to both this [[movie]] and "King Arthur", on DVDs chosen by [[others]] for an evening's "entertainment" and [[together]] they [[achieve]] nothing more than bearing out a [[growing]] [[notion]] I have that the [[modern]] movie-watching public [[totally]] [[lacks]] [[discrimination]], and is content as [[long]] as they get "[[action]]". Both movies were utter rubbish.

Whatever happened to [[character]] [[development]]? Whatever [[happened]] to meaningful dialogue? Whatever [[happened]] to ACTING? And, when watching something that [[vaguely]] purports to be "historical", whatever [[happened]] to [[attempting]] to [[capture]] some [[measure]] of accuracy, some [[realistic]] [[idea]] of the "political [[map]]" of the [[time]], [[even]] some [[slight]] flavour of the era, [[especially]] in its social [[attitudes]]. Why do they all have to [[display]] the [[value]] set of 21st century [[America]]? I have read on the message boards of disclaimers that "[[little]] was known" of the [[dark]] ages. Not so. [[Considerable]] [[amounts]] are known, with much [[learned]] [[scholarship]] on the [[era]], but these [[jokers]] [[simply]] couldn't be [[bothered]] to do any homework.

I only wish I [[could]] [[vote]] 0/10 In recent times I have been subjected to both this [[filmmaking]] and "King Arthur", on DVDs chosen by [[alia]] for an evening's "entertainment" and [[jointly]] they [[realize]] nothing more than bearing out a [[rising]] [[notions]] I have that the [[fashionable]] movie-watching public [[wholly]] [[lacking]] [[discriminate]], and is content as [[longer]] as they get "[[measures]]". Both movies were utter rubbish.

Whatever happened to [[traits]] [[developments]]? Whatever [[arrived]] to meaningful dialogue? Whatever [[arrived]] to ACTING? And, when watching something that [[loosely]] purports to be "historical", whatever [[arrived]] to [[tried]] to [[capturing]] some [[measures]] of accuracy, some [[lifelike]] [[thoughts]] of the "political [[maps]]" of the [[moment]], [[yet]] some [[lightweight]] flavour of the era, [[mostly]] in its social [[behaviours]]. Why do they all have to [[visualize]] the [[values]] set of 21st century [[Americans]]? I have read on the message boards of disclaimers that "[[small]] was known" of the [[darkness]] ages. Not so. [[Large]] [[moneys]] are known, with much [[learning]] [[scholarships]] on the [[epoch]], but these [[lifelines]] [[exclusively]] couldn't be [[disturbed]] to do any homework.

I only wish I [[did]] [[voted]] 0/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[Slaughter]] [[High]]" is, [[perhaps]], the most [[underrated]] slasher [[flick]] of the 1980s. It is one of the few [[films]] in the genre that is [[enthralling]] throughout. That being [[said]], it also relies [[heavily]] on the [[standard]] slasher formula: A group of young men and [[women]] get killed one by one gruesomely until the final [[showdown]].

The [[reason]] why "Slaughter [[High]]" stands above most movies in its genre is that it goes more over-the-top. [[Marty]], the killer, has good reason to hold a [[grudge]] against his [[former]] classmates. They electrocuted him as he stood naked in a girl's locker room shower, jabbed at his crotch with a javelin, and, to top it off, [[rigged]] his science lab experiment so it could [[disfigure]] him.

So, the [[victims]] in this movie are about as unlikeable as you get. When they reunite years later -- at a high school reunion put on by Marty himself -- you realize they haven't matured all that much. They're a bunch of sociopaths.

It is mind-boggling why they would not wonder why they were the only ones to show up to the reunion, which, by the way, is held at a school that has since fell into disrepair. And who would think it's a good idea to drink beer and liquor found in the abandoned building in a room that happens to have their old [[lockers]] -- as well as Marty's -- on display? There are many [[leaps]] of faith the viewer needs to take to enjoy this film. The ending makes little or no sense. And the screenwriters have a strange understanding of how April Fool's Day works: The movie claims that pranks are no longer allowed after noon.

[[In]] all, the movie is one of the [[best]] examples of the slasher genre, despite all of its flaws. It is hard to understand why it hasn't yet found its way to DVD, when so many other run-of-the-mill slasher flicks are graced with special editions. "[[Carnage]] [[Supremo]]" is, [[presumably]], the most [[undervalued]] slasher [[movie]] of the 1980s. It is one of the few [[movie]] in the genre that is [[exciting]] throughout. That being [[avowed]], it also relies [[severely]] on the [[norms]] slasher formula: A group of young men and [[females]] get killed one by one gruesomely until the final [[confrontation]].

The [[justification]] why "Slaughter [[Highest]]" stands above most movies in its genre is that it goes more over-the-top. [[Martyn]], the killer, has good reason to hold a [[rancour]] against his [[old]] classmates. They electrocuted him as he stood naked in a girl's locker room shower, jabbed at his crotch with a javelin, and, to top it off, [[falsified]] his science lab experiment so it could [[deface]] him.

So, the [[fatalities]] in this movie are about as unlikeable as you get. When they reunite years later -- at a high school reunion put on by Marty himself -- you realize they haven't matured all that much. They're a bunch of sociopaths.

It is mind-boggling why they would not wonder why they were the only ones to show up to the reunion, which, by the way, is held at a school that has since fell into disrepair. And who would think it's a good idea to drink beer and liquor found in the abandoned building in a room that happens to have their old [[cupboards]] -- as well as Marty's -- on display? There are many [[salta]] of faith the viewer needs to take to enjoy this film. The ending makes little or no sense. And the screenwriters have a strange understanding of how April Fool's Day works: The movie claims that pranks are no longer allowed after noon.

[[During]] all, the movie is one of the [[better]] examples of the slasher genre, despite all of its flaws. It is hard to understand why it hasn't yet found its way to DVD, when so many other run-of-the-mill slasher flicks are graced with special editions. --------------------------------------------- Result 4705 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this a great Disney flick.it is the story of an aging high school baseball coach(Dennis Quaid),who was once on his way to the big leagues as a pitcher,but suffered a career ending injury.but through series of events,Jimmy Morris(Quaid)gets a try out with a major league team and even makes the roster.this is a great family film.it is inspirational,but doesn't pour it on too thick.it's fun and entertaining.adults will enjoy this movie as well as kids.it is based upon a true story,though i'm sure the filmmakers took some liberties in telling the story.Quaid is sensational as the title character,very convincing.if you're looking for a film the whole family can enjoy,look no further.9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]]

[[In]] 1970, after a five year [[absence]], Kurosawa [[made]] what [[would]] be his first [[film]] in color. Dodes' Ka-Den is a [[film]] that [[centers]] around [[many]] intertwining [[stories]] that go on in a [[small]] Tokyo [[slum]].

The title [[comes]] from the [[sound]] a [[mentally]] retarded [[boy]] makes as he [[imagines]] he is operating a train. We slowly [[get]] to know more of the people in the [[small]] [[community]], the two drunks who [[trade]] wives because they are not [[happy]] with the ones they have. The [[old]] [[man]] who is the [[center]] of the [[town]] who helps out a [[burglar]] that [[tries]] to rob him. The very [[poor]] [[father]] and [[son]] that cannot ever afford a [[house]], so they imagine one up of their own. By the end of the [[film]], the [[stories]] all [[come]] full circle, some [[turn]] out [[happy]], others [[sad]].

[[Since]] this was Kurosawa's first [[color]] [[film]] you can see that he [[uses]] it to his [[advantage]] and it [[shows]]. [[Maybe]] too much. This [[movie]] goes in [[many]] [[different]] [[directions]] and it's [[hard]] to [[settle]] down and [[get]] into it. But don't get me [[wrong]], Dodes' Ka-Den may not be Kurosawa's [[best]], but [[coming]] from the [[greatest]] [[director]] of all [[time]], it's much [[better]] than 99% of today's [[films]].

[[Across]] 1970, after a five year [[lacks]], Kurosawa [[introduced]] what [[should]] be his first [[movie]] in color. Dodes' Ka-Den is a [[movie]] that [[centres]] around [[several]] intertwining [[history]] that go on in a [[tiny]] Tokyo [[squatter]].

The title [[arises]] from the [[sounds]] a [[spiritually]] retarded [[dude]] makes as he [[imagine]] he is operating a train. We slowly [[obtain]] to know more of the people in the [[tiny]] [[communities]], the two drunks who [[trading]] wives because they are not [[pleased]] with the ones they have. The [[ancient]] [[males]] who is the [[centres]] of the [[towns]] who helps out a [[mermaid]] that [[endeavour]] to rob him. The very [[pauper]] [[fathers]] and [[sons]] that cannot ever afford a [[dwellings]], so they imagine one up of their own. By the end of the [[films]], the [[history]] all [[coming]] full circle, some [[converting]] out [[pleased]], others [[unfortunate]].

[[Because]] this was Kurosawa's first [[colours]] [[cinematic]] you can see that he [[employs]] it to his [[advantages]] and it [[displays]]. [[Conceivably]] too much. This [[flick]] goes in [[various]] [[multiple]] [[direction]] and it's [[laborious]] to [[liquidate]] down and [[obtain]] into it. But don't get me [[amiss]], Dodes' Ka-Den may not be Kurosawa's [[better]], but [[come]] from the [[largest]] [[headmaster]] of all [[period]], it's much [[best]] than 99% of today's [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4707 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[rented]] this on DVD and I kind of feel bad since Dawson and Lugacy are so earnest about it in the DVD comments. It's not a bad [[movie]] exactly, but it's one of those films that [[desperately]] [[wants]] to be a deep comment on human nature while not realizing that its story is practically a genre. Plus, it is a little simplistic about the issue in a lot of ways, and the characters' [[behavior]] often strains belief. I'd say its a film that you would get something out of if you don't have a lot of film/TV/literature/life behind you (to be honest, I've seen almost exactly the same story in horror comics even). Otherwise, its point has been made before and more artfully. And that gets to the big problem, which is that it really doesn't have much of cinematic interest to it besides the point. It ends up being a fairly [[bland]] movie overall that invests everything in the idea that the basic story will be shocking and compelling, and it doesn't really pay off. I [[lease]] this on DVD and I kind of feel bad since Dawson and Lugacy are so earnest about it in the DVD comments. It's not a bad [[filmmaking]] exactly, but it's one of those films that [[sorely]] [[wanted]] to be a deep comment on human nature while not realizing that its story is practically a genre. Plus, it is a little simplistic about the issue in a lot of ways, and the characters' [[deportment]] often strains belief. I'd say its a film that you would get something out of if you don't have a lot of film/TV/literature/life behind you (to be honest, I've seen almost exactly the same story in horror comics even). Otherwise, its point has been made before and more artfully. And that gets to the big problem, which is that it really doesn't have much of cinematic interest to it besides the point. It ends up being a fairly [[insipid]] movie overall that invests everything in the idea that the basic story will be shocking and compelling, and it doesn't really pay off. --------------------------------------------- Result 4708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] The [[secret]] is...this movie blows. Sorry, but it just did.

****SPOILER****

[[In]] this [[bad]] riff on I KNOW WHAT YOU DID [[LAST]] SUMMER and SCREAM, Beth, [[played]] admirably by Dorie Barton, [[joins]] [[several]] friends on a [[Spring]] [[Break]] [[trip]]. The [[group]] rents a fancy [[house]] and tries to [[enjoy]] a [[fun]] vacation. Then, the deaths begin. First one then another then another of the [[friends]] is [[murdered]], [[leading]] to a sad and [[trite]] [[climax]] with [[predictable]] [[results]].

One [[note]], Dorie Barton is the poor man's [[Reese]] Witherspoon–she looks like Reese, acts like Reese and [[could]] pass for Reese in a police lineup. Maybe that's how they [[cast]] her? [[Anyhoo]], decent [[cinematography]] and fair acting [[could]] not [[quite]] make up for [[bad]] dialog and [[terrible]] [[writing]]. The [[secrets]] is...this movie blows. Sorry, but it just did.

****SPOILER****

[[For]] this [[horrid]] riff on I KNOW WHAT YOU DID [[FINAL]] SUMMER and SCREAM, Beth, [[effected]] admirably by Dorie Barton, [[participates]] [[dissimilar]] friends on a [[Springs]] [[Rupture]] [[voyage]]. The [[clusters]] rents a fancy [[homes]] and tries to [[enjoying]] a [[droll]] vacation. Then, the deaths begin. First one then another then another of the [[friend]] is [[killed]], [[culminating]] to a sad and [[corny]] [[apogee]] with [[predictably]] [[findings]].

One [[memo]], Dorie Barton is the poor man's [[Reece]] Witherspoon–she looks like Reese, acts like Reese and [[did]] pass for Reese in a police lineup. Maybe that's how they [[casting]] her? [[Anywho]], decent [[filmmaking]] and fair acting [[would]] not [[rather]] make up for [[unfavorable]] dialog and [[scary]] [[write]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Although in [[many]] ways I agree with the other reviewers [[comments]]. I find that the plot and idea are very good. [[Many]] of the [[supporting]] [[actors]] were very [[good]]. The [[fatal]] problem with this film is Ellen Pompeo. I am sure, I have never seen a less talented "actor" How this person has ever been in a film or on television, I cannot imagine. In my [[opinion]] she would be [[better]] as a [[greater]] at a Wal-Mart. To [[see]] a [[person]] with this low [[level]] of [[talent]] [[involved]] in paying roles, does [[beg]] the question...... "Who does she know"? I would very [[much]] like to see this film re-made with some [[talent]]. I do not fault the writer for the [[failure]] of this film to be worth the [[time]] to [[view]] it. Although in [[myriad]] ways I agree with the other reviewers [[sightings]]. I find that the plot and idea are very good. [[Innumerable]] of the [[helping]] [[protagonists]] were very [[buena]]. The [[lethal]] problem with this film is Ellen Pompeo. I am sure, I have never seen a less talented "actor" How this person has ever been in a film or on television, I cannot imagine. In my [[vista]] she would be [[best]] as a [[bigger]] at a Wal-Mart. To [[consults]] a [[somebody]] with this low [[tiers]] of [[talents]] [[engaged]] in paying roles, does [[implore]] the question...... "Who does she know"? I would very [[very]] like to see this film re-made with some [[talents]]. I do not fault the writer for the [[shortcoming]] of this film to be worth the [[times]] to [[visualise]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Pialat films people in [[extreme]] [[emotional]] situations, usually with [[several]] violent scenes. In La Gueule ouverte, he's dealing with the devastating [[effects]] on a woman's husband and son as she dies of cancer. In A nos amours, the teenage girl's sexual experimentation leads to violent confrontations with her family. Here we have a rather spoiled young woman who abandons her husband to take up with a sexy ex-con. Her [[motivation]] is a little cloudy, since Loulou is incapable of reading or discussing anything more challenging than TV shows; on the other hand, he's got a fabulous body (I wonder why Depardieu never made a sports movie to show off that physique--he would have been great as a rugby player).

The casting is [[impressive]]. Isabelle Huppert isn't allowed to give a bland, inexpressive performance (she has given many); Depardieu plays Loulou with all the dynamism and charm you could want--see the scene in the bar, where he's stabbed in the gut, runs away and seeks treatment, then soon restarts with Nelly. Guy Marchand, with those coal-black eyes and distressed look, plays Nelly's husband [[beautifully]]; it's a [[fine]] [[repeat]] of the pairing in Coup de foudre. Pialat films people in [[abject]] [[sentimental]] situations, usually with [[assorted]] violent scenes. In La Gueule ouverte, he's dealing with the devastating [[effect]] on a woman's husband and son as she dies of cancer. In A nos amours, the teenage girl's sexual experimentation leads to violent confrontations with her family. Here we have a rather spoiled young woman who abandons her husband to take up with a sexy ex-con. Her [[motif]] is a little cloudy, since Loulou is incapable of reading or discussing anything more challenging than TV shows; on the other hand, he's got a fabulous body (I wonder why Depardieu never made a sports movie to show off that physique--he would have been great as a rugby player).

The casting is [[wondrous]]. Isabelle Huppert isn't allowed to give a bland, inexpressive performance (she has given many); Depardieu plays Loulou with all the dynamism and charm you could want--see the scene in the bar, where he's stabbed in the gut, runs away and seeks treatment, then soon restarts with Nelly. Guy Marchand, with those coal-black eyes and distressed look, plays Nelly's husband [[divinely]]; it's a [[fined]] [[repetitive]] of the pairing in Coup de foudre. --------------------------------------------- Result 4711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I watched this film based on the very [[favorable]] reviews that I read about it here by others.

They definitely saw something in this movie I didn't see, that's for sure.

The movie starts off at a [[good]] [[pace]], and the first 15 or 20 minutes of it are interesting, then it [[begins]] to get logged down and draggy, not to mention completely unbelievable.

Eventually you find yourself [[saying]]: "What?!? He's going to do that too? Just how far is he going to go with this [[thing]]?"

The plot [[begins]] with [[Jeff]] Goldblum's [[character]], John, going into a deli to purchase a bottle of wine. There is a robbery and a [[new]] store clerk, Auggie Rose, gets killed during the [[robbery]].

John gets in the ambulance and goes to the [[hospital]] with the guy. This seems a little much, but wait, there's more.

John becomes totally obsessed with Auggie Rose.

[[For]] [[reasons]] that never [[make]] any [[kind]] of [[logical]] [[sense]], [[John]], who has a very [[good]] [[life]], a [[beautiful]], loving [[girlfriend]], a [[secure]], well-paying [[job]], [[nice]] [[house]], [[nice]] [[car]], expensive suits--decides he [[wants]] to be a loser like Auggie [[Rose]] was, and experience [[life]] in a low paying [[job]], living in a [[dump]] with a dippy girlfriend and [[possible]] [[connections]] with dangerous people.

Why this dim-witted, half-baked [[film]] [[got]] favorable reviews I'll never know. Sure Goldblum does a good acting [[job]] - he always does - and his looks have improved with age -- but [[unless]] you have a BIG infatuation with [[Jeff]] Goldblum and have to [[see]] [[every]] [[film]] he's in, I wouldn't [[recommend]] this [[turkey]]. It's approximately two hours of your [[life]] you're not going to get back - and believe me - you'll have nothing to be thankful about when those two hours are over, other than being grateful you're not still sitting there watching this [[film]]!

I watched this film based on the very [[positive]] reviews that I read about it here by others.

They definitely saw something in this movie I didn't see, that's for sure.

The movie starts off at a [[alright]] [[cadence]], and the first 15 or 20 minutes of it are interesting, then it [[startup]] to get logged down and draggy, not to mention completely unbelievable.

Eventually you find yourself [[telling]]: "What?!? He's going to do that too? Just how far is he going to go with this [[stuff]]?"

The plot [[starts]] with [[Jeffery]] Goldblum's [[characteristics]], John, going into a deli to purchase a bottle of wine. There is a robbery and a [[newer]] store clerk, Auggie Rose, gets killed during the [[theft]].

John gets in the ambulance and goes to the [[clinic]] with the guy. This seems a little much, but wait, there's more.

John becomes totally obsessed with Auggie Rose.

[[At]] [[motivation]] that never [[deliver]] any [[genera]] of [[reasonable]] [[feeling]], [[Jon]], who has a very [[alright]] [[lifetime]], a [[sumptuous]], loving [[amie]], a [[safe]], well-paying [[labor]], [[handsome]] [[homes]], [[delightful]] [[motors]], expensive suits--decides he [[wanna]] to be a loser like Auggie [[Soaring]] was, and experience [[living]] in a low paying [[labor]], living in a [[dumping]] with a dippy girlfriend and [[doable]] [[connector]] with dangerous people.

Why this dim-witted, half-baked [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] favorable reviews I'll never know. Sure Goldblum does a good acting [[workplace]] - he always does - and his looks have improved with age -- but [[if]] you have a BIG infatuation with [[Geoff]] Goldblum and have to [[behold]] [[each]] [[flick]] he's in, I wouldn't [[recommends]] this [[ankara]]. It's approximately two hours of your [[lives]] you're not going to get back - and believe me - you'll have nothing to be thankful about when those two hours are over, other than being grateful you're not still sitting there watching this [[filmmaking]]!

--------------------------------------------- Result 4712 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to confess that I am severely disappointed.

This version can in no way compete with the version of 1995. The reason why I watched it was that I wasn't entirely happy with Ciaran Hinds as Captain Wentworth and thought that Rupert Penry-Jones looked much more like the Captain I had imagined when I read the book. And he was too.

Unfortunately that is the only redeeming quality of the film. The rest is as un-Austen-like as possible.

Miss Elliot would NEVER have run through the streets of Bath like this. It wasn't in her character and it just wasn't done by a lady of the those times. The Anne Elliot of the book was a lady and she had dignity. There are other painful anachronisms but this was the worst.

Although there are 3 important quotes from the book, they are at entirely inappropriate moments, warning those who know the book that yet another important part of the book will either be missing or completely changed.

And although this version is not much shorter than the other one, it feels like everything is rushed. Very little care was taken to introduce the characters, show their dispositions and motives. Important scenes were omitted. How could they possibly have butchered the final scenes in this way ? A disaster ! And it was by far not as beautifully photographed as the other one.

No, no, no. If you love Austen, then don't waste your time with this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Directed by Samuel Fuller, who also wrote the screenplay, Pickup on South Street is a tough, brutal, well made film about a pickpocket (Richard Widmark) who inadvertently aquires top-secret microfilm and becomes a target for espionage agents. Also involved are Jean Peters as a tough broad who is used as a courier by her evil ex-lover Richard Kiley. It's film-noir at its best and although the performances are very good its grand character actress Thelma Ritter who steals the movie. As Moe a weary street peddler selling neck ties (and who also sells information) she is terrific in a role that brought her another Oscar nomination. Its amazing that Miss Ritter was nominated six times for an Academy Award and she never won. This should have been the role that copped it for her! --------------------------------------------- Result 4714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The men can slaver over Lollo, if they like (or her lollos--she gave her name to a slang terms for breasts in French), but the ladies have an even tastier morsel in the divine Gerard Philipe, who is not only beautiful but can act. Don't be deterred if your version has no subtitles because in this [[simple]], dashing story of love and war, in which all is fair, they are not [[needed]]. All you need know is that, at the beginning of the film, Lollobrigida reads Philipe's palm and tells him he will marry the daughter of the king. Thereafter the story is quite plain from the Gallic gestures and the running, jumping, and swordplay.

On the minus side, the obviousness of the story and the heavy-handed facetiousness of the tone [[become]] [[somewhat]] wearying, and it is annoying that the French apparently consider themselves too superior to Hollywood to bother even attempting the plausibility of its exciting stunts. And of course the non-French-speaker misses the occasional bit of ooh-la-la, such as: Virtuous girl: I must tell you that my heart belongs to Fanfan. Seducer: My dear, what made you think I was interested in that bagatelle? The men can slaver over Lollo, if they like (or her lollos--she gave her name to a slang terms for breasts in French), but the ladies have an even tastier morsel in the divine Gerard Philipe, who is not only beautiful but can act. Don't be deterred if your version has no subtitles because in this [[uncomplicated]], dashing story of love and war, in which all is fair, they are not [[requisite]]. All you need know is that, at the beginning of the film, Lollobrigida reads Philipe's palm and tells him he will marry the daughter of the king. Thereafter the story is quite plain from the Gallic gestures and the running, jumping, and swordplay.

On the minus side, the obviousness of the story and the heavy-handed facetiousness of the tone [[gotten]] [[rather]] wearying, and it is annoying that the French apparently consider themselves too superior to Hollywood to bother even attempting the plausibility of its exciting stunts. And of course the non-French-speaker misses the occasional bit of ooh-la-la, such as: Virtuous girl: I must tell you that my heart belongs to Fanfan. Seducer: My dear, what made you think I was interested in that bagatelle? --------------------------------------------- Result 4715 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I gave this movie a 2, and though I consider myself a [[science]] fiction [[fan]], I [[found]] this movie very [[difficult]] to take seriously. It was on AMC one late [[night]], and I'm [[glad]] I saw it for free. This movie is [[probably]] [[good]] for a few [[laughs]], but not [[much]] more.

The special [[effects]] are about average for the time [[period]] - not awful, but not great, either. Of course we know more about Mars now than we did back then, but we really can't hold that against this film. The main reason I did not like this movie is because of the story.

There were several parts of this movie that I wish would have been explored in a little more detail - the astronaut's injury/condition, the city on Mars, the creature in the lake, etc. Overall, the movie is much like a lengthy episode of the 1960s version of The Outer Limits - complete with a cheesy ending. I gave this movie a 2, and though I consider myself a [[sciences]] fiction [[breather]], I [[detected]] this movie very [[laborious]] to take seriously. It was on AMC one late [[nuit]], and I'm [[contented]] I saw it for free. This movie is [[undeniably]] [[alright]] for a few [[giggling]], but not [[very]] more.

The special [[influencing]] are about average for the time [[timeline]] - not awful, but not great, either. Of course we know more about Mars now than we did back then, but we really can't hold that against this film. The main reason I did not like this movie is because of the story.

There were several parts of this movie that I wish would have been explored in a little more detail - the astronaut's injury/condition, the city on Mars, the creature in the lake, etc. Overall, the movie is much like a lengthy episode of the 1960s version of The Outer Limits - complete with a cheesy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 4716 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This film, once sensational for its forward-thinking politics and depictions of free love and sexual liberation, has been [[reduced]] by time to a mere curiosity. It seems absurd now that this mostly [[boring]] little [[film]] had been banned and seized by governments in many countries. Given how socialistic Sweden eventually became, the 'radicalism' of its politics, once controversial, appear naive and almost mainstream four decades later. And its sex scenes, at one time the subject of sensational obscenity trials, look pretty tame in a modern context. Nevertheless, the film and accompanying documentaries detailing its many controversies and influences remains marginally watchable as an early reliquary of 60's youth rebellion. One part of the film that still holds up: its self-consciousness with respect to the 'fourth wall'. Every once in a while, the filmmakers film themselves making the film. The satiric playfulness of this still elicits a chuckle. This film, once sensational for its forward-thinking politics and depictions of free love and sexual liberation, has been [[decrease]] by time to a mere curiosity. It seems absurd now that this mostly [[monotonous]] little [[filmmaking]] had been banned and seized by governments in many countries. Given how socialistic Sweden eventually became, the 'radicalism' of its politics, once controversial, appear naive and almost mainstream four decades later. And its sex scenes, at one time the subject of sensational obscenity trials, look pretty tame in a modern context. Nevertheless, the film and accompanying documentaries detailing its many controversies and influences remains marginally watchable as an early reliquary of 60's youth rebellion. One part of the film that still holds up: its self-consciousness with respect to the 'fourth wall'. Every once in a while, the filmmakers film themselves making the film. The satiric playfulness of this still elicits a chuckle. --------------------------------------------- Result 4717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] 'Five Days' is billed as something special, a [[crime]] [[drama]] that consists of a series of episodes, each set on one particular day of a police [[enquiry]]. But in [[fact]], this element of the [[story]] [[turns]] out to be [[rather]] [[less]] [[significant]] than might at first be thought, as the fact that the action in each episode is confined to 24 hours is [[hardly]] [[noticeable]], and very little [[distinguishes]] the [[program]] from countless other crime stories. In fact one almost can't help drawing comparisons to the last 'Prime Suspect', as one of the sub-plots focuses on a single, cynical female cop approaching retirement: and it's not just the absence of Helen Mirren that makes the [[comparisons]] unfavourable. There's a lot of earnest over-emoting, manipulative music and a set of characters seemingly contrived so that each one is in some sense sympathetic, in another suspicious. And it's possible to guess the guilty party well before the end, not because of the internal dynamic of the story, but rather because of the construction of the drama as a whole: certain things must be true, to justify the way that the series focuses on certain characters at certain times. In spite of these failings, the series grew on me: by the end, I was quite gripped. But it's a sad sign that the BBC, which once made the likes of 'The Singing Detective', boasted of this of "possibly the best drama of the year": for there's little true originality on offer here, and the claim reveals a lack of ambition that is dreadfully disappointing. 'Five Days' is in fact not rubbish; but it is formulaic, and one would hope that the very best the BBC had to offer would be something a little more innovative and fresh. 'Five Days' is billed as something special, a [[felony]] [[theater]] that consists of a series of episodes, each set on one particular day of a police [[probes]]. But in [[facto]], this element of the [[narratives]] [[revolves]] out to be [[quite]] [[lowest]] [[important]] than might at first be thought, as the fact that the action in each episode is confined to 24 hours is [[barely]] [[observable]], and very little [[distinguishing]] the [[curriculum]] from countless other crime stories. In fact one almost can't help drawing comparisons to the last 'Prime Suspect', as one of the sub-plots focuses on a single, cynical female cop approaching retirement: and it's not just the absence of Helen Mirren that makes the [[compares]] unfavourable. There's a lot of earnest over-emoting, manipulative music and a set of characters seemingly contrived so that each one is in some sense sympathetic, in another suspicious. And it's possible to guess the guilty party well before the end, not because of the internal dynamic of the story, but rather because of the construction of the drama as a whole: certain things must be true, to justify the way that the series focuses on certain characters at certain times. In spite of these failings, the series grew on me: by the end, I was quite gripped. But it's a sad sign that the BBC, which once made the likes of 'The Singing Detective', boasted of this of "possibly the best drama of the year": for there's little true originality on offer here, and the claim reveals a lack of ambition that is dreadfully disappointing. 'Five Days' is in fact not rubbish; but it is formulaic, and one would hope that the very best the BBC had to offer would be something a little more innovative and fresh. --------------------------------------------- Result 4718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This was a [[pretty]] decent [[movie]]. This [[movie]] is good to just [[sit]] down and watch and be [[entertained]]. Just a [[typical]] Hollywood [[film]]. This [[movie]] will never [[win]] an [[Oscar]] or anything and definitely doesn't deserve one, but I [[thought]] it was [[pretty]] good. It's [[kind]] of [[like]] the [[show]] 24 but set into movie [[format]]. If you [[like]] the [[whole]] we've got to [[stop]] the [[terrorist]] from [[killing]] the [[president]] kind of [[movie]] then you will [[enjoy]] this flick. I personally [[think]] that storyline has been [[done]] [[WAY]] too much, but The [[Sentinel]] does [[add]] a [[little]] twist with the [[mole]] in the Secret Service. [[All]] in all, this [[movie]] won't [[leave]] your [[jaw]] to the [[floor]] or [[change]] your [[life]], but who [[says]] [[every]] [[single]] [[movie]] has to be like that to be good? This was a [[belle]] decent [[kino]]. This [[kino]] is good to just [[sits]] down and watch and be [[distracted]]. Just a [[symptomatic]] Hollywood [[movie]]. This [[kino]] will never [[gaining]] an [[Oskar]] or anything and definitely doesn't deserve one, but I [[brainchild]] it was [[belle]] good. It's [[sort]] of [[iike]] the [[exhibit]] 24 but set into movie [[layout]]. If you [[adores]] the [[entire]] we've got to [[stopped]] the [[terrorism]] from [[kill]] the [[presidency]] kind of [[cinematography]] then you will [[enjoys]] this flick. I personally [[thought]] that storyline has been [[completed]] [[PATHWAY]] too much, but The [[Sentry]] does [[inserting]] a [[kiddo]] twist with the [[birthmark]] in the Secret Service. [[Totality]] in all, this [[kino]] won't [[letting]] your [[chin]] to the [[flooring]] or [[modified]] your [[vida]], but who [[alleges]] [[each]] [[sole]] [[kino]] has to be like that to be good? --------------------------------------------- Result 4719 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Brother's Promise is a wonderful family film. This is a biography of Dan Jansen, a champion Olympic speed skater. The movie depicts this athlete's life from a young age through full adulthood. The love and support of the family members is evident throughout. How Dan and the rest of his family handle winning and losing races is a life lesson for all of us. The commitment and determination of Dan's coach and his teammates, shows what it takes to make a real team. How Dan and his family deal with a devastating illness of a loved one is depicted without undo sentiment or sugarcoating. The faith of the family is shown in basic terms and is obviously a major part of their lives. This is a powerful family film which can be meaningful for a person of any age. --------------------------------------------- Result 4720 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From the opening scene aboard a crowded train where a ruthless pickpocket is at work (RICHARD WIDMARK) stealing from a woman's purse (JEAN PETERS), PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET is relentlessly fascinating to watch. Partly it's because the acting is uniformly strong from the entire cast, the B&W photography is crisp and adds to the starkness of the story and characters, and because Samuel Fuller's direction puts him in the same league with the biggies like John (ASPHALT JUNGLE) Huston. In fact, it has the same urgency as the Huston film about a heist that goes wrong--but the payoff is not quite as strong.

JEAN PETERS is excellent as the hard-edged girl whom Widmark describes as being "knocked around a lot". She gives a lot of raw energy and sex appeal to her role of the not too bright woman carrying a micro-film in her purse for her boyfriend (RICHARD KILEY), something the FBI already knows about. They're on her trail when the theft occurs.

THELMA RITTER adds realism to her portrait of a woman called "Moe" who buys and sells anything to make a profit and ends up paying for it with her life. She's particularly touching in her final scene with Kiley.

This one is guaranteed to hold your attention through its one hour and twenty minute running time. Good noir from Fox and notable for the performances of Widmark, Peters and Ritter. --------------------------------------------- Result 4721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have seen the short movie a few years ago. After that I watch all sequels. The first one is really not the best - but it's the most popular one. I've already watch the making of [[Guinea]] Pig 1. It's really [[great]] what these guys did. [[Also]] the sequels are excellent in the special effects. Take your [[chance]] to watch it! I have seen the short movie a few years ago. After that I watch all sequels. The first one is really not the best - but it's the most popular one. I've already watch the making of [[Equatorial]] Pig 1. It's really [[wondrous]] what these guys did. [[Furthermore]] the sequels are excellent in the special effects. Take your [[chances]] to watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 4722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Absence]] of a GOOD PLOT, [[absence]] of decent ACTING, [[absence]] of good [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]], [[absence]] of decent looking SPECIAL [[EFFECTS]]...[[need]] I [[go]] on? Review MAY contain [[SPOILERS]]. The [[actors]] [[appear]] to be READING their lines, and not very well at that. [[Most]] of the "[[actors]]" were acting like they were in a SECOND [[GRADE]] [[play]]. The [[story]] appeared to have been [[written]] by one of the [[aforementioned]] second graders...it's not [[really]] all that [[convoluted]]...it's just so SIMPLE and [[DUMB]], that a [[person]] thinks they must be missing [[something]] so they [[think]] it is convoluted. [[Nope]] it's not, it's EXACTLY as SIMPLE as you [[think]] it is. I [[UNDERSTOOD]] the "[[film]]", that's how i KNOW that it STUNK! MOST of the film just had people [[sitting]] around talking(reading their lines), TRYING to [[look]] sinister. The narrator was ANNOYING. The "special effects" were LAUGHABLE. I [[love]] low budget movies. I [[also]] [[like]] [[Carolyn]] Munro, Tom Savini, Jack Scarry, and Michael Berrymore...just not in THIS movie...you can [[tell]] they weren't [[getting]] [[paid]], or weren't [[getting]] paid [[much]], because neither their hearts NOR their talents were in it. I [[LOVE]] Tony Todd...however, he was only [[adequate]] in this [[movie]]. [[In]] fact, Tony Todd's performance is the ONLY [[reason]] I [[gave]] it 3 stars instead of 1...and Tony was only in it for a whole TWO MINUTES (seriously)! I would [[suggest]] to fast forward the DVD to the two minute Tony Todd segment. If I had gone to the theater, and paid more than a DOLLAR to [[see]] this "[[film]]" I [[would]] have been P.O.'D and demanded my money back. Hopefully the people who made this will do better next [[time]]. [[Absent]] of a GOOD PLOT, [[absent]] of decent ACTING, [[lack]] of good [[FILMMAKING]], [[lack]] of decent looking SPECIAL [[INFLUENCES]]...[[require]] I [[going]] on? Review MAY contain [[TROUBLEMAKERS]]. The [[players]] [[appears]] to be READING their lines, and not very well at that. [[Plus]] of the "[[players]]" were acting like they were in a SECOND [[GRADING]] [[playing]]. The [[storytelling]] appeared to have been [[typed]] by one of the [[above]] second graders...it's not [[genuinely]] all that [[complicate]]...it's just so SIMPLE and [[TWIT]], that a [[persons]] thinks they must be missing [[anything]] so they [[thoughts]] it is convoluted. [[No]] it's not, it's EXACTLY as SIMPLE as you [[ideas]] it is. I [[UNDERSTAND]] the "[[kino]]", that's how i KNOW that it STUNK! MOST of the film just had people [[sit]] around talking(reading their lines), TRYING to [[glance]] sinister. The narrator was ANNOYING. The "special effects" were LAUGHABLE. I [[iove]] low budget movies. I [[additionally]] [[likes]] [[Caroline]] Munro, Tom Savini, Jack Scarry, and Michael Berrymore...just not in THIS movie...you can [[told]] they weren't [[obtain]] [[credited]], or weren't [[obtain]] paid [[very]], because neither their hearts NOR their talents were in it. I [[LOVED]] Tony Todd...however, he was only [[proper]] in this [[filmmaking]]. [[Among]] fact, Tony Todd's performance is the ONLY [[cause]] I [[yielded]] it 3 stars instead of 1...and Tony was only in it for a whole TWO MINUTES (seriously)! I would [[proposes]] to fast forward the DVD to the two minute Tony Todd segment. If I had gone to the theater, and paid more than a DOLLAR to [[behold]] this "[[filmmaking]]" I [[could]] have been P.O.'D and demanded my money back. Hopefully the people who made this will do better next [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4723 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

If you're at all interested in pirates, pirate movies, New Orleans/early 19th century American history, or Yul Brynner, see this film for yourself and make up your own mind about it. Don't be put off by various lacklustre reviews. My reaction to it was that it is entertaining, well acted (for the most part), has some very witty dialogue, and that it does an excellent job of portraying the charm, appeal and legendary fascination of the privateer Jean Lafitte. While not all the events in the film are historically accurate (can you show me any historical film that succeeds in this?), I feel the film is accurate in its treatment of the role Lafitte played in New Orleans' history, and the love-hate relationship between the "respectable" citizens of New Orleans and this outlaw who was one of the city's favorite sons. Don't worry about what the film doesn't do, but watch it for what it does do, i.e., for its study of one of New Orleans', and America's, most intriguing historical figures. --------------------------------------------- Result 4724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Return]] to [[Cabin]] by the Lake is [[Perhaps]] one of The Few Sequels that Can [[Live]] up to The Original. It Had Black [[Humor]], [[Good]] [[Suspense]], Nice [[Looking]] [[Girls]], and Of Course, a Psycho Killer. What are We [[Missing]]? I Think Nothing. Except we Are Left with a [[Small]] [[Amount]] of [[Gore]] and Nudity because It Was Made for [[Television]]. [[Besides]] [[Being]] one Of The Best Sequels, it is one of The Best [[Thrillers]] to Watch as a [[Family]]. [[Recommended]] for [[Everyone]]. [[Revert]] to [[Stateroom]] by the Lake is [[Maybe]] one of The Few Sequels that Can [[Living]] up to The Original. It Had Black [[Mood]], [[Well]] [[Wait]], Nice [[Researching]] [[Woman]], and Of Course, a Psycho Killer. What are We [[Gone]]? I Think Nothing. Except we Are Left with a [[Miniscule]] [[Sums]] of [[Gora]] and Nudity because It Was Made for [[Tv]]. [[Apart]] [[Ongoing]] one Of The Best Sequels, it is one of The Best [[Thriller]] to Watch as a [[Families]]. [[Suggested]] for [[Somebody]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4725 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[recently]] watched Caprica again and [[thought]] I might as well [[come]] and [[write]] up a [[review]]! I [[first]] [[saw]] this [[right]] after I saw the series finale of [[Battlestar]] Galactica ( Being a big drooling [[fan]] [[boy]] of the [[show]] left me clinging [[onto]] anything I could of the [[shows]] [[universe]] )so I didn't know what to expect...but I did come out with a [[smile]] though I must admit...

The story starts off [[dramatically]] on [[planet]] of caprica and we are introduced with a variety of interesting characters...I won't give too much away but there is a dramatic event that dictates the course of the story but I suggest you watch this.

Must say...Esai Morales is one hell of an actor he pulled off a young Joseph Adama...(father of the Admiral in [[Battlestar]] Galactica)I found his acting spot on and I could believe that he is the father of William Adama from BSG...

Also Eric Stoltz fits his role precisely...! Special note it was good to see Polly Walker outside of Rome! Don't sit down and watch Caprica with the expectation of it being like [[Battlestar]] Galactica because the story line is pretty straight forward and anyone can watch it..without having to have see BSG!.

This show is a well written [[drama]] for those who like there [[drama]] with a bit of a sci-fi kick! I [[newly]] watched Caprica again and [[figured]] I might as well [[arriving]] and [[writing]] up a [[revising]]! I [[firstly]] [[seen]] this [[rights]] after I saw the series finale of [[Galactica]] Galactica ( Being a big drooling [[ventilator]] [[bloke]] of the [[spectacle]] left me clinging [[in]] anything I could of the [[showings]] [[universes]] )so I didn't know what to expect...but I did come out with a [[smirk]] though I must admit...

The story starts off [[remarkably]] on [[planets]] of caprica and we are introduced with a variety of interesting characters...I won't give too much away but there is a dramatic event that dictates the course of the story but I suggest you watch this.

Must say...Esai Morales is one hell of an actor he pulled off a young Joseph Adama...(father of the Admiral in [[Galactica]] Galactica)I found his acting spot on and I could believe that he is the father of William Adama from BSG...

Also Eric Stoltz fits his role precisely...! Special note it was good to see Polly Walker outside of Rome! Don't sit down and watch Caprica with the expectation of it being like [[Galactica]] Galactica because the story line is pretty straight forward and anyone can watch it..without having to have see BSG!.

This show is a well written [[tragedy]] for those who like there [[teatro]] with a bit of a sci-fi kick! --------------------------------------------- Result 4726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[John]] Scott (John Wayne) and partner Kansas Charlie (Eddy Chandler) are [[trail]] [[buddies]] who make their way to the [[Rattlesnake]] [[Gulch]] rodeo. Scott is a pretty fair [[contestant]], but finds that [[unless]] he's willing to [[accept]] twenty five cents on the dollar in [[prize]] [[money]] from a crooked promoter, he'll have to [[collect]] his [[winnings]] at gunpoint. Quite coincidentally, [[bandits]] Pete (Al Ferguson) and Jim (Paul Fix) [[decide]] they'd like the rest of the rodeo [[take]]; they shoot promoter Farnsworth ([[Henry]] Hall), and make it [[look]] like Scott and Kansas [[Charlie]] are the killers.

Wayne and Chandler [[use]] a running gag in the [[film]] where they're about to [[go]] at it with their fists over [[various]] [[trivialities]]. Each [[time]] Chandler takes a wild swing, Wayne [[foot]] stomps him and knocks him silly.

If you're very [[attentive]], there's a neat Lipton's Tea ad in one of the scenes in which Scott's [[love]] interest Anne ([[Mary]] Kornman) appears.

Later on in the [[film]], the [[buddies]] are framed once again over a stage robbery. Having a [[change]] of [[heart]] and seeing the [[error]] of his ways, [[bad]] [[guy]] Jim [[wants]] to come clean and confess to the sheriff, but [[Pete]] shoots him down. [[While]] being patched up, Jim tells his [[story]] to the [[doctor]] and his sister [[Anne]]. In an [[unbelievable]] scene, Anne marches right into the middle of a gunfight between the [[good]] guys and the villains to confront the sheriff.

"The Desert Trail" is one of the blander John Wayne [[Westerns]] from Lone Star Productions during this era. Noticeably absent are George "Gabby" Hayes and Yakima Canutt, one or both are usually to be seen in these oaters. If you're a John Wayne fan though, you'll have to see it once, but that will probably be enough. [[Giovanni]] Scott (John Wayne) and partner Kansas Charlie (Eddy Chandler) are [[pathway]] [[friends]] who make their way to the [[Snake]] [[Ravine]] rodeo. Scott is a pretty fair [[contender]], but finds that [[if]] he's willing to [[accepts]] twenty five cents on the dollar in [[prix]] [[cash]] from a crooked promoter, he'll have to [[collects]] his [[earns]] at gunpoint. Quite coincidentally, [[robbers]] Pete (Al Ferguson) and Jim (Paul Fix) [[deciding]] they'd like the rest of the rodeo [[taking]]; they shoot promoter Farnsworth ([[Enrico]] Hall), and make it [[gaze]] like Scott and Kansas [[Charley]] are the killers.

Wayne and Chandler [[used]] a running gag in the [[filmmaking]] where they're about to [[going]] at it with their fists over [[different]] [[trifles]]. Each [[moment]] Chandler takes a wild swing, Wayne [[feet]] stomps him and knocks him silly.

If you're very [[vigilant]], there's a neat Lipton's Tea ad in one of the scenes in which Scott's [[amore]] interest Anne ([[Mari]] Kornman) appears.

Later on in the [[cinema]], the [[friends]] are framed once again over a stage robbery. Having a [[modifications]] of [[heartland]] and seeing the [[mistakes]] of his ways, [[negative]] [[man]] Jim [[wanted]] to come clean and confess to the sheriff, but [[Peter]] shoots him down. [[Despite]] being patched up, Jim tells his [[histories]] to the [[doctors]] and his sister [[Anna]]. In an [[staggering]] scene, Anne marches right into the middle of a gunfight between the [[alright]] guys and the villains to confront the sheriff.

"The Desert Trail" is one of the blander John Wayne [[Westerners]] from Lone Star Productions during this era. Noticeably absent are George "Gabby" Hayes and Yakima Canutt, one or both are usually to be seen in these oaters. If you're a John Wayne fan though, you'll have to see it once, but that will probably be enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 4727 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] So why does this show suck? [[Unfortunately]], that really is the only [[question]], because there is no doubt that it does.

For those unfamiliar with the premise of the [[show]], the doomed-to-be-shortlived [[series]] Cavemen [[focuses]] on a number of Neanderthals and their struggle to exist in modern day America and is [[based]] on the characters featured in a series of television ads for Geico [[Insurance]]. The [[concept]] is solid and there is every reason to think it could be executed [[successfully]].

I had to [[think]] about it for awhile, but then the tagline from the commercials -- something to the [[effect]] of "We're not that much different from you" [[provided]] me with the [[key]] to the show's suckiness. Even [[though]] cavemen/Neanderthals are [[actually]] a [[different]] species than humanity, the title characters of this [[show]], it [[turns]] out, are exactly the same as those of us who are boring [[jerks]].

[[Maybe]] its my [[background]] as a [[game]] writer -- rather than a [[soulless]], hack, committee-based writer from California -- but this [[show]] had so much [[potential]], and [[none]] of it has been realized. To [[start]] with, the [[producers]] should have [[focused]] on the fun things that would make cavemen different from us.

What [[could]] conceivably be [[funny]], for example, about giving them [[occupations]] like [[perpetual]] grad [[student]] and furniture [[store]] clerk, when they would have more compellingly been [[drawn]] to [[things]] like subterranean utility [[workers]] and [[guides]] at cave parks? Why [[would]] they [[play]] prosaic games like squash, when a [[whole]] episode could be devoted to them trying get [[hunting]] [[licenses]] to go after [[game]] with spears? A [[show]] like this could write itself, and it [[takes]] some willfully [[bad]] [[writing]] to make it [[quite]] so crappy and boring.

Another [[tiresome]] aspect of this [[show]] is an [[attempt]] to [[portray]] the cavemen as being subjected to a number of stereotypes [[associated]] with [[various]] human [[minorities]]. Yawn! This has been [[done]] so many [[times]] before, and never more drearily than this. And, as [[noted]] previously, Neanderthals [[really]] are a [[different]] species, so [[using]] them as a metaphor for [[racial]] stereotyping is both uncompelling and off the [[mark]].

[[Responses]] are [[welcome]], [[including]] those from [[anyone]] who [[wants]] to tell me why I'm wrong. I'd like to enjoy this show and am just sorry that I have thus far been unable to.

Michael J. Varhola, Skirmisher Online Gaming Magazine So why does this show suck? [[Unhappily]], that really is the only [[issue]], because there is no doubt that it does.

For those unfamiliar with the premise of the [[shows]], the doomed-to-be-shortlived [[serials]] Cavemen [[concentrate]] on a number of Neanderthals and their struggle to exist in modern day America and is [[base]] on the characters featured in a series of television ads for Geico [[Security]]. The [[concepts]] is solid and there is every reason to think it could be executed [[satisfactorily]].

I had to [[reckon]] about it for awhile, but then the tagline from the commercials -- something to the [[repercussions]] of "We're not that much different from you" [[gave]] me with the [[pivotal]] to the show's suckiness. Even [[despite]] cavemen/Neanderthals are [[genuinely]] a [[various]] species than humanity, the title characters of this [[exhibition]], it [[revolves]] out, are exactly the same as those of us who are boring [[tossers]].

[[Possibly]] its my [[context]] as a [[games]] writer -- rather than a [[callous]], hack, committee-based writer from California -- but this [[exhibit]] had so much [[possibilities]], and [[nos]] of it has been realized. To [[commencing]] with, the [[makers]] should have [[focus]] on the fun things that would make cavemen different from us.

What [[wo]] conceivably be [[humorous]], for example, about giving them [[professions]] like [[nonstop]] grad [[learners]] and furniture [[boutique]] clerk, when they would have more compellingly been [[draws]] to [[aspects]] like subterranean utility [[worker]] and [[handbook]] at cave parks? Why [[should]] they [[gaming]] prosaic games like squash, when a [[total]] episode could be devoted to them trying get [[chasing]] [[permission]] to go after [[games]] with spears? A [[exposition]] like this could write itself, and it [[pick]] some willfully [[unfavourable]] [[handwriting]] to make it [[rather]] so crappy and boring.

Another [[pesky]] aspect of this [[exhibit]] is an [[tries]] to [[describe]] the cavemen as being subjected to a number of stereotypes [[tied]] with [[varied]] human [[minority]]. Yawn! This has been [[accomplished]] so many [[moments]] before, and never more drearily than this. And, as [[observed]] previously, Neanderthals [[truthfully]] are a [[disparate]] species, so [[utilize]] them as a metaphor for [[ethnic]] stereotyping is both uncompelling and off the [[markup]].

[[Answering]] are [[welcomed]], [[encompassing]] those from [[everyone]] who [[desires]] to tell me why I'm wrong. I'd like to enjoy this show and am just sorry that I have thus far been unable to.

Michael J. Varhola, Skirmisher Online Gaming Magazine --------------------------------------------- Result 4728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh... my... god... this is without a doubt the absolute cheesiest movie I have ever seen. The acting is bad, the story is weak, the characters are weaker, and the whole film just doesn't make sense. Couple this with mediocre directing, really strange scenes (such as the one where the kid reaches over the ravine and mysteriously falls in), and thoroughly abysmal dialog ("Look!" "Musta peed his pants!"), and you get one complete failure. Not to mention the fact that the only thing Mr. Atlas looks like he could defeat is a case of chocolate bars. But this is part of the movie's charm. Sit down and watch it with a few of your friends for a good laugh.

I love this movie, because it's just SO BAD! --------------------------------------------- Result 4729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Return is one of those movies for that niche group of people who like movies that bore and confuse them at the same time. Sarah Michelle Gellar plays a lame buisnesswoman who does not kill vampires or get naked at all throughout the movie. I was willing to put up with this, however I was not willing to put up with the worst editing ever combined with pointless flashbacks. At the end it turns out she crashes her car into herself when she was young. Or maybe I'm wrong and that was just a flashback. With this movie it's impossible to tell. Can you believe the same dude who made Army of Darkness produced this crap? A much better idea is to stay at home and watch Army of Darkness on Sci Fi channel. That movie had it all: sluts, zombies and a dude with a chainsaw for an arm. The Forgotten didn't even have one of these things. --------------------------------------------- Result 4730 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] [[In]] this [[satire]] of the commercialization and 'lightheartedness' of [[war]], [[John]] Cusack plays [[Brand]] Hauser, an [[assassin]] [[sent]] to to 'Turaqistan' to take out Omar Sharif, who is doing some [[oil]] [[business]] that will spell [[trouble]] for the [[former]] Vice [[President]] of the US's own [[company]]. [[In]] addition to this, Hauser must juggle his fake position as a trade show producer, a wedding for pop princess Yonica (Hillary Duff), and a nosy Liberal journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei).

[[Assessing]] the technical aspects:

- The acting (by the main characters,at least) was good, as was to be expected. Some of John Cusack's dialogue was quite obviously not written for him as he often seemed uncomfortable saying it. . . maybe unrealistic is more accurate. Joan put forth a great, and often hilarious, performance. Marisa Tomei, while I've never been a big fan of hers, was more than suitable for the role and worked well. Hillary Duff, however, was pretty terrible. They needed an attractive Middle Eastern (or Russian, or whatever that accent was supposed to be) pop-star. Unfortunately, they went 0 for 3 with her.

- Like I said above, the writing [[seemed]] a little stiff and mismatched at points, especially John Cusack's dialogue. Not much of it, mind, but some. The story also got a bit ludicrous at points, which is fine for a satire to a point, but it took it to a whole new level here. Luckily, the Cusacks and Tomei keep a relatively cool, calm demeanor throughout, and that makes a nice even mix of the craziness of the film and the levelheadedness of the actors.

- Joshua Seftel, who previously had a drought of real credits to his name, did a fine job with a rather wide-spectrum film. He handled the small ($10 million) budget very well, stretching it to make it appear to be much more. Seftel also managed to nicely blend the humour of the story. . . with the painful and hard-to-watch parts of the real war (including slaughter of civilians, etc.).

- As far as the general satire goes, its exaggerated look on the commercializing of war is very well done, especially the 'Golden Palace Poker' ads on the U.S. tanks. At points, it becomes a little too much, but, in the end, it still accurate portrays what it's going for an a young 'Mel Brooks'-type of style.

Overall, the film is very well made for the meager budget and it's definitely worthy of a look. It won't go down as one of the great satires of cinema, but it's certainly not the worst.

7/10. [[Throughout]] this [[spelling]] of the commercialization and 'lightheartedness' of [[warfare]], [[Johannes]] Cusack plays [[Markings]] Hauser, an [[callin]] [[sends]] to to 'Turaqistan' to take out Omar Sharif, who is doing some [[oils]] [[enterprise]] that will spell [[problem]] for the [[antigua]] Vice [[Presidents]] of the US's own [[societies]]. [[Among]] addition to this, Hauser must juggle his fake position as a trade show producer, a wedding for pop princess Yonica (Hillary Duff), and a nosy Liberal journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei).

[[Estimating]] the technical aspects:

- The acting (by the main characters,at least) was good, as was to be expected. Some of John Cusack's dialogue was quite obviously not written for him as he often seemed uncomfortable saying it. . . maybe unrealistic is more accurate. Joan put forth a great, and often hilarious, performance. Marisa Tomei, while I've never been a big fan of hers, was more than suitable for the role and worked well. Hillary Duff, however, was pretty terrible. They needed an attractive Middle Eastern (or Russian, or whatever that accent was supposed to be) pop-star. Unfortunately, they went 0 for 3 with her.

- Like I said above, the writing [[looked]] a little stiff and mismatched at points, especially John Cusack's dialogue. Not much of it, mind, but some. The story also got a bit ludicrous at points, which is fine for a satire to a point, but it took it to a whole new level here. Luckily, the Cusacks and Tomei keep a relatively cool, calm demeanor throughout, and that makes a nice even mix of the craziness of the film and the levelheadedness of the actors.

- Joshua Seftel, who previously had a drought of real credits to his name, did a fine job with a rather wide-spectrum film. He handled the small ($10 million) budget very well, stretching it to make it appear to be much more. Seftel also managed to nicely blend the humour of the story. . . with the painful and hard-to-watch parts of the real war (including slaughter of civilians, etc.).

- As far as the general satire goes, its exaggerated look on the commercializing of war is very well done, especially the 'Golden Palace Poker' ads on the U.S. tanks. At points, it becomes a little too much, but, in the end, it still accurate portrays what it's going for an a young 'Mel Brooks'-type of style.

Overall, the film is very well made for the meager budget and it's definitely worthy of a look. It won't go down as one of the great satires of cinema, but it's certainly not the worst.

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] Portrays the day to day stark reality of survival on a ranch in the old west. [[Outstanding]] acting by both principal actors. This doesn't even feel like a movie...you feel like you're there. Animal activists should beware...many scenes are obviously not just realistic...they are real. Portrays the day to day stark reality of survival on a ranch in the old west. [[Unresolved]] acting by both principal actors. This doesn't even feel like a movie...you feel like you're there. Animal activists should beware...many scenes are obviously not just realistic...they are real. --------------------------------------------- Result 4732 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] After a long period in the space, looking for the remains of planet Krypton, Superman (Brandon Routh) returns to Earth. He misses Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth), who got married and has a son with Richard White (James Marsden). Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) plots an evil plan, using crystals he stole from the Fortress of Solitude, to create a new land and submerge the USA.

After so many [[delightful]] [[movies]] of Superman with the unforgettable Christopher Reeve, or TV shows like "Lois and Clark" (and Teri Hatcher) or "Smallville", a great [[expectation]] was created for the return of Superman in this Bryan Singer's version. Unfortunately, the awful story is too long and boring, with many unnecessary parts, lack of emotion and overrated in IMDb. In addition, the romance between Lois Lane and Superman is something shamefully ridiculous. The twenty-two years old actress Kate Bosworth is wrongly miscast, playing the role of a mature reporter and experienced mother of a five years old boy. Brandon Routh is two years younger than Tom Welling, who plays a teenager Clark Kent in "Smallville". The character of Parker Posey, Kitty Kowalski, is actually a silly caricature. Last but not the least and in spite of being a terrific Lex Luthor, Kevin Spacey is forty-five years old, therefore older and older than the rest of the lead cast. The corny conclusion looks like a soap opera and is [[terrible]]. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Superman Returns" After a long period in the space, looking for the remains of planet Krypton, Superman (Brandon Routh) returns to Earth. He misses Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth), who got married and has a son with Richard White (James Marsden). Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) plots an evil plan, using crystals he stole from the Fortress of Solitude, to create a new land and submerge the USA.

After so many [[sumptuous]] [[theater]] of Superman with the unforgettable Christopher Reeve, or TV shows like "Lois and Clark" (and Teri Hatcher) or "Smallville", a great [[expectancy]] was created for the return of Superman in this Bryan Singer's version. Unfortunately, the awful story is too long and boring, with many unnecessary parts, lack of emotion and overrated in IMDb. In addition, the romance between Lois Lane and Superman is something shamefully ridiculous. The twenty-two years old actress Kate Bosworth is wrongly miscast, playing the role of a mature reporter and experienced mother of a five years old boy. Brandon Routh is two years younger than Tom Welling, who plays a teenager Clark Kent in "Smallville". The character of Parker Posey, Kitty Kowalski, is actually a silly caricature. Last but not the least and in spite of being a terrific Lex Luthor, Kevin Spacey is forty-five years old, therefore older and older than the rest of the lead cast. The corny conclusion looks like a soap opera and is [[abysmal]]. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Superman Returns" --------------------------------------------- Result 4733 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] That film is absolutely fantastic!! If you watch it with your friends it can be a very nice day... [[Obviously]] you have to know that the film is [[stupid]] and very bad [[directed]] and acted (Tomba/Unziker what a couple), and that is probably the worse film in the world, but you can enjoy it very much. We watched it in 19 and it was a very nice evening. The [[best]] scenes are the [[first]] one, when the criminals kill the friend of Alex, and he tries to act like a [[desperate]], and the result is a [[comic]] scene of first category... And then when he shows to Leva (Antevleva, what a name) the "Palassio di giusstissia", and then the [[accident]] of Leva, that once is [[going]] on her [[car]] out of the [[road]], and a second [[later]], the [[car]] is [[completely]] [[empty]]! What a [[magic]]! That film is absolutely fantastic!! If you watch it with your friends it can be a very nice day... [[Definitely]] you have to know that the film is [[dolt]] and very bad [[oriented]] and acted (Tomba/Unziker what a couple), and that is probably the worse film in the world, but you can enjoy it very much. We watched it in 19 and it was a very nice evening. The [[better]] scenes are the [[frst]] one, when the criminals kill the friend of Alex, and he tries to act like a [[distraught]], and the result is a [[sitcom]] scene of first category... And then when he shows to Leva (Antevleva, what a name) the "Palassio di giusstissia", and then the [[casualty]] of Leva, that once is [[go]] on her [[motors]] out of the [[route]], and a second [[subsequently]], the [[vehicle]] is [[altogether]] [[emptiness]]! What a [[sorcery]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Night Listener is probably not one of William's best roles, but he makes a very interesting character in a somewhat odd but very different movie. I can guarantee you that you have never seen this kind of movie before. Some people maybe won't like the slow pacing of this movie, but I think it's the great plus of the movie. It is definitely one of the top movies that have come out the year 2006. It has a intriguing performance in a movie with a great content, dramatic feeling. This is no americanized movie. Neither is it a predictable movie. You just feel that it is a movie that has secrets which you have a hard time to determine what the outcome of it may be. This is no excellent movie that has everything, but hell, it's a damn good and very original movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I settled back to watch "Read My Lips," a plate of Freedom Fries before me. The food was quickly forgotten as I became [[engrossed]] by director and co-writer [[Jacques]] Audiard's original and [[superb]] [[thriller]].

Carla (Emmanuelle Devos) is a secretary at a firm that develops major building projects. She actually has some significant responsibilities that don't often fall to secretaries and she's capable and ambitious. And thwarted by a male hierarchy that will exploit but not reward her.

Work piling up faster than she can handle it, Carla is told to hire a secretary. Enter ex-con and general layabout Paul (Vincent Cassel). He lies about his skills and in fact has none that any legitimate enterprise might require. After an initial serious misunderstanding by Paul as to Carla's interest in him, the two become allies. A quirky friendship starts. In a stunt that would have made a real Carla a major contender on "The Apprentice," she trumps her egotistic male adversary at work with Paul's connivance. Exit the rival.

Carla is virtually deaf without her hearing aid. With it she hears almost normally. She turns the hearing aid off to isolate herself from unpleasant sounds and annoying people. She's also very lonely. A heroic makeup effort was made to have her appear plain but she's truly beautiful. She hasn't a boyfriend. She babysits so a friend can have a liaison (it IS a French movie) Worse and humiliatingly, she accedes to a girlfriend's plea that she hang out somewhere while that married friend has it off with her paramour in Carla's bed. Not nice.

As Carla and Paul get to know each other better, the barely repressed larcenous side of the not so former felon emerges. There's a side story, by the way, of Paul's relationship with his parole officer which neatly complements the main plot and has its own big surprise ending.

"Read My Lips?" Ingenious Paul recognizes that Carla's ability to read lips, even from a considerable distance, is more than the amusing parlor trick it first seems to be.

From there a caper develops. Enough said.

Paul and Carla are a true criminal oddball couple. She wants love but will also accept money. He wants her, sort of, but business must come before possible erotic satiation. Together Cassel and Devos are strong actors carrying an unusual crime tale to its end very convincingly.

Rent it or buy it but if you enjoy a good crime story you'll go for "Read My Lips." And you may well want to watch it several times: I do.

9/10 I settled back to watch "Read My Lips," a plate of Freedom Fries before me. The food was quickly forgotten as I became [[absorbed]] by director and co-writer [[James]] Audiard's original and [[wondrous]] [[thrillers]].

Carla (Emmanuelle Devos) is a secretary at a firm that develops major building projects. She actually has some significant responsibilities that don't often fall to secretaries and she's capable and ambitious. And thwarted by a male hierarchy that will exploit but not reward her.

Work piling up faster than she can handle it, Carla is told to hire a secretary. Enter ex-con and general layabout Paul (Vincent Cassel). He lies about his skills and in fact has none that any legitimate enterprise might require. After an initial serious misunderstanding by Paul as to Carla's interest in him, the two become allies. A quirky friendship starts. In a stunt that would have made a real Carla a major contender on "The Apprentice," she trumps her egotistic male adversary at work with Paul's connivance. Exit the rival.

Carla is virtually deaf without her hearing aid. With it she hears almost normally. She turns the hearing aid off to isolate herself from unpleasant sounds and annoying people. She's also very lonely. A heroic makeup effort was made to have her appear plain but she's truly beautiful. She hasn't a boyfriend. She babysits so a friend can have a liaison (it IS a French movie) Worse and humiliatingly, she accedes to a girlfriend's plea that she hang out somewhere while that married friend has it off with her paramour in Carla's bed. Not nice.

As Carla and Paul get to know each other better, the barely repressed larcenous side of the not so former felon emerges. There's a side story, by the way, of Paul's relationship with his parole officer which neatly complements the main plot and has its own big surprise ending.

"Read My Lips?" Ingenious Paul recognizes that Carla's ability to read lips, even from a considerable distance, is more than the amusing parlor trick it first seems to be.

From there a caper develops. Enough said.

Paul and Carla are a true criminal oddball couple. She wants love but will also accept money. He wants her, sort of, but business must come before possible erotic satiation. Together Cassel and Devos are strong actors carrying an unusual crime tale to its end very convincingly.

Rent it or buy it but if you enjoy a good crime story you'll go for "Read My Lips." And you may well want to watch it several times: I do.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A [[dreary]] and [[pointless]] bit of fluff (bloody fluff, but fluff). [[Badly]] scripted, with [[inane]] and wooden [[dialogue]]. You do not [[care]] if the [[characters]] ([[indeed]], even if the [[actors]] themselves) [[live]] or [[die]]. [[Little]] [[grace]] or [[charm]], [[little]] [[action]], [[little]] point to the [[whole]] [[thing]]. Perhaps some of the set and [[setting]] will interest--those [[gaps]] between the boards of all the buildings [[may]] be [[true]] to the [[way]] [[life]] was [[lived]]. The framework encounter is [[unnecessary]] and distracting, and the Hoppalong Cassidy [[character]] himself is both [[boring]] and inept. A [[dismal]] and [[superfluous]] bit of fluff (bloody fluff, but fluff). [[Sorely]] scripted, with [[trifling]] and wooden [[discussions]]. You do not [[healthcare]] if the [[personages]] ([[actually]], even if the [[protagonists]] themselves) [[vivo]] or [[decease]]. [[Scant]] [[gracia]] or [[seduction]], [[scant]] [[activities]], [[small]] point to the [[ensemble]] [[stuff]]. Perhaps some of the set and [[configure]] will interest--those [[demerits]] between the boards of all the buildings [[maggio]] be [[veritable]] to the [[ways]] [[vie]] was [[resided]]. The framework encounter is [[superfluous]] and distracting, and the Hoppalong Cassidy [[trait]] himself is both [[dreary]] and inept. --------------------------------------------- Result 4737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Too many sources [[routinely]] lump this thought-provoking period [[drama]] in part based on [[historical]] fact together with the superficially [[similar]] "nunsploitation" which was a [[mainstay]] in '70s Euro trash cinema, [[overlooking]] the righteous [[anger]] that [[drives]] the whole endeavor. Perhaps coincidentally it was also director Gianfranco Mingozzi's [[singular]] attempt at [[narrative]] film-making outside of [[many]] well-received documentaries.

[[Safely]] set within a historical context, FLAVIA charts the growing rebellion of an early 15th century Italian nun (Florinda Bolkan's career performance, even surpassing her sterling work in Lucio Fulci's devastating DON'T TORTURE A DUCKLING), locked away in convent by her not so nobleman father in a desperate attempt to curb the girl's budding sensuous nature. Wondering why women are relegated to secondary roles at best in life as in holy scripture, she is confronted by ways in which male domination can rupture female lives, inspiring revolt fueled by the ranting of semi-crazed older Sister Agatha (indelibly portrayed by veteran actress Maria Casarès from Marcel Carné's LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS) and - more constructively - by a Muslim invasion. Joining the oppressors and perhaps unwittingly manipulating them to do her bidding, Flavia truly becomes the outcast she already felt herself to be, with expected tragic results.

With its [[breathtaking]] widescreen compositions by Alfio Contini, who shot Michelangelo Antonioni's ZABRISKIE POINT, this is an uncompromising and [[austere]] account of one woman's [[fierce]] [[yet]] ultimately futile [[fight]] against [[patriarchal]] society which [[allotted]] her no rights beyond [[childbearing]] or whoring as Sister Agatha wryly remarks. A [[lengthy]] drug-induced fantasy sequence [[clearly]] modeled on Ken Russell's [[otherwise]] far more flamboyant DEVILS [[notwithstanding]], the [[movie]] [[turns]] out [[relatively]] stingy in the skin department, making something of a mockery out of its semi-porn reputation. This is a [[serious]] [[work]] deserving rediscovery and [[restoration]] of its unjustly tarnished reputation. Too many sources [[fluently]] lump this thought-provoking period [[tragedy]] in part based on [[historic]] fact together with the superficially [[equivalent]] "nunsploitation" which was a [[linchpin]] in '70s Euro trash cinema, [[neglects]] the righteous [[fury]] that [[drive]] the whole endeavor. Perhaps coincidentally it was also director Gianfranco Mingozzi's [[sole]] attempt at [[descriptive]] film-making outside of [[several]] well-received documentaries.

[[Securely]] set within a historical context, FLAVIA charts the growing rebellion of an early 15th century Italian nun (Florinda Bolkan's career performance, even surpassing her sterling work in Lucio Fulci's devastating DON'T TORTURE A DUCKLING), locked away in convent by her not so nobleman father in a desperate attempt to curb the girl's budding sensuous nature. Wondering why women are relegated to secondary roles at best in life as in holy scripture, she is confronted by ways in which male domination can rupture female lives, inspiring revolt fueled by the ranting of semi-crazed older Sister Agatha (indelibly portrayed by veteran actress Maria Casarès from Marcel Carné's LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS) and - more constructively - by a Muslim invasion. Joining the oppressors and perhaps unwittingly manipulating them to do her bidding, Flavia truly becomes the outcast she already felt herself to be, with expected tragic results.

With its [[striking]] widescreen compositions by Alfio Contini, who shot Michelangelo Antonioni's ZABRISKIE POINT, this is an uncompromising and [[joyless]] account of one woman's [[stiff]] [[nonetheless]] ultimately futile [[tussle]] against [[patriarchy]] society which [[awarded]] her no rights beyond [[pregnancies]] or whoring as Sister Agatha wryly remarks. A [[prolonged]] drug-induced fantasy sequence [[overtly]] modeled on Ken Russell's [[alternatively]] far more flamboyant DEVILS [[whilst]], the [[cinematography]] [[revolves]] out [[comparatively]] stingy in the skin department, making something of a mockery out of its semi-porn reputation. This is a [[gravest]] [[jobs]] deserving rediscovery and [[renovations]] of its unjustly tarnished reputation. --------------------------------------------- Result 4738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Rented and watched this short (< 90 minutes) work. It's by far the best treatment Modesty has received on film -- and her creator, Peter O'Donnell, agrees, participating as a "Creative Consultant." The character, and we who love her, are handled with respect. Spiegel's direction is the best he's done to date, and the casting was very well done. Alexandra Staden is almost physically perfect as a match to the original Jim Holdaway illustrations of Modesty. A terrific find by whoever cast her! Raymond Cruz as a young Rafael Garcia was also excellent. I hope that Tarantino & co. will go on to make more in the series -- I'm especially interested to see whom they'd choose to be the incomparable Willie Garvin! --------------------------------------------- Result 4739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] "Magnolia" is a [[preposterous]], bewildering acting showcase that adds up to very [[little]]. Like "Eyes Wide Shut," "Magnolia" is an aimless series of episodes without any concern for coherence. The camera swoops through hallways and corridors, catching glimpses of sad characters. Where is the reason to care for these people? The common theme seems to be people who yell a lot, who can't care for others (except for John C. Reilly's and Philip Seymour Hoffman's characters), and are self-destructive jerks who are either falling to pieces or dying. I was reminded of how much I disliked "Shine" because of the irredeemable monster of a father played by Armin Mueller-Stahl. There are so many unattractive, unappealing characters here, why would we want to spend time with them?

Having said that, there is nothing held back about "Magnolia." Paul Thomas Anderson's ideas are splashed onto his canvas with abandon. There are two ideas in particular that bomb. Both happen in the last hour of this 188-minute film. One has the camera flipping from one character to another while each one sings one of Aimee Mann's coffeehouse folk songs. Sweet, but ineffectual since we can't see what strings them all together. The other idea I refer to cannot be revealed other than to say it is completely unexpected and completely ridiculous.

"Magnolia" has a lot of great acting. Particularly Tom Cruise who unleashes a performance I didn't know he had in him. And John C. Reilly plays maybe the most decent and truly good cop in recent memory. But it all adds up to nothing. When the secret unexpected event happened, a girl behind me in the theatre couldn't hold it in any more and said, "This is stupid!" My feeling is the majority of moviegoers will agree. "Magnolia" is a [[counterintuitive]], bewildering acting showcase that adds up to very [[scant]]. Like "Eyes Wide Shut," "Magnolia" is an aimless series of episodes without any concern for coherence. The camera swoops through hallways and corridors, catching glimpses of sad characters. Where is the reason to care for these people? The common theme seems to be people who yell a lot, who can't care for others (except for John C. Reilly's and Philip Seymour Hoffman's characters), and are self-destructive jerks who are either falling to pieces or dying. I was reminded of how much I disliked "Shine" because of the irredeemable monster of a father played by Armin Mueller-Stahl. There are so many unattractive, unappealing characters here, why would we want to spend time with them?

Having said that, there is nothing held back about "Magnolia." Paul Thomas Anderson's ideas are splashed onto his canvas with abandon. There are two ideas in particular that bomb. Both happen in the last hour of this 188-minute film. One has the camera flipping from one character to another while each one sings one of Aimee Mann's coffeehouse folk songs. Sweet, but ineffectual since we can't see what strings them all together. The other idea I refer to cannot be revealed other than to say it is completely unexpected and completely ridiculous.

"Magnolia" has a lot of great acting. Particularly Tom Cruise who unleashes a performance I didn't know he had in him. And John C. Reilly plays maybe the most decent and truly good cop in recent memory. But it all adds up to nothing. When the secret unexpected event happened, a girl behind me in the theatre couldn't hold it in any more and said, "This is stupid!" My feeling is the majority of moviegoers will agree. --------------------------------------------- Result 4740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Slaughter]] [[High]] starts like any other day at Doddsville [[County]] High School where little minx Carol Manning (Caroline Munro) has [[tricked]] resident nerd [[Marty]] Rantzen (Simon Scuddamore) into the girls locker rooms where she tells him to get undressed in the shower, while doing so Carol's gang of friends come in & give the now naked [[Marty]] a [[big]] surprise as they film him as they stick his head down the girls toilet in an April fool's day joke. The school's sports coach (Marc Smith) saves Marty & punishes the gang who rather harshly blame Marty, they decide to play another trick on him only this time things get out of hand & [[Marty]] is caught in an explosion & has nitric acid splashed over his face. Years later & the whole gang are invited to a class reunion at the now closed down school, they all arrive to discover they are the only ones there. They all venture inside where they quickly learn they aren't the only ones there as Marty is back & has revenge on his mind...

Originally [[shot]] under the title April Fool's Day which they [[changed]] [[probably]] because of another slasher [[film]] named April Fool's Day (1986) [[made]] the same year this American English co-production is [[unusual]] in that it has three [[credited]] writers & [[directors]], [[George]] Dugdale, [[Mark]] Ezra & [[Peter]] Litten (after never [[seeing]] a [[film]] with three credited director's I've now [[seen]] two in a week the other being the Jean-Claude Van Damme flick Kickboxer (1989)) & I have to [[say]] I really rather liked Slaughter [[High]] [[even]] [[though]] it [[seems]] to have a pretty [[bad]] [[reputation]]. One of the [[things]] I [[like]] about the script is that it is a pure unashamed slasher flick, it doesn't try to be anything else & it just accepts the genres rules, short comings & trappings & plays up to them. Basically it [[delivers]] what it promises, a [[homicidal]] killer, blood, boobs & babes. I thought the character's were alright, the story was OK even though it's just an excuse to get a load of teens inside an isolated location so some killer can bump them off one at a time & I actually [[liked]] the twist ending as well which is also something for which Slaughter [[High]] gets a lot of flak for. The first half starts off a little slow but the second half moves along at a rate of knots as there is one gory killing after another. Some of the situations & character reactions make little sense but the same can be said of just about any film ever made so who's complaining?

Despite three credited director's Slaughter High turned out pretty good, I liked the look of the film a lot. The isolated rundown school made for a really atmospheric location & looked good, the makers throw in a good thunderstorm as well & there's some nice photography especially at the end where there are numerous impressive uninterrupted long lasting stedicam tracking shots which follow Carol through various corridors of the rundown school. While not particularly stylish it certainly looks nice enough & is professionally made. There is some good gore here including burnt bodies, people melted with acid, impalings, stomach explosions, axes in faces & death by lawnmower as well as someone who gets drowned in fecal matter down a drain! The special effects are also better than one would expect & I was both impressed & pleased with the higher than expected body count.

Technically the film is better than I had expected & beats most low budget horror crap that gets released today, I would have thought it was relatively low budget itself though. Supposedly set in America this was very obviously shot in England. Harry Manfredini composes another score which sounds exactly like all of his other musical scores & is basically the same as the theme from Friday the 13th (1980) & it's sequels. Anyone living here in the UK will probably recognise Billy Hartman who played Frank as a regular in Emmerdale Farm (one of our nations top rated soap operas) in which he plays Terry Woods! While most horror fans will recognise the sexy Caroline Munro in a rare staring role. Legendary exploitation producer Dick Randall did the deed on Slaughter High & actually appears in the film as a porno movie producer... talk about typecasting! You can also see a poster for the misunderstood brilliance that was Pieces (1982) which he also produced behind him in his office.

Slaughter High is a slasher film that I liked a lot, did you see that? I didn't say it was great I actually said I liked it on a personal level & I'm sure the predictable plot & lack of story will probably put many off so I can't recommend it but I can say I liked it, make of that what you want. Make sure you you watch the uncut version if you ever decide you want to check it out. If your not a fan of the slasher flick genre then Slaughter High won't change your mind but if your looking for a simple & effective slasher then you could do a lot worse than this. [[Carnage]] [[Supreme]] starts like any other day at Doddsville [[Prefecture]] High School where little minx Carol Manning (Caroline Munro) has [[hoodwinked]] resident nerd [[Martti]] Rantzen (Simon Scuddamore) into the girls locker rooms where she tells him to get undressed in the shower, while doing so Carol's gang of friends come in & give the now naked [[Martyn]] a [[gros]] surprise as they film him as they stick his head down the girls toilet in an April fool's day joke. The school's sports coach (Marc Smith) saves Marty & punishes the gang who rather harshly blame Marty, they decide to play another trick on him only this time things get out of hand & [[Martti]] is caught in an explosion & has nitric acid splashed over his face. Years later & the whole gang are invited to a class reunion at the now closed down school, they all arrive to discover they are the only ones there. They all venture inside where they quickly learn they aren't the only ones there as Marty is back & has revenge on his mind...

Originally [[filmed]] under the title April Fool's Day which they [[modification]] [[potentially]] because of another slasher [[flick]] named April Fool's Day (1986) [[brought]] the same year this American English co-production is [[odd]] in that it has three [[paid]] writers & [[administrators]], [[Georgie]] Dugdale, [[Markup]] Ezra & [[Pieter]] Litten (after never [[see]] a [[kino]] with three credited director's I've now [[saw]] two in a week the other being the Jean-Claude Van Damme flick Kickboxer (1989)) & I have to [[told]] I really rather liked Slaughter [[Supremo]] [[yet]] [[if]] it [[seem]] to have a pretty [[amiss]] [[notoriety]]. One of the [[matters]] I [[fond]] about the script is that it is a pure unashamed slasher flick, it doesn't try to be anything else & it just accepts the genres rules, short comings & trappings & plays up to them. Basically it [[gives]] what it promises, a [[fatal]] killer, blood, boobs & babes. I thought the character's were alright, the story was OK even though it's just an excuse to get a load of teens inside an isolated location so some killer can bump them off one at a time & I actually [[enjoyed]] the twist ending as well which is also something for which Slaughter [[Supremo]] gets a lot of flak for. The first half starts off a little slow but the second half moves along at a rate of knots as there is one gory killing after another. Some of the situations & character reactions make little sense but the same can be said of just about any film ever made so who's complaining?

Despite three credited director's Slaughter High turned out pretty good, I liked the look of the film a lot. The isolated rundown school made for a really atmospheric location & looked good, the makers throw in a good thunderstorm as well & there's some nice photography especially at the end where there are numerous impressive uninterrupted long lasting stedicam tracking shots which follow Carol through various corridors of the rundown school. While not particularly stylish it certainly looks nice enough & is professionally made. There is some good gore here including burnt bodies, people melted with acid, impalings, stomach explosions, axes in faces & death by lawnmower as well as someone who gets drowned in fecal matter down a drain! The special effects are also better than one would expect & I was both impressed & pleased with the higher than expected body count.

Technically the film is better than I had expected & beats most low budget horror crap that gets released today, I would have thought it was relatively low budget itself though. Supposedly set in America this was very obviously shot in England. Harry Manfredini composes another score which sounds exactly like all of his other musical scores & is basically the same as the theme from Friday the 13th (1980) & it's sequels. Anyone living here in the UK will probably recognise Billy Hartman who played Frank as a regular in Emmerdale Farm (one of our nations top rated soap operas) in which he plays Terry Woods! While most horror fans will recognise the sexy Caroline Munro in a rare staring role. Legendary exploitation producer Dick Randall did the deed on Slaughter High & actually appears in the film as a porno movie producer... talk about typecasting! You can also see a poster for the misunderstood brilliance that was Pieces (1982) which he also produced behind him in his office.

Slaughter High is a slasher film that I liked a lot, did you see that? I didn't say it was great I actually said I liked it on a personal level & I'm sure the predictable plot & lack of story will probably put many off so I can't recommend it but I can say I liked it, make of that what you want. Make sure you you watch the uncut version if you ever decide you want to check it out. If your not a fan of the slasher flick genre then Slaughter High won't change your mind but if your looking for a simple & effective slasher then you could do a lot worse than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4741 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The [[movie]] [[actually]] has a fairly good [[story]], but gets bogged down in [[several]] [[key]] places. It's almost as if the director threw the movie together without taking the time to make some essential [[cuts]] in the film. [[Dennis]] Quaid does a fairly decent job in his role... but [[something]] is clearly [[missing]] from several key scenes.

This 2.5 [[hour]] [[movie]] [[could]] have been reduced to about a 2 hour movie. And probably would have been a much better film had it not had the feel as if it was thrown together.

The [[kino]] [[indeed]] has a fairly good [[histories]], but gets bogged down in [[dissimilar]] [[critical]] places. It's almost as if the director threw the movie together without taking the time to make some essential [[compressions]] in the film. [[Denny]] Quaid does a fairly decent job in his role... but [[algo]] is clearly [[faded]] from several key scenes.

This 2.5 [[hora]] [[cinematography]] [[wo]] have been reduced to about a 2 hour movie. And probably would have been a much better film had it not had the feel as if it was thrown together.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Timeless musical gem, with Gene Kelly in top form, stylish direction by Vincente Minnelli, and wonderful musical numbers. It is great entertainment from start to finish, one of those films that people watch with a smile and say "they don't make 'em like they used to!" But they never did quite make them like this. The climactic 25 minute musical sequence without any dialogue is among the most beautiful in film history. Movie magic, clearly derived from the heart and soul of everyone involved. A must see! --------------------------------------------- Result 4743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe I wasted my time with this movie. I couldn't even call it a movie. It was so bad with nothing to recommend it.

I like low budget movies and weird flicks but this one had me bored to death. Badly made and bad acting ruined it from being curious. You have to wonder what these people were thinking when they spent money to produce this movie. I wonder what I was thinking watching it to the end. I recommend this movie to no one. How did they release this? Was there an audience who likes this kind of movie? There must be because you can find this at almost any video store. But why?

Deserves to be forgotten.

If you like bad movies then this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The whole point of making this film, one of the [[earliest]] and [[best]] [[international]] color releases of cinematic [[opera]], was to make it more accessible to the masses. And it succeeded admirably in doing so. The [[general]] [[public]] would not sit [[still]] for a [[love]] story about two young exotic lovers in [[ancient]] Egypt if played by the [[typical]] 300 pound over 40 tenor and soprano with the vocal equipment to sing the [[glorious]] music [[properly]]. Hence the visual substitution of the [[beautiful]] principals (a [[young]] [[Loren]], [[handsome]] Della Marra, and a slinky Ms. Maxwell)who make the story much more believable, giving those not familiar with the [[plot]] or the music a better [[chance]] at being wooed into the [[lovely]] [[arias]] who [[otherwise]] might not be. [[Altogether]], an enchanting [[introduction]] to one of Verdi's [[great]] works. I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this when I was in junior [[high]] [[school]] and it [[certainly]] awakened my interest in opera, a [[form]] with which I was then not well acquainted. I still regard this [[film]] fondly and would [[recommend]] it [[highly]] to those who might [[appreciate]] the [[great]] music accompanied by better than average visuals. Luciano [[Della]] Marra was a standout as Radames, and unfortunately for audiences did not appear in any other [[films]]. The whole point of making this film, one of the [[nearest]] and [[better]] [[global]] color releases of cinematic [[oprah]], was to make it more accessible to the masses. And it succeeded admirably in doing so. The [[overall]] [[populace]] would not sit [[yet]] for a [[loved]] story about two young exotic lovers in [[immemorial]] Egypt if played by the [[symptomatic]] 300 pound over 40 tenor and soprano with the vocal equipment to sing the [[wondrous]] music [[adequately]]. Hence the visual substitution of the [[wondrous]] principals (a [[youths]] [[Lauren]], [[beau]] Della Marra, and a slinky Ms. Maxwell)who make the story much more believable, giving those not familiar with the [[intrigue]] or the music a better [[chances]] at being wooed into the [[nice]] [[aria]] who [[alternately]] might not be. [[Quite]], an enchanting [[introducing]] to one of Verdi's [[grand]] works. I [[remind]] [[witnessing]] this when I was in junior [[higher]] [[scholastic]] and it [[probably]] awakened my interest in opera, a [[shape]] with which I was then not well acquainted. I still regard this [[movies]] fondly and would [[recommending]] it [[vastly]] to those who might [[appreciative]] the [[wondrous]] music accompanied by better than average visuals. Luciano [[Dela]] Marra was a standout as Radames, and unfortunately for audiences did not appear in any other [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4745 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] One thing about Hollywood, someone has a success and it's [[always]] [[rushed]] to be [[copied]]. And another thing is that players give some of their [[best]] performances away from their [[home]] studio.

Rock Hudson got such accolades for his performance in the Texas based [[film]] [[Giant]] that Universal [[executives]] must have [[thought]], let's [[quick]] get him into another [[modern]] Texas setting.

[[Similarly]] Robert [[Stack]] [[got]] [[great]] reviews for The High and the Mighty as the [[pilot]] who was cracking under the strain of flying a [[damaged]] aircraft that it was natural to give him another crack up role.

Both of these [[ends]] were [[achieved]] in [[Written]] on the Wind. Before Hudson was the big ranch owner, now he's the son of a hunting companion of Robert Stack's [[father]] who took Hudson under his wing. In other words the James Dean [[part]] without the James Dean [[racism]] from Giant.

[[Lauren]] Bacall is the executive secretary of an advertising agency that Stack's Hadley Oil Company uses. Hudson likes her, but she's [[dazzled]] by Stack's millions and when he woos a girl he's got the means to really pursue a campaign. She marries Stack.

And last but not [[least]] in the mix we have Dorothy Malone who's Stack's [[amoral]] sister who has a yen for Rock, but Rock ain't about to [[get]] tangled up with this wild [[child]].

Dorothy Malone spent over 10 years in a [[whole]] bunch of colorless film heroine roles before landing this gem. She got a [[Best]] Supporting Actress Award for her part as Marilee Hadley and it was well deserved.

If you like splashy technicolor Fifties soap opera than this is the film for you. One thing about Hollywood, someone has a success and it's [[perpetually]] [[sped]] to be [[copying]]. And another thing is that players give some of their [[better]] performances away from their [[dwellings]] studio.

Rock Hudson got such accolades for his performance in the Texas based [[cinematography]] [[Titan]] that Universal [[managers]] must have [[figured]], let's [[rapid]] get him into another [[contemporary]] Texas setting.

[[Alternatively]] Robert [[Funnels]] [[get]] [[wondrous]] reviews for The High and the Mighty as the [[experimental]] who was cracking under the strain of flying a [[harmed]] aircraft that it was natural to give him another crack up role.

Both of these [[terminates]] were [[performed]] in [[Writes]] on the Wind. Before Hudson was the big ranch owner, now he's the son of a hunting companion of Robert Stack's [[fathers]] who took Hudson under his wing. In other words the James Dean [[portions]] without the James Dean [[racist]] from Giant.

[[Loren]] Bacall is the executive secretary of an advertising agency that Stack's Hadley Oil Company uses. Hudson likes her, but she's [[blinded]] by Stack's millions and when he woos a girl he's got the means to really pursue a campaign. She marries Stack.

And last but not [[lowest]] in the mix we have Dorothy Malone who's Stack's [[immoral]] sister who has a yen for Rock, but Rock ain't about to [[obtain]] tangled up with this wild [[children]].

Dorothy Malone spent over 10 years in a [[total]] bunch of colorless film heroine roles before landing this gem. She got a [[Better]] Supporting Actress Award for her part as Marilee Hadley and it was well deserved.

If you like splashy technicolor Fifties soap opera than this is the film for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is the weepy that Beaches never was. As much as I wanted to love Beaches, it [[always]] [[seemed]] too hurried for me to "feel" for it (its soundtrack is one of my favorite albums though). Stella, on the other hand, moves at a slower (and occasionally too slow) pace and though it's somewhat manipulative in its tears-inducing tale about a self-sacrificial mother, it works because [[Bette]] and the rest of the cast [[turn]] in [[great]] performances. 10/10 This is the weepy that Beaches never was. As much as I wanted to love Beaches, it [[steadily]] [[looked]] too hurried for me to "feel" for it (its soundtrack is one of my favorite albums though). Stella, on the other hand, moves at a slower (and occasionally too slow) pace and though it's somewhat manipulative in its tears-inducing tale about a self-sacrificial mother, it works because [[Midler]] and the rest of the cast [[converting]] in [[wondrous]] performances. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Follow-up to 1973's "Walking Tall" continues the real-life drama surrounding Tennessee sheriff Buford Pusser, but this installment plays like a lame TV-movie. Bo Svenson takes over the lead role from Joe Don Baker, but he's much too mild for the part; he comes off like an ambling country singer with a bat instead of a guitar. Good supporting actors like Richard Jaekel, Luke Askew and Robert DoQui end up with very little to do. I would give the film one-star strictly on its good intentions, but the screenplay is a transparent and lazy mass of routine predicaments and the production is cheapjack. Followed in 1977 by "Final Chapter-Walking Tall" and in 1978 by the television film "A Real American Hero". --------------------------------------------- Result 4748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this movie as a preview of a Matthew Barney art exhibit. It certainly prepared me. I almost skipped the exhibit and, in retrospect, probably should have.

Aside from the score being great (Bjork) and the photography rich and colorful, the content was mostly tedious and predictable. Gee, I really needed to see someone wearing pearls to figure out what the pearl-divers were up to. The film was mostly a silly mixture of Japanese cultural references and industrial shots of modern whaling technology being used in a mock-hunt/harvest. The film "peaks" with enough gratuitous shock-art to turn your stomach.

What was the point of the movie? While others might argue that it is an anti-whaling piece, one could equally argue that it somehow also justifies whaling. Personally I think it was Barney's attempt at "flashing" the audience with his anal, fecal, self-mutilation, and cannibalistic fetishes.

Bottom line: unless you really get off on Barney's sense of art, don't bother seeing this movie. The message is obscure, the pace slow, and the cultural references pretentious. If you're after shock-art, you'll do better at one of the many "Undead" movies or hunting down an old copy of Hustler and taking in a fecal-cartoon. --------------------------------------------- Result 4749 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was reviewing some old VHS tapes I have and came across The TV show John Denver & The Muppets A Christmas Together.This made me go to my computer and look it up to see if I could find a DVD version of this show to buy. I was disappointed not to be able to [[find]] it [[yet]] on DVD. The show aired in 1979 and was a [[delightful]] [[show]]. I have the record and the CD but I [[would]] love to [[buy]] a DVD version of this show. The tape is old and picture quality is pretty good but fading, the sound is not as good as the CD. There is also a few other songs not put on the CD. As a Fan of John Denver and of the Muppets, a DVD of this [[show]] [[would]] really be a good seller. If you don't have the CD it is a [[wonderful]] Chritmas [[collection]] of songs taken from that show. The album is also good if you can find it and still have a record player to play it on. I was reviewing some old VHS tapes I have and came across The TV show John Denver & The Muppets A Christmas Together.This made me go to my computer and look it up to see if I could find a DVD version of this show to buy. I was disappointed not to be able to [[unearthed]] it [[even]] on DVD. The show aired in 1979 and was a [[wondrous]] [[demonstrating]]. I have the record and the CD but I [[ought]] love to [[buying]] a DVD version of this show. The tape is old and picture quality is pretty good but fading, the sound is not as good as the CD. There is also a few other songs not put on the CD. As a Fan of John Denver and of the Muppets, a DVD of this [[spectacle]] [[ought]] really be a good seller. If you don't have the CD it is a [[wondrous]] Chritmas [[collating]] of songs taken from that show. The album is also good if you can find it and still have a record player to play it on. --------------------------------------------- Result 4750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Seldom do I ever [[encounter]] a [[film]] so completely [[fulfilling]] that I [[must]] [[speak]] about it [[immediately]]. This movie is [[definitely]] some of the [[finest]] [[entertainment]] [[available]] and it is [[highly]] [[authentic]]. I happened to [[see]] the dubbed [[version]] but I'm on my [[way]] right now to grab the DVD remaster with [[original]] Chinese dialogue. Still, the dubbing didn't get in the way and [[sometimes]] provided some seriously [[funny]] [[humour]]: "[[Poison]] Clan rocks the world!!!"

The story-telling stays true to Chinese methods of intrigue, [[suspense]], and inter-personal [[relationships]]. You can expect twists and turns as the [[identities]] of the 5 venoms are [[revealed]] and an [[expert]] [[pace]].

The martial [[arts]] [[fight]] [[choreography]] is in a [[class]] of its own and must be [[seen]] to be believed. It's [[like]] watching [[real]] [[animals]] [[fight]] each other, but construed from their own [[arcane]] martial [[arts]] [[forms]]. Such level of [[skill]] [[amongst]] the [[cast]] is [[unsurpassed]] in modern day [[cinema]].

The [[combination]] [[provides]] for a [[serious]] [[dose]] of [[old]] Chinese [[culture]] and I [[recommend]] it [[solely]] on the [[basis]] of the film's [[genuine]] [[intent]] to [[tell]] a martial arts [[story]] and the mastery of its [[execution]]. ...Of course, if you just [[want]] to [[see]] people [[pummel]] each other, along with crude [[forms]] of [[ancient]] Chinese torture, be my guest! Seldom do I ever [[face]] a [[movie]] so completely [[discharging]] that I [[ought]] [[talking]] about it [[directly]]. This movie is [[obviously]] some of the [[meanest]] [[entertainments]] [[accessible]] and it is [[heavily]] [[vera]]. I happened to [[behold]] the dubbed [[stepping]] but I'm on my [[path]] right now to grab the DVD remaster with [[preliminary]] Chinese dialogue. Still, the dubbing didn't get in the way and [[intermittently]] provided some seriously [[humorous]] [[humor]]: "[[Toxin]] Clan rocks the world!!!"

The story-telling stays true to Chinese methods of intrigue, [[sufferance]], and inter-personal [[relations]]. You can expect twists and turns as the [[identity]] of the 5 venoms are [[shown]] and an [[specialised]] [[rhythm]].

The martial [[humanities]] [[tussle]] [[dancers]] is in a [[homeroom]] of its own and must be [[watched]] to be believed. It's [[iike]] watching [[actual]] [[beasts]] [[struggling]] each other, but construed from their own [[opaque]] martial [[humanities]] [[formulas]]. Such level of [[jurisdiction]] [[among]] the [[casting]] is [[unrivaled]] in modern day [[theatre]].

The [[jumpsuit]] [[gives]] for a [[gravest]] [[doses]] of [[antigua]] Chinese [[cropping]] and I [[recommending]] it [[merely]] on the [[basics]] of the film's [[real]] [[intention]] to [[telling]] a martial arts [[fairytales]] and the mastery of its [[executes]]. ...Of course, if you just [[wanting]] to [[consults]] people [[crush]] each other, along with crude [[formulas]] of [[antigua]] Chinese torture, be my guest! --------------------------------------------- Result 4751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Without "[[mental]] anachronism", this film which I would like to [[find]] in DVD offer an [[extraordinary]] [[diving]] in the vital and [[mental]] context of thought of the people before the "disenchantment of the [[world]]". That, there is thirty years, a director and a scenario writer [[could]] [[test]] one such empathy and such a romantic [[truth]] to do it of them masterpiece leaves me [[astounding]]. It would be necessary to be able to see and re-examine it film for better seizing than the temporal and cultural distance us to make [[lose]] of capacity to be [[included]]/understood, analyze and finally to accept of such or such [[example]] of "[[primitive]] thought". Because this thought maintaining almost impossible to feel in the secularized world however contain certain keys of our behavior, that only them future generations will be able to analyze with sufficient relevance. If somebody knows where I then to get a numerical copy or VHS to me or DVD… thank you in advance. Without "[[psychotropic]] anachronism", this film which I would like to [[unearthed]] in DVD offer an [[wondrous]] [[dives]] in the vital and [[psychological]] context of thought of the people before the "disenchantment of the [[monde]]". That, there is thirty years, a director and a scenario writer [[wo]] [[testing]] one such empathy and such a romantic [[veracity]] to do it of them masterpiece leaves me [[breathtaking]]. It would be necessary to be able to see and re-examine it film for better seizing than the temporal and cultural distance us to make [[wasting]] of capacity to be [[inscribed]]/understood, analyze and finally to accept of such or such [[instances]] of "[[rudimentary]] thought". Because this thought maintaining almost impossible to feel in the secularized world however contain certain keys of our behavior, that only them future generations will be able to analyze with sufficient relevance. If somebody knows where I then to get a numerical copy or VHS to me or DVD… thank you in advance. --------------------------------------------- Result 4752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Yep, the [[topic]] is a straight [[quote]] from the [[movie]] and I think it's pretty [[accurate]]. I was so bored to [[dead]] with this pointless [[effort]]. All the flashes etc. making no [[sense]] after first 20 minutes is just [[bad]] [[film]] making + [[If]] you are epileptic, you would have died at [[least]] five times already. Of course all the David Lynch fans would [[raise]] a flag for this [[kind]] of [[turkey]] to be "the [[best]] [[film]] ever made" because it doesn't make any [[sense]] AND when it doesn't make any [[sense]] it's got to be art, and art movie is always [[good]]. Right? I say [[WRONG]]. This kind of [[artificial]] art grab is just a [[pathetic]] [[way]] to [[try]] to show that you're a good [[film]] [[maker]]. [[Anthony]] Hopkins as a [[excellent]] actor should just [[stay]] acting. Yep, the [[matter]] is a straight [[quoting]] from the [[filmmaking]] and I think it's pretty [[meticulous]]. I was so bored to [[decedent]] with this pointless [[endeavor]]. All the flashes etc. making no [[sensing]] after first 20 minutes is just [[unfavourable]] [[cinematography]] making + [[Though]] you are epileptic, you would have died at [[fewest]] five times already. Of course all the David Lynch fans would [[rise]] a flag for this [[genre]] of [[ankara]] to be "the [[finest]] [[filmmaking]] ever made" because it doesn't make any [[sensing]] AND when it doesn't make any [[feeling]] it's got to be art, and art movie is always [[buena]]. Right? I say [[INACCURATE]]. This kind of [[manmade]] art grab is just a [[unfortunate]] [[camino]] to [[strive]] to show that you're a good [[kino]] [[manufacturers]]. [[Antony]] Hopkins as a [[sumptuous]] actor should just [[remain]] acting. --------------------------------------------- Result 4753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It, at all, you have seen when harry met sally, then [[avoid]] this one. It will not only make you bang your head on the table as why can't bollywood even make a [[good]] remake; but also annoy you with the so [[called]] funny moments in it. The charm of the movie is [[missing]]. Ranee looks [[terrible]]. Saif [[tries]] to [[act]] [[like]] he is one hell of an [[actor]]. The plots that have been [[picked]] up from the [[original]], don't look [[effective]] [[either]]. The [[part]] where both of them [[bring]] their [[friends]] along and they hit a note, it just doesn't look [[appealing]]. What can be more [[disastrous]]? you [[wanna]] waste some [[money]], this is what you can [[get]]. [[Otherwise]], put some more [[bucks]], and watch the [[original]]. Its too good to [[miss]].. It, at all, you have seen when harry met sally, then [[avoided]] this one. It will not only make you bang your head on the table as why can't bollywood even make a [[buena]] remake; but also annoy you with the so [[drew]] funny moments in it. The charm of the movie is [[gone]]. Ranee looks [[frightful]]. Saif [[try]] to [[ley]] [[iike]] he is one hell of an [[protagonist]]. The plots that have been [[opt]] up from the [[preliminary]], don't look [[efficacious]] [[neither]]. The [[party]] where both of them [[brings]] their [[friendships]] along and they hit a note, it just doesn't look [[tempting]]. What can be more [[devastating]]? you [[wanting]] waste some [[cash]], this is what you can [[gets]]. [[Alternately]], put some more [[dollars]], and watch the [[upfront]]. Its too good to [[missed]].. --------------------------------------------- Result 4754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I have read modesty Blaise for several years now, collecting numbers of the strip. After the fiasco movie made many years ago based on the first book "[[Modesty]] [[Blaise]]" I was surprised the [[result]] got this good.

What I [[got]] was a [[movie]] not based on action or violence. The director had focused on history and psychology. How was Modesty created based on the own tale and what parts in her life was affected by her non-childhood. I think this thougths will give a greater understanding to the next (I hope) film. I simply [[loved]] the movies old-fashioned style.

However everything wasn't that good, the [[gambling]] wasn't that good. almost boring and unreal. The acting could have been improved too. I'm not thinking the bad guy in this movie felt real, the only reason he was there was so Modesty could have someone to tell her story for. Also they could have expanded the movie, showing more about when she builds up "The network" but I'll guess thats for the next movie.

And please forgive me for my bad English I have read modesty Blaise for several years now, collecting numbers of the strip. After the fiasco movie made many years ago based on the first book "[[Decency]] [[Belize]]" I was surprised the [[conclusions]] got this good.

What I [[get]] was a [[kino]] not based on action or violence. The director had focused on history and psychology. How was Modesty created based on the own tale and what parts in her life was affected by her non-childhood. I think this thougths will give a greater understanding to the next (I hope) film. I simply [[cared]] the movies old-fashioned style.

However everything wasn't that good, the [[wagering]] wasn't that good. almost boring and unreal. The acting could have been improved too. I'm not thinking the bad guy in this movie felt real, the only reason he was there was so Modesty could have someone to tell her story for. Also they could have expanded the movie, showing more about when she builds up "The network" but I'll guess thats for the next movie.

And please forgive me for my bad English --------------------------------------------- Result 4755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I [[began]] riding [[horses]] [[fairly]] recently, and, as anyone who has ever ridden should know, I fell in love with horses and their world. I rented [[Spirit]] on a [[whim]], just [[trying]] to [[pack]] my life full of as much horse related material as I could, and I was [[surprised]] by the results.

What I expected was a feel-good Disneyesque movie with talking animals and stereotypes every five minutes.

What I [[got]] was an amazing film, filled with beautiful scenery and animation, and an amazing storyline that has the great potential to warm one's heart.

Spirit is a wild mustang in the Old West, whose entire world is brought crumbling down around him when he discovers the humans slowly taking over his homeland. The story unfolds with a wide array of characters, some human, some animals, all are well written and most are pleasant to watch on screen.

I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys a good story, and who has an appreciation for history and animals.

One thing I forgot to [[mention]], but that I feel is important, is that the animals in this film do not talk. This was a really nice vacation from the Lady And The Tramp animated movies that everyone today is used to. I [[launches]] riding [[ponies]] [[comparatively]] recently, and, as anyone who has ever ridden should know, I fell in love with horses and their world. I rented [[Wits]] on a [[quirk]], just [[striving]] to [[packaging]] my life full of as much horse related material as I could, and I was [[horrified]] by the results.

What I expected was a feel-good Disneyesque movie with talking animals and stereotypes every five minutes.

What I [[ai]] was an amazing film, filled with beautiful scenery and animation, and an amazing storyline that has the great potential to warm one's heart.

Spirit is a wild mustang in the Old West, whose entire world is brought crumbling down around him when he discovers the humans slowly taking over his homeland. The story unfolds with a wide array of characters, some human, some animals, all are well written and most are pleasant to watch on screen.

I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys a good story, and who has an appreciation for history and animals.

One thing I forgot to [[cited]], but that I feel is important, is that the animals in this film do not talk. This was a really nice vacation from the Lady And The Tramp animated movies that everyone today is used to. --------------------------------------------- Result 4756 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When Gundam0079 became the movie trilogy most of us are familiar with, a lot of it was sheer action and less of anything else. This OVA is kinda the opposite. Though there're only half a dozen episodes, it isn't filled with action, but emotional things. The two main action sequences in this, I believe, are enough to satisfy me. After seeing so many gundam series, movies, and OVAs, I was completely ready for a civilian-esquire movie. This movie did a fantastic job of that. What makes this movie stand out is that shows both sides of the war have good and bad people. It made the Zeons seem more human rather than the original movies where they're depicted as the second rise of evil Nazis. Most people that don't like anime that I've forced to watch this movie (lol), liked it. So, I'd recommend it to a lot of people just for the anti-war story. If you're a Gundam fan, and haven't seen this, you shouldn't be reading this; you should already be watching it right now. --------------------------------------------- Result 4757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[usually]] enjoy Loretta Young's early [[movies]]: her acting back then was light and breezy, and she sure [[knew]] how to [[wear]] [[clothes]]. But this one is just a loser from the word [[go]] except for a [[funny]] supporting [[turn]] by Glenda Farrell. Young is a hatcheck [[girl]] who [[talks]] her writer-husband (Paul Lukas) into [[becoming]] a championship bridge [[player]]. It's not the most [[cinematic]] of games, and the [[long]], talky [[middle]] [[part]] in which their marriage [[falls]] apart just about [[kills]] the [[film]].

There's one interesting bit [[though]]. As Lukas and Ferdinand Gottschalk [[start]] their [[climactic]] [[game]], a series of [[quick]] [[shots]] [[show]] [[airplanes]], trains, football games, even a diver in mid-air, [[freezing]] in [[anticipation]] of the [[event]]. It's the [[earliest]] [[use]] of a [[freeze]] [[frame]] I've seen in an American [[film]]. [[Wish]] the rest of it were that inventive-and [[funny]]. I [[generally]] enjoy Loretta Young's early [[cinema]]: her acting back then was light and breezy, and she sure [[overheard]] how to [[wearing]] [[garment]]. But this one is just a loser from the word [[going]] except for a [[hilarious]] supporting [[transforming]] by Glenda Farrell. Young is a hatcheck [[daughters]] who [[chitchat]] her writer-husband (Paul Lukas) into [[becomes]] a championship bridge [[protagonist]]. It's not the most [[cinematographic]] of games, and the [[protracted]], talky [[mid]] [[portions]] in which their marriage [[fall]] apart just about [[mata]] the [[filmmaking]].

There's one interesting bit [[while]]. As Lukas and Ferdinand Gottschalk [[induction]] their [[climatic]] [[games]], a series of [[fastest]] [[punches]] [[illustrates]] [[airplane]], trains, football games, even a diver in mid-air, [[frost]] in [[expectation]] of the [[incidents]]. It's the [[tightest]] [[utilize]] of a [[frost]] [[framework]] I've seen in an American [[flick]]. [[Wants]] the rest of it were that inventive-and [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an astounding film. As well as showing actual footage of key events in the failed coup to oust Chavez, we are given the background picture which describes a class-divided society. Many of the rich, it appears, have a choice with the people's democratic choice, and are willing to use the military for regime change. 'Be careful what you say in front of your servants' is a revealing comment. The head of the country's biggest oil company appoints himself as the new president, with US backing, and these young Irish film makers have it all on camera. A great film to educate young people about democracy. We see transparent documentation of how media can be manipulated, and force used, in the interests of big business, against the interests of the democratic wishes of the people. Riveting stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 4759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Generically [[speaking]], Fay Grim is a [[highly]] [[entertaining]] thriller [[featuring]] two of the most [[inexorably]] [[enjoyable]] [[names]] in American [[movies]], unshakably beautiful and [[gracefully]] spunky [[Parker]] [[Posey]] and [[endlessly]] charismatic and unavoidably [[hilarious]] [[Jeff]] Goldblum. They have [[many]] scenes in the first half of the [[film]] in which we [[see]] these two insatiable presences volleying off of each other, [[even]] radiating with charm when Goldblum rolls off Hartley's [[shamelessly]] epic info-dumps. Nevertheless, if one were to deconstruct [[Fay]] Grim, one [[would]] [[see]] many instances in which countless scenes could've been squeezed for [[much]] more benefit than they have resulted in being.

This sort of filmed in-joke is the sequel to Hal Hartley's [[Henry]] Fool, which was [[made]] ten [[years]] [[earlier]]. It has title [[character]] Posey forced by CIA [[agent]] Goldblum to [[track]] down the notebooks that were the [[precious]] [[possessions]] of her missing fugitive husband, the predecessor's titular anti-hero. [[Available]] [[within]] them is information that [[could]] concede the safety of the [[United]] States. [[Fay]] [[first]] makes for Paris to [[get]] a hold of them but [[becomes]] [[engulfed]] in a bona [[fide]] [[celebration]] of [[espionage]] clichés featuring everything from [[car]] [[bombs]] to [[ambiguous]] [[helpers]] to Following the [[Girl]] to double-crosses to triple-crosses.

The [[primary]] appeal of it all for me is that it's such a novel approach to the sequel of a [[movie]] about a garbageman and a struggling [[novelist]] in a [[small]] [[town]]. [[In]] the [[original]] Henry Fool, Posey played a [[simple]] [[woman]] leading a very [[simple]] [[life]]. Hartley's talents do not reach the heights of [[many]] of the other independent [[newbies]] from the 1990s, but I do [[admire]] his [[wild]] [[creativity]] in [[making]] an inadvertent Nearne [[sister]] out of her, giving her a [[terrific]] predicament, as he did to her character's brother, played by [[James]] Urbaniak, in [[Henry]] [[Fool]], as she is [[trapped]] between whether or not she may [[still]] [[love]] her [[overwhelming]] refugee husband and the problematic but [[forceful]] plans of Goldblum.

Hartley, [[however]], is simply riding on that fragmentary idea. His plot, [[though]] [[complex]] and labyrinthine, true to the [[form]] of the [[spy]] [[film]], it seems as if to be [[entirely]] capricious. The [[reason]] I was not [[bored]] was [[mostly]] due to the pace at which the [[story]] unfolds, not to [[mention]] the presence of Posey and Goldblum. The problem with the remainder of Hartley's cast is that I cannot seem to become fond of the rest of them. It has nothing to do with how obscure they are compared to the relative star power of the two said charm masters, but with how they don't seem to hold their own alongside them, though Saffron Burrows certainly comes close. Most of the scenes not involving Posey or Goldblum are far too light on their feet, stringing us along with info-dumps we have no choice but to listen to or else be totally lost in the ensuing sequence of scenes. They are shot almost entirely in tiled angles, as if Hartley is compensating for that implacable feeling of a lack of material.

Liam Aiken, however, playing the now teenage son of Fay and Henry, has a certain allure about him, seeming wise beyond his years, certainly much wiser than any of the adult characters. Perhaps Hartley intended that, or maybe it's simply Aiken's presence. The problem with a Hartley film is that you never quite know what was intended and what just happens to be there. As Scorsese said, "Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out." One has to be able to trust that what we see is a conscious decision by the filmmaker to remain in the finished film. Generically [[discussing]], Fay Grim is a [[vastly]] [[amusing]] thriller [[featured]] two of the most [[inextricably]] [[nice]] [[name]] in American [[film]], unshakably beautiful and [[politely]] spunky [[Barker]] [[Posse]] and [[constantly]] charismatic and unavoidably [[funny]] [[Geoffrey]] Goldblum. They have [[various]] scenes in the first half of the [[cinema]] in which we [[behold]] these two insatiable presences volleying off of each other, [[yet]] radiating with charm when Goldblum rolls off Hartley's [[shamefully]] epic info-dumps. Nevertheless, if one were to deconstruct [[Fey]] Grim, one [[ought]] [[behold]] many instances in which countless scenes could've been squeezed for [[very]] more benefit than they have resulted in being.

This sort of filmed in-joke is the sequel to Hal Hartley's [[Heinrich]] Fool, which was [[brought]] ten [[ages]] [[sooner]]. It has title [[nature]] Posey forced by CIA [[officer]] Goldblum to [[trails]] down the notebooks that were the [[invaluable]] [[belongings]] of her missing fugitive husband, the predecessor's titular anti-hero. [[Accessible]] [[inside]] them is information that [[would]] concede the safety of the [[Unified]] States. [[Fey]] [[firstly]] makes for Paris to [[got]] a hold of them but [[become]] [[immersed]] in a bona [[fe]] [[festivities]] of [[spies]] clichés featuring everything from [[motors]] [[bombings]] to [[uncertain]] [[assistant]] to Following the [[Daughter]] to double-crosses to triple-crosses.

The [[main]] appeal of it all for me is that it's such a novel approach to the sequel of a [[cinematography]] about a garbageman and a struggling [[screenwriter]] in a [[little]] [[ville]]. [[Throughout]] the [[upfront]] Henry Fool, Posey played a [[mere]] [[women]] leading a very [[simpler]] [[lifetime]]. Hartley's talents do not reach the heights of [[various]] of the other independent [[beginners]] from the 1990s, but I do [[behold]] his [[feral]] [[imagination]] in [[doing]] an inadvertent Nearne [[sisters]] out of her, giving her a [[tremendous]] predicament, as he did to her character's brother, played by [[Jacques]] Urbaniak, in [[Henri]] [[Jester]], as she is [[stuck]] between whether or not she may [[however]] [[adore]] her [[considerable]] refugee husband and the problematic but [[vigorous]] plans of Goldblum.

Hartley, [[instead]], is simply riding on that fragmentary idea. His plot, [[despite]] [[convoluted]] and labyrinthine, true to the [[forms]] of the [[hyena]] [[cinematography]], it seems as if to be [[utterly]] capricious. The [[justification]] I was not [[drilled]] was [[basically]] due to the pace at which the [[storytelling]] unfolds, not to [[referenced]] the presence of Posey and Goldblum. The problem with the remainder of Hartley's cast is that I cannot seem to become fond of the rest of them. It has nothing to do with how obscure they are compared to the relative star power of the two said charm masters, but with how they don't seem to hold their own alongside them, though Saffron Burrows certainly comes close. Most of the scenes not involving Posey or Goldblum are far too light on their feet, stringing us along with info-dumps we have no choice but to listen to or else be totally lost in the ensuing sequence of scenes. They are shot almost entirely in tiled angles, as if Hartley is compensating for that implacable feeling of a lack of material.

Liam Aiken, however, playing the now teenage son of Fay and Henry, has a certain allure about him, seeming wise beyond his years, certainly much wiser than any of the adult characters. Perhaps Hartley intended that, or maybe it's simply Aiken's presence. The problem with a Hartley film is that you never quite know what was intended and what just happens to be there. As Scorsese said, "Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out." One has to be able to trust that what we see is a conscious decision by the filmmaker to remain in the finished film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Made in the same year as "Vertigo," this is an equally bewitching movie, though in a much lighter vein. It's set in an enchanted New York during the winter: Kim Novak is a witch who casts a spell over James Stewart, but gets caught in it instead. The interesting sidelight is that Novak's rival is played by Janice Rule, who originated the part of Madge in "Picnic" on Broadway (the part that Novak would make famous on film). --------------------------------------------- Result 4761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] [[Excellent]] film. I cried when she cried, I [[loved]] when they [[loved]] , I was [[frustrated]] when they were. This film [[touched]] my heart. It was a reality check for me since this is [[reality]] for me, a 19 [[year]] old [[soldier]] [[Wondrous]] film. I cried when she cried, I [[worshipped]] when they [[worshipped]] , I was [[disappointed]] when they were. This film [[poked]] my heart. It was a reality check for me since this is [[realist]] for me, a 19 [[annum]] old [[serviceman]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Although]] the casting for this film was [[admirable]], particularly Dianne Keaton and Tom Everett Scott, the quality of the writing was so poor that it would be impossible for any actor or director to make this film worth watching.

My wife and I decided that the reason we watched the entire film was that it was like a train wreck, and it was almost impossible to turn away. It may have been that we "hoped" that the message would eventually make itself apparent, and that we would be able to glean some meaning from this effort. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

Of course the audience may have been able to "make sense" of this convoluted tale, a credit to the ingenuity of the human brain to make sense of the absurd. The writers, however, did NOTHING to facilitate this innate need we seem to have for finding meaning.

It was apparent that those involved were simply going through the motions of their respective crafts, and that any intrinsic passion for the characters or the story was either secondary or non-existent.

Unfortunately, made-for-TV movies have seemed to devolve over the years. Whereas communicating a message to the audience may to have been the primary interest of the writers in the past, present-day writers and producers seem condescending to their audience, concentrating primarily on manipulating us to "stay-tuned" through the incessant advertising which seems to be the only reason movies such as Surrender, Dorothy are made. [[Despite]] the casting for this film was [[sumptuous]], particularly Dianne Keaton and Tom Everett Scott, the quality of the writing was so poor that it would be impossible for any actor or director to make this film worth watching.

My wife and I decided that the reason we watched the entire film was that it was like a train wreck, and it was almost impossible to turn away. It may have been that we "hoped" that the message would eventually make itself apparent, and that we would be able to glean some meaning from this effort. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

Of course the audience may have been able to "make sense" of this convoluted tale, a credit to the ingenuity of the human brain to make sense of the absurd. The writers, however, did NOTHING to facilitate this innate need we seem to have for finding meaning.

It was apparent that those involved were simply going through the motions of their respective crafts, and that any intrinsic passion for the characters or the story was either secondary or non-existent.

Unfortunately, made-for-TV movies have seemed to devolve over the years. Whereas communicating a message to the audience may to have been the primary interest of the writers in the past, present-day writers and producers seem condescending to their audience, concentrating primarily on manipulating us to "stay-tuned" through the incessant advertising which seems to be the only reason movies such as Surrender, Dorothy are made. --------------------------------------------- Result 4763 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Well, after long anticipation after [[seeing]] a few clips on Bravo's The 100 Scariest Movie Moments I had [[long]] awaited to see this film. The plot was [[simple]], [[beautiful]] model Alison Parker (Cristina Raines) moves into an [[apartment]] building that's a gateway to hell. The Sentinel is a down right [[creepy]] [[film]], even if it's a bit [[slow]]. It's a mix of The [[Omen]] and Rosemary's Baby. The acting is fine, and there are some [[truly]] disturbing bits such as the awkward orgy scene with the dead [[father]] and the chubby woman in the [[middle]] of the orgy eating cake and [[laughing]] The [[ending]] is a [[weird]] [[mix]] of deformed people and cannibals. It's a very odd, campy but in the [[end]], I [[truly]] [[believe]] a [[great]] [[film]]! One of my [[favorites]] from the 70's, [[even]] if it's [[nothing]] [[greatly]] original. It's [[wacky]] and [[extremely]] creepy! [[Probably]] one of my all [[time]] [[favorites]]. 9/10 Well, after long anticipation after [[witnessing]] a few clips on Bravo's The 100 Scariest Movie Moments I had [[longer]] awaited to see this film. The plot was [[mere]], [[fabulous]] model Alison Parker (Cristina Raines) moves into an [[condo]] building that's a gateway to hell. The Sentinel is a down right [[frightening]] [[cinematography]], even if it's a bit [[lento]]. It's a mix of The [[Portent]] and Rosemary's Baby. The acting is fine, and there are some [[honestly]] disturbing bits such as the awkward orgy scene with the dead [[fathers]] and the chubby woman in the [[medium]] of the orgy eating cake and [[laughs]] The [[ended]] is a [[odd]] [[mixes]] of deformed people and cannibals. It's a very odd, campy but in the [[termination]], I [[honestly]] [[believing]] a [[wondrous]] [[kino]]! One of my [[favourite]] from the 70's, [[yet]] if it's [[anything]] [[extraordinarily]] original. It's [[loony]] and [[considerably]] creepy! [[Surely]] one of my all [[period]] [[preferred]]. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is one military [[drama]] I like a [[lot]]! Tom Berenger playing military assassin Thomas [[Beckett]]. This Marine is no-nonsense, in your face, and no questions asked kind of person who gets the job done. There you have Billy Zane("The Phantom" and others) who plays Richard Miller, a former SWAT form D.C., works for the government and takes orders only from them. Who needs a bureaucrat? I don't! When these two are paired, sparks should be flying. And how. However, [[Beckett]] teaches the young bureaucrat on how it works. When the other sniper hits, it's wits vs. wits, cat vs. mouse, gunman vs. gunman. And when the seasoned sniper is caught, it's up to Miller to put politics aside and save him. Who needs politics when you a pro like Beckett, he took orders from no one but himself, plays by the rules and not the book, and mutual respect is brought out despite the politics. The movie was a direct [[hit]]. Watch it. [[Rating]] 4 out of 5 [[stars]]. This is one military [[tragedy]] I like a [[batches]]! Tom Berenger playing military assassin Thomas [[Becket]]. This Marine is no-nonsense, in your face, and no questions asked kind of person who gets the job done. There you have Billy Zane("The Phantom" and others) who plays Richard Miller, a former SWAT form D.C., works for the government and takes orders only from them. Who needs a bureaucrat? I don't! When these two are paired, sparks should be flying. And how. However, [[Becket]] teaches the young bureaucrat on how it works. When the other sniper hits, it's wits vs. wits, cat vs. mouse, gunman vs. gunman. And when the seasoned sniper is caught, it's up to Miller to put politics aside and save him. Who needs politics when you a pro like Beckett, he took orders from no one but himself, plays by the rules and not the book, and mutual respect is brought out despite the politics. The movie was a direct [[struck]]. Watch it. [[Assessments]] 4 out of 5 [[star]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] PROM NIGHT (2008)

[[directed]] by: Nelson McCormick

starring: Brittany Snow, Scott Porter, Jessica Stroup, and Dana Davis

plot: Three years ago, Donna (Brittany Snow) witnessed the [[death]] of her entire family at the hands of her teacher (Jonathan Schaech) who has a bit of a crush on her. Now, she is preparing for her [[senior]] prom with her [[stupid]] [[annoying]] [[friends]]. Once there, they [[start]] [[dying]] one by one because the killer escaped from [[prison]] and no one bothered to warn Donna because apparently her prom is too important to interrupt.

pros: I got a few good [[laughs]] out of the film due to the terrible dialog and the dumb [[character]] moves.

An example:

Everyone decides not to tell Donna that the man who is [[oddly]] obsessed with her (she doesn't seem that great) has escaped from [[prison]]. Their reason: They don't want to embarrass her in front of all her friends. LOL

cons: Let me [[start]] off by saying I'm a [[huge]] slasher fan. [[Usually]] I can have fun with even the [[bad]] ones. I even like some PG-13 horror films. TOURIST TRAP (1979), one of my favorites, was originally rated PG. I also enjoy POLTERGEIST (1982) and THE [[GRUDGE]] (2004). So the fact that this is a dumb slasher [[film]] that is rated PG-13 does not have [[anything]] to do with me not [[enjoying]] the [[movie]].

First of all, I had a [[big]] [[problem]] with the story. I like slasher films that don't [[even]] have stories. At [[least]] they can be [[entertaining]]. This is about a [[teacher]] who [[falls]] in [[love]] with his [[student]], so he [[kills]] her [[entire]] family. A few [[years]] later, he tries to make it up to her by ruining her [[prom]] and [[killing]] all of her [[friends]] ...? [[Then]] there were subplots that I doubt anyone cared about. Claire (Jessica Stroup) is fighting with her boyfriend, she has cramps, and I couldn't care less. This should have been a Lifetime feature, not a remake of PROM NIGHT.

And then ... this is a slasher film with terrible death scenes. I don't even care that it's not that gory, some of my favorite slashers (HALLOWEEN, CURTAINS, the original PROM NIGHT) were not that gory but they still had effective murders. Here, we have half the characters dying in the same hotel room off screen, a woman being stabbed several times with no stab wounds, and a closeup on a bad actor's face as he screams in agony. I'm sure that 10 year-old girls were terrified, but not me.

I also hated the characters. There was Donna's unrealistically sensitive boyfriend Bobby (Scott Porter) and I can almost guarantee you will never meet a boyfriend that sensitive in your life, unless you are a gay male. Then we had Donna's annoying friends Claire (Stroup) and Lisa (Dana Davis), and the token mean girl Chrissy (Brianne Davis). If you thought the characters in DEATH PROOF were annoying, try watching this movie. And don't get me started on Ronnie (Collins Pennie) and the DJ (Jay Phillips) who gave me flashbacks to Usher's performance in SHE'S ALL THAT.

Add to all that predictable plot turns, a terrible soundtrack and a big lack of respect to the original material, and you have quite a stinker. PROM NIGHT (2008)

[[geared]] by: Nelson McCormick

starring: Brittany Snow, Scott Porter, Jessica Stroup, and Dana Davis

plot: Three years ago, Donna (Brittany Snow) witnessed the [[mortality]] of her entire family at the hands of her teacher (Jonathan Schaech) who has a bit of a crush on her. Now, she is preparing for her [[eldest]] prom with her [[dumb]] [[exasperating]] [[friendships]]. Once there, they [[starter]] [[died]] one by one because the killer escaped from [[gaol]] and no one bothered to warn Donna because apparently her prom is too important to interrupt.

pros: I got a few good [[smiles]] out of the film due to the terrible dialog and the dumb [[trait]] moves.

An example:

Everyone decides not to tell Donna that the man who is [[suspiciously]] obsessed with her (she doesn't seem that great) has escaped from [[jail]]. Their reason: They don't want to embarrass her in front of all her friends. LOL

cons: Let me [[initiate]] off by saying I'm a [[monumental]] slasher fan. [[Routinely]] I can have fun with even the [[negative]] ones. I even like some PG-13 horror films. TOURIST TRAP (1979), one of my favorites, was originally rated PG. I also enjoy POLTERGEIST (1982) and THE [[DENT]] (2004). So the fact that this is a dumb slasher [[filmmaking]] that is rated PG-13 does not have [[nothing]] to do with me not [[experience]] the [[filmmaking]].

First of all, I had a [[prodigious]] [[issues]] with the story. I like slasher films that don't [[yet]] have stories. At [[fewer]] they can be [[droll]]. This is about a [[maestro]] who [[autumn]] in [[amour]] with his [[pupil]], so he [[homicide]] her [[total]] family. A few [[yr]] later, he tries to make it up to her by ruining her [[promo]] and [[homicide]] all of her [[buddies]] ...? [[Subsequently]] there were subplots that I doubt anyone cared about. Claire (Jessica Stroup) is fighting with her boyfriend, she has cramps, and I couldn't care less. This should have been a Lifetime feature, not a remake of PROM NIGHT.

And then ... this is a slasher film with terrible death scenes. I don't even care that it's not that gory, some of my favorite slashers (HALLOWEEN, CURTAINS, the original PROM NIGHT) were not that gory but they still had effective murders. Here, we have half the characters dying in the same hotel room off screen, a woman being stabbed several times with no stab wounds, and a closeup on a bad actor's face as he screams in agony. I'm sure that 10 year-old girls were terrified, but not me.

I also hated the characters. There was Donna's unrealistically sensitive boyfriend Bobby (Scott Porter) and I can almost guarantee you will never meet a boyfriend that sensitive in your life, unless you are a gay male. Then we had Donna's annoying friends Claire (Stroup) and Lisa (Dana Davis), and the token mean girl Chrissy (Brianne Davis). If you thought the characters in DEATH PROOF were annoying, try watching this movie. And don't get me started on Ronnie (Collins Pennie) and the DJ (Jay Phillips) who gave me flashbacks to Usher's performance in SHE'S ALL THAT.

Add to all that predictable plot turns, a terrible soundtrack and a big lack of respect to the original material, and you have quite a stinker. --------------------------------------------- Result 4766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] **[[Warning]]! [[Spoilers]] Ahead!**

This short is [[part]] one of two that [[expound]] [[upon]] the [[brief]] portion of "The Matrix" in which Morpheus [[explains]] how the matrix came to be. [[Because]] we already know the story, the plot itself is no [[surprise]]; and the short isn't so much entertaining as [[informative]]. But that's how it is [[presented]], as a [[file]] in the [[historical]] archives. The visuals are better than [[average]], and the generally [[cold]] [[colors]] [[aid]] the [[purpose]] of the short.

A [[couple]] problems. The violence of the [[tale]] is a [[little]] [[gratuitous]] and, [[combined]] with the occasional dose of political [[correctness]] (UN scenes), detracts from the [[straight]] narrative of the short. Plus it [[needs]] to be [[seen]] with [[part]] two to be complete.

The Animatrix [[concept]] is [[brilliant]], and [[despite]] a few [[issues]], this short [[still]] [[fulfills]] its [[purpose]]. It [[would]] not have [[fit]] in the [[original]] movie in style, content, or flow. This is the perfect method to [[reveal]] the [[history]].

Bottom Line: Good information. [[Could]] have been [[told]] a [[little]] [[better]], but [[still]] a [[solid]] 7 of 10. **[[Warns]]! [[Vandals]] Ahead!**

This short is [[parties]] one of two that [[describe]] [[after]] the [[writ]] portion of "The Matrix" in which Morpheus [[explain]] how the matrix came to be. [[Since]] we already know the story, the plot itself is no [[amazement]]; and the short isn't so much entertaining as [[insightful]]. But that's how it is [[submitted]], as a [[dossiers]] in the [[historic]] archives. The visuals are better than [[medium]], and the generally [[frigid]] [[coloring]] [[aided]] the [[target]] of the short.

A [[matching]] problems. The violence of the [[narratives]] is a [[petite]] [[unwarranted]] and, [[merged]] with the occasional dose of political [[propriety]] (UN scenes), detracts from the [[consecutive]] narrative of the short. Plus it [[gotta]] to be [[saw]] with [[parties]] two to be complete.

The Animatrix [[notion]] is [[awesome]], and [[although]] a few [[subjects]], this short [[yet]] [[completes]] its [[intention]]. It [[should]] not have [[suited]] in the [[preliminary]] movie in style, content, or flow. This is the perfect method to [[disclose]] the [[story]].

Bottom Line: Good information. [[Wo]] have been [[said]] a [[small]] [[improved]], but [[yet]] a [[robust]] 7 of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4767 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I usually try to be professional and constructive when I criticize movies, but my GOD!!! This was THE worst movie I have ever seen. Bad acting, bad effects, bad script, bad everything!

The plot follows a group of teen cliche's on their way to a rave (that takes place in broad daylight) at a remote island. However, when the group arrives, all they find is an empty dance floor and bloody clothes. Determined to find out what happened to the rest of the party-goers, the clan set's off on a mission through a zombie-infested forest. During this crusade, they are aided by a police chick and a sea captain that just happens to have the right number of weapons to give to each of the kids. They also meet up with Jonathan Cherry and some other survivors. Basically the rest of the movie is a collection of poorly directed action sequences including a far too long shootout outside of the "house of the dead." This fight came complete with cheesy Hollywood violence, redundant clips from the HOTD video game, and sloppy matrix-esque camera rotations. One of the character's even volunteers to sacrifice himself to save the others. Why? Not because he was noble and brave, but because part of his face got scarred by acid a zombie spat on him after he continued to beat the creature long after it had been disabled! I'm supposed to feel sorry for this guy?!?

To sum it all up, there is absolutely no point in seeing this movie unless you want to see for yourself just how terrible it is. The theater I was in was more dead than the zombies on the screen, and I'm sure the money I wasted seeing this piece of sh*t could easily cover the costs it took to make it. GRADE: F --------------------------------------------- Result 4768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[cars]] in this [[movie]] are awesome. The acting in this movie is awful. The plot and driving scenes don't make much [[sense]] and are [[equally]] [[bad]]. If you get really bothered by movies where someone shifts and suddenly goes ridiculously faster, save yourself the trouble and money. Good movie for racing fans? Well, there is a part where they make the mistake of [[referring]] to a NASCAR driver as a rally car driver. [[If]] you can't tell the difference, go watch it, you'll have a blast. It really comes down to this, there are really really really nice cars in this movie, they are driven horribly and are completely unrealistic. The acting is horrible mainly because of the [[extremely]] [[bad]] plot. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] [[hot]] girls, [[turn]] on mtv or vh1 [[instead]]. I am [[disappointed]] that such [[nice]] [[cars]] [[would]] be represented in such a [[bad]] [[movie]]. If the [[class]] of the [[cars]] were to [[match]] that of the movie, they should be racing with [[rusted]] [[bicycles]]. The [[motor]] in this [[filmmaking]] are awesome. The acting in this movie is awful. The plot and driving scenes don't make much [[sensing]] and are [[alike]] [[rotten]]. If you get really bothered by movies where someone shifts and suddenly goes ridiculously faster, save yourself the trouble and money. Good movie for racing fans? Well, there is a part where they make the mistake of [[commenting]] to a NASCAR driver as a rally car driver. [[Though]] you can't tell the difference, go watch it, you'll have a blast. It really comes down to this, there are really really really nice cars in this movie, they are driven horribly and are completely unrealistic. The acting is horrible mainly because of the [[extraordinarily]] [[unfavourable]] plot. [[Though]] you [[wanting]] to [[behold]] [[hottest]] girls, [[turning]] on mtv or vh1 [[however]]. I am [[disappoint]] that such [[pleasurable]] [[motor]] [[should]] be represented in such a [[unfavourable]] [[filmmaking]]. If the [[kinds]] of the [[auto]] were to [[ballgame]] that of the movie, they should be racing with [[rusty]] [[biking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4769 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] The plot of " Astronuat [[returns]] to [[Earth]] as a mutating [[monster]] " died out in the 1950s mainly down to the scientific fact that travelling outside the Earth's orbit doesn't humans cause to turn in to mutated monsters , and that the first film to use this plot THE QUATERMASS EXPERIMENT was the only decent sci-fi [[movie]] to use the [[idea]] . So the idea of having the redundant [[plot]] return seems doomed from the [[start]] . Alas watching THE INCREDIBLE MELTING [[MAN]] it seems the plot is the [[least]] of its problems

First of all this is an [[incredibly]] [[badly]] [[made]] movie . The budget is in single figures and I'm talking about lira not dollars . There is no cinematography to speak of and there's countless editing blunders . For example a photographer takes his ( Barely legal ) model for a photo shoot . Cut to a shot where the sun is directly behind model , then cut to shot of photographer where the sun is directly behind him, then cut back to the model where the sun is ...

The lack of budget drags the film down in other aspects too . According to the [[trivia]] page the budget was so low the producers couldn't get any stock footage of Saturn so when astronaut Steve West [[mentions]] how beautiful Saturn looks we get footage of the sun . Actually the [[sun]] gives the most impressive performance in the [[film]] since the human actors wouldn't be employed by a porn studio . If I was appearing in this I wouldn't be scared by the eponymous monster - I'd be terrified of splinters from the rest of the cast . Perhaps we should be slightly forgiving though since the obvious lack of budget manifests itself in things [[like]] the actors having to wear their own clothes . A general for instance doesn't wear his nice fancy dress uniform complete with medals - he wears a denim jacket and baseball cap

There has to be suspension of [[disbelief]] for a film like this to work but it fails on every [[level]] . The tone is set early on in the film where Mr Melty murders a nurse and escapes from the hospital . Instead of the police getting a call saying there's been a murder Dr Nelson just decides to track down his patient on his own own same as he'd look for a missing cat . It's also [[strange]] a thoroughly decomposing homicidal monster can walk down the road without [[anyone]] noticing , but this is typical of a film where horny 70 year olds stop their car down dark roads for a quickie and people nonchalantly mention their wife is pregnant whilst forgetting to tell the police that there's a monster on the loose .

THE INCREDIBLE MELTING MAN is Z grade rubbish . I can certainly understand why people enjoy this movie because it does reach the heights of " It's so bad it's good " but apart from Rick Baker's sometimes impressive make up effects it's nothing more than a very guilty pleasure The plot of " Astronuat [[revert]] to [[Tierra]] as a mutating [[monsters]] " died out in the 1950s mainly down to the scientific fact that travelling outside the Earth's orbit doesn't humans cause to turn in to mutated monsters , and that the first film to use this plot THE QUATERMASS EXPERIMENT was the only decent sci-fi [[filmmaking]] to use the [[inkling]] . So the idea of having the redundant [[intrigue]] return seems doomed from the [[induction]] . Alas watching THE INCREDIBLE MELTING [[BLOKE]] it seems the plot is the [[fewer]] of its problems

First of all this is an [[surprisingly]] [[sorely]] [[introduced]] movie . The budget is in single figures and I'm talking about lira not dollars . There is no cinematography to speak of and there's countless editing blunders . For example a photographer takes his ( Barely legal ) model for a photo shoot . Cut to a shot where the sun is directly behind model , then cut to shot of photographer where the sun is directly behind him, then cut back to the model where the sun is ...

The lack of budget drags the film down in other aspects too . According to the [[platitudes]] page the budget was so low the producers couldn't get any stock footage of Saturn so when astronaut Steve West [[cites]] how beautiful Saturn looks we get footage of the sun . Actually the [[sunshine]] gives the most impressive performance in the [[filmmaking]] since the human actors wouldn't be employed by a porn studio . If I was appearing in this I wouldn't be scared by the eponymous monster - I'd be terrified of splinters from the rest of the cast . Perhaps we should be slightly forgiving though since the obvious lack of budget manifests itself in things [[iike]] the actors having to wear their own clothes . A general for instance doesn't wear his nice fancy dress uniform complete with medals - he wears a denim jacket and baseball cap

There has to be suspension of [[skepticism]] for a film like this to work but it fails on every [[plano]] . The tone is set early on in the film where Mr Melty murders a nurse and escapes from the hospital . Instead of the police getting a call saying there's been a murder Dr Nelson just decides to track down his patient on his own own same as he'd look for a missing cat . It's also [[weird]] a thoroughly decomposing homicidal monster can walk down the road without [[everybody]] noticing , but this is typical of a film where horny 70 year olds stop their car down dark roads for a quickie and people nonchalantly mention their wife is pregnant whilst forgetting to tell the police that there's a monster on the loose .

THE INCREDIBLE MELTING MAN is Z grade rubbish . I can certainly understand why people enjoy this movie because it does reach the heights of " It's so bad it's good " but apart from Rick Baker's sometimes impressive make up effects it's nothing more than a very guilty pleasure --------------------------------------------- Result 4770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] "Why?"

That simple question had to be on the [[lips]] of every single [[New]] Yorker during the 12 months of terror that David Berkowitz created in 1976-77. That same one word will [[surely]] become the same [[perplexing]] question 22 summers later as people exit theaters [[exhibiting]] the [[trite]] and exploitative "Summer of Sam".

[[Director]] Spike Lee attempts to weave the story of a pack of [[misguided]] thugs searching for the celebrated psychopath -- who paralyzed New York City for over a year -- with a stark and graphical depiction of the killings, the demons inside Berkowitz's head and the frustration of a futile NYPD manhunt. He presents an ensemble of despicable losers who hear their own "barking dogs" as they live lives devoid of love, honor and humanity -- no different than Berkowitz. Lee browbeats the audience in nearly every frame with "not one of us are what we seem to be". Often a critic of the white establishment, Lee [[perpetuates]] the stereotype by including a scene where Mira Sorvino, playing a newlywed with a cheating husband (John Leguizamo), hopes to have oral sex with a black man "in the back of a big black Cadillac". An Italian Mafioso tells a black detective that the famous Willie Mays' over-the-back center field catch was "lucky". Lee even makes sure to deliver the racist musings of one middle aged black woman who declares "I'm happy it's a white man killing all these white people because if it were a black man killing all these white people - there would be the biggest race riot in NYC history."

Other than an [[outstanding]] opening pan shot of an arrival at a disco (reminiscent of shots from Martin Scorcese's "[[Goodfellas]]" or [[Orson]] Welles' "The Third Man"), this film has no soul, purpose or passion. He parades characters on the screen bereft of human decency. Although we learn nothing about the true victims of this horrible spree, Spike Lee seems to be saying New York City got what it deserved during that frightening, boiling summer over two decades ago.

"How could anyone wreak such havoc on his beloved city?" "How could someone show such hatred toward his fellow man?"

Are these appropriate questions for Berkowitz or Lee?

You decide. "Why?"

That simple question had to be on the [[mouths]] of every single [[Nuevo]] Yorker during the 12 months of terror that David Berkowitz created in 1976-77. That same one word will [[definitely]] become the same [[unnerving]] question 22 summers later as people exit theaters [[showing]] the [[commonplace]] and exploitative "Summer of Sam".

[[Superintendent]] Spike Lee attempts to weave the story of a pack of [[fallacious]] thugs searching for the celebrated psychopath -- who paralyzed New York City for over a year -- with a stark and graphical depiction of the killings, the demons inside Berkowitz's head and the frustration of a futile NYPD manhunt. He presents an ensemble of despicable losers who hear their own "barking dogs" as they live lives devoid of love, honor and humanity -- no different than Berkowitz. Lee browbeats the audience in nearly every frame with "not one of us are what we seem to be". Often a critic of the white establishment, Lee [[sustains]] the stereotype by including a scene where Mira Sorvino, playing a newlywed with a cheating husband (John Leguizamo), hopes to have oral sex with a black man "in the back of a big black Cadillac". An Italian Mafioso tells a black detective that the famous Willie Mays' over-the-back center field catch was "lucky". Lee even makes sure to deliver the racist musings of one middle aged black woman who declares "I'm happy it's a white man killing all these white people because if it were a black man killing all these white people - there would be the biggest race riot in NYC history."

Other than an [[unpaid]] opening pan shot of an arrival at a disco (reminiscent of shots from Martin Scorcese's "[[Buddies]]" or [[Welles]] Welles' "The Third Man"), this film has no soul, purpose or passion. He parades characters on the screen bereft of human decency. Although we learn nothing about the true victims of this horrible spree, Spike Lee seems to be saying New York City got what it deserved during that frightening, boiling summer over two decades ago.

"How could anyone wreak such havoc on his beloved city?" "How could someone show such hatred toward his fellow man?"

Are these appropriate questions for Berkowitz or Lee?

You decide. --------------------------------------------- Result 4771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This is one of the most [[brilliant]] movies that I have seen in recent times. Goes way above even any international movie of any repute. I am really surprised why this has not received the recognition it deserved. Sonali Kulkarni winning the National Award is perhaps the only consoling fact. Renuka Daftardar simply amazes as she speaks volumes through her eyes. There are a few scenes that stand out: When Gauri comes back from the city on Krishna's wedding, she and Krishna meet for the first time in many years. Krishna notices a change in Gauri, but not a single line of dialogue is said. The entire gamut of emotions is conveyed through subtle mannerisms and the eyes. There's another towards the end when Krishna pleads to Abhay Kulkarni to marry Gauri instead. If you are not moved by that scene, you don't have a heart.

Watch this movie for sheer movie-making brilliance and acting capabilities. This is one of the most [[wondrous]] movies that I have seen in recent times. Goes way above even any international movie of any repute. I am really surprised why this has not received the recognition it deserved. Sonali Kulkarni winning the National Award is perhaps the only consoling fact. Renuka Daftardar simply amazes as she speaks volumes through her eyes. There are a few scenes that stand out: When Gauri comes back from the city on Krishna's wedding, she and Krishna meet for the first time in many years. Krishna notices a change in Gauri, but not a single line of dialogue is said. The entire gamut of emotions is conveyed through subtle mannerisms and the eyes. There's another towards the end when Krishna pleads to Abhay Kulkarni to marry Gauri instead. If you are not moved by that scene, you don't have a heart.

Watch this movie for sheer movie-making brilliance and acting capabilities. --------------------------------------------- Result 4772 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] This movie is [[great]]! This [[movie]] is [[beautiful]]! [[Finally]], a [[movie]] that [[portrays]] [[Moslems]] as PEOPLE, no stereotypes here. This [[movie]] is [[driven]] by the [[story]], by the acting and above all by its [[theme]], that of [[cultural]] affirmation and [[discovery]]. They [[may]] [[seem]] like clichés but they are not, at [[least]] not in this [[movie]]. The [[vista]] of the [[Grand]] [[Mosque]] of Mecca is [[absolutely]] stupendous and the audience is [[given]] a glimpse of a side of the [[Moslem]] [[world]] that is rarely of ever [[shown]] in the West. Here the people are caring, [[supportive]], devout, tolerant and [[devoted]] to each other. What a [[welcomed]] and way overdue departure from the usual [[negative]] portrayals of Arabs. [[Outstanding]] [[movie]]. This movie is [[fantastic]]! This [[film]] is [[fantastic]]! [[Eventually]], a [[kino]] that [[illustrates]] [[Muslims]] as PEOPLE, no stereotypes here. This [[kino]] is [[fueled]] by the [[history]], by the acting and above all by its [[themes]], that of [[culturally]] affirmation and [[discoveries]]. They [[maggio]] [[looks]] like clichés but they are not, at [[fewest]] not in this [[film]]. The [[viewing]] of the [[Big]] [[Masjid]] of Mecca is [[downright]] stupendous and the audience is [[awarded]] a glimpse of a side of the [[Islamists]] [[globe]] that is rarely of ever [[revealed]] in the West. Here the people are caring, [[favorable]], devout, tolerant and [[dedicated]] to each other. What a [[welcome]] and way overdue departure from the usual [[bad]] portrayals of Arabs. [[Unresolved]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] So, where are the cannibals? Those intrigued by the title and the 'real cannibal' appeal of this [[film]] will be [[let]] down. Instead, we are [[shown]] a [[strange]] [[man]] and his re-visiting of a [[Papua]] New Guinea village full of natives, one of whom was his lover [[several]] decades [[prior]]. The man, Tobias Schneebaum is [[New]] York [[Jewish]] as they [[come]] and somehow, this is intertwined with the documentary as he [[appears]] in his yamika in several scenes.

There are no real cannibals here: only [[stories]] [[relayed]] by some of the natives and by Tobias himself. Not all together a [[bad]] film. Very interesting and great cinematography. Schneebaum [[remains]] highly likable throughout and provides us with a fascinating glimpse into a life that is about as far removed from Western [[Civilization]] as one can [[get]].

It's just not what it claims to be on the [[cover]] and in the plot [[summary]].

4 out of 10, kids. So, where are the cannibals? Those intrigued by the title and the 'real cannibal' appeal of this [[filmmaking]] will be [[leaving]] down. Instead, we are [[illustrated]] a [[unusual]] [[men]] and his re-visiting of a [[Babo]] New Guinea village full of natives, one of whom was his lover [[different]] decades [[avant]]. The man, Tobias Schneebaum is [[Newest]] York [[Jew]] as they [[coming]] and somehow, this is intertwined with the documentary as he [[appearing]] in his yamika in several scenes.

There are no real cannibals here: only [[history]] [[conveyed]] by some of the natives and by Tobias himself. Not all together a [[unfavourable]] film. Very interesting and great cinematography. Schneebaum [[stays]] highly likable throughout and provides us with a fascinating glimpse into a life that is about as far removed from Western [[Cultures]] as one can [[got]].

It's just not what it claims to be on the [[covers]] and in the plot [[abstract]].

4 out of 10, kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 4774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] The Scots excel at storytelling. The traditional sort. Many years after the event, I can still see in my mind's eye an elderly lady, my friend's mother, retelling the Battle of Culloden. She makes the [[characters]] [[come]] alive. Her passion is that of an eye-witness. One to the events on the sodden heath a mile or so from where she lives.

Of course, it happened [[many]] years before she was born, but you wouldn't guess from the way she [[tells]] it. The same story is told in bars the length and [[breadth]] of [[Scotland]]. As I [[discussed]] it with a [[friend]] one [[night]] in Mallaig, a local [[cut]] in to [[give]] his version. The discussion continued to [[closing]] [[time]].

[[Stories]] passed down like this become part of our being. Who doesn't [[remember]] the stories our parents [[told]] us when we were children? They [[become]] our invisible [[world]]. And, as we [[grow]] [[older]], they [[maybe]] [[still]] serve as inspiration or as an [[emotional]] reservoir. [[Fact]] and fiction [[blend]] with aspiration, role models. Warning [[stories]]. Archetypes. [[Magic]] and mystery.

"My name is Aonghas, like my [[grandfather]] and his grandfather before him." Our protagonist [[introduces]] himself to us. And [[also]] [[introduces]] the [[story]] that stretches back through generations. It [[produces]] [[stories]] within stories. Stories that evoke the [[impenetrable]] wonder of Scotland, its [[rugged]] mountains shrouded in mists. The [[stuff]] of legend. Yet Seach'd is [[rooted]] in reality. This is what [[gives]] it its [[special]] [[charm]]. It has a rough beauty and authenticity, [[tempered]] with some of the [[finest]] Gaelic singing you will ever [[hear]].

Aonghas (Angus) [[visits]] his [[grandfather]] in [[hospital]] shortly before his [[death]]. He burns with [[frustration]]. Part of him [[yearns]] to be in the twenty-first century, to hang out in [[Glasgow]]. But he is raised on the Western [[shores]] among a Gaelic-speaking [[community]].

Yet there is a [[deeper]] conflict within him. He yearns to [[know]] the [[truth]]. The truth [[behind]] his grandfather's [[ancient]] stories. Where does fiction [[end]]? And he wants to know the truth behind the [[death]] of his parents.

He is pulled to make a last [[fateful]] [[journey]], to the summit of one of Scotland's most inaccessible mountains. Can the truth be told? Or is it all in stories?

In this story about stories, we revisit bloody battles, poisoned lovers, the folklore of old and the sometimes more [[treacherous]] folklore of accepted truth. In doing so, we each connect with Angus, as he lives the story of his own life.

Seachd: The Inaccessible Pinnacle is probably the most honest, unpretentious and genuinely beautiful film of Scotland ever made. Like Angus, I got slightly annoyed with the pretext of hanging stories on more stories. But, also like Angus, I forgave this once I saw the 'bigger picture.' Forget the box-office pastiche of Braveheart and its like. You might even forego the justly famous dramatisation of The Wicker Man. To see a film that is true to Scotland, this one is probably unique. [[If]] you maybe meditate on it deeply [[enough]], you might even re-evaluate the power of storytelling, and the age-old question of whether there are some truths that cannot be told but only experienced. The Scots excel at storytelling. The traditional sort. Many years after the event, I can still see in my mind's eye an elderly lady, my friend's mother, retelling the Battle of Culloden. She makes the [[hallmarks]] [[arrived]] alive. Her passion is that of an eye-witness. One to the events on the sodden heath a mile or so from where she lives.

Of course, it happened [[innumerable]] years before she was born, but you wouldn't guess from the way she [[narrates]] it. The same story is told in bars the length and [[amplitude]] of [[Scots]]. As I [[debate]] it with a [[boyfriend]] one [[nocturnal]] in Mallaig, a local [[chopped]] in to [[lend]] his version. The discussion continued to [[shutdown]] [[moment]].

[[Story]] passed down like this become part of our being. Who doesn't [[reminisce]] the stories our parents [[tell]] us when we were children? They [[becomes]] our invisible [[monde]]. And, as we [[raising]] [[elder]], they [[might]] [[however]] serve as inspiration or as an [[sentimental]] reservoir. [[Doing]] and fiction [[mingling]] with aspiration, role models. Warning [[narratives]]. Archetypes. [[Witchcraft]] and mystery.

"My name is Aonghas, like my [[grandpa]] and his grandfather before him." Our protagonist [[introducing]] himself to us. And [[similarly]] [[introduce]] the [[history]] that stretches back through generations. It [[generated]] [[histories]] within stories. Stories that evoke the [[unintelligible]] wonder of Scotland, its [[manly]] mountains shrouded in mists. The [[thing]] of legend. Yet Seach'd is [[root]] in reality. This is what [[donne]] it its [[specific]] [[amulet]]. It has a rough beauty and authenticity, [[dampened]] with some of the [[meanest]] Gaelic singing you will ever [[overheard]].

Aonghas (Angus) [[visiting]] his [[grandpa]] in [[hospitals]] shortly before his [[dead]]. He burns with [[disillusionment]]. Part of him [[longs]] to be in the twenty-first century, to hang out in [[Edinburgh]]. But he is raised on the Western [[coastline]] among a Gaelic-speaking [[communities]].

Yet there is a [[closer]] conflict within him. He yearns to [[savoir]] the [[veracity]]. The truth [[posterior]] his grandfather's [[antiquity]] stories. Where does fiction [[terminating]]? And he wants to know the truth behind the [[dead]] of his parents.

He is pulled to make a last [[deadly]] [[tour]], to the summit of one of Scotland's most inaccessible mountains. Can the truth be told? Or is it all in stories?

In this story about stories, we revisit bloody battles, poisoned lovers, the folklore of old and the sometimes more [[perfidious]] folklore of accepted truth. In doing so, we each connect with Angus, as he lives the story of his own life.

Seachd: The Inaccessible Pinnacle is probably the most honest, unpretentious and genuinely beautiful film of Scotland ever made. Like Angus, I got slightly annoyed with the pretext of hanging stories on more stories. But, also like Angus, I forgave this once I saw the 'bigger picture.' Forget the box-office pastiche of Braveheart and its like. You might even forego the justly famous dramatisation of The Wicker Man. To see a film that is true to Scotland, this one is probably unique. [[Though]] you maybe meditate on it deeply [[adequately]], you might even re-evaluate the power of storytelling, and the age-old question of whether there are some truths that cannot be told but only experienced. --------------------------------------------- Result 4775 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Finally we have before us a Category III movie for the summer 2006 season. Made of equal parts cruelty, crime and [[passion]], Dog [[Bite]] Dog [[benefits]] not [[merely]] from an apt title, but also flexible direction, [[superb]] cinematography and respectable performances from most involved. Of course there has to be a catch, manifested here in the form of several glaring [[inconsistencies]], [[yet]] all told DBD represents the mature [[spirit]] we'd love to see more of in the HK mainstream.

It also marks the [[heralded]] return of Edison Chen, long absent since the Initial D debacle of a year ago. Chen's reserved machismo does wonders for the movie, yet would have had it rough without opposite Sam Lee, whose knack for alternating between physical comedy (Crazy 'N' the City, No Problem 2) and lunatic menace has culminated in the [[strongest]] role we've seen from him since Made in Hong Kong.

Together, the duo makes Dog Bite Dog, and hopefully Edison's going to get an easier break from now on as a consequence: his touch transformed projects from Princess D to the Infernal Affairs saga, and still he remains a rare occurrence.

Mostly upon commencing, DBD [[showcases]] some [[mesmerizing]] [[imagery]], playing [[gorgeous]] [[tricks]] with light, shadow and [[perspective]]. The soundtrack [[boosts]] this atmospheric effect, adding to the overall unreal mood the film purveys. Much of the resultant combination probably has to do with writer Matt Chow, previously engaged in likewise [[gruesome]] Three Extremes. Dog Bite Dog retains numerous traits recalled from that horror project, namely rundown urbanscapes and a [[pervasive]] air of something eerie lurking round the corner.

Rest [[assured]], though, this isn't a [[horror]] movie, instead following a [[path]] trodden before by classic One Nite in [[Mongkok]], albeit from a miles more [[perverse]] angle. [[Replacing]] [[Daniel]] Wu's [[reluctant]] [[mainland]] assassin [[character]] we have Edison, [[playing]] a [[nameless]] [[killing]] machine [[hailing]] from Cambodia's underworld. Sent [[Hong]] Kong-way to [[execute]] a single [[target]], the [[nearly]] [[silent]] [[assassin]] takes [[care]] of [[business]] [[immediately]] upon arrival, a process chillingly [[depicted]] courtesy of the film's [[brilliant]] visuals.

[[Although]] weaned from [[childhood]] to [[become]] a [[professional]] killer, Edison's eponymous wild [[dog]] [[still]] has human [[weaknesses]] and leaves a trail, picked up on by a CID team sent to investigate. This assembly features a nice cameo by mob-movie stalwart Lam Suet, and good support from TV star Wayne Lai. However, Sam Lee's renegade officer Wai leads the [[charge]], revealing himself to be a highly disturbed individual but excellent cop nonetheless. We gradually learn Wai's inner-conflict stems from his father's police corruption background, evoking demons handy in the relentless pursuit that ensues.

A minor body count transpires, as Edison seems to consider taking prisoners a no-no. There's quite the violence quotient in store, even though gore per se feels toned down in places, and adult language only makes a token appearance. Once more, no nudity, leading one to conclude Cat III's are being handed these days a bit hastily. Still, DBD's a relatively mature theatrical release, and we applaud its arrival.

In between the fighting, stabbing , hacking and shooting, even a career murderer needs some romance, and just like Daniel Wu had Cecilia Cheung in One Nite, so does intrepid Mr. Chen get a sweetheart, done beautifully by new comer Pei Pei. Her unnamed character (lots of anonymity in this one) meets Edison's at a strangely deserted landfill, abused by her father to the point of repulsive madness and yearning for escape. When the killer ditches HK, he agrees to take her with him, and they go on the run [[together]], love blooming en route. While the movie doesn't linger on lovey-dovey stuff, our hearts go out to Pei Pei's tragic character and her endless suffering. She renders the timid but valiant protagonist amazingly well, establishing that there aren't any good or bad guys here, evinced by the highly sobering finale.

Director Cheang Soi's portfolio includes recent suspense thriller Home Sweet Home and Love Battlefield with Eason Chan, two numbers likely surpassed in most accounts by Dog Bite Dog's sinister demeanor. Cheang manages to keep DBD flowing throughout, and considering the many parts in play here, stands up to critical standards erected by people like Johnny To in his watershed nocturnal epic The Mission. A couple of glitches do come about, to wit Edison miraculously shrugging off a shot to the chest, but these are highly forgivable.

Marking triumphant returns for two young, talented performers of the kind Hong Kong needs if we want the city's movie heyday to come back, Dog Bite Dog doesn't stand out for story. Its forte lies in strong portrayals and style, buoyed along on the strength of thespian muscle and a keen eye for visual and auditory finesse.

HK has a long, time-honored tradition of stories to do with the city's nighttime alter-ego, something Dog Bite Dog upholds lovingly, amounting to a solid run if not an outright masterpiece.

Rating: * * * * Finally we have before us a Category III movie for the summer 2006 season. Made of equal parts cruelty, crime and [[fervor]], Dog [[Mouthful]] Dog [[profit]] not [[exclusively]] from an apt title, but also flexible direction, [[excellent]] cinematography and respectable performances from most involved. Of course there has to be a catch, manifested here in the form of several glaring [[absurdities]], [[even]] all told DBD represents the mature [[geist]] we'd love to see more of in the HK mainstream.

It also marks the [[announced]] return of Edison Chen, long absent since the Initial D debacle of a year ago. Chen's reserved machismo does wonders for the movie, yet would have had it rough without opposite Sam Lee, whose knack for alternating between physical comedy (Crazy 'N' the City, No Problem 2) and lunatic menace has culminated in the [[strictest]] role we've seen from him since Made in Hong Kong.

Together, the duo makes Dog Bite Dog, and hopefully Edison's going to get an easier break from now on as a consequence: his touch transformed projects from Princess D to the Infernal Affairs saga, and still he remains a rare occurrence.

Mostly upon commencing, DBD [[showcase]] some [[bewitching]] [[photographs]], playing [[super]] [[ploys]] with light, shadow and [[vistas]]. The soundtrack [[reinforces]] this atmospheric effect, adding to the overall unreal mood the film purveys. Much of the resultant combination probably has to do with writer Matt Chow, previously engaged in likewise [[loathsome]] Three Extremes. Dog Bite Dog retains numerous traits recalled from that horror project, namely rundown urbanscapes and a [[omnipresent]] air of something eerie lurking round the corner.

Rest [[ensuring]], though, this isn't a [[monstrosity]] movie, instead following a [[pathways]] trodden before by classic One Nite in [[Mong]], albeit from a miles more [[perverted]] angle. [[Replacements]] [[Daniela]] Wu's [[hesitant]] [[hinterland]] assassin [[nature]] we have Edison, [[play]] a [[unexplored]] [[manslaughter]] machine [[praising]] from Cambodia's underworld. Sent [[Hk]] Kong-way to [[execution]] a single [[goals]], the [[approximately]] [[mute]] [[killer]] takes [[healthcare]] of [[businesses]] [[promptly]] upon arrival, a process chillingly [[exemplified]] courtesy of the film's [[wondrous]] visuals.

[[Despite]] weaned from [[children]] to [[gotten]] a [[vocational]] killer, Edison's eponymous wild [[hound]] [[however]] has human [[inadequacies]] and leaves a trail, picked up on by a CID team sent to investigate. This assembly features a nice cameo by mob-movie stalwart Lam Suet, and good support from TV star Wayne Lai. However, Sam Lee's renegade officer Wai leads the [[burdens]], revealing himself to be a highly disturbed individual but excellent cop nonetheless. We gradually learn Wai's inner-conflict stems from his father's police corruption background, evoking demons handy in the relentless pursuit that ensues.

A minor body count transpires, as Edison seems to consider taking prisoners a no-no. There's quite the violence quotient in store, even though gore per se feels toned down in places, and adult language only makes a token appearance. Once more, no nudity, leading one to conclude Cat III's are being handed these days a bit hastily. Still, DBD's a relatively mature theatrical release, and we applaud its arrival.

In between the fighting, stabbing , hacking and shooting, even a career murderer needs some romance, and just like Daniel Wu had Cecilia Cheung in One Nite, so does intrepid Mr. Chen get a sweetheart, done beautifully by new comer Pei Pei. Her unnamed character (lots of anonymity in this one) meets Edison's at a strangely deserted landfill, abused by her father to the point of repulsive madness and yearning for escape. When the killer ditches HK, he agrees to take her with him, and they go on the run [[jointly]], love blooming en route. While the movie doesn't linger on lovey-dovey stuff, our hearts go out to Pei Pei's tragic character and her endless suffering. She renders the timid but valiant protagonist amazingly well, establishing that there aren't any good or bad guys here, evinced by the highly sobering finale.

Director Cheang Soi's portfolio includes recent suspense thriller Home Sweet Home and Love Battlefield with Eason Chan, two numbers likely surpassed in most accounts by Dog Bite Dog's sinister demeanor. Cheang manages to keep DBD flowing throughout, and considering the many parts in play here, stands up to critical standards erected by people like Johnny To in his watershed nocturnal epic The Mission. A couple of glitches do come about, to wit Edison miraculously shrugging off a shot to the chest, but these are highly forgivable.

Marking triumphant returns for two young, talented performers of the kind Hong Kong needs if we want the city's movie heyday to come back, Dog Bite Dog doesn't stand out for story. Its forte lies in strong portrayals and style, buoyed along on the strength of thespian muscle and a keen eye for visual and auditory finesse.

HK has a long, time-honored tradition of stories to do with the city's nighttime alter-ego, something Dog Bite Dog upholds lovingly, amounting to a solid run if not an outright masterpiece.

Rating: * * * * --------------------------------------------- Result 4776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It never [[ceases]] to amaze me how you can take an [[excellent]] [[actor]], and put him to waste in a film such as this. [[Robert]] De Niro is one of the [[best]] Hollywood [[stars]] of all time, but even he couldn't [[save]] this movie. In fact, his character is [[much]] the same as the one he [[played]] in [[Cape]] [[Fear]], which was [[actually]] pretty good, but I can't [[stand]] it when actors do the same schtick over more than one [[movie]]. I [[believe]] it gets [[old]], and that is the case here.

There's nothing surprising in this movie, but then, the story has been told a million times before. Wesley Snipes is your typical baseball player, and his [[conceit]] shows through in his characterization. De Niro plays the obsessed fan, but his role in this film is less than entertaining.

However, because De Niro is IN this film, that makes it a draw if you are a fan (no pun intended) who sees everything he does no matter how bad. But to see De Niro at his best, see "Midnight Run", "[[Goodfellas]]", or "Cop Land", or even go way back and check out "Taxi Driver" or "Godfather II". Don't [[waste]] your [[time]] with this [[drivel]].

My Rating: 3/10 It never [[halted]] to amaze me how you can take an [[sumptuous]] [[protagonist]], and put him to waste in a film such as this. [[Roberta]] De Niro is one of the [[better]] Hollywood [[celebrity]] of all time, but even he couldn't [[rescued]] this movie. In fact, his character is [[very]] the same as the one he [[accomplished]] in [[Acme]] [[Afraid]], which was [[indeed]] pretty good, but I can't [[standing]] it when actors do the same schtick over more than one [[filmmaking]]. I [[reckon]] it gets [[vecchio]], and that is the case here.

There's nothing surprising in this movie, but then, the story has been told a million times before. Wesley Snipes is your typical baseball player, and his [[vanity]] shows through in his characterization. De Niro plays the obsessed fan, but his role in this film is less than entertaining.

However, because De Niro is IN this film, that makes it a draw if you are a fan (no pun intended) who sees everything he does no matter how bad. But to see De Niro at his best, see "Midnight Run", "[[Mates]]", or "Cop Land", or even go way back and check out "Taxi Driver" or "Godfather II". Don't [[wastes]] your [[moment]] with this [[whim]].

My Rating: 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4777 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I [[discovered]] this [[film]] after reading the book that inspired it. It is not a strictly biographical [[film]]; it is "loosely based" on the facts. But I [[found]] it a [[compelling]] and [[eerie]] [[exploration]] of evil and [[madness]], and [[Michel]] Serrault gives an [[unforgettable]] performance as Dr. Petiot.

There are [[many]] memorable [[images]] in this movie; Petiot [[traveling]] through the night like a vampire, his [[black]] cloak flapping behind him, is [[almost]] iconic. There are [[also]] [[several]] [[touches]] of expressionism - Petiot's [[crooked]] [[silhouette]] mounting the [[stairs]] [[leading]] from the [[cellar]] where the [[butchered]] [[remains]] of his victims [[await]] [[cremation]], [[reminds]] me of some scenes from 'Nosferatu'.

But I found the primary appeal of this [[movie]] to be [[aural]]. The soundtrack is [[loaded]] with ominous sounds, starting with the foreboding [[music]] of the opening [[credits]], [[accompanied]] by wordless wailing. Petiot [[lives]] and [[runs]] his medical [[practice]] in a [[complex]] with [[many]] [[small]] [[shops]], and there is a [[persistent]] [[background]] noise of knives being sharpened [[somewhere]], as well as a peddler playing eerie [[tunes]] on a saw. There are [[animal]] noises as well - the concierge keeps a [[goat]], [[unseen]] cats [[howl]] - and [[later]] in the film we [[see]] [[hapless]] [[cattle]] being herded through an underpass. The whole [[atmosphere]] is unsettling, with [[overtones]] of violence and [[slaughter]].

Not only [[animals]], but [[human]] [[voices]] are [[often]] [[heard]] - the [[screams]] of Gestapo [[victims]], Petiot's [[patients]] in his waiting [[room]], monitored by a listening device, just the same as the suspected [[collaborators]] after the [[war]] are [[monitored]] in their cells. Even the action of the film is [[often]] [[arranged]] so that we [[hear]] the [[voices]] of the [[participants]] without [[seeing]] them - when Petiot goes to [[see]] [[Mme]] Kern, we [[hear]] her [[singing]] as she [[works]], her [[voice]] echoing in the theater, before we ever [[see]] her. And even when she does appear, she is [[often]] [[filmed]] from [[behind]], her [[voice]] calling out to her husband, whose [[voice]] calls out to her in [[conversation]]. Disembodied [[voices]] echo in [[large]] halls, and their [[owners]], when [[seen]] at all, are [[photographed]] at a distance, so we cannot actually [[see]] them [[speaking]]. This is a ghost [[story]], and these are the [[voices]] of ghosts - [[many]] of them Petiot's [[future]] victims.

[[Yet]] Petiot himself is [[often]] only a voice; his frightening laughter echoes as he retreats from the camera, throwing comments behind him or into the air to nobody. In a way, he is as much a ghost as those he murders. He is always frantically busy, scurrying from appointment to appointment, never at rest. But his [[activity]] is that of a machine - lifeless and imperturbable. It is interesting that among all the horror and danger of occupied Paris, Petiot alone is unafraid; he is amused, enthusiastic, angry, irritated, contemptuous, but never afraid, unlike those real people he lures to their deaths. It is no surprise that he boasts of his mechanical inventions, including a perpetual motion machine (a true detail from the book - he did claim to have invented many machines); he is a sort of perpetual motion machine himself. And mechanical imagery is everywhere in the film, from the opening giant wheel in the movie house, to Petiot's bicycle (with its squeaking wheels echoing the sound of sharpening knives), to the Victrola he keeps winding up to play music before he makes a kill. Even his routine with his victims is mechanical - write a note to your wife, let me disguise you before you leave, you need a vaccination, Barcelona, Casablanca, Dakar - like a well-oiled machine, the routine is always the same, just as the record is always the same.

Maeder, the author, says that it was the clockwork perfection of his crimes that weighed so heavily against Petiot at his trial. His system was as smooth and efficient as a Nazi concentration camp, and this may be why the movie invents a subplot of Petiot's involvement with the French Gestapo and the occupying Nazis. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite work as part of the story, because it's very hard to figure out just what Petiot is doing for the collaborators, or what is going on when he ends up at their headquarters in the middle of the night. Disposing of bodies? Hiding stolen goods? It's hard to say, and harder to believe; it's not likely the state would turn to a freelancer like Petiot.

But it does remind us of the duality of evil people; Petiot is a robber and a murderer, but he is also a devoted father and husband. Just as we learned that Hitler loved dogs, and that Nazis guilty of the worst war crimes could also be loving fathers and family men, so we have to recognize that Petiot could commit unspeakable horrors and yet also function normally. His insanity is easily camouflaged by the insanity and horror of the wartime situation in Paris; when killing, robbing and disappearing are happening all around, nobody pays attention as Petiot tosses more corpses on the pile. I [[uncovered]] this [[movie]] after reading the book that inspired it. It is not a strictly biographical [[cinematic]]; it is "loosely based" on the facts. But I [[unearthed]] it a [[cogent]] and [[freaky]] [[explorer]] of evil and [[insanity]], and [[Mitchell]] Serrault gives an [[memorable]] performance as Dr. Petiot.

There are [[myriad]] memorable [[visuals]] in this movie; Petiot [[trips]] through the night like a vampire, his [[negra]] cloak flapping behind him, is [[hardly]] iconic. There are [[apart]] [[multiple]] [[affects]] of expressionism - Petiot's [[warped]] [[figure]] mounting the [[stairwell]] [[principal]] from the [[basement]] where the [[massacred]] [[leftovers]] of his victims [[awaits]] [[crematorium]], [[reminding]] me of some scenes from 'Nosferatu'.

But I found the primary appeal of this [[film]] to be [[audible]]. The soundtrack is [[burdens]] with ominous sounds, starting with the foreboding [[musician]] of the opening [[credit]], [[accompanying]] by wordless wailing. Petiot [[life]] and [[manages]] his medical [[practicing]] in a [[tricky]] with [[countless]] [[tiny]] [[storing]], and there is a [[chronic]] [[context]] noise of knives being sharpened [[somehow]], as well as a peddler playing eerie [[hymns]] on a saw. There are [[zoo]] noises as well - the concierge keeps a [[goats]], [[invisible]] cats [[scream]] - and [[then]] in the film we [[behold]] [[lamentable]] [[cows]] being herded through an underpass. The whole [[atmospheric]] is unsettling, with [[allusions]] of violence and [[sacrifice]].

Not only [[zoo]], but [[mankind]] [[voice]] are [[routinely]] [[audition]] - the [[yelling]] of Gestapo [[victim]], Petiot's [[patient]] in his waiting [[rooms]], monitored by a listening device, just the same as the suspected [[collaborator]] after the [[warfare]] are [[monitoring]] in their cells. Even the action of the film is [[frequently]] [[organising]] so that we [[heard]] the [[voice]] of the [[attendees]] without [[see]] them - when Petiot goes to [[behold]] [[Ms]] Kern, we [[heard]] her [[sing]] as she [[work]], her [[vowel]] echoing in the theater, before we ever [[consults]] her. And even when she does appear, she is [[habitually]] [[shot]] from [[backside]], her [[vowel]] calling out to her husband, whose [[vocals]] calls out to her in [[schmooze]]. Disembodied [[voice]] echo in [[hefty]] halls, and their [[possessor]], when [[noticed]] at all, are [[pictured]] at a distance, so we cannot actually [[behold]] them [[talking]]. This is a ghost [[histories]], and these are the [[voice]] of ghosts - [[several]] of them Petiot's [[futur]] victims.

[[Though]] Petiot himself is [[generally]] only a voice; his frightening laughter echoes as he retreats from the camera, throwing comments behind him or into the air to nobody. In a way, he is as much a ghost as those he murders. He is always frantically busy, scurrying from appointment to appointment, never at rest. But his [[action]] is that of a machine - lifeless and imperturbable. It is interesting that among all the horror and danger of occupied Paris, Petiot alone is unafraid; he is amused, enthusiastic, angry, irritated, contemptuous, but never afraid, unlike those real people he lures to their deaths. It is no surprise that he boasts of his mechanical inventions, including a perpetual motion machine (a true detail from the book - he did claim to have invented many machines); he is a sort of perpetual motion machine himself. And mechanical imagery is everywhere in the film, from the opening giant wheel in the movie house, to Petiot's bicycle (with its squeaking wheels echoing the sound of sharpening knives), to the Victrola he keeps winding up to play music before he makes a kill. Even his routine with his victims is mechanical - write a note to your wife, let me disguise you before you leave, you need a vaccination, Barcelona, Casablanca, Dakar - like a well-oiled machine, the routine is always the same, just as the record is always the same.

Maeder, the author, says that it was the clockwork perfection of his crimes that weighed so heavily against Petiot at his trial. His system was as smooth and efficient as a Nazi concentration camp, and this may be why the movie invents a subplot of Petiot's involvement with the French Gestapo and the occupying Nazis. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite work as part of the story, because it's very hard to figure out just what Petiot is doing for the collaborators, or what is going on when he ends up at their headquarters in the middle of the night. Disposing of bodies? Hiding stolen goods? It's hard to say, and harder to believe; it's not likely the state would turn to a freelancer like Petiot.

But it does remind us of the duality of evil people; Petiot is a robber and a murderer, but he is also a devoted father and husband. Just as we learned that Hitler loved dogs, and that Nazis guilty of the worst war crimes could also be loving fathers and family men, so we have to recognize that Petiot could commit unspeakable horrors and yet also function normally. His insanity is easily camouflaged by the insanity and horror of the wartime situation in Paris; when killing, robbing and disappearing are happening all around, nobody pays attention as Petiot tosses more corpses on the pile. --------------------------------------------- Result 4778 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] An okay film, with a fine leading [[lady]], but a [[terrible]] leading man. Stephan Jenkins, who plays the husband, is a truly [[bad]] actor. Joyce Hyser, on the other hand, is the movie's [[saving]] grace. She's the best [[actor]] of the bunch.

NOTE* the first comment, by the fellow who heaped praise upon the movie (and, according to his IMDB.com account, has only written ONE review -- and guess for what movie?) is obviously a plant. [[While]] the movie is nicely [[shot]], it's by no means subtle or great or whatever other hypobolic descriptions the reviewer used.

"Art of Revenge" is a fair movie, but it's a big tease. It offers up all manner of sexual situations but never goes through with it. Like watching a Skin Flick on Cinemax, but with all the "naughty bits" edited out.

The film, as a whole, is a bit unfocused and the ending, and much of the third act, is really a big [[mess]]. There's a twist ending, of course, since every movie nowadays finds it necessary to have a twist ending.

A 4 out of 10.

An okay film, with a fine leading [[dame]], but a [[abysmal]] leading man. Stephan Jenkins, who plays the husband, is a truly [[unfavorable]] actor. Joyce Hyser, on the other hand, is the movie's [[saved]] grace. She's the best [[actress]] of the bunch.

NOTE* the first comment, by the fellow who heaped praise upon the movie (and, according to his IMDB.com account, has only written ONE review -- and guess for what movie?) is obviously a plant. [[Whilst]] the movie is nicely [[offed]], it's by no means subtle or great or whatever other hypobolic descriptions the reviewer used.

"Art of Revenge" is a fair movie, but it's a big tease. It offers up all manner of sexual situations but never goes through with it. Like watching a Skin Flick on Cinemax, but with all the "naughty bits" edited out.

The film, as a whole, is a bit unfocused and the ending, and much of the third act, is really a big [[chaos]]. There's a twist ending, of course, since every movie nowadays finds it necessary to have a twist ending.

A 4 out of 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4779 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] If this [[guy]] can make a movie, then I sure as hell can make one too.

In fact, if you [[hire]] me to [[make]] a [[movie]] for you, I promise to do the following:

1) I will [[add]] more naked [[women]]. This movie had [[none]]. I think cheesy B-class horror movies are only rented because of their traditional exploitation of the female body. I wouldn't want to let my [[viewers]] down.

2) I will refrain from making too many scenes where the hero wakes up to find out it's only a dream. I think HorrorVision had about 4 of these scenes. And, considering the movie was only like an hour long, the dream-to-movie-length ratio was quite high. And, if I do decide to do a dream sequence, I will make sure that the person wakes up without clothes on. I mean, who sleeps in leather pants??

3) I will not rip off any movies like Star Wars or the Matrix because I will know that my budget is small and I will not want to mask my contempt for big-budget Hollywood movies by adding satirical references about them in mine.

4) And finally, I will not mix modern technology with the undead. I mean, a palm pilot can only be so scary ... at least they turned it into an evil rolly-polly monster before the screen blew up or something.

So, if you are looking for the above qualities in your next horror production, count on me: wanna-b-movie director extraordinaire. If this [[buddy]] can make a movie, then I sure as hell can make one too.

In fact, if you [[recruitment]] me to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]] for you, I promise to do the following:

1) I will [[summing]] more naked [[femmes]]. This movie had [[nos]]. I think cheesy B-class horror movies are only rented because of their traditional exploitation of the female body. I wouldn't want to let my [[listeners]] down.

2) I will refrain from making too many scenes where the hero wakes up to find out it's only a dream. I think HorrorVision had about 4 of these scenes. And, considering the movie was only like an hour long, the dream-to-movie-length ratio was quite high. And, if I do decide to do a dream sequence, I will make sure that the person wakes up without clothes on. I mean, who sleeps in leather pants??

3) I will not rip off any movies like Star Wars or the Matrix because I will know that my budget is small and I will not want to mask my contempt for big-budget Hollywood movies by adding satirical references about them in mine.

4) And finally, I will not mix modern technology with the undead. I mean, a palm pilot can only be so scary ... at least they turned it into an evil rolly-polly monster before the screen blew up or something.

So, if you are looking for the above qualities in your next horror production, count on me: wanna-b-movie director extraordinaire. --------------------------------------------- Result 4780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] One-note comedy that [[probably]] sets modern day feminists' teeth on edge. [[Department]] [[store]] clerk [[Betsy]] Drake is in love with the [[idea]] of [[babies]] and [[marriage]], pinning her [[hopes]] on women's [[magazines]] until she spies super-bait in the form of sleek [[bachelor]] [[Cary]] Grant. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] plods from one ploy to the next as the relentless Drake pursues her quarry. I guess the word "perky" just about sum's up Drake's approach to the role. She does have a charming smile, but after 20 minutes of memorizing her [[dentures]], I [[began]] to [[overdose]]. Grant's role is basically secondary and minus his [[usual]] flair. There is one scene, however, that almost salvages this [[slender]] [[exercise]]. Drake queries the hapless [[Grant]] following his [[lecture]] to a roomful of [[respectable]] ladies. Here her perky manner has an unforced freshness that is [[really]] [[quite]] remarkable, and had the production not rubbed our noses in that upbeat [[grin]] for 90 minutes, the [[film]] might have [[amounted]] to more than a girls' camp day-dream, [[circa]] 1948. One-note comedy that [[indubitably]] sets modern day feminists' teeth on edge. [[Ministries]] [[storehouse]] clerk [[Betsey]] Drake is in love with the [[thinks]] of [[bebe]] and [[matrimony]], pinning her [[expect]] on women's [[magazine]] until she spies super-bait in the form of sleek [[baccalaureate]] [[Carrey]] Grant. The [[roosting]] of the [[films]] plods from one ploy to the next as the relentless Drake pursues her quarry. I guess the word "perky" just about sum's up Drake's approach to the role. She does have a charming smile, but after 20 minutes of memorizing her [[dental]], I [[started]] to [[od]]. Grant's role is basically secondary and minus his [[routine]] flair. There is one scene, however, that almost salvages this [[delgado]] [[practise]]. Drake queries the hapless [[Grants]] following his [[lectures]] to a roomful of [[honorable]] ladies. Here her perky manner has an unforced freshness that is [[truthfully]] [[abundantly]] remarkable, and had the production not rubbed our noses in that upbeat [[smiles]] for 90 minutes, the [[filmmaking]] might have [[totaled]] to more than a girls' camp day-dream, [[towards]] 1948. --------------------------------------------- Result 4781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was pleased with the cast of reputable players. The story is one of standing up for a cause, even if you are at personal risk in doing so. In a time where violence and pain are often in the movie forefront, this movie focuses on the old fashioned good cop. Although similar plots have been done repeatedly, these guys pull it off well. Kick back and enjoy. Dennehy is a master of taking over a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4782 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably New Zealands worst Movie ever made

The Jokes They are not funny. Used from other movies & just plain corny The acting Is bad even though there is a great cast

The story is Uninteresting & Boring Has more cheese then pizza huts cheese lovers pizza kind of like the acting Has been do 1,000 times before

I watched this when it came on TV but was so boring could only stand 30 minutes of it.

This movie sucks

Do not watch it,

Watch paint dry instead --------------------------------------------- Result 4783 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Considering that I felt like picking up a new Jet Li film to see some but kicking and brainless hand to hand fighting, I grabbed this title.

Unfortunatly, this movie contains more gun battles (ala Chow Yun Fat but nowhere near as good), than Jet Li and company's acrobatic fighting. Thus it was a let down.

The faucet fighting was interesting and even funny, considering this was something totaly unexpected in a Jet Li film for me, more on the line of say Jackie Chan.

But alas I'd recommend Fist of Legend, Tai Chi Master, or even the Enforcer over this dissapointment.

Rating 4 for martial arts Rating 3 for overall movie score --------------------------------------------- Result 4784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is Not a [[Love]] Song.

My one word summary of this film would be `Excellent'.

It [[probably]] won't appeal to the mass movie [[watching]] public – it's a

[[film]] that [[forces]] you to participate. You observe, think, and [[question]].

[[Comparisons]] could be made with Deliverance (Topic/Theme) and

[[perhaps]] with The Blair Witch Project for overall filming style.

[[However]] this film stands [[unique]] against both.

The cinematography effects (solarisation, freeze frame, blur etc)

have been seen before but they are used most effectively in this

film to underpin the natural tension of the story.

Acting is raw, menacing and utterly believable.

The [[real]] theme of the film is about [[friendship]]; the title really [[gives]]

the game away. It's [[probably]] not the kind of friendship that most of

us have experienced or indeed would want to.

It is a love song. This is Not a [[Adored]] Song.

My one word summary of this film would be `Excellent'.

It [[presumably]] won't appeal to the mass movie [[staring]] public – it's a

[[movie]] that [[troop]] you to participate. You observe, think, and [[issue]].

[[Compare]] could be made with Deliverance (Topic/Theme) and

[[presumably]] with The Blair Witch Project for overall filming style.

[[Still]] this film stands [[sole]] against both.

The cinematography effects (solarisation, freeze frame, blur etc)

have been seen before but they are used most effectively in this

film to underpin the natural tension of the story.

Acting is raw, menacing and utterly believable.

The [[actual]] theme of the film is about [[goodwill]]; the title really [[delivers]]

the game away. It's [[certainly]] not the kind of friendship that most of

us have experienced or indeed would want to.

It is a love song. --------------------------------------------- Result 4785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[film]] is [[wonderful]] in [[every]] [[way]] that modern action adventures are not. Take some time. Relax, enjoy. Think. People who see this [[movie]] as slow or plodding or dull really need to take a week off and watch it several times until their short attention span mind comes to grips with the possibility of being involved with a cause or even beautiful story in a [[beautiful]] [[place]] for no other reason than because it isn't hurrying to make the points you so emphatically [[need]] it to make in the short time alloted. At first I was apprehensive of Brosnan playing a native American. Given the story line though, I think it was apt casting. Now, back to my hermiting. -Jahfre This [[cinematography]] is [[wondrous]] in [[any]] [[routes]] that modern action adventures are not. Take some time. Relax, enjoy. Think. People who see this [[movies]] as slow or plodding or dull really need to take a week off and watch it several times until their short attention span mind comes to grips with the possibility of being involved with a cause or even beautiful story in a [[wondrous]] [[placing]] for no other reason than because it isn't hurrying to make the points you so emphatically [[requisite]] it to make in the short time alloted. At first I was apprehensive of Brosnan playing a native American. Given the story line though, I think it was apt casting. Now, back to my hermiting. -Jahfre --------------------------------------------- Result 4786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Love Trap is not a short, it's quite obviously a full length feature film with a running time of 105 minutes.

While I'm writing this, I might as well talk a bit more about Love Trap. I'm frequently asked what makes Love Trap different... this is how I respond to that question: 1) It introduces characters - one in particular - that have never been seen before in film, period.

2) It reveals more truth about love, and delves more deeply into the very concept of love, than any other U.S. film ever made, in my humble opinion.

3) Structurally, as in the way the story is told, it is unlike any love story you've ever seen.

4) It offers extremely timely insights on various cultural issues, both within and outside the Black community.

Over time, people will come to see Love Trap as about as wholly an original work as possible in this era, delightfully refreshing, authentic and honest. It is a rare morality play full of food for thought.

Please visit www.lovetrapmovie.com for complete and accurate info about this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is about the unlikely friendship between a businessman and a man with Down Syndrome.

The character development in this film is excellent. We get to believe that Harry is a businessman who neglects his family, and Georges is an innocent man who craves loving and care from the "normal" society. Acting is excellent, and the Cannes best actor award is well deserved.

The fantasy scenes in the film highlights the fact that Georges misery towards his abandonment by his family, and his desire to be treated like a normal person. The song that gets played repeatedly also reinforces this message. The film shows that people who are mentally handicapped are good natured. We have been treating them with discrimination and neglect, a fact that is highlighted by the scene where Georges gives a present to the waitress in the kitchen). If we get to understand and share these people's world, both we and the mentally handicapped can become very happy.

I was so drawn into the film and the characters' emotional experiences. It is a touching film for good natured souls. --------------------------------------------- Result 4788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'm a big fan of films where people get conned, and House of Games is [[almost]] the [[pinnacle]] of the '[[films]] where people [[get]] conned' genre. In short, it's an [[exceptional]] thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat by providing interesting characters with [[many]] [[levels]], and never truly revealing what's happening, while throwing in [[many]] [[twists]] and [[surprises]] to upset [[completely]] what you've just [[seen]]. The [[film]] cons the audience on [[many]] occasions, and despite us [[knowing]] this; it's still difficult to [[guess]] where it's going, and every [[twist]] comes off as a [[surprise]]. As [[mentioned]], I'm a [[big]] fan of [[cons]] in [[movies]] and the plot of this one follows a female [[psychiatrist]] who [[receives]] a patient with a huge debt owed to a fellow [[gambler]]. She then goes to the [[gambler]] in an [[attempt]] to [[help]] out her [[patient]], and on the [[way]] [[gets]] [[drawn]] into the art of reading people in [[order]] to [[pull]] off a con.

[[House]] of Games breathes a sleazy [[atmosphere]] throughout, and David Mamet does well in [[establishing]] his film's [[setting]] in the underground levels of the [[city]]. The [[film]] is well acted [[also]], with all concerned bringing [[life]] and believability to their [[characters]] with the [[greatest]] of [[skill]]. Joe Mantegna stars as the con [[man]] at the heart of the [[film]], and [[although]] his performance is a [[little]] under wrought, he's [[always]] [[solid]] and believable as the villain of the [[piece]]. Lindsay Crouse [[stars]] alongside him as the [[psychiatrist]] seduced by his [[work]], and again is [[believable]] in her role. She may not be the [[greatest]] looker, but at least she can act. The [[way]] that the film executes it's plot is the [[main]] star of the show, however, and you will no doubt be amazed on multiple occasions as to how the film constantly manages to amaze and deceive the viewer. At times it's [[almost]] like we are in the thick of the action and being [[conned]] by the con men in the film. Another thing that's [[great]] about this [[film]] is the way that it shows the audience how to pull off certain cons, which is useful if you're interested in making twenty bucks, say. All in all, [[House]] of Games is a [[truly]] [[first]] [[rate]] thrill ride. I'm a big fan of films where people get conned, and House of Games is [[approximately]] the [[climax]] of the '[[kino]] where people [[gets]] conned' genre. In short, it's an [[wondrous]] thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat by providing interesting characters with [[countless]] [[grades]], and never truly revealing what's happening, while throwing in [[various]] [[kinks]] and [[stuns]] to upset [[entirely]] what you've just [[watched]]. The [[cinematography]] cons the audience on [[various]] occasions, and despite us [[mindful]] this; it's still difficult to [[reckon]] where it's going, and every [[twisting]] comes off as a [[amaze]]. As [[quoted]], I'm a [[enormous]] fan of [[jerks]] in [[films]] and the plot of this one follows a female [[therapist]] who [[gets]] a patient with a huge debt owed to a fellow [[hotshot]]. She then goes to the [[gamer]] in an [[endeavour]] to [[helps]] out her [[patients]], and on the [[route]] [[get]] [[lured]] into the art of reading people in [[orders]] to [[pulls]] off a con.

[[Residential]] of Games breathes a sleazy [[mood]] throughout, and David Mamet does well in [[creating]] his film's [[configure]] in the underground levels of the [[town]]. The [[cinematography]] is well acted [[further]], with all concerned bringing [[iife]] and believability to their [[characteristics]] with the [[greater]] of [[expertise]]. Joe Mantegna stars as the con [[men]] at the heart of the [[cinema]], and [[while]] his performance is a [[tiny]] under wrought, he's [[repeatedly]] [[robust]] and believable as the villain of the [[slice]]. Lindsay Crouse [[celebrity]] alongside him as the [[therapist]] seduced by his [[jobs]], and again is [[reliable]] in her role. She may not be the [[largest]] looker, but at least she can act. The [[pathway]] that the film executes it's plot is the [[principal]] star of the show, however, and you will no doubt be amazed on multiple occasions as to how the film constantly manages to amaze and deceive the viewer. At times it's [[approximately]] like we are in the thick of the action and being [[screwed]] by the con men in the film. Another thing that's [[huge]] about this [[cinematic]] is the way that it shows the audience how to pull off certain cons, which is useful if you're interested in making twenty bucks, say. All in all, [[Households]] of Games is a [[really]] [[frst]] [[rates]] thrill ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 4789 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Would anyone really watch this RUBBISH if it didn't contain little children running around nude? From a cinematic point of view it is probably one of the worst films I have encountered absolutely dire. Some perv woke up one day and thought I will make a film with little girls in and call it art, stick them in countryside and there isn't any need for a story or explanation of how they got there or why they don't appear to live anywhere or have parents because p*rn films don't need anything like that. I would comment on the rest of the film but I haven't ticked spoilers so I will just say avoid, avoid avoid and find yourself a proper film to watch --------------------------------------------- Result 4790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i know technically this isn't the greatest TV show ever,i mean it was shot on video and its limitations show in both the audio and visual aspect of it.the acting can at time be also a little crumby.but,i love this show so much.it scared the hell out of me when it first aired in 1988.of course it would i was 5 years old.but i recently purchased the DVD of the first 3 episodes,which unfortunately i hear is now deleted.and i also heard warner's aren't going to release any more due to the first DVD's bad sales.also the TV show didn't have the same feel as the movies,in fact i thought it had a more sinister tone.even though the colour palette is similar to nightmare on elm street 4(both that film and the TV show were made the same year),this has more of a serious tone whereas the fims were progressively getting more and more sardonic and jokey.not a bad thing,i like freddy as the clown wise cracker.but i think that was the strenght of this TV show,you didn't have freddy popping up every minutes cracking a joke before and after he kills somebody.in fact this has more of a dream feel to it,reinforced by the soft focus of the lense.im not sure if its deliberate on the part of the shows creators or just to the limitations of being shot on video. i love this show,and taken not as a companion piece to the movies can be very enjoyable.much better than anything on TV today. --------------------------------------------- Result 4791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the worst films I've seen in years!! You could randomly pluck 5 people off the streets and they could act better than anyone in this film. Absolute waste of time watching it. I only gave it a 2 as I like gory films but this is just plain rubbish. The acting (and I use that term VERY loosely) is abysmal, someone please tell me that the 5 main actors in this were making their first ever film?? Don't waste your time watching this. Hostel was a better film by some way. I cannot believe that someone has spent money making this, I hope for the producers sake it only cost $50,000 to make - it looks like a school project, made by kids who haven't got a clue. Did this even make it to the cinema?? --------------------------------------------- Result 4792 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] A [[documentary]] without a [[loss]] for [[words]]... ever...

Let us [[assume]] that the narration is more than a [[spoof]], let us assume it is a [[commentary]] on Japanese [[society]]. And as this [[film]] is as [[fast]] paced an absurdist [[documentary]] as they [[come]], the [[constant]] wordplay, as [[fast]] is it goes, and as poorly [[translated]] as it is-- in its [[current]] festival screener version as seen [[tonight]] at the Copenhagen Cinematek-- It is still [[quite]] [[enjoyable]].

But for the patient, and [[ONLY]] the [[truly]] [[patient]] and open-minded, I'm talking to you Jim Jarmusch fans with [[ADD]] relapses, I [[believe]] this is a [[film]] for you. It's an [[intelligent]] [[film]] if you [[allow]] it to [[win]] you over.

[[Quite]] [[beautiful]], and [[quite]] [[kitsch]], and [[quite]] Japanese sub-culture. And [[quite]] [[experimental]]. Static 2D in a 3D [[world]]. [[All]] in all, [[Fun]] for those that [[want]] to [[see]] a Japanese [[film]] that spoofs Japanese food [[culture]]. A [[thumbs]] up if you're in the mood for something [[completely]] [[different]]. A [[literature]] without a [[losing]] for [[mots]]... ever...

Let us [[suppose]] that the narration is more than a [[simulate]], let us assume it is a [[comment]] on Japanese [[societies]]. And as this [[cinematography]] is as [[promptly]] paced an absurdist [[literature]] as they [[arrived]], the [[continual]] wordplay, as [[prompt]] is it goes, and as poorly [[translating]] as it is-- in its [[underway]] festival screener version as seen [[sunday]] at the Copenhagen Cinematek-- It is still [[rather]] [[nice]].

But for the patient, and [[JUST]] the [[honestly]] [[ailing]] and open-minded, I'm talking to you Jim Jarmusch fans with [[ADDS]] relapses, I [[think]] this is a [[movies]] for you. It's an [[smarter]] [[movies]] if you [[enabled]] it to [[earn]] you over.

[[Pretty]] [[leggy]], and [[perfectly]] [[kitschy]], and [[very]] Japanese sub-culture. And [[altogether]] [[experiment]]. Static 2D in a 3D [[globe]]. [[Everything]] in all, [[Amusing]] for those that [[wanted]] to [[consults]] a Japanese [[flick]] that spoofs Japanese food [[civilisations]]. A [[inches]] up if you're in the mood for something [[abundantly]] [[multiple]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4793 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Great]] documentary about the [[lives]] of NY firefighters during the [[worst]] terrorist attack of all time.. That reason [[alone]] is why this should be a [[must]] [[see]] collectors [[item]].. What shocked me was not only the [[attacks]], but the"[[High]] Fat [[Diet]]" and [[physical]] appearance of some of these [[firefighters]]. I [[think]] a lot of Doctors would agree with me that,in the [[physical]] shape they were in, some of these firefighters [[would]] [[NOT]] of [[made]] it to the 79th floor [[carrying]] over 60 [[lbs]] of gear. Having said that i now have a [[greater]] [[respect]] for firefighters and i [[realize]] [[becoming]] a firefighter is a [[life]] [[altering]] job. The [[French]] have a [[history]] of making great documentary's and that is what this is, a [[Great]] Documentary..... [[Awesome]] documentary about the [[iife]] of NY firefighters during the [[lousiest]] terrorist attack of all time.. That reason [[lonely]] is why this should be a [[ought]] [[seeing]] collectors [[topics]].. What shocked me was not only the [[aggressions]], but the"[[Supremo]] Fat [[Nutritional]]" and [[corporal]] appearance of some of these [[firefighter]]. I [[thinks]] a lot of Doctors would agree with me that,in the [[bodily]] shape they were in, some of these firefighters [[should]] [[NO]] of [[accomplished]] it to the 79th floor [[transporting]] over 60 [[lb]] of gear. Having said that i now have a [[enhanced]] [[respecting]] for firefighters and i [[attaining]] [[becomes]] a firefighter is a [[vie]] [[modifying]] job. The [[Frenchman]] have a [[histories]] of making great documentary's and that is what this is, a [[Wondrous]] Documentary..... --------------------------------------------- Result 4794 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] WARNING: [[POSSIBLE]] [[SPOILERS]] (but not really - keep reading). Ahhh, there are so [[many]] [[reasons]] to [[become]] [[utterly]] addicted to this spoof gem that I won't have room to [[list]] them all. The [[opening]] credits set the playful scene with kitsch late 1950s cartoon stills; an [[enchanting]] [[Peres]] 'Prez' Prado mambo theme which [[appears]] to be curiously uncredited (but his grunts are unmistakable, and no-one else did them); and with familiar cast names, including Kathy Najimi a full year before she hit with Sister Acts 1 & 2 plus Teri Hatcher from TV's Superman.

Every scene is [[imbued]] with shallow [[injustices]] flung at various actors, actresses and producers in daytime TV. [[Peeking]] behind the careers of these people is all just an [[excuse]] for an old-fashioned, [[delicious]] [[farce]]. Robert Harling penned this riotous spoof that plays like an issue of MAD Magazine, but feels like a gift to us in the audience. Some of the cliched characters are a bit dim, but everyone is drizzling with high jealousy, especially against Celeste Talbert (Sally Field) who is the show's perennial award-winning lead, nicknamed "America's Sweetheart". The daytime Emmies-like awards opening does introduce us to Celeste's show, The Sun Also Sets. Against all vain fears to the contrary, Celeste wins again. She is overjoyed, because it's always "such a genuine thrill": "Adam, did you watch? I won! Well, nguh..." The reason for Adam's absence soon becomes the justification for the entire plot, and we're instantly off on a trip with Celeste's neuroses. She cries, [[screeches]], and wrings her hands though the rest of the movie while her [[dresser]] Tawnee (Kathy Najimi, constantly waddling after Celeste, unseen through Celeste's fog of paranoia) indulges a [[taste]] for Tammy Faye Baker, for which Tawnee had been in fact specifically hired.

Rosie Schwartz (Whoopi [[Goldberg]]) has seen it all before. She is the head writer of the show, and she and Celeste have been excellent support networks to each other for 15 years. So when Celeste freaks, Rosie offers to write her off the show for six months: "We'll just say that Maggie went to visit with the Dalai Lama." But Celeste has doubts: "I thought that the Dalai Lama moved to LA." "-Well, then, some other lama, Fernando Lamas, come on!". Such a skewering line must be rather affronting to still living beefcake actor Lorenzo Lamas, son of aforementioned Fernando Lamas (d. 1982).

Those who can remember the economics teacher (Ben Stein) in Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) as he deadeningly calls the roll ("Bueller. Bueller. Bueller"), will take secret pleasure from seeing him again as a nitwit writer. Other well hidden member of the cast include Garry Marshall (in real life Mr Happy Days and brother of Penny), who "gets paid $1.2 million to make the command decisions" on The Sun Also Sets - he says he definitely likes "peppy and cheap"; and Carrie Fisher as Betsy Faye Sharon, who's "a bitch".

Geoffrey Anderson (Kevin Kline) is the "yummy-with-a-spoon" (and he is, by the way) dinner theater actor now rescued from his Hell by David Seaton Barnes (Robert Downey Jr), and brought back to the same show he was canned from 20 years earlier. Of course this presents some logical challenges for the current scriptwriters because his character, Rod Randall, was supposed to have been decapitated all those years ago. Somehow they work out the logical difficulties, and Geoffrey Anderson steps off the choo-choo.

Celeste can now only get worse, and her trick of going across the Washington bridge no longer helps. First, her hands shake as she tries to put on mascara, but she soon degenerates into a stalker. Unfortunately, she cannot get rid of Geoffrey Anderson so easily. Geoffrey's been promised development of his one-man play about Hamlet, and he means to hold the producer to that promise. "I'm not going back to Florida no-how!", argues Geoffrey. "You try playing Willie Loman in front of a bunch of old farts eating meatloaf !" And indeed, seeing Geoffrey's dinner theater lifestyle amongst all the hocking and accidents is hilarious. Back in Florida in his Willie Loman fat suit in his room, Geoffrey Anderson used to chafe at being called to stage as "Mr Loman". He was forced to splat whatever cockroaches crawled across his TV with a shoe, and to use pliers instead of the broken analog channel changer. Now he find himself as the yummy surgeon dating Laurie Craven, the show's new ingenue; so he's not leaving.

Beautiful Elizabeth Shue (as Laurie) rounds out the amazing ensemble cast who all do the fantastic job of those who know the stereotypes all too well. But, of course, the course to true love never did run smoothly. Montana Moorehead (Cathy Moriarty) is getting impatient waiting for her star to rise, and is getting desperate for some publicity.

Will her plots finally succeed? Will Celeste settle her nerves, or will she kill Tawnee first? Will the producer get Mr Fuzzy? -You'll just have to watch * the second half * of this utterly lovable, farcically malicious riot.

And you'll really have to see to believe how the short-sighted Geoffrey reads his lines without glasses live off the TelePrompter. If you are not in stitches with stomach-heaving laughter and tears pouring down your face, feel free to demand your money back for the video rental. Soapdish (1991) is an unmissable gem that you will need to see again and again, because it's not often that a movie can deliver so amply with so many hilarious lines. This is very well-crafted humor, almost all of it in the writing. A draw with Blazing Saddles (1974) for uproarious apoplexy value, although otherwise dissimilar. Watch it and weep. A happy source for anyone's video addiction. 10 out of 10. WARNING: [[PROBABLE]] [[VANDALS]] (but not really - keep reading). Ahhh, there are so [[several]] [[motivation]] to [[gotten]] [[downright]] addicted to this spoof gem that I won't have room to [[listings]] them all. The [[initiation]] credits set the playful scene with kitsch late 1950s cartoon stills; an [[charmer]] [[Pires]] 'Prez' Prado mambo theme which [[emerges]] to be curiously uncredited (but his grunts are unmistakable, and no-one else did them); and with familiar cast names, including Kathy Najimi a full year before she hit with Sister Acts 1 & 2 plus Teri Hatcher from TV's Superman.

Every scene is [[steeped]] with shallow [[inequities]] flung at various actors, actresses and producers in daytime TV. [[Peeked]] behind the careers of these people is all just an [[apologize]] for an old-fashioned, [[delectable]] [[jest]]. Robert Harling penned this riotous spoof that plays like an issue of MAD Magazine, but feels like a gift to us in the audience. Some of the cliched characters are a bit dim, but everyone is drizzling with high jealousy, especially against Celeste Talbert (Sally Field) who is the show's perennial award-winning lead, nicknamed "America's Sweetheart". The daytime Emmies-like awards opening does introduce us to Celeste's show, The Sun Also Sets. Against all vain fears to the contrary, Celeste wins again. She is overjoyed, because it's always "such a genuine thrill": "Adam, did you watch? I won! Well, nguh..." The reason for Adam's absence soon becomes the justification for the entire plot, and we're instantly off on a trip with Celeste's neuroses. She cries, [[yelps]], and wrings her hands though the rest of the movie while her [[drawer]] Tawnee (Kathy Najimi, constantly waddling after Celeste, unseen through Celeste's fog of paranoia) indulges a [[tasting]] for Tammy Faye Baker, for which Tawnee had been in fact specifically hired.

Rosie Schwartz (Whoopi [[Tucker]]) has seen it all before. She is the head writer of the show, and she and Celeste have been excellent support networks to each other for 15 years. So when Celeste freaks, Rosie offers to write her off the show for six months: "We'll just say that Maggie went to visit with the Dalai Lama." But Celeste has doubts: "I thought that the Dalai Lama moved to LA." "-Well, then, some other lama, Fernando Lamas, come on!". Such a skewering line must be rather affronting to still living beefcake actor Lorenzo Lamas, son of aforementioned Fernando Lamas (d. 1982).

Those who can remember the economics teacher (Ben Stein) in Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) as he deadeningly calls the roll ("Bueller. Bueller. Bueller"), will take secret pleasure from seeing him again as a nitwit writer. Other well hidden member of the cast include Garry Marshall (in real life Mr Happy Days and brother of Penny), who "gets paid $1.2 million to make the command decisions" on The Sun Also Sets - he says he definitely likes "peppy and cheap"; and Carrie Fisher as Betsy Faye Sharon, who's "a bitch".

Geoffrey Anderson (Kevin Kline) is the "yummy-with-a-spoon" (and he is, by the way) dinner theater actor now rescued from his Hell by David Seaton Barnes (Robert Downey Jr), and brought back to the same show he was canned from 20 years earlier. Of course this presents some logical challenges for the current scriptwriters because his character, Rod Randall, was supposed to have been decapitated all those years ago. Somehow they work out the logical difficulties, and Geoffrey Anderson steps off the choo-choo.

Celeste can now only get worse, and her trick of going across the Washington bridge no longer helps. First, her hands shake as she tries to put on mascara, but she soon degenerates into a stalker. Unfortunately, she cannot get rid of Geoffrey Anderson so easily. Geoffrey's been promised development of his one-man play about Hamlet, and he means to hold the producer to that promise. "I'm not going back to Florida no-how!", argues Geoffrey. "You try playing Willie Loman in front of a bunch of old farts eating meatloaf !" And indeed, seeing Geoffrey's dinner theater lifestyle amongst all the hocking and accidents is hilarious. Back in Florida in his Willie Loman fat suit in his room, Geoffrey Anderson used to chafe at being called to stage as "Mr Loman". He was forced to splat whatever cockroaches crawled across his TV with a shoe, and to use pliers instead of the broken analog channel changer. Now he find himself as the yummy surgeon dating Laurie Craven, the show's new ingenue; so he's not leaving.

Beautiful Elizabeth Shue (as Laurie) rounds out the amazing ensemble cast who all do the fantastic job of those who know the stereotypes all too well. But, of course, the course to true love never did run smoothly. Montana Moorehead (Cathy Moriarty) is getting impatient waiting for her star to rise, and is getting desperate for some publicity.

Will her plots finally succeed? Will Celeste settle her nerves, or will she kill Tawnee first? Will the producer get Mr Fuzzy? -You'll just have to watch * the second half * of this utterly lovable, farcically malicious riot.

And you'll really have to see to believe how the short-sighted Geoffrey reads his lines without glasses live off the TelePrompter. If you are not in stitches with stomach-heaving laughter and tears pouring down your face, feel free to demand your money back for the video rental. Soapdish (1991) is an unmissable gem that you will need to see again and again, because it's not often that a movie can deliver so amply with so many hilarious lines. This is very well-crafted humor, almost all of it in the writing. A draw with Blazing Saddles (1974) for uproarious apoplexy value, although otherwise dissimilar. Watch it and weep. A happy source for anyone's video addiction. 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Richard Dreyfuss stars in "Moon Over Parador," a 1988 Paul Mazursky film also starring Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, Jonathan Winters and Charo. Dreyfuss plays a New York actor, Jonathan Nolan, in the Caribbean country of Parador to make a film. When the dictator dies suddenly, the Secret Police Chief (Julia) who is the one actually controlling the dictator and the country, drafts Jonathan to play the dictator, having noticed the resemblance between them. Soon Jonathan is ensconced in the palace as Alphonse Simms, and Simms' prostitute girlfriend Madonna (Braga) who realizes the switch promises to help him in any way she can.

Mazursky, who appears in drag as Simms' mother, gives us a look at how the CIA operates in third world countries. The Winters character, supposedly a salesman, is actually a CIA operative. The film, however, flirts with but doesn't really tread on very serious ground and is more of a send-up, and a funny one at that.

Richard Dreyfuss does a fabulous job as Jonathan the actor and Alphonse the dictator, creating two separate characters and nailing both. The gorgeous Sonia Braga is great as Madonna, and Raul Julia hands in a wickedly funny performance as Strausmann, the man behind the dictator. It's one of those performances where you never quite know what the character is thinking - he can be pleasant or turn psycho at any moment. Charo is on hand as a maid and manages to be funny and unobtrusive at the same time.

A very good film, not a big blockbuster, but very entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 4796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] "Washington Square" is a flat, [[shabby]] [[adaptation]] of the short novel by Henry James. Indeed, the [[novel]] is very good, but far from the level of James' masterpieces. Moreover its simple, eventless story seems unsuited to make it into a film (although [[William]] Wyler, with his "The [[Heiress]]", gave in 1949 a beautiful version of the novel).

Anyway, the [[movie]] [[completely]] betrays the [[spirit]] of this work of the great American [[writer]]. In the novel, the heroine Catherine is shy, not very attractive and somewhat clumsy, but nonetheless she is a sound, intelligent young woman, and she's not as naive as it may seem. Her attachment for her [[father]] is dignified and respectful, with no morbid sides in it. Along three quarters of the movie, Catherine (Jennifer Jason Leigh) just seems to be mentally [[retarded]], poor thing. In the last quarter, she suddenly (and incredibly) becomes intelligent, aware of her dignity as a woman, and all that.

The director Agnieszka [[Holland]] has added two vulgar scenes to the story. The first, when the nervous child Catherine has, well, troubles with her vesica. The second scene, when we see on the background a sort of open-air brothel, with prostitutes taking their customers behind tents, and so on. Nothing could be more contrary to the spirit and artistic ideals of Henry James. It is notorious that the writer was extremely decent and demure even for the standards of the Victorian age. I [[defy]] anyone to find any coarseness anywhere in the thousands of pages of James' huge literary production. I really was particularly [[annoyed]] by these two scenes.

Yes, I know that a director needs reasonable freedom in the screen adaptation of a novel. But if a director utterly ignores or misunderstands the art of an author (here Henry James), I don't see the point of using his work to make a [[bad]] [[movie]].

The acting is adequate to the movie: poor and flat, in spite of the talent of Albert Finney and Maggie Smith. "Washington Square" is definitely a non-recommendable film. "Washington Square" is a flat, [[seedy]] [[adjustments]] of the short novel by Henry James. Indeed, the [[newer]] is very good, but far from the level of James' masterpieces. Moreover its simple, eventless story seems unsuited to make it into a film (although [[Wilhelm]] Wyler, with his "The [[Heir]]", gave in 1949 a beautiful version of the novel).

Anyway, the [[filmmaking]] [[fully]] betrays the [[geist]] of this work of the great American [[novelist]]. In the novel, the heroine Catherine is shy, not very attractive and somewhat clumsy, but nonetheless she is a sound, intelligent young woman, and she's not as naive as it may seem. Her attachment for her [[pere]] is dignified and respectful, with no morbid sides in it. Along three quarters of the movie, Catherine (Jennifer Jason Leigh) just seems to be mentally [[retard]], poor thing. In the last quarter, she suddenly (and incredibly) becomes intelligent, aware of her dignity as a woman, and all that.

The director Agnieszka [[Netherlands]] has added two vulgar scenes to the story. The first, when the nervous child Catherine has, well, troubles with her vesica. The second scene, when we see on the background a sort of open-air brothel, with prostitutes taking their customers behind tents, and so on. Nothing could be more contrary to the spirit and artistic ideals of Henry James. It is notorious that the writer was extremely decent and demure even for the standards of the Victorian age. I [[defiant]] anyone to find any coarseness anywhere in the thousands of pages of James' huge literary production. I really was particularly [[outraged]] by these two scenes.

Yes, I know that a director needs reasonable freedom in the screen adaptation of a novel. But if a director utterly ignores or misunderstands the art of an author (here Henry James), I don't see the point of using his work to make a [[negative]] [[filmmaking]].

The acting is adequate to the movie: poor and flat, in spite of the talent of Albert Finney and Maggie Smith. "Washington Square" is definitely a non-recommendable film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4797 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Reading web [[sites]] on Bette Davis one can find instances where authors claim that there is nothing special about her acting. I even found a site which claimed that Bette Davis' success was probably due to her luck. But Ms Davis films of 1934 tell quite the opposite. The most evident example are two films that she did only few weeks apart: Fog over Frisco and On Human Bondage. [[Characters]] she played in these movies, though both being [[negative]], are quite different. Arlene in the former is a [[beautiful]], [[glamorous]] and frivolous heiress and [[much]] more [[likable]] [[character]] than Mildred in the latter, which is a pale, uneducated and [[impudent]] Cockney [[waitress]]. Needless to [[say]] that [[Ms]] Davis played both [[characters]] very [[authentic]] and with the same [[enthusiasm]]. But even that is not all. The point is that the former role, which would be wished by most actresses of the day, was the one she was forced to play. The [[latter]] role, which seemed to most [[actresses]] as undesirable, career destroying role, was the one she fought for [[ferociously]] for months. And it was the [[latter]] role that [[launched]] her [[among]] the [[greatest]] stars. So there is no [[question]] that [[Ms]] [[Davis]] knew from the [[start]] what she was doing.

The [[film]], which [[tells]] about a [[medical]] [[student]] [[Phillip]] Carey ([[Leslie]] Howard) which [[falls]] [[unhappily]] in [[love]] with Cockney [[waitress]] [[Mildred]] Rogers (Bette Davis), has a few [[week]] points, but [[many]] more [[strong]] ones. The [[story]] is [[simply]] too big to be [[told]] in mere 83 minutes. [[For]] [[example]], it is [[quite]] [[unclear]] why refined student [[found]] any interest in an impudent [[waitress]] in the first place. [[Well]], there is one scene in which we are exposed to Ms [[Davis]] captivating eyes, but this is when his [[emotions]] are already [[fully]] evolved. [[Nevertheless]], the integrity of the [[story]] is [[preserved]] by [[superior]] acting from Howard and Davis as well as [[fantastic]] Steiner's [[music]] which tells [[tons]] of [[emotions]] [[even]] when we do not see characters' faces. In [[fact]] the [[film]] is [[amalgamated]] by Phillip's [[walking]] sequences [[showing]] him from the back supplemented with [[shuddering]] two-tone [[repetition]]. [[Every]] [[detail]] is well thought - Max Steiner wrote a beautiful leitmotif for each women in Phillip's life, which is consistently used through the film. And a [[beautiful]] scene in which we see Sally's face in front of calendar is one of the [[sweetest]] scenes I've ever seen exactly due to Francis Dee's breathtaking beauty (Ms Dee was by the way considered to be too beautiful to play leading role in Gone with a Wind) as well as Steiner's captivating music. Camera movements between the some scenes is also original and refreshing.

But my [[strongest]] objection is that events are presented too two-dimensionally, which induce viewer that Mildred is an ultimate slut. The most disgusting characters ought to be men which lure her into relationship, despite well knowing that they will abandon her after taking use of her, but they, curiously, finished portrayed as likable characters. After all, Mildred always - in her own specific, but still a honest way - lets Phillip know that she despises him and had no interest in him. Which he just refuses to hear. It is Phillips masochistic nature connected to his club foot and infantile experiences that is the principal reason of his love problem. He is enslaved to his club foot as much as to Mildred and perhaps has to be free of both to start a normal life. Of course, selfish and impudent Mildred, after discovering voluntary Phillip's bondage to her, did its own share to make his life hell. Even taking into account that she exploded after realizing that the bondage has loosen, it is less than clear why would she burn Phillip's money (Maugham intended different in his novel). After all, she could as well steal it and drunk gallons of champagne.

For modern standards the film is a bit outdated, but each subsequent time you watch it, you can reveal new interesting details due to superior acting, fascinating music and original editing, so it does deserve the highest possible mark. Reading web [[site]] on Bette Davis one can find instances where authors claim that there is nothing special about her acting. I even found a site which claimed that Bette Davis' success was probably due to her luck. But Ms Davis films of 1934 tell quite the opposite. The most evident example are two films that she did only few weeks apart: Fog over Frisco and On Human Bondage. [[Features]] she played in these movies, though both being [[bad]], are quite different. Arlene in the former is a [[handsome]], [[admirable]] and frivolous heiress and [[very]] more [[sympathetic]] [[traits]] than Mildred in the latter, which is a pale, uneducated and [[snotty]] Cockney [[hostess]]. Needless to [[said]] that [[Mrs]] Davis played both [[features]] very [[real]] and with the same [[passion]]. But even that is not all. The point is that the former role, which would be wished by most actresses of the day, was the one she was forced to play. The [[final]] role, which seemed to most [[actors]] as undesirable, career destroying role, was the one she fought for [[furiously]] for months. And it was the [[last]] role that [[commencing]] her [[between]] the [[larger]] stars. So there is no [[matter]] that [[Mrs]] [[Davies]] knew from the [[embark]] what she was doing.

The [[cinematography]], which [[told]] about a [[physician]] [[students]] [[Philip]] Carey ([[Lesley]] Howard) which [[waterfalls]] [[sadly]] in [[likes]] with Cockney [[hostess]] [[Elsie]] Rogers (Bette Davis), has a few [[zhou]] points, but [[various]] more [[forceful]] ones. The [[storytelling]] is [[merely]] too big to be [[tell]] in mere 83 minutes. [[During]] [[examples]], it is [[very]] [[blurred]] why refined student [[finds]] any interest in an impudent [[hostess]] in the first place. [[Good]], there is one scene in which we are exposed to Ms [[Davies]] captivating eyes, but this is when his [[passions]] are already [[perfectly]] evolved. [[However]], the integrity of the [[history]] is [[stored]] by [[upper]] acting from Howard and Davis as well as [[funky]] Steiner's [[musician]] which tells [[tonne]] of [[passions]] [[yet]] when we do not see characters' faces. In [[facto]] the [[cinematography]] is [[merged]] by Phillip's [[marching]] sequences [[displayed]] him from the back supplemented with [[gasping]] two-tone [[repetitions]]. [[Any]] [[clarification]] is well thought - Max Steiner wrote a beautiful leitmotif for each women in Phillip's life, which is consistently used through the film. And a [[wondrous]] scene in which we see Sally's face in front of calendar is one of the [[kindest]] scenes I've ever seen exactly due to Francis Dee's breathtaking beauty (Ms Dee was by the way considered to be too beautiful to play leading role in Gone with a Wind) as well as Steiner's captivating music. Camera movements between the some scenes is also original and refreshing.

But my [[biggest]] objection is that events are presented too two-dimensionally, which induce viewer that Mildred is an ultimate slut. The most disgusting characters ought to be men which lure her into relationship, despite well knowing that they will abandon her after taking use of her, but they, curiously, finished portrayed as likable characters. After all, Mildred always - in her own specific, but still a honest way - lets Phillip know that she despises him and had no interest in him. Which he just refuses to hear. It is Phillips masochistic nature connected to his club foot and infantile experiences that is the principal reason of his love problem. He is enslaved to his club foot as much as to Mildred and perhaps has to be free of both to start a normal life. Of course, selfish and impudent Mildred, after discovering voluntary Phillip's bondage to her, did its own share to make his life hell. Even taking into account that she exploded after realizing that the bondage has loosen, it is less than clear why would she burn Phillip's money (Maugham intended different in his novel). After all, she could as well steal it and drunk gallons of champagne.

For modern standards the film is a bit outdated, but each subsequent time you watch it, you can reveal new interesting details due to superior acting, fascinating music and original editing, so it does deserve the highest possible mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 4798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] i just happened to stumble on this film [[channel]] [[surfing]]. my first reaction was, 'oh [[god]] not again!'. it's so hip to play a retard these days it has [[become]] pretentious and frankly [[despicable]]. for some reason, though, i stayed and [[watched]] it 'til the end. maybe it was my faith in the [[actors]], hoping they'd give me something to cheer about.

and surely, ken and helena can [[act]]. also, the movie progresses into something better towards the end and actually does make a point.

helena bonham carter also surprised me with her character. jane has a mean side that she uses to keep distance and repel pity. then again she has a soft side that's just looking for love. the only thing that surprised me even more was branagh's character...this was a triumph of acting, the movie itself is nothing unique.

see if you are an acting student...if you're looking for pure entertainment you can skip this one. it's sean penn serious! oh my, that was a bit harsh it does feature a couple jokes...not for escapists though. i just happened to stumble on this film [[chanel]] [[navigating]]. my first reaction was, 'oh [[seigneur]] not again!'. it's so hip to play a retard these days it has [[gotten]] pretentious and frankly [[disgusting]]. for some reason, though, i stayed and [[observed]] it 'til the end. maybe it was my faith in the [[players]], hoping they'd give me something to cheer about.

and surely, ken and helena can [[ley]]. also, the movie progresses into something better towards the end and actually does make a point.

helena bonham carter also surprised me with her character. jane has a mean side that she uses to keep distance and repel pity. then again she has a soft side that's just looking for love. the only thing that surprised me even more was branagh's character...this was a triumph of acting, the movie itself is nothing unique.

see if you are an acting student...if you're looking for pure entertainment you can skip this one. it's sean penn serious! oh my, that was a bit harsh it does feature a couple jokes...not for escapists though. --------------------------------------------- Result 4799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hello again, I have to comment on this wonderful, exciting, and believable tale of romance and intrigue. The music in wonderful and memorable. Very good colorful movie. Another movie I liked as well later on was High Society with Bing Crosby. Wonderful music. Thanks for listening, Florence Forrester-Stockton, Reno, Nevada --------------------------------------------- Result 4800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This interesting [[documentary]] tells a remarkable tale of an expedition to take blind Tibetan children trekking in the Himalayas; but [[also]] of a personality clash between two remarkable people. On one hand, there is Erik Weihenmeyer, the first blind man to climb Everest, and the team of (sighted) mountaineers who are guiding the kids. On the other, there is Sabriye Tenberken, a blind woman who runs the first school for blind Tibetans, who agrees to the expedition but subsequently has doubts about how it is progressing. At some level, Sabine simply doesn't understand the mountaineer's philosophy (with it's emphasis on summitting); she is probably right in identifying the mismatch between the mountaineers goals and the desires of the children but her certainty in her own correctness makes her a hard [[person]] to sympathise with, especially as she has an effective veto. In the background to this (reasonably well-mannered) clash, we get an insight into the lives of the children themselves. I enjoyed the [[film]], although it delivers a message clearly designed to be uplifting - even though it details the quarrel, the film somewhat relentlessly asserts how amazing all those who feature in it are. But it's hard to [[argue]] with that assessment, even if it is presented to the viewer somewhat unsubtly. This interesting [[documentation]] tells a remarkable tale of an expedition to take blind Tibetan children trekking in the Himalayas; but [[apart]] of a personality clash between two remarkable people. On one hand, there is Erik Weihenmeyer, the first blind man to climb Everest, and the team of (sighted) mountaineers who are guiding the kids. On the other, there is Sabriye Tenberken, a blind woman who runs the first school for blind Tibetans, who agrees to the expedition but subsequently has doubts about how it is progressing. At some level, Sabine simply doesn't understand the mountaineer's philosophy (with it's emphasis on summitting); she is probably right in identifying the mismatch between the mountaineers goals and the desires of the children but her certainty in her own correctness makes her a hard [[anyone]] to sympathise with, especially as she has an effective veto. In the background to this (reasonably well-mannered) clash, we get an insight into the lives of the children themselves. I enjoyed the [[kino]], although it delivers a message clearly designed to be uplifting - even though it details the quarrel, the film somewhat relentlessly asserts how amazing all those who feature in it are. But it's hard to [[plead]] with that assessment, even if it is presented to the viewer somewhat unsubtly. --------------------------------------------- Result 4801 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This [[show]] is a [[perfect]] example of how the CBC should [[stick]] to either news, sports, or [[satirical]] sketch [[comedy]]. As a developer of situation [[comedy]], CBC has [[shown]] it can [[combine]] the pizazz of "[[King]] of Kensington" with the belly [[laughs]] of "The Beachcombers". It is an embarrassment to [[great]] shows like "[[Kids]] in the Hall" and "[[Second]] City" that they have to [[share]] their comedic [[roots]] with this lame [[production]].

I have to admit, that I didn't [[give]] this [[show]] [[much]] of a [[chance]] right from when I first heard of its [[concept]]. To [[start]], half of the concept is a direct [[attempt]] to rip-off one of the few sitcom [[successes]] in English-Canadian [[history]], "Corner Gas". The [[rest]] of the concept--the cultural clash--is far from being [[original]] and is too [[often]] [[used]] as a crutch for screen [[writing]] laziness. The [[selection]] of the Muslim [[religion]] as the [[basis]] for the "fish out of water" [[characters]] seems to be a [[desperate]] [[attempt]] to be "[[edgy]]" and "topical", but [[comes]] off as forced. Some of the jokes that are [[based]] [[around]] the local's [[reaction]] to the [[newcomers]] are cringe inducing and [[thoroughly]] [[insulting]] to the [[intelligence]] of everyone involved, especially the [[audience]].

This [[show]] is a [[perfect]] [[example]] of how CBC just doesn't "[[get]] it" when it [[comes]] to [[creating]] Canadian content, [[especially]] when [[presenting]] Canada as a multicultural [[environment]]. [[Cultural]] [[diversity]] in Canada does not have to be [[presented]] in such a heavy-handed and [[forced]] [[way]]. It would be a refreshing [[change]] to [[see]] CBC introduce diversity into a television [[show]] without making the [[show]] all about [[said]] [[diversity]]. I [[doubt]] that CBC has [[sufficient]] sitcom talent to [[pull]] off [[something]] so subtle. A [[comparison]] could be [[made]] to the [[way]] diversity is [[depicted]] in Corner Gas--i.e. the [[aboriginal]] [[characters]] are not set apart by their ethnicity nor is their heritage [[used]] to [[generate]] story lines. More realistically, their [[lives]] and the other [[characters]] [[lives]] intertwine in a [[way]] that makes ethnicity no more [[significant]] than any of their other personal characteristics.

That being [[said]], even as a formulaic fish-out-of-water [[comedy]] this show [[fails]]. The acting is [[weak]], the comic pacing all over the [[map]], and the [[story]] [[premises]] that I [[saw]] were too far beyond the [[suspension]] of belief, [[even]] for a comedy. The only saving grace is the talented [[Derek]] McGrath, who is horribly wasted here. I doubt that even the addition of guest stars (Colin Mochrie, for example, as an Anglican archbishop) can save this dog. I decided to give the show a chance once the CBC's 'hype' had died down; but two episodes were all I could stand--I could almost feel my braincells shutting themselves down with each failed punchline. The time-slot would be better served by airing more Coronation Street, Air Farce re-runs, or Dr. Who. Even an infomercial would be an improvement. This [[exhibition]] is a [[flawless]] example of how the CBC should [[wand]] to either news, sports, or [[sarcastic]] sketch [[humour]]. As a developer of situation [[humor]], CBC has [[demonstrated]] it can [[combined]] the pizazz of "[[Emperor]] of Kensington" with the belly [[laughed]] of "The Beachcombers". It is an embarrassment to [[gorgeous]] shows like "[[Brats]] in the Hall" and "[[Seconds]] City" that they have to [[exchanges]] their comedic [[root]] with this lame [[productivity]].

I have to admit, that I didn't [[confer]] this [[exposition]] [[very]] of a [[likelihood]] right from when I first heard of its [[conception]]. To [[startup]], half of the concept is a direct [[attempts]] to rip-off one of the few sitcom [[success]] in English-Canadian [[story]], "Corner Gas". The [[remainder]] of the concept--the cultural clash--is far from being [[initial]] and is too [[generally]] [[use]] as a crutch for screen [[writes]] laziness. The [[choices]] of the Muslim [[religions]] as the [[bases]] for the "fish out of water" [[character]] seems to be a [[hopeless]] [[attempts]] to be "[[jittery]]" and "topical", but [[arrives]] off as forced. Some of the jokes that are [[bases]] [[throughout]] the local's [[answers]] to the [[freshmen]] are cringe inducing and [[meticulously]] [[demeaning]] to the [[intelligentsia]] of everyone involved, especially the [[viewers]].

This [[exhibition]] is a [[flawless]] [[case]] of how CBC just doesn't "[[gets]] it" when it [[arrives]] to [[establishment]] Canadian content, [[mainly]] when [[introducing]] Canada as a multicultural [[environs]]. [[Culture]] [[variety]] in Canada does not have to be [[lodged]] in such a heavy-handed and [[compelled]] [[manner]]. It would be a refreshing [[adjustments]] to [[seeing]] CBC introduce diversity into a television [[demonstrate]] without making the [[exhibition]] all about [[say]] [[variety]]. I [[duda]] that CBC has [[enough]] sitcom talent to [[pulls]] off [[somethin]] so subtle. A [[comparisons]] could be [[introduced]] to the [[ways]] diversity is [[illustrated]] in Corner Gas--i.e. the [[native]] [[features]] are not set apart by their ethnicity nor is their heritage [[utilized]] to [[produce]] story lines. More realistically, their [[life]] and the other [[character]] [[life]] intertwine in a [[ways]] that makes ethnicity no more [[major]] than any of their other personal characteristics.

That being [[stated]], even as a formulaic fish-out-of-water [[comedian]] this show [[fail]]. The acting is [[tenuous]], the comic pacing all over the [[charting]], and the [[history]] [[venues]] that I [[noticed]] were too far beyond the [[outage]] of belief, [[yet]] for a comedy. The only saving grace is the talented [[Derrick]] McGrath, who is horribly wasted here. I doubt that even the addition of guest stars (Colin Mochrie, for example, as an Anglican archbishop) can save this dog. I decided to give the show a chance once the CBC's 'hype' had died down; but two episodes were all I could stand--I could almost feel my braincells shutting themselves down with each failed punchline. The time-slot would be better served by airing more Coronation Street, Air Farce re-runs, or Dr. Who. Even an infomercial would be an improvement. --------------------------------------------- Result 4802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I had numerous [[problems]] with this film.

It contains some basic factual information concerning quantum mechanics, which is [[fine]]. Although quantum physics has been around for over 50 years, the [[film]] [[presents]] this information in a grandiose way that seems to be [[saying]]: "Aren't you just blown away by this!" Well, not really. These aren't [[earth]] shattering revelations anymore. At any rate, I was already familiar with quantum theory, and the fact that particles have to be described by wave equations, etc. is not new.

The main problem I have with this movie, however, is the way these people use quantum theory as a way of providing a scientific basis for mysticism and spiritualism. I don't have any serious problem with mysticism and spiritualism, but quantum mechanics doesn't really have anything to do with these things, and it should be kept separate. The people they interviewed for this movie start with the ideas of quantum theory and then make the leap to say that simply by thinking about something you can alter the matter around you, hence we should think positively so as to have a positive impact on the world and make our lives better. The reasoning is completely ridiculous, and the conclusions do not logically follow from quantum theory. For every so called "expert" that they interviewed for this film, there are scores of theoretically physicists who would completely disagree. They would point out, quite rightly, that the unpredictability of the subatomic world does not lend support to mystical notions about our spiritual connectedness.

It disturbs me that people are going to see this film and completely eat it up because it leaves them with a nice positive feeling. The main thrust of the film is based on a total [[misinterpretation]] of quantum theory, and it is as bad in its reasoning as any attempt to justify organized religion with similar pseudo-scientific arguments.

[[Avoid]] this [[film]].

Oh yeah. At one point, one of the "experts" says that since throughout history most of the assumptions people have made about the world turned out to be false, therefore the assumptions we currently hold about the world are also likely to be false. Huh? That totally does not follow. And even if it did, I don't see how that helps his argument. I mean, if his ideas ever became common assumptions then I guess we would have to assume that they are false too, based on his own reasoning. I had numerous [[hassles]] with this film.

It contains some basic factual information concerning quantum mechanics, which is [[alright]]. Although quantum physics has been around for over 50 years, the [[filmmaking]] [[exposes]] this information in a grandiose way that seems to be [[telling]]: "Aren't you just blown away by this!" Well, not really. These aren't [[overland]] shattering revelations anymore. At any rate, I was already familiar with quantum theory, and the fact that particles have to be described by wave equations, etc. is not new.

The main problem I have with this movie, however, is the way these people use quantum theory as a way of providing a scientific basis for mysticism and spiritualism. I don't have any serious problem with mysticism and spiritualism, but quantum mechanics doesn't really have anything to do with these things, and it should be kept separate. The people they interviewed for this movie start with the ideas of quantum theory and then make the leap to say that simply by thinking about something you can alter the matter around you, hence we should think positively so as to have a positive impact on the world and make our lives better. The reasoning is completely ridiculous, and the conclusions do not logically follow from quantum theory. For every so called "expert" that they interviewed for this film, there are scores of theoretically physicists who would completely disagree. They would point out, quite rightly, that the unpredictability of the subatomic world does not lend support to mystical notions about our spiritual connectedness.

It disturbs me that people are going to see this film and completely eat it up because it leaves them with a nice positive feeling. The main thrust of the film is based on a total [[misconception]] of quantum theory, and it is as bad in its reasoning as any attempt to justify organized religion with similar pseudo-scientific arguments.

[[Stave]] this [[filmmaking]].

Oh yeah. At one point, one of the "experts" says that since throughout history most of the assumptions people have made about the world turned out to be false, therefore the assumptions we currently hold about the world are also likely to be false. Huh? That totally does not follow. And even if it did, I don't see how that helps his argument. I mean, if his ideas ever became common assumptions then I guess we would have to assume that they are false too, based on his own reasoning. --------------------------------------------- Result 4803 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Certainly one of the finest movies I have seen for quite some time. Exquisite direction and flawless acting make this a very entertaining and often moving film. Denzel Washington plays one of his most engaging and emotional roles to date, and the rest of the cast perform beautifully. Christopher Walken is of course superb in his part although he did not appear as often as I would have liked. A story of ultimate greed that backfires is offset against a childs innocence and love. This is also a film for action movie lovers as it has its fair share of bullets, rockets and revenge. The location of Mexico City adds a feel of seediness and corruption which in itself is an eye opener. All in all, a truly gripping film from beginning to end. Highly recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 4804 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] "This might mean the end of the white [[race]]!" gasps a [[general]] as a [[dozen]] [[Native]] Zombies wander [[around]] the battlefields of [[Europe]] during the "[[Great]] War". An [[expedition]] sets out tor the long-lost, back-projected [[city]] of Kennif-Angor to stop this sort of thing and [[keep]] the battlefields clear for decent honest white people to slaughter each other by the tens of [[thousands]].

It is a bit hard to tell when people are zombies or not in this film as the acting is so [[wooden]]. [[Even]] by 1936 [[standards]] the acting in this [[film]] is [[bad]]. From a [[previous]] decade. It [[looks]] like it [[came]] out of a correspondence school text book on '[[How]] to Act'

------------- Chapter [[Three]]: [[Emotions]] -------------

"How to [[express]] [[fear]] and loathing ([[Female]]) Clench both [[fists]]. Place fist of one hand on heart. [[Open]] mouth as it to scream. Place other fist, palm out, against mouth. Hold pose for 10 seconds [[longer]] than is comfortable then [[quickly]] [[turn]] [[head]] 90 degrees away from [[direction]] of [[loathed]] [[object]] and sob".

"How to have [[difficult]], [[heavily]] emotionally charged scene with ex-fiancé [[explaining]] your love for [[someone]] [[else]]. Do NOT make eye contact. Do not [[move]]. Do not [[show]] any emotion. [[Do]] not [[move]] your [[eyes]] too much as you read your lines off the studio wall."

To give us a [[respite]] from the leaden acting the [[director]] cunningly cuts in [[long]] [[pauses]] where [[nothing]] much [[happens]] except that film keeps [[running]] through the [[projectors]]. Thus 35 minute's worth of [[story]] is [[padded]] out to 60ish minutes.

The [[revolt]] of the [[zombies]] when it comes is so slow! [[Released]] from mental bondage the armies of ex-zombiefied [[minions]] [[turn]] on their [[former]] master by ambling slowly up [[hill]] and then sort of stabbing a door a bit and smashing a [[window]]. "[[Yea]]... let's... oh, I dunnno [[yeah]]. Let's [[get]] him [[grrr]]. Frankenstein [[must]] be destroyed - manana." ([[though]] I have just [[found]] a [[bit]] of [[hidden]] symbolism. Jagger is [[shot]] by a [[Native]] as some [[sort]] of [[ironic]] counterpoint to all the [[Natives]] being [[shot]] by the Germans at the start of the flick. see, even downtrodden Natives don't want the end of the White Race!) The chase (it you can call it that) through the back-projected swamp is hilarious and worth the admission price alone. Roy D'Arcy has a hell of a time camping it up, but is totally wasted, as Col. Mazovia.

There is one interesting moment in this film. A nice little montage of the zombied natives and white cast members falling under the evil eyes spell. face after face, cross-fade into one another. It works, though there is a strange little blip in the middle of each close up like a frame has been cut. I guess these must be Neg Cutters' frames between the fades.

Best watched with friends and in a silly mood. "This might mean the end of the white [[races]]!" gasps a [[overall]] as a [[twelve]] [[Aborigines]] Zombies wander [[throughout]] the battlefields of [[Europa]] during the "[[Wonderful]] War". An [[expeditions]] sets out tor the long-lost, back-projected [[ville]] of Kennif-Angor to stop this sort of thing and [[sustain]] the battlefields clear for decent honest white people to slaughter each other by the tens of [[thousand]].

It is a bit hard to tell when people are zombies or not in this film as the acting is so [[wood]]. [[Yet]] by 1936 [[standard]] the acting in this [[filmmaking]] is [[negative]]. From a [[past]] decade. It [[seems]] like it [[arrived]] out of a correspondence school text book on '[[Mode]] to Act'

------------- Chapter [[Tres]]: [[Feelings]] -------------

"How to [[expresses]] [[fright]] and loathing ([[Girl]]) Clench both [[grips]]. Place fist of one hand on heart. [[Openings]] mouth as it to scream. Place other fist, palm out, against mouth. Hold pose for 10 seconds [[most]] than is comfortable then [[faster]] [[transforming]] [[leader]] 90 degrees away from [[orientation]] of [[hated]] [[objects]] and sob".

"How to have [[hard]], [[highly]] emotionally charged scene with ex-fiancé [[clarified]] your love for [[everyone]] [[further]]. Do NOT make eye contact. Do not [[budge]]. Do not [[spectacle]] any emotion. [[Doing]] not [[budge]] your [[eye]] too much as you read your lines off the studio wall."

To give us a [[reprieve]] from the leaden acting the [[headmaster]] cunningly cuts in [[prolonged]] [[pausing]] where [[none]] much [[comes]] except that film keeps [[executing]] through the [[projector]]. Thus 35 minute's worth of [[tales]] is [[upholstered]] out to 60ish minutes.

The [[insurgency]] of the [[walkers]] when it comes is so slow! [[Liberated]] from mental bondage the armies of ex-zombiefied [[demons]] [[transforming]] on their [[old]] master by ambling slowly up [[hillside]] and then sort of stabbing a door a bit and smashing a [[windows]]. "[[Yup]]... let's... oh, I dunnno [[yea]]. Let's [[got]] him [[grrrr]]. Frankenstein [[should]] be destroyed - manana." ([[while]] I have just [[detected]] a [[bite]] of [[concealment]] symbolism. Jagger is [[filmed]] by a [[Aborigines]] as some [[genre]] of [[sarcastic]] counterpoint to all the [[Aborigines]] being [[filmed]] by the Germans at the start of the flick. see, even downtrodden Natives don't want the end of the White Race!) The chase (it you can call it that) through the back-projected swamp is hilarious and worth the admission price alone. Roy D'Arcy has a hell of a time camping it up, but is totally wasted, as Col. Mazovia.

There is one interesting moment in this film. A nice little montage of the zombied natives and white cast members falling under the evil eyes spell. face after face, cross-fade into one another. It works, though there is a strange little blip in the middle of each close up like a frame has been cut. I guess these must be Neg Cutters' frames between the fades.

Best watched with friends and in a silly mood. --------------------------------------------- Result 4805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We brought this film as a joke for a friend, and could of been our worst joke to play. The film is barely watchable, and the acting is dire. The worst child actor ever used and Hasslehoff giving a substandard performance. The plot is disgraceful and at points we was so bored we was wondering what the hell was going on. It tries to be gruesome in places but is just laughable.

Just terrible --------------------------------------------- Result 4806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] OK, so I know of this [[movie]] because of a [[friend]] of mine's in it and I actually [[visited]] the set when they were filming, so from a personal stand-point, I was intrigued to [[finally]] [[view]] this obscure [[little]] gem. [[If]] you [[dig]] at all on [[info]] regarding this [[movie]], you'll find it's mired in [[legal]] [[troubles]] (even over 7 [[years]] after being filmed) so, if you are at all like me -- then you'll do [[whatever]] it [[takes]] to [[obtain]] a [[copy]]. My [[source]]? [[Ebay]]. [[About]] $15 but I felt ripped because when I [[got]] it [[today]] in the [[mail]], it was a very [[rough]], grainy copy of a "SCREENER [[ONLY]]" release, complete with annoying [[top]] mini time-code but [[alas]], I could [[still]] [[enjoy]] it but not as much as if I had a proper copy, something I suggest you obtain if you want the full impact this film may or may not have on you. From what I have gleaned, it's been released on DVD in Germany & now Spain. With that, good luck & happy searching/bidding...;). The score/sndtrk is worth it alone. [[Very]] eclectic and varied (somethinbg rare these days IMHO in film) -- I think that will be my next sndtrk/score to locate, but I digress...

Now, onto the review. The film opens as Billy Zane's character is injecting a nurse in the mental ward he is apparently locked up in. He steals her clothes (even shoes) and quickly moves into a series of holding up a bank/loan shop but after escaping with the loot, well, I guess this is where the "plot" begins -- he inadvertently looses it. After perpetrating several campy over-the-top crimes & dalliances to various A to C-list celebs to locate the money, he finds himself somehow in a cemetery where a funeral -- I think for the dead guy he shoots in the loan office/bank, and -- even with 1950's police cars and cops looking all over for him steadily throughout -- he never gets seen or nabbed. (He sees daily newspapers reporting his "crimes") This I liked, because it gave the thin plot an extension. After all, it's a MOVIE (see: fiction) & director Iris Iliopulos does what I think is everything possible to 1) Bring Wood's vision to fruition and 2) Give it an updated feel, yet have shots of authentic 50's police cars intertwined with, ahh, local L.A..99$ stores -- so well hence my 9 rating. If the period and props were authentic -- I would have given it a 10. Now it wraps it self up kinda weird and I won't spoil it for anyone but let's just say the final ending is somewhat disappointing for it, to me, it had promise, action and comedy -- all up till the end, so...with ALL that said --locate a copy at your own discretion.

Just realize that, as there is no dialouge (except for some narration and singing) this may be up your alley -- maybe not-- but I definitely think it's worth a watch. The actors all do fine performances and it's only the inconsistency in proper period pieces that really made me long for just that correction -- then I would say by all means check this film out for it's not like anything these studios put out these days (or will in the future, too) I am sure. OK, so I know of this [[cinematography]] because of a [[boyfriend]] of mine's in it and I actually [[visits]] the set when they were filming, so from a personal stand-point, I was intrigued to [[lastly]] [[vista]] this obscure [[tiny]] gem. [[Unless]] you [[digging]] at all on [[information]] regarding this [[movies]], you'll find it's mired in [[lawful]] [[difficulties]] (even over 7 [[aged]] after being filmed) so, if you are at all like me -- then you'll do [[whichever]] it [[pick]] to [[achieve]] a [[copying]]. My [[origin]]? [[Abbey]]. [[Around]] $15 but I felt ripped because when I [[did]] it [[yesterday]] in the [[email]], it was a very [[coarse]], grainy copy of a "SCREENER [[ALONE]]" release, complete with annoying [[topped]] mini time-code but [[alack]], I could [[yet]] [[enjoys]] it but not as much as if I had a proper copy, something I suggest you obtain if you want the full impact this film may or may not have on you. From what I have gleaned, it's been released on DVD in Germany & now Spain. With that, good luck & happy searching/bidding...;). The score/sndtrk is worth it alone. [[Quite]] eclectic and varied (somethinbg rare these days IMHO in film) -- I think that will be my next sndtrk/score to locate, but I digress...

Now, onto the review. The film opens as Billy Zane's character is injecting a nurse in the mental ward he is apparently locked up in. He steals her clothes (even shoes) and quickly moves into a series of holding up a bank/loan shop but after escaping with the loot, well, I guess this is where the "plot" begins -- he inadvertently looses it. After perpetrating several campy over-the-top crimes & dalliances to various A to C-list celebs to locate the money, he finds himself somehow in a cemetery where a funeral -- I think for the dead guy he shoots in the loan office/bank, and -- even with 1950's police cars and cops looking all over for him steadily throughout -- he never gets seen or nabbed. (He sees daily newspapers reporting his "crimes") This I liked, because it gave the thin plot an extension. After all, it's a MOVIE (see: fiction) & director Iris Iliopulos does what I think is everything possible to 1) Bring Wood's vision to fruition and 2) Give it an updated feel, yet have shots of authentic 50's police cars intertwined with, ahh, local L.A..99$ stores -- so well hence my 9 rating. If the period and props were authentic -- I would have given it a 10. Now it wraps it self up kinda weird and I won't spoil it for anyone but let's just say the final ending is somewhat disappointing for it, to me, it had promise, action and comedy -- all up till the end, so...with ALL that said --locate a copy at your own discretion.

Just realize that, as there is no dialouge (except for some narration and singing) this may be up your alley -- maybe not-- but I definitely think it's worth a watch. The actors all do fine performances and it's only the inconsistency in proper period pieces that really made me long for just that correction -- then I would say by all means check this film out for it's not like anything these studios put out these days (or will in the future, too) I am sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This movie is a [[journey]] through the mind of a screenwriter caught in his own paradoxical philosophy. He [[examines]] the ever illusive [[question]] of 'who am I' and 'what is I?' It's a [[courageous]] and thought [[provoking]] [[enterprise]]. There is a shipload of [[beautiful]] [[images]], dream-inspired, Escher-like paradoxes reminiscent of the hand drawing itself, or rather, erasing itself. More and more we follow the writer in his agony over what to say and what to film, we [[see]] him phoning with his wife who left for Peru, leaving him to [[take]] care of their baby, a task he performs with less and less attention until he's so absorbed in his dilemma's that he hardly looks at the child anymore. His wife comes back and makes a scene, destroys his notes and helping him go over the last treshold until he erases him-self. Interspersed with eye-pleasing and I-destructing [[images]], the story is mainly philosophical. It's about the veils of Maya, the world of illusion. The paradox of the movie however, is that it needs a lot of talking and thinking to prove that thinking should stop. [[During]] the more than two hours of provocative beauty and rapid philosophising the movie made me long for silence or a [[shorter]] movie. If that was the purpose of the maker, he succeeded quite well. This movie is a [[tour]] through the mind of a screenwriter caught in his own paradoxical philosophy. He [[discuss]] the ever illusive [[issue]] of 'who am I' and 'what is I?' It's a [[bold]] and thought [[arousing]] [[corporation]]. There is a shipload of [[wondrous]] [[photos]], dream-inspired, Escher-like paradoxes reminiscent of the hand drawing itself, or rather, erasing itself. More and more we follow the writer in his agony over what to say and what to film, we [[consults]] him phoning with his wife who left for Peru, leaving him to [[taking]] care of their baby, a task he performs with less and less attention until he's so absorbed in his dilemma's that he hardly looks at the child anymore. His wife comes back and makes a scene, destroys his notes and helping him go over the last treshold until he erases him-self. Interspersed with eye-pleasing and I-destructing [[photos]], the story is mainly philosophical. It's about the veils of Maya, the world of illusion. The paradox of the movie however, is that it needs a lot of talking and thinking to prove that thinking should stop. [[At]] the more than two hours of provocative beauty and rapid philosophising the movie made me long for silence or a [[shortest]] movie. If that was the purpose of the maker, he succeeded quite well. --------------------------------------------- Result 4808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I felt drawn into the world of the manipulation of mind and will at the heart of the story. The acting by Nolte, Lee, Arkin and the supporting cast was superb. The strange twists in the Vonnegut story are made stranger by odd details. --------------------------------------------- Result 4809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is a movie that has a [[lot]] of [[things]] that only Japanese people can [[understand]]. Even well [[translated]], there are some [[things]] that are [[obviously]] [[private]] jokes or regional symbolism. My [[guess]] is that it [[tried]] to [[send]] a message of some [[sort]], but that just [[got]] [[wasted]] on me.

What I [[felt]] that is [[basically]] this is a mediocre movie with nice special effects. Some kid [[becomes]] "The one" and in the end has almost no relevance to a yokai [[war]] that makes no sense whatsoever anyway. It would have been nice to understand what the hell they were talking about, but between the Azumi bean washing yokai and the one that looks like a big tongued umbrella (Rihanna eat your heart out!) I couldn't really discern the plot.

Bottom line: nice visuals, the kid screams a lot, the river princess is terrible cute and the rest is crap. This is a movie that has a [[batches]] of [[items]] that only Japanese people can [[fathom]]. Even well [[translate]], there are some [[items]] that are [[unmistakably]] [[privy]] jokes or regional symbolism. My [[guessing]] is that it [[attempting]] to [[consignment]] a message of some [[kinds]], but that just [[did]] [[squandered]] on me.

What I [[deemed]] that is [[principally]] this is a mediocre movie with nice special effects. Some kid [[becoming]] "The one" and in the end has almost no relevance to a yokai [[warfare]] that makes no sense whatsoever anyway. It would have been nice to understand what the hell they were talking about, but between the Azumi bean washing yokai and the one that looks like a big tongued umbrella (Rihanna eat your heart out!) I couldn't really discern the plot.

Bottom line: nice visuals, the kid screams a lot, the river princess is terrible cute and the rest is crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 4810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] *Spoiler warning*

First of all I rated this movie 2 out of 10.

The idea is good, but there are too many stupid errors in the movie, failing to make it the psyching drama that it might have been. First of all she never fights alone. After an initial very strange doubt from her mother (which is not believable when the mother proves to be so supportive and loving later in the movie) the rape victim is not alone.

She is also unbelievably naive always falling into the Crew's strange traps.

Her friends are unbelievably nasty.

The thing that I find most unbelievably is that Ethan fails to control the crew when he changes his opinon. Ethan is very much the leader of the Crew (hey, they even say so) and people seem to think the other guy is a jerk, but when Ethan changes his opinion he just doesn't manage to convince even one single person in the Crew that he is right and that his former friend is wrong. Everyone just simply hates him... why?? The movie provides no explanation. How did he ever become the leader?

A funny note is that my girlfriend thought I was watching Beverly Hills when she came in. Two actors from the same successful TV-series.... a cheap way to get viewers? --------------------------------------------- Result 4811 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[LOVE]] [[AT]] THE TOP--the utterly wrongheaded American title for the superb French film "Le Mouton Enrage" (which [[means]], I [[think]], The [[Rabid]] [[Sheep]])-- is such an original [[movie]], the fact that it dates back to 1974 seems all the more [[astounding]]. This film was far ahead of its [[time]]; even by today's highest standards, it accomplishes [[things]] that [[seem]] rich and [[new]]. Filmed by the hugely underrated director [[Michel]] Deville, it rather defies [[description]] in the way it combines social critique, comedy, mystery, love, sex and satire into one [[wholly]] original mix--leaving for the end a [[major]] but subtle [[surprise]] to render all that has gone before suddenly sad and more understandable. The cast is [[splendid]], ditto the writing and theme. But it's Deville's [[delicious]] tone, keeping you constantly off-balance but enrapt, that pushes this "lost" film to a very high level indeed. (The written interview with the director on the "[[Special]] Features" section of the DVD is [[definitely]] worth reading if you have the time.) [[ADORED]] [[IN]] THE TOP--the utterly wrongheaded American title for the superb French film "Le Mouton Enrage" (which [[mode]], I [[believing]], The [[Irate]] [[Lamb]])-- is such an original [[films]], the fact that it dates back to 1974 seems all the more [[unbelievable]]. This film was far ahead of its [[moment]]; even by today's highest standards, it accomplishes [[aspects]] that [[looks]] rich and [[novel]]. Filmed by the hugely underrated director [[Michael]] Deville, it rather defies [[descriptions]] in the way it combines social critique, comedy, mystery, love, sex and satire into one [[fully]] original mix--leaving for the end a [[principal]] but subtle [[amazement]] to render all that has gone before suddenly sad and more understandable. The cast is [[wondrous]], ditto the writing and theme. But it's Deville's [[scrumptious]] tone, keeping you constantly off-balance but enrapt, that pushes this "lost" film to a very high level indeed. (The written interview with the director on the "[[Particular]] Features" section of the DVD is [[surely]] worth reading if you have the time.) --------------------------------------------- Result 4812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A [[nicely]] [[done]] thriller with plenty of sex in it. I [[saw]] it on late night TV. There are two hardcore stars in it, Lauen Montgomery and [[Venus]]. [[Thankfully]], [[Gabriella]] Hall has just a [[small]] [[part]]. A [[respectfully]] [[doing]] thriller with plenty of sex in it. I [[watched]] it on late night TV. There are two hardcore stars in it, Lauen Montgomery and [[Zahra]]. [[Gladly]], [[Gabriel]] Hall has just a [[miniscule]] [[parties]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4813 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The acting was [[horrendous]] as well as the [[screenplay]]. It was poorly put [[together]] and made you [[almost]] [[want]] to laugh at the several terribly acted out [[murder]] scenes. The ending was even [[worse]]. Everyone kept dying, but somehow the ending [[made]] it look [[like]] everything was [[perfectly]] OK! They did not [[give]] enough history about the obsession the [[teacher]] had, etc. The movie [[needed]] more time to [[perhaps]] [[develop]] a [[better]] storyline. The only reason I give this 3/10 is that I kind of feel bad for the young actors. They [[needed]] [[better]] coaching. They [[could]] have [[really]] [[made]] this an OK [[film]], but the screenplay and acting [[failed]] [[miserably]]. The acting was [[horrible]] as well as the [[scenario]]. It was poorly put [[jointly]] and made you [[hardly]] [[wanted]] to laugh at the several terribly acted out [[kill]] scenes. The ending was even [[worst]]. Everyone kept dying, but somehow the ending [[accomplished]] it look [[iike]] everything was [[altogether]] OK! They did not [[confer]] enough history about the obsession the [[maestro]] had, etc. The movie [[needs]] more time to [[probably]] [[develops]] a [[optimum]] storyline. The only reason I give this 3/10 is that I kind of feel bad for the young actors. They [[needs]] [[best]] coaching. They [[wo]] have [[truthfully]] [[introduced]] this an OK [[filmmaking]], but the screenplay and acting [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] The first step to getting off of that road that leads to nowhere is recognizing that you're on it in the first place; then it [[becomes]] a matter of being assertive and [[taking]] positive [[steps]] to overcome the [[negative]] [[influences]] in your life that may have put you on that [[road]] to begin with. [[Which]] is [[exactly]] what a young Latino girl does in `Girlfight,' written and directed by Karyn Kusama. Diana (Michelle [[Rodriguez]]) is an eighteen-year-old High School senior from the projects in Brooklyn, [[facing]] [[expulsion]] after her fourth [[fight]] in the halls since the [[beginning]] of the semester. She [[affects]] a `whatever' attitude which masks a deep-seated [[anger]] that [[threatens]] to [[take]] her into [[places]] she'd rather not [[go]]. She lives with her [[father]], Sandro ([[Paul]] [[Calderon]]), with whom she has a very tentative [[relationship]], and her younger brother, [[Tiny]] (Ray Santiago). With her [[life]] teetering on the brink of [[dissolution]], she [[desperately]] [[needs]] an outlet through which to channel the [[demons]] that plague her. And one day she [[finds]] it, without [[even]] [[looking]] for it, when she [[stops]] by the [[gym]] where Tiny trains. [[Ironically]], [[Tiny]] wants [[nothing]] to do with boxing; he wants to [[go]] to art school, but Sandro is determined that his son should be able to take care of himself on the streets, and [[pays]] the ten dollars a [[week]] it [[costs]] for his lessons. When Diana convinces Tiny's [[trainer]], Hector ([[Jaime]] Tirelli), to take her on, and [[approaches]] her [[father]] for the money, under the guise of calling it a weekly [[allowance]] (she doesn't [[want]] him to know what she [[wants]] the money for), Sandro turns her down and [[tells]] her to [[go]] out and earn her own money. [[Ultimately]], with Tiny's help she [[finds]] a [[way]], and the [[ring]] [[soon]] [[becomes]] her second [[home]]. It's an environment to which she [[readily]] [[adapts]], and it [[appears]] that her [[life]] is about to [[take]] a [[turn]] for the better. And the fact that she will have to [[fight]] [[men]], not women, in `gender blind' [[competitions]], does not faze her in the [[least]]. Diana has [[found]] her [[element]].

First [[time]] [[writer]]/director Karyn Kusama has done a [[terrific]] job of creating a realistic setting for her story, presenting an honest [[portrait]] of life in the projects and conveying that [[desperation]] so [[familiar]] to so [[many]] [[young]] people who find themselves in dead-end [[situations]] and on that [[road]] that [[leads]] to nowhere. And there's no candy coating on it, either; as Hector tells Diana when she asks him how he came to be where he is, `I was a fighter once. I lost.' Then, looking around the busy gym, `Like most of these guys, they're going to lose, too. But it's all they know--' And it's that honesty of attitude, as well as the way in which the characters are portrayed, that makes this movie as good as it is. It's a bleak world, underscored by the dimly lit, run-down gym-- you can fairly smell the sweat of the boxers-- and that sense of desolation that hangs over it all like a pall, blanketing these people who are grasping and hanging on to the one and only thing they have, all that they know.

Making her screen debut, Michelle Rodriguez is perfectly cast as Diana, infusing her with a depth and brooding intensity that fairly radiates off of her in waves. She is so real that it makes you wonder how much of it is really Rodriguez; exactly where does the actor leave off and the character begin? Whatever it is, it works. It's a powerful, memorable performance, by an actor from whom we will await another endeavor with great anticipation. She certainly makes Diana a positive role model, one in whom many hopefully will find inspiration and the realization that there are alternative paths available in life, at least to those who would seek them out.

As positive as this film is, however, it ends on something of an ambiguous note; though Diana obviously has her feet on the ground, there's no indication of where she's headed. Is this a short term fix for her, or is she destined to become the female counterpart of Hector? After all, realistically (and in light of the fact that the realism is one of the strengths of this film), professional boxing isn't exactly a profession that lends itself to, nor opens it's arms to women. And in keeping with the subject matter of the film, and the approach of the filmmaker, an affirmation of the results of Diana's assertiveness would have been appropriate.

The supporting cast includes Santiago Douglas (Adrian), Elisa Bocanegra (Marisol), Alicia Ashley (Ricki) and Thomas Barbour (Ira). Though it delivers a very real picture of life to which many will be able to identify, there are certain aspects of `Girlfight,' that stretch credibility a bit, regarding some of what happens in the ring. That aside, it's a positive film that for the most part is a satisfying experience. I rate this one 7/10.



The first step to getting off of that road that leads to nowhere is recognizing that you're on it in the first place; then it [[become]] a matter of being assertive and [[picked]] positive [[measurements]] to overcome the [[bad]] [[impact]] in your life that may have put you on that [[path]] to begin with. [[Whom]] is [[accurately]] what a young Latino girl does in `Girlfight,' written and directed by Karyn Kusama. Diana (Michelle [[Hector]]) is an eighteen-year-old High School senior from the projects in Brooklyn, [[encountering]] [[deportation]] after her fourth [[wrestling]] in the halls since the [[begin]] of the semester. She [[touching]] a `whatever' attitude which masks a deep-seated [[rage]] that [[threatening]] to [[taking]] her into [[sites]] she'd rather not [[going]]. She lives with her [[fathers]], Sandro ([[Paulo]] [[Emilio]]), with whom she has a very tentative [[relationships]], and her younger brother, [[Little]] (Ray Santiago). With her [[vida]] teetering on the brink of [[dissolve]], she [[badly]] [[required]] an outlet through which to channel the [[minions]] that plague her. And one day she [[found]] it, without [[yet]] [[researching]] for it, when she [[stopping]] by the [[gymnasium]] where Tiny trains. [[Sarcastically]], [[Smallest]] wants [[anything]] to do with boxing; he wants to [[going]] to art school, but Sandro is determined that his son should be able to take care of himself on the streets, and [[payroll]] the ten dollars a [[chow]] it [[expenditures]] for his lessons. When Diana convinces Tiny's [[instructors]], Hector ([[Jamie]] Tirelli), to take her on, and [[approaching]] her [[fathers]] for the money, under the guise of calling it a weekly [[subsidies]] (she doesn't [[wanna]] him to know what she [[wanna]] the money for), Sandro turns her down and [[says]] her to [[going]] out and earn her own money. [[Finally]], with Tiny's help she [[find]] a [[path]], and the [[ringing]] [[promptly]] [[becoming]] her second [[house]]. It's an environment to which she [[easily]] [[readjust]], and it [[appearing]] that her [[living]] is about to [[taking]] a [[turning]] for the better. And the fact that she will have to [[wrestling]] [[male]], not women, in `gender blind' [[competition]], does not faze her in the [[slightest]]. Diana has [[find]] her [[ingredient]].

First [[period]] [[novelist]]/director Karyn Kusama has done a [[wondrous]] job of creating a realistic setting for her story, presenting an honest [[portrayal]] of life in the projects and conveying that [[distress]] so [[accustomed]] to so [[countless]] [[youthful]] people who find themselves in dead-end [[instances]] and on that [[chemin]] that [[leeds]] to nowhere. And there's no candy coating on it, either; as Hector tells Diana when she asks him how he came to be where he is, `I was a fighter once. I lost.' Then, looking around the busy gym, `Like most of these guys, they're going to lose, too. But it's all they know--' And it's that honesty of attitude, as well as the way in which the characters are portrayed, that makes this movie as good as it is. It's a bleak world, underscored by the dimly lit, run-down gym-- you can fairly smell the sweat of the boxers-- and that sense of desolation that hangs over it all like a pall, blanketing these people who are grasping and hanging on to the one and only thing they have, all that they know.

Making her screen debut, Michelle Rodriguez is perfectly cast as Diana, infusing her with a depth and brooding intensity that fairly radiates off of her in waves. She is so real that it makes you wonder how much of it is really Rodriguez; exactly where does the actor leave off and the character begin? Whatever it is, it works. It's a powerful, memorable performance, by an actor from whom we will await another endeavor with great anticipation. She certainly makes Diana a positive role model, one in whom many hopefully will find inspiration and the realization that there are alternative paths available in life, at least to those who would seek them out.

As positive as this film is, however, it ends on something of an ambiguous note; though Diana obviously has her feet on the ground, there's no indication of where she's headed. Is this a short term fix for her, or is she destined to become the female counterpart of Hector? After all, realistically (and in light of the fact that the realism is one of the strengths of this film), professional boxing isn't exactly a profession that lends itself to, nor opens it's arms to women. And in keeping with the subject matter of the film, and the approach of the filmmaker, an affirmation of the results of Diana's assertiveness would have been appropriate.

The supporting cast includes Santiago Douglas (Adrian), Elisa Bocanegra (Marisol), Alicia Ashley (Ricki) and Thomas Barbour (Ira). Though it delivers a very real picture of life to which many will be able to identify, there are certain aspects of `Girlfight,' that stretch credibility a bit, regarding some of what happens in the ring. That aside, it's a positive film that for the most part is a satisfying experience. I rate this one 7/10.



--------------------------------------------- Result 4815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] SWING! is an important film because it's one of the remaining Black-produced and acted films from the 1930s. Many of these films have simply deteriorated so badly that they are unwatchable, but this one is in fairly good shape. It's also a nice [[chance]] to [[see]] [[many]] of the talented Black [[performers]] of the period just after the heyday of the old Cotton Club--a time all but forgotten today.

[[Unfortunately]], while the film is historically important and has some lovely performances, it's also a [[mess]]. The main plot is very similar to the Hollywood musicals of the era--including a prima donna who is going to ruin the show and the surprise unknown who appears from no where to save the day. However, the writing is just god-awful and a bit trashy at times--and projects images of Black America that some might find a bit demeaning. This is because before the plot really gets going, you are treated to a no-account bum who lives off his hard working wife (a popular stereotype of the time) and when he is caught with a hussy (who, by the way, totally overplays this role), they have a fight which looks like a scene from WWE Smackdown! And, the one lady wants to cut the other lady with a straight razor--a trashy scene indeed! Later in the film, when the prima donna is behaving abominably, her husband punches her in the face and everyone applauds him! It seems like the film, at times, wants to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience PLUS they can't even do this well--with some of the worst acting I've seen in a very long time.

Still, if you can look past a lousy production in just about every way (with trashy characters, bad acting and direction and poor writing), this one might be worth a peek so you can see excellent singing and tap dancing--as well as to catch a glimpse of forgotten Black culture. Just don't say I didn't warn you about the acting--it's really, really bad! SWING! is an important film because it's one of the remaining Black-produced and acted films from the 1930s. Many of these films have simply deteriorated so badly that they are unwatchable, but this one is in fairly good shape. It's also a nice [[likelihood]] to [[behold]] [[innumerable]] of the talented Black [[artistes]] of the period just after the heyday of the old Cotton Club--a time all but forgotten today.

[[Unluckily]], while the film is historically important and has some lovely performances, it's also a [[confusion]]. The main plot is very similar to the Hollywood musicals of the era--including a prima donna who is going to ruin the show and the surprise unknown who appears from no where to save the day. However, the writing is just god-awful and a bit trashy at times--and projects images of Black America that some might find a bit demeaning. This is because before the plot really gets going, you are treated to a no-account bum who lives off his hard working wife (a popular stereotype of the time) and when he is caught with a hussy (who, by the way, totally overplays this role), they have a fight which looks like a scene from WWE Smackdown! And, the one lady wants to cut the other lady with a straight razor--a trashy scene indeed! Later in the film, when the prima donna is behaving abominably, her husband punches her in the face and everyone applauds him! It seems like the film, at times, wants to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience PLUS they can't even do this well--with some of the worst acting I've seen in a very long time.

Still, if you can look past a lousy production in just about every way (with trashy characters, bad acting and direction and poor writing), this one might be worth a peek so you can see excellent singing and tap dancing--as well as to catch a glimpse of forgotten Black culture. Just don't say I didn't warn you about the acting--it's really, really bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 4816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Though]] not [[seen]] in too many films [[prior]], you have certainly [[seen]] the basic plot [[themes]] in too [[many]] [[films]] [[since]].

Not one of Grant's nor Loy's [[best]] [[films]], they make an [[outstanding]] effort together. After all, with that much talent and very good supporting cast, you know the [[laughs]] will be there.

The film is light, has some dramatic spotting but [[keeps]] the plot moving and gets you to smile the whole way through.

A [[great]] example of [[classic]] American film fare that has stood the test of time.

Definite [[Saturday]] afternoon fare, heavy on the popcorn. [[Despite]] not [[saw]] in too many films [[earlier]], you have certainly [[watched]] the basic plot [[item]] in too [[innumerable]] [[cinema]] [[because]].

Not one of Grant's nor Loy's [[better]] [[kino]], they make an [[unresolved]] effort together. After all, with that much talent and very good supporting cast, you know the [[smiling]] will be there.

The film is light, has some dramatic spotting but [[retains]] the plot moving and gets you to smile the whole way through.

A [[wondrous]] example of [[conventional]] American film fare that has stood the test of time.

Definite [[Mondays]] afternoon fare, heavy on the popcorn. --------------------------------------------- Result 4817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Although it has been 2 years, I still [[remember]] the [[complete]] [[waste]] that [[comprises]] the entire plot of the [[movie]]. Unfortunately, I came [[across]] this movie after my [[friends]] and I selected it while browsing through the new releases at Blockbuster. We decided to pick the movie because it was the only one we all had not seen and it [[sounded]] like it [[may]] be enjoyable. Although it has been quite some time since I viewed the [[movie]], I still remember the [[lack]] of plot (seriously, there is no true [[plot]]), and [[complete]] waste of [[time]] that was spent watching the movie. If you are in the video store and this film catches your eye, walk on and [[find]] a better movie. If you did end up seeing this movie, I understand your pain :) Although it has been 2 years, I still [[remind]] the [[finished]] [[wastes]] that [[understands]] the entire plot of the [[films]]. Unfortunately, I came [[in]] this movie after my [[buddies]] and I selected it while browsing through the new releases at Blockbuster. We decided to pick the movie because it was the only one we all had not seen and it [[rang]] like it [[maggio]] be enjoyable. Although it has been quite some time since I viewed the [[filmmaking]], I still remember the [[shortfall]] of plot (seriously, there is no true [[intrigue]]), and [[finish]] waste of [[times]] that was spent watching the movie. If you are in the video store and this film catches your eye, walk on and [[unearthed]] a better movie. If you did end up seeing this movie, I understand your pain :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4818 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] "A Gentleman's Game" uses the game of golf in a country club setting to illustrate an adolescent's discovery about honesty, prejudice, and other life lessons. Several times I thought I knew where this film was [[heading]], only to be [[proved]] wrong. Unfortunately, I'm not so sure that the filmmakers ever knew where it was heading, either. The defining moment in this movie is [[probably]] the scene in which Gary Sinise mocks "The [[Karate]] [[Kid]]" and debunks any notions that he's going to [[become]] a [[mentor]] to the adolescent golfer. It's refreshing, in a way, that this movie refuses to follow most of the simplistic and over-worked movie [[formulas]]. However, too much of it [[still]] comes off as contrived. [[At]] the [[drop]] of a [[hat]] people [[drop]] all [[pretenses]] of [[civility]], or fail to [[stick]] up for the things in which they [[believe]], or are exposed for [[something]] far less respectable than their [[place]] in society [[assumes]]. Unfortunately, there is often no [[resolution]] to these [[moments]]. And except for the fact that the club [[serves]] as [[backdrop]] for them, there is no [[real]] [[continuity]] or [[linking]] of them. It's a shame that the [[writers]] and [[director]] [[could]] not [[salvage]] a [[better]] film, [[especially]] [[given]] some of the [[talented]] [[actors]] and potential in the [[setup]]. "A Gentleman's Game" uses the game of golf in a country club setting to illustrate an adolescent's discovery about honesty, prejudice, and other life lessons. Several times I thought I knew where this film was [[letterhead]], only to be [[revealed]] wrong. Unfortunately, I'm not so sure that the filmmakers ever knew where it was heading, either. The defining moment in this movie is [[arguably]] the scene in which Gary Sinise mocks "The [[Kicks]] [[Child]]" and debunks any notions that he's going to [[becoming]] a [[tutor]] to the adolescent golfer. It's refreshing, in a way, that this movie refuses to follow most of the simplistic and over-worked movie [[forms]]. However, too much of it [[however]] comes off as contrived. [[Under]] the [[fall]] of a [[bonnet]] people [[autumn]] all [[excuses]] of [[politeness]], or fail to [[wand]] up for the things in which they [[think]], or are exposed for [[somethin]] far less respectable than their [[placing]] in society [[implies]]. Unfortunately, there is often no [[settle]] to these [[times]]. And except for the fact that the club [[serving]] as [[context]] for them, there is no [[true]] [[continuation]] or [[bind]] of them. It's a shame that the [[authors]] and [[headmaster]] [[did]] not [[bailout]] a [[best]] film, [[mainly]] [[yielded]] some of the [[gifted]] [[protagonists]] and potential in the [[configured]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. What else can I say. Kate Jackson must have been desperate to direct. May be she should go back to acting...on second thought she was a bad actress to. Who would put money in to producing something this bad. I like anti-Christ movies and usually have a good laugh and the odd scare but this one is just Bad Bad Bad. The acting by the stars was worse than what you find on a soap opera. The special effects, if you can call them that, where laughable. I would not be surprised if you played the scenes in slow motion you would see the tubes the blood shoots out of. We had to turn the disc off after only 30 minutes. This so called movies original prints should be destroyed, all disc' and tapes destroyed and all the people associated with the making of the movie have to pay back money to the people that rented the movie. Then those people should never be allowed to act, direct or film any thing but their own home movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4820 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] I [[love]] special [[effects]] and witnessing new technologies that make science fiction seem real. The special effects of this movie are very good. I have seen most of this movie, since it's been airing on HBO for the past couple of months. I must admit, I MAY have missed a few scenes, but I'm usually drawn into movies, and have seen some scenes more than once. But every time I see some of "Hollow Man," I feel [[depressed]], almost like a "film noir." I'm not sure why; perhaps it's that I don't want Kevin Bacon to be evil, and there's disappointment in that. But I think it's witnessing just HOW relentlessly evil he becomes. Regardless, I can recommend this movie for excitement (although some parts move slowly), but I do NOT recommend for youngsters under the age of 14 (perhaps 12, if they are mature). I [[iove]] special [[repercussions]] and witnessing new technologies that make science fiction seem real. The special effects of this movie are very good. I have seen most of this movie, since it's been airing on HBO for the past couple of months. I must admit, I MAY have missed a few scenes, but I'm usually drawn into movies, and have seen some scenes more than once. But every time I see some of "Hollow Man," I feel [[depressive]], almost like a "film noir." I'm not sure why; perhaps it's that I don't want Kevin Bacon to be evil, and there's disappointment in that. But I think it's witnessing just HOW relentlessly evil he becomes. Regardless, I can recommend this movie for excitement (although some parts move slowly), but I do NOT recommend for youngsters under the age of 14 (perhaps 12, if they are mature). --------------------------------------------- Result 4821 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Over [[Christmas]] [[break]], a [[group]] of [[college]] friends stay behind to [[help]] [[prepare]] the [[dorms]] to be [[torn]] down and replaced by [[apartment]] buildings. To make the [[work]] a [[bit]] more [[difficult]], a [[murderous]], Chucks-wearing [[psycho]] is [[wandering]] the halls of the dorm, preying on the group in various [[violent]] ways.

[[Registered]] as one of the 74 '[[video]] nasties' listed by the U.K. in the 1980s, The [[Dorm]] That Dripped Blood had a good [[reputation]] [[built]] up for it [[prior]] to first viewing. The term '[[video]] nasty' [[strikes]] into mind some [[images]] of some [[great]] explicit gore, violence, [[sex]], etc.: All the things a horror fan [[dreams]] of. [[So]], after hearing all of that info, I [[settled]] into [[Pranks]] (alt. title) [[expecting]] a [[sleazy]] slasher [[experience]]. . . and that's what it tried to be, but failed [[pretty]] much [[completely]]. Visually, the film's not great. The [[cinematography]], gore (except for a couple scenes), and [[overall]] direction all fail. It's [[simply]] not [[enjoyable]] to watch. The unoriginal [[script]] is [[lacking]] and often throws in random things without any [[real]] [[reason]] (like the [[opening]] kill). There are some [[cool]] death scenes, [[including]] a pretty nice face melt (which can be [[seen]] on the poster), but that's about it for the positive. The acting is pretty [[bad]], the story seems unimportant, the [[killer]] isn't cool or scary, and it suffers the one major error that any slasher flick should always avoid: it's a bit boring. Overall, for a film done by a few UCLA film students for $90,000 (which [[would]] be over [[double]] that today), The Dorm That Dripped Blood isn't a total mess. It has a [[couple]] good [[things]], and is fairly watchable. . . But, as a slasher flick looking to be on the [[level]] of films like The [[House]] on [[Sorority]] Row and Pieces. . . it just cannot compare. Don't [[expect]] much, and you may at [[least]] be [[entertained]]. I hate to say it, but this is one of the few [[films]] I've [[seen]] that [[would]] [[actually]] be better with a remake. . . and [[yet]], they go after [[great]] works like Black [[Christmas]]. [[Oh]] well. . .

[[Obligatory]] Horror [[Elements]]:

- Subgenre: Slasher

- Violence/Gore: There are some [[brutally]] cool kills, and the gore is okay for the most part. . . but nothing special. Also, they off-screened some of the [[best]] [[murders]].

- Sex/Nudity: There's a little unappealing (to me) nudity, but not very much.

- Cool Killer(s): Nah. The ending monologue(s) of the killer made him/her pretty uncool.

- Scares/Suspense: A jump scare or two, but nothing too effective.

- Mystery: I suppose, yeah, but I simply didn't care enough, and it's as obvious as the nose on the killer's face.

- - -

Final verdict: 3.75/10. Bah! Humbug!

-AP3- Over [[Claus]] [[outage]], a [[groups]] of [[academies]] friends stay behind to [[aid]] [[preparation]] the [[residences]] to be [[buzzed]] down and replaced by [[apartments]] buildings. To make the [[works]] a [[bitten]] more [[knotty]], a [[fatal]], Chucks-wearing [[maniac]] is [[roaming]] the halls of the dorm, preying on the group in various [[fierce]] ways.

[[Recorded]] as one of the 74 '[[videos]] nasties' listed by the U.K. in the 1980s, The [[Hostel]] That Dripped Blood had a good [[notoriety]] [[erected]] up for it [[ago]] to first viewing. The term '[[videos]] nasty' [[strike]] into mind some [[pictures]] of some [[super]] explicit gore, violence, [[sexuality]], etc.: All the things a horror fan [[nightmares]] of. [[Thus]], after hearing all of that info, I [[settle]] into [[Jokes]] (alt. title) [[hoping]] a [[salacious]] slasher [[enjoying]]. . . and that's what it tried to be, but failed [[quite]] much [[wholly]]. Visually, the film's not great. The [[filmmaking]], gore (except for a couple scenes), and [[general]] direction all fail. It's [[exclusively]] not [[nice]] to watch. The unoriginal [[scripts]] is [[missing]] and often throws in random things without any [[actual]] [[cause]] (like the [[opens]] kill). There are some [[groovy]] death scenes, [[encompass]] a pretty nice face melt (which can be [[watched]] on the poster), but that's about it for the positive. The acting is pretty [[negative]], the story seems unimportant, the [[shooter]] isn't cool or scary, and it suffers the one major error that any slasher flick should always avoid: it's a bit boring. Overall, for a film done by a few UCLA film students for $90,000 (which [[could]] be over [[dual]] that today), The Dorm That Dripped Blood isn't a total mess. It has a [[couples]] good [[matters]], and is fairly watchable. . . But, as a slasher flick looking to be on the [[levels]] of films like The [[Maison]] on [[Brotherhood]] Row and Pieces. . . it just cannot compare. Don't [[expecting]] much, and you may at [[less]] be [[distracted]]. I hate to say it, but this is one of the few [[filmmaking]] I've [[watched]] that [[could]] [[genuinely]] be better with a remake. . . and [[again]], they go after [[phenomenal]] works like Black [[Navidad]]. [[Ohh]] well. . .

[[Mandatory]] Horror [[Element]]:

- Subgenre: Slasher

- Violence/Gore: There are some [[abruptly]] cool kills, and the gore is okay for the most part. . . but nothing special. Also, they off-screened some of the [[bestest]] [[assassinate]].

- Sex/Nudity: There's a little unappealing (to me) nudity, but not very much.

- Cool Killer(s): Nah. The ending monologue(s) of the killer made him/her pretty uncool.

- Scares/Suspense: A jump scare or two, but nothing too effective.

- Mystery: I suppose, yeah, but I simply didn't care enough, and it's as obvious as the nose on the killer's face.

- - -

Final verdict: 3.75/10. Bah! Humbug!

-AP3- --------------------------------------------- Result 4822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] So Mary and Rhoda have aged--who hasn't? I was a teen when Mary premiered, and a "young adult" when it left the air. Yes, it was [[great]] to see Mary and Rho together, and yes, [[maybe]] the film didn't [[sustain]] the [[comedy]] of the [[original]] series, but there were [[enough]] [[moments]] that recalled the [[spirit]] of the series to make this a [[fitting]] [[tribute]]. Example: the producer who hires Mary and then dictates the idea for a new series about "old people." Isn't this typical of the mentality of present-day Hollywood TV and film "bean counters?" This may not be THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW at its best--but it's a pretty [[damned]] good [[look]] back at one of the [[best]] [[shows]] we [[grew]] up with in the 70s. So Mary and Rhoda have aged--who hasn't? I was a teen when Mary premiered, and a "young adult" when it left the air. Yes, it was [[wondrous]] to see Mary and Rho together, and yes, [[conceivably]] the film didn't [[maintaining]] the [[humour]] of the [[upfront]] series, but there were [[sufficient]] [[times]] that recalled the [[geist]] of the series to make this a [[fit]] [[homage]]. Example: the producer who hires Mary and then dictates the idea for a new series about "old people." Isn't this typical of the mentality of present-day Hollywood TV and film "bean counters?" This may not be THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW at its best--but it's a pretty [[cursed]] good [[glance]] back at one of the [[bestest]] [[demonstrates]] we [[enhanced]] up with in the 70s. --------------------------------------------- Result 4823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I do not [[expect]] this film to be well [[understood]] by viewers out of Romania. This tells something certainly about the value, or maybe about the lack of universality of the film, but also [[tells]] something about how different history and even life of common people was in Romania compared to other countries, even in Eastern Europe.

The film is an adaptation of a novel by Marin Preda, a controversial novelist who died during the Communist rule soon after the book was published. It tells the story of an intellectual, professor of philosophy whose life is crushed after he is imprisoned on false accusations at the end of the Stalinist era. Basically the first part of the film tells the story of his fight for survival in prison, the second describes his tentative to regain his life after being released. His release is actually only apparent, Romania of the 60s asks from him different types of compromises and crimes, but yet his fight for survival is as tough morally as in prison.

The film is splendidly acted by some of the best Romanian actors. Stefan Iordache who has the lead role would be in another time and another place a mega-star, we can get here a good glimpse of his fabulous acting art. Although suffering from a hesitant story-telling and falling sometimes in non-essential details or character comics, the film is still an important landmark for the Romanian cinema, as well as for the process of recovering the moral and historic values in the Romanian society. I do not [[hopes]] this film to be well [[understanding]] by viewers out of Romania. This tells something certainly about the value, or maybe about the lack of universality of the film, but also [[narrates]] something about how different history and even life of common people was in Romania compared to other countries, even in Eastern Europe.

The film is an adaptation of a novel by Marin Preda, a controversial novelist who died during the Communist rule soon after the book was published. It tells the story of an intellectual, professor of philosophy whose life is crushed after he is imprisoned on false accusations at the end of the Stalinist era. Basically the first part of the film tells the story of his fight for survival in prison, the second describes his tentative to regain his life after being released. His release is actually only apparent, Romania of the 60s asks from him different types of compromises and crimes, but yet his fight for survival is as tough morally as in prison.

The film is splendidly acted by some of the best Romanian actors. Stefan Iordache who has the lead role would be in another time and another place a mega-star, we can get here a good glimpse of his fabulous acting art. Although suffering from a hesitant story-telling and falling sometimes in non-essential details or character comics, the film is still an important landmark for the Romanian cinema, as well as for the process of recovering the moral and historic values in the Romanian society. --------------------------------------------- Result 4824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] A number of contributors have mentioned the age [[difference]] between [[Stewart]] and [[Novak]]. She was 25 and he was 50 when this movie was [[released]]. I [[think]] that the [[difference]] didn't matter for a [[suspense]] [[drama]] like Vertigo, but it does [[matter]] for a romantic comedy. We can easily [[understand]], that is, why his character [[would]] be attracted to hers, but it's [[less]] clear why hers would be [[attracted]] to his.

Still, the movie works as a [[light]] romantic fantasy. The scene where she stares at him across the cat's head, with her dark painted-on eyebrows flaring and the sounds of her humming and the cat purring, is true [[magic]]. It's a little jarring, therefore, when the scene shifts to the top of the Flatiron Building, and we see the age difference very sharply. As he embraces her, she [[reaches]] up to run her fingers through his hair, but stops that motion and just brushes her fingertips lightly against his toupee. A number of contributors have mentioned the age [[variance]] between [[Stuart]] and [[Novick]]. She was 25 and he was 50 when this movie was [[freed]]. I [[thinking]] that the [[dispute]] didn't matter for a [[wait]] [[tragedy]] like Vertigo, but it does [[question]] for a romantic comedy. We can easily [[understanding]], that is, why his character [[should]] be attracted to hers, but it's [[least]] clear why hers would be [[lured]] to his.

Still, the movie works as a [[lighting]] romantic fantasy. The scene where she stares at him across the cat's head, with her dark painted-on eyebrows flaring and the sounds of her humming and the cat purring, is true [[quadrant]]. It's a little jarring, therefore, when the scene shifts to the top of the Flatiron Building, and we see the age difference very sharply. As he embraces her, she [[achieves]] up to run her fingers through his hair, but stops that motion and just brushes her fingertips lightly against his toupee. --------------------------------------------- Result 4825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[movie]] isn't about football at all. It's about Jesus/[[GOD]]!! It's the same [[kind]] of sappy [[sanctimonious]] [[religious]] drivel you get from those arch idiots who wrestle for Jesus, or pump iron for Jesus. Yeah, [[Jesus]] was [[totally]] buffed, [[liked]] [[contact]] sports, and [[definitely]] [[owned]] a full set of dumb bells. DUHHH! This [[movie]] should have been entitled "[[Hiking]] for [[Jesus]]," or something along those lines just to [[let]] the general public know that the real [[intent]] of this [[movie]] is to [[convert]] people to Christianity, and to pander to those whose brains have already been thoroughly washed in the blood of the lamb. That the title is derived from the Bible is made clear when the head coach is reading his Bible and asking Jesus for help. The recent sports movie "Invincible" was 100 times more inspiring than this was, and Jesus wasn't even a factor. It was just the desire and determination of an individual with a dream.

Any broad [[appeal]] as an inspirational sports movie is ultimately [[lost]] amidst all of the [[blatant]] Bible thumping and [[sanctimonious]] religious [[propaganda]]. One gets the [[impression]] that the [[sole]] [[message]] is the only way you can succeed and make [[positive]] gain is if you accept [[Jesus]] as your personal savior. But this is [[simply]] not true, and is therefore a lie being [[perpetuated]] by those who believe that it is [[true]] and want everyone else to believe it. The image of the winning [[athlete]] thanking Jesus when he wins comes directly to mind. What does he do when he loses? Does he curse [[Jesus]]? Of course not! When he loses Jesus isn't responsible. Jesus is only responsible when he wins. And the logic goes round and round and round, and it ends up exactly where the true believer needs it to be, every time!! I had to [[hit]] [[pause]] when the scene with the coach receiving a brand new truck came on so I could stop rolling on the floor [[laughing]] my ass off and catch my breath. Materialism is not what Jesus taught. I find it [[odd]] that most so called "Christians" seem to [[either]] [[forget]] or ignore this message from their "savior," [[especially]] when I see a Jesus fish on the back of a huge gas guzzling SUV that passes me like I'm standing still.

Another message this movie implies is that Jesus apparently cares more about the win loss record of a [[mediocre]] high school [[football]] team that he does about the [[millions]] of starving children in the world. The final scene where the insecure and unsure kicker boots a 51 yard field goal and it is hyped up as an unbelievably [[incredible]] miracle puts the final gag me with a spoon [[religious]] red flag on this turkey. I only gave it three stars because the guy who [[played]] the black coach could actually act. This [[filmmaking]] isn't about football at all. It's about Jesus/[[CHRIST]]!! It's the same [[genre]] of sappy [[hypocritical]] [[ecclesiastical]] drivel you get from those arch idiots who wrestle for Jesus, or pump iron for Jesus. Yeah, [[Damn]] was [[altogether]] buffed, [[wished]] [[contacting]] sports, and [[decidedly]] [[own]] a full set of dumb bells. DUHHH! This [[filmmaking]] should have been entitled "[[Trek]] for [[Geez]]," or something along those lines just to [[allowing]] the general public know that the real [[goals]] of this [[filmmaking]] is to [[transforming]] people to Christianity, and to pander to those whose brains have already been thoroughly washed in the blood of the lamb. That the title is derived from the Bible is made clear when the head coach is reading his Bible and asking Jesus for help. The recent sports movie "Invincible" was 100 times more inspiring than this was, and Jesus wasn't even a factor. It was just the desire and determination of an individual with a dream.

Any broad [[appellate]] as an inspirational sports movie is ultimately [[forfeited]] amidst all of the [[overt]] Bible thumping and [[moralistic]] religious [[publicity]]. One gets the [[feeling]] that the [[alone]] [[messaging]] is the only way you can succeed and make [[favorable]] gain is if you accept [[Dammit]] as your personal savior. But this is [[exclusively]] not true, and is therefore a lie being [[commited]] by those who believe that it is [[authentic]] and want everyone else to believe it. The image of the winning [[athletic]] thanking Jesus when he wins comes directly to mind. What does he do when he loses? Does he curse [[Christ]]? Of course not! When he loses Jesus isn't responsible. Jesus is only responsible when he wins. And the logic goes round and round and round, and it ends up exactly where the true believer needs it to be, every time!! I had to [[knocked]] [[pauses]] when the scene with the coach receiving a brand new truck came on so I could stop rolling on the floor [[laughs]] my ass off and catch my breath. Materialism is not what Jesus taught. I find it [[weird]] that most so called "Christians" seem to [[neither]] [[overlook]] or ignore this message from their "savior," [[notably]] when I see a Jesus fish on the back of a huge gas guzzling SUV that passes me like I'm standing still.

Another message this movie implies is that Jesus apparently cares more about the win loss record of a [[lackluster]] high school [[soccer]] team that he does about the [[zillion]] of starving children in the world. The final scene where the insecure and unsure kicker boots a 51 yard field goal and it is hyped up as an unbelievably [[amazing]] miracle puts the final gag me with a spoon [[ecclesiastical]] red flag on this turkey. I only gave it three stars because the guy who [[accomplished]] the black coach could actually act. --------------------------------------------- Result 4826 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Although]] there were some [[amusing]] moments, I thought the movie was pretty lame. The longer it ran, the worse it got. Once the action entered Monument Valley, I found myself watching the [[magnificent]] outcroppings more than the increasingly [[silly]] and [[unconvincing]] [[interaction]] of the characters.

The character of the daughter was [[particularly]] [[incoherent]]. [[First]] she's in on the deal, then discovers the truth and she bails. Then she's back again, then deserts them again. Then she's back again. There's no apparent [[motivation]] for any of her decisions. There were interesting [[characters]], some interesting scenes, and [[many]] missed possibilities. I [[would]] have to [[say]] the pictures was [[much]] [[less]] than the [[sum]] of its parts. Apparently the people who [[liked]] Repo [[Man]] were [[inclined]] to [[like]] this one. Searchers 2.0 is no [[match]] for The Searchers. [[Whereas]] there were some [[hilarious]] moments, I thought the movie was pretty lame. The longer it ran, the worse it got. Once the action entered Monument Valley, I found myself watching the [[sumptuous]] outcroppings more than the increasingly [[farcical]] and [[feeble]] [[interactions]] of the characters.

The character of the daughter was [[notably]] [[inconsistent]]. [[Fiirst]] she's in on the deal, then discovers the truth and she bails. Then she's back again, then deserts them again. Then she's back again. There's no apparent [[reasons]] for any of her decisions. There were interesting [[personage]], some interesting scenes, and [[innumerable]] missed possibilities. I [[could]] have to [[tell]] the pictures was [[very]] [[least]] than the [[somme]] of its parts. Apparently the people who [[wished]] Repo [[Hombre]] were [[slanted]] to [[likes]] this one. Searchers 2.0 is no [[ballgame]] for The Searchers. --------------------------------------------- Result 4827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Solid comedy entertainment, with musical interludes, it generates a [[fast]] pace that carries proceedings along in zestful tempo through a [[maze]] of humorous and chiller [[complications]]. Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi and Peter Lorre [[form]] a strong [[setup]] of sinister villainy. The script contains all the standard mystery film props-sliding panels, secret passageways, thunder and lightning and poisoned blow-darts. Karloff, Lugosi and Lorre go in for heavy leers and obvious melodramatics of the gaslit era. Kay Kyser and his band offered great entertainment for the people living in the 1940's who were trying to forget about the horror's of World War II. Solid comedy entertainment, with musical interludes, it generates a [[swifter]] pace that carries proceedings along in zestful tempo through a [[daedalus]] of humorous and chiller [[complication]]. Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi and Peter Lorre [[forma]] a strong [[configure]] of sinister villainy. The script contains all the standard mystery film props-sliding panels, secret passageways, thunder and lightning and poisoned blow-darts. Karloff, Lugosi and Lorre go in for heavy leers and obvious melodramatics of the gaslit era. Kay Kyser and his band offered great entertainment for the people living in the 1940's who were trying to forget about the horror's of World War II. --------------------------------------------- Result 4828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I am marking this as a "[[spoiler]]" only because of some of my comments of the show's content, not to the content itself.

As I read the comments it is apparent that those Republicans somehow tolerate the show, but disdain it, while the Democrats seems to relish in its so called truthfulness. One reader even (so it seems) actually indicates that he believes these events did or could have happened when Bush was in grade school.

But as to the content as I see it, [[trying]] to be neutral, is that the group that made this series must actually be really Bush haters. In the Episode that I saw last, s02e03, it showed that the program must have been put together long before McCain became the front runner for the nomination; because, the other former front runners are all featured.

Another thing that caught my attention, was the use of add in closets. I thought that the series must have been made in Europe of for sure not in the U.S.A., because I know of no home the U.S.A. that does not have built in closets, and most likely in the homes of the artists.

As I watch the show, yes I do get caught up in it, I am amazed to see what must be a terrific desire of the writers to do what they can to [[embarrass]] our President. Sure there are problems as most American will agree, but that is no reason to be so hateful in public displays seen around the world. Perhaps the trend has now been set by this show and network, so that IF Obama or Hillary got in, would they continue to produce and air the same sort of "humor" about them?

Just one more comment on a commentator's remarks. IF there had been some sort of change in the election back in 2000, according to that writer, he was so sure that there would be a completely different acceptable president. Wow, wishful thinking on his part. As far as 911 events, I do believe that it was set in motion back when Clinton was president, and I can't see how if Gore was president anything would be much different. I am marking this as a "[[deflector]]" only because of some of my comments of the show's content, not to the content itself.

As I read the comments it is apparent that those Republicans somehow tolerate the show, but disdain it, while the Democrats seems to relish in its so called truthfulness. One reader even (so it seems) actually indicates that he believes these events did or could have happened when Bush was in grade school.

But as to the content as I see it, [[seek]] to be neutral, is that the group that made this series must actually be really Bush haters. In the Episode that I saw last, s02e03, it showed that the program must have been put together long before McCain became the front runner for the nomination; because, the other former front runners are all featured.

Another thing that caught my attention, was the use of add in closets. I thought that the series must have been made in Europe of for sure not in the U.S.A., because I know of no home the U.S.A. that does not have built in closets, and most likely in the homes of the artists.

As I watch the show, yes I do get caught up in it, I am amazed to see what must be a terrific desire of the writers to do what they can to [[shame]] our President. Sure there are problems as most American will agree, but that is no reason to be so hateful in public displays seen around the world. Perhaps the trend has now been set by this show and network, so that IF Obama or Hillary got in, would they continue to produce and air the same sort of "humor" about them?

Just one more comment on a commentator's remarks. IF there had been some sort of change in the election back in 2000, according to that writer, he was so sure that there would be a completely different acceptable president. Wow, wishful thinking on his part. As far as 911 events, I do believe that it was set in motion back when Clinton was president, and I can't see how if Gore was president anything would be much different. --------------------------------------------- Result 4829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Vincent]] Cassel plays the [[part]] of Paul, an ex-con assigned to an office job where he meets [[Carla]], a secretary who is ‘quite deaf', when she has her hearing aids in ‘very deaf‘ when not (played by Emmanuelle Devos). [[Together]] they help each other to [[develop]] as people.

What was particularly interesting about this [[film]] was the [[complexity]] of the characters – not [[fitting]] into obvious [[stereotypes]]. Paul appears uneasy in the office environment, is it that he's just not cut out for work? This belief is dispelled when he gets a job in a bar and [[shines]].

The film has a certain amorality which I find refreshing and [[showed]] how easy is to act criminally, even if we think it is harmless or justified.

Finally, it is a film full of [[great]] ‘moments' both touching and humorous. One is when Carla is babysitting and is trying to comfort a screaming baby. She continues to cuddle it – but takes her hearing aids out for her own comfort. [[Tome]] Cassel plays the [[portion]] of Paul, an ex-con assigned to an office job where he meets [[Carli]], a secretary who is ‘quite deaf', when she has her hearing aids in ‘very deaf‘ when not (played by Emmanuelle Devos). [[Entire]] they help each other to [[developing]] as people.

What was particularly interesting about this [[movies]] was the [[complication]] of the characters – not [[fixture]] into obvious [[stereotype]]. Paul appears uneasy in the office environment, is it that he's just not cut out for work? This belief is dispelled when he gets a job in a bar and [[glitters]].

The film has a certain amorality which I find refreshing and [[evidenced]] how easy is to act criminally, even if we think it is harmless or justified.

Finally, it is a film full of [[wondrous]] ‘moments' both touching and humorous. One is when Carla is babysitting and is trying to comfort a screaming baby. She continues to cuddle it – but takes her hearing aids out for her own comfort. --------------------------------------------- Result 4830 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I read [[comments]] about this being the best Chinese movie ever. [[Perhaps]] if the only Chinese movies you've [[seen]] [[contained]] no dialogue, long drawn-out far-away stares and silences, and [[hack]] [[editing]], then you're spot on.

Complicated story-line? Hardly. [[Try]] [[juvenile]] and [[amateurish]]. Exquisite moods and haunting memories? Hardly. Try flat-out boring and trite.

This was [[awful]]. I [[could]] not wait for it to be over. Particularly when the best lines in the movie consist of "How are you? I'm fine. Are you sure? Yes." Wow! What depth of character. I [[guess]] the incessant [[cigarette]] smoking was [[supposed]] to [[speak]] for them.

As a [[huge]] [[fan]] of [[many]] Chinese, Japanese and Korean [[films]], I was totally [[disappointed]] in this. [[Even]] Zhang's sentimentally [[sappy]] "The Road [[Home]]" was [[better]] than this. I read [[sightings]] about this being the best Chinese movie ever. [[Potentially]] if the only Chinese movies you've [[noticed]] [[containing]] no dialogue, long drawn-out far-away stares and silences, and [[piracy]] [[edited]], then you're spot on.

Complicated story-line? Hardly. [[Attempts]] [[adolescent]] and [[unprofessional]]. Exquisite moods and haunting memories? Hardly. Try flat-out boring and trite.

This was [[abysmal]]. I [[would]] not wait for it to be over. Particularly when the best lines in the movie consist of "How are you? I'm fine. Are you sure? Yes." Wow! What depth of character. I [[suppose]] the incessant [[tobacco]] smoking was [[suspected]] to [[speaks]] for them.

As a [[prodigious]] [[ventilator]] of [[myriad]] Chinese, Japanese and Korean [[filmmaking]], I was totally [[disappointing]] in this. [[Yet]] Zhang's sentimentally [[gooey]] "The Road [[House]]" was [[optimum]] than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] My school's drama club will be putting this [[show]] in the spring of 2002, and I can only hope we're as good as this! I watched this [[film]] recently as sort of "research" for my role (Rosie Alvarez), and I'd just like to say, Vanessa Williams is the [[coolest]]!

Wow! The [[casting]] for this movie was right-on (with one [[exception]]). Jason Alexander, oh my gawd, is there [[anything]] he can't do? He was the most wonderful Albert Peterson ever - I especially loved all of his funny facial [[expressions]] and dancing during "Put on a Happy Face!" He is so great! Vanessa Williams, as I said before, is the coolest. She was a beautiful Rosie, and her transition from secretary to seductress was totally believable. Tyne Daly was hilarious as Albert's obnoxious mother and George Wendt was superb as the annoyed Mr. McAfee (however I LOVED Paul Lynde's performance in the 1963 version!). Brigitta Dau cracked me up as Ursula Merkle; she really hammed it up! And Marc Kudisch was an awesome Conrad Birdie..."Suffer!"

There was only one casting that I didn't understand, and, as you'll see from previous comments, many other people didn't understand. Chynna Phillips as Kim McAfee - what was that? I mean she's really pretty and very talented, but...she looks a bit too old for the role. Eh, maybe I'm delusional.

Okay well anyways, I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this movie. It'll leave you smiling!

My school's drama club will be putting this [[exhibition]] in the spring of 2002, and I can only hope we're as good as this! I watched this [[cinema]] recently as sort of "research" for my role (Rosie Alvarez), and I'd just like to say, Vanessa Williams is the [[coldest]]!

Wow! The [[pouring]] for this movie was right-on (with one [[immunities]]). Jason Alexander, oh my gawd, is there [[something]] he can't do? He was the most wonderful Albert Peterson ever - I especially loved all of his funny facial [[phrase]] and dancing during "Put on a Happy Face!" He is so great! Vanessa Williams, as I said before, is the coolest. She was a beautiful Rosie, and her transition from secretary to seductress was totally believable. Tyne Daly was hilarious as Albert's obnoxious mother and George Wendt was superb as the annoyed Mr. McAfee (however I LOVED Paul Lynde's performance in the 1963 version!). Brigitta Dau cracked me up as Ursula Merkle; she really hammed it up! And Marc Kudisch was an awesome Conrad Birdie..."Suffer!"

There was only one casting that I didn't understand, and, as you'll see from previous comments, many other people didn't understand. Chynna Phillips as Kim McAfee - what was that? I mean she's really pretty and very talented, but...she looks a bit too old for the role. Eh, maybe I'm delusional.

Okay well anyways, I [[vitally]] [[recommending]] this movie. It'll leave you smiling!

--------------------------------------------- Result 4832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This programme bugs me! There is no humour to it and is far too serious to be called "fun"! It's just far too educational for my liking! The characters are very stereotyped and unappealing. The plots are redundant and the morals are just repeated over and over again. Where's the fun in it? Also I feel this has been on the BBC for far too long and is broadcast way too much. Does it really need to have a slot on T.V every 2 or 3 months when a brand new show runs out of episodes? I think it's time that the BBC starting bringing back some of their older shows like: Inspector Gadget, Bananaman, The Smurfs, Snorks, Moomins, the Raccoons and Count Duckula other than continually giving contracts to these newer shows! I thought the BBC where bring back Danger Mouse, so what's going on with that?! 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[first]] one meant victory. This one [[means]] defeat. It takes place in a Bolivia, there the guerillas are sick and [[wary]] and don't meet that much sympathy from the farmers. If you know your 60s history, you understand how it ends. You will understand it [[even]] without that knowledge.

Del Toro is once again [[splendid]]. He goes on building this icon about the revolutionary who [[remains]] the same, regardless of success or failure. That's what Guevara is according to the legend, but [[still]] it's so well acted.

The documentary [[feeling]] is there [[around]] the icon, which is one of the [[greatest]] [[achievements]] in this big Soderbergh [[project]]. He has succeeded. The [[frst]] one meant victory. This one [[signifies]] defeat. It takes place in a Bolivia, there the guerillas are sick and [[mistrustful]] and don't meet that much sympathy from the farmers. If you know your 60s history, you understand how it ends. You will understand it [[yet]] without that knowledge.

Del Toro is once again [[handsome]]. He goes on building this icon about the revolutionary who [[stays]] the same, regardless of success or failure. That's what Guevara is according to the legend, but [[however]] it's so well acted.

The documentary [[impression]] is there [[roundabout]] the icon, which is one of the [[biggest]] [[successes]] in this big Soderbergh [[projects]]. He has succeeded. --------------------------------------------- Result 4834 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] When the British [[Film]] Institute asked [[Martin]] Scorcese to [[create]] the American part of its Century of the [[Cinema]] series, he [[grabbed]] the [[opportunity]] with both hands. A Personal [[Journey]] through [[American]] [[Movies]] is a fascinating, wide-ranging and, as the title says, a [[highly]] personal [[look]] at Hollywood [[cinema]].

Scorcese's [[story]] is [[primarily]] about Hollywood's directors – actors, producers, screenwriters and other collaborators barely [[get]] a mention. He states right from the beginning that for him the [[primary]] conflict [[within]] the [[film]] industry is that between the director's vision and the distributor's [[profit]] motive, between art and commercial viability. He [[even]] [[opens]] with a clip from Vincente Minnelli's The Bad and the [[Beautiful]], one of the [[earliest]] [[films]] to [[openly]] [[explore]] this contradiction. This dictates the structure for the documentary. Scorcese looks at how [[genres]] have [[darkened]] and clichés have [[become]] challenged, how mavericks have [[challenged]] the production [[code]], and how certain filmmakers [[fell]] from grace when they dared to be [[different]]. [[However]], Scorcese never [[falls]] into the auteurist [[trap]] of dismissing [[directors]] who [[consistently]] [[pleased]] the studio bosses (he lavishes [[praise]] on Cecil B. De [[Mille]]), or those who had [[less]] of a [[recognisable]] [[style]] but were master craftsmen of the [[cinema]] [[nonetheless]].

Scorcese doesn't necessarily [[focus]] on his absolute favourite directors either (Orson Welles and [[Alfred]] Hitchcock, two of Scorcese's [[biggest]] influences, are only [[mentioned]] in passing). [[Instead]], he [[looks]] at the [[individuals]] and the [[films]] that [[serve]] to [[tell]] his [[story]]. [[For]] [[example]], he [[shows]] us a [[succession]] of [[John]] Ford films to [[show]] how the western evolved. He looks at the [[work]] of Vincente Minnelli ([[probably]] the most [[often]] [[referenced]] [[director]] of the [[documentary]]) to show how a supposedly [[wholesome]] [[genre]] like the musical [[could]] [[also]] have darker undercurrents. I can [[imagine]] that, had this [[assignment]] not been limited to America, Scorcese [[would]] have [[also]] [[loved]] to talk about, for [[example]] his Italian [[influences]] or his [[British]] hero Michael Powell. As it is, he stretches the [[definition]] of American [[movies]] to [[include]] both the Hollywood [[films]] of immigrant directors such as FW Murnau, Billy Wilder and Douglas Sirk, as well as the [[work]] of US-born filmmakers that was [[produced]] [[elsewhere]] – such as that of Stanley Kubrick.

[[Rather]] than [[simply]] tell the [[story]] of Hollywood chronologically, Scorcese compares films from various eras in order to tackle various subjects. In his section on the language and tools of cinema, he begins with DW Griffith, looks at the coming of sound, colour and widescreen and inevitably ends up going over computer generated effects which, although Scorcese is not keen on them, he is even-handed enough to include clips of George Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola defending them. However, he doesn't simply finish the chapter here as if this is the end of it. Instead, he then rewinds back to the 1940s, to show how a low-budget horror like The Cat People can achieve effective results from the simplest and cheapest of elements.

A Personal Journey through American Movies has to be one of the best film documentaries made. There were a number of outstanding directors and pictures which I would never have discovered without, and even the most seasoned of film buffs would be likely to find something new in its broad scope. Scorcese has also restored the balance to forgotten or undervalued pictures. I was pleased to see that, when he talks about Kubrick in his "Iconoclasts" chapter, he looks at Lolita and Barry Lindon, for me his two most underrated films. Scorcese's respect for the medium is on display in the way he allows clips to play out fully, rather than just giving us tiny bits, and he interrupts them with talking heads (a combination of archive and new interviews) only when necessary. There is a bit of bias towards the 40s and 50s, but that is hardly surprising since it is the era in which Scorcese grew up and discovered cinema. And after all, I don't think this documentary could have been achieved had it not been a personal journey.

One word of warning though, in its in depth look at certain pictures, this documentary does contain a fair few spoilers. When the British [[Cinematography]] Institute asked [[Martina]] Scorcese to [[creating]] the American part of its Century of the [[Theaters]] series, he [[caught]] the [[likelihood]] with both hands. A Personal [[Tour]] through [[America]] [[Theater]] is a fascinating, wide-ranging and, as the title says, a [[vastly]] personal [[glance]] at Hollywood [[theaters]].

Scorcese's [[histories]] is [[basically]] about Hollywood's directors – actors, producers, screenwriters and other collaborators barely [[obtain]] a mention. He states right from the beginning that for him the [[elemental]] conflict [[inside]] the [[cinematography]] industry is that between the director's vision and the distributor's [[benefits]] motive, between art and commercial viability. He [[yet]] [[opened]] with a clip from Vincente Minnelli's The Bad and the [[Belle]], one of the [[nearest]] [[movie]] to [[clearly]] [[explorer]] this contradiction. This dictates the structure for the documentary. Scorcese looks at how [[genre]] have [[dark]] and clichés have [[becoming]] challenged, how mavericks have [[disputed]] the production [[cipher]], and how certain filmmakers [[dipped]] from grace when they dared to be [[several]]. [[Still]], Scorcese never [[autumn]] into the auteurist [[mousetrap]] of dismissing [[administrators]] who [[incessantly]] [[satisfied]] the studio bosses (he lavishes [[commend]] on Cecil B. De [[Mile]]), or those who had [[lesser]] of a [[identifiable]] [[styling]] but were master craftsmen of the [[film]] [[still]].

Scorcese doesn't necessarily [[orientated]] on his absolute favourite directors either (Orson Welles and [[Alfredo]] Hitchcock, two of Scorcese's [[bigger]] influences, are only [[quoted]] in passing). [[However]], he [[seems]] at the [[persons]] and the [[movie]] that [[serving]] to [[told]] his [[tale]]. [[In]] [[case]], he [[showing]] us a [[inherit]] of [[Giovanni]] Ford films to [[illustrates]] how the western evolved. He looks at the [[collaborate]] of Vincente Minnelli ([[potentially]] the most [[normally]] [[mentioned]] [[superintendent]] of the [[documentation]]) to show how a supposedly [[healthier]] [[sort]] like the musical [[would]] [[further]] have darker undercurrents. I can [[imagining]] that, had this [[allocation]] not been limited to America, Scorcese [[should]] have [[additionally]] [[enjoyed]] to talk about, for [[case]] his Italian [[effects]] or his [[Uk]] hero Michael Powell. As it is, he stretches the [[definitions]] of American [[cinematography]] to [[incorporate]] both the Hollywood [[movie]] of immigrant directors such as FW Murnau, Billy Wilder and Douglas Sirk, as well as the [[collaborate]] of US-born filmmakers that was [[generated]] [[else]] – such as that of Stanley Kubrick.

[[Fairly]] than [[merely]] tell the [[conte]] of Hollywood chronologically, Scorcese compares films from various eras in order to tackle various subjects. In his section on the language and tools of cinema, he begins with DW Griffith, looks at the coming of sound, colour and widescreen and inevitably ends up going over computer generated effects which, although Scorcese is not keen on them, he is even-handed enough to include clips of George Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola defending them. However, he doesn't simply finish the chapter here as if this is the end of it. Instead, he then rewinds back to the 1940s, to show how a low-budget horror like The Cat People can achieve effective results from the simplest and cheapest of elements.

A Personal Journey through American Movies has to be one of the best film documentaries made. There were a number of outstanding directors and pictures which I would never have discovered without, and even the most seasoned of film buffs would be likely to find something new in its broad scope. Scorcese has also restored the balance to forgotten or undervalued pictures. I was pleased to see that, when he talks about Kubrick in his "Iconoclasts" chapter, he looks at Lolita and Barry Lindon, for me his two most underrated films. Scorcese's respect for the medium is on display in the way he allows clips to play out fully, rather than just giving us tiny bits, and he interrupts them with talking heads (a combination of archive and new interviews) only when necessary. There is a bit of bias towards the 40s and 50s, but that is hardly surprising since it is the era in which Scorcese grew up and discovered cinema. And after all, I don't think this documentary could have been achieved had it not been a personal journey.

One word of warning though, in its in depth look at certain pictures, this documentary does contain a fair few spoilers. --------------------------------------------- Result 4835 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] There are laughs in this [[film]], that is for [[sure]]. [[Michael]] Keaton is a [[talent]] and he used to be [[funny]] (before he decided he was a [[serious]] [[actor]]). However, what [[bothers]] me so much about this film, is how unlikable practically all of the [[characters]] are. Other than the [[main]] two [[leads]], [[everybody]] is a jerk. I mean, these small [[town]] losers are about as [[uncouth]] as you can [[get]]. You just watch and think, [[man]], these losers should be unemployed. [[Moreover]], the American factory [[worker]] is portrayed as a lazy and ungrateful slob. It [[made]] me wonder if this [[film]] was [[made]] by Japanese nationalists. Oh sure, in the [[end]] they all [[come]] [[together]] as one, but I just did not [[enjoy]] the [[trip]] to [[get]] there. There are laughs in this [[filmmaking]], that is for [[persuaded]]. [[Michel]] Keaton is a [[talents]] and he used to be [[comical]] (before he decided he was a [[severe]] [[actress]]). However, what [[irritates]] me so much about this film, is how unlikable practically all of the [[personages]] are. Other than the [[primary]] two [[leeds]], [[someone]] is a jerk. I mean, these small [[city]] losers are about as [[boorish]] as you can [[got]]. You just watch and think, [[dude]], these losers should be unemployed. [[Meanwhile]], the American factory [[labour]] is portrayed as a lazy and ungrateful slob. It [[accomplished]] me wonder if this [[filmmaking]] was [[effected]] by Japanese nationalists. Oh sure, in the [[terminates]] they all [[arrived]] [[jointly]] as one, but I just did not [[enjoys]] the [[voyage]] to [[got]] there. --------------------------------------------- Result 4836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] There are no people like "Show People" [[Marion]] Davies (as Peggy Pepper) and William Haines (as Billy Boone). My introduction to Ms. Davies was a "clip" from this film; the [[delightfully]] spoofy one in which she lowers a scarf to reveal different [[emotions]]. My introduction to Mr. Haines was in viewing this film, [[presently]]; [[though]], it's [[possible]] I've seen him in a less memorable role. Haines makes an [[incredible]] impression, when he [[joins]] Davies for a commissary meal - tossing his hat into the ring with some wonderful bits at the dining table. Indeed, Haines and [[Davies]] deliver [[great]] comic performances.

The story starts off with Dell Henderson (Colonel Pepper) driving daughter Davies into Hollywood, certain she will become Tinseltown's newest sensation. Indeed, Davies and the already arrived Haines become comedy stars. But, Davies yearns to become a true drama queen. Davies leaves Haines, and partners up with the dashingly dramatic Paul Ralli. But, audiences prefer [[Davies]] in more comic roles; [[perhaps]] director King Vidor is [[offering]] up a [[case]] for art imitating life?

Full of [[great]] Hollywood location footage, both on the set, and off. Full of [[great]] "cameos"; at a studio lunch, at the stars' table, Davies sits between Douglas Fairbanks and William S. Hart. The [[best]] "bit" player, however, is Charlie Chaplin, who has [[enough]] nerve to [[ask]] [[Davies]] for her [[autograph]]! While the cameos are [[fun]], they, and the episodic sequences, do help "Show People" become less of an [[important]] film, and more of an [[important]] historical [[document]].

******** Show People (11/11/28) King Vidor ~ [[Marion]] [[Davies]], [[William]] Haines, Dell Henderson There are no people like "Show People" [[Mariana]] Davies (as Peggy Pepper) and William Haines (as Billy Boone). My introduction to Ms. Davies was a "clip" from this film; the [[wonderfully]] spoofy one in which she lowers a scarf to reveal different [[sentiments]]. My introduction to Mr. Haines was in viewing this film, [[now]]; [[despite]], it's [[achievable]] I've seen him in a less memorable role. Haines makes an [[striking]] impression, when he [[engages]] Davies for a commissary meal - tossing his hat into the ring with some wonderful bits at the dining table. Indeed, Haines and [[Davis]] deliver [[wondrous]] comic performances.

The story starts off with Dell Henderson (Colonel Pepper) driving daughter Davies into Hollywood, certain she will become Tinseltown's newest sensation. Indeed, Davies and the already arrived Haines become comedy stars. But, Davies yearns to become a true drama queen. Davies leaves Haines, and partners up with the dashingly dramatic Paul Ralli. But, audiences prefer [[Davis]] in more comic roles; [[potentially]] director King Vidor is [[delivers]] up a [[instances]] for art imitating life?

Full of [[huge]] Hollywood location footage, both on the set, and off. Full of [[wondrous]] "cameos"; at a studio lunch, at the stars' table, Davies sits between Douglas Fairbanks and William S. Hart. The [[better]] "bit" player, however, is Charlie Chaplin, who has [[adequately]] nerve to [[calls]] [[Davis]] for her [[looper]]! While the cameos are [[funny]], they, and the episodic sequences, do help "Show People" become less of an [[substantial]] film, and more of an [[principal]] historical [[documenting]].

******** Show People (11/11/28) King Vidor ~ [[Marian]] [[Davis]], [[Wilhelm]] Haines, Dell Henderson --------------------------------------------- Result 4837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This movie [[changed]] it all for me...I heard of breakdancing and hiphop, but had never seen it professionally done (hey I was an 11-year old kid from [[Holland]]!) When I saw this movie, this all [[changed]]. I got [[actively]] involved in the hiphop-movement in our city, started breakdancing and writing lyrics.

To this day, I still consider this movie to be a personal [[favorite]]. Sure, the filming and "cinematographic" [[importance]] might not be that significant. But who cares if the wide-shot was filmed badly or if you [[could]] see a mic hanging above [[somebody]]? It's what it does to you personally that [[counts]]... This movie [[alterations]] it all for me...I heard of breakdancing and hiphop, but had never seen it professionally done (hey I was an 11-year old kid from [[Dutch]]!) When I saw this movie, this all [[modify]]. I got [[forcefully]] involved in the hiphop-movement in our city, started breakdancing and writing lyrics.

To this day, I still consider this movie to be a personal [[prefers]]. Sure, the filming and "cinematographic" [[significance]] might not be that significant. But who cares if the wide-shot was filmed badly or if you [[wo]] see a mic hanging above [[someone]]? It's what it does to you personally that [[count]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 4838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Yes, this was [[pure]] [[unbelievable]] condescending babble. We know that the French often have a skewed [[idea]] of the USA, it's puritanism and views towards sex. As an American (Hoosier) who [[lives]] in [[France]], I have ample opportunity to observe these attitudes. And while some of these preconceived notions may be [[true]], [[NOT]] ONE ELEMENT of the midwestern [[town]] portrayed in this [[film]] rang real. A man who has never had sex because he was told in high school 20 years prior that his penis is too big? Where in the world would you find that? A juke box in a bar that plays only vintage bluegrass? A town with maybe 16 people less than two hours away from Chicago, but with no major gas station, no Tvs in the home, no McDonalds, no kids... A population that knows each other's intimate details yet relentlessly gets together like one big family that hates each other. The adult males plant whoopee cushions at the local cafe, have farms but don't harvest, kill the guy they don't like in front of everyone and seem to get away with it, and all with equal emotion? The liberated French girl who will screw the 17 year old virgin boy because of her sexual generosity, the too much flesh guy who goes from getting off in cornfields by the mere breath of an Illinois breeze to helping deflower this same 17 year old farm boy? HELP! I am so [[baffled]] and astounded by the [[absurdity]] of this film that I am not expressing clearly how ridiculous it is. Go see it for the A-to-Z primer on what to avoid. Gosh, I hope I didn't ruin it for you! Yes, this was [[pur]] [[unimaginable]] condescending babble. We know that the French often have a skewed [[thinks]] of the USA, it's puritanism and views towards sex. As an American (Hoosier) who [[iife]] in [[Francia]], I have ample opportunity to observe these attitudes. And while some of these preconceived notions may be [[truthful]], [[NAH]] ONE ELEMENT of the midwestern [[municipality]] portrayed in this [[filmmaking]] rang real. A man who has never had sex because he was told in high school 20 years prior that his penis is too big? Where in the world would you find that? A juke box in a bar that plays only vintage bluegrass? A town with maybe 16 people less than two hours away from Chicago, but with no major gas station, no Tvs in the home, no McDonalds, no kids... A population that knows each other's intimate details yet relentlessly gets together like one big family that hates each other. The adult males plant whoopee cushions at the local cafe, have farms but don't harvest, kill the guy they don't like in front of everyone and seem to get away with it, and all with equal emotion? The liberated French girl who will screw the 17 year old virgin boy because of her sexual generosity, the too much flesh guy who goes from getting off in cornfields by the mere breath of an Illinois breeze to helping deflower this same 17 year old farm boy? HELP! I am so [[disconcerted]] and astounded by the [[claptrap]] of this film that I am not expressing clearly how ridiculous it is. Go see it for the A-to-Z primer on what to avoid. Gosh, I hope I didn't ruin it for you! --------------------------------------------- Result 4839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought the film could be a bit more complex,in a psychological sense perhaps, but the action and voice acting were top notch. The animation was heavy CG in many scenes, but very good ones at that. This is one of the Batman Returns/Forever type films, which include romances and the conflicts of Wayne and motives for dating. 007 fans would love this, and so would the females, great theme song! Wayne was portrayed very well in this film, and the Penquin was back to his true form, no mutant genes in him this time! I liked the fact Robin wasn't used too much, Tim Drake was just a good computer nerd, somewhat of an Indigo child or mind of the future.

The supporting cast was made up of some soap opera stars, decent talents and the characters were drawn to look like the voice actors too. Kelly Ripa was hilarious in this film.

I rate this below Phantasm, Return of the Joker, and Batman vs. Dracula, but liked the smarter script better than I enjoyed Subzero. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4840 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] At [[least]] something good came out of Damon Runyon's misguided attempt to sentimentalize the Mafia. "Guys and Dolls," the seemingly indestructible stage musical, was [[captured]] on film in 1955 by Joseph L. Mankiewicz ("All About Eve") in a colorful, [[enjoyable]] movie that featured an all-star cast including Vivian Blaine (from the original Broadway show), Jean Simmons (whose character bears an odd resemblance to Audrey Hepburn in "Roman Holiday") and two of the all-time great leading men, Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando, both of whom had recently won Oscars for [[Best]] Supporting Actor ("From Here To Eternity") and [[Best]] Actor ("On the [[Waterfront]]") and were on the top of their game. One [[listen]] to Brando singing "Luck Be a Lady [[Tonight]]" [[speaks]] [[volumes]] about where the early Dylan got his voice. Stubby Kaye [[steals]] the [[show]] as Nicely Nicely Johnson, who [[brings]] down the house with "[[Sit]] Down You're Rocking The [[Boat]]." The [[ubiquitous]] Sheldon Leonard adds [[yet]] another [[page]] to his rogue's gallery of screen [[gangsters]]. The film has a bright, cartoonish look, anticipating the Pop Art of the early 1960s. The characters speak in a stylized patois, [[apparently]] [[based]] on Yiddish idioms. [[Although]] the film's [[social]] [[attitudes]] and [[gender]] [[roles]] are dated, it's all [[great]] [[fun]], and even the [[gentle]] [[kidding]] of the Salvation Army is harmless and [[reflects]] no [[real]] animosity [[toward]] organized [[religion]]. [[Just]] seeing Sinatra and Brando in the same [[film]] is reason [[enough]] to watch this [[movie]], but it has lots of other attractions to [[offer]] during its 149 minutes. At [[lowest]] something good came out of Damon Runyon's misguided attempt to sentimentalize the Mafia. "Guys and Dolls," the seemingly indestructible stage musical, was [[apprehended]] on film in 1955 by Joseph L. Mankiewicz ("All About Eve") in a colorful, [[congenial]] movie that featured an all-star cast including Vivian Blaine (from the original Broadway show), Jean Simmons (whose character bears an odd resemblance to Audrey Hepburn in "Roman Holiday") and two of the all-time great leading men, Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando, both of whom had recently won Oscars for [[Better]] Supporting Actor ("From Here To Eternity") and [[Finest]] Actor ("On the [[Seafront]]") and were on the top of their game. One [[hear]] to Brando singing "Luck Be a Lady [[Mondays]]" [[discussing]] [[quantities]] about where the early Dylan got his voice. Stubby Kaye [[itches]] the [[spectacle]] as Nicely Nicely Johnson, who [[poses]] down the house with "[[Seated]] Down You're Rocking The [[Freighter]]." The [[omnipresent]] Sheldon Leonard adds [[however]] another [[pages]] to his rogue's gallery of screen [[muggers]]. The film has a bright, cartoonish look, anticipating the Pop Art of the early 1960s. The characters speak in a stylized patois, [[obviously]] [[founded]] on Yiddish idioms. [[Despite]] the film's [[sociable]] [[attitude]] and [[genders]] [[functions]] are dated, it's all [[wondrous]] [[amusing]], and even the [[mild]] [[joking]] of the Salvation Army is harmless and [[reflecting]] no [[authentic]] animosity [[about]] organized [[cults]]. [[Mere]] seeing Sinatra and Brando in the same [[cinematic]] is reason [[adequate]] to watch this [[cinematography]], but it has lots of other attractions to [[offered]] during its 149 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 4841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] If you played "Spider-Man" on the PS version, then you've seen it all. To truly experience it you should get the DC version. Simply put it's a much graphically superior game; the textures are sharp, levels are easy to navigate, and it has much better sound then it's PS cousin. I bought this game back in late '00s and it still [[holds]] up even till this day. Well, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance is a much superior and strategic game but if you're a fan of 'ol Web Head then you owe it yourself to pick this up for your gaming library. Swinging around the city as Spidey has never looked this good and dead-on in a video game. If you have a Dreamcast, snag this up for cheap. The DC version is simply [[incredible]]. If you played "Spider-Man" on the PS version, then you've seen it all. To truly experience it you should get the DC version. Simply put it's a much graphically superior game; the textures are sharp, levels are easy to navigate, and it has much better sound then it's PS cousin. I bought this game back in late '00s and it still [[possesses]] up even till this day. Well, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance is a much superior and strategic game but if you're a fan of 'ol Web Head then you owe it yourself to pick this up for your gaming library. Swinging around the city as Spidey has never looked this good and dead-on in a video game. If you have a Dreamcast, snag this up for cheap. The DC version is simply [[unthinkable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4842 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] "The Straight [[Story]]" is a [[truly]] beautiful movie about an [[elderly]] man named Alvin Straight, who [[rides]] his lawnmower across the [[country]] to visit his estranged, dying brother. But that's just the [[basic]] synapsis...this movie is about so much more than that. This was Richard's Farnworth's last role before he [[died]], and it's [[definitely]] one that he will be [[remembered]] for. He's a [[stubborn]] old [[man]], not unlike a [[lot]] of the [[old]] [[men]] that you and I [[probably]] know.

"The [[Straight]] [[Story]]" is a movie that everyone should watch at [[least]] once in their lives. It will [[reach]] down and [[touch]] some [[part]] of you, at [[least]] if you have a [[heart]], it will. "The Straight [[Narratives]]" is a [[really]] beautiful movie about an [[ancient]] man named Alvin Straight, who [[wrinkles]] his lawnmower across the [[nation]] to visit his estranged, dying brother. But that's just the [[fundamental]] synapsis...this movie is about so much more than that. This was Richard's Farnworth's last role before he [[deaths]], and it's [[surely]] one that he will be [[recalled]] for. He's a [[obstinate]] old [[dude]], not unlike a [[batches]] of the [[antique]] [[males]] that you and I [[potentially]] know.

"The [[Consecutive]] [[Fairytales]]" is a movie that everyone should watch at [[fewer]] once in their lives. It will [[achieving]] down and [[toque]] some [[portions]] of you, at [[lowest]] if you have a [[nub]], it will. --------------------------------------------- Result 4843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (63%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] "Meatball Machine" has got to be one of the most complex ridiculous, awful and over-exaggerated sci-fi horror films that I have ever came across. It is about good against evil and a coming-of-age tale, with the aim of to entertain with bloody, sleazy and humorous context. Because of that the violence isn't particularly gruesome and it doesn't make you squirm, but the gratuitous bloodletting and nudity does run freely. The performances by Issei Takahashi and Toru Tezuka is the worst i have seen, if that was not enough it is also directed by an unheard of director called Yudai Yamaguchi. This movie just have it all, it is bad to the bone!, A must see for every b-movie freak!!!... Simply: an enjoying and rare gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 4844 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] In the movie several references are made in subtly to Blade [[runner]], but one of the most obvious is the fact the Cain 607 and his unit are all genetic constructs, breed to be expendable warriors. But as favorite quote of mine from the movie is, " you should have made them smart as well as fast". Kurt [[Russell]] did a [[incredible]] job, his facial expressions or lack of in the movies gave more in the way of relating the story then the rest of the [[cast]] [[combined]]. [[Even]] when he falls in love with Sandra but does not know how to deal with these emotions, and his tears after being expelled from the group, or his shuddering when he is given a hug, and his attachment to the mute young boy who in many ways [[reminded]] Todd of himself, and what he could have been if not for his selection to be a soldier. In the movie several references are made in subtly to Blade [[racer]], but one of the most obvious is the fact the Cain 607 and his unit are all genetic constructs, breed to be expendable warriors. But as favorite quote of mine from the movie is, " you should have made them smart as well as fast". Kurt [[Russel]] did a [[unthinkable]] job, his facial expressions or lack of in the movies gave more in the way of relating the story then the rest of the [[casting]] [[merged]]. [[Yet]] when he falls in love with Sandra but does not know how to deal with these emotions, and his tears after being expelled from the group, or his shuddering when he is given a hug, and his attachment to the mute young boy who in many ways [[recalls]] Todd of himself, and what he could have been if not for his selection to be a soldier. --------------------------------------------- Result 4845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This [[film]] is [[fun]], if your a person who likes a good campy [[feature]] [[film]] [[every]] now and then. By no means is this movie fine [[cinema]], but if you [[dont]] [[take]] things too seriously, and can laugh at yourself once in a while, Elvira is a good frownbuster. This [[movie]] is [[funny]], if your a person who likes a good campy [[idiosyncrasies]] [[kino]] [[all]] now and then. By no means is this movie fine [[film]], but if you [[whats]] [[taking]] things too seriously, and can laugh at yourself once in a while, Elvira is a good frownbuster. --------------------------------------------- Result 4846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I LOVED the Apprentice for the first two seasons.

But now with season 5? (or is it 6?) things are getting just plain too tiring.

I used to like the show, but its become Donald Trumps own ego fest. Granted its his company you'll be working for, but come on! some of the things says "You're FIRED" is just insulting.

after watching the show, I would not want to work for him. not because he is arrogant, pompous or such. Its just that the show is unrealistic and the way he handles things makes me just squirm. Good Entertainment? YES, but tiring as the back stabbing gets so tiring.. its not team work, its not personal, its just business. watch your back jack. --------------------------------------------- Result 4847 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a [[bad]], bad movie. I'm an [[actual]] fencer: trust me when I [[say]] that this film's [[pretension]] of [[accuracy]] is just that. This is [[especially]] [[true]] during that [[vile]] little scene when the fencers are [[combining]] footwork with 80's [[pop]]. The ending is predictable, and the movie is a [[bore]] from [[start]] to finish. [[Horrible]]. This is a [[unfavourable]], bad movie. I'm an [[real]] fencer: trust me when I [[says]] that this film's [[pretense]] of [[accurate]] is just that. This is [[namely]] [[veritable]] during that [[nasty]] little scene when the fencers are [[merging]] footwork with 80's [[papa]]. The ending is predictable, and the movie is a [[boring]] from [[starts]] to finish. [[Frightful]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Like [[many]] others have [[commented]] before me here, I have to say that this [[movie]] is [[bad]], but not the [[worst]] I've [[seen]]. There will be no direct references to [[movie]] plots or sequences in this [[comment]], because I hate [[spoilers]].

I [[got]] a [[feeling]] I was watching an episode of a TV [[show]] or something, where they had gotten a hold of some [[extra]] $$$ to [[spend]] on CGI (I've [[seen]] [[worse]] of those)... All in all, it is [[quite]] an [[insult]] to the [[viewer]], at [[least]] if you have ANY [[knowledge]] about [[computers]] and/or [[technology]] at all. There are just too [[many]] of these [[moments]] of insults to [[make]] me feel [[comfortable]], and I [[found]] myself just begging for it all to [[end]] - [[fast]] - [[halfway]] through. [[In]] addition, there are countless "easy [[way]] out" scenarios, which also is an insult to your [[intelligence]] as a [[thinking]] human being...

This movie [[absolutely]] fades in comparison to the [[old]] "Wargames", and I think it's a [[damn]] [[shame]] they even got to [[call]] it a sequel.

Two stars from me, because of one thing and one [[thing]] only: the actors' performances aren't half-bad, [[considering]] the regurgitated [[crap]] of a [[script]] they had to [[work]] with. [[Still]], they should never have [[signed]] on to this movie. Not [[really]] a career-move, but I guess we all have [[bills]] to [[pay]].

To those of you who gave this [[movie]] top [[score]]...you have to be on the studio's [[payroll]] or something, that's my only explanation.

To all who haven't [[seen]] this one: by all means, watch it and [[make]] up your own mind. But lower your expectations to the [[floor]] (and then some). Like [[myriad]] others have [[noted]] before me here, I have to say that this [[filmmaking]] is [[unfavourable]], but not the [[meanest]] I've [[noticed]]. There will be no direct references to [[movies]] plots or sequences in this [[comments]], because I hate [[troublemakers]].

I [[gets]] a [[sentiment]] I was watching an episode of a TV [[exhibitions]] or something, where they had gotten a hold of some [[additional]] $$$ to [[expenditure]] on CGI (I've [[saw]] [[pire]] of those)... All in all, it is [[rather]] an [[snub]] to the [[bystander]], at [[lowest]] if you have ANY [[acquaintances]] about [[machines]] and/or [[technologies]] at all. There are just too [[countless]] of these [[times]] of insults to [[deliver]] me feel [[cozy]], and I [[finds]] myself just begging for it all to [[ending]] - [[quickly]] - [[midway]] through. [[At]] addition, there are countless "easy [[route]] out" scenarios, which also is an insult to your [[intelligentsia]] as a [[idea]] human being...

This movie [[totally]] fades in comparison to the [[elderly]] "Wargames", and I think it's a [[fucking]] [[pity]] they even got to [[invitation]] it a sequel.

Two stars from me, because of one thing and one [[stuff]] only: the actors' performances aren't half-bad, [[consider]] the regurgitated [[bullshit]] of a [[scripts]] they had to [[collaborated]] with. [[However]], they should never have [[signing]] on to this movie. Not [[genuinely]] a career-move, but I guess we all have [[bill]] to [[paid]].

To those of you who gave this [[filmmaking]] top [[scoring]]...you have to be on the studio's [[pay]] or something, that's my only explanation.

To all who haven't [[watched]] this one: by all means, watch it and [[deliver]] up your own mind. But lower your expectations to the [[storey]] (and then some). --------------------------------------------- Result 4849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I found this film to be an interesting study in [[cause]] and [[effect]] but little more than that. The [[basic]] plot follows the lives of a handful of people and how their actions (deliberate and otherwise) [[effect]] the [[lives]] of the [[others]]. The film's premise holds [[great]] promise but I feel it fails to [[deliver]] on its promise. Too much time is [[spent]] telling the [[audience]] about chaos theory and too [[little]] time actually [[showing]] it. As a [[result]], I never got a true feel for any of the [[characters]] and never made a [[good]] connection with them emotionally. By the end of the movie, I had a "so what" attitude about all of them. A stronger [[direction]] in character [[development]] [[would]] have made this [[movie]] great, but as it stands it is [[merely]] so-so I found this film to be an interesting study in [[reason]] and [[impacts]] but little more than that. The [[fundamental]] plot follows the lives of a handful of people and how their actions (deliberate and otherwise) [[implications]] the [[iife]] of the [[alia]]. The film's premise holds [[resplendent]] promise but I feel it fails to [[provide]] on its promise. Too much time is [[expended]] telling the [[spectators]] about chaos theory and too [[scant]] time actually [[demonstrate]] it. As a [[findings]], I never got a true feel for any of the [[personage]] and never made a [[well]] connection with them emotionally. By the end of the movie, I had a "so what" attitude about all of them. A stronger [[orientation]] in character [[evolution]] [[ought]] have made this [[kino]] great, but as it stands it is [[purely]] so-so --------------------------------------------- Result 4850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Was lucky [[enough]] to be an [[extra]] in this [[great]] film and [[loved]] every minute of the filming. Went to the premier in London and had a great chat to Phil, Peter, Martin, and Jon as did my wife.Fantastic after [[party]] too. Then a few weeks later had trip to the cinema with members of our bike club. What a brilliant film, it deserves to be up there with all the great biker films. Now we have the DVD Sue my wife can't get enough of it neither can the kids. Get a bit of stick from the club who seem to think I'm a film star now oh well one can only dream. I think they are just jealous. The only downside of the first part of the filming was the weather, rain, rain and more rain but hey we was in Wales. Hopefully there will be a follow up so keep me posted Jon. Danny Beck Was lucky [[suitably]] to be an [[supplemental]] in this [[wondrous]] film and [[cared]] every minute of the filming. Went to the premier in London and had a great chat to Phil, Peter, Martin, and Jon as did my wife.Fantastic after [[parties]] too. Then a few weeks later had trip to the cinema with members of our bike club. What a brilliant film, it deserves to be up there with all the great biker films. Now we have the DVD Sue my wife can't get enough of it neither can the kids. Get a bit of stick from the club who seem to think I'm a film star now oh well one can only dream. I think they are just jealous. The only downside of the first part of the filming was the weather, rain, rain and more rain but hey we was in Wales. Hopefully there will be a follow up so keep me posted Jon. Danny Beck --------------------------------------------- Result 4851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] About the [[worst]] [[movie]] in distribution right now! I love zombie movies and [[saw]] this in the used rack so I thought why not? Oh my god a shame to zombie movies and fans to the genre! Whoever made this movie needs to put away your camcorder and go to film school! There are so many gore hounds out there who have put time and effort into their films and they have something that this film doesn't dignity. I know it what it takes to make [[films]] and I'm sure there was a lot of money and time spent in making Meat [[Market]] but [[none]] of that money and time went in to making it good. You [[need]] actors, a script, a real camera, [[invest]] in some books on how to make independent films. I don't know how you got a DVD release but whoever did that is either a really good friend or banging their head on the wall. In gore films it is quality not quantity, the effects are weak! I was so angry that this is actually in stores and that I couldn't get my money back. Please if you have seen this film write here and put an end to shlock. I know I'm being very harsh, I only had 10 lines so I'm trying to get to the point. About the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] in distribution right now! I love zombie movies and [[observed]] this in the used rack so I thought why not? Oh my god a shame to zombie movies and fans to the genre! Whoever made this movie needs to put away your camcorder and go to film school! There are so many gore hounds out there who have put time and effort into their films and they have something that this film doesn't dignity. I know it what it takes to make [[filmmaking]] and I'm sure there was a lot of money and time spent in making Meat [[Markets]] but [[nos]] of that money and time went in to making it good. You [[necessity]] actors, a script, a real camera, [[investing]] in some books on how to make independent films. I don't know how you got a DVD release but whoever did that is either a really good friend or banging their head on the wall. In gore films it is quality not quantity, the effects are weak! I was so angry that this is actually in stores and that I couldn't get my money back. Please if you have seen this film write here and put an end to shlock. I know I'm being very harsh, I only had 10 lines so I'm trying to get to the point. --------------------------------------------- Result 4852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I love to watch this movie a [[lot]] because of all the scary scenes about the raptors. I like [[raptors]] because they are scary. My favorite parts are the ones where the raptor looks behind the pillar because it reminds me of a scene from the Friday the 13th movie with the girl who eats the banana.

I really [[love]] to watch a [[lot]] of this movie because the computer graphics [[seem]] a little [[fake]] but it's okay because once you get into the movie you hardly even [[notice]] what is going on and I think it's [[got]] a good ending [[even]] though I didn't really understand what was going on on my first couple viewings I figured it out over time and that's the important part. The other important part is how scary the dinosaurs can be if you're watching it the first time.

THIS IS [[BEST]] [[MOVIE]]. I love to watch this movie a [[batches]] because of all the scary scenes about the raptors. I like [[vultures]] because they are scary. My favorite parts are the ones where the raptor looks behind the pillar because it reminds me of a scene from the Friday the 13th movie with the girl who eats the banana.

I really [[amore]] to watch a [[lots]] of this movie because the computer graphics [[looks]] a little [[scythe]] but it's okay because once you get into the movie you hardly even [[advices]] what is going on and I think it's [[ai]] a good ending [[yet]] though I didn't really understand what was going on on my first couple viewings I figured it out over time and that's the important part. The other important part is how scary the dinosaurs can be if you're watching it the first time.

THIS IS [[BETTER]] [[FILMS]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie with my rock climbing instructor, and we found the entire thing so ridiculous as to be beyond pity. (For one, if Stallone is out free-climbing by himself, there's no need to carry any gear, but I guess those dangling carabiners look sorta "mountain climby," so let's throw them in). For those lobotomized folks who think that Colorado looks anything like the Dolomites in Italy (where the movie was filmed), well the Hollywood moguls have got a lot more ridiculous & foul-smelling stuff for you to swallow. --------------------------------------------- Result 4854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't know [[anything]] of the writer's or the director's [[earlier]] [[work]] so I hadn't brought any prejudices to the film. Based on the brief description of the plot in [[TV]] [[Guide]] I thought it might be interesting.

But implausibility was [[piled]] upon implausibility. Each [[turn]] of the plot [[seemed]] to be an [[excuse]] to drag in more bloodshed, gruesome makeup, or [[special]] [[effects]].

The score was professional and [[Kari]] Wuhrer seems like a [[decent]] actress but the [[rest]] was more than [[disappointing]]. It was [[positively]] [[repulsive]].

I will not [[go]] through the vagaries of the [[narrative]] but I'll [[give]] an [[example]] of what I [[think]] of as an [[excess]] of explicit [[gore]].

Chris McKenna goes to an isolated ranch [[house]] and [[pulls]] the frozen body of his [[earlier]] [[victim]] (Wendt) out of the deep [[freeze]]. McKenna had [[killed]] Wendt by biting a chunk out of his [[neck]]. Now he [[feels]] he [[must]] destroy the evidence of his involvement in Wendt's demise. (What are the [[cops]] going to do, measure his [[bite]] radius?) McKenna unwraps Wendt's [[head]] and [[neck]] from the [[freezer]] [[bag]] it's in, takes an [[ax]], and [[begins]] to chop off Wendt's [[head]]. Whack. Whack. Whack. The [[bit]] of the ax keeps chipping away at Wendt's [[neck]]. The air is filled with nuggets of flying [[frozen]] flesh, one of which [[drops]] on McKenna's [[head]]. (He [[brushes]] it off when he's [[done]].) McKenna then takes the frozen head outside to a [[small]] fire he's [[built]]. He [[sits]] the [[head]] on the [[ground]], squats next to it, [[takes]] out some [[photos]] of a woman he's just [[killed]], and [[shows]] them to Wendt's [[head]]. "[[Remember]] her? We [[could]] have [[really]] [[made]] it if it hadn't been for you guys," he [[tells]] the head. "Duke, you've [[always]] [[liked]] bonfires, haven't you?" he asks. [[Then]] he [[places]] the [[head]] on the [[fire]]. We only [[get]] a glimpse of it [[burning]] but we can [[hear]] the [[fat]] sizzling in the [[flame]].

I don't [[want]] this [[sort]] of [[garbage]] to be censored. I'm only [[wondering]] who enjoys seeing this stuff.

There's no reason to go on with the rest of the movie. Well, I'll mention one example of an "implausibility," since I brought the idea up. McKenna has been kidnapped and locked in a dark bare shack. He knows he's going to be clobbered half to death in the following days. (He's literally invited the heavies to do it.) What would you do in this Poe-like situation? Here's what McKenna does on what may turn out to be the last night of his life. He finds a discarded calendar with a pin-up girl on it and masturbates (successfully). Give that man the Medal of Freedom!

A monster who looks like Pizza the Hut is thrown into some unnecessary flashbacks. The camera is often hand held and wobbly. The dialog has lines like, "Life is a piece of s***. Or else it's the best of all possible worlds. It depends on your point of view." Use is made of a wide angle lens that turns ordinary faces into gargoyle masks. A house blows up in an explosive fireball at the end while the hero, McKenna, walks towards us in the foreground.

Some hero he is, too. He first kills a man for $13,000 by bashing him over the head several times with a heavy statue, then a potted plant, before finally tipping a refrigerator over onto the body. (This bothers him a little, but not enough to keep him from insisting on payment.) Then, I hope I have the order straight, he kills Wendt by ripping out part of his neck. Then he kills the wife of his first victim by accident and blames the heavies for it, although by almost any moral calculus they had nothing to do with it. Next he burns the head honcho (Baldwin) alive. Then, having disabled the two lesser heavies, he deliberately blows them up, though one of them isn't entirely unsympathetic. And we're supposed to be rooting for McKenna.

These aren't cartoon deaths like those in the Dirty Harry movies either -- bang bang and you're dead. These are slow and painful. The first one -- the murder for $13,000 -- is done clumsily enough to resemble what might happen in real life. It isn't really easy to kill another human being, as Hitchcock had demonstrated in Torn Curtain. But that scene leads to no place of any importance.

Some people might enjoy this, especially those young enough to think that pain and death are things that happen only in movies. Some meretricious stuff on screen here. I don't know [[something]] of the writer's or the director's [[ago]] [[cooperate]] so I hadn't brought any prejudices to the film. Based on the brief description of the plot in [[TELEVISION]] [[Manual]] I thought it might be interesting.

But implausibility was [[stacked]] upon implausibility. Each [[converting]] of the plot [[sounded]] to be an [[apologize]] to drag in more bloodshed, gruesome makeup, or [[peculiar]] [[impacts]].

The score was professional and [[Carrey]] Wuhrer seems like a [[presentable]] actress but the [[resting]] was more than [[distressing]]. It was [[favorably]] [[outrageous]].

I will not [[going]] through the vagaries of the [[descriptive]] but I'll [[lend]] an [[instances]] of what I [[believe]] of as an [[surpluses]] of explicit [[gora]].

Chris McKenna goes to an isolated ranch [[homes]] and [[pulled]] the frozen body of his [[ago]] [[victims]] (Wendt) out of the deep [[frost]]. McKenna had [[kill]] Wendt by biting a chunk out of his [[collar]]. Now he [[thinks]] he [[gotta]] destroy the evidence of his involvement in Wendt's demise. (What are the [[police]] going to do, measure his [[bitten]] radius?) McKenna unwraps Wendt's [[chief]] and [[collar]] from the [[freezers]] [[backpack]] it's in, takes an [[hatchet]], and [[initiating]] to chop off Wendt's [[leader]]. Whack. Whack. Whack. The [[bitten]] of the ax keeps chipping away at Wendt's [[collar]]. The air is filled with nuggets of flying [[frost]] flesh, one of which [[fall]] on McKenna's [[chief]]. (He [[brush]] it off when he's [[accomplished]].) McKenna then takes the frozen head outside to a [[little]] fire he's [[erected]]. He [[sit]] the [[chief]] on the [[terra]], squats next to it, [[pick]] out some [[imagery]] of a woman he's just [[assassinated]], and [[demonstrates]] them to Wendt's [[leader]]. "[[Reminisce]] her? We [[did]] have [[truly]] [[introduced]] it if it hadn't been for you guys," he [[told]] the head. "Duke, you've [[permanently]] [[enjoyed]] bonfires, haven't you?" he asks. [[Afterward]] he [[venues]] the [[chief]] on the [[wildfire]]. We only [[gets]] a glimpse of it [[arson]] but we can [[listened]] the [[tallow]] sizzling in the [[blaze]].

I don't [[wants]] this [[genre]] of [[trash]] to be censored. I'm only [[asking]] who enjoys seeing this stuff.

There's no reason to go on with the rest of the movie. Well, I'll mention one example of an "implausibility," since I brought the idea up. McKenna has been kidnapped and locked in a dark bare shack. He knows he's going to be clobbered half to death in the following days. (He's literally invited the heavies to do it.) What would you do in this Poe-like situation? Here's what McKenna does on what may turn out to be the last night of his life. He finds a discarded calendar with a pin-up girl on it and masturbates (successfully). Give that man the Medal of Freedom!

A monster who looks like Pizza the Hut is thrown into some unnecessary flashbacks. The camera is often hand held and wobbly. The dialog has lines like, "Life is a piece of s***. Or else it's the best of all possible worlds. It depends on your point of view." Use is made of a wide angle lens that turns ordinary faces into gargoyle masks. A house blows up in an explosive fireball at the end while the hero, McKenna, walks towards us in the foreground.

Some hero he is, too. He first kills a man for $13,000 by bashing him over the head several times with a heavy statue, then a potted plant, before finally tipping a refrigerator over onto the body. (This bothers him a little, but not enough to keep him from insisting on payment.) Then, I hope I have the order straight, he kills Wendt by ripping out part of his neck. Then he kills the wife of his first victim by accident and blames the heavies for it, although by almost any moral calculus they had nothing to do with it. Next he burns the head honcho (Baldwin) alive. Then, having disabled the two lesser heavies, he deliberately blows them up, though one of them isn't entirely unsympathetic. And we're supposed to be rooting for McKenna.

These aren't cartoon deaths like those in the Dirty Harry movies either -- bang bang and you're dead. These are slow and painful. The first one -- the murder for $13,000 -- is done clumsily enough to resemble what might happen in real life. It isn't really easy to kill another human being, as Hitchcock had demonstrated in Torn Curtain. But that scene leads to no place of any importance.

Some people might enjoy this, especially those young enough to think that pain and death are things that happen only in movies. Some meretricious stuff on screen here. --------------------------------------------- Result 4855 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Somewhat too long and going over the top [[towards]] the end, this [[comedy]] is an utterly [[delightful]], never [[condescending]] or [[ridiculing]] look into the [[problems]] of a "power [[man]]", who [[likes]] to [[wear]] [[women]]´s clothes at nite.

Julie Walters is lovely as [[always]], but Adrian Pasdar is utterly credible and [[steals]] the film. He (she)is [[absolutely]] [[gorgeous]] in high [[heels]] and [[silk]] [[stockings]]. Somewhat too long and going over the top [[circa]] the end, this [[comedian]] is an utterly [[charmer]], never [[patronising]] or [[belittling]] look into the [[trouble]] of a "power [[dawg]]", who [[adores]] to [[wearing]] [[femmes]]´s clothes at nite.

Julie Walters is lovely as [[invariably]], but Adrian Pasdar is utterly credible and [[robs]] the film. He (she)is [[entirely]] [[wondrous]] in high [[stubs]] and [[floss]] [[bas]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Ruby in Paradise" is a [[beautiful]], coming-of-age [[story]] about a young woman, Ruby Lee Gissing, escaping her [[stifling]] roots to become herself. Although the title character is played artfully by the gorgeous Ashley Judd -- in likely her first movie role, albeit one to be quite [[proud]] of -- the emphasis is not upon becoming "somebody," a la the next Madonna (whether Jesus' mother or the lurid, attention-hungry singer).

It instead emphasizes following ones' instincts and being somewhat introspective about them, to grow into one's ideal, adult self. NOTE: This isn't an action movie!!! It uses an occasional voice-over narration (by Ms. Judd) while writing in her journal -- and oh, I see I've just lost the male half of the readers out there. But be patient with this beautiful movie, where we learn that one's bliss can be discovered in -- oh, I dunno, carrying water and chopping wood.

Actor/director/writer Todd Field, who played Nick Nightingale in "Eyes Wide Shut," co-stars as Ruby Lee's noble love interest, one who helps her heal her idea of relationships implanted from youth.

But not even his character is the answer for Ruby Lee: There's no external hero imposed upon her. The ultimate message is that we are responsible for ourselves. Writer/director Victor Nunez, who also wrote/directed "Ulee's Gold," did an amazing job showing a young woman growing into herself -- confronting age-old challenges of good v. evil along the way.

The supporting cast is also stellar, and the music used, particularly the cuts by chanteuse Sam Phillips (whom I hear is the wife of T. Bone Burnett), is right on -- most especially "Trying to Hold on to the Earth." Now, when I hear the first few chords of that song, tears spring to my eyes, Pavlovian and unbidden -- not sure if it's the music, or the indelible connection to the movie's quiet, charming message of empowerment.

This movie is highly [[recommended]] for any young person trying to find his/her way. For any woman of any age, it is a must see! The downside: It is NOT on DVD, except in Spanish. (We learned, however, that it is legal to make one copy of a VHS version, which can be readily found online. My beloved husband found someone with a VHS copy and got a DVD copy made for me.) Although this treasure of a movie occasionally pops up on-air – on an indie channel, usually – you can't count on that when you might need it most as a tonic to soothe the pressures of the world. So buy a copy for yourself.

This movie should have a major re-release, and it would, if I were Queen of Hollywood.

-- Figgy Jones "Ruby in Paradise" is a [[wondrous]], coming-of-age [[conte]] about a young woman, Ruby Lee Gissing, escaping her [[suffocating]] roots to become herself. Although the title character is played artfully by the gorgeous Ashley Judd -- in likely her first movie role, albeit one to be quite [[prideful]] of -- the emphasis is not upon becoming "somebody," a la the next Madonna (whether Jesus' mother or the lurid, attention-hungry singer).

It instead emphasizes following ones' instincts and being somewhat introspective about them, to grow into one's ideal, adult self. NOTE: This isn't an action movie!!! It uses an occasional voice-over narration (by Ms. Judd) while writing in her journal -- and oh, I see I've just lost the male half of the readers out there. But be patient with this beautiful movie, where we learn that one's bliss can be discovered in -- oh, I dunno, carrying water and chopping wood.

Actor/director/writer Todd Field, who played Nick Nightingale in "Eyes Wide Shut," co-stars as Ruby Lee's noble love interest, one who helps her heal her idea of relationships implanted from youth.

But not even his character is the answer for Ruby Lee: There's no external hero imposed upon her. The ultimate message is that we are responsible for ourselves. Writer/director Victor Nunez, who also wrote/directed "Ulee's Gold," did an amazing job showing a young woman growing into herself -- confronting age-old challenges of good v. evil along the way.

The supporting cast is also stellar, and the music used, particularly the cuts by chanteuse Sam Phillips (whom I hear is the wife of T. Bone Burnett), is right on -- most especially "Trying to Hold on to the Earth." Now, when I hear the first few chords of that song, tears spring to my eyes, Pavlovian and unbidden -- not sure if it's the music, or the indelible connection to the movie's quiet, charming message of empowerment.

This movie is highly [[suggested]] for any young person trying to find his/her way. For any woman of any age, it is a must see! The downside: It is NOT on DVD, except in Spanish. (We learned, however, that it is legal to make one copy of a VHS version, which can be readily found online. My beloved husband found someone with a VHS copy and got a DVD copy made for me.) Although this treasure of a movie occasionally pops up on-air – on an indie channel, usually – you can't count on that when you might need it most as a tonic to soothe the pressures of the world. So buy a copy for yourself.

This movie should have a major re-release, and it would, if I were Queen of Hollywood.

-- Figgy Jones --------------------------------------------- Result 4857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really the tale of two cocky brothers and their respective falls from grace (via drug addiction) and later redemption. One brother, a self-proclaimed genius played by James Franco is your typical sensitive but intelligent man-child. The other brother is a hard-working future doctor who becomes less judgmental as he himself falls prey to addiction while dealing with the stress of living up to his family's expectations for both children. Not too heavy handed as drug fables are want to be, and all in all a pretty realistic sketch of the family dynamics that drug problems bring about. I'd recommend it to anyone interested in such character studies and commend James Franco for his efforts in what was obviously a labor of love. --------------------------------------------- Result 4858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Paul Verhoeven's De Vierde Man (The Fourth Man) is one of the most compelling thrillers I have ever seen. It really was a pleasant surprise. The story concerns bi-sexual writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe), as he is lured into a relationship with beautiful hairdresser Christine (Renée Soutendijk), but in the twisted mind of Gerard there could be more to the story. Verhoeven and cinematographer Jan De Bont create a beautiful and thick atmosphere full of surreal and sickening sexual imagery, this really pulls you into the story, you don't want to watch, but you can't turn yourself away. This is by far Verhoeven's best film (maybe second only to Robocop). True The Fourth Man isn't for everyone, some of the sex scenes are quite gratuitous (just ignore them, but trust me, if you watch for at least ten minutes you'll be hooked. This is one of those films that you need to know how it ends, a true whodunit it in the Hitchcock tradition, compelling, controversial and thrilling. I even like the spider metaphor.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey" is one of those wonderful old movies about house pets. Deserves a place among the great movies of its genre and even the cinema world in general, together with other animal movies like "Old Yeller", "Napoleon", "Fluke" and "Air Bud". This means it is more than just a movie about pets.

Can this possibly be just a "remake"? It is too good to be a "remake"! I know this one by heart, since my early teen years (when I was 12).

It's a family movie to treasure. It's emotional, thrilling, adventurous, exciting, entertaining, humorous, charming, sweet, nostalgic, beautiful, heartwarming and sometimes dramatic. It's one of those movies to put a smile on the faces of those who appreciate this kind of films.

This movie does not lack qualities. It has a well thought story, enjoyable characters, excellent and relaxing instrumental soundtrack, dazzling sceneries/landscapes of the magnificent Sierra mountains (in Oregon). Speaking of the vistas, it's not all mountains: forests, trees, rivers, waterfalls, sunsets... in conclusion, all of pure nature's wonders - truly a full panorama.

The main human characters are nice, well developed and well portrayed by respective actors. Robert Hays is awesome as the kind-hearted dad, Bob Seaver. Kim Greist is good as Laura Burnford. Veronica Lauren is equally good as Hope. Kevin Chevalia is conventional as the youngest and cute brother Jamie (his appearance actually reminds me very much of Kevin Corcoran in "Old Yeller"). Benj Thall is great as Peter Burnford.

When it comes to our quadruped pals, Shadow is my favorite. Shadow is the loyal, wise, mature, beautiful, caring and loving old Golden Retriever (brilliantly voiced by Don Ameche). Chance, the American Bulldog, is the opposite of Shadow. He is carefree, silly, impatient, anxious, clumsy, hilarious and loves to play (voiced by the talented Michael J. Fox). Chance just can't stand still. Sassy is the epitome of cats's image: elegant, independent, very confident and self-proud, with a typical cat attitude but with a certain feline charm. Sassy is a Seal Point Himalayan cat, one of the most beautiful cat breeds. Sassy is voiced by Sally Field, who also does a good job.

Our four-legged friends are, themselves, great "actors" by nature: Ben as Shadow, Rattler as Chance and Tiki as Sassy.

It's an underrated movie, but a classic by its own right. Its sequel is clearly inferior.

This should definitely be on Top 250. --------------------------------------------- Result 4860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Everything]] a musical [[comedy]] should be. Gene [[Kelly]] (as Joe Brady) doesn't miss a [[step]], and Frank Sinatra (as Clarence Doolittle) doesn't miss a [[note]]. Scenes with them [[together]] are very good, [[showing]] how much talent can [[add]] to a [[somewhat]] [[uneven]] plot. Sinatra's "I Fall in [[Love]] Too Easily" is an indication of his then and [[future]] best. Kelly's "[[Mexican]] [[Hat]] [[Dance]]" with a young [[Mexican]] [[girl]] is [[delightful]]. [[Kelly]] [[certainly]] [[earned]] his [[nomination]] as [[Best]] Actor. And there is a bushel of [[truly]] funny lines, like: "You [[think]] the [[navy]] takes dopes?"; "You [[think]] [[anybody]] sings a [[sailor]] to sleep?"; and, "We [[got]] in a little trouble, we [[picked]] up a [[little]] [[kid]]." A [[thoroughly]] [[enjoyable]] [[movie]], just the thing for shaking off the dust of a [[recently]] concluded [[World]] [[War]] [[II]]. [[Entire]] a musical [[parody]] should be. Gene [[Kelley]] (as Joe Brady) doesn't miss a [[steps]], and Frank Sinatra (as Clarence Doolittle) doesn't miss a [[notes]]. Scenes with them [[jointly]] are very good, [[proving]] how much talent can [[added]] to a [[rather]] [[ragged]] plot. Sinatra's "I Fall in [[Iove]] Too Easily" is an indication of his then and [[next]] best. Kelly's "[[Mexico]] [[Bonnet]] [[Dancing]]" with a young [[Wetback]] [[daughter]] is [[wondrous]]. [[Kayleigh]] [[probably]] [[obtained]] his [[appointments]] as [[Better]] Actor. And there is a bushel of [[really]] funny lines, like: "You [[thinking]] the [[naval]] takes dopes?"; "You [[thinking]] [[somebody]] sings a [[marine]] to sleep?"; and, "We [[get]] in a little trouble, we [[took]] up a [[small]] [[kids]]." A [[rigorously]] [[nice]] [[kino]], just the thing for shaking off the dust of a [[freshly]] concluded [[Monde]] [[Warfare]] [[SECONDLY]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4861 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] How could I possibly pass up the chance to see Orlando Bloom and Heath Ledger [[together]]? Well, I couldn't and so, I [[rented]] this mess of a movie.

I had never heard of Ned Kelly and was [[surprised]] by what I [[found]] out about this young man's legend. I was also [[surprised]] at how mediocre this movie was. Perhaps the fact that it was very, very late and at the end of a 4 hour movie marathon or maybe it was because it really is a little slow, I found this story difficult to follow. Not because the story is complicated, but because it is slow. Even with a slow story, Ledger and Bloom managed to create interesting, dimensional characters.

Though I flounder to recommend this as a must see, it is a great story of Australian history (considering how young the country is, this is very rare and should be appreciated) and the film does have some good actions sequences.

6/10 see it for historical value....(yeah right...and that's the only reason to see it... ;) ) How could I possibly pass up the chance to see Orlando Bloom and Heath Ledger [[jointly]]? Well, I couldn't and so, I [[leasing]] this mess of a movie.

I had never heard of Ned Kelly and was [[dumbfounded]] by what I [[discoveries]] out about this young man's legend. I was also [[stunned]] at how mediocre this movie was. Perhaps the fact that it was very, very late and at the end of a 4 hour movie marathon or maybe it was because it really is a little slow, I found this story difficult to follow. Not because the story is complicated, but because it is slow. Even with a slow story, Ledger and Bloom managed to create interesting, dimensional characters.

Though I flounder to recommend this as a must see, it is a great story of Australian history (considering how young the country is, this is very rare and should be appreciated) and the film does have some good actions sequences.

6/10 see it for historical value....(yeah right...and that's the only reason to see it... ;) ) --------------------------------------------- Result 4862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] When I first [[heard]] about the show, I heard a lot about it, and it was getting some good reviews. I watched the first episode of this "forensic fairy tale", as it so proclaims itself, and I really got hooked on it. I have loved it since. This show has a good sense of humour and it's fun to see a good show like this. The cast is [[excellent]] as their characters, and I wouldn't want to [[change]] them in any way.

For those unfamiliar with this [[show]], Pushing [[Daisies]] centers around a man named Ned (aka The Pie Maker, played by Lee Pace) who discovered a special gift when he was a boy: He could bring the dead back to life with the touch of a finger. He first did so with his dog, Digby. However, there is the catch: If he keeps a dead person alive for more than one minute, someone else dies. He learned this when he brought his mother back to life, and his childhood crush's father died in Ned's mother's place. The other catch is if he touches the person again, they're dead again, but this time for good. He learned this when his mother kissed him goodnight. His father took him to boarding school, and when he left, Ned never saw his father again.

Almost 20 years later, Ned owns a pie bakery, cleverly titled "The Pie Hole." A co-worker of Ned's, Olive Snook (Kristin Chenoweth) has a crush on Ned, but Ned rejects her moves, trying not to get close to anyone, learning from past experiences. Private Investigator Emerson Cod ([[Chi]] McBride) discovered the gift that Ned has, and decides to make him a partner in solving murders. Ned touches the victim, asks who killed them, and when the minute is up, he touches them again, and they solve it. That's how they usually solve it. Throughout the episodes, the murders have very interesting plots and be what people least expect.

One day, Ned discovers that his next murder to solve is his childhood sweetheart, Charlotte "Chuck" Charles (Anna Friel). He brings her back to life and decides to break the rules and keep her alive. In her place, the funeral director, who stole jewelery from the corpses, [[died]]. When Emerson finds out, and when Chuck wants to help with solving the murders, he doesn't agree a bit--for a while, we hear him call Chuck 'Dead girl'. This is all kept in secret from Olive, Chuck's aunts Vivian and Lily (Ellen Greene and Swoosie Kurtz, respectively), and everyone else for that matter, in case anyone recognized her from obituaries, the news, etc. Vivian and Lily, formerly synchronized swimmers, hadn't left the house in years. Emerson, Ned, and Chuck agree to work together. Ned and Chuck grow to love each other, though they can't touch each other ever again.

This show is funny, has terrific characters, contains great plot twists, and will definitely get your spirits up. I hope it doesn't get cancelled at 13 episodes. When I first [[listened]] about the show, I heard a lot about it, and it was getting some good reviews. I watched the first episode of this "forensic fairy tale", as it so proclaims itself, and I really got hooked on it. I have loved it since. This show has a good sense of humour and it's fun to see a good show like this. The cast is [[wondrous]] as their characters, and I wouldn't want to [[amend]] them in any way.

For those unfamiliar with this [[displays]], Pushing [[Mums]] centers around a man named Ned (aka The Pie Maker, played by Lee Pace) who discovered a special gift when he was a boy: He could bring the dead back to life with the touch of a finger. He first did so with his dog, Digby. However, there is the catch: If he keeps a dead person alive for more than one minute, someone else dies. He learned this when he brought his mother back to life, and his childhood crush's father died in Ned's mother's place. The other catch is if he touches the person again, they're dead again, but this time for good. He learned this when his mother kissed him goodnight. His father took him to boarding school, and when he left, Ned never saw his father again.

Almost 20 years later, Ned owns a pie bakery, cleverly titled "The Pie Hole." A co-worker of Ned's, Olive Snook (Kristin Chenoweth) has a crush on Ned, but Ned rejects her moves, trying not to get close to anyone, learning from past experiences. Private Investigator Emerson Cod ([[Zhi]] McBride) discovered the gift that Ned has, and decides to make him a partner in solving murders. Ned touches the victim, asks who killed them, and when the minute is up, he touches them again, and they solve it. That's how they usually solve it. Throughout the episodes, the murders have very interesting plots and be what people least expect.

One day, Ned discovers that his next murder to solve is his childhood sweetheart, Charlotte "Chuck" Charles (Anna Friel). He brings her back to life and decides to break the rules and keep her alive. In her place, the funeral director, who stole jewelery from the corpses, [[dying]]. When Emerson finds out, and when Chuck wants to help with solving the murders, he doesn't agree a bit--for a while, we hear him call Chuck 'Dead girl'. This is all kept in secret from Olive, Chuck's aunts Vivian and Lily (Ellen Greene and Swoosie Kurtz, respectively), and everyone else for that matter, in case anyone recognized her from obituaries, the news, etc. Vivian and Lily, formerly synchronized swimmers, hadn't left the house in years. Emerson, Ned, and Chuck agree to work together. Ned and Chuck grow to love each other, though they can't touch each other ever again.

This show is funny, has terrific characters, contains great plot twists, and will definitely get your spirits up. I hope it doesn't get cancelled at 13 episodes. --------------------------------------------- Result 4863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] While essentially a remake of the [[original]] Chinese Ghost [[Story]], this third installment has higher production [[values]] and greater [[subtlety]] in both the acting and the story. [[Tony]] [[Leung]] is particularly good. CGS III is a [[gorgeous]], [[moving]] [[film]]. While essentially a remake of the [[preliminary]] Chinese Ghost [[Histories]], this third installment has higher production [[value]] and greater [[finesse]] in both the acting and the story. [[Tonda]] [[Upton]] is particularly good. CGS III is a [[wondrous]], [[mover]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4864 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had the [[privilege]] of seeing this [[film]] at a preview screening [[years]] [[ago]], and outside the [[theater]] I was confronted by a camera crew from a local TV station looking for comments on the [[film]]. At the time, the only words that escaped my mouth were "Awesome. Just awesome." I like to think I can articulate myself a little better than that, but at the time I was [[somewhat]] [[incapable]] of doing so.

The story is intriguing and thought provoking, and the acting is [[first]] [[rate]] from all the principals. This film was the first one that Terry Gilliam directed that he didn't have a hand in the writing credit for. Back with Universal after his long, arduous battle with them over "Brazil", Terry had achieved what he wanted most; the "final cut". Terry is a master craftsman, and each shot is like a beautifully conceived painting that has been constructed carefully with determination and conviction. It is only justice that such an individual should be unfettered in his attempts to convey a concept. Unfortunately, limitations still exist in such arrangements.

The Universal Collector's Edition DVD of this film is simply [[amazing]], although most of the bonus features aren't listed on the box. It contains among other things, a director/producer audio commentary and an [[informative]] and extremely interesting 90 minute documentary on the making of the film called "The Hamster Factor and Other Tales of 12 Monkeys". It tells of some of the creative pitfalls in filmmaking, including a test of mettle when preview screenings tested poorly, striking the team with feelings of self-doubt and despair. Fortunately, for all of us, they decided to [[change]] very little about the film and released it to an enormous success.

I had the [[privileged]] of seeing this [[films]] at a preview screening [[olds]] [[beforehand]], and outside the [[cinema]] I was confronted by a camera crew from a local TV station looking for comments on the [[cinematography]]. At the time, the only words that escaped my mouth were "Awesome. Just awesome." I like to think I can articulate myself a little better than that, but at the time I was [[rather]] [[incompetent]] of doing so.

The story is intriguing and thought provoking, and the acting is [[fiirst]] [[rates]] from all the principals. This film was the first one that Terry Gilliam directed that he didn't have a hand in the writing credit for. Back with Universal after his long, arduous battle with them over "Brazil", Terry had achieved what he wanted most; the "final cut". Terry is a master craftsman, and each shot is like a beautifully conceived painting that has been constructed carefully with determination and conviction. It is only justice that such an individual should be unfettered in his attempts to convey a concept. Unfortunately, limitations still exist in such arrangements.

The Universal Collector's Edition DVD of this film is simply [[unbelievable]], although most of the bonus features aren't listed on the box. It contains among other things, a director/producer audio commentary and an [[informational]] and extremely interesting 90 minute documentary on the making of the film called "The Hamster Factor and Other Tales of 12 Monkeys". It tells of some of the creative pitfalls in filmmaking, including a test of mettle when preview screenings tested poorly, striking the team with feelings of self-doubt and despair. Fortunately, for all of us, they decided to [[modifying]] very little about the film and released it to an enormous success.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] " It had to be You" is another sign that Hollywood is running out of [[ideas]]. This picture is about Charlie Hudson a [[former]] [[police]] [[officer]] turned Author. When Charlie's fiancé goes out of [[town]] he's [[stuck]] with all of the [[wedding]] [[planning]]. He [[spends]] a [[week]] at a fancy hotel and meets [[Anna]] [[Penn]] a [[teacher]] who just [[happens]] to also be getting [[married]]. The two [[quickly]] [[become]] friends and set out to plan their [[separate]] [[weddings]] together. This is when the plot [[gets]] [[boring]], Charlie falls in [[love]] with [[Anna]] and she has to [[choose]] between a [[safe]] life or [[Charlie]]. This [[movie]] [[rips]] off every romantic [[comedy]] ever [[made]] and just has you [[waiting]] for the end of the movie so you can do something else. Micahel Vartan and [[Natasha]] Henstridge give really [[mediocre]] performances which just makes this movie all the more [[gut]] wrenching to watch. " It had to be You" is another sign that Hollywood is running out of [[reflections]]. This picture is about Charlie Hudson a [[previous]] [[cops]] [[agent]] turned Author. When Charlie's fiancé goes out of [[towns]] he's [[trapped]] with all of the [[wed]] [[plan]]. He [[spent]] a [[chow]] at a fancy hotel and meets [[Anne]] [[Pennsylvania]] a [[professor]] who just [[arises]] to also be getting [[wedding]]. The two [[punctually]] [[gotten]] friends and set out to plan their [[segregated]] [[marriage]] together. This is when the plot [[get]] [[dreary]], Charlie falls in [[likes]] with [[Ana]] and she has to [[elected]] between a [[seguro]] life or [[Charley]]. This [[film]] [[criticizes]] off every romantic [[travesty]] ever [[accomplished]] and just has you [[suspense]] for the end of the movie so you can do something else. Micahel Vartan and [[Delphine]] Henstridge give really [[lackluster]] performances which just makes this movie all the more [[digestive]] wrenching to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 4866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Since I watched it for the first time, "Piedras" is a personal favorite and one of the few pictures I actually could watch over and over again. The great screenplay depicts the lives of a bunch of women (all of them somehow interconnected) with deep understanding and sensibility. Ramón Salazar achieved a compelling film in his directorial debut, and proves himself as an efficient actors' director.

Not that all performances are excellent, though. Of all leading ladies, they range from average (Najwa Nimri) to very good (Vicky Peña), but the standing ovation should be directed to newcomer Mónica Cervera, who convincingly plays Antonia San Juan's retarded daughter. Enrique Alcides is irresistibly charming as the girl's male nurse, and there are nice small turns from Andrés Gertrúdix, Geli Albaladejo and the director himself, Ramón Salazar.

"Piedras" is beautifully written and filmed, when I watched it I got so moved that I couldn't stop thinking of it for days. I highly recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] My introduction into Yoji Yamada's cinematic world is through his [[famed]] and recent Samurai Trilogy with The Twilight Samurai, The [[Hidden]] Blade and Love and Honor. I had enjoyed all three films, and looking at the prolific, veteran director's filmography, I think it'll [[take]] me a very long while to watch all his [[films]], especially the Tora-san [[series]]. Needless to [[say]] when Kabei Our Mother has [[finally]] reached our shores, I jumped at the [[chance]] to watch what would be an [[ode]] to Mothers [[everywhere]], celebrating their innate [[love]] for their children.

[[Based]] on the autobiography of Teruyo Nogami, Kabei - Our Mother tells of a close [[knit]] [[family]] of four – Mother Kayo "Kabei" (Sayuri Yoshinaga), [[Father]] Shigeru "Tobei" (Mitsugoro Bando), eldest [[daughter]] Hatsu (Mirai Shida) and [[youngest]] [[child]] Teru (Miku Sato). From the get [[go]] their [[lives]] [[would]] be [[changed]] [[forever]], when Shigeru [[gets]] [[arrested]] under the [[Peace]] [[Preservation]] [[Law]] for his morally [[controversial]] writings against the [[nation]], set in the late 30s where Japan had [[begun]] their "crusade" in China, and [[thereafter]] their [[participation]] in WWII.

[[So]] begins Kabei's [[struggle]] to [[hold]] down [[jobs]] to [[feed]] her [[family]], and the frequent, [[difficult]] meetings with her husband behind [[bars]]. Help [[comes]] from relatives, [[especially]] on Shigeru's side, [[since]] Kabei's own [[dad]] had [[adopted]] an "I [[told]] you so" attitude with her [[choice]] of spouse. Shigeru's one [[time]] student Yama (arthouse buffs should [[recognize]] Tadanobu Asano here) [[provides]] [[laughter]] as a bumbling man who slowly becomes confidante and surrogate guardian to the [[children]], and Kabei's sister in [[law]] Hisako (Rei [[Dan]]) from Hiroshima, which I [[believe]] would have sounded some hindsight alarm bells as to her unfortunate fate as the film progresses through its timeline.

While the film centers [[primarily]] on how the kids are growing up under the presence of their mom, and in a distant relationship with their dad, what I [[enjoyed]] is how the microscopic family events [[unfold]] under the macroscopic worldwide events that have impacted on the common folk in Japan. It's against the historical backdrop of Japan's push to regional dominance, and there are characters here that don't mask those ambitions, even discussing what the country would eventually do should it be successful in holding onto conquered lands. This is something I rarely see in Japanese films, being that frank in their discussion of that era, and also to get a glimpse of how the common man have to struggle against domestic issues made all the more difficult with resources channeled toward the war effort.

The actresses casted here are pitch perfect in their delivery and roles, be they the veterans or the child actors. Actress Sayuri Yoshinaga deserves special mention for her role as the motherly figure who has to dig deep and find that inner strength to carry the household through under trying circumstances, while Mirai Shida and Miku Sato are lovable as the understanding children who have to learn to make do and compromise. Each scene with the three of them together just makes it heart wrenching when the going gets tough, or fill your heart with Joy should they be celebrating. Before long you'll soon find yourself being attracted to want to be part of this family, thanks to the primary cast's powerful performances, with Yoji Yamada coaxing some really natural performances from the kids.

Kabei - Our Mother boasts some stunningly beautiful art direction, and is classy in its delivery of both happy and sad moments without going over the top, or relying on cheap melodrama to cheapen the emotions it seeks from the audience. There are plenty of little things here done right which makes it pitch perfect, with every scene not being wasted, and with every nuance very meaningful in conveying its message across, be it compassion or love.

Aside from the very abrupt ending (I had hoped that it could have continued for a lot more, despite its more than 2 hours runtime), Kabei Our Mother comes highly recommended, and you'll find it difficult to be holding back either your tears, or that thought about your own mom and her sacrifices she makes for you on an everyday basis. Just what those sacrifices are should you need another reminder, then the scene during the end credits roll will remind you of the stuff that you'd probably have taken for granted. My introduction into Yoji Yamada's cinematic world is through his [[acclaimed]] and recent Samurai Trilogy with The Twilight Samurai, The [[Occult]] Blade and Love and Honor. I had enjoyed all three films, and looking at the prolific, veteran director's filmography, I think it'll [[taking]] me a very long while to watch all his [[movie]], especially the Tora-san [[serials]]. Needless to [[told]] when Kabei Our Mother has [[eventually]] reached our shores, I jumped at the [[possibilities]] to watch what would be an [[odie]] to Mothers [[anywhere]], celebrating their innate [[loves]] for their children.

[[Predicated]] on the autobiography of Teruyo Nogami, Kabei - Our Mother tells of a close [[crochet]] [[familial]] of four – Mother Kayo "Kabei" (Sayuri Yoshinaga), [[Fathers]] Shigeru "Tobei" (Mitsugoro Bando), eldest [[girls]] Hatsu (Mirai Shida) and [[younger]] [[children]] Teru (Miku Sato). From the get [[going]] their [[vie]] [[should]] be [[amended]] [[endlessly]], when Shigeru [[get]] [[netted]] under the [[Peaceful]] [[Conservation]] [[Ley]] for his morally [[contentious]] writings against the [[countries]], set in the late 30s where Japan had [[undertaken]] their "crusade" in China, and [[then]] their [[presence]] in WWII.

[[Therefore]] begins Kabei's [[combat]] to [[held]] down [[labour]] to [[foods]] her [[families]], and the frequent, [[problematic]] meetings with her husband behind [[handlebars]]. Help [[occurs]] from relatives, [[namely]] on Shigeru's side, [[because]] Kabei's own [[pope]] had [[passed]] an "I [[say]] you so" attitude with her [[elects]] of spouse. Shigeru's one [[period]] student Yama (arthouse buffs should [[recognising]] Tadanobu Asano here) [[prescribes]] [[giggling]] as a bumbling man who slowly becomes confidante and surrogate guardian to the [[childhood]], and Kabei's sister in [[laws]] Hisako (Rei [[Dana]]) from Hiroshima, which I [[reckon]] would have sounded some hindsight alarm bells as to her unfortunate fate as the film progresses through its timeline.

While the film centers [[basically]] on how the kids are growing up under the presence of their mom, and in a distant relationship with their dad, what I [[liked]] is how the microscopic family events [[unfolds]] under the macroscopic worldwide events that have impacted on the common folk in Japan. It's against the historical backdrop of Japan's push to regional dominance, and there are characters here that don't mask those ambitions, even discussing what the country would eventually do should it be successful in holding onto conquered lands. This is something I rarely see in Japanese films, being that frank in their discussion of that era, and also to get a glimpse of how the common man have to struggle against domestic issues made all the more difficult with resources channeled toward the war effort.

The actresses casted here are pitch perfect in their delivery and roles, be they the veterans or the child actors. Actress Sayuri Yoshinaga deserves special mention for her role as the motherly figure who has to dig deep and find that inner strength to carry the household through under trying circumstances, while Mirai Shida and Miku Sato are lovable as the understanding children who have to learn to make do and compromise. Each scene with the three of them together just makes it heart wrenching when the going gets tough, or fill your heart with Joy should they be celebrating. Before long you'll soon find yourself being attracted to want to be part of this family, thanks to the primary cast's powerful performances, with Yoji Yamada coaxing some really natural performances from the kids.

Kabei - Our Mother boasts some stunningly beautiful art direction, and is classy in its delivery of both happy and sad moments without going over the top, or relying on cheap melodrama to cheapen the emotions it seeks from the audience. There are plenty of little things here done right which makes it pitch perfect, with every scene not being wasted, and with every nuance very meaningful in conveying its message across, be it compassion or love.

Aside from the very abrupt ending (I had hoped that it could have continued for a lot more, despite its more than 2 hours runtime), Kabei Our Mother comes highly recommended, and you'll find it difficult to be holding back either your tears, or that thought about your own mom and her sacrifices she makes for you on an everyday basis. Just what those sacrifices are should you need another reminder, then the scene during the end credits roll will remind you of the stuff that you'd probably have taken for granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 4868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] First of all, if you'r a fan of the comic, well, you'll be VERY [[disappointed]] I'm sure ! Low budget movie !!! Largo is supposed to be Serbian in the comic, now suddenly he becomes croatian, pfff! chicken [[producers]], it [[gave]] some spice and guts to the comic ( By the way, in the [[film]], his father speaks Serbian and he speaks croatian... Lol ). The [[striking]] N.Y. [[Winch]] building becomes a common average-small yacht in H.K. The good looking Largo becomes some unshaved Tzigan/Turkish looking guy. Freddy the cool 'scarface' pilot becomes some fat, out of shape, sad, average guy. Simon, Largo's good buddy, does not exist at all !? He gave some pepper ! Largo doesn't throw knifes at all, but just some snake stares... The whole story is [[confused]] and looks like a [[pretentious]] TV-film. French directors and producers, if you don't have the money, the ability or the technology to adapt correctly the comic, please stick to some romance shooted in Paris. Very very [[bad]] [[film]], good [[thing]] I just rented it, don't count on me to watch the sequel ( If there is any ! ). First of all, if you'r a fan of the comic, well, you'll be VERY [[disappoint]] I'm sure ! Low budget movie !!! Largo is supposed to be Serbian in the comic, now suddenly he becomes croatian, pfff! chicken [[producer]], it [[delivered]] some spice and guts to the comic ( By the way, in the [[kino]], his father speaks Serbian and he speaks croatian... Lol ). The [[whopping]] N.Y. [[Hoist]] building becomes a common average-small yacht in H.K. The good looking Largo becomes some unshaved Tzigan/Turkish looking guy. Freddy the cool 'scarface' pilot becomes some fat, out of shape, sad, average guy. Simon, Largo's good buddy, does not exist at all !? He gave some pepper ! Largo doesn't throw knifes at all, but just some snake stares... The whole story is [[disconcerted]] and looks like a [[cocky]] TV-film. French directors and producers, if you don't have the money, the ability or the technology to adapt correctly the comic, please stick to some romance shooted in Paris. Very very [[unfavourable]] [[kino]], good [[stuff]] I just rented it, don't count on me to watch the sequel ( If there is any ! ). --------------------------------------------- Result 4869 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] [[Saving]] Grace is a feel good movie with it's [[heart]] in the right place. Grace is recently widowed and realizes her late husband left her with a lot of debts. She could lose her lovely house and sees no other solution to her misery than to start growing marijuana. She's living in a beautiful village where most viewers would love to live and the villagers are all wonderful people most viewers would love to have as neighbors. There's only one thing wrong with this picture and that is the [[way]] it [[portraits]] the [[effect]] marijuana has on it's user. It's obvious none of the actors or writers of this film actually ever did [[smoke]] the stuff. The way the villagers act after smoking a joint is ridiculous and only [[supposedly]] funny. It's precisely in those scenes that wit is replaced by English slapstick, and that is a pity in a movie that is [[none]] the [[less]] very [[enjoyable]]. [[Rescued]] Grace is a feel good movie with it's [[coeur]] in the right place. Grace is recently widowed and realizes her late husband left her with a lot of debts. She could lose her lovely house and sees no other solution to her misery than to start growing marijuana. She's living in a beautiful village where most viewers would love to live and the villagers are all wonderful people most viewers would love to have as neighbors. There's only one thing wrong with this picture and that is the [[camino]] it [[sketches]] the [[effects]] marijuana has on it's user. It's obvious none of the actors or writers of this film actually ever did [[smoking]] the stuff. The way the villagers act after smoking a joint is ridiculous and only [[ostensibly]] funny. It's precisely in those scenes that wit is replaced by English slapstick, and that is a pity in a movie that is [[nothingness]] the [[fewest]] very [[congenial]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This movie was so [[great]]! I am a [[teenager]], and I and my friends all love the series, so it just goes to show that these movies [[draw]] attention to all age crowds. I [[recommend]] it to [[everyone]]. My favorite line in this movie is when Logan Bartholomew says: "rosy [[cheeks]]", when he is talking about his [[baby]] [[daughter]]. He is such a [[great]] actor, as well as Erin Cottrell. They [[pair]] up so well, and have such a [[great]] chemistry! I really hope that they can [[work]] again together. They are such [[attractive]] people, and are very good [[actors]]. I have [[finally]] found [[movies]] that are good to watch. Lately it has been hard for me to [[find]] [[movies]] that are [[good]], and show good [[morals]], and Christian values. But at the same [[time]], these movies aren't cheesy. This movie was so [[wondrous]]! I am a [[teen]], and I and my friends all love the series, so it just goes to show that these movies [[attracting]] attention to all age crowds. I [[recommendation]] it to [[someone]]. My favorite line in this movie is when Logan Bartholomew says: "rosy [[cheekbones]]", when he is talking about his [[babies]] [[girls]]. He is such a [[awesome]] actor, as well as Erin Cottrell. They [[couple]] up so well, and have such a [[super]] chemistry! I really hope that they can [[collaborate]] again together. They are such [[tempting]] people, and are very good [[actresses]]. I have [[ultimately]] found [[movie]] that are good to watch. Lately it has been hard for me to [[found]] [[cinematography]] that are [[alright]], and show good [[morality]], and Christian values. But at the same [[period]], these movies aren't cheesy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4871 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I used to [[love]] Sabrina The Teenage Witch and have seen every single episode. I [[remember]] when I used to sit at 6pm every night and wait for it to come on Nickelodeon, however when Sabrina left high school the show began to go downhill. The best series has to be when she was friends with Valerie (I'm not sure which one that is). From there the [[next]] series (friends with Dreama) was still really good, but when she left high school it just didn't seem right. All the main characters seemed to have [[left]], which meant that it didn't have as much of the old "sparkle", however the first series where Sabrina is in college is still relatively good and watchable, however when her aunt's leave and Sabrina moves into their house it just isn't right. She is no longer a teenager, so therefore the name of the show isn't right and without Hilda and Zelda and Josh the show just doesn't seem right, especially when Sabrina nearly marries someone that isn't Harvey. Thank goodness he came through in the last five minutes of the last episode to take her away. All in all I still [[love]] to watch the old episodes of Sabrina the Teenage Witch, but I think the writers took it too far and should have [[left]] it with Sabrina leaving high school. Because after that the show definitely lost some of it's magic I used to [[iike]] Sabrina The Teenage Witch and have seen every single episode. I [[rember]] when I used to sit at 6pm every night and wait for it to come on Nickelodeon, however when Sabrina left high school the show began to go downhill. The best series has to be when she was friends with Valerie (I'm not sure which one that is). From there the [[impending]] series (friends with Dreama) was still really good, but when she left high school it just didn't seem right. All the main characters seemed to have [[exited]], which meant that it didn't have as much of the old "sparkle", however the first series where Sabrina is in college is still relatively good and watchable, however when her aunt's leave and Sabrina moves into their house it just isn't right. She is no longer a teenager, so therefore the name of the show isn't right and without Hilda and Zelda and Josh the show just doesn't seem right, especially when Sabrina nearly marries someone that isn't Harvey. Thank goodness he came through in the last five minutes of the last episode to take her away. All in all I still [[amour]] to watch the old episodes of Sabrina the Teenage Witch, but I think the writers took it too far and should have [[exited]] it with Sabrina leaving high school. Because after that the show definitely lost some of it's magic --------------------------------------------- Result 4872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Envy stars some of the best. Jack Black, Ben Stiller, Amy Poehler, and the [[great]] Christopher Walken. With such a cast, one can only expect the best. [[However]], with "[[Envy]]", no one [[could]] save this [[disaster]].

Tim Dingman (Stiller) and Nick Vanderpark (Black) are best friends and co-workers at a sandpaper factory. Both are making a decent living, but because Tim has a better performance at work, he's able to afford more than his buddy Nick. Nick is a dreamer who's always coming up with new ideas for inventions. One day, Nick comes up with the idea for a spray can that makes dog poop disappear (Yes, I'm serious). Falling in love with the idea, Nick decides to really invent this product. He makes an offer to Tim to invest in his idea and share the profits 50/50. Tim refuses thinking the [[idea]] will never [[work]].

Nick's [[invention]], titled "va-poo-rize" (again, i'm serious), ends up making millions. He enjoys spending his money on things like a much larger house, a horse, a personal trainer, and fancy deserts. Tim starts feeling envy for Nick. Hence the name of the movie.

The concept isn't bad, but it still turns out [[awful]]. This movie contains some of the worst dialog and very poor performances from all the cast. Then again, as I mentioned earlier, none of them could save this [[mess]]. Not even the great Christoper Walken, playing a homeless character named "J-man", made this movie funny. The movie is [[bad]] from the start and only [[continues]] to get worse.

I recommend this movie if: *you [[like]] [[crap]] (no pun [[intended]]) *you [[want]] to [[see]] [[Jack]] Black in a white [[tux]]

I [[say]], [[avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]], but [[avoid]] [[ESPECIALLY]] if: *you're offended by [[bathroom]] [[humor]] *you [[love]] [[animals]] Envy stars some of the best. Jack Black, Ben Stiller, Amy Poehler, and the [[huge]] Christopher Walken. With such a cast, one can only expect the best. [[Instead]], with "[[Jealousy]]", no one [[would]] save this [[calamity]].

Tim Dingman (Stiller) and Nick Vanderpark (Black) are best friends and co-workers at a sandpaper factory. Both are making a decent living, but because Tim has a better performance at work, he's able to afford more than his buddy Nick. Nick is a dreamer who's always coming up with new ideas for inventions. One day, Nick comes up with the idea for a spray can that makes dog poop disappear (Yes, I'm serious). Falling in love with the idea, Nick decides to really invent this product. He makes an offer to Tim to invest in his idea and share the profits 50/50. Tim refuses thinking the [[ideals]] will never [[works]].

Nick's [[inventor]], titled "va-poo-rize" (again, i'm serious), ends up making millions. He enjoys spending his money on things like a much larger house, a horse, a personal trainer, and fancy deserts. Tim starts feeling envy for Nick. Hence the name of the movie.

The concept isn't bad, but it still turns out [[scary]]. This movie contains some of the worst dialog and very poor performances from all the cast. Then again, as I mentioned earlier, none of them could save this [[chaos]]. Not even the great Christoper Walken, playing a homeless character named "J-man", made this movie funny. The movie is [[negative]] from the start and only [[persisted]] to get worse.

I recommend this movie if: *you [[fond]] [[dammit]] (no pun [[intentioned]]) *you [[wanting]] to [[behold]] [[Jacques]] Black in a white [[costume]]

I [[says]], [[avert]] this [[filmmaking]] at all [[prices]], but [[preventing]] [[CHIEFLY]] if: *you're offended by [[restroom]] [[humour]] *you [[adored]] [[wildlife]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] this [[movie]], i won't call it a "film," was basically about [[nothing]] and [[functioned]] mostly for the [[popular]] acts of the time. [[yeah]] the war was on full swing (pun intended), and this [[movie]] [[gave]] the [[troops]] and our audiences a treat.

but let's have something with a bit more [[substance]].

loved seeing a young Buddy Rich on the drums. the music was good throughout.

but one cameo after another [[gets]] [[old]] fast.

i didn't even recognize Zero Mostel! so if you're one from the "greatest generation," as they say, you'll definitely enjoy this...

movie. this [[filmmaking]], i won't call it a "film," was basically about [[none]] and [[worked]] mostly for the [[fashionable]] acts of the time. [[yes]] the war was on full swing (pun intended), and this [[filmmaking]] [[given]] the [[forces]] and our audiences a treat.

but let's have something with a bit more [[substances]].

loved seeing a young Buddy Rich on the drums. the music was good throughout.

but one cameo after another [[attains]] [[vecchio]] fast.

i didn't even recognize Zero Mostel! so if you're one from the "greatest generation," as they say, you'll definitely enjoy this...

movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] this may not be War & [[Peace]], but the two Academy noms wouldn't have been [[forthcoming]] if it weren't for the [[genius]] of James Wong Howe...

this is one of the few films I've [[fallen]] in [[love]] with as a [[child]] and [[gone]] back to without [[dissatisfaction]]. whether you have any interest in what it [[offers]] fictively or not, BB&C is a [[visual]] [[feast]].

I'm not saying it's his [[best]] [[work]], I'm no [[expert]] there for sure. but the look of this movie is [[amazing]]. I [[love]] everything about it; Elsa Lanchester, the [[cat]], the [[crazy]] hoo-doo, the retro-downtown-ness; but the way it was put on [[film]] is breathtaking.

I [[even]] like the [[inconsistencies]] pointed out on this [[page]] above, and the "special effects" that [[seem]] [[backward]] now. it all [[creates]] a really [[consistent]] [[world]]. this may not be War & [[Nonviolent]], but the two Academy noms wouldn't have been [[impending]] if it weren't for the [[prodigy]] of James Wong Howe...

this is one of the few films I've [[plummeted]] in [[adores]] with as a [[kiddies]] and [[faded]] back to without [[discontent]]. whether you have any interest in what it [[offered]] fictively or not, BB&C is a [[optic]] [[festival]].

I'm not saying it's his [[better]] [[jobs]], I'm no [[specialist]] there for sure. but the look of this movie is [[astounding]]. I [[amour]] everything about it; Elsa Lanchester, the [[kitten]], the [[madman]] hoo-doo, the retro-downtown-ness; but the way it was put on [[kino]] is breathtaking.

I [[yet]] like the [[inconsistency]] pointed out on this [[pages]] above, and the "special effects" that [[looks]] [[aft]] now. it all [[begets]] a really [[consonant]] [[monde]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is like real life, by which I [[mean]] - not a lot happens in the [[available]] 2 [[hours]] or so, and not much game [[plan]] or [[plot]] is [[evidenced]] by the [[frequently]] [[invisible]] cast (their invisibility being due to the "experimental" [[lighting]] as [[mentioned]] by [[many]] reviewers).

A big [[bore]]. No big [[surprise]] that Altman helms this - he is a very variable performer ([[yes]] we all [[loved]] "Gosford Park", but "Pret A Porter" anyone? Kansas City? Dr T. and the [[Women]]? Aaargh), but the fact that the raw [[material]] is a [[John]] Grisham [[tale]], and the excellent cast that you will perceive through the gathering gloaming of your insistent slumber - makes this truly a masterpiece of [[bad]] film. And no, it is not "so bad it's good".

It's just [[bad]]. This [[filmmaking]] is like real life, by which I [[meaning]] - not a lot happens in the [[accessible]] 2 [[hour]] or so, and not much game [[plans]] or [[intrigue]] is [[exemplified]] by the [[periodically]] [[unseen]] cast (their invisibility being due to the "experimental" [[lights]] as [[referenced]] by [[myriad]] reviewers).

A big [[boring]]. No big [[astonishment]] that Altman helms this - he is a very variable performer ([[oui]] we all [[liked]] "Gosford Park", but "Pret A Porter" anyone? Kansas City? Dr T. and the [[Female]]? Aaargh), but the fact that the raw [[materials]] is a [[Jon]] Grisham [[storytelling]], and the excellent cast that you will perceive through the gathering gloaming of your insistent slumber - makes this truly a masterpiece of [[unfavourable]] film. And no, it is not "so bad it's good".

It's just [[unfavourable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Much [[underrated]] camp [[movie]] on the level of Cobra Woman, etc. Photographic stills resemble Rembrandt prints. Sometimes subtle dialog and hidden [[literate]] touches found [[throughout]]. Much [[underestimated]] camp [[cinematography]] on the level of Cobra Woman, etc. Photographic stills resemble Rembrandt prints. Sometimes subtle dialog and hidden [[literacy]] touches found [[during]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Being a giant monster fan, me [[seeing]] "Yeti" was an absolute [[must]], especially after hearing so much about it. Thanks to the good 'ol bootleg market I was able to find a copy pretty easily, and was happily surprised upon watching that this flick was actually, dare I say, decent.

Decent for what it is, actually, namely a cheesy giant-monster [[flick]]. It [[kicks]] in pretty quickly as [[Yeti]] is found pretty much immediately, and we get [[introduced]] to [[various]] [[characters]]. They consist of some sleazy ones, some good ones, and a girl who is pretty much one of the most downright strikingly beautiful girls in any cheesy sci-fi film, by far.

Yeti looks like a long-haired guy straight out of the original Woodstock concert, and really, he's not that bad of a dude, especially after being introduced to the world in some kind of funky cage-like thing. Godzilla he is not - despite his rude awakening, he doesn't even rampage (actually he rarely destroys anything in the whole picture), but kinda just looks puzzled while trying to figure things out. Yeti seems to understand English pretty nicely (my copy was dubbed in English) and he knows who the good guys and bad guys are.

However, we want to see the giant Yeti do his thing, and he's pretty much in the whole movie, and in typical low-budget fashion, he seems to change size a lot depending on the scene and there's even a bunch of the "fake legs" shots of him just standing there.

Yes, the special effects aren't the greatest, but there are definitely some good ones here. A scene where Yeti smashes through a warehouse is done very well, and in another, he uses the windows of a building as "ladder steps" to climb down from the top of it - shattering each window with his foot and often shocking the occupants inside - in one sequence that really looks much, much better than it should in such a "[[bad]]" movie.

"Yeti" never stoops as low as say, "A.P.E." does. Actually the only time it even comes close to genuine silliness is when the beautiful girl causes Yeti's nipple to become erect and he lifts his eyebrow in an "oh yeah baby" manner. But even this isn't that bad, and kinda even gets a laugh out of the viewer.

The movie is pretty long for this kind of thing, but surprisingly enough it doesn't get boring - the story is actually good, and just watching this utterly gorgeous actress on screen will make any male viewer happy.

"Yeti" may not be in the upper echelon of giant monster flicks, but it is definitely better than other King Kong '76 rip-offs like "A.P.E." and "Queen Kong" by very far. Being a giant monster fan, me [[witnessing]] "Yeti" was an absolute [[ought]], especially after hearing so much about it. Thanks to the good 'ol bootleg market I was able to find a copy pretty easily, and was happily surprised upon watching that this flick was actually, dare I say, decent.

Decent for what it is, actually, namely a cheesy giant-monster [[gesture]]. It [[karate]] in pretty quickly as [[Bigfoot]] is found pretty much immediately, and we get [[tabled]] to [[diversified]] [[features]]. They consist of some sleazy ones, some good ones, and a girl who is pretty much one of the most downright strikingly beautiful girls in any cheesy sci-fi film, by far.

Yeti looks like a long-haired guy straight out of the original Woodstock concert, and really, he's not that bad of a dude, especially after being introduced to the world in some kind of funky cage-like thing. Godzilla he is not - despite his rude awakening, he doesn't even rampage (actually he rarely destroys anything in the whole picture), but kinda just looks puzzled while trying to figure things out. Yeti seems to understand English pretty nicely (my copy was dubbed in English) and he knows who the good guys and bad guys are.

However, we want to see the giant Yeti do his thing, and he's pretty much in the whole movie, and in typical low-budget fashion, he seems to change size a lot depending on the scene and there's even a bunch of the "fake legs" shots of him just standing there.

Yes, the special effects aren't the greatest, but there are definitely some good ones here. A scene where Yeti smashes through a warehouse is done very well, and in another, he uses the windows of a building as "ladder steps" to climb down from the top of it - shattering each window with his foot and often shocking the occupants inside - in one sequence that really looks much, much better than it should in such a "[[amiss]]" movie.

"Yeti" never stoops as low as say, "A.P.E." does. Actually the only time it even comes close to genuine silliness is when the beautiful girl causes Yeti's nipple to become erect and he lifts his eyebrow in an "oh yeah baby" manner. But even this isn't that bad, and kinda even gets a laugh out of the viewer.

The movie is pretty long for this kind of thing, but surprisingly enough it doesn't get boring - the story is actually good, and just watching this utterly gorgeous actress on screen will make any male viewer happy.

"Yeti" may not be in the upper echelon of giant monster flicks, but it is definitely better than other King Kong '76 rip-offs like "A.P.E." and "Queen Kong" by very far. --------------------------------------------- Result 4878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] In its depiction of a miserable Milanese underclass, this film was [[probably]] quite revealing in its day. [[However]], I get the [[feeling]] that neorealism was never [[really]] director De Sica's [[bag]], since here he [[decided]] to try and create some [[sort]] of modern fable centring around a boy that had been found in a cabbage patch by an old dear in the country. After spending most of his [[childhood]] in an orphanage, Toto ends up living in a shantytown in Milan. He organises the [[inhabitants]] into community action, and keeps their spirits up by swanning around with an annoyingly constant smile on his face and testing them on their times tables. That nobody tells him where to stick his times tables is beyond me, as these people have far more important things to think about, like where the next Pot Noodle is going to come from. Anyway, De Sica then uses a sublimely subtle dramatic device in order to highlight exactly why these poor sods are where they are. It's all down to capitalism of course, and in order to illustrate this, he has the miserables discover a fountain of oil on their land. Brilliant! To his credit, though, by this time he has given up on making a serious film, and the capitalists appear as severe caricatures, all fur coats and cigars. They want that land, but our mathematical hero will not support such nonsense. By a bizarre stroke of luck, his old, deceased guardian from the cabbage patch days appears in the sky and gives him a magic dove. He uses it to shower gifts on his mates, who prove just as greedy as the cigar men. I reckon this film was a missed opportunity. To address the theme of poverty , as not many film-makers had done until then, and then get caught up in a fairy tale, to me seems a bit daft. How come 'great' directors get away with child-like plot turns like the ones we see here? Hans Christian Anderson would probably have balked at the idea of having the poor folk flying off over the Milan Duomo and on to a higher place on broomsticks. De Sica, however, is proclaimed as a genius for this. Surely the fact that these people are so poor, that their faith is unswerving, and that miracles never happen to them, is enough for any story-teller to work on.

In its depiction of a miserable Milanese underclass, this film was [[undeniably]] quite revealing in its day. [[Instead]], I get the [[sentiment]] that neorealism was never [[truthfully]] director De Sica's [[knapsack]], since here he [[decide]] to try and create some [[genre]] of modern fable centring around a boy that had been found in a cabbage patch by an old dear in the country. After spending most of his [[infantile]] in an orphanage, Toto ends up living in a shantytown in Milan. He organises the [[inhabitant]] into community action, and keeps their spirits up by swanning around with an annoyingly constant smile on his face and testing them on their times tables. That nobody tells him where to stick his times tables is beyond me, as these people have far more important things to think about, like where the next Pot Noodle is going to come from. Anyway, De Sica then uses a sublimely subtle dramatic device in order to highlight exactly why these poor sods are where they are. It's all down to capitalism of course, and in order to illustrate this, he has the miserables discover a fountain of oil on their land. Brilliant! To his credit, though, by this time he has given up on making a serious film, and the capitalists appear as severe caricatures, all fur coats and cigars. They want that land, but our mathematical hero will not support such nonsense. By a bizarre stroke of luck, his old, deceased guardian from the cabbage patch days appears in the sky and gives him a magic dove. He uses it to shower gifts on his mates, who prove just as greedy as the cigar men. I reckon this film was a missed opportunity. To address the theme of poverty , as not many film-makers had done until then, and then get caught up in a fairy tale, to me seems a bit daft. How come 'great' directors get away with child-like plot turns like the ones we see here? Hans Christian Anderson would probably have balked at the idea of having the poor folk flying off over the Milan Duomo and on to a higher place on broomsticks. De Sica, however, is proclaimed as a genius for this. Surely the fact that these people are so poor, that their faith is unswerving, and that miracles never happen to them, is enough for any story-teller to work on.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4879 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm going to go on the record as the second person who has, after years of using the IMDb to look up movies, been motivated by Nacho's film, The Abandoned to create an account and post a comment. This was hands down the worst movie I've ever seen in my entire life. The plot was on the verge of non-existence, and none of the "puzzle-pieces" added up in any way whatsoever. The acting was laughable and the writing was embarrassing. How this film got backed and came to be is completely beyond me. The only saving grace I could find was Anastasia Hille's cunning and repetitive use of the f word. (and brilliant sound design) If I were faced with the option of seeing this film again or being mauled by wild bores I would be up against a difficult decision. I'm disappointed that I am unable to give it 0 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 4880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sloppily directed, witless comedy that supposedly spoofs the "classic" 50s "alien invasion" films, but really is no better than them, except of course in the purely technical department (good makeup effects). And any spoof that is worse than its target is doomed to fail ("Casino Royale", "Our Man Flint" are worse than almost any James Bond movie). After two hours of hearing the screeching voices of the aliens, you'll be begging for some peace and quiet. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 4881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Somewhere near the bottom of the film studio ladder you can find companies like U.F.O, Troma and beneath them lie Seduction cinema.

[[Seduction]] is a direct to video production company that specialize in lesbian themed, non-hardcore erotic movies. It has developed a very dedicated fan base that purchase each new title as they are released but [[sadly]] the company has become too closely associated with frequent star Misty Mundae. I say sadly because recent mainstream interest and her appearance on the show Masters of Horrors has caused her to set her sights a little higher than the zero budget S.C efforts which forces the company to find a new identity. But back in their glory days they released this film on a very [[appreciative]] world.

The gorgeous Misty Mundae is forced to attend a boarding school at the request of a absent father. At the school she meets her absurdly hot room-mate played by Ruby Larocca who immediately has designs on her but the headmistress (Barbara Joyce) has other plans. In typical S.C style the movie stops every ten minutes for a extended sex scene but unlike most of their efforts this one has a somewhat interesting story and a couple of good performances. Ms. Larocca appears to be having a great time as the sexual predator who views Misty as a tasty meal and Darian Caine makes a welcome (though brief) appearance as Satan. This is the sort of film that Jess Franco would crank out in the 70s (although this one does not have the hardcore sex that [[Franco]] was always willing to throw in for foreign sales) and fans of that madman's work would be wise to give this one a go.

To me, as a long time zero budget cinema fan (and Troma worshiper), I came across the Seduction cinema films through their parody films (Playmate of the apes, Who wants to be a erotic billionaire) but I actually prefer their more original works. You either see past the low budget and occasionally weak acting or you get hung up on these things and just hate all of these films. For me the most obvious thing that unites these no-budget movies is a real sense of fun. These low budget companies are able to create their own unique style which gives the viewer something very different from the bland, by the numbers, studio efforts that load up the multiplexes.

If you have never seen a Seduction cinema film either this or Sin Sisters (featuring both of the Mundae sisters) are excellent choices to begin with. This one is a fun, fast paced film (although the frequent exterior shots of the school do get a little old) and the DVD is totally loaded with extras including a ton of previews of other company offerings, a great behind the scenes featurette and some deleted scenes including a alternate opening. I do recommend you pass on the disc's bonus feature, the first film by director, as it is quite weak and not really worth viewing. Somewhere near the bottom of the film studio ladder you can find companies like U.F.O, Troma and beneath them lie Seduction cinema.

[[Attraction]] is a direct to video production company that specialize in lesbian themed, non-hardcore erotic movies. It has developed a very dedicated fan base that purchase each new title as they are released but [[unhappily]] the company has become too closely associated with frequent star Misty Mundae. I say sadly because recent mainstream interest and her appearance on the show Masters of Horrors has caused her to set her sights a little higher than the zero budget S.C efforts which forces the company to find a new identity. But back in their glory days they released this film on a very [[recognising]] world.

The gorgeous Misty Mundae is forced to attend a boarding school at the request of a absent father. At the school she meets her absurdly hot room-mate played by Ruby Larocca who immediately has designs on her but the headmistress (Barbara Joyce) has other plans. In typical S.C style the movie stops every ten minutes for a extended sex scene but unlike most of their efforts this one has a somewhat interesting story and a couple of good performances. Ms. Larocca appears to be having a great time as the sexual predator who views Misty as a tasty meal and Darian Caine makes a welcome (though brief) appearance as Satan. This is the sort of film that Jess Franco would crank out in the 70s (although this one does not have the hardcore sex that [[Franko]] was always willing to throw in for foreign sales) and fans of that madman's work would be wise to give this one a go.

To me, as a long time zero budget cinema fan (and Troma worshiper), I came across the Seduction cinema films through their parody films (Playmate of the apes, Who wants to be a erotic billionaire) but I actually prefer their more original works. You either see past the low budget and occasionally weak acting or you get hung up on these things and just hate all of these films. For me the most obvious thing that unites these no-budget movies is a real sense of fun. These low budget companies are able to create their own unique style which gives the viewer something very different from the bland, by the numbers, studio efforts that load up the multiplexes.

If you have never seen a Seduction cinema film either this or Sin Sisters (featuring both of the Mundae sisters) are excellent choices to begin with. This one is a fun, fast paced film (although the frequent exterior shots of the school do get a little old) and the DVD is totally loaded with extras including a ton of previews of other company offerings, a great behind the scenes featurette and some deleted scenes including a alternate opening. I do recommend you pass on the disc's bonus feature, the first film by director, as it is quite weak and not really worth viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hey guys,

i have been looking every where to find these two movies and i can't find them anywhere in my local area. (I am Australian). Could You please help me and tell me where i can buy it from. In General Home Ward Bound 1 and 2 are the best movies i have ever seen and are good for people of all ages. It was my favourite movie wen i was 5 and it still is even now when i am a teenager. It is a great movie for the whole family. My entire family loves this movie except for my younger sister because i have watched it that many times that she is sick of it. I love this movie and i cant wait till i can buy it again on DVD.

Sally --------------------------------------------- Result 4883 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pinjar is truly a masterpiece... . It's a thought provoking Film that makes you think and makes you question our culture. It is without a doubt the best Hindi movie I have seen to date. This film should have been shown at movie festivals around the world and I believe would have been a serious contender at Cannes. All the characters were perfectly cast and Urmila Matkondar and Manoj Bhajpai were haunting in their roles.

The story the movie tells about partition is a very very important story and one that should never be forgotten.

It has no biases or prejudices and has given the partition a human story. Here, no one country is depicted as good or bad. There are evil Indians, evil Pakistanis and good Indians and Pakistanis. The cinematography is excellent and the music is melodious, meaningful and haunting. Everything about the movie was amazing...and the acting just took my breath away. All were perfectly cast. --------------------------------------------- Result 4884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Tapeheads", a scrappy, intermittently [[funny]] spoof of the music video [[business]], might have been the perfect comedic short, and stars John Cusack and Tim Robbins are effortlessly in the swing of the [[nonsensical]] chaos involved. They play two semi-savvy security guards in Los Angeles who start their own company, Video [[Aces]], making hilarious videos for [[groups]], parties, and one deathbed star. It's too [[bad]] the filmmakers had to [[invent]] a dim side-plot to pad the running time (shenanigans involving a crooked politician and his henchmen which doesn't do much except take away from the movie's primary strength, sending-up the music culture of the late-'80s). Still, Cusack and Robbins create a [[couple]] of originals here: nerdy but loose, street-smart without being [[hipsters]] or posers, these [[guys]] are on the same [[nutty]] wavelength, and they never put each other down. They're the real [[thing]] in buddy-comedies. *1/2 from **** "Tapeheads", a scrappy, intermittently [[hilarious]] spoof of the music video [[companies]], might have been the perfect comedic short, and stars John Cusack and Tim Robbins are effortlessly in the swing of the [[farcical]] chaos involved. They play two semi-savvy security guards in Los Angeles who start their own company, Video [[Ace]], making hilarious videos for [[groupings]], parties, and one deathbed star. It's too [[negative]] the filmmakers had to [[fabricate]] a dim side-plot to pad the running time (shenanigans involving a crooked politician and his henchmen which doesn't do much except take away from the movie's primary strength, sending-up the music culture of the late-'80s). Still, Cusack and Robbins create a [[matching]] of originals here: nerdy but loose, street-smart without being [[hipster]] or posers, these [[blokes]] are on the same [[absurd]] wavelength, and they never put each other down. They're the real [[stuff]] in buddy-comedies. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Renown]] writer Mark Redfield (as Edgar Allen Poe) tries to conquer old addictions and start a new life for himself, as a Baltimore, Maryland magazine publisher. However, [[blackouts]], [[delirium]], and rejection threaten to thwart his efforts. He would also like to [[rekindle]] romance with an old sweetheart, a significantly flawed prospect, as things turns out. Mr. Redfield [[also]] [[directed]] this [[dramatization]] of the mysterious last days of Edgar Allen Poe. Redfield employs a lot of black and white, color, and trick [[photography]] to create mood. Kevin G. Shinnick (as Dr. John Moran) performs well, relatively speaking. It's not enough. [[Repute]] writer Mark Redfield (as Edgar Allen Poe) tries to conquer old addictions and start a new life for himself, as a Baltimore, Maryland magazine publisher. However, [[outages]], [[delusion]], and rejection threaten to thwart his efforts. He would also like to [[reanimate]] romance with an old sweetheart, a significantly flawed prospect, as things turns out. Mr. Redfield [[further]] [[geared]] this [[simulation]] of the mysterious last days of Edgar Allen Poe. Redfield employs a lot of black and white, color, and trick [[images]] to create mood. Kevin G. Shinnick (as Dr. John Moran) performs well, relatively speaking. It's not enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 4886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The Secret Fury, in many [[ways]] a run-of-the-mill romantic suspense drama (directed by Mel Ferrer) boasts top-notch [[principals]] in Colbert and Ryan; it stays [[puzzling]] if not [[quite]] [[gripping]] until [[towards]] the end, when implausibility conquers [[suspension]] of disbelief -- as so often it does in this genre. But for some viewers the film's highlight will be the portrayal of blowsy Leah by Vivian Vance -- the immortal Ethel Mertz on "I Love Lucy." Oddly, Vance had very few [[film]] roles; her true home was Broadway, where (among other gigs) she understudied for Ethel Merman. Here she contributes a [[winning]] [[turn]] as a chambermaid suborned to play a minor part in a [[nefarious]] scheme; watch her half-heartedly trying to wave away the smoke when she's puffing a furtive cigarette in the hotel's linen-storage room -- a transgression for which she ultimately pays the supreme penalty. The Secret Fury, in many [[methods]] a run-of-the-mill romantic suspense drama (directed by Mel Ferrer) boasts top-notch [[chiefs]] in Colbert and Ryan; it stays [[disorienting]] if not [[pretty]] [[captivating]] until [[into]] the end, when implausibility conquers [[adjournment]] of disbelief -- as so often it does in this genre. But for some viewers the film's highlight will be the portrayal of blowsy Leah by Vivian Vance -- the immortal Ethel Mertz on "I Love Lucy." Oddly, Vance had very few [[kino]] roles; her true home was Broadway, where (among other gigs) she understudied for Ethel Merman. Here she contributes a [[earning]] [[converting]] as a chambermaid suborned to play a minor part in a [[disgusting]] scheme; watch her half-heartedly trying to wave away the smoke when she's puffing a furtive cigarette in the hotel's linen-storage room -- a transgression for which she ultimately pays the supreme penalty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sure, he became rapidly uneven after this film, but from "Knife In the Water" up till "The Tenant", Roman Polanski could always be counted on to deliver something fascinating and unique. Despite many running themes (alienation, paranoia), no two of his films are really alike. The story of this is somewhat similar to his own "Repulsion" from ten years earlier, but the tone is completely different. "The Tenant" manages to balance darker than dark absurdity (I'm a bit hesitant on calling it humor, even though the protagonists bizarre behavior and dialog was occasionally funny) with some truly suspenseful paranoia. Polanski was always a master at building unease, and moments in this film are almost unbearably creepy. The overall weirdness of the film is also a plus.

In addition to Polanski's exquisite as usual direction, the rest of the cast and crew offer great contributions. Polanski the actor is often overshadowed by Polanski the director, but his performance here truly captures his characters awkwardness and sense of being an outcast. The themes of social discrimination make this film more than just strangeness for the sake of being strange. The rest of the cast offers strong performances also, especially Isabelle Adjani's sympathetic turn, and Melyvn Douglas and Shelley Winters' appropriately annoying ones. "The Tenant" is often underrated because of how ready people are to heap praise on both "Repulsion" and "Rosemary's Baby", but its just as brilliant as either of those classics. (9/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 4888 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] [[So]] much is wrong with this [[abysmal]] little [[wet]] [[fart]] of a [[movie]] that it's hard to know where to [[begin]].

[[First]] of all, it's a [[remarkably]] un-scary [[scary]] [[movie]], even by Amercian [[standards]]. The [[dialogue]] is cliché, the [[characters]] are two-dimensional, the [[writing]] is ho-hum, and what [[little]] [[story]] there is is [[neither]] coherent nor remotely interesting.

We [[meet]] the following [[stereotypes]] in order: Balding Loser [[Guy]] ([[probably]] [[divorced]], but who knows? This [[movie]] doesn't [[tell]] us) with a [[brave]] heart, the Young Hero (who doesn't do [[anything]] [[heroic]] at all), [[Brave]] [[Little]] [[Kid]] (with a homicidal streak a mile [[wide]]) and Black Bad-Ass Bitch (with more brawn than brains). These [[guys]] take up an [[ongoing]] [[fight]] with the Tall [[Scary]] Reaper [[Man]] and his [[evil]] Ewoks.

Oh, and the [[film]] is full of [[wicked]] [[little]] metal orbs whoosing [[around]] [[menacing]] people. Given a [[chance]], they perform [[impromptu]] brain surgery on those who doen't have the mental acuity to duck when they come at them. Booh! Actually, one of them is [[haunted]] by a [[good]] ghost (but then again, it might be a [[deceitful]] spectre) who [[seems]] [[intent]] on [[helping]] our [[Brave]] Contagonists [[retrieve]] their young kidnapped [[friend]].

There is no [[character]] [[background]] or even an [[introduction]] to any of the [[characters]]. It [[starts]] with some [[kind]] of [[recap]] of the [[ending]] of the [[previous]] [[movie]], but this doesn't [[explain]] a lot. If you've [[seen]] the first two [[movies]], [[fine]]. [[Otherwise]] you don't know who these people are, how they are [[related]], why they aren't in school or at [[work]], or why you should [[care]] whether they [[live]] or [[die]]. [[Consequently]], you don't. The only point of interest becomes any splatter [[effects]]. And there aren't [[enough]] of those to keep you awake.

Of potenial interest/amusement are the three [[Raider]] [[Punks]], as stupid as they are evil, who [[menace]] Our [[Heroes]]. But they don't [[get]] much screen time. They are [[offed]] almost [[immediately]]. Then they are buried (why [[anybody]] should take the time is beyond me), then they appear again as Evil [[Raider]] Punk Zombies. [[Only]] to be offed again, literally within a minute.

The rest of the movie mainly seems to consist of Caspar the Friendly Ghost appearing and disappearing, driving around looking for places, and Balding Loser trying to score som Bad Black Bitch Booty, using pickup lines that would embarrass a mentally retarded teenager. No dice there; not even some gratuitous sex could have saved this movie, so good thing there never is any.

The head baddie, called the Tall Man, doesn't manage to scare anyone older than 3 years; howling "Booooy!" every five minutes isn't enough. Why he, with his amazing telekinetic powers and uncanny upper-body strength, doesn't simply squash our heroes like bugs isn't explained. Instead, he delegates the job to his inept retarded little minions, who never manage to kill anyone before being shot to hell.

Filmgoers who like masterpieces like "Friday 13th part XXXXVIII: Jason goes to college" might find some entertainment. The rest of us, who have developed pubic hair, will be bored out of our skulls. [[Consequently]] much is wrong with this [[horrific]] little [[humid]] [[pets]] of a [[filmmaking]] that it's hard to know where to [[begins]].

[[Outset]] of all, it's a [[marvellously]] un-scary [[fearsome]] [[film]], even by Amercian [[norms]]. The [[talks]] is cliché, the [[nature]] are two-dimensional, the [[writes]] is ho-hum, and what [[small]] [[stories]] there is is [[ni]] coherent nor remotely interesting.

We [[satisfy]] the following [[preconceptions]] in order: Balding Loser [[Buddy]] ([[certainly]] [[divorcing]], but who knows? This [[film]] doesn't [[telling]] us) with a [[valiant]] heart, the Young Hero (who doesn't do [[something]] [[gutsy]] at all), [[Adventurous]] [[Small]] [[Petit]] (with a homicidal streak a mile [[large]]) and Black Bad-Ass Bitch (with more brawn than brains). These [[boy]] take up an [[uninterrupted]] [[fights]] with the Tall [[Fearful]] Reaper [[Guy]] and his [[wicked]] Ewoks.

Oh, and the [[filmmaking]] is full of [[evil]] [[petite]] metal orbs whoosing [[throughout]] [[threatens]] people. Given a [[luck]], they perform [[improvised]] brain surgery on those who doen't have the mental acuity to duck when they come at them. Booh! Actually, one of them is [[tormented]] by a [[alright]] ghost (but then again, it might be a [[untrue]] spectre) who [[seem]] [[intentions]] on [[helps]] our [[Gutsy]] Contagonists [[recuperating]] their young kidnapped [[buddies]].

There is no [[characteristics]] [[backdrop]] or even an [[introducing]] to any of the [[trait]]. It [[launch]] with some [[types]] of [[synthesis]] of the [[ended]] of the [[anterior]] [[filmmaking]], but this doesn't [[explains]] a lot. If you've [[noticed]] the first two [[film]], [[fined]]. [[Alternately]] you don't know who these people are, how they are [[tied]], why they aren't in school or at [[cooperate]], or why you should [[healthcare]] whether they [[inhabit]] or [[dies]]. [[Accordingly]], you don't. The only point of interest becomes any splatter [[influencing]]. And there aren't [[sufficient]] of those to keep you awake.

Of potenial interest/amusement are the three [[Ryder]] [[Villains]], as stupid as they are evil, who [[endangering]] Our [[Heroic]]. But they don't [[obtain]] much screen time. They are [[shot]] almost [[quickly]]. Then they are buried (why [[everyone]] should take the time is beyond me), then they appear again as Evil [[Ryder]] Punk Zombies. [[Len]] to be offed again, literally within a minute.

The rest of the movie mainly seems to consist of Caspar the Friendly Ghost appearing and disappearing, driving around looking for places, and Balding Loser trying to score som Bad Black Bitch Booty, using pickup lines that would embarrass a mentally retarded teenager. No dice there; not even some gratuitous sex could have saved this movie, so good thing there never is any.

The head baddie, called the Tall Man, doesn't manage to scare anyone older than 3 years; howling "Booooy!" every five minutes isn't enough. Why he, with his amazing telekinetic powers and uncanny upper-body strength, doesn't simply squash our heroes like bugs isn't explained. Instead, he delegates the job to his inept retarded little minions, who never manage to kill anyone before being shot to hell.

Filmgoers who like masterpieces like "Friday 13th part XXXXVIII: Jason goes to college" might find some entertainment. The rest of us, who have developed pubic hair, will be bored out of our skulls. --------------------------------------------- Result 4889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a lesbian, I am always on the lookout for films relating to gays & lesbians. However, with this kind of crap out there--it would be enough to discourage any audience.

I kept waiting for something to happen--anything!--a story to develop, or just for it to make some kind of sense. Neither occurred. It was just meaningless scenes, unconnected in any way with anything. The film failed to conveyed any kind of story or depth to the character.

After an hour or more of this nonsense, I simply turned it off.

Don't waste your time on this absurdity.

1 Star - and it doesn't even deserve that. --------------------------------------------- Result 4890 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Former]] private eye-turned-security [[guard]] ditches his [[latest]] droning [[job]] and is [[immediately]] [[offered]] a [[chance]] to [[return]] to his [[previous]] [[profession]]. His assignment: to tail a mysterious French [[woman]] newly [[arrived]] in California...and [[apparently]] wanted by suit-and-tie racketeers. Unsuccessful [[attempt]] to [[update]] the [[film]] noir genre, without [[enough]] sting or wit (or involving plot [[dynamics]]) in the [[screenplay]]. [[Director]] and co-scenarist [[Paul]] Magwood (who later claimed the [[picture]] was edited without his involvement) doesn't give off the [[impression]] of having [[high]] regard for the '40s [[films]] his "Chandler" was borne from; his nostalgia is [[appropriately]] rumpled, but [[also]] bitter-tinged and somewhat [[indifferent]]. The [[handling]] is [[curiously]], commendably low-keyed, and Warren Oates is well-cast as this '70s [[variant]] on the 'private dick' archetype, but the [[movie]] doesn't have any snap. [[Nice]] to see [[Leslie]] Caron and [[Gloria]] Grahame in the cast--though neither has [[much]] to do, and Caron's hot-and-cold running [[character]] is [[exasperating]] [[throughout]]. Vivid cinematography by Alan Stensvold, nice [[location]] shooting, but it fails to [[come]] to any [[kind]] of a boil. *1/2 from **** [[Past]] private eye-turned-security [[guards]] ditches his [[recent]] droning [[jobs]] and is [[quickly]] [[providing]] a [[luck]] to [[returns]] to his [[formerly]] [[occupations]]. His assignment: to tail a mysterious French [[female]] newly [[arrives]] in California...and [[reportedly]] wanted by suit-and-tie racketeers. Unsuccessful [[attempts]] to [[upgraded]] the [[filmmaking]] noir genre, without [[adequate]] sting or wit (or involving plot [[vibrant]]) in the [[scenarios]]. [[Superintendent]] and co-scenarist [[Pablo]] Magwood (who later claimed the [[pictures]] was edited without his involvement) doesn't give off the [[printing]] of having [[alto]] regard for the '40s [[film]] his "Chandler" was borne from; his nostalgia is [[satisfactorily]] rumpled, but [[similarly]] bitter-tinged and somewhat [[impassive]]. The [[treat]] is [[surprisingly]], commendably low-keyed, and Warren Oates is well-cast as this '70s [[variations]] on the 'private dick' archetype, but the [[kino]] doesn't have any snap. [[Handsome]] to see [[Lesley]] Caron and [[Glory]] Grahame in the cast--though neither has [[very]] to do, and Caron's hot-and-cold running [[trait]] is [[galling]] [[in]]. Vivid cinematography by Alan Stensvold, nice [[locations]] shooting, but it fails to [[coming]] to any [[genera]] of a boil. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A lot of people seemed to have liked the [[film]], so I feel somewhat bad giving it a bad review. But after sitting through 96 minutes of it, I feel I have to do so. Where the heck is the plot in this film?! I must have missed it, I was waiting for the storyline to unfold and [[nothing]] happened. Sure the ending was "[[somewhat]] shocking" but they didn't build up to it. I forgot who was who half of the time, so they didn't really develop the characters. The acting was so-so, most of the time it was [[believable]], but I was able to [[see]] through it most of the time. [[So]]... without giving anything away, I must say that [[unless]] you like the actors in the film, there is no real reason to watch this movie. I could be mistaken, but I just didn't understand why there was so little, or too much of the film. I can't decide which one that would be, so I say judge for yourselves. I don't even know if renting it would be a good idea, the cost and all...

Plot: 0/10 Characters: 1/10 Acting: 2/10 [[Overall]]: 3/10 I feel like that's too high really, I am staying with my vote up at the top. A lot of people seemed to have liked the [[filmmaking]], so I feel somewhat bad giving it a bad review. But after sitting through 96 minutes of it, I feel I have to do so. Where the heck is the plot in this film?! I must have missed it, I was waiting for the storyline to unfold and [[anything]] happened. Sure the ending was "[[slightly]] shocking" but they didn't build up to it. I forgot who was who half of the time, so they didn't really develop the characters. The acting was so-so, most of the time it was [[dependable]], but I was able to [[seeing]] through it most of the time. [[Accordingly]]... without giving anything away, I must say that [[if]] you like the actors in the film, there is no real reason to watch this movie. I could be mistaken, but I just didn't understand why there was so little, or too much of the film. I can't decide which one that would be, so I say judge for yourselves. I don't even know if renting it would be a good idea, the cost and all...

Plot: 0/10 Characters: 1/10 Acting: 2/10 [[Holistic]]: 3/10 I feel like that's too high really, I am staying with my vote up at the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 4892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] The [[beginning]] of this movie was good. It started to get really dumb after he told the people he wanted to kill himself. I think if I came from a little town like that I would be offended after seeing this movie. They made a lot of these people look dumb and crazy. How could these people have so [[little]] to do that they follow him around all day. A lot of times these people were telling him ways to kill himself like they were urging him to do it. How can so many people have little respect for other people? I also think they [[could]] have made a much better ending for this movie. There were some good parts to this movie also. Some people might like it, but I wouldn't [[recommend]] this to anyone. The [[initiate]] of this movie was good. It started to get really dumb after he told the people he wanted to kill himself. I think if I came from a little town like that I would be offended after seeing this movie. They made a lot of these people look dumb and crazy. How could these people have so [[scant]] to do that they follow him around all day. A lot of times these people were telling him ways to kill himself like they were urging him to do it. How can so many people have little respect for other people? I also think they [[did]] have made a much better ending for this movie. There were some good parts to this movie also. Some people might like it, but I wouldn't [[recommends]] this to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 4893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] To be honest I [[knew]] what to [[expect]] before I watched this [[film]], and I've [[got]] to [[say]] it has the [[worst]] acting I've ever [[seen]]. It does have its moments, and on a comedy [[level]] its very entertaining, but i'm [[afraid]] its not scary, and [[stupidity]] is taken to a [[new]] level. There's a [[lot]] of [[unnecessary]] gore, and the plot is all over the place. I have no [[idea]] why the [[aliens]] were [[evil]], and why they even [[came]] to this [[remote]] part of wales, (i mean who'd go there anyway?) but I didn't care at that point, because I was amused by the [[costumes]], and the [[bad]] CGI. As far as B-movies [[go]], this [[deserves]] the title of 'being so [[bad]], its good', and kudos to the film-makers, because they [[probably]] knew what they were doing. Long may these [[films]] [[continue]]..... To be honest I [[overheard]] what to [[expecting]] before I watched this [[filmmaking]], and I've [[did]] to [[says]] it has the [[meanest]] acting I've ever [[noticed]]. It does have its moments, and on a comedy [[tier]] its very entertaining, but i'm [[frighten]] its not scary, and [[madness]] is taken to a [[nuevo]] level. There's a [[lots]] of [[superfluous]] gore, and the plot is all over the place. I have no [[concept]] why the [[exotic]] were [[malign]], and why they even [[became]] to this [[aloof]] part of wales, (i mean who'd go there anyway?) but I didn't care at that point, because I was amused by the [[garb]], and the [[unfavourable]] CGI. As far as B-movies [[going]], this [[deserve]] the title of 'being so [[negative]], its good', and kudos to the film-makers, because they [[unquestionably]] knew what they were doing. Long may these [[movies]] [[nonstop]]..... --------------------------------------------- Result 4894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I really enjoyed the first half [[hour]] of this [[movie]] but, wow, did it turn corny, or should I [[say]], "just plain stupid." This is just another example of [[outdated]] humor. It might have been [[funny]] in 1940, but not now....not [[even]] close.

[[Dick]] Powell is always interesting to watch. I especially liked him once he started switching from his boyish looks and high voice of the Busby Berkeley musicals to where he's mature and sounds it, too.

He was fine as "Jimmy MacDonald," but the [[rest]] of the cast just played stupid characters, the worst being the boss (Raymond Walburn) of the Maxford House Coffee Company, who did nothing but shout all the time. He was brutal to hear and was a big [[detriment]] to the movie. I really enjoyed the first half [[hours]] of this [[filmmaking]] but, wow, did it turn corny, or should I [[told]], "just plain stupid." This is just another example of [[antiquated]] humor. It might have been [[fun]] in 1940, but not now....not [[yet]] close.

[[Penis]] Powell is always interesting to watch. I especially liked him once he started switching from his boyish looks and high voice of the Busby Berkeley musicals to where he's mature and sounds it, too.

He was fine as "Jimmy MacDonald," but the [[remaining]] of the cast just played stupid characters, the worst being the boss (Raymond Walburn) of the Maxford House Coffee Company, who did nothing but shout all the time. He was brutal to hear and was a big [[harm]] to the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a movie that i can watch over and over and never ever get tired of it, it has lot's of laughs, guns, action, crime,, good one liners, and a decent plot, with an over the top, Donald Sutherland in a rather comedic role as an Assasain. Tia Carerra looks as hot as she ever did and can act too, Thomas Ian Griffin is great in this as the lead character "Max" a DEA agent Diane is the FBI agent, played by Carerra, and John Lithgow from Frazier on TV, plays the bad guy,, "Livingston". The plot centers around Max and Diane trying to capture Livingston while they fight and argue with each other about who gets the money for the respective agencies, throw into the mix the Assassain Sutherland, who pretty much has all the good one liners, this is the perfect crime caper, there is the usual love story,, but played very differently than you would think by Carerra and Griffith. You also have the Russian mafia, Italian Mafia, and Chineese Mafia here thrown into the mix,, the film is shot in Boston,, where you have some great shots , and locals,, great photography and music in this film, this movie is just the epitome of a crime comedy,, it has everything that one could ever want. Check out Sutherland's toilet in a particular scene,, very unusual. this film is a riot and will make you laugh real hard 10 plus for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched the DVD (called BLACK WIDOW in the U.S.A.) and felt afterward that it was, indeed, a truly awful movie. But they must have cut quite a bit out of the original film, or I missed a lot. The sex scenes had very little vulgarity and no nudity (not even a breast), but I've read several other comments on IMDb.com mentioning the vulgarity and something about a tampon. I did not see anything like that, just a bad, boring film with unlikable characters and a trite, sophomoric plot. Giada Colagrande is either paralyzed from the mouth up or Botoxed to the gills, and nary an expression touches her face. And her name makes me think of super-sizing a beverage at Taco Bell: "I'll have the Cola Grande!" It was actually kind of fun it was so bad, I got to play like I was in my own Mystery Science Theater 3000, noting things like the fact that Dafoe's skin is too big for his face. It's really like silly putty! --------------------------------------------- Result 4897 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] No spoilers here but I have been a [[fan]] since Waking the [[Dead]] [[started]] but the [[last]] [[series]], of which only 3 have been on so far is [[awful]]. The [[stories]] [[bear]] no [[resemblance]] to the [[original]] [[idea]] of the series. I [[found]] these 3 in the [[last]] series jaw droppingly [[ludicrous]]. As a BBC [[licence]] payer, after the show I rang BBC complaints to pass on my [[disappointment]]. I'm [[amazed]] that actors of the calibre of Trevor Eve and Sue Johnstone didn't object to the [[story]] lines. These actors have been with these [[characters]] for 8 seasons, surly they can [[see]] it's lost all [[direction]]. It's a good [[job]] it is the last [[series]] or the [[next]] [[series]] may [[start]] with the team [[investigating]] the [[death]] of [[Father]] [[Christmas]]!

[[Paul]] Bentley, West Yorkshire, [[England]]. No spoilers here but I have been a [[ventilator]] since Waking the [[Deaths]] [[inaugurated]] but the [[latter]] [[serials]], of which only 3 have been on so far is [[horrific]]. The [[history]] [[xiong]] no [[analogy]] to the [[upfront]] [[thinks]] of the series. I [[unearthed]] these 3 in the [[latter]] series jaw droppingly [[stupid]]. As a BBC [[license]] payer, after the show I rang BBC complaints to pass on my [[displeasure]]. I'm [[surprised]] that actors of the calibre of Trevor Eve and Sue Johnstone didn't object to the [[tales]] lines. These actors have been with these [[personages]] for 8 seasons, surly they can [[seeing]] it's lost all [[directions]]. It's a good [[employment]] it is the last [[serials]] or the [[forthcoming]] [[serials]] may [[initiated]] with the team [[inquiry]] the [[fatalities]] of [[Fathers]] [[Navidad]]!

[[Pauli]] Bentley, West Yorkshire, [[Uk]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4898 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] This movie is so [[bad]], you almost feel contaminated by it. Actually, there is a strong sense of relief when it's over, relief that you can now put the cassette back in the rewinder and RUSH this back to the video rental store before it contaminates the rest of your video collection. I jokingly suggested when we rented it that it looked like the kind of film where William Hurt would "phone in" his performance. I meant that he would not be trying very hard. But lo and [[behold]], in a huge number of scenes in this film, Bill Hurt is actually ON THE PHONE! Our realization of this irony was the only [[pleasure]] we [[derived]] from this confusing [[mess]]. The cinematography and editing are murky and [[befuddled]], the story is chaotic, and the soundtrack is [[barely]] audible. There is a very slight [[resemblance]] to "Falling Down", but that film had a boldly disturbing story-line, great writing and acting, and an engaging soundtrack. "Contaminated Man" is just some kind of broken down old European tourist trap, and watching it is like driving along some unfamiliar back road in an unknown country where you don't speak the language in a steady rain just after nightfall as the windshield keeps fogging up. You get the picture? Don't get this one. This movie is so [[unfavourable]], you almost feel contaminated by it. Actually, there is a strong sense of relief when it's over, relief that you can now put the cassette back in the rewinder and RUSH this back to the video rental store before it contaminates the rest of your video collection. I jokingly suggested when we rented it that it looked like the kind of film where William Hurt would "phone in" his performance. I meant that he would not be trying very hard. But lo and [[admire]], in a huge number of scenes in this film, Bill Hurt is actually ON THE PHONE! Our realization of this irony was the only [[gladness]] we [[derivative]] from this confusing [[disarray]]. The cinematography and editing are murky and [[perplexed]], the story is chaotic, and the soundtrack is [[hardly]] audible. There is a very slight [[likeness]] to "Falling Down", but that film had a boldly disturbing story-line, great writing and acting, and an engaging soundtrack. "Contaminated Man" is just some kind of broken down old European tourist trap, and watching it is like driving along some unfamiliar back road in an unknown country where you don't speak the language in a steady rain just after nightfall as the windshield keeps fogging up. You get the picture? Don't get this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4899 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Have never understood why the MacDonald-Eddy swan song has always been panned so mercilessly--not just by their detractors but by virtually everyone. To me, "I Married an Angel" is more lively and imaginative than any of the duo's more celebrated outings. The sets and costumes are as lavish as any to be found in an MGM musical, the script is by the reliable Anita Loos ("San Francisco," "The Women," "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes," etc.), the Rodgers and Hart tunes (albeit altered a bit by MacDonald-Eddy regulars Bob Wright and Chet Forrest) are given celestial treatment by Herbert Stothart (Oscar-winner for scoring "The Wizard of Oz"), and best of all, the "singing sweethearts" look great in their contemporary clothes and seem to be having fun with the bizarre proceedings. Try to show "Rose Marie" or "Sweethearts" to the uninitiated today and they may very well have a hard time sitting still, but this offbeat, fast-paced fantasy is bound to entertain. --------------------------------------------- Result 4900 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I didn't really know what to [[expect]] when going out to watch the [[film]], apart from the slightly [[surreal]] [[basic]] plotline that a [[lonely]] [[man]] orders a Russian [[bride]] over the [[internet]]. That and it had [[Nicole]] Kidman in it. I [[absolutely]] loved the film though, and came out thinking 'wow'.

[[Refreshingly]] down to [[earth]], the [[film]] moves along [[nicely]], with a few suprises at each corner. The [[relationships]] in the [[film]] are believeable, with [[Nicole]] and Chaplin working against each other [[beautifully]]. The [[humour]] is subtle, with some [[great]] 'Office'-like scenes at the bank, and the thriller [[element]] add [[tension]] without being Hollywood.

[[Overall]] the [[film]] is about [[real]] people in an [[unusual]] situation. It's less about [[heroics]] and more about [[delicate]] [[relationships]]. Brit-filmmaking at its [[best]]...

(9/10) I didn't really know what to [[awaited]] when going out to watch the [[movie]], apart from the slightly [[bizarre]] [[fundamental]] plotline that a [[single]] [[males]] orders a Russian [[fiance]] over the [[cyber]]. That and it had [[Nickel]] Kidman in it. I [[totally]] loved the film though, and came out thinking 'wow'.

[[Cheerfully]] down to [[overland]], the [[movies]] moves along [[gently]], with a few suprises at each corner. The [[ties]] in the [[cinematic]] are believeable, with [[Nickel]] and Chaplin working against each other [[amazingly]]. The [[comedy]] is subtle, with some [[wondrous]] 'Office'-like scenes at the bank, and the thriller [[ingredients]] add [[tensile]] without being Hollywood.

[[General]] the [[movies]] is about [[actual]] people in an [[strange]] situation. It's less about [[exploits]] and more about [[tricky]] [[relationship]]. Brit-filmmaking at its [[better]]...

(9/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 4901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Writer-director Brian De Palma is best known for his string of films that have been called, somewhat unfairly, "Hitchcock imitations." Contrary to popular belief, De Palma doesn't rip-off Hitchcock; he borrows story or character elements that may have been seen in a Hitchcock film and then expands on them in a more violent, modern way. Like Hitchcock, De Palma is known for mixing blood-soaked death with macabre humor.

"Dressed to Kill," made way back in 1980, is, perhaps, De Palma's most well-known Hitchcockian film, and it's probably his best as well. The story involves a cross-dressing serial killer stalking both a burnt-out housewife (played by Angie Dickinson) and a street-wise hooker (played by Nancy Allen).

Yes, it will remind you distinctly of "Psycho," but De Palma's flick is just as technically ingenious and darkly creative. The museum sequence is particularly well-scored and edited; the elevator stab scene is also one of the most uniquely shot murders ever put on film. "Dressed to Kill" may not be a complete original, but I'd say it's definitely worth your time. Rated R. 105 minutes. 9 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4902 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I must confess to not having read the original M R James story although I have read many of his other supernatural tales. I've also seen most of the previous BBC Christmas Ghost Stories and this one, in my opinion, surpasses most of them, only equalling The Signalman.

I can't really fault A View From a Hill - the direction and 'mood' is perfect, as is the acting, lighting and, of course, the story and writing. I thoroughly enjoyed this and can only hope for more of this quality from the same director and production team. I understand that the BBC plan to make some more (not necessarily based on M R James stories) so that's promising.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This "[[movie]]" is more like a [[music]] video. Kusturica said in an interview from 2004 that when he is making movies, he feels like making music, and when he is making music, he feels like making movies. The best [[thing]] in "Promise me this" is the music, written by Stribor Kusturica.

Kusturica said in the same interview, that for him the dialogues in the movies are like noise. "Promise me this" has very little "noise".

I liked "Life is a miracle". It was also like music video for the first 30 minutes and at some points later, but it had a beautiful plot. "Promise me this" has no plot. I was awaiting this [[movie]] with big expectations, because I've read, that the script has been written by Ranko Bozic - one of my favourite scriptwriters, who participated also in "Life is a miracle". Ranko Bozic writes great dialogues, but for Kusturica they are "noise", and much to my regret, I saw only two dialogues, which I could identify as written by Ranko Bozic. The other part of the script was used by the director for making his chaotic music video for the music of his son Stribor.

Gordan Mihic (the man who wrote the scripts for "Time of the gypsies" and "Black cat white cat") said in an interview, that Kusturica never follows the script. "Black cat white cat" was the only script, for which Kusturica said, that he will not touch it. According to Gordan Mihic, after all Kusturica comes back to the script, and if he doesn't, he doesn't make a good movie. And I think this is the case with "Promise me this". He should have followed the script of Ranko Bozic.

"Promise me this" is billed as a "comedy", but there are very few moments, which made me laugh. The comedic moments are in the same style as "Black cat white cat", but are not that [[funny]] at all. I think the difference comes from the fact, that "Black cat white cat" was written by Gordan Mihic.

However, I know some people, who liked "Promise me this", they find it very positive movie. This "[[filmmaking]]" is more like a [[musica]] video. Kusturica said in an interview from 2004 that when he is making movies, he feels like making music, and when he is making music, he feels like making movies. The best [[stuff]] in "Promise me this" is the music, written by Stribor Kusturica.

Kusturica said in the same interview, that for him the dialogues in the movies are like noise. "Promise me this" has very little "noise".

I liked "Life is a miracle". It was also like music video for the first 30 minutes and at some points later, but it had a beautiful plot. "Promise me this" has no plot. I was awaiting this [[filmmaking]] with big expectations, because I've read, that the script has been written by Ranko Bozic - one of my favourite scriptwriters, who participated also in "Life is a miracle". Ranko Bozic writes great dialogues, but for Kusturica they are "noise", and much to my regret, I saw only two dialogues, which I could identify as written by Ranko Bozic. The other part of the script was used by the director for making his chaotic music video for the music of his son Stribor.

Gordan Mihic (the man who wrote the scripts for "Time of the gypsies" and "Black cat white cat") said in an interview, that Kusturica never follows the script. "Black cat white cat" was the only script, for which Kusturica said, that he will not touch it. According to Gordan Mihic, after all Kusturica comes back to the script, and if he doesn't, he doesn't make a good movie. And I think this is the case with "Promise me this". He should have followed the script of Ranko Bozic.

"Promise me this" is billed as a "comedy", but there are very few moments, which made me laugh. The comedic moments are in the same style as "Black cat white cat", but are not that [[fun]] at all. I think the difference comes from the fact, that "Black cat white cat" was written by Gordan Mihic.

However, I know some people, who liked "Promise me this", they find it very positive movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ghost Train is a fine and entertaining film, typical of the better British comedy chillers of the 1930s and 40s. The antics of comedian Arthur Askey are not as funny as they once apparently were, but this can be overcome by viewing him as a period piece or a curiosity.

For a low-budget wartime production, Ghost Train is atmospheric, effective, and it provides some genuine suspense. Great fun for a dark (and, yes, stormy) night. Lighten up, take off the critic's hat, and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Trash/bad movies usually ain't bad because I will find them enjoyable. This one is so [[bad]] that I am out of words to describe it - its below "bad". There is an instruction in the beginning of the film that tell you what to do during the movie. [[Needless]] to say, the instruction and a [[dozen]] of beer couldn't [[help]] me [[seat]] through the entire [[film]]. One tagliner compares this one to KILLBILL which is [[certainly]] [[unthinkable]] and an [[insult]] to our [[intelligent]]. [[Obviously]]. this tagliner had a [[plan]] to tempt you into [[buying]] this DVD.

If you are [[considering]] [[renting]] this one, put it down! If you are thinking of [[buying]], [[Dont]] think! [[If]] you [[unlucky]] to have this [[dvd]], [[dont]] [[play]] it, throw it in trash [[bin]] immediately. Trash/bad movies usually ain't bad because I will find them enjoyable. This one is so [[unfavourable]] that I am out of words to describe it - its below "bad". There is an instruction in the beginning of the film that tell you what to do during the movie. [[Redundant]] to say, the instruction and a [[twelve]] of beer couldn't [[pomoc]] me [[seating]] through the entire [[flick]]. One tagliner compares this one to KILLBILL which is [[definitively]] [[unimaginable]] and an [[offend]] to our [[shrewd]]. [[Patently]]. this tagliner had a [[systems]] to tempt you into [[purchased]] this DVD.

If you are [[reviewing]] [[leased]] this one, put it down! If you are thinking of [[purchasing]], [[Shouldnt]] think! [[Though]] you [[lamentable]] to have this [[dvds]], [[thats]] [[gaming]] it, throw it in trash [[benn]] immediately. --------------------------------------------- Result 4906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I mean, really... either i suddenly lost my sense of humor or this is just a really bad movie. It's stupid, ridiculous and just not funny AT ALL.

Since i saw the preview i knew it wasn't going to be a great movie, i just didn't think it was gonna be that bad...

What happened to the good old times when you could find clever funny lines at any movie? When the actors didn't have to play ridiculous roles in attempt to be funny?. Now we find ourselves with movies like this one, Borat, Little Men, Scary Movie 4 where i could not find the funny parts!!

Just skip this piece of garbage

P.S. (sorry for my English) --------------------------------------------- Result 4907 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In fact, these young people were so distasteful that I couldn't wait for all of 'em to get slaughtered, and that includes Clarissa (Joanna Canton) since I considered her the most annoying of the bunch.

But I knew it was gonna be a mess from the opening minutes when a teen Christine opened fired on the priest and the nuns with the Leslie Gore music playing in the background. It had nowhere to go but down.

Even the prosthetics looked fake and the "blood" looked suspiciously like Hawaiian Punch, although later on it took on red day-glo look to match the silly halloween makeup they were all wearing. I'm sure all the GOTH morons out there will appreciate this bullsh-t since it'll appeal to that bunch. It sure didn't appeal to me. Blah...

And not even my favorite horror babe Adrienne Barbeau can save this stupid teen horror flick from itself. She still looks hot, though. I'm glad she takes care of herself since we don't get to see too much of her nowadays.

However, it is a step up from Dante Tomaselli's meandering HORROR (2002) in that it has a somewhat coherent plot, so I'll give it that much. That and the little Boston terrier named Boozer also brings it up a notch. I like what Boozer does to Clarissa in the end. It was the only good scene in an otherwise silly film.

Lion's Gate Films sure must have been desperate when they picked this one up.

2 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I'm a big fan of Morgan Freeman. 'The Shawshank Redemption' ranks at the top of my all-time favorite movies. But I have to admit that I have often wondered about his choice of roles. So many of his titles were big budget clichés with no heart. '10 Items Or Less' for me [[marks]] the return of Freeman to a role that truly [[showcases]] his [[considerable]] acting [[talents]].

Freeman plays an [[unnamed]], [[formerly]] [[big]] [[time]] Hollywood [[actor]] who hasn't [[worked]] in several years. He has been [[offered]] a part in an [[unspecified]] indi picture for which he is doing some research at a grocery store in a poor [[neighborhood]] in [[LA]]. After being stranded there by his [[flaky]] [[driver]], Freeman is offered a ride home by checkout girl Scarlet (Paz Vega), whom he has semi-befriended. [[Before]] she can take him home, however, Scarlet has a big job interview she needs to get to, and Freeman agrees to [[tag]] along in exchange for the ride.

The movie follows Scarlet and Freeman to [[several]] [[locations]], but the [[movie]] is [[really]] just a [[character]] piece about the [[interactions]] between the two. Freeman is the quintessential disconnected Hollywood type who hasn't heard of Target, and doesn't know his own telephone number or even what day of the week it is. He spouts wisdom from the Dalai Lama filtered thru his 'the whole world is but a stage' [[mentality]], and repeatedly calls Scarlet's job interview an 'audition'. And yet he has a way with people, a way of affecting them that extends beyond his fame. He is a fan of humanity. He studies them, asks incessant questions about them, and [[delights]] in their quirks where [[others]] would simply be annoyed. In Scarlet, he sees the stubborn, proud loner that he was; he sees the man he used to be.

Scarlet, for her part, displays a fierce pride and sharp tongue that serve to hide her own insecurities about herself. Vega plays the role with a connection to Freeman that [[skates]] the line between an almost daughterly love and physical attraction, although she plays it [[beautifully]] and it's not at all as creepy as it [[sounds]]. But even as she feels her connection to Freeman grow, Scarlet has a keen eye for the reality of their different worlds and [[cuts]] thru Freeman's Hollywood bull*hit with a sharp pragmatism that refuses to accept anything but the truth.

The movie is [[smart]], [[funny]], and well written, with dialogue that is simple but effective. I read one IMDb review that said the lines were 'stilted', which I think is a misinterpretation of realistic human speech. There are no [[big]] soliloquies here, no deep soul searching moments. And so the trick is, I think, to show how people in ordinary, everyday life can forge connections with one another. And I think Freeman and Vega pull it off beautifully, painting a picture of a bond between two people that glitters like sun on the ocean, ethereal and elusive. Long after it's gone it lives on in your memories, tantalizing you with what might have been. OK, that was a bit flowery, but I really did like the performances and the movie. I would definitely recommend it. I'm a big fan of Morgan Freeman. 'The Shawshank Redemption' ranks at the top of my all-time favorite movies. But I have to admit that I have often wondered about his choice of roles. So many of his titles were big budget clichés with no heart. '10 Items Or Less' for me [[branded]] the return of Freeman to a role that truly [[illustrates]] his [[sizable]] acting [[talent]].

Freeman plays an [[unrecognized]], [[ago]] [[overwhelming]] [[times]] Hollywood [[protagonist]] who hasn't [[functioned]] in several years. He has been [[providing]] a part in an [[unrecognized]] indi picture for which he is doing some research at a grocery store in a poor [[neighboring]] in [[LAS]]. After being stranded there by his [[flakey]] [[drivers]], Freeman is offered a ride home by checkout girl Scarlet (Paz Vega), whom he has semi-befriended. [[Ago]] she can take him home, however, Scarlet has a big job interview she needs to get to, and Freeman agrees to [[labeling]] along in exchange for the ride.

The movie follows Scarlet and Freeman to [[assorted]] [[site]], but the [[cinematography]] is [[genuinely]] just a [[characters]] piece about the [[interplay]] between the two. Freeman is the quintessential disconnected Hollywood type who hasn't heard of Target, and doesn't know his own telephone number or even what day of the week it is. He spouts wisdom from the Dalai Lama filtered thru his 'the whole world is but a stage' [[psyche]], and repeatedly calls Scarlet's job interview an 'audition'. And yet he has a way with people, a way of affecting them that extends beyond his fame. He is a fan of humanity. He studies them, asks incessant questions about them, and [[pleasures]] in their quirks where [[alia]] would simply be annoyed. In Scarlet, he sees the stubborn, proud loner that he was; he sees the man he used to be.

Scarlet, for her part, displays a fierce pride and sharp tongue that serve to hide her own insecurities about herself. Vega plays the role with a connection to Freeman that [[skids]] the line between an almost daughterly love and physical attraction, although she plays it [[amazingly]] and it's not at all as creepy as it [[noises]]. But even as she feels her connection to Freeman grow, Scarlet has a keen eye for the reality of their different worlds and [[clippings]] thru Freeman's Hollywood bull*hit with a sharp pragmatism that refuses to accept anything but the truth.

The movie is [[artful]], [[amusing]], and well written, with dialogue that is simple but effective. I read one IMDb review that said the lines were 'stilted', which I think is a misinterpretation of realistic human speech. There are no [[considerable]] soliloquies here, no deep soul searching moments. And so the trick is, I think, to show how people in ordinary, everyday life can forge connections with one another. And I think Freeman and Vega pull it off beautifully, painting a picture of a bond between two people that glitters like sun on the ocean, ethereal and elusive. Long after it's gone it lives on in your memories, tantalizing you with what might have been. OK, that was a bit flowery, but I really did like the performances and the movie. I would definitely recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I watched this immediately after seeing HILLSIDE CANNIBALS so anything would have been an [[improvement]] . On top of that it stops me from comparing ZOMBI 3 to 28 DAYS LATER and its sequel . [[Unfortunately]] the more I watched it the more I realised how well made Danny Boyle's original was and how much this movie influenced 28 WEEKS LATER

One can't help noticing how much the 28 franchise has dated this type of Italian horror movie . I was totally convinced ZOMBI 3 must have been made in 1980 or 1981 at the very latest - In which case I would have called my summary 28 YEARS LATER ( Geddit ? ) - but wasn't until I came to this page to find it was released in 1988 . All the production values scream that it's a low budget splatter flick from the very early part of that decade . I might have enjoyed this movie as a fifteen year old schoolboy in 1982 as would have my peers but not now

Much of the problem involves a lack of internal continuity . For example some of the zombies shuffle about with the pace of a snail while others can run very fast and posses self awareness which leads to a ridiculous end scene involving a DJ . Likewise some can be killed by a kick to the face while others remain alive even if they've had their head chopped off , wait till you see the fridge scene , you might just die laughing . Even the serious characters suffer from this type of contrived sloppy scripting where a character suddenly reveals he's a helicopter pilot which leads me to ask why the army have been employing him to drive jeeps for a career

Obviously you're reminded of the earlier film THE CRAZIES which also reminded me of the later 28 films . Bunch of terrorists break in to scientific base leading to all sorts of disaster with the military being the bad guys trying to kill both the infected and the survivors and long before the ending you'll have worked out that basically everyone dies . The problem with this is you'll instantly be reminded of how the British franchise did it so much better on a bigger budget . Not just that but the 28 franchise will appeal to a thinking audience who may have little interest in the average horror movie . ZOMBI 3 will appeal to no one but a hardcore splatter audience I watched this immediately after seeing HILLSIDE CANNIBALS so anything would have been an [[enhancements]] . On top of that it stops me from comparing ZOMBI 3 to 28 DAYS LATER and its sequel . [[Woefully]] the more I watched it the more I realised how well made Danny Boyle's original was and how much this movie influenced 28 WEEKS LATER

One can't help noticing how much the 28 franchise has dated this type of Italian horror movie . I was totally convinced ZOMBI 3 must have been made in 1980 or 1981 at the very latest - In which case I would have called my summary 28 YEARS LATER ( Geddit ? ) - but wasn't until I came to this page to find it was released in 1988 . All the production values scream that it's a low budget splatter flick from the very early part of that decade . I might have enjoyed this movie as a fifteen year old schoolboy in 1982 as would have my peers but not now

Much of the problem involves a lack of internal continuity . For example some of the zombies shuffle about with the pace of a snail while others can run very fast and posses self awareness which leads to a ridiculous end scene involving a DJ . Likewise some can be killed by a kick to the face while others remain alive even if they've had their head chopped off , wait till you see the fridge scene , you might just die laughing . Even the serious characters suffer from this type of contrived sloppy scripting where a character suddenly reveals he's a helicopter pilot which leads me to ask why the army have been employing him to drive jeeps for a career

Obviously you're reminded of the earlier film THE CRAZIES which also reminded me of the later 28 films . Bunch of terrorists break in to scientific base leading to all sorts of disaster with the military being the bad guys trying to kill both the infected and the survivors and long before the ending you'll have worked out that basically everyone dies . The problem with this is you'll instantly be reminded of how the British franchise did it so much better on a bigger budget . Not just that but the 28 franchise will appeal to a thinking audience who may have little interest in the average horror movie . ZOMBI 3 will appeal to no one but a hardcore splatter audience --------------------------------------------- Result 4910 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If the writer/director is reading this (and I imagine you are since you should now be out of work) then I must tell you - I have seen some bad movies in my time but this one gets the distinction of having the worst premise I've ever heard.

SPOILERS - Nothing happens!

A total waste of time. I laughed out loud at the end.

SIDE NOTE - (if the whole movie was her in a coma then does the scene where she sleeps with that guy mean someone raped her while she was knocked out?)

Utter rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 4911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Murder]] By Numbers is one of those movies that you [[expect]] is made-for-TV but isn't. Considering the only actor of any [[note]] is [[Bullock]] (although [[Michael]] Pitt seems to be moving onto [[bigger]] and [[better]] things), it isn't a [[great]] [[surprise]] that this movie [[quickly]] fades away from memory to be replaced by more important things. Like... [[remembering]] to lock your front door when you go out. Or putting clothes back on when you come out of the shower.

Bullock plays Cassie Mayweather, a cop with personal issues (don't they all). Together with her new [[partner]] (a wet-looking Ben Chaplin), she is [[called]] to investigate the murder of a young woman. Nothing unusual there except that the [[perps]] are a couple of [[teenage]] students who think they've planned and [[executed]] the perfect murder. As the investigation continues, a battle of wills emerges between Cassie and the main suspect Richie Haywood (Ryan Gosling).

The [[crippling]] issue here is that the two leads are hopeless. Bullock, though she is very nice to look at, is about as [[believable]] in the role of a hardened cynical cop as Rodney Dangerfield (actually, he'd be better!). Chaplin, for his sins, is a complete non-entity and I feel sorry that he has to put this film on his CV in his attempt to break into Hollywood. At least Gosling and Pitt, as the conniving [[sneering]] suspects, [[acquit]] themselves adequately. As if [[dodgy]] leads weren't bad enough, a story that would send anybody to sleep and a highly predictable (but [[illogical]]) ending shoot this film in the head before it has a chance to run.

"Murder By Numbers" has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] going for it, [[even]] a [[pointless]] nude scene by Bullock wouldn't [[redeem]] it. Well, just a little but [[still]] not enough to [[save]] it. Forgettable, [[predictable]] and redundant - this is one film that isn't going to move the cop genre forward. As Cassie probably says on her next case, there's nothing to see here people. Move along, keep moving... [[Homicide]] By Numbers is one of those movies that you [[expects]] is made-for-TV but isn't. Considering the only actor of any [[memo]] is [[Pollock]] (although [[Micheal]] Pitt seems to be moving onto [[stronger]] and [[best]] things), it isn't a [[tremendous]] [[surprising]] that this movie [[faster]] fades away from memory to be replaced by more important things. Like... [[recalling]] to lock your front door when you go out. Or putting clothes back on when you come out of the shower.

Bullock plays Cassie Mayweather, a cop with personal issues (don't they all). Together with her new [[partners]] (a wet-looking Ben Chaplin), she is [[termed]] to investigate the murder of a young woman. Nothing unusual there except that the [[abductors]] are a couple of [[youth]] students who think they've planned and [[conducted]] the perfect murder. As the investigation continues, a battle of wills emerges between Cassie and the main suspect Richie Haywood (Ryan Gosling).

The [[cripple]] issue here is that the two leads are hopeless. Bullock, though she is very nice to look at, is about as [[dependable]] in the role of a hardened cynical cop as Rodney Dangerfield (actually, he'd be better!). Chaplin, for his sins, is a complete non-entity and I feel sorry that he has to put this film on his CV in his attempt to break into Hollywood. At least Gosling and Pitt, as the conniving [[smirking]] suspects, [[exempt]] themselves adequately. As if [[shady]] leads weren't bad enough, a story that would send anybody to sleep and a highly predictable (but [[irrational]]) ending shoot this film in the head before it has a chance to run.

"Murder By Numbers" has [[abundantly]] [[none]] going for it, [[yet]] a [[vain]] nude scene by Bullock wouldn't [[redeeming]] it. Well, just a little but [[however]] not enough to [[rescues]] it. Forgettable, [[foreseeable]] and redundant - this is one film that isn't going to move the cop genre forward. As Cassie probably says on her next case, there's nothing to see here people. Move along, keep moving... --------------------------------------------- Result 4912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "[[Stargate]] SG-1" follows the intergalactic [[explorations]] of a team named SG-1 through a device called the [[Stargate]] and all the [[surprises]] [[awaiting]] on the other side of the wormhole.

Having seen this [[series]] sporadically for it's first few seasons when it first came out, I didn't know how good this series would really be, 10 [[years]] after I had [[last]] [[seen]] an episode. My [[old]] [[impression]] was that the series was great, but my impression was far from the truth. "[[Stargate]] SG-1" is more than just a [[simple]] sci-fi [[series]], it is one of the most well made, interesting, long [[running]], [[exciting]] sci-fi ever [[produced]]. And why? Because it runs on an [[amazing]] premise.

This series value far surpasses that of the movie it was [[based]] on and I [[think]] it is a very good [[example]] that [[television]], as a [[medium]], with a [[suitable]] premise, is [[able]] to [[provide]] [[something]] that doesn't work on the [[time]] [[restriction]] of [[film]]. The sense of familiarity created by a long running [[series]], watching the [[characters]] and their [[circumstances]] progressing with [[time]] is [[stunning]] and just adds to the [[ability]] to suspend disbelief, and it's all a result of [[terrific]] writing and a [[lot]] of [[dedication]] by the all crew to the [[show]].

"[[Stargate]] SG-1" kept offering [[great]] adventures [[throughout]] the 10 [[years]], but was never [[afraid]] of the [[challenge]] of moving the plot and it gave [[way]] for some very [[different]] [[time]] [[periods]] of the [[show]]:

- The first few seasons, [[perhaps]] up to the 4th/5th, focused a lot more on the exploration of planets and different situations, [[keeping]] the episodes fairly unrelated to each other if it were not for the always impending Goaul'd threat.

- From the 5th to the 7th there was increasingly more episodes focusing on fighting the Goaul'd and preventing attacks on [[Earth]]. After this seasons [[exploration]] of the planets was [[almost]] only an [[excuse]] for putting sg-1 in a [[place]] of Goaul'd/replicator/ori [[conflicts]]

- The 8th season is [[probably]] the most [[mixed]] one. It has a stream of [[episodes]] that [[includes]] [[minor]] [[earth]] [[matters]] in which the [[stargate]] is [[hardly]] [[even]] [[mentioned]], but the [[last]] episodes feature some [[great]] replicator [[moments]].

- The 9th and 10th travel together because they have the same new enemy and no Jack O'Neil. They are both good continuations, although the first few episodes of the 10th season are a little weak, because they seem to be about little more than SG-1 and human/Jaffa losing battle after battle to the Ori.

Basically, after season 7, exploration was pushed to the background, which in many ways was a shame, because of the potential and mystery each planet(episode) presented; on the other hand, it made for so many great episodes of the ongoing conflicts that the change of [[nature]] of the show still worked and shows how great and bold the writers were.

Even tough I believe the series have a high quality ending that nicely puts it to rest, the feeling I have is that it could go on; the people involved were all great professionals and the series narrative had plenty to offer. A last season returning to the beginning nature of the series was very doable and would have been most welcome, but ultimately things are as they are.

In the end, because of the fact that I enjoyed everything, it's a little hard to find that it ends. The big picture, however, the one drawn by the work of hundreds of people over the course of 10 years, is a sight of beauty and a true testament to the dedication of the crew, those outstanding actors and the characters the we will always remember as a collective by the name of SG-1. "[[Porte]] SG-1" follows the intergalactic [[browse]] of a team named SG-1 through a device called the [[Porte]] and all the [[stuns]] [[wait]] on the other side of the wormhole.

Having seen this [[serials]] sporadically for it's first few seasons when it first came out, I didn't know how good this series would really be, 10 [[olds]] after I had [[final]] [[watched]] an episode. My [[longtime]] [[feeling]] was that the series was great, but my impression was far from the truth. "[[Porte]] SG-1" is more than just a [[simpler]] sci-fi [[serial]], it is one of the most well made, interesting, long [[executing]], [[riveting]] sci-fi ever [[generated]]. And why? Because it runs on an [[wondrous]] premise.

This series value far surpasses that of the movie it was [[founded]] on and I [[thinks]] it is a very good [[case]] that [[tv]], as a [[media]], with a [[adequate]] premise, is [[capable]] to [[deliver]] [[somethin]] that doesn't work on the [[times]] [[constraint]] of [[movie]]. The sense of familiarity created by a long running [[serials]], watching the [[features]] and their [[situations]] progressing with [[times]] is [[breathless]] and just adds to the [[capacity]] to suspend disbelief, and it's all a result of [[magnifique]] writing and a [[batch]] of [[commitments]] by the all crew to the [[shows]].

"[[Porte]] SG-1" kept offering [[grand]] adventures [[around]] the 10 [[ages]], but was never [[spooked]] of the [[challenged]] of moving the plot and it gave [[path]] for some very [[varied]] [[period]] [[deadline]] of the [[demonstrate]]:

- The first few seasons, [[presumably]] up to the 4th/5th, focused a lot more on the exploration of planets and different situations, [[maintenance]] the episodes fairly unrelated to each other if it were not for the always impending Goaul'd threat.

- From the 5th to the 7th there was increasingly more episodes focusing on fighting the Goaul'd and preventing attacks on [[Lands]]. After this seasons [[crawling]] of the planets was [[roughly]] only an [[apologizing]] for putting sg-1 in a [[placing]] of Goaul'd/replicator/ori [[controversies]]

- The 8th season is [[potentially]] the most [[blended]] one. It has a stream of [[spells]] that [[involves]] [[smaller]] [[overland]] [[subjects]] in which the [[porte]] is [[practically]] [[yet]] [[quoted]], but the [[final]] episodes feature some [[wondrous]] replicator [[times]].

- The 9th and 10th travel together because they have the same new enemy and no Jack O'Neil. They are both good continuations, although the first few episodes of the 10th season are a little weak, because they seem to be about little more than SG-1 and human/Jaffa losing battle after battle to the Ori.

Basically, after season 7, exploration was pushed to the background, which in many ways was a shame, because of the potential and mystery each planet(episode) presented; on the other hand, it made for so many great episodes of the ongoing conflicts that the change of [[character]] of the show still worked and shows how great and bold the writers were.

Even tough I believe the series have a high quality ending that nicely puts it to rest, the feeling I have is that it could go on; the people involved were all great professionals and the series narrative had plenty to offer. A last season returning to the beginning nature of the series was very doable and would have been most welcome, but ultimately things are as they are.

In the end, because of the fact that I enjoyed everything, it's a little hard to find that it ends. The big picture, however, the one drawn by the work of hundreds of people over the course of 10 years, is a sight of beauty and a true testament to the dedication of the crew, those outstanding actors and the characters the we will always remember as a collective by the name of SG-1. --------------------------------------------- Result 4913 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I took a [[flyer]] in renting this [[movie]] but I gotta say, it was very, very good. On all [[fronts]]: script, cast, director, photography, and [[high]] production values, [[etc]]. [[Proves]] Eva Longoria Parker is head and shoulders in [[rom]]/com above bad actors such as Kate Hudson and Jennifer Aniston, who mug and [[call]] it acting. Who'da thunk it?

[[Parker]] and [[Isla]] [[Fisher]] are in a [[class]] by themselves in this regard and should try to hold out for projects as good as "Over Her Dead Body." Lake [[Bell]] is [[excellent]], too, and this is the first time I have seen her. And finally, Paul Rudd [[gets]] to shine in a really good movie, [[instead]] of [[lesser]] films.

A movie like this never gets its dues from close-minded males. It's too bad. As other IMDb reviewers here have noted, there is nothing lame about this gem --no hack writing or acting.

And its depiction of contemporary L.A. and California, in general, makes every scene look bright, beautiful, clean, and otherwise outstanding in every way. Never before has a movie made L.A. look so good. Ah, what a little talent and a lot of caring can do for a movie.

I won't divulge the plot, but as a long-time and hard-core atheist, I was willing to suspend disbelief and buy into the supernatural theme in order to enjoy an excellent and light-hearted piece of entertainment. It reminds me very much of the old "Topper" movies, which were also so enjoyable.

This movie [[exposes]] popular, but otherwise hackneyed, movies like "Ghost" for the mediocre and overly sentimental crap fests they are. We already know the public taste leans heavily toward the mediocre. Some of us save our praise for the truly worthy, however.

If you have enjoyed other overlooked gems such as "Into the Night" with Michelle Pfeiffer, Jeff Goldblum and Clu Gulager, "Blind Date" with Bruce Willis and Kim Basinger, "American Dreamer" with JoBeth Williams, "Chances Are" with Robert Downey Jr., Christopher McDonald and Cybil Sheppard, "Making Mr. Right" with John Malkovich, etc., you'll enjoy this.

A first-rate job all around (even if it's kinda hard to believe a straight guy can pretend to be gay for more than five years.) But even that plot device doesn't detract from the movie's overall excellence. I took a [[prospectus]] in renting this [[kino]] but I gotta say, it was very, very good. On all [[frontlines]]: script, cast, director, photography, and [[higher]] production values, [[cetera]]. [[Illustrates]] Eva Longoria Parker is head and shoulders in [[romani]]/com above bad actors such as Kate Hudson and Jennifer Aniston, who mug and [[calls]] it acting. Who'da thunk it?

[[Barker]] and [[Island]] [[Fishermen]] are in a [[schoolroom]] by themselves in this regard and should try to hold out for projects as good as "Over Her Dead Body." Lake [[Ringtone]] is [[wondrous]], too, and this is the first time I have seen her. And finally, Paul Rudd [[obtains]] to shine in a really good movie, [[however]] of [[minimum]] films.

A movie like this never gets its dues from close-minded males. It's too bad. As other IMDb reviewers here have noted, there is nothing lame about this gem --no hack writing or acting.

And its depiction of contemporary L.A. and California, in general, makes every scene look bright, beautiful, clean, and otherwise outstanding in every way. Never before has a movie made L.A. look so good. Ah, what a little talent and a lot of caring can do for a movie.

I won't divulge the plot, but as a long-time and hard-core atheist, I was willing to suspend disbelief and buy into the supernatural theme in order to enjoy an excellent and light-hearted piece of entertainment. It reminds me very much of the old "Topper" movies, which were also so enjoyable.

This movie [[presents]] popular, but otherwise hackneyed, movies like "Ghost" for the mediocre and overly sentimental crap fests they are. We already know the public taste leans heavily toward the mediocre. Some of us save our praise for the truly worthy, however.

If you have enjoyed other overlooked gems such as "Into the Night" with Michelle Pfeiffer, Jeff Goldblum and Clu Gulager, "Blind Date" with Bruce Willis and Kim Basinger, "American Dreamer" with JoBeth Williams, "Chances Are" with Robert Downey Jr., Christopher McDonald and Cybil Sheppard, "Making Mr. Right" with John Malkovich, etc., you'll enjoy this.

A first-rate job all around (even if it's kinda hard to believe a straight guy can pretend to be gay for more than five years.) But even that plot device doesn't detract from the movie's overall excellence. --------------------------------------------- Result 4914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recall seeing this movie as a kid. I don't recall where I saw it. I must have been around 14 years old. I thought the movie was incredible and wished to see it again. It came on the Kung Fu channel once, but I missed it. I was really bummed. It is the best special-effects Kung Fu movie that I've seen to date! I highly recommend it, and now that I've discovered where to get it, I can enjoy it once more and for years to come. I also have to check out this Return of the Venom movie of which some have spoken so highly. --------------------------------------------- Result 4915 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] My title ought to be enough.

It [[baffles]] me that a culture so [[rich]] in literary excellence (Dumas, Flaubert, Balzac, Maupassant) would churn out such tosh as the "nouvelle vague" cinematic movement. Until the 20th century, France had a great tradition of artistic lucidity and [[clever]] philosophy. But the minute you hand them a movie [[camera]] they start acting like WOOOHOOO LOOK HOW WEIRD I CAN BE! [[PLOT]]? THEME? PSHAW! LET'S [[FILM]] AN [[AMUSEMENT]] PARK RIDE GOING ROUND & ROUND! At [[least]] this is not as bad as Godard (who has an unhealthy fascination with the backs of peoples' heads. Oh-la-la, quel artiste.). No, Truffaut maintains a degree of visual clarity. But so does the security camera at a quickie-mart. The two are indistinguishable.

Haha, just as an aside to all you dweeby film school nerds: I bet the vein is popping out the side of your neck right now. But don't leave without reading the last sentence of my review.

Anyway, if you like French literature, you will HATE this. People who like this movie probably have never read any books other than the ramblings of Jack Kerouac or maybe "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Or maybe they have read the lyrics to The Doors songs, and they think that's profoundly moving. Whatever floats yer boat. I find it ironic that this film injects some (weak) allusions to Balzac, one of the finest and most meaningful writers who ever lived. Nice try, Truffles. But you're nowhere near the ballpark.

[[Avoid]] this [[film]] like an aids-infected syringe.

If you're the type of person who likes to think, then stick to Jean Cocteau (ORPHEE), Robert Bresson (PICKPOCKET) and the Japanese masters Kurosawa (IKURU), Kobayashi (KAIDAN) and Teshigahara (SUNA NO ONNA).

If you're an idiot, enjoy your Truffaut, Godard, and Andy Worhol. And for pete's sake push that vein back in your neck. You look like a cabbage. My title ought to be enough.

It [[puzzles]] me that a culture so [[affluent]] in literary excellence (Dumas, Flaubert, Balzac, Maupassant) would churn out such tosh as the "nouvelle vague" cinematic movement. Until the 20th century, France had a great tradition of artistic lucidity and [[canny]] philosophy. But the minute you hand them a movie [[cameras]] they start acting like WOOOHOOO LOOK HOW WEIRD I CAN BE! [[INTRIGUE]]? THEME? PSHAW! LET'S [[FILMMAKING]] AN [[ENTERTAINMENTS]] PARK RIDE GOING ROUND & ROUND! At [[fewest]] this is not as bad as Godard (who has an unhealthy fascination with the backs of peoples' heads. Oh-la-la, quel artiste.). No, Truffaut maintains a degree of visual clarity. But so does the security camera at a quickie-mart. The two are indistinguishable.

Haha, just as an aside to all you dweeby film school nerds: I bet the vein is popping out the side of your neck right now. But don't leave without reading the last sentence of my review.

Anyway, if you like French literature, you will HATE this. People who like this movie probably have never read any books other than the ramblings of Jack Kerouac or maybe "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Or maybe they have read the lyrics to The Doors songs, and they think that's profoundly moving. Whatever floats yer boat. I find it ironic that this film injects some (weak) allusions to Balzac, one of the finest and most meaningful writers who ever lived. Nice try, Truffles. But you're nowhere near the ballpark.

[[Stave]] this [[filmmaking]] like an aids-infected syringe.

If you're the type of person who likes to think, then stick to Jean Cocteau (ORPHEE), Robert Bresson (PICKPOCKET) and the Japanese masters Kurosawa (IKURU), Kobayashi (KAIDAN) and Teshigahara (SUNA NO ONNA).

If you're an idiot, enjoy your Truffaut, Godard, and Andy Worhol. And for pete's sake push that vein back in your neck. You look like a cabbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 4916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Ridiculous]] [[fluff]], that compounds its [[error]] by [[trying]] to have [[meaning]]. [[Joan]], this time as a [[congresswoman]], Agatha Reed, [[chairwoman]] of a committee dedicated to "investigating the high cost of food." Says [[Congresswoman]] Reed, "The housewife has been getting it in the neck too long. I'm going to keep fighting long enough so that the American family can take a vacation once a year, see a movie every week and feed an occasional peanut to an elephant." She's all business, but becomes all gushy when she is awarded an honorary degree from Good [[Hope]] College, where she was expelled for the [[crime]] of having stayed out all night (the parallel to Joan's real life is unmistakable here, as it is in all Joan Movies). The [[degree]] causes much [[consternation]] on campus ("That would make it the most broad-minded institution in the history of education!") – but Joan is unaware of this as she arrives. The college president, Jim Merrill, played by Robert Young, at his handsomest, happens to be Joan's former teacher – and lover. It was with *him* that she spent the night out, all those years ago, but Joan felt it was [[better]] to just disappear rather than try and explain to the skeptical college that they were about to be married. Naturally, this high-profile event will be covered by *Life* [[magazine]] – and who does the photographer turn out to be? Yet another of Joan's old lovers – this one, she hung out with in China "during the war", and he thinks Joan might be headed for trouble with her old flame. Eve Arden, playing Joan's assistant, "Woodie," is at her butchest and most smart-alecky in this movie – with her flippant and [[unnecessary]] [[remarks]] that would make you dismiss her from her job, if you didn't like her so much. But you not only like Eve in this, as in all her roles, you adore her. She is so droll and no-nonsense, you'd like to pay her just to hang around and be one of the boys. When Joan cries upon arriving at her alma mater, Eve tells her it "looks fierce." But Joan says that maybe others only see a collection of buildings, she, Joan, sees youth – herself at 18 "eager, expectant – a little frightened, asking 'What is life? What am I?'" But, of course, if we actually go into depth about Joan at 18, the truth may be a little different.

For me, this is the major problem in watching any Joan movie. You can call her characters whatever you want to, but it's always all Joan, all the time. So, since what we're always seeing is Joan being herself, it's easy to dispense with character's names. It's just that it gets confusing when Joan tries to tell us something patently untrue, like her description of herself at 18 – when we know that at 18, Joan had already been around the block several times. Many men would have described her as eager, and as far as being expectant, she had already had several abortions at this point. But that's a personal problem, and I digress, but I simply wanted to explain why I say things such as "…and then Joan does…" this or that, or "We see Joan as..." when we are not literally watching a home movie.

There is an unintentionally hilarious moment in which Joan is given the Clara Bow doll that she left behind in college – quick arithmetic tells us that Joan and Clara were contemporaries and this is a transparent ploy to make us believe Joan is much younger than she actually looks. It fails. What also fails is an attempt at early-50s political correctness. In the story, Joan has written a book about free speech and made a film (no, not the one about the plumber), and she attracts the attention of an early 50s campus radical, Dr. Pitt, who is about to be fired for his views, which are shockingly similar to Joan's. This is where the movie mysteriously becomes a morality tale –a weak one, to be sure, but perhaps the only thing that keeps it from sliding into oblivion. [[Farcical]] [[grope]], that compounds its [[mistaken]] by [[tempting]] to have [[meanings]]. [[Joana]], this time as a [[congressman]], Agatha Reed, [[presidential]] of a committee dedicated to "investigating the high cost of food." Says [[Congressional]] Reed, "The housewife has been getting it in the neck too long. I'm going to keep fighting long enough so that the American family can take a vacation once a year, see a movie every week and feed an occasional peanut to an elephant." She's all business, but becomes all gushy when she is awarded an honorary degree from Good [[Expectancy]] College, where she was expelled for the [[misdemeanour]] of having stayed out all night (the parallel to Joan's real life is unmistakable here, as it is in all Joan Movies). The [[diploma]] causes much [[bewilderment]] on campus ("That would make it the most broad-minded institution in the history of education!") – but Joan is unaware of this as she arrives. The college president, Jim Merrill, played by Robert Young, at his handsomest, happens to be Joan's former teacher – and lover. It was with *him* that she spent the night out, all those years ago, but Joan felt it was [[best]] to just disappear rather than try and explain to the skeptical college that they were about to be married. Naturally, this high-profile event will be covered by *Life* [[revue]] – and who does the photographer turn out to be? Yet another of Joan's old lovers – this one, she hung out with in China "during the war", and he thinks Joan might be headed for trouble with her old flame. Eve Arden, playing Joan's assistant, "Woodie," is at her butchest and most smart-alecky in this movie – with her flippant and [[superfluous]] [[sightings]] that would make you dismiss her from her job, if you didn't like her so much. But you not only like Eve in this, as in all her roles, you adore her. She is so droll and no-nonsense, you'd like to pay her just to hang around and be one of the boys. When Joan cries upon arriving at her alma mater, Eve tells her it "looks fierce." But Joan says that maybe others only see a collection of buildings, she, Joan, sees youth – herself at 18 "eager, expectant – a little frightened, asking 'What is life? What am I?'" But, of course, if we actually go into depth about Joan at 18, the truth may be a little different.

For me, this is the major problem in watching any Joan movie. You can call her characters whatever you want to, but it's always all Joan, all the time. So, since what we're always seeing is Joan being herself, it's easy to dispense with character's names. It's just that it gets confusing when Joan tries to tell us something patently untrue, like her description of herself at 18 – when we know that at 18, Joan had already been around the block several times. Many men would have described her as eager, and as far as being expectant, she had already had several abortions at this point. But that's a personal problem, and I digress, but I simply wanted to explain why I say things such as "…and then Joan does…" this or that, or "We see Joan as..." when we are not literally watching a home movie.

There is an unintentionally hilarious moment in which Joan is given the Clara Bow doll that she left behind in college – quick arithmetic tells us that Joan and Clara were contemporaries and this is a transparent ploy to make us believe Joan is much younger than she actually looks. It fails. What also fails is an attempt at early-50s political correctness. In the story, Joan has written a book about free speech and made a film (no, not the one about the plumber), and she attracts the attention of an early 50s campus radical, Dr. Pitt, who is about to be fired for his views, which are shockingly similar to Joan's. This is where the movie mysteriously becomes a morality tale –a weak one, to be sure, but perhaps the only thing that keeps it from sliding into oblivion. --------------------------------------------- Result 4917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] 'The Mother' is that [[extraordinary]] piece of [[film]] making - it [[gets]] you [[thinking]], it pulls no punches - and ultimately it leaves you [[thinking]]. [[Very]] much open-ended as to the lead character's [[fate]]. [[Anne]] Reid (which I only knew briefly from her appearances in some Victoria Wood-led projects and [[thought]] a [[fine]] comedienne) is [[truly]] [[superb]] here. Not the stereotypical widowed [[housewife]] that was perfect in marriage and motherhood at all. And not all that free-spirited and [[adventurous]] at first. She plays her character just with the right [[note]] that rings [[true]] (well, it did to me). [[Powerful]] cast. [[Great]] script. [[Renaissance]] of European [[cinema]] [[indeed]] ;) 'The Mother' is that [[wondrous]] piece of [[cinematography]] making - it [[get]] you [[thought]], it pulls no punches - and ultimately it leaves you [[think]]. [[Extremely]] much open-ended as to the lead character's [[destinies]]. [[Anna]] Reid (which I only knew briefly from her appearances in some Victoria Wood-led projects and [[think]] a [[fined]] comedienne) is [[honestly]] [[wondrous]] here. Not the stereotypical widowed [[homemaker]] that was perfect in marriage and motherhood at all. And not all that free-spirited and [[audacious]] at first. She plays her character just with the right [[remark]] that rings [[authentic]] (well, it did to me). [[Mighty]] cast. [[Huge]] script. [[Revival]] of European [[cinemas]] [[actually]] ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 4918 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a ripsnorting, old-fashioned adventure yarn. I understand that by today's political standards, the treatment of the Indians was unacceptable. But this moving isn't about politics. It's about action, dialogue, comradery, acting, direction, music, and photography, and it's marvelous on all these factors. Grant, Fairbanks, and McLaglen are electric together, and Jaffe is superb. This is the ultimate buddy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4919 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Really [[bad]] [[movie]]. Maybe the [[worst]] I've ever [[seen]]. Alien invasion, a la The [[Blob]], without the acting. Meteorite turns [[beautiful]] woman into a [[host]] body for nasty tongue. Bad plot, bad fake tongue. Absurd comedy worth missing. Wash your hair or take out the trash. Really [[unfavourable]] [[movies]]. Maybe the [[meanest]] I've ever [[noticed]]. Alien invasion, a la The [[Stain]], without the acting. Meteorite turns [[sumptuous]] woman into a [[reception]] body for nasty tongue. Bad plot, bad fake tongue. Absurd comedy worth missing. Wash your hair or take out the trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 4920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] 20 out of 10 This is a [[truly]] [[wonderful]] [[story]] about a wartime evacuee and a curmudgeonly carpenter Tom Oakley. The boy (William Beech) is billeted with Tom and it is immediately apparent that he has serious issues when he wets his bed on the first night. William is illiterate and frightened but somehow the two find solace in each others loneliness. It transpires that William has a talent as an [[artist]] and we see Tom's [[talent]] as a choirmaster in an amusing [[rendition]] of Jerusalem. William is befriended by Zacharias Wrench, a young Jewish lad also from London and along with both Tom and Zacharias, he finally learns to read and write and to feel a part of this small close knit community. Just as he is settling down, William is recalled back to London by his mother, and it is here we see why he is so screwed up. His mother is clearly mentally sick and when Tom doesn't hear from William, he travels to London to look for him. He finally finds him holding his dead baby sister where he has been tied up in a cellar. After a period in hospital, Tom realises he must kidnap him and take him home with him. The climax is a bitter-sweet ending when William is told he is to be adopted by Tom, while at the same time, learning his best friend Zacharias has been killed in an air raid in London. For me, one of the most [[moving]] scenes was when Tom was talking to a official from the Home Office.

I love 'im, an' for what it's worth, I think he loves me too'.

It just doesn't [[get]] better that that does it? 20 out of 10 This is a [[really]] [[wondrous]] [[saga]] about a wartime evacuee and a curmudgeonly carpenter Tom Oakley. The boy (William Beech) is billeted with Tom and it is immediately apparent that he has serious issues when he wets his bed on the first night. William is illiterate and frightened but somehow the two find solace in each others loneliness. It transpires that William has a talent as an [[painters]] and we see Tom's [[talents]] as a choirmaster in an amusing [[extradition]] of Jerusalem. William is befriended by Zacharias Wrench, a young Jewish lad also from London and along with both Tom and Zacharias, he finally learns to read and write and to feel a part of this small close knit community. Just as he is settling down, William is recalled back to London by his mother, and it is here we see why he is so screwed up. His mother is clearly mentally sick and when Tom doesn't hear from William, he travels to London to look for him. He finally finds him holding his dead baby sister where he has been tied up in a cellar. After a period in hospital, Tom realises he must kidnap him and take him home with him. The climax is a bitter-sweet ending when William is told he is to be adopted by Tom, while at the same time, learning his best friend Zacharias has been killed in an air raid in London. For me, one of the most [[shifting]] scenes was when Tom was talking to a official from the Home Office.

I love 'im, an' for what it's worth, I think he loves me too'.

It just doesn't [[obtain]] better that that does it? --------------------------------------------- Result 4921 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Tears]] of Kali is an [[original]] yet flawed horror film that delves into the doings of a cult [[group]] in [[India]] comprised of German psychologists who have [[learned]] how to [[control]] their [[wills]] and their [[bodies]] to the point that they can cause others to be "healed" through radical techniques (that can trigger nightmarish hallucinations and physical pain and torture) to release the pent-up demons inside them.

The [[film]] is [[shown]] as a series of vignettes about the Taylor-Eriksson group--the above-mentioned cult group. The [[first]] segment is [[somewhat]] slower than the rest but serves fine to set up the [[premise]] for the [[rest]] of the film. The [[rest]] of it plays out [[like]] a mindf@ck [[film]] with some of the [[key]] staples [[thrown]] in the [[mix]] (full-frontal nudity, some gore) to [[keep]] you [[happy]].

I say check this out. [[May]] not be [[spectacular]], but it's concept is pretty neato and it [[delivers]] in the right [[spots]]. 8/10. [[Rip]] of Kali is an [[initials]] yet flawed horror film that delves into the doings of a cult [[groups]] in [[Hindustan]] comprised of German psychologists who have [[learnt]] how to [[supervisory]] their [[testament]] and their [[organisations]] to the point that they can cause others to be "healed" through radical techniques (that can trigger nightmarish hallucinations and physical pain and torture) to release the pent-up demons inside them.

The [[kino]] is [[revealed]] as a series of vignettes about the Taylor-Eriksson group--the above-mentioned cult group. The [[frst]] segment is [[slightly]] slower than the rest but serves fine to set up the [[supposition]] for the [[remaining]] of the film. The [[remainder]] of it plays out [[iike]] a mindf@ck [[cinematographic]] with some of the [[principal]] staples [[hurled]] in the [[mixes]] (full-frontal nudity, some gore) to [[conserve]] you [[cheerful]].

I say check this out. [[Maggio]] not be [[remarkable]], but it's concept is pretty neato and it [[offers]] in the right [[speckles]]. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This [[movie]] [[probably]] [[would]] only get a 7 or 8 from me to tell the truth if I had [[seen]] trailers or had any kind of knowledge of what the film is all about. Since it was virtually all a surprise it was [[almost]] a [[perfect]] piece of [[edgy]] entertainment that gets a strong 9 from me.

I read through some of the [[comments]] briefly and [[saw]] that someone [[else]] had [[almost]] the same [[experience]] as me and he [[advised]] to just watch it. It was good [[advice]]. Read the rest at your own [[risk]] of spoiling.

[[Eva]] Mendez plays a head-strong, success-starved [[network]] [[TV]] [[programmer]] that took a [[joke]] [[made]] by a co-worker while brain-storming [[TV]] [[program]] ideas about Russian Roulette seriously. The story follows her in a documentary [[style]] on her [[pursuit]] to make this happen. This [[kino]] [[arguably]] [[ought]] only get a 7 or 8 from me to tell the truth if I had [[saw]] trailers or had any kind of knowledge of what the film is all about. Since it was virtually all a surprise it was [[hardly]] a [[impeccable]] piece of [[jumpy]] entertainment that gets a strong 9 from me.

I read through some of the [[feedback]] briefly and [[watched]] that someone [[otherwise]] had [[approximately]] the same [[enjoying]] as me and he [[apprised]] to just watch it. It was good [[counsel]]. Read the rest at your own [[perils]] of spoiling.

[[Evy]] Mendez plays a head-strong, success-starved [[networks]] [[TELEVISIONS]] [[programmers]] that took a [[joking]] [[brought]] by a co-worker while brain-storming [[TELEVISION]] [[agenda]] ideas about Russian Roulette seriously. The story follows her in a documentary [[stylistic]] on her [[pursuing]] to make this happen. --------------------------------------------- Result 4923 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I remember this movie in particular when I was a [[teenager]], my best friend was telling me all about this movie and how it freaked her out as a kid. Of course being the blood thirsty gal that I am, I had to go out and find this movie. Now I don't know how to put this without loosing credibility, so I'm just going to say it, I actually had [[fun]] watching this movie! I know that it's stupid, not the [[best]] story and beyond bloody and [[gruesome]], but that's what I was [[looking]] for and The Dentist [[delivers]] in the scares, blood, sex, and crazy psychopaths. Sometimes I just need a fun movie like this to just let loose and get grossed out by.

Dr. Alan Feinstone is obsessed with order and cleanliness. On the day of his wedding anniversary, he spies his wife Brooke having sex with their filthy pool man, Matt. At his dental practice, Feinstone's first patient of the day is young Jody Saunders, there for his very first dental appointment. Feinstone begins to clean Jody's teeth. Everything goes smoothly at first, until he imagines that Jody's teeth are brown and rotten. His dental pick slips, stabbing Jody in the gums. Jody's mother picks up her crying, bleeding child and leaves angrily. Feinstone sees his second patient, beauty queen April Reign. Alone with April, Feinstone sedates her with nitrous oxide so that he can fill a cavity in one of her molars. As she drifts off into unconsciousness, Feinstone imagines that she has transformed into his wife. He begins kissing and fondling her on the dental chair, then begins to choke her. April starts to cough and half-wakes up from the gas. Feinstone snaps out of his trance and quickly re-buttons April's blouse. Feinstone decides to end the day early and sends his staff and patients home. Later that night, Brooke meets Feinstone at his practice. He reveals his new Italian opera-themed patient room. He encourages Brooke to try out the room's dental chair. When she does, Feinstone binds her to the chair and sedates her with nitrous oxide. With operatic music blaring in the background, he begins to pull out Brooke's teeth. Feinstone has gone off the deep end and is definitely not going to let anybody stand in his way of cleanliness.

Honestly, as silly as this movie sounds, I did have a lot of fun watching The Dentist. The best scene without a doubt is when he teaches that nasty IRS agent a lesson in hygiene that I'm sure he'll never forget. Man, I don't think I've brushed my teeth so much after I watched The Dentist. Yeah, I am going to warn you, this movie is in no way for the faint of heart, it's very bloody. There's stabbing, gun shots and just these brutal dental torture scenes that will make your stomach turn. Yet somehow I just enjoyed this movie, if I ever want just a good gore movie that was made for true horror fans, I slip it in my DVD player, and that's the "tooth" LOL! I am so funny! Um, yeah, I try, give me a little credit.

7/10 I remember this movie in particular when I was a [[youth]], my best friend was telling me all about this movie and how it freaked her out as a kid. Of course being the blood thirsty gal that I am, I had to go out and find this movie. Now I don't know how to put this without loosing credibility, so I'm just going to say it, I actually had [[funny]] watching this movie! I know that it's stupid, not the [[better]] story and beyond bloody and [[loathsome]], but that's what I was [[researching]] for and The Dentist [[offerings]] in the scares, blood, sex, and crazy psychopaths. Sometimes I just need a fun movie like this to just let loose and get grossed out by.

Dr. Alan Feinstone is obsessed with order and cleanliness. On the day of his wedding anniversary, he spies his wife Brooke having sex with their filthy pool man, Matt. At his dental practice, Feinstone's first patient of the day is young Jody Saunders, there for his very first dental appointment. Feinstone begins to clean Jody's teeth. Everything goes smoothly at first, until he imagines that Jody's teeth are brown and rotten. His dental pick slips, stabbing Jody in the gums. Jody's mother picks up her crying, bleeding child and leaves angrily. Feinstone sees his second patient, beauty queen April Reign. Alone with April, Feinstone sedates her with nitrous oxide so that he can fill a cavity in one of her molars. As she drifts off into unconsciousness, Feinstone imagines that she has transformed into his wife. He begins kissing and fondling her on the dental chair, then begins to choke her. April starts to cough and half-wakes up from the gas. Feinstone snaps out of his trance and quickly re-buttons April's blouse. Feinstone decides to end the day early and sends his staff and patients home. Later that night, Brooke meets Feinstone at his practice. He reveals his new Italian opera-themed patient room. He encourages Brooke to try out the room's dental chair. When she does, Feinstone binds her to the chair and sedates her with nitrous oxide. With operatic music blaring in the background, he begins to pull out Brooke's teeth. Feinstone has gone off the deep end and is definitely not going to let anybody stand in his way of cleanliness.

Honestly, as silly as this movie sounds, I did have a lot of fun watching The Dentist. The best scene without a doubt is when he teaches that nasty IRS agent a lesson in hygiene that I'm sure he'll never forget. Man, I don't think I've brushed my teeth so much after I watched The Dentist. Yeah, I am going to warn you, this movie is in no way for the faint of heart, it's very bloody. There's stabbing, gun shots and just these brutal dental torture scenes that will make your stomach turn. Yet somehow I just enjoyed this movie, if I ever want just a good gore movie that was made for true horror fans, I slip it in my DVD player, and that's the "tooth" LOL! I am so funny! Um, yeah, I try, give me a little credit.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4924 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay, so I have come a long way from Houston by now, but whenever I see this movie, I am taken back to a little cowgirl's dream to one day ride the bull at Gilley's. (It burned down before I was of drinking age.)

If you grew up in in East Texas, then you know this movie is an accurate depiction of contemporary life at that time. If you didn't then trust me and watch the movie. Either you will join the many who love it (and at the same time strangely repulsed), or at the very least, you can make fun of the red-necks. (There is plenty material for poking fun.) This movie doesn't try to be P.C. (what was that in the 80's) or hide the white trash element and it is honest to the time and place.

Gotta be a 10 for me! --------------------------------------------- Result 4925 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] okay, this movie f*ck in' rules. it is without question one of the most technically [[inept]] pieces of cinema ever made. absolutely [[terrible]], but you GOTTA see it. [[rent]] this with your buddies and come up with a drinking game or just have fun, it's hilarious. and the behind-the-scenes featurette [[proves]] it, you can do [[anything]] with paper [[plates]] and finger [[paint]]. awesome. okay, [[rent]] it just for this one scene: two characters are actually WALKING [[IN]] [[PLACE]] for about 3 minutes in a shot. the [[director]] (on the [[commentary]]) [[says]] "[[yeah]], the [[tracking]] was so [[smooth]] it [[looks]] like they're...". [[yeah]], right [[man]], they are totally [[walking]] in place. it's so funny. okay, this movie f*ck in' rules. it is without question one of the most technically [[incompetent]] pieces of cinema ever made. absolutely [[scary]], but you GOTTA see it. [[leased]] this with your buddies and come up with a drinking game or just have fun, it's hilarious. and the behind-the-scenes featurette [[demonstrating]] it, you can do [[nothing]] with paper [[plaque]] and finger [[lacquer]]. awesome. okay, [[rental]] it just for this one scene: two characters are actually WALKING [[INTO]] [[PLACING]] for about 3 minutes in a shot. the [[headmaster]] (on the [[comments]]) [[alleges]] "[[yah]], the [[track]] was so [[seamless]] it [[seem]] like they're...". [[yah]], right [[dude]], they are totally [[walk]] in place. it's so funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 4926 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Dirty Sanchez is the more [[extreme]], British version of [[Jackass]] in which the four [[boys]] ([[Pritchard]], Dainton, Joycey and Pancho) [[go]] to great [[lengths]] to hurt and humiliate each other. The reason this [[show]] is better than [[Jackass]] is because most of the stunts are not [[planned]] which makes the reaction much more [[funny]]. There are 3 series of the show, the first follows them around and takes a long look at their lives eg. there's an episode on their love lives,[[jobs]] etc. The [[second]] [[series]] sends the [[boys]] to [[try]] out [[different]] occupations. The third follows their European [[tour]]. It seems that the boys [[get]] more and more [[daring]] as the [[show]] progresses through the [[series]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]] the third series is the [[best]], but [[trust]] me when i [[say]], if you have a [[week]] stomach [[DO]] [[NOT]] WATCH, as you are [[lightly]] to [[see]] a [[fair]] [[amount]] of blood and puke in [[every]] episode. Dirty Sanchez is the more [[abject]], British version of [[Asshole]] in which the four [[guy]] ([[Purcell]], Dainton, Joycey and Pancho) [[going]] to great [[duration]] to hurt and humiliate each other. The reason this [[demonstrating]] is better than [[Buffoon]] is because most of the stunts are not [[envisioned]] which makes the reaction much more [[amusing]]. There are 3 series of the show, the first follows them around and takes a long look at their lives eg. there's an episode on their love lives,[[job]] etc. The [[secondly]] [[serials]] sends the [[guy]] to [[tries]] out [[various]] occupations. The third follows their European [[tours]]. It seems that the boys [[got]] more and more [[boldness]] as the [[showing]] progresses through the [[serial]]. [[For]] my [[opinions]] the third series is the [[nicest]], but [[trusting]] me when i [[told]], if you have a [[zhou]] stomach [[DOING]] [[NAH]] WATCH, as you are [[casually]] to [[behold]] a [[equitable]] [[somme]] of blood and puke in [[all]] episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 4927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Upon seeing this film once again it appeared infinitely superior to me this time than the previous times I have viewed it. The acting is stunningly wonderful. The characters are very [[clearly]] drawn. Brad Pitt is simply [[superb]] as the errant son who rebels. The other actors and actresses are equally fine in [[every]] respect. Robert Redford creates a wonderful period piece from the days of speakeasies of the 1920s. The scenery is incredibly beautiful of the mountains and streams of western Montana. [[All]] in all, this is one of the [[finest]] films made in the 1990s.

You must see this movie!

Upon seeing this film once again it appeared infinitely superior to me this time than the previous times I have viewed it. The acting is stunningly wonderful. The characters are very [[overtly]] drawn. Brad Pitt is simply [[wondrous]] as the errant son who rebels. The other actors and actresses are equally fine in [[any]] respect. Robert Redford creates a wonderful period piece from the days of speakeasies of the 1920s. The scenery is incredibly beautiful of the mountains and streams of western Montana. [[Totality]] in all, this is one of the [[meanest]] films made in the 1990s.

You must see this movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 4928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] As I mentioned previously, John Carpenter's 1978 classic is one of the first two movies I can remember seeing and being heavily influenced by (the other being the classic Conan the Barbarian). It so truly scared me that the only monster under my bed was Michael Meyers, whom I eventually befriended (imaginary friend) to keep him from killing me in my sleep. Now that is terror for a 10 year old.

It is a horror [[classic]] and I am [[sure]] my [[modest]] review will not do it the justice it deserves. The most surprising thing of all is that the movie still [[works]], perhaps not in the guttural reaction but more of a cognitive possibility or immediate subconscious. This all could happen. It isn't in the realm of impossibility or located in a foreign country (as most modern horror is, i.e. Hostel, Touristas, Cry Wolf, Saw,etc). At times it is graphic while the rest is relegated to our imaginations. I believe it is this element that keeps people terrified or at the very least wary of going outside at night with the signature soundtrack still vivid in their head. It still works because we can substitute implied or tertiary killing with anything more terrifying that our mind can create. So we ourselves are contributing to our own fears and anxiety.

Carpenter weaves a simple story about an everyday, middle class, suburban and relatively benign child who snaps on Halloween and kills his sister. He then spends the next 15 years in an institution (which we thankfully do not experience) only to escape and return to his hometown, the infamous Haddonfield. On his way he kills and kills. The child's name is Michael Meyers, though he is not a person. John Carpenter uses Michael Meyers as a metaphor against the implied safety of middle class suburbia. In the bastion of American safety and security, chaos can still strike.

Michael ceased to be a person once he killed. He is not a serial killer, human being or psychopath. He is as [[unstoppable]] force. The generic overalls, bleached-white Shatner mask, and lack of any dialog other then some breathing, helps to dehumanize and complete Michael's generification. This is the source of all his power. He is faceless, speechless and unremarkable in any way other than as a source of unrelenting chaos. This is helped by the cinematography (post card effect), a lack of information/motivation/explanation and the veteran narrative experience of Donald Pleasence (Dr. Loomis). His over the top performance and uneasiness sells "the Shape". This is also the first film performance by Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode, the innocent girl who deters chaos in the face of overwhelming odds (at least for a little bit).

Though this isn't the first movie of this new niche of horror films (Black Christmas came out 4 years earlier), it is the most successful and does not diminish upon reviewing. If you haven't been scared by horror movies in a long time (like me), this will probably make the hairs on the back of your head tingle at the first chords of the signature soundtrack. I highly recommend this movie as a must see horror movie and as one of the pinnacles of John Carpenter's career. As I mentioned previously, John Carpenter's 1978 classic is one of the first two movies I can remember seeing and being heavily influenced by (the other being the classic Conan the Barbarian). It so truly scared me that the only monster under my bed was Michael Meyers, whom I eventually befriended (imaginary friend) to keep him from killing me in my sleep. Now that is terror for a 10 year old.

It is a horror [[conventional]] and I am [[convinced]] my [[unassuming]] review will not do it the justice it deserves. The most surprising thing of all is that the movie still [[collaborating]], perhaps not in the guttural reaction but more of a cognitive possibility or immediate subconscious. This all could happen. It isn't in the realm of impossibility or located in a foreign country (as most modern horror is, i.e. Hostel, Touristas, Cry Wolf, Saw,etc). At times it is graphic while the rest is relegated to our imaginations. I believe it is this element that keeps people terrified or at the very least wary of going outside at night with the signature soundtrack still vivid in their head. It still works because we can substitute implied or tertiary killing with anything more terrifying that our mind can create. So we ourselves are contributing to our own fears and anxiety.

Carpenter weaves a simple story about an everyday, middle class, suburban and relatively benign child who snaps on Halloween and kills his sister. He then spends the next 15 years in an institution (which we thankfully do not experience) only to escape and return to his hometown, the infamous Haddonfield. On his way he kills and kills. The child's name is Michael Meyers, though he is not a person. John Carpenter uses Michael Meyers as a metaphor against the implied safety of middle class suburbia. In the bastion of American safety and security, chaos can still strike.

Michael ceased to be a person once he killed. He is not a serial killer, human being or psychopath. He is as [[unconquerable]] force. The generic overalls, bleached-white Shatner mask, and lack of any dialog other then some breathing, helps to dehumanize and complete Michael's generification. This is the source of all his power. He is faceless, speechless and unremarkable in any way other than as a source of unrelenting chaos. This is helped by the cinematography (post card effect), a lack of information/motivation/explanation and the veteran narrative experience of Donald Pleasence (Dr. Loomis). His over the top performance and uneasiness sells "the Shape". This is also the first film performance by Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode, the innocent girl who deters chaos in the face of overwhelming odds (at least for a little bit).

Though this isn't the first movie of this new niche of horror films (Black Christmas came out 4 years earlier), it is the most successful and does not diminish upon reviewing. If you haven't been scared by horror movies in a long time (like me), this will probably make the hairs on the back of your head tingle at the first chords of the signature soundtrack. I highly recommend this movie as a must see horror movie and as one of the pinnacles of John Carpenter's career. --------------------------------------------- Result 4929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently saw this film and enjoyed it very much. it gives a insight to indie movie making and how much work is really involved when you have a low budget yet need a name actor/actress to get people, any people to come see it and give the movie exposure. Bobby Myeres played by Modine and his partner Saul - Paul Linder make an excellent combination finding eccentric Miachel Bates, a "NAME" actor played by Alan Bates was a perfect casting decision in the movie and for the movie. My favorite cast member was Sandy Ryan played by the magnificent and underrated Debra Kara Unger with her own special performance again in the movie within the movie. If you enjoy thinking when watching a comedy then this one is for you. Low budget meets lower budget with High laugh content. --------------------------------------------- Result 4930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's my opinion that when you decide to re-make a very good film, you should strive to do better than the original; or at least give it a fresh point of view. Now the 1963 Robert Wise telling of Shirley Jackson's remarkable novel "The Haunting of Hill House" is worth the price of admission even today. Now fast forward to 1999 and the re-make. I was left shaking my head and asking, why? The acting is wooden, the story unrecognizable and the whole point seems to be to replace the subtle horror of the original with as many special effects computers can generate. I had heard that this update was bad; but couldn't believe it was that bad, considering the source material. I was wrong. After watching this and saying to my wife how awful it was, she said; "Well they got your money!" She's right, don't let them get yours. If there's no profit in making lousy re-makes, maybe they'll stop making them or come up to a higher standard that doesn't insult their audience --------------------------------------------- Result 4931 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I cannot [[say]] this movie is a disappointment because I read some reviews before watching and it did not do as well as I thought it would have. The bar was not set that high, so the fact that my expectations were met is not saying much.

The [[Good]]: The city of New York. If you live in the city like me, you'll recognize certain places and understand that the city is supposed to be more than just a setting, rather one of the main characters. There are genuinely tender moments, humorous conversations, and plot twists left and right which all [[keep]] [[things]] interesting.

The Bad: The first thing I thought after leaving the theater was that I wanted more, but not in the positive "leave them wanting more" fashion. Certainly the good skits/scenes outweigh the bad, but there are a lot of skits that fall within the "in-between" category, too many in fact, which is what ultimately brings the movie down. Also, New York City's diversity, though hinted at though the many distant pans of the city and mentioned in conversation throughout the movie, is never really realized or analyzed to the point of doing the city justice. For example, many of the skits involve well to do middle aged whites. I mean I know the city is home to many of the said demographic but come on, Paris Je'taime's plot and character diversity makes New York City look like Lancaster, PA, or someplace really white. It is just disappointing to [[see]] the city shortchanged on its heritage like that.

Still, even after having said this, I would recommend giving New York, I Love You a view. Who knows, maybe you'll disagree with my opinion and maybe you won't. You will never know until you see it for yourself. This review is not meant to deter anyone from watching this movie, as everyone's opinion on art differs. I'm just giving you a very vague heads up on what to expect. I cannot [[tell]] this movie is a disappointment because I read some reviews before watching and it did not do as well as I thought it would have. The bar was not set that high, so the fact that my expectations were met is not saying much.

The [[Well]]: The city of New York. If you live in the city like me, you'll recognize certain places and understand that the city is supposed to be more than just a setting, rather one of the main characters. There are genuinely tender moments, humorous conversations, and plot twists left and right which all [[conserve]] [[items]] interesting.

The Bad: The first thing I thought after leaving the theater was that I wanted more, but not in the positive "leave them wanting more" fashion. Certainly the good skits/scenes outweigh the bad, but there are a lot of skits that fall within the "in-between" category, too many in fact, which is what ultimately brings the movie down. Also, New York City's diversity, though hinted at though the many distant pans of the city and mentioned in conversation throughout the movie, is never really realized or analyzed to the point of doing the city justice. For example, many of the skits involve well to do middle aged whites. I mean I know the city is home to many of the said demographic but come on, Paris Je'taime's plot and character diversity makes New York City look like Lancaster, PA, or someplace really white. It is just disappointing to [[seeing]] the city shortchanged on its heritage like that.

Still, even after having said this, I would recommend giving New York, I Love You a view. Who knows, maybe you'll disagree with my opinion and maybe you won't. You will never know until you see it for yourself. This review is not meant to deter anyone from watching this movie, as everyone's opinion on art differs. I'm just giving you a very vague heads up on what to expect. --------------------------------------------- Result 4932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The film largely focuses on a bullying Robert Taylor as a ruthless buffalo hunter and the people who have to put up with him. Set amidst a hunt for dwindling numbers of buffalo, it portrays the end of a tragic era of senseless slaughter and is full of [[drama]] and remorse for both the buffalo and the Native Americans. Taylor is blinded by his hatred of Indians and his naivete that the buffalo herds will never disappear. In one scene, he shoots animal after animal, while in another he murders Indians and then eats the food they had cooking on their fire. Under this ruthless exterior lies an insecure person who is reduced to begging his comrades (Stewart Granger, Lloyd Nolan, and Russ Tamblyn) not to leave him. It's not the most pleasant of films and is weighed down by the drama it creates, leading to a dismal and very [[fitting]] conclusion in a blizzard. The film largely focuses on a bullying Robert Taylor as a ruthless buffalo hunter and the people who have to put up with him. Set amidst a hunt for dwindling numbers of buffalo, it portrays the end of a tragic era of senseless slaughter and is full of [[tragedy]] and remorse for both the buffalo and the Native Americans. Taylor is blinded by his hatred of Indians and his naivete that the buffalo herds will never disappear. In one scene, he shoots animal after animal, while in another he murders Indians and then eats the food they had cooking on their fire. Under this ruthless exterior lies an insecure person who is reduced to begging his comrades (Stewart Granger, Lloyd Nolan, and Russ Tamblyn) not to leave him. It's not the most pleasant of films and is weighed down by the drama it creates, leading to a dismal and very [[montage]] conclusion in a blizzard. --------------------------------------------- Result 4933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is this private campground in Plymouth, Massachusetts, that's been around since 1959. My grandparents were among its founders, my parents had a site starting in 1965, and my two brothers have sites there now.

(This doesn't have anything directly to do with the movie; bear with me.)

I spent summers at Blueberry Hill from when I was five years old to when I was eighteen, and it is to people like me to whom this film speaks: the ones for whom a group camp in the woods was, as my fiancée tells of me, "the good and happy place." If you've never experienced the lifestyle, Indian Summer will probably be lost on you; don't bother. It's not quick-paced, it doesn't have rapid cuts, the plots aren't in the least bit convoluted, it has no explosions, such dramatic tension as exists is mild, there aren't any A-list actors, there are no rapid-fire quips just to show off how clever the scriptwriters are (other than, perhaps, Kimberley Williams' killer line about how her fiancé shouldn't "overwind his toys." That is not the least degree what this movie is about, any more than The Godfather is a slasher flick just because it has a lot of on screen gore.

But Indian Summer is Godfather's polar opposite. If you have experienced the lifestyle, see this movie. Don't read any more, just do it.

For me, this is a 9/10 film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Most successful comic book movies usually depend on having villains that are bigger than life, ready to jump off the screen and strangle you alive with a smile or a demented line or two of dialog. The Tim Burton Batmans had it, as did (in an even more grotesque manner) Sin City. With Dick Tracy producer/director/star Warren Beatty [[piles]] on the villains until it becomes part of the framework. Like a [[boisterous]] [[homage]] to 1930s gangster pictures- only this [[time]] meant for kids as [[opposed]] to the darker Bonnie and Clyde- Dick Tracy is [[filled]], [[joyfully]], with archetypes and bright, primary colors, where the criminals carry tommy guns and are formed on their faces to shape their personalities. Villains like The Stooge, Shoulders, Lips, The Brow, Mumbles, the Blank, Pruneface, Spud. Chester Gould gave the names to his [[characters]] that fit their profiles, and gave his hero a jaw that could cut glass. The film is a continuation of sight gags that are perfectly taken seriously.

If, at the time, movies like Batman and (underrated) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were darker depictions of reality within a comic-book outline, Dick Tracy is more 'old-school'. It's a story of cops and [[crooks]], or rather A cop, detective Tracy as he tries to bust Big Boy (Al [[Pacino]], in what is [[arguably]] his [[BIGGEST]] performance to [[date]], and in a sense the one that makes sense for his [[grandiose]] style), but with no such luck. There's also a little kid, called simply the Kid (Charlie Korsmo, who somehow brings more spunk to this little kid than would've been [[imagined]]), and Tracy's love interest in Tess. And then there's the nightclub 'dame' (Madonna, who [[probably]] doesn't give any kind of great acting performance, but maybe that suits the role fine, and she sings excellently when called upon), who wont testify unless Tracy admits feelings he doesn't have for her. Then there's convoluted dealings with taking Tracy down, and a mysterious masked figure with a scraggly voice.

Meantime, as if doing an impersonation of a Howard Hawks film in a splash of visual effects and bigger explosions, Dick Tracy adds on the wink-and-nod comedy and the action like its syrup on a tall stack of pancakes. It's a wonder to look at this world, which is created in ways that have a fascination to them that had they been done today would just be simply by proxy of computers (i.e. Sin City, which can be justifiably compared to Beatty's film). We're driven through this world in great big shots and then thrust in the plot line, or whatever there is of it, in big editing montages with camera angles that seem to come out of those little tilted panels in the comics of old. I'm almost reminded of the Cotton Club during these sequences, as story, music, detail, and a few BIG punches and gun-shots go a long way to revealing what needs to be said, which, actually, isn't more than it needs to. And there's a heap-load of catchy dialog from the script (one of my favorites: "the enemy of my enemy is... my enemy", plus any of Pacino's references to other figures in quotes).

Revisiting this after seeing it for the first time in the movie theater (and only remembering little bits), Dick Tracy is a hard-boiled fantasy to the finest degree. It's filled with good cheer for the kids, and with some pretty good action squared away without some of the more sinister intent of its cousin comic-book movies (i.e. PG-13 fare), and for the adults its throw-back central done with panache and a solid feeling for the unsubtle. Even Dustin Hoffman hams it up, and he barely says an audible word! Most successful comic book movies usually depend on having villains that are bigger than life, ready to jump off the screen and strangle you alive with a smile or a demented line or two of dialog. The Tim Burton Batmans had it, as did (in an even more grotesque manner) Sin City. With Dick Tracy producer/director/star Warren Beatty [[heaps]] on the villains until it becomes part of the framework. Like a [[raucous]] [[eulogy]] to 1930s gangster pictures- only this [[times]] meant for kids as [[opposing]] to the darker Bonnie and Clyde- Dick Tracy is [[filling]], [[luckily]], with archetypes and bright, primary colors, where the criminals carry tommy guns and are formed on their faces to shape their personalities. Villains like The Stooge, Shoulders, Lips, The Brow, Mumbles, the Blank, Pruneface, Spud. Chester Gould gave the names to his [[hallmarks]] that fit their profiles, and gave his hero a jaw that could cut glass. The film is a continuation of sight gags that are perfectly taken seriously.

If, at the time, movies like Batman and (underrated) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were darker depictions of reality within a comic-book outline, Dick Tracy is more 'old-school'. It's a story of cops and [[frauds]], or rather A cop, detective Tracy as he tries to bust Big Boy (Al [[Deniro]], in what is [[presumably]] his [[BIGGER]] performance to [[dates]], and in a sense the one that makes sense for his [[wondrous]] style), but with no such luck. There's also a little kid, called simply the Kid (Charlie Korsmo, who somehow brings more spunk to this little kid than would've been [[figured]]), and Tracy's love interest in Tess. And then there's the nightclub 'dame' (Madonna, who [[certainly]] doesn't give any kind of great acting performance, but maybe that suits the role fine, and she sings excellently when called upon), who wont testify unless Tracy admits feelings he doesn't have for her. Then there's convoluted dealings with taking Tracy down, and a mysterious masked figure with a scraggly voice.

Meantime, as if doing an impersonation of a Howard Hawks film in a splash of visual effects and bigger explosions, Dick Tracy adds on the wink-and-nod comedy and the action like its syrup on a tall stack of pancakes. It's a wonder to look at this world, which is created in ways that have a fascination to them that had they been done today would just be simply by proxy of computers (i.e. Sin City, which can be justifiably compared to Beatty's film). We're driven through this world in great big shots and then thrust in the plot line, or whatever there is of it, in big editing montages with camera angles that seem to come out of those little tilted panels in the comics of old. I'm almost reminded of the Cotton Club during these sequences, as story, music, detail, and a few BIG punches and gun-shots go a long way to revealing what needs to be said, which, actually, isn't more than it needs to. And there's a heap-load of catchy dialog from the script (one of my favorites: "the enemy of my enemy is... my enemy", plus any of Pacino's references to other figures in quotes).

Revisiting this after seeing it for the first time in the movie theater (and only remembering little bits), Dick Tracy is a hard-boiled fantasy to the finest degree. It's filled with good cheer for the kids, and with some pretty good action squared away without some of the more sinister intent of its cousin comic-book movies (i.e. PG-13 fare), and for the adults its throw-back central done with panache and a solid feeling for the unsubtle. Even Dustin Hoffman hams it up, and he barely says an audible word! --------------------------------------------- Result 4935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] My friends and I were just discussing how frustrated we are with the [[way]] [[movies]] and especially romantic comedy's are being made. We feel offended by the schlock that Hollywood is serving up these [[days]] as they act [[like]] all is well.

Well all is not well...with the [[exception]] of a few bright spots, like this movie. It doesn't have the big name actors, the big budget, I don't think it had a big [[release]] (I rented from Hollywood Video) it didn't [[really]] have anything that most [[big]] [[budget]] romantic comedy's have.

But it did have what most of those [[lack]]. It had [[great]] chemistry between the love interests, "Parker" (Jonathan Schaech) and "Sam" (Alison [[Eastwood]]). Their love story wasn't [[forced]] on us like so many. The director took his [[time]] to allow these [[characters]] to truly [[get]] to know each other. Their story reminded me of one of my favorites, "Tootsie".

The supporting cast added not only really funny comic moments, but depth to the story as well. James LeGros' character was absolutely priceless. Sam's gay friend was hysterical. Parker's [[interaction]] with his fellow [[employees]] in a Psychic Hotline was a lot of fun.

I laughed, I cried, I remembered how great it feels to fall in [[love]]. My friends and I were just discussing how frustrated we are with the [[route]] [[kino]] and especially romantic comedy's are being made. We feel offended by the schlock that Hollywood is serving up these [[jours]] as they act [[likes]] all is well.

Well all is not well...with the [[exemption]] of a few bright spots, like this movie. It doesn't have the big name actors, the big budget, I don't think it had a big [[frees]] (I rented from Hollywood Video) it didn't [[genuinely]] have anything that most [[considerable]] [[budgets]] romantic comedy's have.

But it did have what most of those [[inadequacy]]. It had [[wondrous]] chemistry between the love interests, "Parker" (Jonathan Schaech) and "Sam" (Alison [[Nolan]]). Their love story wasn't [[obliged]] on us like so many. The director took his [[moment]] to allow these [[hallmarks]] to truly [[obtain]] to know each other. Their story reminded me of one of my favorites, "Tootsie".

The supporting cast added not only really funny comic moments, but depth to the story as well. James LeGros' character was absolutely priceless. Sam's gay friend was hysterical. Parker's [[interactive]] with his fellow [[employee]] in a Psychic Hotline was a lot of fun.

I laughed, I cried, I remembered how great it feels to fall in [[likes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not usually a fan of strictly romantic movies but heard this was good. I was stunned. Easily the most romantic thing I've ever seen in my life. Stunning. Brilliant, sweet, funny and full of heart. The chemistry is flawless as is the writing and directing.

Ethan Hawke and Julie Delphy are so natural and sweet together you really think they're a couple.

The movies grabs you right away and doesn't let go. You can't look away nor can you stop listening to them. Even the little moments just melt your heart.

This has jumped into the ranks of one of my favourite ever. A masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 4937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] When I [[first]] started watching this anime I never [[thought]] that something about making bread could actually be interesting, but [[thankfully]] I was mistaken. From the moment I started watching it, anime just pulled into the [[world]] of bread making, I was hooked.

The biggest [[advantage]] of this anime is it's humor, which is very intelligent and very funny, with some recurring [[gags]]. But the animation, soundtrack and character development are below average, while these [[disadvantages]] aren't seen so much in the first episodes, because of the [[great]] job on this anime, it really starts to show in the last 20 episodes, when the reactions and recurring gags just grow old, and aren't as funny as before.

As far as I'm concerned, if this anime had ended with episode 52 I would have given it a 9, but the last episodes just leave a bitter aftertaste, which sadly can't be washed away by the awesome 50 episodes.

7/10 When I [[frst]] started watching this anime I never [[brainchild]] that something about making bread could actually be interesting, but [[merrily]] I was mistaken. From the moment I started watching it, anime just pulled into the [[monde]] of bread making, I was hooked.

The biggest [[parti]] of this anime is it's humor, which is very intelligent and very funny, with some recurring [[jaws]]. But the animation, soundtrack and character development are below average, while these [[disabilities]] aren't seen so much in the first episodes, because of the [[wondrous]] job on this anime, it really starts to show in the last 20 episodes, when the reactions and recurring gags just grow old, and aren't as funny as before.

As far as I'm concerned, if this anime had ended with episode 52 I would have given it a 9, but the last episodes just leave a bitter aftertaste, which sadly can't be washed away by the awesome 50 episodes.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4938 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Having searched for this movie high and low, I actually [[found]] it when I least expected, playing on the Sundance Channel very early in the morning one day. Why I searched endlessly for a small vanity project that Chuck Barris that was made during the last waning years of the TV show, I haven't a clue. The film is [[simply]] put [[horrible]]. The scripted part that deals with a week that is. Of course the [[highlight]] of the film is seeing the real [[performers]] that were "too hot for TV" or rejected for some reason or other. That part is still [[horrid]], but campy [[bad]] which was enjoyable in it's own way. Now that I saw what I [[sought]] after for so long will I watch it again in my [[lifetime]]? Resoundingly [[NO]]!! [[Do]] yourself a favor and just watch the MUCH MUCH [[better]] "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" or [[find]] [[old]] [[copies]] of the actual show. The [[girl]] [[act]] where there just lick popsicles provocatively was fun, but having to endure seeing Jay P. Morgon flash the audience has in all likelihood made me sterile. In hindsight, I'm so very happy that this was massive flop, for if it was a massive hit, there could have been a "The $1.98 Beauty Show Movie" and THAT my friends would surely have brought upon the Apocalypse.

My Grade: D Having searched for this movie high and low, I actually [[discoveries]] it when I least expected, playing on the Sundance Channel very early in the morning one day. Why I searched endlessly for a small vanity project that Chuck Barris that was made during the last waning years of the TV show, I haven't a clue. The film is [[exclusively]] put [[hideous]]. The scripted part that deals with a week that is. Of course the [[emphasize]] of the film is seeing the real [[entertainers]] that were "too hot for TV" or rejected for some reason or other. That part is still [[hideous]], but campy [[unfavourable]] which was enjoyable in it's own way. Now that I saw what I [[striven]] after for so long will I watch it again in my [[vie]]? Resoundingly [[NONE]]!! [[Doing]] yourself a favor and just watch the MUCH MUCH [[best]] "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" or [[finds]] [[antigua]] [[printouts]] of the actual show. The [[girlie]] [[law]] where there just lick popsicles provocatively was fun, but having to endure seeing Jay P. Morgon flash the audience has in all likelihood made me sterile. In hindsight, I'm so very happy that this was massive flop, for if it was a massive hit, there could have been a "The $1.98 Beauty Show Movie" and THAT my friends would surely have brought upon the Apocalypse.

My Grade: D --------------------------------------------- Result 4939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Don't [[drink]] the cool-aid.

This is an [[opinion]] [[piece]] [[disguised]] as a [[documentary]]. And to title it as a "truth" is just plain [[crap]]. The debate over [[global]] [[warming]] is far from over, and will only be over when the eco-zombies [[start]] [[acknowledging]] the mountain of [[evidence]] [[contrary]] to their beloved theory. [[Just]] Google "[[Global]] Warming" and "[[Hoax]]" or "[[Junk]] Science" and you will [[find]] a [[river]] of [[information]] refuting nearly [[every]] [[link]] in the [[chain]] of logic that [[Gore]] sites. The reason it is so important for people to educate themselves is the [[disastrous]] economic impact that global warming prevention [[measures]] [[would]] have. [[Wake]] up people. [[Anyone]] with a computer, a [[little]] [[time]], and some common sense can [[find]] many [[many]] reasons why this [[theory]] is not even [[close]] to [[credible]]. Don't just read articles that [[support]] your present [[opinions]], read everything you can [[find]]. There is no in-depth [[analysis]] to make, [[really]]. There is [[simply]] too [[many]] alternate [[possibilities]] and counter-evidence for the theory to have [[even]] the most [[basic]] [[level]] of scientific credibility. It is so uncredible, in [[fact]], that it may be the [[single]] biggest hoax in the course of human existence. It's [[time]] for people to [[start]] [[speaking]] out against this [[kind]] of [[propaganda]], and it's [[time]] for people to [[admit]] to themselves and others that you can be a both a conservationist AND [[recognize]] the glaring conclusion that [[global]] [[warming]] hysteria is a big lie. Don't [[bois]] the cool-aid.

This is an [[opinions]] [[slice]] [[secret]] as a [[literature]]. And to title it as a "truth" is just plain [[damnit]]. The debate over [[international]] [[heat]] is far from over, and will only be over when the eco-zombies [[launching]] [[recognized]] the mountain of [[proof]] [[converse]] to their beloved theory. [[Jen]] Google "[[Universally]] Warming" and "[[Deception]]" or "[[Trash]] Science" and you will [[found]] a [[revere]] of [[informations]] refuting nearly [[any]] [[lier]] in the [[chaining]] of logic that [[Gora]] sites. The reason it is so important for people to educate themselves is the [[tragic]] economic impact that global warming prevention [[activities]] [[should]] have. [[Waking]] up people. [[Person]] with a computer, a [[petit]] [[times]], and some common sense can [[finds]] many [[myriad]] reasons why this [[doctrine]] is not even [[closed]] to [[plausible]]. Don't just read articles that [[helped]] your present [[view]], read everything you can [[finds]]. There is no in-depth [[analyzed]] to make, [[truthfully]]. There is [[straightforward]] too [[innumerable]] alternate [[opportunities]] and counter-evidence for the theory to have [[yet]] the most [[fundamental]] [[grades]] of scientific credibility. It is so uncredible, in [[facto]], that it may be the [[sole]] biggest hoax in the course of human existence. It's [[period]] for people to [[initiates]] [[speaks]] out against this [[genre]] of [[publicity]], and it's [[moment]] for people to [[accepted]] to themselves and others that you can be a both a conservationist AND [[acknowledgment]] the glaring conclusion that [[worldwide]] [[warm]] hysteria is a big lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] We've all seen this story a hundred times. You can see each plot turn coming a mile away. The relationship between the mother and daughter is way too sweet and understanding to pass for [[realistic]]. Janet Mcteer's performance is stock southern hot- ticket mother in vintage [[clothes]]. Should have been made for the Lifetime Channel. We've all seen this story a hundred times. You can see each plot turn coming a mile away. The relationship between the mother and daughter is way too sweet and understanding to pass for [[hardheaded]]. Janet Mcteer's performance is stock southern hot- ticket mother in vintage [[garb]]. Should have been made for the Lifetime Channel. --------------------------------------------- Result 4941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I have had the chance to watch several movies in BluRay and HD [[DVD]]. This [[movie]] stays to it's [[wonderful]] action and great story. Although if you are [[looking]] for a movie with an excellent picture this one is not it. Not having this movie on DVD helped make the [[purchase]] easier. I have always enjoyed the intense [[action]] and the excellent acting which don't always go together. [[Overall]] that is what makes this an [[excellent]] fun [[film]] to watch. Now on the Blu [[Ray]] scale. [[In]] [[many]] Blu Ray [[movies]] you either get two things. A picture that is almost crystal clear with no [[distortion]] or a movie with grainy hd picture. I was disappointed when I made this my first blu ray movie. I almost began to think that this was a blu ray standard. Although after watching other movies I know better. I don't believe they spent as much time as they should have transferring this movie over to hd. That is generally the problem with some movies. And for the price of Blu Ray players and the Blue Ray Discs you should only have the best picture. So I only consider this a [[worthwhile]] investment for people who have either never seen the movie or have not bought the DVD version. I have had the chance to watch several movies in BluRay and HD [[DVDS]]. This [[cinema]] stays to it's [[awesome]] action and great story. Although if you are [[researching]] for a movie with an excellent picture this one is not it. Not having this movie on DVD helped make the [[bought]] easier. I have always enjoyed the intense [[efforts]] and the excellent acting which don't always go together. [[General]] that is what makes this an [[wondrous]] fun [[kino]] to watch. Now on the Blu [[Gleam]] scale. [[At]] [[myriad]] Blu Ray [[theater]] you either get two things. A picture that is almost crystal clear with no [[skew]] or a movie with grainy hd picture. I was disappointed when I made this my first blu ray movie. I almost began to think that this was a blu ray standard. Although after watching other movies I know better. I don't believe they spent as much time as they should have transferring this movie over to hd. That is generally the problem with some movies. And for the price of Blu Ray players and the Blue Ray Discs you should only have the best picture. So I only consider this a [[helpful]] investment for people who have either never seen the movie or have not bought the DVD version. --------------------------------------------- Result 4942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The Bourne Ultimatum is the third and final outing for super-spy Jason [[Bourne]], a [[man]] who is out to kill the people who [[made]] him into a killer. The Bourne series is one of the [[highest]] regarded trilogies by [[critics]] ([[Ultimatum]] has an 85/100 on metacritic.com, meaning it's status is "universal acclaim) and for good reason- the [[fighting]] is choreographed very well and the deep [[story]] can be very [[engrossing]].

First, I highly [[advise]] you watch The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Supremacy, the two fancy-titled prequels to [[Ultimatum]]. There may be three [[different]] [[movies]], but in reality they are all a [[continuance]] of one another: [[missing]] one leaves you stranded and [[confused]], just like I was. You will [[still]] be about to [[enjoy]] the [[action]] and [[fight]] scenes of [[Ultimatum]] if you [[missed]] the first two, but then the [[story]] will [[definitely]] lead to some [[confusion]].

[[If]] you were lucky [[enough]] to [[view]] the prequels to this [[movie]], you probably had a treat watching Bourne take down his [[enemies]] and [[track]] down the [[man]] who screwed him from [[Supremacy]]. Jason Bourne is [[played]] very well by Matt…Damon. Damon does [[nothing]] to [[deserve]] an [[Oscar]] [[nod]], but his [[work]] here is good [[enough]] to hold it's own. Bourne's adventures [[take]] place in [[many]] [[different]] cities; the [[cities]] are all [[varied]] enough to keep the movie from becoming bland at [[times]]. The agency tracking Bourne takes advantage of [[every]] [[technological]] [[tool]] [[known]] to mankind to [[track]] him down.

I won't [[go]] into detail on the characters because they are continuations off of the first two [[movies]]. [[However]], it wouldn't hurt the movie to spell a few things out for the audience- not [[every]] viewer is a die-hard [[movie]] watcher who can [[pick]] up on [[every]] little hint about story development. Ultimatum wouldn't have been harmed at all if the story was a little more up [[front]].

It [[seems]] most people agree that [[Ultimatum]] was a success of a [[film]]: the [[movie]] [[opened]] to $69 [[million]], and -box office [[total]] now is up to $216 mil- is currently [[still]] going very [[strongly]] for a [[movie]] that has been in theatres since [[August]] 3. It's the [[best]] [[action]] [[movie]] I've seen [[since]] Live Free or Die Hard.

[[Good]]) Damon is [[solid]] but not [[spectacular]], very [[smart]] movie Bad) Story is like [[many]] others The Bourne Ultimatum is the third and final outing for super-spy Jason [[Bourn]], a [[males]] who is out to kill the people who [[introduced]] him into a killer. The Bourne series is one of the [[biggest]] regarded trilogies by [[criticisms]] ([[Warn]] has an 85/100 on metacritic.com, meaning it's status is "universal acclaim) and for good reason- the [[firefight]] is choreographed very well and the deep [[saga]] can be very [[captivating]].

First, I highly [[councillor]] you watch The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Supremacy, the two fancy-titled prequels to [[Warns]]. There may be three [[diversified]] [[cinematography]], but in reality they are all a [[continuity]] of one another: [[faded]] one leaves you stranded and [[baffled]], just like I was. You will [[however]] be about to [[enjoys]] the [[measures]] and [[combat]] scenes of [[Alerts]] if you [[miss]] the first two, but then the [[history]] will [[surely]] lead to some [[mess]].

[[Though]] you were lucky [[sufficiently]] to [[opinions]] the prequels to this [[films]], you probably had a treat watching Bourne take down his [[enemy]] and [[rails]] down the [[dude]] who screwed him from [[Sovereignty]]. Jason Bourne is [[served]] very well by Matt…Damon. Damon does [[anything]] to [[merit]] an [[Oskar]] [[ida]], but his [[jobs]] here is good [[sufficiently]] to hold it's own. Bourne's adventures [[taking]] place in [[various]] [[several]] cities; the [[municipalities]] are all [[differed]] enough to keep the movie from becoming bland at [[time]]. The agency tracking Bourne takes advantage of [[any]] [[technical]] [[instruments]] [[renowned]] to mankind to [[tracking]] him down.

I won't [[going]] into detail on the characters because they are continuations off of the first two [[theater]]. [[Conversely]], it wouldn't hurt the movie to spell a few things out for the audience- not [[each]] viewer is a die-hard [[cinematography]] watcher who can [[choosing]] up on [[all]] little hint about story development. Ultimatum wouldn't have been harmed at all if the story was a little more up [[newsweek]].

It [[appears]] most people agree that [[Alarm]] was a success of a [[cinema]]: the [[cinema]] [[started]] to $69 [[trillion]], and -box office [[generals]] now is up to $216 mil- is currently [[however]] going very [[furiously]] for a [[films]] that has been in theatres since [[Aug]] 3. It's the [[better]] [[measures]] [[films]] I've seen [[because]] Live Free or Die Hard.

[[Well]]) Damon is [[robust]] but not [[noteworthy]], very [[brainy]] movie Bad) Story is like [[multiple]] others --------------------------------------------- Result 4943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The scenes are fast-paced. the [[characters]] are [[great]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[movie]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. The scenes are fast-paced. the [[features]] are [[wondrous]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[kino]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 4944 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I went to the movie [[theater]] this [[afternoon]] [[expecting]] to be underwhelmed by Scoop. Happily, the film exceeded expectations, at least a little bit. It's [[nothing]] [[heavy]], [[nothing]] deep -- and not anywhere as good as any number of [[real]] Allen [[masterpieces]] -- but it's also [[completely]] [[enjoyable]] as a light, bantering comedy. There's [[something]] [[kind]] of simple and sweet about it. "Cute" was the word I heard from people in the audience as they were [[walking]] out after the [[show]]. It doesn't feel like Allen set out to [[create]] a masterpiece here, it [[feels]] like he [[wanted]] to [[make]] a [[little]] [[comedy]] and have [[fun]] doing it. [[Compared]] to just about everything Hollywood is [[producing]], Allen's [[stuff]] has a [[tendency]] to charm. [[Even]] the fluffy stuff. These [[days]] it's just [[refreshing]] to go to a movie made by an actual [[human]] being. I went to the movie [[drama]] this [[evening]] [[awaited]] to be underwhelmed by Scoop. Happily, the film exceeded expectations, at least a little bit. It's [[anything]] [[ponderous]], [[anything]] deep -- and not anywhere as good as any number of [[authentic]] Allen [[classics]] -- but it's also [[totally]] [[nice]] as a light, bantering comedy. There's [[anything]] [[type]] of simple and sweet about it. "Cute" was the word I heard from people in the audience as they were [[marching]] out after the [[display]]. It doesn't feel like Allen set out to [[creating]] a masterpiece here, it [[thinks]] like he [[wanna]] to [[deliver]] a [[tiny]] [[farce]] and have [[funny]] doing it. [[Comparative]] to just about everything Hollywood is [[generating]], Allen's [[thing]] has a [[inclination]] to charm. [[Yet]] the fluffy stuff. These [[jours]] it's just [[freshen]] to go to a movie made by an actual [[humans]] being. --------------------------------------------- Result 4945 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Some [[comments]] here on IMDb have [[likened]] [[Dog]] [[Bite]] [[Dog]] to the classic Cat III films of the 90s, but although it is undoubtedly [[brutal]], [[violent]] and very [[downbeat]], this film from Pou-Soi Cheang isn't really [[sleazy]], lurid or sensationalist enough to earn that comparison. However, it still packs a [[punch]] that makes it worth a watch, particularly if gritty, hard-edged action is your thing.

Edison [[Chen]] plays [[Pang]], a Cambodian hit-man who [[travels]] to [[Hong]] Kong to [[assassinate]] the [[wife]] of a [[judge]]; Sam Lee is Wai, the [[ruthless]] [[cop]] who is determined to [[track]] him down, [[whatever]] the [[cost]]. With Wai closing in on his [[target]], Pang will [[stop]] at [[nothing]] to [[ensure]] his escape—until he meets Yue, a pretty [[illegal]] [[immigrant]] who [[needs]] his [[help]] to escape her [[life]] of [[abuse]].

A [[relentlessly]] [[harsh]] [[drama]] with [[great]] cinematography, amazing sound design, a haunting score, and solid performances from [[Chen]] and Lee (as well as newcomer Pei Pei as Pang's love interest), [[Dog]] Bite [[Dog]] is one for fans of hard-hitting Asian hyper-violence ([[think]] along the lines of Chan-wook Park's Vengeance trilogy). Stabbings, shootings, merciless beatings: all [[happen]] [[regularly]] in this [[film]] and are caught unflinchingly by director Cheang.

Of course, this is the [[kind]] of [[tale]] that is destined to have an [[unhappy]] ending for all involved, and sure [[enough]], pretty much everyone in this film dies ([[rather]] [[nasty]] [[deaths]]). Unfortunately, there is a fine line between [[tragedy]] and (unintentional) comedy, and in its final moments, Dog [[Bite]] Dog [[crosses]] it: in a laughably over-dramatic [[final]] scene, Pang and Wai are [[locked]] in [[battle]] as a pregnant Yue [[looks]] on. Eventually, after all three have suffered severe stab [[wounds]] during the fracas, a [[wounded]] Pang [[performs]] a DIY Ceasarean on (a now [[dead]]) Yue, delivering their baby [[moments]] before he himself [[dies]].

[[Whilst]] this [[film]] might not be a 'classic' [[slice]] of [[Hong]] Kong excess, with its deliriously OTT [[action]] and [[stylish]] [[visuals]], it's [[still]] worth [[seeking]] out. Some [[commentaries]] here on IMDb have [[compared]] [[Doggy]] [[Bitten]] [[Pooch]] to the classic Cat III films of the 90s, but although it is undoubtedly [[brute]], [[fierce]] and very [[morose]], this film from Pou-Soi Cheang isn't really [[salacious]], lurid or sensationalist enough to earn that comparison. However, it still packs a [[punching]] that makes it worth a watch, particularly if gritty, hard-edged action is your thing.

Edison [[Shen]] plays [[Pong]], a Cambodian hit-man who [[trips]] to [[Kong]] Kong to [[killed]] the [[women]] of a [[justices]]; Sam Lee is Wai, the [[relentless]] [[policeman]] who is determined to [[tracking]] him down, [[regardless]] the [[expenditures]]. With Wai closing in on his [[goals]], Pang will [[cease]] at [[anything]] to [[ensuring]] his escape—until he meets Yue, a pretty [[unauthorised]] [[immigration]] who [[needed]] his [[supporting]] to escape her [[vie]] of [[abuses]].

A [[assiduously]] [[stiff]] [[tragedy]] with [[huge]] cinematography, amazing sound design, a haunting score, and solid performances from [[Shen]] and Lee (as well as newcomer Pei Pei as Pang's love interest), [[Hound]] Bite [[Hound]] is one for fans of hard-hitting Asian hyper-violence ([[ideas]] along the lines of Chan-wook Park's Vengeance trilogy). Stabbings, shootings, merciless beatings: all [[arise]] [[continually]] in this [[cinema]] and are caught unflinchingly by director Cheang.

Of course, this is the [[sorting]] of [[story]] that is destined to have an [[pathetic]] ending for all involved, and sure [[sufficiently]], pretty much everyone in this film dies ([[quite]] [[nauseating]] [[killings]]). Unfortunately, there is a fine line between [[drama]] and (unintentional) comedy, and in its final moments, Dog [[Bitten]] Dog [[crossed]] it: in a laughably over-dramatic [[latter]] scene, Pang and Wai are [[latched]] in [[struggles]] as a pregnant Yue [[seem]] on. Eventually, after all three have suffered severe stab [[injures]] during the fracas, a [[injured]] Pang [[conducts]] a DIY Ceasarean on (a now [[deaths]]) Yue, delivering their baby [[times]] before he himself [[died]].

[[Notwithstanding]] this [[cinema]] might not be a 'classic' [[cutting]] of [[Kong]] Kong excess, with its deliriously OTT [[efforts]] and [[stylized]] [[photos]], it's [[again]] worth [[trying]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4946 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This supernatural Peter Weir thriller is truly one of the most haunting and fascinating movies ever seen. Richard Chamberlain does his best performance here as the Australian lawyer who defends a group of young Aborigins accused of murder. As he gets closer on the case, he discovers more about the main defendant, Chris, and not least about himself. Chris tells him that he is a Mulkurul, which appear to be a race of supernatural beings that lived in Australia thousands of years ago. At the same time, extraordinary high rainfall seems to confirm the Aboriginal prophecy of the coming of the LAST WAVE, the one that will drown the world.

The dream sequences and the supernatural effects enhance this movie and make it a spectacular experience. Olivia Hamnett and David Gulpilil are solid in the supporting roles, as well as the chap with the difficult name who plays Charlie, the old Aborigin who can turn into an owl. The climax and the ending don't disappoint, in contrast to many other supernatural thrillers who fall flat after a promising hour or so. However, this can not be called a pure thriller. It is a drama as well and talks about spirituality and spiritual identity in the modern world. A masterful work by Peter Weir, the master of visually stunning dramas. --------------------------------------------- Result 4947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] As a [[person]] who sought out an existence as a 'professional' person with [[income]] [[backed]] by a BS in [[Chemistry]] and [[MS]] in [[Business]] [[Management]], my sanity was [[always]] spasmodically [[sustained]] in outside indulgences in [[things]] more artistic. My post-post graduate [[classes]] were always [[emotionally]] and spiritually supported by an interest in [[photography]], stained-glass, [[ceramics]], [[metal]] forging/welding, and art drawing that [[also]] included [[silk]] screening.

I [[also]] keep [[healthy]] with jogging, walking and [[lately]], [[hiking]] to remote [[destinations]] in California and nearby states like Utah, Arizona, and Nevada. Jogging, walking and hiking [[gets]] one [[close]] to the earth with [[time]] to [[stop]] and watch and [[listen]] and [[also]] [[photograph]] or record sounds.

Within that background, I was obsessed with RIVERS [[AND]] [[TIDES]]. I was equally [[impressed]] with the documentary content of artist Andy Goldsworthy as well as the skills and smoothness of Director/[[Cinematographer]] Thomas Riedelsheimer. I actually [[could]] not [[separate]] the [[art]] of Goldsworthy with camera [[path]] of Riedelsheimer.

Wonderful. Wonderful. Wonderful. As a [[someone]] who sought out an existence as a 'professional' person with [[profits]] [[supported]] by a BS in [[Chem]] and [[MRS]] in [[Enterprise]] [[Governance]], my sanity was [[continually]] spasmodically [[continuing]] in outside indulgences in [[items]] more artistic. My post-post graduate [[categories]] were always [[romantically]] and spiritually supported by an interest in [[pictures]], stained-glass, [[porcelain]], [[metals]] forging/welding, and art drawing that [[additionally]] included [[floss]] screening.

I [[similarly]] keep [[salubrious]] with jogging, walking and [[freshly]], [[touring]] to remote [[destination]] in California and nearby states like Utah, Arizona, and Nevada. Jogging, walking and hiking [[got]] one [[closure]] to the earth with [[period]] to [[discontinue]] and watch and [[hear]] and [[similarly]] [[picture]] or record sounds.

Within that background, I was obsessed with RIVERS [[UND]] [[AIRWAVES]]. I was equally [[surprising]] with the documentary content of artist Andy Goldsworthy as well as the skills and smoothness of Director/[[Photographer]] Thomas Riedelsheimer. I actually [[did]] not [[discrete]] the [[artistry]] of Goldsworthy with camera [[chemin]] of Riedelsheimer.

Wonderful. Wonderful. Wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 4948 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] WHERE THE SIDEWALK [[ENDS]] deserves to be a better known [[film]] directed by Otto Preminger, the [[man]] who gave the [[world]] LAURA. And this [[time]], he's got the same co-stars: DANA ANDREWS and [[GENE]] TIERNEY. It must be [[said]] that Tierney here is under-used in what amounts to more of a [[supporting]] role while the [[spotlight]] goes to [[Andrews]].

He plays a tough, hardened cop used to dealing with a bunch of thugs in too vigorous a way until one night he accidentally kills a man in the process of arresting him. When suspicion falls on a cab driver (TOM TULLY), he goes along with the investigation into the murder but starts to feel guilt because he's in love with the cabbie's daughter (GENE TIERNEY). Tierney, by the way, looks a little too elegant for the [[girl]] she's playing here and doesn't [[seem]] to fit into the squalid background elements of the story.

The story takes a grim turn as the investigation goes deeper and it's discovered that the murdered man had a silver plate in his head from his service as a war hero. By the end, it turns into a morality tale with Andrews developing a conscience over his crime.

It's fascinating as film noir with capable performances from a strong supporting cast. A good [[entry]] in the field of [[noir]], forcefully directed by Preminger and [[nicely]] played by Andrews and Tierney, despite the [[slight]] miscasting of her character. WHERE THE SIDEWALK [[END]] deserves to be a better known [[movie]] directed by Otto Preminger, the [[guy]] who gave the [[worldwide]] LAURA. And this [[moment]], he's got the same co-stars: DANA ANDREWS and [[GENETICS]] TIERNEY. It must be [[say]] that Tierney here is under-used in what amounts to more of a [[aiding]] role while the [[limelight]] goes to [[Andrew]].

He plays a tough, hardened cop used to dealing with a bunch of thugs in too vigorous a way until one night he accidentally kills a man in the process of arresting him. When suspicion falls on a cab driver (TOM TULLY), he goes along with the investigation into the murder but starts to feel guilt because he's in love with the cabbie's daughter (GENE TIERNEY). Tierney, by the way, looks a little too elegant for the [[chick]] she's playing here and doesn't [[seems]] to fit into the squalid background elements of the story.

The story takes a grim turn as the investigation goes deeper and it's discovered that the murdered man had a silver plate in his head from his service as a war hero. By the end, it turns into a morality tale with Andrews developing a conscience over his crime.

It's fascinating as film noir with capable performances from a strong supporting cast. A good [[inlet]] in the field of [[negro]], forcefully directed by Preminger and [[kindly]] played by Andrews and Tierney, despite the [[lightweight]] miscasting of her character. --------------------------------------------- Result 4949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Excellent]] P.O.W. [[adventure]], [[adapted]] by Eric Williams from his own book (a paperback copy of which forms part of my father's library) that was inspired by [[true]] [[events]]; it may well be the first [[film]] of its kind and, therefore, has a lot to [[answer]] for – not just similarly stiff-upper-lipped examples such as ALBERT, R.N. (1953; which I'll be [[watching]] presently), THE COLDITZ STORY (1955) and [[DANGER]] WITHIN (1959) but higher-profile releases from the other side of the Atlantic, namely STALAG 17 (1953) and THE GREAT ESCAPE (1963). This, then, sets the basis pretty solidly: British soldiers interned in a German [[camp]] devise an ingenious plan of escape, borrowing a page from Greek legend – burrowing from under a vaulting horse used during physical exercise and in full view of their captors! Actually, the film is neatly split into two halves: the first deals with the slow process of digging the tunnel, culminating in the escape itself, while the latter [[stages]] [[depict]] their [[fortunes]] [[outside]] the camp as they try to make it to neutral Sweden. [[Typically]] of these British [[films]], the cast [[showcases]] [[several]] [[established]] (Leo Genn), current ([[Anthony]] Steel) and up-and-coming ([[Peter]] Finch, David Tomlinson and Bill [[Travers]]) stars, to [[say]] [[nothing]] of innumerable [[reliable]] [[character]] actors (Anthony Dawson, Bryan Forbes, Michael Goodliffe and Walter Gotell). The three leads/[[escapees]] are Genn, Steel and Tomlinson: while the first two stick together, the latter goes his own [[way]] – only to [[run]] into the others on [[reaching]] safety. As can be [[expected]], the [[narrative]] involves plenty of [[suspense]] and [[excitement]]; as with most male-centered P.O.W. sagas, too, female interest is [[kept]] to the barest minimum. Director Lee didn't have a [[lengthy]] career – with this and the [[somewhat]] [[similar]] (albeit with a [[change]] of both setting and viewpoint) A [[TOWN]] [[LIKE]] ALICE (1956) his most [[noteworthy]] achievements – but he [[certainly]] milked [[every]] gripping situation in this [[case]] (even if, [[reportedly]], delays in filming saw Lee quitting his post prematurely…leaving [[producer]] Ian Dalrymple with the [[task]] of [[tying]] up [[loose]] [[ends]]!). [[Anyway]], worth [[special]] [[mention]] is the [[exquisite]] lighting ([[particularly]] during night-time [[sequences]]) [[throughout]]. [[Wondrous]] P.O.W. [[adventurer]], [[adjusted]] by Eric Williams from his own book (a paperback copy of which forms part of my father's library) that was inspired by [[real]] [[happenings]]; it may well be the first [[cinematic]] of its kind and, therefore, has a lot to [[answered]] for – not just similarly stiff-upper-lipped examples such as ALBERT, R.N. (1953; which I'll be [[staring]] presently), THE COLDITZ STORY (1955) and [[MENACE]] WITHIN (1959) but higher-profile releases from the other side of the Atlantic, namely STALAG 17 (1953) and THE GREAT ESCAPE (1963). This, then, sets the basis pretty solidly: British soldiers interned in a German [[campground]] devise an ingenious plan of escape, borrowing a page from Greek legend – burrowing from under a vaulting horse used during physical exercise and in full view of their captors! Actually, the film is neatly split into two halves: the first deals with the slow process of digging the tunnel, culminating in the escape itself, while the latter [[phases]] [[describing]] their [[barons]] [[outdoors]] the camp as they try to make it to neutral Sweden. [[Normally]] of these British [[movie]], the cast [[illustrates]] [[multiple]] [[formulated]] (Leo Genn), current ([[Antoine]] Steel) and up-and-coming ([[Pieter]] Finch, David Tomlinson and Bill [[Through]]) stars, to [[tell]] [[none]] of innumerable [[credible]] [[nature]] actors (Anthony Dawson, Bryan Forbes, Michael Goodliffe and Walter Gotell). The three leads/[[runaways]] are Genn, Steel and Tomlinson: while the first two stick together, the latter goes his own [[route]] – only to [[execute]] into the others on [[realizing]] safety. As can be [[hoped]], the [[descriptive]] involves plenty of [[wait]] and [[arousal]]; as with most male-centered P.O.W. sagas, too, female interest is [[preserved]] to the barest minimum. Director Lee didn't have a [[lang]] career – with this and the [[rather]] [[analog]] (albeit with a [[alter]] of both setting and viewpoint) A [[VILLE]] [[FOND]] ALICE (1956) his most [[notable]] achievements – but he [[obviously]] milked [[any]] gripping situation in this [[lawsuit]] (even if, [[apparently]], delays in filming saw Lee quitting his post prematurely…leaving [[producers]] Ian Dalrymple with the [[tasks]] of [[linking]] up [[lax]] [[end]]!). [[Anyways]], worth [[peculiar]] [[mentioning]] is the [[wondrous]] lighting ([[specifically]] during night-time [[sequence]]) [[across]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] What is with all of the European (especially England) [[comments]] here? All i gotta say is that when i saw this movie for the first time when i was like 13 i [[thought]] it was [[great]]. Of course it's stupid. That's the point. You have to see the movie Dr. Strangelove and Men in Black to get the whole joke behind this movie, but come on people, what did you expect to see? I can think of many movies that are far worse than this, and they were expensive Hollwood films with real actors in them. For what it's worth, [[Men]] in White is a very stupid-funny [[mock]] of a movie. And with all the stupid-funny stuff that England has been making for the last half century, i am shocked at all the [[negative]] [[comments]]. Us [[stupid]] Americans like our stupid [[humor]]. P.S., see 'Team America: [[World]] Police" for some [[true]] [[laughs]] that Europeans will [[especially]] [[like]]. HA! What is with all of the European (especially England) [[commentary]] here? All i gotta say is that when i saw this movie for the first time when i was like 13 i [[brainchild]] it was [[wondrous]]. Of course it's stupid. That's the point. You have to see the movie Dr. Strangelove and Men in Black to get the whole joke behind this movie, but come on people, what did you expect to see? I can think of many movies that are far worse than this, and they were expensive Hollwood films with real actors in them. For what it's worth, [[Male]] in White is a very stupid-funny [[fictitious]] of a movie. And with all the stupid-funny stuff that England has been making for the last half century, i am shocked at all the [[pernicious]] [[remarks]]. Us [[nonsensical]] Americans like our stupid [[mood]]. P.S., see 'Team America: [[Global]] Police" for some [[real]] [[laughing]] that Europeans will [[primarily]] [[iike]]. HA! --------------------------------------------- Result 4951 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The second [[official]] episode of the "Columbo" series ("Murder by the Book," filmed later, hit the [[airwaves]] first). [[Robert]] Culp, who would match wits with Peter Falk's detective in several future installments, is [[terrific]] as the short-tempered head of a sophisticated private detective agency who murders a client's wife when she refuses to cave-in to his blackmail schemes. The two stars are well-matched in this [[clever]] [[cat]] and [[mouse]] [[exercise]] that is one of the [[best]] in the series. The second [[functionary]] episode of the "Columbo" series ("Murder by the Book," filmed later, hit the [[ripples]] first). [[Roberto]] Culp, who would match wits with Peter Falk's detective in several future installments, is [[wondrous]] as the short-tempered head of a sophisticated private detective agency who murders a client's wife when she refuses to cave-in to his blackmail schemes. The two stars are well-matched in this [[malin]] [[ctu]] and [[mice]] [[practising]] that is one of the [[better]] in the series. --------------------------------------------- Result 4952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] this [[film]] is [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. basically, the plot [[revolves]] around a serial [[killer]] being [[somehow]] [[turned]] into a snowman through some B-movie chemical [[accident]]. he then heads for [[town]] and [[starts]] terrorising the [[locals]]. its up to the local police chief and some other [[characters]] to try and [[stop]] him. its [[made]] on a wee budget and it certainly [[shows]], but the great thing about this [[film]] is it knows that its [[rubbish]]. the improvisations of Styrofoam and polystyrene [[mimicking]] the giant killer snowman are [[classic]], and this is clearly the intention - its one of the few [[films]] that has its budget as its [[main]] [[selling]] point. [[alongside]] the [[comic]] tackiness there are some other [[great]] [[comedy]] moments - listen out right in the [[beginning]] for the voice over of a dad scaring his kids to [[death]], and the funniest rape scene ever committed to [[film]]. [[fantastic]] [[tacky]] [[fun]] this [[kino]] is [[totally]] [[comical]]. basically, the plot [[turns]] around a serial [[slayer]] being [[someplace]] [[revolved]] into a snowman through some B-movie chemical [[crash]]. he then heads for [[cities]] and [[begun]] terrorising the [[inhabitants]]. its up to the local police chief and some other [[features]] to try and [[halted]] him. its [[accomplished]] on a wee budget and it certainly [[displaying]], but the great thing about this [[movie]] is it knows that its [[codswallop]]. the improvisations of Styrofoam and polystyrene [[simulate]] the giant killer snowman are [[conventional]], and this is clearly the intention - its one of the few [[cinematic]] that has its budget as its [[principal]] [[sales]] point. [[beside]] the [[comedian]] tackiness there are some other [[grand]] [[farce]] moments - listen out right in the [[commence]] for the voice over of a dad scaring his kids to [[killings]], and the funniest rape scene ever committed to [[movie]]. [[wondrous]] [[insipid]] [[funny]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] James [[Dickey]] is a [[wonderfully]] [[descriptive]] author. When one reads "Deliverance", one is instantly [[transported]] into the lush backwoods of the Deep South. When one [[watches]] [[John]] Boorman's film version of the book, one realizes just how accurately he [[captures]] the essence of the [[book]]. The camera is as [[descriptive]] as the narration. The [[characters]] are [[fully]] [[realized]], and the portrayals are [[fantastic]]. I [[first]] [[saw]] this movie in 1992, after my [[freshman]] year of [[college]]. I was in a phase where I was watching [[movies]] that were all [[released]] within a [[couple]] of years of my birth in 1973. [[Among]] them were "Patton", "[[Papillon]]", and "All the President's [[Men]]"; fine [[films]], all of them. This one was [[easily]] the [[class]] of the [[group]]. That [[says]] a [[lot]]. James [[Dickie]] is a [[fantastically]] [[narrative]] author. When one reads "Deliverance", one is instantly [[hauled]] into the lush backwoods of the Deep South. When one [[clocks]] [[Johannes]] Boorman's film version of the book, one realizes just how accurately he [[caught]] the essence of the [[books]]. The camera is as [[narrative]] as the narration. The [[features]] are [[totally]] [[performed]], and the portrayals are [[wondrous]]. I [[firstly]] [[noticed]] this movie in 1992, after my [[sophomore]] year of [[academics]]. I was in a phase where I was watching [[movie]] that were all [[liberated]] within a [[coupling]] of years of my birth in 1973. [[In]] them were "Patton", "[[Butterfly]]", and "All the President's [[Males]]"; fine [[movie]], all of them. This one was [[conveniently]] the [[category]] of the [[groupings]]. That [[said]] a [[lots]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4954 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] 1) I am not weapon [[expert]], but [[even]] i can [[see]] difference between U.S. army riffles in WWI and WWII. In [[movie]] we can see privates, armed with "M1 Garand" (invented in [[year]] 1932!), not [[authentic]] "1903 Springfield" ([[aka]] "[[Silent]] [[Death]]"), who [[privates]] [[use]] until WWII. [[Difference]] - M1 can load 1,5 times more ammunition and 3 times more fire [[rate]]! M1 was semi - automatic, Springfield [[requires]] reloading after [[every]] shot. Little difference?! 2) German army [[uniforms]] has [[borrowed]] from 1940 Year too. Especially - helmets. German helmets until end of WWI have significant pike on top, we cannot see [[even]] one in [[movie]]. And if we [[make]] [[little]] additional search in archives - how much [[truthful]] is this "True Story"? I am surprised, how [[much]] "[[truthful]]" can be film directors in a [[pursuit]] of [[cheap]] [[propagation]]. 1) I am not weapon [[specialists]], but [[yet]] i can [[consults]] difference between U.S. army riffles in WWI and WWII. In [[cinematography]] we can see privates, armed with "M1 Garand" (invented in [[annum]] 1932!), not [[genuine]] "1903 Springfield" ([[nickname]] "[[Quiet]] [[Die]]"), who [[soldiers]] [[employs]] until WWII. [[Divergence]] - M1 can load 1,5 times more ammunition and 3 times more fire [[rates]]! M1 was semi - automatic, Springfield [[requiring]] reloading after [[any]] shot. Little difference?! 2) German army [[uniform]] has [[loaned]] from 1940 Year too. Especially - helmets. German helmets until end of WWI have significant pike on top, we cannot see [[yet]] one in [[filmmaking]]. And if we [[deliver]] [[petit]] additional search in archives - how much [[veritable]] is this "True Story"? I am surprised, how [[very]] "[[authentic]]" can be film directors in a [[pursue]] of [[inexpensive]] [[propagate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] My [[brother]] is in love with this show, let's get this straight. I completely agree with the people who said it was [[copying]] off of Dexter's [[Lab]] and Fairly Odd Parents.

I've never really liked fairly odd parents, I mean, some things did make me laugh, but most of the time it's downright annoying and not [[cute]] at all. This is [[almost]] the same way I feel about [[Johnny]] [[Test]]. Except, [[NOTHING]] makes me laugh on that show. The gags are so stupid and pointless, and to tell you the truth, maybe it's just me, but kids don't DRESS like that! Yes, I do think Johnny's hair is awesome, but c'Mon!

And Dexter's Lab, that used to be one of my favorite shows and I still don't mind watching it. Which makes me disgusted and ashamed of Johnny Test making an absolute JOKE out of that wonderful show!

One more thing. The. Dog. Is. So. Annoying. He is more loud and obnoxious than Johnny! And the gay accent? What the fudge! I hate the dog to death and I hope he dies, because that would be better for kids to see than listening and watching the obnoxious crap that goes on in that show, and picking up a gay accent.

Unless you want you eyeballs to burn into miraculous flames and your brain fried from this show, don't watch it! My [[brah]] is in love with this show, let's get this straight. I completely agree with the people who said it was [[copy]] off of Dexter's [[Labs]] and Fairly Odd Parents.

I've never really liked fairly odd parents, I mean, some things did make me laugh, but most of the time it's downright annoying and not [[belle]] at all. This is [[hardly]] the same way I feel about [[Jonny]] [[Proof]]. Except, [[NOTHIN]] makes me laugh on that show. The gags are so stupid and pointless, and to tell you the truth, maybe it's just me, but kids don't DRESS like that! Yes, I do think Johnny's hair is awesome, but c'Mon!

And Dexter's Lab, that used to be one of my favorite shows and I still don't mind watching it. Which makes me disgusted and ashamed of Johnny Test making an absolute JOKE out of that wonderful show!

One more thing. The. Dog. Is. So. Annoying. He is more loud and obnoxious than Johnny! And the gay accent? What the fudge! I hate the dog to death and I hope he dies, because that would be better for kids to see than listening and watching the obnoxious crap that goes on in that show, and picking up a gay accent.

Unless you want you eyeballs to burn into miraculous flames and your brain fried from this show, don't watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 4956 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have been watching horror movies since I was 5 years old, beginning with Childs Play.Since then, I have seen good horror movies and bad, but this is without question, the DUMBEST movie I have ever seen! The actors did all they could with the material. The plot was just idiotic. Plus , it was just all gore. I can stomach a lot of blood, but that was just ridiculous! In one of the scenes, a character gets stabbed in the rear end and choked with his intestines! Plain Stupid! Another problem with this movie is that its boring and probably the slowest movie ever made. The end of it is just dumb. But then again, it goes with the rest of it! At the end, when the girl gets away from the cannibal/ancestor, she receives help from a old lady. The old lady is making tea, but when she turns around to talk to the girl, the girl attacks her! She turned into a cannibal! Retarded movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (65%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Seeing]] this movie, as I just did for the first time on Turner Classic (which lists it as "Dangerous Female"), can only multiply your appreciation for the 1941 Bogart-Astor version. Ricardo Cortez must have been getting paid by the smirk. I hope he remembered his dentist and his Brylcreem salesman in his will; they made him the actor he was. The women are all good, but no better than that. Well, Una Merkel is a little better. More interesting are the "original" Joel Cairo and Mr. Gutman, who competently deliver many of the individual tics but almost nothing of the set-changing atmospherics of their successors in the roles, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet. Humphrey Bogart and Mary Astor somehow transcended the essential seediness of their characters in the remake; here, Sam Spade and Ruth Wonderley(!) can't.

This movie doesn't exactly stink; it lies there like a big slice of [[ham]]. Its chief value today is as a reminder that great movies like the '41 "Falcon" don't just happen. On the 1-to-10 scale I rate it a 4, mainly for the camera work and the supporting players. [[See]] this movie, as I just did for the first time on Turner Classic (which lists it as "Dangerous Female"), can only multiply your appreciation for the 1941 Bogart-Astor version. Ricardo Cortez must have been getting paid by the smirk. I hope he remembered his dentist and his Brylcreem salesman in his will; they made him the actor he was. The women are all good, but no better than that. Well, Una Merkel is a little better. More interesting are the "original" Joel Cairo and Mr. Gutman, who competently deliver many of the individual tics but almost nothing of the set-changing atmospherics of their successors in the roles, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet. Humphrey Bogart and Mary Astor somehow transcended the essential seediness of their characters in the remake; here, Sam Spade and Ruth Wonderley(!) can't.

This movie doesn't exactly stink; it lies there like a big slice of [[chatham]]. Its chief value today is as a reminder that great movies like the '41 "Falcon" don't just happen. On the 1-to-10 scale I rate it a 4, mainly for the camera work and the supporting players. --------------------------------------------- Result 4958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This centers on unironic notions of coming to grips with guilt.

Merrill berates the distraught boy to stop his 'whining' about Rennie's death. Old-style real men in action, here.

The crashing model plane and car crash must have been impressive on the big screen.

The storytelling itself, despite the flashback sequences, plays it straight -- all the narrators are trusted by us (regardless of the 'truth' or 'untruth' of the dialogue), so there's no game with the viewer about narrative structure. This would become a rough template for future retellings, such as "Fearless".

So all we're left with is individual performance, and at that level, it's best for Wynn's bantering, a virtual one-man show. --------------------------------------------- Result 4959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's been 19 years since Gordon Gekko used "Wall Street" to let us know that greed is good. Now, Michael Douglas takes the GG persona and morphs it into a Secret Service agent, Pete Garrison. Guess what? It works! This is a solid political thriller that kept me guessing. The detail work in showing the security precautions taken by the SS on behalf of the President and First Lady was likewise intriguing. All the leads were pretty good but, try as I might, I could not accept Eva Longoria as a Secret Service agent. Whereas Jodie Foster just made you suspend belief and really think she was FBI agent Starling in "Silence of the Lambs", you do not get the same feeling with Longoria. Nevertheless, this is a fun film, escapist entertainment with the Beltway as the backdrop. --------------------------------------------- Result 4960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Some bad reviews here for this and I understand why but treat it as a low budget serial killer film and you might get more from it than most.

I thought that this [[worked]] in a way because afterwards I felt dirty and wanted to take a long shower so that is some degree of success isn't it?

I would say there is just the right level of sleaze here to get under your skin although the acting is maybe a bit too uneven. David Hess is only in this brielfy so don not get your hopes up to much if you like Last House.

Other than that - worth a look. Some bad reviews here for this and I understand why but treat it as a low budget serial killer film and you might get more from it than most.

I thought that this [[acted]] in a way because afterwards I felt dirty and wanted to take a long shower so that is some degree of success isn't it?

I would say there is just the right level of sleaze here to get under your skin although the acting is maybe a bit too uneven. David Hess is only in this brielfy so don not get your hopes up to much if you like Last House.

Other than that - worth a look. --------------------------------------------- Result 4961 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I didn't know if i would laugh or cry seeing this. Only addicted fans of danni filth could have a taste for this. This is supposed to be a horror movie but there's only filth in this. The most cool scene is the car accident, with [[real]] special [[effects]] from the best of hollywood. [[Avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]]. See this only for [[studies]] of how [[bad]] can be a [[movie]]................ I didn't know if i would laugh or cry seeing this. Only addicted fans of danni filth could have a taste for this. This is supposed to be a horror movie but there's only filth in this. The most cool scene is the car accident, with [[veritable]] special [[impact]] from the best of hollywood. [[Shirk]] this [[filmmaking]] at all [[charges]]. See this only for [[researches]] of how [[unfavorable]] can be a [[filmmaking]]................ --------------------------------------------- Result 4962 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Principally]] it is the [[story]] of two [[men]] who were [[part]] of the Portuguese revolution. It was easy to understand the [[contest]], but [[usually]] directors [[starts]] from a historical fact to [[speak]] about [[something]] else, or they [[shows]] [[also]] the [[period]] before or after this fact, here everything [[happen]] during that couple of days when the revolution acts. It could [[also]] be [[seen]] as a kind of documentary. The movie focalize to these two people, [[showing]] as [[normal]] they were, not [[like]] common heroes, because the revolution [[come]] from people. [[Although]] it was made from military army from the title you can understand that they were just "capitaes" as the [[main]] characters. Nice [[colors]] and lights during the [[whole]] movie, [[excellent]] [[work]] for the director being her first movie, she doesn't [[fall]] to the banal [[way]]. [[Well]] [[shown]] [[emotions]] and [[passion]] of people and [[crowd]]. The [[character]] of Maia ([[main]] one)is well-made and there is [[also]] a good [[interpretation]] for Stefano Accorsi, [[able]] to [[show]] Maia's [[limits]], this not-being an hero. [[Essentially]] it is the [[history]] of two [[male]] who were [[portions]] of the Portuguese revolution. It was easy to understand the [[competition]], but [[normally]] directors [[outset]] from a historical fact to [[speaking]] about [[anything]] else, or they [[displaying]] [[similarly]] the [[timeline]] before or after this fact, here everything [[occur]] during that couple of days when the revolution acts. It could [[apart]] be [[watched]] as a kind of documentary. The movie focalize to these two people, [[displayed]] as [[routine]] they were, not [[adores]] common heroes, because the revolution [[arriving]] from people. [[Though]] it was made from military army from the title you can understand that they were just "capitaes" as the [[primary]] characters. Nice [[dye]] and lights during the [[entire]] movie, [[brilliant]] [[jobs]] for the director being her first movie, she doesn't [[drops]] to the banal [[manner]]. [[Good]] [[displays]] [[passions]] and [[fervor]] of people and [[multitude]]. The [[nature]] of Maia ([[primary]] one)is well-made and there is [[apart]] a good [[explanations]] for Stefano Accorsi, [[capable]] to [[exhibition]] Maia's [[restrains]], this not-being an hero. --------------------------------------------- Result 4963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is very much not the sort of movie for which John Wayne is known. He plays a diplomat, a man who gets things done through words and persuasion rather than physical action. The film moves with a quiet [[realism]] through its superficially unexciting story.

[[For]] the open-minded, the [[patient]] and the thoughtful, this [[movie]] is a [[rich]] depiction of an [[intriguing]] part of history.

There are two intertwining [[stories]]. The [[big]] story is of internalised, isolationist Japan and externalised, expansionist America clashing when their interests conflict. The [[small]], human, story is of an outsider barbarian (Wayne) and a civilised Geisha's initial hostility and dislike turning to [[mutual]] respect and love. The human [[story]] is a reflection of the [[greater]] [[story]] of the two nations.

The [[movie]] is very well done and all [[actors]] [[play]] their [[roles]] well. The two lead [[roles]] are performed to [[perfection]]. John Wayne is [[excellent]] as Townsend Harris, [[striking]] [[exactly]] the right [[blend]] of force and [[negotiation]] in his dealings with the Japanese. Eiko Ando is [[likewise]] [[excellent]] as the Geisha of the title, [[charming]] and [[delightful]]. The [[interaction]] between her [[character]] and John Wayne's is [[particularly]] well portrayed. This is [[exactly]] how these two [[individuals]] (as they are [[depicted]] in the film) [[would]] have [[behaved]].

The script is very well [[written]]. It lacks all pomposity. and is a [[realistic]] [[depiction]] of the [[manner]] in which the depicted [[events]] may have [[occurred]]. The [[characters]] are [[real]] people, not self-consciously "[[great]]" [[figures]] from [[history]]. Furthermore, the clash of [[cultures]] and interests is [[portrayed]] with [[great]] [[skill]] and [[subtlety]]. [[Indeed]], the clash of a traditionalist, and [[traditionally]] powerful, isolationist Japan and a [[rising]], newly powerful [[nation]] from [[across]] the [[ocean]] is summarised very well in one [[exchange]] between John Wayne and the local Japanese [[baron]]. Wayne complains that shipwrecked [[sailors]] are beheaded if they [[land]] in Japan, and that passing [[ships]] cannot even put into [[port]] for water. The Baron [[responds]] that Japan just wants to be left [[alone]]. Wayne's [[character]] [[replies]] that Japan is at an increasingly [[important]] crossroads of [[international]] [[shipping]], and that if things continue as before the [[nation]] will be regarded as [[nothing]] more than a [[band]] of brigands infesting an [[important]] roadway. A very [[real]] [[summary]] of the way in which the two [[countries]] each [[saw]] themselves as being in the [[right]], and saw the other as being in the wrong. The resultant clash between two self-righteous peoples with conflicting interests has its reflections throughout history, a continuing theme that echoes into the present and on into the future.

Cinematography and the depiction of mid-nineteenth century Japan, before the accelerated growth towards industrialisation that was to follow later in the century, is excellent. A visual treat, and an enlightening insight into Japan's ancient civilisation.

I highly recommend anyone, whether a John Wayne fan or not, to watch this film if you get the chance. Just be aware that it isn't an action film. It is a representation of an interesting place and time in [[history]], and a slow-boiling love story which (much to their surprise) comes to dominate the personal lives of the two main characters. Watch this film on its merits, without preconceptions, allow yourself to be immersed in its [[story]], and you will thoroughly enjoy it.

All in all, an excellent film. This is very much not the sort of movie for which John Wayne is known. He plays a diplomat, a man who gets things done through words and persuasion rather than physical action. The film moves with a quiet [[lifelike]] through its superficially unexciting story.

[[In]] the open-minded, the [[ill]] and the thoughtful, this [[kino]] is a [[rika]] depiction of an [[fascinating]] part of history.

There are two intertwining [[story]]. The [[considerable]] story is of internalised, isolationist Japan and externalised, expansionist America clashing when their interests conflict. The [[little]], human, story is of an outsider barbarian (Wayne) and a civilised Geisha's initial hostility and dislike turning to [[reciprocal]] respect and love. The human [[saga]] is a reflection of the [[bigger]] [[saga]] of the two nations.

The [[movies]] is very well done and all [[players]] [[gaming]] their [[duties]] well. The two lead [[duties]] are performed to [[perfect]]. John Wayne is [[wondrous]] as Townsend Harris, [[astonishing]] [[precisely]] the right [[mixing]] of force and [[bargaining]] in his dealings with the Japanese. Eiko Ando is [[alternatively]] [[super]] as the Geisha of the title, [[cute]] and [[handsome]]. The [[interactive]] between her [[characteristics]] and John Wayne's is [[principally]] well portrayed. This is [[precisely]] how these two [[persons]] (as they are [[exemplified]] in the film) [[could]] have [[acted]].

The script is very well [[wrote]]. It lacks all pomposity. and is a [[practical]] [[portrayal]] of the [[method]] in which the depicted [[phenomena]] may have [[arose]]. The [[trait]] are [[actual]] people, not self-consciously "[[large]]" [[numbers]] from [[stories]]. Furthermore, the clash of [[civilizations]] and interests is [[depicted]] with [[large]] [[jurisdiction]] and [[finesse]]. [[Actually]], the clash of a traditionalist, and [[ordinarily]] powerful, isolationist Japan and a [[growing]], newly powerful [[nations]] from [[throughout]] the [[marine]] is summarised very well in one [[share]] between John Wayne and the local Japanese [[barron]]. Wayne complains that shipwrecked [[marine]] are beheaded if they [[earth]] in Japan, and that passing [[vessels]] cannot even put into [[oporto]] for water. The Baron [[replied]] that Japan just wants to be left [[merely]]. Wayne's [[traits]] [[answers]] that Japan is at an increasingly [[pivotal]] crossroads of [[global]] [[shipment]], and that if things continue as before the [[countries]] will be regarded as [[anything]] more than a [[bands]] of brigands infesting an [[sizable]] roadway. A very [[true]] [[summarized]] of the way in which the two [[nations]] each [[sawthe]] themselves as being in the [[rights]], and saw the other as being in the wrong. The resultant clash between two self-righteous peoples with conflicting interests has its reflections throughout history, a continuing theme that echoes into the present and on into the future.

Cinematography and the depiction of mid-nineteenth century Japan, before the accelerated growth towards industrialisation that was to follow later in the century, is excellent. A visual treat, and an enlightening insight into Japan's ancient civilisation.

I highly recommend anyone, whether a John Wayne fan or not, to watch this film if you get the chance. Just be aware that it isn't an action film. It is a representation of an interesting place and time in [[histories]], and a slow-boiling love story which (much to their surprise) comes to dominate the personal lives of the two main characters. Watch this film on its merits, without preconceptions, allow yourself to be immersed in its [[conte]], and you will thoroughly enjoy it.

All in all, an excellent film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4964 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Early Hollywood at it's best!! A classic Kipling poem is transformed into an epic adventure featuring memorable performances by a stellar cast. I think the measure of a good film is how many times you can watch it and still genuinely enjoy it. I've seen it a dozen times and still cry at the end and, admit it, you do too!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4965 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] It's a [[rather]] [[good]] movie, but too Americanised in it's predictability. Change the Kung Fu for football and the Turkish Family for a Pakistani one, and you get to watch Bend It Like Beckham (2002) [[almost]] scene for scene. A nice feature the serves as the backbone of the movie is the progression of fights with the mysterious ninja under the highway, [[beginning]] with miserable losses and slowly progressing until the last fight is a win against oneself, as the Kung Fu master stressed several [[times]]. On a [[different]] [[level]], the Danish [[life]] is [[revealed]] quite different than the image it has by outsiders: the non indigenous immigrants that make a large proportion (actually, the majority) of the Danish citizenry, the graffiti in the Copenhagen suburbs, the taunting of the immigrant girl in the begging of the movie. [[All]] [[portray]] a different picture than one has in mind when one hears the word Denmark. It's a [[somewhat]] [[alright]] movie, but too Americanised in it's predictability. Change the Kung Fu for football and the Turkish Family for a Pakistani one, and you get to watch Bend It Like Beckham (2002) [[hardly]] scene for scene. A nice feature the serves as the backbone of the movie is the progression of fights with the mysterious ninja under the highway, [[launches]] with miserable losses and slowly progressing until the last fight is a win against oneself, as the Kung Fu master stressed several [[moments]]. On a [[several]] [[plano]], the Danish [[lifetime]] is [[divulged]] quite different than the image it has by outsiders: the non indigenous immigrants that make a large proportion (actually, the majority) of the Danish citizenry, the graffiti in the Copenhagen suburbs, the taunting of the immigrant girl in the begging of the movie. [[Everything]] [[describing]] a different picture than one has in mind when one hears the word Denmark. --------------------------------------------- Result 4966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh, brother. The only reason this very irritating film avoids getting the total "bomb" from me is because it's at least historically noteworthy as the first Three Stooges film (when they weren't yet on their own and were still saddled with that painfully unfunny Ted Healy). But even as a longtime Stooges fan I'd have to say that young Moe, Larry and Curly are badly used here as three zany assistant janitors to Mr. Healy's taller boss janitor. They're not featured steadily through the movie and their silly on-and-off-again stints paint them more like zany overactive cartoon characters trying too hard to be amusing.

Most of this toothache deals with Jack Pearl seeking in vain to get some chuckles from the audience himself as a man who impersonates Baron Munchausen (here's a good example of the level of humor: "I object!" "On what grounds?" "Coffee grounds!"). His sidekick is none other than a young Jimmy Durante, but even the schnoz himself is a bore. --------------------------------------------- Result 4967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is a level of high expectation when you sit down to watch a comedy with a cast headed by Cary Grant, Jayne Mansfield, Ray Walston and Werner Klemperer. Those expectations are buoyed further when the film is directed by Stanley Donen, whose comic touch was so evident in, among others, DAMN YANKEES!, BEDAZZLED and CHARADE. For the first five minutes, or so, it seems that those expectations might be met and then…. Nothing. What is supposed to be a light comedy, plunges into leaden, heavy handed melodrama, with nary a chuckle to be had.

Relative newcomer Suzy Parker has often been criticized for her performance, or lack of one, in this film, but in a movie in which even the great Cary Grant frequently appears flat and wooden, attacking Parker seems unfair. Not even as bright a light as an Audrey Hepburn or Doris Day could have changed the fortunes of this meandering, dreary and wholly pointless script, which drags itself lamely along and drags the viewer's interest and patience down with it.

The rest of the cast, especially Ray Walston, keep trying to breath some life into the proceedings, but the horrible script is beyond resuscitation. The desperate, inane effort to drag a half hearted laugh from the numbed audience in the film's final moments only serves to add insult to injury.

This film is nothing but a major disappointment on all levels. --------------------------------------------- Result 4968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Many of the classic films of the late '60s haven't retained their ability to disturb and confront the audience. "In Cold Blood" hasn't lost an ounce of its power. Its exceptionally well made yet forces the viewer to think. Some have complained not only about the film, but about Truman Capote's source "non-fiction novel", that the central message is unsubtle. That may be true, but this is definitely a case where the lack of ambiguity doesn't detract from the film at all. Its refreshing, especially considering today's simplistic and manipulative moral dramas, to see a film with a convinced political voice unafraid to force the audience to consider its viewpoint. To be honest, I'm not sure if I agree with the film's central message, but I admire its audacity nonetheless.

Even if you disagree with the anti-capital punishment message, there's plenty to admire about the film. The acting from the two leads is terrific. Scott Wilson (still one of the most underrated actors ever) is chilling as the nihilistic leader, one who uses his charisma to hide his weaknesses. Robert Blake is also chilling as the more submissive of the two and the one with a conscience. His character obviously has a voice of reason, but is terrified to go against Wilson (theres a good amount of homoerotic subtext on his character's part). The cinematography is terrific, sleek yet gritty and really giving the impression the viewer is watching a documentary. Add another classic score from Quincey Jones, and you have a masterpiece. (9/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 4969 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If this is someone's "favorite" movie, they need some serious help. There is nothing funny or clever about this crapfest. I haven't seen the original movie this is the remake of (some 1950s film), but it simply has to be better than this newer bastardization.

A major gets kicked out of the military for being a fringe element, and winds up teaching children at an ROTC school. Unfortunately, the major is Daman Wayans... so the children are in for a world of annoying, humorless asininity. Can Wayans whip these losers into shape? Can they get him to become a little more human? The film bombs as most Wayans films do, with only a few sparkling moments. William Hickey gets about one minute of screen time, fair too little. This charming old man (known best to me as a "Tales from the Crypt" actor, known best to you as Uncle Louis from "Christmas Vacation") shines every moment he's on screen, which isn't much here.

Bam Bam Bigelow also makes an appearance as a biker, which fits him perfectly. I wouldn't mind slightly more Bam Bam, but I think he carried the role of "biker" about as far as it could be carried for a military film.

And then there's the attractive teacher, who someone falls for Major Payne even though he treats the kids poorly, has no social skills and is simply impossible to convert into someone you would want to spend time with. She must either be incredibly stupid or incredibly desperate. I'm not sure which (though it would seem "stupid" since the movie makes it clear she gets out of the house often enough).

Wayans had one shining moment: a dance sequence where he performs a series of moves (including a very nice "robot"), and with the help of music from 2 Live Crew. This scene was enjoyable but hardly made up for anything else that made this film dog spittle.

Seriously, avoid this film. If you want to see a film a bout a loser who helps loser kids become heroes, rent or buy "Ernest Goes to Camp". At least he's a lovable loser, and actually funny. Maybe if Major Payne had fought a badger I'd feel better, but he didn't. Forget Payne, forget Wayans... you can do so much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 4970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a [[movie]] I had never even [[thought]] of [[seeing]] until my 3 year old spotted it at the video store and [[grabbed]] it after liking the [[cover]] picture of the [[animals]] on Nabooboo Island. We [[got]] it and have [[watched]] it [[repeatedly]] [[since]]; in [[fact]] we've rented it [[several]] [[times]] [[since]]. There are very few non-animated [[movies]] that my [[son]] will watch and pay attention to; what a nice [[change]] from Dumbo and the [[Little]] Mermaid. The acting is [[outstanding]], the [[songs]] are [[compelling]], they [[get]] deep into your [[head]] and you can't [[help]] but singing along. The storyline, while [[specifically]] about WW2 is [[timeless]] in it's own [[way]] and there is [[something]] [[new]] to [[see]] every [[time]] you watch. I've heard it [[compared]] to Mary Poppins, but I [[think]] they are two very [[different]] [[movies]], both [[excellent]], but somehow my [[son]] has no interest at all in Mary Poppins. This is one of those [[movies]] that [[kids]] will [[want]] to watch over and over again and one that parents won't mind complying with. There are days we watch it before nap time and bed [[time]] and I don't feel that groan coming that [[comes]] when he [[wants]] to [[repeat]] any other [[movie]]. This is a [[kino]] I had never even [[figured]] of [[witnessing]] until my 3 year old spotted it at the video store and [[caught]] it after liking the [[covered]] picture of the [[zoo]] on Nabooboo Island. We [[did]] it and have [[saw]] it [[periodically]] [[because]]; in [[facto]] we've rented it [[different]] [[moments]] [[because]]. There are very few non-animated [[cinematography]] that my [[yarns]] will watch and pay attention to; what a nice [[amendment]] from Dumbo and the [[Small]] Mermaid. The acting is [[wondrous]], the [[lyrics]] are [[convincing]], they [[got]] deep into your [[chief]] and you can't [[aiding]] but singing along. The storyline, while [[expressly]] about WW2 is [[perpetual]] in it's own [[camino]] and there is [[anything]] [[newer]] to [[seeing]] every [[moment]] you watch. I've heard it [[compares]] to Mary Poppins, but I [[thinking]] they are two very [[several]] [[movie]], both [[noteworthy]], but somehow my [[yarns]] has no interest at all in Mary Poppins. This is one of those [[cinema]] that [[brats]] will [[wants]] to watch over and over again and one that parents won't mind complying with. There are days we watch it before nap time and bed [[period]] and I don't feel that groan coming that [[arrives]] when he [[wanting]] to [[repetitions]] any other [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4971 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This [[movie]] documents the Harlem [[ball]] [[circuit]] of the mid eighties. [[Much]] more fun than than [[Palazzo]] Volpi, [[though]] just as diseased, this [[movie]] is a [[true]] gem of [[squalor]]. One cannot [[help]] but sympathize with the characters because of their freakness . The sole purpose of [[middle]] [[class]] [[intellectuals]] is to [[document]] the phenomenons of the [[trash]] and the glitz. Here the most genius of [[trash]] is [[extremely]] well [[documented]] and [[duly]] glamorized. The characters' [[penchant]] for idolatry of all that is [[glamorous]] [[inspires]] [[even]] more adoration of the [[characters]] themselves on [[part]] of the [[viewer]], creating a "[[phenomenon]] of a [[phenomenon]]" [[effect]] which makes this [[movie]] a piece of art. This [[kino]] documents the Harlem [[ballon]] [[racetrack]] of the mid eighties. [[Very]] more fun than than [[Palace]] Volpi, [[however]] just as diseased, this [[films]] is a [[truthful]] gem of [[wretchedness]]. One cannot [[support]] but sympathize with the characters because of their freakness . The sole purpose of [[mid]] [[kinds]] [[theologians]] is to [[documentation]] the phenomenons of the [[rubbish]] and the glitz. Here the most genius of [[junk]] is [[enormously]] well [[researched]] and [[adequately]] glamorized. The characters' [[propensity]] for idolatry of all that is [[fantastic]] [[inspire]] [[yet]] more adoration of the [[hallmarks]] themselves on [[portions]] of the [[bystander]], creating a "[[phenomena]] of a [[phenomena]]" [[implications]] which makes this [[cinematography]] a piece of art. --------------------------------------------- Result 4972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is the [[weakest]] of the series, not much of a [[plot]] and a rather odd-looking [[Wallace]]. But it's still pretty good, [[considering]]. A sign of greater things to come!

6/10 This is the [[fewer]] of the series, not much of a [[intrigue]] and a rather odd-looking [[Dallas]]. But it's still pretty good, [[scrutinize]]. A sign of greater things to come!

6/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] i saw switching goals ..twice....and always the same feeling...you see the Olsen twins make same movie....they like play different sports and then fall in love to boys..OK now about the movie....first off all such little boys and girls don't play on such big goals...2.football does not play on time outs...3.if the game is at its end the referee gives some overtime (a minute or more)...and the finish is so foreseen....i think that this [[movie]] is bad because of the lack of football knowledgement....if it were done by European producers it would be better..and also the mane actors aren't the wright choice...they suffer from lack of authentic..OK they played some seasons in full house but that doesn't make them big stars....you have got to show your talent....and that is what is missing in the Olsen twins i saw switching goals ..twice....and always the same feeling...you see the Olsen twins make same movie....they like play different sports and then fall in love to boys..OK now about the movie....first off all such little boys and girls don't play on such big goals...2.football does not play on time outs...3.if the game is at its end the referee gives some overtime (a minute or more)...and the finish is so foreseen....i think that this [[filmmaking]] is bad because of the lack of football knowledgement....if it were done by European producers it would be better..and also the mane actors aren't the wright choice...they suffer from lack of authentic..OK they played some seasons in full house but that doesn't make them big stars....you have got to show your talent....and that is what is missing in the Olsen twins --------------------------------------------- Result 4974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[true]] [[wholesome]] American [[story]] about [[teenagers]] who are interested in [[launching]] their own [[rocket]] in a [[rural]] [[West]] [[Virginia]] [[coal]] mining [[town]], after the [[launch]] of Sputnik in 1957.

Through trial, [[tribulations]] and [[perseverance]] beyond [[belief]], they are ultimately able to achieve their [[goals]].

Jake Gyllenhaal, as the [[leader]] of the group, is excellent in the title role. As his motivating science teacher, Laura Linney is [[quite]] good but her [[southern]] accent is over the [[top]].

There is a standout supporting performance by Chris Cooper, a head miner, who wants his [[son]] to follow in his footsteps, but gradually comes around at film's end.

What makes this [[film]] so unusual for our [[times]] is that there are no bed-hopping scenes and no profanity whatsoever. It is the epitome of an American [[story]] that is well [[done]].

[[Besides]] the science angle, we have the father-son [[disagreement]], [[football]] scholarships as a way to [[escape]] [[coal]] mining, and the loving [[spirit]] of [[family]].

Why aren't [[pictures]] like this [[recognized]] more at [[award]] [[times]]? A [[real]] [[salubrious]] American [[conte]] about [[teens]] who are interested in [[launched]] their own [[rockets]] in a [[agricultural]] [[Westen]] [[Virginie]] [[carbon]] mining [[municipality]], after the [[launches]] of Sputnik in 1957.

Through trial, [[sufferings]] and [[obstinacy]] beyond [[beliefs]], they are ultimately able to achieve their [[target]].

Jake Gyllenhaal, as the [[chef]] of the group, is excellent in the title role. As his motivating science teacher, Laura Linney is [[pretty]] good but her [[south]] accent is over the [[supreme]].

There is a standout supporting performance by Chris Cooper, a head miner, who wants his [[sons]] to follow in his footsteps, but gradually comes around at film's end.

What makes this [[movie]] so unusual for our [[moments]] is that there are no bed-hopping scenes and no profanity whatsoever. It is the epitome of an American [[conte]] that is well [[doing]].

[[Furthermore]] the science angle, we have the father-son [[disharmony]], [[soccer]] scholarships as a way to [[fleeing]] [[carbone]] mining, and the loving [[wits]] of [[families]].

Why aren't [[picture]] like this [[recognising]] more at [[awards]] [[moments]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 4975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am a [[great]] [[fan]] of the Batman [[comics]] and I [[became]] disappointed when I [[could]] no [[longer]] [[find]] Batman: The [[Animated]] [[Series]] on TV anymore. I was [[excited]] to [[learn]] that there was [[going]] to be a new Batman cartoon on [[TV]]. I watched the first episode the day it premiered and I was very [[disappointed]].

[[First]] of all, the [[animation]] is very [[poor]]. It looks like a [[cheap]], crappy Japanese anime. Then again, just about every modern-day cartoon is like that.

The character designs are even [[worse]]. Batman looks more like Birdman, Catwoman looks more like Chihuahuawoman, Bane looks more like a red version of the Hulk, the Penguin is a Kung-Fu master, Mr. Freeze is some undead thing with an iceberg on his head, and the Riddler is a Gothic Marilyn Manson look-alike (which is funny because I don't expect people who are obsessed with riddles and puzzles to be Gothic).

The [[worst]] character [[design]] is that of the Joker. They turned him into a monkey/demented Bob Marley/Kung-Fu fighter! The Joker is supposed to be Batman's deadliest enemy, but in this show he hardly poses a threat because his crimes are so stupid and pointless. In one episode his plan was to put his Joker venom in dog food! Oh, how evil! Batman is a fascinating and complex character because he is haunted by the deaths of his parents, which is why he fights crime. This version of Batman doesn't seem haunted by his parents' deaths and is not interesting at all. He's also not a detective, just a fighter. If there's an enemy he can't defeat, he won't study the enemy to find out their weak points like a detective would, he'll just build a giant fighting robot to defeat them. A lot of [[times]] this show doesn't [[even]] feel like a Batman show, just another [[brainless]] anime that's [[nothing]] but [[pointless]] fighting.

What I [[hate]] the most about this show is what they did to the villains. They've taken away everything that makes them likable and relatable and [[turned]] them into stereotypical evil bad guys. Man-Bat is the biggest example. In the comics, he's a tragic scientist who studies bats to find a cure for his deafness. When experimenting on himself, he accidentally transforms himself into a giant bat creature. In this show, he's a mad scientist who wants to purposely transform himself into a giant bat creature for no apparent reason. Just about all the villains are like that; none of them, with the exception of about one or two, have an actual motive for their crimes.

The worst characterization is that of Mr. Freeze. In the comics, Freeze was a just a mad scientist until the genius writer Paul Dini wrote the BTAS episode "Heart of Ice", which gave Freeze a new origin that made him a more tragic, three-dimensional, and likable villain. The episode was so popular that fans accepted it as his actual origin and it was even used in the comics as his origin. Even that crappy movie Batman & Robin used it as his origin. In this show, he's a petty jewel thief before becoming Mr. Freeze. After becoming Mr. Freeze, guess what? He's STILL a petty jewel thief! Great origin. No wonder they used it over the one Dini created.

As a Batman fan, I don't dislike this show just because it isn't like the comics because I also liked BTAS, the Batman cartoons that came after it, Tim Burton's Batman films, and obviously, the superb Christopher Nolan Batman films. None of them were 100% loyal to the comics, but they were still very good. The problem with this show is not that it's not exactly like the comics or BTAS, it's that it lacks any sort of depth that makes other Batman media so popular.

I've given this show so many chances, but the more I watch, the more I find that disappoints me. I miss the good old days back when Batman cartoons were something everyone could enjoy. I am a [[whopping]] [[admirer]] of the Batman [[funnies]] and I [[came]] disappointed when I [[wo]] no [[most]] [[finds]] Batman: The [[Animate]] [[Serial]] on TV anymore. I was [[thrilled]] to [[learned]] that there was [[go]] to be a new Batman cartoon on [[TELEVISIONS]]. I watched the first episode the day it premiered and I was very [[frustrated]].

[[Outset]] of all, the [[animate]] is very [[poorest]]. It looks like a [[cheaper]], crappy Japanese anime. Then again, just about every modern-day cartoon is like that.

The character designs are even [[pire]]. Batman looks more like Birdman, Catwoman looks more like Chihuahuawoman, Bane looks more like a red version of the Hulk, the Penguin is a Kung-Fu master, Mr. Freeze is some undead thing with an iceberg on his head, and the Riddler is a Gothic Marilyn Manson look-alike (which is funny because I don't expect people who are obsessed with riddles and puzzles to be Gothic).

The [[hardest]] character [[designs]] is that of the Joker. They turned him into a monkey/demented Bob Marley/Kung-Fu fighter! The Joker is supposed to be Batman's deadliest enemy, but in this show he hardly poses a threat because his crimes are so stupid and pointless. In one episode his plan was to put his Joker venom in dog food! Oh, how evil! Batman is a fascinating and complex character because he is haunted by the deaths of his parents, which is why he fights crime. This version of Batman doesn't seem haunted by his parents' deaths and is not interesting at all. He's also not a detective, just a fighter. If there's an enemy he can't defeat, he won't study the enemy to find out their weak points like a detective would, he'll just build a giant fighting robot to defeat them. A lot of [[dates]] this show doesn't [[yet]] feel like a Batman show, just another [[jackass]] anime that's [[nothin]] but [[senseless]] fighting.

What I [[loathes]] the most about this show is what they did to the villains. They've taken away everything that makes them likable and relatable and [[revolved]] them into stereotypical evil bad guys. Man-Bat is the biggest example. In the comics, he's a tragic scientist who studies bats to find a cure for his deafness. When experimenting on himself, he accidentally transforms himself into a giant bat creature. In this show, he's a mad scientist who wants to purposely transform himself into a giant bat creature for no apparent reason. Just about all the villains are like that; none of them, with the exception of about one or two, have an actual motive for their crimes.

The worst characterization is that of Mr. Freeze. In the comics, Freeze was a just a mad scientist until the genius writer Paul Dini wrote the BTAS episode "Heart of Ice", which gave Freeze a new origin that made him a more tragic, three-dimensional, and likable villain. The episode was so popular that fans accepted it as his actual origin and it was even used in the comics as his origin. Even that crappy movie Batman & Robin used it as his origin. In this show, he's a petty jewel thief before becoming Mr. Freeze. After becoming Mr. Freeze, guess what? He's STILL a petty jewel thief! Great origin. No wonder they used it over the one Dini created.

As a Batman fan, I don't dislike this show just because it isn't like the comics because I also liked BTAS, the Batman cartoons that came after it, Tim Burton's Batman films, and obviously, the superb Christopher Nolan Batman films. None of them were 100% loyal to the comics, but they were still very good. The problem with this show is not that it's not exactly like the comics or BTAS, it's that it lacks any sort of depth that makes other Batman media so popular.

I've given this show so many chances, but the more I watch, the more I find that disappoints me. I miss the good old days back when Batman cartoons were something everyone could enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4976 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OMG! The only reason I'm giving this movie a 2 instead of a 1 is because Tom Hanks is funny as an Elvis-in-the-box. Apart from that, how did this halfway decent cast sign on to do such a lame movie?? Maybe it seemed like a good idea at the time... There are no laughs to mention, the stereotypes are pathetic, the cast is wasted, the direction is amateurish. Now that I think about it, most of the blame probably lies with the director, Joel Zwick. He brings out nothing but flat performances from all involved. Don't waste your time like I did; but then, I enjoy a good train wreck. Geez, now the system is telling me I need more lines-- here ya go: This movie should be called Return to Sender. Okay, now THAT was funnier than anything in the movie... --------------------------------------------- Result 4977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] From the [[awful]] death scenes to [[guns]] that fire without making [[sounds]] to a character [[called]] the [[Fiend]]. It's all [[tiresome]], [[slow]] moving, unimaginative [[drivel]]. It was OK [[seeing]] the guy with the cape and the hunchback lurking around. Visually it was creepy and [[probably]] occupied the moviegoer of the [[time]], but even in 1936 one would [[think]] that there would have been a little more imagination and verisimilitude to even a film like this. I just kept waiting for something to happen of any importance as people stood around making speeches and acting like they were posing at an office picnic. And then there are those bullets as a previous commentator mentioned. Perhaps the [[best]] clue would have been to search for a water spot on someone's pants pocket. From the [[scary]] death scenes to [[pistols]] that fire without making [[noises]] to a character [[termed]] the [[Devil]]. It's all [[pesky]], [[sluggish]] moving, unimaginative [[whim]]. It was OK [[witnessing]] the guy with the cape and the hunchback lurking around. Visually it was creepy and [[unquestionably]] occupied the moviegoer of the [[moment]], but even in 1936 one would [[ideas]] that there would have been a little more imagination and verisimilitude to even a film like this. I just kept waiting for something to happen of any importance as people stood around making speeches and acting like they were posing at an office picnic. And then there are those bullets as a previous commentator mentioned. Perhaps the [[optimum]] clue would have been to search for a water spot on someone's pants pocket. --------------------------------------------- Result 4978 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is an [[amazing]] film to watch or [[show]] young people. [[Aside]] from a very brief nude scene, it gives an interesting glimpse into colonial rule in Africa that you'll rarely find in other films. It does bear a superficial similarity to OUT OF Africa, but without all the romantic fluff. The White French people in Cameroon are fascinating because they don't even seem to regard the natives as people. The Whites are all the bosses and they expect Black [[servitude]] without question. However, unlike real servants, you only once hear any of the [[Whites]] say 'thank you' and no other regard is [[given]] these people. Again and again, it's like they are pets or slaves, as the feelings of the people are never even considered.

The central illustration of this thoughtlessness is the relationship between the mother, Aimée and her servant, Protée. Although at times they spend a lot of time together and it is only normal that they might begin to have sexual feelings towards each other, the White woman never [[considers]] Protée or the existence of his feelings. A good example of this thoughtlessness is when she has Protée lace up her dress and it's obvious that he is very sexually frustrated by this. Apart from this relationship, while [[almost]] all the Whites are completely oblivious to the fact that the Africans are people, a few go so far as to verbally [[abuse]] and [[treat]] them like garbage.

Also interesting is the [[relationship]] between Protée and the [[little]] [[girl]] (who is the one who is [[grown]] at the [[beginning]] and end of the film). While they are very [[close]], at [[times]] he's more like a [[plaything]] or pet and the [[girl]] never plays with native children.

There is one bizarre White character who [[seems]], at [[times]], to regard the Blacks better but [[unfortunately]] his character is very inconsistent and confusing. One moment, he's doing hard work along side the [[Blacks]] or [[eating]] with them ([[something]] the other Whites [[would]] never have [[done]]) and the next he's trying to beat up Protée! I could only [[guess]] as to what motivated him--perhaps he was just a [[jerk]], or was [[crazy]] or [[perhaps]] was a [[Communist]] agitator [[trying]] to stir up the Blacks against the [[Whites]] (who knows!). [[In]] fact, other than a few good scenes, this character [[seems]] pretty much wasted.

While I [[really]] enjoyed the [[insight]] this [[movie]] gave, I wish it had instead been more than just a few snippets of this world through the perspective of a child during one small period of her life. The context and what happened to rid the country of colonialism is never addressed and the film left me wanting more. The film appeared to begin in the early 1980s (since she's wearing a Walkman-style headset) and when the film went back in time, it seems that it was set about 1960 (more or less), but there was never any mention of the 1950s anti-colonialism violence or independence for the nation in the early 1960s. I am guessing that some of this confusion might be that the makers of the film screwed up and SHOULD have made the beginning of the film earlier (such as the 1970s) and had the lady think back to her life there in the early 1950s--before the country experienced political change.

Apart from the missing context and a confusion over time periods, using the prologue and epilogue that showed her as an adult traveling the country was a good idea. And I also appreciated the ending, as it was a pleasant surprise when you find out more about the nice man who offers her a ride. But overall, it just feels like something is missing--there just isn't any sort of resolution or message other than showing that colonialism is thoughtless and cruel. This is an [[wondrous]] film to watch or [[exhibit]] young people. [[Sideways]] from a very brief nude scene, it gives an interesting glimpse into colonial rule in Africa that you'll rarely find in other films. It does bear a superficial similarity to OUT OF Africa, but without all the romantic fluff. The White French people in Cameroon are fascinating because they don't even seem to regard the natives as people. The Whites are all the bosses and they expect Black [[slavery]] without question. However, unlike real servants, you only once hear any of the [[Caucasians]] say 'thank you' and no other regard is [[granted]] these people. Again and again, it's like they are pets or slaves, as the feelings of the people are never even considered.

The central illustration of this thoughtlessness is the relationship between the mother, Aimée and her servant, Protée. Although at times they spend a lot of time together and it is only normal that they might begin to have sexual feelings towards each other, the White woman never [[believes]] Protée or the existence of his feelings. A good example of this thoughtlessness is when she has Protée lace up her dress and it's obvious that he is very sexually frustrated by this. Apart from this relationship, while [[hardly]] all the Whites are completely oblivious to the fact that the Africans are people, a few go so far as to verbally [[misused]] and [[addressing]] them like garbage.

Also interesting is the [[relationships]] between Protée and the [[tiny]] [[women]] (who is the one who is [[increased]] at the [[launches]] and end of the film). While they are very [[nearer]], at [[time]] he's more like a [[toy]] or pet and the [[daughter]] never plays with native children.

There is one bizarre White character who [[appears]], at [[time]], to regard the Blacks better but [[unluckily]] his character is very inconsistent and confusing. One moment, he's doing hard work along side the [[Nubians]] or [[feeding]] with them ([[anything]] the other Whites [[ought]] never have [[performed]]) and the next he's trying to beat up Protée! I could only [[suppose]] as to what motivated him--perhaps he was just a [[imbecile]], or was [[lunatic]] or [[presumably]] was a [[Communism]] agitator [[tempting]] to stir up the Blacks against the [[Caucasians]] (who knows!). [[Among]] fact, other than a few good scenes, this character [[looks]] pretty much wasted.

While I [[truthfully]] enjoyed the [[eyesight]] this [[kino]] gave, I wish it had instead been more than just a few snippets of this world through the perspective of a child during one small period of her life. The context and what happened to rid the country of colonialism is never addressed and the film left me wanting more. The film appeared to begin in the early 1980s (since she's wearing a Walkman-style headset) and when the film went back in time, it seems that it was set about 1960 (more or less), but there was never any mention of the 1950s anti-colonialism violence or independence for the nation in the early 1960s. I am guessing that some of this confusion might be that the makers of the film screwed up and SHOULD have made the beginning of the film earlier (such as the 1970s) and had the lady think back to her life there in the early 1950s--before the country experienced political change.

Apart from the missing context and a confusion over time periods, using the prologue and epilogue that showed her as an adult traveling the country was a good idea. And I also appreciated the ending, as it was a pleasant surprise when you find out more about the nice man who offers her a ride. But overall, it just feels like something is missing--there just isn't any sort of resolution or message other than showing that colonialism is thoughtless and cruel. --------------------------------------------- Result 4979 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I will be short...This film is an [[embarrassment]] to everyone except its [[cinematographer]]. The very fact that it is a critique of the sex tourism industry seems [[valid]] until we are "treated" to a [[lingering]] [[dance]] scene. The plot is ridiculous no one except the most ardent fan of BAD horror will get anything out of it. And for the love of God please stop saying this [[film]] is a tale of innocence lost or even of female empowerment because it is quite [[clearly]] not (childish fumbling lesbians, what the [[hell]]?). this was by far the [[worst]] [[film]] at the Edinburgh [[festival]] (that i [[saw]] anyway), someone even collapsed [[halfway]] through the film probably because they couldn't [[take]] any more of it. this may [[seem]] like an overly critical [[rant]] but i [[genuinely]] [[cannot]] [[find]] a redeeming [[feature]] of this [[film]] except for [[perhaps]] if you [[take]] it as pure [[comedy]]. [[In]] short this [[film]] is [[best]] [[watched]] on a cocktail of [[class]] A [[drugs]]. I will be short...This film is an [[shame]] to everyone except its [[photographer]]. The very fact that it is a critique of the sex tourism industry seems [[legitimate]] until we are "treated" to a [[continuing]] [[ballet]] scene. The plot is ridiculous no one except the most ardent fan of BAD horror will get anything out of it. And for the love of God please stop saying this [[filmmaking]] is a tale of innocence lost or even of female empowerment because it is quite [[notoriously]] not (childish fumbling lesbians, what the [[brothel]]?). this was by far the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] at the Edinburgh [[feast]] (that i [[observed]] anyway), someone even collapsed [[midway]] through the film probably because they couldn't [[taking]] any more of it. this may [[seems]] like an overly critical [[ranting]] but i [[actually]] [[significant]] [[finds]] a redeeming [[features]] of this [[movie]] except for [[potentially]] if you [[taking]] it as pure [[comedian]]. [[Among]] short this [[filmmaking]] is [[nicest]] [[seen]] on a cocktail of [[kinds]] A [[medications]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I went to see this a few days ago, and it's hard to forget that film...for the wrong reasons. This film is supposed to be funny, it's not, not a single laugh in the theatre( perhaps for josé garcia and gérard Depardieu ), and it's boring, boring, boring. It was even hard sometimes to understand what they were saying. They just talk to fast and don't open their enough for us to understand. I was with a friend and more than 4 or 5 times i caught myself saying after a line that was supposed to be funny " what, what did he say", and i'm french. I hate to say that, given the fact that i think good films are made here, but i apologise in advance for all foreigners who will go see the film ( if ever shown outside of France ).

We're deeply sorry for that cr@p. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4981 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think this movie is well done and realistic. I you are used to watching Hollywood "action" movies, and use that as a standard to rate this movie, you are bound to be disappointed. This movie is much closer to real life than 95% of what Hollywood can produce, and that is what lifts it above the average action movie. I have no experience with Swedish military whatsoever, and can therefore not point out any mistakes in the way they act. But as i have seen the "making of" extra I'm convinced that there has been done a lot to avoid any mistakes. This is a movie i will recommend for others to watch. High quality realistic story and movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4982 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] THE [[DECOY]] is one of those [[independent]] productions, made by obvious newcomers, but it doesn't have all the [[usual]] flaws that sink most such films. It has a definite story, it has [[adequate]] acting, the photography is very good, the hero and the bad guy are both formidable [[men]], and the [[background]] music isn't overdone. This is a DVD [[New]] Release, so people will be looking here to see if it's [[worthwhile]]. I don't know where all the 10's come from, as there's no [[way]] this film is that good --- [[even]] if you're the filmmaker's mother.

The last film we saw at a theater was Warner's trashing of J K Rawlings much-loved and excellent book, Order of the Phoenix. In comparing THE DECOY with PHOENIX, consider that PHOENIX (as made by Warners) had no story, certainly no acting was allowed by the director, the photography was dreadful, and the wall-of-sound [[overbearing]] musical score was just a mess. I rated Phoenix a "1" because the scale doesn't go any lower. THE DECOY is 4 times better -- in all regards.

If you have the opportunity, give THE DECOY a chance. Remember, this isn't "Decoy 3 -- the Shootout" or any such nonsense. It's original. If your expectations aren't overblown by the foolish "10" scores here, you [[might]] just enjoy the film on its own terms. THE [[LURE]] is one of those [[autonomous]] productions, made by obvious newcomers, but it doesn't have all the [[accustomed]] flaws that sink most such films. It has a definite story, it has [[appropriate]] acting, the photography is very good, the hero and the bad guy are both formidable [[male]], and the [[context]] music isn't overdone. This is a DVD [[Newest]] Release, so people will be looking here to see if it's [[helpful]]. I don't know where all the 10's come from, as there's no [[pathways]] this film is that good --- [[yet]] if you're the filmmaker's mother.

The last film we saw at a theater was Warner's trashing of J K Rawlings much-loved and excellent book, Order of the Phoenix. In comparing THE DECOY with PHOENIX, consider that PHOENIX (as made by Warners) had no story, certainly no acting was allowed by the director, the photography was dreadful, and the wall-of-sound [[haughty]] musical score was just a mess. I rated Phoenix a "1" because the scale doesn't go any lower. THE DECOY is 4 times better -- in all regards.

If you have the opportunity, give THE DECOY a chance. Remember, this isn't "Decoy 3 -- the Shootout" or any such nonsense. It's original. If your expectations aren't overblown by the foolish "10" scores here, you [[apt]] just enjoy the film on its own terms. --------------------------------------------- Result 4983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Now this is more like it! The [[first]] [[movie]] had some iffy dialogue and some [[weaker]] acting, but it seems like the team behind this [[got]] their stuff [[together]] for the sequel and put out a [[solid]], thoroughly enjoyable, [[hilarious]] and [[creative]] comedy that will keep everyone on the edge of their seats the whole way through.

Seriously, this is just full of [[great]] stuff, brimming with creativity, and it's less of a spoof on 80s movies at the same time. The scenes in Hell are [[great]], and so are the ones in [[Heaven]]. There's really no [[shortage]] to the mad-cap adventurous romp that this one promises, and you will never see another movie like this. Even the hammy final act of the movie isn't as bad as the first one, being generally heartwarming and enjoyable in its extremely cliché repertoire of family fun movie bliss. And even Keanu Reeves, despite looking about 30, isn't that bad here.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Now this is more like it! The [[frst]] [[cinematography]] had some iffy dialogue and some [[lowest]] acting, but it seems like the team behind this [[ai]] their stuff [[jointly]] for the sequel and put out a [[robust]], thoroughly enjoyable, [[comical]] and [[imaginative]] comedy that will keep everyone on the edge of their seats the whole way through.

Seriously, this is just full of [[wondrous]] stuff, brimming with creativity, and it's less of a spoof on 80s movies at the same time. The scenes in Hell are [[wondrous]], and so are the ones in [[Heavens]]. There's really no [[scarcity]] to the mad-cap adventurous romp that this one promises, and you will never see another movie like this. Even the hammy final act of the movie isn't as bad as the first one, being generally heartwarming and enjoyable in its extremely cliché repertoire of family fun movie bliss. And even Keanu Reeves, despite looking about 30, isn't that bad here.

Sounds like a good deal to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4984 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Horror spoofs are not just a thing of the 21st century. Way before the 'Scary Movie' series there were a few examples of this genre, mostly in the 80s. But like said franchise most of these films are hit or miss. Some like 'Elvira, Mistress of the Dark' mostly rise above that, but other like 'Saturday the 14th' and it's sequel fail to deliver the laughs. But out of all these types of films there is one particularly big offender and that's 'Transylvania 6-5000,' a major waste of time for many reasons.

Pros: A great cast that does it's best. Some of the dopey humor is amusing. A corny, but catch theme song. Some good Transylvanian locations.

Cons: Threadbare plot. Mostly tedious pacing. Most of the humor just doesn't cut it. The monsters are given little to do and little screen time. I thought this was supposed to be a spoof of monster movies? Lame ending that will likely make viewers angry.

Final thoughts: This is a comedy? If it is then why are the really funny bits so few and far in between? Comedies are supposed to make us roll on the floor, not roll our eyes and yawn, aching for it to be over. I can't believe Anchor Bay released this tired junk. I'll admit it's not one of the worst films ever made, but it's not worth anyone's time or money even if you're a fan of any of the actors. See 'Transylvania Twist' instead.

My rating: 2/5 --------------------------------------------- Result 4985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Overall an [[extremely]] [[disappointing]] picture. [[Very]], very [[slow]] [[build]] up to the basic storyline. The role of Maria Schrader searching for her [[families]] secret past. (Every take seems to last forever…. There is really no [[rhythm]] in the [[film]].) ***SPOILERS*** Her Mother Ruth is rescued from the Nazis, by a German woman, played by Katja Riemann. The entire character of Ruth is so one [[dimensional]], so stereotypical. ***SPOILERS END*** The film cuts back and forth between present day New York and Berlin and Berlin 40s something. Please when you do that, give the audience an indication of what time exactly the story takes place. There is never a clear indication of time – very annoying. Worst part is, the end. ***SPOILERS*** The entire show and jabber about the Jews being so terribly tormented, simply by a bureaucratic accident! Give me a break. That's how the Jews got out of the Rosenstrasse? The question of who freed the Jews is NEVER answered. Was is Goebels who freed them? Did Lean Fischer sleep with Goebels? In Venice the film won an acting award for K. Riemann, why? – I have no idea. Must be the Jewish theme… Overall an [[eminently]] [[depressing]] picture. [[Eminently]], very [[sluggish]] [[built]] up to the basic storyline. The role of Maria Schrader searching for her [[family]] secret past. (Every take seems to last forever…. There is really no [[tempo]] in the [[filmmaking]].) ***SPOILERS*** Her Mother Ruth is rescued from the Nazis, by a German woman, played by Katja Riemann. The entire character of Ruth is so one [[dimensions]], so stereotypical. ***SPOILERS END*** The film cuts back and forth between present day New York and Berlin and Berlin 40s something. Please when you do that, give the audience an indication of what time exactly the story takes place. There is never a clear indication of time – very annoying. Worst part is, the end. ***SPOILERS*** The entire show and jabber about the Jews being so terribly tormented, simply by a bureaucratic accident! Give me a break. That's how the Jews got out of the Rosenstrasse? The question of who freed the Jews is NEVER answered. Was is Goebels who freed them? Did Lean Fischer sleep with Goebels? In Venice the film won an acting award for K. Riemann, why? – I have no idea. Must be the Jewish theme… --------------------------------------------- Result 4986 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] Pecker is a hilariously funny yet [[twisted]] film about a small town in Baltimore whose daily, humdrum routine is broken by Pecker, a young photographer who takes pictures of "real things." No pretty models, no gorgeous men, just hard living. This [[wonderful]] [[film]] pokes fun at the plasticness of the urban art chain. There is one particular scene when a homeless woman who shops at Pecker's mom's thrift shop buys the same exact coat as one of the Whitney art junkies for only 25 cents instead of five hundred dollars. This just goes to show you that no matter what kind of money you have, you might not always have taste. Yet again John Waters sends you into a never-ending spiral of laughter and raw reality. You can have your mainstream Hollywood movies with special affects and mountains of celebrities, but give me a "Pecker" or a "Hairspray" (another [[excellent]] John Waters film) over a "Titanic" or a "Godzilla" anyday!! Pecker is a hilariously funny yet [[distorted]] film about a small town in Baltimore whose daily, humdrum routine is broken by Pecker, a young photographer who takes pictures of "real things." No pretty models, no gorgeous men, just hard living. This [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] pokes fun at the plasticness of the urban art chain. There is one particular scene when a homeless woman who shops at Pecker's mom's thrift shop buys the same exact coat as one of the Whitney art junkies for only 25 cents instead of five hundred dollars. This just goes to show you that no matter what kind of money you have, you might not always have taste. Yet again John Waters sends you into a never-ending spiral of laughter and raw reality. You can have your mainstream Hollywood movies with special affects and mountains of celebrities, but give me a "Pecker" or a "Hairspray" (another [[wondrous]] John Waters film) over a "Titanic" or a "Godzilla" anyday!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4987 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As I watch this film, it is interesting to see how much it marginalizes Black men. The film [[spends]] its time showing how [[powerless]] the most [[visible]] Black man in it is ([[save]] for an [[heroic]] moment). For much of the film, the other Black men (and dark-skinned Black women) in the film are way in the background, barely visible.

Vanessa Williams' character was strong and sympathetic. The viewer can easily [[identify]] and [[sympathize]] with her. There are [[also]] some fairly visible and three-dimensional [[support]] characters who are light-skinned, and some White characters of some warmth and dignity. But 99% of the Black [[males]] in this film are [[nothing]] but [[invisible]] [[men]]. [[Voiceless]] [[shadows]] in the [[background]], of no [[consequence]]. Such a [[horrible]] [[flaw]], but [[anything]] but [[unusual]] in the mainstream [[media]]. As I watch this film, it is interesting to see how much it marginalizes Black men. The film [[dedicates]] its time showing how [[impotent]] the most [[evident]] Black man in it is ([[economize]] for an [[gallant]] moment). For much of the film, the other Black men (and dark-skinned Black women) in the film are way in the background, barely visible.

Vanessa Williams' character was strong and sympathetic. The viewer can easily [[identification]] and [[commiserate]] with her. There are [[apart]] some fairly visible and three-dimensional [[supports]] characters who are light-skinned, and some White characters of some warmth and dignity. But 99% of the Black [[man]] in this film are [[none]] but [[unseen]] [[man]]. [[Speechless]] [[shade]] in the [[backgrounds]], of no [[consequences]]. Such a [[scary]] [[shortcomings]], but [[something]] but [[exceptional]] in the mainstream [[medium]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (63%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Found this flick in a videostore, it cost $2 to buy. The whole movie stinks really bad! The so-called colonel, who would the hero here if the cover could have been trusted, must be in his eighties and is barely able to walk. He nevertheless manages to shoot some of the dumbest ninjas in the world. Then the story leaves the colonel, which makes sense given the old man's inability to DO anything worth mentioning, a now two terrifyingly eighties-looking guys take over, in what must have been some sort of story. I got lost a hundred times but didn't mind, because the movie is so bad, it's real fun to watch. Zero-Budget trash with actors not deserving that name. Go check it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 4989 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Mild [[SPOILERS]] contained herein. I'm spoiling this film to [[save]] you the trouble of having to watch it.

Jet Li's movies fall into one of two categories: Shaolin period movies and movies set in modern-day Hong Kong revolving around Triads or Triad like organizations. Each [[genre]] has its best and [[worst]] [[films]]. `Twin Warriors' is Jet Li's best Shaolin era flick while `The Evil Cult' is his [[worst]]. `Fist of Legend' while in the recent past is the best `modern era' Jet Li movie. `Black Mask' without a doubt is the [[worst]].

Jet Li plays a self-exiled mercenary who received an injection that [[gives]] him superhuman ability, but shortens his life span. In his `new life' in exile he plays a pacifist librarian. When his old mercenary squad goes on a rampage, Jet Li becomes a vigilante determined to stop them. He dons a very silly corrugated cardboard mask so as to conceal his identity from the police (and public) as a librarian, as well as to conceal his true identity to his ex-comrades in arms.

The version I saw was dubbed, and horribly at that. Why does Jet Li capture and hold hostage his library co-worker if he's a pacifist? Is there a love story between them? Why does the police chief not care when he learns of the Black Mask's true identity? The plot is just plain [[BAD]]. Bad by way of the superhero cheesiness, bad in the sense that characters are never properly developed, bad in its character interactions, all [[topped]] off by a half-explained [[story]] I [[quickly]] [[lost]] interest in.

The action and martial arts sequences are way over the top. Lots of blood, gore (severed body parts aplenty), explosions, and Matrix style superhuman martial arts fiascos are present in the film. Unfortunately this is the films best and only selling point. If you want to see [[Jet]] Li [[playing]] a [[vigilante]] [[superhero]] in a Mission [[Impossible]] [[style]] [[movie]] `Black Mask' [[delivers]]. [[For]] the rest of us [[Jet]] Li fans it is a [[true]] [[disappointment]]. This is one of those movies where Jet Li never gets to be Jet Li: he gets neither the chance to charm us with his charisma, nor a chance to impress us with his impressive yet realistic martial arts ability.

Normally a Chinese knockoff of Ozzy Osbourne would be enough to engross me in a film, sadly `Black Mask' proved to be an exception to that rule. Indeed the antagonist of this movie, by the way he dresses, his long straight hair, and trademark round sunglasses looks like the modern and aged Ozzy Osbourne. However the villain isn't on-screen long enough to make the gimmick worthwhile. I am assuming the likeness to Ozzy was intentional; in addition to the villain's look, he also ran a satanic looking hideout. So much more could have been made from the Ozzy Osbourne villain gimmick! If only the writer, director, or ANYONE had bothered to give a background to and develop the character of the film's arch villain!

`Black Mask' was the first Jet Li film released on video in the USA after Lethal Weapon 4, and I'm glad I stayed away from it until now. It may well have ruined my whole perception of Jet Li as a martial artist and actor. If you want to see Jet Li at his worst, rent `Black Mask' and `The Evil Cult' and make it a double feature or horror, both intentional and unintentional. Otherwise stick to moves that utilize the talents of Jet Li, and have plots that are semi-well thought out and plausible. 3/9 stars. Mild [[TROUBLEMAKERS]] contained herein. I'm spoiling this film to [[rescued]] you the trouble of having to watch it.

Jet Li's movies fall into one of two categories: Shaolin period movies and movies set in modern-day Hong Kong revolving around Triads or Triad like organizations. Each [[types]] has its best and [[meanest]] [[kino]]. `Twin Warriors' is Jet Li's best Shaolin era flick while `The Evil Cult' is his [[pire]]. `Fist of Legend' while in the recent past is the best `modern era' Jet Li movie. `Black Mask' without a doubt is the [[meanest]].

Jet Li plays a self-exiled mercenary who received an injection that [[delivers]] him superhuman ability, but shortens his life span. In his `new life' in exile he plays a pacifist librarian. When his old mercenary squad goes on a rampage, Jet Li becomes a vigilante determined to stop them. He dons a very silly corrugated cardboard mask so as to conceal his identity from the police (and public) as a librarian, as well as to conceal his true identity to his ex-comrades in arms.

The version I saw was dubbed, and horribly at that. Why does Jet Li capture and hold hostage his library co-worker if he's a pacifist? Is there a love story between them? Why does the police chief not care when he learns of the Black Mask's true identity? The plot is just plain [[FAULTY]]. Bad by way of the superhero cheesiness, bad in the sense that characters are never properly developed, bad in its character interactions, all [[exceeded]] off by a half-explained [[conte]] I [[early]] [[forfeited]] interest in.

The action and martial arts sequences are way over the top. Lots of blood, gore (severed body parts aplenty), explosions, and Matrix style superhuman martial arts fiascos are present in the film. Unfortunately this is the films best and only selling point. If you want to see [[Jett]] Li [[gaming]] a [[militiaman]] [[hero]] in a Mission [[Unable]] [[styles]] [[flick]] `Black Mask' [[offer]]. [[Onto]] the rest of us [[Jett]] Li fans it is a [[veritable]] [[disillusionment]]. This is one of those movies where Jet Li never gets to be Jet Li: he gets neither the chance to charm us with his charisma, nor a chance to impress us with his impressive yet realistic martial arts ability.

Normally a Chinese knockoff of Ozzy Osbourne would be enough to engross me in a film, sadly `Black Mask' proved to be an exception to that rule. Indeed the antagonist of this movie, by the way he dresses, his long straight hair, and trademark round sunglasses looks like the modern and aged Ozzy Osbourne. However the villain isn't on-screen long enough to make the gimmick worthwhile. I am assuming the likeness to Ozzy was intentional; in addition to the villain's look, he also ran a satanic looking hideout. So much more could have been made from the Ozzy Osbourne villain gimmick! If only the writer, director, or ANYONE had bothered to give a background to and develop the character of the film's arch villain!

`Black Mask' was the first Jet Li film released on video in the USA after Lethal Weapon 4, and I'm glad I stayed away from it until now. It may well have ruined my whole perception of Jet Li as a martial artist and actor. If you want to see Jet Li at his worst, rent `Black Mask' and `The Evil Cult' and make it a double feature or horror, both intentional and unintentional. Otherwise stick to moves that utilize the talents of Jet Li, and have plots that are semi-well thought out and plausible. 3/9 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 4990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] La Maman et la Putain has to be watched as a movie that is both related to the time it was released (post-68) and eternal in many respects. True, the actors don't "act" ... True, they talk a lot... But what they talk about is just what makes life worth living... or dying. The very long monologue spoken by Françoise Lebrun is perhaps the most accurate and moving text that was ever written about womanhood, manhood and love. Not easy to translate accurately, though. This movie is a statement about the difficulty of being a man and a woman (or two women in this case). And IMHO, Jean Pierre Léaud is one of the greatest French actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 4991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I found this film in my local videostore I expected it to be another cheesy American vampire film in the same vein of "The Lost Boys"(1987).To my surprise "To Die for" is a really good movie.It's a little bit corny at times,but still there are enough stylish set-pieces and surprises to satisfy vampire enthusiasts.This is a perfect mix of romance and horror and it's surprisingly gory at times.Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 4992 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This charmingly pleasant and tenderhearted sequel to the hugely successful "The Legend of Boggy Creek" is a follow-up in name only. Stories abound in a sleepy, self-contained fishing community of a supposedly vicious Bigfoot creature called "Big Bay Ty" that resides deep in the uninviting swamplands of Boggy Creek. Two bratty brothers and their older, more sensible tomboy sister (a sweetly feisty performance by cute, pigtailed future "Different Strokes" sitcom star Dana Plato) go venturing into the treacherous marsh to check out if the creature of local legend may be in fact a real live being. The trio get hopelessly lost in a fierce storm and the furry, bear-like, humongous, but very gentle and benevolent Sasquatch comes to the kids' rescue.

Tom Moore's casual, no-frills direction relates this simple story at a leisurely pace, astutely capturing the workaday minutiae of the rural town in compellingly exact detail, drawing the assorted country characters with great warmth and affection, and thankfully developing the sentiment in an organic, restrained, unforced manner that never degenerates into sticky-sappy mush. The adorable Dawn Wells (Mary Ann on "Gilligan's Island") gives an engagingly plucky portrayal of the kids' loving working class single mom while Jim Wilson and John Hofeus offer enjoyably irascible support as a couple of squabbling ol' hayseed curmudgeonly coots. Robert Bethard's capable, sunny cinematography displays the woodsy setting in all its sumptuously tranquil, achingly pure and fragile untouched by civilization splendor. Darrell Deck's score adeptly blends flesh-crawling synthesizer shudders and jubilant banjo-pluckin' country bluegrass into a tuneful sonic brew. In addition, this picture warrants special praise for the way it uncannily predicts the 90's kiddie feature Bigfoot vogue by a good 15-odd years in advance. --------------------------------------------- Result 4993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I have a high tolerance level for crap, so I was looking forward to this. It did not disappoint. Apparently based on Sheridan Le Fanu's classic Carmilla, it follows a father and daughter hunting a female vampire who, luckily, happens to be travelling with them. [[Then]] we have Santa Claus (or the General, as he likes to be called here) running over random zombies. Did I mention there was a zombie outbreak? The dead are returning to life but nobody seems too concerned. We have construction worker zombies, soldier zombies and even St.Trinian schoolgirl zombies. Apparently Santa Claus is looking for his daughter who has been turned into a vampire. Oh wait there are no vampires, the girl is in a lunatic asylum and Carmilla is her nurse, or is she? The zombies are back and Santa's mad. Lesbian sex, I like vampires and I like zombies but I especially like lesbian sex. Nothing like some simulated cunnilingus to get the juices flowing. When are we going to see vampires fight zombies? Is she a vampire or is she a lunatic? Or both? Is Carmilla a hot sexy lesbian vampire or a nurse? More cunnilingus, you can never have enough cunnilingus. Here come the St.Trinian zombies. Chainsaw time!! More lesbian sex then the zombies kill and eat the vampires. I guess the zombies won, or did they? Plot? Who needs a plot when you've got lesbian vampires and schoolgirl zombies? And cunnilingus? I have a high tolerance level for crap, so I was looking forward to this. It did not disappoint. Apparently based on Sheridan Le Fanu's classic Carmilla, it follows a father and daughter hunting a female vampire who, luckily, happens to be travelling with them. [[Later]] we have Santa Claus (or the General, as he likes to be called here) running over random zombies. Did I mention there was a zombie outbreak? The dead are returning to life but nobody seems too concerned. We have construction worker zombies, soldier zombies and even St.Trinian schoolgirl zombies. Apparently Santa Claus is looking for his daughter who has been turned into a vampire. Oh wait there are no vampires, the girl is in a lunatic asylum and Carmilla is her nurse, or is she? The zombies are back and Santa's mad. Lesbian sex, I like vampires and I like zombies but I especially like lesbian sex. Nothing like some simulated cunnilingus to get the juices flowing. When are we going to see vampires fight zombies? Is she a vampire or is she a lunatic? Or both? Is Carmilla a hot sexy lesbian vampire or a nurse? More cunnilingus, you can never have enough cunnilingus. Here come the St.Trinian zombies. Chainsaw time!! More lesbian sex then the zombies kill and eat the vampires. I guess the zombies won, or did they? Plot? Who needs a plot when you've got lesbian vampires and schoolgirl zombies? And cunnilingus? --------------------------------------------- Result 4994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] SAPS [[AT]] [[SEA]] is evidently a pun on a Gary Cooper film, SOULS [[AT]] SEA. The title aptly describes the starring team, Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. who go on an ocean voyage to [[soothe]] Ollie's nerves only to run into escaped killer Nick Grainger. As played by Rychard Cramer, this criminal is both amusing and [[chilling]], making him a fine foil for the Boys' comedic [[characters]]. Despite his [[powerful]] presence, Cramer never upstages the [[Boys]], a tribute to Stan and Ollie's [[beguiling]] [[charisma]]. That is as it should be, since the [[Boys]] are supposed to be the protagonists in this film.

Such is the [[charm]] of Laurel and Hardy's personas that they [[elevate]] average material. For SAPS AT SEA has its slow spots. For instance, as a previous commentator has [[noted]], a [[bit]] where a [[doctor]] (the [[delightfully]] flustered James Finlayson) tries a balloon called "lung tester" on Ollie, lacks punch. The scenario is very episodic, with the first part, taking place in the Boys' apartment, almost completely unrelated to the second part where they go off to sea. But on the whole, the [[film]] is [[highly]] [[pleasant]] [[entertainment]] with a [[sufficiently]] brief [[running]] time so that it doesn't wear out it's welcome.

There's a certain poignancy viewing the final collaboration between Laurel and Hardy and producer Hal Roach. I haven't [[seen]] all of Laurel and Hardy's post-1940 films but those that I have seen don't measure up to even the [[weakest]] Hal Roach products. In these later movies, Laurel and Hardy seem to be in an alien [[environment]], deprived of such colorful supporting players like Finlayson and Charlie Hall and Marvin Hately and LeRoy Shield's sprightly musical scores. They also aren't the well-meaning and optimistic bumblers we know and love but in the later films, are either exasperating blockheads or pathetic misfits.

It is a [[pity]] that [[many]] Hal Roach Laurel and Hardy films are now generally unavailable to the public. Even in a [[minor]] entry like SAPS AT SEA, one can see that Laurel and Hardy were great comedians. This was because Hal Roach, for the most part, allowed Stan Laurel, the guiding force behind the team, complete artistic freedom. Once Laurel lost his autonomy at other studios, the team lost much of its uniqueness. SAPS [[INTO]] [[HAI]] is evidently a pun on a Gary Cooper film, SOULS [[DURING]] SEA. The title aptly describes the starring team, Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. who go on an ocean voyage to [[calm]] Ollie's nerves only to run into escaped killer Nick Grainger. As played by Rychard Cramer, this criminal is both amusing and [[chill]], making him a fine foil for the Boys' comedic [[attribute]]. Despite his [[influential]] presence, Cramer never upstages the [[Guys]], a tribute to Stan and Ollie's [[entrancing]] [[seduction]]. That is as it should be, since the [[Guys]] are supposed to be the protagonists in this film.

Such is the [[seduction]] of Laurel and Hardy's personas that they [[raise]] average material. For SAPS AT SEA has its slow spots. For instance, as a previous commentator has [[highlighted]], a [[bitten]] where a [[doctors]] (the [[divinely]] flustered James Finlayson) tries a balloon called "lung tester" on Ollie, lacks punch. The scenario is very episodic, with the first part, taking place in the Boys' apartment, almost completely unrelated to the second part where they go off to sea. But on the whole, the [[movies]] is [[vastly]] [[nice]] [[recreational]] with a [[adequately]] brief [[run]] time so that it doesn't wear out it's welcome.

There's a certain poignancy viewing the final collaboration between Laurel and Hardy and producer Hal Roach. I haven't [[watched]] all of Laurel and Hardy's post-1940 films but those that I have seen don't measure up to even the [[weaker]] Hal Roach products. In these later movies, Laurel and Hardy seem to be in an alien [[surroundings]], deprived of such colorful supporting players like Finlayson and Charlie Hall and Marvin Hately and LeRoy Shield's sprightly musical scores. They also aren't the well-meaning and optimistic bumblers we know and love but in the later films, are either exasperating blockheads or pathetic misfits.

It is a [[shame]] that [[innumerable]] Hal Roach Laurel and Hardy films are now generally unavailable to the public. Even in a [[underage]] entry like SAPS AT SEA, one can see that Laurel and Hardy were great comedians. This was because Hal Roach, for the most part, allowed Stan Laurel, the guiding force behind the team, complete artistic freedom. Once Laurel lost his autonomy at other studios, the team lost much of its uniqueness. --------------------------------------------- Result 4995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Paul (Jason Lee) is an underachiever who just happens to be engaged to a type-A princess named Karen (Selma Blair). She chooses his clothes and his daily schedule. At his bachelor party, Paul gets a little too drunk and somehow ends up taking a pretty dancer named Becky (Julia Stiles) back to his digs. "Nothing happened", as they [[say]], but the duo do wake up in the same bed. Suddenly [[Karen]] telephones. She's on her way to Paul's apartment. Understandably, Paul hustles Becky out of the place, although her underpants are left behind. But, there is even more fun ahead. At a family dinner at Karen's parents' home, Paul runs smack into Becky again, learning that she is Karen's cousin. Talk about some explaining to do! But, instead, Paul chooses to feign a stomach problem and hides out in the bathroom. Will Karen ever find out that Becky spent the night at Paul's place? And, what will be the consequences? I'm sorry for critics who pan movies like this. They should [[definitely]] lighten up, for this [[film]] is fresh and [[fun]]. Of course, it doesn't hurt matters that Lee is a [[consummate]] funny man, Stiles is a charming beauty or that Blair is a natural as a pretty but anal fiancée. The rest of the cast, including James Brolin and Julie Haggerty, is also quite nice. The look of the film is [[wonderful]], as are the costumes and California settings. Best of all, the [[script]] is [[imaginative]] and inspired, creating [[big]] [[laughs]] for the [[audience]]. [[In]] short, if you want to [[tickle]] the [[proverbial]] funnybones, get this [[movie]] [[tonight]]. It [[may]] not be Academy [[Award]] [[material]] but it is [[absolutely]] [[guaranteed]] to turn a [[bad]] day into a darn good one. Paul (Jason Lee) is an underachiever who just happens to be engaged to a type-A princess named Karen (Selma Blair). She chooses his clothes and his daily schedule. At his bachelor party, Paul gets a little too drunk and somehow ends up taking a pretty dancer named Becky (Julia Stiles) back to his digs. "Nothing happened", as they [[told]], but the duo do wake up in the same bed. Suddenly [[Carin]] telephones. She's on her way to Paul's apartment. Understandably, Paul hustles Becky out of the place, although her underpants are left behind. But, there is even more fun ahead. At a family dinner at Karen's parents' home, Paul runs smack into Becky again, learning that she is Karen's cousin. Talk about some explaining to do! But, instead, Paul chooses to feign a stomach problem and hides out in the bathroom. Will Karen ever find out that Becky spent the night at Paul's place? And, what will be the consequences? I'm sorry for critics who pan movies like this. They should [[obviously]] lighten up, for this [[cinema]] is fresh and [[amusing]]. Of course, it doesn't hurt matters that Lee is a [[perfection]] funny man, Stiles is a charming beauty or that Blair is a natural as a pretty but anal fiancée. The rest of the cast, including James Brolin and Julie Haggerty, is also quite nice. The look of the film is [[wondrous]], as are the costumes and California settings. Best of all, the [[hyphen]] is [[creative]] and inspired, creating [[vast]] [[laughing]] for the [[audiences]]. [[For]] short, if you want to [[tickling]] the [[notorious]] funnybones, get this [[film]] [[mondays]]. It [[maggio]] not be Academy [[Scholarship]] [[materials]] but it is [[totally]] [[ensure]] to turn a [[amiss]] day into a darn good one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4996 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I already know that critics and some [[audiences]] [[say]] that it was a [[satire]], there were [[numerous]] political and social messages, the names make refer to some other [[names]] etc. It might be. I cannot realize such [[things]] (I don't [[want]] to do anyway) because I am not interested in, I am interested in 'cinema'. As for the movie itself, again it is [[said]] that the movie is clever and [[dramatically]] powerful. I [[could]] not see [[anything]] which we don't see in [[monster]] [[movies]] except the scene which takes place in a office in the second half. Yes, that scene says somethings about humanity, but it does not make the movie [[brilliant]]. The movie is entertaining (mildly) and exciting in some moments or scenes, but no more than that. As for the biggest [[flaw]] of the movie, it is visual [[effects]]. It was just shocking, I could not pull myself together for a while, because I had [[expected]] a realistic monster, because it is not one of the old Gojira movies, it was made in 2006, but it was not. It is like if you don't believe that there is a monster, you cannot care about. If you agree with me about this, I highly recommend you Cloverfield that is extremely realistic. The design of the monster is not interesting, but at least planned, there is an effort. Dramatically powerful critique. Some critics talk about it as if it is a Kurosawa movie. Yes, it is rather a drama than a thriller or action, but it should not mean that it is dramatically powerful. I don't want to compare The Host with other monster movies, but I try to mean that The Host does not do something that other monster movies do not do. By the way, may be some people call the movie masterpiece because of their sympathy for Asian cinema. Yes, I like Asian cinema too, but this is the fact. I already know that critics and some [[spectators]] [[says]] that it was a [[irony]], there were [[myriad]] political and social messages, the names make refer to some other [[name]] etc. It might be. I cannot realize such [[aspects]] (I don't [[wanting]] to do anyway) because I am not interested in, I am interested in 'cinema'. As for the movie itself, again it is [[avowed]] that the movie is clever and [[immensely]] powerful. I [[would]] not see [[nothing]] which we don't see in [[creature]] [[filmmaking]] except the scene which takes place in a office in the second half. Yes, that scene says somethings about humanity, but it does not make the movie [[resplendent]]. The movie is entertaining (mildly) and exciting in some moments or scenes, but no more than that. As for the biggest [[imperfection]] of the movie, it is visual [[repercussions]]. It was just shocking, I could not pull myself together for a while, because I had [[prophesied]] a realistic monster, because it is not one of the old Gojira movies, it was made in 2006, but it was not. It is like if you don't believe that there is a monster, you cannot care about. If you agree with me about this, I highly recommend you Cloverfield that is extremely realistic. The design of the monster is not interesting, but at least planned, there is an effort. Dramatically powerful critique. Some critics talk about it as if it is a Kurosawa movie. Yes, it is rather a drama than a thriller or action, but it should not mean that it is dramatically powerful. I don't want to compare The Host with other monster movies, but I try to mean that The Host does not do something that other monster movies do not do. By the way, may be some people call the movie masterpiece because of their sympathy for Asian cinema. Yes, I like Asian cinema too, but this is the fact. --------------------------------------------- Result 4997 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Before Stan [[Laurel]] became the [[smaller]] half of the all-time [[greatest]] [[comedy]] team, he laboured under contract to Broncho Billy Anderson in a [[series]] of cheapies, many of which were parodies of major Hollywood [[features]]. Following a dispute with Anderson, Laurel [[continued]] the informal series of parodies at Joe Rock's smaller (and more indigent) [[production]] [[company]].

Most of Laurel's parody films were only [[mildly]] [[funny]] at the [[time]], and [[even]] [[less]] [[funny]] for modern audiences who haven't [[seen]] the original [[movie]] which Laurel is parodying. 'West of Hot Dog' is a fairly generic parody of cowboy shoot-'em-ups. It's marginally a specific parody of 'West of the Pecos', an oater released two years earlier with no major actors. Since 'West of the Pecos' was never a huge success, it's difficult to see why Stan's film unit chose this particular movie as a target for their lampoonery, much less why they waited so long after its release to parody it. And where did they get that title 'West of Hot Dog'? Possibly it's down to the fact that 'Hot dog!' was a sexual interjection favoured by American lechers in the 1920s. (As in the opening scene of the stage play 'Machinal'.)

'West of Hot Dog' was produced and co-directed by Joe Rock. Among his many other achievements, Rock introduced Laurel to Lois Neilson, and he was subsequently best [[man]] at their wedding. Full disclosure: In the last years of his life, I had the great privilege of befriending Joe Rock and interviewing him. Nearly ninety years old at the time, Rock's memory was impressively clear ... but he remembered [[nothing]] at all about 'West of Hot Dog', and I can't blame him. This movie is eminently forgettable.

The leading lady's character is named Little Mustard: If that's meant to be a parody of something in 'West of the Pecos', I don't get it. There are a couple of 'impossible' gags here, including Laurel's method for mounting a horse. For just one moment in this movie, Stan Laurel reminded me of the great Buster Keaton when he suddenly broke into a run. 'West of Hot Dog' is vaguely similar in subject matter and tone to Keaton's short comedy 'The Frozen North', but Keaton's version is much funnier. The plot of this film somewhat anticipates a situation in Keaton's feature 'Our Hospitality' but (again) suffers by comparison: here, two tough varmint brothers expect to inherit the Last Chance Saloon, but the previous owner has bequeathed it to weakling tenderfoot Stan. However, the brothers will become the legal heirs if Stan dies. Hmmm...

Seriously, though: is such a bequest legal? As soon as Stan takes possession of the property, surely any further questions of ownership or inheritance become his decision, not the previous owner's decision. I had plenty of time to consider such points of law while watching this dull comedy.

At one point, a gag involves some crude animation drawn directly onto the film stock. It looks cheap and isn't funny.

This 'Hot Dog' is no weiner, and no winner: it's just a whiner. My rating: one point out of 10. Hang on, Stan: in a few more years you'll be one-half of a comedy legend. Before Stan [[Laurier]] became the [[lesser]] half of the all-time [[strongest]] [[humour]] team, he laboured under contract to Broncho Billy Anderson in a [[serial]] of cheapies, many of which were parodies of major Hollywood [[trait]]. Following a dispute with Anderson, Laurel [[perpetual]] the informal series of parodies at Joe Rock's smaller (and more indigent) [[productivity]] [[corporations]].

Most of Laurel's parody films were only [[gently]] [[comical]] at the [[moment]], and [[yet]] [[lowest]] [[comical]] for modern audiences who haven't [[noticed]] the original [[filmmaking]] which Laurel is parodying. 'West of Hot Dog' is a fairly generic parody of cowboy shoot-'em-ups. It's marginally a specific parody of 'West of the Pecos', an oater released two years earlier with no major actors. Since 'West of the Pecos' was never a huge success, it's difficult to see why Stan's film unit chose this particular movie as a target for their lampoonery, much less why they waited so long after its release to parody it. And where did they get that title 'West of Hot Dog'? Possibly it's down to the fact that 'Hot dog!' was a sexual interjection favoured by American lechers in the 1920s. (As in the opening scene of the stage play 'Machinal'.)

'West of Hot Dog' was produced and co-directed by Joe Rock. Among his many other achievements, Rock introduced Laurel to Lois Neilson, and he was subsequently best [[guy]] at their wedding. Full disclosure: In the last years of his life, I had the great privilege of befriending Joe Rock and interviewing him. Nearly ninety years old at the time, Rock's memory was impressively clear ... but he remembered [[anything]] at all about 'West of Hot Dog', and I can't blame him. This movie is eminently forgettable.

The leading lady's character is named Little Mustard: If that's meant to be a parody of something in 'West of the Pecos', I don't get it. There are a couple of 'impossible' gags here, including Laurel's method for mounting a horse. For just one moment in this movie, Stan Laurel reminded me of the great Buster Keaton when he suddenly broke into a run. 'West of Hot Dog' is vaguely similar in subject matter and tone to Keaton's short comedy 'The Frozen North', but Keaton's version is much funnier. The plot of this film somewhat anticipates a situation in Keaton's feature 'Our Hospitality' but (again) suffers by comparison: here, two tough varmint brothers expect to inherit the Last Chance Saloon, but the previous owner has bequeathed it to weakling tenderfoot Stan. However, the brothers will become the legal heirs if Stan dies. Hmmm...

Seriously, though: is such a bequest legal? As soon as Stan takes possession of the property, surely any further questions of ownership or inheritance become his decision, not the previous owner's decision. I had plenty of time to consider such points of law while watching this dull comedy.

At one point, a gag involves some crude animation drawn directly onto the film stock. It looks cheap and isn't funny.

This 'Hot Dog' is no weiner, and no winner: it's just a whiner. My rating: one point out of 10. Hang on, Stan: in a few more years you'll be one-half of a comedy legend. --------------------------------------------- Result 4998 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This movie has several things going for it. It is a "feel good" story. The [[characters]] and actors are [[likable]], [[realistic]] and present fine performances. Most [[important]], I believe, is that [[Dennis]] Quaid knows how to grip and throw a baseball. Robert Redford looked [[good]] both throwing and swinging a bat in "The Natural, and so did Kevin Costner in "For [[Love]] of the Game" and "[[Bull]] Durham." [[In]] "[[Major]] League," [[Tom]] Berenger and [[Charlie]] Sheen [[looked]] like they knew what they were doing, but [[many]] of the others did not, and that picture was [[pure]] silliness - and not very funny.

So many [[earlier]] baseball [[movies]], [[even]] where the [[stories]] might be interesting, presented such a [[lack]] of baseball [[ability]] on the part of the leads, they were ludicrous in this [[respect]]. [[In]] "The Stratton Story" and "[[Strategic]] [[Air]] Command," [[Jimmy]] [[Stewart]] looked about as believable as a [[professional]] baseball [[player]], as your overweight, non-athletic, elderly uncle in the softball game at the [[family]] reunion. Other [[virile]] and physically [[robust]] [[stars]] (e.g., Gary Cooper as [[Lou]] Gehrig; Robald Reagan as [[Grover]] Cleveland [[Alexander]]; and Dan Dailey as [[Dizzy]] Dean) [[also]] exhibited a [[degree]] of baseball [[ability]] that would put them in the late rounds while "choosing-up" for a game at the [[Sunday]] [[picnic]] (even if coed, and even if your uncle were [[involved]]).

The scenes of Quaid's [[high]] [[school]] team he coached, the ones where he attends his tryout with the [[Devil]] Rays, and those with him [[playing]] in two [[minor]] leagues and in the [[American]] League, all ring [[true]]. The [[participants]] are [[believable]] and [[capable]]. [[In]] [[addition]], he is an [[engaging]] [[actor]] who [[always]] [[delivers]] a talented and [[appropriate]] characterization (except, to a degree, some of his "over-the-top" scenes, and his [[forced]] accent, in his [[portrayal]] of [[Jerry]] Lee Lewis). But he's [[definitely]] on-target here, and this [[movie]] is a "9," as good, or better, as any [[others]] of this [[genre]], except for "The Natural." This movie has several things going for it. It is a "feel good" story. The [[hallmarks]] and actors are [[sympathetic]], [[practical]] and present fine performances. Most [[crucial]], I believe, is that [[Denny]] Quaid knows how to grip and throw a baseball. Robert Redford looked [[alright]] both throwing and swinging a bat in "The Natural, and so did Kevin Costner in "For [[Loved]] of the Game" and "[[Ox]] Durham." [[During]] "[[Significant]] League," [[Thom]] Berenger and [[Charley]] Sheen [[seemed]] like they knew what they were doing, but [[various]] of the others did not, and that picture was [[sheer]] silliness - and not very funny.

So many [[prior]] baseball [[theater]], [[yet]] where the [[narratives]] might be interesting, presented such a [[failure]] of baseball [[skills]] on the part of the leads, they were ludicrous in this [[respecting]]. [[Throughout]] "The Stratton Story" and "[[Strategy]] [[Aerial]] Command," [[Jimi]] [[Steward]] looked about as believable as a [[occupational]] baseball [[protagonist]], as your overweight, non-athletic, elderly uncle in the softball game at the [[families]] reunion. Other [[male]] and physically [[solids]] [[celebrity]] (e.g., Gary Cooper as [[Lew]] Gehrig; Robald Reagan as [[Glover]] Cleveland [[Alexandra]]; and Dan Dailey as [[Dazed]] Dean) [[similarly]] exhibited a [[diploma]] of baseball [[skills]] that would put them in the late rounds while "choosing-up" for a game at the [[Saturday]] [[barbecue]] (even if coed, and even if your uncle were [[implicated]]).

The scenes of Quaid's [[higher]] [[teaching]] team he coached, the ones where he attends his tryout with the [[Daemon]] Rays, and those with him [[play]] in two [[small]] leagues and in the [[Americans]] League, all ring [[real]]. The [[participant]] are [[trustworthy]] and [[able]]. [[During]] [[supplement]], he is an [[participate]] [[actress]] who [[repeatedly]] [[offerings]] a talented and [[adequate]] characterization (except, to a degree, some of his "over-the-top" scenes, and his [[obligated]] accent, in his [[depiction]] of [[Gerry]] Lee Lewis). But he's [[obviously]] on-target here, and this [[cinematography]] is a "9," as good, or better, as any [[alia]] of this [[sort]], except for "The Natural." --------------------------------------------- Result 4999 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] This is the last time I [[rent]] a video without [[checking]] in at the IMDB [[reviews]]. The Limey is [[directed]] by Steven Soderbergh who also wrote wrote the truly awful Nightwatch with [[Ewan]] Macgregor and directed such trash as Out of Sight with the anti-talented Jennifer Lopez. Terence Stamp is a fine [[actor]] and it is a [[shame]] he involved himself in such a [[bad]] film. There is frequent confusing [[editing]] that seems like it was a last minute decision in order to make up for the lack or story, filming and just plain common sense. This film does everything [[wrong]]. What were they thinking? This is the last time I [[leases]] a video without [[controlling]] in at the IMDB [[scrutinize]]. The Limey is [[geared]] by Steven Soderbergh who also wrote wrote the truly awful Nightwatch with [[Ioan]] Macgregor and directed such trash as Out of Sight with the anti-talented Jennifer Lopez. Terence Stamp is a fine [[protagonist]] and it is a [[dishonour]] he involved himself in such a [[unfavourable]] film. There is frequent confusing [[edited]] that seems like it was a last minute decision in order to make up for the lack or story, filming and just plain common sense. This film does everything [[mistaken]]. What were they thinking? --------------------------------------------- Result 5000 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This was the first televised episode of the Columbo series ([[although]] it was filmed after "[[Death]] Lends a Hand")and it heralded one of the most successful TV [[series]] in history.

[[Jack]] Cassidy (who played the [[murderer]] in the [[series]] three [[times]]) enthuses smugness, arrogance and self-assuredness in [[equal]] [[measure]] here, as Ken Franklin, one half of a mystery writing team who hatches an elaborate plot to kill off his partner, Jim Ferris (played by Martin Milner) who decides to [[terminate]] their [[professional]] [[relationship]], [[leaving]] Franklin exposed as [[merely]] a good publicist rather than a prolific writer.

The initial [[murder]] set-up is [[fantastic]] and Cassidy's performance facilitates an arguable accolade that he was the [[best]] Columbo murderer in the series.

[[Peter]] Falk is [[wonderfully]] understated in his role as Columbo and the character's inherent [[traits]] and oddities, which are underlined by a [[seeming]] slowness and absent-mindedness, contrast particularly well with Cassidy's character's [[extreme]] smugness: one of their early scenes [[together]] where [[Ken]] Franklin fabricates a motive for the [[killing]] through Jim Ferris's non-existent expo-see of identifying hit-men [[operating]] in the underworld exemplifies this very well. Franklin [[hints]] to Columbo this potential motive and Columbo (purposely or ignorantly) fails to latch on, forcing Franklin to express his disappointment in a [[markedly]] patronising manner and compare him unfavourably with the detective in the books, Mrs. Melville.

[[Also]], [[noteworthy]] is the early directorial contribution of 24 year old Steven Spielberg. Notwithstanding, some elementary inclusions of cameras shadowing the actors and actresses, he [[adds]] some stylish and [[elaborate]] [[touches]] to uphold the general professionalism of the episode. One [[particularly]] stark image is of Jim Feriss's dead [[body]] lying on the settee, [[almost]] dark in the foreground, as Ken Franklin raises a [[glass]] to him in the background after he [[finishes]] [[answering]] a phone call to Ferris's distraught wife. I have no doubt that [[working]] to a restrictive 10-14 day schedule, Spieberg's [[efforts]] should not be [[underestimated]].

Unfortunately, the [[event]] of the second [[murder]], necessitated by a blackmailing [[scheme]] which is plotted by a female [[friend]] of Franklin's (and ironically referred to as "sloppy" by Columbo in his climatic summing up) takes the steam out of the whole thing. The cutting edge of the plot is compromised and the screen-time between Falk and Cassidy inexcusably lessens at this point to perhaps help the script-writer (Stephen Bocho) out of a tight corner, since he cannot singularly develop the [[story]] without another murder.

The climax is the most disappointing aspect of this episode. The initial banter and exchange of words between Falk and Cassidy is strongly and [[effectively]] [[executed]], but it merely advertises the fact that it should have happened more in the episode. The main aggravation lies with the sealing clue (if it can be called a clue): Cassidy's character's hitherto smugness and arrogance is amazingly expelled by a clue that really does little to imply his guilt; and once this is mentioned, he capitulates in a rather unspectacular and uncharacteristic fashion.

All in all, a bold opening to the series, which inevitably advertises and foretells all that is good about Columbo, and, conversely, the problems associated with such ingenuity, i.e maintaining the high standards and particularly, creating a credible and suitably intelligent ending. This was the first televised episode of the Columbo series ([[nevertheless]] it was filmed after "[[Killings]] Lends a Hand")and it heralded one of the most successful TV [[serial]] in history.

[[Jacque]] Cassidy (who played the [[hitman]] in the [[serials]] three [[moments]]) enthuses smugness, arrogance and self-assuredness in [[egalitarian]] [[measurements]] here, as Ken Franklin, one half of a mystery writing team who hatches an elaborate plot to kill off his partner, Jim Ferris (played by Martin Milner) who decides to [[terminated]] their [[vocational]] [[relationships]], [[leave]] Franklin exposed as [[simply]] a good publicist rather than a prolific writer.

The initial [[killings]] set-up is [[wondrous]] and Cassidy's performance facilitates an arguable accolade that he was the [[finest]] Columbo murderer in the series.

[[Pedro]] Falk is [[admirably]] understated in his role as Columbo and the character's inherent [[characters]] and oddities, which are underlined by a [[glaring]] slowness and absent-mindedness, contrast particularly well with Cassidy's character's [[severe]] smugness: one of their early scenes [[jointly]] where [[Keane]] Franklin fabricates a motive for the [[murdered]] through Jim Ferris's non-existent expo-see of identifying hit-men [[function]] in the underworld exemplifies this very well. Franklin [[suggestions]] to Columbo this potential motive and Columbo (purposely or ignorantly) fails to latch on, forcing Franklin to express his disappointment in a [[drastically]] patronising manner and compare him unfavourably with the detective in the books, Mrs. Melville.

[[Moreover]], [[tremendous]] is the early directorial contribution of 24 year old Steven Spielberg. Notwithstanding, some elementary inclusions of cameras shadowing the actors and actresses, he [[adding]] some stylish and [[devise]] [[afflicts]] to uphold the general professionalism of the episode. One [[specially]] stark image is of Jim Feriss's dead [[bodies]] lying on the settee, [[virtually]] dark in the foreground, as Ken Franklin raises a [[luna]] to him in the background after he [[finalise]] [[replied]] a phone call to Ferris's distraught wife. I have no doubt that [[cooperate]] to a restrictive 10-14 day schedule, Spieberg's [[endeavor]] should not be [[underrated]].

Unfortunately, the [[events]] of the second [[killings]], necessitated by a blackmailing [[plan]] which is plotted by a female [[amie]] of Franklin's (and ironically referred to as "sloppy" by Columbo in his climatic summing up) takes the steam out of the whole thing. The cutting edge of the plot is compromised and the screen-time between Falk and Cassidy inexcusably lessens at this point to perhaps help the script-writer (Stephen Bocho) out of a tight corner, since he cannot singularly develop the [[conte]] without another murder.

The climax is the most disappointing aspect of this episode. The initial banter and exchange of words between Falk and Cassidy is strongly and [[effectiveness]] [[conducted]], but it merely advertises the fact that it should have happened more in the episode. The main aggravation lies with the sealing clue (if it can be called a clue): Cassidy's character's hitherto smugness and arrogance is amazingly expelled by a clue that really does little to imply his guilt; and once this is mentioned, he capitulates in a rather unspectacular and uncharacteristic fashion.

All in all, a bold opening to the series, which inevitably advertises and foretells all that is good about Columbo, and, conversely, the problems associated with such ingenuity, i.e maintaining the high standards and particularly, creating a credible and suitably intelligent ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 5001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[In]] my [[opinion]], this is an [[absolutely]] romantic [[Disney]] [[masterpiece]]. If you [[ask]] me, the stepmother (voice of Lucille [[La]] Verne) was [[truly]] [[diabolical]]. You'll have to [[see]] the [[movie]] if you want to know why. [[On]] the other hand, [[despite]] the [[fact]] that she did a lot of housekeeping, Cinderella ([[voice]] of Ilene [[Stanley]]) was a very [[beautiful]] [[lady]]. To me, the scenery was [[beautiful]], the [[cast]] was well chosen, and the writing was strong. Before I [[wrap]] this up, I'd like to [[say]] that [[everyone]] involved in this [[film]] did very well. [[Now]], in [[conclusion]], I [[highly]] recommend this [[absolutely]] romantic Disney masterpiece to all of you who haven't [[seen]] it. You're in for a good [[time]], so go to the [[video]] [[store]], rent it or buy it, [[kick]] back with a [[friend]], and watch it. [[During]] my [[view]], this is an [[perfectly]] romantic [[Disneyland]] [[centerpiece]]. If you [[demand]] me, the stepmother (voice of Lucille [[Las]] Verne) was [[truthfully]] [[satanic]]. You'll have to [[behold]] the [[films]] if you want to know why. [[Onto]] the other hand, [[though]] the [[facto]] that she did a lot of housekeeping, Cinderella ([[vocal]] of Ilene [[Stan]]) was a very [[wondrous]] [[missus]]. To me, the scenery was [[excellent]], the [[casting]] was well chosen, and the writing was strong. Before I [[wrapping]] this up, I'd like to [[said]] that [[anyone]] involved in this [[cinematography]] did very well. [[Currently]], in [[conclusions]], I [[crucially]] recommend this [[totally]] romantic Disney masterpiece to all of you who haven't [[watched]] it. You're in for a good [[moment]], so go to the [[videos]] [[storehouse]], rent it or buy it, [[kicking]] back with a [[boyfriend]], and watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5002 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] If you ever hear these three [[words]] uttered to you..."Joe Don Baker", be [[afraid]]...

[[Final]] Justice is the low budget action movie based on a sheriff in a [[Texas]] town named Geronimo (pronounced as Heronimo). He's an ugly, [[slimy]], rude [[character]] who is on the [[hunt]] for a criminal in Malta who [[killed]] his [[partner]] in [[Texas]]. His partner actually slumps down twice in the [[movie]]. Very [[bad]] editing. Joe Don Baker (Geronimo) ends up in jail like 4 or 5 times in this movie, making the plot go nowhere fast. Plus, he shoots everybody like he's in the wild west. I guess nobody told him it was the 20th century. A woman cop is assigned to show him around Malta (who looks like Elaine from Seinfeld) and she is the only one who can put up with the redneck. She must be insane!

The strippers in the bar are the most entertaining characters in this movie. Their dancing is shown throughout the film and I began to bond with the sleazy women. Well, at least it was better than watching Geronimo try to dumb his way out of something. The ending is flawed and somewhat predictable, and I was happy it was finally over. You'll never forget that last line of Joe Don Baker from the movie.

It's so hard to imagine how he was in THREE Bond movies...very weird! Anyway, if you're up for a laugh, then see this one on MST3K sometime. Also, I've heard his other [[bad]] movie (among [[many]]), "[[Mitchell]]" MST3K version is being released on DVD by Rhino. I can't wait to see that! If you ever hear these three [[phrase]] uttered to you..."Joe Don Baker", be [[apprehensive]]...

[[Latter]] Justice is the low budget action movie based on a sheriff in a [[Texan]] town named Geronimo (pronounced as Heronimo). He's an ugly, [[sticky]], rude [[personage]] who is on the [[hounding]] for a criminal in Malta who [[die]] his [[partners]] in [[Texan]]. His partner actually slumps down twice in the [[movies]]. Very [[unfavourable]] editing. Joe Don Baker (Geronimo) ends up in jail like 4 or 5 times in this movie, making the plot go nowhere fast. Plus, he shoots everybody like he's in the wild west. I guess nobody told him it was the 20th century. A woman cop is assigned to show him around Malta (who looks like Elaine from Seinfeld) and she is the only one who can put up with the redneck. She must be insane!

The strippers in the bar are the most entertaining characters in this movie. Their dancing is shown throughout the film and I began to bond with the sleazy women. Well, at least it was better than watching Geronimo try to dumb his way out of something. The ending is flawed and somewhat predictable, and I was happy it was finally over. You'll never forget that last line of Joe Don Baker from the movie.

It's so hard to imagine how he was in THREE Bond movies...very weird! Anyway, if you're up for a laugh, then see this one on MST3K sometime. Also, I've heard his other [[rotten]] movie (among [[innumerable]]), "[[Michel]]" MST3K version is being released on DVD by Rhino. I can't wait to see that! --------------------------------------------- Result 5003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Who would've imagined -- Hal Hartley creates a filmic corollary to Syriana while retaining his signature idiosyncratic style. The fusion is highly entertaining.

Having not seen a Hal Hartley film for about a decade, I approached this one with some caution. His brilliant productions of the nineties had impressed critics and audiences with their unique style and dialog. The director's earlier films featured colorful characters and offered close observations of life -- often in the region of Long Island, New York or in New York City itself -- that were offbeat and insightful.

My initial caution stemmed from the description of this movie as a "spy thriller". To my pleasant surprise, Hartley manages to mesh his well established style and focus to produce a highly original drama of international intrigue. It works in more ways than one might imagine. Hartley's film retains the dialog and character focus that are his trademarks, along with a singular cinematographic style.

Moreover it is highly appropriate given the current situation in the world and the state of war that has been fostered by dark elements on all sides. Hartley has brought all his skills to something new -- a political film worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as Syriana. Truly he is coming into his own. The cast does a fine job of interpreting Hartley's vision and style. Fans of Parker Posey will see her in full bloom here, still with us and more ripe and gorgeous than before. --------------------------------------------- Result 5004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This film is a great [[example]] of fine storytelling. The acting is superb. The story is inspiring without being overly manipulative or fake. There were a couple points where they [[probably]] [[made]] people a tad more [[good]] or [[bad]] than they really were, but considering it is a Hollywood [[movie]], they [[showed]] [[amazing]] [[restraint]]. There wasn't a single [[explosion]] [[shown]] in the [[movie]], even [[though]] they had one [[opportunity]] to. The film, while having suspenseful parts, was not [[made]] into an [[action]] movie. The story is [[thus]] made to focus on an [[extraordinary]] man in [[unfortunately]] [[ordinary]] times. Well [[done]]! This film is a great [[case]] of fine storytelling. The acting is superb. The story is inspiring without being overly manipulative or fake. There were a couple points where they [[assuredly]] [[brought]] people a tad more [[buena]] or [[naughty]] than they really were, but considering it is a Hollywood [[cinematic]], they [[displays]] [[wondrous]] [[limitations]]. There wasn't a single [[blast]] [[exhibited]] in the [[cinematography]], even [[if]] they had one [[likelihood]] to. The film, while having suspenseful parts, was not [[effected]] into an [[efforts]] movie. The story is [[so]] made to focus on an [[wondrous]] man in [[regrettably]] [[banal]] times. Well [[doing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5005 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Finally I got to see the infamous "Ice Age". Apart from maybe not being as dead funny as I'd hoped for after seeing the brilliant teaser there is not a bad word I can say about it. Sure, it's not as glamorous as a Disney production(besides, it is Fox's 1st attempt at a full length CG movie) but it's got immense heart and on some occasions(like the look in Manfred's eyes after we see the sad glimpse of his past) I found myself on the verge of tears. But when they reunited the baby with its father I just couldn't hold them in anymore. A movie that has no trouble walking on the thin line of sappy and cliché and manages to bring more than the best out of it; the end result being one of the most touching animated creations I have ever seen. Great funny looking characters that quickly grow on you(and great voice talents as well) and many funny memorable scenes, especially from Scrat's behalf make the movie more than enough reason to give it a go. Plus the Dodo scene, which is my personal favorite funny scene of 2002.

I honestly don't get it, but for some reason it really looks like CG animation will be taking the upper hand in the future. But if it just means that there will be more movies like this one (and who can forget Pixar's creations) then I don't really mind, at least for now. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is perhaps the worst attempt at a Zombie film I have ever had the misfortune to see. Terrible, terrible, terrible. Any review found on this site is obviously the work of either the filmmaker, the filmmakers family, or a friend of the filmmaker. How does this film suck? Let us count the ways...

The plot? Incoherent. Dialogue? Atrocious. I will not slam the effects/gore, as I understand that this is low budget. But was there even one zombie that was not obese? C'mon! And for a film set in Rhode Island, why did that truck sport a Massachusetts plate? Continuity, find some.

The Girl dancing while the soldier "Stands at attention". Please, don't put your ex-girlfriend or buddy's sister in your movie naked. This was an ugly movie filled with ugly people, and has no business even mentioning Romero on the cover. Next time you decide to make a movie, don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 5007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely one of the worst movies I've seen in a long time! It starts off badly and just deteriorates. Katherine Heigl is woefully miscast in a Lolita role and Leo Grillo manfully struggles with what is essentially a cardboard cutout character. The only cast-member with any enthusiasm is Tom Sizemore, who hams it up as a villain and goes completely overboard with his role. The script is dire, the acting horrible and it has plot holes big enough to drive a double-decker bus through! It is also the most sexist movie I have ever seen! Katherine Heigl's character is completely unsympathetic. She's seen as an evil, wanton seductress who lures the poor, innocent married man to cheat on his wife. It is implied throughout the movie that she's underage, and the message that accompanies that plot-strand just beggars belief! At the end, she isn't even able to redeem herself by shooting the man who's obviously (ha!) become demented with rage and guilt, but the script allows him to kill himself, thereby redeeming himself in the eyes of males everywhere. Horrible. Don't waste your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It's a [[testament]] to Gosha's [[incredible]] film-making prowess that he was [[able]] to [[complete]] both Hitokiri and his [[stunning]] masterpiece, Goyokin, in the same year, 1969. And it's a testament to how criminally [[underrated]] he [[remains]] for the general public ([[compared]] to media [[darlings]] like the [[great]] Akira Kurosawa), that both Hitokiri and Goyokin have [[received]] [[less]] than 500 [[votes]] between the two of them.

Shintaro Katsu is Okada Izo: [[mad]] [[dog]] [[killer]], [[loyal]] to the Tosha clan and their [[boss]] Takechi, played by another genre stalwart, Tatsuya Nakadai. The Tosha clan was [[part]] of a [[larger]] alliance that [[supported]] the Emperor against the flailing Shogunate. The [[historical]] [[backdrop]] is fairly [[accurate]] - with Japan's [[increasing]] [[political]] [[turmoil]] between imperialists and the Tokugawa and the pressure by the [[West]] to [[end]] a 300 year social and [[political]] seclusion. It helps a lot to know a thing or two about Japanese [[history]] and what [[eventually]] [[led]] to the Meiji [[Restoration]] and the [[abolition]] of the Tokugawa Shogunate, but it's not [[essential]] by any means. The [[movie]] was made [[primarily]] for a Japanese [[audience]] so certain [[things]] are [[taken]] for [[granted]] but it [[flows]] very well for the uninitiated as well.

As one [[would]] [[expect]] from a Hideo Gosha [[film]] in his golden [[years]] (the late 60's) the visual palette is breathtaking, the [[use]] of [[external]] and internal symbolism [[hiding]] behind pictorial beauty. Style [[however]] is never [[decorative]] for Gosha - it is [[always]] [[employed]] in the service of story.

And [[speaking]] of story, Hitokiri is dominated both literally and figuratively by the tortured [[main]] character Izo Okada. As most chambara [[protagonists]], Izo [[finds]] himself in a moral double-bind, torn between giri ([[obligation]]) and ninjo (natural [[impulse]]) - [[although]] it [[takes]] a while for him to [[realize]] what [[exactly]] his giri is. [[In]] the first half of the [[movie]] Izo is [[trying]] for [[social]] self-advancement. [[Lofty]] [[aspirations]] of [[social]] [[rank]] and [[marriage]] with an aristocrat's daughter - a [[great]] [[progression]] for someone coming from a farmer's background in the [[rigid]] social [[caste]] system of 19th century [[Japan]].

The [[turning]] point for Izo is when he realizes at what cost self-advancement comes, the loss of identity and by consequence the loss of self. It is at that point that he undergoes a very symbolic transformation from a famous swordsman of the Tosha Clan to a "nameless" drifter without past or future, Torazo the Vagrant. Although not technically nameless and not a genre drifter in Yojimbo's mold, it is the loss of his former self and the cast off of ego, ambition and self-dillusion that allows Izo to see things as they really are and redeem himself.

Hitokiri ends (which I won't reveal here) in the best way any story can end: both positive and negative with a deeply ironic twist that gives Izo the last laugh, a last sardonic remark in the face of death. It's a [[wills]] to Gosha's [[impressive]] film-making prowess that he was [[capable]] to [[finishing]] both Hitokiri and his [[noteworthy]] masterpiece, Goyokin, in the same year, 1969. And it's a testament to how criminally [[underestimated]] he [[remained]] for the general public ([[likened]] to media [[honey]] like the [[wonderful]] Akira Kurosawa), that both Hitokiri and Goyokin have [[benefited]] [[fewer]] than 500 [[vote]] between the two of them.

Shintaro Katsu is Okada Izo: [[lunatic]] [[pooch]] [[murderer]], [[faithful]] to the Tosha clan and their [[chef]] Takechi, played by another genre stalwart, Tatsuya Nakadai. The Tosha clan was [[portion]] of a [[akbar]] alliance that [[aided]] the Emperor against the flailing Shogunate. The [[historic]] [[context]] is fairly [[exact]] - with Japan's [[widening]] [[politician]] [[churning]] between imperialists and the Tokugawa and the pressure by the [[Western]] to [[ending]] a 300 year social and [[politician]] seclusion. It helps a lot to know a thing or two about Japanese [[histories]] and what [[finally]] [[headed]] to the Meiji [[Renovation]] and the [[removing]] of the Tokugawa Shogunate, but it's not [[important]] by any means. The [[movies]] was made [[essentially]] for a Japanese [[viewers]] so certain [[items]] are [[picked]] for [[given]] but it [[flux]] very well for the uninitiated as well.

As one [[ought]] [[hopes]] from a Hideo Gosha [[films]] in his golden [[ages]] (the late 60's) the visual palette is breathtaking, the [[usage]] of [[exterior]] and internal symbolism [[disguised]] behind pictorial beauty. Style [[instead]] is never [[ornamental]] for Gosha - it is [[repeatedly]] [[employing]] in the service of story.

And [[talk]] of story, Hitokiri is dominated both literally and figuratively by the tortured [[leading]] character Izo Okada. As most chambara [[actors]], Izo [[found]] himself in a moral double-bind, torn between giri ([[responsability]]) and ninjo (natural [[impetus]]) - [[despite]] it [[pick]] a while for him to [[achieve]] what [[accurately]] his giri is. [[Onto]] the first half of the [[kino]] Izo is [[tempting]] for [[sociable]] self-advancement. [[Exalted]] [[ambitions]] of [[sociable]] [[grading]] and [[matrimony]] with an aristocrat's daughter - a [[wondrous]] [[advancements]] for someone coming from a farmer's background in the [[stiff]] social [[castes]] system of 19th century [[Japans]].

The [[inflection]] point for Izo is when he realizes at what cost self-advancement comes, the loss of identity and by consequence the loss of self. It is at that point that he undergoes a very symbolic transformation from a famous swordsman of the Tosha Clan to a "nameless" drifter without past or future, Torazo the Vagrant. Although not technically nameless and not a genre drifter in Yojimbo's mold, it is the loss of his former self and the cast off of ego, ambition and self-dillusion that allows Izo to see things as they really are and redeem himself.

Hitokiri ends (which I won't reveal here) in the best way any story can end: both positive and negative with a deeply ironic twist that gives Izo the last laugh, a last sardonic remark in the face of death. --------------------------------------------- Result 5009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Well, TiVo recorded this because of Angelina Jolie. It had 2.5 stars. It seemed promising. It went downhill [[fast]].

There is much overacting, [[even]] from Angelina. She's about 20 and playing a 16 year [[old]]. There are three [[characters]] that are supposed to be Italian. [[Everyone]] else is Italian- American. The native Italian accents were good, I thought. The [[young]] [[male]] lead is [[cute]], my [[wife]] [[says]]. Everyone else in this [[movie]] is a fat Italian [[woman]]. Even the [[men]].

I should have known that when [[Dick]] Van Patten was cast as a randy [[doctor]], that that was a [[bad]] sign. The two couples [[chasing]] their kids around are like the four [[Italian]] Stooges.

My [[wife]] would not let go of the [[remote]]. [[Hopefully]] she was not taking [[makeup]], [[clothing]] or [[decorating]] [[tips]]. It was a sick and [[twisted]] [[combination]] of [[hideous]] and [[garish]]. It was hidegarishous.

[[Cutting]] off my left [[ventricle]] was not [[sufficient]] to [[distract]] from the [[pain]] of watching this [[movie]]. If this [[movie]] [[shows]] up on your TV, do yourself a favor and ram your [[head]] through the [[TV]] screen [[instead]]. You'll be [[glad]] you did. The only [[movie]] I've ever [[seen]] that was worse than this was "Hamburger: The [[Movie]]". [[Or]] [[maybe]] "Deadly Friend". Well, TiVo recorded this because of Angelina Jolie. It had 2.5 stars. It seemed promising. It went downhill [[promptly]].

There is much overacting, [[yet]] from Angelina. She's about 20 and playing a 16 year [[former]]. There are three [[character]] that are supposed to be Italian. [[Everybody]] else is Italian- American. The native Italian accents were good, I thought. The [[youthful]] [[masculine]] lead is [[lovely]], my [[femme]] [[said]]. Everyone else in this [[filmmaking]] is a fat Italian [[girl]]. Even the [[man]].

I should have known that when [[Rooster]] Van Patten was cast as a randy [[doktor]], that that was a [[naughty]] sign. The two couples [[chase]] their kids around are like the four [[Ltalian]] Stooges.

My [[femme]] would not let go of the [[distant]]. [[Fortunately]] she was not taking [[composition]], [[clothe]] or [[makeover]] [[advice]]. It was a sick and [[sinuous]] [[combo]] of [[outrageous]] and [[discourteous]]. It was hidegarishous.

[[Slitting]] off my left [[ventricular]] was not [[adequate]] to [[detract]] from the [[heartache]] of watching this [[filmmaking]]. If this [[filmmaking]] [[show]] up on your TV, do yourself a favor and ram your [[leader]] through the [[TVS]] screen [[however]]. You'll be [[thrilled]] you did. The only [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[noticed]] that was worse than this was "Hamburger: The [[Flick]]". [[Neither]] [[probably]] "Deadly Friend". --------------------------------------------- Result 5010 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Steven Speilberg's [[adaptation]] of Alice Walkers popular novel is not without its share of controversy. When [[first]] released [[members]] of the black community criticised its treatment of black men, while others questioned why a white man was directing this film about black women.

This is the story of a young black woman named Celie, growing up in rural America after the turn of the century. She has two children by her abusive father which are snatched from her arms at birth. Her only solace in her miserable life comes from her sister.

Celie (played in later years by newcomer Whoopie Goldberg) is married off to an abusive husband (Danny Glover). The husband is humiliated by the sister and so she is quickly removed from Celie's life.

The story is often heartbreaking as Celie keeps up hope that she may one day be reunited with her sister and with her children. Throughout her life she meets an assortment of characters, including Sophia, a tough as nails wife to her step son, and Shug, a loud and luscious saloon singer, who teaches her a thing or two about love.

Speilberg's direction is all over this picture, which offers [[brilliant]] cinematography and some stellar performances. I dare you to watch this film and not be [[moved]]! The film The Color Purple manages to [[capture]] the [[essence]] of what is a complicated [[story]]. [[While]] it [[tends]] to minimise the lesbian aspects as well as the [[African]] [[story]], both of which were so [[vivid]] in the [[book]], the [[movie]] remains true to its [[themes]], allowing the [[voice]] of [[Alice]] Walker to [[shine]] through.

I couldn't [[begin]] to respond to the [[controversy]] that surrounded this film. Suffice it to say, however, this is one of the few [[films]] that I can watch again and again, and which has left an indelible [[mark]] on me.

Steven Speilberg's [[readjustment]] of Alice Walkers popular novel is not without its share of controversy. When [[firstly]] released [[member]] of the black community criticised its treatment of black men, while others questioned why a white man was directing this film about black women.

This is the story of a young black woman named Celie, growing up in rural America after the turn of the century. She has two children by her abusive father which are snatched from her arms at birth. Her only solace in her miserable life comes from her sister.

Celie (played in later years by newcomer Whoopie Goldberg) is married off to an abusive husband (Danny Glover). The husband is humiliated by the sister and so she is quickly removed from Celie's life.

The story is often heartbreaking as Celie keeps up hope that she may one day be reunited with her sister and with her children. Throughout her life she meets an assortment of characters, including Sophia, a tough as nails wife to her step son, and Shug, a loud and luscious saloon singer, who teaches her a thing or two about love.

Speilberg's direction is all over this picture, which offers [[wondrous]] cinematography and some stellar performances. I dare you to watch this film and not be [[relocated]]! The film The Color Purple manages to [[caught]] the [[crux]] of what is a complicated [[saga]]. [[Albeit]] it [[strives]] to minimise the lesbian aspects as well as the [[Africans]] [[tale]], both of which were so [[vibrant]] in the [[cookbook]], the [[cinema]] remains true to its [[topic]], allowing the [[vocals]] of [[Alicia]] Walker to [[gloss]] through.

I couldn't [[initiating]] to respond to the [[contention]] that surrounded this film. Suffice it to say, however, this is one of the few [[kino]] that I can watch again and again, and which has left an indelible [[flagged]] on me.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5011 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw "Breaking Glass" in 1980, and thought that it would be one of the "Movie Classics". This film is a great look into the music industry with a great cast of performers. This is one film that should be in the collection of everyone and any one that wants to get into the music industry. I can't wait for it to be available on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 5012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This [[movie]] has no [[plot]] and no [[focus]]. Yes, it's [[supposed]] to be a slap-stick, [[stupid]] [[comedy]], but the screen-writers have no idea what the [[movie]] was about. Even the title doesn't go along with the [[movie]]. It should have been called "[[Cool]] Ethan" or "Cheaters Never Win" or [[something]] like that. The [[characters]] are not [[developed]] and no one cares what happens to them! The [[girl]] [[roommate]] character (from That 70's Show) was the only person worth watching. She was [[hilarious]] and stole [[every]] scene she was in. The [[others]] [[need]] to [[make]] sure that their own [[college]] [[diplomas]] are in the [[works]] since they'll [[need]] a [[career]] other than acting. This [[filmmaking]] has no [[intrigue]] and no [[focuses]]. Yes, it's [[alleged]] to be a slap-stick, [[silly]] [[charade]], but the screen-writers have no idea what the [[filmmaking]] was about. Even the title doesn't go along with the [[cinematography]]. It should have been called "[[Cooling]] Ethan" or "Cheaters Never Win" or [[somethings]] like that. The [[attribute]] are not [[established]] and no one cares what happens to them! The [[dame]] [[flatmate]] character (from That 70's Show) was the only person worth watching. She was [[humorous]] and stole [[each]] scene she was in. The [[alia]] [[needed]] to [[deliver]] sure that their own [[academies]] [[degrees]] are in the [[cooperating]] since they'll [[required]] a [[occupations]] other than acting. --------------------------------------------- Result 5013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As a [[huge]] [[fan]] of only the first 2 seasons of BSG and the [[stand]] [[alone]] feature BSG Razor I was hoping that this [[release]] would return the [[franchise]] to its original [[glory]] days. [[Usually]] I have no problem with science fiction that is mostly dialog driven as opposed to a visual bonanza of special effects. [[If]] the script is tight with some original ideas delivered by good [[actors]] one can [[create]] a profound film with little CGI [[money]] spent. This prequel has [[none]] of those aforementioned [[requirements]] [[going]] for it. The virtual [[reality]] world [[created]] by the terrorist [[teenagers]] was both [[ridiculous]] & unbelievable. This scene was [[simply]] put there to raise the release rating to Restricted. Not that [[teens]] don't love virtual reality mosh pits filled with sex & violence & heavy dance music. Its the part about those same teens having the intellectual [[depth]] & [[reason]] or political & religious passion as to create such [[futuristic]] software or become suicide bombers that perplexes me. These kids are definitely not from this planet. The movie plays out like a soap opera with only the last 10 [[minutes]] being slightly interesting. The scene with Eric Stolz giving his cyborg a devine conscienceness via the student firmware upgrade was [[amusing]] if not entertaining. But this [[old]] concept was far better portrayed & much more believable in the [[brilliant]], [[classic]] [[original]] "Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff. Caprica rips off its only interesting idea from an old Hollywood horror film. No surprise there! [[Overall]] this movie was bland & unoriginal & cheap looking, using recycled CGI of Caprica from BSG. I doubt I'll be watching this space soap when it premieres on the Sci-Fi channel. Unless of [[course]] I happen to be suffering from a bad bout of insomnia at which time this show would definitely be the cure. Zzzzzzzz As a [[whopping]] [[breather]] of only the first 2 seasons of BSG and the [[stands]] [[only]] feature BSG Razor I was hoping that this [[freed]] would return the [[candour]] to its original [[gloria]] days. [[Generally]] I have no problem with science fiction that is mostly dialog driven as opposed to a visual bonanza of special effects. [[Though]] the script is tight with some original ideas delivered by good [[protagonists]] one can [[engender]] a profound film with little CGI [[cash]] spent. This prequel has [[nos]] of those aforementioned [[requirement]] [[go]] for it. The virtual [[realism]] world [[generated]] by the terrorist [[youngsters]] was both [[absurd]] & unbelievable. This scene was [[exclusively]] put there to raise the release rating to Restricted. Not that [[schoolgirl]] don't love virtual reality mosh pits filled with sex & violence & heavy dance music. Its the part about those same teens having the intellectual [[depths]] & [[motives]] or political & religious passion as to create such [[future]] software or become suicide bombers that perplexes me. These kids are definitely not from this planet. The movie plays out like a soap opera with only the last 10 [[mins]] being slightly interesting. The scene with Eric Stolz giving his cyborg a devine conscienceness via the student firmware upgrade was [[entertaining]] if not entertaining. But this [[longtime]] concept was far better portrayed & much more believable in the [[sumptuous]], [[typical]] [[preliminary]] "Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff. Caprica rips off its only interesting idea from an old Hollywood horror film. No surprise there! [[Entire]] this movie was bland & unoriginal & cheap looking, using recycled CGI of Caprica from BSG. I doubt I'll be watching this space soap when it premieres on the Sci-Fi channel. Unless of [[cours]] I happen to be suffering from a bad bout of insomnia at which time this show would definitely be the cure. Zzzzzzzz --------------------------------------------- Result 5014 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a better adaptation of the book than the one with Paltrow (although I liked that one, too). It isn't so much that Beckinsale is better -- they are both very good -- but that the screenplay is better. Davies is a master at adapting Austen for filming, and the production values here are very good. It's not quite as glossy as the Hollywood treatment, but it's close, and I thought that the locations and the costumes actually worked better. --------------------------------------------- Result 5015 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[William]] Russ is the [[main]] character [[throughout]] this made for [[TV]] [[movie]]. He left his [[family]] behind to only reappear and [[begin]] [[paying]] off his debts. But he [[tries]] to keep away from his family. Thats where [[Peter]] Falk (Colombo) comes in, playing several different [[roles]], to [[convince]] him to come [[home]].

The story is average and they actually [[managed]] to get a former star (Peter Falk) and use him to a fairly nice degree. But [[William]] Russ wasn't truly a star. However, it [[appears]] his acting is still OK.

I [[found]] the delivery and [[story]] very cheesy in how everything was [[predictable]]. [[In]] [[fact]], the last 20 minutes I [[could]] almost dictate word for word before it happened. A good movie should never be like that.

[[Overall]], it was a sub-par [[movie]]. In a letter grading system, it [[would]] receive a "D". [[Guillaume]] Russ is the [[primary]] character [[around]] this made for [[TELEVISION]] [[filmmaking]]. He left his [[families]] behind to only reappear and [[initiation]] [[pay]] off his debts. But he [[seeks]] to keep away from his family. Thats where [[Pedro]] Falk (Colombo) comes in, playing several different [[functions]], to [[persuade]] him to come [[housing]].

The story is average and they actually [[administer]] to get a former star (Peter Falk) and use him to a fairly nice degree. But [[Willem]] Russ wasn't truly a star. However, it [[appear]] his acting is still OK.

I [[detected]] the delivery and [[tales]] very cheesy in how everything was [[foreseeable]]. [[Among]] [[facto]], the last 20 minutes I [[wo]] almost dictate word for word before it happened. A good movie should never be like that.

[[Total]], it was a sub-par [[filmmaking]]. In a letter grading system, it [[ought]] receive a "D". --------------------------------------------- Result 5016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Maybe]] it's because I looked up the [[history]] of the Irish troubles in the 1920s and then the [[sad]] [[Civil]] [[War]] that [[engulfed]] the [[Free]] State after the [[signing]] of the treaty before watching this movie. Anyway, the [[sudden]] [[turn]] at the [[end]] [[brought]] [[tears]] to my eyes.

[[Victor]] McLaglen isn't as famous [[today]] as he was back then, and he should be better [[remembered]]. [[In]] this [[film]], I [[think]] he's playing himself as he [[would]] have been without his innate [[talent]] and brains. [[For]] example, the scenes where his [[buddy]] in the crowd is challenging [[men]] to fight with him is [[probably]] [[quite]] reminiscent of what McLaglen actually did in [[earlier]] years, when he was a world-class bare-knuckles boxer. [[John]] Ford is [[partly]] [[responsible]] for that; the IMDb trivia section [[shows]] how he [[tricked]] McLaglen into [[getting]] a really [[bad]] hangover for the [[trial]] scene. This director [[also]] could bring out a [[lot]] in his actors, [[even]] without such tricks. [[Mostly]], [[though]], McLaglen is [[firmly]] in [[control]], [[especially]] when his [[character]] is [[almost]] [[totally]] blotto (which is [[difficult]] for an [[actor]] to do believably), and he [[also]] plays Gypo Nolan with a [[depth]] and emotional power that is [[surprising]] for [[someone]] who has only [[seen]] McLaglen [[later]] in his [[career]], in "The [[Quiet]] [[Man]]." I [[especially]] like the [[contrast]] between this role as an IRA [[man]] and the much more [[obviously]] [[controlled]] performance he [[gave]] as the IRA [[man]] [[Denis]] Hogan in "Hangman's [[House]]."

[[In]] "The Quiet [[Man]]," of course, McLaglen is a country squire at odds with the local IRA. [[Victor]] McLaglen was [[big]] and bully, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, but he was a good [[actor]], too, and capable of [[wide]] [[range]] and fine [[nuances]] of performance that we just wouldn't [[expect]] of a such a [[man]] [[today]]. It's a [[rather]] [[sad]] [[comment]] on our own set of expectations and prejudices.

Ford, as [[usual]], [[packs]] a [[lot]] into a [[little]] bit of [[film]]. All the [[characters]] are [[excellent]] ([[though]] the Commandant's [[mostly]] American accent is [[distracting]]) -- [[NOTE]]: There be spoilers ahead! -- Knowing that Gypo once [[drew]] the short straw and was [[ordered]] to [[kill]] a [[man]] but [[let]] him [[talk]] his [[way]] out of it instead, we really empathize with the [[man]] who [[draws]] the short straw for executing Gypo, and the humanity he shows, most notably when they go to take Gypo in Mary's room.

John Ford really shows his genius here, taking what could have been a gruesome and yet expected outcome to the whole story and instead using it to set up a totally unexpected and yet very satisfying ending that makes us think not just of Gypo and the other characters, but of poor Ireland during that tortured time. [[Potentially]] it's because I looked up the [[historian]] of the Irish troubles in the 1920s and then the [[regretful]] [[Civilian]] [[Wars]] that [[plunged]] the [[Libre]] State after the [[signature]] of the treaty before watching this movie. Anyway, the [[abrupt]] [[converting]] at the [[terminate]] [[lodged]] [[rip]] to my eyes.

[[Viktor]] McLaglen isn't as famous [[yesterday]] as he was back then, and he should be better [[recalling]]. [[During]] this [[movie]], I [[thought]] he's playing himself as he [[should]] have been without his innate [[talents]] and brains. [[At]] example, the scenes where his [[guy]] in the crowd is challenging [[man]] to fight with him is [[possibly]] [[altogether]] reminiscent of what McLaglen actually did in [[prior]] years, when he was a world-class bare-knuckles boxer. [[Giovanni]] Ford is [[partially]] [[liable]] for that; the IMDb trivia section [[demonstrate]] how he [[fooled]] McLaglen into [[obtain]] a really [[mala]] hangover for the [[trials]] scene. This director [[further]] could bring out a [[batch]] in his actors, [[yet]] without such tricks. [[Basically]], [[albeit]], McLaglen is [[flatly]] in [[monitors]], [[concretely]] when his [[characters]] is [[virtually]] [[altogether]] blotto (which is [[problematic]] for an [[protagonist]] to do believably), and he [[apart]] plays Gypo Nolan with a [[depths]] and emotional power that is [[stunning]] for [[person]] who has only [[saw]] McLaglen [[afterward]] in his [[quarries]], in "The [[Silent]] [[Guy]]." I [[principally]] like the [[opposite]] between this role as an IRA [[males]] and the much more [[apparently]] [[oversaw]] performance he [[handed]] as the IRA [[males]] [[Denny]] Hogan in "Hangman's [[Household]]."

[[For]] "The Quiet [[Males]]," of course, McLaglen is a country squire at odds with the local IRA. [[Viktor]] McLaglen was [[wide]] and bully, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, but he was a good [[actress]], too, and capable of [[big]] [[ranges]] and fine [[niceties]] of performance that we just wouldn't [[awaited]] of a such a [[dude]] [[yesterday]]. It's a [[quite]] [[unlucky]] [[observation]] on our own set of expectations and prejudices.

Ford, as [[normal]], [[packing]] a [[lots]] into a [[tiny]] bit of [[movie]]. All the [[character]] are [[wondrous]] ([[nevertheless]] the Commandant's [[especially]] American accent is [[embarrassing]]) -- [[MEMO]]: There be spoilers ahead! -- Knowing that Gypo once [[phoned]] the short straw and was [[instructed]] to [[mata]] a [[men]] but [[allowing]] him [[chatter]] his [[manner]] out of it instead, we really empathize with the [[bloke]] who [[drawn]] the short straw for executing Gypo, and the humanity he shows, most notably when they go to take Gypo in Mary's room.

John Ford really shows his genius here, taking what could have been a gruesome and yet expected outcome to the whole story and instead using it to set up a totally unexpected and yet very satisfying ending that makes us think not just of Gypo and the other characters, but of poor Ireland during that tortured time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Clever, gritty, witty, fast-paced, sexy, extravagant, sleazy, erotic, heartfelt and corny, Footlight Parade is a first-class entertainment, what the movies are all about.

The realistic, satirical treatment gives a fresh edge to the material and its pace and line delivery are breathtaking. To think that they only started making feature talking pictures 7 years before this! The brilliance of the dialogue cannot be matched anywhere today, especially considering that "realism" has taken over and engulfed contemporary cinema.

This film was made at a time when the Hayes code restricting content was being ignored and the result is a fresh, self-referential, critical and living cinema that spoke directly to contemporary audiences suffering through the depression and the general angst of the age. I'd recommend watching any film from this period, that is 1930-1935, for a vision of what popular cinema can potentially be. --------------------------------------------- Result 5018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a gentle, easy-going 1950s comedy. Kim Novak belongs to a coven of witches in Manhattan. She puts a spell on neighbor Jimmy Stewart out of boredom but eventually falls in love with him, losing her powers. See, witches are permitted to have "hot blood" but not love. Elsa Lanchester is Novak's aunt, also a witch. Jack Lemmon is her brother, ditto. Hermione Gingold is the chief witch, and Ernie Kovacks is Sidney Redlich, an author who specializes in writing about witches.

I described it as a 1950s comedy because it could hardly be mistaken for anything else. Everything is so smooth and polished, from the set decoration, through wardrobe and plot, to the performances and direction. Take the character of Ernie Kovacks. He's referred to as "a drunk and a nut." And here's how the movie demonstrates these traits. He asks for a second drink, and, though he always wears a jacket and tie like the other gentlemen, his hair is a bit long and tousled. That's a strictly 1950s version of a drunk and a nut. Nothing is out of place; everything is tidy and free of dust. The soles of Jimmy Stewart's shoes are barely scuffed.

And the Zodiac Club, where the witches hang out. It's called "a low dive." Yet it's a clean, dark place with polite waiters, a quintet of musicians, neatly dressed clientèle, and potted plants against bare brick walls. That is not my idea or yours of a "low dive" -- not even for Greenwich Village in 1958. My idea of a dive in Greenwich Village is Julius's or The White Horse Tavern or The San Remo or The Swing Rendezvous, a now defunct lesbian hangout. The Zodiac Club is a high dive compared to these.

The kookiness we always hear about is muted by today's standards. I mean, Kim Novak is odd because she runs around her apartment in her bare feet. And she wears a lot of black clothes like the Beatniks of the period did.

But never mind all that. It's an enjoyable romantic comedy. Kim Novak is effective as Gillian, who runs a primitive art shop for the uptrodden. She has a strange beauty, bulky and ethereal at the same time. She glides rather than walks, a wispy presence. Her eyebrows seem drawn with a set of plastic French curves. And Jimmy Stewart is quite good as the bewildered and bewitched victim. In the 1930s he usually played in light roles. In the postwar years and for much of the 1950s he was the tortured protagonist, but here he puts his early experience in comedy to good use. Who could resist laughing when Hermione Gingold forces him to wear a shawl and drink a hideous concoction of putrid fluid in order to cure him of Novak's spell? It's good to see him as a stooge instead of the angry and indignant man of principle he was in danger of becoming. Richard Quine directs the movie quietly, without fireworks or special effects, and does some interesting things that the play couldn't have had. Note the scene in which Novak casts the spell over Stewart, when the Siamese cat's face and ears seem to merge with Novak's startling eyes.

Ernie Kovacks in the 1950s was a well-known television personality. There was never anything quite like The Ernie Kovacks Show before -- or after. It brings the word "surrealism" to mind. He could stage five minutes worth of wordless and indescribable tricks in an unpopulated room with only Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra as background. And he did an unimpeachable sketch using the character of Percy Dovetail, an effete poet. The credits kind of skip over The Condoli Brothers but that's rather casual because these two guys -- Pete and Conte -- were virtuoso trumpeters with independent careers in jazz ensembles. Conte was later a member of Doc Severison's band on Johnny Carson's Late Show.

The third act kind of bogs down a little and becomes more "romantic" than "comedy". But it's never dull. The whole film rolls along as neatly as Van Druten's play and the kids will probably get a kick out of it too. --------------------------------------------- Result 5019 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] [[After]] repeated listenings to the CD soundtrack, I knew I wanted this film, [[got]] it for Christmas and I was [[amazed]]. Marc Bolan had such charisma, i can't [[describe]] it. I'd heard about him in that way, but didn't understand what people were talking about until I was in the company of this footage. He was [[incredible]]. Clips from the Wembley concert are interspersed with surrealistic sketches such as nuns gorging themselves at a garden party as Marc Bolan [[performs]] some acoustic versions of Get It On, etc. (I'm still learning the song titles). George Claydon, the diminutive photographer from Magical Mystery Tour, plays a chauffeur who jumps out of a car and eats one of the side mirrors. Nothing I can say to describe it [[would]] spoil it, even though I put the spoilers disclaimer on this review, so you would just need to see this for yourselves. It evades [[description]].

Yes, I love the Beatles and was curious about Ringo directing a rock documentary - that was 35 years ago - now, I finally find out it's been on DVD for 2 years, but it's finally in my home. It's an [[amazing]] viewing experience - even [[enthralling]].

Now the DVD comes with hidden extras and the following is a copy and paste from another user:

There's two hidden extras on the Born To boogie double DVD release.

1.From the menu on disc one,select the bonus material and goto the extra scenes 2.On the extra scenes page goto Scene 42 take 1 and keep pressing left 3.when the cursor disappears keep pressing right until a "Star+1972" logo appears 4.Press Enter

5.From the main menu on disc two,select the sound options 6.On the sound options page goto the 90/25 (I think thats right) option and keep pressing left 7.When the cursor disappears keep pressing right until a "Star+Home video" logo appears 8.Press Enter [[Upon]] repeated listenings to the CD soundtrack, I knew I wanted this film, [[ai]] it for Christmas and I was [[horrified]]. Marc Bolan had such charisma, i can't [[depict]] it. I'd heard about him in that way, but didn't understand what people were talking about until I was in the company of this footage. He was [[unthinkable]]. Clips from the Wembley concert are interspersed with surrealistic sketches such as nuns gorging themselves at a garden party as Marc Bolan [[conducts]] some acoustic versions of Get It On, etc. (I'm still learning the song titles). George Claydon, the diminutive photographer from Magical Mystery Tour, plays a chauffeur who jumps out of a car and eats one of the side mirrors. Nothing I can say to describe it [[ought]] spoil it, even though I put the spoilers disclaimer on this review, so you would just need to see this for yourselves. It evades [[descriptions]].

Yes, I love the Beatles and was curious about Ringo directing a rock documentary - that was 35 years ago - now, I finally find out it's been on DVD for 2 years, but it's finally in my home. It's an [[wondrous]] viewing experience - even [[intriguing]].

Now the DVD comes with hidden extras and the following is a copy and paste from another user:

There's two hidden extras on the Born To boogie double DVD release.

1.From the menu on disc one,select the bonus material and goto the extra scenes 2.On the extra scenes page goto Scene 42 take 1 and keep pressing left 3.when the cursor disappears keep pressing right until a "Star+1972" logo appears 4.Press Enter

5.From the main menu on disc two,select the sound options 6.On the sound options page goto the 90/25 (I think thats right) option and keep pressing left 7.When the cursor disappears keep pressing right until a "Star+Home video" logo appears 8.Press Enter --------------------------------------------- Result 5020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Shocking]], well-made chiller is an [[undervalued]] [[tale]] of atrocious murder and evil forces.

Small town doctor tries to discover who, or what, is committing a series of violent sexual murders.

Incubus is a [[tight]] mystery, with some horrific murder sequences, that builds to an off-beat and eerie climatic twist. The murder scenes are intense and gory, so this isn't a film for the squeamish! The direction of John Hough, along with a bizarre music score, combine to create a dark atmosphere of dread that runs through out the film. It also carries a kind of Gothic vibe as well. Nice filming locations and some stylish camera work also highlight.

The cast isn't bad either. The great John Cassavetes does a solid performance as the new doctor in town. Also good are the performances of Kerrie Keane as the local reporter, Helen Hughes as the town historian, and Duncan McIntosh as a tormented psychic teen.

All around Incubus is a forgotten horror film that needs to be re-discovered and re-evaluated.

*** out of **** [[Appalling]], well-made chiller is an [[underestimated]] [[conte]] of atrocious murder and evil forces.

Small town doctor tries to discover who, or what, is committing a series of violent sexual murders.

Incubus is a [[stringent]] mystery, with some horrific murder sequences, that builds to an off-beat and eerie climatic twist. The murder scenes are intense and gory, so this isn't a film for the squeamish! The direction of John Hough, along with a bizarre music score, combine to create a dark atmosphere of dread that runs through out the film. It also carries a kind of Gothic vibe as well. Nice filming locations and some stylish camera work also highlight.

The cast isn't bad either. The great John Cassavetes does a solid performance as the new doctor in town. Also good are the performances of Kerrie Keane as the local reporter, Helen Hughes as the town historian, and Duncan McIntosh as a tormented psychic teen.

All around Incubus is a forgotten horror film that needs to be re-discovered and re-evaluated.

*** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This was the first PPV in a [[new]] era for the WWE as Hulk Hogan, The Ultimate Warrior, Ric Flair and Sherri Martel had all left. A [[new]] crop of talent needed to be pushed. And this all started with Lex Luger, a former NWA World Heavyweight Champion being [[given]] a title shot against Yokozuna. Lex [[travelled]] all over the [[US]] in a [[bus]] [[called]] the Lex Express to [[inspire]] [[Americans]] into rallying behind him in his [[bid]] to [[beat]] the Japanese [[monster]] (who was [[actually]] Samoan) and [[get]] the WWE [[Championship]] back into American hands. As such there was much [[anticipation]] for this [[match]].

But [[every]] good PPV [[needs]] an undercard and this had some good [[stuff]].

The night started off with Razor Ramon defeating Ted DiBiase in a good [[match]]. The [[story]] [[going]] into this was that DiBiase had [[picked]] on Ramon and [[even]] offered him a [[job]] as a slave after his [[shock]] [[loss]] to the 1-2-3 [[Kid]] on RAW in [[July]]. Ramon, angry, had then [[teamed]] with the 1-2-3 Kid against the Money Inc [[tag]] team of Ted DiBiase and [[Irwin]] R Shyster. To settle their [[differences]] they were both given one on one [[matches]] DiBiase [[vs]] Ramon and Shyster vs The Kid. Razor was [[able]] to [[settle]] his side of the deal after hitting a Razor's Edge.

Next up came the Steiner [[Brothers]] putting the WWE [[Tag]] Team Titles on the line against The [[Heavenly]] [[Bodies]]. Depsite the [[interference]] of "The Bodies" Manager Jim Cornette, who hit Scott Steiner in the throat with a tennis racket, they were able to pull out the [[win]] in a decent [[match]].

[[Shawn]] Michaels and Mr [[Perfect]] had been feuding since Wrestlemania IX when [[Shawn]] Michaels confronted Perfect after his loss to Lex Luger. Perfect had then [[cost]] Michaels the Intercontinental Championship when he distracted him in a title match against Marty Janetty. Michaels had won the title back and was putting it on the line against Mr [[Perfect]], but Michaels now had a powerful ally in his corner in his 7 foot bodyguard Diesel. Micheals and [[Perfect]] had an [[excellent]] match here, but it was Diesel who proved the difference maker, pulling [[Perfect]] out of the ring and throwing him into the steel steps for Shawn to win by count out.

Irwin R Shyster avenged the loss of his tag team partner earlier in the night, easily accounting for the 1-2-3 Kid.

Next came one of the big matches of the night as Bret Hart prepared to battle Jerry Lawler for the title of undisputed King of the WWE. But Lawler came out with crutches, saying he'd been injured in a car accident earlier that day and that he'd arranged another opponent for Hart: Doink the Clown. Hart and Doink had a passable match which Hart won with a sharpshooter. He was then jumped from behind by Lawler. This bought WWE President Jack Tunney to the ring who told Lawler that he would receive a lifetime ban if he didn't wrestle Hart. Hart then destroyed Lawler, winning with the sharpshooter, but Hart refused to let go of the hold and the referee reversed his decision. So after all that Lawler was named the undisputed King of the WWE. This match was followed by Ludvig Borda destroying Marty Janetty in a short match.

The Undertaker finished his long rivalry with Harvey Wippleman, which had started in 1992 when the Undertaker had defeated Wippleman's client Kamala at Summerslam and continued when Wippleman's latest monster The Giant Gonzales had destroyed Taker at the Rumble and then again at Wrestlemania, with a decisive victory over Gonzales here. Gonzales then turned on Wippleman, chokeslamming him after a poor match.

Next it was time for six man tag action as the Smoking Gunns (Bart and BIlly) and Tatanka defeated The Headshrinkers (Samu and Fatu) and Bam Bam Bigelow with Tatanka pinning Samu.

This brings us to the main event with Yokozuna, flanked by Jim Cornette and Mr Fuji, putting the WWE Title on the line against Lex Luger and it was all on board the Lex Express. Lex came out attacking, but Yokozuna took control. Lex came back though as he was able to avoid a banzai drop and then body slam Yokozuna before knocking him out of the ring. Luger then attacked Cornette and Fuji as Yokozuna was counted out. Luger had won a fine match!!!!! Balloons fell from the ceiling. The heroes all came out to congratulate him on his win. Yokozuna may have retained the title, but Luger had proved he could be beaten. The only question was, who could beat him in the ring and get that title off him? This was the first PPV in a [[novo]] era for the WWE as Hulk Hogan, The Ultimate Warrior, Ric Flair and Sherri Martel had all left. A [[newer]] crop of talent needed to be pushed. And this all started with Lex Luger, a former NWA World Heavyweight Champion being [[yielded]] a title shot against Yokozuna. Lex [[flew]] all over the [[AMERICANS]] in a [[buses]] [[termed]] the Lex Express to [[inspires]] [[Us]] into rallying behind him in his [[bids]] to [[beats]] the Japanese [[monsters]] (who was [[genuinely]] Samoan) and [[got]] the WWE [[Championships]] back into American hands. As such there was much [[expectation]] for this [[ballgame]].

But [[any]] good PPV [[should]] an undercard and this had some good [[thing]].

The night started off with Razor Ramon defeating Ted DiBiase in a good [[couple]]. The [[saga]] [[go]] into this was that DiBiase had [[selecting]] on Ramon and [[yet]] offered him a [[labour]] as a slave after his [[shocks]] [[losing]] to the 1-2-3 [[Kids]] on RAW in [[June]]. Ramon, angry, had then [[partnered]] with the 1-2-3 Kid against the Money Inc [[label]] team of Ted DiBiase and [[Erwin]] R Shyster. To settle their [[variance]] they were both given one on one [[couples]] DiBiase [[v]] Ramon and Shyster vs The Kid. Razor was [[capable]] to [[settles]] his side of the deal after hitting a Razor's Edge.

Next up came the Steiner [[Plymouth]] putting the WWE [[Labeling]] Team Titles on the line against The [[Divine]] [[Organisations]]. Depsite the [[intervene]] of "The Bodies" Manager Jim Cornette, who hit Scott Steiner in the throat with a tennis racket, they were able to pull out the [[earning]] in a decent [[couple]].

[[Sean]] Michaels and Mr [[Flawless]] had been feuding since Wrestlemania IX when [[Sean]] Michaels confronted Perfect after his loss to Lex Luger. Perfect had then [[pricing]] Michaels the Intercontinental Championship when he distracted him in a title match against Marty Janetty. Michaels had won the title back and was putting it on the line against Mr [[Irreproachable]], but Michaels now had a powerful ally in his corner in his 7 foot bodyguard Diesel. Micheals and [[Perfecting]] had an [[wondrous]] match here, but it was Diesel who proved the difference maker, pulling [[Faultless]] out of the ring and throwing him into the steel steps for Shawn to win by count out.

Irwin R Shyster avenged the loss of his tag team partner earlier in the night, easily accounting for the 1-2-3 Kid.

Next came one of the big matches of the night as Bret Hart prepared to battle Jerry Lawler for the title of undisputed King of the WWE. But Lawler came out with crutches, saying he'd been injured in a car accident earlier that day and that he'd arranged another opponent for Hart: Doink the Clown. Hart and Doink had a passable match which Hart won with a sharpshooter. He was then jumped from behind by Lawler. This bought WWE President Jack Tunney to the ring who told Lawler that he would receive a lifetime ban if he didn't wrestle Hart. Hart then destroyed Lawler, winning with the sharpshooter, but Hart refused to let go of the hold and the referee reversed his decision. So after all that Lawler was named the undisputed King of the WWE. This match was followed by Ludvig Borda destroying Marty Janetty in a short match.

The Undertaker finished his long rivalry with Harvey Wippleman, which had started in 1992 when the Undertaker had defeated Wippleman's client Kamala at Summerslam and continued when Wippleman's latest monster The Giant Gonzales had destroyed Taker at the Rumble and then again at Wrestlemania, with a decisive victory over Gonzales here. Gonzales then turned on Wippleman, chokeslamming him after a poor match.

Next it was time for six man tag action as the Smoking Gunns (Bart and BIlly) and Tatanka defeated The Headshrinkers (Samu and Fatu) and Bam Bam Bigelow with Tatanka pinning Samu.

This brings us to the main event with Yokozuna, flanked by Jim Cornette and Mr Fuji, putting the WWE Title on the line against Lex Luger and it was all on board the Lex Express. Lex came out attacking, but Yokozuna took control. Lex came back though as he was able to avoid a banzai drop and then body slam Yokozuna before knocking him out of the ring. Luger then attacked Cornette and Fuji as Yokozuna was counted out. Luger had won a fine match!!!!! Balloons fell from the ceiling. The heroes all came out to congratulate him on his win. Yokozuna may have retained the title, but Luger had proved he could be beaten. The only question was, who could beat him in the ring and get that title off him? --------------------------------------------- Result 5022 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Throughout this film, you might think this film is just for kids. Well, it is mainly pointed towards them, but it's also well-rounded enough with the jokes pointed also at the adults in the audience. This time around, the Muppet gang try to get on Broadway, with the dire straits keeping them from getting it produced, leading them to splitting up. But Kermit won't stop, and his determination keeps things moving along until after getting the deal together he gets hit by a car and sent into amnesia!

It's a send-up, in part, of those old starring vehicles from the 40s with musicals actually as the topic of a musical, only here there's the usual lot of zaniness and wonderful moments thrown into a pot of hysterically funny moments (Lou Zealand's boomerang fish; Gonzo's water-stunt display, the whisper campaign, among many others), but also with a lot of heart too. The Muppet writers aren't shy of the conventions, on the contrary, they embrace them to the point where it's almost refreshing to see such a 'lets put on a show' story where through thick and think the characters will meet their dream.

While not as totally original in scope as the Muppet Movie, it's got many catchy and memorable songs, excellent locations all over Manhattan, and even some intonations of inter-species dating (and marriage)! Cameos include Liza Minneli ("a frog?"), Elliot Gould (as the cop), Brooke Shields (propositioned by a rat), Edward I. Koch, Gregory Hines and Joan Rivers. So get ready to sing-along, or just have a lot of big laughs and romantic (yes romantic) times with one of the best Muppet movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5023 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay, if you've seen The Ring, you've basically seen The Grudge. It's trying to be scary by just having freaky camera work and loud sounds, but it fails miserably. The plot, if you can call it that, is weak and rather full of holes, for instance, how would the care center have known that Yoko didn't show up for work when the people who lived in the house were not there? And it's not really clear what Bill Pullman's character had to do with anything. He just kind of came out of nowhere to advance the plot. It didn't make a lot of sense what happened to the original family. Who was hanging in the room, the little boy or the dad? And was Yoko alive or dead when the care center guy found her? There were too many unanswered questions and I was too bored to think about it more. --------------------------------------------- Result 5024 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Personnaly I really loved this movie, and it particularly moved me. The two main actors are giving us such great performances, that at the end, it is really heart breaking to know what finally happened to their characters.

The alchemy between Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson is marvelous, and the song are just great the way they are.

That's why I didn't feel surprised when I learned it had won 5 golden globe awards (the most rewarded movie at the Golden Globes), an Oscar and even a Grammy. This movie is a classic that deserves to be seen by anyone. A great movie, that has often been criticized (maybe because Streisand dared to get involved in it, surely as a "co-director"). Her artistry is the biggest, and that will surely please you! --------------------------------------------- Result 5025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Hi all I am a chess [[enthusiast]] [[since]] the [[age]] of about 6. I supposed I am [[quite]] [[obsessed]] by chess, but hopefully not as much as the central character in this film.

In this film, the central character reflects a real chess player called Curt von Bardeleben who committed suicide in 1924. He is famous for a game he played against Steinitz, where a beautiful combination was played by Steinitz. Instead of resigning, he simply walked out of the tournament hall, never to return.

The social ineptness of the central character is unfortunately a treat of some of the more serious Grandmasters you sometimes get in chess tournaments. Chess I suppose is a very big sacrifice, and you can sometimes end up imbalanced in other areas of life. A major example of this is the chess legend Bobby Fischer. Although a genius, he was also very disturbed in many ways.

In the film, a World championship match is depicted, as between an Italian Grandmaster and Luzhin. The format is a knockout, which actually the world Governing body of Fide has sometimes employed as a format itself - going from 128 players to just 2 in the final. But this was a group knockout - which also depicts a realistic format, where the winners of each group play against each other.

The position before adjournment makes for a fascinating chess puzzle in itself. In fact, I have done a youtube video about it, for you to explore the winning combination in detail - enjoy! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XZPtdtPhwdM Best wishes Tryfon Hi all I am a chess [[aficionado]] [[because]] the [[ageing]] of about 6. I supposed I am [[very]] [[oversexed]] by chess, but hopefully not as much as the central character in this film.

In this film, the central character reflects a real chess player called Curt von Bardeleben who committed suicide in 1924. He is famous for a game he played against Steinitz, where a beautiful combination was played by Steinitz. Instead of resigning, he simply walked out of the tournament hall, never to return.

The social ineptness of the central character is unfortunately a treat of some of the more serious Grandmasters you sometimes get in chess tournaments. Chess I suppose is a very big sacrifice, and you can sometimes end up imbalanced in other areas of life. A major example of this is the chess legend Bobby Fischer. Although a genius, he was also very disturbed in many ways.

In the film, a World championship match is depicted, as between an Italian Grandmaster and Luzhin. The format is a knockout, which actually the world Governing body of Fide has sometimes employed as a format itself - going from 128 players to just 2 in the final. But this was a group knockout - which also depicts a realistic format, where the winners of each group play against each other.

The position before adjournment makes for a fascinating chess puzzle in itself. In fact, I have done a youtube video about it, for you to explore the winning combination in detail - enjoy! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XZPtdtPhwdM Best wishes Tryfon --------------------------------------------- Result 5026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[first]] saw Martin's Day when I was just 10 years old, at [[home]], on The [[Movie]] Channel, and [[still]] remember the [[impact]] it made on my [[life]]. It touched me as no other [[film]] had touched me, and I remember balling my eyes out.

After the [[first]] [[time]] I [[saw]] it, I couldn't find it anywhere [[else]]. I would [[ask]] [[around]] and no one had ever [[heard]] of the film! I [[guess]] it was one of those more [[rare]] [[films]] that not [[many]] people [[knew]] about, because no one, and I [[mean]] no one, knew what I was [[talking]] about. I searched and searched [[throughout]] the [[years]], [[checking]] video [[stores]] shelves and [[scanning]] cable TV [[listings]], but [[always]] came up short. [[Finally]], in 1996 I [[found]] out I could special order it, I did, and have [[probably]] watched it at [[least]] 50 [[times]] since--and it still makes me cry, [[every]] time.

Martin's Day is about Martin Steckert, a man who is in prison (but genuinely a good guy), who [[yearns]] to make it back to the special lake where he grew up as boy. This was a special place, where he lived off nature, spent time with his dog, and was left alone to enjoy life. Soon into the movie, he escapes and starts making his way back to the lake.

It isn't long before the cops find him, and Steckert grabs a child as a hostage to convince the police to back off. Soon Steckert and his hostage (the 2nd Martin) become best friends, and have many fun adventures together--from [[robbing]] a [[toy]] truck, to hi-jacking a train, all on the [[way]] to this [[special]] lake.

Throughout the [[movie]], Steckert has [[great]] flashbacks of him at the lake as a [[boy]].

I won't [[ruin]] the ending for you, but I will tell you, this [[movie]] is a must see. It is the [[BEST]] movie I have EVER [[seen]] in my [[life]]! I am, without a doubt, the [[biggest]] [[fan]] of this [[movie]] EVER! I managed to [[find]] the song that the two Martin's are [[singing]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]] ("I'm going back, to where I come from...). I'm even planning a [[trip]] to Canada to see the lake and [[cottage]] where Martin's Day was filmed. [[Crazy]], I know--but that movie just means so much to me. I [[firstly]] saw Martin's Day when I was just 10 years old, at [[housing]], on The [[Film]] Channel, and [[however]] remember the [[consequences]] it made on my [[living]]. It touched me as no other [[movie]] had touched me, and I remember balling my eyes out.

After the [[outset]] [[period]] I [[watched]] it, I couldn't find it anywhere [[further]]. I would [[demand]] [[throughout]] and no one had ever [[listened]] of the film! I [[guessing]] it was one of those more [[few]] [[cinematography]] that not [[myriad]] people [[overheard]] about, because no one, and I [[imply]] no one, knew what I was [[schmooze]] about. I searched and searched [[around]] the [[yr]], [[checked]] video [[boutiques]] shelves and [[scanned]] cable TV [[lists]], but [[steadily]] came up short. [[Lastly]], in 1996 I [[detected]] out I could special order it, I did, and have [[presumably]] watched it at [[slightest]] 50 [[moments]] since--and it still makes me cry, [[any]] time.

Martin's Day is about Martin Steckert, a man who is in prison (but genuinely a good guy), who [[craves]] to make it back to the special lake where he grew up as boy. This was a special place, where he lived off nature, spent time with his dog, and was left alone to enjoy life. Soon into the movie, he escapes and starts making his way back to the lake.

It isn't long before the cops find him, and Steckert grabs a child as a hostage to convince the police to back off. Soon Steckert and his hostage (the 2nd Martin) become best friends, and have many fun adventures together--from [[stealing]] a [[pawn]] truck, to hi-jacking a train, all on the [[routes]] to this [[particular]] lake.

Throughout the [[cinematography]], Steckert has [[wondrous]] flashbacks of him at the lake as a [[guy]].

I won't [[spoil]] the ending for you, but I will tell you, this [[kino]] is a must see. It is the [[NICEST]] movie I have EVER [[noticed]] in my [[iife]]! I am, without a doubt, the [[greater]] [[ventilator]] of this [[cinematography]] EVER! I managed to [[unearth]] the song that the two Martin's are [[sung]] [[around]] the [[flick]] ("I'm going back, to where I come from...). I'm even planning a [[tours]] to Canada to see the lake and [[cottages]] where Martin's Day was filmed. [[Coot]], I know--but that movie just means so much to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 5027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yaitate!! Japan is a really fun show and I really like it! It was shown in our country just recently in Hero TV and ABS-CBN every 5:30. It is about Azuma Kazuma who is trying to fulfill his dream to make Japanese bread that will represent his country. He is working in the Southern Toyo branch of Pantasia and he is also helping his friend (Tsukino Azusagawa) along with other bakers (like Kawachi Kyousuke and Kanmuri Shigeru) to beat St. Pierre and take control of Pantasia. They fight other skillful bakers from many other countries and not only learn to make different kinds of bread but also learn to cook other food. It is a really funny and unique anime because they also mimic characters from other anime(like Naruto, Detective Conan and One Piece)and famous people from real life. It is one of the best works of Takashi Haschiguchi and is really a must-see for people of different ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 5028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I did not really want to watch this one. It seemed to be an old Raj Kanwar movie which disgusted me [[even]] before I started watching it because I don't consider him even close to being mediocre as a filmmaker. The only reason I took this one is obviously the Shahrukh [[Khan]] [[appearance]] in the film. I had not even [[known]] what the film was all about because I was sure it would be just an ordinary fairy [[tale]]. So I just [[imagined]] a love [[story]] between Shahrukh Khan and Divya Bharti with a substantial supporting role by Rishi Kapoor who I thought would be playing her father or uncle. And to my complete shock, Rishi Kapoor is actually the hero! He is the one who romances the young Divya! I was saddened to find out that Shahrukh had a small part of no substance and that too, only in the second part of this [[idiotic]] film.

Just let me repeat the [[question]]: why would a 17 year-old lovely [[Divya]] have fallen for a 40-plus long haired, chubby, [[swollen]] [[piglet]] like Rishi Kapoor? Rishi Kapoor should be [[ashamed]] of [[taking]] this part; the only [[thing]] he did is ridiculing himself. He romanced a girl who [[could]] [[logically]] be younger than his own [[daughter]] and to make [[things]] [[worse]] -- acts like a teenager at his forties. On [[top]] of that, just to make himself more [[pathetic]], he plays a pop-star...

To make things clear, I have no problems with actors romancing ladies much younger than they themselves are. As long as they make a convincing couple, there should be no problem. In fact, leading actors have always been cast opposite young girls (Amitabh Bachchan-Sridevi, Mithun Chakraborty-Madhuri [[Dixit]], Shahrukh Khan-Deepika, Salman Khan-Sneha Ullal) and made the pairing pretty well. Also, I have nothing against Rishi Kapoor, I think he is a good [[actor]], and his act in Bobby is still well-engraved in my heart, but it's not that he looks in this film like, say, [[Shahrukh]] Khan, Salman Khan or Aamir Khan look today.

That was such a disappointment. Oh, and as for the reason every person actually watched this film, Shahrukh Khan made a good debut. He excelled in the very little his part allowed him to do. The late Divya Bharti made a promising debut as well. If you want to watch this film, go for the second half only. Personally, I would not do even that. I did not really want to watch this one. It seemed to be an old Raj Kanwar movie which disgusted me [[yet]] before I started watching it because I don't consider him even close to being mediocre as a filmmaker. The only reason I took this one is obviously the Shahrukh [[Kahn]] [[semblance]] in the film. I had not even [[renowned]] what the film was all about because I was sure it would be just an ordinary fairy [[fairytales]]. So I just [[conjured]] a love [[history]] between Shahrukh Khan and Divya Bharti with a substantial supporting role by Rishi Kapoor who I thought would be playing her father or uncle. And to my complete shock, Rishi Kapoor is actually the hero! He is the one who romances the young Divya! I was saddened to find out that Shahrukh had a small part of no substance and that too, only in the second part of this [[farcical]] film.

Just let me repeat the [[matter]]: why would a 17 year-old lovely [[Deirdre]] have fallen for a 40-plus long haired, chubby, [[puffy]] [[swine]] like Rishi Kapoor? Rishi Kapoor should be [[shamed]] of [[adopting]] this part; the only [[stuff]] he did is ridiculing himself. He romanced a girl who [[did]] [[understandably]] be younger than his own [[girl]] and to make [[items]] [[pire]] -- acts like a teenager at his forties. On [[supreme]] of that, just to make himself more [[lamentable]], he plays a pop-star...

To make things clear, I have no problems with actors romancing ladies much younger than they themselves are. As long as they make a convincing couple, there should be no problem. In fact, leading actors have always been cast opposite young girls (Amitabh Bachchan-Sridevi, Mithun Chakraborty-Madhuri [[Madhuri]], Shahrukh Khan-Deepika, Salman Khan-Sneha Ullal) and made the pairing pretty well. Also, I have nothing against Rishi Kapoor, I think he is a good [[protagonist]], and his act in Bobby is still well-engraved in my heart, but it's not that he looks in this film like, say, [[Rukh]] Khan, Salman Khan or Aamir Khan look today.

That was such a disappointment. Oh, and as for the reason every person actually watched this film, Shahrukh Khan made a good debut. He excelled in the very little his part allowed him to do. The late Divya Bharti made a promising debut as well. If you want to watch this film, go for the second half only. Personally, I would not do even that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen. The Footage is extraordinary, mesmerizing at times. It also received an Oscar for best photography, and deservedly so. I have many movies in my film collection and several more I've seen besides them, and not many of them are more beautifully or even equally as beautifully shot as this one.

It's unique and an overall great movie. The cast is terrific and do a great job in portraying their characters. We follow their destinies with devotion, and get very emotionally attached to them. Along the way, we also learn things about ourselves and our lives. I think much of this film for what it represent, and how it present it. I warmly recommend it --------------------------------------------- Result 5030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A [[retired]] diplomat, played nicely by [[Michael]] York, goes to Russia to [[get]] [[revenge]] on the Russian gangster that [[murdered]] the diplomat's [[policeman]] son. There the [[diplomat]] [[meets]] an [[exceptionally]] [[strong]] and decent Russian [[cop]] who [[helps]] him [[bring]] the Russian gangster to justice.

I [[remembered]] the old [[action]] flicks of the 1980s that always [[portray]] the [[Russians]] as evil [[bad]] guys out to undermine the righteous U.S. [[government]]. It's interesting to [[see]] this [[time]] the Russian [[guy]] as a hero.

Not a great flick, it's really typically a "B" action flick. [[Michael]] York lends some class to this mediocre movie. Alexander Nevsky, who plays the Russian cop is kind of "blah" but surprisingly has some [[chemistry]] with Michael York. [[Face]] it, Michael York is such a good actor that he'd have [[chemistry]] with anyone he's doing a scene with. Disappointingly, the handsome Adrian Paul gets killed within the first 15 minutes into the movie. Now, if Adrian Paul was in this movie longer, it would've been an above average "B" action flick. All I can say about Adrian Paul is that he is real nice to look at for the first 15 minutes of the movie. The [[villain]], [[played]] by Richard Tyson, is your typical bad guy. He's very [[blonde]] and very villainous in this movie.

Rent this flick if there is nothing else on TV to watch. It's okay. It doesn't suck too bad. The action scenes are decent. The acting [[could]] be better, the plot could've moved much faster, but hey, you get to see what Russia looks like today! A [[retiree]] diplomat, played nicely by [[Michal]] York, goes to Russia to [[obtain]] [[reprisals]] on the Russian gangster that [[killing]] the diplomat's [[policemen]] son. There the [[diplomats]] [[satisfies]] an [[unimaginably]] [[forceful]] and decent Russian [[policing]] who [[succour]] him [[bringing]] the Russian gangster to justice.

I [[recall]] the old [[measures]] flicks of the 1980s that always [[illustrate]] the [[Russkies]] as evil [[negative]] guys out to undermine the righteous U.S. [[administrations]]. It's interesting to [[consults]] this [[moment]] the Russian [[buddy]] as a hero.

Not a great flick, it's really typically a "B" action flick. [[Michaela]] York lends some class to this mediocre movie. Alexander Nevsky, who plays the Russian cop is kind of "blah" but surprisingly has some [[chemicals]] with Michael York. [[Encounter]] it, Michael York is such a good actor that he'd have [[chem]] with anyone he's doing a scene with. Disappointingly, the handsome Adrian Paul gets killed within the first 15 minutes into the movie. Now, if Adrian Paul was in this movie longer, it would've been an above average "B" action flick. All I can say about Adrian Paul is that he is real nice to look at for the first 15 minutes of the movie. The [[hoodlum]], [[served]] by Richard Tyson, is your typical bad guy. He's very [[lager]] and very villainous in this movie.

Rent this flick if there is nothing else on TV to watch. It's okay. It doesn't suck too bad. The action scenes are decent. The acting [[did]] be better, the plot could've moved much faster, but hey, you get to see what Russia looks like today! --------------------------------------------- Result 5031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[At]] first I didn't didn't like it that much, although I did. They didn't include the third Trueba generation, the love between [[Blanca]] and Pedro wans't well [[explained]] and some [[actors]] were too different from what I had imagined.

[[Later]] I realized that, had the [[movie]] been more [[loyal]] to the book, it would have been like five [[hours]] long, and would be [[kind]] of tedious. Now I [[like]] it very much, because my favourite [[characters]] are there as I portraited them. [[Clara]] really looks like an Angel in live, and her [[introduction]] to the story at the beggining of the film was [[fantastic]], [[loyal]] and short. Glenn [[Close]] is Ferula. I [[pictured]] her just like that, only not in [[mourning]] throughout the whole [[thing]]. Esteban is [[find]] enough. I never really liked his character, and, although I was interested in him, I hated him a [[lot]], more specially when he [[hit]] Clara. As in the book, the very [[last]] [[part]] is the most exciting one, and it has [[real]] history too there.

The [[movie]] is [[really]] [[good]], [[specially]] considering that it was a gringo film based [[upon]] a [[latin]] [[american]] [[book]]. Its [[amazing]] how [[many]] [[famous]] [[stars]] are there, don't you [[think]] so? [[In]] first I didn't didn't like it that much, although I did. They didn't include the third Trueba generation, the love between [[White]] and Pedro wans't well [[clarified]] and some [[protagonists]] were too different from what I had imagined.

[[Thereafter]] I realized that, had the [[kino]] been more [[faithful]] to the book, it would have been like five [[hour]] long, and would be [[genus]] of tedious. Now I [[fond]] it very much, because my favourite [[character]] are there as I portraited them. [[Claire]] really looks like an Angel in live, and her [[introducing]] to the story at the beggining of the film was [[wondrous]], [[trusty]] and short. Glenn [[Closings]] is Ferula. I [[photographing]] her just like that, only not in [[grieving]] throughout the whole [[stuff]]. Esteban is [[unearthed]] enough. I never really liked his character, and, although I was interested in him, I hated him a [[batch]], more specially when he [[hitting]] Clara. As in the book, the very [[latter]] [[portion]] is the most exciting one, and it has [[actual]] history too there.

The [[movies]] is [[truthfully]] [[alright]], [[concretely]] considering that it was a gringo film based [[after]] a [[latino]] [[americas]] [[books]]. Its [[fabulous]] how [[several]] [[notorious]] [[celebrity]] are there, don't you [[ideas]] so? --------------------------------------------- Result 5032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In a series chock-full of brilliant episodes, this one stands out as one of my very favorites. It's not the most profound episode, there's no great meaning or message. But it's a lot of fun, and there are some fine performances.

But what makes it really stand out for me is that it is, to my knowledge, the *only* Twilight Zone episode with a *double* snapper ending. The Zone is rightly famous for providing a big surprise at the end of a story. But this time, you get a surprise, and think that's that, but it turns out there's *another* surprise waiting. I just like that so much, that this is probably one of my two favorite episodes (the other being a deeper, more message-oriented one). --------------------------------------------- Result 5033 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Budget limitations, time [[restrictions]], [[shooting]] a script and then cutting it, cutting it, cutting it... This crew is a group of good, young filmmakers; thoughtful in this script - yes, allegorical - [[clever]] in zero-dollar effects when time and knowledge is all you have, relying on actors and friends and kind others for their time, devotion, locations; and getting a first feature in the can, a 1-in-1000 thing. These guys make films. Good ones. Check out their shorts [[collection]] "Heartland Horrors" and see the development. And I can vouch, working with them is about the most [[fun]] thing you'll do in the business. I'm stymied by harsh, insulting [[criticism]] for this film, wondering if one reviewer even heard one word of dialogue, pondered one thought or concept, or if all that was desired of this work was the visual gore of bashing and slashing to satisfy some mindless view of what horror should mean to an audience. Let "The Empty Acre" bring itself to you. Don't preconceive what you expect it should be just because it gets put in the horror/thriller genre due to its supernatural premise. It's a drama with depth beyond how far you can stick a blade into someone with a reverence for a message that doesn't assault your brain's visual center, but rather, draws upon one's empathetic imagination to experience other's suffering of mind and spirit. mark ridgway, Curtis, "The Empty Acre" Budget limitations, time [[limitation]], [[shootout]] a script and then cutting it, cutting it, cutting it... This crew is a group of good, young filmmakers; thoughtful in this script - yes, allegorical - [[malin]] in zero-dollar effects when time and knowledge is all you have, relying on actors and friends and kind others for their time, devotion, locations; and getting a first feature in the can, a 1-in-1000 thing. These guys make films. Good ones. Check out their shorts [[collects]] "Heartland Horrors" and see the development. And I can vouch, working with them is about the most [[amusing]] thing you'll do in the business. I'm stymied by harsh, insulting [[criticise]] for this film, wondering if one reviewer even heard one word of dialogue, pondered one thought or concept, or if all that was desired of this work was the visual gore of bashing and slashing to satisfy some mindless view of what horror should mean to an audience. Let "The Empty Acre" bring itself to you. Don't preconceive what you expect it should be just because it gets put in the horror/thriller genre due to its supernatural premise. It's a drama with depth beyond how far you can stick a blade into someone with a reverence for a message that doesn't assault your brain's visual center, but rather, draws upon one's empathetic imagination to experience other's suffering of mind and spirit. mark ridgway, Curtis, "The Empty Acre" --------------------------------------------- Result 5034 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is an odd [[film]] for me, as after I reviewed a nice film from a new film maker (FAR OUT by Phil Mucci), another writer/director, Ryan Jafri, contacted me and asked me to watch and review his film, THE [[CURE]]. I don't normally review films this way, but what the heck--I love shorts and couldn't wait to [[see]] another.

Interestingly, while it turned out I did like THE CURE, I was not [[thrilled]] by it and let Jafri know. To his credit, he [[encouraged]] me to review it anyway--giving it my honest [[appraisal]].

The film has tremendous style and as far as Jafri's direction goes, it's exceptional--especially for such an inexperienced film maker (it's his first film). The combination of exceptional choices of color, pacing and music that well-suited the film created a great sense of atmosphere. You really are pulled into the film and that is a credit to the film making. However, the thing I didn't love was some of the writing. While the basic idea was great, the ending was just too easy to foresee. I really would have loved the ending had it come as more of a surprise or there to have been an unexpected twist. However, considering that this film is from someone who shouldn't be able to make such a professional film given his experience, it bodes well for his [[future]]. [[Good]] [[job]]. This is an odd [[cinematography]] for me, as after I reviewed a nice film from a new film maker (FAR OUT by Phil Mucci), another writer/director, Ryan Jafri, contacted me and asked me to watch and review his film, THE [[CURING]]. I don't normally review films this way, but what the heck--I love shorts and couldn't wait to [[behold]] another.

Interestingly, while it turned out I did like THE CURE, I was not [[contented]] by it and let Jafri know. To his credit, he [[promoted]] me to review it anyway--giving it my honest [[estimation]].

The film has tremendous style and as far as Jafri's direction goes, it's exceptional--especially for such an inexperienced film maker (it's his first film). The combination of exceptional choices of color, pacing and music that well-suited the film created a great sense of atmosphere. You really are pulled into the film and that is a credit to the film making. However, the thing I didn't love was some of the writing. While the basic idea was great, the ending was just too easy to foresee. I really would have loved the ending had it come as more of a surprise or there to have been an unexpected twist. However, considering that this film is from someone who shouldn't be able to make such a professional film given his experience, it bodes well for his [[forthcoming]]. [[Well]] [[jobs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film was the [[worst]] film I have ever viewed. It was like a "homework [[assignment]]" for a film [[class]]. It totally misses the [[mark]] when it comes to the "message" it is TRYING to relay. [[Characters]] are over [[exaggerated]], poor acting and as for a plot...well it is utterly ridiculous. The [[cover]] shot is what made me [[think]] it may be a decent [[film]], the co-actor is [[handsome]] and that's about it. [[Moral]] of this [[movie]]: NEVER JUDGE A MOVIE BY IT'S [[COVER]]! Save your [[time]], money and energy and make your own [[home]] movie and you will be far [[better]] off than I. It was [[painful]] to watch and [[quite]] frankly I am surprised that [[anyone]] would spend [[money]] to [[make]] and [[distribute]] it! This film was the [[meanest]] film I have ever viewed. It was like a "homework [[allotment]]" for a film [[category]]. It totally misses the [[flagged]] when it comes to the "message" it is TRYING to relay. [[Nature]] are over [[inflated]], poor acting and as for a plot...well it is utterly ridiculous. The [[coverings]] shot is what made me [[believing]] it may be a decent [[kino]], the co-actor is [[sumptuous]] and that's about it. [[Morales]] of this [[filmmaking]]: NEVER JUDGE A MOVIE BY IT'S [[COVERINGS]]! Save your [[times]], money and energy and make your own [[homes]] movie and you will be far [[optimum]] off than I. It was [[hurtful]] to watch and [[pretty]] frankly I am surprised that [[everybody]] would spend [[moneys]] to [[deliver]] and [[dispense]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This would've been a sure [[fire]] classic had they chosen ALMOST ANYBODY ELSE for [[John]] Abraham. This [[guy]] is an [[awful]] [[actor]]. Be it [[comedy]], [[drama]], tear-jerkers etc. He [[stinks]]. It [[seemed]] like at some point Priyadarshan realized this too, and pretty much had him jumping around like a monkey in order to make his solo-scenes a bit funny.

He's the only [[noticeable]] [[drawback]](there are a couple more annoying tid-bits) of an [[ABSOLUTELY]] [[hilarious]] movie otherwise. [[Best]] [[comedy]] to [[come]] along in Bollywood [[since]] Hungama, IMO. Like Hungama, it's a situational comedy carried on the shoulders of a brilliant [[screenplay]] and of course,Akshay Kumar. This is probably his [[best]] performance to date. He better be a shoe-in for [[best]] comedian at [[every]] [[award]] function. AK's always been good at comedy, but he [[takes]] it to a different [[level]] here. The body language, the facial [[expressions]] and just the [[way]] he [[delivers]] [[every]] line. It's a [[genius]] performance. The packed [[theater]] was going nuts for pretty much the [[entire]] [[length]] of the [[movie]] and I don't [[think]] I've ever [[seen]] such an [[atmosphere]] for a Bollywood [[movie]] here in USA.

[[Garam]] [[Masala]] doesn't have one "lead" heroine. It stars 3 [[incredibly]] [[HOT]]+[[Beautiful]] [[girls]] who I [[thought]] did a [[fairly]] [[good]] [[job]]. Pretty sure they are all [[making]] their debuts. Paresh Rawal is [[solid]] as [[usual]], [[although]] his routine wears itself out after a while. Rajpal Yadav is his typical annoying self(sick of his over-the-top act in [[every]] movie). Rimi Sen has nothing to do.

[[Overall]], [[definitely]] worth a dekho. I'd [[say]] it's FUNNIER than [[No]] [[Entry]], and that's [[saying]] a lot. Could've been even better had they [[chosen]] [[someone]] a little more competent than [[John]] Abraham.

8/10 This would've been a sure [[feu]] classic had they chosen ALMOST ANYBODY ELSE for [[Giovanni]] Abraham. This [[fella]] is an [[odious]] [[actress]]. Be it [[humorous]], [[theatrical]], tear-jerkers etc. He [[sucks]]. It [[appeared]] like at some point Priyadarshan realized this too, and pretty much had him jumping around like a monkey in order to make his solo-scenes a bit funny.

He's the only [[conspicuous]] [[downside]](there are a couple more annoying tid-bits) of an [[ALTOGETHER]] [[funny]] movie otherwise. [[Better]] [[comedian]] to [[arrive]] along in Bollywood [[because]] Hungama, IMO. Like Hungama, it's a situational comedy carried on the shoulders of a brilliant [[scenario]] and of course,Akshay Kumar. This is probably his [[better]] performance to date. He better be a shoe-in for [[better]] comedian at [[each]] [[scholarship]] function. AK's always been good at comedy, but he [[pick]] it to a different [[grades]] here. The body language, the facial [[expression]] and just the [[route]] he [[offering]] [[any]] line. It's a [[engineers]] performance. The packed [[drama]] was going nuts for pretty much the [[total]] [[duration]] of the [[cinematography]] and I don't [[believing]] I've ever [[watched]] such an [[atmospheric]] for a Bollywood [[films]] here in USA.

[[Masala]] [[Garam]] doesn't have one "lead" heroine. It stars 3 [[terribly]] [[HOTTEST]]+[[Fantastic]] [[female]] who I [[figured]] did a [[rather]] [[buena]] [[jobs]]. Pretty sure they are all [[doing]] their debuts. Paresh Rawal is [[robust]] as [[ordinary]], [[nonetheless]] his routine wears itself out after a while. Rajpal Yadav is his typical annoying self(sick of his over-the-top act in [[each]] movie). Rimi Sen has nothing to do.

[[Totals]], [[surely]] worth a dekho. I'd [[says]] it's FUNNIER than [[Nope]] [[Entries]], and that's [[telling]] a lot. Could've been even better had they [[picks]] [[everyone]] a little more competent than [[Johannes]] Abraham.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well-made but [[basically]] dreary low-life melodrama which, according to the [[accompanying]] [[interview]] with lead Isabelle Huppert, writer/director Pialat [[infused]] with a good [[deal]] of autobiographical [[detail]]; [[given]] the [[mainly]] unsympathetic characters [[involved]], it doesn't do him any [[compliments]] - and he does [[seem]] to have been a troubled man, as Huppert also [[says]] that Pialat [[often]] disappeared for days on end during the shoot!

The acting is uniformly [[excellent]], however; [[despite]] their relatively young age, Huppert and co-star Gerard Depardieu (as the title [[character]]!) were already at the forefront of modern French stars - a status which, with varying degrees of success, they both still hold to this day.

I have 3 more of Pialat's films in my "VHS To Watch" pile, [[albeit]] all in [[French]] without [[English]] [[Subtitles]]; due to this [[fact]] but [[also]] LOULOU'S oppressive [[realism]] - in spite of its [[undeniable]] [[artistic]] merit - I can't [[say]] that I'm in any [[particular]] [[hurry]] to check them out now... Well-made but [[fundamentally]] dreary low-life melodrama which, according to the [[accompanied]] [[interviewing]] with lead Isabelle Huppert, writer/director Pialat [[brewed]] with a good [[address]] of autobiographical [[details]]; [[gave]] the [[especially]] unsympathetic characters [[entangled]], it doesn't do him any [[praising]] - and he does [[looks]] to have been a troubled man, as Huppert also [[say]] that Pialat [[normally]] disappeared for days on end during the shoot!

The acting is uniformly [[wondrous]], however; [[though]] their relatively young age, Huppert and co-star Gerard Depardieu (as the title [[traits]]!) were already at the forefront of modern French stars - a status which, with varying degrees of success, they both still hold to this day.

I have 3 more of Pialat's films in my "VHS To Watch" pile, [[while]] all in [[Frenchman]] without [[Frenchman]] [[Caption]]; due to this [[facto]] but [[additionally]] LOULOU'S oppressive [[reality]] - in spite of its [[uncontested]] [[arty]] merit - I can't [[told]] that I'm in any [[unique]] [[fast]] to check them out now... --------------------------------------------- Result 5038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Hello]] Dave Burning Paradise is a film for [[anyone]] who likes [[Jackie]] Chan and Indiana Jones. The films main protagonist is most [[definitely]] the bastard son of these two strange fathers. As for the other [[characters]] well they are [[familiar]] [[transformations]] of similar action film stereotypes. [[Where]] this film is [[original]] is in the [[blending]] of the [[traditional]] [[Hong]] Kong movie [[style]] with the Hollywood action [[adventure]]. Sadly this has not been [[true]] of the films he has made in Hollywood. [[Bonjour]] Dave Burning Paradise is a film for [[someone]] who likes [[Melanie]] Chan and Indiana Jones. The films main protagonist is most [[undeniably]] the bastard son of these two strange fathers. As for the other [[features]] well they are [[colloquial]] [[converting]] of similar action film stereotypes. [[Whenever]] this film is [[upfront]] is in the [[amalgam]] of the [[classical]] [[Kong]] Kong movie [[styles]] with the Hollywood action [[adventurer]]. Sadly this has not been [[authentic]] of the films he has made in Hollywood. --------------------------------------------- Result 5039 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Forget that this is a "B" [[movie]]. Forget that it is in many ways [[outdated]]. [[Instead]] give writer-director Ida Lupino much deserved credit for addressing a subject which at the time (1950) was taboo in Hollywood. To my knowledge, this was the first film to [[address]] the subject of rape and the emotional and mental effects that that crime has [[upon]] its victims.

[[Although]] much of the cast's acting is pedestrian at best, Mala Powers, who at the time was eighteen or nineteen, gives an [[excellent]] performance throughout as the [[traumatized]] young woman, Ann, who tries to run away from her "shame." Based on her work in this film, I'm surprised that she did not have a more successful acting career. Tod Andrews, too, has some fine moments as the minister who reaches out to help her.

Ms Lupino, obviously working on a limited budget, was still able to create some memorable scenes such as the pursuit through the streets and alleys leading to the rape, and the police lineup following it. And, she created a bittersweet ending which left me wondering if Ann really could ever have a normal life again. Forget that this is a "B" [[kino]]. Forget that it is in many ways [[lapsed]]. [[Alternatively]] give writer-director Ida Lupino much deserved credit for addressing a subject which at the time (1950) was taboo in Hollywood. To my knowledge, this was the first film to [[addressing]] the subject of rape and the emotional and mental effects that that crime has [[after]] its victims.

[[While]] much of the cast's acting is pedestrian at best, Mala Powers, who at the time was eighteen or nineteen, gives an [[wondrous]] performance throughout as the [[scarred]] young woman, Ann, who tries to run away from her "shame." Based on her work in this film, I'm surprised that she did not have a more successful acting career. Tod Andrews, too, has some fine moments as the minister who reaches out to help her.

Ms Lupino, obviously working on a limited budget, was still able to create some memorable scenes such as the pursuit through the streets and alleys leading to the rape, and the police lineup following it. And, she created a bittersweet ending which left me wondering if Ann really could ever have a normal life again. --------------------------------------------- Result 5040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As much as I love Rodney Dangerfield, this was a terrible movie. The plot was kind of a holistic rip off of various movies, but unfortunately they forgot to rip off any good jokes. In addition it was annoying and boring and that's being kind. If you're looking for a good laugh, rent a copy of Private Parts. --------------------------------------------- Result 5041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There seems to be only two types of reviews of this film on the net. Those who hate it and curse Ralph Bakshis name and those love it and call it work of genious. I'm inclined to be in the middle. I'am forced to agree with most of the criticisms of this film (e.g.the cruel cutting of the story, badly rotoscoped charecters, over acting etc...) But dispite this I still love this film. The rotoscoping (when done properly)adds an eerie lifelike dimension to the charecters and the final battle scene at the end of the film is fantastic. The surrealistic scenes when the nineriders chase Frodo are stylish and well executed and the musical score... magic. Sadly the bad points outweight film but if you can bring yourself to ignore them it is a great film.

(No doubt I'll be lynched by an angry mob of people who hate this film after writing this review, ah well, such is life) --------------------------------------------- Result 5042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sur mes lèvres or READ MY LIPS is fine little thriller that also examines the lives of 'outsiders', people who live in the periphery of our vision who struggle with the need to 'fit in'. Director Jacques Audiard with and co-writer Tonino Benacquista have created a tense, tight, completely entertaining little thriller that makes some significant statements about out of the norm individuals and their plights.

Carla (Emmanuelle Devos) is a plain Jane, mostly deaf, thirty something unnoticed secretary for a company whose life is one of social and sexual isolation and whose view of the future is rather bleak. Enter Paul (Vincent Cassel) a recent released ex-con parolee who responds to an ad to be Carla's assistant. There is a mutual physical repulsion at first meeting: Carla had hoped for a well-groomed, genteel man who might fulfill her fantasies and Paul is a coarse, unkempt sleazy guy who is not impressed with being a clerk. Their concepts change rather quickly when Paul salvages Carla's job by filling her request to steal a letter that would cost her her job and Paul discovers Carla's lip reading ability which he sees as a way to spy on the criminals from his past who threaten his life for money owed. So this odd couple of a team join forces and together enter a dangerous suspense filled ploy to gain Paul's safety and freedom. The relationship is full of twists and edge of the seat suspense with each of these unlikely characters fulfilling roles in their lives that fill the chinks in their walls of isolation in surprising ways.

Devos and Cassel deliver bravura performances and the remainder of the cast is uniformly strong. Once again Alexandre Desplat has produced a musical score that enhances the tension and cinematographer Mathieu Vadepied finds all the right lighting and angles to suggest the worlds of isolation of the characters as well as the Hitchcockian sense of suspense. Director Audiard wisely manipulates a factor that is at once sensitive and transformative for the story: he shows us the difference between 'hearing' the world with and without hearing aids and in doing so makes some powerful social comments. This is a fine film that remains in the ranks of the best of the French film noir genre. Recommended. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 5043 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I felt this movie [[started]] out well. The acting was spot on and I felt for all the characters situation, even though the true family unit was not completely revealed. We never got enough info on the father to truly feel his pain for his whole involvement or the build up for his animosity with Tobe. I mean in one scene you see him admiring her for tensity and in another scene he just about takes her head off. Another problem with the movie was it just unraveled and lost all focus by the end, and I was begging for it to just be over with. Any movie with such a long drawn out , and painful ending should never get an automatic rating of 7 or above just for the acting. We are looking at the over all quality of the movie experience. In the case of this movie the end is so bad I seriously contemplated just walking out of the theater. This movie pulled me in then just spit me out. I felt this movie [[embarked]] out well. The acting was spot on and I felt for all the characters situation, even though the true family unit was not completely revealed. We never got enough info on the father to truly feel his pain for his whole involvement or the build up for his animosity with Tobe. I mean in one scene you see him admiring her for tensity and in another scene he just about takes her head off. Another problem with the movie was it just unraveled and lost all focus by the end, and I was begging for it to just be over with. Any movie with such a long drawn out , and painful ending should never get an automatic rating of 7 or above just for the acting. We are looking at the over all quality of the movie experience. In the case of this movie the end is so bad I seriously contemplated just walking out of the theater. This movie pulled me in then just spit me out. --------------------------------------------- Result 5044 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Show]] favorites [[Green]] [[Arrow]] ([[introduced]] this season), Aquaman ([[introduced]] in Season 5), "[[Impulse]]" (Season 4), and Cyborg (Season 5) all come [[together]], along with [[Clark]], to stop one of Lex's [[evil]] [[plans]] in this [[thrilling]] mid-season episode.

Through his [[sophisticated]] [[technology]], Green [[Arrow]] [[learns]] that Lex Luthor is constructing laboratories across the [[world]] that [[hold]] people [[induced]] by the meteor substance kryptonite and people with [[abilities]] to [[run]] tests on. Green [[Arrow]] over the [[past]] months has allied [[Arthur]] [[Curry]] (Aqua), Bart Allen ([[Impulse]]) and [[Victor]] Stone (Cyborg) to [[stop]] Lex and [[destroy]] these [[facilities]]. After recruiting [[Clark]] to [[help]], the team puts on quite a show in [[interrogating]] and [[destroying]] a [[local]] laboratory.

This episode is [[incredible]]. Full of [[action]], [[humor]], and [[fabulous]] dialog, it feels more like a movie. It is full of entertainment and provides as a springboard for the most interesting storyline of the sixth season. [[Shows]] favorites [[Archer]] [[Arrows]] ([[lodged]] this season), Aquaman ([[brought]] in Season 5), "[[Stimulus]]" (Season 4), and Cyborg (Season 5) all come [[jointly]], along with [[Clarke]], to stop one of Lex's [[diabolic]] [[systems]] in this [[riveting]] mid-season episode.

Through his [[complex]] [[technique]], Green [[Arrows]] [[taught]] that Lex Luthor is constructing laboratories across the [[monde]] that [[held]] people [[induce]] by the meteor substance kryptonite and people with [[competence]] to [[running]] tests on. Green [[Arrows]] over the [[previous]] months has allied [[Arturo]] [[Carey]] (Aqua), Bart Allen ([[Impetus]]) and [[Vittorio]] Stone (Cyborg) to [[cease]] Lex and [[ruin]] these [[installation]]. After recruiting [[Clarke]] to [[assists]], the team puts on quite a show in [[interview]] and [[demolished]] a [[locale]] laboratory.

This episode is [[unthinkable]]. Full of [[activities]], [[comedy]], and [[super]] dialog, it feels more like a movie. It is full of entertainment and provides as a springboard for the most interesting storyline of the sixth season. --------------------------------------------- Result 5045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was probably the worst movie i have ever seen in my life!! It was stupid there was no plot and the special affects were ridiculous!! And i have never seen such bad acting in my life! The only good part about the movie were all the hot guys(especially Drew Fuller). I don't know what these people were thinking when they made this movie!! I didn't even want to finish the whole thing because you get to this point in the movie where the guys are all in bed touching themselves. I mean it was like some kind of sick and twisted kiddy porn! I would advise anyone who has heard of this movie and was interested in seeing it to just forget about it and find another movie to watch! I was very disappointed!! The whole movie was a complete waste of time in my opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 5046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm not sure what. I just couldn't [[laugh]] at it. I had an open [[mind]]. I didn't [[want]] to be a tight-@ss about it. But I [[seriously]] just couldn't laugh at this [[film]]. It was just not [[funny]] to me. Some parts it [[seemed]] like Ben Stiller and [[Jack]] [[Black]] tried too [[hard]]. [[Just]] because you put two very [[funny]] [[men]] together doesn't [[mean]] that this is going to be an [[excellent]] [[comedy]]. Some [[movies]] just shouldn't be [[made]]. This is one of them. Because it does a lot of [[old]] jokes and the acting was just [[stupid]]. I know, I know it's a [[comedy]]. [[Sort]] of at [[least]]. But I was just not [[impressed]]. I'm [[sorry]], but I cannot give this anything [[lower]] than a two. And that's all I'm [[giving]].

2/10 I'm not sure what. I just couldn't [[chuckles]] at it. I had an open [[intellect]]. I didn't [[wanted]] to be a tight-@ss about it. But I [[conscientiously]] just couldn't laugh at this [[flick]]. It was just not [[hilarious]] to me. Some parts it [[sounded]] like Ben Stiller and [[Jacque]] [[Negra]] tried too [[dur]]. [[Virtuous]] because you put two very [[fun]] [[man]] together doesn't [[signify]] that this is going to be an [[sumptuous]] [[humour]]. Some [[filmmaking]] just shouldn't be [[introduced]]. This is one of them. Because it does a lot of [[elderly]] jokes and the acting was just [[dumb]]. I know, I know it's a [[farce]]. [[Sorts]] of at [[lowest]]. But I was just not [[surprising]]. I'm [[apologise]], but I cannot give this anything [[weakest]] than a two. And that's all I'm [[confer]].

2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5047 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Every [[great]] [[gangster]] [[movie]] has under-currents of human [[drama]]. Don't expect an emotional story of [[guilt]], retribution and [[despair]] from "Scarface". This is a tale of ferocious greed, corruption, and power. The darker side of the fabled "American Dream".

[[Anybody]] [[complaining]] about the "cheesiness" of this film is missing the point. The superficial characters, cheesy music, and dated fashions further fuel the [[criticism]] of this life of diabolical excess. Nothing in the lives of these characters really matter, not on any human level at least. In fact the film practically borderlines satire, ironic considering all the gangsta rappers that were positively inspired by the lifestyle of Tony Montana.

This isn't Brian DePalma's strongest directorial effort, it is occasionally excellent and well-handled (particularly the memorable finale), but frequently sinks to sloppy and misled. Thankfully, it is supported by a very strong script by Oliver Stone (probably good therapy for him, considering the coke habit he was tackling at the time). The themes are consistent, with the focus primarily on the life of Tony Montana, and the evolution of his character as he is consumed by greed and power. The dialogue is also excellent, see-sawing comfortably between humour and drama. There are many stand-out lines, which have since wormed their way into popular culture in one form or another.

The cast help make it what it is as well, but this is really Pacino's film. One of his earlier less subtle performances (something much more common from him nowadays), this is a world entirely separate from Michael Corleone and Frank Serpico. Yet he is as watchable here as ever, in very entertaining (and intentionally over-the-top) form. It is hard to imagine another Tony Montana after seeing this film, in possibly one of the most mimicked performances ever. Pfeiffer stood out as dull and uncomfortable on first viewing, but I've come to realize how she plays out the part of the bored little wife. Not an exceptional effort, but unfairly misjudged. The supporting players are very good too, particularly Paul Shenar as the suave Alejandro Sosa.

Powerful, occasionally humorous, sometimes shocking, and continually controversial. "Scarface" is one of the films of the eighties (whatever that might mean to you). An essential and accessible gangster flick, and a pop-culture landmark. 9/10 Every [[wondrous]] [[hoodlum]] [[movies]] has under-currents of human [[theater]]. Don't expect an emotional story of [[blame]], retribution and [[despondency]] from "Scarface". This is a tale of ferocious greed, corruption, and power. The darker side of the fabled "American Dream".

[[Person]] [[whining]] about the "cheesiness" of this film is missing the point. The superficial characters, cheesy music, and dated fashions further fuel the [[criticized]] of this life of diabolical excess. Nothing in the lives of these characters really matter, not on any human level at least. In fact the film practically borderlines satire, ironic considering all the gangsta rappers that were positively inspired by the lifestyle of Tony Montana.

This isn't Brian DePalma's strongest directorial effort, it is occasionally excellent and well-handled (particularly the memorable finale), but frequently sinks to sloppy and misled. Thankfully, it is supported by a very strong script by Oliver Stone (probably good therapy for him, considering the coke habit he was tackling at the time). The themes are consistent, with the focus primarily on the life of Tony Montana, and the evolution of his character as he is consumed by greed and power. The dialogue is also excellent, see-sawing comfortably between humour and drama. There are many stand-out lines, which have since wormed their way into popular culture in one form or another.

The cast help make it what it is as well, but this is really Pacino's film. One of his earlier less subtle performances (something much more common from him nowadays), this is a world entirely separate from Michael Corleone and Frank Serpico. Yet he is as watchable here as ever, in very entertaining (and intentionally over-the-top) form. It is hard to imagine another Tony Montana after seeing this film, in possibly one of the most mimicked performances ever. Pfeiffer stood out as dull and uncomfortable on first viewing, but I've come to realize how she plays out the part of the bored little wife. Not an exceptional effort, but unfairly misjudged. The supporting players are very good too, particularly Paul Shenar as the suave Alejandro Sosa.

Powerful, occasionally humorous, sometimes shocking, and continually controversial. "Scarface" is one of the films of the eighties (whatever that might mean to you). An essential and accessible gangster flick, and a pop-culture landmark. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[John]] Garfield plays a Marine who is [[blinded]] by a [[grenade]] while fighting on Guadalcanal and who has to [[learn]] to [[live]] with his [[disability]]. He has all the stereotypical notions about blindness, and is sure he'll be a [[burden]] to [[everyone]]. The [[hospital]] [[staff]] and his [[fellow]] [[wounded]] [[Marines]] can't [[get]] through to him. Neither can his [[girl]] back [[home]] played by Eleanor [[Parker]]. He's stubborn and blinded by his own [[fears]], self [[pity]], and [[prejudices]]. It's a [[complex]] role that Garfield [[carries]] off memorably in a [[great]] performance that keeps one watching in spite of the ever present syrupy melodrama. The best scenes are on Guadalcanal, where he's in a machine gun nest trying to fend off the [[advancing]] Japanese soldiers in a hellish looking night [[time]] [[battle]], and [[later]] a [[dream]] [[sequence]] in the hospital where he [[sees]] himself [[walking]] down a train [[platform]] with a white cane, [[dark]] glasses, and holding out a tin cup, all the while his girlfriend walks backward away from the [[camera]]. [[Johannes]] Garfield plays a Marine who is [[blind]] by a [[pomegranate]] while fighting on Guadalcanal and who has to [[learnt]] to [[vivo]] with his [[disabilities]]. He has all the stereotypical notions about blindness, and is sure he'll be a [[payload]] to [[anyone]]. The [[clinic]] [[personnel]] and his [[colleagues]] [[injured]] [[Marina]] can't [[got]] through to him. Neither can his [[dame]] back [[households]] played by Eleanor [[Barker]]. He's stubborn and blinded by his own [[jitters]], self [[compassion]], and [[misconceptions]]. It's a [[complicate]] role that Garfield [[carrying]] off memorably in a [[wondrous]] performance that keeps one watching in spite of the ever present syrupy melodrama. The best scenes are on Guadalcanal, where he's in a machine gun nest trying to fend off the [[promoting]] Japanese soldiers in a hellish looking night [[period]] [[tussle]], and [[then]] a [[slumber]] [[sequences]] in the hospital where he [[believes]] himself [[marching]] down a train [[platforms]] with a white cane, [[somber]] glasses, and holding out a tin cup, all the while his girlfriend walks backward away from the [[cameras]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5049 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Priyadarshan- whenever a person heard his name, his first thought would be 'comedy'. That is what this man is known for, or rather, was known for. After giving stupendous blockbuster comedies like Hungama, Hera Pheri and Hunchul, his train derailed slowly with movies like Chupke Chupke and a few others whose names I can't recollect for now. Now with hideous films like Dhol, the first word that would strike our mind after hearing his name would be- 'torture'.

Dhol is a mixture of bad, unfunny toilet jokes, somewhat of drama, poor suspense and idiocracy. The only good thing about Dhol was one or two of the scenes which were funny, though not witty, and secondly, except for Kunal Khemu and the hysterical grandma, the acting was decent.

Speaking of the acting, I felt that Rajpal Yadav and Sharman Joshi were at the top (if you compare them with the others in the movie), then came Tusshar Kapoor, then Tanushree and at the last the two idiots mentioned above. The flaw in Kunal Khemu was that he was loud in his jokes and even in his acting. The grandma, firstly resembled a ghost, plus she was not funny at all but rather silly.

The plot was the same, seen before one. Four boys behind girls and in need of money, but with a few twists. There is a 'bad' man who is preposterously stupid and dumb. And at last, the good wins over the bad and everything is fine. The idea of having a Dhol with a tone full of cash in it is simply not witty.

The worst thing about the movie is its length. After an hour or so, you get exhausted and want to leave the theater. But being a critic, it is my responsibility to tolerated the whole two and half hours of the movie. THe movie goes on and on and the same kind of jokes are repeated again and again and the situations are perennial just at a different place.

If your mother-in-law has arrived to your house and starts mocking you at everything, then send her for this movie and have fun. 3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Falls]] into the [[film]] category of "Way too ridiculous in the [[dialogue]] and execution departments to be [[taken]] seriously". Whereas Shriek If You [[Know]] What I [[Did]] [[Last]] [[Friday]] the Thirteenth or My Boyfriend's Back know they are [[bad]], Scarecrows doesn't. [[Evil]] [[Dead]] set such a [[high]] [[standard]] for the comedic [[horror]] on a [[budget]] genre, that Scarecrows is [[simply]] out of place.

Suspicions of inexperience are [[immediately]] at play as there are no [[hints]] of noise or vibration in the hull and cockpit of an airborne plane. The repeated [[display]] of a [[picture]] of 3 men just screams for a [[story]] [[arc]], but [[nothing]] [[comes]]. [[Although]] the men are obviously the scarecrows, there is no explanation.

Knowing this [[film]] is too serious for it's own good may produce some [[grins]]. I don't [[recall]] if Joe Bob Briggs ever previewed Scarecrows, but I [[believe]] that he wouldn't [[stoop]] this low. [[However]], with an IMDb [[rating]] of over 6, there are [[many]] people that disagree. [[Fall]] into the [[cinematography]] category of "Way too ridiculous in the [[discussions]] and execution departments to be [[took]] seriously". Whereas Shriek If You [[Savoir]] What I [[Ai]] [[Final]] [[Wednesday]] the Thirteenth or My Boyfriend's Back know they are [[negative]], Scarecrows doesn't. [[Devilish]] [[Deaths]] set such a [[highest]] [[norms]] for the comedic [[monstrosity]] on a [[budgets]] genre, that Scarecrows is [[exclusively]] out of place.

Suspicions of inexperience are [[expeditiously]] at play as there are no [[suggestions]] of noise or vibration in the hull and cockpit of an airborne plane. The repeated [[demonstrating]] of a [[photographing]] of 3 men just screams for a [[conte]] [[archangel]], but [[none]] [[arrives]]. [[Though]] the men are obviously the scarecrows, there is no explanation.

Knowing this [[filmmaking]] is too serious for it's own good may produce some [[smiles]]. I don't [[rappel]] if Joe Bob Briggs ever previewed Scarecrows, but I [[reckon]] that he wouldn't [[porch]] this low. [[Conversely]], with an IMDb [[appraisals]] of over 6, there are [[countless]] people that disagree. --------------------------------------------- Result 5051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] ** [[CONTAINS]] SPOILERS **

The truly exquisite Sean Young (who in some scenes, with her hair poofed up, looks something like Elizabeth Taylor) is striking in her [[opening]] moments in this [[film]]. Sitting in the back of a police car waiting to signal a bust, her face and body are tense and distracted. [[Unfortunately]], once the bust is over Young's [[strained]] [[demeanor]] never changes. This is one fatally [[inhibited]] actress.

One has only to compare Young to the performer playing her coworker and best friend, Arnetia Walker, to grasp what is missing in Young. Walker is open, emotional, and at ease at all times...in that there's no apparent barrier between what she may be feeling and her expression of it. She is an open book. Young, on the other hand, acts in the skittish, self-conscious way you might expect your neighbor to act were they suddenly thrown into starring in a film. Basically, she doesn't have a clue.

With this major void looming at the center of the movie, we're left to ponder the implausiblities of the story. For instance, after Miss Young is kidnapped by the criminal she's trailing and locked in a closet, she breaks the door down when left alone. Granted, she's dressed only in a bra and panties, but in a similar situation, with a psycho captor due to return any moment, would you head for the door...or take the time to go through his dresser, take out some clothes and get dressed? I would guess that this and other scenes are trying to suggest some sort of mixed emotions Miss Young's character is experiencing, but Young can not convey this type of complexity.

There are a few affecting moments in the film, such as the short police interviews with the criminal's past victims, but overall this is an aimless endeavor. It's too bad Miss Young was replaced while filming the pair of comic book style films that might have exploited her limitations with some humor (BATMAN and DICK TRACY), because her floundering while attempting to play actual people is oddly touching. Watching Miss Young try to act, at least in this "thriller", is a sad spectacle. ** [[ENCOMPASS]] SPOILERS **

The truly exquisite Sean Young (who in some scenes, with her hair poofed up, looks something like Elizabeth Taylor) is striking in her [[initiation]] moments in this [[filmmaking]]. Sitting in the back of a police car waiting to signal a bust, her face and body are tense and distracted. [[Regrettably]], once the bust is over Young's [[tensed]] [[demeanour]] never changes. This is one fatally [[hampered]] actress.

One has only to compare Young to the performer playing her coworker and best friend, Arnetia Walker, to grasp what is missing in Young. Walker is open, emotional, and at ease at all times...in that there's no apparent barrier between what she may be feeling and her expression of it. She is an open book. Young, on the other hand, acts in the skittish, self-conscious way you might expect your neighbor to act were they suddenly thrown into starring in a film. Basically, she doesn't have a clue.

With this major void looming at the center of the movie, we're left to ponder the implausiblities of the story. For instance, after Miss Young is kidnapped by the criminal she's trailing and locked in a closet, she breaks the door down when left alone. Granted, she's dressed only in a bra and panties, but in a similar situation, with a psycho captor due to return any moment, would you head for the door...or take the time to go through his dresser, take out some clothes and get dressed? I would guess that this and other scenes are trying to suggest some sort of mixed emotions Miss Young's character is experiencing, but Young can not convey this type of complexity.

There are a few affecting moments in the film, such as the short police interviews with the criminal's past victims, but overall this is an aimless endeavor. It's too bad Miss Young was replaced while filming the pair of comic book style films that might have exploited her limitations with some humor (BATMAN and DICK TRACY), because her floundering while attempting to play actual people is oddly touching. Watching Miss Young try to act, at least in this "thriller", is a sad spectacle. --------------------------------------------- Result 5052 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Where to begin?

#1 Amitabh's son, played by Akshaye Khanna, is 30.

Amitabh's been in prison for 33+ years... he

A) Telepathically transmitted the sperm home?

B) Asked a nice Pakistani guard to mail it for him?

C) They allow conjugal visits in secret Pakistani Jails

D) All of the above

E) The producers were having a little too much bhang at

the time they approved the script?

#2) Amrita Rao (Yummm!) wants Khanna - he's yum, yum, yummy... and apparently he wants her - who wouldn't, right?!... But, when her dad gets ratted out, and then killed (I hardly think this is a 'spoiler' as you'd have to be brain-dead and blind not to see this coming in the film) he's pretty emotionless towards this catastrophe and with the tip (metaphorically) of his hat, leaves her behind to save his dad, never mind her loss, and says (paraphrasing) "If god wills it, we'll meet again"... Basically meaning, "I'm gonna get my dad and MY job done, sorry for your loss - CYA! Buh Bye!" - callus beyond even low-life Hollywood standards...

#3) There are so many holes in this horrible waste of time called a movie, that you can drive all the jeeps, trucks camels and any extra stuff through it. Pass - really, complete and total waste of time - Oh! There is a great dance sequence (yes, only one - as in dance sequence - regardless of quality) great belly dancing - but NOT worth watching just for this.

Rent Veer-Zaara or Lakshya (will Hrithik Roshan ever take acting lessons?) for better Indo-Pak conflict movies... In fact, Veer-Zaara is pretty damned good - 7.5/8 I'd say! --------------------------------------------- Result 5053 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The world at war is one of the best documentaries about world war 2.

The 24 episodes cover the war and what it was like in the countries involved in it. The first episode tells us how the Hitler came to power, and how he was able to build up one of the strongest armies in the world. They also fucus on the military actions taken during the war, and the holocaust. One of the strongest and best documentaries ever made. All of you must watch this. Perfection! 10/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 5054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this movie, and what a waste of time. The movie was predictable and slow. It's basically the Mormon bad news bears that play church sanctioned basketball. Rather than watching this movie, I should have had a root canal. The cameo performances were obviously driven by sponsorship / funding. This movie had potential due to the outrageous behavior that is exhibited by Mormons when they play church sanctioned basketball, however because it's rated PG, the true nature of the spectacle could not be transfered to film. The acting is horrible with the exception of Clint Howard and Fred Willard. Thurl Bailey's appearance in the film was completely unnecessary. --------------------------------------------- Result 5055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[movie]] is a [[total]] crap. We have two [[good]] [[actors]] who are miscast and a meat-head of an actor Salman [[Khan]] just to [[attract]] the female [[audience]]. The [[story]] is a [[crap]]. The [[characters]] poorly [[sketched]]. Non existent [[story]] [[telling]]. [[No]] [[editing]] to [[speak]] of. Ajay Devgan as a [[Rock]] [[Star]]..that is a dream in itself. The [[movie]] drags along to the point of decadence. The whole [[charade]] about Arjun bringing his Manna to London, let him grope his girlfriend and [[let]] him not play at Wembley (Vimbley in the [[dubbing]] process) is [[absurd]]. Salman Khan's over the [[top]] acting or faking is too painful to watch. I remember seeing some [[good]] [[movies]] from this Producer Vipul Shah but this is not one of them. It seems all the good directors are falling prey to the Box Office mania..that the Mumbai Media Morons have [[created]]. This is [[yet]] another [[crap]] movie in the lines of "[[Wanted]]" with [[idiot]] actor like Salman [[Khan]] who has no place in a Good Hindi [[Cinema]]. He is good to the Indian Cinema as Titanic was to the [[Winter]] [[Cruise]] [[Business]]. [[On]] a [[positive]] note-I like Asin [[character]] dancing Bharatnatyam when she [[changes]] to the Western style dancing when the [[teacher]] is not looking. The [[filmmaking]] is a [[utter]] crap. We have two [[alright]] [[protagonists]] who are miscast and a meat-head of an actor Salman [[Kahn]] just to [[luring]] the female [[audiences]]. The [[conte]] is a [[shit]]. The [[features]] poorly [[described]]. Non existent [[histories]] [[saying]]. [[Nope]] [[edited]] to [[talk]] of. Ajay Devgan as a [[Rocks]] [[Stars]]..that is a dream in itself. The [[flick]] drags along to the point of decadence. The whole [[travesty]] about Arjun bringing his Manna to London, let him grope his girlfriend and [[letting]] him not play at Wembley (Vimbley in the [[copying]] process) is [[senseless]]. Salman Khan's over the [[supreme]] acting or faking is too painful to watch. I remember seeing some [[buena]] [[cinematographic]] from this Producer Vipul Shah but this is not one of them. It seems all the good directors are falling prey to the Box Office mania..that the Mumbai Media Morons have [[engendered]]. This is [[however]] another [[bollocks]] movie in the lines of "[[Wanna]]" with [[knucklehead]] actor like Salman [[Kahn]] who has no place in a Good Hindi [[Theatre]]. He is good to the Indian Cinema as Titanic was to the [[Winters]] [[Cruising]] [[Enterprise]]. [[Onto]] a [[auspicious]] note-I like Asin [[personages]] dancing Bharatnatyam when she [[changing]] to the Western style dancing when the [[maestro]] is not looking. --------------------------------------------- Result 5056 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Come on Tina Fey you can do better then this. As soon as the [[movie]] [[started]] i [[knew]] how it [[would]] [[end]]. Sure it was funny at times. Even [[laugh]] out [[loud]] funny. But there isn't [[enough]] [[laughs]] to [[save]] this movie. I don't [[recommend]] buying this. At the most i recommend [[renting]] it but [[thats]] all. [[Baby]] [[Mama]] has some [[funny]] scenes but is [[predictable]] and fails to have the heartwarming ending it strives for.

Tina [[Fey]] and Amy Poalher [[made]] a good team. Mean Girls is one of my favorite movies. Tina Fey and Amy Poalher both did great in that and they do good in this. But this isn't there best. Baby Mama had a great supporting cast. Dane Cook, Sigourney Weaver and Steve Martin add to the casts greatness.

Another [[pregnancy]] movie has hit the [[cinema]] world. After the great Knocked Up and Juno, Baby Mama [[looks]] very average when compared. Knocked Up and Juno are Hilarious, Heartwarming and have endings that leave you with a [[smile]] on your [[face]]. [[Baby]] Mama's ending was unfunny and [[dull]].

Baby Mama wasn't the best comedy of the [[year]] and it doesn't [[try]] to be. I recommend it but don't expect it to be totally [[hilarious]]. [[Expect]] a average [[comedy]] that doesn't give the big emotional ending it [[tries]] to have. I give [[Baby]] [[Mama]].....

4/10 Come on Tina Fey you can do better then this. As soon as the [[filmmaking]] [[launched]] i [[overheard]] how it [[could]] [[terminates]]. Sure it was funny at times. Even [[laughs]] out [[noisy]] funny. But there isn't [[adequately]] [[laughed]] to [[saving]] this movie. I don't [[recommends]] buying this. At the most i recommend [[leasing]] it but [[becuase]] all. [[Honey]] [[Mom]] has some [[hilarious]] scenes but is [[foreseeable]] and fails to have the heartwarming ending it strives for.

Tina [[Fay]] and Amy Poalher [[accomplished]] a good team. Mean Girls is one of my favorite movies. Tina Fey and Amy Poalher both did great in that and they do good in this. But this isn't there best. Baby Mama had a great supporting cast. Dane Cook, Sigourney Weaver and Steve Martin add to the casts greatness.

Another [[childbirth]] movie has hit the [[filmmaking]] world. After the great Knocked Up and Juno, Baby Mama [[seems]] very average when compared. Knocked Up and Juno are Hilarious, Heartwarming and have endings that leave you with a [[smiles]] on your [[confronts]]. [[Babe]] Mama's ending was unfunny and [[boring]].

Baby Mama wasn't the best comedy of the [[annum]] and it doesn't [[attempted]] to be. I recommend it but don't expect it to be totally [[comic]]. [[Expecting]] a average [[parody]] that doesn't give the big emotional ending it [[attempted]] to have. I give [[Babe]] [[Mommy]].....

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5057 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] was [[Excellent]], I thought that the [[original]] one was quiet [[mediocre]]. This one however [[got]] all the ingredients, a factory 1970 Hemi Challenger with 4 speed transmission that really shows that Mother Mopar knew how to build the best muscle cars! I was in Chrysler heaven every [[time]] Kowalski floored that big block Hemi, and he sure did that a lot :) This [[films]] was [[Magnifique]], I thought that the [[upfront]] one was quiet [[lackluster]]. This one however [[did]] all the ingredients, a factory 1970 Hemi Challenger with 4 speed transmission that really shows that Mother Mopar knew how to build the best muscle cars! I was in Chrysler heaven every [[moment]] Kowalski floored that big block Hemi, and he sure did that a lot :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5058 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Just]] a comment on [[New]] Orleans accents...

An [[earlier]] [[reviewer]] [[noted]] the following: "This [[film]], [[could]] have been shot in [[New]] York, or another Northern big city because it [[presents]] us with [[characters]] that speak more like "broklynese" than [[maybe]] a Southern accent one might [[hear]] in that [[part]] of the [[country]]." There was [[also]] another [[comment]] along these lines from an English [[reviewer]].

Many people in [[New]] Orleans do, in fact, sound "broklynese". I have never [[found]] out why. (It's [[mentioned]] in "A [[Confederacy]] of Dunces" by [[John]] Kennedy Toole.) I always [[appreciate]] [[movies]] [[taking]] place in [[New]] Orleans that include this [[detail]], as this one did. Too often it's just the Hollywood version of the standard [[Southern]] accent. [[Only]] a comment on [[Nuevo]] Orleans accents...

An [[ago]] [[testers]] [[commented]] the following: "This [[cinematography]], [[would]] have been shot in [[Novel]] York, or another Northern big city because it [[present]] us with [[hallmarks]] that speak more like "broklynese" than [[likely]] a Southern accent one might [[heed]] in that [[parties]] of the [[nations]]." There was [[apart]] another [[remarks]] along these lines from an English [[testers]].

Many people in [[Novo]] Orleans do, in fact, sound "broklynese". I have never [[detected]] out why. (It's [[talked]] in "A [[Confederate]] of Dunces" by [[Johannes]] Kennedy Toole.) I always [[appreciative]] [[cinematography]] [[picked]] place in [[Novel]] Orleans that include this [[clarification]], as this one did. Too often it's just the Hollywood version of the standard [[Southerly]] accent. --------------------------------------------- Result 5059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is absolutely horrific. One of the worst movies I've ever seen. The story does nearly not exist, the characters are full of stereotypes and the Special-FX only make you laugh. The only remarkable thing about this movie is the guest appearance of the Rapper Coolio as some kind of police officer.

If this film was supposed to be a comedy I didn't quite get the point. If you want to watch this movie: please get yourself drunk first and then prepare for some good laughs...especially when the first Special-FX appear on the screen.

But if you like trash movies made on the cheap: this film is a must-see for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 5060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Could anyone please stop John Carpenter from continuously and deliberately ruining his reputation? How low can you go? It seems this man has lost any self respect.

This episode looks like it has been done by a film student, it isn't even worth beginning to talk about WHAT was bad, because it was just a borefest, directed by somebody with no talent as a filmmaker or without any motivation...

Come on, Mr. Carpenter, please retire immediately with a rest of self-esteem and stop spilling out trash like this in a bad tradition from Escape from L.A. to Ghosts of Mars.

Get drunk instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 5061 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Masayuki Suo, who directed this fine film, is on a role. After the decent "Fancy Dance" and the classic (in Japan, anyway) college-sumo comedy "Shiko Funjatta", Suo has followed his own huge footsteps with a smashing success.

The story is engaging. We both laugh often (Naoto Takenaka is hilarious, as he is in Suo's two previous films) and really root for the characters. But to me the big bonus is the look this movie gives the viewer into Japanese society - real life in Japan. Suo has a knack for showing real-life activities with entertaining flair. The result is a movie that will pull you in, make you laugh, make you think, and both entertain you and give you insight into today's Japan.

Also look for the the main 8 actors from Shiko Funjatta, as they all appear again in various roles, from supporting characters (Takenaka) to short cameos (many). --------------------------------------------- Result 5062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] That was the [[first]] thing that sprang to mind as I watched the closing [[credits]] to Europa [[make]] there was [[across]] the screen, never in my entire life have I [[seen]] a [[film]] of such technical [[genius]], the [[visuals]] of Europa are so [[impressive]] that any [[film]] I watch in it's [[wake]] will only pale in comparison, [[forget]] your Michael Bay, Ridley Scott slick Hollywood [[cinematography]], [[Europa]] has more ethereal [[beauty]] than [[anything]] those two [[could]] [[conjure]] up in a [[million]] [[years]]. Now I'd be the [[first]] to [[hail]] [[Lars]] von Trier a [[genius]] just off the back of his films Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark, but this is stupid, the fact that Europa has gone un-noticed by film experts for so long is a crime against cinema, whilst overrated rubbish like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Life is Beautiful clean up at the academy awards (but what do the know) Europa has been hidden away, absent form video stores and (until recently) any British TV channels.

The visuals in Europa are not MTV gloss; it's not a case of style over substance, its more a case of substance dictating style. Much like his first film The Element of Crime, von Trier uses the perspective of the main character to draw us into his world, and much like Element, the film begins with the main character (or in the case of Europa, we the audience) being hypnotized. As we move down the tracks, the voice of the Narrator (Max von Sydow) counts us down into a deep sleep, until we awake in Europa. This allows von Trier and his three cinematographers to pay with the conventions of time and imagery, there are many scenes in Europa when a character in the background, who is in black and white, will interact with a person in the foreground who will be colour, von Trier is trying to show us how much precedence the coloured item or person has over the plot, for instance, it's no surprise that the first shot of Leopold Kessler (Jean-marc Barr) is in colour, since he is the only character who's actions have superiority over the film.

The performances are good, they may not be on par with performances in later von Trier films, but that's just because the images are sometimes so distracting that you don't really pick up on them the first time round. But I would like to point out the fantastic performance of Jean-Marc Barr in the lead role, whose blind idealism is slowly warn down by the two opposing sides, until he erupts in the films final act. Again, muck like The Element of Crime, the film ends with our hero unable to wake up from his nightmare state, left in this terrible place, with only the continuing narration of von Sydow to seal his fate. Europa is a tremendous film, and I cant help thinking what a shame that von Trier has abandoned this way of filming, since he was clearly one of the most talented visual directors working at that time, Europa, much like the rest of his cinematic cannon is filled with a wealth of iconic scenes. His dedication to composition and mise-en-scene is unrivalled, not to mention his use of sound and production design. But since his no-frills melodramas turned out to be Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark then who can argue, but it does seems like a waste of an imaginative talent. 10/10 That was the [[fiirst]] thing that sprang to mind as I watched the closing [[credit]] to Europa [[deliver]] there was [[throughout]] the screen, never in my entire life have I [[noticed]] a [[kino]] of such technical [[engineering]], the [[photos]] of Europa are so [[wondrous]] that any [[kino]] I watch in it's [[waking]] will only pale in comparison, [[forgot]] your Michael Bay, Ridley Scott slick Hollywood [[movie]], [[Europe]] has more ethereal [[beaut]] than [[nada]] those two [[wo]] [[conjuring]] up in a [[trillion]] [[yrs]]. Now I'd be the [[frst]] to [[hailed]] [[Bjorn]] von Trier a [[engineers]] just off the back of his films Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark, but this is stupid, the fact that Europa has gone un-noticed by film experts for so long is a crime against cinema, whilst overrated rubbish like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Life is Beautiful clean up at the academy awards (but what do the know) Europa has been hidden away, absent form video stores and (until recently) any British TV channels.

The visuals in Europa are not MTV gloss; it's not a case of style over substance, its more a case of substance dictating style. Much like his first film The Element of Crime, von Trier uses the perspective of the main character to draw us into his world, and much like Element, the film begins with the main character (or in the case of Europa, we the audience) being hypnotized. As we move down the tracks, the voice of the Narrator (Max von Sydow) counts us down into a deep sleep, until we awake in Europa. This allows von Trier and his three cinematographers to pay with the conventions of time and imagery, there are many scenes in Europa when a character in the background, who is in black and white, will interact with a person in the foreground who will be colour, von Trier is trying to show us how much precedence the coloured item or person has over the plot, for instance, it's no surprise that the first shot of Leopold Kessler (Jean-marc Barr) is in colour, since he is the only character who's actions have superiority over the film.

The performances are good, they may not be on par with performances in later von Trier films, but that's just because the images are sometimes so distracting that you don't really pick up on them the first time round. But I would like to point out the fantastic performance of Jean-Marc Barr in the lead role, whose blind idealism is slowly warn down by the two opposing sides, until he erupts in the films final act. Again, muck like The Element of Crime, the film ends with our hero unable to wake up from his nightmare state, left in this terrible place, with only the continuing narration of von Sydow to seal his fate. Europa is a tremendous film, and I cant help thinking what a shame that von Trier has abandoned this way of filming, since he was clearly one of the most talented visual directors working at that time, Europa, much like the rest of his cinematic cannon is filled with a wealth of iconic scenes. His dedication to composition and mise-en-scene is unrivalled, not to mention his use of sound and production design. But since his no-frills melodramas turned out to be Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark then who can argue, but it does seems like a waste of an imaginative talent. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is by far the cutest I have seen in a long time! Wonderful animation and adorable characters (even the bad guys were cute!) made this one a total winner in my book, and also in the books of those I saw it with. I still want to see it again, but haven't had time. Better than Toy Story, which was good too, but not THIS good . --------------------------------------------- Result 5064 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought the movie was a poor documentary. Nothing of substance was discussed. It seemed to cheapen the ideas and did not provide anything new. The film lacked wonder or romance or anything that would really drive one to science. Most scientists appeared "stereotyped" and sometimes weird. A woman said that her awards didn't matter a whole lot, only children that were helped. She said that after a 10 minute scene where she explained all her awards. Playing "humble scientist", are we? "I have equations dancing in my head," another said. I don't see how that explains anything to us. It hasn't covered significant effects of science on our culture. Politics of science were barely touched.

Not a bad flick for a 10-14 year-olds. Other than that, I felt it was boring and unrevealing.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5065 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[remember]] back when I was [[little]] when I was away at [[camp]] and we would campout under the stars. There was always [[someone]] there that [[would]] have a good [[story]] to tell that [[involved]] the woods that [[surrounded]] us and they would always creep me out. Well, when I found Wendigo at the library, I checked it out hoping to be one of those [[films]] that had a [[supernatural]] being haunting people in the woods [[much]] like the [[stories]] that were [[told]] at [[camp]]. Well, [[much]] to my dismay, I was so far from the [[truth]]. Wendigo is really [[bad]]. The story starts of when a family of three is driving to their [[winter]] [[cabin]], which looks like your normal suburban home and nothing like a cabin in the woods, and they run into a deer. Well, it seems the local rednecks were actually hunting this [[particular]] deer and are pretty upset at our city folk. The [[movie]] spends far too much time following the [[families]] everyday [[activities]] instead of getting to the point of the [[film]]. It wasn't until about the last 15 minutes that we actually have some [[action]] [[involving]] the "wendigo." My [[suggestion]] is that you stay very far away this film. It will [[leave]] you [[wanting]] your hour and a half back. I [[remind]] back when I was [[tiny]] when I was away at [[campground]] and we would campout under the stars. There was always [[everybody]] there that [[should]] have a good [[conte]] to tell that [[participating]] the woods that [[besieged]] us and they would always creep me out. Well, when I found Wendigo at the library, I checked it out hoping to be one of those [[movie]] that had a [[uncanny]] being haunting people in the woods [[very]] like the [[story]] that were [[said]] at [[campground]]. Well, [[very]] to my dismay, I was so far from the [[veracity]]. Wendigo is really [[naughty]]. The story starts of when a family of three is driving to their [[winters]] [[bungalow]], which looks like your normal suburban home and nothing like a cabin in the woods, and they run into a deer. Well, it seems the local rednecks were actually hunting this [[especial]] deer and are pretty upset at our city folk. The [[filmmaking]] spends far too much time following the [[family]] everyday [[activity]] instead of getting to the point of the [[cinema]]. It wasn't until about the last 15 minutes that we actually have some [[actions]] [[encompassing]] the "wendigo." My [[recommendations]] is that you stay very far away this film. It will [[let]] you [[wanna]] your hour and a half back. --------------------------------------------- Result 5066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Carter [[Wong]] plays a noble hero on a quest for a book of healing which leads him seeking ultimate vengeance! The pacing is good in this film and there are a lot of fight scenes to keep the movie going. The flying guillotines look wicked and the main villain has no [[problems]] using them. [[Although]] the story isn't strong, the action is [[fun]] and [[draws]] you to the very end (which I [[felt]] could've had a sequel).

Campy and [[dark]], this is [[great]] ol skool kung fu!! Carter [[Hwang]] plays a noble hero on a quest for a book of healing which leads him seeking ultimate vengeance! The pacing is good in this film and there are a lot of fight scenes to keep the movie going. The flying guillotines look wicked and the main villain has no [[trouble]] using them. [[Though]] the story isn't strong, the action is [[funny]] and [[attracts]] you to the very end (which I [[deemed]] could've had a sequel).

Campy and [[murky]], this is [[wondrous]] ol skool kung fu!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] While to most people watching the movie, this will be of [[little]] interest, but out of the many hundreds of movies dealing with magic and the occult in one form or another, this one is probably the [[best]] in [[many]] [[ways]].

From The Golem to The Craft the subject seems to be of endless interest to the movie industry. The majority of movies which touch on it in any way do so childishly (for example "Witchboard", a true piece of utter garbage in every way) either taking the transcendental elements as cheap excuses for cheesy special effects or cardboard cutout villians (cf "[[Warlock]]"). More frequently the subject comes up in an hysterical religious context (in the various Revelations-oriented movies, the antichrist is inevitably an advocate of some kind of new-age style practice). Rarely, a movie seems to show at least some passing experience with [[magic]] as it is practiced in [[real]] [[life]], but the [[presentation]] of the occult in such [[movies]] can at [[best]] be [[described]] as allegorical and not literal, or [[symbolic]], or ... just not [[quite]] right.

I watched this [[movie]] again after [[many]] [[years]] [[tonight]]. I had [[seen]] it before on VHS; it is a [[dark]], [[moody]] piece, and after [[watching]] it on [[DVD]], I [[would]] [[say]] if you have any [[intention]] to watch this [[movie]], watch it on [[DVD]], don't watch it on VHS.

The darkness and moodiness are [[overpowering]] in VHS but in DVD the [[movie]] takes on a very [[different]] tone. I [[think]] Weir [[pushed]] the dark aspects intentionally for style, but when the movie is converted to the lower [[color]] medium of VHS this goes over the edge. DVD [[brings]] the [[movie]] to [[life]] again and I [[saw]] it differently.

[[Anyway]], seeing it as if for the first time, I [[realized]] that the treatment of magic is [[extremely]] good in this movie. It's difficult to go into all the reasons why, I don't care to take the time to do so.

For anybody who's curious, anyway, if you want to see what it is like in real life, this movie is just very right on countless [[levels]].

And for anybody who isn't, you really wasted a lot of time reading to this point. While to most people watching the movie, this will be of [[small]] interest, but out of the many hundreds of movies dealing with magic and the occult in one form or another, this one is probably the [[nicest]] in [[myriad]] [[method]].

From The Golem to The Craft the subject seems to be of endless interest to the movie industry. The majority of movies which touch on it in any way do so childishly (for example "Witchboard", a true piece of utter garbage in every way) either taking the transcendental elements as cheap excuses for cheesy special effects or cardboard cutout villians (cf "[[Magician]]"). More frequently the subject comes up in an hysterical religious context (in the various Revelations-oriented movies, the antichrist is inevitably an advocate of some kind of new-age style practice). Rarely, a movie seems to show at least some passing experience with [[witchcraft]] as it is practiced in [[true]] [[vida]], but the [[introductions]] of the occult in such [[movie]] can at [[better]] be [[outlining]] as allegorical and not literal, or [[iconic]], or ... just not [[pretty]] right.

I watched this [[cinematography]] again after [[various]] [[olds]] [[sunday]]. I had [[watched]] it before on VHS; it is a [[gloomy]], [[fickle]] piece, and after [[staring]] it on [[DVDS]], I [[should]] [[tell]] if you have any [[ambition]] to watch this [[cinematography]], watch it on [[DVDS]], don't watch it on VHS.

The darkness and moodiness are [[conquering]] in VHS but in DVD the [[cinema]] takes on a very [[dissimilar]] tone. I [[believing]] Weir [[shoved]] the dark aspects intentionally for style, but when the movie is converted to the lower [[colours]] medium of VHS this goes over the edge. DVD [[poses]] the [[cinematography]] to [[living]] again and I [[watched]] it differently.

[[Writ]], seeing it as if for the first time, I [[performed]] that the treatment of magic is [[unbelievably]] good in this movie. It's difficult to go into all the reasons why, I don't care to take the time to do so.

For anybody who's curious, anyway, if you want to see what it is like in real life, this movie is just very right on countless [[echelons]].

And for anybody who isn't, you really wasted a lot of time reading to this point. --------------------------------------------- Result 5068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Strange... I like all this movie crew and dark humor movies; but didn't like this one at all! It's awful, horrible and surely not funny at all. Pity cannot do a whole movie plot, disgust either. And it was really boring. Long empty moments fills the movie; it could have been removed. It should have been in another shorter format, surely. Maybe i expected too much from the crew - like saving the movie lol -. It's also filled with overused clichés of characters and situations... I don't get it why people liked it... "Poetry", "hope"; nope 'mam, didn't see anything like that! ^^ All in all, it's empty and crude, pitiful and hopeless. Oh darn this one........ --------------------------------------------- Result 5069 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[originally]] [[saw]] this very dark [[comedy]] [[around]] 2000 or so on cable TV. What a surprise and [[delight]]! [[Everyone]] is covertly armed in this [[movie]]! Dreyfuss plays the "[[mental]]" don ([[remember]] the [[New]] York don who was [[supposed]] to be [[schizophrenic]]? Art [[imitates]] [[life]] or vice-versa?). Diane [[Lane]] and [[Ellen]] Barkin are at their most beautiful and [[NOT]] to be toyed with! Thus [[proving]] that beauty and [[toughness]] [[DO]] [[go]] [[together]]! Then there is the [[great]] "bullshit" scene between Barkin and [[Jeff]] Goldblum (Rita and Mickey) where they [[verbally]] [[play]] off the [[world]] "bullshit." This film is both subtle and bald. [[For]] all the shooting, it can be a very [[quiet]] [[film]]. And, you have the [[opportunity]] to [[see]] [[several]] actors in their [[final]] or near [[final]] [[roles]]. Joey [[Bishop]]. [[Richard]] Pryor. [[Henry]] Silva. It is not a [[film]] for everyone. But, if you like a [[film]] that has a [[lot]] of word [[play]] and keeps [[moving]] without [[blowing]] up everything in [[sight]], this is the film for you. Roger Ebert dumps on this [[film]]. He's flat [[wrong]]. THIS is a [[fine]], fine [[film]]! [[Maybe]] just not one for Ebert. I consider it as a 10 because of how well it is [[done]] and how funny the [[script]] can be, while not really being a [[straight]] comedy [[kind]] of film. I [[like]] it so well that I [[bought]] it on DVD because it just doesn't [[get]] [[shown]] very much on cable [[TV]]. Now, it's all [[mine]]! I [[initially]] [[sawthe]] this very dark [[comedian]] [[throughout]] 2000 or so on cable TV. What a surprise and [[glee]]! [[Someone]] is covertly armed in this [[cinematography]]! Dreyfuss plays the "[[spiritual]]" don ([[remembering]] the [[Newest]] York don who was [[alleged]] to be [[schizophrenia]]? Art [[simulates]] [[lives]] or vice-versa?). Diane [[Lanes]] and [[Eileen]] Barkin are at their most beautiful and [[NAH]] to be toyed with! Thus [[proves]] that beauty and [[endurance]] [[DOING]] [[going]] [[jointly]]! Then there is the [[wondrous]] "bullshit" scene between Barkin and [[Geoff]] Goldblum (Rita and Mickey) where they [[orally]] [[playing]] off the [[monde]] "bullshit." This film is both subtle and bald. [[During]] all the shooting, it can be a very [[shush]] [[films]]. And, you have the [[possibilities]] to [[consults]] [[different]] actors in their [[last]] or near [[ultimate]] [[duties]]. Joey [[Archbishop]]. [[Richards]] Pryor. [[Heinrich]] Silva. It is not a [[films]] for everyone. But, if you like a [[movie]] that has a [[lots]] of word [[playing]] and keeps [[relocating]] without [[swelling]] up everything in [[vision]], this is the film for you. Roger Ebert dumps on this [[cinematography]]. He's flat [[amiss]]. THIS is a [[fined]], fine [[kino]]! [[Probably]] just not one for Ebert. I consider it as a 10 because of how well it is [[played]] and how funny the [[screenplay]] can be, while not really being a [[consecutive]] comedy [[sort]] of film. I [[loves]] it so well that I [[buys]] it on DVD because it just doesn't [[gets]] [[display]] very much on cable [[TELEVISION]]. Now, it's all [[mining]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5070 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] [[Anarchy]] and lawlessness reign [[supreme]] in the podunk hick hamlet of Elk Hills. The [[town]] [[elders]] deputize [[tough]], cagey Vietnam veteran Aaron (a [[wonderfully]] [[robust]] and engaging performance by Kris Kristofferson) and [[several]] of his fellow vet [[buddies]] to [[clean]] up the place. The [[plan]] goes sour when Aaron and his [[cruel]] cronies [[decide]] to [[take]] over Elk [[Hills]] after they [[get]] rid of all the [[bad]] [[elements]]. It's up to Aaron's decent do-gooder brother [[Ben]] (amiably [[played]] by Jan-Michael Vincent) to put a stop to him before [[things]] get too out of hand. [[Writer]]/director George ("Miami Blues," "[[Gross]] Pointe Blank") Armitage whips up a [[delightfully]] [[amoral]], [[cynical]] and wickedly subversive redneck drive-in exploitation [[contemporary]] Western winner: he expertly [[creates]] a gritty, no-nonsense tone, keeps the pace brisk and unflagging throughout, and stages the plentiful action scenes with considerable muscular aplomb (the rousing explosive climax is especially strong and stirring). The first-rate cast of familiar B-feature faces constitutes as a major asset: Victoria Principal as Ben's sweet hottie girlfriend Linda, the fabulous Bernadette Peters as [[flaky]] saloon singer Little Dee, Brad Dexter as the feckless mayor, David Doyle as a slimy bank president, Andrew Stevens as an affable gas station attendant, John Carpenter movie regular Charles Cyphers as one of the 'Nam vets, Anthony Carbone as a smarmy casino manager, John Steadman as a folksy old diner owner, Paul Gleason as a mean strong-arm shakedown bully, and Dick Miller as a talentless piano player. Moral: Don't hire other people to do your dirty work. William Cronjager's slick [[cinematography]], Gerald Fried's lively, harmonic hillbilly bluegrass [[score]], and the [[abundant]] raw violence further add to the [[overall]] trashy [[fun]] of this unjustly neglected little doozy. [[Pandemonium]] and lawlessness reign [[supremo]] in the podunk hick hamlet of Elk Hills. The [[municipality]] [[elder]] deputize [[arduous]], cagey Vietnam veteran Aaron (a [[excellently]] [[sturdy]] and engaging performance by Kris Kristofferson) and [[various]] of his fellow vet [[friends]] to [[cleanliness]] up the place. The [[programmes]] goes sour when Aaron and his [[merciless]] cronies [[decided]] to [[taking]] over Elk [[Slopes]] after they [[obtain]] rid of all the [[horrid]] [[components]]. It's up to Aaron's decent do-gooder brother [[Bin]] (amiably [[done]] by Jan-Michael Vincent) to put a stop to him before [[items]] get too out of hand. [[Screenwriter]]/director George ("Miami Blues," "[[Glaring]] Pointe Blank") Armitage whips up a [[pleasantly]] [[immoral]], [[sarcastic]] and wickedly subversive redneck drive-in exploitation [[modern]] Western winner: he expertly [[generates]] a gritty, no-nonsense tone, keeps the pace brisk and unflagging throughout, and stages the plentiful action scenes with considerable muscular aplomb (the rousing explosive climax is especially strong and stirring). The first-rate cast of familiar B-feature faces constitutes as a major asset: Victoria Principal as Ben's sweet hottie girlfriend Linda, the fabulous Bernadette Peters as [[flakey]] saloon singer Little Dee, Brad Dexter as the feckless mayor, David Doyle as a slimy bank president, Andrew Stevens as an affable gas station attendant, John Carpenter movie regular Charles Cyphers as one of the 'Nam vets, Anthony Carbone as a smarmy casino manager, John Steadman as a folksy old diner owner, Paul Gleason as a mean strong-arm shakedown bully, and Dick Miller as a talentless piano player. Moral: Don't hire other people to do your dirty work. William Cronjager's slick [[films]], Gerald Fried's lively, harmonic hillbilly bluegrass [[notation]], and the [[bountiful]] raw violence further add to the [[entire]] trashy [[funny]] of this unjustly neglected little doozy. --------------------------------------------- Result 5071 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Forget Plan 9, this is the ultimate fiasco, a costume drama, ineptly directed, scripted, acted, etc. This film is based on Isabel Allende's not-so-much-better novel. I hate Meryl Streep and Antonio Banderas (in non-Spanish films), and the other actors, including Winona, my favourite actress and Jeremy Irons try hard to get over such a terrible script. Plenty of mistakes (like, for example, since when does it snow in Xmas in Chile?) and very cruel, with tons of that evil named "magic realism", this stands out as the worst movie of all time. It totally sucks!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is S-L-O-W. Spent most of the movie actually waiting for it to 'begin'.

The setting was bleak, the script was bleak, the cinematography was bleak, the plot was bleak, the budget was low (not that all low budget movies are bad, but this one had no redeeming features).

The plot was more consumed with a vengeful, slightly deranged hunter than the actual Wendigo which made a very brief appearance toward the end of the movie. This in itself was disappointing as this 'Wendigo' was just a bizarre mix of a tree and a stag. Everything about the movie was uninspiring.

The parents of the little boy appeared to be rather aloof and at times seemed completely detached from their son. Whether this was down to bad acting or a bad script I'm not sure, but it only heightened my disappointment and boredom levels.

There was no food for thought, nothing to pique an interest. With no real intrigue or chill factor, this movie creaked along so painfully, you just couldn't care less what happened by the end.

Wendigo's ambiance reminds me of the dull movie shown at the awards ceremony toward the end of 'Mr Bean's Holiday': a movie which is artistic and nonsensical, trying too hard to to be deep and meaningful, but coming across as pretentious and boring.

I would never want to watch this again. I only watched it to the end in the vain hope that something interesting might happen ... but it didn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 5073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] [[Strangely]], this [[version]] of [[OPEN]] [[YOUR]] [[EYES]] is more mature and more [[nuanced]]. Aided by [[hindsight]], Crowe's [[screenplay]] is a lot [[tighter]] and more fleshed out than Amenabar's original. The Spanish filmmaker should [[get]] credit for [[thinking]] of the story [[first]], but there's no doubt that [[Crowe]] has improved on it -- if just [[slightly]]. [[Notice]] that you have no [[idea]] what the lead did in OPEN YOUR EYES, but you [[know]] [[almost]] everything about the [[lead]] in VANILLA [[SKY]]. That's what i mean by more "fleshed out." [[Suspiciously]], this [[stepping]] of [[OPENING]] [[UOUR]] [[EYE]] is more mature and more [[subtle]]. Aided by [[retrospect]], Crowe's [[script]] is a lot [[fatter]] and more fleshed out than Amenabar's original. The Spanish filmmaker should [[obtain]] credit for [[ideas]] of the story [[frst]], but there's no doubt that [[Crow]] has improved on it -- if just [[mildly]]. [[Notification]] that you have no [[ideals]] what the lead did in OPEN YOUR EYES, but you [[savoir]] [[hardly]] everything about the [[culminate]] in VANILLA [[HEAVENLY]]. That's what i mean by more "fleshed out." --------------------------------------------- Result 5074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Paul Verhoeven (genius and master film maker) strikes back with the less than [[perfect]], [[yet]] still fun in a "[[dirty]] [[old]] man [[type]] of [[way]]," Hollow [[Man]]. The first two [[acts]] are so [[good]] that the slasher final act disappoints. Yet I am giving a [[recommendation]] to this film for it's [[MIND]] BLOWING special effects (perhaps the [[best]] so far around) and two dandy performances by the leads. Verhoeven's moral [[questions]] are of course [[thought]] [[provoking]], and [[although]] the film [[turned]] off [[many]], this [[movie]] is pretty soft-core for old Verhoeven.

Two major flaws: Josh Brolin (aka walking ape-man) and the whole deal with the elevator. If there was an access ladder, why were they trapped down in the lab?

A fun horror film for a Saturday night. Paul Verhoeven (genius and master film maker) strikes back with the less than [[faultless]], [[still]] still fun in a "[[soiled]] [[archaic]] man [[typing]] of [[pathways]]," Hollow [[Bloke]]. The first two [[act]] are so [[buena]] that the slasher final act disappoints. Yet I am giving a [[propositions]] to this film for it's [[ESPRIT]] BLOWING special effects (perhaps the [[better]] so far around) and two dandy performances by the leads. Verhoeven's moral [[issues]] are of course [[thinking]] [[causing]], and [[though]] the film [[revolved]] off [[innumerable]], this [[kino]] is pretty soft-core for old Verhoeven.

Two major flaws: Josh Brolin (aka walking ape-man) and the whole deal with the elevator. If there was an access ladder, why were they trapped down in the lab?

A fun horror film for a Saturday night. --------------------------------------------- Result 5075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Okay this is gona be short and sweet review...Something the movie should have taken a practice ina nd made its life shorter and sweeter than it was.

This [[movie]] is $^@%. There's a good reason there was a petition with over 40,000 + signatures ALL [[demanding]] Uwe Boll stop making movies from franchises people liked. Blood Rayne being a biggie there.

The jokes are good...if you've never heard them a THOUSAND times before. THe acting is descent but u can really only blame the script for that. I even a few moments wonder if they're even using a script.

The movie has little to NOTHING to do with the original games. HELLO if you've played the games u know the main character has no real motivation outside homicidal urges like mass murder because he stubbed his toe or simular. There's way too much story for such a stupid [[movie]]. like I said. I WOULDN'T even steal this movie. ANd for the person who [[says]] this is ' Funniest movie of 2007'..........need to take a look around, the news is better than this. Okay this is gona be short and sweet review...Something the movie should have taken a practice ina nd made its life shorter and sweeter than it was.

This [[filmmaking]] is $^@%. There's a good reason there was a petition with over 40,000 + signatures ALL [[exacting]] Uwe Boll stop making movies from franchises people liked. Blood Rayne being a biggie there.

The jokes are good...if you've never heard them a THOUSAND times before. THe acting is descent but u can really only blame the script for that. I even a few moments wonder if they're even using a script.

The movie has little to NOTHING to do with the original games. HELLO if you've played the games u know the main character has no real motivation outside homicidal urges like mass murder because he stubbed his toe or simular. There's way too much story for such a stupid [[filmmaking]]. like I said. I WOULDN'T even steal this movie. ANd for the person who [[tells]] this is ' Funniest movie of 2007'..........need to take a look around, the news is better than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[In]] my humble [[opinion]], this version of the [[great]] BDWY musical has only two [[things]] going for it - Tyne Daly and the [[fact]] that there is now a filmed [[version]] with the [[original]] [[script]]. (OK Vanessa Williams is good to watch.)But to me that's all there is. Most of the [[cast]] [[seem]] to be [[walking]] through the show - Chynna [[Phillips]] has no idea who Kim really is and no wonder people walk over Harry McAfee when it's [[played]] by [[George]] Wendt who [[looks]] like he'd rather be back on a [[bar]] stool in Boston. Jason [[Alexander]] is passable, but that wig has to [[go]] and I [[saw]] [[better]] dancing in Bugsy Malone. As I mentioned, it's good to have a version of the stage script now, but I hope the young out there, who have never seen a musical, DON'T judge them all by this. [[Throughout]] my humble [[viewing]], this version of the [[whopping]] BDWY musical has only two [[aspects]] going for it - Tyne Daly and the [[facto]] that there is now a filmed [[stepping]] with the [[initial]] [[scripts]]. (OK Vanessa Williams is good to watch.)But to me that's all there is. Most of the [[casting]] [[looks]] to be [[marche]] through the show - Chynna [[Philips]] has no idea who Kim really is and no wonder people walk over Harry McAfee when it's [[done]] by [[Jorge]] Wendt who [[seem]] like he'd rather be back on a [[solicitors]] stool in Boston. Jason [[Alexandra]] is passable, but that wig has to [[going]] and I [[noticed]] [[nicer]] dancing in Bugsy Malone. As I mentioned, it's good to have a version of the stage script now, but I hope the young out there, who have never seen a musical, DON'T judge them all by this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hey,

If your going to make a documentary about Leonard Cohen try making it about Leonard Cohen! This is filled with only enough Leonard to anger the viewer who will be left wondering why they are listening to all these other singers (some of them questionable) talk about themselves. Puleeze....sounds like them reliving their diary entries in junior high - who cares about you, what about Leonard? Guess what people, if you "do something" worthy maybe someone will make a documentary about you. I found particularly insulting the parading of U2's members as if that would add credibility to this movie - NOT. Leonard doesn't need Bono or the Edge talking about his spirituality. What would have been nice would have been for the filmmakers to embody some piece of his spirituality through the film. Gee, what a concept! I will give props to Rufus Wainwright and Jarvis Cocker for their covers of Cohen tunes - the rest of the performances were a bore and some were unbearable.

Cohen fans, don't say I didn't warn you! --------------------------------------------- Result 5078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hello Playmates.I recently watched this film for the first time ever and it is also my first experience of Arthur Askey, I have to admit I was very impressed by this film. As a fan of black and white films generally, passport to pimlico, the lavender hill mob and Tommy Trinder (who is apparently a distant relative), this film appealed in that it provided good old fashioned British humour. I notice that there are some on here who have criticised Askey's performance, however in my opinion it stands the test of time as a fine example of forties comic acting and if anything adds to the picture by creating characters that are more than the mere stereotypes which seem to so dominate films now.If you can get hold of this film I would recommend you get hold of it,shame these films generally aren't shown on Sunday afternoons anymore.I am also glad to have had the opportunity to watch another piece of work by Arnold Ridley (Private Godfrey in dad's army).I thank you --------------------------------------------- Result 5079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] When one thinks of 1950s science fiction [[films]] one thinks of the [[sort]] of schlocky black and white B films that were parodied on the [[old]] [[Mystery]] [[Science]] Theater 3000 television [[show]]. [[Yet]], while there were far more [[films]] like [[Plan]] 9 From Outer Space and Robot [[Monster]] than good films, the 1950s did have some very good, if not [[great]], science fiction [[films]] like The Day The [[Earth]] Stood [[Still]], The Incredible Shrinking Man, Invasion Of The Body Snatchers, War Of The [[Worlds]], and The [[Thing]] From Another World. Yet, the [[best]] of the bunch, for its literacy and production [[values]], was [[undoubtedly]] MGM's [[first]] [[big]] foray into A level science fiction, Forbidden Planet, released in 1956. It was a 98 minute [[color]] film, directed by Fred [[M]]. Wilcox, that [[featured]] then state of the art special effects, and was [[endowed]] with a very good [[screenplay]] by [[Cyril]] Hume, from a screen [[treatment]] called Fatal Planet, by Irving [[Block]] and Allen Adler, who adapted aspects of William Shakespeare's The [[Tempest]] into it.

The [[film]] drew raves when it was [[released]], for its [[Oscar]] [[nominated]] special effects, its all electronic music [[score]], by [[Louis]] and Bebe [[Barron]] (although [[credited]] as Electronic Tonalities, to [[avoid]] music guild [[fees]]), vivid matte paintings- inspired by Chesley Bonestell, and the [[famed]] [[Monster]] Of The Id (MOTI), which was animated by an animator, [[Joshua]] Meador, on [[loan]] from the Walt [[Disney]] studio. [[Even]] more [[famous]] was the appearance of Robby The Robot, in his first role in [[either]] film or [[television]]. [[Later]] he [[would]] appear in the [[film]] The Invisible Boy- included in this DVD as a [[bonus]], as well as [[several]] appearances in the 1960s sci fi TV [[shows]] The Twilight [[Zone]], Night Gallery, and Lost [[In]] Space- with [[whose]] own [[robot]] he is [[often]] confused, and a cameo appearance in the 1984 [[film]] Gremlins.

The [[tale]] is simple, but [[elegantly]] [[constructed]], and filled with [[humorous]] asides that leaven the [[forced]] 'love story' [[aspect]] in the film. [[In]] the 23rd Century, the [[United]] [[Planets]] Cruiser C-57D- a flying [[saucer]], [[led]] by Commander J.J. [[Adams]] ([[Leslie]] Nielsen- [[yes]] he was once a leading [[man]] [[type]] before his [[Police]] Squad [[days]]), is en [[route]] to the planet Altair IV, to investigate what happened to the crew of the Bellerophon, [[sent]] to the planet twenty [[years]] [[earlier]]. After a year's journey, there they encounter the lone survivor of the party, Doctor Edward Morbius (Walter Pidgeon), the Prospero stand-in- a philologist, his gorgeous blond daughter Altaira (Anne Francis)- the Miranda character in a pre 1960s miniskirt, and Robby the Robot, the domestic servant who is the Calibanian counterpart. Morbius warns the crew of a mysterious force that killed the Bellerophon party in their first year, yet he was immune to it…. All in all, it's a technically good film- especially with some rear projections and matte paintings, and the absurdity of the adult reactions to Timmy's and Robby's exploits borders an Dalian surreal absurdity. Yet, it's manifest that the filmmakers had no sense of the sublime absurdity the film conjures, for it's played straight, thus making it even funnier. As for the main feature? Forbidden Planet deserves all its kudos. It's not a perfect film, but it's a great way to spend a couple of hours, and far better than Star Wars, which although made twenty years later seems much more outdated, and juvenile. Only such films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Solaris, Alien and Aliens, and the first two Terminator films, have really equaled or surpassed this classic in depth and effects.

It's worth knowing that, despite Forbidden Planet's 'happy ending', there is the possibility that the MOTI is still dormant within Alta, as well. After all, she is her father's daughter, and had an even more vivid nightmare than her father when the MOTI attacked the ship a second time. Also, the film wisely only 'shows' the MOTI once, and never shows the Krel, for the imagination can always conjure greater scares than the best special effects. The film also makes good use of narrative ellipses to condense the tale, something that far more realistic art films often fail to do. Forbidden [[Planet]] is one of those rare films that both defines yet transcends its era- unlike other sci fi films which were rather obvious Cold War allegories. Watch it, and you will agree, as well as sleep a little less easy. But, even if you don't, there's still the scene of Anne Francis skinnydipping. That alone is timeless. When one thinks of 1950s science fiction [[cinematography]] one thinks of the [[genre]] of schlocky black and white B films that were parodied on the [[ancient]] [[Riddle]] [[Sciences]] Theater 3000 television [[displays]]. [[Still]], while there were far more [[movie]] like [[Systems]] 9 From Outer Space and Robot [[Monsters]] than good films, the 1950s did have some very good, if not [[wonderful]], science fiction [[film]] like The Day The [[Terrestrial]] Stood [[However]], The Incredible Shrinking Man, Invasion Of The Body Snatchers, War Of The [[Universe]], and The [[Stuff]] From Another World. Yet, the [[bestest]] of the bunch, for its literacy and production [[value]], was [[admittedly]] MGM's [[fiirst]] [[wide]] foray into A level science fiction, Forbidden Planet, released in 1956. It was a 98 minute [[coloring]] film, directed by Fred [[meters]]. Wilcox, that [[features]] then state of the art special effects, and was [[equipped]] with a very good [[scenarios]] by [[Cyrillic]] Hume, from a screen [[treat]] called Fatal Planet, by Irving [[Bloc]] and Allen Adler, who adapted aspects of William Shakespeare's The [[Cyclone]] into it.

The [[films]] drew raves when it was [[releasing]], for its [[Oskar]] [[appointing]] special effects, its all electronic music [[notation]], by [[Lewis]] and Bebe [[Baron]] (although [[paid]] as Electronic Tonalities, to [[evade]] music guild [[royalties]]), vivid matte paintings- inspired by Chesley Bonestell, and the [[commemorated]] [[Monsters]] Of The Id (MOTI), which was animated by an animator, [[Jeremiah]] Meador, on [[loans]] from the Walt [[Disneyland]] studio. [[Yet]] more [[notorious]] was the appearance of Robby The Robot, in his first role in [[neither]] film or [[tv]]. [[Then]] he [[could]] appear in the [[flick]] The Invisible Boy- included in this DVD as a [[bonuses]], as well as [[various]] appearances in the 1960s sci fi TV [[showing]] The Twilight [[Sphere]], Night Gallery, and Lost [[Among]] Space- with [[who]] own [[robotics]] he is [[generally]] confused, and a cameo appearance in the 1984 [[cinema]] Gremlins.

The [[story]] is simple, but [[neatly]] [[built]], and filled with [[comic]] asides that leaven the [[obliged]] 'love story' [[element]] in the film. [[During]] the 23rd Century, the [[Unify]] [[Planetary]] Cruiser C-57D- a flying [[flywheel]], [[spearheaded]] by Commander J.J. [[Adam]] ([[Lesley]] Nielsen- [[yeah]] he was once a leading [[guy]] [[genera]] before his [[Cops]] Squad [[jours]]), is en [[path]] to the planet Altair IV, to investigate what happened to the crew of the Bellerophon, [[sends]] to the planet twenty [[olds]] [[formerly]]. After a year's journey, there they encounter the lone survivor of the party, Doctor Edward Morbius (Walter Pidgeon), the Prospero stand-in- a philologist, his gorgeous blond daughter Altaira (Anne Francis)- the Miranda character in a pre 1960s miniskirt, and Robby the Robot, the domestic servant who is the Calibanian counterpart. Morbius warns the crew of a mysterious force that killed the Bellerophon party in their first year, yet he was immune to it…. All in all, it's a technically good film- especially with some rear projections and matte paintings, and the absurdity of the adult reactions to Timmy's and Robby's exploits borders an Dalian surreal absurdity. Yet, it's manifest that the filmmakers had no sense of the sublime absurdity the film conjures, for it's played straight, thus making it even funnier. As for the main feature? Forbidden Planet deserves all its kudos. It's not a perfect film, but it's a great way to spend a couple of hours, and far better than Star Wars, which although made twenty years later seems much more outdated, and juvenile. Only such films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Solaris, Alien and Aliens, and the first two Terminator films, have really equaled or surpassed this classic in depth and effects.

It's worth knowing that, despite Forbidden Planet's 'happy ending', there is the possibility that the MOTI is still dormant within Alta, as well. After all, she is her father's daughter, and had an even more vivid nightmare than her father when the MOTI attacked the ship a second time. Also, the film wisely only 'shows' the MOTI once, and never shows the Krel, for the imagination can always conjure greater scares than the best special effects. The film also makes good use of narrative ellipses to condense the tale, something that far more realistic art films often fail to do. Forbidden [[Globe]] is one of those rare films that both defines yet transcends its era- unlike other sci fi films which were rather obvious Cold War allegories. Watch it, and you will agree, as well as sleep a little less easy. But, even if you don't, there's still the scene of Anne Francis skinnydipping. That alone is timeless. --------------------------------------------- Result 5080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You can call it a mystery, perhaps a small thriller, or an intelligent film.

The story takes you through the life of one person who has lost his life and is looking to regain it.

I have to say I was quite surprised that I truly did enjoy this film. It is not usually the genre I care for however the characters quickly became people to me and I wanted to know what they were about and what was going to happen to them.

Just like many french films over English made, we are able to learn much more about the character and the affect of their surroundings on their person. This film is character driven and will not disappoint! --------------------------------------------- Result 5081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Many people [[thought]] that this is a good movie but I don't agree with them. At the [[beginning]] of the movie, a spaceship crushed on earth and some of the aliens escaped from the spaceship, then hey killed some people on the earth, but for no reason. Also, it is in a dark [[forest]], I can't see anything on the screen, I can only [[hardly]] hear the sound.

[[After]] a few days, the [[predator]] came to the earth but no one had sent signals to him before that, he should not know what happened on the earth, so there is a contradiction. Finally, the [[predator]] [[found]] the headmaster of the [[aliens]] and [[killed]] it for no reason. He was not live on earth, t is none of his [[business]] about the things happened here. [[Lastly]], the [[duration]] of the [[movie]] is only 90 minutes long, the [[summary]] is too short and it can't [[tell]] the reviewers about the [[story]] [[clearly]].

[[In]] [[conclusion]], I don't [[think]] this is a [[good]] movie. Many people [[thinking]] that this is a good movie but I don't agree with them. At the [[beginnings]] of the movie, a spaceship crushed on earth and some of the aliens escaped from the spaceship, then hey killed some people on the earth, but for no reason. Also, it is in a dark [[forester]], I can't see anything on the screen, I can only [[practically]] hear the sound.

[[Upon]] a few days, the [[predatory]] came to the earth but no one had sent signals to him before that, he should not know what happened on the earth, so there is a contradiction. Finally, the [[predators]] [[discovered]] the headmaster of the [[foreigner]] and [[assassinated]] it for no reason. He was not live on earth, t is none of his [[corporations]] about the things happened here. [[Eventually]], the [[lifespan]] of the [[filmmaking]] is only 90 minutes long, the [[summarize]] is too short and it can't [[say]] the reviewers about the [[saga]] [[openly]].

[[Onto]] [[conclude]], I don't [[reckon]] this is a [[buena]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed it. In general, I'm not a fan of comedies and comedians, but I do like Whoopi. I'm also partial to Sci/Fi Fantasy. And the dinosaur craze. I read for pleasure, but when I'm feeling over-stressed or really mind-dead, I watch TV & movies to escape. Theodore Rex enabled me to do so. That makes it a success in my eyes! I didn't even walk away to do something else while it was running. Whether or not it was rated as "good" or not doesn't really matter to me. And no, I'm not a juvenile. Nor am I a moron. --------------------------------------------- Result 5083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a long time Red Sox fan, I just had to go see the movie. It was great! While there can never be enough live footage from the miracle 2004 Red Sox season, there were great shots of some of my favorite Red Sox players. While the movie is certainly a chick flick, it has enough baseball footage from the amazing 2004 Red Sox comeback to make it one of my top 10 movies of all time. I especially enjoyed the Red Sox fans that were part of Ben's baseball family. The scene where Ben is meeting with his buddies on draft day to determine who will get seats to certain games is hilarious! A must see if you are looking for a wholesome movie to watch with your spouse, date, or significant other...especially if you are a baseball fan...and even more especially if you are Red Sox fan!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Sorry]], not good.

It [[starts]] out interesting, but [[looses]] its way a few [[minutes]] into the [[movie]].

It does not [[help]] a [[lot]] that [[none]] of the [[normally]] [[great]] actors (Quaid, Glover, Ermey, Leto etc.) delivers a [[really]] [[good]] performance.

It might be owed to the fact that I saw a dubbed version (german), but Dennis Quaid's character was [[especially]] [[wooden]] and annoying, and [[Danny]] Glover does not [[really]] make for a believable villain. Moreover, Jared Leto's [[character]] does not [[really]] [[contribute]] to the [[story]] whatsoever (except [[saving]] one [[main]] character's [[life]] at one point, but that scene is as [[necessary]] as a windshield wiper on a [[submarine]] in the first place ;-)

[[Speaking]] of unnecessary scenes - the [[main]] complaint is really the tangled and cliché-ridden storyline: The detective (of course!) has to [[settle]] a personal [[matter]] with the villain and is (of course!) [[suspended]] from his official [[duties]] courtesy of his personal entanglement. The killer (of course!) *wants* to be tracked down and plays a cat-and-mouse game with his [[opponent]] for years ... I don't know how [[many]] [[movies]] [[build]] on a [[similar]] plot - most of them better, [[however]].

The plot has [[got]] holes [[galore]] and [[many]] [[completely]] [[unbelievable]] and [[unnecessary]] scenes that do not [[contribute]] to or [[work]] well with the storyline at all (e.[[g]]. the truck stop scene or the [[car]] at the cliff's edge etc.)

To [[top]] it off, the [[ending]] [[tries]] to be [[original]] and [[exciting]], but fails [[completely]] in these regards. We've [[seen]] *much* better finales with a [[similar]] [[kind]] of ultimate-battle-on-a-train-in-a-forlorn-winter-landscape [[setup]] ... [[In]] the end there is the [[supposedly]] moving [[reunion]] of parent and [[child]] ... hokey, at the least. [[Apologise]], not good.

It [[induction]] out interesting, but [[loses]] its way a few [[mins]] into the [[filmmaking]].

It does not [[helps]] a [[lots]] that [[nothingness]] of the [[generally]] [[tremendous]] actors (Quaid, Glover, Ermey, Leto etc.) delivers a [[truly]] [[alright]] performance.

It might be owed to the fact that I saw a dubbed version (german), but Dennis Quaid's character was [[particularly]] [[wood]] and annoying, and [[Dany]] Glover does not [[genuinely]] make for a believable villain. Moreover, Jared Leto's [[trait]] does not [[genuinely]] [[contributing]] to the [[histories]] whatsoever (except [[save]] one [[primary]] character's [[lifetime]] at one point, but that scene is as [[essential]] as a windshield wiper on a [[underwater]] in the first place ;-)

[[Discussing]] of unnecessary scenes - the [[primary]] complaint is really the tangled and cliché-ridden storyline: The detective (of course!) has to [[dissipating]] a personal [[topic]] with the villain and is (of course!) [[discontinued]] from his official [[roles]] courtesy of his personal entanglement. The killer (of course!) *wants* to be tracked down and plays a cat-and-mouse game with his [[enemies]] for years ... I don't know how [[innumerable]] [[film]] [[building]] on a [[akin]] plot - most of them better, [[nevertheless]].

The plot has [[did]] holes [[aplenty]] and [[various]] [[fully]] [[awesome]] and [[superfluous]] scenes that do not [[contributing]] to or [[cooperating]] well with the storyline at all (e.[[grams]]. the truck stop scene or the [[cars]] at the cliff's edge etc.)

To [[supreme]] it off, the [[ceasing]] [[attempts]] to be [[initial]] and [[fascinating]], but fails [[perfectly]] in these regards. We've [[saw]] *much* better finales with a [[comparable]] [[sorting]] of ultimate-battle-on-a-train-in-a-forlorn-winter-landscape [[configure]] ... [[Throughout]] the end there is the [[reportedly]] moving [[reuniting]] of parent and [[kids]] ... hokey, at the least. --------------------------------------------- Result 5085 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I never trust the opinions of anyone regarding a film. That goes for critics as well. Sure, if it gets positive reviews that's OK and a plus, but most films that get critical rave I hate. I enjoyed this film for what it was, an entertaining film. It takes you out of your life for a couple hours and into a fictional character...that being Catherine Trammell. Sharon Stone is awesome in this role, just like she was in the first one. Anyone who says she is horrible in this film must have felt the same in the first one b/c she is back acting the same way she did in Basic Instinct 1. Catherine is hers and she plays her to perfection. Her one liners are great, much like in the first one. Who can forget in the first film when she tells the cops, "If you're gonna arrest me do it...otherwise get the f**k out of here!" Great scene, and believe me, she does it again in this one. I was captivated by her. Her outfits, the way she smoked her cigarettes, believe me, its worth the price just to see Stone's performance. I cannot wait for this film to be released on DVD, uncut, because I can only imagine how much better it is going to be. And yes, there are lots of twists, as in the first one, including the ending! --------------------------------------------- Result 5086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Due to the [[invention]] of a "The Domestication [[Collar]]", flesh-eating zombies are brought under control, and become productive members of [[society]]; however, they perform menial [[tasks]]. The servile dead attend to those living in fenced US 1950s-styled small towns, while untamed zombies [[roam]] around in "The Wild [[Zone]]". In the town of "Willard", pre-teen K'Sun Ray (as Timmy Robinson) lives with parents Carrie-Anne Moss and Dylan Baker (as Helen and Bill Robinson). Alas, the Robinsons are the only family on their street who do not own a zombie; their new neighbors, the Bottoms, have six. So, to keep up, the Robinsons obtain zombie Billy Connolly (as Fido).

Unfortunately, Mr. Connolly's "Domestication Collar" is damaged by an old lady's walker, and he eats her; then, new and hungry zombies infest the town. Meanwhile, young Ray has grown attached to Connolly (the boy and his zombie are like TV's "Timmy and Lassie") and, the Robinson [[family]] find it difficult to cooperate with the controlling "Zomcom" authorities.

"Fido" doesn't go far enough into its own intriguing "Wild Zone"; but, it is a colorful, stylish, and amusingly satirical [[addition]] to zombie film lore. Ray and the cast perform well, individually; with nubile zombie Sonja Bennett (as Tammy) and owner Tim Blake Nelson (as Theopolis) the most [[memorable]] pair. Director Andrew Currie and crew, including Rob Gray (design), Jan Kiesser (photography), Don MacDonald (music), and James Willcock (design), deservedly won awards.

******* Fido (2006) Andrew Currie ~ K'Sun Ray, Carrie-Anne Moss, Billy Connolly, Dylan Baker Due to the [[inventive]] of a "The Domestication [[Neck]]", flesh-eating zombies are brought under control, and become productive members of [[societies]]; however, they perform menial [[functions]]. The servile dead attend to those living in fenced US 1950s-styled small towns, while untamed zombies [[wander]] around in "The Wild [[Zona]]". In the town of "Willard", pre-teen K'Sun Ray (as Timmy Robinson) lives with parents Carrie-Anne Moss and Dylan Baker (as Helen and Bill Robinson). Alas, the Robinsons are the only family on their street who do not own a zombie; their new neighbors, the Bottoms, have six. So, to keep up, the Robinsons obtain zombie Billy Connolly (as Fido).

Unfortunately, Mr. Connolly's "Domestication Collar" is damaged by an old lady's walker, and he eats her; then, new and hungry zombies infest the town. Meanwhile, young Ray has grown attached to Connolly (the boy and his zombie are like TV's "Timmy and Lassie") and, the Robinson [[families]] find it difficult to cooperate with the controlling "Zomcom" authorities.

"Fido" doesn't go far enough into its own intriguing "Wild Zone"; but, it is a colorful, stylish, and amusingly satirical [[addendum]] to zombie film lore. Ray and the cast perform well, individually; with nubile zombie Sonja Bennett (as Tammy) and owner Tim Blake Nelson (as Theopolis) the most [[landmark]] pair. Director Andrew Currie and crew, including Rob Gray (design), Jan Kiesser (photography), Don MacDonald (music), and James Willcock (design), deservedly won awards.

******* Fido (2006) Andrew Currie ~ K'Sun Ray, Carrie-Anne Moss, Billy Connolly, Dylan Baker --------------------------------------------- Result 5087 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] When the remake of When A Stranger Calls was out, obviously I was interested in watching the original. Then when I read about the original (which I recall had my sisters totally freaked out back in the day) I saw that the real [[money]] is on Black Christmas, which apparently beat everyone to the "the caller is in the house" punch. So I Netflix that, and it sits at the top of my list for months due to its "very long [[wait]]." All this time I am getting more and more [[eager]] to see it! Then one day, out of the blue, it finally arrives! ...And it's a total snore.

Sure, maybe I had elevated expectations, but I don't think it would have gained more had I seen it fresh. The thing is it's Christmas in some Canadian college town, and there's this sorority having a party. We see some killer-POV shots as he climbs this trellis and sneaks into the attic. So we KNOW he's in the house. Then we're introduced to our characters—-Olivia Hussey as the mousy, whiny, Canadian-accented Jess. Margot Kidder as the annoying, overtly aggressive alcoholic Barb. She's so annoying even her mother dis-invites her for her Christmas festivities. There's also this irritating Janis Ian clone ("Phil") and this alcoholic den mother Mrs. Mac, seen taking nips from the various bottles of booze she has stashed all over the house. We also meet Jess's highly-strung boyfriend Peter, played by Keir Dullea of 2001 and Bunny Lake is Missing fame, though halfway through the film I was still asking myself "Which one's Keir Dullea?"

So it seems that the house has been receiving obscene phone calls, but this was before email, so they couldn't ask him to send a photo. Then—-well, you know how they say those plastic dry-cleaning bags are not a toy? One of the sisters finds that out the hard way. Don't worry if you don't catch the first 14 shots of the plastic-encased corpse face as it reposes in the attic—-there'll be 28 more interspersed throughout the film, obviously there to make you say "Oh my God! There's a corpse in the attic!" Though after the first hour that changes to: "How come the dumb police haven't found the rather prominently-placed plastic-encased corpse in the attic?" Especially as it is made abundantly clear that it is clearly visible from outside the house. Really, any time before CSI came on the air must have been such a golden age of crime; the cops are so dumb. Fortunately some of them look like John Saxon.

Anyway, after a lot more darn boring human drama, the house mother fears that her precious kitty has ascended a vertical ladder and has pushed open a heavy-looking trap door that rests atop it (those wily cats!), for she sticks her head in there and ends up with a hook pulley in her neck for the trouble. Now we have two corpses up in the attic—-hey, why don't we have 75 more shots trying to chill us by the fact that there are now TWO corpses in the attic?

So by now the police have begun to take the situation seriously, and tap the houses' phone and station a cop outside. They inform Jess and her pal Janis Ian that if the obscene caller calls back, they need to keep him on the phone. Jessica, who has grown even more whiny, mousy and annoying keeps asking the caller "Who is this? What do you want? Who are you?" after like the first 89 calls, when it is clear that he is not going to answer her. Isn't that like a sign a developmental disability? The inability to learn from unsuccessful attempts at something? And what's he going to do, suddenly say "Oh yeah, hi, it's Bob from the Laundromat?" Dumb Jess.

Spoilers! Anyway, soon Janis Ian and Lois Lane (Kidder) are piled in bed with ketchup splashed on their faces (this film's idea of gore), and idiot Jess realizes that not a single door or window in the house is locked. Hello? Are you being stalked or what? Then the cops realize that the killer is in the house, and call Jess and tell her "don't ask questions, just do as I say… walk to the front door and get out." So what does moron Jess do? Starts screaming "Phil? Barb? Phil? Barb?" Hey, great idea sister. Now why don't you go right upstairs where you know a psychotic killer is lurking? Of course she does, and sees her former friends, all splashed with ketchup, prompting this viewer to scream at the screen: "Have a clue now?!"

Now, obviously one needs to be understanding and realize that this movie was made before the classic slasher movie tropes were solidly in place, and that it doesn't move to the same pace we're used to, and seeing a plastic-covered corpse in the attic like 206 times probably WAS scary back in the day, and people weren't used to being stalked by psychopaths, so they wouldn't think to, you know, lock the doors or windows. And they might be tempted to wander upstairs when they have just been told that a rabid killer is up there. You see, people were stupid back in the 70s. We have to understand that. One of the big shocks is that we don't even see our proto-Final Girl kill the psycho. But believe me, that fact is more interesting being read in this review than sitting through the movie for. Spoilers end!

------ Hey, check out Cinema de Merde, my website on bad and cheesy movies (with a few good movies thrown in). You can find the URL in my email address above. When the remake of When A Stranger Calls was out, obviously I was interested in watching the original. Then when I read about the original (which I recall had my sisters totally freaked out back in the day) I saw that the real [[moneys]] is on Black Christmas, which apparently beat everyone to the "the caller is in the house" punch. So I Netflix that, and it sits at the top of my list for months due to its "very long [[awaited]]." All this time I am getting more and more [[avid]] to see it! Then one day, out of the blue, it finally arrives! ...And it's a total snore.

Sure, maybe I had elevated expectations, but I don't think it would have gained more had I seen it fresh. The thing is it's Christmas in some Canadian college town, and there's this sorority having a party. We see some killer-POV shots as he climbs this trellis and sneaks into the attic. So we KNOW he's in the house. Then we're introduced to our characters—-Olivia Hussey as the mousy, whiny, Canadian-accented Jess. Margot Kidder as the annoying, overtly aggressive alcoholic Barb. She's so annoying even her mother dis-invites her for her Christmas festivities. There's also this irritating Janis Ian clone ("Phil") and this alcoholic den mother Mrs. Mac, seen taking nips from the various bottles of booze she has stashed all over the house. We also meet Jess's highly-strung boyfriend Peter, played by Keir Dullea of 2001 and Bunny Lake is Missing fame, though halfway through the film I was still asking myself "Which one's Keir Dullea?"

So it seems that the house has been receiving obscene phone calls, but this was before email, so they couldn't ask him to send a photo. Then—-well, you know how they say those plastic dry-cleaning bags are not a toy? One of the sisters finds that out the hard way. Don't worry if you don't catch the first 14 shots of the plastic-encased corpse face as it reposes in the attic—-there'll be 28 more interspersed throughout the film, obviously there to make you say "Oh my God! There's a corpse in the attic!" Though after the first hour that changes to: "How come the dumb police haven't found the rather prominently-placed plastic-encased corpse in the attic?" Especially as it is made abundantly clear that it is clearly visible from outside the house. Really, any time before CSI came on the air must have been such a golden age of crime; the cops are so dumb. Fortunately some of them look like John Saxon.

Anyway, after a lot more darn boring human drama, the house mother fears that her precious kitty has ascended a vertical ladder and has pushed open a heavy-looking trap door that rests atop it (those wily cats!), for she sticks her head in there and ends up with a hook pulley in her neck for the trouble. Now we have two corpses up in the attic—-hey, why don't we have 75 more shots trying to chill us by the fact that there are now TWO corpses in the attic?

So by now the police have begun to take the situation seriously, and tap the houses' phone and station a cop outside. They inform Jess and her pal Janis Ian that if the obscene caller calls back, they need to keep him on the phone. Jessica, who has grown even more whiny, mousy and annoying keeps asking the caller "Who is this? What do you want? Who are you?" after like the first 89 calls, when it is clear that he is not going to answer her. Isn't that like a sign a developmental disability? The inability to learn from unsuccessful attempts at something? And what's he going to do, suddenly say "Oh yeah, hi, it's Bob from the Laundromat?" Dumb Jess.

Spoilers! Anyway, soon Janis Ian and Lois Lane (Kidder) are piled in bed with ketchup splashed on their faces (this film's idea of gore), and idiot Jess realizes that not a single door or window in the house is locked. Hello? Are you being stalked or what? Then the cops realize that the killer is in the house, and call Jess and tell her "don't ask questions, just do as I say… walk to the front door and get out." So what does moron Jess do? Starts screaming "Phil? Barb? Phil? Barb?" Hey, great idea sister. Now why don't you go right upstairs where you know a psychotic killer is lurking? Of course she does, and sees her former friends, all splashed with ketchup, prompting this viewer to scream at the screen: "Have a clue now?!"

Now, obviously one needs to be understanding and realize that this movie was made before the classic slasher movie tropes were solidly in place, and that it doesn't move to the same pace we're used to, and seeing a plastic-covered corpse in the attic like 206 times probably WAS scary back in the day, and people weren't used to being stalked by psychopaths, so they wouldn't think to, you know, lock the doors or windows. And they might be tempted to wander upstairs when they have just been told that a rabid killer is up there. You see, people were stupid back in the 70s. We have to understand that. One of the big shocks is that we don't even see our proto-Final Girl kill the psycho. But believe me, that fact is more interesting being read in this review than sitting through the movie for. Spoilers end!

------ Hey, check out Cinema de Merde, my website on bad and cheesy movies (with a few good movies thrown in). You can find the URL in my email address above. --------------------------------------------- Result 5088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Down to Earth is about Lance Barton, a [[black]] comedian who gets [[hit]] by a truck. He goes to Heaven and he gets to get another body. Lance gets the body of Charles Wellington, a white [[guy]]. [[So]] Lance does a few things in the body of Charles. The [[movie]] has a few [[laughs]], but it's [[nothing]] special. It's a good [[movie]] if you're a fan of Chris [[Rock]]. Madagascar, the 2005 animated [[comedy]], is better. This is a good movie, but Chris Rock has done way better things than this. It will only make you laugh about 4 times the whole [[movie]]. And it's not really laugh-out-loud [[funny]]. You'll laugh to yourself and you [[might]] giggle, but you definitely won't be rolling on the floor [[laughing]]. Down to Earth is about Lance Barton, a [[negro]] comedian who gets [[knocked]] by a truck. He goes to Heaven and he gets to get another body. Lance gets the body of Charles Wellington, a white [[pal]]. [[Therefore]] Lance does a few things in the body of Charles. The [[filmmaking]] has a few [[smiling]], but it's [[none]] special. It's a good [[filmmaking]] if you're a fan of Chris [[Boulder]]. Madagascar, the 2005 animated [[humor]], is better. This is a good movie, but Chris Rock has done way better things than this. It will only make you laugh about 4 times the whole [[filmmaking]]. And it's not really laugh-out-loud [[hilarious]]. You'll laugh to yourself and you [[apt]] giggle, but you definitely won't be rolling on the floor [[laughter]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This is one of the [[finest]] films to come out of Hong Kong's 'New Wave' that began with Tsui Hark's "ZU: Warriors of Magic Mountain". Tsui set a tone for the New Wave's approach to the martial arts film that pretty much all the directors of the New Wave (Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung, Wong Jing, Ching Siu Tung, etc.) accepted from then on as a given; namely, the approach to such films thenceforth would need more than a touch of irony, if not outright comedy. "Burning Paradise" put a stop to all that, and with a vengeance.

It's not that there isn't humor here; but it is a purely human humor, as with the aged Buddhist priest at the beginning who somehow manages a quick feel of the nubile young prostitute while hiding in a bundle of straw. But this is just as humans are, not even Buddhist priests can be saints all the time.

When irony is at last introduced into the film, it is the nastiest possible, emanating from the 'abbot' of Red Lotus Temple, who is a study in pure nihilism such as has never been recorded on film before. He is the very incarnation of Milton's Satan from "Paradise Lost": "Better to rule in Hell than serve in heaven!" And if he can't get to Satan's hell soon enough, he'll turn the world around him into a living hell he can rule.

That's the motif underscoring the brutal violence of much of the imagery here: It's not that the Abbot just wants to kill people; he wants them to despair, to feel utterly hopeless, to accept his nihilism as all-encompassing reality. Thus there's a definite sense pervading the Red Temple scenes that there just might not be any other reality outside of the Temple itself - it has become all there is to the universe, and the Abbot, claiming mastery of infinite power, is in charge.

Of course, fortunately, the film doesn't end there. Though there are losses, the human will to be just ordinarily human at last prevails. (If you want to know how, see the film!) Yet there is no doubt that, in viewing this film, we visit hell. Hopefully, we do not witness our own afterlives; but we certainly feel chastened by the experience - and somehow better for it over all. This is one of the [[meanest]] films to come out of Hong Kong's 'New Wave' that began with Tsui Hark's "ZU: Warriors of Magic Mountain". Tsui set a tone for the New Wave's approach to the martial arts film that pretty much all the directors of the New Wave (Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung, Wong Jing, Ching Siu Tung, etc.) accepted from then on as a given; namely, the approach to such films thenceforth would need more than a touch of irony, if not outright comedy. "Burning Paradise" put a stop to all that, and with a vengeance.

It's not that there isn't humor here; but it is a purely human humor, as with the aged Buddhist priest at the beginning who somehow manages a quick feel of the nubile young prostitute while hiding in a bundle of straw. But this is just as humans are, not even Buddhist priests can be saints all the time.

When irony is at last introduced into the film, it is the nastiest possible, emanating from the 'abbot' of Red Lotus Temple, who is a study in pure nihilism such as has never been recorded on film before. He is the very incarnation of Milton's Satan from "Paradise Lost": "Better to rule in Hell than serve in heaven!" And if he can't get to Satan's hell soon enough, he'll turn the world around him into a living hell he can rule.

That's the motif underscoring the brutal violence of much of the imagery here: It's not that the Abbot just wants to kill people; he wants them to despair, to feel utterly hopeless, to accept his nihilism as all-encompassing reality. Thus there's a definite sense pervading the Red Temple scenes that there just might not be any other reality outside of the Temple itself - it has become all there is to the universe, and the Abbot, claiming mastery of infinite power, is in charge.

Of course, fortunately, the film doesn't end there. Though there are losses, the human will to be just ordinarily human at last prevails. (If you want to know how, see the film!) Yet there is no doubt that, in viewing this film, we visit hell. Hopefully, we do not witness our own afterlives; but we certainly feel chastened by the experience - and somehow better for it over all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I could give it a zero, I'd change my mind and give it a -10 instead. Absolutely horrible movie with no movie plot, doesn't make sense of what is happening. Just PLAIN BORING. Please don't waste your money on this one. Pleaseee!!! This movie could have done so well if it truly depicted the real zodiac killer's story, but nopes, I didn't feel anything but disgust while watching it. Do yourself a favor and rent some classic movies instead, its better to watch a movie you've already seen like 3-4 times than watch this crap! I don't understand why people even bother to make such movies when they know its not going to do well. Zodiac killer should be called 'Boriac killer' instead!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5091 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a beautiful, rich, and very well-executed film with a rich and meaningful story. Basically, it tells how an old master story teller needs to find a (male) heir to carry on his craft, but ends up not getting what he expected in his very male-dominated world. The characters must then deal with their situation and the old master must grapple with the conflict between his desire for a companion and heir and his and society's traditional notions.

The story is fun, emotional, and complex. The exploration of the characters, their lives, and emotions, is rich and compelling the character development is strong while the characters are complex and not one dimensional at all. The film expertly conveys the old man's emotions and his desire to find an heir, and compellingly shows how he and the kid handle the situation. There is also humour, sometimes quite subtle, at appropriate points. The film also examines the good and bad of traditional Chinese culture, creating further interest and depth to the film.

The directing, acting, and scenery are all outstanding. Added to the other strengths, this creates rich and convincing visual images and compelling, real characters. As a result, the film evokes strong empathy for, and feelings about, the characters.

Some have claimed that the ending weakens the film, but I do not necessarily agree. Perhaps it could have been stronger with a different ending, but any improvement in the overall film would have been rather small. --------------------------------------------- Result 5092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I was [[watching]] this when my [[wife]] called to inquire from the other [[room]] as to my [[choice]] of [[fare]]. My [[comment]]? "I am watching my [[Life]]!"

[[Though]] younger, but only by 5 [[years]] or so, than the "Rocket [[Boys]]" I remember the [[absolute]] [[urgency]] with which Sputnick was [[greeted]] by our administrators of education and how the whole Science Fair [[thing]] gained momentum and [[took]] me and others into the competitive [[whirlwind]]. My own tornado landed me in my own State's Science Fair, in Physics by '62, [[though]] our [[group]] was less successful in [[gaining]] the [[support]] of, for [[example]], firefighters we approached for [[guidance]] and [[counsel]] until after a [[tragic]] [[event]], our [[city]] went so far as to [[allow]] us to [[tour]] the Nike [[missile]] [[site]] on Chicago's [[lakeshore]].

This [[movie]] [[brought]] it all back for me and I will [[bet]] that it [[brought]] it all back for a bunch of us "UberNerds" of the late '50s and [[early]] 60's.

We are in a [[similar]] science brain drainage period now and really [[need]] this [[movie]] as a country. See It! I was [[staring]] this when my [[women]] called to inquire from the other [[salas]] as to my [[choices]] of [[tariffs]]. My [[commentaries]]? "I am watching my [[Iife]]!"

[[Nevertheless]] younger, but only by 5 [[ages]] or so, than the "Rocket [[Fellas]]" I remember the [[utter]] [[emergency]] with which Sputnick was [[salute]] by our administrators of education and how the whole Science Fair [[stuff]] gained momentum and [[taken]] me and others into the competitive [[whirlpool]]. My own tornado landed me in my own State's Science Fair, in Physics by '62, [[while]] our [[cluster]] was less successful in [[win]] the [[aiding]] of, for [[case]], firefighters we approached for [[advice]] and [[counselors]] until after a [[calamitous]] [[happenings]], our [[ville]] went so far as to [[permitting]] us to [[voyage]] the Nike [[projectile]] [[locations]] on Chicago's [[shoreline]].

This [[flick]] [[tabled]] it all back for me and I will [[chickened]] that it [[tabled]] it all back for a bunch of us "UberNerds" of the late '50s and [[swift]] 60's.

We are in a [[equivalent]] science brain drainage period now and really [[require]] this [[cinematography]] as a country. See It! --------------------------------------------- Result 5093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie was an attempt to go into places most don't and perhaps shouldn't venture into. It was a [[similar]] trial at the bizarre, head-case perspective given to us in The Cell, although not near as in-depth and well portrayed. The plot is constructed simply with an initial campy feel to it. [[Then]], as the movie takes its supposed "[[dramatic]]" turn, the [[plot]] [[falls]] [[apart]] on what few legs it had to stand on in the first place.

Basically the idea is that of a kid (Chris McKenna) who needs money. He takes on the role of a hit man, killing a city accountant. Then he doesn't get paid for his work but instead gets tortured for several days because he dreamed up the "brilliant" idea of trying to use a backup file he had as leverage for payment. This [[idiotic]] move at trying to force them to pay him backfires as he is horribly and endlessly abused. He begins to go crazy (some very disturbing scenes). Then, thinking he has paid for his sins and can start over, he visits the wife (Kari Wuhrer) of the man who he killed and wins her affections. Soon after she discovers who he is, tragedy strikes, and revenge sweeps through the air as the boy goes after his torturers (Daniel Baldwin, George Wendt, Vernon Wells) for their previous "kindness".

I got to ask though, what is it with Kari Wuhrer and horror/gore type films?

It seems everything she has put out lately has been in this genre. [[Granted]], I liked her in "Eight-Legged Freaks" and she was okay in "Anaconda". But despite all her obvious cuteness and allure ([[wow]], she's hot!), she can act much better and chose better roles. Or maybe, I'm wrong and that is just a misconception. For all you guys out there, you get to see the "fully monty" of her in this film, although it's rather bizarre and short-lived. I almost felt like she did some soft-porn after watching this film (something not foreign to Kari's career). The sex-simulation is such that it has to make you wonder what things really go on during filming.

Anyway, I will say there is some good acting. Just don't expect much of it from Daniel Balwin, whose career seems forever destined to second his brother Alex's. The film did bring out a few old greats though, George Wendt (Norm from Cheers) and Vernon Wells (Commando, Weird Science). Above all, Chris McKenna does the best job in playing the main character, Sean Crawley. His little acting experience and yet his believable nature as a naive youth, bring some elements of substance to the film.

I wouldn't go out of my way for this one. If you're bored and are tired of the same old episodes of "The Hitchhiker", then I might advise watching this.

And Kari, please start acting in some better films! This movie was an attempt to go into places most don't and perhaps shouldn't venture into. It was a [[comparable]] trial at the bizarre, head-case perspective given to us in The Cell, although not near as in-depth and well portrayed. The plot is constructed simply with an initial campy feel to it. [[Subsequently]], as the movie takes its supposed "[[phenomenal]]" turn, the [[intrigue]] [[plunges]] [[regardless]] on what few legs it had to stand on in the first place.

Basically the idea is that of a kid (Chris McKenna) who needs money. He takes on the role of a hit man, killing a city accountant. Then he doesn't get paid for his work but instead gets tortured for several days because he dreamed up the "brilliant" idea of trying to use a backup file he had as leverage for payment. This [[farcical]] move at trying to force them to pay him backfires as he is horribly and endlessly abused. He begins to go crazy (some very disturbing scenes). Then, thinking he has paid for his sins and can start over, he visits the wife (Kari Wuhrer) of the man who he killed and wins her affections. Soon after she discovers who he is, tragedy strikes, and revenge sweeps through the air as the boy goes after his torturers (Daniel Baldwin, George Wendt, Vernon Wells) for their previous "kindness".

I got to ask though, what is it with Kari Wuhrer and horror/gore type films?

It seems everything she has put out lately has been in this genre. [[Awarded]], I liked her in "Eight-Legged Freaks" and she was okay in "Anaconda". But despite all her obvious cuteness and allure ([[whew]], she's hot!), she can act much better and chose better roles. Or maybe, I'm wrong and that is just a misconception. For all you guys out there, you get to see the "fully monty" of her in this film, although it's rather bizarre and short-lived. I almost felt like she did some soft-porn after watching this film (something not foreign to Kari's career). The sex-simulation is such that it has to make you wonder what things really go on during filming.

Anyway, I will say there is some good acting. Just don't expect much of it from Daniel Balwin, whose career seems forever destined to second his brother Alex's. The film did bring out a few old greats though, George Wendt (Norm from Cheers) and Vernon Wells (Commando, Weird Science). Above all, Chris McKenna does the best job in playing the main character, Sean Crawley. His little acting experience and yet his believable nature as a naive youth, bring some elements of substance to the film.

I wouldn't go out of my way for this one. If you're bored and are tired of the same old episodes of "The Hitchhiker", then I might advise watching this.

And Kari, please start acting in some better films! --------------------------------------------- Result 5094 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Did]] anyone who was making this movie, particularly the [[director]], spare a [[thought]] for the logic of the story-line? These are not [[mere]] plot-holes, but plot [[graves]], that become ever deeper as we lose any [[sympathy]] for the main character and his plight. That is, if you are kind enough a viewer to valiantly ignore the [[fact]] for most of the movie that the [[characters]] are either servants to the grave-hole [[plot]], or [[boring]] and unlikeable. Or, in the case of Downey's & Hannah's [[characters]], [[apparently]] superfluous. [[In]] pondering the [[reason]] for existence of Downey's character's significant screen-time in the movie, I decided that either the director had [[liked]] his character and unnecessarily [[increased]] his screen-time (unlikley, as the director didn't [[change]] anything [[else]] about the script he actually [[needed]] to) or that his character was going to be sacrificed on the altar of [[bad]] plotting. I'll leave you to guess which one it was to be.

I had to keep checking the cover of the DVD to confirm that this really was made by credible talents. I cannot understand why [[Robert]] Altman would take this job. Surely he has some power to pick and chose. Actually, I can't understand why anyone would take this script on, except a first-time director looking for the experience.

I suppose Robert Downey Jr. needed the money for his habit. I suppose Kenneth Branagh wanted to try a southern accent. I suppose Robert Duvall was only given a few pages of the script and thought the role in isolation sounded intriguing. These are the only [[motivations]] I can see that would coerce good actors to take on roles in this movie. As for Robert Altman, plenty of effort has gone in on his part to making the movie look fantastic. I found myself noticing how he had framed such and such a scene, or [[used]] the bright orange float vests in another scene to draw the eye's movements, or [[imposed]] a beautiful filter to create a [[particular]] mood. I do not typically notice such things in [[movies]], [[since]] most movies I [[bother]] to watch to the end actually engage me for [[reasons]] of good story-telling and interesting characters with [[understandable]] [[motives]]. I [[watched]] this to the end only because some [[ridiculous]] [[element]] of [[optimism]] in myself [[kept]] looking at that [[DVD]] [[cover]] and being [[convinced]] that, due to the talent involved, there had to be some redeeming factor in this movie.

Nice [[direction]]. But that's not why I watch movies. [[Wo]] anyone who was making this movie, particularly the [[superintendent]], spare a [[thinking]] for the logic of the story-line? These are not [[simple]] plot-holes, but plot [[headstones]], that become ever deeper as we lose any [[condolences]] for the main character and his plight. That is, if you are kind enough a viewer to valiantly ignore the [[facto]] for most of the movie that the [[personages]] are either servants to the grave-hole [[intrigue]], or [[bore]] and unlikeable. Or, in the case of Downey's & Hannah's [[personage]], [[patently]] superfluous. [[Across]] pondering the [[raison]] for existence of Downey's character's significant screen-time in the movie, I decided that either the director had [[wished]] his character and unnecessarily [[enhanced]] his screen-time (unlikley, as the director didn't [[adjustments]] anything [[elsewhere]] about the script he actually [[needs]] to) or that his character was going to be sacrificed on the altar of [[negative]] plotting. I'll leave you to guess which one it was to be.

I had to keep checking the cover of the DVD to confirm that this really was made by credible talents. I cannot understand why [[Roberto]] Altman would take this job. Surely he has some power to pick and chose. Actually, I can't understand why anyone would take this script on, except a first-time director looking for the experience.

I suppose Robert Downey Jr. needed the money for his habit. I suppose Kenneth Branagh wanted to try a southern accent. I suppose Robert Duvall was only given a few pages of the script and thought the role in isolation sounded intriguing. These are the only [[motif]] I can see that would coerce good actors to take on roles in this movie. As for Robert Altman, plenty of effort has gone in on his part to making the movie look fantastic. I found myself noticing how he had framed such and such a scene, or [[utilizes]] the bright orange float vests in another scene to draw the eye's movements, or [[dictated]] a beautiful filter to create a [[especial]] mood. I do not typically notice such things in [[theater]], [[because]] most movies I [[annoy]] to watch to the end actually engage me for [[motifs]] of good story-telling and interesting characters with [[intelligible]] [[motivations]]. I [[seen]] this to the end only because some [[farcical]] [[ingredient]] of [[optimist]] in myself [[retained]] looking at that [[DVDS]] [[covers]] and being [[persuaded]] that, due to the talent involved, there had to be some redeeming factor in this movie.

Nice [[directions]]. But that's not why I watch movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Story]] of a good-for-nothing poet and a sidekick singer who puts his words to music. Director Danny Boyle has lost none of his predilection for raking in the gutter of humanity for characters but he has [[lost]], in this film, the edge for creating inspiring and funny films. Strumpet is [[painful]] to watch and [[barely]] [[justified]] by the fact that it was made for TV. [[Fairytales]] of a good-for-nothing poet and a sidekick singer who puts his words to music. Director Danny Boyle has lost none of his predilection for raking in the gutter of humanity for characters but he has [[outof]], in this film, the edge for creating inspiring and funny films. Strumpet is [[hurtful]] to watch and [[hardly]] [[vindicated]] by the fact that it was made for TV. --------------------------------------------- Result 5096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There's perhaps a special [[reason]] why The Fox and the [[Child]] [[hit]] a special [[note]] in my heart. Having just [[said]] goodbye to my new fiancée - of oh...one day - for an unknown [[period]] of [[time]], I was a bit overwhelmed with varying emotions and was suffering the fallout from putting on the [[brave]] face she [[needed]] to see.

I [[watched]] a few movies and [[TV]] [[shows]], but my interest darted from what I was [[leaving]] behind to what is out there and what I haven't [[seen]]. [[For]] that, I have this [[movie]] to [[thank]].

Being a nature lover and having [[heard]] about the [[film]] beforehand, I was sure I was going to like it anyway. But I didn't just like it, I [[loved]] it.

The [[technical]] mastery is [[astounding]]. How did they do it? How did they capture the [[animals]] in the [[way]] they did?? It's just [[wonderful]].

The moral of the [[tale]] is a good one and while the ending is oh so French and [[ambiguous]], it's a happy/[[sad]] one. Again, it [[caught]] me a bit off-guard. As a [[man]] who [[usually]] [[keeps]] his [[emotions]] to himself, the [[ending]] was [[tough]] going while on a [[plane]] full of people I [[would]] be seeing for the [[next]] 15 or so hours! [[Perhaps]] it's because the ending [[made]] me [[think]] back to what I left.

But for those few hours on the [[plane]], I was happy to [[see]] [[something]] new and [[original]]. And that's life. [[Sure]], there are those things you [[love]] and feel comfortable [[around]]...but the [[great]] outdoors holds [[many]] a mystery. So the [[next]] [[time]] I [[see]] something out of the ordinary while out in the [[open]]; I'm [[going]] to [[explore]] it, [[observe]] it and [[embrace]] it. That's [[precisely]] what [[happens]] in this [[movie]] and that's [[precisely]] what you should do with this darn good [[movie]]/nature doc too. 8/10

P.S. It's two [[months]] on from the [[plane]] [[journey]]. We still don't know when we'll see each other again, but we will. There's perhaps a special [[motif]] why The Fox and the [[Children]] [[struck]] a special [[remark]] in my heart. Having just [[indicated]] goodbye to my new fiancée - of oh...one day - for an unknown [[timeline]] of [[moment]], I was a bit overwhelmed with varying emotions and was suffering the fallout from putting on the [[gutsy]] face she [[required]] to see.

I [[seen]] a few movies and [[TELEVISION]] [[displays]], but my interest darted from what I was [[let]] behind to what is out there and what I haven't [[watched]]. [[During]] that, I have this [[movies]] to [[gratitude]].

Being a nature lover and having [[listened]] about the [[kino]] beforehand, I was sure I was going to like it anyway. But I didn't just like it, I [[cared]] it.

The [[tech]] mastery is [[astonishing]]. How did they do it? How did they capture the [[animal]] in the [[manner]] they did?? It's just [[wondrous]].

The moral of the [[saga]] is a good one and while the ending is oh so French and [[shadowy]], it's a happy/[[unfortunate]] one. Again, it [[grabbed]] me a bit off-guard. As a [[men]] who [[normally]] [[retains]] his [[sentiments]] to himself, the [[terminated]] was [[rigid]] going while on a [[aircraft]] full of people I [[ought]] be seeing for the [[imminent]] 15 or so hours! [[Potentially]] it's because the ending [[accomplished]] me [[ideas]] back to what I left.

But for those few hours on the [[aircraft]], I was happy to [[seeing]] [[anything]] new and [[preliminary]]. And that's life. [[Convinced]], there are those things you [[iove]] and feel comfortable [[about]]...but the [[huge]] outdoors holds [[various]] a mystery. So the [[imminent]] [[moment]] I [[behold]] something out of the ordinary while out in the [[opened]]; I'm [[go]] to [[studied]] it, [[observation]] it and [[embracing]] it. That's [[accurately]] what [[arrives]] in this [[movies]] and that's [[accurately]] what you should do with this darn good [[kino]]/nature doc too. 8/10

P.S. It's two [[month]] on from the [[aircraft]] [[itinerary]]. We still don't know when we'll see each other again, but we will. --------------------------------------------- Result 5097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Besides Planes, Trains and Automobiles and Uncle Buck, this is John Candy's funniest movie. When he gets hypnotized with the playing card (similar to the Manchurian Candidate) and becomes a horny guy who does not know what he is saying, he makes two very memorable quotes (Both deal with the male anatomy). The love scene involving grocery items has to be seen, it cannot be described.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I'm a Black man [[living]] in a [[predominantly]] Black [[city]]. That being said, I have some major misgivings about [[Tyler]] Perry's work. I [[realize]] that some people out there feel the [[need]] to [[praise]] him, because he's [[Black]] and [[trying]] to [[portray]] a [[positive]] [[image]] about the culture. But, I [[honestly]] do [[believe]] that, were Perry White, this [[film]] would have had the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and Jessie Jackson all over his [[ass]].

I have been [[forced]] to watch this [[movie]] one whole hell of a lot [[recently]] and each [[repeated]] viewing makes my blood boil. The [[characters]] are poorly [[written]] and [[acted]]. The [[jokes]] are so [[bad]], I have to actually be [[told]] [[something]] is [[supposed]] to be [[funny]]. I'm just [[going]] to [[break]] this [[big]] [[pile]] of sh-t down.

[[Madea]]=suck. The [[character]] may have had some [[appeal]], but it doesn't anymore. When the only [[thing]] she ever seems to do is smack around [[children]] and [[threaten]] adults with violence she is less than [[useless]]. She is [[unnecessary]].

The situation with the [[wife]] beating [[fiancé]] was horsesh-t. [[If]] a woman was so [[scared]] to [[death]] of her husband, why would she [[try]] to [[run]] away when he's sleeping in [[bed]]. Wouldn't it have made more sense for her to leave when he was at work. [[At]] any rate, the [[characters]] in this arc were so [[annoying]] and [[overbearing]] that I [[hoped]] he would throw her off the balcony and was royally [[ticked]] when he didn't.

Then there are the two lovebirds. A bus driver [[asks]] a [[woman]] out by harassing her while he's making his rounds. I couldn't [[believe]] it. I [[really]] couldn't believe when she [[agreed]] to go out with him even more. But, what takes the [[cake]] is that a [[grown]] [[man]] was [[reduced]] to tossing [[pebbles]] at a [[window]] and passing notes like a ten year old by a castrating [[mega]] bitch. I don't [[use]] this term lightly, but that [[woman]] only had two [[modes]]. [[Morose]] victim and [[psycho]] [[momma]]. [[No]] [[matter]] which of these two faces she showed, however, there was one [[constant]]. The bus driver wasn't [[going]] to [[get]] any. He even [[married]] her without [[sampling]] the goods--WTF!

Then there's the family [[reunion]] scene. Here we've got the mother [[load]] which includes implied incestual taboos, grinding for the sake of grinding, shirtless, overly musclebound, b-ball, plus the great taste of Maya Angelou. When those babes dragged their butts outside and called a meeting, was I wrong to wish that the oldest of them was claimed by a heart attack. All this crap is going on at the reunion, in laughably easy to separate groups, and then they ring a bell. When they do, everyone drops what they're doing and heads on over for a stern talking too, just like a pack of Pavlov's doggies--WTF!!

Then you have the final five minutes of the film. In it we see the abusive fiancé get manhandled by his longtime victim and all around bad actress. There is an impromptu wedding where Black people are dressed like angels and are hanging from the ceiling--WTF!!! The only reason to watch it this far, besides testing your threshold for pain, is the hope that the second villain of this story gets her ass handed to her as well. Guess what, it doesn't happen. Instead, Perry takes the testicularly challenged way out and plays it safe, ending the movie on a tone of forgiveness--WTF!!

I'm pretty sure that, if given a day , I could probably write a doctoral dissertation on all the ways this movie sucks. Don't even get me started on the rest of Tyler Perry's films. I'm just going to say this. In my opinion, as a Black guy, D.W. Griffith's legacy lives on. The irony is that it is doing so through a Black man who will be praised for doing what Birth of a Nation did, selling us down the river. I only wish Perry's films were dudes so I could kick them in the nuts. Thanks a lot, dude!! What are you going to follow this up with in 2009, a comedy about the raping and savage beating of slaves in Colonial America? I'm a Black man [[inhabit]] in a [[especially]] Black [[ville]]. That being said, I have some major misgivings about [[Ty]] Perry's work. I [[attaining]] that some people out there feel the [[require]] to [[compliment]] him, because he's [[Negro]] and [[try]] to [[illustrate]] a [[affirmative]] [[images]] about the culture. But, I [[plainly]] do [[believing]] that, were Perry White, this [[filmmaking]] would have had the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and Jessie Jackson all over his [[cul]].

I have been [[obliged]] to watch this [[flick]] one whole hell of a lot [[lately]] and each [[recurring]] viewing makes my blood boil. The [[attribute]] are poorly [[authored]] and [[served]]. The [[pranks]] are so [[rotten]], I have to actually be [[say]] [[somethin]] is [[alleged]] to be [[fun]]. I'm just [[go]] to [[blackout]] this [[large]] [[battery]] of sh-t down.

[[Doa]]=suck. The [[trait]] may have had some [[recourse]], but it doesn't anymore. When the only [[stuff]] she ever seems to do is smack around [[kids]] and [[menacing]] adults with violence she is less than [[unnecessary]]. She is [[superfluous]].

The situation with the [[femme]] beating [[fiancée]] was horsesh-t. [[Though]] a woman was so [[afraid]] to [[fatalities]] of her husband, why would she [[tried]] to [[executing]] away when he's sleeping in [[bedside]]. Wouldn't it have made more sense for her to leave when he was at work. [[Under]] any rate, the [[characteristic]] in this arc were so [[troublesome]] and [[haughty]] that I [[expected]] he would throw her off the balcony and was royally [[clicked]] when he didn't.

Then there are the two lovebirds. A bus driver [[poser]] a [[girl]] out by harassing her while he's making his rounds. I couldn't [[reckon]] it. I [[genuinely]] couldn't believe when she [[accepted]] to go out with him even more. But, what takes the [[sundae]] is that a [[increased]] [[mec]] was [[declining]] to tossing [[stones]] at a [[windows]] and passing notes like a ten year old by a castrating [[super]] bitch. I don't [[usage]] this term lightly, but that [[women]] only had two [[methodology]]. [[Dismal]] victim and [[crazy]] [[mom]]. [[None]] [[issue]] which of these two faces she showed, however, there was one [[perpetual]]. The bus driver wasn't [[go]] to [[got]] any. He even [[matrimony]] her without [[specimens]] the goods--WTF!

Then there's the family [[reunification]] scene. Here we've got the mother [[upload]] which includes implied incestual taboos, grinding for the sake of grinding, shirtless, overly musclebound, b-ball, plus the great taste of Maya Angelou. When those babes dragged their butts outside and called a meeting, was I wrong to wish that the oldest of them was claimed by a heart attack. All this crap is going on at the reunion, in laughably easy to separate groups, and then they ring a bell. When they do, everyone drops what they're doing and heads on over for a stern talking too, just like a pack of Pavlov's doggies--WTF!!

Then you have the final five minutes of the film. In it we see the abusive fiancé get manhandled by his longtime victim and all around bad actress. There is an impromptu wedding where Black people are dressed like angels and are hanging from the ceiling--WTF!!! The only reason to watch it this far, besides testing your threshold for pain, is the hope that the second villain of this story gets her ass handed to her as well. Guess what, it doesn't happen. Instead, Perry takes the testicularly challenged way out and plays it safe, ending the movie on a tone of forgiveness--WTF!!

I'm pretty sure that, if given a day , I could probably write a doctoral dissertation on all the ways this movie sucks. Don't even get me started on the rest of Tyler Perry's films. I'm just going to say this. In my opinion, as a Black guy, D.W. Griffith's legacy lives on. The irony is that it is doing so through a Black man who will be praised for doing what Birth of a Nation did, selling us down the river. I only wish Perry's films were dudes so I could kick them in the nuts. Thanks a lot, dude!! What are you going to follow this up with in 2009, a comedy about the raping and savage beating of slaves in Colonial America? --------------------------------------------- Result 5099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Billy Crystal normally brings the crowd to laughter, but in this movie he and all the rest of them cannot bring any smile on my face.... or perhaps just one. They call it comedy, I say it's a waste of my time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5100 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Deathtrap is not a whodunit. It's a who gonna do it to who first. It's so hard to [[describe]] this movie without giving anything away so I won't mention anything more about the plot. As far as acting goes it is [[Cris]] Reeves [[greatest]] role as Clifford, a [[young]] playwrite. You really [[see]] the [[range]] in his acting [[abilities]] in this movie from "exhaling cheeseburgers" to [[downright]] frightening. Clifford is such a [[hard]] role to play and in the stage [[production]] of this I have never [[seen]] Clifford [[played]] well on both [[ends]] of the [[spectrum]]. The actor plays him as a little puppy or a homicidal maniac. Reeves is the only person I have seen who has the character right all the way through. As for Michael Caine he's.....well he's Michael Caine. One of the [[best]] actors of the last 50 years and in this [[film]] as good as he has ever been. Deathtrap is not a whodunit. It's a who gonna do it to who first. It's so hard to [[portray]] this movie without giving anything away so I won't mention anything more about the plot. As far as acting goes it is [[Screams]] Reeves [[higher]] role as Clifford, a [[youths]] playwrite. You really [[seeing]] the [[assortment]] in his acting [[skills]] in this movie from "exhaling cheeseburgers" to [[altogether]] frightening. Clifford is such a [[dur]] role to play and in the stage [[productivity]] of this I have never [[saw]] Clifford [[served]] well on both [[culminates]] of the [[gamut]]. The actor plays him as a little puppy or a homicidal maniac. Reeves is the only person I have seen who has the character right all the way through. As for Michael Caine he's.....well he's Michael Caine. One of the [[better]] actors of the last 50 years and in this [[cinema]] as good as he has ever been. --------------------------------------------- Result 5101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm not entirely [[sure]] Rob Schmidt qualifies as a "[[Master]]" in the genre of horror, since he [[previously]] just [[directed]] one horror film called "Wrong Turn" and that one was actually just was slightly above mediocre, but [[fact]] is that he [[made]] with "[[Right]] to Die" one of the [[best]] and creepiest [[episodes]] of the entire second season of the "[[Masters]] of [[Horror]]" [[franchise]]. There was a [[similar]] underdog story in season one, when William Malone [[made]] on of the [[best]] [[episodes]] with "The Fair [[Haired]] [[Child]]" [[even]] though his other [[long]] [[feature]] films "[[Fear]] Dot Com" and "[[House]] on [[Haunted]] [[Hill]]" [[sucked]] pretty badly.

The [[story]] of "[[Right]] to [[Die]]" cleverly [[picks]] in on the nowadays piping hot social [[debate]] of euthanasia, but [[thankfully]] [[also]] [[features]] [[multiple]] old-fashioned horror themes like ghostly vengeance, murderous conspiracies, [[pitch]] black [[humor]] and comic book [[styled]] violence. Whilst driving home late one night and [[discussing]] the husband's [[continuous]] adultery, the Addison couple are involved in a terrible car accident. Cliff walks away from the wreck unharmed but his wife Abby is fully burned and needs to be kept alive artificially. Whilst Cliff and his sleazy attorney (Corbin Bernsen of "The [[Dentist]]") [[want]] to plug the plug on her and sue the car constructor, Abbey's mum sets up a giant media campaign to keep her [[daughter]] alive as a vegetable and blame everything on [[Cliff]]. Meanwhile Abbey's hateful [[spirit]] [[comes]] back for [[revenge]] and [[kills]] [[someone]] in Cliff's surrounding [[whenever]] she has a [[near]] [[fatal]] experience with the [[medical]] devices. After a few [[victims]], [[Cliff]] [[realizes]] it might be safer for him to keep his [[wife]] alive if he [[wants]] to remain alive as well. "[[Right]] to Die" is a stupendous episode and exactly the [[type]] of [[stuff]] I [[always]] hoped to see from a TV-series concept like "[[Masters]] of Horror". It's violent and gory with a sick & [[twisted]] sense of humor and loads of sleaze sequences. The euthanasia theme and the [[whole]] [[obligatory]] [[media]] circus that [[surrounds]] it is [[processed]] into the script very well, yet without unnecessarily reverting to political standpoints or [[morality]] lessons. The [[atmosphere]] is suspenseful and the [[killing]] [[sequences]] are [[suitably]] [[nasty]] and [[unsettling]]. [[Actresses]] [[Julia]] [[Anderson]] and [[Robin]] Sydney both have pretty [[face]] and [[impressively]] voluptuous racks, which is [[always]] a [[welcome]] [[plus]], and [[Corbin]] Bernsen is finally offered the chance again to depict a mean-spirited and egocentric bastard. Great "MoH" episode; definitely one of the [[highlights]] of both seasons. I'm not entirely [[convinced]] Rob Schmidt qualifies as a "[[Maestro]]" in the genre of horror, since he [[ago]] just [[oriented]] one horror film called "Wrong Turn" and that one was actually just was slightly above mediocre, but [[facto]] is that he [[introduced]] with "[[Rights]] to Die" one of the [[bestest]] and creepiest [[spells]] of the entire second season of the "[[Master]] of [[Terror]]" [[franchises]]. There was a [[analogue]] underdog story in season one, when William Malone [[brought]] on of the [[better]] [[spells]] with "The Fair [[Redhead]] [[Children]]" [[yet]] though his other [[longer]] [[features]] films "[[Scare]] Dot Com" and "[[Homes]] on [[Obsessed]] [[Hillside]]" [[aspired]] pretty badly.

The [[narratives]] of "[[Rights]] to [[Death]]" cleverly [[elected]] in on the nowadays piping hot social [[debating]] of euthanasia, but [[happily]] [[apart]] [[characters]] [[countless]] old-fashioned horror themes like ghostly vengeance, murderous conspiracies, [[pitching]] black [[comedy]] and comic book [[designed]] violence. Whilst driving home late one night and [[discuss]] the husband's [[lifelong]] adultery, the Addison couple are involved in a terrible car accident. Cliff walks away from the wreck unharmed but his wife Abby is fully burned and needs to be kept alive artificially. Whilst Cliff and his sleazy attorney (Corbin Bernsen of "The [[Dentistry]]") [[wants]] to plug the plug on her and sue the car constructor, Abbey's mum sets up a giant media campaign to keep her [[daughters]] alive as a vegetable and blame everything on [[Clive]]. Meanwhile Abbey's hateful [[wits]] [[arrives]] back for [[retribution]] and [[assassinated]] [[everyone]] in Cliff's surrounding [[where]] she has a [[nearby]] [[deadly]] experience with the [[medicinal]] devices. After a few [[victim]], [[Ravine]] [[realises]] it might be safer for him to keep his [[women]] alive if he [[desires]] to remain alive as well. "[[Rights]] to Die" is a stupendous episode and exactly the [[genus]] of [[thing]] I [[continuously]] hoped to see from a TV-series concept like "[[Maestro]] of Horror". It's violent and gory with a sick & [[crooked]] sense of humor and loads of sleaze sequences. The euthanasia theme and the [[ensemble]] [[mandatory]] [[medium]] circus that [[wraps]] it is [[treated]] into the script very well, yet without unnecessarily reverting to political standpoints or [[morals]] lessons. The [[mood]] is suspenseful and the [[murdering]] [[sequencing]] are [[duly]] [[squalid]] and [[troubling]]. [[Actors]] [[Yulia]] [[Andersen]] and [[Robben]] Sydney both have pretty [[encountering]] and [[considerably]] voluptuous racks, which is [[permanently]] a [[congratulated]] [[anymore]], and [[Furey]] Bernsen is finally offered the chance again to depict a mean-spirited and egocentric bastard. Great "MoH" episode; definitely one of the [[emphasise]] of both seasons. --------------------------------------------- Result 5102 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far the worst film I have seen in my entire life. The acting is poor and the storyline is almost incomprehensible. Whether or not you like lightships or any ships for that matter is irrelevant. As for special effects the film has none. The whole film crew were probably on the boat out in rough seas rather than in a studio and when some of the men are "stabbed" (if you can even call it that) their reactions are totally unreal. The guns are more quiet than a mute. How this film could have one two awards puts serious questions to the state of the human mind. Well thats about it. This review is probably more fun to read than the film is to watch. If anyone is considering watching it or buying it I would seriously advise you against it for obvious reasons. I have said that it includes a spoiler. If the fact that some people get stabbed and a gun gets fired is a plot giveaway. I suppose it is because they are the only good parts of the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Indian Summer is a good film. It made me feel good and I thought the cast was exceptional. How about Sam Raimi playing the camp buffoon. I thought his scenes were very funny in a Buster Keaton-like performance. Solid directing and nice cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 5104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] this [[movie]] was a [[horrible]] [[excuse]] for...a [[movie]]. first of all, the casting [[could]] have been better; Katelyn the [[main]] character looked nothing like her TV [[mom]].

also, the plot was pathedic. it was [[extremely]] cliché and predictable. the ending was very [[disappointing]] and [[cheesy]]. (but [[thats]] all i'll [[say]] about that).

the nail in the [[bag]] [[though]], was a scene when Katelyn ([[jordan]] hinson) was supposed to be crying, but the girl couldn't cry on command! there were no tears streaming down her [[face]], just a few [[unbelievable]] [[sobs]]. she is not a dynamic [[actress]] at all. she gave the same [[fake]] [[little]] laugh [[identical]] to that of [[hillary]] duff on [[lizzie]] Maguire (sp?). thats when the [[movie]] went from not-so-good, to just plain [[bad]]. it really looked [[like]] she was acting.

in a nutshell: this [[movie]] was really [[bad]]! it was [[kind]] of a [[mix]] of [[every]] cliché kid [[movie]] from the 1990's that everyone's sick of--only [[worse]]!

i [[give]] it an 'F', because it was just so darn [[hard]] to sit through (b/t/w, i was babysitting when i saw it).

[[however]], you may [[like]] it if your 9 or under. ;) this [[filmmaking]] was a [[scary]] [[alibis]] for...a [[filmmaking]]. first of all, the casting [[did]] have been better; Katelyn the [[principal]] character looked nothing like her TV [[mommy]].

also, the plot was pathedic. it was [[considerably]] cliché and predictable. the ending was very [[depressing]] and [[corny]]. (but [[haha]] all i'll [[tell]] about that).

the nail in the [[baggies]] [[although]], was a scene when Katelyn ([[giordano]] hinson) was supposed to be crying, but the girl couldn't cry on command! there were no tears streaming down her [[confronts]], just a few [[fabulous]] [[tears]]. she is not a dynamic [[actor]] at all. she gave the same [[spurious]] [[scant]] laugh [[selfsame]] to that of [[hilary]] duff on [[liz]] Maguire (sp?). thats when the [[flick]] went from not-so-good, to just plain [[rotten]]. it really looked [[iike]] she was acting.

in a nutshell: this [[filmmaking]] was really [[unfavourable]]! it was [[kinds]] of a [[amalgam]] of [[any]] cliché kid [[cinema]] from the 1990's that everyone's sick of--only [[pire]]!

i [[confer]] it an 'F', because it was just so darn [[tough]] to sit through (b/t/w, i was babysitting when i saw it).

[[still]], you may [[likes]] it if your 9 or under. ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 5105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a German film from 1974 that is something to do with some women who come to a castle and beyond that, I can't really tell you their purpose or even what the purpose of the movie is. I can tell you that there's several women who also moonlight as servants at this particular castle who strip, put on body paint and gyrate to bongos like they were at the Goth Kit-Kat Klub, though, and that seems to be a good portion of the run time of this film. Yeah, there seems to be something with devil worship and vampires, and there's some girl on girl stuff, etc., but the main focus seems to be the painted babes gyrating away in the basement. I did rather like the eye-rolling of one of the main housekeepers/devil worshipers, that lent an authenticity to the proceedings and made her even more evil-looking. Was that Wanda the Evil Lesbian (as billed in the credits)? No matter. If you aren't too picky about your lesbian devil worshiping movies, you might like this, otherwise it's pretty dull stuff and I couldn't even finish it, I was so bored. 3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think it great example of the differences between two cultures. It would be a great movie to show in a sociology class. I thought it was pretty funny and I must say that i am a sucker for that "lets band together and get the job done" plot device. It seems most people don't realize that this movie is not just a comedy. It has a few dramatic elements in it as well and I think they blend in nicely. Overall, I give it a solid 8. --------------------------------------------- Result 5107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I've just [[returned]] from a showing of "My [[Left]] Foot" at our public [[library]]. What an [[emotional]] [[experience]] -- I feel drained and uplifted.

It's the story of Christy [[Brown]], Irish writer and painter, and based on the author's autobiographical "My Left [[Foot]]." [[Christy]] was born with a form of cerebral [[palsy]] such that the only limb he had good control of was his [[left]] foot. Doctors advised his [[parents]] he was hopelessly mentally [[retarded]] but his mother didn't [[give]] up on him and, [[somewhat]] as Annie Sullivan had [[done]] with [[Helen]] Keller, [[helped]] him [[achieve]] a breakthrough in which he [[learned]] the alphabet and then to read, write, and [[paint]].

This [[film]] won Academy Awards for [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis (best actor) as well as best supporting [[actress]] for the actress [[playing]] his [[mother]]; it also received [[Oscar]] [[nominations]] for best [[picture]], best [[director]], and [[best]] [[adapted]] screenplay.

As a retired clinical psychologist and family [[therapist]], while [[many]] [[films]] may entertain me, [[many]] [[also]] [[often]] [[leave]] me having to [[overlook]] gross fictions or improbabilities in [[realistic]] [[psychological]] [[reactions]].

Not this film--it was [[absolutely]] "spot on" in portraying typical Irish parental [[roles]] & behaviors ([[see]], e.g., [[see]] typical Irish [[families]] in McGoldrick's "[[Ethnicity]] & Family [[Therapy]]") as well [[Christy]] Brown's uneven [[emotional]] maturation--some immature personality [[reactions]] that were even further [[amplified]] by his [[picking]] up [[traits]] of his father.

The [[film]] [[presents]] the [[greater]] truth while [[changing]] certain sequences in his [[development]] ([[painting]] & [[writing]]) and condensing several [[important]] people into one [[person]], for the sake of [[telling]] a coherent, [[believable]] [[story]], not [[burdened]] by [[small]], [[distracting]], [[less]] [[important]] actualities. ([[See]] [[Christy]] Brown in Wikipedia for more [[accuracy]].) The DVD version we were [[shown]] had some English [[subtitles]] that were a [[great]] help in understanding Christy's [[speech]] (& some of the Irish speech); the [[initial]] [[release]] of the [[film]] may have lacked this. (If you see this on DVD, [[enable]] that [[option]].)

The performance by [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis is one of the [[greatest]], [[believable]] acting jobs I've ever [[seen]]. [[Truly]] [[magnificent]], [[outstanding]], superlative.

"My [[Left]] [[Foot]]" bears more than some similarity to a more recent film, "The Diving Bell & the Butterfly," in that each portrays the life of a real person successfully surmounting the imprisonment and isolation of an extremely severe physical handicap.

And in doing so, it resonates with William Ernest Henley's "Invictus" which begins: "Out of the night that covers me,//Black as the Pit from pole to pole,//I thank whatever gods may be//For my unconquerable soul." I've just [[revert]] from a showing of "My [[Exited]] Foot" at our public [[bookstore]]. What an [[sentimental]] [[experiences]] -- I feel drained and uplifted.

It's the story of Christy [[Brownish]], Irish writer and painter, and based on the author's autobiographical "My Left [[Footing]]." [[Kristy]] was born with a form of cerebral [[paralysis]] such that the only limb he had good control of was his [[exited]] foot. Doctors advised his [[parent]] he was hopelessly mentally [[nutcase]] but his mother didn't [[lend]] up on him and, [[rather]] as Annie Sullivan had [[played]] with [[Hackett]] Keller, [[supporting]] him [[reach]] a breakthrough in which he [[learns]] the alphabet and then to read, write, and [[painted]].

This [[cinematography]] won Academy Awards for [[Daniela]] Day-Lewis (best actor) as well as best supporting [[actor]] for the actress [[play]] his [[mummy]]; it also received [[Oskar]] [[nominees]] for best [[photographs]], best [[superintendent]], and [[better]] [[adjusted]] screenplay.

As a retired clinical psychologist and family [[psychologist]], while [[multiple]] [[movies]] may entertain me, [[several]] [[further]] [[normally]] [[leaving]] me having to [[ignoring]] gross fictions or improbabilities in [[practical]] [[mental]] [[reply]].

Not this film--it was [[altogether]] "spot on" in portraying typical Irish parental [[duties]] & behaviors ([[behold]], e.g., [[seeing]] typical Irish [[family]] in McGoldrick's "[[Ethnic]] & Family [[Treatments]]") as well [[Christie]] Brown's uneven [[sentimental]] maturation--some immature personality [[responses]] that were even further [[compounded]] by his [[gathering]] up [[characters]] of his father.

The [[kino]] [[presenting]] the [[biggest]] truth while [[modifying]] certain sequences in his [[developments]] ([[paint]] & [[writes]]) and condensing several [[critical]] people into one [[someone]], for the sake of [[saying]] a coherent, [[credible]] [[stories]], not [[load]] by [[petite]], [[embarrassing]], [[lesser]] [[critical]] actualities. ([[Seeing]] [[Christie]] Brown in Wikipedia for more [[precision]].) The DVD version we were [[revealed]] had some English [[caption]] that were a [[super]] help in understanding Christy's [[speeches]] (& some of the Irish speech); the [[original]] [[liberating]] of the [[cinematography]] may have lacked this. (If you see this on DVD, [[lets]] that [[alternatives]].)

The performance by [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis is one of the [[higher]], [[trustworthy]] acting jobs I've ever [[noticed]]. [[Honestly]] [[wondrous]], [[wondrous]], superlative.

"My [[Exited]] [[Footing]]" bears more than some similarity to a more recent film, "The Diving Bell & the Butterfly," in that each portrays the life of a real person successfully surmounting the imprisonment and isolation of an extremely severe physical handicap.

And in doing so, it resonates with William Ernest Henley's "Invictus" which begins: "Out of the night that covers me,//Black as the Pit from pole to pole,//I thank whatever gods may be//For my unconquerable soul." --------------------------------------------- Result 5108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably the worst film I've ever seen, the acting and story were terrible and I almost fell asleep. The only good actor was Colm Meaney. I had the impression to see the same scenes again and again until the end, no emotion, no charisma...nothing ! --------------------------------------------- Result 5109 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The sitcom [[revolved]] [[around]] a girl who [[must]] learn to be responsible for her own [[actions]]. As she had the power of [[magic]], she often used it to try to [[help]] her loved ones or herself, frequently [[resulting]] in literal puns that are [[often]] disastrous and [[always]] humorous.

The [[program]] [[began]] with Sabrina's [[adventures]] in high school in the [[fictional]] [[town]] of Westbridge, [[located]] near Boston, Massachusetts (as opposed to Greendale in the comics). [[In]] the series' later seasons, Sabrina graduated from high school and enrolled in college, then moved on to her attempts to live on her own and keep a job at the local newspaper. Breaking further from its comic [[roots]], the show ended with Sabrina's [[wedding]], [[although]], in the end, she abandoned the wedding and ran off with [[Harvey]].

Many episodes involve Sabrina getting to meet, through natural or supernatural means, popular real-life musical artists of the time, including Coolio, the Violent Femmes, the Backstreet Boys, Phantom Planet, Davy Jones of The Monkees, Britney Spears, Avril Lavigne, Daniel Bedingfield, Hanson, Eden's Crush, Savage Garden, 'N Sync, and Ashanti. Course of Nature, the band of Melissa Joan Hart's then-boyfriend (now husband) Mark Wilkerson, appeared in an episode in 2002. The sitcom [[turned]] [[throughout]] a girl who [[ought]] learn to be responsible for her own [[measurements]]. As she had the power of [[hallucinogenic]], she often used it to try to [[succour]] her loved ones or herself, frequently [[result]] in literal puns that are [[ordinarily]] disastrous and [[repeatedly]] humorous.

The [[programming]] [[begun]] with Sabrina's [[shenanigans]] in high school in the [[bogus]] [[urban]] of Westbridge, [[positioned]] near Boston, Massachusetts (as opposed to Greendale in the comics). [[Into]] the series' later seasons, Sabrina graduated from high school and enrolled in college, then moved on to her attempts to live on her own and keep a job at the local newspaper. Breaking further from its comic [[root]], the show ended with Sabrina's [[wed]], [[despite]], in the end, she abandoned the wedding and ran off with [[Harve]].

Many episodes involve Sabrina getting to meet, through natural or supernatural means, popular real-life musical artists of the time, including Coolio, the Violent Femmes, the Backstreet Boys, Phantom Planet, Davy Jones of The Monkees, Britney Spears, Avril Lavigne, Daniel Bedingfield, Hanson, Eden's Crush, Savage Garden, 'N Sync, and Ashanti. Course of Nature, the band of Melissa Joan Hart's then-boyfriend (now husband) Mark Wilkerson, appeared in an episode in 2002. --------------------------------------------- Result 5110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Oh where to [[begin]]. The [[cinematography]] was great. When the movie first started because of the initial landscape scenes I thought that I was in for a good [[movie]]. Then the cgi [[Bigfoot]] [[showed]] up .It looked like a cartoon drawing of the Lion king and king Kong's love child.It totally took away from the believability of the character.Now I knew there wasn't a [[Bigfoot]] chasing people hiking around the woods for no apparent reason but a cheesy cgi cartoon.[[So]] from then on the [[whole]] [[movie]] was [[shot]] for me.The money they flushed down the [[toilet]] for the cgi they could of spent on a costume like roger Patterson did. His was the best Bigfoot costume ever no one else could match his.I am a hardcore cheesy Bigfoot movie fan and I was warned about this movie but my compulsion led me to watching this movie and I was [[disappointed]] [[like]] the previous reviews warned me about. I know after you read this review you will still say "I must watch Sasquatch hunters,must watch Sasquatch hunters." Then you will say why did I waste my good hard earned money on such a [[excruciatingly]] bad boring movie! Oh where to [[lancer]]. The [[film]] was great. When the movie first started because of the initial landscape scenes I thought that I was in for a good [[kino]]. Then the cgi [[Yeti]] [[evidenced]] up .It looked like a cartoon drawing of the Lion king and king Kong's love child.It totally took away from the believability of the character.Now I knew there wasn't a [[Sasquatch]] chasing people hiking around the woods for no apparent reason but a cheesy cgi cartoon.[[Therefore]] from then on the [[together]] [[filmmaking]] was [[filmed]] for me.The money they flushed down the [[wc]] for the cgi they could of spent on a costume like roger Patterson did. His was the best Bigfoot costume ever no one else could match his.I am a hardcore cheesy Bigfoot movie fan and I was warned about this movie but my compulsion led me to watching this movie and I was [[disillusioned]] [[iike]] the previous reviews warned me about. I know after you read this review you will still say "I must watch Sasquatch hunters,must watch Sasquatch hunters." Then you will say why did I waste my good hard earned money on such a [[horribly]] bad boring movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 5111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm a fan of the series and have read all 7 books. I [[wanted]] to see this just to see how it was done. All i can say, is that the only people who should watch this are ones who have already read the series and are curious about it. Its pretty [[bad]], and will turn you off reading them. Not to be mean, but Lucy is so ugly it detracts from the movie. Was she the [[directors]] daughter? Seriously, I'm sure the beavers in the movie were jealous of her teeth. She had an overbite that would put any beaver to shame. The movie just [[loses]] so much in translation. CS books don't translate as easily as the Tolkein LOTR books, or even Harry Potter.

One thing they did right! Aslan! very well done. Although the other human actors with painted faces ( beavers, wolf) look silly, Aslan was really well done since it was not just a human actor walking around. ( i guess its like that old horse custume? 2 people inside? ) Also, i would be curious what kids think of this movie. Maybe they would enjoy it? But as for adults, safe bet they wont, even if a CS fan. I'm a fan of the series and have read all 7 books. I [[wished]] to see this just to see how it was done. All i can say, is that the only people who should watch this are ones who have already read the series and are curious about it. Its pretty [[unfavourable]], and will turn you off reading them. Not to be mean, but Lucy is so ugly it detracts from the movie. Was she the [[managers]] daughter? Seriously, I'm sure the beavers in the movie were jealous of her teeth. She had an overbite that would put any beaver to shame. The movie just [[looses]] so much in translation. CS books don't translate as easily as the Tolkein LOTR books, or even Harry Potter.

One thing they did right! Aslan! very well done. Although the other human actors with painted faces ( beavers, wolf) look silly, Aslan was really well done since it was not just a human actor walking around. ( i guess its like that old horse custume? 2 people inside? ) Also, i would be curious what kids think of this movie. Maybe they would enjoy it? But as for adults, safe bet they wont, even if a CS fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 5112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] What people fail to [[understand]] about this movie is that it isn't a [[beginning]], [[middle]], and end, it is just the [[conclusion]] of a 26 episode [[long]] [[TV]] [[series]]. [[So]] [[remember]] that when you all [[talk]] about how the [[world]] wasn't explored [[enough]]. That was all [[done]] in the TV [[show]].

As [[great]] and [[stunning]] as the visuals are, I [[think]] the ***SPOILERS*** [[argument]] between Lian-Chu and Gwizdo near the [[end]] of the [[film]] was what [[really]] made me [[love]] this [[movie]]. Seeing characters I had followed through 26 [[episodes]] fight like that was agonizing, and [[seeing]] Gwizdo walking [[sadly]] off by himself amidst the floating [[ruins]] while Lian-Chu sharpened his [[blade]] was [[almost]] tear-jerking.

Then we [[got]] a total [[contrast]] with Lian-Chu fighting these [[insanely]] [[awesome]] [[dragons]] ([[Which]] had been featured before in the [[series]]) while Gwizdo is babbling insanely and indirectly [[threatening]] to [[kill]] Zoe. *Shudder* I'm [[surprised]] that this [[particular]] scene hasn't been [[mentioned]] more in the warnings. Any [[kid]] that has a [[lick]] of [[sense]] will be [[able]] to see that Gwizdo wasn't himself and was [[fully]] [[intent]] on strangling that [[little]] [[girl]]. It was [[enough]] to bother me, and I'm 15.

The [[world]] is amazing, the plot is a [[lot]] [[better]] than most multi-million blockbusters, and it was a nice [[way]] to see some of my [[favorite]] [[characters]] [[go]]. [[Check]] it out. :) What people fail to [[fathom]] about this movie is that it isn't a [[beginnings]], [[mid]], and end, it is just the [[conclusions]] of a 26 episode [[lang]] [[TELEVISION]] [[serial]]. [[Thus]] [[reminisce]] that when you all [[discussing]] about how the [[worldwide]] wasn't explored [[adequately]]. That was all [[doing]] in the TV [[showings]].

As [[gorgeous]] and [[fabulous]] as the visuals are, I [[reckon]] the ***SPOILERS*** [[controversy]] between Lian-Chu and Gwizdo near the [[terminating]] of the [[movie]] was what [[truthfully]] made me [[amour]] this [[cinematography]]. Seeing characters I had followed through 26 [[spells]] fight like that was agonizing, and [[witnessing]] Gwizdo walking [[unfortunately]] off by himself amidst the floating [[ruin]] while Lian-Chu sharpened his [[blades]] was [[virtually]] tear-jerking.

Then we [[did]] a total [[contrasts]] with Lian-Chu fighting these [[shockingly]] [[astonishing]] [[dragoons]] ([[Whose]] had been featured before in the [[serials]]) while Gwizdo is babbling insanely and indirectly [[menacing]] to [[assassinate]] Zoe. *Shudder* I'm [[stunned]] that this [[singular]] scene hasn't been [[quoted]] more in the warnings. Any [[children]] that has a [[suck]] of [[sensing]] will be [[capable]] to see that Gwizdo wasn't himself and was [[perfectly]] [[purpose]] on strangling that [[tiny]] [[chick]]. It was [[adequately]] to bother me, and I'm 15.

The [[monde]] is amazing, the plot is a [[batch]] [[best]] than most multi-million blockbusters, and it was a nice [[ways]] to see some of my [[preferred]] [[character]] [[going]]. [[Audits]] it out. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Someone]] [[actually]] [[gave]] this [[movie]] 2 [[stars]]. There's a very high [[chance]] they need [[immediate]] professional [[help]] as [[anyone]] who doesn't [[spend]] 30 seconds to see if you can [[award]] no stars is [[quite]] literally scary.

This film is ... well ... I guess it's [[pretty]] much some [[kind]] of [[attempt]] at a [[horrible]] porn / snuff movie with no porn or no [[real]] horrible [[bits]] ([[apart]] from the acting, plot, [[story]], sets, [[dialogue]] and sound). I [[wrongly]] assumed it was about [[zombies]].

[[Watching]] it is actually quite scary in fairness; you're [[terrified]] [[someone]] will come over and you'll never be able to describe what it is and they'll [[go]] away [[thinking]] you're a freak that watches home-made [[amateur]] torture [[videos]] or something along those lines.

I'm so taken aback I'm writing this [[review]] on my mobile so I don't forget to attempt to bring the rating down further than the [[current]] 1.6 to [[save]] others from the same [[horrible]] fate that I just suffered.

I [[worst]] film I've ever [[seen]] and I can say (with hand on heart) it will never, never be [[topped]]. [[Everybody]] [[indeed]] [[supplied]] this [[filmmaking]] 2 [[star]]. There's a very high [[opportunities]] they need [[forthwith]] professional [[helps]] as [[person]] who doesn't [[spends]] 30 seconds to see if you can [[scholarship]] no stars is [[rather]] literally scary.

This film is ... well ... I guess it's [[quite]] much some [[genre]] of [[try]] at a [[scary]] porn / snuff movie with no porn or no [[actual]] horrible [[tib]] ([[also]] from the acting, plot, [[tales]], sets, [[discussions]] and sound). I [[incorrectly]] assumed it was about [[walkers]].

[[Staring]] it is actually quite scary in fairness; you're [[scared]] [[everybody]] will come over and you'll never be able to describe what it is and they'll [[going]] away [[thought]] you're a freak that watches home-made [[enthusiast]] torture [[tapes]] or something along those lines.

I'm so taken aback I'm writing this [[scrutinize]] on my mobile so I don't forget to attempt to bring the rating down further than the [[ongoing]] 1.6 to [[rescues]] others from the same [[fearsome]] fate that I just suffered.

I [[meanest]] film I've ever [[watched]] and I can say (with hand on heart) it will never, never be [[exceeded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5114 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] at the beginning i was happy to know about a new superman movie , i though that will be great but it wasn't.

is a [[bad]] copy of the Richard Donner work,Lex is again a villain that makes no more else , even played by Kevin spice.

the evil plan is the same of the first movie of Donner just a lot [[forced]].

the [[script]] is [[predictable]] and simple (all stuff Luthor finds in a museum or an old lady).

the story is the [[wrong]] thing , it must be the Kevin Smith Script and may be it could be better.

i just hope a sequel without Brian Singer and with a new talent director to do something new and not a copy.

all read you later at the beginning i was happy to know about a new superman movie , i though that will be great but it wasn't.

is a [[unfavourable]] copy of the Richard Donner work,Lex is again a villain that makes no more else , even played by Kevin spice.

the evil plan is the same of the first movie of Donner just a lot [[compelled]].

the [[scripts]] is [[foreseeable]] and simple (all stuff Luthor finds in a museum or an old lady).

the story is the [[incorrect]] thing , it must be the Kevin Smith Script and may be it could be better.

i just hope a sequel without Brian Singer and with a new talent director to do something new and not a copy.

all read you later --------------------------------------------- Result 5115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As gently as I can, I sincerely believe this movie is a waste of time. I did not find it the 'warm, emotionally satisfying' film others did. I found it boring, with music that distracted from the film. The story was thin, the characters overdrawn, and the direction pedestrian.

Fooey.

Now I'm going to write some more about this movie, so I make the 10 line minimum. There really isn't more to be said and brevity is important, but IMDb has its minimums, so here goes.

Young eager kid finds nascent talent, seeks time with aging, embittered mentor in spite of father's cartoonish homophobia. Aging, embittered mentor turns out to drink a lot and teach very little. conflict arises. While I don't think this is a spoiler, I've added the warning in case someone feels this much information is too much.

Mostly, I just found the film boring and pretentious. A waste of my time. I honestly don't understand what little fuss there seems to be, mostly on this web site, about the transcendent quality of this movie. I think it's really worth avoiding. But, as Dennis Miller used to say, "Maybe I'm wrong." --------------------------------------------- Result 5116 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[First]] of all this was not a three [[hour]] [[movie]] - Two hours, ten minutes... last time i checked commercials aren't actually part of a [[movie]]! [[Perhaps]], [[though]], it should've been a two parter for a total of about 3 hours? Yeah, would have gotten more in, been able to explore some more emotion. [[Overall]], though, it was an interesting look into the lives of Lucy and Desi. I watch I Love Lucy from time to [[time]] and [[love]] it but never have I read or [[seen]] a [[biography]], never knew anything about their lives off the screen. Because of this movie I do now but I'm not so sure that's a good thing. [[Everything]] here no one really needed to know. This was essentially a movie that didn't need to be made. But it was made and the [[reason]] is because [[Lucy]] & Desi are [[still]] such [[huge]] [[stars]] and certain people in American [[society]] feel that the [[rest]] of [[society]] [[needs]] to know ALL about our tv and [[movie]] [[stars]]. That is [[definitely]] so not [[true]] and very, very [[sad]].

[[Anyway]], what was [[shown]] here in Lucy was [[pretty]] good. Two [[complaints]] - the [[actress]] who [[played]] Viv Vance - not [[great]] casting at all. And the [[switch]] from Madeline Zima to Rachel York.... [[uhhh]], like Lucy had plastic surgery and all of a [[sudden]] she's a [[whole]] [[new]] [[person]]!? That wasn't too [[great]]. But the story went on and [[focused]] on the rocky [[relationship]] between Lucy & Desi. [[No]], the kids were not [[shown]] very much at all and that wasn't necessarily a [[drawback]] to this [[movie]] because like I [[said]], this [[focused]] [[mainly]] just on Lucy & Desi. [[Had]] there been more [[time]], had the [[story]] been more about Lucy's [[entire]] life, then [[maybe]] the [[kids]] [[woulda]] been there more. But they weren't so we got to [[see]] the likes of Gable & Lombard, [[Red]] Skelton and Buster Keaton very briefly [[instead]]. [[Wow]], that was one [[thing]] about this story that I [[thought]] was [[really]] cool: his [[presence]] and [[influence]] in Lucy's life. [[Really]] neat and it's too [[bad]] that wasn't [[explored]] more. [[Oh]] well. What was [[explored]] was [[done]] well, for the most [[part]]. Honestly, I don't [[think]] I'll ever watch this again and I don't think this movie'll be that [[memorable]]. For [[someone]] who [[digs]] I Love [[Lucy]] but isn't an [[enormous]] Lucille Ball fan, this should be an interesting watch. My grade for this: B [[Outset]] of all this was not a three [[hours]] [[cinematography]] - Two hours, ten minutes... last time i checked commercials aren't actually part of a [[movies]]! [[Possibly]], [[albeit]], it should've been a two parter for a total of about 3 hours? Yeah, would have gotten more in, been able to explore some more emotion. [[Totals]], though, it was an interesting look into the lives of Lucy and Desi. I watch I Love Lucy from time to [[times]] and [[loved]] it but never have I read or [[watched]] a [[biographies]], never knew anything about their lives off the screen. Because of this movie I do now but I'm not so sure that's a good thing. [[Entire]] here no one really needed to know. This was essentially a movie that didn't need to be made. But it was made and the [[motive]] is because [[Lucie]] & Desi are [[nonetheless]] such [[considerable]] [[superstar]] and certain people in American [[societies]] feel that the [[resting]] of [[societies]] [[need]] to know ALL about our tv and [[flick]] [[superstar]]. That is [[certainly]] so not [[authentic]] and very, very [[unfortunate]].

[[Writ]], what was [[displayed]] here in Lucy was [[belle]] good. Two [[grievance]] - the [[actor]] who [[served]] Viv Vance - not [[remarkable]] casting at all. And the [[switching]] from Madeline Zima to Rachel York.... [[uhmm]], like Lucy had plastic surgery and all of a [[abrupt]] she's a [[overall]] [[newest]] [[persona]]!? That wasn't too [[awesome]]. But the story went on and [[concentrating]] on the rocky [[relationships]] between Lucy & Desi. [[Nope]], the kids were not [[display]] very much at all and that wasn't necessarily a [[shortcoming]] to this [[cinematography]] because like I [[told]], this [[concentrated]] [[essentially]] just on Lucy & Desi. [[Has]] there been more [[moment]], had the [[stories]] been more about Lucy's [[whole]] life, then [[probably]] the [[kid]] [[coulda]] been there more. But they weren't so we got to [[behold]] the likes of Gable & Lombard, [[Reid]] Skelton and Buster Keaton very briefly [[conversely]]. [[Whoa]], that was one [[stuff]] about this story that I [[ideology]] was [[truly]] cool: his [[participation]] and [[influences]] in Lucy's life. [[Truly]] neat and it's too [[amiss]] that wasn't [[exploring]] more. [[Aw]] well. What was [[exploring]] was [[completed]] well, for the most [[portions]]. Honestly, I don't [[believing]] I'll ever watch this again and I don't think this movie'll be that [[eventful]]. For [[somebody]] who [[excavation]] I Love [[Lucie]] but isn't an [[sizable]] Lucille Ball fan, this should be an interesting watch. My grade for this: B --------------------------------------------- Result 5117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] If you want to watch a film that is oddly shot, oddly lit, weird stories of these men (and one woman) who [[enjoy]] beating the crap out of each other, if you want to [[enjoy]] a story that goes nowhere of these two guys, one a boxer and the other a gay man, then you should watch this film.

After watching this film, I almost [[felt]] as badly bruised up and [[cut]] up, [[like]] the [[director]] (of the film) himself beat the hell out of me.

This is a [[movie]] where one is not meant to watch for plot or for [[great]] acting, this is a film to gawk at in horror and wonder. A lot like watching an airplane crash or a train wreck.

If you want to watch a great movie, a good movie, a "B" movie, or even a mediocre movie, this [[movie]] is not it.

A warning to all who watch this film, please don't eat beforehand. You might want to puke by the end of the film. If you want to watch a film that is oddly shot, oddly lit, weird stories of these men (and one woman) who [[enjoys]] beating the crap out of each other, if you want to [[enjoys]] a story that goes nowhere of these two guys, one a boxer and the other a gay man, then you should watch this film.

After watching this film, I almost [[believed]] as badly bruised up and [[sliced]] up, [[iike]] the [[superintendent]] (of the film) himself beat the hell out of me.

This is a [[filmmaking]] where one is not meant to watch for plot or for [[resplendent]] acting, this is a film to gawk at in horror and wonder. A lot like watching an airplane crash or a train wreck.

If you want to watch a great movie, a good movie, a "B" movie, or even a mediocre movie, this [[filmmaking]] is not it.

A warning to all who watch this film, please don't eat beforehand. You might want to puke by the end of the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5118 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I still don't know why I forced myself to sit through the whole thing. This "film" wasn't worth the Memorex DVD-R it was burned on; I thought I was watching the end result of a group of middle schoolers stealing their parents' camcorder. This is by far the worst movie ever made. I truly, from the bottom of my heart, want to sue Aaron Yamasato for the two hours he stole from my life.

So apparently, it's supposed to be bad on purpose; However, if you should end up in Hell and are forced to watch this 90-minute coil of doo-doo, you'll see that Yamasato is really trying hard to make an awesome flick. The actors attempt dramatic kick-ass performances comparable to Crimson Tide but come closer to The Marine.

The crap acting is just the tip of the iceberg. The camera angles are awful. The story is C-movie at best-- the plot isn't even good enough to be considered B-movie caliber. The dialogue attempts to be dynamic and witty, but is crap like everything else. Rumor has it that a hard copy of the screenplay actually attracts flies. Plus, the techno score is annoying... not because it's techno, but because it's NON-STOP. That's right, the music plays in the background THE WHOLE TIME, acting as a subliminal reminder of how bad this thing is. I don't care what the disclaimer claims, I don't buy it. BOTS was not made this bad on purpose, because it takes itself WAY too serious for what it was: a joke.

This "film" was very low-budget. But that is no excuse for its record-setting suck factor. Great films are born of substance, not budget. BOTS had neither.

Allow me to further articulate the overwhelming power of this 90-minute waste of time: if I were having a three-way with Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel in front of a TV and Blood of the Samurai came on, I'd be out of there quicker than Steven Seagal in Executive Decision.

Undoubtedly, some people will try to defend the movie. Two, maybe three. They'll say, "it's grindhouse chop-socky!" or "cheesy in a good way!" or "it's so bad, it's good!" Those people are idiots. A movie is either good, or it's bad. There's no such thing as a good bad movie. But there ARE such things as idiots that like crappy movies. Don't get me wrong; there are lots of cornball not-to-be-taken-seriously movies out there that are enjoyable and entertaining. Slither is one. BOTS is not.

This suckfest runs about an hour and a half, and in my humble opinion, it's 90 minutes too long. The best thing about this "film" is the DVD cover, so next time you're near the Wal-Mart DVD bargain bin, take a look at it-- DON'T TOUCH IT, just look-- and quietly walk away. --------------------------------------------- Result 5119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] While channel surfing, we found this movie with its promising synopsis. We were [[dismayed]] at the flat acting, and formulaic storyline. We found amusing the exploding [[car]] scenes, unbelievable shoot outs, and sets that crash down with the weight of tyro-foam and [[cardboard]]. What was even more hilarious was seeing all the [[recycled]] scenes from "Dante's Peak", where the church front falls on the school bus, the store fronts break away from the main street, the overpass collapsing, and the red truck speeding down the alley way as the bricks fall down on it. It was a good laugh although unintended, and leaves the viewer wondering if it was not originally intended as a low budget spoof of disaster films. While channel surfing, we found this movie with its promising synopsis. We were [[distressed]] at the flat acting, and formulaic storyline. We found amusing the exploding [[auto]] scenes, unbelievable shoot outs, and sets that crash down with the weight of tyro-foam and [[luge]]. What was even more hilarious was seeing all the [[reclaimed]] scenes from "Dante's Peak", where the church front falls on the school bus, the store fronts break away from the main street, the overpass collapsing, and the red truck speeding down the alley way as the bricks fall down on it. It was a good laugh although unintended, and leaves the viewer wondering if it was not originally intended as a low budget spoof of disaster films. --------------------------------------------- Result 5120 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] SPOILERS

In the [[words]] of Jean-Paul Sartre, "Hell is other people". In "The [[Odd]] Couple", Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau demonstrate just how accurate this can be. As [[Felix]] Ungar and [[Oscar]] Madison, Lemmon and Matthau respectively create two [[good]] [[friends]] who [[decide]] to [[live]] together. As the two [[begin]] to slowly grow more and more [[frustrated]] with each other, the [[laughs]] [[come]] thick and fast, before [[Felix]] departs, leaving Oscar a [[changed]] and more cleanly individual.

[[Jack]] Lemmon as Ungar is [[absolutely]] [[superb]] as the neurotic, [[cleaning]] obsessed divorcee [[coping]] with [[life]] as a [[single]] [[man]]. [[Walter]] Matthau in contrast to Lemmon's [[character]] is [[equally]] as good as the slobbish sports writer who [[simply]] [[wants]] to play poker to earn money for his [[child]] benefits.

Lemmon and Matthau are magnificant in their selected parts, to some degree [[dependent]] upon the [[beautiful]] script by Neil Simon, and [[simultaneously]] because they work well as a team. As two [[friends]] who are [[inherently]] [[different]] in lifestyles, [[although]] [[similar]] in [[relationships]] with ex-wives and [[children]], these two, late, [[great]] [[actors]] [[create]] a [[partnership]] which is [[practically]] [[impossible]] to [[recreate]]. So [[great]] in [[fact]], that the [[world]] [[screamed]] out so [[much]] for [[something]] [[similar]], that two [[years]] before Matthau's [[death]] and three before Lemmon's, the [[characters]] were reunited in an inferior sequel. This [[idea]], whilst following Hollywood's irritating obsession with sequels, might have worked to a certain [[degree]], but at the same [[time]], it [[could]] never come close to [[replicating]] the genius of this original [[film]].

Ultimately it's not really [[possible]] to [[say]] anything else. With Simon's [[amazing]] [[script]], [[filled]] with [[humour]] and laughter, the creators of this [[film]] were already [[onto]] a hit. The [[casting]] of Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau as Felix Ungar and Oscar Madison [[though]], is the most [[important]] part of this film. "The [[Odd]] [[Couple]]", with it's [[traditional]] soundtrack (which even gained a tribute in "The [[Simpsons]]"), it's [[excellent]] script and it's genius leading men, is a tribute to cinema and a feature for history to remember. SPOILERS

In the [[mots]] of Jean-Paul Sartre, "Hell is other people". In "The [[Peculiar]] Couple", Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau demonstrate just how accurate this can be. As [[Vasquez]] Ungar and [[Oskar]] Madison, Lemmon and Matthau respectively create two [[buena]] [[friendships]] who [[decides]] to [[vive]] together. As the two [[lancer]] to slowly grow more and more [[disappointed]] with each other, the [[giggles]] [[arrived]] thick and fast, before [[Gonzalez]] departs, leaving Oscar a [[amended]] and more cleanly individual.

[[Jacque]] Lemmon as Ungar is [[completely]] [[wondrous]] as the neurotic, [[decontamination]] obsessed divorcee [[adapting]] with [[lifetime]] as a [[exclusive]] [[men]]. [[Walther]] Matthau in contrast to Lemmon's [[trait]] is [[alike]] as good as the slobbish sports writer who [[solely]] [[desires]] to play poker to earn money for his [[children]] benefits.

Lemmon and Matthau are magnificant in their selected parts, to some degree [[dependents]] upon the [[handsome]] script by Neil Simon, and [[meanwhile]] because they work well as a team. As two [[friend]] who are [[fundamentally]] [[distinct]] in lifestyles, [[albeit]] [[comparable]] in [[relations]] with ex-wives and [[childhood]], these two, late, [[super]] [[players]] [[creating]] a [[collaboration]] which is [[hardly]] [[unable]] to [[reestablish]]. So [[grand]] in [[facto]], that the [[monde]] [[groaned]] out so [[very]] for [[anything]] [[equivalent]], that two [[ages]] before Matthau's [[killings]] and three before Lemmon's, the [[features]] were reunited in an inferior sequel. This [[concept]], whilst following Hollywood's irritating obsession with sequels, might have worked to a certain [[diploma]], but at the same [[moment]], it [[did]] never come close to [[reproducing]] the genius of this original [[cinematography]].

Ultimately it's not really [[feasible]] to [[told]] anything else. With Simon's [[surprising]] [[hyphen]], [[filling]] with [[mood]] and laughter, the creators of this [[cinematography]] were already [[for]] a hit. The [[cast]] of Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau as Felix Ungar and Oscar Madison [[despite]], is the most [[major]] part of this film. "The [[Strange]] [[Matching]]", with it's [[classical]] soundtrack (which even gained a tribute in "The [[Simpson]]"), it's [[wondrous]] script and it's genius leading men, is a tribute to cinema and a feature for history to remember. --------------------------------------------- Result 5121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[thought]] this [[movie]] was [[pretty]] [[good]]. Some parts were corny but that's understandable [[since]] it was [[made]] more than 55 [[years]] [[ago]]. I thought the best performance in the [[movie]] was [[given]] by Michele Morgan who [[played]] Millie convincingly. [[Jack]] Haley is [[also]] really good as [[Mike]] O'Brien. [[Even]] [[though]] I'm not a [[big]] Frank Sinatra fan, I think he was very good in this [[movie]]. If your have a craving for a silly, over the top musical [[comedy]], [[Higher]] and [[Higher]] is the [[movie]] for you.

I [[brainchild]] this [[kino]] was [[belle]] [[alright]]. Some parts were corny but that's understandable [[because]] it was [[brought]] more than 55 [[olds]] [[prior]]. I thought the best performance in the [[flick]] was [[yielded]] by Michele Morgan who [[done]] Millie convincingly. [[Jacques]] Haley is [[apart]] really good as [[Mick]] O'Brien. [[Yet]] [[if]] I'm not a [[prodigious]] Frank Sinatra fan, I think he was very good in this [[films]]. If your have a craving for a silly, over the top musical [[travesty]], [[Upper]] and [[Upper]] is the [[kino]] for you.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think that this film adds to diversity and is very accurate in terms of historic reconstruction. The way it shows the various communities leaving together in Thailand is very interesting...The Portuguese, the Japanese, and the various communities being managed by the king. The plots around the court are as usual a struggle for power with a lot of treason. The wardrobe is fine. The film is also done locally in Thailand in a reasonable production. The scene with the elefant as executors is very interesting. It is fun and I think that is also usable in schools for its historic accuracy because it shows that the European in Asia were subjects of the local kings in way very different from the traditional Hollywood perspective. --------------------------------------------- Result 5123 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This has some excellent spots but the length of the film can not sustain the wafer thin plot. It is another sailors on leave film, zippier than Astaire's 'Follow the Fleet' but not as good as 'On The Town'.

Kathryn Grayson is bland but [[Kelly]] and Sinatra work well [[together]]. Their 'If you Knew Susie' number is hilarious as they make up the song as they sing it. 'I [[Begged]] Her' is [[also]] [[fun]] with Sinatra showing how adept he was at hoofing. Sinatra's solo songs are dull and seem to be inserted to show off his singing rather than as part of the story. Fortunately there are accomplished supporting actors like Grady Sutton, Rags Ragland, Carlos Ramirez and Pamela Britton and an unlikely but impertubable Jose Iturbi as himself, to keep one watching.

[[Kelly]] is the star of the film, although third billed and it is interesting to see him interact with children, which Astaire never did. Dean Stockwell plays a child who wants to be in the navy and [[latches]] on to the Kelly [[character]]. He also visit a school resulting in him telling the children a fictitious [[story]] of his life in the Pomeranian (!)navy which leads to his [[wonderful]] dance with an animated Jerry Mouse. In another scene he dances a charming Mexican Hat Dance with a sublimely [[grave]] [[faced]] [[little]] girl, Sharon McManus, that is [[entrancing]] and [[sweet]].

[[Very]] [[pleasant]] then but a [[bit]] too long. A taster of better musicals to come. This has some excellent spots but the length of the film can not sustain the wafer thin plot. It is another sailors on leave film, zippier than Astaire's 'Follow the Fleet' but not as good as 'On The Town'.

Kathryn Grayson is bland but [[Kelley]] and Sinatra work well [[jointly]]. Their 'If you Knew Susie' number is hilarious as they make up the song as they sing it. 'I [[Pleaded]] Her' is [[apart]] [[funny]] with Sinatra showing how adept he was at hoofing. Sinatra's solo songs are dull and seem to be inserted to show off his singing rather than as part of the story. Fortunately there are accomplished supporting actors like Grady Sutton, Rags Ragland, Carlos Ramirez and Pamela Britton and an unlikely but impertubable Jose Iturbi as himself, to keep one watching.

[[Kayleigh]] is the star of the film, although third billed and it is interesting to see him interact with children, which Astaire never did. Dean Stockwell plays a child who wants to be in the navy and [[closes]] on to the Kelly [[nature]]. He also visit a school resulting in him telling the children a fictitious [[conte]] of his life in the Pomeranian (!)navy which leads to his [[wondrous]] dance with an animated Jerry Mouse. In another scene he dances a charming Mexican Hat Dance with a sublimely [[graves]] [[encountered]] [[tiny]] girl, Sharon McManus, that is [[bewitching]] and [[sugary]].

[[Quite]] [[nice]] then but a [[bite]] too long. A taster of better musicals to come. --------------------------------------------- Result 5124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Robert Siodmak does a [[fabulous]] [[job]] with this B noir starring Ella Raines, Franchot Tone, and Alan Curtis. And he does it, I [[might]] [[add]], without a [[lot]] of help from his male actors, i.e., Curtis and Tone. It's Raines all the [[way]], a pretty, leggy [[actress]] who for one [[reason]] or another never [[reached]] the status of some of her "noir" [[counterparts]].

Siodmak's use of sex, light, shadows, and music is [[truly]] [[remarkable]] as he tackles this [[genre]]. The shadows, lighting effects, and camera angles are all effective. But the highlight of the film takes place in a nightclub with a very [[sexual]] drum riff by Elisha Cook, egged on by an excited Raines. It's this scene that [[brings]] "Phantom Lady" into [[new]] territory.

Siodmak's [[commitment]] to the material is [[matched]] only by Raines, who gives a [[sincere]] performance as a [[woman]] in [[love]] trying to [[save]] her man. Franchot Tone phoned this one in. [[Alan]] [[Curtis]] didn't [[seem]] [[upset]] that he might [[die]] and didn't [[seem]] [[happy]] that he lived. And he never, except for a [[brief]] [[moment]] in prison, [[seemed]] to be in [[love]] with Raines.

The [[amusing]] [[thing]] about [[many]] of these [[films]] is that, as [[World]] [[War]] II [[progressed]], interest in [[psychiatry]] [[deepened]]. But [[often]] the terms were [[used]] incorrectly in [[films]] such as "[[Possessed]]," "[[Spellbound]]," and "The [[Greatest]] [[Show]] on [[Earth]]." Tone is [[called]] paranoid by Thomas [[Gomez]] - Tone [[probably]] has some paranoia attached to his [[disorder]], but he appears to be [[closer]] to a [[psychopath]]. [[In]] actuality, as [[evidenced]] by his headaches, he may have had a brain [[tumor]] [[pushing]] against his brain.

[[Phantom]] [[Lady]] doesn't have the [[greatest]] plot, but it's well worth [[watching]]. Robert Siodmak does a [[excellent]] [[labour]] with this B noir starring Ella Raines, Franchot Tone, and Alan Curtis. And he does it, I [[probability]] [[adds]], without a [[batch]] of help from his male actors, i.e., Curtis and Tone. It's Raines all the [[route]], a pretty, leggy [[actor]] who for one [[motives]] or another never [[achieved]] the status of some of her "noir" [[counterpart]].

Siodmak's use of sex, light, shadows, and music is [[truthfully]] [[wondrous]] as he tackles this [[types]]. The shadows, lighting effects, and camera angles are all effective. But the highlight of the film takes place in a nightclub with a very [[nationality]] drum riff by Elisha Cook, egged on by an excited Raines. It's this scene that [[puts]] "Phantom Lady" into [[novo]] territory.

Siodmak's [[obligation]] to the material is [[confronted]] only by Raines, who gives a [[earnest]] performance as a [[daughters]] in [[loves]] trying to [[rescued]] her man. Franchot Tone phoned this one in. [[Alain]] [[Cortes]] didn't [[appears]] [[pissed]] that he might [[killed]] and didn't [[appears]] [[pleased]] that he lived. And he never, except for a [[writ]] [[time]] in prison, [[appeared]] to be in [[loves]] with Raines.

The [[funny]] [[stuff]] about [[several]] of these [[kino]] is that, as [[Worldwide]] [[Warfare]] II [[advances]], interest in [[psychiatrist]] [[intensified]]. But [[generally]] the terms were [[employs]] incorrectly in [[cinematography]] such as "[[Owning]]," "[[Transfixed]]," and "The [[Bigger]] [[Displayed]] on [[Land]]." Tone is [[drew]] paranoid by Thomas [[Fernandez]] - Tone [[potentially]] has some paranoia attached to his [[commotion]], but he appears to be [[tighter]] to a [[madmen]]. [[Among]] actuality, as [[exemplified]] by his headaches, he may have had a brain [[tumors]] [[prompting]] against his brain.

[[Ghost]] [[Missus]] doesn't have the [[finest]] plot, but it's well worth [[staring]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5125 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Do]] not be [[mistaken]], this is neither a [[horror]], nor really a [[film]]. I [[firmly]] advise against [[watching]] this 82 minute [[failure]]; the only [[reason]] it [[merited]] a [[star]] was the presence of [[Chris]] Pine.

[[Nothing]] [[happens]]. You [[wait]] [[patiently]] in the hope that there may be a [[flicker]] of a twist, a hint of surprise, a plot to [[emerge]] - but no.

The [[characters]] take [[erratic]] [[turns]] of [[pace]] in their [[actions]] and [[yet]] don't have the [[time]] to [[develop]] - thanks to the thrifty [[editors]] and [[frankly]] [[ashamed]] [[writers]] - before [[returning]] to an idyllic and playful ([[bring]] on the teen rock montage) state. The only [[thing]] that [[could]] have [[made]] it [[worse]] would be [[adding]] the perishable token [[ethnic]] 'companion'.

Their encounters with [[obstacles]] (be they human or [[physical]]) are [[brief]], confusing and [[entirely]] [[pointless]].

[[Chris]] [[Pine]] [[fights]] to [[keep]] himself above the surface whilst being [[drowned]] by a misery of a lightweight [[cast]]. Lou Taylor Pucci couldn't be dryer if he [[spent]] the summer with Keanu Reaves combing the Navada desert.

Watch 'The Road', watch '28 days Later', watch day [[time]] [[TV]]...[[anything]] but this; I implore you. [[Suffer]] the boredom, unlike you [[may]] be [[led]] to [[believe]] in the [[film]], this [[film]] is no [[cure]]. [[Doing]] not be [[mistake]], this is neither a [[monstrosity]], nor really a [[filmmaking]]. I [[emphatically]] advise against [[staring]] this 82 minute [[impossibility]]; the only [[cause]] it [[deserving]] a [[stars]] was the presence of [[Chrissy]] Pine.

[[None]] [[arrives]]. You [[awaits]] [[painstakingly]] in the hope that there may be a [[flinch]] of a twist, a hint of surprise, a plot to [[arise]] - but no.

The [[personages]] take [[unpredictable]] [[revolves]] of [[rhythm]] in their [[measures]] and [[however]] don't have the [[moment]] to [[prepare]] - thanks to the thrifty [[publisher]] and [[openly]] [[shamed]] [[authors]] - before [[reverted]] to an idyllic and playful ([[bringing]] on the teen rock montage) state. The only [[stuff]] that [[wo]] have [[brought]] it [[worst]] would be [[add]] the perishable token [[racial]] 'companion'.

Their encounters with [[barrier]] (be they human or [[corporal]]) are [[writ]], confusing and [[completely]] [[futile]].

[[Kris]] [[Pines]] [[battle]] to [[preserve]] himself above the surface whilst being [[sunken]] by a misery of a lightweight [[casting]]. Lou Taylor Pucci couldn't be dryer if he [[spend]] the summer with Keanu Reaves combing the Navada desert.

Watch 'The Road', watch '28 days Later', watch day [[times]] [[TELEVISION]]...[[nothing]] but this; I implore you. [[Suffering]] the boredom, unlike you [[maggio]] be [[culminated]] to [[believing]] in the [[filmmaking]], this [[filmmaking]] is no [[therapy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The screenwriter poorly attempted to re-create the "Exorcist'. But put in some blah-blah love story that makes you sick instead of keeping you engaged. There is no substance whatsoever in this entire film. It had the potential of being something special but blows it by showing a bunch of people yack about things nobody cares about. Extremely boring, I wanted to leave the theater when I saw this but the dumb movie tickets were expensive so I had to withstand the dreary torture which felt like it lasted forever. Nothing on screen connected relevance back to whatever the characters were talking about.

They use computer graphics in here that instead of wowing me (as it intended, I hate CGI) just ruined the movie even more. Some people say this movie did horrible in the movie theaters because of how "thought-provoking" and "slow-paced-without-action-because it's an intelligent film" it was. What is so intelligent or thought provoking when the story is basically about pretty boy Heath Ledger as a priest who has a love interest and disobeys his religion? Seems like an uninspired concept. Oh and there's some mumbo jumbo about the "sin-eater" (movie was originally going to be titled "sin-eater"). Lame concept but the movie took the "sin-eater" thing too seriously, making the movie become pathetic and delusional about how dark and intelligent it was. Yeah, I know there were really sin-eaters in the medieval times but this movie just makes it sound cheesy.

Nothing in the movie was executed right and I forget why I even bothered to see this movie. If you want horror films that actually have depth, watch Rosemary's Baby, The Tenant, Naked Blood, Society, Cannibal Holocaust, Pin, Exorcist, Omen, or any of the Romero "Dead Trilogy" films. Nonsense dialogue does not equate to intelligence people, mainstream movie fans think that though (same kind of people that think a ridiculous movie like Hulk is a cinematic masterpiece). If you want mind-numbingly boring horror, watch the Order. This movie makes church seem like a roller coaster ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 5127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Chloe is mysteriously saved from Dr. Caselli, the corrupt doctor responsible for transferring patients with abilities from Belle Reve to Project 33.1, and a fraction of second later Clark arrives. He finds that Bart Allan has returned to Smallville and they meet each other in Kent Farm. When Bart is captured by Lex during a break-in in a LuthorCorp's facility, Clark discovers that the Green Arrow had also hired Bart (a.k.a. Impulse), Arthur Curry (Aquaman) and Victor Stone (Cyborg) to investigate the Project 33.1. Clark accepts to join the trio to save Bart and invites Chloe to participate of their mission.

"Justice" is the best episode so far of this 6th Season. In this episode, the Justice League begins its saga with the association of five heroes: Clark, Green Arrow, The Flash ("Impulse"), Aquaman and Cyborg. The participation of Chloe is spectacular, completing the necessary organization to the teamwork. In the end, Oliver breaks up with Lois based on the importance of fighting against criminals and Lex's secret laboratories around the world. My vote is ten.

Title (Brazil): "Justiça" ("Justice") --------------------------------------------- Result 5128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I am still shuddering at the thought of EVER seeing this movie again.

I have seen action films, I have even liked quite a few of them, but this one goes over the top.

Not only does it have the [[worst]] male [[actor]] ever (Sly Stallone) playing the lead role, but the plot of the movie is so [[stupid]] from the beginning (why not [[rob]] the [[money]] while the [[plane]] is on the [[ground]], would be hell of a lot easier) that it [[requires]] a [[person]] with IQ [[less]] than his shoenumber to believe it.

[[Furthermore]], the plot has no [[real]] [[twists]] at all, a three year [[old]] kid could [[guess]] what [[comes]] [[next]]. It is a set of [[cliches]] (of action genre), with Sly [[performing]] [[even]] [[worse]] than his other [[movies]] (he was [[better]] [[even]] in Rambo III if you watch that [[movie]] as a comedy rather than [[action]] [[film]]). Now there is an [[actor]] who can't [[act]] [[A]]) [[surprised]] B) sad C) [[anything]] [[else]] than his [[basic]] face.

I would [[still]] [[like]] to point out that this [[movie]] has two factors that might make some people like it. [[EXPLOSIONS]] are outstanding, but then... you can see better on the 4th of [[July]]. [[LANDSCAPES]] are magnificient, but then... there are [[documentaries]] about the Alps and Himalayas, so you can [[see]] [[better]] sights that way, rather than waste [[time]] on this [[flick]].

[[Go]] watch some other [[movie]] instead, there are hundreds, [[even]] thousands better action [[movies]]. I am still shuddering at the thought of EVER seeing this movie again.

I have seen action films, I have even liked quite a few of them, but this one goes over the top.

Not only does it have the [[gravest]] male [[protagonist]] ever (Sly Stallone) playing the lead role, but the plot of the movie is so [[witless]] from the beginning (why not [[stealing]] the [[cash]] while the [[planes]] is on the [[terra]], would be hell of a lot easier) that it [[requiring]] a [[persona]] with IQ [[least]] than his shoenumber to believe it.

[[Besides]], the plot has no [[actual]] [[spins]] at all, a three year [[former]] kid could [[guesses]] what [[happens]] [[future]]. It is a set of [[cliche]] (of action genre), with Sly [[fulfilling]] [[yet]] [[pire]] than his other [[filmmaking]] (he was [[best]] [[yet]] in Rambo III if you watch that [[filmmaking]] as a comedy rather than [[efforts]] [[movies]]). Now there is an [[protagonist]] who can't [[ley]] [[una]]) [[astounded]] B) sad C) [[nothing]] [[otherwise]] than his [[fundamental]] face.

I would [[nevertheless]] [[fond]] to point out that this [[filmmaking]] has two factors that might make some people like it. [[EXPLODES]] are outstanding, but then... you can see better on the 4th of [[June]]. [[SCENERY]] are magnificient, but then... there are [[literature]] about the Alps and Himalayas, so you can [[behold]] [[optimum]] sights that way, rather than waste [[times]] on this [[film]].

[[Going]] watch some other [[movies]] instead, there are hundreds, [[yet]] thousands better action [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5129 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (A possible spoiler or two)

"Soul Survivors" is quite possibly the worst theatrical released movie ever. Nothing makes sense at all, there's some plot about a girl who has strange visions of people who may or may not be dead. The entire movie is just a bunch of random shots of things that don't really tie together, by the end of the film.

Tha acting is non-existent, the camera work is jerky and the script is so confusing, it just makes the movie even harder to watch.

I kept waiting for something to tie the movie together but nothing came. Definitely the worst film of the year. -****1/2 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 5130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Please don't waste your time. This movie rehashes the worst of Bram Stoker's Dracula (Van Helsing), Anne Rice's Vampire Lestat (rock music and silly biblical references), and Blade (high-tech toys). I really like vampire movies and novels, and there are many out there that are very good . But not this stinker. Not even the soundtrack helps it, mostly because the movie resorts to ridiculous scary classical music rather than the "kick-ass metal" some reported. Only a few times did I hear any metal; mostly it was tortured violins. Avoid it like garlic and crucifixes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For a movie with a plot like this I would normally smell "tearjerker" in the first ten minutes and turn it off, but this was very well made, with emotional subtleties, great acting, and some genuinely funny moments. It was also interesting to see a different culture - a vanishing one at that. My wife and I both dug it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This program didn't do it for me, although I'm a fan of the genre. The major factor that [[disappointed]] me was that there was not a single scene which was not dominated by the main character. This made it a bit two-dimensional and I [[gave]] up before the program was over.

I was hoping to leave my critique there as I'm no movie critic, however, the guidelines on IMDb state that you must put in 10 lines of commentary. It did remind me of Hudson [[Hawk]] in the way the main character is in every single scene, and I would hope that the writers of this program could employ some more diversity to engage with the viewers. I don't doubt the talent of any of the cast and crew, it's just that after watching things like "the wire", I've come to expect great things from cop drama. This program didn't do it for me, although I'm a fan of the genre. The major factor that [[frustrated]] me was that there was not a single scene which was not dominated by the main character. This made it a bit two-dimensional and I [[delivered]] up before the program was over.

I was hoping to leave my critique there as I'm no movie critic, however, the guidelines on IMDb state that you must put in 10 lines of commentary. It did remind me of Hudson [[Buzzard]] in the way the main character is in every single scene, and I would hope that the writers of this program could employ some more diversity to engage with the viewers. I don't doubt the talent of any of the cast and crew, it's just that after watching things like "the wire", I've come to expect great things from cop drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 5133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]] and it was a little [[difficult]] do that when your brother is [[making]] [[stupid]] [[comments]] in it ever 30 seconds. But this [[movie]] I [[enjoyed]], [[mostly]] because I'm [[used]] to the [[usual]] HK [[action]] [[films]]. Most of the [[films]] like this are don't watch it for the story line, watch it for the [[mindless]] action. And [[mindless]] [[action]] is right. You [[get]] to see [[Jet]] Li [[Jump]], spin, kick, punch, shoot, make [[impossible]] jumps and dodge countless bullets. It's true that this [[movie]] was [[released]] to a [[broader]] [[audience]] after Li was in [[Lethal]] [[Weapon]] 4. That is one of the [[reasons]] the [[ratings]] on this [[movie]] [[dropped]]. [[Most]] people were [[probably]] [[expecting]] to see a [[movie]] that was as polished as a [[North]] American [[film]]. But you [[need]] to [[remember]] most HK film [[budgets]] aren't [[nearly]] as [[high]] as a [[North]] American [[film]], and the [[style]] in a [[HK]] [[action]] [[film]] is [[usually]] very [[different]] [[usually]] [[requiring]] in wire work in a [[lot]] of them. [[If]] you [[want]] to see a good [[action]] [[film]] you should [[see]] this just [[try]] to [[ignore]] the dubbing.

My [[rating]] was an 8. I [[genuinely]] [[appreciated]] this [[flick]] and it was a little [[arduous]] do that when your brother is [[doing]] [[dolt]] [[commentary]] in it ever 30 seconds. But this [[movies]] I [[appreciated]], [[basically]] because I'm [[using]] to the [[ordinary]] HK [[efforts]] [[cinematography]]. Most of the [[movie]] like this are don't watch it for the story line, watch it for the [[unthinking]] action. And [[nonsensical]] [[activities]] is right. You [[obtain]] to see [[Jett]] Li [[Leaps]], spin, kick, punch, shoot, make [[impractical]] jumps and dodge countless bullets. It's true that this [[cinematography]] was [[freed]] to a [[larger]] [[audiences]] after Li was in [[Murderous]] [[Arms]] 4. That is one of the [[motivations]] the [[rating]] on this [[cinematography]] [[tumbled]]. [[More]] people were [[surely]] [[waiting]] to see a [[cinema]] that was as polished as a [[Nordic]] American [[cinema]]. But you [[required]] to [[remembering]] most HK film [[budget]] aren't [[roughly]] as [[higher]] as a [[Nordic]] American [[cinema]], and the [[styles]] in a [[HONG]] [[efforts]] [[films]] is [[normally]] very [[disparate]] [[traditionally]] [[demand]] in wire work in a [[batch]] of them. [[Though]] you [[wish]] to see a good [[efforts]] [[films]] you should [[behold]] this just [[tries]] to [[ignoring]] the dubbing.

My [[ratings]] was an 8. --------------------------------------------- Result 5134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] BEFORE THE DEVIL KNOWS YOU'RE DEAD starts off promisingly, setting up a simple heist that goes awry, told from varying perspectives (in RASHOMON style). At around the hour mark, Sidney Lumet transforms this film into something that is so much more than the sum of its parts; it eventually morphs into a multi-faceted family drama, exploring the full realm of human emotions/relations, as the story comes to its chilling climax.

As is the case with Lumet, he manages to coax exceptional performances out of his star-studded cast, without any notion of over-acting or hyperbole. Philip Seymour Hoffman, in one of his best roles, is a complex, mysterious, and interesting character, and oftentimes dwarfs Ethan Hawke, who plays his brother, Hank. That's not to say that Hawke is not bad; in fact he is quite above adequate, in a troubled role that suits his style. Marisa Tomei is excellent for her relatively short appearance (the fact that she bares her flesh adds to this). Albert Finney's character (Andy and Hank's father) is the most intriguing, and in my opinion, he deserved a bit more screen-time. Amy Ryan also performs her job adequately.

BEFORE THE DEVIL KNOWS YOU'RE DEAD is not an exceptional movie, but it proves that Lumet is still near the top of his game at the (apparent) twilight of an illustrious career. Many of his characteristics and trademarks appear here, not least of which involves the use of his characters. Infused with a killer script (no pun intended), smart dialogue and pacing, and a decent score, BEFORE THE DEVIL KNOWS YOU'RE DEAD is a must-see. A truly underrated gem. 8/10. 3 stars (out of 4). Should just enter my Top 250 at 248. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[If]] you didn't enjoy this movie, either your dead, or you hate Adam Sandler or Don Cheadle.

An Excellent cast, all of who gave good performances. This movie [[proved]] that Adam Sandler is good actor, [[despite]] what critics say. Adam Sandler is [[becoming]] a very well respected actor. It all [[started]] with his performance in Big Daddy, then he did a [[couple]] bad movies, then he broke through with [[terrific]] performance in 50 [[First]] [[Dates]], The Longest Yard, then Click, and now Reign Over Me.

Back to the movie. Adam Sandler plays a man who has lost everything. The closest thing to family he has are a mother-in-law and father-in-law. After his [[old]] college roommate (Cheadle) ran into him, he seems to turn his life around. I will say no more, because I do not want to ruin the movie, but I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] this movie. One of the [[best]] movies of 2007. [[Unless]] you didn't enjoy this movie, either your dead, or you hate Adam Sandler or Don Cheadle.

An Excellent cast, all of who gave good performances. This movie [[evidenced]] that Adam Sandler is good actor, [[albeit]] what critics say. Adam Sandler is [[become]] a very well respected actor. It all [[initiating]] with his performance in Big Daddy, then he did a [[matching]] bad movies, then he broke through with [[wondrous]] performance in 50 [[Outset]] [[Date]], The Longest Yard, then Click, and now Reign Over Me.

Back to the movie. Adam Sandler plays a man who has lost everything. The closest thing to family he has are a mother-in-law and father-in-law. After his [[ancient]] college roommate (Cheadle) ran into him, he seems to turn his life around. I will say no more, because I do not want to ruin the movie, but I [[mightily]] [[recommendation]] this movie. One of the [[bestest]] movies of 2007. --------------------------------------------- Result 5136 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you are going to attempt building tension in a film it is always a good idea not to build it beyond the point of total tedium.

Unfortunately the Butcher Brothers haven't grasped this yet.

This film sucks, unlike the majority of its characters who (if you didn't work out they are vampires in the first few minutes then shame on you) preference stringing up the plentiful supply of 'no one knows where I am' cheerleader types and homosexual drifters that waft conveniently and with a fast food swagger, past their isolated door.

The only tiny bit of originality in the plot is how these vampires come to be vampires in the first place but the rest of it is ludicrous and sloppy.

Forced to up sticks (as opposed stakes) on a regular basis due to their penchant for filling their basement with bloodless corpses, they really are none too bright. If they fed their victims they could run their own little blood farm and it would cut down on the mortality rate, thereby allowing them to settle down and get chintzy.

Why the producers felt it necessary to introduce the incestuous twins and the homicidally gay older brother I am not sure. It added zero to the plot, which was unfortunate given that there wasn't a great deal of plot to start with and had no shock value at all.

One was never told why the parents had died, unless of course that was explained during one of my frequent tea breaks. Clearly the social worker must have been alerted to the family for some reason or other but again, it was for the viewer to write their own reason.

The only well rounded character was the youngest brother who emerges looking like Pugsley from the Adams Family. Indeed he was way too rounded, having the appearance of a child who has inadvertently wandered from a Weight watchers' class in to a very bad horror film. Oh heavens, he had. Never mind dear, have another doughnut with a yummy blood centre. --------------------------------------------- Result 5137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I just [[watched]] this movie and I've gotta say that with such a great [[premise]] and [[great]] talent this [[turkey]] just [[lays]] there!!! A [[friend]] lent me this movie and I watched with an open [[mind]] [[mainly]] because he had such [[high]] [[praise]] for the story.

[[Well]], the movie started off with Kevin Costner as a fighter pilot retiring... why? Why did they make him a fighter pilot? He was supposedly going to be [[hired]] by Anthony Quinn's character to be his new [[pilot]]... well, we never see Costner go near a plane for the [[rest]] of the movie!

Costner [[runs]] into a Texan (James Gammon) selling a horse to a big Mexican businessman and Costner tags along for a ride. Without knowing what happened, Gammon is beat to near death and Costner drives him to the meeting, which happens to be with an associate of Quinn! But, nothing comes of it... nada, zilcho! Why did they have Gammon's character? Why did they have the horse sale with the Quinn associate if nothing was to come of it?

Also, after they leave Costner for dead, they make Madeline Stowe's character become a whore, then she attacks one of Quinn's men that was paying for a turn... she stabs him with his own knife, and the next thing she's been moved to a convent! No explanation as to why she was moved, or when it was done!

Too much [[talent]] wasted on such a [[weak]] script and poor editing!! I only [[watched]] this because a [[friend]] [[owned]] it and let me watch it... I'm going to [[throw]] it at him for the 2 hours I wasted of my life [[watching]] the [[blasted]] thing! I just [[seen]] this movie and I've gotta say that with such a great [[assumption]] and [[marvellous]] talent this [[turk]] just [[laying]] there!!! A [[freund]] lent me this movie and I watched with an open [[intellect]] [[principally]] because he had such [[supreme]] [[applaud]] for the story.

[[Good]], the movie started off with Kevin Costner as a fighter pilot retiring... why? Why did they make him a fighter pilot? He was supposedly going to be [[incurred]] by Anthony Quinn's character to be his new [[experiment]]... well, we never see Costner go near a plane for the [[remaining]] of the movie!

Costner [[manages]] into a Texan (James Gammon) selling a horse to a big Mexican businessman and Costner tags along for a ride. Without knowing what happened, Gammon is beat to near death and Costner drives him to the meeting, which happens to be with an associate of Quinn! But, nothing comes of it... nada, zilcho! Why did they have Gammon's character? Why did they have the horse sale with the Quinn associate if nothing was to come of it?

Also, after they leave Costner for dead, they make Madeline Stowe's character become a whore, then she attacks one of Quinn's men that was paying for a turn... she stabs him with his own knife, and the next thing she's been moved to a convent! No explanation as to why she was moved, or when it was done!

Too much [[talents]] wasted on such a [[feeble]] script and poor editing!! I only [[saw]] this because a [[friends]] [[belonged]] it and let me watch it... I'm going to [[toss]] it at him for the 2 hours I wasted of my life [[staring]] the [[slammed]] thing! --------------------------------------------- Result 5138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Koen Wouters is a flemish [[singer]] and presenter. In the early ninety's he tried his hand on [[movies]] as well. But this [[unbelievable]] [[piece]] of [[junk]] [[ended]] his acting career once and for all. It also [[ended]] the acting [[career]] of [[dutch]] [[actress]] Nada van Nie who went on being a football-wife a [[TV]] presenter and program-maker. I actually did [[see]] this in an ( [[almost]] empty) [[theatre]] because I [[used]] to be a [[fan]] of the [[band]] of Koen Wouters, Clouseau. I so [[regret]] spending money on it. It [[looks]] cheap, it is a terrible [[story]] and it is executed bad in every possible way. Some people think it's so bad it's funny. I am not one of them. I just found it an [[incredible]] [[waste]] of [[time]] and money. Koen Wouters is a flemish [[vocalist]] and presenter. In the early ninety's he tried his hand on [[filmmaking]] as well. But this [[awesome]] [[slice]] of [[trash]] [[completed]] his acting career once and for all. It also [[finalized]] the acting [[professions]] of [[dutchman]] [[actor]] Nada van Nie who went on being a football-wife a [[TVS]] presenter and program-maker. I actually did [[consults]] this in an ( [[hardly]] empty) [[teatro]] because I [[using]] to be a [[breather]] of the [[banding]] of Koen Wouters, Clouseau. I so [[sadness]] spending money on it. It [[seems]] cheap, it is a terrible [[tale]] and it is executed bad in every possible way. Some people think it's so bad it's funny. I am not one of them. I just found it an [[awesome]] [[squander]] of [[times]] and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 5139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I don't think I [[need]] to tell you the story. [[For]] it has been told for years and years. So I will just share my [[feelings]]. I first saw Cinderella was when I was five years old. From then on I was a Disney child in a good way. The animation now seems [[childish]] and old fashioned, but that is part of its charm now. Now, in the age of High School [[Musical]] and computer generated images, it [[seems]] like people have [[forgotten]] the genius and magical essence of early Disney movies. [[Thankfully]] I was [[born]] before that so I was [[introduced]] to this [[classic]]. And it seems no matter how old I get, I turn back into that five year old watching it on VHS. Which is the true [[magic]] of Disney. I don't think I [[needed]] to tell you the story. [[During]] it has been told for years and years. So I will just share my [[sentiments]]. I first saw Cinderella was when I was five years old. From then on I was a Disney child in a good way. The animation now seems [[boyish]] and old fashioned, but that is part of its charm now. Now, in the age of High School [[Music]] and computer generated images, it [[seem]] like people have [[forget]] the genius and magical essence of early Disney movies. [[Mercifully]] I was [[ould]] before that so I was [[tabled]] to this [[conventional]]. And it seems no matter how old I get, I turn back into that five year old watching it on VHS. Which is the true [[witchcraft]] of Disney. --------------------------------------------- Result 5140 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] It was "The Night HE Came [[Home]]," [[warned]] the posters for John Carpenter's career-making [[horror]] [[classic]]. Set in a [[small]] American [[town]], Halloween centerers around serial [[killer]] [[Michael]] Myers' [[attempts]] to [[track]] down his sister Laurie Strode, and in the process eliminates all her [[friends]] in [[rather]] [[brutal]] [[ways]]...[[leaving]] poor Laurie to [[fight]] against the [[seemingly]] [[indestructible]] [[Michael]]. This plot out-line inspired countless [[horror]] knock-offs [[throughout]] the 80s, 90s and [[continues]] to do so [[today]], as well as a poorly [[received]] 2007 remake. The difference between them, and this, is, [[quite]] [[simply]], that "Halloween" is the [[best]].

Made on a very modest, tight budget...Halloween changed the [[face]] of horror in 1978 and [[spawned]] the sub-genre of "sexually promiscuous-teens getting stalked by a knife/axe/chainsaw/ wielding psycho". It was "The Night HE Came [[Houses]]," [[cautioned]] the posters for John Carpenter's career-making [[terror]] [[conventional]]. Set in a [[little]] American [[municipality]], Halloween centerers around serial [[assassin]] [[Michel]] Myers' [[endeavor]] to [[trails]] down his sister Laurie Strode, and in the process eliminates all her [[friend]] in [[fairly]] [[brute]] [[pathways]]...[[exiting]] poor Laurie to [[wrestling]] against the [[apparently]] [[invincible]] [[Michele]]. This plot out-line inspired countless [[terror]] knock-offs [[around]] the 80s, 90s and [[continue]] to do so [[yesterday]], as well as a poorly [[benefited]] 2007 remake. The difference between them, and this, is, [[altogether]] [[purely]], that "Halloween" is the [[better]].

Made on a very modest, tight budget...Halloween changed the [[encountering]] of horror in 1978 and [[consorted]] the sub-genre of "sexually promiscuous-teens getting stalked by a knife/axe/chainsaw/ wielding psycho". --------------------------------------------- Result 5141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[movie]] has only one flaw, [[unfortunately]] this flaw [[damages]] all [[credibility]] of the piece.

It [[starts]] with the condemnation of the Israeli occupation of disputed territories. It fails to address the reason Israelis are there. Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan attacked Israel. This is why Israel "occupys" their land, because those countries lost it in a war they started.

The [[film]] also [[claims]] that [[Israel]] has [[defied]] the U N by not complying with [[Resolution]] 242. Problem is, 242 was rejected immediately upon it's inception by.....the [[palestinians]], making it [[void]].

Many films are put together well, and can really show footage that changes minds, but [[remember]], when watching [[anything]], believe [[none]] of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

All participants in this film are [[known]] critics of Israel, and some have [[made]] many antisemitic public comments, removing any [[possible]] [[credibility]] to their [[words]].

All participants are in [[dire]] [[need]] of a [[actual]] [[history]] lesson [[taught]] objectively, not by some palestinian sympathizer. The [[filmmaking]] has only one flaw, [[unluckily]] this flaw [[harm]] all [[credence]] of the piece.

It [[initiates]] with the condemnation of the Israeli occupation of disputed territories. It fails to address the reason Israelis are there. Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan attacked Israel. This is why Israel "occupys" their land, because those countries lost it in a war they started.

The [[filmmaking]] also [[claim]] that [[Israeli]] has [[disobeyed]] the U N by not complying with [[Resolves]] 242. Problem is, 242 was rejected immediately upon it's inception by.....the [[israelis]], making it [[vacuum]].

Many films are put together well, and can really show footage that changes minds, but [[recalling]], when watching [[nothing]], believe [[nos]] of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

All participants in this film are [[renowned]] critics of Israel, and some have [[effected]] many antisemitic public comments, removing any [[probable]] [[credence]] to their [[mots]].

All participants are in [[frightful]] [[gotta]] of a [[real]] [[tale]] lesson [[learns]] objectively, not by some palestinian sympathizer. --------------------------------------------- Result 5142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Hard to [[believe]] that [[director]] Barbet Schroeder once did the majestic and very [[funny]] Maitresse (1976), and now only [[seems]] to do "by the numbers" Hollywood thrillers.

This is very [[lightweight]] [[John]] Grisham material, [[crossed]] with the plot of a [[TV]] [[movie]]. [[Bullock]] is Cass Mayweather, a feisty and [[independent]] [[crime]] [[investigator]] [[specialising]] in serial killers. Ben Chaplin is her [[reserved]] [[police]] [[partner]] Sam Kennedy, and together they make an [[uncomfortable]] [[duo]]. Not good, when two unbalanced college maladriots (Gosling and Pitt) decide to send them on a wild goose [[chase]] - by [[planting]] very clever and [[misleading]] forensic evidence at a crime scene.

Fair [[enough]], but while Bullock and [[Chaplin]] [[fail]] to create any sparks, we [[also]] have to [[endure]] a several dull overly-melodramatic flashbacks [[illustrating]] an [[important]] [[event]] in Cass's [[history]]. Then of course there are the frequent shots of a cliff-side [[log]] cabin where there's absolutely no doubt the OTT ending will be set. [[Oooh]]... the atmosphere.

Watch any episode of CSI [[instead]]. It's to the point and far more exciting. Hard to [[think]] that [[headmaster]] Barbet Schroeder once did the majestic and very [[comical]] Maitresse (1976), and now only [[seem]] to do "by the numbers" Hollywood thrillers.

This is very [[slight]] [[Johannes]] Grisham material, [[traversed]] with the plot of a [[TELEVISIONS]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Pollock]] is Cass Mayweather, a feisty and [[autonomous]] [[crimes]] [[investigators]] [[specializing]] in serial killers. Ben Chaplin is her [[reserve]] [[cop]] [[partners]] Sam Kennedy, and together they make an [[uneasy]] [[duet]]. Not good, when two unbalanced college maladriots (Gosling and Pitt) decide to send them on a wild goose [[hunts]] - by [[seeding]] very clever and [[false]] forensic evidence at a crime scene.

Fair [[suitably]], but while Bullock and [[Chapin]] [[fails]] to create any sparks, we [[similarly]] have to [[withstand]] a several dull overly-melodramatic flashbacks [[show]] an [[essential]] [[phenomena]] in Cass's [[stories]]. Then of course there are the frequent shots of a cliff-side [[checkin]] cabin where there's absolutely no doubt the OTT ending will be set. [[Oh]]... the atmosphere.

Watch any episode of CSI [[conversely]]. It's to the point and far more exciting. --------------------------------------------- Result 5143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Japan]] is in serious [[trouble]]. Demons have infested Edo, taking possession of earthly forms and bending them to their unholy will. On top of that, the rebirth of Ashura, Queen of the demons, is nigh. The only thing that stands against this grave threat are the Demon Wardens, a fearsome group of warriors, who [[might]] just be as bad as the demons themselves.

Izumo is a retired Demon [[Warden]], who five years ago, [[took]] up theater instead of Demon Slaying after accidentally killing a innocent child (In a battle that's strangely reminiscent of the bar scene from Dusk till Dawn). One night by a chance encounter he meets a beautiful and mysterious woman named Tsubaki. Their fortunes intertwine (literally) and they are bound by fate to be lovers and enemies.

If you think this sounds like your typical Japanese Fantasy/Swordplay epic, you'd be wrong. In fact, there's nothing [[typical]] about Ashura. It is a hodge-podge of [[many]] different genre's of film. Those just [[mentioned]], as well as a comedy, [[drama]], and romance. Director Yojiro Takita (Onmyoji) juggles the genre's [[fairly]] respectfully (Although, the comedy seems forced in some scenes) and the end result is a ridiculous, but [[really]] [[fun]] popcorn movie.

To be sure, there are [[flaws]] in the film. Some of the humor seems contrived, and out of place. And the acting isn't the [[greatest]]. But [[seriously]], do you watch [[Fantasy]]/Swordplay/[[Comedy]] films for the [[great]] acting performances?? No, we watch them for the action and the crazy CG visuals, all of which Ashura has in Spades. Not to be misleading, the film is not all action, but it is spaced out generously enough with lots of swordplay and buckets of green blood to keep the average viewer happy.

Bottom line; the films has it's faults and is not a martial arts epic, but it doesn't try to be and it features interesting visuals and good swordplay action. The reason the [[film]] [[worked]] for me is that it never takes itself too seriously and if the viewer does the same, their sure to be delighted by this fun and silly swordplay fantasy action flick.

My Rating 7 out of 10. Fun popcorn movie. [[Japans]] is in serious [[hassle]]. Demons have infested Edo, taking possession of earthly forms and bending them to their unholy will. On top of that, the rebirth of Ashura, Queen of the demons, is nigh. The only thing that stands against this grave threat are the Demon Wardens, a fearsome group of warriors, who [[apt]] just be as bad as the demons themselves.

Izumo is a retired Demon [[Reeve]], who five years ago, [[picked]] up theater instead of Demon Slaying after accidentally killing a innocent child (In a battle that's strangely reminiscent of the bar scene from Dusk till Dawn). One night by a chance encounter he meets a beautiful and mysterious woman named Tsubaki. Their fortunes intertwine (literally) and they are bound by fate to be lovers and enemies.

If you think this sounds like your typical Japanese Fantasy/Swordplay epic, you'd be wrong. In fact, there's nothing [[characteristic]] about Ashura. It is a hodge-podge of [[multiple]] different genre's of film. Those just [[referenced]], as well as a comedy, [[opera]], and romance. Director Yojiro Takita (Onmyoji) juggles the genre's [[comparatively]] respectfully (Although, the comedy seems forced in some scenes) and the end result is a ridiculous, but [[genuinely]] [[amusing]] popcorn movie.

To be sure, there are [[irregularities]] in the film. Some of the humor seems contrived, and out of place. And the acting isn't the [[greater]]. But [[conscientiously]], do you watch [[Imagination]]/Swordplay/[[Comedian]] films for the [[large]] acting performances?? No, we watch them for the action and the crazy CG visuals, all of which Ashura has in Spades. Not to be misleading, the film is not all action, but it is spaced out generously enough with lots of swordplay and buckets of green blood to keep the average viewer happy.

Bottom line; the films has it's faults and is not a martial arts epic, but it doesn't try to be and it features interesting visuals and good swordplay action. The reason the [[cinema]] [[acted]] for me is that it never takes itself too seriously and if the viewer does the same, their sure to be delighted by this fun and silly swordplay fantasy action flick.

My Rating 7 out of 10. Fun popcorn movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One thing I always liked about Robert Ludlum thrillers is just when you think you have it figured out, it goes in a completely different direction. There are so many twists and turns in this film that I have a sore neck from watching.

One thing I also like about director John Dahl (Kill Me Again, Rounders, Unforgettable) is that he can be depended upon to direct and, in this case, write (with his brother Rick) a good story.

Now, add Nick Cage, Dennis Hopper, Lara Flynn Boyle, and J.T. Walsh to the cast and you have a story that will keep your interest even if they are playing characters that all of them have perfected. Dahl seems to bring out the best in folks, and this will keep you interested, and guessing, until the very end. --------------------------------------------- Result 5145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The [[true]] [[story]] of a bunch of junkies robbing a not so honest businessman of drugs, jewelry, guns, and money. Some would say this is the tragic tale of America in the excessive eighties where the high of the peace and free love sixties had crashed into drugs and AIDS. Honestly, this is just [[regular]] people with no aim in life who sit around getting high and decide to rob a ruthless man. What is the second part of their master plan? Once they have his stuff...they'll sit around and get high again. [[Great]] [[plan]]. Even if you don't know the story, there is no suspense in this movie and no surprises. The fact that Cox tries to make some kind of folk heroes out of these characters, with party scenes and a montage of their loot, is weak and insulting. The story was better off with a more straight forward approach. As it is, this is just a sad story of small time drug dealers getting killed by big time drug dealers. The bigger story, in more ways than one, is John Holmes. He is the center of this story anyway. This movie should have been all about him, his life. He was the one in wonderland, with the wonders about to fade away.

P.S. Although it isn't official, Boogie Nights is a better [[version]] of Holmes life. It isn't entirely factual, but it's far more enjoyable. The [[real]] [[conte]] of a bunch of junkies robbing a not so honest businessman of drugs, jewelry, guns, and money. Some would say this is the tragic tale of America in the excessive eighties where the high of the peace and free love sixties had crashed into drugs and AIDS. Honestly, this is just [[regularly]] people with no aim in life who sit around getting high and decide to rob a ruthless man. What is the second part of their master plan? Once they have his stuff...they'll sit around and get high again. [[Grand]] [[scheme]]. Even if you don't know the story, there is no suspense in this movie and no surprises. The fact that Cox tries to make some kind of folk heroes out of these characters, with party scenes and a montage of their loot, is weak and insulting. The story was better off with a more straight forward approach. As it is, this is just a sad story of small time drug dealers getting killed by big time drug dealers. The bigger story, in more ways than one, is John Holmes. He is the center of this story anyway. This movie should have been all about him, his life. He was the one in wonderland, with the wonders about to fade away.

P.S. Although it isn't official, Boogie Nights is a better [[stepping]] of Holmes life. It isn't entirely factual, but it's far more enjoyable. --------------------------------------------- Result 5146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[felt]] this film - [[throughout]]. I waas impressed with Russell Crowe's talent in developing his [[relationship]] with Lillie, such a typical Aussie blend of softly softly approach, a bit self depreciating and very persistent. Really [[loved]] the cinematography and direction. Pace was just right and the portrayals of nearly all characters was [[impressive]].

Gosh, didn't Russell's talent even in 1993 shine! .. and I have yet to see Gladiator. I [[smelled]] this film - [[around]]. I waas impressed with Russell Crowe's talent in developing his [[rapport]] with Lillie, such a typical Aussie blend of softly softly approach, a bit self depreciating and very persistent. Really [[cared]] the cinematography and direction. Pace was just right and the portrayals of nearly all characters was [[wondrous]].

Gosh, didn't Russell's talent even in 1993 shine! .. and I have yet to see Gladiator. --------------------------------------------- Result 5147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] what ends up killing this movie is its self-consciousness, among other things. here's a short list: 1. irreverent behavior. when the beatles came over and injected their brand of "quirky, irreverent" behavior/humor, it was greeted as fresh. that was over 4 decades ago. get over it.

2. false sophistication. spewing out base, quasi-socio-political-isms is hard ground to make work comically. ask woody allen.

3. the post-modern "i'm hard on this phony world and yes, i recognize it in myself" snake eating itself - used as illustration with another animal in the film itself! - is such a retread.

4. smarmy, smug drollness.

5. amateurish writing, acting, direction... ever seen student films? a victim of itself, about the only thing i can say positive is that it at least has a sense of itself, and sheesh, now i'm getting caught up in the self-reflexive thing that it posits as worthwhile, of value.

but towards... what? ultimately, it just rings as hollow as any other pretentious piece - hey, ever see woody allen's take on bergman, ie: "Interiors"??? well, this just does it more amateurishly. --------------------------------------------- Result 5148 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh, those sneaky Italians. It's not the first time they based a movie on source material without the permission or knowledge of the, in this case, author of the novel. Of course this is not something that is typically Italian but got done quite a lot in the early days of cinema, mostly because they often thought they would be able to get away with it. James M. Cain's publishers managed to keep this movie off American screens until 1976 but nevertheless the movie itself has grown a bit into a well known classic.

The movie is not as great to watch as the 1946 American version but it's a great movie nevertheless. This of course not in the least is due to the movie it's great strong story, that is an intriguing one and provides the movie with some great characters and realism. It follows the novel quite closely and is therefore mostly the same as other movie versions of its story, with of course as a difference that it got set in an Italian environment.

Leave it up to the Italians to make a movie about life and the real people in it. These early drama's always have a very realistic feeling over it and are therefore also quite involving to watch. Unfortunately the movie lost some of its power toward the end, when the movie started to feel a bit overlong and dragging in parts. The movie could had easily ended 15 minutes earlier.

Nevertheless, I don't really have much else negative to say about this movie. It's simply a greatly made one, based on some equally great and strong source material. Quite an impressive directorial debut for Luchino Visconti, who continued to direct some many more great and memorable Italian dramatic movies.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Everyone involved (and the audience) should seek out "The Candidate" to [[see]] how [[good]] this [[movie]] [[could]] have been. What happened the [[South]] American story? What were Julie Christie and Kate Capshaw thinking to [[allow]] their [[roles]] to be cardboard cut-outs. Up to now I have liked every Gene Hackman performance and/or movie. He was [[either]] [[disinterested]] (which I can [[hardly]] [[believe]]) or [[dreadfully]] miscast. I have [[also]] [[liked]] and defended Richard Gere (and been vilified for it). But here he had no "power". He was never intimidating and only [[occasionally]] persuasive. [[All]] in all I was very [[disappointed]]. I really [[expected]] [[much]] more from this director and cast. [[If]] you can't find "The Candidate" watch "Wag the [[dog]]" again or [[even]] "Bulworth". Everyone involved (and the audience) should seek out "The Candidate" to [[seeing]] how [[alright]] this [[filmmaking]] [[did]] have been. What happened the [[Southerly]] American story? What were Julie Christie and Kate Capshaw thinking to [[allowed]] their [[functions]] to be cardboard cut-outs. Up to now I have liked every Gene Hackman performance and/or movie. He was [[neither]] [[selfless]] (which I can [[scarcely]] [[think]]) or [[horribly]] miscast. I have [[apart]] [[wished]] and defended Richard Gere (and been vilified for it). But here he had no "power". He was never intimidating and only [[intermittently]] persuasive. [[Entire]] in all I was very [[frustrating]]. I really [[anticipated]] [[very]] more from this director and cast. [[Though]] you can't find "The Candidate" watch "Wag the [[terrier]]" again or [[yet]] "Bulworth". --------------------------------------------- Result 5150 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I [[thought]] that ROTJ was [[clearly]] the [[best]] out of the three [[Star]] [[Wars]] [[movies]]. I find it [[surprising]] that ROTJ is [[considered]] the [[weakest]] installment in the Trilogy by [[many]] who have voted. To me it seemed like ROTJ was the best because it had the most [[profound]] plot, the most [[suspense]], [[surprises]], most [[emotional]],([[especially]] the ending) and [[definitely]] the most episodic [[movie]]. I personally like the Empire [[Strikes]] Back a [[lot]] [[also]] but I [[think]] it is [[slightly]] [[less]] good than than ROTJ [[since]] it was slower-moving, was not as episodic, and I just did not feel as much suspense or emotion as I did with the third movie.

It also seems like to me that after reading these surprising reviews that the reasons people cited for ROTJ being an inferior film to the other two are just plain ludicrous and are insignificant reasons compared to the sheer excellence of the film as a whole. I have heard many strange reasons such as: a) Because Yoda died b) Because Bobba Fett died c) Because small Ewoks defeated a band of stormtroopers d) Because Darth Vader was revealed

I would like to debunk each of these reasons because I believe that they miss the point completely. First off, WHO CARES if Bobba Fett died??? If George Lucas wanted him to die then he wanted him to die. Don't get me wrong I am fan of Bobba Fett but he made a few cameo appearances and it was not Lucas' intention to make him a central character in the films that Star Wars fans made him out to be. His name was not even mentioned anywhere in the movie... You had to go to the credits to find out Bobba Fett's name!!! Judging ROTJ because a minor character died is a bit much I think... Secondly, many fans did not like Yoda dying. Sure, it was a momentous period in the movie. I was not happy to see him die either but it makes the movie more realistic. All the good guys can't stay alive in a realistic movie, you know. Otherwise if ALL the good guys lived and ALL the bad guys died this movie would have been tantamount to a cheesy Saturday morning cartoon. Another aspect to this point about people not liking Yoda's death.. Well, nobody complained when Darth Vader struck down Obi Wan Kenobi in A New Hope. (Many consider A New Hope to be the best of the Trilogy) Why was Obi Wan's death okay but Yoda's not... hmmmmmmmmmmmm.... Another reason I just can not believe was even stated was because people found cute Ewoks overpowering stormtroopers to be impossible. That is utterly ridiculous!! I can not believe this one!! First off, the Ewoks are in their native planet Endor so they are cognizant of their home terrain since they live there. If you watch the movie carefully many of the tactics the Ewoks used in defeating the stormtroopers was through excellent use of their home field advantage. (Since you lived in the forest all your life I hope you would have learned to use it to your advantage) They had swinging vines, ropes, logs set up to trip those walkers, and other traps. The stormtroopers were highly disadvantaged because they were outnumbered and not aware of the advantages of the forest. The only thing they had was their blasters. To add, it was not like the Ewoks were battling the stormtroopers themselves, they were heavily assisted by the band of rebels in that conquest. I thought that if the stormtroopers were to have defeated a combination of the Star Wars heros, the band of rebels, as well as the huge clan of Ewoks with great familiarity of their home terrain, that would have been a great upset. Lastly, if this scene was still unbelievable to you.. How about in Empire Strikes Back or in A New Hope where there were SEVERAL scenes of a group consisting of just Han Solo, Chewbacca, and the Princess, being shot at by like ten stormtroopers and all their blasters missed while the heros were in full view!! And not only that, the heroes , of course, always hit the Stormtroopers with their blasters. The troopers must have VERY, VERY bad aim then! At least in Empire Strikes Back, the Battle of Endor was much more believable since you had two armies pitted each other not 3 heroes against a legion of stormtroopers. Don't believe me? Check out the battle at Cloud City when our heroes were escaping Lando's base. Or when our heros were rescuing Princess Leia and being shot at (somehow they missed)as Han Solo and Luke were trying to exit the Death Star.

The last reason that I care to discuss (others are just too plain ridiculous for me to spend my time here.) is that people did not like Darth Vader being revealed! Well, in many ways that was a major part of the plot in the movie. Luke was trying to find whether or not Darth Vader was his father, Annakin Skywalker. It would have been disappointing if the movie had ended without Luke getting to see his father's face because it made it complete. By Annakin's revelation it symbolized the transition Darth Vader underwent from being possessed by the dark side (in his helmet) and to the good person he was Annakin Skywalker (by removing the helmet). The point is that Annakin died converted to the light side again and that is what the meaning of the helmet removal scene was about. In fact, that's is what I would have done in that scene too if I were Luke's father...Isn't that what you would have done if you wanted to see your son with your own eyes before you died and not in a mechanized helmet?

On another note, I think a subconscious or conscious expectation among most people is that the sequel MUST be worse (even if it is better) that preceding movies is another reason that ROTJ does not get as many accolades as it deserves. I never go into a film with that deception in mind, I always try to go into a film with the attitude that "Well, it might be better or worse that the original .. But I can not know for sure.. Let's see." That way I go with an open mind and do not dupe myself into thinking that a clearly superior film is not as good as it really was.

I am not sure who criticizes these movies but, I have asked many college students and adults about which is their favorite Star Wars movie and they all tell me (except for one person that said that A New Hope was their favorite) that it is ROTJ. I believe that the results on these polls are appalling and quite misleading.

Bottom line, the Return of the Jedi was the best of the Trilogy. This movie was the only one of the three that kept me riveted all throughout its 135 minutes. There was not a moment of boredom because each scene was either suspenseful, exciting, surprising, or all of the above. For example, the emotional light saber battle between Luke and his father in ROTJ was better than the one in the Empire Strikes Back any day!!!

Finally, I hope people go see the Phantom Menace with an open mind because if fans start looking for nitpicky, insignificant details (or see it as "just another sequel") to trash the movie such as "This movie stinks because Luke is not in it!" then this meritorious film will become another spectacular movie that will be the subject of derision like ROTJ suffered unfortunately.

I [[figured]] that ROTJ was [[apparently]] the [[nicest]] out of the three [[Superstar]] [[Warfare]] [[cinematography]]. I find it [[unbelievable]] that ROTJ is [[judged]] the [[lowest]] installment in the Trilogy by [[various]] who have voted. To me it seemed like ROTJ was the best because it had the most [[deep]] plot, the most [[wait]], [[stuns]], most [[sentimental]],([[mostly]] the ending) and [[conclusively]] the most episodic [[movies]]. I personally like the Empire [[Bombing]] Back a [[lots]] [[apart]] but I [[thoughts]] it is [[marginally]] [[fewest]] good than than ROTJ [[because]] it was slower-moving, was not as episodic, and I just did not feel as much suspense or emotion as I did with the third movie.

It also seems like to me that after reading these surprising reviews that the reasons people cited for ROTJ being an inferior film to the other two are just plain ludicrous and are insignificant reasons compared to the sheer excellence of the film as a whole. I have heard many strange reasons such as: a) Because Yoda died b) Because Bobba Fett died c) Because small Ewoks defeated a band of stormtroopers d) Because Darth Vader was revealed

I would like to debunk each of these reasons because I believe that they miss the point completely. First off, WHO CARES if Bobba Fett died??? If George Lucas wanted him to die then he wanted him to die. Don't get me wrong I am fan of Bobba Fett but he made a few cameo appearances and it was not Lucas' intention to make him a central character in the films that Star Wars fans made him out to be. His name was not even mentioned anywhere in the movie... You had to go to the credits to find out Bobba Fett's name!!! Judging ROTJ because a minor character died is a bit much I think... Secondly, many fans did not like Yoda dying. Sure, it was a momentous period in the movie. I was not happy to see him die either but it makes the movie more realistic. All the good guys can't stay alive in a realistic movie, you know. Otherwise if ALL the good guys lived and ALL the bad guys died this movie would have been tantamount to a cheesy Saturday morning cartoon. Another aspect to this point about people not liking Yoda's death.. Well, nobody complained when Darth Vader struck down Obi Wan Kenobi in A New Hope. (Many consider A New Hope to be the best of the Trilogy) Why was Obi Wan's death okay but Yoda's not... hmmmmmmmmmmmm.... Another reason I just can not believe was even stated was because people found cute Ewoks overpowering stormtroopers to be impossible. That is utterly ridiculous!! I can not believe this one!! First off, the Ewoks are in their native planet Endor so they are cognizant of their home terrain since they live there. If you watch the movie carefully many of the tactics the Ewoks used in defeating the stormtroopers was through excellent use of their home field advantage. (Since you lived in the forest all your life I hope you would have learned to use it to your advantage) They had swinging vines, ropes, logs set up to trip those walkers, and other traps. The stormtroopers were highly disadvantaged because they were outnumbered and not aware of the advantages of the forest. The only thing they had was their blasters. To add, it was not like the Ewoks were battling the stormtroopers themselves, they were heavily assisted by the band of rebels in that conquest. I thought that if the stormtroopers were to have defeated a combination of the Star Wars heros, the band of rebels, as well as the huge clan of Ewoks with great familiarity of their home terrain, that would have been a great upset. Lastly, if this scene was still unbelievable to you.. How about in Empire Strikes Back or in A New Hope where there were SEVERAL scenes of a group consisting of just Han Solo, Chewbacca, and the Princess, being shot at by like ten stormtroopers and all their blasters missed while the heros were in full view!! And not only that, the heroes , of course, always hit the Stormtroopers with their blasters. The troopers must have VERY, VERY bad aim then! At least in Empire Strikes Back, the Battle of Endor was much more believable since you had two armies pitted each other not 3 heroes against a legion of stormtroopers. Don't believe me? Check out the battle at Cloud City when our heroes were escaping Lando's base. Or when our heros were rescuing Princess Leia and being shot at (somehow they missed)as Han Solo and Luke were trying to exit the Death Star.

The last reason that I care to discuss (others are just too plain ridiculous for me to spend my time here.) is that people did not like Darth Vader being revealed! Well, in many ways that was a major part of the plot in the movie. Luke was trying to find whether or not Darth Vader was his father, Annakin Skywalker. It would have been disappointing if the movie had ended without Luke getting to see his father's face because it made it complete. By Annakin's revelation it symbolized the transition Darth Vader underwent from being possessed by the dark side (in his helmet) and to the good person he was Annakin Skywalker (by removing the helmet). The point is that Annakin died converted to the light side again and that is what the meaning of the helmet removal scene was about. In fact, that's is what I would have done in that scene too if I were Luke's father...Isn't that what you would have done if you wanted to see your son with your own eyes before you died and not in a mechanized helmet?

On another note, I think a subconscious or conscious expectation among most people is that the sequel MUST be worse (even if it is better) that preceding movies is another reason that ROTJ does not get as many accolades as it deserves. I never go into a film with that deception in mind, I always try to go into a film with the attitude that "Well, it might be better or worse that the original .. But I can not know for sure.. Let's see." That way I go with an open mind and do not dupe myself into thinking that a clearly superior film is not as good as it really was.

I am not sure who criticizes these movies but, I have asked many college students and adults about which is their favorite Star Wars movie and they all tell me (except for one person that said that A New Hope was their favorite) that it is ROTJ. I believe that the results on these polls are appalling and quite misleading.

Bottom line, the Return of the Jedi was the best of the Trilogy. This movie was the only one of the three that kept me riveted all throughout its 135 minutes. There was not a moment of boredom because each scene was either suspenseful, exciting, surprising, or all of the above. For example, the emotional light saber battle between Luke and his father in ROTJ was better than the one in the Empire Strikes Back any day!!!

Finally, I hope people go see the Phantom Menace with an open mind because if fans start looking for nitpicky, insignificant details (or see it as "just another sequel") to trash the movie such as "This movie stinks because Luke is not in it!" then this meritorious film will become another spectacular movie that will be the subject of derision like ROTJ suffered unfortunately.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5151 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Hitchcock was of the [[opinion]] that [[audiences]] aren't really interested in what puts protagonists into danger - only that they ARE in danger, and need to escape.

This film proves Hitchcock was not 100% [[correct]]. Police believe Jean Simmons is guilty of a crime, when she plainly isn't. Trevor Howard decides their best course of action is to run for it. And so, the body of the movie has our charismatic [[pair]] dodging on and off trains, buses and coaches - jumping across rocks at the top of a waterfall - scrambling across dockyard roofs.

All good exciting stuff - but I couldn't get out of my mind that it was all unnecessary. They should have stayed put.

In other words, the MacGuffin wasn't strong enough. Hitchcock was of the [[viewing]] that [[listeners]] aren't really interested in what puts protagonists into danger - only that they ARE in danger, and need to escape.

This film proves Hitchcock was not 100% [[accurate]]. Police believe Jean Simmons is guilty of a crime, when she plainly isn't. Trevor Howard decides their best course of action is to run for it. And so, the body of the movie has our charismatic [[doublet]] dodging on and off trains, buses and coaches - jumping across rocks at the top of a waterfall - scrambling across dockyard roofs.

All good exciting stuff - but I couldn't get out of my mind that it was all unnecessary. They should have stayed put.

In other words, the MacGuffin wasn't strong enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 5152 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Angels who got a little icky were banned from heaven and now reside in a British forest where they seduce and chop up teens. Talk about high concept. On the plus side this little mother gives us Tom Savini, but since his acting range is limited to two minutes screen-time, his five minute presence seems a tad long. The angels run around the forest naked for the most part of the movie, but though they might have the body of an angel, their faces sure look like Joan Rivers on a bad day. Mediocre acting and amateurish gore-effects don't help and the night scenes fatally recall Paris Hilton's most famous movie. So bad that it is REALLY bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 5153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] Jimmy Cagney races by your eyes constantly in this [[story]] of a stage-producer who is vigorously struggling against the [[upcoming]] "talking" [[movies]].

This story of love, deceit, women and dancing is [[presented]] in such a [[manner]] that as a [[viewer]] you are never treated to a [[dull]] moment. The direction of the mass scenes in the rehearsal rooms was enormously well done. The story never really got [[lost]] in this frantic pace.

Some parts of the material presented here have become a little dated but that doesn't matter because when you look at this in a 1933 time-frame it is [[fabulous]] to watch this next to a lot of the other drags of movies that were released during that time.

Jimmy Cagney is a sight for sore eyes in this film, never loosing his composure as the ever-working producer of previews made for the movie theaters as intros. In this way he tries to save his ass from going out of business, he was a broadway producer before he started this. Joan Blondell is [[fabulous]] as the neglected love-interest, Nan, she gives such a [[spirited]] performance that is so unusual for [[movies]] of that [[time]], so cool to watch a woman who is portrayed as a [[strong]] woman for a change.

The only [[problem]] I had with the [[film]] were the [[enormous]] productions at the end. These were [[magnificent]] in itself, beautifully choreographed and wonderfully produced, but they just didn't [[seem]] to fit in the [[story]]. The only link they have to the [[main]] [[story]] is that Cagney had to put on 3 previews in 3 days to get a [[contract]] and that's what he did. I had a hard time believing that this was what the [[girls]] had been rehearsing during the [[entire]] [[movie]] and that these sets could fit in a [[movie]] [[theater]]. In this way the "Sitting On A Backyard Fence" was much more appropriate to the story.

The productions at the end seemed to drag this frantically paced story to a halt and that was not a good [[thing]]. I was tired after seeing the first Musical sequence and then I realized there were another two [[coming]] up. These sequences got a lot a chuckles from the audience as well.

All in all a [[great]] film with a sour ending.

9/10 Jimmy Cagney races by your eyes constantly in this [[conte]] of a stage-producer who is vigorously struggling against the [[imminent]] "talking" [[theater]].

This story of love, deceit, women and dancing is [[tabled]] in such a [[method]] that as a [[onlooker]] you are never treated to a [[uninspiring]] moment. The direction of the mass scenes in the rehearsal rooms was enormously well done. The story never really got [[forfeited]] in this frantic pace.

Some parts of the material presented here have become a little dated but that doesn't matter because when you look at this in a 1933 time-frame it is [[unbelievable]] to watch this next to a lot of the other drags of movies that were released during that time.

Jimmy Cagney is a sight for sore eyes in this film, never loosing his composure as the ever-working producer of previews made for the movie theaters as intros. In this way he tries to save his ass from going out of business, he was a broadway producer before he started this. Joan Blondell is [[wondrous]] as the neglected love-interest, Nan, she gives such a [[plucky]] performance that is so unusual for [[theater]] of that [[moment]], so cool to watch a woman who is portrayed as a [[forceful]] woman for a change.

The only [[trouble]] I had with the [[flick]] were the [[hefty]] productions at the end. These were [[spectacular]] in itself, beautifully choreographed and wonderfully produced, but they just didn't [[seems]] to fit in the [[tale]]. The only link they have to the [[principal]] [[storytelling]] is that Cagney had to put on 3 previews in 3 days to get a [[marketplace]] and that's what he did. I had a hard time believing that this was what the [[woman]] had been rehearsing during the [[whole]] [[cinematography]] and that these sets could fit in a [[cinematography]] [[teatro]]. In this way the "Sitting On A Backyard Fence" was much more appropriate to the story.

The productions at the end seemed to drag this frantically paced story to a halt and that was not a good [[stuff]]. I was tired after seeing the first Musical sequence and then I realized there were another two [[arriving]] up. These sequences got a lot a chuckles from the audience as well.

All in all a [[wondrous]] film with a sour ending.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I have [[seen]] this [[wonderful]] production, and I wonder if anyone can tell me anything about the actress who played the blacksmith's wife-I am not sure of her character's name. I went to BYU with her and lost touch with her-her maiden name was Kim Luke-and I wonder if anyone has any info on her. She is not listed in the credits. This production was outstanding, a tear-jerker on all accounts, superb acting by all. I guess I don't even want to put it in the general category of 'acting', more like '[[portraying]] with feeling the amazing events that led to the opening of the Heavens for this the final dispensation'.....something like that. If anyone worked with Kim or has a website or something please let me know!!! She was fantastic in her role, by the way....Thanks, Melissa Thorne I have [[watched]] this [[wondrous]] production, and I wonder if anyone can tell me anything about the actress who played the blacksmith's wife-I am not sure of her character's name. I went to BYU with her and lost touch with her-her maiden name was Kim Luke-and I wonder if anyone has any info on her. She is not listed in the credits. This production was outstanding, a tear-jerker on all accounts, superb acting by all. I guess I don't even want to put it in the general category of 'acting', more like '[[outlining]] with feeling the amazing events that led to the opening of the Heavens for this the final dispensation'.....something like that. If anyone worked with Kim or has a website or something please let me know!!! She was fantastic in her role, by the way....Thanks, Melissa Thorne --------------------------------------------- Result 5155 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] What happens when you give a free man just enough money to trap him into the rat race and watch him squirm? Homeless people answer to no one. They have no mortgages, rent payments or idiot bosses. Homeless people don't have to worry about the IRS or performance reviews or credit card payments. But, give them just enough money to rent an apartment and buy a car and, suddenly, they have to worry about entering the rat race, buying gas for transportation, paying insurance on their car, and working for someone else. They get a chance to be a "productive citizens." This [[film]] was about as exploitive as a film can be. It's a way for the rich and middle-class sheeple to say "see what happens when you try to help the poor?" and it vindicates capitalistic arrogance.

Why not a film that asks, "What happens when you take away everything a rich man has?" What happens when you give a free man just enough money to trap him into the rat race and watch him squirm? Homeless people answer to no one. They have no mortgages, rent payments or idiot bosses. Homeless people don't have to worry about the IRS or performance reviews or credit card payments. But, give them just enough money to rent an apartment and buy a car and, suddenly, they have to worry about entering the rat race, buying gas for transportation, paying insurance on their car, and working for someone else. They get a chance to be a "productive citizens." This [[filmmaking]] was about as exploitive as a film can be. It's a way for the rich and middle-class sheeple to say "see what happens when you try to help the poor?" and it vindicates capitalistic arrogance.

Why not a film that asks, "What happens when you take away everything a rich man has?" --------------------------------------------- Result 5156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I too was intrigued by the high (8.5) rating for this film, and was very [[disappointed]]. I had just seen a couple of good foreign films and was looking forward to making it three in a row, but it was not to be. I went with a spanish speaking friend who felt the same way. There is not much of a [[plot]], if any. I don't necessarily need that in a movie, but it needs to somehow entertain or bring me in. The best I could say would be that it aspires to be an Altman-esque film, albeit with an extremely small ensemble. Sure, there are moments, but a few moments easily get thinned out by 97 slow [[minutes]] of [[nothing]]. I do not understand the high rating for this film. I give it a 3.

I too was intrigued by the high (8.5) rating for this film, and was very [[disappoint]]. I had just seen a couple of good foreign films and was looking forward to making it three in a row, but it was not to be. I went with a spanish speaking friend who felt the same way. There is not much of a [[intrigue]], if any. I don't necessarily need that in a movie, but it needs to somehow entertain or bring me in. The best I could say would be that it aspires to be an Altman-esque film, albeit with an extremely small ensemble. Sure, there are moments, but a few moments easily get thinned out by 97 slow [[mins]] of [[anything]]. I do not understand the high rating for this film. I give it a 3.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5157 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is really terrible.

The only redeeming feature about this movie is that the next time people ask me what is the worst vampire movie I have ever watched, I would have a suitable reply.

I think it is filmed on 35 mm so it is already tacky like hell. I wouldn't have bothered commenting but I noticed some fanboys (probably connected to the movie) had claimed that this was the best movie since the Matrix. Let me debunk the myths and lies.

There is nothing good in the movie. Everything yells tacky. The actress is ugly. The fight choreography is the worst I have ever seen. The fight scenes are unbelievably amateurish. Imagine a girl flailing her arms around in a circle helplessly and delivering weak kicks which wouldn't hurt a kitten. Obviously, the director just pulled people off the street to give them roles in the movie.

I know the director did not have much budget for the movie but still better movies have been made on smaller budget before. Unforgivable. --------------------------------------------- Result 5158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The documentary revolves around Eva Mozes Kor, a holocaust survivor, [[part]] of Mengele's experiments on [[twins]], consisting primarily her version of what happened at Auschwitz, and a comparison of the emotions of the other survivors of the twin experiments. The movie [[obviously]] had great [[reviews]]. It's one of those topics that no one dares to voice a contrary opinion about.

I too, for a [[large]] part of the movie, got [[sucked]] into the emotion that the movie-maker so obviously wanted the viewer to concentrate on. One of the user reviews on IMDb by Eric Monder (obviously having nothing critical to say about the issue on a public forum) could only find the sweetest nectar. "In one of the many dramatic sequences, as a group of Jews argue with Kor at a Jewish center, the meaning of the word "forgive" is even debated, but the isolated and outnumbered Kor holds her own" But by this time, the sappy hold that the movie had on my dormant emotional repertoire had let loose enough that I could see clearly once more. After the "strong-willed" Eva Kor forgives her "Nazi captors" the movie begins to delve into what forgiving is all about, at least from the viewpoint of Kor. The movie goes about following her, past her public statement forgiving the Nazis and into new territory. To me, this was the meat of the movie, surrounded by inedible fat of her "act of forgiveness". Obviously, it was a very sick [[cow]].

On a mission to test her theory of forgiveness, in order to heal wounds of the past, she makes her way to the "promised land" to meet with some Arabs, to discuss with them the issues that they face and to see if dialogue cannot lead to a better understanding of the situation and heavily interspersed with debates and discussions with Jews in the US on her act of forgiving the Nazis, including one at a Jewish center in Chicago. From then on, anyone not so teary eyed that they can't see the screen will find it hard-pressed to miss the obvious contradiction in her statements.

Firstly, you immediately notice her body language, defensive and unwilling to listen in a room full of Arab scholars and teachers. Her comments about how she feared that they might kidnap her shows how much of a waste of time, effort and money the entire act was. A rather annoyed Dr Sami Advan (Professor of education at Bethlehem University) gets it just right when he tells Kor off for a statement she makes about how she would rather be asleep in her apartment.

Finally, the debate at the Jewish center in Chicago, where she is "grilled" on the meaning of forgiveness and her right to do so, in the wake of those that continue suffering through the trauma of the acts.

I will cut to the chase. By the end of the movie, I was hoping I hadn't chosen to watch the movie. The movie was badly made, failing to delve deeper into anything about Auschwitz apart from the purely trivial, just sufficient to make sure the holocaust is refreshed in the viewers memory and to incite a barrage of tears. It showed that Kor, the subject of the documentary was unable to engage in fair discussion. Her discussion abilities were limited to parroting her stance on forgiveness (at best) to a complete unwillingness to listen or participate.

Lastly, is everyone so retarded today that they can't notice the difference between making peace and forgiving? Quoting another IMDb user, "I don't see her forgiveness as being weak- quite the contrary, she just wanted to relieve its hold from her soul, she wanted the suffering to be over, so she let it go." That would be the perfect layman's definition of MAKING PEACE.

I guess, in a world of propaganda, blind faith and political correctness, there is no room to question those that have "gone through more than the human mind can fathom".

P.S. The dictionary certainly should go into all those Books-to-buy lists everyone keeps making. The documentary revolves around Eva Mozes Kor, a holocaust survivor, [[parties]] of Mengele's experiments on [[binoculars]], consisting primarily her version of what happened at Auschwitz, and a comparison of the emotions of the other survivors of the twin experiments. The movie [[unmistakably]] had great [[appraisals]]. It's one of those topics that no one dares to voice a contrary opinion about.

I too, for a [[grandes]] part of the movie, got [[aspired]] into the emotion that the movie-maker so obviously wanted the viewer to concentrate on. One of the user reviews on IMDb by Eric Monder (obviously having nothing critical to say about the issue on a public forum) could only find the sweetest nectar. "In one of the many dramatic sequences, as a group of Jews argue with Kor at a Jewish center, the meaning of the word "forgive" is even debated, but the isolated and outnumbered Kor holds her own" But by this time, the sappy hold that the movie had on my dormant emotional repertoire had let loose enough that I could see clearly once more. After the "strong-willed" Eva Kor forgives her "Nazi captors" the movie begins to delve into what forgiving is all about, at least from the viewpoint of Kor. The movie goes about following her, past her public statement forgiving the Nazis and into new territory. To me, this was the meat of the movie, surrounded by inedible fat of her "act of forgiveness". Obviously, it was a very sick [[vaca]].

On a mission to test her theory of forgiveness, in order to heal wounds of the past, she makes her way to the "promised land" to meet with some Arabs, to discuss with them the issues that they face and to see if dialogue cannot lead to a better understanding of the situation and heavily interspersed with debates and discussions with Jews in the US on her act of forgiving the Nazis, including one at a Jewish center in Chicago. From then on, anyone not so teary eyed that they can't see the screen will find it hard-pressed to miss the obvious contradiction in her statements.

Firstly, you immediately notice her body language, defensive and unwilling to listen in a room full of Arab scholars and teachers. Her comments about how she feared that they might kidnap her shows how much of a waste of time, effort and money the entire act was. A rather annoyed Dr Sami Advan (Professor of education at Bethlehem University) gets it just right when he tells Kor off for a statement she makes about how she would rather be asleep in her apartment.

Finally, the debate at the Jewish center in Chicago, where she is "grilled" on the meaning of forgiveness and her right to do so, in the wake of those that continue suffering through the trauma of the acts.

I will cut to the chase. By the end of the movie, I was hoping I hadn't chosen to watch the movie. The movie was badly made, failing to delve deeper into anything about Auschwitz apart from the purely trivial, just sufficient to make sure the holocaust is refreshed in the viewers memory and to incite a barrage of tears. It showed that Kor, the subject of the documentary was unable to engage in fair discussion. Her discussion abilities were limited to parroting her stance on forgiveness (at best) to a complete unwillingness to listen or participate.

Lastly, is everyone so retarded today that they can't notice the difference between making peace and forgiving? Quoting another IMDb user, "I don't see her forgiveness as being weak- quite the contrary, she just wanted to relieve its hold from her soul, she wanted the suffering to be over, so she let it go." That would be the perfect layman's definition of MAKING PEACE.

I guess, in a world of propaganda, blind faith and political correctness, there is no room to question those that have "gone through more than the human mind can fathom".

P.S. The dictionary certainly should go into all those Books-to-buy lists everyone keeps making. --------------------------------------------- Result 5159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] There are four [[great]] movie depicting the Vietnam War. They are (in no [[particular]] order: Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July, Platoon, and [[finally]] Tigerland. All but Tigerland focus on the actual war and the [[men]] in it. Tigerland [[focuses]] on [[men]] in advanced training for the Vietnam War. The character of Boz is one of the most [[important]] depictions of a man [[questioning]] war, and the absurdity of it. This has been [[done]] in [[many]] war movies, but rarely in [[boot]] [[camp]]. Also, this is a very complex character, whose method with dealing with his [[feeling]] and [[emotions]] are the driving force of this [[movie]]. The [[character]] of Boz makes this movie so [[good]]. It is a [[shame]] it did not [[get]] a [[major]] [[release]]. It belongs on the shelf of any [[movie]] [[fan]] alongside the aforementioned [[movie]] titles. There are four [[wondrous]] movie depicting the Vietnam War. They are (in no [[specific]] order: Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July, Platoon, and [[eventually]] Tigerland. All but Tigerland focus on the actual war and the [[males]] in it. Tigerland [[concentrated]] on [[hombre]] in advanced training for the Vietnam War. The character of Boz is one of the most [[notable]] depictions of a man [[interrogated]] war, and the absurdity of it. This has been [[played]] in [[numerous]] war movies, but rarely in [[boots]] [[campground]]. Also, this is a very complex character, whose method with dealing with his [[sense]] and [[passions]] are the driving force of this [[cinema]]. The [[trait]] of Boz makes this movie so [[alright]]. It is a [[embarrassment]] it did not [[obtain]] a [[important]] [[liberate]]. It belongs on the shelf of any [[kino]] [[groupie]] alongside the aforementioned [[cinematography]] titles. --------------------------------------------- Result 5160 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Well, it is hard to [[add]] comment after reading what is already here but I feel I [[must]] say something. I wasn't exactly [[looking]] for 'a splatterfest' as [[someone]] puts it or even 'blood and [[guts]]/gore'. I have some [[respect]] for the victims relatives [[although]] I [[really]] felt the filmaker DIDN'T. -They were [[nameless]], faceless and [[meaningless]]. [[Just]] a [[vessel]] for Dahmers sexual antics.

I [[watched]] this [[film]] with the kind of [[morbid]] curiosity that makes me [[think]] 'What makes a [[guy]] be a serial [[killer]]?' as well as [[wondering]] the [[specifics]] about the Dahmer [[story]], of which I know very [[little]]. People here [[seem]] to [[think]] that the movie didn't have to [[cover]] the [[events]] of the Dahmer [[story]].. I.E. his [[history]], what [[happened]] when he got [[caught]], the [[aftermath]], etc but IT IS [[IMPORTANT]]! You [[see]], I assume if you are American you WILL KNOW all of this. We do not all live in [[America]]. To [[tell]] this [[story]] about such a man as he [[obviously]] was, REQUIRES that at [[least]] SOME of the [[history]] and [[actual]] [[events]] are [[told]]/[[shown]]. This doesn't mean blood and [[guts]], there are ways of [[showing]] horrific things in a [[movie]] by [[implication]] or clever filming without resorting to gore. [[Without]] even [[touching]] [[upon]] some of what he did (I [[found]] out more about him reading the [[user]] [[comments]] on this site!), the [[movie]] [[felt]] like a void. A moment in [[time]] with very [[little]] [[substance]]. I [[would]] [[like]] to know if there is a [[film]] about the REAL Dahmer because with its [[lack]] of [[direction]], [[VERY]] [[slow]] [[pace]] that NEVER changes, [[Strange]] portrayal of [[homosexuality]] and the [[VERY]] [[unfortunate]] [[lack]] of [[ANY]] [[attempt]] at an [[ending]], this [[movie]] is POOR. I [[would]] not [[recommend]] to [[anyone]] that they waste the [[time]] it [[takes]] to watch it. A definite 1 out of 10 (for the acting!) Well, it is hard to [[adding]] comment after reading what is already here but I feel I [[owes]] say something. I wasn't exactly [[searching]] for 'a splatterfest' as [[everyone]] puts it or even 'blood and [[insides]]/gore'. I have some [[respecting]] for the victims relatives [[despite]] I [[genuinely]] felt the filmaker DIDN'T. -They were [[unfamiliar]], faceless and [[senseless]]. [[Only]] a [[battleship]] for Dahmers sexual antics.

I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] with the kind of [[illness]] curiosity that makes me [[ideas]] 'What makes a [[man]] be a serial [[assassin]]?' as well as [[asked]] the [[characteristics]] about the Dahmer [[saga]], of which I know very [[small]]. People here [[appears]] to [[thinks]] that the movie didn't have to [[covers]] the [[incidents]] of the Dahmer [[fairytales]].. I.E. his [[story]], what [[sweated]] when he got [[apprehended]], the [[consequence]], etc but IT IS [[VITAL]]! You [[seeing]], I assume if you are American you WILL KNOW all of this. We do not all live in [[Americas]]. To [[say]] this [[tales]] about such a man as he [[clearly]] was, REQUIRES that at [[lowest]] SOME of the [[stories]] and [[real]] [[happenings]] are [[say]]/[[revealed]]. This doesn't mean blood and [[insides]], there are ways of [[exhibiting]] horrific things in a [[filmmaking]] by [[consequences]] or clever filming without resorting to gore. [[Sans]] even [[affects]] [[after]] some of what he did (I [[finds]] out more about him reading the [[users]] [[feedback]] on this site!), the [[movies]] [[deemed]] like a void. A moment in [[times]] with very [[scant]] [[substances]]. I [[ought]] [[likes]] to know if there is a [[flick]] about the REAL Dahmer because with its [[lacked]] of [[orientation]], [[EXTREMELY]] [[sluggish]] [[rhythm]] that NEVER changes, [[Unusual]] portrayal of [[sodomy]] and the [[QUITE]] [[sad]] [[insufficiency]] of [[EVERYTHING]] [[strive]] at an [[ceasing]], this [[filmmaking]] is POOR. I [[ought]] not [[recommendations]] to [[everyone]] that they waste the [[times]] it [[pick]] to watch it. A definite 1 out of 10 (for the acting!) --------------------------------------------- Result 5161 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] for whoever play games video games here did anybody notice that the GTA:Vice City Mansion inside the game and some other things including weapons from the movie that are connected to this movie and this movie inspired the makers of the game (Rockstar Games) to copy some things from this movie and by the way this is one of the best 80's movies out there i recommend this for anybody who still didn't see it 10/10 no questions asked --------------------------------------------- Result 5162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I thought this [[movie]] was [[terrible]]. I'm [[Chinese]], so I [[thought]] everything was totally wrong. [[Many]] of the facts were [[incorrect]]. The only thing right about Chinese [[history]] in the [[movie]] was when Wendy's [[mother]] [[explained]] to her husband about the [[statues]] that guarded ShiHuangDi. I [[also]] [[thought]] the [[fight]] scenes were very cheesy and [[fake]]. [[Many]] of the [[actors]] and [[actresses]] were not very great. Some of the [[jokes]] that were [[supposedly]] "[[funny]]" were really [[stupid]]. I [[think]] this [[movie]] should [[receive]] the worst possible [[rating]] it could get. [[Disney]] has really [[got]] to get more information about Chinese [[history]] if they [[want]] to [[create]] an extravagant [[movie]]. Mulan was [[quite]] [[accurate]]. Watch this movie if you [[want]] to waste some [[time]]. I thought this [[filmmaking]] was [[horrible]]. I'm [[Chinaman]], so I [[thinking]] everything was totally wrong. [[Several]] of the facts were [[faulty]]. The only thing right about Chinese [[story]] in the [[filmmaking]] was when Wendy's [[mommy]] [[explains]] to her husband about the [[idols]] that guarded ShiHuangDi. I [[similarly]] [[ideas]] the [[combats]] scenes were very cheesy and [[untrue]]. [[Various]] of the [[players]] and [[actors]] were not very great. Some of the [[pranks]] that were [[seemingly]] "[[comical]]" were really [[silly]]. I [[believing]] this [[movies]] should [[receives]] the worst possible [[valuation]] it could get. [[Disneyland]] has really [[gets]] to get more information about Chinese [[story]] if they [[wanted]] to [[creating]] an extravagant [[flick]]. Mulan was [[pretty]] [[correct]]. Watch this movie if you [[wanna]] to waste some [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is a dry and sterile [[feature]] filming on one of most interesting events in WWII and in [[history]] of [[warfare]] [[behind]] the front line. [[Bad]] drama [[composition]] is worst about this [[film]] as plot on [[killing]] [[Hitler]] [[suppose]] to be pretty [[dramatic]] [[event]]. There is no [[character]] [[development]] at all and idea that Tom [[Cruise]] [[suppose]] to [[play]] a [[high]] [[rank]] commander that [[questions]] his [[deepest]] [[inner]] [[thoughts]] on patriotism and [[treason]] is [[completely]] [[insane]]. I believe that [[Mister]] Bin [[would]] play it better. Generally speaking, film pretty much [[looks]] as a cheep [[copy]] of [[good]] German [[TV]] [[movie]] "Stauffenberg" from 2004, but can't get [[close]] to that film [[regarding]] any [[movie]] aspect whatsoever. However, movie [[obviously]] gets its [[financial]] [[goal]] with pop-corn [[audience]] that [[cherishes]] Hollywood fast-mood [[blood]] and [[shallow]] [[art]] values. This is a dry and sterile [[trait]] filming on one of most interesting events in WWII and in [[story]] of [[battle]] [[posterior]] the front line. [[Mala]] drama [[makeup]] is worst about this [[filmmaking]] as plot on [[killed]] [[Nazi]] [[reckon]] to be pretty [[prodigious]] [[events]]. There is no [[trait]] [[evolution]] at all and idea that Tom [[Cruises]] [[imagining]] to [[gaming]] a [[supreme]] [[categorize]] commander that [[issues]] his [[sincerest]] [[interiors]] [[reflections]] on patriotism and [[disloyalty]] is [[absolutely]] [[loca]]. I believe that [[Monsieur]] Bin [[should]] play it better. Generally speaking, film pretty much [[seem]] as a cheep [[copied]] of [[well]] German [[TVS]] [[cinema]] "Stauffenberg" from 2004, but can't get [[nearer]] to that film [[relative]] any [[movies]] aspect whatsoever. However, movie [[definitely]] gets its [[monetary]] [[objectives]] with pop-corn [[viewers]] that [[appreciates]] Hollywood fast-mood [[transfusion]] and [[cursory]] [[artistry]] values. --------------------------------------------- Result 5164 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I consider myself a bit of a connoisseur of boxing movies and as such there is only one thing that prevents me from calling "Gentleman Jim" the best boxing movie ever made. That is the Robert Wise/Paul Newman flick "Somebody Up There Likes Me." That movie might be number 1, but "Gentleman Jim" is a close number 2.

The movie doesn't just chronicle the rise of James J. Corbett, it also shows the sport of boxing at a crucial time of transition. In the late 1800s boxing was moving away from the brutal days of bare-knuckle rules to the more "gentlemanly" days of the gloved, Marquis of Queensbury rules. And the sport was moving away from the days when it was an illegal spectacle and towards a time of acceptance and respectability.

"Gentleman Jim" is not a realistic look at those days. It is romanticized and, yes, even a bit hokey at times. But always delightfully so. Errol Flynn is perfect as the "Gentleman" Jim who really isn't a "gentleman" at all but merely a fast talker from a working class family. Alexis Smith is quite ravishing as the upper class woman with whom he has a love/hate relationship (and we all know it is, of course, love that will win that match in the end).

At the end of "Gentleman Jim" the great John L Sullivan (whose famous line was NOT "I can lick any man in the world" of course...romanticism again) hands over his belt to Corbett. This is truly one of the best scenes in any sports move ever made. Realistic? No. But wonderful. Hey, if you want realism watch "Raging Bull" instead. That is a much more realistic boxing movie. But "Gentleman Jim" is a lot more fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 5165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anton Newcombe makes the film and he is the main subject. Watching him knock up a song if not a whole album quickly showed the guy to be a real talent. He thinks he is god but is so prollific and interesting. The DW are not really that interesting in comparison musicly or otherwise. "Hey, do you haver a drivers license?" ,Anton says to the cameraman, "Well lets go pawn this guitar!". Great use of archive/ home video material. Great to see rock docs still being made. A cool doc about the creative process. If you like this go see Nirvana Live! Tonight! Sold Out! on DVD. A good experience Anton is this film. 8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Does [[anyone]] know, where I can [[see]] or [[download]] the "What I [[like]] about you" season 4 episodes in the [[internet]]? Because I would die to see them and here in Germany there won't be [[shown]] on [[TV]]. Please help me. I wanna [[see]] the season 4 episodes badly. I already have seen episode 4 and episode 18 on YouTube. But I couldn't find more [[episodes]] of season 4. Is there maybe a website where I can see the episodes? Because I've read some comments in forums from [[Germany]] and there were people which had already seen the season 4 episodes even though they haven't been shown at TV in Germany. I am happy about [[every]] [[information]] I can [[get]]. [[Thanks]] Kate Does [[somebody]] know, where I can [[consults]] or [[downloaded]] the "What I [[adores]] about you" season 4 episodes in the [[cyber]]? Because I would die to see them and here in Germany there won't be [[illustrated]] on [[TVS]]. Please help me. I wanna [[behold]] the season 4 episodes badly. I already have seen episode 4 and episode 18 on YouTube. But I couldn't find more [[bouts]] of season 4. Is there maybe a website where I can see the episodes? Because I've read some comments in forums from [[Germania]] and there were people which had already seen the season 4 episodes even though they haven't been shown at TV in Germany. I am happy about [[any]] [[info]] I can [[obtains]]. [[Merci]] Kate --------------------------------------------- Result 5167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] "I Love [[New]] York" is another entry by VH-1 (MTV Networks) [[showing]] the entertaining side of dating a shrill, [[obnoxious]], woman. It must have been an easy decision to take the most wildest, Ebonics speaking, craziest contestant - and her mother - and give them a show on this network. Many will argue, "this is a show". True, it's not as bad as it's previous show, "Flavor of Love" - but it's just as [[bad]].

It reminds me of a skit from the 90's show "In Living Color" where Keenan Ivory Wayans was imitating the boxer Mike Tyson on "The Love Connection" dating show and he picked "Robin Givens" for a date. Mike talked of how the date was okay, but how the obnoxious mother kept butting in. This show reminds me of that.

The men are chosen and given names to degrade themselves and the woman that they are dating more - (I would think an intelligent man looking to date an intelligent woman would NOT allow her - and her mother - to give you a name that is so ghetto, you'll embarrass yourself every time you appear on TV.) but these are professional reality actors, so why bother.

It escapes me to discover what is so entertaining about all of this. The fact that this is as fake as her newly implanted additions? 15 Minutes of fame and hundreds of thousands of dollars in ad time for the network? (Well, you can't hate them for trying to make a buck.) Maybe the wonder is - who would want to be with this woman past an hour? Or wonder if she and her mother's next show would be on the WWF! Any way you slice it, it's a train wreck you've seen countless times before so by now the shock value is down to nil.

No twist or turn will make this a more interesting train wreck, or any different from any of the others. Appeals to the lowest common denominator and for those calling an "end" to reality shows, this is just another nail in the coffin as to why they should end, immediately. "I Love [[Nouveau]] York" is another entry by VH-1 (MTV Networks) [[shows]] the entertaining side of dating a shrill, [[outrageous]], woman. It must have been an easy decision to take the most wildest, Ebonics speaking, craziest contestant - and her mother - and give them a show on this network. Many will argue, "this is a show". True, it's not as bad as it's previous show, "Flavor of Love" - but it's just as [[negative]].

It reminds me of a skit from the 90's show "In Living Color" where Keenan Ivory Wayans was imitating the boxer Mike Tyson on "The Love Connection" dating show and he picked "Robin Givens" for a date. Mike talked of how the date was okay, but how the obnoxious mother kept butting in. This show reminds me of that.

The men are chosen and given names to degrade themselves and the woman that they are dating more - (I would think an intelligent man looking to date an intelligent woman would NOT allow her - and her mother - to give you a name that is so ghetto, you'll embarrass yourself every time you appear on TV.) but these are professional reality actors, so why bother.

It escapes me to discover what is so entertaining about all of this. The fact that this is as fake as her newly implanted additions? 15 Minutes of fame and hundreds of thousands of dollars in ad time for the network? (Well, you can't hate them for trying to make a buck.) Maybe the wonder is - who would want to be with this woman past an hour? Or wonder if she and her mother's next show would be on the WWF! Any way you slice it, it's a train wreck you've seen countless times before so by now the shock value is down to nil.

No twist or turn will make this a more interesting train wreck, or any different from any of the others. Appeals to the lowest common denominator and for those calling an "end" to reality shows, this is just another nail in the coffin as to why they should end, immediately. --------------------------------------------- Result 5168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] It is [[unbelievable]] that a [[script]] as cliché and [[completely]] absurd could make any screen [[even]] the small one. The dialogue in this movie makes Catwoman [[seem]] like a [[high]] [[culture]] classic. Billy Zane plays the bad ass [[harmonica]] playing, [[Elvis]] impersonating, gunslinging, martial arts master who gambles on the life of a down-an-out former football player turned gambling addict played by the winner of NBC's craptastic show "Next Action Star." His performance is as cold as ice and not in a [[cool]] way. The "[[film]]" takes place in Vegas, and since people play poker there the writers felt it was a perfect setting for a movie about a guy trying to survive 24 hours against an omnipresent, wealthy gambler who has offered his target $2.4 million if he can make it through the day. And so the hunt ensues. A hunt reeking with unimpressive explosions, construction yard [[settings]], shoddy [[cinematography]], and one-liners containing the word "bet" or "gamble." The female winner is also tossed in the mix, but for what reason I have no idea. Oh but don't worry "NAS" fans the [[losers]] make their memorable cameos as well. The surprise ending will knock your socks off if you love predictability or plagiarism. Joel Silver should reevaluate his [[decision]] to sell out even more. I wish he could give me those two hours of my life back. It is [[impressive]] that a [[scripts]] as cliché and [[totally]] absurd could make any screen [[yet]] the small one. The dialogue in this movie makes Catwoman [[seems]] like a [[supreme]] [[cropping]] classic. Billy Zane plays the bad ass [[banjo]] playing, [[Alves]] impersonating, gunslinging, martial arts master who gambles on the life of a down-an-out former football player turned gambling addict played by the winner of NBC's craptastic show "Next Action Star." His performance is as cold as ice and not in a [[cooling]] way. The "[[filmmaking]]" takes place in Vegas, and since people play poker there the writers felt it was a perfect setting for a movie about a guy trying to survive 24 hours against an omnipresent, wealthy gambler who has offered his target $2.4 million if he can make it through the day. And so the hunt ensues. A hunt reeking with unimpressive explosions, construction yard [[configure]], shoddy [[movies]], and one-liners containing the word "bet" or "gamble." The female winner is also tossed in the mix, but for what reason I have no idea. Oh but don't worry "NAS" fans the [[tossers]] make their memorable cameos as well. The surprise ending will knock your socks off if you love predictability or plagiarism. Joel Silver should reevaluate his [[rulings]] to sell out even more. I wish he could give me those two hours of my life back. --------------------------------------------- Result 5169 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Where is it written that sequels must suck? Scream 2 didn't! Others didn't! But this one sure did... problems include horrible actors (only Christopher Walken could act in the entire film), bad writing (you will never understand what's going on and I even have done research on the idea of Nephilim before), and just horrible choices for casting. Eric Roberts makes the stupidest Archangel Michael that I have ever seen in my life!

Avoid it like the plague unless you are desperate to see Christopher Walken. In that case just fast-forward to the parts where he is in the film, and avoid the others.

Yech!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The Bill was essentially a cultural [[fountain]] from which a [[beautiful]] rainbow-haze of socio-introspection emerged, inspiring such famed derivatives as Cop Land, The Departed, The Godfather 3, and most recently of course, The Wire.

With multi-faceted [[characters]] and story lines that have been described as '4-dimensional Shakespeare', The Bill grabbed you by the collars from episode one and just would not let you [[go]].

The [[show]] [[covered]], [[anticipated]], and even occasionally [[caused]] all the [[major]] global events between 1984 and 2010. The most famously prescient moment being episode 19 of series 5, which aired on the eve of the second Gulf War. Detective Jim Carver's misguided - and ultimately career ending - drugs raid on Craig 'Fun Boy' Richardson's flat in the Jasmine Allen Estate in early 2003, was widely viewed as a predictive allegory for the coalition's failure to find weapons of mass destruction following the invasion of Iraq several months later.

However, it was the work the Bill did to try and highlight some of the lesser-known problems experienced by police officers that won it the most praise. This was [[sympathetic]] [[drama]] covering such [[sensitive]] areas as helmet-phobia, under-uniform cross-dressing, in-van homosexuality, lost truncheons, casual drunken bestiality (regretted), siren [[aversion]] syndrome (SAS), groin chaffing caused by chasing suspects while wearing an overly starched [[uniform]] and many, many more issues that still trouble, disturb, [[haunt]] and excite officers to this day.

The last word should go to one of The Bill's most famous fans, Nelson Mandela: "…it is no exaggeration to say that I would not have made it through the dark void of loneliness that summed up my last years of incarceration on Robben Island if it wasn't for the heart-warming, casual buffoonery of Reg Hollis." The Bill was essentially a cultural [[trout]] from which a [[wondrous]] rainbow-haze of socio-introspection emerged, inspiring such famed derivatives as Cop Land, The Departed, The Godfather 3, and most recently of course, The Wire.

With multi-faceted [[features]] and story lines that have been described as '4-dimensional Shakespeare', The Bill grabbed you by the collars from episode one and just would not let you [[going]].

The [[exhibitions]] [[covering]], [[planned]], and even occasionally [[engendered]] all the [[big]] global events between 1984 and 2010. The most famously prescient moment being episode 19 of series 5, which aired on the eve of the second Gulf War. Detective Jim Carver's misguided - and ultimately career ending - drugs raid on Craig 'Fun Boy' Richardson's flat in the Jasmine Allen Estate in early 2003, was widely viewed as a predictive allegory for the coalition's failure to find weapons of mass destruction following the invasion of Iraq several months later.

However, it was the work the Bill did to try and highlight some of the lesser-known problems experienced by police officers that won it the most praise. This was [[empathy]] [[tragedy]] covering such [[receptive]] areas as helmet-phobia, under-uniform cross-dressing, in-van homosexuality, lost truncheons, casual drunken bestiality (regretted), siren [[revulsion]] syndrome (SAS), groin chaffing caused by chasing suspects while wearing an overly starched [[uniforms]] and many, many more issues that still trouble, disturb, [[torment]] and excite officers to this day.

The last word should go to one of The Bill's most famous fans, Nelson Mandela: "…it is no exaggeration to say that I would not have made it through the dark void of loneliness that summed up my last years of incarceration on Robben Island if it wasn't for the heart-warming, casual buffoonery of Reg Hollis." --------------------------------------------- Result 5171 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[really]] enjoyed the pilot, it was as [[amazing]] as I [[hoped]] it [[would]] be, if not better. [[Patrick]] Warburton was a [[riot]], [[although]] at [[first]] i thought that I wouldn't be able to stand his character. Him and Megyn Price Had little chemistry at all, but hopefully as the season goes on they'll get more comfortable around each other. It must have been weird for Megyn to go from being the star on her last [[show]] ["Grounded [[For]] [[Life]]"] to being a co-star.

Bianca Kajlich and Oliver Hudson seem really [[new]] to the whole Sitcom scene, but I think in time they'll get better. David Spade's character, to my surprise, wasn't the whole [[focus]] of this [[pilot]]. The [[way]] he delivers his lines is so [[different]] from [[anyone]] [[else]] i've ever [[seen]] on TV, but I [[think]] that it is just his style. It [[works]] for him.

I think that couples, or even [[singles]], will be able to relate to all the [[doubts]] and fights and being unsure about your decisions, that this show is about. All the [[situations]] that the characters are put in just feel like real life, not sugar-coated like most [[shows]].

I hope for all the actors sakes that CBS gives them a chance. This show has the potential to be one of the best series, if just given the chance and time. I [[genuinely]] enjoyed the pilot, it was as [[wondrous]] as I [[waited]] it [[ought]] be, if not better. [[Tangerine]] Warburton was a [[rioting]], [[though]] at [[frst]] i thought that I wouldn't be able to stand his character. Him and Megyn Price Had little chemistry at all, but hopefully as the season goes on they'll get more comfortable around each other. It must have been weird for Megyn to go from being the star on her last [[showing]] ["Grounded [[During]] [[Lifetime]]"] to being a co-star.

Bianca Kajlich and Oliver Hudson seem really [[novel]] to the whole Sitcom scene, but I think in time they'll get better. David Spade's character, to my surprise, wasn't the whole [[focused]] of this [[experiment]]. The [[routes]] he delivers his lines is so [[assorted]] from [[anybody]] [[further]] i've ever [[noticed]] on TV, but I [[reckon]] that it is just his style. It [[collaborate]] for him.

I think that couples, or even [[bachelors]], will be able to relate to all the [[anxieties]] and fights and being unsure about your decisions, that this show is about. All the [[circumstances]] that the characters are put in just feel like real life, not sugar-coated like most [[exposition]].

I hope for all the actors sakes that CBS gives them a chance. This show has the potential to be one of the best series, if just given the chance and time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This was a typical grade B [[movie]] in 1940s Hollywood and [[yet]] it succeeded [[way]] [[beyond]] its [[expectations]]. Why? It has a [[wonderful]] [[plot]] and backed up by Nina Foch, George MacReady and Dame May Witty, as a female villain, of all people.

When a young [[lady]] [[answers]] an [[advertisement]] for a secretary, she certainly [[gets]] more than she bargained for. The only talents her [[employers]] are [[seeking]] are those which will lead to her demise. Seems that Witty and MacReady [[want]] to pass her off as their daughter-in-law and wife, respectively. MacReady killed his real wife and wants to do Foch in as well so that a body can be claimed.

The [[film]] deals with how Foch tries to get town people to believe her and how she is thwarted in practically everything she does. Why don't people [[believe]] her? This was a typical grade B [[films]] in 1940s Hollywood and [[even]] it succeeded [[path]] [[afterlife]] its [[prospects]]. Why? It has a [[wondrous]] [[intrigue]] and backed up by Nina Foch, George MacReady and Dame May Witty, as a female villain, of all people.

When a young [[dame]] [[response]] an [[publicity]] for a secretary, she certainly [[obtains]] more than she bargained for. The only talents her [[employer]] are [[striving]] are those which will lead to her demise. Seems that Witty and MacReady [[wanting]] to pass her off as their daughter-in-law and wife, respectively. MacReady killed his real wife and wants to do Foch in as well so that a body can be claimed.

The [[films]] deals with how Foch tries to get town people to believe her and how she is thwarted in practically everything she does. Why don't people [[believing]] her? --------------------------------------------- Result 5173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm somewhat of a [[fan]] of Lynche's work, so I was [[excited]] when I found this DVD. Unfortunately, I was very [[let]] down. It's a [[series]] of short cartoons which [[attempt]] to show a disturbing and disgusting sort of [[humor]]. The [[animation]] is very crude, no doubt done using Macromedia. Each [[cartoon]] has a big [[fat]] guy beating up his family and generally acting like a jerk to everyone he knows.

For people who are not [[familiar]] with this vein of animation, they will [[probably]] be somewhat [[impressed]] by it. However, if you've [[spent]] much time on Newgrounds.com, like me, then these cartoons will be no different than any of the other stuff you've seen before. Many of the popular amateur artists on Newgrounds are doing much better work than what was shown on this DVD. If Lynch submitted this work to the website, then he [[would]] blend in perfectly with some of the [[better]] of Newgrounds [[artists]]. But, since I saw this on DVD, instead of on Newgrounds, I [[give]] it a 4/10, [[instead]] of a 7/10, as I would have otherwise. These cartoons are fit for the internet, but with a name like David Lynch on it, I [[expected]] better quality both in story and in animation. I'm somewhat of a [[breather]] of Lynche's work, so I was [[thrilled]] when I found this DVD. Unfortunately, I was very [[leave]] down. It's a [[serial]] of short cartoons which [[tried]] to show a disturbing and disgusting sort of [[comedy]]. The [[animate]] is very crude, no doubt done using Macromedia. Each [[cartoons]] has a big [[gras]] guy beating up his family and generally acting like a jerk to everyone he knows.

For people who are not [[colloquial]] with this vein of animation, they will [[undeniably]] be somewhat [[surprising]] by it. However, if you've [[expended]] much time on Newgrounds.com, like me, then these cartoons will be no different than any of the other stuff you've seen before. Many of the popular amateur artists on Newgrounds are doing much better work than what was shown on this DVD. If Lynch submitted this work to the website, then he [[could]] blend in perfectly with some of the [[best]] of Newgrounds [[performer]]. But, since I saw this on DVD, instead of on Newgrounds, I [[confer]] it a 4/10, [[however]] of a 7/10, as I would have otherwise. These cartoons are fit for the internet, but with a name like David Lynch on it, I [[hoped]] better quality both in story and in animation. --------------------------------------------- Result 5174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For Columbo fans, such as myself, this is the episode of episodes that made a case for why Columbo was so popular, and just how good it really was. Ruth Gordon has a field day (as ever) playing the wittily intelligent crime novelist Abigail Mitchell. Seems Abigail calls her nephew-in-law to sign some papers making him her heir. She never got over her niece's death, and is convinced her dead niece's husband (Charles Frank) did the dirty deed. To tell more would be unthinkable. Mariette Hartley has a sly role as Abigail's personal assistant. This episode of Columbo is in a class by itself. It's a truly well made television movie. I recommend it most highly. --------------------------------------------- Result 5175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] Everything I remember about it was [[excellent]]... great cast with Sam Waterston & George Innes (before he became more familiar to US audiences).... excellent scripts as only the English can do - Edwardian Sherlock Holmes/Lord Peter Wimsey/Albert Campion type mysteries, but with a Jules Verne twist. Sort of like MacGyver would have been had it been in England 80 years earlier... right at the beginning of the scientific/technological revolution of the 20th century.

I've often wondered if the creators of MacGyver saw these shows. MacGyver first aired about 3 years later.

I still have 1 episode on a much deteriorated tape. Everything I remember about it was [[wondrous]]... great cast with Sam Waterston & George Innes (before he became more familiar to US audiences).... excellent scripts as only the English can do - Edwardian Sherlock Holmes/Lord Peter Wimsey/Albert Campion type mysteries, but with a Jules Verne twist. Sort of like MacGyver would have been had it been in England 80 years earlier... right at the beginning of the scientific/technological revolution of the 20th century.

I've often wondered if the creators of MacGyver saw these shows. MacGyver first aired about 3 years later.

I still have 1 episode on a much deteriorated tape. --------------------------------------------- Result 5176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Walerian Borowczyks La Bete (1975) was [[obviously]] [[received]] in different ways: Some were appalled, some were [[shocked]] others applauded the courage. I [[however]] am [[completely]] [[untouched]], [[bored]] and cannot [[stop]] [[asking]] myself why the [[display]] of [[incoherent]], inconsistent [[images]] which vaguely orbit around a central theme are [[considered]] an [[intellectual]] journey.

What was this [[movie]] actually about? [[Growing]] sexuality in a woman? I've seen [[great]] films on this subject, but this is not one of them. How can one attempt to portray a growing sexuality in a girl without at least [[trying]] to [[characterize]] her as a person not only as a narrative device to dream (in the nude) of beasts. Where there are no characters, there is no character study. The woman persecuted by the beast was not adolescent, the girl having sex with the black butler (is he also characterized as a beast?) has a very grown up attitude to sexuality, so where is the consistency? Is it a movie about religion? If yes we would need a bit more thematic material than a priest without function, character and charisma, but with a strong desire towards two young boys.

Is it about bestiality? The metaphoric feel of the movie forbids any realistic examination of bestiality, especially as realistic examination requires realistic characters. So no real bestiality here. Some mythic beast and two priests talking to each other about the sin of bestiality. Enough for a [[college]] essay on the topic? I don't think so.

Is it about sex? Is it about anything? I don't know. I only know that showing a fired gun doesn't make a film a war movie. Dealing with a topic must mean more than displaying its own associations with the theme.

So look across the controversy. Don't be scared by the bestiality, nudity, ejaculations, masturbation and stuff. I am not. Look at it as you look at any other story and you might discover that this is a poorly made, poorly edited, poorly acted, really poorly written (okay, some pictures are quite nice, and the main character is a really good looking girl) cerebral masturbation of a director who thinks beating around the bush in a hypnotic slow manner will make a story intelligent. It doesn't. It makes it boring. Walerian Borowczyks La Bete (1975) was [[definitely]] [[benefited]] in different ways: Some were appalled, some were [[dismayed]] others applauded the courage. I [[still]] am [[fully]] [[intact]], [[drilled]] and cannot [[stopping]] [[asks]] myself why the [[visualize]] of [[counterintuitive]], inconsistent [[photograph]] which vaguely orbit around a central theme are [[judged]] an [[intelligentsia]] journey.

What was this [[filmmaking]] actually about? [[Rising]] sexuality in a woman? I've seen [[marvellous]] films on this subject, but this is not one of them. How can one attempt to portray a growing sexuality in a girl without at least [[try]] to [[characterized]] her as a person not only as a narrative device to dream (in the nude) of beasts. Where there are no characters, there is no character study. The woman persecuted by the beast was not adolescent, the girl having sex with the black butler (is he also characterized as a beast?) has a very grown up attitude to sexuality, so where is the consistency? Is it a movie about religion? If yes we would need a bit more thematic material than a priest without function, character and charisma, but with a strong desire towards two young boys.

Is it about bestiality? The metaphoric feel of the movie forbids any realistic examination of bestiality, especially as realistic examination requires realistic characters. So no real bestiality here. Some mythic beast and two priests talking to each other about the sin of bestiality. Enough for a [[university]] essay on the topic? I don't think so.

Is it about sex? Is it about anything? I don't know. I only know that showing a fired gun doesn't make a film a war movie. Dealing with a topic must mean more than displaying its own associations with the theme.

So look across the controversy. Don't be scared by the bestiality, nudity, ejaculations, masturbation and stuff. I am not. Look at it as you look at any other story and you might discover that this is a poorly made, poorly edited, poorly acted, really poorly written (okay, some pictures are quite nice, and the main character is a really good looking girl) cerebral masturbation of a director who thinks beating around the bush in a hypnotic slow manner will make a story intelligent. It doesn't. It makes it boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 5177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Still being of school age, and having to learn Shakespeare almost constantly for the last four years (which is very off-putting of any writer, no matter how good), I didn't really [[expect]] to enjoy this film when my English teacher put it on; I thought it'd be the [[typical]] English lesson movie: bad acting, awfully shot, badly edited and the dreaded awful old dialog, so, as you can tell, I was all but ready to go into a [[coma]] from the go. However, I watched and, much to my [[disturbance]], [[found]] myself not only [[paying]] [[attention]], but actually [[enjoying]] the movie too. This [[production]] of Hamlet is [[possibly]] one of the [[best]] [[drama]] [[movies]] I have [[seen]] in a [[long]] time- and it really [[brings]] to life what I [[expect]] Shakespeare [[wanted]] his plays to be like (well, with the [[difference]] that this is cinema) much better than my English [[teacher]] harking over the text ever [[possibly]] [[could]]. The [[story]] is good, the [[dialog]] [[seems]] to [[flow]] with an unexpected grace that is far from [[boring]] ([[though]] a little [[hard]] to [[keep]] up with if you aren't [[used]] to Shakespeare's language) and [[even]] the smallest parts are [[performed]] with a [[skill]] you wouldn't [[expect]]; [[mainly]], [[perhaps]], due to the [[staggering]] number of cameos this [[movie]] has. [[Brian]] Blessed and Charlton Heston are as [[great]] as you'd expect these two veterans to be, [[even]] in such [[small]] parts, but it is [[Robin]] Williams as Osric and Billy Crystal as the Gravedigger who really [[stand]] out, giving such [[minor]] parts an unexpected [[zest]], as well as [[offering]] some [[comic]] relief [[amidst]] the [[tragedy]].

The [[main]] [[stars]], of course, are [[also]] [[wonderful]]. Kenneth Branagh excels as [[Hamlet]], bringing not only the [[confusion]] and [[pain]] [[required]] to the roll, but also a [[sort]] of sardonic [[air]] which plays [[beautifully]] in the [[comic]] scenes, [[making]] the [[movie]] as a whole much more watchable. The other [[major]] [[players]] are [[also]] good, but it is Kenneth Branagh who stands head and shoulders above the [[rest]] in the title role.

The set [[pieces]], too, are often quite stunning, giving a refreshing [[change]] to the danky old castle corridors we're used to seeing in Shakespeare productions, as well as a [[real]] sense of the country [[around]] them.

Of course, the [[movie]], [[taken]] as a [[movie]] in its own right, is not without faults, but no major ones (the pacing is the only real [[problem]] I can [[think]] of [[offhand]], as well as the prose for anyone not used to, as I said, Shakesperean language) and, especially when compared to the sort of Shakespeare productions I'm used to seeing in class, it really is quite brilliant. It's even made me rethink my previous typical teenager stance on Shakespeare, that his plays are boring (I came to the conclusion it's not the plays that are boring, merely the teachers who recite them in class). If only they made all of his plays into movies such as this one, English students in schools everywhere might have a higher opinion of the Bard.

Overall 7/10 Still being of school age, and having to learn Shakespeare almost constantly for the last four years (which is very off-putting of any writer, no matter how good), I didn't really [[hopes]] to enjoy this film when my English teacher put it on; I thought it'd be the [[symptomatic]] English lesson movie: bad acting, awfully shot, badly edited and the dreaded awful old dialog, so, as you can tell, I was all but ready to go into a [[eat]] from the go. However, I watched and, much to my [[agitation]], [[detected]] myself not only [[salaries]] [[beware]], but actually [[enjoy]] the movie too. This [[productivity]] of Hamlet is [[potentially]] one of the [[better]] [[theater]] [[cinematography]] I have [[watched]] in a [[longer]] time- and it really [[puts]] to life what I [[hopes]] Shakespeare [[want]] his plays to be like (well, with the [[variance]] that this is cinema) much better than my English [[professors]] harking over the text ever [[potentially]] [[did]]. The [[histories]] is good, the [[dialogues]] [[appears]] to [[flux]] with an unexpected grace that is far from [[bored]] ([[despite]] a little [[difficult]] to [[maintaining]] up with if you aren't [[employs]] to Shakespeare's language) and [[yet]] the smallest parts are [[done]] with a [[proficiency]] you wouldn't [[expecting]]; [[basically]], [[probably]], due to the [[stunning]] number of cameos this [[cinematography]] has. [[Bryan]] Blessed and Charlton Heston are as [[wondrous]] as you'd expect these two veterans to be, [[yet]] in such [[petite]] parts, but it is [[Rubin]] Williams as Osric and Billy Crystal as the Gravedigger who really [[standing]] out, giving such [[lesser]] parts an unexpected [[enthusiasm]], as well as [[offered]] some [[comedian]] relief [[amid]] the [[drama]].

The [[principal]] [[superstar]], of course, are [[apart]] [[magnifique]]. Kenneth Branagh excels as [[Hamlets]], bringing not only the [[muddle]] and [[pains]] [[needed]] to the roll, but also a [[sorting]] of sardonic [[airline]] which plays [[amazingly]] in the [[comedian]] scenes, [[doing]] the [[cinematography]] as a whole much more watchable. The other [[large]] [[gamblers]] are [[similarly]] good, but it is Kenneth Branagh who stands head and shoulders above the [[remainder]] in the title role.

The set [[slices]], too, are often quite stunning, giving a refreshing [[amend]] to the danky old castle corridors we're used to seeing in Shakespeare productions, as well as a [[actual]] sense of the country [[about]] them.

Of course, the [[cinematography]], [[picked]] as a [[movies]] in its own right, is not without faults, but no major ones (the pacing is the only real [[difficulties]] I can [[believe]] of [[flippant]], as well as the prose for anyone not used to, as I said, Shakesperean language) and, especially when compared to the sort of Shakespeare productions I'm used to seeing in class, it really is quite brilliant. It's even made me rethink my previous typical teenager stance on Shakespeare, that his plays are boring (I came to the conclusion it's not the plays that are boring, merely the teachers who recite them in class). If only they made all of his plays into movies such as this one, English students in schools everywhere might have a higher opinion of the Bard.

Overall 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If you're researching UFO [[facts]], then this [[video]] is very [[important]]. The 'meat' of the video is the [[comments]] made by Buzz Aldrin. He is without a doubt from the best of America. [[Trained]] to be objective, honest and factual in his reports. [[Many]] [[Astronauts]] from [[America]] of all eras have reported some kind of [[contact]], or UFO observance and there are videos from some of those missions. At the very least something has happened that [[requires]] further objective ongoing investigating. I [[think]] this testimony from [[Buzz]] Aldrin shows that it is possible that other [[worlds]] may be interested in our progress. [[Like]] all supposed documentary video, this one may be slanted, but it does contain further information and [[opinions]] from an [[accomplished]] American [[hero]]. Those don't come along every day. So the fact that some people aren't interested in [[details]] should not detour your from viewing this video. If [[nothing]] [[else]], it is interesting and I recommend you watch with an open mind. If you're researching UFO [[truths]], then this [[videos]] is very [[critical]]. The 'meat' of the video is the [[commentary]] made by Buzz Aldrin. He is without a doubt from the best of America. [[Formed]] to be objective, honest and factual in his reports. [[Innumerable]] [[Astronaut]] from [[Americans]] of all eras have reported some kind of [[contacting]], or UFO observance and there are videos from some of those missions. At the very least something has happened that [[require]] further objective ongoing investigating. I [[reckon]] this testimony from [[Gaston]] Aldrin shows that it is possible that other [[mundos]] may be interested in our progress. [[Iike]] all supposed documentary video, this one may be slanted, but it does contain further information and [[views]] from an [[played]] American [[heroin]]. Those don't come along every day. So the fact that some people aren't interested in [[detail]] should not detour your from viewing this video. If [[anything]] [[further]], it is interesting and I recommend you watch with an open mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 5179 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Whatever happened to Keaton is what I [[want]] to know.

Actually I don't, I [[crawled]] away, [[heaving]], [[thinking]] she [[must]] [[owe]] half the [[bookies]] in [[Vegas]], or maybe not, [[maybe]] she was just brainwashed, blackmailed and [[bored]] to [[death]]. [[Rich]] [[enough]] to [[adopt]] a third-world [[country]], she somehow had to [[star]] in [[yet]] another cookie-cut, cliché-ridden drool'athon, [[based]] on the same character-franchise she's been rehashing since '[[Father]] of the Bride'('91). You'd [[think]] she's going [[head]] to [[head]] with [[Mr]].Bean.

(Spoilers)

So hubby (Dax) get's fired by [[obnoxious]] son of boss, his [[mom]] (Keaton)leaves his [[dad]] after [[classic]] row, and [[crashes]] over with her own dog-show in tow, [[oh]] those [[little]] rascals. Hubby's got cold-feet for diaper-duty, wifey's [[clock]] a-ticking and [[hey]], let's toss in a space-cadet as second house-guest for [[good]] [[measure]], all in one day because that's so [[funny]] and original. [[Wife]] gets [[fed]] up and [[walks]] away, [[mom]] leaves [[dad]] for space-cadet and the [[couple]] makes up in [[time]] for closing [[credits]], 86 very long minutes [[later]].

[[Now]] if you have to have a space-cadet, he can't be devious as well, he can't scheme some [[excuse]] for his stayover, and if [[mom]] leaves [[dad]], she can't [[hop]] into a [[cab]] [[dressed]] as a [[pumpkin]] just because some [[scriptwriter]] [[agonized]] over how to cheer thing up.

Plus that gag [[whereby]] they [[invite]] her in only to then [[discover]] she's got her canine [[entourage]] in the [[cab]] has [[got]] to be [[outlawed]] by now. And you only [[get]] one [[obnoxious]] 2-dimensional [[boss]] to [[denigrate]]. Another movie-killer [[would]] be the movie-script the [[space]] cadet is [[toiling]] away at, supposedly more lame than the [[actual]] one, again, dejas-ad-nausea.

Liv [[Tyler]] doesn't [[seem]] [[happy]] here, her [[voice]] was [[weird]] at times, it had me [[wondering]] if they later had her redub some of it, and she's a [[smart]] one, she's [[handled]] great roles and we'll forgive her for Jersey Girl, it was disaster-prone, could happen to anyone. Dax Shepard was watchable and that's being generous considering the material.

Personally, it's the director, the screenwriters and especially the producers that I would love to see tar'n'feathered before shipped to Guantanamo as playthings for the prisoners, and that's me keeping this 'lite'. Whatever happened to Keaton is what I [[wanna]] to know.

Actually I don't, I [[crept]] away, [[uprising]], [[thought]] she [[needs]] [[gotta]] half the [[bookie]] in [[Blackpool]], or maybe not, [[probably]] she was just brainwashed, blackmailed and [[drilled]] to [[dies]]. [[Rika]] [[satisfactorily]] to [[approve]] a third-world [[nation]], she somehow had to [[superstar]] in [[even]] another cookie-cut, cliché-ridden drool'athon, [[predicated]] on the same character-franchise she's been rehashing since '[[Pere]] of the Bride'('91). You'd [[thought]] she's going [[jefe]] to [[leader]] with [[Mister]].Bean.

(Spoilers)

So hubby (Dax) get's fired by [[vile]] son of boss, his [[mama]] (Keaton)leaves his [[papa]] after [[classical]] row, and [[accidents]] over with her own dog-show in tow, [[ah]] those [[petite]] rascals. Hubby's got cold-feet for diaper-duty, wifey's [[pendulum]] a-ticking and [[hi]], let's toss in a space-cadet as second house-guest for [[alright]] [[measurement]], all in one day because that's so [[fun]] and original. [[Femme]] gets [[fueled]] up and [[walking]] away, [[mama]] leaves [[pope]] for space-cadet and the [[couples]] makes up in [[moment]] for closing [[appropriations]], 86 very long minutes [[subsequently]].

[[Nowadays]] if you have to have a space-cadet, he can't be devious as well, he can't scheme some [[apologize]] for his stayover, and if [[moms]] leaves [[pop]], she can't [[jump]] into a [[taxis]] [[clothed]] as a [[sweetheart]] just because some [[playwright]] [[anguished]] over how to cheer thing up.

Plus that gag [[where]] they [[please]] her in only to then [[discovering]] she's got her canine [[motorcade]] in the [[taxicab]] has [[gets]] to be [[prohibition]] by now. And you only [[gets]] one [[despicable]] 2-dimensional [[chef]] to [[belittle]]. Another movie-killer [[could]] be the movie-script the [[spacing]] cadet is [[toiled]] away at, supposedly more lame than the [[real]] one, again, dejas-ad-nausea.

Liv [[Ty]] doesn't [[looks]] [[happier]] here, her [[vocal]] was [[bizarro]] at times, it had me [[asked]] if they later had her redub some of it, and she's a [[ingenious]] one, she's [[handles]] great roles and we'll forgive her for Jersey Girl, it was disaster-prone, could happen to anyone. Dax Shepard was watchable and that's being generous considering the material.

Personally, it's the director, the screenwriters and especially the producers that I would love to see tar'n'feathered before shipped to Guantanamo as playthings for the prisoners, and that's me keeping this 'lite'. --------------------------------------------- Result 5180 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I honestly had no idea that the Notorious B.I.G. (Bert I. Gordon the director; not the murdered rapper) was still active in the 80's! I always presumed the deliciously [[inept]] "Empire of the Ants" [[stood]] as his last masterful accomplishment in the horror genre, but that was before my dirty little hands stumbled upon an ancient and dusty VHS copy of "The Coming", a totally obscure and unheard of witchery-movie that actually turned out a more or less pleasant surprise! What starts out as a seemingly atmospheric tale of late Dark Ages [[soon]] [[takes]] a silly turn when a villager of [[year]] 1692 inexplicably [[becomes]] [[transferred]] to present day Salum, Massachusetts and [[promptly]] [[attacks]] a [[girl]] in the [[history]] [[museum]]. [[For]] you [[see]], this [[particular]] [[girl]] is the reincarnation of Ann Putman who was a bona fide [[evil]] girl in 1692 and [[falsely]] accused over [[twenty]] people of [[practicing]] [[witchcraft]] which led to their [[executions]] at the state. The [[man]] who attacked Loreen lost his [[wife]] and [[daughter]] this and [[wants]] his overdue revenge. But poor and three [[centuries]] older Loreen is just an innocent [[schoolgirl]], … or is she? "[[Burned]] at the Stake" unfolds like a mixture between "The Exorcist" and "Witchfinder [[General]]" with a tad [[bit]] of "The [[Time]] Machine" thrown in for [[good]] [[measure]]. [[Way]] to [[go]], Bert! The plot becomes sillier and more [[senseless]] with every [[new]] twist but at [[least]] it never [[transcends]] into [[complete]] boredom, like too [[often]] the [[case]] in other [[contemporary]] witchcraft [[movies]] like "The Dunwich [[Horror]]" and "The Devonsville [[Terror]]". The [[film]] [[jumps]] back and forth between the events in present day and flashbacks of 1692; which keeps it [[rather]] amusing and fast-paced. The Ann Putman [[girl]] is quite a fascinating [[character]], reminiscent of the Abigail Williams character in the more commonly known stage play "The Crucible" (also depicted by Winona Ryder in the 1996 motion picture). There are a couple of cool death sequences, like the teacher in the graveyard or the journalist in the [[library]], that are [[committed]] by the ghost of malignant reverend who made a pact with Ann Putman and perhaps even the Devil himself. The film gets pretty spastic and completely absurd near the end, but overall there's some good cheesy fun to be had. Plus, the least you can say about [[Bert]] I. Gordon is that he definitely build up some directorial competences over the years. I honestly had no idea that the Notorious B.I.G. (Bert I. Gordon the director; not the murdered rapper) was still active in the 80's! I always presumed the deliciously [[incompetent]] "Empire of the Ants" [[amounted]] as his last masterful accomplishment in the horror genre, but that was before my dirty little hands stumbled upon an ancient and dusty VHS copy of "The Coming", a totally obscure and unheard of witchery-movie that actually turned out a more or less pleasant surprise! What starts out as a seemingly atmospheric tale of late Dark Ages [[shortly]] [[pick]] a silly turn when a villager of [[annum]] 1692 inexplicably [[become]] [[transferring]] to present day Salum, Massachusetts and [[fast]] [[strikes]] a [[dame]] in the [[stories]] [[museums]]. [[Onto]] you [[seeing]], this [[special]] [[daughters]] is the reincarnation of Ann Putman who was a bona fide [[malicious]] girl in 1692 and [[incorrectly]] accused over [[twentieth]] people of [[exercising]] [[magic]] which led to their [[implementation]] at the state. The [[dude]] who attacked Loreen lost his [[femme]] and [[daughters]] this and [[wanted]] his overdue revenge. But poor and three [[ages]] older Loreen is just an innocent [[teenaged]], … or is she? "[[Scorched]] at the Stake" unfolds like a mixture between "The Exorcist" and "Witchfinder [[Overall]]" with a tad [[bitten]] of "The [[Moment]] Machine" thrown in for [[buena]] [[measures]]. [[Pathway]] to [[going]], Bert! The plot becomes sillier and more [[mindless]] with every [[newest]] twist but at [[less]] it never [[exceeded]] into [[finalise]] boredom, like too [[routinely]] the [[instances]] in other [[current]] witchcraft [[film]] like "The Dunwich [[Terror]]" and "The Devonsville [[Panic]]". The [[filmmaking]] [[leap]] back and forth between the events in present day and flashbacks of 1692; which keeps it [[quite]] amusing and fast-paced. The Ann Putman [[girls]] is quite a fascinating [[personages]], reminiscent of the Abigail Williams character in the more commonly known stage play "The Crucible" (also depicted by Winona Ryder in the 1996 motion picture). There are a couple of cool death sequences, like the teacher in the graveyard or the journalist in the [[bookstore]], that are [[commited]] by the ghost of malignant reverend who made a pact with Ann Putman and perhaps even the Devil himself. The film gets pretty spastic and completely absurd near the end, but overall there's some good cheesy fun to be had. Plus, the least you can say about [[Bertin]] I. Gordon is that he definitely build up some directorial competences over the years. --------------------------------------------- Result 5181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This, the [[finest]] achievement from Georg Wilhelm Pabst's [[Social]] [[Realism]] [[period]] is [[based]] upon a [[tragedy]] in early 1906 that claimed the [[lives]] of [[nearly]] 1100 French [[miners]] as a coal dust explosion deep in mines at Courrieres in [[northern]] France [[took]] place after a fire had smouldered for three weeks, eventually releasing deadly pit [[gas]] that [[brought]] about the fatalities. Estimable designer Erno Metzner creates stark sets that simulate the tragedy, [[providing]] a perception of reality, [[augmented]] by matchless sound editing, with the only music being produced by integral [[orchestras]] during the beginning and ending [[portions]] of a [[work]] for which [[aural]] effects [[possess]] equal importance with the [[eminent]] director's [[fascinating]] visual compositions. Pabst's [[manner]] of "invisible editing" that segues action from shot to shot through movements of players proves to be smoothly [[integrated]] within this landmark [[film]] that [[also]] [[showcases]] [[sublime]] [[cinematography]] [[utilizing]] [[cameras]] [[mounted]] [[upon]] vehicles, [[enabling]] the director to [[shift]] amid scenes without having a [[necessity]] of cutting. [[Although]] the work's cardinal [[theme]] relates to Socialist [[dogma]], the [[unforgettable]] power of this [[film]] is held in its [[details]], born of Pabst's nonpareil [[skill]] at [[weaving]] [[numerous]] plot lines into a [[cinema]] [[tapestry]] that stirs one to admiration for German [[rescue]] [[squads]] of whom their [[Fatherland]] is [[greatly]] proud while no less despairing of [[disastrous]] losses to the families of French victims; certainly, a seminal [[triumph]] [[fully]] as [[stimulating]] [[today]] to a cineaste as it was at the time of its first release. This, the [[meanest]] achievement from Georg Wilhelm Pabst's [[Sociable]] [[Realist]] [[calendars]] is [[groundwork]] upon a [[drama]] in early 1906 that claimed the [[life]] of [[practically]] 1100 French [[miner]] as a coal dust explosion deep in mines at Courrieres in [[north]] France [[picked]] place after a fire had smouldered for three weeks, eventually releasing deadly pit [[petrol]] that [[made]] about the fatalities. Estimable designer Erno Metzner creates stark sets that simulate the tragedy, [[supplying]] a perception of reality, [[heighten]] by matchless sound editing, with the only music being produced by integral [[orchestra]] during the beginning and ending [[chunks]] of a [[jobs]] for which [[phonetic]] effects [[possessed]] equal importance with the [[salient]] director's [[riveting]] visual compositions. Pabst's [[way]] of "invisible editing" that segues action from shot to shot through movements of players proves to be smoothly [[embedded]] within this landmark [[movies]] that [[similarly]] [[demonstrates]] [[wondrous]] [[movies]] [[using]] [[camera]] [[mount]] [[after]] vehicles, [[permitting]] the director to [[shifts]] amid scenes without having a [[imperative]] of cutting. [[Despite]] the work's cardinal [[subject]] relates to Socialist [[doctrine]], the [[landmark]] power of this [[cinema]] is held in its [[clarification]], born of Pabst's nonpareil [[jurisdiction]] at [[knitting]] [[several]] plot lines into a [[cine]] [[wallpaper]] that stirs one to admiration for German [[saves]] [[squadrons]] of whom their [[Patria]] is [[heavily]] proud while no less despairing of [[catastrophic]] losses to the families of French victims; certainly, a seminal [[clockwork]] [[utterly]] as [[encouraging]] [[hoy]] to a cineaste as it was at the time of its first release. --------------------------------------------- Result 5182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film, though [[ostensibly]] a comedy, is deadly serious. Its [[subject]] is Imperialism (with a capital I): how Britain, [[foolishly]], humiliatingly, tries to [[convince]] itself that it's still a great power after World War [[II]]. [[At]] [[home]], the Empire is run by amiable dolts, benevolent Tories who are so in-bred that they can't distinguish close relatives; the Offices of [[Government]] [[consist]] of long [[forgotten]] archives (a [[dig]] at Orwellian paranoia?), inhabited by indolent [[rats]], and ante-rooms wherein lounge [[bored]] synacures, reading [[popular]] novels.

Abroad, Britain clings to the old pomp; but pomp out of context looks threadbare and silly, especially when its embodied in bumbling twits. Carlton-Browne is an unsentimental picture of [[decline]], with none of the lachrymose rot that marred the supposedly anti-imperialist Jewel in the Crown.

The film is also about the Cold [[War]], bravely admitting that it's a dangerous farce, whose participants deserve mockery and contempt, not fear and respect. It's about how colonialism, characterised more by neglect than tyranny, destroys the [[colonies]] it deserts, robbing them of amenities, power, and, most importantly, self-respect, leaving them vulnerable to the machinations of dangerous [[cowboys]].

It's the seriousness, of course, that [[kills]] it. That's not to say that weighty subjects can't be treated in comedy - The Miracle Of Morgan's Creek, Dr. Strangelove and The Life Of Brian have all proved that. Indeed, one might suggest that serious themes should only be treated by [[comedy]] - it allows for a clearer-eyed view.

The [[problem]] with Carlton-Browne is that [[every]] situation [[must]] have a significance beyond the [[merely]] [[comic]], so that it [[becomes]] [[weighed]] down and unfunny. [[In]] the three [[films]] [[mentioned]] above, [[much]] of the [[comedy]] [[arises]] from [[character]] reaction to an [[extreme]] situation, not the [[extreme]] situation itself. Here, the [[script]] is too [[poor]] to [[sustain]] rich [[comic]] characterisations, and some of the [[greatest]] [[comedy]] talent ever [[assembled]] - [[Peter]] [[Sellers]], Terry-Thomas, [[Raymond]] Huntley and [[John]] le Mesurier - are criminally wasted.

Terry-Thomas, [[sublime]] so [[often]], shows that he couldn't handle lead parts, and that he needed to play sneering, arrogant bounders, not brainless toffs. The music is made to carry much of the comedy, but its heavy irony only draws attention to the lack of hilarity on screen. (To be fair, unlike the majority of British comedies of the period, which were stagy and underproduced, the Boultings often try to make their points through film itself, by montage and [[composition]]) Only Huntley manages to raise genuine laughs, and that's by essaying a character he could have played in his sleep.

None of the Boultings' farces have dated well - they're never thought through [[enough]]. Although Carlton-Browne revels in the decline of the Empire, it also seems to be anti-democratic and militaristic. I'm sure this wasn't intended, but these blunders are bound to happen if you allow worthy intentions to take precedence over comic intelligence and film form. This film, though [[visibly]] a comedy, is deadly serious. Its [[themes]] is Imperialism (with a capital I): how Britain, [[naively]], humiliatingly, tries to [[persuade]] itself that it's still a great power after World War [[SECONDLY]]. [[For]] [[housing]], the Empire is run by amiable dolts, benevolent Tories who are so in-bred that they can't distinguish close relatives; the Offices of [[Govt]] [[comprise]] of long [[overlooked]] archives (a [[excavate]] at Orwellian paranoia?), inhabited by indolent [[coons]], and ante-rooms wherein lounge [[drilled]] synacures, reading [[fashionable]] novels.

Abroad, Britain clings to the old pomp; but pomp out of context looks threadbare and silly, especially when its embodied in bumbling twits. Carlton-Browne is an unsentimental picture of [[reduces]], with none of the lachrymose rot that marred the supposedly anti-imperialist Jewel in the Crown.

The film is also about the Cold [[Warfare]], bravely admitting that it's a dangerous farce, whose participants deserve mockery and contempt, not fear and respect. It's about how colonialism, characterised more by neglect than tyranny, destroys the [[colony]] it deserts, robbing them of amenities, power, and, most importantly, self-respect, leaving them vulnerable to the machinations of dangerous [[steelers]].

It's the seriousness, of course, that [[mata]] it. That's not to say that weighty subjects can't be treated in comedy - The Miracle Of Morgan's Creek, Dr. Strangelove and The Life Of Brian have all proved that. Indeed, one might suggest that serious themes should only be treated by [[humour]] - it allows for a clearer-eyed view.

The [[issues]] with Carlton-Browne is that [[each]] situation [[needs]] have a significance beyond the [[simply]] [[comical]], so that it [[becoming]] [[weighted]] down and unfunny. [[Across]] the three [[filmmaking]] [[alluded]] above, [[very]] of the [[charade]] [[comes]] from [[personages]] reaction to an [[utmost]] situation, not the [[tremendous]] situation itself. Here, the [[hyphen]] is too [[deficient]] to [[maintaining]] rich [[hilarious]] characterisations, and some of the [[greater]] [[travesty]] talent ever [[congregated]] - [[Pete]] [[Dealerships]], Terry-Thomas, [[Raimundo]] Huntley and [[Giovanni]] le Mesurier - are criminally wasted.

Terry-Thomas, [[admirable]] so [[commonly]], shows that he couldn't handle lead parts, and that he needed to play sneering, arrogant bounders, not brainless toffs. The music is made to carry much of the comedy, but its heavy irony only draws attention to the lack of hilarity on screen. (To be fair, unlike the majority of British comedies of the period, which were stagy and underproduced, the Boultings often try to make their points through film itself, by montage and [[makeup]]) Only Huntley manages to raise genuine laughs, and that's by essaying a character he could have played in his sleep.

None of the Boultings' farces have dated well - they're never thought through [[adequate]]. Although Carlton-Browne revels in the decline of the Empire, it also seems to be anti-democratic and militaristic. I'm sure this wasn't intended, but these blunders are bound to happen if you allow worthy intentions to take precedence over comic intelligence and film form. --------------------------------------------- Result 5183 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I desperately [[need]] this on a [[tape]], not a DVD, and [[soon]]!

I have one nephew who is in the infantry but has not yet deployed, although he set to go to Iraq soon after December 2008. I lost my beloved step son in Ramadi [[Iraq]] on 09-15-05 from an unmanned missile in a green zone. I have another nephew who is joining the army as soon as he graduates from high school this spring because he, like his older brother, has some idealized and romanticized idea about what serving in the military is. My stepson died after only 10 days in country and he never went out on any missions so my nephews have no way to reference any of the experiences shown in this [[candid]] [[documentary]] from any type of personal experiences that might have been conveyed by my now deceased son.

There is nothing I can do about those who are in, or now gone, but I have one left that has not raised his hand and been sworn in YET. I desperately want him to do so [[informed]], none of the others did.

Pleases help me with this.

The movie documentary The Ground Truth is the [[best]] visual reference I have ever seen. I need to somehow make my youngest nephew see what he is getting himself into before it is to late. BUT: ( do not laugh )I NEED my mother to see this first. She must actually see and hear these men and women, not [[simply]] the idea of them, but the truth of what they will be immersed in, possibly forever. Then she will have the emotional determination to make my brother watch this film and once he has then he may then make his son, my youngest nephew, watch it too. Then, my nephew might begin to take this seriously.

((( is there another time when this will be shown on TV ? if so please tell me when ? )))

However, my problem is, my mother does not own a DVD player, she still uses video ( is that [[correct]]? with tapes ? ) So, I need to find a [[way]] for her to be able to watch this [[film]]. Can I [[purchase]] this from anyone in that form? [[If]] not, is there any other way for me to get this in the form of a tape from [[anyone]]? Is there any legitimate link from which I can pay to download it onto my computer and then transfer it to a tape. If so who would I contact. I will gladly pay for the privilege providing it is a legitimate link.

Or,if you have any alternative ideas I will consider anything you can suggest.

Please help me, I have lost one very precious adored and loved one already, I already know my oldest nephew will never be the same when he returns and I may loose him too. I cannot loose three and the emotional toll for all of those that do make it back is too high a price to pay for every male child in my family of that generation. Please help me. I will happily call you, email me a number if that is the best way to get the needed information. Thank you so much for any help you can offer.

Sincerely, Lori Swanberg l.swanberg@yahoo.com I desperately [[required]] this on a [[tapes]], not a DVD, and [[rapidly]]!

I have one nephew who is in the infantry but has not yet deployed, although he set to go to Iraq soon after December 2008. I lost my beloved step son in Ramadi [[Iraqis]] on 09-15-05 from an unmanned missile in a green zone. I have another nephew who is joining the army as soon as he graduates from high school this spring because he, like his older brother, has some idealized and romanticized idea about what serving in the military is. My stepson died after only 10 days in country and he never went out on any missions so my nephews have no way to reference any of the experiences shown in this [[forthright]] [[literature]] from any type of personal experiences that might have been conveyed by my now deceased son.

There is nothing I can do about those who are in, or now gone, but I have one left that has not raised his hand and been sworn in YET. I desperately want him to do so [[notified]], none of the others did.

Pleases help me with this.

The movie documentary The Ground Truth is the [[nicest]] visual reference I have ever seen. I need to somehow make my youngest nephew see what he is getting himself into before it is to late. BUT: ( do not laugh )I NEED my mother to see this first. She must actually see and hear these men and women, not [[exclusively]] the idea of them, but the truth of what they will be immersed in, possibly forever. Then she will have the emotional determination to make my brother watch this film and once he has then he may then make his son, my youngest nephew, watch it too. Then, my nephew might begin to take this seriously.

((( is there another time when this will be shown on TV ? if so please tell me when ? )))

However, my problem is, my mother does not own a DVD player, she still uses video ( is that [[rightness]]? with tapes ? ) So, I need to find a [[manner]] for her to be able to watch this [[flick]]. Can I [[procurement]] this from anyone in that form? [[Though]] not, is there any other way for me to get this in the form of a tape from [[someone]]? Is there any legitimate link from which I can pay to download it onto my computer and then transfer it to a tape. If so who would I contact. I will gladly pay for the privilege providing it is a legitimate link.

Or,if you have any alternative ideas I will consider anything you can suggest.

Please help me, I have lost one very precious adored and loved one already, I already know my oldest nephew will never be the same when he returns and I may loose him too. I cannot loose three and the emotional toll for all of those that do make it back is too high a price to pay for every male child in my family of that generation. Please help me. I will happily call you, email me a number if that is the best way to get the needed information. Thank you so much for any help you can offer.

Sincerely, Lori Swanberg l.swanberg@yahoo.com --------------------------------------------- Result 5184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It's wonderful to see that Shane Meadows is already exerting international influence - LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDANT [[shares]] [[many]] [[themes]] with A [[ROOM]] FOR ROMEO BRASS: the vague class identity above working but well below middle, the unhinged father, the abandoned urban [[milieu]], the sense of adult [[failure]], the barely concealed fascism underpinning [[modern]] urban life.

But if Meadows is an expert formalist, Mariage [[trades]] in images, and his coolly [[composed]], [[exquisitely]] [[Surreal]], monochrome [[frames]], serve to distance the grimy and rather bleak subject matter, which, Meadows-like, veers from high [[farce]] to tragedy within seconds.

There are longueurs and [[cliches]], but Poelvoorde is compellingly mad, an ordinary [[man]] with ordinary ambitions, [[whose]] attempts to realise them are hatstand [[dangerous]]; while individual set-pieces - the popcorn/pidgeon [[explosions]]; the [[best]] marriage [[sequence]] [[since]] THE DEAD AND THE [[DEADLY]] - manage to snatch epiphany from [[despair]]. It's wonderful to see that Shane Meadows is already exerting international influence - LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDANT [[exchange]] [[various]] [[item]] with A [[COURTROOMS]] FOR ROMEO BRASS: the vague class identity above working but well below middle, the unhinged father, the abandoned urban [[medium]], the sense of adult [[deficiency]], the barely concealed fascism underpinning [[trendy]] urban life.

But if Meadows is an expert formalist, Mariage [[crafts]] in images, and his coolly [[consist]], [[finely]] [[Unreal]], monochrome [[framework]], serve to distance the grimy and rather bleak subject matter, which, Meadows-like, veers from high [[jest]] to tragedy within seconds.

There are longueurs and [[cliche]], but Poelvoorde is compellingly mad, an ordinary [[guy]] with ordinary ambitions, [[who]] attempts to realise them are hatstand [[perilous]]; while individual set-pieces - the popcorn/pidgeon [[bomb]]; the [[nicest]] marriage [[sequences]] [[because]] THE DEAD AND THE [[MURDEROUS]] - manage to snatch epiphany from [[despondency]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[first]] saw this film when it was transmitted around 1988 by the BBC when I was working on UK's 2000AD. My pal Steve Parkhouse recorded it on VHS and sent it to me. Up till this point, I'd really only seen the Shaw Bros kung fu movies, with their harsh lighting (so audience could see the moves clearly), so it was a [[revelation]] to me to see something that looked like it had been lit by Ridley Scott coming out of Hong Kong. This was also my first exposure to the movies of Tsui Hark (pronounced, apparently, "Choy Huk").

Yet for all the smoky, back-lit exteriors and ambitious special effects (Stop-motion? In a Hong Kong Movie?) at the heart of Chinese GHOST STORY lies a simple and moving love story, made all the more real by the outstanding acting talent of Leslie Cheung (what a tragic, tragic waste of a [[life]]!) and the beauty and [[elegance]] of Joey Wong. [[Granted]] Joey is [[gorgeous]], but it's her balletic hand gestures that give her character an [[unattainable]] eroticism that's hard to [[analyse]]. And [[though]] Joey is now almost 20 years [[older]] (gawd, which of us isn't?) this will [[always]] be the [[enduring]] [[image]] of that actress.

Some reviewers here have said that the [[film]] is [[simplistic]] and [[lacks]] any [[surprises]], but they're [[missing]] the [[fact]] that this [[movie]] was based on a [[famous]] Chinese [[story]] [[written]] by [[Pu]] Songling around 1700! That's a [[bit]] like complaining that Romeo and Juliet has a predictable [[ending]] and just copies WEST SIDE [[STORY]]. (Just [[wanted]] to get that off my [[chest]]!)

[[For]] me, Chinese GHOST [[STORY]] is the quintessential romantic tale. It has [[high]] tragedy, because we know that Chio Sin and Sin [[Seen]] can never be [[together]]. It's about becoming [[mature]], for [[none]] of us can mature until we've [[experienced]] [[great]] loss. It's about [[sacrifice]], for [[sacrifice]] is an [[essential]] [[component]] of True [[Love]]. And the comedy stylings of Wu [[Ma]] don't hurt a [[bit]], [[either]].

[[Enjoy]] [[Chinese]] [[GHOST]] [[STORY]] by [[trying]] not to [[view]] it through a filter of Western culture and you'll get on with it just [[fine]]. I [[firstly]] saw this film when it was transmitted around 1988 by the BBC when I was working on UK's 2000AD. My pal Steve Parkhouse recorded it on VHS and sent it to me. Up till this point, I'd really only seen the Shaw Bros kung fu movies, with their harsh lighting (so audience could see the moves clearly), so it was a [[epiphany]] to me to see something that looked like it had been lit by Ridley Scott coming out of Hong Kong. This was also my first exposure to the movies of Tsui Hark (pronounced, apparently, "Choy Huk").

Yet for all the smoky, back-lit exteriors and ambitious special effects (Stop-motion? In a Hong Kong Movie?) at the heart of Chinese GHOST STORY lies a simple and moving love story, made all the more real by the outstanding acting talent of Leslie Cheung (what a tragic, tragic waste of a [[living]]!) and the beauty and [[styling]] of Joey Wong. [[Given]] Joey is [[remarkable]], but it's her balletic hand gestures that give her character an [[unreachable]] eroticism that's hard to [[analyzing]]. And [[despite]] Joey is now almost 20 years [[oldest]] (gawd, which of us isn't?) this will [[permanently]] be the [[persistent]] [[photographic]] of that actress.

Some reviewers here have said that the [[cinema]] is [[facile]] and [[lacked]] any [[surprise]], but they're [[extinct]] the [[facto]] that this [[cinema]] was based on a [[famed]] Chinese [[stories]] [[authored]] by [[Bo]] Songling around 1700! That's a [[bite]] like complaining that Romeo and Juliet has a predictable [[terminated]] and just copies WEST SIDE [[TALES]]. (Just [[want]] to get that off my [[torso]]!)

[[During]] me, Chinese GHOST [[TALE]] is the quintessential romantic tale. It has [[higher]] tragedy, because we know that Chio Sin and Sin [[Watched]] can never be [[jointly]]. It's about becoming [[ripe]], for [[nos]] of us can mature until we've [[experimented]] [[phenomenal]] loss. It's about [[slaughter]], for [[slaughter]] is an [[essentials]] [[ingredients]] of True [[Loves]]. And the comedy stylings of Wu [[Mommy]] don't hurt a [[bite]], [[neither]].

[[Enjoying]] [[Chino]] [[PHANTOM]] [[NARRATIVES]] by [[tempting]] not to [[visualise]] it through a filter of Western culture and you'll get on with it just [[fined]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] this movie is just [[great]]. if you have a chance to see it, then you should run to see it. even though the movie has almost nothing to do with its original from 1932, Pacino does a great job playing as Tony Montana to get around.

Pacino has this way about him where he can say anything in anyway and make it sound just great. if you thought that Pulp Fiction was good with the swear words (if you saw it) then you should also see Scarface to see another angle at how an actor can say them. (its quite sweet)

even though the movie is has a lot of action and the plot moves very fast through time, not keeping the realtime aspect ratio correct, it is still easy to follow along, but you must keep your eyes peeled at all times to not lose anything. personally, i have found that watching this movie makes three hours seem like a breeze, it is really just that great.

this movie is one of thoe movies that is acted and directed so well that not only do you forget that this movie was made in the crappy 80s but that it makes you actually root for the bad guy... "So say good night to the BAD guy" this movie is just [[wondrous]]. if you have a chance to see it, then you should run to see it. even though the movie has almost nothing to do with its original from 1932, Pacino does a great job playing as Tony Montana to get around.

Pacino has this way about him where he can say anything in anyway and make it sound just great. if you thought that Pulp Fiction was good with the swear words (if you saw it) then you should also see Scarface to see another angle at how an actor can say them. (its quite sweet)

even though the movie is has a lot of action and the plot moves very fast through time, not keeping the realtime aspect ratio correct, it is still easy to follow along, but you must keep your eyes peeled at all times to not lose anything. personally, i have found that watching this movie makes three hours seem like a breeze, it is really just that great.

this movie is one of thoe movies that is acted and directed so well that not only do you forget that this movie was made in the crappy 80s but that it makes you actually root for the bad guy... "So say good night to the BAD guy" --------------------------------------------- Result 5187 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I [[found]] the [[pace]] to be [[glacial]] and the original [[story]] blown way out of proportion to the content. My wife slept through most of it and I did not try to wake her because I felt she was not missing anything.

When Holmes and Watson enter the house and then are potentially caught, it is unclear how they could hide all of their entry and burglary tools so quickly. It is also unclear how the door to the study is locked, preventing the servants from getting in.

The thing that puzzled me was right at the end when there was a glint in the eye of the broken statute. I have no clue what this was supposed to represent. I [[detected]] the [[rhythm]] to be [[glacier]] and the original [[conte]] blown way out of proportion to the content. My wife slept through most of it and I did not try to wake her because I felt she was not missing anything.

When Holmes and Watson enter the house and then are potentially caught, it is unclear how they could hide all of their entry and burglary tools so quickly. It is also unclear how the door to the study is locked, preventing the servants from getting in.

The thing that puzzled me was right at the end when there was a glint in the eye of the broken statute. I have no clue what this was supposed to represent. --------------------------------------------- Result 5188 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Johny To makes here one of his best style exercises, making a strong film with a good Yakuza's story. The election of the new Yakuza's boss is the beginning of a war inside the organization.

In my opinion the violence is wise used in the context, making a very strong gangs film. I specially love the way he tells the history, moving around all the roles inside the Yakuza's family, and making that we see the violence, like the only way they have to solve their problems...

Talking about, the technical aspects, the film is a good example of paused, rythmic and planified way of shooting a film. One of the Hong Kong Films of the year. Is like Infernal affairs, but without the easy action-violence scenes, and the confused storyline. Strongly recommended to all Asian films lovers.

(sorry for my English, better do in Spanish lol) --------------------------------------------- Result 5189 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Filmfour are going to have to do a lot better than this little snot of a [[film]] if they're [[going]] to [[get]] the right [[sort]] of [[reputation]] for themselves.

This [[film]] is set in Glasgow ([[although]] only a [[couple]] of secondary [[characters]] have [[anything]] [[approaching]] a Scottish [[accent]]). The [[premise]], about people who's lives are going nowhere, who all [[meet]] up in the same [[cafe]] in the [[early]] hours of the morning as they have night [[jobs]], [[COULD]] have made for a really [[funny]], [[insightful]], [[quirky]], cultish film. [[Instead]] we have a group of self-obsessed saddos and a plot which has been so [[done]] to bits I'm [[suprised]] it hasn't been [[banned]]. X and Y are [[friends]]. X is [[sleeping]] with Z. Y sleeps with Z as well. [[Oh]] you figure it out.

A [[total]] [[waste]] of [[time]]. Painful [[dialogue]] - it [[sounded]] like [[something]] that a [[group]] of 16 year [[olds]] would have [[written]] for a GCSE [[drama]] project. The [[female]] character was [[completely]] superfluous - just [[written]] in as a token female in the hope that [[women]] would be cajoled into seeing it.

If you're the [[sort]] of thicko lad who [[laughs]] at [[beer]] [[adverts]] and can [[usually]] be [[found]] [[wandering]] round in [[packs]] [[shouting]] on [[Saturday]] nights in nondescript [[town]] [[centres]] then you will love this film and find it "a right laff". Everyone [[else]], [[run]], don't [[walk]] away from this sorry [[little]] misfit.

And one [[question]], when the [[group]] [[left]] the "[[boring]]" seaside [[town]] (Saltcoats incidentally [[although]] they [[changed]] the [[name]] on the film), to go back to [[Glasgow]], WHY did they do it via the Forton motorway services at LANCASTER which is in [[England]]? Filmfour are going to have to do a lot better than this little snot of a [[filmmaking]] if they're [[go]] to [[gets]] the right [[sorts]] of [[notoriety]] for themselves.

This [[filmmaking]] is set in Glasgow ([[whereas]] only a [[matches]] of secondary [[trait]] have [[something]] [[nearing]] a Scottish [[emphasis]]). The [[assumption]], about people who's lives are going nowhere, who all [[fulfill]] up in the same [[coffee]] in the [[swift]] hours of the morning as they have night [[labor]], [[WO]] have made for a really [[hilarious]], [[informative]], [[mercurial]], cultish film. [[Alternatively]] we have a group of self-obsessed saddos and a plot which has been so [[played]] to bits I'm [[actualy]] it hasn't been [[barred]]. X and Y are [[buddies]]. X is [[slumber]] with Z. Y sleeps with Z as well. [[Oooh]] you figure it out.

A [[whole]] [[squandering]] of [[times]]. Painful [[discussions]] - it [[rang]] like [[somethin]] that a [[groupings]] of 16 year [[yr]] would have [[wrote]] for a GCSE [[opera]] project. The [[girl]] character was [[absolutely]] superfluous - just [[handwritten]] in as a token female in the hope that [[females]] would be cajoled into seeing it.

If you're the [[sorting]] of thicko lad who [[giggling]] at [[casket]] [[advert]] and can [[traditionally]] be [[detected]] [[roaming]] round in [[packets]] [[shout]] on [[Saturdays]] nights in nondescript [[ciudad]] [[centre]] then you will love this film and find it "a right laff". Everyone [[elsewhere]], [[executes]], don't [[marche]] away from this sorry [[petite]] misfit.

And one [[issue]], when the [[grouped]] [[gauche]] the "[[dreary]]" seaside [[towns]] (Saltcoats incidentally [[albeit]] they [[amend]] the [[designation]] on the film), to go back to [[Edinburgh]], WHY did they do it via the Forton motorway services at LANCASTER which is in [[Anglia]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 5190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "One shot, one kill, no exceptions." A [[must]] [[see]] if you are into marines or snipers. two big thumbs up! [[Great]] [[overall]] storyline, [[great]] camera [[work]], good drama, action, details, and more. Pretty close to the [[real]] thing. But this isn't a film to [[breakdown]] and pick out the editing [[faults]]. this is to sit back and have a good 99 mins. The plot has some depth but this [[movie]] isn't really about [[making]] you [[think]]. its about [[enjoying]] the [[sniper]] lifestyle and [[action]]. sniper 2 and 3 are pretty good follow ups but the first is [[still]] the [[best]] [[overall]] [[movie]]. Tom Berenger does a [[great]] job [[playing]] his [[character]] and [[showing]] the [[hidden]] side of the [[sniper]] life. the plain of [[dealing]] with all of the [[death]]. [[Must]] [[see]] for sniper [[fans]]. "One shot, one kill, no exceptions." A [[ought]] [[consults]] if you are into marines or snipers. two big thumbs up! [[Wondrous]] [[entire]] storyline, [[wondrous]] camera [[jobs]], good drama, action, details, and more. Pretty close to the [[true]] thing. But this isn't a film to [[breakage]] and pick out the editing [[vulnerabilities]]. this is to sit back and have a good 99 mins. The plot has some depth but this [[film]] isn't really about [[doing]] you [[reckon]]. its about [[savoring]] the [[gunner]] lifestyle and [[efforts]]. sniper 2 and 3 are pretty good follow ups but the first is [[however]] the [[nicest]] [[holistic]] [[movies]]. Tom Berenger does a [[wondrous]] job [[play]] his [[nature]] and [[display]] the [[covert]] side of the [[rifleman]] life. the plain of [[addressing]] with all of the [[die]]. [[Gotta]] [[consults]] for sniper [[stalkers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[used]] to have a [[fascination]] with the [[cartoon]] back in [[college]] when it was being made. It had much the [[charm]] of "[[Get]] [[Smart]]". [[While]] it [[admittedly]] had its faults, it was [[rather]] [[enjoyable]].

Naturally I was very interested in [[seeing]] the film version. That was before I [[saw]] it. Afterwords I wished it had never been made.

Besides being miscast all around (who on Earth though Broderick was even close to the role?) it just didn't make the grade.

The effects were reasonable and perhaps the [[ONLY]] thing I liked about the movie; seeing a live-action version of the gadgets in action! What was missing was a story and treatment which made it funny or charming or interesting.

The original was a wacky [[cartoon]] with a very lighthearted attitude. It was FUN. The motion picture became murky and took itself FAR too [[seriously]]. If it had [[seriously]] had a great [[plot]] or went crazy [[enough]] to make it seem like a "cartoon on film" it might have been [[enjoyable]].

As it [[exists]] it doesn't [[deserve]] to be considered part of the "[[Gadget]] Legacy". I [[using]] to have a [[glamour]] with the [[cartoons]] back in [[campus]] when it was being made. It had much the [[amulet]] of "[[Got]] [[Artful]]". [[Despite]] it [[surely]] had its faults, it was [[quite]] [[pleasant]].

Naturally I was very interested in [[see]] the film version. That was before I [[seen]] it. Afterwords I wished it had never been made.

Besides being miscast all around (who on Earth though Broderick was even close to the role?) it just didn't make the grade.

The effects were reasonable and perhaps the [[MERE]] thing I liked about the movie; seeing a live-action version of the gadgets in action! What was missing was a story and treatment which made it funny or charming or interesting.

The original was a wacky [[caricatures]] with a very lighthearted attitude. It was FUN. The motion picture became murky and took itself FAR too [[conscientiously]]. If it had [[profoundly]] had a great [[intrigue]] or went crazy [[suitably]] to make it seem like a "cartoon on film" it might have been [[congenial]].

As it [[existed]] it doesn't [[deserved]] to be considered part of the "[[Gizmo]] Legacy". --------------------------------------------- Result 5192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (78%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Lorenz who loves his wife so much that he will do anything to keep her young. This film starts off with a wedding as the bride is about to take her vows she suddenly collapses. She is pronounced dead and taken away by undertakers. Trouble is that these are not real undertakers but body snatchers. A wave of bride deaths at the altar and their body disappearing confounds the police. Enter reporter [[Patricia]] [[Hunter]] to solve the case. She does track down Dr. Lorenz but he also decides to use her youth to keep his wife young also. Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Lorenz who loves his wife so much that he will do anything to keep her young. This film starts off with a wedding as the bride is about to take her vows she suddenly collapses. She is pronounced dead and taken away by undertakers. Trouble is that these are not real undertakers but body snatchers. A wave of bride deaths at the altar and their body disappearing confounds the police. Enter reporter [[Pat]] [[Hunting]] to solve the case. She does track down Dr. Lorenz but he also decides to use her youth to keep his wife young also. --------------------------------------------- Result 5193 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stephen King adaptation (scripted by King himself) in which a young family, newcomers to rural Maine, find out about the pet cemetery close to their home. The father (Dale Midkiff) then finds out about the Micmac burial ground beyond the pet cemetery that has powers of resurrection - only of course anything buried there comes back not quite RIGHT.

Below average "horror" picture starts out clumsy, insulting, and inept, and continues that way for a while, with the absolute worst element being Midkiff's worthless performance. It gets a little better toward the end, with genuinely disturbing finale. In point of fact, the whole movie is really disturbing, which is why I can't completely dismiss it - at least it has SOMETHING to make it memorable. Decent supporting performances by Fred Gwynne, as the wise old aged neighbor, and Brad Greenquist, as the disfigured spirit Victor Pascow are not enough to really redeem film.

King has his usual cameo as the minister.

Followed by a sequel also directed by Mary Lambert (is it any wonder that she's had no mainstream film work since?).

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I recently [[caught]] up with this [[little]] gem of a [[film]] on cable. It [[took]] me by surprise, [[even]] though, I should have [[expected]] it from the team [[involved]] with this [[movie]].

Henry Bromwell directed this film with a [[sure]] hand, and it [[shows]]. One always wonders about the [[secret]] [[life]] of hit [[killers]]. One doesn't have to [[go]] too far to [[realize]] they [[probably]] are one's own [[neighbors]], or [[social]] [[acquaintances]], or [[even]] friends; they're no different from us, at [[least]] on the [[surface]].

[[In]] this [[story]], the grandfather, is a [[despicable]] [[character]] who does not hesitate in [[eliminating]] [[anyone]] for the right [[price]]. He has no [[scruples]] in [[teaching]] the [[ropes]] to his own [[son]], and even to the [[grandson]]!

Alex, is a [[man]] [[living]] in [[turmoil]]. He knows what he has [[done]] in the past and suddenly is coming to [[realize]] the [[consequence]] of his [[actions]]. He has to see [[someone]] to [[help]] him [[find]] peace with himself. [[In]] going to Dr. Parks, he is trying to [[find]] absolution, [[although]], he doesn't [[find]] it there. On the contrary, there is a dramatic twist when Alex [[learns]] about who is [[supposed]] to [[kill]] next.

[[Alex]], [[brilliantly]] [[portrayed]] by [[William]] H. Macy, mesmerizes us. Not only is he a [[fantastic]] [[actor]], but he makes us [[believe]] he is that [[man]]. One of the [[best]] things in the [[movie]] is the late [[John]] [[Ritter]]. He is [[equally]] [[convincing]] as Dr. Parks, the [[man]] who unravels the [[mystery]].

Donald Sutherland, as the [[grandfather]] is perfect. He is a natural [[actor]] in everything he does. Neve Campbell [[surprised]] in her pivotal role of Sarah. She [[shows]] a capability and [[range]] that are incredible. [[Tracey]] Ullman is [[Martha]], the [[suffering]] wife, and she doesn't get to do [[much]]. Also Barbara [[Bain]], in a [[rare]] appearance, is the [[grandmother]] from hell. David Dorfman, is a delight in the film. He shows a maturity [[beyond]] his years.

I recently [[apprehended]] up with this [[petite]] gem of a [[films]] on cable. It [[picked]] me by surprise, [[yet]] though, I should have [[waited]] it from the team [[participating]] with this [[movies]].

Henry Bromwell directed this film with a [[convinced]] hand, and it [[showcase]]. One always wonders about the [[undercover]] [[vida]] of hit [[assassins]]. One doesn't have to [[going]] too far to [[realizing]] they [[conceivably]] are one's own [[bordering]], or [[sociable]] [[knowledge]], or [[yet]] friends; they're no different from us, at [[slightest]] on the [[surfaces]].

[[Throughout]] this [[saga]], the grandfather, is a [[obnoxious]] [[trait]] who does not hesitate in [[removing]] [[whoever]] for the right [[pricing]]. He has no [[inhibitions]] in [[schooling]] the [[rope]] to his own [[sons]], and even to the [[grandchildren]]!

Alex, is a [[guy]] [[vida]] in [[commotion]]. He knows what he has [[doing]] in the past and suddenly is coming to [[realizing]] the [[impacts]] of his [[measurements]]. He has to see [[somebody]] to [[assisting]] him [[found]] peace with himself. [[Across]] going to Dr. Parks, he is trying to [[found]] absolution, [[whereas]], he doesn't [[unearthed]] it there. On the contrary, there is a dramatic twist when Alex [[teaches]] about who is [[alleged]] to [[murder]] next.

[[Allie]], [[brightly]] [[depicted]] by [[Williams]] H. Macy, mesmerizes us. Not only is he a [[awesome]] [[actress]], but he makes us [[think]] he is that [[men]]. One of the [[nicest]] things in the [[movies]] is the late [[Giovanni]] [[Knight]]. He is [[alike]] [[convince]] as Dr. Parks, the [[guy]] who unravels the [[puzzle]].

Donald Sutherland, as the [[grandpa]] is perfect. He is a natural [[actress]] in everything he does. Neve Campbell [[horrified]] in her pivotal role of Sarah. She [[displayed]] a capability and [[assortment]] that are incredible. [[Tracy]] Ullman is [[Marta]], the [[hardship]] wife, and she doesn't get to do [[very]]. Also Barbara [[Bathing]], in a [[scarce]] appearance, is the [[grandma]] from hell. David Dorfman, is a delight in the film. He shows a maturity [[afterlife]] his years.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an embarrassment to everyone and everything used in making this joke. I personally don't care one way or another about Jessica Simpson and her talent or whatever so many people find fascinating about her. Just as a movie this is something that wouldn't even get a passing grade in film school. The script is a mess, the acting is atrocious, and the fact Luke Wilson (co-writer of "Bottle Rocket") did this makes me wonder what the hell he was thinking. He did "Old School" for crying out loud! This doesn't even belong in the same state as my "Old School" DVD! Please for whatever reason DO NOT WATCH THIS! I see there is a comment that this is so bad it's good, but that frankly is too kind. When will we stop seeing singers that obviously can't act keep trying to, I hope ends soon. The worst part is that there are actually some decent actors (Penelope Ann Miller, Rachel Leigh Cook, & Luke Wilson) who are part of this dump. As far as the plot, well it is almost non-existent and so poorly done and written (yes I know it's another rehash) I very much doubt anyone will remember anything about this. Please whatever you do don't waste your time, but if you do, feel sorry for the ACTUAL actors involved for wasting their time doing this bomb. Jessica Simpson you're pretty, but stick to singing, although I'm not much a fan of that either. And whoever did this film, I wouldn't put this on your resume. 1/10 because you can't give a zero. --------------------------------------------- Result 5196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[OK]], so [[Mr]]. Agrama's company (which is [[involved]] in some [[dubious]] [[business]] with [[former]] Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi) [[produced]] a horrendous mish-mash by a Mr. Carl Macek.

What is this horrendous mish-mash I'm [[talking]] about? Well, Macek [[took]] three [[entirely]] unrelated Japanese sci-fi animated [[series]] (namely, Macross, [[Southern]] Cross and Mospeada), added TONS of [[dialogue]] - [[believing]] firmly that the American [[audience]] is too dumb to [[understand]] the narrative and artistic virtue of silence - , edited the [[whole]] [[lot]] [[heavily]] for [[violent]] content, added some metaphysical mumbo jumbo, dubbed it using some of the [[worst]] voice [[actors]] this side of acting [[Hell]] (Reba West's [[singing]] was - and [[still]] is - unbearable and a [[total]] [[outrage]], [[especially]] compared to Mrs. [[Mari]] Iijima)... And the result was an 85-episode series with hundreds of continuity [[problems]] and plot holes.

Of course, the mecha were cool to look at ([[especially]] those in the "Macross [[Saga]]") and the plot parts that [[remained]] [[unscathed]] were good. But whatever was good about Robotech was not the result of Macek's [[work]] or the "[[voice]] [[talents]]" he recruited. It was because of the toils and [[efforts]] of the (uncredited - why? [[would]] I be too [[bold]] to [[accuse]] HG of plagiarism here?) Japanese creators. Those of us who [[eventually]] [[got]] [[wind]] of the [[real]] [[deal]] and [[compared]] the originals to Robotech now wish we had never been exposed to Robotech. The [[originals]] are so much better, [[naturally]], and [[make]] a [[lot]] more sense.

Robotech, [[however]], [[DID]] [[something]] worthwhile: it [[prompted]] legendary anime creator Leiji Matsumoto to [[start]] a campaign for the [[protection]] of Japanese anime creators' intellectual property from such unauthorized and uncalled-for reworkings that [[talentless]] people like Carl Macek produce. [[OKAY]], so [[Monsieur]]. Agrama's company (which is [[participating]] in some [[shady]] [[corporations]] with [[previous]] Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi) [[generated]] a horrendous mish-mash by a Mr. Carl Macek.

What is this horrendous mish-mash I'm [[debating]] about? Well, Macek [[picked]] three [[fully]] unrelated Japanese sci-fi animated [[serials]] (namely, Macross, [[Southward]] Cross and Mospeada), added TONS of [[discussions]] - [[believe]] firmly that the American [[viewers]] is too dumb to [[understands]] the narrative and artistic virtue of silence - , edited the [[ensemble]] [[lots]] [[widely]] for [[ferocious]] content, added some metaphysical mumbo jumbo, dubbed it using some of the [[worse]] voice [[players]] this side of acting [[Bordello]] (Reba West's [[sing]] was - and [[however]] is - unbearable and a [[whole]] [[anger]], [[mainly]] compared to Mrs. [[Mary]] Iijima)... And the result was an 85-episode series with hundreds of continuity [[troubles]] and plot holes.

Of course, the mecha were cool to look at ([[mostly]] those in the "Macross [[Story]]") and the plot parts that [[persisted]] [[undamaged]] were good. But whatever was good about Robotech was not the result of Macek's [[cooperate]] or the "[[vowel]] [[talent]]" he recruited. It was because of the toils and [[activities]] of the (uncredited - why? [[should]] I be too [[gutsy]] to [[blaming]] HG of plagiarism here?) Japanese creators. Those of us who [[finally]] [[did]] [[windmill]] of the [[veritable]] [[addresses]] and [[compares]] the originals to Robotech now wish we had never been exposed to Robotech. The [[foreground]] are so much better, [[evidently]], and [[deliver]] a [[lots]] more sense.

Robotech, [[still]], [[GOT]] [[somethings]] worthwhile: it [[driven]] legendary anime creator Leiji Matsumoto to [[commencement]] a campaign for the [[safeguards]] of Japanese anime creators' intellectual property from such unauthorized and uncalled-for reworkings that [[untalented]] people like Carl Macek produce. --------------------------------------------- Result 5197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I am a relative latecomer to the transcendent work of film auteur Yasujiro Ozu, whose masterfully understated views of Japanese life, especially in the post-WWII era, illuminate universal truths. Having now seen several of his landmark films such as 1949's "Late Spring" and 1953's "Tokyo Story", I am [[convinced]] that Ozu had a particularly idiosyncratic gift of conveying the range of feelings arising from intergenerational conflict through [[elliptical]] [[narratives]] and subtle [[imagery]]. It is Taiwanese director Hou Hsiao-hsien's keen aspiration to pay homage to Ozu on his centenary with this generally enervating 2003 film. Among with co-screenwriter T'ien-wen Chu, Hsiao-hsien appears to get the visuals right but does not capture the requisite emotional weight that would have made the glacial pacing tolerable.

The story concerns Yôko, a young Japanese writer researching the life of mid-20th century Taiwanese composer Jiang Wen-Ye in Tokyo after coming back from Taiwan where she taught Japanese. After 25 drawn-out minutes of character set-up, she reveals to her father and stepmother that she is pregnant by one of her students in Taiwan. At the same time, Yôko's coffeehouse friend Hajime, who runs a used bookstore, has an obsession for trains and seems likely to be in love with her. Hsiao-hsien connects this slim plot line with a series of shots held for [[inordinately]] lengthy takes as the frame composition changes. There are also long stretches of silence as well as an abundance of scenes featuring trains. While these techniques are consistent with Ozu's style, Hsiao-hsien cannot seem to dive into the characters' psyches the way Ozu did with maximal fluidity and minimal theatrics, in particular, Yôko's plight seems rather non-committal in the scheme of the drama presented and her parents' reaction overly passive to hold much interest. In fact, the whole film has an atmosphere of [[exhaustion]] about it, which makes the film feel interminable.

The performances are unobtrusive though [[hardly]] memorable. J-pop music star Yo Hitoto brings a natural ease to Yôko, while Tadanobu Asano is something of a cipher as Hajime. The rest of the characters barely register, even Nenji Kobayashi and Kimiko Yo as Yôko's parents. Cinematographer Lee Ping-Bing provides expert work though he violates a cardinal rule of Ozu films by not keeping the camera stable during shots. Hitoto speak-sings the fetching pop song used over he ending credits, "Hito-Shian". The DVD includes an hour long, French-made documentary, "Métro Lumière", which actually does help provide some of the context for Hsiao-hsien's approach to the film. It includes excerpts from Ozu's films, in particular, "Equinox Flower", to show the parallels with this film though surprisingly no mention of either "Tokyo Story" or "Early Summer", the obvious basis for some of the scenes and situation set-ups. There are also edited interview clips of Hitoto, Asano and Hsiao-hsien, as well as the film's trailer. I am a relative latecomer to the transcendent work of film auteur Yasujiro Ozu, whose masterfully understated views of Japanese life, especially in the post-WWII era, illuminate universal truths. Having now seen several of his landmark films such as 1949's "Late Spring" and 1953's "Tokyo Story", I am [[persuaded]] that Ozu had a particularly idiosyncratic gift of conveying the range of feelings arising from intergenerational conflict through [[elliptic]] [[story]] and subtle [[picture]]. It is Taiwanese director Hou Hsiao-hsien's keen aspiration to pay homage to Ozu on his centenary with this generally enervating 2003 film. Among with co-screenwriter T'ien-wen Chu, Hsiao-hsien appears to get the visuals right but does not capture the requisite emotional weight that would have made the glacial pacing tolerable.

The story concerns Yôko, a young Japanese writer researching the life of mid-20th century Taiwanese composer Jiang Wen-Ye in Tokyo after coming back from Taiwan where she taught Japanese. After 25 drawn-out minutes of character set-up, she reveals to her father and stepmother that she is pregnant by one of her students in Taiwan. At the same time, Yôko's coffeehouse friend Hajime, who runs a used bookstore, has an obsession for trains and seems likely to be in love with her. Hsiao-hsien connects this slim plot line with a series of shots held for [[unusually]] lengthy takes as the frame composition changes. There are also long stretches of silence as well as an abundance of scenes featuring trains. While these techniques are consistent with Ozu's style, Hsiao-hsien cannot seem to dive into the characters' psyches the way Ozu did with maximal fluidity and minimal theatrics, in particular, Yôko's plight seems rather non-committal in the scheme of the drama presented and her parents' reaction overly passive to hold much interest. In fact, the whole film has an atmosphere of [[burnout]] about it, which makes the film feel interminable.

The performances are unobtrusive though [[practically]] memorable. J-pop music star Yo Hitoto brings a natural ease to Yôko, while Tadanobu Asano is something of a cipher as Hajime. The rest of the characters barely register, even Nenji Kobayashi and Kimiko Yo as Yôko's parents. Cinematographer Lee Ping-Bing provides expert work though he violates a cardinal rule of Ozu films by not keeping the camera stable during shots. Hitoto speak-sings the fetching pop song used over he ending credits, "Hito-Shian". The DVD includes an hour long, French-made documentary, "Métro Lumière", which actually does help provide some of the context for Hsiao-hsien's approach to the film. It includes excerpts from Ozu's films, in particular, "Equinox Flower", to show the parallels with this film though surprisingly no mention of either "Tokyo Story" or "Early Summer", the obvious basis for some of the scenes and situation set-ups. There are also edited interview clips of Hitoto, Asano and Hsiao-hsien, as well as the film's trailer. --------------------------------------------- Result 5198 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Scarface" has a major cult following even now, 22 [[years]] after its [[release]].

It has also been widely [[criticized]] as being very tacky, unrefined, over-the-top and all bloated up! These are people who compare Scarface to The Godfather [[movies]]. It is true that on the technical front, (cinematography, screenplay, direction, etc.) Scarface is [[way]] behind 'The Godfather'.

But it is also true, that what Scarface has and some other [[gangster]] [[movies]] lack, is the rawness, the sheer crude approach of the [[gangsters]]. The Latino [[gangsters]] in this movie look much more menacing and real than any of the polished Italian or Irish gangsters from other [[gangster]] classics like 'The Godfather' or 'Goodfellas'. This is one of the [[major]] [[winning]] points of Scarface and I [[strongly]] [[believe]] that this fact has been written off as "tackiness" by most critics! I have seen the original 1932 Scarface, and I must say that both these [[movies]] are way too different from each other and should be seen as two different movies instead of praising the original over the "remake"!

Al Pacino has been [[criticized]] to be over-the-top and [[loud]] in this movie. But how about considering that that is [[precisely]] the [[way]] the film-makers wanted Tony Montana's character to be! He is this [[angry]] [[young]] [[man]] who takes hasty [[decisions]] and [[throws]] [[fits]] of [[tantrum]] every other minute! He is not the [[calm]] [[Michael]] Corleone here. He is Tony Montana, a very tacky, uneducated [[individual]] who doesn't really think much and gets angry all the time!

There is [[definitely]] a very 80s feel to this [[movie]]. The soundtrack is all 80s! I love some of the songs, including 'Gina and Elvira's theme', 'Push it to the limit' and the title track instrumental.

There are some memorable and beautifully shot [[sequences]], including the famous chainsaw scene, the Rebenga hit, the first meeting with Sosa and Tony's visit to his mother's.

About the performances: Al Pacino is [[brilliant]] as the [[angry]] Cuban refugee. He has reportedly mentioned that he enjoyed playing Tony Montana the most in his entire career. And it really does seem like he has enjoyed himself thoroughly in all his scenes! One wonders what "Scarface" would be like without Pacino. I just couldn't imagine anyone else portraying Tony Montana and in all probabilities, the film wouldn't be as effective without him!

Steven Bauer shines as Tony's friend Manny.

Robert Loggia is wonderful as Tony's boss, Lopez. So is F. Murray Abraham (as Omar) in a small role.

Then there is some eye-candy in the form of Elvira played by Michelle Pfeiffer. She looks beautiful and is adequate in her role.

The director does go a bit overboard during a particular part in the climax. Without revealing anything, I would only say that that was the only little part that suffers due to improper handling.

"Scarface" is definitely one of the most entertaining and one of the best gangster movies to ever come out. Enjoy it for what it is: a raw portrayal of the Drug Lords and their gangland! "Scarface" has a major cult following even now, 22 [[yr]] after its [[liberating]].

It has also been widely [[slammed]] as being very tacky, unrefined, over-the-top and all bloated up! These are people who compare Scarface to The Godfather [[cinematography]]. It is true that on the technical front, (cinematography, screenplay, direction, etc.) Scarface is [[routes]] behind 'The Godfather'.

But it is also true, that what Scarface has and some other [[hoodlum]] [[kino]] lack, is the rawness, the sheer crude approach of the [[muggers]]. The Latino [[gangbangers]] in this movie look much more menacing and real than any of the polished Italian or Irish gangsters from other [[mobster]] classics like 'The Godfather' or 'Goodfellas'. This is one of the [[big]] [[earning]] points of Scarface and I [[furiously]] [[think]] that this fact has been written off as "tackiness" by most critics! I have seen the original 1932 Scarface, and I must say that both these [[theater]] are way too different from each other and should be seen as two different movies instead of praising the original over the "remake"!

Al Pacino has been [[slammed]] to be over-the-top and [[noisy]] in this movie. But how about considering that that is [[exactly]] the [[camino]] the film-makers wanted Tony Montana's character to be! He is this [[irate]] [[youthful]] [[bloke]] who takes hasty [[decision]] and [[casts]] [[conforms]] of [[ire]] every other minute! He is not the [[appease]] [[Michel]] Corleone here. He is Tony Montana, a very tacky, uneducated [[person]] who doesn't really think much and gets angry all the time!

There is [[surely]] a very 80s feel to this [[kino]]. The soundtrack is all 80s! I love some of the songs, including 'Gina and Elvira's theme', 'Push it to the limit' and the title track instrumental.

There are some memorable and beautifully shot [[sequence]], including the famous chainsaw scene, the Rebenga hit, the first meeting with Sosa and Tony's visit to his mother's.

About the performances: Al Pacino is [[wondrous]] as the [[infuriated]] Cuban refugee. He has reportedly mentioned that he enjoyed playing Tony Montana the most in his entire career. And it really does seem like he has enjoyed himself thoroughly in all his scenes! One wonders what "Scarface" would be like without Pacino. I just couldn't imagine anyone else portraying Tony Montana and in all probabilities, the film wouldn't be as effective without him!

Steven Bauer shines as Tony's friend Manny.

Robert Loggia is wonderful as Tony's boss, Lopez. So is F. Murray Abraham (as Omar) in a small role.

Then there is some eye-candy in the form of Elvira played by Michelle Pfeiffer. She looks beautiful and is adequate in her role.

The director does go a bit overboard during a particular part in the climax. Without revealing anything, I would only say that that was the only little part that suffers due to improper handling.

"Scarface" is definitely one of the most entertaining and one of the best gangster movies to ever come out. Enjoy it for what it is: a raw portrayal of the Drug Lords and their gangland! --------------------------------------------- Result 5199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I just can't agree with the above [[comment]] - there's [[lots]] of interesting and indeed [[amazing]] filmic imagery in this one, it has an [[unusual]] structure and moves well toward a frightening climactic sequence that is notable for it's effective use of silence. What's more, it [[explores]] the odd [[impulse]] of [[suicide]] in a very [[frank]] [[way]], not pulling any [[punches]] in what it [[shows]], [[yet]] not dwelling and over-sensationalising the subject [[matter]]. it has hints of documentary about it as well as [[horror]] and art-house [[cinema]], and [[deserves]] a [[place]] amongst the canon of 'different' [[horror]] [[films]] like The Blair Witch Project and the original Ring (both of which it predates and could well be an unacknowledged influence on). It's definitely worth seeing if you're interested in the edges of horror cinema. I just can't agree with the above [[remark]] - there's [[alot]] of interesting and indeed [[wondrous]] filmic imagery in this one, it has an [[odd]] structure and moves well toward a frightening climactic sequence that is notable for it's effective use of silence. What's more, it [[explorer]] the odd [[stimulus]] of [[suicidal]] in a very [[franck]] [[paths]], not pulling any [[shots]] in what it [[displayed]], [[still]] not dwelling and over-sensationalising the subject [[topic]]. it has hints of documentary about it as well as [[terror]] and art-house [[kino]], and [[deserved]] a [[placing]] amongst the canon of 'different' [[terror]] [[kino]] like The Blair Witch Project and the original Ring (both of which it predates and could well be an unacknowledged influence on). It's definitely worth seeing if you're interested in the edges of horror cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 5200 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Yes, I sat through the [[whole]] thing, God knows why.

It was a long afternoon, I had nothing to do, it was bitterly [[cold]] outside, okay, those are all lame excuses but they're the only ones I have.

I gave The Darkling 4 [[stars]] out of a [[possible]] 10 - I have [[seen]] worse [[films]], but this one [[definitely]] is right there in the old [[trash]] [[bin]] of [[bad]] filmdom--poor script, poor acting, bad lighting, and cheesy [[special]] [[effects]].

The storyline, which never [[completely]] makes sense, [[revolves]] around this [[simple]] little family, [[Daddy]], [[Mommy]], and [[little]] girl--that I [[assume]] the [[viewer]] is [[supposed]] to be "[[identifying]]" with, all three of them were [[tedious]] and [[annoying]]. You just [[want]] the [[dark]] side to get every one of them.

[[Daddy]] is a [[cook]] whose hobby is cars. Daddy meets a rich [[man]] named [[Rubin]] who [[collects]] [[cars]] and who is also in [[possession]] of a being he [[purchased]] in the "mysterious" Orient. [[Rubin]] keeps it in a birdcage and refers to it as "The Darkling".

[[During]] the course of the [[film]], the Darkling is explained as being about 3 or 4 different things: a shadow without a [[person]], the [[inner]] [[darkness]] that [[exists]] in all of us, and the [[Devil]]. [[So]] [[take]] your [[pick]] of [[whichever]] one of those explanations suits your fancy--because trust me, it doesn't [[really]] [[matter]].

The Darkling's main [[problem]] seems to be that it [[craves]] having a companion--it [[gets]] a human companion--and then eventually is dissatisfied with the human being. This, of course, [[leads]] to [[immense]] [[wealth]], followed by [[disaster]], for the [[human]] who [[hooks]] up with The Darkling.

And for the [[rest]] of us -- it just leads to a very [[long]], [[tedious]] movie.

Yes, I sat through the [[together]] thing, God knows why.

It was a long afternoon, I had nothing to do, it was bitterly [[icy]] outside, okay, those are all lame excuses but they're the only ones I have.

I gave The Darkling 4 [[star]] out of a [[attainable]] 10 - I have [[noticed]] worse [[filmmaking]], but this one [[undoubtedly]] is right there in the old [[litter]] [[ibn]] of [[unfavourable]] filmdom--poor script, poor acting, bad lighting, and cheesy [[peculiar]] [[impact]].

The storyline, which never [[totally]] makes sense, [[spins]] around this [[easy]] little family, [[Papa]], [[Ma]], and [[petit]] girl--that I [[assumes]] the [[viewfinder]] is [[presumed]] to be "[[detecting]]" with, all three of them were [[tiresome]] and [[galling]]. You just [[wants]] the [[darkened]] side to get every one of them.

[[Papa]] is a [[kitchen]] whose hobby is cars. Daddy meets a rich [[dude]] named [[Robin]] who [[gathered]] [[vehicles]] and who is also in [[ownership]] of a being he [[bought]] in the "mysterious" Orient. [[Ruben]] keeps it in a birdcage and refers to it as "The Darkling".

[[For]] the course of the [[movies]], the Darkling is explained as being about 3 or 4 different things: a shadow without a [[anybody]], the [[inboard]] [[blackness]] that [[existed]] in all of us, and the [[Devils]]. [[Therefore]] [[taking]] your [[chose]] of [[whatever]] one of those explanations suits your fancy--because trust me, it doesn't [[genuinely]] [[question]].

The Darkling's main [[troubles]] seems to be that it [[yearns]] having a companion--it [[got]] a human companion--and then eventually is dissatisfied with the human being. This, of course, [[leeds]] to [[whopping]] [[affluence]], followed by [[disasters]], for the [[humanity]] who [[hook]] up with The Darkling.

And for the [[stays]] of us -- it just leads to a very [[longer]], [[monotonous]] movie.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5201 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This movie is [[really]] [[funny]]!! The General is Keaton's [[finest]] work but there are many of his works that are more hilarious - in this one are multiple sight gags and creative humor. We watch it over and over and it only seems to get funnier! This movie is [[truthfully]] [[comical]]!! The General is Keaton's [[meanest]] work but there are many of his works that are more hilarious - in this one are multiple sight gags and creative humor. We watch it over and over and it only seems to get funnier! --------------------------------------------- Result 5202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] OK, this movie is stupid. I mean that in a good way though.It was [[stupid]] on purpose, and was one of the [[better]] "[[stupid]]" movies I've seen. The jokes and gags are purposefully bad, but delivered in a way that it struck all the right notes with me. The supporting characters were pretty shallow and mediocre. There is a pretty weak plot, but it works just fine.

Elvira's character is the focus here.She is lovable and adorable.Cassandra Petersen has a [[world]] of acting talent that just glows in this movie.On top of that acting talent she had physical attributes which were frankly, stunning. Few [[men]] could disagree with that. The parts that show off her figure were also some of the funnier scenes in the movie.

I had a [[smile]] [[ear]] to ear from the first scene to the [[last]].

[[Highly]] [[recommended]] to fans of [[comedy]], and to [[fans]] of beautiful women. I wish they had [[made]] a dozen more Elvia [[movies]]. OK, this movie is stupid. I mean that in a good way though.It was [[moronic]] on purpose, and was one of the [[best]] "[[preposterous]]" movies I've seen. The jokes and gags are purposefully bad, but delivered in a way that it struck all the right notes with me. The supporting characters were pretty shallow and mediocre. There is a pretty weak plot, but it works just fine.

Elvira's character is the focus here.She is lovable and adorable.Cassandra Petersen has a [[worldwide]] of acting talent that just glows in this movie.On top of that acting talent she had physical attributes which were frankly, stunning. Few [[males]] could disagree with that. The parts that show off her figure were also some of the funnier scenes in the movie.

I had a [[smirk]] [[ree]] to ear from the first scene to the [[latter]].

[[Heavily]] [[suggested]] to fans of [[parody]], and to [[followers]] of beautiful women. I wish they had [[effected]] a dozen more Elvia [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Okay]]. [[So]] there aren't [[really]] that many [[great]] movies around. Recent [[gems]] like American Dream, The [[Straight]] Story and even Toy Story 2 don't normally come so [[close]] together. But boy (!) does this film counter-balance the quality.

I have NO idea what these people thought they were doing. Are the financiers in this world so easily convinced to [[fund]] such a [[crock]] of ****? I can just [[see]] it now...

Producer - "So we've got Joe Fiennes. He's cute as a button and was pretty good in Shakespeare in Love. And we've got Rhys Ifans, who isn't cute but was cool in Notting Hill. We'll mix in a really mediocre score, a few forgettable post-Britpop tunes, hemlock root and lizard brains and hey presto you've got the worst film of the new millennium.And believe me, it's gonna be a hard job to make anything as bad as this in the next thousand years."

The Bank - "I like it! Any unnecessary sex? Bad camera movements? And what about the worst accents this side of Devil's Own?"

Producer - "Yeah, we got plenty of those."

The Bank - "Sounds great, where do we sign?"

Please. [[Alrighty]]. [[Thus]] there aren't [[truthfully]] that many [[marvellous]] movies around. Recent [[jewelry]] like American Dream, The [[Consecutive]] Story and even Toy Story 2 don't normally come so [[shuts]] together. But boy (!) does this film counter-balance the quality.

I have NO idea what these people thought they were doing. Are the financiers in this world so easily convinced to [[fonda]] such a [[baloney]] of ****? I can just [[consults]] it now...

Producer - "So we've got Joe Fiennes. He's cute as a button and was pretty good in Shakespeare in Love. And we've got Rhys Ifans, who isn't cute but was cool in Notting Hill. We'll mix in a really mediocre score, a few forgettable post-Britpop tunes, hemlock root and lizard brains and hey presto you've got the worst film of the new millennium.And believe me, it's gonna be a hard job to make anything as bad as this in the next thousand years."

The Bank - "I like it! Any unnecessary sex? Bad camera movements? And what about the worst accents this side of Devil's Own?"

Producer - "Yeah, we got plenty of those."

The Bank - "Sounds great, where do we sign?"

Please. --------------------------------------------- Result 5204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] which makes you think: would Hulk " The real American " Hogan have [[done]] the same? [[Frankly]] I don't [[think]] so and he'd have been right. I'm [[Italian]], I cannot go [[proud]] of my [[country]] for many reasons, but I wouldn't have rowed for another team (The French, for [[example]]), simply because I'm in love with Juliette Binoche. Besides the protagonist doesn't [[fall]] in [[love]] [[desire]] with a British [[girl]] at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] but with a fellow countrywoman, so why rowing against Yale. As far as acting is [[concerned]], well, all the players act very poorly. And then , you know, I hated that "[[Dead]] poets [[society]] " atmosphere. In fact that's another movie I [[hate]]. This is one of those [[films]] which makes you think: would Hulk " The real American " Hogan have [[effected]] the same? [[Truthfully]] I don't [[thinking]] so and he'd have been right. I'm [[Italiano]], I cannot go [[prideful]] of my [[nations]] for many reasons, but I wouldn't have rowed for another team (The French, for [[cases]]), simply because I'm in love with Juliette Binoche. Besides the protagonist doesn't [[slumps]] in [[adore]] [[willingness]] with a British [[fille]] at the [[terminates]] of the [[filmmaking]] but with a fellow countrywoman, so why rowing against Yale. As far as acting is [[worried]], well, all the players act very poorly. And then , you know, I hated that "[[Death]] poets [[societies]] " atmosphere. In fact that's another movie I [[dislikes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[If]] you've ever been harassed on the [[Underground]] by a [[Christian]] who [[says]], "[[Jesus]] is the [[answer]]. What's the [[question]]?", then [[perhaps]] you should [[thank]] [[God]] if you've never [[met]] a Lacanian. Slavoj Zizek, the most evangelical of Lacanians, would [[surely]] [[exchange]] the word "[[Jesus]]" in that [[statement]] for "Lacan/Hegel".

Zizek's [[star]] burns brightly at the [[moment]], no doubt because we generally [[view]] [[films]] and [[pop]] [[culture]] purely as [[entertainment]] for our consumption. [[So]] it [[seems]] [[impressive]] when [[someone]] - [[anyone]] - [[comes]] along and [[says]], "Hang on, [[films]] may [[say]] [[something]] about ourselves."

The [[ideas]] Zizek expounds in this [[film]] are "[[true]]" [[purely]] because he says so. For [[example]], Zizek [[explains]] that three Marx Bros are the ego, superego and id ([[God]] knows what happened to Zeppo, or Gummo … [[perhaps]] they're the sinthome...or is that [[movies]] themselves?). This is simply what they are. In Zizek's output, [[culture]] is not there to be [[investigated]] but merely to be [[held]] as an [[example]] of his ideology. People may object that he [[certainly]] has [[something]] to say - but how [[different]] is what he [[says]] from the Christian attributing everything to God's will?

What's wrong with [[taking]] [[examples]], from films or [[anywhere]], to [[illustrate]] [[theory]]? Well, [[nothing]] at all. As Zizek [[seems]] to [[believe]], they may even [[serve]] as a [[proof]]. However, it is [[merely]] [[cant]] and [[propaganda]] when these examples are isolated from their context. Without context, you can say and prove anything you want. For Zizek, Lacan is the answer – so he goes and makes an example of it. [[Everything]] but everything resembles the teachings of the Master and culture is there to bear this out, to serve this ideology. For instance, Zizek's exemplar of the fantasy position of the voyeur is taken from a scene in [[Vertigo]] when Jimmy Stewart spies on Kim Novak in a flower shop. But, in the context of the film, this is not a voyeur's fantasy position at all. Stewart has been [[deliberately]] led there by Novak. This [[presentation]] of examples isolated from their context continues throughout Zizek's two hour and a half cinematic sermon.

His analysis of the "baby wants to f---" scene in Blue Velvet is laughable. Touching lightly on what he appears to consider to be the horrific (to the masculine) truth of "feminine jouissance", Zizek says that Isabella Rossilini's character not only demands her degradation but is, unconsciously, in charge of the situation. This is an example of her "jouissance". Well ... possibly. But - sorry to be prosaic - where is the evidence for this? In the film, she partially undergoes her humiliations because Hopper has kidnapped her son. Zizek may object that she also evidently enjoys rough sex with Kyle MacLachalan. But this may be due to any number of things. Isn't that the point of so-called feminine "jouissance"? According to Lacan, feminine jouissance, unlike phallic jouissance, cannot be articulated, it is beyond the phallic capture and castration of language. If this is right, then no example can be made of it. It also means that the entire concept is non-sensical and entirely mystical. It can only be designated by dogmatists such as Zizek: "There's feminine jouissance for you! Why is this feminine jouissance? Because I say so."

What example can really be garnered from these films? Only Zizek's psychology. Why does he keep inserting himself into his favourite films, even to the point that, when in a boat on Botega Bay, he says he wants to f--- Rod Steiger too? Is this not the wish-fulfilment of someone who spends his life critiquing films? As the saying goes, Freud would have a field day with The Pervert's Guide to the Cinema - but with Zizek himself, nobody else.

Zizek's theory that films show us how we desire may be right on the face of it, but these films cannot be strict universal examples of psychoanalytical laws. This film illustrates how Zizek desires and only extremely vaguely - as to be almost useless - how the rest of us desire. For, as any psychoanalyst knows, how we desire and what we desire cannot be fully separated - and cannot be easily universalised, if at all. Zizek's love of making everything an example of Lacan's Answer bears this out: how do we desire? like this, this is how I do it. Problem is, in Zizek's desire, everything and everyone else is rationalised into his desire. But Zizek is a Leninist and they certainly don't like letting the "subject" speak for itself.

The Pervert's Guide to the Cinema is a summation Zizek's love of dogma and is entirely unphilosophical even if it remains very political (what dogma isn't?). Zizek has never questioned exactly what his motives might be when embarking on an analysis, what he is trying to discover, because the terms of his exploration, and therefore his ethics in doing so, are never put into question.

Zizek is extremely prolific but all his books and this film say the same thing. He's a kind of Henry Ford of cultural theory: mass-production and any colour as long as it's black. He is perfect for today's highly consumerist society: supposedly critical while giving people the same c-ap over and over and pretending that it is something different. This is popular because people largely prefer readymade answers to their problems - which capitalism always claims to provide - rather than investigating things with any serious consideration at all. Which is kind of like being brain dead. For me, Zizek's third Matrix pill is a suicide capsule.

PS: I loved Zizek's solemn remark - presented as a revelation about cinema and humanity - that music in films can greatly affect people's sympathies. Did this only occur to Zizek after he watched Jaws? [[Though]] you've ever been harassed on the [[Subterranean]] by a [[Christians]] who [[say]], "[[Damn]] is the [[responses]]. What's the [[matter]]?", then [[presumably]] you should [[thanks]] [[Goodness]] if you've never [[complied]] a Lacanian. Slavoj Zizek, the most evangelical of Lacanians, would [[admittedly]] [[sharing]] the word "[[Jeez]]" in that [[declaration]] for "Lacan/Hegel".

Zizek's [[superstar]] burns brightly at the [[time]], no doubt because we generally [[viewing]] [[film]] and [[papa]] [[cultivation]] purely as [[recreational]] for our consumption. [[Therefore]] it [[appears]] [[marvellous]] when [[person]] - [[person]] - [[arises]] along and [[say]], "Hang on, [[kino]] may [[said]] [[anything]] about ourselves."

The [[insights]] Zizek expounds in this [[filmmaking]] are "[[real]]" [[exclusively]] because he says so. For [[instances]], Zizek [[explained]] that three Marx Bros are the ego, superego and id ([[Goodness]] knows what happened to Zeppo, or Gummo … [[conceivably]] they're the sinthome...or is that [[film]] themselves?). This is simply what they are. In Zizek's output, [[cultivation]] is not there to be [[scrutinize]] but merely to be [[holds]] as an [[cases]] of his ideology. People may object that he [[unquestionably]] has [[anything]] to say - but how [[several]] is what he [[contends]] from the Christian attributing everything to God's will?

What's wrong with [[adopting]] [[instances]], from films or [[everywhere]], to [[portray]] [[doctrines]]? Well, [[none]] at all. As Zizek [[seem]] to [[reckon]], they may even [[serving]] as a [[test]]. However, it is [[purely]] [[shouldnt]] and [[advocacy]] when these examples are isolated from their context. Without context, you can say and prove anything you want. For Zizek, Lacan is the answer – so he goes and makes an example of it. [[Entire]] but everything resembles the teachings of the Master and culture is there to bear this out, to serve this ideology. For instance, Zizek's exemplar of the fantasy position of the voyeur is taken from a scene in [[Dizzy]] when Jimmy Stewart spies on Kim Novak in a flower shop. But, in the context of the film, this is not a voyeur's fantasy position at all. Stewart has been [[consciously]] led there by Novak. This [[presentations]] of examples isolated from their context continues throughout Zizek's two hour and a half cinematic sermon.

His analysis of the "baby wants to f---" scene in Blue Velvet is laughable. Touching lightly on what he appears to consider to be the horrific (to the masculine) truth of "feminine jouissance", Zizek says that Isabella Rossilini's character not only demands her degradation but is, unconsciously, in charge of the situation. This is an example of her "jouissance". Well ... possibly. But - sorry to be prosaic - where is the evidence for this? In the film, she partially undergoes her humiliations because Hopper has kidnapped her son. Zizek may object that she also evidently enjoys rough sex with Kyle MacLachalan. But this may be due to any number of things. Isn't that the point of so-called feminine "jouissance"? According to Lacan, feminine jouissance, unlike phallic jouissance, cannot be articulated, it is beyond the phallic capture and castration of language. If this is right, then no example can be made of it. It also means that the entire concept is non-sensical and entirely mystical. It can only be designated by dogmatists such as Zizek: "There's feminine jouissance for you! Why is this feminine jouissance? Because I say so."

What example can really be garnered from these films? Only Zizek's psychology. Why does he keep inserting himself into his favourite films, even to the point that, when in a boat on Botega Bay, he says he wants to f--- Rod Steiger too? Is this not the wish-fulfilment of someone who spends his life critiquing films? As the saying goes, Freud would have a field day with The Pervert's Guide to the Cinema - but with Zizek himself, nobody else.

Zizek's theory that films show us how we desire may be right on the face of it, but these films cannot be strict universal examples of psychoanalytical laws. This film illustrates how Zizek desires and only extremely vaguely - as to be almost useless - how the rest of us desire. For, as any psychoanalyst knows, how we desire and what we desire cannot be fully separated - and cannot be easily universalised, if at all. Zizek's love of making everything an example of Lacan's Answer bears this out: how do we desire? like this, this is how I do it. Problem is, in Zizek's desire, everything and everyone else is rationalised into his desire. But Zizek is a Leninist and they certainly don't like letting the "subject" speak for itself.

The Pervert's Guide to the Cinema is a summation Zizek's love of dogma and is entirely unphilosophical even if it remains very political (what dogma isn't?). Zizek has never questioned exactly what his motives might be when embarking on an analysis, what he is trying to discover, because the terms of his exploration, and therefore his ethics in doing so, are never put into question.

Zizek is extremely prolific but all his books and this film say the same thing. He's a kind of Henry Ford of cultural theory: mass-production and any colour as long as it's black. He is perfect for today's highly consumerist society: supposedly critical while giving people the same c-ap over and over and pretending that it is something different. This is popular because people largely prefer readymade answers to their problems - which capitalism always claims to provide - rather than investigating things with any serious consideration at all. Which is kind of like being brain dead. For me, Zizek's third Matrix pill is a suicide capsule.

PS: I loved Zizek's solemn remark - presented as a revelation about cinema and humanity - that music in films can greatly affect people's sympathies. Did this only occur to Zizek after he watched Jaws? --------------------------------------------- Result 5206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] by the [[film]]. Let's face it; the premise doesn't [[sound]] particularly appealing when having to hand over money for a the night's flick, but it had an [[easygoing]] [[nature]] that [[wins]] one over. There were no moments that I [[found]] uproarious, and I [[doubt]] any that I'll remember the next day, but this doesn't fail as a nice diversion. What I [[found]] [[funny]] was watching it here in [[Peking]] with my Chinese girlfriend who never [[understands]] [[anything]] I [[like]]. I [[told]] her there was a plot- three [[guys]] have to bring back some weed to London. Hardly satisfying for her. There is no [[mugging]] [[going]] on here for the [[camera]] which I'd been [[expecting]] after reading a number of the [[comments]]. I do [[take]] [[exception]] however to [[comparisons]] with Withnail and I; not in the same league, and I doubt was it intended to. www.imperialflags.blogspot.com I was [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]] by the [[movies]]. Let's face it; the premise doesn't [[sounds]] particularly appealing when having to hand over money for a the night's flick, but it had an [[affable]] [[trait]] that [[earning]] one over. There were no moments that I [[unearthed]] uproarious, and I [[duda]] any that I'll remember the next day, but this doesn't fail as a nice diversion. What I [[find]] [[comical]] was watching it here in [[Jing]] with my Chinese girlfriend who never [[understand]] [[something]] I [[fond]]. I [[tells]] her there was a plot- three [[buddies]] have to bring back some weed to London. Hardly satisfying for her. There is no [[storming]] [[go]] on here for the [[cameras]] which I'd been [[awaited]] after reading a number of the [[feedback]]. I do [[taking]] [[immunities]] however to [[compares]] with Withnail and I; not in the same league, and I doubt was it intended to. www.imperialflags.blogspot.com --------------------------------------------- Result 5207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The bittersweet twist to this movie [[contains]] a [[wonderful]] element of romanticism that evokes an impetuous [[passion]]! These [[characteristics]] of [[idealistic]] [[imagery]] which "Moonstruck" [[possesses]], spur on an [[end]] [[result]] of a resounding thumbs up [[verdict]] by [[virtually]] [[every]] [[prominent]] critic in Hollywood. Let me describe the circumstances to this film, [[simply]] put, they are "yesteryear". "Moonstruck" is a [[cohesive]] [[film]] which sparks the naivety of an [[old]] Italian [[neighborhood]] in [[New]] York [[City]]. [[New]] York [[City]] has [[always]] been one [[big]] [[melting]] pot that is galvanized by [[many]] bicker-some mannerisms which are indicative of [[typical]] [[New]] Yorkers, this [[includes]] a [[lot]] of Italian Americans [[living]] in New York as well! The mid and late eighties brought on an abrupt [[conclusion]] to [[many]] strong associations with various cultural stereotypes. Ethnicity polarization was a [[firmly]] embedded scourge in American [[history]] that was far more prevalent several generations before this movie was made. These generalizing [[proclivities]] still [[exist]] today, however, they are more mollified and [[less]] [[identifiable]]! [[For]] this Italian family of a bygone era, [[confusion]], indecisiveness, agitation, and yes, of course, [[love]], all have the comical [[camaraderie]] of an [[utterly]] human [[understanding]] to them! The [[kindred]] [[spirits]] with [[everyone]] in "Moonstruck" [[seems]] to be that of comprehending individual [[frailties]]. One might wonder about [[Cher]] [[playing]] the lead role, as she is more known as an entertainer than a [[big]] box office [[first]] [[billing]] [[star]] in a [[movie]]. [[In]] "Moonstruck", [[however]], I [[think]] she was [[incredibly]] well [[suited]] to her role, and [[came]] off as [[thoroughly]] [[believable]] in a [[relatively]] unbelievable situation. All of the [[characters]] in "Moonstruck" are very [[rough]] [[around]] the edges, really [[tough]], and not [[afraid]] to have a [[formidable]] duel with [[adversity]]. The most [[hilarious]] [[aspect]] to their lives is imperfection, and they are thoroughly [[aware]] of the fact that weathering the [[storm]] [[definitely]] [[serves]] a constructive purpose! I [[thought]] the acting in this [[movie]] was sensational. All relationships in this [[movie]] garner an [[auspicious]] potential to [[vividly]] illuminate because [[everybody]] knows how everybody else's [[basic]] nature is really [[like]]!! [[For]] this [[family]], nothing is [[glamorous]], nothing is pretentiously [[romantic]], and nothing is [[overly]] emotional (just [[moderately]] so). The fact is, this entire family is [[plainly]] and [[perpetually]] afflicted and overcome by an extremely zealous and candid cupid in all of their lives. Taking moon beams literally can indeed have a [[pleasantly]] enervating impact on one's resolve, masqueraded mystique, and resistance to the proverbial am ore'. Thus signifying everything!! The homey and mercurial tenet in this film is basically one of ; Be honest, get angry; Be honest, get confrontational; Be honest, get distorted and emphatic; Most importantly; Be honest, and fall in love!! This is Cher's best performance ever as an actress!! Nicholas Cage, Danny Aiello, and Olympia Dukakis, were wonderfully flawed in "Moonstruck" Such performances by these three were perfectly appropriate for the kinetic energy of the characters in this movie! Director, Norman Jewison (Famous for "Cincinnati Kid", "Thomas Crowne Affair", and most famous for "In The Heat Of The Night" which won the academy award for best picture in 1967) depicts many keen and humanistic instincts in the process of purveying the deliberate incongruity to this film! I am Italian American in descent, (Partially anyways) Cher is not Italian, and, for that matter, neither is the writer nor the director! I guess since non-Italians like eating our food, they may as well use our culture to make a fabulous film too! It is refreshing to know that a film can be marvelous and have an incredibly happy ending!! For those of you who didn't like this movie, I just have one thing to say "Snap Out Of It!!" This movie "Moonstruck" is totally happy go lucky!! Totally eighties!! and Totally five stars!! See it!! The bittersweet twist to this movie [[therein]] a [[spectacular]] element of romanticism that evokes an impetuous [[enthusiasm]]! These [[hallmarks]] of [[utopian]] [[visuals]] which "Moonstruck" [[possessed]], spur on an [[termination]] [[upshot]] of a resounding thumbs up [[judgement]] by [[basically]] [[any]] [[conspicuous]] critic in Hollywood. Let me describe the circumstances to this film, [[mere]] put, they are "yesteryear". "Moonstruck" is a [[consistent]] [[movies]] which sparks the naivety of an [[antigua]] Italian [[barrio]] in [[Novo]] York [[Ville]]. [[Nuevo]] York [[Ville]] has [[incessantly]] been one [[large]] [[smelting]] pot that is galvanized by [[countless]] bicker-some mannerisms which are indicative of [[classic]] [[Novel]] Yorkers, this [[encompasses]] a [[lots]] of Italian Americans [[residing]] in New York as well! The mid and late eighties brought on an abrupt [[conclusions]] to [[several]] strong associations with various cultural stereotypes. Ethnicity polarization was a [[flatly]] embedded scourge in American [[tale]] that was far more prevalent several generations before this movie was made. These generalizing [[tendencies]] still [[exists]] today, however, they are more mollified and [[lesser]] [[recognizable]]! [[During]] this Italian family of a bygone era, [[chaos]], indecisiveness, agitation, and yes, of course, [[adored]], all have the comical [[comradeship]] of an [[quite]] human [[understand]] to them! The [[tribal]] [[schnapps]] with [[someone]] in "Moonstruck" [[appears]] to be that of comprehending individual [[failings]]. One might wonder about [[Sher]] [[playback]] the lead role, as she is more known as an entertainer than a [[substantial]] box office [[frst]] [[billings]] [[stars]] in a [[kino]]. [[Among]] "Moonstruck", [[instead]], I [[ideas]] she was [[vastly]] well [[readjusted]] to her role, and [[arrived]] off as [[intently]] [[trustworthy]] in a [[fairly]] unbelievable situation. All of the [[character]] in "Moonstruck" are very [[crude]] [[roundabout]] the edges, really [[stiff]], and not [[fearful]] to have a [[monumental]] duel with [[distress]]. The most [[funny]] [[element]] to their lives is imperfection, and they are thoroughly [[knowing]] of the fact that weathering the [[blizzard]] [[obviously]] [[serve]] a constructive purpose! I [[ideology]] the acting in this [[cinema]] was sensational. All relationships in this [[cinema]] garner an [[supportive]] potential to [[strikingly]] illuminate because [[somebody]] knows how everybody else's [[core]] nature is really [[likes]]!! [[In]] this [[families]], nothing is [[wondrous]], nothing is pretentiously [[sentimental]], and nothing is [[unreasonably]] emotional (just [[sparingly]] so). The fact is, this entire family is [[overtly]] and [[ceaselessly]] afflicted and overcome by an extremely zealous and candid cupid in all of their lives. Taking moon beams literally can indeed have a [[cheerfully]] enervating impact on one's resolve, masqueraded mystique, and resistance to the proverbial am ore'. Thus signifying everything!! The homey and mercurial tenet in this film is basically one of ; Be honest, get angry; Be honest, get confrontational; Be honest, get distorted and emphatic; Most importantly; Be honest, and fall in love!! This is Cher's best performance ever as an actress!! Nicholas Cage, Danny Aiello, and Olympia Dukakis, were wonderfully flawed in "Moonstruck" Such performances by these three were perfectly appropriate for the kinetic energy of the characters in this movie! Director, Norman Jewison (Famous for "Cincinnati Kid", "Thomas Crowne Affair", and most famous for "In The Heat Of The Night" which won the academy award for best picture in 1967) depicts many keen and humanistic instincts in the process of purveying the deliberate incongruity to this film! I am Italian American in descent, (Partially anyways) Cher is not Italian, and, for that matter, neither is the writer nor the director! I guess since non-Italians like eating our food, they may as well use our culture to make a fabulous film too! It is refreshing to know that a film can be marvelous and have an incredibly happy ending!! For those of you who didn't like this movie, I just have one thing to say "Snap Out Of It!!" This movie "Moonstruck" is totally happy go lucky!! Totally eighties!! and Totally five stars!! See it!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film could have been a silent movie; it certainly has the feel of one. I was extremely, extremely lucky to see this very rare version of this film. Extase, is a 'symphony of love', and transcends all language versions. French, which is the ultimate romantic language, seems quite suitable for this very sensual and lyrical version.A young Hedy Lamarr lights up the screen, in this film which, in a way is almost like a sex fantasy; but definitely far from being pornographic.Tech qualities may have been a little crude; but that does not detract from the magical spell this film exudes.Many lovers of early cinema, would absolutely adore this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[first]] watched this movie on its release in 1987 and was [[greatly]] [[affected]] [[emotionally]], through a combination of guilt at what my fellow white human beings could do to innocent people and the reluctance of the outside world to really investigate these atrocities against man.

Particularly moving was the Funeral of Steve Biko, made even more [[vivid]] and hard-hitting by the South African Anthem [[played]] at the time. I have [[long]] believed that this movie achieved what nobody else had managed - to open the eyes of the world to what was really happening in South Africa. I consider myself to be a normal right thinking person and I can attest to how this film changed my whole way of thinking about not just South Africa, but how we as white people perceive black people. I have never seen any difference between people of any colour or creed, but after viewing this film I physically changed my [[life]] and have spent the last 17 years living in a predominantly black country and helping many people rise above their present standard of living and achieve that which they would not have thought possible. The greatest reward I can honestly say I have received - to be able to say that in my own small way I have contributed and redressed the balance a little. But if more people thought like me and actually DID something to help black people without seeking reward then the entire black population of this planet would be a little better off.

I challenge any right thinking person to watch [[Cry]] Freedom from beginning to end and not feel that emotion tugging at your heartstrings as you witness the 700 [[schoolchildren]] brutally shot dead in Sharpville for refusing to learn Afrikaans, the senseless murder of Steve Biko, such a champion for his own people's rights, and then, ultimately, to understand that all this is not [[merely]] a [[film]], albeit a [[magnificent]] one, but that it all [[actually]] [[happened]] and less than 30 [[years]] [[ago]].

[[Yes]], my friends, watch this [[movie]] and then see if you can go out afterwards and party [[hard]]. I couldn't. I was too upset at knowing the truth. That is the hallmark of a [[great]] film. It was [[obviously]] the [[intention]] of Sir Richard Attenborough to [[get]] this [[message]] over about [[South]] Africa. Of [[course]] he has achieved it. Unless you happen to [[support]] apartheid. [[God]] help you. I [[firstly]] watched this movie on its release in 1987 and was [[drastically]] [[stricken]] [[excitedly]], through a combination of guilt at what my fellow white human beings could do to innocent people and the reluctance of the outside world to really investigate these atrocities against man.

Particularly moving was the Funeral of Steve Biko, made even more [[vibrant]] and hard-hitting by the South African Anthem [[served]] at the time. I have [[longer]] believed that this movie achieved what nobody else had managed - to open the eyes of the world to what was really happening in South Africa. I consider myself to be a normal right thinking person and I can attest to how this film changed my whole way of thinking about not just South Africa, but how we as white people perceive black people. I have never seen any difference between people of any colour or creed, but after viewing this film I physically changed my [[vie]] and have spent the last 17 years living in a predominantly black country and helping many people rise above their present standard of living and achieve that which they would not have thought possible. The greatest reward I can honestly say I have received - to be able to say that in my own small way I have contributed and redressed the balance a little. But if more people thought like me and actually DID something to help black people without seeking reward then the entire black population of this planet would be a little better off.

I challenge any right thinking person to watch [[Crying]] Freedom from beginning to end and not feel that emotion tugging at your heartstrings as you witness the 700 [[student]] brutally shot dead in Sharpville for refusing to learn Afrikaans, the senseless murder of Steve Biko, such a champion for his own people's rights, and then, ultimately, to understand that all this is not [[only]] a [[movies]], albeit a [[noteworthy]] one, but that it all [[genuinely]] [[sweated]] and less than 30 [[ages]] [[beforehand]].

[[Yeah]], my friends, watch this [[cinematography]] and then see if you can go out afterwards and party [[difficult]]. I couldn't. I was too upset at knowing the truth. That is the hallmark of a [[wondrous]] film. It was [[unmistakably]] the [[intending]] of Sir Richard Attenborough to [[obtain]] this [[messaging]] over about [[Southerly]] Africa. Of [[cours]] he has achieved it. Unless you happen to [[help]] apartheid. [[Jeez]] help you. --------------------------------------------- Result 5210 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A masterful treatment of James Caine's "The Postman Always Rings Twice" as Luchino Visconti's first film shot primarily around Ferrara in a soulless war-torn Italy. The original negative was thought destroyed but Visconti saved a print and fortunately we can see this early neo-realist work today. A ruggedly handsome Massimo Girotti and Clara Calamai (who had recently revealed her breasts in La Cena delle beffe" (1941), star as the sensually-charged and ill-fated lovers who plot to kill her husband. Unusual ending in which, although crime does not pay, one pays in a way not directly linked to the crime. Excellent direction, script, acting, and cinematography. Reportedly not as good as the French "Le Dernier tournant' (1939) but probably better than the US version (1946) featuring Lana Turner and John Garfield in the lead roles. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5211 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw this film when I was 10 or 11 years old, alone in my parent's basement on a Saturday night. It was being [[shown]] on "Chiller Theatre," a regular [[fright]] [[feature]] that I watched religiously as a young 'un. Now, I have seen [[many]] [[old]] [[horror]] films thanks to Chiller Theatre, but [[none]] ever stuck with me like "[[Danse]] Macabre," a.k.a. "Castle of Blood." I am 51 now, and only [[last]] year was I fortunate enough to locate a relatively [[recent]], quality [[DVD]] edition of this [[wonderfully]] shudder-inducing supernatural classic, having thought I'd never manage to see it again. I have already watched it four more times, and cannot [[seem]] to get tired of it.

They just don't make [[spook]] films like this one anymore. Haunted catacombs and mist-enshrouded [[graveyards]] just don't work as well in color as they did in black and white back in the day. [[Anyway]], this one has Edgar Allen Poe and Barbara Steele, [[deliciously]] shadowy, cobweb-wrap'ed haunted castle sets, restless spirits re-enacting their deaths... and a wickedly ironic ending.

IMO, this one's right up there with Robert Wise's "The Haunting," "The Innocents" (with Deborah Kerr), and the more recent "The Others." I saw this film when I was 10 or 11 years old, alone in my parent's basement on a Saturday night. It was being [[illustrated]] on "Chiller Theatre," a regular [[fear]] [[peculiarities]] that I watched religiously as a young 'un. Now, I have seen [[countless]] [[ancient]] [[terror]] films thanks to Chiller Theatre, but [[nothing]] ever stuck with me like "[[Dance]] Macabre," a.k.a. "Castle of Blood." I am 51 now, and only [[final]] year was I fortunate enough to locate a relatively [[newly]], quality [[DVDS]] edition of this [[stunningly]] shudder-inducing supernatural classic, having thought I'd never manage to see it again. I have already watched it four more times, and cannot [[seems]] to get tired of it.

They just don't make [[startle]] films like this one anymore. Haunted catacombs and mist-enshrouded [[headstones]] just don't work as well in color as they did in black and white back in the day. [[Writ]], this one has Edgar Allen Poe and Barbara Steele, [[divinely]] shadowy, cobweb-wrap'ed haunted castle sets, restless spirits re-enacting their deaths... and a wickedly ironic ending.

IMO, this one's right up there with Robert Wise's "The Haunting," "The Innocents" (with Deborah Kerr), and the more recent "The Others." --------------------------------------------- Result 5212 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "National Treasure" (2004) is a thoroughly [[misguided]] hodge-podge of [[plot]] entanglements that borrow from nearly every cloak and dagger [[government]] conspiracy cliché that has ever been [[written]]. The film stars [[Nicholas]] Cage as Benjamin Franklin Gates (how precious is that, I [[ask]] you?); a seemingly normal fellow who, for no other reason than being of a [[lineage]] of like-minded [[misguided]] fortune hunters, decides to steal a 'national treasure' that has been hidden by the United States founding fathers. After a bit of subtext and [[background]] that plays laughably ([[unintentionally]]) like Indiana Jones meets The Patriot, the [[film]] degenerates into one [[misguided]] whimsy after another – [[attempting]] to [[create]] a '[[Stanley]] Goodspeed' regurgitation of Nicholas Cage and [[launch]] the [[whole]] [[convoluted]] [[mess]] forward with a series of high octane, but disconnected misadventures.

The relevancy and logic to having George Washington and his motley crew of patriots burying a king's ransom someplace on native soil, and then, going through the meticulous plan of leaving clues scattered throughout U.S. currency art work, is something that director Jon Turteltaub never quite gets [[around]] to [[explaining]]. Couldn't Washington found better usage for such wealth during the start up of the country? Hence, we are left with a mystery built on top of an enigma that is already on shaky ground by the time Ben appoints himself the new custodian of this untold wealth. Ben's intentions are noble – if confusing. He's set on protecting the treasure. For who and when?…your [[guess]] is as good as mine.

But there are a few problems with Ben's crusade. First up, his [[friend]], Ian Holmes (Sean Bean) decides that he can't wait for [[Ben]] to make up his mind about stealing the Declaration of Independence from the National Archives (oh, yeah – brilliant idea!). Presumably, the back of that famous document holds the secret [[answer]] to the ultimate fortune. So Ian [[tries]] to kill Ben. The assassination attempt is, of course, unsuccessful, if overly melodramatic. It also affords [[Ben]] the [[opportunity]] to pick up, and pick on, the very sultry [[curator]] of the archives, Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger). She thinks Ben is clearly a nut – at least at the beginning. But true to action/romance form, Abby's resolve melts quicker than you can say, "is that the Hope Diamond?" The film moves into full X-File-ish mode, as the FBI, mistakenly believing that Ben is behind the theft, retaliate in various benign ways that lead to a multi-layering of action sequences reminiscent of Mission Impossible meets The Fugitive. Honestly, don't those guys ever get 'intelligence' information that is correct? In the final analysis, "National Treasure" isn't great film making, so much as it's a patchwork rehash of tired old bits from other movies, woven together from scraps, the likes of which would make IL' Betsy Ross blush.

The Buena Vista DVD delivers a far more generous treatment than this film is deserving of. The anamorphic widescreen picture exhibits a very smooth and finely detailed image with very rich colors, natural flesh tones, solid blacks and clean whites. The stylized image is also free of blemishes and digital enhancements. The audio is 5.1 and delivers a nice sonic boom to your side and rear speakers with intensity and realism. Extras include a host of promotional junket material that is rather deep and over the top in its explanation of how and why this film was made. If only, as an audience, we had had more clarification as to why Ben and co. were chasing after an illusive treasure, this might have been one good flick. Extras conclude with the theatrical trailer, audio commentary and deleted scenes. Not for the faint-hearted – just the thick-headed. "National Treasure" (2004) is a thoroughly [[false]] hodge-podge of [[intrigue]] entanglements that borrow from nearly every cloak and dagger [[governments]] conspiracy cliché that has ever been [[writes]]. The film stars [[Nikolaus]] Cage as Benjamin Franklin Gates (how precious is that, I [[wondering]] you?); a seemingly normal fellow who, for no other reason than being of a [[descent]] of like-minded [[wrong]] fortune hunters, decides to steal a 'national treasure' that has been hidden by the United States founding fathers. After a bit of subtext and [[backdrop]] that plays laughably ([[accidently]]) like Indiana Jones meets The Patriot, the [[filmmaking]] degenerates into one [[flawed]] whimsy after another – [[seeking]] to [[creating]] a '[[Stan]] Goodspeed' regurgitation of Nicholas Cage and [[lancer]] the [[ensemble]] [[tortuous]] [[chaos]] forward with a series of high octane, but disconnected misadventures.

The relevancy and logic to having George Washington and his motley crew of patriots burying a king's ransom someplace on native soil, and then, going through the meticulous plan of leaving clues scattered throughout U.S. currency art work, is something that director Jon Turteltaub never quite gets [[throughout]] to [[indicating]]. Couldn't Washington found better usage for such wealth during the start up of the country? Hence, we are left with a mystery built on top of an enigma that is already on shaky ground by the time Ben appoints himself the new custodian of this untold wealth. Ben's intentions are noble – if confusing. He's set on protecting the treasure. For who and when?…your [[imagines]] is as good as mine.

But there are a few problems with Ben's crusade. First up, his [[freund]], Ian Holmes (Sean Bean) decides that he can't wait for [[Ibn]] to make up his mind about stealing the Declaration of Independence from the National Archives (oh, yeah – brilliant idea!). Presumably, the back of that famous document holds the secret [[response]] to the ultimate fortune. So Ian [[attempting]] to kill Ben. The assassination attempt is, of course, unsuccessful, if overly melodramatic. It also affords [[Benn]] the [[possibilities]] to pick up, and pick on, the very sultry [[preservative]] of the archives, Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger). She thinks Ben is clearly a nut – at least at the beginning. But true to action/romance form, Abby's resolve melts quicker than you can say, "is that the Hope Diamond?" The film moves into full X-File-ish mode, as the FBI, mistakenly believing that Ben is behind the theft, retaliate in various benign ways that lead to a multi-layering of action sequences reminiscent of Mission Impossible meets The Fugitive. Honestly, don't those guys ever get 'intelligence' information that is correct? In the final analysis, "National Treasure" isn't great film making, so much as it's a patchwork rehash of tired old bits from other movies, woven together from scraps, the likes of which would make IL' Betsy Ross blush.

The Buena Vista DVD delivers a far more generous treatment than this film is deserving of. The anamorphic widescreen picture exhibits a very smooth and finely detailed image with very rich colors, natural flesh tones, solid blacks and clean whites. The stylized image is also free of blemishes and digital enhancements. The audio is 5.1 and delivers a nice sonic boom to your side and rear speakers with intensity and realism. Extras include a host of promotional junket material that is rather deep and over the top in its explanation of how and why this film was made. If only, as an audience, we had had more clarification as to why Ben and co. were chasing after an illusive treasure, this might have been one good flick. Extras conclude with the theatrical trailer, audio commentary and deleted scenes. Not for the faint-hearted – just the thick-headed. --------------------------------------------- Result 5213 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A pretty [[memorable]] [[movie]] of the animals-killing-people variety, [[specifically]] [[similar]] to "Willard" in that it stars an aging character actor (in this case, a step down a bit to the level of Les Tremayne, who puts in the only distinguished performance I've seen him give) in a role as a man whose life is unbalanced and who subsequently decides to use his animal friends to exact revenge on those who have wronged him. Yes, this is one of those movies where pretty much everybody is despicable, so that you will cheer when they die, and really the selection of actors, locations, etc. couldn't be better at giving the film an atmosphere of shabby decadence.

Tremayne's character is "Snakey Bender", and he is certainly the most interesting thing about the movie: an aged snake collector who is obsessed with John Philip Souza's music. When the local preacher clamps down on his practice of collecting small animals from the local schoolchildren as bait for his snakes, and his friend gets married to a stripper (thus upsetting his ritual Wednesday night band concert) he goes on the rampage, in the process creating a memorable pile-up of clunkers beneath the cliff where he dumps the wrecks after disposing of their unfortunate owners. One amusing game you can play while watching "Snakes" is to place bets on which cars will land the farthest down the cliff.

All in all, very cheap and exploitative, but will really be a [[lot]] of [[fun]] for [[fans]] of these kinds of [[movies]]. A pretty [[landmark]] [[flick]] of the animals-killing-people variety, [[notably]] [[akin]] to "Willard" in that it stars an aging character actor (in this case, a step down a bit to the level of Les Tremayne, who puts in the only distinguished performance I've seen him give) in a role as a man whose life is unbalanced and who subsequently decides to use his animal friends to exact revenge on those who have wronged him. Yes, this is one of those movies where pretty much everybody is despicable, so that you will cheer when they die, and really the selection of actors, locations, etc. couldn't be better at giving the film an atmosphere of shabby decadence.

Tremayne's character is "Snakey Bender", and he is certainly the most interesting thing about the movie: an aged snake collector who is obsessed with John Philip Souza's music. When the local preacher clamps down on his practice of collecting small animals from the local schoolchildren as bait for his snakes, and his friend gets married to a stripper (thus upsetting his ritual Wednesday night band concert) he goes on the rampage, in the process creating a memorable pile-up of clunkers beneath the cliff where he dumps the wrecks after disposing of their unfortunate owners. One amusing game you can play while watching "Snakes" is to place bets on which cars will land the farthest down the cliff.

All in all, very cheap and exploitative, but will really be a [[batches]] of [[funny]] for [[amateurs]] of these kinds of [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I can see why this film was Oscar-nominated for Best Live Action Short, as it was constructed [[masterfully]]. [[Even]] if you don't [[particularly]] like the Blues ([[though]] to me, this sounded much more like jazz), you can easily [[appreciate]] this film. It is [[simply]] very well made, though for the life of me, I can't see why director Gjon Mili only got to direct one film--this one. In other words, the film is [[nominated]] and yet the director didn't [[get]] any sort of career boost. As for the black performers, I could [[understand]] this not causing their careers to shift into high gear, as unfortunately most of white society have indifference (or worse) for blacks or "that kind of music".

If you do watch this film, if you aren't particularly enjoying the earlier portion, skip ahead to about the 5:50 mark--where it [[picks]] up considerably. When the lady stopped singing and the performers began to improvise, the pace improved quite a bit. I can see why this film was Oscar-nominated for Best Live Action Short, as it was constructed [[artfully]]. [[Yet]] if you don't [[especially]] like the Blues ([[if]] to me, this sounded much more like jazz), you can easily [[thankful]] this film. It is [[merely]] very well made, though for the life of me, I can't see why director Gjon Mili only got to direct one film--this one. In other words, the film is [[appointing]] and yet the director didn't [[obtain]] any sort of career boost. As for the black performers, I could [[fathom]] this not causing their careers to shift into high gear, as unfortunately most of white society have indifference (or worse) for blacks or "that kind of music".

If you do watch this film, if you aren't particularly enjoying the earlier portion, skip ahead to about the 5:50 mark--where it [[opted]] up considerably. When the lady stopped singing and the performers began to improvise, the pace improved quite a bit. --------------------------------------------- Result 5215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] **SPOILERS**KHAMOSH is totally unrealistic, lacks a plot, and was basically only made to see stars portray themselves. The most suspenseful scene in the movie was when Shabana Azmi is in the shower and then we see her TV playing the shower scene from PSYCHO. This movie actually expected users to believe that Naseeruddin Shah's character has a good enough memory to remember where certain shots were fired and how many!

***SPOILER BEGINS***

At the end, the killer spills his guts to Shabana Azmi long enough to allow Naseeruddin Shah's character to run up and shoot him!

***SPOILER ENDS***

It is a little humorous (only a little) in the beginning to hear the director and cast members throwing insults at each other and hearing Shabana Azmi exclaim, "Oh sh-t!"

Overall, a baaaaaaaaaaad movie!

Rating: ** out of ********** (2 out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 5216 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This is an [[extremely]] dense, [[somber]], and [[complicated]] [[film]] that unravels [[quite]] slowly, revealing excruciating [[detail]], like the attention [[paid]] in a [[novel]], and watching this [[film]] "IS" like watching a [[novel]] unfold. [[While]] I didn't care for the [[narrator]], as I [[felt]] he was out of [[balance]] with the [[rest]] of the performances, this [[film]] features some of the [[best]] [[ensemble]] acting I have ever [[seen]], and the lead, Summer Phoenix, is [[fabulous]]. Her innocence and naivete some might [[find]] [[implausible]], [[sort]] of a [[cross]] between Cinderella and Alice in Wonderland. I can [[buy]] that [[critique]], but she's [[still]] [[fabulous]], partially because she's unlike [[anything]] I've ever [[seen]] before.

This [[film]] is [[unbelievably]] [[beautiful]], filmed by Eric Gautier, and [[part]] of what is so [[unique]] about this [[film]] is how it doesn't ever [[show]] what you'd [[expect]]. It's [[always]] surprising, and despite it's [[length]], the [[film]] never [[reveals]] more than it [[needs]] to. [[At]] 163 minutes, it's [[extremely]] concise, to a fault, I'd say, which is one of the [[wonders]] of this [[film]]. It's filled with [[brief]] moments which are [[simply]] [[stunning]], some of the [[best]] you're likely to [[see]] all year, and all these [[moments]] [[add]] up in the [[end]] to an [[extraordinary]] [[film]] experience. The [[family]] [[moments]] are [[unique]], [[Ian]] Holm is brilliant, and what this [[film]] has to [[say]] about the [[theater]] hasn't been [[seen]] in [[films]] [[since]] Cassavetes' "Opening Night," or perhaps Chaplin's "Limelight." But, believe it or not, this film is much "less" conventional. I never knew where this film was going, and now, having seen it, it still has [[multiple]] possibilities. This is a [[powerful]], [[incredibly]] [[provocative]] [[film]]. This is an [[terribly]] dense, [[depressing]], and [[knotty]] [[films]] that unravels [[altogether]] slowly, revealing excruciating [[details]], like the attention [[paying]] in a [[newer]], and watching this [[kino]] "IS" like watching a [[newer]] unfold. [[Though]] I didn't care for the [[announcer]], as I [[believed]] he was out of [[equilibrium]] with the [[remainder]] of the performances, this [[cinematography]] features some of the [[better]] [[whole]] acting I have ever [[noticed]], and the lead, Summer Phoenix, is [[gorgeous]]. Her innocence and naivete some might [[unearthed]] [[unlikely]], [[kind]] of a [[rist]] between Cinderella and Alice in Wonderland. I can [[buys]] that [[critiques]], but she's [[however]] [[wondrous]], partially because she's unlike [[nothing]] I've ever [[watched]] before.

This [[cinematography]] is [[remarkably]] [[wondrous]], filmed by Eric Gautier, and [[parties]] of what is so [[sole]] about this [[cinematography]] is how it doesn't ever [[display]] what you'd [[hopes]]. It's [[continually]] surprising, and despite it's [[duration]], the [[cinematography]] never [[uncovers]] more than it [[need]] to. [[For]] 163 minutes, it's [[terribly]] concise, to a fault, I'd say, which is one of the [[graces]] of this [[movie]]. It's filled with [[writ]] moments which are [[merely]] [[striking]], some of the [[nicest]] you're likely to [[consults]] all year, and all these [[times]] [[inserting]] up in the [[termination]] to an [[awesome]] [[movie]] experience. The [[families]] [[times]] are [[particular]], [[Iain]] Holm is brilliant, and what this [[movie]] has to [[said]] about the [[cinemas]] hasn't been [[watched]] in [[movie]] [[because]] Cassavetes' "Opening Night," or perhaps Chaplin's "Limelight." But, believe it or not, this film is much "less" conventional. I never knew where this film was going, and now, having seen it, it still has [[several]] possibilities. This is a [[influential]], [[unbelievably]] [[inflammatory]] [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5217 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 2 stars, and I'm being generous. (minor spoilers) Look, this is a low budget zombie movie set in gangland Oakland. As the plot goes, a scientist wants to bring his dead brother back to life after being killed in a drive-by.

The main problem with this movie: what zombies?! All the "zombies" do is growl (which doesn't sound even remotely scary) and drip fake red blood from their mouths! No scary eyes, no decaying flesh, just a bunch of people growling pathetically and running around like idiots.

The cover is also misleading. There are only about 6 zombies in the whole film, so it's not like the whole "hood" is plagued with zombies or anything, it's just a few, and is contained in no time.

The acting actually is so bad it's hilarious. No one can act at all in this movie (except maybe one of the gang members) and it really seems like a bunch of friends got together, decided to cast their family, and made a movie one weekend.

Final note: since when do Doctors wear tracksuits?! Skip this one, please! --------------------------------------------- Result 5218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Haunted by a secret, Ben Thomas (Will Smith) looks for redemption by radically transforming the lives of seven people he doesn't know. Once his plan is set, nothing will be able to stop him. At least that's what he thinks. But Ben hadn't planned on falling in love with one of these people and she's the one who will end up transforming him. Will Smith is back again with Director Gabriele Muccino, after the life inspiring movie "The Pursuit of Happiness". "Seven Pounds" is yet another life changing movie experience, which not only does reminds you of their previous collaboration, tearful, but inspires you joyfully in the end. Will Smith, also is the producer again with some of the others. These movies are very realistic, which depicts a common man's life & his struggles through life. Seven Pounds might have took some time to gain it's actual momentum, but just after half an hour of the movie, the movie is all set to rule your heart. Also, this movie has some twists revolving around, which lets the viewers keep guessing. Director Gabriele Muccino once again is the winner all the way, with his emotional yet inspiring message. He makes all the characters of the movie very real, that the people would actually find themselves in somewhere of the movie. Along with the director, Will Smith is yet another winner, with his superb acting skills. Once again, the duo of the director & the actor works as a charm. Also, there are other talented actors in the movie who did their part pretty well. Rosario Dawson, beauty with brains, that's what she can be called. She looks beautiful & does her part extremely well. Barry Pepper, gives a great support to the movie & Woody Harrelson does the same, although Woody did not had much screen timing(would have been good if he had more). You won't forget this movie easily. Watch this movie & change your life. Top class cinema! --------------------------------------------- Result 5219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Well, magic works in [[mysterious]] [[ways]]. This [[movie]] about 4 prisoners, [[trying]] to escape with the [[help]] of spells, [[written]] by another [[prisoner]] centuries [[ago]] was a [[superb]] occult thriller with a [[surprising]] end and lots of [[suspense]]. Even if it had something of a theater-play ([[almost]] everything [[happens]] in the [[cell]]) it never got [[boring]] and it was acted very well. In the tradition of "Cube" you felt [[trapped]] with the Characters and even if they were criminal, you developed some sympathy with some of them, only to [[change]] your mind by the twists the [[story]] takes. Some happenings catched you off [[guard]] and there was always a touch of insanity in the air. [[Altogether]] intense and [[entertaining]] and as I didn't expect anything (a friend rented it), it was a positive [[surprise]]! Well, magic works in [[shadowy]] [[mode]]. This [[cinematography]] about 4 prisoners, [[tempting]] to escape with the [[aid]] of spells, [[authored]] by another [[captives]] centuries [[prior]] was a [[wondrous]] occult thriller with a [[uncanny]] end and lots of [[sufferance]]. Even if it had something of a theater-play ([[virtually]] everything [[arrives]] in the [[cells]]) it never got [[dreary]] and it was acted very well. In the tradition of "Cube" you felt [[ambushed]] with the Characters and even if they were criminal, you developed some sympathy with some of them, only to [[modified]] your mind by the twists the [[fairytales]] takes. Some happenings catched you off [[guardsmen]] and there was always a touch of insanity in the air. [[Quite]] intense and [[amusing]] and as I didn't expect anything (a friend rented it), it was a positive [[amaze]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5220 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I will [[always]] have a [[soft]] [[spot]] for this Disney flick, another of their part live action/part animation entries that sought to recreate the success of "Mary Poppins" and never quite made it. When I was in grade school, every once in a while we would have a movie day, where the whole school would crowd into the cafeteria, and a movie would be projected the old-fashioned way, multiple reels and all. At the time, it seemed like a momentous occasion whenever this day arrived, and "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" is one of the movies I can remember seeing this [[way]].

And from what I remember, it's [[quite]] charming. Angela Lansbury never put her name to anything that wasn't at least competent, and she's winning here as a witch with a magic bed (boy, that could be misconstrued, couldn't it?) who can take her and a couple of young kids on magic adventures to far-off places. Come on, what kid wouldn't want a bed like that?

Grade: A I will [[permanently]] have a [[mild]] [[blemish]] for this Disney flick, another of their part live action/part animation entries that sought to recreate the success of "Mary Poppins" and never quite made it. When I was in grade school, every once in a while we would have a movie day, where the whole school would crowd into the cafeteria, and a movie would be projected the old-fashioned way, multiple reels and all. At the time, it seemed like a momentous occasion whenever this day arrived, and "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" is one of the movies I can remember seeing this [[route]].

And from what I remember, it's [[rather]] charming. Angela Lansbury never put her name to anything that wasn't at least competent, and she's winning here as a witch with a magic bed (boy, that could be misconstrued, couldn't it?) who can take her and a couple of young kids on magic adventures to far-off places. Come on, what kid wouldn't want a bed like that?

Grade: A --------------------------------------------- Result 5221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I live in Missouri, so the direct effects of terrorism are largely unknown to me, this [[brought]] it home. That two men would put themselves on the line in the way that those members of FDNY and NYPD did, just to document the [[horror]] that unfolded on that day. This [[film]] is a testament to those who lost their lives and the true [[evil]] that terror brings. I live in Missouri, so the direct effects of terrorism are largely unknown to me, this [[tabled]] it home. That two men would put themselves on the line in the way that those members of FDNY and NYPD did, just to document the [[terror]] that unfolded on that day. This [[movie]] is a testament to those who lost their lives and the true [[satanic]] that terror brings. --------------------------------------------- Result 5222 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I have to [[say]] that this TV [[movie]] was the [[work]] that really [[showed]] how talented Melissa Joan Hart is. We are so [[used]] to, now, [[seeing]] her in a sitcom and I really hope that a TV station will [[show]] this TV [[movie]] again [[soon]] as it will [[show]] the Sabrina [[fans]] that MJH shines in a [[drama]]. [[Seen]] as we have watched her on Sabrina now for now 5 [[years]] and so to give the [[viewers]] a [[taste]] of her much unused [[talent]] would be a plus. Melissa plays her role so well in this wanting her [[parents]] "done away" with so she can be with the guy she [[loves]]. One thing that all Sabrina viewers will [[notice]], [[Melissa]] [[works]] with David Lascher in this, well before he [[took]] the role of Josh on Sabrina. So it [[would]] be [[kind]] of neat to [[see]] this [[currently]] [[whenever]] it [[gets]] [[aired]] again. Hopefully MJH [[gets]] some good [[roles]] in [[movies]] or [[even]] in more TV [[Movies]], [[sort]] of like Kellie Martin who has [[always]] [[shined]] in [[TV]] [[Movies]]. [[Lots]] of unused talent [[waiting]] to [[bust]] out when it [[comes]] to [[Melissa]] Joan Hart, you [[shine]] [[always]] Melissa!!! I have to [[tell]] that this TV [[cinema]] was the [[jobs]] that really [[illustrated]] how talented Melissa Joan Hart is. We are so [[usage]] to, now, [[see]] her in a sitcom and I really hope that a TV station will [[display]] this TV [[cinematography]] again [[quick]] as it will [[displayed]] the Sabrina [[followers]] that MJH shines in a [[dramas]]. [[Saw]] as we have watched her on Sabrina now for now 5 [[aged]] and so to give the [[audiences]] a [[liking]] of her much unused [[talents]] would be a plus. Melissa plays her role so well in this wanting her [[relatives]] "done away" with so she can be with the guy she [[adore]]. One thing that all Sabrina viewers will [[avis]], [[Mireille]] [[working]] with David Lascher in this, well before he [[taken]] the role of Josh on Sabrina. So it [[ought]] be [[type]] of neat to [[seeing]] this [[presently]] [[everytime]] it [[got]] [[distributed]] again. Hopefully MJH [[get]] some good [[functions]] in [[movie]] or [[yet]] in more TV [[Movie]], [[sorting]] of like Kellie Martin who has [[repeatedly]] [[waxed]] in [[TELEVISIONS]] [[Cinema]]. [[Batch]] of unused talent [[awaiting]] to [[fiasco]] out when it [[occurs]] to [[Mireille]] Joan Hart, you [[gloss]] [[continuously]] Melissa!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5223 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Why? Because for one reason, there has never been a more adorable scene in any film than Ann Margret singing "Bye Bye Birdie" at the opening. She reprises it again at the ending, too (in a different mood!). Both wonderful. Rent it and see. Even if that's all of it that you watch. You'll agree, I'm sure.

Everything about the [[original]] was so [[excellent]] it just didn't [[need]] a remake, [[sorry]]! Jason and Vanessa [[gave]] commendable performances, as well as Tyne and Chynna. In fact, all the actors and singers in this new version were giving their 'all,' but it's like trying to improve on "Casablanca" -- it just can't be done! It's even annoying finding yourself comparing the two mentally as you try to appreciate the remake, and it just falls short, through no fault of the actors. Why? Because for one reason, there has never been a more adorable scene in any film than Ann Margret singing "Bye Bye Birdie" at the opening. She reprises it again at the ending, too (in a different mood!). Both wonderful. Rent it and see. Even if that's all of it that you watch. You'll agree, I'm sure.

Everything about the [[initial]] was so [[sumptuous]] it just didn't [[requisite]] a remake, [[apologise]]! Jason and Vanessa [[delivered]] commendable performances, as well as Tyne and Chynna. In fact, all the actors and singers in this new version were giving their 'all,' but it's like trying to improve on "Casablanca" -- it just can't be done! It's even annoying finding yourself comparing the two mentally as you try to appreciate the remake, and it just falls short, through no fault of the actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 5224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have seen this [[movie]] and [[even]] [[though]] I kind of knew who the killer was from the [[beginning]] I [[still]] [[liked]] [[watching]] it. I [[would]] [[recommend]] it to other people. It comes on Lifetime [[movie]] network [[quite]] a lot. And I am thinking [[since]] it's close to Halloween they [[might]] play it more. [[So]] [[please]] be on the [[look]] out for it if you are interested in watching it. I [[believe]] that Alicia Silverstone [[played]] her [[part]] very well. I really [[like]] her as an actress and [[person]]. She seems so [[nice]] and down to [[earth]]. Kevin [[Dillon]] he's performance was so so for me. I am not trying to [[knock]] him or anything but I believe that his brother Matt would have been able to pull this bad [[evil]] serial killer [[persona]] better. Kevin just seems too sweet for me. But I think he did [[okay]]. I have seen this [[cinematography]] and [[yet]] [[although]] I kind of knew who the killer was from the [[starts]] I [[yet]] [[loved]] [[staring]] it. I [[should]] [[recommended]] it to other people. It comes on Lifetime [[cinema]] network [[rather]] a lot. And I am thinking [[because]] it's close to Halloween they [[probable]] play it more. [[Consequently]] [[invites]] be on the [[gaze]] out for it if you are interested in watching it. I [[reckon]] that Alicia Silverstone [[served]] her [[portions]] very well. I really [[loves]] her as an actress and [[persons]]. She seems so [[handsome]] and down to [[overland]]. Kevin [[Dylan]] he's performance was so so for me. I am not trying to [[patting]] him or anything but I believe that his brother Matt would have been able to pull this bad [[baleful]] serial killer [[person]] better. Kevin just seems too sweet for me. But I think he did [[verywell]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This sci-fi [[masterpiece]] has too many flaws after the editors had butchered it after its opening in 1936. Visually it is a wonder to behold, but the script allows too many intellectual speeches about war and progress.This gets very corny when the actors are given to recite a [[lot]] of [[high]] [[minded]] [[messages]] at all [[times]].Raymond Massey and Cedric Hardwicke,both [[great]] actors,come off as [[quite]] a pair of fanatics. Ralph Richardson is very good as the "The Boss" a megalomaniac warlord. The prediction of World War II was very eerie considering that the world was on the brink of the most devastating conflict in human history at the time. I'm sure glad that war didn't turn out as it did in the movie. There are some visually stunning montage sequences bridging the leaps of time between the movie's different episodes. Although its not as entertaining as I hoped it would be,this movie sticks in your mind long after you've seen it. This sci-fi [[centerpiece]] has too many flaws after the editors had butchered it after its opening in 1936. Visually it is a wonder to behold, but the script allows too many intellectual speeches about war and progress.This gets very corny when the actors are given to recite a [[batch]] of [[higher]] [[tilted]] [[messaging]] at all [[period]].Raymond Massey and Cedric Hardwicke,both [[wondrous]] actors,come off as [[utterly]] a pair of fanatics. Ralph Richardson is very good as the "The Boss" a megalomaniac warlord. The prediction of World War II was very eerie considering that the world was on the brink of the most devastating conflict in human history at the time. I'm sure glad that war didn't turn out as it did in the movie. There are some visually stunning montage sequences bridging the leaps of time between the movie's different episodes. Although its not as entertaining as I hoped it would be,this movie sticks in your mind long after you've seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5226 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I [[guess]] if you are into the sci-fi and horror [[stuff]] it might be interesting. The acting was okay but not [[great]]. The two [[pregnant]] [[girls]] are [[supposed]] to be fifteen but are [[played]] by [[obviously]] [[older]] [[actresses]] who [[turned]] out to be twenty and twenty-one at the [[time]]. The plot is okay, but the story does jump around a bit, [[leaving]] one guessing whether you're in Boston or [[Pennsylvania]]. The [[priest]] seems to [[use]] warp [[speed]] between the two. The catholic [[church]] is portrayed as having a secretive [[sect]] for [[investigating]] events which only [[happen]] to those of that [[faith]]. What if the two [[girls]] had been protestant? Would the catholics of [[cared]]? [[Therefore]] some what contrived. Who knows, some day the catholic [[church]] might [[even]] [[learn]] what the [[Bible]] [[teaches]]. [[If]] you miss this one, don't feel you've lost anything. I [[guessing]] if you are into the sci-fi and horror [[thing]] it might be interesting. The acting was okay but not [[phenomenal]]. The two [[expectant]] [[woman]] are [[presumed]] to be fifteen but are [[effected]] by [[definitely]] [[oldest]] [[actors]] who [[transformed]] out to be twenty and twenty-one at the [[moment]]. The plot is okay, but the story does jump around a bit, [[letting]] one guessing whether you're in Boston or [[Penn]]. The [[shepherd]] seems to [[utilizes]] warp [[velocities]] between the two. The catholic [[iglesias]] is portrayed as having a secretive [[sects]] for [[exploring]] events which only [[occur]] to those of that [[fe]]. What if the two [[dame]] had been protestant? Would the catholics of [[adored]]? [[So]] some what contrived. Who knows, some day the catholic [[iglesias]] might [[yet]] [[learnt]] what the [[Biblical]] [[learns]]. [[Though]] you miss this one, don't feel you've lost anything. --------------------------------------------- Result 5227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] An absorbing ([[although]] repetitive and [[rather]] didactic) analysis of exploitation and [[despair]] in a situation where there is no [[way]] forward or up, where the [[attempts]] to make yourself feel better by [[violating]] and putting down whoever is below you [[seems]] to be the only [[option]]. But even here, in this desolate wasteland of lost [[dreams]] and no future, that does not work, and reaching out to something or [[someone]] to [[comfort]] and [[share]] with, a [[simple]] act of [[charity]], gives some [[reward]], [[even]] if it just makes the present bearable by reviving [[memories]] of the [[past]].

[[Although]] there is [[little]] actual on screen violence, this is a [[harsh]] and [[brutal]] [[film]] about the [[small]] mindedness of [[oppression]] (politically and personally) that does not make for [[easy]] [[entertainment]]. [[Clearly]] based on a [[play]], with a [[small]] cast, a broader more expansive [[relation]] to the general social and political [[environment]] would [[possibly]] have helped the [[film]] to [[reach]] a wider [[audience]]. An absorbing ([[though]] repetitive and [[comparatively]] didactic) analysis of exploitation and [[desperation]] in a situation where there is no [[routes]] forward or up, where the [[seeks]] to make yourself feel better by [[breached]] and putting down whoever is below you [[looks]] to be the only [[surrogate]]. But even here, in this desolate wasteland of lost [[nightmares]] and no future, that does not work, and reaching out to something or [[somebody]] to [[solace]] and [[exchanges]] with, a [[mere]] act of [[philanthropic]], gives some [[rewards]], [[yet]] if it just makes the present bearable by reviving [[memoirs]] of the [[former]].

[[Despite]] there is [[kiddo]] actual on screen violence, this is a [[stiff]] and [[barbarous]] [[movies]] about the [[tiny]] mindedness of [[repression]] (politically and personally) that does not make for [[effortless]] [[amusement]]. [[Blatantly]] based on a [[playing]], with a [[minimal]] cast, a broader more expansive [[relationship]] to the general social and political [[environs]] would [[maybe]] have helped the [[kino]] to [[reaching]] a wider [[audiences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5228 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is [[definitely]] one of the best kung fu movies ever, and may be one of the best movies ever... It's got a great plot that functions like a [[puzzle]], with lots of intrigue and [[suspense]]. This film is full of [[cat]] and mouse games and [[deceptions]], with people hiding their identities and their natures. The [[characters]] in this film live and [[breath]] [[much]] more than your average kung [[fu]] [[movie]] [[characters]]. They are all interesting and [[compelling]] and the movie does a good job at giving them scenes to show their personality's and [[desires]].

The [[fight]] scenes play out like [[little]] [[stories]] and [[many]] of them are very [[original]] and [[exciting]]. It has cool training sequences and martial [[arts]] [[skills]] that are so [[awesome]] they [[enter]] the [[realm]] of [[fantasy]]. There are 5 members of the [[poison]] clan each one with his own style that [[mimics]] the [[special]] [[skill]] of a [[venomous]] [[animal]]. The [[styles]] of each of these [[characters]] are [[fun]] to watch and you can [[see]] the techniques they [[use]] in training [[applied]] during the [[film]]... [[When]] this [[happens]], The director [[uses]] [[quick]] [[cutting]] back to the training scene to [[draw]] a parallel. These [[cuts]] are [[accompanied]] by [[music]] [[changes]] and sound effects and the [[whole]] [[thing]] really [[works]] [[nicely]].

One [[thing]] about this movie that is very [[original]] is the [[way]] it [[treats]] death. The director [[Chang]] Cheh was [[obviously]] very concerned that the [[film]] not trivialize [[death]]. This makes some of the scenes in the [[movie]] much more [[effective]]. We [[actually]] care when people are [[killed]] in this [[film]]. This is because the [[camera]] [[lingers]] on the [[horror]] of [[death]] [[even]] when the [[bad]] [[guys]] are [[killed]]. Some of the [[sequences]] in this movie are [[truly]] [[gut]] wrenching. When [[characters]] go in [[search]] of vengeance you really feel their [[anger]] and [[pain]].

[[At]] the same [[time]], this is [[also]] a fun movie. It has all the [[typical]] [[things]] you [[expect]] from a [[traditional]] kung fu [[film]]. There is [[bad]] [[dubbing]], The [[characters]] are [[willing]] to [[fight]] at the drop of a hat. Some of the sound effects are [[hilarious]] and at [[times]] the [[behavior]] of the [[characters]] is incredibly unrealistic... all this just adds to the [[greatness]] of the [[film]].

And [[lets]] not forget that this director was a visual [[stylist]] [[much]] more [[gifted]] than most of his contemporaries. [[If]] you watch this [[movie]] [[closely]] you will notice that the technical prowess on [[display]] is virtuostic. Everything goes by so fast (because of the quick cutting [[style]] and the rapid camera movements of the genre) that it is easy to overlook how beautiful the movie really is. The lighting and composition are spectacular at times. The camera work and movement is extremely sophisticated along with very interesting fast paced editing... In the scenes that portray suspense and intrigue for example, imagine Hitchcock moving at about twice the [[speed]]. Chang Cheh was truly a master craftsman and artist who knew his genre and was able to produce important material while working within it's confines. He doesn't rattle the boat of the kung fu genre film, but in a subtle way his skills permeate every scene and every shot and they add greatly to the quality of the work. He is an important filmmaker who continues to influence many people.

This is the real package A kung fu movie that delivers on every level. It's art, it's trash, it's emotionally moving, and it's fun, it has a true sense of morality, but doesn't allow that morality to get in the way of delivering good action. I recommend it to everybody whether you are a fan of this genre or not. This is [[obviously]] one of the best kung fu movies ever, and may be one of the best movies ever... It's got a great plot that functions like a [[conundrum]], with lots of intrigue and [[wait]]. This film is full of [[pussycat]] and mouse games and [[disappointments]], with people hiding their identities and their natures. The [[character]] in this film live and [[murmur]] [[very]] more than your average kung [[foo]] [[kino]] [[attribute]]. They are all interesting and [[convincing]] and the movie does a good job at giving them scenes to show their personality's and [[wants]].

The [[wrestling]] scenes play out like [[petite]] [[narratives]] and [[several]] of them are very [[preliminary]] and [[intriguing]]. It has cool training sequences and martial [[arte]] [[capabilities]] that are so [[remarkable]] they [[penetrate]] the [[sphere]] of [[utopia]]. There are 5 members of the [[poisoning]] clan each one with his own style that [[simulates]] the [[particular]] [[proficiency]] of a [[noxious]] [[wildlife]]. The [[style]] of each of these [[hallmarks]] are [[funny]] to watch and you can [[seeing]] the techniques they [[usage]] in training [[implemented]] during the [[cinematography]]... [[Whenever]] this [[arrives]], The director [[used]] [[prompt]] [[sliced]] back to the training scene to [[attracts]] a parallel. These [[clippings]] are [[escorted]] by [[musicians]] [[amendment]] and sound effects and the [[entire]] [[stuff]] really [[working]] [[kindly]].

One [[stuff]] about this movie that is very [[preliminary]] is the [[ways]] it [[addresses]] death. The director [[Jang]] Cheh was [[plainly]] very concerned that the [[movies]] not trivialize [[killings]]. This makes some of the scenes in the [[movies]] much more [[efficient]]. We [[indeed]] care when people are [[assassinated]] in this [[movies]]. This is because the [[cameras]] [[endures]] on the [[abomination]] of [[muerte]] [[yet]] when the [[amiss]] [[lads]] are [[murdering]]. Some of the [[sequencing]] in this movie are [[honestly]] [[tripe]] wrenching. When [[attribute]] go in [[researching]] of vengeance you really feel their [[wrath]] and [[agony]].

[[During]] the same [[times]], this is [[apart]] a fun movie. It has all the [[characteristic]] [[matters]] you [[hopes]] from a [[classic]] kung fu [[flick]]. There is [[amiss]] [[copying]], The [[nature]] are [[desirous]] to [[wrestling]] at the drop of a hat. Some of the sound effects are [[fun]] and at [[period]] the [[conduct]] of the [[attribute]] is incredibly unrealistic... all this just adds to the [[size]] of the [[movies]].

And [[allow]] not forget that this director was a visual [[hairstylist]] [[very]] more [[prodigy]] than most of his contemporaries. [[Though]] you watch this [[movies]] [[intently]] you will notice that the technical prowess on [[exposition]] is virtuostic. Everything goes by so fast (because of the quick cutting [[elegance]] and the rapid camera movements of the genre) that it is easy to overlook how beautiful the movie really is. The lighting and composition are spectacular at times. The camera work and movement is extremely sophisticated along with very interesting fast paced editing... In the scenes that portray suspense and intrigue for example, imagine Hitchcock moving at about twice the [[accelerate]]. Chang Cheh was truly a master craftsman and artist who knew his genre and was able to produce important material while working within it's confines. He doesn't rattle the boat of the kung fu genre film, but in a subtle way his skills permeate every scene and every shot and they add greatly to the quality of the work. He is an important filmmaker who continues to influence many people.

This is the real package A kung fu movie that delivers on every level. It's art, it's trash, it's emotionally moving, and it's fun, it has a true sense of morality, but doesn't allow that morality to get in the way of delivering good action. I recommend it to everybody whether you are a fan of this genre or not. --------------------------------------------- Result 5229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Susan Seidelman seems to have had a decent career with a few top notch credits under her belt. I'm certainly glad she bounced back from this film which seems to have its admirers. I'm not one of them.

I've seen better acting in high school plays than I did in Smithereens. The plot such as it is involved young Susan Berman who is ambitious to make it in the world of music and is willing to do just about anything to get there. She even rejects the sincere advances of a young artist who is living out of his van off the East River played by Brad Rijn.

Young Mr. Rijn contributes the worst performance in the film, in fact one of the worst acting jobs I've seen in a long time. No wonder he's not gone anywhere.

I will say that Seidelman's eye for the camera is a good one in capturing the familiar East Village locations where the film was mostly shot. But her work with her live performers didn't measure up. I'm not sure she had that much raw material to work with.

Look fast and you'll see a very young Christopher Noth before Law and Order and Sex in the City as a street hustler.

If you like punk rock, you might sit through this for the soundtrack. I'll stick to Bing Crosby. --------------------------------------------- Result 5230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] on the contrary to the person listed above me i felt that this movie was [[really]] [[funny]] [[particularly]] in the scenes were there is a lot of mix up. i don't [[want]] to [[give]] the plot and the storyline away to the people that haven't watched it [[yet]] but i will say that Paresh Rawal does not have an [[extensive]] role such as past Priyadarshan [[movies]], for example, Hera Pheri and Hungama. Paresh Rawal does an [[amazing]] [[part]] in the little role [[given]] to him, John [[Abraham]] does [[equally]] well, Akshay [[Kumar]] has [[proved]] that he is no less in this [[movie]] like he had from Waqt and [[almost]] all his [[movies]] after Andaaz. Even [[though]] all three heroins in this [[movie]] were at a debut they did a pretty good [[job]] of acting [[particularly]] Nargis who is very good looking and [[hot]]. i [[would]] [[say]] that if you liked Hungama or Hera Pheri this [[movie]] is a [[must]] watch. on the contrary to the person listed above me i felt that this movie was [[genuinely]] [[comical]] [[concretely]] in the scenes were there is a lot of mix up. i don't [[wanna]] to [[confer]] the plot and the storyline away to the people that haven't watched it [[even]] but i will say that Paresh Rawal does not have an [[comprehensive]] role such as past Priyadarshan [[kino]], for example, Hera Pheri and Hungama. Paresh Rawal does an [[wondrous]] [[parties]] in the little role [[afforded]] to him, John [[Avram]] does [[alike]] well, Akshay [[Sharma]] has [[evidenced]] that he is no less in this [[films]] like he had from Waqt and [[roughly]] all his [[cinema]] after Andaaz. Even [[if]] all three heroins in this [[film]] were at a debut they did a pretty good [[labour]] of acting [[concretely]] Nargis who is very good looking and [[sexier]]. i [[ought]] [[said]] that if you liked Hungama or Hera Pheri this [[films]] is a [[should]] watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 5231 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The dialogue was pretty [[dreadful]]. The plot not [[really]] all that inspired beyond the [[obvious]] twist it presents. Not visually [[stunning]]. Actually visually [[annoying]] at times. [[Most]] definitely one of those [[films]] you find easier to [[finish]] if you [[keep]] one finger on the [[fast]] forward button. If you [[could]] watch it for free, have [[absolutely]] no other [[options]] open at the moment and you really dig seeing the [[little]] poltergeist [[lady]]... well [[maybe]] I'd recommend it to you, but not anyone else I [[could]] think of at the moment. The dialogue was pretty [[abhorrent]]. The plot not [[truthfully]] all that inspired beyond the [[unmistakable]] twist it presents. Not visually [[breathless]]. Actually visually [[exasperating]] at times. [[Greatest]] definitely one of those [[cinema]] you find easier to [[completing]] if you [[keeping]] one finger on the [[quick]] forward button. If you [[wo]] watch it for free, have [[fully]] no other [[option]] open at the moment and you really dig seeing the [[scant]] poltergeist [[ladies]]... well [[presumably]] I'd recommend it to you, but not anyone else I [[wo]] think of at the moment. --------------------------------------------- Result 5232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The story of this film is truly [[remarkable]]. A virus cut loose and only 1% of the human race survived. The only thing we know now is that animals rule the land above and there are posters everywhere that say, "The Twelve Monkeys did it." Thats right, the human race had to hide underground from the [[sickness]] that had killed over 500 Billion people. Apparently animals do not contract this disease. Day by day the present scientist try to discover what type of sickness had caused this; how it was created; if nature did it or a mere human being had created it. All they know is that there is are a bunch of animals running around a city above them, the deaths began during 1996-1997, and twelve monkeys have something to do with it. (Or at least thats what the poster says.) So a current convict named James Cole (Bruce Willis) is sent as a "volunteer" to get some samples from above. After he does his "volunteer" work, he is asked to be sent back in time to the year 1996 to figure out what happened to the world. Cole accepts and the story of the Twelve Monkeys begin.

Throughout the story the time machine gets the dates wrong quite a few times, from 1990, to some time during the 1950's. (In a middle of a war.) Throughout the time traveling back and forth, it starts to mess James up in the head and that twist the story up. The whole story is very well done and I would of gave it a higher grade if it wasn't for the ending. I personally didn't like the ending of the movie and I was very disappointed. I just was expecting a more explaining ending then what had happen, but it isn't everyone who thinks this way. So I gave it a 8, but if everyone had the same opinion as me I would give it a 6 or 7.

For the whole acting of the film, I give it a A+. Bruce Willis is great for this role and he acts good, but Brad Pitt is completely 100% excellent. His acting is so great, he gets into the character so well. I never really cared for Brad Pitt in till I saw him in this and Fight Club. There characters or similar in this film, he is just a little more... insane in this film. So overall I think this film is completely worth checking out. For most people it's a great science fiction film, I just don't think it is a masterpiece. The story of this film is truly [[wondrous]]. A virus cut loose and only 1% of the human race survived. The only thing we know now is that animals rule the land above and there are posters everywhere that say, "The Twelve Monkeys did it." Thats right, the human race had to hide underground from the [[morbid]] that had killed over 500 Billion people. Apparently animals do not contract this disease. Day by day the present scientist try to discover what type of sickness had caused this; how it was created; if nature did it or a mere human being had created it. All they know is that there is are a bunch of animals running around a city above them, the deaths began during 1996-1997, and twelve monkeys have something to do with it. (Or at least thats what the poster says.) So a current convict named James Cole (Bruce Willis) is sent as a "volunteer" to get some samples from above. After he does his "volunteer" work, he is asked to be sent back in time to the year 1996 to figure out what happened to the world. Cole accepts and the story of the Twelve Monkeys begin.

Throughout the story the time machine gets the dates wrong quite a few times, from 1990, to some time during the 1950's. (In a middle of a war.) Throughout the time traveling back and forth, it starts to mess James up in the head and that twist the story up. The whole story is very well done and I would of gave it a higher grade if it wasn't for the ending. I personally didn't like the ending of the movie and I was very disappointed. I just was expecting a more explaining ending then what had happen, but it isn't everyone who thinks this way. So I gave it a 8, but if everyone had the same opinion as me I would give it a 6 or 7.

For the whole acting of the film, I give it a A+. Bruce Willis is great for this role and he acts good, but Brad Pitt is completely 100% excellent. His acting is so great, he gets into the character so well. I never really cared for Brad Pitt in till I saw him in this and Fight Club. There characters or similar in this film, he is just a little more... insane in this film. So overall I think this film is completely worth checking out. For most people it's a great science fiction film, I just don't think it is a masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 5233 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have seen the movie Holes and [[say]] that it has to be the [[best]] [[movie]] all year [[long]]. It [[brings]] out the [[child]] in [[everyone]]. I mean who [[would]] [[come]] up with the [[idea]] of having [[troublesome]] [[boys]] dig holes as their [[punishment]]? [[Louis]] Sachar [[thats]] who. Although the movie was different from the [[book]] it was [[still]] very good. For example Caveman/[[Stanley]] was supposed to be the [[biggest]] one there. Weight wise and height wise but ZigZag/[[Ricky]] was taller and Armpit/[[Theodore]] was bigger. [[Also]] X-Ray/Rex was [[supposed]] to be one of the [[smallest]] [[boys]] but wasn't. The only [[thing]] that I didn't like about the [[movie]] was that the flashbacks were [[rather]] persuasive and long. I would have [[rather]] [[seen]] more of the present than past but [[thats]] just my [[opinion]]. I [[especially]] like the [[work]] of the boys though. Like Squid/[[Alan]] who was [[played]] by Jake M.Smith was supposed to be a [[moody]] and [[tough]] [[kid]]. Jake [[M]].Smith performed just that and did a [[great]] [[job]] at it as did [[almost]] all of the [[actors]] in Holes. [[So]] I [[would]] [[say]] if you [[havent]] seen Holes [[yet]] then you should definatly [[see]] it when it [[comes]] out again or you'll be missing out on a [[whole]] lotta [[fun]]. I have seen the movie Holes and [[says]] that it has to be the [[better]] [[flick]] all year [[longer]]. It [[puts]] out the [[kids]] in [[someone]]. I mean who [[should]] [[arriving]] up with the [[thinking]] of having [[pesky]] [[boy]] dig holes as their [[penalty]]? [[Louise]] Sachar [[theres]] who. Although the movie was different from the [[workbook]] it was [[however]] very good. For example Caveman/[[Stan]] was supposed to be the [[greatest]] one there. Weight wise and height wise but ZigZag/[[Rick]] was taller and Armpit/[[Theodor]] was bigger. [[Moreover]] X-Ray/Rex was [[alleged]] to be one of the [[slightest]] [[guy]] but wasn't. The only [[stuff]] that I didn't like about the [[kino]] was that the flashbacks were [[somewhat]] persuasive and long. I would have [[quite]] [[watched]] more of the present than past but [[theres]] just my [[vista]]. I [[principally]] like the [[works]] of the boys though. Like Squid/[[Alain]] who was [[effected]] by Jake M.Smith was supposed to be a [[fickle]] and [[stiff]] [[petit]]. Jake [[meters]].Smith performed just that and did a [[huge]] [[labour]] at it as did [[hardly]] all of the [[players]] in Holes. [[Hence]] I [[ought]] [[said]] if you [[actualy]] seen Holes [[again]] then you should definatly [[behold]] it when it [[occurs]] out again or you'll be missing out on a [[entire]] lotta [[funny]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Well, what was [[fun]]... except for the fun [[part]].

It's my second [[least]] favorite so far, I even thought it was worse than 'Lazarus' and '[[Ghost]] in the Machine'.

Let's [[start]] with the good. The teaser, it was [[incredibly]] well [[done]] and also emotional. Being the [[great]] animal lover that I am, it was [[fun]] seeing so [[many]] [[beautiful]] animals in this episode.

But then there's all the [[bad]], and [[believe]] me there is a [[lot]] of it. [[Little]] made sense, so those [[animals]] were being [[abducted]] by [[aliens]] and impregnated? whaaa??? the [[dialog]] was [[also]] [[pretty]] [[awful]]. There were about one or two quotable lines.

and worst of all, having pretty much all those [[animals]] [[die]] was very [[unpleasant]] for me. [[In]] the [[end]]... what's the point? they all [[pretty]] much died. We didn't [[learn]] [[anything]], we weren't [[entertained]], and I couldn't [[even]] [[find]] Sophia's death [[sad]]... just very [[frustrating]].

* [[star]]. [[shame]] because Season 2 was doing so well. Well, what was [[hilarious]]... except for the fun [[portions]].

It's my second [[lowest]] favorite so far, I even thought it was worse than 'Lazarus' and '[[Phantom]] in the Machine'.

Let's [[induction]] with the good. The teaser, it was [[amazingly]] well [[completed]] and also emotional. Being the [[grand]] animal lover that I am, it was [[funny]] seeing so [[various]] [[sumptuous]] animals in this episode.

But then there's all the [[negative]], and [[think]] me there is a [[lots]] of it. [[Tiny]] made sense, so those [[zoo]] were being [[hijack]] by [[foreigner]] and impregnated? whaaa??? the [[dialogues]] was [[apart]] [[belle]] [[scary]]. There were about one or two quotable lines.

and worst of all, having pretty much all those [[zoo]] [[killed]] was very [[nasty]] for me. [[Onto]] the [[terminate]]... what's the point? they all [[quite]] much died. We didn't [[learnt]] [[nothing]], we weren't [[distracted]], and I couldn't [[yet]] [[found]] Sophia's death [[unfortunate]]... just very [[depressing]].

* [[superstar]]. [[pity]] because Season 2 was doing so well. --------------------------------------------- Result 5235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Elvira Mistress Of The Dark (1988): Cassandra Peterson, Daniel Greene, William Morgan Sheppard, Susan Kellerman, Edie McClug, Jeff Conaway, Phil Rubenstein, Larry Flash Jenkins, Tress MacNeille, Damita Jo Freeman, Mario Celario, William Dance, Lee McLaughlin, Charles Woolf, Sharon Hays, Bill Cable, Joseph Arias, Scott Morris, Ira Heiden, Frank Collison, Lynne Marie Stewart, Marie Sullivan, Jack Fletcher, Robert Benedetti, Kate Brown, Hugh Gillin, Eve Smith, Raleigh Bond, Tony Burrier, Alan Dewames, Timm Hill, Read Scot, James Hogan, Derek Givens...Director James Signorelli...Screenplay Sam Egan, John Paragon.

Elvira, Mistress of the Dark was an 80's TV icon who had her own late night show on cable. She hosted and presented classic American horror films, many of them campy, while providing her own quips and humorous remarks. Actress Cassandra Peterson has to this date ridden on that success. In 1988, her first film was released. Playing herself, she's stuck hosting monster movie shows but longs for her own show in Las Vegas and make big money. Her agent Manny proves a disappointment. It's not long before she inherits a mansion from a deceased relative, a pet dog and a book of recipes. She comes to claim her inheritance in a small Nevada town - she was on her way to Vegas and became lost - and soon stirs things up in the sedate community. Outspoken conservative town council woman Chastity Pariah (Edie McClurg) soon sees her as a threat to the decency and values of the small town. Her voluptuous figure and winning personality soon draws the youth of the town. She falls for Bob Redding (Daniel Greene) the town handyman/carpenter, but before any real relationship can bloom, she finds herself in deep trouble. Vincent Talbot (William Morgan Sheppard) an eerie older man who is also set to inherit part of the fortune of Elvira's relative is in fact an age-old sorcerer who has a personal vendetta against Elvira's aunt and Elvira herself. He is aware that the so-called "recipe book" is actually a book of powerful magic, a power he wishes to claim for himself. He schemes to bring down Elvira by having the town burn her at the stake. How will Elvira get out of this one ? The movie was no real success at the box office, drawing a crowd of mostly young audiences familiar with the Elvira show on cable. Truth be told, this is a funny and feel-good movie. The script is chalk full of all kinds of jokes, some bad, some good, lots of sexual innuendo, visual jokes and overall campiness i.e. the hilarious last scene in which Elvira has finally got her own strip show in Vegas. This film is a cult classic of sorts, catering to Elvira fans. You couldn't enjoy this film otherwise. It's also a look back at "pop" culture of the 80's. Elvira was as much an icon of the 80's as was Alf, Vicky the Robot, Hulk Hogan, Mr. T and Madonna. --------------------------------------------- Result 5236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am very surprised to see such a high rating for this film, and of the few reviews that there are to be positive. I saw the movie and was pretty dissapointed. I didn't find it very enjoyable at all. It was slow, and lacks the entertainment value. Even the murder scenes are lackluster, with real close-up shots of generic stabbings that don't look good at all. And the supposed great twist ending is really not much, I did see it coming, and then the ending just seemed cliche. This movie may not get much mention, but by the little that it does get, it is overrated. I would not recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] "The [[Running]] [[Jumping]] & Standing Still [[Film]]" is not a film as such, but it is a short series of clips with a comical slapstick theme. This 'film' got Richard Lester recognised and paved the way for him to direct the first Beatles [[film]]: 'A Hard Day's Night".

Richard Lester directed and wrote the music for his [[first]] [[film]] in 1959. This film was entitled The Running, Jumping, & Standing Still Film. It was intended to be viewed only by those who had aided in its production. Since the film was intended to be viewed by Lester and his partners alone, a small amount of money and time was invested. The sole purpose of this film is entertainment, but the main reason for its existence is the fact that it served as an experiment to work the camera. The film cost 70£ to make, and it was filmed in sepia-toned film stock in a field on a couple of Sundays. All of the shots that were filmed were included in the finished production; the finished production is eleven minutes in length.

The Running, Jumping, & Standing Still Film is a comedy about English Sundays and the small hobbies that people do to pass the time. All of the events in this film take place in a field. A few of these comical events include a woman scrubbing a lawn, a man running around a tree stump with a needle to play a record, a photographer developing film in a pond, an artist aided in painting by the numbers on a model's face, a man building a tent, an athlete running over the tent, and a duel between a man with a knife and a man with a gun. Not only does the film poke fun at the hobbies that people do to pass the time away, but it also pokes fun at English culture when compared to American culture. Another one of several events in this film includes a group of men and a kite, which has been constructed out of the flag of the United Kingdom. One of the men jumps inside the kite while the other men attempt to fly it, and the kite breaks. According to Neil Sinyard, author of The Films of Richard Lester, this event symbolizes the United Kingdom as lesser in power and technology when compared to the United States during the space age. According to this scene, the British fly primitive kites while the Americans, the world-power after World War II, fly highly-advanced rockets and space shuttles. "The [[Executes]] [[Salta]] & Standing Still [[Filmmaking]]" is not a film as such, but it is a short series of clips with a comical slapstick theme. This 'film' got Richard Lester recognised and paved the way for him to direct the first Beatles [[kino]]: 'A Hard Day's Night".

Richard Lester directed and wrote the music for his [[fiirst]] [[filmmaking]] in 1959. This film was entitled The Running, Jumping, & Standing Still Film. It was intended to be viewed only by those who had aided in its production. Since the film was intended to be viewed by Lester and his partners alone, a small amount of money and time was invested. The sole purpose of this film is entertainment, but the main reason for its existence is the fact that it served as an experiment to work the camera. The film cost 70£ to make, and it was filmed in sepia-toned film stock in a field on a couple of Sundays. All of the shots that were filmed were included in the finished production; the finished production is eleven minutes in length.

The Running, Jumping, & Standing Still Film is a comedy about English Sundays and the small hobbies that people do to pass the time. All of the events in this film take place in a field. A few of these comical events include a woman scrubbing a lawn, a man running around a tree stump with a needle to play a record, a photographer developing film in a pond, an artist aided in painting by the numbers on a model's face, a man building a tent, an athlete running over the tent, and a duel between a man with a knife and a man with a gun. Not only does the film poke fun at the hobbies that people do to pass the time away, but it also pokes fun at English culture when compared to American culture. Another one of several events in this film includes a group of men and a kite, which has been constructed out of the flag of the United Kingdom. One of the men jumps inside the kite while the other men attempt to fly it, and the kite breaks. According to Neil Sinyard, author of The Films of Richard Lester, this event symbolizes the United Kingdom as lesser in power and technology when compared to the United States during the space age. According to this scene, the British fly primitive kites while the Americans, the world-power after World War II, fly highly-advanced rockets and space shuttles. --------------------------------------------- Result 5238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Anyone who visited drive-ins in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, must have seen a film or two by American International Pictures, a distributor that resembled 1980s giant Cannon Films. Wherever movie-goers ventured, AIP would be right there to supply the latest en vogue titles - in the 50s came horror movies like 'Voodoo Woman' and 'The Undead;' in the 60s were Frankie Avalon-Annette Funicello beach comedies and biker flicks like 'The Glory Stompers;' and into the 70s, AIP churned out grindhouse-level trash like 'Cannibal Girls' and 'Sugar Hill.'

'Dillinger,' released in 1973, is one of the more 'highbrow' AIP [[efforts]] that capture the true spirit of drive-in film-making; it is one of those [[uneven]], over-the-top flicks that satisfied the masses' thirst for entertainment, craftsmanship and common [[sense]] be [[damned]]. On the whole, 'Dillinger' is typical for its era: entertaining and worth a [[couple]] of hours, but [[certainly]] not [[memorable]]. [[Heavy]] on action and short on both acting and historical fact, 'Dillinger' was a fair effort by screenwriter-director John Milius ('Magnum Force') but certainly left room for improvement in his extensive career.

The 109-minute 'Dillinger' - epic for AIP's scope - follows the quest of FBI Midwest chief Melvin Purvis, played by Academy Award winner Ben Johnson. Purvis was the investigator who sought [[revenge]] for four FBI agents [[killed]] in a 1933 Kansas City ambush that [[helped]] gangster Frank Nash to escape justice. [[At]] large were the [[men]] who [[supposedly]] [[plotted]] that breakout, including expert bankrobber John Dillinger (Warren Oates), Pretty Boy Floyd (Steve Kanaly), and psychopath Baby Face [[Nelson]] ([[Richard]] Dreyfuss). Dillinger eventually joined [[forces]] with Floyd and Nelson, taking along Homer Van Meter (Harry Dean Stanton) and Harry Pierpont ([[Geoffrey]] Lewis). He also hooked up with Billie Frechette (Michelle Phillips), a [[prostitute]] of French and Indian [[extraction]]. [[While]] taking place over [[several]] [[months]] in 1933-4, 'Dillinger' is [[basically]] a chase [[film]], with Purvis's entourage [[looking]] to [[run]] down and [[kill]] off the men wanted by J. Edgar Hoover.

'Dillinger' has a documentary feel, listing dates and places while Johnson supplies loose narrative as Purvis. Milius keeps an honest Depression look, using authentic fashion, cars, weapons, and buildings; he also sprinkles around black-and-white photography and stock footage of gangster shootouts. The film is never boring, moving at a quick, if haphazard, pace. The action scenes are Dillinger's strongpoint, edited competently by Fred Feitshans Jr in his last professional effort. Thousands of blank ammunition rounds must have been used to make this film, not to mention pounds of explosives. This film is certainly not for the squeamish, with people getting shot and dropping dead all over the place. The violence, while gratuitous, brings some understanding of the mayhem that organized crime dumped on American life.

This film never transcends its exploitation status, however, because the needed writing just isn't there. John Milius, somewhat overrated as a filmmaker, places way too much emphasis on action. The action scenes (mostly blood-filled shootouts) are impressive and comparable with any major crime film of its era, including 1967's 'Bonnie and Clyde.' But we simply don't get to know much about Dillinger and his gang members as people; the vital relationship that develops between Dillinger and Frechette is barely touched upon, with the pair meeting in a bar during one scene and cavorting as lovers just ten minutes afterward. Melvin Purvis also seems to wander in and out of the storyline, becoming a prominent figure only when Milius needs to keep the film from unraveling. All too often, the film takes on a shoot-'em-up persona when its characters could have been explored in detail.

Aside from this, the picture's main crime is ignorance of historical fact. While many say that 'Dillinger' is just a film, it's films such as this one that create fables and make them permanent. Those with knowledge of gangster history will point out that John Dillinger was not the last of his ring to die, as Milius's screenplay and the film's documentary style encourage us to believe. In fact, Dillinger died before Baby Face Nelson and Homer Van Meter; he also was said not to be carrying a gun on the night of his death, nor did he have Billie Frechette in tow. While these inaccuracies might make for high drama, there is no reason why Milius couldn't have stayed with the facts and written a great story around them.

Warren Oates's performance as Dillinger is quite good, although he sometimes looks unconvincing. Oates is humorous and nicely portrays how Dillinger became consumed by his larger-than-life image in the American press; however, we never really feel the menace he invoked in his lifetime. Ben Johnson gives some life to Purvis, suave but rather flat. Michelle Phillips brings emotion to the Billie Frechette character and it's really too bad that Milius's screenplay didn't flesh out her relationship with Dillinger. We never learn what drew her to a cold-blooded killer, other than the stereotype of an easy-going girl who is attracted to men of danger. The supporting roles with Kanaly, Dreyfuss, Stanton, Lewis, and a briefly-appearing Cloris Leachman, are acceptable for such talent.

As a piece of 1970s exploitation, 'Dillinger' appears doomed to retail bargain bins, which is exactly where I picked up MGM's DVD release for $4.99. The film is nicely presented in widescreen (a must for drive-in flicks) with subtitles in French and Spanish. Dillinger's theatrical trailer is supplied as a lone extra. Largely forgotten except by gangster movie fans and drive-in enthusiasts, the film doesn't really call for much else in way of supplementary material. For fans of the genre, it's certainly worth checking out.

** out of 4

Roving Reviewer - www.geocities.com/paul_johnr Anyone who visited drive-ins in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, must have seen a film or two by American International Pictures, a distributor that resembled 1980s giant Cannon Films. Wherever movie-goers ventured, AIP would be right there to supply the latest en vogue titles - in the 50s came horror movies like 'Voodoo Woman' and 'The Undead;' in the 60s were Frankie Avalon-Annette Funicello beach comedies and biker flicks like 'The Glory Stompers;' and into the 70s, AIP churned out grindhouse-level trash like 'Cannibal Girls' and 'Sugar Hill.'

'Dillinger,' released in 1973, is one of the more 'highbrow' AIP [[action]] that capture the true spirit of drive-in film-making; it is one of those [[lopsided]], over-the-top flicks that satisfied the masses' thirst for entertainment, craftsmanship and common [[feeling]] be [[damn]]. On the whole, 'Dillinger' is typical for its era: entertaining and worth a [[matches]] of hours, but [[probably]] not [[unforgettable]]. [[Ponderous]] on action and short on both acting and historical fact, 'Dillinger' was a fair effort by screenwriter-director John Milius ('Magnum Force') but certainly left room for improvement in his extensive career.

The 109-minute 'Dillinger' - epic for AIP's scope - follows the quest of FBI Midwest chief Melvin Purvis, played by Academy Award winner Ben Johnson. Purvis was the investigator who sought [[retaliation]] for four FBI agents [[die]] in a 1933 Kansas City ambush that [[aiding]] gangster Frank Nash to escape justice. [[In]] large were the [[man]] who [[seemingly]] [[masterminded]] that breakout, including expert bankrobber John Dillinger (Warren Oates), Pretty Boy Floyd (Steve Kanaly), and psychopath Baby Face [[Nielsen]] ([[Ritchie]] Dreyfuss). Dillinger eventually joined [[troop]] with Floyd and Nelson, taking along Homer Van Meter (Harry Dean Stanton) and Harry Pierpont ([[Jeff]] Lewis). He also hooked up with Billie Frechette (Michelle Phillips), a [[hussy]] of French and Indian [[extract]]. [[Despite]] taking place over [[multiple]] [[mois]] in 1933-4, 'Dillinger' is [[principally]] a chase [[cinematographic]], with Purvis's entourage [[researching]] to [[running]] down and [[mata]] off the men wanted by J. Edgar Hoover.

'Dillinger' has a documentary feel, listing dates and places while Johnson supplies loose narrative as Purvis. Milius keeps an honest Depression look, using authentic fashion, cars, weapons, and buildings; he also sprinkles around black-and-white photography and stock footage of gangster shootouts. The film is never boring, moving at a quick, if haphazard, pace. The action scenes are Dillinger's strongpoint, edited competently by Fred Feitshans Jr in his last professional effort. Thousands of blank ammunition rounds must have been used to make this film, not to mention pounds of explosives. This film is certainly not for the squeamish, with people getting shot and dropping dead all over the place. The violence, while gratuitous, brings some understanding of the mayhem that organized crime dumped on American life.

This film never transcends its exploitation status, however, because the needed writing just isn't there. John Milius, somewhat overrated as a filmmaker, places way too much emphasis on action. The action scenes (mostly blood-filled shootouts) are impressive and comparable with any major crime film of its era, including 1967's 'Bonnie and Clyde.' But we simply don't get to know much about Dillinger and his gang members as people; the vital relationship that develops between Dillinger and Frechette is barely touched upon, with the pair meeting in a bar during one scene and cavorting as lovers just ten minutes afterward. Melvin Purvis also seems to wander in and out of the storyline, becoming a prominent figure only when Milius needs to keep the film from unraveling. All too often, the film takes on a shoot-'em-up persona when its characters could have been explored in detail.

Aside from this, the picture's main crime is ignorance of historical fact. While many say that 'Dillinger' is just a film, it's films such as this one that create fables and make them permanent. Those with knowledge of gangster history will point out that John Dillinger was not the last of his ring to die, as Milius's screenplay and the film's documentary style encourage us to believe. In fact, Dillinger died before Baby Face Nelson and Homer Van Meter; he also was said not to be carrying a gun on the night of his death, nor did he have Billie Frechette in tow. While these inaccuracies might make for high drama, there is no reason why Milius couldn't have stayed with the facts and written a great story around them.

Warren Oates's performance as Dillinger is quite good, although he sometimes looks unconvincing. Oates is humorous and nicely portrays how Dillinger became consumed by his larger-than-life image in the American press; however, we never really feel the menace he invoked in his lifetime. Ben Johnson gives some life to Purvis, suave but rather flat. Michelle Phillips brings emotion to the Billie Frechette character and it's really too bad that Milius's screenplay didn't flesh out her relationship with Dillinger. We never learn what drew her to a cold-blooded killer, other than the stereotype of an easy-going girl who is attracted to men of danger. The supporting roles with Kanaly, Dreyfuss, Stanton, Lewis, and a briefly-appearing Cloris Leachman, are acceptable for such talent.

As a piece of 1970s exploitation, 'Dillinger' appears doomed to retail bargain bins, which is exactly where I picked up MGM's DVD release for $4.99. The film is nicely presented in widescreen (a must for drive-in flicks) with subtitles in French and Spanish. Dillinger's theatrical trailer is supplied as a lone extra. Largely forgotten except by gangster movie fans and drive-in enthusiasts, the film doesn't really call for much else in way of supplementary material. For fans of the genre, it's certainly worth checking out.

** out of 4

Roving Reviewer - www.geocities.com/paul_johnr --------------------------------------------- Result 5239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] As others have [[noted]], this should have been an [[excellent]] Hammer-style [[film]], and it [[seems]] to me that that's how most of the actors were instructed to play it... but the screenplay is so leaden, poorly paced, and filled with a lot of dull soliloquies (poor Timothy Dalton is [[saddled]] with most of them) that it's all too [[overblown]] and self-important. This is an uncharacteristically [[weak]] performance from Dalton, although he quietly nails the climactic scene where [[Dr]]. [[Rock]] finally [[realizes]] what he's [[done]]. The only actor who [[comes]] off really well is Patrick Stewart who is a most welcome [[sight]]. Freddie Francis may have been a [[great]] [[cinematographer]], but he was a [[lousy]] [[director]]. As others have [[observed]], this should have been an [[sumptuous]] Hammer-style [[filmmaking]], and it [[looks]] to me that that's how most of the actors were instructed to play it... but the screenplay is so leaden, poorly paced, and filled with a lot of dull soliloquies (poor Timothy Dalton is [[burdened]] with most of them) that it's all too [[exaggerating]] and self-important. This is an uncharacteristically [[feeble]] performance from Dalton, although he quietly nails the climactic scene where [[Doktor]]. [[Rocks]] finally [[understands]] what he's [[accomplished]]. The only actor who [[happens]] off really well is Patrick Stewart who is a most welcome [[vision]]. Freddie Francis may have been a [[prodigious]] [[cameraman]], but he was a [[rotten]] [[headmaster]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie should be number one on the bottom 100. The acting is so horrible that when my son and I watched it we nearly got physically ill. And the story is worse. I could go on and on about how bad it is but all I really wanted to do was add a warning to frankbob's review as I see no one else has gone to the trouble of doing so yet. Don't waste your time, money, energy or anything else on this movie. Thank goodness we saw it on TV so we didn't spend anything on it. Had we, I would have been forced to write the people responsible for this abomination and be forced to hurl an execration in their general direction. In conclusion, I would like to say that I have always enjoyed watching Carrie Fisher act. But I am sad to say that she is not worth watching in this particular film. Don't spoil your opinion of Carrie by viewing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Allison Dean's performance is what stands out in my mind watching this film. She balances out the melancholy tone of the film with an iridescent energy. I would like to see more of her. --------------------------------------------- Result 5242 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] No one goes to a [[movie]] like The [[Hills]] [[Have]] Eyes 2 and expects the second coming of Citizen Kane. The same is [[true]] for the majority of low-rent horror flicks, especially those [[Roger]] Ebert has dubbed "Dead [[Teenager]] Movies." The [[Hills]] [[Have]] Eyes 2 definitely qualifies as a Dead Teenager Movie, only here, the teenagers have been given the superficial appearance of military [[trainees]].

Some will argue the line "it's only a movie" when questionable facts are raised in a movie review, but I've always been a firm believer that all good fantasy must be rooted in reality in order to be effective. In the Hills Have Eyes 2, we're to believe the main characters are military people on a training exercise, but they look and talk like high school kids camping in the desert. The dialog is awful and frequently vulgar to excess. Though the films aren't nearly comparable, I kept imagining these "soldiers" being in Platoon, and shuddering with dread.

Very little about the characters [[evokes]] a soldier other than rifles and fatigues: radio transmissions are carried out like teenage phone conversations; a Colonel is addresses as "hey, asshole" by a Private. And nobody seems to have the slightest idea what to do, or any sense of command structure, when things begin to go wrong. I think of the soldiers in James Cameron's Aliens, a film of pure fantasy, and how even those futuristic Marines behaved like real soldiers despite their fantastic situations. Fantasy rooted in reality.

I try to begin watching a movie as a 5 on a scale of 10, and judge it's strengths and weaknesses from there. You have to allow concessions for the material; there's no way Star Wars is as good of a movie as The [[Godfather]], on equal terms. But both are excellent examples of their type.

In that respect, while the Hills Have Eyes 2 is a pretty [[dreadful]] exercise in amateur and immature [[writing]], it's only modestly worse in that regard than the typical Dead Teenager Movie. On a technical side, the movie [[appears]] to have decent production values and is pretty well made from that perspective. Scenes that are intended to shock, or which are intended to evoke urgency or suspense generally work. So, while watching The Hills Have Eyes 2 may indeed be a fate worse than death, there are certainly far worse horror flicks in circulation.

It's worth a watch for those who enjoy this type of stuff without the usual fanboy baggage, or those who don't tend towards thinking every movie they see is either the Best Ever or the Worst Ever of all time. If you don't "get" horror, especially the Dead Teenager variety, you're not likely to have a good time with this one.

4/10 No one goes to a [[filmmaking]] like The [[Collines]] [[Ha]] Eyes 2 and expects the second coming of Citizen Kane. The same is [[veritable]] for the majority of low-rent horror flicks, especially those [[Roget]] Ebert has dubbed "Dead [[Schoolgirl]] Movies." The [[Slopes]] [[Ha]] Eyes 2 definitely qualifies as a Dead Teenager Movie, only here, the teenagers have been given the superficial appearance of military [[cadets]].

Some will argue the line "it's only a movie" when questionable facts are raised in a movie review, but I've always been a firm believer that all good fantasy must be rooted in reality in order to be effective. In the Hills Have Eyes 2, we're to believe the main characters are military people on a training exercise, but they look and talk like high school kids camping in the desert. The dialog is awful and frequently vulgar to excess. Though the films aren't nearly comparable, I kept imagining these "soldiers" being in Platoon, and shuddering with dread.

Very little about the characters [[puts]] a soldier other than rifles and fatigues: radio transmissions are carried out like teenage phone conversations; a Colonel is addresses as "hey, asshole" by a Private. And nobody seems to have the slightest idea what to do, or any sense of command structure, when things begin to go wrong. I think of the soldiers in James Cameron's Aliens, a film of pure fantasy, and how even those futuristic Marines behaved like real soldiers despite their fantastic situations. Fantasy rooted in reality.

I try to begin watching a movie as a 5 on a scale of 10, and judge it's strengths and weaknesses from there. You have to allow concessions for the material; there's no way Star Wars is as good of a movie as The [[Nominating]], on equal terms. But both are excellent examples of their type.

In that respect, while the Hills Have Eyes 2 is a pretty [[scary]] exercise in amateur and immature [[handwriting]], it's only modestly worse in that regard than the typical Dead Teenager Movie. On a technical side, the movie [[emerges]] to have decent production values and is pretty well made from that perspective. Scenes that are intended to shock, or which are intended to evoke urgency or suspense generally work. So, while watching The Hills Have Eyes 2 may indeed be a fate worse than death, there are certainly far worse horror flicks in circulation.

It's worth a watch for those who enjoy this type of stuff without the usual fanboy baggage, or those who don't tend towards thinking every movie they see is either the Best Ever or the Worst Ever of all time. If you don't "get" horror, especially the Dead Teenager variety, you're not likely to have a good time with this one.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Barbra Streisand's first television special was simply fantastic! From her skit as a child to her medley of songs in a high-fashion department store -- everything was top-notch! It was easy to understand how this special received awards.

Not muddled down by guest appearances, the focus remained on Barbra thoughout the entire production. --------------------------------------------- Result 5244 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] A [[wonderful]] film, [[filled]] with [[great]] understated performance and [[sharp]], [[intelligent]] dialogue. What really [[distinguishes]] the film, however, is that undercurrent of sadness throughout. The story is underscored by affairs, loneliness, suicide, disappointment, the fear of losing ones job in a world where that had disastrous consequences. Most of all it was set in a world that no longer existed, having been ripped apart by the beginning of World War II. In fact, the film is barely a comedy at all if you compare the percentage of serious scenes to the comic scenes. [[Yet]] funny it is--listen to Margaret Sullivan's harsh dismissal of Jimmy Stewart and watch his pained expression as he replies that her comments were a remarkable blend "of poetry and meanness". It's funny, pointed, and sad all at once. A remarkable achievement and one of the ten greatest screen comedies ever made. A [[wondrous]] film, [[filling]] with [[huge]] understated performance and [[steep]], [[termite]] dialogue. What really [[distinguishing]] the film, however, is that undercurrent of sadness throughout. The story is underscored by affairs, loneliness, suicide, disappointment, the fear of losing ones job in a world where that had disastrous consequences. Most of all it was set in a world that no longer existed, having been ripped apart by the beginning of World War II. In fact, the film is barely a comedy at all if you compare the percentage of serious scenes to the comic scenes. [[Even]] funny it is--listen to Margaret Sullivan's harsh dismissal of Jimmy Stewart and watch his pained expression as he replies that her comments were a remarkable blend "of poetry and meanness". It's funny, pointed, and sad all at once. A remarkable achievement and one of the ten greatest screen comedies ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 5245 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (78%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] First of all, I think the below [[comment]] is unworthy for a [[site]] like this. Obviously you have no taste and you don't respect the taste of others. Not to give you a history lesson but I think it needs to be done. Black actors out there are just, if not more, successful as others. If you are not a part of the "Black" race you cannot understand the quality, creativeness, and vibrant of old movies such as "Sparkle" and "Mahogany" and "Cooley High." Since unfortunately you are not Black, you do not have the pleasure of feeling what we feel when we watch these classics, so therefore you need to keep your freaking mouth shut and just stick to your non-dancing race. Thanks. First of all, I think the below [[commentary]] is unworthy for a [[locations]] like this. Obviously you have no taste and you don't respect the taste of others. Not to give you a history lesson but I think it needs to be done. Black actors out there are just, if not more, successful as others. If you are not a part of the "Black" race you cannot understand the quality, creativeness, and vibrant of old movies such as "Sparkle" and "Mahogany" and "Cooley High." Since unfortunately you are not Black, you do not have the pleasure of feeling what we feel when we watch these classics, so therefore you need to keep your freaking mouth shut and just stick to your non-dancing race. Thanks. --------------------------------------------- Result 5246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I now that these days, some people wan't see a movie without movie styling, so much Dogma, Lars Von, Watchosky Brothers, are changed what we expect in a movie, perhaps, Casomai is no-one-more-Independent-non-american movie, the movie take all movies resources and language to tell us a simple history about love and marriage, but [[much]] more .. [[Fully]] of [[views]], [[lectures]] and [[let]] you thinking ... and I'm sure, you can't [[fell]] boried any second of a long 116 minutes. I calculate that don't have a [[single]] scene longer that 3 o 2 1/2 [[minutes]]. I now that these days, some people wan't see a movie without movie styling, so much Dogma, Lars Von, Watchosky Brothers, are changed what we expect in a movie, perhaps, Casomai is no-one-more-Independent-non-american movie, the movie take all movies resources and language to tell us a simple history about love and marriage, but [[very]] more .. [[Entirely]] of [[opinions]], [[conferences]] and [[leave]] you thinking ... and I'm sure, you can't [[decreased]] boried any second of a long 116 minutes. I calculate that don't have a [[sole]] scene longer that 3 o 2 1/2 [[mins]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] [[Admittedly]], I know [[nothing]] about baseball, I'm not even a [[fan]] of the [[sport]], but that didn't [[stop]] me [[enjoying]] the Farrelly brothers' latest film, Fever Pitch, a charmingly irreverent romantic comedy. The [[film]] is not really about baseball; [[rather]], it's really about [[relationships]], and the emotional disconnectedness that can [[often]] take place.

[[Jimmy]] [[Fallen]] – giving his [[best]] performance to [[date]] – [[stars]] as [[Ben]], a dorky, [[lightly]] nerdy schoolteacher. Ben is a [[kind]] of man-boy, who [[unfortunately]] has never really [[grown]] up, and he fosters an [[almost]] fanatical [[addiction]] to the Red [[Sox]] baseball team. Ben has [[devoted]] his [[life]] to the [[Sox]], and does everything from making the [[pilgrimage]] to [[Florida]] for spring training to decorating [[every]] [[square]] inch of his apartment in team [[paraphernalia]].

One day, while taking his [[honors]] [[geometry]] [[class]] to on a field trip to her office, Ben meets the go-getting Lindsey (a [[wonderful]] Drew Barrymore). [[Lindsey]] is a corporate, career orientated kind of girl, but she has a kind of cuteness that Ben [[finds]] [[totally]] endearing. He's initially hesitant to [[ask]] her out, thinking that she's [[way]] out of his "[[class]]," and, Lindsey doesn't [[immediately]] [[see]] a [[potential]] [[partner]] in [[Ben]].

Their first [[date]] gets off to a [[disastrous]] [[start]] when Lindsey is stricken with a [[severe]] [[case]] of [[food]] [[poisoning]] — and her resonant retching [[provides]] the first clue that we are, in fact, [[watching]] a Farrelly brothers [[movie]]. [[Rather]] than [[accept]] Lindsey's - [[rather]] urgent - [[request]] to reschedule, [[Ben]] sticks [[around]] to play [[nurse]], orderly, and [[janitor]]. So Ben [[scrubs]] the [[toilet]] and the dog's teeth, while his love interest is passed out with a bucket next to her bed.

When Lindsey wakes up in the morning and [[finds]] him asleep on her couch, she [[begins]] the long, fitful process of [[dismantling]] the [[web]] of status [[anxiety]] and [[ambition]] she has [[come]] to [[think]] of as her [[standards]]. [[Soon]] they are [[falling]] in [[love]], with Lindsey blithely accepting Ben's fanatical [[devotion]] to his [[sport]].

Having inherited [[choice]] season [[tickets]] from his [[beloved]] uncle, [[Ben]] has [[organized]] his life around the season — he's never missed a game. But their relationship, which has progressed without a hitch [[throughout]] the winter, hits a snag at the [[start]] of the season.

Lindsey [[wants]] Ben to do other things, like holiday with her parents and party with her friends, but Ben begins to have trouble modulating his interest to meet Lindsey halfway. Can Lindsey consent to his irrational devotion to the boys of summer in order to make their relationship work? Can she really accommodate Ben's infatuation with sports? Can a die-hard and nerdy Red Sox fan find true love after all? Of course, Lindsey and Ben come with a colorful assortment of opinion-wielding friends. Lindsey's strictest buddy, the skinny, rich and blond Robin (KaDee Strickland), insists that there must be something wrong with the guy if he's still [[single]] at 30. However, plump, curly-haired Sarah (Marissa Jaret Winokur) and Molly (Ione Skye) supply a more optimistic and positive [[view]] of Ben.

Ben's eccentricity could be applied to virtually any obsessive sports fan, while Lindsay's frustrations could be representative of any upwardly mobile career driven woman. Fallon is terrific as Ben, exhibiting real big screen potential, overcoming the not-insignificant challenge of keeping Ben from being unsympathetic. Barrymore, meanwhile, is equally charming as the workaholic Lindsey, particularly as she struggles to accept Ben for who he is without losing sight of her own needs.

Fever Pitch really works, and even though there are lots of inspired comedic moments, the movie is also addressing the serious problem of sports addiction and how difficult it can be for couples to negotiate this fragile territory.

Much of the movie was filmed at Boston's Fenway Park, which adds a fine sense of authenticity to the proceedings, as well as the ambiance of the games, though fully appreciating what transpired with the team will probably be limited to baseball aficionados. Even so, Fever Pitch is blessed with such a finely wrought and intelligently funny script that even novice baseball fans will find much with which to connect. Mike Leonard September 05. [[Undeniably]], I know [[anything]] about baseball, I'm not even a [[admirer]] of the [[sports]], but that didn't [[halt]] me [[experience]] the Farrelly brothers' latest film, Fever Pitch, a charmingly irreverent romantic comedy. The [[cinematography]] is not really about baseball; [[somewhat]], it's really about [[relationship]], and the emotional disconnectedness that can [[usually]] take place.

[[Jimbo]] [[Shrank]] – giving his [[better]] performance to [[dates]] – [[star]] as [[Benn]], a dorky, [[casually]] nerdy schoolteacher. Ben is a [[types]] of man-boy, who [[sadly]] has never really [[grew]] up, and he fosters an [[practically]] fanatical [[dependence]] to the Red [[Astros]] baseball team. Ben has [[dedicated]] his [[living]] to the [[Astros]], and does everything from making the [[pilgrims]] to [[Fl]] for spring training to decorating [[any]] [[squares]] inch of his apartment in team [[utensils]].

One day, while taking his [[honor]] [[keystone]] [[classroom]] to on a field trip to her office, Ben meets the go-getting Lindsey (a [[handsome]] Drew Barrymore). [[Lindsay]] is a corporate, career orientated kind of girl, but she has a kind of cuteness that Ben [[find]] [[completely]] endearing. He's initially hesitant to [[asking]] her out, thinking that she's [[manner]] out of his "[[kinds]]," and, Lindsey doesn't [[expeditiously]] [[behold]] a [[prospective]] [[partners]] in [[Benn]].

Their first [[dates]] gets off to a [[calamitous]] [[launch]] when Lindsey is stricken with a [[serious]] [[examples]] of [[meal]] [[toxin]] — and her resonant retching [[offers]] the first clue that we are, in fact, [[staring]] a Farrelly brothers [[movies]]. [[Fairly]] than [[agreeing]] Lindsey's - [[somewhat]] urgent - [[demands]] to reschedule, [[Bin]] sticks [[about]] to play [[infirmary]], orderly, and [[gatekeeper]]. So Ben [[blouses]] the [[wc]] and the dog's teeth, while his love interest is passed out with a bucket next to her bed.

When Lindsey wakes up in the morning and [[find]] him asleep on her couch, she [[starts]] the long, fitful process of [[dissolving]] the [[internet]] of status [[concern]] and [[intention]] she has [[coming]] to [[thinking]] of as her [[norms]]. [[Quickly]] they are [[decreasing]] in [[iike]], with Lindsey blithely accepting Ben's fanatical [[allegiance]] to his [[sports]].

Having inherited [[choices]] season [[ticket]] from his [[dear]] uncle, [[Benn]] has [[organizing]] his life around the season — he's never missed a game. But their relationship, which has progressed without a hitch [[across]] the winter, hits a snag at the [[begin]] of the season.

Lindsey [[desires]] Ben to do other things, like holiday with her parents and party with her friends, but Ben begins to have trouble modulating his interest to meet Lindsey halfway. Can Lindsey consent to his irrational devotion to the boys of summer in order to make their relationship work? Can she really accommodate Ben's infatuation with sports? Can a die-hard and nerdy Red Sox fan find true love after all? Of course, Lindsey and Ben come with a colorful assortment of opinion-wielding friends. Lindsey's strictest buddy, the skinny, rich and blond Robin (KaDee Strickland), insists that there must be something wrong with the guy if he's still [[exclusive]] at 30. However, plump, curly-haired Sarah (Marissa Jaret Winokur) and Molly (Ione Skye) supply a more optimistic and positive [[avis]] of Ben.

Ben's eccentricity could be applied to virtually any obsessive sports fan, while Lindsay's frustrations could be representative of any upwardly mobile career driven woman. Fallon is terrific as Ben, exhibiting real big screen potential, overcoming the not-insignificant challenge of keeping Ben from being unsympathetic. Barrymore, meanwhile, is equally charming as the workaholic Lindsey, particularly as she struggles to accept Ben for who he is without losing sight of her own needs.

Fever Pitch really works, and even though there are lots of inspired comedic moments, the movie is also addressing the serious problem of sports addiction and how difficult it can be for couples to negotiate this fragile territory.

Much of the movie was filmed at Boston's Fenway Park, which adds a fine sense of authenticity to the proceedings, as well as the ambiance of the games, though fully appreciating what transpired with the team will probably be limited to baseball aficionados. Even so, Fever Pitch is blessed with such a finely wrought and intelligently funny script that even novice baseball fans will find much with which to connect. Mike Leonard September 05. --------------------------------------------- Result 5248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] this movie is [[made]] for Asian/Chinese market, [[targeting]] particularly fans of Jay Chou, one of the biggest music star in Asian.

Jay Chou is a very talented song writer/singer. He is mediocre as an actor, although he did appear in several big-budget productions ("initial D", "Curse of the Golden Flower "). Amazingly, he won both golden horse (taiwan) and Hong Kong film awards for "initial D".

The supporting cast are very well chosen, which appeals basically everyone from China. The cast including many famous movie/TV actors, singers, even sport commentator (Huang Jianxiang from China). However, they were not given enough time to show their talents.

The biggest [[mistake]] is that Chu took over both director and writer position. He has a reputation of making shallow and brainless movies based off non-coherent scripts. With his poor directing and lam story, the whole talented cast, fancy vision effects and tones of production money was wasted.

However, the [[terrible]] [[movie]] successfully cashed in over 10 million dollars, maybe even more in Asian, which made this one of the biggest box office success in Asian.

The bottom line is: you can watch this movie only if you want to see how money and talents are wasted, or if you are simply accompanying your kids who are fans of Jay Chou. this movie is [[effected]] for Asian/Chinese market, [[purpose]] particularly fans of Jay Chou, one of the biggest music star in Asian.

Jay Chou is a very talented song writer/singer. He is mediocre as an actor, although he did appear in several big-budget productions ("initial D", "Curse of the Golden Flower "). Amazingly, he won both golden horse (taiwan) and Hong Kong film awards for "initial D".

The supporting cast are very well chosen, which appeals basically everyone from China. The cast including many famous movie/TV actors, singers, even sport commentator (Huang Jianxiang from China). However, they were not given enough time to show their talents.

The biggest [[mistaken]] is that Chu took over both director and writer position. He has a reputation of making shallow and brainless movies based off non-coherent scripts. With his poor directing and lam story, the whole talented cast, fancy vision effects and tones of production money was wasted.

However, the [[abysmal]] [[filmmaking]] successfully cashed in over 10 million dollars, maybe even more in Asian, which made this one of the biggest box office success in Asian.

The bottom line is: you can watch this movie only if you want to see how money and talents are wasted, or if you are simply accompanying your kids who are fans of Jay Chou. --------------------------------------------- Result 5249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw this [[movie]] at the 2006 [[Palm]] [[Springs]] [[International]] [[Film]] [[Festival]] and it is a [[movie]] and not a film since it apparently was [[shot]] by HBO to be [[shown]] on their cable [[network]] sometime this year. This movie presents [[Page]] as a bondage and discipline fetish pinup and B&D stag film actress who had [[enough]] talent to [[become]] a [[real]] actress. Page was a little more than that and the [[film]] touches on some of her other roles in modeling but not enough to balance out the career of the 50's pinup [[icon]]. This film is supposedly based on the book "The [[Real]] Bettie Page" by [[Richard]] [[Foster]]. It's shot in black and white for that 1950's nostalgia feel. I have the book called "Bettie Page The [[Life]] of a Pinup Legend" that has a [[lot]] of [[great]] photos chronicling the [[career]] of [[Page]] and I [[must]] [[say]] that this [[movie]] reproduces on [[film]], with Gretchen Mol as [[Page]], many of those [[famous]] photo's very accurately. Mol herself with the Bettie [[Page]] black wig and brown contact lenses is Bettie [[Page]]. Not only does she have the Bettie [[Page]] [[look]] but she has the [[smile]] and [[characteristics]] of her personality that [[came]] through the [[camera]] down [[perfect]]. And her [[body]] is as [[close]] to a replica of Page's as [[possible]]. [[Terrific]] [[casting]]. The [[story]] is kind of thin and tabloidesque and certainly could have been a lot better. But this is a [[pretty]] good TV movie. I would rate it a 7.0 of a [[scale]] of 10 and recommend it's viewing when it comes on TV. I saw this [[movies]] at the 2006 [[Palma]] [[Fountains]] [[Internationally]] [[Movie]] [[Celebratory]] and it is a [[cinematography]] and not a film since it apparently was [[filmed]] by HBO to be [[illustrated]] on their cable [[networks]] sometime this year. This movie presents [[Pages]] as a bondage and discipline fetish pinup and B&D stag film actress who had [[adequate]] talent to [[gotten]] a [[actual]] actress. Page was a little more than that and the [[kino]] touches on some of her other roles in modeling but not enough to balance out the career of the 50's pinup [[icons]]. This film is supposedly based on the book "The [[Authentic]] Bettie Page" by [[Richards]] [[Promoting]]. It's shot in black and white for that 1950's nostalgia feel. I have the book called "Bettie Page The [[Vie]] of a Pinup Legend" that has a [[lots]] of [[excellent]] photos chronicling the [[quarries]] of [[Newsweek]] and I [[should]] [[told]] that this [[films]] reproduces on [[cinematography]], with Gretchen Mol as [[Pages]], many of those [[celebrated]] photo's very accurately. Mol herself with the Bettie [[Newsweek]] black wig and brown contact lenses is Bettie [[Newsweek]]. Not only does she have the Bettie [[Newsweek]] [[peek]] but she has the [[mouse]] and [[specifications]] of her personality that [[arrived]] through the [[cameras]] down [[perfection]]. And her [[agency]] is as [[near]] to a replica of Page's as [[feasible]]. [[Magnifique]] [[cast]]. The [[storytelling]] is kind of thin and tabloidesque and certainly could have been a lot better. But this is a [[belle]] good TV movie. I would rate it a 7.0 of a [[scales]] of 10 and recommend it's viewing when it comes on TV. --------------------------------------------- Result 5250 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] OK, I have [[watched]] the [[original]] French version. But I can't imagine this being better with [[subtitles]].

[[All]] I have to [[say]] that this is the most boring movie I have seen in a [[long]] time. There are almost no [[redeeming]] qualities to this [[film]]. That's why I can't understand all the positive reviews. It might be realistic in a sense but some [[real]] [[stories]] are [[best]] left untold.

I [[usually]] like [[slow]] paced [[movies]] as [[long]] as it [[serves]] the [[purpose]] of the movie. Tarkovsky's Solaris is [[extremely]] slow paced but it [[allows]] introspection and sets the [[mood]] of the film for [[example]]. But in this [[case]], the [[movie]] is just filed with [[mindless]] dialog that manage to tell us [[little]] about the [[characters]]. [[None]] of which I [[could]] [[identify]] with or care for. In a lot of the scenes I [[found]] myself [[thinking]]: "When are they [[going]] to [[shut]] up"? The acting was [[pretty]] [[bad]]. Not in an overacting [[obvious]] [[kind]] of way. But It [[seems]] [[none]] of the actors [[cared]] about their characters and they all [[looked]] like they wanted to be [[elsewhere]] in most of the scenes. This might be due to the uninspired dialog they were [[given]]. Also the [[whole]] [[flow]] of the [[movie]] [[felt]] [[quite]] [[mechanical]]. Going from one scene to the next. It [[seems]] this [[movie]] was just written ([[badly]]) but never directed.

This is one of the few [[films]] that I can [[say]] generated no [[emotional]] [[response]] from any of the scenes. [[No]] suspense, no fear, no [[anticipation]], no [[sorrow]], no introspection, no intellectual [[stimulation]], no interest what so ever.

A [[perfect]] [[example]] of what I call an anti-movie. OK, I have [[observed]] the [[preliminary]] French version. But I can't imagine this being better with [[captions]].

[[Every]] I have to [[says]] that this is the most boring movie I have seen in a [[lang]] time. There are almost no [[redeem]] qualities to this [[films]]. That's why I can't understand all the positive reviews. It might be realistic in a sense but some [[veritable]] [[story]] are [[optimum]] left untold.

I [[generally]] like [[slower]] paced [[film]] as [[lang]] as it [[contributes]] the [[objective]] of the movie. Tarkovsky's Solaris is [[greatly]] slow paced but it [[enabling]] introspection and sets the [[humour]] of the film for [[examples]]. But in this [[example]], the [[flick]] is just filed with [[irrational]] dialog that manage to tell us [[small]] about the [[character]]. [[Nos]] of which I [[did]] [[identifies]] with or care for. In a lot of the scenes I [[detected]] myself [[thought]]: "When are they [[go]] to [[closed]] up"? The acting was [[belle]] [[unfavourable]]. Not in an overacting [[palpable]] [[sort]] of way. But It [[looks]] [[nothingness]] of the actors [[adored]] about their characters and they all [[seemed]] like they wanted to be [[else]] in most of the scenes. This might be due to the uninspired dialog they were [[awarded]]. Also the [[overall]] [[flows]] of the [[filmmaking]] [[smelled]] [[rather]] [[mechanistic]]. Going from one scene to the next. It [[appears]] this [[filmmaking]] was just written ([[desperately]]) but never directed.

This is one of the few [[film]] that I can [[tell]] generated no [[sentimental]] [[riposte]] from any of the scenes. [[Nos]] suspense, no fear, no [[expectation]], no [[heartbreak]], no introspection, no intellectual [[incentive]], no interest what so ever.

A [[impeccable]] [[examples]] of what I call an anti-movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film is an hour or so of good entertainment and has some [[genuinely]] [[funny]] moments. I [[loved]] the character of Matt, and also Tiny. They seemed the most engaging and [[funny]] [[characters]], and [[certainly]] the most interesting. Matt is very good (as is his no good cousin), and the police woman and the blonde biker woman provide some welcome eye candy. I [[must]] say I [[saw]] striking similarities between Matt and another [[Aussie]] actor, Eric Bana. My personal favourite [[part]] was the brothel scene, [[loved]] that. Overall, I [[liked]] the [[film]] and it'll [[get]] about an 8 [[rating]]. The [[penalty]] however, I was [[disappointed]] in. It was a side foot curl, rather than the appropriate laces blast.

I am of course kidding. :) This film is an hour or so of good entertainment and has some [[actually]] [[comical]] moments. I [[enjoyed]] the character of Matt, and also Tiny. They seemed the most engaging and [[humorous]] [[characteristics]], and [[probably]] the most interesting. Matt is very good (as is his no good cousin), and the police woman and the blonde biker woman provide some welcome eye candy. I [[ought]] say I [[witnessed]] striking similarities between Matt and another [[Australians]] actor, Eric Bana. My personal favourite [[parties]] was the brothel scene, [[cared]] that. Overall, I [[enjoyed]] the [[cinematography]] and it'll [[obtain]] about an 8 [[valuation]]. The [[sanctions]] however, I was [[disillusioned]] in. It was a side foot curl, rather than the appropriate laces blast.

I am of course kidding. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had heard (and read) so many good things about Weeds that I was looking forward to getting hooked on another great cable Series (like Entourage, Sopranos or Mad Men) but that slowly eroded away with each episode I watched from Season One. (didn't make it past the first six episodes)

The writing was unoriginal, contrived and the portrayal of Blacks embarrassing. The dialog felt forced, like the writers are trying way too hard to be clever and hip . It was a rare moment when I actually emitted an audible laugh.

The characters never developed enough for me to care about them, they were selfish and unappealing. I absolutely HATED the addition of the Brother-in-law (who should have been hauled away on To Catch A Predator) and the removal of the Hodes' daughter Quinn from the cast by sending her to boarding school in Mexico was so unoriginal and cliché, I had to conclude the writers were testing the viewer's loyalty.

Episode after episode I liked the characters less and couldn't get past many of the technical flaws in the story line.

Add to that I heard that Season Two wasn't as good, so I lost all motivation to continue to watch this play out.

If you're a fan of good casting and writing, I suspect this show will be a challenge for you to like, unless of course you're stoned and then all bets are off. --------------------------------------------- Result 5253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Okay, the [[story]] makes no sense, the [[characters]] lack any dimensionally, the [[best]] dialogue is ad-libs about the low quality of [[movie]], the [[cinematography]] is dismal, and only editing [[saves]] a bit of the [[muddle]], but Sam" Peckinpah [[directed]] the film. [[Somehow]], his [[direction]] is not enough. [[For]] those who appreciate Peckinpah and his [[great]] [[work]], this movie is a [[disappointment]]. Even a [[great]] cast cannot redeem the [[time]] the viewer wastes with this minimal effort.

The [[proper]] [[response]] to the [[movie]] is the [[contempt]] that the director [[San]] Peckinpah, [[James]] Caan, [[Robert]] Duvall, Burt Young, [[Bo]] Hopkins, Arthur [[Hill]], and [[even]] Gig Young [[bring]] to their [[work]]. Watch the [[great]] Peckinpah [[films]]. Skip this [[mess]]. Okay, the [[fairytales]] makes no sense, the [[nature]] lack any dimensionally, the [[optimum]] dialogue is ad-libs about the low quality of [[cinema]], the [[filmmaking]] is dismal, and only editing [[rescued]] a bit of the [[disarray]], but Sam" Peckinpah [[geared]] the film. [[Someplace]], his [[directorate]] is not enough. [[In]] those who appreciate Peckinpah and his [[marvellous]] [[cooperate]], this movie is a [[displeasure]]. Even a [[whopping]] cast cannot redeem the [[moment]] the viewer wastes with this minimal effort.

The [[appropriate]] [[reactions]] to the [[filmmaking]] is the [[disdain]] that the director [[Saint]] Peckinpah, [[Jacques]] Caan, [[Roberta]] Duvall, Burt Young, [[Pu]] Hopkins, Arthur [[Shan]], and [[yet]] Gig Young [[brings]] to their [[cooperating]]. Watch the [[whopping]] Peckinpah [[cinematography]]. Skip this [[chaos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is actually one of my favorite films, I would recommend that EVERYONE watches it. There is some great acting in it and it shows that not all "good" films are American.... --------------------------------------------- Result 5255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Damn, was that a lot to take in. I was pretty much [[mesmerised]] throughout. It was [[pretty]] [[perfect]], [[though]] I [[would]] say the [[editing]] had a [[lot]] to do with that. I can't [[believe]] this guy stayed on good terms with the [[lot]] of them ([[Anton]] [[especially]]) to [[get]] all of this footage without any serious... [[beef]]. The Dandy's did come off well-together, middle-class [[kids]] who took [[advantage]] of their situation (and [[rightly]] so!). I [[felt]] [[bad]] for Jonestown and [[especially]] for [[Anton]], which [[maybe]] wasn't what a [[lot]] of other people [[felt]]. [[Great]] [[piece]] of film-making and [[great]] [[choice]] of [[subject]](s). I [[recommend]] this to any music/[[film]] [[fan]]. You'll [[probably]] [[learn]] [[something]] about film-making. Damn, was that a lot to take in. I was pretty much [[fascinated]] throughout. It was [[quite]] [[consummate]], [[while]] I [[could]] say the [[edit]] had a [[batch]] to do with that. I can't [[reckon]] this guy stayed on good terms with the [[batch]] of them ([[Antony]] [[concretely]]) to [[obtains]] all of this footage without any serious... [[cattle]]. The Dandy's did come off well-together, middle-class [[brats]] who took [[advantages]] of their situation (and [[appropriately]] so!). I [[smelled]] [[amiss]] for Jonestown and [[mainly]] for [[Anthony]], which [[potentially]] wasn't what a [[batch]] of other people [[deemed]]. [[Awesome]] [[slice]] of film-making and [[wondrous]] [[elects]] of [[subjected]](s). I [[recommending]] this to any music/[[movies]] [[ventilator]]. You'll [[potentially]] [[learnt]] [[anything]] about film-making. --------------------------------------------- Result 5256 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Skippy from "Family [[Ties]]" plays Eddie, a wussy 'metal' nerd who gets [[picked]] on. When his favorite wussy 'metal' [[singer]], Sammi Curr, dies, he throws a hissy fit tearing down all the posters on his bedroom wall. But when he [[later]] gets an unreleased [[record]] that [[holds]] the spirit of his [[dead]] 'metal' [[idol]]. He [[first]] [[gets]] sucked into [[ideas]] of [[revenge]], but then he doesn't want to take it as far as Sammi does. Which isn't [[really]] that far as his main [[victims]] only [[seem]] to go to the hospital. This [[movie]] is utterly [[laughable]] and has about as much to do with [[real]] [[metal]] as [[say]], "Rock Star". [[OK]], [[maybe]] a tad more than that [[piece]] of [[junk]], but you [[get]] my point. And how [[ANYone]] can [[root]] for a [[guy]] played by Skippy from "Family Ties" I haven't a clue. The cameo by Gene Simmons is OK, and [[Ozzy]] Osbourne reaches coherency, I [[applaud]] him for that, but [[otherwise]] skip this one.

My Grade: D

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]:[[Elise]] [[Richards]] [[gets]] topless, an a topless [[extra]] at a pool [[party]] Skippy from "Family [[Link]]" plays Eddie, a wussy 'metal' nerd who gets [[pick]] on. When his favorite wussy 'metal' [[diva]], Sammi Curr, dies, he throws a hissy fit tearing down all the posters on his bedroom wall. But when he [[thereafter]] gets an unreleased [[recordings]] that [[possesses]] the spirit of his [[died]] 'metal' [[heroine]]. He [[firstly]] [[receives]] sucked into [[thoughts]] of [[retaliatory]], but then he doesn't want to take it as far as Sammi does. Which isn't [[genuinely]] that far as his main [[fatalities]] only [[looks]] to go to the hospital. This [[filmmaking]] is utterly [[ridiculous]] and has about as much to do with [[veritable]] [[metallurgy]] as [[told]], "Rock Star". [[OKAY]], [[presumably]] a tad more than that [[slice]] of [[trash]], but you [[gets]] my point. And how [[person]] can [[racine]] for a [[bloke]] played by Skippy from "Family Ties" I haven't a clue. The cameo by Gene Simmons is OK, and [[Ozzie]] Osbourne reaches coherency, I [[congratulated]] him for that, but [[alternately]] skip this one.

My Grade: D

[[Eyeball]] [[Sweets]]:[[Elizabeth]] [[Richard]] [[attains]] topless, an a topless [[supplemental]] at a pool [[parties]] --------------------------------------------- Result 5257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] normally i'm not the sort to be scared by [[horror]] movies, but this movie is the [[exception]]. some how this movie got into my mind!!! it is a very simple movie but at the same [[time]] extremelly [[effective]], it has great atmosphere and this leads to some shocking moments, the girls father coming down the hill is a real standout. Another seen was the family [[photo]] i wasn't expecting that and i [[jumped]] out my [[seat]]!!! i would recommend everyone to [[see]] this movie, with the lights out it will stay with you for a long time!!!!! normally i'm not the sort to be scared by [[terror]] movies, but this movie is the [[exemption]]. some how this movie got into my mind!!! it is a very simple movie but at the same [[times]] extremelly [[efficient]], it has great atmosphere and this leads to some shocking moments, the girls father coming down the hill is a real standout. Another seen was the family [[image]] i wasn't expecting that and i [[rocketed]] out my [[seating]]!!! i would recommend everyone to [[seeing]] this movie, with the lights out it will stay with you for a long time!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Horror movies can be a lot of fun with low budgets, bad acting, and a bit of panache. I think the film is just missing panache, because, one thuddingly [[dull]] scene after another, people make laughably harmless claw-handed grabs at the air. If it weren't so boring, it might be [[funny]].

A horror film can go a long way with a [[tired]] concept like "college kids in a haunted house," in much the same way the Evil Dead [[movies]] had a lot of fun with a similar standard plotline. Hallow's End, unfortunately, doesn't go a long [[way]]. Actually, it doesn't go anywhere. It spends the [[better]] [[part]] of an hour setting up faceless and anonymous characters with what seem like [[endless]] interpersonal [[drama]]. I have nothing against character [[development]], not [[even]] in a horror movie, but these are [[strictly]] one-dimensional characters (the alpha-male, the milquetoast, the... um... throwaway [[characters]] that exist mostly for sex scenes.) Spending forty-plus bloodless, droning minutes with them was more horrific than when the bloodshed [[started]].

Well, [[implied]] bloodshed anyway. When the [[college]] [[kids]] turn into whatever they [[dressed]] as for their haunted [[house]] (one's a [[vampire]], one's wearing O.R. scrubs and some white pancake) they [[look]] pretty [[much]] the way they did in their [[amateur]] haunted [[house]] costumes; The Dead Hate The [[Living]], using a similar theme, is a masterwork in [[comparison]]. There isn't [[really]] any gore to [[speak]] of, nor are there any [[real]] scares.

I've thought about this one from almost [[every]] [[approach]]. [[If]] it was supposed to be a tight, suspenseful horror [[movie]] (which [[would]] explain why [[things]] moved so slowly), the [[pathetic]] sex scenes and [[cheap]] monsters would [[invalidate]] it. [[If]] it was [[supposed]] to be a [[genuine]] [[blood]] & guts horror [[movie]] (which [[would]] [[explain]] the schlock)... where's the blood and [[guts]]? And the anticlimax is one of the unexciting endings to a [[movie]] I've ever [[seen]]. It's the kind of movie that, though it doesn't have a [[narrator]] through the [[film]], is bookended by voice-overs because all of the meaningless [[dialogue]] just wasn't enough.

This was a hard one... coming out of it, I wonder if I've just sat through a christian horror film. Maybe the "I know hell exists" of the opening wasn't meant that way, but there are some hints (or misdirection-- I'm not sure which). For all the profanity in the film, a line like "gosh-darnit" comes off a little absurd, and so does most of the crucifix worshipping, god-fearing, and satan-dreading, especially after some lecherous T&A sex scenes (one heterosexual, one lesbian).

If it a christian company (Highland Myst's logo even has a bit of a crucifix resemblance), then this film weighs in heavily for the atheist camp. An omnipotent being can't be this bad a filmmaker.

Horror movies can be a lot of fun with low budgets, bad acting, and a bit of panache. I think the film is just missing panache, because, one thuddingly [[uninspiring]] scene after another, people make laughably harmless claw-handed grabs at the air. If it weren't so boring, it might be [[droll]].

A horror film can go a long way with a [[knackered]] concept like "college kids in a haunted house," in much the same way the Evil Dead [[filmmaking]] had a lot of fun with a similar standard plotline. Hallow's End, unfortunately, doesn't go a long [[manner]]. Actually, it doesn't go anywhere. It spends the [[optimum]] [[party]] of an hour setting up faceless and anonymous characters with what seem like [[limitless]] interpersonal [[tragedy]]. I have nothing against character [[developments]], not [[yet]] in a horror movie, but these are [[tightly]] one-dimensional characters (the alpha-male, the milquetoast, the... um... throwaway [[nature]] that exist mostly for sex scenes.) Spending forty-plus bloodless, droning minutes with them was more horrific than when the bloodshed [[began]].

Well, [[implicit]] bloodshed anyway. When the [[academics]] [[children]] turn into whatever they [[clothed]] as for their haunted [[maison]] (one's a [[vamp]], one's wearing O.R. scrubs and some white pancake) they [[peek]] pretty [[very]] the way they did in their [[enthusiast]] haunted [[household]] costumes; The Dead Hate The [[Life]], using a similar theme, is a masterwork in [[comparative]]. There isn't [[genuinely]] any gore to [[talking]] of, nor are there any [[veritable]] scares.

I've thought about this one from almost [[all]] [[approaches]]. [[Unless]] it was supposed to be a tight, suspenseful horror [[filmmaking]] (which [[could]] explain why [[aspects]] moved so slowly), the [[unfortunate]] sex scenes and [[cheaper]] monsters would [[overturn]] it. [[Though]] it was [[alleged]] to be a [[truthful]] [[transfusion]] & guts horror [[filmmaking]] (which [[could]] [[explains]] the schlock)... where's the blood and [[insides]]? And the anticlimax is one of the unexciting endings to a [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[watched]]. It's the kind of movie that, though it doesn't have a [[storyteller]] through the [[filmmaking]], is bookended by voice-overs because all of the meaningless [[discussions]] just wasn't enough.

This was a hard one... coming out of it, I wonder if I've just sat through a christian horror film. Maybe the "I know hell exists" of the opening wasn't meant that way, but there are some hints (or misdirection-- I'm not sure which). For all the profanity in the film, a line like "gosh-darnit" comes off a little absurd, and so does most of the crucifix worshipping, god-fearing, and satan-dreading, especially after some lecherous T&A sex scenes (one heterosexual, one lesbian).

If it a christian company (Highland Myst's logo even has a bit of a crucifix resemblance), then this film weighs in heavily for the atheist camp. An omnipotent being can't be this bad a filmmaker.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I never saw the original 1954 version with Judy Garland, so have no means of comparison. Also, it's been some years, but I found this tale [[neither]] gripping nor its romance captivating. The movie tells the story of two lovers whose musical careers are headed in opposite directions. John Norman Howard is a worn out, disillusioned rock star on the decline, embarking upon a romance with a fresh, talented new singing sensation, Esther Hoffman. Her dramatic success only serves to emphasize his decline.

The lead actors, Kris Kristofferson and Barbra Streisand, are adequate in their roles, but neither their chemistry nor the plot left much of a mark with me. The film is noteworthy to me for only one aspect, Streisand's beautiful rendition of the Oscar winning song 'Evergreen'. She truly has a powerful and magnificent voice. I never saw the original 1954 version with Judy Garland, so have no means of comparison. Also, it's been some years, but I found this tale [[or]] gripping nor its romance captivating. The movie tells the story of two lovers whose musical careers are headed in opposite directions. John Norman Howard is a worn out, disillusioned rock star on the decline, embarking upon a romance with a fresh, talented new singing sensation, Esther Hoffman. Her dramatic success only serves to emphasize his decline.

The lead actors, Kris Kristofferson and Barbra Streisand, are adequate in their roles, but neither their chemistry nor the plot left much of a mark with me. The film is noteworthy to me for only one aspect, Streisand's beautiful rendition of the Oscar winning song 'Evergreen'. She truly has a powerful and magnificent voice. --------------------------------------------- Result 5260 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Faces are slashed, throats are cut, blood [[squirts]], and in end the three main [[characters]] are either depressed or they [[die]]. They even blow up Kevin Costner's dog with a shotgun. Why [[would]] anyone [[want]] to see a movie like this? Violence is valid only when the good [[guys]] [[kill]] the bad [[guys]], not the other [[way]] [[around]]. Take for [[instance]] Underworld and Underworld [[Evolution]] where you can enjoy seeing justice done when the demons are slain. In this [[movie]], the good guys are cut up. See the difference? Why would anyone want to MAKE a [[movie]] that depresses the [[audience]]? Beautiful [[photography]] and [[skilled]] editing in a motion picture like this is a [[waste]] of talent. Let's put this one into the [[category]] of the exquisite [[corpse]]. Faces are slashed, throats are cut, blood [[syringes]], and in end the three main [[personage]] are either depressed or they [[dies]]. They even blow up Kevin Costner's dog with a shotgun. Why [[could]] anyone [[wish]] to see a movie like this? Violence is valid only when the good [[buddies]] [[murder]] the bad [[buddies]], not the other [[ways]] [[throughout]]. Take for [[case]] Underworld and Underworld [[Evolve]] where you can enjoy seeing justice done when the demons are slain. In this [[film]], the good guys are cut up. See the difference? Why would anyone want to MAKE a [[filmmaking]] that depresses the [[spectators]]? Beautiful [[images]] and [[seasoned]] editing in a motion picture like this is a [[squandering]] of talent. Let's put this one into the [[categories]] of the exquisite [[cadaver]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This movie is such [[cheesy]] [[goodness]].

A bunch of people trapped in an abandoned school. They start getting killed off, they know they are being stalked, so what do they do? One girl decides to take a bath, another decides to cheat on her husband (who is also there) with an old boyfriend so they somehow find a bed (in an old abandoned school?) and go at it.

And it comes through with the gore and the T&A.

And it's also interesting from a historical/sociological point of view. Where the usual 80's slasher is a reflection of how we view ourselves, or how adults view young people, or as Hollywood views the rest of the country this has a [[unique]] perspective. This is a Brit film made to be an American slasher. It's hilarious to see how often the British actors who are trying to speak "American" unintentionally slip back in to their UK accents.

If you like cheesy 80's slashers (like Pieces) then you will like this one. This movie is such [[corny]] [[christ]].

A bunch of people trapped in an abandoned school. They start getting killed off, they know they are being stalked, so what do they do? One girl decides to take a bath, another decides to cheat on her husband (who is also there) with an old boyfriend so they somehow find a bed (in an old abandoned school?) and go at it.

And it comes through with the gore and the T&A.

And it's also interesting from a historical/sociological point of view. Where the usual 80's slasher is a reflection of how we view ourselves, or how adults view young people, or as Hollywood views the rest of the country this has a [[sole]] perspective. This is a Brit film made to be an American slasher. It's hilarious to see how often the British actors who are trying to speak "American" unintentionally slip back in to their UK accents.

If you like cheesy 80's slashers (like Pieces) then you will like this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 5262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If 1977's "Exorcist II: The Heretic" did him no favors, it's hard to imagine what thespian extraordinaire Richard Burton saw in this drab exercise in non-thrills. You've seen it all before: Burton plays a writer who discovered at an early age he possesses the power to move inanimate objects through force of his mind (and you thought "Carrie" had no impact on Hollywood!). Though adapted from a novel by Peter Van Greenaway, "Medusa" plays like recycled goods, though the special effects in the cathedral finale are solid (if typical). Lee Remick is somewhat present as a doctor, but otherwise the supporting cast is extremely weak. Burton is hammy but weary...not even telekinesis could save him at this point. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Wendy Wu: [[Homecoming]] Warrior has a very good, strong plot but is [[ruined]] by [[cheesy]] details throughout the [[movie]]. I am a younger teenager and didn't enjoy this movie very much. I thought the effects were horrible, but they [[might]] [[seem]] entertaining to younger children. The matrix [[moves]] ruined the action, you know that it was absolutely fake. Then there was the Yen Lo, an evil spirit who temporarily possesses random people and homecoming in which Wendy was striving to win. It all ends like a [[typical]] feel good movie when Wendy and her Buddhist monk cousin Shen defeat Yen Lo (and destroy him forever) in the end. So Wendy learns a lesson...blah, blah, blah. I'm ready for the next DCOM. Wendy Wu: [[Return]] Warrior has a very good, strong plot but is [[obliterated]] by [[corny]] details throughout the [[filmmaking]]. I am a younger teenager and didn't enjoy this movie very much. I thought the effects were horrible, but they [[probability]] [[seems]] entertaining to younger children. The matrix [[shift]] ruined the action, you know that it was absolutely fake. Then there was the Yen Lo, an evil spirit who temporarily possesses random people and homecoming in which Wendy was striving to win. It all ends like a [[classic]] feel good movie when Wendy and her Buddhist monk cousin Shen defeat Yen Lo (and destroy him forever) in the end. So Wendy learns a lesson...blah, blah, blah. I'm ready for the next DCOM. --------------------------------------------- Result 5264 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was really disappointed in this movie. Those that voted this thing a 10 have a screw lose. The acting was ok, kinda wooden and cardboard. The ending was sorry. I just didn't care for this at all.

No way could I recommend this mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 5265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I like this film a lot. It has a wonderful chemistry between the actors and tells a story that is pretty universal, the story of the prodigal son. The aspect I like the best however was the way that the bath house was more than just a background for the story. As the father told the son the story of his wife's family in the northern deserts of china, the element of water and bathing becomes an almost sacred ritual. Water was so scarce that a simple bath had profound depth and meaning.

Overall the film was very effective. There were moments, however, when it verged on "too" sweet...bordering on cloying during the park recital scene. But overall, I highly recommend this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd give it a 2/10.

I was really, really disappointed.

The storyline was poorly developed, for instance, the incidents were too short and brief, hence the moral was not clearly brought out. I thought Brenda Song did a fine job, but Shin Koyamada seemed to have a difficult time handling his role. I could see the need to put in western elements in the show, however, there are certain parts, where Chinese elements were needed too! The villain for example. His physical appearance resembled a robot, instead of something out of the Chinese culture. The final and the worst flaw, were the incorrect, and distorted facts placed in the show.

Others may point out that this is a 'Kid's show' and hence, there is no need for the such high standards. However, there are other Disney shows, such as Mu Lan, which have been much better in terms of story development and presentation.

In conclusion, I feel that Disney movies should be better researched and better planned. A good show is not enough with just a series of martial arts moves to depend on. --------------------------------------------- Result 5267 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When thinking about Captivity many words come to mind. Among them are: uninteresting, unentertaining, unsuspensful, unsexy, unfathomable, and unwatchable.

I used to hate those movies from the mid to late nineties that were basically ripoffs of Scream but these new Saw knockoffs are beginning to make those films look like classics. They still pander to the same demographic that those other movies were so successful at doing, but now they add a new level of degeneracy that make the twelve to fourteen year old girls they're aimed at feel like they're hardcore AND hip.

This movie is a load of boring crap! What the hell has happened to Larry Cohen? His name hasn't been attached to anything good since 1993! Even so, I was still surprised to see that he had anything to do with something THIS bad! Was anyone surprised when the movie's love interest turned out to be one of the psychopaths? Did anyone not know it when they first saw him? Only someone who has never before in his or her life, ever seen another movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 5268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] on t.v. this afternoon and I can't [[see]] how [[anyone]] can [[sit]] through this [[piece]] of trash. It's not [[funny]] at all and it [[takes]] your I.Q. down a few [[notches]]. I know this [[movie]] is for [[kids]], but that doesn't [[mean]] the writers should [[take]] their [[intelligence]] for granted. I bet that writers were [[sitting]] around a [[large]] [[wooden]] table and figured that a) The word "[[poop]]" equals [[big]] laugh. b) A four foot tall [[kid]] can dunk on a ten foot tall basketball net. c) [[Kids]] should [[always]] [[fight]] [[kidnappers]] armed with [[guns]] because the [[kidnappers]] will [[fall]] for anything and d) 3 months of karate training is all you [[need]] to [[beat]] up so-called "ninjas" with [[swords]]. One [[good]] [[thing]] I can [[say]] about this [[movie]] is it contains the [[weakest]] suburban "gang" in the world that couldn't [[scare]] [[anybody]]. [[Maybe]] the [[guys]] at MST3K [[could]] [[use]] this [[movie]] for a [[good]] laugh. Don't [[bother]] with this lame-ass [[excuse]] for a [[movie]]. I [[noticed]] this [[film]] on t.v. this afternoon and I can't [[behold]] how [[person]] can [[seated]] through this [[slice]] of trash. It's not [[droll]] at all and it [[pick]] your I.Q. down a few [[dents]]. I know this [[filmmaking]] is for [[enfant]], but that doesn't [[meaning]] the writers should [[taking]] their [[intellect]] for granted. I bet that writers were [[assis]] around a [[mammoth]] [[wood]] table and figured that a) The word "[[chit]]" equals [[prodigious]] laugh. b) A four foot tall [[petit]] can dunk on a ten foot tall basketball net. c) [[Enfants]] should [[constantly]] [[struggle]] [[captors]] armed with [[rifles]] because the [[perps]] will [[tumble]] for anything and d) 3 months of karate training is all you [[required]] to [[beating]] up so-called "ninjas" with [[sword]]. One [[buena]] [[stuff]] I can [[tell]] about this [[films]] is it contains the [[lower]] suburban "gang" in the world that couldn't [[affraid]] [[person]]. [[Possibly]] the [[blokes]] at MST3K [[did]] [[utilise]] this [[filmmaking]] for a [[alright]] laugh. Don't [[irritate]] with this lame-ass [[alibis]] for a [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Being half-portuguese doesn't render me half-blind (nor half-prejudiced) when discussing portuguese films. Not that I get to do that very often anyway. But this film was such a [[rush]] of adrenaline! Yes, that's right - it was mostly accurate as far as history went/goes - but it pulled no [[punches]] on venturing beyond usual portuguese-film territory: things like using real locations in the middle of traffic-congested Lisbon and recruiting a real crowd to stand in for the real crowd of almost 30 years ago. And by God did they get it right! OK, to sum it up: very emotional if you've lived through it, but you'll spot minor improvements that could have been made as well as plot necessities that were. If you're just watching it randomly, you're in for a good historical romp, only of the very recent History kind and a bit more thought-proving than usual. Even by European standards, yes. Being half-portuguese doesn't render me half-blind (nor half-prejudiced) when discussing portuguese films. Not that I get to do that very often anyway. But this film was such a [[rashness]] of adrenaline! Yes, that's right - it was mostly accurate as far as history went/goes - but it pulled no [[shots]] on venturing beyond usual portuguese-film territory: things like using real locations in the middle of traffic-congested Lisbon and recruiting a real crowd to stand in for the real crowd of almost 30 years ago. And by God did they get it right! OK, to sum it up: very emotional if you've lived through it, but you'll spot minor improvements that could have been made as well as plot necessities that were. If you're just watching it randomly, you're in for a good historical romp, only of the very recent History kind and a bit more thought-proving than usual. Even by European standards, yes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] As a [[big]] [[fan]] of [[David]] Mamet's [[films]] and plays, especially his [[first]] [[film]] [[House]] of [[Games]] that also starred Joe Mantegna, I was [[expecting]] [[great]] [[things]] from this [[film]]. [[Instead]], I [[found]] myself annoyed by the film's superficiality and lack of credibility. Racial [[slurs]] are thrown about without any [[feeling]] or [[meaning]] behind them, in the [[hopes]] of setting up a racial [[tension]] that for me never materialized. Identity is totally reevaluated and [[men]] [[become]] "heroes" for no [[apparent]] [[reason]]. [[Because]] of his oaths [[taken]] as a [[cop]], the lead character adamantly [[refuses]] to perform one [[relatively]] [[small]] [[action]] that would [[harm]] no one and [[could]] [[possibly]] [[save]] [[lives]], and [[yet]] performs another [[action]] which is very [[violent]] and [[VERY]] illegal, but then [[still]] [[refuses]] the minor [[action]]. In addition, a [[highly]] [[unbelievable]] subplot [[involving]] a [[man]] who has [[killed]] his [[family]] is introduced just for the sake of a plot point that was all but advertised with skywriting, and the cop's [[reaction]] to that occurrence stretch credulity way beyond all [[reasonable]] [[limits]]. Needless to say, after expecting another [[exciting]] thriller from [[David]] Mamet, I was [[extremely]] [[disappointed]] to [[say]] the [[least]]. 3 out of 10. As a [[overwhelming]] [[ventilator]] of [[Davide]] Mamet's [[filmmaking]] and plays, especially his [[frst]] [[kino]] [[Dwelling]] of [[Game]] that also starred Joe Mantegna, I was [[waiting]] [[wondrous]] [[aspects]] from this [[films]]. [[Conversely]], I [[finds]] myself annoyed by the film's superficiality and lack of credibility. Racial [[insults]] are thrown about without any [[sensation]] or [[sens]] behind them, in the [[expect]] of setting up a racial [[tensile]] that for me never materialized. Identity is totally reevaluated and [[man]] [[becomes]] "heroes" for no [[overt]] [[reasons]]. [[Since]] of his oaths [[picked]] as a [[police]], the lead character adamantly [[refused]] to perform one [[fairly]] [[minor]] [[measures]] that would [[prejudice]] no one and [[did]] [[conceivably]] [[rescues]] [[vie]], and [[however]] performs another [[actions]] which is very [[ferocious]] and [[QUITE]] illegal, but then [[again]] [[disallowed]] the minor [[actions]]. In addition, a [[eminently]] [[impressive]] subplot [[encompassing]] a [[dude]] who has [[murdered]] his [[familial]] is introduced just for the sake of a plot point that was all but advertised with skywriting, and the cop's [[reactions]] to that occurrence stretch credulity way beyond all [[logical]] [[restraints]]. Needless to say, after expecting another [[breathtaking]] thriller from [[Davide]] Mamet, I was [[considerably]] [[disappointing]] to [[told]] the [[fewer]]. 3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I don't know what some of you are smoking, but i suspect it's potent.

To call Swept Away awful would be an [[insult]] to the very concept of terribleness. The acting is [[hideous]] and i'm not picking on Madonna here, we all know she's useless, but someone should have warned everyone [[else]] that her [[ailment]] is [[contagious]]. My back literally hurts from [[cringing]] so much at poorly [[delivered]] lines. The [[editing]] is so sloppy, it beggars description. The [[photography]] and [[composition]] (which in this era, competence should be a GIVEN for any film with a budget) are astonishingly [[inept]], even the [[lighting]] is horrid and [[unnatural]] looking. These are BASIC elements of filmmaking, if you can't get them right, you should seek another line of work. It's as contrived as a grade 3 production of [[Snow]] White, except nowhere near as well made or interesting.

The [[original]] film by Lina Wertmueller is a wonderful satire and metaphor, superbly acted and written, featuring breathtaking visuals - you can practically taste the sea salt and feel the windswept sand in your hair. The sexual tension feels real and immediate...those of you who found Guy Ritchie's version deplorable, should see it, it really is one of the landmarks of world cinema.

Those of you who thought the remake is some kind of masterpiece should have your heads examined. I don't know what some of you are smoking, but i suspect it's potent.

To call Swept Away awful would be an [[slur]] to the very concept of terribleness. The acting is [[outrageous]] and i'm not picking on Madonna here, we all know she's useless, but someone should have warned everyone [[further]] that her [[affection]] is [[infectious]]. My back literally hurts from [[wincing]] so much at poorly [[gave]] lines. The [[editorial]] is so sloppy, it beggars description. The [[photographer]] and [[makeup]] (which in this era, competence should be a GIVEN for any film with a budget) are astonishingly [[incapable]], even the [[lit]] is horrid and [[abnormal]] looking. These are BASIC elements of filmmaking, if you can't get them right, you should seek another line of work. It's as contrived as a grade 3 production of [[Snowfall]] White, except nowhere near as well made or interesting.

The [[upfront]] film by Lina Wertmueller is a wonderful satire and metaphor, superbly acted and written, featuring breathtaking visuals - you can practically taste the sea salt and feel the windswept sand in your hair. The sexual tension feels real and immediate...those of you who found Guy Ritchie's version deplorable, should see it, it really is one of the landmarks of world cinema.

Those of you who thought the remake is some kind of masterpiece should have your heads examined. --------------------------------------------- Result 5272 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sometimes you have to look back to go forward. The 60's did just that. We need to remember the past. The past is part of the future.

Great mix Gary J. Coppola. I see a great future. You deserve to be nominated and win, The 60's best mixer of the year.

Best mini-series of all times.

Thanks Ursula

--------------------------------------------- Result 5273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] For the first [[couple]] of seasons, I [[thought]] The Apprentice was a highly engaging and exciting show. The combination between reality TV and a 16 week job-interview was innovative, and the producers of the show managed to keep the show relevant and not too "out there".

The new season 6 is nothing more than a [[big]] [[joke]] and it has absolutely nothing to do with business - at all. In the earlier seasons they used to put a lot more emphasis on the business-related tasks - now the focus is mostly in the boardroom where the contestants are expected to do EVERYTHING to keep them on the show (that means lying, trash-talking, backstabbing etc.). The boardroom can be entertaining to watch, but it's entertainment at it's low-point - Sometimes you wonder if you are watching a repeat of an old Jerry Springer episode. The tasks on the show are, at most, boring and mostly a showcase for the companies who are dumb enough to pay NBC for the publicity. And what is the deal about half of the contestants living in tents in season 6? That is just plain stupid and has nothing to do with business in real-life.

I have absolutely [[NO]] respect for any of the contestants this season, they all seem like idiots to me. In earlier seasons at least some of the contestants had a bit of integrity, now it seems like the contestants would kill their own mother to keep them on the show. It also seems like Donald Trump's massive ego becomes bigger and bigger for every season that pass by and to be honest, I can't see why anyone with a common sense would want to work for him. His rationality in the boardroom mostly doesn't make any sense at all and sometimes it seems he just like to trash people for what it's worth.

R.I.P The Apprentice. Please NBC, for God's sake, get the show off the air as soon as possible. It's just too embarrassing to watch. The Apprentice was once a great TV-show, but now it's just a big fat joke. For the first [[coupling]] of seasons, I [[think]] The Apprentice was a highly engaging and exciting show. The combination between reality TV and a 16 week job-interview was innovative, and the producers of the show managed to keep the show relevant and not too "out there".

The new season 6 is nothing more than a [[prodigious]] [[giggle]] and it has absolutely nothing to do with business - at all. In the earlier seasons they used to put a lot more emphasis on the business-related tasks - now the focus is mostly in the boardroom where the contestants are expected to do EVERYTHING to keep them on the show (that means lying, trash-talking, backstabbing etc.). The boardroom can be entertaining to watch, but it's entertainment at it's low-point - Sometimes you wonder if you are watching a repeat of an old Jerry Springer episode. The tasks on the show are, at most, boring and mostly a showcase for the companies who are dumb enough to pay NBC for the publicity. And what is the deal about half of the contestants living in tents in season 6? That is just plain stupid and has nothing to do with business in real-life.

I have absolutely [[NOS]] respect for any of the contestants this season, they all seem like idiots to me. In earlier seasons at least some of the contestants had a bit of integrity, now it seems like the contestants would kill their own mother to keep them on the show. It also seems like Donald Trump's massive ego becomes bigger and bigger for every season that pass by and to be honest, I can't see why anyone with a common sense would want to work for him. His rationality in the boardroom mostly doesn't make any sense at all and sometimes it seems he just like to trash people for what it's worth.

R.I.P The Apprentice. Please NBC, for God's sake, get the show off the air as soon as possible. It's just too embarrassing to watch. The Apprentice was once a great TV-show, but now it's just a big fat joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 5274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This [[tale]] [[based]] on two Edgar Allen [[Poe]] [[pieces]] ("The [[Fall]] of the [[House]] of Usher", "[[Dance]] of Death" ([[poem]]) ) is [[actually]] [[quite]] creepy from [[beginning]] to [[end]]. It is [[similar]] to some of the [[old]] black-and-white movies about people that [[meet]] in an [[old]] decrepit house (for [[example]], "The Cat and the Canary", "The [[Old]] [[Dark]] [[House]]", "Night of Terror" and so on). Boris Karloff plays a demented [[inventor]] of life-size dolls that [[terrorize]] the guests. He [[dies]] [[early]] in the [[film]] (or does he ? ) and the [[residents]] of the [[house]] are subjected to a number of [[terrifying]] [[experiences]]. I won't go into too much [[detail]] here, but it is [[definitely]] a must-see for [[fans]] of [[old]] [[dark]] [[house]] mysteries.

Watch it with plenty of popcorn and soda in a darkened [[room]].

Dan Basinger 8/10 This [[story]] [[founded]] on two Edgar Allen [[Boe]] [[smithereens]] ("The [[Dipped]] of the [[Dwellings]] of Usher", "[[Choreography]] of Death" ([[poetry]]) ) is [[genuinely]] [[altogether]] creepy from [[starting]] to [[ending]]. It is [[akin]] to some of the [[ancient]] black-and-white movies about people that [[respond]] in an [[antigua]] decrepit house (for [[instance]], "The Cat and the Canary", "The [[Ancient]] [[Gloom]] [[Dwelling]]", "Night of Terror" and so on). Boris Karloff plays a demented [[innovator]] of life-size dolls that [[terrify]] the guests. He [[dead]] [[prematurely]] in the [[cinematography]] (or does he ? ) and the [[villagers]] of the [[dwelling]] are subjected to a number of [[shocking]] [[experiments]]. I won't go into too much [[particulars]] here, but it is [[obviously]] a must-see for [[lovers]] of [[ancient]] [[blackness]] [[households]] mysteries.

Watch it with plenty of popcorn and soda in a darkened [[salle]].

Dan Basinger 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This film was a critical and box-office [[fiasco]] back in 1957. It was based on a novel which was later turned into a play--which flopped on Broadway. The story is about some navy officers on leave in San Francisco during WWII. They have 4 day's leave which they spend at the Mark Hopkins hotel. The film meanders a lot and [[none]] of the [[characters]] [[seem]] very [[real]]. Cary Grant is generally brilliant in comedy and drama--but here he plays a sort of wheeler dealer and he doesn't really pull it off. Tony Curtis or James Garner would have been better choices. Audrey Hepburn was initially set to play opposite Grant, but had other commitments--so Suzy parker stepped in. She had never acted before, but was America's top photographic model at the time. I think that she did a good job, considering all the pressure that she was under. Grant's pairing with Jayne Mansfield in a few brief scenes--did not really work. The Studio was trying to give her some class by acting with Grant--but the character had no [[substance]] at all. This film was a critical and box-office [[flop]] back in 1957. It was based on a novel which was later turned into a play--which flopped on Broadway. The story is about some navy officers on leave in San Francisco during WWII. They have 4 day's leave which they spend at the Mark Hopkins hotel. The film meanders a lot and [[nos]] of the [[personages]] [[seems]] very [[veritable]]. Cary Grant is generally brilliant in comedy and drama--but here he plays a sort of wheeler dealer and he doesn't really pull it off. Tony Curtis or James Garner would have been better choices. Audrey Hepburn was initially set to play opposite Grant, but had other commitments--so Suzy parker stepped in. She had never acted before, but was America's top photographic model at the time. I think that she did a good job, considering all the pressure that she was under. Grant's pairing with Jayne Mansfield in a few brief scenes--did not really work. The Studio was trying to give her some class by acting with Grant--but the character had no [[substances]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] If you [[like]] [[horror]] [[movies]] with lots of blood and gore, [[tons]] of jump-scare moments and [[unrelenting]], [[escalating]] scenes of [[excruciating]] [[death]], then look [[elsewhere]]. [[If]] you like [[quiet]], [[moody]], [[thoughtful]] horror which casts blood aside in favor of a [[genuine]] [[feeling]] of dread, then Wendigo is for you.

[[Thoughtful]], stressed out [[George]], his psychoanalyst wife Kim and their young son Miles are heading out to the snowy countryside for a long weekend vacation away from the city. On the way up, George hits a stag with his car. The hunters who had been pursuing the deer are not thrilled when they find that George has ended their chase. In particular, deranged hunter Otis takes it personally. He follows the family to their vacation home, making sure they see him. He spies on George and Kim as they have sex. He fires through their windows with his rifle when they aren't home, letting them discover the ominous holes in their windows and walls when they return. When Kim takes Miles to the drugstore in town, Miles is attracted to a small sculpture in a display case, carved to resemble a man with the head of a stag. A Native American man tells Miles that this is the Wendigo, a spirit of the woods who has a taste for flesh and is always hungry. Miles takes the figure home with him, already haunted by the death of the deer the day before. That afternoon, when he and his father go sledding, George is shot and Miles pursued through the woods by a creature barely glimpsed...or is he just in shock, and imagining the whole thing? Hours later, George is rushed to the hospital and Miles, still clutching his statue, either faints, dreams or goes on a vision quest, in which the Wendigo returns. This time the angry, flesh eating god - part tree, part stag and part man - is hunting for Otis, who has finally gone over the edge.

Wendigo is a [[beautifully]] made [[film]], almost totally [[silent]] but for the wind howling through the snow covered trees. Okay, so the monster itself is kind of fakey-looking, but it's a small flaw, more than made up for by the genuine feeling of tension and dread that creeps through every frame of the film, and the eerie backdrop of the silent, snowy countryside. The performances are [[great]], particularly by Jake Weber as the moody and thoughtful George and Patricia Clarkson as his sweet but no-nonsense wife. They are a happy couple with their share of common problems, and it is the strength of their relationship and their love for each other that makes this film powerful. Watching this film is often like watching someone's home videos, so realistic are the performances.

This movie is not for everyone. A lot of people may find themselves totally bored, waiting for the hideous Lovecraftian Beast and bloody revenge that never come. We can never really be sure if the Wendigo even exists, seen as it is through the eyes of a sensitive child and also, later, through the eyes of a madman. This is more a psychological drama than a horror film, but it has more than enough creepy elements in it to satisfy fans of subtle horror. If you [[fond]] [[abomination]] [[films]] with lots of blood and gore, [[tonnes]] of jump-scare moments and [[untiring]], [[spiraling]] scenes of [[appalling]] [[dies]], then look [[else]]. [[Though]] you like [[hush]], [[fickle]], [[pensive]] horror which casts blood aside in favor of a [[real]] [[sentiment]] of dread, then Wendigo is for you.

[[Pensive]], stressed out [[Jorge]], his psychoanalyst wife Kim and their young son Miles are heading out to the snowy countryside for a long weekend vacation away from the city. On the way up, George hits a stag with his car. The hunters who had been pursuing the deer are not thrilled when they find that George has ended their chase. In particular, deranged hunter Otis takes it personally. He follows the family to their vacation home, making sure they see him. He spies on George and Kim as they have sex. He fires through their windows with his rifle when they aren't home, letting them discover the ominous holes in their windows and walls when they return. When Kim takes Miles to the drugstore in town, Miles is attracted to a small sculpture in a display case, carved to resemble a man with the head of a stag. A Native American man tells Miles that this is the Wendigo, a spirit of the woods who has a taste for flesh and is always hungry. Miles takes the figure home with him, already haunted by the death of the deer the day before. That afternoon, when he and his father go sledding, George is shot and Miles pursued through the woods by a creature barely glimpsed...or is he just in shock, and imagining the whole thing? Hours later, George is rushed to the hospital and Miles, still clutching his statue, either faints, dreams or goes on a vision quest, in which the Wendigo returns. This time the angry, flesh eating god - part tree, part stag and part man - is hunting for Otis, who has finally gone over the edge.

Wendigo is a [[stunningly]] made [[cinematography]], almost totally [[mute]] but for the wind howling through the snow covered trees. Okay, so the monster itself is kind of fakey-looking, but it's a small flaw, more than made up for by the genuine feeling of tension and dread that creeps through every frame of the film, and the eerie backdrop of the silent, snowy countryside. The performances are [[wondrous]], particularly by Jake Weber as the moody and thoughtful George and Patricia Clarkson as his sweet but no-nonsense wife. They are a happy couple with their share of common problems, and it is the strength of their relationship and their love for each other that makes this film powerful. Watching this film is often like watching someone's home videos, so realistic are the performances.

This movie is not for everyone. A lot of people may find themselves totally bored, waiting for the hideous Lovecraftian Beast and bloody revenge that never come. We can never really be sure if the Wendigo even exists, seen as it is through the eyes of a sensitive child and also, later, through the eyes of a madman. This is more a psychological drama than a horror film, but it has more than enough creepy elements in it to satisfy fans of subtle horror. --------------------------------------------- Result 5277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[enjoy]] a good, slow-moving drama. Christmas In August, Chungking Express, Virgin Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, The Way Home, Springtime in a Small Town, Hana bi, Eat Drink Man Woman, Dolls, In the Mood for Love, and Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring are all enjoyable films – just to name a few.

[[Unfortunately]], there is a subset of [[films]] within the drama genre that attempt to ride the coattails of good films while [[providing]] [[nothing]] of interest themselves. These are what I [[call]] IAN films – "[[Incomprehensible]] Artistic [[Nonsense]]." [[Tsai]] Ming-liang is the king of this subgenre, and Vive L'Amour is his "masterpiece." In fact, this is the crème de la crème of crap-infested garbage under the guise of "art." People walk around in their apartments, drink water, stroll back and forth waiting for pay phones to become vacant, hang posters, staple papers together, go to the bathroom, eat, do pushups, have sex, slap at mosquitoes, etc. I'm not joking when I say that is an accurate synopsis of the entire film, which is the quintessential posterchild for pointless art-house trash. There is no plot, no storyline, no interesting or noteworthy events, no emotion, no meaningful dialogue, and most importantly – no drama.

The most eventful scene has two people "banging" on a bed with a person masturbating underneath the mattress – ironic that it's also totally tasteless and gratuitous. The relationship of the characters on the bed is practically non-existent. Tsai apparently didn't feel like communicating anything to the viewer regarding these people other than the obvious fact that they like to "bang." The person under the bed is just as one-dimensional and uninteresting. He likes to drink water, makeout with melons, and stroke himself. This is Tsai's idea of "character development." A truly [[misguided]] "entertainer" indeed.

Tsai's true contribution in Vive L'Amour is perhaps the most atrocious scene in art-house film history. He first shows the lead actress walk all the way from one end of a park to the other for 285 consecutive seconds, only to then show her cry hysterically – for absolutely no reason whatsoever – for another 356 consecutive seconds. The film then abruptly ends. No point. No entertainment. Just pure, concentrated torture inflicted on the viewer.

In an effort to beat a dead horse. The underlying theme of loneliness is mishandled so greatly that the only true feeling of this film is that of boredom. In fact, Kiyoshi Kurosawa provides a much better exposition on loneliness in his horror film Kairo. And guess what? It's actually INTERESTING! That film moved as slow as molasses in January, but there are better ways of addressing the concept of loneliness than the utter waste known as Vive L'Amour. Kairo is a perfect example of that.

Fans of cinema may thank Tsai Ming-liang for directing this film, as he has provided irrefutable evidence that art-house cinema can be just as poorly made as B-grade, made-for-television horror flicks. Art-house snobs have now officially lost their pedestal of self-righteousness. The quality level of your precious genre now overlaps films like Army of Darkness and – gasp! – Showgirls. How do you like them apples? I [[enjoys]] a good, slow-moving drama. Christmas In August, Chungking Express, Virgin Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, The Way Home, Springtime in a Small Town, Hana bi, Eat Drink Man Woman, Dolls, In the Mood for Love, and Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring are all enjoyable films – just to name a few.

[[Unhappily]], there is a subset of [[cinematographic]] within the drama genre that attempt to ride the coattails of good films while [[offered]] [[nada]] of interest themselves. These are what I [[invitation]] IAN films – "[[Unimaginable]] Artistic [[Claptrap]]." [[Choi]] Ming-liang is the king of this subgenre, and Vive L'Amour is his "masterpiece." In fact, this is the crème de la crème of crap-infested garbage under the guise of "art." People walk around in their apartments, drink water, stroll back and forth waiting for pay phones to become vacant, hang posters, staple papers together, go to the bathroom, eat, do pushups, have sex, slap at mosquitoes, etc. I'm not joking when I say that is an accurate synopsis of the entire film, which is the quintessential posterchild for pointless art-house trash. There is no plot, no storyline, no interesting or noteworthy events, no emotion, no meaningful dialogue, and most importantly – no drama.

The most eventful scene has two people "banging" on a bed with a person masturbating underneath the mattress – ironic that it's also totally tasteless and gratuitous. The relationship of the characters on the bed is practically non-existent. Tsai apparently didn't feel like communicating anything to the viewer regarding these people other than the obvious fact that they like to "bang." The person under the bed is just as one-dimensional and uninteresting. He likes to drink water, makeout with melons, and stroke himself. This is Tsai's idea of "character development." A truly [[flawed]] "entertainer" indeed.

Tsai's true contribution in Vive L'Amour is perhaps the most atrocious scene in art-house film history. He first shows the lead actress walk all the way from one end of a park to the other for 285 consecutive seconds, only to then show her cry hysterically – for absolutely no reason whatsoever – for another 356 consecutive seconds. The film then abruptly ends. No point. No entertainment. Just pure, concentrated torture inflicted on the viewer.

In an effort to beat a dead horse. The underlying theme of loneliness is mishandled so greatly that the only true feeling of this film is that of boredom. In fact, Kiyoshi Kurosawa provides a much better exposition on loneliness in his horror film Kairo. And guess what? It's actually INTERESTING! That film moved as slow as molasses in January, but there are better ways of addressing the concept of loneliness than the utter waste known as Vive L'Amour. Kairo is a perfect example of that.

Fans of cinema may thank Tsai Ming-liang for directing this film, as he has provided irrefutable evidence that art-house cinema can be just as poorly made as B-grade, made-for-television horror flicks. Art-house snobs have now officially lost their pedestal of self-righteousness. The quality level of your precious genre now overlaps films like Army of Darkness and – gasp! – Showgirls. How do you like them apples? --------------------------------------------- Result 5278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] When I saw the preview, I thought: this is going to be a great movie. And indeed it could have been. The actress playing the main character was very credible, and the beauty of the filming is undeniable. [[However]] the dialogues cast a dark shadow on the whole picture. The [[level]] of language was too familiar and too contemporary for an action taking place in 1610, and it took away most of the magic of the film. However, I [[must]] congratulate the [[translator]], because the English sub-titles were more refined and appropriate that the original French cues, and it probably explains the good rating the movie received on the imbd! When I saw the preview, I thought: this is going to be a great movie. And indeed it could have been. The actress playing the main character was very credible, and the beauty of the filming is undeniable. [[Nonetheless]] the dialogues cast a dark shadow on the whole picture. The [[plano]] of language was too familiar and too contemporary for an action taking place in 1610, and it took away most of the magic of the film. However, I [[gotta]] congratulate the [[interpreters]], because the English sub-titles were more refined and appropriate that the original French cues, and it probably explains the good rating the movie received on the imbd! --------------------------------------------- Result 5279 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Robert Urich was a fine actor, and he makes this TV movie believable. I remember watching this film when I was 15, and when seeing it a second time my opinion stays the same. People lose who they were when enter this exclusive club, in a computer rich Californian town. Urich try's to figure out what is wrong with his family, and I love the Halloween space suit idea, brilliant. This film is about the battle of one's sprit. TV quality, that exceeds, the big budget, Gangs of New York. I wonder if Robert Urich was the compassionate man he portrayed in many of his movie? I hope so! 6 or 7 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] If you like Sci-Fi, Monsters, and Ancient Legends, then you will [[love]] this [[movie]]!!

The Special Effects are by far the [[best]] I have seen since Juarassic Park hit the big screen years ago. [[While]] the acting may have been a little less than desirable, the story line and effects adequately [[compensated]] for it.

I [[wish]] now I had [[seen]] this at the [[movies]] on a [[theater]] screen instead of our 42 [[inch]] [[big]] screen [[TV]].

[[If]] you [[like]] non-stop [[action]], [[awesome]] visuals, and taste for myth and lore....you have to see this [[movie]]!! If you like Sci-Fi, Monsters, and Ancient Legends, then you will [[loves]] this [[film]]!!

The Special Effects are by far the [[better]] I have seen since Juarassic Park hit the big screen years ago. [[Despite]] the acting may have been a little less than desirable, the story line and effects adequately [[compensating]] for it.

I [[wanting]] now I had [[watched]] this at the [[movie]] on a [[movies]] screen instead of our 42 [[centimetre]] [[sizeable]] screen [[TELEVISIONS]].

[[Unless]] you [[fond]] non-stop [[actions]], [[wondrous]] visuals, and taste for myth and lore....you have to see this [[film]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] As the summary says you just made the most [[ignorant]] comment i have ever heard on an RPG. You seriously thought they were gay? Are you retarded? If you went to go save your best friend and someone decides out of the goodness of his heart to help you then you are in a serious debt to that man. Lavitz was a good person and each time they helped each other it made them closer as friends. They weren't gay lovers like your [[bitching]] about. And to let you know the game is set in a medieval time period. Back then, women did just prepare meals while the men fought. Do you even know your history? Do you know how long it took for women to be accepted in the army in present day? This game contains a lot of realism even though your too damn slow obviously to catch it, and you really need to spit out some solid proof instead of ignorant assumptions based off your misguided act to interpret the story. As the summary says you just made the most [[ignoramus]] comment i have ever heard on an RPG. You seriously thought they were gay? Are you retarded? If you went to go save your best friend and someone decides out of the goodness of his heart to help you then you are in a serious debt to that man. Lavitz was a good person and each time they helped each other it made them closer as friends. They weren't gay lovers like your [[complaining]] about. And to let you know the game is set in a medieval time period. Back then, women did just prepare meals while the men fought. Do you even know your history? Do you know how long it took for women to be accepted in the army in present day? This game contains a lot of realism even though your too damn slow obviously to catch it, and you really need to spit out some solid proof instead of ignorant assumptions based off your misguided act to interpret the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 5282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] ...not that all Disney [[films]] are garbage.

Anyway, I saw "Legend of Boggy [[Creek]]" first and absolutely loved the film. When I heard it had 2 sequels, I was ecstatic. I finally found a copy of this and watched it one night. I don't see how they can make a G-rated sequel to a horror film. The original is a movie/documentary about the Fauke Monster, and can scare anyone. "Return" is for kids and should not be watched by anyone. I don't remember the plot too well, as it's been quite some time since I watched it and I will not watch it again, but... It's about these hunters coming to town and they go looking to kill Bigfoot. Three little kids sneek out of the house to stop them. A big monsoon comes through. The hunters get hurt, are saved by the kids. Then they all hide out in a boat with a big piece of tarp on top and try to wait out the storm. Then all of a sudden, Bigfoot comes and does something really sick. I don't wanna ruin the ending for any of yas, but it's not scary. Well.... ...not that all Disney [[filmmaking]] are garbage.

Anyway, I saw "Legend of Boggy [[Brooks]]" first and absolutely loved the film. When I heard it had 2 sequels, I was ecstatic. I finally found a copy of this and watched it one night. I don't see how they can make a G-rated sequel to a horror film. The original is a movie/documentary about the Fauke Monster, and can scare anyone. "Return" is for kids and should not be watched by anyone. I don't remember the plot too well, as it's been quite some time since I watched it and I will not watch it again, but... It's about these hunters coming to town and they go looking to kill Bigfoot. Three little kids sneek out of the house to stop them. A big monsoon comes through. The hunters get hurt, are saved by the kids. Then they all hide out in a boat with a big piece of tarp on top and try to wait out the storm. Then all of a sudden, Bigfoot comes and does something really sick. I don't wanna ruin the ending for any of yas, but it's not scary. Well.... --------------------------------------------- Result 5283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Moonstruck' is a love story. There is not one romance, there are at least three, but they all have to do with the same family. Loretta's family. Loretta (Cher) is about to marry Johnny Cammareri (Danny Aiello). She doesn't love him, but he is sweet and good man. When he leaves to visit his dying mother in Italy Loretta meets Johnny's brother Ronny (Nicolas Cage). He and Johnny haven't spoken each other in five years and Loretta wants to invite him to the wedding. Of course they fall instantly for each other.

How this story and love stories of Loretta's parents and uncle and aunt develop is something you simply have to see for yourself. Every seen is a delight to watch, with Cher as the bright star in the middle of everything. She won and really deserved the Oscar that year. Cage is pretty good, and goofy as well, and Olympia Dukakis as Loretta's mother and Vincent Gardenia as her father are terrific. This movie is funny, charming and therefore highly enjoyable. --------------------------------------------- Result 5284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[If]] you're a fan of Gothic horror, then you're [[definitely]] [[absolutely]] guaranteed to LOVE this wondrous Italian 60's film "Castle of Blood". We're really [[talking]] about creepily creaking [[doors]], eerie [[portraits]] that appear to be moving, spontaneously [[dying]] [[candles]] although there's no [[wind]] and smoke coming from [[underneath]] [[heavy]] wooden [[chamber]] [[doors]]. [[Speaking]] in terms of [[atmosphere]] and style, this [[masterful]] piece of [[Gothic]] film-making is one of the [[best]] out there; just one tiny league below landmarks such as "Black Sunday", "The [[Three]] [[Faces]] of [[Fear]]" and "[[Curse]] of the [[Crying]] [[Woman]]". The [[prominent]] directors duo Sergio Corbucci ("The [[Great]] [[Silence]]", "Django") and Antonio Margheriti ("[[Cannibal]] Apocalypse", "[[Killer]] Fish") are successful in all [[areas]], including a [[powerful]] plot (one that is [[genuinely]] nightmare inducing), ultra-sinister scenery and filming locations, [[stylish]] black and white [[photography]], spine-chilling [[music]] and a brilliant gathering of talented performers. [[Barbara]] Steele, starlet of the aforementioned "Black Sunday" and Italian goth-muse number one, [[shines]] brightly again as a [[spiritually]] tormented [[character]] and she's literally [[surrounded]] by [[excellent]] co-players. One of them, Silvano Tranquilli, even gives away a [[fairly]] credential depiction of author [[Edgar]] Allan Poe. The [[story]] [[involves]] him and another [[wealthy]] visitor of a countryside tavern [[challenging]] a [[brutal]] young [[journalist]] to [[accept]] a morbid wager. [[If]] he – [[Alan]] [[Foster]] – [[would]] survive spending one [[night]] in the [[infamous]] Blackwood Castle, he [[receives]] the [[astonishing]] reward of $10 and a [[newspaper]] interview with Poe. [[Needless]] to say the ordeal is much more [[dangerous]] than it [[sounds]], even for somebody like Alan [[Foster]] who's a firm non-believer in ghosts and [[vampires]]. The night starts out [[great]] for him, as he [[even]] meets up with the [[stunningly]] [[beautiful]] woman of his [[dreams]], but gradually he [[learns]] that Blackwood Castle is a hellish [[place]] where the ghosts of the previously [[deceased]] [[visitors]] are trapped for all eternity. I don't know about you, but this is [[seriously]] one of my favorite [[horror]] movie premises of all [[time]]. Co-director Antonio Margheriti clearly was [[proud]] of this [[film]] as well, because he remade it himself a couple of years [[later]] as "Web of the Spider". That movie had a handful of trumps, like for example the [[casting]] of no [[less]] than Klaus Kinski in the role of Edgar Allan Poe, but in [[general]] this original is vastly superior. "Castle of Blood" literally oozes with atmosphere and maintains a thoroughly unsettling ambiance throughout. This truly is one of the rare films that can make the hair on your arms and back of the neck rise with fear if you watch it in the right circumstances. Watch it late at night, preferably alone and in a candle lit room, and you'll get an idea about the true definition of horror. [[Though]] you're a fan of Gothic horror, then you're [[clearly]] [[completely]] guaranteed to LOVE this wondrous Italian 60's film "Castle of Blood". We're really [[debating]] about creepily creaking [[floodgates]], eerie [[sketches]] that appear to be moving, spontaneously [[died]] [[sails]] although there's no [[windward]] and smoke coming from [[underside]] [[hefty]] wooden [[salle]] [[portals]]. [[Talk]] in terms of [[mood]] and style, this [[masterly]] piece of [[Goth]] film-making is one of the [[better]] out there; just one tiny league below landmarks such as "Black Sunday", "The [[Tre]] [[Confronting]] of [[Frightened]]" and "[[Cursing]] of the [[Tears]] [[Female]]". The [[notable]] directors duo Sergio Corbucci ("The [[Magnificent]] [[Silent]]", "Django") and Antonio Margheriti ("[[Cannibalistic]] Apocalypse", "[[Shooter]] Fish") are successful in all [[regions]], including a [[influential]] plot (one that is [[actually]] nightmare inducing), ultra-sinister scenery and filming locations, [[tasteful]] black and white [[photographs]], spine-chilling [[musicians]] and a brilliant gathering of talented performers. [[Barbarous]] Steele, starlet of the aforementioned "Black Sunday" and Italian goth-muse number one, [[glows]] brightly again as a [[intellectually]] tormented [[trait]] and she's literally [[besieged]] by [[noteworthy]] co-players. One of them, Silvano Tranquilli, even gives away a [[comparatively]] credential depiction of author [[Edgard]] Allan Poe. The [[histories]] [[consists]] him and another [[wealthiest]] visitor of a countryside tavern [[problematic]] a [[ferocious]] young [[reporters]] to [[agreeing]] a morbid wager. [[Unless]] he – [[Alain]] [[Encouraging]] – [[could]] survive spending one [[overnight]] in the [[loathsome]] Blackwood Castle, he [[recieve]] the [[uncanny]] reward of $10 and a [[newspapers]] interview with Poe. [[Unhelpful]] to say the ordeal is much more [[unsafe]] than it [[noises]], even for somebody like Alan [[Promoted]] who's a firm non-believer in ghosts and [[vampire]]. The night starts out [[fantastic]] for him, as he [[yet]] meets up with the [[disturbingly]] [[fantastic]] woman of his [[dream]], but gradually he [[teaches]] that Blackwood Castle is a hellish [[placing]] where the ghosts of the previously [[departed]] [[tourists]] are trapped for all eternity. I don't know about you, but this is [[gravely]] one of my favorite [[terror]] movie premises of all [[moment]]. Co-director Antonio Margheriti clearly was [[prideful]] of this [[kino]] as well, because he remade it himself a couple of years [[then]] as "Web of the Spider". That movie had a handful of trumps, like for example the [[cast]] of no [[least]] than Klaus Kinski in the role of Edgar Allan Poe, but in [[overall]] this original is vastly superior. "Castle of Blood" literally oozes with atmosphere and maintains a thoroughly unsettling ambiance throughout. This truly is one of the rare films that can make the hair on your arms and back of the neck rise with fear if you watch it in the right circumstances. Watch it late at night, preferably alone and in a candle lit room, and you'll get an idea about the true definition of horror. --------------------------------------------- Result 5285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was horrible. I swear they didn't even write a script they just kinda winged it through out the whole movie. Ice-T was annoying as hell. *SPOILERS Phht more like reasons not to watch it* They sit down and eat breakfast for 20 minutes. he coulda been long gone. The ground was hard it would of been close to impossible to to track him with out dogs. And when ICE-T is on that Hill and uses that Spaz-15 Assault SHOTGUN like its a sniper rifle (and then cuts down a tree with eight shells?? It would take 1000's of shells to cut down a tree that size.) Shotguns and hand guns are considered to be inaccurate at 100yards. And they even saw the reflection. What reflected the light?? I didn't see a scope on that thing. Also when he got shot in the gut and kept going, that was retarded he would of bled to death right there. PlusThe ending where he stuffs a rock or a cigarette in the guys barrel. It wouldn't blow up and kill him. The bullet would still fire kill Ice T but mess up the barrel. --------------------------------------------- Result 5286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I went to school with Jeremy [[Earl]], that is how I [[heard]] of this movie, I don't really know if it was in the theater's at all. I don't recall the name. I have seen it, it is like one of those after school specials. The acting is OK, not great. The plot was kind of weak and the lines were pretty corny. So the only [[comment]] I can give this movie is "[[Eh]]" I [[borrowed]] the movie from Jeremy, if I was in a [[movie]] rental place, this is one that I would walk [[past]] and after watching it I wouldn't [[recommend]] it to anyone [[past]] middle school age. I've also noticed that many times when urban kids are portrayed, the slang is [[overused]] or just [[outdated]]. [[Many]] times I think thats what makes their characters unbelievable. I went to school with Jeremy [[Earle]], that is how I [[tryout]] of this movie, I don't really know if it was in the theater's at all. I don't recall the name. I have seen it, it is like one of those after school specials. The acting is OK, not great. The plot was kind of weak and the lines were pretty corny. So the only [[comments]] I can give this movie is "[[Huh]]" I [[loaned]] the movie from Jeremy, if I was in a [[filmmaking]] rental place, this is one that I would walk [[yesteryear]] and after watching it I wouldn't [[recommended]] it to anyone [[yesteryear]] middle school age. I've also noticed that many times when urban kids are portrayed, the slang is [[devalued]] or just [[lapsed]]. [[Innumerable]] times I think thats what makes their characters unbelievable. --------------------------------------------- Result 5287 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Not that much [[things]] happen in this movie but A [[lot]] of meanings. The [[woman]] thought she had all that she can in [[life]], but that was indeed not true, and she [[found]] out herself when she met this person who was conducting some research for his [[next]] [[job]]. There really should be more [[types]] of [[movies]] like this, im not even that old as considered "mature" ( im 13 by the [[way]]) and i [[still]] got the idea and point of the [[film]]. The main point is in my [[opinion]]: DON'T [[THINK]] [[YOU]] CAN'T HAVE A [[BETTER]] LIFE, JUST BECAUSE [[YOU]] CURRENTLY [[HAVE]] THIS ONE.

Though I got to [[admit]] i was thinking of [[watching]] another [[movie]] but after reading all the [[reviews]] and [[seen]] the trailer i decided on this one [[even]] [[though]] i knew not that much action [[would]] appear in the film. I recommend anyone to watch this movie as it has very good points in the film, and is a really good ending. Not that much [[aspects]] happen in this movie but A [[batches]] of meanings. The [[female]] thought she had all that she can in [[vida]], but that was indeed not true, and she [[finds]] out herself when she met this person who was conducting some research for his [[imminent]] [[employment]]. There really should be more [[kind]] of [[kino]] like this, im not even that old as considered "mature" ( im 13 by the [[route]]) and i [[yet]] got the idea and point of the [[movie]]. The main point is in my [[view]]: DON'T [[BELIEVE]] [[THEE]] CAN'T HAVE A [[BEST]] LIFE, JUST BECAUSE [[THEE]] CURRENTLY [[HAS]] THIS ONE.

Though I got to [[confess]] i was thinking of [[staring]] another [[kino]] but after reading all the [[exams]] and [[watched]] the trailer i decided on this one [[yet]] [[if]] i knew not that much action [[could]] appear in the film. I recommend anyone to watch this movie as it has very good points in the film, and is a really good ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 5288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This film is notable for three [[reasons]].

First, apparently capitalizing on the success of the two 'Superman' serials, this low budget feature was made and released to theaters, marking George Reeves' and Phyllis Coates' initial appearances as Clark Kent / Superman and [[Lois]] Lane. Part of the opening is re-used in the series. Outside the town of Silby, a six-mile deep [[oil]] well penetrates the 'hollow Earth' allowing the 'Mole-Men' to come to the surface. [[Forget]] about the other holes (those in the plot).

Second, unlike most SF invasion films of the fifties, the hero plays a dominant (and controlling) force in preaching and enforcing tolerance and acceptance of difference against a raging mob of segregationist vigilantes. No 'mild mannered reporter' here! Clark Kent, knowledgeable and self-assertive, grabs control of the situation throughout ("I'll handle this!"), even assisting in a hospital gown in the removal of a bullet from a Mole-Man! As Superman, he is gentler than Clark towards the feisty Lois, but is also the voice of reason and tolerance as he rails against the vigilantes as "Nazi storm troopers."

Third, you will notice that the transition from the Fleisher-like cartoon animated flying of Superman in the two serials to the 'live action' flying in the 'Adventures of Superman' had not yet been made. This film is notable for three [[motifs]].

First, apparently capitalizing on the success of the two 'Superman' serials, this low budget feature was made and released to theaters, marking George Reeves' and Phyllis Coates' initial appearances as Clark Kent / Superman and [[Legislation]] Lane. Part of the opening is re-used in the series. Outside the town of Silby, a six-mile deep [[hydrocarbon]] well penetrates the 'hollow Earth' allowing the 'Mole-Men' to come to the surface. [[Overlook]] about the other holes (those in the plot).

Second, unlike most SF invasion films of the fifties, the hero plays a dominant (and controlling) force in preaching and enforcing tolerance and acceptance of difference against a raging mob of segregationist vigilantes. No 'mild mannered reporter' here! Clark Kent, knowledgeable and self-assertive, grabs control of the situation throughout ("I'll handle this!"), even assisting in a hospital gown in the removal of a bullet from a Mole-Man! As Superman, he is gentler than Clark towards the feisty Lois, but is also the voice of reason and tolerance as he rails against the vigilantes as "Nazi storm troopers."

Third, you will notice that the transition from the Fleisher-like cartoon animated flying of Superman in the two serials to the 'live action' flying in the 'Adventures of Superman' had not yet been made. --------------------------------------------- Result 5289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was one of the lamest movies we watched in the last few months with a predictable plot line and pretty bad acting (mainly from the supporting characters). The interview with Hugh Laurie on the DVD was actually more rewarding than the film itself...

Hugh Laurie obviously put a lot of effort into learning how to dance the Samba but the scope of his character only required that he immerse himself at the kiddie end of the pool. The movie is based on the appearance of a lovely girl and great music but these are not sufficient to make good entertainment.

If you have never seen Rio, or the inside of a British bank, this film is for you. 2 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] North Africa in the 1930's. To a small [[Arab]] town on the edge of the Sahara [[comes]] a beautiful woman [[looking]] for meaning to her life & a [[handsome]] Trappist monk [[fleeing]] from his [[crisis]] of faith. They will meet and [[passions]] will be stirred, but not even the Sand Diviner knows if they will find happiness or [[sorrow]], here, in THE GARDEN OF ALLAH.

The plot is pure hokum, but the [[film]] is still [[great]] fun & [[beautiful]] to look at. Marlene Dietrich & Charles [[Boyer]] are a superb screen [[couple]]. She is, to put it [[simply]], [[gorgeous]], and Boyer gives a most effective, understated performance, letting his sensitive face do much of his acting for him.

The supporting [[cast]] is [[excellent]]: Basil Rathbone, in a sympathetic role as a Count who loves the desert; Joseph Schildkraut as a friendly, talkative guide (all the "Arabic" he & others speak in the film is pure gibberish); Lucile Watson as a gentle Mother Superior; Alan Marshal as an honorable young French officer; Tilly Losch as a dangerous dancer; Henry Brandon as a comic porter; John Carradine as the mysterious Sand Diviner; and magnificent Sir C. Aubrey Smith as a wise old priest.

Movie mavens will recognize Helen Jerome Eddy as a nun; Marcia Mae Jones & Bonita Granville (peeking over the nun's shoulder) as convent girls; gaunt Nigel De Brulier as a monastery lector; and Ferdinand Gottschalk as a hotel clerk, all uncredited.

Color films of the 1930's are both [[rare]] & lovely to look at, and this movie is no [[exception]] - the cinematography is as [[colorful]] as the desert itself. THE GARDEN OF ALLAH was the first Technicolor film to be shot on location. Yuma, Arizona gave the film makers all the sand dunes they could desire, but contaminated drinking water & 135 degree heat soon had the company in revolt. When the daily rushes showed Boyer's face had burned a bright tomato red, producer David O. Selznick finally gave in. The remainder of the film was shot on a Hollywood sound stage. North Africa in the 1930's. To a small [[Arabic]] town on the edge of the Sahara [[happens]] a beautiful woman [[researching]] for meaning to her life & a [[fantastic]] Trappist monk [[leaking]] from his [[crises]] of faith. They will meet and [[feelings]] will be stirred, but not even the Sand Diviner knows if they will find happiness or [[grief]], here, in THE GARDEN OF ALLAH.

The plot is pure hokum, but the [[kino]] is still [[huge]] fun & [[leggy]] to look at. Marlene Dietrich & Charles [[Boer]] are a superb screen [[couples]]. She is, to put it [[solely]], [[handsome]], and Boyer gives a most effective, understated performance, letting his sensitive face do much of his acting for him.

The supporting [[casting]] is [[wondrous]]: Basil Rathbone, in a sympathetic role as a Count who loves the desert; Joseph Schildkraut as a friendly, talkative guide (all the "Arabic" he & others speak in the film is pure gibberish); Lucile Watson as a gentle Mother Superior; Alan Marshal as an honorable young French officer; Tilly Losch as a dangerous dancer; Henry Brandon as a comic porter; John Carradine as the mysterious Sand Diviner; and magnificent Sir C. Aubrey Smith as a wise old priest.

Movie mavens will recognize Helen Jerome Eddy as a nun; Marcia Mae Jones & Bonita Granville (peeking over the nun's shoulder) as convent girls; gaunt Nigel De Brulier as a monastery lector; and Ferdinand Gottschalk as a hotel clerk, all uncredited.

Color films of the 1930's are both [[scarce]] & lovely to look at, and this movie is no [[immunities]] - the cinematography is as [[scenic]] as the desert itself. THE GARDEN OF ALLAH was the first Technicolor film to be shot on location. Yuma, Arizona gave the film makers all the sand dunes they could desire, but contaminated drinking water & 135 degree heat soon had the company in revolt. When the daily rushes showed Boyer's face had burned a bright tomato red, producer David O. Selznick finally gave in. The remainder of the film was shot on a Hollywood sound stage. --------------------------------------------- Result 5291 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What we have here is a damn good little nineties thriller that, while perhaps lacking in substance, still provides great entertainment throughout it's running time and overall does everything you could possibly want a film of this nature to do. I saw this film principally because it was directed by John Dahl - a highly underrated director behind great thrillers such as The Last Seduction, Rounders and Roadkill. I figured that if this film was up to standard of what I've already seen from the director, it would be well worth watching - and Red Rock West is certainly a film that Dahl can be proud of. The plot focuses on the overly moral Michael; a man travelling across America looking for work. He ends up finding it one day when he stumbles upon a bar in Red Rock County - only catch is that the job is to murder a man's wife. He's been mistaken for a killer named Lyle, but instead of doing the job; he plays both sides against each other and eventually plans to make a getaway. However, his attempts to escape are unsuccessful and he finds himself in a bad situation when the real Lyle turns up...

John Dahl appears to enjoy setting thrillers on the road; he did it three years earlier with Kill Me Again, and again almost a decade on from this film with Roadkill. It's not hard to see why Dahl chooses this sort of location, as it provides a fabulous atmosphere for a thriller the likes of this one. Dahl also provides his film with a 'film noir' like atmosphere, as the plot mainly focuses on the central character and the word he is plunged into is full of dark and mysterious characters. The acting is largely very good, with Nicholas Cage doing an excellent job in the lead role, and getting A-class support from Lara Flynn Boyle, J.T. Walsh and, of course, Dennis Hopper; who once again commands the screen with his over the top performance. It has to be said that the second half of the film isn't as gripping as the first, but Red Rock West certainly is never boring and the way that Dahl orchestrates the grand finale is excellent in that all the central characters get to be a part of it. Overall, Red Rock West is a film that you're unlikely to regret watching. It's thrilling throughout, and you can't ask for much more than that! --------------------------------------------- Result 5292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] When I watched this film the first time, it was a taped copy and the title was/is Caged Terror. I still own the tape, and I confess, I've watched it more than once from beginning to end! The film is extremely low budget and the dialogue is [[often]] unintentionally amusing! I have gotten a few of my friends to watch this and we've had some [[great]] laughs from the terrible script. The film concerns a couple, (remember this is like early 70's so they are just too hip man!) who go on a week-end camping trip in what I believe was supposed to be upstate NY. They have some hilarious dialogue after catching and eating a fish and the girl bemoans the death of the fish and that they ate it! The guy comes back with something goofy about how they ate the fish and now it was a part of them, and he goes; "And that's beautiful man!" Heavy man, really heavy! LOL! Anyway, along come a couple of Vietnam vets, one of who plays the flute, I believe. (At any rate they are musical fellows!) The guys are clearly attracted to the girl and when the couple prove unfriendly, they end up terrorizing them during the night. The guy ends up caged in a chicken coop, and has to watch his girl friend being ravished by the two guys. Actually, by the end of the night, she seems to be pretty into it, and when morning comes, the guys leave and the girl and guy are free to leave. Supposedly the guy has learned a lesson about how to treat people, and the girl has a smile on her face! :) Anyway, I would recommend this film highly to anyone looking for a damn good laugh! It never fails to amuse me anyway! If I could find this on DVD and replace my old tape copy, I'd actually buy it again, it's classic camp! You gotta love this stuff! When I watched this film the first time, it was a taped copy and the title was/is Caged Terror. I still own the tape, and I confess, I've watched it more than once from beginning to end! The film is extremely low budget and the dialogue is [[oftentimes]] unintentionally amusing! I have gotten a few of my friends to watch this and we've had some [[wondrous]] laughs from the terrible script. The film concerns a couple, (remember this is like early 70's so they are just too hip man!) who go on a week-end camping trip in what I believe was supposed to be upstate NY. They have some hilarious dialogue after catching and eating a fish and the girl bemoans the death of the fish and that they ate it! The guy comes back with something goofy about how they ate the fish and now it was a part of them, and he goes; "And that's beautiful man!" Heavy man, really heavy! LOL! Anyway, along come a couple of Vietnam vets, one of who plays the flute, I believe. (At any rate they are musical fellows!) The guys are clearly attracted to the girl and when the couple prove unfriendly, they end up terrorizing them during the night. The guy ends up caged in a chicken coop, and has to watch his girl friend being ravished by the two guys. Actually, by the end of the night, she seems to be pretty into it, and when morning comes, the guys leave and the girl and guy are free to leave. Supposedly the guy has learned a lesson about how to treat people, and the girl has a smile on her face! :) Anyway, I would recommend this film highly to anyone looking for a damn good laugh! It never fails to amuse me anyway! If I could find this on DVD and replace my old tape copy, I'd actually buy it again, it's classic camp! You gotta love this stuff! --------------------------------------------- Result 5293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Well, what can I [[say]], this [[movie]] really [[got]] to me, it's not so bad, as [[many]] say, I really loved it, [[although]] the idea [[seems]] so simple, and [[rather]] [[boring]], it isn't. [[First]] of all I enjoyed the soundtrack (Bryan [[Adams]]), it really goes with the [[movie]]. Second the [[simple]] story, and the [[drama]] of Spirit [[gets]] your attention. One thing I [[like]] the most is that they didn't give the stallion a [[human]] [[voice]] to interact with the other horses, it makes the [[movie]] more realistic, not [[many]] animations [[seem]] realistic now do they ?, but... I don't know, [[making]] animals talk is just so... lame.

One of the most [[beautiful]] animations of 2002 in my [[opinion]], I [[recommend]] it to everyone, not just the kids :), because it is very relaxing. Well, what can I [[tell]], this [[kino]] really [[ai]] to me, it's not so bad, as [[various]] say, I really loved it, [[though]] the idea [[looks]] so simple, and [[quite]] [[bored]], it isn't. [[Firstly]] of all I enjoyed the soundtrack (Bryan [[Adam]]), it really goes with the [[cinema]]. Second the [[uncomplicated]] story, and the [[tragedy]] of Spirit [[got]] your attention. One thing I [[likes]] the most is that they didn't give the stallion a [[humans]] [[vocals]] to interact with the other horses, it makes the [[movies]] more realistic, not [[various]] animations [[looks]] realistic now do they ?, but... I don't know, [[doing]] animals talk is just so... lame.

One of the most [[wondrous]] animations of 2002 in my [[visualise]], I [[recommends]] it to everyone, not just the kids :), because it is very relaxing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I've read one [[comment]] which labeled this film "[[trash]]" and "a [[waste]]

of time." I think this person got their political undies [[tugged]] a bit

too much.

I just rented the [[new]] [[Criterion]] DVD's of both [[Yellow]] and [[Blue]].

These films--although [[hardly]] great--have at least become of

[[historical]] interest as to the so-called "[[radical]] [[student]]

political-social [[movement]]"of the [[late]] '60s.

I hadn't [[seen]] either picture and from their [[notorious]] [[reputation]], I

was [[expecting]] some [[real]] [[porn]] (there isn't any.) There is [[frontal]]

nudity ([[including]] the [[still]] verboten frontal [[male]] nudity (automatic

NC-17--the Orwellian-X) in the U.S. But I wasn't [[expecting]] the [[films]]

in-your-face democratic socialist message.

[[Though]] it [[tends]] to the simplistic , I thought it occassionally [[made]]

its [[points]] well. Both films occassionally had me laughing out loud

and the director's [[commentary]] made it clear there was plenty of

parody in the film. Especially the supposedly "pornographic" sex

scenes. The first such scene is very [[realistic]]. The lead [[couple]] is

[[clumsy]], inept, funny and endearing in their first copulation scene.

The second--which caused the most complaints--has faked

cunnilingus and [[fellatio]]. And the last is the [[end]] of an [[angry]] [[fight]],

that is [[believable]].

The extras include an [[informative]] [[introduction]] to the [[film]], an

[[interview]] with the [[original]] [[American]] [[distributor]] and his [[attorney]],

excerpts from [[trial]] testimony in the U.S. and a "diary" commentary

by the director on some scenes.

This is the film that "blue noses" wouldn't let alone and led to the

pivotal "prurient interest with no social redeeming value" standard

that, thankfully, still stands.

Those with an interest in the quirks of history will find this a must

see. I've read one [[commentaries]] which labeled this film "[[litter]]" and "a [[wastes]]

of time." I think this person got their political undies [[tugging]] a bit

too much.

I just rented the [[novel]] [[Criteria]] DVD's of both [[Amber]] and [[Azul]].

These films--although [[practically]] great--have at least become of

[[historic]] interest as to the so-called "[[extremist]] [[learners]]

political-social [[movements]]"of the [[belated]] '60s.

I hadn't [[watched]] either picture and from their [[proverbial]] [[notoriety]], I

was [[awaiting]] some [[veritable]] [[porno]] (there isn't any.) There is [[lobe]]

nudity ([[include]] the [[however]] verboten frontal [[virile]] nudity (automatic

NC-17--the Orwellian-X) in the U.S. But I wasn't [[awaits]] the [[movie]]

in-your-face democratic socialist message.

[[If]] it [[strives]] to the simplistic , I thought it occassionally [[introduced]]

its [[dot]] well. Both films occassionally had me laughing out loud

and the director's [[comment]] made it clear there was plenty of

parody in the film. Especially the supposedly "pornographic" sex

scenes. The first such scene is very [[practical]]. The lead [[pair]] is

[[inconvenient]], inept, funny and endearing in their first copulation scene.

The second--which caused the most complaints--has faked

cunnilingus and [[blowjob]]. And the last is the [[ceases]] of an [[annoyed]] [[battling]],

that is [[reliable]].

The extras include an [[informational]] [[intro]] to the [[cinematography]], an

[[interviews]] with the [[initial]] [[Americas]] [[merchants]] and his [[prosecutors]],

excerpts from [[trials]] testimony in the U.S. and a "diary" commentary

by the director on some scenes.

This is the film that "blue noses" wouldn't let alone and led to the

pivotal "prurient interest with no social redeeming value" standard

that, thankfully, still stands.

Those with an interest in the quirks of history will find this a must

see. --------------------------------------------- Result 5295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I got Mirror Mirror mainly because [[Yvonne]] De [[Carlo]] was in it (I [[thought]] she was [[great]] in American Gothic) but sadly she didn't have a very big role in this film. It [[starts]] off OK and the pace moves along nicely...but by the [[end]] it [[starts]] [[getting]] a bit [[tedious]] and dull. That's not to [[say]] that this is a [[boring]] [[film]], but it's just very average and nothing spectacular. I didn't like the "posession" side of it and there were no decent gore scenes. Plus the 'main' [[story]] was very [[confusing]] and the ending doesn't make much [[sense]] at all. I did [[however]] like the [[story]] [[surrounding]] the Gothic [[girl]] and how she [[got]] revenge on her tormentors.

I wouldn't [[particularly]] recommend Mirror [[Mirror]] to horror fans - it's nothing to [[wet]] yourself over. I got Mirror Mirror mainly because [[Shaun]] De [[Carla]] was in it (I [[think]] she was [[large]] in American Gothic) but sadly she didn't have a very big role in this film. It [[startup]] off OK and the pace moves along nicely...but by the [[ends]] it [[outset]] [[obtain]] a bit [[monotonous]] and dull. That's not to [[says]] that this is a [[tiresome]] [[filmmaking]], but it's just very average and nothing spectacular. I didn't like the "posession" side of it and there were no decent gore scenes. Plus the 'main' [[tales]] was very [[disconcerting]] and the ending doesn't make much [[sensing]] at all. I did [[nevertheless]] like the [[saga]] [[surround]] the Gothic [[chick]] and how she [[gets]] revenge on her tormentors.

I wouldn't [[principally]] recommend Mirror [[Mirrored]] to horror fans - it's nothing to [[damp]] yourself over. --------------------------------------------- Result 5296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Name]] just says it all. I watched this movie with my dad when it [[came]] out and having [[served]] in [[Korea]] he had [[great]] [[admiration]] for the man. The disappointing thing about this film is that it only concentrate on a short period of the man's life - interestingly enough the man's entire life would have made such an epic bio-pic that it is staggering to [[imagine]] the cost for [[production]].

Some posters [[elude]] to the flawed characteristics about the man, which are cheap shots. The [[theme]] of the movie "Duty, Honor, Country" are not just mere words blathered from the lips of a high-brassed officer - it is the [[deep]] [[declaration]] of one man's total devotion to his country.

Ironically Peck being the liberal that he was garnered a better understanding of the man. He does a great job [[showing]] the fearless general [[tempered]] with the humane side of the man. [[Denomination]] just says it all. I watched this movie with my dad when it [[became]] out and having [[acted]] in [[Rok]] he had [[wondrous]] [[exclamation]] for the man. The disappointing thing about this film is that it only concentrate on a short period of the man's life - interestingly enough the man's entire life would have made such an epic bio-pic that it is staggering to [[imagines]] the cost for [[productivity]].

Some posters [[circumvent]] to the flawed characteristics about the man, which are cheap shots. The [[subject]] of the movie "Duty, Honor, Country" are not just mere words blathered from the lips of a high-brassed officer - it is the [[deepest]] [[proclamation]] of one man's total devotion to his country.

Ironically Peck being the liberal that he was garnered a better understanding of the man. He does a great job [[shows]] the fearless general [[dimmed]] with the humane side of the man. --------------------------------------------- Result 5297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Jeanette [[MacDonald]] and Nelson [[Eddy]] star in this "[[modern]]" musical that showcases MacDonald's [[comic]] [[abilities]]. [[Surreal]] 40s musical seem to be [[making]] fun of 40s [[fashions]] even as they were in [[current]] [[vogue]]. Eye-popping [[costumes]] and sets ([[yes]] B&W) add to the [[surreal]], dreamlike quality of the entire [[film]]. Several good [[songs]] enliven the [[film]], with the "[[Twinkle]] in [[Your]] [[Eye]]" number a [[total]] highlight, [[including]] a fun jitterbug number between [[MacDonald]] and Binnie Barnes. Also in the [[HUGE]] [[cast]] are [[Edward]] Everett Horton, Reginal Owen, [[Mona]] [[Maris]], Douglas Dumbrille and [[Anne]] Jeffreys. Also to been [[seen]] in [[extended]] bit parts are Esther Dale, Almira [[Sessions]], Grace Hayle, Gertrude [[Hoffman]], Rafaela Ottiano, Odette Myrtile, [[Cecil]] Cunningham and [[many]] others.

[[Great]] [[fun]] and nice to [[see]] the [[wonderful]] [[MacDonald]] in her jitterbug/[[vamp]] [[routines]]. She [[could]] do it all. Jeanette [[mcdonald]] and Nelson [[Vortex]] star in this "[[trendy]]" musical that showcases MacDonald's [[comedian]] [[skills]]. [[Unreal]] 40s musical seem to be [[doing]] fun of 40s [[fads]] even as they were in [[underway]] [[popularity]]. Eye-popping [[clothes]] and sets ([[yea]] B&W) add to the [[bizarre]], dreamlike quality of the entire [[movie]]. Several good [[hymns]] enliven the [[films]], with the "[[Dishwashing]] in [[Uour]] [[Ocular]]" number a [[whole]] highlight, [[containing]] a fun jitterbug number between [[mcdonalds]] and Binnie Barnes. Also in the [[GIGANTIC]] [[casting]] are [[Edwards]] Everett Horton, Reginal Owen, [[Mina]] [[Husbands]], Douglas Dumbrille and [[Anna]] Jeffreys. Also to been [[watched]] in [[elongated]] bit parts are Esther Dale, Almira [[Session]], Grace Hayle, Gertrude [[Hoffmann]], Rafaela Ottiano, Odette Myrtile, [[Cecile]] Cunningham and [[myriad]] others.

[[Grand]] [[amusing]] and nice to [[consults]] the [[wondrous]] [[mcdonalds]] in her jitterbug/[[vampire]] [[routine]]. She [[wo]] do it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Originally aired as an ABC Movie of the Week. This involves two young innocent [[female]] [[college]] students who are railroaded into a [[prison]] [[camp]] in a [[little]] Southern [[town]]. They aren't allowed [[phone]] [[calls]] and nobody knows they're there. What follows is rape, torture, [[beatings]], humiliation and degradation leading to a very [[disturbing]] conclusion.

The [[TV]] version was (for its time) grim. No nudity and the [[beatings]] were pretty [[tame]] but the [[overall]] feeling of sleaziness wore one down. The unrated version is even worse--there's [[plentiful]] nudity, the violence is extreme and, in one [[particularly]] disgusting [[sequence]], we see a [[crying]] female [[prisoner]] [[forced]] to [[strip]] while a lesbian [[guard]] "[[uses]]" her. YUCK! There's nothing wrong with exploitation [[films]] but this one just goes over the brink. You get the feeling that the filmmakers [[enjoy]] having these poor women being tortured and degraded--all this is shoved in your face like you're [[supposed]] to [[enjoy]] it. The [[needlessly]] downbeat ending doesn't [[help]].

I'm giving it a 3 because the acting is good--but that actually makes the movie [[harder]] to watch. A sick, sleazy film. Not [[recommended]]. Originally aired as an ABC Movie of the Week. This involves two young innocent [[girls]] [[academies]] students who are railroaded into a [[prisons]] [[encampment]] in a [[petit]] Southern [[municipal]]. They aren't allowed [[phones]] [[asks]] and nobody knows they're there. What follows is rape, torture, [[strokes]], humiliation and degradation leading to a very [[disconcerting]] conclusion.

The [[TVS]] version was (for its time) grim. No nudity and the [[coups]] were pretty [[tammy]] but the [[holistic]] feeling of sleaziness wore one down. The unrated version is even worse--there's [[abundant]] nudity, the violence is extreme and, in one [[peculiarly]] disgusting [[sequences]], we see a [[blubbering]] female [[inmate]] [[obligated]] to [[strapping]] while a lesbian [[guards]] "[[utilizes]]" her. YUCK! There's nothing wrong with exploitation [[film]] but this one just goes over the brink. You get the feeling that the filmmakers [[enjoying]] having these poor women being tortured and degraded--all this is shoved in your face like you're [[alleged]] to [[enjoying]] it. The [[senselessly]] downbeat ending doesn't [[pomoc]].

I'm giving it a 3 because the acting is good--but that actually makes the movie [[tighter]] to watch. A sick, sleazy film. Not [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5299 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie the other night and I have to honestly say it's one of the worst films I've ever seen. The acting is fair, but the plot is totally ridiculous. A killer is born because of all the "energy used to make the movie" and if the film is burned the killer will die? How unbelievable is that? The characters were underdeveloped to say the least...for example, all of a sudden the man mentions "Aren't you trying to complete the film because your mother couldn't?" So we're supposed to go along with this? We had no idea it was her daughter until half way through the film. The movie really didn't spotlight on anyone, we didn't know anything about the main people who survived except Ringwald's character was a whiney actress, the guy was on the set when the people died and Raffy wanted to be a director like her mother. Not truly diving in to know who they are. Seemed things were rushed to just get to the killings. The whole plot is entirely too weak for my taste and I was extremely disappointed. Anyone who enjoyed this piece of crap, obviously needs to learn a thing or two about film making. I can't believe anyone would agree to star or even work on this picture. It's not funny, it was not scary and was cliche through the entire film. I found myself predicting what would happen before each scene, which believe you me wasn't hard at all to do. It's a disgrace and I'm deeply sorry I wasted an hour and a half watching the mess. 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5300 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dreyfuss plays a mob boss who lost his mind, but now he's "fixed." Lane is his girl who's been messing around with his Number One (Goldblum), who's supposed to have something going with Lane's sister (Barkin).

With what anyone could consider an all-star supporting cast (Burt Reynolds, Gabriel Byrne, Kyle MacLachlan and even an appearance by Richard Pryor) can't help this plot, as Dreyfuss proves he's not "fixed" and tries to kill just about everyone in sight.

You know, it's not like you didn't know what was coming. The first ten minutes were nothing but guys trying to tell Goldblum what was in store for him when Dreyfuss gets out, but I'll save you all the trouble: skip this movie.

The actual reason I picked this movie is because I've been on a Diane Lane kick lately and have been trying to see all her movies. The real let-down for me wasn't just the terrible plot, but also the fact that she doesn't show up until the last fifteen minutes of the movie (although we hear about her all through the movie). Even being a fan of over half of the cast can't help me enjoy this film. The parts where the suspense was supposed to mount found me laughing at what was actually going on.

3 out of 10 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 5301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Another variation and [[improvisation]] on the famous and beloved children tale, La Bete (1975) aka The Beast [[tries]] to imagine (in very graphic and what may seem offensive and disturbing but in reality rather silly and comical way), what actually happened between Beauty and the Beast? I am amused by many reviews and comments that seem to look too deeply into this movie. I would not go so far as saying that it is a serious and dark exploration of such subjects as sexual frustration, longing, fulfillment, or satirical criticizing of the catholic Religion. I [[would]] not [[even]] call it a horror-erotic movie. It's more of the parody on all genres it touches or mentions even though it's got some shocking moments in all departments that sure will stay in your memory.

The long (way too long) scene between an Aristocratic young woman and the supposedly horrifying but the most [[laughable]] I've ever seen in the movies creature with truly impressive...well anatomy, is set to the clavichord music of Scarlatti and is hysterical. My husband and I both laughed out loud at the exaggerated details of the encounter. The moral of the scene is - beauty can and will defeat the monster. The question is - who is the target audience for the film? For an erotic picture, it is too verbose; for an art movie - it's got too many jaw-dropping scenes of sheer madness and I'd say an abrupt ending. IMO, the film creator did not mean for it to be a serious drama. As a parody of art house/horror/erotica, it is funny and certainly original. Have a good laugh and try not to look for some deep meaning. This story of the curious Beauties and the lustful Beasts certainly is not recommended for co-viewing with the children. The opening scene that may shock an unprepared viewer much more than the infamous scene of bestiality can be successfully used On Discovery channel for the program like "In the world of animals - mating habits and rituals of horses". Another variation and [[jam]] on the famous and beloved children tale, La Bete (1975) aka The Beast [[try]] to imagine (in very graphic and what may seem offensive and disturbing but in reality rather silly and comical way), what actually happened between Beauty and the Beast? I am amused by many reviews and comments that seem to look too deeply into this movie. I would not go so far as saying that it is a serious and dark exploration of such subjects as sexual frustration, longing, fulfillment, or satirical criticizing of the catholic Religion. I [[should]] not [[yet]] call it a horror-erotic movie. It's more of the parody on all genres it touches or mentions even though it's got some shocking moments in all departments that sure will stay in your memory.

The long (way too long) scene between an Aristocratic young woman and the supposedly horrifying but the most [[grotesque]] I've ever seen in the movies creature with truly impressive...well anatomy, is set to the clavichord music of Scarlatti and is hysterical. My husband and I both laughed out loud at the exaggerated details of the encounter. The moral of the scene is - beauty can and will defeat the monster. The question is - who is the target audience for the film? For an erotic picture, it is too verbose; for an art movie - it's got too many jaw-dropping scenes of sheer madness and I'd say an abrupt ending. IMO, the film creator did not mean for it to be a serious drama. As a parody of art house/horror/erotica, it is funny and certainly original. Have a good laugh and try not to look for some deep meaning. This story of the curious Beauties and the lustful Beasts certainly is not recommended for co-viewing with the children. The opening scene that may shock an unprepared viewer much more than the infamous scene of bestiality can be successfully used On Discovery channel for the program like "In the world of animals - mating habits and rituals of horses". --------------------------------------------- Result 5302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] German filmmaker Ulli Lommel has managed a task many horror fans thought was [[impossible]]: he's unseated fellow Teuton Uwe Boll for the crown of [[director]] of the [[worst]] horror [[film]] ever [[made]].

Lommel is truly the Ed [[Wood]] of the [[new]] millennium. This [[film]] is as shoddy and [[laughable]] as the best-worst of [[EW]]. I am both proud and [[embarrassed]] to [[say]] that I [[watched]] it in toto, morbidly [[fascinated]] to [[see]] just low the bar [[could]] be set. The answer is: [[subterranean]]; Lommel dug a pit and buried it.

The fun [[begins]] with the cast of international nobodies. [[Only]] [[someone]] who has [[lived]] in Los [[Angeles]], where [[every]] [[auto]] mechanic, [[doctor]] and mailman is an [[actor]] or [[screenwriter]] waiting to be [[discovered]], [[could]] [[easily]] [[understand]] how Lommel managed to [[find]] so many wannabe [[actors]] willing to spew his [[ridiculous]] dialog with a straight [[face]].

The main character, a villainous [[beat]] cop, is played by a German [[actor]] with a thick German accent. Aside from being a serial killer, he is [[also]] the [[oldest]] beat cop in [[LA]]. Despite the fact that he [[stops]] innocent [[women]] [[drivers]] and takes them into custody, then drags them into his [[home]] (which inexplicably is the [[top]] [[floor]] of a furniture [[warehouse]]), and does all this in [[plain]] [[sight]] of his rookie partners, the [[LAPD]] [[refuses]] to [[investigate]], [[going]] so far as to physically [[attack]] one of his accusers in a ninja [[style]] raid on his apartment.

The sets are [[excruciatingly]] [[bad]]. The [[production]] designer's budget [[apparently]] included just enough [[money]] for a can of [[paint]]; enough to paint "Precinct 707" on a cardboard wall.

Since the [[actors]] were [[obviously]] unpaid non-professionals--a sad [[assortment]] of European emigres ([[possibly]] [[deportees]] if they [[acted]] in their native [[lands]]), bimbos, mimbos, and [[desperate]] middle-aged women--and [[since]] little if any [[money]] was spent on sets, [[special]] efx, [[locations]] or other production [[value]], it is only fair to mention that they did spring for a few genuine-looking [[police]] uniforms. Sadly, they couldn't afford a [[police]] [[car]]; the uniformed [[cops]] [[cruise]] the streets in a [[shiny]] [[new]] [[Mercury]] rental.

[[More]] than half of the story focuses on the dirty deeds of our deranged German LAPD officer and the futile efforts of two young rookies to stop him. One of these young actors is especially pitiable because he's the only actor in this whole mess with even a vague shot at a real career in the movies. The other fits right in, with a rockabilly hairdo and tortured Brando posing that needs to be seen to be appreciated.

The latter part of the film is where the title gets its zombie, as the [[victims]] of our killer are resurrected after he murders a girl who had just visited some voodoo priestesses to have a protective spell put on her. Don't ask why a girl from Romania would resort to voodooism in anticipation of being murdered, just accept Lommel's logic and enjoy the absurd ride.

After much prolonged hand-clawing out of straw-covered roadside graves, the zombie girls manage to make their appearance. They look exactly as they did before death, maybe even prettier, with black glamor make-up generously airbrushed around their eyes. Looking nothing like zombies, they look more like high fashion models ready for the runway.

At this point in the movie Lommel borrows a creative [[note]] from his lauded countryman Boll, and injects [[large]] doses of cheesy Euro-trash techno into the soundtrack. We're talking prehistoric electronic bumblebee noise. Stuff they might have played in an Ibiza disco when Lommel was still young enough to shake his booty.

Unlike other zombies, Lommel's girls speak and function as normal... er, I mean, as they did before becoming zombified. This gives our auteur ample opportunities to shower us with more of his golden dialog. Yes, a golden shower it is.

I won't spoil anything by revealing the shock ending. All I can say is it's perfectly in tune with the rest of this masterpiece. The spirit of Ed Wood lives on... or should I [[say]] his geist. German filmmaker Ulli Lommel has managed a task many horror fans thought was [[unable]]: he's unseated fellow Teuton Uwe Boll for the crown of [[superintendent]] of the [[gravest]] horror [[cinema]] ever [[accomplished]].

Lommel is truly the Ed [[Bois]] of the [[newest]] millennium. This [[filmmaking]] is as shoddy and [[nonsensical]] as the best-worst of [[ICK]]. I am both proud and [[ashamed]] to [[said]] that I [[seen]] it in toto, morbidly [[mesmerised]] to [[seeing]] just low the bar [[wo]] be set. The answer is: [[underground]]; Lommel dug a pit and buried it.

The fun [[launched]] with the cast of international nobodies. [[Purely]] [[everybody]] who has [[resided]] in Los [[Las]], where [[each]] [[motor]] mechanic, [[physicians]] and mailman is an [[protagonist]] or [[writer]] waiting to be [[uncovered]], [[wo]] [[comfortably]] [[realise]] how Lommel managed to [[found]] so many wannabe [[protagonists]] willing to spew his [[silly]] dialog with a straight [[confronting]].

The main character, a villainous [[defeats]] cop, is played by a German [[protagonist]] with a thick German accent. Aside from being a serial killer, he is [[similarly]] the [[older]] beat cop in [[LAS]]. Despite the fact that he [[ceasing]] innocent [[girl]] [[driver]] and takes them into custody, then drags them into his [[households]] (which inexplicably is the [[supreme]] [[storey]] of a furniture [[platt]]), and does all this in [[lowland]] [[eyesight]] of his rookie partners, the [[NYPD]] [[disallowed]] to [[explores]], [[go]] so far as to physically [[attacks]] one of his accusers in a ninja [[styles]] raid on his apartment.

The sets are [[awfully]] [[negative]]. The [[productivity]] designer's budget [[ostensibly]] included just enough [[cash]] for a can of [[paintings]]; enough to paint "Precinct 707" on a cardboard wall.

Since the [[protagonists]] were [[apparently]] unpaid non-professionals--a sad [[variety]] of European emigres ([[arguably]] [[evacuees]] if they [[reacted]] in their native [[territories]]), bimbos, mimbos, and [[distraught]] middle-aged women--and [[because]] little if any [[cash]] was spent on sets, [[peculiar]] efx, [[placements]] or other production [[values]], it is only fair to mention that they did spring for a few genuine-looking [[cop]] uniforms. Sadly, they couldn't afford a [[cop]] [[motor]]; the uniformed [[cop]] [[cruising]] the streets in a [[glossy]] [[novel]] [[Hg]] rental.

[[Most]] than half of the story focuses on the dirty deeds of our deranged German LAPD officer and the futile efforts of two young rookies to stop him. One of these young actors is especially pitiable because he's the only actor in this whole mess with even a vague shot at a real career in the movies. The other fits right in, with a rockabilly hairdo and tortured Brando posing that needs to be seen to be appreciated.

The latter part of the film is where the title gets its zombie, as the [[fatalities]] of our killer are resurrected after he murders a girl who had just visited some voodoo priestesses to have a protective spell put on her. Don't ask why a girl from Romania would resort to voodooism in anticipation of being murdered, just accept Lommel's logic and enjoy the absurd ride.

After much prolonged hand-clawing out of straw-covered roadside graves, the zombie girls manage to make their appearance. They look exactly as they did before death, maybe even prettier, with black glamor make-up generously airbrushed around their eyes. Looking nothing like zombies, they look more like high fashion models ready for the runway.

At this point in the movie Lommel borrows a creative [[memo]] from his lauded countryman Boll, and injects [[big]] doses of cheesy Euro-trash techno into the soundtrack. We're talking prehistoric electronic bumblebee noise. Stuff they might have played in an Ibiza disco when Lommel was still young enough to shake his booty.

Unlike other zombies, Lommel's girls speak and function as normal... er, I mean, as they did before becoming zombified. This gives our auteur ample opportunities to shower us with more of his golden dialog. Yes, a golden shower it is.

I won't spoil anything by revealing the shock ending. All I can say is it's perfectly in tune with the rest of this masterpiece. The spirit of Ed Wood lives on... or should I [[said]] his geist. --------------------------------------------- Result 5303 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] In a way, [[Corridors]] of Time is a success [[story]] because the [[movie]] reaches its goal : being seen by thousands. But it fails at making them laugh...

Les Visiteurs has had its success, because the subject was an original way of considering the time travel : forget about Zemeckis's Back to the future, here comes the old France, the middle-age [[knight]] and its nearly barbaric way of life. Full of pride, funny thanks to the ancient words he uses, Montmirail can sometimes be disgusting but he keeps his honor. Then comes the sequel.

Nobody had foreseen the tremendous success of Les Visiteurs, the first. And it's no use being a movie expert to realize that the Corridors of Time has been made for money.

The general story begins after the end of Les Visiteurs, and immediately tries to justify the sequel with a time paradox that would have needed some second tought. Explanation : it's no use trying to get back the jewelry Jacquouille has stolen ; don't you remember this nice red shiny and expensive car he bought at the end of the 1st episode ? Where do you think he found the money ? Selling the jewelry... And that's only one of many holes Poiré tries to avoid... and fails.

Let's have a look at the characters : Montmirail doesn't change, he's just a little more [[boring]]. Regarding Frenegonde... that's another story : Valérie Lemercier decided not to compromise herself in this sequel to avoid getting stuck in the bourgeoise role. And Muriel Robin tries to imitate her in a way that I found so pitiful I nearly felt pain for her. And Poiré doesn't realize that a cast of humorists isn't enough to make a good comedy.

Forget about the time travels, about the digital effects, concentrate on the story and you'll see that there's enough room on a mail stamp to write it 10 times.

The main interest of this film is the landscapes. A movie for youngsters, let's say up to 13 years old. In a way, [[Passageways]] of Time is a success [[fairytales]] because the [[filmmaking]] reaches its goal : being seen by thousands. But it fails at making them laugh...

Les Visiteurs has had its success, because the subject was an original way of considering the time travel : forget about Zemeckis's Back to the future, here comes the old France, the middle-age [[caballero]] and its nearly barbaric way of life. Full of pride, funny thanks to the ancient words he uses, Montmirail can sometimes be disgusting but he keeps his honor. Then comes the sequel.

Nobody had foreseen the tremendous success of Les Visiteurs, the first. And it's no use being a movie expert to realize that the Corridors of Time has been made for money.

The general story begins after the end of Les Visiteurs, and immediately tries to justify the sequel with a time paradox that would have needed some second tought. Explanation : it's no use trying to get back the jewelry Jacquouille has stolen ; don't you remember this nice red shiny and expensive car he bought at the end of the 1st episode ? Where do you think he found the money ? Selling the jewelry... And that's only one of many holes Poiré tries to avoid... and fails.

Let's have a look at the characters : Montmirail doesn't change, he's just a little more [[monotonous]]. Regarding Frenegonde... that's another story : Valérie Lemercier decided not to compromise herself in this sequel to avoid getting stuck in the bourgeoise role. And Muriel Robin tries to imitate her in a way that I found so pitiful I nearly felt pain for her. And Poiré doesn't realize that a cast of humorists isn't enough to make a good comedy.

Forget about the time travels, about the digital effects, concentrate on the story and you'll see that there's enough room on a mail stamp to write it 10 times.

The main interest of this film is the landscapes. A movie for youngsters, let's say up to 13 years old. --------------------------------------------- Result 5304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] It was interesting to see how accurate the writing was on the geek buzz words, yet very [[naive]] on the corporate world. The Justice Department would catch more of the big corp giants if they did such naive things to win. The real corporate world is much more subtle and interesting, yet every bit as sinister. I seriously doubt ANY corp would actually kill someone directly; even the mod is more indirect these days. In the real world, they do kill people with nicotine, pollution, additives, poisons, etc. This movie must have been developed by some garage geeks, I think, and the studios didn't know the difference. They just wanted something to capitalize on the Microsoft antitrust case in the news. It was interesting to see how accurate the writing was on the geek buzz words, yet very [[ingenuous]] on the corporate world. The Justice Department would catch more of the big corp giants if they did such naive things to win. The real corporate world is much more subtle and interesting, yet every bit as sinister. I seriously doubt ANY corp would actually kill someone directly; even the mod is more indirect these days. In the real world, they do kill people with nicotine, pollution, additives, poisons, etc. This movie must have been developed by some garage geeks, I think, and the studios didn't know the difference. They just wanted something to capitalize on the Microsoft antitrust case in the news. --------------------------------------------- Result 5305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The problem with the 1985 [[version]] of this [[movie]] is [[simple]]; Indiana Jones was so closely modeled after [[Alan]] Quartermain (or at [[least]] is an Alan Quartermain [[TYPE]] of character), that the '85 [[director]] made the mistake of [[plundering]] the IJ [[movies]] for dialog and [[story]] far too deeply. What you got as a finished [[product]] was a jumbled mess of the [[name]] Alan Quartermain, in an [[uneven]] hodge podge of a cheaply [[imitated]] IJ saga (with a [[touch]] of Austin Powers-esquire cheese here and there).

It was [[labeled]] by [[many]] critics to have been a "[[great]] parody," or "[[unintentional]] [[comedy]]." Unintentional is the word. This [[movie]] was never [[intended]] to be [[humorous]]; [[witty]], [[yes]], but not humorous. Unfortunately, it's [[witless]] [[rather]] than witty.

With this [[new]] M4TV mini-series, you [[get]] [[much]] more story, [[character]] [[development]] of your lead, solid portrayals, and a [[fine]], [[even]], [[entertaining]] [[blend]]. This [[story]] is a bit long; much [[longer]] than its [[predecessors]], but [[deservedly]] so as this [[version]] [[carries]] a [[real]] storyline and not just [[action]] and [[Eye]] Candy. [[While]] it [[features]] both action and [[Eye]] Candy, it also [[corrects]] the [[mistake]] [[made]] in the 1985 version by forgetting IJ all together and [[going]] back to the source materials for AQ, [[making]] for a fine, well - thought - out plot, and some nice complementing sub-plots.

Now this attempt is not the all out action-extravaganza that is Indiana Jones. [[Nor]] is it a [[poor]] [[attempt]] to be so. This vehicle is plot and [[character]] driven and is a [[beautiful]] rendition of the AQ/KSM saga. Filmed on location in South [[Africa]], the [[audience]] is [[granted]] [[beautiful]] (if desolate) [[vistas]], SA [[aboriginal]] [[cultures]], and some nice [[wildlife]] footage to [[blend]] [[smoothly]] with the performances and storyline here.

Steve Boyum totally surprised me with this one, as I have never been one to subscribe to his [[vision]]. In fact, I have disliked most of his work as a director, until this attempt. I hope this is more a new vein of talent and less the fluke that it seems to be.

This version rates a 9.8/10 on the "TV" scale from...

the Fiend :. The problem with the 1985 [[stepping]] of this [[kino]] is [[simpler]]; Indiana Jones was so closely modeled after [[Allan]] Quartermain (or at [[less]] is an Alan Quartermain [[KIND]] of character), that the '85 [[headmaster]] made the mistake of [[looting]] the IJ [[movie]] for dialog and [[history]] far too deeply. What you got as a finished [[merchandise]] was a jumbled mess of the [[behalf]] Alan Quartermain, in an [[ragged]] hodge podge of a cheaply [[replicated]] IJ saga (with a [[touching]] of Austin Powers-esquire cheese here and there).

It was [[labelled]] by [[various]] critics to have been a "[[awesome]] parody," or "[[coincidental]] [[parody]]." Unintentional is the word. This [[cinematography]] was never [[intend]] to be [[funny]]; [[spiritual]], [[yep]], but not humorous. Unfortunately, it's [[dolt]] [[quite]] than witty.

With this [[novo]] M4TV mini-series, you [[obtain]] [[very]] more story, [[nature]] [[evolution]] of your lead, solid portrayals, and a [[alright]], [[yet]], [[amuse]] [[blended]]. This [[narratives]] is a bit long; much [[most]] than its [[ancestors]], but [[correctly]] so as this [[stepping]] [[carrying]] a [[actual]] storyline and not just [[activity]] and [[Eyes]] Candy. [[Though]] it [[attribute]] both action and [[Eyes]] Candy, it also [[corrected]] the [[mistaken]] [[effected]] in the 1985 version by forgetting IJ all together and [[gonna]] back to the source materials for AQ, [[doing]] for a fine, well - thought - out plot, and some nice complementing sub-plots.

Now this attempt is not the all out action-extravaganza that is Indiana Jones. [[Oder]] is it a [[pauper]] [[attempting]] to be so. This vehicle is plot and [[nature]] driven and is a [[leggy]] rendition of the AQ/KSM saga. Filmed on location in South [[Continents]], the [[spectators]] is [[attributed]] [[brilliant]] (if desolate) [[prospects]], SA [[indigenous]] [[crop]], and some nice [[animals]] footage to [[mix]] [[mildly]] with the performances and storyline here.

Steve Boyum totally surprised me with this one, as I have never been one to subscribe to his [[insight]]. In fact, I have disliked most of his work as a director, until this attempt. I hope this is more a new vein of talent and less the fluke that it seems to be.

This version rates a 9.8/10 on the "TV" scale from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 5306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] at the [[Edmonton]] [[International]] [[Film]] [[Festival]], with the [[great]] Dr. Uwe Boll in attendance.

The film is, [[simply]] put, very, very [[bad]]. And no, not in the [[usual]] Uwe Boll "so bad it's actually [[entertaining]]" way, but just plain bad. The plot concerns a [[man]] who leads a [[terrible]] life (because of a [[past]] criminal [[record]], [[apparently]]), can't get a job, and with an [[awful]] 900 [[pound]] cheating [[wife]]. This [[man]] turns to his cult-leader uncle in a [[plan]] to [[steal]] a truck [[load]] of toys that contain the bird flu [[virus]]. Al [[Qaeda]] also has [[designs]] on [[stealing]] the toys, and what follows is just under two [[hours]] of [[completely]] [[incomprehensible]] [[sex]] and violence.

The acting is [[awful]] (except for Dave [[Foley]], who really [[tries]], [[despite]] it all), the jokes never [[rise]] above [[children]] being shot in the [[chest]] in [[slow]] motion, and people [[taking]] a [[poo]]. It's [[supposed]] to be [[satire]], but I'm not sure of what.

[[Think]] "[[Airplane]]!", but [[done]] by the creators of [[South]] Park, and without any [[jokes]]. I [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]] at the [[Saskatoon]] [[World]] [[Movie]] [[Feast]], with the [[tremendous]] Dr. Uwe Boll in attendance.

The film is, [[solely]] put, very, very [[rotten]]. And no, not in the [[routine]] Uwe Boll "so bad it's actually [[amuse]]" way, but just plain bad. The plot concerns a [[dude]] who leads a [[terrifying]] life (because of a [[previous]] criminal [[records]], [[seemingly]]), can't get a job, and with an [[gruesome]] 900 [[pounds]] cheating [[femme]]. This [[men]] turns to his cult-leader uncle in a [[schemes]] to [[stole]] a truck [[loads]] of toys that contain the bird flu [[viruses]]. Al [[Qaida]] also has [[designing]] on [[fly]] the toys, and what follows is just under two [[hour]] of [[perfectly]] [[unimaginable]] [[sexuality]] and violence.

The acting is [[frightful]] (except for Dave [[Volley]], who really [[endeavour]], [[while]] it all), the jokes never [[soaring]] above [[kids]] being shot in the [[torso]] in [[sluggish]] motion, and people [[pick]] a [[chit]]. It's [[presumed]] to be [[sarcasm]], but I'm not sure of what.

[[Thought]] "[[Air]]!", but [[effected]] by the creators of [[Southerly]] Park, and without any [[gags]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] As I was watching this [[movie]] I was thinking,[[OK]] it'll get good any moment...I was wrong. The [[real]] best part of this movie was when it was over. A [[complete]] [[waste]] of 92 minutes. All seriousness aside the best [[part]] was when the Wendigo finally showed up which was at the end and you couldn't really even see him that good. And the tail end was really kind of dumb as well. There was too many sections in the movie where you thought something was [[going]] to happen but was a let down. The worse [[part]] is there was more talk of the Wendigo then there was Wendigo. For the [[creature]] to be so [[bad]],you definitely couldn't tell it by this [[movie]]. As I was watching this [[filmmaking]] I was thinking,[[OKAY]] it'll get good any moment...I was wrong. The [[veritable]] best part of this movie was when it was over. A [[finish]] [[wastes]] of 92 minutes. All seriousness aside the best [[portions]] was when the Wendigo finally showed up which was at the end and you couldn't really even see him that good. And the tail end was really kind of dumb as well. There was too many sections in the movie where you thought something was [[gonna]] to happen but was a let down. The worse [[portion]] is there was more talk of the Wendigo then there was Wendigo. For the [[monster]] to be so [[rotten]],you definitely couldn't tell it by this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5308 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] ****[[SPOILER]] ALERT**** All throughout Australia the summer turned into a [[deluge]] of rain and hail stones the size of baseballs that was causing havoc in coastal cities like Sydney. It's under these [[hectic]] conditions that tax lawyer [[David]] Burton, [[Richard]] Chamberlain,got involved in a [[case]], as a defense attorney, involving the death of a local aborigine who was found dead outside a Sydney bar.

Having five fellow aborigines arrested for Billy Cormans,Athol Compton, death it's determined by the police coroner that Billy died of drowning not by violence even though he had bruises on his neck and shoulders. Yet the court decided to prosecute the five for his death charging them with manslaughter instead of murder.

David defending the five [[gets]] no help from them in their defense with the accused assailants opting to remain quite and keep what happened to Billy to themselves and take what's coming to them from the court. One of the defendants Chris, David Gulpili, begin to somehow invades David's dreams as if he want's to tell him what was really behind Billy's death.

David at first not taking his dreams of Chris seriously begins to sense that their real when he meet him at the courthouse. Chris confirms David's dreams by showing him a strange looking black rock that David saw Chris have in his dreams. Later meeting Chris and, what turns out to be an aborigine shaman, Charlie (Nandjiwarna Amagula) who came to his house that evening David is told that he, like Charlie, has spiritual powers that he inherited from his mother's grandfather. Those powers will reveal to him the future that has to do with the strange weather conditions that are flooding the Australian continent. The earth,Chris tells David, is going through a gigantic cleansing cycle with the old world about to be washed away and the new world ready to take it's place.

David is confused about what both Chris and Charlie are telling him but as the rains continue to increase and the ocean waves start to rise he feels that something terrible is going to happen. David want's to know if it's all aborigine folklore or there's some scientific facts, or logic, behind their end of world-like revelations.

By now it's obvious that both Chris and Charlie are members of an aborigine tribe right in the heart of modern Sydney. That alone can get Chris off, as well as his four friends, for the murder of Billy. Since the Australian government will not prosecute tribal aborigines, leaving any justice to be done by the tribes themselves. Still Chris refuses to admit he's a member of a native tribe and he and his four friends are convicted of manslaughter in Billy's death with the sentences to be handed down by the judge within days.

David now determined to find out what was the reason for Chris' silence, and why Billy had to die, is taken by Chris to the scene of the crime. It's there that David finds out that Billy betrayed Chris' tribe members by going there with Billy not being a member of Chris's aborigine tribe. It's also revealed to David that he himself has some kind of spiritual connection with the Austrailan aborigines as both Charlie and his step-father Rev. Burton,David Parslow, told him.

The stage is now set for the great and final cleansing cycle that David's been seeing in both his night-time dreams and day-time visions. It comes in the form of a massive tidal wave rolling out of the Pacific Ocean into the Australian coast city of Sydney and then submerges the entire continent. ****[[BAFFLE]] ALERT**** All throughout Australia the summer turned into a [[outpouring]] of rain and hail stones the size of baseballs that was causing havoc in coastal cities like Sydney. It's under these [[frenzied]] conditions that tax lawyer [[Davide]] Burton, [[Ritchie]] Chamberlain,got involved in a [[lawsuit]], as a defense attorney, involving the death of a local aborigine who was found dead outside a Sydney bar.

Having five fellow aborigines arrested for Billy Cormans,Athol Compton, death it's determined by the police coroner that Billy died of drowning not by violence even though he had bruises on his neck and shoulders. Yet the court decided to prosecute the five for his death charging them with manslaughter instead of murder.

David defending the five [[got]] no help from them in their defense with the accused assailants opting to remain quite and keep what happened to Billy to themselves and take what's coming to them from the court. One of the defendants Chris, David Gulpili, begin to somehow invades David's dreams as if he want's to tell him what was really behind Billy's death.

David at first not taking his dreams of Chris seriously begins to sense that their real when he meet him at the courthouse. Chris confirms David's dreams by showing him a strange looking black rock that David saw Chris have in his dreams. Later meeting Chris and, what turns out to be an aborigine shaman, Charlie (Nandjiwarna Amagula) who came to his house that evening David is told that he, like Charlie, has spiritual powers that he inherited from his mother's grandfather. Those powers will reveal to him the future that has to do with the strange weather conditions that are flooding the Australian continent. The earth,Chris tells David, is going through a gigantic cleansing cycle with the old world about to be washed away and the new world ready to take it's place.

David is confused about what both Chris and Charlie are telling him but as the rains continue to increase and the ocean waves start to rise he feels that something terrible is going to happen. David want's to know if it's all aborigine folklore or there's some scientific facts, or logic, behind their end of world-like revelations.

By now it's obvious that both Chris and Charlie are members of an aborigine tribe right in the heart of modern Sydney. That alone can get Chris off, as well as his four friends, for the murder of Billy. Since the Australian government will not prosecute tribal aborigines, leaving any justice to be done by the tribes themselves. Still Chris refuses to admit he's a member of a native tribe and he and his four friends are convicted of manslaughter in Billy's death with the sentences to be handed down by the judge within days.

David now determined to find out what was the reason for Chris' silence, and why Billy had to die, is taken by Chris to the scene of the crime. It's there that David finds out that Billy betrayed Chris' tribe members by going there with Billy not being a member of Chris's aborigine tribe. It's also revealed to David that he himself has some kind of spiritual connection with the Austrailan aborigines as both Charlie and his step-father Rev. Burton,David Parslow, told him.

The stage is now set for the great and final cleansing cycle that David's been seeing in both his night-time dreams and day-time visions. It comes in the form of a massive tidal wave rolling out of the Pacific Ocean into the Australian coast city of Sydney and then submerges the entire continent. --------------------------------------------- Result 5309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was so disappointing. From the blurb that made me decide to see Phantom Love (why is it called this?)I had expected something arty and thoughtful with beautiful imagery. It did have some interesting images but these often seemed random and made no sense. In fact they seemed like they were inserted to fill in time. In the end the effect was listless.

I believe the film was meant to be atmospheric, but it just wasn't. The lack of a coherent plot did not help matters. You might say it was mysterious, but I think it was just incoherent with no atmosphere.

The main character seemed to be disturbed but the plot did not draw me in enough to care about her situation. Without looking at the cast list I would not have known that you see the main character as a child. The film has very little context for the time, place or character. I am not a prude but the sex scenes (there were several) seemed pointless and confused me further, I recognised Lulu but I was not sure if it was the same man, different men, a lover, her husband or was she a prostitute. It was only when I saw the credits that I discovered the hairy back was meant to belong to her lover. This film did manage to make what should have been shocking (dream sequences involving Lulu's mother) seem a bit boring.

The nail filing actually made more sense, as it did give some indication of Lulu's emotional state. I will not fault the actors as I don't they had a lot to work on.

I do not know if the lack of context or flow in the film was because of ineptitude or because it was pretentious but the end result was dull.

I can't be bothered talking about it anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 5310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] This movie describes the [[life]] of somebody who grew up in the worst of [[circumstances]] but unlike many people he actually grew up to be a respectable person. [[Whats]] more is that this is a [[true]] [[story]].

Antwone Fisher is so innocent and yet he was [[abused]] such just because he was not [[white]]. Antwone Fisher has been married to the same women for ten years and he never fooled around with women, coke, cigars, [[weed]], alcohol, or any of those things that are very popular in the places he was growing up.

There is not much more to [[say]] about this movie it is [[excellent]]. The only rating I can give it is a 10/10. This movie describes the [[iife]] of somebody who grew up in the worst of [[situations]] but unlike many people he actually grew up to be a respectable person. [[Dont]] more is that this is a [[real]] [[history]].

Antwone Fisher is so innocent and yet he was [[abusing]] such just because he was not [[blanc]]. Antwone Fisher has been married to the same women for ten years and he never fooled around with women, coke, cigars, [[grass]], alcohol, or any of those things that are very popular in the places he was growing up.

There is not much more to [[tell]] about this movie it is [[wondrous]]. The only rating I can give it is a 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[PERHAPS]] in an attempt to find another "Hot Property" for adaptation, the [[Brothers]] [[Fleischer]] thought back to their highly successful foray into the [[world]] of the Newspaper [[Comic]] Strip with their production of 1933's POPEYE THE [[SAILOR]] (Fleischer Studios/Paramount). [[Although]] it was a part of the [[BETTY]] BOOP Series, Miss B. only [[made]] a [[brief]] appearance in the short; [[leaving]] the [[rest]] as a pilot episode for the possible emergence of a full blown series.

AS is now common knowledge, the gruff, squinty eyed, brawlin' [[seaman]] became [[perhaps]] the most successful cartoon series ever; outlasting and literally outliving the Fleischers and their Studio, lasting to this day.

[[RETURNING]] to [[King]] Features for another [[try]] at [[luck]] was no doubt the [[reason]] for trying out the very popular [[HENRY]] [[Comic]] Strip [[character]] in a BETTY BOOP outing; objective being the [[seeking]] of another [[series]]. The reasoning then [[surely]] seemed sound. HENRY was a most popular feature in the Hearst Papers' line-up; [[appearing]] as both a [[Daily]] and on Sunday's Color [[Comics]] [[Supplement]], PUCK, THE [[COMICS]] WEEKLY. You know, "What [[Fools]] These Mortals [[Be]]!" [[Remember]] that one, Schultz? [[IN]] [[viewing]] the chubby, [[little]], bald boy [[Comic]] Strip 'Hero' and his on screen antics, both solo and in tandem with Miss [[Betty]]; we were [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] in seeing just how well the [[character]] was handled. The [[story]] and [[Director]] [[Dave]] Fleischer both afforded a plethora of [[comic]] strip-like [[situations]] and [[sight]] gags that seemed most appropriate for the character of [[little]] [[Henry]]. These mostly silent vignettes were very important to the animated [[film]] in remaining [[faithful]] to the printed [[page]]; as the HENRY Feature was mostly done in a sort of 4 color 'mime'.

IN the cartoon, titled BETTY BOOP WITH HENRY: THE FUNNIEST LIVING American (Fleischer Studios/Paramount Pictures Corporation, 1935), we see what is; basically being a one situational exercise; being punctuated with the usual array of Dave Fleischer's rapid fire, machine gun-like gags. In short, Henry spots a puppy in the window of Betty Boop's Pet Shop. It is a sort of love at first sight as Henry attempts to purchase the little pup dog with the only money he had, to coins in his pocket. He is in formed by Miss Boop that it would be $2.00 in depression era money to make the purchase. Tears appear as the little guy leaves dejectedly.

BUT a reprieve is soon on the horizon as Betty asks the boy to mind the store, while she leaves on urgent business. In return for his services, Miss Betty promises him the little dog in return. Of course, they have a deal and Betty leaves.

GETTING to the work of cleaning cages and feeding the livestock affords the opportunity for the Fleischer Crew to fire up a whole new string of gags; this time featuring bird seed, Henry's bald pate and push brooms. (But not all at once of course, Schultz!) Henry's enthusiasm for mass feeding of the store's avian population by first literally seeding his head soon leads to a mass defection of the birds; out of the store to the open street in a mass jail break.

BETTY returns to this sight and expresses her disappointment and anger with Henry's temporary custodial care. All bets were off, no doggie for Henry. He begins to leave; dejectedly; but soon convinces the proprietress to give him another shot at fixing things up. His head covered with bird seed, he manages to corral all of the little feathered creatures; returning them to their pet store coop. Happily, the little fella leaves; but this time he has his own affectionate, little, face licking puppy.

UNDOUBETLY this was a winning combination. We have the carefree, energy filled, free wheeling of the boy, the kindness of Betty and the emotions of the situation and doubtful outcome of the 'boy and his dog' situation. Max and Dave Fleischer had given us a sort of almost minor mini-masterpiece of a surreal comedy short.

WE were quite surprised that no HENRY Series followed. Judging by the fairly faithful treatment of the character, it certainly could have been sustained for some time. At any rate, this teaming was in many ways the best of the Betty Boop try out pictures. Although the first, POPEYE THE SAILOR (Fleischer/Paramount, 1933), was the most successful (and barely had any Betty Boop in it, save for a cameo as a carnival hula dancer); the HENRY Short was much better than the two following King Features "tryouts", BETTY BOOP AND THE LITTLE KING and BETTY BOOP AND LITTLE JIMMY, both 1936.

POODLE SCHNITZ!! [[PRESUMABLY]] in an attempt to find another "Hot Property" for adaptation, the [[Plymouth]] [[Fletcher]] thought back to their highly successful foray into the [[worldwide]] of the Newspaper [[Sitcom]] Strip with their production of 1933's POPEYE THE [[MARINERS]] (Fleischer Studios/Paramount). [[Despite]] it was a part of the [[BEATTY]] BOOP Series, Miss B. only [[accomplished]] a [[briefing]] appearance in the short; [[exiting]] the [[stays]] as a pilot episode for the possible emergence of a full blown series.

AS is now common knowledge, the gruff, squinty eyed, brawlin' [[crewmen]] became [[potentially]] the most successful cartoon series ever; outlasting and literally outliving the Fleischers and their Studio, lasting to this day.

[[REVERTED]] to [[Emperor]] Features for another [[endeavour]] at [[likelihood]] was no doubt the [[justification]] for trying out the very popular [[HENRI]] [[Hilarious]] Strip [[trait]] in a BETTY BOOP outing; objective being the [[trying]] of another [[serials]]. The reasoning then [[definitely]] seemed sound. HENRY was a most popular feature in the Hearst Papers' line-up; [[appear]] as both a [[Everyday]] and on Sunday's Color [[Cartoons]] [[Addition]], PUCK, THE [[CARTOONS]] WEEKLY. You know, "What [[Idiots]] These Mortals [[Are]]!" [[Remembers]] that one, Schultz? [[DURING]] [[vista]] the chubby, [[tiny]], bald boy [[Cartoon]] Strip 'Hero' and his on screen antics, both solo and in tandem with Miss [[Beatty]]; we were [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]] in seeing just how well the [[nature]] was handled. The [[history]] and [[Headmaster]] [[Davey]] Fleischer both afforded a plethora of [[sitcom]] strip-like [[instances]] and [[conception]] gags that seemed most appropriate for the character of [[tiny]] [[Gregg]]. These mostly silent vignettes were very important to the animated [[films]] in remaining [[trusty]] to the printed [[newsweek]]; as the HENRY Feature was mostly done in a sort of 4 color 'mime'.

IN the cartoon, titled BETTY BOOP WITH HENRY: THE FUNNIEST LIVING American (Fleischer Studios/Paramount Pictures Corporation, 1935), we see what is; basically being a one situational exercise; being punctuated with the usual array of Dave Fleischer's rapid fire, machine gun-like gags. In short, Henry spots a puppy in the window of Betty Boop's Pet Shop. It is a sort of love at first sight as Henry attempts to purchase the little pup dog with the only money he had, to coins in his pocket. He is in formed by Miss Boop that it would be $2.00 in depression era money to make the purchase. Tears appear as the little guy leaves dejectedly.

BUT a reprieve is soon on the horizon as Betty asks the boy to mind the store, while she leaves on urgent business. In return for his services, Miss Betty promises him the little dog in return. Of course, they have a deal and Betty leaves.

GETTING to the work of cleaning cages and feeding the livestock affords the opportunity for the Fleischer Crew to fire up a whole new string of gags; this time featuring bird seed, Henry's bald pate and push brooms. (But not all at once of course, Schultz!) Henry's enthusiasm for mass feeding of the store's avian population by first literally seeding his head soon leads to a mass defection of the birds; out of the store to the open street in a mass jail break.

BETTY returns to this sight and expresses her disappointment and anger with Henry's temporary custodial care. All bets were off, no doggie for Henry. He begins to leave; dejectedly; but soon convinces the proprietress to give him another shot at fixing things up. His head covered with bird seed, he manages to corral all of the little feathered creatures; returning them to their pet store coop. Happily, the little fella leaves; but this time he has his own affectionate, little, face licking puppy.

UNDOUBETLY this was a winning combination. We have the carefree, energy filled, free wheeling of the boy, the kindness of Betty and the emotions of the situation and doubtful outcome of the 'boy and his dog' situation. Max and Dave Fleischer had given us a sort of almost minor mini-masterpiece of a surreal comedy short.

WE were quite surprised that no HENRY Series followed. Judging by the fairly faithful treatment of the character, it certainly could have been sustained for some time. At any rate, this teaming was in many ways the best of the Betty Boop try out pictures. Although the first, POPEYE THE SAILOR (Fleischer/Paramount, 1933), was the most successful (and barely had any Betty Boop in it, save for a cameo as a carnival hula dancer); the HENRY Short was much better than the two following King Features "tryouts", BETTY BOOP AND THE LITTLE KING and BETTY BOOP AND LITTLE JIMMY, both 1936.

POODLE SCHNITZ!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] December [[holiday]] specials, like the original Frosty, [[ought]] to be richly-produced with quality [[music]] and a [[wholesome]], yet lighthearted storyline. They should have a touch of the mystical [[magic]] of the holidays. [[Basically]], they should [[look]], [[sound]], and feel...well, "[[special]]" and they should have a [[decent]] and [[appropriate]] December [[holiday]] subtext.

[[So]] when I saw Legend of Frosty the Snowman in the TV listings, I got my [[kids]] (6 and 8) pumped up for it by [[telling]] them the story of the [[original]] Frosty and passionately relating how much I [[enjoyed]] it as a kid. As my wife and kids cozied up on the couch to watch the movie the expectations were high, but 10 minutes into it my kids were yawning and my wife and I were giving each other "the look" and rolling our eyes. After 35 minutes my kids were actually asking to go to bed -- I guess they were fed up with the insensitive [[language]] and pointless, disconnected segments. I was [[actually]] embarrassed about their (and my) disappointment with this movie.

Unfortunately, Legend of Frosty the Snowman is more like a bad episode of Fairly Odd Parents crossed with a worse-than-normal episode of Sponge Bob than a classic holiday movie. Don't get me wrong...those shows are fine and I like them as much as the next guy, but when I watch Fairly Odd Parents or Sponge Bob, my low expectations (for [[mediocre]], off-color, zero subtext, mind numbing episodes) are always satisfied.

We picked out some good books and spent the rest of the evening reading together. A much better [[choice]] than the embarrassingly bad Legend of Frosty the Snowman. December [[vacation]] specials, like the original Frosty, [[must]] to be richly-produced with quality [[musica]] and a [[salubrious]], yet lighthearted storyline. They should have a touch of the mystical [[quadrant]] of the holidays. [[Primarily]], they should [[gaze]], [[sounds]], and feel...well, "[[especial]]" and they should have a [[presentable]] and [[opportune]] December [[holidays]] subtext.

[[Therefore]] when I saw Legend of Frosty the Snowman in the TV listings, I got my [[youngsters]] (6 and 8) pumped up for it by [[tell]] them the story of the [[upfront]] Frosty and passionately relating how much I [[liked]] it as a kid. As my wife and kids cozied up on the couch to watch the movie the expectations were high, but 10 minutes into it my kids were yawning and my wife and I were giving each other "the look" and rolling our eyes. After 35 minutes my kids were actually asking to go to bed -- I guess they were fed up with the insensitive [[parlance]] and pointless, disconnected segments. I was [[genuinely]] embarrassed about their (and my) disappointment with this movie.

Unfortunately, Legend of Frosty the Snowman is more like a bad episode of Fairly Odd Parents crossed with a worse-than-normal episode of Sponge Bob than a classic holiday movie. Don't get me wrong...those shows are fine and I like them as much as the next guy, but when I watch Fairly Odd Parents or Sponge Bob, my low expectations (for [[lackluster]], off-color, zero subtext, mind numbing episodes) are always satisfied.

We picked out some good books and spent the rest of the evening reading together. A much better [[selection]] than the embarrassingly bad Legend of Frosty the Snowman. --------------------------------------------- Result 5313 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] In one of her first movies, Romy Schneider shines as young queen Victoria of Britain, as she is suddenly put into the throne at the age of 18, learns to govern despite the machinations of the politicians, and eventually romances and marries Prince Albert of Saxony. Kitschy and campy (though surprisingly faithful to the real events), this romantic piece is [[irresistible]]. Seeing this movie about British royals spoken in German adds to its quaint charm. On that front, one wonders why an Austrian movie was made about an English queen; but then one remembers that in 1954, Austria was still under occupation by allied troops, including British ones. Maybe this was one of the reasons for the existence of this film. In one of her first movies, Romy Schneider shines as young queen Victoria of Britain, as she is suddenly put into the throne at the age of 18, learns to govern despite the machinations of the politicians, and eventually romances and marries Prince Albert of Saxony. Kitschy and campy (though surprisingly faithful to the real events), this romantic piece is [[inexorable]]. Seeing this movie about British royals spoken in German adds to its quaint charm. On that front, one wonders why an Austrian movie was made about an English queen; but then one remembers that in 1954, Austria was still under occupation by allied troops, including British ones. Maybe this was one of the reasons for the existence of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Thief of Baghdad is one of my ten all-time favorite movies. It is exciting without gore, it is beautifully filmed and the art direction is flawless. The casting couldn't have been better. Rex Ingram made me believe in genies. And the epitome of evil is certainly captured by Conrad Veight as Jafar. He set the bar very high.

..I watch this movie at least twice a year...and never tire of it. This film is an adventure for all ages..no-one too old to enjoy it. The Thief of Bahgdad jogs my memories to a more innocent time...I was ten years old the first time I saw it and the U.S. was just about to enter WWII. Conrad Vieght was such a great actor that he was able to continue this underlying "evilness" a few years later in "Casablanca." And Korda teamed up,I believe, with Justin and Dupree again in "The Four Feathers"....great film-making! --------------------------------------------- Result 5315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I missed almost all of the first season, but when the other shows went to reruns, I started watching. I ended up buying the entire first season off iTunes. This is now one of my favorite comedy shows. Patrick Warburton is the key. His dry sense of humor has me rolling all the time. David Spade is funny, but sometimes a little Russell goes a long way. I enjoy the other cast members more (but not saying he doesn't add to the show).

Do yourself a favor. If you haven't checked this one out, give it a try. If you can catch the episode where "Jeff" goes to the sperm bank, you will see how good this show is.

I hope this series has a long run. --------------------------------------------- Result 5316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] ::[[POTENTIAL]] SPOILERS::

[[Man]], this [[movie]] was [[awful]]. A Catholic/superstitious/suspense thriller it goes over already well tread [[ground]] from previous [[movies]].

The [[doubting]] priest. [[Sex]] and the priesthood. [[Politics]] and [[religion]]. [[Church]] hypocrisy. Conspiracy [[involving]] the church. The dawn of a [[new]] [[evil]] age. All kinds of dark [[magic]] voodoo [[battles]] between good and [[evil]].

[[Pretty]] stupid and lame with a [[weak]] storyline to [[suffice]]. The [[story]] [[revolves]] around two [[concepts]]: Absolution, [[better]] known as the Sacrament of Anointing the [[Sick]] - the [[last]] rights a [[person]] can [[ask]] for to [[cleanse]] one's [[sins]] while on the [[brink]] of [[death]]; And Excommunication, the [[act]] of [[cutting]] a [[person]] off from the [[Church]]. Basically, an Excommunicated person can't [[receive]] Absolution. Thus [[comes]] in the Sin Eater, and I'll [[leave]] it at that. Throw in all the dopy [[things]] I already [[listed]] and you have "The [[Order]]".

I [[found]] the sex scene with the priest interlaced with shots of a [[picture]] of the Virgin Mary rather insulting to Catholics. It also ends with Heath Ledger saying (I paraphrase) "I am the [[redeemer]] and damner of [[sins]], I [[live]] on without [[love]] blah blah blah" /cue him walking in dark alley with [[long]] [[trench]] coat alla "The Matrix".

I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a 1 for not only being crappy and unoriginal but [[also]] because it managed to [[insult]] an [[entire]] [[faith]] in the process. If you [[want]] to [[see]] [[something]] better I [[suggest]] "The [[Prophecy]]" with Christopher Walken. ::[[POTENTIALITIES]] SPOILERS::

[[Dude]], this [[filmmaking]] was [[frightful]]. A Catholic/superstitious/suspense thriller it goes over already well tread [[terrestrial]] from previous [[film]].

The [[questioning]] priest. [[Sexuality]] and the priesthood. [[Policy]] and [[religions]]. [[Ecclesiastical]] hypocrisy. Conspiracy [[encompassing]] the church. The dawn of a [[newest]] [[nefarious]] age. All kinds of dark [[quadrant]] voodoo [[combat]] between good and [[wicked]].

[[Belle]] stupid and lame with a [[feeble]] storyline to [[enough]]. The [[fairytales]] [[spins]] around two [[concept]]: Absolution, [[best]] known as the Sacrament of Anointing the [[Ill]] - the [[latter]] rights a [[somebody]] can [[enquired]] for to [[cleanliness]] one's [[iniquities]] while on the [[rand]] of [[die]]; And Excommunication, the [[legislation]] of [[chopped]] a [[somebody]] off from the [[Ecclesiastical]]. Basically, an Excommunicated person can't [[perceive]] Absolution. Thus [[arrives]] in the Sin Eater, and I'll [[letting]] it at that. Throw in all the dopy [[matters]] I already [[lists]] and you have "The [[Edict]]".

I [[finds]] the sex scene with the priest interlaced with shots of a [[pictures]] of the Virgin Mary rather insulting to Catholics. It also ends with Heath Ledger saying (I paraphrase) "I am the [[lifesaver]] and damner of [[iniquities]], I [[vivo]] on without [[amore]] blah blah blah" /cue him walking in dark alley with [[lengthy]] [[moat]] coat alla "The Matrix".

I [[supplied]] this [[movies]] a 1 for not only being crappy and unoriginal but [[likewise]] because it managed to [[insulted]] an [[whole]] [[creed]] in the process. If you [[wants]] to [[consults]] [[anything]] better I [[insinuate]] "The [[Predict]]" with Christopher Walken. --------------------------------------------- Result 5317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film was screen as part of the 2007 Sydney Mardi [[Gras]] Film Festival. I had no [[expectation]] of the film as someone else choose it for me.

I actually like [[films]] that [[take]] time to develop, [[films]] that [[allow]] the characters to unfold and lets the [[story]] flow. [[Stillness]] is good. But this [[film]] [[though]] was just [[plain]] slow.

[[Credit]] [[must]] go to the two [[main]] [[actors]]. There was a sense of tension between them as two [[totally]] different people, misfits [[really]], come together in a very [[awkward]] way. There were tender moments and sadness as we learned more about them.

I also liked the [[setting]] and the way it was shot. It was claustrophobic and monochrome and it added to the film's intimacy and reinforces the oddness of the characters.

I just don't understand the ending. What was the point of it all? This film was screen as part of the 2007 Sydney Mardi [[Tallow]] Film Festival. I had no [[wait]] of the film as someone else choose it for me.

I actually like [[movie]] that [[taking]] time to develop, [[cinematography]] that [[enabled]] the characters to unfold and lets the [[history]] flow. [[Deadlock]] is good. But this [[cinematography]] [[if]] was just [[lowland]] slow.

[[Credence]] [[owes]] go to the two [[primary]] [[players]]. There was a sense of tension between them as two [[perfectly]] different people, misfits [[truly]], come together in a very [[tricky]] way. There were tender moments and sadness as we learned more about them.

I also liked the [[configure]] and the way it was shot. It was claustrophobic and monochrome and it added to the film's intimacy and reinforces the oddness of the characters.

I just don't understand the ending. What was the point of it all? --------------------------------------------- Result 5318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] For Muslim women in western Africa, [[married]] life at the hands of [[abusive]] [[husbands]] can be very [[hard]] . The community may not [[explicitly]] endorse such [[behaviour]], but [[equally]], they may not [[yet]] be ready to [[see]] it as criminal, an [[attitude]] which of course [[enables]] it to continue. [[Fortunately]], the letter of the Cameroonian [[law]] [[promises]] equality to all, and this documentary follows the [[real]] [[life]] exploits of [[various]] female practitioners in the Cameroonian legal system as they [[attempt]] to [[secure]] justice for a number of women and children. What is [[notable]] ([[apart]] from the [[uplifting]] central [[story]]) is how, in spite of their informality, the [[courts]] are [[actually]] pragmatically progressive, if a [[case]] is [[actually]] [[bought]]. The [[program]] also gives a [[fascinating]] [[insight]] the [[whole]] Cameroonian life-style, which (aside from the [[awful]] [[crimes]] [[committed]] in the featured [[cases]]) seems [[amazingly]] [[emotional]] and [[joyous]] [[compared]] with that [[enjoyed]] by [[inhabitants]] of [[Europe]] or [[North]] [[America]]. And while I [[concede]] that this [[comment]] may betray naiveté on my part, this attitude [[appears]] to be [[captured]] in [[delightful]] pidgin-English they [[speak]]. [[Overall]], this is a [[terrific]] [[little]] [[film]], and much more fun to watch than you [[might]] [[imagine]]. For Muslim women in western Africa, [[wedding]] life at the hands of [[offensive]] [[maris]] can be very [[dur]] . The community may not [[openly]] endorse such [[conduct]], but [[similarly]], they may not [[again]] be ready to [[behold]] it as criminal, an [[stance]] which of course [[permit]] it to continue. [[Joyfully]], the letter of the Cameroonian [[ley]] [[promised]] equality to all, and this documentary follows the [[actual]] [[living]] exploits of [[several]] female practitioners in the Cameroonian legal system as they [[tries]] to [[ensure]] justice for a number of women and children. What is [[cannot]] ([[regardless]] from the [[uplift]] central [[narratives]]) is how, in spite of their informality, the [[courthouse]] are [[indeed]] pragmatically progressive, if a [[instances]] is [[indeed]] [[purchasing]]. The [[curriculum]] also gives a [[intriguing]] [[vision]] the [[total]] Cameroonian life-style, which (aside from the [[horrendous]] [[offense]] [[commit]] in the featured [[examples]]) seems [[disturbingly]] [[sentimental]] and [[joyful]] [[likened]] with that [[liked]] by [[villagers]] of [[Eu]] or [[Nordic]] [[Americans]]. And while I [[recognized]] that this [[commentary]] may betray naiveté on my part, this attitude [[appearing]] to be [[catch]] in [[nice]] pidgin-English they [[talking]]. [[Total]], this is a [[wondrous]] [[tiny]] [[cinematography]], and much more fun to watch than you [[apt]] [[reckon]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] This is one of the [[first]] [[films]] I can [[remember]], or maybe the first one. Exactly the [[beautiful]] [[kind]] of film than introduce a kid, sweetly, into the world of violence and [[addictions]] were we [[live]]. A little bit of Babe, [[Casino]] and Constantine, all this well mixed into a [[carton]], and we get this. I don't know if its truly rated for kids, but I think it was very [[cool]], very [[funny]] and interesting. I hate when a film (spescially a carton)can have a good end and its ruining because [[every]] character [[must]] have a [[happy]] end, even if it sounds weird (Im not a bitter person).But this was OK, he [[simply]] goes heaven and they let it in that way.

All this is just a critic, Its a good movie an [[something]] new. very [[touching]] and I gotta go This is one of the [[firstly]] [[movies]] I can [[remind]], or maybe the first one. Exactly the [[awesome]] [[sorting]] of film than introduce a kid, sweetly, into the world of violence and [[dependency]] were we [[viva]]. A little bit of Babe, [[Blackjack]] and Constantine, all this well mixed into a [[cardboard]], and we get this. I don't know if its truly rated for kids, but I think it was very [[refrigerate]], very [[amusing]] and interesting. I hate when a film (spescially a carton)can have a good end and its ruining because [[any]] character [[should]] have a [[joyful]] end, even if it sounds weird (Im not a bitter person).But this was OK, he [[solely]] goes heaven and they let it in that way.

All this is just a critic, Its a good movie an [[anything]] new. very [[touch]] and I gotta go --------------------------------------------- Result 5320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I was born in 1982. Most of my childhood memories are in the extreme late 80's and 90's. I watched the [[Groove]] Tube for the first time in 2001, when I was 19.

And I [[found]] it hilarious.

So for anybody who thinks that something "dated" can't be quite funny 30 years [[later]]....think again! It's [[funny]] [[even]] if you have no idea what the 70's were like, and the thought of bell-bottom [[pants]] make you cringe. Who can argue with a Bozo the Clown type who reads adult literature? There is plenty to [[laugh]] at. The scrotal puppet show at the end is the [[best]]. I was born in 1982. Most of my childhood memories are in the extreme late 80's and 90's. I watched the [[Slot]] Tube for the first time in 2001, when I was 19.

And I [[finds]] it hilarious.

So for anybody who thinks that something "dated" can't be quite funny 30 years [[then]]....think again! It's [[amusing]] [[yet]] if you have no idea what the 70's were like, and the thought of bell-bottom [[britches]] make you cringe. Who can argue with a Bozo the Clown type who reads adult literature? There is plenty to [[laughed]] at. The scrotal puppet show at the end is the [[nicest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5321 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I mean of all the obscure, [[overlooked]], low budget horror movies waiting to be re-discovered in a DVD [[release]], why [[pick]] THE [[FOREST]]? I [[love]] ultra low budget direct to [[home]] video or other [[alternative]] release [[horror]]. I [[love]] 80s [[hacker]] horror. I [[love]] backwoods slashers with fools wandering off into the night to be chased, murdered and eaten by [[psychopaths]]. I am all for the [[idea]] of non-professionals working on a horror movie as a way to maybe break into the industry or just making a [[movie]] because they want to make one. I am all for [[using]] [[found]] public [[locations]], non-actors, no name talent [[behind]] the camera and in the studio. NO PROBLEM! The most evocative image from THE FOREST is it's [[opening]] shot of a couple walking in the distance [[across]] a [[forest]] into the woods: We see them as tiny, vulnerable creatures entering a dank gloomy world where humans may not be the top of the food chain or most feared predator. Then the film takes a dive & never recovers -- we briefly meet the backpacking couple just as they realize that they are being stalked. They get separated, both are butchered, and then we meet the movie's protagonists as they drive their car in a traffic jam. They meet up with their respective mates and decide to take a camping trip. Sounds of snoring fill the room as people who came over to watch a movie fiddle with their cell phones text messaging people not there telling them how much the movie sucks.

This film is too slow, this movie is too boring, and this movie is too talky. Which wouldn't be such a bad thing if the writers had given the people something to say other than the most stupid, [[asinine]] and [[unnecessary]] things. You know your horror movie is in trouble when the character with the most interesting lines is the droopy-faced park ranger who warns everyone away from the Cannibal Woods. And speaking of these "woods" they look about as far away from civilization as the overgrown vacant lot behind the soccer fields, only with bigger rocks and a stream flowing through it. There are impressive shots of the forest primeval, but no real sense of being out in the middle of it. If any one of the characters just sat down on the trail and waited long enough someone would amble by.

What is worse about the film is that it fails to generate any human interest: I don't know who these couples are and don't care what happens to them. The hermit cannibal slasher guy is uninteresting even when pretending to saw freshly cooked meat off the leg of one of his victims to serve grisly bites to her boyfriend, who just happens to seek shelter in his cave. The irony of which is the epitome of "underwhelming". Coupled with a deliberately ominous synthesizer music score, cinematography that suspiciously looks like someone strapped a camera on a dog and it follow people's movements, a lack of appreciable gore, nudity, lurid thrills and unwholesome atmosphere and what we have here is a horror movie that isn't even as frightening as a PBS educational TV show about how magnets work.

I don't mean to "dish it out" to the people behind this film, since they obviously went into the project with next to nothing, did not push themselves to be creative and ended up with just another boring movie about some maggot chasing women through the woods with a knife. There is nothing wrong with that concept, what is wrong is the unimaginative and utterly pedestrian way this was executed, right down to the utterly pointless conclusion when the film simply peters out at about the 80 minute mark. The best thing that you can say about THE FOREST is that it is over relatively quickly and there isn't much to command a repeat screening -- Hence my confusion at why anyone would feel the need for a DVD release. It was fine as a Prism Video rental years oddity, as a DVD it will be $5.99 rack fare inside a month of hitting the shelves. There is little or no urgency to see the film, unless you are considering making your own ultra low budget backwoods hacker set in a public park where nobody can charge you money for filming there. Here is a guide of steps to avoid making.

With all that said and done, the film did have one interesting sequence, or rather one sequence that was so pathetic and ineptly thought out that it becomes an enigma in an otherwise cut & dried film: The madman comes home to find his wife in bed with the local contractor. He dispatches his beloved, arms himself with a kitchen knife that looks like it was made just to be used in a horror film and takes off after the interloper. The guy corners and attacks his quarry, who sidesteps & runs away, only to have the psycho materialize in his footsteps with a bigger, badder weapon. The psycho attacks again, and the guy gets away. The psycho materializes AGAIN, and once more the guy gets away. Then AGAIN! Finally on the fifth try the psycho trips the dude so to fall on some sort of a bladed contraption. How did he keep materializing armed with bigger badder weapons like that? Is there some supernatural element to this psycho? Since the film never makes it clear either way the scene is just an enigma, staged to build some tension. It's purpose remains unclear. The whole film is like that really, existing without any need to be made and executed in such a ham-fisted, uninteresting manner that one cannot help but wonder what the point of it was.

3/10, and ample evidence that just because you can release a movie on DVD that doesn't mean you necessarily should. I mean of all the obscure, [[disregarded]], low budget horror movies waiting to be re-discovered in a DVD [[freed]], why [[opt]] THE [[FORESTRY]]? I [[adored]] ultra low budget direct to [[housing]] video or other [[alternate]] release [[monstrosity]]. I [[iike]] 80s [[hack]] horror. I [[adored]] backwoods slashers with fools wandering off into the night to be chased, murdered and eaten by [[sociopaths]]. I am all for the [[inkling]] of non-professionals working on a horror movie as a way to maybe break into the industry or just making a [[filmmaking]] because they want to make one. I am all for [[used]] [[discovered]] public [[site]], non-actors, no name talent [[backside]] the camera and in the studio. NO PROBLEM! The most evocative image from THE FOREST is it's [[opened]] shot of a couple walking in the distance [[throughout]] a [[forestry]] into the woods: We see them as tiny, vulnerable creatures entering a dank gloomy world where humans may not be the top of the food chain or most feared predator. Then the film takes a dive & never recovers -- we briefly meet the backpacking couple just as they realize that they are being stalked. They get separated, both are butchered, and then we meet the movie's protagonists as they drive their car in a traffic jam. They meet up with their respective mates and decide to take a camping trip. Sounds of snoring fill the room as people who came over to watch a movie fiddle with their cell phones text messaging people not there telling them how much the movie sucks.

This film is too slow, this movie is too boring, and this movie is too talky. Which wouldn't be such a bad thing if the writers had given the people something to say other than the most stupid, [[moron]] and [[superfluous]] things. You know your horror movie is in trouble when the character with the most interesting lines is the droopy-faced park ranger who warns everyone away from the Cannibal Woods. And speaking of these "woods" they look about as far away from civilization as the overgrown vacant lot behind the soccer fields, only with bigger rocks and a stream flowing through it. There are impressive shots of the forest primeval, but no real sense of being out in the middle of it. If any one of the characters just sat down on the trail and waited long enough someone would amble by.

What is worse about the film is that it fails to generate any human interest: I don't know who these couples are and don't care what happens to them. The hermit cannibal slasher guy is uninteresting even when pretending to saw freshly cooked meat off the leg of one of his victims to serve grisly bites to her boyfriend, who just happens to seek shelter in his cave. The irony of which is the epitome of "underwhelming". Coupled with a deliberately ominous synthesizer music score, cinematography that suspiciously looks like someone strapped a camera on a dog and it follow people's movements, a lack of appreciable gore, nudity, lurid thrills and unwholesome atmosphere and what we have here is a horror movie that isn't even as frightening as a PBS educational TV show about how magnets work.

I don't mean to "dish it out" to the people behind this film, since they obviously went into the project with next to nothing, did not push themselves to be creative and ended up with just another boring movie about some maggot chasing women through the woods with a knife. There is nothing wrong with that concept, what is wrong is the unimaginative and utterly pedestrian way this was executed, right down to the utterly pointless conclusion when the film simply peters out at about the 80 minute mark. The best thing that you can say about THE FOREST is that it is over relatively quickly and there isn't much to command a repeat screening -- Hence my confusion at why anyone would feel the need for a DVD release. It was fine as a Prism Video rental years oddity, as a DVD it will be $5.99 rack fare inside a month of hitting the shelves. There is little or no urgency to see the film, unless you are considering making your own ultra low budget backwoods hacker set in a public park where nobody can charge you money for filming there. Here is a guide of steps to avoid making.

With all that said and done, the film did have one interesting sequence, or rather one sequence that was so pathetic and ineptly thought out that it becomes an enigma in an otherwise cut & dried film: The madman comes home to find his wife in bed with the local contractor. He dispatches his beloved, arms himself with a kitchen knife that looks like it was made just to be used in a horror film and takes off after the interloper. The guy corners and attacks his quarry, who sidesteps & runs away, only to have the psycho materialize in his footsteps with a bigger, badder weapon. The psycho attacks again, and the guy gets away. The psycho materializes AGAIN, and once more the guy gets away. Then AGAIN! Finally on the fifth try the psycho trips the dude so to fall on some sort of a bladed contraption. How did he keep materializing armed with bigger badder weapons like that? Is there some supernatural element to this psycho? Since the film never makes it clear either way the scene is just an enigma, staged to build some tension. It's purpose remains unclear. The whole film is like that really, existing without any need to be made and executed in such a ham-fisted, uninteresting manner that one cannot help but wonder what the point of it was.

3/10, and ample evidence that just because you can release a movie on DVD that doesn't mean you necessarily should. --------------------------------------------- Result 5322 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This movie was horrible, simply put. It was so [[bad]] I [[registered]] with IMDb to [[warn]] you of its dangers.

I am a campy horror [[film]] expert, per se. I have [[watched]] "Redneck Zombies", "[[House]] of the Psychotic [[Women]]", "Slumber [[Party]] [[Massacre]] [[II]]" and [[many]] others. I know my schlock. And I know this [[movie]] sucks.

[[Three]] fourths of the [[film]] is [[comprised]] of [[scared]] individuals running from one side of the screen to the other. When they are not running, they are spouting non-sequitur lines, devoid of emotion or [[motivation]]. When the [[actors]] [[begin]] to be [[acceptable]], the [[direction]] [[falls]] to [[pieces]]. There were so [[many]] [[jarring]] low-angle shots; I [[figured]] Leif Jonker had a 3 foot tall tripod. He [[used]] what I [[call]] the "[[Leif]] [[Maneuver]]" [[several]] [[millions]] times: that is, zooming out from an [[object]] of interest like an [[amateur]]. Apparently the [[film]] crew couldn't [[get]] up [[early]] [[enough]] to [[film]] a sunrise, so they [[filmed]] a sunset... and [[played]] it in [[reverse]]. With [[direction]] this lazy, you are [[actually]] impressed with the [[final]] gory scene. The only [[thing]] you can figure is that the last five minutes was [[filmed]] before the first eighty-five minutes.

[[If]] you [[want]] a good ([[bad]]) gory movie, rent "Riki-Oh" or the foundational "[[Dead]] [[Alive]]." [[If]] you are a schlock buff, and are looking for a challenge, give "Darkness" a go.

[[Quote]] o' the movie-

[[Vampire]]: It's [[die]] [[time]]! This movie was horrible, simply put. It was so [[unfavourable]] I [[recorded]] with IMDb to [[cautionary]] you of its dangers.

I am a campy horror [[flick]] expert, per se. I have [[saw]] "Redneck Zombies", "[[Housing]] of the Psychotic [[Girl]]", "Slumber [[Part]] [[Carnage]] [[SECONDLY]]" and [[various]] others. I know my schlock. And I know this [[filmmaking]] sucks.

[[Tre]] fourths of the [[filmmaking]] is [[composed]] of [[startled]] individuals running from one side of the screen to the other. When they are not running, they are spouting non-sequitur lines, devoid of emotion or [[motif]]. When the [[protagonists]] [[starts]] to be [[agreeable]], the [[orientation]] [[waterfalls]] to [[slices]]. There were so [[innumerable]] [[mismatch]] low-angle shots; I [[imagined]] Leif Jonker had a 3 foot tall tripod. He [[utilized]] what I [[calls]] the "[[Lev]] [[Maneuvers]]" [[dissimilar]] [[zillion]] times: that is, zooming out from an [[objects]] of interest like an [[enthusiast]]. Apparently the [[movie]] crew couldn't [[gets]] up [[soon]] [[suitably]] to [[movie]] a sunrise, so they [[shot]] a sunset... and [[accomplished]] it in [[inversion]]. With [[directions]] this lazy, you are [[indeed]] impressed with the [[definitive]] gory scene. The only [[stuff]] you can figure is that the last five minutes was [[shot]] before the first eighty-five minutes.

[[Though]] you [[wish]] a good ([[negative]]) gory movie, rent "Riki-Oh" or the foundational "[[Death]] [[Vivid]]." [[Though]] you are a schlock buff, and are looking for a challenge, give "Darkness" a go.

[[Citing]] o' the movie-

[[Bloodsucker]]: It's [[death]] [[moment]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] During the cheap filmed in [[video]] [[beginning]] of [[Crazy]] [[Fat]] [[Ethel]] II, I [[wondered]] if it was the same [[film]] that was on the cover. [[Unfortunately]], it was. The story itself is mindlessly simple. Ethel, a homicidal maniac with an eating disorder, is released into a halfway [[house]] because of hospital overcrowding. She is by far the most sane [[resident]] watching while one [[man]] puts [[dead]] [[flies]] into another's soup. Ethel is then teased by one of the halfway [[house]] [[employees]] with a chocolate bar after he hits on the [[cost]] [[cutting]] [[measure]] of [[feeding]] the [[residents]] [[dog]] [[food]]. Ethel retaliates by strangling him with a [[wire]] noose on the [[stairs]] and then....well, you get the [[idea]]. If this all [[sounds]] like fun, it isn't. This film was poorly made with cheap effects and [[even]] worse acting. The [[characters]] are so [[wooden]] when [[delivering]] their lines that they should be standing out in front of a cigar store. To make [[matters]] worse, half of the [[film]] consists of [[flashbacks]] to the first [[Ethel]] [[movie]], Criminally Insane, which is [[little]] better. A [[VERY]] [[poor]] [[effort]]. During the cheap filmed in [[videotape]] [[starts]] of [[Deranged]] [[Blubber]] [[Athol]] II, I [[questioned]] if it was the same [[filmmaking]] that was on the cover. [[Sadly]], it was. The story itself is mindlessly simple. Ethel, a homicidal maniac with an eating disorder, is released into a halfway [[housing]] because of hospital overcrowding. She is by far the most sane [[capita]] watching while one [[guy]] puts [[deceased]] [[fly]] into another's soup. Ethel is then teased by one of the halfway [[housing]] [[servants]] with a chocolate bar after he hits on the [[price]] [[slice]] [[steps]] of [[eating]] the [[villagers]] [[hound]] [[foods]]. Ethel retaliates by strangling him with a [[telegram]] noose on the [[stair]] and then....well, you get the [[thoughts]]. If this all [[sound]] like fun, it isn't. This film was poorly made with cheap effects and [[yet]] worse acting. The [[trait]] are so [[wood]] when [[offered]] their lines that they should be standing out in front of a cigar store. To make [[questions]] worse, half of the [[filmmaking]] consists of [[reminiscences]] to the first [[Athol]] [[cinematography]], Criminally Insane, which is [[small]] better. A [[QUITE]] [[poorest]] [[endeavor]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] OK another [[film]] [[bought]] by me and Joe Swatman. [[OK]] this isn't the [[worst]] [[film]] i've [[reviewed]] this [[week]] but it still [[sucked]] royaly. we had a lot of fun watching this piece of [[crap]].

The Monster [[Jigsaw]] is a mish mash of all these dysfunctional [[students]] [[ideas]], u just know ur in for [[trouble]] when [[someone]] equips him with a buzzsaw and a sawed of shotgun, the film wasn't as gory as we [[hoped]], i [[mean]] on of the [[deaths]] is a heart attack. Again i [[think]] the acting sucks, [[sum]] of the [[actors]] [[must]] be [[porn]] [[stars]] and one get into her [[undies]] for what ever reason.

The absolute [[worst]] [[part]] is the [[ending]], it [[leaves]] it open for a bit of a [[Jigsaw]] 2 but thats never gunna happen lets [[face]] it.

My [[ratings]]:

[[funny]] 4/100 [[mock]] (how much [[fun]] we had [[mocking]] it) 73/100 acting 8/100 [[generally]] 12/100 OK another [[films]] [[acquire]] by me and Joe Swatman. [[ALRIGHT]] this isn't the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] i've [[revisiting]] this [[weeks]] but it still [[aspired]] royaly. we had a lot of fun watching this piece of [[damnit]].

The Monster [[Tiling]] is a mish mash of all these dysfunctional [[student]] [[brainchild]], u just know ur in for [[troubles]] when [[everybody]] equips him with a buzzsaw and a sawed of shotgun, the film wasn't as gory as we [[waited]], i [[meaning]] on of the [[fatality]] is a heart attack. Again i [[ideas]] the acting sucks, [[suma]] of the [[players]] [[gotta]] be [[interracial]] [[celebrity]] and one get into her [[shorts]] for what ever reason.

The absolute [[hardest]] [[party]] is the [[terminated]], it [[departs]] it open for a bit of a [[Patchwork]] 2 but thats never gunna happen lets [[encounter]] it.

My [[rating]]:

[[comical]] 4/100 [[simulation]] (how much [[entertaining]] we had [[kidding]] it) 73/100 acting 8/100 [[routinely]] 12/100 --------------------------------------------- Result 5325 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Gotta start with [[Ed]] Furlong on this one. You [[gotta]]. God bless this kid. $5 bucks says the [[character]] he plays in this film is what he's [[really]] like in [[real]] life. He has a one-liner or two that made me almost blow snot because of the [[subtle]] [[humor]] in the script. You know all the [[trials]] this guy has gone through in recent years and it doesn't even seem like Furlong is even acting. Maybe that's why his performance was good. Same with Madsen. You [[keep]] thinking, "I bet this guy is really like this in [[real]] life." Does Madsen even have to act? Just natural. Vosloo has obviously moved on from the type-casted Mummy guy. I [[think]] the biggest [[surprise]] to this [[film]] was Jordana Spiro's performance. Her [[reactions]] are spot-on in this [[film]]. I battled if she was hot or not, but [[realized]] I would just like to [[see]] more of her.

Not a [[big]] fan of shoot 'em out/hostage [[type]] [[films]]. But what I am a fan of are films with [[lots]] of [[twists]] and turns to [[try]] and [[keep]] you [[guessing]]. It's not just your [[standard]] robbers [[take]] over a bank, they [[kill]] [[hostages]], and the good guys [[win]] in the [[end]] type of [[film]]. The [[twists]] keep on [[coming]]...and [[coming]].

The café scenes [[work]] best with the hand-held cams to [[show]] what it's really like in there. Not glossed over a bit. Think like [[Bourne]] [[Ultimatum]] "lite" style on some scenes in the café.

And for those Bo Bice fanatics out there - actor Curtis Wayne (who plays Karl) will make you do a double take. These [[guys]] are [[twins]].

As I watched I wondered why some of the actors had foreign accents and what were they doing in this [[small]] [[town]]. Made sense in the [[end]] that these people smuggled stuff to other countries/states so they might have these accents. But more is [[revealed]] in the [[bonus]] [[features]] of how some of the producers wanted to make this [[film]] for [[International]] audiences with some of their stars we might not have [[heard]] of. And some of them are smoking [[hot]]. Moncia Dean? Need I say more. Gotta start with [[Comp]] Furlong on this one. You [[should]]. God bless this kid. $5 bucks says the [[nature]] he plays in this film is what he's [[truthfully]] like in [[authentic]] life. He has a one-liner or two that made me almost blow snot because of the [[perceptive]] [[mood]] in the script. You know all the [[proceedings]] this guy has gone through in recent years and it doesn't even seem like Furlong is even acting. Maybe that's why his performance was good. Same with Madsen. You [[conserving]] thinking, "I bet this guy is really like this in [[actual]] life." Does Madsen even have to act? Just natural. Vosloo has obviously moved on from the type-casted Mummy guy. I [[ideas]] the biggest [[surprises]] to this [[cinematography]] was Jordana Spiro's performance. Her [[answering]] are spot-on in this [[cinematography]]. I battled if she was hot or not, but [[realised]] I would just like to [[behold]] more of her.

Not a [[substantial]] fan of shoot 'em out/hostage [[genera]] [[film]]. But what I am a fan of are films with [[batch]] of [[kinks]] and turns to [[trying]] and [[preserve]] you [[guess]]. It's not just your [[norms]] robbers [[taking]] over a bank, they [[murdering]] [[hostage]], and the good guys [[earning]] in the [[terminates]] type of [[movie]]. The [[spins]] keep on [[upcoming]]...and [[come]].

The café scenes [[worked]] best with the hand-held cams to [[demonstrate]] what it's really like in there. Not glossed over a bit. Think like [[Bourn]] [[Alerted]] "lite" style on some scenes in the café.

And for those Bo Bice fanatics out there - actor Curtis Wayne (who plays Karl) will make you do a double take. These [[blokes]] are [[binoculars]].

As I watched I wondered why some of the actors had foreign accents and what were they doing in this [[minimal]] [[municipal]]. Made sense in the [[terminate]] that these people smuggled stuff to other countries/states so they might have these accents. But more is [[divulged]] in the [[freebie]] [[attribute]] of how some of the producers wanted to make this [[kino]] for [[Internationally]] audiences with some of their stars we might not have [[audition]] of. And some of them are smoking [[sexier]]. Moncia Dean? Need I say more. --------------------------------------------- Result 5326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is always a nice suprise when a film made for TV turns out to be entertaining such as Little Richard. This is a very watchable film about the story of Rock and Roller ,Little Richard played by an actor called Leon who i have never seen before but does an very good job. As most TV films , this is a little tamer than if made for Cinema which is a shame because i am sure there is lot we could have seen about Little Richard that was controversial. Instead we see a lot religous rubbish which is the only thing that spoils the film and eventually spoilt a very promising career. All in all this film is good and the acting is above average fot a TV film. 7 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I truly wish I was not writing this review. I'm a [[Christian]], so I waited anxiously to see this movie. It seemed great -- a Christian movie with some fairly famous stars and a plot that seemed intriguing (not that I buy the Bible Code itself -- you can make it say anything you want. I do, however believe everything inside the Bible). So I'm sitting on the edge of my seat [[enjoying]] the previews, when the movie [[comes]] on and manages to [[destroy]] my mood in a matter of minutes. I had to bite my lip to stop from commenting on the [[terrible]] writing and acting while I was in the theater (I would have been torn to pieces by the people cheering at the rather clumsy but basically uplifting scenes and gasping at the insanely obvious and predictable Tension Scenes, I'm sure). Once the final credits began to roll, however, I could reflect. There were many parts of the movie I liked -- some mostly unexpected plot twists, some effects that were indeed special (I'm not counting the Visions. Those were poorly done), and some interesting technical work -- fades, sets, that type of thing. Unfortunately, I got the distinct impression that if I read the book of Revelation to a monkey and set the monkey in front of a typewriter for an hour, I could've gotten a better script. And the music was beyond cheesy (even for a Bond fan who likes kinda cheesy music in scenes of action and intrigue). So I wish I could be like everyone else in the theater -- like the people who came out crying and breathless because of how incredible it was -- but I'm not someone who can be appeased by a writer who throws some words over a Biblical shell and slaps a Christian stamp on it. I need a good plot and believable dialogue before I can enjoy most movies, and this just didn't have either. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone. And that's the tragedy. When will we see some intelligent Christian fiction? It has to be out there somewhere... I truly wish I was not writing this review. I'm a [[Cristiano]], so I waited anxiously to see this movie. It seemed great -- a Christian movie with some fairly famous stars and a plot that seemed intriguing (not that I buy the Bible Code itself -- you can make it say anything you want. I do, however believe everything inside the Bible). So I'm sitting on the edge of my seat [[savoring]] the previews, when the movie [[happens]] on and manages to [[demolish]] my mood in a matter of minutes. I had to bite my lip to stop from commenting on the [[abysmal]] writing and acting while I was in the theater (I would have been torn to pieces by the people cheering at the rather clumsy but basically uplifting scenes and gasping at the insanely obvious and predictable Tension Scenes, I'm sure). Once the final credits began to roll, however, I could reflect. There were many parts of the movie I liked -- some mostly unexpected plot twists, some effects that were indeed special (I'm not counting the Visions. Those were poorly done), and some interesting technical work -- fades, sets, that type of thing. Unfortunately, I got the distinct impression that if I read the book of Revelation to a monkey and set the monkey in front of a typewriter for an hour, I could've gotten a better script. And the music was beyond cheesy (even for a Bond fan who likes kinda cheesy music in scenes of action and intrigue). So I wish I could be like everyone else in the theater -- like the people who came out crying and breathless because of how incredible it was -- but I'm not someone who can be appeased by a writer who throws some words over a Biblical shell and slaps a Christian stamp on it. I need a good plot and believable dialogue before I can enjoy most movies, and this just didn't have either. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone. And that's the tragedy. When will we see some intelligent Christian fiction? It has to be out there somewhere... --------------------------------------------- Result 5328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A bus full of passengers is stuck during a snow storm. The police have closed the bridge--saying it's unsafe and they are stuck in a little café until the road has been cleared. However, after a while, their boredom is [[turned]] to [[concern]], as it seems that one of the passengers was NOT originally on the bus and may just be an alien!! This leads to a [[conclusion]] that is ironic but also rather funny in a low-brow [[way]].

This is another of the [[fun]] [[episodes]] of The [[Twilight]] Zone. Instead of the [[typical]] twists or social commentary, this one features no lasting message. However, it's also very and watchable, so who cares?! Exactly WHAT occurs you'll just have to see for yourself.

By the way, this one stars John Hoyt--a face most of you will recognize from countless old TV shows and movies. In almost every case, he played a real grouch (like Charles Lane during the same era), but boy did I love seeing him--as he perfected the grouchy persona and was kind of funny at the same time. A bus full of passengers is stuck during a snow storm. The police have closed the bridge--saying it's unsafe and they are stuck in a little café until the road has been cleared. However, after a while, their boredom is [[revolved]] to [[preoccupation]], as it seems that one of the passengers was NOT originally on the bus and may just be an alien!! This leads to a [[concluding]] that is ironic but also rather funny in a low-brow [[manner]].

This is another of the [[droll]] [[spells]] of The [[Dusk]] Zone. Instead of the [[classic]] twists or social commentary, this one features no lasting message. However, it's also very and watchable, so who cares?! Exactly WHAT occurs you'll just have to see for yourself.

By the way, this one stars John Hoyt--a face most of you will recognize from countless old TV shows and movies. In almost every case, he played a real grouch (like Charles Lane during the same era), but boy did I love seeing him--as he perfected the grouchy persona and was kind of funny at the same time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my all-time favorite Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers film. The dialogue between the two is so cute and funny and very clever. Not to mention this film contains some of the best songs recorded by the two; like I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket and Let's Face the Music and Dance. If I remember correctly, this was the film that introduced me to Fred Astaire so I suppose because of that it will always hold a special place in my heart (sorry for the sentimental cr*p but I'm woman so get over it)All in all this film gets an 8/10 from me. The choreography was superb and also the fact that Lucille Ball is in it makes it even more awesome. --------------------------------------------- Result 5330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Without a doubt, 12 MONKEYS is one of the best films of the Sci-fi genre and director Terry Gilliam is no stranger at pulling off such cinematic originality. An apocalyptic film that holds you completely spellbound, 12 MONKEYS never lets up and has you guessing all the way throughout. Excellent use of Philadelphia locales and netherworld sets create a gothic sense of tragedy and two people caught in time at the wrong place.

Bruce Willis escapes his macho image and portrays a true loony who happens to be right about all that will happen. He is actually sane, but the people of the future (or present if you will) distort this guy's head so bad through time travel, no wonder he unravels. He gets sent to World War I just after beng sent to the wrong year to find out how the Army of the Twelve Monkeys pulls off the annihilation of civilization as we know it. They finally get it right and in what is truly a remarkable screenplay to match the performance, we get to see Willis, Madeleine Stowe and an ominous Brad Pitt cross-referenced over the course of 6 years.

Stowe is sensual and solid as the risk-taking shrink who slowly starts to realize that Willis may not be as cracked up as he seems. A captivating element of the relationship between her and Willis is their sense of "seeing" each other before, in another place or time. 12 MONKEYS is essentially about time and the madness the futuristic people immerse into it and the times of the present, when killers and a psychotic genius can alter the world.

The brooding city of Philadelphia is a dark and gothic backdrop for Willis' plight to complete his mission which is, against all usual Hollywood stereotype, NOT to save the world. He is gathering information. The film plays tricks on the viewer as well, placing Willis in a new setting at the drop of a pin. This must have been an extremely difficult picture to make but Gilliam seems to be the master of hard-boiled movie making. He even drops in some humor reminiscent of other great works like TIME BANDITS, and BRAZIL. The screen is this man's canvas and he knows how to paint a sometimes terrifying picture of the world and its possible future within the mainstream atmosphere of big-budget films. If you want sincere madness and ironic tragedy, see 12 MONKEYS.

RATING: 9 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5331 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Apart]] from having the [[longest]] reign in British history (63 years), Queen Victoria [[also]] holds two other distinctions. She was, apart from our [[current]] Queen, the oldest ever British monarch, living to the age of 81. And she was also the youngest ever British (as opposed to English or Scottish) monarch, coming to the throne as a girl of eighteen. And yet [[whenever]] [[television]] or the cinema make a [[programme]] or film about her, they seem far more interested in the older Victoria than they do in the young girl; the version of Victoria with which modern audiences will probably be most familiar is [[Judi]] Dench in "[[Mrs]] Brown". "The [[Young]] Victoria" tries to redress the [[balance]] by [[showing]] us the events surrounding her accession and the early years of her reign. It has the [[rare]] [[distinction]] of being produced by a [[former]] [[Royal]], [[Sarah]] Duchess of York, [[whose]] [[daughter]] Princess Beatrice makes a [[brief]] appearance as an [[extra]].

There are three main strands to the plot. The first concerns the [[intrigues]] of Victoria's mother, the Duchess of Kent, a [[highly]] unpopular [[figure]] even with her own [[daughter]], [[largely]] because of the [[influence]] of her [[adviser]] [[Sir]] [[John]] Conroy, who was [[widely]] rumoured to be her lover. ([[According]] to one unfounded rumour he, and not the late Duke of [[Kent]], was Victoria's natural father). The [[second]] strand concerns the [[growing]] romance between Victoria and her German [[cousin]] Prince [[Albert]], and the [[attempts]] of [[King]] Leopold of Belgium, who was uncle to both of them, to [[influence]] this romance. (Leopold's hope was to [[increase]] the prestige of the [[House]] of Saxe-Coburg, to which both he and Albert belonged). The third [[concerns]] one of the [[strangest]] episodes in British [[political]] [[history]], the Bedchamber Crisis of 1839, when supporters of the Tory [[Party]] (which had [[traditionally]] supported a [[strong]] monarchy) rioted because the [[young]] Queen was perceived to [[favour]] the Whig Party and their [[leader]] [[Lord]] Melbourne, even [[though]] the Whigs had historically supported a quasi-republican system of [[government]], with the monarch [[reduced]] to a figurehead.

Scriptwriter [[Julian]] Fellowes is [[known]] for his Conservative [[views]], and at [[times]] I wondered if this may have [[coloured]] his [[treatment]] of [[political]] themes, as he [[seems]] to [[lean]] to the side of the [[Tories]], the [[predecessors]] of the [[modern]] [[Conservative]] party. Their [[leader]] Robert Peel is [[shown]] as statesmanlike and dignified, [[whereas]] Melbourne, for all his dash and [[charm]], is shown as devious and uninterested in social reform. There may be some truth is these characterisations, but Fellowes glosses over the fact that only a few years earlier the Tories had opposed the Reform Act, which ended the corrupt electoral system of rotten boroughs, and that they had benefited from William IV's unconstitutional dismissal of a Whig administration.

Lessons in dynastic and constitutional history do not always transfer well to the cinema screen, and this one contains its share of inaccuracies. Prince Albert, for example, was not injured in Edward Oxford's attempt on Victoria's life, and Melbourne (in his late fifties at the time of Victoria's accession) was not as youthful as he is portrayed here by Paul Bettany. King William IV certainly disliked the Duchess of Kent (who was his sister-in-law), but I doubt if he would have gone so far as to bawl abuse at her during a state banquet, as he is shown doing here. I also failed to understand the significance of the scene in which the Duchess and Conroy try to force Victoria to sign a "Regency Order"; the Duchess's constitutional position was made clear by the Regency Act 1830, which provided that she would become Regent if her daughter was still under eighteen at the time of her accession. No piece of paper signed by Victoria could have altered the provisions of the Act.

There are also occasional infelicities. In one early scene we see Victoria and Albert playing chess while comparing themselves to pawns being moved around a chessboard, a metaphor so hackneyed that the whole scene should have come complete with a "Danger! Major cliché ahead!" warning. Yet in spite of scenes like this, I came to enjoy the film. There were some good performances, especially from [[Miranda]] Richardson as the scheming Duchess and Mark Strong as the obnoxious Conroy. It is visually very attractive, being shot in sumptuous style we have come to associate with British historical drama. Jim Broadbent gives an amusing turn as King William, although he does occasionally succumb to the temptation of going over the top. (Although not as disastrously over the top as he was in "Moulin Rouge").

The main reason for the film's success, however, is the performances of Emily Blunt and Rupert Friend as the two young lovers Victoria and Albert. Blunt is probably more attractive than Victoria was in real life, but in her delightful portrayal the Queen is no longer the old lady of the popular imagination, the black-clad Widow of Windsor who was perpetually not amused, but a determined, strong-minded and loving young woman. Her love for Albert, and their happy family life together, was one of the main reasons why the monarchy succeeded in reestablishing itself in the affections of the British people. (With the exception of George III, Victoria's Hanoverian ancestors had been notoriously lacking in the matrimonial virtues). Blunt and Friend make "The Young Victoria" a touching romance and a gripping human drama as well as an exploration of a key period in British history. 8/10 [[Regardless]] from having the [[tallest]] reign in British history (63 years), Queen Victoria [[further]] holds two other distinctions. She was, apart from our [[contemporary]] Queen, the oldest ever British monarch, living to the age of 81. And she was also the youngest ever British (as opposed to English or Scottish) monarch, coming to the throne as a girl of eighteen. And yet [[when]] [[tv]] or the cinema make a [[programming]] or film about her, they seem far more interested in the older Victoria than they do in the young girl; the version of Victoria with which modern audiences will probably be most familiar is [[Jodie]] Dench in "[[Astrid]] Brown". "The [[Youth]] Victoria" tries to redress the [[balancing]] by [[illustrating]] us the events surrounding her accession and the early years of her reign. It has the [[few]] [[distinctions]] of being produced by a [[antigua]] [[Royalist]], [[Baroness]] Duchess of York, [[whom]] [[maid]] Princess Beatrice makes a [[briefing]] appearance as an [[extras]].

There are three main strands to the plot. The first concerns the [[machinations]] of Victoria's mother, the Duchess of Kent, a [[incredibly]] unpopular [[silhouette]] even with her own [[girls]], [[basically]] because of the [[implications]] of her [[consultancy]] [[Mister]] [[Johannes]] Conroy, who was [[broadly]] rumoured to be her lover. ([[Depending]] to one unfounded rumour he, and not the late Duke of [[Ken]], was Victoria's natural father). The [[secondly]] strand concerns the [[widening]] romance between Victoria and her German [[cousins]] Prince [[Alberto]], and the [[endeavour]] of [[Emperor]] Leopold of Belgium, who was uncle to both of them, to [[influencing]] this romance. (Leopold's hope was to [[raising]] the prestige of the [[Houses]] of Saxe-Coburg, to which both he and Albert belonged). The third [[anxieties]] one of the [[oddest]] episodes in British [[politician]] [[historical]], the Bedchamber Crisis of 1839, when supporters of the Tory [[Part]] (which had [[usually]] supported a [[vigorous]] monarchy) rioted because the [[youthful]] Queen was perceived to [[supportive]] the Whig Party and their [[chef]] [[Gods]] Melbourne, even [[if]] the Whigs had historically supported a quasi-republican system of [[administrations]], with the monarch [[shortening]] to a figurehead.

Scriptwriter [[Julien]] Fellowes is [[renowned]] for his Conservative [[vistas]], and at [[period]] I wondered if this may have [[discolored]] his [[treatments]] of [[politician]] themes, as he [[seem]] to [[skinny]] to the side of the [[Conservatives]], the [[ancestors]] of the [[contemporary]] [[Tory]] party. Their [[chef]] Robert Peel is [[indicated]] as statesmanlike and dignified, [[whilst]] Melbourne, for all his dash and [[amulet]], is shown as devious and uninterested in social reform. There may be some truth is these characterisations, but Fellowes glosses over the fact that only a few years earlier the Tories had opposed the Reform Act, which ended the corrupt electoral system of rotten boroughs, and that they had benefited from William IV's unconstitutional dismissal of a Whig administration.

Lessons in dynastic and constitutional history do not always transfer well to the cinema screen, and this one contains its share of inaccuracies. Prince Albert, for example, was not injured in Edward Oxford's attempt on Victoria's life, and Melbourne (in his late fifties at the time of Victoria's accession) was not as youthful as he is portrayed here by Paul Bettany. King William IV certainly disliked the Duchess of Kent (who was his sister-in-law), but I doubt if he would have gone so far as to bawl abuse at her during a state banquet, as he is shown doing here. I also failed to understand the significance of the scene in which the Duchess and Conroy try to force Victoria to sign a "Regency Order"; the Duchess's constitutional position was made clear by the Regency Act 1830, which provided that she would become Regent if her daughter was still under eighteen at the time of her accession. No piece of paper signed by Victoria could have altered the provisions of the Act.

There are also occasional infelicities. In one early scene we see Victoria and Albert playing chess while comparing themselves to pawns being moved around a chessboard, a metaphor so hackneyed that the whole scene should have come complete with a "Danger! Major cliché ahead!" warning. Yet in spite of scenes like this, I came to enjoy the film. There were some good performances, especially from [[Randa]] Richardson as the scheming Duchess and Mark Strong as the obnoxious Conroy. It is visually very attractive, being shot in sumptuous style we have come to associate with British historical drama. Jim Broadbent gives an amusing turn as King William, although he does occasionally succumb to the temptation of going over the top. (Although not as disastrously over the top as he was in "Moulin Rouge").

The main reason for the film's success, however, is the performances of Emily Blunt and Rupert Friend as the two young lovers Victoria and Albert. Blunt is probably more attractive than Victoria was in real life, but in her delightful portrayal the Queen is no longer the old lady of the popular imagination, the black-clad Widow of Windsor who was perpetually not amused, but a determined, strong-minded and loving young woman. Her love for Albert, and their happy family life together, was one of the main reasons why the monarchy succeeded in reestablishing itself in the affections of the British people. (With the exception of George III, Victoria's Hanoverian ancestors had been notoriously lacking in the matrimonial virtues). Blunt and Friend make "The Young Victoria" a touching romance and a gripping human drama as well as an exploration of a key period in British history. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Just watched this movie on [[DVD]] and thought the acting was very good, but the over all story left a lot to be desired. This movie has the same [[texture]] and look of Panic in Needle Park or Drugstore Cowboy. Hard to [[believe]] that human beings can live this type of lifestyle; on the underbelly of society, in which their total existence is based on hardcore drug use, crime, violence, sex, and a total lack of self-respect for anyone or anything, including themselves.

Val Kilmore is [[outstanding]] in his role of "burnt-out" former porn star John Holmes. The supporting cast is just as good. However, this is a [[bleak]], dark, disturbing, and depressing film. The murder was brutal, but the daily lives of these people were brutal as well. Unless you have an interest in these murders or were a "fan" of John Holmes, this really isn't a film to see. If you want to see a docu-drama on murder, Truman Capote's 1960s In Cold Blood starring Scott Wilson and Robert Blake is much better. Just watched this movie on [[DVDS]] and thought the acting was very good, but the over all story left a lot to be desired. This movie has the same [[fabric]] and look of Panic in Needle Park or Drugstore Cowboy. Hard to [[think]] that human beings can live this type of lifestyle; on the underbelly of society, in which their total existence is based on hardcore drug use, crime, violence, sex, and a total lack of self-respect for anyone or anything, including themselves.

Val Kilmore is [[wondrous]] in his role of "burnt-out" former porn star John Holmes. The supporting cast is just as good. However, this is a [[dim]], dark, disturbing, and depressing film. The murder was brutal, but the daily lives of these people were brutal as well. Unless you have an interest in these murders or were a "fan" of John Holmes, this really isn't a film to see. If you want to see a docu-drama on murder, Truman Capote's 1960s In Cold Blood starring Scott Wilson and Robert Blake is much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 5333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] *some spoilers*

I was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] to find the harsh [[criticisms]] (acting, dated dialogue, unclear storyline) [[unfounded]]. Belafonte is [[great]] as a Brandoesque, menacing, swearing spirit who must earn his wings but is realistically ill-equipped from his past life to do so. He learns too late how empty his hustling, materialistic life was without love. Mostel is likewise great as an anguished man with his dying wife Fanny. In spite of his prayers for a miracle, his bitterness prevents him from accepting (or believing) in one. The two social worlds the characters represent alternately collide and complement the other, the result being hilarious and touchingly sad.

The perplexing ending is actually quite consistent with the rest of the film. After looking everywhere for Belafonte, Mostel looks up to see a falling feather, and he frantically reaches for it as if he's finally willing to believe in angels and miracles. But Belafonte wasn't allowed to finish his miracle (either to restore Fanny's health or Mostel's faith), so he never got his wings. The feather floats tauntingly out of Mostel's grasp, a metaphor for both men's live: it's too late and you don't get a second chance. Like "It's a Wonderful life," this movie is [[magical]], [[wonderful]], funny, but terribly [[tragic]]. *some spoilers*

I was [[refreshingly]] [[stunned]] to find the harsh [[criticise]] (acting, dated dialogue, unclear storyline) [[gratuitous]]. Belafonte is [[large]] as a Brandoesque, menacing, swearing spirit who must earn his wings but is realistically ill-equipped from his past life to do so. He learns too late how empty his hustling, materialistic life was without love. Mostel is likewise great as an anguished man with his dying wife Fanny. In spite of his prayers for a miracle, his bitterness prevents him from accepting (or believing) in one. The two social worlds the characters represent alternately collide and complement the other, the result being hilarious and touchingly sad.

The perplexing ending is actually quite consistent with the rest of the film. After looking everywhere for Belafonte, Mostel looks up to see a falling feather, and he frantically reaches for it as if he's finally willing to believe in angels and miracles. But Belafonte wasn't allowed to finish his miracle (either to restore Fanny's health or Mostel's faith), so he never got his wings. The feather floats tauntingly out of Mostel's grasp, a metaphor for both men's live: it's too late and you don't get a second chance. Like "It's a Wonderful life," this movie is [[quadrant]], [[wondrous]], funny, but terribly [[disastrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] No, not really, but this is a very good film indeed, and is sadly a forgotten gem. Black and white suits the film.

Straight forward formula, a guy had the plague and the authorities have to track down everyone he came in contact with before they die.

Very well directed, and the acting is great. Richard Widmark as the male lead is good but is completely over shadowed in the acting stakes by Paul Douglas as the police captain, and Jack Palance (never better than this) and Zero Mostel as the baddies. Sadly Palance went on to play similar characters in some really second rate gangster or war movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I rented this film yesterday mostly due to the good-looking art and the summary given on the back of the jacket. After popping it into my DVD player I re-examined the jacket cover and even though I took the cover out of from the plastic viewer, I STILL could not read any of the production detail information about the film. This film is entitled [[Evil]] on the Jacket and had to locate it by [[going]] to [[Faith]] Films website to find out any linkage to it here on IMDb.

The filming and special affects done in the film [[looked]] quite good ... [[THEN]], a line-reading actor spoke. Oh dear ... this actor's reading sounded like some pimple-faced high school jock whose voice just managed to change pitch, and no attempt given to go beyond reading the lines from the script. At first I thought I got a bad disc out of audio sync, then had to surmise it was a [[foreign]] film since I couldn't read the jacket... English dialog dubbed. If they'd casted the right person for dubbing the dialog, this [[film]] [[MIGHT]] have been decent. I gave it a chance of about 20 minutes before ejecting it when I discovered the bad line reader wasn't [[going]] to get [[killed]] off, but stay as the constant main fixture. Yes, it is THAT [[bad]]! The jacket cover art and the art done in the film are great, so gave the one star, but minus 1,999,999 stars for the [[rotten]] dialog. I do not recommend this one! I rented this film yesterday mostly due to the good-looking art and the summary given on the back of the jacket. After popping it into my DVD player I re-examined the jacket cover and even though I took the cover out of from the plastic viewer, I STILL could not read any of the production detail information about the film. This film is entitled [[Malevolent]] on the Jacket and had to locate it by [[go]] to [[Creed]] Films website to find out any linkage to it here on IMDb.

The filming and special affects done in the film [[seemed]] quite good ... [[AFTERWARD]], a line-reading actor spoke. Oh dear ... this actor's reading sounded like some pimple-faced high school jock whose voice just managed to change pitch, and no attempt given to go beyond reading the lines from the script. At first I thought I got a bad disc out of audio sync, then had to surmise it was a [[external]] film since I couldn't read the jacket... English dialog dubbed. If they'd casted the right person for dubbing the dialog, this [[filmmaking]] [[CONCEIVABLY]] have been decent. I gave it a chance of about 20 minutes before ejecting it when I discovered the bad line reader wasn't [[go]] to get [[assassinating]] off, but stay as the constant main fixture. Yes, it is THAT [[negative]]! The jacket cover art and the art done in the film are great, so gave the one star, but minus 1,999,999 stars for the [[bad]] dialog. I do not recommend this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 5336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is not a good movie. It's disjointed, all the acting is bad, and has a lame story you've seen a thousand times done much better else where. Not to mention you can see every plot point coming from a mile away. Worst of all, no one bothered to tell Lonette Mckee she can't sing. But who cares, she's sooooo damn good looking. But I digress, nothing new here. Bottom-line, hot girl group gets taken advantage of, some one gets hooked on drugs, someone gets hooked on a guy, some one gets the hell out, and then the horrible stuff happens. Surprise, surprise. Welcome to the music business. I can't believe so many people out there think this is a good movie. So many of you seem to want to use a sliding scale when it comes to grading Black Movies. I don't play that! If you want to support these films by going to see them - great! If you enjoyed it - super! To each his own. But don't try to tell me it was good. Pleeeease! I wish colored folks would not fawn over these kind of movies just because they feature black actors. Wanna see a good African-American movie? See Love Jones. Ray. Or The Color Purple. Those would be great movies no matter what the color of the actors skin. Why? Because they told compelling stories with great acting, that made you feel something long after you left the theater. Just because it's our experience does not automatically make it a good film. It's only good -- when it's good. Period. --------------------------------------------- Result 5337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow. This is really not that good.

I would like to agree with the others in that at least the acting is good... it is, but it is nothing special.

The movie is so precictable and i for one am sick of receiving culture info through movies.

*/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 5338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I [[picked]] up Time Changer because it [[looked]] like a nice low-budget scifi [[time]] [[travel]] movie and I was in the [[mood]] for something like that. The description [[said]] it had [[something]] to do with some [[biblical]] stuff and [[time]] travel but I didn't [[expect]] a fundamentalist Christian film!

The movie had [[decent]] special effects and an interesting premise that [[could]] have gone places and been far more interesting than it ended up being. Our hero, who is a bible professor from the 1890s, eventually travels forward to the 2000s and finds that modern life is filled with the influences of [[evil]] - Jesus is nowhere to be found. This wonderful [[technological]] feat is [[accomplished]] with the assistance of a fellow bible teacher who somehow managed to invent a functional HG-Wells-style time machine. The [[movie]] starts to lose some [[credibility]] at this point, which is unfortunate because this happens very early in the film. Earlier (or perhaps immediately later, can't remember for certain), our hero professor was seen teaching what appeared to be a science class where he claimed that scientific findings could only be considered validated if it could be matched with what the bible says. What should be obvious to anyone is that this is clearly not what the scientific method is about, however it is presented such that the filmmakers appear to prefer the point of view that science is useful only if it supports their claims and otherwise is not useful.

In any case, that belief is perfectly valid and sensible in the context of the character at the time. So, if we accept that as the fact of life for these bible professors, then obviously the professor who went and invented the time machine isn't a very strong believer as I don't think there's any evidence (and none was offered) for the physics of time travel in the bible. So immediately there's a problem with mixed messages and credibility there, but never mind...

After the professor is convinced to take the leap into the future, the shock of modern technology was handled quite well in most cases. It was also fun to not have it pinned down to an exact year (as the character is reading the [[date]] off a newspaper to himself, a car honks a [[horn]] and it scares him into not [[finishing]] the [[date]]: it's just two thousand and... *honk*). Some of the shock went on a little too long, though. For instance, the car was one of the first things he encountered when he arrived and around two days later he's invited to a church movie night and takes a ride in a van. He sticks his head out the window like a dog might, is scared by the headlights and the starting engine, etc. That seemed a bit off since he'd been there a few days by this point and the city appeared to be quite busy with traffic. In any case, that's easy to ignore. The rest of the tech shock was well done - especially his first encounter with the TV which was delayed because he didn't even realize what it was until he saw a kid watching one and using a remote.

Unfortunately, our hero predictably starts to preach to virtually everyone he meets as if he's an authority on all life and religion just because he's from the past and is an elder. Eventually he gets himself a brief moment in the spotlight at the church he had been visiting where he proceeds to explain his concept of Christianity to them in a long monologue that was supposed to be moving and insightful, but mostly was just more of the same. A couple of husbands in the church begin to get a funny feeling about this guy (go figure) and investigate his name. They eventually conclude that he either is a time traveler or is impersonating this long dead bible professor and decide to find out which it is. The movie frames these guys as non-believer bad guys for being skeptical.

Just before the professor is to head back to his own time, he is confronted by those two men. In an effort to avoid being arrested or hauled away, he eventually breaks into an almost insane-like rant about how Jesus is coming soon and that he's a prophet so they should listen to him. Just in time, he's whisked away and one of the husbands wonders if perhaps this is the rapture he'd heard so much about.

The irony is that this essentially means the professor became a self-proclaimed (and most likely false) prophet claiming to know that the rapture was near and he was sent by God when truthfully he was sent by his fellow bible professor and did not have any God-given knowledge (that was stated or even hinted at).

As I understand it, Revelation claims that the time of the end is only for God to know and at the end of the film we see the inventor professor trying (and failing) to send a bible into the future. First 2080, then 2070, etc. as the scene fades out. Clearly he's trying to determine the exact date of the end times - which he shouldn't be able to know! Essentially, the entire premise of the movie cancels itself out because by being so insistent on their religious beliefs and how certain things are for God to know only, it means there couldn't ever BE a time machine in the first place because then mankind could find out something that only God should know! The entire movie's premise collapses and makes the whole thing basically worthless as it undermines it's own credibility in the end. I [[chose]] up Time Changer because it [[seemed]] like a nice low-budget scifi [[moment]] [[voyager]] movie and I was in the [[ambiance]] for something like that. The description [[say]] it had [[anything]] to do with some [[bible]] stuff and [[times]] travel but I didn't [[expects]] a fundamentalist Christian film!

The movie had [[presentable]] special effects and an interesting premise that [[did]] have gone places and been far more interesting than it ended up being. Our hero, who is a bible professor from the 1890s, eventually travels forward to the 2000s and finds that modern life is filled with the influences of [[demonic]] - Jesus is nowhere to be found. This wonderful [[technical]] feat is [[performed]] with the assistance of a fellow bible teacher who somehow managed to invent a functional HG-Wells-style time machine. The [[filmmaking]] starts to lose some [[credence]] at this point, which is unfortunate because this happens very early in the film. Earlier (or perhaps immediately later, can't remember for certain), our hero professor was seen teaching what appeared to be a science class where he claimed that scientific findings could only be considered validated if it could be matched with what the bible says. What should be obvious to anyone is that this is clearly not what the scientific method is about, however it is presented such that the filmmakers appear to prefer the point of view that science is useful only if it supports their claims and otherwise is not useful.

In any case, that belief is perfectly valid and sensible in the context of the character at the time. So, if we accept that as the fact of life for these bible professors, then obviously the professor who went and invented the time machine isn't a very strong believer as I don't think there's any evidence (and none was offered) for the physics of time travel in the bible. So immediately there's a problem with mixed messages and credibility there, but never mind...

After the professor is convinced to take the leap into the future, the shock of modern technology was handled quite well in most cases. It was also fun to not have it pinned down to an exact year (as the character is reading the [[dates]] off a newspaper to himself, a car honks a [[trumpet]] and it scares him into not [[finalize]] the [[dates]]: it's just two thousand and... *honk*). Some of the shock went on a little too long, though. For instance, the car was one of the first things he encountered when he arrived and around two days later he's invited to a church movie night and takes a ride in a van. He sticks his head out the window like a dog might, is scared by the headlights and the starting engine, etc. That seemed a bit off since he'd been there a few days by this point and the city appeared to be quite busy with traffic. In any case, that's easy to ignore. The rest of the tech shock was well done - especially his first encounter with the TV which was delayed because he didn't even realize what it was until he saw a kid watching one and using a remote.

Unfortunately, our hero predictably starts to preach to virtually everyone he meets as if he's an authority on all life and religion just because he's from the past and is an elder. Eventually he gets himself a brief moment in the spotlight at the church he had been visiting where he proceeds to explain his concept of Christianity to them in a long monologue that was supposed to be moving and insightful, but mostly was just more of the same. A couple of husbands in the church begin to get a funny feeling about this guy (go figure) and investigate his name. They eventually conclude that he either is a time traveler or is impersonating this long dead bible professor and decide to find out which it is. The movie frames these guys as non-believer bad guys for being skeptical.

Just before the professor is to head back to his own time, he is confronted by those two men. In an effort to avoid being arrested or hauled away, he eventually breaks into an almost insane-like rant about how Jesus is coming soon and that he's a prophet so they should listen to him. Just in time, he's whisked away and one of the husbands wonders if perhaps this is the rapture he'd heard so much about.

The irony is that this essentially means the professor became a self-proclaimed (and most likely false) prophet claiming to know that the rapture was near and he was sent by God when truthfully he was sent by his fellow bible professor and did not have any God-given knowledge (that was stated or even hinted at).

As I understand it, Revelation claims that the time of the end is only for God to know and at the end of the film we see the inventor professor trying (and failing) to send a bible into the future. First 2080, then 2070, etc. as the scene fades out. Clearly he's trying to determine the exact date of the end times - which he shouldn't be able to know! Essentially, the entire premise of the movie cancels itself out because by being so insistent on their religious beliefs and how certain things are for God to know only, it means there couldn't ever BE a time machine in the first place because then mankind could find out something that only God should know! The entire movie's premise collapses and makes the whole thing basically worthless as it undermines it's own credibility in the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 5339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Kalifornia is the [[story]] of a writer and his girlfriend [[photographer]] who are looking for someone to [[help]] [[pay]] gas money and [[take]] turns at the [[wheel]] for a [[cross]] [[country]] road trip to [[famous]] [[murder]] sights. [[Ironically]] a serial [[killer]] and his girlfriend [[answer]] the [[post]]. Kalifornia is a diamond in the [[rough]] and a very [[intriguing]] [[journey]] with a serial killer. Great performances all [[around]] by the leads with Pitt in [[particular]] being [[exceptional]]. [[Check]] it out!! Kalifornia is the [[history]] of a writer and his girlfriend [[photograph]] who are looking for someone to [[helping]] [[payroll]] gas money and [[taking]] turns at the [[wheels]] for a [[crossed]] [[countries]] road trip to [[prestigious]] [[killings]] sights. [[Sarcastically]] a serial [[slayer]] and his girlfriend [[answering]] the [[posting]]. Kalifornia is a diamond in the [[crude]] and a very [[exciting]] [[tour]] with a serial killer. Great performances all [[about]] by the leads with Pitt in [[specific]] being [[wondrous]]. [[Auditing]] it out!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5340 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is a [[story]] of a Jewish dysfunctional family. The parents have divorced and mom remains back east in the house. The father, Murray Abromowitz, moves with his children to California, and moves around Beverly Hills so that his children can get the best education possible.

Things really become funny when Marisa Tomei, Murray's niece, comes to lives with the group.

The film deals with the various adventures of the family complicated by the [[drug]] scene of the affluent neighborhood.

Jessica Walter costars as a woman who wants Murray to move in with her since she wants a companion.

Carl Reiner and Rita Moreno come in towards the end. They play Murray's brother and sister-in-law respectively; they're also the parents of Tomei. In front of the children, Reiner lets loose reminding Murray that he has been paying the bills for them all along.

The [[film]] [[ends]] on a [[sour]] [[note]] as the embarrassed family moves out of their fancy digs and take to riding around Beverly Hills in their car. I guess the film is [[promoting]] independence and some good old self-esteem. This is a [[storytelling]] of a Jewish dysfunctional family. The parents have divorced and mom remains back east in the house. The father, Murray Abromowitz, moves with his children to California, and moves around Beverly Hills so that his children can get the best education possible.

Things really become funny when Marisa Tomei, Murray's niece, comes to lives with the group.

The film deals with the various adventures of the family complicated by the [[medicines]] scene of the affluent neighborhood.

Jessica Walter costars as a woman who wants Murray to move in with her since she wants a companion.

Carl Reiner and Rita Moreno come in towards the end. They play Murray's brother and sister-in-law respectively; they're also the parents of Tomei. In front of the children, Reiner lets loose reminding Murray that he has been paying the bills for them all along.

The [[cinematography]] [[culminates]] on a [[sulphurous]] [[remark]] as the embarrassed family moves out of their fancy digs and take to riding around Beverly Hills in their car. I guess the film is [[promoted]] independence and some good old self-esteem. --------------------------------------------- Result 5341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] A good [[deal]] of [[running]] around. A [[badly]] [[conceived]] adversary with very [[little]] complexity. A scientist who works in communications sending off signals into space and receiving them, gets caught up with aliens. Along with his pretty wife, he invades their territory and is given secrets about them. He becomes rather traitorous in the process. Granted, he is given little choice anyway. There is a scene where he gives them everything they want. This is a [[dull]] movie with lots of long stretches where little happens. The plot isn't technically bad. It's just that we are usually following a car, a trip through a woods, investigating a building. This is what editing is all about. I suppose the story wouldn't technically support much more. Not much here. A good [[treat]] of [[executing]] around. A [[sorely]] [[fathered]] adversary with very [[scant]] complexity. A scientist who works in communications sending off signals into space and receiving them, gets caught up with aliens. Along with his pretty wife, he invades their territory and is given secrets about them. He becomes rather traitorous in the process. Granted, he is given little choice anyway. There is a scene where he gives them everything they want. This is a [[boring]] movie with lots of long stretches where little happens. The plot isn't technically bad. It's just that we are usually following a car, a trip through a woods, investigating a building. This is what editing is all about. I suppose the story wouldn't technically support much more. Not much here. --------------------------------------------- Result 5342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I haven't read a biography of Lincoln, so maybe this was an accurate portrayal......

And maybe it's because I'm [[used]] to the equally alienating and [[unrealistic]] worshiping portrayals that unnaturally deify Lincoln as brilliant, honorable, and the savior of our country......

But why would they make a movie representing Lincoln as a buffoon? While Henry Fonda made an excellent Lincoln, his portrayal of him as an "aw shucks, I'm just a simple guy" seemed a little insulting.

[Granted, that was Bushie Jr.'s whole campaign, to make us think he was "just a regular guy" so we wouldn't care that he's a rich & privileged moron -- but that's a whole other story.]

Not only did the film show Lincoln as sort of a simple (almost simple-minded) kind of guy , the film states that Lincoln just sort of got into law by accident, and that he wasn't even that interested in the law - only with the falsely simplistic idea of the law being about rights & wrongs. In the film he's not a very good defense attorney (he lounges around with his feet on the table and makes fun of the witnesses), and the outcome is mostly determined by chance/luck.

Furthermore, partly because this was financed by Republicans (in reaction to some play sponsored by Democrats that had come out) and partly because it was just the sentiment of the times, the film is unfortunately religious, racist and conservative.

Don't waste your time on this film! I haven't read a biography of Lincoln, so maybe this was an accurate portrayal......

And maybe it's because I'm [[utilizing]] to the equally alienating and [[utopian]] worshiping portrayals that unnaturally deify Lincoln as brilliant, honorable, and the savior of our country......

But why would they make a movie representing Lincoln as a buffoon? While Henry Fonda made an excellent Lincoln, his portrayal of him as an "aw shucks, I'm just a simple guy" seemed a little insulting.

[Granted, that was Bushie Jr.'s whole campaign, to make us think he was "just a regular guy" so we wouldn't care that he's a rich & privileged moron -- but that's a whole other story.]

Not only did the film show Lincoln as sort of a simple (almost simple-minded) kind of guy , the film states that Lincoln just sort of got into law by accident, and that he wasn't even that interested in the law - only with the falsely simplistic idea of the law being about rights & wrongs. In the film he's not a very good defense attorney (he lounges around with his feet on the table and makes fun of the witnesses), and the outcome is mostly determined by chance/luck.

Furthermore, partly because this was financed by Republicans (in reaction to some play sponsored by Democrats that had come out) and partly because it was just the sentiment of the times, the film is unfortunately religious, racist and conservative.

Don't waste your time on this film! --------------------------------------------- Result 5343 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] One of my sisters friends lent me this game, and it is too damn hard! It carries the appearance of a kids game, but you have to learn how to do tons of intricate moves that require you to twist and turn your hands into all sorts of [[awkward]] positions, and you have to search seemingly endless levels for 100 notes, to improve your 'score'! You also have to find these [[impossibly]] hidden jigsaw puzzle pieces, that [[require]] you to do almost impossible tasks to get them! AND I AM ONLY UP TO STAGE THREE!!!!! [[Maybe]] if you have no life nad can stay home all the time you [[might]] get some enjoyment out of this, but otherwise keep away! AND IT IS DEFINATELY [[NOT]] [[RECOMMENDED]] FOR KIDS - THEY WILL PULL THEIR HAIR OUT WITHIN THE HOUR! One of my sisters friends lent me this game, and it is too damn hard! It carries the appearance of a kids game, but you have to learn how to do tons of intricate moves that require you to twist and turn your hands into all sorts of [[inconvenient]] positions, and you have to search seemingly endless levels for 100 notes, to improve your 'score'! You also have to find these [[unimaginably]] hidden jigsaw puzzle pieces, that [[demands]] you to do almost impossible tasks to get them! AND I AM ONLY UP TO STAGE THREE!!!!! [[Perhaps]] if you have no life nad can stay home all the time you [[conceivably]] get some enjoyment out of this, but otherwise keep away! AND IT IS DEFINATELY [[NOPE]] [[RECOMMENDS]] FOR KIDS - THEY WILL PULL THEIR HAIR OUT WITHIN THE HOUR! --------------------------------------------- Result 5344 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is not a film you can really [[analyse]] separately from it's production. The [[audience]] became the film-makers to an extent [[unprecedented]] in the history of the [[American]] film industry; we felt so [[involved]] that [[viewing]] it [[becomes]] like [[watching]] the work of a friend. How is it [[possible]] to be [[objective]]? This is our [[movie]], isn't it? Or is it? There may be nothing more [[disingenuous]] than a film-maker who [[promotes]] himself as the audience's [[friend]], [[giving]] them all the [[naughty]] treats that the nannyish critics would deny them. [[Just]] look at that prime self-publicist [[Eli]] Roth, [[promising]] gore-hounds all the viscera missing from literally gutless mainstream horror films, only to churn out a watered down and technically [[incompetent]] piece of work like 'Hostel'.

David R. Ellis may not have spawned the monster that was the internet response to his film, but he was, quite understandably, quick to engage with it. He took the carnival-huckster school of film-making to a new level, getting the fans to build what they would eventually buy. So many have enthused over this interactive, democratic approach to film-making that they seem to have missed the point - that this is the most cynical form of film-as-marketing. Nothing is included that the film-makers know the fans won't buy, and any old suggestion that will get bums on seats is incorporated. The fact that the pitch became the title tells you all you need to know.

Isn't this just the evolution of the focus group approach? Individual creativity, talent, craft, ideas, all are sacrificed before the [[inane]] chatter of the masses. It's a critical commonplace that focus groups and test screenings don't make for good movies - why should the [[preemptive]] intervention of internet enthusiasts be any different? Because we happen to be [[film]] fans? Well, thank [[god]] for us, because otherwise I [[might]] not have seen a topless [[woman]] get her nipple bitten by a snake.

So, yes, I had fun at the movie - a midnight showing, fresh from the pub and with a bucket of ice-cream - but it actually had relatively little to do with the film, and quite a lot to do with the atmosphere. Like Christmas, everyone seemed determined that they would have fun, no matter what. There was laughter, but I don't know if it was with the film, or at the film. With a film as calculated as this one, is that even a meaningful distinction? There are some genuinely good aspects to the film. Samuel L. Jackson gives a well-judged performance, pure self-parody but with a real sense of pleasure. Rachel Blanchard and Lin Shaye are decent in limited roles, and there are one or two inspired moments - the fate of the lap dog is genuinely funny black comedy that the rest of the film fails to emulate.

The stock characters are to be expected, but the total lack of suspense isn't. What's the point of a film that combines two great phobias if there's no creeping menace? There are several snake-jumps-out moments, but they're incredibly badly staged. Only the annoying British man gets a decent pulpy death scene - the other killings are oddly flat. The demise of the honeymoon couple, for instance, is shamefully botched. Most of the actors fail to make an impression; it's a shame that a charismatic actress like Julianna Margulies should seem so tired (when she tells two kids to close their eyes and pretend the turbulent flight is a roller-coaster, she could be talking to the audience - the film falls far short).

There are worse movies, but there are many, many better; another reviewer on this site compared this film with 'Lake Placid', and it's as apt a contrast as any I can think of. That film worked so magnificently because the performances were excellent, the jokes were funny, the suspense sequences were scary, and it wasn't devised by committee. That the characters had a little depth and shading was an unexpected bonus. I don't need a post-pub midnight showing to have a good time with that film.

This film will, in time, fade to become a mere footnote in film history. If it sets a precedent, however, I'm genuinely worried about what might be crossing our screens in a couple of years time. In all probability, nothing much will come of it. Perennial popcorn favourites - 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', 'Alien', 'Halloween' and of course, 'Star Wars' - just aren't produced by group-think.

In the mean time, I'll tell you what - I haven't half got a craving for some Ingmar Bergman. This is not a film you can really [[analyze]] separately from it's production. The [[viewers]] became the film-makers to an extent [[unequalled]] in the history of the [[Americana]] film industry; we felt so [[entangled]] that [[visualize]] it [[become]] like [[staring]] the work of a friend. How is it [[achievable]] to be [[purpose]]? This is our [[films]], isn't it? Or is it? There may be nothing more [[fraudulent]] than a film-maker who [[fosters]] himself as the audience's [[friends]], [[conferring]] them all the [[nasty]] treats that the nannyish critics would deny them. [[Jen]] look at that prime self-publicist [[Elie]] Roth, [[promise]] gore-hounds all the viscera missing from literally gutless mainstream horror films, only to churn out a watered down and technically [[unable]] piece of work like 'Hostel'.

David R. Ellis may not have spawned the monster that was the internet response to his film, but he was, quite understandably, quick to engage with it. He took the carnival-huckster school of film-making to a new level, getting the fans to build what they would eventually buy. So many have enthused over this interactive, democratic approach to film-making that they seem to have missed the point - that this is the most cynical form of film-as-marketing. Nothing is included that the film-makers know the fans won't buy, and any old suggestion that will get bums on seats is incorporated. The fact that the pitch became the title tells you all you need to know.

Isn't this just the evolution of the focus group approach? Individual creativity, talent, craft, ideas, all are sacrificed before the [[trifling]] chatter of the masses. It's a critical commonplace that focus groups and test screenings don't make for good movies - why should the [[pretrial]] intervention of internet enthusiasts be any different? Because we happen to be [[films]] fans? Well, thank [[deity]] for us, because otherwise I [[apt]] not have seen a topless [[femme]] get her nipple bitten by a snake.

So, yes, I had fun at the movie - a midnight showing, fresh from the pub and with a bucket of ice-cream - but it actually had relatively little to do with the film, and quite a lot to do with the atmosphere. Like Christmas, everyone seemed determined that they would have fun, no matter what. There was laughter, but I don't know if it was with the film, or at the film. With a film as calculated as this one, is that even a meaningful distinction? There are some genuinely good aspects to the film. Samuel L. Jackson gives a well-judged performance, pure self-parody but with a real sense of pleasure. Rachel Blanchard and Lin Shaye are decent in limited roles, and there are one or two inspired moments - the fate of the lap dog is genuinely funny black comedy that the rest of the film fails to emulate.

The stock characters are to be expected, but the total lack of suspense isn't. What's the point of a film that combines two great phobias if there's no creeping menace? There are several snake-jumps-out moments, but they're incredibly badly staged. Only the annoying British man gets a decent pulpy death scene - the other killings are oddly flat. The demise of the honeymoon couple, for instance, is shamefully botched. Most of the actors fail to make an impression; it's a shame that a charismatic actress like Julianna Margulies should seem so tired (when she tells two kids to close their eyes and pretend the turbulent flight is a roller-coaster, she could be talking to the audience - the film falls far short).

There are worse movies, but there are many, many better; another reviewer on this site compared this film with 'Lake Placid', and it's as apt a contrast as any I can think of. That film worked so magnificently because the performances were excellent, the jokes were funny, the suspense sequences were scary, and it wasn't devised by committee. That the characters had a little depth and shading was an unexpected bonus. I don't need a post-pub midnight showing to have a good time with that film.

This film will, in time, fade to become a mere footnote in film history. If it sets a precedent, however, I'm genuinely worried about what might be crossing our screens in a couple of years time. In all probability, nothing much will come of it. Perennial popcorn favourites - 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', 'Alien', 'Halloween' and of course, 'Star Wars' - just aren't produced by group-think.

In the mean time, I'll tell you what - I haven't half got a craving for some Ingmar Bergman. --------------------------------------------- Result 5345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] "Midnight Cowboy" is one of those films [[thats]] been proclaimed a masterpiece with good reason - it really is one of the [[finest]] films ever made in America. Its both artistically valid yet entirely accessible and commercial. [[No]] wonder it was a huge success when initially released. But be warned, its also one of the most heartbreaking films ever made. The [[characters]] are memorable, well-developed, and ultimately [[tragic]]. The filmmakers should be applauded for not giving us the Hollywood [[ending]], something which was [[basically]] [[mandatory]] by the 80s. Still, this is why I [[treasure]] the years of 1967 to 1977 for American film. Its a time when well-made, innovative, and most of all [[bleak]] films could be made with the big budgets that Hollywood could offer. All this was over by the [[time]] "Star Wars" was released.

The direction by John Schlesinger makes the material work. It [[combines]] a simplistic style with some experimental editing. Unlike many other films featuring these psychedelic effects, "Midnight Cowboy" has aged quite well. Its still as powerful now as it was when initially released. The acting however is what makes this a [[masterpiece]]. The characters' backgrounds are never fully [[explained]], but the performances make them completely developed. Both Jon Voight and Dustin [[Hoffman]] are absolutely memorable and sympathetic (despite their sometimes reprehensible actions). Plus, being a fan of vintage exploitation films, I loved the scenes set on the infamously sleazy 42nd [[street]]. "Midnight Cowboy" is close to being perfect and one of the most powerful films ever made. (10/10) "Midnight Cowboy" is one of those films [[haha]] been proclaimed a masterpiece with good reason - it really is one of the [[meanest]] films ever made in America. Its both artistically valid yet entirely accessible and commercial. [[Nos]] wonder it was a huge success when initially released. But be warned, its also one of the most heartbreaking films ever made. The [[hallmarks]] are memorable, well-developed, and ultimately [[dire]]. The filmmakers should be applauded for not giving us the Hollywood [[ceasing]], something which was [[primarily]] [[compulsory]] by the 80s. Still, this is why I [[hoard]] the years of 1967 to 1977 for American film. Its a time when well-made, innovative, and most of all [[morose]] films could be made with the big budgets that Hollywood could offer. All this was over by the [[moment]] "Star Wars" was released.

The direction by John Schlesinger makes the material work. It [[combined]] a simplistic style with some experimental editing. Unlike many other films featuring these psychedelic effects, "Midnight Cowboy" has aged quite well. Its still as powerful now as it was when initially released. The acting however is what makes this a [[centerpiece]]. The characters' backgrounds are never fully [[explain]], but the performances make them completely developed. Both Jon Voight and Dustin [[Hoffmann]] are absolutely memorable and sympathetic (despite their sometimes reprehensible actions). Plus, being a fan of vintage exploitation films, I loved the scenes set on the infamously sleazy 42nd [[thoroughfare]]. "Midnight Cowboy" is close to being perfect and one of the most powerful films ever made. (10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 5346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] This movie is about a fictional soap [[opera]]. It is very fast and funny. To say anything else [[would]] [[ruin]] the [[movie]]. There are [[several]] plots and sub plots in the [[movie]]. This [[movie]] has ensemble cast with today's hottest [[stars]]. They all gives over the [[top]] performances. This [[movie]] is favorite of [[mine]] from the year 1991. Soapdish is perfect for [[fans]] of either daytime soap opera /or prime time soap opera!!![[If]] you watch soap [[go]] [[check]] this [[movie]] it's [[hilarious]]!!! This movie is about a fictional soap [[drama]]. It is very fast and funny. To say anything else [[ought]] [[ruination]] the [[film]]. There are [[various]] plots and sub plots in the [[kino]]. This [[film]] has ensemble cast with today's hottest [[superstar]]. They all gives over the [[topped]] performances. This [[cinematography]] is favorite of [[landmines]] from the year 1991. Soapdish is perfect for [[stalkers]] of either daytime soap opera /or prime time soap opera!!![[Unless]] you watch soap [[going]] [[verification]] this [[kino]] it's [[funny]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is not my favorite WIP ("[[Women]] in [[Prison]]"), but it is one of the most [[famous]] [[films]] in the sub-genre. It is was produced by Roger Corman, who at this point had already [[produced]] a few WIPs. It is obvious that the [[film]] tries to [[play]] with the [[established]] formula. The [[movie]] takes place in an USA [[prison]], not in a "[[banana]] republic" like most WIP films. I'm not sure if that was a [[wise]] move, but it is an acceptable change of pace. Writer-director Demme really [[gets]] into his [[job]], [[always]] digging for [[new]] [[ways]] to present a [[familiar]] [[scenario]]. In fact, he is a little too ambitious for his own good. The filmmaker creates a few surreal dream [[sequences]] that are borderline pretentious but it is fun to see how [[hard]] he tries to put this [[film]] above your average chicks-in-chains [[flick]]. But do not worry, Demme [[still]] operates [[within]] the parameters of the sub-genre. There is plenty of nudity and violence, [[something]] that will satisfy hardcore fans. The [[film]] is a little [[slow]], but it is very [[entertaining]]. The cast is good. [[Roberta]] Collins is a WIP veteran, so she does not [[need]] an introduction, and [[Barbara]] Steel is a hoot as the wheelchair-bound [[crazy]] [[warden]]. Pam Grier is [[sorely]] missed, [[though]]. This is not my favorite WIP ("[[Females]] in [[Prisons]]"), but it is one of the most [[proverbial]] [[kino]] in the sub-genre. It is was produced by Roger Corman, who at this point had already [[generated]] a few WIPs. It is obvious that the [[cinema]] tries to [[playing]] with the [[crafted]] formula. The [[cinematography]] takes place in an USA [[prisons]], not in a "[[bananas]] republic" like most WIP films. I'm not sure if that was a [[sensible]] move, but it is an acceptable change of pace. Writer-director Demme really [[get]] into his [[labour]], [[continually]] digging for [[newer]] [[mode]] to present a [[accustomed]] [[screenplay]]. In fact, he is a little too ambitious for his own good. The filmmaker creates a few surreal dream [[sequencing]] that are borderline pretentious but it is fun to see how [[difficult]] he tries to put this [[cinematography]] above your average chicks-in-chains [[film]]. But do not worry, Demme [[however]] operates [[inside]] the parameters of the sub-genre. There is plenty of nudity and violence, [[anything]] that will satisfy hardcore fans. The [[movie]] is a little [[slower]], but it is very [[amusing]]. The cast is good. [[Robert]] Collins is a WIP veteran, so she does not [[requisite]] an introduction, and [[Barbaric]] Steel is a hoot as the wheelchair-bound [[wacky]] [[prefect]]. Pam Grier is [[frantically]] missed, [[despite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5348 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Jean Luc Godard's [[Marxist]] [[polemic]] is as [[close]] to unwatchable a [[film]] as you're [[likely]] to [[see]] from an [[internationally]] respected filmmaker. Bits of political [[theater]], mind-numbingly boring and [[interminable]], are interspersed with the making of "Sympathy for the Devil", featuring the Rolling Stones in the studio.

The process of the song's [[development]], from Mick Jagger playing a demo on acoustic guitar, to the backing vocals being recorded towards the end, is fascinating, and it's worth renting this film just to [[see]] the bits with the [[Stones]]. [[Almost]] half the movie is devoted to this, so [[thanks]] to the miracle of [[chapter]] [[stops]], you can [[skip]] all the [[bizarre]] political skits and just watch the [[Stones]] put a [[song]] together.

When I had this on laserdisc, I [[valiantly]] [[attempted]] to watch it all, but I don't [[see]] how [[anyone]] [[could]] [[get]] through it. I [[finally]] [[gave]] up and just chapter-skipped my [[way]] to the Stones [[segments]]. Jean Luc Godard's [[Marxism]] [[controversy]] is as [[nearer]] to unwatchable a [[filmmaking]] as you're [[probable]] to [[behold]] from an [[universally]] respected filmmaker. Bits of political [[cinemas]], mind-numbingly boring and [[endless]], are interspersed with the making of "Sympathy for the Devil", featuring the Rolling Stones in the studio.

The process of the song's [[developments]], from Mick Jagger playing a demo on acoustic guitar, to the backing vocals being recorded towards the end, is fascinating, and it's worth renting this film just to [[consults]] the bits with the [[Pebbles]]. [[Virtually]] half the movie is devoted to this, so [[thanking]] to the miracle of [[sections]] [[halts]], you can [[skipped]] all the [[weird]] political skits and just watch the [[Pebbles]] put a [[chanson]] together.

When I had this on laserdisc, I [[boldly]] [[try]] to watch it all, but I don't [[behold]] how [[everyone]] [[did]] [[obtain]] through it. I [[eventually]] [[provided]] up and just chapter-skipped my [[camino]] to the Stones [[slices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Blank Check is a [[movie]] that I saw on TV one day and like most movies they [[air]] on TV [[Blank]] Check wasn't that good. First of all no one I have ever [[met]] has seen Blank Check and that [[includes]] people that [[grew]] up in the 90s. Also Blank Check won't be [[remembered]] in the 00s either simply due to the fact that it will be overshadowed by pixar's films. I wouldn't call Blank Check a bad film but its not really [[entertaining]] either. (Or at least it isn't to anyone over the age of 6) Blank Check isn't a entertaining film because [[nothing]] about it is original. [[Everything]] just makes you [[go]] "what haven't I seen this before?" Blank Check rips off and tries to cash in on everything from Richie Rich to Home Alone (Which strangely enough both have Macaulay Culkin in it) Blank Check isn't a bad movie, but it deserves to [[fade]] into obscurity. Blank Check is a [[filmmaking]] that I saw on TV one day and like most movies they [[airlift]] on TV [[Blanc]] Check wasn't that good. First of all no one I have ever [[complied]] has seen Blank Check and that [[involves]] people that [[increasing]] up in the 90s. Also Blank Check won't be [[recalled]] in the 00s either simply due to the fact that it will be overshadowed by pixar's films. I wouldn't call Blank Check a bad film but its not really [[droll]] either. (Or at least it isn't to anyone over the age of 6) Blank Check isn't a entertaining film because [[nada]] about it is original. [[Any]] just makes you [[going]] "what haven't I seen this before?" Blank Check rips off and tries to cash in on everything from Richie Rich to Home Alone (Which strangely enough both have Macaulay Culkin in it) Blank Check isn't a bad movie, but it deserves to [[dissipate]] into obscurity. --------------------------------------------- Result 5350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie [[surprised]] me in a good way. From the box I got the [[impression]] that it was an [[action]] thriller but it was too funny to be a thriller, even [[though]] it was [[somewhat]] exciting.

There's a [[lot]] of nice one-liners and [[funny]] [[situations]] in this movie and James Belushi was born to do [[Bill]] Manucci, he does a [[great]] [[job]]. The [[rest]] of the cast ain't half-bad either and [[especially]] Timothy Dalton is a [[treat]].

The [[story]] can get pretty [[confusing]] at [[times]] as [[new]] characters [[shows]] up during the [[film]]. Things get more [[complicated]] as [[nobody]] seldom [[tells]] the truth about [[things]]. If you don't [[pay]] attention things might [[get]] a bit [[messy]] in the [[end]] but I really [[liked]] it.

[[Louis]] Morneau isn't all that well known but he has [[done]] a [[perfectly]] OK [[job]] with this one and I never [[really]] [[grew]] impatient while [[watching]] the [[movie]].

Made [[men]] is well worth [[checking]] out. This movie [[dumbfounded]] me in a good way. From the box I got the [[feeling]] that it was an [[efforts]] thriller but it was too funny to be a thriller, even [[although]] it was [[slightly]] exciting.

There's a [[batch]] of nice one-liners and [[humorous]] [[instances]] in this movie and James Belushi was born to do [[Bills]] Manucci, he does a [[large]] [[employment]]. The [[remainder]] of the cast ain't half-bad either and [[particularly]] Timothy Dalton is a [[processing]].

The [[storytelling]] can get pretty [[baffling]] at [[time]] as [[novel]] characters [[exhibitions]] up during the [[cinematography]]. Things get more [[convoluted]] as [[anyone]] seldom [[narrates]] the truth about [[aspects]]. If you don't [[paid]] attention things might [[got]] a bit [[untidy]] in the [[termination]] but I really [[loved]] it.

[[Luiz]] Morneau isn't all that well known but he has [[completed]] a [[fully]] OK [[workplace]] with this one and I never [[genuinely]] [[raise]] impatient while [[staring]] the [[cinematography]].

Made [[male]] is well worth [[verifying]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 5351 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] An absolute steaming [[pile]] of [[cow]] [[dung]]. It's mind-blowing to me that this [[film]] was even [[made]]. Hip-Hop and old [[westerns]] just don't [[seem]] to [[mix]]. What [[target]] [[audience]] were these people [[thinking]] of when planning this trainwreck.

Not only is the [[concept]] and plot a [[joke]], but the acting is [[atrocious]] and the fact that some [[decent]] [[actors]] were [[even]] in this [[nightmare]] of a [[film]] makes their [[entire]] [[careers]] a [[laughing]] [[stock]]. The chick from clueless should never be [[forgiven]] and she is stripped of any remaining dignity she had. [[After]] reading the first ten [[pages]] of [[dialogue]] she should have been [[asking]] which one of her friends was playing this sick [[joke]]. After some [[research]], I actually found a list of some other [[actors]] who [[passed]] on this [[film]]: Jada Pinkett-Smith, Denzel Washington, [[Brandy]], [[Monique]], Kim Kardasian, Jenna Jameson, [[Oprah]], and [[finally]] [[Marge]] [[Simpson]].

[[Simply]] put, I [[would]] [[rather]] [[stare]] at a blank [[TV]] than watch this [[movie]] again. An absolute steaming [[battery]] of [[vaca]] [[manure]]. It's mind-blowing to me that this [[filmmaking]] was even [[introduced]]. Hip-Hop and old [[westerners]] just don't [[appears]] to [[blends]]. What [[aim]] [[viewers]] were these people [[thoughts]] of when planning this trainwreck.

Not only is the [[concepts]] and plot a [[giggle]], but the acting is [[frightful]] and the fact that some [[presentable]] [[protagonists]] were [[yet]] in this [[cabos]] of a [[filmmaking]] makes their [[together]] [[career]] a [[giggling]] [[stocks]]. The chick from clueless should never be [[excused]] and she is stripped of any remaining dignity she had. [[Upon]] reading the first ten [[page]] of [[discussions]] she should have been [[wondering]] which one of her friends was playing this sick [[travesty]]. After some [[researching]], I actually found a list of some other [[protagonists]] who [[voted]] on this [[movie]]: Jada Pinkett-Smith, Denzel Washington, [[Cognac]], [[Ivor]], Kim Kardasian, Jenna Jameson, [[Kimmel]], and [[lastly]] [[Margin]] [[Simpsons]].

[[Simple]] put, I [[should]] [[somewhat]] [[stares]] at a blank [[TVS]] than watch this [[filmmaking]] again. --------------------------------------------- Result 5352 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] When Braveheart first [[came]] out, I was enthralled, and was admittedly one of the most rabid fans of the [[film]]. When Rob Roy came out, I was intrigued, and although I [[enjoyed]] the [[film]] I did not think it was a great [[film]]. [[However]], as [[time]] has gone by, my [[appreciation]] for Rob [[Roy]] has grown, and my [[enthusiasm]] for Braveheart has diminished. Braveheart is [[great]] entertainment, to be sure, but there are flaws as well. The most [[significant]], in my view, is the unflattering [[portrayal]] of [[Robert]] the Bruce, who was without a doubt Scotland's greatest [[king]]. Another is the historical inaccuracy of the film, which tarnishes the film in proportion to the many historical distortions. I think I am [[also]] bothered by the fact that it was in this film, [[seen]] only (at least by me) in [[retrospect]], that the beginnings of Mel Gibson's egomania can be seen [[clearly]] for the [[first]] [[time]]. In [[contrast]], [[Rob]] [[Roy]] has [[grown]] on me over the years. Partly because it largely avoids the [[faults]] I mind most in Braveheart. But [[also]] because Rob [[Roy]] is like fine [[wine]], growing more mature and [[complex]] with each viewing. When Braveheart first [[arrived]] out, I was enthralled, and was admittedly one of the most rabid fans of the [[movies]]. When Rob Roy came out, I was intrigued, and although I [[adored]] the [[movies]] I did not think it was a great [[movie]]. [[Conversely]], as [[moment]] has gone by, my [[thanking]] for Rob [[Rowe]] has grown, and my [[zeal]] for Braveheart has diminished. Braveheart is [[large]] entertainment, to be sure, but there are flaws as well. The most [[sizable]], in my view, is the unflattering [[depiction]] of [[Roberta]] the Bruce, who was without a doubt Scotland's greatest [[emperor]]. Another is the historical inaccuracy of the film, which tarnishes the film in proportion to the many historical distortions. I think I am [[further]] bothered by the fact that it was in this film, [[noticed]] only (at least by me) in [[hindsight]], that the beginnings of Mel Gibson's egomania can be seen [[notoriously]] for the [[firstly]] [[moment]]. In [[contrasts]], [[Burgle]] [[Rowe]] has [[cultivated]] on me over the years. Partly because it largely avoids the [[demerits]] I mind most in Braveheart. But [[likewise]] because Rob [[Rowe]] is like fine [[wines]], growing more mature and [[tricky]] with each viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This [[could]] be a [[strong]] [[candidate]] for "The [[Worst]] Flick Ever". [[Perhaps]] without the presence of [[John]] [[Hurt]], it could be tolerated as a kid-film. However, the TRAGEDY of this [[entire]] endeavor, is that John Hurt, one of the screen's [[greatest]] [[actors]], diminishes himself in this....I gave it two [[points]] just because [[Mr]]. Hurt [[SHOWED]] UP...I [[take]] AWAY 8 points, because he didn't [[run]] from it [[fast]] enough. As far as the [[rest]] of the [[cast]], they are, [[simply]], [[terrible]]. [[Janine]] [[Turner]], as [[pretty]] as she [[might]] be, cannot act to save her [[soul]]. And the lead actor is, for all intents and purposes, AWFUL. If you can spare yourself this [[embarrassment]], please do so. It's so [[bad]], it almost HURTS. This [[did]] be a [[vigorous]] [[contestant]] for "The [[Pire]] Flick Ever". [[Potentially]] without the presence of [[Giovanni]] [[Injure]], it could be tolerated as a kid-film. However, the TRAGEDY of this [[whole]] endeavor, is that John Hurt, one of the screen's [[bigger]] [[protagonists]], diminishes himself in this....I gave it two [[dot]] just because [[Bernd]]. Hurt [[EVIDENCED]] UP...I [[taking]] AWAY 8 points, because he didn't [[executes]] from it [[vite]] enough. As far as the [[repose]] of the [[casting]], they are, [[solely]], [[abysmal]]. [[Janeane]] [[Latour]], as [[quite]] as she [[apt]] be, cannot act to save her [[alma]]. And the lead actor is, for all intents and purposes, AWFUL. If you can spare yourself this [[awkwardness]], please do so. It's so [[naughty]], it almost HURTS. --------------------------------------------- Result 5354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I read some comments on the internet about this [[film]] like "...harder then Hostel...", "the camera never screens of when it's getting really brutal...". But [[none]] of them is [[true]]. The camera never screens of, because there is [[nothing]] to screen of. The same scene is repeated hundred and hundred times again. Women [[lies]] on a table, [[killer]] [[rapes]] [[women]] a few times, killer cuts [[women]] into pieces (you never see this during the [[whole]] film!). [[Police]] come and arrested him. Killer [[fools]] the [[jury]]. [[Film]] over. In [[Germany]] we [[would]] say :"Viel Lärm um Nichts". [[All]] in all, one of the most [[boring]] films I ever see. [[Absolutely]] non-recommendable. I read some comments on the internet about this [[filmmaking]] like "...harder then Hostel...", "the camera never screens of when it's getting really brutal...". But [[nos]] of them is [[veritable]]. The camera never screens of, because there is [[none]] to screen of. The same scene is repeated hundred and hundred times again. Women [[lying]] on a table, [[assassin]] [[transgressions]] [[wife]] a few times, killer cuts [[woman]] into pieces (you never see this during the [[overall]] film!). [[Cops]] come and arrested him. Killer [[pigeons]] the [[jurors]]. [[Filmmaking]] over. In [[Germania]] we [[could]] say :"Viel Lärm um Nichts". [[Every]] in all, one of the most [[dull]] films I ever see. [[Abundantly]] non-recommendable. --------------------------------------------- Result 5355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I myself am a big fan of low-budget 80's horror films. This isn't the worst but still not to spectacular. The plot line is decent but drags out way too long. You're through half the movie before you even get to see any zombie action. The kills aren't very creative and the zombies aren't too crafty. I truly think this movie would have been better if they left out the zombies and just made it into some mafia flick. It's watchable but I feel that this film did steal at least an hour of my life. I'll give the film credit for being somewhat original. If you are really into B horror movies it's worth a viewing but if you're not, don't bother. But you don't have to take my word for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5356 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Swedish action [[movies]] have over the past few years evolved into something that imitate [[American]] hardened action movies like "Heat" but with a low budget. This movie follows the same prescription as "Noll Tolerans" and "Livvakterna". However, it is [[obvious]] that they are [[trying]] too hard to make a cool and tough movie.

The [[story]] has been [[seen]] before, the dialogue feels artificial and the acting is very poor, especially from the main [[actress]]. The movie tries to [[paint]] a [[picture]] of hard-boiled military-like [[robbers]] with no remorse at all and a female [[investigator]] who has [[completely]] lost it with [[problems]] of the [[past]] but at the same [[time]] acts [[completely]] [[rational]]. It does not succeed very well.

The bluish-cast photo style does not seem fresh anymore, and it is not even done well in this [[picture]]. Only a very few scenes actually look good. Also, the sound is quite weird and it sounds like a lot of the actual dialogue is recorded afterward.

The [[main]] quality of this [[movie]] is [[Stefan]] Sauk, though not making a [[convincing]] portrait of a SWAT-team leader, has some [[really]] [[funny]] lines. Also, the music is quite well. Swedish action [[cinema]] have over the past few years evolved into something that imitate [[Americas]] hardened action movies like "Heat" but with a low budget. This movie follows the same prescription as "Noll Tolerans" and "Livvakterna". However, it is [[observable]] that they are [[striving]] too hard to make a cool and tough movie.

The [[tales]] has been [[watched]] before, the dialogue feels artificial and the acting is very poor, especially from the main [[actor]]. The movie tries to [[painted]] a [[photograph]] of hard-boiled military-like [[thieves]] with no remorse at all and a female [[scientist]] who has [[fully]] lost it with [[difficulty]] of the [[former]] but at the same [[period]] acts [[totally]] [[sensible]]. It does not succeed very well.

The bluish-cast photo style does not seem fresh anymore, and it is not even done well in this [[photograph]]. Only a very few scenes actually look good. Also, the sound is quite weird and it sounds like a lot of the actual dialogue is recorded afterward.

The [[primary]] quality of this [[filmmaking]] is [[Stephane]] Sauk, though not making a [[persuade]] portrait of a SWAT-team leader, has some [[truly]] [[hilarious]] lines. Also, the music is quite well. --------------------------------------------- Result 5357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Wow]]! All I can [[say]] is that if Elizabeth Montgomery is the [[enemy]] (she speaks Russian), then I'm surrendering right now. In her short skirt, high-top boots, and pronounced bust line, she's a [[real]] babe, [[even]] if her zombie-like eye-shadow [[sort]] of comes and goes. This 30 minutes is no [[doubt]] the [[sexiest]] of the series. Note the [[realistic]] and revealing wrestling match with Bronson until he ungallantly slugs her on the chin, ruining all the fun. Okay, probably I should [[leave]] off my hormonal [[response]].

This is a very well produced half-hour by that underrated force [[behind]] the series's [[success]], Buck Houghton. [[Naturally]], the producers want to lead off the third season with an above [[average]] [[entry]]. It's post nuclear-holocaust [[America]] (we know because she's [[part]] of the invading force) and only American Bronson and Soviet Montgomery are left, along with about twenty tons of [[realistic]] wreckage. They wander among the destruction in alternating [[moods]], while we wonder how long it will [[take]] for biology to trump politics, which of course it eventually does, (lucky Bronson). And that's about it. No [[real]] talk, except for what Bronson has to say which is pretty overblown. Nonetheless, the screenplay is still entertaining, and rather daring for its [[time]], even suggesting that not all Russian women looked like truck drivers (a popular Cold War stereotype of the [[time]]).

[[In]] passing-- it's [[rather]] [[curious]] that the very Slavic-looking Bronson (Buchinsky) [[would]] be cast as the [[American]] and the glossy-looking Montgomery as the Slav. Appearance-wise, it should be the [[reverse]]. My [[guess]] is that the [[producers]] did not [[want]] to cast the [[American]] in the physically [[weaker]] role of the female, [[regardless]] of [[appearances]]. [[However]] that may be, there is [[little]] of the usual TZ [[fright]] or [[atmosphere]], [[still]] the episode [[remains]] a very, very watchable 30 minutes. [[Woah]]! All I can [[tell]] is that if Elizabeth Montgomery is the [[haters]] (she speaks Russian), then I'm surrendering right now. In her short skirt, high-top boots, and pronounced bust line, she's a [[authentic]] babe, [[yet]] if her zombie-like eye-shadow [[sorting]] of comes and goes. This 30 minutes is no [[duda]] the [[hot]] of the series. Note the [[pragmatic]] and revealing wrestling match with Bronson until he ungallantly slugs her on the chin, ruining all the fun. Okay, probably I should [[let]] off my hormonal [[answers]].

This is a very well produced half-hour by that underrated force [[backside]] the series's [[accomplishments]], Buck Houghton. [[Understandably]], the producers want to lead off the third season with an above [[medium]] [[input]]. It's post nuclear-holocaust [[Americans]] (we know because she's [[portions]] of the invading force) and only American Bronson and Soviet Montgomery are left, along with about twenty tons of [[lifelike]] wreckage. They wander among the destruction in alternating [[sentiments]], while we wonder how long it will [[taking]] for biology to trump politics, which of course it eventually does, (lucky Bronson). And that's about it. No [[veritable]] talk, except for what Bronson has to say which is pretty overblown. Nonetheless, the screenplay is still entertaining, and rather daring for its [[moment]], even suggesting that not all Russian women looked like truck drivers (a popular Cold War stereotype of the [[times]]).

[[Onto]] passing-- it's [[comparatively]] [[inquisitive]] that the very Slavic-looking Bronson (Buchinsky) [[ought]] be cast as the [[Americans]] and the glossy-looking Montgomery as the Slav. Appearance-wise, it should be the [[reversal]]. My [[suppose]] is that the [[maker]] did not [[wantto]] to cast the [[Americans]] in the physically [[lowest]] role of the female, [[whatever]] of [[phenomena]]. [[Instead]] that may be, there is [[tiny]] of the usual TZ [[fearful]] or [[ambience]], [[again]] the episode [[leftovers]] a very, very watchable 30 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ok, so it's an adult movie. But it really is very tastefully done. It's obvious that the producers spent a lot of time and money into making a classy sort of movie. I was pleasantly surprised at just how good it was. Even the acting was fairly decent. The plot was more solid than most adult films I've seen. The camera work was above average. It's just a good flick!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] horror film about a [[snotty]] [[young]] [[girl]] and her nightmares. For a horror or "thriller" [[film]] and hype, it's way too tame. There are only a few tense moments in here, not [[anywhere]] as near as many as should have been for a [[film]] of this genre. Even those "tense" scenes weren't [[much]]. The music made them more [[dramatic]] that they actually were.

There is a lot of symbolism in here, so the elitist critics [[label]] this "a thinking person's horror film." Well, if they think about it, I'm sure they will come to the same conclusion I did - a [[waste]] of money at the video rental store.

Summary: a yawner that [[offers]] an unlikeable lead character and generally poor acting. Vastly overrated and certainly not what it is advertised. This was a [[depressing]] horror film about a [[brazen]] [[youthful]] [[daughters]] and her nightmares. For a horror or "thriller" [[filmmaking]] and hype, it's way too tame. There are only a few tense moments in here, not [[wherever]] as near as many as should have been for a [[filmmaking]] of this genre. Even those "tense" scenes weren't [[very]]. The music made them more [[prodigious]] that they actually were.

There is a lot of symbolism in here, so the elitist critics [[tagging]] this "a thinking person's horror film." Well, if they think about it, I'm sure they will come to the same conclusion I did - a [[squandering]] of money at the video rental store.

Summary: a yawner that [[tender]] an unlikeable lead character and generally poor acting. Vastly overrated and certainly not what it is advertised. --------------------------------------------- Result 5360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of my all time favorite movies and I would recommend it to anyone. On my list of favorite movies (mental list, mind) the only ones on par with it are movies such as The Lord of the Rings series, Spirited Away and Fly Away Home.

I can really relate to the main character Jess. At the start of the movie she's a shy girl with a slightly odd background who has a lot more friends who are boys than that are girls. She really sucks you into her life. I also certainly can't fault any of the protagonist's acting, or anyone else's in the film.

The soccer was interesting to watch even for someone like me who has no idea of the rules. The movie is never boring. The romance is really cute and didn't make me blush tooooo hard! One thing that really made it though was the Indian factor. Jess' parents are Indian and there are many colourful Indian conventions throughout the film providing a very interesting cultural insight as well as everything else. The Indian people are also hilarious! Essentially this is a coming of age film about choosing the path you want and fighting for it.

Feel good comedies are becoming my favorite movie genre thanks to this film. They're funny, they're refreshing and they make you feel good! ^_~ --------------------------------------------- Result 5361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is one of those rare films that established its place in film history immediately. Praise for the film was absolutely nonexistent, even from the people involved in making it. This [[film]] was [[loathed]] from day one. While every now and then one will come across some maverick who will [[praise]] the film on philosophical grounds (aggressive feminism or the courage to tackle the issue of transgenderism), the film has not developed a [[cult]] following like some notorious flops do. It's not hailed as a misunderstood masterpiece like SCARFACE, or trotted out to be ridiculed as a camp classic like SHOWGIRLS.

Undoubtedly the reason is that the film, though outrageously awful, is not lovable, or even [[likable]]. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is just plain mean. As a Hollywood satire it is cold-blooded and mean-spirited, but in a hollow [[pointless]] way. MYRA takes for granted that Hollywood is a corrupt town, but goes further to attack such beloved icons as Laurel and Hardy, Shirley Temple, Judy Garland and Gary Cooper. The film seems to imply that everything about Hollywood is by its very nature vile. It seems to think that there is something inherently courageous about mocking sacred cows, but doesn't supply a rationale for doing the mocking in the first place. The film is also viscously anti-American and anti-establishment and anti-this and anti-that, but all in a superficial, late-1960's, trendy way. Like CASINO ROYALE; SKI-DOO; I LOVE YOU, ALICE B. TOKLAS and other would-be hip epics, MYRA is a middle-aged vision of the hippy-dippy youth culture. It [[tries]] to embrace the very attitude that it belittles. But instead of being cheerfully self-mocking, MYRA makes no attempt to conceal its contempt for everything that comes within its grasp. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE has the humor of a bully; there's not a single moment of innocence in it. Its intentions aren't honorable. TIME magazine aptly described it as being "about as funny as a child molester," but it's not nearly as sympathetic.

For instance, poor Mae West bore the brunt of so much of the criticism aimed at the film, being described as looking like everything from an aging drag queen to a reanimated walking corpse. The octogenarian star obviously didn't know just how ridiculous she looked playing a lecherous talent agent lusting after men young enough to be her grandsons or even her great-grandsons. But, director Michael Sarne had to know, but he used her anyway. Why? Because, she apparently was the joke. Just like John Huston, John Carradine, Grady Sutton, Andy Devine and other veteran performers in the film, they are there only so the film can mock their age and use them to trash their film images. They are cast as smarmy self-parodies, as is Rex Reed, the arrogant, fey film critic, who is cast as just that in the film. But the real Reed, the celebrity hound, jet-setting, talk show gossip, can be charming in an obnoxiously funny way; but as Myron, Myra's alter ego, he is just obnoxious. Again, apparently for Sarne, Reed is the joke.

You watch MYRA BRECKINRIDGE and you don't see actors, you see victims. None more so than Raquel Welch. No one will ever accuse Welch of being a great actress, but it is a testament to her tenacity and her appeal that she survived this film and her career prospered. Being in almost every scene, Welch was front and center as a target for abuse aimed at the film, but to her credit, she gives a remarkably nuanced performance. Though, of course, centered between the scenery chewing Huston and the almost catatonic West, Welch doesn't have to do much to strike a good balance. Even so, she renders her horribly unfunny dialogue with a deadpan smirk, with just the hint of self-righteous glee that would do any James Bond villain proud. Legend has it that Welch was snubbed by a condescending West and subjected to repeated verbal abuse on the set by bumbling director Sarne, not to mention being featured in one degrading scene after another, making it all the more remarkable that she was able to give such a cool and collected performance.

The film's only intriguing element is trying to figure out just what the film's agenda is. The whole story is a fantasy fable, which should indicate that it has a moral to deliver, but what that might be is anybody's guess. With all of its talk about destroying "the last vestigial traces of traditional manhood from the race," it would seem to have a feminist axe to grind. But as a feminist, Myra is a monstrous figure, a sexual predator. Besides, Myra isn't a woman, rather she is a delusion of Myron, who presumably is a gay male. That might explain the male rape scene as well as the character's love/hate attitude toward the macho, seemingly straight, deadhead Rusty, but it doesn't explain his/her obsession for and the supposedly lesbian tryst with Farrah Fawcett's Mary Ann. The film is obsessed with sex, but can hardly be accused of being in favor of the sexual revolution; all the sex is treated as being, if not dirty, than at least perverse and degrading. Turning to Gore Vidal's original novel isn't of any help, because it is as confused and pointless as the movie.

And this is a rare movie that actually seems to hate movies. Not just movies as a business, but movies as part of the culture as well. The film itself is wall-to-wall arcane references to old movies, all of which director-screenwriter Sarne approaches with a seething disdain. He has raided the film vaults of 20th Century-Fox and peppered the film with snippets of old films, not as an homage or to provide a social commentary, but to mock the innocence of old Hollywood. How can an artist -- if you generously want to call Sarne that -- make a work of art if he already hates the very medium he is working in? The very effort is totally self-defeating.

MYRA BRECKINRIDGE doesn't seem to be in favor of anything other than being just nasty. It hates Hollywood, it hates America, it hates sex, it hates gays and straights and women and men and old people and young people and Laurel and Hardy and, well, you name it and it probably has a scene showing contempt for it. In a very sad and sorry way, MYRA BRECKINRIDGE may be the first punk manifesto, a celebration of pop culture nihilism. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is one of those rare films that established its place in film history immediately. Praise for the film was absolutely nonexistent, even from the people involved in making it. This [[filmmaking]] was [[detested]] from day one. While every now and then one will come across some maverick who will [[extol]] the film on philosophical grounds (aggressive feminism or the courage to tackle the issue of transgenderism), the film has not developed a [[heresy]] following like some notorious flops do. It's not hailed as a misunderstood masterpiece like SCARFACE, or trotted out to be ridiculed as a camp classic like SHOWGIRLS.

Undoubtedly the reason is that the film, though outrageously awful, is not lovable, or even [[congenial]]. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is just plain mean. As a Hollywood satire it is cold-blooded and mean-spirited, but in a hollow [[vain]] way. MYRA takes for granted that Hollywood is a corrupt town, but goes further to attack such beloved icons as Laurel and Hardy, Shirley Temple, Judy Garland and Gary Cooper. The film seems to imply that everything about Hollywood is by its very nature vile. It seems to think that there is something inherently courageous about mocking sacred cows, but doesn't supply a rationale for doing the mocking in the first place. The film is also viscously anti-American and anti-establishment and anti-this and anti-that, but all in a superficial, late-1960's, trendy way. Like CASINO ROYALE; SKI-DOO; I LOVE YOU, ALICE B. TOKLAS and other would-be hip epics, MYRA is a middle-aged vision of the hippy-dippy youth culture. It [[seeks]] to embrace the very attitude that it belittles. But instead of being cheerfully self-mocking, MYRA makes no attempt to conceal its contempt for everything that comes within its grasp. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE has the humor of a bully; there's not a single moment of innocence in it. Its intentions aren't honorable. TIME magazine aptly described it as being "about as funny as a child molester," but it's not nearly as sympathetic.

For instance, poor Mae West bore the brunt of so much of the criticism aimed at the film, being described as looking like everything from an aging drag queen to a reanimated walking corpse. The octogenarian star obviously didn't know just how ridiculous she looked playing a lecherous talent agent lusting after men young enough to be her grandsons or even her great-grandsons. But, director Michael Sarne had to know, but he used her anyway. Why? Because, she apparently was the joke. Just like John Huston, John Carradine, Grady Sutton, Andy Devine and other veteran performers in the film, they are there only so the film can mock their age and use them to trash their film images. They are cast as smarmy self-parodies, as is Rex Reed, the arrogant, fey film critic, who is cast as just that in the film. But the real Reed, the celebrity hound, jet-setting, talk show gossip, can be charming in an obnoxiously funny way; but as Myron, Myra's alter ego, he is just obnoxious. Again, apparently for Sarne, Reed is the joke.

You watch MYRA BRECKINRIDGE and you don't see actors, you see victims. None more so than Raquel Welch. No one will ever accuse Welch of being a great actress, but it is a testament to her tenacity and her appeal that she survived this film and her career prospered. Being in almost every scene, Welch was front and center as a target for abuse aimed at the film, but to her credit, she gives a remarkably nuanced performance. Though, of course, centered between the scenery chewing Huston and the almost catatonic West, Welch doesn't have to do much to strike a good balance. Even so, she renders her horribly unfunny dialogue with a deadpan smirk, with just the hint of self-righteous glee that would do any James Bond villain proud. Legend has it that Welch was snubbed by a condescending West and subjected to repeated verbal abuse on the set by bumbling director Sarne, not to mention being featured in one degrading scene after another, making it all the more remarkable that she was able to give such a cool and collected performance.

The film's only intriguing element is trying to figure out just what the film's agenda is. The whole story is a fantasy fable, which should indicate that it has a moral to deliver, but what that might be is anybody's guess. With all of its talk about destroying "the last vestigial traces of traditional manhood from the race," it would seem to have a feminist axe to grind. But as a feminist, Myra is a monstrous figure, a sexual predator. Besides, Myra isn't a woman, rather she is a delusion of Myron, who presumably is a gay male. That might explain the male rape scene as well as the character's love/hate attitude toward the macho, seemingly straight, deadhead Rusty, but it doesn't explain his/her obsession for and the supposedly lesbian tryst with Farrah Fawcett's Mary Ann. The film is obsessed with sex, but can hardly be accused of being in favor of the sexual revolution; all the sex is treated as being, if not dirty, than at least perverse and degrading. Turning to Gore Vidal's original novel isn't of any help, because it is as confused and pointless as the movie.

And this is a rare movie that actually seems to hate movies. Not just movies as a business, but movies as part of the culture as well. The film itself is wall-to-wall arcane references to old movies, all of which director-screenwriter Sarne approaches with a seething disdain. He has raided the film vaults of 20th Century-Fox and peppered the film with snippets of old films, not as an homage or to provide a social commentary, but to mock the innocence of old Hollywood. How can an artist -- if you generously want to call Sarne that -- make a work of art if he already hates the very medium he is working in? The very effort is totally self-defeating.

MYRA BRECKINRIDGE doesn't seem to be in favor of anything other than being just nasty. It hates Hollywood, it hates America, it hates sex, it hates gays and straights and women and men and old people and young people and Laurel and Hardy and, well, you name it and it probably has a scene showing contempt for it. In a very sad and sorry way, MYRA BRECKINRIDGE may be the first punk manifesto, a celebration of pop culture nihilism. --------------------------------------------- Result 5362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] This show is [[terrible]], the [[jokes]] are all terrible and just getting [[worse]] and worse. I am one of those people who was never a [[big]] fan of Corner [[Gas]] but at [[least]] I [[liked]] it at first until it got into a [[rut]] [[around]] season two, all the jokes had been [[played]] out and the [[characters]] had nothing to them. Well at [[least]] Corner Gas was good at first, [[Little]] [[Mosque]] on the Prairie is [[typically]] [[awful]] bland CBC [[comedy]] that had nothing going for it from episode 1. Who are the people who are [[watching]] this show anyway, I am being honest is it [[old]] people or maybe just people who [[actually]] [[live]] on the [[prairies]]? Maybe the jokes are for them and they [[work]] there? I don't know a single person who [[likes]] this [[show]] and can't stand it myself, the jokes are totally [[predictable]] and the characters are even less [[developed]] than in [[Corner]] Gas. [[Hopefully]] it won't [[last]] [[much]] [[longer]] because all the success this show has had seems to me to be based [[entirely]] on the premise of this show being [[Muslim]] which is different and [[could]]/should have led to a [[great]] [[show]]. This show is [[frightful]], the [[pranks]] are all terrible and just getting [[worst]] and worse. I am one of those people who was never a [[prodigious]] fan of Corner [[Gases]] but at [[lowest]] I [[wished]] it at first until it got into a [[stalemate]] [[throughout]] season two, all the jokes had been [[done]] out and the [[character]] had nothing to them. Well at [[lowest]] Corner Gas was good at first, [[Petit]] [[Masjid]] on the Prairie is [[normally]] [[terrible]] bland CBC [[comic]] that had nothing going for it from episode 1. Who are the people who are [[staring]] this show anyway, I am being honest is it [[former]] people or maybe just people who [[genuinely]] [[iive]] on the [[prairie]]? Maybe the jokes are for them and they [[collaboration]] there? I don't know a single person who [[iike]] this [[exhibition]] and can't stand it myself, the jokes are totally [[foreseeable]] and the characters are even less [[elaborated]] than in [[Cornering]] Gas. [[Luckily]] it won't [[final]] [[very]] [[long]] because all the success this show has had seems to me to be based [[totally]] on the premise of this show being [[Muslims]] which is different and [[would]]/should have led to a [[gorgeous]] [[shows]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely the most boring movie I have ever spent my money on.This was a wrong choice for all these great stars to waste their reputations on. Boring! boring! boring! Each character was portrayed in a less than inspirational way. No acting talent shown -just reading a part. Alec can play realistic characters normally, Gwynyth made herself look ugly for an unrewarding part, Annette needs advise on how to pick the movies she chooses to play in as do all these big stars who have left me disappointed at the way they have all allowed their talents to be smothered in a feature that leaves much to be desired in entertainment. "Running with scissors" leads the public to anticipate great acting in a film that suggests experiencing tension and deep emotion. There was not one moment when the cast was able to portray any interpretation of this onto the screen. Maybe it was the director's fault----whatever. --------------------------------------------- Result 5364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Hayden Christianson and Jessica Alba two of my least favourite actors of this century team up in what is quite possibly the flattest [[attempt]] at remake the already dire The Butterfly Effect. Awake is so [[dull]] and so utterly uninteresting that you'd be better off asleep. Terrance Howard still recovering from the diabolical August Rush puts up a decent fight as the sadistic doctor who [[seems]] hell bent on killing Christianson and after viewing his performance I would gladly assists.

Alba, still recovering after Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver surfer. Is [[naturally]] [[disastrous]] and equally unwatchable as she always was. Only once has she ever been rather [[brilliant]] at that was in the safe hands of master director [[Robert]] Rodriguez in Sin [[City]]. [[Could]] it [[possibly]] be that Jessica alba isn't as poor of an [[actress]] as most give her [[credit]] for and is is possibly that her acting [[abilities]] are being weight down by a poor [[script]]. If so then that would [[explain]] [[Awake]]. What with a [[script]] that [[would]] [[shame]] that of Plan 9 from Outer Space.

Jessica Alba, [[Hayden]] Christenson, and Terrence Howard star in first-time [[director]]/[[screenwriter]] Joby Harold's nerve-jangling [[psychological]] thriller about a [[man]] who experiences the [[frighteningly]] common surgical phenomenon [[known]] as "aesthetic [[awareness]]," in which those laid out on the [[operating]] table remain acutely [[aware]] of what is going on [[around]] them [[despite]] remaining [[completely]] [[paralyzed]] and [[unable]] to cry out for help. When a successful young young man (Christenson) goes under the knife and realizes that the anaesthesia hasn't quite [[done]] its [[job]], the horror [[quickly]] sets in as his [[worried]] [[wife]] (Alba) waits anxiously and a terrifying drama unfolds in the operating [[room]].

Hoping to do for operating tables what Final Destination did for planes, this first [[effort]] from [[director]] Joby Harold pivots on a blood-frosting conceit. The pre-credits sequence tells us one in 700 people suffers from a phenomenon known as 'anaesthetic awareness', where the patient remains [[conscious]] but paralysed during surgery. One such [[unfortunate]] individual is Clayton Beresford Jr (Hayden Christensen), who finds himself wide awake during a heart transplant... and he can feel every single slice.

Intermittently inventive as it probes away at his tortured psyche, Awake fails to inject true terror into its novel premise. Spiralling from chilling simplicity into absurd conspiracy, it's hindered by stilted turns from Christensen and Jessica Alba. You'll wish you'd popped a sedative before watching…

VERDICT: Awake is at very best extremely undemanding. A pull no punches film that undoubtedly looked better on paper. As a film though its awfully generic and extremely derived. Awake fails to inject terror into its novel premise. The end result is really quite lousy. Alba and Christian are the very least of your worries as the films main flaw lies in its inability to scare its audience. Awake is a film you'll most likely sleep through. Hayden Christianson and Jessica Alba two of my least favourite actors of this century team up in what is quite possibly the flattest [[endeavor]] at remake the already dire The Butterfly Effect. Awake is so [[drab]] and so utterly uninteresting that you'd be better off asleep. Terrance Howard still recovering from the diabolical August Rush puts up a decent fight as the sadistic doctor who [[appears]] hell bent on killing Christianson and after viewing his performance I would gladly assists.

Alba, still recovering after Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver surfer. Is [[patently]] [[devastating]] and equally unwatchable as she always was. Only once has she ever been rather [[sumptuous]] at that was in the safe hands of master director [[Roberta]] Rodriguez in Sin [[Town]]. [[Wo]] it [[arguably]] be that Jessica alba isn't as poor of an [[actor]] as most give her [[credits]] for and is is possibly that her acting [[proficiency]] are being weight down by a poor [[hyphen]]. If so then that would [[explaining]] [[Woke]]. What with a [[scripts]] that [[ought]] [[pity]] that of Plan 9 from Outer Space.

Jessica Alba, [[Haydn]] Christenson, and Terrence Howard star in first-time [[headmaster]]/[[novelist]] Joby Harold's nerve-jangling [[mental]] thriller about a [[men]] who experiences the [[strikingly]] common surgical phenomenon [[renowned]] as "aesthetic [[consciousness]]," in which those laid out on the [[functioning]] table remain acutely [[conscious]] of what is going on [[throughout]] them [[albeit]] remaining [[fully]] [[crippled]] and [[impossible]] to cry out for help. When a successful young young man (Christenson) goes under the knife and realizes that the anaesthesia hasn't quite [[played]] its [[labor]], the horror [[faster]] sets in as his [[fearful]] [[femme]] (Alba) waits anxiously and a terrifying drama unfolds in the operating [[salle]].

Hoping to do for operating tables what Final Destination did for planes, this first [[endeavors]] from [[headmaster]] Joby Harold pivots on a blood-frosting conceit. The pre-credits sequence tells us one in 700 people suffers from a phenomenon known as 'anaesthetic awareness', where the patient remains [[cognizant]] but paralysed during surgery. One such [[hapless]] individual is Clayton Beresford Jr (Hayden Christensen), who finds himself wide awake during a heart transplant... and he can feel every single slice.

Intermittently inventive as it probes away at his tortured psyche, Awake fails to inject true terror into its novel premise. Spiralling from chilling simplicity into absurd conspiracy, it's hindered by stilted turns from Christensen and Jessica Alba. You'll wish you'd popped a sedative before watching…

VERDICT: Awake is at very best extremely undemanding. A pull no punches film that undoubtedly looked better on paper. As a film though its awfully generic and extremely derived. Awake fails to inject terror into its novel premise. The end result is really quite lousy. Alba and Christian are the very least of your worries as the films main flaw lies in its inability to scare its audience. Awake is a film you'll most likely sleep through. --------------------------------------------- Result 5365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Okay. This [[Movie]] is a [[Pure]] [[Pleasure]]. It has the Ever so Violent Horror Mixed with a Little [[Suspense]] and a [[Lot]] of Black Comedy. The [[Dentist]] [[Really]] Starts to loose His [[Mind]] and It's Enjoyable to Watch him do so. This Movie is for Certain People, Though. Either you'll [[Completely]] Love it or You [[Will]] Totally Hate It. A Good [[Movie]] to [[Rent]] and Watch When you don't Got Anything else to do. Also [[Recommended]]: Psycho III Okay. This [[Kino]] is a [[Pur]] [[Joy]]. It has the Ever so Violent Horror Mixed with a Little [[Wait]] and a [[Lots]] of Black Comedy. The [[Dentistry]] [[Truthfully]] Starts to loose His [[Intellect]] and It's Enjoyable to Watch him do so. This Movie is for Certain People, Though. Either you'll [[Abundantly]] Love it or You [[Willingness]] Totally Hate It. A Good [[Kino]] to [[Renting]] and Watch When you don't Got Anything else to do. Also [[Suggested]]: Psycho III --------------------------------------------- Result 5366 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] An [[unexpected]] [[pleasure]] as I had heard nothing about this film.

Shameful [[since]] it warrants having a wider audience.

A [[wonderfully]] humane [[story]] with a social message [[gently]] told, [[although]] admittedly predictable in its resolution. [[Solidly]] acted by the principals. Beautifully photographed with muted [[colors]] floating against grey that [[captures]] the [[nostalgic]] tone of the film.

My recent foray into Chinese [[film]] (Shower, The Road Home, Not One Less) has been an exciting one that I hope to continue exploring. China and its people is an amazing canvas for film-makers. "The King of [[Masks]]" can be highly recommended as a starting point for anyone similarly interested in recent Chinese film.

An [[unplanned]] [[gladness]] as I had heard nothing about this film.

Shameful [[because]] it warrants having a wider audience.

A [[divinely]] humane [[histories]] with a social message [[mildly]] told, [[while]] admittedly predictable in its resolution. [[Soundly]] acted by the principals. Beautifully photographed with muted [[dye]] floating against grey that [[capturing]] the [[homesick]] tone of the film.

My recent foray into Chinese [[kino]] (Shower, The Road Home, Not One Less) has been an exciting one that I hope to continue exploring. China and its people is an amazing canvas for film-makers. "The King of [[Conceals]]" can be highly recommended as a starting point for anyone similarly interested in recent Chinese film.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I agree with many of the negative reviews posted here, for reasons I will go into later on. But this miniseries is powerful and convincing because the talented cast really captures the dark truth of Hitler's world.

Peter Stormare is perfect as Ernst Rohm, the brutal Brownshirt leader. Each scene he has with Hitler is explosive! Hitler is so evil he dominates everyone but the thuggish, primitive Rohm -- and he clearly digs Rohm for just that reason. The interplay between Stormare and Carlisle illuminates the way Hitler relished Rohm's brutality, but later sacrificed him for political reasons.

Jena Malone turns in a heartrending performance as Geli Raubal, Hitler's doomed niece and the victim of his unspeakable perversions. Without revealing any of the sexual filth directly, Jena Malone plays out all the horror of the slow extinction of a young girl's spirit. She uses her eyes and voice to suggest all the horror that will be visited on millions in the years to come. And she's brilliant! Zoe Telford very nearly matches Jena Malone with her portrayal of Eva Braun. Eva is clearly sick, cruel and heartless -- but at the same time almost pitiably dependent on her Adolph's twisted tenderness. The aborted lovemaking scene between them (hinting at the spine tingling truth of Hitler's enormous self-loathing) is both chilling and erotic.

Liev Schrieber gives a deliciously weasel-like performance as Putzi Hanfstaengel, the spineless man-about-town who is seduced by Hitler's promises of wealth and power. While a brute like Rohm simply loves the idea of crushing skulls under his boots, Schrieber's character is one of many Germans who abhors Nazi violence but can't resist the quick and easy route to money and power. His weak-willed fawning over Hitler soon loses him the respect of his wife, played with style and sensuality by the stunning and regal Julianna Margulies. They provide a true portrait of marriage and betrayal.

These performances carry the mini series along, easily overcoming occasional weaknesses in the script. There is one exception. Regrettably, Matthew Modine's acting chops just aren't up to snuff. His noble lunk-haid journalist ruins every scene he has -- the viewer can hardly wait for Rohm's brown-shirts to stomp that smug, righteous look off his ignorant, corn-pone low-rent Hollywood golden boy face. But the story still works.

Now in regard to the factual inaccuracies of the script -- Hitler's perversions and cruelty are rendered in a vibrant, compelling drama. But the battlefield record of Corporal Hitler is badly distorted. As if afraid the audience can't handle the idea of evil and courage in the same person, the writers make Hitler look like a whining coward who "begged" for an Iron Cross. As if anyone in the Kaiser's Army could get a medal just by whining about it! The movie makes it look as if Hitler were a coward in the trenches, when he was a fearless soldier. They also suggest his comrades despised him, when in reality he was widely admired by officers and enlisted men alike. The depressing thing is that the mini-series succeeds so well in representing Hitler as a monster in honest ways -- but they just couldn't resist the cheap shot.

All in all, however, Hitler: RISE OF EVIL is a soaring success highlighted by powerful performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 5368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I pity people [[calling]] [[kamal]] [[hassan]] 'ulaganaayakan' [[maybe]] for them ulagam is tollywood ! comeon [[guys]]..this [[movie]] is a thriller without thrill..

come out of your ulagam and just watch some high [[class]] thrillers like The Usual [[Suspects]] or even The [[Silence]] of the Lambs.

[[technically]] good but style over substance [[kamal]] doesn't [[look]] like a police officer, there is no thrill whatsoever dragging and boring till end you might be saving 3 valuable hrs of your life if u skip watching this movie.

kamal at his best is the best in tollywood I pity people [[call]] [[kemal]] [[hasan]] 'ulaganaayakan' [[conceivably]] for them ulagam is tollywood ! comeon [[blokes]]..this [[filmmaking]] is a thriller without thrill..

come out of your ulagam and just watch some high [[sorts]] thrillers like The Usual [[Accuser]] or even The [[Silencer]] of the Lambs.

[[technologically]] good but style over substance [[kemal]] doesn't [[peek]] like a police officer, there is no thrill whatsoever dragging and boring till end you might be saving 3 valuable hrs of your life if u skip watching this movie.

kamal at his best is the best in tollywood --------------------------------------------- Result 5369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Like most people I was intrigued when I heard the [[concept]] of this film, especially the "film makers were then attacked" aspect that the case seems to emphasize, what with the picture on the cover of the film makers being chased by an angry mob.

Then, to watch the film and discover, oh, what they [[mean]] by "the [[film]] makers were attacked" was some kids threw rocks at a sign and a number of people complained loudly and said "Someone should beat those two kids up." The picture on the cover, "the [[chase]]" as it were? [[Total]] fabrication. [[Which]] I guess ties in with the theme of the film, lying and manipulation to [[satisfy]] [[vain]], stupid [[children]] with more money and time then sense.

I have no idea what great [[truth]] the [[viewer]] is supposed to [[take]] away from this film. It's like Michael Moore's "Roger & Me", but if "Roger & Me" was Moore mocking the people of [[Flint]]. It's completely misdirected and totally [[inane]]. Wow! Can you believe that people who suffered under the yoke of Communism would be really excited to have markets full of food? What [[jerks]]! And it's not so much, "Look at the effects of capitalism and western media blah blah blah", since it wasn't just that their fake market had comparable prices to the competitors, it was that, as many people in the film say, the prices were absurdly low, someone mentions that they should've known it was fake by how much they were charging for duck. That's not proving anything except that people who are poor, will go to a store that has low prices, bravo [[fellas]], way to stick it to the people on the bottom.

Way to play a [[stupid]] practical joke on [[elderly]] people. You should be very proud. How about for your [[next]] movie you [[make]] a [[documentary]] about [[Iraq]] and show how people there will get really excited for a [[house]] without bullet holes in the walls and then, [[say]], "[[HAHA]]! NO SUCH [[HOUSE]] [[EXISTS]]! YOUR SO STUPID AND LOVED TO BE [[LIED]] TO BY THE MEDIA!".

Morgan "Please Like Me" Spurlock [[unleashed]] this [[wet]] [[fart]] of a [[film]] and it's no [[surprise]] since Spurlock as One Hit Wonder prince of the documentary world seems to throw his weight behind any silly sounding concept to stay relevant in a world that really has no need of him.

Avoid like the plague. Like most people I was intrigued when I heard the [[conceptions]] of this film, especially the "film makers were then attacked" aspect that the case seems to emphasize, what with the picture on the cover of the film makers being chased by an angry mob.

Then, to watch the film and discover, oh, what they [[meaning]] by "the [[filmmaking]] makers were attacked" was some kids threw rocks at a sign and a number of people complained loudly and said "Someone should beat those two kids up." The picture on the cover, "the [[hunting]]" as it were? [[Totals]] fabrication. [[Whom]] I guess ties in with the theme of the film, lying and manipulation to [[comply]] [[futile]], stupid [[childhood]] with more money and time then sense.

I have no idea what great [[veracity]] the [[beholder]] is supposed to [[taking]] away from this film. It's like Michael Moore's "Roger & Me", but if "Roger & Me" was Moore mocking the people of [[Glassy]]. It's completely misdirected and totally [[insignificant]]. Wow! Can you believe that people who suffered under the yoke of Communism would be really excited to have markets full of food? What [[cons]]! And it's not so much, "Look at the effects of capitalism and western media blah blah blah", since it wasn't just that their fake market had comparable prices to the competitors, it was that, as many people in the film say, the prices were absurdly low, someone mentions that they should've known it was fake by how much they were charging for duck. That's not proving anything except that people who are poor, will go to a store that has low prices, bravo [[guys]], way to stick it to the people on the bottom.

Way to play a [[dumb]] practical joke on [[older]] people. You should be very proud. How about for your [[future]] movie you [[deliver]] a [[documentation]] about [[Bagdad]] and show how people there will get really excited for a [[households]] without bullet holes in the walls and then, [[told]], "[[THATS]]! NO SUCH [[HOUSES]] [[EXISTED]]! YOUR SO STUPID AND LOVED TO BE [[LIE]] TO BY THE MEDIA!".

Morgan "Please Like Me" Spurlock [[sparked]] this [[moist]] [[pet]] of a [[flick]] and it's no [[surprises]] since Spurlock as One Hit Wonder prince of the documentary world seems to throw his weight behind any silly sounding concept to stay relevant in a world that really has no need of him.

Avoid like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 5370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] When I was over at Hollywood video I [[looked]] through their clearance out movies and there was DEMONICUS for five buckaroos plus fifty percent off! I [[saw]] it only once before and couldn't pass up this [[great]] deal! The second [[viewing]] was much [[better]] than the first. The [[box]] is so [[cool]] and the music is very good. If you haven't seen Demonicus yet I recommend that you do or if you [[rented]] and hated Demonicus do give it another chance as another viewing of it [[may]] change your mind. If you [[seen]] a copy at Hollywood Video for the price I [[got]] it for don't pass it up as it is a great deal!

Demonicus is well a very different but [[entertaining]] [[movie]].Believe it or not is like watching a interactive video game with out playing it!It has very low budget and actors I'M sure that nobody is familiar with. We began the the video game uh I mean film with a guy and a woman some where in Italy and there is a cave that actually looks like a rail road/train track tunnel and she says don't go in there and what does he do?The normal stuff!HE DIDN'T LISTEN TO HER! He goes in there and find lots of gladiator artifacts and armor and a almost perfectly preserved body of a legendary gladiator named Tyrannous!Where did the chair come from that Tyrannous was sitting on and how did his body stay so good and where did the Cauldron Pot come from?So every cave is complete with a Caultron Pot?Tyrannous is wearing his armor,helmet,and has a weapon or two.He does the dumbest thing a person could do,he puts on the helmet and is taken over by the spirit of Tyrannous! From there he walks around just killing all of the campers near by to bring back the real Tyrannous.

Now,I said before its like a video game.Its hard to explain but it just feels like it.The music even sounds like video games.The acting is really terrible.The actors say things like why is he doing this,oh he was nuts already and Fine since he's nuts i'm going home!Also the movie also has some major errors like a guy is running and trying to find his girlfriend in the night and is still running in the day time still searching for her with out taking a break!

This movie has some errors but it isn't a classic like Werewolf but it is entertaining if you like really low budget error prone movies then you better see Demonicus! When I was over at Hollywood video I [[seemed]] through their clearance out movies and there was DEMONICUS for five buckaroos plus fifty percent off! I [[watched]] it only once before and couldn't pass up this [[wondrous]] deal! The second [[visualize]] was much [[nicer]] than the first. The [[shoebox]] is so [[refrigerate]] and the music is very good. If you haven't seen Demonicus yet I recommend that you do or if you [[leases]] and hated Demonicus do give it another chance as another viewing of it [[maggio]] change your mind. If you [[noticed]] a copy at Hollywood Video for the price I [[did]] it for don't pass it up as it is a great deal!

Demonicus is well a very different but [[amusing]] [[movies]].Believe it or not is like watching a interactive video game with out playing it!It has very low budget and actors I'M sure that nobody is familiar with. We began the the video game uh I mean film with a guy and a woman some where in Italy and there is a cave that actually looks like a rail road/train track tunnel and she says don't go in there and what does he do?The normal stuff!HE DIDN'T LISTEN TO HER! He goes in there and find lots of gladiator artifacts and armor and a almost perfectly preserved body of a legendary gladiator named Tyrannous!Where did the chair come from that Tyrannous was sitting on and how did his body stay so good and where did the Cauldron Pot come from?So every cave is complete with a Caultron Pot?Tyrannous is wearing his armor,helmet,and has a weapon or two.He does the dumbest thing a person could do,he puts on the helmet and is taken over by the spirit of Tyrannous! From there he walks around just killing all of the campers near by to bring back the real Tyrannous.

Now,I said before its like a video game.Its hard to explain but it just feels like it.The music even sounds like video games.The acting is really terrible.The actors say things like why is he doing this,oh he was nuts already and Fine since he's nuts i'm going home!Also the movie also has some major errors like a guy is running and trying to find his girlfriend in the night and is still running in the day time still searching for her with out taking a break!

This movie has some errors but it isn't a classic like Werewolf but it is entertaining if you like really low budget error prone movies then you better see Demonicus! --------------------------------------------- Result 5371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Having just [[watched]] this film again from a 1998 showing off VH-1, I just had to comment.

The first time I saw this film on TV, it was about 1981, and I remember taping it off of my mother's betamax. It wound up taping in black and white for some reason, which [[gave]] it a period look that I [[grew]] to like.

I remember very distinctively the [[film]] beginning with the [[song]], "My Bonnie", as the camera panned over a scene of [[Liverpool]]. I also remember the [[opening]] scene where Paul gestures to some girls and says, "Look, talent!" [[So]] it was with great irritation that I popped in my 1998 [[taped]] version and "remembered" that the film [[opens]] with "She Loves You", [[instead]] of "My Bonnie". When you see how slowly the camera pans vs. the speed of the music, you can see that "She Loves You" just doesn't fit. Also, in this "later" version when Paul sees the girls, he says, "Look, GIRLS!"..and somehow having remembered the earlier version, THAT word just didn't seem to fit, either. Why they felt they had to Americanize this film for American audiences is beyond me. Personally, if I'm going to watch a film about a British band, I want all of the British colloquialisms and such that would be a part of their speech, [[mannerisms]], etc.

Another irritation was how "choppy" the editing was for [[television]]. [[Just]] after Stu [[gets]] beaten, for example, the [[film]] cuts to a [[commercial]] break-LOTS of '[[em]]. Yeah, I [[know]] it depends on the [[network]], but it really ruins the effect of a film to have it sliced apart, as we all know. What some people might [[find]] as insignificant in terms of dialogue (and thereby okay to edit), may [[actually]] go the way of explaining a particular action or scene that follows.

My point is, the "[[best]]" [[version]] of this film was probably the earlier version I taped from 1981, which just so happened to include the "[[Shake]], Rattle & Roll" scene that my 1998 version didn't. I [[started]] to surmise that there had to have been two different versions [[made]] for television, and a [[look]] at the "[[alternate]] versions" [[link]] regarding this film proved me right. That the American version had some shorter/cut/different scenes and/or dialogue is a huge disappointment to me and something worth mentioning if one cares about such things. Imo, ones best bet is to try and get a hold of the European version of this film, if possible, and (probably even less possible), an unedited version. Sadly, I had to discard my old betamax European version because I didn't know how to convert it.

All that aside, I found this film to be, perhaps, one of the best films regarding the story behind the "birth of the Beatles". Being well aware that artistic and creative license is [[often]] used in movies and TV when portraying events in history, I didn't let any discrepancies mar my enjoyment of the film. Sure, you see the Beatles perform songs at the Cavern that made me wonder, "Did they even write that back then?? I don't think so", but, nevertheless, I thought it was a great film and the performances, wonderful.

The real stand-out for me, in fact, was the actor who played John, Stephen MacKenna. I just about fell in love with him. His look, mannerisms, personality and speaking voice seemed to be spot-on. He looked enough like a young John for me to do a double-take towards the end of the film when you see the Beatles performing on Ed Sullivan for the first time. I actually found myself questioning whether or not it was actual Beatle footage, until I saw the other actors in the scene.

If you're looking for a dead accurate history of The Beatles' life and beginnings, you can't get any better than, "The Beatles' Anthology", as it was "written" by the boys', themselves. However, if you're looking for a fun snapshot of their pre-Beatlemania days leading up to their arrival in America and you leave your anal critical assessments at the door, you can't go wrong with the "Birth of the Beatles"--a MUST for any "real" or casual Beatle fan. Having just [[observed]] this film again from a 1998 showing off VH-1, I just had to comment.

The first time I saw this film on TV, it was about 1981, and I remember taping it off of my mother's betamax. It wound up taping in black and white for some reason, which [[handed]] it a period look that I [[raising]] to like.

I remember very distinctively the [[cinematography]] beginning with the [[chanson]], "My Bonnie", as the camera panned over a scene of [[Newcastle]]. I also remember the [[initiation]] scene where Paul gestures to some girls and says, "Look, talent!" [[Therefore]] it was with great irritation that I popped in my 1998 [[strapped]] version and "remembered" that the film [[opened]] with "She Loves You", [[alternatively]] of "My Bonnie". When you see how slowly the camera pans vs. the speed of the music, you can see that "She Loves You" just doesn't fit. Also, in this "later" version when Paul sees the girls, he says, "Look, GIRLS!"..and somehow having remembered the earlier version, THAT word just didn't seem to fit, either. Why they felt they had to Americanize this film for American audiences is beyond me. Personally, if I'm going to watch a film about a British band, I want all of the British colloquialisms and such that would be a part of their speech, [[idiosyncrasies]], etc.

Another irritation was how "choppy" the editing was for [[tvs]]. [[Righteous]] after Stu [[receives]] beaten, for example, the [[flick]] cuts to a [[mercantile]] break-LOTS of '[[electromagnetic]]. Yeah, I [[savoir]] it depends on the [[networking]], but it really ruins the effect of a film to have it sliced apart, as we all know. What some people might [[unearthed]] as insignificant in terms of dialogue (and thereby okay to edit), may [[indeed]] go the way of explaining a particular action or scene that follows.

My point is, the "[[better]]" [[stepping]] of this film was probably the earlier version I taped from 1981, which just so happened to include the "[[Rattle]], Rattle & Roll" scene that my 1998 version didn't. I [[beginning]] to surmise that there had to have been two different versions [[accomplished]] for television, and a [[gaze]] at the "[[surrogate]] versions" [[binding]] regarding this film proved me right. That the American version had some shorter/cut/different scenes and/or dialogue is a huge disappointment to me and something worth mentioning if one cares about such things. Imo, ones best bet is to try and get a hold of the European version of this film, if possible, and (probably even less possible), an unedited version. Sadly, I had to discard my old betamax European version because I didn't know how to convert it.

All that aside, I found this film to be, perhaps, one of the best films regarding the story behind the "birth of the Beatles". Being well aware that artistic and creative license is [[commonly]] used in movies and TV when portraying events in history, I didn't let any discrepancies mar my enjoyment of the film. Sure, you see the Beatles perform songs at the Cavern that made me wonder, "Did they even write that back then?? I don't think so", but, nevertheless, I thought it was a great film and the performances, wonderful.

The real stand-out for me, in fact, was the actor who played John, Stephen MacKenna. I just about fell in love with him. His look, mannerisms, personality and speaking voice seemed to be spot-on. He looked enough like a young John for me to do a double-take towards the end of the film when you see the Beatles performing on Ed Sullivan for the first time. I actually found myself questioning whether or not it was actual Beatle footage, until I saw the other actors in the scene.

If you're looking for a dead accurate history of The Beatles' life and beginnings, you can't get any better than, "The Beatles' Anthology", as it was "written" by the boys', themselves. However, if you're looking for a fun snapshot of their pre-Beatlemania days leading up to their arrival in America and you leave your anal critical assessments at the door, you can't go wrong with the "Birth of the Beatles"--a MUST for any "real" or casual Beatle fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 5372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] [[First]] off, I knew [[nothing]] about 'Mazes and Monster' before I watched it. I had no knowledge of the Role-playing controversy behind it or the fact that it was a Made-For-TV movie. When I [[looked]] at the [[cover]] (the updated DVD one) I seriously thought it would be another [[Fantasy]] adventure like 'Legend', with [[Tom]] Hank as the nerdy hero from 1980s [[earth]] entering a [[mythical]] [[world]] to [[save]] a princess from an evil [[maze]] filled with [[monsters]]. Sounds [[exciting]], [[right]]? That is what the [[cover]] suggests to you at first glance. I was given this [[movie]] as a gift, [[obviously]] under the same premise because my [[aunt]] knows I'm into [[action]] [[movies]] with a medieval myth theme. And it has Tom Hanks, one of my [[favorite]] [[actors]]. So I popped this [[movie]] in, [[expecting]] a feel [[good]] [[movie]] with Tom Hanks in a 80s [[special]] [[effects]] world that [[would]] be good for a [[laugh]].

[[No]]! [[None]] of this happens. Now before I [[continue]] I will [[confess]], I am a nerd but I have no interest in Role-playing games. That is all this [[movie]] is about so my interest in the content is lukewarm at [[best]]. And [[M]]&M (copyright infringement?) is not even a feel good role-playing based movie with lovable geeks that uses their imagination to [[enter]] a [[world]] of awesomeness. No! This is an Anti-Role-playing movie that must have been made by some [[Religious]] folk (the same people who also think Barney is the work of Satan.) I understand, [[Satan]] is a crafty fellow but I don't think he is desperate enough for soul to [[lull]] RPG [[lovers]] into worship him. This movie is THEE anti-gamer movie. This is what I get from this movie: it [[hates]] RPGs and not only does it make fun of the people engaging in Role-playing but it makes poor [[Tom]] Hanks a mental patient.

Tom had an excuse to talk to a volleyball in 'Castaway', poor guy was alone but Tom somehow made his [[insanity]] fun and you literally saw the Volleyball as a lovable character through Tom's good acting. I wish I watched that movie [[instead]] of this. In this movie, Tom is attacked by a make believe dragon creature (it looks like a poorly [[made]] mascot for a RPG team) and has a split [[personality]] that is [[creepy]] at [[best]]. Tom's acting only [[exceeds]] to make you feel bad for his character and nothing else. I get that the poor guy lost his brother and is not right in the head because of it so the movie does win points for being intentionally tragic. I am not one for [[films]] that exploit mental illness and the ending to 'M&M' made me feel like cr*p. Luckily I watched 'Hudson Hawk' afterwards and got a good laugh before my soul was crushed any further. Yah, 'HH' surpasses 'M&M' by . . . a LOT! This is not one of Tom's better films. In fact it is thee most depressing movie I've ever seen him in (Even 'Saving Private Ryan' is not this depressing). I walked in hoping to watch a feel good movie and I ended up feeling the exact opposite. If you want to watch a sad (both emotionally and visually) movie then by all means watch this. If this movie is to convey a message, it is this: "Don't play RPGs if you are Cuckoo for Coco-Puffs." [[Outset]] off, I knew [[none]] about 'Mazes and Monster' before I watched it. I had no knowledge of the Role-playing controversy behind it or the fact that it was a Made-For-TV movie. When I [[seemed]] at the [[coverings]] (the updated DVD one) I seriously thought it would be another [[Imagination]] adventure like 'Legend', with [[Thom]] Hank as the nerdy hero from 1980s [[lands]] entering a [[legendary]] [[globe]] to [[saved]] a princess from an evil [[labyrinth]] filled with [[monster]]. Sounds [[thrilling]], [[rights]]? That is what the [[coverings]] suggests to you at first glance. I was given this [[filmmaking]] as a gift, [[clearly]] under the same premise because my [[queer]] knows I'm into [[measures]] [[cinematography]] with a medieval myth theme. And it has Tom Hanks, one of my [[favourite]] [[protagonists]]. So I popped this [[filmmaking]] in, [[expect]] a feel [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] with Tom Hanks in a 80s [[particular]] [[consequences]] world that [[should]] be good for a [[laughed]].

[[Nos]]! [[No]] of this happens. Now before I [[continued]] I will [[admit]], I am a nerd but I have no interest in Role-playing games. That is all this [[filmmaking]] is about so my interest in the content is lukewarm at [[better]]. And [[metres]]&M (copyright infringement?) is not even a feel good role-playing based movie with lovable geeks that uses their imagination to [[entering]] a [[globe]] of awesomeness. No! This is an Anti-Role-playing movie that must have been made by some [[Nuns]] folk (the same people who also think Barney is the work of Satan.) I understand, [[Lucifer]] is a crafty fellow but I don't think he is desperate enough for soul to [[quietness]] RPG [[fans]] into worship him. This movie is THEE anti-gamer movie. This is what I get from this movie: it [[abhor]] RPGs and not only does it make fun of the people engaging in Role-playing but it makes poor [[Thom]] Hanks a mental patient.

Tom had an excuse to talk to a volleyball in 'Castaway', poor guy was alone but Tom somehow made his [[madness]] fun and you literally saw the Volleyball as a lovable character through Tom's good acting. I wish I watched that movie [[conversely]] of this. In this movie, Tom is attacked by a make believe dragon creature (it looks like a poorly [[brought]] mascot for a RPG team) and has a split [[persona]] that is [[spooky]] at [[better]]. Tom's acting only [[surpassing]] to make you feel bad for his character and nothing else. I get that the poor guy lost his brother and is not right in the head because of it so the movie does win points for being intentionally tragic. I am not one for [[cinema]] that exploit mental illness and the ending to 'M&M' made me feel like cr*p. Luckily I watched 'Hudson Hawk' afterwards and got a good laugh before my soul was crushed any further. Yah, 'HH' surpasses 'M&M' by . . . a LOT! This is not one of Tom's better films. In fact it is thee most depressing movie I've ever seen him in (Even 'Saving Private Ryan' is not this depressing). I walked in hoping to watch a feel good movie and I ended up feeling the exact opposite. If you want to watch a sad (both emotionally and visually) movie then by all means watch this. If this movie is to convey a message, it is this: "Don't play RPGs if you are Cuckoo for Coco-Puffs." --------------------------------------------- Result 5373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] True, there are many movies much [[worse]] then this movie. This [[movie]] was no Manos: The Hands of Fate, or Troll 2 ([[yes]], I have seen them both.. twice) but at the same time this movie is No Alien, [[Predator]] or even Alien Vs. Predator (Yes, even that movie surpassed this). Movies like this make Battlefield Earth look like a Star [[Wars]] it is so [[bad]]. Razzie awards lookout, your biggest competition has just arrived in theaters. This film I'm talking about is of [[course]] Alone in the Dark. I'll try to take you though a step by step process on why this film was so bad.

Acting- I'll first start off with what perhaps was the best component of this film (next to the ending credits, which played 'Wish I had An Angel', the acting. Christian Slater must be proud of himself, he successfully proved that it is possible to act decent in a film worse then drinking antifreeze. Though all his awful dialog he had to speak, it made me wonder why he just didn't walk off the set halfway. Perhaps it was because of Stephen Dorff being in the film as well (somebody he wishes he could be but fails at it). Tara Reid is a bad actress but good looking and that's all that really matters in films like these. That is not to say the acting was perfect though, it was average, not good, and perhaps the only thing in the film not good.

The Soundtrack- Except for 'Wish I had An Angel', the soundtrack is pointless and bad heavy medal being pumped into the viewers ears, perhaps to disguise the awful story (something I will get to soon). A long and very expensive 2 CD soundtrack is now up for sale for those musically challenged.

The Directing- Directed by Hollywoods favorite director Uwe Ball who brought us the classic House of the Dead. Telling us "Yes, movies can get this utterly bad and that's just the beginning to my deadly saga of [[awful]] movies". At least it is said to be directed by Uwe Ball. Without being told I would have guessed a monkey was kidnapped from the Congo, brought here and forced to make opinions on how to make the movie under penalty of being shocked. The director of photography was probably a camcorder taped onto a skateboard and pushed forward until it hits a wall. On the scenes where the camera should stay still it is constantly moving, not allowing us to stop anywhere and when it should be moving in action, the camera stops for some reason.

The Producing- Who on earth is stupid enough to put money towards this bomb? I pity the fool... sometimes. Sometimes I'm glad he or she was taught such a lesson to never put money towards garbage worse then dog dung tied up in a bag.

The Writing / Storyboard- Trying to Analise the story is more painful then jamming an ice pick under a big toe and kicking a soccer ball as hard as I possibly could with it right after but I will still attempt it.

Edward Carnby escapes as a child from an orphanage where 20 children where to go under science experiments. He escapes and hides in an electrical outlet where he is electrocuted (this is the point where it got so bad i started to laugh out loud). Then it fast-forwards many years later where he's a paranoia detective. He get's attacked by some zombie that can't be shot to death, kills it and moves on with life. Later on he gets attacked by some crazy looking monster and he discovers secrets that nobody else knows.

Yeah, the plot is bad, really really bad. The film beings with expecting us to read approximately 10 minutes, which felt like 100, of random text about an untrue civilization called the Abskani. The film goes not to have one twist after another, more then the audience can handle, more then the audience wants to handle, more then the audience could ever care about. This storyline is rock bottom bad that even Double Dragon does better.

Overall, miss out on this movie. I gave it a 1 out of 10 but that is because there is no 0. True, there are many movies much [[worst]] then this movie. This [[filmmaking]] was no Manos: The Hands of Fate, or Troll 2 ([[yeah]], I have seen them both.. twice) but at the same time this movie is No Alien, [[Predatory]] or even Alien Vs. Predator (Yes, even that movie surpassed this). Movies like this make Battlefield Earth look like a Star [[Warfare]] it is so [[unfavourable]]. Razzie awards lookout, your biggest competition has just arrived in theaters. This film I'm talking about is of [[cours]] Alone in the Dark. I'll try to take you though a step by step process on why this film was so bad.

Acting- I'll first start off with what perhaps was the best component of this film (next to the ending credits, which played 'Wish I had An Angel', the acting. Christian Slater must be proud of himself, he successfully proved that it is possible to act decent in a film worse then drinking antifreeze. Though all his awful dialog he had to speak, it made me wonder why he just didn't walk off the set halfway. Perhaps it was because of Stephen Dorff being in the film as well (somebody he wishes he could be but fails at it). Tara Reid is a bad actress but good looking and that's all that really matters in films like these. That is not to say the acting was perfect though, it was average, not good, and perhaps the only thing in the film not good.

The Soundtrack- Except for 'Wish I had An Angel', the soundtrack is pointless and bad heavy medal being pumped into the viewers ears, perhaps to disguise the awful story (something I will get to soon). A long and very expensive 2 CD soundtrack is now up for sale for those musically challenged.

The Directing- Directed by Hollywoods favorite director Uwe Ball who brought us the classic House of the Dead. Telling us "Yes, movies can get this utterly bad and that's just the beginning to my deadly saga of [[frightful]] movies". At least it is said to be directed by Uwe Ball. Without being told I would have guessed a monkey was kidnapped from the Congo, brought here and forced to make opinions on how to make the movie under penalty of being shocked. The director of photography was probably a camcorder taped onto a skateboard and pushed forward until it hits a wall. On the scenes where the camera should stay still it is constantly moving, not allowing us to stop anywhere and when it should be moving in action, the camera stops for some reason.

The Producing- Who on earth is stupid enough to put money towards this bomb? I pity the fool... sometimes. Sometimes I'm glad he or she was taught such a lesson to never put money towards garbage worse then dog dung tied up in a bag.

The Writing / Storyboard- Trying to Analise the story is more painful then jamming an ice pick under a big toe and kicking a soccer ball as hard as I possibly could with it right after but I will still attempt it.

Edward Carnby escapes as a child from an orphanage where 20 children where to go under science experiments. He escapes and hides in an electrical outlet where he is electrocuted (this is the point where it got so bad i started to laugh out loud). Then it fast-forwards many years later where he's a paranoia detective. He get's attacked by some zombie that can't be shot to death, kills it and moves on with life. Later on he gets attacked by some crazy looking monster and he discovers secrets that nobody else knows.

Yeah, the plot is bad, really really bad. The film beings with expecting us to read approximately 10 minutes, which felt like 100, of random text about an untrue civilization called the Abskani. The film goes not to have one twist after another, more then the audience can handle, more then the audience wants to handle, more then the audience could ever care about. This storyline is rock bottom bad that even Double Dragon does better.

Overall, miss out on this movie. I gave it a 1 out of 10 but that is because there is no 0. --------------------------------------------- Result 5374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] [[Beyond]] dirt cheap, this shot-on-video [[exercise]] in [[ineptitude]] was [[difficult]] to get through. It's got the typical [[gore]] that you'd [[expect]] in a zombie [[movie]], but [[none]] of the [[required]] [[atmosphere]] to make it worth while.

What's [[strange]] is that this is an [[amateur]] German [[video]], and the version I [[saw]] is English-dubbed! The dubbers seem to be American fans (penpals of the [[Germans]]?!) who can't [[decide]] whether they [[want]] to play it straight or [[turn]] it into a [[comedy]]. One [[character]] (a [[white]] German, of course) is dubbed by a black [[guy]] [[apparently]], who [[speaks]] with thick ebonics! '[[Kno]] wahm sayin', Comrad? [[Afterlife]] dirt cheap, this shot-on-video [[exercises]] in [[idiocy]] was [[laborious]] to get through. It's got the typical [[gora]] that you'd [[expecting]] in a zombie [[filmmaking]], but [[nil]] of the [[needed]] [[ambiance]] to make it worth while.

What's [[peculiar]] is that this is an [[dilettante]] German [[videos]], and the version I [[noticed]] is English-dubbed! The dubbers seem to be American fans (penpals of the [[Germany]]?!) who can't [[decided]] whether they [[wanted]] to play it straight or [[transforming]] it into a [[humor]]. One [[trait]] (a [[blanc]] German, of course) is dubbed by a black [[dawg]] [[patently]], who [[speaking]] with thick ebonics! '[[Sayin]] wahm sayin', Comrad? --------------------------------------------- Result 5375 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Well made and stylish while still [[ultimately]] making sense this thriller would work better for non giallo [[fans]] to get interested in the [[genre]] than the [[later]] Argento [[entries]] which go overboard in all [[directions]].

[[For]] fans of these crazed [[Italian]] thrillers, they will appreciate George Hilton and the turns his [[character]] takes and what he's put through. The camera-work is fresh with [[dashes]] of [[graphic]] violence and [[odd]], but [[appropriate]] choices and a good not overblown music score as well. The [[less]] you [[know]] about the [[story]] the better to make it [[work]].

The only thing [[lacking]] in keeping this from being a [[great]] Sergio Martino directed giallo is that the [[story]] doesn't have that extra sexual or [[psychological]], or both [[element]] to put it over the [[top]]. It's more a routine [[mystery]], the [[characters]] are well [[defined]] but live or die according to the plot not [[according]] to their own [[virtues]] and [[flaws]].

The recent DVD (2005) [[release]] is [[beautiful]] looking and [[definitely]] the [[way]] to [[see]] the [[film]], unless these ever [[get]] art [[house]] screenings which seems [[unlikely]]. Well made and stylish while still [[finally]] making sense this thriller would work better for non giallo [[amateurs]] to get interested in the [[sorts]] than the [[subsequent]] Argento [[entrance]] which go overboard in all [[instructions]].

[[In]] fans of these crazed [[Ltalian]] thrillers, they will appreciate George Hilton and the turns his [[personage]] takes and what he's put through. The camera-work is fresh with [[alphabets]] of [[graphs]] violence and [[freaky]], but [[adequate]] choices and a good not overblown music score as well. The [[least]] you [[savoir]] about the [[stories]] the better to make it [[cooperate]].

The only thing [[insufficiency]] in keeping this from being a [[huge]] Sergio Martino directed giallo is that the [[stories]] doesn't have that extra sexual or [[mental]], or both [[ingredient]] to put it over the [[topped]]. It's more a routine [[riddle]], the [[hallmarks]] are well [[identified]] but live or die according to the plot not [[conforming]] to their own [[advantages]] and [[inadequacies]].

The recent DVD (2005) [[frees]] is [[wondrous]] looking and [[surely]] the [[pathways]] to [[behold]] the [[kino]], unless these ever [[obtains]] art [[abode]] screenings which seems [[improbable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Hitler, the rise of Evil" is [[clearly]] produced by people [[emotionally]] unburdened by the horrors of [[World]] War 2. Which makes watching a [[refreshing]] experience.

I [[think]] its [[greatest]] [[value]] [[lies]] in its crystal [[clear]] [[revealing]] of the Nazi-mechanism. Of the utterly corrupt [[ways]] Hitler [[used]] to make it to the top. Having arrived there, this [[film]] ends.

When on top, the 'Fuhrer' (= German for 'leader') led his Germany to the biggest & most devastating war in history of mankind. [[Ending]] six years later in Germany's utter defeat. As a result, Germany lost its eastern provinces (= about 35% of its prewar soil), and was forced to accept a 44 year-split of its remaining territory. Both West and East Germany had to be rebuilt from scrap, their reputations severely damaged by the many Nazi-atrocities inspired by racism.

As I said, "Hitler, the rise of Evil" makes an good watch. Set in an acceptable thirties-environment, with (more than) competent acting. In particular Peter O'Toole's role as the aged president von Hindenburg stands out, even adds an extra dimension.

My copy of "Hitler, the rise of Evil" also provides a second DVD with two good documentary films. One is about Hitler's personality, the second deals with the forgery of the Hitler-diaries. In 1983 this forgery caused a hilarious scandal in England and Germany, damaging the reputations of several historians and journalists. "Hitler, the rise of Evil" is [[blatantly]] produced by people [[excitedly]] unburdened by the horrors of [[Global]] War 2. Which makes watching a [[refreshes]] experience.

I [[ideas]] its [[bigger]] [[values]] [[lying]] in its crystal [[unmistakable]] [[uncovering]] of the Nazi-mechanism. Of the utterly corrupt [[shapes]] Hitler [[utilizes]] to make it to the top. Having arrived there, this [[kino]] ends.

When on top, the 'Fuhrer' (= German for 'leader') led his Germany to the biggest & most devastating war in history of mankind. [[End]] six years later in Germany's utter defeat. As a result, Germany lost its eastern provinces (= about 35% of its prewar soil), and was forced to accept a 44 year-split of its remaining territory. Both West and East Germany had to be rebuilt from scrap, their reputations severely damaged by the many Nazi-atrocities inspired by racism.

As I said, "Hitler, the rise of Evil" makes an good watch. Set in an acceptable thirties-environment, with (more than) competent acting. In particular Peter O'Toole's role as the aged president von Hindenburg stands out, even adds an extra dimension.

My copy of "Hitler, the rise of Evil" also provides a second DVD with two good documentary films. One is about Hitler's personality, the second deals with the forgery of the Hitler-diaries. In 1983 this forgery caused a hilarious scandal in England and Germany, damaging the reputations of several historians and journalists. --------------------------------------------- Result 5377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] After seeing a heavily censored [[version]] of this movie on television years ago, I was [[curious]] to see the unedited version. I was surprised that it was more believable and well [[acted]] than I remembered, but one [[thing]] really stood out. I think other reviewers have mentioned this also, namely, what [[exactly]] is the nature and motivation of the Chris Sarandon [[character]]? Has he raped other victims before? Is he completely psychotic or an "average" sociopath? How did he expect to get away with his attack on the younger sister? Is this [[character]] at all [[credible]], or is it just a matter of more background being necessary? He seems almost simultaneously to be an uncomfortably believable character, and too crazy to actually be able to hold on to a teaching job that puts him in contact with young, vulnerable girls. This seems to to be the biggest [[complaint]] of viewers in general. It has nothing to do with his performance, which is terrifyingly convincing.The movie occupies an uneasy position between sheer exploitation and a half way serious treatment of the subject, without quite settling into either mode. Not the [[worst]] movie ever made, but not all that good, either. After seeing a heavily censored [[stepping]] of this movie on television years ago, I was [[unusual]] to see the unedited version. I was surprised that it was more believable and well [[behaved]] than I remembered, but one [[stuff]] really stood out. I think other reviewers have mentioned this also, namely, what [[accurately]] is the nature and motivation of the Chris Sarandon [[trait]]? Has he raped other victims before? Is he completely psychotic or an "average" sociopath? How did he expect to get away with his attack on the younger sister? Is this [[nature]] at all [[dependable]], or is it just a matter of more background being necessary? He seems almost simultaneously to be an uncomfortably believable character, and too crazy to actually be able to hold on to a teaching job that puts him in contact with young, vulnerable girls. This seems to to be the biggest [[complaints]] of viewers in general. It has nothing to do with his performance, which is terrifyingly convincing.The movie occupies an uneasy position between sheer exploitation and a half way serious treatment of the subject, without quite settling into either mode. Not the [[gravest]] movie ever made, but not all that good, either. --------------------------------------------- Result 5378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] Grey [[Gardens]] was [[enthralling]] and crazy and you just couldn't [[really]] look away. It was so [[strange]], and [[funny]] and [[sad]] and sick and ……….. really no words can [[describe]]. The move [[Grey]] [[Gardens]] is beyond bizarre. I [[found]] out about this [[film]] reading my Uncle John's Great [[Big]] [[Bathroom]] Reader, by the [[Bathroom]] Reader's Institute and it was well worth the [[rental]] and [[bump]] to the top of my [[movie]] watching queue. This [[movie]] is about the nuttiest most [[eccentric]] people that may have ever been filmed. One should watch it for their [[favorite]] Edie [[outfits]], which I am sure [[include]] curtains. When I get [[old]] I [[almost]] [[wish]] to be just like [[Big]] Edie, thumbing my nose at normalcy and [[society]]. Grey [[Backyards]] was [[riveting]] and crazy and you just couldn't [[genuinely]] look away. It was so [[inquisitive]], and [[amusing]] and [[unlucky]] and sick and ……….. really no words can [[depicts]]. The move [[Greys]] [[Backyards]] is beyond bizarre. I [[discoveries]] out about this [[cinema]] reading my Uncle John's Great [[Major]] [[Toilets]] Reader, by the [[Crapper]] Reader's Institute and it was well worth the [[rented]] and [[damper]] to the top of my [[films]] watching queue. This [[movies]] is about the nuttiest most [[quirky]] people that may have ever been filmed. One should watch it for their [[preferred]] Edie [[dresses]], which I am sure [[including]] curtains. When I get [[archaic]] I [[nearly]] [[wishing]] to be just like [[Huge]] Edie, thumbing my nose at normalcy and [[societal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is like an allegory of the gospel. It has such direct honesty and innocence you can not possibly believe it was made after the world war when Italy was ravaged and devastated, and was filled with a huge homeless, impoverished population. It is a monument to the best qualities of the human spirit, as well as to the endless creative resources of that land of inspiration.

Toto is a character like Doestoevisky's "Idiot", a modern Christ finding his way in a big city. He is goodness and purity fortified by love, and his acts change the people he encounters, as much as the miracle working dove. The story is told in a natural manner and simple style, yet imbued with a magic that is almost a premonition of Fellini's surrealist fantasies. It is one of the most inspiring, uplifting movies ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 5380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best musicals ever made, this is an example of where the producers and director were not afraid to pick actors for their talent, rather than for what people might expect. The lighting and set are unique, giving it a very interesting effect (this has a special name that I cannot think of). The dialog is also unique in that no contractions are used. The movie is well paced, beautifully acted and interesting from start to finish. A real joy is the MUSIC. Such an array of first-rate songs, from beginning to end, that are perfectly performed and orchestrated. Also, the music is very original and very memorable, and I think superior to many musicals from the thirties through the sixties. It certainly has more original and beautiful songs than most musicals, that might have only two or three. Not bad for a director with no experience in this type of movie. Another quality is that it is fresh each time one sees it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Although]] THE [[FLOCK]] has some pretty good acting by veteran Richard Gere, and some [[okay]] shots that [[might]] harken some back to THE [[SILENCE]] OF THE LAMBS days, the movie stretches credibility to the breaking point and [[destroys]] itself against a [[plot]] that really leads nowhere.

The film is about Erroll Babbage (Gere) who works for the department of safety and is preparing to retire. His office thrusts upon him his [[replacement]], [[Allison]] Lowry ([[Claire]] Danes, STARDUST), who quickly discovers that Babbage is obsessed with his job. And that job ain't very fun. He monitors hundreds of sexual offenders who are on parole in his jurisdiction. Allison goes with Erroll on many calls to check up on his "flock" of offenders and learns that he is in desperate need of retirement. But Erroll is good at his job even if his methods aren't. He taunts sexual predators and even has physical conflicts with them. Erroll justifies his actions by bringing up these deviants' pasts. It is this "good justification" that challenges the audience on some level, letting us see how [[brutal]] Erroll is and [[yet]] how out-of-touch he's become (by being too close to his job).

When a teenage girl goes missing in Erroll's "area", he immediate leaps to the conclusion that she was [[abducted]] by one of his [[flock]]. But how [[could]] he know? Is Erroll that [[good]] at his [[job]]? Allison challenges him and Erroll pushes back. Their battles become as [[fierce]] as Erroll's [[need]] to [[find]] this missing girl.

Although the set-up for the [[story]] was [[okay]], it didn't have any umpf! I will [[give]] credit to Richard Gere, [[however]], who plays the Erroll character very well. Battling retirement. Worried about everyone who's near his flock. Disgusted with those he's responsible for overseeing. Disgusted with himself for having to do some of things he does. Quite a change in character portrayal for Gere. But beyond him there's not much else. Some of the sets are okay (dark and dangerous) but there are so many other problems as to be [[laughable]].

I'll be the first to admit that suspending disbelief is a requirement whenever watching films. But that suspension has limits. The biggest push against those limits is the destruction of EXTREMELY vital crime scenes. Someone as meticulous as Erroll would KNOW that moving a body would be a huge no-no. Or trampling through a crime scene. Or moving evidence. It went beyond and hurt the film to no end.

The other damaging part of this film is that we never get into Clair Danes' character, Allison. She's almost dropped by the wayside at the end of the film and we're never privy to what her intension might be: Will she stay or leave? Will she end up like Erroll if she does stay? This isn't a horrible film as it does touch on some uncomfortable moral ground, but the story as a whole needed to be tightened up. [[Whilst]] THE [[HERD]] has some pretty good acting by veteran Richard Gere, and some [[alrighty]] shots that [[probability]] harken some back to THE [[MUFFLER]] OF THE LAMBS days, the movie stretches credibility to the breaking point and [[obliterating]] itself against a [[intrigue]] that really leads nowhere.

The film is about Erroll Babbage (Gere) who works for the department of safety and is preparing to retire. His office thrusts upon him his [[alternatives]], [[Rosalie]] Lowry ([[Clara]] Danes, STARDUST), who quickly discovers that Babbage is obsessed with his job. And that job ain't very fun. He monitors hundreds of sexual offenders who are on parole in his jurisdiction. Allison goes with Erroll on many calls to check up on his "flock" of offenders and learns that he is in desperate need of retirement. But Erroll is good at his job even if his methods aren't. He taunts sexual predators and even has physical conflicts with them. Erroll justifies his actions by bringing up these deviants' pasts. It is this "good justification" that challenges the audience on some level, letting us see how [[ruthless]] Erroll is and [[however]] how out-of-touch he's become (by being too close to his job).

When a teenage girl goes missing in Erroll's "area", he immediate leaps to the conclusion that she was [[kidnapped]] by one of his [[herd]]. But how [[wo]] he know? Is Erroll that [[alright]] at his [[labour]]? Allison challenges him and Erroll pushes back. Their battles become as [[intense]] as Erroll's [[require]] to [[finds]] this missing girl.

Although the set-up for the [[histories]] was [[verywell]], it didn't have any umpf! I will [[lend]] credit to Richard Gere, [[conversely]], who plays the Erroll character very well. Battling retirement. Worried about everyone who's near his flock. Disgusted with those he's responsible for overseeing. Disgusted with himself for having to do some of things he does. Quite a change in character portrayal for Gere. But beyond him there's not much else. Some of the sets are okay (dark and dangerous) but there are so many other problems as to be [[ludicrous]].

I'll be the first to admit that suspending disbelief is a requirement whenever watching films. But that suspension has limits. The biggest push against those limits is the destruction of EXTREMELY vital crime scenes. Someone as meticulous as Erroll would KNOW that moving a body would be a huge no-no. Or trampling through a crime scene. Or moving evidence. It went beyond and hurt the film to no end.

The other damaging part of this film is that we never get into Clair Danes' character, Allison. She's almost dropped by the wayside at the end of the film and we're never privy to what her intension might be: Will she stay or leave? Will she end up like Erroll if she does stay? This isn't a horrible film as it does touch on some uncomfortable moral ground, but the story as a whole needed to be tightened up. --------------------------------------------- Result 5382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Honestly before I [[watched]] this [[movie]], I had [[heard]] [[many]] people [[said]] this movie was a [[disgrace]]. I did not believe that [[since]] Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey have taken [[roles]] in this [[movie]], and [[watched]] it by my own. Apparently they were right. I was really [[disappointed]] and [[wondering]] all the [[time]] during the movie - why the hell did I watch this [[movie]].

Of course I was not expecting much from Justin as he really does not belong in the movie/[[theater]] [[business]]. But Morgan and Kevin? I could not stop [[asking]] myself why the heck they agreed to [[take]] part in Edison. To be honest, their roles are [[rather]] stupid.

Well you [[might]] think if the players suck, then I should pay more attention to the story. It is [[indeed]] story is the [[core]] of a movie, but guys... trust me... this is not a [[movie]] you want to give a credit for its story. [[Imagine]] this, a smart-ass journalist (Justin Timberlake) wrote a story against the system and at the same time [[learning]] how to become a 'real' journalist from his boss (Morgan Freeman). This all was [[supported]] by one [[agent]] who still has heart for justice (LL Cool J) and an brilliant investigator (Kevin Spacey). At the end, they beat the system with a happy ending story.

Jeez, I [[could]] not even [[carry]] on with this. Just recalling the movie is making me sick already. My advise guys, don't watch this! Please save your money and [[time]] for another movie. Honestly before I [[saw]] this [[filmmaking]], I had [[hear]] [[various]] people [[asserted]] this movie was a [[shame]]. I did not believe that [[because]] Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey have taken [[duties]] in this [[filmmaking]], and [[saw]] it by my own. Apparently they were right. I was really [[frustrating]] and [[asks]] all the [[times]] during the movie - why the hell did I watch this [[filmmaking]].

Of course I was not expecting much from Justin as he really does not belong in the movie/[[movies]] [[companies]]. But Morgan and Kevin? I could not stop [[wondering]] myself why the heck they agreed to [[taking]] part in Edison. To be honest, their roles are [[somewhat]] stupid.

Well you [[probability]] think if the players suck, then I should pay more attention to the story. It is [[actually]] story is the [[nuclei]] of a movie, but guys... trust me... this is not a [[filmmaking]] you want to give a credit for its story. [[Reckon]] this, a smart-ass journalist (Justin Timberlake) wrote a story against the system and at the same time [[learned]] how to become a 'real' journalist from his boss (Morgan Freeman). This all was [[corroborated]] by one [[officers]] who still has heart for justice (LL Cool J) and an brilliant investigator (Kevin Spacey). At the end, they beat the system with a happy ending story.

Jeez, I [[wo]] not even [[bears]] on with this. Just recalling the movie is making me sick already. My advise guys, don't watch this! Please save your money and [[moment]] for another movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a movie about animal cruelty. Under the guise of a marathon race, we see depictions of extreme animal abuse, including literally running a horse to death IN SLOW MOTION. The guy who did this then has his conscience spiritually cleansed by the flames from the burial/burning of the horse, which of course is still dead, having been tortured to death. This is one of the sickest, slimiest movies I've ever had the displeasure of viewing. As Gene Hackman and James Coburn near the finish line on their DYING animals, we're supposed to admire their spirit for finishing the race. I'd like to put the producers and director in a marathon race; I'll decide when they're finished, probably about 20 minutes after they stop breathing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Hills [[Have]] Eyes [[II]] is what you [[would]] expect it to be and nothing more. Of course it's not [[going]] to be an Oscar [[nominated]] film, it's just [[pure]] entertainment which you can just lose yourself in for 90 minutes.

The plot is basically about a group of National Guard [[trainees]] who find themselves [[battling]] against the notorious mutated hillbillies on their last day of training in the [[desert]]. It's just them fighting back [[throughout]] the whole [[film]], which [[includes]] a lot of violence (which is [[basically]] the [[whole]] [[film]]) as blood and guts are [[constantly]] flying around [[throughout]] the [[whole]] thing, and [[also]] [[yet]] another graphic [[rape]] scene which is pointlessly [[thrown]] in to [[shock]] the [[audience]].

I'd give the [[Hills]] [[Have]] [[Eyes]] II 4 out of 10 for [[pure]] [[entertainment]], and that only. Although even then I [[found]] myself looking at my watch more and more as the [[film]] went on, as it [[began]] to [[drag]] due to the [[fact]] it [[continued]] to [[try]] and [[shock]] the [[audience]] with graphic gore and the [[occasional]] [[jump]] scene just to make [[sure]] the [[audience]] stays [[awake]]. The [[Hills]] [[Have]] Eyes II is just [[decent]] [[entertainment]], [[something]] to pass time if you're bored, and [[nothing]] else.

4/10 The Hills [[Has]] Eyes [[SECONDLY]] is what you [[could]] expect it to be and nothing more. Of course it's not [[go]] to be an Oscar [[designated]] film, it's just [[sheer]] entertainment which you can just lose yourself in for 90 minutes.

The plot is basically about a group of National Guard [[apprentices]] who find themselves [[struggling]] against the notorious mutated hillbillies on their last day of training in the [[deserts]]. It's just them fighting back [[during]] the whole [[filmmaking]], which [[contains]] a lot of violence (which is [[principally]] the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]]) as blood and guts are [[steadily]] flying around [[during]] the [[together]] thing, and [[similarly]] [[however]] another graphic [[raping]] scene which is pointlessly [[tossed]] in to [[shocked]] the [[viewers]].

I'd give the [[Slopes]] [[Ha]] [[Eye]] II 4 out of 10 for [[unadulterated]] [[amusement]], and that only. Although even then I [[discoveries]] myself looking at my watch more and more as the [[movies]] went on, as it [[starts]] to [[trawl]] due to the [[facto]] it [[unbroken]] to [[attempted]] and [[shocked]] the [[viewers]] with graphic gore and the [[casual]] [[jumps]] scene just to make [[persuaded]] the [[spectators]] stays [[woke]]. The [[Slopes]] [[Has]] Eyes II is just [[presentable]] [[amusement]], [[anything]] to pass time if you're bored, and [[none]] else.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Soylent [[Green]] IS...a [[really]] [[good]] movie, actually.

I never would've thought it. I don't really [[like]] Heston in his sci-fi efforts. He's one of those actors who, like Superman, [[manages]] to [[come]] [[across]] all sneery and [[invincible]] most of the time. I prefer more [[vulnerable]] heroes. And [[indeed]], he sneers his way through much of Soylent Green, too, but as he's supposed to be [[playing]] an overconfident bully I don't really mind.

I can [[understand]] why some people [[would]] [[turn]] their noses up at this [[movie]]. Soylent Green makes no [[effort]] whatsoever to [[create]] futuristic visuals (what do you know - it looks just like 1973), and it's [[lacking]] in action. But I [[admired]] the film's vision of a [[complex]], corrupt, and [[highly]] stratified [[society]], and I was so [[pleased]] to [[see]] that Edward G. Robinson had such a [[moving]], [[funny]] [[final]] role. Nice little [[character]] [[moments]] - like when he [[shares]] some [[precious]] [[food]] with Heston - really make the [[movie]].

The message of Soylent Green is pretty relevant these days, when [[nobody]] [[seems]] to know what the [[hell]] the government or corporations are up to. Funny, isn't it, to [[see]] Heston in a [[prototype]] Michael Moore [[movie]]... Soylent [[Greening]] IS...a [[truthfully]] [[alright]] movie, actually.

I never would've thought it. I don't really [[iike]] Heston in his sci-fi efforts. He's one of those actors who, like Superman, [[administering]] to [[arrive]] [[during]] all sneery and [[invulnerable]] most of the time. I prefer more [[weak]] heroes. And [[actually]], he sneers his way through much of Soylent Green, too, but as he's supposed to be [[replay]] an overconfident bully I don't really mind.

I can [[comprehend]] why some people [[could]] [[converting]] their noses up at this [[cinematography]]. Soylent Green makes no [[endeavor]] whatsoever to [[creating]] futuristic visuals (what do you know - it looks just like 1973), and it's [[lack]] in action. But I [[admire]] the film's vision of a [[sprawling]], corrupt, and [[hugely]] stratified [[societal]], and I was so [[gratified]] to [[consults]] that Edward G. Robinson had such a [[transferring]], [[comical]] [[last]] role. Nice little [[personage]] [[times]] - like when he [[share]] some [[invaluable]] [[nutrition]] with Heston - really make the [[kino]].

The message of Soylent Green is pretty relevant these days, when [[anyone]] [[looks]] to know what the [[hellfire]] the government or corporations are up to. Funny, isn't it, to [[seeing]] Heston in a [[blueprint]] Michael Moore [[cinema]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 5386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved this movie. It was so well done! Great acting and drama and historically accurate. I love Romy Schneider movies. This one rocks, not as great as Sissi but still rocks!

And Scorpiolina,she commented and said french dubbing. Well this is originally a German movie not french. So yea. Second of all there was a plot, maybe your not familiar with history. Oh and her mother played the part of her governess, not her teacher. And the storyline was actually not Cinderella but Queen Victoria, maybe u missed that detail.

But anyway.... yea the history in this movie is great, I love historical movies and Queen Victoria is very fascinating! I love all the historical stuff. Like that guy that was trying to manipulate her mom. And when she ran away and met her future husband and he showed her the "new type of dance" waltzing. When waltzing was new it was considered kinda scandalous because the couples dance so close. Yea her governess was like oh my god!

And also the clothes, I love the clothes. The styles are great, hoop skirts are awesome. And of course Romy always looks very pretty. --------------------------------------------- Result 5387 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[music]] of Albeniz pervades this [[film]]. Once and a while it is played with original instrumentation (e.g. piano, but never full orchestra), but [[often]] it is re-worked with various contemporary ensembles (e.g.guitar) and treatments (e.g. jazz piano). Only [[occasionally]] is the music the sole focus of the film: the vast majority of the [[time]] the music is set to various dances, often flamenco, but not always. I [[would]] guess that there are 12–14 scenes, which are not united by a plot. Not all scenes will [[reach]] the heights for an individual viewer. In my case about half reached the pinnacle, though all the [[rest]] were in their own way very fine. Those that [[worked]] for me [[moved]] me to goose-flesh aesthetic delight; indeed, the final scene left me weepy with joy. And in some very [[magical]] [[way]] it brings you deep into Spanish culture. If you don't like subtitles, don't worry. The film is virtually wordless, though each scene carries a title of an Albeniz piece. Seeing this very [[beautiful]] [[film]] sharpens my [[complaint]] that [[virtually]] [[none]] of the [[films]] of Saura are available on [[DVD]] in the USA. I am thinking here [[particularly]] of his flamenco version of "[[Carmen]]," a [[spectacular]] work of art that is available in Europe but not here (European DVD's won't play on American DVD [[players]]). This is a scandal. The [[musicians]] of Albeniz pervades this [[cinematography]]. Once and a while it is played with original instrumentation (e.g. piano, but never full orchestra), but [[usually]] it is re-worked with various contemporary ensembles (e.g.guitar) and treatments (e.g. jazz piano). Only [[intermittently]] is the music the sole focus of the film: the vast majority of the [[period]] the music is set to various dances, often flamenco, but not always. I [[ought]] guess that there are 12–14 scenes, which are not united by a plot. Not all scenes will [[accomplish]] the heights for an individual viewer. In my case about half reached the pinnacle, though all the [[repose]] were in their own way very fine. Those that [[cooperates]] for me [[shifted]] me to goose-flesh aesthetic delight; indeed, the final scene left me weepy with joy. And in some very [[quadrant]] [[pathways]] it brings you deep into Spanish culture. If you don't like subtitles, don't worry. The film is virtually wordless, though each scene carries a title of an Albeniz piece. Seeing this very [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] sharpens my [[grievance]] that [[almost]] [[nos]] of the [[movies]] of Saura are available on [[DVDS]] in the USA. I am thinking here [[concretely]] of his flamenco version of "[[Kamen]]," a [[wondrous]] work of art that is available in Europe but not here (European DVD's won't play on American DVD [[gamers]]). This is a scandal. --------------------------------------------- Result 5388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Witchy Hildegard Knef traps a group of people in an [[isolated]] hotel and picks them off one by one in twisted, [[disgusting]] ways. I thought I'd seen it all until one [[unfortunate]] [[man]] here is crucified and then has his head set on fire. Hildy is quite the prankster too: she takes a [[nagging]] harpy and sews her mouth [[shut]]...then hangs her upside down in the [[chimney]] just in [[time]] for a roaring fire! "Witchery" [[made]] me [[sick]]. It made my [[eyes]] hurt. I was ready to write it off as the [[worst]] [[movie]] ever-ever-ever [[made]] by otherwise [[competent]] people...until the finale. I have to admit I loved the [[ending]]. It [[involves]] a [[boy]] and his toy tape-recorder cornered by Linda Blair [[looking]] [[fantastically]] possessed. The scene only lasts for about a minute and the movie's over, but you know that old [[saying]]: "If you've got a [[great]] ending, people will [[forgive]] you for just about anything!" Witchy Hildegard Knef traps a group of people in an [[reclusive]] hotel and picks them off one by one in twisted, [[abhorrent]] ways. I thought I'd seen it all until one [[deplorable]] [[men]] here is crucified and then has his head set on fire. Hildy is quite the prankster too: she takes a [[agonizing]] harpy and sews her mouth [[nears]]...then hangs her upside down in the [[mantelpiece]] just in [[period]] for a roaring fire! "Witchery" [[introduced]] me [[ill]]. It made my [[eye]] hurt. I was ready to write it off as the [[meanest]] [[films]] ever-ever-ever [[introduced]] by otherwise [[proficient]] people...until the finale. I have to admit I loved the [[terminating]]. It [[includes]] a [[guys]] and his toy tape-recorder cornered by Linda Blair [[researching]] [[splendidly]] possessed. The scene only lasts for about a minute and the movie's over, but you know that old [[arguing]]: "If you've got a [[gorgeous]] ending, people will [[forgiving]] you for just about anything!" --------------------------------------------- Result 5389 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you want to make a movie like this, have the threat be real. Don't surround your patsy with a bunch of Bonzos. There is no credibility here. The plot is dull and unbelievable. The acting is even worse. I thought that I was watching Arthur Lake (Dagwood) who is one of the worst actors in history, when I saw the main character. Oh well, at some point he has to face the music and get fighting mad. I don't care. Do you? There are all these long scenes set in this austere office (the furniture made out of cardboard or masonite). People talk and smoke and don't do anything. Most of the action happens in a five minute sequence. After that, it's over. Don't bother. --------------------------------------------- Result 5390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As other viewers have [[mentioned]], this [[film]] was an interesting experiment in [[photography]]. The colors are [[comic]] [[book]] [[bold]]. I think the [[director]] [[got]] carried away with his "artistic [[vision]]" over the look of the film instead o badly [[needed]] attention to content. [[Despite]] its stellar cast, the performances are [[lackluster]] and the [[story]] nearly [[incoherent]]. Madonna was likely cast [[purely]] as a [[stunt]] to get pre-release press. A [[good]] [[thing]] as her appearance here lent some credence to her album "I'm Breathless ([[Music]] inspired by the [[film]] [[Dick]] Tracy)" which was a stratospheric [[hit]] (due in [[large]] [[part]] to the inclusion of dance-hit "Vogue" - which is not in, nor has the [[slightest]] relation to this [[film]]). I'd [[guess]] the [[major]] [[portion]] of [[money]] from this [[film]] [[came]] from tie-ins to Madonna's "I'm Breathless" album.

[[If]] you watch it at [[home]], by end-titles, you'll [[think]] "there's two hours out of my life I'd like to have back." [[Save]] yourself the wasted [[time]] - do not bother with this. As other viewers have [[talked]], this [[filmmaking]] was an interesting experiment in [[image]]. The colors are [[humorous]] [[ledger]] [[brave]]. I think the [[headmaster]] [[get]] carried away with his "artistic [[conception]]" over the look of the film instead o badly [[require]] attention to content. [[While]] its stellar cast, the performances are [[mediocre]] and the [[saga]] nearly [[inconsistent]]. Madonna was likely cast [[solely]] as a [[understudy]] to get pre-release press. A [[alright]] [[stuff]] as her appearance here lent some credence to her album "I'm Breathless ([[Musical]] inspired by the [[filmmaking]] [[Tail]] Tracy)" which was a stratospheric [[strike]] (due in [[mammoth]] [[portions]] to the inclusion of dance-hit "Vogue" - which is not in, nor has the [[lowest]] relation to this [[cinema]]). I'd [[imagine]] the [[large]] [[fraction]] of [[moneys]] from this [[cinema]] [[arrived]] from tie-ins to Madonna's "I'm Breathless" album.

[[Though]] you watch it at [[housing]], by end-titles, you'll [[thinking]] "there's two hours out of my life I'd like to have back." [[Rescue]] yourself the wasted [[times]] - do not bother with this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I love MIDNIGHT [[COWBOY]] and have it in my video collection as it is a favorite of mine. What is interesting to me is how when MIDNIGHT COWBOY came out in 1969, it was so shocking to viewers that it was rated X. Of course, at that time X meant Maturity. Since I was only two years old at the time of the movie's release, it is hard for me to imagine just how shocked viewers were back then. However, when I try to take into account that many of the topics covered in the film, which included prostitution (the title itself was slang for a male prostitute); homosexuality; loneliness; physical (and to some extent emotional as well) abuse and drugs are hard for many people to talk about to this day, I can begin to get a sense of what [[viewers]] of this movie thought back on its release. It is worth noting that in the 1970's, MIDNIGHT COWBOY was downgraded to an R rating and even though it is still rated R, some of the scenes could almost be rated PG-13 by today's standards.

I want to briefly give a synopsis of the plot although it is probably known to almost anyone who has heard of the movie. Jon Voight plays a young man named Joe Buck from Texas who decides that he can make it big as a male hustler in New York City escorting rich women. He emulates cowboy actors like Roy Rogers by wearing a cowboy outfit thinking that that will impress women. After being rejected by all the women he has come across, he meets a sleazy con-man named Enrico "Ratso" Rizzo who is played by Dustin [[Hoffman]]. Ratso convinces Joe that he can make all kinds of money if he has a manager. Once again, Joe is conned and before long is homeless. However, Joe comes across Ratso and is invited to stay in a dilapidated apartment. Without giving away much more of the plot, I want to say that the remainder of the movie deals with Joe and Ratso as they try to help one another in an attempt to fulfill their dreams. I.E. Joe making it as a gigolo and Ratso going down to Florida where he thinks he can regain his health.

I want to make some comments about the movie itself. First of all, the acting is [[excellent]], especially the leads. [[Although]] the movie is really very sad from the beginning to the end, there are some [[classic]] scenes. In fact, there are some scenes that while they are not intended to be funny, I find them amusing. For example, there is the classic scene where Dustin Hoffman and Jon Voight are walking down a city street and a cab practically runs them over. Dustin Hoffman bangs on the cab and says "Hey, I'm walkin' here! I'm walkin' here!" I get a kick out of that scene because it is so typical of New York City where so many people are in a hurry. Another scene that comes to mind is the scene where Ratso (Dustin Hoffman) sends Joe (Jon Voight) to a guy named O'Daniel. What is amusing is that at first, we think O'Daniel is there to recruit gigolos and can see why Joe is getting so excited but then we begin to realize that O'Daniel is nothing but a religious nut. In addition to the two scenes I mentioned, I love the scene where Ratso and Joe are arguing in their apartment when Ratso says to Joe that his cowboy outfit only attracts homosexuals and Joe says in self-defense "John Wayne! You gonna tell me he's a fag!" What I like is the delivery in that scene.

I would say that even though MIDNIGHT COWBOY was set in the late '60's, much of it rings true today. That's because although the area around 42nd Street in New York has been cleaned up in the form of Disneyfication in the last several years, homelessness is still just as prevalent there now as it was 40 years ago. Also, many people have unrealistic dreams of how they are going to strike it big only to have their dreams smashed as was the case with the Jon Voight character. One thing that impresses me about Jon Voight's character is how he is a survivor and I felt that at the end of the movie, he had matured a great deal and that Ratso (Dustin Hoffman's character) was a good influence on him.

In conclusion, I want to say that I suggest that when watching this movie, one should watch it at least a couple of times because there are so many things that go on. For example, there are a bunch of flashback and dream sequences that made more sense to me after a couple of viewings. Also, what I find interesting is that there is a lot in this movie that is left to interpretation such as what really happened with Joe Buck (Jon Voight's character) and the people who were in his life in Texas. Even the ending, while I don't want to give it away for those who have not seen the movie, is rather open-ended. I love MIDNIGHT [[DENIM]] and have it in my video collection as it is a favorite of mine. What is interesting to me is how when MIDNIGHT COWBOY came out in 1969, it was so shocking to viewers that it was rated X. Of course, at that time X meant Maturity. Since I was only two years old at the time of the movie's release, it is hard for me to imagine just how shocked viewers were back then. However, when I try to take into account that many of the topics covered in the film, which included prostitution (the title itself was slang for a male prostitute); homosexuality; loneliness; physical (and to some extent emotional as well) abuse and drugs are hard for many people to talk about to this day, I can begin to get a sense of what [[audience]] of this movie thought back on its release. It is worth noting that in the 1970's, MIDNIGHT COWBOY was downgraded to an R rating and even though it is still rated R, some of the scenes could almost be rated PG-13 by today's standards.

I want to briefly give a synopsis of the plot although it is probably known to almost anyone who has heard of the movie. Jon Voight plays a young man named Joe Buck from Texas who decides that he can make it big as a male hustler in New York City escorting rich women. He emulates cowboy actors like Roy Rogers by wearing a cowboy outfit thinking that that will impress women. After being rejected by all the women he has come across, he meets a sleazy con-man named Enrico "Ratso" Rizzo who is played by Dustin [[Hoffmann]]. Ratso convinces Joe that he can make all kinds of money if he has a manager. Once again, Joe is conned and before long is homeless. However, Joe comes across Ratso and is invited to stay in a dilapidated apartment. Without giving away much more of the plot, I want to say that the remainder of the movie deals with Joe and Ratso as they try to help one another in an attempt to fulfill their dreams. I.E. Joe making it as a gigolo and Ratso going down to Florida where he thinks he can regain his health.

I want to make some comments about the movie itself. First of all, the acting is [[wondrous]], especially the leads. [[While]] the movie is really very sad from the beginning to the end, there are some [[conventional]] scenes. In fact, there are some scenes that while they are not intended to be funny, I find them amusing. For example, there is the classic scene where Dustin Hoffman and Jon Voight are walking down a city street and a cab practically runs them over. Dustin Hoffman bangs on the cab and says "Hey, I'm walkin' here! I'm walkin' here!" I get a kick out of that scene because it is so typical of New York City where so many people are in a hurry. Another scene that comes to mind is the scene where Ratso (Dustin Hoffman) sends Joe (Jon Voight) to a guy named O'Daniel. What is amusing is that at first, we think O'Daniel is there to recruit gigolos and can see why Joe is getting so excited but then we begin to realize that O'Daniel is nothing but a religious nut. In addition to the two scenes I mentioned, I love the scene where Ratso and Joe are arguing in their apartment when Ratso says to Joe that his cowboy outfit only attracts homosexuals and Joe says in self-defense "John Wayne! You gonna tell me he's a fag!" What I like is the delivery in that scene.

I would say that even though MIDNIGHT COWBOY was set in the late '60's, much of it rings true today. That's because although the area around 42nd Street in New York has been cleaned up in the form of Disneyfication in the last several years, homelessness is still just as prevalent there now as it was 40 years ago. Also, many people have unrealistic dreams of how they are going to strike it big only to have their dreams smashed as was the case with the Jon Voight character. One thing that impresses me about Jon Voight's character is how he is a survivor and I felt that at the end of the movie, he had matured a great deal and that Ratso (Dustin Hoffman's character) was a good influence on him.

In conclusion, I want to say that I suggest that when watching this movie, one should watch it at least a couple of times because there are so many things that go on. For example, there are a bunch of flashback and dream sequences that made more sense to me after a couple of viewings. Also, what I find interesting is that there is a lot in this movie that is left to interpretation such as what really happened with Joe Buck (Jon Voight's character) and the people who were in his life in Texas. Even the ending, while I don't want to give it away for those who have not seen the movie, is rather open-ended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This movie is as unique as it is [[overlooked]]......A Different [[Story]] is just that, it [[shows]] how out of the need to survive or [[maintain]], one can find the [[capacity]] to [[love]] if you have an [[open]] heart as well as an [[open]] [[mind]]. I first saw this on [[cable]] in the late 70's and it [[truly]] [[depicted]] the limitations of the gay community at the [[time]]. I [[believe]] this movie was ahead of its [[time]] in depicting a [[little]] [[slice]] of an [[obscure]] [[way]] of life. It is [[truly]] a [[classic]] in the sense that it was a precursor to what is now depicted as the [[extended]] family. This film should be available on DVD/VHS so that not only the [[extra]] [[ordinary]] performances of Meg Foster & Perry King can be [[acknowledged]], but to [[show]] how far we have [[come]] & [[still]] have to go where relationships are [[concerned]]. This movie is as unique as it is [[forgotten]]......A Different [[Histories]] is just that, it [[exhibition]] how out of the need to survive or [[preservation]], one can find the [[capacities]] to [[likes]] if you have an [[opening]] heart as well as an [[openings]] [[intellect]]. I first saw this on [[wiring]] in the late 70's and it [[really]] [[exemplified]] the limitations of the gay community at the [[period]]. I [[think]] this movie was ahead of its [[moment]] in depicting a [[petite]] [[cutting]] of an [[indistinct]] [[path]] of life. It is [[honestly]] a [[typical]] in the sense that it was a precursor to what is now depicted as the [[elongated]] family. This film should be available on DVD/VHS so that not only the [[additional]] [[banal]] performances of Meg Foster & Perry King can be [[recognize]], but to [[illustrates]] how far we have [[arrived]] & [[yet]] have to go where relationships are [[apprehensive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] demonicus rocked, you guys need to understand how hard it rocked, unfortunately, the words needed to explain the extent of the rocking have not been discovered. for a tiny idea, pop like 50 hits of E, watch Death Factory while on the phone with Jesus, wait, Jesus is on call waiting, you're having phone sex with Will Smith on the primary line. seriously, that [[movie]]... so good. you need to watch it at least a 4 [[times]] to catch all the subtleties... well, not so much subtleties as much as it takes the length of the movie, times 4 in order to ponder why the people at full moon are allowed to A, live, and B, reproduce. what is our world coming to? demonicus rocked, you guys need to understand how hard it rocked, unfortunately, the words needed to explain the extent of the rocking have not been discovered. for a tiny idea, pop like 50 hits of E, watch Death Factory while on the phone with Jesus, wait, Jesus is on call waiting, you're having phone sex with Will Smith on the primary line. seriously, that [[films]]... so good. you need to watch it at least a 4 [[time]] to catch all the subtleties... well, not so much subtleties as much as it takes the length of the movie, times 4 in order to ponder why the people at full moon are allowed to A, live, and B, reproduce. what is our world coming to? --------------------------------------------- Result 5394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[While]] in the barn of Kent Farm with Shelby [[waiting]] for [[Chloe]], Clark is attacked and awakes in a mental institution in the middle of a session with Dr. Hudson. The psychologist tells him that for five [[years]] he has been delusional, believing that he has come from Krypton and had superpowers. Clark succeeds to escape, and meets [[Lana]], Martha and Lex that [[confirm]] the [[words]] of Dr. Hudson. [[Only]] [[Chloe]] believe on his words, but she is [[also]] [[considered]] insane. Clark fights to find the [[truth]] about his own [[personality]] and origin.

"[[Labyrinth]]" is [[undoubtedly]] the most [[intriguing]] episode of "Smallville". The writer was very [[luck]] and [[original]] denying the [[whole]] existence of the [[powerful]] boy from Krypton. The annoying hum gives the sensation of [[disturbance]] and the [[identity]] [[mysterious]] saver [[need]] to be clarified. My vote is nine.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "Labirinto" ("[[Labyrinth]]") [[Although]] in the barn of Kent Farm with Shelby [[expects]] for [[Naomi]], Clark is attacked and awakes in a mental institution in the middle of a session with Dr. Hudson. The psychologist tells him that for five [[ages]] he has been delusional, believing that he has come from Krypton and had superpowers. Clark succeeds to escape, and meets [[Laine]], Martha and Lex that [[confirmed]] the [[expression]] of Dr. Hudson. [[Purely]] [[Vivienne]] believe on his words, but she is [[apart]] [[judged]] insane. Clark fights to find the [[veracity]] about his own [[persona]] and origin.

"[[Maze]]" is [[indubitably]] the most [[riveting]] episode of "Smallville". The writer was very [[opportunities]] and [[preliminary]] denying the [[ensemble]] existence of the [[potent]] boy from Krypton. The annoying hum gives the sensation of [[agitation]] and the [[identities]] [[cryptic]] saver [[needed]] to be clarified. My vote is nine.

Title ([[Brazilian]]): "Labirinto" ("[[Daedalus]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 5395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] DEAD HUSBANDS is a somewhat silly comedy about a bunch of wives conspiring to bump off each others husbands`. It`s by no [[means]] [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] like some comedies I could mention but it never fufils its [[potential]] . Imagine how good this could have been if we had the Farrelly brothers directing Ben Stiller in the role of Carter Elson .

Oh is Carter based on Jerry Springer ? Just curious because the catch phrase on Dr Elson`s show is " look after each other and keep talking " DEAD HUSBANDS is a somewhat silly comedy about a bunch of wives conspiring to bump off each others husbands`. It`s by no [[methods]] [[brazenly]] [[unfavorable]] like some comedies I could mention but it never fufils its [[prospective]] . Imagine how good this could have been if we had the Farrelly brothers directing Ben Stiller in the role of Carter Elson .

Oh is Carter based on Jerry Springer ? Just curious because the catch phrase on Dr Elson`s show is " look after each other and keep talking " --------------------------------------------- Result 5396 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[Production]] [[line]] [[collection]] of fart jokes that pretends 'Babe' was never made; the writers clearly hoped that the gimmick of seeing animals talk [[would]] be [[enough]] to keep the [[movie]] [[going]]. It's not. Eddie Murphy [[sells]] out [[yet]] again as a doctor who rediscovers his forgotten childhood [[gift]] for understanding the incessant and witless chatter of guinea pigs, tigers, rats, dogs and pigeons. The voice cast is [[impressive]] (Albert [[Brooks]], Julie Kavner, Reni Santoni, John Leguizamo, Garry Shandling, Ellen DeGeneres, Paul Reubens, Brian Doyle-Murray) but the [[script]] is so unimaginative, charmless and depressingly unfunny that the [[whole]] [[thing]] [[rattles]] down the [[bin]] chute [[pretty]] [[quickly]]. [[Productivity]] [[iine]] [[collections]] of fart jokes that pretends 'Babe' was never made; the writers clearly hoped that the gimmick of seeing animals talk [[should]] be [[satisfactorily]] to keep the [[filmmaking]] [[go]]. It's not. Eddie Murphy [[sold]] out [[nevertheless]] again as a doctor who rediscovers his forgotten childhood [[donate]] for understanding the incessant and witless chatter of guinea pigs, tigers, rats, dogs and pigeons. The voice cast is [[resplendent]] (Albert [[Creeks]], Julie Kavner, Reni Santoni, John Leguizamo, Garry Shandling, Ellen DeGeneres, Paul Reubens, Brian Doyle-Murray) but the [[hyphen]] is so unimaginative, charmless and depressingly unfunny that the [[ensemble]] [[stuff]] [[rocks]] down the [[benn]] chute [[quite]] [[punctually]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Harvey Keital's best performance so far the new century. Very nicely photographed, a beautiful snap-shot of pre-Castro Cuba. The story revolves around the nephew of a local minor crime boss who develops a friendship with an American with Hollywood connections. It's really about the moment when a boy awakens to the fact that the small circle of people he knows actually live in a much larger, much more complex world that he doesn't yet understand.the script is strong and filled with humor, the direction is crisp. Over all, a really professional job that fits in well with the tradition of Latin American cinema. The one weakness is the decision to shoot in sync-sound English rather than Spanish - probably to improve sales in the US. Unfortunately, this just makes the film a little less convincing. But if you can see beyond this, you will find a heartfelt trip to another world. Recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I had never seen a silent movie until July 24, 2005. I had never seen a movie with Mary Pickford in it. I've seen thousands of movies. Very few are hypnotic to me. I found Last of the Mohicans and Unforgettable (Ray Liotta) to be hypnotic, so consider the source as you read this. I [[started]] watching Tess of the Storm Country on TCM just to see who this Mary Pickford was, who has been credited by many for launching Hollywood. I had no idea what I was in for. Two hours [[later]], I [[snapped]] out of it, and realized I'd watched one of the most beautiful women I had ever seen, playing a role perfectly suited to her. Imagine a movie fan in 1922, having never seen anyone that gorgeous and that expressive before. You would have to see her again and again. The setting was perfect for a girl that expressive. She was a poor squatter, couldn't speak the King's English, but you had to admire her. What a movie... time to start my Mary Pickford movie collection! I had never seen a silent movie until July 24, 2005. I had never seen a movie with Mary Pickford in it. I've seen thousands of movies. Very few are hypnotic to me. I found Last of the Mohicans and Unforgettable (Ray Liotta) to be hypnotic, so consider the source as you read this. I [[commences]] watching Tess of the Storm Country on TCM just to see who this Mary Pickford was, who has been credited by many for launching Hollywood. I had no idea what I was in for. Two hours [[thereafter]], I [[caved]] out of it, and realized I'd watched one of the most beautiful women I had ever seen, playing a role perfectly suited to her. Imagine a movie fan in 1922, having never seen anyone that gorgeous and that expressive before. You would have to see her again and again. The setting was perfect for a girl that expressive. She was a poor squatter, couldn't speak the King's English, but you had to admire her. What a movie... time to start my Mary Pickford movie collection! --------------------------------------------- Result 5399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Annie's wig does not look good. she is not [[cute]] and pretty enough to play Annie. Annie sticks out in the movie, as her outfits look like Halloween costumes. terrible acting and terrible plots. This movie is such a change from the 1982 version. I think that a younger and smaller girl should have had the lead role. Ashley Johnson portrays a very boyish Annie. Not [[appealing]] at all. [[At]] [[least]] the casting [[director]] [[got]] it right with Daddy Warbucks. Ms. Hannigan was also miscast. Camilla Belle played Molly alright. "Warning" this [[movie]] might insult your IQ so you might just want to only show it to very [[young]] [[children]]. 8 and younger. Some of the plots are too fictional and could hardly take place in the real world. Annie's wig does not look good. she is not [[belle]] and pretty enough to play Annie. Annie sticks out in the movie, as her outfits look like Halloween costumes. terrible acting and terrible plots. This movie is such a change from the 1982 version. I think that a younger and smaller girl should have had the lead role. Ashley Johnson portrays a very boyish Annie. Not [[tempting]] at all. [[Under]] [[fewer]] the casting [[headmaster]] [[gets]] it right with Daddy Warbucks. Ms. Hannigan was also miscast. Camilla Belle played Molly alright. "Warning" this [[filmmaking]] might insult your IQ so you might just want to only show it to very [[youthful]] [[kiddies]]. 8 and younger. Some of the plots are too fictional and could hardly take place in the real world. --------------------------------------------- Result 5400 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] ...for this movie defines a new low in Bollywood and has set the standard against which all c**p must now be compared.

First off, the beginning did have elements of style....and if handled well, could have become a cult classic, a-la pulp fiction or a Desi desperado...but the plot (was there one?) begins to meander and at one point completely [[loses]] it.

[[Throw]] in a deranged don with an obsession for English, a call center smart Alec, a femme fa tale who can don a bikini and a Saree with the same aplomb, a levitating, gravity defying hit-man and a cop with a hundred (or was it a thousand) black cat commandos on their trail....good ingredients in [[competent]] hands. But this is where I would [[like]] to [[ask]] the director: Sir, what were you smoking?

Im sure this [[movie]] [[would]] be remembered in the annals of Bollywood film making - for what [[must]] never be [[done]] - insult the [[intelligence]] of the most brain dead of [[movie]] goers.

[[Possibly]] the only [[redeeming]] [[feature]] in this Desi matrix plus desperado plus grindhouse caper is the [[music]]...watch the [[videos]]...[[hear]] the airplay and you wont be disappointed. Vishal- Shekhar come up with some eminently hummable tunes.

How I wish the director had [[spent]] the [[money]] in [[creating]] some more eye [[candy]]....

As I sign off, I [[want]] to really, badly know how does Akshay's bullet [[wound]] [[vanish]] in a microsecond...what were you [[editors]] doing? Tashan, maybe... ...for this movie defines a new low in Bollywood and has set the standard against which all c**p must now be compared.

First off, the beginning did have elements of style....and if handled well, could have become a cult classic, a-la pulp fiction or a Desi desperado...but the plot (was there one?) begins to meander and at one point completely [[looses]] it.

[[Toss]] in a deranged don with an obsession for English, a call center smart Alec, a femme fa tale who can don a bikini and a Saree with the same aplomb, a levitating, gravity defying hit-man and a cop with a hundred (or was it a thousand) black cat commandos on their trail....good ingredients in [[proficient]] hands. But this is where I would [[loves]] to [[request]] the director: Sir, what were you smoking?

Im sure this [[filmmaking]] [[should]] be remembered in the annals of Bollywood film making - for what [[needs]] never be [[doing]] - insult the [[intelligentsia]] of the most brain dead of [[cinematography]] goers.

[[Presumably]] the only [[redeem]] [[idiosyncrasies]] in this Desi matrix plus desperado plus grindhouse caper is the [[musica]]...watch the [[video]]...[[heard]] the airplay and you wont be disappointed. Vishal- Shekhar come up with some eminently hummable tunes.

How I wish the director had [[spend]] the [[cash]] in [[establish]] some more eye [[sweets]]....

As I sign off, I [[wanna]] to really, badly know how does Akshay's bullet [[injury]] [[dissipate]] in a microsecond...what were you [[publishers]] doing? Tashan, maybe... --------------------------------------------- Result 5401 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Creep is the story of Kate (Potente), an [[intensely]] unlikeable bourgeois [[bitch]] that finds herself somehow [[sleeping]] through the noise of the [[last]] underground train, and [[waking]] up to find herself locked in the [[tube]] station. After [[somehow]] [[meeting]] workmate and would-be [[rapist]] Guy on a mystery [[train]] that runs after the lines have [[closed]], things go awry and she finds herself [[pursued]] by what lurks beneath the city's streets. Her story is linked to that of George (Blackwood), an ex-con working in the [[sewer]] system; they meet in the final [[third]] of the [[film]], brought together by their attempts to escape the monster that [[pursues]] them.

The pair proceed through a set of increasingly unlikely locations; from the Tube station, they end up in the sewage works before somehow finding themselves in some sort of [[abandoned]] underground surgery. Most Tube stations don't have toilets, so how one has a surgery is beyond me. Naturally, the film cares to explain that the surgery doesn't have running water. Yet it has electricity? Just one of many [[inconsistencies]] that work against the atmosphere of everyday believability that the film [[tries]] to create.

The monster itself is a problem. There's a [[complete]] [[lack]] of reasoning for its actions, it just kills people for no obvious [[reason]]. And then of course it [[keeps]] some alive for no real reason either, perhaps just so that they can eventually escape and give the film an extra 15 minutes or so [[running]] time. I understand that natural evil is [[supposed]] to be scary, but then the film attempts to explain itself via a photo of a doctor and his son, and a few shots of some jars containing babies, and yes, it is just as tired and [[pathetic]] as it sounds. It also fails to [[explain]] how the [[creature]] has been [[underground]] [[long]] enough to lose the [[ability]] to speak, communicating only in raptor screams, but not [[long]] enough for its [[pair]] of [[shorts]] to [[decay]]. [[Hmm]].

This [[doctor]] [[business]] leads to scene that is the film's desperate [[attempt]] to implant itself on your [[memory]], and while it is gory and [[uncomfortable]] to watch, it just isn't enough. The final [[third]] of the film hinges on an emotional [[relationship]] that never existed, and the [[characters]] [[break]] down and [[recover]] for [[little]] or no [[obvious]] reason. [[George]] breaks down, unable to [[cope]] with [[something]] despite stating that he [[wants]] to [[escape]] so he can see his daughter again, and Kate becomes emotionally tough seconds after going to pieces over someone that ripped her off for a travelcard. Yeah.

After starting out as a "this could happen to anyone" movie, it quickly falls apart as it introduces ideas that make it more and more unrealistic. A complete lack of emotional interest in the characters and an absence of suspense make this one to avoid. Creep is the story of Kate (Potente), an [[intensively]] unlikeable bourgeois [[hussy]] that finds herself somehow [[asleep]] through the noise of the [[latter]] underground train, and [[awaken]] up to find herself locked in the [[pipe]] station. After [[someplace]] [[meetings]] workmate and would-be [[violator]] Guy on a mystery [[forming]] that runs after the lines have [[shutting]], things go awry and she finds herself [[pursuing]] by what lurks beneath the city's streets. Her story is linked to that of George (Blackwood), an ex-con working in the [[drains]] system; they meet in the final [[thirds]] of the [[filmmaking]], brought together by their attempts to escape the monster that [[haunts]] them.

The pair proceed through a set of increasingly unlikely locations; from the Tube station, they end up in the sewage works before somehow finding themselves in some sort of [[relinquished]] underground surgery. Most Tube stations don't have toilets, so how one has a surgery is beyond me. Naturally, the film cares to explain that the surgery doesn't have running water. Yet it has electricity? Just one of many [[incompatibility]] that work against the atmosphere of everyday believability that the film [[try]] to create.

The monster itself is a problem. There's a [[finished]] [[lacked]] of reasoning for its actions, it just kills people for no obvious [[reasons]]. And then of course it [[retains]] some alive for no real reason either, perhaps just so that they can eventually escape and give the film an extra 15 minutes or so [[implementing]] time. I understand that natural evil is [[alleged]] to be scary, but then the film attempts to explain itself via a photo of a doctor and his son, and a few shots of some jars containing babies, and yes, it is just as tired and [[lamentable]] as it sounds. It also fails to [[explained]] how the [[ogre]] has been [[subterranean]] [[largo]] enough to lose the [[abilities]] to speak, communicating only in raptor screams, but not [[longer]] enough for its [[torque]] of [[slacks]] to [[breakup]]. [[Mmm]].

This [[physician]] [[enterprise]] leads to scene that is the film's desperate [[strives]] to implant itself on your [[memories]], and while it is gory and [[inconvenient]] to watch, it just isn't enough. The final [[thirds]] of the film hinges on an emotional [[nexus]] that never existed, and the [[traits]] [[breaks]] down and [[reclaim]] for [[small]] or no [[perceptible]] reason. [[Giorgi]] breaks down, unable to [[coping]] with [[somethings]] despite stating that he [[want]] to [[elope]] so he can see his daughter again, and Kate becomes emotionally tough seconds after going to pieces over someone that ripped her off for a travelcard. Yeah.

After starting out as a "this could happen to anyone" movie, it quickly falls apart as it introduces ideas that make it more and more unrealistic. A complete lack of emotional interest in the characters and an absence of suspense make this one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 5402 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] The movie is just [[plain]] [[fun]]....[[maybe]] more fun for those of us who were young and [[fans]] of "The Ramones" [[around]] the time the [[film]] was [[made]]. I've watched the [[film]] over and over, by myself and with friends, and it is [[still]] fresh and [[funny]]. [[At]] the risk of being too serious, the [[concept]] of being a [[big]] fan of a certain [[band]] is timeless, and [[high]] school students boredom with [[drudgery]] of some [[classes]] is just as [[timeless]].

And, the film has some gem lines/scenes.....[[references]] to how our "[[permanent]] [[record]]" in high [[school]] will follow us through [[life]]. (Let me [[assure]] you I've been out of high school for, [[uhhh]], some [[years]] and it's not following me).....the [[famous]] "static" line ("I'm getting some static"....."Not as much as you're going to get", as Principal Togar [[approaches]]).....the school board [[member]] who is so decrepit he's [[attended]] by nurses....the [[Nazi]] Hall [[Monitors]] love for a "[[body]] search" ......Principal Togar [[announcing]], "I give you the [[final]] solution", and [[burning]] the Ramones records ([[note]]: records were what came before CD's) ....and of course Joey Ramone noting, "Things sure have [[changed]] since we got kicked out of high [[school]]", followed by Togar [[asking]] "Do your parents know you're Ramones?"

Just one piece of [[advice]].....don't [[look]] up where the stars are now.....Joey Ramone sadly [[died]] young. Dey Young, who was a major [[hottie]] in the [[film]], [[today]] [[reminds]] us we all age....PJ [[Soles]] [[career]] never advanced as we [[might]] have [[expected]]......... Marla Rosenfield, as one the other [[students]], [[apparently]] appeared only in this [[film]] (one of my male [[friends]] [[dies]] over her [[every]] time we watch the [[film]]), [[though]] I [[submit]] her performance was more than adequate and should have [[brought]] her more [[teen]] film [[roles]]. And, does [[anyone]] know what [[happened]] to [[DJ]] [[Don]] Steele?

So, watch and [[enjoy]].....don't [[think]]....just have FUN! The movie is just [[lowlands]] [[funny]]....[[presumably]] more fun for those of us who were young and [[followers]] of "The Ramones" [[about]] the time the [[movie]] was [[introduced]]. I've watched the [[movie]] over and over, by myself and with friends, and it is [[however]] fresh and [[comical]]. [[In]] the risk of being too serious, the [[idea]] of being a [[major]] fan of a certain [[bands]] is timeless, and [[alto]] school students boredom with [[tedium]] of some [[category]] is just as [[perpetual]].

And, the film has some gem lines/scenes.....[[reference]] to how our "[[persistent]] [[records]]" in high [[scholastic]] will follow us through [[living]]. (Let me [[ensured]] you I've been out of high school for, [[uhmm]], some [[olds]] and it's not following me).....the [[celebrated]] "static" line ("I'm getting some static"....."Not as much as you're going to get", as Principal Togar [[approaching]]).....the school board [[members]] who is so decrepit he's [[attend]] by nurses....the [[Hitler]] Hall [[Monitoring]] love for a "[[bodies]] search" ......Principal Togar [[announced]], "I give you the [[last]] solution", and [[burns]] the Ramones records ([[noting]]: records were what came before CD's) ....and of course Joey Ramone noting, "Things sure have [[modified]] since we got kicked out of high [[teaching]]", followed by Togar [[wondering]] "Do your parents know you're Ramones?"

Just one piece of [[councils]].....don't [[gaze]] up where the stars are now.....Joey Ramone sadly [[deaths]] young. Dey Young, who was a major [[hot]] in the [[movie]], [[hoy]] [[remembered]] us we all age....PJ [[Bottoms]] [[carrera]] never advanced as we [[probability]] have [[waited]]......... Marla Rosenfield, as one the other [[student]], [[obviously]] appeared only in this [[kino]] (one of my male [[mates]] [[dying]] over her [[each]] time we watch the [[movie]]), [[while]] I [[submitting]] her performance was more than adequate and should have [[made]] her more [[adolescent]] film [[duties]]. And, does [[someone]] know what [[sweated]] to [[MJ]] [[Donated]] Steele?

So, watch and [[enjoys]].....don't [[thought]]....just have FUN! --------------------------------------------- Result 5403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] when i [[first]] started watching these it [[became]] one of my [[favourite]] [[shows]]. [[Melissa]] Joan hart is very [[funny]] and talented so were the [[aunts]] and the other [[characters]] and the [[star]] of of the show Salem the [[cat]], he was [[immensely]] funny. the first few season in my opinion were the [[best]] where Sabrina was a teenager in [[high]] [[school]] [[adapting]] to witch [[life]]. they were most funniest, most [[entertaining]] and most [[um]]... good. i'm not a fan of when they [[started]] [[introducing]] [[Brad]] and Dreamer cause i [[quite]] [[liked]] Valerie, but they were [[okay]] the [[problem]] was they were only in it for one season. if you're gonna have new people at least [[keep]] them. i didn't like [[Josh]] he was a tw*t, i [[preferred]] Harvey but then he [[disappeared]]. and they [[got]] rid of Libby! it [[would]] have been [[awesome]] if thy had been [[bickering]] in theses seven [[years]]. and [[Mr]]. craft as well, if him and Zelda [[got]] married that would have been gold! then Sabrina [[moves]] out of her [[aunts]] [[house]] and into Roxie/[[Miles]]/Morgan's [[house]]. i didn't like theses people [[either]], it didn't [[really]] [[seem]] they [[liked]] Sabrina. Sabrina [[seemed]] to [[lose]] her [[charm]] and [[stuff]] and the [[aunts]] [[seem]] to be [[shunned]] out of her [[life]] and into they're own [[stupid]] story lines. i [[kind]] of [[stopped]] watching it for a while and the [[old]] re-runs were back and i was like whoo-hoo! LOL. i [[must]] [[say]] the last few seasons were [[absolutely]] terrible.they [[got]] rid of the [[aunts]] which sucked cause they were a [[big]] part of the [[show]]. then suddenly she [[lets]] those two freeloaders [[move]] in to the [[nice]] house when they [[treated]] he like dirt. and now she's [[working]] at some [[magazine]] shop so they're putting [[loads]] [[celebrity]] [[guest]] [[stars]] into the [[show]], if they're in [[every]] episode it [[kind]] of [[ruins]] it. the [[programme]] just [[really]] went downhill and lost its luster. i saw the [[last]] episode. it had the [[aunts]] in it (Zelda was [[reduced]] to a candle) and she's about to [[get]] married but she runs off with Harvey the [[end]]. i [[would]] have liked to know what happened after. well [[thats]] my [[review]] and the only thing i can [[say]] is the only thing that stayed it's appealing self through the seven years was Salem the cat. when i [[firstly]] started watching these it [[was]] one of my [[favorites]] [[exposition]]. [[Mireille]] Joan hart is very [[fun]] and talented so were the [[aunties]] and the other [[personages]] and the [[superstar]] of of the show Salem the [[kitten]], he was [[extraordinarily]] funny. the first few season in my opinion were the [[better]] where Sabrina was a teenager in [[alto]] [[tuition]] [[tailoring]] to witch [[vida]]. they were most funniest, most [[amusing]] and most [[mmm]]... good. i'm not a fan of when they [[commences]] [[presenting]] [[Bard]] and Dreamer cause i [[very]] [[enjoyed]] Valerie, but they were [[alrighty]] the [[trouble]] was they were only in it for one season. if you're gonna have new people at least [[preserve]] them. i didn't like [[Joshi]] he was a tw*t, i [[favored]] Harvey but then he [[missing]]. and they [[get]] rid of Libby! it [[could]] have been [[noteworthy]] if thy had been [[wrangle]] in theses seven [[ages]]. and [[Monsieur]]. craft as well, if him and Zelda [[ai]] married that would have been gold! then Sabrina [[shift]] out of her [[aunties]] [[households]] and into Roxie/[[Kilometre]]/Morgan's [[households]]. i didn't like theses people [[neither]], it didn't [[genuinely]] [[appears]] they [[wished]] Sabrina. Sabrina [[sounded]] to [[wasting]] her [[seduction]] and [[thing]] and the [[uncles]] [[seems]] to be [[dodged]] out of her [[vida]] and into they're own [[preposterous]] story lines. i [[sort]] of [[stopping]] watching it for a while and the [[archaic]] re-runs were back and i was like whoo-hoo! LOL. i [[ought]] [[told]] the last few seasons were [[fully]] terrible.they [[gets]] rid of the [[aunties]] which sucked cause they were a [[major]] part of the [[illustrating]]. then suddenly she [[allowing]] those two freeloaders [[budge]] in to the [[pleasant]] house when they [[handled]] he like dirt. and now she's [[collaborated]] at some [[revue]] shop so they're putting [[loaded]] [[celebrities]] [[guests]] [[star]] into the [[showing]], if they're in [[all]] episode it [[sort]] of [[wreck]] it. the [[programming]] just [[genuinely]] went downhill and lost its luster. i saw the [[latter]] episode. it had the [[aunties]] in it (Zelda was [[decreased]] to a candle) and she's about to [[obtain]] married but she runs off with Harvey the [[terminate]]. i [[could]] have liked to know what happened after. well [[haha]] my [[exam]] and the only thing i can [[said]] is the only thing that stayed it's appealing self through the seven years was Salem the cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 5404 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] at a 'sneak preview' and i [[must]] [[honestly]] [[confess]] that I do not like [[films]] with [[Meryl]] Streep that [[much]]. This [[picture]] was the [[worst]]. Half the [[theatre]] did not [[return]] after the [[break]] halfway the film. I [[couldnt]] [[blame]] them, if this wasn't a [[true]] [[story]] there had been [[absolutely]] no [[need]] for the second half of the [[picture]]. [[Just]] before the [[film]] goes forward in [[time]] about ten [[years]] I myself was [[expecting]] the [[credits]] to appear. I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] at a 'sneak preview' and i [[gotta]] [[truthfully]] [[concede]] that I do not like [[movies]] with [[Merrill]] Streep that [[very]]. This [[photo]] was the [[meanest]]. Half the [[theaters]] did not [[returnee]] after the [[blackout]] halfway the film. I [[didnt]] [[culpa]] them, if this wasn't a [[veritable]] [[tales]] there had been [[utterly]] no [[gotta]] for the second half of the [[imaging]]. [[Jen]] before the [[filmmaking]] goes forward in [[period]] about ten [[yrs]] I myself was [[awaits]] the [[credit]] to appear. --------------------------------------------- Result 5405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was well done in all respects. The acting is superb along with the fine audio soundtrack which I purchased because it was so moving. It is my all time favorite movie ahead of eastwoods "white hunter,black heart". This movie is simply the best.

cheers Zuf --------------------------------------------- Result 5406 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found this to be the most enjoyable Muppets movie, because I felt it was the most light-hearted and had the best comic delivery on most of its lines. The Muppets try to go on Broadway to sell an original musical they've written, but along the way, they run into the usual problems, including Kermit's memory loss here. While there aren't as many great cameos here as in the original "Muppets Movie," there are some including Joan Rivers and Dabney Coleman. Simply the timing and delivery of so many of the lines is great, and the situations the Muppets find themselves in are hilarious. The original songs are also good here, and the ending is satisfying. There is not much else to say about the film, but Muppet fans should see it for sure. It is the funniest Muppet movie and is sure to be enjoyed by all.

***1/2 out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Thats]] My [[Bush]] is first of all a very [[entertaining]] show by [[Parker]] and Stone, I thought. Its often very very funny, and its quite subversive and crazy. South Park fans would surely get something here.

Another surprise is the production value here. A lot of money must have been put into this, and it shows. A lot of expensive little details. Its not a little show. And Comedy Central is not an extremely rich channel, but they put a lot into this show obviously. In a way I understand that was the death of the show as well though, too costy. It surely could have been done cheaper and went on the will was there.

The critics liked it, and it had its little fanbase, but it failed gaining a big audience. As we know, the show stopped after 8 episodes, which I guess is almost 1 season.

As I really liked the show it has its faults. The problem of the show is kind of that it doesn't know what it wants to be really. Its like it tries to be a sitcom AND a parody of a sitcom at the same time. The actors do a good job, and some of them are well casted, but in my opinion they seem to not always get 100% the bizarre humor they're supposed to present.

I personally think that the show needed some characters that were more down to earth for the show to work. In South Park you have Kyle and Stan, that are kind of a realistic touch in the more looney universe. I think thats kind of what makes South Park work. You need some sane characters that you can relate to in a realistic way, and that makes the insane stuff so much more interesting too because that forces you to take them seriously at some level. If everything is archetypes and stereotypes its difficult to get emotionally included in the show, which really is Thats My Bush biggest problem. Kyle and Stan is characters in South Park that makes sense of the insanity in the show. We have nothing like that here, and this show suffers from it.

Another anchorpoint is Parker and Stones flirting with republicans. Its the only thing about them I don't really get what they're trying to do. Not portraying Bush as nothing else than a dumb Homer Simpsons lovable kind of character IS kind of subversive in a world where a lot of people that can't stand him and think he's the worst president since Nixon, and a parallel comedy world of Letterman and so on that only satirizes his every move... but its difficult to understand if Parker and Stone actually means anything by it. Its like the joke is on us, but somehow it doesn't hit the mark. It seems awkward, because it doesn't remind you of the real Bush at all.

Besides that I actually thought the show was very enjoyable. Some of the jokes in here are hilarious. The pro-life supporter who was a surviving aborted fetus is probably one of my favorite jokes by them in any show. And the show is packed with great material, and is sometimes insanely funny if you use your head a little while watching it. [[Haha]] My [[Busch]] is first of all a very [[droll]] show by [[Barker]] and Stone, I thought. Its often very very funny, and its quite subversive and crazy. South Park fans would surely get something here.

Another surprise is the production value here. A lot of money must have been put into this, and it shows. A lot of expensive little details. Its not a little show. And Comedy Central is not an extremely rich channel, but they put a lot into this show obviously. In a way I understand that was the death of the show as well though, too costy. It surely could have been done cheaper and went on the will was there.

The critics liked it, and it had its little fanbase, but it failed gaining a big audience. As we know, the show stopped after 8 episodes, which I guess is almost 1 season.

As I really liked the show it has its faults. The problem of the show is kind of that it doesn't know what it wants to be really. Its like it tries to be a sitcom AND a parody of a sitcom at the same time. The actors do a good job, and some of them are well casted, but in my opinion they seem to not always get 100% the bizarre humor they're supposed to present.

I personally think that the show needed some characters that were more down to earth for the show to work. In South Park you have Kyle and Stan, that are kind of a realistic touch in the more looney universe. I think thats kind of what makes South Park work. You need some sane characters that you can relate to in a realistic way, and that makes the insane stuff so much more interesting too because that forces you to take them seriously at some level. If everything is archetypes and stereotypes its difficult to get emotionally included in the show, which really is Thats My Bush biggest problem. Kyle and Stan is characters in South Park that makes sense of the insanity in the show. We have nothing like that here, and this show suffers from it.

Another anchorpoint is Parker and Stones flirting with republicans. Its the only thing about them I don't really get what they're trying to do. Not portraying Bush as nothing else than a dumb Homer Simpsons lovable kind of character IS kind of subversive in a world where a lot of people that can't stand him and think he's the worst president since Nixon, and a parallel comedy world of Letterman and so on that only satirizes his every move... but its difficult to understand if Parker and Stone actually means anything by it. Its like the joke is on us, but somehow it doesn't hit the mark. It seems awkward, because it doesn't remind you of the real Bush at all.

Besides that I actually thought the show was very enjoyable. Some of the jokes in here are hilarious. The pro-life supporter who was a surviving aborted fetus is probably one of my favorite jokes by them in any show. And the show is packed with great material, and is sometimes insanely funny if you use your head a little while watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First an explanation on what makes a great movie for me. Excitement about not knowing what is coming next will make me enjoy a movie the first time I watch it (case en point: Twister). There are also other things that go into a great first viewing such as good humor (John Candy in Uncle Buck and The Great Outdoors), good plot with good resolution (Madeline and Matilda), imaginative storytelling (all Star Wars episodes-George Lucas is THE MAN), and good music (again all Star Wars episodes, Wizard of Oz, Sound of Music). What makes me watch a movie at least six times in the theatre and buy a DVD or VHS tape? Characters. With that said, I present Cindy Lou Who and The Grinch. Excellent performance Taylor Momsen and Jim Carrey. The rest of the cast was very good, particularly Jeffery Tambor, Bill Irwin, Molly Shannon, Christine Baranski, and Josh Ryan Evans. But, every single scene with Cindy and The Grinch-together is excellent and very funny and/or heartwarming. Cindy Lou is my favorite character in this movie and the most compelling reason why the movie is better than the cartoon. The Grinch has a strong plot, good conflicts, and a very good theme (I can't get started because I don't want to spoil it). Jim Carrey was very funny as The Grinch-particularly when he interacted with Cindy. And the music! Wow! Excellent music by James Horner. I loved his selection of instruments and the compositions. Very good job Jim Carrey-I didn't know you could sing. Taylor Momsen! Whoa! Your voice is reason enough to see the movie at least once. On your solo - Where Are You Christmas - is your voice really as high as it sounds? Sounds like an F#? That is an obscene range for a 7-year old (obscene meant in the best possible way). Great job. This is the best performance by a child I have ever heard in a movie(Taylor beat out the Von Trapp Children-no small feat!). And now to the actors. Jim Carrey was great, funny, and, surprisingly very sensitive (this really showed through in his scenes with Taylor Momsen). Taylor Momsen's unspoken expressions(one of the secrets to a good acting performance) are very strong-she really becomes Cindy Lou Who. And when she does dialogue she is even stronger.

******************************danger:spoiler alert********************* ***********************************************************************

Examples: expression when she first sees The Grinch. This is a classic quote ("You're the the the" and then filled in with the Grinch line "da da da THE GRINCH-after which she topples into the sorter and then is rescued by The Grinch). The "Thanks for saving me" quote and subsequent response by The Grinch was also very good.

My favorite part of the movie is when Cindy invites The Grinch to be Holiday Cheermeister. This scene is two excellent actors at their best interacting and expressing with each other. Little Taylor Momsen completely holds her own with Jim Carrey in this spot. I sincerely hope we see Taylor Momsen in many more films to come. All in all everything was great about this movie (except maybe the feet and noses). --------------------------------------------- Result 5409 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The '60s is an [[occasionally]] entertaining film, most of this [[entertainment]] is from laughing at the film. It is [[extremely]] [[uneven]], and includes many [[annoying]] elements. [[Take]] for instance the switch between black & white, and color. [[If]] done [[right]], this [[could]] of been fairly [[effective]], but because it was [[done]] poorly , it turned into a nuisance and only detracted from the already bad [[experience]]; [[much]] of the film had an [[odd]] feel to it. The acting wasn't extremely [[bad]] for a made for TV [[flick]], but then again it was downright [[embarrassing]] at other times. Many of the events were not [[coherent]], and ending up being [[confusing]]. How did this family somehow end up being at many of the big events during the 1960's? The [[ending]] was much too sappy for my [[tastes]]; because it was hollywoodized, [[everything]] had to turn out right in the end. I would advise you to not waste your [[time]] on The '60s and do something [[else]] with your time. I'm glad I [[watched]] this in [[class]], and not on my own [[time]]. I think I can safely [[say]] that the [[best]] [[part]] of the [[movie]] was the inclusion of Bob Dylan's [[music]]. Those are just my rambling thoughts on the [[flick]]. I hope you take my [[advice]], and stay away from this. The '60s is an [[sometimes]] entertaining film, most of this [[amusement]] is from laughing at the film. It is [[highly]] [[spotty]], and includes many [[exasperating]] elements. [[Taking]] for instance the switch between black & white, and color. [[Though]] done [[rights]], this [[wo]] of been fairly [[efficient]], but because it was [[played]] poorly , it turned into a nuisance and only detracted from the already bad [[experiences]]; [[very]] of the film had an [[unusual]] feel to it. The acting wasn't extremely [[negative]] for a made for TV [[gesture]], but then again it was downright [[distracting]] at other times. Many of the events were not [[coherence]], and ending up being [[disconcerting]]. How did this family somehow end up being at many of the big events during the 1960's? The [[terminated]] was much too sappy for my [[flavors]]; because it was hollywoodized, [[eveything]] had to turn out right in the end. I would advise you to not waste your [[period]] on The '60s and do something [[further]] with your time. I'm glad I [[observed]] this in [[classroom]], and not on my own [[period]]. I think I can safely [[says]] that the [[better]] [[party]] of the [[filmmaking]] was the inclusion of Bob Dylan's [[musician]]. Those are just my rambling thoughts on the [[gesture]]. I hope you take my [[counsel]], and stay away from this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Mystery]] Men is one of those movies that [[gets]] funnier over time. There is a [[naive]] innocence and "niceness" to the [[characters]]. It has become [[part]] of our [[family]] "[[culture]]," and we quote the [[characters]] [[often]]. It is my favorite [[film]] of the [[last]] two [[years]]. My [[kids]] are 13 and 11 and we all three [[love]] this film. [[Great]] acting and [[comedy]]. We love Galaxy [[Quest]] and Monty Python flicks too. Okay, we're not talking intellectual here, just Family bonding! [[Conundrum]] Men is one of those movies that [[got]] funnier over time. There is a [[unsuspecting]] innocence and "niceness" to the [[features]]. It has become [[party]] of our [[families]] "[[civilisations]]," and we quote the [[nature]] [[normally]]. It is my favorite [[flick]] of the [[final]] two [[olds]]. My [[youths]] are 13 and 11 and we all three [[amour]] this film. [[Wondrous]] acting and [[comedian]]. We love Galaxy [[Looking]] and Monty Python flicks too. Okay, we're not talking intellectual here, just Family bonding! --------------------------------------------- Result 5411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[nominate]] this and [[BABYLON]] 5 as the best [[television]] sci-fi series made. Both stand out in my mind because unlike early STAR TREK series, there is a [[consistent]] [[evolution]] of plots and [[characters]]. If you [[look]] at the [[original]] STAR TREK and STAR TREK:TNG, they were fine [[shows]], but there was no overall [[theme]] or plot that [[connected]] all the episodes. [[In]] [[many]] [[ways]], you could [[usually]] watch the [[shows]] [[totally]] out of [[sequence]] with no [[difficulty]] [[understanding]] what is [[occurring]]. This was [[less]] the [[case]] with DEEP SPACE 9 (with its giant [[battles]] that [[took]] up all of the final season) and the other [[TREK]] [[shows]], as there was more of a [[larger]] [[story]] that [[unified]] them. This [[coherence]] [[seems]] to have [[developed]] as a [[concept]] with BABYLON 5 and [[saw]] this to an even [[greater]] extent with SG-1. The bottom line is that in [[many]] [[ways]] this [[series]] was like [[watching]] a [[family]] or a [[long]] novel slowly [[take]] form. [[Sure]], there were a few "throwaway" [[episodes]] that were not [[connected]] to the [[rest]], but these were very few and far between and were also [[usually]] pretty [[funny]].

And speaking of [[funny]], I [[loved]] that SG-1 [[kept]] the [[mood]] light from [[time]] to [[time]] and wasn't so [[dreadfully]] [[serious]]. [[In]] this way, I actually [[enjoyed]] it more than BABYLON 5. Jack O'Neill was a [[great]] character with his [[sarcasm]] and love of [[Homer]] Simpson--it's really too [[bad]] he slowly [[faded]] from the [[series]] in [[later]] seasons.

To truly appreciate SG-1, you should watch it from the [[beginning]] and see how intricately the plots [[work]]. This [[coherence]] [[gives]] the [[show]] [[exceptional]] [[staying]] power. And, if you don't like SG-1 after [[giving]] it a fair [[chance]], then sci-fi is [[probably]] NOT the [[genre]] for you. I [[nominating]] this and [[BABEL]] 5 as the best [[televisions]] sci-fi series made. Both stand out in my mind because unlike early STAR TREK series, there is a [[coherent]] [[developments]] of plots and [[features]]. If you [[gaze]] at the [[upfront]] STAR TREK and STAR TREK:TNG, they were fine [[illustrates]], but there was no overall [[themes]] or plot that [[related]] all the episodes. [[Onto]] [[multiple]] [[shapes]], you could [[often]] watch the [[show]] [[utterly]] out of [[sequences]] with no [[challenges]] [[fathom]] what is [[happening]]. This was [[lowest]] the [[example]] with DEEP SPACE 9 (with its giant [[combat]] that [[picked]] up all of the final season) and the other [[HIKING]] [[show]], as there was more of a [[bigger]] [[narratives]] that [[united]] them. This [[uniformity]] [[looks]] to have [[crafted]] as a [[concepts]] with BABYLON 5 and [[seen]] this to an even [[enhanced]] extent with SG-1. The bottom line is that in [[multiple]] [[methods]] this [[serials]] was like [[staring]] a [[families]] or a [[lengthy]] novel slowly [[taking]] form. [[Convinced]], there were a few "throwaway" [[bouts]] that were not [[related]] to the [[remainder]], but these were very few and far between and were also [[normally]] pretty [[fun]].

And speaking of [[humorous]], I [[cared]] that SG-1 [[conserved]] the [[humor]] light from [[moment]] to [[period]] and wasn't so [[hideously]] [[grievous]]. [[For]] this way, I actually [[adored]] it more than BABYLON 5. Jack O'Neill was a [[fantastic]] character with his [[satire]] and love of [[Homie]] Simpson--it's really too [[amiss]] he slowly [[dissipated]] from the [[serials]] in [[afterward]] seasons.

To truly appreciate SG-1, you should watch it from the [[start]] and see how intricately the plots [[jobs]]. This [[consistency]] [[donne]] the [[shows]] [[wondrous]] [[residing]] power. And, if you don't like SG-1 after [[conferring]] it a fair [[likelihood]], then sci-fi is [[indubitably]] NOT the [[type]] for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 5412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This film is an absolute classic for camp. That is why it was an Elvira and MST3000 classic. Everyone knows the [[story]]. [[Scientist]] [[keeps]] his girlfriend's [[head]] alive in a [[lasagna]] pan in his [[basement]] while he [[cruises]] town and [[tries]] to [[find]] her a [[body]] by checking out the local chicks. [[Finally]] he [[finds]] a real hourglass [[body]] with a scar-faced chick's head on top. The [[severed]] head makes [[friends]] with the failed [[experiment]] in the [[closet]] and the conehead comes out of the [[closet]] and rips off the assistant's remaining "[[good]]" arm (his other is not right from a scientist's earlier [[failure]]), and the [[whole]] [[place]] burns down.

The [[movie]] [[scared]] us so much as [[kids]] that my [[friend]] wouldn't [[go]] into his [[basement]] for a year after seeing it. As kids we ranked the scariest [[movies]] of all time and this one was number four. [[Only]] one of those [[scary]] movies was [[really]] any good (the [[Original]] "The Haunting".)

I had to [[give]] this movie a seven rating for the [[tremendous]] [[amount]] of entertainment value it [[offers]]. Its eerie effect because of the crappy production and the weird sexual angle when the scientist looks for the [[bodies]] (complete with porno sound track) scares the hell out of innocent children, while the ridiculous aspects make it prime material for watching talking and [[laughing]]. I could watch this film tonight and [[enjoy]] it while I'd rather go to the Dentist than watch "Chicago" again.

Seven is the most I can give it, because its entertainment value is mere luck. The film , as cinema, is a disaster. This film is an absolute classic for camp. That is why it was an Elvira and MST3000 classic. Everyone knows the [[narratives]]. [[Scholars]] [[retains]] his girlfriend's [[chief]] alive in a [[lasagne]] pan in his [[cellar]] while he [[cruise]] town and [[attempts]] to [[finds]] her a [[organs]] by checking out the local chicks. [[Lastly]] he [[discoveries]] a real hourglass [[bodies]] with a scar-faced chick's head on top. The [[clipped]] head makes [[friendships]] with the failed [[experimental]] in the [[wardrobe]] and the conehead comes out of the [[pantry]] and rips off the assistant's remaining "[[alright]]" arm (his other is not right from a scientist's earlier [[lack]]), and the [[ensemble]] [[placing]] burns down.

The [[cinematic]] [[startled]] us so much as [[kid]] that my [[boyfriend]] wouldn't [[going]] into his [[cellar]] for a year after seeing it. As kids we ranked the scariest [[cinema]] of all time and this one was number four. [[Solely]] one of those [[terrible]] movies was [[truly]] any good (the [[Preliminary]] "The Haunting".)

I had to [[lend]] this movie a seven rating for the [[sizable]] [[sums]] of entertainment value it [[offered]]. Its eerie effect because of the crappy production and the weird sexual angle when the scientist looks for the [[organs]] (complete with porno sound track) scares the hell out of innocent children, while the ridiculous aspects make it prime material for watching talking and [[kidding]]. I could watch this film tonight and [[enjoying]] it while I'd rather go to the Dentist than watch "Chicago" again.

Seven is the most I can give it, because its entertainment value is mere luck. The film , as cinema, is a disaster. --------------------------------------------- Result 5413 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having set the sitcom [[world]] alight with 'Father Ted' Arthur Matthews and Graham Linehan's next creation was a forgotten gem for the BBC called 'Hippies' Although created by the pair- the six scripts were written by Arthur Matthews alone.

Set in London in 1969- Ray Purbs, a hippy, is the editor of an anarchist magazine. His friends are his flat-mate, the very laid back and cannabis smoking Alex, his 'girlfriend' is feminist Jill and the none too bright Hugo.

Simon Pegg was [[superb]] as Ray, but he is superb in everything he is in. This sitcom had a feel of 'Citizen Smith' about it. [[Ray]] was very much like Wolfie Smith, [[trying]] to beat society, but failing miserably. At last this sitcom is going to be released on DVD in March, I can't wait to buy it. As it was on in 1999 and has yet been repeated on terrestrial television- my memories aren't too good of the sitcom, yet I remember two episodes really clearly, the first being the opener 'Protesting Hippies' which I thought was a great start- where Ray goes on a protest against sandpaper and the other episode was 'Hippy Dippy Hippies' which I think was episode 4, again quite a clear memory about the Police. Sadly, the sitcom got a negative reaction from viewers (I can't think why). The BBC commissioned another series, but Arthur Matthews decided against it because of the negative reaction. Oh well, I can't wait for the DVD.

Best Episode: Hippy Dippy Hippies- Series 1 episode 4. Having set the sitcom [[monde]] alight with 'Father Ted' Arthur Matthews and Graham Linehan's next creation was a forgotten gem for the BBC called 'Hippies' Although created by the pair- the six scripts were written by Arthur Matthews alone.

Set in London in 1969- Ray Purbs, a hippy, is the editor of an anarchist magazine. His friends are his flat-mate, the very laid back and cannabis smoking Alex, his 'girlfriend' is feminist Jill and the none too bright Hugo.

Simon Pegg was [[handsome]] as Ray, but he is superb in everything he is in. This sitcom had a feel of 'Citizen Smith' about it. [[Gleam]] was very much like Wolfie Smith, [[striving]] to beat society, but failing miserably. At last this sitcom is going to be released on DVD in March, I can't wait to buy it. As it was on in 1999 and has yet been repeated on terrestrial television- my memories aren't too good of the sitcom, yet I remember two episodes really clearly, the first being the opener 'Protesting Hippies' which I thought was a great start- where Ray goes on a protest against sandpaper and the other episode was 'Hippy Dippy Hippies' which I think was episode 4, again quite a clear memory about the Police. Sadly, the sitcom got a negative reaction from viewers (I can't think why). The BBC commissioned another series, but Arthur Matthews decided against it because of the negative reaction. Oh well, I can't wait for the DVD.

Best Episode: Hippy Dippy Hippies- Series 1 episode 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 5414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] From the moment Christopher Lee [[puts]] on a [[pair]] of [[punk]] [[sunglasses]] and tries to sneak into a [[punk]] [[rock]] club, you know you've [[got]] a [[stinker]] on your hands! This [[film]] had [[potential]]. Beneath all of the [[sludge]] there are the remnants of what [[could]] have been [[crafted]] into a decent [[film]], if not an interesting one. The final product is a [[real]] mess, however. Aside from the gratuitous nudity and some very [[attractive]] women, [[Howling]] [[II]] [[winds]] up being a laughable [[excuse]] for a horror film. Christopher Lee gives it a nugget of credibility, but even he cannot raise it above the level of crap.

Having never seen any of the other films in this [[series]], this critic will be [[forced]] to accept on [[face]] value that this is a genuine continuation of the [[events]] in part one. We [[start]] off at a funeral for one of the characters from the [[original]], and [[within]] the first ten minutes we [[find]] ourselves in Transylvania with a [[small]] [[group]] of heroes ready to battle a coven of werewolves. The [[film]] is paced fairly well, and there are not too [[many]] [[dead]] spots. The action is there; it just isn't [[filmed]] well. One bright spot is the [[music]] of a [[punk]] band [[called]] Babel. [[Though]] their song is played [[quite]] [[often]], it is rather catchy.

The problems with this film are great in number. First off, the acting is worse than pitiful. Christopher Lee is good [[enough]], but that's where it [[ends]]. The two leads Reb Brown and Annie McEnroe are [[lacking]] in just about everything you'd [[want]] for such characters. The [[writing]] is wretched, the editing redundant, and the direction amateurish. There are a couple nice [[special]] effect gimmicks, but the cheesy ones far out weigh them in number. Sybil Danning is nice to [[look]] at, but her acting performance is [[less]] than satisfactory. Judd Omen looks the part he plays, but his voice and acting are unconvincing to say the least. Much of the dialog is in an unintelligible language that may or may not be Latin.

I liked the [[general]] [[idea]] for the story. I always enjoy stories of true [[believers]] out to battle seemingly invincible forces of evil. One scene where a small group of good guys are trekking through a dark [[forest]] and shooting down a bunch of werewolves is even kind of exciting. Kind of. Maybe a bigger budget or a better director could have made the rest of the film a bit more compelling. 3 of 10 stars.

The Hound.

Side note: As of this writing, the censors at youtube.com have still not taken down the ending credits with Sybil Danning ripping off her top several times while the Babel song is playing! Catch it while you can! From the moment Christopher Lee [[begs]] on a [[doublet]] of [[thug]] [[shades]] and tries to sneak into a [[scoundrel]] [[boulder]] club, you know you've [[get]] a [[wanker]] on your hands! This [[filmmaking]] had [[prospective]]. Beneath all of the [[mire]] there are the remnants of what [[did]] have been [[devised]] into a decent [[filmmaking]], if not an interesting one. The final product is a [[veritable]] mess, however. Aside from the gratuitous nudity and some very [[tempting]] women, [[Shouting]] [[SECONDLY]] [[headwinds]] up being a laughable [[apologize]] for a horror film. Christopher Lee gives it a nugget of credibility, but even he cannot raise it above the level of crap.

Having never seen any of the other films in this [[serials]], this critic will be [[obliged]] to accept on [[encounter]] value that this is a genuine continuation of the [[phenomena]] in part one. We [[starting]] off at a funeral for one of the characters from the [[initial]], and [[inside]] the first ten minutes we [[found]] ourselves in Transylvania with a [[petit]] [[grouped]] of heroes ready to battle a coven of werewolves. The [[filmmaking]] is paced fairly well, and there are not too [[various]] [[die]] spots. The action is there; it just isn't [[videotaped]] well. One bright spot is the [[musica]] of a [[thug]] band [[termed]] Babel. [[Nevertheless]] their song is played [[perfectly]] [[usually]], it is rather catchy.

The problems with this film are great in number. First off, the acting is worse than pitiful. Christopher Lee is good [[suitably]], but that's where it [[end]]. The two leads Reb Brown and Annie McEnroe are [[missing]] in just about everything you'd [[wants]] for such characters. The [[literary]] is wretched, the editing redundant, and the direction amateurish. There are a couple nice [[particular]] effect gimmicks, but the cheesy ones far out weigh them in number. Sybil Danning is nice to [[glance]] at, but her acting performance is [[least]] than satisfactory. Judd Omen looks the part he plays, but his voice and acting are unconvincing to say the least. Much of the dialog is in an unintelligible language that may or may not be Latin.

I liked the [[overall]] [[ideals]] for the story. I always enjoy stories of true [[devotees]] out to battle seemingly invincible forces of evil. One scene where a small group of good guys are trekking through a dark [[woodlands]] and shooting down a bunch of werewolves is even kind of exciting. Kind of. Maybe a bigger budget or a better director could have made the rest of the film a bit more compelling. 3 of 10 stars.

The Hound.

Side note: As of this writing, the censors at youtube.com have still not taken down the ending credits with Sybil Danning ripping off her top several times while the Babel song is playing! Catch it while you can! --------------------------------------------- Result 5415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When In Rome is a definite improvement on Getting There. Getting There I [[found]] too predictable, contrived and slow, and to this day I still [[consider]] it as the Olsen twins' worst. However, while When In Rome isn't a [[terrible]] movie, it's not a great one either. If I had to sum it up in one word, I would say passable. It is good [[fun]] for [[teenagers]], but I think adults won't find much to go on.

When In Rome does have its good points. Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen are actually quite decent [[actresses]], [[certainly]] very pretty as well. I will admit when I was 10 or so, I really liked them, and in general I kind of like them still. And I have enjoyed some of their movies like Passport To Paris and New York Minute. Back on target, both [[girls]] don't do that bad a job, in fact they are very appealing. Plus their outfits are to die for, and the scenery of Rome is absolutely breathtaking. The soundtrack ain't half bad either.

However, where the film is brought down is in the plot and the script. The script is on the most part [[clichéd]] and has hints of deja vu. The plot, like most of the Mary Kate and Ashley movies, is very predictable, and anyone familiar with any other of the Olsen twins' work, will find some rather unoriginal elements to it. Most of the characters are [[cardboard]] thin, and you don't learn very much about them, and sometimes the pace is uneven. Sadly, the breathtaking scenery is spoilt by rather slapdash camera work, that looked rushed constantly.

All in all, does have its good points, and certainly watchable. However, for my taste, it is harmless and predictable teenage fluff. 4/10 Bethany [[Cox]] When In Rome is a definite improvement on Getting There. Getting There I [[detected]] too predictable, contrived and slow, and to this day I still [[scrutinize]] it as the Olsen twins' worst. However, while When In Rome isn't a [[excruciating]] movie, it's not a great one either. If I had to sum it up in one word, I would say passable. It is good [[funny]] for [[juvenile]], but I think adults won't find much to go on.

When In Rome does have its good points. Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen are actually quite decent [[actors]], [[undeniably]] very pretty as well. I will admit when I was 10 or so, I really liked them, and in general I kind of like them still. And I have enjoyed some of their movies like Passport To Paris and New York Minute. Back on target, both [[woman]] don't do that bad a job, in fact they are very appealing. Plus their outfits are to die for, and the scenery of Rome is absolutely breathtaking. The soundtrack ain't half bad either.

However, where the film is brought down is in the plot and the script. The script is on the most part [[clichés]] and has hints of deja vu. The plot, like most of the Mary Kate and Ashley movies, is very predictable, and anyone familiar with any other of the Olsen twins' work, will find some rather unoriginal elements to it. Most of the characters are [[luge]] thin, and you don't learn very much about them, and sometimes the pace is uneven. Sadly, the breathtaking scenery is spoilt by rather slapdash camera work, that looked rushed constantly.

All in all, does have its good points, and certainly watchable. However, for my taste, it is harmless and predictable teenage fluff. 4/10 Bethany [[Cocos]] --------------------------------------------- Result 5416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is one of the worst movies i've ever seen, but Hostel is definitely much more worse. This movie is more funny and ridiculous, than scary. I laughed most of the time when watched it. Low quality effects (when you gonna watch it, you'll understand what i'm talking about and HOW LOW quality is that), bad actors (i hear of them for the first time), and it seems like it's shot by an amateur camcorder (so it looks more like a TV show, than a movie). But at least i've had the patience to watch it till the end. Like comedies? Watch it. Wanna horror? Go watch Ju-On: The Grudge or some other good horror movie.

If i'm talking about the Legend of Diablo, i don't even know if i can classify it to a Horror genre. Just some low-budget crap.

I rate it 3 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[After]] having watched Koyaanisqatsi two or three dozen times and loving every second of it, I finally had a chance to see it's sequel [[Life]] In Transformation. I was [[truly]] dissappointed as it did not [[nearly]] stand up to the [[high]] [[standards]] of the first. 90 minutes of people with baskets on their head is not my idea of a [[good]] [[movie]]. The Philip [[Glass]] score for this one had [[neither]] the beauty nor the correlating strength of the first. Compared with Koyaanisqatsi this [[movie]] seemed slow and pointless. A [[watered]] down [[version]] of Baraka, which is the same idea but [[done]] better. I truly hope the third [[movie]] in this series will not follow the [[example]] of this [[waste]]. [[Upon]] having watched Koyaanisqatsi two or three dozen times and loving every second of it, I finally had a chance to see it's sequel [[Living]] In Transformation. I was [[honestly]] dissappointed as it did not [[roughly]] stand up to the [[higher]] [[standard]] of the first. 90 minutes of people with baskets on their head is not my idea of a [[alright]] [[flick]]. The Philip [[Glasses]] score for this one had [[either]] the beauty nor the correlating strength of the first. Compared with Koyaanisqatsi this [[filmmaking]] seemed slow and pointless. A [[depleted]] down [[stepping]] of Baraka, which is the same idea but [[effected]] better. I truly hope the third [[film]] in this series will not follow the [[instances]] of this [[wastes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is the most messed up [[entry]] on IMDb that I've [[yet]] to stumble across. All the previous reviewers act like this is the movie. This is [[NOT]] the [[movie]]. Rather it's merely a featurette that's an [[extra]] on the DVD of the movie "The One" It also [[nowhere]] near being the 90 minutes that it's listed here as. In actuality it's [[barely]] over 13 minutes of how cool [[Jet]] Li can do martial arts. and his reflections on the movie. So yeah this IMDb entry is [[quite]] a bit fubar. Don't listen to any of the other reviews as they are ALL [[wrong]]. You can trust me, because I never feed you, dear reader, BS.

and that's the truth. i guess u can say that i'm "the One" Reviewer that matters. This is the most messed up [[inlet]] on IMDb that I've [[nevertheless]] to stumble across. All the previous reviewers act like this is the movie. This is [[NAH]] the [[movies]]. Rather it's merely a featurette that's an [[additional]] on the DVD of the movie "The One" It also [[anywhere]] near being the 90 minutes that it's listed here as. In actuality it's [[hardly]] over 13 minutes of how cool [[Jett]] Li can do martial arts. and his reflections on the movie. So yeah this IMDb entry is [[rather]] a bit fubar. Don't listen to any of the other reviews as they are ALL [[inaccurate]]. You can trust me, because I never feed you, dear reader, BS.

and that's the truth. i guess u can say that i'm "the One" Reviewer that matters. --------------------------------------------- Result 5419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is an utter waste of time, the plot is awful, the dialogue is awful.

The acting is OK, but the actors have absolutely no plot or script to work with. The photography and some of the special effects are OK, too, but again there is nothing interesting in this movie to watch. There is no logical progression to the story, the story line is utter nonsense. It isn't even scary. For a movie to be scary, there has to be at least a small element of believability. This movie has no believability at all.

There are only three characters in the movie. Each character is shallow and has no personality.

Most of the special effects and make up work are both badly done, or at most mediocre.

I hope you read this and do not waste time on this movie unless you are curious to see an entirely awful movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5420 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[If]], in the [[first]] 10 [[minutes]] of this [[film]], you don't [[realize]] that the main [[character]], who [[writes]] a [[life]] [[advice]] column, is [[going]] to have the tables-oh-so-cleverly-turned and [[learn]] some [[valuable]] [[life]] lessons himself, then there is [[probably]] something wrong with you. The set up is so [[predictable]] as to ruin the [[movie]], [[even]] if the rest of the [[movie]] was good (which it isn't)

There's almost no chemistry between the [[leads]], and Steve Carell's stalker-ish behavior is embarrassing, not [[funny]]. It's hard to believe Binoche's character would have any interest in him. Then in the end it's all wrapped up so wonderful and everyone [[lives]] [[happily]] ever after. Isn't that great [[America]]! [[Though]], in the [[fiirst]] 10 [[mins]] of this [[filmmaking]], you don't [[realising]] that the main [[personage]], who [[writing]] a [[living]] [[counsels]] column, is [[go]] to have the tables-oh-so-cleverly-turned and [[learning]] some [[precious]] [[lives]] lessons himself, then there is [[unquestionably]] something wrong with you. The set up is so [[foreseeable]] as to ruin the [[films]], [[yet]] if the rest of the [[cinematographic]] was good (which it isn't)

There's almost no chemistry between the [[leeds]], and Steve Carell's stalker-ish behavior is embarrassing, not [[comical]]. It's hard to believe Binoche's character would have any interest in him. Then in the end it's all wrapped up so wonderful and everyone [[inhabits]] [[joyfully]] ever after. Isn't that great [[Americas]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5421 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Although [[properly]] [[warned]] I actually sat down to watch this movie. [[In]] part because I [[usually]] give every [[movie]] an [[even]] [[break]], and because I thought that a single movie couldn't be that bad. I stand corrected. Not even George Kennedy, Barry Bostwick or Ben Stein could save this [[turkey]] from sinking like a ton of bricks. Only once during this humor forsaken travesty of a spoof did I laugh. [[Namely]] during the Simon [[says]] scene. The other jokes are either poorly carried out or [[simply]] plain unfunny. And some of them you actually see coming a mile away. This [[movie]] just hasn't got what it [[takes]] to be a [[good]] parody like [[Airplane]]! (I+II), Naked [[Gun]] (I+II+III), or [[Scary]] [[Movie]]. They all had A. [[funny]] gags, B. good dialog and most [[important]] of all C. unforgettable quotes. Men [[In]] [[White]] has [[got]] D. [[none]] of the above. To [[call]] this [[movie]] [[bad]] [[would]] be a [[gross]] understatement. [[AVOID]] THIS [[MOVIE]] ANYWAY [[YOU]] CAN! CONSIDER [[YOURSELVES]] [[WARNED]]! Although [[satisfactorily]] [[alerted]] I actually sat down to watch this movie. [[During]] part because I [[routinely]] give every [[flick]] an [[yet]] [[interruption]], and because I thought that a single movie couldn't be that bad. I stand corrected. Not even George Kennedy, Barry Bostwick or Ben Stein could save this [[ankara]] from sinking like a ton of bricks. Only once during this humor forsaken travesty of a spoof did I laugh. [[Notably]] during the Simon [[asserts]] scene. The other jokes are either poorly carried out or [[straightforward]] plain unfunny. And some of them you actually see coming a mile away. This [[filmmaking]] just hasn't got what it [[pick]] to be a [[buena]] parody like [[Airplanes]]! (I+II), Naked [[Firearms]] (I+II+III), or [[Fearful]] [[Flick]]. They all had A. [[comical]] gags, B. good dialog and most [[substantial]] of all C. unforgettable quotes. Men [[During]] [[Blanca]] has [[gets]] D. [[nos]] of the above. To [[invitation]] this [[flick]] [[unfavourable]] [[should]] be a [[flagrant]] understatement. [[STAVE]] THIS [[CINEMATOGRAPHIC]] ANYWAY [[DOYOU]] CAN! CONSIDER [[THEMSELVES]] [[ALERTED]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5422 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[watched]] this movie last night on one of the pay-per-view channels, and while watching it I quickly [[wondered]] why I bothered. In all honesty I really did [[expect]] [[something]] more from this film. Maybe something along the lines of 'Conspiracy Theory'. Why? Maybe because of the casting. I mean, Nicolas Cage and Harvey Keitel, after all. Not to mention Jon Voight and Christopher Plummer. Now I'm [[wondering]], why did they bother? But [[instead]] of an absorbing action cum mystery [[drama]] I was [[caught]] up in a pastiche of breakneck [[silliness]] a là 'The Goonies', which to my great surprise appears to have garnered some actual critical praise. Perhaps it's because 'The Goonies' was clearly targeted toward the pre-teen and teen audiences. Whereas 'National Treasure', judging from the previews, was seriously intended to appeal to an adult audience.

Suspension of disbelief is one thing. It's how one can enjoy sci-fi and horror. But I found myself actually resisting the heaping tablespoons of paranoid and conspiracy-laden tripe being shoved at the audience. Oh, the screenwriter threw around all the jargon intended to evoke a sense of serious engaged wonderment. "Wow! The Masons. The Knights Templars. You know, this could really be true!" I think the writer really lost me when Gates said the Founding Fathers hid the treasure to keep it out of the hands of the British! And just were did the Knights Templar come from? New Jersey? Oh, I forget. From France! Which goes a long way to explain how it ended up in Philadelphia during the Revolution. It was brought there by agents of Napoleon! Anyway, you see what I'm getting at. The premise of the movie is interesting. And I really do think it could have succeeded as a serious mystery drama. But it just comes off as another kid flick in grown-up clothing. In the end I think it asks the audience not simply to suspend belief but to render itself willfully ignorant to an [[insulting]] degree.

I've just finished watching several items by Werner Herzog and Istvan Szabo. It's a shock to switch from fine dining to Hollywood Big Mac and fries.

Okay, okay. If you pant over chases, explosions, and 'gee-whiz' gimmickry you'll enjoy 'National Treasure'. But it's the sort of movie, well, have you ever stood outside a cinema waiting to get in while the previous audience comes out? And all the young kids are talking excitedly among themselves and saying things like, "Wow! Did you see how that thing blew up? That was so cool!" 'National Treasure' is that kind of movie. I [[saw]] this movie last night on one of the pay-per-view channels, and while watching it I quickly [[asked]] why I bothered. In all honesty I really did [[expects]] [[somethings]] more from this film. Maybe something along the lines of 'Conspiracy Theory'. Why? Maybe because of the casting. I mean, Nicolas Cage and Harvey Keitel, after all. Not to mention Jon Voight and Christopher Plummer. Now I'm [[ask]], why did they bother? But [[however]] of an absorbing action cum mystery [[tragedy]] I was [[capturing]] up in a pastiche of breakneck [[hilarity]] a là 'The Goonies', which to my great surprise appears to have garnered some actual critical praise. Perhaps it's because 'The Goonies' was clearly targeted toward the pre-teen and teen audiences. Whereas 'National Treasure', judging from the previews, was seriously intended to appeal to an adult audience.

Suspension of disbelief is one thing. It's how one can enjoy sci-fi and horror. But I found myself actually resisting the heaping tablespoons of paranoid and conspiracy-laden tripe being shoved at the audience. Oh, the screenwriter threw around all the jargon intended to evoke a sense of serious engaged wonderment. "Wow! The Masons. The Knights Templars. You know, this could really be true!" I think the writer really lost me when Gates said the Founding Fathers hid the treasure to keep it out of the hands of the British! And just were did the Knights Templar come from? New Jersey? Oh, I forget. From France! Which goes a long way to explain how it ended up in Philadelphia during the Revolution. It was brought there by agents of Napoleon! Anyway, you see what I'm getting at. The premise of the movie is interesting. And I really do think it could have succeeded as a serious mystery drama. But it just comes off as another kid flick in grown-up clothing. In the end I think it asks the audience not simply to suspend belief but to render itself willfully ignorant to an [[pejorative]] degree.

I've just finished watching several items by Werner Herzog and Istvan Szabo. It's a shock to switch from fine dining to Hollywood Big Mac and fries.

Okay, okay. If you pant over chases, explosions, and 'gee-whiz' gimmickry you'll enjoy 'National Treasure'. But it's the sort of movie, well, have you ever stood outside a cinema waiting to get in while the previous audience comes out? And all the young kids are talking excitedly among themselves and saying things like, "Wow! Did you see how that thing blew up? That was so cool!" 'National Treasure' is that kind of movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5423 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[first]] [[film]] was a [[nice]] one, but it is not as good as the [[wonderful]] animated classic which I found more poignant and endearing. This sequel is inferior, but not [[bad]] at all. [[Sure]] the slapstick is too much, the script has its [[weak]] [[spots]] and the [[plot]] is a tad uninspired. But the dogs are very cute here, and Eric Idle is [[hilarious]] as the macaw. The [[film]] is nice to [[look]] at with stylish [[cinematography]] and [[eye]] popping costumes([[especially]] Cruella's), and the music is [[pleasant]]. The acting is [[mostly]] very good, [[Ioan]] Gruffudd is [[appealing]] and Gerard Depardieu while he has [[given]] better performances has fun as Cruella's accomplice. But the best asset, as it was with the first [[film]], is the [[amazing]] [[Glenn]] [[Close]] in a [[deliciously]] over-the-top performance as Cruella, [[even]] more evil than she was [[previously]]. [[Overall]], nice. 7/10 Bethany Cox The [[fiirst]] [[kino]] was a [[pleasurable]] one, but it is not as good as the [[magnifique]] animated classic which I found more poignant and endearing. This sequel is inferior, but not [[unhealthy]] at all. [[Convinced]] the slapstick is too much, the script has its [[flimsy]] [[stains]] and the [[intrigue]] is a tad uninspired. But the dogs are very cute here, and Eric Idle is [[humorous]] as the macaw. The [[cinematography]] is nice to [[peek]] at with stylish [[cinematographic]] and [[eyes]] popping costumes([[namely]] Cruella's), and the music is [[nice]]. The acting is [[essentially]] very good, [[Ewan]] Gruffudd is [[tempting]] and Gerard Depardieu while he has [[yielded]] better performances has fun as Cruella's accomplice. But the best asset, as it was with the first [[movies]], is the [[wondrous]] [[Gould]] [[Nears]] in a [[exquisitely]] over-the-top performance as Cruella, [[yet]] more evil than she was [[earlier]]. [[Total]], nice. 7/10 Bethany Cox --------------------------------------------- Result 5424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The Mummy's Tomb starts with a review of the events in The Mummy's Hand and then moves the story forward several years and across the [[ocean]] to the United States of America where the current high [[priest]] and the [[mummy]] Kharis set out to wreak havoc and take revenge on those who violated the tomb in the past.

While I absolutely [[loved]] "The Mummy" with Boris Karloff as the mummy Imhotep, and quite liked "The Mummy's Hand" with Tom [[Tyler]] as Kharis (which is the direct prequel to this film), I was not as taken with "The Mummy's Tomb".

It is [[made]] in a similar style as the previous [[film]] and has a somewhat similar plot [[albeit]] in a [[new]] [[setting]]. Lon Chaney Jr is okay as Kharis, but doesn't really stand out. And I guess that's my main criticism of this movie-that [[nothing]] really stands out. There's nothing really terrible here, but nothing really [[outstanding]] [[either]], so the viewer is [[left]] with a rather bland mummy's [[tale]]. The Mummy's Tomb starts with a review of the events in The Mummy's Hand and then moves the story forward several years and across the [[oceana]] to the United States of America where the current high [[pastor]] and the [[maman]] Kharis set out to wreak havoc and take revenge on those who violated the tomb in the past.

While I absolutely [[cared]] "The Mummy" with Boris Karloff as the mummy Imhotep, and quite liked "The Mummy's Hand" with Tom [[Ty]] as Kharis (which is the direct prequel to this film), I was not as taken with "The Mummy's Tomb".

It is [[effected]] in a similar style as the previous [[filmmaking]] and has a somewhat similar plot [[notwithstanding]] in a [[nuevo]] [[settings]]. Lon Chaney Jr is okay as Kharis, but doesn't really stand out. And I guess that's my main criticism of this movie-that [[nada]] really stands out. There's nothing really terrible here, but nothing really [[marvellous]] [[neither]], so the viewer is [[gauche]] with a rather bland mummy's [[history]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have [[always]] liked this [[comedy]] as one of the few ever seriously trying to [[deal]] with the U.S. Government's yearly demand for taxes. Ever read a [[tax]] [[code]]?: it is quite a trial to follow it's multiple clauses that our congressmen and senators push in to help their financial backers and various interest groups. Despite claims that it is fair, the tax [[code]] has always laid the lion [[share]] of the burden on the middle and working classes rather than the [[rich]] and influential. [[Most]] of the various special clauses are meant for their use - go through the average 1040 or 1040A form and look at the variety of different investment and business ventures all of which have a different set of rules. Most people will never have any use for these.

The story here is that a wealthy landowner (Philip Ober) uses his influence to tip off the IRS that his neighbors (Paul Douglas and Una Merkle) have not payed taxes in 20 years. The Baltimore office of the IRS is under Fred Clarke, and he is snapping to attention for Ober with his influence. He sends Tony Randall to check out the situation.

Randall finds that Douglas, Merkle, and their three girls and two boys are pretty decent people, who rarely have need for cash (they get along on their farm produce and barter with their neighbors). But Randall, trained in the clear (to the IRS) lines of the tax code tries to pin down the family to fundamentals. But gradually Douglas notes that Reynolds is fond of Randall, and he keeps sidetracking Randall from his chore, eventually getting him drunk. He also makes it difficult for Randall to leave by having the motor of his car removed "for repairs" by his two sons.

The plot follows the growing attraction and frictions between urban, vaguely ambitious Randall, and countryside, life loving Reynolds. They make a cute couple actually. Eventually, after Ober complains, Randall is sent back in disgrace and Clarke (a tougher cookie) gets down to brass tacks. And comes up with a very large tax bill, that will possibly ruin Douglas's family.

The film does not end there - it does end happily, but it does remind us that the power to tax is the power to destroy, and that the Government does, all too frequently, go in for destruction. A chance in a million reversal saves the family, but it is so rare that we know it is just a dramatic trick. More realistic is how Clarke's boss, (Charles Lane) cuts to the essence regarding Ober's "help" by suggesting that next year his taxes will be looked at more carefully. After that Ober is rather green. I have [[repeatedly]] liked this [[charade]] as one of the few ever seriously trying to [[addressing]] with the U.S. Government's yearly demand for taxes. Ever read a [[taxes]] [[ciphers]]?: it is quite a trial to follow it's multiple clauses that our congressmen and senators push in to help their financial backers and various interest groups. Despite claims that it is fair, the tax [[coding]] has always laid the lion [[sharing]] of the burden on the middle and working classes rather than the [[storied]] and influential. [[Anymore]] of the various special clauses are meant for their use - go through the average 1040 or 1040A form and look at the variety of different investment and business ventures all of which have a different set of rules. Most people will never have any use for these.

The story here is that a wealthy landowner (Philip Ober) uses his influence to tip off the IRS that his neighbors (Paul Douglas and Una Merkle) have not payed taxes in 20 years. The Baltimore office of the IRS is under Fred Clarke, and he is snapping to attention for Ober with his influence. He sends Tony Randall to check out the situation.

Randall finds that Douglas, Merkle, and their three girls and two boys are pretty decent people, who rarely have need for cash (they get along on their farm produce and barter with their neighbors). But Randall, trained in the clear (to the IRS) lines of the tax code tries to pin down the family to fundamentals. But gradually Douglas notes that Reynolds is fond of Randall, and he keeps sidetracking Randall from his chore, eventually getting him drunk. He also makes it difficult for Randall to leave by having the motor of his car removed "for repairs" by his two sons.

The plot follows the growing attraction and frictions between urban, vaguely ambitious Randall, and countryside, life loving Reynolds. They make a cute couple actually. Eventually, after Ober complains, Randall is sent back in disgrace and Clarke (a tougher cookie) gets down to brass tacks. And comes up with a very large tax bill, that will possibly ruin Douglas's family.

The film does not end there - it does end happily, but it does remind us that the power to tax is the power to destroy, and that the Government does, all too frequently, go in for destruction. A chance in a million reversal saves the family, but it is so rare that we know it is just a dramatic trick. More realistic is how Clarke's boss, (Charles Lane) cuts to the essence regarding Ober's "help" by suggesting that next year his taxes will be looked at more carefully. After that Ober is rather green. --------------------------------------------- Result 5426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I waited ages before seeing this as all the [[reviews]] I read of this [[said]] it was horrible! i rented it expecting the worst, and while it is hardly the best sandler film out there, there are much worse! Sandler [[frequently]] talks to the camera and the film does not take itself seriously, but that is all part of the [[fun]]! A [[great]] way to waste an afternoon, and you might even find yourself laughing once a twice! A good film, well worth renting! I waited ages before seeing this as all the [[exam]] I read of this [[asserted]] it was horrible! i rented it expecting the worst, and while it is hardly the best sandler film out there, there are much worse! Sandler [[periodically]] talks to the camera and the film does not take itself seriously, but that is all part of the [[funny]]! A [[wondrous]] way to waste an afternoon, and you might even find yourself laughing once a twice! A good film, well worth renting! --------------------------------------------- Result 5427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first see this film almost 21 years ago when it was an ITV (before the days of cable and satellite) Matinée. i was off School with the Mumps and i was totally wrapped in the film. i have had it on bought video for about 10 years and i want to obtain a DVD copy of it. David Niven is my all time favourite actor and i think it is a travesty that he was over looked so many times when the Oscars came around. i also think that the queen should have knighted him as he easily did as much for the movie industry if not more than Sean Connery or Anthony Hopkins. the way the film switches from black and white to colour and back again is well done and the film has such stellar actors as Roger Livesy, Marius Goring and an early appearance from Richard Attenborough. --------------------------------------------- Result 5428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Oliver! the musical is a favorite of mine. The music, the characters, the story. It all just seems [[perfect]]. In this [[rendition]] of the timeless classic novel turned stage musical, director Carol Reed brings the Broadway hit to life on the movie screen.

The [[transition]] from musical to movie musical is not an [[easy]] one. You have to have the right voices, the right set, the right script, and the right play. All signs point to yes for this play. It [[almost]] appears that it was written for the screen!

Our story takes place in jolly old England where a boy named Oliver manages to work his way out of the orphanage. He winds his way through the country to London where he meets up with a group of juvenile delinquents, headed by Dodger, the smart talking, quick handed pick-pocket. The leader of this gang is named Fagin, an older fellow who sells all the stolen goods.

But all is not well in London town when Bill Sykes played by Oliver Reed and his loving girlfriend Nancy get tangled up with Oliver, Fagin and his young troops, and the law. What ensues is a marvelous tale of love, affection, and great musical numbers.

Whether or not you like musicals or not, one listen to these tunes and you will be humming them all day long. Oliver! is a triumph on and off the stage and is a [[timeless]] [[work]] of art. Oliver! the musical is a favorite of mine. The music, the characters, the story. It all just seems [[faultless]]. In this [[extradition]] of the timeless classic novel turned stage musical, director Carol Reed brings the Broadway hit to life on the movie screen.

The [[changeover]] from musical to movie musical is not an [[simple]] one. You have to have the right voices, the right set, the right script, and the right play. All signs point to yes for this play. It [[hardly]] appears that it was written for the screen!

Our story takes place in jolly old England where a boy named Oliver manages to work his way out of the orphanage. He winds his way through the country to London where he meets up with a group of juvenile delinquents, headed by Dodger, the smart talking, quick handed pick-pocket. The leader of this gang is named Fagin, an older fellow who sells all the stolen goods.

But all is not well in London town when Bill Sykes played by Oliver Reed and his loving girlfriend Nancy get tangled up with Oliver, Fagin and his young troops, and the law. What ensues is a marvelous tale of love, affection, and great musical numbers.

Whether or not you like musicals or not, one listen to these tunes and you will be humming them all day long. Oliver! is a triumph on and off the stage and is a [[perpetual]] [[jobs]] of art. --------------------------------------------- Result 5429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This is a tongue in cheek movie from the very outset with a voice-over that pokes fun at everything French and then [[produces]] a rather naif but very [[brave]] hero in Fanfan [[La]] Tulipe. Portrayed by the [[splendid]] Gerard Philippe, the dashing young man [[believes]] [[utterly]] in the [[fate]] curvaceous Lollobrigida foretells - [[notably]] that he will [[marry]] King Louis XV's daughter! Problem is, [[La]] Lollo [[soon]] [[find]] outs she too is in [[love]] with Fanfan...

[[Propelled]] by good sword fights, cavalcades, and other [[spirited]] action sequences the film moves at a brisk pace and with [[many]] [[comic]] [[moments]]. The direction is perhaps the [[weakest]] aspect but the film is so [[light]] and takes itself so un-seriously that I could not give those shortcomings a second [[thought]]. Look out for Noel Roquevert, a [[traditional]] heavy in French films, [[trying]] to [[steal]] [[La]] Lollo, [[making]] himself a nuisance, and [[feeding]] the script to the fortune [[teller]] that reads La Lollo's hand! And what a gem Marcel Herrand is as the megalomanous and lust-driven [[King]] Louis XV! That is not all: [[So]] many [[beautiful]] [[women]] in one [[film]] makes me wish I were in France and on the set back in 1952! The [[film]] may have [[come]] out that year but its verve, cheek, superb narration, [[immaculate]] photography and the memorable Gerard [[Philippe]] [[ensure]] that it [[remains]] modern and a [[pleasure]] to watch. I [[would]] not [[hesitate]] to recommend it to my grandchildren let alone to anyone who loves movies in general and swashbucklers in [[particular]]! Do see it! This is a tongue in cheek movie from the very outset with a voice-over that pokes fun at everything French and then [[begets]] a rather naif but very [[plucky]] hero in Fanfan [[Angeles]] Tulipe. Portrayed by the [[funky]] Gerard Philippe, the dashing young man [[thinks]] [[quite]] in the [[destiny]] curvaceous Lollobrigida foretells - [[specifically]] that he will [[marie]] King Louis XV's daughter! Problem is, [[Las]] Lollo [[expeditiously]] [[found]] outs she too is in [[iove]] with Fanfan...

[[Driven]] by good sword fights, cavalcades, and other [[plucky]] action sequences the film moves at a brisk pace and with [[several]] [[comedian]] [[times]]. The direction is perhaps the [[fewer]] aspect but the film is so [[lighting]] and takes itself so un-seriously that I could not give those shortcomings a second [[idea]]. Look out for Noel Roquevert, a [[conventional]] heavy in French films, [[striving]] to [[theft]] [[Las]] Lollo, [[doing]] himself a nuisance, and [[dietary]] the script to the fortune [[cashier]] that reads La Lollo's hand! And what a gem Marcel Herrand is as the megalomanous and lust-driven [[Emperor]] Louis XV! That is not all: [[Accordingly]] many [[leggy]] [[female]] in one [[films]] makes me wish I were in France and on the set back in 1952! The [[cinema]] may have [[arriving]] out that year but its verve, cheek, superb narration, [[spotless]] photography and the memorable Gerard [[Philip]] [[ensuring]] that it [[remained]] modern and a [[gladness]] to watch. I [[could]] not [[dither]] to recommend it to my grandchildren let alone to anyone who loves movies in general and swashbucklers in [[peculiar]]! Do see it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5430 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Everyone, my name may sound weird, but there was nothing [[else]]!

Any way, I haven't seen anything like this before so it was crazy! Of course that's a good thing. It is a humorously interesting movie and my absolute all time [[favourite]] thing is how they intertwine other things into one! Like chicken little,, the fish pretending to be King Kong and Runt the pig saying, "Twas [[beauty]] who killed the beast", [[War]] of the [[worlds]] scene and more. Walt Disney company has [[NOT]] [[lost]] his [[touch]] maybe not for this one. Also, how they made it like they were watching a movie and it was like a home cinema.

However some parts don't fit. Like in the original lion king, weren't Timon and Pumbaa with Simba when he beat Scar? In this movie, they are not! they were fighting the hyenas backstage. Ther's more, the reason being why Pumbaa isn't so confident is because he was pushed away by the other animals and also, it's just Timon, Timon, Timon. Anybody realise that only Timonn's story was told, whereas pumbaa only had flashbacks?

But apart from that , IT"S [[GREAT]]! Everyone, my name may sound weird, but there was nothing [[further]]!

Any way, I haven't seen anything like this before so it was crazy! Of course that's a good thing. It is a humorously interesting movie and my absolute all time [[preferred]] thing is how they intertwine other things into one! Like chicken little,, the fish pretending to be King Kong and Runt the pig saying, "Twas [[beaut]] who killed the beast", [[Wars]] of the [[universes]] scene and more. Walt Disney company has [[NOPE]] [[forfeited]] his [[toque]] maybe not for this one. Also, how they made it like they were watching a movie and it was like a home cinema.

However some parts don't fit. Like in the original lion king, weren't Timon and Pumbaa with Simba when he beat Scar? In this movie, they are not! they were fighting the hyenas backstage. Ther's more, the reason being why Pumbaa isn't so confident is because he was pushed away by the other animals and also, it's just Timon, Timon, Timon. Anybody realise that only Timonn's story was told, whereas pumbaa only had flashbacks?

But apart from that , IT"S [[WONDROUS]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] It would [[require]] the beauty and eloquence of Shakespeare to do justice to this [[outstanding]] cinematic feat. Nevertheless, I'll give it a go.

As far as adaptations of Hamlet go this one is already at a better starting point than all other versions since it encompasses the [[entire]] play. Still this is no [[guarantee]] for a first-rate movie, or even a good one. [[Usually]] I'm not much for movies that are overlong and the trend that seems to be prevalent in Hollywood [[today]], namely that movies should be at least two hours [[long]], preferably three, is one that hopefully won't last long. Few stories are strong enough to withstand such extensive exploration and could do with some cutting. Making a four-hour-long movie and keeping it interesting is no small undertaking, but Kenneth Branagh pulls it off with flying colours. He has managed to make a very long movie seem no more than any average movie. I was completely engrossed from start to finish.

The cast is [[excellent]] with Kenneth Branagh himself as the tormented prince giving a [[strong]] and [[memorable]] performance. He manages to convey his feelings admirably through his voice and one does not have to be an expert on Shakespearean verse to catch the myriad of emotions that are waging inside him. Kate Winslet was a positive [[surprise]], I must say. I didn't know what to [[expect]] really. I've always liked her well enough as an actor, but wasn't sure she could pull off playing Shakespeare. Well, she certainly [[eradicated]] all [[doubts]] with her performance. She is the [[best]] Ophelia I have [[seen]] and lent such depth to the character and was [[simply]] [[wonderful]]. Other [[brilliant]] performances are Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Richard Briers as Polonius and Nicholas Farrell as Horatio to name but a few. I [[liked]] the [[fact]] that Branagh [[used]] some [[internationally]] more famous [[stars]] to [[play]] in some of the [[minor]] [[roles]]; I [[especially]] [[enjoyed]] the sparring between Hamlet and the gravedigger played by Billy Crystal.

The [[setting]] of the play in the 19th century gives a [[welcome]] change to the [[usually]] gloomier [[Gothic]] settings. It is overall much lighter than other versions I've seen, more colourful and lavish, but this does not [[distract]] from the tragedy of the play. It is exceptional, stylish and aesthetically pleasing, a definite delight to the eye and other senses as well. The music by Patrick Doyle is as always magical and thoroughly in tune with the movie. One can only feel a deep sense of satisfaction after having seen this. I am shocked and appalled that this exquisite work of art did not win an Academy award for best picture, even more so that it wasn't even nominated. There is no way there was a better movie made that year, or any other year for that matter. This is as close to perfection as you can hope to get.

To sum up, a stunning work of pure genius and I cannot see how anyone could top this. My hat's off to you Mr. Branagh. It would [[demands]] the beauty and eloquence of Shakespeare to do justice to this [[unresolved]] cinematic feat. Nevertheless, I'll give it a go.

As far as adaptations of Hamlet go this one is already at a better starting point than all other versions since it encompasses the [[whole]] play. Still this is no [[assurance]] for a first-rate movie, or even a good one. [[Typically]] I'm not much for movies that are overlong and the trend that seems to be prevalent in Hollywood [[thursday]], namely that movies should be at least two hours [[longue]], preferably three, is one that hopefully won't last long. Few stories are strong enough to withstand such extensive exploration and could do with some cutting. Making a four-hour-long movie and keeping it interesting is no small undertaking, but Kenneth Branagh pulls it off with flying colours. He has managed to make a very long movie seem no more than any average movie. I was completely engrossed from start to finish.

The cast is [[wondrous]] with Kenneth Branagh himself as the tormented prince giving a [[vigorous]] and [[landmark]] performance. He manages to convey his feelings admirably through his voice and one does not have to be an expert on Shakespearean verse to catch the myriad of emotions that are waging inside him. Kate Winslet was a positive [[surprises]], I must say. I didn't know what to [[awaited]] really. I've always liked her well enough as an actor, but wasn't sure she could pull off playing Shakespeare. Well, she certainly [[deleted]] all [[suspicions]] with her performance. She is the [[better]] Ophelia I have [[noticed]] and lent such depth to the character and was [[mere]] [[funky]]. Other [[wondrous]] performances are Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Richard Briers as Polonius and Nicholas Farrell as Horatio to name but a few. I [[wished]] the [[facto]] that Branagh [[using]] some [[globally]] more famous [[superstar]] to [[gaming]] in some of the [[small]] [[functions]]; I [[peculiarly]] [[loved]] the sparring between Hamlet and the gravedigger played by Billy Crystal.

The [[configure]] of the play in the 19th century gives a [[salute]] change to the [[generally]] gloomier [[Goth]] settings. It is overall much lighter than other versions I've seen, more colourful and lavish, but this does not [[entertain]] from the tragedy of the play. It is exceptional, stylish and aesthetically pleasing, a definite delight to the eye and other senses as well. The music by Patrick Doyle is as always magical and thoroughly in tune with the movie. One can only feel a deep sense of satisfaction after having seen this. I am shocked and appalled that this exquisite work of art did not win an Academy award for best picture, even more so that it wasn't even nominated. There is no way there was a better movie made that year, or any other year for that matter. This is as close to perfection as you can hope to get.

To sum up, a stunning work of pure genius and I cannot see how anyone could top this. My hat's off to you Mr. Branagh. --------------------------------------------- Result 5432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Wow]]... I mean WOW this has [[got]] to be one of the [[best]] story's I've ever had the [[chance]] to read/watch. We all know this [[famous]] [[story]]. Two martial artist, a [[man]] and his son, go to [[train]] in the [[forbidden]] [[Cursed]] Springs and while [[ignoring]] their [[warnings]] they both [[fall]] in a spring each. The [[dad]], Genma, the [[spring]] of drowned Panda. And 16 [[year]] old Ranma, the spring of drowned [[girl]]. Now with [[every]] splash of [[cold]] water they [[turn]] into the very being titled to the spring they landed in. [[Crazy]] enough yet? No, [[thats]] just the beginning. As if being one of the strongest [[teenagers]] to ever exist who turns into a female wasn't enough, Ranma has to [[deal]] with crazed martial [[arts]] teachers and hundreds of insane art styles, an insane high school principle, [[opponents]] right and left who have a score to settle with Ranma wither it be for messing up their [[life]] [[early]] on somehow or for "stealling" their [[loved]] ones. And speaking of loved ones, I've lost track of how [[many]] times a [[boy]] or a [[girl]] has [[fallen]] in [[love]] with Ranma. And not once has it been his fiancée, Akane. And [[thats]] just from the first few [[chapters]]/[[episodes]] of the series.

The story itself is [[amazing]]. I have never [[come]] [[across]] something so crazy, so [[bizarre]], so... so... out of this [[world]] and [[yet]] its so down to [[Earth]] and [[believable]]... I can't [[even]] [[describe]] it to its [[fullest]]. Its just a [[charming]] [[story]] [[thats]] so easy to get into. What I [[like]] about it is the [[humor]]. Not once have I laughed out loud this much from a [[manga]], and it doesn't have to [[try]] any of the [[stunts]] you [[would]] [[catch]] in Simpson's or something of the sort. I [[could]] read any part of the comic and I would be laughing from beginning to end. Another thing is the [[characters]]. Ranma, you would think making him too [[strong]] [[would]] be a set back but nooo... with every little problem the story throws at him he's doing his best just to [[survive]] half the time and his personality is that of a foolish young boy it would seem but when [[worst]] [[comes]] to worst he can be a calculating genius. And to think, of the hundreds of perverts in the show, Ranma who hates the idea of perverts all together is considered by everyone in his town, more so by Akane, the worst pervert to ever live. His father Genma, you would think the father character would blend in to the background right? Correct! But whenever he does have some spotlight... he just gives you more reasons to hate him yet at the same love him! You think you know the worst dad ever from an anime? You haven't met Genma. Ryoga, probably one of Ranma's greatest rivals and my favorite character (next to Ranma)... and probably one of the only people he can actually stand. Most likely the strongest character in the series but has two faults, one is his curse that turns him into a baby pig but his worst fault... is his lack of sense in direction! Then we have... you know, I could spend hours at the computer explaining all the characters, the story's, everything positive about it but that would be just pointless.

Check out the series if you haven't, NOW! You WILL NOT regret it! Though I would advise checking the comic out first. I like the anime, but I've had some trouble getting the series at a good price. And a small nitpick, the humor doesn't seem to translate to the anime as well as the manga. I think partly because the comic seems more cartoonish to me. But either way, its a win win! 10 out of 10! [[Whoa]]... I mean WOW this has [[ai]] to be one of the [[nicest]] story's I've ever had the [[possibilities]] to read/watch. We all know this [[renowned]] [[histories]]. Two martial artist, a [[males]] and his son, go to [[forming]] in the [[prohibiting]] [[Damned]] Springs and while [[overlooking]] their [[warning]] they both [[decline]] in a spring each. The [[pope]], Genma, the [[springs]] of drowned Panda. And 16 [[annum]] old Ranma, the spring of drowned [[women]]. Now with [[any]] splash of [[chilled]] water they [[turning]] into the very being titled to the spring they landed in. [[Kooky]] enough yet? No, [[whats]] just the beginning. As if being one of the strongest [[youth]] to ever exist who turns into a female wasn't enough, Ranma has to [[addressing]] with crazed martial [[humanities]] teachers and hundreds of insane art styles, an insane high school principle, [[foe]] right and left who have a score to settle with Ranma wither it be for messing up their [[vida]] [[prematurely]] on somehow or for "stealling" their [[cared]] ones. And speaking of loved ones, I've lost track of how [[various]] times a [[guy]] or a [[dame]] has [[dipped]] in [[loves]] with Ranma. And not once has it been his fiancée, Akane. And [[theres]] just from the first few [[chapter]]/[[spells]] of the series.

The story itself is [[astonishing]]. I have never [[arrive]] [[during]] something so crazy, so [[odd]], so... so... out of this [[globe]] and [[however]] its so down to [[Terra]] and [[reliable]]... I can't [[yet]] [[outline]] it to its [[full]]. Its just a [[charmer]] [[tales]] [[couldnt]] so easy to get into. What I [[fond]] about it is the [[mood]]. Not once have I laughed out loud this much from a [[mana]], and it doesn't have to [[tried]] any of the [[cascades]] you [[ought]] [[captured]] in Simpson's or something of the sort. I [[would]] read any part of the comic and I would be laughing from beginning to end. Another thing is the [[features]]. Ranma, you would think making him too [[vigorous]] [[ought]] be a set back but nooo... with every little problem the story throws at him he's doing his best just to [[outlast]] half the time and his personality is that of a foolish young boy it would seem but when [[lousiest]] [[occurs]] to worst he can be a calculating genius. And to think, of the hundreds of perverts in the show, Ranma who hates the idea of perverts all together is considered by everyone in his town, more so by Akane, the worst pervert to ever live. His father Genma, you would think the father character would blend in to the background right? Correct! But whenever he does have some spotlight... he just gives you more reasons to hate him yet at the same love him! You think you know the worst dad ever from an anime? You haven't met Genma. Ryoga, probably one of Ranma's greatest rivals and my favorite character (next to Ranma)... and probably one of the only people he can actually stand. Most likely the strongest character in the series but has two faults, one is his curse that turns him into a baby pig but his worst fault... is his lack of sense in direction! Then we have... you know, I could spend hours at the computer explaining all the characters, the story's, everything positive about it but that would be just pointless.

Check out the series if you haven't, NOW! You WILL NOT regret it! Though I would advise checking the comic out first. I like the anime, but I've had some trouble getting the series at a good price. And a small nitpick, the humor doesn't seem to translate to the anime as well as the manga. I think partly because the comic seems more cartoonish to me. But either way, its a win win! 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 5433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is the [[first]] Michael Vartan movie i've seen-i haven't seen Alias- and i was curious to see if the [[guy]] can act.He sure can and is likable in this movie.Natasha Henstridge is of course gorgeous but she is [[usually]] in more physical and [[action]] [[roles]],so i [[found]] her very good and lovable in this different"sweet" role of a schoolteacher. Some of the negative [[comments]] i read are true,the movie is full of clichés and the story doesn't ring true at all.Also,even though [[every]] character in the [[movie]] [[remarks]] how good they [[look]] [[together]],i don't [[think]] there is screen chemistry there. [[However]],i [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]].The locales are nice,the [[characters]] are [[likable]] and goodlooking and the [[supporting]] actors are pretty good. [[If]] you are [[expecting]] to [[see]] a [[great]] romance,this is not it.But if you [[want]] to [[see]] a pleasant innocent goodlooking [[movie]] with [[likable]] [[characters]] its very good. This is the [[frst]] Michael Vartan movie i've seen-i haven't seen Alias- and i was curious to see if the [[buddy]] can act.He sure can and is likable in this movie.Natasha Henstridge is of course gorgeous but she is [[normally]] in more physical and [[activity]] [[functions]],so i [[find]] her very good and lovable in this different"sweet" role of a schoolteacher. Some of the negative [[observations]] i read are true,the movie is full of clichés and the story doesn't ring true at all.Also,even though [[each]] character in the [[kino]] [[remark]] how good they [[gaze]] [[jointly]],i don't [[thought]] there is screen chemistry there. [[Instead]],i [[liked]] this [[movies]].The locales are nice,the [[attribute]] are [[likeable]] and goodlooking and the [[assisting]] actors are pretty good. [[Unless]] you are [[hoping]] to [[seeing]] a [[sublime]] romance,this is not it.But if you [[wantto]] to [[consults]] a pleasant innocent goodlooking [[kino]] with [[likeable]] [[attribute]] its very good. --------------------------------------------- Result 5434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I will admit that I'm only a [[college]] student at this present time, an English [[major]] at that. [[At]] the time I saw this [[film]] I was a high school student--I want to say junior year but it may have been senior, hard to remember. My [[experience]] with quantum physics goes pretty much to my honors physics [[course]], an interest in quantum mechanics that has led me to read up on the subject in a number of [[books]] on the theoretical aspects of the field as well as any article I can find in Discover and the like. I'm not a PhD by any means.

That said...

This movie is [[simply]] [[terrible]]. It's designed to appeal to the scientific mind of the average New Age guru who desperately wants to believe in how special everybody is. My mother is such a person and ever since she's seen this movie she's tried to get all her friends to see it and bought a copy of the film. I attempted to point out the various flaws and problems I'd seen with the films logic and science--and they are numerous--and she dismissed my claims because "oh, so a high school student knows more than all those people with PhDs." In this case, apparently so.

Leaving behind the fact that earning a PhD doesn't necessarily require that a person be correct or, in fact, intelligent. Leaving behind the fact that my basic understanding of physics is enough to debunk half the film. Leaving that behind, the film makers completely manipulated their interviews with at least one of the participants to make it appear that he supported their beliefs when, in fact, he completely opposed them.

I could go on and on but I think intuitor did a really good job of debunking the film so feel free to read that if you care to do so.

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/bleep.html I will admit that I'm only a [[university]] student at this present time, an English [[important]] at that. [[For]] the time I saw this [[filmmaking]] I was a high school student--I want to say junior year but it may have been senior, hard to remember. My [[experiences]] with quantum physics goes pretty much to my honors physics [[cours]], an interest in quantum mechanics that has led me to read up on the subject in a number of [[livres]] on the theoretical aspects of the field as well as any article I can find in Discover and the like. I'm not a PhD by any means.

That said...

This movie is [[straightforward]] [[dreaded]]. It's designed to appeal to the scientific mind of the average New Age guru who desperately wants to believe in how special everybody is. My mother is such a person and ever since she's seen this movie she's tried to get all her friends to see it and bought a copy of the film. I attempted to point out the various flaws and problems I'd seen with the films logic and science--and they are numerous--and she dismissed my claims because "oh, so a high school student knows more than all those people with PhDs." In this case, apparently so.

Leaving behind the fact that earning a PhD doesn't necessarily require that a person be correct or, in fact, intelligent. Leaving behind the fact that my basic understanding of physics is enough to debunk half the film. Leaving that behind, the film makers completely manipulated their interviews with at least one of the participants to make it appear that he supported their beliefs when, in fact, he completely opposed them.

I could go on and on but I think intuitor did a really good job of debunking the film so feel free to read that if you care to do so.

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/bleep.html --------------------------------------------- Result 5435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I saw this movie a few days ago, my eyes were completely fixed to the screen. Its greatness held my attention to such an extent that I focused all of my attention on it for its entire duration. I would recommend seeing it not just to fans of anime, but to anyone who likes great movies period (or who likes really weird stuff). The style of art is beautiful, the sound is perfect, and the symbolism within it is breathtaking. I've heard complaints about the weird insertion of English text in the movie, but I think the way its done is complementary to the strange style of the movie. The self-attributed description of "Hello Kitty on acid" doesn't do justice to this film of absolutely epic proportions. I'd like to find more works by whoever made this, and see them. --------------------------------------------- Result 5436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]]

The movie "Slugs" is unique because the titular vermin are actually the [[good]] guys in this [[horrific]] [[tale]] of nature gone awry. You see, these poor [[slugs]] have been mutated through the pollution of evil humans and don't mean to do anything [[malicious]], they're just slugs- slugs with sharp teeth who eat flesh and excrete poison, but slugs none the less. The real bad guys are the humans, who either actively try to destroy our beloved [[slugs]], or overreact when they encounter them.

For example, take the scene where the guy puts on the glove full of slugs. They were just hanging out in a comfortable work glove when out of nowhere this giant hand came at them, and they reacted instinctively, defending themselves and biting the guy. Now, instead of seeking medical attention for his slug bite, this guy runs around his greenhouse screaming like an idiot, spills some highly volatile chemicals, starts a fire, knocks a bookcase over on himself, and cuts off his own hand- then the fire and volatile chemicals mix and his house explodes. How can you blame that on the slugs?

This movie paints a portrait of humans that is [[less]] than favorable. The characters in this [[movie]] include the dumb sheriff who hates everybody, the drunk hick who's mean to his dog, and the lumpy sidekick whose wife is at least forty-five years older than him. There's also a set of drunken teens

that get attacked while copulating, and we have to see the skinny long-haired freaks' genitals. Meanwhile, there's a guy who looks like a [[demonic]] [[Leslie]] Neilson who yells "You don't have the authority to declare happy birthday!" for some [[reason]]. [[Finally]], this [[parade]] of loathsomeness is [[rounded]] out by the guy from the MST3K classic "Pod People" whose face explodes after eating a slug-laces [[salad]] (another [[easily]] avoided fate [[blamed]] on the [[helpful]], harmless slugs).

Humans are portrayed as greedy, stupid, racist, alcoholic, and, in one [[pointless]] scene, as would-be [[rapists]]. [[In]] the movie's climactic scene, the villainous humans try to burn the [[slugs]] who are cowering helplessly in the sewers, Well, since they're idiots, the humans succeed in BLOWING UP THE ENTIRE TOWN. They alone do more damage than the slugs ever did!

If you hate humans, and I know I do, you'll appreciate "Slugs". If you're a fan of bad cinema, you'll also appreciate this crapfest from the director of "Pieces" and "Pod People". There's enough bad acting, silly dialog, illogical plot twists, lame special effects, pointless scenes, and poor dubbing to hold your attention.

The movie "Slugs" is unique because the titular vermin are actually the [[alright]] guys in this [[frightening]] [[history]] of nature gone awry. You see, these poor [[bales]] have been mutated through the pollution of evil humans and don't mean to do anything [[mischievous]], they're just slugs- slugs with sharp teeth who eat flesh and excrete poison, but slugs none the less. The real bad guys are the humans, who either actively try to destroy our beloved [[bullets]], or overreact when they encounter them.

For example, take the scene where the guy puts on the glove full of slugs. They were just hanging out in a comfortable work glove when out of nowhere this giant hand came at them, and they reacted instinctively, defending themselves and biting the guy. Now, instead of seeking medical attention for his slug bite, this guy runs around his greenhouse screaming like an idiot, spills some highly volatile chemicals, starts a fire, knocks a bookcase over on himself, and cuts off his own hand- then the fire and volatile chemicals mix and his house explodes. How can you blame that on the slugs?

This movie paints a portrait of humans that is [[lowest]] than favorable. The characters in this [[filmmaking]] include the dumb sheriff who hates everybody, the drunk hick who's mean to his dog, and the lumpy sidekick whose wife is at least forty-five years older than him. There's also a set of drunken teens

that get attacked while copulating, and we have to see the skinny long-haired freaks' genitals. Meanwhile, there's a guy who looks like a [[evil]] [[Lesley]] Neilson who yells "You don't have the authority to declare happy birthday!" for some [[reasons]]. [[Ultimately]], this [[motorcade]] of loathsomeness is [[round]] out by the guy from the MST3K classic "Pod People" whose face explodes after eating a slug-laces [[lettuce]] (another [[comfortably]] avoided fate [[charged]] on the [[worthwhile]], harmless slugs).

Humans are portrayed as greedy, stupid, racist, alcoholic, and, in one [[senseless]] scene, as would-be [[abusers]]. [[Onto]] the movie's climactic scene, the villainous humans try to burn the [[bales]] who are cowering helplessly in the sewers, Well, since they're idiots, the humans succeed in BLOWING UP THE ENTIRE TOWN. They alone do more damage than the slugs ever did!

If you hate humans, and I know I do, you'll appreciate "Slugs". If you're a fan of bad cinema, you'll also appreciate this crapfest from the director of "Pieces" and "Pod People". There's enough bad acting, silly dialog, illogical plot twists, lame special effects, pointless scenes, and poor dubbing to hold your attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 5437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Someday]] [[somebody]] is going to write an essay comparing Paul Naschy's "Fury of the Wolfman" to the great Spanish surrealist films, "L'age D'or" and "Un Chien Andelou". The Naschy [[film]] is a [[masterpiece]] of [[delirium]] from [[beginning]] to end. Dali and Bunuel probably [[loved]] it, and ate their hearts out [[seeing]] [[someone]] do with such [[apparent]] [[ease]] what they had to rack their brains to pull off.

The [[film]] lacks cohesive structure even [[though]] it does have a plot that moves from A to B to C. Some mishmash about a "Professor Walterman" -- his first name, mind you -- who was bitten by a Yeti monster during an expedition to Tibet and hasn't been the same since, which is understandable. One of his jealous colleagues, the insane daughter of the noted Doctor Wolfstein, knows about his condition and reveals that his wife has been cheating on him. But its a setup for a twisted scientific experiment to unleash his inner beast.

"Walterman" flips out, turns into a werewolf, kills a few people, is electrocuted, dies, is buried, unburied, taken to a castle filled with circus freaks, wired to various machines, zapped with assorted electronic effects, injected with potent elixirs, is chained up, turns into a werewolf, a woman in an evening gown with thigh-high Nazi fetish boots whips him, he escapes, helps the pretty female doctor find her way out of the castle, fends off the circus freaks with a battle axe, eventually turns back into a werewolf, and has to fight to the death against the female werewolf incarnation of his cheating wife. The lady with the Nazi boots shoots him with silver bullets from her Luger pistol, they die together, and the pretty doctor walks off into the morning with the studly reporter, who did nothing. "Look! What a beautiful day it is!"

"La furia del Hombre Lobo" was written by Paul Naschy in a hurry. Original director Enrique Eguilez was fired and replaced by José María Zabalza, a drunk who was infamously intoxicated throughout the production. He was often unable to work (though he did find time to instruct his 14 year old nephew to make some alterations to the script) and Naschy ended up directing much of the film uncredited. Zabalza did rally enough to clip some action scenes from one of Naschy's previous movies, "Mark of the Wolfman". The scenes were fortunately good enough to use twice even if the costumes were different, and helped pad out the runtime after Zabalza refused to get out of bed to finish the movie. Post production was a nightmare. Nobody knew who was doing the editing, the money ran out, the master print disappeared for a while, and then at a pre-release screening for a film distributor the executive arrived to find Zabalza urinating into the gutter in front of the theater. He was too drunk to find the restroom but at least he made it to the curb.

Yet somehow the film works, if you let it. It keys into those atavistic memories we have about murky castles, vaulted catacombs, chains, whips, gloomy moors. Fans of those sort of things will find it hypnotically watchable even if the story as a whole doesn't make much sense due to the fractured discontinuity of the execution. In one scene its pouring rain and the wolfman howls at the lightning; in the next shot its bone dry and he's howling at the full moon. Then its raining again. And yet you don't look at it as a gaffe. Its like an unfolding dream where contradictions are possible, opposites are the same, and effects proceed causes; First the wolfman picks up the power cable and screams, and then the cable starts sparking with electricity. People say its low budget hurts the overall effectiveness -- I say the film would have been unwatchable if they had a dime more to spend. It is a marvel of making something out of nothing, and succeeds not because of what it could of had, but because of what it does. It's easy to laugh at stuff like this and even easier to dismiss it. The trick is being able to see through the mayhem, or rather to regard the chaos as part of the effect.

Paul Naschy died last week at the age of 75. He had been ill with pancreatic cancer for a year or more, was working on film projects right up until his last days, but passed away in Madrid, Spain, with his family while receiving chemotherapy treatment. His rich, varied, and surprisingly lengthy career is a legacy to a man stubbornly pursuing his artistic vision in the face of universal mainstream disinterest. And yet in all of us there is an eleven year old kid who will watch his movies like "Fury of the Wolfman" in rapt awe. Even people who don't like Euro Horror will discover something in this movie to marvel at, if only for just a minute in a couple spots. You can find it for free at Archive.Org or even buy it on a DVD for a nickel. It's worth far, far more.

Amusingly, Naschy was horrified to learn that many others like myself regard this twisted, sick, demented little movie as a classic, if not an outright masterpiece of Cinema Dementia. The problems he encountered during the production and the mess of a film that was left after were perhaps too personal an artistic disappointment for Naschy to forgive. I would never presume to dare to forgive it for him, but I will say this: I'd rather watch "Fury of the Wolfman" in its dingiest, most cut and degraded fullscreen public domain print than ever sit though the overbearing, obnoxious crap churning out up at the Swine Flu cineplexes this or any other weekend.

The world lost a great artist this month. Watch his films, and remember.

9/10 [[Sometime]] [[person]] is going to write an essay comparing Paul Naschy's "Fury of the Wolfman" to the great Spanish surrealist films, "L'age D'or" and "Un Chien Andelou". The Naschy [[cinematographic]] is a [[centerpiece]] of [[delusion]] from [[started]] to end. Dali and Bunuel probably [[enjoyed]] it, and ate their hearts out [[witnessing]] [[anybody]] do with such [[flagrant]] [[lighten]] what they had to rack their brains to pull off.

The [[kino]] lacks cohesive structure even [[despite]] it does have a plot that moves from A to B to C. Some mishmash about a "Professor Walterman" -- his first name, mind you -- who was bitten by a Yeti monster during an expedition to Tibet and hasn't been the same since, which is understandable. One of his jealous colleagues, the insane daughter of the noted Doctor Wolfstein, knows about his condition and reveals that his wife has been cheating on him. But its a setup for a twisted scientific experiment to unleash his inner beast.

"Walterman" flips out, turns into a werewolf, kills a few people, is electrocuted, dies, is buried, unburied, taken to a castle filled with circus freaks, wired to various machines, zapped with assorted electronic effects, injected with potent elixirs, is chained up, turns into a werewolf, a woman in an evening gown with thigh-high Nazi fetish boots whips him, he escapes, helps the pretty female doctor find her way out of the castle, fends off the circus freaks with a battle axe, eventually turns back into a werewolf, and has to fight to the death against the female werewolf incarnation of his cheating wife. The lady with the Nazi boots shoots him with silver bullets from her Luger pistol, they die together, and the pretty doctor walks off into the morning with the studly reporter, who did nothing. "Look! What a beautiful day it is!"

"La furia del Hombre Lobo" was written by Paul Naschy in a hurry. Original director Enrique Eguilez was fired and replaced by José María Zabalza, a drunk who was infamously intoxicated throughout the production. He was often unable to work (though he did find time to instruct his 14 year old nephew to make some alterations to the script) and Naschy ended up directing much of the film uncredited. Zabalza did rally enough to clip some action scenes from one of Naschy's previous movies, "Mark of the Wolfman". The scenes were fortunately good enough to use twice even if the costumes were different, and helped pad out the runtime after Zabalza refused to get out of bed to finish the movie. Post production was a nightmare. Nobody knew who was doing the editing, the money ran out, the master print disappeared for a while, and then at a pre-release screening for a film distributor the executive arrived to find Zabalza urinating into the gutter in front of the theater. He was too drunk to find the restroom but at least he made it to the curb.

Yet somehow the film works, if you let it. It keys into those atavistic memories we have about murky castles, vaulted catacombs, chains, whips, gloomy moors. Fans of those sort of things will find it hypnotically watchable even if the story as a whole doesn't make much sense due to the fractured discontinuity of the execution. In one scene its pouring rain and the wolfman howls at the lightning; in the next shot its bone dry and he's howling at the full moon. Then its raining again. And yet you don't look at it as a gaffe. Its like an unfolding dream where contradictions are possible, opposites are the same, and effects proceed causes; First the wolfman picks up the power cable and screams, and then the cable starts sparking with electricity. People say its low budget hurts the overall effectiveness -- I say the film would have been unwatchable if they had a dime more to spend. It is a marvel of making something out of nothing, and succeeds not because of what it could of had, but because of what it does. It's easy to laugh at stuff like this and even easier to dismiss it. The trick is being able to see through the mayhem, or rather to regard the chaos as part of the effect.

Paul Naschy died last week at the age of 75. He had been ill with pancreatic cancer for a year or more, was working on film projects right up until his last days, but passed away in Madrid, Spain, with his family while receiving chemotherapy treatment. His rich, varied, and surprisingly lengthy career is a legacy to a man stubbornly pursuing his artistic vision in the face of universal mainstream disinterest. And yet in all of us there is an eleven year old kid who will watch his movies like "Fury of the Wolfman" in rapt awe. Even people who don't like Euro Horror will discover something in this movie to marvel at, if only for just a minute in a couple spots. You can find it for free at Archive.Org or even buy it on a DVD for a nickel. It's worth far, far more.

Amusingly, Naschy was horrified to learn that many others like myself regard this twisted, sick, demented little movie as a classic, if not an outright masterpiece of Cinema Dementia. The problems he encountered during the production and the mess of a film that was left after were perhaps too personal an artistic disappointment for Naschy to forgive. I would never presume to dare to forgive it for him, but I will say this: I'd rather watch "Fury of the Wolfman" in its dingiest, most cut and degraded fullscreen public domain print than ever sit though the overbearing, obnoxious crap churning out up at the Swine Flu cineplexes this or any other weekend.

The world lost a great artist this month. Watch his films, and remember.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5438 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie probably had some potential for something; my bewilderment is how these utterly prosaic unfunny themes keep making it to theaters, it's as if ideas are being recycled just because generations are. Truly the decerebrate oafs behind most films are like dogs, they return to ingest their own vomit. Well, they're 19 bucks richer now because of me. This was not at all imaginative, there was no redeeming moment, anything remotely funny was shown in the trailer (and nothing amusing was in the trailer), performances were strained (especially Molly's, totally unconvincing). What was theoretically supposed to be some comic relief was the homoerotic friend with a penchant for Disney films; none of his analogies hit home, his little moral speeches were flat, I was literally waiting for them to go on to say something meaningful, only to find out he was done. The so-called "hard 10" is the most insipid plastic creature there is (apart from having a horse-like face with a weird smile); I honestly found her friend Patty (referred to as the Hamburglar) to be much better looking than her. But then again, gentlemen prefer brunettes ;) Well, anyway, the whole premise is that society is superficial and if love is true it transcends all social facades; the way they showed this, with a dude shaving another's scrotum and the million-times-mutilated-and-beaten-to-death-horse premature ejaculation routine (with obvious allusions to American Pie and Happiness - the latter in the disgusting scene denouement involving the family dog). I feel as if the movie was like adjoining ridiculous jokes into an unformed wretched ball of raw sewage. Goes to show marketing can push anything out there, shine whatever fetid mass and call it gold, people will come (worked for me). Done with tirade. --------------------------------------------- Result 5439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[saw]] the [[new]] redubbed and [[edited]] version [[yesterday]] and loved it. Then I went [[home]] and [[watched]] it with subtitles and I [[loved]] it. I am ready to watch it again.

I am a sucker for the [[mild]] mannered secret identity and what could be more mild mannered than a [[pacifist]] librarian? The scenes where he reveals his super powers to his friends or absent mindedly forgets to be [[meek]] are my favortites.

Of course the martial arts are [[stunning]]. There is really not much I can [[say]] about them if you are [[familiar]] with the [[HK]] [[style]]. [[However]], if you are not... we [[paused]] [[playback]] [[briefly]] and Walker, [[Texas]] [[Ranger]] was on. We [[noticed]] that after [[every]] [[strike]] there was a [[cut]]. Not in [[Black]] [[Mask]].

I [[sawthe]] the [[novel]] redubbed and [[editing]] version [[sunday]] and loved it. Then I went [[domicile]] and [[saw]] it with subtitles and I [[liked]] it. I am ready to watch it again.

I am a sucker for the [[temperate]] mannered secret identity and what could be more mild mannered than a [[nonviolent]] librarian? The scenes where he reveals his super powers to his friends or absent mindedly forgets to be [[mick]] are my favortites.

Of course the martial arts are [[breathtaking]]. There is really not much I can [[said]] about them if you are [[colloquial]] with the [[KONG]] [[styling]]. [[Conversely]], if you are not... we [[hesitated]] [[reproduction]] [[terse]] and Walker, [[Texan]] [[Prowler]] was on. We [[saw]] that after [[each]] [[strikes]] there was a [[chop]]. Not in [[Negra]] [[Conceal]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 5440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is not a good film. The acting is remarkably stiff and unconvincing.The film doesn't seem to know whether it is going for a real horror approach or to go down the camp and kitsch route. I never saw the first film but this one doesn't stand up on its own merits, there are several unconvincing plot twists and the viewer is never made aware of the importance of the lead female vampire. Not worth the effort of watching --------------------------------------------- Result 5441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The only [[reason]] I [[came]] [[across]] this [[movie]] was that it's on the [[LITTLE]] [[MISS]] MARKER [[DVD]] and I do [[recommend]] watching it although you won't like it as well as the better known movie.

We have [[Gary]] Cooper and [[Carole]] Lombard as a con [[man]] and his [[companion]]. The [[film]] starts out [[quite]] light, but [[becomes]] more dramatic as [[Coop]] first plans on [[using]] his [[daughter]] to extort a [[sizable]] [[amount]] of [[cash]] from his brother-in-law but upon meeting the [[girl]] and seeing the discipline she would be subject to with his brother-in-law [[elects]] to [[keep]] her. [[However]], he has [[trouble]] staying on the [[straight]] and [[narrow]] [[path]] and so the [[drama]] develops.

Cooper and Lombard are [[good]] and Shirley still [[manages]] to [[steal]] the scenes she's in. There's little [[music]] in this, and Shirley only has one song. However this is [[entertaining]] and worth watching along with LITTLE MISS MARKER. The only [[motive]] I [[arrived]] [[throughout]] this [[kino]] was that it's on the [[SCANT]] [[MADEMOISELLE]] MARKER [[DVDS]] and I do [[recommended]] watching it although you won't like it as well as the better known movie.

We have [[Garry]] Cooper and [[Carroll]] Lombard as a con [[males]] and his [[mate]]. The [[cinematography]] starts out [[abundantly]] light, but [[becoming]] more dramatic as [[Henhouse]] first plans on [[utilise]] his [[fille]] to extort a [[notable]] [[quantities]] of [[moneys]] from his brother-in-law but upon meeting the [[female]] and seeing the discipline she would be subject to with his brother-in-law [[choices]] to [[conserve]] her. [[Still]], he has [[difficulty]] staying on the [[successive]] and [[limited]] [[trajectories]] and so the [[tragedy]] develops.

Cooper and Lombard are [[alright]] and Shirley still [[administering]] to [[robbing]] the scenes she's in. There's little [[musica]] in this, and Shirley only has one song. However this is [[amusing]] and worth watching along with LITTLE MISS MARKER. --------------------------------------------- Result 5442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Storyline: Max von Sydow's voice-over narration hypnotizes the protagonist (and audience) back to 1945 where our protagonist the young American ideologist Leopold Kessler (Jean-Marc Barr) has just arrived in post-WWII 1945 Germany to help rebuilding the damaged country. Uncle Kessler (Ernst-Hugo Järegård) supplies Leopold with a job in the big Zentropa train corporation, but soon Leopold falls in love with Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa); daughter of Zentropa owner Max Hartmann (Jørgen Reenberg). Leopold soon finds himself caught in a web of corruption, being taken advantage of, losing his ideology, and is forced to chose between pest or colera.

Mysterious, mesmerizing, manipulative, noirish, haunting, beautiful, and ugly. These are some immediate, grandiose, descriptions that come to mind when thinking of Lars von Trier's 1991 masterpiece EUROPA; the final chapter of the Europa trilogy. In USA it was retitled ZENTROPA so audiences wouldn't confuse it with Agnieszka Holland's EUROPA EUROPA from 1990 (equally a WWII drama). The Europa trilogy also consists of FORBRYDELSENS ELEMENT from 1984 and EPIDEMIC from 1987 (the infamous experiment that only sold 900 tickets in the Danish cinemas). The trilogy thematically deals with hypnotism and loss of idealism, although the themes of this trilogy are not as essential as the visuals. In the opening-shot of EUROPA we see a locomotive moving towards us while our unidentified narrator literally hypnotizes us: "On the mental count of ten, you will be in Europa. Be there at ten. I say: ten". A metaphor for movies' ability to transport us into a subconscious dream-reality.

EUROPA utilizes a strange but extremely effective visual style -- that famous Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky is Trier's main-influence says it all. It's a black-and-white movie occasionally intertwined with red in form of blood, a red dress etc. According to rumors this inspired Steven Spielberg to use the similar effect in SHINDLER'S LIST from 1993 (coincidentially another WWII drama). Furthermore Trier uses so-called Dutch angels and reinvents background-projection by adding separately shot co-operating layers upon layers, but unlike old Hollywood movies that incorporated it for economical reasons, Trier uses it for artistic reasons. These carefully executed strange-looking visual techniques underline that we are in a dream-reality, we are hypnotized; the universe of EUROPA is not real! EUROPA is often criticized for weighing advanced technique (such as multi-layered background-projection) above plot and characters, but hey that's what reviewers criticized Stanley Kubrick's 1968 visual masterpiece 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for -- nowadays it holds an obligatory place in all cinema-history books.

EUROPA also gets accused of historical incorrectness. Apparently Trier assigns the Nazis' Werewolf terrorist-group too much historical significance. According to various online-sources that's correct (a fascinating subject - try Googl'ing it yourself!), yet Trier's purposes are neither educational nor portraying history accurately. EUROPA is a never-ending nightmare. Leopold Kessler is hypnotized, therefore the universe that the audience encounters is a distorted reality. Equally it shows how our memory deceives us -- a 100% accurate reconstruction is a lie! Although young audiences who experience EUROPA are too young to have memories from WWII, we have a collective memory of it from various BBC documentaries, so these small inaccuracies actually serve a purpose: they inform us us that we are not in post-WWII Germany 1945, but in Leopolds memory of it.

All three Europa trilogy chapters portray young ideologists with noble intentions forced into corruption and losing their ideological innocence. The ambiguous endings of FORBRYDELSENS ELEMENT and EUROPA show the ideologists getting forever caught in their hypnotized realities. Before, during and after shooting EUROPA in 1990 in Poland, Lars von Trier and co-writer Niels Vørsel were extremely interested in WWII. It shows. It's packed with extremely beautiful shots catching the atmosphere of the time-period spot-on. A great example is the old Polish church (EUROPA was shot in Poland primarily for economic reasons) in the last act of EUROPA. As with 2001: SPACE ODYSSEY I think EUROPA will receive it's rightfully deserved place in cinema-history. Its method of twisting old film-noir love-affair clichés and visual techniques is so unique, strange and completely different from anything you will see from Hollywood nowadays, or any other dream-factory for that matter.

EUROPA is an essential movie in the Lars von Trier catalog. Some write it off as pure commercial speculation, but that would be catastrophic. It's right up there with other Trier classics and semi-classics such as FORBRYDELSENS ELEMENT from 1984, the TV-series RIGET from 1993 and DOGVILLE from 2003. It's a unique experience from before Trier cared for his actors, and before the Dogme95 Manifesto. Watch it! "On the count of ten..." 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] " Now in India's sunny 'clime, where I use to spend my time as a soldier in the service of her Majesty the queen . . . " so goes the famous poem penned by Rudyard Kipling. This is the literal foundation upon which the movie "Gunga Din" is based. If you are fortunate enough to watch this legendary Classic, you will enjoy films the way they use to make them; for the sheer pleasure. Taken from the script of the established novelist and poet, this is a story of a humble Indian native named Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) who works as 'a regimental beasty' during the British occupation of India during the 18th century. His greatest wish is to become a soldier. The water boy is part of a British Calvary contingent threatened with death by a notorious blood cult of Kali called the 'Thuggee.' Three particular soldiers stand out in this company who are noted for their bravery and comradeship. First is handsome and debonair, Cary Grant playing Sgt. Archibald Cutter. Next is Victor McLaglen as courageous Sgt. MacChesney and finally there's flamboyant Douglas Fairbanks Jr. as Sgt. Thomas Ballantine. All three and their fellow soldiers are surrounded by a hoard of mountain stranglers led by their fanatical leader called the 'Guru' (Eduardo Ciannelli). Amid the Chaos of war, is the brave water-boy who hopes to earn a place in the army by playing a bugle he found. A solid story for an old black and white film which needs little fanfare for anyone looking to enjoy a classic. **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5444 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I was taken to this [[film]] by a friend and was [[sceptical]] about a Swedish film with subtitles. However, I thoroughly enjoyed [[every]] minute of this [[beautiful]] film. The unnecessary [[cruelty]] that [[man]] is capable of was portrayed confidently without [[overwhelming]] [[images]] - [[although]] animal lovers [[may]] have to shield their eyes for a [[brief]] couple of seconds somewhere during the first 10 minutes. A traditional [[story]] of humility versus [[brutality]] and hope [[versus]] tragedy was illustrated from a satisfyingly fresh [[angle]] [[using]] a [[spectrum]] of [[characters]] with very natural [[flaws]] and features. I particularly [[liked]] how the [[film]] managed to [[address]] [[multiple]] [[aspects]] of hypocritical human [[behaviour]] that [[concern]] bias, [[discrimination]] and [[sanctimonious]] [[pretence]]. An [[absolute]] gem of a [[film]] that I will [[promote]] to all who will [[listen]]. I was taken to this [[kino]] by a friend and was [[incredulous]] about a Swedish film with subtitles. However, I thoroughly enjoyed [[any]] minute of this [[wondrous]] film. The unnecessary [[savagery]] that [[dude]] is capable of was portrayed confidently without [[whopping]] [[picture]] - [[while]] animal lovers [[maggio]] have to shield their eyes for a [[briefing]] couple of seconds somewhere during the first 10 minutes. A traditional [[tale]] of humility versus [[cruelty]] and hope [[vs]] tragedy was illustrated from a satisfyingly fresh [[angles]] [[used]] a [[gamut]] of [[attribute]] with very natural [[malfunctions]] and features. I particularly [[enjoyed]] how the [[kino]] managed to [[deal]] [[different]] [[things]] of hypocritical human [[behavioral]] that [[anxiety]] bias, [[discriminate]] and [[moralistic]] [[pretext]]. An [[utter]] gem of a [[cinematography]] that I will [[adoptive]] to all who will [[hear]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5445 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] A less-than-subtle poke at the [[beliefs]] and teachings of the Catholic [[Church]] is given a darker shade of [[death]] near the end of the [[show]]. [[Throughout]] the show, dark humour plays a medium through which several commonly heard [[rhetoric]] questions are [[asked]], especially "If [[God]] is so good, why does he [[allow]] evil to [[exist]] in the [[world]]?"

[[Diane]] Keaton is excellent in her role as an exaggerated version (though some might [[disagree]]) of they stereotyped religious teacher who spouts the "[[company]] line" and condemns half the world to burn in [[Hell]]. To celebrate her school's 25th anniversary, she invites her first students to return and perform their Christmas pageant.

However, when the quartet "update" their play to parody Sister Mary's "fallacious" teachings, the nun is pushed over the edge, sending the story spiralling into a [[chain]] of [[unhappy]] events. The ending finally leaves the audience with a [[sick]] [[feeling]] in their hearts.

Not [[recommended]]. Go watch the [[play]] [[instead]]. A less-than-subtle poke at the [[faiths]] and teachings of the Catholic [[Iglesias]] is given a darker shade of [[muerte]] near the end of the [[showings]]. [[During]] the show, dark humour plays a medium through which several commonly heard [[discourse]] questions are [[enquired]], especially "If [[Seigneur]] is so good, why does he [[authorize]] evil to [[existent]] in the [[monde]]?"

[[Dianne]] Keaton is excellent in her role as an exaggerated version (though some might [[disagreement]]) of they stereotyped religious teacher who spouts the "[[businesses]] line" and condemns half the world to burn in [[Bordello]]. To celebrate her school's 25th anniversary, she invites her first students to return and perform their Christmas pageant.

However, when the quartet "update" their play to parody Sister Mary's "fallacious" teachings, the nun is pushed over the edge, sending the story spiralling into a [[chaining]] of [[hapless]] events. The ending finally leaves the audience with a [[indisposed]] [[sensation]] in their hearts.

Not [[suggested]]. Go watch the [[gaming]] [[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Whoever wrote up "Redline" as a great car movie must be getting paid off by Daniel Sadek to promote this ultra crappy flaming, steaming pile of amateur crap. Easily the worst automotive movie or any movie ever made. This makes Showgirls look like Citizen Kane.

Take every cheesy cliché out of an 80s action TV series, put in some really crappy special effects and lame characters with no relevance and you have living proof that Daniel Sadek should not write screenplays and produce movies but should remain in the real estate business.

This is such a lame movie with such a lame plot and the most contrived action sequences ever. What offends me is not that the makers of this film are idiots but that they consider the movie going public to be idiots enough to fall for this crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 5447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A group of forest rangers and [[scientists]] [[go]] into the woods to find fossils.They stumble on a Bigfoot burial ground eventually (the didn't notice it in the dark), The scenes of the CGI Bigfoot are [[horrid]], but [[better]] than the [[endless]] scenes of talking that they rarely punctuate. I [[used]] to think that there just might be a [[good]] [[Bigfoot]] movie to be made. But now after so many sad sad movies about the legend, I'm having serious doubts. To pour [[salt]] in the [[wound]] of watching this [[film]], the ONE good-looking [[girl]] just doesn't [[get]] [[naked]] once. And while this one [[MAY]] be better than "Boggy [[Creek]] 2" (no mean feat there), it's [[still]] sad that the best non-documentary film on Bigfoot remains "Harry and the Henriksons"

My Grade: D A group of forest rangers and [[scientist]] [[going]] into the woods to find fossils.They stumble on a Bigfoot burial ground eventually (the didn't notice it in the dark), The scenes of the CGI Bigfoot are [[nefarious]], but [[optimum]] than the [[countless]] scenes of talking that they rarely punctuate. I [[utilise]] to think that there just might be a [[well]] [[Sasquatch]] movie to be made. But now after so many sad sad movies about the legend, I'm having serious doubts. To pour [[saltwater]] in the [[injuring]] of watching this [[flick]], the ONE good-looking [[woman]] just doesn't [[gets]] [[barefoot]] once. And while this one [[MAGGIO]] be better than "Boggy [[Brooks]] 2" (no mean feat there), it's [[nonetheless]] sad that the best non-documentary film on Bigfoot remains "Harry and the Henriksons"

My Grade: D --------------------------------------------- Result 5448 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You can't really go far when the initial story isn't all that great. The premise of cyborg's needing blood is just dopey.

The script is blasé'. The actors don't have much to work with. The sets were staged out in the desert to cut costs. It's a trademark that if the background is the desert, then the movie has no budget.

Lack of budget is okay, if there's a story. "Solarbabies" and "Blood of Champions" are examples of decent work from no $. but this movie looks as if they had to scrape their change together just to buy the cameraman a sandwich. Again, forgivable if only the story didn't just plain suck.

Finally, this movie commits the biggest crime of all: It doesn't finish! It simply ends as if it's a commercial break away from the rest of the movie. But the rest never comes. Just odd.

Just bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 5449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only redeeming part of this movie was the price I paid. At least all I lost was $3.00 and the time elapsed sitting through this bomb. The crew member who was in charge of continuity missed the boat. When the female lead and the FBI guy went to the alleged killers location, Mr. FBI handed the female a revolver. When the alleged killer came out the door, the revolver has magically transformed into an automatic. One is left to ponder would an FBP agent hand a weapon to a civilian? I think not. Ms. Xavier appears to be a very attractive female. It is too bad the R rating did not allow much of her to be seen. It would seem that a film editor cut what might have been the best parts of the film out. --------------------------------------------- Result 5450 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved this series when it was on Kids WB, I didn't believe that there was a Batman spin off seeing as the original show ended in 1995 and this show came in 1997. First of all I loved the idea of Robin leaving Batman to solve crime on his own. It was an interesting perspective to their relationship. I also liked the addition of Tim Drake in the series, and once again like it's predecessor this show had great story lines, great animation (better then the original), fantastic voice work and of course brilliant writing. The only thing that I didn't like was that was when it was in the US it would often run episodes in a 15 minute storyline. I just wish some of the episodes could be longer. My favorite episode of any Batman cartoons comes in this series, and it's called "Over the Edge", in my opinion as good if not better then "Heart of Ice" and "Robin's reckoning." Overall a nice follow up, along with Superman this show made my childhood very happy. --------------------------------------------- Result 5451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is a lot of silliness about a woman from London who marries a tea planter from Ceylon whom she barely knows. It's full of cliches, and the Liz Taylor character is not believable. It has a [[marvelous]] set, some [[exotic]] location footage. It shows Taylor at the height of her [[beauty]]. She looks stunning. This is a lot of silliness about a woman from London who marries a tea planter from Ceylon whom she barely knows. It's full of cliches, and the Liz Taylor character is not believable. It has a [[wondrous]] set, some [[extraterrestrial]] location footage. It shows Taylor at the height of her [[beaut]]. She looks stunning. --------------------------------------------- Result 5452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] ([[SPOILERS]] IN THIS)

"Rosenstraße" is a movie about heroic women in German Nazi time. But it is way too long, it is not touching and sometimes even boring! There are too many clichés and not enough good acting.

The storytelling (storyline) is [[bad]]. Like in James Cameron´s Titanic an old woman remembers events of her live. Good, now we´ve got a point of view. Than there is another woman introduced who does the same. Confusing is that they both are recalling events of lifes of other people! Come on! This is a [[lack]] of knowledge of basic story telling...How can Riemann know about the fate of the little girl´s mother and her interrogation for example?

The scenes are shown in the wrong order and you rarely know when it took place. For example the scene when Riemann is proposing to Fabian. When did that happen? The scene looks like it is set in the Twenties...

Riemann´s character is of course a talented pianist, well, she is even a Baroness! Wow. Her brother comes back from the Eastern Front, he has received a "Ritterkreuz" which he is showing in some scenes. So he is a war hero and still a fine man who preserved his conscience. And he gained knowledge of massacres committed by Germans. He even made some photographs! And so it goes, cliché after cliché is piling up and this is why the movie does not [[work]].

Basically von Trotta made a chick flick out of something what could have been a decent movie. And in the end it´s all very simple. Riemann finds a way to get Goebbels into bed and - ta da! - everyone is free. Which is not a historical fact but pure imagination despite the "true story" claim at the beginning. Like "Sass" it is vaguely BASED on a true event.

It is sad but [[true]], this IS the typical German movie these days. It is [[bad]]! Macaulay J. Connor

([[SABOTEURS]] IN THIS)

"Rosenstraße" is a movie about heroic women in German Nazi time. But it is way too long, it is not touching and sometimes even boring! There are too many clichés and not enough good acting.

The storytelling (storyline) is [[unfavourable]]. Like in James Cameron´s Titanic an old woman remembers events of her live. Good, now we´ve got a point of view. Than there is another woman introduced who does the same. Confusing is that they both are recalling events of lifes of other people! Come on! This is a [[shortfall]] of knowledge of basic story telling...How can Riemann know about the fate of the little girl´s mother and her interrogation for example?

The scenes are shown in the wrong order and you rarely know when it took place. For example the scene when Riemann is proposing to Fabian. When did that happen? The scene looks like it is set in the Twenties...

Riemann´s character is of course a talented pianist, well, she is even a Baroness! Wow. Her brother comes back from the Eastern Front, he has received a "Ritterkreuz" which he is showing in some scenes. So he is a war hero and still a fine man who preserved his conscience. And he gained knowledge of massacres committed by Germans. He even made some photographs! And so it goes, cliché after cliché is piling up and this is why the movie does not [[collaborated]].

Basically von Trotta made a chick flick out of something what could have been a decent movie. And in the end it´s all very simple. Riemann finds a way to get Goebbels into bed and - ta da! - everyone is free. Which is not a historical fact but pure imagination despite the "true story" claim at the beginning. Like "Sass" it is vaguely BASED on a true event.

It is sad but [[veritable]], this IS the typical German movie these days. It is [[unfavourable]]! Macaulay J. Connor

--------------------------------------------- Result 5453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie is another on the list that i did not want to see. i was talked into it and dragged into the theater, but boy am i glad for that. i thought it was going to be just another love story, but it turns out to be SOOO much more than that. definatly an intellectual flick, one of those movies you have to pay attention to. --------------------------------------------- Result 5454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I have been a [[fan]] of Without A Trace from the premier episode. I really cannot express my disappointment in the episode last week. This is a REAL problem that far too [[many]] Afican-American families have dealt with and continue to deal with. The lack of media coverage [[crucial]] in the first 48 hours has been documented by a [[recent]] [[study]]. [[Law]] enforcement [[including]] local , state, and federal are [[also]] complicit. What was the [[purpose]] of advertising this subject [[matter]] and then copping out on the ending? Seemingly, television can [[deal]] with [[almost]] ANY subject matter EXCEPT RACE. This is [[shameful]].Get it together or don't explore it [[next]] [[time]]. I have been a [[breather]] of Without A Trace from the premier episode. I really cannot express my disappointment in the episode last week. This is a REAL problem that far too [[myriad]] Afican-American families have dealt with and continue to deal with. The lack of media coverage [[imperative]] in the first 48 hours has been documented by a [[latest]] [[investigate]]. [[Act]] enforcement [[consisting]] local , state, and federal are [[similarly]] complicit. What was the [[target]] of advertising this subject [[topic]] and then copping out on the ending? Seemingly, television can [[treating]] with [[virtually]] ANY subject matter EXCEPT RACE. This is [[outrageous]].Get it together or don't explore it [[impending]] [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] One word can describe this movie and that is weird. I [[recorded]] this [[movie]] one day because it was a Japanese animation and it was old so I thought it would be interesting. Well it was, the movie is about a young boy who travels the universe to [[get]] a metal body so he can seek revenge. On the way he meets very [[colorful]] [[characters]] and [[must]] ultimately decide if he wants the body or not. [[Very]] [[strange]], if you are a fan of animation/science-fiction you might want to [[check]] this out. One word can describe this movie and that is weird. I [[records]] this [[kino]] one day because it was a Japanese animation and it was old so I thought it would be interesting. Well it was, the movie is about a young boy who travels the universe to [[obtains]] a metal body so he can seek revenge. On the way he meets very [[scenic]] [[nature]] and [[needs]] ultimately decide if he wants the body or not. [[Hugely]] [[nosy]], if you are a fan of animation/science-fiction you might want to [[audits]] this out. --------------------------------------------- Result 5456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] We all know a movie never does complete justice to the book, but this is exceptional. Important characters were [[cut]] out, Blanca and Alba were essentially mushed into the same character, most of the subplots and major elements of the main plot were eliminated. Clara's [[clairvoyance]] was [[extremely]] downplayed, making her [[seem]] like a much more [[shallow]] character than the one I got to know in the book. In the [[book]] we learn more about her powers and the important effects she had on so many people, which in turn was a key element in the life of the family. In the movie she was no more than some special lady. The relationship between Esteban and Pedro Tercero (Tercero-third-, by the way, is the son and thus comes after Segundo-second-) and its connections to that between Esteban and his grandson from Pancha García (not son, who he also did recognize) is chopped in half and its importance downplayed.

One of the most fundamental things about the book that the film is all but stripped of: this is called "The House of the Spirits." Where is the house? The story of 3-4 generations of a family is supposed to revolve around the "big house on the corner," a line stated so many times in the novel. The house in fundamental to the story, but the movie unjustly relegates it to a mere backdrop.

If I hadn't read the book before, I would have never guessed that such a sappy, shallow [[movie]] could be based on such a rich and entertaining novel. We all know a movie never does complete justice to the book, but this is exceptional. Important characters were [[slice]] out, Blanca and Alba were essentially mushed into the same character, most of the subplots and major elements of the main plot were eliminated. Clara's [[telepathy]] was [[considerably]] downplayed, making her [[looks]] like a much more [[superficial]] character than the one I got to know in the book. In the [[ledger]] we learn more about her powers and the important effects she had on so many people, which in turn was a key element in the life of the family. In the movie she was no more than some special lady. The relationship between Esteban and Pedro Tercero (Tercero-third-, by the way, is the son and thus comes after Segundo-second-) and its connections to that between Esteban and his grandson from Pancha García (not son, who he also did recognize) is chopped in half and its importance downplayed.

One of the most fundamental things about the book that the film is all but stripped of: this is called "The House of the Spirits." Where is the house? The story of 3-4 generations of a family is supposed to revolve around the "big house on the corner," a line stated so many times in the novel. The house in fundamental to the story, but the movie unjustly relegates it to a mere backdrop.

If I hadn't read the book before, I would have never guessed that such a sappy, shallow [[filmmaking]] could be based on such a rich and entertaining novel. --------------------------------------------- Result 5457 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Acclaimed]] director Mervyn LeRoy [[puts]] drama on [[film]] that competes with the [[best]] of soap operas. [[High]] drama is [[found]] in the [[loves]] and infidelities in [[New]] York's [[social]] set. Oh [[yes]], don't [[forget]] jealousy can [[bring]] about tainted hearts and [[murder]]. The all [[star]] cast [[features]]: Barbara Stanwyck, Van Heflin, James Mason, Ava Gardner, Cyd Charisse and Nancy Davis. [[Famed]] director Mervyn LeRoy [[evokes]] drama on [[movies]] that competes with the [[nicest]] of soap operas. [[Highest]] drama is [[detected]] in the [[likes]] and infidelities in [[Newer]] York's [[sociable]] set. Oh [[yep]], don't [[forgot]] jealousy can [[brings]] about tainted hearts and [[homicide]]. The all [[stars]] cast [[traits]]: Barbara Stanwyck, Van Heflin, James Mason, Ava Gardner, Cyd Charisse and Nancy Davis. --------------------------------------------- Result 5458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Wow]]. Uhm...well...[[wow]]! I guess I'll start with the plot. A betrothed [[woman]] (Lucy) arrives at the family home of her would be husband (Mathurin) in [[France]], where they are awaiting the arrival of the Bishop or Cardinal or someone in the Catholic Church to marry them (to satisfy a will.) While [[waiting]], [[young]] Lucy learns about a legend of a Beast who roamed the grounds centuries before. In bed that night, she begins fantasizing about the Beast and his rape-turned-consensual tryst with the former lady of the house. That's where it gets interesting! The plot is really pretty thin (and it seems to drag on for quite a while in the middle of the flick), but the filmmaker rewards (?) those who stick it out with a [[shocking]] and [[hilarious]] finale.

This movie isn't for everyone. If you're looking for great cinema, look elsewhere. If you're looking for a far-out movie about bestiality (that almost casts a sympathetic glance over the subject) this movie is for you! (If you have a weak stomach, don't be afraid of this one. Outside of some horse-on-horse action at the beginning, the 'deeds' are pretty cartoonish, IMO) [[Whew]]. Uhm...well...[[ruff]]! I guess I'll start with the plot. A betrothed [[wife]] (Lucy) arrives at the family home of her would be husband (Mathurin) in [[Francia]], where they are awaiting the arrival of the Bishop or Cardinal or someone in the Catholic Church to marry them (to satisfy a will.) While [[awaiting]], [[youngster]] Lucy learns about a legend of a Beast who roamed the grounds centuries before. In bed that night, she begins fantasizing about the Beast and his rape-turned-consensual tryst with the former lady of the house. That's where it gets interesting! The plot is really pretty thin (and it seems to drag on for quite a while in the middle of the flick), but the filmmaker rewards (?) those who stick it out with a [[gruesome]] and [[comic]] finale.

This movie isn't for everyone. If you're looking for great cinema, look elsewhere. If you're looking for a far-out movie about bestiality (that almost casts a sympathetic glance over the subject) this movie is for you! (If you have a weak stomach, don't be afraid of this one. Outside of some horse-on-horse action at the beginning, the 'deeds' are pretty cartoonish, IMO) --------------------------------------------- Result 5459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] This [[movie]] is ridiculous. Anyone saying the acting is [[great]] and the [[casting]] is [[superb]] have never seen even mediocre [[cinema]]. The acting is obviously terrible in the [[first]] 5 [[characters]] you [[meet]]. Lame. I feel like all the other "[[soaring]]" [[comments]] [[must]] have been made by people [[associated]] with the filmmakers. I was not very [[impressed]] by the storyline, but just [[wanted]] to see some [[beautiful]] Oregon countryside, and there was some [[decent]] cinematography--but the casting was [[anything]] BUT inspired. I think this movie also makes a [[mockery]] of the generally noble suggestion that [[something]] deep in the Amerindian [[culture]] has been ignored and [[perhaps]] lost and that reviving it is worthwhile, and [[possible]]. It places jokes in the wrong and all-too-obvious places, and makes me think it was written by the State Department or something. Back to the drawing board. To even suggest that this film deserves a place in the same vicinity of classics like Harold and Maude is absolutely [[retarded]], and along the same line of begging and pretension and "joking" as is rampant in this film. This [[filmmaking]] is ridiculous. Anyone saying the acting is [[prodigious]] and the [[pouring]] is [[extraordinaire]] have never seen even mediocre [[filmmaking]]. The acting is obviously terrible in the [[frst]] 5 [[personages]] you [[cater]]. Lame. I feel like all the other "[[escalating]]" [[comment]] [[owe]] have been made by people [[related]] with the filmmakers. I was not very [[surprising]] by the storyline, but just [[wanting]] to see some [[sumptuous]] Oregon countryside, and there was some [[dignified]] cinematography--but the casting was [[something]] BUT inspired. I think this movie also makes a [[parody]] of the generally noble suggestion that [[anything]] deep in the Amerindian [[cropping]] has been ignored and [[probably]] lost and that reviving it is worthwhile, and [[achievable]]. It places jokes in the wrong and all-too-obvious places, and makes me think it was written by the State Department or something. Back to the drawing board. To even suggest that this film deserves a place in the same vicinity of classics like Harold and Maude is absolutely [[nutcase]], and along the same line of begging and pretension and "joking" as is rampant in this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to agree with everyone else that has posted.

I watched it quite a while ago but I'll tell you, whenever I hear certain music from this anime I am reminded of the story, the beautiful animation, the characters and the feeling I got when watching it, and it does make me cry(such a happy yet sad feeling). I do however find that the love story in it felt alittle rushed and they didn't explain things properly but it didn't ruin any part of the viewing experience.

I was into this anime so much that after the end I just had to do some research(and watch the ending a few more times) and I found all my answers and a whole lot more. I love how they configured historical legends to fit into this anime, it was amazing and just made me want to research a whole lot more.(I've always been very interested in certain historical figures associated with this anime)

I do think it should have been a longer series but if this is all they had to work with then they pulled it off nicely. I'd recommend this to anyone who likes emotional anime with an excellent story, well built characters(some mysterious)and a bit of fantasy action.

Also, even though this was based on a H-game it doesn't have any of that stuff in it and I actually prefer it this way.(I have no problem with mature anime, in most cases I prefer it) --------------------------------------------- Result 5461 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] What could have been an engaging-and [[emotionally]] [[charged]] character [[study]] is [[totally]] [[undermined]] by the predictable factor. Fox is OK as Nathaniel Ayers, the Julliard [[trained]] musician who dreams of playing with the Walt Disney orchestra until his bouts with schizophrenia drive him into the street and ultimately [[skid]] row. Looking for a good story to [[boost]] his [[flagging]] career, [[reporter]] Steve Lopez {Robert "rehab" Downey } gets to know him and tells his story. [[Taking]] every [[element]] of the [[classic]] "how we hit the [[skids]]" [[movies]], [[borrowing]] very liberally from "A [[Beautiful]] Mind", taking the [[bogus]] "feel good" attitude of films [[like]] "Rocky"-you pick the sequel number-and whipping up too much 1930s style melodrama all that is left on the screen is a burnt out shell of a [[movie]]. It is [[corny]], [[trite]], utterly [[predictable]] and plays way too [[often]] on our sentiments. I hate to say it, but this is the [[kind]] of [[movie]] that, if you say you [[hated]] it, people will give you bad looks. I [[really]] wish I [[could]] say [[something]] [[positive]] about this [[film]], but I [[really]] can't. The acting redeems it [[somewhat]], but not enough for me to [[give]] it more than one [[star]]. [[Strictly]] [[made]] for [[TV]] [[movie]] [[stuff]]. Not worth your time. What could have been an engaging-and [[psychologically]] [[accused]] character [[examine]] is [[entirely]] [[hampered]] by the predictable factor. Fox is OK as Nathaniel Ayers, the Julliard [[formed]] musician who dreams of playing with the Walt Disney orchestra until his bouts with schizophrenia drive him into the street and ultimately [[skate]] row. Looking for a good story to [[stimulating]] his [[tracking]] career, [[reporters]] Steve Lopez {Robert "rehab" Downey } gets to know him and tells his story. [[Picked]] every [[aspect]] of the [[conventional]] "how we hit the [[booties]]" [[films]], [[refinance]] very liberally from "A [[Sumptuous]] Mind", taking the [[phonies]] "feel good" attitude of films [[iike]] "Rocky"-you pick the sequel number-and whipping up too much 1930s style melodrama all that is left on the screen is a burnt out shell of a [[film]]. It is [[dorky]], [[petty]], utterly [[foreseeable]] and plays way too [[oftentimes]] on our sentiments. I hate to say it, but this is the [[genre]] of [[filmmaking]] that, if you say you [[hating]] it, people will give you bad looks. I [[genuinely]] wish I [[wo]] say [[anything]] [[conducive]] about this [[filmmaking]], but I [[genuinely]] can't. The acting redeems it [[rather]], but not enough for me to [[confer]] it more than one [[stars]]. [[Tightly]] [[accomplished]] for [[TVS]] [[kino]] [[thing]]. Not worth your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I found this to be a [[charming]] [[adaptation]], very lively and full of fun. With the [[exception]] of a couple of [[major]] [[errors]], the cast is [[wonderful]]. I have to echo some of the [[earlier]] [[comments]] -- Chynna Phillips is [[horribly]] miscast as a [[teenager]]. [[At]] 27, she's just too old (and, yes, it DOES [[show]]), and [[lacks]] the [[singing]] "[[chops]]" for Broadway-style [[music]]. Vanessa Williams is a decent-enough [[singer]] and, for a non-dancer, she's [[adequate]]. [[However]], she is [[NOT]] [[Latina]], and her [[character]] [[definitely]] is. She's [[also]] very [[STRIDENT]] [[throughout]], which gets tiresome.

The girls of Sweet Apple's [[Conrad]] Birdie fan club [[really]] sparkle -- with special [[kudos]] to Brigitta Dau and Chiara Zanni. I [[also]] [[enjoyed]] Tyne Daly's performance, though I'm not [[generally]] a fan of her [[work]]. Finally, the dancing Shriners are a [[riot]], [[especially]] the [[dorky]] three in the [[bar]].

The [[movie]] is suitable for the [[whole]] [[family]], and I [[highly]] [[recommend]] it. I found this to be a [[cute]] [[adjustment]], very lively and full of fun. With the [[exemption]] of a couple of [[big]] [[error]], the cast is [[wondrous]]. I have to echo some of the [[formerly]] [[feedback]] -- Chynna Phillips is [[terribly]] miscast as a [[youngsters]]. [[Under]] 27, she's just too old (and, yes, it DOES [[exhibit]]), and [[shortage]] the [[sung]] "[[steaks]]" for Broadway-style [[musicians]]. Vanessa Williams is a decent-enough [[vocalist]] and, for a non-dancer, she's [[sufficient]]. [[Still]], she is [[NAH]] [[Latino]], and her [[nature]] [[undoubtedly]] is. She's [[further]] very [[SHRILL]] [[around]], which gets tiresome.

The girls of Sweet Apple's [[Konrad]] Birdie fan club [[truthfully]] sparkle -- with special [[laurels]] to Brigitta Dau and Chiara Zanni. I [[apart]] [[liked]] Tyne Daly's performance, though I'm not [[routinely]] a fan of her [[jobs]]. Finally, the dancing Shriners are a [[rioting]], [[namely]] the [[tacky]] three in the [[solicitor]].

The [[cinematography]] is suitable for the [[together]] [[families]], and I [[immeasurably]] [[recommends]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5463 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The story is very [[trustworthy]] and powerful. The technical side of the movie is quite [[fine]].. even the [[directing]] of it. The main problem is with the castings, that turned that movie into almost another local and regular cliché with a great [[lack]] of impact and even greater [[lack]] of impression. [[Beside]] the small role of the father, Rafael (played impressively by [[Asi]] Dayan), all other actors were unfortunately not in their [[best]]. The role of the elder Blind girl, played by Taly Sharon, was fresh but without any intensity as the leading role. therefore the figure she acted had become mild and low profile. There were moments and episodes that looked more like a rehearsal then a real movie. But after all it's a good point to begin from and to make big improvements in the future. The story is very [[dependable]] and powerful. The technical side of the movie is quite [[alright]].. even the [[instructing]] of it. The main problem is with the castings, that turned that movie into almost another local and regular cliché with a great [[scarcity]] of impact and even greater [[scarcity]] of impression. [[Alongside]] the small role of the father, Rafael (played impressively by [[Assi]] Dayan), all other actors were unfortunately not in their [[optimum]]. The role of the elder Blind girl, played by Taly Sharon, was fresh but without any intensity as the leading role. therefore the figure she acted had become mild and low profile. There were moments and episodes that looked more like a rehearsal then a real movie. But after all it's a good point to begin from and to make big improvements in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 5464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Horrendous]] [[pillaging]] of a classic.

It wasn't [[written]] convincingly at all why Mary should develop such sympathy for [[Bates]]. He may be more [[stable]] until they start playing pranks with him, but he still doesn't help himself at all with his actions. (inviting a comparative stranger to stay alone with him in his until recently disused motel; telling the attractive young girl of his past mental issues; lying about the knives, etc... ) This, in addition to her previous knowledge should have kept Mary extremely wary of him, but this somehow doesn't happen just so they can play the 'mistaken-identity-murder-game later on. Which in itself is also ridiculous: 'So-and-so is the real killer - plus her as well - also him! There were too many contrived twists in order to slap a [[story]] on screen when the [[narrative]] didn't [[need]] [[extending]].

It was good to see Perkins reprising his [[famous]] role again, but that's about the only [[small]] [[pleasure]] to be had. It's definitely not a patch on Hitchcock, and if you have no [[intention]] of even trying to [[get]] close then you shouldn't be [[bothering]] at all. [[Frightful]] [[loot]] of a classic.

It wasn't [[writes]] convincingly at all why Mary should develop such sympathy for [[Pats]]. He may be more [[stabilize]] until they start playing pranks with him, but he still doesn't help himself at all with his actions. (inviting a comparative stranger to stay alone with him in his until recently disused motel; telling the attractive young girl of his past mental issues; lying about the knives, etc... ) This, in addition to her previous knowledge should have kept Mary extremely wary of him, but this somehow doesn't happen just so they can play the 'mistaken-identity-murder-game later on. Which in itself is also ridiculous: 'So-and-so is the real killer - plus her as well - also him! There were too many contrived twists in order to slap a [[fairytales]] on screen when the [[descriptive]] didn't [[require]] [[prolonging]].

It was good to see Perkins reprising his [[proverbial]] role again, but that's about the only [[petite]] [[gladness]] to be had. It's definitely not a patch on Hitchcock, and if you have no [[goals]] of even trying to [[got]] close then you shouldn't be [[hassling]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5465 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This is one of the few comedies I can watch again and again and still laugh out loud. [[In]] other [[places]], I have read [[complaints]] about [[racism]] and sexism from sanctimonious, politically correct prigs. There is neither here, unless you define sexism as a woman as housewife and racism as a [[family]] employing a colored maid.

The lines are [[hilarious]], and all the leads have never been better. Melvin Douglas is [[especially]] [[brilliant]].

If you've ever thought of or tried to build a new house, you will be relieved to know that no matter how infuriating the process, no matter how much a [[lamb]] among wolves you may feel, you are not [[alone]]! This is one of the few comedies I can watch again and again and still laugh out loud. [[Onto]] other [[venues]], I have read [[grievance]] about [[racist]] and sexism from sanctimonious, politically correct prigs. There is neither here, unless you define sexism as a woman as housewife and racism as a [[familia]] employing a colored maid.

The lines are [[funny]], and all the leads have never been better. Melvin Douglas is [[concretely]] [[wondrous]].

If you've ever thought of or tried to build a new house, you will be relieved to know that no matter how infuriating the process, no matter how much a [[sheep]] among wolves you may feel, you are not [[merely]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5466 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] There's a lot of good that can be said for this cartoon; the [[backgrounds]] are rich, lushly colored and full of nicely done art deco details. The animation is up to the usual studio standards of the time, which are unquestionably higher than those of the present day. However, I [[find]] it [[tedious]] for a number of [[reasons]].

The Music: It's definitely not up to Scott Bradley's usual [[standards]]. Although it's probably supposed to be [[evocative]] of a "Great Gatsby" setting, it [[ends]] up being [[dreary]], sleepy, repetitious AND [[monotonous]] (repetitious and monotonous are not the same, as Beethoven's 5th Symphony attests). Since most people (including me) tend to close their eyes when they yawn, there's a lot of the visual part of the cartoon that will be missed by the average viewer.

The Storyline: I'm not giving away any secrets that aren't already in the plot summary - country good, city bad. This is a common theme in films, both animated and live, from this era. It's a misplaced nostalgia for a nonexistent rural idyll, which, in the present day, is reflected in a similar nostalgia for "values" that never were. There's a lot of good that can be said for this cartoon; the [[roots]] are rich, lushly colored and full of nicely done art deco details. The animation is up to the usual studio standards of the time, which are unquestionably higher than those of the present day. However, I [[unearth]] it [[monotonous]] for a number of [[grounds]].

The Music: It's definitely not up to Scott Bradley's usual [[standard]]. Although it's probably supposed to be [[reminiscent]] of a "Great Gatsby" setting, it [[end]] up being [[dismal]], sleepy, repetitious AND [[dull]] (repetitious and monotonous are not the same, as Beethoven's 5th Symphony attests). Since most people (including me) tend to close their eyes when they yawn, there's a lot of the visual part of the cartoon that will be missed by the average viewer.

The Storyline: I'm not giving away any secrets that aren't already in the plot summary - country good, city bad. This is a common theme in films, both animated and live, from this era. It's a misplaced nostalgia for a nonexistent rural idyll, which, in the present day, is reflected in a similar nostalgia for "values" that never were. --------------------------------------------- Result 5467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really cant think of anything good to say about this film...not a single thing. The script is a nightmare.. the writer blurs the line between chemical and biological traits and doesnt seem to understand the difference. You'd think they would at least get a technical advisor. The performances were bad by most of the cast... although I dont really blame them.. the material really stinks. The editing was equally bad.. I'll just stop now.. its all bad 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Jim [[Carrey]] is back to much the same role that he [[played]] in The [[Mask]], a [[timid]] guy who is [[trying]] to [[get]] ahead in the [[world]] but who seems to be [[plagued]] with [[bad]] [[luck]]. Even when he [[tries]] to [[help]] a [[homeless]] [[guy]] from being [[harassed]] by a bunch of [[hoodlums]] (and of course they have to be Mexican, obviously), his [[good]] will towards his fellow man backfires. [[In]] that [[case]], it wasn't too hard to [[predict]] that he was about to have a handful of [[angry]] [[hoodlums]], but I [[like]] that the [[movie]] suggests that [[things]] like that shouldn't be [[ignored]]. I'm reminded of the episode of Michael Moore's brilliant The Awful [[Truth]], when they had a man lay down on the sidewalk and pretend to be dead and see who would actually stop and make sure he was okay. The results were not very promising, so it's nice to see someone in the movies setting a good example.

Jim Carrey plays the part of Bruce Nolan, the nice guy mentioned above whose entire life seems to be falling apart. Or even better, it seems to be breaking up by the blows of bad luck like an asteroid entering the atmosphere (a little metaphor that comes up when Bruce miraculously finds himself a gigantic news story later in the film). Bruce is nearly 40 years old and all he has to show for it is a position as a news reporter of the sort that reports on such exciting news as the local bakery that's seeking to bake the world's biggest cookie. He's desperate to obtain the job of head anchor at the TV station, but he loses his cool on live TV when he hears that the job went to his rival colleague. You have to love how they time the revelation of this news to him seconds before his first live report. Needless to say, he loses his temper on live TV in one of the funniest scenes of the entire film.

Morgan Freeman delivers a [[fantastic]] performance as the Man himself, displaying a God whose infinite wisdom is somewhat reflected through Freeman's massive talent as an actor. He is the kind of God who takes his job very seriously, but in such a way as to advise his followers (as well as the viewers of this movie) that there are times when you need to slow down and do some manual labor in life. I love his line that some of the happiest people in the world come home smelling to high heaven at the end of the day. There are a lot of people in the world (maybe more than our share in America) who are so absorbed by their money and their possessions and their jobs and everything that they completely lost touch with the natural side of themselves as humans.

One of the biggest strengths is that the movie is able to provide great advice to people in general about improving their lives, and this message is clear and acceptable regardless of the viewer's religion. I, for example, tend to reject organized religion in all forms and I see God and Satan to be metaphors for different aspects of nature and human psychology rather than actual figures who ever lived or continue to live. But despite the fact that I don't believe that God exists as an entity overseeing the universe or as a janitor dressed all in white who mops the floors of his downtown office in his spare time, I was able to appreciate the messages that were delivered in this movie.

Jim Carrey's movies display this fantastic evolution that ties them all together and makes the newer ones look even better just because you can see how far he's come. If you compare Bruce Almighty with movies like Ace Ventura (both of which I loved, by the way) or a lot of what he did before he got into film, it's amazing how far he's come. He has moved from cheesy TV comedy to cheesy comedic films to comedies that are truly intelligent and meaningful like this film as well as others like The Truman Show, Man on the Moon, and The Majestic (easily one of his greatest films ever). Jim Carrey has unmistakably moved from the cheesy comedy of his past to become one of the most important comic actors working today.

Jennifer Aniston also once again provides an excellent addition to the movie (as she did in the side-splitting Office Space) as Bruce's girlfriend, who becomes increasingly exasperated by Bruce's growing stress about his life as well as his negligence to ask her to marry him. There is definitely some low-brow comedy in the film that doesn't really fit with the importance of the film's meaning or the quality of the delivery, such as the dog reading the newspaper on the toilet and the whole monkey scene, but it was definitely pretty nice to see Ace Ventura's friend Spike make a cameo appearance. As Stephen King very well knows, it's always nice to see familiar characters. It's almost like seeing family again.

Bruce is endowed with the powers of God for a given period of time so that he can understand life a bit better, and he says a lot about himself when he uses the powers only for his own purposes rather than to help all of the people who pray to him. The thing I love about this is that, like I said before, religion is absent from my life, but I was able to watch this and learn a lot about myself as well by thinking about what kinds of things I would have done had I been endowed with such powers. The movie allows us to learn vicariously this way, which empowers the message even more.

The scenes that involve the news station are easily the funniest in the entire film, such as the scene when Bruce loses his temper about the anchor position, the Jimmy Hoffa scene (who was conveniently buried with an original birth certificate and a complete set of dental records), the scene where Bruce's rival colleague is made to go nuts on camera, and my favorites, the ones at the beginning and the end involving the local bakery's cooking. The movie has plenty of time for Carrey to deliver some excellent jokes, such as when he says to God (who reveals that he's the janitor, the proprietor, the electrician, etc) that his Christmas parties must be real bashes, and to be careful about drinking, because on of him might need a ride home! I also loved the end when he says that behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes. A little too true, and as Gallagher would add, behind every great man is also an amazed mother-in-law.

Bruce Almighty is one of the more memorable comedies to have come out for quite a while, and is probably the only directly religious that I can remember seeing that I am anxious to buy on DVD to add to my personal collection. It is a comedy written and performed in good taste, but with enough relatively low-brow humor to keep the kids entertained. This is a meaningful comedy for the whole family, which is becoming rarer and rarer these days. In a world that is about to be flogged with yet another American Pie film AND another Scary Movie (which are only scary because of their sheer barbarous idiocy), it's nice to see that there are still people making comedies worth watching. Don't miss this one. Jim [[Kari]] is back to much the same role that he [[served]] in The [[Conceal]], a [[bashful]] guy who is [[tempting]] to [[obtain]] ahead in the [[globe]] but who seems to be [[ravaged]] with [[naughty]] [[likelihood]]. Even when he [[attempting]] to [[supporting]] a [[sleepers]] [[blokes]] from being [[hounded]] by a bunch of [[bandits]] (and of course they have to be Mexican, obviously), his [[alright]] will towards his fellow man backfires. [[Throughout]] that [[example]], it wasn't too hard to [[prophecy]] that he was about to have a handful of [[pissed]] [[gangbangers]], but I [[likes]] that the [[cinema]] suggests that [[items]] like that shouldn't be [[omitted]]. I'm reminded of the episode of Michael Moore's brilliant The Awful [[Veracity]], when they had a man lay down on the sidewalk and pretend to be dead and see who would actually stop and make sure he was okay. The results were not very promising, so it's nice to see someone in the movies setting a good example.

Jim Carrey plays the part of Bruce Nolan, the nice guy mentioned above whose entire life seems to be falling apart. Or even better, it seems to be breaking up by the blows of bad luck like an asteroid entering the atmosphere (a little metaphor that comes up when Bruce miraculously finds himself a gigantic news story later in the film). Bruce is nearly 40 years old and all he has to show for it is a position as a news reporter of the sort that reports on such exciting news as the local bakery that's seeking to bake the world's biggest cookie. He's desperate to obtain the job of head anchor at the TV station, but he loses his cool on live TV when he hears that the job went to his rival colleague. You have to love how they time the revelation of this news to him seconds before his first live report. Needless to say, he loses his temper on live TV in one of the funniest scenes of the entire film.

Morgan Freeman delivers a [[wondrous]] performance as the Man himself, displaying a God whose infinite wisdom is somewhat reflected through Freeman's massive talent as an actor. He is the kind of God who takes his job very seriously, but in such a way as to advise his followers (as well as the viewers of this movie) that there are times when you need to slow down and do some manual labor in life. I love his line that some of the happiest people in the world come home smelling to high heaven at the end of the day. There are a lot of people in the world (maybe more than our share in America) who are so absorbed by their money and their possessions and their jobs and everything that they completely lost touch with the natural side of themselves as humans.

One of the biggest strengths is that the movie is able to provide great advice to people in general about improving their lives, and this message is clear and acceptable regardless of the viewer's religion. I, for example, tend to reject organized religion in all forms and I see God and Satan to be metaphors for different aspects of nature and human psychology rather than actual figures who ever lived or continue to live. But despite the fact that I don't believe that God exists as an entity overseeing the universe or as a janitor dressed all in white who mops the floors of his downtown office in his spare time, I was able to appreciate the messages that were delivered in this movie.

Jim Carrey's movies display this fantastic evolution that ties them all together and makes the newer ones look even better just because you can see how far he's come. If you compare Bruce Almighty with movies like Ace Ventura (both of which I loved, by the way) or a lot of what he did before he got into film, it's amazing how far he's come. He has moved from cheesy TV comedy to cheesy comedic films to comedies that are truly intelligent and meaningful like this film as well as others like The Truman Show, Man on the Moon, and The Majestic (easily one of his greatest films ever). Jim Carrey has unmistakably moved from the cheesy comedy of his past to become one of the most important comic actors working today.

Jennifer Aniston also once again provides an excellent addition to the movie (as she did in the side-splitting Office Space) as Bruce's girlfriend, who becomes increasingly exasperated by Bruce's growing stress about his life as well as his negligence to ask her to marry him. There is definitely some low-brow comedy in the film that doesn't really fit with the importance of the film's meaning or the quality of the delivery, such as the dog reading the newspaper on the toilet and the whole monkey scene, but it was definitely pretty nice to see Ace Ventura's friend Spike make a cameo appearance. As Stephen King very well knows, it's always nice to see familiar characters. It's almost like seeing family again.

Bruce is endowed with the powers of God for a given period of time so that he can understand life a bit better, and he says a lot about himself when he uses the powers only for his own purposes rather than to help all of the people who pray to him. The thing I love about this is that, like I said before, religion is absent from my life, but I was able to watch this and learn a lot about myself as well by thinking about what kinds of things I would have done had I been endowed with such powers. The movie allows us to learn vicariously this way, which empowers the message even more.

The scenes that involve the news station are easily the funniest in the entire film, such as the scene when Bruce loses his temper about the anchor position, the Jimmy Hoffa scene (who was conveniently buried with an original birth certificate and a complete set of dental records), the scene where Bruce's rival colleague is made to go nuts on camera, and my favorites, the ones at the beginning and the end involving the local bakery's cooking. The movie has plenty of time for Carrey to deliver some excellent jokes, such as when he says to God (who reveals that he's the janitor, the proprietor, the electrician, etc) that his Christmas parties must be real bashes, and to be careful about drinking, because on of him might need a ride home! I also loved the end when he says that behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes. A little too true, and as Gallagher would add, behind every great man is also an amazed mother-in-law.

Bruce Almighty is one of the more memorable comedies to have come out for quite a while, and is probably the only directly religious that I can remember seeing that I am anxious to buy on DVD to add to my personal collection. It is a comedy written and performed in good taste, but with enough relatively low-brow humor to keep the kids entertained. This is a meaningful comedy for the whole family, which is becoming rarer and rarer these days. In a world that is about to be flogged with yet another American Pie film AND another Scary Movie (which are only scary because of their sheer barbarous idiocy), it's nice to see that there are still people making comedies worth watching. Don't miss this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 5469 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] When it comes to the erotic [[genre]], I'm lucky to [[get]] through the first 20 minutes of the plot without getting up or [[looking]] for something else to watch. This [[movie]] is [[different]]. [[Julie]] Davis (I love You Don't Touch Me) directed two very strong lead actors Kira [[Reed]] and Doug Jeffery in this [[enthralling]] thriller. Kira is convincing as "Kim" a sweet innocent romance novelist that [[gets]] caught in the web of [[seduction]] of Doug Jeffery's "The Man" a handsome stranger. Kira loses control of her [[inhibitions]] in the role, and as actress, giving what [[could]] have been simply another T and A depth and believability. I [[believe]] it to be her [[best]] performance [[yet]]. And Julie Davis' direction is a [[great]] [[gift]] to erotica. When it comes to the erotic [[types]], I'm lucky to [[obtain]] through the first 20 minutes of the plot without getting up or [[researching]] for something else to watch. This [[cinematography]] is [[various]]. [[Jolly]] Davis (I love You Don't Touch Me) directed two very strong lead actors Kira [[Reid]] and Doug Jeffery in this [[thrilling]] thriller. Kira is convincing as "Kim" a sweet innocent romance novelist that [[got]] caught in the web of [[attraction]] of Doug Jeffery's "The Man" a handsome stranger. Kira loses control of her [[scruples]] in the role, and as actress, giving what [[wo]] have been simply another T and A depth and believability. I [[reckon]] it to be her [[better]] performance [[however]]. And Julie Davis' direction is a [[wondrous]] [[donating]] to erotica. --------------------------------------------- Result 5470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I have just started watching the TV series "What I like About You" and I [[must]] say that is a [[joy]] to watch. I always like to see new shows do well considering a lot of shows go off before you really get a feel for them. I have watched Amanda Bynes since "All That" she is [[truly]] a funny girl, what is the best about her comedy is that its so [[natural]] and what i mean about that is, its something that a [[person]] [[could]] here there best friend saying, its not rehearsed.

I just [[recently]] started watching the [[show]] and have [[fell]] in love. I am just [[watching]] re-runs as of now but am looking [[forward]] to the next season. All the [[characters]] in the show give something to the whole [[story]] line. Its nice to see some old [[face]] from other shows I enjoyed watching in the [[past]] such as, [[Jennie]] Garth from "90210", [[Leslie]] Grossman from "[[Popular]]", and Wesley Jonathan from "City [[Guys]]." The New Character are very talented as well, [[Nick]] Zano has that [[charm]] the makes you [[love]] him [[even]] when he is doing something [[wrong]] to holly (Bynes).

[[Overall]] this [[show]] has the right ingredients to be successful, I look forward to watching it [[grow]]. I have just started watching the TV series "What I like About You" and I [[ought]] say that is a [[pleasure]] to watch. I always like to see new shows do well considering a lot of shows go off before you really get a feel for them. I have watched Amanda Bynes since "All That" she is [[genuinely]] a funny girl, what is the best about her comedy is that its so [[naturel]] and what i mean about that is, its something that a [[persona]] [[did]] here there best friend saying, its not rehearsed.

I just [[lately]] started watching the [[exhibition]] and have [[slumped]] in love. I am just [[staring]] re-runs as of now but am looking [[forwards]] to the next season. All the [[attribute]] in the show give something to the whole [[histories]] line. Its nice to see some old [[confront]] from other shows I enjoyed watching in the [[former]] such as, [[Jenny]] Garth from "90210", [[Lesley]] Grossman from "[[Fashionable]]", and Wesley Jonathan from "City [[Guy]]." The New Character are very talented as well, [[Nikki]] Zano has that [[amulet]] the makes you [[loves]] him [[yet]] when he is doing something [[amiss]] to holly (Bynes).

[[General]] this [[spectacle]] has the right ingredients to be successful, I look forward to watching it [[increase]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5471 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The message of this movie is "personality is more important than beauty". Jeanine Garofalo is supposed to be the "ugly duckling", but the funny thing is that she's not at all ugly (actually she's a lot more attractive than Uma Thurman, the friend who looks like a model).

Now, would this movie work if the "ugly duckling" was really unattractive? When will Hollywood stop with this hypocrisy?

In my opinion, despite the message that it wants to convey, this movie is simply ridiculous.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Despite Louis B. Mayer reportedly not being interested in signing the young Greta Garbo to a contract, this [[first]] American and MGM [[film]] for the actress looked quite beautiful. It's obvious that the film was assigned some amazing talent to film the production and make matte [[paintings]], as it has all the nice polish and artfulness you'd expect from the best [[pictures]] the studio [[could]] produce. It [[simply]] looks beautiful--even 84 [[years]] later.

As for Garbo herself, like her other very early American films she, too, looks different. While she's [[quite]] recognizable, her makeup is much softer than it would become just a year later--giving her a less [[severe]] look and a gentleness about her you just didn't see in subsequent films. I kind of wish they'd kept this look, but considering how famous she'd become with the trademark look, who am I to say they shouldn't have gone that route?! The [[film]] is about Garbo and how she and her family are unfairly forced off their land by the landlord. [[While]] the landlady, the much esteemed Doña Bernarda, claims it's because the bank has [[demanded]] [[payment]], it's because her son has [[fallen]] for Garbo--and what better [[way]] to get rid of her than to force them out on the streets! [[Nice]] lady, huh?! [[Years]] pass and by now Garbo has [[become]] a [[new]] singing sensation who is world-famous. When she [[returns]] to her hometown [[years]] [[later]], her [[old]] boyfriend (who [[HAD]] promised to [[marry]] her but wimped out when his mother, Doña Bernarda, [[refused]] to [[allow]] it) [[sees]] her. His [[new]] [[love]] for another lady is now tested--will he be content to marry this lady who is the heir to a huge [[pig]] fortune or will he [[want]] his [[old]] [[flame]]? And, more importantly, will Garbo [[even]] take him back after he behaved so spinelessly? [[In]] the meantime, a [[huge]] rainstorm hits. The land begins to flood and [[homes]] [[soon]] are being [[washed]] away by the [[deluge]]. Cortez and a [[friend]] make a [[mad]] [[dash]] as the dam [[breaks]]! [[In]] a scene where they obviously superimposed his row [[boat]] over the cascading [[stream]], he eventually makes it out alive and to the [[home]] where Garbo is now staying. She welcomes them inside and they [[stay]] with her until the [[storm]] passes. Then, he [[admits]] that he [[still]] [[loves]] her and had [[braved]] the storm to make sure that she was [[safe]]. She tells him to get lost! Next, you see Ricardo about to get married to his second choice, the daughter of the Pork King. He obviously has little enthusiasm for this--and you feel sorry for the lady, as she did nothing wrong. Soon, Cortez is seen wandering back to Garbo's home--he's love-sick and needs her. In this scene, Garbo is quite luminous and can't tell him to leave--as they dissolve in each other's arms. Once again, he tells her of his love for her.

When Doña Bernarda learns of this, she is not pleased. Evidently, a Pork Queen is a better catch than an internationally known singer. Because of the meddling of this nasty old lady, Garbo leaves--unwilling to come between the mother and her wimpy son. But, Cortez comes running--announcing he MUST have her and won't rest until he has her as his wife. Moments after making this proclamation, a family friend talks to Cortez and [[convinces]] him to give her up for the good of his career and reputation. So much for "won't rest until he has her for his wife", huh?! Despite Cortez being a wimp through and through, for some reason she cannot bring herself to hate him. And so, he marries the Pork Queen and lives a very dull life. When years later Garbo meets Cortez again, he is a dull looking middle-aged man--while she is as beautiful as ever. And, not surprisingly, she tells him, once again, to get lost.

At the time this film was made, Garbo was not a star in the US and Cortez was. So, in light of this, it's surprising they gave Cortez such an unlikable character to play. Instead of the usual confident Valentino-like role they'd been giving him, here he is an indecisive wimp--a HUGE wimp. And, from here on, his career was on a slow downward spiral. As for Garbo, the role helped establish her as a big star--as she was THE focus of the film and played a character much like her later personas.

As for the film, the new music composed for it was very nice, though a tad repetitive. The print, oddly, was nearly perfect throughout except for the intertitle cards--which could use some restoration.

A most enjoyable film--expertly constructed, wistful and worth seeing. And, for one of the few times I can think of it, I have no real complaints in this excellent film. Despite Louis B. Mayer reportedly not being interested in signing the young Greta Garbo to a contract, this [[outset]] American and MGM [[cinematography]] for the actress looked quite beautiful. It's obvious that the film was assigned some amazing talent to film the production and make matte [[paint]], as it has all the nice polish and artfulness you'd expect from the best [[pictured]] the studio [[would]] produce. It [[merely]] looks beautiful--even 84 [[olds]] later.

As for Garbo herself, like her other very early American films she, too, looks different. While she's [[very]] recognizable, her makeup is much softer than it would become just a year later--giving her a less [[extreme]] look and a gentleness about her you just didn't see in subsequent films. I kind of wish they'd kept this look, but considering how famous she'd become with the trademark look, who am I to say they shouldn't have gone that route?! The [[cinematographic]] is about Garbo and how she and her family are unfairly forced off their land by the landlord. [[Albeit]] the landlady, the much esteemed Doña Bernarda, claims it's because the bank has [[requested]] [[payments]], it's because her son has [[decrease]] for Garbo--and what better [[route]] to get rid of her than to force them out on the streets! [[Pleasant]] lady, huh?! [[Aged]] pass and by now Garbo has [[gotten]] a [[newer]] singing sensation who is world-famous. When she [[revert]] to her hometown [[yrs]] [[then]], her [[antique]] boyfriend (who [[HAS]] promised to [[wedding]] her but wimped out when his mother, Doña Bernarda, [[denied]] to [[authorizes]] it) [[believes]] her. His [[novel]] [[loves]] for another lady is now tested--will he be content to marry this lady who is the heir to a huge [[pork]] fortune or will he [[wish]] his [[former]] [[torch]]? And, more importantly, will Garbo [[yet]] take him back after he behaved so spinelessly? [[At]] the meantime, a [[massive]] rainstorm hits. The land begins to flood and [[home]] [[quickly]] are being [[scrubbed]] away by the [[floods]]. Cortez and a [[friends]] make a [[lunatic]] [[hyphen]] as the dam [[interrupts]]! [[Throughout]] a scene where they obviously superimposed his row [[boats]] over the cascading [[creek]], he eventually makes it out alive and to the [[household]] where Garbo is now staying. She welcomes them inside and they [[remain]] with her until the [[cyclone]] passes. Then, he [[pleads]] that he [[again]] [[adore]] her and had [[defied]] the storm to make sure that she was [[safer]]. She tells him to get lost! Next, you see Ricardo about to get married to his second choice, the daughter of the Pork King. He obviously has little enthusiasm for this--and you feel sorry for the lady, as she did nothing wrong. Soon, Cortez is seen wandering back to Garbo's home--he's love-sick and needs her. In this scene, Garbo is quite luminous and can't tell him to leave--as they dissolve in each other's arms. Once again, he tells her of his love for her.

When Doña Bernarda learns of this, she is not pleased. Evidently, a Pork Queen is a better catch than an internationally known singer. Because of the meddling of this nasty old lady, Garbo leaves--unwilling to come between the mother and her wimpy son. But, Cortez comes running--announcing he MUST have her and won't rest until he has her as his wife. Moments after making this proclamation, a family friend talks to Cortez and [[persuades]] him to give her up for the good of his career and reputation. So much for "won't rest until he has her for his wife", huh?! Despite Cortez being a wimp through and through, for some reason she cannot bring herself to hate him. And so, he marries the Pork Queen and lives a very dull life. When years later Garbo meets Cortez again, he is a dull looking middle-aged man--while she is as beautiful as ever. And, not surprisingly, she tells him, once again, to get lost.

At the time this film was made, Garbo was not a star in the US and Cortez was. So, in light of this, it's surprising they gave Cortez such an unlikable character to play. Instead of the usual confident Valentino-like role they'd been giving him, here he is an indecisive wimp--a HUGE wimp. And, from here on, his career was on a slow downward spiral. As for Garbo, the role helped establish her as a big star--as she was THE focus of the film and played a character much like her later personas.

As for the film, the new music composed for it was very nice, though a tad repetitive. The print, oddly, was nearly perfect throughout except for the intertitle cards--which could use some restoration.

A most enjoyable film--expertly constructed, wistful and worth seeing. And, for one of the few times I can think of it, I have no real complaints in this excellent film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Goebbels [[motivation]] in backing down was not [[explored]]. In the [[aftermath]] of Stalingrad the [[Reich]] had decided to go for 'total war'. This is [[referred]] to in the [[film]]. Part of this was to use women in the war effort, which Germany had not previously done to any great extent. An SS [[massacre]] of [[women]] would have [[faced]] Goebbels with a public relations disaster of massive proportion. His preference was to make the [[problem]] go away as quietly as possible, on the basis that the Jewish men could always be rounded up later. I understand the majority survived the war.

His other problem was that the 'Red' Berlin had never been very enthusiastically behind the Nazi cause and had to be handled cautiously. Again a massacre of women could have cost the Nazis what mediocre level of support they had in their capital city.

It was interesting that the majority of SS uniforms showed patches which indicated that the men wearing them were not of German nationality, but were from German origins in other countries such as Lithuania or Latvia Goebbels [[motivational]] in backing down was not [[scrutinize]]. In the [[consequences]] of Stalingrad the [[Empire]] had decided to go for 'total war'. This is [[mentioned]] to in the [[movies]]. Part of this was to use women in the war effort, which Germany had not previously done to any great extent. An SS [[bloodbath]] of [[females]] would have [[confronted]] Goebbels with a public relations disaster of massive proportion. His preference was to make the [[trouble]] go away as quietly as possible, on the basis that the Jewish men could always be rounded up later. I understand the majority survived the war.

His other problem was that the 'Red' Berlin had never been very enthusiastically behind the Nazi cause and had to be handled cautiously. Again a massacre of women could have cost the Nazis what mediocre level of support they had in their capital city.

It was interesting that the majority of SS uniforms showed patches which indicated that the men wearing them were not of German nationality, but were from German origins in other countries such as Lithuania or Latvia --------------------------------------------- Result 5474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie. My friend Marcus and I were browsing the local Hastings because we had an urge to rent something we had never seen before and stumbled across this fine film. We had no idea what it was going to be about, but it turned out spectacular. 2 thumbs up. I liked how the film was shot, and the actors were very funny. If you are are looking for a funny movie that also makes you think I highly suggest you quickly run to your local video store and find this movie. I would tell you some of my favorite parts but that might ruin the film for you so I won't. This movie is definitely on my top 10 list of good movies. Do you really think Nothing is bouncy? --------------------------------------------- Result 5475 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] It's a strange [[feeling]] to sit alone in a theater occupied by parents and their rollicking kids. I felt like instead of a movie [[ticket]], I should have been [[given]] a NAMBLA membership.

Based upon Thomas Rockwell's [[respected]] Book, How To Eat [[Fried]] Worms starts like any children's story: [[moving]] to a new town. The new kid, fifth grader Billy Forrester was once popular, but has to start anew. Making friends is never [[easy]], especially when the only prospect is Poindexter Adam. Or Erica, who at 4 1/2 feet, is a giant.

Further [[complicating]] things is Joe the bully. His freckled face and sleeveless shirts are daunting. He antagonizes kids with the Death Ring: a Crackerjack ring that is rumored to kill you if you're punched with it. But not immediately. No, the death ring unleashes a poison that kills you in the eight grade.

Joe and his axis of evil welcome Billy by smuggling a handful of slimy worms into his thermos. Once discovered, Billy plays it cool, swearing that he eats worms all the time. Then he throws them at Joe's face. [[Ewww]]! To win them over, Billy reluctantly bets that he can eat 10 worms. Fried, boiled, marinated in hot sauce, squashed and spread on a peanut butter sandwich. Each meal is dubbed an exotic name like the "Radioactive Slime Delight," in which the kids finally live out their dream of microwaving a living organism.

If you've ever met me, you'll know that I have an uncontrollably hearty laugh. I felt like a creep erupting at a toddler whining that his "dilly dick" hurts. But Fried Worms is wonderfully disgusting. Like a G-rated Farrelly brothers film, it is both vomitous and [[delightful]].

Writer/director Bob Dolman is also a savvy storyteller. To raise the stakes the worms must be consumed by 7 pm. In addition Billy holds a dark secret: he has an ultra-sensitive stomach.

Dolman also has a keen sense of perspective. With such accuracy, he draws on children's insecurities and tendency to exaggerate mundane dilemmas.

If you were to hyperbolize this movie the way kids do their quandaries, you will see that it is essentially about war. Freedom-fighter and freedom-hater use pubescent boys as pawns in proxy wars, only to learn a valuable lesson in unity. International leaders can learn a thing or two about global peacekeeping from Fried Worms.

At the end of the film, I was comforted when two chaperoning mothers behind me, looked at each other with befuddlement and agreed, "That was a great movie." Great, now I won't have to register myself in any lawful databases. It's a strange [[sentiment]] to sit alone in a theater occupied by parents and their rollicking kids. I felt like instead of a movie [[tickets]], I should have been [[granted]] a NAMBLA membership.

Based upon Thomas Rockwell's [[obeyed]] Book, How To Eat [[Toast]] Worms starts like any children's story: [[transferring]] to a new town. The new kid, fifth grader Billy Forrester was once popular, but has to start anew. Making friends is never [[simple]], especially when the only prospect is Poindexter Adam. Or Erica, who at 4 1/2 feet, is a giant.

Further [[complication]] things is Joe the bully. His freckled face and sleeveless shirts are daunting. He antagonizes kids with the Death Ring: a Crackerjack ring that is rumored to kill you if you're punched with it. But not immediately. No, the death ring unleashes a poison that kills you in the eight grade.

Joe and his axis of evil welcome Billy by smuggling a handful of slimy worms into his thermos. Once discovered, Billy plays it cool, swearing that he eats worms all the time. Then he throws them at Joe's face. [[Eeew]]! To win them over, Billy reluctantly bets that he can eat 10 worms. Fried, boiled, marinated in hot sauce, squashed and spread on a peanut butter sandwich. Each meal is dubbed an exotic name like the "Radioactive Slime Delight," in which the kids finally live out their dream of microwaving a living organism.

If you've ever met me, you'll know that I have an uncontrollably hearty laugh. I felt like a creep erupting at a toddler whining that his "dilly dick" hurts. But Fried Worms is wonderfully disgusting. Like a G-rated Farrelly brothers film, it is both vomitous and [[wondrous]].

Writer/director Bob Dolman is also a savvy storyteller. To raise the stakes the worms must be consumed by 7 pm. In addition Billy holds a dark secret: he has an ultra-sensitive stomach.

Dolman also has a keen sense of perspective. With such accuracy, he draws on children's insecurities and tendency to exaggerate mundane dilemmas.

If you were to hyperbolize this movie the way kids do their quandaries, you will see that it is essentially about war. Freedom-fighter and freedom-hater use pubescent boys as pawns in proxy wars, only to learn a valuable lesson in unity. International leaders can learn a thing or two about global peacekeeping from Fried Worms.

At the end of the film, I was comforted when two chaperoning mothers behind me, looked at each other with befuddlement and agreed, "That was a great movie." Great, now I won't have to register myself in any lawful databases. --------------------------------------------- Result 5476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] To borrow from Dorothy Parker: This is not a [[film]] to be tossed aside

lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

This is an [[excruciating]] [[mess]]. And I'm a Greenaway fan.

MIND-NUMBINGLY [[AWFUL]]

"The Mummy Returns" has much more artistic [[merit]] To borrow from Dorothy Parker: This is not a [[filmmaking]] to be tossed aside

lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

This is an [[horrifying]] [[chaos]]. And I'm a Greenaway fan.

MIND-NUMBINGLY [[HORRIFYING]]

"The Mummy Returns" has much more artistic [[deserves]] --------------------------------------------- Result 5477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] So what constitutes a real independent film? In a day and age where the latest fad of mainstream hollywood is to appear rugged and cutting edge, I'm sorry to say that what the general public tends to perceive as independent film is usually nothing more than a clever marketing ploy.

Which is why we should be glad that films like "Hatred of a Minute" exist. Across the board, this film makes a point out of contradicting its own template (indie horror film). [[Love]] it or hate it, "Hatred" isn't [[afraid]] of being what it is, and in watching this film, you get the real sense that Kallio (the director) didn't just make this film to spray fake blood all over the place, he's in this to tell stories. Good ones. You may find this film in the horror film section of your video store, but don't be fooled, this story is also about love, about good people pushed over the edge, and that oh-so-distant light at the end of the tunnel.

If you expect smut, or an Evil Dead ripoff, stay away from this film. But if you dig the finer points of the horror/suspense genres, [[check]] this film out.

Yes. Bruce Campbell did produce this movie, and I'm sure he's proud to tell anyone that it's not "Evil Dead". Bruce has never tried to bank on his "ash" image, and it's obvious that he didn't get involved with "Hatred" so that it could do so [[either]].

My advice, though, to all Dead-ites rabidly [[devouring]] anything issued by [[Mr]]. Campbell is to [[check]] this film out anyway and [[see]] what [[else]] Mr. Kallio and Mr. Campbell are trying to show you.

The acting is well done, although nothing about this film is oscar caliber (perhaps intentionally), it's good to [[see]] [[compassionate]] performances in a horror film. [[So]] often, actors in films such as these don't even seem to try, with "Hatred", it seemed as though all the actors took thier charecters very seriously, never resorting to typical horror-film campiness.

Technically, "[[Hatred]]" is about as competent as indie film gets. The editing is fast paced, the cinematography is good given the budget, and "Hatred" keeps a quick pace, without any bog-down points or bad anti-climaxes.

All in all, Hatred may not have the glossed over look of all those multi-million dollar fake indies, but personally, I don't see a problem with that. It's a film by folks who actually care about the medium. People who reached into thier broke ass pockets, pulled out thier nickles and dimes, threw caution to the wind and made a damn good movie.

Check this one out. So what constitutes a real independent film? In a day and age where the latest fad of mainstream hollywood is to appear rugged and cutting edge, I'm sorry to say that what the general public tends to perceive as independent film is usually nothing more than a clever marketing ploy.

Which is why we should be glad that films like "Hatred of a Minute" exist. Across the board, this film makes a point out of contradicting its own template (indie horror film). [[Amour]] it or hate it, "Hatred" isn't [[affraid]] of being what it is, and in watching this film, you get the real sense that Kallio (the director) didn't just make this film to spray fake blood all over the place, he's in this to tell stories. Good ones. You may find this film in the horror film section of your video store, but don't be fooled, this story is also about love, about good people pushed over the edge, and that oh-so-distant light at the end of the tunnel.

If you expect smut, or an Evil Dead ripoff, stay away from this film. But if you dig the finer points of the horror/suspense genres, [[audits]] this film out.

Yes. Bruce Campbell did produce this movie, and I'm sure he's proud to tell anyone that it's not "Evil Dead". Bruce has never tried to bank on his "ash" image, and it's obvious that he didn't get involved with "Hatred" so that it could do so [[neither]].

My advice, though, to all Dead-ites rabidly [[eating]] anything issued by [[Hannes]]. Campbell is to [[audit]] this film out anyway and [[behold]] what [[elsewhere]] Mr. Kallio and Mr. Campbell are trying to show you.

The acting is well done, although nothing about this film is oscar caliber (perhaps intentionally), it's good to [[seeing]] [[merciful]] performances in a horror film. [[Accordingly]] often, actors in films such as these don't even seem to try, with "Hatred", it seemed as though all the actors took thier charecters very seriously, never resorting to typical horror-film campiness.

Technically, "[[Loathes]]" is about as competent as indie film gets. The editing is fast paced, the cinematography is good given the budget, and "Hatred" keeps a quick pace, without any bog-down points or bad anti-climaxes.

All in all, Hatred may not have the glossed over look of all those multi-million dollar fake indies, but personally, I don't see a problem with that. It's a film by folks who actually care about the medium. People who reached into thier broke ass pockets, pulled out thier nickles and dimes, threw caution to the wind and made a damn good movie.

Check this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 5478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] This film (along with Rinne) are minor gems amongst the retread homage pics that have passed for horror movies so far at the 8FTDF "HorrorFest." And, yes, that's faint praise indeed. 'Cause there's not much worse in filmdom than would-be auteurs who think atmosphere is a substitute for a coherent plot.

And that's all you get with The Abandoned. This is a [[film]] that was made almost entirely in the directors head. Sure, it would have been nice if he'd transfered it to film, but this happened instead. It's a very pretty film with a few genuine scares, but the last reel is strictly for the latte slurping cineaste crowd. This film (along with Rinne) are minor gems amongst the retread homage pics that have passed for horror movies so far at the 8FTDF "HorrorFest." And, yes, that's faint praise indeed. 'Cause there's not much worse in filmdom than would-be auteurs who think atmosphere is a substitute for a coherent plot.

And that's all you get with The Abandoned. This is a [[filmmaking]] that was made almost entirely in the directors head. Sure, it would have been nice if he'd transfered it to film, but this happened instead. It's a very pretty film with a few genuine scares, but the last reel is strictly for the latte slurping cineaste crowd. --------------------------------------------- Result 5479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] An Insomniac's Nightmare is the story of a man's plunge into insanity. Having chronic Insomnia, Jack is plagued by hallucinations; causing him to try and determine what is real and what isn't.

We find out interesting things about Jack near the end, and [[think]] that by the time the movie is over we will have a "happily ever after" Hollywood ending. Wrong. This is New [[York]] [[City]], the place where nobody [[sleeps]].

Tess Nanavati ([[Writer]] and Director) has herself a good [[film]] in 'An Insomniac's Nightmare'. A talented filmmaker and writer (she made this film right after her High School Graduation), she has [[real]] potential and will be one to watch in the upcoming future.

As I [[watched]] this short [[film]] I was constantly uncomfortable; between the music, bleak scenery, and [[realistic]] portrayal of an insomniac by Dominic Monaghan (as Jack), I desperately [[wanted]] to turn this off at [[times]] just to escape from it. An Insomniac's Nightmare is the story of a man's plunge into insanity. Having chronic Insomnia, Jack is plagued by hallucinations; causing him to try and determine what is real and what isn't.

We find out interesting things about Jack near the end, and [[thought]] that by the time the movie is over we will have a "happily ever after" Hollywood ending. Wrong. This is New [[Yorke]] [[Ville]], the place where nobody [[sleeping]].

Tess Nanavati ([[Screenwriter]] and Director) has herself a good [[cinematic]] in 'An Insomniac's Nightmare'. A talented filmmaker and writer (she made this film right after her High School Graduation), she has [[genuine]] potential and will be one to watch in the upcoming future.

As I [[saw]] this short [[cinematic]] I was constantly uncomfortable; between the music, bleak scenery, and [[practical]] portrayal of an insomniac by Dominic Monaghan (as Jack), I desperately [[wished]] to turn this off at [[time]] just to escape from it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5480 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] [[Animal]] [[Farm]] (1954) was a very [[good]] read about the [[dangers]] of totalitarianism. [[How]] good ideals can be [[changed]] and distorted by those who are ignorant or rule with an iron fist and an empty [[head]]. Sadly this [[movie]] does not portray either of these. What we're [[shown]] is a [[propaganda]] piece with a lot of finger waving and pointing. The animation and the [[direction]] were [[good]] considering the budget and the time period but the very [[essence]] of George Orwell's novel is [[sorely]] missing.

If you're one of those who want to see how not to adapt a novel or are just interested in seeing an adaptation of this brilliant novelette then by all means watch. I just found this one to be somewhat mediocre. Just one man's opinion however.

The remake is a notch below but not by much. [[Wildlife]] [[Farmhouse]] (1954) was a very [[buena]] read about the [[risks]] of totalitarianism. [[Mode]] good ideals can be [[altered]] and distorted by those who are ignorant or rule with an iron fist and an empty [[leader]]. Sadly this [[filmmaking]] does not portray either of these. What we're [[exhibited]] is a [[advocacy]] piece with a lot of finger waving and pointing. The animation and the [[orientation]] were [[buena]] considering the budget and the time period but the very [[crux]] of George Orwell's novel is [[frantically]] missing.

If you're one of those who want to see how not to adapt a novel or are just interested in seeing an adaptation of this brilliant novelette then by all means watch. I just found this one to be somewhat mediocre. Just one man's opinion however.

The remake is a notch below but not by much. --------------------------------------------- Result 5481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 24 is the best television show!!!!! It's an incredible TV series with an incredible suspense, excellent plots and unforgettable characters. And the first episode of all is my best evidence. Because it's only the first episode, only the introduction, and you are hooked because of the plot and the continuous twists and turns.

Jack Bauer is a federal agent who is assigned the protection of the senator David Palmer. He can't trust in anybody because people of the CTU may be involved. And, when this events occurred his daughter: Kimberly escapes from house to a party. But...

At the end of the episode, you want to watch more, and more, and more.

It's only the first of the lot, and it's excellent. --------------------------------------------- Result 5482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] It is like what the title of this thread say. [[Only]] impression I got from that movie is that Marlee Matlin's [[character]] was always angry, so cynical, and so [[pathetic]]. Her character's first date with [[William]] Hurt's character where they were [[dancing]] were [[dumb]]. All in all, I've [[tried]] to finish watching the movie four times, and of all four times I fell asleep. I [[would]] keep watching that [[movie]] with one [[intention]]... to beat my problem with insomnia, because all it do is to put me to [[sleep]]. Sweet [[dream]]. It is like what the title of this thread say. [[Solely]] impression I got from that movie is that Marlee Matlin's [[nature]] was always angry, so cynical, and so [[regrettable]]. Her character's first date with [[Guillaume]] Hurt's character where they were [[ballet]] were [[witless]]. All in all, I've [[attempted]] to finish watching the movie four times, and of all four times I fell asleep. I [[could]] keep watching that [[movies]] with one [[purpose]]... to beat my problem with insomnia, because all it do is to put me to [[sleeping]]. Sweet [[dreamt]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Is there any other [[time]] [[period]] that has been so exhaustively covered by television (or the [[media]] in [[general]]) as the 1960s? [[No]]. And do we [[really]] [[need]] [[yet]] another [[trip]] through that turbulent [[time]]? Not really. But if we [[must]] have one, does it have to be as shallow as "The '60s"?

I [[like]] to think that co-writers Bill Couturie and [[Robert]] Greenfield had more in mind for this two-part miniseries than what ultimately resulted, [[especially]] [[given]] Couturie's involvement in the superb HBO movie "Dear America: Letters Home From Vietnam" which utilized little original music and no original footage, letting the sights and sounds of the time speak for themselves. This presentation intercuts file footage with the dramatic production, but it doesn't do anyone any favours by trying to do too much in too little time; like so many of its ilk, it's seen from the point of view of one family. But the children of the family seem to be involved tangentially with almost every major event of the '60s (it's amazing that one of them doesn't go to the Rolling Stones gig at Altamont), making it seem less like a period drama and more like a Cliff Notes version of the decade.

The makers rush through it so much that there's little or no time to give the characters any character, with the stick figures called our protagonists off screen for ages at a time - the children's father is especially [[clichéd]] - and then when they're back on BLAMMO! it's something else. Garry Trudeau could teach the filmmakers a thing or two about doing this kind of thing properly. In fairness, Jerry O'Connell, Jordana Brewster, Jeremy Sisto, Julia Stiles and Charles S. Dutton give their material the old college try, but they're wasted (especially the latter two); it's undeniably good to [[see]] David Alan Grier in a rare straight role as activist Fred Hampton, and Rosanna Arquette (in an uncredited cameo in part 2) is always welcome.

What isn't welcome is how "The '60s" drowns the soundtrack with so many period songs that it ultimately reduces its already minimal effect (and this may well be the only time an American TV presentation about post-60s America never mentions the British Invasion - no Beatles, no Rolling Stones... then again, there's only so much tunes you can shoehorn into a soundtrack album, right?). Capping its surface-skimming approach to both the time and the plot with an almost out-of-place happy ending, "American Dreams" and "The Wonder Years" did it all much, much better. Nothing to see here you can't see elsewhere, people... except for Julia Stiles doing the twist, that is. Is there any other [[times]] [[timetables]] that has been so exhaustively covered by television (or the [[medias]] in [[overall]]) as the 1960s? [[None]]. And do we [[truly]] [[gotta]] [[again]] another [[journey]] through that turbulent [[moment]]? Not really. But if we [[gotta]] have one, does it have to be as shallow as "The '60s"?

I [[adores]] to think that co-writers Bill Couturie and [[Roberta]] Greenfield had more in mind for this two-part miniseries than what ultimately resulted, [[peculiarly]] [[gave]] Couturie's involvement in the superb HBO movie "Dear America: Letters Home From Vietnam" which utilized little original music and no original footage, letting the sights and sounds of the time speak for themselves. This presentation intercuts file footage with the dramatic production, but it doesn't do anyone any favours by trying to do too much in too little time; like so many of its ilk, it's seen from the point of view of one family. But the children of the family seem to be involved tangentially with almost every major event of the '60s (it's amazing that one of them doesn't go to the Rolling Stones gig at Altamont), making it seem less like a period drama and more like a Cliff Notes version of the decade.

The makers rush through it so much that there's little or no time to give the characters any character, with the stick figures called our protagonists off screen for ages at a time - the children's father is especially [[cliché]] - and then when they're back on BLAMMO! it's something else. Garry Trudeau could teach the filmmakers a thing or two about doing this kind of thing properly. In fairness, Jerry O'Connell, Jordana Brewster, Jeremy Sisto, Julia Stiles and Charles S. Dutton give their material the old college try, but they're wasted (especially the latter two); it's undeniably good to [[seeing]] David Alan Grier in a rare straight role as activist Fred Hampton, and Rosanna Arquette (in an uncredited cameo in part 2) is always welcome.

What isn't welcome is how "The '60s" drowns the soundtrack with so many period songs that it ultimately reduces its already minimal effect (and this may well be the only time an American TV presentation about post-60s America never mentions the British Invasion - no Beatles, no Rolling Stones... then again, there's only so much tunes you can shoehorn into a soundtrack album, right?). Capping its surface-skimming approach to both the time and the plot with an almost out-of-place happy ending, "American Dreams" and "The Wonder Years" did it all much, much better. Nothing to see here you can't see elsewhere, people... except for Julia Stiles doing the twist, that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 5484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't get this. The movie obviously has a pretty good budget. It has very good cinematography. It has nice pacing, good editing and pretty good directing too. Then WHY OH WHY didn't they hire someone to do a final rewrite of the script so it would not be so damn cheesy and WHY OH WHY did they hire such lousy actors that can't act their way out of a paper bag? This movie could have been good. At most times it LOOKS good and FEELS good but in the end, you realize that the movie was no good at all.

So I would say it's a good production but a bad movie. Too bad actually.

And eels? Come one, really! --------------------------------------------- Result 5485 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[proverb]] "Never judge a book by it's cover", was coined as a warning to those who fail to look beneath the surface.

As I viewed the artwork to,"King of the Ants" I instantly thought [[HORROR]]! The [[arcane]] imagery proudly displayed on the cover & back spoke of a dark vision, the [[synopsis]] [[promised]] a story of murder, betrayal, & retribution. [[Instead]] what I discovered [[beneath]] that surface, was less interesting than what you can [[find]] under your average rock.

"King of the [[Ants]]" features Chris L. McKenna as Sean Crawley, an average [[guy]] ready to make a [[name]] for himself in this [[world]], even if it [[means]] [[murder]]. Except Sean Crawley is [[someone]] you don't care about, never once did I feel any [[compassion]] or [[sympathy]] for this character. [[In]] fact he's downright unlikable, but not as much as [[Daniel]] Baldwin ([[Ray]] [[Mathews]])who turns in an [[uninspired]] performance as a made all the [[worst]] by the utterly [[laughable]] [[dialogue]] he is [[forced]] to recite. [[Throw]] in [[Kari]] Wuhrer as a [[grieving]] [[widow]] who [[apparently]] has unconditional trust (esp. in the homeless), and [[little]] to no common [[sense]], and [[George]] Wendt as Duke, which is basically a sober [[Norm]] from Cheers but MEAN!

Now there are a couple of interesting "hallucination" sequences in this [[film]] (the [[source]] of the [[cover]] [[images]]) but this film never delves further into that world. It [[prefers]] to [[bombard]] you with unmotivated [[characters]], [[bad]] [[dialogue]], and [[unlikely]] event after unlikely [[event]]. Oh the [[Horror]]! The [[adage]] "Never judge a book by it's cover", was coined as a warning to those who fail to look beneath the surface.

As I viewed the artwork to,"King of the Ants" I instantly thought [[TERROR]]! The [[esoteric]] imagery proudly displayed on the cover & back spoke of a dark vision, the [[outline]] [[vowed]] a story of murder, betrayal, & retribution. [[However]] what I discovered [[underneath]] that surface, was less interesting than what you can [[finds]] under your average rock.

"King of the [[Mules]]" features Chris L. McKenna as Sean Crawley, an average [[man]] ready to make a [[behalf]] for himself in this [[monde]], even if it [[mode]] [[assassination]]. Except Sean Crawley is [[everyone]] you don't care about, never once did I feel any [[pity]] or [[sympathies]] for this character. [[During]] fact he's downright unlikable, but not as much as [[Daniela]] Baldwin ([[Gleam]] [[Mathew]])who turns in an [[unimaginative]] performance as a made all the [[meanest]] by the utterly [[farcical]] [[conversation]] he is [[compelled]] to recite. [[Toss]] in [[Carrey]] Wuhrer as a [[heartbreak]] [[widows]] who [[visibly]] has unconditional trust (esp. in the homeless), and [[small]] to no common [[sensing]], and [[Giorgi]] Wendt as Duke, which is basically a sober [[Norma]] from Cheers but MEAN!

Now there are a couple of interesting "hallucination" sequences in this [[flick]] (the [[roots]] of the [[covering]] [[pictures]]) but this film never delves further into that world. It [[favors]] to [[bombings]] you with unmotivated [[personage]], [[unfavourable]] [[conversations]], and [[improbable]] event after unlikely [[events]]. Oh the [[Terror]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cheech & Chong's Next Movie (1980) was the second film to star to pot loving duo of Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong. The lovable burn out smokers are now roommates. They live in a condemned building looking for ways to score more smoke and just lay about all day. But Cheech is the "responsible" one. He has a job and a steady girlfriend. One day, Cheech wants to get his freak on so he tries to get Chong out of the house. Another problem arises as well, Cheech's brother "Red" (Cheech is another role) is in town and wants to hang with him. Firguring that he could kill two birds with one stone, Cheech pawns Chong off and Red. What kind of adventures will Chong and Red get into? Will Cheech get his freak on? How long will Chong go without some smoke? Just watch CHEECH & CHONG'S NEXT MOVIE to find out!!

Tommy Chong takes over the directorial reigns for the sequel. He received some experience when he did some uncredited work on UP IN SMOKE. Funny but not as good as the first film. But Cheech and Chong fans will enjoy it. Followed by NICE DREAMS.

Recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Small SPOILERS alert !!!

Good movie...VERY good movie. And I'm surprised to say that myself, because I'm not a big fan of vampires and the sound of the director's name Deran Serafian [[usually]] means bad news. Most of his [[films]] are below average action movies like Death Warrant and Gunmen. This was one of his [[first]] films and [[maybe]] he should have continued making horror movies instead of action. This movie really fascinated me. Good accomplishment, [[seeing]] no famous actors or big budget was involved. It really is the [[story]] that [[keeps]] you [[focused]]. Especially fans of the original Dracula myth will be satisfied. Sarafian [[lights]] up another [[aspect]] of the famous Bram Stoker [[story]] and [[remains]] [[rather]] [[loyal]] and true to the truth. It [[explains]] the [[life]] of the Roemenian [[Count]] Dracula and how he [[scared]] the Turkish army away by spearing [[dead]] corpses in front of his castle. Of course, that's where the [[reality]] and the "[[based]] on a [[true]] [[story]]" stops. The blood drinking and stuff all was [[invented]] by Bram Stoker.

[[In]] this [[movie]], the [[count]] ( Vlad Teppish) emigrates to the [[USA]] and seduces [[tons]] of [[woman]]. And they're all [[pretty]] [[girls]], I'll give him that. [[Overall]], good acting by [[unknown]] [[faces]], [[enough]] blood and [[gore]] to [[satisfy]] the more [[morbid]] [[horror]] [[fans]] and an interesting storyline. This [[film]] is really unknown and it was [[hidden]] on the darkest [[shelf]] at my [[local]] videostore. But it [[certainly]] is worth cleaning up the [[dust]] on the cover and put it in the VCR. Heck, it's a [[lot]] [[better]] than the [[famous]] Nicole Kidman [[movie]] with the same title. These two [[films]] have [[nothing]] [[else]] in common, but I [[blame]] that [[movie]] for stealing the [[attention]] away from this nice [[little]] [[picture]]. [[Check]] it out...my [[humble]] opinion on To [[Die]] [[For]] = 8.5/10 Small SPOILERS alert !!!

Good movie...VERY good movie. And I'm surprised to say that myself, because I'm not a big fan of vampires and the sound of the director's name Deran Serafian [[generally]] means bad news. Most of his [[cinematography]] are below average action movies like Death Warrant and Gunmen. This was one of his [[fiirst]] films and [[possibly]] he should have continued making horror movies instead of action. This movie really fascinated me. Good accomplishment, [[see]] no famous actors or big budget was involved. It really is the [[history]] that [[retains]] you [[oriented]]. Especially fans of the original Dracula myth will be satisfied. Sarafian [[lit]] up another [[element]] of the famous Bram Stoker [[tale]] and [[stays]] [[somewhat]] [[faithful]] and true to the truth. It [[explained]] the [[vie]] of the Roemenian [[Comte]] Dracula and how he [[startled]] the Turkish army away by spearing [[died]] corpses in front of his castle. Of course, that's where the [[realism]] and the "[[founded]] on a [[real]] [[storytelling]]" stops. The blood drinking and stuff all was [[coined]] by Bram Stoker.

[[Onto]] this [[cinematography]], the [[counting]] ( Vlad Teppish) emigrates to the [[US]] and seduces [[tonnes]] of [[dame]]. And they're all [[quite]] [[females]], I'll give him that. [[Entire]], good acting by [[unexplored]] [[facing]], [[adequate]] blood and [[gora]] to [[comply]] the more [[sickness]] [[abomination]] [[stalkers]] and an interesting storyline. This [[cinematography]] is really unknown and it was [[disguising]] on the darkest [[bookshelf]] at my [[locale]] videostore. But it [[probably]] is worth cleaning up the [[stardust]] on the cover and put it in the VCR. Heck, it's a [[batch]] [[best]] than the [[proverbial]] Nicole Kidman [[kino]] with the same title. These two [[cinematographic]] have [[anything]] [[further]] in common, but I [[guilt]] that [[film]] for stealing the [[beware]] away from this nice [[petite]] [[imagery]]. [[Auditing]] it out...my [[lowly]] opinion on To [[Deaths]] [[At]] = 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Ah, the 1970's. A time when it was in to be a swinger. To be honest, [[today]] is [[also]] a good time to be a [[swinger]] but it just felt more daring then.

Joe Sarno offers up a [[pretty]] good soft-core film. In fact, just like [[today]], some of the actors are famous hardcore actors. Unlike today, these people were good actors and these films had a plot and [[character]] development.

It's pretty much what you would expect out of a swinger's movie. Two [[couples]] with open relationships re-ignite the wanderlust out of the MILF of one of the women who has come for a visit. Not much more to it.

Of course, when the MILF is Jennifer Welles then it is a [[different]] story. Not too many 40-somethings [[look]] as delicious undressed as Ms. Welles. It's worth the price alone to see [[Ms]]. Welles look at herself in the mirror as if she's Aphrodite. She's no "Stifler's Mom". She's way sexier.

I [[also]] digged [[Chris]] Jordan's [[Anna]]. Jordan looks and sounds so much like Elaine Joyce that I thought she might be her "separated at birth" twin or even Elaine herself. Anna is [[always]] eating but [[must]] have [[incredible]] metabolism.

Unlike 1990's soft-core porn, 70's softie porn [[retained]] the hardcore film's [[realism]] (something that 2000's soft-core has [[brought]] back on occasion, [[instead]] of the 90's music and canned orgasms) and it is here in full force. It's not [[real]] but it [[feels]] [[real]].

For those who [[enjoyed]] the [[Quebec]] [[produced]] "Deux [[Femmes]] En Or", you'll enjoy this one. Another [[classic]] [[film]] only on Drive-In Classics, the best $2.50 CAN a month you can [[spend]]. Ah, the 1970's. A time when it was in to be a swinger. To be honest, [[thursday]] is [[further]] a good time to be a [[swingers]] but it just felt more daring then.

Joe Sarno offers up a [[belle]] good soft-core film. In fact, just like [[yesterday]], some of the actors are famous hardcore actors. Unlike today, these people were good actors and these films had a plot and [[nature]] development.

It's pretty much what you would expect out of a swinger's movie. Two [[couple]] with open relationships re-ignite the wanderlust out of the MILF of one of the women who has come for a visit. Not much more to it.

Of course, when the MILF is Jennifer Welles then it is a [[various]] story. Not too many 40-somethings [[glance]] as delicious undressed as Ms. Welles. It's worth the price alone to see [[Corinne]]. Welles look at herself in the mirror as if she's Aphrodite. She's no "Stifler's Mom". She's way sexier.

I [[apart]] digged [[Kris]] Jordan's [[Ana]]. Jordan looks and sounds so much like Elaine Joyce that I thought she might be her "separated at birth" twin or even Elaine herself. Anna is [[steadily]] eating but [[should]] have [[impressive]] metabolism.

Unlike 1990's soft-core porn, 70's softie porn [[kept]] the hardcore film's [[reality]] (something that 2000's soft-core has [[made]] back on occasion, [[however]] of the 90's music and canned orgasms) and it is here in full force. It's not [[authentic]] but it [[deems]] [[true]].

For those who [[loved]] the [[Qc]] [[generated]] "Deux [[Females]] En Or", you'll enjoy this one. Another [[typical]] [[kino]] only on Drive-In Classics, the best $2.50 CAN a month you can [[expenditures]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5489 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "54" is a film based on the infamous "Studio 54" of the 1970s - the hangout for the social elite and party clubbers. In the film, Ryan Phillippe is the main character, based on an actual employee of Studio from 1977 - 1982.

The film's problem is that it's all glitter and style and no substance. It tries to be a really grimy and probing satire like "Boogie Nights" but ultimately comes across as an inferior wannabe. Mike Myers is given the thankless task of playing cocaine-snorting club owner Steve Rubell. It's only a slightly comedic role and if this was Myers' best attempts at sliding into drama like Lemmon and other comedic actors did in their time, it's a total failure.

"54" could have been insightful and interesting but instead it's just another dumb teen flick that isn't entertaining or even remotely engaging. View at your own peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 5490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (71%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Dolph Lundgren is back! Detention marks Dolphs first film in nearly 2 years, and that is following the delayed Hidden Agenda. This film still marks an improvement for Dolph over his cheapie trilogy of Jill Rips, Agent Red and Stormcatcher. However this film is well below the standard of Hidden Agenda, which was better in almost every respect. What this film does have in it's favour from Dolph's previous outing, is a sense of cheesy fun. The film also has a [[rejuvenated]] Dolph back in a high action role, and it's good to see Dolph doing his own stunts again.

The films story is ludicrous and prime B-movie material. An ex-military man is now a teacher and on his last day of teaching, whilst taking a Detention class, he runs into some Slovakian bad guys who have taken over the school to use as cover for a big drug deal. The film has no originality but in a movie of this type you need to have a sense of fun with all the cliches. If you take it too seriously the audience will find little to enjoy. Thankfully the filmmakers don't take matters too seriously and along with all the action cliches you can think of and the predictability, this film has a so bad it's enjoyable kind of vibe.

Where the film is let down is miss-using a fairly decent budget. The budget of around 10 million has not been well spent. It's all up on screen with plenty of carnage and big explosions but a lot of the shootouts lack imagination. The opening action is okay but after that the good moments become more sparse. There are some good moments. You have a car careering through school hallways for example and a decent shootout at the beginning, with plenty of destruction. The rest of the shootouts are fairly mechanical but there is plenty going on onscreen.

As for the cast. Hidden Agenda boasted the best cast Dolph has worked with in ages. There was a good standard of actors for a DTV film. This however has problems. The actors are on the most part bad. The bad guys are terrible, but the lead bad guy has a kind of enjoyable cheesiness because Alex Karsis plays it so over the top and without the hint of any menace that you can laugh at the pure badness. The teenagers of the piece are actually good but they are playing such cliched characters. They all hate authority, each other and all have bad attitudes and of course by the end they learn important life lessons, but generally they are decent and Chris Collins in particular has a likeability. This movie is all about Dolph though. While this film is nowhere near his best, it is nowhere near his worst. It also marks a turning point in his career. He is now back in good shape, and will be in even better shape in his next film Direct Action. Dolph looks enthusiastic here, he does all his own stunts and it is good to see him play the typical action man (running from explosions in slow-mo, one liners, and handling large weapons) again in a movie like his older ones, albeit with less flair and imagination than cliched films like Army Of One. It is good to see Dolph looking energised. His films of the last 8 or so years have seen Dolph looking a little more weary, and using doubles a lot (he still does all the fights himself though) but the new streamlined Dolph seems up for it.

Overall this is watchable if only for the cheese value and Dolph in prime action man mode. There's not a single surprise but it has a laughably inept kind of charm. ** Dolph Lundgren is back! Detention marks Dolphs first film in nearly 2 years, and that is following the delayed Hidden Agenda. This film still marks an improvement for Dolph over his cheapie trilogy of Jill Rips, Agent Red and Stormcatcher. However this film is well below the standard of Hidden Agenda, which was better in almost every respect. What this film does have in it's favour from Dolph's previous outing, is a sense of cheesy fun. The film also has a [[revived]] Dolph back in a high action role, and it's good to see Dolph doing his own stunts again.

The films story is ludicrous and prime B-movie material. An ex-military man is now a teacher and on his last day of teaching, whilst taking a Detention class, he runs into some Slovakian bad guys who have taken over the school to use as cover for a big drug deal. The film has no originality but in a movie of this type you need to have a sense of fun with all the cliches. If you take it too seriously the audience will find little to enjoy. Thankfully the filmmakers don't take matters too seriously and along with all the action cliches you can think of and the predictability, this film has a so bad it's enjoyable kind of vibe.

Where the film is let down is miss-using a fairly decent budget. The budget of around 10 million has not been well spent. It's all up on screen with plenty of carnage and big explosions but a lot of the shootouts lack imagination. The opening action is okay but after that the good moments become more sparse. There are some good moments. You have a car careering through school hallways for example and a decent shootout at the beginning, with plenty of destruction. The rest of the shootouts are fairly mechanical but there is plenty going on onscreen.

As for the cast. Hidden Agenda boasted the best cast Dolph has worked with in ages. There was a good standard of actors for a DTV film. This however has problems. The actors are on the most part bad. The bad guys are terrible, but the lead bad guy has a kind of enjoyable cheesiness because Alex Karsis plays it so over the top and without the hint of any menace that you can laugh at the pure badness. The teenagers of the piece are actually good but they are playing such cliched characters. They all hate authority, each other and all have bad attitudes and of course by the end they learn important life lessons, but generally they are decent and Chris Collins in particular has a likeability. This movie is all about Dolph though. While this film is nowhere near his best, it is nowhere near his worst. It also marks a turning point in his career. He is now back in good shape, and will be in even better shape in his next film Direct Action. Dolph looks enthusiastic here, he does all his own stunts and it is good to see him play the typical action man (running from explosions in slow-mo, one liners, and handling large weapons) again in a movie like his older ones, albeit with less flair and imagination than cliched films like Army Of One. It is good to see Dolph looking energised. His films of the last 8 or so years have seen Dolph looking a little more weary, and using doubles a lot (he still does all the fights himself though) but the new streamlined Dolph seems up for it.

Overall this is watchable if only for the cheese value and Dolph in prime action man mode. There's not a single surprise but it has a laughably inept kind of charm. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 5491 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Germans]] think [[smirking]] is [[funny]] (just like Americans think mumbling is sexy and that women with English accents are acting). I had to cross my eyes whenever the screen was filled yet again with a giant close-up of a [[smirking]] face. One of those 'housewife [[hacks]] corporate mainframe' tales where she defrauds a bank by [[tapping]] a few [[random]] keys on her [[home]] PC which is connected only to a power socket. The director [[obviously]] loves the rather large [[leading]] [[lady]]. Can't [[say]] I [[share]] his [[feelings]]. There's [[quite]] a funny [[bit]] when the entire family sit in front of the television [[chanting]] tonelessly along with the adverts. Apparently this review needs to be one line [[longer]] so here it is. [[Germany]] think [[snickering]] is [[comical]] (just like Americans think mumbling is sexy and that women with English accents are acting). I had to cross my eyes whenever the screen was filled yet again with a giant close-up of a [[grinning]] face. One of those 'housewife [[screwups]] corporate mainframe' tales where she defrauds a bank by [[eavesdropping]] a few [[indiscriminate]] keys on her [[homes]] PC which is connected only to a power socket. The director [[definitely]] loves the rather large [[culminating]] [[milady]]. Can't [[said]] I [[shares]] his [[sensations]]. There's [[abundantly]] a funny [[bite]] when the entire family sit in front of the television [[cheering]] tonelessly along with the adverts. Apparently this review needs to be one line [[most]] so here it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 5492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Virgil Manoven is an old [[man]] who lives [[alone]] in his remote [[rural]] farmhouse.Chasing his [[beloved]] cat one morning into the [[woods]] around his property,Manoven glimpses what looks like the [[murder]] of a young child in the [[middle]] of the [[woods]].He reports the crime to the police but there's no [[body]] to be [[found]].[[Troubled]] by disturbing visions,he [[investigates]] further and eventually is guided to a spooky orphanage where [[events]] [[take]] a supernatural [[turn]]…"Soft for [[Digging]]" is a [[fantastic]] experimental horror with lots of creepy [[atmosphere]] to spare.This minimalist film is almost completely devoid of [[dialogue]].Some scenes are genuinely nightmarish and the acting is [[excellent]].The location sets provide plenty of creepiness:the eerie Maryland woods rival those used in "The Blair Witch Projcect".Give this strange horror film a [[chance]].9 out of 10. Virgil Manoven is an old [[bloke]] who lives [[solely]] in his remote [[agrarian]] farmhouse.Chasing his [[dear]] cat one morning into the [[timber]] around his property,Manoven glimpses what looks like the [[slaying]] of a young child in the [[medium]] of the [[timber]].He reports the crime to the police but there's no [[agencies]] to be [[discovered]].[[Tormented]] by disturbing visions,he [[investigate]] further and eventually is guided to a spooky orphanage where [[phenomena]] [[taking]] a supernatural [[transforming]]…"Soft for [[Excavated]]" is a [[wondrous]] experimental horror with lots of creepy [[atmospheric]] to spare.This minimalist film is almost completely devoid of [[discussions]].Some scenes are genuinely nightmarish and the acting is [[wondrous]].The location sets provide plenty of creepiness:the eerie Maryland woods rival those used in "The Blair Witch Projcect".Give this strange horror film a [[probability]].9 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] An axellent second installment that manages to be just as good as the first.

Once again, the casting is just [[wonderful]]. I like how the first and second episode have nothing in common except for the wit and cleverness.

The second episode is just very [[funny]], very silly and very [[enjoyable]]. It is the very first Christmas episode, about a woman who is tormented by a serial killer dressed as Santa after having killed her own husband. Just like the first episode; karma.

The most humorous scene is a tie between the murder of her husband and her phone call, first faking her fear until it becomes real. An axellent second installment that manages to be just as good as the first.

Once again, the casting is just [[wondrous]]. I like how the first and second episode have nothing in common except for the wit and cleverness.

The second episode is just very [[amusing]], very silly and very [[nice]]. It is the very first Christmas episode, about a woman who is tormented by a serial killer dressed as Santa after having killed her own husband. Just like the first episode; karma.

The most humorous scene is a tie between the murder of her husband and her phone call, first faking her fear until it becomes real. --------------------------------------------- Result 5494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What is the point of creating sequels that have [[absolutely]] no relevance to the [[original]] [[film]]? No point. This is why the Prom Night sequels are so [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]].

The [[original]] [[film]] [[entailed]] a [[group]] of [[children]] [[hiding]] a [[dark]] [[secret]] that [[eventually]] [[get]] them all killed, bar one, in a brutal [[act]] of [[revenge]]. Can [[someone]] please explain to me what a [[dead]] [[prom]] queen-to-be [[rising]] from the [[grave]] to steel the crown has to do with the [[first]] [[movie]] then? [[Prom]] [[Night]] 2 had [[continuous]] plot [[holes]] that left the [[audience]] [[constantly]] [[wondering]] how did that happen and why should that [[happen]]? But in the end, i guess you [[could]] call it one of those movies that is so bad, you [[end]] up [[laughing]] yourself through it. What is the point of creating sequels that have [[totally]] no relevance to the [[initial]] [[filmmaking]]? No point. This is why the Prom Night sequels are so [[grossly]] [[negative]].

The [[upfront]] [[filmmaking]] [[implied]] a [[groups]] of [[childhood]] [[hidden]] a [[darkness]] [[secrets]] that [[finally]] [[got]] them all killed, bar one, in a brutal [[legislation]] of [[vengeance]]. Can [[everyone]] please explain to me what a [[deaths]] [[endgame]] queen-to-be [[climb]] from the [[graves]] to steel the crown has to do with the [[frst]] [[filmmaking]] then? [[Endgame]] [[Nuit]] 2 had [[constant]] plot [[ruts]] that left the [[spectators]] [[always]] [[asked]] how did that happen and why should that [[emerge]]? But in the end, i guess you [[did]] call it one of those movies that is so bad, you [[ends]] up [[giggling]] yourself through it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Well, What can I [[say]], other than these people are Super in every [[way]]. I quite like Sharon Mcreedy, I [[enjoy]] this [[pure]] [[Nostalgic]] [[Series]] And I have the boxed set of 9 [[discs]] 30 [[episodes]], I did not [[realise]] that they had made so [[many]], I also think that it is a great [[shame]], that they have not made any more. I wish that I [[got]] [[given]] these powers, Imagine me, being knocked off my cycle, somewhere and being knocked out cold, then waking up in a special [[hospital]]. Later on, I discover that my body has been [[enhanced]]. [[Just]] like Richard Barrat. These [[stories]] are 50 Minutes of pure action and [[suspense]] all the way, You cannot fight these 3 people, as they would defeat you in all [[forms]] of weaponry. The [[music]] is well written, and to me, puts a [[wonderful]] [[picture]] of 3 super beings in my mind, The sort of powers that the [[champions]] have are the same as our [[domestic]] dog or cats, [[Improved]] sight, Improved hearing and [[touch]]. and the strength of 10 men for Richard and Craig and the strength of 3 [[women]] for Sharon. Who I thought was beautiful and intelligent. When I was a boy, I had a huge crush on her!!!! Now I can see why, on my DVD set. The box is very nice and it comes with a free [[booklet]] all about the series. I also thought that Trymane was a good boss, firm but he got things done! Well, What can I [[told]], other than these people are Super in every [[routing]]. I quite like Sharon Mcreedy, I [[enjoys]] this [[pur]] [[Homesick]] [[Serials]] And I have the boxed set of 9 [[rotors]] 30 [[spells]], I did not [[understand]] that they had made so [[myriad]], I also think that it is a great [[embarrassment]], that they have not made any more. I wish that I [[ai]] [[awarded]] these powers, Imagine me, being knocked off my cycle, somewhere and being knocked out cold, then waking up in a special [[clinic]]. Later on, I discover that my body has been [[heighten]]. [[Merely]] like Richard Barrat. These [[story]] are 50 Minutes of pure action and [[wait]] all the way, You cannot fight these 3 people, as they would defeat you in all [[formulas]] of weaponry. The [[musician]] is well written, and to me, puts a [[wondrous]] [[imagery]] of 3 super beings in my mind, The sort of powers that the [[champion]] have are the same as our [[internal]] dog or cats, [[Improving]] sight, Improved hearing and [[toque]]. and the strength of 10 men for Richard and Craig and the strength of 3 [[female]] for Sharon. Who I thought was beautiful and intelligent. When I was a boy, I had a huge crush on her!!!! Now I can see why, on my DVD set. The box is very nice and it comes with a free [[pamphlet]] all about the series. I also thought that Trymane was a good boss, firm but he got things done! --------------------------------------------- Result 5496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is a very light [[headed]] comedy about a wonderful family that has a son called Pecker because he use to Peck at his Food. Pecker loves to take all kinds of pictures of the people in a small suburb of Baltimore, Md., and manages to get the attention of a group of photo art lovers from New York City. Pecker has a cute sister who goes simply nuts over SUGAR and is actually an ADDICT, taking spoonfuls of sugar from a bag. There are scenes of men showing off the lumps in their jockey's with grinding movements and gals doing pretty much the same. It is [[rather]] hard to keep your mind out of the gutter with this film, but who cares, it is only a film to give you a few laughs at a [[simple]] picture made in 1998. This is a very light [[led]] comedy about a wonderful family that has a son called Pecker because he use to Peck at his Food. Pecker loves to take all kinds of pictures of the people in a small suburb of Baltimore, Md., and manages to get the attention of a group of photo art lovers from New York City. Pecker has a cute sister who goes simply nuts over SUGAR and is actually an ADDICT, taking spoonfuls of sugar from a bag. There are scenes of men showing off the lumps in their jockey's with grinding movements and gals doing pretty much the same. It is [[comparatively]] hard to keep your mind out of the gutter with this film, but who cares, it is only a film to give you a few laughs at a [[mere]] picture made in 1998. --------------------------------------------- Result 5497 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] With its companion piece [[MASTERS]] OF [[HORROR]], NIGHTMARES AND DREAMSCAPES can only be seen as the [[absolute]] nadir of the genre that [[began]] so auspiciously with THE [[TWILIGHT]] [[ZONE]] and THE OUTER LIMITS.

Of course, [[part]] of the problem is that it does [[nothing]] to be of any interest to a [[comparatively]] adult audience, [[instead]] [[aiming]] at TEN-YEAR-OLDS, who are only able to [[count]] body-bags, and scarcely that. And so grossness is king, and King is grossness.

Stephen King is [[simply]] illiterate – in general he has the [[aptitude]] for storytelling of Bart Simpson. Since he cannot read his [[sole]] inspiration is the [[movies]].

True, the [[cinema]] is not such a bad place to start, since it has generally escaped the onslaught of "Realism". But these [[films]] are only the [[rumor]], not the thing, and if you [[want]] to [[WRITE]], you have to [[dig]] deeper.

Of course, only PICKMAN had monsters as [[close]] acquaintances. But even so, it should be clear to any [[undergraduate]] that [[vampires]] are not Dracula and Lugosi.

[[At]] [[least]] AUTOPSY [[ROOM]] FOUR is a [[clear]] indication of what is wrong. One can [[almost]] imagine this [[pathetic]] dolt [[sitting]] as his desk [[trying]] to [[come]] up with something [[SCARY]].

Not, mind you, [[trying]] to describe [[accurately]] the [[horror]] of the system of which he is an [[integral]] part, [[making]] the [[stupid]] stupider, but [[trying]] to come up with a [[scary]] [[story]] for his [[little]] nephew. [[Suppose]], you were [[paralyzed]], and people thought you were dead and [[started]] to cut you open like they do at those autopsy things! Wouldn't that be gross? And that, [[boys]] and [[girls]], is the [[story]].

What about characterization? [[Oh]] yes, he's one of these [[suits]], who never really appreciated life, you [[know]], and now it's too late, right? And he's [[shouting]] – well, they can't actually [[hear]] him, you [[know]] – he's saying that he's [[going]] to sue the [[hospital]], but he's not such a big [[shot]] anymore, you [[see]], [[lying]] there (or is it [[laying]], I can never [[remember]]) and all. And he's [[thinking]]: [[Oh]] no please, please don't cut me and this is terrible, lying (or laying) like that – now, wouldn't that be a great story? You know I read somewhere that a snake bite can do that, I think it was that great medical authority Agatha Christie. What was the name of that snake again, oh yeah, a BOOMSLANG – has quite a ring to it, doesn't it.

Let's make it a PERUVIAN BOOMSLANG! Sure, Steve, that's great – except that BOOMSLANG is Afrikaans, you moron! But how can you really tell that the target audience is children, and not simply mental defects? It's easy: There's no sex.

Well, there is, but it's the kind glimpsed through a crack in the door to our parent's bedroom. Modern filmmakers are really big on the erotic aspects of the genre, the monster, the female victim, the chase.

But unlike UNIVERSAL and LEWTON they have no idea what's going on. All that's really left is the giggling outside the SM club and the Fascist credo that people with sexual preferences are intrinsically evil.

In spite of a certain discrepancy in size, King Kong knew exactly what to do with Fay Wray. Freddy Krueger can only kill her.

And since there's no [[real]] titillation in that, he has to torture her first – not in any way that might excite her, you understand, since that would upset our puritan sentiments. And so, horror and romanticism become simply unpleasantness and the grooming of psychopaths.

Our hero, you see, is a rubber fetishist, and can only get a boner if someone touches him you know down there with you know – rubber gloves (giggle). And that's what they use in autopsies, and that's how they discover that he is, in fact, you know.

Obviously, this is the author at the height of his inspirational powers. Too bad, they cut it out, since it might have upset the FIVE-YEAR-OLDS watching the show! With its companion piece [[MASTER]] OF [[TERROR]], NIGHTMARES AND DREAMSCAPES can only be seen as the [[unmitigated]] nadir of the genre that [[inaugurated]] so auspiciously with THE [[DUSK]] [[AREAS]] and THE OUTER LIMITS.

Of course, [[party]] of the problem is that it does [[none]] to be of any interest to a [[rather]] adult audience, [[however]] [[objectives]] at TEN-YEAR-OLDS, who are only able to [[comte]] body-bags, and scarcely that. And so grossness is king, and King is grossness.

Stephen King is [[exclusively]] illiterate – in general he has the [[fitness]] for storytelling of Bart Simpson. Since he cannot read his [[alone]] inspiration is the [[film]].

True, the [[filmmaking]] is not such a bad place to start, since it has generally escaped the onslaught of "Realism". But these [[filmmaking]] are only the [[gossip]], not the thing, and if you [[wanting]] to [[WRITES]], you have to [[digs]] deeper.

Of course, only PICKMAN had monsters as [[closed]] acquaintances. But even so, it should be clear to any [[baccalaureate]] that [[vampire]] are not Dracula and Lugosi.

[[For]] [[lowest]] AUTOPSY [[CHAMBER]] FOUR is a [[unmistakable]] indication of what is wrong. One can [[roughly]] imagine this [[unfortunate]] dolt [[seated]] as his desk [[tempting]] to [[coming]] up with something [[FEARFUL]].

Not, mind you, [[try]] to describe [[exactly]] the [[terror]] of the system of which he is an [[intrinsic]] part, [[doing]] the [[dumb]] stupider, but [[seeking]] to come up with a [[frightful]] [[saga]] for his [[petite]] nephew. [[Imagine]], you were [[crippled]], and people thought you were dead and [[begins]] to cut you open like they do at those autopsy things! Wouldn't that be gross? And that, [[boy]] and [[girl]], is the [[stories]].

What about characterization? [[Ah]] yes, he's one of these [[clothes]], who never really appreciated life, you [[savoir]], and now it's too late, right? And he's [[screaming]] – well, they can't actually [[heard]] him, you [[savoir]] – he's saying that he's [[go]] to sue the [[clinic]], but he's not such a big [[offed]] anymore, you [[behold]], [[lied]] there (or is it [[lays]], I can never [[rember]]) and all. And he's [[thought]]: [[Oooh]] no please, please don't cut me and this is terrible, lying (or laying) like that – now, wouldn't that be a great story? You know I read somewhere that a snake bite can do that, I think it was that great medical authority Agatha Christie. What was the name of that snake again, oh yeah, a BOOMSLANG – has quite a ring to it, doesn't it.

Let's make it a PERUVIAN BOOMSLANG! Sure, Steve, that's great – except that BOOMSLANG is Afrikaans, you moron! But how can you really tell that the target audience is children, and not simply mental defects? It's easy: There's no sex.

Well, there is, but it's the kind glimpsed through a crack in the door to our parent's bedroom. Modern filmmakers are really big on the erotic aspects of the genre, the monster, the female victim, the chase.

But unlike UNIVERSAL and LEWTON they have no idea what's going on. All that's really left is the giggling outside the SM club and the Fascist credo that people with sexual preferences are intrinsically evil.

In spite of a certain discrepancy in size, King Kong knew exactly what to do with Fay Wray. Freddy Krueger can only kill her.

And since there's no [[actual]] titillation in that, he has to torture her first – not in any way that might excite her, you understand, since that would upset our puritan sentiments. And so, horror and romanticism become simply unpleasantness and the grooming of psychopaths.

Our hero, you see, is a rubber fetishist, and can only get a boner if someone touches him you know down there with you know – rubber gloves (giggle). And that's what they use in autopsies, and that's how they discover that he is, in fact, you know.

Obviously, this is the author at the height of his inspirational powers. Too bad, they cut it out, since it might have upset the FIVE-YEAR-OLDS watching the show! --------------------------------------------- Result 5498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yesterday my Spanish / Catalan wife and myself saw this emotional lesson in history. Spain is going into the direction of political confrontation again. That is why this masterpiece should be shown in all Spanish High Schools. It is a tremendous lesson in the hidden criminality of fascism. The American pilot who gets involved in the Spanish Civil War chooses for the democratically elected Republican Government. The criminal role of religion is surprisingly well shown in one of the most inventive scenes that Uribe ever made. The colors are magnificent. The cruelty of a war (could anybody tell me the difference between Any war and a Civil war ?)is used as a scenario of hope when two young children express their feelings and protect each other. The cowards that start their abuse of power even towards innocent children are now active again. A film like 'El viaje de Carol'/ 'Carol's journey' tells one of the so many sad stories of the 20th Century. It is a better lesson in history than any book could contain. Again great work from the Peninsula Iberica ! --------------------------------------------- Result 5499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Director Sidney Lumet has made some masterpieces,like Network,Dog Day Afternoon or Serpico.But,he was not having too much luck on his most recent works.Gloria (1999) was pathetic and Find Me Guilty was an interesting,but failed experiment.Now,Lumet brings his best film in decades and,by my point of view,a true masterpiece:Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.I think this film is like a rebirth for Lumet.This movie has an excellent story which,deeply,has many layers.Also,I think the ending of the movie is perfect.The performances are brilliant.Philip Seymour Hoffman brings,as usual,a magnificent performance and he's,no doubt,one of the best actors of our days.Ethan Hawke is also an excellent actor but he's underrated by my point of view.His performance in here is great.The rest of the cast is also excellent(specially,the great Albert Finney) but these two actors bring monumental performances which were sadly ignored by the pathetic Oscars.The film has a good level of intensity,in part thanks to the performances and,in part,thanks to the brilliant screenplay.Before the Devil Knows You're Dead is a real masterpiece with perfect direction,a great screenplay and excellent performances.We need more movies like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Having read the comments on the site I feel [[compelled]] to [[write]] in for the first time. It seems this [[movie]] is like Marmite and has [[split]] the audience. I have to [[say]] that while I agree [[films]] don't have to make sense to be [[enjoyable]] (see MULHOLLAND DRIVE) they still have to [[engage]] you with the [[characters]]. Now while I was totally absorbed by the [[murderous]] lesbian affair in Lynch's opus, I have to say I couldn't [[give]] a [[turd]] about [[Mr]] [[Green]] or the other [[cardboard]] gangsters that inhabited this dayglo world.

[[Also]], while so many people seem to try and say you didn't enjoy because you didn't get it I would have to disagree - I didn't [[enjoy]] because I was bored. I wanted the film to end and constantly listening to those [[quotes]] over and over again did not [[help]]. Call it clever if you will - I think it's repetitious.

However, my main [[reason]] for writing is to [[ask]] all the other reviewers a question - there were no end credits on the print of the film I saw. Just music over black. Did I watch a dud print or is this evidence of GR's pretentiousness? Or, did everyone involved in the [[movie]] watch the rough cut and have their [[name]] removed??? Having read the comments on the site I feel [[coerced]] to [[writing]] in for the first time. It seems this [[filmmaking]] is like Marmite and has [[hyphenate]] the audience. I have to [[told]] that while I agree [[kino]] don't have to make sense to be [[pleasurable]] (see MULHOLLAND DRIVE) they still have to [[embark]] you with the [[nature]]. Now while I was totally absorbed by the [[fatal]] lesbian affair in Lynch's opus, I have to say I couldn't [[confer]] a [[shite]] about [[Olli]] [[Greene]] or the other [[carton]] gangsters that inhabited this dayglo world.

[[Similarly]], while so many people seem to try and say you didn't enjoy because you didn't get it I would have to disagree - I didn't [[enjoys]] because I was bored. I wanted the film to end and constantly listening to those [[citation]] over and over again did not [[pomoc]]. Call it clever if you will - I think it's repetitious.

However, my main [[raison]] for writing is to [[enquired]] all the other reviewers a question - there were no end credits on the print of the film I saw. Just music over black. Did I watch a dud print or is this evidence of GR's pretentiousness? Or, did everyone involved in the [[filmmaking]] watch the rough cut and have their [[behalf]] removed??? --------------------------------------------- Result 5501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Whenever I [[make]] up a [[list]] of the absolute worst [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]], this [[movie]] is [[always]] on it. It has no redeeming [[qualities]] whatsoever. It [[took]] an act of will to [[sit]] through the whole thing, and I would [[sooner]] [[spill]] my own blood than have to [[sit]] through it again.

What's wrong with it? [[Let]] me tell you the story of my [[trip]] to [[go]] see it in the [[theater]].

I went to a midnight show, on a Saturday [[night]]. I the only ones in the [[theater]] were myself, and a bunch of [[loud]], [[boisterous]], rather [[unruly]] [[teenagers]], [[sitting]] [[somewhere]] behind me. They were [[obviously]] out having a [[good]] time on a [[Saturday]] [[night]], and had [[come]] to this "[[comedy]]" for some [[laughs]]. Before the [[movie]] [[starts]], during the previews, they were [[laughing]] and [[joking]] and making loud [[comments]] having a [[grand]] [[old]] time. It was borderline [[annoying]]; had they [[continued]] their [[unbridled]] enthusiasm into the [[actual]] [[movie]], I might've [[said]] [[something]], but I was feeling tolerant and empathetic of their [[spirited]] fun, so I let it [[go]]. And they did [[settle]] down once the [[movie]] [[started]].

Why am I [[telling]] you all this? Because you can [[judge]] this alleged "[[comedy]]" by the [[effect]] it had not just on myself, but on this rowdy bunch.

[[During]] the [[entire]] run of the [[film]], not one [[person]] in the [[theater]] [[laughed]]. Not once. Not myself, not the boisterous [[kids]]. Absolute [[silence]], aside from the soundtrack. And when the [[film]] was over and the lights [[came]] on, we all, all of us, slowly [[filed]] out of the [[theater]] in [[slow]], somber, absolute silence. It could've been a [[funeral]].

This was the [[effect]] that this "[[comedy]]" [[produced]]. Not laughter, not enjoyment, but absolute DEPRESSION. It was a [[depressing]], [[depressing]] [[movie]], and not the [[tiniest]] bit [[funny]]. Preachy, self-indulgent, [[depressing]], but not [[funny]].

I consider Mel Brooks' "[[Blazing]] Saddles" to be on the [[short]] list for Funniest [[Movie]] Ever. It [[still]] [[absolutely]] [[blows]] my [[mind]] that the same [[gentleman]] [[could]] be responsible for [[quite]] [[probably]] the Least [[Funny]] [[Movie]] Ever.

In short: if you're feeling too happy, give this movie a whirl; otherwise, don't say I didn't warn you. Whenever I [[deliver]] up a [[listings]] of the absolute worst [[movie]] I've ever [[noticed]], this [[filmmaking]] is [[repeatedly]] on it. It has no redeeming [[qualifications]] whatsoever. It [[picked]] an act of will to [[seated]] through the whole thing, and I would [[beforehand]] [[spilling]] my own blood than have to [[seated]] through it again.

What's wrong with it? [[Allowing]] me tell you the story of my [[journey]] to [[going]] see it in the [[movies]].

I went to a midnight show, on a Saturday [[nuit]]. I the only ones in the [[cinemas]] were myself, and a bunch of [[vocal]], [[raucous]], rather [[undisciplined]] [[adolescence]], [[seated]] [[nowhere]] behind me. They were [[naturally]] out having a [[buena]] time on a [[Mondays]] [[nighttime]], and had [[coming]] to this "[[humor]]" for some [[laugh]]. Before the [[filmmaking]] [[began]], during the previews, they were [[kidding]] and [[joke]] and making loud [[feedback]] having a [[tremendous]] [[elderly]] time. It was borderline [[irritating]]; had they [[continuous]] their [[unchecked]] enthusiasm into the [[real]] [[movies]], I might've [[stated]] [[anything]], but I was feeling tolerant and empathetic of their [[lively]] fun, so I let it [[going]]. And they did [[settled]] down once the [[films]] [[began]].

Why am I [[saying]] you all this? Because you can [[richter]] this alleged "[[comedian]]" by the [[impacts]] it had not just on myself, but on this rowdy bunch.

[[At]] the [[whole]] run of the [[films]], not one [[anyone]] in the [[movies]] [[smiled]]. Not once. Not myself, not the boisterous [[youths]]. Absolute [[speechless]], aside from the soundtrack. And when the [[filmmaking]] was over and the lights [[arrived]] on, we all, all of us, slowly [[file]] out of the [[movies]] in [[lento]], somber, absolute silence. It could've been a [[burial]].

This was the [[impacts]] that this "[[humor]]" [[generated]]. Not laughter, not enjoyment, but absolute DEPRESSION. It was a [[grim]], [[sombre]] [[filmmaking]], and not the [[littlest]] bit [[droll]]. Preachy, self-indulgent, [[sombre]], but not [[hilarious]].

I consider Mel Brooks' "[[Burning]] Saddles" to be on the [[terse]] list for Funniest [[Film]] Ever. It [[however]] [[abundantly]] [[strokes]] my [[intellect]] that the same [[messieurs]] [[wo]] be responsible for [[abundantly]] [[undeniably]] the Least [[Droll]] [[Cinematographic]] Ever.

In short: if you're feeling too happy, give this movie a whirl; otherwise, don't say I didn't warn you. --------------------------------------------- Result 5502 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have zero interest [[rap]] and in ghetto culture, i'm white and [[like]] classic [[rock]], [[however]], that did not [[stop]] me from appreciating this [[fantastic]] [[comedy]]. Its pretty much a sequel of This Is Spinal Tap in the sense that it is the same movie, just about rap [[instead]] or rock. Yet it's [[hilarious]]. There are many [[funny]] jokes but not without a few jokes that just fall flat. The characters are all very funny and believable. I watched just because it made me [[laugh]] at 3 a.m., and any movie that can do that [[warrants]] at least a [[test]] screening. One of the [[reasons]] why this movies was so funny was that it makes fun of rap from a different. Rap [[today]] is concerned with the [[wrong]] [[things]] and [[get]] by with studio noise and [[little]] [[talent]]. This [[movie]] comes from a [[time]] where [[rappers]] [[deserved]] more [[credit]]. [[Overall]], it's a [[funny]] [[movie]] with [[many]] jokes about [[racism]], sex and music [[culture]] among the more [[obvious]] [[themes]] of [[humor]]. This is [[highly]] recommend for any [[fan]] of This is Spinal Tap. They are essentially the same movie, just about [[different]] [[worlds]], and yes, the same jokes work in both movies. I have zero interest [[rapper]] and in ghetto culture, i'm white and [[likes]] classic [[rocks]], [[conversely]], that did not [[halted]] me from appreciating this [[wondrous]] [[travesty]]. Its pretty much a sequel of This Is Spinal Tap in the sense that it is the same movie, just about rap [[alternatively]] or rock. Yet it's [[humorous]]. There are many [[comical]] jokes but not without a few jokes that just fall flat. The characters are all very funny and believable. I watched just because it made me [[laughter]] at 3 a.m., and any movie that can do that [[justifies]] at least a [[tests]] screening. One of the [[justification]] why this movies was so funny was that it makes fun of rap from a different. Rap [[thursday]] is concerned with the [[amiss]] [[items]] and [[gets]] by with studio noise and [[petite]] [[talents]]. This [[films]] comes from a [[moment]] where [[rapper]] [[merit]] more [[credits]]. [[Totals]], it's a [[comical]] [[cinema]] with [[several]] jokes about [[racist]], sex and music [[cropping]] among the more [[glaring]] [[item]] of [[comedy]]. This is [[heavily]] recommend for any [[ventilator]] of This is Spinal Tap. They are essentially the same movie, just about [[multiple]] [[universe]], and yes, the same jokes work in both movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Many people like this movie and many more love it, but it seems that it is all for the wrong [[reasons]]. Scarface should be liked and loved but not in the way it has been or is.

Many people say the acting was over-the-top, but who better to do an over-the-top character than Al Pacino. To say that Pacino went over-the-top in here would be an understatement. Yet he does it so well, he just [[brings]] the inner devil out of you so well. His character Tony Montana was not such a great guy to begin with but his thirst for power just bring his sickness of greed to another level; an inhumane [[level]]. Sure at times [[Pacino]] seems to be a bit cartoonish and surreal but that does not at all to me seem to be a liability at all. The supporting cast [[served]] its job very well. Michelle Pfeiffer was not really at her best but she certainly fit the role she played. On the other hand Steven Bauer was at his best, still he is Steven Bauer. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio was good and like Michelle Pfeiffer fit her role very well. Robert Loggia I have always enjoyed watching in just seeing him yell. Other than Pacino they were not really any standout or memorable performances. Everybody just seemed to fit their roles by being there. They did not fit in perfectly but were [[convincing]] enough.

Brian De [[Palma]] did a very good job directing this movie. Whenever an actor is able to become larger than life with his performance some credit should be given to the director and I will certainly give De [[Palma]] that. Brian De [[Palma]], [[though]] not [[given]] the respect, is a very versatile director by my count. He knows how to direct [[movies]] according to their [[genres]], but that at [[times]] has not [[turned]] out well. In here it does, this is by all counts a gangster movie but few are much better than this one because of De [[Palma]].

The writing was [[great]] it was just [[pure]] Oliver [[Stone]]. When I [[saw]] the credits at the [[end]] of this [[movie]] and [[saw]] that Oliver [[Stone]] had [[written]] this I was not the least bit [[surprised]]. That is a [[testament]] to him though. I have [[always]] though of him as a [[great]] [[writer]] and to me he proves this once again with [[Scarface]]. [[Nobody]] knows how to [[write]] a [[surreal]] [[reality]] for a [[movie]] than Oliver [[Stone]].

The music was good but not that great. It is certainly not my favorite from Giorgio Moroder. The music was a little bit too 80s-ish for me but it didn't annoy me. The cinematography was good, not amazing but really who cares with a movie like this.

This has probably been one of the most influential movies in the past 25 years but as [[mentioned]] before it is for the wrong reasons. People should realize that the character of [[Tony]] Montana is no hero, he is a monster. He is not inspiring in anyway. He is greedy, bloodthirsty, uneducated and self consumed. Yet he is a role model to many people because he is in some way or another a rebel but probably most of all because he is a deluded gangster. A vigilante would be like Mother Tereasa next to Scarface.

The good thing about this movie though is that it shows that the Tony Montanas' are not the real problem. If we or the people of authority would want to shut people like him down we could do it but we don't. In a freaky twisted way he is a necessity of our society. He is somebody you could blame everything on and fell better about yourself doing it. The Tony Montanas' of this world are the scapegoats of our society. This in no way excuses people like him. Instead it is more of a reminder that we shouldn't excuse or allow ourselves to do bad things just because we measure up or think we measure up compared better to a gangster or drug dealer. I love this movie because it is more than a corruption movie, it is a movie that in a strange way makes you self reflect. Many people like this movie and many more love it, but it seems that it is all for the wrong [[motivation]]. Scarface should be liked and loved but not in the way it has been or is.

Many people say the acting was over-the-top, but who better to do an over-the-top character than Al Pacino. To say that Pacino went over-the-top in here would be an understatement. Yet he does it so well, he just [[poses]] the inner devil out of you so well. His character Tony Montana was not such a great guy to begin with but his thirst for power just bring his sickness of greed to another level; an inhumane [[plano]]. Sure at times [[Deniro]] seems to be a bit cartoonish and surreal but that does not at all to me seem to be a liability at all. The supporting cast [[acted]] its job very well. Michelle Pfeiffer was not really at her best but she certainly fit the role she played. On the other hand Steven Bauer was at his best, still he is Steven Bauer. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio was good and like Michelle Pfeiffer fit her role very well. Robert Loggia I have always enjoyed watching in just seeing him yell. Other than Pacino they were not really any standout or memorable performances. Everybody just seemed to fit their roles by being there. They did not fit in perfectly but were [[persuade]] enough.

Brian De [[Palm]] did a very good job directing this movie. Whenever an actor is able to become larger than life with his performance some credit should be given to the director and I will certainly give De [[Parma]] that. Brian De [[Parma]], [[if]] not [[afforded]] the respect, is a very versatile director by my count. He knows how to direct [[films]] according to their [[genera]], but that at [[dates]] has not [[transformed]] out well. In here it does, this is by all counts a gangster movie but few are much better than this one because of De [[Palm]].

The writing was [[wondrous]] it was just [[pur]] Oliver [[Pebble]]. When I [[sawthe]] the credits at the [[termination]] of this [[flick]] and [[seen]] that Oliver [[Pebble]] had [[authored]] this I was not the least bit [[horrified]]. That is a [[wills]] to him though. I have [[steadily]] though of him as a [[excellent]] [[novelist]] and to me he proves this once again with [[Scar]]. [[Anyone]] knows how to [[writes]] a [[unreal]] [[realities]] for a [[films]] than Oliver [[Pebble]].

The music was good but not that great. It is certainly not my favorite from Giorgio Moroder. The music was a little bit too 80s-ish for me but it didn't annoy me. The cinematography was good, not amazing but really who cares with a movie like this.

This has probably been one of the most influential movies in the past 25 years but as [[alluded]] before it is for the wrong reasons. People should realize that the character of [[Tonda]] Montana is no hero, he is a monster. He is not inspiring in anyway. He is greedy, bloodthirsty, uneducated and self consumed. Yet he is a role model to many people because he is in some way or another a rebel but probably most of all because he is a deluded gangster. A vigilante would be like Mother Tereasa next to Scarface.

The good thing about this movie though is that it shows that the Tony Montanas' are not the real problem. If we or the people of authority would want to shut people like him down we could do it but we don't. In a freaky twisted way he is a necessity of our society. He is somebody you could blame everything on and fell better about yourself doing it. The Tony Montanas' of this world are the scapegoats of our society. This in no way excuses people like him. Instead it is more of a reminder that we shouldn't excuse or allow ourselves to do bad things just because we measure up or think we measure up compared better to a gangster or drug dealer. I love this movie because it is more than a corruption movie, it is a movie that in a strange way makes you self reflect. --------------------------------------------- Result 5504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Set in a post-apocalyptic environment, cyborgs [[led]] by warlord [[Job]] rein over the human [[population]]. They basically keep them as livestock, as they need fresh human blood to live off. Nea and her brother managed to survive one of their attacks when she was a kid, and years have past when she came face-to-face with the cyborgs again, but this time she's saved by the cyborg Gabriel, who was created to destroy all cyborgs. [[Job]] and his men are on their way to capture a largely populated city, while Nea (with revenge on mind) pleads Gabriel to train her in the way of killing cyborgs and she'll get him to Gabriel.

Cheap low-rent cyborg / post-apocalyptic foray by writer / director Albert Pyun (who made "Cyborg" prior to it and the blistering "Nemsis" the same year) is reasonably a [[misguided]] hunk of [[junk]] with some interesting novelties. Very little [[structure]] makes its [[way]] into the threadbare story, as the turgid [[script]] is [[weak]], corny and [[overstated]]. The leaden banter tries to be witty, but it pretty much stinks and comes across being comical in the unintentional moments. Most of the occurring actions are pretty senseless and [[routine]]. The [[material]] could've used another polish up, as it was an inspired idea swallowed up by lazy inclusions, lack of a narrative and an almost jokey tone. The open-ended, cliffhanger conclusion is just too [[abrupt]], especially since a sequel has yet to be made. Makes it feel like that that run out of money, and said "Time to [[pack]] up. Let's [[finish]] it off another day (or [[maybe]] in another decade). There's no rush." However it did [[find]] it [[rather]] diverting, [[thanks]] [[largely]] to its [[quick]] [[pace]], some well-executed combat and [[George]] Mooradian's gliding [[cinematography]] that beautifully captured the visually arresting [[backdrop]]. Performances are fair. Kris Kristofferson's dry and steely persona works [[perfectly]] as Gabriel and a self-assured, psychically [[capable]] [[Kathy]] [[Long]] [[pulls]] off the stunts [[expertly]] and with aggression. [[However]] her acting is too [[wooden]]. A mugging [[Lance]] Henriksen [[gives]] a mouth-watering performance of pure [[ham]], as the villainous cyborg [[leader]] [[Job]] who [[constantly]] having a saliva meltdown. Scott Paulin also [[drums]] up plenty of gleefulness as one of the cyborgs and Gary Daniels pouts about as one too. Pyun strikes up few exciting martial art set pieces, involving some flashy vigour and gratuitous slow-motion. Seeping into the background is a scorching, but mechanical sounding music score. The special effects and make-up FX stand up fine enough. Watchable, but not quite a success and it's minimal limitations can be a cause of that. Set in a post-apocalyptic environment, cyborgs [[headed]] by warlord [[Employment]] rein over the human [[demographics]]. They basically keep them as livestock, as they need fresh human blood to live off. Nea and her brother managed to survive one of their attacks when she was a kid, and years have past when she came face-to-face with the cyborgs again, but this time she's saved by the cyborg Gabriel, who was created to destroy all cyborgs. [[Labour]] and his men are on their way to capture a largely populated city, while Nea (with revenge on mind) pleads Gabriel to train her in the way of killing cyborgs and she'll get him to Gabriel.

Cheap low-rent cyborg / post-apocalyptic foray by writer / director Albert Pyun (who made "Cyborg" prior to it and the blistering "Nemsis" the same year) is reasonably a [[erroneous]] hunk of [[trash]] with some interesting novelties. Very little [[architecture]] makes its [[route]] into the threadbare story, as the turgid [[scripts]] is [[vulnerable]], corny and [[overrated]]. The leaden banter tries to be witty, but it pretty much stinks and comes across being comical in the unintentional moments. Most of the occurring actions are pretty senseless and [[everyday]]. The [[materials]] could've used another polish up, as it was an inspired idea swallowed up by lazy inclusions, lack of a narrative and an almost jokey tone. The open-ended, cliffhanger conclusion is just too [[sudden]], especially since a sequel has yet to be made. Makes it feel like that that run out of money, and said "Time to [[packs]] up. Let's [[conclude]] it off another day (or [[perhaps]] in another decade). There's no rush." However it did [[finds]] it [[quite]] diverting, [[appreciation]] [[substantially]] to its [[fastest]] [[tempo]], some well-executed combat and [[Georgie]] Mooradian's gliding [[film]] that beautifully captured the visually arresting [[context]]. Performances are fair. Kris Kristofferson's dry and steely persona works [[altogether]] as Gabriel and a self-assured, psychically [[able]] [[Cathy]] [[Lengthy]] [[pulling]] off the stunts [[masterfully]] and with aggression. [[Instead]] her acting is too [[timber]]. A mugging [[Toss]] Henriksen [[provides]] a mouth-watering performance of pure [[chatham]], as the villainous cyborg [[chef]] [[Jobs]] who [[always]] having a saliva meltdown. Scott Paulin also [[drum]] up plenty of gleefulness as one of the cyborgs and Gary Daniels pouts about as one too. Pyun strikes up few exciting martial art set pieces, involving some flashy vigour and gratuitous slow-motion. Seeping into the background is a scorching, but mechanical sounding music score. The special effects and make-up FX stand up fine enough. Watchable, but not quite a success and it's minimal limitations can be a cause of that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK. So it's a low-budget "film" (I used the quotes because it was shot in Hi-8 video). The acting is universally horrid, the makeup is laughable (the blood looks like it came from Sherwin-Williams and I've seen more convincing bruises made from halloween ghoul kits), and the lighting generally looks like they used someone's borrowed Toyota pickup to shine headlights on the actors.

I might be able to forgive these low-budget traits if there were some actual content, if a movie made an attempt to tell a story. But this collection of video footage can boast of no plot, no real characters, and no momentum. It's a self-indulgent mess.

And don't worry -- no spoilers here, 'cause there's absolutely nothing to spoil. --------------------------------------------- Result 5506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First off, I'm a huge fan of 80s movies, and of Jennifer Conelly as well. So yesterday, I wandered into a local used book/movie store and found a VHS copy. I read the back and it sounded good and for $3.99, it was a good deal. So I took it home and popped it in the VCR. What a sweet movie! At my age now, I relate more to movies like About Last Night or St. Elmo's Fire, but still I remember what it was like to be 15/16 and in love with an older guy, etc. We all have those little crushes when we're younger. And if it doesn't work out, we're heartbroken and we think that we'll never get over it. But of course we do. Many times. It's that sort of sweet quality that I really got from this movie. The feeling of "Oooh! I remember when something like that happened to me..." is all through it. The characters are interesting and well-developed. I recommend it to anyone who likes 80s movies, teen films in particular, or to anyone who just wants to go back and remember a simpler time in their lives. --------------------------------------------- Result 5507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] While listening to an audio book, Cambpell Scott is the reader. I was so excited to hear his voice and that brought back my disappointment that "Six Degrees" was [[canceled]]. They never seem to keep the good shows on air long enough to capture an audience that can connect with the shows story. What a shame, and shame on th network for not giving this show a full seasons chance. This was an [[excellent]] show to watch with a great cast. The network gave "Men in Trees" a second chance witch is also a great show , but they took "Invasion" off and that also was something totally different to watch, not the same old-same old themes. Why can't the networks get it right. While listening to an audio book, Cambpell Scott is the reader. I was so excited to hear his voice and that brought back my disappointment that "Six Degrees" was [[nullified]]. They never seem to keep the good shows on air long enough to capture an audience that can connect with the shows story. What a shame, and shame on th network for not giving this show a full seasons chance. This was an [[wondrous]] show to watch with a great cast. The network gave "Men in Trees" a second chance witch is also a great show , but they took "Invasion" off and that also was something totally different to watch, not the same old-same old themes. Why can't the networks get it right. --------------------------------------------- Result 5508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Valentine]] is a [[horrible]] [[movie]]. This is what I [[thought]] of it:

Acting: [[Very]] [[bad]]. [[Katherine]] Heigl can not [[act]]. The other's weren't much better.

Story: The story was [[okay]], but it [[could]] have been more [[developed]]. This [[movie]] had the [[potential]] to be a [[great]] movie, but it failed.

[[Music]]: [[Yes]], some of the music was pretty cool.

Originality: Not very [[original]]. The name `Paige Prescott' [[Recognize]] Prescott?

Bottom Line: Don't [[see]] Valentine. It's a really [[stupid]] movie.

1/10

[[Valentin]] is a [[abysmal]] [[filmmaking]]. This is what I [[thinks]] of it:

Acting: [[Eminently]] [[unfavourable]]. [[Katie]] Heigl can not [[ley]]. The other's weren't much better.

Story: The story was [[alright]], but it [[did]] have been more [[formulated]]. This [[filmmaking]] had the [[prospective]] to be a [[whopping]] movie, but it failed.

[[Musical]]: [[Yup]], some of the music was pretty cool.

Originality: Not very [[upfront]]. The name `Paige Prescott' [[Confess]] Prescott?

Bottom Line: Don't [[seeing]] Valentine. It's a really [[dumb]] movie.

1/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 5509 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I actually prefer Robin Williams in his more serious roles (e.g. Good Will Hunting, The Fisher King, The World According to Garp). These are my favorite Robin Williams movies. But Seize the Day, although well-acted, is one of the worst movies I've ever seen and certainly the worst Robin Williams movie (even worse than Death to Smoochy, Club Paradise, and Alladin on Ice).

Every good story is going to have its ups and downs. This movie, however, is one giant down. I don't need a feel-good Hollywood cheese-fest, but I've got to have something other than 90 minutes of complete and utter hopelessness. This movie reminds me of "Love Liza" (which is actually worse) because it seems that the only point of the movie is to see how far one person can fall. The answer? Who cares. --------------------------------------------- Result 5510 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[trick]] to creating a good, solid [[mystery]] story is as much a matter of timing as its about plot contrivances, [[colorful]] [[characters]] or [[surprising]] twists. Anyone who has ever labored in frustration with an un-finishable [[Sunday]] New York [[Times]] crossword knows that any puzzle that takes too [[long]] to solve ceases to be any fun. The [[best]] murder [[mysteries]], be they on film or in print, are slight affairs that get to the point, spell out their clues, line up their suspects and, hopefully, zap us with a few surprises; being complicated without being unduly confusing. And they play fair; on second, third and fourth viewings of the clues and red herrings we should be just as pleased to marvel at how well it all comes together as we were at being surprised in the first place. Indeed, good thrillers should get better on repeated viewings as we anticipate the double and triple crosses.

Sidney Lumet's comedy-thriller DEATHTRAP, as derived from Ira Levin's hit Broadway play, is a [[great]] example. It moves along at a tidy clip, skillfully juggling its clues, being (almost) totally honest with us (even when it is lying to us) and yet never revealing where it is going (even when it is telling us where it might go). It is less a murder mystery movie in the traditional vane than it is a movie about murder mysteries, derived from a play about playwriting. Rather than going backward -- a murder and then an investigation to explain why everything happened -- DEATHTRAP leads us through the crime(s) step by step, leaving ample room for the unexpected; as the ads advise it is less a "whodunit" than a "who'lldoit."

DEATHTRAP is often compared (unfavorably, oddly enough) to the play and movie versions of SLEUTH, though in reality it has much more in common with SCREAM, the self-mocking essay on teeny-bopper horror flicks. Like that clever film, DEATHTRAP labels itself (a thriller about thrillers), sets it parameters ("a one-set, five character moneymaker") and then proceeds to deconstruct its genre by revealing itself as "the most outlandish and preposterous set of [[circumstances]] entertaining enough to persuade an audience to suspend its disbelief."

DEATHTRAP bravely gives us a mystery with only five major characters, two of which are of minimum importance. Henry Jones as a cagey lawyer is on hand mostly for exposition (and to supply us with his penchant for folksy charm) and Irene Worth is all quirks and comic relief as a psychic-cum-sleuth who acts as the nominal detective. That leaves three main characters to be the killer(s) and/or the victim(s): It is a testament to Michael Caine's abilities that as Sidney Bruhl, a down-on-his-luck author of mystery plays, he creates a character who we intrinsically like and trust, even as we recognize immediately that almost everything he says is a lie. As his adoring, if somewhat ditzy wife, Myra, Dyan Canon flirts with being over the top by giving a roller-coaster ride of a performance with a character that by turns seems to be frail or overbearing, crafty or hysterical, timid or bold and uncompromisingly in love with a less than reciprocating Sidney. The third angle of this unexpected triangle is a fledgling playwright named Clifford Anderson played by Christopher Reeve in such a way that we never quite get a handle on just who his character is: enthusiastic preppie wannabe writer, semi-innocent victim or cunningly charming sociopath. As the various character dance around each other, the cleverly dour script adapted by ace scribe Jay Presson Allen manages to be consistently amusing, even as it builds suspense. And even after the final twist (an improvement over the play's finale), it may not be quite clear just who has manipulated who to do what.

Lumet is by no means a master of comedy, so he lets his able cast have free reign to flesh out the characters and they all give sharp, theatrical, yet subtle work, with Reeve being particularly noteworthy. But what Lumet does so well is to work skillfully in tight quarters. As he did brilliantly in 12 ANGRY MEN, he takes a one-set play, and with a minimum of opening up, manages to make what could have been cramped, stagy and stagnant seem endlessly photogenic and spacious. The setting, a country home converted from an old windmill, is relatively small, but as designed by Tony Walton it manages to be both cozy and charming, as well as spooky and treacherous. It is so truly difficult to tell where the studio set and the real country house cross boundaries that to a degree the set becomes a sixth character. And as the scene of the crime, it is a most inviting deathtrap indeed. The [[ruse]] to creating a good, solid [[puzzle]] story is as much a matter of timing as its about plot contrivances, [[scenic]] [[characteristics]] or [[impressed]] twists. Anyone who has ever labored in frustration with an un-finishable [[Tuesday]] New York [[Moments]] crossword knows that any puzzle that takes too [[lange]] to solve ceases to be any fun. The [[nicest]] murder [[riddles]], be they on film or in print, are slight affairs that get to the point, spell out their clues, line up their suspects and, hopefully, zap us with a few surprises; being complicated without being unduly confusing. And they play fair; on second, third and fourth viewings of the clues and red herrings we should be just as pleased to marvel at how well it all comes together as we were at being surprised in the first place. Indeed, good thrillers should get better on repeated viewings as we anticipate the double and triple crosses.

Sidney Lumet's comedy-thriller DEATHTRAP, as derived from Ira Levin's hit Broadway play, is a [[wondrous]] example. It moves along at a tidy clip, skillfully juggling its clues, being (almost) totally honest with us (even when it is lying to us) and yet never revealing where it is going (even when it is telling us where it might go). It is less a murder mystery movie in the traditional vane than it is a movie about murder mysteries, derived from a play about playwriting. Rather than going backward -- a murder and then an investigation to explain why everything happened -- DEATHTRAP leads us through the crime(s) step by step, leaving ample room for the unexpected; as the ads advise it is less a "whodunit" than a "who'lldoit."

DEATHTRAP is often compared (unfavorably, oddly enough) to the play and movie versions of SLEUTH, though in reality it has much more in common with SCREAM, the self-mocking essay on teeny-bopper horror flicks. Like that clever film, DEATHTRAP labels itself (a thriller about thrillers), sets it parameters ("a one-set, five character moneymaker") and then proceeds to deconstruct its genre by revealing itself as "the most outlandish and preposterous set of [[situations]] entertaining enough to persuade an audience to suspend its disbelief."

DEATHTRAP bravely gives us a mystery with only five major characters, two of which are of minimum importance. Henry Jones as a cagey lawyer is on hand mostly for exposition (and to supply us with his penchant for folksy charm) and Irene Worth is all quirks and comic relief as a psychic-cum-sleuth who acts as the nominal detective. That leaves three main characters to be the killer(s) and/or the victim(s): It is a testament to Michael Caine's abilities that as Sidney Bruhl, a down-on-his-luck author of mystery plays, he creates a character who we intrinsically like and trust, even as we recognize immediately that almost everything he says is a lie. As his adoring, if somewhat ditzy wife, Myra, Dyan Canon flirts with being over the top by giving a roller-coaster ride of a performance with a character that by turns seems to be frail or overbearing, crafty or hysterical, timid or bold and uncompromisingly in love with a less than reciprocating Sidney. The third angle of this unexpected triangle is a fledgling playwright named Clifford Anderson played by Christopher Reeve in such a way that we never quite get a handle on just who his character is: enthusiastic preppie wannabe writer, semi-innocent victim or cunningly charming sociopath. As the various character dance around each other, the cleverly dour script adapted by ace scribe Jay Presson Allen manages to be consistently amusing, even as it builds suspense. And even after the final twist (an improvement over the play's finale), it may not be quite clear just who has manipulated who to do what.

Lumet is by no means a master of comedy, so he lets his able cast have free reign to flesh out the characters and they all give sharp, theatrical, yet subtle work, with Reeve being particularly noteworthy. But what Lumet does so well is to work skillfully in tight quarters. As he did brilliantly in 12 ANGRY MEN, he takes a one-set play, and with a minimum of opening up, manages to make what could have been cramped, stagy and stagnant seem endlessly photogenic and spacious. The setting, a country home converted from an old windmill, is relatively small, but as designed by Tony Walton it manages to be both cozy and charming, as well as spooky and treacherous. It is so truly difficult to tell where the studio set and the real country house cross boundaries that to a degree the set becomes a sixth character. And as the scene of the crime, it is a most inviting deathtrap indeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 5511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I'll be blunt. I'm not one for politically [[correct]] [[movies]] where the [[woman]] plays the [[bad]] ass who's not going to take any [[crap]] from anyone. [[If]] any one of the cast [[members]] wanted to, they could have just [[taken]] her out in a [[heartbeat]]. It was [[entertaining]] on MST 3K, but don't [[rent]] the real [[version]]. Trust me. Have I ever [[lied]] to you? I'll be blunt. I'm not one for politically [[rightness]] [[cinematographic]] where the [[mujer]] plays the [[unfavourable]] ass who's not going to take any [[shit]] from anyone. [[Though]] any one of the cast [[member]] wanted to, they could have just [[took]] her out in a [[jiffy]]. It was [[droll]] on MST 3K, but don't [[tenancy]] the real [[stepping]]. Trust me. Have I ever [[lie]] to you? --------------------------------------------- Result 5512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] As I watched this movie I [[began]] to feel very nostalgic. As a [[child]] [[growing]] up in a rural [[area]] I [[felt]] as if I was a [[kid]] again! The swimming pond (it's called a "[[tank]]" in Central [[Texas]]), the [[running]] through the countryside like a [[wild]] free [[spirit]]! The story was very [[believable]] and I totally lost it and [[cried]] [[toward]] the end. Through the pain we [[go]] through in life...[[life]] goes on and there can be [[forgiveness]]. As I watched this movie I [[embarked]] to feel very nostalgic. As a [[kids]] [[raising]] up in a rural [[sphere]] I [[believed]] as if I was a [[infantile]] again! The swimming pond (it's called a "[[reservoir]]" in Central [[Texan]]), the [[execution]] through the countryside like a [[feral]] free [[esprit]]! The story was very [[trustworthy]] and I totally lost it and [[shouted]] [[about]] the end. Through the pain we [[going]] through in life...[[living]] goes on and there can be [[amnesty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What to say about this movie. [[Well]] it is about a bunch of [[good]] students who have some bad drugs and [[turn]] into delinquent [[students]] that sell more of the bad drugs to people. Two of those people have [[adverse]] [[effects]] as one turns into a toxic avenger [[type]] and his girlfriend [[throws]] up some [[creature]] that [[grows]] in the school's basement. That is about all there is to it and they stretch it out for 84 minutes. This movie is pretty [[bad]] and should be locked away [[forever]]. Though that is not [[fair]], some people like Troma's [[movies]] and they can watch it if they [[want]]. Troma [[movies]] for me [[though]], are the [[worst]] [[movies]] there are out there. I just [[watched]] this one out of morbid curiosity. What to say about this movie. [[Good]] it is about a bunch of [[buena]] students who have some bad drugs and [[turning]] into delinquent [[pupil]] that sell more of the bad drugs to people. Two of those people have [[negative]] [[influences]] as one turns into a toxic avenger [[kind]] and his girlfriend [[casts]] up some [[monster]] that [[heightened]] in the school's basement. That is about all there is to it and they stretch it out for 84 minutes. This movie is pretty [[unfavourable]] and should be locked away [[eternally]]. Though that is not [[impartiality]], some people like Troma's [[film]] and they can watch it if they [[wanting]]. Troma [[cinematographic]] for me [[while]], are the [[hardest]] [[filmmaking]] there are out there. I just [[observed]] this one out of morbid curiosity. --------------------------------------------- Result 5514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love Sabrina! Its one of my fave shows!! My favourite episodes are; the one where she turns Libby into a geek, the first episode, the true love episode and most of the rest from the first series. I do think the college episodes were not as good as the high school ones but they were better than the last series which was awful. Valerie was a good character as she was more rounded than Jenny, but Jenny was in some brilliant episodes. Hilda and Zelda were amazing, and there seemed to be no explanation for where they went! Libby was a good character too. I never liked Morgan or Roxy, they just weren't as good as her other friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 5515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always enjoyed the Pokemon movies. Yes, I know, all of them are very corny, mediocre in some certain areas and sure, even though they're aimed at little kids they're too adult in some fields to be able to guard them with the statement,"Hey, lighten up, it's a kids movie," but all that aside, aren't they still good pieces of entertainment? In my opinion, they are so and I enjoy them greatly. This one is just as enjoyable as the previous three, and certainly cuter. It has some really sweet and touching moments since it is the introduction of the lovable, fresh Pokemon Celebi. It's not the best Pokemon movie, but I do enjoy it more than the third installment, even though the third is not bad, and the entire series is just entertaining, harmless, popcorn family fun and should be considered nothing more, nothing less. This film has some high marks of intensity and interest, especially around the climax/ending, as do all the installments, and the characters, while a bit more lackluster than the previous three, I thought, are still likable and humorous. This films is the lowest rated and most criticized of the four feature length adaptions, and it doesn't deserve that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very heart warming and uplifting movie. Outstanding performance by Alisan Porter (Curly Sue). I saw this movie when it was first released and enjoyed it immensely. I just caught it again on the Mplex channel, and Curly Sue touched my heart again. --------------------------------------------- Result 5517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I'm not a big [[fan]] of the Stooges' [[slapstick]], but I find their [[history]] interesting. I've recently tried to check out stuff from each [[Stooge]] era, but the [[opportunity]] to [[see]] Joe shorts doesn't seem to come easy; this is the only one I've [[seen]] so far.

Some [[say]] the quality problems with Joe-era shorts are really not Joe's fault, and I suspect that's the [[case]]. Joe as a performer is far from the [[worst]] thing about this. The thing that bothers me the most about it has been pointed out in another comment: the [[pitting]] of the other guys against the third [[violates]] the whole comedy-team/Stooges ethos. Perhaps Joe's style was perceived, by those in charge, as not really fitting in -- though there were no real off-camera conflicts between him & the others -- and this was their way of working around that.

And what's with the titles of this and some of the other late Stooges shorts? Definitely a [[lack]] of [[creativity]] going on there; was that sort of thing the cause or the effect of the shorts market drying up? I'm not a big [[breather]] of the Stooges' [[comedic]], but I find their [[story]] interesting. I've recently tried to check out stuff from each [[Lackey]] era, but the [[chances]] to [[seeing]] Joe shorts doesn't seem to come easy; this is the only one I've [[saw]] so far.

Some [[said]] the quality problems with Joe-era shorts are really not Joe's fault, and I suspect that's the [[lawsuits]]. Joe as a performer is far from the [[hardest]] thing about this. The thing that bothers me the most about it has been pointed out in another comment: the [[picketing]] of the other guys against the third [[breached]] the whole comedy-team/Stooges ethos. Perhaps Joe's style was perceived, by those in charge, as not really fitting in -- though there were no real off-camera conflicts between him & the others -- and this was their way of working around that.

And what's with the titles of this and some of the other late Stooges shorts? Definitely a [[scarcity]] of [[imagination]] going on there; was that sort of thing the cause or the effect of the shorts market drying up? --------------------------------------------- Result 5518 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If this [[movie]] as meant to discourage people from doing [[drugs]], it [[fails]]. I was ready to [[start]] [[using]] them I got waiting for [[something]] to [[happen]] and [[nothing]] ever really did. This [[movie]] is neither horror or [[drama]]. It's just the paranoia of meth users. This [[movie]] may [[win]] an award for the using the "F" word so [[many]] times and so [[uselessly]]. It was not well [[stated]], but I felt like they were [[making]] Meth to [[replace]] [[Meth]] they [[owed]] to [[someone]]. Hector just got [[worse]] and more paranoid as the [[movie]] went on and the girl just [[got]] more [[hopeless]]. The [[ending]] [[really]] [[made]] no sense. The [[movie]] made no [[sense]] unless it was just [[showing]] how [[annoying]] is is to be [[stuck]] in a [[house]] in the [[middle]] of [[nowhere]] with a meth-head. I [[relied]] on the other feedback when I [[decided]] to watch this movie and the [[rating]] on this movie should be a much lower [[average]]. If this [[filmmaking]] as meant to discourage people from doing [[drug]], it [[fail]]. I was ready to [[started]] [[used]] them I got waiting for [[algo]] to [[occur]] and [[anything]] ever really did. This [[film]] is neither horror or [[tragedy]]. It's just the paranoia of meth users. This [[filmmaking]] may [[won]] an award for the using the "F" word so [[countless]] times and so [[needlessly]]. It was not well [[reported]], but I felt like they were [[doing]] Meth to [[supersede]] [[Methamphetamine]] they [[payable]] to [[everyone]]. Hector just got [[pire]] and more paranoid as the [[movies]] went on and the girl just [[did]] more [[incorrigible]]. The [[ended]] [[truthfully]] [[introduced]] no sense. The [[movies]] made no [[feeling]] unless it was just [[display]] how [[irritating]] is is to be [[jammed]] in a [[maison]] in the [[oriente]] of [[anywhere]] with a meth-head. I [[rested]] on the other feedback when I [[deciding]] to watch this movie and the [[ratings]] on this movie should be a much lower [[medium]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Satan's Little Helper is one of the better B Horror movies I have seen. When I say better I mean the story. The film hatches a new plot, something that's not so cliché in the Horror genre - something fresh. But there are also some [[ridiculous]] [[questions]] that come along with it. Questions you will be asking yourself throughout the movie.

The film first caught my attention while I was cruising the Horror section in HMV. I was tired of all the so called "terrifiying" Hollywood blockbusters and wanted something different. The cover art for Satan's Little Helper immediately caught my attention. As you can see, the image draws you in - it's chilling! I knew it was a straight to DVD release - but I took a chance. I mean, I just seen "Boogey Man" the night before - so It couldn't get any worse! After I watched the movie, I was semi-satisfied. I loved the plot of the movie. It was really creepy how the killer was pretending to be the little boys friend, so he could kill. In some sick deranged way, he actually thought he and the little boy would become partners - a duo of terror. It was a great idea to set the film on Halloween night. This way, no one would think anything of a masked man beside a little kid. They would simply think he was his guardian. But, this is also where the "plot holes" begin to surface.

If your son came home with a "friend" he met trick or treating - that's fine. You wouldn't think anything of it - if he was 9!, or round about the same age as him. If however, he appeared with a strange man in a mask, you would be startled and protective of your child. You would ask the man to remove his mask and identify himself. You would ask why he is with your son. He doesn't know him. You would tell him to please leave. He isn't a family friend. He's a stranger. Now, we're supposed to teach our child not to talk to strangers. In this case, the mum is completely fine with it. Huh? They never seem to think it's a tad odd that the "man" doesn't speak - at all. Gruanted they think it's the daughters boyfriend, but after 10 minutes of not talking you would pull the mask off and ask him why he's not saying a word.

The film goes down hill from there. The thing that got me the most was, all the mum said was "Do you want some cider?". I can't count how many times she says this in the movie. It's like, oh you're dying - we have cider though, it's all good!! The movie started promising, and failed to deliver. It was more of a horror/comedy, and even as that it fails to deliver. I guess you could call it a "Dud","Flop" etc..

The best thing about the movie is the cover art. Though, something tells me that's not worth the 12 dollars! Satan's Little Helper is one of the better B Horror movies I have seen. When I say better I mean the story. The film hatches a new plot, something that's not so cliché in the Horror genre - something fresh. But there are also some [[farcical]] [[subjects]] that come along with it. Questions you will be asking yourself throughout the movie.

The film first caught my attention while I was cruising the Horror section in HMV. I was tired of all the so called "terrifiying" Hollywood blockbusters and wanted something different. The cover art for Satan's Little Helper immediately caught my attention. As you can see, the image draws you in - it's chilling! I knew it was a straight to DVD release - but I took a chance. I mean, I just seen "Boogey Man" the night before - so It couldn't get any worse! After I watched the movie, I was semi-satisfied. I loved the plot of the movie. It was really creepy how the killer was pretending to be the little boys friend, so he could kill. In some sick deranged way, he actually thought he and the little boy would become partners - a duo of terror. It was a great idea to set the film on Halloween night. This way, no one would think anything of a masked man beside a little kid. They would simply think he was his guardian. But, this is also where the "plot holes" begin to surface.

If your son came home with a "friend" he met trick or treating - that's fine. You wouldn't think anything of it - if he was 9!, or round about the same age as him. If however, he appeared with a strange man in a mask, you would be startled and protective of your child. You would ask the man to remove his mask and identify himself. You would ask why he is with your son. He doesn't know him. You would tell him to please leave. He isn't a family friend. He's a stranger. Now, we're supposed to teach our child not to talk to strangers. In this case, the mum is completely fine with it. Huh? They never seem to think it's a tad odd that the "man" doesn't speak - at all. Gruanted they think it's the daughters boyfriend, but after 10 minutes of not talking you would pull the mask off and ask him why he's not saying a word.

The film goes down hill from there. The thing that got me the most was, all the mum said was "Do you want some cider?". I can't count how many times she says this in the movie. It's like, oh you're dying - we have cider though, it's all good!! The movie started promising, and failed to deliver. It was more of a horror/comedy, and even as that it fails to deliver. I guess you could call it a "Dud","Flop" etc..

The best thing about the movie is the cover art. Though, something tells me that's not worth the 12 dollars! --------------------------------------------- Result 5520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I am [[sad]] to say that I [[disagree]] with other people on this Columbo episode. Death Lends a Hand is frankly kind of a [[boring]] Columbo to me. After a few times, I get bored and [[changed]] the channel. I [[still]] [[love]] Robert Culp and Patricia Crowley and Ray Milland in their [[roles]] but the story was [[weaker]] in this episode than in the others. First, Robert Culp plays an investigator for Ray Milland's character. He hires him to investigate his young pretty wife played by Patricia Crowley to see if she is having an affair. In return, Culp's character blackmails the cheating wife who plans to expose his scheme to her husband ruining his career. Out of anger, Culp kills her by striking her in the face and setting the up the body elsewhere. I don't know. Maybe I just didn't care for this one at all. Of course, Columbo gets him in the end. It's just the question of how. I am [[hapless]] to say that I [[disagreement]] with other people on this Columbo episode. Death Lends a Hand is frankly kind of a [[monotonous]] Columbo to me. After a few times, I get bored and [[shifted]] the channel. I [[yet]] [[amore]] Robert Culp and Patricia Crowley and Ray Milland in their [[functions]] but the story was [[weakest]] in this episode than in the others. First, Robert Culp plays an investigator for Ray Milland's character. He hires him to investigate his young pretty wife played by Patricia Crowley to see if she is having an affair. In return, Culp's character blackmails the cheating wife who plans to expose his scheme to her husband ruining his career. Out of anger, Culp kills her by striking her in the face and setting the up the body elsewhere. I don't know. Maybe I just didn't care for this one at all. Of course, Columbo gets him in the end. It's just the question of how. --------------------------------------------- Result 5521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is to Halloween what the hilarious "Christmas Story" is to Christmas: both are relatively low-budget, no-big-name-stars type films...and both are two of the absolute greatest and funniest movies available, both seasonal CLASSICS!!! "Spaced Invaders" comes galloping out right from the start with warmth and humor and a superb cast of characters...all five goofy Martians, Klembecker the Realtor, Russell the deputy, Vern at the "fuel dispensing depot" and so many more! You just have to see this movie to believe it, and, like "Christmas Story", it just keeps getting better and better with each viewing, and you pick up on fun little things each time!! MOST DEFINITELY A TEN!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] What an [[absolute]] pile of pants. Having read Chris Brookmyre's books religiously [[since]] I came [[across]] "[[Quite]] [[Ugly]]...", I was [[delighted]] to [[find]] out that this [[drama]] had been [[commissioned]].

I [[obviously]] had too much [[faith]].

Nesbitt is [[probably]] the [[best]] [[thing]] in this [[show]] - and even he doesn't [[quite]] [[fit]]. How [[anyone]] can read the book, and then [[adapt]] it to this piece of [[dross]] is beyond me.

[[Entire]] [[characters]] are changed, situations are [[dropped]], and to [[see]] Parlablane's [[dramatic]] break-in [[reduced]] to Nesbitt doing a [[quick]] chin up and [[sliding]] open a bay [[window]]... it [[brought]] tears to my eyes.

I dread to [[think]] what's [[going]] to [[happen]] with "[[Country]] Of The [[Blind]]" if this is the benchmark...

[[Please]], just [[avoid]] it... What an [[utter]] pile of pants. Having read Chris Brookmyre's books religiously [[because]] I came [[in]] "[[Pretty]] [[Disgusting]]...", I was [[charmed]] to [[finds]] out that this [[opera]] had been [[instructed]].

I [[undoubtedly]] had too much [[fe]].

Nesbitt is [[arguably]] the [[optimum]] [[stuff]] in this [[exhibition]] - and even he doesn't [[rather]] [[fitting]]. How [[person]] can read the book, and then [[adjusting]] it to this piece of [[dairy]] is beyond me.

[[Together]] [[personages]] are changed, situations are [[fallen]], and to [[seeing]] Parlablane's [[tremendous]] break-in [[reducing]] to Nesbitt doing a [[rapids]] chin up and [[slider]] open a bay [[luna]]... it [[introduced]] tears to my eyes.

I dread to [[thinking]] what's [[go]] to [[occur]] with "[[Nationals]] Of The [[Blinded]]" if this is the benchmark...

[[Invite]], just [[shirk]] it... --------------------------------------------- Result 5523 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Less than 10 minutes into this film I wanted it to end as it was painful. All this "horror" movie was about was a group of whiny bitches doing stupid things for 90 minutes, arguing, crying and screaming. Do not let the positive reviews fool you as this really is a terrible movie and you really shouldn't watch it.

The movies plot had potential to be something great, but it just doesn't happen. A group of five "teenage" girls are driving home one night when they find themselves being pursued by a crazed female driver who wants to kill them. Two minutes into the movie, and the characters are already arguing and this doesn't stop. All we have for 90 minutes is a bunch of girls whining, crying, screaming, "acting" and arguing. None of the dialogue is even remotely interesting too, so you don't get to really know these characters or enjoy them.

The acting was terrible and I was shocked to find out that these characters were meant to be teenagers. None of these women looked a day under 20, and one of them easily looked like she was nearly 30 years old. At least get people who look the age. None of them gave even remotely decent performances, and just seemed like they were picked off the street or were friends of the director with no acting abilities. The "actress" who played the killer overdone it, but she at least showed something that the other girls didn't - a little bit of talent.

The characters don't help things because these girls are a bunch of whiny, stupid bitches. That is all I can really say about them, and it did not help that they ALL survived. If I have to go into detail, in one scene the girls are being chased by the killer and having their car knocked a lot. One girl injures herself and is whining about it...four of them aren't wearing seat-belts...what do you expect? One of your friends is being brutally attacked by the killer...and you all just happen to be conveniently "too hurt" to help? Whatever.

The filming of the movie is absolutely terrible. I don't care if this movie had a budget the size of a peanut, the filming was terrible and it was like watching a pirated version of a movie. The cameraman was clearly in the car with the girls, pushed up against a window somewhere and the amount of times the camera blurred out, shook and brushed up against an "actress" was horrendous. It was also grainy, and at times you couldn't hear what characters were saying (not that it was anything worth listening to).

Supposedly the killers car in the movie (that supposedly got hit, even though we only heard the accident) is actually the directors car in real life. No wonder they didn't show the car getting hit! This movie is so cheap, they can't even show a car getting a little scratched up. Oh, gotta mention the soundtrack also...if that's what it was. It was horrid...sad one second, then hard rock the next.

At the end of the day, Five Across The Eyes just feels like a terrible home-movie filmed in the middle of the road at night with a bunch of stupid girls screaming and arguing for 90 minutes. It doesn't help when the script is terrible, the scares/tension/suspense and (hardly even any gore to make up for it) are absent, the acting is terrible and the picture quality and filming are horrendous.

This was a horrible low-budget movie. Avoid it at all costs.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Oh, come on, [[learn]] to have a little [[fun]]. [[When]] I was a [[kid]], oh, this movie was Oscar-worthy to me. I [[thought]] it was [[absolutely]] hysterical. One of the [[best]] [[movies]] I had [[seen]].

Now, it's a [[little]] [[stupid]], but come on. [[If]] you [[enjoyed]] "[[Excellent]] Adventure", you should most [[likely]] have fun with "Bogus Journey". This was the movie before "[[Dude]], where's my [[car]]?". Only this one is actually funny. Like I [[said]], it's just a [[good]] time. It shouldn't be [[taken]] seriously and if you enjoyed the first one, you should like "Bogus Journey". It's just a funny [[movie]] with some memorable [[characters]]. [[For]] your enjoyment only, watch it, [[let]] [[go]], and [[remember]] that it's a [[silly]] [[comedy]]. That's all.

7/10 Oh, come on, [[learnt]] to have a little [[amusing]]. [[Whenever]] I was a [[kids]], oh, this movie was Oscar-worthy to me. I [[ideology]] it was [[perfectly]] hysterical. One of the [[nicest]] [[movie]] I had [[watched]].

Now, it's a [[kiddo]] [[nonsensical]], but come on. [[Though]] you [[liked]] "[[Funky]] Adventure", you should most [[possibly]] have fun with "Bogus Journey". This was the movie before "[[Bloke]], where's my [[auto]]?". Only this one is actually funny. Like I [[avowed]], it's just a [[alright]] time. It shouldn't be [[took]] seriously and if you enjoyed the first one, you should like "Bogus Journey". It's just a funny [[flick]] with some memorable [[trait]]. [[During]] your enjoyment only, watch it, [[leave]] [[going]], and [[remind]] that it's a [[preposterous]] [[parody]]. That's all.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5525 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I greatly enjoyed Margaret Atwood's [[novel]] 'The Robber Bride', and I was thrilled to see there was a movie version. A woman frames a cop boyfriend for her own murder, and his buddy, an ex-cop journalist, tries to clear his name by checking up on the dead woman's crazy female friends. It's fortunate that the movie [[script]] fixes Ms. Atwood's clumsy [[plotting]] by focusing on the story of these two men, victims of scheming women...

Heh. Okay, you got me. If these guys are mentioned in the book, and I'm pretty sure they're entirely made up for the movie, I'll eat the dust cover of my hardback copy. Apparently, the three main female characters of the novel aren't enough to carry the movie. Zenia's manipulations aren't interesting unless we see them happen to a man, and a man's life is screwed up. Roz, Charis, and Toni tell their stories -- to a man. Because it's not important if a man doesn't hear them.

I liked the characters in the book. It hurts to see them pushed off to the side for a man's story. I normally do not look for feminist angles on media, and I tried to enjoy the movie as is. If I hadn't read the book, I might have enjoyed the movie a lot more. So if you like the cop and the ex-cop, and you want to read more about them, you're out of luck. Read the novel, if you want to enjoy luscious prose and characterization subtly layered through a plot. It's the same plot: the movie excavated it, ironed it, and sprinkled it with male angst. It's like Zenia's revenge on Margaret Atwood. I greatly enjoyed Margaret Atwood's [[newer]] 'The Robber Bride', and I was thrilled to see there was a movie version. A woman frames a cop boyfriend for her own murder, and his buddy, an ex-cop journalist, tries to clear his name by checking up on the dead woman's crazy female friends. It's fortunate that the movie [[screenplay]] fixes Ms. Atwood's clumsy [[conspiring]] by focusing on the story of these two men, victims of scheming women...

Heh. Okay, you got me. If these guys are mentioned in the book, and I'm pretty sure they're entirely made up for the movie, I'll eat the dust cover of my hardback copy. Apparently, the three main female characters of the novel aren't enough to carry the movie. Zenia's manipulations aren't interesting unless we see them happen to a man, and a man's life is screwed up. Roz, Charis, and Toni tell their stories -- to a man. Because it's not important if a man doesn't hear them.

I liked the characters in the book. It hurts to see them pushed off to the side for a man's story. I normally do not look for feminist angles on media, and I tried to enjoy the movie as is. If I hadn't read the book, I might have enjoyed the movie a lot more. So if you like the cop and the ex-cop, and you want to read more about them, you're out of luck. Read the novel, if you want to enjoy luscious prose and characterization subtly layered through a plot. It's the same plot: the movie excavated it, ironed it, and sprinkled it with male angst. It's like Zenia's revenge on Margaret Atwood. --------------------------------------------- Result 5526 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Has]] Al Pacino ever been in a [[bad]] [[movie]]? His name [[seems]] to be an imprimatur for top notch [[cinema]]. This is as good a performance as he's ever [[given]]. Pacino is an American Olivier. And this is a [[political]] thriller as good as they [[get]]. There are no good [[guys]] and no bad [[guys]]. But the system has its [[inexorable]] [[effect]] on the people who [[think]] they're [[running]] it. Not only is Pacino's performance [[compelling]] --- the [[eulogy]] at the [[dead]] child's funeral is awesomely powerful --- the [[film]] has a [[fast]] paced, gritty [[realism]] to it that [[enhances]] the [[fine]] performances without resorting to gimmicks. This [[outstanding]] [[portrait]] of [[big]] city [[politics]] also [[manages]] to [[provide]] two hours of [[superb]] [[movie]] watching without [[undue]] violence, overheated [[sex]] or gutter [[language]]. There is [[murder]]. There are [[bad]] people. But they come [[across]] effectively without [[crossing]] the [[line]]. A [[film]] like this [[restores]] my [[jaded]] [[faith]] in Hollywood. I don't [[award]] [[many]] tens. This one richly [[deserves]] it! [[Ha]] Al Pacino ever been in a [[horrid]] [[film]]? His name [[appears]] to be an imprimatur for top notch [[theatre]]. This is as good a performance as he's ever [[yielded]]. Pacino is an American Olivier. And this is a [[politician]] thriller as good as they [[obtain]]. There are no good [[dudes]] and no bad [[fella]]. But the system has its [[pitiless]] [[repercussions]] on the people who [[ideas]] they're [[implementing]] it. Not only is Pacino's performance [[convincing]] --- the [[tributes]] at the [[deceased]] child's funeral is awesomely powerful --- the [[flick]] has a [[faster]] paced, gritty [[pragmatism]] to it that [[boosts]] the [[fined]] performances without resorting to gimmicks. This [[unresolved]] [[depiction]] of [[substantial]] city [[polices]] also [[runs]] to [[render]] two hours of [[wondrous]] [[film]] watching without [[unseemly]] violence, overheated [[sexuality]] or gutter [[vocabulary]]. There is [[assassinate]]. There are [[inclement]] people. But they come [[throughout]] effectively without [[traversing]] the [[linea]]. A [[cinematography]] like this [[regains]] my [[fatigued]] [[belief]] in Hollywood. I don't [[scholarship]] [[myriad]] tens. This one richly [[merited]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5527 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (55%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I love horses and admire hand drawn animation, so I expected nothing short of amazement from Dreamworks new animated picture Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron. I guess you could say I was a little bit disappointed. You have [[wonderful]] animation and at first what seems like a perfect story. A story about absolutely nothing but a horse in nature. The animals don't sing cute songs or even talk -- a major plus. Sadly, the film has an uncalled for narration by Matt Damon; a sappy soundtrack by Bryan Adams; and enough action scenes to compare it to a Jerry Bruckheimer production. If the film makers would have just stayed with simplicity, we'd have a masterpiece here. This is not a great film, but it is good entertainment for small children. I would recommend this film to families because it has its heart in the right place and its the only thing out there right now that isn't offensive to small children. Not bad, but could have been much better. Very pretty visuals though. I love horses and admire hand drawn animation, so I expected nothing short of amazement from Dreamworks new animated picture Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron. I guess you could say I was a little bit disappointed. You have [[wondrous]] animation and at first what seems like a perfect story. A story about absolutely nothing but a horse in nature. The animals don't sing cute songs or even talk -- a major plus. Sadly, the film has an uncalled for narration by Matt Damon; a sappy soundtrack by Bryan Adams; and enough action scenes to compare it to a Jerry Bruckheimer production. If the film makers would have just stayed with simplicity, we'd have a masterpiece here. This is not a great film, but it is good entertainment for small children. I would recommend this film to families because it has its heart in the right place and its the only thing out there right now that isn't offensive to small children. Not bad, but could have been much better. Very pretty visuals though. --------------------------------------------- Result 5528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although I agree that it's a good but not great movie, for many of the reasons other posters have mentioned, I still enjoy it. One reason is the music: I'd call attention to the very cool appearance by the Candoli brothers -- Conte and Pete -- in a well-staged scene in the nightclub. These guys were two of the best jazz trumpeters of their day, and they manage to convincingly boggle the mind of Jimmy Stewart by playing an hysterical trumpet duet, one trumpet in each of Stewart's ears. The Candolis really did play that well, too, though I suspect the actual music for that scene was dubbed later by the two of them. I don't know much about George Duning, who gets the credit for the music (other than that he seems to have worked with the Three Stooges on more than one occasion), but the casting of the Candoli brothers as jazz-playing warlocks was a real nice touch. --------------------------------------------- Result 5529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] Henry Thomas showed a restraint, [[even]] when the third act turned into horrible hollywood resolution that could've killed this movie, that kept the dignity of a redemption story and as for pure creepiness-sniffing babies? Henry Thomas showed a restraint, [[yet]] when the third act turned into horrible hollywood resolution that could've killed this movie, that kept the dignity of a redemption story and as for pure creepiness-sniffing babies? --------------------------------------------- Result 5530 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you enjoy Cleese & all the British 'Pythonesque' humour of the time, then this little gem is absolutely hilarious.

Arthur Lowe is a real treat!

I saw this with friends on TV when it first came out, and its classic quotes have formed a part of our jokes for 30 years, and will do forever! I have it on tape and it is continually appreciated.

Perhaps some reviewers are taking it too seriously.

I can't believe it is now only available in the US (NTSC of course), and not in UK, where it should be an essential part of the history of British humour!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie goes beyond just being bad, it is definitively the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. Unless you yourself have a problem with necrophilia than you will not enjoy will not enjoy the scenes depicting it in this film, (if you can call it that). --------------------------------------------- Result 5532 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Well, I am delighted to hear a rumor that this may finally be issued on DVD. When that will [[happen]], I don't know, but I will grab it when it's released.

In my humble opinion, this is Errol Flynn's most entertaining [[film]], especially when "[[Gentleman]] Jim" Corbett's ring [[career]] [[begins]] in the [[film]]. Then it goes from a good film to a [[great]] one.

Few people could play arrogant men and [[still]] [[come]] off as a likable good guy as well as Flynn could and this film is a perfect example of that. Reportedly, this was Flynn's [[favorite]] role and I [[believe]] that. You can just sense how much [[fun]] he was having here. Ward [[Bond]] [[also]] [[looks]] like he was [[really]] [[enjoying]] his role playing the famous John L. Sullivan. [[Bond]], too, was never [[better]].

There is just the right [[amount]] of [[action]] boxing scenes in here and they are pretty well [[done]], too. Corbett's family is fun to watch, too, as they carry on in the stands during Jim's matches. Out of the arena, Corbett's family's constant arguments and yelling can [[get]] a [[little]] too [[loud]] and annoying but they set the stage for a [[fitting]] [[conclusion]].

And [[speaking]] of the conclusion, Sullivan's speech to Corbett after the [[big]] [[fight]] is very [[touching]] and the highlight of the film. Some mean-spirited critics (Variety, for example) didn't like that ending nor the fact that much of the film is fictionalized but - duh - most films are fictionalized, like it or not. And, in this case, it [[made]] for a nice [[story]] and nice ending. (In [[real]] life, Corbett was a very soft-spoken [[true]] gentleman, not [[anything]] like Flynn's portrayal, but Flynn [[still]] make him a good [[guy]].)

This is one of the more [[entertaining]] [[classic]] [[films]] I have ever [[watched]] and I [[eagerly]] wait for the DVD. Well, I am delighted to hear a rumor that this may finally be issued on DVD. When that will [[emerge]], I don't know, but I will grab it when it's released.

In my humble opinion, this is Errol Flynn's most entertaining [[cinematography]], especially when "[[Gentlemen]] Jim" Corbett's ring [[careers]] [[commencement]] in the [[cinematography]]. Then it goes from a good film to a [[wondrous]] one.

Few people could play arrogant men and [[yet]] [[arrived]] off as a likable good guy as well as Flynn could and this film is a perfect example of that. Reportedly, this was Flynn's [[preferable]] role and I [[think]] that. You can just sense how much [[amusing]] he was having here. Ward [[Bonding]] [[furthermore]] [[seems]] like he was [[truthfully]] [[experience]] his role playing the famous John L. Sullivan. [[Bonded]], too, was never [[optimum]].

There is just the right [[quantities]] of [[efforts]] boxing scenes in here and they are pretty well [[completed]], too. Corbett's family is fun to watch, too, as they carry on in the stands during Jim's matches. Out of the arena, Corbett's family's constant arguments and yelling can [[obtain]] a [[small]] too [[vocal]] and annoying but they set the stage for a [[fitted]] [[conclusions]].

And [[talk]] of the conclusion, Sullivan's speech to Corbett after the [[major]] [[struggling]] is very [[touches]] and the highlight of the film. Some mean-spirited critics (Variety, for example) didn't like that ending nor the fact that much of the film is fictionalized but - duh - most films are fictionalized, like it or not. And, in this case, it [[introduced]] for a nice [[conte]] and nice ending. (In [[authentic]] life, Corbett was a very soft-spoken [[real]] gentleman, not [[something]] like Flynn's portrayal, but Flynn [[yet]] make him a good [[fella]].)

This is one of the more [[amusing]] [[conventional]] [[movie]] I have ever [[observed]] and I [[impatiently]] wait for the DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 5533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The really sad thing is that this was supposedly the highest budget "Halestorm Entertainment" has had to work with. All involved should be fined for littering since all the celluloid they wasted is good for nothing more than filling the trash. Not only is the writing atrocious and the jokes awful, but the camera work and film quality are amateur at best. The soundtrack sounds like it was created on some guys laptop PC. The worst part of all is that I actually sat through the whole thing. I think just because I couldn't believe that I had actually paid to buy a ticket and that the theater I was watching it in had actually agreed to show the "film". --------------------------------------------- Result 5534 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this on TV so long ago that I can't remember when it was, but it still stands out as one of the scariest, most unnerving films I've ever seen. There is a simultaneously subtle but intense dread induced by the woman in black lurking at the edge of the frame, not quite clearly visible, so that you feel (like the solicitor hero), unsure whether its just imagination or not. It is also one of the few films which has really made me fearful to keep watching. "Production values" be hanged, good films are about a director's ability to create atmosphere using film, actors, locations/sets, music, attention to detail, and ...imagination. A real gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 5535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] I'm starting to think that there's a conspiracy, all right: one that [[involves]] a wallop of money paid to those who have access to [[published]] [[columns]] in newspapers and [[film]] and art [[magazines]] to ensure that this or that film, [[despite]] its [[obscurity]], will [[reach]] a [[higher]] status via a ratings point which will [[tag]] it with a "universal acclaim" or [[something]] [[within]] that range, [[thus]] ensuring unsuspecting folk (like me) will wander into theatres or rent the bloody thing, [[expecting]] a surprise, only to [[find]] myself racing to the [[bathroom]] to upchuck.

This movie is one of them. It has definitely make me bypass any and every posted article I come across because it's rather clear that two things might have happened: either I didn't get the message that is so hidden beneath this film's inner realms as to be impossible to access, or they and I watched two entirely different movies that happen to share the same name. 4 is a dirty trick on the audience. It's no wonder that it appeared and disappeared faster than you can say "smorsgabord" and that despite the rating it got on Metacritic, no one had heard of it. It's terrible with sugar on [[top]].

Firstly, there is the ever-present number four from start to finish. While having a little symbolism here and there is [[okay]], and it's been done with various degrees of [[success]] in many well-known movies, this movie is panting with it. Four dogs at the start of the movie, looking at the [[camera]] in a heretofore empty street when suddenly, [[machinery]] drops onto the foreground and [[proceeds]] to rip open the asphalt. Four people in a [[bar]], although one of them is a non-entity. [[Three]] of them go their separate ways but are linked nevertheless, not only to each other but to what their lives are not. [[While]] this [[concept]] may [[work]], the [[movie]] meanders so much -- [[particularly]] with the [[story]] of the would-be [[model]] played by [[Marina]] Vovchenko which goes into the territory of the [[extremely]] [[bizarre]], and not in a [[good]] [[way]] -- that the [[initial]] [[theme]] [[gets]] lost in [[translation]]. [[Or]] [[maybe]], like I [[said]] before, I just "didn't get it." The [[problem]] [[also]] [[lies]] in that so [[much]] [[time]] is [[spent]] on Marina's [[story]] (which revolves on the [[death]] of her [[sister]], from bread-chewing, no less, and the subsequent, shrill mourning which follows) that any interest in the inherent Surrealism dissipates without a trace. So what if the same horrifying tales that the three strangers interchanged in a bar seem to have a truth of their own? The director doesn't invest much time in truly tying them together, or weaving a tighter story that could, in a David Lynchian way, intersect either with the past-present, or within alternate dimensions, or even as a straightforward, mundane science-fiction story. This is an uphill battle against an insurmountable wall that only a saint (or someone into the weird for weird's sake) could endure. I'm starting to think that there's a conspiracy, all right: one that [[implies]] a wallop of money paid to those who have access to [[publish]] [[poles]] in newspapers and [[filmmaking]] and art [[magazine]] to ensure that this or that film, [[while]] its [[darkness]], will [[achieving]] a [[supreme]] status via a ratings point which will [[labelled]] it with a "universal acclaim" or [[anything]] [[inside]] that range, [[therefore]] ensuring unsuspecting folk (like me) will wander into theatres or rent the bloody thing, [[expects]] a surprise, only to [[unearthed]] myself racing to the [[latrines]] to upchuck.

This movie is one of them. It has definitely make me bypass any and every posted article I come across because it's rather clear that two things might have happened: either I didn't get the message that is so hidden beneath this film's inner realms as to be impossible to access, or they and I watched two entirely different movies that happen to share the same name. 4 is a dirty trick on the audience. It's no wonder that it appeared and disappeared faster than you can say "smorsgabord" and that despite the rating it got on Metacritic, no one had heard of it. It's terrible with sugar on [[topped]].

Firstly, there is the ever-present number four from start to finish. While having a little symbolism here and there is [[alright]], and it's been done with various degrees of [[avail]] in many well-known movies, this movie is panting with it. Four dogs at the start of the movie, looking at the [[cameras]] in a heretofore empty street when suddenly, [[machines]] drops onto the foreground and [[incomes]] to rip open the asphalt. Four people in a [[barrister]], although one of them is a non-entity. [[Tre]] of them go their separate ways but are linked nevertheless, not only to each other but to what their lives are not. [[Despite]] this [[concepts]] may [[cooperating]], the [[filmmaking]] meanders so much -- [[principally]] with the [[storytelling]] of the would-be [[models]] played by [[Naval]] Vovchenko which goes into the territory of the [[considerably]] [[odd]], and not in a [[buena]] [[manner]] -- that the [[upfront]] [[subjects]] [[receives]] lost in [[translate]]. [[Nor]] [[potentially]], like I [[say]] before, I just "didn't get it." The [[troubles]] [[similarly]] [[resides]] in that so [[very]] [[period]] is [[spending]] on Marina's [[history]] (which revolves on the [[fatalities]] of her [[sisters]], from bread-chewing, no less, and the subsequent, shrill mourning which follows) that any interest in the inherent Surrealism dissipates without a trace. So what if the same horrifying tales that the three strangers interchanged in a bar seem to have a truth of their own? The director doesn't invest much time in truly tying them together, or weaving a tighter story that could, in a David Lynchian way, intersect either with the past-present, or within alternate dimensions, or even as a straightforward, mundane science-fiction story. This is an uphill battle against an insurmountable wall that only a saint (or someone into the weird for weird's sake) could endure. --------------------------------------------- Result 5536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I just [[saw]] this at the Venice [[Film]] Festival, and can't quite decide about it. We were never allowed to get [[close]] enough to any of the characters to care about them. Maybe that was the point, that we are all in a "bubble" of our own, but these people didn't compel me to be concerned about them or shocked at their various fates. At a [[running]] time of just over an hour, the characters weren't very well developed. Lots of time was devoted to shots of factory equipment (forklifts, conveyor belts, shovels); and the slightly-creepy-looking baby dolls with surprisingly lifelike [[eyes]], that most of the characters made for a living, were somehow more interesting than the live people. An interesting [[experiment]], but somehow it never quite came together. I just [[watched]] this at the Venice [[Filmmaking]] Festival, and can't quite decide about it. We were never allowed to get [[near]] enough to any of the characters to care about them. Maybe that was the point, that we are all in a "bubble" of our own, but these people didn't compel me to be concerned about them or shocked at their various fates. At a [[run]] time of just over an hour, the characters weren't very well developed. Lots of time was devoted to shots of factory equipment (forklifts, conveyor belts, shovels); and the slightly-creepy-looking baby dolls with surprisingly lifelike [[eye]], that most of the characters made for a living, were somehow more interesting than the live people. An interesting [[piloting]], but somehow it never quite came together. --------------------------------------------- Result 5537 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This long winded [[film]] turns out to be less about Berkowitz and his effect on NYC, but more about painting [[caricatures]] of a certain group of Italian-Americans, known locally as "Guidos." The problem is that "Guidos" are uninteresting, no matter what kind of story or setting they are immersed in. They are already living [[caricatures]], so Lee only amplifies them, rather than simply [[portraying]] them.

When someone has a caricature done of themselves, they don't go home and say, "Hey, let's make the ears and nose even bigger!" That's what Lee has done in this film. The most interesting characters in the film are the two (Adrian Brody and Jennifer Esposito) who wish to escape the "Guido" lifestyle. Top it off with an uninteresting storyline for the characters, particularly John Leguizamo's, and you get a nice film to fall asleep by. Especially considering it's lengthy run time.

One more strike against it: For someone proclaiming to be a Yankees fan, and has grown up in New York, Spike Lee should know how to spell Phil Rizzuto, which is spelled incorrectly in the closing credits. This long winded [[filmmaking]] turns out to be less about Berkowitz and his effect on NYC, but more about painting [[cartoon]] of a certain group of Italian-Americans, known locally as "Guidos." The problem is that "Guidos" are uninteresting, no matter what kind of story or setting they are immersed in. They are already living [[cartoons]], so Lee only amplifies them, rather than simply [[outlining]] them.

When someone has a caricature done of themselves, they don't go home and say, "Hey, let's make the ears and nose even bigger!" That's what Lee has done in this film. The most interesting characters in the film are the two (Adrian Brody and Jennifer Esposito) who wish to escape the "Guido" lifestyle. Top it off with an uninteresting storyline for the characters, particularly John Leguizamo's, and you get a nice film to fall asleep by. Especially considering it's lengthy run time.

One more strike against it: For someone proclaiming to be a Yankees fan, and has grown up in New York, Spike Lee should know how to spell Phil Rizzuto, which is spelled incorrectly in the closing credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 5538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]]

"[[After]] [[dark]], my sweet" is a strange [[mix]] of [[sensuality]] and dullness. The film runs slow, very slow, but takes a rythm to tell a story about murder and passion. Jason Patric never ever was so sexy and powerful (the man gives a [[true]] performance), and Rachel Ward is all but sexy.

The sexual tension, the pshycological heat, the footsteps of the [[past]]... the flashback scenes, the weirdness of the Patric´s [[Character]], all becomes a [[sexy]] [[mystery]]. I [[recommend]] this one cause is the more [[sexy]] dull [[movie]] that i ever seen. Check the [[love]] making scene, it´s particulary [[sexy]].

"[[Upon]] [[gloomy]], my sweet" is a strange [[amalgam]] of [[eroticism]] and dullness. The film runs slow, very slow, but takes a rythm to tell a story about murder and passion. Jason Patric never ever was so sexy and powerful (the man gives a [[real]] performance), and Rachel Ward is all but sexy.

The sexual tension, the pshycological heat, the footsteps of the [[former]]... the flashback scenes, the weirdness of the Patric´s [[Characteristics]], all becomes a [[scorching]] [[riddle]]. I [[recommending]] this one cause is the more [[scorching]] dull [[films]] that i ever seen. Check the [[adores]] making scene, it´s particulary [[scorching]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Shame]] [[really]] - very [[rarely]] do I watch a [[film]] and am [[left]] feeling [[disappointed]] at the [[end]]. I've [[seen]] [[quite]] a few of Ira Levin's [[adaptations]] - 'Rosemary's Baby' and 'The Stepford Wives' - and [[liked]] both them, but this just didn't [[appeal]] to me.

When I read the plot [[outline]] - an [[award]] [[winning]] playwright ([[Michael]] Caine) [[decides]] to [[murder]] one of his former pupils (Christopher Reeve) and steel his [[script]] for his own [[success]] - I was [[excited]]. I like [[thrillers]], [[Michael]] Caine's a [[good]] [[actor]], Sidney Lumet's a [[good]] [[director]] and Ira Levin's [[work]] is [[generally]] [[good]].

I won't spoil it for [[anyone]] who hasn't [[seen]] it [[yet]], but all I'd [[say]] is there are [[LOADS]] of twists and [[turns]]. So [[many]] its [[kind]] of [[hard]] to [[explain]] the film's plot line in detail, without giving it away. I [[enjoyed]] the first ... 45 minutes, before the twists and turns [[began]] to occur and at that point my interest and enjoyment [[began]] to fade out. [[Though]] I have to give Lumet credit for the very amusing ending which did make me laugh out loud.

The main [[cast]] - [[Michael]] Caine, [[Christopher]] [[Reeve]], Dyan [[Cannon]] and Irene Worth - were all [[brilliant]] in their roles. [[Though]] Worth's [[obvious]] [[fake]] Russian [[accent]] [[got]] on my nerves [[slightly]] (nothing personal Irene, I think any actor's [[fake]] accent [[would]] [[irritate]] me). Not sure if Cannon's [[character]] was [[meant]] to be annoyingly [[funny]] but Dyan [[managed]] to annoy and amuse - at the same [[time]].

[[Anyone]] reading this - I don't [[want]] you to be put-off watching this because of my [[views]] - give it a [[chance]], you [[may]] [[like]] it, you may not. It's all about [[opinion]]. [[Pity]] [[truly]] - very [[seldom]] do I watch a [[filmmaking]] and am [[exited]] feeling [[disappointing]] at the [[terminate]]. I've [[saw]] [[very]] a few of Ira Levin's [[adjustment]] - 'Rosemary's Baby' and 'The Stepford Wives' - and [[loved]] both them, but this just didn't [[appellate]] to me.

When I read the plot [[expound]] - an [[awards]] [[won]] playwright ([[Michel]] Caine) [[decided]] to [[homicide]] one of his former pupils (Christopher Reeve) and steel his [[screenplay]] for his own [[avail]] - I was [[thrilled]]. I like [[thriller]], [[Michel]] Caine's a [[alright]] [[actress]], Sidney Lumet's a [[alright]] [[superintendent]] and Ira Levin's [[collaboration]] is [[routinely]] [[buena]].

I won't spoil it for [[everybody]] who hasn't [[saw]] it [[again]], but all I'd [[says]] is there are [[LOADED]] of twists and [[revolves]]. So [[numerous]] its [[genus]] of [[tough]] to [[explains]] the film's plot line in detail, without giving it away. I [[appreciated]] the first ... 45 minutes, before the twists and turns [[commencing]] to occur and at that point my interest and enjoyment [[started]] to fade out. [[While]] I have to give Lumet credit for the very amusing ending which did make me laugh out loud.

The main [[casting]] - [[Michel]] Caine, [[Christophe]] [[Prefect]], Dyan [[Barrel]] and Irene Worth - were all [[resplendent]] in their roles. [[Despite]] Worth's [[noticeable]] [[phonies]] Russian [[focusing]] [[gets]] on my nerves [[moderately]] (nothing personal Irene, I think any actor's [[fictitious]] accent [[should]] [[disturb]] me). Not sure if Cannon's [[personages]] was [[intended]] to be annoyingly [[hilarious]] but Dyan [[administered]] to annoy and amuse - at the same [[times]].

[[Everybody]] reading this - I don't [[wanting]] you to be put-off watching this because of my [[viewpoint]] - give it a [[opportunity]], you [[maggio]] [[iike]] it, you may not. It's all about [[visualise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] First and foremost I would like to say that I'm a huge Sarah Silverman fan, and having other people say that and then rag on the pilot is beyond me. Everything in the pilot was in typical Sarah Silverman form, maybe not directly funny, but the situation and the delivery are what [[counts]].

[[If]] you liked Jesus is Magic then I don't see how you wouldn't like this. It has that same [[flow]] and that same rhythm. True it's only for the [[true]] [[fans]], but if you are you'll be pleased.

Again only for the true [[fans]], there's no way around that. If you're not used to her style then you wouldn't get why this is funny. However, it is, and I hope you think so too. First and foremost I would like to say that I'm a huge Sarah Silverman fan, and having other people say that and then rag on the pilot is beyond me. Everything in the pilot was in typical Sarah Silverman form, maybe not directly funny, but the situation and the delivery are what [[counting]].

[[Unless]] you liked Jesus is Magic then I don't see how you wouldn't like this. It has that same [[flux]] and that same rhythm. True it's only for the [[authentic]] [[amateurs]], but if you are you'll be pleased.

Again only for the true [[stalkers]], there's no way around that. If you're not used to her style then you wouldn't get why this is funny. However, it is, and I hope you think so too. --------------------------------------------- Result 5541 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is very good. The screenplay is enchanting. But Meryl Streep is most impressive. Her performance is excellent. She brings me to go into the heart of her role. --------------------------------------------- Result 5542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The [[energetic]] [[young]] producer of theatrical prologues (those [[staged]] performances, [[usually]] musical, that [[often]] proceeded the movie in the [[larger]] [[cinemas]] in bygone days) [[must]] deal with [[crooked]] [[competition]], [[fraudulent]] partners, [[unfaithful]] lovers & amateur talent to [[realize]] his [[dream]] of [[making]] his [[mark]] on the FOOTLIGHT PARADE.

While closely resembling other Warner's musical spectaculars, notably the GOLDDIGGER films, this movie had a [[special]] [[attraction]] none of the [[others]] had: Jimmy Cagney. He is a wonder, loose-jointed and lithe, as agile as any tomcat - a [[creature]] he actually [[mimics]] a few [[times]] during the movie. Cagney [[grabs]] the [[viewers]] attention & never [[lets]] [[go]], powering the rapid-fire dialogue and [[corny]] plot with his [[charisma]] & buoyant [[charm]].

The [[rest]] of the cast [[gives]] their best, as well. Joan Blondell is [[perfect]] as the smart-mouthed, big-hearted [[blonde]] [[secretary]], infatuated with Cagney ([[major]] quibble - why wasn't she given a musical number?). [[Dick]] Powell & [[Ruby]] Keeler once again [[play]] [[lovers]] onstage & off; the fact that her singing & acting [[abilities]] are a bit on the [[lean]] side are compensated for by her dancing ; Powell [[still]] exudes [[boyish]] enthusiasm in his unaccustomed position as second male lead.

Guy Kibbee & Hugh Herbert are [[lots]] of fun as brothers-in-law, both scheming to cheat Cagney in [[different]] [[ways]]. [[Ruth]] Donnelly scores as Kibbee's wealthy wife, a woman devoted to her handsome protégés. Frank McHugh's [[harried]] choreographer is an [[apt]] foil for Cagney's wit. Herman Bing is hilarious in his one tiny scene as a music arranger. Mavens will spot little Billy Barty, Jimmy Conlin & maybe even John Garfield during the musical numbers.

Finally, there's Busby Berkeley, choreographer nonpareil. His terpsichorean confections, sprinkled throughout the decade of the 1930's, were a supreme example of the cinematic [[escapism]] that Depression audiences wanted to enjoy. The big joke about Berkeley's creations, of course, was that they were meant, as part of the plot, to be stage productions. But no theater could ever hold these products of the master's imagination. They are perfect illustrations of the type of entertainment only made possible by the movie camera.

Berkeley's musical offerings generally took one of two different approaches, either a story (often rather bizarre) told with song & dance; or else stunning geometrically designed numbers, eye candy, featuring plentiful chorus girls, overhead camerawork & a romantic tune. In a spasm of outré extravagance, FOOTLIGHT PARADE climaxes with three Berkeley masterworks: `Honeymoon Hotel' and its pre-Production Code telling of a couple's wedding night; `By A Waterfall' - dozens of unclad females, splashing, floating & diving in perfect patterns & designs (peer closely & you'll see how the synchronous effects were achieved); and finally, `Shanghai Lil' - a fitting tribute to the talents of both Cagney & Berkeley. The [[dynamic]] [[youthful]] producer of theatrical prologues (those [[orchestrated]] performances, [[popularly]] musical, that [[typically]] proceeded the movie in the [[biggest]] [[teatro]] in bygone days) [[gotta]] deal with [[twisted]] [[contest]], [[fictitious]] partners, [[unbeliever]] lovers & amateur talent to [[realise]] his [[slumber]] of [[doing]] his [[brand]] on the FOOTLIGHT PARADE.

While closely resembling other Warner's musical spectaculars, notably the GOLDDIGGER films, this movie had a [[particular]] [[lure]] none of the [[alia]] had: Jimmy Cagney. He is a wonder, loose-jointed and lithe, as agile as any tomcat - a [[ogre]] he actually [[simulates]] a few [[dates]] during the movie. Cagney [[grab]] the [[spectators]] attention & never [[enabled]] [[going]], powering the rapid-fire dialogue and [[mundane]] plot with his [[seduction]] & buoyant [[amulet]].

The [[repose]] of the cast [[donne]] their best, as well. Joan Blondell is [[irreproachable]] as the smart-mouthed, big-hearted [[redhead]] [[secretaries]], infatuated with Cagney ([[momentous]] quibble - why wasn't she given a musical number?). [[Penis]] Powell & [[Robbie]] Keeler once again [[gaming]] [[amateurs]] onstage & off; the fact that her singing & acting [[capacity]] are a bit on the [[scrawny]] side are compensated for by her dancing ; Powell [[however]] exudes [[childish]] enthusiasm in his unaccustomed position as second male lead.

Guy Kibbee & Hugh Herbert are [[alot]] of fun as brothers-in-law, both scheming to cheat Cagney in [[assorted]] [[methods]]. [[Roth]] Donnelly scores as Kibbee's wealthy wife, a woman devoted to her handsome protégés. Frank McHugh's [[hastened]] choreographer is an [[likely]] foil for Cagney's wit. Herman Bing is hilarious in his one tiny scene as a music arranger. Mavens will spot little Billy Barty, Jimmy Conlin & maybe even John Garfield during the musical numbers.

Finally, there's Busby Berkeley, choreographer nonpareil. His terpsichorean confections, sprinkled throughout the decade of the 1930's, were a supreme example of the cinematic [[escapist]] that Depression audiences wanted to enjoy. The big joke about Berkeley's creations, of course, was that they were meant, as part of the plot, to be stage productions. But no theater could ever hold these products of the master's imagination. They are perfect illustrations of the type of entertainment only made possible by the movie camera.

Berkeley's musical offerings generally took one of two different approaches, either a story (often rather bizarre) told with song & dance; or else stunning geometrically designed numbers, eye candy, featuring plentiful chorus girls, overhead camerawork & a romantic tune. In a spasm of outré extravagance, FOOTLIGHT PARADE climaxes with three Berkeley masterworks: `Honeymoon Hotel' and its pre-Production Code telling of a couple's wedding night; `By A Waterfall' - dozens of unclad females, splashing, floating & diving in perfect patterns & designs (peer closely & you'll see how the synchronous effects were achieved); and finally, `Shanghai Lil' - a fitting tribute to the talents of both Cagney & Berkeley. --------------------------------------------- Result 5543 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I saw this recently on a [[faded]] [[old]] VHS [[tape]], and remembered it dimly. Looking at it now, it seems charming.

When it was first [[released]], it was [[recognized]] by pretty much everyone as a spoof of coming out as a gay teenager. To [[hammer]] the point [[home]], the mother is seen reading a [[paperback]] copy of "1 [[Teenager]] [[In]] 10", the most [[popular]] coming out book of the [[time]]. [[David]] Warner [[hams]] it up as the persecuting [[vampire]] hunter [= gay-hating [[evangelist]]], who is of course a self-loathing closet case. The [[list]] of sight gags and in-jokes that were included to make sure nobody missed the point would be too long to go into. The producers were having some good-natured fun, and [[hoping]], no doubt, to lighten-up as well as to enlighten.

But I have no clue how a [[teenage]] audience would look at this film, nowadays. In some places, where there is [[education]] and culture, the terrifying ordeals that gay teens had to go through are a thing of the past. But I'm sure there are plenty of dark, nasty corners of our continent where it's just as [[bad]] as it always was. I saw this recently on a [[extinct]] [[longtime]] VHS [[tapes]], and remembered it dimly. Looking at it now, it seems charming.

When it was first [[liberated]], it was [[recognise]] by pretty much everyone as a spoof of coming out as a gay teenager. To [[hammers]] the point [[housing]], the mother is seen reading a [[hardcover]] copy of "1 [[Youngsters]] [[During]] 10", the most [[trendy]] coming out book of the [[moment]]. [[Davids]] Warner [[hamas]] it up as the persecuting [[bloodsucker]] hunter [= gay-hating [[guru]]], who is of course a self-loathing closet case. The [[listings]] of sight gags and in-jokes that were included to make sure nobody missed the point would be too long to go into. The producers were having some good-natured fun, and [[expecting]], no doubt, to lighten-up as well as to enlighten.

But I have no clue how a [[youths]] audience would look at this film, nowadays. In some places, where there is [[tuition]] and culture, the terrifying ordeals that gay teens had to go through are a thing of the past. But I'm sure there are plenty of dark, nasty corners of our continent where it's just as [[unfavourable]] as it always was. --------------------------------------------- Result 5544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first time my best friend and I sat down to watch this movie, we were watching it for Alex Winter of "Bill & Ted's" fame. We didn't know what to expect other than who and what it was about.

By the time the movie was over, we knew that it was love at first sight. This movie, while not completely historically accurate, was and is the best one of its genre. I have seen other movies depicting the history of this famous summer and in my opinion, none of the others can compare. It fibbed a little at certain details, but those parts did not take away from the sheer elegance and romance of the story. I have seen the other movies about this summer and I find most of them to be good, but none as captivating as this one.

"Haunted Summer" has the qualities of a painting. The colors and settings seem to be something one would find on a canvas, framed and hung in a museum or on the walls of an eccentric's home. The costumes were gorgeous and, despite not being the most comfortable clothes in the world, made me want to find a seamstress to create such garb for myself. The whole movie was set on the picturesque Lake Geneva (where I hope to one day go because of seeing this movie) and the serenity that these historical figures found there.

This movie shows, besides the tranquility found by all the escapees of England's harsh judgements, the strangeness that surrounded this adventure as well. Yes, there were drugs. It was a fairly common practice during that time, a time when drugs were not illegal. And the taking of laudanum (the liquid form of opium) was medicinal as well as recreational. Shelley suffered from consumption. Lord Byron suffered the pains of a clubbed foot. It was not surprising that there would be prescriptions of the strong drugs that were in their possession during that summer. And they were poets during a time when experience was the key. There was no time for prudish caution. Passion and experience were a big part of the Romantic Era. And out of the thoughts and discussions of science, religion and philosophy came the creation of a legend: "Frankenstein."

Yes, in this movie, we see the beautiful and liberated Mary Godwin (not married to Shelley at that time) played by beautiful and talented Alice Krige. She is the control factor to all that goes on until she, too, gives in to experience. But she stands her ground and experiences things on her own terms. As was the strength that she inherited from her mother and father.

The actors and actresses in this were perfect for the parts they played. The music fitting. The direction captured the essence of the summer, as I've read about it. This movie was based on a wonderful book "Haunted Summer" by Anne Edwards. If you like this movie, read the book. The author takes the story from what she was able to put together from the actual journals of Mary Godwin Shelley and the other participants of this story.

If you are a person who loves history (even the little inaccuracies from time to time) and romance and the gothic, then this is a movie for you. It shows the birth of the birth of the monster, which even today teaches us about the morals of "playing God."

A definite must see movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 5545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is available on a "Drive In [[Double]] [[Feature]]" from Dark [[Sky]] [[Films]], and since I just had finished up "Barracuda", I [[watched]] this too. This is a [[film]] that proves to be incredibly ambitious and [[inept]] at the same [[time]].

We [[begin]] with two young [[ladies]] [[wandering]] the streets of some [[foreign]] town, but where [[exactly]] are they? They [[stop]] to look at [[necklaces]] from some Chinese [[vendor]], and [[try]] on Chinese-style clothes at a shop, but then we [[see]] some Aztec [[dancers]]? And all the while, these girls are being followed by two [[guys]], who [[eventually]] [[drop]] whatever stealth they didn't have to chase the [[girls]] on a [[wild]] [[run]] [[though]] the [[town]], and they finally [[catch]] them.

It [[seems]] that one of the [[girls]] has a [[coin]] on a [[string]] [[around]] her [[neck]], and these [[guys]] [[want]] to [[find]] the loot, and where did she [[get]] it? So, in flashback, we [[go]] back to [[find]] out. And how did they know she had this coin? [[Hard]] to say, really.

Now, back in the day, when these two women were 10 years old, they were out with their sisters and their sister's boyfriends on a boat, and after stopped to get air in their tanks, they tow this young boy back to his home dock, only to have his grandpa come out & invite the "young 'uns" up for herbal tea with granny. But not everyone has the tea, [[Todd]] has gone back to the boat to check on the young girls, and then when they're away from it, the boat blows up, and when they get back to the house their friends have mysteriously disappeared. Well, it seems as [[though]] these "kindly folk" raise their own vegetables but they wait for the meat to drop by for a spell, and serve it herbal tea.

But the [[girls]] and Todd did leave the island, but now, they're returning, escorted by their captors, and they're there to find the treasure, despite the fact that no one ever showed the girls where it was BEFORE. There also seems to be someone else on the island, and the thugs mysteriously begin to die, one by one, and since there's only three, it doesn't take long. And there's even a sort of happy ending, which will leave the viewer every bit as baffled as they were throughout the rest of the film.

The two thugs seem to be speed freaks with anger issues, and combined with no acting ability they're borderline hilarious. The hillbilly-type family is also devoid of acting ability, despite the fact that the grandpa is Hank Worden, who appeared in many films and TV shows. The action is confusing, the locales are even more confusing, and the island looks like Southern California.

So what the hell IS this? I'm not sure, but it certainly is worth seeing once so you can think (or say), huh? 4 out of 10, very bizarre. This is available on a "Drive In [[Doble]] [[Idiosyncrasies]]" from Dark [[Skye]] [[Cinematographic]], and since I just had finished up "Barracuda", I [[saw]] this too. This is a [[filmmaking]] that proves to be incredibly ambitious and [[incompetent]] at the same [[moment]].

We [[commence]] with two young [[mesdames]] [[stray]] the streets of some [[alien]] town, but where [[accurately]] are they? They [[cessation]] to look at [[collars]] from some Chinese [[salesman]], and [[attempting]] on Chinese-style clothes at a shop, but then we [[behold]] some Aztec [[ballet]]? And all the while, these girls are being followed by two [[buddies]], who [[ultimately]] [[drops]] whatever stealth they didn't have to chase the [[girl]] on a [[wilde]] [[execute]] [[albeit]] the [[ville]], and they finally [[captures]] them.

It [[appears]] that one of the [[daughter]] has a [[currencies]] on a [[rope]] [[throughout]] her [[collar]], and these [[guy]] [[wants]] to [[finds]] the loot, and where did she [[obtains]] it? So, in flashback, we [[going]] back to [[found]] out. And how did they know she had this coin? [[Difficult]] to say, really.

Now, back in the day, when these two women were 10 years old, they were out with their sisters and their sister's boyfriends on a boat, and after stopped to get air in their tanks, they tow this young boy back to his home dock, only to have his grandpa come out & invite the "young 'uns" up for herbal tea with granny. But not everyone has the tea, [[Thad]] has gone back to the boat to check on the young girls, and then when they're away from it, the boat blows up, and when they get back to the house their friends have mysteriously disappeared. Well, it seems as [[while]] these "kindly folk" raise their own vegetables but they wait for the meat to drop by for a spell, and serve it herbal tea.

But the [[female]] and Todd did leave the island, but now, they're returning, escorted by their captors, and they're there to find the treasure, despite the fact that no one ever showed the girls where it was BEFORE. There also seems to be someone else on the island, and the thugs mysteriously begin to die, one by one, and since there's only three, it doesn't take long. And there's even a sort of happy ending, which will leave the viewer every bit as baffled as they were throughout the rest of the film.

The two thugs seem to be speed freaks with anger issues, and combined with no acting ability they're borderline hilarious. The hillbilly-type family is also devoid of acting ability, despite the fact that the grandpa is Hank Worden, who appeared in many films and TV shows. The action is confusing, the locales are even more confusing, and the island looks like Southern California.

So what the hell IS this? I'm not sure, but it certainly is worth seeing once so you can think (or say), huh? 4 out of 10, very bizarre. --------------------------------------------- Result 5546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched an episode. Yes I sat through the entire miserable experience, and I have to say, this brand of comedy is one of the worst you will get. Imagine Peter Griffin, of Family Guy fame. Now imagine Peter Griffin as a(admittedly slim and minus the glasses) woman, except that he now lacks the something that made him hilarious. Peter Griffin is an idiot, but he doesn't know he's an idiot. Sarah has none of the genuine character, none of the acting ability to pull her character off. Maybe its the trite, formulaic jokes that pull her comedy even lower than her character can take it by herself. Maybe it's the lack of believable foils. Her insensitive, bigoted persona may appeal to insensitive, bigoted people unlike the mass appeal that Stephen Colbert's insensitive, bigoted character has. Like Bill O'Reilly, Sarah creates an annoying, unfunny character. She lacks something that is necessary for the genre of satire, let alone for the entire world of comedy. What Sarah Silverman lacks, its noticeable. And when you don't believe it and identify with it, it's not funny anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 5547 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Tenants Two writers struggle to complete their books in an all but empty apartment house. They at first help each other and then slowly the tension between them begins to build.

This is based upon a Bernard Malamud novel and unfortunately everyone speaks as though they are in that novel. [[Very]] little of the dialog is natural, its purple and brimming with shades of meaning. Its as if a college English major with a head full of [[pretensions]] wrote the [[script]]. It's [[awful]] and I [[found]] myself instantly immune to [[anything]] the [[film]] had to say, which is a [[shame]] [[since]] the film is populated with great performances from top to bottom. Snoop Dog on down are [[fine]] form, unfortunately none of them can over [[come]] the falseness of the [[words]] and the premise.

I can't really [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. [[While]] not really bad, its very preachy and [[pretentious]] to the point of making you want to walk away. I [[lost]] interest less then a third of the [[way]] in and had to [[struggle]] to [[get]] to the end. If you're interested I'd try it on [[cable]], but I wouldn't lay out good money to [[see]] it. Tenants Two writers struggle to complete their books in an all but empty apartment house. They at first help each other and then slowly the tension between them begins to build.

This is based upon a Bernard Malamud novel and unfortunately everyone speaks as though they are in that novel. [[Vitally]] little of the dialog is natural, its purple and brimming with shades of meaning. Its as if a college English major with a head full of [[pretenses]] wrote the [[scripts]]. It's [[shocking]] and I [[finds]] myself instantly immune to [[nothing]] the [[filmmaking]] had to say, which is a [[pity]] [[because]] the film is populated with great performances from top to bottom. Snoop Dog on down are [[fined]] form, unfortunately none of them can over [[arrived]] the falseness of the [[phrase]] and the premise.

I can't really [[recommendation]] this [[cinematography]]. [[Though]] not really bad, its very preachy and [[cocky]] to the point of making you want to walk away. I [[outof]] interest less then a third of the [[ways]] in and had to [[tussle]] to [[gets]] to the end. If you're interested I'd try it on [[wires]], but I wouldn't lay out good money to [[seeing]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] After viewing this film, I [[felt]] the compelling [[need]] to vent a bit of my [[frustration]]. Selma Blair is a [[fabulous]], [[currently]] [[underrated]] [[actress]] and [[Max]] Beesley was [[rather]] charming in "[[Kill]] Me [[Later]]". The [[story]], while not exactly [[original]], [[certainly]] [[showed]] some promise. [[None]] of that mattered though...at all.

I don't know what her deal is, but director Dana Lustig has virtually no talent whatsoever as a director. She slowed footage down, sped footage up, [[reversed]] footage, [[used]] awkward camera [[angles]], [[used]] [[annoying]] [[color]] filters, [[made]] a zillion [[quick]] cuts, [[jumped]] back and forth in the [[timeline]] and [[topped]] it all off with an [[obnoxious]] "modern" soundtrack of blaring [[junk]]. I can't [[remember]] the [[last]] [[time]] I saw such an incompetent job of directing a [[film]]. Her ego must be huge to [[toss]] out the acting and [[story]] and put her direction front and [[center]] for the audience [[members]] to [[take]] [[notice]] of. It is crammed down their throats.

There are a [[couple]] of [[good]] scenes in "Kill Me [[Later]]" which [[show]] what [[could]] have and should have been. [[Unfortunately]], just when things would [[start]] to [[show]] promise, [[Ms]]. Lustig would [[dig]] into her [[bag]] of film [[school]] tricks and [[jumble]] things up again. It's a [[shame]] because Blair and Beesley had good [[chemistry]] and you [[could]] tell that the film really had a good [[heart]]. 3/10 After viewing this film, I [[deemed]] the compelling [[gotta]] to vent a bit of my [[disappointment]]. Selma Blair is a [[sumptuous]], [[presently]] [[underestimated]] [[actor]] and [[Maxie]] Beesley was [[quite]] charming in "[[Killin]] Me [[Subsequent]]". The [[narratives]], while not exactly [[initial]], [[definitely]] [[revealed]] some promise. [[Nos]] of that mattered though...at all.

I don't know what her deal is, but director Dana Lustig has virtually no talent whatsoever as a director. She slowed footage down, sped footage up, [[reversal]] footage, [[uses]] awkward camera [[angle]], [[utilized]] [[infuriating]] [[hue]] filters, [[accomplished]] a zillion [[speedy]] cuts, [[bounced]] back and forth in the [[periods]] and [[surpassed]] it all off with an [[outrageous]] "modern" soundtrack of blaring [[trash]]. I can't [[remind]] the [[final]] [[period]] I saw such an incompetent job of directing a [[flick]]. Her ego must be huge to [[lance]] out the acting and [[conte]] and put her direction front and [[centers]] for the audience [[member]] to [[taking]] [[notification]] of. It is crammed down their throats.

There are a [[matching]] of [[alright]] scenes in "Kill Me [[Trailing]]" which [[exhibit]] what [[did]] have and should have been. [[Sadly]], just when things would [[launched]] to [[showing]] promise, [[Mrs]]. Lustig would [[dug]] into her [[suitcase]] of film [[tuition]] tricks and [[muddle]] things up again. It's a [[pity]] because Blair and Beesley had good [[chemical]] and you [[did]] tell that the film really had a good [[nub]]. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5549 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If you have plenty of [[time]] to waste ... it's OK. It moves at a good pace but to [[pull]] this movie off it would need to be a little [[longer]] with a little more [[background]] on the sitter.

The acting is OK. [[Mariana]] Klaveno as the sitter does the [[best]] job and is the most [[believable]].

William R. [[Moses]] [[played]] a pretty good part as the [[husband]].

[[Gail]] O'Grady, as the wife, had a weak [[part]] and the reasons for her going back to work were not developed.

The ending is sort of silly. Like most of these sitter movies ... there are parts that are interesting ... but overall it leaves you wondering why you [[spent]] the time. If you have plenty of [[times]] to waste ... it's OK. It moves at a good pace but to [[pulled]] this movie off it would need to be a little [[plus]] with a little more [[backdrop]] on the sitter.

The acting is OK. [[Marianna]] Klaveno as the sitter does the [[optimum]] job and is the most [[dependable]].

William R. [[Mose]] [[effected]] a pretty good part as the [[hubby]].

[[Gayle]] O'Grady, as the wife, had a weak [[portion]] and the reasons for her going back to work were not developed.

The ending is sort of silly. Like most of these sitter movies ... there are parts that are interesting ... but overall it leaves you wondering why you [[spending]] the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5550 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Enterprise is the entertainment, but it is also the forefront of Science Fiction and a positive outlook for tomorrow. With gratitude and respect Mr. Berman and Mr. Braga. I wish you well, thank you both for your service to Trek.

Enterprise is what Trek is about... --------------------------------------------- Result 5551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Let's see. In the "St. Elsewhere" finale we found out that there was no hospital and that every thing had been in the mind of an autistic child. "Newhart" ended by telling us that it had all been a [[dream]]. And "Roseanne" ended by telling us that it all had taken place in her mind. Very "[[creative]]". [[Annoying]] was more like it. Yes, it was just a TV show and wasn't at all [[reality]]. It's just that when you get caught up in a great movie or TV show you end up at least wanting to believe that it's all "real". At least as far as the reality it portrays on screen. This type of series finale had been done twice before and was old hat, [[frustrating]] and [[simply]] not [[fun]] to watch. Now "Newhart" being all a dream? At [[least]] done in a creative way that far exceeded the expectations of anyone who loved the show. The idea itself was not too engaging but it was so brilliantly done that its arguably the Best Series Finale Ever. Roseanne left me feeling cheated after being such a loyal fan. Let's see. In the "St. Elsewhere" finale we found out that there was no hospital and that every thing had been in the mind of an autistic child. "Newhart" ended by telling us that it had all been a [[nightmares]]. And "Roseanne" ended by telling us that it all had taken place in her mind. Very "[[inventive]]". [[Irksome]] was more like it. Yes, it was just a TV show and wasn't at all [[realities]]. It's just that when you get caught up in a great movie or TV show you end up at least wanting to believe that it's all "real". At least as far as the reality it portrays on screen. This type of series finale had been done twice before and was old hat, [[discouraging]] and [[mere]] not [[amusing]] to watch. Now "Newhart" being all a dream? At [[lowest]] done in a creative way that far exceeded the expectations of anyone who loved the show. The idea itself was not too engaging but it was so brilliantly done that its arguably the Best Series Finale Ever. Roseanne left me feeling cheated after being such a loyal fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 5552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Using Buster Keaton in the twilight of his career was an interesting choice. He may have been the most talented comedian of the silent age. This gives him a chance to display those talents in a little time travel story. He get [[hooked]] up with a guy living in modern times, and it becomes obvious that we are best left in our own [[times]] Keaton is [[able]] to do his sight [[gags]] very well. I've heard his voice before. I believe he did some of those Beach Party films, playing some vacuous characters just to earn a few bucks. Serling seemed to have respect for him and portrayed him that way. It's not a [[bad]] story. It shows how one reacts when we wish for something we don't have and get that wish. Using Buster Keaton in the twilight of his career was an interesting choice. He may have been the most talented comedian of the silent age. This gives him a chance to display those talents in a little time travel story. He get [[hook]] up with a guy living in modern times, and it becomes obvious that we are best left in our own [[dates]] Keaton is [[capable]] to do his sight [[jaws]] very well. I've heard his voice before. I believe he did some of those Beach Party films, playing some vacuous characters just to earn a few bucks. Serling seemed to have respect for him and portrayed him that way. It's not a [[horrid]] story. It shows how one reacts when we wish for something we don't have and get that wish. --------------------------------------------- Result 5553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[direction]] [[struck]] me as poor man's Ingemar Bergman. The [[inaudible]] [[dialogue]] was [[annoying]]. The [[somber]] stoicism that all [[characters]] except Banderas' [[showed]] made me [[think]] they were drugged. I [[think]] the director ruined it for me. The [[directorate]] [[knocked]] me as poor man's Ingemar Bergman. The [[unfathomable]] [[talks]] was [[exasperating]]. The [[dark]] stoicism that all [[personage]] except Banderas' [[exhibited]] made me [[thinks]] they were drugged. I [[believing]] the director ruined it for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 5554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Finally]]! An Iranian [[film]] that is not made by Majidi, Kiarostami or the Makhmalbafs. This is a non-documentary, an [[entertaining]] black [[comedy]] with subversive young [[girls]] [[subtly]] kicking the 'system' in its [[ass]]. It's all about football and its funny, its really funny. The director [[says]] "The [[places]] are real, the [[event]] is real, and so are the [[characters]] and the [[extras]]. This is why I [[purposely]] [[chose]] not to use [[professional]] [[actors]], as their [[presence]] [[would]] have [[introduced]] a [[notion]] of falseness." The non-actors will have you [[rooting]] for them [[straightaway]] unless a. your heart is [[made]] of stone b. you are blind. [[Excellently]] scripted, the [[film]] challenges [[patriarchal]] authority with an [[almost]] [[absurd]] [[freshness]]. It has won the Jury Grand [[Prize]], Berlin, 2006. [[Dear]] reader, it's near-perfect. [[WHERE]], where can I [[get]] hold of it? [[Lastly]]! An Iranian [[kino]] that is not made by Majidi, Kiarostami or the Makhmalbafs. This is a non-documentary, an [[amuse]] black [[travesty]] with subversive young [[females]] [[delicately]] kicking the 'system' in its [[butt]]. It's all about football and its funny, its really funny. The director [[contends]] "The [[sites]] are real, the [[phenomena]] is real, and so are the [[attribute]] and the [[goodies]]. This is why I [[deliberately]] [[selects]] not to use [[occupational]] [[players]], as their [[participation]] [[should]] have [[lodged]] a [[concepts]] of falseness." The non-actors will have you [[racine]] for them [[immediately]] unless a. your heart is [[accomplished]] of stone b. you are blind. [[Divinely]] scripted, the [[cinematography]] challenges [[patriarchy]] authority with an [[practically]] [[preposterous]] [[coldness]]. It has won the Jury Grand [[Prizes]], Berlin, 2006. [[Dearie]] reader, it's near-perfect. [[WHEREVER]], where can I [[obtain]] hold of it? --------------------------------------------- Result 5555 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is the [[worst]] film, but it [[ranks]] very high for me. It is how a slasher [[movie]] should be. It takes place at a university in which there only seems to be a handful of students. The teachers are dumber than a sack of hammers. It is filled with good Catholic priest, sexually repressed humor. Bad hair, bad clothes. The [[dialogue]] is so [[cliched]] it is hard to believe that I was able to predict lines in quotes. The slashings have some creativity and seem to revolve around stabbing people in the genitalia. A lack of continuity in the soundtrack and characters that deserve to die because they are so bad, I recommend this film for a fun time. Get a case of cheap beer and some friends, watch it and laugh. This film is the [[meanest]] film, but it [[categorize]] very high for me. It is how a slasher [[filmmaking]] should be. It takes place at a university in which there only seems to be a handful of students. The teachers are dumber than a sack of hammers. It is filled with good Catholic priest, sexually repressed humor. Bad hair, bad clothes. The [[talks]] is so [[cliché]] it is hard to believe that I was able to predict lines in quotes. The slashings have some creativity and seem to revolve around stabbing people in the genitalia. A lack of continuity in the soundtrack and characters that deserve to die because they are so bad, I recommend this film for a fun time. Get a case of cheap beer and some friends, watch it and laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 5556 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] ... and in *no way* as clean, logical, and [[understandable]] as in [[pictured]] in that [[pathetic]] [[sum]] of tired Hollywood cliches.

I'm 27, and I've spent 16 years of my life struggling through delusional [[phobia]] and paranoid hallucinations. Like the main character in the film, I was successful mainly because of logic : because I kept thinking over and over to keep [[delusion]] away from reality, and to know what was really going on and what wasn't. In the end, I was really successful because of medication, by the way, but I certainly escaped madness because I knew before I took medication the difference between what was real and what wasn't.

So, I feel entitled to tell you that this movie is a total fraud. Not only does it cheat with the main character's story (who wasn't faithful to his wife, who was bisexual - something really important here), but mostly, it shows a comforting, tamed view of schizophrenia - which is entirely missing the point.

Schizophrenia is a mind structure, not a disease. A schizophrenic *isn't* a "normal man with a disease", it's someone who from early on views and feels things differently from most people : for him, things like time, space, and people's personalities aren't solid things. He feels it can be bent, it can change, it can mutate, and maybe even disappear. To cope with this, a [[schizophrenic]] has a rich, very imaginative inner world which "normal" people don't expect - but he's trapped in it because he can't relate with most people, and his world gets poorer and poorer until he finishes in a blank, delusive dead end.

This is very different to what's depicted in this [[ridiculous]] "cure", tear-jerking movie. It should be violently frightening. People other than the main character should appear strange, weird and absurd, like in Lynch's "Eraserhead", for example. There should be *really* impressive, weird, gross hallucinations, because that's what schizophrenia is all about. It's not about *details*.

I mean, watch "Naked Lunch", "Lost Highway", read P.K. Dick's "Martian Time-Split" or "Ubik", DO watch "The Cell", "Perfect Blue", "Dark City", or play "American McGee's Alice" on PC, and you may have a vague idea of what it's like. Don't watch the "feel good" movie of the month, with banal situations, cleaned characters and visuals, and stupid plot tricks. "The Cell" is the most accurate movie about a schizophrenic's mind, his visions and his inner consistency - it's violent, weird, confusing, and very, very scary.

Once again, Schizophrenia isn't about details, it's not a neat, tame trick played to you. It jumps in your face and won't let you go : walls fall apart, people turn into strange hostile creatures, you feel like you go backward in time, you're not sure you're who you think you are, everything feels... strange, unnatural. Believe me, this is much much more than what's depicted in this soap-like melodrama ... and in *no way* as clean, logical, and [[legible]] as in [[photography]] in that [[lamentable]] [[suma]] of tired Hollywood cliches.

I'm 27, and I've spent 16 years of my life struggling through delusional [[phobias]] and paranoid hallucinations. Like the main character in the film, I was successful mainly because of logic : because I kept thinking over and over to keep [[illusion]] away from reality, and to know what was really going on and what wasn't. In the end, I was really successful because of medication, by the way, but I certainly escaped madness because I knew before I took medication the difference between what was real and what wasn't.

So, I feel entitled to tell you that this movie is a total fraud. Not only does it cheat with the main character's story (who wasn't faithful to his wife, who was bisexual - something really important here), but mostly, it shows a comforting, tamed view of schizophrenia - which is entirely missing the point.

Schizophrenia is a mind structure, not a disease. A schizophrenic *isn't* a "normal man with a disease", it's someone who from early on views and feels things differently from most people : for him, things like time, space, and people's personalities aren't solid things. He feels it can be bent, it can change, it can mutate, and maybe even disappear. To cope with this, a [[schizophrenia]] has a rich, very imaginative inner world which "normal" people don't expect - but he's trapped in it because he can't relate with most people, and his world gets poorer and poorer until he finishes in a blank, delusive dead end.

This is very different to what's depicted in this [[farcical]] "cure", tear-jerking movie. It should be violently frightening. People other than the main character should appear strange, weird and absurd, like in Lynch's "Eraserhead", for example. There should be *really* impressive, weird, gross hallucinations, because that's what schizophrenia is all about. It's not about *details*.

I mean, watch "Naked Lunch", "Lost Highway", read P.K. Dick's "Martian Time-Split" or "Ubik", DO watch "The Cell", "Perfect Blue", "Dark City", or play "American McGee's Alice" on PC, and you may have a vague idea of what it's like. Don't watch the "feel good" movie of the month, with banal situations, cleaned characters and visuals, and stupid plot tricks. "The Cell" is the most accurate movie about a schizophrenic's mind, his visions and his inner consistency - it's violent, weird, confusing, and very, very scary.

Once again, Schizophrenia isn't about details, it's not a neat, tame trick played to you. It jumps in your face and won't let you go : walls fall apart, people turn into strange hostile creatures, you feel like you go backward in time, you're not sure you're who you think you are, everything feels... strange, unnatural. Believe me, this is much much more than what's depicted in this soap-like melodrama --------------------------------------------- Result 5557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] After the [[success]] of Part 4, another sequel was a [[natural]] [[move]]. However they should have stopped it before it began. [[Alice]], having survived Part 4 finds herself [[pregnant]] and it seems Freddy is using her unborn [[child]] to get at his [[victims]], which of course are Alice's [[friends]]. [[Strange]] [[Nightmare]] movie, very [[heavy]] on [[religious]] imagery and [[bad]] acting. The [[special]] effects are good, but the movie itself is not. After the [[succeeded]] of Part 4, another sequel was a [[naturel]] [[budge]]. However they should have stopped it before it began. [[Alicia]], having survived Part 4 finds herself [[expectant]] and it seems Freddy is using her unborn [[kid]] to get at his [[fatalities]], which of course are Alice's [[pals]]. [[Unusual]] [[Cabos]] movie, very [[ponderous]] on [[ecclesiastical]] imagery and [[unfavourable]] acting. The [[specially]] effects are good, but the movie itself is not. --------------------------------------------- Result 5558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I really can't [[understand]] how could someone [[give]] this [[disgusting]] film more than 1 star... How can you like such a retarded film, where all the animal abuse scenes are [[real]]? I don't even want to imagine the excruciating pain those innocent and defenseless living beings felt in those horrific [[moments]]... Jesus... What kind of ''human'' would torture them like that for no reason, or just for [[money]]? I [[tell]] you, that [[director]] is either mentally retarded, or he's just a monster with a ''heart'' of stone. [[Or]] both. He truly [[deserves]] to get his hands [[cut]] off and burn alive.

It contains various horribly barbaric scenes that may cause shock, especially to sensitive persons and children: a real frog is skinned alive, fish are sadistically mutilated and [[thrown]] back into the water, a dog is beaten, [[birds]] are thrown into the water...

This movie is more than awful; it has to be the [[worst]] and most [[retarded]] [[film]] ever [[made]], along with another one, called ''Cannibal Holocaust'' or something like that. I'll never watch or [[buy]] any [[film]] directed by this [[heartless]] monster. No one should waste their [[time]] [[watching]] it, [[especially]] when there are a [[lot]] of [[TRULY]] [[great]] [[movies]] out there, in which all the animal [[abuse]] scenes are staged.

[[Fortunately]], only a few people [[liked]] this - which is natural, since it's the [[worst]] [[film]] ever -, so it wasn't successful. I [[hope]] this will make the retarded [[director]] [[realize]] that such [[unjustified]] barbaric acts of extreme [[cruelty]] and violence to REAL animals will NEVER be [[praised]], and that he will [[stage]] all the animal abuse scenes in his following [[films]]. I [[truly]] believe that everyone [[receives]] but what they give! There will be a day when all the retarded and [[cruel]] ''humans'' will feel the same pain they once inflicted to others.

This, [[however]], is [[probably]] my only ''negative'' [[review]]. I [[usually]] don't [[comment]] on a [[movie]] if I [[dislike]] it, but this [[time]] I just couldn't [[shut]] up. I had to [[speak]] the truth, because animal abuse must stop! I really can't [[fathom]] how could someone [[confer]] this [[abhorrent]] film more than 1 star... How can you like such a retarded film, where all the animal abuse scenes are [[veritable]]? I don't even want to imagine the excruciating pain those innocent and defenseless living beings felt in those horrific [[times]]... Jesus... What kind of ''human'' would torture them like that for no reason, or just for [[cash]]? I [[say]] you, that [[headmaster]] is either mentally retarded, or he's just a monster with a ''heart'' of stone. [[Ord]] both. He truly [[merited]] to get his hands [[chopping]] off and burn alive.

It contains various horribly barbaric scenes that may cause shock, especially to sensitive persons and children: a real frog is skinned alive, fish are sadistically mutilated and [[threw]] back into the water, a dog is beaten, [[poultry]] are thrown into the water...

This movie is more than awful; it has to be the [[gravest]] and most [[nutcase]] [[flick]] ever [[brought]], along with another one, called ''Cannibal Holocaust'' or something like that. I'll never watch or [[buys]] any [[movie]] directed by this [[remorseless]] monster. No one should waste their [[times]] [[staring]] it, [[mostly]] when there are a [[lots]] of [[TRUTHFULLY]] [[super]] [[film]] out there, in which all the animal [[mistreat]] scenes are staged.

[[Luckily]], only a few people [[wished]] this - which is natural, since it's the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever -, so it wasn't successful. I [[hopes]] this will make the retarded [[headmaster]] [[realizing]] that such [[unreasonable]] barbaric acts of extreme [[brutality]] and violence to REAL animals will NEVER be [[hailing]], and that he will [[phases]] all the animal abuse scenes in his following [[filmmaking]]. I [[genuinely]] believe that everyone [[receive]] but what they give! There will be a day when all the retarded and [[ruthless]] ''humans'' will feel the same pain they once inflicted to others.

This, [[still]], is [[arguably]] my only ''negative'' [[reviews]]. I [[generally]] don't [[commentaries]] on a [[movies]] if I [[antipathy]] it, but this [[moment]] I just couldn't [[closes]] up. I had to [[speaks]] the truth, because animal abuse must stop! --------------------------------------------- Result 5559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[got]] a good [[laugh]] reading all the idiotic [[comments]] for this film,

as it's obvious that those people who [[criticized]] the [[movie]] never [[seen]] it, or were stupid enough to pay to see it.

The best reason to watch was on the Elvira [[show]] a few [[years]] back. Elvira delivered the movie with as many [[laughs]] as one can.

It's an ok monster flick, compared to the hundreds of horrendous American [[flicks]] made. Way better!!!! I [[did]] a good [[giggling]] reading all the idiotic [[commentary]] for this film,

as it's obvious that those people who [[critique]] the [[kino]] never [[saw]] it, or were stupid enough to pay to see it.

The best reason to watch was on the Elvira [[exhibitions]] a few [[yrs]] back. Elvira delivered the movie with as many [[grin]] as one can.

It's an ok monster flick, compared to the hundreds of horrendous American [[gestures]] made. Way better!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Superficically, "Brigadoon" is a very [[promising]] [[entertainment]] [[package]]. Gene Kelly and Vincente Minnelli, the team behind "An American in Paris", are reunited with a lot of the great craftsmen and women behind their previous collaborations. Gene's leading lady is Cyd Charisse, one of the best dancers of 40s/50s cinema, and unlike the generally superior "It's Always Fair Weather" this film gave them the chance for not only one but two dances. Lerner and Loewe were the rising team behind such future hits as "My Fair Lady" and Minnelli's musical masterpiece "Gigi"; Lerner and Minnelli had already demonstrated their sanguine collaborative juices on the excellent "American in Paris."

What happened along the way? Why is the [[movie]] itself such a [[stupid]] [[bore]]? Minnelli himself didn't want to do the movie, despite his previous warm artistic and personal relationship with Lerner. Maybe it was because the movie's innate conservatism was just a bit too much of two steps forward for MGM and one step backward for Vincente Minnelli. But once trapped in this assignment like the denizens of Brigadoon are trapped within its city limits, Minnelli strove to turn it into something that would be entertaining in a specifically distracting, if not liberating way. The ultimate result is truly horrific to behold.

While aiming for the naive charm of previous Minnelli hits like "Cabin in the Sky" and "Meet Me in St. Louis", the plaid-tights wearing inhabitants of Brigadoon can conjure up [[none]] of the illusive nostalgia of those never-have-been locales. Its whimsy doesn't even match up to the glossy luster of "Yolanda and the Thief" or "The Pirate" because the highlands settings seem at the same time too specific for such an exotic fantasy and too generic for real human emotions. The only people in Brigadoon who I at least can relate to are the malcontented man who tries to escape and the unfortunate fellow-traveler played by Van Johnson who accidentally shoots him. The general proceedings in the township of Brigadoon itself are too arcane and provincial even to be attributed to a backwards form of Christianity: they seem positively pagan in their aspect. For example, in exchange for Brigadoon's immortality, the honorable and most generally "good" pastor of the town has sacrificed his own place in the supposedly blessed refuge.

At one point we're assured that "everybody's looking for their own Brigadoon." Suffice it to say the box office for this picture confirms my own suspicion that most of us aren't looking for this kind of quasi-queasy paradise. The premise itself is ridiculous and almost insultingly patronizing, but could work if the players were perfect. But Kelly himself is the most patronizing thing about the movie, and Charisse is horribly miscast as a virginal optimist in much the same way as Lucille Bremer was miscast in "Yolanda and the Thief." Van Johnson does his best version of the classic Oscar Levant sidekick to Kelly (even lighting 3 cigarettes at one point like Levant in "AIP"), and he provides a lot of amusing moments. But it says something in itself if the best part of a big budget extravaganza with all the best talents of MGM is a tossed-off Van Johnson performance. Superficically, "Brigadoon" is a very [[promise]] [[entertainments]] [[packs]]. Gene Kelly and Vincente Minnelli, the team behind "An American in Paris", are reunited with a lot of the great craftsmen and women behind their previous collaborations. Gene's leading lady is Cyd Charisse, one of the best dancers of 40s/50s cinema, and unlike the generally superior "It's Always Fair Weather" this film gave them the chance for not only one but two dances. Lerner and Loewe were the rising team behind such future hits as "My Fair Lady" and Minnelli's musical masterpiece "Gigi"; Lerner and Minnelli had already demonstrated their sanguine collaborative juices on the excellent "American in Paris."

What happened along the way? Why is the [[movies]] itself such a [[dumb]] [[boring]]? Minnelli himself didn't want to do the movie, despite his previous warm artistic and personal relationship with Lerner. Maybe it was because the movie's innate conservatism was just a bit too much of two steps forward for MGM and one step backward for Vincente Minnelli. But once trapped in this assignment like the denizens of Brigadoon are trapped within its city limits, Minnelli strove to turn it into something that would be entertaining in a specifically distracting, if not liberating way. The ultimate result is truly horrific to behold.

While aiming for the naive charm of previous Minnelli hits like "Cabin in the Sky" and "Meet Me in St. Louis", the plaid-tights wearing inhabitants of Brigadoon can conjure up [[nos]] of the illusive nostalgia of those never-have-been locales. Its whimsy doesn't even match up to the glossy luster of "Yolanda and the Thief" or "The Pirate" because the highlands settings seem at the same time too specific for such an exotic fantasy and too generic for real human emotions. The only people in Brigadoon who I at least can relate to are the malcontented man who tries to escape and the unfortunate fellow-traveler played by Van Johnson who accidentally shoots him. The general proceedings in the township of Brigadoon itself are too arcane and provincial even to be attributed to a backwards form of Christianity: they seem positively pagan in their aspect. For example, in exchange for Brigadoon's immortality, the honorable and most generally "good" pastor of the town has sacrificed his own place in the supposedly blessed refuge.

At one point we're assured that "everybody's looking for their own Brigadoon." Suffice it to say the box office for this picture confirms my own suspicion that most of us aren't looking for this kind of quasi-queasy paradise. The premise itself is ridiculous and almost insultingly patronizing, but could work if the players were perfect. But Kelly himself is the most patronizing thing about the movie, and Charisse is horribly miscast as a virginal optimist in much the same way as Lucille Bremer was miscast in "Yolanda and the Thief." Van Johnson does his best version of the classic Oscar Levant sidekick to Kelly (even lighting 3 cigarettes at one point like Levant in "AIP"), and he provides a lot of amusing moments. But it says something in itself if the best part of a big budget extravaganza with all the best talents of MGM is a tossed-off Van Johnson performance. --------------------------------------------- Result 5561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It's not so much that SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION had little [[potential]]. Indeed the under-explored title phenomenon is quite [[intriguing]] and, for at least the opening half, this Tobe Hooper [[effort]] [[promises]] to entertain in a way only cheesy '90s [[horror]] can. But somewhere between Brad Dourif's on-again-off-again performance and the overly intricate plot, this would-be thriller [[loses]] its [[way]].

Dourif, [[featured]] here before his built-in [[horror]] fan [[base]] had accumulated, is average [[guy]] Sam. Of course average guys don't [[stay]] average for long in horror movies, so after a well-done [[origin]] outline, we [[see]] Sam's [[various]] [[body]] parts start to [[ignite]]. Soon he's [[igniting]] other people, too, much to the consternation of gal pal [[Lisa]], [[played]] unmemorably by [[Cynthia]] Bain.

While the title of the film implies a fire-happy monster on the [[loose]], [[director]] Hooper opted to make Sam an [[unwilling]] killer. This approach gives the film an added human depth it [[would]] otherwise lack, but it also prevents us from truly fearing the human [[flamethrower]]. We're [[left]] [[wondering]] whether this would have [[worked]] [[better]] as a straight-up villain-versus-everyone [[effort]] ala NIGHTMARE [[ON]] ELM STREET.

SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION is a [[pretty]] nominal [[effort]] when all is [[said]] and [[done]]. It will carry added appeal for Dourif's fans and those who can't get enough 1990s horror, be it good, [[bad]] or in between, but only on a slow night. It's not so much that SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION had little [[prospective]]. Indeed the under-explored title phenomenon is quite [[riveting]] and, for at least the opening half, this Tobe Hooper [[efforts]] [[commitment]] to entertain in a way only cheesy '90s [[terror]] can. But somewhere between Brad Dourif's on-again-off-again performance and the overly intricate plot, this would-be thriller [[losing]] its [[camino]].

Dourif, [[features]] here before his built-in [[monstrosity]] fan [[foundations]] had accumulated, is average [[buddy]] Sam. Of course average guys don't [[stays]] average for long in horror movies, so after a well-done [[roots]] outline, we [[consults]] Sam's [[numerous]] [[agency]] parts start to [[spark]]. Soon he's [[sparking]] other people, too, much to the consternation of gal pal [[Lise]], [[effected]] unmemorably by [[Brenda]] Bain.

While the title of the film implies a fire-happy monster on the [[lax]], [[headmaster]] Hooper opted to make Sam an [[hesitant]] killer. This approach gives the film an added human depth it [[should]] otherwise lack, but it also prevents us from truly fearing the human [[incinerator]]. We're [[exited]] [[requests]] whether this would have [[collaborating]] [[best]] as a straight-up villain-versus-everyone [[endeavors]] ala NIGHTMARE [[ONTO]] ELM STREET.

SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION is a [[belle]] nominal [[endeavors]] when all is [[told]] and [[effected]]. It will carry added appeal for Dourif's fans and those who can't get enough 1990s horror, be it good, [[unfavourable]] or in between, but only on a slow night. --------------------------------------------- Result 5562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, I guess I'm emotionally attached to this movie since it's the first one I went to see more than 10 times in the cinema ... helping me through my master's thesis, or rather keeping me from working on it!

But on watching it again several years (and many many movies) later - what a well-crafted little gem this is! I've never seen Gwyneth Paltrow in a more convincing performance, and Jeremy Northam is the perfect Mr Knightley - where does one meet such a man??? <<>> Sophie Thompson's turn as Ms Bates is virtuoso acting of the finest (oh, napkins, sorry!) and the rest of the cast is no disappointment either - Toni Colette brings a lot of Muriel to her Harriet, and Ewan McGregor is convincingly charming - and Alan Cumming and Juliet Stevenson are the perfect "impossible" couple!

Of course the sets and costumes, and the beautiful soundtrack contribute a lot to the feelgood, almost Hobbiton-like atmosphere of the movie - although as far as cinematography and art decoration go, it's almost a case of visual overload. Very very pretty, but a little more austerity might have conveyed a better sense of period. But the good thing is, the movie doesn't take itself too seriously, and there is plenty of fun - and some pretty cool editing - that keep it from sinking into saccharine Merry Old England mode.

My particular favorite is the ball scene - some beautiful acting and directing here, and the concluding dance summarizes the relationship between Emma and Mr Knightley just beautifully. Pity that the final proposal scene goes on for just a little too long - cut two shots (I can think of exactly which ones!) and it would have been much more in keeping with the rest of the movie.

Gosh, I just realize (by reading the imdb listings) that I've seen Jeremy Northam in at least three movies without even being aware that it was him - seems he's got a lot more going for him, as an actor, than just being a gentlemanlike English heartthrob! Hmm, guess I need to pay my video store a visit...

Lovely movie. My favorite Jane Austen adaptation so far - though perhaps Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility is, strictly speaking, the better movie, this one is closest to my heart - and I've certainly seen it many more times! Watch it if you can - and don't be too hard on its little imperfections.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] From the What Was She [[Thinking]]? [[file]]: Whoopi Goldberg plays a [[cop]] in the [[future]] who is teamed with a talking dinosaur (!) for a [[crime]] [[case]] involving a [[madman]] who wants to [[start]] another ice-age. Straight-to-tape [[oddity]] is embarrassing and ridiculous, a high-concept in [[search]] of itself. Apparently this was a labor of [[love]] for its writer-director, Jonathan Betuel (who also [[served]] as one of the producers); sadly, the end [[results]] are [[anemic]], to be [[charitable]]. Goldberg's mere presence on-screen can often [[spark]] good will and [[laughter]] no matter how poor the [[script]], but here she's [[drowning]] and you can [[see]] the unfunny [[results]]. NO [[STARS]] from **** From the What Was She [[Thought]]? [[archive]]: Whoopi Goldberg plays a [[police]] in the [[impending]] who is teamed with a talking dinosaur (!) for a [[delinquency]] [[lawsuits]] involving a [[mad]] who wants to [[launched]] another ice-age. Straight-to-tape [[peculiarity]] is embarrassing and ridiculous, a high-concept in [[researching]] of itself. Apparently this was a labor of [[amore]] for its writer-director, Jonathan Betuel (who also [[played]] as one of the producers); sadly, the end [[outcomes]] are [[sluggish]], to be [[benevolent]]. Goldberg's mere presence on-screen can often [[ignite]] good will and [[chuckles]] no matter how poor the [[hyphen]], but here she's [[drown]] and you can [[consults]] the unfunny [[consequences]]. NO [[CELEBRITY]] from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Love]] this film [[also]]. [[Saw]] it when it was [[first]] [[shown]] i8n [[Germany]] in a small independent [[cinema]] in Frankfurt. It was [[really]] [[crowded]] and it was a very ambitious [[atmosphere]] to. The erotic of the [[movie]] hit the [[spectators]] and the [[discussion]] with Moritz Boerner the producer and director was always [[underlined]] by that. In his [[genre]] it was a very ambitious [[movie]] [[even]] [[especially]] when you think that it was an independent movie.

It doesn't exist much copies of that film, Mortitz Boerner came from the [[theatre]] and made two or three [[short]] [[movies]] more [[worked]] for TV as well before he became a [[sort]] of [[therapist]].

For the people who [[wish]] to [[see]] that movie again, you [[could]] find it on his [[homepage]] which isn't that easy to [[search]] for but its possible. [[Loves]] this film [[apart]]. [[Watched]] it when it was [[frst]] [[showed]] i8n [[Deutschland]] in a small independent [[film]] in Frankfurt. It was [[truly]] [[congested]] and it was a very ambitious [[atmospheric]] to. The erotic of the [[cinema]] hit the [[audiences]] and the [[talks]] with Moritz Boerner the producer and director was always [[stressing]] by that. In his [[genera]] it was a very ambitious [[films]] [[yet]] [[mainly]] when you think that it was an independent movie.

It doesn't exist much copies of that film, Mortitz Boerner came from the [[cinema]] and made two or three [[terse]] [[cinematic]] more [[collaborated]] for TV as well before he became a [[sorting]] of [[psychiatrist]].

For the people who [[wants]] to [[seeing]] that movie again, you [[would]] find it on his [[hosting]] which isn't that easy to [[researching]] for but its possible. --------------------------------------------- Result 5565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] What if a platoon of G.I.'s from the Japanese army were to be send back in time 400 years right in the middle of the feudal wars that led to the formation of the Tokugawa Shogunate? Great pitch right? The [[movie]] does exactly what it says on the tin.

[[Thankfully]] the writers didn't bother to explain the, usually ridiculous in sci-fi movies, scientific mumbo jumbo of time transport. No how's or why's. They just did. However the time transport sequence itself is trippy as hell and quite [[beautiful]], if not a bit dated. Not as silly as one would imagine.

The rest of the movie follows the premise to a T. But while it loses a bit of steam with the various subplots that follow the G.I.s arrival to medieval Japan, it [[picks]] up with a [[devastating]] battle sequence. Undoubtedly it's the main order of the day. The whole concept and by extension the movie itself, was probably originated from this simple pitch: what if G.I.'s equipped with the latest in modern warfare were to fight samurais? And boy does it deliver.

The main battle sequence that spans more than half an hour is probably one of THE [[best]] of its kind in 70's action/war movies. Not only is it relentless and exhausting in pace and length, it's also a [[terrific]] mish-mash of styles and techniques that only unique premises like G.I. Samurai can deliver. I mean, where else would you get the chance to feature tanks, ninjas complete with shuriikens, a helicopter and samurais in the same shot? The G.I. platoon led by lieutenant Iba tears literally through hundreds of extras, gunning them down with machine guns, mortars, grenades and tanks.

This mish-mash of styles is with one foot firmly rooted in the sprawling jidai-geki epic of Kurosawa's Kagemusha or Hiroshi Inagaki's Samurai Banners, while the other is in western action and war movies. There are stylistic touches (like the wonderful slow-motion shots and bloody violence) that bring Sam Peckinpah or Enzo G. Castellari circa Keoma to mind. Japanese cinema has always been influenced by westerns and other Hollywood works and vice versa, and G.I. Samurai effortlessly turns this east-meets-west melting pot into an exciting film.

The film-makers thankfully take the whole thing seriously and the movie benefits immensely from it. Not that tongue-in-cheek mentality is completely absent, it's just that it doesn't try to pander to so-bad-it's-good audiences that enjoy laughing at their movies. The budget was probably hefty, as it is evident in the hundreds of extras, elaborate costumes (very decent for a production that is not a traditional jidai-geki) and special effects. The camera-work and editing are all top notch, almost better than a movie with no higher artistic ambitions deserves.

It's not withouts its flaws either of course. There are many "song" scenes, where all sorts of 70's Japanese rock, disco and country songs play over montages (there's a bonding scene, a love-interest scene, a "war is hell" scene etc). The songs themselves are pretty lame and corny and detract from the whole thing. Although it clocks at a whooping 140 minutes, it flies like a bullet for the most part. Still some scenes, flashbacks and subplots in the first half could have been clipped for a tighter effect.

The cast also deserves a mention, featuring such prominent names as Sonny Chiba, Isao Natsuyagi (Goyokin, Samurai Wolf), Tsunehiko Watase (The Yakuza Papers) and Hiroyuki Sanada, all of them hitting the right notes. What if a platoon of G.I.'s from the Japanese army were to be send back in time 400 years right in the middle of the feudal wars that led to the formation of the Tokugawa Shogunate? Great pitch right? The [[movies]] does exactly what it says on the tin.

[[Hopefully]] the writers didn't bother to explain the, usually ridiculous in sci-fi movies, scientific mumbo jumbo of time transport. No how's or why's. They just did. However the time transport sequence itself is trippy as hell and quite [[wondrous]], if not a bit dated. Not as silly as one would imagine.

The rest of the movie follows the premise to a T. But while it loses a bit of steam with the various subplots that follow the G.I.s arrival to medieval Japan, it [[selection]] up with a [[ruinous]] battle sequence. Undoubtedly it's the main order of the day. The whole concept and by extension the movie itself, was probably originated from this simple pitch: what if G.I.'s equipped with the latest in modern warfare were to fight samurais? And boy does it deliver.

The main battle sequence that spans more than half an hour is probably one of THE [[nicest]] of its kind in 70's action/war movies. Not only is it relentless and exhausting in pace and length, it's also a [[tremendous]] mish-mash of styles and techniques that only unique premises like G.I. Samurai can deliver. I mean, where else would you get the chance to feature tanks, ninjas complete with shuriikens, a helicopter and samurais in the same shot? The G.I. platoon led by lieutenant Iba tears literally through hundreds of extras, gunning them down with machine guns, mortars, grenades and tanks.

This mish-mash of styles is with one foot firmly rooted in the sprawling jidai-geki epic of Kurosawa's Kagemusha or Hiroshi Inagaki's Samurai Banners, while the other is in western action and war movies. There are stylistic touches (like the wonderful slow-motion shots and bloody violence) that bring Sam Peckinpah or Enzo G. Castellari circa Keoma to mind. Japanese cinema has always been influenced by westerns and other Hollywood works and vice versa, and G.I. Samurai effortlessly turns this east-meets-west melting pot into an exciting film.

The film-makers thankfully take the whole thing seriously and the movie benefits immensely from it. Not that tongue-in-cheek mentality is completely absent, it's just that it doesn't try to pander to so-bad-it's-good audiences that enjoy laughing at their movies. The budget was probably hefty, as it is evident in the hundreds of extras, elaborate costumes (very decent for a production that is not a traditional jidai-geki) and special effects. The camera-work and editing are all top notch, almost better than a movie with no higher artistic ambitions deserves.

It's not withouts its flaws either of course. There are many "song" scenes, where all sorts of 70's Japanese rock, disco and country songs play over montages (there's a bonding scene, a love-interest scene, a "war is hell" scene etc). The songs themselves are pretty lame and corny and detract from the whole thing. Although it clocks at a whooping 140 minutes, it flies like a bullet for the most part. Still some scenes, flashbacks and subplots in the first half could have been clipped for a tighter effect.

The cast also deserves a mention, featuring such prominent names as Sonny Chiba, Isao Natsuyagi (Goyokin, Samurai Wolf), Tsunehiko Watase (The Yakuza Papers) and Hiroyuki Sanada, all of them hitting the right notes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5566 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I haven't [[written]] a [[review]] on IMDb for the longest time, [[however]], I [[felt]] myself compelled to write this! When looking up this movie I [[found]] one particular review which urged people [[NOT]] to see this film. Do not pay any attention to this ignorant person! NOTHING is a [[fantastic]] [[film]], full of laughs and above all... imagination! Aren't you sick and tired of being force fed the same [[old]] [[cycle]] of bubble-gum trash movies? Sometimes a film like NOTHING comes along and gives you something you have never seen before. I don't even care if you dislike (even hate) the movie, but no one has a right to discredit the film. IMDb has a monumental impact on reputations and no negative review should discredit the film like that. Just say you hate it and why you hate it... but don't try to tell people that they shouldn't watch it. We have minds of our own and will make up our own minds thank you.

[[If]] my judgment is any good, I'd say that more people will enjoy this movie as opposed to those who hate it.

Treat your mind to a bit of eye-candy! See NOTHING! I haven't [[handwritten]] a [[scrutinize]] on IMDb for the longest time, [[instead]], I [[deemed]] myself compelled to write this! When looking up this movie I [[discoveries]] one particular review which urged people [[NAH]] to see this film. Do not pay any attention to this ignorant person! NOTHING is a [[wondrous]] [[cinema]], full of laughs and above all... imagination! Aren't you sick and tired of being force fed the same [[antigua]] [[cycles]] of bubble-gum trash movies? Sometimes a film like NOTHING comes along and gives you something you have never seen before. I don't even care if you dislike (even hate) the movie, but no one has a right to discredit the film. IMDb has a monumental impact on reputations and no negative review should discredit the film like that. Just say you hate it and why you hate it... but don't try to tell people that they shouldn't watch it. We have minds of our own and will make up our own minds thank you.

[[Though]] my judgment is any good, I'd say that more people will enjoy this movie as opposed to those who hate it.

Treat your mind to a bit of eye-candy! See NOTHING! --------------------------------------------- Result 5567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Every once in a while , someone out of the blue looks at me a little sideways and asks "What's with SNITCH'D" ? I know [[immediately]] they have a [[case]] of barely-hidden [[amusement]] + [[horror]]. You see, I was the cinematographer on the film.

Let me clarify some points regarding this "interesting life experience".

Originally, SNITCH'D was called ONE HARD HIT. I [[met]] James Cahill in July of 1999, a day after I wrapped [[TRIANGLE]] SQUARE, a great little 35mm feature that like so many indie features of the era never got distribution despite festival accolades...it fell eternal victim to the fine print of SAG's notorious Experimental Feature contract. But I digress...

I though I was on a roll, and when James asked me to shoot his little gangster flick in 16mm with a shooting budget of about $25,000, not wanting to break pace, I took it. After all, CLERKS, EL MARIACHI... I too believed the myth back then.

Let's just chalk it up as "film school" for many involved, myself included. SNITCH'D was shot over two weeks in August, 1999, in Aliso Viejo and Santa Ana, CA. Cahill taught Drama at a High School in the latter city ( yes, he is a Drama and English teacher...consider THAT while watching the film, or even observing the use of apostrophe in title ), hence the locations and cast.

Of note in his cast were the only known dramatic appearance of L.A.'s Channel 2 Morning News weather girl Vera Jimenez, and of greater impact, the debut of Eva Longoria, who had just arrived in Hollywood and was as eager as I to get a film under her belt. I must say her professional dedication, focus and "let's do this" attitude kept me inspired and was a foreshadow of her stardom-yet-to-come.

SNITCH'D suffered from poor optics, few lights or electricity, several boom operators du jour, and delivery of an uncorrected offline for duplication. None of that overshadows the actual content, which speaks for itself.

Anyway, by 2003, the film was sold to distributors ( at a net loss, I understand ) who inexplicably had no photos of Eva on the box ( by then she was a rising, working name ) but who did manage to obtain a clear photo of what appears to be an authentic Latino gangster to lend credibility to SNITCH'D. Since Cahill's other passion is antiquarian book dealing, it appears to confirm he believes you can, in fact, judge a book by it's cover... as so many have picked up this DVD based on it's sleeve. ----------------- One year later, Eva, now on a soap, and I met James for one day to shoot a simple short film he had concocted, SPLIT SECOND, which I think has never seen any play despite festival intent.

6 years later, I was hired to shoot another Cahill film titled JUAREZ, Mexico. I though he had worked out the process; my participation was contingent on casting, script and crew control, and the resultant film actually looked promising in dailies, for what it was... a cheap detective story surrounding the mass murders of girls in Juarez; despite claims here and elsewhere, the film has NEVER appeared in any festival or venue, although Cahill has repeatedly claimed the film has distribution and was simply awaiting release to coincide with the DVD release of two studio pictures on the same subject, VIRGIN OF JUAREZ and BORDER TOWN. Every once in a while , someone out of the blue looks at me a little sideways and asks "What's with SNITCH'D" ? I know [[immediatly]] they have a [[lawsuit]] of barely-hidden [[entertainments]] + [[monstrosity]]. You see, I was the cinematographer on the film.

Let me clarify some points regarding this "interesting life experience".

Originally, SNITCH'D was called ONE HARD HIT. I [[complied]] James Cahill in July of 1999, a day after I wrapped [[TRILATERAL]] SQUARE, a great little 35mm feature that like so many indie features of the era never got distribution despite festival accolades...it fell eternal victim to the fine print of SAG's notorious Experimental Feature contract. But I digress...

I though I was on a roll, and when James asked me to shoot his little gangster flick in 16mm with a shooting budget of about $25,000, not wanting to break pace, I took it. After all, CLERKS, EL MARIACHI... I too believed the myth back then.

Let's just chalk it up as "film school" for many involved, myself included. SNITCH'D was shot over two weeks in August, 1999, in Aliso Viejo and Santa Ana, CA. Cahill taught Drama at a High School in the latter city ( yes, he is a Drama and English teacher...consider THAT while watching the film, or even observing the use of apostrophe in title ), hence the locations and cast.

Of note in his cast were the only known dramatic appearance of L.A.'s Channel 2 Morning News weather girl Vera Jimenez, and of greater impact, the debut of Eva Longoria, who had just arrived in Hollywood and was as eager as I to get a film under her belt. I must say her professional dedication, focus and "let's do this" attitude kept me inspired and was a foreshadow of her stardom-yet-to-come.

SNITCH'D suffered from poor optics, few lights or electricity, several boom operators du jour, and delivery of an uncorrected offline for duplication. None of that overshadows the actual content, which speaks for itself.

Anyway, by 2003, the film was sold to distributors ( at a net loss, I understand ) who inexplicably had no photos of Eva on the box ( by then she was a rising, working name ) but who did manage to obtain a clear photo of what appears to be an authentic Latino gangster to lend credibility to SNITCH'D. Since Cahill's other passion is antiquarian book dealing, it appears to confirm he believes you can, in fact, judge a book by it's cover... as so many have picked up this DVD based on it's sleeve. ----------------- One year later, Eva, now on a soap, and I met James for one day to shoot a simple short film he had concocted, SPLIT SECOND, which I think has never seen any play despite festival intent.

6 years later, I was hired to shoot another Cahill film titled JUAREZ, Mexico. I though he had worked out the process; my participation was contingent on casting, script and crew control, and the resultant film actually looked promising in dailies, for what it was... a cheap detective story surrounding the mass murders of girls in Juarez; despite claims here and elsewhere, the film has NEVER appeared in any festival or venue, although Cahill has repeatedly claimed the film has distribution and was simply awaiting release to coincide with the DVD release of two studio pictures on the same subject, VIRGIN OF JUAREZ and BORDER TOWN. --------------------------------------------- Result 5568 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] For a [[science]] scare movie to work well it has to be either truly original or a very [[good]] retelling. This movie is neither. Sure there is a pseudo-original twist in that the [[guy]] [[kills]] people because of a toxin and not because of a [[disease]], but that is a very [[minor]] [[twist]]. There is the [[government]] [[conspiracy]] angle, the crusader protagonist who has personal experience...

And one real drawback of this movie is that the contaminated man has no pathos. Although the character is scripted to be [[someone]] who should be pitied, he is not. Without the [[pity]] the [[movie]] is pointless. The other [[characters]] are so cookie cutter they are [[ridiculous]]. The subplots are convoluted and [[annoying]]. And the saddest [[thing]] is the movie is too flat to [[even]] be [[enjoyed]] as mock material. Make the movie a 45 minute short and it might be worth [[watching]]. For a [[sciences]] scare movie to work well it has to be either truly original or a very [[buena]] retelling. This movie is neither. Sure there is a pseudo-original twist in that the [[guys]] [[assassinated]] people because of a toxin and not because of a [[illness]], but that is a very [[underage]] [[twisting]]. There is the [[administrations]] [[complicity]] angle, the crusader protagonist who has personal experience...

And one real drawback of this movie is that the contaminated man has no pathos. Although the character is scripted to be [[person]] who should be pitied, he is not. Without the [[shame]] the [[filmmaking]] is pointless. The other [[character]] are so cookie cutter they are [[farcical]]. The subplots are convoluted and [[exasperating]]. And the saddest [[stuff]] is the movie is too flat to [[yet]] be [[adored]] as mock material. Make the movie a 45 minute short and it might be worth [[staring]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] The only reason I [[elected]] to give this flick a shot was due to the presence of [[Oscar]] winner [[Ernest]] Borgnine. All I can [[say]] is, it was the greatest [[waste]] of a good actor ever put to film. As far as I could tell, Borgnine was the [[ONLY]] [[actor]] in it. The other performances were so uniformly [[terrible]], I am [[amazed]] a studio [[would]] [[actually]] [[pay]] the "[[performers]]" to [[appear]]. [[Couple]] this level of talent in the acting department with a [[story]] so plodding and [[insipid]] that I [[thought]] my eyes were going to [[start]] bleeding by the [[time]] the [[credits]] rolled, and you have a [[perfect]] [[cinematic]] [[disaster]]. [[Obviously]] the [[movie]] was [[made]] to [[appeal]] to an [[audience]] of [[children]], and to its credit, it was better than most of the [[original]] programing on the [[Disney]] [[Channel]] and [[similar]] kid-focused [[networks]]. But honestly, that is not [[saying]] much. The only reason I [[selects]] to give this flick a shot was due to the presence of [[Oskar]] winner [[Ernesto]] Borgnine. All I can [[said]] is, it was the greatest [[wastes]] of a good actor ever put to film. As far as I could tell, Borgnine was the [[JUST]] [[protagonist]] in it. The other performances were so uniformly [[abysmal]], I am [[surprised]] a studio [[should]] [[indeed]] [[pays]] the "[[performer]]" to [[arise]]. [[Match]] this level of talent in the acting department with a [[history]] so plodding and [[tasteless]] that I [[think]] my eyes were going to [[initiation]] bleeding by the [[moment]] the [[credit]] rolled, and you have a [[flawless]] [[cinematographic]] [[disasters]]. [[Definitely]] the [[film]] was [[brought]] to [[appellate]] to an [[viewers]] of [[enfant]], and to its credit, it was better than most of the [[preliminary]] programing on the [[Disneyland]] [[Channels]] and [[akin]] kid-focused [[networking]]. But honestly, that is not [[telling]] much. --------------------------------------------- Result 5570 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It was simple and yet so nice. I think the whole sense of sex segregation in society, which can be bitter, was shown very delicately. It had a bitter kind of hummer in it. The fact that most of the actors were not professionals, made the movie more tangible and more realistic. There was a "documentary" side to the movie too. The best scenes were those that all the girls, banned from watching, were listening passionately to the soldier, who is supposed to keep an eye on them, broadcasting the game. If you are an Iranian, the familiar cheering and dancing in the streets after a game won, fills you up with National pride!! If you are not Iranian, you'll still love it all the same! --------------------------------------------- Result 5571 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A family moves into a old house in Japan. But there's a catch it's haunted (BOO!!!). Aw, didn't mean to make you jump. It's only a review. Settle back down. Ahem, now anyways it's haunted by an old samurai who killed his wife & her lover in slow motion. This naturally makes a 3 minutes scene stretch out to about 7 or 8. Horrid acting. Horrid story. But How bad can it be you ask? Well it was SO bad my brain started to melt & leak out through my nose in thoughtful drips. It was SO bad whenever Doug McClure came on-screen I prayed that i had flashbacks of Small Wonder (Yes, i know Doug was in "Out of this world" & not "small Wonder", but it's pretty much the same damn show, & i can hum the "small wonder" theme better) There are movies that are so bad they're good. this isn't one of those

Where i saw it: Showtime Beyond

My Grade: F-

Eye Candy: Mako Hattori gets topless,Susan George gets 2 love scenes ( one nude, one just topless)

--------------------------------------------- Result 5572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] [[In]] Hollywood in the 1930's and 1940's, I think that every studio can make a western, except Warner bros. The few [[times]] they [[try]], it always [[ridiculous]] (except, perhaps, for They Died with their Boots on - which is a cavalery western.) I have read that Humphrey Bogart, seing [[James]] Cagney with this big cowboy hat on his head, said that he looks like a [[mushroom]]. [[True]]! Cagney and Bogart are too urban, too XXe century to be [[credible]] in a western movie. The [[story]] here had no suprise, and it did't [[help]]. Every 10 minutes, I figure I can see Bogart and Cagney [[drops]] their little guns and put hands in a machine gun to get away from the set in a 1930's black car. [[During]] Hollywood in the 1930's and 1940's, I think that every studio can make a western, except Warner bros. The few [[moments]] they [[tried]], it always [[foolish]] (except, perhaps, for They Died with their Boots on - which is a cavalery western.) I have read that Humphrey Bogart, seing [[Jacques]] Cagney with this big cowboy hat on his head, said that he looks like a [[mushrooms]]. [[Veritable]]! Cagney and Bogart are too urban, too XXe century to be [[believable]] in a western movie. The [[storytelling]] here had no suprise, and it did't [[aids]]. Every 10 minutes, I figure I can see Bogart and Cagney [[descartes]] their little guns and put hands in a machine gun to get away from the set in a 1930's black car. --------------------------------------------- Result 5573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this debut by Ring director, Hideo Nakata. If you've seen Ring beforehand then you'll be familiar with the style and idea of this flick. It's got a subtle spookiness about it that works better than the constant (and predictable) stingers that infest most mainstream movies of this genre. If you like films that give you the chills, then you will probably like this one. A good, creepy debut by Hideo Nakata. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Sometime I fail to understand what do the directors think when they make a movie... I had had a trauma after watching Welcome (2007) and thought that they wont do it again. But after loads of [[amazing]] promos, Tashan finally [[ended]] as heart [[attack]].

Such amazing 3 songs in [[promo]] - Dil Haara, Chhaliya and Tashan Mein..... and what u get in the movie? [[Zero]] story, predictable plot, plenty of Akshay Kumar stunts and [[nothing]] interesting [[apart]] from watching Kareena after her major weight loss...!!!

Music-wise another major [[disaster]]... in the music album, they have spent time on giving [[pathetic]] small dialogs of these 4 jokers and they haven't thought of giving the background [[song]] of the scenes when Akshay Kumar is doing stunts...! that song is such nice, quite comparable to Tashan Mein and that is not [[taken]] in the music [[album]]!!! :-( [[If]] you [[plan]] to watch this [[movie]], i would say, watch it to [[listen]] to that [[background]] song which goes something like ...'Bachchan Bachchan Pandey...'

Overall very [[disappointed]] even with the [[way]] Bhaiyyaji has [[made]] [[attempt]] to speak [[bad]] English!

Go away man, i need to [[puke]]! Sometime I fail to understand what do the directors think when they make a movie... I had had a trauma after watching Welcome (2007) and thought that they wont do it again. But after loads of [[striking]] promos, Tashan finally [[completed]] as heart [[onslaught]].

Such amazing 3 songs in [[prom]] - Dil Haara, Chhaliya and Tashan Mein..... and what u get in the movie? [[Null]] story, predictable plot, plenty of Akshay Kumar stunts and [[anything]] interesting [[additionally]] from watching Kareena after her major weight loss...!!!

Music-wise another major [[cataclysm]]... in the music album, they have spent time on giving [[unhappy]] small dialogs of these 4 jokers and they haven't thought of giving the background [[chanson]] of the scenes when Akshay Kumar is doing stunts...! that song is such nice, quite comparable to Tashan Mein and that is not [[took]] in the music [[albums]]!!! :-( [[Unless]] you [[programmes]] to watch this [[filmmaking]], i would say, watch it to [[hear]] to that [[backgrounds]] song which goes something like ...'Bachchan Bachchan Pandey...'

Overall very [[disappointing]] even with the [[camino]] Bhaiyyaji has [[effected]] [[strives]] to speak [[unfavourable]] English!

Go away man, i need to [[puking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Whoo-boy, that was [[definitely]] one of the [[worst]] flicks I've seen all summer. [[Granted]], it was on Sci Fi, and I don't watch much Sci Fi, but man, [[talk]] about a razor thin plot and two dimensional characters to the max.

The [[characters]] were stereotypical and [[overdone]], the plot and [[setting]] were [[unbelievable]], the [[vampires]] were [[less]] [[intimidating]], more funny-looking, the gore was unnecessary, the [[special]] effects were down-right [[horrible]], and the ending? [[Well]], the only thing unpredictable about the ending was when [[suddenly]] the tomboy [[becomes]] a lesbian and [[starts]] to do it with the [[female]] [[vampire]], which, by the [[way]], isn't really all that [[hot]] [[considering]] it [[occurs]] for about three seconds, in which you're closer to "What the [[hell]]?" then "Man, that's [[hot]]." [[If]] this ever appears in reruns, [[God]] [[forbid]], DON'T WATCH IT. Whoo-boy, that was [[admittedly]] one of the [[meanest]] flicks I've seen all summer. [[Awarded]], it was on Sci Fi, and I don't watch much Sci Fi, but man, [[conversation]] about a razor thin plot and two dimensional characters to the max.

The [[character]] were stereotypical and [[overkill]], the plot and [[settings]] were [[fantastic]], the [[vamps]] were [[minimum]] [[bullying]], more funny-looking, the gore was unnecessary, the [[specially]] effects were down-right [[scary]], and the ending? [[Good]], the only thing unpredictable about the ending was when [[abruptly]] the tomboy [[becoming]] a lesbian and [[launching]] to do it with the [[girls]] [[vamp]], which, by the [[ways]], isn't really all that [[hottest]] [[reviewing]] it [[comes]] for about three seconds, in which you're closer to "What the [[inferno]]?" then "Man, that's [[sexy]]." [[Unless]] this ever appears in reruns, [[Deities]] [[banned]], DON'T WATCH IT. --------------------------------------------- Result 5576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I really [[love]] this movie. I remember one time when I was in 2nd >grade, my teacher showed it to us on a 16mm film reel. This movie, [[however]], can be a little [[frightening]] for 2nd graders such as the scene where Bill [[murders]] [[Nancy]] and seeing Fagin's [[face]] for the first [[time]] on the screen. One of my relatives is sick of seeing this [[movie]] because she [[studied]] over it in music class. If I were a teacher and could grade the people who produced this [[wonderful]] film, I [[would]] give them an A+. I really [[loved]] this movie. I remember one time when I was in 2nd >grade, my teacher showed it to us on a 16mm film reel. This movie, [[still]], can be a little [[dreadful]] for 2nd graders such as the scene where Bill [[assassinating]] [[Nance]] and seeing Fagin's [[encounter]] for the first [[period]] on the screen. One of my relatives is sick of seeing this [[flick]] because she [[explored]] over it in music class. If I were a teacher and could grade the people who produced this [[wondrous]] film, I [[ought]] give them an A+. --------------------------------------------- Result 5577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an immoral and reprehensible piece of garbage, that no doubt wants to be a Friday the 13th (1980) clone. The poster for this movie makes it look like there's going to be some sort of a cross between Jason and Freddy, which is likely to attract movie-goers. There is NOTHING good or entertaining about this movie about this movie. It just makes me sad, just thinking that some people are going to stumble upon Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers (1988) on video or DVD, and waste their time with this sad, cynical, depressing movie.

Angela Baker (Pamela Springsteen) is a camp counselor at Camp Rolling Hills, who hopes that the other campers are as nice as she is, and that they stay out of trouble. Meanwhile, the other campers are realizing that people are disappearing one by one, with Angela making up the excuse that she had to send them home. Could Angela be the killer, who was once a man, who underwent a sex change operation years earlier? Who knows? Who cares?

The 1980s was home to a lot of movies that made the cross between the Mad Slasher and Dead Teenager genres, in which a mad killer goes berserk. Some have a plot, some don't, but they're all about as bad as this one. Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers is 80 minutes of teenagers being introduced and then being stabbed, strangled, impaled, chopped up, burned alive, and mutilated. That's all this movie is. It is just mindless, bloody violence.

Watching this movie, I was reminded of the Friday the 13th movies, in which the message for its viewers was that the primary function of teenagers is to be hacked to death. The filmmakers of Sleepaway Camp II have every right to be ashamed of themselves. Imagine the sick message that this movie offers for its teen viewers: "The world is a totally evil place," this movie tells you, " and it'll kill you. It doesn't matter what your dreams or your hopes are. It doesn't matter if you have a new boyfriend, or a new girlfriend. It doesn't matter what you think, what you do or what your plans for the future are. You can forget those plans, because you're just going to wind up dead."

And the sickest thing is--and by not giving too much away--the movie simply sets up room for a sequel. Well, why not? They've probably and already taken the bucket to the cesspool by making three or four of these movies. I missed out on the original Sleepaway Camp (1983), and, after watching its first sequel, I will hopefully stay away from the other sequels, as well as the original. And for parents, if you know kids who actually LIKE this movie, do not let them date your children. --------------------------------------------- Result 5578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Thanks Jymn Magon, for creating Disney's 2 best cartoons ever. This show has improved very much over the years. As a kid, I didn't like it because I thought it was a rip-off of Ducktales, which was my favorite Disney thing at the time (like Grandmoffromero). Then later on though it was good but not great. But after reading the reviews here, I decided to give it another chance & bought the DVD set & watched the whole pilot the first day I got it, & was very pleasantly surprised. It's still my favorite episode, although the series did live up to it. And by the end of disc 1, I knew this was going to be a top tenner.

The characters are so complex & charming. My favorite has got to be Wildcat. He's absolutely hilarious and sweet to boot. My next favorite is Baloo, the best pilot on the show. I can see why 'ol Jymn built the show around him. Then it's Kit Cloudkicker. He & Baloo have the best relationship in the series. After that, Louie. Jim Cummings did a perfect job of impersonating the original voice. After him, Rebecca. She has made me laugh pretty hard, and I do believe she and Baloo eventually marry. And finally(for the heroes), Molly. Although she's my least favorite, I still like her. I think she's a very cute character(much better than Webby from Ducktales). And the villains were very original. Don Karnage & his air pirates always crack me up, Kahn is ice-cold and ruthless, and the Thembrians are always at least amusing.

As said before, the stories range from hilarious(Time Waits For No Bear, Romance of Red Chimp) to nothing short of touching(The Old Man & the Seaduck, Paradise Lost), to fun, funny & exciting adventures(In Search of Ancient Blunders & my favorite For Whom the Bell Klangs). These are only a few of my favorite episodes. Anyway, Talespin is Disney's best, aside from Gummi Bears Some reasons for this? GB had a decent amount of my favorite character(Cubbi), while TS didn't have enough of Wildcat. But in the end Talespin remains a classic. BOTTOM LINE- 10/10 6th best cartoon ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 5579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This an [[free]] adaptation of the novels of Clarence Mulford; fans of the Willaim Boyd films will probably feel a little at [[sea]] here (and the reviews here so far reflect that). But I [[knew]] of Hopalong from the novels first, and never cared much for the Boyd [[films]] once I got around to them.

Christopher Coppola has [[made]] a [[wise]] [[choice]] - he has not made a nostalgic "Western"; instead, he has approached the Cassidy story as a slice of what we used to call 'Americana'; or what older [[critics]] once called 'homespun'. As the film unraveled, I found myself more and more reminded of the great "Hallmark Theater" version of Mark Twain's "Roughing It", with James Garner narrating.

Both these films remind us that, although films about the 'old west' are probably always to be mythic for Americans, they need not be 'westerns'; they can very well be just films about what it meant to be American in that time, in that place.

I never feel pandered to, watching this film; there's no [[effort]] to shove the Boyd-Cassidy legacy down our throats, no irony, no camp. Consequently, I get a sense of these characters as having walked - or ridden horseback - across some real western America I too could have walked a hundred years ago.

Given that, the plainness of the [[film]] - it positively avoids anything we have [[come]] to [[call]] "[[style]]" - is all to its favor; and the plain acting of the performers fits neatly in with this; gosh, it really does feel like some story told around a campfire on a cattle drive - no visual dressing, just the quirks and good humor - and sudden violence - that we expect from the good narration of an adventure yarn. I was very [[pleasantly]] surprised by this film, and if the viewer sets aside encultured expectations, he or she will find considerable pleasure in it.

I would have given this film 9-stars, but I'll give it a ten just because most reviewers here have missed the point completely; and I urge them to set their memories of Boyd aside and give this film another chance.

Note 1: A reviewer complained that Hopalong shoots people dead in this film, rather than shooting the guns out of their hands (ala Boyd's Cassidy); first, Cassidy DOES shoot people dead in the novels; second, if Cassidy were a real cowboy he would have shot people dead - the problem with shooting guns out of people's hands is that they can always get another gun - which happens to be part of the subtext of this very film.

Note 2: I admit that I am jealous of the Coppola family, that they have the Director of "The Godfather" among them who can get them all opportunities to make movies that I can't; but a good movie is a good movie; and this is a good movie. If it's by somebody by the name "Coppola", well, that's just is as it is. America is the land of opportunity (or was, until Bush got into office) - that's what the great American novels are all about. This an [[extricate]] adaptation of the novels of Clarence Mulford; fans of the Willaim Boyd films will probably feel a little at [[hoi]] here (and the reviews here so far reflect that). But I [[knowed]] of Hopalong from the novels first, and never cared much for the Boyd [[kino]] once I got around to them.

Christopher Coppola has [[brought]] a [[wiser]] [[wahl]] - he has not made a nostalgic "Western"; instead, he has approached the Cassidy story as a slice of what we used to call 'Americana'; or what older [[critiques]] once called 'homespun'. As the film unraveled, I found myself more and more reminded of the great "Hallmark Theater" version of Mark Twain's "Roughing It", with James Garner narrating.

Both these films remind us that, although films about the 'old west' are probably always to be mythic for Americans, they need not be 'westerns'; they can very well be just films about what it meant to be American in that time, in that place.

I never feel pandered to, watching this film; there's no [[endeavors]] to shove the Boyd-Cassidy legacy down our throats, no irony, no camp. Consequently, I get a sense of these characters as having walked - or ridden horseback - across some real western America I too could have walked a hundred years ago.

Given that, the plainness of the [[kino]] - it positively avoids anything we have [[coming]] to [[calling]] "[[elegance]]" - is all to its favor; and the plain acting of the performers fits neatly in with this; gosh, it really does feel like some story told around a campfire on a cattle drive - no visual dressing, just the quirks and good humor - and sudden violence - that we expect from the good narration of an adventure yarn. I was very [[cheerfully]] surprised by this film, and if the viewer sets aside encultured expectations, he or she will find considerable pleasure in it.

I would have given this film 9-stars, but I'll give it a ten just because most reviewers here have missed the point completely; and I urge them to set their memories of Boyd aside and give this film another chance.

Note 1: A reviewer complained that Hopalong shoots people dead in this film, rather than shooting the guns out of their hands (ala Boyd's Cassidy); first, Cassidy DOES shoot people dead in the novels; second, if Cassidy were a real cowboy he would have shot people dead - the problem with shooting guns out of people's hands is that they can always get another gun - which happens to be part of the subtext of this very film.

Note 2: I admit that I am jealous of the Coppola family, that they have the Director of "The Godfather" among them who can get them all opportunities to make movies that I can't; but a good movie is a good movie; and this is a good movie. If it's by somebody by the name "Coppola", well, that's just is as it is. America is the land of opportunity (or was, until Bush got into office) - that's what the great American novels are all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 5580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Carla]] is a secretary who is [[essentially]] deaf without her hearing aids. When she [[finds]] herself overloaded at work, she is [[able]] to hire [[Paul]] to [[help]] her out. Paul is just out of jail, and his [[past]] is not [[entirely]] behind him. To [[say]] too much more about the story, which has [[many]] twists, [[would]] be a [[mistake]].

The most interesting [[thing]] about this [[film]] for me is how [[sound]] is [[used]] to indicate when [[Carla]] can hear and when she can't -- a [[sort]] of "point of [[hear]]" (like point of [[view]]). The [[early]] scenes that set this up, as well as the [[early]] character development of [[Carla]] and Paul, was more interesting to me than the twists and turns later on, some of which were hard to follow and/or stretched credibility a bit. There is also some unpleasant violence. Back to the positive side, the cinematography was very good.

The film is worth seeing, but [[perhaps]] not seeking out. Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival on 4/28/2002. [[Carly]] is a secretary who is [[basically]] deaf without her hearing aids. When she [[find]] herself overloaded at work, she is [[capable]] to hire [[Paulo]] to [[assist]] her out. Paul is just out of jail, and his [[preceding]] is not [[absolutely]] behind him. To [[told]] too much more about the story, which has [[multiple]] twists, [[should]] be a [[blunder]].

The most interesting [[stuff]] about this [[kino]] for me is how [[audible]] is [[using]] to indicate when [[Carly]] can hear and when she can't -- a [[sorting]] of "point of [[overheard]]" (like point of [[opinions]]). The [[precocious]] scenes that set this up, as well as the [[precocious]] character development of [[Carli]] and Paul, was more interesting to me than the twists and turns later on, some of which were hard to follow and/or stretched credibility a bit. There is also some unpleasant violence. Back to the positive side, the cinematography was very good.

The film is worth seeing, but [[probably]] not seeking out. Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival on 4/28/2002. --------------------------------------------- Result 5581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Okay, sorry, but I [[loved]] this movie. I just love the whole 80's genre of these kind of movies, because you don't see many like this one anymore! I want to ask all of you people who [[say]] this movie is just a rip-off, or a cheesy imitation, what is it imitating? I've never seen another movie like this one, well, not horror anyway.

Basically its about the popular group in school, who like to make everyones lives living hell, so they decided to [[pick]] on this nerdy boy named [[Marty]]. It turns fatal when he really gets hurt from one of their little pranks.

So, its like 10 [[years]] later, and the group of friends who hurt Marty start getting High School reunion letters. But...they are the only ones [[receiving]] them! [[So]] they [[return]] back to the [[old]] school, and one by one get [[knocked]] off by.......Yeah you [[probably]] know what [[happens]]!

The only [[part]] that [[disappointed]] me was the very [[end]]. It could have been [[left]] off, or [[thought]] out better.

I [[think]] you should give it a [[try]], and try not to be to critical!

~*~CupidGrl~*~ Okay, sorry, but I [[cared]] this movie. I just love the whole 80's genre of these kind of movies, because you don't see many like this one anymore! I want to ask all of you people who [[tell]] this movie is just a rip-off, or a cheesy imitation, what is it imitating? I've never seen another movie like this one, well, not horror anyway.

Basically its about the popular group in school, who like to make everyones lives living hell, so they decided to [[takes]] on this nerdy boy named [[Martyn]]. It turns fatal when he really gets hurt from one of their little pranks.

So, its like 10 [[olds]] later, and the group of friends who hurt Marty start getting High School reunion letters. But...they are the only ones [[reception]] them! [[Therefore]] they [[homecoming]] back to the [[antigua]] school, and one by one get [[hit]] off by.......Yeah you [[maybe]] know what [[arises]]!

The only [[portions]] that [[disillusioned]] me was the very [[terminating]]. It could have been [[gauche]] off, or [[thinking]] out better.

I [[thinking]] you should give it a [[tries]], and try not to be to critical!

~*~CupidGrl~*~ --------------------------------------------- Result 5582 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] We, as a family, were so [[delighted]] with 'The Last of the Blonde Bombshells' we [[purchased]] a copy for our [[home]] video library.

The acting is A1 and the cast contains [[many]] [[favorite]] [[actors]] and singers. The theme is [[unusual]] and the script well [[written]]. The [[music]]/[[songs]] are [[timeless]] and takes us back to our young days when we sang the [[songs]] at the top of our [[voices]]. To outline the story here would [[spoil]] the 'plot' as it is really nice to [[sit]] back and enjoy the story as it unfolds.

Full [[marks]] to this most [[enjoyable]] and [[uplifting]] [[production]] and we [[heartily]] [[recommend]] it to [[anyone]] who is [[looking]] for a belly-laugh and lots of music. We, as a family, were so [[happy]] with 'The Last of the Blonde Bombshells' we [[buying]] a copy for our [[housing]] video library.

The acting is A1 and the cast contains [[several]] [[preferred]] [[actresses]] and singers. The theme is [[odd]] and the script well [[typed]]. The [[musicians]]/[[hymns]] are [[perpetual]] and takes us back to our young days when we sang the [[hymns]] at the top of our [[voice]]. To outline the story here would [[ruin]] the 'plot' as it is really nice to [[sits]] back and enjoy the story as it unfolds.

Full [[marques]] to this most [[nice]] and [[uplift]] [[productivity]] and we [[unreservedly]] [[recommending]] it to [[somebody]] who is [[researching]] for a belly-laugh and lots of music. --------------------------------------------- Result 5583 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have nothing to comment on this movie It is so bad that I had to put my first comment on IMDb website to help some viewers save some time and do something more interesting, instead of watching this "movie" ... anything will do, even stare at the walls is better.

And because I have to write minimum 10 lines of text, i tell you also is a low budget movie, bad acting, no name actors, a stupid mutt as the wolf, and so on... Also the story brings nothing new, the special effects are made in the 80's style.

The movie is almost as bad as the movie "Megalodon".

So have fun! ;) (not watching this movie) --------------------------------------------- Result 5584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I find myself comparing all stand-up acts to this one performance now. Even older recorded performances I once thought were funny just don't seem as funny after seeing Eddie Izzard in this award-winning look at history, language disparities, and Englebert Humperdink... --------------------------------------------- Result 5585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I don't have much to add to what has been said before, but it's very much a [[film]] of it's time, and the first (and likely only) time that the studio hung the film totally on the Dead End [[Kids]].

The Warner's gave the [[boys]] plenty of help, from director Ray Enright and an 'A' budget, to an almost [[magical]] [[cast]] of supporting [[actors]]. At every [[turn]], we get one of those gem performances from real pros. They are too many to list, but it seems like just about everybody on the Warner's lot (Sans the very biggest stars) walk through this [[picture]]. (See if you can spot John Ridgely)

The only over the top performance is from the always reliable Eduardo Cianelli as a mob boss with a messianistic complex. He plays this character almost exactly like that of the Thuggie leader in "Gunga Din". He's something to watch! And Marjorie [[Main]] is [[excellent]] and gets her best role [[since]] "Dead End".

My bid for this one is a second feature on a double bill with something like "City for Conquest".

Hooray for Warners! I don't have much to add to what has been said before, but it's very much a [[movies]] of it's time, and the first (and likely only) time that the studio hung the film totally on the Dead End [[Brats]].

The Warner's gave the [[guys]] plenty of help, from director Ray Enright and an 'A' budget, to an almost [[quadrant]] [[casting]] of supporting [[players]]. At every [[transforming]], we get one of those gem performances from real pros. They are too many to list, but it seems like just about everybody on the Warner's lot (Sans the very biggest stars) walk through this [[image]]. (See if you can spot John Ridgely)

The only over the top performance is from the always reliable Eduardo Cianelli as a mob boss with a messianistic complex. He plays this character almost exactly like that of the Thuggie leader in "Gunga Din". He's something to watch! And Marjorie [[Leading]] is [[wondrous]] and gets her best role [[because]] "Dead End".

My bid for this one is a second feature on a double bill with something like "City for Conquest".

Hooray for Warners! --------------------------------------------- Result 5586 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I'm no big fan of Martial Arts movies, but the video shop was nearly empty and Jet Li was in Lethal Weapon 4 and I got it free when the other films I'd rented, either way I rented it. I absolutely [[loved]] it, my flatmate and myself (22 year old Biochemistry and Accountancy students) spent the half hour after the film making strange Kung Fu noises and throwing beermat shurikens at each other. I can't explain it (well maybe a little tequila). I never enjoyed Bruce Lee, skinny bloke kicking big bloke, beating him, kicking bigger bloke etc film ends. Think Jackie Chan with a little less comedy and more action. I'm no big fan of Martial Arts movies, but the video shop was nearly empty and Jet Li was in Lethal Weapon 4 and I got it free when the other films I'd rented, either way I rented it. I absolutely [[cared]] it, my flatmate and myself (22 year old Biochemistry and Accountancy students) spent the half hour after the film making strange Kung Fu noises and throwing beermat shurikens at each other. I can't explain it (well maybe a little tequila). I never enjoyed Bruce Lee, skinny bloke kicking big bloke, beating him, kicking bigger bloke etc film ends. Think Jackie Chan with a little less comedy and more action. --------------------------------------------- Result 5587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Having read the novel before seeing this film, I was [[enormously]] [[disappointed]] by the wooden acting and the arrogance of the [[producers]] in their blatant [[disregard]] of the plot. I feel this [[film]] in no way reflects the brilliance of Bronte's work, and rather [[gave]] the impression of a shallow love story. In the condensing of the [[film]] to a short 2hours, the film [[lost]] many of the key features which make the [[book]] comprehendable and progressional, thus resulting in a somewhat jumpy [[plot]] with little grounding. There is no build up to the romance between Rochester and [[Jane]] Eyre, so this appears rather abrupt and unfounded since the two characters have such infrequent interaction you cannot help but imagine their 'love' is superficial. This is such an [[injustice]] to Bronte's [[novel]];you are given no impression of Jane's quirky cheek and boldness which [[attracts]] Rochester to her, and his arrogance which [[attracts]] Jane to him.

Despite to poor scripting, I think that a few of the characters were portrayed very astutely, [[namely]] Mrs Fairfax and Grace Poole, [[however]] [[overall]] the production was poor. Given a better scripting, perhaps the [[film]] [[would]] have been more successful. [[See]] "Jane Eyre" (1970) with Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton for an outstanding production. Having read the novel before seeing this film, I was [[significantly]] [[disappoint]] by the wooden acting and the arrogance of the [[industrialists]] in their blatant [[disdain]] of the plot. I feel this [[filmmaking]] in no way reflects the brilliance of Bronte's work, and rather [[handed]] the impression of a shallow love story. In the condensing of the [[filmmaking]] to a short 2hours, the film [[outof]] many of the key features which make the [[ledger]] comprehendable and progressional, thus resulting in a somewhat jumpy [[intrigue]] with little grounding. There is no build up to the romance between Rochester and [[Jeanne]] Eyre, so this appears rather abrupt and unfounded since the two characters have such infrequent interaction you cannot help but imagine their 'love' is superficial. This is such an [[iniquity]] to Bronte's [[newer]];you are given no impression of Jane's quirky cheek and boldness which [[draws]] Rochester to her, and his arrogance which [[attract]] Jane to him.

Despite to poor scripting, I think that a few of the characters were portrayed very astutely, [[especially]] Mrs Fairfax and Grace Poole, [[instead]] [[generals]] the production was poor. Given a better scripting, perhaps the [[filmmaking]] [[could]] have been more successful. [[Behold]] "Jane Eyre" (1970) with Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton for an outstanding production. --------------------------------------------- Result 5588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was just down right bad. I love war movies and can normally come away from most movies and find something that I liked,but this was not one of them. This movie lacked substance and intensity.OK I get it, the Finns put up one hell of a fight and thats great, but the story is poorly told. You don't have any real connection with any of the characters and there's no real story line to follow. You just go from one random scene to another, nothing flows to form the story that is trying to be conveyed. If you want a war movie that will keep you riveted, and amazingly enough without battles scenes, then I would suggest "Downfall" (WWII German film). Or if you prefer a great story line and a lot of action then I would suggest "Brotherhood of War" (Korean war/Korean film). These two movies will not let you down as Winter War will. --------------------------------------------- Result 5589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I could not [[believe]] the low 5.6 [[rating]] on IMDb about Johnny Dangerously at the moment I [[wrote]] this [[review]] and I [[thought]] I had to do something to promote that [[memorable]] piece of [[comedy]] as much as I can. [[Seriously]], to [[get]] a [[rating]] so low, the people who [[voted]] must have a very [[limited]] [[sense]] of [[humor]], not to mention a very shallow [[opened]] mind. [[If]] you don't like humorous [[flicks]], don't watch them! [[Combining]] [[absurd]] [[humour]], a very good [[storytelling]], and an [[outstanding]] [[pace]] [[given]] by the [[multiple]] [[running]] [[gags]], this movie has made its [[way]] into my DVD collection. And that is without mentioning the [[visual]] farces [[embedded]] here and there and of course, the use of "clin d'oeils" and "clichés" based on our favorite [[organized]] crime [[movies]].

I showed this [[movie]] to a lot of people and, being [[introduced]] to it without any [[specific]] [[expectations]] (except maybe watching a comedy)- the very state of mind you should have to watch any [[movie]] in my [[opinion]] - they all liked it very much. It goes well, it's not long to watch and there are [[absolutely]] no slowing downs in the [[evolution]] of the story, which I [[think]] is really straightforward. [[Sure]] it's not perfect, some gags [[fall]] a bit short, but no movie is perfect, [[especially]] when [[considering]] other [[opinions]] that yours. That is why I rated this movie 9 out of 10. This [[movie]] is in my [[opinion]] a [[precursor]] like "Top [[Secret]]" and "Spaceballs" in the [[field]] of [[absurd]] but well-thought comedies. Which are nowadays more and more [[absurd]] while [[cutting]] down on the [[thought]] and ingeniosity side. [[Sometimes]] [[gags]] [[need]] more [[culture]] than a [[lot]] of people [[imagine]] to be [[understood]] correctly, if at all. As a [[final]] word, I [[would]] like to [[say]] : watch it for yourself, do not follow average Joe's saying and if you don't like it, then you'll know for real it was not good for your tastes, which is [[understandable]] but unlikely in my [[opinion]]. I could not [[think]] the low 5.6 [[ratings]] on IMDb about Johnny Dangerously at the moment I [[texted]] this [[inspect]] and I [[thoughts]] I had to do something to promote that [[landmark]] piece of [[parody]] as much as I can. [[Severely]], to [[got]] a [[scoring]] so low, the people who [[passed]] must have a very [[constrained]] [[sensing]] of [[mood]], not to mention a very shallow [[inaugurated]] mind. [[Unless]] you don't like humorous [[gestures]], don't watch them! [[Combined]] [[preposterous]] [[comedy]], a very good [[narration]], and an [[unpaid]] [[rhythm]] [[afforded]] by the [[numerous]] [[executing]] [[jaws]], this movie has made its [[paths]] into my DVD collection. And that is without mentioning the [[optic]] farces [[incorporated]] here and there and of course, the use of "clin d'oeils" and "clichés" based on our favorite [[organised]] crime [[cinematography]].

I showed this [[movies]] to a lot of people and, being [[tabled]] to it without any [[concrete]] [[predictions]] (except maybe watching a comedy)- the very state of mind you should have to watch any [[flick]] in my [[viewing]] - they all liked it very much. It goes well, it's not long to watch and there are [[perfectly]] no slowing downs in the [[developments]] of the story, which I [[believe]] is really straightforward. [[Convinced]] it's not perfect, some gags [[decreased]] a bit short, but no movie is perfect, [[mainly]] when [[examining]] other [[opinion]] that yours. That is why I rated this movie 9 out of 10. This [[cinematography]] is in my [[view]] a [[predecessor]] like "Top [[Concealed]]" and "Spaceballs" in the [[campo]] of [[preposterous]] but well-thought comedies. Which are nowadays more and more [[grotesque]] while [[cut]] down on the [[brainchild]] and ingeniosity side. [[Intermittently]] [[jaws]] [[needs]] more [[civilisations]] than a [[lots]] of people [[suppose]] to be [[understanding]] correctly, if at all. As a [[last]] word, I [[could]] like to [[said]] : watch it for yourself, do not follow average Joe's saying and if you don't like it, then you'll know for real it was not good for your tastes, which is [[comprehensible]] but unlikely in my [[viewing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5590 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't figure out how anyone can get a budget for a movie this bad. It's like the TV station are desperate for anything, anything at all. They're buried underneath a bunch of snow, the electricity constantly flashes on and off, yet magically there is a background light that stays constant. Where does all this (fake) light come from? That, and all that stupid bickering between the characters. They seem to be more interested in complaining to each other than trying to invent ways to survive. It tries to create that feel of emergency and people helping. But because it's such bad directing and acting, you will not your Florence Nightingale fix with this flick, sorry. I'm joining the negative feedback, and I concur that this is one of the worst movies ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 5591 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "The [[Godfather]]" of television, but aside from it's acclaim and mobster characters, the two are [[nothing]] [[alike]]. Tony Soprano is forced to go to a psychiatrist after a series of panic attacks. His psychiatrist learns that Tony is actually part of two families -- in one family he is a loving father yet not-so-perfect-husband, and in the other family he is a ruthless wiseguy. After analysis, Dr. Melfi concludes that Tony's problems actually derive from his mother Livia, who's suspected to have borderline-personality disorder. Gandolfini is rightfully praised as the main character; yet Bracco and Marchand aren't nearly as recognized for their equally and talented performances as the psychiatrist and mother, respectively. Falco, Imperioli and DeMatteo are acclaimed for their brilliant supporting roles. Van Zandt (from the E-Street Band) plays his first and only role as Tony's best friend, and is [[quite]] [[convincing]] and latching. Chianese, the only recurring actor to have actually appeared in a Godfather film, plays Tony's uncle and on-and-off nemesis. Many fans also enjoyed characters played by Pastore, Ventimiglia, Curatola, Proval, Pantoliano, Lip, Sciorra and Buscemi. Tony's children are "okay" but not notable (with the exception of Iler's stunning performance in the third-to-last episode, "The Second Coming"); Sirico and Schirripa are unconvincing and over-the-top, but the show is too strong for them to hold it back. Even as the show continues for over six season, it ceases to have a dull or predictable moment.

**** (out of four) "The [[Nominating]]" of television, but aside from it's acclaim and mobster characters, the two are [[anything]] [[equally]]. Tony Soprano is forced to go to a psychiatrist after a series of panic attacks. His psychiatrist learns that Tony is actually part of two families -- in one family he is a loving father yet not-so-perfect-husband, and in the other family he is a ruthless wiseguy. After analysis, Dr. Melfi concludes that Tony's problems actually derive from his mother Livia, who's suspected to have borderline-personality disorder. Gandolfini is rightfully praised as the main character; yet Bracco and Marchand aren't nearly as recognized for their equally and talented performances as the psychiatrist and mother, respectively. Falco, Imperioli and DeMatteo are acclaimed for their brilliant supporting roles. Van Zandt (from the E-Street Band) plays his first and only role as Tony's best friend, and is [[rather]] [[persuade]] and latching. Chianese, the only recurring actor to have actually appeared in a Godfather film, plays Tony's uncle and on-and-off nemesis. Many fans also enjoyed characters played by Pastore, Ventimiglia, Curatola, Proval, Pantoliano, Lip, Sciorra and Buscemi. Tony's children are "okay" but not notable (with the exception of Iler's stunning performance in the third-to-last episode, "The Second Coming"); Sirico and Schirripa are unconvincing and over-the-top, but the show is too strong for them to hold it back. Even as the show continues for over six season, it ceases to have a dull or predictable moment.

**** (out of four) --------------------------------------------- Result 5592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Rob]] Schneider is a famous comedian [[cause]] of his movements, facials and performances of "not humans". This [[time]] he is The Animal. Marvin is a loser who is trying to be a [[hero]] and one day, nobody [[takes]] a [[call]] from a man that gets attacked, so Marvin has to take this case and save the attacked man. But on his way to the crime scene, he crashes with his [[car]] and gets really damaged. He doesn't remember what happens and at the next ordinary day, his life is not same when he finds out that he has [[animal]] instincts. Of course, we [[got]] our [[female]] that our main character is [[trying]] to reach but his tryings, are [[useless]]. She is played by Collen Haskell. There are no negative characters. The negative [[character]], is [[destiny]] if I [[could]] [[use]] this [[metaphor]]. Marvin should [[find]] out, how to [[become]] a normal human being again. By the way-his animal instincts, [[helps]] him in some situations. Schneider's performance is a so-so. The [[movie]] is so [[unreal]] that [[gets]] [[stupid]] at some moments but it is one of those [[movies]], [[called]] mindless fun as I have [[written]] above. So watch it for the monkey style Rob Schneider but it is definitely not one of the best comedies ever or one of the best [[movies]] that Schneider [[appears]] in. He is a [[great]] comedian but this is not his best movie. [[Burgle]] Schneider is a famous comedian [[reason]] of his movements, facials and performances of "not humans". This [[moment]] he is The Animal. Marvin is a loser who is trying to be a [[heroin]] and one day, nobody [[pick]] a [[invitation]] from a man that gets attacked, so Marvin has to take this case and save the attacked man. But on his way to the crime scene, he crashes with his [[auto]] and gets really damaged. He doesn't remember what happens and at the next ordinary day, his life is not same when he finds out that he has [[wildlife]] instincts. Of course, we [[ai]] our [[daughters]] that our main character is [[seeking]] to reach but his tryings, are [[unnecessary]]. She is played by Collen Haskell. There are no negative characters. The negative [[characteristics]], is [[fate]] if I [[wo]] [[utilizes]] this [[analogy]]. Marvin should [[found]] out, how to [[becoming]] a normal human being again. By the way-his animal instincts, [[supports]] him in some situations. Schneider's performance is a so-so. The [[filmmaking]] is so [[surrealist]] that [[get]] [[foolish]] at some moments but it is one of those [[movie]], [[telephoned]] mindless fun as I have [[authored]] above. So watch it for the monkey style Rob Schneider but it is definitely not one of the best comedies ever or one of the best [[filmmaking]] that Schneider [[emerges]] in. He is a [[resplendent]] comedian but this is not his best movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] I had [[somewhat]] [[high]] [[hopes]] for this since I [[like]] Tim Roth. I was not [[pleased]] with this [[film]]. I [[liked]] the Ang [[Lee]] The Hulk a few [[years]] back so I figured this would have more of a bang to it. First I was very [[disappointed]] with [[John]] Hurt's performance here. He [[looks]] as if his [[eyebrows]] were re-shaped for this. His performance was not [[convincing]]. He was not as good as one [[would]] expect. Tim Roth is cool as always here. The Gama thing didn't really stick to the original story line I don't [[think]]. I [[guess]] the best part of the film was the [[end]]. It had some cool action. The only problem with the original was that it was too long. This one is not as long but it [[got]] a [[bit]] [[boring]] at times. I [[remember]] some [[time]] [[ago]] when Walmart had this [[movie]] [[really]] cheap for [[sale]] and I always [[wondered]] why?. Now I [[know]]. I was [[hoping]] to to [[get]] blown away, but I was not. I had [[rather]] [[highest]] [[waits]] for this since I [[fond]] Tim Roth. I was not [[happier]] with this [[filmmaking]]. I [[loved]] the Ang [[Rhee]] The Hulk a few [[ages]] back so I figured this would have more of a bang to it. First I was very [[frustrating]] with [[Giovanni]] Hurt's performance here. He [[seems]] as if his [[eyebrow]] were re-shaped for this. His performance was not [[persuading]]. He was not as good as one [[could]] expect. Tim Roth is cool as always here. The Gama thing didn't really stick to the original story line I don't [[believing]]. I [[imagines]] the best part of the film was the [[ends]]. It had some cool action. The only problem with the original was that it was too long. This one is not as long but it [[did]] a [[bite]] [[dull]] at times. I [[remind]] some [[period]] [[before]] when Walmart had this [[film]] [[truthfully]] cheap for [[sales]] and I always [[asked]] why?. Now I [[savoir]]. I was [[expecting]] to to [[gets]] blown away, but I was not. --------------------------------------------- Result 5594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] When you start [[watching]] this animation-masterpiece, you quickly notice, that it's a European production. Although the Europeans have ([[sadly]]) integrated some of the clichés you [[would]] normally [[find]] in an American [[production]] of this [[kind]], most are missing. One of these is that there is an [[overwhelming]] [[evil]] that only our (very few and very unlikely) heroes can vanquish. Another is that one of the [[group]] is only in the [[business]] for the [[money]], is [[greedy]], [[runs]] away when the [[heat]] is up but somehow gives in to his better nature. This movie [[would]] have been better off without both.

The movie is based [[upon]] a TV-Series that was out four [[years]] before the [[movie]]. Unlike the movie, the TV-Series is a cartoon and not a computer animation. [[At]] [[first]] I [[thought]] the computer [[would]] [[kill]] the charm and [[character]] of the plot but I was quickliy convinced: [[Whoever]] did the animation knew his or her stuff! [[Although]] the characters are obviously fictional (in stills they don't even look real), they seem as alive and sentient as the audience following their quest. Making [[characters]] who by "[[normal]]" standards [[could]] be [[considered]] deformed (those micro-legs [[could]] never [[carry]] that giant [[body]] [[let]] [[alone]] make it [[jump]]) so [[alive]] and lovable is more than "just a [[highlight]]"! The creation of the world is another [[masterpiece]]. Not so much because of its [[looks]] but because of the inventiveness of it. The [[world]] our [[heroes]] travel is not [[solid]] like our own but is [[made]] of [[many]] pieces of [[land]] [[varying]] in shape and size that seem to be floating in [[mid]] [[air]]. When a [[person]] [[steps]] on a [[smaller]] fragment of [[ground]], it nods a [[little]] bit as if feathering from the weight. In some [[cases]] up and down no [[longer]] [[apply]] but our [[heroes]] [[still]] [[manage]] to [[get]] a foothold [[somewhere]]. Although the [[world]] of floating [[islands]] is [[completely]] [[surreal]], in this [[movie]] it is [[absolutely]] [[believable]] and after a short time it doesn't seem any weirder than [[running]] into a car somewhere in New York.

I wrote that the [[looks]] of the world aren't as breathtaking as the idea. As true as that might be to my mind, the quality of the [[world]], the [[characters]] and the [[attention]] to details is [[staggering]]. [[Although]] the faces of the [[characters]] have [[relatively]] few attributes, [[emotions]] can be read as clearly as in Sean Connery's or Dustin Hoffman's [[face]]. The world [[around]] the [[characters]] is wonderfully [[colourful]] and no two settings are alike. The background is always in motion, something is always going on which makes the world seem even more alive. If you stop the movie and look at the background you will be surprised how many details you can find.

The existence of Hector actually puts the cherry on top. Hector is a furry little "thing" (possibly the equivalent of a dog in our world) who is [[totally]] lovable and extremely funny. Although he isn't really important for the main plot, he would be missed like Scrat would be in Ice Age. The really cool thing about Hector is that you need to speak Gibberish to understand him.

If the movie is so great, why didn't I give it 10 stars? Well, the plot in itself was rather thin. Two hunters are sent out to rescue the world from a really bad dragon who wants to swallow the world, isn't really original. That in itself wouldn't be much of a problem. What I missed was the background information. What kind of a dragon was this and why did it look that way? I love mythical stories but if they get too thin then they seem to be written after the movie is finished in a feeble attempt to give the whole thing some depth.

Another thing I didn't like was Zoé. Although a little girl like her could be considered adorable, she was somewhat of a pain in this movie. She seemed pretty resistant to all types of learning about reality, kept dreaming of some hero from a story book and basically slowed the others down. She would have been OK if she had developed a little more and a little earlier in the movie - or had been less of a girly to start with. To me the idea of this girl who was there to twist the story a little backfired on the writers.

All in all, this is a really good movie for just about all ages. When you start [[staring]] this animation-masterpiece, you quickly notice, that it's a European production. Although the Europeans have ([[woefully]]) integrated some of the clichés you [[ought]] normally [[unearthed]] in an American [[productivity]] of this [[sort]], most are missing. One of these is that there is an [[sizable]] [[satanic]] that only our (very few and very unlikely) heroes can vanquish. Another is that one of the [[panels]] is only in the [[companies]] for the [[moneys]], is [[stingy]], [[manages]] away when the [[thermal]] is up but somehow gives in to his better nature. This movie [[ought]] have been better off without both.

The movie is based [[after]] a TV-Series that was out four [[ages]] before the [[movies]]. Unlike the movie, the TV-Series is a cartoon and not a computer animation. [[For]] [[frst]] I [[figured]] the computer [[ought]] [[killings]] the charm and [[nature]] of the plot but I was quickliy convinced: [[Someone]] did the animation knew his or her stuff! [[Nevertheless]] the characters are obviously fictional (in stills they don't even look real), they seem as alive and sentient as the audience following their quest. Making [[features]] who by "[[routine]]" standards [[would]] be [[judged]] deformed (those micro-legs [[would]] never [[transporting]] that giant [[organs]] [[allowing]] [[merely]] make it [[leaping]]) so [[viva]] and lovable is more than "just a [[emphasize]]"! The creation of the world is another [[centerpiece]]. Not so much because of its [[seem]] but because of the inventiveness of it. The [[globe]] our [[heroic]] travel is not [[robust]] like our own but is [[brought]] of [[several]] pieces of [[terra]] [[differing]] in shape and size that seem to be floating in [[medium]] [[aeronautics]]. When a [[somebody]] [[measure]] on a [[smallest]] fragment of [[terra]], it nods a [[petite]] bit as if feathering from the weight. In some [[lawsuit]] up and down no [[most]] [[implement]] but our [[heroic]] [[yet]] [[administering]] to [[obtain]] a foothold [[nowhere]]. Although the [[globe]] of floating [[archipelago]] is [[altogether]] [[unreal]], in this [[movies]] it is [[fully]] [[reliable]] and after a short time it doesn't seem any weirder than [[implementing]] into a car somewhere in New York.

I wrote that the [[seem]] of the world aren't as breathtaking as the idea. As true as that might be to my mind, the quality of the [[globe]], the [[hallmarks]] and the [[beware]] to details is [[shocking]]. [[Despite]] the faces of the [[features]] have [[fairly]] few attributes, [[sentiments]] can be read as clearly as in Sean Connery's or Dustin Hoffman's [[confronted]]. The world [[about]] the [[attribute]] is wonderfully [[colorful]] and no two settings are alike. The background is always in motion, something is always going on which makes the world seem even more alive. If you stop the movie and look at the background you will be surprised how many details you can find.

The existence of Hector actually puts the cherry on top. Hector is a furry little "thing" (possibly the equivalent of a dog in our world) who is [[absolutely]] lovable and extremely funny. Although he isn't really important for the main plot, he would be missed like Scrat would be in Ice Age. The really cool thing about Hector is that you need to speak Gibberish to understand him.

If the movie is so great, why didn't I give it 10 stars? Well, the plot in itself was rather thin. Two hunters are sent out to rescue the world from a really bad dragon who wants to swallow the world, isn't really original. That in itself wouldn't be much of a problem. What I missed was the background information. What kind of a dragon was this and why did it look that way? I love mythical stories but if they get too thin then they seem to be written after the movie is finished in a feeble attempt to give the whole thing some depth.

Another thing I didn't like was Zoé. Although a little girl like her could be considered adorable, she was somewhat of a pain in this movie. She seemed pretty resistant to all types of learning about reality, kept dreaming of some hero from a story book and basically slowed the others down. She would have been OK if she had developed a little more and a little earlier in the movie - or had been less of a girly to start with. To me the idea of this girl who was there to twist the story a little backfired on the writers.

All in all, this is a really good movie for just about all ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 5595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I [[enjoyed]] Still Crazy more than any film I have seen in years. A successful band from the 70's decide to give it another try. They start by playing some gigs in some seedy European venues, with hilarious results. The music is [[fantastic]], the script and acting are [[terrific]]. The characters are [[spot]] on, especially the lead singer with the high heavy metal voice, makeup and personality problems. The concert at the end was unreal. Go and see it, preferably in a cinema with a good sound system :) I [[loved]] Still Crazy more than any film I have seen in years. A successful band from the 70's decide to give it another try. They start by playing some gigs in some seedy European venues, with hilarious results. The music is [[wondrous]], the script and acting are [[wondrous]]. The characters are [[blot]] on, especially the lead singer with the high heavy metal voice, makeup and personality problems. The concert at the end was unreal. Go and see it, preferably in a cinema with a good sound system :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] SUcks. That's all I got to say about this sorry excuse for a film. Sucks. Sucks. Sucks. I mean, what the hell were they thinking? The idiots involved should never be allowed to make another films. The acting was so bad that it even failed to entertain on a bad level. The attempt at a "lesbian scene" was sad. I felt so bad for the ladies involved. This movie sucks! Sucks! Sucks!

I heard rumors of a sequel.

God

Help

Us

All --------------------------------------------- Result 5597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (64%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Immediately after renting and watching this movie several years ago, a friend and I decided that it defined the absolute zero on the movie scale. There was nothing about the movie that could have been done worse than it was. To this day we still rate movies, even very [[bad]] ones, by how much better than "The Lonely Lady" they are.

A long time ago I saw an interview with Eleanor Perry, who wrote the screenplays for, among other things, "Last Summer" and "Diary of a Mad Housewife," and she related that she had been asked to write a screenplay for the Harold Robbins' book "The Lonely Lady." She said that she sent in a treatment and it was rejected because they didn't think she understood the difficulties of a female screenwriter in Hollywood. She then said "I think they got someone else to write it." The interview was filmed before the movie was released. She died in 1981, and I bet the first thing she did on arrival in heaven was personally thank God for saving her from involvement in the result. Immediately after renting and watching this movie several years ago, a friend and I decided that it defined the absolute zero on the movie scale. There was nothing about the movie that could have been done worse than it was. To this day we still rate movies, even very [[unfavorable]] ones, by how much better than "The Lonely Lady" they are.

A long time ago I saw an interview with Eleanor Perry, who wrote the screenplays for, among other things, "Last Summer" and "Diary of a Mad Housewife," and she related that she had been asked to write a screenplay for the Harold Robbins' book "The Lonely Lady." She said that she sent in a treatment and it was rejected because they didn't think she understood the difficulties of a female screenwriter in Hollywood. She then said "I think they got someone else to write it." The interview was filmed before the movie was released. She died in 1981, and I bet the first thing she did on arrival in heaven was personally thank God for saving her from involvement in the result. --------------------------------------------- Result 5598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just saw this film at the 2001 Toronto international film festival. The working title there was 'Dog Days'. The audience reaction was mixed. Some people [[found]] the graphic sex and realistic violence to be too much for them. Others seemed to genuinely [[appreciate]] how good this film was.

This film isn't for the faint of heart. It's like 'Happiness' with explicit sex and a less optimistic [[view]] of humanity. There's animal poisoning, a strip-tease from a senior citizen, an orgy'esque' bathouse in a shopping centre, anal candle penetration, and the molestation of the mentally incompetent.

[[If]] any of this sounds like too much to handle then this film isn't for you. This film [[shows]] [[humanity]] at its most [[desperate]] and pathetic. The banality of our existence is shoved in our [[face]] with [[utmost]] [[glee]].

Seidl has no interest in redeeming [[humanity]] here. And why should he? This [[film]] features [[excellent]] performances from all [[involved]], is [[always]] interesting, and is [[probably]] the most [[intelligent]] social [[statement]] to be made on [[film]] in awhile. I just saw this film at the 2001 Toronto international film festival. The working title there was 'Dog Days'. The audience reaction was mixed. Some people [[uncovered]] the graphic sex and realistic violence to be too much for them. Others seemed to genuinely [[thankful]] how good this film was.

This film isn't for the faint of heart. It's like 'Happiness' with explicit sex and a less optimistic [[opinion]] of humanity. There's animal poisoning, a strip-tease from a senior citizen, an orgy'esque' bathouse in a shopping centre, anal candle penetration, and the molestation of the mentally incompetent.

[[Though]] any of this sounds like too much to handle then this film isn't for you. This film [[showing]] [[humanist]] at its most [[despairing]] and pathetic. The banality of our existence is shoved in our [[encounter]] with [[severe]] [[gladness]].

Seidl has no interest in redeeming [[humanist]] here. And why should he? This [[movies]] features [[wondrous]] performances from all [[engaged]], is [[repeatedly]] interesting, and is [[admittedly]] the most [[artful]] social [[statements]] to be made on [[movie]] in awhile. --------------------------------------------- Result 5599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] There's [[enough]] [[star]] power in THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS to create another galaxy, [[yet]] the final [[product]] is pretty [[debatable]]. The [[film]] and its messages are very noble, and I [[think]] [[perhaps]] most [[would]] agree with them. (Liberal Democracy good, violent [[fascist]] regime bad; open-mindedness good, racism bad, etc). Unfortunately, we're battered from head to toe with these, and as much [[subtlety]] is [[used]] as I've [[described]] them.

Ultimately, we are [[left]] watching very noble people without any [[flaws]] squaring off with [[nasty]] cretins who have no redeeming qualities. It radiates with all the suspense of a [[badly]] [[orchestrated]] "pro" wrestling match.

Jeremy Irons plays the patron, a man of [[many]] contradictions. [[Meryl]] Streep as his [[gifted]] [[bride]] and [[Glenn]] Close, as her [[sister]] in [[law]]. [[When]] the [[camera]] [[stays]] with these folks, the [[movie]] tends to [[move]], and is quite enjoyable. [[Unfortunately]], THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS [[engages]] with simply [[way]] too many subplots, and [[characters]] [[pop]] up and out of the [[picture]] like shooting gallery [[targets]]. We don't get to [[know]] them, [[hence]] we don't [[get]] to [[care]] for them. The [[result]] is boredom.

If Bille [[August]], the [[director]] and [[screenwriter]] (from [[Isabel]] Allende's [[book]]) had either [[lengthened]] the [[film]] or snipped a few [[characters]], this [[film]] might have [[worked]] [[completely]]. As it stands, it was a nice [[try]], with nice messages, and a bonecrushing yawnfest.

Not [[recommended]]. There's [[sufficiently]] [[superstar]] power in THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS to create another galaxy, [[nonetheless]] the final [[commodities]] is pretty [[controversial]]. The [[filmmaking]] and its messages are very noble, and I [[believing]] [[conceivably]] most [[could]] agree with them. (Liberal Democracy good, violent [[antifascist]] regime bad; open-mindedness good, racism bad, etc). Unfortunately, we're battered from head to toe with these, and as much [[finesse]] is [[utilized]] as I've [[describe]] them.

Ultimately, we are [[gauche]] watching very noble people without any [[drawbacks]] squaring off with [[vile]] cretins who have no redeeming qualities. It radiates with all the suspense of a [[desperately]] [[staged]] "pro" wrestling match.

Jeremy Irons plays the patron, a man of [[numerous]] contradictions. [[Merrill]] Streep as his [[talented]] [[fiancee]] and [[Glyn]] Close, as her [[sisterly]] in [[lois]]. [[Whenever]] the [[cameras]] [[resting]] with these folks, the [[film]] tends to [[budge]], and is quite enjoyable. [[Unluckily]], THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS [[participates]] with simply [[ways]] too many subplots, and [[trait]] [[papa]] up and out of the [[visuals]] like shooting gallery [[goal]]. We don't get to [[savoir]] them, [[thus]] we don't [[gets]] to [[caring]] for them. The [[upshot]] is boredom.

If Bille [[Augustus]], the [[headmaster]] and [[novelist]] (from [[Isabelle]] Allende's [[cookbook]]) had either [[elongated]] the [[filmmaking]] or snipped a few [[traits]], this [[filmmaking]] might have [[collaborated]] [[downright]]. As it stands, it was a nice [[strive]], with nice messages, and a bonecrushing yawnfest.

Not [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Tho 35 [[years]] old, [[Groove]] Tube looks a lot like actual TV [[today]]! Specialty niche networks (nude sports), a TV show about stoner drug dealers called the Dealers (ala Weeds, and even predating 1978's Cheech & Chong Up In Smoke), weird beer commercials (Butz Beer, no less bizarre than Bud Bowls), dirty-minded kid's clown Koko (shades of Pee Wee Herman), even Chevy Chase doing slapstick humor (a violent barbershop vocal duo) a year before his 1975 debut on Saturday Night Live. And thanks to the infamous opening sequence that earned Groove Tube an initial X-rating, I still can't hear Curtis Mayfield's "Move On Up" without thinking of naked dancing hitchhiking hippies ---- For similar sketch-style movies, see TunnelVision, Kentucky Fried Movie, Amazon Women on the Mood, Monty Python's Beyond the Fringe, Dynamite Chicken, and the Firesign Theatre's Everything You Know is Wrong. Tho 35 [[olds]] old, [[Cleft]] Tube looks a lot like actual TV [[hoy]]! Specialty niche networks (nude sports), a TV show about stoner drug dealers called the Dealers (ala Weeds, and even predating 1978's Cheech & Chong Up In Smoke), weird beer commercials (Butz Beer, no less bizarre than Bud Bowls), dirty-minded kid's clown Koko (shades of Pee Wee Herman), even Chevy Chase doing slapstick humor (a violent barbershop vocal duo) a year before his 1975 debut on Saturday Night Live. And thanks to the infamous opening sequence that earned Groove Tube an initial X-rating, I still can't hear Curtis Mayfield's "Move On Up" without thinking of naked dancing hitchhiking hippies ---- For similar sketch-style movies, see TunnelVision, Kentucky Fried Movie, Amazon Women on the Mood, Monty Python's Beyond the Fringe, Dynamite Chicken, and the Firesign Theatre's Everything You Know is Wrong. --------------------------------------------- Result 5601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is the second [[film]] I've seen of Ida Lupino as a director after 53's the hitch-hiker. I [[think]] this one was a [[better]] film then that one. This one has a girl who is about to get married and she is then sexually assaulted and doesn't like everyone looking and talking about her so she runs away and and is taken in by a family. I [[think]] Leonard Maltin's [[review]] is right only to give it 2 and 1/2 stars. This is the second [[kino]] I've seen of Ida Lupino as a director after 53's the hitch-hiker. I [[ideas]] this one was a [[best]] film then that one. This one has a girl who is about to get married and she is then sexually assaulted and doesn't like everyone looking and talking about her so she runs away and and is taken in by a family. I [[thought]] Leonard Maltin's [[examine]] is right only to give it 2 and 1/2 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 5602 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never viewed this film and enjoyed the singing and dancing by Cagney and the other cast members namely: Dick Powell, (Scott Blair) who had a great tenor voice and Ruby Keeler, (Bea Thorn). James Cagney plays the role as Chester Kent who writes musicals and eventually goes into producing Prologues which are shown in between the feature films shown in movie theater's during the 1930's. Chester has trouble with people trying to steal his ideas for his shows. This is a very entertaining film with lots of comedy and plenty of laughs. Joan Blondell, (Nan Prescott) gave a great supporting role who was also very young and pretty. Dick Powell was great as a singer and dancer and just starting out with his long and successful screen career. Enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 5603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Chances are if I [[watched]] this again I might get physically sick, the film is so annoying.....unless you believe in psychics, re-incarnation and the other hocus- pocus which this promotes big-time. The "re-cycling of souls," they call it here. Puh-leeze.

This story has been [[done]] [[several]] times before with such films as "Heaven Can Wait." It's [[also]] been [[done]] a lot better. Too bad they had to waste the [[talents]] of [[Robert]] Downey Jr., Cybill Shepherd, Ryan O'Neal and Mary Stuart Masterson.

At least it's a pretty tame film, language-wise. That's about the only redeeming quality of this [[movie]]. Chances are if I [[observed]] this again I might get physically sick, the film is so annoying.....unless you believe in psychics, re-incarnation and the other hocus- pocus which this promotes big-time. The "re-cycling of souls," they call it here. Puh-leeze.

This story has been [[completed]] [[diverse]] times before with such films as "Heaven Can Wait." It's [[likewise]] been [[effected]] a lot better. Too bad they had to waste the [[talent]] of [[Roberta]] Downey Jr., Cybill Shepherd, Ryan O'Neal and Mary Stuart Masterson.

At least it's a pretty tame film, language-wise. That's about the only redeeming quality of this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unremarkable and unmemorable remake of an old, celebrated English film. Although it may be overly maligned as a total disaster (which it is not), it never builds any tension and betrays its TV origins. Richard Burton sleepwalks through his role, and Sophia Loren's closed (in this movie) face doesn't display much passion, either. (**) --------------------------------------------- Result 5605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The story [[centers]] around [[Barry]] [[McKenzie]] who must go to [[England]] if he wishes to claim his inheritance. Being about the grossest Aussie shearer ever to set foot outside this [[great]] Nation of ours there is something of a culture [[clash]] and much [[fun]] and [[games]] ensue. The [[songs]] of Barry [[McKenzie]]([[Barry]] Crocker) are [[highlights]]. The story [[centre]] around [[Bari]] [[mackenzie]] who must go to [[Britain]] if he wishes to claim his inheritance. Being about the grossest Aussie shearer ever to set foot outside this [[wondrous]] Nation of ours there is something of a culture [[skirmish]] and much [[amusing]] and [[game]] ensue. The [[lyrics]] of Barry [[mackenzie]]([[Bari]] Crocker) are [[stress]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "Back of Beyond" takes place at a dive diner/gas station in the middle of the Australian desert run by Tom [[McGregor]] (Paul Mercurio), a shy guy who suddenly finds himself in a spot of trouble when some visitors unexpectedly arrive. We get what, at first, confusingly seems like a flashback in which he and his sister (though their relationship to each other is better understood later in the film) are speeding through the desert on his motorcycle. Afterwards, he [[appears]] as a terribly quiet, and [[sometimes]], moody character in the presence of the arrivals.

We know one thing is for sure and that is McGregor's sort of spiritual sense, his foresight of danger and such--his clairvoyance only slightly relevant to the story, the bulk of which concerns three diamond thieves who's car breaks down and who rely on Tom to help them out of spot without getting in their way. Of course, Tom falls for one of the thieves, a young woman named Charlie, and suddenly, it pits all three already mistrusting allies against each other. But not in a way that really results in anything of much mystery or action. In fact, the whole movie all the while seems to want to build up to something [[significant]], but [[really]] fails to do so. [[Even]] the ending, of which plays out like a trite campfire tale (and one that really reveals a lot of [[narrative]] flaws), is almost just as [[ridiculous]].

It [[may]] be worth trying if you don't [[mind]] the [[terribly]] slow pacing, but are in the [[mood]], at [[least]], for [[something]] a [[little]] [[different]] than the [[usual]]. "Back of Beyond" takes place at a dive diner/gas station in the middle of the Australian desert run by Tom [[macgregor]] (Paul Mercurio), a shy guy who suddenly finds himself in a spot of trouble when some visitors unexpectedly arrive. We get what, at first, confusingly seems like a flashback in which he and his sister (though their relationship to each other is better understood later in the film) are speeding through the desert on his motorcycle. Afterwards, he [[emerges]] as a terribly quiet, and [[intermittently]], moody character in the presence of the arrivals.

We know one thing is for sure and that is McGregor's sort of spiritual sense, his foresight of danger and such--his clairvoyance only slightly relevant to the story, the bulk of which concerns three diamond thieves who's car breaks down and who rely on Tom to help them out of spot without getting in their way. Of course, Tom falls for one of the thieves, a young woman named Charlie, and suddenly, it pits all three already mistrusting allies against each other. But not in a way that really results in anything of much mystery or action. In fact, the whole movie all the while seems to want to build up to something [[sizable]], but [[truly]] fails to do so. [[Yet]] the ending, of which plays out like a trite campfire tale (and one that really reveals a lot of [[descriptive]] flaws), is almost just as [[farcical]].

It [[maggio]] be worth trying if you don't [[esprit]] the [[terrifyingly]] slow pacing, but are in the [[ambiance]], at [[less]], for [[somethings]] a [[scant]] [[diversified]] than the [[habitual]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having just wasted a couple of hours watching this and for 80% of that time in complete disbelief, I can give this garbage the turkey of the year award, no problem. To say the plot was unbelievable is some big understatement. Frankly I am lost for words to describe this utter tripe. Not only are the characters completely and utterly without any semblance of originality (this sort of stuff has been done much better in dozens of 'serial killer flicks')but the acting was dire. For those who pay to see this, I hope you get your money back, for those who were paid to do this, I hope you GIVE your money back. Believe me folks there are many new releases out there that are much, much better. Go see. --------------------------------------------- Result 5608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ...for one of the worst Swedish movies ever...forgive me for being dull.

First of all i haven't seen the first one (i was bored that's my reason for watching the 2nd before the 1st one), well i hope the first one is better than this, it was filled with weird cut scenes and very strange plot changes, For the people that have seen this and think 4/10 is high (belive me so do i), but it made me laugh a few times, because it was so bizarre so bad and i still laugh thinking of the punk that came up with this idea, what's next "Det sjunde inseglet II". Sequels not based on novel or book doesn't turning out great to often, and this is a perfect example of one.

OK i'm gonna be honest with you: i did laugh a bit, it got a few decent jokes in it and slapstick humor. But don't buy it, rent it. Just let some other idiot do it or download it.

4/10 This movie will be remembered and the director is probably laughed out already... --------------------------------------------- Result 5609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was playing at our theater in Amsterdam and the film we wanted to see was sold-out so we went to this, not knowing anything about it other than it was a documentary about the planet. We were very happy at our misfortune as this was a very powerful film about life and the delicate balance we all share with the rest of the inhabitants of Earth. This film has some of the most breathtaking photography I have ever seen in a film and took me places from deserts to oceans to rain forests and displayed things I have never seen in a film, TV or book! "Earth" is a film that every student should see before they become jaded. I will encourage my niece to see this film since she will be inheriting the planet we leave her. This is also a film to see on a theater screen or a very big television since the photography is so powerful and exotic. --------------------------------------------- Result 5610 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] This [[movie]] is very important because [[suggested]] me this [[consideration]]: [[sometimes]] you can [[wish]] to be [[sick]] ... sometimes you can [[wish]] to have a syndrome ... [[sometimes]], for [[example]], you can wish have Goldfield Syndrome... that [[way]] you'd not [[remember]] this boring [[movie]] ... and above all you'd not [[remember]] [[Adam]] "superfluos" Sandler... sometimes, [[simply]], you can [[wish]]... have rented another [[movie]]...

My vote? 3 out of 10. My [[suggestion]]? [[If]] you are neither a fan of boring [[romantic]] comedies or [[Adam]] Sandler (...it's a joke don't [[exist]] [[Adam]] Sandler's [[fan]]...I want to hope it), [[save]] yourself... [[Someone]] to save? Drew Barrymore. ... [[perhaps]]. This [[filmmaking]] is very important because [[recommended]] me this [[examine]]: [[sometime]] you can [[want]] to be [[ill]] ... sometimes you can [[wanna]] to have a syndrome ... [[occasionally]], for [[examples]], you can wish have Goldfield Syndrome... that [[camino]] you'd not [[remind]] this boring [[filmmaking]] ... and above all you'd not [[recalling]] [[Adams]] "superfluos" Sandler... sometimes, [[straightforward]], you can [[wishing]]... have rented another [[flick]]...

My vote? 3 out of 10. My [[recommendation]]? [[Though]] you are neither a fan of boring [[sentimental]] comedies or [[Adams]] Sandler (...it's a joke don't [[existing]] [[Adama]] Sandler's [[breather]]...I want to hope it), [[saved]] yourself... [[Everybody]] to save? Drew Barrymore. ... [[maybe]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5611 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Straight Story is a multilevel exploration of the goodness and beauty of America. At one level a slow walk through the heartland, it's kind inhabitants, and amber grain, at another level about growing old and remembering what is important(and actively forgetting what isn't). David Lynch gives us time in this movie and helps me to remember that so much can be said with silence. A remarkable movie that will rest gently with me for some time to come. --------------------------------------------- Result 5612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always had the philosophy that every single human being has different tastes, i found this movie to be awesome and i think every college student out there might agree with me. Notwithstanding this is not a "movie with a plot", its about real guys and some of the "problems" that they face. I found the movie hilarious(especially the parts that they played the practical jokes on each other). Simply put, if you are in the same "wave-length" as these people, you will find this movie amazing. I don't think that this is going win any Golden Globes or Oscars, or that the people in this movie will become future Hollywood stars, but its a kind of "cult-classic" among young people who could relate to their experience. For me the guy that stands out the most is Hans: the Scandinavian guy,who ,according to him "isnt a looker", but gets all(or some) of the chicks. The "little-people" also play a big part in the movie, especially when they are drunk. If i keep going, i might provide a spoiler and i don't want to do that, just go and get the movie and you will not regret. I give it a 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5613 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This is one of those "so bad it is good" films that you always hear about but never see! Unlike Troma films which are deliberately bad and campy (and I am not amused) this one is 100% [[pure]] serious.

[[However]] with features such as a supposedly super-lethal killer robot that prances about like one of the Solid Gold [[Dancers]] on an acid trip and a magical first mate that calls down lightning and transforms into the Good Witch of the [[East]] the [[fact]] that it [[takes]] itself [[seriously]] pushes it so far over the edge of [[bad]] that makes it full circle [[around]] back to entertaining.

Watcheable [[enough]] because of that. This is one of those "so bad it is good" films that you always hear about but never see! Unlike Troma films which are deliberately bad and campy (and I am not amused) this one is 100% [[sheer]] serious.

[[Yet]] with features such as a supposedly super-lethal killer robot that prances about like one of the Solid Gold [[Ballerinas]] on an acid trip and a magical first mate that calls down lightning and transforms into the Good Witch of the [[Oriental]] the [[facto]] that it [[pick]] itself [[harshly]] pushes it so far over the edge of [[unfavorable]] that makes it full circle [[approximately]] back to entertaining.

Watcheable [[satisfactorily]] because of that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] After having seen a lot of Greek movies I feel very suspicious against most of them. But after [[watching]] this I felt astonished. The movies is [[great]] without a big try. You cannot claim that the screenplay is so great or the photography is perfect or something technical. It's a [[real]] story and it is happening in Greek rural areas in places forgotten from God. The movie is like a [[punch]] in the stomach and I would really wish that things are not like this. It obviously talks about the xenophobia of the Greek people (the ignorance)to anything different. The problem of this guy is not that he is an ex-convicted. The problem is that he is not one of these people. He is different and they do not [[want]] them (that's why all the [[good]] things he is doing turn boomerang to him). And [[also]] speaks about the apathy of the people, because there are some people who are against the hunting of the King, but they do not dare to say their opinion. In the end you can clearly see the hypocrisy of the society being religious and trying to act like God says, but at the same time acting so unfairly to the King. This shows how easily people rationalize their feelings or their beliefs according to the established system. [[In]] the end you can have a positive lesson from this very bad story, meaning that you can understand and be part of this society only if you want to become one of them. If you want to remain different and even alone, you are lost (and it is not far from reality) I think it is tragic that the story is [[real]] and this should be a bell for everybody. No comment for the main actor because he is already given an award and I believe that his play was great. Small comment for Hatzisavvas (plays the policeman), he is like a dinosaur, he has played a lot of roles and I'm sure that this role for him was very easy but he plays it so [[great]] that you cannot [[deny]] him a big [[bravo]]. I definitely [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to anybody who wants to see a good Greek movie. After having seen a lot of Greek movies I feel very suspicious against most of them. But after [[staring]] this I felt astonished. The movies is [[wondrous]] without a big try. You cannot claim that the screenplay is so great or the photography is perfect or something technical. It's a [[reales]] story and it is happening in Greek rural areas in places forgotten from God. The movie is like a [[punching]] in the stomach and I would really wish that things are not like this. It obviously talks about the xenophobia of the Greek people (the ignorance)to anything different. The problem of this guy is not that he is an ex-convicted. The problem is that he is not one of these people. He is different and they do not [[wants]] them (that's why all the [[buena]] things he is doing turn boomerang to him). And [[apart]] speaks about the apathy of the people, because there are some people who are against the hunting of the King, but they do not dare to say their opinion. In the end you can clearly see the hypocrisy of the society being religious and trying to act like God says, but at the same time acting so unfairly to the King. This shows how easily people rationalize their feelings or their beliefs according to the established system. [[Onto]] the end you can have a positive lesson from this very bad story, meaning that you can understand and be part of this society only if you want to become one of them. If you want to remain different and even alone, you are lost (and it is not far from reality) I think it is tragic that the story is [[true]] and this should be a bell for everybody. No comment for the main actor because he is already given an award and I believe that his play was great. Small comment for Hatzisavvas (plays the policeman), he is like a dinosaur, he has played a lot of roles and I'm sure that this role for him was very easy but he plays it so [[huge]] that you cannot [[refuse]] him a big [[congrats]]. I definitely [[recommending]] this [[kino]] to anybody who wants to see a good Greek movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I believe a [[lot]] of people down rated the [[movie]], NOT because of the lack of quality. But it did not follow the [[standard]] Hollywood formula. Some of the [[conflicts]] are not resolved. The ending is just a [[little]] too [[real]] for others, but the [[journey]] the [[rich]] [[characters]] and [[long]] [[list]] of [[supporters]] [[provide]] is both thought [[provoking]] and very entertaining. Even the [[cinematography]] is [[excellent]] [[given]] the urban [[setting]], the directing [[also]] is [[excellent]] and [[innovative]].

This is a 10 in my [[book]], this movie will [[take]] you [[places]] the [[normal]] and [[expected]] Hollywood script will not. They [[took]] some [[risks]] and did a few [[things]] different. I [[think]] it [[worked]] well, I am [[purposely]] [[trying]] to [[avoid]] any direct references to the movie because seeing it for yourself is the [[best]] [[answer]], not [[accepting]] someone else's [[interpretation]]. I believe a [[lots]] of people down rated the [[kino]], NOT because of the lack of quality. But it did not follow the [[standards]] Hollywood formula. Some of the [[quarrels]] are not resolved. The ending is just a [[scant]] too [[authentic]] for others, but the [[trip]] the [[richest]] [[features]] and [[largo]] [[listing]] of [[backers]] [[supplying]] is both thought [[arousing]] and very entertaining. Even the [[film]] is [[outstanding]] [[awarded]] the urban [[configured]], the directing [[similarly]] is [[wondrous]] and [[innovator]].

This is a 10 in my [[cookbook]], this movie will [[taking]] you [[locations]] the [[ordinary]] and [[hoped]] Hollywood script will not. They [[picked]] some [[peril]] and did a few [[items]] different. I [[reckon]] it [[acted]] well, I am [[deliberately]] [[tempting]] to [[preventing]] any direct references to the movie because seeing it for yourself is the [[better]] [[replying]], not [[countenance]] someone else's [[explanations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very fine and poetic story. Beautiful scenery. Magnificent music score. I've been twice in Japan last year and the movie gave me this typical Japanese feeling. The movement of the camera is superb, as well as the actors. It goes deep into your feelings without becoming melodramatic. Japanese people are very sensitive and kind and it's all very well brought onto the screen here. The director is playing superb with light an colors and shows the audience that it is also possible to let them enjoy a movie with subtle and fine details. Once you've seen this movie you will want to see more from the same director. It's a real feel good movie and I can only recommend it to everybody. --------------------------------------------- Result 5617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stoic and laconic soldier Sergeant Todd (a fine and credible performance by the ever reliable Kurt Russell) gets dumped on a desolate remote planet after he's deemed obsolete by ruthless and arrogant Colonel Mekum (deliciously played to the slimy hilt by Jason Isaacs), who has Todd and his fellow soldiers replaced with a new advanced breed of genetically engineered combatants. Todd joins a peaceful ragtag community of self-reliant outcasts and has to defend this community when the new soldiers arrive for a field exercise. Director Paul W.S. Anderson, working from a smart and provocative script by David Webb Peoples, depicts a chilling vision of a bleak, cold and harsh possible near future while maintaining a snappy pace and a tough, gritty tone throughout. Moreover, Anderson handles moving moments of humanity well (Todd's struggle to get in touch with his previously repressed feelings is genuinely poignant) and stages the stirring action scenes with rip-roaring gusto. Russell gives a strong and impressive almost pantomime portrayal of Todd; he conveys a lot of emotion without saying much and instead does the majority of his acting through his body movements and facial expressions. Bang-up supporting turns by Jason Scott Lee as brutish rival soldier Caine 607, Connie Nielson as the compassionate Sandra, Sean Pertwee as the kindly Mace, Jared and Taylor Thorne as mute little boy Nathan, Gary Busey as crusty seasoned veteran Captain Church, Michael Chiklis as the jolly Johnny Pig, and Brenda Wehle as the sensible Mayor Hawkins. Better still, this film makes a profound and significant statement about the spiritual cost of being a merciless soldier and the importance of intellectual strength over physical might. David Tattersall's polished cinematography, Joel McNeely's rousing full-bore orchestral score, and the first-rate rate special effects all further enhance the overall sterling quality of this superior science fiction/action hybrid outing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Andy Lau stars in another [[cop]] undercover [[tale]]. Daniel Wu plays Nick who is working for the cops and is [[also]] close to the top of a [[drug]] dealing gang(Lau). The movie begins as we watch the [[police]] try to make a [[drug]] bust only to see it [[go]] to pieces. We then are [[introduced]] to the young [[drug]] addicted [[mother]] and her [[daughter]] [[living]] near [[Nick]] and to his cronies and the cops, and 45 minutes in I shut off the [[movie]] and put on the news. Well acted and [[great]] to [[look]] at this is as uninvolving a movie as I've seen in a [[long]] time. Its not [[bad]] as such its just you really don't care. I mean I really didn't [[care]] at all. I actually started to do [[something]] [[else]] completely forgetting I had on a subtitled movie on, thats how much I didn't care. I [[wish]] I could have [[hated]] the [[film]] but the [[film]] is such a nonentity that it made [[almost]] no impression on me (its not even something I could sleep to its just something to ignore). Come on the box called it the Chinese Scarface,what after he was dead? This is one to [[avoid]]. Andy Lau stars in another [[policemen]] undercover [[story]]. Daniel Wu plays Nick who is working for the cops and is [[apart]] close to the top of a [[narcotics]] dealing gang(Lau). The movie begins as we watch the [[cops]] try to make a [[drugs]] bust only to see it [[going]] to pieces. We then are [[made]] to the young [[medicines]] addicted [[mum]] and her [[maid]] [[inhabit]] near [[Nicky]] and to his cronies and the cops, and 45 minutes in I shut off the [[filmmaking]] and put on the news. Well acted and [[marvellous]] to [[peek]] at this is as uninvolving a movie as I've seen in a [[lengthy]] time. Its not [[negative]] as such its just you really don't care. I mean I really didn't [[healthcare]] at all. I actually started to do [[anything]] [[otherwise]] completely forgetting I had on a subtitled movie on, thats how much I didn't care. I [[want]] I could have [[disliked]] the [[filmmaking]] but the [[filmmaking]] is such a nonentity that it made [[hardly]] no impression on me (its not even something I could sleep to its just something to ignore). Come on the box called it the Chinese Scarface,what after he was dead? This is one to [[averted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I was about 7 when this [[DIRE]] MONSTROSITY of a [[film]] was released. [[In]] the UK it was [[advertised]] on the TV in the summer of 1977 for weeks, as if it were some incredible blockbuster film. It was actually the first film I ever saw at a cinema, and I was put off going for years to come. The following week I was invited to go and see the new film "Star Wars" and I declined. To this day I have never seen it, in protest at having to watch Sasquatch! Seriously, even at the age of 7 I [[could]] tell that I was [[watching]] [[garbage]]. It's just so bad, it's almost unbelievable. Rambling [[nonsense]] that should NEVER have made it to a cinema. I was however amused to read all these years later that the director never directed again, just as well as far as I'm concerned. [[AVOID]] [[AT]] ALL COSTS!!! I was about 7 when this [[FRIGHTFUL]] MONSTROSITY of a [[filmmaking]] was released. [[Throughout]] the UK it was [[announced]] on the TV in the summer of 1977 for weeks, as if it were some incredible blockbuster film. It was actually the first film I ever saw at a cinema, and I was put off going for years to come. The following week I was invited to go and see the new film "Star Wars" and I declined. To this day I have never seen it, in protest at having to watch Sasquatch! Seriously, even at the age of 7 I [[did]] tell that I was [[staring]] [[refuse]]. It's just so bad, it's almost unbelievable. Rambling [[claptrap]] that should NEVER have made it to a cinema. I was however amused to read all these years later that the director never directed again, just as well as far as I'm concerned. [[EVADE]] [[INTO]] ALL COSTS!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5620 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Cowboys [[James]] Stewart and [[Walter]] Brennan take their herd from Seattle to [[Alaska]] and on into Canada to stake a [[claim]]. Once there, they have to [[contend]] with seductive, shifty businesswoman Ruth Roman and ice-cold, happy-go-lucky villain James McIntire.

John Wayne may get talked about more, but his good pal Stewart made some excellent, hard-edged westerns too, some with the great director Anthony Mann. Frankly, I'd [[take]] this, with it's [[sturdy]] action sequences and fine melodrama, over [[North]] To Alaska any day!

The Far [[Country]] features some breathtaking scenery and cinematography that should definitely have been shot in widescreen.

[[Also]], there's some strong support by the [[always]] reliable Brennan, Roman (who's great), the incredibly cute Corrine Calvet, and [[James]] McIntire, who plays one of my [[favorite]] [[types]] of [[bad]] [[guy]], the [[kind]] that doesn't take himself too seriously.

This would make a [[great]] double-bill with another [[highly]] [[recommended]] Mann/[[Stewart]] northwest-set western, [[Bend]] Of The River. Cowboys [[Jacques]] Stewart and [[Walther]] Brennan take their herd from Seattle to [[Ak]] and on into Canada to stake a [[grievance]]. Once there, they have to [[allege]] with seductive, shifty businesswoman Ruth Roman and ice-cold, happy-go-lucky villain James McIntire.

John Wayne may get talked about more, but his good pal Stewart made some excellent, hard-edged westerns too, some with the great director Anthony Mann. Frankly, I'd [[taking]] this, with it's [[beefy]] action sequences and fine melodrama, over [[Norden]] To Alaska any day!

The Far [[Countries]] features some breathtaking scenery and cinematography that should definitely have been shot in widescreen.

[[Moreover]], there's some strong support by the [[invariably]] reliable Brennan, Roman (who's great), the incredibly cute Corrine Calvet, and [[Jacques]] McIntire, who plays one of my [[preferential]] [[genus]] of [[amiss]] [[blokes]], the [[genre]] that doesn't take himself too seriously.

This would make a [[wondrous]] double-bill with another [[inordinately]] [[suggested]] Mann/[[Steward]] northwest-set western, [[Bent]] Of The River. --------------------------------------------- Result 5621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film first on my way home from Paris to Newark aboard Air France in August 1996. The film itself I believe is quite a masterpiece. It's the kind of film that people should be making. I still think Daniel Auteuil is one of the sexiest actors around. In this French film, he plays a divorced father and businessman who has lost his zest for life until he across a Down Syndrome man who lives in an institution with other Down Syndrome patients. The actors including the actor who actually has Down Syndrome create a believable friendship and relationship between these two unlikely men. Daniel's life and ours changes forever with the Down Syndrome man. He realizes that life is not just work and not play but for the living and loving and that's what life should be all about. The ending is kind of silly though but I still think it's one of my favorite movies. It's enough to bring a tear to your eye. --------------------------------------------- Result 5622 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This [[movie]] is a re-write of the 1978 Warren Beatty [[movie]], "Heaven Can Wait", but it is written for the stand-up comedic style of [[Mr]] [[Rock]]. The premise remains the same: Lance Barton, (Rock) is [[taken]] before his [[life]] [[time]] is up and [[works]] a [[deal]] with God's representative, Mr King, to come back to earth as someone else. As in Beatty's movie; he [[chooses]] the murdered [[Charles]] Wellington, a [[rich]] white [[man]], all because he fancies Sontee Jenkins (Regina [[King]]) who happens to turn up at Wellington's house during the [[murder]]. The role of Mrs Wellington and her lover suffers in this remake and the [[idea]] to turn an [[aged]] white multi-millionaire into a stand up black comedian who [[tries]] to [[woo]] Sontee [[simply]] does not [[work]]. Also the intercuts used to show [[Rock]] as Wellington and then as the [[real]] 'white' Wellington, fail miserably. [[Improvements]] [[could]] have been [[made]] to the [[original]] [[Beatty]] plot - which in itself did not [[masterfully]] portray the life-after-death [[idea]] - but they [[certainly]] were not to be [[found]] in "Down To [[Earth]]". This [[filmmaking]] is a re-write of the 1978 Warren Beatty [[films]], "Heaven Can Wait", but it is written for the stand-up comedic style of [[Mister]] [[Boulder]]. The premise remains the same: Lance Barton, (Rock) is [[took]] before his [[lives]] [[times]] is up and [[working]] a [[deals]] with God's representative, Mr King, to come back to earth as someone else. As in Beatty's movie; he [[choosing]] the murdered [[Karel]] Wellington, a [[richest]] white [[men]], all because he fancies Sontee Jenkins (Regina [[Emperor]]) who happens to turn up at Wellington's house during the [[manslaughter]]. The role of Mrs Wellington and her lover suffers in this remake and the [[thought]] to turn an [[elderly]] white multi-millionaire into a stand up black comedian who [[try]] to [[hu]] Sontee [[purely]] does not [[cooperate]]. Also the intercuts used to show [[Rocks]] as Wellington and then as the [[actual]] 'white' Wellington, fail miserably. [[Improving]] [[wo]] have been [[effected]] to the [[initial]] [[Betty]] plot - which in itself did not [[skilfully]] portray the life-after-death [[thinks]] - but they [[indubitably]] were not to be [[uncovered]] in "Down To [[Tierra]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 5623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A linear travel within a non-linear structure. It's a fact that time, in 12 monkeys, flows in this come-and-go between present, future and past. However, the movie's linearity can't be avoided: it's the very work of the projector, the unfolding of the narrative.

What we can see underlying the temporal theme is a reflection on the inevitability of our actions. The world of this Terry Gilliam film is a world with little space for free-will.

Right from the beginning we are informed about a schizophrenic's prophecy, according to which a plague would rule the Earth in 1997, forcing the few survivors to live underground - the only place not affected by the virus.

Cole's (Willis) mission is clear: return to the mid 90's to investigate whatever and whoever is related to the release of the virus. There's no way to change the past: all that can be done is gather information that can help the scientists of the present (that, for us viewers, is the future) find the cure. Not to change what happened (the past is inevitable), but make the present better.

In his "returns" in time, Cole gradually comes near a striking dilemma: his life in the past is better than his life in the present.

The latter is dark and dehumanizing, controlled by totalitarian scientists that elect "volunteers" (this word is incisively ironic) to embark on the journeys to the past.

The scientists have not yet reached the highest level of achievements in time travel, and Cole ends up on wrong dates - this will, later in the plot, work as a proof of his sanity for the psychiatrist Kathryn (Stowe).

We can see, through the evolution of the story, that linearity and non-linearity interlace in a circular temporality.

There is more than one moment in which the scene that is the first and ends up being almost the last - and certainly the climactic - appears. It modifies itself, according to the evocation of Cole's memories, that come up in his dreams.

In an airport, a man is shot dead while running, armed, toward someone else. A blonde woman runs after the murdered one.

This is the scene that connects the past (in which Cole is a kid that visits the airport with his parents), the present (the time of the narrative) and the future (adult Cole) Throughout the narrative, Cole has the feeling of having already lived the reality he is experiencing now. His prophetic dreams are the proof that it is impossible to escape or avoid what happened. The agents that shoot him stop him from killing the mad scientist, doctor Peters (Morse), that is the responsible for the dissemination of the disease.

What was can't be changed. And, in Cole's case, what was is what will be. Eternally.

A film not quite well understood for many. To me, nothing less than a masterpiece.

Other good movies with similar theme: The Back to the future trilogy (that has another angle regarding the "mad scientist" character, and although it shares the atmosphere of decay - particularly in the second film -, it is way more optimistic than Gilliam's work, that is an odd Hollywood picture).

In another register, there is "Wild strawberries", one of Bergman's masterpieces, that involves a striking and enlightening travel to the past through dreams and reminiscences.

I've never watched "La Jetée", but only because I can't find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Forgive me for stating the obvious, but some films are good and some films are bad. Of course, there are extremes within those two broad categories. Films such as The Godfather, Saving Private Ryan, and [[Star]] Wars slot comfortably into the good category. At the other end of the spectrum there are those films that simply don't deserve to be mentioned by name. [[Occasionally]] however, someone [[produces]] a truly [[woeful]] film. A [[film]] that should be singled out as a [[demonstration]] of how [[awful]] a film can be. A [[film]] that is more than bad. Such a [[film]] is Maiden Voyage.

Briefly, Maiden Voyage is a story about a luxury cruise ship that is hijacked by a gang of evil criminals who demand a ransom from an equally evil, scheming ship's owner. Of course, there is an all American hero on board, complete with chiselled jaw and sculptured chest, who saves the day.

This is a production that plumbs new depths. Everything about it is bad. The acting, the direction and the so-called plot are breath-takingly poor. In short, it is an insult to the intelligence of any unfortunate viewer. Even an American viewer would be annoyed by its shortcomings.

Yes, it's that bad.

I will resist the temptation to compose a list of things that angered me about this film. However, its dumber-than-dumb conclusion should serve as an adequate example of what I mean.

Imagine in your mind that you are an evil hijacker and you are stood in an open lifeboat on a calm sea. You are in company with the hero who holds a ticking bomb. Said hero throws the bomb to you and dives overboard. What would you do? I don't know about you, but I would throw the bomb as far as I possibly could into the sea. Not this guy. He watches as our hero swims away and then he tries to disarm the bomb with unfortunate (for him) results. Enough said. Such a demise would merit a mention in the Darwin Awards website and might also be a suitably apt conclusion to the production team's lives. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but some films are good and some films are bad. Of course, there are extremes within those two broad categories. Films such as The Godfather, Saving Private Ryan, and [[Stars]] Wars slot comfortably into the good category. At the other end of the spectrum there are those films that simply don't deserve to be mentioned by name. [[Sometimes]] however, someone [[generates]] a truly [[regrettable]] film. A [[filmmaking]] that should be singled out as a [[demonstrations]] of how [[abysmal]] a film can be. A [[filmmaking]] that is more than bad. Such a [[filmmaking]] is Maiden Voyage.

Briefly, Maiden Voyage is a story about a luxury cruise ship that is hijacked by a gang of evil criminals who demand a ransom from an equally evil, scheming ship's owner. Of course, there is an all American hero on board, complete with chiselled jaw and sculptured chest, who saves the day.

This is a production that plumbs new depths. Everything about it is bad. The acting, the direction and the so-called plot are breath-takingly poor. In short, it is an insult to the intelligence of any unfortunate viewer. Even an American viewer would be annoyed by its shortcomings.

Yes, it's that bad.

I will resist the temptation to compose a list of things that angered me about this film. However, its dumber-than-dumb conclusion should serve as an adequate example of what I mean.

Imagine in your mind that you are an evil hijacker and you are stood in an open lifeboat on a calm sea. You are in company with the hero who holds a ticking bomb. Said hero throws the bomb to you and dives overboard. What would you do? I don't know about you, but I would throw the bomb as far as I possibly could into the sea. Not this guy. He watches as our hero swims away and then he tries to disarm the bomb with unfortunate (for him) results. Enough said. Such a demise would merit a mention in the Darwin Awards website and might also be a suitably apt conclusion to the production team's lives. --------------------------------------------- Result 5625 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I saw this film with a special screening of the work of Owen Alik Shahadah. It is so interesting where did this guy come from. Now he is probably the key independent African filmmaker in the world. And I am not talking about black filmmakers I am talking about filmmakers who are rooted in culture. The idea if anything testifies to the diversity and range of African themes, with his film 500 Years Later it is a African issue. But the Idea doesn't fit that [[mold]]. Showing the artistic diversity. The film is an all African cast but the topic is a human topic which most of us could relate to. I just [[love]] the mild comedy in it. And the Kora of Tunde Jegede is just [[amazing]], it is really a art-house gem. I saw this film with a special screening of the work of Owen Alik Shahadah. It is so interesting where did this guy come from. Now he is probably the key independent African filmmaker in the world. And I am not talking about black filmmakers I am talking about filmmakers who are rooted in culture. The idea if anything testifies to the diversity and range of African themes, with his film 500 Years Later it is a African issue. But the Idea doesn't fit that [[mould]]. Showing the artistic diversity. The film is an all African cast but the topic is a human topic which most of us could relate to. I just [[amour]] the mild comedy in it. And the Kora of Tunde Jegede is just [[astounding]], it is really a art-house gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 5626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is one of the funnier films i've seen. it had it's crude moments, but they were full of charm. it's Altmanesque screenplay, brilliant physical humour, and relaxed friendships were a pleasure to watch, and a slice of life most of us can relate to. and i can say with a measure of honesty that i was afraid for Steve Carell's nipple..i truly was. surprisingly, this is a good-natured, unabashed comedy that is essentially about love, and the many relationships we may find ourselves in along the way. Catherine Keener was terrific as Trish, and all of Steve Carell's friends were flawed but amiable, and so much fun. the idea that they suspected that Carell was a serial killer is a hilarious metaphor for a forty-year old virgin. but the simple truth was that he wanted to be in love first. original, charming, and very funny. highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] This movie is another one on my List of Movies Not To Bother With. Saw it 40 years ago as an adolescent, stayed up late to do so, was very [[annoyed]] to find that it was about 95% romance,4% everything else, 1% history if that. It's what I call a bait and switch movie, one with an interesting title, the actual movie is a scam. This is a subject which deserves a good cinematic treatment, this movie is almost an insult to those who served. The actual members of the Lafayette Escadrille were not on the run from the law nor were they the products of abusive homes, they were in reality idealists who wanted to do something to help France. And I suspect many of them came from a more upper class background than Tab Hunter's character. Flying school is not for the smart alecks and the know it alls, an individual such as the one portrayed here wouldn't have lasted two days, it would have either been the stockade or the infantry. Discipline in the French Army was often rather fierce. In short, another Hollywierd version of an historical episode that deserves proper treatment. This movie is another one on my List of Movies Not To Bother With. Saw it 40 years ago as an adolescent, stayed up late to do so, was very [[irritable]] to find that it was about 95% romance,4% everything else, 1% history if that. It's what I call a bait and switch movie, one with an interesting title, the actual movie is a scam. This is a subject which deserves a good cinematic treatment, this movie is almost an insult to those who served. The actual members of the Lafayette Escadrille were not on the run from the law nor were they the products of abusive homes, they were in reality idealists who wanted to do something to help France. And I suspect many of them came from a more upper class background than Tab Hunter's character. Flying school is not for the smart alecks and the know it alls, an individual such as the one portrayed here wouldn't have lasted two days, it would have either been the stockade or the infantry. Discipline in the French Army was often rather fierce. In short, another Hollywierd version of an historical episode that deserves proper treatment. --------------------------------------------- Result 5628 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[While]] [[watching]] this [[movie]] I was frustrated and distracted and by the end, I [[wanted]] to give the movie a solid 4 or 5. I thought the [[animation]] was random and all over the place and there was too much going on. Even my A.D.D couldn't keep up. It [[felt]] like a [[slight]] acid trip. Everything looked flat, there was no dimension to anything. There were so many shapes, lines and patterns. I really wanted to stop the movie mid-way and smash my burned copy of this movie. But after I finish watching it, I went online to read up on the movie and I should have done a little research into this movie before watching.

The Secret of Kells is loosely based on the true story about the original Book of Kells. A small boy, Brendan, is given the task of penning new pages in what is set to be the greatest book ever written. This book will contain information that will help "change darkness into light." Brendan lives in the village of Kells behind huge stone walls. Taking place in the 8th century, Brendan's uncle, the Abbot of Kells, is trying to build the wall to keep the Vikings out. Brendan's uncle insist he help complete the wall, but a traveler and keeper of "the book" secretly trains Brendan to hone in on his illustration skills, and convinces him to complete "the book" and carry out it's word.

The entire time I watched the movie I thought I was missing something because I didn't really understand what was going on. I figured I was just missing a piece of Irish history. A simple Google search taught me all I needed to know about the original Book of Kells. After reading many articles, my opinion of the movie [[greatly]] changed.

The Book of Kells is a copied version of the first few books of the New Testament transcribed into Latin by Gaelic monks in Ireland in the 8th century. Along with it's paleographic and insular script, the book is also beautifully illustrated in insular art, a type of early art form know for it's intricacy, complexity, and miniature illustrations. Much of the art in the Book of Kells is depicted as lots of art was at the time, flat and dimensionality challenged with no perspective. But what makes the Book of Kells [[stand]] out from other early pieces of art is it's use of many colors.

The Secret of Kells is very colorful. I originally thought the animation was flat and boring. It reminded me a lot of the cartoon Samurai Jack which also had a flat and "amine" look to it. Once I learned about the art styles of the Book of Kells, it's obvious that many of the styles from the book are mimicked in the movie. There are lines and swirls and various shapes that inhabit Brendan's mind. Whenever he goes into his imagination, circular shapes resembling the sun, cogs, clocks and wheels begin filling the screen. The edges of the screen become framed in decorated moving triangles or circles. Transitions are filled with color, and Celtic knots. From the trees to the floors, many things in this world are covered in shapes or patterns.

Clocking in at 70 minutes minus credits, The Secret of Kells is a fun little history lesson with a little adventure and silliness thrown in to keep people (maybe just children) interested. I think one has to generally be open-mined to The Secret of Kells as half art piece, half movie about history. Despite looking like it was animated with Adobe illustrator, It's a very nice looking movie. But based on the 20 films submitted for Oscar consideration, I don't think it was worth being nominated over Mary and Max.

ThatWasJunk.Blogspot.com [[Despite]] [[staring]] this [[kino]] I was frustrated and distracted and by the end, I [[desired]] to give the movie a solid 4 or 5. I thought the [[animate]] was random and all over the place and there was too much going on. Even my A.D.D couldn't keep up. It [[smelled]] like a [[lightweight]] acid trip. Everything looked flat, there was no dimension to anything. There were so many shapes, lines and patterns. I really wanted to stop the movie mid-way and smash my burned copy of this movie. But after I finish watching it, I went online to read up on the movie and I should have done a little research into this movie before watching.

The Secret of Kells is loosely based on the true story about the original Book of Kells. A small boy, Brendan, is given the task of penning new pages in what is set to be the greatest book ever written. This book will contain information that will help "change darkness into light." Brendan lives in the village of Kells behind huge stone walls. Taking place in the 8th century, Brendan's uncle, the Abbot of Kells, is trying to build the wall to keep the Vikings out. Brendan's uncle insist he help complete the wall, but a traveler and keeper of "the book" secretly trains Brendan to hone in on his illustration skills, and convinces him to complete "the book" and carry out it's word.

The entire time I watched the movie I thought I was missing something because I didn't really understand what was going on. I figured I was just missing a piece of Irish history. A simple Google search taught me all I needed to know about the original Book of Kells. After reading many articles, my opinion of the movie [[heavily]] changed.

The Book of Kells is a copied version of the first few books of the New Testament transcribed into Latin by Gaelic monks in Ireland in the 8th century. Along with it's paleographic and insular script, the book is also beautifully illustrated in insular art, a type of early art form know for it's intricacy, complexity, and miniature illustrations. Much of the art in the Book of Kells is depicted as lots of art was at the time, flat and dimensionality challenged with no perspective. But what makes the Book of Kells [[standing]] out from other early pieces of art is it's use of many colors.

The Secret of Kells is very colorful. I originally thought the animation was flat and boring. It reminded me a lot of the cartoon Samurai Jack which also had a flat and "amine" look to it. Once I learned about the art styles of the Book of Kells, it's obvious that many of the styles from the book are mimicked in the movie. There are lines and swirls and various shapes that inhabit Brendan's mind. Whenever he goes into his imagination, circular shapes resembling the sun, cogs, clocks and wheels begin filling the screen. The edges of the screen become framed in decorated moving triangles or circles. Transitions are filled with color, and Celtic knots. From the trees to the floors, many things in this world are covered in shapes or patterns.

Clocking in at 70 minutes minus credits, The Secret of Kells is a fun little history lesson with a little adventure and silliness thrown in to keep people (maybe just children) interested. I think one has to generally be open-mined to The Secret of Kells as half art piece, half movie about history. Despite looking like it was animated with Adobe illustrator, It's a very nice looking movie. But based on the 20 films submitted for Oscar consideration, I don't think it was worth being nominated over Mary and Max.

ThatWasJunk.Blogspot.com --------------------------------------------- Result 5629 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked the movie a real lot. Wanted to see it just for Dara Tomanovich, but the plot and story were ok too. A very cool change in plot when you least expect it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I was [[probably]] one of the few [[Australians]] not [[watching]] the tennis when this [[series]] [[aired]]. I have to say when [[William]] McInnes first [[appeared]] I [[though]], that is one [[crappy]] [[actor]]! But as the series [[continued]] he toned down his performance and I [[totally]] [[loved]] him. He was such a [[rotten]] [[guy]] but he did [[make]] me laugh. I watched the [[show]] to see Hugo Speers ([[Heart]] and Bones, The Full [[Monty]]) and Tom [[Long]] (SeaChange, Two Hands). It was interesting to [[see]] Speers [[play]] a nice, quiet man and [[even]] more interesting to watch Tom Longs' rippling [[muscles]]! Sigh... Seriously, Long's performance was a [[total]] shock and really [[brilliant]]. He [[stole]] the [[show]]. Martin Sacks was good [[also]] in a small role, and the leading actress put in an [[entertaining]] performance. I'd recommend this [[programme]] if you enjoy [[stories]] with a twist and watching Tom Long walk around with no shirt on... I was [[presumably]] one of the few [[Australia]] not [[staring]] the tennis when this [[serials]] [[circulated]]. I have to say when [[Wilhelm]] McInnes first [[emerged]] I [[although]], that is one [[shitty]] [[actress]]! But as the series [[uninterrupted]] he toned down his performance and I [[absolutely]] [[enjoyed]] him. He was such a [[lousy]] [[man]] but he did [[deliver]] me laugh. I watched the [[display]] to see Hugo Speers ([[Heartland]] and Bones, The Full [[Python]]) and Tom [[Lange]] (SeaChange, Two Hands). It was interesting to [[seeing]] Speers [[playing]] a nice, quiet man and [[yet]] more interesting to watch Tom Longs' rippling [[musculature]]! Sigh... Seriously, Long's performance was a [[whole]] shock and really [[awesome]]. He [[stolen]] the [[showings]]. Martin Sacks was good [[further]] in a small role, and the leading actress put in an [[amusing]] performance. I'd recommend this [[agenda]] if you enjoy [[story]] with a twist and watching Tom Long walk around with no shirt on... --------------------------------------------- Result 5631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] A decent sequel, but does not [[pack]] the [[punch]] of the original. A murderous [[screenwriter]](Judd Nelson)assumes [[new]] identities in order to direct his own [[novel]] CABIN BY THE LAKE. [[Still]] ruthless [[killing]], but [[movie]] [[seems]] very tongue-in-cheek. [[Any]] [[humor]] is not of the [[funny]] kind. Total project [[seems]] to have the quality of a quickie and at times [[Nelson]] is [[way]] over the [[top]]. This [[movie]] is about a [[script]] being rewritten before going to the screen...this should have [[happened]] to this [[script]]. A decent sequel, but does not [[packaging]] the [[punching]] of the original. A murderous [[scriptwriter]](Judd Nelson)assumes [[newer]] identities in order to direct his own [[newer]] CABIN BY THE LAKE. [[However]] ruthless [[murdered]], but [[kino]] [[appears]] very tongue-in-cheek. [[Everything]] [[humour]] is not of the [[hilarious]] kind. Total project [[appears]] to have the quality of a quickie and at times [[Nielson]] is [[ways]] over the [[superior]]. This [[filmmaking]] is about a [[screenplay]] being rewritten before going to the screen...this should have [[transpired]] to this [[screenplay]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] {rant [[start]]} I didn't [[want]] to [[believe]] them at first, but I guess this is what people are [[talking]] about when they say South Korean [[cinema]] has peaked and may even be going downhill. After the [[surprisingly]] [[fun]] and [[moving]] [[monster]] [[movie]] "Gwoemul" (aka "The [[Host]]") of 2006-- which [[actually]] succeeded in making a [[sharp]] satire out of a B-movie genre-- [[successive]] Korean blockbusters have [[become]] more and more generic, [[even]] though their budgets (mainly spent on special effects) have become more and more fantastic. Do South Korean movie-makers [[really]] want to [[squander]] all the [[audience]] and investor [[goodwill]], which their industry has [[built]] up [[since]] the 1999 break-out [[film]] "Shiri/Swiri", by making a [[whole]] series of [[big]] budget mediocre movies like mainland [[China]] did? {rant [[end]]}

The only "[[reason]]" I can fathom for [[making]] this [[movie]] is to dupe the investors into financing the most detailed and fluid digital animation of a Korean/ East Asian-styled dragon I have seen to date, for the final scenes. Now if they had introduced that dragon at the beginning and given it more personality and purpose like in the 1996 "Dragonheart", the movie might have had a few more [[redeeming]] qualities other than having lots of digitally animated dragons. Remember "Dungeons & Dragons" in 2000? Hasn't anyone learnt that the trick is not how MUCH special effects you use, but how WELL you use it? I hope there are more (and better) Korean legends they can use, because they have just [[killed]] a lot of international interest in Korean dragon legends with the way they filmed this one.

In short, I agree with all the negative reviews gone before and wonder how Koreans felt about having their folk anthem "Arirang" being played at the very end. As a creature feature, I [[would]] have given it at least 5 stars out of 10 if the special effects or action sequences had been worth it, but I've seen many video games with better camera work and scripting (just less dragons). {rant [[cranking]]} I didn't [[wanting]] to [[think]] them at first, but I guess this is what people are [[talk]] about when they say South Korean [[filmmaking]] has peaked and may even be going downhill. After the [[impossibly]] [[droll]] and [[shifting]] [[creature]] [[flick]] "Gwoemul" (aka "The [[Receiving]]") of 2006-- which [[genuinely]] succeeded in making a [[abrupt]] satire out of a B-movie genre-- [[sequential]] Korean blockbusters have [[becomes]] more and more generic, [[yet]] though their budgets (mainly spent on special effects) have become more and more fantastic. Do South Korean movie-makers [[truthfully]] want to [[wasting]] all the [[viewers]] and investor [[friendship]], which their industry has [[builds]] up [[because]] the 1999 break-out [[movie]] "Shiri/Swiri", by making a [[overall]] series of [[major]] budget mediocre movies like mainland [[Hua]] did? {rant [[terminate]]}

The only "[[grounds]]" I can fathom for [[doing]] this [[filmmaking]] is to dupe the investors into financing the most detailed and fluid digital animation of a Korean/ East Asian-styled dragon I have seen to date, for the final scenes. Now if they had introduced that dragon at the beginning and given it more personality and purpose like in the 1996 "Dragonheart", the movie might have had a few more [[redeem]] qualities other than having lots of digitally animated dragons. Remember "Dungeons & Dragons" in 2000? Hasn't anyone learnt that the trick is not how MUCH special effects you use, but how WELL you use it? I hope there are more (and better) Korean legends they can use, because they have just [[assassination]] a lot of international interest in Korean dragon legends with the way they filmed this one.

In short, I agree with all the negative reviews gone before and wonder how Koreans felt about having their folk anthem "Arirang" being played at the very end. As a creature feature, I [[ought]] have given it at least 5 stars out of 10 if the special effects or action sequences had been worth it, but I've seen many video games with better camera work and scripting (just less dragons). --------------------------------------------- Result 5633 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was by far the best war documentary ever made. From the very beginning of the first episode when Sir Laurence Olivier described the horrific events in Oradour-Sur-Glane 'The day the soldiers came'. To the final days of the war when the mushroom clouds appeared over Japan, I never missed a second of this classic series and I remember it well even though it was screened way back in 1974. Each and every aspect of this tragedy was covered in detail. This whole series should be compulsory viewing for as many of the world's children as possible so that the tragedy of World War Two is not repeated and that bigotry, hatred, greed and intolerance are not confused with patriotism or religious zeal. --------------------------------------------- Result 5634 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] All these reviewers are spot on. I've seen many bad films over the years, believe me, and this beats the lot!

This is not just a "so bad it's good" exploiter [[waste]] of time, but a genuine, hilarious, movie [[atrocity]].

CHECK OUT the white furry monster type thing!

WET YOURSELF LAUGHING at Thom Christopher's "spell-weaving" acting!

GAPE IN SHEER A**E-CLENCHING DISBELIEF! at the threadbare sets!

This is one of those "European co-productions". No wonder we have so many wars. I swear, some of the people taking part in 'Wizards of the Lost Kingdom' aren't actually aware they are appearing in a film!

FACT! I originally watched this movie on HTV Wales late one night while suffering from concussion and sleep deprivation. I had to track down a copy several weeks later to make sure it was really this awful. It is. Worse even than Lee Majors in The Norseman, more laughable than all of John Derek's films, this is, truly, the Citizen Kane of Trash. All these reviewers are spot on. I've seen many bad films over the years, believe me, and this beats the lot!

This is not just a "so bad it's good" exploiter [[squandering]] of time, but a genuine, hilarious, movie [[monstrosity]].

CHECK OUT the white furry monster type thing!

WET YOURSELF LAUGHING at Thom Christopher's "spell-weaving" acting!

GAPE IN SHEER A**E-CLENCHING DISBELIEF! at the threadbare sets!

This is one of those "European co-productions". No wonder we have so many wars. I swear, some of the people taking part in 'Wizards of the Lost Kingdom' aren't actually aware they are appearing in a film!

FACT! I originally watched this movie on HTV Wales late one night while suffering from concussion and sleep deprivation. I had to track down a copy several weeks later to make sure it was really this awful. It is. Worse even than Lee Majors in The Norseman, more laughable than all of John Derek's films, this is, truly, the Citizen Kane of Trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 5635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] he is the quintessential narcissist and [[manipulator]]; in this [[case]], [[portraying]] [[attorney]] (and [[murderer]]) [[Tom]] Capano.

Kathryn Morris is [[sympathetic]] as victim, [[Anne]] Marie Fahey, but in the [[beginning]] is a [[bit]] too much the victim. We are sorry for the situation, but become simultaneously disgusted after seeing his victimization of several other [[women]] (including [[Rachel]] Ward) as well.

The [[sad]] part is where she is actually [[getting]] help with her self-esteem issues, and Capano actually had her [[psychologist]] [[killed]]. Pretty hard to believe, but this was [[based]] on a [[true]] [[story]].

There is a cameo with Olympia Dukakis (excellent) as Capano's mother. [[All]] in all, an interesting story because it is [[based]] on a [[true]] murder, and you will want to read Ann Rule's book to [[get]] the accurate details. 8/10. he is the quintessential narcissist and [[handler]]; in this [[lawsuit]], [[illustrating]] [[solicitor]] (and [[assassin]]) [[Thom]] Capano.

Kathryn Morris is [[congenial]] as victim, [[Anna]] Marie Fahey, but in the [[startup]] is a [[bite]] too much the victim. We are sorry for the situation, but become simultaneously disgusted after seeing his victimization of several other [[femmes]] (including [[Rachael]] Ward) as well.

The [[unfortunate]] part is where she is actually [[obtaining]] help with her self-esteem issues, and Capano actually had her [[psychoanalyst]] [[assassinated]]. Pretty hard to believe, but this was [[founded]] on a [[real]] [[histories]].

There is a cameo with Olympia Dukakis (excellent) as Capano's mother. [[Every]] in all, an interesting story because it is [[founded]] on a [[genuine]] murder, and you will want to read Ann Rule's book to [[obtain]] the accurate details. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5636 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am sorry to say that this film is indeed bad. It reminds me of a c-grade porn movie with one major difference: no porn.

The story and dialogue needs a complete overhaul. Maybe then the bad acting would not have been as noticeable. At the very least, the pacing should have been picked up.

While I accept that this had a low budget and the director did a good job visually given what little resources he had, he should have spent more time on the story or better yet, get someone else to write it. Many of the action scenes were just pointless.

It was a complete waste of my time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] After [[seeing]] '[[Break]] a Leg' in [[Vancouver]] at the release [[party]] I [[thought]] it was a very [[enjoyable]] [[film]].

I had a few outright belly [[laughs]] and some of the cameos (Eric Roberts in [[particular]]) were a [[scream]]. I haven't [[heard]] word about [[actual]] release date [[although]] I've heard it's close.

The story is [[simple]] but is [[mainly]] a [[vehicle]] for the [[characters]] and situations. The [[script]] is [[smooth]] and seamless, the plot develops effortlessly and the acting is [[comfortable]] [[yet]] fresh. This film has won at [[least]] one award from [[EACH]] of the film [[festivals]] it's been in, which is [[around]] 10 - 15 or so.

I [[highly]] [[recommend]] '[[Break]] a Leg'. After [[witnessing]] '[[Rupture]] a Leg' in [[Calgary]] at the release [[part]] I [[brainchild]] it was a very [[nice]] [[kino]].

I had a few outright belly [[laughing]] and some of the cameos (Eric Roberts in [[specific]]) were a [[screaming]]. I haven't [[tryout]] word about [[real]] release date [[despite]] I've heard it's close.

The story is [[simpler]] but is [[basically]] a [[motorcars]] for the [[features]] and situations. The [[screenplay]] is [[seamless]] and seamless, the plot develops effortlessly and the acting is [[cosy]] [[however]] fresh. This film has won at [[lowest]] one award from [[EVERYONE]] of the film [[festivities]] it's been in, which is [[about]] 10 - 15 or so.

I [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] '[[Breaks]] a Leg'. --------------------------------------------- Result 5638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This anime was underrated and still is. Hardly the dorky kids movie as noted, i still come back to this 10 years after i first saw it. One of the better movies released.

The animation while not perfect is good, camera tricks give it a 3D feel and the story is still as good today even after i grew up and saw ground-breakers like Neon Genesis Evangelion and RahXephon. It has nowhere near the depth obviously but try to see it from a lighthearted view. It's a story to entertain, not to question.

Still one of my favourites I come back too when i feel like a giggle on over more lighthearted animes. Not to say its a childish movies, there are surprisingly sad moments in this and you need a sense of humour to see it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is how movies are supposed to be made: a fascinating setting; characters about whom you come to care deeply; writing and editing that move the plot efficiently and build suspense. This is a wonderful film -- deeply moving without being sentimental. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Ultra-grim [[crime]] [[drama]] from Pou-Soi Cheang, the director of "Home Sweet Home". Tonally, it reminded me of Billy Tang's "Run and Kill", although it's not as polished as that. [[Nevertheless]], it's an [[engaging]], flawed bit of [[mayhem]] about a Cambodian [[loner]], Pang (Edison Chen), who arrives in Hong Kong to kill a lawyer. While fleeing the scene, he kills the partner of cop Sam Wai, who, to add insult to [[injury]], is in the midst of dealing with his dying father, so Sam begins an insane, obsessive manhunt for Pang that results in close to a dozen dead bodies and relentless violence. There must be something in the air [[lately]] because I've never seen so many humans beating the pulp out of each other as I have lately. This is [[grim]], nasty stuff, which is why I'm so partial to it, and I [[applaud]] its downbeat vibe. It's visually [[arresting]] and the sound design is very [[unique]]. Dramatically, everything spirals downwards until every character finds him- or herself in a world of screaming pain. A subplot involving Pang's attachment to a sexually abused girl adds depth to the story and spawns a surprise fourth act which boasts a [[fine]] act of grotesque surgery. Ultra-grim [[offence]] [[dramas]] from Pou-Soi Cheang, the director of "Home Sweet Home". Tonally, it reminded me of Billy Tang's "Run and Kill", although it's not as polished as that. [[Notwithstanding]], it's an [[participate]], flawed bit of [[shambles]] about a Cambodian [[hermit]], Pang (Edison Chen), who arrives in Hong Kong to kill a lawyer. While fleeing the scene, he kills the partner of cop Sam Wai, who, to add insult to [[damages]], is in the midst of dealing with his dying father, so Sam begins an insane, obsessive manhunt for Pang that results in close to a dozen dead bodies and relentless violence. There must be something in the air [[newly]] because I've never seen so many humans beating the pulp out of each other as I have lately. This is [[morose]], nasty stuff, which is why I'm so partial to it, and I [[commend]] its downbeat vibe. It's visually [[detained]] and the sound design is very [[sole]]. Dramatically, everything spirals downwards until every character finds him- or herself in a world of screaming pain. A subplot involving Pang's attachment to a sexually abused girl adds depth to the story and spawns a surprise fourth act which boasts a [[fined]] act of grotesque surgery. --------------------------------------------- Result 5641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is probably the first [[entry]] in the "[[Lance]] O'Leary/[[Nurse]] Keat" detective series; in [[subsequent]] O'Leary films, he was played by much younger actors than Guy Kibbee.

A group of [[relatives]] (all played by well-known character actors) gathers in an old house (on a rainy nite, of course!) to speak to a [[wealthy]] relative, who goes into a coma.

While they wait for him to recover, all sorts of mysterious goings-on happen, including a couple of [[murders]].

A creepy film; worth seeing! This is probably the first [[entries]] in the "[[Toss]] O'Leary/[[Matron]] Keat" detective series; in [[successive]] O'Leary films, he was played by much younger actors than Guy Kibbee.

A group of [[parents]] (all played by well-known character actors) gathers in an old house (on a rainy nite, of course!) to speak to a [[rika]] relative, who goes into a coma.

While they wait for him to recover, all sorts of mysterious goings-on happen, including a couple of [[assassinations]].

A creepy film; worth seeing! --------------------------------------------- Result 5642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I instantly [[fell]] in love with "[[Pushing]] [[Daisies]]". This [[show]] [[manages]] to put a smile on my [[face]] with it's [[great]] storytelling, witty [[dialog]] and great acting. But that's not all: It [[also]] manages to [[keep]] you until the [[end]]. The [[basic]] [[idea]] behind the [[show]] - Bringing people back to life with one touch, [[ending]] the undead status with a second - is interesting and could still be in later seasons. But the suspenseful murder [[cases]], the [[unique]] [[look]] of the [[show]] and the [[highly]] proficient narrator add to the [[experience]]. But "Pushing [[Daisies]]" is more than it's parts. It has a certain [[charm]] that I really [[enjoy]] and I'm looking forward to [[enter]] the [[world]] of Ned and Chuck for a second season. I instantly [[dipped]] in love with "[[Prompting]] [[Mommies]]". This [[displaying]] [[administered]] to put a smile on my [[encounter]] with it's [[awesome]] storytelling, witty [[dialogues]] and great acting. But that's not all: It [[further]] manages to [[maintain]] you until the [[termination]]. The [[fundamental]] [[concept]] behind the [[exhibit]] - Bringing people back to life with one touch, [[cease]] the undead status with a second - is interesting and could still be in later seasons. But the suspenseful murder [[example]], the [[sole]] [[glance]] of the [[spectacle]] and the [[immeasurably]] proficient narrator add to the [[experiences]]. But "Pushing [[Margaritas]]" is more than it's parts. It has a certain [[allure]] that I really [[enjoying]] and I'm looking forward to [[penetrate]] the [[monde]] of Ned and Chuck for a second season. --------------------------------------------- Result 5643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was a bit scared to watch this movie due to its rates. But [[living]] in Italy titles like this never ever come [[across]] and I love [[step]] so much that I decided to give it try. And how [[surprised]] I was! The story is [[different]] from any other dance-movie I've [[seen]] [[lately]], with a deeper [[meaning]] than just "winning". It's [[touching]] and well written and well directed. Raya is such a strong [[character]], I [[love]] the [[fact]] that she never doubts herself, she's so mature and [[focused]] and AWARE of her TALENT (and what talent Rutina Wesley has, my jaw dropped in the [[final]] dance scene). The [[way]] she [[pursues]] her [[dream]] and [[refuses]] to let [[anything]] stop her is, honestly, inspiring. Also, the [[fact]] that she's not the [[typical]] super-hot chick ([[see]] [[Jessica]] Alba, [[Briana]] Evigan, Jenna Dewan, Zoe Seldana...) makes her really [[appealing]] and [[real]]. Seriously, why is this [[movie]] rated so low? You can [[understand]] between the first 5 minutes that it's a good [[work]]. [[Really]] good [[actually]]. I [[even]] cried at the [[end]] of the movie. And the [[dancing]] [[routines]] are just sick. I was a bit scared to watch this movie due to its rates. But [[residing]] in Italy titles like this never ever come [[throughout]] and I love [[steps]] so much that I decided to give it try. And how [[horrified]] I was! The story is [[disparate]] from any other dance-movie I've [[watched]] [[freshly]], with a deeper [[mean]] than just "winning". It's [[affects]] and well written and well directed. Raya is such a strong [[nature]], I [[likes]] the [[facto]] that she never doubts herself, she's so mature and [[oriented]] and AWARE of her TALENT (and what talent Rutina Wesley has, my jaw dropped in the [[last]] dance scene). The [[pathways]] she [[chasing]] her [[dreaming]] and [[denied]] to let [[something]] stop her is, honestly, inspiring. Also, the [[facto]] that she's not the [[classic]] super-hot chick ([[consults]] [[Jennifer]] Alba, [[Brianna]] Evigan, Jenna Dewan, Zoe Seldana...) makes her really [[tempting]] and [[true]]. Seriously, why is this [[kino]] rated so low? You can [[understanding]] between the first 5 minutes that it's a good [[cooperation]]. [[Truthfully]] good [[indeed]]. I [[yet]] cried at the [[termination]] of the movie. And the [[dancers]] [[routine]] are just sick. --------------------------------------------- Result 5644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] To begin with, I [[loved]] göta kanal 1, it had a lot of classic jokes [[including]] that unlucky guy in the canoe who always seems to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, he is still acting the same guy in the göta kanal 2 movie but in my opinion hes performance is not as funny as it was in the first movie, in fact you don't notice him much at all. A thing that made me think bad about this movie is the choice of boats, in this movie there are only race boats, they sure is speedy but those do not make waves like the big floating mansions used in the first movie, I liked the old ones better and these new boats makes one of the last scenes look ridiculous when the man in the canoe suddenly jumps out of it to evade the "big waves" from those small speedy boats. Truly a minus. You have to accept that we're not living in the same Sweden as in 1974 anymore. This movie also contains a bit more violence than the first one. Although the movie was great all in all. I've just concentrated on some cons that i was disappointed in but the rest of the movie were up to my expectations, so go see it! It's worth the money. To begin with, I [[cared]] göta kanal 1, it had a lot of classic jokes [[consisting]] that unlucky guy in the canoe who always seems to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, he is still acting the same guy in the göta kanal 2 movie but in my opinion hes performance is not as funny as it was in the first movie, in fact you don't notice him much at all. A thing that made me think bad about this movie is the choice of boats, in this movie there are only race boats, they sure is speedy but those do not make waves like the big floating mansions used in the first movie, I liked the old ones better and these new boats makes one of the last scenes look ridiculous when the man in the canoe suddenly jumps out of it to evade the "big waves" from those small speedy boats. Truly a minus. You have to accept that we're not living in the same Sweden as in 1974 anymore. This movie also contains a bit more violence than the first one. Although the movie was great all in all. I've just concentrated on some cons that i was disappointed in but the rest of the movie were up to my expectations, so go see it! It's worth the money. --------------------------------------------- Result 5645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Julia Roberts obviously makes a concerted effort to shake off her cotton wool Pretty Woman persona with this spurious spousal abuse thriller, but it's hard to imagine she'd end up putting in a performance as powerful and convincing (and oscar winning) as she did in Erin Brokovich based on the back of this rubbish. And make no bones about it, it's nothing more than a Julia Roberts vehicle, but unfortunately, her performance is not the most lacklustre thing about it.

The plot has all the markings of a late night made-for-cable, and don't be under the impression that it will offer any insight into the dark world of domestic abuse because non of the characters are sketched out enough for you to really care.

Ultimately disappointing and unsatisfying, without Roberts' name above the title, I'm sure it would have totally flopped, deservedly. --------------------------------------------- Result 5646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I have this [[film]] out of the library right now and I haven't finished watching it. It is so bad I am in disbelief. Audrey Hepburn had totally lost her talent by then, although she'd pretty much finished with it in 'Robin and Marian.' This is the [[worst]] thing about this [[appallingly]] stupid film. It's really only of interest because it was her last [[feature]] film and because of the Dorothy Stratten appearance just prior to her [[homicide]].

There is nothing but idiocy between Gazzara and his cronies. [[Little]] [[signals]] and [[little]] [[bows]] and [[nods]] to [[real]] screwball [[comedy]] of which this is the [[faintest]], palest shadow.

Who [[could]] [[believe]] that there are [[even]] some of the same Manhattan [[environs]] that Hepburn inhabited so magically and [[even]] mythically in '[[Breakfast]] at Tiffany's' twenty [[years]] [[earlier]]? The soundtrack of [[old]] Sinatra [[songs]] and the Gershwin song from which the title is [[taken]] is too loud and obvious--you sure don't have to [[wait]] for the credits to [[find]] out that [[something]] was [[subtly]] woven into the cine-musique of the [[picture]] to know when the [[songs]] blasted out at you.

'Reverting to type' [[means]] going back up as well as going back down, I guess. [[In]] this [[case]], Audrey Hepburn's chic European [[lady]] is all you [[see]] of someone who was formerly occasionally an actress and [[always]] a [[star]]. Here she has even lost her [[talent]] as a [[star]]. If [[someone]] [[whose]] [[talent]] was [[continuing]] to [[grow]] in the [[period]], like Ann-Margret, had [[played]] the role, there [[would]] have been some [[life]] in it, even given the [[unbelievably]] [[bad]] [[material]] and Mongoloid-level situations.

Hepburn was a [[great]] [[person]], of [[course]], [[greater]] than most movie [[stars]] ever [[dreamed]] of being, and she was once one of the most [[charming]] and [[beautiful]] of [[film]] [[actors]]. After this [[dreadful]] performance, she went on to make an [[atrocious]] TV [[movie]] with [[Robert]] Wagner [[called]] '[[Love]] [[Among]] Thieves.' [[In]] 'They all Laughed' it is as [[though]] she were [[still]] [[playing]] an ingenue in her 50's. Even much vainer and [[obviously]] less [[intelligent]] actresses who [[insisted]] [[upon]] doing this like [[Lana]] Turner were infinitely more effective than is Hepburn. [[Turner]] took acting [[seriously]] [[even]] when she was [[bad]]. Hepburn doesn't [[take]] it seriously at all, couldn't be [[bothered]] with it; even her [[hair]] and clothes look tacky. Her last [[really]] good work was in 'Two for the Road,' perhaps her most perfect, if possibly not her best in many ways.

And that girl who plays the country singer is just sickening. John Ritter is horrible, there is simply nothing to recommend this film except to see Dorothy Stratten, who was truly pretty. Otherwise, critic David Thomson's oft-used phrase 'losing his/her talent' never has made more sense.

Ben Gazarra had lost all sex appeal by then, and so we have 2 films with Gazarra and Hepburn--who could ask for anything less? Sandra Dee's last, pitiful film 'Lost,' from 2 years later, a low-budget nothing, had more to it than this. At least Ms. Dee spoke in her own voice; by 1981, Audrey Hepburn's accent just sounded silly; she'd go on to do the PBS 'Gardens of the World with Audrey Hepburn' and there her somewhat irritating accent works as she walks through English gardens with aristocrats or waxes effusively about 'what I like most is when flowers go back to nature!' as in naturalized daffodils, but in an actual fictional movie, she just sounds ridiculous.

To think that 'Breakfast at Tiffany's' was such a profound sort of light poetic thing with Audrey Hepburn one of the most beautiful women in the world--she was surely one of the most beautiful screen presences in 'My Fair Lady', matching Garbo in several things and Delphine Seyrig in 'Last Year at Marienbad.' And then this! And her final brief role as the angel 'Hap' in the Spielberg film 'Always' was just more of the lady stuff--corny, witless and stifling.

I went to her memorial service at the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church, a beautiful service which included a boys' choir singing the Shaker hymn 'Simple Gifts.' The only thing not listed in the program was the sudden playing of Hepburn's singing 'Moon River' on the fire escape in 'Breakfast at Tiffany's,' and this brought much emotion and some real tears out in the congregation.

A great lady who was once a fine actress (as in 'The Nun's Story') and one of the greatest and most beautiful of film stars in many movies of the 50's and 60's who became a truly bad one--that's not all that common. And perhaps it is only a great human being who, in making such things as film performances trivial, nevertheless has the largeness of mind to want to have the flaws pointed out mercilessly--which all of her late film work contained in abundance. Most of the talk about Hepburn's miscasting is about 'My Fair Lady.' But the one that should have had the original actress in it was 'Wait Until Dark,' which had starred Lee Remick on Broadway. Never as celebrated as Hepburn, she was a better actress in many ways (Hepburn was completely incapable of playing anything really sordid), although Hepburn was at least adequate enough in that part. After that, all of her acting went downhill. I have this [[flick]] out of the library right now and I haven't finished watching it. It is so bad I am in disbelief. Audrey Hepburn had totally lost her talent by then, although she'd pretty much finished with it in 'Robin and Marian.' This is the [[meanest]] thing about this [[terrifically]] stupid film. It's really only of interest because it was her last [[idiosyncrasies]] film and because of the Dorothy Stratten appearance just prior to her [[murder]].

There is nothing but idiocy between Gazzara and his cronies. [[Scant]] [[signage]] and [[scant]] [[arches]] and [[ida]] to [[true]] screwball [[humor]] of which this is the [[teeniest]], palest shadow.

Who [[wo]] [[believing]] that there are [[yet]] some of the same Manhattan [[environments]] that Hepburn inhabited so magically and [[yet]] mythically in '[[Dinners]] at Tiffany's' twenty [[ages]] [[formerly]]? The soundtrack of [[former]] Sinatra [[melodies]] and the Gershwin song from which the title is [[picked]] is too loud and obvious--you sure don't have to [[awaiting]] for the credits to [[finds]] out that [[anything]] was [[finely]] woven into the cine-musique of the [[visuals]] to know when the [[melodies]] blasted out at you.

'Reverting to type' [[modes]] going back up as well as going back down, I guess. [[Onto]] this [[cases]], Audrey Hepburn's chic European [[ladies]] is all you [[seeing]] of someone who was formerly occasionally an actress and [[consistently]] a [[superstar]]. Here she has even lost her [[talents]] as a [[superstar]]. If [[everybody]] [[who]] [[talents]] was [[continued]] to [[augmented]] in the [[time]], like Ann-Margret, had [[accomplished]] the role, there [[should]] have been some [[vie]] in it, even given the [[surprisingly]] [[negative]] [[materials]] and Mongoloid-level situations.

Hepburn was a [[prodigious]] [[individual]], of [[cours]], [[biggest]] than most movie [[star]] ever [[fantasized]] of being, and she was once one of the most [[ravishing]] and [[sumptuous]] of [[movies]] [[protagonists]]. After this [[abhorrent]] performance, she went on to make an [[outrageous]] TV [[cinematographic]] with [[Roberta]] Wagner [[drew]] '[[Amore]] [[In]] Thieves.' [[Throughout]] 'They all Laughed' it is as [[while]] she were [[again]] [[gaming]] an ingenue in her 50's. Even much vainer and [[notoriously]] less [[smarts]] actresses who [[underline]] [[after]] doing this like [[Wool]] Turner were infinitely more effective than is Hepburn. [[Latour]] took acting [[conscientiously]] [[yet]] when she was [[naughty]]. Hepburn doesn't [[taking]] it seriously at all, couldn't be [[deranged]] with it; even her [[hairdo]] and clothes look tacky. Her last [[genuinely]] good work was in 'Two for the Road,' perhaps her most perfect, if possibly not her best in many ways.

And that girl who plays the country singer is just sickening. John Ritter is horrible, there is simply nothing to recommend this film except to see Dorothy Stratten, who was truly pretty. Otherwise, critic David Thomson's oft-used phrase 'losing his/her talent' never has made more sense.

Ben Gazarra had lost all sex appeal by then, and so we have 2 films with Gazarra and Hepburn--who could ask for anything less? Sandra Dee's last, pitiful film 'Lost,' from 2 years later, a low-budget nothing, had more to it than this. At least Ms. Dee spoke in her own voice; by 1981, Audrey Hepburn's accent just sounded silly; she'd go on to do the PBS 'Gardens of the World with Audrey Hepburn' and there her somewhat irritating accent works as she walks through English gardens with aristocrats or waxes effusively about 'what I like most is when flowers go back to nature!' as in naturalized daffodils, but in an actual fictional movie, she just sounds ridiculous.

To think that 'Breakfast at Tiffany's' was such a profound sort of light poetic thing with Audrey Hepburn one of the most beautiful women in the world--she was surely one of the most beautiful screen presences in 'My Fair Lady', matching Garbo in several things and Delphine Seyrig in 'Last Year at Marienbad.' And then this! And her final brief role as the angel 'Hap' in the Spielberg film 'Always' was just more of the lady stuff--corny, witless and stifling.

I went to her memorial service at the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church, a beautiful service which included a boys' choir singing the Shaker hymn 'Simple Gifts.' The only thing not listed in the program was the sudden playing of Hepburn's singing 'Moon River' on the fire escape in 'Breakfast at Tiffany's,' and this brought much emotion and some real tears out in the congregation.

A great lady who was once a fine actress (as in 'The Nun's Story') and one of the greatest and most beautiful of film stars in many movies of the 50's and 60's who became a truly bad one--that's not all that common. And perhaps it is only a great human being who, in making such things as film performances trivial, nevertheless has the largeness of mind to want to have the flaws pointed out mercilessly--which all of her late film work contained in abundance. Most of the talk about Hepburn's miscasting is about 'My Fair Lady.' But the one that should have had the original actress in it was 'Wait Until Dark,' which had starred Lee Remick on Broadway. Never as celebrated as Hepburn, she was a better actress in many ways (Hepburn was completely incapable of playing anything really sordid), although Hepburn was at least adequate enough in that part. After that, all of her acting went downhill. --------------------------------------------- Result 5647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A few years ago I added a comment to the IMDB on "The Real [[McCoys]]" TV series. I said then and repeat now it was a charming, funny, and [[entertaining]] [[show]], well-acted with wonderful characterizations.

I recently saw on [[DVD]] four old [[episodes]] PLUS the Reunion of 2000 with Richard Crenna, Kathy Nolan, and Tony Martinez. As another writer here [[mentioned]], it is curious that Lydia Reed (Hassie) and Michael Winkelman (Little Luke) weren't refered to, but perhaps they can be tracked down via SAG or AFTRA.

The reunion show was well done and gave us [[many]] unknown [[insights]] into the [[show]]. One piece of inside information we did NOT get was whether or not Kathy Nolan regretted [[quitting]] the [[show]] in an unpleasant contract dispute, which [[left]] Luke a "widow" in it's last [[year]], which wasn't very good. Nolan went on to do a bomb of a comedy called "Broadside", about women nurses in the Pacific in WW II. [[Get]] it? BROADside? [[No]], not funny.

Unlike the sleazy, [[salacious]], and [[violent]] TRASH on TV now that is so undermining our [[values]], "The [[Real]] [[McCoys]]" [[entertained]] with decent values and fine human beings. And I [[thank]] all [[involved]], [[including]] the creator, [[Irving]] Pinkus, for having [[brought]] it to my family. We never [[missed]] it. A few years ago I added a comment to the IMDB on "The Real [[hatfields]]" TV series. I said then and repeat now it was a charming, funny, and [[amusing]] [[illustrates]], well-acted with wonderful characterizations.

I recently saw on [[DVDS]] four old [[bouts]] PLUS the Reunion of 2000 with Richard Crenna, Kathy Nolan, and Tony Martinez. As another writer here [[talked]], it is curious that Lydia Reed (Hassie) and Michael Winkelman (Little Luke) weren't refered to, but perhaps they can be tracked down via SAG or AFTRA.

The reunion show was well done and gave us [[several]] unknown [[ideas]] into the [[demonstrate]]. One piece of inside information we did NOT get was whether or not Kathy Nolan regretted [[smoking]] the [[showing]] in an unpleasant contract dispute, which [[exited]] Luke a "widow" in it's last [[annum]], which wasn't very good. Nolan went on to do a bomb of a comedy called "Broadside", about women nurses in the Pacific in WW II. [[Got]] it? BROADside? [[Nos]], not funny.

Unlike the sleazy, [[unclean]], and [[ferocious]] TRASH on TV now that is so undermining our [[value]], "The [[Actual]] [[hatfields]]" [[distracted]] with decent values and fine human beings. And I [[appreciation]] all [[entangled]], [[containing]] the creator, [[Owen]] Pinkus, for having [[tabled]] it to my family. We never [[flunked]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Well, there is a plenty of ways how to spoil a political thriller. [[Usually]] they are derivative or too ambitious, [[often]] they [[feature]] a conspiracy that is totally paranoic and [[unbelievable]]. But [[City]] Hall does not do neither of the above mentioned. The plot is [[cleverly]] [[crafted]], [[story]] is [[believable]]. As far as [[characters]] go I [[would]] say this [[movie]] is a [[solid]] [[average]]. [[No]] character seems out of place and Al Pacino is [[brilliant]] as [[always]]. His [[portrayal]] of a charismatic NYC [[mayor]] is [[superb]] and [[proves]] again that Al Pacino [[belongs]] to the absolute top of American actors nowadays. Well, there is a plenty of ways how to spoil a political thriller. [[Fluently]] they are derivative or too ambitious, [[usually]] they [[featured]] a conspiracy that is totally paranoic and [[impressive]]. But [[Town]] Hall does not do neither of the above mentioned. The plot is [[wisely]] [[conceived]], [[history]] is [[trustworthy]]. As far as [[features]] go I [[ought]] say this [[cinema]] is a [[robust]] [[medium]]. [[Nope]] character seems out of place and Al Pacino is [[impressive]] as [[consistently]]. His [[depiction]] of a charismatic NYC [[alcalde]] is [[wondrous]] and [[testify]] again that Al Pacino [[belonging]] to the absolute top of American actors nowadays. --------------------------------------------- Result 5649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Nothin'. There ain't nothing' in Room 237. But you ain't got no business going' in there anyway. So stay out. You understand? Stay out."

Never has there been such a feat of psychological horror as this film achieves. This is the highest rated horror film of all and rightly so. Jack nicholson is a superb actor and this is one of the greatest performances in cinema.

Its about a family moving to an isolated and deserted hotel for 5 months over the winter. Then the father (Jack) becomes almost possessed by the horrors in the hotel.

Kubricks direction is nothing short then perfect. The tense tracking shots, agonising music, mystical messages and perplexing plot makes this the best horror film ever made.

Throughout the film there is constant references to danger, death and horror. Red is used in EVERY scene. Is the red purposely put in by Kubrick? Of course!.

This is a definitive Kubrick classic and this is the third of his films I have given 10/10. He is a perfectionist in his direction and you can see it in all his films. He loves to perplex his watchers in everyone of his films.

I will be talking about this film for months to come. It has infinite depth.

In conclusion, this is the cornerstone of horror and tension. A masterpiece of terror 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I read some gushing reviews here on IMDb and thought I would give this movie a look. Disappointed. On the plus side the male leads are good, and some interesting photography but as a whole this movie fails to convince. Seems to be full of its' own self indulgent importance in trying to say something meaningful but falls way short and all in all the picture is an unconvincing mess.

It is one of those films classified as a film noir which can be defined as follows:

"A film noir is marked by a mood of pessimism, fatalism, menace and cynical characters".

Well that is the story here: 3 losers stumble upon each other with their collective problems that include mental illness, alcoholism, laziness, indebtedness etc and together they conspire to kidnap a child and outwit each other.

Would have been a much better movie if the story was confined more to the kidnap instead of the character failings of the kidnappers. I thought the female lead was way out of her depth and came across as an amateur actress.

Whilst some good moments, I finished up feeling I had wasted my time.

4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can count (on one hand) the number of good movies starring Joe Don Baker. This is not one of them.

Interminable chase scenes, dim-witted dialogue, and terrible lapses in continuity made this movie a prime choice for getting the send-up on MST3K.

And that is the only way I was able to watch this... --------------------------------------------- Result 5652 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] First week of May, [[every]] [[year]] brings back the [[memories]] of the holocaust, through movies on televisions. [[Among]] [[many]] [[movies]] they showed, this was the one I had not [[seen]].

The story is about Hilter's [[life]] and how he [[came]] to power. It [[starts]] with his [[childhood]] and ends with his holding the top most [[position]] of power in [[Germany]].

The [[movie]] was [[earlier]] [[presented]] as a TV series and [[later]] converted into a movie format. [[Scottish]] [[actor]] Robert Carlyle plays [[Adolf]] Hitler with [[great]] guts, [[conviction]] and flare to give a [[real]] [[portrayal]] of this [[man]].

It is a good [[screenplay]] and narrative, that educates the [[audiences]] on the [[main]] [[events]] that lead Hitler into power, and [[also]] tries to show the [[probable]] psychological make up of Hitler. The [[movie]] is a biased [[viewpoint]] of the director Christian Duguay – who [[shows]] Hitler as a one-track, [[menacing]], [[angry]], and [[shouting]] [[person]] – who had such a strong hold on the [[Germans]] and people around him. Hitler is not [[shown]] as [[someone]] having charishma and [[attraction]], and there the [[movie]] fails to [[convince]] Hitler's portrayal.

Even [[though]] the [[venture]] was for [[TV]], all the [[ingredients]] of production are first [[class]] and at par with any [[main]] [[stream]] [[movie]]. The production [[value]], sets, [[costumes]], etc. were [[perfect]].

There is a [[lot]] of criticism of this [[movie]], in the authenticity about the [[historic]] [[events]] that is [[presented]]. But [[still]] the [[movie]] is gripping, [[every]] engaging and entertaining. [[Robert]] [[Carlyle]] [[overpowers]] and dominates the screen as no one [[else]] does. He is [[amazingly]] [[good]] – [[brilliant]]! I would have liked a more [[balanced]] [[view]] of Hitler's [[life]], because I [[think]], Hitler was able to bring out the [[dormant]] [[feelings]] of [[million]] of Germans and it is not only him who should be [[blamed]] for the holocaust. As I have [[told]] [[several]] times, that – very [[sadly]] - our [[society]] loves to garland or [[prosecute]] one [[person]], as a representative of the society's good or evil respectively. First week of May, [[any]] [[annum]] brings back the [[memory]] of the holocaust, through movies on televisions. [[In]] [[various]] [[film]] they showed, this was the one I had not [[watched]].

The story is about Hilter's [[vida]] and how he [[arrived]] to power. It [[commenced]] with his [[preschool]] and ends with his holding the top most [[posture]] of power in [[Germans]].

The [[cinematography]] was [[beforehand]] [[lodged]] as a TV series and [[then]] converted into a movie format. [[Plaid]] [[protagonist]] Robert Carlyle plays [[Rudolph]] Hitler with [[wondrous]] guts, [[condemnation]] and flare to give a [[actual]] [[depiction]] of this [[dude]].

It is a good [[script]] and narrative, that educates the [[listeners]] on the [[primary]] [[phenomena]] that lead Hitler into power, and [[similarly]] tries to show the [[apt]] psychological make up of Hitler. The [[films]] is a biased [[views]] of the director Christian Duguay – who [[illustrates]] Hitler as a one-track, [[threatening]], [[irritated]], and [[screaming]] [[persona]] – who had such a strong hold on the [[Germany]] and people around him. Hitler is not [[displayed]] as [[whoever]] having charishma and [[lure]], and there the [[cinematic]] fails to [[convincing]] Hitler's portrayal.

Even [[albeit]] the [[ventures]] was for [[TELEVISION]], all the [[element]] of production are first [[classroom]] and at par with any [[primary]] [[streams]] [[film]]. The production [[values]], sets, [[clothes]], etc. were [[perfection]].

There is a [[batch]] of criticism of this [[cinematography]], in the authenticity about the [[historical]] [[phenomena]] that is [[lodged]]. But [[however]] the [[movies]] is gripping, [[any]] engaging and entertaining. [[Roberta]] [[Carlisle]] [[defeats]] and dominates the screen as no one [[further]] does. He is [[oddly]] [[alright]] – [[impressive]]! I would have liked a more [[equilibrium]] [[opinion]] of Hitler's [[vida]], because I [[believe]], Hitler was able to bring out the [[idle]] [[sensations]] of [[trillion]] of Germans and it is not only him who should be [[blame]] for the holocaust. As I have [[said]] [[many]] times, that – very [[unfortunately]] - our [[societies]] loves to garland or [[prosecuting]] one [[somebody]], as a representative of the society's good or evil respectively. --------------------------------------------- Result 5653 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[In]] the [[tradition]] of G-Men, The [[House]] On 92nd Street, The Street With [[No]] Name, now comes The FBI [[Story]] one of those [[carefully]] [[supervised]] [[films]] that showed the [[Federal]] Bureau of [[Investigation]] in the best possible light. [[While]] it's 48 year [[director]] J. Edgar Hoover was alive, it would be showed in no other [[kind]] of light.

The book by Don Whitehead that this film is based on is a straight forward history of the bureau from it's founding in 1907 until roughly the time the film The FBI Story came out. It's important sometimes to remember there WAS an FBI before J. Edgar Hoover headed it. Some of that time is covered in the film as well.

But Warner Brothers was not making a documentary so to give the FBI flesh and blood the fictional character of John 'Chip' Hardesty was created. Hardesty as played by James Stewart is a career FBI man who graduated law school and rather than go in practice took a job with the bureau in the early twenties.

In real life the Bureau was headed by William J. Burns of the Burns Private Detective Agency. It was in fact a [[grossly]] political operation then as is showed in the film. Burns was on the periphery of the scandals of the Harding administration. When Hoover was appointed in 1924 to bring professional law enforcement techniques and rigorous standards of competence in, he did just that.

Through the Hardesty family which is Stewart and wife Vera Miles we see the history of the FBI unfold. In [[addition]] we see a lot of their personal family history which is completely [[integrated]] into the FBI's story itself. Stewart and Miles are most [[assuredly]] an all American couple. We follow the FBI through some of the cases Stewart is involved with, arresting Ku Klux Klan members, a plot to murder oil rich Indians, bringing down the notorious criminals of the thirties, their involvement with apprehending Nazi sympathizers in World War II and against Communist espionage in the Cold War.

There is a kind of prologue [[portion]] where Stewart tells a class at the FBI [[Academy]] before going into the history of the bureau as it intertwines with his own. That involves a bomb placed on an airline by a [[son]] who [[purchased]] a [[lot]] of [[life]] [[insurance]] on his [[mother]] before the [[flight]]. [[Nick]] [[Adams]] will give you the creeps as the [[perpetrator]] and the story is sadly relevant today.

Of course if The FBI Story were written and produced today it would reflect something different and not so all American. Still the FBI does have a story to tell and it is by no means a negative one.

The FBI Story is not one of Jimmy Stewart's best films, but it's the first one I ever saw with my favorite actor in it so it has a special fondness for me. If the whole FBI were made up Jimmy Stewarts, I'd feel a lot better about it. There's also a good performance by Murray Hamilton as his friend and fellow agent who is killed in a shootout with Baby Face Nelson.

Vera Miles didn't just marry Stewart, she in fact married the FBI as the film demonstrates. It's dated mostly, but still has a good and interesting story to tell. [[Across]] the [[traditions]] of G-Men, The [[Housing]] On 92nd Street, The Street With [[Nos]] Name, now comes The FBI [[Conte]] one of those [[scrupulously]] [[monitor]] [[movie]] that showed the [[Federally]] Bureau of [[Survey]] in the best possible light. [[Although]] it's 48 year [[headmaster]] J. Edgar Hoover was alive, it would be showed in no other [[sorts]] of light.

The book by Don Whitehead that this film is based on is a straight forward history of the bureau from it's founding in 1907 until roughly the time the film The FBI Story came out. It's important sometimes to remember there WAS an FBI before J. Edgar Hoover headed it. Some of that time is covered in the film as well.

But Warner Brothers was not making a documentary so to give the FBI flesh and blood the fictional character of John 'Chip' Hardesty was created. Hardesty as played by James Stewart is a career FBI man who graduated law school and rather than go in practice took a job with the bureau in the early twenties.

In real life the Bureau was headed by William J. Burns of the Burns Private Detective Agency. It was in fact a [[rudely]] political operation then as is showed in the film. Burns was on the periphery of the scandals of the Harding administration. When Hoover was appointed in 1924 to bring professional law enforcement techniques and rigorous standards of competence in, he did just that.

Through the Hardesty family which is Stewart and wife Vera Miles we see the history of the FBI unfold. In [[supplement]] we see a lot of their personal family history which is completely [[embedded]] into the FBI's story itself. Stewart and Miles are most [[indubitably]] an all American couple. We follow the FBI through some of the cases Stewart is involved with, arresting Ku Klux Klan members, a plot to murder oil rich Indians, bringing down the notorious criminals of the thirties, their involvement with apprehending Nazi sympathizers in World War II and against Communist espionage in the Cold War.

There is a kind of prologue [[parte]] where Stewart tells a class at the FBI [[Oscars]] before going into the history of the bureau as it intertwines with his own. That involves a bomb placed on an airline by a [[sons]] who [[buys]] a [[lots]] of [[vida]] [[security]] on his [[mum]] before the [[flights]]. [[Naik]] [[Adam]] will give you the creeps as the [[culprit]] and the story is sadly relevant today.

Of course if The FBI Story were written and produced today it would reflect something different and not so all American. Still the FBI does have a story to tell and it is by no means a negative one.

The FBI Story is not one of Jimmy Stewart's best films, but it's the first one I ever saw with my favorite actor in it so it has a special fondness for me. If the whole FBI were made up Jimmy Stewarts, I'd feel a lot better about it. There's also a good performance by Murray Hamilton as his friend and fellow agent who is killed in a shootout with Baby Face Nelson.

Vera Miles didn't just marry Stewart, she in fact married the FBI as the film demonstrates. It's dated mostly, but still has a good and interesting story to tell. --------------------------------------------- Result 5654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] At the start, this one is from [[England]], so, of course, I had 98 % chances that it will be intelligent and very good cinema. I never heard of this film before. From the minute I saw Helena Bonham-Carter, I [[said]] to myself : Oh! Here's comes the feminine version of My Left Foot. I was right, but I was also wrong. Wrong because the two movies are very differents. My Left Foot was a John Ford alike movie and this one is a Chaplin alike movie (not because this is funny, but Chaplin at that [[great]] sense of melodrama that brings tears to your eyes.) I was right because in 1990 [[handsome]] Daniel Day-Lewis [[turn]] a little bit ugly by playing an crippled person and he did it with a great [[sense]] of [[reality]]. Here, very [[beautiful]] Bonham-Carter did exactly the same thing, but with very feminine [[emotions]]. The [[story]] is well [[written]] and it's very [[intelligent]]. For me, miss Bonham-Carter gives one of the [[greatest]] woman's [[part]] of the 1990's, with Emily Lloyd in [[Breaking]] The Waves. Gee! And look at her eyes! She had the most [[beautiful]] eyes of [[cinema]] [[since]] Jobyna Ralston, Louise Brooks, [[Michele]] Morgan and Ava [[Gardner]]! She's also a [[true]] [[talent]], as seen on [[many]] other [[movies]]. See this one, you won't [[regret]] it! And a very [[fine]] job by Branagh too! At the start, this one is from [[Anglia]], so, of course, I had 98 % chances that it will be intelligent and very good cinema. I never heard of this film before. From the minute I saw Helena Bonham-Carter, I [[asserted]] to myself : Oh! Here's comes the feminine version of My Left Foot. I was right, but I was also wrong. Wrong because the two movies are very differents. My Left Foot was a John Ford alike movie and this one is a Chaplin alike movie (not because this is funny, but Chaplin at that [[wondrous]] sense of melodrama that brings tears to your eyes.) I was right because in 1990 [[fantastic]] Daniel Day-Lewis [[transforming]] a little bit ugly by playing an crippled person and he did it with a great [[feeling]] of [[realistic]]. Here, very [[handsome]] Bonham-Carter did exactly the same thing, but with very feminine [[sentiments]]. The [[saga]] is well [[wrote]] and it's very [[artful]]. For me, miss Bonham-Carter gives one of the [[bigger]] woman's [[parte]] of the 1990's, with Emily Lloyd in [[Violating]] The Waves. Gee! And look at her eyes! She had the most [[leggy]] eyes of [[movie]] [[because]] Jobyna Ralston, Louise Brooks, [[Micheal]] Morgan and Ava [[Gardiner]]! She's also a [[truthful]] [[talents]], as seen on [[several]] other [[movie]]. See this one, you won't [[sorrow]] it! And a very [[fined]] job by Branagh too! --------------------------------------------- Result 5655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] First of all, this plot is way overdone - [[girl]] [[wants]] to make it, [[everyone]] [[loves]] her, [[snobby]] [[girl]] intervenes, all looks lost, [[girl]] pulls through, [[everyone]] [[loves]] her again etc. [[Throw]] in the [[fitting]] in thing, an [[attractive]] [[male]] crushing on the heroine, plus single-parent [[troubles]] and it's so [[predictable]] that you can [[practically]] recite along with it.

Second of all, I really [[hate]] how they [[keep]] on dissing classical music. They send out the message that [[everyone]] involved in [[classical]] music is [[uptight]] and [[snobby]] and close-minded - in fact, I don't [[recall]] the quote exactly, but I [[remember]] at one point in the [[movie]], [[Holly]] says, "Why do they have to be so [[uptight]]...so [[classical]]?" It's [[really]] [[insulting]] how [[label]] classical music in this [[way]].

Third, I've went over it [[dozens]] of [[times]], but the only [[reason]] that I can [[think]] of for [[making]] this [[movie]] is to [[promote]] [[Britney]] [[Spears]]. there just isn't any point at all.

And [[oh]] [[yeah]], while the [[actress]] who portrayed [[Holly]] (I'm not sure whether that was really her [[singing]] or not) had a [[reasonably]] [[good]] [[voice]], it wasn't as [[amazing]] as they were making it out to be - [[especially]] when she was belting. She was oversupporting the whole [[time]].

1/10 [[stars]]. First of all, this plot is way overdone - [[women]] [[wanting]] to make it, [[anybody]] [[likes]] her, [[snobbish]] [[women]] intervenes, all looks lost, [[chica]] pulls through, [[somebody]] [[love]] her again etc. [[Toss]] in the [[fixture]] in thing, an [[tempting]] [[men]] crushing on the heroine, plus single-parent [[hassles]] and it's so [[foreseeable]] that you can [[almost]] recite along with it.

Second of all, I really [[hatred]] how they [[preserve]] on dissing classical music. They send out the message that [[anyone]] involved in [[classic]] music is [[taut]] and [[snobbish]] and close-minded - in fact, I don't [[recalling]] the quote exactly, but I [[reminisce]] at one point in the [[filmmaking]], [[Hol]] says, "Why do they have to be so [[jittery]]...so [[classic]]?" It's [[truthfully]] [[demeaning]] how [[etiquette]] classical music in this [[pathways]].

Third, I've went over it [[tens]] of [[time]], but the only [[motif]] that I can [[believing]] of for [[doing]] this [[filmmaking]] is to [[encourages]] [[Rihanna]] [[Spurs]]. there just isn't any point at all.

And [[ah]] [[yup]], while the [[actor]] who portrayed [[Holi]] (I'm not sure whether that was really her [[sing]] or not) had a [[sensibly]] [[buena]] [[vocal]], it wasn't as [[marvellous]] as they were making it out to be - [[notably]] when she was belting. She was oversupporting the whole [[period]].

1/10 [[celebrity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Always [[enjoy]] [[great]] [[films]] which [[deal]] with the super-natural and the deep thoughts of the [[Spiritual]] world. [[However]], this film just [[turned]] me off as far as its production and direction. There is nothing to go into deep discussion about what this story has to tell; all I can say is that it was a big [[waste]] of time and effort to put it on the big screen. The actors, namely: Mark Addy, Thomas Garrett, gave an outstanding performance in his native land [[England]], and we have seen him in "Still Standing" a TV Series. Heath Ledger, played the real [[wicked]] dude and we have recently viewed him in "Brokeback Mountain",'05, gave a great supporting role. Shannyn Sossaman, (Mara Sinclair), did a good job of seducing a priest from a church not recognized by any faith. Don't waste your [[time]], you will be [[sorry]]! Always [[enjoying]] [[sublime]] [[filmmaking]] which [[dealing]] with the super-natural and the deep thoughts of the [[Mental]] world. [[Conversely]], this film just [[transformed]] me off as far as its production and direction. There is nothing to go into deep discussion about what this story has to tell; all I can say is that it was a big [[wastes]] of time and effort to put it on the big screen. The actors, namely: Mark Addy, Thomas Garrett, gave an outstanding performance in his native land [[Uk]], and we have seen him in "Still Standing" a TV Series. Heath Ledger, played the real [[bad]] dude and we have recently viewed him in "Brokeback Mountain",'05, gave a great supporting role. Shannyn Sossaman, (Mara Sinclair), did a good job of seducing a priest from a church not recognized by any faith. Don't waste your [[times]], you will be [[dorry]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5657 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Creature [[Comforts]] in America should have been released on a different network, or at least been given the chance to have its full run of episodes. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Given that American audiences (seemingly) have the attention spans of a gnat when it comes to the humor that does not consist of profanity laced diatribes, or has a preoccupation with scatological functions (both sound and smells), shows like this will be few and far between. One of the main problems was that [[however]] [[brilliant]] it was, it was made for a rarefied audience who knew what to expect but was viewed by an audience and board rooms that did not have a clue at to what they were watching. Which is sad, but not unexpected. I would have liked to have seen at least three more seasons of this show even if it was produced for direct DVD release. The material and the interactions between the creatures were rich with sub context and there were other conversations just waiting to be had under the surface. But thanks to Political Correctness, such conversations take place only in my mind. Creature [[Amenities]] in America should have been released on a different network, or at least been given the chance to have its full run of episodes. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Given that American audiences (seemingly) have the attention spans of a gnat when it comes to the humor that does not consist of profanity laced diatribes, or has a preoccupation with scatological functions (both sound and smells), shows like this will be few and far between. One of the main problems was that [[instead]] [[sparkly]] it was, it was made for a rarefied audience who knew what to expect but was viewed by an audience and board rooms that did not have a clue at to what they were watching. Which is sad, but not unexpected. I would have liked to have seen at least three more seasons of this show even if it was produced for direct DVD release. The material and the interactions between the creatures were rich with sub context and there were other conversations just waiting to be had under the surface. But thanks to Political Correctness, such conversations take place only in my mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 5658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] Eyeliner was worn nearly 6000 years ago in Egypt. Really not that much of a stretch for it to be around in the 12th century. I also didn't realize the series flopped. There is a second season airing now isn't there? It is amazing to me when commentaries are made by those who are either ill-informed or don't watch a show at all. It is a waste of space on the boards and of other's time. The first show of the series was maybe a bit painful as the cast began to fall into place, but that is to be expected from any show. The remainder of the first season is [[excellent]]. I can hardly wait for the second season to begin in the United States. Eyeliner was worn nearly 6000 years ago in Egypt. Really not that much of a stretch for it to be around in the 12th century. I also didn't realize the series flopped. There is a second season airing now isn't there? It is amazing to me when commentaries are made by those who are either ill-informed or don't watch a show at all. It is a waste of space on the boards and of other's time. The first show of the series was maybe a bit painful as the cast began to fall into place, but that is to be expected from any show. The remainder of the first season is [[wondrous]]. I can hardly wait for the second season to begin in the United States. --------------------------------------------- Result 5659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love the movie, it was a very interesting fantasy movie b/c of the real meaning of family in it, the history of our country, the fun-filled action displayed in the movie. I watch time @ the top about 4 X's a week and I just love it! I wish that a sequel had of been made to see more of Susan's dad in the past and watching how Susan delt with her new baby sister and having no telephone, computers, gameboys or anything of the 21st century. I hope everyone else enjoyed the movie as much as I did I guess you could say I'm a time at the top fanatic and I don't mind. The lil boy in the movie Robert Lincoln Walker was simply adorible I wonder who he is and how old he is today. Does anyone know if he's played in over movies or TV shows? --------------------------------------------- Result 5660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved This Movie. When I saw it on Febuary 3rd I knew I had to buy It!!! It comes out to buy on July 24th!!! It has cool deaths scenes, Hot girls, great cast, good story , good acting. Great Slasher Film. the Movies is about some serial killer killing off four girls. SEE this movies --------------------------------------------- Result 5661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Brendan Filone is the absolute best character in The Sopranos. he died by getting shot in the eye. This was the best and well orchestrated scene ever in the Sopranos. Brendan Filone is too good. Brendan Filone shall haunt Uncle Junior in his dreams until Uncle Junior can't take it anymore. Brendan Filone is the best character. Brendan Filone was killed in episode # 3, Denial, anger, acceptance. But his legacy will live on forever. Brendan Filone is the best character on Sopranos! Brendan Filone is the best character ever. I recommend this show to anyone who likes Drama and wants to see good death scenes and great directing and producing, because it doesn't get any better than this series. Brendan Filone is the best. --------------------------------------------- Result 5662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This film is [[terrible]]. The [[story]] [[concerns]] a woman [[trying]] to find out what has [[happened]] to her sister. The film struggles with its identity, lurching from Noir/thriller to erotic, with elements of horror thrown in for good [[measure]]. The film has a very [[confused]] structure, for example with frequent use of flashbacks without [[tying]] these into the story. The plot is poorly developed, and the characterisation [[made]] it difficult to distinguish between who was who and the part they were playing. Some implausibilities [[exist]] in many [[films]], but the scene where the main protagonist willingly accompanies a virtual [[stranger]] to his [[home]], then agrees to go upstairs [[alone]] (to where he [[says]] she will [[find]] a [[phone]]), minus the [[gun]] she had brought with her, to [[call]] the [[Police]], was too [[hard]] to [[believe]]. Some of the [[cinematography]] is very poor: we were [[watching]] on a 42" TV so how [[anyone]] with a [[smaller]] set [[could]] [[work]] out what was happening in the scenes taken in [[almost]] complete [[darkness]] is [[beyond]] me. [[Overall]], a chaotic [[mess]]. This film is [[frightful]]. The [[history]] [[worries]] a woman [[attempts]] to find out what has [[transpired]] to her sister. The film struggles with its identity, lurching from Noir/thriller to erotic, with elements of horror thrown in for good [[measures]]. The film has a very [[disconcerted]] structure, for example with frequent use of flashbacks without [[tied]] these into the story. The plot is poorly developed, and the characterisation [[introduced]] it difficult to distinguish between who was who and the part they were playing. Some implausibilities [[existing]] in many [[filmmaking]], but the scene where the main protagonist willingly accompanies a virtual [[foreigner]] to his [[household]], then agrees to go upstairs [[lonely]] (to where he [[asserts]] she will [[found]] a [[telephone]]), minus the [[guns]] she had brought with her, to [[calling]] the [[Constable]], was too [[tough]] to [[reckon]]. Some of the [[filmmaking]] is very poor: we were [[staring]] on a 42" TV so how [[everybody]] with a [[fewer]] set [[wo]] [[cooperation]] out what was happening in the scenes taken in [[virtually]] complete [[obscurity]] is [[afterlife]] me. [[Comprehensive]], a chaotic [[chaos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I don't know if the [[problem]] I had with this movie is that I was not able to capture the way [[movies]] were done in the past but I believe that this one did not miss to make [[use]] of any of the the [[fashionable]] [[conventions]] available in the 40s to make a [[film]]. If you don't have [[anything]] [[better]] to do my advise is not to watch this movie but to read a book or to go out for a walk. I don't know if the [[difficulty]] I had with this movie is that I was not able to capture the way [[movie]] were done in the past but I believe that this one did not miss to make [[utilizes]] of any of the the [[chic]] [[pacts]] available in the 40s to make a [[filmmaking]]. If you don't have [[somethings]] [[optimum]] to do my advise is not to watch this movie but to read a book or to go out for a walk. --------------------------------------------- Result 5664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] A study in [[bad]]. [[Bad]] acting, [[bad]] [[music]], bad [[screenplay]], bad editing, bad direction and a [[bad]] [[idea]]. [[Pieces]] of schlock don't come any cheesier or unintentionally funnier than this... thing. By the end of the "[[movie]]", you are [[left]] [[wondering]] why did they [[bother]] in the [[first]] place. Poor Malcolm McDowell, was he short of [[cash]] or something? Still [[thinking]] of seeing this? *SPOILERS AHOY*: If you haven't [[died]] of laughter in the first thirty minutes, by the [[time]] you'll [[see]] the cyborg-populated [[town]] named "Cytown", you will. [[Avoid]] this, my movie-loving [[friends]]. [[Avoid]]. A study in [[naughty]]. [[Rotten]] acting, [[rotten]] [[musica]], bad [[scenarios]], bad editing, bad direction and a [[rotten]] [[think]]. [[Segments]] of schlock don't come any cheesier or unintentionally funnier than this... thing. By the end of the "[[flick]]", you are [[exited]] [[asking]] why did they [[irritate]] in the [[fiirst]] place. Poor Malcolm McDowell, was he short of [[moneys]] or something? Still [[think]] of seeing this? *SPOILERS AHOY*: If you haven't [[die]] of laughter in the first thirty minutes, by the [[moment]] you'll [[behold]] the cyborg-populated [[urban]] named "Cytown", you will. [[Avert]] this, my movie-loving [[amigos]]. [[Evade]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Bette Davis' cockney accent in this [[film]] is [[absolutely]] [[appalling]]. I [[totally]] [[understand]] that [[Americans]] and other nationalities mightn't [[realise]] this and that's fine; but [[believe]] me, it's about half as good as [[Dick]] Van Dyke's cockney [[accent]] in Mary Poppins, and that was a right [[load]] of [[old]] pony ([[slipped]] into London vernacular there - [[many]] apologies).

The [[remarkable]] [[thing]] to me is that the [[strange]] accents and [[exaggerated]] acting [[styles]] don't [[detract]] from the films' power. Of [[Human]] [[Bondage]] is a [[fascinating]] [[piece]] of cinema [[despite]] its superficial faults. It also has to be viewed in perspective. The technical and cultural limitations of film making at the time have to be appreciated, and given those limitations John Cromwell does a very good job directing the [[camera]] and [[allowing]] the narrative to [[develop]] cinematically [[rather]] than solely via the mannered acting and stilted dialogue. A fine example of his skillful direction is the scene set at Victoria Station. It is beautifully conceived, shot and edited. Note too the stark shots of the prostrate Mildred towards the end of the film; they owe more to the early days of artistic film making than the sanitised, formulaic world of the studio that was about to dominate.

The themes of the film are universally familiar and [[compelling]] ones: sexual obsession, unrequited love, scorned passion, self-loathing, manipulative relationships, social divides and youthful folly. [[Though]] the dialogue is often rather hackneyed, the difficult task of portraying these themes and the inner lives of the characters is tackled well albeit in a low-key way. Some of the scenes of obsession and emotional rejection are uncomfortable to watch but the [[story]] doesn't descend into cliché; we're aware that the characters (even the poisonous Mildred) are both victims and [[perpetrators]], and that their actions are motivated by their misunderstanding of each others feelings as well as by wilful selfishness. Whilst naive in style the story [[reaches]] to the [[complex]] [[heart]] of the human [[condition]] and the mannered nature of the acting and the [[occasionally]] grating exchanges don't [[diminish]] the veracity of the [[work]].

Of [[Human]] [[Bondage]] was one of the [[films]] that [[got]] [[Bette]] [[Davis]] noticed in Hollywood and whilst watching it you are conscious of being witness at the birth of a [[celebrated]] [[career]]. Her unconventional beauty and screen charisma (no one flounced or did [[disdain]] [[quite]] like Ms Davis) grab your attention from her first appearance. Whilst hers is definitely the memorable performance in the film, Leslie Howard is also excellent as the sensitive and fragile student Philip Carey. They are a good combination, though, why oh why didn't he help her with that terrible, terrible accent!? Bette Davis' cockney accent in this [[cinematic]] is [[perfectly]] [[harrowing]]. I [[altogether]] [[understands]] that [[Us]] and other nationalities mightn't [[realize]] this and that's fine; but [[believing]] me, it's about half as good as [[Penis]] Van Dyke's cockney [[focus]] in Mary Poppins, and that was a right [[loads]] of [[elderly]] pony ([[dipped]] into London vernacular there - [[myriad]] apologies).

The [[spectacular]] [[stuff]] to me is that the [[bizarre]] accents and [[overstated]] acting [[style]] don't [[divert]] from the films' power. Of [[Mankind]] [[Slavery]] is a [[exciting]] [[slice]] of cinema [[while]] its superficial faults. It also has to be viewed in perspective. The technical and cultural limitations of film making at the time have to be appreciated, and given those limitations John Cromwell does a very good job directing the [[cameras]] and [[permit]] the narrative to [[prepare]] cinematically [[somewhat]] than solely via the mannered acting and stilted dialogue. A fine example of his skillful direction is the scene set at Victoria Station. It is beautifully conceived, shot and edited. Note too the stark shots of the prostrate Mildred towards the end of the film; they owe more to the early days of artistic film making than the sanitised, formulaic world of the studio that was about to dominate.

The themes of the film are universally familiar and [[persuasive]] ones: sexual obsession, unrequited love, scorned passion, self-loathing, manipulative relationships, social divides and youthful folly. [[If]] the dialogue is often rather hackneyed, the difficult task of portraying these themes and the inner lives of the characters is tackled well albeit in a low-key way. Some of the scenes of obsession and emotional rejection are uncomfortable to watch but the [[history]] doesn't descend into cliché; we're aware that the characters (even the poisonous Mildred) are both victims and [[authors]], and that their actions are motivated by their misunderstanding of each others feelings as well as by wilful selfishness. Whilst naive in style the story [[attained]] to the [[complicate]] [[heartland]] of the human [[stipulation]] and the mannered nature of the acting and the [[intermittently]] grating exchanges don't [[lowered]] the veracity of the [[works]].

Of [[Humans]] [[Slave]] was one of the [[cinematography]] that [[ai]] [[Midler]] [[Davies]] noticed in Hollywood and whilst watching it you are conscious of being witness at the birth of a [[commemorated]] [[occupations]]. Her unconventional beauty and screen charisma (no one flounced or did [[contempt]] [[perfectly]] like Ms Davis) grab your attention from her first appearance. Whilst hers is definitely the memorable performance in the film, Leslie Howard is also excellent as the sensitive and fragile student Philip Carey. They are a good combination, though, why oh why didn't he help her with that terrible, terrible accent!? --------------------------------------------- Result 5666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] If you [[liked]] watching Mel Gibson in Million [[Dollar]] Hotel then you [[might]] enjoy watching Burt Reynolds in [[yet]] another [[film]] so bad it [[could]] never be distributed. I can only [[attest]] to the DVD version so [[maybe]] the VHS version is [[better]] quality wise but the movies night and dark scenes have been so poorly [[done]] that everythings seems red. I first thought my DVD players was messed up. It wasn't. [[If]] you insist on watching it I recommend you adjust the color on your TV until it is black and white. If you don't you will never be able to get through the film. If you do it will [[simply]] [[remind]] you of a [[poor]] film students attempt to revist the style of Pulp Fiction. If you [[enjoyed]] watching Mel Gibson in Million [[Dollars]] Hotel then you [[probability]] enjoy watching Burt Reynolds in [[even]] another [[filmmaking]] so bad it [[did]] never be distributed. I can only [[testifies]] to the DVD version so [[conceivably]] the VHS version is [[best]] quality wise but the movies night and dark scenes have been so poorly [[played]] that everythings seems red. I first thought my DVD players was messed up. It wasn't. [[Though]] you insist on watching it I recommend you adjust the color on your TV until it is black and white. If you don't you will never be able to get through the film. If you do it will [[exclusively]] [[remembered]] you of a [[poorest]] film students attempt to revist the style of Pulp Fiction. --------------------------------------------- Result 5667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This might [[contain]] a [[spoiler]], so beware.

If it had been 200,000 thousand or two [[million]] people, does it make a [[difference]]? Sometimes I [[get]] so [[angry]] at the [[apparent]] [[apathy]] of a [[small]] number of (strangely very [[LOUD]]) [[Americans]], but I have to [[remember]] that [[many]] people here in the [[US]] were not [[bred]] or raised to [[care]] about [[anything]] outside of their [[comfort]] [[zone]]. [[God]] Help us for what we have done. after the relative [[ease]] of what we did to the native Americans, and the [[indifference]] to the horrors of enslaving a race, you [[would]] [[think]] we'd have [[grown]] hearts and souls in the [[late]] 60's and early 70's. But now I see it is OK as [[long]] as our [[ends]] are justified to only us. How then, can we look at any other dictator and [[horrible]] government and [[think]] we are somehow doing good to [[impose]] our will? We are [[contradictory]] and hypocritical, and I am ashamed for this. I feel sorrow for the people affected. They deserve justice and their homes back. If this was done in my name as an American for my supposed safety, I don't [[want]] it. I denounce these actions, and hope our global community [[understands]] that [[many]] [[Americans]] [[believe]] the American [[government]] is a [[runaway]] train of deceit. No one is above the law. I [[want]] my [[country]] back, and so do the Chagos Islanders. Regardless of what people post from the anonymity of their computers, no one can in their heart deny that they would be unwilling to give up their birthplace for some bombs and heliports. We can't stand to be stuck in traffic, let alone forcibly and unjustly removed from our homes. 'Not one of us, Brit and American [[alike]] forget what goes around comes around. Don't [[buy]] into the fallacy that a simpler, more natural civilization is somehow less worthy of having their rights observed, and preserved - when we turn our backs on the basic human rights and dignities of 2000, we turn away from the basic human rights and dignities of all men. This might [[contained]] a [[baffle]], so beware.

If it had been 200,000 thousand or two [[trillion]] people, does it make a [[dispute]]? Sometimes I [[got]] so [[furious]] at the [[blatant]] [[indifference]] of a [[miniscule]] number of (strangely very [[ROWDY]]) [[Us]], but I have to [[remind]] that [[innumerable]] people here in the [[USA]] were not [[reared]] or raised to [[healthcare]] about [[somethings]] outside of their [[solace]] [[areas]]. [[Lawd]] Help us for what we have done. after the relative [[eased]] of what we did to the native Americans, and the [[carelessness]] to the horrors of enslaving a race, you [[ought]] [[thinking]] we'd have [[cultivated]] hearts and souls in the [[tardy]] 60's and early 70's. But now I see it is OK as [[longer]] as our [[terminates]] are justified to only us. How then, can we look at any other dictator and [[horrendous]] government and [[ideas]] we are somehow doing good to [[imposed]] our will? We are [[incompatible]] and hypocritical, and I am ashamed for this. I feel sorrow for the people affected. They deserve justice and their homes back. If this was done in my name as an American for my supposed safety, I don't [[wanting]] it. I denounce these actions, and hope our global community [[comprises]] that [[innumerable]] [[Us]] [[believing]] the American [[goverment]] is a [[rampant]] train of deceit. No one is above the law. I [[wantto]] my [[nation]] back, and so do the Chagos Islanders. Regardless of what people post from the anonymity of their computers, no one can in their heart deny that they would be unwilling to give up their birthplace for some bombs and heliports. We can't stand to be stuck in traffic, let alone forcibly and unjustly removed from our homes. 'Not one of us, Brit and American [[equally]] forget what goes around comes around. Don't [[purchased]] into the fallacy that a simpler, more natural civilization is somehow less worthy of having their rights observed, and preserved - when we turn our backs on the basic human rights and dignities of 2000, we turn away from the basic human rights and dignities of all men. --------------------------------------------- Result 5668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the few best films of all time. The change from Black and white to colour for the Heaven and Earth Sequences was Directorial excellence.

The Plot is extremely clever, the complete film leaves you overwhelmed by all of the human emotions, and although a war film it doesn't discriminate. I must have seen this film more times than any other, and I never tire of it. It is a film that makes you question your own mortality and beliefs on what happens after our demise. --------------------------------------------- Result 5669 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Ossessione, adapted loosely (or if it is as loose or close to the version I saw of James M. Cain's The Postman Always Rings Twice with Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange I can't be certain) by [[first]] time director Luchino Visconti, is no less [[outstanding]] with usage of mis-en-scene, music (both diegetic and non-diegetic), and the acting. I didn't know what to [[expect]] Visconti to do in his approach to the material, after seeing La Terra Trema and seeing how sometimes his political motivations snuck in a little bit. But this is a [[totally]] character and emotional based drama, bordering on melodrama (however, without the conventions that [[bog]] down lesser ones), and with the style in the [[finest]] path of the budding film-noir movement, Visconti creates a [[debut]] that's as involving as any other neo-realist film. Neo-realism, by the way, could rightfully be claimed as this being a forefather (along with De Sica's The Children Are Watching Us), which that would take shape after the war. Although love and romance is more in play here than in some of the more famous neo-realist efforts, it's dealt with in a bare-bones storytelling fashion, and it's laced with other familiar themes in neo-realism (the lower-class, death, desperation).

Aside from the story, which is simply as it is described on this site, the artistry with which Visconti [[captures]] the images, and then layers them with objects (a shawl over Gino Costa's profile when in guilt), shadows and [[darkness]] that tend to overcome many of the later scenes in the film (usually over Gian and Giovanna), and the feel of the Italian streets in many of the exterior scenes. Domenico Scala and Aldo Tonti (who would lens some of Rossellini and Fellini's films) help in envisioning the look of Ossessione, which is usually moving in on a character, then pausing to read as much emotion on their faces, their voices and mannerisms lovely and ugly, sad and dark and romantic. I think I've just scratched the surface on how [[effective]] it was that the film itself was moving me along, even as I was in fear of the futures of the two leads. The two leads (Massimo Girotti and Clara Calamai) portray all the compelling, truthful, and near-operatic emotions, and the key supporting actors are also without their attributes.

It's a brilliant, crushing adaptation, and it points as a striking signpost of what was to come for Visconti in his career. Ossessione, adapted loosely (or if it is as loose or close to the version I saw of James M. Cain's The Postman Always Rings Twice with Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange I can't be certain) by [[frst]] time director Luchino Visconti, is no less [[unresolved]] with usage of mis-en-scene, music (both diegetic and non-diegetic), and the acting. I didn't know what to [[waits]] Visconti to do in his approach to the material, after seeing La Terra Trema and seeing how sometimes his political motivations snuck in a little bit. But this is a [[entirely]] character and emotional based drama, bordering on melodrama (however, without the conventions that [[marshes]] down lesser ones), and with the style in the [[greatest]] path of the budding film-noir movement, Visconti creates a [[infancy]] that's as involving as any other neo-realist film. Neo-realism, by the way, could rightfully be claimed as this being a forefather (along with De Sica's The Children Are Watching Us), which that would take shape after the war. Although love and romance is more in play here than in some of the more famous neo-realist efforts, it's dealt with in a bare-bones storytelling fashion, and it's laced with other familiar themes in neo-realism (the lower-class, death, desperation).

Aside from the story, which is simply as it is described on this site, the artistry with which Visconti [[apprehended]] the images, and then layers them with objects (a shawl over Gino Costa's profile when in guilt), shadows and [[dark]] that tend to overcome many of the later scenes in the film (usually over Gian and Giovanna), and the feel of the Italian streets in many of the exterior scenes. Domenico Scala and Aldo Tonti (who would lens some of Rossellini and Fellini's films) help in envisioning the look of Ossessione, which is usually moving in on a character, then pausing to read as much emotion on their faces, their voices and mannerisms lovely and ugly, sad and dark and romantic. I think I've just scratched the surface on how [[effectiveness]] it was that the film itself was moving me along, even as I was in fear of the futures of the two leads. The two leads (Massimo Girotti and Clara Calamai) portray all the compelling, truthful, and near-operatic emotions, and the key supporting actors are also without their attributes.

It's a brilliant, crushing adaptation, and it points as a striking signpost of what was to come for Visconti in his career. --------------------------------------------- Result 5670 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I'm [[disappointed]] that Reiser (who wrote the film) [[felt]] the need to use so much profanity for no reason whatsoever. [[Maybe]] that's his idea of "adult" films, plenty of nasty words with bathroom humor thrown in? I [[thought]] better of him and [[think]] less of him for this movie.

Falk's acting and some moments of humor as well as some possibly important [[themes]] are what made me [[give]] it such a [[high]] [[rating]].

This might be a good movie for adult children to watch and laugh over about their own folks and their foibles. But the lack of consideration for audience families seriously detriments what could have been a family film but fails. [[Certainly]] not worth spending [[money]] on, though it might be worth a watch for free on television. I'm [[disillusioned]] that Reiser (who wrote the film) [[smelled]] the need to use so much profanity for no reason whatsoever. [[Presumably]] that's his idea of "adult" films, plenty of nasty words with bathroom humor thrown in? I [[brainchild]] better of him and [[thought]] less of him for this movie.

Falk's acting and some moments of humor as well as some possibly important [[item]] are what made me [[confer]] it such a [[higher]] [[ratings]].

This might be a good movie for adult children to watch and laugh over about their own folks and their foibles. But the lack of consideration for audience families seriously detriments what could have been a family film but fails. [[Definitely]] not worth spending [[moneys]] on, though it might be worth a watch for free on television. --------------------------------------------- Result 5671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[really]] surprised with this [[movie]]. Going in to the [[sneak]] preview, knowing [[nothing]] about the [[movie]] except for the one [[trailer]] I'd seen, I thought it was [[going]] to be a Dude Where's My [[Car]] kind of crap fest. I was [[expecting]] bad sex jokes and farting and a pathetic lead character who will get laid in the end because that's just how movies work. [[Instead]] I [[got]] a smart, [[surprisingly]] [[original]] [[movie]] about a decent, average guy who just never had sex.

[[Yes]], the film is chock full o' sex jokes and vulgarity and the occasional hey-look-a-nipple!, but it's done much in the spirit of Bad Santa rather than Sorority Boys. All the characters are people you probably know in real life, redeemable friends who are just trying to hook a brother up and live their lives.

I went in thinking this [[movie]] was going to be total crap, and I was very [[surprised]]. [[Yea]], it's pretty over the top (c'mon, it's a movie about a 40 year old virgin!), but it's very smartly done.

In the end, you're really pulling for this guy to get laid, which says a lot about the movie because honestly, did you really care if Ashton Kutcher found his car or not? I was [[genuinely]] surprised with this [[films]]. Going in to the [[infiltrate]] preview, knowing [[anything]] about the [[cinema]] except for the one [[caravan]] I'd seen, I thought it was [[gonna]] to be a Dude Where's My [[Cars]] kind of crap fest. I was [[expects]] bad sex jokes and farting and a pathetic lead character who will get laid in the end because that's just how movies work. [[Alternatively]] I [[ai]] a smart, [[oddly]] [[initial]] [[kino]] about a decent, average guy who just never had sex.

[[Yeah]], the film is chock full o' sex jokes and vulgarity and the occasional hey-look-a-nipple!, but it's done much in the spirit of Bad Santa rather than Sorority Boys. All the characters are people you probably know in real life, redeemable friends who are just trying to hook a brother up and live their lives.

I went in thinking this [[kino]] was going to be total crap, and I was very [[astounded]]. [[Yup]], it's pretty over the top (c'mon, it's a movie about a 40 year old virgin!), but it's very smartly done.

In the end, you're really pulling for this guy to get laid, which says a lot about the movie because honestly, did you really care if Ashton Kutcher found his car or not? --------------------------------------------- Result 5672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I had mixed feelings for "Les Valseuses" (1974) written and directed by Bertrand Blier when I [[started]] watching it but I [[ended]] up liking it. I [[would]] not call it [[vulgar]] ("[[Dumb]] and Dumber" is vulgar, "The [[Sweetest]] [[Thing]]" is both [[vulgar]] and unforgivably [[stupid]]); I [[would]] call it [[shocking]] and offensive. I can [[understand]] why [[many]] [[viewers]], [[especially]], the [[females]] [[would]] not [[like]] or [[even]] [[hate]] it. It is the epitome of misogyny (or so it [[seems]]), and the [[way]] two antiheroes [[treat]] [[every]] [[woman]] they'd meet [[seems]] [[unspeakable]]. But the more I [[think]] of it the more I realize that it [[somehow]] [[comes]] off as a [[delightful]] [[little]] gem. I am fascinated how Blier was [[able]] to get away with it. The movie is very entertaining and [[highly]] enjoyable: it is well [[written]], the acting by all is first - [[class]], and the [[music]] is sweet and [[melancholic]]. Actually, when I [[think]] of it, two [[buddies]] had [[done]] [[something]] good to the [[women]] they [[came]] across to: they [[prepared]] a [[woman]] in the train (the lovely, [[docile]] blonde [[Brigitte]] Fossey who [[started]] her [[movie]] career with one of the most [[impressive]] debuts in René Clément's "[[Forbidden]] Games"(1952) at age 6) for the [[meeting]] with her husband whom she had not [[seen]] for two [[months]]; they [[found]] a man who was [[finally]] able to [[get]] a frigid Marie-Ange (Miou-Miou) exited and [[satisfied]]; they enlightened and educated young and very [[willing]] [[Isabelle]] Huppert (in one of her early screen appearances.) Their encounter with [[Jeanne]] [[Moreau]] elevates this [[comedy]] to the [[tragic]] [[level]]. [[In]] short, I am not sure I'd like to meet Gérard Depardieu's Jean-Claude and [[Patrick]] Dewaere's Pierrot in [[real]] [[life]] and [[invite]] them over for [[dinner]] but I had a [[good]] time watching the [[movie]] and two hours [[almost]] [[flew]] - it was never [[boring]]. I had mixed feelings for "Les Valseuses" (1974) written and directed by Bertrand Blier when I [[began]] watching it but I [[finished]] up liking it. I [[could]] not call it [[skanky]] ("[[Dolt]] and Dumber" is vulgar, "The [[Loveliest]] [[Stuff]]" is both [[crass]] and unforgivably [[idiotic]]); I [[could]] call it [[harrowing]] and offensive. I can [[comprehend]] why [[multiple]] [[audiences]], [[particularly]], the [[female]] [[should]] not [[loves]] or [[yet]] [[hating]] it. It is the epitome of misogyny (or so it [[seem]]), and the [[pathway]] two antiheroes [[addressing]] [[all]] [[female]] they'd meet [[appears]] [[untold]]. But the more I [[reckon]] of it the more I realize that it [[somewhere]] [[occurs]] off as a [[nice]] [[scant]] gem. I am fascinated how Blier was [[capable]] to get away with it. The movie is very entertaining and [[heavily]] enjoyable: it is well [[wrote]], the acting by all is first - [[classroom]], and the [[musician]] is sweet and [[mournful]]. Actually, when I [[thought]] of it, two [[guys]] had [[completed]] [[anything]] good to the [[woman]] they [[arrived]] across to: they [[authored]] a [[women]] in the train (the lovely, [[obedient]] blonde [[Birgit]] Fossey who [[begun]] her [[cinema]] career with one of the most [[brilliant]] debuts in René Clément's "[[Prohibiting]] Games"(1952) at age 6) for the [[meetings]] with her husband whom she had not [[saw]] for two [[month]]; they [[discoveries]] a man who was [[eventually]] able to [[gets]] a frigid Marie-Ange (Miou-Miou) exited and [[persuaded]]; they enlightened and educated young and very [[desirous]] [[Isabel]] Huppert (in one of her early screen appearances.) Their encounter with [[Jannet]] [[Moro]] elevates this [[charade]] to the [[disastrous]] [[plano]]. [[For]] short, I am not sure I'd like to meet Gérard Depardieu's Jean-Claude and [[Patricio]] Dewaere's Pierrot in [[genuine]] [[iife]] and [[urging]] them over for [[luncheons]] but I had a [[alright]] time watching the [[cinematography]] and two hours [[nearly]] [[hovered]] - it was never [[bored]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was very unimpressed with Cinderella 2 and Jungle [[Book]] 2, but this is [[possibly]] worse than both titles. First of all, I didn't like the animation, very Saturday-morning-cartoon, only worse in some scenes. I [[liked]] some of the characters, [[namely]] Thunderbolt and [[Patch]], but the other [[characters]], like Cruella were mediocre. Cruella was [[truly]] villainous in the [[original]], but she lost her quality in the sequel. What she said was [[nothing]] at all to write [[home]] about and her animation was kind of ugly. Also her [[artist]] companion [[Lars]] was a [[joke]] to be honest with you, and Roger [[seemed]] to have quit [[smoking]] overnight. The [[voice]] talents were very good [[though]] [[especially]] [[Barry]] Bostwick as Thunderbolt, with the [[exception]] of [[Jodi]] Benson, the accent [[ruined]] it for me. There were some [[good]] [[moments]], but the [[whole]] plot [[seemed]] bloated for me, and [[highly]] suggestive of an [[extended]] TV episode. All in all, a [[hugely]] [[disappointing]] sequel to the most [[memorable]] of the 60s Disney [[movies]] along with Jungle Book. Sorry, I can only [[give]] this a 3/10, it just wasn't my [[cup]] of tea. Bethany [[Cox]] I was very unimpressed with Cinderella 2 and Jungle [[Cookbook]] 2, but this is [[maybe]] worse than both titles. First of all, I didn't like the animation, very Saturday-morning-cartoon, only worse in some scenes. I [[enjoyed]] some of the characters, [[particularly]] Thunderbolt and [[Stopgap]], but the other [[character]], like Cruella were mediocre. Cruella was [[honestly]] villainous in the [[preliminary]], but she lost her quality in the sequel. What she said was [[none]] at all to write [[domicile]] about and her animation was kind of ugly. Also her [[performer]] companion [[Jorgen]] was a [[joking]] to be honest with you, and Roger [[sounded]] to have quit [[smokers]] overnight. The [[vocals]] talents were very good [[despite]] [[notably]] [[Pari]] Bostwick as Thunderbolt, with the [[exceptions]] of [[Jodie]] Benson, the accent [[obliterated]] it for me. There were some [[alright]] [[times]], but the [[ensemble]] plot [[sounded]] bloated for me, and [[exceptionally]] suggestive of an [[prolonged]] TV episode. All in all, a [[eminently]] [[frustrating]] sequel to the most [[unforgettable]] of the 60s Disney [[kino]] along with Jungle Book. Sorry, I can only [[confer]] this a 3/10, it just wasn't my [[goblet]] of tea. Bethany [[Cocos]] --------------------------------------------- Result 5674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I think if you were to [[ask]] most JW's whether they expect a miracle cure because of their faith, you will [[find]] they do not. I [[know]] I do not. What you will find instead is that they believe the [[promises]] Christ made of a resurrection. [[So]], even even if the [[worst]] were to happen and we [[die]] while holding onto our integrity, [[Jehovah]] can, and will correct this.

It really [[gets]] down to a [[simple]] question: is God real to you or is this all just make [[believe]]? If he is real, and you trust him, you will follow his directions no matter what the short term outcome may be.

I had a heart attack about a year and a half ago. One in my family was horrified when she saw the words "NO BLOOD" written in large letters over my chart. I reasoned with her that if I were in a position that only a blood transfusion would save my life, would that be a good time to anger the only one could return me to life when the time came? She didn't get it -- God just isn't real enough to her. Too bad. I wish she could have the comfort a strong faith gives. I think if you were to [[asked]] most JW's whether they expect a miracle cure because of their faith, you will [[unearthed]] they do not. I [[savoir]] I do not. What you will find instead is that they believe the [[pledging]] Christ made of a resurrection. [[Accordingly]], even even if the [[lousiest]] were to happen and we [[decease]] while holding onto our integrity, [[Yahweh]] can, and will correct this.

It really [[got]] down to a [[uncomplicated]] question: is God real to you or is this all just make [[believing]]? If he is real, and you trust him, you will follow his directions no matter what the short term outcome may be.

I had a heart attack about a year and a half ago. One in my family was horrified when she saw the words "NO BLOOD" written in large letters over my chart. I reasoned with her that if I were in a position that only a blood transfusion would save my life, would that be a good time to anger the only one could return me to life when the time came? She didn't get it -- God just isn't real enough to her. Too bad. I wish she could have the comfort a strong faith gives. --------------------------------------------- Result 5675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] may seem scary on [[commercials]], but the [[actual]] [[movie]] was a reason to [[vomit]]. This is a below below average, ([[even]] lower than that) and has no [[plot]]. I mean every [[house]] can make you feel [[scared]] and sure, a [[dead]] Japanese [[woman]] would scare the [[poop]] out of you, but so what? Make a [[movie]] that [[would]] [[appeal]] to watchers and not just [[show]] [[images]] of [[scared]] people and some hair (dead Japanese woman). Can you say "[[horrible]] rip-off of Samara (The Ring)"? Don't [[get]] me [[started]] with the "dead [[child]]". Not [[even]] that scary! [[So]] what? He has a cat and he can imitate it, big [[freaking]] [[deal]]! [[Just]] bury the poor zombies and save some lives that have the [[potential]] of being harmed by the [[Grudge]]! 1/10! Yuck! >.< This [[filmmaking]] may seem scary on [[spots]], but the [[real]] [[filmmaking]] was a reason to [[puked]]. This is a below below average, ([[yet]] lower than that) and has no [[intrigue]]. I mean every [[households]] can make you feel [[startled]] and sure, a [[deaths]] Japanese [[wife]] would scare the [[chit]] out of you, but so what? Make a [[filmmaking]] that [[could]] [[appealing]] to watchers and not just [[illustrates]] [[photography]] of [[afraid]] people and some hair (dead Japanese woman). Can you say "[[terrible]] rip-off of Samara (The Ring)"? Don't [[obtain]] me [[beginning]] with the "dead [[children]]". Not [[yet]] that scary! [[Consequently]] what? He has a cat and he can imitate it, big [[goddamn]] [[treat]]! [[Jen]] bury the poor zombies and save some lives that have the [[possibilities]] of being harmed by the [[Rancour]]! 1/10! Yuck! >.< --------------------------------------------- Result 5676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] This is one very [[confusing]] movie. The film is very hard to follow and the plot just didn't seem to make any sense. The Fury of the Wolfman was made in Spain and I think that when any film is dubbed from one language to another, it doesn't translate exactly as it was first meant. Maybe this is part of the problem but I doubt if it can account for all the problems with this film. The dubbing is pretty bad and the voices don't match the characters very well. The scenes are [[choppy]], there is an array of strange and [[irrelevant]] characters that do little more than confuse the viewer even more. What I did like about this film was the look of the wolfman himself and the scenes where he attacks. Now if they could have put it all together and had it make some sense, they might have had something. Don't waste your time on this one. This is one very [[disconcerting]] movie. The film is very hard to follow and the plot just didn't seem to make any sense. The Fury of the Wolfman was made in Spain and I think that when any film is dubbed from one language to another, it doesn't translate exactly as it was first meant. Maybe this is part of the problem but I doubt if it can account for all the problems with this film. The dubbing is pretty bad and the voices don't match the characters very well. The scenes are [[tumultuous]], there is an array of strange and [[immaterial]] characters that do little more than confuse the viewer even more. What I did like about this film was the look of the wolfman himself and the scenes where he attacks. Now if they could have put it all together and had it make some sense, they might have had something. Don't waste your time on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 5677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] No [[laughs]] whatsoever. Yes, I [[watched]] this entire train [[wreck]] but only so that I wouldn't later wonder if Cleese had come to his senses in the latter part. (No, he had not.)

This may be historically interesting to you youngsters out there, to see that British "[[humor]]" [[included]] [[black]] "[[jokes]]" like these, thirty years ago.

What amazes me even more [[though]], is to read the other reviewers' comments, which acknowledge this isn't very good, yet then turn around and give it high [[votes]]. [[If]] the [[vast]] majority of the comedies that you have seen are even much worse than this one, then I certainly [[pity]] your torturous existences.

The humor level of this show [[appears]] [[aimed]] at little [[kids]], yet the subject [[matter]] does not. So who is this for? People who enjoy repeated & drawn-out double-takes, pratfalls, drug jokes (interesting only as a short trip back to '77), and other "low" humor. The Three [[Stooges]] are still funny, and were to me as a [[kid]], too. THEY [[exerted]] some effort in making jokes work. This however is sloughed off schlock. I fear that it IS the end of civilization, if this stuff really is accepted as worthwhile. Next you'll be telling me that tabloid TV is popular. :( No [[smiling]] whatsoever. Yes, I [[observed]] this entire train [[shipwreck]] but only so that I wouldn't later wonder if Cleese had come to his senses in the latter part. (No, he had not.)

This may be historically interesting to you youngsters out there, to see that British "[[mood]]" [[inscribed]] [[calico]] "[[gags]]" like these, thirty years ago.

What amazes me even more [[whilst]], is to read the other reviewers' comments, which acknowledge this isn't very good, yet then turn around and give it high [[vote]]. [[Though]] the [[whopping]] majority of the comedies that you have seen are even much worse than this one, then I certainly [[compassion]] your torturous existences.

The humor level of this show [[emerges]] [[geared]] at little [[kiddies]], yet the subject [[issue]] does not. So who is this for? People who enjoy repeated & drawn-out double-takes, pratfalls, drug jokes (interesting only as a short trip back to '77), and other "low" humor. The Three [[Pawns]] are still funny, and were to me as a [[kiddo]], too. THEY [[practised]] some effort in making jokes work. This however is sloughed off schlock. I fear that it IS the end of civilization, if this stuff really is accepted as worthwhile. Next you'll be telling me that tabloid TV is popular. :( --------------------------------------------- Result 5678 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I love Kristen Dunst, [[especially]] in Elizabethtown. I guess she's the kind of actress who had better not act before camera, but just be herself. She did that, and she looked so natural in Elizabethtown. In this movie, however, she did try to add in more artificial performance, especially in the first half of the film, so that she looked more like a sober editor. While in the other half, she totally set herself back in her daily [[track]], and I just couldn't tell her to be an editor any way. Therefore, her performance is not [[enduring]] in this [[film]].

The film,on the whole, is attracting and inspiring. the character of Young is full and reasonable. Anyway, the film tells a big and sophisticated story.

The only big defect is that it didn't show a turning point of the hero and heroine's love story. I am totally confused when they kiss at the end of the story, because that is rather unclear for the two persons. I love Kristen Dunst, [[namely]] in Elizabethtown. I guess she's the kind of actress who had better not act before camera, but just be herself. She did that, and she looked so natural in Elizabethtown. In this movie, however, she did try to add in more artificial performance, especially in the first half of the film, so that she looked more like a sober editor. While in the other half, she totally set herself back in her daily [[tracking]], and I just couldn't tell her to be an editor any way. Therefore, her performance is not [[lasting]] in this [[kino]].

The film,on the whole, is attracting and inspiring. the character of Young is full and reasonable. Anyway, the film tells a big and sophisticated story.

The only big defect is that it didn't show a turning point of the hero and heroine's love story. I am totally confused when they kiss at the end of the story, because that is rather unclear for the two persons. --------------------------------------------- Result 5679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I recently watched [[Spirit]] and enjoyed it very much, I've [[seen]] it about 4 times now on HBO and will buy the DVD. Those who [[gave]] [[negative]] [[reviews]] [[would]] [[probably]] [[think]] that `Vanishing Point' was just another [[car]] [[chase]] movie and `Thelma & Louise' was just another chick flick. [[Although]] the conclusions of those [[films]] are darker I feel the themes are somewhat related; that [[freedom]] and individualism are very important and that there is usually someone [[wanting]] to [[take]] it away from you. The other common [[trait]] of these [[movies]] is the caring, thoughtful `guardian angel' [[types]] who [[help]] the main [[characters]] to [[overcome]] adversity.

Another [[review]] here [[mentions]] how this [[film]] relates to the [[theme]] of [[civilization]] invading [[someone]] else's home. [[All]] one has to do is [[look]] around at the [[dwindling]] open [[areas]] [[around]] us to [[see]] that.

I thought the animation and the [[story]] were [[amazing]], the animators really [[got]] the horses to [[look]], [[act]] and move [[naturally]]. Spirit's [[emotions]] were very [[clear]] as the story progressed (yes I'm aware they do humanize the horses a [[bit]], but this is fiction). In a couple of [[action]] scenes you feel [[caught]] in the current of the [[rapids]] and the [[heat]] from a [[forest]] fire. In other more [[quiet]] scenes (which are most of the [[time]]) you're [[allowed]] to savor the [[backgrounds]]. One of the [[big]] things that [[make]] the [[story]] really [[work]] is by not [[going]] the talking, [[singing]] [[animals]] [[route]]. [[Doing]] so would [[take]] away from the story's power. [[Instead]] the flow of the [[story]] is told by [[occasional]] narration by the [[main]] character, further [[punch]] is added by the [[fantastic]] soundtrack. Another plus is that they weren't [[afraid]] to [[give]] the story [[somewhat]] of a dark side (which really made this film watchable to me). This isn't prevalent through the [[entire]] movie though, and the conclusion is [[fitting]] and uplifting without being sappy.

Those who appreciate horses will really like this movie, but I think it's a bit more than a horse movie. I don't feel this would be a good movie to take children to if they're brought up on the inane fare that's offered up today. But if they're the thoughtful sort that can handle compelling stories like The Lord of the Rings and Black Beauty they'll likely love this movie. Hell, I'm 35 years old and STILL love that stuff. I recently watched [[Wits]] and enjoyed it very much, I've [[noticed]] it about 4 times now on HBO and will buy the DVD. Those who [[delivered]] [[mala]] [[inspect]] [[should]] [[potentially]] [[believe]] that `Vanishing Point' was just another [[vehicles]] [[hunts]] movie and `Thelma & Louise' was just another chick flick. [[Though]] the conclusions of those [[film]] are darker I feel the themes are somewhat related; that [[liberty]] and individualism are very important and that there is usually someone [[wanted]] to [[taking]] it away from you. The other common [[symptomatic]] of these [[theater]] is the caring, thoughtful `guardian angel' [[type]] who [[helped]] the main [[character]] to [[overcoming]] adversity.

Another [[inspect]] here [[cites]] how this [[flick]] relates to the [[themes]] of [[civilizations]] invading [[somebody]] else's home. [[Everything]] one has to do is [[gaze]] around at the [[diminishing]] open [[area]] [[about]] us to [[behold]] that.

I thought the animation and the [[tale]] were [[startling]], the animators really [[ai]] the horses to [[gaze]], [[law]] and move [[obviously]]. Spirit's [[sentiments]] were very [[clara]] as the story progressed (yes I'm aware they do humanize the horses a [[bite]], but this is fiction). In a couple of [[efforts]] scenes you feel [[grabbed]] in the current of the [[quicker]] and the [[heating]] from a [[forestry]] fire. In other more [[silent]] scenes (which are most of the [[times]]) you're [[permits]] to savor the [[source]]. One of the [[gros]] things that [[deliver]] the [[tale]] really [[jobs]] is by not [[gonna]] the talking, [[sing]] [[zoo]] [[routes]]. [[Making]] so would [[taking]] away from the story's power. [[Alternatively]] the flow of the [[stories]] is told by [[sporadic]] narration by the [[primary]] character, further [[punching]] is added by the [[super]] soundtrack. Another plus is that they weren't [[fearful]] to [[lend]] the story [[rather]] of a dark side (which really made this film watchable to me). This isn't prevalent through the [[total]] movie though, and the conclusion is [[fitted]] and uplifting without being sappy.

Those who appreciate horses will really like this movie, but I think it's a bit more than a horse movie. I don't feel this would be a good movie to take children to if they're brought up on the inane fare that's offered up today. But if they're the thoughtful sort that can handle compelling stories like The Lord of the Rings and Black Beauty they'll likely love this movie. Hell, I'm 35 years old and STILL love that stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 5680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I bought this DVD I though: "It seems to be a nice light comedy about love and relationships made up in Portuguese standards… let's give it a chance…" I was TOTALLY WRONG! What a disappointing movie! First, it's not a comedy; it's a cheap drama which can be so melodramatic that it's even worse than many Portuguese soap operas! Second, the plot is so boring, and leads nowhere… It has no structure, it just flows, like the wind, in one or another direction… The production is also bad! The sound mixing is horrible, because sometimes the voices are disconnected. It made me remind some old Portuguese movies from the 80's… The acting should have been better too… Well, to sum up, it's not with films like this one that Portuguese cinema will improve! In fact, it was one of the worst Portuguese movies I have seen in the last years! Bad argument, bad acting, bad production… I had no high hopes for this movie, but it was much worse than I've ever imagined! Just forget about it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5681 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] i'm not even sure what to say about this film. it's one of only a handful of movies ever made that i would [[consider]] romantic. to try to talk plot or performance or technical details about this film would be in the [[words]] of frank zappa "like [[dancing]] about architecture". it [[absolutely]] [[hits]] the nail right on the [[head]] in the way it [[captures]] those fleeting moments in [[life]] that move us and then run away from us never to be experienced again. this seems like the movie the character version of charlie kaufman in the movie [[Adaptation]] wanted to write. the [[ending]] is left open and [[ambiguous]], no happy ending here, just mystery. no profound life lessons, just a couple of horny and intelligent kids exploring the ability to feel the most irrational and unrealistic of [[feelings]]...... romantic love.

10 out of 10 watch it with your special lady and [[recommend]] it to a stranger................ i'm not even sure what to say about this film. it's one of only a handful of movies ever made that i would [[contemplating]] romantic. to try to talk plot or performance or technical details about this film would be in the [[expression]] of frank zappa "like [[danced]] about architecture". it [[entirely]] [[rattles]] the nail right on the [[leader]] in the way it [[captured]] those fleeting moments in [[vida]] that move us and then run away from us never to be experienced again. this seems like the movie the character version of charlie kaufman in the movie [[Adjusting]] wanted to write. the [[terminated]] is left open and [[nebulous]], no happy ending here, just mystery. no profound life lessons, just a couple of horny and intelligent kids exploring the ability to feel the most irrational and unrealistic of [[sentiments]]...... romantic love.

10 out of 10 watch it with your special lady and [[recommending]] it to a stranger................ --------------------------------------------- Result 5682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Halfway through Lajos Koltai's "Evening," a [[woman]] on her deathbed [[asks]] a figure appearing in her hallucination: "Can you [[tell]] me where my [[life]] went?" The line [[could]] be [[embarrassingly]] theatrical, but the woman [[speaking]] it is Vanessa Redgrave, delivering it with utter [[simplicity]], and the question [[tears]] your [[heart]] out.

[[Time]] and again, the film based on Susan Minot's novel skirts sentimentality and ordinariness, it holds attention, offers [[admirable]] performances, and [[engenders]] emotional involvement as few [[recent]] movies have. With only six months of the year gone, there are now two memorable, meaningful, worthwhile [[films]] in theaters, the other, of course, being Sara Polley's "Away from Her." Hollywood might have turned "Evening" into a slick celebrity vehicle with its two pairs of real-life mothers and daughters - Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha Richardson, and Meryl [[Streep]] and Mamie Gummer. Richardson is Redgrave's daughter in the film (with a sister played by Tony Collette), and Gummer plays Streep's younger self, while Redgrave's youthful incarnation is Claire Danes.

Add Glenn Close, Eileen Atkins, Hugh Dancy, Patrick Wilson, and a large cast - [[yes]], it [[could]] have turned into a multiple star platform. Instead, Koltai - the brilliant Hungarian cinematographer of "Mephisto," and director of "Fateless" - created a subtle [[ensemble]] [[work]] with a "Continental feel," the story taking place in a high-society Newport environment, in the days leading up to a wedding that is fraught with trouble.

Missed connections, wrong choices, and dutiful compliance with social and family pressures present quite a soap opera, but the quality of the writing, Koltai's direction, and selfless acting raise "Evening" way above that level, into the the rarified air of English, French (and a few American) family sagas from a century before its contemporary setting.

Complex relationships between mothers and daughters, between friends and lovers, with the addition of a difficult triangle all come across clearly, understandably, captivatingly. Individual tunes are woven into a symphony.

And yet, with the all the foregoing emphasis on ensemble and selfless performances, the stars of "Evening" still shine through, Redgrave, Richardson, Gummer (an exciting new discovery, looking vaguely like her mother, but a very different actress), Danes carrying most of the load - until Streep shows up in the final moments and, of course, steals the show. Dancy and Wilson are well worth the price of admission too.

As with "Away from Her," "Evening" stays with you at length, inviting a re-thinking its story and characters, and re-experiencing the emotions it raises. At two hours, the film runs a bit long, but the way it stays with you thereafter is welcome among the many movies that go cold long before your popcorn. Halfway through Lajos Koltai's "Evening," a [[daughters]] on her deathbed [[requested]] a figure appearing in her hallucination: "Can you [[told]] me where my [[living]] went?" The line [[did]] be [[shamefully]] theatrical, but the woman [[talking]] it is Vanessa Redgrave, delivering it with utter [[simplify]], and the question [[rip]] your [[coeur]] out.

[[Times]] and again, the film based on Susan Minot's novel skirts sentimentality and ordinariness, it holds attention, offers [[wondrous]] performances, and [[breeds]] emotional involvement as few [[freshly]] movies have. With only six months of the year gone, there are now two memorable, meaningful, worthwhile [[movies]] in theaters, the other, of course, being Sara Polley's "Away from Her." Hollywood might have turned "Evening" into a slick celebrity vehicle with its two pairs of real-life mothers and daughters - Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha Richardson, and Meryl [[Meryl]] and Mamie Gummer. Richardson is Redgrave's daughter in the film (with a sister played by Tony Collette), and Gummer plays Streep's younger self, while Redgrave's youthful incarnation is Claire Danes.

Add Glenn Close, Eileen Atkins, Hugh Dancy, Patrick Wilson, and a large cast - [[yep]], it [[would]] have turned into a multiple star platform. Instead, Koltai - the brilliant Hungarian cinematographer of "Mephisto," and director of "Fateless" - created a subtle [[whole]] [[collaborate]] with a "Continental feel," the story taking place in a high-society Newport environment, in the days leading up to a wedding that is fraught with trouble.

Missed connections, wrong choices, and dutiful compliance with social and family pressures present quite a soap opera, but the quality of the writing, Koltai's direction, and selfless acting raise "Evening" way above that level, into the the rarified air of English, French (and a few American) family sagas from a century before its contemporary setting.

Complex relationships between mothers and daughters, between friends and lovers, with the addition of a difficult triangle all come across clearly, understandably, captivatingly. Individual tunes are woven into a symphony.

And yet, with the all the foregoing emphasis on ensemble and selfless performances, the stars of "Evening" still shine through, Redgrave, Richardson, Gummer (an exciting new discovery, looking vaguely like her mother, but a very different actress), Danes carrying most of the load - until Streep shows up in the final moments and, of course, steals the show. Dancy and Wilson are well worth the price of admission too.

As with "Away from Her," "Evening" stays with you at length, inviting a re-thinking its story and characters, and re-experiencing the emotions it raises. At two hours, the film runs a bit long, but the way it stays with you thereafter is welcome among the many movies that go cold long before your popcorn. --------------------------------------------- Result 5683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A found tape about 3? guys having fun torturing a woman in several [[inhuman]] ways.

Yeah, spoiler.

First of all, the acting made this short not scary at all, the woman [[seemed]] to have orgasms, not suffering. Some of the punishments were so ridiculous! what's shocking about throwing some meat or spin her in a chair? If you are [[shooting]] a nonsense tape, at least make it good. The only part to remark is the end: the hammered hand and the pierced [[eye]], the [[rest]] of the [[film]] is [[really]] poor. To end the boredom, the supposed [[story]] about the [[tape]] being investigated, extra [[bullshit]]. A found tape about 3? guys having fun torturing a woman in several [[subhuman]] ways.

Yeah, spoiler.

First of all, the acting made this short not scary at all, the woman [[appeared]] to have orgasms, not suffering. Some of the punishments were so ridiculous! what's shocking about throwing some meat or spin her in a chair? If you are [[shootout]] a nonsense tape, at least make it good. The only part to remark is the end: the hammered hand and the pierced [[eyes]], the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] is [[truly]] poor. To end the boredom, the supposed [[conte]] about the [[cassette]] being investigated, extra [[claptrap]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] " Så som i himmelen " .. as above so below.. that very special point where Divine and Human meet. I ADORE this film ! A gem. YES amazing grace !

I was so deeply moved by its very HUMAN quality. I laughed and cried through a whole register , indeed several octaves of emotions.

Mikael Nyqvist ís BRILLIANT as Daniel , a first rate passionate performance, charismatic and powerful. His inner light and exceptional talent shines through in every scene, every interaction ,in every meeting. I was totally mesmerised, enchanted and caught up the story, which is our collective story, the story of life itself.

The film was also so inclusive of many archetypes, messiah, wounded child ,magical child, artist, teacher, priest, abuser, abused, victim, bully, divine fool - ALL the characters so real and true to life - all awakened great fondness and compassion in me.

It is a real treat to see such a thought provoking yet thoroughly enjoyable, entertaining film. Oh ..mustn't forget the heavenly choir of angels and breathtakingly beautiful sound.

THANK YOU ALL - This Swedish film will surely captivate people world-wide. BRILLIANT ! --------------------------------------------- Result 5685 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not really a big box office draw, but I was pleasently surprised

with this movie. James "I did some things to Farrah Fawcett" Orr

co-wrote and directed this movie about an ordinary, average guy

named Larry Burrows who thinks his life would have been

incredibly different if he hit a homerun at a key baseball game

when he was 15. But thanks to mysterious and magical bartender

Mike, Larry gets his wish, yet soon realizes that his new life

isn't exactly as he hoped it would be.

I must say, this movie really impressed me. Critics have given

it mixed, and I must say the concept is really interesting and

pulled off well. Yes, it is a little standard, but packs enough

funny moments, drama and excellent acting to make it really

good. James Belushi (I think) was Oscar worthy for his role. Jon

Lovitz is perfect, and Linda Hamilton plus Renee Russo shine in

their roles. Michael Caine is perfect as the bartender. It's

just a good movie with a good lesson. If you've never seen, I

highly recommend you check --------------------------------------------- Result 5686 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] This movie [[reminds]] me of "Irréversible (2002)", another art-work movie with is a violent and radical approach of human nature. I did not like the [[movie]] but I cannot say that it is a bad movie, it is just special. I reminds me also of "Camping Cosmos (1996)" where a bunch of low-class figures are residents of a camp at the sea in Belgium. The same description of people living together, side by side against their wills and with all the confrontation of characters that do not match together. I also thought about the books by the French writer Emile Zola who was a writer of the style that is naturalism. I did not like the movie and I also do not like the people who are in it. They all seem so vulgar, without any basic good taste. One could ask the question why do they live, they all seem to be on this planet a a member of a big farce, forced to live against their will. Or you could say: the hell is on this world. This movie [[remembering]] me of "Irréversible (2002)", another art-work movie with is a violent and radical approach of human nature. I did not like the [[filmmaking]] but I cannot say that it is a bad movie, it is just special. I reminds me also of "Camping Cosmos (1996)" where a bunch of low-class figures are residents of a camp at the sea in Belgium. The same description of people living together, side by side against their wills and with all the confrontation of characters that do not match together. I also thought about the books by the French writer Emile Zola who was a writer of the style that is naturalism. I did not like the movie and I also do not like the people who are in it. They all seem so vulgar, without any basic good taste. One could ask the question why do they live, they all seem to be on this planet a a member of a big farce, forced to live against their will. Or you could say: the hell is on this world. --------------------------------------------- Result 5687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] First off, I agree with quite a bit that escapes [[Mr]]. Chomsky's mouth. His matter-of-fact delivery of interesting counterpoint is what makes the [[man]] a hit on the university campus circus. He comes [[across]] likable, unassuming, pragmatic. He doesn't cater to the current political style (obnoxious bi-partisanship) and he sets his sights on the far left as well as the far right, chastising both, and for good reason.

[[Unfortunately]], the [[film]] itself is a dud. In fact, I [[would]] not even call this a documentary but rather just a [[collection]] of speeches. [[Watching]] "Rebel Without a Pause" is no [[different]] from [[watching]] a speaker on a 3am taped segment on CSPAN. There are no camera movements, no edits, no [[stylistic]] [[touches]]. There is no [[story]], no [[narrative]].

Technically speaking, the production is [[strictly]] [[amateurish]]. Audio is terrible and [[inconsistent]]; sometimes we cannot [[hear]] Noam [[speak]], other times we cannot [[hear]] the questions that are being posited by those in attendance. When Noam is [[speaking]] rarely are we allowed to see the reactions of the audience except when we are given a quick shot of his [[wife]] who [[apparently]] [[attends]] every one of his speeches and beams with pride every [[time]] we [[see]] her.

I cannot [[recommend]] this [[film]] and [[would]] [[say]] that you're [[probably]] better off checking out his [[taped]] speeches on cassette or CD to listen to in the [[car]].

4 out of 10 stars...and I'm in a generous mood today. First off, I agree with quite a bit that escapes [[Olli]]. Chomsky's mouth. His matter-of-fact delivery of interesting counterpoint is what makes the [[bloke]] a hit on the university campus circus. He comes [[throughout]] likable, unassuming, pragmatic. He doesn't cater to the current political style (obnoxious bi-partisanship) and he sets his sights on the far left as well as the far right, chastising both, and for good reason.

[[Sadly]], the [[kino]] itself is a dud. In fact, I [[ought]] not even call this a documentary but rather just a [[collating]] of speeches. [[Staring]] "Rebel Without a Pause" is no [[assorted]] from [[staring]] a speaker on a 3am taped segment on CSPAN. There are no camera movements, no edits, no [[styles]] [[touching]]. There is no [[stories]], no [[descriptive]].

Technically speaking, the production is [[rigorously]] [[unprofessional]]. Audio is terrible and [[incompatible]]; sometimes we cannot [[listen]] Noam [[talk]], other times we cannot [[listen]] the questions that are being posited by those in attendance. When Noam is [[speaks]] rarely are we allowed to see the reactions of the audience except when we are given a quick shot of his [[women]] who [[allegedly]] [[attending]] every one of his speeches and beams with pride every [[times]] we [[seeing]] her.

I cannot [[recommended]] this [[filmmaking]] and [[should]] [[tell]] that you're [[undeniably]] better off checking out his [[recorded]] speeches on cassette or CD to listen to in the [[automobile]].

4 out of 10 stars...and I'm in a generous mood today. --------------------------------------------- Result 5688 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] In Joel Schumacher, you have one of the most [[inconsistent]] [[film]] makers of all time. But this is common [[knowledge]]; I [[think]] his main problem is the array of [[genres]] that he [[covers]] whilst at the same [[time]], [[failing]] to [[develop]] any [[sort]] of certain style that might [[label]] him an [[auteur]]. Hitchcock liked his [[suspense]] and his horror/thriller; Chaplin [[liked]] his comedy; Scorsese likes his crime driven mafia stories [[amongst]] others and Spielberg likes his large scale, big budget adventure films that combine just enough violence for the adults and fun for the kids. Other more obscure examples include Kubrick and Welles who covered too much to write about here.

But Schumacher is the sort of guy who makes a flawed film revolving around a great [[idea]] or a really quite enjoyable film revolving around a seemingly dull premise. Falling Down had a great idea behind it but I found it flawed and anticlimactic with too many scenes seemingly relying on comedy. Batman is a superhero; superhero films have been big hits recently so how he managed to make not one but two [[appalling]] superhero films is beyond me. Then comes 8MM; a film with a basic premise that is executed in an [[impressive]] manner before Tigerland which is Schumacher's [[best]] [[film]] from what I've so far seen, in my opinion. With the war genre, laughter isn't something you'd associate with it for most of the time. I can remember scoffing at the absurdity of the D-Day landings during Saving Private Ryan: at the time when I first saw the film, I had not much knowledge of the Second World War bar when it began and finished. My eyebrows were up, my mouth slightly open with a weak 'I can't believe it smile' on my face. Needless to say, it was because of that film I searched out learning a bit more on what that event was all about and the war as a whole. In Tigerland, you are invited to laugh at the absurdity of war through Bozz (Farrell), a tough and egotistical soldier training for the Vietnam War.

But what's clever here is that there are no jaw dropping war scenes of fighting and death and destruction; just one man and his battle with the system for most of the time. The things he says and the audacity at which he deals with his predicament is reminiscent of a school child winding up a series of teachers at an extremely strict boarding school. Tigerland may borrow from Full Metal Jacket in the sense it is a training routine for the Vietnam War but egos and superegos play more of a part here, I think. The superegos that are the drill sergeants go up against Bozz whose ego is extremely large. There is also the third part of Freud's triangle that sneaks into Bozz: the ID. Compared to all the other soldiers who all have rather large egos, Bozz is the only one brave enough to show it in front of the sergeants thus suggesting he is allows what he shouldn't do to float to the surface and express itself: "You are all dead in this situation!" barks a sergeant. "Any Questions?" "Yeah, if I'm dead how come I can ask a question?" replies Bozz whose punishments such as push-ups and dirt eating seem to un-faze him in true ID style; that is he enjoys the punishments.

Also regarding the superegos, Bozz at one point tries to command a group of soldiers in field training. This is something the existing captain of the squad cannot do thus suggesting he is lacking in both the superego required for the job and the confidence to tell Bozz he is in charge. What follows is an actual conversation between Bozz and an existing drill sergeant who gives him his Christian name. This is where Private Wilson's (Whigham) character steps in: His uncontrollable rage and anger at Bozz explodes at certain time all culminating in the film's only real scenes of a shootout which is in the form of a training exercise in a river. Wilson cannot control his impulses and dislike toward Bozz and acts out.

What I also liked about Tigerland is that it's shot in such a way that is brave. While lacking in innovation, Tigerland seems to use lower grade film stock or lesser cameras to get across its gritty look. Make no mistake that this could have been a pretty looking film with lots of colour and attractiveness. But, we get a documentary approach in the final piece making everything look like it was shot on a typical everyday camera for TV; the emphasis on the hand held is also apparent but Schumacher is clever: he never allows the film to become too much like a mockumentry whilst at the same time suggesting the film's budget could've been half of what it was. It's worth saying here that Spielberg said he wanted Saving Private Ryan to look like actual reel footage or something along those lines and as if it was recorded from the war scenes.

While being very funny and entertaining, Tigerland is still a great study of what makes people tick; not necessarily in war but in the closest possible substitute. Its study on one man and how much he hates the system that he cannot even take it seriously is fascinating as is the drive of each soldier. There are several memorable scenes and situations culminating in a happy, if not unhappy ending that'll open your mind and make you think about what it's perhaps really like in the military. In Joel Schumacher, you have one of the most [[incoherent]] [[movies]] makers of all time. But this is common [[acquaintance]]; I [[thought]] his main problem is the array of [[genders]] that he [[coverings]] whilst at the same [[period]], [[omitting]] to [[elaborate]] any [[sorts]] of certain style that might [[etiquette]] him an [[author]]. Hitchcock liked his [[wait]] and his horror/thriller; Chaplin [[loved]] his comedy; Scorsese likes his crime driven mafia stories [[inter]] others and Spielberg likes his large scale, big budget adventure films that combine just enough violence for the adults and fun for the kids. Other more obscure examples include Kubrick and Welles who covered too much to write about here.

But Schumacher is the sort of guy who makes a flawed film revolving around a great [[thinks]] or a really quite enjoyable film revolving around a seemingly dull premise. Falling Down had a great idea behind it but I found it flawed and anticlimactic with too many scenes seemingly relying on comedy. Batman is a superhero; superhero films have been big hits recently so how he managed to make not one but two [[horrendous]] superhero films is beyond me. Then comes 8MM; a film with a basic premise that is executed in an [[dramatic]] manner before Tigerland which is Schumacher's [[bestest]] [[movies]] from what I've so far seen, in my opinion. With the war genre, laughter isn't something you'd associate with it for most of the time. I can remember scoffing at the absurdity of the D-Day landings during Saving Private Ryan: at the time when I first saw the film, I had not much knowledge of the Second World War bar when it began and finished. My eyebrows were up, my mouth slightly open with a weak 'I can't believe it smile' on my face. Needless to say, it was because of that film I searched out learning a bit more on what that event was all about and the war as a whole. In Tigerland, you are invited to laugh at the absurdity of war through Bozz (Farrell), a tough and egotistical soldier training for the Vietnam War.

But what's clever here is that there are no jaw dropping war scenes of fighting and death and destruction; just one man and his battle with the system for most of the time. The things he says and the audacity at which he deals with his predicament is reminiscent of a school child winding up a series of teachers at an extremely strict boarding school. Tigerland may borrow from Full Metal Jacket in the sense it is a training routine for the Vietnam War but egos and superegos play more of a part here, I think. The superegos that are the drill sergeants go up against Bozz whose ego is extremely large. There is also the third part of Freud's triangle that sneaks into Bozz: the ID. Compared to all the other soldiers who all have rather large egos, Bozz is the only one brave enough to show it in front of the sergeants thus suggesting he is allows what he shouldn't do to float to the surface and express itself: "You are all dead in this situation!" barks a sergeant. "Any Questions?" "Yeah, if I'm dead how come I can ask a question?" replies Bozz whose punishments such as push-ups and dirt eating seem to un-faze him in true ID style; that is he enjoys the punishments.

Also regarding the superegos, Bozz at one point tries to command a group of soldiers in field training. This is something the existing captain of the squad cannot do thus suggesting he is lacking in both the superego required for the job and the confidence to tell Bozz he is in charge. What follows is an actual conversation between Bozz and an existing drill sergeant who gives him his Christian name. This is where Private Wilson's (Whigham) character steps in: His uncontrollable rage and anger at Bozz explodes at certain time all culminating in the film's only real scenes of a shootout which is in the form of a training exercise in a river. Wilson cannot control his impulses and dislike toward Bozz and acts out.

What I also liked about Tigerland is that it's shot in such a way that is brave. While lacking in innovation, Tigerland seems to use lower grade film stock or lesser cameras to get across its gritty look. Make no mistake that this could have been a pretty looking film with lots of colour and attractiveness. But, we get a documentary approach in the final piece making everything look like it was shot on a typical everyday camera for TV; the emphasis on the hand held is also apparent but Schumacher is clever: he never allows the film to become too much like a mockumentry whilst at the same time suggesting the film's budget could've been half of what it was. It's worth saying here that Spielberg said he wanted Saving Private Ryan to look like actual reel footage or something along those lines and as if it was recorded from the war scenes.

While being very funny and entertaining, Tigerland is still a great study of what makes people tick; not necessarily in war but in the closest possible substitute. Its study on one man and how much he hates the system that he cannot even take it seriously is fascinating as is the drive of each soldier. There are several memorable scenes and situations culminating in a happy, if not unhappy ending that'll open your mind and make you think about what it's perhaps really like in the military. --------------------------------------------- Result 5689 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] The [[movie]] is [[truly]] [[poignant]], [[unique]] and uplifting. The [[story]] is universal in that it's a [[battle]] between good, [[evil]] and the [[world]] between. THE [[MOST]] IMPORTANT [[thing]] is that its [[rating]] is [[wrong]], misleading, and a travesty. Blockbuster has it rated as though it were an X rated [[movie]]. The truth is is that it is closer to G than PG and should be [[seen]] by children who can read the clear and [[simple]] sub-titles. The [[kino]] is [[really]] [[agonizing]], [[peculiar]] and uplifting. The [[histories]] is universal in that it's a [[bataille]] between good, [[satanic]] and the [[monde]] between. THE [[GREATER]] IMPORTANT [[stuff]] is that its [[appraisal]] is [[amiss]], misleading, and a travesty. Blockbuster has it rated as though it were an X rated [[movies]]. The truth is is that it is closer to G than PG and should be [[noticed]] by children who can read the clear and [[mere]] sub-titles. --------------------------------------------- Result 5690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This, despite not being the original - it [[began]] life as a play in Central [[Europe]] - has [[weathered]] the [[several]] incarnations that followed (MGM's own remake with [[period]] [[songs]] [[In]] The [[Good]] [[Old]] Summertime, the Broadway [[show]] She [[Loves]] Me, even the excellent theatre [[revival]] in Paris a couple of years [[ago]]) and [[remains]] the [[definitive]] [[version]] and the one they all have to [[beat]]. [[Several]] [[previous]] commenters have identified the contributing factors that make it so successful and [[memorable]] not least being the [[prevailing]] fashion in 30s and 40s Hollywood for lavishing attention and [[detail]] on ensemble [[playing]] [[rather]] than just two [[leads]] as so [[often]] [[happens]] [[today]] - [[try]], for [[example]], removing Ugarte, Ferrari, Renault etc from Casablanca and yes you'd [[still]] have Rick and Ilsa and Viktor Lazslo but they'd just be frosting without the [[rich]] [[cake]] [[mixture]] below. [[Jimmy]] [[Stewart]] and Maggie Sullavan WERE both [[ideal]] and irreplaceable leads but how much brighter they [[shine]] when their performances are reflected in those of Frank Morgan, Felix Bressart, [[Joseph]] Schildkraut and Andy Hardy's [[Sara]] Haden and this is BEFORE we factor in that Lubitsch 'touch'. Okay, maybe they WERE a tad more naive, innocent [[even]], in that Jurassic Age but how many [[genuine]] [[film]] lovers, sated with scatology, screwing and in-your-face sex, turn back to those days of [[Stories]], Style, Slickness and Skill and wallow in great movies like this one. By far the best thing about this technological age is not CSI but DVD that can at one and the same time make these classics available to nostalgics and show the Matrix freaks how the big boys used to do it. This, despite not being the original - it [[launches]] life as a play in Central [[Eu]] - has [[tampered]] the [[various]] incarnations that followed (MGM's own remake with [[schedules]] [[lyrics]] [[Into]] The [[Buena]] [[Former]] Summertime, the Broadway [[demonstrate]] She [[Loved]] Me, even the excellent theatre [[regeneration]] in Paris a couple of years [[prior]]) and [[leftovers]] the [[definite]] [[stepping]] and the one they all have to [[overpowered]]. [[Many]] [[earlier]] commenters have identified the contributing factors that make it so successful and [[landmark]] not least being the [[reigning]] fashion in 30s and 40s Hollywood for lavishing attention and [[details]] on ensemble [[gaming]] [[somewhat]] than just two [[leeds]] as so [[traditionally]] [[comes]] [[yesterday]] - [[seeks]], for [[case]], removing Ugarte, Ferrari, Renault etc from Casablanca and yes you'd [[nonetheless]] have Rick and Ilsa and Viktor Lazslo but they'd just be frosting without the [[richest]] [[pudding]] [[mix]] below. [[Jimmie]] [[Stuart]] and Maggie Sullavan WERE both [[idealistic]] and irreplaceable leads but how much brighter they [[gloss]] when their performances are reflected in those of Frank Morgan, Felix Bressart, [[Jozef]] Schildkraut and Andy Hardy's [[Sarah]] Haden and this is BEFORE we factor in that Lubitsch 'touch'. Okay, maybe they WERE a tad more naive, innocent [[yet]], in that Jurassic Age but how many [[real]] [[cinema]] lovers, sated with scatology, screwing and in-your-face sex, turn back to those days of [[History]], Style, Slickness and Skill and wallow in great movies like this one. By far the best thing about this technological age is not CSI but DVD that can at one and the same time make these classics available to nostalgics and show the Matrix freaks how the big boys used to do it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5691 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Back when Alec Baldwin and [[Kim]] Basinger were a [[mercurial]], hot-tempered, high-powered Hollywood [[couple]] they [[filmed]] this (nearly) scene-for-scene remake of the 1972 [[Steve]] McQueen-Ali MacGraw action-thriller about a fugitive twosome. It [[almost]] [[worked]] the [[first]] time because McQueen was such a [[vital]] [[presence]] on the screen--even stone [[silent]] and weary, you [[could]] [[sense]] his [[clock]] [[ticking]], his cagey magnetism. Baldwin is not in Steve McQueen's league, but he has his [[charms]] and is [[probably]] a more versatile actor--if so, this is not a [[showcase]] for his attributes. Basinger does well and [[certainly]] looks [[good]], but James Woods is artificially hammy in a [[silly]] mob-magnet role. A sub-plot involving another [[couple]] [[taken]] [[hostage]] by Baldwin's ex-partner was unbearable in the '72 film and plays even worse here. As for the [[action]] scenes, they're pretty [[old]] [[hat]], which causes one to wonder: why even [[remake]] the [[original]]? ** from **** Back when Alec Baldwin and [[Kima]] Basinger were a [[moody]], hot-tempered, high-powered Hollywood [[pair]] they [[shot]] this (nearly) scene-for-scene remake of the 1972 [[Steven]] McQueen-Ali MacGraw action-thriller about a fugitive twosome. It [[roughly]] [[works]] the [[fiirst]] time because McQueen was such a [[indispensable]] [[participation]] on the screen--even stone [[tacit]] and weary, you [[would]] [[sensing]] his [[countdown]] [[tick]], his cagey magnetism. Baldwin is not in Steve McQueen's league, but he has his [[enchanting]] and is [[undeniably]] a more versatile actor--if so, this is not a [[illustrates]] for his attributes. Basinger does well and [[arguably]] looks [[alright]], but James Woods is artificially hammy in a [[beast]] mob-magnet role. A sub-plot involving another [[match]] [[took]] [[hostages]] by Baldwin's ex-partner was unbearable in the '72 film and plays even worse here. As for the [[efforts]] scenes, they're pretty [[former]] [[sombrero]], which causes one to wonder: why even [[redo]] the [[initial]]? ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[In]] [[addition]] to being an [[extremely]] fun [[movie]], may I add that the [[costumes]] and scenery were wonderful. This kind, fun loving woman had a great deal of money. Unfortunately, she also had two greedy daughters who were anxious to get their hands on her money. This woman was [[lonely]] since the death of her husband. He had proposed to her in a [[theater]] that was going to be torn down. To prevent that, she [[bought]] it. Her daughters were afraid she was throwing away "their" money and decided to take action. The character actors in this film were a great [[plus]] [[also]]. I [[would]] give almost anything to have a [[copy]] of this film in my video library, but as of yet, it's never been released. Sad. [[During]] [[supplement]] to being an [[critically]] fun [[films]], may I add that the [[garb]] and scenery were wonderful. This kind, fun loving woman had a great deal of money. Unfortunately, she also had two greedy daughters who were anxious to get their hands on her money. This woman was [[alone]] since the death of her husband. He had proposed to her in a [[teatro]] that was going to be torn down. To prevent that, she [[purchasing]] it. Her daughters were afraid she was throwing away "their" money and decided to take action. The character actors in this film were a great [[longer]] [[additionally]]. I [[ought]] give almost anything to have a [[photocopies]] of this film in my video library, but as of yet, it's never been released. Sad. --------------------------------------------- Result 5693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] In celebration of Earth Day Disney has released the film "Earth". [[Stopping]] far short of any strident message of gloom and doom, we are [[treated]] to some [[excellent]] footage of animals in their [[habitats]] without feeling too [[bad]] about ourselves.

The stars of the show are a herd of elephants, a family of polar bears and a whale and its calf. The narrative begins at the North Pole and proceeds south until we reach the tropics, all the while being introduced to denizens of the various climatic zones traversed.

Global warming is mentioned in while we view the wanderings of polar bear; note is made of the shrinking sea ice islands in more recent years. We never see the bears catch any seals, but the father's desperate search for food leads him to a dangerous solution.

The aerial shots of caribou migrating across the tundra is one of the most [[spectacular]] wildlife [[shots]] I ever saw; it and another of migrating wildfowl are enough to reward the price of admission to see them on the big screen.

One of the disappointments I felt was that otherwise terrific shots of great white sharks taking seals were filmed in slow motion. Never do you get the sense of one characteristic of wild animals; their incredible speed. The idea of slowing down the film to convey great quickness I think began with (or at least it's the first I recall seeing) the television show "Kung Fu" during the early Seventies.

An interesting sidelight is that as the credits roll during the end some demonstrations of the cinematographic techniques employed are revealed. There are enough dramatic, humorous and instructive moments in this movie to make it a solid choice for nature buffs. Perhaps because of some selective editing (sparing us, as it were, from the grisly end of a prey-predator moment) and the fact that this footage had been released in 2007 and is available on DVD it is a [[solid]] film in its own right. And you can take your kids!

Three [[stars]]. In celebration of Earth Day Disney has released the film "Earth". [[Parada]] far short of any strident message of gloom and doom, we are [[processed]] to some [[wondrous]] footage of animals in their [[habitat]] without feeling too [[horrid]] about ourselves.

The stars of the show are a herd of elephants, a family of polar bears and a whale and its calf. The narrative begins at the North Pole and proceeds south until we reach the tropics, all the while being introduced to denizens of the various climatic zones traversed.

Global warming is mentioned in while we view the wanderings of polar bear; note is made of the shrinking sea ice islands in more recent years. We never see the bears catch any seals, but the father's desperate search for food leads him to a dangerous solution.

The aerial shots of caribou migrating across the tundra is one of the most [[wondrous]] wildlife [[punches]] I ever saw; it and another of migrating wildfowl are enough to reward the price of admission to see them on the big screen.

One of the disappointments I felt was that otherwise terrific shots of great white sharks taking seals were filmed in slow motion. Never do you get the sense of one characteristic of wild animals; their incredible speed. The idea of slowing down the film to convey great quickness I think began with (or at least it's the first I recall seeing) the television show "Kung Fu" during the early Seventies.

An interesting sidelight is that as the credits roll during the end some demonstrations of the cinematographic techniques employed are revealed. There are enough dramatic, humorous and instructive moments in this movie to make it a solid choice for nature buffs. Perhaps because of some selective editing (sparing us, as it were, from the grisly end of a prey-predator moment) and the fact that this footage had been released in 2007 and is available on DVD it is a [[solids]] film in its own right. And you can take your kids!

Three [[star]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably the best television show I've ever seen. I first saw it on Comedy Central several years ago. At the time I was unaware that it had been dramatically edited and was shown out of order, and having just watched all three series in order and unedited (thank you internet and your wondrous "series of tubes") I am SO GLAD I rediscovered it! I think Comedy Central sort of picked and chose their way through series one and two to make a "season"......and I tried to get friends and family to watch it, but nobody really seemed to like it (I need new friends). So, on my own, I made the best out of it that I could. Even when I felt like it was waning a bit, I still felt compelled to continue watching. Years after when I discovered Little Britain, I immediately recognized Pauline from LoG as having influenced Marjorie in Fat Fighters. Also, I love the idea of writers who act the entire show....(not new, but done impeccably here). LB has nothing on LoG! (No offense, Matt & David....Love you)! This is indeed a darkly comedic piece of genius. Serial murder, implied cannibalism.....you name it and it's probably found in this wonderful, unique piece of TV art. The location shots from the very first scene themselves are chilling and seem to beckon you to the town of Royston Vasey.....You'll Never Leave! I think my favorite character would have to be Tubbs, but each character as portrayed has it's own "charm". My least favorite was Papa Lazarous, that was until he re-surfaced in series three (clever and wholly unexpected)! It's best to watch several episodes in a row as it drives the continuity and as I said before, becomes so compelling (while repulsing) that you really CAN'T stop watching. This is not for those with weak stomachs, kids, conservatives or Grandma (unless you've got one saucy granny)! I have always loved British TV, particularly comedies, from Monty Python to Benny Hill, Red Dwarf to Keeping Up Appearances, Absolutely Fabulous and the British originals Coupling and The Office (but not their US counterparts....sorry). This is unlike any of those in that it completely redraws the line between what's funny and what's just sick and twisted. Nothing, NOTHING on US TV has ever come close to this level of entertainment. US broadcast TV is so sad and lame, I can barely stand to watch ANY of it. It's kind of sad that even our cable channels don't have the guts to show unedited versions of this gem (your loss, Comedy Central). Thankfully there are shows like this one that come from the "across the pond" that redeem the entire medium every decade or so. Basic cable here in the US has been making tiny steps the last few years in confidently "crossing lines" with more graphic sexual content, drug use and adult language, but they are still years away from just deciding to be Adults about showing real life, adult behavior (instead of just murder obsession and blowing things up, sheesh, it's like the same basic show format for the past 35 years)! Don't even get me started on US sitcoms! Waste of time and lots of wasted money......did you know that "According to Jim" has been on the air for 10 years??? 10 YEARS?? Anyway... Watch this show, get it on DVD, do what you must and then make your friends watch it as well! You've never seen anything like it. There are three specials that I have not watched yet....I'm saving them to spring on my best friend next time he visits. He'll watch them, even if I have to chain him up and paint him with Excrement! Lines and lines and lines and lines! Note that series three departs from one and two....the greater town seems to fall away to concentrate on newer characters, the laugh track is gone (thank bloody hell), the theme is more band and less orchestra and a bit of the story takes place outside of Royston Vasey. Don't be thrown by any of that as by the end, the series has preserved the quiet perversity first demonstrated in series one and two. I think these four guys have created something sort of undefinable. Brilliant, confident and absolutely demented. You will want to re-watch it again and again. It's amazing that in 5 seconds of screen time they can go from cheap sight-gag to horrifying blasphemy then end with a single actors close-up facial expression. If ever I were to meet any of the writer/performers, I'd implore them not to recreate it or try to top it.....I'd just say "Can I help you at all?" (Then they'd probably slap me, so I'd ask them to sign the slap-mark)! 10 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Along with Patrick McGoohan and Robert Culp, Jack Cassidy was an [[iconic]] Columbo villain. The very [[first]] "[[proper]]" episode of Columbo, following two standalone pilots, "Murder By The Book" is not far off [[classic]] status.

Jack Cassidy plays [[Ken]] Franklin, one half of a murder mystery writing partnership. His partner Jim is the talented one, [[whereas]] Ken has no talent other than the gift of the gab and a skill for promoting the books. As soon as Jim has decided he no longer requires Ken's marketing skills, Ken hatches a plot to kill Jim. Except it's not a new plot, it's actually the implementation in real life of a [[murder]] storyline originally [[intended]] for one of their books.

It doesn't take Columbo long to work out that [[Ken]] is the [[murderer]], [[although]] [[unfortunately]] another [[murder]] has to [[take]] place ([[Ken]] romances and then [[kills]] a [[key]] witness) before Columbo has [[enough]] evidence to [[secure]] a [[conviction]].

[[Nothing]] whatsoever wrong with "[[Murder]] By The [[Book]]", but it's not [[quite]] top-notch. I [[would]] just give "Publish Or Perish" the edge over this: both episodes feature Jack Cassidy and the [[world]] of publishing, but "[[Publish]] Or Perish" is a [[fraction]] more [[tense]] and [[unpredictable]]. But this is [[still]] a [[great]] episode. Along with Patrick McGoohan and Robert Culp, Jack Cassidy was an [[symbolic]] Columbo villain. The very [[outset]] "[[appropriate]]" episode of Columbo, following two standalone pilots, "Murder By The Book" is not far off [[typical]] status.

Jack Cassidy plays [[Keane]] Franklin, one half of a murder mystery writing partnership. His partner Jim is the talented one, [[while]] Ken has no talent other than the gift of the gab and a skill for promoting the books. As soon as Jim has decided he no longer requires Ken's marketing skills, Ken hatches a plot to kill Jim. Except it's not a new plot, it's actually the implementation in real life of a [[killings]] storyline originally [[conceived]] for one of their books.

It doesn't take Columbo long to work out that [[Kent]] is the [[slayer]], [[while]] [[unluckily]] another [[killings]] has to [[taking]] place ([[Keane]] romances and then [[killings]] a [[critical]] witness) before Columbo has [[adequate]] evidence to [[ensure]] a [[condemnation]].

[[Anything]] whatsoever wrong with "[[Slain]] By The [[Books]]", but it's not [[very]] top-notch. I [[ought]] just give "Publish Or Perish" the edge over this: both episodes feature Jack Cassidy and the [[worldwide]] of publishing, but "[[Publication]] Or Perish" is a [[proportion]] more [[tensed]] and [[erratic]]. But this is [[again]] a [[wondrous]] episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 5696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was one of the best movies that I have seen this year. I didn't see any cameos in the movie, but it is still pretty good. It is similar to Anchorman in the humor department, but I think this is a better put together movie. It actually has a point. If you are going to see a whole bunch of T&A you will be disappointed. Just a well put together movie!!!! If you have nothing to do for the day or you need a lot of humor, you will find this to be a really good movie. I definitely think that Ebert and Roeper's review of this movie is right on. I mean, I don't really like Ebert on most movies, but this is the movie that I will agree about. The movie contains a good enough story that it is actually believable that these type of people are out there. There is definitely something to be said about how they treat virginity in this movie. Yea, sure, you get laughed at when it is found out about, but it still suggests that you wait. Steve did a wonderful job of portraying the person that he did in this movie and yet, it is still funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 5697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I saw Dick [[Tracy]] when I was very [[young]]. I didn't know who any of the actors were, and I didn't know the movie would turn out different than the way it was previewed. I [[sure]] [[loved]] it though.

Warren Beatty stars as the crime-fighting 1930's detective Dick Tracy who goes after the biggest mob bosses in the city. This time, Big Boy Caprice (Al Pacino) has killed a very powerful man and is out to take over the city with his singer girlfriend Breathless Mahoney (Madonna) who has her eye on [[Tracy]]. It becomes even worse because a new [[criminal]] is invading and the worst part is: this [[criminal]] has no face. He or she is very unknown. Plus, the famous villians are back from the comic book [[collection]].

I [[thought]] that this movie was very [[colorful]] and creative. It was [[entertaining]] and fun to watch [[especially]] as a child. Warren Beaty was just [[like]] James Bond of the 1930's the [[way]] he [[played]] [[Dick]] [[Tracy]].

An [[ensemble]] cast of the film [[includes]]: Charlie Korsmo, Glenn Headly, William Forsythe, Dustin Hoffman, [[James]] Caan, [[Ed]] O' Ross, Tommy Lee Jones, Mandy Patinkin, [[Charles]] Durning. [[Plus]] [[More]]!

Dick [[Tracy]] is a [[movie]] for all ages and is a fun [[movie]] for a family to enjoy. Take my word for it. I saw Dick [[Tracey]] when I was very [[youthful]]. I didn't know who any of the actors were, and I didn't know the movie would turn out different than the way it was previewed. I [[persuaded]] [[cared]] it though.

Warren Beatty stars as the crime-fighting 1930's detective Dick Tracy who goes after the biggest mob bosses in the city. This time, Big Boy Caprice (Al Pacino) has killed a very powerful man and is out to take over the city with his singer girlfriend Breathless Mahoney (Madonna) who has her eye on [[Tracey]]. It becomes even worse because a new [[felon]] is invading and the worst part is: this [[felon]] has no face. He or she is very unknown. Plus, the famous villians are back from the comic book [[collate]].

I [[brainchild]] that this movie was very [[scenic]] and creative. It was [[amusing]] and fun to watch [[principally]] as a child. Warren Beaty was just [[fond]] James Bond of the 1930's the [[camino]] he [[served]] [[Rooster]] [[Pauline]].

An [[whole]] cast of the film [[involves]]: Charlie Korsmo, Glenn Headly, William Forsythe, Dustin Hoffman, [[Jacques]] Caan, [[Comp]] O' Ross, Tommy Lee Jones, Mandy Patinkin, [[Charl]] Durning. [[Longer]] [[Most]]!

Dick [[Pauline]] is a [[filmmaking]] for all ages and is a fun [[movies]] for a family to enjoy. Take my word for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5698 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is very dated, but that's part of the charm with this 1933 movie. You can say the same for most Pre-Code films; they're just different, and usually in an interesting way.

It was the short running time, the great acting of Spencer Tracy and the beautiful face and sweetness of Loretta Young's character which kept me watching and enjoying this stagy-but-intriguing film.

You'd be hard-pressed to find a nicer girl than "Trinna," played by the 20-year-old Young who was already into making her 50th movie! (She started acting as a small child. That, and the fact they made movies quickly back in the old days.) The camera, although in soft focus throughout much of the film, zoomed in on Loretta's face and eyes many times and I was mesmerized by her beauty.

Playing a crotchety man with a cynical outlook on life, Tracy's "Bill" slowly transformed into a loving man, thanks to Trinna. Spencer delivered his lines here with such naturalness that you hardly knew he was acting.

Although they have small roles, supporting actors Walter Connolly, Marjorie Rambeau, Arthur Hohl and Glenda Farrell leave lasting impressions long after viewing this 75-minute film. I was particularly fascinated with Connolly's role as the minister/father figure of the camp.

The story is a little far-fetched but - hey - that's the movies. This story is about two lonely Great Depression victims trying to survive in a "Hooverville"-type camp and it winds up to be a very touching tale. --------------------------------------------- Result 5699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being from a small town in Illinois myself, I can instantly relate to this movie. Considering the era it was made in, the townsfolk look uncomfortably like a lot of people I grew up with. Yes the plot is so-so. And yes, the Acting is not going to get nominated for an Oscar anytime soon. But that isn't the point. The point is to suspend reality and just have FUN. And this movie has Fun aplenty. From the greedy,uncaring banker to the well meaning,but dimwitted deputy, this movie was made to poke fun at the SciFi genre and small town living at it's best. Who can't smile at the sight of the Enforcer Drone or the Vern Droid? and I LOVED the FarmZoid. Wish I had one when I was growing up. Overall, considering the technology they had available at the time, this is a pleasant romp into one's childhood, when you could sit back on a Saturday afternoon, Popcorn in hand, and laugh at the foibles of small town living. This is a movie I would watch again and again, if for no other reason than to poke fun at myself and my small town ways. --------------------------------------------- Result 5700 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie, which starts out with a interesting opening of two hot blondes getting it on in the back of a driver-less, moving vehicle, has [[quite]] the [[quirky]] little [[personality]] to [[boot]]. The cast of seven ([[although]] one girl doesn't hang [[around]] for the bodycount, which is [[unfortunate]] because the death toll is already so [[small]] as is) are all super-hot, as our [[story]] centers around teens partying [[way]] out in the [[desert]] (an [[odd]] but effective [[choice]] of [[setting]]), who are hunted down by a creepy [[man]] in black gloves and [[jeans]] who drives a black truck. It predates many of the vehicle-inspired slashers to date ("The Trip", "Joy Ride", "Jeepers Creepers") where the killer's vehicle itself becomes an evil antagonist. The killer himself is quite creepy, and we find solace in the [[extremely]] likable heroine in Jennifer McAllister (look at the interesting symbolic [[contrast]] of the evil killer in all black, while our benevolent heroine sports all white attire, as scanty and stonewashed as it may be). Director Bill Crain does some really [[great]] [[things]] with his camera, some neat [[tricks]] on screen, and the cast tries their [[absolute]] best. There's enough [[gore]] in the low bodycount to [[please]] the gore fans, and enough T&A from a couple of the [[girls]] to please T&A fans. [[Overall]], this flick is highly [[underrated]] and widely sought out in the slasher movie [[world]] as it's proved [[quite]] [[rare]] to [[find]] on video. Highly [[recommended]]. This movie, which starts out with a interesting opening of two hot blondes getting it on in the back of a driver-less, moving vehicle, has [[utterly]] the [[lunatic]] little [[subjectivity]] to [[startup]]. The cast of seven ([[despite]] one girl doesn't hang [[throughout]] for the bodycount, which is [[pathetic]] because the death toll is already so [[miniscule]] as is) are all super-hot, as our [[history]] centers around teens partying [[paths]] out in the [[walkabout]] (an [[inquisitive]] but effective [[electing]] of [[configured]]), who are hunted down by a creepy [[males]] in black gloves and [[trousers]] who drives a black truck. It predates many of the vehicle-inspired slashers to date ("The Trip", "Joy Ride", "Jeepers Creepers") where the killer's vehicle itself becomes an evil antagonist. The killer himself is quite creepy, and we find solace in the [[vastly]] likable heroine in Jennifer McAllister (look at the interesting symbolic [[opposite]] of the evil killer in all black, while our benevolent heroine sports all white attire, as scanty and stonewashed as it may be). Director Bill Crain does some really [[grand]] [[matters]] with his camera, some neat [[ploys]] on screen, and the cast tries their [[utter]] best. There's enough [[gora]] in the low bodycount to [[invites]] the gore fans, and enough T&A from a couple of the [[daughter]] to please T&A fans. [[Total]], this flick is highly [[underestimated]] and widely sought out in the slasher movie [[globe]] as it's proved [[utterly]] [[few]] to [[found]] on video. Highly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5701 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] To [[sat]] how [[awful]] The Shield is, you'd have to write pages and pages, so suffice it to say that it is a monument to [[bad]] directing.

"When Directors Go Awry" should have been the title of this production. Indeed, directors are supposed to infuse their work with a sense of visual style and story-telling that propels the story forward.

How is [[constantly]] [[shaking]] the camera and [[playing]] with the zoom lens a "[[style]]"? How is it propelling the story forward? Of course there's also the "editing by random [[numbers]]" [[nonsense]]. Apparently it's become hip to just cut randomly.

I guess it's too much work to do good editing.

Well, that made it too much [[work]] for most people to watch The [[Shield]] which languished as one of the most over-hyped and unwatched [[shows]] of all [[time]]. To [[oin]] how [[scary]] The Shield is, you'd have to write pages and pages, so suffice it to say that it is a monument to [[unfavourable]] directing.

"When Directors Go Awry" should have been the title of this production. Indeed, directors are supposed to infuse their work with a sense of visual style and story-telling that propels the story forward.

How is [[steadily]] [[stirring]] the camera and [[play]] with the zoom lens a "[[elegance]]"? How is it propelling the story forward? Of course there's also the "editing by random [[figures]]" [[absurd]]. Apparently it's become hip to just cut randomly.

I guess it's too much work to do good editing.

Well, that made it too much [[collaboration]] for most people to watch The [[Shielded]] which languished as one of the most over-hyped and unwatched [[exhibitions]] of all [[period]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There is something [[special]] about the Austrian [[movies]] not only by Seidl, but by Spielmann and other [[directors]] as well. This is the piercing sense of reality that never [[leaves]] the viewer throughout the movie. Hundstage is no [[exception]]. This [[effect]] is [[achieved]] not only by the [[depicted]] [[stories]] but [[also]] by actors [[playing]]. [[In]] Hundstage I have never had the feeling that these are actors playing, but real people instead. So [[real]] is the visceral [[feeling]] of the [[viewer]]...Almost as if the grumpy [[pensioner]] or [[lonely]] lady in the movie are living below you in your block.

Any person living in Vienna can without any doubt painfully recognize the people in the movie with their meckern/sudern (complaining), their hidden sexual urges and the prolo macho guys. This is further reinforced by the Viennese dialect which is, according to many, especially made for complaining as a way of life. A special parochialism and arrogance typical for Vienna are also very well [[portrayed]].

The Viennese suburbs have a vivid presence in the movie with their stupor and [[drowsiness]] where nothing happens. Moreover, they have been turned into a celebration of materialism with shopping malls and huge department stores. Inbetween are the houses of the people where they [[indulge]] into what they [[reckon]] is pleasure-giving activities, trying to stay in touch with their human selves, yet in vain. The examples are the sexual game of the old lady with the men which bordered on rape, the prolo guy losing his nerves and hitting his girlfriend and the young woman who hitchhikes and irritates her drivers.

The film has no soundtrack as it [[concentrates]] on the normality/abnormality of its images only. Another typical feature of Seidl (and other Austrian [[directors]]) is his showing of disturbingly [[sexual]] images. These include the stripping of the [[old]] [[woman]] for her [[husband]], the sexual scenes in the bath, the sexual game of the lady with the two men in her [[apartment]], etc.

[[In]] Hundstage Seild has [[portrayed]] the [[lives]] of people who [[eventually]] may be as much Viennese as they [[could]] be citizens of Paris, [[New]] York or Madrid. The [[viewers]] should not [[despise]] or feel [[pity]] for the [[Viennese]] in the [[movie]] as they themselves could [[become]] victims of the same human estrangement and alienation, albeit in different circumstances. In the end, I believe Seidl's film is a warning to us about the terrible state of human relationships so brutally [[revealed]] in Hundstage. And if the viewer does not succumb to the reasons for this evil transformation, Seidl has achieved his goal. There is something [[specific]] about the Austrian [[cinematic]] not only by Seidl, but by Spielmann and other [[administrators]] as well. This is the piercing sense of reality that never [[sheets]] the viewer throughout the movie. Hundstage is no [[exemption]]. This [[consequences]] is [[fulfilled]] not only by the [[illustrated]] [[tale]] but [[apart]] by actors [[gaming]]. [[Among]] Hundstage I have never had the feeling that these are actors playing, but real people instead. So [[actual]] is the visceral [[impression]] of the [[viewfinder]]...Almost as if the grumpy [[retiree]] or [[alone]] lady in the movie are living below you in your block.

Any person living in Vienna can without any doubt painfully recognize the people in the movie with their meckern/sudern (complaining), their hidden sexual urges and the prolo macho guys. This is further reinforced by the Viennese dialect which is, according to many, especially made for complaining as a way of life. A special parochialism and arrogance typical for Vienna are also very well [[depicted]].

The Viennese suburbs have a vivid presence in the movie with their stupor and [[insomnia]] where nothing happens. Moreover, they have been turned into a celebration of materialism with shopping malls and huge department stores. Inbetween are the houses of the people where they [[indulging]] into what they [[imagining]] is pleasure-giving activities, trying to stay in touch with their human selves, yet in vain. The examples are the sexual game of the old lady with the men which bordered on rape, the prolo guy losing his nerves and hitting his girlfriend and the young woman who hitchhikes and irritates her drivers.

The film has no soundtrack as it [[focussed]] on the normality/abnormality of its images only. Another typical feature of Seidl (and other Austrian [[administrators]]) is his showing of disturbingly [[sexually]] images. These include the stripping of the [[elderly]] [[wife]] for her [[hubby]], the sexual scenes in the bath, the sexual game of the lady with the two men in her [[townhouse]], etc.

[[During]] Hundstage Seild has [[depicted]] the [[iife]] of people who [[lastly]] may be as much Viennese as they [[did]] be citizens of Paris, [[Novel]] York or Madrid. The [[onlookers]] should not [[loathed]] or feel [[shame]] for the [[Vienna]] in the [[flick]] as they themselves could [[becoming]] victims of the same human estrangement and alienation, albeit in different circumstances. In the end, I believe Seidl's film is a warning to us about the terrible state of human relationships so brutally [[demonstrated]] in Hundstage. And if the viewer does not succumb to the reasons for this evil transformation, Seidl has achieved his goal. --------------------------------------------- Result 5703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] You know how Star Trek fans flocked to all the Star Trek movies, even the really bad ones? Why? To see their heroes in action one more time. That's the way I feel about Doc Savage. I am a major fanatic for the character, and the prospect of seeing Doc and his crew in an adventure was overwhelming. And the first 20 minutes of the film only heightened that feeling of anticipation. Then they decided to crib elements from a number of Doc adventures and throw them into this one movie, resulting in a [[somewhat]] [[disjointed]] film. There's a lot of promise in here, diluted by a number of unfortunate choices (the music, the "camp" elements, etc.) But the spirit of Doc is there, and that's what those of us familiar with Doc and his crew respond to. So, in my long-winded way, what I'm trying to say is that this is not a bad movie: it's just not as good as it should have been. And anyone who is a fan of Superman, James Bond, Indiana Jones, Buckaroo Banzai, and many other characters ought to check this movie out just to become familiar with the hero who provided inspiration for them all. You know how Star Trek fans flocked to all the Star Trek movies, even the really bad ones? Why? To see their heroes in action one more time. That's the way I feel about Doc Savage. I am a major fanatic for the character, and the prospect of seeing Doc and his crew in an adventure was overwhelming. And the first 20 minutes of the film only heightened that feeling of anticipation. Then they decided to crib elements from a number of Doc adventures and throw them into this one movie, resulting in a [[rather]] [[incoherent]] film. There's a lot of promise in here, diluted by a number of unfortunate choices (the music, the "camp" elements, etc.) But the spirit of Doc is there, and that's what those of us familiar with Doc and his crew respond to. So, in my long-winded way, what I'm trying to say is that this is not a bad movie: it's just not as good as it should have been. And anyone who is a fan of Superman, James Bond, Indiana Jones, Buckaroo Banzai, and many other characters ought to check this movie out just to become familiar with the hero who provided inspiration for them all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5704 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Considering its pedigree, this should be a far more enjoyable film than it is. Even with a lip-smacking collection of eccentrics in the cast - what aficionado would not eagerly anticipate a movie which brings together Lemmon, Lanchester, Kovacs and Gingold? - the entire event is dully paced, drearily shot and, more often than not, witless.

Kim Novak's gifts were not essentially comic, as she went on to confirm in Kiss Me Stupid. James Stewart was a fine comedian, as he ably demonstrated in movies from ranging from The Philadelphia Story to Harvey. I think he comes out better from this mess than anyone else does. Except maybe the cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 5705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Maybe [[television]] will be as brutal one day. Maybe „Big Brother` was only the first step in the direction Stephen „Richard Bachmann` King described the end point of. But enough about that. If I [[spend]] too much words talking about the serious background topic of this movie I do exactly what the producers [[hoped]] by choosing this material. It's the same with „The 6th Day`. No [[matter]], how primitive the film is, it provokes a discussion about its topic, which [[serves]] the [[producers]] as [[publicity]]. Let's [[NOT]] be taken in by that. The [[social]] [[criticism]] that is [[suggested]] by that plot [[summary]] is only an alibi to make it possible to [[produce]] a speculative, violent [[movie]], more for [[video]] [[sale]] than for [[cinema]].

I didn't read the [[book]]. I don't dare criticising Stephen King without having read him, but when I [[saw]] the [[film]] I thought they couldn't make such a [[terrible]] [[film]] out of a [[good]] book: [[In]] a [[typical]] 1980s set with 1980s [[music]] and some minor [[actors]] Arnold Schwarzenegger [[finds]] himself as a [[policeman]] [[running]] away from [[killers]] within a [[cruel]] TV [[show]]. The [[audience]] is cheering.

[[Together]] with „Predator`, this is definitely Schwarzenegger's most [[stupid]] [[movie]]. 2 stars out of 10. Maybe [[tv]] will be as brutal one day. Maybe „Big Brother` was only the first step in the direction Stephen „Richard Bachmann` King described the end point of. But enough about that. If I [[expenditure]] too much words talking about the serious background topic of this movie I do exactly what the producers [[expected]] by choosing this material. It's the same with „The 6th Day`. No [[issue]], how primitive the film is, it provokes a discussion about its topic, which [[contributes]] the [[makers]] as [[advocacy]]. Let's [[NAH]] be taken in by that. The [[societal]] [[criticized]] that is [[suggests]] by that plot [[synthesis]] is only an alibi to make it possible to [[generating]] a speculative, violent [[movies]], more for [[videos]] [[sales]] than for [[theaters]].

I didn't read the [[books]]. I don't dare criticising Stephen King without having read him, but when I [[noticed]] the [[filmmaking]] I thought they couldn't make such a [[scary]] [[movies]] out of a [[buena]] book: [[Across]] a [[characteristic]] 1980s set with 1980s [[musica]] and some minor [[players]] Arnold Schwarzenegger [[discoveries]] himself as a [[cops]] [[implementing]] away from [[murderers]] within a [[brutal]] TV [[shows]]. The [[viewers]] is cheering.

[[Jointly]] with „Predator`, this is definitely Schwarzenegger's most [[dumb]] [[cinema]]. 2 stars out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5706 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This might be the [[worst]] film ever [[made]], and is [[possibly]] worth seeing for that reason [[alone]]. Streisand is laughably unbelievable as a [[young]] woman [[posing]] as a [[man]] in [[order]] to [[study]] [[Judaism]]. The soundtrack is torturous, featuring Barbara belting out some of the [[weakest]] blather ever put to [[film]]. And don't even get me [[started]] on the plot. You will actually get more chuckles out of this film than many comedies because it is soooooooo [[terrible]]. The [[rampant]] ego of Streisand, thinking she could somehow raise this [[stinker]] to Oscar [[heights]], led to this [[disaster]]. I'm pretty [[sure]] the [[novelist]], Isaac Bashevis [[Singer]], [[hated]] this film and never forgave Streisand. I can't blame him. This movie is like [[watching]] a car wreck in slow motion for two hours with the soundtrack of 'The Sound of Music' being played backwards on an [[old]] turntable. It's truly that bad. I'm [[amazed]] that [[anyone]] from Streisand enjoyed this [[movie]] on the level that it was intended. This might be the [[meanest]] film ever [[introduced]], and is [[arguably]] worth seeing for that reason [[exclusively]]. Streisand is laughably unbelievable as a [[youthful]] woman [[masquerading]] as a [[bloke]] in [[decree]] to [[scrutinize]] [[Jewish]]. The soundtrack is torturous, featuring Barbara belting out some of the [[lower]] blather ever put to [[movie]]. And don't even get me [[initiating]] on the plot. You will actually get more chuckles out of this film than many comedies because it is soooooooo [[frightful]]. The [[runaway]] ego of Streisand, thinking she could somehow raise this [[tosser]] to Oscar [[highlands]], led to this [[catastrophe]]. I'm pretty [[persuaded]] the [[playwright]], Isaac Bashevis [[Diva]], [[hating]] this film and never forgave Streisand. I can't blame him. This movie is like [[staring]] a car wreck in slow motion for two hours with the soundtrack of 'The Sound of Music' being played backwards on an [[archaic]] turntable. It's truly that bad. I'm [[surprised]] that [[everyone]] from Streisand enjoyed this [[filmmaking]] on the level that it was intended. --------------------------------------------- Result 5707 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The movie was TERRIBLE!!! Easily the worst movie I have seen in the past few years. One of those movies I will be able to tell people for the next three years that it was the worst movie I can think of. Thank you for giving me an answer to that burning question "What is the worst movie you have seen?" Answer: Celestine Prophecy. Trust me...I read the book, enjoyed the message and was excited to see the movie, but then, they treated the audience like we are r*tarded. There is no story and the story that is there is crippled by too much magic and coincidence. It is too bad they have to spell out the nine prophecies and can't simply weave them into a story that is entertaining to follow. They didn't spend any time on character development and it was easy to not care if any character died. It was embarrassing to be one of the few people who stuck around until the end of this incredibly boring movie. The book is pretty boring too but I enjoyed the parallels that could be seen in everyday life while you read the book. The film does not offer the same opportunity and I would suggest not seeing it if you want to continue to hold the words of the book close to your heart. DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE. Trust me. --------------------------------------------- Result 5708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is a crappy and forgettable Sean Connery vehicle. The performances are generally crappy especially by Capshaw, Fishburne, and the usually solid Ed Harris. Connery seems miscast as a Harvard Academic. The movie absolutely gets worse as it goes along. It is a third rate mystery that becomes extremely contrived by the time it unravels. The movie squanders an excellent supporting cast. George Plimpton also turns up in a minor role to add some gravitas to Connery as they debate the death penalty. The violence and the atmosphere pepper a third rate mystery/thriller that is manipulation to the highest degree. The scripting and direction are extremely poor. Connery's charisma and screen presence are the film's only virtue. Manipulative, Violent, and Ridiculous. 2/10 Avoid It. --------------------------------------------- Result 5709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a film which should be seen by anybody interested in, effected by, or suffering from an eating disorder. It is an amazingly accurate and sensitive portrayal of bulimia in a teenage girl, its causes and its symptoms. The girl is played by one of the most brilliant young actresses working in cinema today, Alison Lohman, who was later so spectacular in 'Where the Truth Lies'. I would recommend that this film be shown in all schools, as you will never see a better on this subject. Alison Lohman is absolutely outstanding, and one marvels at her ability to convey the anguish of a girl suffering from this compulsive disorder. If barometers tell us the air pressure, Alison Lohman tells us the emotional pressure with the same degree of accuracy. Her emotional range is so precise, each scene could be measured microscopically for its gradations of trauma, on a scale of rising hysteria and desperation which reaches unbearable intensity. Mare Winningham is the perfect choice to play her mother, and does so with immense sympathy and a range of emotions just as finely tuned as Lohman's. Together, they make a pair of sensitive emotional oscillators vibrating in resonance with one another. This film is really an astonishing achievement, and director Katt Shea should be proud of it. The only reason for not seeing it is if you are not interested in people. But even if you like nature films best, this is after all animal behaviour at the sharp edge. Bulimia is an extreme version of how a tormented soul can destroy her own body in a frenzy of despair. And if we don't sympathise with people suffering from the depths of despair, then we are dead inside. --------------------------------------------- Result 5710 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I am not one of those people who just go [[online]] after I [[see]] a [[movie]] and [[decide]] to [[call]] it the [[worst]] [[movie]] ever [[made]]. [[If]] you [[doubt]] me, please look at my other reviews. [[However]], for the [[first]] time ever, I have [[seen]] a movie so [[horrible]] that I [[wanted]] to write about how bad it was before it was even over.

I [[LOVE]] bad [[movies]]. To me, Ed [[Wood]] is a [[genius]], I thought Bloody [[Murder]], Jeepers Creepers and most horrible horror [[movies]] were good. However, there is not a [[single]] good thing I can [[say]] about this [[film]].

The plot is [[basically]] non existent. If [[someone]] reading my [[review]] wastes their [[money]] to see it, they can discern for themselves what the plot might be, but I [[advise]] you that a nickel [[would]] be worth more than watching this [[movie]].

The special [[effects]] are [[bad]].

The acting is [[bad]].

The two leads are [[attractive]], but that's all there is.

I am not the [[type]] to spoil a [[movie]] for [[anyone]], but I [[INVITE]] [[anyone]] to email me at foxbarking@yahoo.com to [[ask]] for my [[opinion]] on this movie before they waste a dime on it. I will tell you anything.

I [[love]] [[bad]] [[movies]], and I [[love]] [[horror]] and I [[love]] new [[inventive]] [[movies]]. I even [[love]] [[horror]] porn stuff like Hostel ([[Which]] some reviewers claimed this was like, but [[obviously]] they only [[thought]] so cause Roger Bart was in this and Hostel 2). But this may be the Number 1 most [[worthless]] and stupid and dumbass [[movie]] EVER made.

And before you [[disregard]] this review, this is [[coming]] from [[someone]] who not only sat through the [[ENTIRE]] premiere of House of the Dead, but [[actually]] bought a [[copy]] of it. I am not one of those people who just go [[onscreen]] after I [[consults]] a [[flick]] and [[deciding]] to [[calls]] it the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[effected]]. [[Though]] you [[duda]] me, please look at my other reviews. [[Conversely]], for the [[firstly]] time ever, I have [[noticed]] a movie so [[horrific]] that I [[want]] to write about how bad it was before it was even over.

I [[ADORED]] bad [[filmmaking]]. To me, Ed [[Bois]] is a [[engineering]], I thought Bloody [[Kill]], Jeepers Creepers and most horrible horror [[filmmaking]] were good. However, there is not a [[exclusive]] good thing I can [[told]] about this [[filmmaking]].

The plot is [[predominantly]] non existent. If [[everyone]] reading my [[reviews]] wastes their [[moneys]] to see it, they can discern for themselves what the plot might be, but I [[counselor]] you that a nickel [[could]] be worth more than watching this [[flick]].

The special [[consequences]] are [[naughty]].

The acting is [[naughty]].

The two leads are [[seductive]], but that's all there is.

I am not the [[kind]] to spoil a [[flick]] for [[somebody]], but I [[URGED]] [[nobody]] to email me at foxbarking@yahoo.com to [[requested]] for my [[viewing]] on this movie before they waste a dime on it. I will tell you anything.

I [[adored]] [[faulty]] [[movie]], and I [[adored]] [[terror]] and I [[adores]] new [[ingenious]] [[cinematographic]]. I even [[adored]] [[terror]] porn stuff like Hostel ([[Whose]] some reviewers claimed this was like, but [[definitely]] they only [[think]] so cause Roger Bart was in this and Hostel 2). But this may be the Number 1 most [[pointless]] and stupid and dumbass [[filmmaking]] EVER made.

And before you [[disdain]] this review, this is [[come]] from [[everyone]] who not only sat through the [[EVERYTHING]] premiere of House of the Dead, but [[indeed]] bought a [[copies]] of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The fact that this movie has been entitled to the most successful movie in Switzerland's film history makes me shake my head! It's [[true]], but [[pitiful]] at the same time. A flick about the Swiss army could be a good deal better.

The story sounds interesting, at the beginning: Antonio Carrera (Michael Koch) gets forced to absolve his military training by the army while he is in the [[church]], wedding his love Laura Moretti (Mia Aegerter).

The Acting in some [[way]] doesn't really differ from just a few recruits getting drunk and stoned in the reality. Melanie Winiger plays her role as the strong Michelle Bluntschi mediocre, personally i found her rather annoying.

The storyline contains a comedy combined with a romance, which does not work as expected. The romance-part is too trashy, and the comedy-part is not funny at all, it's just a cheap try and does not change throughout the whole movie whatsoever. It's funny for preadolescent 12-13 year olds, but not for such as those who search an entertaining comedy. The humor is weak except for some shots.

Dope? Cool! Stealing? Cool! If you want a proper comedy about the Swiss RS, make sure you did not absolve your military training yet, and even then don't expect too much!

I'll give it 4 out of 10 stars, because Marco Rima is quite funny during his screen time. Not a hell of a lot screen time though The fact that this movie has been entitled to the most successful movie in Switzerland's film history makes me shake my head! It's [[veritable]], but [[sorrowful]] at the same time. A flick about the Swiss army could be a good deal better.

The story sounds interesting, at the beginning: Antonio Carrera (Michael Koch) gets forced to absolve his military training by the army while he is in the [[iglesias]], wedding his love Laura Moretti (Mia Aegerter).

The Acting in some [[camino]] doesn't really differ from just a few recruits getting drunk and stoned in the reality. Melanie Winiger plays her role as the strong Michelle Bluntschi mediocre, personally i found her rather annoying.

The storyline contains a comedy combined with a romance, which does not work as expected. The romance-part is too trashy, and the comedy-part is not funny at all, it's just a cheap try and does not change throughout the whole movie whatsoever. It's funny for preadolescent 12-13 year olds, but not for such as those who search an entertaining comedy. The humor is weak except for some shots.

Dope? Cool! Stealing? Cool! If you want a proper comedy about the Swiss RS, make sure you did not absolve your military training yet, and even then don't expect too much!

I'll give it 4 out of 10 stars, because Marco Rima is quite funny during his screen time. Not a hell of a lot screen time though --------------------------------------------- Result 5712 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the more i think about it, there was nothing redeeming about this

movie. i saw it 9 months ago, so my memory might have made it

worse than it was, but i do know it was at least as bad as a 4 out of

10.

after seeing the movie, i met the director. he seemed so clueless

as to what he was doing or what he had done, and as far as i

could tell, he didn't care for the film either. even he agreed that he

didn't really know what he was doing, and he was forced to do

certain things because it was filmed digitally.

i felt that the movie was trying to hard to fit in to the formula that it

built for itself: "9 people all have to be connected in some way. how

can we get from point 'A' to point 'B'" so in order get from the

prostitute we see in the start and back to her at the end they 10

minutes on each character's relationship to another person. it

makes one feel choked by the 2 demensional, badly drawn

characters.

I just remembered the one redeeming part of the movie... Steve

Bouchemi there is one scene where he is amazing. that's it. as i

say... 4 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Hood of the Living Dead and all of the other movies these guys [[directed]] look [[like]] they got together and filmed this with their buddies who have zero talent one afternoon when they were bored (lines are completely unrehearsed and [[unconvincing]]). I find that 95% of amateur movies and 90% of home video footage is [[better]] than this film (although the similarities between them warrant the [[comparison]]). "Hey lets see if anyone is dumb enough to buy our [[movies]]!". Hopefully nobody ELSE wasn't. My [[apologies]] to those [[involved]] in the flic as this review is somewhat harsh but i was the dope who read your [[fake]] reviews and purchased the movie. Hood of the Living Dead and all of the other movies these guys [[geared]] look [[iike]] they got together and filmed this with their buddies who have zero talent one afternoon when they were bored (lines are completely unrehearsed and [[inconclusive]]). I find that 95% of amateur movies and 90% of home video footage is [[optimum]] than this film (although the similarities between them warrant the [[comparisons]]). "Hey lets see if anyone is dumb enough to buy our [[movie]]!". Hopefully nobody ELSE wasn't. My [[apologizing]] to those [[embroiled]] in the flic as this review is somewhat harsh but i was the dope who read your [[forged]] reviews and purchased the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very funny east-meets-west film influenced by the closure of GM's Flint, Michigan plant in the eighties and the rise and integration of Japanese automakers in the US. Set in western Pennsylvania, it features great performances by Michael Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, and George Wendt. Music by blues legend Stevie Ray Vaughan. --------------------------------------------- Result 5715 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[saw]] this movie a few days ago... what the [[hell]] was that?

I like [[movies]] with Brian O'Halloran, they are funny and [[enjoyable]]. When I saw a [[name]] of this title and genre I [[thought]] [[great]], this one [[could]] be [[really]] [[good]]... some [[parody]] for slashers or another gore [[movies]]... but.. then i read a preview and [[thought]] [[right]] it [[could]] be [[good]] anyway... but it wasn't...

my opinion: if like [[movies]] they look little [[bit]] like documentary, with [[little]] [[bit]] of [[comedy]] [[try]] some Moore's [[movies]] or [[Alien]] autopsy, they are [[really]] about something. this one was empty.

and put A comedy to title... no comment... [[really]] [[bad]] joke I [[observed]] this movie a few days ago... what the [[bordello]] was that?

I like [[movie]] with Brian O'Halloran, they are funny and [[pleasant]]. When I saw a [[denomination]] of this title and genre I [[ideology]] [[large]], this one [[did]] be [[truly]] [[alright]]... some [[mockery]] for slashers or another gore [[filmmaking]]... but.. then i read a preview and [[figured]] [[rights]] it [[did]] be [[buena]] anyway... but it wasn't...

my opinion: if like [[cinematography]] they look little [[bitten]] like documentary, with [[small]] [[bitten]] of [[parody]] [[attempting]] some Moore's [[cinema]] or [[Stranger]] autopsy, they are [[truly]] about something. this one was empty.

and put A comedy to title... no comment... [[genuinely]] [[unfavourable]] joke --------------------------------------------- Result 5716 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And so the great rewriting of history continues Hollywood style.

This was senseless ridiculous rubbish.

Its shocks me that such an amazing amount of money can be spent to produce what is the most contrived, poorly acted inaccurate film I have ever seen. It is appalling.

Nic Cage's brief flirtation with serious acting appears to be over. I can only assume that Leaving Las Vegas was a glitch in an otherwise litany of dreadful films.

Diane Kruger proves that her performance in Troy was no fluke, she really can't act.

Harvey Keitel should be ashamed of himself for working on such tripe.

Only recommended for those either recovering from a recent lobotomy or people of an opinion that America invented the world. --------------------------------------------- Result 5717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm usually not one to say that a film is not worth watching, but this is certainly an extenuating circumstance. The only true upside to this film is Cornelia Sharpe, looking rather attractive, and the fact that this film is REALLY short.

The plot in the film is unbelievably boring and goes virtually nowhere throughout the film. None of the characters are even remotely interesting and there is no reason to care about anyone. I'm not sure why on earth Sean Connery agreed to do this film, but he should have definitely passed on this one.

The only reason I could see for seeing this film is if you are a die-hard Sean Connery fan and simply want to see everything he's done. Save this one for last though.

Well, if you by some miracle end up seeing this despite my review (or any of the other reviews on this site), then I hope you enjoy it more than I did. Thanks for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 5718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I can't believe I am so [[angry]] after seeing this that I am about to write my first ever review on IMDb.

This Disney documentary is [[nothing]] but a rehashed Planet Earth lite. Now I [[knew]] going into this that it was [[advertised]] as "from the people who brought you Planet Earth," but I had no idea they were going to [[blatantly]] use the exact same cuts as the groundbreaking documentary mini-series. I just [[paid]] $8.75 to see something I already own on [[DVD]]. [[Shame]] on Disney for not warning people that there is [[absolutely]] nothing original here (save a James Earl Jones voice-over and 90 seconds of sailfish that I don't believe were in Planet Earth).

But the [[biggest]] crime of all, is that while Planet [[Earth]] uses the tragic story of the polar bear as evidence that we are killing this planet and a catalyst for ecologic change, Disney took that story and turned it into family friendly [[tripe]]. After the male polar bear's demise, they show his cubs grown significantly a year later, and spew some garbage about how they are ready to carry on his memory, and that the earth really is a [[beautiful]] place after all. No [[mention]] of the grown cubs impending deaths due to the same plight their father endured, no [[warning]] of trouble for future generations if we don't get our act together, nothing. Just a [[montage]] of stuff we have already seen throughout the movie (and many times more, if you are one of the billion people who have already seen Planet Earth).

I have never left the theater feeling so ashamed and [[cheated]] in my life. I can't believe I am so [[outraged]] after seeing this that I am about to write my first ever review on IMDb.

This Disney documentary is [[anything]] but a rehashed Planet Earth lite. Now I [[overheard]] going into this that it was [[publicized]] as "from the people who brought you Planet Earth," but I had no idea they were going to [[overtly]] use the exact same cuts as the groundbreaking documentary mini-series. I just [[pay]] $8.75 to see something I already own on [[DVDS]]. [[Pity]] on Disney for not warning people that there is [[fully]] nothing original here (save a James Earl Jones voice-over and 90 seconds of sailfish that I don't believe were in Planet Earth).

But the [[greater]] crime of all, is that while Planet [[Overland]] uses the tragic story of the polar bear as evidence that we are killing this planet and a catalyst for ecologic change, Disney took that story and turned it into family friendly [[gut]]. After the male polar bear's demise, they show his cubs grown significantly a year later, and spew some garbage about how they are ready to carry on his memory, and that the earth really is a [[sumptuous]] place after all. No [[cite]] of the grown cubs impending deaths due to the same plight their father endured, no [[ultimatum]] of trouble for future generations if we don't get our act together, nothing. Just a [[fitting]] of stuff we have already seen throughout the movie (and many times more, if you are one of the billion people who have already seen Planet Earth).

I have never left the theater feeling so ashamed and [[remodeled]] in my life. --------------------------------------------- Result 5719 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really love this show, it's like reading a book and each chapter leaves you wanting more. It gets you thinking about what is going to happen in the next episode, and the struggle of trying to maintain their friendship throughout the years. After each episode ends it leaves a sweet bitter taste in your mouth knowing that: One - The show was good, you can't wait for the next episode and it really gets you thinking about what actually happens to the friends throughout the twenty years. And two - the fact that the show has been put "on hiatus" and we will not see the show finish in it's entirety. Fox obviously do not know what they have done, they claim that they are losing viewers in the 18 - 49 category they clearly do not know what people want to see if they got rid of a good show such as "Reunion". I have one query though that I would like to raise. If they were to bring the show back and it went on for another season how would it work since each episode is done in the period of a year and the story is based on what happens in the span of twenty years? Your answers are most welcome. Bring back Reunion! Bring back Reunion! --------------------------------------------- Result 5720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Wow, i'm a huge Henry VIII/Tudor era fan and, well, this was .... interesting. The only one I [[watched]] was the Catherine of Aragon one. And wow...just wow. I've [[seen]] [[bad]] acting before, but this reached new heights. When the [[actress]] who played Catherine was umm.. crying? she wails and screams and i have to admit i rewinded many times... many, many times .... funny, funny stuff. The only person who even [[showed]] any slight sliver of [[talent]] was the actress playing Anne Boleyn (i might be prejudiced though, i do have a slight obsession with Anne Boleyn, she was a really facinating woman, read up on her, it's worth it!) Also, i have read a lot about the Tudor time period and i think that the [[characters]] weren't very acurately displayed, they were all very stereotypical. Only see this movie if you are prepared to see a very important time period, and the important lives of those involved turned into a laughing stock. Wow, i'm a huge Henry VIII/Tudor era fan and, well, this was .... interesting. The only one I [[seen]] was the Catherine of Aragon one. And wow...just wow. I've [[noticed]] [[unfavorable]] acting before, but this reached new heights. When the [[actor]] who played Catherine was umm.. crying? she wails and screams and i have to admit i rewinded many times... many, many times .... funny, funny stuff. The only person who even [[revealed]] any slight sliver of [[talents]] was the actress playing Anne Boleyn (i might be prejudiced though, i do have a slight obsession with Anne Boleyn, she was a really facinating woman, read up on her, it's worth it!) Also, i have read a lot about the Tudor time period and i think that the [[trait]] weren't very acurately displayed, they were all very stereotypical. Only see this movie if you are prepared to see a very important time period, and the important lives of those involved turned into a laughing stock. --------------------------------------------- Result 5721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A long time ago, I watched this movie from the middle on cable. I then had a crush on Mary Moronov. I saw her again in Eating Raoul. I was convinced that she's the hottest woman on screen.

I maybe biased about this movie. 9 out of 10.

This's the only movie I own on original tape. --------------------------------------------- Result 5722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Waldemar Daninsky (Paul Naschy) [[travels]] to Tibet and is bitten by a yeti, which causes him to become a werewolf. He is accidentally killed after he attacks his cheating [[wife]] and her lover, and is later revived by a female [[scientist]], [[Dr]]. Ilona Ermann, who uses him in [[mind]] control [[experiments]]. Daninsky [[later]] discovers an underground asylum populated by the [[bizarre]] subjects of the doctor's failed experiments.

Upon hearing of Naschy's death from colleague Jon Kitley, I rummaged through my collection for a [[suitable]] [[film]] to watch. In my scramble, I found I own not one but three(!) copies of "Fury of the Wolfman". The film is of questionable video quality, the sound is dubbed in a mediocre fashion, the cinematography is sort of slapstick style at times. And the American versions have two love scenes removed. Quite frankly, without a remastered, uncut copy, I wasn't really getting the proper movie in all its glory.

This film claims to be the fourth in a long series about the werewolf Count Waldemar Daninsky. I suspect this is true, but you wouldn't know this from the film itself. The plot is confusing at times, and there's really no indication that this is a sequel. If you read the plot summaries on Wikipedia and compare them to what is printed on the box, you'll see that I'm not alone in my confusion.

Perhaps the film's shortcomings can be forgiven if we understand the production hell it went through. While floating around for years, it was only released in 1973, due to problems involved in finding a distributor. And Naschy said in his autobiography that the director, Zabalza, was an incompetent alcoholic, and that he hated working with him. Those really aren't light accusations, and I have no idea what Zabalza had to say on his own behalf.

Chances are, sooner or later you'll come across a low-grade version of "Fury of the Wolfman". It appears in a variety of three-packs and box sets, so you might accidentally acquire it and not even know. What really needs to happen is an American uncut version, with a decent sound and video mix, and the love scenes thrown back in. As far as I know, this does not exist. Let us honor Paul Naschy's legacy and get his films to a wider audience in a level of quality he deserves. Waldemar Daninsky (Paul Naschy) [[travel]] to Tibet and is bitten by a yeti, which causes him to become a werewolf. He is accidentally killed after he attacks his cheating [[mujer]] and her lover, and is later revived by a female [[scholar]], [[Doktor]]. Ilona Ermann, who uses him in [[intellect]] control [[experiences]]. Daninsky [[then]] discovers an underground asylum populated by the [[surreal]] subjects of the doctor's failed experiments.

Upon hearing of Naschy's death from colleague Jon Kitley, I rummaged through my collection for a [[proper]] [[filmmaking]] to watch. In my scramble, I found I own not one but three(!) copies of "Fury of the Wolfman". The film is of questionable video quality, the sound is dubbed in a mediocre fashion, the cinematography is sort of slapstick style at times. And the American versions have two love scenes removed. Quite frankly, without a remastered, uncut copy, I wasn't really getting the proper movie in all its glory.

This film claims to be the fourth in a long series about the werewolf Count Waldemar Daninsky. I suspect this is true, but you wouldn't know this from the film itself. The plot is confusing at times, and there's really no indication that this is a sequel. If you read the plot summaries on Wikipedia and compare them to what is printed on the box, you'll see that I'm not alone in my confusion.

Perhaps the film's shortcomings can be forgiven if we understand the production hell it went through. While floating around for years, it was only released in 1973, due to problems involved in finding a distributor. And Naschy said in his autobiography that the director, Zabalza, was an incompetent alcoholic, and that he hated working with him. Those really aren't light accusations, and I have no idea what Zabalza had to say on his own behalf.

Chances are, sooner or later you'll come across a low-grade version of "Fury of the Wolfman". It appears in a variety of three-packs and box sets, so you might accidentally acquire it and not even know. What really needs to happen is an American uncut version, with a decent sound and video mix, and the love scenes thrown back in. As far as I know, this does not exist. Let us honor Paul Naschy's legacy and get his films to a wider audience in a level of quality he deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 5723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] Its Christmas Eve and lazy and [[submissive]] [[housewife]] Della (Kim Basinger) receives some violent threats from her troubled and abusive husband. Leaving her twin children in bed she ventures off into the night for one last shopping spree at the local mall. Its busy there and finding a parking space is nigh on impossible, Della takes umbrage at one motorist who parks in two spaces, she leaves them a note saying as much. Returning to her car after visiting the shops she is confronted by some yobs, Yup the owners of the car she left a note on, they are very angry and want some fun with her, a kindly security guard steps into assist her, but things get out of hand and the guard is shot, Della flees with the now murderous yobs in hot pursuit, they shoot at her, she looses control of her car and crashes, quickly grabbing her toolbox from the trunk, she hides in a deserted building site, but is soon caught, just before they try to rape and kill her, from her magical toolbox she produces a wrench, wounding their leader "Chuckie", she manages to escape again into the nearby woods, in the fracas one of the gang is killed, it just happens to be the black guy Here the night gets worse for all involved as a deadly game of cat and mouse ensues. A similar plot line to Eden Lake drew me to this, but that is where the comparisons end. This is a brainless and dumb film, [[shockingly]] scripted and [[horribly]] [[acted]] by all involved, the doe eyed Disney-esquire twin kids are horrible to watch, but its Lukas Haas as Chuckie, that must take the plaudits in the [[bad]] acting department, although he is given a run for his money by the equally awful husband. As a film its plot line is completely telegraphed all the way through, even in the set up early on Della's cell phone goes dead and then in the shops her credit card has been cancelled by her hubby and she has no cash and its Christmas Eve, now where could they be going with this I wonder??? The only surprising part of this $hit is when after killing all the clichéd bad guys with the contents of her magic toolbox, she demands Chuckie to f@ck her, if my jaw had not already been on the floor at this films awfulness, it would surely have dropped and smashed on the floor. even the ending is messed up, all the feminist grannies wanting their pound of flesh are left utterly disappointed.. I didn't think I could be further disappointed, but then I saw that Guillermo del Toro produced this dreck Its Christmas Eve and lazy and [[docile]] [[homemaker]] Della (Kim Basinger) receives some violent threats from her troubled and abusive husband. Leaving her twin children in bed she ventures off into the night for one last shopping spree at the local mall. Its busy there and finding a parking space is nigh on impossible, Della takes umbrage at one motorist who parks in two spaces, she leaves them a note saying as much. Returning to her car after visiting the shops she is confronted by some yobs, Yup the owners of the car she left a note on, they are very angry and want some fun with her, a kindly security guard steps into assist her, but things get out of hand and the guard is shot, Della flees with the now murderous yobs in hot pursuit, they shoot at her, she looses control of her car and crashes, quickly grabbing her toolbox from the trunk, she hides in a deserted building site, but is soon caught, just before they try to rape and kill her, from her magical toolbox she produces a wrench, wounding their leader "Chuckie", she manages to escape again into the nearby woods, in the fracas one of the gang is killed, it just happens to be the black guy Here the night gets worse for all involved as a deadly game of cat and mouse ensues. A similar plot line to Eden Lake drew me to this, but that is where the comparisons end. This is a brainless and dumb film, [[marvellously]] scripted and [[unimaginably]] [[reacted]] by all involved, the doe eyed Disney-esquire twin kids are horrible to watch, but its Lukas Haas as Chuckie, that must take the plaudits in the [[unfavourable]] acting department, although he is given a run for his money by the equally awful husband. As a film its plot line is completely telegraphed all the way through, even in the set up early on Della's cell phone goes dead and then in the shops her credit card has been cancelled by her hubby and she has no cash and its Christmas Eve, now where could they be going with this I wonder??? The only surprising part of this $hit is when after killing all the clichéd bad guys with the contents of her magic toolbox, she demands Chuckie to f@ck her, if my jaw had not already been on the floor at this films awfulness, it would surely have dropped and smashed on the floor. even the ending is messed up, all the feminist grannies wanting their pound of flesh are left utterly disappointed.. I didn't think I could be further disappointed, but then I saw that Guillermo del Toro produced this dreck --------------------------------------------- Result 5724 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie was just plain dumb i do not think it was scary at all i went in hoping to be shocked and scared but was mostly laughing some of the scenes were just to fake and thrown together blood scenes were extremely over cg and some of the mutants were ridiculously gay looking it also sucked because the acting was just plain horrible u think they could get some good actors and most of the characters i hated just because how stupid and lame they acted even though they were supposed to be in the military i get to watch movies for free and seen many people walking out im guessing because it was so dumb kinda glad i didn't have to pay for it in short DUMB ASS MOVIE don't see it...but then again thats my opinion --------------------------------------------- Result 5725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Spinal Tap was funny because if you [[knew]] a little about heavy metal, you saw in-jokes all over the place. If you know anything about porn, this [[mock]] documentary will leave you cold. Everything in it [[rings]] [[false]].

Spinal Tap was funny because it took a familiar world and pushed it over the top. This film is decidedly not [[funny]] because it paints a picture of how porn is [[made]] that [[bears]] no relationship to the real world.

The acting here is uniformly [[awful]], but that [[would]] not [[matter]] much if the core idea of the [[movie]] were good. But it's not. Spinal Tap was funny because if you [[knowed]] a little about heavy metal, you saw in-jokes all over the place. If you know anything about porn, this [[simulation]] documentary will leave you cold. Everything in it [[ring]] [[specious]].

Spinal Tap was funny because it took a familiar world and pushed it over the top. This film is decidedly not [[comical]] because it paints a picture of how porn is [[brought]] that [[carry]] no relationship to the real world.

The acting here is uniformly [[scary]], but that [[should]] not [[question]] much if the core idea of the [[filmmaking]] were good. But it's not. --------------------------------------------- Result 5726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie at the 18th Haifa film festival, and it is one of the best I've seen this year. Seeing it on a big screen (and I mean BIG, not one of those TV screens most cinemas have) with an excellent sound system always enhance the cinematic experience, as the movie takes over your eyes and ears and sucks you into the story, into the picture.

The movie presents a set of characters, which are loosely inter-connected. Their stories cross at certain points, and the multiplicity of story lines reminded me very much of the great Robert Altman and his exquisite films. But the true hero of the movie is obviously the city of Madrid, which provides the backdrop for the entire movie. It houses the characters, contains the pavements and roads on which they walk, and sets the background atmosphere for all the events, all in beautifully filmed scenes.

The movie returns again and again to certain themes (shoes, for instance), and in essence Salazar makes his metaphores more and more understandable to the viewer as the movie progresses. He combines the views of the city with the shots of the characters, and elegantly matches the feeling of the scene to the background. A set of talented actors helps him portrait a wide variety of characters. One excellent example is the scene in which Juaquin takes Anita across the street for the first time. It might not work on a small screen, but it gave me goose bumps easily on a big screen.

The message of the movie is very positive, and accordingly the movie is light and funny at times. The music along the movie is usually pop, with a few instrumental pieces (I hope to put my hand on the soundtrack one day, although I seriously doubt I will).

All together, I came out of this movie with a sensational feeling, and I'm not easily impressed (you'll have to take my word for it). For this and more I give this movie a solid 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5727 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Oh a vaguely once famous actress in a [[film]] where she plays a mother to a child . It`s being shown on BBC 1 at half past midnight , I wonder if ... [[yup]] it`s a TVM

You`ve got to hand it to TVM [[producers]] , not content on making one mediocre [[movie]] , they [[usually]] give us two mediocre movies where two themes are mixed [[together]] and NOWHERE TO [[HIDE]] is no [[different]] . The first theme is a [[woman]] in [[danger]] [[theme]] cross pollinated with a [[woman]] suffering from the pain of a divorce [[theme]] which means we have a scene of the [[heroine]] surviving a [[murder]] [[attempt]] followed by a scene having her [[son]] [[Sam]] ask why she divorced ? And being a TVM she [[answers]] that the [[reason]] is " That people change " rather than [[say]] something along the lines like " I`m a right slapper " or Your daddy [[cruises]] mens [[public]] [[toilets]] for sex " as does [[happen]] in [[real]] [[life]] divorce [[cases]] . And it`s [[young]] Sam I feel [[sorry]] for , not only are his [[parents]] divorced but he`s as thick as two short [[planks]] . Actually since he`s so stupid he [[deserves]] no [[sympathy]] because he`s unaware that a man flushing stuff down a [[toilet]] is a [[drug]] dealer , unaware that you [[might]] [[die]] if [[someone]] [[shoots]] at you , and unaware that I LOVE LUCY is painfully unfunny . If only our own childhoods were so innocent , [[ah]] well as Orwell [[said]] " [[Ignorance]] is strength " . Oh hold on Sam is suddenly an [[expert]] on [[marine]] life ! Is this [[character]] [[development]] or poor scripting ? I know what one my money`s on . And [[strange]] that Sam the [[boy]] genuis hasn`t noticed that if the [[story]] is set in 1994 then why do people often wear [[clothes]] , drive [[cars]] and ride trains from the 1950s ? But as it turns out during a plot twist it`s the [[mother]] who`s the dummy . Then there`s a [[final]] plot twist that [[left]] me feeling [[like]] an [[idiot]] for watching this Oh a vaguely once famous actress in a [[filmmaking]] where she plays a mother to a child . It`s being shown on BBC 1 at half past midnight , I wonder if ... [[yes]] it`s a TVM

You`ve got to hand it to TVM [[maker]] , not content on making one mediocre [[movies]] , they [[normally]] give us two mediocre movies where two themes are mixed [[jointly]] and NOWHERE TO [[HIDING]] is no [[distinct]] . The first theme is a [[daughters]] in [[hazards]] [[themes]] cross pollinated with a [[daughters]] suffering from the pain of a divorce [[themes]] which means we have a scene of the [[heroin]] surviving a [[slain]] [[strive]] followed by a scene having her [[sons]] [[Sams]] ask why she divorced ? And being a TVM she [[answer]] that the [[motif]] is " That people change " rather than [[says]] something along the lines like " I`m a right slapper " or Your daddy [[cruising]] mens [[populace]] [[loo]] for sex " as does [[emerge]] in [[true]] [[lifetime]] divorce [[case]] . And it`s [[youthful]] Sam I feel [[apology]] for , not only are his [[relatives]] divorced but he`s as thick as two short [[floorboards]] . Actually since he`s so stupid he [[deserve]] no [[compassion]] because he`s unaware that a man flushing stuff down a [[bathroom]] is a [[medications]] dealer , unaware that you [[apt]] [[dying]] if [[everyone]] [[twigs]] at you , and unaware that I LOVE LUCY is painfully unfunny . If only our own childhoods were so innocent , [[aw]] well as Orwell [[say]] " [[Ignorant]] is strength " . Oh hold on Sam is suddenly an [[specialist]] on [[marin]] life ! Is this [[personage]] [[evolution]] or poor scripting ? I know what one my money`s on . And [[peculiar]] that Sam the [[guys]] genuis hasn`t noticed that if the [[histories]] is set in 1994 then why do people often wear [[dresses]] , drive [[carriages]] and ride trains from the 1950s ? But as it turns out during a plot twist it`s the [[mommy]] who`s the dummy . Then there`s a [[definitive]] plot twist that [[exited]] me feeling [[iike]] an [[witless]] for watching this --------------------------------------------- Result 5728 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] If you want mindless action, hot chicks and a post-apocalyptic view of Seattle, then this is the show for you!

The concept of Dark Angel isn't anything new (in fact, there's controversy over whether James Cameron stole the idea from a book), but I spend the entire hour watching it [[every]] [[Tuesday]] from start to finish.

Jessica Alba is smoking and Max' friends (original Cindy, Kendra) are just as [[hot]].

The fight scenes are getting better, but the dialogues between Original Cindy and Max need to be a little bit better (the slang sounds forced and it sounds like someone living in the suburbs wrote it).

In my opinion, Dark Angel is a great guilty pleasure filled with everything an action fan could ask for, but if you're looking for hard hitting, award-winning drama, go watch "The West Wing" or something. If you want mindless action, hot chicks and a post-apocalyptic view of Seattle, then this is the show for you!

The concept of Dark Angel isn't anything new (in fact, there's controversy over whether James Cameron stole the idea from a book), but I spend the entire hour watching it [[any]] [[Yesterday]] from start to finish.

Jessica Alba is smoking and Max' friends (original Cindy, Kendra) are just as [[caliente]].

The fight scenes are getting better, but the dialogues between Original Cindy and Max need to be a little bit better (the slang sounds forced and it sounds like someone living in the suburbs wrote it).

In my opinion, Dark Angel is a great guilty pleasure filled with everything an action fan could ask for, but if you're looking for hard hitting, award-winning drama, go watch "The West Wing" or something. --------------------------------------------- Result 5729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The [[movie]] has several story lines that follow [[several]] different [[characters]]. The [[different]] [[story]] lines don't feel like one whole complete [[piece]] which makes this comedy a very [[incoherent]] one and gets even annoying to watch at times.

It may [[sound]] [[weak]] and cliché but it's [[true]]; You're way better of watching the [[Crocodile]] Hunter series on the Discovery channel with [[Steve]] and Terri Irwin. It's more fun and even more [[hilarious]] than this movie is. I'm sure both cast and crew had lots of fun [[making]] this movie but the movie doesn't give us the viewers much [[pleasure]]. For a [[comedy]] it simply isn't [[funny]] enough and Steve and [[Terri]] [[Irwin]] just aren't good actors, not [[even]] when they play themselves! Their antics are [[simply]] not good [[enough]] to make an entire movie around and their scene's feel long, distracting and unnecessary and even annoying at times.

The movie had quite some [[potential]], I mean Steve Irwin is one character that in a strange way is both intriguing and hilarious to watch, so when I [[first]] [[heard]] that they were making a [[movie]] about 'the crocodile hunter' my [[first]] reaction was; brilliant! The movie however heavily suffers from its weak [[story]] and the incoherent [[story]] lines with uninteresting and unfunny characters. The movie does has a certain entertainment value, at least enough to make this movie watchable for at least once but [[still]], I must certainly wouldn't recommend this movie.

Watching this movie felt like a [[waste]] of time. Still this movie might be watchable just once, when it gets on TV, on a rainy afternoon. It does has some good [[moments]] but the story lines really completely ruin the movie and its potential.

4/10 The [[filmmaking]] has several story lines that follow [[many]] different [[trait]]. The [[distinct]] [[fairytales]] lines don't feel like one whole complete [[slice]] which makes this comedy a very [[counterintuitive]] one and gets even annoying to watch at times.

It may [[audible]] [[vulnerable]] and cliché but it's [[veritable]]; You're way better of watching the [[Croc]] Hunter series on the Discovery channel with [[Steven]] and Terri Irwin. It's more fun and even more [[comic]] than this movie is. I'm sure both cast and crew had lots of fun [[doing]] this movie but the movie doesn't give us the viewers much [[glee]]. For a [[parody]] it simply isn't [[hilarious]] enough and Steve and [[Terry]] [[Erwin]] just aren't good actors, not [[yet]] when they play themselves! Their antics are [[merely]] not good [[satisfactorily]] to make an entire movie around and their scene's feel long, distracting and unnecessary and even annoying at times.

The movie had quite some [[prospective]], I mean Steve Irwin is one character that in a strange way is both intriguing and hilarious to watch, so when I [[firstly]] [[listened]] that they were making a [[filmmaking]] about 'the crocodile hunter' my [[outset]] reaction was; brilliant! The movie however heavily suffers from its weak [[tales]] and the incoherent [[histories]] lines with uninteresting and unfunny characters. The movie does has a certain entertainment value, at least enough to make this movie watchable for at least once but [[however]], I must certainly wouldn't recommend this movie.

Watching this movie felt like a [[squander]] of time. Still this movie might be watchable just once, when it gets on TV, on a rainy afternoon. It does has some good [[times]] but the story lines really completely ruin the movie and its potential.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5730 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Without [[Kirsten]] Miller this [[project]] needn't have been [[completed]]. [[However]] with the [[awe]] [[inspiring]] [[beauty]] and [[talent]] that is Miss [[Miller]] I would [[definitely]] [[recommend]] it. It looked as if the other actors were only playing to her strong performance. Wagner's dismal [[attempt]] to honor this film was a bit disappointing, but his few scenes didn't [[detract]] from being entertained. Mostly my criticisms are with the writing and plot line, the group of talent assembled did a heroic job of salvaging what should have been a disaster. The charismatic Miller delivery and [[timing]] were impeccable and [[believable]]. She plays that fine line between assertive and bossy but never [[offensive]] she is in fact the structural engineer she claims to be. I wish I had seen this on the [[big]] screen but alas I was fortunate to [[rent]] it before it was lost. Without [[Kristen]] Miller this [[projects]] needn't have been [[accomplished]]. [[Still]] with the [[admiration]] [[stimulating]] [[beaut]] and [[talents]] that is Miss [[Mailer]] I would [[undoubtedly]] [[recommendation]] it. It looked as if the other actors were only playing to her strong performance. Wagner's dismal [[tries]] to honor this film was a bit disappointing, but his few scenes didn't [[divert]] from being entertained. Mostly my criticisms are with the writing and plot line, the group of talent assembled did a heroic job of salvaging what should have been a disaster. The charismatic Miller delivery and [[timetable]] were impeccable and [[reliable]]. She plays that fine line between assertive and bossy but never [[obnoxious]] she is in fact the structural engineer she claims to be. I wish I had seen this on the [[major]] screen but alas I was fortunate to [[tenancy]] it before it was lost. --------------------------------------------- Result 5731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolute masterpiece of a film! Goodnight Mr.Tom has swiftly become one of my favourite films of all time. Nobody should miss out on seeing this film, it's just too good! Mr.Tom is perfectly portrayed by John Thaw as the harsh old man who becomes a soft father-figure when William Beech(Nick Robinson) is sent to him for evacuation, almost like 'The town mouse and the country mouse'. A truly heart wrenching film. The director knew exactly how to turn book into film and he has done so extremely well. The film was so excellently shot that the emotions of the characters and what was happening made the audience feel a range of emotions from love to fear, and these emotions could turn on a six-pence. Set in a time of turmoil during World War Two, this film also shows the difference between the cities and the countryside, they are almost like different countries. An absolute must see, those who don't are missing out on a truly amazing and brilliant film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5732 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was excited to hear that someone had made a documentary on what it was like to be Puerto Rican. When I heard it was Rosie Perez, I wondered..could she possibly know what it is really like to be Puerto Rican. As far as I knew....she was a Nuyorican. Well anyway, I anxiously sat with my popcorn to watch. I realized 10 min into it that my initial apprehension was right. Rosie Perez has little knowledge about what it is like to be Puerto Rican. This "[[documentary]]" is more a 1st hand, very very personal account on what it is like to be a Nuyorican..and all of what that entails. She (like most of the Nuyoricans I know) have a watered down, partial and sometimes twisted sense of [[history]]. (How could they not..they live here.) [[Yes]], all of them are proud. As they should be! But a [[lot]] don't know the ins and outs of the REAL [[culture]], [[history]] and political background or [[language]] for the most [[part]]. It all [[became]] very very [[apparent]] with her participation in the Vieques [[issue]]. [[Regardless]] of my personal take is on this [[issue]]..at least I know what the [[hell]] the fight is for. There is she is getting arrested for [[something]] she knew [[little]] about.. and only participated in because it was a "[[Puerto]] Rican Cause" I really don't understand how she is not embarrassed to [[admit]] to it. [[For]] those of you that are not [[Puerto]] Rican, please view this as a partial account of a woman's journey of self [[discovery]] and acceptance. Do not take this as gospel...a lot of it isn't even [[true]]. Please consider the [[source]]. Rosie is an actress; not a historian. This [[movie]] is not and should never be, for other Nuyoricans, the base for their information. Instead, just a [[step]] [[towards]] finding more info, learning and [[debating]] what the [[reality]] is. Not just the one coming from this woman's eyes. I was excited to hear that someone had made a documentary on what it was like to be Puerto Rican. When I heard it was Rosie Perez, I wondered..could she possibly know what it is really like to be Puerto Rican. As far as I knew....she was a Nuyorican. Well anyway, I anxiously sat with my popcorn to watch. I realized 10 min into it that my initial apprehension was right. Rosie Perez has little knowledge about what it is like to be Puerto Rican. This "[[documentation]]" is more a 1st hand, very very personal account on what it is like to be a Nuyorican..and all of what that entails. She (like most of the Nuyoricans I know) have a watered down, partial and sometimes twisted sense of [[tale]]. (How could they not..they live here.) [[Yep]], all of them are proud. As they should be! But a [[batches]] don't know the ins and outs of the REAL [[civilisations]], [[story]] and political background or [[vocabulary]] for the most [[portions]]. It all [[was]] very very [[observable]] with her participation in the Vieques [[question]]. [[Irrespective]] of my personal take is on this [[issuing]]..at least I know what the [[brothel]] the fight is for. There is she is getting arrested for [[somethings]] she knew [[small]] about.. and only participated in because it was a "[[Rico]] Rican Cause" I really don't understand how she is not embarrassed to [[concede]] to it. [[In]] those of you that are not [[Rican]] Rican, please view this as a partial account of a woman's journey of self [[detect]] and acceptance. Do not take this as gospel...a lot of it isn't even [[veritable]]. Please consider the [[backgrounds]]. Rosie is an actress; not a historian. This [[filmmaking]] is not and should never be, for other Nuyoricans, the base for their information. Instead, just a [[steps]] [[into]] finding more info, learning and [[debated]] what the [[realism]] is. Not just the one coming from this woman's eyes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Simply]] put, this is the [[worst]] [[movie]] since "Police Academy: [[Mission]] to Moscow" (if you liked that movie you will [[probably]] like this one).

What were they thinking ? Some [[ideas]] should stay just that, an idea. The fact that this idea [[could]] itself to film should be a criminal offense.

What was so bad about it I hear you [[ask]]. One word ... EVERYTHING.

[[Cost]] to [[Hire]]: $4.50 Cost in Time to Watch: 89 Minutes

I [[want]] a [[refund]] on both! [[Simple]] put, this is the [[gravest]] [[filmmaking]] since "Police Academy: [[Delegation]] to Moscow" (if you liked that movie you will [[unquestionably]] like this one).

What were they thinking ? Some [[thinks]] should stay just that, an idea. The fact that this idea [[wo]] itself to film should be a criminal offense.

What was so bad about it I hear you [[enquired]]. One word ... EVERYTHING.

[[Priced]] to [[Rental]]: $4.50 Cost in Time to Watch: 89 Minutes

I [[wish]] a [[rebate]] on both! --------------------------------------------- Result 5734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Alright, before we [[review]], I have to [[ask]]: why isn't this listed [[individually]]? It may have been [[merely]] a TV [[item]] in Italy, but to international Lamberto Bava [[fans]] this is its own FILM. [[In]] [[America]] this [[film]] is [[distributed]] on VHS and [[DVD]] as [[either]] "The Ogre" or "Demons 3". Yes, I know it has [[nothing]] to do with "[[Demons]]" apart from one cast member and the crew. But yes, I personally was upset that this was so [[hard]] to [[find]] on this [[site]] which is otherwise so useful.

Finally, let's review "The Ogre". I've [[seen]] the [[trailer]] for this [[many]] times on YouTube and [[honestly]] [[found]] that [[rather]] scary. The [[movie]] itself (it is [[feature]] [[length]], [[therefore]] [[making]] it a [[movie]]) has [[many]] [[many]] [[strong]] parts and does [[manage]] to scare. I was displeased by the [[last]] act, but on the whole I don't regret having bought the DVD before [[seeing]] it ([[available]] from Shriek [[Show]]). I guess the film's TV origins [[explain]] the last act. I won't [[give]] out any spoilers.

The plot is somewhat familiar: an [[American]] [[horror]] [[writer]] vacationing at an ancient spooky castle with husband and son only to find it exactly resembles the setting of her childhood nightmares. There are faint echoes of "The Shining", but this is a [[different]] [[brand]] of supernatural horror. The woman (Virginia Bryant) finds more and more proof that this is the real life place of her nightmares, but her husband won't [[believe]] her. [[Great]] [[atmosphere]] and terror follow.

The multiple nightmare sequences were pretty freaky. The Ogre cocoon [[effect]] was good, it reminded me a bit of Uncle Frank's resurrection from the first "Hellraiser". There's [[also]] a few good [[shocks]] and a well done underwater scene. I give them props that the film never stooped to imitating American films with similar concepts, namely "A Nightmare on Elm [[Street]]". "The Ogre" is an original. And the monster itself was a scary one, when it was [[presented]] correctly.

On the Shriek Show DVD there is a Lamberto Bava interview in which he is careful to mention that this is not part of his classic "Demons" series. He also gives a lot of credit to the real castle in which the movie was filmed. Indeed, this setting contributes a lot to the film. The Simon Boswell music helps too.

There's lots of good stuff here. "The Ogre" is not perfect, but it is very much worth seeing. Take it is a lesser Lamberto Bava achievement. Alright, before we [[inspecting]], I have to [[requesting]]: why isn't this listed [[separately]]? It may have been [[alone]] a TV [[subjects]] in Italy, but to international Lamberto Bava [[stalkers]] this is its own FILM. [[During]] [[Americas]] this [[flick]] is [[circulated]] on VHS and [[DVDS]] as [[neither]] "The Ogre" or "Demons 3". Yes, I know it has [[anything]] to do with "[[Devil]]" apart from one cast member and the crew. But yes, I personally was upset that this was so [[dur]] to [[finds]] on this [[locations]] which is otherwise so useful.

Finally, let's review "The Ogre". I've [[watched]] the [[caravan]] for this [[several]] times on YouTube and [[plainly]] [[discovered]] that [[comparatively]] scary. The [[cinematography]] itself (it is [[attribute]] [[lengths]], [[thereby]] [[doing]] it a [[films]]) has [[several]] [[several]] [[vigorous]] parts and does [[administering]] to scare. I was displeased by the [[latter]] act, but on the whole I don't regret having bought the DVD before [[see]] it ([[accessible]] from Shriek [[Exposition]]). I guess the film's TV origins [[explained]] the last act. I won't [[lend]] out any spoilers.

The plot is somewhat familiar: an [[Americas]] [[terror]] [[screenwriter]] vacationing at an ancient spooky castle with husband and son only to find it exactly resembles the setting of her childhood nightmares. There are faint echoes of "The Shining", but this is a [[multiple]] [[branding]] of supernatural horror. The woman (Virginia Bryant) finds more and more proof that this is the real life place of her nightmares, but her husband won't [[believing]] her. [[Grand]] [[mood]] and terror follow.

The multiple nightmare sequences were pretty freaky. The Ogre cocoon [[consequences]] was good, it reminded me a bit of Uncle Frank's resurrection from the first "Hellraiser". There's [[similarly]] a few good [[shock]] and a well done underwater scene. I give them props that the film never stooped to imitating American films with similar concepts, namely "A Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]]". "The Ogre" is an original. And the monster itself was a scary one, when it was [[tabled]] correctly.

On the Shriek Show DVD there is a Lamberto Bava interview in which he is careful to mention that this is not part of his classic "Demons" series. He also gives a lot of credit to the real castle in which the movie was filmed. Indeed, this setting contributes a lot to the film. The Simon Boswell music helps too.

There's lots of good stuff here. "The Ogre" is not perfect, but it is very much worth seeing. Take it is a lesser Lamberto Bava achievement. --------------------------------------------- Result 5735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a film for entertainment; I did not think the world made social commentary from one small film. I personally find this film funny, audacious, and memorable. It is a fantasy not unlike a cinder girl becoming a Princess. This film was done very well I might add, in the 70's a time of the best experiments in film with being able to mention a person's sexuality. This movie is not about a person being homosexual or not, it is however about love, in all it's strange forms. This film does show some of the realities of being gay in the 70's in Hollywood, or in California. Pretty boys being looked after by older not so pretty men. Women who had to stay deeply locked in the emotional closet or risk not having a career. Bathhouses were an integral part of the gay community.

THEN the fantasy begins!! Let us mix a lesbian with a gay and add some liquor and what do we have? Well this movie, which in ANY way was better than that dismal redo "The Next Big Thing". Perhaps someone should have asked the entire crew to see this movie and then try to do better.

I enjoyed this movie when I saw it in the 70's and it still brings a smile to my lips now. I heartily advise anyone who wants a funny, tender movie- to curl up with some popcorn and have some fun. Some people need to lighten up!!! And this is the film you should do it with!

--------------------------------------------- Result 5736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The highlight of this movie for me was without doubt Tom Hanks. As [[Mike]] Sullivan, he was definitely cast against type and showed that he can [[handle]] an untraditional (for him) role. Hanks is [[usually]] the good [[guy]] in a movie - the one you like, admire and [[root]] for. Sullivan was [[definitely]] not a [[good]] guy. It's true that in the context of this movie he came across as somewhat noble - his purpose being to avenge the murders of his wife and youngest son. Even so, he was already a gangster and murderer before those killings. [[So]] Hanks [[took]] a role I wouldn't have expected him in, and he pulled it off well.

Hanks' good performance aside, though, I [[certainly]] couldn't call this an enjoyable movie. After an opening that I would best describe as enigmatic (it wasn't [[entirely]] [[clear]] to me for a while where this was [[going]]) it turns into a very sombre movie, about the [[complicated]] relationships Sullivan has developed as a gangster - largely raised by Rooney ([[Paul]] Newman), who's a [[sort]] of mob boss, and [[trying]] to [[raise]] his own two [[sons]] and to [[keep]] them "clean" so to [[speak]]; isolated from his [[business]]. After the [[older]] son witnesses a murder, the gang [[tries]] to [[kill]] him to [[keep]] him quiet, gets the wrong son (and the [[mother]]), and leaves Sullivan and his [[older]] son (Mike, Jr.) on the [[run]]. It becomes a weird sort of father/son bonding [[movie]].

[[Although]] it ends on a somewhat [[hopeful]] note (at [[least]] in the overall context of the story) it's really very [[dark]] throughout, that [[mood]] being reinforced with many of the scenes being shot in darkness and torrential rainfall. I have to confess that while I appreciated Hanks' performance, the [[movie]] as a whole just didn't [[pull]] me in. 4/10 The highlight of this movie for me was without doubt Tom Hanks. As [[Mick]] Sullivan, he was definitely cast against type and showed that he can [[manipulated]] an untraditional (for him) role. Hanks is [[ordinarily]] the good [[man]] in a movie - the one you like, admire and [[origins]] for. Sullivan was [[unquestionably]] not a [[alright]] guy. It's true that in the context of this movie he came across as somewhat noble - his purpose being to avenge the murders of his wife and youngest son. Even so, he was already a gangster and murderer before those killings. [[Accordingly]] Hanks [[picked]] a role I wouldn't have expected him in, and he pulled it off well.

Hanks' good performance aside, though, I [[probably]] couldn't call this an enjoyable movie. After an opening that I would best describe as enigmatic (it wasn't [[wholly]] [[unmistakable]] to me for a while where this was [[go]]) it turns into a very sombre movie, about the [[difficult]] relationships Sullivan has developed as a gangster - largely raised by Rooney ([[Pablo]] Newman), who's a [[genre]] of mob boss, and [[seeking]] to [[increasing]] his own two [[son]] and to [[retain]] them "clean" so to [[speaks]]; isolated from his [[companies]]. After the [[elderly]] son witnesses a murder, the gang [[attempted]] to [[killings]] him to [[retaining]] him quiet, gets the wrong son (and the [[mama]]), and leaves Sullivan and his [[elderly]] son (Mike, Jr.) on the [[execute]]. It becomes a weird sort of father/son bonding [[film]].

[[While]] it ends on a somewhat [[upbeat]] note (at [[fewer]] in the overall context of the story) it's really very [[blackness]] throughout, that [[ambiance]] being reinforced with many of the scenes being shot in darkness and torrential rainfall. I have to confess that while I appreciated Hanks' performance, the [[filmmaking]] as a whole just didn't [[pulled]] me in. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] It's not a [[big]] [[film]]. The acting is not amazing (some sub charterers are even played badly), The [[film]] is not [[beautiful]] in any [[sense]]. Nothing [[really]] inventive or new. If you [[like]] big [[films]], this one is not for you. [[yet]] it has a [[big]] - [[REALLY]] BIG plus on the story. Larry's story works, because we know this story from our own [[lives]]. The girl we didn't ask to a date, the test we've failed, the friend we let down, are all in our history. This movie works, because it touch it, It's a great story because it's a small one. It's the life we all have, with regrets we all have, and yet the message hits: every life we could have lived would have had their downside. The first time I watched it, I was 15. It was shown in a party at my school. 16 years later, I keep reflecting on it every once in a while, and every time I see it, it puts a smile on my face. Watch it. It will do you good. You'll be happier with what you have. It's not a [[substantial]] [[movie]]. The acting is not amazing (some sub charterers are even played badly), The [[kino]] is not [[resplendent]] in any [[feeling]]. Nothing [[genuinely]] inventive or new. If you [[fond]] big [[cinematographic]], this one is not for you. [[even]] it has a [[grand]] - [[GENUINELY]] BIG plus on the story. Larry's story works, because we know this story from our own [[inhabits]]. The girl we didn't ask to a date, the test we've failed, the friend we let down, are all in our history. This movie works, because it touch it, It's a great story because it's a small one. It's the life we all have, with regrets we all have, and yet the message hits: every life we could have lived would have had their downside. The first time I watched it, I was 15. It was shown in a party at my school. 16 years later, I keep reflecting on it every once in a while, and every time I see it, it puts a smile on my face. Watch it. It will do you good. You'll be happier with what you have. --------------------------------------------- Result 5738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The third [[collaboration]] for Karloff and Lugosi sees a [[move]] away from [[Poe]] and into the [[realm]] of the science fiction serial. Karloff plays Dr. Janos [[Rukh]], creator of a device that can [[capture]] light rays through his telescope in the Carpathian Mountains and [[translate]] them into [[pictures]] that form a [[visual]] history of the universe.

Before [[several]] guests, including Lugosi as Dr. Benet, an astro-chemist who had [[previously]] scoffed at Rukh's [[theories]], he demonstrates the existence of an unknown radioactive [[element]], here termed "[[Radium]] X", [[contained]] in a [[meteor]] that [[fell]] to Earth in darkest Africa [[several]] thousand years [[ago]]. Karloff joins the [[expedition]] to [[prove]] his [[theories]], but [[Radium]] X is a [[tricky]] compound - it levels mountains at [[long]] [[range]], and cures blindness at short range. Rukh is careless, [[however]], and poisons himself, glowing in the [[dark]] rather like those [[old]] [[Ready]] Breck commercials! Dr. Benet is on hand to devise a counter-active for the [[radiation]], but [[combination]] of poison and [[cure]] drives Rukh [[insanely]] paranoid. Convinced he has been [[cheated]], he [[seeks]] out the [[members]] of the [[expedition]] in Paris, including his estranged [[wife]], and his very touch while in his radioactive state [[means]] [[death]]...

Along the [[way]] we get the [[old]] pseudo-scientific [[idea]] that a [[dead]] person's eyes record the [[image]] of their [[killer]] (a [[remarkably]] [[distinct]] Karloff!) and the Radium X device [[used]] to symbolically [[melt]] statues that represent the expedition members. And even a touch of [[James]] [[Whale]] in a cockney landlady in Paris!

The Invisible Ray is [[great]] [[fun]], aside from the [[Gothic]] opening it's interesting to see Universal move the action around to Africa and Paris. The film lacks pace, but is [[always]] absorbing. Karloff [[slightly]] overdoes his performance but Lugosi is [[terrific]]. Universal used the [[basic]] [[story]] outline again in [[Man]] [[Made]] [[Monster]], this [[time]] with Lon [[Chaney]] Jr. as the glowing [[menace]] (this time caused by electricity) and Lionel Atwill as a much madder [[doctor]] than Lugosi is here. The [[Invisible]] Ray is a [[sombre]] and [[clever]] [[little]] [[film]] with much to [[admire]]. Not as [[famous]] as other [[Universal]] Horrors, [[perhaps]], but it [[works]] and is [[highly]] [[entertaining]]. The third [[cooperates]] for Karloff and Lugosi sees a [[budge]] away from [[Boe]] and into the [[sphere]] of the science fiction serial. Karloff plays Dr. Janos [[Shahrukh]], creator of a device that can [[catch]] light rays through his telescope in the Carpathian Mountains and [[translated]] them into [[photograph]] that form a [[optic]] history of the universe.

Before [[myriad]] guests, including Lugosi as Dr. Benet, an astro-chemist who had [[ago]] scoffed at Rukh's [[doctrines]], he demonstrates the existence of an unknown radioactive [[aspect]], here termed "[[Diode]] X", [[containing]] in a [[asteroid]] that [[dropped]] to Earth in darkest Africa [[many]] thousand years [[prior]]. Karloff joins the [[expeditions]] to [[proven]] his [[doctrines]], but [[Diode]] X is a [[awkward]] compound - it levels mountains at [[prolonged]] [[ranging]], and cures blindness at short range. Rukh is careless, [[instead]], and poisons himself, glowing in the [[blackness]] rather like those [[ancient]] [[Poised]] Breck commercials! Dr. Benet is on hand to devise a counter-active for the [[radiating]], but [[combo]] of poison and [[remedy]] drives Rukh [[freakishly]] paranoid. Convinced he has been [[remodeled]], he [[try]] out the [[member]] of the [[expeditions]] in Paris, including his estranged [[woman]], and his very touch while in his radioactive state [[signifies]] [[killings]]...

Along the [[route]] we get the [[antigua]] pseudo-scientific [[concept]] that a [[deceased]] person's eyes record the [[images]] of their [[murderer]] (a [[terribly]] [[separate]] Karloff!) and the Radium X device [[employs]] to symbolically [[melting]] statues that represent the expedition members. And even a touch of [[Jacques]] [[Whales]] in a cockney landlady in Paris!

The Invisible Ray is [[wondrous]] [[funny]], aside from the [[Goth]] opening it's interesting to see Universal move the action around to Africa and Paris. The film lacks pace, but is [[continually]] absorbing. Karloff [[modestly]] overdoes his performance but Lugosi is [[wondrous]]. Universal used the [[baseline]] [[saga]] outline again in [[Dude]] [[Introduced]] [[Creature]], this [[times]] with Lon [[Cheney]] Jr. as the glowing [[endangerment]] (this time caused by electricity) and Lionel Atwill as a much madder [[physicians]] than Lugosi is here. The [[Undetectable]] Ray is a [[dusky]] and [[intelligent]] [[tiny]] [[movies]] with much to [[admired]]. Not as [[proverbial]] as other [[Globally]] Horrors, [[potentially]], but it [[cooperated]] and is [[heavily]] [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is deeply idiotic. A man wants revenge for a crime- but when he enacts his revenge- there is a video camera pointed right at him the entire time. What man with a brain cell in his head would sit there and do this for so long in front of a video camera?

Just the fact that this script could never even happen except with someone unable to dress themselves destroyed it for me- but it got dumber!!!

I am thinking the script writers have some serious habits that are cooking their brain cells and making them miss plot holes you can drive an battalion of armored tanks through.

PLOT: a man seeks revenge for the death of loved ones, but in the middle of the plot something goes totally wrong, and then the unexpected unfolds.

If only these people writing this story hadn't been so dumb as to write totally unrealistic plot turns that could never happen this way. To the writers I say- seek help for your serious mental problem. --------------------------------------------- Result 5740 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm writing this because I somehow felt being led to believe Dark Remains was a good movie. Whilst it's not the worst I've seen, it certainly isn't good.

A Weak script, weak actors, and weak directing. Even if they can't afford big name cast, would it be too much to ask for a more attractive lead actress? It was painful to watch a plain actress through out the film with her dull performance. The story was a cliché and poorly scripted. The special effects were minimal. The "suspense" tricks employed repetitively here were hard to swallow.

To be fair, Dark Remains is no worse than quite some of the Masters of Horrors' episodes. But not quite on par with quality movies yet. Dark Remains is only recommended for the hardcore horror fans who don't want to miss any movie in the genre, even if it's a poorly made one. As for anyone else, time should be spent on something more valuable - which should be extremely easy. --------------------------------------------- Result 5741 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I guess if a film has magic, I don't need it to be fluid or seamless. It can skip background information, go too fast in some places, too slow in others, etc. [[Magic]] in this film: the scene in the library. There are many minor flaws in Stanley & Iris, yet they don't [[detract]] from the overall positive impact of watching people help each other in [[areas]] of life that [[seem]] the most incomprehensible, the hardest to fix. Both characters are smart. Yet Stanley can't understand enough to function because he can't read; he can't read because he's had too much adventure in his childhood. Iris, although well-educated, hasn't had enough adventure and so can't understand how to move past the U-turn her life took. In both their faults and strengths, the characters compliment each other. It may be a bit of a stretch to accept that an Iris would wind up working year after year in a factory, or that a Stanley never hid his illiteracy enough to work in construction or some other better-paying job. And while these "mysteries" are explained in the course of the story, their unfolding seems somewhat contrived. I assume no one took the time to rethink the script. Even so, it's a good [[movie]]—just imagine what De Niro, [[Fonda]] and Plimpton would have done on screen if someone had! I guess if a film has magic, I don't need it to be fluid or seamless. It can skip background information, go too fast in some places, too slow in others, etc. [[Sorcery]] in this film: the scene in the library. There are many minor flaws in Stanley & Iris, yet they don't [[divert]] from the overall positive impact of watching people help each other in [[spheres]] of life that [[looks]] the most incomprehensible, the hardest to fix. Both characters are smart. Yet Stanley can't understand enough to function because he can't read; he can't read because he's had too much adventure in his childhood. Iris, although well-educated, hasn't had enough adventure and so can't understand how to move past the U-turn her life took. In both their faults and strengths, the characters compliment each other. It may be a bit of a stretch to accept that an Iris would wind up working year after year in a factory, or that a Stanley never hid his illiteracy enough to work in construction or some other better-paying job. And while these "mysteries" are explained in the course of the story, their unfolding seems somewhat contrived. I assume no one took the time to rethink the script. Even so, it's a good [[kino]]—just imagine what De Niro, [[Fund]] and Plimpton would have done on screen if someone had! --------------------------------------------- Result 5742 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Many]] people see this as a classic, but I [[obviously]] [[must]] have missed something. Life in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's is pretty [[dull]] - which [[means]] that a [[movie]] about [[life]] in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's will be [[pretty]] dull too! What is it that so [[many]] people see in this? Once the last picture [[show]] in Anarene closes there really won't be anything to do in [[town]]. Duane (Jeff Bridges) makes that point at the end of the [[movie]]. But even before it [[closes]] there isn't much to do, so basically everything revolves around sex. High school students make plans for how to lose their virginity - sometimes with each other and sometimes with some of the equally [[bored]] [[adults]] in [[town]]. You see, there's not much for them to do either - except to have sex ([[sometimes]] with each other and sometimes with the [[bored]] [[teenagers]]) or to [[whine]] about the local high [[school]] [[football]] team. Three [[times]] something happened that I thought was going to [[add]] some [[spark]] of [[drama]] to the [[movie]]. Sam (Ben Johnson) [[dies]] unexpectedly, but [[nothing]] [[really]] happens because of that, Sonny (Timothy Bottoms) and Jacy (Cybill Shepherd) [[elope]], but nothing really happens because of that, Joe Bob (Barc Doyle) [[kidnaps]] a [[little]] [[girl]], but [[nothing]] [[really]] happens because of that. The only [[thing]] that [[added]] [[anything]] of [[dramatic]] [[value]] to the movie came at the end with the death of Billy (Sam Bottoms) which really points out the emptiness of life in this [[pathetic]] little town, as the [[men]] [[stand]] around [[looking]] at the [[body]] [[debating]] where to go for [[breakfast]].

Peter Bogdanovic filmed this in black and white, which is [[intended]] I [[suppose]] to point out how grey this town is, but the only [[thing]] I [[found]] interesting was the early [[look]] at [[actors]] like Bottoms, [[Shepherd]], [[Bridges]] and Randy Quaid. (As an aside it was terrifying to see how much Quaid - in 1971 - actually [[looks]] like his [[character]] of Cousin [[Eddie]] in the National Lampoon [[Vacation]] [[movies]].) [[Classic]]? I don't [[think]] so! 3/10 [[Innumerable]] people see this as a classic, but I [[definitely]] [[gotta]] have missed something. Life in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's is pretty [[drab]] - which [[mode]] that a [[filmmaking]] about [[living]] in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's will be [[quite]] dull too! What is it that so [[numerous]] people see in this? Once the last picture [[shows]] in Anarene closes there really won't be anything to do in [[ville]]. Duane (Jeff Bridges) makes that point at the end of the [[filmmaking]]. But even before it [[shutting]] there isn't much to do, so basically everything revolves around sex. High school students make plans for how to lose their virginity - sometimes with each other and sometimes with some of the equally [[bore]] [[adult]] in [[ville]]. You see, there's not much for them to do either - except to have sex ([[occasionally]] with each other and sometimes with the [[boring]] [[adolescence]]) or to [[mourn]] about the local high [[teaching]] [[soccer]] team. Three [[moments]] something happened that I thought was going to [[adding]] some [[sparks]] of [[tragedy]] to the [[filmmaking]]. Sam (Ben Johnson) [[succumbed]] unexpectedly, but [[anything]] [[truly]] happens because of that, Sonny (Timothy Bottoms) and Jacy (Cybill Shepherd) [[escape]], but nothing really happens because of that, Joe Bob (Barc Doyle) [[snatches]] a [[petite]] [[daughters]], but [[anything]] [[truly]] happens because of that. The only [[stuff]] that [[adding]] [[something]] of [[tremendous]] [[values]] to the movie came at the end with the death of Billy (Sam Bottoms) which really points out the emptiness of life in this [[unfortunate]] little town, as the [[males]] [[standing]] around [[researching]] at the [[organ]] [[talking]] where to go for [[dinners]].

Peter Bogdanovic filmed this in black and white, which is [[conceived]] I [[assume]] to point out how grey this town is, but the only [[stuff]] I [[unearthed]] interesting was the early [[gaze]] at [[protagonists]] like Bottoms, [[Pastor]], [[Pont]] and Randy Quaid. (As an aside it was terrifying to see how much Quaid - in 1971 - actually [[seems]] like his [[trait]] of Cousin [[Eddy]] in the National Lampoon [[Holidays]] [[cinematography]].) [[Typical]]? I don't [[thought]] so! 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] NATURAL BORN KILLERS (1994)

Cinema Cut: [[R]]

Director's Cut: NC-17

It's an unusual Oliver Stone [[picture]], but when I read he was on drugs during the filming, I [[needed]] no further explanation. 'Natural Born Killers' is a risky, [[mad]], all out film-making that we do not [[get]] very [[often]]; strange, [[psychotic]], artistic pictures.

'Natural Born Killers' is basically the story of how two mass killers were popularised and glorified by the media; there is a great scene where an interviewer questions some teenagers about Mickey and Mallory, and the teenager says 'Murder is wrong.... but If I was a mass murderer I'd be Mickey and Mallory'. Mickey [[describes]] this with a situation of 'Frankenstein (the monster) and Dr. Frankenstein' - Dr. Frankenstein is the media who has turned them into these monstrous killers

Most Oliver Stone films examine the flaws of the America, the country that the director loves and admires. I [[guess]] 'Natural Born Killers' is about the effect of mass media, technology and how obsessive as a nation, Americans are (and most of the world) over things such as mass killers and bizarre situations.

The killers played by Woody Harrelson (Mickey) and Juliette Lewis (Mallory) are [[executed]] astonishingly by two excellent actors who step into the lives of two [[interestingly]] brutal killers. Mickey and Mallory believe that some people are worthy of killing, perhaps in the cruel theory of Social Darwinism (survival of the [[fittest]]) - Mickey says in his interview in prison, that other species commit murder, we as humans ravage other species and exploit the environment; the script is interesting, but it is [[questionable]] how much this film amounts to, in the sense of making us think about society and human behaviour, rather than the intensity of a 2 hour bloodbath that we have seen.

The last hour of the film takes place in a maximum security prison; we see the harsh realities of prison life; the attitudes of the warden etc;overfilling of prisons - maybe Stone is questioning the future, the path that society is leading to.

Two other interesting characters; [[First]], a reporter who runs a show about 'America's Maniacs' and is obsessed with boosting ratings, that he goes to any length to capture the story of Mickey and Mallory. The other is police officer Scagnetti, an insane, perhaps sadistic officer that is in love with Mallory - he also has some weird obsession with mass killers, since his mother was killed during the massacre at Waco, Texas by Charles Whitman.

The cinematography is superb; different colours, shadows, styles create a feeling of disorientation; the green colour most evident of all is green, to resemble the sickness of the killers (in the drugstore when they are looking for rattlesnake antidote).

The camera work is insane; shaky, buzzy, it takes some determination to get use to it and accept it. Highly unorthodox, psychedelic and unusual.

'Natural Born Killers' does not glamourise the existence of insane murderers, it questions it and how we as the public may fuel this attribute...

Although the above review sound quite positive, I did dislike the film. Quentin Tarantino, who originally wrote the script for the film, was not pleased with the altered screenplay and he asked for his name to be removed. I can see why. While mildly interesting at times, Natural Born Killers is a mess of a picture.

4/10 NATURAL BORN KILLERS (1994)

Cinema Cut: [[rs]]

Director's Cut: NC-17

It's an unusual Oliver Stone [[images]], but when I read he was on drugs during the filming, I [[needs]] no further explanation. 'Natural Born Killers' is a risky, [[loca]], all out film-making that we do not [[gets]] very [[routinely]]; strange, [[psycho]], artistic pictures.

'Natural Born Killers' is basically the story of how two mass killers were popularised and glorified by the media; there is a great scene where an interviewer questions some teenagers about Mickey and Mallory, and the teenager says 'Murder is wrong.... but If I was a mass murderer I'd be Mickey and Mallory'. Mickey [[depicts]] this with a situation of 'Frankenstein (the monster) and Dr. Frankenstein' - Dr. Frankenstein is the media who has turned them into these monstrous killers

Most Oliver Stone films examine the flaws of the America, the country that the director loves and admires. I [[reckon]] 'Natural Born Killers' is about the effect of mass media, technology and how obsessive as a nation, Americans are (and most of the world) over things such as mass killers and bizarre situations.

The killers played by Woody Harrelson (Mickey) and Juliette Lewis (Mallory) are [[conducted]] astonishingly by two excellent actors who step into the lives of two [[curiously]] brutal killers. Mickey and Mallory believe that some people are worthy of killing, perhaps in the cruel theory of Social Darwinism (survival of the [[strongest]]) - Mickey says in his interview in prison, that other species commit murder, we as humans ravage other species and exploit the environment; the script is interesting, but it is [[suspicious]] how much this film amounts to, in the sense of making us think about society and human behaviour, rather than the intensity of a 2 hour bloodbath that we have seen.

The last hour of the film takes place in a maximum security prison; we see the harsh realities of prison life; the attitudes of the warden etc;overfilling of prisons - maybe Stone is questioning the future, the path that society is leading to.

Two other interesting characters; [[Frst]], a reporter who runs a show about 'America's Maniacs' and is obsessed with boosting ratings, that he goes to any length to capture the story of Mickey and Mallory. The other is police officer Scagnetti, an insane, perhaps sadistic officer that is in love with Mallory - he also has some weird obsession with mass killers, since his mother was killed during the massacre at Waco, Texas by Charles Whitman.

The cinematography is superb; different colours, shadows, styles create a feeling of disorientation; the green colour most evident of all is green, to resemble the sickness of the killers (in the drugstore when they are looking for rattlesnake antidote).

The camera work is insane; shaky, buzzy, it takes some determination to get use to it and accept it. Highly unorthodox, psychedelic and unusual.

'Natural Born Killers' does not glamourise the existence of insane murderers, it questions it and how we as the public may fuel this attribute...

Although the above review sound quite positive, I did dislike the film. Quentin Tarantino, who originally wrote the script for the film, was not pleased with the altered screenplay and he asked for his name to be removed. I can see why. While mildly interesting at times, Natural Born Killers is a mess of a picture.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Lion King series is easily the crowning achievement in Disney animation. The original Lion King is the greatest masterpiece in cel animation. Lion King II:Simba's Pride is the BY FAR the best direct-to-video sequel that Disney, or any other studio, has made for an animated feature. It deserved a theatrical release. The same can be said for this movie. It has the original cast, songs by Elton John, a hilarious story, exciting action, and touching character moments. Everything you've come to expect from this series. Not so much a new story, but filler and extended background on Timon and Pumbaa, and their place in this story. What impressed me the most, was the care taken in the animation. All to often, Disney shorts on the animation quality of their video and television efforts. But here, they seamlessly blend new animation with footage from the original film. The scenes never seem out of place. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella are in full swing as Timon and Pumbaa. Matthew Broderick, Robert Guillame, and Moira Kelly reprise their roles as Simba, Rafiki, and Nala, respectively. We even get a return visit by Whoopi Goldberg and Cheech Marin as the hyenas.There are MANY big laughs in this movie. So if you love Lion King, you need this movie. The story is just not complete without it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5745 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "The Plainsman" represents the directorial [[prowess]] of [[Cecil]] B. DeMille at its most inaccurate and un-factual. It sets up [[parallel]] plots for no [[less]] stellar an entourage than [[Wild]] Bill Hickok (Gary Cooper), Buffalo Bill Cody (James Ellison), Calamity [[Jane]] (Jean [[Arthur]]), [[George]] Armstrong Custer and Abraham Lincoln to [[interact]], even [[though]] in reality Lincoln was already dead at the time the [[story]] takes place. [[Every]] once in a while DeMille floats dangerously [[close]] [[toward]] the [[truth]], but just as easily veers away from it into unabashed spectacle and showmanship. The film is an attempt to buttress Custer's [[last]] stand with a heap of fiction that is only loosely based on the lives of people, who were already the product of manufactured stuffs and legends. Truly, this is the world according to DeMille - a zeitgeist in the annals of entertainment, but a pretty campy [[relic]] by today's standards.

TRANSFER: Considering the vintage of the film, this is a moderately appealing transfer, with often clean whites and extremely solid blacks. There's a considerable amount of film grain in some scenes and an absence of it at other moments. All in all, the image quality is therefore somewhat inconsistent, but it is never all bad or all good – just a bit better than middle of the road. Age related artifacts are kept to a minimum and digital anomalies do not distract. The audio is mono but nicely balanced.

EXTRAS: Forget it. It's Universal! BOTTOM LINE: As pseudo-history painted on celluloid, this western is [[compelling]] and fun. Just take its characters and story with a grain of salt – in some cases – a whole box seems more appropriate! "The Plainsman" represents the directorial [[valour]] of [[Cecile]] B. DeMille at its most inaccurate and un-factual. It sets up [[randomness]] plots for no [[fewest]] stellar an entourage than [[Sauvage]] Bill Hickok (Gary Cooper), Buffalo Bill Cody (James Ellison), Calamity [[Jin]] (Jean [[Arturo]]), [[Jorge]] Armstrong Custer and Abraham Lincoln to [[communicate]], even [[if]] in reality Lincoln was already dead at the time the [[tales]] takes place. [[Any]] once in a while DeMille floats dangerously [[nearing]] [[towards]] the [[veracity]], but just as easily veers away from it into unabashed spectacle and showmanship. The film is an attempt to buttress Custer's [[latter]] stand with a heap of fiction that is only loosely based on the lives of people, who were already the product of manufactured stuffs and legends. Truly, this is the world according to DeMille - a zeitgeist in the annals of entertainment, but a pretty campy [[remnant]] by today's standards.

TRANSFER: Considering the vintage of the film, this is a moderately appealing transfer, with often clean whites and extremely solid blacks. There's a considerable amount of film grain in some scenes and an absence of it at other moments. All in all, the image quality is therefore somewhat inconsistent, but it is never all bad or all good – just a bit better than middle of the road. Age related artifacts are kept to a minimum and digital anomalies do not distract. The audio is mono but nicely balanced.

EXTRAS: Forget it. It's Universal! BOTTOM LINE: As pseudo-history painted on celluloid, this western is [[convincing]] and fun. Just take its characters and story with a grain of salt – in some cases – a whole box seems more appropriate! --------------------------------------------- Result 5746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was the worst movie I have seen since "Date Movie." I was laughing through out the whole movie instead of being scared. It was funny how the snakes would search for particular section of the passengers body to attack for example, the eye, the tongue, the butt, the breast. If we have seen national geographic channel we know snakes wont stay clinched on the body once they bite. For each particular scene the snakes would bite the passengers and would stay on the body biting the person. I believe the producer did not study his information on snakes and their behavior. I cant believe I wasted my money on this movie.So I don't recommend this movie trust just wait until it is at the dollar theatre or rent it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (57%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Band Camp was awful, The Naked Mile was a little better, and this third straight to DVD in the American Pie franchise [[seems]] the same quality as the predecessor. Basically Erik Stifler (John White) split from his girlfriend after losing his virginity, and now him and Mike 'Cooze' Coozeman (Jake Siegel) are joining Erik's cousin Dwight (Steve Talley) at college. With the promise of many parties, plenty of booze, and enough hot chicks at the Beta House, they only have fifty listed tasks to carry out to become official privileged members. But a threat comes into sight with the rivals, GEK ("Geek") House, led by power-hungry nerd (and sheep shagger) Edgar (Tyrone Savage) offering bigger and better than what Beta have. To settle it once and for all, Beta and Gek go into battle with the banned, for forty years, Greek Games to beat each other in, with the loser moving out. The last champion of the games, Noah Levenstein aka Jim's Dad (the only regular Eugene Levy) runs the show, which sees the people unhooking bras, a gladiator duel floating on water, catching a greased pig, Russian Roulette in the mouth with cartridges of aged horse spunk, wife carrying and drinking a full keg of alcohol (with puking not disqualifying). It all comes to the sudden death, with a guy getting stripper lap dancing, and they have to resist cumming, Beta House win when Edgar cums with a girl dressed as a sheep on his lap. Also starring Flubber's Christopher McDonald as Mr. Stifler, Meghan Heffern as Ashley, Dan Petronijevic as Bull, Nic Nac as Bobby, Christine Barger as Margie, Italia Ricci as Laura Johnson, Moshana Halbert as Sara Coleman, Sarah Power as Denise, Andreja Punkris as Stacy and Jordan Prentice as Rock. The nudity amount is very slightly increased, as is the grossness of the jokes, and I could guess it being rated one star out of five, but I like it. Adequate! Band Camp was awful, The Naked Mile was a little better, and this third straight to DVD in the American Pie franchise [[appears]] the same quality as the predecessor. Basically Erik Stifler (John White) split from his girlfriend after losing his virginity, and now him and Mike 'Cooze' Coozeman (Jake Siegel) are joining Erik's cousin Dwight (Steve Talley) at college. With the promise of many parties, plenty of booze, and enough hot chicks at the Beta House, they only have fifty listed tasks to carry out to become official privileged members. But a threat comes into sight with the rivals, GEK ("Geek") House, led by power-hungry nerd (and sheep shagger) Edgar (Tyrone Savage) offering bigger and better than what Beta have. To settle it once and for all, Beta and Gek go into battle with the banned, for forty years, Greek Games to beat each other in, with the loser moving out. The last champion of the games, Noah Levenstein aka Jim's Dad (the only regular Eugene Levy) runs the show, which sees the people unhooking bras, a gladiator duel floating on water, catching a greased pig, Russian Roulette in the mouth with cartridges of aged horse spunk, wife carrying and drinking a full keg of alcohol (with puking not disqualifying). It all comes to the sudden death, with a guy getting stripper lap dancing, and they have to resist cumming, Beta House win when Edgar cums with a girl dressed as a sheep on his lap. Also starring Flubber's Christopher McDonald as Mr. Stifler, Meghan Heffern as Ashley, Dan Petronijevic as Bull, Nic Nac as Bobby, Christine Barger as Margie, Italia Ricci as Laura Johnson, Moshana Halbert as Sara Coleman, Sarah Power as Denise, Andreja Punkris as Stacy and Jordan Prentice as Rock. The nudity amount is very slightly increased, as is the grossness of the jokes, and I could guess it being rated one star out of five, but I like it. Adequate! --------------------------------------------- Result 5748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I'm [[going]] to keep this [[review]] short and sweet....

I [[saw]] the [[trailer]] for this and [[thought]] I'd give it a whirl 5 minutes in and my [[initial]] thoughts were "what the [[hell]] is this?" But after 10 minutes I was hooked and after 20 I was picking my jaw up from off the floor. This film is a [[great]] example of how [[different]] a [[movie]] can be, and [[furthermore]] it's french. This film is [[high]] art eye candy wrapped up in a tidy futuristic film [[noir]] package, the motion capture is very clever and the black and white animation style which has no grey although at first didn't do it for me totally captivated me and by the end of the film and I found myself wishing every film was made like this. I think my opinion was helped by the great dubbing it would have been very easy to ruin it had they not landed so many respected actors as many voice actors give no feeling to the characters (Just watch any [[Hong]] Kong legends film in English to see a perfect example)I [[gave]] it 9 [[although]] I gave it an [[extra]] 2 because of how fresh and new the whole thing feels.... I'm [[go]] to keep this [[revisions]] short and sweet....

I [[sawthe]] the [[caravan]] for this and [[brainchild]] I'd give it a whirl 5 minutes in and my [[incipient]] thoughts were "what the [[dammit]] is this?" But after 10 minutes I was hooked and after 20 I was picking my jaw up from off the floor. This film is a [[wondrous]] example of how [[several]] a [[kino]] can be, and [[meanwhile]] it's french. This film is [[alto]] art eye candy wrapped up in a tidy futuristic film [[negro]] package, the motion capture is very clever and the black and white animation style which has no grey although at first didn't do it for me totally captivated me and by the end of the film and I found myself wishing every film was made like this. I think my opinion was helped by the great dubbing it would have been very easy to ruin it had they not landed so many respected actors as many voice actors give no feeling to the characters (Just watch any [[Kong]] Kong legends film in English to see a perfect example)I [[supplied]] it 9 [[whereas]] I gave it an [[additional]] 2 because of how fresh and new the whole thing feels.... --------------------------------------------- Result 5749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I'm [[among]] millions who consider themselves [[Cary]] [[Grant]] [[fans]], but I can't [[think]] of a [[single]] [[reason]] to recommend this [[movie]].I don't [[understand]] the [[casting]] of [[Betsy]] [[Drake]] and it [[appears]] no one else did,if we're to judge from the [[small]] number of [[films]] in which she [[played]] afterwards.

Most fans will agree that Katharine Hepburn was [[superb]] at [[chasing]] and catching Cary [[Grant]] in [[Bringing]] Up [[Baby]].Here the [[director]] or writers try to rehash the [[idea]],but it [[fails]] [[miserably]].I've read [[comments]] about how "[[creepy]]" Drake was,but I thought that was far too [[mild]] a description. Franchot Tone walked through this one as if he were hungover.A casting [[disaster]] is one thing.This [[film]] is a [[total]] [[disaster]].

This one doesn't [[deserve]] 10 lines of comments and I don't know why that's a [[requirement]].Too [[bad]] this one was preserved when so [[many]] [[worthwhile]] films lie rotting in vaults.

Unless you want to torture [[someone]],give this one a wide berth. I'm [[in]] millions who consider themselves [[Carrey]] [[Subsidies]] [[enthusiasts]], but I can't [[believing]] of a [[alone]] [[reasons]] to recommend this [[filmmaking]].I don't [[understanding]] the [[foundry]] of [[Betsey]] [[Gregg]] and it [[seems]] no one else did,if we're to judge from the [[scant]] number of [[film]] in which she [[effected]] afterwards.

Most fans will agree that Katharine Hepburn was [[stunning]] at [[chase]] and catching Cary [[Awarding]] in [[Bring]] Up [[Toddler]].Here the [[headmaster]] or writers try to rehash the [[concept]],but it [[fail]] [[spectacularly]].I've read [[remark]] about how "[[frightening]]" Drake was,but I thought that was far too [[gentle]] a description. Franchot Tone walked through this one as if he were hungover.A casting [[catastrophes]] is one thing.This [[filmmaking]] is a [[whole]] [[disasters]].

This one doesn't [[deserved]] 10 lines of comments and I don't know why that's a [[necessity]].Too [[negative]] this one was preserved when so [[multiple]] [[actionable]] films lie rotting in vaults.

Unless you want to torture [[everyone]],give this one a wide berth. --------------------------------------------- Result 5750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[movie]] is very cool. If you're a fan of [[Tsui]] Hark and [[Chinese]] fantasy films, you should love this. This [[film]] is the Asian Lord of the [[rings]]: A high fantasy [[story]], [[based]] in actual Chinese mythology. (I [[realize]] [[many]] [[critics]] have [[called]] this [[film]] plot-less, I [[think]] they [[probably]] have zero [[knowledge]] of Chinese mythology.) [[If]] you liked Stormriders or [[Warriors]] of [[Heaven]] & Earth, this one should be right up your [[alley]]. This [[film]] is [[still]] very [[difficult]] to [[find]] in the U.S., even [[though]] it was [[purchased]] for U.S. distribution along with [[Crouching]] [[Tiger]], [[Hidden]] [[Dragon]] and [[Iron]] [[Monkey]]. Well worth the [[search]]!!! This [[DVD]] is [[also]] [[worthy]] of owning. This [[cinematography]] is very cool. If you're a fan of [[Suh]] Hark and [[Chino]] fantasy films, you should love this. This [[movie]] is the Asian Lord of the [[piercings]]: A high fantasy [[tale]], [[founded]] in actual Chinese mythology. (I [[accomplishing]] [[countless]] [[detractors]] have [[termed]] this [[cinema]] plot-less, I [[thinks]] they [[presumably]] have zero [[expertise]] of Chinese mythology.) [[Though]] you liked Stormriders or [[Militants]] of [[Heavens]] & Earth, this one should be right up your [[driveway]]. This [[movie]] is [[yet]] very [[troublesome]] to [[found]] in the U.S., even [[while]] it was [[acquiring]] for U.S. distribution along with [[Crouched]] [[Tigers]], [[Disguising]] [[Lung]] and [[Railroad]] [[Monkeys]]. Well worth the [[frisk]]!!! This [[DVDS]] is [[apart]] [[creditable]] of owning. --------------------------------------------- Result 5751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (84%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Although The Notorious Bettie Page is well acted and shot, is is, at best, a Cliffs Notes version of Bettie's biography. The film mainly centers on her work with Irving and Paula Klaw, the brother and sister team who produced the bulk of her most famous photos. It does not detail her life after posing, aside from her religious rebirth. It cites "The Real Bettie Page", by Richard Foster as a source, but it ignores Bettie's later years of mental illness and incarceration in a mental hospital. The narrow focus of the biography can be debated, but the majority of Bettie's fans and the "civilians" would probably be more interested in her modeling career, which is what they get.

The film is well acted, with Gretchen Mol faithfully reproducing the look of Bettie, as well as conveying the sweetness that her photos exuded. The character is played as rather naive, a probable byproduct of interviews given by Bettie in recent years. It is more likely that Bettie was aware of the nature of her photos but rationalized it as acting and costumes.

The supporting cast is also [[outstanding]], with Chris Bauer and Lili Taylor playing Irving and Paula Klaw, and David Strathairn as Estes Kefauver. The film errs with the character of John Willie, played by Jared Harris. John Willie never met Bettie Page and was not involved in photo shoots with the Klaws. Harris plays Willie a bit like Peter O'Toole, in his more debauched state.

Despite the quality of acting, the film is a bit of a disappointment in terms of depth. The story is rather cursory and we never feel that we truly get to know Bettie. Much like her photos, it's just an image. It does tend to exaggerate Bettie's notoriety. Her photos were mainly seen in and around New York, in a very narrow market of underground and cultish publications. Her real fame came after her photos were reprinted in the late 70's and 80's, and the Cult of Betty Page (as her name was usually spelled) grew. Bettie's greatest exposure (pardon the pun) was in Playboy, appearing in the January 1955 issue (the Christmas photo, which is staged in reverse in the film).

The film is well done, if rather shallow. It is able to sustain interest until the end and showcases many fine performances. It hits the high points of Bettie's life, but ignores many details which would have given it far greater depth. The ending is rather a let down. It feels rather abrupt. Still, the movie is definitely worth viewing by anyone interested in Bettie, or even the time period. The soundtrack is great, really pulling the viewer into the 1950's. If nothing else, the film stands as a showcase for America's burgeoning sexuality and the clash with its Puritan past. It's also a peek at an icon for both men and women. Although The Notorious Bettie Page is well acted and shot, is is, at best, a Cliffs Notes version of Bettie's biography. The film mainly centers on her work with Irving and Paula Klaw, the brother and sister team who produced the bulk of her most famous photos. It does not detail her life after posing, aside from her religious rebirth. It cites "The Real Bettie Page", by Richard Foster as a source, but it ignores Bettie's later years of mental illness and incarceration in a mental hospital. The narrow focus of the biography can be debated, but the majority of Bettie's fans and the "civilians" would probably be more interested in her modeling career, which is what they get.

The film is well acted, with Gretchen Mol faithfully reproducing the look of Bettie, as well as conveying the sweetness that her photos exuded. The character is played as rather naive, a probable byproduct of interviews given by Bettie in recent years. It is more likely that Bettie was aware of the nature of her photos but rationalized it as acting and costumes.

The supporting cast is also [[unresolved]], with Chris Bauer and Lili Taylor playing Irving and Paula Klaw, and David Strathairn as Estes Kefauver. The film errs with the character of John Willie, played by Jared Harris. John Willie never met Bettie Page and was not involved in photo shoots with the Klaws. Harris plays Willie a bit like Peter O'Toole, in his more debauched state.

Despite the quality of acting, the film is a bit of a disappointment in terms of depth. The story is rather cursory and we never feel that we truly get to know Bettie. Much like her photos, it's just an image. It does tend to exaggerate Bettie's notoriety. Her photos were mainly seen in and around New York, in a very narrow market of underground and cultish publications. Her real fame came after her photos were reprinted in the late 70's and 80's, and the Cult of Betty Page (as her name was usually spelled) grew. Bettie's greatest exposure (pardon the pun) was in Playboy, appearing in the January 1955 issue (the Christmas photo, which is staged in reverse in the film).

The film is well done, if rather shallow. It is able to sustain interest until the end and showcases many fine performances. It hits the high points of Bettie's life, but ignores many details which would have given it far greater depth. The ending is rather a let down. It feels rather abrupt. Still, the movie is definitely worth viewing by anyone interested in Bettie, or even the time period. The soundtrack is great, really pulling the viewer into the 1950's. If nothing else, the film stands as a showcase for America's burgeoning sexuality and the clash with its Puritan past. It's also a peek at an icon for both men and women. --------------------------------------------- Result 5752 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This one [[stood]] out for it's originality. I'm seriously tired of [[seeing]] Hindi [[movies]] that are a hotch-potch of a whole bunch of Hollywood and Brit [[movies]]. Some [[flaws]] were [[inevitable]], [[nonetheless]], this [[movie]] is a must-see. Surya's [[portrayal]] of the clean-cut, [[conscientious]] [[cop]] (as [[opposed]] to the pot-bellied, money-hungry ones that we [[normally]] see) was [[awesome]]. He's [[come]] a long way from his [[work]] in Nerukku Ner. I liked the [[movie]] so much that I had to own it. I'm not [[usually]] into the [[mindless]] violence [[type]] of [[movies]], somehow I actually [[felt]] for each [[character]] and therefore can't [[really]] [[bring]] myself to [[call]] it 'mindless' violence. I do not appreciate the [[excessive]] melodrama and [[sentimental]] scenes that go hand in hand with most [[Hindi]] and Tamil [[movies]]. I [[absolutely]] [[loved]] this [[movie]] for it's [[lack]] of the same. ACP Anbuselvan's reaction to [[loosing]] his [[wife]], is not [[overdone]], is heart-wrenching and makes me [[want]] to bawl my eyes out. There are certain [[times]] when I'm watching a [[movie]] when I [[want]] to hit the FF button. Plenty of [[times]] I've [[wanted]] to do that at a [[cinema]] hall. Never [[wanted]] to do so when [[watching]] this [[movie]]. I'm really [[hoping]] that Ghajini [[releases]] soon. This one [[amounted]] out for it's originality. I'm seriously tired of [[witnessing]] Hindi [[kino]] that are a hotch-potch of a whole bunch of Hollywood and Brit [[movie]]. Some [[flaw]] were [[inevitability]], [[however]], this [[cinematic]] is a must-see. Surya's [[depiction]] of the clean-cut, [[careful]] [[policemen]] (as [[bucked]] to the pot-bellied, money-hungry ones that we [[often]] see) was [[wondrous]]. He's [[coming]] a long way from his [[cooperate]] in Nerukku Ner. I liked the [[movies]] so much that I had to own it. I'm not [[habitually]] into the [[nonsensical]] violence [[typing]] of [[movie]], somehow I actually [[smelled]] for each [[characters]] and therefore can't [[genuinely]] [[bringing]] myself to [[invitation]] it 'mindless' violence. I do not appreciate the [[extravagant]] melodrama and [[emotional]] scenes that go hand in hand with most [[Hindustani]] and Tamil [[movie]]. I [[completely]] [[cared]] this [[kino]] for it's [[failure]] of the same. ACP Anbuselvan's reaction to [[losing]] his [[woman]], is not [[exaggerated]], is heart-wrenching and makes me [[wants]] to bawl my eyes out. There are certain [[moments]] when I'm watching a [[kino]] when I [[wanna]] to hit the FF button. Plenty of [[dates]] I've [[wants]] to do that at a [[theaters]] hall. Never [[want]] to do so when [[staring]] this [[kino]]. I'm really [[wait]] that Ghajini [[released]] soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 5753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Everybody who wants to be an [[editor]] should watch this [[movie]]! It shows you about [[every]] [[mistake]] not to do in [[editing]] a [[movie]]! My grandma [[could]] have [[done]] better than that! But that's not the only reason why this movie is really [[bad]]! (It's actually so bad that I'm not able to [[write]] a [[sentence]] without exclamation mark!) [[If]] the first episode of ‘Les Visiteurs' was a [[quite]] good familial [[comedy]] with [[funny]] jokes and [[cult]] [[dialogues]], this sequel is [[copying]] [[badly]] the receipe of the first one. The [[funny]] parts could be counted on one hand and maybe half of it. Clavier is over-acting his role even more than in the [[first]] [[part]], Robin is [[trying]] to [[act]] like Lemercier (because she's [[replacing]] her) but that's ‘grotesque'. Lemercier is Lemercier, Robin is Robin! [[Even]] if Muriel [[Robin]] can be funny by herself on stage, she is not in this [[movie]] because she's not acting as she [[used]] to [[act]]. I know that it should be [[hard]] to [[replace]] [[somebody]] who was good in a role (Lemercier [[obtained]] a César [[award]] for her role in the first movie) but she [[made]] a [[big]] [[mistake]]: [[instead]] of playing her role, she played ‘Lemercier playing her role'! As for the [[story]], it's just too much! Of course we [[knew]] at he end of the first [[movie]] that there [[would]] be a sequel but Poiré and Clavier should hae tried to [[write]] a more simple story like the first episode. The [[gags]] are [[repetitive]], [[childish]] and déjà-vu. No, really, there's no more than 3 [[funny]] parts in this. The only good things might be the costumes and some special effects. So you have only 2 [[reasons]] to watch it: 1) if you [[want]] to [[learn]] how to [[edit]] [[awfully]] a [[movie]], 2) if you [[want]] to waste your [[time]] or if you really [[need]] a ‘[[brainless]] moment'! 2/10 Everybody who wants to be an [[editorial]] should watch this [[filmmaking]]! It shows you about [[any]] [[mistaken]] not to do in [[edited]] a [[movies]]! My grandma [[wo]] have [[doing]] better than that! But that's not the only reason why this movie is really [[unfavourable]]! (It's actually so bad that I'm not able to [[writing]] a [[penalties]] without exclamation mark!) [[Though]] the first episode of ‘Les Visiteurs' was a [[altogether]] good familial [[charade]] with [[comical]] jokes and [[worship]] [[dialogue]], this sequel is [[copied]] [[sorely]] the receipe of the first one. The [[droll]] parts could be counted on one hand and maybe half of it. Clavier is over-acting his role even more than in the [[firstly]] [[portions]], Robin is [[try]] to [[ley]] like Lemercier (because she's [[alternates]] her) but that's ‘grotesque'. Lemercier is Lemercier, Robin is Robin! [[Yet]] if Muriel [[Ruben]] can be funny by herself on stage, she is not in this [[movies]] because she's not acting as she [[uses]] to [[acts]]. I know that it should be [[stiff]] to [[substituted]] [[anybody]] who was good in a role (Lemercier [[obtain]] a César [[awards]] for her role in the first movie) but she [[introduced]] a [[prodigious]] [[mistaken]]: [[however]] of playing her role, she played ‘Lemercier playing her role'! As for the [[history]], it's just too much! Of course we [[overheard]] at he end of the first [[filmmaking]] that there [[could]] be a sequel but Poiré and Clavier should hae tried to [[handwriting]] a more simple story like the first episode. The [[jokes]] are [[repeat]], [[boyish]] and déjà-vu. No, really, there's no more than 3 [[hilarious]] parts in this. The only good things might be the costumes and some special effects. So you have only 2 [[motif]] to watch it: 1) if you [[wants]] to [[learns]] how to [[edited]] [[terribly]] a [[filmmaking]], 2) if you [[wanted]] to waste your [[moment]] or if you really [[require]] a ‘[[jerk]] moment'! 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I haven't laughed that much in a long time - although the movie has some sad moments too, especially when it changes from hyper-funny to honest and serious. The characters are very realistic most of the times, sappy [[sometimes]], but quite believable. I am not a fan of the Jerry Springer show - I feel sorry for the participating people. This film instead is a satire, and it is doing [[great]].

Too bad that all expletives were *beeped* out while this movie aired on public tv, that takes a [[lot]] of [[fun]] out of it. I will go rent this movie to fully enjoy it.

I haven't laughed that much in a long time - although the movie has some sad moments too, especially when it changes from hyper-funny to honest and serious. The characters are very realistic most of the times, sappy [[intermittently]], but quite believable. I am not a fan of the Jerry Springer show - I feel sorry for the participating people. This film instead is a satire, and it is doing [[wondrous]].

Too bad that all expletives were *beeped* out while this movie aired on public tv, that takes a [[batches]] of [[droll]] out of it. I will go rent this movie to fully enjoy it.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ah, Channel 5 of local Mexican t.v. Everyday, at 2:00 a.m. they air Horror movies from the 70's to early 2000's. It was "Return To Cabin By The Lake" the movie that aired yesterday. I regret for watching it.

The original "Cabin By The Lake" was a regularly popular low budgeter and it was good accepted. The problem is that this sequel is horrible, not even unintentionally funny and tries to imitate the original. Ugh. The plot is really stupid in all the sense of the word.

The movie at some points looks like a soap-opera because of it's absurd dialogs, cinematography, and direction.

My advice is : avoid this one at all costs. It's a movie that it shouldn't be watched by anyone. Not even for lovers of mediocre film-making.

You have been warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 5756 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We fans of Ed Wood tend to be an obsessive bunch in the first place, but this movie in particular has driven me to a level of fan-dom that I have never before approached! One of the most intense thrills of non-mainstream movie adulation - at least as far as I am concerned - is the pleasure of unearthing the obscure. I remember how, as a teenager, I longed to see Eddie's "Revenge of the Dead" (a.k.a. "Night of the Ghouls"), which at that time had been vaulted for a couple of decades. Likewise such arcane masterpieces of low budget filmmaking as Doris Wishman's "A Night to Dismember" or half the works of Jesus Franco! However, recent years have seen video and DVD rendering these once unfindable treasures almost TOO accessible - even for those of us on the 'wrong' (!) side of the Atlantic....

And then, behold, there was "I Woke Up Early the Day I Died" - a movie that SHOULD have been so 'big', yet which disappeared into the ether even before Fangoria printed the first fairly lengthy article on it that first whetted my appetite. The 1990s NEEDED a hard-to-find movie though which would REALLY be worth hunting out: and this, to be sure is it.... I don't especially wish to add too much of a commentary on all those marvellous aspects of the film - its classy-yet-kitsch cast, its haunting yet often hallucinogenic visuals, its wondrous moments of "pure cinema" (in the sense of the 1920s French cineastes) and surrealism, or even its resoundingly memorable soundtrack - since this has all been described most eloquently by other users here.

What I DO wish to mention, briefly, is the pleasure that I have received also from hunting down certain obscure artefacts relating to this almost-lost-to-us-but-thankfully-not-quite movie! I think the German video, which I picked up while in Cologne on a cold crisp winter's day, is fairly well-known to Ed Wood's followers now. It is also quite common knowledge that a promotional poster for the film was released. However, there is thankfully more to be found!!! Firstly, there are a number of reviews available from the film's German THEATRICAL release - I have used several of these in my translation classes in an attempt to "Woodify" my students..... some of these reviews are positive eulogies to the film's artistry and entertainment value - and most interesting of all is that most critics placed it squarely within both the American trash AND European arthouse traditions. Secondly, there is the score by Larry Groupe', which can be acquired from the man himself - many of the tracks exert a truly emotional pull on the listener, particularly if you are contemplating the film's currently "vaulted" status and growing a little melancholy at the same time. Finally - for now - I wish to mention the promo SOUNDTRACK that Cinequanon put out in extremely limited numbers. BEG, BORROW, STEAL, KILL or do whatever it takes if you get the chance to acquire one of these!!!!!! It features 14 tracks from the film, including Eartha Kitt's ballad, the late Darcy Clay's "Jesus I Was Evil" (two versions of which are also available on CD from New Zealand, although that is another story again!), the cool radio music to which Christina Ricci dances, and also those amazing techno drops by Minty and ZHV (the latter being Billy Z's very own techno band).....

Become obsessed - let Ed Wood rule your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 5757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Laurence Olivier, Merle Oberon, Ralph [[Richardson]], and Binnie Barnes [[star]] in "The Divorce of [[Lady]] X," a 1938 comedy based on a play. Olivier plays a young barrister, Everard Logan who allows Oberon to [[spend]] the night in his [[hotel]] [[room]], when the London fog is too dense for [[guests]] at a costume ball to go home. The next day, a [[friend]] of his, Lord Mere (Richardson), [[announces]] that his wife (Barnes) [[spent]] the night with another [[man]] at the same [[hotel]], and he [[wants]] to [[divorce]] her. [[Believing]] the woman to be Oberon, [[Olivier]] panics. Oberon, who is [[single]] and the [[granddaughter]] of a [[judge]], pretends that she's the lady in question, Lady Mere, when she's really [[Leslie]] Steele.

We've [[seen]] this plot or variations thereof [[dozens]] of [[time]]. With this cast, it's [[delightful]]. I mean, [[Richardson]] and [[Olivier]]? [[Olivier]] and Oberon, that [[great]] team in Wuthering Heights? [[Pretty]] [[special]]. [[Olivier]] is devastatingly handsome and does a great job with the [[comedy]] as he [[portrays]] the [[uptight]], nervous barrister. Oberon gives her role the right light touch. She looks [[extremely]] young here, [[fuller]] in the [[face]], with Jean Harlow eyebrows and a very different [[hairdo]] for her. She wears some [[beautiful]] street clothes, [[though]] her [[first]] gown looks like a birthday cake, and in one [[gown]] she tries on, with that hair-do, she's ready to play [[Snow]] White. Binnie Barnes is [[delightful]] as the [[real]] [[Lady]] Mere.

The [[color]] in this is a mess, and as [[others]] have [[mentioned]], it could really use a restoration. [[Definitely]] worth seeing. Laurence Olivier, Merle Oberon, Ralph [[Roberts]], and Binnie Barnes [[superstar]] in "The Divorce of [[Dame]] X," a 1938 comedy based on a play. Olivier plays a young barrister, Everard Logan who allows Oberon to [[spends]] the night in his [[motel]] [[salle]], when the London fog is too dense for [[guest]] at a costume ball to go home. The next day, a [[friends]] of his, Lord Mere (Richardson), [[declaring]] that his wife (Barnes) [[expended]] the night with another [[guy]] at the same [[guesthouse]], and he [[wish]] to [[divorced]] her. [[Think]] the woman to be Oberon, [[Olivia]] panics. Oberon, who is [[exclusive]] and the [[grandchildren]] of a [[judges]], pretends that she's the lady in question, Lady Mere, when she's really [[Lesley]] Steele.

We've [[noticed]] this plot or variations thereof [[scores]] of [[moment]]. With this cast, it's [[charmer]]. I mean, [[Roberts]] and [[Olivia]]? [[Olivia]] and Oberon, that [[super]] team in Wuthering Heights? [[Belle]] [[peculiar]]. [[Olivia]] is devastatingly handsome and does a great job with the [[comedian]] as he [[exemplifies]] the [[tensed]], nervous barrister. Oberon gives her role the right light touch. She looks [[critically]] young here, [[fowler]] in the [[encounter]], with Jean Harlow eyebrows and a very different [[hair]] for her. She wears some [[belle]] street clothes, [[albeit]] her [[outset]] gown looks like a birthday cake, and in one [[attire]] she tries on, with that hair-do, she's ready to play [[Snowy]] White. Binnie Barnes is [[wondrous]] as the [[actual]] [[Dame]] Mere.

The [[colors]] in this is a mess, and as [[alia]] have [[alluded]], it could really use a restoration. [[Admittedly]] worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I was a [[huge]] fan of the original [[cartoon]] [[series]], and was [[looking]] forward to [[finally]] [[seeing]] [[Gadget]] on the [[big]] screen -- but I never in my wildest [[dreams]] [[expected]] [[something]] so [[extremely]] [[extremely]] [[terrible]]. The pace was [[WAY]] too [[fast]], there was no [[plot]], and 'wowser!' - what the hell is that?? It was 'WOWSERS!!'. I was a [[whopping]] fan of the original [[toon]] [[serials]], and was [[researching]] forward to [[ultimately]] [[see]] [[Gizmo]] on the [[hefty]] screen -- but I never in my wildest [[nightmares]] [[scheduled]] [[anything]] so [[unimaginably]] [[eminently]] [[scary]]. The pace was [[WAYS]] too [[swifter]], there was no [[intrigue]], and 'wowser!' - what the hell is that?? It was 'WOWSERS!!'. --------------------------------------------- Result 5759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]]

I just bought this movie on DVD and watched it for the [[first]] time the other night. I've been a fan of Tolkien's work for about 4 years now, ever since I got out of high school. I didn't [[grow]] up on this movie...perhaps my [[mother]] [[kept]] me away from it. It's definitely not for [[children]]. Not that it's bad in a graphic sense, but that the themes would go right over most 10 year olds heads. [[Overall]], the animation was [[excellent]] considering this was made in 1978/1979. I thought the story followed the book fairly well in a loose sense. But I am bothered that Bashki didn't just add another 40 minutes or so and tack on the Return of the King parts. That would've made it the ultimate movie. I was bothered by it's abrupt end, and then when I heard Return of the King sucked, I was bothered even more. Too bad it wasn't one great animation film. It might have garnered a higher vote from me. I give it a 7. I can only hope Peter Jackson will do the books justice with the new live action LOTR.

I just bought this movie on DVD and watched it for the [[fiirst]] time the other night. I've been a fan of Tolkien's work for about 4 years now, ever since I got out of high school. I didn't [[rising]] up on this movie...perhaps my [[mommy]] [[preserved]] me away from it. It's definitely not for [[infant]]. Not that it's bad in a graphic sense, but that the themes would go right over most 10 year olds heads. [[Entire]], the animation was [[wondrous]] considering this was made in 1978/1979. I thought the story followed the book fairly well in a loose sense. But I am bothered that Bashki didn't just add another 40 minutes or so and tack on the Return of the King parts. That would've made it the ultimate movie. I was bothered by it's abrupt end, and then when I heard Return of the King sucked, I was bothered even more. Too bad it wasn't one great animation film. It might have garnered a higher vote from me. I give it a 7. I can only hope Peter Jackson will do the books justice with the new live action LOTR. --------------------------------------------- Result 5760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There is so much that can be said about this [[film]]. It is not your [[typical]] nunsploitation. Of course, there is nudity and sex with [[nuns]], but that is [[almost]] [[incidental]] to the [[story]].

It is set in 15th Century Italy, at the time of the martyrdom of 800 Christians at Otranto. The battle between the [[Muslims]] and the [[Christians]] [[takes]] up a good [[part]] of the [[film]]. It was interesting when everyone was running from the [[Muslim]] hoards, that the mother superior would ask, "Why do you fear the Muslims,; they will not do anything that the [[Christians]] have done to you?" [[Certainly]], there was enough torture on both sides.

[[Sister]] Flavia (Florinda Bolkan) is [[sent]] to a [[convent]] for defying her [[father]]. In the process, she witnesses and endures [[many]] [[things]]: the gelding of a [[stallion]], the rape of a local woman by a [[new]] Duke, the [[torture]] of a nun who was overcome during a [[visit]] by the Tarantula Sect, and a whipping herself when she ran off with a [[Jew]]. The torture was [[particularly]] [[gruesome]] with [[hot]] [[wax]] being [[poured]] on the nun, and her nipples [[cut]] off.

[[Sister]] Flavia is bound to [[continue]] to [[get]] into [[trouble]] as she questions the male-dominated society in which she [[lives]]. She even [[asks]] [[Jesus]], why the [[father]], son and [[holy]] [[ghost]] are all [[men]].

[[Eventually]], she [[joins]] the leader of the Muslims as his lover and they sack the [[convent]]. Here is where you [[see]] more flesh than you can possible enjoy at one [[time]]. But, tragedy is to come. She [[manages]] to exact [[sweet]] revenge on all, [[including]] the [[Duke]] and her [[father]], but [[finds]] that the [[Muslim]] lover [[treats]] her exactly the same. She is a [[woman]] and that is all there is to it.

I won't [[describe]] what the [[holy]] [[men]] of the [[church]] did to this heretic at the end, but it predates the torture of Saw or Hostel by decades.

Nunsploitation fans will be satisfied with the treats, but movie lovers will find plenty of meat to digest. There is so much that can be said about this [[kino]]. It is not your [[characteristic]] nunsploitation. Of course, there is nudity and sex with [[nun]], but that is [[around]] [[fortuitous]] to the [[tale]].

It is set in 15th Century Italy, at the time of the martyrdom of 800 Christians at Otranto. The battle between the [[Islamists]] and the [[Christendom]] [[pick]] up a good [[parties]] of the [[films]]. It was interesting when everyone was running from the [[Islamist]] hoards, that the mother superior would ask, "Why do you fear the Muslims,; they will not do anything that the [[Kristen]] have done to you?" [[Probably]], there was enough torture on both sides.

[[Sisters]] Flavia (Florinda Bolkan) is [[transmitted]] to a [[nun]] for defying her [[pere]]. In the process, she witnesses and endures [[several]] [[items]]: the gelding of a [[stud]], the rape of a local woman by a [[novo]] Duke, the [[tortured]] of a nun who was overcome during a [[visiting]] by the Tarantula Sect, and a whipping herself when she ran off with a [[Jews]]. The torture was [[especially]] [[horrendous]] with [[sexy]] [[beeswax]] being [[flowed]] on the nun, and her nipples [[chopped]] off.

[[Sisters]] Flavia is bound to [[uninterrupted]] to [[obtain]] into [[problem]] as she questions the male-dominated society in which she [[vie]]. She even [[asked]] [[Dammit]], why the [[pere]], son and [[santo]] [[phantom]] are all [[mens]].

[[Finally]], she [[join]] the leader of the Muslims as his lover and they sack the [[nun]]. Here is where you [[seeing]] more flesh than you can possible enjoy at one [[moment]]. But, tragedy is to come. She [[administered]] to exact [[sugary]] revenge on all, [[comprising]] the [[Duca]] and her [[pere]], but [[discoveries]] that the [[Islamist]] lover [[addresses]] her exactly the same. She is a [[wife]] and that is all there is to it.

I won't [[expound]] what the [[sacrosanct]] [[man]] of the [[basilica]] did to this heretic at the end, but it predates the torture of Saw or Hostel by decades.

Nunsploitation fans will be satisfied with the treats, but movie lovers will find plenty of meat to digest. --------------------------------------------- Result 5761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] *********Ten out of Ten Stars*********

It's hard to believe this was a made for [[television]] movie. Just the [[phrase]], "made of TV", makes me shudder. The production values for made for TV movies are almost [[always]] [[remarkably]] lower than production values for professional movie studios. That being [[said]], this [[version]] of the "Christmas Carol" should have been released in [[theaters]], because it IS that good. It's my personal [[favorite]] of all the "Christmas Carol" movies because [[every]] [[aspect]] of this production are of the [[highest]] quality. Yes, there are some minor on screen glitches with two of the ghosts that visit Scrooge, but there isn't a movie in existence that doesn't have at least a couple of mistakes.

Scott turns in a stellar performance as Scrooge, he's a pleasure to watch. In fact, I can't think of one performance in this film that shouldn't be applauded. The costuming, location shooting, and winter backdrop are [[mesmerizing]]. The musical score is endearing and heart warming. Add to that, solid directing, [[flawless]] cinematography, and faithful scripting; we have here what will one day be considered a holiday classic. It really hasn't been around long enough to be a classic, but mark my words, one day soon it will be. This [[film]] has turned into a yearly Christmas tradition in my [[home]] because it [[embodies]] the [[true]] [[meaning]] behind Christmas: [[Love]], [[selflessness]], and giving. [[In]] as [[selfish]], [[greedy]] [[world]], my family and I can lose ourselves in "The [[Christmas]] [[Carol]]", [[starring]] George C. Scott. *********Ten out of Ten Stars*********

It's hard to believe this was a made for [[televisions]] movie. Just the [[expressions]], "made of TV", makes me shudder. The production values for made for TV movies are almost [[continuously]] [[shockingly]] lower than production values for professional movie studios. That being [[say]], this [[stepping]] of the "Christmas Carol" should have been released in [[teatro]], because it IS that good. It's my personal [[prefer]] of all the "Christmas Carol" movies because [[any]] [[facet]] of this production are of the [[higher]] quality. Yes, there are some minor on screen glitches with two of the ghosts that visit Scrooge, but there isn't a movie in existence that doesn't have at least a couple of mistakes.

Scott turns in a stellar performance as Scrooge, he's a pleasure to watch. In fact, I can't think of one performance in this film that shouldn't be applauded. The costuming, location shooting, and winter backdrop are [[bewitching]]. The musical score is endearing and heart warming. Add to that, solid directing, [[faultless]] cinematography, and faithful scripting; we have here what will one day be considered a holiday classic. It really hasn't been around long enough to be a classic, but mark my words, one day soon it will be. This [[cinematography]] has turned into a yearly Christmas tradition in my [[lodgings]] because it [[symbolizes]] the [[real]] [[mean]] behind Christmas: [[Iike]], [[selfless]], and giving. [[Among]] as [[ungenerous]], [[stingy]] [[monde]], my family and I can lose ourselves in "The [[Christmastime]] [[Carrol]]", [[featuring]] George C. Scott. --------------------------------------------- Result 5762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The acting is [[bad]] [[ham]], ALL the [[jokes]] are superficial and the [[target]] [[audience]] is [[clearly]] very [[young]] children, assuming they have below average IQs. I [[realize]] that it was [[meant]] for [[kids]], but so is Malcom in the [[Middle]], yet they [[still]] throw in [[adult]] humor and situations.

What should we expect from a show lead by Bob Saget, the only [[comedian]] in existence who is less [[funny]] than a ball [[hitting]] a man's groin, which is [[probably]] why he [[stopped]] hosting America's Funniest Home Videos.

Parents, do not [[let]] your [[kids]] watch this show unless you [[want]] to [[save]] [[money]] on [[college]]. [[Expose]] your [[kids]] to [[stupidity]] and they will [[grow]] up dumberer. The acting is [[naughty]] [[chatham]], ALL the [[gags]] are superficial and the [[goals]] [[audiences]] is [[apparently]] very [[youth]] children, assuming they have below average IQs. I [[achieve]] that it was [[intended]] for [[kiddies]], but so is Malcom in the [[Idler]], yet they [[again]] throw in [[mature]] humor and situations.

What should we expect from a show lead by Bob Saget, the only [[comedy]] in existence who is less [[comical]] than a ball [[hit]] a man's groin, which is [[unquestionably]] why he [[stopping]] hosting America's Funniest Home Videos.

Parents, do not [[allowing]] your [[juvenile]] watch this show unless you [[wanna]] to [[rescues]] [[cash]] on [[university]]. [[Unmask]] your [[juvenile]] to [[insanity]] and they will [[heightened]] up dumberer. --------------------------------------------- Result 5763 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[If]] you're [[looking]] for a Hollywood [[action]] [[packed]] kid-flick with the common [[bad]] [[language]] and violence this may not be the [[film]] to sit down for. If you're on the other hand interested in watching a [[film]] with youre [[children]] that has [[actually]] some values like showing the importance of [[friendship]] and truth this is the [[film]] to watch. [[Looking]] at the [[program]] [[guide]] this is [[obviously]] what [[millions]] of other [[viewers]] have found. [[Not]] many low-budget [[independent]] [[films]] have ever been [[aired]] as much as Mr. Atlas. The film is actually very [[funny]] as well as warm hearted and [[shows]] some [[beautiful]] locations [[masterfully]] [[captured]] by the [[sharp]] [[eye]] of the [[obvious]] [[brilliant]] [[cinematographer]] Suki Medencevic. [[Also]] if you're interested in [[looking]] at a muscular [[fellow]] with good looks the [[ladies]] can get an [[eye]] full. Let's [[support]] those who make good childrens [[film]] [[buy]] [[buying]] their [[videos]] and watching their products on [[TV]]. Enjoy [[Unless]] you're [[searching]] for a Hollywood [[activity]] [[packaging]] kid-flick with the common [[inclement]] [[vocabulary]] and violence this may not be the [[kino]] to sit down for. If you're on the other hand interested in watching a [[movie]] with youre [[kid]] that has [[genuinely]] some values like showing the importance of [[goodwill]] and truth this is the [[movies]] to watch. [[Researching]] at the [[curriculum]] [[guiding]] this is [[apparently]] what [[zillion]] of other [[spectators]] have found. [[No]] many low-budget [[autonomous]] [[film]] have ever been [[disseminated]] as much as Mr. Atlas. The film is actually very [[amusing]] as well as warm hearted and [[displayed]] some [[wondrous]] locations [[artfully]] [[caught]] by the [[abrupt]] [[ojo]] of the [[conspicuous]] [[shiny]] [[photographer]] Suki Medencevic. [[Moreover]] if you're interested in [[researching]] at a muscular [[coworkers]] with good looks the [[madams]] can get an [[eyes]] full. Let's [[assists]] those who make good childrens [[movie]] [[bought]] [[procurement]] their [[tapes]] and watching their products on [[TELEVISION]]. Enjoy --------------------------------------------- Result 5764 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I [[believe]] that war films should [[try]] to convey the terror of war, avoid idealism and respect some rudimentary military principles. Zvezda [[barely]] does the first. Zvezda being a Russian war film, I was [[expecting]] patriotism, sentimentality, beautiful poetic [[pictures]], a lush score, [[Slavic]] cheekbones and cruel [[Germans]]. What I didn't need was the naive love non-affair, the unrealistically [[silly]] war scenes and the [[abuse]] of the syrupy soundtrack in a [[film]] which [[avoided]] carefully all historical or political [[references]] (Stalinism, Nazism, [[Holocaust]]) only to [[end]] on a passing but nonetheless [[insulting]] to our sense of history endnote about "liberating Poland". A missed [[opportunity]] as a film but not as propaganda apparently. I [[believing]] that war films should [[seek]] to convey the terror of war, avoid idealism and respect some rudimentary military principles. Zvezda [[hardly]] does the first. Zvezda being a Russian war film, I was [[waiting]] patriotism, sentimentality, beautiful poetic [[picture]], a lush score, [[Slaves]] cheekbones and cruel [[German]]. What I didn't need was the naive love non-affair, the unrealistically [[beast]] war scenes and the [[abuses]] of the syrupy soundtrack in a [[filmmaking]] which [[shunned]] carefully all historical or political [[referencing]] (Stalinism, Nazism, [[Shoah]]) only to [[terminating]] on a passing but nonetheless [[pejorative]] to our sense of history endnote about "liberating Poland". A missed [[likelihood]] as a film but not as propaganda apparently. --------------------------------------------- Result 5765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is [[NOT]] as bad a movie as some reviewers, and as the summary at the IMDB page for this movie, say it is. Why? First is the fact that in 1984 the movie makers were daring enough to confront, as one of the plot elements, the issue of domestic violence -- so reviewers who complain about the plot are sadly missing one of the main points! Second, without the plot element of Prince's movie relationship with his abusive father, the musical climax wouldn't work as well as it does -- so those [[reviewers]] who say that only the music is good have, once again, missed one of the points -- specifically, WHY it is so good...because all of the music in this film has a plot element backdrop that makes the music more effective. Third, give this movie a break! For first-time movie producers and director, this is just not that bad! There are far worse movies out there by accomplished movie people!! And last, the reviewers who say that the music is "good" have also missed the point -- [[check]] out the [[range]] of stylistic musical treatments, the variety, the musicianship, and the stage performance of Prince -- truly one of a kind, going musically where no one else was going during the 1980's, and with a style seen in the work of other artists (clothes and movement: which costuming elements came first, Michael Jackson's or Prince's? Also, [[see]] if you can spot the splayed fingers sweeping in front of the eyes that [[Prince]] does in this movie, long before Quentin Tarentino's "Pulp Fiction"). As the [[sum]] of its parts, not a [[bad]] [[movie]] at all. This is [[NOPE]] as bad a movie as some reviewers, and as the summary at the IMDB page for this movie, say it is. Why? First is the fact that in 1984 the movie makers were daring enough to confront, as one of the plot elements, the issue of domestic violence -- so reviewers who complain about the plot are sadly missing one of the main points! Second, without the plot element of Prince's movie relationship with his abusive father, the musical climax wouldn't work as well as it does -- so those [[testers]] who say that only the music is good have, once again, missed one of the points -- specifically, WHY it is so good...because all of the music in this film has a plot element backdrop that makes the music more effective. Third, give this movie a break! For first-time movie producers and director, this is just not that bad! There are far worse movies out there by accomplished movie people!! And last, the reviewers who say that the music is "good" have also missed the point -- [[audit]] out the [[assortment]] of stylistic musical treatments, the variety, the musicianship, and the stage performance of Prince -- truly one of a kind, going musically where no one else was going during the 1980's, and with a style seen in the work of other artists (clothes and movement: which costuming elements came first, Michael Jackson's or Prince's? Also, [[behold]] if you can spot the splayed fingers sweeping in front of the eyes that [[Prinz]] does in this movie, long before Quentin Tarentino's "Pulp Fiction"). As the [[suma]] of its parts, not a [[unfavourable]] [[kino]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 5766 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] This [[film]] has a very simple but somehow very [[bad]] plot. The entire movie is about a girl getting sucked through a gate to another dimension then years later it gets opened again by a witch while a group of friends (including the lead actor who is having trouble getting over his ex girlfriend who is one of the other campers along with her new partner... another girl... that's right they're lesbians and there is some nudity of course for no particular reason). [[Unfortunately]] demon follows the now adult girl back through. Also unfortunately, none of this is ever explained. Where exactly were they? Where did the demon come from? How did she survive as a child in a place full of evil demons? Who the hell trained her and made her a gladiator type outfit? The acting is terrible I think but it's hard to tell because the writing is so bad maybe there was just nothing they could do with it. I give it a three because the wrestler was pretty good and the effects were pretty fun even though they were very cheap. I would not recommend it, it wasn't quite bad enough to be funny. This [[filmmaking]] has a very simple but somehow very [[unfavourable]] plot. The entire movie is about a girl getting sucked through a gate to another dimension then years later it gets opened again by a witch while a group of friends (including the lead actor who is having trouble getting over his ex girlfriend who is one of the other campers along with her new partner... another girl... that's right they're lesbians and there is some nudity of course for no particular reason). [[Tragically]] demon follows the now adult girl back through. Also unfortunately, none of this is ever explained. Where exactly were they? Where did the demon come from? How did she survive as a child in a place full of evil demons? Who the hell trained her and made her a gladiator type outfit? The acting is terrible I think but it's hard to tell because the writing is so bad maybe there was just nothing they could do with it. I give it a three because the wrestler was pretty good and the effects were pretty fun even though they were very cheap. I would not recommend it, it wasn't quite bad enough to be funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 5767 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] To be completely honest,I haven't seen that many [[western]] films but I've [[seen]] enough to [[know]] what a good one is.This by far the [[worst]] western on the [[planet]] today.First off there black people in the [[wild]] west? Come on! Who ever thought that this [[could]] be a cool off the wall [[movie]] that everyone would [[love]] were [[slightly]], no no, completely retarded!Secondly in that day and age [[women]] especially [[black]] [[women]] were not prone to be [[carrying]] and or [[using]] guns.Thirdly [[whats]] with the Asian [[chick]] speaking perfect [[English]]? [[If]] the setting is [[western]],Asia isn't where your going. [[Finally]],the evil gay [[chick]] was too much the movie was just crap from the beginning.Now don't get me [[wrong]] I'm not racist or white either so don't get [[ticked]] after reading this but this [[movie]],this [[movie]] is the [[worst]] [[presentation]] of black people I have ever [[seen]]! To be completely honest,I haven't seen that many [[west]] films but I've [[noticed]] enough to [[savoir]] what a good one is.This by far the [[meanest]] western on the [[planets]] today.First off there black people in the [[feral]] west? Come on! Who ever thought that this [[would]] be a cool off the wall [[filmmaking]] that everyone would [[adored]] were [[somewhat]], no no, completely retarded!Secondly in that day and age [[females]] especially [[negro]] [[females]] were not prone to be [[carries]] and or [[utilize]] guns.Thirdly [[thats]] with the Asian [[nana]] speaking perfect [[Frenchman]]? [[Though]] the setting is [[west]],Asia isn't where your going. [[Eventually]],the evil gay [[girl]] was too much the movie was just crap from the beginning.Now don't get me [[misguided]] I'm not racist or white either so don't get [[clicked]] after reading this but this [[filmmaking]],this [[cinematographic]] is the [[meanest]] [[introductions]] of black people I have ever [[noticed]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 5768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Chillers starts on a [[cold]], [[dark]] stormy [[night]] as a bus [[drops]] off three passenger's outside a bus station, a [[young]] [[boy]] named Mason ([[Jesse]] Emery), a [[college]] [[professor]] Dr. Howard Conrow (David Wohl) & a woman named Sharon Phillips ([[Laurie]] Pennington). [[Inside]] they [[discover]] that they have [[missed]] their [[connecting]] bus & are stranded for the [[night]]. [[In]] the waiting [[area]] they find two other people, [[Ronnie]] (Jim [[Wolf]]) & a sleeping woman named Lindsay (Marjorie Fitzsimmons) who is [[currently]] having a [[terrifying]] nightmare...

While [[swimming]] in an [[indoor]] [[pool]] [[Lindsay]] encounters & befriends [[guy]] named [[Billy]] Waters ([[Jesse]] Johnson), the [[next]] time Lindsay sees Billy he dives into the pool & then seemingly disappears into [[thin]] [[air]] before he surfaces. Shortly after [[Lindsay]] [[discovers]] that [[Billy]] Water [[died]] in a [[diving]] accident 5 years [[ago]]...

[[Lindsay]] wakes up & tells the others about her nightmare, everyone [[else]] responds by saying that they too have [[suffered]] [[disturbing]] dreams recently & [[decide]] to share them to pass the [[time]]...

[[Next]] up is Mason who tells a [[story]] of how he & two friends, Scott (David R. Hamm) & [[Jimmy]] ([[Will]] Tuckwiller), are [[terrorised]] during a [[camping]] [[trip]]...

Then it's Sharon [[whose]] [[story]] [[revolves]] around a newsman named Tom Williams ([[Thom]] Delventhal) who she phones up, in no [[time]] at all Tom is at her front [[door]] but he [[actually]] [[turns]] out to be a [[Vampire]]...

It's Ronnie's [[turn]] [[next]] & he [[describes]] how he discovers that he can [[bring]] the dead back to [[life]], [[unfortunately]] he [[brings]] executed [[mass]] [[murderer]] Nelson Caulder (Bradford Boll) back to homicidal [[life]]...

[[Finally]] Dr. Conrow [[tells]] a [[tale]] of how two of his [[students]] [[brought]] an [[ancient]] Aztec war-god named Ixpe (Kimberly [[Harbour]]) back to life...

Then it's back to the bus station for one [[last]] ([[predictable]]) twist...

[[Written]], produced & directed by [[Daniel]] Boyd Chillers is one of the [[worst]] [[horror]] anthologies I've ever [[seen]] & I [[usually]] really like this sub-genre. The [[script]] by Boyd [[lacks]] what is needed for films such as Chillers to work, you can see the final twist coming a mile off & each story is really lame. The first one is totally pointless & didn't seem to have an ending & the best thing about these anthologies are the short snappy stories that are rounded off with a neat twist. The second story is predictable &, again, just ends without any payoff. So it continues throughout Chillers that each story is deeply unsatisfying to watch & have no reward for doing so. The character's & dialogue are poorly written, the stories seem to have no original ideas of their own & as a whole the film totally sucks. At least each story doesn't last long & I liked the idea behind the linking segments.

Director Boyd was obviously working with a very low budget & it shows. All I can say is if you want to watch a 15 odd minute short story set entirely within a swimming pool then Chillers is for you. The stories are neither clever, scary or have any sort of tension or build up to anything. Having said that it does have a few nice scenes & some surprising competence shines through on occasion. Violence & gore wise there isn't much happening in Chillers, a ripped out heart, a decapitated head & a bitten off hand is as gory as it gets.

Technically Chillers is poor stuff that won't impress anyone. Basic cinematography, bad music, cheap special effects & below average production values. Chillers also features one of the worst closing theme songs ever, period. The acting is also of a very low standard.

I am sure a lot of effort was put into Chillers as a low budget film & at least the filmmakers tried so I will give credit for that at least, but that still doesn't stop me from thinking it's crap. Similar anthology films like Tales From the Crypt (1972), Asylum (1972), The Vault of Horror (1973), Dr. Terror's House of Horrors (1965), Creepshow (1982) & Tales From the Darkside: The Movie (1990) are far superior to Chillers so watch one of those instead. Chillers starts on a [[chilled]], [[somber]] stormy [[nuit]] as a bus [[falls]] off three passenger's outside a bus station, a [[youthful]] [[boys]] named Mason ([[Jess]] Emery), a [[campus]] [[teachers]] Dr. Howard Conrow (David Wohl) & a woman named Sharon Phillips ([[Lori]] Pennington). [[Indoors]] they [[detect]] that they have [[miss]] their [[connection]] bus & are stranded for the [[overnight]]. [[At]] the waiting [[areas]] they find two other people, [[Rooney]] (Jim [[Woolf]]) & a sleeping woman named Lindsay (Marjorie Fitzsimmons) who is [[nowadays]] having a [[shocking]] nightmare...

While [[bathing]] in an [[inner]] [[pools]] [[Lindsey]] encounters & befriends [[buddy]] named [[Billie]] Waters ([[Jess]] Johnson), the [[forthcoming]] time Lindsay sees Billy he dives into the pool & then seemingly disappears into [[delgado]] [[aviation]] before he surfaces. Shortly after [[Lindsey]] [[discover]] that [[Billie]] Water [[dead]] in a [[diver]] accident 5 years [[formerly]]...

[[Lindsey]] wakes up & tells the others about her nightmare, everyone [[other]] responds by saying that they too have [[endured]] [[disquieting]] dreams recently & [[decided]] to share them to pass the [[period]]...

[[Future]] up is Mason who tells a [[storytelling]] of how he & two friends, Scott (David R. Hamm) & [[Jimmie]] ([[Willingness]] Tuckwiller), are [[terrorized]] during a [[campground]] [[travels]]...

Then it's Sharon [[who]] [[history]] [[turns]] around a newsman named Tom Williams ([[Tom]] Delventhal) who she phones up, in no [[times]] at all Tom is at her front [[wears]] but he [[genuinely]] [[revolves]] out to be a [[Vamp]]...

It's Ronnie's [[turning]] [[imminent]] & he [[portray]] how he discovers that he can [[brings]] the dead back to [[lives]], [[sadly]] he [[puts]] executed [[mace]] [[assassin]] Nelson Caulder (Bradford Boll) back to homicidal [[vida]]...

[[Lastly]] Dr. Conrow [[told]] a [[tales]] of how two of his [[learners]] [[introduced]] an [[longtime]] Aztec war-god named Ixpe (Kimberly [[Ports]]) back to life...

Then it's back to the bus station for one [[final]] ([[foreseeable]]) twist...

[[Authored]], produced & directed by [[Danielle]] Boyd Chillers is one of the [[meanest]] [[terror]] anthologies I've ever [[noticed]] & I [[generally]] really like this sub-genre. The [[hyphen]] by Boyd [[absence]] what is needed for films such as Chillers to work, you can see the final twist coming a mile off & each story is really lame. The first one is totally pointless & didn't seem to have an ending & the best thing about these anthologies are the short snappy stories that are rounded off with a neat twist. The second story is predictable &, again, just ends without any payoff. So it continues throughout Chillers that each story is deeply unsatisfying to watch & have no reward for doing so. The character's & dialogue are poorly written, the stories seem to have no original ideas of their own & as a whole the film totally sucks. At least each story doesn't last long & I liked the idea behind the linking segments.

Director Boyd was obviously working with a very low budget & it shows. All I can say is if you want to watch a 15 odd minute short story set entirely within a swimming pool then Chillers is for you. The stories are neither clever, scary or have any sort of tension or build up to anything. Having said that it does have a few nice scenes & some surprising competence shines through on occasion. Violence & gore wise there isn't much happening in Chillers, a ripped out heart, a decapitated head & a bitten off hand is as gory as it gets.

Technically Chillers is poor stuff that won't impress anyone. Basic cinematography, bad music, cheap special effects & below average production values. Chillers also features one of the worst closing theme songs ever, period. The acting is also of a very low standard.

I am sure a lot of effort was put into Chillers as a low budget film & at least the filmmakers tried so I will give credit for that at least, but that still doesn't stop me from thinking it's crap. Similar anthology films like Tales From the Crypt (1972), Asylum (1972), The Vault of Horror (1973), Dr. Terror's House of Horrors (1965), Creepshow (1982) & Tales From the Darkside: The Movie (1990) are far superior to Chillers so watch one of those instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 5769 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When i [[got]] this [[movie]] free from my [[job]], along with three other similar [[movies]].. I [[watched]] then with very low [[expectations]]. [[Now]] this [[movie]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[pay]] for. It is a [[tale]] of [[love]], [[betrayal]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[want]] in a [[movie]]. [[Definitely]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[would]] probably never watch this movie again. [[In]] a nutshell this is the [[kind]] of movie that you [[would]] see [[either]] very [[late]] at night on a local [[television]] station that is just [[wanting]] to take up some time, or you [[would]] [[see]] it on a [[Sunday]] afternoon on a local [[television]] station that is [[trying]] to take up some time. Despite the [[bad]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[camera]] [[work]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[movie]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVD]] [[player]]. The [[story]] has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]] in [[many]] [[movies]]. This one is no [[different]], no better, no [[worse]].

Just your average [[movie]]. When i [[get]] this [[films]] free from my [[workplace]], along with three other similar [[filmmaking]].. I [[seen]] then with very low [[forecasts]]. [[Presently]] this [[filmmaking]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[paying]] for. It is a [[conte]] of [[amore]], [[treachery]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[desiring]] in a [[filmmaking]]. [[Unmistakably]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[ought]] probably never watch this movie again. [[At]] a nutshell this is the [[genre]] of movie that you [[should]] see [[neither]] very [[tard]] at night on a local [[tv]] station that is just [[wanted]] to take up some time, or you [[ought]] [[consults]] it on a [[Sundays]] afternoon on a local [[tv]] station that is [[attempting]] to take up some time. Despite the [[unfavourable]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[cameras]] [[cooperation]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[filmmaking]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVDS]] [[protagonist]]. The [[storytelling]] has been [[effected]] [[innumerable]] [[period]] in [[multiple]] [[theater]]. This one is no [[assorted]], no better, no [[worst]].

Just your average [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] If Saura hadn't [[done]] anything like this before, Iberia would be a milestone. Now it still [[deserves]] inclusion to honor a [[great]] director and a [[great]] cinematic [[conservator]] of Spanish culture, but he has done a lot like this before, and though we can [[applaud]] the riches he has given us, we have to pick and choose favorites and [[high]] points among [[similar]] [[films]] which [[include]] Blood [[Wedding]] (1981), [[Carmen]] (1983), El [[Amore]] Brujo (1986), Sevillanas (1992), Salomé (2002) and Tango (1998). I would choose Saura's 1995 Flamenco as his most [[unique]] and [[potent]] cultural [[document]], next to which Iberia pales.

Iberia is conceived as a series of interpretations of the music of Isaac [[Manuel]] [[Francisco]] Albéniz (1860-1909) and in particular his "Iberia" suite for piano. Isaac Albéniz was a [[great]] [[contributor]] to the externalization of Spanish musical [[culture]] -- its re-formatting for a non-Spanish audience. He [[moved]] to France in his [[early]] thirties and was [[influenced]] by French composers. His "Iberia" suite is an [[imaginative]] [[synthesis]] of Spanish folk music with the styles of Liszt, Dukas and d'Indy. He traveled around performing his compositions, which are a kind of [[beautiful]] standardization of Spanish rhythms and [[melodies]], not as homogenized as Ravel's Bolero but [[moving]] in that direction. Naturally, the Spanish have repossessed Albéniz, and in Iberia, the performers reinterpret his compositions in terms of various more ethnic and regional dances and styles. But the source is a tamed and diluted form of Spanish musical and dance culture [[compared]] to the echt Spanishness of [[pure]] flamenco. Flamenco, [[coming]] out of the [[region]] of Andalusia, is a [[deeply]] [[felt]] [[amalgam]] of gitane, Hispano-Arabic, and Jewish [[cultures]]. Iberia [[simply]] is the peninsula comprising [[Spain]], [[Portugal]], [[Andorra]] and [[Gibraltar]]; the very [[concept]] is more diluted.

Saura's Flamenco is an unstoppably [[intense]] ethnic [[mix]] of [[music]], [[singing]], [[dancing]] and that peacock [[manner]] of noble preening that is the [[essence]] of Spanish style, the [[way]] a [[man]] and a [[woman]] carries himself or herself with [[pride]] verging on arrogance and [[elegance]] and panache -- even bullfights and the moves of the torero are full of it -- in a series of electric sequences without introduction or conclusion; they just are. Saura always emphasized the staginess of his collaborations with choreographer Antonio Gades and other artists. In his 1995 Flamenco he dropped any pretense of a story and simply has singers, musicians, and dancers move on and off a big sound stage with nice lighting and screens, flats, and mirrors arranged by cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, another of the Spanish filmmaker's important collaborators. The beginnings and endings of sequences in Flamenco are often rough, but atmospheric, marked only by the rumble and rustle of shuffling feet and a mixture of voices. Sometimes the film keeps feeding when a performance is over and you see the dancer bend over, sigh, or laugh; or somebody just unexpectedly says something. In Flamenco more than any of Saura's other musical films it's the rapt, intense interaction of singers and dancers and rhythmically clapping participant observers shouting impulsive olé's that is the "story" and creates the magic. Because Saura has truly made magic, and perhaps best so when he dropped any sort of conventional story.

Iberia is in a similar style to some of Saura's purest musical films: no narration, no dialogue, only brief titles to indicate the type of song or the region, beginning with a pianist playing Albeniz's music and gradually moving to a series of dance sequences and a little singing. In flamenco music, the fundamental element is the unaccompanied voice, and that voice is the most unmistakable and unique contribution to world music. It relates to other songs in other ethnicities, but nothing quite equals its raw raucous unique ugly-beautiful cry that defies you to do anything but listen to it with the closest attention. Then comes the clapping and the foot stomping, and then the dancing, combined with the other elements. There is only one flamenco song in Iberia. If you love Saura's Flamenco, you'll want to see Iberia, but you'll be a bit disappointed. The style is there; some of the great voices and dancing and music are there. But Iberia's source and conception doom it to a lesser degree of power and make it a less rich and intense cultural experience. If Saura hadn't [[accomplished]] anything like this before, Iberia would be a milestone. Now it still [[deserved]] inclusion to honor a [[excellent]] director and a [[wonderful]] cinematic [[curator]] of Spanish culture, but he has done a lot like this before, and though we can [[praises]] the riches he has given us, we have to pick and choose favorites and [[alto]] points among [[analogue]] [[movies]] which [[containing]] Blood [[Marriage]] (1981), [[Roxy]] (1983), El [[Amour]] Brujo (1986), Sevillanas (1992), Salomé (2002) and Tango (1998). I would choose Saura's 1995 Flamenco as his most [[sole]] and [[mighty]] cultural [[documentation]], next to which Iberia pales.

Iberia is conceived as a series of interpretations of the music of Isaac [[Manoel]] [[Franz]] Albéniz (1860-1909) and in particular his "Iberia" suite for piano. Isaac Albéniz was a [[huge]] [[taxpayer]] to the externalization of Spanish musical [[civilisations]] -- its re-formatting for a non-Spanish audience. He [[relocated]] to France in his [[precocious]] thirties and was [[impacting]] by French composers. His "Iberia" suite is an [[creative]] [[recap]] of Spanish folk music with the styles of Liszt, Dukas and d'Indy. He traveled around performing his compositions, which are a kind of [[wondrous]] standardization of Spanish rhythms and [[songs]], not as homogenized as Ravel's Bolero but [[relocating]] in that direction. Naturally, the Spanish have repossessed Albéniz, and in Iberia, the performers reinterpret his compositions in terms of various more ethnic and regional dances and styles. But the source is a tamed and diluted form of Spanish musical and dance culture [[comparing]] to the echt Spanishness of [[sheer]] flamenco. Flamenco, [[incoming]] out of the [[districts]] of Andalusia, is a [[heavily]] [[smelled]] [[merge]] of gitane, Hispano-Arabic, and Jewish [[crop]]. Iberia [[solely]] is the peninsula comprising [[Spaniards]], [[Portuguese]], [[Principality]] and [[Cayenne]]; the very [[idea]] is more diluted.

Saura's Flamenco is an unstoppably [[fierce]] ethnic [[mixing]] of [[musicians]], [[sing]], [[dancers]] and that peacock [[modes]] of noble preening that is the [[crux]] of Spanish style, the [[routes]] a [[males]] and a [[wife]] carries himself or herself with [[hubris]] verging on arrogance and [[style]] and panache -- even bullfights and the moves of the torero are full of it -- in a series of electric sequences without introduction or conclusion; they just are. Saura always emphasized the staginess of his collaborations with choreographer Antonio Gades and other artists. In his 1995 Flamenco he dropped any pretense of a story and simply has singers, musicians, and dancers move on and off a big sound stage with nice lighting and screens, flats, and mirrors arranged by cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, another of the Spanish filmmaker's important collaborators. The beginnings and endings of sequences in Flamenco are often rough, but atmospheric, marked only by the rumble and rustle of shuffling feet and a mixture of voices. Sometimes the film keeps feeding when a performance is over and you see the dancer bend over, sigh, or laugh; or somebody just unexpectedly says something. In Flamenco more than any of Saura's other musical films it's the rapt, intense interaction of singers and dancers and rhythmically clapping participant observers shouting impulsive olé's that is the "story" and creates the magic. Because Saura has truly made magic, and perhaps best so when he dropped any sort of conventional story.

Iberia is in a similar style to some of Saura's purest musical films: no narration, no dialogue, only brief titles to indicate the type of song or the region, beginning with a pianist playing Albeniz's music and gradually moving to a series of dance sequences and a little singing. In flamenco music, the fundamental element is the unaccompanied voice, and that voice is the most unmistakable and unique contribution to world music. It relates to other songs in other ethnicities, but nothing quite equals its raw raucous unique ugly-beautiful cry that defies you to do anything but listen to it with the closest attention. Then comes the clapping and the foot stomping, and then the dancing, combined with the other elements. There is only one flamenco song in Iberia. If you love Saura's Flamenco, you'll want to see Iberia, but you'll be a bit disappointed. The style is there; some of the great voices and dancing and music are there. But Iberia's source and conception doom it to a lesser degree of power and make it a less rich and intense cultural experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 5771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I read the [[negative]] [[comments]] before [[viewing]] this film and undeterred, went ahead and started watching. I admit that I had to rewind quite a few [[times]] as the film is [[incredibly]] [[complex]], [[involved]] and full of detail. That is a good thing but also, quite unexpected in this culture of car chases, explosions, gratuitous sex and general violence that substitute for plot and character development. In [[fact]], what a [[welcome]] departure, however, I am so used to not paying a lot of attention to what I watch.

This film is chock [[full]] of character development and plot line; the kind that we used to analyze when I was in high school. It requires actual mental participation on the part of the viewer. What a nice change. I would compare it to 'All The President's Men' in terms of generic subject matter. That is, it is a mystery about intense misconduct on the part of elected officials and those with enough influence upon officials to essentially 'own' them.

Unlike 'All The President's Men', this film makes an effort to give a couple of the characters actual personality. In this sense the movie is a character study like 'The Negotiatior' with Samuel Jackson and Kevin Spacey. In that movie, their characters are both city employees and the plot is extremely intense. Yet, the plot is dependent on the ability of their characters to cooperate with each other, trust each, and ultimately unite together against the corrupt Police Department. There is more gun fire in this film and the specific plot is different but generically, there are many similarities.

I WILL say that City Hall requires a whole lot more concentration. In fact, I was struck how parallel it was to past and present political scandals I've seen in my life going back to Watergate. The thing is, the public knows that something is wrong, for sure! but following the details is hard to do. This movie is not even close to being as complex as real life but it actually is [[realistic]] to [[life]] in its complexity. I think that is one of the reasons that previous posters have criticized the film: unrealistic expectations.

If one watches this knowing what they are about to see and are up to the experience, it really is excellent! I watched it 3 [[times]] in a row! The acting is [[superb]] and the directing is [[flawless]]. The weakest link is John Cusak's accent. I read the [[mala]] [[commentary]] before [[visualizing]] this film and undeterred, went ahead and started watching. I admit that I had to rewind quite a few [[moments]] as the film is [[terribly]] [[complicate]], [[engaged]] and full of detail. That is a good thing but also, quite unexpected in this culture of car chases, explosions, gratuitous sex and general violence that substitute for plot and character development. In [[facto]], what a [[welcomed]] departure, however, I am so used to not paying a lot of attention to what I watch.

This film is chock [[fullest]] of character development and plot line; the kind that we used to analyze when I was in high school. It requires actual mental participation on the part of the viewer. What a nice change. I would compare it to 'All The President's Men' in terms of generic subject matter. That is, it is a mystery about intense misconduct on the part of elected officials and those with enough influence upon officials to essentially 'own' them.

Unlike 'All The President's Men', this film makes an effort to give a couple of the characters actual personality. In this sense the movie is a character study like 'The Negotiatior' with Samuel Jackson and Kevin Spacey. In that movie, their characters are both city employees and the plot is extremely intense. Yet, the plot is dependent on the ability of their characters to cooperate with each other, trust each, and ultimately unite together against the corrupt Police Department. There is more gun fire in this film and the specific plot is different but generically, there are many similarities.

I WILL say that City Hall requires a whole lot more concentration. In fact, I was struck how parallel it was to past and present political scandals I've seen in my life going back to Watergate. The thing is, the public knows that something is wrong, for sure! but following the details is hard to do. This movie is not even close to being as complex as real life but it actually is [[practical]] to [[lives]] in its complexity. I think that is one of the reasons that previous posters have criticized the film: unrealistic expectations.

If one watches this knowing what they are about to see and are up to the experience, it really is excellent! I watched it 3 [[time]] in a row! The acting is [[wondrous]] and the directing is [[irreproachable]]. The weakest link is John Cusak's accent. --------------------------------------------- Result 5772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Kevin Kline and Meg Ryan are among that class of actors which I am always interested in seeing, despite reviews. I have always found Ms. Ryan to be a charming and winsome actress in nearly all her roles, and Kevin Kline is almost always worth watching.

I say "nearly" and "almost" in large part because of this movie.

First off, Meg Ryan does not play a likeable [[character]], she plays a weak-willed whiner who [[begins]] [[grating]] on your nerves shortly after the opening credits and doesn't give up until several days later. That said, Kevin Kline's character is even more annoying and less likeable. So, even if you normally like these two actors, I recommend your give this movie a pass. Kevin Kline and Meg Ryan are among that class of actors which I am always interested in seeing, despite reviews. I have always found Ms. Ryan to be a charming and winsome actress in nearly all her roles, and Kevin Kline is almost always worth watching.

I say "nearly" and "almost" in large part because of this movie.

First off, Meg Ryan does not play a likeable [[nature]], she plays a weak-willed whiner who [[beginnings]] [[grill]] on your nerves shortly after the opening credits and doesn't give up until several days later. That said, Kevin Kline's character is even more annoying and less likeable. So, even if you normally like these two actors, I recommend your give this movie a pass. --------------------------------------------- Result 5773 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I wasn't aware of Steve McQueen in 1958. I only [[knew]] that I was extremely frightened about [[going]] to [[see]] this [[film]]. (I'd been [[devastated]] by the movie "Trantula" at age seven . . . but I was ten now). The 1st scene where the [[Blob]] crawls up the farmer's probing [[stick]] and engulfs his hand was enough to make me want to [[leave]] the theater. But I stayed and [[suffered]] through each of our monster's [[attacks]]. I [[felt]] such [[horror]] when Steve and his girl barely made it out of the doctor's office (poor [[doc]]), and even more when The [[Blob]] entered a movie theater and devoured a large [[portion]] of the audience . . . so [[many]] in [[fact]] that IT oooooozzzzzzed out of the front doors, too huge now to fit through just one. It seemed [[indestructible]] and unlimited in growth potential, and when it trapped poor Steve in a sieve-like diner, he seemed like a sure dinner to be.

To say that the Blob was [[cold]] would be a [[modern]] day description, but in the end, better [[icy]] than scaring and mentally rupturing little [[kids]].

I [[remember]] walking home that evening with my uncle Nick, trying to act brave. He knew I was in trouble, and when I got into bed that night I could not only feel the Blob in the room, but when I summoned up the courage to [[look]] down at the floor, there the red pulsating, heart-like hungry dude sat, waiting for me to try and get up and go to the bathroom. It took months to recover.

I'm 57 [[years]] [[old]] now . . . I've made it.

Of course The Blob wasn't destroyed. I wasn't aware of Steve McQueen in 1958. I only [[knowed]] that I was extremely frightened about [[go]] to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]]. (I'd been [[ruined]] by the movie "Trantula" at age seven . . . but I was ten now). The 1st scene where the [[Smudge]] crawls up the farmer's probing [[wand]] and engulfs his hand was enough to make me want to [[let]] the theater. But I stayed and [[endured]] through each of our monster's [[aggressions]]. I [[smelled]] such [[abomination]] when Steve and his girl barely made it out of the doctor's office (poor [[docs]]), and even more when The [[Stain]] entered a movie theater and devoured a large [[fraction]] of the audience . . . so [[myriad]] in [[facto]] that IT oooooozzzzzzed out of the front doors, too huge now to fit through just one. It seemed [[invincible]] and unlimited in growth potential, and when it trapped poor Steve in a sieve-like diner, he seemed like a sure dinner to be.

To say that the Blob was [[chilled]] would be a [[trendy]] day description, but in the end, better [[glacial]] than scaring and mentally rupturing little [[brats]].

I [[recalling]] walking home that evening with my uncle Nick, trying to act brave. He knew I was in trouble, and when I got into bed that night I could not only feel the Blob in the room, but when I summoned up the courage to [[gaze]] down at the floor, there the red pulsating, heart-like hungry dude sat, waiting for me to try and get up and go to the bathroom. It took months to recover.

I'm 57 [[yrs]] [[former]] now . . . I've made it.

Of course The Blob wasn't destroyed. --------------------------------------------- Result 5774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a good film! Made Men is a great action movie with lots of twists and turns. James Belushi is very good as an ex hood who has stolen 12 million from the boss who has to fend of the gangsters , hillbillies his wife and the local sheriff( Timothy Dalton).you wont be disappointed, jump on board and enjoy the ride. 8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stereotypical send up of slasher flicks falls far short as supposed entertainment. Gerrit Graham, Michael Lerner, Zane Busby, and in fact the entire cast are totally wasted. Lame jokes abound, and every punch line is well telegraphed. The dumb one liners come at a fast pace, and almost every one falls flat as a squashed grape. The musical numbers only contribute to the boredom that sets in and lingers for the entire movie. Another negative is the claustrophobic setting entirely within the walls of an abandoned high school. Avoid this and seek out one of "Lampoon's" truly funny films like "National Lampoon's Golddiggers" - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 5776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was like any Jimmy Stewart film,witty,charming and very enjoyable.Kim Novak's performance as Gillian,the beautiful witch who longs to be human,is splendid,her subtle facial expressions,her every move and gesture all create Gillian's unique and somewhat haunting character,she left us hanging on her every word.I should not fail to mention Ernie Kovacs' and Elsa Lanchester's highly commendable performances as the scotch loving writer obsessed with the world of magic(Kovacs) and the latter as the lovable aunt who can't seem to stop using magic even when forbidden to.The romantic scenes between Stewart and Novak are beautifully done and the chemistry between them is great,but then again when is the chemistry between Jimmy Stewart and any leading lady bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 5777 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I am stunned at the [[negative]] [[comments]] that I have read and can only assume that the people making such [[comments]] were [[less]] than honest. This is the most [[moving]] and [[real]] [[portrayal]] of Joseph Smith that I have ever [[seen]]. It was well [[acted]] to the point that at times I [[forgot]] that I was watching a movie. It [[brought]] Joseph's [[life]] of [[hardship]], good-natured [[optimism]], [[enduring]] faith in people and [[God]], and ultimate [[sacrifice]] to life such in a [[way]] that frankly left me speechless and silent in [[awe]]. If [[anyone]], of ANY Christian [[religion]] can watch this movie without being [[touched]] in some [[positive]] way--I [[would]] have to say it is a reflection of the individual and [[NOT]] the [[movie]]. I give the [[movie]] a "10" and encourage honest souls to [[view]] it. [[At]] the very [[LEAST]] it is an [[extremely]] [[heart]] [[felt]] portrayal of [[man]] who [[gave]] everything he had for what he believed...[[In]] a [[world]] where values and beliefs are ridiculed, this movie stands as a enduring reminder of the [[kind]] of people we are [[supposed]] to be- no matter what religious beliefs we hold.- Ann Pruitt- I am stunned at the [[inauspicious]] [[commentary]] that I have read and can only assume that the people making such [[observations]] were [[lesser]] than honest. This is the most [[transferring]] and [[actual]] [[depiction]] of Joseph Smith that I have ever [[noticed]]. It was well [[served]] to the point that at times I [[forget]] that I was watching a movie. It [[made]] Joseph's [[lifetime]] of [[distress]], good-natured [[optimist]], [[sustained]] faith in people and [[Christ]], and ultimate [[slaughter]] to life such in a [[path]] that frankly left me speechless and silent in [[dazzle]]. If [[someone]], of ANY Christian [[cults]] can watch this movie without being [[poked]] in some [[conducive]] way--I [[should]] have to say it is a reflection of the individual and [[NOPE]] the [[film]]. I give the [[cinematic]] a "10" and encourage honest souls to [[opinions]] it. [[For]] the very [[MINUS]] it is an [[vastly]] [[heartland]] [[deemed]] portrayal of [[fella]] who [[handed]] everything he had for what he believed...[[Among]] a [[worldwide]] where values and beliefs are ridiculed, this movie stands as a enduring reminder of the [[sorting]] of people we are [[alleged]] to be- no matter what religious beliefs we hold.- Ann Pruitt- --------------------------------------------- Result 5778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The influence of Hal Hartley in Adrienne Shelly's "I'll Take You There" is not overt, but clearly has ties to his work (Shelly has acted in two of Hartley's films). Not only does her film exhibit a very tight narrative, but the hyper-stylized and extreme characters strangely render human emotion in a very real light. Though this film is not ironic on the whole (thank God), the small and subtle ironies that pepper the piece allude to the bitter truths in love and loss. With beautiful cinematography and a soundtrack straight from the seventies, "I'll See You There" is a great indie-film that doesn't stoop to postmodern irony when dealing with the woes of love and the reality of human emotion.

The film begins with Bill's life falling to pieces. Not only has he sold his best friend Ray a beautiful country home, but his wife Rose has left him in order to join Ray in the retreat. All washed up, Bill wallows in his own gloom and doom until his sister Lucy (played by the director Adrienne Shelly) brings him all kinds of surprises: a self-help book and a "date" for her traumatized brother.

The unwilling Bill tries to refuse, but the sudden appearance of Bernice at his door leaves him no choice. No doubt Bernice's initially superficial demeanor and ridiculous hairstyle detract from his ability to "rebound" with her. However, her pseudo-hippie qualities annoy him so much that he lashes at her on their first date. And Bernice is so traumatized by his derogatory remarks that she attaches herself to him, forcing herself upon him. To what end, we are not aware... except for maybe the fact that she is psycho. (And who better to play the psycho than Ally Sheedy?)

Aware that Bill desperately wants to see Rose, Bernice offers her car, but on the condition that he take her somewhere first. On the way, she proceeds to hold Bill prisoner with his own gun (a Pinkerton Detective, no less). An imbroglio of angst, resentment, redemption, passion and violence ensue as Bill and Bernice find themselves on their way to the country home of Ray and Rose... of course, with a few stops along the way. --------------------------------------------- Result 5779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This was the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've ever seen, [[yet]] it was [[also]] the [[best]] movie. Sci Fi [[original]] movie's are supposed to be [[bad]], that's what makes them fun! The line, "I like my dinosaur meat well [[done]]!" is probably the [[best]] [[quote]] ever! [[Also]], the plot sounds like something out of a pot induced dream. I can imagine it now, the writers waking up after a [[long]] [[night]] of [[getting]] [[high]] and [[playing]] dance dance revolution, then putting ideas [[together]] for this: [[Space]] marines got to alien [[planet]], which is infested with dinosaurs and has [[medieval]] [[houses]] in it, to protect a science team [[studying]] the [[planet]]. Best idea ever! In fact, in fits the complete Sci Fi original movie checklist: guns dinosaurs medieval times space travel terrible acting

So go watch this movie, but don't buy it. This was the [[lousiest]] [[film]] I've ever seen, [[even]] it was [[apart]] the [[nicest]] movie. Sci Fi [[preliminary]] movie's are supposed to be [[unfavourable]], that's what makes them fun! The line, "I like my dinosaur meat well [[doing]]!" is probably the [[better]] [[quoting]] ever! [[Similarly]], the plot sounds like something out of a pot induced dream. I can imagine it now, the writers waking up after a [[protracted]] [[nocturne]] of [[obtaining]] [[highest]] and [[gaming]] dance dance revolution, then putting ideas [[jointly]] for this: [[Spacing]] marines got to alien [[globe]], which is infested with dinosaurs and has [[mediaeval]] [[habitation]] in it, to protect a science team [[explores]] the [[planets]]. Best idea ever! In fact, in fits the complete Sci Fi original movie checklist: guns dinosaurs medieval times space travel terrible acting

So go watch this movie, but don't buy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I think they really let the quality of the [[DVD]] production get away from them. I [[rented]] this DVD from 2 [[movie]] [[stores]] and the second time I finally got it to play on the 3rd DVD player I [[tried]].

Anyone else have this [[issue]]? It's really hard to [[give]] the film an un-biased review after going through such a [[hassle]] to play it. [[For]] one, I've never seen a Finnish horror film before so I was sort of bummed that the movie was [[done]] in English. Also since it's never made clear what is wrong with Sarah, she just came off as retarded and [[therefore]] I really just [[hoped]] [[someone]] [[would]] shoot her in the [[face]] and [[make]] all the [[horrific]] happenings go away. I think they really let the quality of the [[DVDS]] production get away from them. I [[lease]] this DVD from 2 [[flick]] [[storehouse]] and the second time I finally got it to play on the 3rd DVD player I [[attempting]].

Anyone else have this [[issuing]]? It's really hard to [[confer]] the film an un-biased review after going through such a [[difficulty]] to play it. [[At]] one, I've never seen a Finnish horror film before so I was sort of bummed that the movie was [[completed]] in English. Also since it's never made clear what is wrong with Sarah, she just came off as retarded and [[thus]] I really just [[desired]] [[everyone]] [[could]] shoot her in the [[confront]] and [[deliver]] all the [[terrible]] happenings go away. --------------------------------------------- Result 5781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Acclaimed Japanese [[director]] Takashi Miike can't [[seem]] to get the wheels [[moving]] with this torpid [[thriller]], an adaptation of Yasushi Akimoto's [[book]] concerning an evil [[old]] [[woman]] (and [[child]] [[abuser]]!) who is part of a [[new]] urban legend: if your cell-phone [[rings]] with a [[strange]] tone--and you [[see]] the message 'One Missed Call'--you will [[replay]] the message only to [[hear]] your own [[final]] [[words]] before your [[death]]. Most successful part of the [[film]] is the trenchant satire of [[Reality]] TV cameras intruding on the future [[victims]], but the not-so-elaborate [[deaths]] (which [[include]] a [[hidden]] [[piece]] of red [[candy]]!) are disappointing and dispiriting. The frequent [[shots]] of [[ravaged]] dead [[bodies]] are [[actually]] [[displayed]] [[rather]] [[discreetly]], and this overall politeness may be the [[reason]] why the [[film]] is [[ultimately]] so staid. Hollywood predictably [[jumped]] on the far-fetched plot in 2008, [[yet]] the U.S. version fared no better. NO [[STARS]] from **** Acclaimed Japanese [[headmaster]] Takashi Miike can't [[appears]] to get the wheels [[shifting]] with this torpid [[thrillers]], an adaptation of Yasushi Akimoto's [[ledger]] concerning an evil [[former]] [[mujer]] (and [[enfants]] [[offender]]!) who is part of a [[newest]] urban legend: if your cell-phone [[ring]] with a [[freaky]] tone--and you [[seeing]] the message 'One Missed Call'--you will [[replication]] the message only to [[heed]] your own [[ultimate]] [[expression]] before your [[mortality]]. Most successful part of the [[filmmaking]] is the trenchant satire of [[Realities]] TV cameras intruding on the future [[victim]], but the not-so-elaborate [[mortality]] (which [[containing]] a [[ulterior]] [[slice]] of red [[sweets]]!) are disappointing and dispiriting. The frequent [[beatings]] of [[devastated]] dead [[organizations]] are [[genuinely]] [[exhibited]] [[somewhat]] [[quietly]], and this overall politeness may be the [[cause]] why the [[filmmaking]] is [[eventually]] so staid. Hollywood predictably [[vaulted]] on the far-fetched plot in 2008, [[again]] the U.S. version fared no better. NO [[CELEBRITY]] from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 5782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Having [[seen]] the short a number of [[times]] at horror movie marathons, I [[believe]] it to be a [[humorous]] parody that [[slices]] to the [[main]] point of its [[reference]].

[[Though]] the themes are crusty and [[stale]] to today's [[viewers]], it is by no means a crumby waste of time.

[[Though]] being a [[student]] [[film]] gives little [[rise]] to an excuse, the proof is that it appears [[crafted]] with care on a [[budget]] of little to no [[dough]].

As noted by another [[reviewer]], it is less than ten minutes which is plenty of time to cleanse the viewing palate with a toast of [[joy]], sit back and loaf idly through the film.

I think this short-bread of a film should be enjoyed as an appetizer for the title reference and the viewer should relax and roll with it. Having [[watched]] the short a number of [[dates]] at horror movie marathons, I [[think]] it to be a [[comic]] parody that [[segments]] to the [[principal]] point of its [[references]].

[[Despite]] the themes are crusty and [[archaic]] to today's [[bystanders]], it is by no means a crumby waste of time.

[[Despite]] being a [[learners]] [[cinematography]] gives little [[increases]] to an excuse, the proof is that it appears [[conceived]] with care on a [[budgets]] of little to no [[batter]].

As noted by another [[examiner]], it is less than ten minutes which is plenty of time to cleanse the viewing palate with a toast of [[gladness]], sit back and loaf idly through the film.

I think this short-bread of a film should be enjoyed as an appetizer for the title reference and the viewer should relax and roll with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Horror]] Gods Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi should be more than sufficient a reason for any Genre-lover to watch a film, and, even though the most convincing one they are not the only reason to watch this particular [[little]] Sci-Fi/[[Horror]] gem. [[While]] Lambert Hillyer's "The Invisible Ray" of 1936 does not nearly share the brilliance of other [[contemporary]] films [[starring]] Karloff ("Frankenstein, "Bride Of Frankenstein", "The [[Mummy]]",...) or Lugosi ("White Zombie", "Island Of The Lost Souls", "Dracula",...), or both ("The Black Cat", "The Raven",...), this is doubtlessly a [[highly]] [[entertaining]] [[film]] that no lover of [[cult]] cinema should consider [[missing]]. Compared to other Universal [[Horror]] pictures, the storyline seems a [[bit]] [[silly]], but in a [[delightful]] [[manner]]. Karloff and Lugosi, of course, [[shine]] as [[always]], and the [[film]] furthermore profits from [[great]] sceneries and an [[excellent]] photography. Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a [[brilliant]] [[scientist]] who has invented a [[technique]] to [[look]] into the [[past]] through a [[telescope]], and [[finds]] out that a meteor has [[hit]] the [[earth]] thousands of [[years]] [[ago]]. [[Stunned]] by Rukh's [[invention]], the [[celebrated]] French [[scientist]] Dr. [[Felix]] [[Benet]] (Bela Lugosi), [[invites]] him to [[join]] an [[expedition]] in to [[find]] the meteor. In Africa, Rukh makes a [[discovery]] that is capable of causing [[great]] beneficence and [[great]] destruction alike... It is [[somewhat]] [[odd]] that Karloff, who was in fact [[British]], plays a Hungarian [[scientist]] here while Lugosi, who was Hungarian, plays a French [[Scientist]], but they are both [[excellent]] as usual. As far as I am concerned, these two [[Horror]] [[Deities]] [[could]] have [[probably]] been filmed reading the [[telephone]] directory, and I am sure they [[would]] have [[made]] [[something]] out of it - either [[man]] is an [[icon]] of the [[Horror]] [[genre]], and [[seeing]] them [[together]] is a [[treat]] for [[every]] fan of the [[genre]]. By the [[way]], this is one of the few [[films]], if not the only one, in which it is [[obvious]] that Lugosi was actually taller than Karloff. [[Frances]] [[Drake]] makes a very good [[female]] lead in her role of Dr Rukh's [[beautiful]] young [[wife]]. The rest of the performances are [[also]] good, if not particularly worth mentioning. Other than the casting of Karloff and Lugosi, the film's [[greatest]] [[qualities]] are probably the atmosphere due to great settings and photography, as well as the wonderfully cheesy and highly entertaining storyline. My main complaint is that I would have wished for more screen time for Lugosi, and for his role to have a bit more significance. He is fantastic as always, but his role could have been bigger, and more sinister. Otherwise, "The Invisible Ray" is a wonderfully entertaining film which should satisfy every lover of classic Horror/Sci-Fi cinema, and a must-see for all my fellow Lugosi/Karloff fans. [[Terror]] Gods Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi should be more than sufficient a reason for any Genre-lover to watch a film, and, even though the most convincing one they are not the only reason to watch this particular [[petite]] Sci-Fi/[[Abomination]] gem. [[Despite]] Lambert Hillyer's "The Invisible Ray" of 1936 does not nearly share the brilliance of other [[modern]] films [[championship]] Karloff ("Frankenstein, "Bride Of Frankenstein", "The [[Mom]]",...) or Lugosi ("White Zombie", "Island Of The Lost Souls", "Dracula",...), or both ("The Black Cat", "The Raven",...), this is doubtlessly a [[immeasurably]] [[amusing]] [[films]] that no lover of [[religions]] cinema should consider [[lacking]]. Compared to other Universal [[Terror]] pictures, the storyline seems a [[bite]] [[beast]], but in a [[pleasant]] [[method]]. Karloff and Lugosi, of course, [[gloss]] as [[continually]], and the [[films]] furthermore profits from [[wondrous]] sceneries and an [[impressive]] photography. Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a [[glowing]] [[researchers]] who has invented a [[technologies]] to [[gaze]] into the [[former]] through a [[telescopes]], and [[found]] out that a meteor has [[slapped]] the [[overland]] thousands of [[olds]] [[prior]]. [[Surprised]] by Rukh's [[inventor]], the [[notorious]] French [[researchers]] Dr. [[Agnes]] [[Bennett]] (Bela Lugosi), [[calls]] him to [[joining]] an [[sending]] in to [[found]] the meteor. In Africa, Rukh makes a [[discoveries]] that is capable of causing [[huge]] beneficence and [[huge]] destruction alike... It is [[rather]] [[weird]] that Karloff, who was in fact [[Uk]], plays a Hungarian [[researchers]] here while Lugosi, who was Hungarian, plays a French [[Researchers]], but they are both [[handsome]] as usual. As far as I am concerned, these two [[Terror]] [[Lords]] [[would]] have [[potentially]] been filmed reading the [[phones]] directory, and I am sure they [[should]] have [[introduced]] [[anything]] out of it - either [[males]] is an [[icons]] of the [[Terror]] [[types]], and [[see]] them [[jointly]] is a [[processing]] for [[any]] fan of the [[gender]]. By the [[route]], this is one of the few [[movie]], if not the only one, in which it is [[overt]] that Lugosi was actually taller than Karloff. [[Francis]] [[Gregg]] makes a very good [[women]] lead in her role of Dr Rukh's [[excellent]] young [[women]]. The rest of the performances are [[apart]] good, if not particularly worth mentioning. Other than the casting of Karloff and Lugosi, the film's [[bigger]] [[qualifications]] are probably the atmosphere due to great settings and photography, as well as the wonderfully cheesy and highly entertaining storyline. My main complaint is that I would have wished for more screen time for Lugosi, and for his role to have a bit more significance. He is fantastic as always, but his role could have been bigger, and more sinister. Otherwise, "The Invisible Ray" is a wonderfully entertaining film which should satisfy every lover of classic Horror/Sci-Fi cinema, and a must-see for all my fellow Lugosi/Karloff fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 5784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Italy produced a lot of really great and [[original]] horror films in the 1960's - and this is certainly one of them! The first thing you will notice about Danse Macabre is the style of the film. Shot in [[beautiful]] black and [[white]], and due to director [[Antonio]] Margheriti's use of lighting; the [[film]] [[almost]] [[looks]] [[like]] it [[could]] be a German expressionistic [[horror]] [[film]]. This, [[coupled]] with the horror-filled plot line [[ensures]] that Danse Macabre is a film that [[truly]] [[captures]] the [[essence]] of horror. Of course, the fact that the beautiful Barbara Steele appears in the film doesn't [[harm]] matters - and the good news [[continues]] as, in this [[film]], she [[gets]] to flex her acting muscles more than she did in the films that made her famous. The plot is very aware of the time in which this was released, and so incorporates the [[great]] Edgar Allen Poe. We follow Alan [[Foster]], a writer who accepts a [[bet]] from Poe himself and Lord Blackwood that he can't spend an entire [[night]] in the latter's creepy [[old]] castle. [[Everyone]] that has [[spent]] the night there [[previously]] has died...and our hero is about to meet the previous wager-takers!

Nowadays, horror [[films]] don't [[tend]] to focus so much on each shot and the result is that there isn't much beauty left in the [[genre]]. It is refreshing, [[therefore]], to see this [[film]]. [[Many]] of the shots here are incredibly [[beautiful]] - from the female side of the couple wearing just a see-through skirt, to my personal [[favourite]] - a shot of smoke [[creeping]] in from under a [[door]]. This my first [[Antonio]] Margheriti [[film]], and [[even]] after [[seeing]] just this one; it's obvious that he was one of Italy's premier [[directors]]. [[Also]] interesting is the fact that screenplay was co-written by another of the Italian greats; Django creator Sergio Corbucci. The plot can meander a little too [[much]] at [[times]], but there's always [[enough]] atmosphere on hand to make sure that the film never becomes [[boring]] - and the [[fact]] that it is [[always]] intriguing, [[even]] when the [[plot]] [[slows]] down, ensures the same thing. The [[way]] that Danse [[Macabre]] utilises the 'haunted house' [[theme]] is both well [[done]] and [[original]], and [[helps]] to keep the [[story]] as eerie as [[possible]]. On the [[whole]], [[fans]] of [[Italian]] and/or [[cult]] [[cinema]] will not want to [[miss]] this little gem! Italy produced a lot of really great and [[initial]] horror films in the 1960's - and this is certainly one of them! The first thing you will notice about Danse Macabre is the style of the film. Shot in [[magnifique]] black and [[bianchi]], and due to director [[Geraldine]] Margheriti's use of lighting; the [[films]] [[practically]] [[seems]] [[iike]] it [[did]] be a German expressionistic [[abomination]] [[cinematography]]. This, [[matched]] with the horror-filled plot line [[guaranteeing]] that Danse Macabre is a film that [[really]] [[caught]] the [[nub]] of horror. Of course, the fact that the beautiful Barbara Steele appears in the film doesn't [[damages]] matters - and the good news [[continuing]] as, in this [[cinematography]], she [[receives]] to flex her acting muscles more than she did in the films that made her famous. The plot is very aware of the time in which this was released, and so incorporates the [[huge]] Edgar Allen Poe. We follow Alan [[Promote]], a writer who accepts a [[bets]] from Poe himself and Lord Blackwood that he can't spend an entire [[nocturnal]] in the latter's creepy [[ancient]] castle. [[Someone]] that has [[spending]] the night there [[beforehand]] has died...and our hero is about to meet the previous wager-takers!

Nowadays, horror [[cinematography]] don't [[tended]] to focus so much on each shot and the result is that there isn't much beauty left in the [[type]]. It is refreshing, [[so]], to see this [[cinematography]]. [[Multiple]] of the shots here are incredibly [[wondrous]] - from the female side of the couple wearing just a see-through skirt, to my personal [[preferable]] - a shot of smoke [[crawling]] in from under a [[wears]]. This my first [[Geraldine]] Margheriti [[cinematography]], and [[yet]] after [[witnessing]] just this one; it's obvious that he was one of Italy's premier [[administrators]]. [[Similarly]] interesting is the fact that screenplay was co-written by another of the Italian greats; Django creator Sergio Corbucci. The plot can meander a little too [[very]] at [[time]], but there's always [[suffice]] atmosphere on hand to make sure that the film never becomes [[bored]] - and the [[facto]] that it is [[unceasingly]] intriguing, [[yet]] when the [[intrigue]] [[slow]] down, ensures the same thing. The [[camino]] that Danse [[Ghoulish]] utilises the 'haunted house' [[subject]] is both well [[doing]] and [[initial]], and [[supporting]] to keep the [[narratives]] as eerie as [[feasible]]. On the [[total]], [[amateurs]] of [[Ltalian]] and/or [[worship]] [[cinematographic]] will not want to [[missed]] this little gem! --------------------------------------------- Result 5785 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] With no affinity towards any [[type]] of filmmaking, and a healthy appreciation of documentaries, I can [[honestly]] [[say]] I was [[angry]] at myself for [[bothering]] to [[sit]] through the entire [[length]] of "20 [[Dates]]". I won't waste your [[time]] with the plot, you [[may]] read other reviews. I will [[say]] [[though]] that Berkowitz's hyper, Woody Allen-style [[narration]] was [[extremely]] [[annoying]]. You either wished he'd lay off the coffee or ingest some tranquilizers. And it's [[potentially]] [[apparent]] to Berkowitz himself that this [[film]] was a bad idea, as parts of it details his [[trials]] to [[finance]] the documentary. [[Forgive]] me for [[disguising]] insults as compliments, but I'll give credit to Berkowitz for having the [[skills]] to convince some idiot to finance this [[horrid]] piece of ****. I [[appreciate]] the boundaries & [[intentions]] of the [[film]] here, but [[even]] when [[regarding]] the [[standards]] Berkowitz sets for himself, he [[fires]] off and misses on all [[levels]]. In [[closing]], I'm sure many of these female companions were not at ease going on a [[date]] with a twitchy wanna-be filmmaker, and therefore I question the film's sense of [[authenticity]]. Hey Myles, I loved your film the first time I saw it... when it appeared as an episode of Seinfeld or was a film directed by Woody Allen or Kevin Smith. With no affinity towards any [[genus]] of filmmaking, and a healthy appreciation of documentaries, I can [[candidly]] [[told]] I was [[indignant]] at myself for [[teasing]] to [[sitting]] through the entire [[duration]] of "20 [[Dated]]". I won't waste your [[times]] with the plot, you [[maggio]] read other reviews. I will [[tell]] [[despite]] that Berkowitz's hyper, Woody Allen-style [[storytelling]] was [[unimaginably]] [[exasperating]]. You either wished he'd lay off the coffee or ingest some tranquilizers. And it's [[conceivably]] [[visible]] to Berkowitz himself that this [[filmmaking]] was a bad idea, as parts of it details his [[lawsuits]] to [[finances]] the documentary. [[Forgives]] me for [[concealing]] insults as compliments, but I'll give credit to Berkowitz for having the [[dexterity]] to convince some idiot to finance this [[nasty]] piece of ****. I [[appreciative]] the boundaries & [[intending]] of the [[filmmaking]] here, but [[yet]] when [[pertaining]] the [[norms]] Berkowitz sets for himself, he [[flames]] off and misses on all [[grades]]. In [[closes]], I'm sure many of these female companions were not at ease going on a [[dating]] with a twitchy wanna-be filmmaker, and therefore I question the film's sense of [[veracity]]. Hey Myles, I loved your film the first time I saw it... when it appeared as an episode of Seinfeld or was a film directed by Woody Allen or Kevin Smith. --------------------------------------------- Result 5786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I don't [[doubt]] that [[Victor]] McLaglen won his Best Actor Oscar for this film by dint of a three [[way]] split [[among]] the [[Mutiny]] on the Bounty leads of Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, and Franchot Tone who were all in the same race. But The [[Informer]] is [[still]] a fine [[film]] because [[John]] Ford wouldn't have gotten his first Best Director [[Oscar]] if it wasn't. No [[split]] involved in his award.

The [[movie]] and the [[story]] by Liam O'Flaherty that it is [[based]] on [[involves]] a [[poor]] [[simpleton]] of a [[man]] named Gypo Nolan who was once a [[member]] of the Irish Republican Army. He was cashiered out of it for some [[imbecilic]] stunt he pulled and [[wants]] back in. He's down to his last pence and if he can't [[get]] back in, [[wants]] enough for passage to [[America]]. There's a twenty [[pound]] reward for information leading to the [[arrest]] of a [[former]] comrade named Frankie McPhillip [[played]] by Wallace Ford. [[In]] a [[moment]] of [[weakness]] he goes to the [[Black]] and [[Tan]] [[constabulary]] and informs on McPhillip.

The IRA is pretty [[anxious]] to find out who ratted McPhillip out and they're [[pretty]] certain it was McLaglen. He hasn't the wit to [[really]] [[cover]] his own [[tracks]]. He does make a [[feeble]] effort to [[implicate]] another [[man]] named [[Peter]] Mulligan [[played]] by Donald [[Meek]]. He [[also]] [[picks]] up a hanger-on [[played]] by J.[[M]]. Kerrigan.

The whole [[action]] of The Informer takes place in 1922 in Dublin from about six in the [[evening]] to early the following morning. Of a [[necessity]] it is [[shot]] in [[darkness]] and shadows, making it [[possibly]] the [[first]] noir thriller. [[Had]] it been [[done]] post [[World]] [[War]] [[II]] The [[Informer]] [[would]] have ranked as a [[great]] [[noir]] classic, like [[Odd]] [[Man]] Out or the The [[Third]] [[Man]] which it bares a [[lot]] of [[resemblance]] to.

John Ford knew this world very well. He took some [[time]] off during the [[Rebellion]] and was in Ireland at the [[time]] and had a [[brother]] who was in the IRA. His real [[name]] before having it anglicized was [[Sean]] O'Fiernan.

Preston Foster plays the IRA [[commandant]] Dan Gallagher. [[In]] the book [[Gallagher]] is a harder and meaner [[man]] than [[Foster]] has him here. My guess is that John Ford wanted him as a sympathetic character to give movie fans some rooting interest. He makes it [[clear]] that Foster has to eliminate the informer because the Black and Tans will grab him and get quite a bit more out of him and put the whole [[organization]] in peril.

The IRA trial scene is the highlight of the film. When Foster asks Donald Meek whether he recognizes the authority of their court, Meek ain't in a position to say no. The King's justice and writ does not run here. It graphically illustrates at that point despite occupation by army troops and constabulary, the British are indeed losing their grip on the population.

Of course The Informer a rather grim story has its John Ford touches, but rather fewer than you would expect. Even as McLaglen is spending his money on a drunken spree, the IRA is constantly in the shadows watching him and counting every farthing.

The Informer is a tale well told about Ireland in a grim and [[dismal]] time. I don't [[duda]] that [[Viktor]] McLaglen won his Best Actor Oscar for this film by dint of a three [[paths]] split [[in]] the [[Insurrection]] on the Bounty leads of Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, and Franchot Tone who were all in the same race. But The [[Narc]] is [[however]] a fine [[filmmaking]] because [[Johannes]] Ford wouldn't have gotten his first Best Director [[Oskar]] if it wasn't. No [[hyphenate]] involved in his award.

The [[flick]] and the [[histories]] by Liam O'Flaherty that it is [[founded]] on [[contains]] a [[pauper]] [[nitwit]] of a [[dude]] named Gypo Nolan who was once a [[members]] of the Irish Republican Army. He was cashiered out of it for some [[sophomoric]] stunt he pulled and [[wanna]] back in. He's down to his last pence and if he can't [[obtain]] back in, [[wanting]] enough for passage to [[Americans]]. There's a twenty [[lb]] reward for information leading to the [[arrests]] of a [[antigua]] comrade named Frankie McPhillip [[served]] by Wallace Ford. [[During]] a [[time]] of [[inadequacy]] he goes to the [[Negro]] and [[Ochre]] [[gendarmerie]] and informs on McPhillip.

The IRA is pretty [[keen]] to find out who ratted McPhillip out and they're [[quite]] certain it was McLaglen. He hasn't the wit to [[genuinely]] [[covers]] his own [[rails]]. He does make a [[flimsy]] effort to [[implicating]] another [[men]] named [[Pedro]] Mulligan [[effected]] by Donald [[Mick]]. He [[further]] [[selected]] up a hanger-on [[served]] by J.[[metres]]. Kerrigan.

The whole [[activities]] of The Informer takes place in 1922 in Dublin from about six in the [[tonight]] to early the following morning. Of a [[need]] it is [[filmed]] in [[dark]] and shadows, making it [[presumably]] the [[frst]] noir thriller. [[Have]] it been [[doing]] post [[Global]] [[Wars]] [[SECONDLY]] The [[Squealer]] [[could]] have ranked as a [[super]] [[negro]] classic, like [[Outlandish]] [[Males]] Out or the The [[Terzi]] [[Men]] which it bares a [[batch]] of [[similarity]] to.

John Ford knew this world very well. He took some [[period]] off during the [[Mutiny]] and was in Ireland at the [[period]] and had a [[sibling]] who was in the IRA. His real [[naming]] before having it anglicized was [[Shawn]] O'Fiernan.

Preston Foster plays the IRA [[commanders]] Dan Gallagher. [[Across]] the book [[Hager]] is a harder and meaner [[bloke]] than [[Adoptive]] has him here. My guess is that John Ford wanted him as a sympathetic character to give movie fans some rooting interest. He makes it [[unambiguous]] that Foster has to eliminate the informer because the Black and Tans will grab him and get quite a bit more out of him and put the whole [[agencies]] in peril.

The IRA trial scene is the highlight of the film. When Foster asks Donald Meek whether he recognizes the authority of their court, Meek ain't in a position to say no. The King's justice and writ does not run here. It graphically illustrates at that point despite occupation by army troops and constabulary, the British are indeed losing their grip on the population.

Of course The Informer a rather grim story has its John Ford touches, but rather fewer than you would expect. Even as McLaglen is spending his money on a drunken spree, the IRA is constantly in the shadows watching him and counting every farthing.

The Informer is a tale well told about Ireland in a grim and [[bleak]] time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I [[saw]] this film in its entirety in the 1960s & 70s, yes it IS [[gruesome]], and [[could]] be the progenitor of the "Faces of Death" series popular in the 80s & 90s. Considering the state of so-called "driver education" these days, this one should be required viewing for everyone preparing to learn to drive. When you see violent death in all its gore & horror, you certainly (if you have any [[sensibility]] at all) get a truer perspective on the responsibilities required to [[drive]] [[safely]], what one [[instant]] of [[thoughtlessness]] or inattentiveness at the wheel can do. I worked for Bell Telephone in the 70s & 80s, and at one point was assigned to conduct a safety class. I found this film in the company library, showed it at the session, a number of people got physically sick and had to leave the room! Incredibly, most of them later said "I never knew a car accident could be so terrible!" This film, and another, "RED ASPHALT", is certainly reality in its most graphic form. I'll never forget it, I only wish I could have found a copy when my children were attending "driver's ed" in high school! I [[sawthe]] this film in its entirety in the 1960s & 70s, yes it IS [[abysmal]], and [[did]] be the progenitor of the "Faces of Death" series popular in the 80s & 90s. Considering the state of so-called "driver education" these days, this one should be required viewing for everyone preparing to learn to drive. When you see violent death in all its gore & horror, you certainly (if you have any [[tenderness]] at all) get a truer perspective on the responsibilities required to [[driving]] [[reliably]], what one [[snapshots]] of [[levity]] or inattentiveness at the wheel can do. I worked for Bell Telephone in the 70s & 80s, and at one point was assigned to conduct a safety class. I found this film in the company library, showed it at the session, a number of people got physically sick and had to leave the room! Incredibly, most of them later said "I never knew a car accident could be so terrible!" This film, and another, "RED ASPHALT", is certainly reality in its most graphic form. I'll never forget it, I only wish I could have found a copy when my children were attending "driver's ed" in high school! --------------------------------------------- Result 5788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Me and my girlfriend went to see this movie as a "Premiere Surprise" that is we bought at ticket to the preview to a movie before it opened here in Denmark. We sat through the 1st hour or so and then we left! The point of the movie seemed to be simply to portray the era (and club 54), but it did so at the expence of character development, of which there was [[none]], and [[plot]] of which there was little.

Seldom have I been so [[indifferent]] to the characters in a movie!

The music was good [[though]]. So if you like to hear some good music and get a fix of that 70ies mood I guess it is OK. But don't expect to get a plot of believable characters.

Me and my girlfriend went to see this movie as a "Premiere Surprise" that is we bought at ticket to the preview to a movie before it opened here in Denmark. We sat through the 1st hour or so and then we left! The point of the movie seemed to be simply to portray the era (and club 54), but it did so at the expence of character development, of which there was [[nos]], and [[intrigue]] of which there was little.

Seldom have I been so [[impassive]] to the characters in a movie!

The music was good [[despite]]. So if you like to hear some good music and get a fix of that 70ies mood I guess it is OK. But don't expect to get a plot of believable characters.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Why a stupid, [[boring]], crappy [[overrated]] film series like "Star Wars" [[gets]] all the [[hype]], and a [[truly]] [[amazing]] [[film]] like this one goes completely un-noticed.. is beyond me... This movie will really open your eyes to the dark, [[disturbing]], [[sad]], and scary [[world]] we live in...

Unlike the boring "Elephant", this movie isn't one of those "just a typical day until someome pulls the trigger" movies.. this movie focuses more on what happens AFTER the event...

Deana, played by the very hot and very talented [[Erika]] Christensen, is a happy and healthy straight-A [[student]] with [[great]] [[friends]] and a [[great]] [[life]]... until... she is [[injured]] on the day of the shooting, by being [[shot]] in the [[head]].. [[Luckily]] she is not [[killed]], but is [[severely]] [[injured]] and has to be in the [[hospital]] for a while, causing her to be in a [[lot]] of [[emotional]] [[pain]], in addition to the physical...

Meanwhile, Alicia, [[played]] by the [[also]] very [[gorgeous]] and [[talented]] Busy Phillips, is a [[nasty]], cold-hearted, [[rebellious]], anti-social goth [[girl]] who doesn't have a single [[positive]] [[trait]] on her... and she is unharmed when the [[shooting]] [[happens]].. because it [[turns]] out, she was FRIENDS with the shooter and knew he was [[going]] to do what he did... which causes her to be [[brought]] into the [[police]] station and be [[asked]] some [[questions]].. When she [[refuses]] to [[tell]] the [[cops]] if she [[knew]] the [[shooting]] was [[going]] to [[happen]], they [[constantly]] [[come]] by her [[house]] to [[try]] to [[convince]] her to [[say]] something... and she [[still]] doesn't, so the [[principal]] of the [[school]] makes her [[attend]] a [[funeral]] of one of the [[dead]] [[students]], and after she walks out on that... the principal [[decides]] [[enough]] is [[enough]], and [[forces]] her to [[go]] [[visit]] Deana in the [[hospital]].. Of course she refuses this too, but the [[principal]] [[says]] that if Alicia doesn't do this, the [[cops]] are going to [[continue]] to [[try]] to [[get]] her to say something.. and so she [[actually]] goes to [[see]] her...

The [[lonely]], traumatized, and both physically and [[emotionally]] [[wounded]] Deana is more than happy to have [[someone]] visit her, but of course, Alicia is anything BUT happy to be [[seeing]] her.. Deana attempts to give her a friendly welcome, but of course, Alicia responds with nothing but harsh and hurtful comments and a harsh statement on how she is only here because she is being forced, and has no intention of being friendly with her at all. But sooner or later, that intention will change... (and that's all I'll say :) This is truly one of the most [[moving]] movies ever, as well as one of the most dark and disturbing.. Actually, I think I would tie this with "American History X" as equally disturbing and moving at the same time...

WARNING: Watch this movie at your own risk!! It contains VERY graphic scenes and images! EXCELLENT and criminally under-appreciated movie! I feel so ashamed that I'm pretty much the only one that knows about it! Why a stupid, [[bore]], crappy [[overstated]] film series like "Star Wars" [[attains]] all the [[fanfare]], and a [[genuinely]] [[noteworthy]] [[kino]] like this one goes completely un-noticed.. is beyond me... This movie will really open your eyes to the dark, [[alarming]], [[unlucky]], and scary [[worldwide]] we live in...

Unlike the boring "Elephant", this movie isn't one of those "just a typical day until someome pulls the trigger" movies.. this movie focuses more on what happens AFTER the event...

Deana, played by the very hot and very talented [[Erica]] Christensen, is a happy and healthy straight-A [[students]] with [[tremendous]] [[mates]] and a [[resplendent]] [[vida]]... until... she is [[wounding]] on the day of the shooting, by being [[filmed]] in the [[leader]].. [[Hopefully]] she is not [[assassinated]], but is [[critically]] [[wounding]] and has to be in the [[clinic]] for a while, causing her to be in a [[batch]] of [[sentimental]] [[agony]], in addition to the physical...

Meanwhile, Alicia, [[done]] by the [[additionally]] very [[marvelous]] and [[prodigy]] Busy Phillips, is a [[foul]], cold-hearted, [[mutinous]], anti-social goth [[girls]] who doesn't have a single [[favourable]] [[characteristic]] on her... and she is unharmed when the [[gunshot]] [[comes]].. because it [[revolves]] out, she was FRIENDS with the shooter and knew he was [[go]] to do what he did... which causes her to be [[lodged]] into the [[policing]] station and be [[inquired]] some [[subjects]].. When she [[denying]] to [[say]] the [[police]] if she [[overheard]] the [[gunfire]] was [[gonna]] to [[occur]], they [[systematically]] [[coming]] by her [[dwellings]] to [[tried]] to [[persuade]] her to [[told]] something... and she [[however]] doesn't, so the [[key]] of the [[teaching]] makes her [[attended]] a [[burials]] of one of the [[died]] [[pupils]], and after she walks out on that... the principal [[decide]] [[adequately]] is [[adequately]], and [[troops]] her to [[going]] [[visits]] Deana in the [[hospitals]].. Of course she refuses this too, but the [[key]] [[said]] that if Alicia doesn't do this, the [[police]] are going to [[persist]] to [[endeavour]] to [[got]] her to say something.. and so she [[indeed]] goes to [[seeing]] her...

The [[solitary]], traumatized, and both physically and [[excitedly]] [[injury]] Deana is more than happy to have [[anybody]] visit her, but of course, Alicia is anything BUT happy to be [[see]] her.. Deana attempts to give her a friendly welcome, but of course, Alicia responds with nothing but harsh and hurtful comments and a harsh statement on how she is only here because she is being forced, and has no intention of being friendly with her at all. But sooner or later, that intention will change... (and that's all I'll say :) This is truly one of the most [[displacement]] movies ever, as well as one of the most dark and disturbing.. Actually, I think I would tie this with "American History X" as equally disturbing and moving at the same time...

WARNING: Watch this movie at your own risk!! It contains VERY graphic scenes and images! EXCELLENT and criminally under-appreciated movie! I feel so ashamed that I'm pretty much the only one that knows about it! --------------------------------------------- Result 5790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An ultra-modern house in an affluent neighborhood appears to be the cause of each of its inhabitants bizarre (and deadly) behavior. Or at least that is what Lara Flynn Boyle's character, Col Kennedy, argues. After a series of deadly occurrences in a gargantuan house next door, Col knows something has got to give. Mark-Paul Gosselaar also stars as the mysterious architect.

My opinion: The House Next Door works because of Lara Flynn Boyle and the locations (beautiful house) and stylish sets. Boyle is a talented and dynamic actress, not to mention absolutely stunning. She brings credibility to her character and makes the film intriguing. Without her, it would have failed. "It's so alive" declares a prospective buyer in reference to the house. Yes, it is alive. But the story itself is not so much.

Barring Boyle's presence, not much is happening here, as an enormous amount of the movie is spent watching or waiting to see how the house will affect its current owners. The results are predictable. But I liked it anyway. The cinematography lends the film a polished look. 8/10 on account of Boyle, the premise of an evil ultra-modern house, the locations and cinematography, and set decoration and wardrobe. --------------------------------------------- Result 5791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I remember the original series vividly [[mostly]] due to it's [[unique]] [[blend]] of wry humor and macabre subject matter. Kolchak was hard-bitten newsman from the Ben Hecht school of big-city reporting, and his gritty determination and wise-ass demeanor made even the most mundane episode [[eminently]] watchable. My personal fave was "The Spanish Moss Murders" due to it's totally [[original]] storyline. A poor,troubled Cajun youth from Louisiana bayou country, takes part in a sleep research experiment, for the purpose of dream analysis. Something goes inexplicably wrong, and he literally dreams to life a swamp creature inhabiting the dark folk tales of his youth. This malevolent manifestation seeks out all persons who have wronged the dreamer in his conscious state, and brutally suffocates them to death. Kolchak investigates and uncovers this horrible truth, much to the chagrin of police captain [[Joe]] "Mad Dog" Siska([[wonderfully]] essayed by a grumpy Keenan Wynn)and the [[head]] sleep researcher played by Second [[City]] improv [[founder]], Severn Darden, to [[droll]], [[understated]] [[perfection]]. The wickedly funny, [[harrowing]] finale takes place in the Chicago sewer system, and is a series [[highlight]]. Kolchak never [[got]] any [[better]]. [[Timeless]]. I remember the original series vividly [[essentially]] due to it's [[sole]] [[mix]] of wry humor and macabre subject matter. Kolchak was hard-bitten newsman from the Ben Hecht school of big-city reporting, and his gritty determination and wise-ass demeanor made even the most mundane episode [[supremely]] watchable. My personal fave was "The Spanish Moss Murders" due to it's totally [[preliminary]] storyline. A poor,troubled Cajun youth from Louisiana bayou country, takes part in a sleep research experiment, for the purpose of dream analysis. Something goes inexplicably wrong, and he literally dreams to life a swamp creature inhabiting the dark folk tales of his youth. This malevolent manifestation seeks out all persons who have wronged the dreamer in his conscious state, and brutally suffocates them to death. Kolchak investigates and uncovers this horrible truth, much to the chagrin of police captain [[Kawa]] "Mad Dog" Siska([[strikingly]] essayed by a grumpy Keenan Wynn)and the [[leader]] sleep researcher played by Second [[Ville]] improv [[founders]], Severn Darden, to [[amusing]], [[underestimated]] [[consummate]]. The wickedly funny, [[alarming]] finale takes place in the Chicago sewer system, and is a series [[stress]]. Kolchak never [[gets]] any [[improved]]. [[Undying]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5792 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gurinda Chada's semi-autobiographical film (2002) is a gentle, poignant comedy set in the ethnically diverse community near Heahthrow Airport in West London.

Like the airliners which constantly arrive and depart from overhead, we follow the ups and downs of the two main characters Jess Bhamra (Parminder Nagra) and Jules Paxton (Keira Knightley) as they strike up an unlikely friendship which centres around their mutual passion for soccer and their technical infatuation with David Beckham.

Much of the comedy grows out of the misunderstandings of the families of these two talented girls as they break all the expectations and conventions of their very different family backgrounds.

Somewhere in the middle, as broker, peacemaker and blighted athlete, Joe (Jonathan Reece-Myers) - team coach for the Hounslow Harriers - intercedes in times of crisis, while at the same time remaining the main object of affection of both the main characters.

Eventually, and not without many obstacles and triumphs on the way, we finally see our dedicated and beloved soccer heroines soaring away to realise their dreams.

With great performances from Bollywood veteran Anupam Kher (Mr Bhamra), Shaheen Khan (Mrs Bhamra), Juliet Stevenson (Mrs Paxton) and Frank Harper (Mr Paxton) this really is a film that captures the urgent passion of adolescence and crosses all ethnic frontiers.

Pinky Bamrha (Archie Panjabi) and (Taz) Trey Farley are struggling their own struggles, but nevertheless contribute greatly to our understanding of the main characters in the film.

In it's own special way, this film tells an important story that in quite incidental the football. It celebrates the evolution in the understanding of ordinary people in ordinary families and the innate ability of the young to teach the old. --------------------------------------------- Result 5793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow! This film is truly awful. I can't imagine how anyone could have read this badly written script and given it the greenlight. The cast is uniformly second rate with some truly horrendous performances from virtually all of the cast. The story is disjointed, fragmented and incoherent. The telling, leaden and predictable. No wit, no charm, no humour. Not sexy in the least. The characters remain as flat as the proverbial pancake. There's also a strong current of misogyny which became increasingly hard to stomach as the film went on. When your lead (Carrell) is unfunny and unappealing it's uphill from there. Despite it's phony turn-around ending where love triumphs over lust I was left with a sick feeling in my stomach. If this is what passes for humour and social comment then we're definitely doomed. --------------------------------------------- Result 5794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] If you like movies about creepy towns, hotels, houses, states (ala the Eagles "Hotel California"), etc. that possess the people that are "just passing through," read almost any Stephen King novel instead. If you like the setting of "Disappearance" start by reading King's "Desperation" but also check out "The Shining", "Salem's Lot" and "Needful Things."

The crow motif, the desert, the family driving in desperation to escape or avoid possession are [[tired]]. Why didn't they just make the film from the "Desperation" novel? Maybe they approached King and he nixed? Must be.

Susan Dey and Harry Hamlin look happy to be reunited and they have both worn well over the years, but they're still TV and direct-to-DVD caliber actors. If you like movies about creepy towns, hotels, houses, states (ala the Eagles "Hotel California"), etc. that possess the people that are "just passing through," read almost any Stephen King novel instead. If you like the setting of "Disappearance" start by reading King's "Desperation" but also check out "The Shining", "Salem's Lot" and "Needful Things."

The crow motif, the desert, the family driving in desperation to escape or avoid possession are [[jaded]]. Why didn't they just make the film from the "Desperation" novel? Maybe they approached King and he nixed? Must be.

Susan Dey and Harry Hamlin look happy to be reunited and they have both worn well over the years, but they're still TV and direct-to-DVD caliber actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 5795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] He's stocky, sweaty, slightly cross-eyed and restless. He stands in front of us and [[calls]] himself a pervert. He claims that we – the film viewers – perceive the screen as a toilet bowl, and are all secretly wishing for all the s**t to explode from the inside. He's unpredictable and scary. Well…? Come on, you could have guessed by now: he's one of the leading philosophers of our age.

Slavoj Žižek is both a narrator and a subject of Sophie Fiennes' [[extraordinary]] new film, A Pervert's Guide to the Cinema. Fiennes illustrates a feature-long lecture by Žižek, and does so in two [[ways]]: by providing [[exemplary]] film clips and putting Žižek on real (or reconstructed) locations from the movies he speaks about. It's always nice to watch neatly captioned scenes from great movies (although Revenge of the Sith got here as well), but the main attraction of A Pervert's Guide… is Žižek himself. What makes the movie such fun to watch is the unanswerable question one cannot help but ask over and over again: what is more outrageous, Žižek's views or Žižek's screen presence? In a documentary by Astra Taylor (Žižek!, 05), Slovenian philosopher at one point confessed his fear of being silent. Because, he claimed, he feels like he doesn't exist in the first place, the only way to make all other people believe he does is to talk constantly and [[feverishly]]. And talk he did, and how. Also A Pervert's Guide… is dominated by his voice – delivering [[perfect]] English in most crazy way, and making some astonishing points about the cinema.

What are those? Well, for example he sees Chaplin's reluctance towards talking picture as a sign of an universal fear of voice itself (kind of alien force taking over the human being – think the ventriloquist segment of Dead of Night [45]). He says that the perverse nature of cinema is to teach us to desire certain objects, not to provide us with them. He identifies Groucho Marx as super ego, Chico as ego and Harpo as id. He says a million other interesting things, and all the time we cannot take our eyes off him, so [[persuasive]] (and [[captivating]]) are his looks. At some point I couldn't help but stare at his thick, scruffy hair and wonder what kind of a brain lays stored underneath. Craving, of course, for more insights.

Most notable are Žižek's readings of Lynch and Hitchcock (which comes as no surprise since he has written about both of them). The cumulative effect of many brilliantly edited clips from their respective work made those parts of Žižek's lecture memorable and – unlike others – difficult to argue with, since he seems to really have gotten things right on these two directors. This doesn't go for his reading of Tarkovsky for example, upon whom he relentlessly imposes his own utterly materialistic view of reality, dismissing precisely what's so remarkable in all Tarkovsky (namely strong religious intuitions and images).

The question isn't whether Žižek is inspiring and brilliant, because he is; or whether Fiennes film is worth watching, because it is likewise. The real question is rather: are Žižek views coherent? One smart observation after another make for an overwhelming intellectual ride, but after the whole thing is over, some doubts remain. For example: while considering Vertigo (58) Žižek states that what's hidden behind human face is a perfect void, which makes face itself only a facade: something of a deception in its own means. However, when in the final sequence we hear about the ever-shattering finale of City Lights (31) as being a portrait of one human being fully exposed to another, it's hard not to ask: what happened to the whole facade-thing…? Why should we grant Chaplin's face intrinsic value of the real thing and deprive Kim Novak's of this same privilege in two bold strokes…? Or maybe that incoherence might also be read in Lacan's terms? (The name of the notoriously "unreadable" French psychoanalyst is fundamental to Žižek's thought.) The film has all the virtues of a splendid two-and-a-half hours lecture: lots of ground are covered, many perspectives employed, even some first-rate wisecracks made (when Žižek travels on a Melanie Daniels' boat from The Birds [63] and tries to think as she did, he comes up with: "I want to f**k Mitch!"). But it has also one shortcoming that isn't inherent to two-and-a-half hours lecture as such: it's almost obsessively digressive. Žižek's yarn about how far are we from the Real is as good as any other psychoanalytic yarn, but after some 80 minutes it becomes quite clear that one of Žižek's perverse pleasures is to ramble on and on, changing subjects constantly. Overall effect is this of being swept away by a giant, cool, fizzing wave: you're simultaneously taken by surprise, refreshed, in mortal danger and confused no end. As you finish watching, your head is brimming with ideas not of your own and you're already planning on re-watching some films – but you also share a sense of having survived a calamity.

The ultimate question is: did Žižek lost it? Or haven't we even came close to the real thing? Once cinephilia becomes punishable by imprisonment, we shall all meet in a one big cell and finally talk to each other (not having any movies around to turn our faces to). I dare you all: who will have enough guts to approach Žižek and defy him? My guess is that once you look into those eyes in real life, you become a believer. He's stocky, sweaty, slightly cross-eyed and restless. He stands in front of us and [[inviting]] himself a pervert. He claims that we – the film viewers – perceive the screen as a toilet bowl, and are all secretly wishing for all the s**t to explode from the inside. He's unpredictable and scary. Well…? Come on, you could have guessed by now: he's one of the leading philosophers of our age.

Slavoj Žižek is both a narrator and a subject of Sophie Fiennes' [[wondrous]] new film, A Pervert's Guide to the Cinema. Fiennes illustrates a feature-long lecture by Žižek, and does so in two [[way]]: by providing [[excellent]] film clips and putting Žižek on real (or reconstructed) locations from the movies he speaks about. It's always nice to watch neatly captioned scenes from great movies (although Revenge of the Sith got here as well), but the main attraction of A Pervert's Guide… is Žižek himself. What makes the movie such fun to watch is the unanswerable question one cannot help but ask over and over again: what is more outrageous, Žižek's views or Žižek's screen presence? In a documentary by Astra Taylor (Žižek!, 05), Slovenian philosopher at one point confessed his fear of being silent. Because, he claimed, he feels like he doesn't exist in the first place, the only way to make all other people believe he does is to talk constantly and [[furiously]]. And talk he did, and how. Also A Pervert's Guide… is dominated by his voice – delivering [[faultless]] English in most crazy way, and making some astonishing points about the cinema.

What are those? Well, for example he sees Chaplin's reluctance towards talking picture as a sign of an universal fear of voice itself (kind of alien force taking over the human being – think the ventriloquist segment of Dead of Night [45]). He says that the perverse nature of cinema is to teach us to desire certain objects, not to provide us with them. He identifies Groucho Marx as super ego, Chico as ego and Harpo as id. He says a million other interesting things, and all the time we cannot take our eyes off him, so [[conclusive]] (and [[intriguing]]) are his looks. At some point I couldn't help but stare at his thick, scruffy hair and wonder what kind of a brain lays stored underneath. Craving, of course, for more insights.

Most notable are Žižek's readings of Lynch and Hitchcock (which comes as no surprise since he has written about both of them). The cumulative effect of many brilliantly edited clips from their respective work made those parts of Žižek's lecture memorable and – unlike others – difficult to argue with, since he seems to really have gotten things right on these two directors. This doesn't go for his reading of Tarkovsky for example, upon whom he relentlessly imposes his own utterly materialistic view of reality, dismissing precisely what's so remarkable in all Tarkovsky (namely strong religious intuitions and images).

The question isn't whether Žižek is inspiring and brilliant, because he is; or whether Fiennes film is worth watching, because it is likewise. The real question is rather: are Žižek views coherent? One smart observation after another make for an overwhelming intellectual ride, but after the whole thing is over, some doubts remain. For example: while considering Vertigo (58) Žižek states that what's hidden behind human face is a perfect void, which makes face itself only a facade: something of a deception in its own means. However, when in the final sequence we hear about the ever-shattering finale of City Lights (31) as being a portrait of one human being fully exposed to another, it's hard not to ask: what happened to the whole facade-thing…? Why should we grant Chaplin's face intrinsic value of the real thing and deprive Kim Novak's of this same privilege in two bold strokes…? Or maybe that incoherence might also be read in Lacan's terms? (The name of the notoriously "unreadable" French psychoanalyst is fundamental to Žižek's thought.) The film has all the virtues of a splendid two-and-a-half hours lecture: lots of ground are covered, many perspectives employed, even some first-rate wisecracks made (when Žižek travels on a Melanie Daniels' boat from The Birds [63] and tries to think as she did, he comes up with: "I want to f**k Mitch!"). But it has also one shortcoming that isn't inherent to two-and-a-half hours lecture as such: it's almost obsessively digressive. Žižek's yarn about how far are we from the Real is as good as any other psychoanalytic yarn, but after some 80 minutes it becomes quite clear that one of Žižek's perverse pleasures is to ramble on and on, changing subjects constantly. Overall effect is this of being swept away by a giant, cool, fizzing wave: you're simultaneously taken by surprise, refreshed, in mortal danger and confused no end. As you finish watching, your head is brimming with ideas not of your own and you're already planning on re-watching some films – but you also share a sense of having survived a calamity.

The ultimate question is: did Žižek lost it? Or haven't we even came close to the real thing? Once cinephilia becomes punishable by imprisonment, we shall all meet in a one big cell and finally talk to each other (not having any movies around to turn our faces to). I dare you all: who will have enough guts to approach Žižek and defy him? My guess is that once you look into those eyes in real life, you become a believer. --------------------------------------------- Result 5796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I would not consider myself as one of Leonard Cohen's greatest fans. He does however feature as an important poet / musician in my literary / musical heritage. By far the most valuable element in this documentary is to [[hear]] Leonard's reflections on his own life and career. [[Warming]] and humble.

[[Unfortunately]] the most of the [[musicians]] featured in the concert didn't [[converse]] the [[nuances]] of Leonard's musical / literary manner. Nick Cave, Jarvis Cocker & Beth Orton were the exceptions, even though Leonard highly values Rufus Wainrights interpretations of his songs.

What particularly [[failed]] in this documentary was the ability of the filmmaker to allow the viewer to see who Leonard Cohen is and how these musicians connect to him. A lot is said in this respect, but the viewer is not drawn into the person Leonard Cohen. This [[failing]] is especially evident with the interviews with Bono and the Edge. They view Leonard as a special icon, but can't translate their exact value of Leonard Cohen. The collaboration with U2 is a farce. The entire live registration looks like a rushed job. And just as in the whole film, only Leonard Cohen remains his part and can tell about his own part.

The entire montage and [[screenplay]] is much like a high school extramural project. The use of effects such as echo, slow-motion or flashed images are [[ill]] placed. Some of the camera-work is dismal. Part of the score hardly recalls any associations I may have expected. At times it seemed the filmmaker was [[adding]] [[psychotic]] [[elements]] to the film. Perhaps a reference to his once use of LSD.

Some [[unintentional]] humor ... at some point Leonard tells how he influenced a musical genre. Initially he can't recall the genre's name, until eventually he says it was punk, the punksters really picked up on his music. The next scene in the film is a live cover of 'I can't forget' ...

"And I can't forget, I can't forget I can't forget but I don't remember who" I would not consider myself as one of Leonard Cohen's greatest fans. He does however feature as an important poet / musician in my literary / musical heritage. By far the most valuable element in this documentary is to [[heard]] Leonard's reflections on his own life and career. [[Warm]] and humble.

[[Unluckily]] the most of the [[music]] featured in the concert didn't [[invert]] the [[subtleties]] of Leonard's musical / literary manner. Nick Cave, Jarvis Cocker & Beth Orton were the exceptions, even though Leonard highly values Rufus Wainrights interpretations of his songs.

What particularly [[faulted]] in this documentary was the ability of the filmmaker to allow the viewer to see who Leonard Cohen is and how these musicians connect to him. A lot is said in this respect, but the viewer is not drawn into the person Leonard Cohen. This [[defect]] is especially evident with the interviews with Bono and the Edge. They view Leonard as a special icon, but can't translate their exact value of Leonard Cohen. The collaboration with U2 is a farce. The entire live registration looks like a rushed job. And just as in the whole film, only Leonard Cohen remains his part and can tell about his own part.

The entire montage and [[screenplays]] is much like a high school extramural project. The use of effects such as echo, slow-motion or flashed images are [[patient]] placed. Some of the camera-work is dismal. Part of the score hardly recalls any associations I may have expected. At times it seemed the filmmaker was [[summing]] [[psychopathic]] [[facets]] to the film. Perhaps a reference to his once use of LSD.

Some [[unforeseen]] humor ... at some point Leonard tells how he influenced a musical genre. Initially he can't recall the genre's name, until eventually he says it was punk, the punksters really picked up on his music. The next scene in the film is a live cover of 'I can't forget' ...

"And I can't forget, I can't forget I can't forget but I don't remember who" --------------------------------------------- Result 5797 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Basically, this movie is one of those [[rare]] movies you either [[hate]] and [[think]] [[borders]] on [[suicide]] as the [[next]] [[best]] thing to do, [[rather]] than having to [[sit]] through it for two hours. [[Or]], as in my case, you see it as a kult [[hit]], one of those [[movies]] [[wherein]] the [[humour]], the plot, the acting, is [[actually]] very [[hidden]] but for those of us [[willing]] to [[go]] [[looking]] for it, [[trusting]] the director well, the reward is: U laugh your [[A]].. of !! The [[fact]] that U have to [[find]] the [[things]] [[mentioned]] above, [[actually]] makes the [[movie]] [[even]] more funny, because u [[get]] the [[impression]] the director isn't [[even]] [[aware]] of how funny his [[movie]] is, which doesn't seem [[likely]] and therein lies the intelligence at the [[helm]] of this magnificient project called : Spaced [[Invaders]] !! Basically, this movie is one of those [[few]] movies you either [[loathe]] and [[thinks]] [[bounds]] on [[suicidal]] as the [[imminent]] [[nicest]] thing to do, [[fairly]] than having to [[assis]] through it for two hours. [[Nor]], as in my case, you see it as a kult [[slugged]], one of those [[movie]] [[whereby]] the [[mood]], the plot, the acting, is [[indeed]] very [[ulterior]] but for those of us [[desirous]] to [[going]] [[searching]] for it, [[trustful]] the director well, the reward is: U laugh your [[una]].. of !! The [[facto]] that U have to [[unearth]] the [[aspects]] [[referred]] above, [[indeed]] makes the [[kino]] [[yet]] more funny, because u [[obtains]] the [[printout]] the director isn't [[yet]] [[conscious]] of how funny his [[cinematography]] is, which doesn't seem [[apt]] and therein lies the intelligence at the [[tiller]] of this magnificient project called : Spaced [[Infiltrators]] !! --------------------------------------------- Result 5798 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Zodiac Killer (2005) was an interesting film from German born director Ulli Lommel. He directs, produced and co-stars in this [[latest]] production. Not only does he manage to make an interesting film on the cheap. But he reaches a new low when Herr Lommel works in footage from nearly his entire film catalog. I have seen film clips from Boogeyman I and II, War Birds, Tenderness of the Wolf, Brain Waves and Cocaine Cowboys (even Andy Warhol makes a cameo from beyond the grave [[courtesy]] of this film). [[Even]] though he [[uses]] plenty of [[old]] footage, he [[works]] them in well (and very creatively might I add).

The film follows a young [[man]] who copies the original Zodiac [[Killer]]. he also corresponds with a writer (Ulli Lommel) who originally wrote about the serial killer during the late sixties and early seventies. The writer's friend (David Hess) [[helps]] him to [[try]] and find this wannabe Zodiac. Can this killer be stopped? Will the writer put two and two together and reclaim some of his old glory? Is David [[Hess]] still the man? You'll have to find out for yourself and watch the Zodiac [[Killer]].

This [[film]] is NOT about the [[original]] Zodiac [[killer]]. I have also heard people whine about this film being shot on video. [[So]] what. The director's old school artistic style outshines the fact that it's shot on video. My only complaint was the over use of stock footage from Herr Lommel's earlier films (but I understand why "wink" "wink".) Don't believe the hype. This is a gritty and street level horror film. [[Like]] the disclaimer in the beginning states, this [[film]] does nor glorify [[murder]]. You got to like that statement.

[[Highly]] [[recommend]] for Ulli Lommel fans. Zodiac Killer (2005) was an interesting film from German born director Ulli Lommel. He directs, produced and co-stars in this [[newer]] production. Not only does he manage to make an interesting film on the cheap. But he reaches a new low when Herr Lommel works in footage from nearly his entire film catalog. I have seen film clips from Boogeyman I and II, War Birds, Tenderness of the Wolf, Brain Waves and Cocaine Cowboys (even Andy Warhol makes a cameo from beyond the grave [[vanity]] of this film). [[Yet]] though he [[employs]] plenty of [[longtime]] footage, he [[collaborated]] them in well (and very creatively might I add).

The film follows a young [[males]] who copies the original Zodiac [[Shooter]]. he also corresponds with a writer (Ulli Lommel) who originally wrote about the serial killer during the late sixties and early seventies. The writer's friend (David Hess) [[assisting]] him to [[endeavour]] and find this wannabe Zodiac. Can this killer be stopped? Will the writer put two and two together and reclaim some of his old glory? Is David [[Haas]] still the man? You'll have to find out for yourself and watch the Zodiac [[Slayer]].

This [[cinematography]] is NOT about the [[preliminary]] Zodiac [[shooter]]. I have also heard people whine about this film being shot on video. [[Hence]] what. The director's old school artistic style outshines the fact that it's shot on video. My only complaint was the over use of stock footage from Herr Lommel's earlier films (but I understand why "wink" "wink".) Don't believe the hype. This is a gritty and street level horror film. [[Iike]] the disclaimer in the beginning states, this [[cinematography]] does nor glorify [[manslaughter]]. You got to like that statement.

[[Vastly]] [[recommendation]] for Ulli Lommel fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 5799 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have to admit that Over Her Dead Body actually wasn't as bad as I was expecting, my mom wanted to see it, so I rented it. I figured just to go ahead and see the horror before my eyes, but actually this wasn't too bad. I was just expecting this [[horrific]] movie, but it seems like the writers meant no harm, but the casting of Eva Longoria(Parker, [[sorry]]), she seems a little off set for the movie. I think I may have found it to be a little better without her, just she does annoy me. But Paul Rudd and Lake Bell had a decent [[chemistry]] that made the film somewhat likable. But you have to [[admit]], there was no point to this [[movie]], it was one of those quick paychecks for the actor [[type]] of thing. The movie could've been funnier if [[someone]] had really [[paid]] attention to it and had a better cast.

Henry just lost his [[bride]] to be, Kate, who was [[killed]] by an ice [[sculpture]] on their [[wedding]] day. But when his [[sister]] takes him to a psychic, Ashley, [[Henry]] [[falls]] for her, but Kate is haunting her from beyond the [[grave]]. Kate is [[jealous]] and doesn't [[want]] [[Henry]] to move on so quickly and she will [[make]] sure that Ashley doesn't [[get]] him by torturing her day and night with her rambles, [[believe]] me, with Kate's voice, that's scary.

Over Her Dead [[Body]] is an alright movie, not sure if it's worth the [[money]], but I'd give it a rental for you if you [[want]] to [[see]] it or are curious. Eva Longoria just doesn't have enough [[star]] power to make the film work, no [[offense]] to those who [[love]] her, she just belongs on the small screen over the silver screen. Not to mention the character of Ashley, she [[seems]] still not too [[likable]] with everything she [[pulls]], or her "gay" friend, [[Dan]], just again, not really [[likable]]. [[Just]] with some re-writing and [[proper]] attention, this [[film]] [[could]] have been better, but [[instead]] we [[get]] the average predictable [[romantic]] comedy that will [[leave]] with with an empty [[feeling]].

4/10 I have to admit that Over Her Dead Body actually wasn't as bad as I was expecting, my mom wanted to see it, so I rented it. I figured just to go ahead and see the horror before my eyes, but actually this wasn't too bad. I was just expecting this [[shocking]] movie, but it seems like the writers meant no harm, but the casting of Eva Longoria(Parker, [[apologizing]]), she seems a little off set for the movie. I think I may have found it to be a little better without her, just she does annoy me. But Paul Rudd and Lake Bell had a decent [[chemist]] that made the film somewhat likable. But you have to [[recognized]], there was no point to this [[film]], it was one of those quick paychecks for the actor [[genre]] of thing. The movie could've been funnier if [[everybody]] had really [[credited]] attention to it and had a better cast.

Henry just lost his [[fiance]] to be, Kate, who was [[kills]] by an ice [[sculptures]] on their [[marries]] day. But when his [[sisters]] takes him to a psychic, Ashley, [[Enrico]] [[waterfalls]] for her, but Kate is haunting her from beyond the [[serious]]. Kate is [[jealousy]] and doesn't [[wanting]] [[Enrico]] to move on so quickly and she will [[deliver]] sure that Ashley doesn't [[gets]] him by torturing her day and night with her rambles, [[believing]] me, with Kate's voice, that's scary.

Over Her Dead [[Cadaver]] is an alright movie, not sure if it's worth the [[cash]], but I'd give it a rental for you if you [[wanted]] to [[behold]] it or are curious. Eva Longoria just doesn't have enough [[stars]] power to make the film work, no [[offenses]] to those who [[amore]] her, she just belongs on the small screen over the silver screen. Not to mention the character of Ashley, she [[appears]] still not too [[congenial]] with everything she [[pulled]], or her "gay" friend, [[Dana]], just again, not really [[sympathetic]]. [[Righteous]] with some re-writing and [[suitable]] attention, this [[filmmaking]] [[did]] have been better, but [[conversely]] we [[gets]] the average predictable [[sentimental]] comedy that will [[let]] with with an empty [[sense]].

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My wife and I are semi amused by Howie Mandel's show.. I also like Shatner - even when he's at his most pathetic..

But this is absolutely the worst show on television.

Please cancel this show. It sucks a**.

The only positive thing I can say is that the girls are hotter on this show and seem to wear less clothing than Deal or no Deal...

The questions are a mixture of way too easy and incredibly obscure. And watching Shatner or the contestant say "Show me the money" makes me want to vomit..

This one will not last. --------------------------------------------- Result 5801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Princess Tam Tam is without the trappings of [[racism]], in the [[way]] we [[think]] of [[racism]] in the United States, but there are more subtle (to the [[American]] viewer) [[assertions]] about ethnic identity during the time. Pay attention to Alwina's ([[Baker]]) placement within shots, how she is [[addressed]] by the other [[characters]], the settings [[around]] her that all [[depict]] her as a "savage" African, and ask yourself if Alwina has any shred of agency [[throughout]] the film. I don't want to [[ruin]] anything but at the [[end]] pay very careful [[attention]], the dichotomy between "[[Eastern]]" and "Western" [[culture]] is to [[say]] the least [[offensive]], such diction is thankfully disavowed these days. The French have a checkered past as an imperial force [[throughout]] the areas [[depicted]] (see Chris Marker's Les Statues Meurent Aussi- 1953), and pay attention to the [[places]] the European [[travelers]] visit while they are in Africa, and what does that reflect about their [[attitudes]] [[towards]] the "other". I give this [[film]] a 7 because I am a sucker for [[Baker]], much of what she did in her professional career, like Princes [[Tam]] Tam, that is regressive is [[certainly]] [[overshadowed]] by her efforts [[towards]] [[integration]], her work as a freaking spy (I am gushing, sorry.) However the [[film]] for me is [[captivating]] because of her performance, besides that it is a [[telling]] [[relic]] of bygone mentalities. Princess Tam Tam is without the trappings of [[racist]], in the [[manner]] we [[reckon]] of [[racist]] in the United States, but there are more subtle (to the [[Americas]] viewer) [[confirmations]] about ethnic identity during the time. Pay attention to Alwina's ([[Boulanger]]) placement within shots, how she is [[broached]] by the other [[attribute]], the settings [[throughout]] her that all [[portray]] her as a "savage" African, and ask yourself if Alwina has any shred of agency [[in]] the film. I don't want to [[vandalize]] anything but at the [[termination]] pay very careful [[beware]], the dichotomy between "[[Timor]]" and "Western" [[cultivation]] is to [[tell]] the least [[insulting]], such diction is thankfully disavowed these days. The French have a checkered past as an imperial force [[around]] the areas [[portrayed]] (see Chris Marker's Les Statues Meurent Aussi- 1953), and pay attention to the [[sites]] the European [[passengers]] visit while they are in Africa, and what does that reflect about their [[behavior]] [[vers]] the "other". I give this [[cinematic]] a 7 because I am a sucker for [[Becker]], much of what she did in her professional career, like Princes [[Tan]] Tam, that is regressive is [[unquestionably]] [[marred]] by her efforts [[into]] [[incorporation]], her work as a freaking spy (I am gushing, sorry.) However the [[movie]] for me is [[intriguing]] because of her performance, besides that it is a [[saying]] [[hangover]] of bygone mentalities. --------------------------------------------- Result 5802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Dane [[tries]] to [[hard]] and is to extreme with all of his yelling and going crazy, spilling water on himself and rolling on the floor. To much. Calm down, get yourself together and make us laugh. I didn't quite [[understand]] his [[comparison]] toward comics and rock stars. [[Just]] because there both up on [[stage]] or [[something]]? He [[said]] that [[every]] [[comedian]] wants to be a rock star. I'm sure [[Rodney]] Dangerfield was really into that when he was alive. He had a few good jokes like the [[Burger]] King joke where people yell at the drive thru. I also liked the Reese's Pieces [[joke]]. If Dane just didn't act so mental he might be funnier and I [[might]] have [[given]] this a higher rating, as high as [[maybe]] an eight. Dane [[try]] to [[stiff]] and is to extreme with all of his yelling and going crazy, spilling water on himself and rolling on the floor. To much. Calm down, get yourself together and make us laugh. I didn't quite [[realise]] his [[compare]] toward comics and rock stars. [[Only]] because there both up on [[phase]] or [[somethin]]? He [[told]] that [[all]] [[humorist]] wants to be a rock star. I'm sure [[Vinny]] Dangerfield was really into that when he was alive. He had a few good jokes like the [[Hamburger]] King joke where people yell at the drive thru. I also liked the Reese's Pieces [[travesty]]. If Dane just didn't act so mental he might be funnier and I [[probable]] have [[bestowed]] this a higher rating, as high as [[conceivably]] an eight. --------------------------------------------- Result 5803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is is a [[thoroughly]] [[unpleasant]], if slickly [[made]], movie. I tried it because it stars Richard Dreyfus and Jeff Goldblum, two good actors, and because the plot line - a mob boss is about to be released from a mental institution - sounded promising. The movie is billed as a comedy, sorta. What we have is an endless series of shots - you should pardon the pun - of people in dimly lit and elegant, if somewhat surreal, interiors, shooting each other - in the head, stomach, kneecap, foot, heart (no part of the anatomy is avoided, it seems) while uttering vague and cryptic dialogue, some of which is supposed, evidently, to be humorous in a sort of post-modern way. Goldblum's dialogue for the whole movie could fit on a 3x5 card, and he wears a single facial expression - a sardonic grin - throughout. Ellen Barkin and Gregory Hines do the best they can. Burt Reynolds does a cameo. The credits list Rob Reiner and Joey Bishop, but I somehow missed them (good move on their part). The whole thing is cold, [[sterile]], mechanical and unsavory; an heir, I suspect, to the style of 'Pulp Fiction', 'Fargo' and 'Natural Born Killers'. If you liked those, you'll probably like this. This is is a [[meticulously]] [[nasty]], if slickly [[effected]], movie. I tried it because it stars Richard Dreyfus and Jeff Goldblum, two good actors, and because the plot line - a mob boss is about to be released from a mental institution - sounded promising. The movie is billed as a comedy, sorta. What we have is an endless series of shots - you should pardon the pun - of people in dimly lit and elegant, if somewhat surreal, interiors, shooting each other - in the head, stomach, kneecap, foot, heart (no part of the anatomy is avoided, it seems) while uttering vague and cryptic dialogue, some of which is supposed, evidently, to be humorous in a sort of post-modern way. Goldblum's dialogue for the whole movie could fit on a 3x5 card, and he wears a single facial expression - a sardonic grin - throughout. Ellen Barkin and Gregory Hines do the best they can. Burt Reynolds does a cameo. The credits list Rob Reiner and Joey Bishop, but I somehow missed them (good move on their part). The whole thing is cold, [[infertile]], mechanical and unsavory; an heir, I suspect, to the style of 'Pulp Fiction', 'Fargo' and 'Natural Born Killers'. If you liked those, you'll probably like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 5804 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When this was [[released]], I thought this was one of the most profane [[films]] ever [[made]]. However, [[thanks]] to [[Martin]] Scorcese and a few other filmmakers like him, there have been mainline films worse, language-wise, than this....but this is a pretty brutal [[assault]] on one's ears. Hey, I can take a [[lot]] of it, but this got [[ridiculous]]. In the first six minutes [[alone]], I heard a half-dozen usage's of the Lord's [[name]] in [[vain]] plus an untold number of f-words. I wonder how [[many]] people walked out of the [[theater]] watching this in 1990? I couldn't have been the only one.

Not [[surprisingly]], some of the [[feature]] [[actors]] included [[Jennifer]] Jason-Leigh, Burt [[Young]], Jerry Orbach and Rikki Lake. [[Since]] this [[film]], [[Stephen]] Lang [[seems]] to have [[improved]] his [[image]], at [[least]] playing the Godly "Stonewall" Jackson in "[[Gods]] and [[Generals]]." Lang's role here is just the opposite: [[perhaps]] the [[worst]] trashy [[person]] in the [[film]] and a [[character]] who [[falls]] in [[love]] with a transvestite by the [[end]] of the [[film]].

Depressing, [[gloomy]], semi-pornographic, [[repulsive]]: these are just a few of the adjectives people [[used]] - even some Liberal critics - in describing this [[story]], which is [[painted]] [[even]] [[worse]] in the novel. Of course, some of the better-known [[critics]], all [[extreme]] Libs, [[praised]] the [[movie]]. [[However]], they were the only ones. Most [[critics]] were [[disgusted]], as well almost all of the paying public. It's [[unbelievable]] that [[anyone]] [[could]] [[praise]] filth and [[garbage]] like this.

Trust me on this: there are no [[good]], likable [[characters]] in this [[entire]] [[movie]]. This is a [[mean]], sick [[film]]: one of the [[worst]] of the "[[modern]] [[era]]." That is, [[unless]] you [[enjoy]] [[seeing]] [[child]] abuse, drug abuse, teen prostitutes, on and on - two [[straight]] [[hours]] of [[nothing]] but [[atrocities]] and just [[plain]] evil people. No thanks. When this was [[freed]], I thought this was one of the most profane [[filmmaking]] ever [[effected]]. However, [[appreciation]] to [[Martina]] Scorcese and a few other filmmakers like him, there have been mainline films worse, language-wise, than this....but this is a pretty brutal [[mugging]] on one's ears. Hey, I can take a [[lots]] of it, but this got [[farcical]]. In the first six minutes [[mere]], I heard a half-dozen usage's of the Lord's [[denomination]] in [[worthless]] plus an untold number of f-words. I wonder how [[countless]] people walked out of the [[drama]] watching this in 1990? I couldn't have been the only one.

Not [[bizarrely]], some of the [[hallmarks]] [[players]] included [[Jessica]] Jason-Leigh, Burt [[Youths]], Jerry Orbach and Rikki Lake. [[Because]] this [[filmmaking]], [[Stephens]] Lang [[seem]] to have [[enhanced]] his [[picture]], at [[lowest]] playing the Godly "Stonewall" Jackson in "[[Lords]] and [[Whole]]." Lang's role here is just the opposite: [[potentially]] the [[worse]] trashy [[anyone]] in the [[filmmaking]] and a [[trait]] who [[slumps]] in [[amour]] with a transvestite by the [[termination]] of the [[filmmaking]].

Depressing, [[dusky]], semi-pornographic, [[hateful]]: these are just a few of the adjectives people [[usage]] - even some Liberal critics - in describing this [[tales]], which is [[brushed]] [[yet]] [[worst]] in the novel. Of course, some of the better-known [[criticisms]], all [[utmost]] Libs, [[applauds]] the [[film]]. [[Conversely]], they were the only ones. Most [[criticisms]] were [[infuriated]], as well almost all of the paying public. It's [[extraordinary]] that [[person]] [[did]] [[extol]] filth and [[detritus]] like this.

Trust me on this: there are no [[alright]], likable [[trait]] in this [[overall]] [[filmmaking]]. This is a [[signify]], sick [[flick]]: one of the [[meanest]] of the "[[trendy]] [[epoch]]." That is, [[if]] you [[enjoying]] [[see]] [[kid]] abuse, drug abuse, teen prostitutes, on and on - two [[successive]] [[hour]] of [[none]] but [[indignities]] and just [[lowland]] evil people. No thanks. --------------------------------------------- Result 5805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw this movie on the BIFFF [[Festival]] in Brussel, [[spring]] 2004. What a [[surprise]]! This German production, a stylish and [[imaginative]] shocker, is one of the scariest flic i have seen. Be warned: this is not a [[joke]]! This terrorizer has a big cast of good actors (as an [[example]]:Peter Martell as a European [[guru]] has a [[strong]] presence), [[excellent]] direction, nice [[production]] design, a very good soundtrack and a lot of [[heavy]] gore sfx like Italian [[horror]] [[movies]] in the eighties. Flesh ripped clean to the [[bone]]...and the blood runs red ...this [[savage]] [[Heart]] Stopper will grip you...and give you some [[dark]] [[dreams]] ... A must-see!! I saw this movie on the BIFFF [[Fest]] in Brussel, [[springs]] 2004. What a [[amaze]]! This German production, a stylish and [[innovative]] shocker, is one of the scariest flic i have seen. Be warned: this is not a [[kidding]]! This terrorizer has a big cast of good actors (as an [[case]]:Peter Martell as a European [[evangelist]] has a [[forceful]] presence), [[wondrous]] direction, nice [[productivity]] design, a very good soundtrack and a lot of [[onerous]] gore sfx like Italian [[abomination]] [[cinematography]] in the eighties. Flesh ripped clean to the [[skeletal]]...and the blood runs red ...this [[sauvage]] [[Nub]] Stopper will grip you...and give you some [[gloomy]] [[dreamt]] ... A must-see!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega are the mismatched pair who get in the car and go about doing errands according to the need of one or the other. Morgan Freeman is [[superbly]] human, [[relating]] with one and all, while Paz Vega is the edgy cashier behind the "10 Items or Less" check out line, intimidating customers and bored out of her mind. [[Together]] they explore, discover, and [[learn]] from each other. To do that of course they must be vulnerable, interested in change, and have a sense of [[humour]], all of which they both have. I wish this film was realistic, I [[wish]] this type of [[story]] happened more often, I wish we didn't have to go to the movies to [[realize]] that we can [[indeed]] [[connect]] with each other [[even]] if we [[come]] from vastly different backgrounds. The film's message is [[based]] in the open [[heart]], and makes us wonder about the possibility of another [[world]] where we [[meet]] each other from there - a world where [[peace]] could be a possibility. Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega are the mismatched pair who get in the car and go about doing errands according to the need of one or the other. Morgan Freeman is [[divinely]] human, [[pertaining]] with one and all, while Paz Vega is the edgy cashier behind the "10 Items or Less" check out line, intimidating customers and bored out of her mind. [[Totality]] they explore, discover, and [[learnt]] from each other. To do that of course they must be vulnerable, interested in change, and have a sense of [[comedy]], all of which they both have. I wish this film was realistic, I [[wanna]] this type of [[conte]] happened more often, I wish we didn't have to go to the movies to [[accomplishing]] that we can [[admittedly]] [[linking]] with each other [[yet]] if we [[coming]] from vastly different backgrounds. The film's message is [[predicated]] in the open [[nub]], and makes us wonder about the possibility of another [[monde]] where we [[cater]] each other from there - a world where [[placid]] could be a possibility. --------------------------------------------- Result 5807 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I got the DVD from the [[library]] in the [[expectation]] of getting a [[good]] [[idea]] of how things go on in the [[background]] at a [[major]] [[opera]] [[production]]. I have to [[say]], I was very [[disappointed]]. The subject had so much potential. The sets in a Wagnerian production must, of necessity, be elaborate and [[impressive]] and the [[story]] behind their [[creation]] and [[use]] [[could]] have been an [[excellent]] [[educational]] [[experience]]. [[Instead]], what we get it a hodgepodge of clips of people [[moving]] around big [[items]] of scenery, vaguely help [[together]] with a [[commentary]] which failed to [[hold]] my attention. I [[found]] myself [[listening]] [[primarily]] to the background [[clips]] of [[music]] from operas. I was impressed by the sheer enormity of the effort [[required]] to put on such a production - that did [[come]] across [[fairly]] well and [[next]] time I am at the opera I am sure I will remember that part if this video - but was left feeling somewhat cheated by the lack of detailed commentary and explanation. I got the DVD from the [[bookcase]] in the [[expectancy]] of getting a [[alright]] [[thoughts]] of how things go on in the [[context]] at a [[large]] [[dramas]] [[productivity]]. I have to [[tell]], I was very [[frustrated]]. The subject had so much potential. The sets in a Wagnerian production must, of necessity, be elaborate and [[staggering]] and the [[narratives]] behind their [[institution]] and [[uses]] [[did]] have been an [[extraordinary]] [[instructional]] [[experiences]]. [[However]], what we get it a hodgepodge of clips of people [[transferring]] around big [[item]] of scenery, vaguely help [[jointly]] with a [[commentaries]] which failed to [[held]] my attention. I [[discoveries]] myself [[listen]] [[especially]] to the background [[trombones]] of [[musica]] from operas. I was impressed by the sheer enormity of the effort [[needed]] to put on such a production - that did [[coming]] across [[rather]] well and [[upcoming]] time I am at the opera I am sure I will remember that part if this video - but was left feeling somewhat cheated by the lack of detailed commentary and explanation. --------------------------------------------- Result 5808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had to walk out on this film fifteen minutes from the end... having passed through the cringe stage and into pure boredom. What really horrifies me, I mean truly disturbs me, is that there are people referring to this aimless drivel as 'delightful' or a 'must see.' I would feel deep pity for those so afflicted were it not for the distinct impression that most of the positive comments about this shallow and humourless travesty were written by industry plants.

The truth is this is a lame film that does nothing to entertain nor enlighten. It is decidedly unfunny, poorly scripted and has all the pace and energy of cold, canned rice pudding. To be kind to Ms Kramer, the best one can say is it was a missed opportunity, for having read the synopsis before I watched it, I had expected something more challenging. The possible misinterpretations of a close brother and sister co-dependence, the unexpected awakening of 'sisterly' sexuality, and the comic potential in such sibling rivalry (for the affections of the same girl) were all obvious subjects for refreshing comedic exploration, yet which at every turn the movie frustratingly shies away from.

Instead, the audience is subjected to a meandering series of uninspired and insipidly drawn situations, with clichéd characterisations and dull performances from a cast struggling for belief and obviously in need of much tighter direction. The lack of directorial control seems astounding; on the one hand, Moynahan, Cavanagh and Spacek all give very pedestrian performances, while Heather Graham and Molly Shannon - the latter in particular - veer towards embarrassing over-compensation at times. One could lay the blame for this on the director - maybe Sue Kramer hopes that if her actors over-act, they will force a bigger laugh from the audience. But then again, the cast is a veteran one; one would expect them to do better.

Sue Kramer really needs to think carefully what kind of movies she wants to make, and for whom. Given the possible issues Gray Matters alludes to, and given her inability or unwillingness to fully explore them in the context of a comedy, perhaps she should consider writing dramas instead. I know it is never easy to make films about women and women's issues, especially when one hopes to reach a wider audience than women alone, but whatever direction she takes, inconsequential and flimsy characters like Gray are not going to cut mustard. --------------------------------------------- Result 5809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Before [[Sunrise]] is romance for the slacker generation. Richard Linklater's romantic drama is an offbeat [[telling]] of a [[dream]] come [[true]] for most people. The film [[depicts]] romance in all it's [[glory]], but without any of the pitfalls that befall most [[couples]]; and in short the film is about two people that have a relationship that's as close to perfection as relationships will ever [[come]] to - with just one problem, the problem of [[time]]. [[While]] most relationships wind down with [[time]], this one [[keeps]] going strong throughout and time itself is the only [[thing]] that [[wears]] out. Before Sunrise is certainly not the [[typical]] [[sentimental]] 'Hollywood romance', which is another [[aspect]] that puts this [[film]] leagues ahead of the pretenders. The story follows two people, Jesse; an American and Celine; a French [[girl]] that meet on a train into Vienna. They instantly connect, and after [[telling]] her his [[awful]] idea for a [[television]] [[show]] and almost [[getting]] off the train, Jesse asks Celine to join him for the day in the picturesque city of Vienna...

Before Sunrise [[works]] [[principally]] for two reasons - [[realistic]] acting and an [[immense]] [[script]] that [[builds]] the characters through their thoughts and feelings and thus [[allows]] us to get to know them as we do the people in [[real]] [[life]]. This [[allows]] the [[characters]] to be [[free]], and it's easy to [[believe]] that these are [[real]] people and not just [[actors]] [[working]] from a script. This also [[allows]] us to feel for the characters for who they are, and not [[merely]] because they're the protagonists. This [[kind]] of [[realism]] is hard to capture as, at the [[end]] of the day, we as the [[audience]] know that they're watching a [[film]] and not observing real life; but Before Sunrise represents one of the truest to life [[exhibitions]] of realism ever to be seen on screen. A [[truly]] great script cannot work on it's own, and [[needs]] [[great]] actors to deliver it to an extent that does it justice, and [[although]] I'm not a [[fan]] of either Julie Deply or Ethan Hawke; on viewing this [[film]], there is [[nothing]] you can do but [[give]] them both respect. I don't know whether they were in [[character]] or just [[playing]] themselves, but when a [[film]] is this good; it hardly matters.

In a [[film]] [[like]] this, it is the [[writing]] that's the most important [[thing]], and contained [[within]] the [[script]] are several observations about life, most of which I personally [[could]] [[relate]] to. This represents what [[Richard]] Linklater has achieved with this script as not only does it create and build the characters, but it also manages to expose what true love is, along with several other aspects of life. The fact that not all the anecdotes are relatable to me personally again represents the brilliance of writing. Everyone is different, and so different parts of the script will appeal to different people. There could be certain aspects about one person that one person loves and another hates; and that's the case with the musings in this script. Adding to the beauty of the film is the city of Vienna. The city itself isn't really important to the film as this is a story that could have taken place just about anywhere - but it makes for some lovely visuals and the upbeat, energetic romance that blossoms throughout the movie is matched by the beauty of the location.

Before Sunrise is simultaneously beautiful and captivating. Richard Linklater has created something that is rare in the world of cinema; a film that captures the beauty of life without ever going over the top or being overly sentimental. Before Sunrise is what it is. And what it is, is pure cinematic brilliance. Before [[Sunup]] is romance for the slacker generation. Richard Linklater's romantic drama is an offbeat [[saying]] of a [[nightmares]] come [[authentic]] for most people. The film [[describes]] romance in all it's [[gloria]], but without any of the pitfalls that befall most [[matches]]; and in short the film is about two people that have a relationship that's as close to perfection as relationships will ever [[arriving]] to - with just one problem, the problem of [[period]]. [[Although]] most relationships wind down with [[times]], this one [[retains]] going strong throughout and time itself is the only [[stuff]] that [[gate]] out. Before Sunrise is certainly not the [[classic]] [[romantic]] 'Hollywood romance', which is another [[element]] that puts this [[cinematography]] leagues ahead of the pretenders. The story follows two people, Jesse; an American and Celine; a French [[women]] that meet on a train into Vienna. They instantly connect, and after [[tell]] her his [[hideous]] idea for a [[tv]] [[displays]] and almost [[obtain]] off the train, Jesse asks Celine to join him for the day in the picturesque city of Vienna...

Before Sunrise [[collaborating]] [[essentially]] for two reasons - [[practical]] acting and an [[jumbo]] [[screenplay]] that [[constructed]] the characters through their thoughts and feelings and thus [[allow]] us to get to know them as we do the people in [[true]] [[living]]. This [[allowed]] the [[features]] to be [[libre]], and it's easy to [[believing]] that these are [[actual]] people and not just [[protagonists]] [[worked]] from a script. This also [[allowing]] us to feel for the characters for who they are, and not [[alone]] because they're the protagonists. This [[genera]] of [[reality]] is hard to capture as, at the [[termination]] of the day, we as the [[audiences]] know that they're watching a [[films]] and not observing real life; but Before Sunrise represents one of the truest to life [[shows]] of realism ever to be seen on screen. A [[honestly]] great script cannot work on it's own, and [[needed]] [[wondrous]] actors to deliver it to an extent that does it justice, and [[despite]] I'm not a [[ventilator]] of either Julie Deply or Ethan Hawke; on viewing this [[kino]], there is [[anything]] you can do but [[lend]] them both respect. I don't know whether they were in [[traits]] or just [[play]] themselves, but when a [[movies]] is this good; it hardly matters.

In a [[movie]] [[iike]] this, it is the [[handwriting]] that's the most important [[stuff]], and contained [[inside]] the [[hyphen]] are several observations about life, most of which I personally [[would]] [[pertain]] to. This represents what [[Richie]] Linklater has achieved with this script as not only does it create and build the characters, but it also manages to expose what true love is, along with several other aspects of life. The fact that not all the anecdotes are relatable to me personally again represents the brilliance of writing. Everyone is different, and so different parts of the script will appeal to different people. There could be certain aspects about one person that one person loves and another hates; and that's the case with the musings in this script. Adding to the beauty of the film is the city of Vienna. The city itself isn't really important to the film as this is a story that could have taken place just about anywhere - but it makes for some lovely visuals and the upbeat, energetic romance that blossoms throughout the movie is matched by the beauty of the location.

Before Sunrise is simultaneously beautiful and captivating. Richard Linklater has created something that is rare in the world of cinema; a film that captures the beauty of life without ever going over the top or being overly sentimental. Before Sunrise is what it is. And what it is, is pure cinematic brilliance. --------------------------------------------- Result 5810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] While returning from a Christmas Eve shopping trip, an abused suburban housewife (Basinger) finds herself in a fight for survival after a disagreement with a group of delinquent youths takes a violent turn.

Suffering the indignity of a straight to DVD release here in the U.K., Susan Montford's directorial debut will [[perhaps]] not be given the recognition it deserves. This is a shame, as the standard of the writing, directing and acting is very good [[indeed]], and certainly [[surpasses]] the quality of your average straight to DVD flick.

Kim Basinger gives her [[best]] performance in some [[time]] as the downtrodden wife of an abusive husband (Craig Sheffer). While Sheffer is not really given anything more to do than be a threatening presence, it is in their brief scenes together that Basinger [[connects]] - [[showing]] painful vulnerability yet hinting at the rage that will eventually boil over in her confrontations with the youths. It's a [[truly]] [[great]], understated performance, her transformation from victim to aggressor is seamlessly played.

Lukas Haas I [[initially]] thought was miscast, as he (along with the other three youths) just did not seem much of a threat. However, had all four youths been more physically imposing, the later scenes in which Basinger turns the tables against them would not have worked at all. The fact that these are four average men, albeit slightly unhinged, is the key to why the film works as well as it does.

Apart from a few pacing issues during the latter half of the movie and a couple of cheesy lines here and there, what we have here is a [[great]] thriller that actually leaves the [[viewer]] with something to think about when the film is over. Some may be put off by the slow - burn nature of the opening scenes, or the abrupt ending. Others by the at times brutal violence. I say give it a chance, it's certainly more deserving of your time than Saw V. While returning from a Christmas Eve shopping trip, an abused suburban housewife (Basinger) finds herself in a fight for survival after a disagreement with a group of delinquent youths takes a violent turn.

Suffering the indignity of a straight to DVD release here in the U.K., Susan Montford's directorial debut will [[possibly]] not be given the recognition it deserves. This is a shame, as the standard of the writing, directing and acting is very good [[admittedly]], and certainly [[exceeds]] the quality of your average straight to DVD flick.

Kim Basinger gives her [[better]] performance in some [[times]] as the downtrodden wife of an abusive husband (Craig Sheffer). While Sheffer is not really given anything more to do than be a threatening presence, it is in their brief scenes together that Basinger [[binds]] - [[proving]] painful vulnerability yet hinting at the rage that will eventually boil over in her confrontations with the youths. It's a [[truthfully]] [[wondrous]], understated performance, her transformation from victim to aggressor is seamlessly played.

Lukas Haas I [[originally]] thought was miscast, as he (along with the other three youths) just did not seem much of a threat. However, had all four youths been more physically imposing, the later scenes in which Basinger turns the tables against them would not have worked at all. The fact that these are four average men, albeit slightly unhinged, is the key to why the film works as well as it does.

Apart from a few pacing issues during the latter half of the movie and a couple of cheesy lines here and there, what we have here is a [[wondrous]] thriller that actually leaves the [[viewfinder]] with something to think about when the film is over. Some may be put off by the slow - burn nature of the opening scenes, or the abrupt ending. Others by the at times brutal violence. I say give it a chance, it's certainly more deserving of your time than Saw V. --------------------------------------------- Result 5811 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I just [[accidentally]] [[stumbled]] over this [[film]] on TV one day. It was [[aired]] in the [[middle]] of the day on a channel not exactly [[famous]] for airing good [[movies]]. This one, however, was [[nothing]] [[less]] then good.

[[October]] [[Sky]] [[tells]] the [[true]] [[story]] of [[Homer]] Hickam, a [[boy]] inspired by the Sputnick [[launch]] to become a [[rocket]] [[scientist]]. He and his friends [[begin]] to [[build]] [[rockets]]. His father is not to [[happy]] about his sons new [[found]] hobby and [[would]] [[rather]] [[see]] him [[become]] a coal-miner as himself or [[go]] to [[college]] on a football-scholarship like his brother.

The [[story]] is well [[written]]. A bit too predictable [[maybe]], but that's [[OK]] cause it doesn't [[focus]] too much on those parts of the [[story]]. It's [[important]] part, but where this is [[obvious]] the [[inner]] [[action]], the [[action]] between the [[characters]] is [[focused]] on. The [[story]] is good. It has some [[clichés]], but that's OK. It's [[based]] on actual event's so you [[kind]] of can't just [[drop]] out these [[clichés]]. The [[characters]] are really good. Where the [[story]] is on a downhill the [[characters]] are [[brought]] out and [[manage]] to [[keep]] the [[action]] and the quality of the movie [[high]]. You get to know these [[characters]] and you get sympathy for them. They are well [[written]] and [[believable]].

This is a good looking [[movie]]. The sets and the 50's [[style]] is thorough and the [[pictures]] are well [[composed]] and well [[lit]]. This all sets the mood of the [[film]] very good.

The acting is really good. Jake Gyllenhaal [[delivers]] a [[great]] performance as Homer Hickam and Chris Cooper is good as [[John]] Hickam. As for the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] they are [[good]] too. All together this makes out a pretty strong cast.

All in all I'm glad I [[caught]] this [[movie]]. It was first after seeing it I [[learned]] that it was based on actual [[events]]. If I had [[known]] that when [[seeing]] it, it would [[probably]] just be [[even]] more interesting. October [[Sky]] is a good and interesting movie. It's a [[movie]] I [[believe]] [[everyone]] can enjoy. It's kind of a feel-good [[movie]]. Not bad at all! I just [[coincidentally]] [[fell]] over this [[cinematography]] on TV one day. It was [[distributed]] in the [[mid]] of the day on a channel not exactly [[prestigious]] for airing good [[films]]. This one, however, was [[anything]] [[lowest]] then good.

[[December]] [[Celestial]] [[says]] the [[real]] [[tale]] of [[Homie]] Hickam, a [[guy]] inspired by the Sputnick [[startup]] to become a [[missiles]] [[scientists]]. He and his friends [[start]] to [[constructing]] [[missiles]]. His father is not to [[delighted]] about his sons new [[detected]] hobby and [[ought]] [[fairly]] [[behold]] him [[gotten]] a coal-miner as himself or [[going]] to [[universities]] on a football-scholarship like his brother.

The [[tale]] is well [[wrote]]. A bit too predictable [[presumably]], but that's [[ALRIGHT]] cause it doesn't [[concentrate]] too much on those parts of the [[tale]]. It's [[principal]] part, but where this is [[visible]] the [[inside]] [[efforts]], the [[efforts]] between the [[attribute]] is [[concentrating]] on. The [[saga]] is good. It has some [[cliché]], but that's OK. It's [[bases]] on actual event's so you [[sort]] of can't just [[tumble]] out these [[cliché]]. The [[nature]] are really good. Where the [[tale]] is on a downhill the [[features]] are [[lodged]] out and [[administering]] to [[keeping]] the [[efforts]] and the quality of the movie [[higher]]. You get to know these [[nature]] and you get sympathy for them. They are well [[wrote]] and [[reliable]].

This is a good looking [[film]]. The sets and the 50's [[elegance]] is thorough and the [[photography]] are well [[consisted]] and well [[lighting]]. This all sets the mood of the [[films]] very good.

The acting is really good. Jake Gyllenhaal [[offering]] a [[excellent]] performance as Homer Hickam and Chris Cooper is good as [[Johannes]] Hickam. As for the [[remainder]] of the [[casting]] they are [[alright]] too. All together this makes out a pretty strong cast.

All in all I'm glad I [[capturing]] this [[movies]]. It was first after seeing it I [[learnt]] that it was based on actual [[phenomena]]. If I had [[renowned]] that when [[see]] it, it would [[arguably]] just be [[yet]] more interesting. October [[Skye]] is a good and interesting movie. It's a [[film]] I [[reckon]] [[somebody]] can enjoy. It's kind of a feel-good [[cinematography]]. Not bad at all! --------------------------------------------- Result 5812 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Houseboat]] Horror is a great title for this [[film]]. It's absolutely spot-on, and therefore the only aspect of the film for which I can give 10 out of 10. There are houseboats, there is horror, there's even horror that takes place on houseboats. But if there were ever a tagline for the film poster, it would surely be 'Something shonky this [[way]] comes...' for Houseboat [[Horror]] is easily the [[worst]] Australian horror [[film]] I've ever seen, not to [[mention]] one of the [[worst]] horror films I've ever seen, and a fairly [[atrocious]] attempt at film-making in [[general]]. The [[good]] news is, it's so [[bloody]] awful, it [[sails]] straight through the [[zone]] of viewer [[contempt]] into the [[wonderful]] world of [[unintentional]] hilarity. It's worth watching *because* it's bloody awful.

The category of 'worst' comes not from the storyline, for the simple reason that there actually is one: a record producer, a film crew and a rock band drive up to the mystifyingly-named Lake Infinity, a picturesque rural retreat somewhere in Victoria (in reality Lake Eildon) to shoot a music video. Someone isn't especially happy to see them there and, possibly in an attempt to do the audience a favour, starts picking them off one by one with a very sharp knife. Even more mystifying is how long it takes the survivors to actually notice this,

On the surface, it looks like a very bog-standard B-movie slasher. You've got highly-annoying youths, [[intolerant]] elders, creepy locals (one of whom, a petrol station attendant, would easily win a gurning competition), and let's face it, my description of the murderer could easily be Jason Voorhees. Ah, but if only the acting and production values were anywhere near as good as the comparative masterpiece that was Friday The 13th Part VII. Unfortunately, Houseboat Horror is completely devoid of both these things.

But in the end, this only makes what you do get so ridiculous and amusing. Fans of one-time 'Late Show' and 'Get This' member Tony Martin will already be aware of some of the real dialogue gems ('Check out the view...you'll bar up!'), while the actual song to accompany the music video is so bad it has to be heard to be believed - I can't help wondering if writer/director Ollie Wood hoped it would actually become a hit. The horror element is comparable I think to B-slashers of the genre and particularly of the period, but there were times when I couldn't help imagining someone biting into a hamburger off-screen and seeing a volley of tomato sauce sprayed at the wall on-screen.

Indeed, if you've been listening to Tony Martin recommending this film as hilarious rubbish like myself, I don't think you'll be disappointed. Any fans of 'so-bad-it's-good' horror should not pass up the opportunity. Whether you'll 'bar up' or not though is another matter. If, on the other hand, you are in search of genuine excellence in the Australian horror genre, get yourself a copy of the incomparable 'Long Weekend' and don't look back. [[Skiff]] Horror is a great title for this [[filmmaking]]. It's absolutely spot-on, and therefore the only aspect of the film for which I can give 10 out of 10. There are houseboats, there is horror, there's even horror that takes place on houseboats. But if there were ever a tagline for the film poster, it would surely be 'Something shonky this [[routing]] comes...' for Houseboat [[Terror]] is easily the [[meanest]] Australian horror [[flick]] I've ever seen, not to [[cite]] one of the [[meanest]] horror films I've ever seen, and a fairly [[excruciating]] attempt at film-making in [[overall]]. The [[alright]] news is, it's so [[murderous]] awful, it [[candles]] straight through the [[areas]] of viewer [[disdain]] into the [[sumptuous]] world of [[unforeseen]] hilarity. It's worth watching *because* it's bloody awful.

The category of 'worst' comes not from the storyline, for the simple reason that there actually is one: a record producer, a film crew and a rock band drive up to the mystifyingly-named Lake Infinity, a picturesque rural retreat somewhere in Victoria (in reality Lake Eildon) to shoot a music video. Someone isn't especially happy to see them there and, possibly in an attempt to do the audience a favour, starts picking them off one by one with a very sharp knife. Even more mystifying is how long it takes the survivors to actually notice this,

On the surface, it looks like a very bog-standard B-movie slasher. You've got highly-annoying youths, [[lactose]] elders, creepy locals (one of whom, a petrol station attendant, would easily win a gurning competition), and let's face it, my description of the murderer could easily be Jason Voorhees. Ah, but if only the acting and production values were anywhere near as good as the comparative masterpiece that was Friday The 13th Part VII. Unfortunately, Houseboat Horror is completely devoid of both these things.

But in the end, this only makes what you do get so ridiculous and amusing. Fans of one-time 'Late Show' and 'Get This' member Tony Martin will already be aware of some of the real dialogue gems ('Check out the view...you'll bar up!'), while the actual song to accompany the music video is so bad it has to be heard to be believed - I can't help wondering if writer/director Ollie Wood hoped it would actually become a hit. The horror element is comparable I think to B-slashers of the genre and particularly of the period, but there were times when I couldn't help imagining someone biting into a hamburger off-screen and seeing a volley of tomato sauce sprayed at the wall on-screen.

Indeed, if you've been listening to Tony Martin recommending this film as hilarious rubbish like myself, I don't think you'll be disappointed. Any fans of 'so-bad-it's-good' horror should not pass up the opportunity. Whether you'll 'bar up' or not though is another matter. If, on the other hand, you are in search of genuine excellence in the Australian horror genre, get yourself a copy of the incomparable 'Long Weekend' and don't look back. --------------------------------------------- Result 5813 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Seriously]], I'm all for gooey [[romantic]] comedies and will [[get]] sucked into [[Miss]] Congeniality as easily as [[Goodfellas]]...but this movie? It doesn't make any [[sense]]!!!! And I'm not even talking about the willing [[suspension]] of [[disbelief]] kind of not [[making]] sense. Why does her [[family]] live in England? [[Or]], at the very [[least]], why doesn't she have a British [[accent]]? She's sure cozy with her [[dad]] and he's surprisingly forgiving of her not being [[around]] for the last two [[years]]. ([[On]] that [[subject]], no one ever makes [[much]] of a [[deal]] about her being away for so long). And what was with the goofy outfits at the bachelorette [[party]]? I'm not [[even]] [[going]] to get into the fact that the [[escort]] she [[paid]] for falls in [[love]] with her--that could've been overcome by [[better]] movie-making. I'm just [[saying]] that the [[characters]], the setting, and the plot aren't fleshed out enough to make an even [[somewhat]] [[cohesive]] [[story]]. [[Oh]], and the [[worst]] [[part]], in my [[opinion]], is the filmmaker's consistent [[use]] of the most unflattering [[angles]] on Deborah Messing's nose--I'd have [[sued]] the filmmakers if I were her! I [[mean]], [[honestly]], I'm all for [[women]] being who they are, but why, in seven loyal [[years]] of Will and Grace viewing, have I not ever noticed how incredibly odd her nose is? [[Oh]]! Because those [[producers]] are kind to her! This [[movie]], like my other least favorite movie ever, Armageddon, is the fault of the filmmakers, not the actors. I can see both Messing and McDermott in these roles with a better writer, director, and producer.

This [[easily]] gets my vote as one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I've ever wasted [[time]] on. I'm just [[glad]] a friend [[loaned]] me her DVD, so all I wasted was [[time]]. [[If]] there were a [[way]] to make this [[review]] [[ZERO]] [[stars]], I'd do it. [[Severely]], I'm all for gooey [[sentimental]] comedies and will [[gets]] sucked into [[Mademoiselle]] Congeniality as easily as [[Buddies]]...but this movie? It doesn't make any [[feeling]]!!!! And I'm not even talking about the willing [[interruption]] of [[skepticism]] kind of not [[doing]] sense. Why does her [[families]] live in England? [[Nor]], at the very [[less]], why doesn't she have a British [[emphasis]]? She's sure cozy with her [[pop]] and he's surprisingly forgiving of her not being [[about]] for the last two [[olds]]. ([[Onto]] that [[theme]], no one ever makes [[very]] of a [[deals]] about her being away for so long). And what was with the goofy outfits at the bachelorette [[parte]]? I'm not [[yet]] [[gonna]] to get into the fact that the [[accompany]] she [[salary]] for falls in [[likes]] with her--that could've been overcome by [[best]] movie-making. I'm just [[arguing]] that the [[hallmarks]], the setting, and the plot aren't fleshed out enough to make an even [[rather]] [[uniformity]] [[tale]]. [[Ooh]], and the [[meanest]] [[portion]], in my [[opinions]], is the filmmaker's consistent [[employs]] of the most unflattering [[angle]] on Deborah Messing's nose--I'd have [[sue]] the filmmakers if I were her! I [[imply]], [[sincerely]], I'm all for [[girl]] being who they are, but why, in seven loyal [[ages]] of Will and Grace viewing, have I not ever noticed how incredibly odd her nose is? [[Ah]]! Because those [[manufacturer]] are kind to her! This [[cinematographic]], like my other least favorite movie ever, Armageddon, is the fault of the filmmakers, not the actors. I can see both Messing and McDermott in these roles with a better writer, director, and producer.

This [[comfortably]] gets my vote as one of the [[meanest]] [[film]] I've ever wasted [[period]] on. I'm just [[pleased]] a friend [[borrowed]] me her DVD, so all I wasted was [[moment]]. [[Though]] there were a [[paths]] to make this [[reviews]] [[NULL]] [[celebrity]], I'd do it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Movies have put me to sleep before, but no movie has ever done that twice, so it took me three sittings actually to finish it. The dialog was bad. Women spoke stiltedly and the men were caricatures. And two of the supposedly Japanese women looked Chinese, had Chinese names and spoke with clearly Chinese accents. I'm still trying to figure out why the Emmenthal men were sexually wrapped up with each other. 10 minus 8 1/2 equals a tough choice: Do I give this movie a rating of one? or two?

Movies have put me to sleep before, but no movie has ever done that twice, so it took me three sittings actually to finish it. The dialog was bad. Women spoke stiltedly and the men were caricatures. And two of the supposedly Japanese women looked Chinese, had Chinese names and spoke with clearly Chinese accents. I'm still trying to figure out why the Emmenthal men were sexually wrapped up with each other. 10 minus 8 1/2 equals a tough choice: Do I give this movie a rating of one? or two? --------------------------------------------- Result 5815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[plot]] of this [[enjoyable]] MGM [[musical]] is contrived and only [[occasionally]] amusing, dealing with espionage and romance but the [[focus]] of the film is properly pointed upon the tuneful interludes showcasing the enormously talented and athletic tap dancing Eleanor Powell, abetted by Tommy Dorsey and his orchestra, featuring Ziggy Elman, Buddy Rich and Frank Sinatra. Red Skelton shares top billing with Powell, and he and sidekick Bert Lahr are given most of the comedic minutes, although Skelton is more effective when he, if it can be believed, performs as Powell's love interest, with Virginia O'Brien actually providing most of the film's humor as the dancer's companion. The technical brilliance of Powell is evidenced during one incredible scene within which Buddy Rich contributes his drumming skills, and which must be viewed several times in order to permit one's breathing to catch up with her precision. Director Edward Buzzell utilizes his large cast well to move the action [[nicely]] along despite the [[rather]] disjointed script with which he must deal, and permits Powell's cotangent impossibilities to rule the affair, as is appropriate. The [[intrigue]] of this [[congenial]] MGM [[music]] is contrived and only [[intermittently]] amusing, dealing with espionage and romance but the [[focuses]] of the film is properly pointed upon the tuneful interludes showcasing the enormously talented and athletic tap dancing Eleanor Powell, abetted by Tommy Dorsey and his orchestra, featuring Ziggy Elman, Buddy Rich and Frank Sinatra. Red Skelton shares top billing with Powell, and he and sidekick Bert Lahr are given most of the comedic minutes, although Skelton is more effective when he, if it can be believed, performs as Powell's love interest, with Virginia O'Brien actually providing most of the film's humor as the dancer's companion. The technical brilliance of Powell is evidenced during one incredible scene within which Buddy Rich contributes his drumming skills, and which must be viewed several times in order to permit one's breathing to catch up with her precision. Director Edward Buzzell utilizes his large cast well to move the action [[politely]] along despite the [[quite]] disjointed script with which he must deal, and permits Powell's cotangent impossibilities to rule the affair, as is appropriate. --------------------------------------------- Result 5816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A trio of buddies, sergeants all in the British Army, carouse & brawl their way across Imperial India. Intensely loyal to each other, they meet their greatest & most deadly challenge when they encounter the resurgence of a hideous cult & its demented, implacable guru. Now they must rely on the lowliest servant of the regiment, the water carrier GUNGA DIN, to save scores of the Queen's soldiers from certain massacre.

Based more on The Three Musketeers than Kipling's classic poem, this is a wonderful adventure epic - a worthy entry in Hollywood's Golden Year of 1939. Filled with suspense & humor, while keeping the romantic interludes to the barest minimum, it grips the interest of the viewer and holds it right up to the (sentimental) conclusion.

It is practically fruitless to discuss the performance nuances of the three stars, Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen & Douglas Fairbanks Jr., as they are really all thirds of a single organism - inseparable and, to all intents & purposes, indistinguishable. However, this diminishes nothing of the great fun in simply watching them have a glorious time.

(It's interesting to note, parenthetically, that McLaglen boasted of a distinguished World War One military career; Fairbanks would have a sterling record in World War Two - mostly in clandestine affairs & earning himself no fewer than 4 honorary knighthoods after the conflict; while Grant reportedly worked undercover for British Intelligence, keeping an eye on Hollywood Nazi sympathizers.)

The real acting laurels here should go to Sam Jaffe, heartbreaking in the title role. He infuses the humble man with radiant dignity & enormous courage, making the last line of Kipling's poem ring true. He is unforgettable.

Montague Love is properly stalwart as the regimental major, whilst Eduardo Ciannelli is Evil Incarnate as the Thuggee guru. The rest of the cast, Joan Fontaine, Robert Coote, Lumsden Hare, are effective but have little to do. Movie mavens will recognize Cecil Kellaway in the tiny role of Miss Fontaine's father.

The film picks its villains well. The demonic Thuggee cult, worshipers of the hideous, blood-soaked Kali, Hindu goddess of destruction, was the bane of Indian life for 6 centuries, ritualistically strangling up to 30,000 victims a year. In 1840 the British military, in cooperation with a number of princely states, succeeded in ultimately suppressing the religion. Henceforth it would remain the stuff of novels & nightmares. --------------------------------------------- Result 5817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] [[First]] off I'd like to say that if I had to honestly [[rate]] this [[movie]] from a 1 to a 10, then I'd give it a -4. It's not that I'm a [[tough]] [[critic]], it's just that this [[movie]] is THAT bad. [[Everything]] from the [[story]], to the directing, to the [[editing]] is [[awful]]. The story is not even halfway decent to [[begin]] with (you can't [[expect]] much since it is [[based]] on a [[video]] [[game]], something I was not aware of going into the [[movie]]) but the directing and editing [[made]] it even [[worse]]. The [[movie]] cuts at [[awkward]] [[points]] and goes to scenes that are [[completely]] unrelated to the previous ones; some, like a quick sex scene in the middle, don't [[even]] make sense being put into the story seeing as how the [[characters]] don't [[show]] any [[feelings]] [[toward]] each other. You [[could]] go into this [[movie]] expecting to [[see]] a [[pile]] of crap on the screen for an hour and a half and you'd [[still]] be [[disappointed]]. [[Honestly]], if you [[pay]] to watch this [[movie]] then you are [[wasting]] your [[money]], and if you don't [[pay]] [[anything]] then you are [[still]] [[wasting]] an hour and a half of your [[life]]. [[So]] do yourself a favor and don't watch it. [[Firstly]] off I'd like to say that if I had to honestly [[rates]] this [[filmmaking]] from a 1 to a 10, then I'd give it a -4. It's not that I'm a [[harsh]] [[criticism]], it's just that this [[filmmaking]] is THAT bad. [[Any]] from the [[history]], to the directing, to the [[editorial]] is [[abhorrent]]. The story is not even halfway decent to [[beginning]] with (you can't [[expecting]] much since it is [[predicated]] on a [[videotape]] [[jeu]], something I was not aware of going into the [[filmmaking]]) but the directing and editing [[accomplished]] it even [[pire]]. The [[filmmaking]] cuts at [[tricky]] [[dot]] and goes to scenes that are [[entirely]] unrelated to the previous ones; some, like a quick sex scene in the middle, don't [[yet]] make sense being put into the story seeing as how the [[attribute]] don't [[illustrates]] any [[moods]] [[about]] each other. You [[did]] go into this [[flick]] expecting to [[seeing]] a [[piles]] of crap on the screen for an hour and a half and you'd [[however]] be [[disappointing]]. [[Genuinely]], if you [[pays]] to watch this [[filmmaking]] then you are [[lose]] your [[cash]], and if you don't [[paying]] [[something]] then you are [[nevertheless]] [[lose]] an hour and a half of your [[vie]]. [[Thus]] do yourself a favor and don't watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] No-nonsense Inspector Hollaway (a [[solid]] [[turn]] by [[John]] Bennett) investigates the disappearance of a famous thespian and [[uncovers]] the wicked past history of a creepy old house. [[First]] and most mundane tale, "Method for Murder" - Successful author Charles Hillyer (nicely played by Denholm Elliott) is haunted by images of the murderous fiend he's writing about in his latest book. Although this particular outing is too obvious and predictable to be anything special, it does [[nonetheless]] build to a real dilly of a genuine [[surprise]] ending. Second and most [[poignant]] anecdote, "Waxworks" - Lonely Philip Grayson (the always [[outstanding]] [[Peter]] Cushing) and his equally [[lonesome]] [[friend]] Neville [[Rogers]] (the [[splendid]] [[Joss]] Ackland) both become infatuated with the beguiling wax statue of a [[beautiful]], but [[lethal]] murderess. Third and most chilling vignette, "[[Sweets]] to the Sweet" - [[Quiet]], reserved and [[secretive]] [[widower]] [[John]] [[Reid]] (a [[typically]] [[terrific]] [[Christopher]] Lee in a [[rare]] semi-sympathetic role) [[hires]] nanny Ann Norton (the fine Nyree Dawn Porter) to take care of his [[seemingly]] [[cute]] and harmless [[daughter]] [[Jane]] (a [[remarkably]] spooky and [[unnerving]] performance by the [[adorable]] [[Chloe]] Franks). This stand-out scary episode is given a [[substantial]] disturbing [[boost]] by the [[exceptional]] acting from [[gifted]] [[child]] actress Franks, who projects a [[truly]] [[unsettling]] sense of [[serene]] [[evil]] lurking just underneath a deceptively sweet and innocent angelic veneer. Fourth and most [[amusing]] yarn, "The [[Cloak]]" - Pompous [[horror]] [[movie]] star [[Paul]] Henderson ([[delightfully]] essayed to the haughty hilt by [[Jon]] Pertwee) purchases a [[mysterious]] [[cloak]] that causes him to [[transform]] into a [[vampire]] whenever he [[wears]] it. This [[item]] makes for good silly [[fun]] and further [[benefits]] from the awesomely pulchritudinous [[presence]] of the luscious Ingrid [[Pitt]] as enticing vampiress [[Carla]]. Director [[Peter]] Duffell, working from a [[deliciously]] macabre and [[witty]] [[script]] by [[noted]] [[horror]] scribe [[Robert]] Bloch, maintains a snappy [[pace]] [[throughout]] and does an [[ace]] [[job]] of [[creating]] a [[suitably]] [[eerie]] [[atmosphere]]. Kudos are [[also]] in order for [[Ray]] Parslow's [[crisp]] [[cinematography]] and the shuddery score by [[Michael]] [[Dress]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]] to fans of omnibus [[fright]] fare. No-nonsense Inspector Hollaway (a [[solids]] [[converting]] by [[Giovanni]] Bennett) investigates the disappearance of a famous thespian and [[discloses]] the wicked past history of a creepy old house. [[Frst]] and most mundane tale, "Method for Murder" - Successful author Charles Hillyer (nicely played by Denholm Elliott) is haunted by images of the murderous fiend he's writing about in his latest book. Although this particular outing is too obvious and predictable to be anything special, it does [[yet]] build to a real dilly of a genuine [[surprises]] ending. Second and most [[agonizing]] anecdote, "Waxworks" - Lonely Philip Grayson (the always [[unpaid]] [[Petra]] Cushing) and his equally [[solitary]] [[boyfriend]] Neville [[Rutgers]] (the [[awesome]] [[Goss]] Ackland) both become infatuated with the beguiling wax statue of a [[awesome]], but [[deadly]] murderess. Third and most chilling vignette, "[[Candy]] to the Sweet" - [[Silence]], reserved and [[secrecy]] [[widow]] [[Giovanni]] [[Reed]] (a [[normally]] [[lovely]] [[Christophe]] Lee in a [[scarce]] semi-sympathetic role) [[recruitment]] nanny Ann Norton (the fine Nyree Dawn Porter) to take care of his [[allegedly]] [[adorable]] and harmless [[girls]] [[Jin]] (a [[terribly]] spooky and [[worrisome]] performance by the [[lovely]] [[Naomi]] Franks). This stand-out scary episode is given a [[sizable]] disturbing [[enhancing]] by the [[wondrous]] acting from [[talented]] [[children]] actress Franks, who projects a [[really]] [[troubling]] sense of [[peaceful]] [[demonic]] lurking just underneath a deceptively sweet and innocent angelic veneer. Fourth and most [[funny]] yarn, "The [[Robe]]" - Pompous [[terror]] [[cinema]] star [[Paulo]] Henderson ([[divinely]] essayed to the haughty hilt by [[John]] Pertwee) purchases a [[opaque]] [[robe]] that causes him to [[converting]] into a [[vamp]] whenever he [[door]] it. This [[items]] makes for good silly [[amusing]] and further [[advantages]] from the awesomely pulchritudinous [[attendance]] of the luscious Ingrid [[Beit]] as enticing vampiress [[Carlo]]. Director [[Pieter]] Duffell, working from a [[exquisitely]] macabre and [[spiritual]] [[scripts]] by [[indicated]] [[terror]] scribe [[Roberto]] Bloch, maintains a snappy [[tempo]] [[during]] and does an [[aces]] [[labour]] of [[establish]] a [[adequately]] [[freaky]] [[atmospheric]]. Kudos are [[furthermore]] in order for [[Gleam]] Parslow's [[sharpness]] [[films]] and the shuddery score by [[Michele]] [[Garments]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]] to fans of omnibus [[affraid]] fare. --------------------------------------------- Result 5819 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "[[Ice]] [[Age]]" is one of the [[cartoon]] [[movies]] ever [[produced]] by [[Blue]] [[Sky]] Studios and released in 2002 as the company's first. We are [[introduced]] to the main [[characters]]: a squirrel named Scrat (voiced by Chris Wedge, [[AND]] [[PLEASE]] NOTE: the sound of Scrat's screams is the sound of Tom's screams from the "Tom and Jerry" cartoons), a woolly mammoth named [[Manny]] (voiced by Ray Romano of "Everybody Loves Raymond"), a sloth named Sid (voiced by John Leguizamo of "Titan A. E."), and a saber toothed tiger named Diego (voiced by Denis Leary of Pixar's "A Bug's Life").

The movie opens with Scrat trying to bury an acorn and right after that, he caused an avalanche. We then see a herd going south for the coming Ice Age (except for Manny, who is going the other way looking for other mammoths that looked like him). Sid comes out of his cave yawning, and saw that his family abandoned him. He then pays toll with some aardvarks. Unfortunately, he gets pursued by Sylvia (voiced by Kirsten Johnston of "3rd Rock from the Sun"), a female orange sloth, who [[wants]] Sid to [[go]] migrating with her. Sid eventually teams up with [[Manny]], and they [[became]] [[friends]].

Meanwhile, nearby a human [[tribe]], Soto (voiced by Goran Visnjic), an evil [[saber]] toothed [[tiger]], [[wants]] [[revenge]] against the tribe's leader for wiping out half of his pack just by [[stealing]] his [[infant]] son, Roshan, away from him. [[In]] the morning, he, Diego, and Soto's henchmen, Lenny (voiced by [[Alan]] Tudyk), [[Oscar]] (voiced by Diedrich Bader), and Zeke (voiced by [[Jack]] Black) attacked the [[tribe]], but the leader's wife escaped with Roshan and [[gave]] him to Manny and Sid to look after. [[Eventually]], Diego [[joins]] them, and went on a [[journey]] to [[return]] Roshan back to his [[tribe]], who are [[also]] [[looking]] for him as well. Relax and watch the rest of the [[movie]] and [[find]] out, [[okay]]? Besides Manny, Sid, Diego, Scrat, Sylvia, and Roshan, the [[supporting]] [[characters]] in there [[including]] a [[pack]] of wolves that Roshan's [[tribe]] are [[using]], and not to mention a fat female purple sloth named Jennifer (voiced by Jane Krakowski), and a skinny female yellow sloth named Rachel (voiced by Lorri Bagley), to whom Sid shows them Roshan as they relax in a tar pit. Incidentally, the two rhinos, Carl (voiced by Cedric The Entertainer of PDI's "Madagascar"), and Frank (voiced by Stephen Root of Pixar's "Finding Nemo"), who go after Sid for ruining their meal and confront Manny on a cliff, are simple minor characters. Same went for the dodos, who are using melons as their food supply.

The gags in this movie are very funny. For instance, Manny talks through his trunk saying, "I'M NOT GOING!" When Jennifer and Rachel are out of the tar pit, Sid asks Jennifer "What do you say if we jump into the gene pool and see what happens?" Jennifer then responds to him, "What do you say if you go jump into the TAR PIT!?" Rachel also then kicks Sid in the waist. Sylvia sees Diego holding Sid by the neck with his teeth, then she asks Sid if he's holding his breath, tells Diego to eat him, and promptly walks off.

Since "Ice Age" is not only a success, but it has 2 sequels: the first one was "Ice Age: The Meltdown", which was released in 2006, and the other was "Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs", which is going to be releasing next year. I can hardly die waiting to see what "Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs" will be like. "[[Sundae]] [[Aging]]" is one of the [[caricatures]] [[movie]] ever [[generated]] by [[Azul]] [[Ciel]] Studios and released in 2002 as the company's first. We are [[tabled]] to the main [[attribute]]: a squirrel named Scrat (voiced by Chris Wedge, [[UND]] [[INVITES]] NOTE: the sound of Scrat's screams is the sound of Tom's screams from the "Tom and Jerry" cartoons), a woolly mammoth named [[Mani]] (voiced by Ray Romano of "Everybody Loves Raymond"), a sloth named Sid (voiced by John Leguizamo of "Titan A. E."), and a saber toothed tiger named Diego (voiced by Denis Leary of Pixar's "A Bug's Life").

The movie opens with Scrat trying to bury an acorn and right after that, he caused an avalanche. We then see a herd going south for the coming Ice Age (except for Manny, who is going the other way looking for other mammoths that looked like him). Sid comes out of his cave yawning, and saw that his family abandoned him. He then pays toll with some aardvarks. Unfortunately, he gets pursued by Sylvia (voiced by Kirsten Johnston of "3rd Rock from the Sun"), a female orange sloth, who [[wish]] Sid to [[going]] migrating with her. Sid eventually teams up with [[Mani]], and they [[was]] [[mates]].

Meanwhile, nearby a human [[clan]], Soto (voiced by Goran Visnjic), an evil [[sword]] toothed [[tigers]], [[wanting]] [[retribution]] against the tribe's leader for wiping out half of his pack just by [[rob]] his [[infants]] son, Roshan, away from him. [[For]] the morning, he, Diego, and Soto's henchmen, Lenny (voiced by [[Alain]] Tudyk), [[Oskar]] (voiced by Diedrich Bader), and Zeke (voiced by [[Jacque]] Black) attacked the [[clan]], but the leader's wife escaped with Roshan and [[supplied]] him to Manny and Sid to look after. [[Ultimately]], Diego [[engages]] them, and went on a [[travelling]] to [[returned]] Roshan back to his [[clans]], who are [[similarly]] [[researching]] for him as well. Relax and watch the rest of the [[movies]] and [[unearthed]] out, [[aight]]? Besides Manny, Sid, Diego, Scrat, Sylvia, and Roshan, the [[helping]] [[attribute]] in there [[containing]] a [[bagging]] of wolves that Roshan's [[clan]] are [[utilised]], and not to mention a fat female purple sloth named Jennifer (voiced by Jane Krakowski), and a skinny female yellow sloth named Rachel (voiced by Lorri Bagley), to whom Sid shows them Roshan as they relax in a tar pit. Incidentally, the two rhinos, Carl (voiced by Cedric The Entertainer of PDI's "Madagascar"), and Frank (voiced by Stephen Root of Pixar's "Finding Nemo"), who go after Sid for ruining their meal and confront Manny on a cliff, are simple minor characters. Same went for the dodos, who are using melons as their food supply.

The gags in this movie are very funny. For instance, Manny talks through his trunk saying, "I'M NOT GOING!" When Jennifer and Rachel are out of the tar pit, Sid asks Jennifer "What do you say if we jump into the gene pool and see what happens?" Jennifer then responds to him, "What do you say if you go jump into the TAR PIT!?" Rachel also then kicks Sid in the waist. Sylvia sees Diego holding Sid by the neck with his teeth, then she asks Sid if he's holding his breath, tells Diego to eat him, and promptly walks off.

Since "Ice Age" is not only a success, but it has 2 sequels: the first one was "Ice Age: The Meltdown", which was released in 2006, and the other was "Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs", which is going to be releasing next year. I can hardly die waiting to see what "Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs" will be like. --------------------------------------------- Result 5820 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Zodiac Killer. 1 out of 10. Worst acting ever. No really worst acting ever. David Hess (Last House on the Left…. No the one from the seventies…. Rent it it's really good) is the worst of the bunch (Pretty stiff competition but he is amazingly god-awful.) One would be hard pressed to find a home movie participant with such an awkward camera presence. The film actually screeches to a stunning painful halt when he is on the screen.

Not that the film actually has any redeeming qualities for Mr. Hess to ruin. It is filmed with a home movie camera and by the looks of things a pretty old one complete with attached boom mike. No post production either. Come on there has to be some shovelware a five year old computer could use that could clean up this picture. Throw in bizarre stock footage pictures of autopsy's and aircraft carrier takeoffs and this is one visually screwed up picture. The autopsy pictures are interjected the way Italian cannibal films interject those god-awful real life animal killings. And the Navy footage is supposed to be some anti war statement (Cause we know all the bloodthirsty maniacs join the Navy) What in the world is Lion's Gate is doing releasing this garbage? It would embarrass Troma. The plot is about the Zodiac Killer (Last seen in Dirty Harry …. No the one from the seventies…. Rent it it's really good) Somebody gets shot in the stomach in LA and the cops assume the Zodiac Killer is back? Uh-huh. What can you expect from a movie that doesn't know that DSM IV is a book not a psychiatric disorder and where the young killer older man relationship resembles that of a congressional page and closeted congressman? Yeah eighties haircuts and production values meet a Nambla subplot. Sign me up. --------------------------------------------- Result 5821 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] SHALLOW [[GRAVE]] [[begins]] with either a [[tribute]] or a rip off of the shower scene in PSYCHO. (I'm leaning toward rip off.) After that it [[gets]] worse and then surprisingly [[gets]] better, almost to the point of being original. Bad acting and [[amateurish]] [[directing]] bog down a fairly interesting little [[story]], but the film already surpasses many in the "Yankee comes down South to get killed by a bunch of rednecks" genre because it is actually shot in the South.

A group of college girls head to Ft. Lauderdale for summer vacation and are waylaid in Georgia by a flat tire after getting off the main road. (Note to Yankees: stay on the highway when you go to Florida.) Sue Ellen (Lisa Stahl) has to pee so she heads into the woods. When she finally finds a good spot to do her business she witnesses the local sheriff (Tony March) strangle his mistress (Merry Rozelle) to death. (Note to Yankees: do not wander off into the woods when in the South; not because you might witness a murder, but you may run across a marijuana plantation.) This is the point where the story, not the movie, actually comes close to being good.

While Tony March will never have to practice his Oscar speech, his Sheriff Dean becomes a creepy facsimile of a normal guy torn by what he has done and what he must do. Tom Law is likable as Deputy Scott and is as authentic a Southern deputy as I've seen since Walton Goggins (Deputy Steve Naish) in HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES.

A few scenes in the movie are worth the mention. The girls stop at a BBQ in South Carolina and display their racism when a big black guy checks them out. Sue Ellen runs into a barn to hide behind some hay bales and in a shockingly realistic moment a large snake is hiding in the hay with her.

And in the strangest scene, Sheriff Dean makes like he's about to rape Patty (Carol Cadby) and tells her to take off her clothes. Dean has turned the radio up to drown out the noise of what he's about to do. The preacher on the radio needs to go back and read his Bible. His sermon is about how Jezebel is saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. I feel sorry for this preacher's flock. Jezebel was in the Old Testament a few thousand years before Christ was born and by no means is she one of the five people you are going to meet in Heaven. SHALLOW [[GRIEVOUS]] [[started]] with either a [[compliments]] or a rip off of the shower scene in PSYCHO. (I'm leaning toward rip off.) After that it [[obtains]] worse and then surprisingly [[get]] better, almost to the point of being original. Bad acting and [[unprofessional]] [[instructing]] bog down a fairly interesting little [[storytelling]], but the film already surpasses many in the "Yankee comes down South to get killed by a bunch of rednecks" genre because it is actually shot in the South.

A group of college girls head to Ft. Lauderdale for summer vacation and are waylaid in Georgia by a flat tire after getting off the main road. (Note to Yankees: stay on the highway when you go to Florida.) Sue Ellen (Lisa Stahl) has to pee so she heads into the woods. When she finally finds a good spot to do her business she witnesses the local sheriff (Tony March) strangle his mistress (Merry Rozelle) to death. (Note to Yankees: do not wander off into the woods when in the South; not because you might witness a murder, but you may run across a marijuana plantation.) This is the point where the story, not the movie, actually comes close to being good.

While Tony March will never have to practice his Oscar speech, his Sheriff Dean becomes a creepy facsimile of a normal guy torn by what he has done and what he must do. Tom Law is likable as Deputy Scott and is as authentic a Southern deputy as I've seen since Walton Goggins (Deputy Steve Naish) in HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES.

A few scenes in the movie are worth the mention. The girls stop at a BBQ in South Carolina and display their racism when a big black guy checks them out. Sue Ellen runs into a barn to hide behind some hay bales and in a shockingly realistic moment a large snake is hiding in the hay with her.

And in the strangest scene, Sheriff Dean makes like he's about to rape Patty (Carol Cadby) and tells her to take off her clothes. Dean has turned the radio up to drown out the noise of what he's about to do. The preacher on the radio needs to go back and read his Bible. His sermon is about how Jezebel is saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. I feel sorry for this preacher's flock. Jezebel was in the Old Testament a few thousand years before Christ was born and by no means is she one of the five people you are going to meet in Heaven. --------------------------------------------- Result 5822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] In the [[seemingly]] endless quest to [[find]] well made, well acted horror films, it is all-too-rare to find one that even comes remotely close to hitting the mark. [[Needless]] to say, I was very [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] when I stumbled across "Burned at the Stake" on a U.S. cable network while I was flipping [[channels]]. The [[premise]] is reasonably simple. In 1692, young Ann Putnam (Swift) is the most vocal witness against alleged witches, leveling baseless charges against anyone who earns her displeasure. Manipulating her for his own ends is Reverend Parris ([[Peters]]) who also serves as the court's guide on matters pertaining to witchcraft and Satanism. Things get complicated when Ann starts accusing members of the Goode family of witchcraft. Salem (of 1980 or so), Loreen Graham (also played by Swift) begins having unusual visions shortly before she visits the Salem Witch Museum. A strange man in seventeenth century garb tries to accost her there and the building. He continues to stalk her while strange phenomena begin to involve her more and more. Soon, it appears that she is becoming possessed by the spirit of Ann Putnam. Unfortunately, further description gets rather involved and would give too much away. [[Though]] the film is not action-oriented and would likely be of little interest to many viewers, the performances are good and the seventeenth century dialogue used in the film's many flashbacks sounds very convincing. The production values are solid with the possible exception of some of the special effects. In a side-note, the film's technical advisor was Laurie Cabot, Salem's official witch. Viewers who appreciate a well-made, atmospheric, but understated horror film may appreciate this. The writer/director, Bert I. Gordon, has had a long career in horror and science fiction filmmaking and is best known for his work on a number of "big bug" films and similar works years earlier. In the [[evidently]] endless quest to [[unearth]] well made, well acted horror films, it is all-too-rare to find one that even comes remotely close to hitting the mark. [[Worthless]] to say, I was very [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]] when I stumbled across "Burned at the Stake" on a U.S. cable network while I was flipping [[canals]]. The [[prerequisite]] is reasonably simple. In 1692, young Ann Putnam (Swift) is the most vocal witness against alleged witches, leveling baseless charges against anyone who earns her displeasure. Manipulating her for his own ends is Reverend Parris ([[Peter]]) who also serves as the court's guide on matters pertaining to witchcraft and Satanism. Things get complicated when Ann starts accusing members of the Goode family of witchcraft. Salem (of 1980 or so), Loreen Graham (also played by Swift) begins having unusual visions shortly before she visits the Salem Witch Museum. A strange man in seventeenth century garb tries to accost her there and the building. He continues to stalk her while strange phenomena begin to involve her more and more. Soon, it appears that she is becoming possessed by the spirit of Ann Putnam. Unfortunately, further description gets rather involved and would give too much away. [[Nevertheless]] the film is not action-oriented and would likely be of little interest to many viewers, the performances are good and the seventeenth century dialogue used in the film's many flashbacks sounds very convincing. The production values are solid with the possible exception of some of the special effects. In a side-note, the film's technical advisor was Laurie Cabot, Salem's official witch. Viewers who appreciate a well-made, atmospheric, but understated horror film may appreciate this. The writer/director, Bert I. Gordon, has had a long career in horror and science fiction filmmaking and is best known for his work on a number of "big bug" films and similar works years earlier. --------------------------------------------- Result 5823 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am Puerto Rican and this is one of the worst documentary of I've ever seen of any type. You can see that the people on it are clueless. They don't know much about Puerto Rico and its culture. They claim to be Puerto Rican because they are from Puerto Rican descendants, but they probably know less than others who are not from there. You can see while they are talking that they are contradicting themselves. If you would like to see a real, and I mean a real, genuine documentary from Puerto Rico, then you must see "Mi Puerto Rico". That's a serious, real documentary. Not like this piece of junk. Rosie Perez based this documentary on herself. I thought it was suppose to be about Puerto Ricans. They keep repeating I didn't know. Well, that's about the only thing they got right on this so called documentary. I hate to see such a piece of garbage being done using the name of the Island. It brings down the standards. --------------------------------------------- Result 5824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The comic banter between William Powell and Jean Arthur is the [[highlight]] of this murder [[mystery]], which has one of the most bizarre and unlikely plots ever. Powell is probably the most suave [[detective]] of the 30's, and Arthur has a [[unique]] [[voice]] which [[often]] sounds like a succession of tiny tinkly bells. They are [[extremely]] fun to watch, so take the brashness of the plot with a [[grain]] of salt and just [[enjoy]] seeing it unfold. Eric Blore also has some [[comic]] turns as Powell's butler.

Powell's contract with MGM included a [[clause]] which allowed him to reject being [[loaned]] out to another studio, but he wanted to work again with Arthur and he liked the script, so he eagerly accepted the assignment. They had worked together in two 1929 Paramount films, The Canary Murder Case and The [[Greene]] Murder Case, both in the Philo Vance [[series]]. The comic banter between William Powell and Jean Arthur is the [[stress]] of this murder [[conundrum]], which has one of the most bizarre and unlikely plots ever. Powell is probably the most suave [[inspector]] of the 30's, and Arthur has a [[sole]] [[vocals]] which [[normally]] sounds like a succession of tiny tinkly bells. They are [[terribly]] fun to watch, so take the brashness of the plot with a [[squall]] of salt and just [[enjoys]] seeing it unfold. Eric Blore also has some [[humorous]] turns as Powell's butler.

Powell's contract with MGM included a [[articles]] which allowed him to reject being [[borrowed]] out to another studio, but he wanted to work again with Arthur and he liked the script, so he eagerly accepted the assignment. They had worked together in two 1929 Paramount films, The Canary Murder Case and The [[Archer]] Murder Case, both in the Philo Vance [[serial]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is absolutely the worst movie I've seen all year.

First, I will say that the acting was very good, and by all of the cast.

This was apparently meant to be very offbeat, and in that regard it succeeded. By the same token, the story revolves around a self-centered wannabe, who is a clueless, talentless chronic liar, whose source of self confidence comes from a pair of leather slippers.

This was worse than watching a car wreck. --------------------------------------------- Result 5826 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sogo Ishii can be a skilled filmmaker under the right conditions, but Gojoe tells the story of a warrior monk and his only rival, a scion of the Genji clan. The film-making has the main hallmarks of a low-budget production, including blurry fight scenes and clumsy montages (the kind you might find in an under-produced dorama). The monk Benkei informs his spiritual teacher that his destiny lies in defeating the mysterious spirit that guards Gojoe bridge at night, but he doesn't realize that this decision will bring him squarely into conflict with nearly every element of society at that time - but which could earn him enlightenment.

There's no absence of ambitiousness, however, in its depiction of the conflict between the holy and the worldly. Artsy flourishes in some of the photography and editing help to compensate for the loose film-making style.

A disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 5827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I just [[got]] the [[UK]] 4-disc special edition of Superman 1 for about $5. The [[additional]] stuff [[includes]] the 1951 [[feature]] Superman and the Mole-Men. [[So]] I slapped it into the DVD player last [[night]], and here are my [[findings]].

Some initial [[disappointment]] - I hadn't [[checked]], and I think I had it mentally tagged as one of the Kirk Alyn serials. I'm not a huge fan of George Reeves as Superman, and I hadn't seen anything other than the odd clip of Kirk Alyn - but hey ho, never mind.

This black and white production runs for less than an hour. It has the feel of a couple of episodes of one of Reeves' early TV series, a two-parter, put together for cinema release, although IMDb says it was filmed as a cinema release in advance of the first TV series. In any event, it's an odd choice for reasons I'll get to later. I'm of an age where I recall TV and movie productions which are limited to one or two locations and sets, so there were no major surprises here. Even so, for a low budget movie, this one is REALLY low budget.

The story concerns the small town of Silsby - population 1,430 - which, puzzlingly, is also home to the world's deepest oil well (6 miles). The story opens with the well's foreman hurriedly taking steps to close the well down. This conflicts with the arrival of Metropolis reporters Kent and Lane to report on the well, at the behest of the oil company. As Clark is sniffing out the fact that the drill has emerged into a radioactive cavern 6 miles down, a couple of odd little guys (small in stature, big in head, black in jumpsuit, and bushy in eyebrow) emerge from the capped-off drillshaft, and start mooching round town with puzzled expressions on their faces.

A deep breath now, here is the remaining plot of the picture. The little guys scare some kids, so Jeff Corey (playing the town's rampant xenophobe) incites some pals to kill these "creatures". Superman steps in (moderately ineffectually) and catches one of the little guys who has been shot and takes him to the local hospital. Corey's pals burn down the shack the other little fellow has hidden in and assume he is killed, but he escapes and legs it down the shaft. Corey incites a lynch mob (despite the sheriff arresting him) to hang the hospitalised Mole-Man. Superman stops them entering the hospital and takes the injured chappie to the shaft to return him to his fellows. A total of 4 Mole-Men emerge with a weapon of some sort which they fire at Jeff Corey (I call this an Aargh! gun because its sole effect seems to be to make Corey go "Aargh!") and Superman saves him. He immediately changes his ways because of amazement at Superman saving him after the way he has behaved, the Mole-men go back down the shaft. The end.

Despite the film only being an hour long, there is an inordinate amount of creeping around, bewareing and pursuing - I have left out all the "Mole-Man 1 creeps from A to B, looking out to make sure no-one is following him" stuff. The Mole-Men are never engaged in any way whatsoever - they have no dialogue - they just turn up, get persecuted, and go back. They do look a little creepy, but they are hardly the bug-eyed monsters that the town's reaction implies.

Reeves is quite a good Clark Kent - very much a hard-nosed reporter, much more so than Phyllis Coates' rather indifferent Lois Lane. But he is a terrible, terrible Superman. Not only does he not look the part (at least his hair is dyed black in this, which is an improvement from the rather light hair he sported in some of the TV episodes), the way he plays it is all wrong in my book. I'm sure he was told to "strike the pose" (which Superman does constantly), but someone should have told him that it should be fists on hips, not fists on ribs. And he plays Superman as a rather strict and touchy schoolteacher - he doesn't actually wag his finger in remonstration, but he may as well have done.

And Superman does a huge amount of walking around (I say a huge amount - he isn't actually in it all that much), and a bit of running. He takes off and lands a couple of times, but isn't seen in flight at any point. Oh, some bullets bounce off him, and he uses telescopic vision as Clark, but with no accompanying visual effect. In fact, visual effects are conspicuous by their absence, and the few which are present aren't very good.

I've tried to consider this effort by reference to the standards of the time: but even by those standards I think it's a pretty threadbare effort. Thankfully, production standards on the TV series were higher, and at least they took the trouble to come up with stories which had a bit more to them.

Something of a disappointment - I shan't be watching it again. I just [[did]] the [[BRITANNICA]] 4-disc special edition of Superman 1 for about $5. The [[extra]] stuff [[consists]] the 1951 [[idiosyncrasies]] Superman and the Mole-Men. [[Consequently]] I slapped it into the DVD player last [[soir]], and here are my [[result]].

Some initial [[displeasure]] - I hadn't [[audited]], and I think I had it mentally tagged as one of the Kirk Alyn serials. I'm not a huge fan of George Reeves as Superman, and I hadn't seen anything other than the odd clip of Kirk Alyn - but hey ho, never mind.

This black and white production runs for less than an hour. It has the feel of a couple of episodes of one of Reeves' early TV series, a two-parter, put together for cinema release, although IMDb says it was filmed as a cinema release in advance of the first TV series. In any event, it's an odd choice for reasons I'll get to later. I'm of an age where I recall TV and movie productions which are limited to one or two locations and sets, so there were no major surprises here. Even so, for a low budget movie, this one is REALLY low budget.

The story concerns the small town of Silsby - population 1,430 - which, puzzlingly, is also home to the world's deepest oil well (6 miles). The story opens with the well's foreman hurriedly taking steps to close the well down. This conflicts with the arrival of Metropolis reporters Kent and Lane to report on the well, at the behest of the oil company. As Clark is sniffing out the fact that the drill has emerged into a radioactive cavern 6 miles down, a couple of odd little guys (small in stature, big in head, black in jumpsuit, and bushy in eyebrow) emerge from the capped-off drillshaft, and start mooching round town with puzzled expressions on their faces.

A deep breath now, here is the remaining plot of the picture. The little guys scare some kids, so Jeff Corey (playing the town's rampant xenophobe) incites some pals to kill these "creatures". Superman steps in (moderately ineffectually) and catches one of the little guys who has been shot and takes him to the local hospital. Corey's pals burn down the shack the other little fellow has hidden in and assume he is killed, but he escapes and legs it down the shaft. Corey incites a lynch mob (despite the sheriff arresting him) to hang the hospitalised Mole-Man. Superman stops them entering the hospital and takes the injured chappie to the shaft to return him to his fellows. A total of 4 Mole-Men emerge with a weapon of some sort which they fire at Jeff Corey (I call this an Aargh! gun because its sole effect seems to be to make Corey go "Aargh!") and Superman saves him. He immediately changes his ways because of amazement at Superman saving him after the way he has behaved, the Mole-men go back down the shaft. The end.

Despite the film only being an hour long, there is an inordinate amount of creeping around, bewareing and pursuing - I have left out all the "Mole-Man 1 creeps from A to B, looking out to make sure no-one is following him" stuff. The Mole-Men are never engaged in any way whatsoever - they have no dialogue - they just turn up, get persecuted, and go back. They do look a little creepy, but they are hardly the bug-eyed monsters that the town's reaction implies.

Reeves is quite a good Clark Kent - very much a hard-nosed reporter, much more so than Phyllis Coates' rather indifferent Lois Lane. But he is a terrible, terrible Superman. Not only does he not look the part (at least his hair is dyed black in this, which is an improvement from the rather light hair he sported in some of the TV episodes), the way he plays it is all wrong in my book. I'm sure he was told to "strike the pose" (which Superman does constantly), but someone should have told him that it should be fists on hips, not fists on ribs. And he plays Superman as a rather strict and touchy schoolteacher - he doesn't actually wag his finger in remonstration, but he may as well have done.

And Superman does a huge amount of walking around (I say a huge amount - he isn't actually in it all that much), and a bit of running. He takes off and lands a couple of times, but isn't seen in flight at any point. Oh, some bullets bounce off him, and he uses telescopic vision as Clark, but with no accompanying visual effect. In fact, visual effects are conspicuous by their absence, and the few which are present aren't very good.

I've tried to consider this effort by reference to the standards of the time: but even by those standards I think it's a pretty threadbare effort. Thankfully, production standards on the TV series were higher, and at least they took the trouble to come up with stories which had a bit more to them.

Something of a disappointment - I shan't be watching it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 5828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Lynch. The man has some really great stuff! He knows how to disturb us, then reward us by getting us think in different ways. This, however, is altogether different. Dumbland's reward is 1% absurd comedy, earned by enduring 99% stupidity. I may have laughed once, but somewhere around episode 4 I just started watching on fast-forward. Didn't miss a thing. I felt relieved when it ended, and that's part of the point with this series. It's an [[annoying]] series about annoying characters in annoying situations, rounded out with [[annoying]] animation, voices and sound. But recognizing this and its other absurdist qualities still fails to make Dumbland worthwhile. Lynch. The man has some really great stuff! He knows how to disturb us, then reward us by getting us think in different ways. This, however, is altogether different. Dumbland's reward is 1% absurd comedy, earned by enduring 99% stupidity. I may have laughed once, but somewhere around episode 4 I just started watching on fast-forward. Didn't miss a thing. I felt relieved when it ended, and that's part of the point with this series. It's an [[exasperating]] series about annoying characters in annoying situations, rounded out with [[exasperating]] animation, voices and sound. But recognizing this and its other absurdist qualities still fails to make Dumbland worthwhile. --------------------------------------------- Result 5829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is brilliant in every way. It touches on the complexities of loving relationships in a meaningful way, but never lectures. The script never condescends toward any character, not even the hapless Johnny. It also and benefits from spot-on direction, production design, casting, and performances. The fact that Cher is so perfect in the film and is more unlike "Cher" than she has ever been is a wonder to me. I watch Moonstruck at least once a year and I just viewed it again this Christmas eve with my 16 year old twin daughters and they loved it as well. It has something for everyone with a heart and leaves you filled with joy in the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 5830 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I do not fail to recognize Haneke's above-average film-making [[skills]]. For example, I [[appreciate]] his lingering on unremarkable-natural-day-lighted settings as a powerful way to force a strong sense of realism. [[However]], regarding the content of this film, I am very sad to see that in the 21st century there is still an urge to pathologize domination-submission relations or feelings (and/or BDSM practices). The problem that the main character has with her mother is [[unbelievably]] topical as is the alienation and uncomprehension felt by Walter (I don't mean the frustration of a lover which is not loved back in the same way, which is understandable; I mean that he looks upon her as if she were crazy, or as if he was a monk, come on!). I mean D/s is not something new in the world and I think it is rather silly to treat the subject as if it were something "freakish" or pathological; it isn't. In general, films dealing with this subject are really lagging behind the times.

So, for me, I feel that this film ends up being quite a programmatical film, worried with very outdated psicoanalitical theories (isn't it nearly embarrassing?), and that does not really relate with real-life lives and experiences of those engaged in D/s relationships (personal experience, forums, irc chatrooms even recent scholar studies will show this). I do not fail to recognize Haneke's above-average film-making [[jurisdiction]]. For example, I [[appreciative]] his lingering on unremarkable-natural-day-lighted settings as a powerful way to force a strong sense of realism. [[Still]], regarding the content of this film, I am very sad to see that in the 21st century there is still an urge to pathologize domination-submission relations or feelings (and/or BDSM practices). The problem that the main character has with her mother is [[unimaginably]] topical as is the alienation and uncomprehension felt by Walter (I don't mean the frustration of a lover which is not loved back in the same way, which is understandable; I mean that he looks upon her as if she were crazy, or as if he was a monk, come on!). I mean D/s is not something new in the world and I think it is rather silly to treat the subject as if it were something "freakish" or pathological; it isn't. In general, films dealing with this subject are really lagging behind the times.

So, for me, I feel that this film ends up being quite a programmatical film, worried with very outdated psicoanalitical theories (isn't it nearly embarrassing?), and that does not really relate with real-life lives and experiences of those engaged in D/s relationships (personal experience, forums, irc chatrooms even recent scholar studies will show this). --------------------------------------------- Result 5831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Holes is a fable about the [[past]] and the [[way]] it [[affects]] the [[present]] lives of at least three people. One of them I will name, the other two are [[mysteries]] and will remain so. Holes is a [[story]] about Stanley Yelnats IV. He is unlucky in [[life]]. Unlucky in fact characterizes the [[fates]] of most of the Yelnats [[men]] and has been [[since]] exploits of [[Stanley]] IV's `no good-dirty-rotten-pig-stealing-great-great-grandfather.' Those particular exploits cursed the family's men to many an ill-fated turn. It is during just such a turn that we meet Stanley IV. He has been accused, falsely, of stealing a pair of baseball shoes, freshly donated to a homeless shelter auction, by a famous baseball player. He is given the option of jail, or he can go to a character building camp. `I've never been to camp before,' says Stanley. With that the Judge enthusiastically sends him off to Camp Green Lake.

Camp Green Lake is an odd place, with an odd philosophy, `If you take a bad boy, make him dig a hole every day in the hot sun, it will turn him into a good boy.' We learn this little pearl of wisdom from Mr. Sir (John Voight) one of the camp's `counselors.' We get the impression right away that he is a dangerous man. He at [[least]] wears his [[attitude]] [[honestly]]; he doesn't think he is [[nice]]. The camp's guidance councilor, Mr. Pendanski (Tim Blake Nelson) is a [[different]] [[matter]] [[entirely]]. He [[acts]] the [[part]] of the caring sensitive counselor, but he [[quick]], [[quicker]] than [[anyone]] [[else]] in authority to unleash the most [[cruel]] verbal barbs at his [[charges]]. The [[Warden]] has a decided capacity for meanness, but other than that she is a [[mystery]]. These three [[rule]] [[Camp]] [[Green]] [[Lake]], a [[place]] that has no [[lake]]. It is just a dry dusty [[desert]] filled with holes, five feet deep and five [[feet]] [[wide]]. Its local [[fauna]], [[seem]] only to be the vultures, and [[dangerous]] poisonous yellow-spotted lizards. Green Lake seems is, in [[many]] [[ways]], a [[haunted]] place.

Holes [[works]] in spite of the [[strange]] setting, and the [[strange]] [[story]], because it [[understands]] people. Specifically because it is honest in the [[way]] it [[deals]] with the [[inmates]] of Camp [[Green]] [[Lake]]. The [[movie]] [[captures]] the way boys interact with one another perfectly. It captures the way boys can bully each other, they way they can win admiration, the way they fight with one another, and the way boys ally themselves along the age [[line]]. It is this well nuanced core that makes everything else in the film believable. What is also refreshing about this film the good nature of its main character. He does not believe in a family curse, he is not bitter about the infamous exploits of his `no good-dirty-rotten-pig-stealing-great-great-grandfather.' In fact he loves hearing the story. Stanley IV is not bitter about the past, and determined not let it affect him in the way it has affected his father and grandfather. There is at times a lot of sadness in the film, but not a lot wallowing angsty silliness. And that is refreshing.

Holes is an intelligent, insightful and witty family movie. It entertains, and not in any cheap way. It is not a comedy, though it has its laughs. It dares to be compelling, where many family movies tend to play it safe and conventional. As such it transcends the family movie genera and simply becomes a good film that everyone can enjoy. I give it a 10. Holes is a fable about the [[bygone]] and the [[camino]] it [[afflicts]] the [[presented]] lives of at least three people. One of them I will name, the other two are [[riddles]] and will remain so. Holes is a [[fairytales]] about Stanley Yelnats IV. He is unlucky in [[lives]]. Unlucky in fact characterizes the [[destination]] of most of the Yelnats [[man]] and has been [[because]] exploits of [[Stan]] IV's `no good-dirty-rotten-pig-stealing-great-great-grandfather.' Those particular exploits cursed the family's men to many an ill-fated turn. It is during just such a turn that we meet Stanley IV. He has been accused, falsely, of stealing a pair of baseball shoes, freshly donated to a homeless shelter auction, by a famous baseball player. He is given the option of jail, or he can go to a character building camp. `I've never been to camp before,' says Stanley. With that the Judge enthusiastically sends him off to Camp Green Lake.

Camp Green Lake is an odd place, with an odd philosophy, `If you take a bad boy, make him dig a hole every day in the hot sun, it will turn him into a good boy.' We learn this little pearl of wisdom from Mr. Sir (John Voight) one of the camp's `counselors.' We get the impression right away that he is a dangerous man. He at [[fewest]] wears his [[stance]] [[frankly]]; he doesn't think he is [[enjoyable]]. The camp's guidance councilor, Mr. Pendanski (Tim Blake Nelson) is a [[multiple]] [[question]] [[abundantly]]. He [[act]] the [[portions]] of the caring sensitive counselor, but he [[expedited]], [[sooner]] than [[someone]] [[further]] in authority to unleash the most [[savage]] verbal barbs at his [[costs]]. The [[Headmaster]] has a decided capacity for meanness, but other than that she is a [[puzzle]]. These three [[regulation]] [[Campground]] [[Archer]] [[Lakes]], a [[placing]] that has no [[lakes]]. It is just a dry dusty [[walkabout]] filled with holes, five feet deep and five [[foot]] [[extensive]]. Its local [[wildlife]], [[looks]] only to be the vultures, and [[hazardous]] poisonous yellow-spotted lizards. Green Lake seems is, in [[multiple]] [[modes]], a [[tormented]] place.

Holes [[working]] in spite of the [[inquisitive]] setting, and the [[bizarre]] [[conte]], because it [[comprises]] people. Specifically because it is honest in the [[camino]] it [[addresses]] with the [[captive]] of Camp [[Archer]] [[Lakes]]. The [[kino]] [[apprehended]] the way boys interact with one another perfectly. It captures the way boys can bully each other, they way they can win admiration, the way they fight with one another, and the way boys ally themselves along the age [[bloodline]]. It is this well nuanced core that makes everything else in the film believable. What is also refreshing about this film the good nature of its main character. He does not believe in a family curse, he is not bitter about the infamous exploits of his `no good-dirty-rotten-pig-stealing-great-great-grandfather.' In fact he loves hearing the story. Stanley IV is not bitter about the past, and determined not let it affect him in the way it has affected his father and grandfather. There is at times a lot of sadness in the film, but not a lot wallowing angsty silliness. And that is refreshing.

Holes is an intelligent, insightful and witty family movie. It entertains, and not in any cheap way. It is not a comedy, though it has its laughs. It dares to be compelling, where many family movies tend to play it safe and conventional. As such it transcends the family movie genera and simply becomes a good film that everyone can enjoy. I give it a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5832 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Daniell Steel's Daddy, what a refreshing [[story]]. This movie glorified the importance of the family and the importance of [[parents]] in the [[lives]] of their children. How [[rare]] is that? [[In]] these times of "Heather has two Mommies" (or what ever, you fill in the blanks) it is [[easy]] to see why this theme is not for everyone. With the father's roles being prominent I was hoping this would be another Daniell Steel [[Saga]]. How disappointing to have it end. [[Every]] character was [[important]] and did a fabulous job [[carrying]] their role. I would have loved to see each character develop over the [[years]]. I [[loved]] this movie, it is one I will defiantly watch every time it's on. Good [[story]], good acting, and I hope this isn't a [[spoiler]], but no obtrusive sex or bad language. Yes it touched my heart. Warning, get the Kleenex ready. What I find sad is that this side of family life is rarely [[depicted]] today in our [[entertainment]], be it Television or. Movie's. Daniell if your [[listening]], You Go Girl, give us more. Daniell Steel's Daddy, what a refreshing [[conte]]. This movie glorified the importance of the family and the importance of [[parent]] in the [[vie]] of their children. How [[rarity]] is that? [[Onto]] these times of "Heather has two Mommies" (or what ever, you fill in the blanks) it is [[easier]] to see why this theme is not for everyone. With the father's roles being prominent I was hoping this would be another Daniell Steel [[Epic]]. How disappointing to have it end. [[Any]] character was [[principal]] and did a fabulous job [[carry]] their role. I would have loved to see each character develop over the [[yr]]. I [[cared]] this movie, it is one I will defiantly watch every time it's on. Good [[fairytales]], good acting, and I hope this isn't a [[deflector]], but no obtrusive sex or bad language. Yes it touched my heart. Warning, get the Kleenex ready. What I find sad is that this side of family life is rarely [[exemplified]] today in our [[amusement]], be it Television or. Movie's. Daniell if your [[listen]], You Go Girl, give us more. --------------------------------------------- Result 5833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How did Mike Hammer live - in a penthouse with a GOLF BAG stashed in the corner next to a big screen cathode ray tube TV and a snazzy fireplace? Nah, he'd knock back a bottle of rye and twenty unfiltered Camels on the couch or floor of his fly-specked office or in the stink of a lousy downtown LA flop house, wiping the dried red crust and oil smeared mud off his face, that's how. Spillane wrote trash paperbacks, for sure, but how do you make it worse? Give some desperate scheming producer a blank check because he thinks any Film Noir titled crap will sell at the box office, add some over-the-hill hot tomatoes and just generally screw-up the story-line by some retard, drugged out screen writer, that's how! --------------------------------------------- Result 5834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Simon Pegg stars as Sidney Young, a stereotypically clumsy idiot Brit working as a celebrity journalist in this [[US]] [[comedy]]. After getting a very lucky [[break]] he starts [[work]] at the highly respected Sharps magazine run by a reliably on form [[Jeff]] [[Bridges]] in New York. It's more The Devil Wears [[Prada]] than Shaun of the Dead. The unlikely love interest is provided by [[Kirsten]] Dunst who [[works]] well with Pegg for the laughs but they don't exactly set the screen ablaze with their passion.

Sidney goes through some emotional challenges while trying to decide if he should forget about his journalistic principles in order to get material in the magazine. Of course he's [[eventually]] [[seduced]] by the glitz and glamour of the world of celebrities especially the young starlet Sophie Maes (Transformers' Megan Fox). Fans of [[Shaun]] of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Spaced will wonder if Pegg himself ever experienced [[similar]] feelings in real [[life]] with this film and to an extent Run Fat Boy Run as one of the UK's [[best]] comic talents being [[ruined]] by the US.

[[All]] in all this is a forgettable comedy. Please come back to us [[Simon]], we can forgive and forget. Simon Pegg stars as Sidney Young, a stereotypically clumsy idiot Brit working as a celebrity journalist in this [[AMERICANS]] [[travesty]]. After getting a very lucky [[breaks]] he starts [[jobs]] at the highly respected Sharps magazine run by a reliably on form [[Jeffrey]] [[Pont]] in New York. It's more The Devil Wears [[Fendi]] than Shaun of the Dead. The unlikely love interest is provided by [[Kirsty]] Dunst who [[collaboration]] well with Pegg for the laughs but they don't exactly set the screen ablaze with their passion.

Sidney goes through some emotional challenges while trying to decide if he should forget about his journalistic principles in order to get material in the magazine. Of course he's [[lastly]] [[charmed]] by the glitz and glamour of the world of celebrities especially the young starlet Sophie Maes (Transformers' Megan Fox). Fans of [[Yvonne]] of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Spaced will wonder if Pegg himself ever experienced [[analog]] feelings in real [[lifetime]] with this film and to an extent Run Fat Boy Run as one of the UK's [[optimum]] comic talents being [[devastated]] by the US.

[[Entire]] in all this is a forgettable comedy. Please come back to us [[Simeon]], we can forgive and forget. --------------------------------------------- Result 5835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Now i have read some [[negative]] [[reviews]] for this [[show]] on this website and [[quite]] frankly I'm appalled. [[For]] [[anyone]] to even [[think]] that the Sopranos is not [[Television]] then i'm [[afraid]] i don't know what the [[world]] has come to. [[Let]] me [[tell]] u [[something]]. I [[started]] watching many [[T]].V shows like [[Lost]], [[Prison]] [[Break]], [[Dexter]], Deadwood and [[even]] [[Invasion]]. But all of those [[shows]] [[lost]] their [[touch]] after the [[first]] season, [[especially]] Lost and [[Prison]] [[Break]] which i [[refuse]] to watch because the [[companies]] [[took]] 2 [[genius]] ideas and [[butchered]] them by making more than one season. Then we have The Sopranos. I can [[honestly]] say that this is the only [[television]] series that i have ever watched where i have been [[enthralled]] in all of its season, and more importantly all of its [[episodes]]. There is no department that this [[show]] doesn't excel in. Acting- [[Nothing]] [[short]] of superb. James Gandolfini is one of my [[favourite]] actors and i feel that his acting is [[absolutely]] [[stunning]] in every episode, after i heard that HBO [[wanted]] Ray Liotta to [[play]] Tony i felt that it would've been the better [[choice]], however after watching the first few episodes, i knew that HBO had [[done]] a great job in [[casting]] James as Tony. The raw emotion he [[displays]] is superb. Then we have everyone else, Edie Falco, Michael Imperioli, Lorraine Bracco, Dominic Chianese (whom i remembered as Johnny Ola in the Godfather Part 2) and my personal two favourite characters Tony Sirico and Steve Van Zandt Paulie 'Walnuts' Gualtieri and Silvio Dante. All of these actors perform to the best quality, and all giving an excellent performance in each episode. Then we have the [[story]], never have i been so sucked into a T.V show before. The story is [[nothing]] short of excellent. Each episode is directed superbly and the Score of this show is just fantastic. I feel that The Sopranos is one show that i can watch again and again and never get bored of. Its got everything from hilarious humour to brutal violence, but nonetheless it is and will always be the best thing to ever grace the Television, and I challenge anyone to find a real flaw in the show. Not just say its too violent, or they feel that the character of Tony is immoral, i mean it is a mafia show at the end of the day, i don't think that the characters are going to be very honest or loyal to God. I implore everyone to watch this show because believe me, you'll be hooked from the very first episode, i was and i have even gotten a few friends who had firstly refused to watch the show, hooked on it. Trust me when i say that this show is a Godsend compared to the crap that comes on T.V. After you've watched the first season, you'll inevitably agree with me when i once again say that this show dominates Television, and no T.V show current or future will ever upstage the marvel that is The Sopranos. Now i have read some [[inauspicious]] [[exam]] for this [[exposition]] on this website and [[altogether]] frankly I'm appalled. [[In]] [[someone]] to even [[thoughts]] that the Sopranos is not [[Tv]] then i'm [[worried]] i don't know what the [[monde]] has come to. [[Letting]] me [[say]] u [[algo]]. I [[initiates]] watching many [[ton]].V shows like [[Forfeited]], [[Imprisoned]] [[Blackout]], [[Dex]], Deadwood and [[yet]] [[Invasions]]. But all of those [[exposition]] [[forfeited]] their [[toque]] after the [[fiirst]] season, [[specifically]] Lost and [[Imprisoned]] [[Rupture]] which i [[reject]] to watch because the [[societies]] [[picked]] 2 [[engineering]] ideas and [[gunned]] them by making more than one season. Then we have The Sopranos. I can [[plainly]] say that this is the only [[tv]] series that i have ever watched where i have been [[fascinated]] in all of its season, and more importantly all of its [[bouts]]. There is no department that this [[spectacle]] doesn't excel in. Acting- [[Nada]] [[succinct]] of superb. James Gandolfini is one of my [[preferential]] actors and i feel that his acting is [[completely]] [[breathless]] in every episode, after i heard that HBO [[wants]] Ray Liotta to [[gaming]] Tony i felt that it would've been the better [[choices]], however after watching the first few episodes, i knew that HBO had [[performed]] a great job in [[moulding]] James as Tony. The raw emotion he [[showings]] is superb. Then we have everyone else, Edie Falco, Michael Imperioli, Lorraine Bracco, Dominic Chianese (whom i remembered as Johnny Ola in the Godfather Part 2) and my personal two favourite characters Tony Sirico and Steve Van Zandt Paulie 'Walnuts' Gualtieri and Silvio Dante. All of these actors perform to the best quality, and all giving an excellent performance in each episode. Then we have the [[conte]], never have i been so sucked into a T.V show before. The story is [[anything]] short of excellent. Each episode is directed superbly and the Score of this show is just fantastic. I feel that The Sopranos is one show that i can watch again and again and never get bored of. Its got everything from hilarious humour to brutal violence, but nonetheless it is and will always be the best thing to ever grace the Television, and I challenge anyone to find a real flaw in the show. Not just say its too violent, or they feel that the character of Tony is immoral, i mean it is a mafia show at the end of the day, i don't think that the characters are going to be very honest or loyal to God. I implore everyone to watch this show because believe me, you'll be hooked from the very first episode, i was and i have even gotten a few friends who had firstly refused to watch the show, hooked on it. Trust me when i say that this show is a Godsend compared to the crap that comes on T.V. After you've watched the first season, you'll inevitably agree with me when i once again say that this show dominates Television, and no T.V show current or future will ever upstage the marvel that is The Sopranos. --------------------------------------------- Result 5836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] OK.... I just have 3 [[words]] - [[cheesy]], cheesy and CHEESY! The only [[redeeming]] [[feature]] of this [[movie]] is Dean Cain. Other than that - it's CHEESEBALL [[SUPREME]]!!!!

The [[movie]] DOES have some [[promise]] in the [[concept]] - an [[underground]] [[lab]] creates a [[real]] live fire [[breathing]] dragon - basically giving us more of "Jurassic Park" [[meets]] "[[Reign]] of Fire"..... There are some [[great]] [[possibilities]], but they just don't follow through.... The [[special]] [[effects]] are decent - even [[though]] you KNOW the dragon is CGI, it doesn't [[horribly]] LOOK like CGI....

I wouldn't lay the blame on Dean Cain ([[although]] he IS one of the [[producers]]), I'd lay more of the blame on [[Phillip]] Roth - the director and writer. It's HIS job to make this film.... and, unfortunately, he [[failed]]. OK.... I just have 3 [[phrase]] - [[dorky]], cheesy and CHEESY! The only [[redeem]] [[characteristic]] of this [[filmmaking]] is Dean Cain. Other than that - it's CHEESEBALL [[HIGHER]]!!!!

The [[filmmaking]] DOES have some [[promising]] in the [[concepts]] - an [[subterranean]] [[labs]] creates a [[true]] live fire [[breath]] dragon - basically giving us more of "Jurassic Park" [[conforms]] "[[Reigned]] of Fire"..... There are some [[grand]] [[chances]], but they just don't follow through.... The [[especial]] [[impact]] are decent - even [[while]] you KNOW the dragon is CGI, it doesn't [[terribly]] LOOK like CGI....

I wouldn't lay the blame on Dean Cain ([[whereas]] he IS one of the [[maker]]), I'd lay more of the blame on [[Philipe]] Roth - the director and writer. It's HIS job to make this film.... and, unfortunately, he [[faulted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Takashi]] Miike is one of my favorite directors and I was [[worried]] about him doing a [[kids]] [[film]], because I [[would]] hate to [[see]] him [[depart]] from his films I came to love: Visitor Q, Gozu, Izo, Ichi the killer and Black Socioty Trilogy. [[Lately]] he seems to be [[exploring]] [[new]] territory and I think he's succeeding. [[Still]] this was the first of his [[films]] I'd seen him take that direction, so I was nervous. Of coarse I [[bought]] it without [[seeing]] it and was [[glad]] I did.

Great Yokai [[War]] is a [[perfect]] [[kids]] [[film]] and adults should like it too. The [[whole]] [[film]] [[reminded]] me so much of the [[movies]] I [[loved]] as a [[child]]: [[Neverending]] story, [[Labyrinth]], [[Return]] to [[Oz]], etc. I [[enjoyed]] those [[films]] because they didn't [[treat]] [[kids]] like they're [[stupid]] and this one doesn't either. The dark underlying [[morals]] are there, but, it's [[also]] as silly as any [[kids]] [[film]] should be. I personally wasn't [[bothered]] by the CGI and [[prosthetics]]. I feel like they [[fit]] well and don't [[think]] [[kids]] will [[notice]].

If you are a [[die]] [[hard]] Takashi Miike [[fan]], you [[may]] not [[like]] this one. But, I [[suggest]] giving it a shot. It [[proves]] that Miike is as diverse and talented as I [[suspected]] he is. He [[also]] [[continues]] to make his [[signature]] Miike films outside of these ones, which is very reassuring.

To those people that are new to Takashi Miike and [[want]] [[something]] light hearted or [[dramatic]] like this one, I [[suggest]] these other Miike [[films]]: 'Zebraman' 'The Happiness of the Katakuris' 'Sabu' and 'The Bird People in China.'

Good [[job]] Takashi Miike! 8/10 stars. [[Hau]] Miike is one of my favorite directors and I was [[alarmed]] about him doing a [[brats]] [[movies]], because I [[should]] hate to [[behold]] him [[departing]] from his films I came to love: Visitor Q, Gozu, Izo, Ichi the killer and Black Socioty Trilogy. [[Newly]] he seems to be [[explored]] [[novo]] territory and I think he's succeeding. [[However]] this was the first of his [[cinematography]] I'd seen him take that direction, so I was nervous. Of coarse I [[buying]] it without [[see]] it and was [[happier]] I did.

Great Yokai [[Warfare]] is a [[flawless]] [[children]] [[movie]] and adults should like it too. The [[entire]] [[cinematography]] [[reminding]] me so much of the [[cinematography]] I [[worshipped]] as a [[kids]]: [[Infinite]] story, [[Maze]], [[Returns]] to [[Ounces]], etc. I [[appreciated]] those [[kino]] because they didn't [[processed]] [[child]] like they're [[nonsensical]] and this one doesn't either. The dark underlying [[morality]] are there, but, it's [[furthermore]] as silly as any [[youths]] [[cinematic]] should be. I personally wasn't [[inconvenienced]] by the CGI and [[prosthesis]]. I feel like they [[fitting]] well and don't [[believe]] [[youths]] will [[avis]].

If you are a [[killed]] [[arduous]] Takashi Miike [[ventilator]], you [[maggio]] not [[iike]] this one. But, I [[propose]] giving it a shot. It [[testify]] that Miike is as diverse and talented as I [[presumed]] he is. He [[apart]] [[continuing]] to make his [[firma]] Miike films outside of these ones, which is very reassuring.

To those people that are new to Takashi Miike and [[wants]] [[anything]] light hearted or [[remarkable]] like this one, I [[suggests]] these other Miike [[movies]]: 'Zebraman' 'The Happiness of the Katakuris' 'Sabu' and 'The Bird People in China.'

Good [[labour]] Takashi Miike! 8/10 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 5838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This short was [[nominated]] for an Academy [[Award]] and I wish it had won! Basically a filmed jam session between some very talented musicians, including Lester Young and Joe Jones, the music is [[incredible]]! Hollywood quite [[often]] embraced Jazz (particularly animation, believe it or not) but this is a rare look on film at an improvisational jam. This has been added to the Film Preservation list and deservedly so. TCM runs this as filler periodically and runs it every March sometime for its' "31 Days of Oscar" tribute. From downtown at the buzzer, swish, [[nothing]] but net and the shot's so smooth, the net barely moved. Most [[solidly]] and [[highly]] [[recommended]]!!! This short was [[appointing]] for an Academy [[Awarding]] and I wish it had won! Basically a filmed jam session between some very talented musicians, including Lester Young and Joe Jones, the music is [[unthinkable]]! Hollywood quite [[ordinarily]] embraced Jazz (particularly animation, believe it or not) but this is a rare look on film at an improvisational jam. This has been added to the Film Preservation list and deservedly so. TCM runs this as filler periodically and runs it every March sometime for its' "31 Days of Oscar" tribute. From downtown at the buzzer, swish, [[anything]] but net and the shot's so smooth, the net barely moved. Most [[strongly]] and [[vastly]] [[suggested]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Panic in the Streets" is a fairly unknown little movie from director Elia Kazan and was made before his classic masterpieces such as "A Streetcar Named Desire", "On the Waterfront" and "East of Eden". Kazan already won an Oscar in 1947, before this movie, so he was not a completely unknown at the time. Still "Panic in the Streets" is mostly a movie that passed under the radar.

The great thing about this movie is the Oscar winning script. It has a very good concept and its excellent tense thriller material with a sniff of crime/film-noir elements. The dialog in this movie is also absolutely magnificent and gives the movie a feel of reality and credibility.

The cast is fairly unknown (especially at the time it was released) but it still features Zero Mostel and Jack Palance in one of their first movie roles. Especially Palance impresses as the tough gangster boss, with a very powerful looking face.

Still the movie drags a little at some points. The movie starts of very well but after the start the movie slows down and does not always makes the right decisions in terms of pace and the point of view the story is told from.

Yet, "Panic in the Streets" remains a perfectly watchable movie, mainly due to its solid script and powerful dialog that makes the movie a believable one to watch. For fans of the thriller genre this is a great movie to watch.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] This [[film]] [[reminds]] me of how college students used to protest against the Vietnam War. As if, upon hearing some kids were doing without cheeseburgers in Cow Dung Collehe, the President was going to immediately change all US foreign policy.

The [[worst]] thing is that, while dangerous, the concept of a policy based on if the USSR and US went to war it could mean the end of the world, WORKED. The US and USSR NEVER WENT TO WAR.

Had we only conventional weapons, the notion of yet another war, a "win-able" war, in Europe and Asia was not unthinkable.

Not that I think they should get rid of this movie. It should be seen by film students as a splendid example of "How NOT to make a film."

It should be 0 stars or maybe black holes... This [[filmmaking]] [[recall]] me of how college students used to protest against the Vietnam War. As if, upon hearing some kids were doing without cheeseburgers in Cow Dung Collehe, the President was going to immediately change all US foreign policy.

The [[meanest]] thing is that, while dangerous, the concept of a policy based on if the USSR and US went to war it could mean the end of the world, WORKED. The US and USSR NEVER WENT TO WAR.

Had we only conventional weapons, the notion of yet another war, a "win-able" war, in Europe and Asia was not unthinkable.

Not that I think they should get rid of this movie. It should be seen by film students as a splendid example of "How NOT to make a film."

It should be 0 stars or maybe black holes... --------------------------------------------- Result 5841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Saxophonist Ronnie Bowers ([[Dick]] Powell) wins a studio contract and goes to Hollywood. He stays at Hollywwod Hotel (of course). At the same time big egotistical star Mona Marshall (Lola Lane) has a tantrum and refuses to attend the premiere of her new picture. In a panic the studio hires lookalike Virginia (Rosemary Lane) to impersonate her and have Bowers take her to the premiere NOT telling him it's not Marshall. [[Naturally]] they fall in love. You can pretty much figure out the rest of the plot yourself.

The plot is old (to put it nicely) but Powell and Rosemary Lane make a very likable pair and have beautiful singing voices. The score is good (highlighted by "Hooray for Hollywood") and director Busby Berkeley shows off his unique visuals in a really fun drive-in musical sequence (with Edgar Kennedy doing his patented slow burn). Also Glenda Farrell has a few funny bits as Monas sister Jonesie.

Still the movie isn't that good. The rest of the cast mugs ferociously and most of the humor is just not funny. Lola Lane especially is just lousy trying to play Mona for comedy. Also there is racism--a stereotypical black maid is played for laughs and there's some truly appalling racist "humor" at one point. That's probably what keeps this off TV most of the time. I realize it was accepted at the time but it comes across as revolting today.

All in all a so-so movie with some serious problems helped by a good cast and some great songs. I [[give]] it a 7. Saxophonist Ronnie Bowers ([[Penis]] Powell) wins a studio contract and goes to Hollywood. He stays at Hollywwod Hotel (of course). At the same time big egotistical star Mona Marshall (Lola Lane) has a tantrum and refuses to attend the premiere of her new picture. In a panic the studio hires lookalike Virginia (Rosemary Lane) to impersonate her and have Bowers take her to the premiere NOT telling him it's not Marshall. [[Evidently]] they fall in love. You can pretty much figure out the rest of the plot yourself.

The plot is old (to put it nicely) but Powell and Rosemary Lane make a very likable pair and have beautiful singing voices. The score is good (highlighted by "Hooray for Hollywood") and director Busby Berkeley shows off his unique visuals in a really fun drive-in musical sequence (with Edgar Kennedy doing his patented slow burn). Also Glenda Farrell has a few funny bits as Monas sister Jonesie.

Still the movie isn't that good. The rest of the cast mugs ferociously and most of the humor is just not funny. Lola Lane especially is just lousy trying to play Mona for comedy. Also there is racism--a stereotypical black maid is played for laughs and there's some truly appalling racist "humor" at one point. That's probably what keeps this off TV most of the time. I realize it was accepted at the time but it comes across as revolting today.

All in all a so-so movie with some serious problems helped by a good cast and some great songs. I [[lend]] it a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 5842 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I must have been only 11 when [[Mr]] Peepers [[started]]. It was a [[must]] see for the whole [[family]], I [[believe]] on [[Sun]]. nights. [[Repeating]] gags were Rob opening his locker (he had to use a yardstick or pointer to gage the right spot on another locker and do some other things, finally kicking the spot whereupon his door would open), and taking pins out of a new shirt(at the start of an episode he would open up a package with a new dress shirt and for the rest of the [[show]] be finding one pin after another that he missed when unwrapping the shirt, timing was everything and the pins got lots of laughs.) I remember an aunt that drove a Rio like Jack Benny and always wanted "Sonny" to Say something scientific. He would think and come up with "semi permeable membrane" or osmosis causing her to say how brilliant he was. (you had to have been there). Marion Lorne stole the show every time she was on screen. Why they didn't continue the series from her POV when Wally quit (he was afraid he was being typecast but by then it was way too late)I'll never know. I saw somewhere that the 1st TV wedding (big one anyway) was Tiny Tim on the Carson show. Horsecocky. It was Rob and Nancy (did I ever have the hots for her) and I remember it made the cover of TV Guide and got press in all the papers and major magazines. A trip to the Museum of Broadcasting in NYC years ago was disappointing in that they had very few episodes then and those might be gone now. I still [[remember]] it as [[wonderful]] and wish I had been a little [[older]]. I must have been only 11 when [[Herr]] Peepers [[launching]]. It was a [[ought]] see for the whole [[familial]], I [[reckon]] on [[Suen]]. nights. [[Rehearsing]] gags were Rob opening his locker (he had to use a yardstick or pointer to gage the right spot on another locker and do some other things, finally kicking the spot whereupon his door would open), and taking pins out of a new shirt(at the start of an episode he would open up a package with a new dress shirt and for the rest of the [[display]] be finding one pin after another that he missed when unwrapping the shirt, timing was everything and the pins got lots of laughs.) I remember an aunt that drove a Rio like Jack Benny and always wanted "Sonny" to Say something scientific. He would think and come up with "semi permeable membrane" or osmosis causing her to say how brilliant he was. (you had to have been there). Marion Lorne stole the show every time she was on screen. Why they didn't continue the series from her POV when Wally quit (he was afraid he was being typecast but by then it was way too late)I'll never know. I saw somewhere that the 1st TV wedding (big one anyway) was Tiny Tim on the Carson show. Horsecocky. It was Rob and Nancy (did I ever have the hots for her) and I remember it made the cover of TV Guide and got press in all the papers and major magazines. A trip to the Museum of Broadcasting in NYC years ago was disappointing in that they had very few episodes then and those might be gone now. I still [[remind]] it as [[wondrous]] and wish I had been a little [[aged]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5843 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have to admit when I went to see this [[movie]], I didn't really have high expectations. But even with my low [[expectations]] I was [[totally]] and [[utterly]] [[disappointed]]...

Basically Luke Wilson is a [[hot]] shot who tends to go out with slightly crazy girlfriends. There's slight mention of a girl stalking him but that's pretty much it for that [[character]]. Which i don't [[quite]] mind cause it [[would]] probably be just as underdeveloped as the rest of the movie.

So while on a subway Rainn Wilson (who i [[actually]] liked before this movie) convinces him to talk to a "hot" girl, Uma Thurman. This is [[strange]] to say the [[least]], as everyone can [[clearly]] see that Uma Thurman does not [[belong]] under the category of "[[hot]]".

Rainn Wilson's performance is also far from "[[hot]]". [[Normally]] I'm all for his acting, but [[even]] he couldn't [[salvage]] this movie. His character was jumpy, [[unrealistic]] and rather annoying. You [[could]] never [[tell]] if the [[writers]] were [[trying]] to make him the [[comical]] token closet gay [[guy]], or just desperate. It was [[almost]] painful.

But anyway, [[someone]] steals her [[purse]] as she goes to leave the subway, and [[Luke]] Wilson being the charming savior he is runs after the [[robber]]. Now we all know that [[Uma]] Thurman is the superhero, or "G-Girl" as they like to call her in the [[movie]]. It [[still]] [[baffles]] me as to what the "[[G]]" stands for, but we'll leave that for the [[message]] boards to [[debate]].

The sex scenes I assume are [[supposed]] to be funny, but I find myself [[asking]] who has [[sex]] like that? They [[nearly]] throw the bed through the [[wall]] because of Uma Thurman's "passion" let's say. It makes my [[head]] [[hurt]], but not in the "I'm thinking really hard to [[understand]] this" [[way]].

When Uma insults [[Anna]] Faris, calling her a "[[whore]]" I had no debate with that. Apart from the [[fact]] that she can't [[choose]] [[movies]] [[properly]], she can't act and relies souly on the [[fact]] that she's [[blonde]] and [[typical]].

Overall I would've walked out of the theater if i hadn't paid $8.75 to see it. The characters are typical and have absolutely no chemistry, especially Uma Thurman. Someone should let her know that just because you move your head a lot doesn't mean you're acting.

Also, the script and storyline could've used either a lot of work or a match and some lighter fluid. I actually started to feel embarrassed for the actors, and their dying careers. Overall, if you value your money, and your self respect do NOT waste your time with this pathetic attempt at a movie. I have to admit when I went to see this [[filmmaking]], I didn't really have high expectations. But even with my low [[predictions]] I was [[altogether]] and [[totally]] [[frustrating]]...

Basically Luke Wilson is a [[sexy]] shot who tends to go out with slightly crazy girlfriends. There's slight mention of a girl stalking him but that's pretty much it for that [[trait]]. Which i don't [[rather]] mind cause it [[should]] probably be just as underdeveloped as the rest of the movie.

So while on a subway Rainn Wilson (who i [[genuinely]] liked before this movie) convinces him to talk to a "hot" girl, Uma Thurman. This is [[weird]] to say the [[less]], as everyone can [[openly]] see that Uma Thurman does not [[belongs]] under the category of "[[sexy]]".

Rainn Wilson's performance is also far from "[[sexiest]]". [[Routinely]] I'm all for his acting, but [[yet]] he couldn't [[salvaging]] this movie. His character was jumpy, [[impractical]] and rather annoying. You [[did]] never [[telling]] if the [[authors]] were [[tempting]] to make him the [[hilarious]] token closet gay [[dude]], or just desperate. It was [[hardly]] painful.

But anyway, [[everyone]] steals her [[bags]] as she goes to leave the subway, and [[Matty]] Wilson being the charming savior he is runs after the [[thief]]. Now we all know that [[Amu]] Thurman is the superhero, or "G-Girl" as they like to call her in the [[filmmaking]]. It [[however]] [[puzzles]] me as to what the "[[gs]]" stands for, but we'll leave that for the [[messaging]] boards to [[discussion]].

The sex scenes I assume are [[suspected]] to be funny, but I find myself [[wondering]] who has [[sexuality]] like that? They [[practically]] throw the bed through the [[mur]] because of Uma Thurman's "passion" let's say. It makes my [[chief]] [[injure]], but not in the "I'm thinking really hard to [[understanding]] this" [[pathway]].

When Uma insults [[Anne]] Faris, calling her a "[[bitch]]" I had no debate with that. Apart from the [[facto]] that she can't [[elect]] [[theater]] [[appropriately]], she can't act and relies souly on the [[facto]] that she's [[blond]] and [[classic]].

Overall I would've walked out of the theater if i hadn't paid $8.75 to see it. The characters are typical and have absolutely no chemistry, especially Uma Thurman. Someone should let her know that just because you move your head a lot doesn't mean you're acting.

Also, the script and storyline could've used either a lot of work or a match and some lighter fluid. I actually started to feel embarrassed for the actors, and their dying careers. Overall, if you value your money, and your self respect do NOT waste your time with this pathetic attempt at a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5844 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This movie is not schlock, despite the lo fi production and its link to Troma productions. A dark [[fable]] for adults. Exploitation is a [[theme]] of Sugar Cookies, and one wonders if the cast has not fallen prey to said [[theme]]. A [[weird]] [[movie]] with enticing visuals: shadows and contrast are prominent. [[Definitely]] worth a look, [[especially]] from fans of Warhol and [[stylish]] [[decadence]]. Through all the [[cruelty]] and wickedness, a moral, albeit [[twisted]], can be gleamed. This movie is not schlock, despite the lo fi production and its link to Troma productions. A dark [[myth]] for adults. Exploitation is a [[subject]] of Sugar Cookies, and one wonders if the cast has not fallen prey to said [[topics]]. A [[odd]] [[kino]] with enticing visuals: shadows and contrast are prominent. [[Decidedly]] worth a look, [[namely]] from fans of Warhol and [[stylishly]] [[decomposition]]. Through all the [[inhumanity]] and wickedness, a moral, albeit [[deformed]], can be gleamed. --------------------------------------------- Result 5845 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] LOL! Not a bad [[way]] to [[start]] it. I thought this was original, but then I discovered it was a clone of the 1976 [[remake]] of KING KONG. I never saw [[KING]] [[KONG]] until I was 15. I [[saw]] this film when I was 9. The film's funky disco music will [[get]] [[stuck]] in your head! Not to mention the film's theme song by the Yetians. This is the [[worst]] creature [[effects]] I've ever seen. [[At]] the same [[time]] this film remains a holy grail of B-movies. Memorable quotes: "Take a tranquilizer and go to [[bed]]." "Put the Yeti in your [[tank]] and you have Yeti power." I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this film on MOVIE MACRABE hosted by Elvira. There is one scene where it was like KING [[KONG]] in [[reverse]]! [[In]] KING [[KONG]] he [[grabs]] the [[girl]] and [[climbs]] up the [[building]], but in this [[film]] he [[climbs]] down the [[building]] and grabs the [[girl]] (who was [[falling]])! [[Also]] [[around]] that [[year]] was another [[KONG]] [[clone]] MIGHTY [[PEKING]] [[MAN]] (1977) which [[came]] from Hong [[Kong]]. There is a lot of traveling matte scenes and motorized body parts. This [[film]] will [[leave]] you laughing. It is like I [[said]], just another KING [[KONG]] [[clone]]. Rated PG for violence, [[language]], thematic elements, and some scary scenes. LOL! Not a bad [[paths]] to [[cranking]] it. I thought this was original, but then I discovered it was a clone of the 1976 [[redo]] of KING KONG. I never saw [[EMPEROR]] [[HONG]] until I was 15. I [[noticed]] this film when I was 9. The film's funky disco music will [[obtain]] [[prude]] in your head! Not to mention the film's theme song by the Yetians. This is the [[meanest]] creature [[influence]] I've ever seen. [[In]] the same [[times]] this film remains a holy grail of B-movies. Memorable quotes: "Take a tranquilizer and go to [[bedside]]." "Put the Yeti in your [[reservoir]] and you have Yeti power." I [[remind]] [[see]] this film on MOVIE MACRABE hosted by Elvira. There is one scene where it was like KING [[HONG]] in [[versa]]! [[During]] KING [[HONG]] he [[grab]] the [[girls]] and [[soar]] up the [[construction]], but in this [[filmmaking]] he [[ascent]] down the [[build]] and grabs the [[dame]] (who was [[declining]])! [[Additionally]] [[about]] that [[annum]] was another [[HONG]] [[clones]] MIGHTY [[BEIJING]] [[DUDE]] (1977) which [[became]] from Hong [[Hong]]. There is a lot of traveling matte scenes and motorized body parts. This [[filmmaking]] will [[let]] you laughing. It is like I [[say]], just another KING [[HK]] [[clones]]. Rated PG for violence, [[parlance]], thematic elements, and some scary scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Scary, but mostly in the sense that will it be over before I turn 70. I [[saw]] this as a late night re-run in about 1976 and [[thought]] it would never end. Like crackers, it's better than [[nothing]] (but just).

[[Ray]] Milland is a little scary because he looks as if he's been stuffed by a taxidermist. Yvette Mimeux looks as if she's [[smoked]] up all the Beautiful [[Downtown]] Burbank Brown.

It's a [[sort]] of [[Roy]] [[Rogers]] [[version]] of Rosemary's [[Baby]]. This is one [[turkey]] that should never have been made. [[If]] you have [[insomnia]] and it's 1:30 on Saturday morning and there's [[nothing]] on but replays of the 1972 Roller Derby Chamionship, then I guess it beats that. But God help you if this is your only choice for entertainment. Scary, but mostly in the sense that will it be over before I turn 70. I [[noticed]] this as a late night re-run in about 1976 and [[thinks]] it would never end. Like crackers, it's better than [[anything]] (but just).

[[Gleam]] Milland is a little scary because he looks as if he's been stuffed by a taxidermist. Yvette Mimeux looks as if she's [[fume]] up all the Beautiful [[Midtown]] Burbank Brown.

It's a [[genre]] of [[Rowe]] [[Rodgers]] [[stepping]] of Rosemary's [[Honey]]. This is one [[ankara]] that should never have been made. [[Though]] you have [[drowsiness]] and it's 1:30 on Saturday morning and there's [[nada]] on but replays of the 1972 Roller Derby Chamionship, then I guess it beats that. But God help you if this is your only choice for entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 5847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not only was this movie better than all the final season of H:LOTS. But it was better than any movie made for TV I have ever seen!

Looking at the "Top 250" I see that only one small screen movie has made it: How the Grinch Stole Christmas. I think it is time to increase that group to 2.

I will admit that the original series had several shows that were better than this, but I didn't mind. I just LOVED being able to enter the world of the Baltimore Homicide Squad again! --------------------------------------------- Result 5848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] The [[movie]] 'Gung Ho!': The Story of Carlson's Makin [[Island]] Raiders was made in 1943 with a [[view]] to [[go]] up the moral of American people at the duration of second world [[war]]. It [[shows]] with the [[better]] [[way]] that the [[cinema]] can [[constitute]] [[body]] of [[propaganda]]. The value of this [[film]] is only [[collection]] and no artistic. In a [[film]] of [[propaganda]] it is [[useless]] to judge [[direction]] and [[actors]]. Watch that movie if you are interested to learn how [[propaganda]] [[functions]] in the [[movies]] or if you are a [[big]] [[fun]] of [[Robert]] Mitchum who has a [[small]] role in the film. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a film for the [[second]] [[world]] [[war]], they [[exist]] much better and objective. I rated it 4/10. The [[filmmaking]] 'Gung Ho!': The Story of Carlson's Makin [[Isla]] Raiders was made in 1943 with a [[vista]] to [[going]] up the moral of American people at the duration of second world [[warfare]]. It [[displays]] with the [[optimum]] [[ways]] that the [[filmmaking]] can [[constitutes]] [[agencies]] of [[publicity]]. The value of this [[filmmaking]] is only [[collects]] and no artistic. In a [[filmmaking]] of [[publicity]] it is [[unnecessary]] to judge [[directorate]] and [[players]]. Watch that movie if you are interested to learn how [[publicize]] [[functioning]] in the [[filmmaking]] or if you are a [[mammoth]] [[entertaining]] of [[Roberta]] Mitchum who has a [[petite]] role in the film. [[Though]] you [[wish]] to [[consults]] a film for the [[secondly]] [[monde]] [[warfare]], they [[existent]] much better and objective. I rated it 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A failure. The movie was just not good. It has humor that 5 year olds that will not even giggle at. I mean, sure, some parts were amusing, but most of it is not. Lindsey Lohan is a great actress (and a bad singer,) and she should be working on better movies. The movie should have been aired as a Disney Channel original movie, that is FREE.

The only thing that was well done about this movie was the music. Nothing like a remade rock soundtrack to brighten up your day. These songs are so good. Especially Alyson and Amanda's Walking On Sunshine and Caleigh Peter's, Beach Boy song, Fun Fun Fun.

4 out of 10. If I gave it a ten, 9 of that would be the music and 1 will be the movie. Not worth your money, but the soundtrack is. --------------------------------------------- Result 5850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It's funny how your [[life]] can [[change]] in a second... To attend ''The Waterdance'' for the first [[time]] it was an unforgettable experience, the way you need to get [[used]] to a new way of life it can seem frightening, and to notice that there are other people [[going]] by a similar situation it can [[help]] you to [[go]] on.

Eric Stoltz's performances and [[mainly]] of Helen Hunt (oh man!, Helen is the purest and graceful woman in earth...) are wonderful, Wesley Snipes [[also]] [[surprises]] in one of your [[last]] [[serious]] [[roles]]. A [[film]] [[simple]] and at the same [[time]] deep that doesn't [[get]] to leave us [[indifferent]] to the message that is [[transmitted]]: enjoy each [[moment]] of your [[life]]...

[[Really]] to a [[film]] as that the any [[hour]] is not [[attended]]!!! (sorry, it's a Brazilian expression...). It's funny how your [[vida]] can [[amend]] in a second... To attend ''The Waterdance'' for the first [[moment]] it was an unforgettable experience, the way you need to get [[using]] to a new way of life it can seem frightening, and to notice that there are other people [[gonna]] by a similar situation it can [[supporting]] you to [[going]] on.

Eric Stoltz's performances and [[fundamentally]] of Helen Hunt (oh man!, Helen is the purest and graceful woman in earth...) are wonderful, Wesley Snipes [[similarly]] [[stuns]] in one of your [[final]] [[gravest]] [[functions]]. A [[flick]] [[simpler]] and at the same [[period]] deep that doesn't [[gets]] to leave us [[uninterested]] to the message that is [[forwarded]]: enjoy each [[time]] of your [[living]]...

[[Genuinely]] to a [[kino]] as that the any [[hora]] is not [[attend]]!!! (sorry, it's a Brazilian expression...). --------------------------------------------- Result 5851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What's that there in the [[skies]]? Is it a [[plane]]? Is it Superman?? [[Errr]], no… It's a TURTLE!?! See, that's what becomes of the [[Cold]] War! Nothing but [[bad]] news and other issues! The [[Americans]] shoot down a Russian [[combat]] [[plane]] somewhere over Artic territory and the subsequent explosion defrosts & literally awakens the [[giant]] prehistoric turtle-creature named Gammera. He/she is not a very friendly critter as it promptly ensues to [[destroy]] everything and [[everyone]] on its [[path]]. The arguing [[governments]] [[finally]] [[decide]] to [[kill]] the ugly bastard with a [[brand]] new and super-sophisticated ice-bomb, but Gammera has another [[surprise]] in store… The [[damn]] turtle can [[fly]]! The first [[time]] this [[happens]] [[results]] in a [[tremendously]] [[grotesque]] and [[hilarious]] [[sequence]]! Gammera [[lies]] on his back looking defeated when [[suddenly]] fire blows from his armpits and he skyrockets himself up in the air. How can you not [[love]] that? Then there's [[also]] a [[dire]] sub plot about an annoying [[kid]] who's able to telepathically [[communicate]] with the [[monster]], but that's just not interesting enough. Flying turtle, people!! There's very [[little]] else to [[write]] about this Japanese (and [[American]] re-edited) Sci-Fi [[effort]], apart from that it's an [[obvious]] and [[totally]] [[shameless]] rip-off of such classics [[like]] the [[original]] Godzilla and The Beast from 20.000 Fathoms. The [[effects]] and monster [[designs]] are extremely hokey and, unlike the [[aforementioned]] [[films]], it never succeeds in [[creating]] an apocalyptic ambiance. [[Respectable]] [[actors]] like Brian Donlevy ("The Quatermass [[Experiment]]") and [[Dick]] O'Neill ("Wolfen") [[seem]] unaware of what [[film]] set they're on and [[even]] the [[original]] Japanese mayhem-scenes aren't very convincing. Gammera's very own and personalized theme-song is [[rather]] cool, [[though]], so it gets one [[extra]] point for that. What's that there in the [[ciel]]? Is it a [[planes]]? Is it Superman?? [[Ummm]], no… It's a TURTLE!?! See, that's what becomes of the [[Chilly]] War! Nothing but [[negative]] news and other issues! The [[America]] shoot down a Russian [[struggle]] [[airplane]] somewhere over Artic territory and the subsequent explosion defrosts & literally awakens the [[titan]] prehistoric turtle-creature named Gammera. He/she is not a very friendly critter as it promptly ensues to [[destroys]] everything and [[someone]] on its [[pathway]]. The arguing [[authorities]] [[ultimately]] [[decides]] to [[assassination]] the ugly bastard with a [[trademark]] new and super-sophisticated ice-bomb, but Gammera has another [[amazement]] in store… The [[goddamn]] turtle can [[steal]]! The first [[period]] this [[arrives]] [[consequences]] in a [[extremely]] [[farcical]] and [[fun]] [[sequences]]! Gammera [[lying]] on his back looking defeated when [[unexpectedly]] fire blows from his armpits and he skyrockets himself up in the air. How can you not [[amour]] that? Then there's [[furthermore]] a [[catastrophic]] sub plot about an annoying [[kids]] who's able to telepathically [[interacting]] with the [[creature]], but that's just not interesting enough. Flying turtle, people!! There's very [[small]] else to [[writes]] about this Japanese (and [[Americana]] re-edited) Sci-Fi [[endeavors]], apart from that it's an [[observable]] and [[absolutely]] [[impudent]] rip-off of such classics [[iike]] the [[preliminary]] Godzilla and The Beast from 20.000 Fathoms. The [[consequences]] and monster [[designing]] are extremely hokey and, unlike the [[above]] [[filmmaking]], it never succeeds in [[establish]] an apocalyptic ambiance. [[Honorable]] [[players]] like Brian Donlevy ("The Quatermass [[Experiences]]") and [[Pecker]] O'Neill ("Wolfen") [[seems]] unaware of what [[flick]] set they're on and [[yet]] the [[initial]] Japanese mayhem-scenes aren't very convincing. Gammera's very own and personalized theme-song is [[fairly]] cool, [[although]], so it gets one [[supplemental]] point for that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was so good. Leon Phelps is hilarious. I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!! I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Master director Ching Siu Tung's perhaps most popular achievement is this series, A Chinese Ghost [[Story]] 1-3. Chinese [[Ghost]] Story stars Leslie [[Cheung]] in some distant past in [[China]] as a tax collector who is [[forced]] to [[spend]] a [[night]] during his "[[collecting]] [[trip]]" in a [[mysterious]] castle in which some [[strange]] [[old]] warriors [[fight]] and [[meet]] him. [[Beautiful]] actress Joey Wang/Wong is the ghost who lives in that castle and is under a domination of one powerful demon, a wood devil who collects human souls for herself/itself with the help of her [[beautiful]] ghosts. [[Leslie]] and Joey fall in [[love]], and even [[though]] ghosts are not [[allowed]] to live with humans, they decide to break that rule and live happily together for the rest of their lives. This is not what the wood [[devil]] thinks and our [[protagonists]] have to [[fight]] for their [[lives]] and their happiness.

This film is no less full of magic than other films by Ching Siu Tung. His masterpieces include Duel to the Death (1983) and the Swordsman series, which all have incredible visuals and kinetic power in their action scenes. Ghost [[Story]] is full of [[brilliant]] lightning and dark [[atmosphere]], which is lightened by the strong presence of the beautiful and good willing ghost. The effects are [[simply]] breath [[taking]] and would work at their [[greatest]] power in the big screen. The camera is moving and twisted all the time and it adds to the fairy tale atmosphere this film has. There's plenty of wire'fu stunts, too, and even though some think they are and look gratuitous or stupid when used in films, I cannot agree and think they give motion pictures the kind of magic, freedom and creativeness any other tool could not give. When people fly in these films, it means the films are not just about our world, and they usually depict things larger than life with the power of this larger than life art form.

The story about the power of love is pretty touching and warm, but the problem is (again) that the characters are little too shallow and act unexplainably occasionally. [[Leslie]] and Joey should have been written with greater care and their characters should be even more warm, deep and genuine in order to give the story a greater power and thus make the film even more noteworthy and important achievement. Also, the message about love and power of it is underlined [[little]] too much at one point and it should have been left just to the viewer's mind to be interpreted and found. Another negative point about the dialogue is that it's too plenty and people talk in this film without a reason. That is very irritating and sadly shows the flaws many scriptwriters tend to do when they write their movies. People just talk and talk and it's all there just to make everything as easy to understand as possible and so the film is not too challenging or believable as it has this gratuitous element. Just think about the films of the Japanese film maker Takeshi Kitano; his films have very little dialogue and all there is is all the necessary as he tells his things by other tools of cinema and never talks, or makes other characters talk too much in his movies. This is just the talent the writers should have in order to [[write]] greater scripts.

Otherwise, Chinese Ghost Story is very beautiful and visually breath taking piece of Eastern cinema, and also the song that is played in the film is very beautiful and hopefully earned some award in the Hong Kong film awards back then. I give Chinese Ghost Story 7/10 and without the flaws mentioned above, this would without a doubt be almost perfect masterpiece of the fantasy genre. Master director Ching Siu Tung's perhaps most popular achievement is this series, A Chinese Ghost [[Storytelling]] 1-3. Chinese [[Phantom]] Story stars Leslie [[Jang]] in some distant past in [[Wa]] as a tax collector who is [[obliged]] to [[expenditures]] a [[overnight]] during his "[[compiling]] [[voyager]]" in a [[opaque]] castle in which some [[bizarre]] [[antigua]] warriors [[fighting]] and [[cater]] him. [[Belle]] actress Joey Wang/Wong is the ghost who lives in that castle and is under a domination of one powerful demon, a wood devil who collects human souls for herself/itself with the help of her [[excellent]] ghosts. [[Lesley]] and Joey fall in [[amour]], and even [[if]] ghosts are not [[permitted]] to live with humans, they decide to break that rule and live happily together for the rest of their lives. This is not what the wood [[daemon]] thinks and our [[players]] have to [[fought]] for their [[life]] and their happiness.

This film is no less full of magic than other films by Ching Siu Tung. His masterpieces include Duel to the Death (1983) and the Swordsman series, which all have incredible visuals and kinetic power in their action scenes. Ghost [[History]] is full of [[shiny]] lightning and dark [[mood]], which is lightened by the strong presence of the beautiful and good willing ghost. The effects are [[merely]] breath [[take]] and would work at their [[larger]] power in the big screen. The camera is moving and twisted all the time and it adds to the fairy tale atmosphere this film has. There's plenty of wire'fu stunts, too, and even though some think they are and look gratuitous or stupid when used in films, I cannot agree and think they give motion pictures the kind of magic, freedom and creativeness any other tool could not give. When people fly in these films, it means the films are not just about our world, and they usually depict things larger than life with the power of this larger than life art form.

The story about the power of love is pretty touching and warm, but the problem is (again) that the characters are little too shallow and act unexplainably occasionally. [[Lesley]] and Joey should have been written with greater care and their characters should be even more warm, deep and genuine in order to give the story a greater power and thus make the film even more noteworthy and important achievement. Also, the message about love and power of it is underlined [[tiny]] too much at one point and it should have been left just to the viewer's mind to be interpreted and found. Another negative point about the dialogue is that it's too plenty and people talk in this film without a reason. That is very irritating and sadly shows the flaws many scriptwriters tend to do when they write their movies. People just talk and talk and it's all there just to make everything as easy to understand as possible and so the film is not too challenging or believable as it has this gratuitous element. Just think about the films of the Japanese film maker Takeshi Kitano; his films have very little dialogue and all there is is all the necessary as he tells his things by other tools of cinema and never talks, or makes other characters talk too much in his movies. This is just the talent the writers should have in order to [[handwriting]] greater scripts.

Otherwise, Chinese Ghost Story is very beautiful and visually breath taking piece of Eastern cinema, and also the song that is played in the film is very beautiful and hopefully earned some award in the Hong Kong film awards back then. I give Chinese Ghost Story 7/10 and without the flaws mentioned above, this would without a doubt be almost perfect masterpiece of the fantasy genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 5854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Steely, powerful gangster supreme Frankie Diomede (the always terrific Lee Van Cleef in fine rugged form) has himself arrested and sent to prison so he can rub out a traitorous partner sans detection. Fawning goofball small-time hood and wiseguy wannabe Tony Breda (an amiable portrayal by Tony Lo Bianco) gets busted as well. Frank and Tony form an unlikely friendship behind bars. Tony helps Frank break out of the joint and assists him on his quest to exact revenge on a rival group of mobsters lead by the ruthless Louis Annunziata (smoothly played by Jean Rochefort). Director Michele Lupo, working from an absorbing script by Sergio Donati and Luciano Vincenzoni, relates the neat story at a constant brisk pace, sustains a suitably gritty, but occasionally lighthearted tone throughout, and stages the rousing action set pieces with considerable rip-snorting brio (a rough'n'tumble jailhouse shower brawl and a protracted mondo destructo car chase rate as the definite thrilling highlights). Van Cleef and Lo Bianco display a nice, loose and engaging on-screen chemistry; the relationship between their characters is alternately funny and touching. The ravishing Edwige Fenech alas isn't given much to do as Tony's whiny girlfriend Orchidea, but at least gets to bare her insanely gorgeous and voluptuous body in a much-appreciated gratuitous nude shower scene. Riz Ortolani's groovy, pulsating, syncopated funk/jazz score certainly hits the soulfully swingin' spot. The polished cinematography by Joe D'Amato and Aldo Tonti is likewise impressive. A really nifty and entertaining little winner. --------------------------------------------- Result 5855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] There are two [[reasons]] why I did not [[give]] a 1 to this movie. One reason are some of the actors (like Malcolm McDowell and Gwynyth Walsh) [[work]], who tried to play at their usually good [[level]] of acting. However at many scenes they were somehow blocked by the bad scripting.

The other reason is the cool [[idea]] and looking of the Cyborg, which is quite different to most other such roles I've [[seen]] so far.

[[Everything]] else in this movie is as [[bad]] as it can be. Boring scenes, [[useless]] and [[boring]] dialogs, [[bad]] script [[work]]. And it [[seemed]] as it was the first [[movie]] ever for [[many]] [[actors]]. It [[could]] have been an interesting story [[though]], but they [[failed]] [[completely]]. There are two [[grounds]] why I did not [[confer]] a 1 to this movie. One reason are some of the actors (like Malcolm McDowell and Gwynyth Walsh) [[collaboration]], who tried to play at their usually good [[echelon]] of acting. However at many scenes they were somehow blocked by the bad scripting.

The other reason is the cool [[thoughts]] and looking of the Cyborg, which is quite different to most other such roles I've [[noticed]] so far.

[[Entire]] else in this movie is as [[unfavourable]] as it can be. Boring scenes, [[unnecessary]] and [[dull]] dialogs, [[negative]] script [[jobs]]. And it [[appeared]] as it was the first [[filmmaking]] ever for [[countless]] [[players]]. It [[did]] have been an interesting story [[while]], but they [[faulted]] [[utterly]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5856 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I had to [[walk]] out of the [[theater]]. After an hour, all I was seeing was people [[cheating]] on [[wives]], schtupping like dogs in a rut, and using the f-word like a diabetic [[using]] Equal.

[[No]] thanks.

It was especially [[frustrating]] because the [[movie]] could have [[done]] a lot. Any one of the [[characters]] could have been quite interesting if they were given more to do than fornicate, talk about it, and [[swear]] at each other.

The few times that it looked as if there were about to be some sort of character development, all that happened was another sex scene. Plot development in the 1st hour can be summarized as 1)several murders occur, 2) Vinnie sees murder scene 3) Vinnie stares moodily across Atlantic/East/Hudson River 4) Vinnie cheats on wife, and 5) Joey (most sympathetic character in the show) gets kicked out of his parents' house. More than that, I didn't wait to see.

The photography and the interplay between the characters were superb, but THERE WAS NOTHING for them to DO. The flood of sex and [[vulgarity]] was [[hardly]] worth waiting another hour for SOMETHING to happen.

Sorry, Spike. Take some lessons from Notting Hill, or Shawshank Redemption. Either one is a better study in community and interpersonal relationships. I had to [[stroll]] out of the [[theatres]]. After an hour, all I was seeing was people [[cheat]] on [[handcuffs]], schtupping like dogs in a rut, and using the f-word like a diabetic [[used]] Equal.

[[Nos]] thanks.

It was especially [[depressing]] because the [[filmmaking]] could have [[played]] a lot. Any one of the [[trait]] could have been quite interesting if they were given more to do than fornicate, talk about it, and [[swearing]] at each other.

The few times that it looked as if there were about to be some sort of character development, all that happened was another sex scene. Plot development in the 1st hour can be summarized as 1)several murders occur, 2) Vinnie sees murder scene 3) Vinnie stares moodily across Atlantic/East/Hudson River 4) Vinnie cheats on wife, and 5) Joey (most sympathetic character in the show) gets kicked out of his parents' house. More than that, I didn't wait to see.

The photography and the interplay between the characters were superb, but THERE WAS NOTHING for them to DO. The flood of sex and [[profanity]] was [[almost]] worth waiting another hour for SOMETHING to happen.

Sorry, Spike. Take some lessons from Notting Hill, or Shawshank Redemption. Either one is a better study in community and interpersonal relationships. --------------------------------------------- Result 5857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[If]] derivative and predictable rape-revenge thrillers are your thing, then you're in for a [[rare]] treat... They don't really [[appeal]] to me, so I couldn't find any single thing to [[redeem]] this peculiar tale. It [[seems]] like [[something]] straight out of the 1980s, a [[different]] age when this would have gone straight to [[video]]. [[Gillian]] [[Anderson]] and Danny Dyer do OK [[work]] with a weak [[script]] and a [[tedious]] [[scenario]]. But what is [[Gillian]] [[Anderson]] doing [[getting]] [[involved]] with a film like this after the [[brilliance]] of her performance as [[Lady]] [[Deadlock]] in the BBC TV [[adaptation]] of Bleak House last year? The director is [[said]] to have been [[influenced]] by witnessing a near-rape and by his [[work]] on documentaries, but [[even]] that's not an [[excuse]] for the [[bizarre]] scene where a [[pack]] of [[rural]] hounds [[beat]] up Dyer. I don't [[think]] I was the only person in the [[cinema]] laughing. What I can't understand is the [[involvement]] of the companies [[behind]] this film - FilmFour and Verve [[Pictures]]. Both have been [[involved]] in some [[great]] [[independent]] British [[films]] in [[recent]] [[years]]. Verve [[distributed]] Bullet [[Boy]], [[Code]] 46 and [[Red]] [[Road]] - Straightheads doesn't [[deserve]] to be mentioned in the same [[breath]]. FilmFour and Verve take [[note]]: is this really the [[best]] you can do? What are independent British filmmakers [[going]] to make of your artistic [[judgement]]? It's a [[big]] [[blot]] on both of your reputations. Listen [[carefully]]: can you [[hear]] the thousands of [[fans]] of independent British [[films]] [[crying]] in despair? [[Though]] derivative and predictable rape-revenge thrillers are your thing, then you're in for a [[uncommon]] treat... They don't really [[appellate]] to me, so I couldn't find any single thing to [[redeeming]] this peculiar tale. It [[seem]] like [[anything]] straight out of the 1980s, a [[several]] age when this would have gone straight to [[videotaped]]. [[Katherine]] [[Andersson]] and Danny Dyer do OK [[cooperate]] with a weak [[hyphen]] and a [[tiresome]] [[scenarios]]. But what is [[Jillian]] [[Andersson]] doing [[obtain]] [[implicated]] with a film like this after the [[splendour]] of her performance as [[Ladies]] [[Stillness]] in the BBC TV [[coping]] of Bleak House last year? The director is [[told]] to have been [[affecting]] by witnessing a near-rape and by his [[jobs]] on documentaries, but [[yet]] that's not an [[apologies]] for the [[curious]] scene where a [[packaged]] of [[agrarian]] hounds [[overcame]] up Dyer. I don't [[thought]] I was the only person in the [[filmmaking]] laughing. What I can't understand is the [[participating]] of the companies [[backside]] this film - FilmFour and Verve [[Picture]]. Both have been [[implicated]] in some [[resplendent]] [[independant]] British [[filmmaking]] in [[latest]] [[ages]]. Verve [[disseminated]] Bullet [[Guys]], [[Encryption]] 46 and [[Reid]] [[Paths]] - Straightheads doesn't [[merited]] to be mentioned in the same [[respiratory]]. FilmFour and Verve take [[observes]]: is this really the [[finest]] you can do? What are independent British filmmakers [[go]] to make of your artistic [[judgements]]? It's a [[prodigious]] [[spot]] on both of your reputations. Listen [[attentively]]: can you [[heard]] the thousands of [[enthusiasts]] of independent British [[kino]] [[weeping]] in despair? --------------------------------------------- Result 5858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] There is only one thing [[essential]] to thorough [[appreciation]] of The Indian [[Runner]]. Unzip your [[trousers]]. Peek inside. Is there [[evidence]] of a Y [[chromosome]]? [[Okay]], you'll do.

This [[film]] has all the [[male]] requisites: blood, [[guns]], [[car]] [[chases]], [[fond]] [[women]], [[death]], [[multiple]] tattoos, cigarettes, [[liquor]], violence, [[pyrotechnics]] -- what have I left out? -- [[oh]], yeah, blowtorches.

As a woman, I seriously hope Sean Penn regards this as a `when I was a child...' [[kind]] of [[effort]]. [[Since]] he both [[wrote]] and [[directed]] the thing, he's [[nearly]] [[solely]] [[responsible]]. An uneven cast (Viggo Mortensen as [[usual]] demonstrating [[brilliantly]] how the job's supposed to be [[done]]) tries to [[save]] Penn. Too late. The lines and [[action]] are there. [[Even]] devoted, skilled acting can't [[change]] those.

I found this [[movie]] [[puerile]] and silly, as well as [[predictable]]. The [[dialogue]] staggers along -- Sandy [[Dennis]] has my respect for trying to [[breathe]] [[life]] into a woodenly maternal monologue without motherly authenticity. Then she [[dies]]. [[After]] a bit, so does the protagonists' father, played by Charles Bronson. Their absence is hardly noticeable.

At intervals, the pyrotechnics, etc., noted above appear to liven things up and scare the audience into thinking something significant is occurring.

If you're [[male]] and under 25, you [[may]] adore this film. [[Plan]] to return to it at 35. [[Think]] you'll still like it?

I don't think so. There is only one thing [[critical]] to thorough [[thanked]] of The Indian [[Racer]]. Unzip your [[undies]]. Peek inside. Is there [[proof]] of a Y [[chromosomes]]? [[Ok]], you'll do.

This [[filmmaking]] has all the [[masculine]] requisites: blood, [[rifles]], [[motors]] [[hunts]], [[likes]] [[woman]], [[mortality]], [[myriad]] tattoos, cigarettes, [[beverage]], violence, [[fireworks]] -- what have I left out? -- [[ahh]], yeah, blowtorches.

As a woman, I seriously hope Sean Penn regards this as a `when I was a child...' [[sort]] of [[efforts]]. [[Because]] he both [[written]] and [[geared]] the thing, he's [[almost]] [[purely]] [[accountable]]. An uneven cast (Viggo Mortensen as [[habitual]] demonstrating [[beautifully]] how the job's supposed to be [[performed]]) tries to [[rescuing]] Penn. Too late. The lines and [[measures]] are there. [[Yet]] devoted, skilled acting can't [[alteration]] those.

I found this [[filmmaking]] [[boyish]] and silly, as well as [[foreseeable]]. The [[talks]] staggers along -- Sandy [[Denis]] has my respect for trying to [[sigh]] [[vida]] into a woodenly maternal monologue without motherly authenticity. Then she [[succumbed]]. [[Upon]] a bit, so does the protagonists' father, played by Charles Bronson. Their absence is hardly noticeable.

At intervals, the pyrotechnics, etc., noted above appear to liven things up and scare the audience into thinking something significant is occurring.

If you're [[virile]] and under 25, you [[maggio]] adore this film. [[Systems]] to return to it at 35. [[Thought]] you'll still like it?

I don't think so. --------------------------------------------- Result 5859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[image]] of [[movie]] studios being financially-driven instead of creatively is not without [[truth]] (in fact, it's more true than [[false]]). This begs the question why [[Castle]] Rock Entertainment [[allowed]] Kenneth Branagh to create a full-length, uncut version of "Hamlet" with his complete creative control among other things. Of course, Branagh had to agree to some concessions (a star-studded cast, and a 2.5 hour version for wider release), but why would the film studio allow Branagh to spend money on a 4 [[hour]] version that they knew few would see? Could they have, at least in this case, had enough respect for the material and Branagh's vision to create something for only a few people? That is not a question that I can answer. Whatever the reason, this is a [[glorious]] vision for those who are willing to spend four hours watching "Hamlet." Everyone knows the story, so I will not spend much time on that. However, unlike other productions of the play, stage included, this is a completely uncut production, which has never been [[done]] before. According to some, Shakespeare never [[intended]] for the play to be [[produced]] uncut, leaving the decision of what to include to the director's discretion. That being said, I have no doubt that had he been able to see it, the Bard would have been [[overjoyed]] with Branagh's production.

The film is top-heavy with film stars, although most have mere bit parts. All play their parts [[equally]] well. I would have thought Branagh too old to play the part of Hamlet, and while he still may be, his performance more than makes up for it. Hamlet is a complex part, [[displaying]] [[every]] emotion from grief to anger, happiness to madness, and everything in between. Branagh [[nailed]] it. Derek Jacobi is [[terrific]] as the [[wily]] Claudius, [[whose]] [[deception]] and [[treachery]] sets all these things in motion; his [[unique]] [[voice]] is [[perfect]] for the role. Julie Christie is [[also]] very good as Gertrude, Hamlet's caring mother who doesn't [[realize]] what is [[going]] on until late in the [[game]].

The [[classical]] actors are cast in [[bit]] parts ([[Judi]] Dench is on for all of 60 seconds and has no lines), but at [[least]] they're in it. [[Surprisingly]], no one takes this to heart; everyone [[gives]] it their all, and it [[shows]]. Special [[mention]] has to [[go]] to [[Jack]] Lemmon and Billy [[Crystal]], who are excellent. Robin Williams is a little too silly, but he's not bad (his part is pretty small anyway).

Yet, this is undeniably Branagh's show. He adapted one of the most famous plays in history, and in so doing, he took on a whale of a project; it's impressive that he got it done, but the fact that the film is this good is a monumental achievement. What I really liked about this film is that you don't have to be a Shakespeare scholar to [[enjoy]] it. As most people know, Shakespeare is difficult to digest, but Branagh and his cast understand this. "Hamlet" is still immensely enjoyable to just sit and listen to the actors deliver the brilliant dialogue and excellent acting.

This is a must see for anyone and everyone. It may be four hours long, but it's definitely worth it. The [[photographing]] of [[cinematography]] studios being financially-driven instead of creatively is not without [[veracity]] (in fact, it's more true than [[untruthful]]). This begs the question why [[Castillo]] Rock Entertainment [[permitting]] Kenneth Branagh to create a full-length, uncut version of "Hamlet" with his complete creative control among other things. Of course, Branagh had to agree to some concessions (a star-studded cast, and a 2.5 hour version for wider release), but why would the film studio allow Branagh to spend money on a 4 [[hours]] version that they knew few would see? Could they have, at least in this case, had enough respect for the material and Branagh's vision to create something for only a few people? That is not a question that I can answer. Whatever the reason, this is a [[wondrous]] vision for those who are willing to spend four hours watching "Hamlet." Everyone knows the story, so I will not spend much time on that. However, unlike other productions of the play, stage included, this is a completely uncut production, which has never been [[doing]] before. According to some, Shakespeare never [[destined]] for the play to be [[generated]] uncut, leaving the decision of what to include to the director's discretion. That being said, I have no doubt that had he been able to see it, the Bard would have been [[thrilled]] with Branagh's production.

The film is top-heavy with film stars, although most have mere bit parts. All play their parts [[alike]] well. I would have thought Branagh too old to play the part of Hamlet, and while he still may be, his performance more than makes up for it. Hamlet is a complex part, [[illustrating]] [[any]] emotion from grief to anger, happiness to madness, and everything in between. Branagh [[pinched]] it. Derek Jacobi is [[great]] as the [[devious]] Claudius, [[whom]] [[swindling]] and [[infidelity]] sets all these things in motion; his [[sole]] [[vowel]] is [[faultless]] for the role. Julie Christie is [[apart]] very good as Gertrude, Hamlet's caring mother who doesn't [[accomplishing]] what is [[go]] on until late in the [[jeu]].

The [[conventional]] actors are cast in [[bitten]] parts ([[Jodie]] Dench is on for all of 60 seconds and has no lines), but at [[fewest]] they're in it. [[Impossibly]], no one takes this to heart; everyone [[furnishes]] it their all, and it [[demonstrate]]. Special [[cite]] has to [[going]] to [[Gato]] Lemmon and Billy [[Cristal]], who are excellent. Robin Williams is a little too silly, but he's not bad (his part is pretty small anyway).

Yet, this is undeniably Branagh's show. He adapted one of the most famous plays in history, and in so doing, he took on a whale of a project; it's impressive that he got it done, but the fact that the film is this good is a monumental achievement. What I really liked about this film is that you don't have to be a Shakespeare scholar to [[enjoying]] it. As most people know, Shakespeare is difficult to digest, but Branagh and his cast understand this. "Hamlet" is still immensely enjoyable to just sit and listen to the actors deliver the brilliant dialogue and excellent acting.

This is a must see for anyone and everyone. It may be four hours long, but it's definitely worth it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] an acted/[[manipulated]] documentary about one of the most darkest places of guatemala. portrayed as a fun, secure... but sad place, were a bunch of [[sex]] [[workers]] get to [[play]] in a soccer team, [[assembled]] in what [[seems]] like no more than a [[week]]! the documentary's main focus is to [[prove]] that [[society]] repels this [[kind]] of "workers", even [[though]] no solution to these poor [[women]] is ever achieved, except that the people who [[documented]] this,[[made]] them some [[sort]] of "stars" (just like the title [[says]] so) in [[exchange]] of being exploited for [[making]] this realityshowlike [[documentary]]. it does have, [[however]], its own [[documented]] [[reality]]... but, that [[sadly]] has nothing to do with the [[main]] storyline. i [[would]] not [[accept]] to [[see]] it again; but i [[would]] [[recommend]] it for [[general]] cultural [[purposes]] only. an acted/[[outmaneuvered]] documentary about one of the most darkest places of guatemala. portrayed as a fun, secure... but sad place, were a bunch of [[sexuality]] [[labor]] get to [[playing]] in a soccer team, [[gathered]] in what [[appears]] like no more than a [[weeks]]! the documentary's main focus is to [[demonstrate]] that [[societies]] repels this [[genre]] of "workers", even [[while]] no solution to these poor [[woman]] is ever achieved, except that the people who [[document]] this,[[accomplished]] them some [[genre]] of "stars" (just like the title [[tells]] so) in [[sharing]] of being exploited for [[doing]] this realityshowlike [[documentaries]]. it does have, [[conversely]], its own [[researched]] [[realism]]... but, that [[regretfully]] has nothing to do with the [[primary]] storyline. i [[should]] not [[admit]] to [[behold]] it again; but i [[ought]] [[recommended]] it for [[overall]] cultural [[target]] only. --------------------------------------------- Result 5861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Strummer's [[hippie]] past was a revelation, but overall this felt like crashing a wake. Campfire stories work best around the intimacy of a campfire. There were just too [[many]] semi-boring old friends anecdotes and too much filler stock footage. I [[love]] The Clash and Joe for not reuniting and selling their songs until now (FU Mick Jones), but this doc left me [[wanting]]..to relate more. Using campfire storytellers without proper explanation of who is [[telling]] the anecdote alienates the [[viewer]] to some extent. They should have been interviewed on their own. [[Even]] using Strummer's 'radio DJ voice' did [[little]] to glue the [[film]] together. And can [[someone]] [[explain]] all the flags [[flying]] behind the campfire scenes? [[After]] the [[awesome]] "Filth And The Fury" I [[hoped]] Temple [[could]] deliver. A [[Joe]] Strummer doc deserves [[better]]. Strummer's [[freak]] past was a revelation, but overall this felt like crashing a wake. Campfire stories work best around the intimacy of a campfire. There were just too [[multiple]] semi-boring old friends anecdotes and too much filler stock footage. I [[iike]] The Clash and Joe for not reuniting and selling their songs until now (FU Mick Jones), but this doc left me [[wish]]..to relate more. Using campfire storytellers without proper explanation of who is [[saying]] the anecdote alienates the [[onlooker]] to some extent. They should have been interviewed on their own. [[Yet]] using Strummer's 'radio DJ voice' did [[small]] to glue the [[filmmaking]] together. And can [[everyone]] [[explains]] all the flags [[fly]] behind the campfire scenes? [[Afterwards]] the [[sumptuous]] "Filth And The Fury" I [[desired]] Temple [[did]] deliver. A [[Evel]] Strummer doc deserves [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The [[Ring]] was made from the only screenplay Hitchcock [[wrote]] himself and it [[deals]], as [[many]] of his earliest [[pictures]] do, with a love triangle. [[At]] [[first]] glance, it looks like a more cynical update of the infidelity-themed morality comedies of Cecil B. De Mille, but more than that it is the [[first]] really competent Hitchcock picture. [[Even]] if he was not [[yet]] using the ideas and motifs of suspenseful thrillers, he was at least developing the tools with which to create suspense.

As well as being a student of the German Expressionist style, the rhythmic editing style of Sergei Eisenstein had had its impact upon Hitchcock. But here he [[keeps]] tempo not just with the edits but with the content of the imagery. This is apparent from the opening shots, where spinning fairground rides brilliantly establish a smooth tempo. And like Eisenstein, the editing style seems to suggest sound – for example when a split-second shot of the bell being rung is flashed in, we almost subconsciously hear the sound because the image is so jarring.

There is also a contrast, particularly with silent films from the US, in that The Ring is not cluttered up with too many title cards. As much as possible is conveyed by imagery, and Hitch has enough faith in the audience to either lip-read or at least infer the meaning of the bulk of the characters' speech. And it's not done by contrived symbolism or overacting, it's all done by getting the right angles and the right timing, particularly with point-of-view shots, as well as some strong yet subtle performances. There are unfortunately a few too many obvious expressionist devices (particularly double exposures), many of which were unnecessary, but there is far less of this than there is in The Lodger.

Let's make a few honourable mentions for the aforementioned actors. First up, the stunningly handsome and very talented Carl Brisson in the lead role. In spite of his talent I was at [[first]] a bit confused as to why he got the role, as to be honest he looks more like a ballet dancer than a pugilist! But that just goes to show how much I know, as it turns out Brisson was in fact a former professional boxer and inexperienced in acting. Playing his rival is the competent Ian Hunter, who would go on to have a lengthy career in supporting roles right up to the 60s. The most demanding role in The Ring has to be that given to Lillian Hall-Davis, torn between two lovers. She pulls it off very well however with an emotive, understated performance, and it's a shame her career never lasted in the sound era. And last but not least the great Gordon Harker provides some comic relief in what is probably his best ever role.

The Ring's climactic fight scene is among the most impressive moments of silent-era Hitchcock. Martin Scorcese may have had his eye on The Ring when he directed the fight scenes in Raging Bull, as his watchword for these scenes was "Stay inside the ring". The fight in The Ring starts off with some fairly regular long shots, but when the action intensifies Hitchcock drops us right in the middle of it, with close-ups and point-of-view shots. Hitchcock's aim always seems to have been to involve his audience, and this was crucial in his later career where the secret of his success was often in immersing the viewer in the character's fear or paranoia.

The Ring really deserves more recognition than the inferior but better known The Lodger. It's a much more polished and professional work than the earlier picture, and probably the best of all his silent features. The [[Ringing]] was made from the only screenplay Hitchcock [[written]] himself and it [[dealing]], as [[various]] of his earliest [[photo]] do, with a love triangle. [[During]] [[fiirst]] glance, it looks like a more cynical update of the infidelity-themed morality comedies of Cecil B. De Mille, but more than that it is the [[fiirst]] really competent Hitchcock picture. [[Yet]] if he was not [[even]] using the ideas and motifs of suspenseful thrillers, he was at least developing the tools with which to create suspense.

As well as being a student of the German Expressionist style, the rhythmic editing style of Sergei Eisenstein had had its impact upon Hitchcock. But here he [[retains]] tempo not just with the edits but with the content of the imagery. This is apparent from the opening shots, where spinning fairground rides brilliantly establish a smooth tempo. And like Eisenstein, the editing style seems to suggest sound – for example when a split-second shot of the bell being rung is flashed in, we almost subconsciously hear the sound because the image is so jarring.

There is also a contrast, particularly with silent films from the US, in that The Ring is not cluttered up with too many title cards. As much as possible is conveyed by imagery, and Hitch has enough faith in the audience to either lip-read or at least infer the meaning of the bulk of the characters' speech. And it's not done by contrived symbolism or overacting, it's all done by getting the right angles and the right timing, particularly with point-of-view shots, as well as some strong yet subtle performances. There are unfortunately a few too many obvious expressionist devices (particularly double exposures), many of which were unnecessary, but there is far less of this than there is in The Lodger.

Let's make a few honourable mentions for the aforementioned actors. First up, the stunningly handsome and very talented Carl Brisson in the lead role. In spite of his talent I was at [[frst]] a bit confused as to why he got the role, as to be honest he looks more like a ballet dancer than a pugilist! But that just goes to show how much I know, as it turns out Brisson was in fact a former professional boxer and inexperienced in acting. Playing his rival is the competent Ian Hunter, who would go on to have a lengthy career in supporting roles right up to the 60s. The most demanding role in The Ring has to be that given to Lillian Hall-Davis, torn between two lovers. She pulls it off very well however with an emotive, understated performance, and it's a shame her career never lasted in the sound era. And last but not least the great Gordon Harker provides some comic relief in what is probably his best ever role.

The Ring's climactic fight scene is among the most impressive moments of silent-era Hitchcock. Martin Scorcese may have had his eye on The Ring when he directed the fight scenes in Raging Bull, as his watchword for these scenes was "Stay inside the ring". The fight in The Ring starts off with some fairly regular long shots, but when the action intensifies Hitchcock drops us right in the middle of it, with close-ups and point-of-view shots. Hitchcock's aim always seems to have been to involve his audience, and this was crucial in his later career where the secret of his success was often in immersing the viewer in the character's fear or paranoia.

The Ring really deserves more recognition than the inferior but better known The Lodger. It's a much more polished and professional work than the earlier picture, and probably the best of all his silent features. --------------------------------------------- Result 5863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I feel like I've been had, the con is on, don't fall for it. After reading glowing reviews (the Director was a film reviewer with Sky for years so must have a lot of mates in the press ready to do him a favour by writing favorable reviews) I [[expected]] solid acting, atmosphere, suspense, strong characterization, an intriguing plot development and poetic moments. [[Sadly]], 'Sixteen years of Alcohol', doesn't deliver on the critics [[promises]], for the most part, sacrifices these qualities in [[lieu]] of cheesy low budget special effects (what was that clichéd cobweb scene in there for?), unrealistic fight choreography and mindless mind numbing narration, cliché edits and camera angles.

'Sixteen years of Alcohol' starts off interestingly with some beautiful location shots in Scotland, but it's straight downhill from here. Unfortunately, instead of [[spending]] some time building atmosphere, creating [[characters]] we [[might]] [[care]] about, or building suspense - the director opts to begin driving you crazy with self indulgent heavy handed twaddle voice-over's. The lead [[characters]] are so unsympathetic and are so badly acted - the [[audience]] doesn't care what happens to them, desperate [[Actors]] do desperate things...like this movie!. To [[make]] [[matters]] worse, the 'homage's' ([[typical]] of a director [[trying]] to pay his dues to past [[masters]]) are either utterly [[cliché]] or unconvincing. The soundtrack is the only [[thing]] that [[lifted]] me and [[kept]] me in the [[cinema]] but [[even]] that [[failed]] to [[support]] the dramatic narrative other connecting a [[period]] of [[time]] to the action.

[[For]] some [[reason]] the [[movie]] got increasingly flawed and to be [[quite]] [[honest]] [[annoying]]. I still [[watched]] the [[whole]] [[damn]] thing!

I guess I [[liked]] the [[attempt]] at gritty [[realism]] in the film but even that was destroyed when they were often inter-cut with weird and abstract, sometimes [[pointless]] scenes. You don't need a huge budget to make truly moving film, so much has been said about how little money they had to make this film, half a million is not a little bit of money...SO NO EXCUSES! Sometimes I wonder what the actors...Or their agents were thinking!

Pass on this [[turkey]] unless you're masochistic or mindless anyway....NOT MY THING

1.5/10 I feel like I've been had, the con is on, don't fall for it. After reading glowing reviews (the Director was a film reviewer with Sky for years so must have a lot of mates in the press ready to do him a favour by writing favorable reviews) I [[waited]] solid acting, atmosphere, suspense, strong characterization, an intriguing plot development and poetic moments. [[Tragically]], 'Sixteen years of Alcohol', doesn't deliver on the critics [[pledge]], for the most part, sacrifices these qualities in [[replacing]] of cheesy low budget special effects (what was that clichéd cobweb scene in there for?), unrealistic fight choreography and mindless mind numbing narration, cliché edits and camera angles.

'Sixteen years of Alcohol' starts off interestingly with some beautiful location shots in Scotland, but it's straight downhill from here. Unfortunately, instead of [[spend]] some time building atmosphere, creating [[features]] we [[apt]] [[caring]] about, or building suspense - the director opts to begin driving you crazy with self indulgent heavy handed twaddle voice-over's. The lead [[character]] are so unsympathetic and are so badly acted - the [[audiences]] doesn't care what happens to them, desperate [[Protagonists]] do desperate things...like this movie!. To [[deliver]] [[themes]] worse, the 'homage's' ([[classic]] of a director [[attempts]] to pay his dues to past [[maestro]]) are either utterly [[clichéd]] or unconvincing. The soundtrack is the only [[stuff]] that [[hoisting]] me and [[maintained]] me in the [[filmmaking]] but [[yet]] that [[faulted]] to [[helps]] the dramatic narrative other connecting a [[deadline]] of [[moment]] to the action.

[[At]] some [[grounds]] the [[filmmaking]] got increasingly flawed and to be [[rather]] [[truthful]] [[irritating]]. I still [[observed]] the [[overall]] [[goddammit]] thing!

I guess I [[wished]] the [[endeavor]] at gritty [[lifelike]] in the film but even that was destroyed when they were often inter-cut with weird and abstract, sometimes [[superfluous]] scenes. You don't need a huge budget to make truly moving film, so much has been said about how little money they had to make this film, half a million is not a little bit of money...SO NO EXCUSES! Sometimes I wonder what the actors...Or their agents were thinking!

Pass on this [[ankara]] unless you're masochistic or mindless anyway....NOT MY THING

1.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5864 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This movie [[strikes]] me as one of the most successful attempts ever at coming up with plausible answers for some of the nagging questions that have [[cropped]] up in recent scholarship concerning the "Passion" (suffering and death of Christ) accounts in the New [[Testament]]. (What motivated Judas if money was not the issue? What could bring the Sanhedrin to meet on a high holy day? Why did Pilate waffle?) It is a movie for the [[serious]], thinking [[Christian]]: fans of "The Passion of the Christ" will no doubt be [[disappointed]] by the lack of [[gory]] spectacle and arch characterization. As for myself, I find the [[portrait]] painted here--of the willingness of ordinary people to so blithely sacrifice common decency when their own self-interest is at stake--far more realistic and deeply unsettling. (The disinterested, "just doing my job" look on the face of the man who drives the first nail in Christ's wrist is as chilling as any moment in film.) The film makes no claim to "authenticity", but the settings and costuming invariably feel more "right" than many more highly acclaimed efforts. It is a slow film but, if you accept its self-imposed limits (it is, after all, "The Death"--not the Life--"of Christ"), ultimately a very [[rewarding]] one. This movie [[shelling]] me as one of the most successful attempts ever at coming up with plausible answers for some of the nagging questions that have [[pruned]] up in recent scholarship concerning the "Passion" (suffering and death of Christ) accounts in the New [[Wills]]. (What motivated Judas if money was not the issue? What could bring the Sanhedrin to meet on a high holy day? Why did Pilate waffle?) It is a movie for the [[grievous]], thinking [[Cristian]]: fans of "The Passion of the Christ" will no doubt be [[disenchanted]] by the lack of [[gori]] spectacle and arch characterization. As for myself, I find the [[portrayal]] painted here--of the willingness of ordinary people to so blithely sacrifice common decency when their own self-interest is at stake--far more realistic and deeply unsettling. (The disinterested, "just doing my job" look on the face of the man who drives the first nail in Christ's wrist is as chilling as any moment in film.) The film makes no claim to "authenticity", but the settings and costuming invariably feel more "right" than many more highly acclaimed efforts. It is a slow film but, if you accept its self-imposed limits (it is, after all, "The Death"--not the Life--"of Christ"), ultimately a very [[bonuses]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 5865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm not [[going]] to comb over TLPS's [[obvious]] peterbogdanovichian [[flaws]]. [[Instead]], I shall take a [[look]] at the [[positive]] [[aspects]] of this overrated celluloid [[pygmy]] of a [[film]].

1. [[Peter]] Bogdanovich [[managed]] to [[make]] a [[movie]] that can be [[endured]] in its entirety. This fact alone [[places]] the movie [[high]] up above and all the way up to the [[top]] of his lame filmography.

2. Bogdanovich had shown how amazingly generous some lucky [[boyfriends]] can be, by sharing Cybill Shepherd's (his then-gal) fabulous body and breasts with his male audience - and not just on one but on two occasions. Brava! The unquestionable highlights of this cinematic festa del siesta.

3. TLPS has [[barely]] a scene without stereotypical country music doodling in the background. (Peter tried to make the obvious point that the movie is set in America's Deep South (as if it weren't bleedin' obvious) so he hammered that point on and on and on...) How is this an advantage, you might ask? Well, when the movie finally ends and the [[monotonous]] country [[music]] finally ceases massaging your tired ear-drums, you start experiencing a strange exhilaration: "The movie's finally over!" It's pure joy.

4. The movie gives all women who look like Cloris Leachman hope. Hope that they, too, may one day snatch a much younger and maybe even good-looking boyfriend.

5. Cloris Leachman's biography (which I realize isn't technically a part of TLPS) gives hope to all women that look like that, that they too may one day win a Miss Chicago beauty pageant. (Provided they have enough money to bribe the jury with.)

(You think I'm joking abut Cloris having won a beauty pageant, huh? Well, check out her bio and then we'll see who laughs last...)

6. The movie was shot in black and white which spared us the sight of Cloris Leachman's face in its original, natural non-glory. I'm not [[go]] to comb over TLPS's [[noticeable]] peterbogdanovichian [[gaps]]. [[Conversely]], I shall take a [[peek]] at the [[favourable]] [[things]] of this overrated celluloid [[pygmies]] of a [[filmmaking]].

1. [[Petr]] Bogdanovich [[managing]] to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]] that can be [[experienced]] in its entirety. This fact alone [[sites]] the movie [[highest]] up above and all the way up to the [[superior]] of his lame filmography.

2. Bogdanovich had shown how amazingly generous some lucky [[buddies]] can be, by sharing Cybill Shepherd's (his then-gal) fabulous body and breasts with his male audience - and not just on one but on two occasions. Brava! The unquestionable highlights of this cinematic festa del siesta.

3. TLPS has [[hardly]] a scene without stereotypical country music doodling in the background. (Peter tried to make the obvious point that the movie is set in America's Deep South (as if it weren't bleedin' obvious) so he hammered that point on and on and on...) How is this an advantage, you might ask? Well, when the movie finally ends and the [[tiresome]] country [[musicians]] finally ceases massaging your tired ear-drums, you start experiencing a strange exhilaration: "The movie's finally over!" It's pure joy.

4. The movie gives all women who look like Cloris Leachman hope. Hope that they, too, may one day snatch a much younger and maybe even good-looking boyfriend.

5. Cloris Leachman's biography (which I realize isn't technically a part of TLPS) gives hope to all women that look like that, that they too may one day win a Miss Chicago beauty pageant. (Provided they have enough money to bribe the jury with.)

(You think I'm joking abut Cloris having won a beauty pageant, huh? Well, check out her bio and then we'll see who laughs last...)

6. The movie was shot in black and white which spared us the sight of Cloris Leachman's face in its original, natural non-glory. --------------------------------------------- Result 5866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] As a child I always hated being forced to sit through musicals. I never understood why people would break out into song like that, and I was far too young to [[appreciate]] the artistry (choreography, set design, costumes, pacing) behind it all. Carol Reed's "Oliver!" was the one musical I remember oddly enjoying as a child, probably because it is one of the darker ones and is appropriately drenched in the spirit of Dickensian squalor. This is a musical about ghetto life in Victorian London, and while the scenery and set designs are stark, dark, and true to that way of life, it is flat out bizarre for people to be breaking out into such ridiculous songs amidst their misery. Upon a recent viewing, my first since childhood, I have some new thoughts and insights into why this musical "works" in that bizarre breaking out into song kind of way, and why most just don't do it for me.

When musicals work or really say something, it is because they realize their own inherent strangeness. Lars von Trier's "[[Dancer]] in the [[Dark]]" as [[tragic]] and operatic and over reaching as it was, [[worked]] as a musical because the musical [[numbers]] were the products of the imagination of the [[protagonist]], an [[immigrant]] obsessed with Hollywood musicals. Likewise, the very cynical and [[enjoyable]] "Chicago" [[worked]] on a similar [[level]] because the musical [[numbers]] were the [[products]] of a homicidal ingenue singer/[[dancer]]. Musicals don't work when they take their own musical-nature too seriously (like in "Moulin [[Rouge]]") or are simply too much fluff about nothing (i.e. something pointless like "[[Mary]] Poppins"). [[Upon]] viewing "Oliver!" for the first time as an adult, I saw it in a new light. Told mostly from the point of view young Oliver, I saw the musical numbers as the products of his childhood imagination and his way of coping with the horrors of ghetto life around him. The best musical number was probably when Nancy got everyone in the tavern signing and dancing about the joys of getting drunk (as a cover to help poor Oliver escape the clutches of the evil Bill Sykes). It was undeniably catchy and sounded like a real pub tune that drunks might start singing around a piano. There are other great and classic tunes to be heard here, and the direction and acting from the leads to the dancing extras are all [[top]] notch.

Still, for all its bleakness (although it does have a happy ending for Oliver at least, though certainly things didn't end happily for Nancy, and unless you think a life on the streets being a pick-pocket is fun, it wasn't a necessarily a good ending for Fagin or the Dodger, despite their peppy closing tune) I wouldn't really classify this as a family film, though I don't think showing it to kids over the age of seven or eight will do any harm. This is a harsh tale about an unfortunate orphan trying to survive on the streets and find some happiness. I think it would be very interesting to see a modern update on this some how, perhaps a revisionist take on it, where people on the streets of Compton break into happy songs about their horrible lives. I'd like to see a hard-edged hip-hop version of "Oliver!". I always thought Dickens would translate well in those regards. As it stands, "Oliver!" was probably the last of the great film musicals and maybe the strangest G-rated film I've ever seen. As a child I always hated being forced to sit through musicals. I never understood why people would break out into song like that, and I was far too young to [[appreciates]] the artistry (choreography, set design, costumes, pacing) behind it all. Carol Reed's "Oliver!" was the one musical I remember oddly enjoying as a child, probably because it is one of the darker ones and is appropriately drenched in the spirit of Dickensian squalor. This is a musical about ghetto life in Victorian London, and while the scenery and set designs are stark, dark, and true to that way of life, it is flat out bizarre for people to be breaking out into such ridiculous songs amidst their misery. Upon a recent viewing, my first since childhood, I have some new thoughts and insights into why this musical "works" in that bizarre breaking out into song kind of way, and why most just don't do it for me.

When musicals work or really say something, it is because they realize their own inherent strangeness. Lars von Trier's "[[Ballerina]] in the [[Darkness]]" as [[calamitous]] and operatic and over reaching as it was, [[acted]] as a musical because the musical [[digits]] were the products of the imagination of the [[actor]], an [[migrant]] obsessed with Hollywood musicals. Likewise, the very cynical and [[nice]] "Chicago" [[working]] on a similar [[grades]] because the musical [[figures]] were the [[commodities]] of a homicidal ingenue singer/[[dancers]]. Musicals don't work when they take their own musical-nature too seriously (like in "Moulin [[Khmer]]") or are simply too much fluff about nothing (i.e. something pointless like "[[Marie]] Poppins"). [[After]] viewing "Oliver!" for the first time as an adult, I saw it in a new light. Told mostly from the point of view young Oliver, I saw the musical numbers as the products of his childhood imagination and his way of coping with the horrors of ghetto life around him. The best musical number was probably when Nancy got everyone in the tavern signing and dancing about the joys of getting drunk (as a cover to help poor Oliver escape the clutches of the evil Bill Sykes). It was undeniably catchy and sounded like a real pub tune that drunks might start singing around a piano. There are other great and classic tunes to be heard here, and the direction and acting from the leads to the dancing extras are all [[superior]] notch.

Still, for all its bleakness (although it does have a happy ending for Oliver at least, though certainly things didn't end happily for Nancy, and unless you think a life on the streets being a pick-pocket is fun, it wasn't a necessarily a good ending for Fagin or the Dodger, despite their peppy closing tune) I wouldn't really classify this as a family film, though I don't think showing it to kids over the age of seven or eight will do any harm. This is a harsh tale about an unfortunate orphan trying to survive on the streets and find some happiness. I think it would be very interesting to see a modern update on this some how, perhaps a revisionist take on it, where people on the streets of Compton break into happy songs about their horrible lives. I'd like to see a hard-edged hip-hop version of "Oliver!". I always thought Dickens would translate well in those regards. As it stands, "Oliver!" was probably the last of the great film musicals and maybe the strangest G-rated film I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 5867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, it's Robin Hood as 'geezer' all right... just as advertised! That didn't sound very hopeful, and alas, it was worse than I'd suspected.

A laddish Robin I can take; a Robin who tangles with a pert dyer's daughter I can credit; but a Robin who exchanges not-very-funny banter with his single henchman is harder to swallow, and a Robin and *entire cast* who seem to be having difficulty managing their lines is the kiss of doom. How could anyone let such laboured delivery pass without re-shooting the scenes? Again and again, Much sounds as if he's struggling with half-comprehended Shakespeare rather than letting loose with a salty quip; I hoped at the onset that it was just a failed comedy trait in a character clearly destined for the role of comedy sidekick, but then it started spreading throughout the rest of the cast.

Whatever else you say about Errol Flynn in the role, he had the knack of delivering high-flown dialogue as naturally as if he'd just thought it up on the spur of the moment... and as this production shows, that's not at all as easy as it sounds! If they were going to cast the characters as cheeky chappies, the actors in question should have been given appropriate lines: they sound as if they haven't a clue how to handle them.

I'm afraid I didn't even like the pantomime Sheriff, for a similar reason; the lines are clearly not intended to be taken seriously but delivered (and in this case written) with a nudge and a wink at the audience. They're out of place all right -- fourth-wall-busting stuff -- but really not that funny.

This much-promised production reminded me of a limping school play. The only actor and character I felt any appreciation for at all was the one playing Guy of Gisbourne, who was the sole one who appeared to have any handle on (a) credible villainy and (b) credible characterisation -- but frankly, I wouldn't have said that was a very good augury for the future of the series! As of the time of writing, I'll give it another shot in the hopes that things may improve and bed down a bit by next week, with less stilted scene-setting required and perhaps the actors more at ease with the dialogue: after all, the opening episode of "Doctor Who" wasn't exactly a show-stopper, though it was nowhere near as bad as this. But if I see no improvement after episode 2, I'm afraid the series has almost certainly lost one viewer.

Which would be a pity, because I've got a soft spot for the "Robin Hood" legend on screen, from the adventures of Douglas Fairbanks to the sturdy reliance of Richard Greene. But this Robin fails to stir my blood in the slightest. --------------------------------------------- Result 5868 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (73%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I just saw this movie at a sneak preview and all I can say is..."What did I just watch????" And I mean that in a good and bad way.

The plot is really simple. Stiller and Black play friends/neighbors. Stiller is the focused, hardworker while Black is a dreamer. Black invents this idea to create a spray that erases poo. The idea becomes very popular, and Black becomes very [[rich]]. The extravagant lifestyle that Black gains and the fact that he still tries to be best friends with Stiller causes Stiller to become crazy with envy.

As I said, the plot is simple. Everything else is plain odd. The direction is odd, with a weird rotating opening shot to out-of-nowhere sped up sequences. The dialouge and the acting is very odd; odd in a rambling sort of way. And the sound track is the oddest thing in the movie, from the weird "Envy" song that keeps on reappearing to the scene where you think you're going to hear a classic 80's song but suddenly it's in Japanese.

So, the true question is this...is odd funny? That depends purely on the individual. I was cracking up at the shear unwavering [[weirdness]] of the movie. After the screening I heard people call it horribly unfunny and glad that it was free. Strangely, I understood their point. There are no jokes whatsoever, so if you aren't hooked by the uniqueness of it all, you will hate this movie. Absolutely hate it.

This movie is destined to lose a lot of money at the box office and become a DVD cult classic. If you can laugh at a movie with no real jokes, like Cable Guy or Punch Drunk Love, then I suggest you see it. If you don't, run away from this movie. It'll only make you mad. I just saw this movie at a sneak preview and all I can say is..."What did I just watch????" And I mean that in a good and bad way.

The plot is really simple. Stiller and Black play friends/neighbors. Stiller is the focused, hardworker while Black is a dreamer. Black invents this idea to create a spray that erases poo. The idea becomes very popular, and Black becomes very [[affluent]]. The extravagant lifestyle that Black gains and the fact that he still tries to be best friends with Stiller causes Stiller to become crazy with envy.

As I said, the plot is simple. Everything else is plain odd. The direction is odd, with a weird rotating opening shot to out-of-nowhere sped up sequences. The dialouge and the acting is very odd; odd in a rambling sort of way. And the sound track is the oddest thing in the movie, from the weird "Envy" song that keeps on reappearing to the scene where you think you're going to hear a classic 80's song but suddenly it's in Japanese.

So, the true question is this...is odd funny? That depends purely on the individual. I was cracking up at the shear unwavering [[strangeness]] of the movie. After the screening I heard people call it horribly unfunny and glad that it was free. Strangely, I understood their point. There are no jokes whatsoever, so if you aren't hooked by the uniqueness of it all, you will hate this movie. Absolutely hate it.

This movie is destined to lose a lot of money at the box office and become a DVD cult classic. If you can laugh at a movie with no real jokes, like Cable Guy or Punch Drunk Love, then I suggest you see it. If you don't, run away from this movie. It'll only make you mad. --------------------------------------------- Result 5869 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I first saw this film when I was about 8 years old on TV in the UK (where it was called "Laupta: The Flying Island"). I absolutely loved it, and was heartbroken when it was [[repeated]] a while later and I missed it. I was [[enchanted]] by the story and [[characters]], but most of all by the haunting and [[beautiful]] music. It would have been the [[original]] English dubbed version which I saw - sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Streamline Dub" (the dub was actually by Ghibli themselves and only distributed by [[Streamline]]) which is [[sadly]] [[unavailable]] except as part of a ridiculously [[expensive]] laser disc box-set.

[[Unfortunately]] I feel that the release has been partly spoiled by Disney. The voice acting is OK but the dialogue doesn't have the same [[raw]] energy that the "streamline" dub or the original Japanese had, and I think James Van Der Beek sounds too old to play the lead. They have [[made]] some [[pointless]] alterations, such as [[changing]] the [[main]] character's name from "Pazu" to "Patzu", and added some dialogue. But worst of all I feel that they have ruined [[many]] scenes with [[intrusive]] music - the opening scene of the airships for example was originally silent but has been spoiled thanks to Disney's moronic requirement that there be music playing whenever anyone is not speaking, which I find annoying in many Disney films.

This film still blows away most recent animated films, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. The plot is [[simple]] [[yet]] [[captivating]] and the [[film]] [[shows]] a flair which is [[sadly]] [[missing]] from most modern mass-market, homogenized animation. I first saw this film when I was about 8 years old on TV in the UK (where it was called "Laupta: The Flying Island"). I absolutely loved it, and was heartbroken when it was [[repetitive]] a while later and I missed it. I was [[charmed]] by the story and [[features]], but most of all by the haunting and [[wondrous]] music. It would have been the [[upfront]] English dubbed version which I saw - sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Streamline Dub" (the dub was actually by Ghibli themselves and only distributed by [[Rationalize]]) which is [[unluckily]] [[unreachable]] except as part of a ridiculously [[pricey]] laser disc box-set.

[[Sadly]] I feel that the release has been partly spoiled by Disney. The voice acting is OK but the dialogue doesn't have the same [[untreated]] energy that the "streamline" dub or the original Japanese had, and I think James Van Der Beek sounds too old to play the lead. They have [[effected]] some [[nonsensical]] alterations, such as [[amended]] the [[principal]] character's name from "Pazu" to "Patzu", and added some dialogue. But worst of all I feel that they have ruined [[innumerable]] scenes with [[invasive]] music - the opening scene of the airships for example was originally silent but has been spoiled thanks to Disney's moronic requirement that there be music playing whenever anyone is not speaking, which I find annoying in many Disney films.

This film still blows away most recent animated films, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. The plot is [[uncomplicated]] [[however]] [[intriguing]] and the [[cinematography]] [[showcase]] a flair which is [[unfortunately]] [[gone]] from most modern mass-market, homogenized animation. --------------------------------------------- Result 5870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This wasn't all that great. Not terrible or hateful or anything, just forgettable.

It had a sort of, um, hesitant, diluted air, like it never properly knew whether it wanted to go for [[laughs]] or for sweetness or for satire. So we were left with [[weak]] [[mix]] of the three. The [[actors]] seemed kinda lost.

Also, the [[ideas]] were really [[tired]] and [[recycled]], almost zombified themselves. How many more times do we have to be told the 50's in the States were infected with a banal sense of conformity? And that this was perpetuated by aggressive consumerism? And that emotional repression in [[men]] is a baaaaad thing? Old hat.

Its biggest [[crime]] in my eyes [[though]] was just how detached from reality it was. I know it was a comedy and all, but - especially in a full movie where you must keep the interest of an audience for a prolonged period - you still need some sort of emotional anchor, some relatable guide through the story, to make it engaging. For the 'hero' kid to watch an old woman, two fellow school pupils and ultimately his father die painfully at the hands of zombies or whatever and for him to greet it all with a cheery smile and a shrug of the shoulders, then I just [[struggle]] to deal with that in any sort of positive way. The [[mum]] was the same. If you make your two [[main]] [[characters]] so inhuman on that [[level]], then you [[risk]] losing me and that's what happened.

[[Biggest]] positive I can [[offer]] is that I [[love]] the [[look]] of that sort of apple pie [[suburbia]] and this captured it well enough, it was a handsome [[film]], especially some of those [[wide]] angled shots of the [[street]] and [[inside]] the Robinsons' [[house]]. Also, the [[opening]] [[newsreel]] was cute, in a been-done-before-but-still-funny [[sort]] of [[way]].

And I [[thought]] Billy Connolly was OK and that comes from [[someone]] who isn't a [[big]] [[fan]] of [[Billy]] Connolly: [[Movie]] [[Star]]. I just had this fear he was [[going]] to be hamming it up and [[trying]] to [[steal]] [[every]] scene, but he played it [[pretty]] low-key for him and [[probably]] came out the most sympathetic character in the [[whole]] [[film]].

[[All]] in all, not [[great]] [[though]]. This wasn't all that great. Not terrible or hateful or anything, just forgettable.

It had a sort of, um, hesitant, diluted air, like it never properly knew whether it wanted to go for [[giggling]] or for sweetness or for satire. So we were left with [[brittle]] [[blend]] of the three. The [[players]] seemed kinda lost.

Also, the [[insights]] were really [[jaded]] and [[reclaimed]], almost zombified themselves. How many more times do we have to be told the 50's in the States were infected with a banal sense of conformity? And that this was perpetuated by aggressive consumerism? And that emotional repression in [[man]] is a baaaaad thing? Old hat.

Its biggest [[crimes]] in my eyes [[despite]] was just how detached from reality it was. I know it was a comedy and all, but - especially in a full movie where you must keep the interest of an audience for a prolonged period - you still need some sort of emotional anchor, some relatable guide through the story, to make it engaging. For the 'hero' kid to watch an old woman, two fellow school pupils and ultimately his father die painfully at the hands of zombies or whatever and for him to greet it all with a cheery smile and a shrug of the shoulders, then I just [[struggles]] to deal with that in any sort of positive way. The [[mom]] was the same. If you make your two [[primary]] [[traits]] so inhuman on that [[levels]], then you [[jeopardy]] losing me and that's what happened.

[[Larger]] positive I can [[delivers]] is that I [[adored]] the [[gaze]] of that sort of apple pie [[commuter]] and this captured it well enough, it was a handsome [[cinematography]], especially some of those [[extensive]] angled shots of the [[rue]] and [[within]] the Robinsons' [[maison]]. Also, the [[introductory]] [[newsreels]] was cute, in a been-done-before-but-still-funny [[genre]] of [[ways]].

And I [[thoughts]] Billy Connolly was OK and that comes from [[everybody]] who isn't a [[overwhelming]] [[groupie]] of [[Billie]] Connolly: [[Filmmaking]] [[Stars]]. I just had this fear he was [[go]] to be hamming it up and [[seek]] to [[theft]] [[all]] scene, but he played it [[quite]] low-key for him and [[arguably]] came out the most sympathetic character in the [[ensemble]] [[filmmaking]].

[[Every]] in all, not [[whopping]] [[despite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5871 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Star [[Trek]] Hidden [[Frontier]] will [[surprise]] you in [[many]] [[ways]]. First, it's a fan made [[series]], available only on the web, and it features [[mainly]] friends & neighbors who have the computer programs and home video cameras and sewing machines to, as Mickey & Judy once put it, put on a show. It's [[definitely]] friends & neighbors to, you can tell. A [[lot]] of these people aren't the most [[beautiful]] looking folks you've ever seen, or the youngest, or the thinnest… some of them stumble through their lines like they're walking on marbles… some of them have thick accents, or simply don't seem to speak well in the [[first]] place, whick makes it virtually impossible to understand a single solitary word that they're saying. Still, you have to admit, for everything these friends & neighbors have put together, it's actually fun to watch. Yes, some of the dialogue is hokey. Yes, it's a little odd (though admittedly a little cool too) watching two Starfleet males kiss (although some of the kissing scenes seem to go on and on.) Yes, you cringe a bit when they clearly quote from ST:TOS, TNG, other shows and the movies, or when you hear the theme from Galaxy Quest played at the beginning and end of every show. Okay. We can get by that. Why? The graphics are [[first]] [[rate]]. Better than almost anything you've seen. And sometimes, a show or two really stands out story-wise… some of them are actually real tear-jerkers.

Hidden Frontier is a total guilty [[pleasure]] in every sense of the word… but you have to give the people involved credit where credit is due. It takes a lot of effort to put on a production of this magnitude. People, sets, costumes, graphics… it's a huge effort on a lot of people's parts. We watch, we return, and we thank them. Star [[Hiking]] Hidden [[Borders]] will [[amaze]] you in [[several]] [[shapes]]. First, it's a fan made [[serials]], available only on the web, and it features [[basically]] friends & neighbors who have the computer programs and home video cameras and sewing machines to, as Mickey & Judy once put it, put on a show. It's [[unmistakably]] friends & neighbors to, you can tell. A [[batches]] of these people aren't the most [[wondrous]] looking folks you've ever seen, or the youngest, or the thinnest… some of them stumble through their lines like they're walking on marbles… some of them have thick accents, or simply don't seem to speak well in the [[fiirst]] place, whick makes it virtually impossible to understand a single solitary word that they're saying. Still, you have to admit, for everything these friends & neighbors have put together, it's actually fun to watch. Yes, some of the dialogue is hokey. Yes, it's a little odd (though admittedly a little cool too) watching two Starfleet males kiss (although some of the kissing scenes seem to go on and on.) Yes, you cringe a bit when they clearly quote from ST:TOS, TNG, other shows and the movies, or when you hear the theme from Galaxy Quest played at the beginning and end of every show. Okay. We can get by that. Why? The graphics are [[frst]] [[rates]]. Better than almost anything you've seen. And sometimes, a show or two really stands out story-wise… some of them are actually real tear-jerkers.

Hidden Frontier is a total guilty [[glee]] in every sense of the word… but you have to give the people involved credit where credit is due. It takes a lot of effort to put on a production of this magnitude. People, sets, costumes, graphics… it's a huge effort on a lot of people's parts. We watch, we return, and we thank them. --------------------------------------------- Result 5872 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my FAVORITE ALL time movie. It used to be my Friday night movie with a pizza and bottle of wine when I was single. I first saw this movie with my aunt Brend and sister Chasity. I was in the 2nd grade. I fell in LOVE with Travolta and Sissy was my new best friend. I've read a lot of comments about why Bud left Sissy & how Sissy has to "learn to act" married. But let's go back and look at this for a second: SPOILER - My interpretation of the movie now, not when I was eight is this about Bud & Sissy's relationship takes a turn for the worst because she makes a fool of him at Gilley's riding the bull. They get in a huge fight. Bud tries to make Sissy jealous by asking Pam to dance. Sissy then thinks two wrongs will make a right and Wes asks her if "she needs any help". They're all on the dance floor acting like fools when Bud asks Pam, "when are you going to take me home and rape me?" Pam answers: "When ever you're ready Cowboy". Bud then goes home with Pam to her condo in downtown Houston. Which Daddy has bought for her with his oil money and "all that that implies". Bud is the one who cheats on Sissy. Sissy is waiting for Bud when he returns home the next day. Sissy is the ONE who leaves Bud. Then, it's up to Bud to prove to Sissy that he is a real "cowboy" and win her back.

Anyways, that's my interpretation. Everyone has their I'm sure! I love this movie.

And believe it or not, I got myself a REAL cowboy! I love him too! :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] When I was [[flicking]] through the TV [[Guide]], and came across "[[Twisted]] Desire" on the movie section, I read it's description. Three [[words]] caught my eye "Melissa Joan Hart" ...I find her role in "Sabrina: The Teenage Witch" absolutely vile, I hate those kind of programs, so I was just thinking that it was going to be a boring old, love story starring her...Little did I know.

It [[finally]] started on the television, I had my bucket ready in [[case]] I were to puke over it's cheesiness or soppiness, you know what I mean. At first, you think she's just a nice, ordinary girl who's in love, but has mean parents. Then when you find out she's manipulated her boyfriend into killing her parents, so she could be with her TRUE love, you're like "Whoa". You just don't expect this sort of role for that sort of actress. She played her role very well in my opinion, I never expected her to be able to act like such a bitch, and voilà, she did it perfectly! Congrats to her, the [[movie]] was very good, I'd definitely watch it again and recommend it to others. When I was [[flicked]] through the TV [[Guided]], and came across "[[Deformed]] Desire" on the movie section, I read it's description. Three [[expression]] caught my eye "Melissa Joan Hart" ...I find her role in "Sabrina: The Teenage Witch" absolutely vile, I hate those kind of programs, so I was just thinking that it was going to be a boring old, love story starring her...Little did I know.

It [[ultimately]] started on the television, I had my bucket ready in [[example]] I were to puke over it's cheesiness or soppiness, you know what I mean. At first, you think she's just a nice, ordinary girl who's in love, but has mean parents. Then when you find out she's manipulated her boyfriend into killing her parents, so she could be with her TRUE love, you're like "Whoa". You just don't expect this sort of role for that sort of actress. She played her role very well in my opinion, I never expected her to be able to act like such a bitch, and voilà, she did it perfectly! Congrats to her, the [[filmmaking]] was very good, I'd definitely watch it again and recommend it to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 5874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Moonwalker by Michael Jackson is a real adventure film for the whole family!

Before the real story of the movie starts, we get a performance of the Bad Tour (Man In The Mirror), and it kicks off a great movie. After that we get a kind of a collage of Michael carrier, as it was until Moonwalker came out in 1988. After a few Music Videos also (Speed Demon, Leave Me Alone, etc.) the story starts.

The plot is basically that Michael and his 3 friends (who are kids) are being chased by the bad guy of the story "Mr. Big", because they discovered his evil plans of getting children all over the world hocked on drugs. During the chase we see fantastic segments, fx. Michaels video for Smooth Criminal, which is absolutely fantastic with its dance sequences, etc. But then one of the kids get kidnapped by Mr. Big, and Michael will haft to save her before she gets a drug addict.

During the movie we see special effects not only amazing for those days standards, but also impressive today. For instance, see Michael turning in to a robot/spaceship in order to protect his friends! It's so cool!

The movie ends with a performance of Come Together (later published in Michaels double-album of HIStory), and you leave the movie with a magic feeling. Amazing!

I recommend this for every family who wants to spend a nice night together with candy and popcorn in front of the TV. And now some parents might stand up and say: "But Michael Jackson is an alleged child abuser!" Yeah, he is indeed, but, come on, we all know it isn't true! Wait and see.. --------------------------------------------- Result 5875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I watched this film in a very [[strange]] way -- I had put it on my Netflix list and couldn't remember why (other than that I knew Philip Seymour Hoffman was in it). Since the film has no opening credits, I couldn't even [[remember]] who had directed it.

As my [[wife]] and I [[watched]] it, I turned to her about 45 minutes in and said, "You know, I [[keep]] wanting to [[decide]] that I [[hate]] this film, but something about it just won't [[let]] me [[stop]] watching it." Then there's a stretch of about half a dozen scenes in the middle of the movie that are truly electrifying in the actors' performances.

It was only as the end credits rolled that I realized it was a Sidney Lumet film. And I thought -- wow. I'm surprised that Lumet took on what was really a dirty, petty little story about really mean, broken people. But it's a testament to his talent that I was so taken in when I didn't even realize it was him.

Philip Seymour Hoffman is really, really good in this movie. Like scary good. Put this up against Capote and I would argue the Oscar should have been for this film instead.

I [[also]] [[highly]] [[recommend]] the narrative special feature with Lumet, Hawke and Hoffman talking about making the movie -- it's entertaining and educational, with Hawke playing the student eager to learn at the master's feet. Lumet [[definitely]] teaches you the first rule of [[working]] with actors -- kiss their [[asses]] constantly!!

There are a lot of violent, [[melodramatic]] movies out there that are empty ciphers when all is said and done. And there is an element of that in this film -- that the actors fill the air with [[sulphurous]] blasts of emotion, and when the smoke clears there's nothing left. Nothing resonates on a deeper [[level]].

But Lumet has [[given]] us [[Network]] and [[Twelve]] [[Angry]] [[Men]] -- films that, each in their own [[ways]], have been elevated into the [[highest]] echelons of cinema.

This [[movie]] isn't at that level. But there's [[something]] about it that lingers. And [[maybe]] that's enough.

My final comment is about the comments -- if you look at the number of comments about this little movie here on IMDb -- and the depth and intelligence of the comments, pro and con -- it's a pretty good indication that something special is going on with this film. I watched this film in a very [[bizarre]] way -- I had put it on my Netflix list and couldn't remember why (other than that I knew Philip Seymour Hoffman was in it). Since the film has no opening credits, I couldn't even [[remind]] who had directed it.

As my [[femme]] and I [[seen]] it, I turned to her about 45 minutes in and said, "You know, I [[preserve]] wanting to [[decides]] that I [[loathed]] this film, but something about it just won't [[leaving]] me [[parada]] watching it." Then there's a stretch of about half a dozen scenes in the middle of the movie that are truly electrifying in the actors' performances.

It was only as the end credits rolled that I realized it was a Sidney Lumet film. And I thought -- wow. I'm surprised that Lumet took on what was really a dirty, petty little story about really mean, broken people. But it's a testament to his talent that I was so taken in when I didn't even realize it was him.

Philip Seymour Hoffman is really, really good in this movie. Like scary good. Put this up against Capote and I would argue the Oscar should have been for this film instead.

I [[similarly]] [[crucially]] [[recommending]] the narrative special feature with Lumet, Hawke and Hoffman talking about making the movie -- it's entertaining and educational, with Hawke playing the student eager to learn at the master's feet. Lumet [[obviously]] teaches you the first rule of [[worked]] with actors -- kiss their [[buttocks]] constantly!!

There are a lot of violent, [[operatic]] movies out there that are empty ciphers when all is said and done. And there is an element of that in this film -- that the actors fill the air with [[sour]] blasts of emotion, and when the smoke clears there's nothing left. Nothing resonates on a deeper [[grades]].

But Lumet has [[awarded]] us [[Networks]] and [[Dozen]] [[Irate]] [[Mens]] -- films that, each in their own [[methods]], have been elevated into the [[high]] echelons of cinema.

This [[cinematography]] isn't at that level. But there's [[anything]] about it that lingers. And [[probably]] that's enough.

My final comment is about the comments -- if you look at the number of comments about this little movie here on IMDb -- and the depth and intelligence of the comments, pro and con -- it's a pretty good indication that something special is going on with this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I had to write a [[review]] of this [[film]] after reading another [[comment]] [[saying]] that this is Sidney Poitier's best [[movie]]. Poitier had just returned from over a decade's break in [[film]] acting and he is clearly creaky here. 11 of his [[films]] are [[mentioned]] in Wikipedia and they don't [[include]] this. 5 of his [[films]] are on the AFI's [[list]] of [[top]] 100 [[inspiring]] [[movies]], again, not including this. Berenger and Poitier, rube and city slicker set out to hunt down a dangerous psychopath before he crosses the [[border]] to Canada. Some of the attempts at comedy in this film clearly fail and Berenger and Poitier's [[bonding]] was cringeworthy and [[awkward]] (not [[helped]] by a [[completely]] bland [[script]]). Kirstie Alley (as the [[hostage]]) was underused, and [[almost]] [[entirely]] ignored when she was on screen. Some [[attempt]] at [[suspense]] is made, for [[example]] when you're [[meant]] to [[try]] and [[guess]] which of 5 [[men]] on a [[fishing]] [[trip]] is the murderer (all of them are type-cast villains). I [[understand]] that this is the [[entire]] appeal to most fans out there. I guessed who it was and I wasn't [[really]] trying hard.

If you're a Berenger fan, watch the Sniper (1993), you even [[get]] to see [[Billy]] Zane strutting his stuff. It's much better. [[All]] in all I'd give Shoot to Kill 3/10. It's not [[daring]], and it's just too [[straightforward]] for me. I had to write a [[reviewed]] of this [[filmmaking]] after reading another [[observation]] [[arguing]] that this is Sidney Poitier's best [[film]]. Poitier had just returned from over a decade's break in [[movie]] acting and he is clearly creaky here. 11 of his [[filmmaking]] are [[quoted]] in Wikipedia and they don't [[encompass]] this. 5 of his [[filmmaking]] are on the AFI's [[listing]] of [[supreme]] 100 [[exhilarating]] [[cinematic]], again, not including this. Berenger and Poitier, rube and city slicker set out to hunt down a dangerous psychopath before he crosses the [[boundaries]] to Canada. Some of the attempts at comedy in this film clearly fail and Berenger and Poitier's [[bond]] was cringeworthy and [[tricky]] (not [[helps]] by a [[totally]] bland [[hyphen]]). Kirstie Alley (as the [[ransom]]) was underused, and [[hardly]] [[totally]] ignored when she was on screen. Some [[attempts]] at [[waiting]] is made, for [[case]] when you're [[intend]] to [[tried]] and [[imagine]] which of 5 [[man]] on a [[peach]] [[journey]] is the murderer (all of them are type-cast villains). I [[comprehend]] that this is the [[total]] appeal to most fans out there. I guessed who it was and I wasn't [[genuinely]] trying hard.

If you're a Berenger fan, watch the Sniper (1993), you even [[got]] to see [[Billie]] Zane strutting his stuff. It's much better. [[Entire]] in all I'd give Shoot to Kill 3/10. It's not [[gutsy]], and it's just too [[uncomplicated]] for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 5877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Moonwalker is a [[Fantasy]] [[Music]] [[film]] [[staring]] [[Michael]] Jackson with [[different]] segments. I will rate each segment [[individually]].

Segment 1 [[opens]] the [[film]] with a Music video. The [[Music]] [[video]] is a concert of Michael Jackson performing the song "[[Man]] in the Mirror", the Music [[video]] [[also]] show's montages of [[historical]] figures such as Gandhi, [[Martin]] Luther king JR, [[John]] Lennon and more. The first segment was a good [[choice]] to open the [[film]] i [[liked]] the song and [[also]] loved the montage of the [[historical]] [[figures]]. I even [[loved]] the [[message]] in the song. I [[give]] the first segment a 9/10.

Segment 2 shows a montage of [[Michael]] Jackson's [[start]] from the Jackson five to his solo career. The montage i [[thought]] was well [[made]], i [[liked]] the animation they put into it and i [[also]] [[loved]] their [[choices]] of [[songs]] such as "I I want you back, [[Beat]] it, Thriller, can you feel it and the [[way]] you [[make]] me feel." The only thing i [[wish]] they [[could]] have [[done]] a little a better in one of the [[songs]] in the montage is "We are the [[world]]". The [[reason]] why is all you [[see]] is rain [[drops]] and in those [[drops]] are [[images]] of Michael Jackson and the [[chorus]] of the celebrities, but it's a [[little]] [[hard]] to [[see]] the [[chorus]]. Other than that the segment is [[still]] [[good]]. I [[give]] it a 9/10

Segment 3 is the song Bad. You're [[probably]] thinking it's Michael Jackson's [[Music]] [[video]] of [[bad]],Well [[yes]] and no. This segment is the [[Music]] video but it's redone by Kids. The segment was cute but it wasn't as good as the other [[segments]]. I give it a 6/10

Segment 4 is a short Claymation Music [[film]] that takes place after the kid's version of [[bad]] [[called]] "[[Speed]] Demon". The short is about [[Michael]] Jackson being chased by his beloved [[fans]] and the [[press]] and he [[disguises]] himself as a [[rabbit]] and rides a [[motorcycle]] to [[try]] to [[get]] away from them. The claymation in the chase [[sequence]] was [[great]] but some parts in the [[film]] the Claymation [[characters]] looked a [[little]] fake when they [[interact]] with [[real]] people. [[Also]] at the [[end]] of the clip out of [[nowhere]] [[Michael]] Jackson rabbit [[costume]] [[comes]] to [[life]] and he's dancing with it. I [[liked]] the [[dancing]] but that was like out of nowhere. I give it a 8/10

Segment 5 is Michael Jackson's Grammy winning Music video "Leave me alone." The Music Video is about the media poking their nose at Michael Jackson's personal life and Michael Jackson feels they won't leave him alone no matter how much he's proved innocent. The music video really speaks out( but keep in mind this happened before the child molestation this just all about the rumors of him in the 80's.) but i didn't feel this Video should be in this Movie because it's a kids Movie and i don't think kid's will understand what he's singing about. I give this Music video 8/10

Segment 6 leads us to the main story of the whole movie called "Smooth Criminal." Michael Jackson plays a gangster who uses his powers of a wishing star as a crime figure to protect children ( including John Lennon's son Sean Lennon) from an Evil Mobster named Mr Bigg (Played by Joe Pesci). The segment i thought really brought out the film especially when he danced and sang the song "Smooth Criminal" with a bunch of Criminals. I also thought the special effects were good. The weird thing about the Segment is why are kids hanging out with a grown man it never explained why. Also Joe Pesci character talks about Drugs and what he plans to do with them. I mean why would you talk about drugs in a kids film. Other wise it was good. My rating for this segment is a 8/10

Segment 7 is the final segment of the whole movie. The film end's with Michael Jackson singing a Cover version of the Beatle's Song "Come Together" and then during the credit's we see Michael Jackson singing with Ladysmith Black Mambazo. Michael did a good cover of "Come Together" and i think it was good idea putting including a group of good singer's with a talented musican like him. My rating is 9/10

This movie is a good Michael Jackson film i think it really brings out children s Imagination. The film is almost as Imaginative as the Beatles animated movie "Yellow Submarine" if you like Michael Jackson and you're up to a film with a lot of creativity this is the film. My Overall rating for this movie is 8/10 Moonwalker is a [[Chimera]] [[Musician]] [[cinematography]] [[watching]] [[Michele]] Jackson with [[assorted]] segments. I will rate each segment [[separately]].

Segment 1 [[open]] the [[cinematography]] with a Music video. The [[Musical]] [[videos]] is a concert of Michael Jackson performing the song "[[Males]] in the Mirror", the Music [[videos]] [[further]] show's montages of [[historic]] figures such as Gandhi, [[Martins]] Luther king JR, [[Johannes]] Lennon and more. The first segment was a good [[choices]] to open the [[cinema]] i [[loved]] the song and [[similarly]] loved the montage of the [[historic]] [[numbers]]. I even [[cared]] the [[messaging]] in the song. I [[lend]] the first segment a 9/10.

Segment 2 shows a montage of [[Michel]] Jackson's [[commence]] from the Jackson five to his solo career. The montage i [[think]] was well [[introduced]], i [[enjoyed]] the animation they put into it and i [[apart]] [[cared]] their [[elect]] of [[hymns]] such as "I I want you back, [[Defeats]] it, Thriller, can you feel it and the [[routes]] you [[deliver]] me feel." The only thing i [[wanting]] they [[would]] have [[accomplished]] a little a better in one of the [[lyrics]] in the montage is "We are the [[monde]]". The [[cause]] why is all you [[seeing]] is rain [[falls]] and in those [[fall]] are [[photographs]] of Michael Jackson and the [[choir]] of the celebrities, but it's a [[petite]] [[stiff]] to [[behold]] the [[verse]]. Other than that the segment is [[however]] [[alright]]. I [[lend]] it a 9/10

Segment 3 is the song Bad. You're [[surely]] thinking it's Michael Jackson's [[Musical]] [[videos]] of [[wicked]],Well [[yea]] and no. This segment is the [[Musical]] video but it's redone by Kids. The segment was cute but it wasn't as good as the other [[slices]]. I give it a 6/10

Segment 4 is a short Claymation Music [[kino]] that takes place after the kid's version of [[wicked]] [[telephoned]] "[[Airspeed]] Demon". The short is about [[Michele]] Jackson being chased by his beloved [[amateurs]] and the [[pressing]] and he [[camouflage]] himself as a [[rabbits]] and rides a [[motorcycles]] to [[endeavour]] to [[obtains]] away from them. The claymation in the chase [[sequencing]] was [[wondrous]] but some parts in the [[kino]] the Claymation [[features]] looked a [[petite]] fake when they [[communicating]] with [[actual]] people. [[Similarly]] at the [[termination]] of the clip out of [[anywhere]] [[Michele]] Jackson rabbit [[costumes]] [[arrives]] to [[living]] and he's dancing with it. I [[wished]] the [[ballet]] but that was like out of nowhere. I give it a 8/10

Segment 5 is Michael Jackson's Grammy winning Music video "Leave me alone." The Music Video is about the media poking their nose at Michael Jackson's personal life and Michael Jackson feels they won't leave him alone no matter how much he's proved innocent. The music video really speaks out( but keep in mind this happened before the child molestation this just all about the rumors of him in the 80's.) but i didn't feel this Video should be in this Movie because it's a kids Movie and i don't think kid's will understand what he's singing about. I give this Music video 8/10

Segment 6 leads us to the main story of the whole movie called "Smooth Criminal." Michael Jackson plays a gangster who uses his powers of a wishing star as a crime figure to protect children ( including John Lennon's son Sean Lennon) from an Evil Mobster named Mr Bigg (Played by Joe Pesci). The segment i thought really brought out the film especially when he danced and sang the song "Smooth Criminal" with a bunch of Criminals. I also thought the special effects were good. The weird thing about the Segment is why are kids hanging out with a grown man it never explained why. Also Joe Pesci character talks about Drugs and what he plans to do with them. I mean why would you talk about drugs in a kids film. Other wise it was good. My rating for this segment is a 8/10

Segment 7 is the final segment of the whole movie. The film end's with Michael Jackson singing a Cover version of the Beatle's Song "Come Together" and then during the credit's we see Michael Jackson singing with Ladysmith Black Mambazo. Michael did a good cover of "Come Together" and i think it was good idea putting including a group of good singer's with a talented musican like him. My rating is 9/10

This movie is a good Michael Jackson film i think it really brings out children s Imagination. The film is almost as Imaginative as the Beatles animated movie "Yellow Submarine" if you like Michael Jackson and you're up to a film with a lot of creativity this is the film. My Overall rating for this movie is 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Though structured [[totally]] [[different]] from the [[book]] by Tim Krabbé who [[wrote]] the original 'The Vanishing' (Spoorloos) it does have the same [[overall]] feel, except for that Koolhoven's [[style]] is [[less]] business-like and more lyric. The [[beginning]] is [[great]], the [[middle]] is fine, but the sting is in the [[end]]. A surprise emotional [[ending]]. As you could read in [[several]] [[magazines]] there is some sex in the film, but it is [[done]] all very [[beautifully]]. Never explicit, but with [[lots]] of warmth and [[sometimes]] [[even]] [[humour]]. It is a [[shame]] American [[films]] can't be as open an honoust as this one. [[Where]] [[Dutch]] [[films]] tend to [[go]] just over the edge when it comes to this subject, 'De Grot' stays [[always]] [[within]] the [[boundaries]] of good [[taste]]. 'De Grot' [[tells]] an [[amazing]] story stretched over more than 30 [[years]]. When you'll leave the [[cinema]] you'll be [[moved]]. What can we [[ask]] more of a [[film]]? Anyway, this [[film]] [[even]] gives more.... Though structured [[entirely]] [[several]] from the [[books]] by Tim Krabbé who [[authored]] the original 'The Vanishing' (Spoorloos) it does have the same [[general]] feel, except for that Koolhoven's [[styling]] is [[least]] business-like and more lyric. The [[launch]] is [[awesome]], the [[mid]] is fine, but the sting is in the [[terminate]]. A surprise emotional [[terminated]]. As you could read in [[various]] [[magazine]] there is some sex in the film, but it is [[completed]] all very [[amazingly]]. Never explicit, but with [[alot]] of warmth and [[occasionally]] [[yet]] [[comedy]]. It is a [[embarrass]] American [[film]] can't be as open an honoust as this one. [[Hence]] [[Antilles]] [[film]] tend to [[going]] just over the edge when it comes to this subject, 'De Grot' stays [[incessantly]] [[inside]] the [[restrictions]] of good [[liking]]. 'De Grot' [[told]] an [[wondrous]] story stretched over more than 30 [[olds]]. When you'll leave the [[film]] you'll be [[shifted]]. What can we [[requesting]] more of a [[movie]]? Anyway, this [[movie]] [[yet]] gives more.... --------------------------------------------- Result 5879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Outragously entertaining period piece set in the 30s, it is a spin on the classic cliffhanger series, as much as "Raiders of the Lost Ark", only done on a low budget and much campier by director Michael Anderson. The opening scenes laces liberal amount of gothic art nuveau, predating Batman by two decades. Starring Ron Ely (Tarzan) as a perfectly cast hero and the gorgeous Pamela Hensley as the local latina Mona tagging on to our hero on a goldhunt in the non-existent latin american country of Hidalgo. Best line, our hero to Mona, holding a fist to her chin just as you expect him to be tender with her and give her a hug: "Mona, you're a brick!"

Paul Wexler's ham-and-cheese blackhat, Captain Seas is a an absolute delight. Expect a little "Raiders..", a dash of "Batman", a little "The Lost World", a little "Lost Horizons" and a whole lot of campiness and you'll get it just right. Watch out for cult favorite Michael Berryman in a small part as undertaker and enjoy the campy use of John Philip Sousa's patriotic music. A prime candidate for DVD release, it is certainly overdue. An unmissable treat for the whole family. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] The cast is [[different]] and now they took a [[different]] approach we have the street smart team "Networth" vs . the supposed professional team "Magna" but boy if you think the street smart team would have trouble you'd be right. While the Magna team has struggled at times, the street team has simply disintegrated week after week.

First some things to reiterate as far as the "Apprentice 3" first of it continues the same absurd mentality (from Trump) and the game in this series: if your a good project manager, but you lose, the team will turn on you and you will be fired, despite the fact that your backstabbing teammates are often the ones who do half ass jobs. Simply absurd, that a game show that claims to hire the best candidate actually "weeds" out the best while the dysfunctional candidates stab each other until one is left and that person is the best . lol

Anyone this season, weve seen a total of cursing, backstabbing and even gay offensive stereotypes carried out as teams try to do campaigns.

The list of victims so far Cast Tara Dowdell , Audrey Evans , Danny Kastner those three are the only that I feel were unfairly fired by Trump, the rest really had it coming as they only incited conflict, anger and suffering. It's just amazing as one candidate Audrey Evans said as how she who did a good job was fired and how some of her worthless teammates are still in the game.

Yes its the game, it's "The Apprentice" where manipulation, backstabbing, and always popular "everyone gang up on the project manager" mentality rules.

It has been an entertaining ride, though, the candidates are given a wide array of assignments from photo shoots to the construction of mini golf courses, to building of new apartments.

Still though it's still the "Apprentice" though so all you can do basically is laugh the whole time as the insanity and chaos insues until lucky person is the winner. The cast is [[disparate]] and now they took a [[assorted]] approach we have the street smart team "Networth" vs . the supposed professional team "Magna" but boy if you think the street smart team would have trouble you'd be right. While the Magna team has struggled at times, the street team has simply disintegrated week after week.

First some things to reiterate as far as the "Apprentice 3" first of it continues the same absurd mentality (from Trump) and the game in this series: if your a good project manager, but you lose, the team will turn on you and you will be fired, despite the fact that your backstabbing teammates are often the ones who do half ass jobs. Simply absurd, that a game show that claims to hire the best candidate actually "weeds" out the best while the dysfunctional candidates stab each other until one is left and that person is the best . lol

Anyone this season, weve seen a total of cursing, backstabbing and even gay offensive stereotypes carried out as teams try to do campaigns.

The list of victims so far Cast Tara Dowdell , Audrey Evans , Danny Kastner those three are the only that I feel were unfairly fired by Trump, the rest really had it coming as they only incited conflict, anger and suffering. It's just amazing as one candidate Audrey Evans said as how she who did a good job was fired and how some of her worthless teammates are still in the game.

Yes its the game, it's "The Apprentice" where manipulation, backstabbing, and always popular "everyone gang up on the project manager" mentality rules.

It has been an entertaining ride, though, the candidates are given a wide array of assignments from photo shoots to the construction of mini golf courses, to building of new apartments.

Still though it's still the "Apprentice" though so all you can do basically is laugh the whole time as the insanity and chaos insues until lucky person is the winner. --------------------------------------------- Result 5881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (74%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Space Camp is a [[pretty]] decent film. The plot is [[predictable]], but the actors do a good job, and the special effects are decent for the time.

This film was originally released about the time of the shuttle disaster, and that really put a hamper on how popular it was.

The scene where the shuttle doors open in space is simply spectacular... on the big screen, that is... on a TV... it just looks average. I remember this scene in the theater. It made you feel like you were really up there.

This would be a good film to see on IMAX, but I'm sure that will never happen. Space Camp is a [[belle]] decent film. The plot is [[foreseeable]], but the actors do a good job, and the special effects are decent for the time.

This film was originally released about the time of the shuttle disaster, and that really put a hamper on how popular it was.

The scene where the shuttle doors open in space is simply spectacular... on the big screen, that is... on a TV... it just looks average. I remember this scene in the theater. It made you feel like you were really up there.

This would be a good film to see on IMAX, but I'm sure that will never happen. --------------------------------------------- Result 5882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Although]] I can understand the [[bad]] [[things]] someone has to [[say]] about this [[movie]], I still [[found]] it to be [[absolutely]] amazing. It will touch you, and [[unless]] your a [[critic]] [[searching]] deep into the [[flaws]] and mishaps of [[every]] movie, or you just [[simply]] aren't [[touched]] by [[anything]], it is worth seeing. Don't [[come]] into the [[movie]] [[expecting]] [[anything]], just have a box of tissues and an [[open]] mind. It is [[beautiful]] and the acting is brilliant. I think Will Smith, [[despite]] that he's [[yet]] again playing another [[lonely]] depressed [[individual]], is amazing. I believe a good actor is someone who can truly portray [[feelings]] and [[emotions]] we all have at our worst/best experiences in such a [[way]] that it reaches out to you and makes [[YOU]] feel something. And that's exactly what this movie does. Give it a chance. [[While]] I can understand the [[amiss]] [[aspects]] someone has to [[told]] about this [[kino]], I still [[find]] it to be [[completely]] amazing. It will touch you, and [[if]] your a [[criticisms]] [[researching]] deep into the [[irregularities]] and mishaps of [[each]] movie, or you just [[solely]] aren't [[impacted]] by [[nothing]], it is worth seeing. Don't [[coming]] into the [[film]] [[waiting]] [[nothing]], just have a box of tissues and an [[opens]] mind. It is [[wondrous]] and the acting is brilliant. I think Will Smith, [[though]] that he's [[again]] again playing another [[alone]] depressed [[person]], is amazing. I believe a good actor is someone who can truly portray [[affections]] and [[feelings]] we all have at our worst/best experiences in such a [[pathway]] that it reaches out to you and makes [[DOYOU]] feel something. And that's exactly what this movie does. Give it a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 5883 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I just finished watching the 139 min version (widescreen) with some friends and we were blown away. I won't bother repeating what others have said. What the filmmakers do with the concept is [[unexpected]] and [[fun]]. The huge battle is exhausting. Afterwards we were stunned to find there was still nearly 30 minutes left to go but that didn't keep us from being completely involved and entertained.

There is one thing that nearly ruined it and that was the horrific music/songs. Blues, Country/Folk and Rock Ballads do not belong here and every time they are used we all broke out in laughter. It's hideous. You have been warned but the story and storytelling keeps you grounded.

There are several outstanding moments that make you appreciate the talent behind the camera. There are many uses of silence as well as slow-motion photography that work beautifully. I really wish I could erase the music but alas.

Seek this out. It's fun, it's different and it takes you to places you wouldn't expect and that's very refreshing. I just finished watching the 139 min version (widescreen) with some friends and we were blown away. I won't bother repeating what others have said. What the filmmakers do with the concept is [[unintended]] and [[amusing]]. The huge battle is exhausting. Afterwards we were stunned to find there was still nearly 30 minutes left to go but that didn't keep us from being completely involved and entertained.

There is one thing that nearly ruined it and that was the horrific music/songs. Blues, Country/Folk and Rock Ballads do not belong here and every time they are used we all broke out in laughter. It's hideous. You have been warned but the story and storytelling keeps you grounded.

There are several outstanding moments that make you appreciate the talent behind the camera. There are many uses of silence as well as slow-motion photography that work beautifully. I really wish I could erase the music but alas.

Seek this out. It's fun, it's different and it takes you to places you wouldn't expect and that's very refreshing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I remember watching this [[film]] on [[Saturday]] afternoon [[TV]] in the 1950s or 60s. It was well presented but I do [[remember]] there was a message of hope [[broadcast]] from transmitters secreted in lamposts in one of the last maniacal [[executions]] for [[impending]] liberation. I'm not sure that squares with the facts.

[[Still]] the [[film]] is well done. The German [[High]] [[Command]] reports wryly without emotion "The [[Russians]] are advancing down The Fredrich Strasse" as if all went [[according]] to [[plan]].

it was my [[impression]] that this [[film]] and a [[later]] American made for TV knock-off was based on the British historian Trevor-Roper's account by a similar title Last Days of Hitler. I was surprised to see no credit to Trevor-Roper.

I agree the newest German [[film]] on the subject DOWNFALL was as well [[done]] as the classic. The American knock-off was a [[little]] flat.

Few [[figures]] have [[attracted]] as much attention from the cinema as Adolph. Yet I [[find]] it interesting that [[none]] of the [[many]] films and books that have come out ever [[speak]] of Hitler's double alluded to in passing in [[John]] Toland's [[magnificent]] historical piece.

[[Was]] gibs? I remember watching this [[cinematic]] on [[Sunday]] afternoon [[TELEVISION]] in the 1950s or 60s. It was well presented but I do [[remembering]] there was a message of hope [[telecast]] from transmitters secreted in lamposts in one of the last maniacal [[implementation]] for [[forthcoming]] liberation. I'm not sure that squares with the facts.

[[However]] the [[cinematography]] is well done. The German [[Supremo]] [[Commanding]] reports wryly without emotion "The [[Soviets]] are advancing down The Fredrich Strasse" as if all went [[conforming]] to [[programmes]].

it was my [[feeling]] that this [[flick]] and a [[thereafter]] American made for TV knock-off was based on the British historian Trevor-Roper's account by a similar title Last Days of Hitler. I was surprised to see no credit to Trevor-Roper.

I agree the newest German [[movie]] on the subject DOWNFALL was as well [[completed]] as the classic. The American knock-off was a [[kiddo]] flat.

Few [[numbers]] have [[lured]] as much attention from the cinema as Adolph. Yet I [[unearthed]] it interesting that [[nothing]] of the [[several]] films and books that have come out ever [[speaks]] of Hitler's double alluded to in passing in [[Johannes]] Toland's [[wondrous]] historical piece.

[[Became]] gibs? --------------------------------------------- Result 5885 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] "The Last Hard Men" is a typical western for the 70's. Most of them seem to be inspired by Sam Peckinpah. [[Also]] this one, but Director [[Andrew]] McLaglan is a John Ford [[Pupil]] and this can be [[obviously]] [[shown]] in [[many]] scenes. IMO the beginning is very [[good]]. [[In]] a certain [[way]] McLaglan wanted to show the [[audience]] a [[travel]] from the [[civilization]] to the wilderness. [[In]] the third [[part]] there are some [[illogical]] flaws and I complain a bit about Charlton Heston. He has to play an [[old]] ex-lawman named Sam Burgade but he is in a fantastic physical shape. I never got the feeling that he really has [[problems]] to [[climb]] on a horse or on a rock. For me he didn't looks very motivated as he usual do in most of his [[epic]] [[movies]]. Same goes to the [[beautiful]] Barbara Hershey who is playing the sheriff's daughter. [[Maybe]] both had [[troubles]] with the director or were [[unhappy]] with their roles. Hershey and Coburn are not showing their best but they are [[still]] good. [[If]] the scriptwriter had John Wayne in their mind as Sam Burgade? Also [[Michael]] Parks as modern sheriff is a [[bit]] underused in his role. [[On]] the other Hand there is James Coburn as [[outlaw]] [[Zach]] Provo. Coburn is a really [[great]] villain in this one. He is [[portraying]] the [[bad]] [[guy]] between maniac [[hate]] and cleverness. His role and his acting is the best of the movie.

[[Landscapes]] and Shootouts are [[terrific]]. The shootings scenes are [[bloody]] and the violence [[looks]] [[realistic]]. [[Zach]] Provo and his gang had some [[gory]] and violent scenes. What I miss is the typical [[western]] [[action]] in the middle of the [[movie]]. I [[would]] have [[appreciated]] a bank robbery or something [[similar]]. [[Overall]] it's an [[entertaining]] western [[flick]]. Not a [[great]] movie but above the [[average]] because of a [[great]] Coburn, a very good [[beginning]] and some [[gory]] and violent scenes. "The Last Hard Men" is a typical western for the 70's. Most of them seem to be inspired by Sam Peckinpah. [[Moreover]] this one, but Director [[Andreu]] McLaglan is a John Ford [[Learners]] and this can be [[apparently]] [[evidenced]] in [[several]] scenes. IMO the beginning is very [[buena]]. [[At]] a certain [[ways]] McLaglan wanted to show the [[viewers]] a [[travelling]] from the [[civilisations]] to the wilderness. [[For]] the third [[parte]] there are some [[incoherent]] flaws and I complain a bit about Charlton Heston. He has to play an [[elderly]] ex-lawman named Sam Burgade but he is in a fantastic physical shape. I never got the feeling that he really has [[disorders]] to [[hike]] on a horse or on a rock. For me he didn't looks very motivated as he usual do in most of his [[odyssey]] [[cinematography]]. Same goes to the [[awesome]] Barbara Hershey who is playing the sheriff's daughter. [[Potentially]] both had [[problems]] with the director or were [[pathetic]] with their roles. Hershey and Coburn are not showing their best but they are [[yet]] good. [[Unless]] the scriptwriter had John Wayne in their mind as Sam Burgade? Also [[Michel]] Parks as modern sheriff is a [[bitten]] underused in his role. [[Onto]] the other Hand there is James Coburn as [[ban]] [[Zac]] Provo. Coburn is a really [[wondrous]] villain in this one. He is [[outlining]] the [[wicked]] [[boy]] between maniac [[loathes]] and cleverness. His role and his acting is the best of the movie.

[[Scenery]] and Shootouts are [[magnifique]]. The shootings scenes are [[homicidal]] and the violence [[seem]] [[practical]]. [[Zac]] Provo and his gang had some [[gori]] and violent scenes. What I miss is the typical [[west]] [[measures]] in the middle of the [[cinematography]]. I [[ought]] have [[complimented]] a bank robbery or something [[analogue]]. [[Generals]] it's an [[amusing]] western [[gesture]]. Not a [[excellent]] movie but above the [[medium]] because of a [[large]] Coburn, a very good [[starts]] and some [[gori]] and violent scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5886 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Movie]] had some good acting and good moments (though obviously pretty low budget), but bad rating due to basic [[premise]] being badly developed. The [[main]] point of [[conflict]] between the two leads doesn't [[play]] out in a [[realistic]] [[manner]] at all. There are a few scenes where they disagree because of it, but no discussions of any [[great]] [[depth]] that [[would]] [[explain]] how they can be [[together]] while seeing the world so differently, [[especially]] since the [[employment]] of Glenn is so wound up in this part of his [[life]] (and Adam is active [[enough]] with his that he supports it with [[time]] and [[money]].) Also, several times [[Glenn]] is portrayed negatively for being the way he is ([[apologizing]] to Adam for his past) while [[Adam]] is shown to be upstanding and "[[traditional]]," which the film [[proclaims]] to be the "good" way in the end. I don't like being preached to like that. I attended a discussion session with the director after [[viewing]] LTR, and he said that he [[presented]] this [[conflict]] between them because, if he was in Glenn's shoes (and he said he does in real life relate to Glenn's [[view]]) that he [[could]] never date [[someone]] with Adam's [[views]]. Well, then, I [[think]] he should have [[done]] a much [[better]] [[job]] explaining how Glenn could do it in the film. Also, director said he directed this, his first movie, only after reading (Directing For Dummies.) Directing was not that bad, but far from a top notch effort. I've seen worse, but I rarely leave films feeling this frustrated. [[Cinematographic]] had some good acting and good moments (though obviously pretty low budget), but bad rating due to basic [[supposition]] being badly developed. The [[principal]] point of [[feuds]] between the two leads doesn't [[gaming]] out in a [[hardheaded]] [[forma]] at all. There are a few scenes where they disagree because of it, but no discussions of any [[marvellous]] [[depths]] that [[ought]] [[elucidate]] how they can be [[jointly]] while seeing the world so differently, [[namely]] since the [[labor]] of Glenn is so wound up in this part of his [[vida]] (and Adam is active [[satisfactorily]] with his that he supports it with [[moment]] and [[cash]].) Also, several times [[Gould]] is portrayed negatively for being the way he is ([[apologized]] to Adam for his past) while [[Adams]] is shown to be upstanding and "[[conventional]]," which the film [[announced]] to be the "good" way in the end. I don't like being preached to like that. I attended a discussion session with the director after [[visualizing]] LTR, and he said that he [[tabled]] this [[conflicts]] between them because, if he was in Glenn's shoes (and he said he does in real life relate to Glenn's [[opinion]]) that he [[did]] never date [[person]] with Adam's [[view]]. Well, then, I [[reckon]] he should have [[completed]] a much [[optimum]] [[workplace]] explaining how Glenn could do it in the film. Also, director said he directed this, his first movie, only after reading (Directing For Dummies.) Directing was not that bad, but far from a top notch effort. I've seen worse, but I rarely leave films feeling this frustrated. --------------------------------------------- Result 5887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh this was a really bad movie. The girl who plays Jennifer is OK, but I think she acts bitchy through the movie, not because she is having her organs ripped out by a raven at night, but because she is thinking of firing her agent for putting her in this piece of crap. Faye Dunaway acts like she is remaking Mommy Dearest and the ending is completely silly. I really can't recommend this movie at all even though as a fan of Edgar Allen Poe, I was intrigued a bit by the references to his work(Ravens, House of Usher-like family curse,and being buried alive)-still he would probably turn over in his grave if he knew about this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 5888 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What is this crap? My little cousin picked this out obviously for the overly girlie DVD art and title... I decided to watch it with her so she didn't get bored, and I sure was appalled at the horrible quality.

First, the acting was terrible. They seem like amateur actresses reading off of cue cards. The delivery is sub-par and very formulaic. Scene cuts were terrible.. it looks like they took it straight from the story board, if there was one.

Secondly, the jokes and stereotypes weren't original or well played at all- again, very formulaic. I can't count the times I was able to predict the next joke. I got a few chuckles out of the blatantly "subtle" sexual innuendos. The Cat, The Beaver Patch, Hung Wong?.. c'mon! Just.. stay away from this movie. It's not cute, it's not funny, it's not even stupid-funny. It's just stupid-stupid. It's like a PG kids' movie with unnecessary sexual innuendo, vulgarity, and violence to bump the MPAA rating. STAY AWAY.

"Would you like to ride my yacht?"

"Is that what they're calling it now?"

"You could ride my ding."

"Oh! I think I got blood on my stool!"

Badly played, sir. --------------------------------------------- Result 5889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is possibly the worst fencing, sword-fighting, movie ever made. That is not just because the so called sports fencing is poor but because the plot, characters are so weak that they've got to throw in a semi nude sex scene and, later, supposed group dancing around a fencing scene in the fencing club trying, I suppose to maintain audience interest. What a waste of F. Murray Abraham's talents. You're better served with overblown swashbuckling movies like Zorro, Scaramouche, anything that has Basil Rathbone as the villain. As a fencer myself I recognize the near impossibility of capturing fencing as a sport on film, but if it ever happens it's got to have fresher, better drawn characters and a plot with more depth. --------------------------------------------- Result 5890 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK, I [[bought]] this [[film]] from Woolworths for my [[friend]] for a joke present on his [[birthday]], because the front cover had a sexual [[innuendo]] in it.

But we decided it to watch it anyway. [[Just]] for hilarity [[purposes]].

And I'm [[sorry]], but this has [[got]] to be, one of THE [[worst]] [[films]] in [[history]].

It [[began]] off [[alright]], and we thought "Ok this might [[actually]] be OK". But after about 10 minutes, we were sadly mistaken.

It began when the "mysterious [[paint]] baller" [[turned]] out to be the most [[obvious]] [[character]], the Scouser/[[Australian]] (I [[say]] that because he had an [[accent]] which couldn't be identified), who's acting might I just say, was [[abysmal]].

Then it [[got]] to the end, and by that [[time]], we had all [[lost]] the will to [[live]]. The paint ball finals.

The only thing I did like about this plot is that they didn't actually [[win]], but annoyingly enough they won by default.

And I know this has nothing to do with it, but the [[name]] the team were given was just awful. [[Critical]] [[Damage]]. I mean they [[could]] of [[picked]] a more [[awesome]] [[name]], like "The Destroyers of the Anti-Christ" or something. Or that's what the [[film]] should of been called anyway. OK, I [[buying]] this [[filmmaking]] from Woolworths for my [[freund]] for a joke present on his [[anniversary]], because the front cover had a sexual [[insinuation]] in it.

But we decided it to watch it anyway. [[Righteous]] for hilarity [[target]].

And I'm [[desolated]], but this has [[gets]] to be, one of THE [[gravest]] [[filmmaking]] in [[stories]].

It [[commencement]] off [[ok]], and we thought "Ok this might [[genuinely]] be OK". But after about 10 minutes, we were sadly mistaken.

It began when the "mysterious [[paintings]] baller" [[transformed]] out to be the most [[perceptible]] [[traits]], the Scouser/[[Australia]] (I [[said]] that because he had an [[focusing]] which couldn't be identified), who's acting might I just say, was [[catastrophic]].

Then it [[ai]] to the end, and by that [[times]], we had all [[forfeited]] the will to [[vivo]]. The paint ball finals.

The only thing I did like about this plot is that they didn't actually [[winning]], but annoyingly enough they won by default.

And I know this has nothing to do with it, but the [[designation]] the team were given was just awful. [[Pivotal]] [[Harms]]. I mean they [[did]] of [[picks]] a more [[sumptuous]] [[behalf]], like "The Destroyers of the Anti-Christ" or something. Or that's what the [[kino]] should of been called anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 5891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I [[think]] I will [[make]] a movie next weekend. Oh [[wait]], I'm [[working]]..oh I'm sure I can [[fit]] it in. It [[looks]] like whoever [[made]] this [[film]] fit it in. I hope the makers of this [[crap]] have day [[jobs]] because this film sucked!!! It looks like someones home [[movie]] and I don't [[think]] more than $100 was spent making it!!! [[Total]] [[crap]]!!! Who let's this stuff be released?!?!?! I [[believe]] I will [[deliver]] a movie next weekend. Oh [[suspense]], I'm [[cooperating]]..oh I'm sure I can [[fitting]] it in. It [[seem]] like whoever [[introduced]] this [[movies]] fit it in. I hope the makers of this [[damnit]] have day [[work]] because this film sucked!!! It looks like someones home [[movies]] and I don't [[thinking]] more than $100 was spent making it!!! [[Whole]] [[damnit]]!!! Who let's this stuff be released?!?!?! --------------------------------------------- Result 5892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film looked interesting; I'd read the book a number of years ago and it informed me that the feature followed the plot outline pretty tightly.

Started watching it and almost from the outset it failed to live up to expectations. In fact, I didn't bother watching the whole thing... utter drivel - bad performances, bad acting and instantly dislikeable characters - that was the point of the film, I guess.

Watching this film left a bad taste in the mouth and put me on a downer for the remainder of my weekend.

Do not bother with this feature. --------------------------------------------- Result 5893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Make no bones about it. There are a lot of things [[wrong]] with this [[movie]]. It's clichéd the whole [[way]], not very [[funny]], predictable, and [[illogical]]. Let's [[start]] at the beginning: [[characters]]. There's the boring, luckless [[guy]] - giving Stiller another notch in his boring, luckless [[guy]] [[belt]] - the [[allegedly]] [[wild]], but in [[reality]] just fairly [[normal]], [[love]] interest - whom Aniston plays well, but [[really]] [[needed]] no effort to do so - the [[fat]], jovial [[friend]], and then the [[assortment]] of clichés: an [[annoying]] daredevil Australian [[guy]], a [[confident]] Spanish [[guy]], etc. The storyline: the [[beginning]] is slightly [[unusual]], but [[thereafter]] goes into the standard any-movie [[style]], with [[every]] plot turn as predictable as your average knock-knock joke. The [[biggest]] problem was that Stiller's character's "[[development]]" [[really]] seemed to come from [[nothing]] - like your average school play, the [[writers]] knew where he [[started]] and where he [[ended]], but didn't put enough [[stock]] into [[properly]] [[telling]] the middle bit. [[Finally]], the [[alleged]] 'jokes' were nothing but [[highly]] [[watered]] down versions of standard gross-out [[humour]]; there was a regulation chunder scene, sweaty [[fat]] [[men]], etc.

In conclusion, the [[simple]] fact about this [[movie]] is that learning the [[meaning]] of the word 'shart' was the only [[good]] thing. Hamburg really dished up a dog's [[dinner]] here, and the [[sugar]] coating of Stiller and Aniston may have [[lured]] the [[viewers]], but the taste left at the [[end]] was just as [[rancid]].

Final [[comment]]: This [[film]] may have been [[dreadful]], but Aniston still picked a [[better]] between-Friends-seasons [[movie]] than Kudrow's [[odious]] '[[Marci]] X.' Make no bones about it. There are a lot of things [[erroneous]] with this [[cinema]]. It's clichéd the whole [[camino]], not very [[fun]], predictable, and [[incongruous]]. Let's [[beginning]] at the beginning: [[nature]]. There's the boring, luckless [[guys]] - giving Stiller another notch in his boring, luckless [[guys]] [[strap]] - the [[ostensibly]] [[feral]], but in [[realism]] just fairly [[usual]], [[loves]] interest - whom Aniston plays well, but [[truthfully]] [[needs]] no effort to do so - the [[fatty]], jovial [[boyfriend]], and then the [[gamut]] of clichés: an [[irritating]] daredevil Australian [[boy]], a [[persuaded]] Spanish [[boy]], etc. The storyline: the [[beginnings]] is slightly [[odd]], but [[later]] goes into the standard any-movie [[elegance]], with [[any]] plot turn as predictable as your average knock-knock joke. The [[greatest]] problem was that Stiller's character's "[[developments]]" [[truly]] seemed to come from [[anything]] - like your average school play, the [[screenwriters]] knew where he [[opened]] and where he [[terminated]], but didn't put enough [[stocks]] into [[correctly]] [[saying]] the middle bit. [[Eventually]], the [[supposed]] 'jokes' were nothing but [[vastly]] [[irrigated]] down versions of standard gross-out [[mood]]; there was a regulation chunder scene, sweaty [[fatty]] [[man]], etc.

In conclusion, the [[mere]] fact about this [[filmmaking]] is that learning the [[mean]] of the word 'shart' was the only [[alright]] thing. Hamburg really dished up a dog's [[supper]] here, and the [[sugars]] coating of Stiller and Aniston may have [[drawn]] the [[audience]], but the taste left at the [[terminate]] was just as [[antiquated]].

Final [[commentary]]: This [[filmmaking]] may have been [[scary]], but Aniston still picked a [[optimum]] between-Friends-seasons [[kino]] than Kudrow's [[infamous]] '[[March]] X.' --------------------------------------------- Result 5894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] That's a [[problem]] I have with [[movies]] that [[come]] on television, when there is [[nothing]] [[else]] to watch. I [[somehow]] get [[sucked]] into really [[bad]] movies.

But this one was fairly watchable. The [[concept]] of being the only ones left on [[Earth]] after a comet, then [[finding]] out [[zombies]] are [[around]] makes me [[laugh]]. And that's why I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a 2, [[instead]] of 1. The [[story]] was [[stupid]]...but in that [[way]] that makes you laugh (too [[stupid]] >[[funny]]).

I [[think]] I only [[watched]] it because the [[guy]] from [[Star]] Trek was the lead. I was [[surprised]] to [[see]] him as a younger [[guy]]...and he was the only [[funny]] [[character]] anyway. That's a [[difficulty]] I have with [[films]] that [[coming]] on television, when there is [[none]] [[elsewhere]] to watch. I [[someplace]] get [[aspired]] into really [[unfavorable]] movies.

But this one was fairly watchable. The [[conceptions]] of being the only ones left on [[Terra]] after a comet, then [[conclusions]] out [[walkers]] are [[throughout]] makes me [[laughs]]. And that's why I [[supplied]] this [[film]] a 2, [[however]] of 1. The [[saga]] was [[dumb]]...but in that [[pathway]] that makes you laugh (too [[witless]] >[[hilarious]]).

I [[believe]] I only [[saw]] it because the [[boy]] from [[Superstar]] Trek was the lead. I was [[shocked]] to [[seeing]] him as a younger [[buddy]]...and he was the only [[hilarious]] [[personage]] anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 5895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] 'Soapdish' is one of the [[best]], yet [[least]] well remembered comedies of the 1990's. The film revolves [[around]] the various off-camera drama's that occur behind the scenes of a cheaply [[produced]] [[Daytime]] Soap Opera. The first of the film's various impressive strengths is it's fantastic A-List cast. 'Soapdish' features some of the greatest actors and actresses of it's era.

The film is [[superbly]] led by Sally Field, as the neurotic [[ageing]] actress Celeste Talbert (She famously throws a tantrum when put in a costume that makes her look like "Gloria F*CKING Swanson!"). Her supporting cast reads like a who's-who of 90's Movie Greats! Whoopi [[Goldberg]], [[Robert]] Downey Jr, [[Teri]] Hatcher, Kevin Kline and [[Kathy]] Najimy all [[elevate]] the [[film]] [[greatly]]. [[Goldberg]] is predictably [[excellent]], whilst Downey Jr.'s and Hatcher's performances hint at the comedic excellence they [[would]] [[later]] achieve.

[[In]] terms of writing, the film is [[outstanding]]. There is a really [[modern]] edge to the script, which [[strays]] into the [[wonderfully]] bizarre on [[several]] occasions. There [[also]] [[several]] visual gags that are [[quite]] ahead of their [[time]]. [[In]] some ways, the film is reminiscent of Mel [[Brooks]] at his best and [[frequently]] [[reminded]] this [[reviewer]] of 'High Anxiety' (1977). Much of the film's [[humour]] hinges on it's [[often]] [[scathing]], but pretty [[accurate]], representations of [[daytime]] television and of neurotic and [[pretentious]] actors. [[For]] example, The extras [[casting]] [[session]] [[featuring]] the exploitative [[executive]] [[played]] by Carrie [[Fisher]], is both [[hilarious]] and [[honest]].

'Soapdish' is, for my money, one of the very [[best]] comedies Hollywood [[produced]] during the 1990's. It's excellent script and A-Class cast make it a must-see. It's [[hard]] not to love this [[film]] after it's [[kept]] you [[laughing]] for 90 minutes. 'Soapdish' is one of the [[better]], yet [[fewer]] well remembered comedies of the 1990's. The film revolves [[roundabout]] the various off-camera drama's that occur behind the scenes of a cheaply [[generated]] [[Daylight]] Soap Opera. The first of the film's various impressive strengths is it's fantastic A-List cast. 'Soapdish' features some of the greatest actors and actresses of it's era.

The film is [[brilliantly]] led by Sally Field, as the neurotic [[senility]] actress Celeste Talbert (She famously throws a tantrum when put in a costume that makes her look like "Gloria F*CKING Swanson!"). Her supporting cast reads like a who's-who of 90's Movie Greats! Whoopi [[Tucker]], [[Roberta]] Downey Jr, [[Kent]] Hatcher, Kevin Kline and [[Baroness]] Najimy all [[elevated]] the [[movies]] [[radically]]. [[Tucker]] is predictably [[handsome]], whilst Downey Jr.'s and Hatcher's performances hint at the comedic excellence they [[should]] [[then]] achieve.

[[Onto]] terms of writing, the film is [[wondrous]]. There is a really [[fashionable]] edge to the script, which [[vagrants]] into the [[amazingly]] bizarre on [[myriad]] occasions. There [[apart]] [[diverse]] visual gags that are [[altogether]] ahead of their [[moment]]. [[At]] some ways, the film is reminiscent of Mel [[Creeks]] at his best and [[periodically]] [[reminding]] this [[reviewers]] of 'High Anxiety' (1977). Much of the film's [[comedy]] hinges on it's [[normally]] [[embittered]], but pretty [[correct]], representations of [[daylight]] television and of neurotic and [[ostentatious]] actors. [[At]] example, The extras [[pouring]] [[sessions]] [[starring]] the exploitative [[governance]] [[done]] by Carrie [[Fisherman]], is both [[comical]] and [[truthful]].

'Soapdish' is, for my money, one of the very [[better]] comedies Hollywood [[generated]] during the 1990's. It's excellent script and A-Class cast make it a must-see. It's [[challenging]] not to love this [[cinematography]] after it's [[preserved]] you [[laughs]] for 90 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 5896 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Two [[thirds]] of [[nearly]] 2,000 IMDb [[users]] who have voted on this film have rated it at 8, 9 or 10 and one [[user]] reports [[wearing]] out six videotapes ([[Was]] this a [[record]], or [[merely]] a [[faulty]] VCR?). [[Although]] the [[film]] is [[primarily]] intended as a period [[piece]] it [[clearly]] has a [[quite]] [[unusual]] [[fascination]]. But for some [[reason]] I [[imagined]] it as [[largely]] whimsy and until [[recently]] never [[felt]] the urge to watch it. My mind was changed by Elizbeth Von Arnim's [[original]] book. My [[wife]] loves reading but her [[sight]] no longer [[allows]] her to read much so she borrowed it in talking book form. Such books are usually irritating to a companion who is busy with other things, but I gradually came to appreciate that this one was seductively [[soothing]], although in no way syrupy, and was [[also]] very well [[written]]. I [[realised]] my wife would enjoy [[watching]] the film, and so decided to buy her the videotape. I am now very [[glad]] that I did, and would certainly recommend its purchase to [[anyone]] else who appreciates a [[quiet]] reflective [[work]] with no fireworks but with well [[constructed]] [[character]] [[development]] and a very successful pre-Mussolini Italian [[atmosphere]]. The story is set in the immediate post WW1 [[period]] and [[starts]] with two married London [[ladies]] who [[decide]] to [[pool]] their savings and enjoy a holiday together, away from their families, in a rented villa in Italy. Force of circumstances lead to this couple being joined by two others with very different characters and backgrounds. Its theme is essentially no more than the interactions that take place as their holiday progresses, not only between these four very disparate [[mature]] [[ladies]], but [[also]] with the occasional male [[visitor]]. [[If]] you [[want]] action, thrills, dramatic sex scenes, natural or man-made disasters, or Harlequin [[style]] romances this [[would]] not be the film for you. But IMDb [[users]] have collectively and very emphatically [[demonstrated]] that none of these are necessary for a film to prove [[highly]] rewarding to watch, and if you care to give it a try you may, as I did, come to rank it among your much loved films.

It is fairly rare for me to watch a film of a book with which I am already familiar. In many cases I find this takes some of the pleasure away from watching the film, but here there is such a strong [[visual]] [[appeal]] in the setting that I actually found my pleasure augmented by the anticipation of seeing the next segment of the book, effectively unrolled before my eyes. (Perhaps Italy itself has some [[part]] in this, the last time I had this experience was when I was watching tales from Boccaccio's Decameron on TV.) Generally films of books tend to increase the dramatic level of the original work to ensure that the filmed version has an even wider appeal, but here if anything it is reduced in order to keep the viewers attention on the gradual character development rather than on any background events. This works very well, although changes from the book are few and basically the film remains true to the original story. Great credit is due to the Director, Mike Newell, and all members of the cast, particularly those well known British Actresses who play the four principal ladies. Two [[third]] of [[approximately]] 2,000 IMDb [[customers]] who have voted on this film have rated it at 8, 9 or 10 and one [[users]] reports [[wears]] out six videotapes ([[Became]] this a [[records]], or [[simply]] a [[mala]] VCR?). [[Though]] the [[movie]] is [[especially]] intended as a period [[slice]] it [[evidently]] has a [[pretty]] [[exceptional]] [[glamour]]. But for some [[justification]] I [[figured]] it as [[fundamentally]] whimsy and until [[freshly]] never [[smelled]] the urge to watch it. My mind was changed by Elizbeth Von Arnim's [[preliminary]] book. My [[women]] loves reading but her [[vision]] no longer [[enabling]] her to read much so she borrowed it in talking book form. Such books are usually irritating to a companion who is busy with other things, but I gradually came to appreciate that this one was seductively [[reassuring]], although in no way syrupy, and was [[apart]] very well [[writes]]. I [[realized]] my wife would enjoy [[staring]] the film, and so decided to buy her the videotape. I am now very [[satisfied]] that I did, and would certainly recommend its purchase to [[someone]] else who appreciates a [[silent]] reflective [[jobs]] with no fireworks but with well [[constructing]] [[traits]] [[evolution]] and a very successful pre-Mussolini Italian [[atmospheric]]. The story is set in the immediate post WW1 [[deadline]] and [[launching]] with two married London [[lady]] who [[decides]] to [[pools]] their savings and enjoy a holiday together, away from their families, in a rented villa in Italy. Force of circumstances lead to this couple being joined by two others with very different characters and backgrounds. Its theme is essentially no more than the interactions that take place as their holiday progresses, not only between these four very disparate [[adult]] [[lady]], but [[apart]] with the occasional male [[reception]]. [[Unless]] you [[wanna]] action, thrills, dramatic sex scenes, natural or man-made disasters, or Harlequin [[styles]] romances this [[ought]] not be the film for you. But IMDb [[customers]] have collectively and very emphatically [[shown]] that none of these are necessary for a film to prove [[heavily]] rewarding to watch, and if you care to give it a try you may, as I did, come to rank it among your much loved films.

It is fairly rare for me to watch a film of a book with which I am already familiar. In many cases I find this takes some of the pleasure away from watching the film, but here there is such a strong [[optic]] [[appellate]] in the setting that I actually found my pleasure augmented by the anticipation of seeing the next segment of the book, effectively unrolled before my eyes. (Perhaps Italy itself has some [[parte]] in this, the last time I had this experience was when I was watching tales from Boccaccio's Decameron on TV.) Generally films of books tend to increase the dramatic level of the original work to ensure that the filmed version has an even wider appeal, but here if anything it is reduced in order to keep the viewers attention on the gradual character development rather than on any background events. This works very well, although changes from the book are few and basically the film remains true to the original story. Great credit is due to the Director, Mike Newell, and all members of the cast, particularly those well known British Actresses who play the four principal ladies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5897 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay so I went into this movie not really expecting much I figured an action flick similar to The Fast and the Furious. Some nice cars some nice girls somewhat of a decent plot. Unfortunately I would have to say that this was probably the worst movie I have seen this year. Don't get me wrong the cars were nice and the girls were OK but the way they put the movie together was just plain crappy to put it nicely. The story just never made you care about the cast and the movie seemed just pieced together. So overall this movie was not the worst thing ever by far but if your looking for a movie to go to this weekend I would pass on this one for now. --------------------------------------------- Result 5898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very funny movie. It was good to see Jim Carrey back in top form. It was definitely worth the price of admission. Morgan Freeman and Jennifer Aniston both played outstanding supporting roles in this film. I think they may have played the dog a bit too much however, still a good film to see. --------------------------------------------- Result 5899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[If]] the term itself were not geographically and semantically meaningless, one might well refer to "Ned [[Kelly]]" as an "Australian [[Western]]." For the people Down Under, Ned Kelly was, [[apparently]], a folk hero [[bandit]] akin to Robin Hood, Jesse James, Bonnie and Clyde, and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. The [[descendant]] of Irish immigrants, [[Kelly]] became a fugitive and an outlaw after he was falsely accused of shooting an Australian law officer, a [[crime]] for which his equally innocent mother was put into prison. To get back at the government for this [[mistreatment]], [[Kelly]], his [[brother]] Dan, and two other companions, became notorious bank robbers, winning over the hearts of many people in the countryside while striking a blow for justice in a land where Irish immigrants were often treated with disrespect and disdain by those who ran the country.

Perhaps because we've [[encountered]] this "gentleman bandit" scenario so many times in the past, "Ned Kelly" feels awfully familiar and unoriginal as it pays homage to any number of the genre's stereotypes and clichés on its way to the inevitable showdown. Ned is the typical heart-of-gold lawbreaker who kills only when he is forced to and, even then, only with the deepest regret. He also has the pulse of the common folk, as when, in the middle of a bank robbery, he returns a valuable watch to one of the customers, after one of his gang has so inconsiderately pilfered it. What movie on this particular subject hasn't featured a scene like that? It's acts of selective generosity like this, of course, that earn him the love and respect of all the little people who come to secretly admire anyone who can get away with sticking it to the powers-that-be and the status quo. Geoffrey Rush plays the typical bedeviled law enforcer who feels a personal stake in bringing down this upstart troublemaker who keeps getting away with tweaking the [[establishment]]. There's [[even]] the [[inevitable]] episode in which one of the ladies being held up goes into the next room and has sex with one of the robbers, so turned on is she by the romantic derring-do of the criminal lifestyle. And the [[film]] is riddled with one hackneyed scene like this after another.

Heath Ledger [[fails]] to distinguish himself in the title role, providing little in the way of substance to make his character either interesting or engaging. It doesn't help that he has been forced to provide a droning voice-over narration that underlines the sanctimoniousness and pretentiousness of both the character and the film.

"Ned Kelly" might serve a function of sorts as a lesson in Australian history, but as an entertainment, it's just the same old story told with different accents. [[Though]] the term itself were not geographically and semantically meaningless, one might well refer to "Ned [[Kelley]]" as an "Australian [[West]]." For the people Down Under, Ned Kelly was, [[patently]], a folk hero [[hoodlum]] akin to Robin Hood, Jesse James, Bonnie and Clyde, and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. The [[descendent]] of Irish immigrants, [[Kel]] became a fugitive and an outlaw after he was falsely accused of shooting an Australian law officer, a [[misdemeanor]] for which his equally innocent mother was put into prison. To get back at the government for this [[abuse]], [[Kelley]], his [[brah]] Dan, and two other companions, became notorious bank robbers, winning over the hearts of many people in the countryside while striking a blow for justice in a land where Irish immigrants were often treated with disrespect and disdain by those who ran the country.

Perhaps because we've [[confronted]] this "gentleman bandit" scenario so many times in the past, "Ned Kelly" feels awfully familiar and unoriginal as it pays homage to any number of the genre's stereotypes and clichés on its way to the inevitable showdown. Ned is the typical heart-of-gold lawbreaker who kills only when he is forced to and, even then, only with the deepest regret. He also has the pulse of the common folk, as when, in the middle of a bank robbery, he returns a valuable watch to one of the customers, after one of his gang has so inconsiderately pilfered it. What movie on this particular subject hasn't featured a scene like that? It's acts of selective generosity like this, of course, that earn him the love and respect of all the little people who come to secretly admire anyone who can get away with sticking it to the powers-that-be and the status quo. Geoffrey Rush plays the typical bedeviled law enforcer who feels a personal stake in bringing down this upstart troublemaker who keeps getting away with tweaking the [[creations]]. There's [[yet]] the [[inescapable]] episode in which one of the ladies being held up goes into the next room and has sex with one of the robbers, so turned on is she by the romantic derring-do of the criminal lifestyle. And the [[filmmaking]] is riddled with one hackneyed scene like this after another.

Heath Ledger [[fail]] to distinguish himself in the title role, providing little in the way of substance to make his character either interesting or engaging. It doesn't help that he has been forced to provide a droning voice-over narration that underlines the sanctimoniousness and pretentiousness of both the character and the film.

"Ned Kelly" might serve a function of sorts as a lesson in Australian history, but as an entertainment, it's just the same old story told with different accents. --------------------------------------------- Result 5900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Mr. VanHook took a good idea and kicked like a football. Unfortunately, it didn't make the goal. The historical subject of giants is a good one, but pour in the goon milk and you end up with a giant wheel of cheese. I say, take this reel wheel and roll it off a cliff. I couldn't even watch the entire film. That says a lot because I rarely walk away from any movie. I always like to give them a chance for last-minute redemption. It's impossible to redeem something this bad. Well, at least the acting was good....NOT!

The only thing "falling" in this film is the rating. 1/10 and sinking into the negative numbers! --------------------------------------------- Result 5901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After seeing all the Jesse James, Quantrill, jayhawkers,etc films in the fifties, it is quite a thrill to see this film with a new perspective by director Ang Lee. The scene of the attack of Lawrence, Kansas is awesome. The romantic relationship between Jewel and Toby Mcguire turns out to be one of the best parts and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is outstanding as the bad guy. All the time this film makes you feel the horror of war, and the desperate situation of the main characters who do not know if they are going to survive the next hours. Definitely worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 5902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was not expecting much going in to this, but still came away disappointed. This was my least favorite Halestorm production I have seen. I thought it was supposed to be a comedy, but I only snickered at 3 or 4 jokes. Is it really a funny gag to see a fat guy eating donuts and falling down over and over? What was up with the janitor in Heaven scene? Fred Willard has been hilarious with some of his Christopher Guest collaborations, but this did not work. They must have spent all the budget on getting "known" actors to appear in this because there was no lighting budget. It looked like it was filmed with a video camera and most scenes were very dark. Does it really take that much film to show someone actually shoot and make a basket, as opposed to cutting away and editing a ball swishing through a basket? I try not to be too critical of low budget comedies, but if you want to see something funny go to a real Church basketball game instead of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[thought]] "Intensive Care" was [[quite]] [[bad]] and very [[unintentionally]] [[funny]]. But at [[least]] not as bad as I [[thought]] it might be. Sometimes it's [[somewhat]] suspenseful, but never a good shocker.

[[SPOILER]] [[AHEAD]]

The fun [[lies]] in [[ridiculous]] moments. But the all-time classic moment is this: Peter (Koen Wauters) is stabbed and beaten by the killer. He lies moaning in the corner of the hallway. Amy (Nada van Nie) kneels [[beside]] him and asks "Poor Peter, shall I get you a band-aid?".

This movie was shot in Dutch and English. To spare [[costs]], all license [[plates]] are USA, and the [[background]] in the news studio is a skyline of Manhattan. Very funny if you're [[Dutch]] and watching the original version in Dutch. I [[ideology]] "Intensive Care" was [[rather]] [[negative]] and very [[accidently]] [[hilarious]]. But at [[lowest]] not as bad as I [[ideas]] it might be. Sometimes it's [[rather]] suspenseful, but never a good shocker.

[[DEFLECTOR]] [[FORTHCOMING]]

The fun [[lurks]] in [[silly]] moments. But the all-time classic moment is this: Peter (Koen Wauters) is stabbed and beaten by the killer. He lies moaning in the corner of the hallway. Amy (Nada van Nie) kneels [[alongside]] him and asks "Poor Peter, shall I get you a band-aid?".

This movie was shot in Dutch and English. To spare [[price]], all license [[plaques]] are USA, and the [[context]] in the news studio is a skyline of Manhattan. Very funny if you're [[Netherlands]] and watching the original version in Dutch. --------------------------------------------- Result 5904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This "tragicomedy" written by [[famous]] [[Serbian]] [[theatre]]/[[film]] [[writer]] Dusan Kovacevic is probably one of the [[best]] [[movies]] ever [[made]] in the [[comedy]] [[category]]. And yet, its [[appearance]] of a theatre [[play]] [[transformed]] into a [[feature]] [[film]] takes nothing of its value. A masterpiece one should not [[miss]] to see (preferably with subtitles, and not dubbed).

[[In]] an aged bus en [[route]] to capital Belgrade, a looming war decides the passengers' behaviour. Two Gypsy musicians sing of their miserable [[life]] but [[also]] foresee a tragedy to come; their [[singing]] both [[divides]] and connects stages in this [[extraordinary]] [[road]] [[movie]] ([[real]] life Kostic [[brothers]] are amateur [[actors]], but [[together]] with Stanojlo Milinkovic as farmer who's [[plowed]] the [[road]] [[give]] a real-life performance).

The [[spectrum]] of [[characters]] gives a [[brilliant]] image of a society [[facing]] a war, an [[insight]] into nation's collective [[person]]: everyone is aware that war is just about to [[begin]] but they [[try]] to [[live]] their own lives the best they can, [[hoping]] that [[ignorance]] might [[avert]] the tragedy. Using a [[simple]] [[movie]] language, director Slobodan Sijan [[paints]] a [[picture]] of [[society]] [[torn]] by [[previous]] [[war]] (World War I), but [[also]] highlights personal [[portraits]] with success: provincialism of a [[singer]], inexperience of the newlyweds, seriousness of the [[Great]] [[War]] veteran who is on way to visit his [[recently]] conscripted [[son]], and [[gloomy]] [[predictions]] from a [[man]] who [[seems]] to be a German spy.

[[Brilliant]] in its narration, with [[memorable]] soundtrack (especialy the Gispsy songs) and [[adjusted]] [[atmosphere]], well photographed and edited, this [[feature]] (Sijan's [[feature]] [[debut]]) was only an [[introduction]] into a series of the [[directors]] bitter-sweet comedies that will define Serbian cinematography of the 1980s: "Maratonci trce pocasni krug", "Kako sam sistematski unisten od idiota", and my other director's favourite "Davitelj protiv davitelja"). This "tragicomedy" written by [[acclaimed]] [[Serb]] [[cinema]]/[[cinematography]] [[novelist]] Dusan Kovacevic is probably one of the [[better]] [[kino]] ever [[effected]] in the [[farce]] [[categories]]. And yet, its [[semblance]] of a theatre [[playing]] [[converting]] into a [[idiosyncrasies]] [[cinema]] takes nothing of its value. A masterpiece one should not [[missed]] to see (preferably with subtitles, and not dubbed).

[[Onto]] an aged bus en [[routes]] to capital Belgrade, a looming war decides the passengers' behaviour. Two Gypsy musicians sing of their miserable [[vida]] but [[apart]] foresee a tragedy to come; their [[singer]] both [[splits]] and connects stages in this [[wondrous]] [[route]] [[movies]] ([[genuine]] life Kostic [[brethren]] are amateur [[protagonists]], but [[jointly]] with Stanojlo Milinkovic as farmer who's [[ploughed]] the [[chemin]] [[lend]] a real-life performance).

The [[spectral]] of [[hallmarks]] gives a [[wondrous]] image of a society [[faces]] a war, an [[vision]] into nation's collective [[individual]]: everyone is aware that war is just about to [[embark]] but they [[trying]] to [[inhabit]] their own lives the best they can, [[wait]] that [[ignorant]] might [[averted]] the tragedy. Using a [[mere]] [[cinematography]] language, director Slobodan Sijan [[repainted]] a [[visuals]] of [[societies]] [[ripped]] by [[past]] [[wars]] (World War I), but [[apart]] highlights personal [[portrait]] with success: provincialism of a [[singers]], inexperience of the newlyweds, seriousness of the [[Huge]] [[Wars]] veteran who is on way to visit his [[newly]] conscripted [[sons]], and [[dark]] [[projections]] from a [[guy]] who [[seem]] to be a German spy.

[[Wondrous]] in its narration, with [[eventful]] soundtrack (especialy the Gispsy songs) and [[adapting]] [[ambience]], well photographed and edited, this [[idiosyncrasies]] (Sijan's [[features]] [[infancy]]) was only an [[intro]] into a series of the [[managers]] bitter-sweet comedies that will define Serbian cinematography of the 1980s: "Maratonci trce pocasni krug", "Kako sam sistematski unisten od idiota", and my other director's favourite "Davitelj protiv davitelja"). --------------------------------------------- Result 5905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] this is just usual Indian garbage that gets [[turned]] out as [[cinema]], as [[Indians]] we can proudly [[boast]] that we have the [[biggest]] cinema industry, however it also the [[worst]].

how can other [[poor]] countries have films with real characters that challenge the views of their respective societies and we just keep on pumping out garbage. take a look at [[Russia]], Iran, [[china]] and [[Latin]] America, look at the [[brilliant]] films they have and we get [[crap]] like Kisna!!

[[get]] real people, no wonder the international community in general laughs at Indian cinema. this is just usual Indian garbage that gets [[revolved]] out as [[filmmaking]], as [[Injuns]] we can proudly [[brag]] that we have the [[hugest]] cinema industry, however it also the [[worse]].

how can other [[deficient]] countries have films with real characters that challenge the views of their respective societies and we just keep on pumping out garbage. take a look at [[Moscow]], Iran, [[wa]] and [[Latins]] America, look at the [[sumptuous]] films they have and we get [[dammit]] like Kisna!!

[[got]] real people, no wonder the international community in general laughs at Indian cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 5906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Superman and the Mole Men is quite possibly Superman's [[toughest]] [[adventures]] ever.

Lois [[Lane]] and Clark Kent are [[sent]] to Silsby, home of the world's deepest oil well. While there, some radioactive mole men [[come]] up through the [[oil]] well and explore the town. Jeff Corey and many other townspeople try to dispose of the invading mole men. Can Superman [[change]] the people's ways in time to save the mole men? Can Superman warn the people in [[time]] about the radioactive [[danger]] the mole men bring?

[[In]] my [[opinion]], Superman and the Mole Men is a very [[intelligent]], well-written and well-acted movie. [[Even]] [[though]] we only [[get]] to [[see]] Superman [[fly]] once briefly, It still makes a [[great]] Superman adventure. [[A]] [[must]] see for [[anyone]].

10/10 Stars Superman and the Mole Men is quite possibly Superman's [[hardest]] [[pranks]] ever.

Lois [[Roads]] and Clark Kent are [[transmitted]] to Silsby, home of the world's deepest oil well. While there, some radioactive mole men [[coming]] up through the [[petrol]] well and explore the town. Jeff Corey and many other townspeople try to dispose of the invading mole men. Can Superman [[modified]] the people's ways in time to save the mole men? Can Superman warn the people in [[period]] about the radioactive [[peril]] the mole men bring?

[[Throughout]] my [[visualizing]], Superman and the Mole Men is a very [[artful]], well-written and well-acted movie. [[Yet]] [[if]] we only [[gets]] to [[behold]] Superman [[flies]] once briefly, It still makes a [[huge]] Superman adventure. [[una]] [[ought]] see for [[someone]].

10/10 Stars --------------------------------------------- Result 5907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] First I would like to [[say]] how [[great]] this. It is astounding and sometimes shocking. And to say the least I'm 11 years old and this is my [[favorite]] [[movie]], I can [[definitely]] stand a [[boring]] film, but this is anything but [[boring]]. It is like a trip through humanity. Its stark realism shows through this monumental masterpiece. It is a heart wrenching tale of two down and outers (VOIGHT AND Hoffman) who build a mutual friendship. Joe Buck (VOIGHT) a naive Texan stud comes to New York to make it rich by entertaining women. Soon he meets Rico 'RATSO' Rizzo (HOFFMAN), who is a poor man barely being able to pay rent. Ratso becomes Joe's 'manager' but soon both men can't find Joe a job which results in stealing food. As they try and survive on the streets of New York we realize how tough it is. They can't get Joe a girl until they meet a lady at a party. Joe makes some money and soon Joe takes Ratso on a Ratso's dream spot, Florida. The final five minutes are [[heart]] breaking yet some of the [[greatest]] moments in the film. From MIDNIGHT COWBOY we get a stark and sometimes disturbing urban view on life. First I would like to [[said]] how [[wondrous]] this. It is astounding and sometimes shocking. And to say the least I'm 11 years old and this is my [[prefer]] [[filmmaking]], I can [[unquestionably]] stand a [[dreary]] film, but this is anything but [[bored]]. It is like a trip through humanity. Its stark realism shows through this monumental masterpiece. It is a heart wrenching tale of two down and outers (VOIGHT AND Hoffman) who build a mutual friendship. Joe Buck (VOIGHT) a naive Texan stud comes to New York to make it rich by entertaining women. Soon he meets Rico 'RATSO' Rizzo (HOFFMAN), who is a poor man barely being able to pay rent. Ratso becomes Joe's 'manager' but soon both men can't find Joe a job which results in stealing food. As they try and survive on the streets of New York we realize how tough it is. They can't get Joe a girl until they meet a lady at a party. Joe makes some money and soon Joe takes Ratso on a Ratso's dream spot, Florida. The final five minutes are [[heartland]] breaking yet some of the [[higher]] moments in the film. From MIDNIGHT COWBOY we get a stark and sometimes disturbing urban view on life. --------------------------------------------- Result 5908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Title: [[Zombie]] 3 (1988)

[[Directors]]: [[Mostly]] Lucio Fulci, but [[also]] Claudio Fragasso and [[Bruno]] Mattei

[[Cast]]: Ottaviano DellAcqua, Massimo Vani, [[Beatrice]] Ring, Deran Serafin

[[Review]]:

To review this flick and [[get]] some [[good]] [[background]] of it, I gotta [[start]] by the beginning. And the [[beginning]] of this is [[really]] [[George]] Romeros Dawn of the Dead. When Dawn [[came]] out in 79, Lucio Fulci decided to make an indirect sequel to it and call it Zombie 2. That film is the one we know as plain ole Zombie. You know the one in which the zombie fights with the shark! [[OK]] so, after that flick (named Zombie 2 in Italy) came out and made a huge chunk of cash, the Italians decided, heck. Lets make some more zombie flicks! These things are raking in the dough! So Zombie 3 was born. Confused yet? The story on this one is really just a rehash of stories we've seen in a lot of American zombie flicks that we have seen before this one, the best comparison that comes to mind is Return of the Living Dead. Lets see...there's the government making experiments with a certain toxic gas that will turn people into zombies. Canister gets released into the general population and shebang! We get loads of zombies yearning for human flesh. A bunch of people start running away from the zombies and end up in an old abandoned hotel. They gotta fight the zombies to survive.

There was a lot of trouble during the filming of this movie. First and foremost, Lucio Fulci the beloved godfather of gore from Italy was sick. So he couldn't really finish this film the way that he wanted to. The film was then handed down to two lesser directors Bruno Mattei (Hell of the Living Dead) and Claudio Fragasso (Zombie 4). They did their best to spice up a film that was already not so good. You see Fulci himself didn't really have his heart and soul on this flick. He was disenchanted with it. He gave the flick over to the producers and basically said: "Do whatever the hell you want with it!" And god love them, they did.

And that is why ladies and gents we have such a crappy zombie flick with the great Fulci credited as its "director". The main problem in my opinion is that its just such a pointless bore! There's no substance to it whatsoever! After the first few minutes in which some terrorists steal the toxic gas and accidentally release it, the rest of the flick is just a bunch of empty soulless characters with no personality whatsoever running from the zombies. Now in some cases this can prove to be fun, if #1 the zombie make up and zombie action is actually good and fun and #2 there's a lot of gore and guts involved.

Here we get neither! Well there's some inspired moments in there, like for example when some eagles get infected by the gas and they start attacking people. That was cool. There's also a scene involving a flying zombie head (wich by the way defies all logic and explanation) and a scene with zombies coming out of the pool of the abandoned hotel and munching off a poor girls legs. But aside from that...the rest of the flick just falls flat on its ass.

Endless upon endless scenes that don't do jack to move the already non existent plot along. That was my main gripe with this flick. The sets look unfinished and the art direction is practically non-existent. I hate it when everything looks so damn unfinished! I like my b-movies, but this one just really went even below that! Its closer to a z-level flick, if you ask me.

The zombie make up? Pure crap. The zombies are all Asian actors (the movie was filmed in the Philippines) so you get a bunch of Asian looking zombies. But thats not a big problem since they movie was set in the phillipine islands anyway. Its the look of the zombies that really sucks! They all died with the same clothes on for some reason. And what passes for zombie make up here is a bunch of black make up (more like smudges) on their faces. One or two zombies had slightly more complex make up, but it still wasn't good enough to impress. Its just a bunch of goo pointlessly splattered on the actors faces. So not only is this flick slowly paced but the zombies look like crap. These are supposed to be dead folks! Anyhows, for those expecting the usual coolness in a Fulci flick don't come expecting it here cause this is mostly somebody else's flick. And those two involved (Mattei and Fragasso) didn't really put there heart and souls into it. In fact, when you see the extras on the DVD you will see that when Fragasso is asked about his recollections and his feelings on this here flick, he doesn't even take it to seriously. You can tell he is ashamed of it and in many occasions he says they "just had a job to do and they did it". And that my friends, is the last nail on this flick. There's no love, and no heart put into making this film. Therefore you get a half assed, crappy zombie flick.

Only for completest or people who want to have or see every zombie flick ever made. Everybody else, don't even bother! Rating: 1 out of 5 Title: [[Ghoul]] 3 (1988)

[[Managers]]: [[Basically]] Lucio Fulci, but [[apart]] Claudio Fragasso and [[Bruna]] Mattei

[[Casting]]: Ottaviano DellAcqua, Massimo Vani, [[Beatriz]] Ring, Deran Serafin

[[Reviewed]]:

To review this flick and [[obtains]] some [[alright]] [[context]] of it, I gotta [[starter]] by the beginning. And the [[launch]] of this is [[truly]] [[Giorgi]] Romeros Dawn of the Dead. When Dawn [[arrived]] out in 79, Lucio Fulci decided to make an indirect sequel to it and call it Zombie 2. That film is the one we know as plain ole Zombie. You know the one in which the zombie fights with the shark! [[OKAY]] so, after that flick (named Zombie 2 in Italy) came out and made a huge chunk of cash, the Italians decided, heck. Lets make some more zombie flicks! These things are raking in the dough! So Zombie 3 was born. Confused yet? The story on this one is really just a rehash of stories we've seen in a lot of American zombie flicks that we have seen before this one, the best comparison that comes to mind is Return of the Living Dead. Lets see...there's the government making experiments with a certain toxic gas that will turn people into zombies. Canister gets released into the general population and shebang! We get loads of zombies yearning for human flesh. A bunch of people start running away from the zombies and end up in an old abandoned hotel. They gotta fight the zombies to survive.

There was a lot of trouble during the filming of this movie. First and foremost, Lucio Fulci the beloved godfather of gore from Italy was sick. So he couldn't really finish this film the way that he wanted to. The film was then handed down to two lesser directors Bruno Mattei (Hell of the Living Dead) and Claudio Fragasso (Zombie 4). They did their best to spice up a film that was already not so good. You see Fulci himself didn't really have his heart and soul on this flick. He was disenchanted with it. He gave the flick over to the producers and basically said: "Do whatever the hell you want with it!" And god love them, they did.

And that is why ladies and gents we have such a crappy zombie flick with the great Fulci credited as its "director". The main problem in my opinion is that its just such a pointless bore! There's no substance to it whatsoever! After the first few minutes in which some terrorists steal the toxic gas and accidentally release it, the rest of the flick is just a bunch of empty soulless characters with no personality whatsoever running from the zombies. Now in some cases this can prove to be fun, if #1 the zombie make up and zombie action is actually good and fun and #2 there's a lot of gore and guts involved.

Here we get neither! Well there's some inspired moments in there, like for example when some eagles get infected by the gas and they start attacking people. That was cool. There's also a scene involving a flying zombie head (wich by the way defies all logic and explanation) and a scene with zombies coming out of the pool of the abandoned hotel and munching off a poor girls legs. But aside from that...the rest of the flick just falls flat on its ass.

Endless upon endless scenes that don't do jack to move the already non existent plot along. That was my main gripe with this flick. The sets look unfinished and the art direction is practically non-existent. I hate it when everything looks so damn unfinished! I like my b-movies, but this one just really went even below that! Its closer to a z-level flick, if you ask me.

The zombie make up? Pure crap. The zombies are all Asian actors (the movie was filmed in the Philippines) so you get a bunch of Asian looking zombies. But thats not a big problem since they movie was set in the phillipine islands anyway. Its the look of the zombies that really sucks! They all died with the same clothes on for some reason. And what passes for zombie make up here is a bunch of black make up (more like smudges) on their faces. One or two zombies had slightly more complex make up, but it still wasn't good enough to impress. Its just a bunch of goo pointlessly splattered on the actors faces. So not only is this flick slowly paced but the zombies look like crap. These are supposed to be dead folks! Anyhows, for those expecting the usual coolness in a Fulci flick don't come expecting it here cause this is mostly somebody else's flick. And those two involved (Mattei and Fragasso) didn't really put there heart and souls into it. In fact, when you see the extras on the DVD you will see that when Fragasso is asked about his recollections and his feelings on this here flick, he doesn't even take it to seriously. You can tell he is ashamed of it and in many occasions he says they "just had a job to do and they did it". And that my friends, is the last nail on this flick. There's no love, and no heart put into making this film. Therefore you get a half assed, crappy zombie flick.

Only for completest or people who want to have or see every zombie flick ever made. Everybody else, don't even bother! Rating: 1 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 5909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, I hate hollywood, but love cinema so i have to watch these cruddy movies in theaters. And, I was hoping Vanilla Sky would be good. i was hoping that they would either keep the original "Open Your Eyes" exactly the same, or they would make it their own. Well, it happened to be a little bit of both, and it sucked.

It started out good. I love Radiohead. I wish there was more of that. But by the end we are listening to Good Vibrations by The Beach Boys. Talk about a wide range of suck between. They had one or two good songs in the club and maybe a couple others, but why oh why did they have to blare GV during the climax. It was more annoying than confusing or blatant. Especially when it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PLOT. At least put some meaning behind the songs. Kid A = primary. Whatever.

He also did a bang up job with the club scene. That was cool. Otherwise the movie was one big ball of arrogance. As if audiences would get the movie. The ones that would get it read subtitles, and the rest won't. Its as simple as that. The motivations got all screwed up. I didn't comprehend the Diaz motivations (hadn't they done the Chicken Soup night before?) and some of the others. And I hate Kurt Russell. Stay overboard. Tom Cruise can't act (especially in these types of movie [i.e. Eyes Wide Shut]). And the elevator. I get it. Anyways they tried improving the original with a crappy american rock soundtrack and crappy angles and good film print and glossy processing and it would have helped if crowe hadn't screwed it up.

2/10 Major disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 5910 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] just watched it, me and my better half [[could]] not [[believe]] how [[awful]] and badly [[acted]] it was. If anyone else thinks its good then you must be [[easily]] pleased. I actually [[gave]] up a night out to watch this, its all been done before. IE. hostel springs to mind, but at [[least]] that did not make you cringe with the bad acting and lack of story line, same old stuff, re-hatched,i read so much about this film, i even [[recommended]] it to my [[mates]], my fault,[[someone]] [[said]] it was good! no more gory,horror or reeling back in disgust than your average "scary movie" it has to be said, please don't bother with this movie. get mary poppins. now thats scary! I'm off out now, go to the cinema and watch something scarier than this, little miss sunshine maybe just watched it, me and my better half [[wo]] not [[reckon]] how [[abhorrent]] and badly [[worked]] it was. If anyone else thinks its good then you must be [[conveniently]] pleased. I actually [[provided]] up a night out to watch this, its all been done before. IE. hostel springs to mind, but at [[lowest]] that did not make you cringe with the bad acting and lack of story line, same old stuff, re-hatched,i read so much about this film, i even [[recommend]] it to my [[companions]], my fault,[[person]] [[say]] it was good! no more gory,horror or reeling back in disgust than your average "scary movie" it has to be said, please don't bother with this movie. get mary poppins. now thats scary! I'm off out now, go to the cinema and watch something scarier than this, little miss sunshine maybe --------------------------------------------- Result 5911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This game is [[fun]] and it has a plot that you could actually [[expect]] to see in the comics. Spider-man has been framed by a mysterious impostor. The city is being overrun by a strange gas, and symbiotes like those of Venom and Carnage are appearing all over the city. Who is behind these crimes? [[Could]] it be Doc Ock? Well he [[seems]] to have turned over a new leaf. Venom [[also]] does not seem to be involved as he is just ticked off that Spider-man has apparently cost him a rather good photo opportunity. Well cameos from other heroes and lots of villains later Spidey will unravel the mystery. The [[fighting]] is basic, not to [[hard]] to pick up, the fights with the bosses are rather [[fun]]. You get to collect comics, you run out of web and it is somewhat fun traversing the city. [[However]], that is also a [[weak]] point. The swinging is not all that great as all you do is hover through the city as Spider-man [[seemingly]] attachés his webs to the sky. You also do not have much maneuverability web-slinging either especially compared to a [[say]] Spider-man 2 movie video [[game]]. Still, it makes up for the rather bad swinging with the other elements especially the story. So be prepared to see Scorpion, Rhino, Venom, Mysterio, Doctor Octopus, and [[Carnage]] for one [[wild]] [[action]] [[packed]] ride. This game is [[droll]] and it has a plot that you could actually [[awaited]] to see in the comics. Spider-man has been framed by a mysterious impostor. The city is being overrun by a strange gas, and symbiotes like those of Venom and Carnage are appearing all over the city. Who is behind these crimes? [[Wo]] it be Doc Ock? Well he [[looks]] to have turned over a new leaf. Venom [[apart]] does not seem to be involved as he is just ticked off that Spider-man has apparently cost him a rather good photo opportunity. Well cameos from other heroes and lots of villains later Spidey will unravel the mystery. The [[struggling]] is basic, not to [[laborious]] to pick up, the fights with the bosses are rather [[droll]]. You get to collect comics, you run out of web and it is somewhat fun traversing the city. [[Still]], that is also a [[flimsy]] point. The swinging is not all that great as all you do is hover through the city as Spider-man [[evidently]] attachés his webs to the sky. You also do not have much maneuverability web-slinging either especially compared to a [[told]] Spider-man 2 movie video [[gaming]]. Still, it makes up for the rather bad swinging with the other elements especially the story. So be prepared to see Scorpion, Rhino, Venom, Mysterio, Doctor Octopus, and [[Butchery]] for one [[feral]] [[activity]] [[packing]] ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 5912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The [[boys]] are [[working]] outside a [[recording]] studio when they [[hear]] "the [[voice]] of an [[angel]]." That would be Miss Van Doren, auditioning and going under the name of Miss Andrews because her father doesn't approve of her being a "radio singer". However, she hopes a certain big-wig, Mrs. Bixby, a friend of her dad's will hire her, and then he will have to give his approval.

She [[leaves]] but within minutes the boys are running amok in the studio causing havoc and having other musicians out to kill them after they ruin the recording session. [[Finally]] things [[calm]] down. "Whew, we [[eluded]] them," says Moe. "Yeah, we got away, too," [[answers]] Curly.

The boys then fool around in the studio, put on Miss Van Doren's [[record]] and Curly [[gets]] dressed in women's clothes and pretends he's singing. Mrs. Bixby walks in, is impressed and hires "Seniorita Cucacha" on the spot! For an extra $500, she's asked to come and sing at their high-society party that night. The rest, as they say,is history as Curly pretends to be an opera singer with some funny results. Oh, by the way, he accompanied by "Senior Mucho" and "Senior Gusto."

What happens at the party is simply that the truth wins out, but not before a few slapstick antics take place. [[In]] all, a pretty good episode. I enjoyed it but wouldn't [[rate]] it as anything special. The [[grooms]] are [[cooperated]] outside a [[registrations]] studio when they [[heed]] "the [[vocals]] of an [[angels]]." That would be Miss Van Doren, auditioning and going under the name of Miss Andrews because her father doesn't approve of her being a "radio singer". However, she hopes a certain big-wig, Mrs. Bixby, a friend of her dad's will hire her, and then he will have to give his approval.

She [[departs]] but within minutes the boys are running amok in the studio causing havoc and having other musicians out to kill them after they ruin the recording session. [[Lastly]] things [[placid]] down. "Whew, we [[evaded]] them," says Moe. "Yeah, we got away, too," [[response]] Curly.

The boys then fool around in the studio, put on Miss Van Doren's [[docket]] and Curly [[get]] dressed in women's clothes and pretends he's singing. Mrs. Bixby walks in, is impressed and hires "Seniorita Cucacha" on the spot! For an extra $500, she's asked to come and sing at their high-society party that night. The rest, as they say,is history as Curly pretends to be an opera singer with some funny results. Oh, by the way, he accompanied by "Senior Mucho" and "Senior Gusto."

What happens at the party is simply that the truth wins out, but not before a few slapstick antics take place. [[During]] all, a pretty good episode. I enjoyed it but wouldn't [[rates]] it as anything special. --------------------------------------------- Result 5913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I am sorry to say that it was one of the [[worst]] films I've ever seen. Although visually [[fascinating]] (e.[[g]]. the [[use]] of [[colour]] was absolutely [[stunning]]), it was pretty boring and [[disturbing]] ([[see]] the father/son incest).

What's more, music is totally absent, and if you [[think]] of those [[wonderful]] soundtracks by Michael Nyman (who [[wrote]] the soundtracks for most of Greenaway's [[films]]) then you can [[imagine]] what a [[difference]] it makes.

I am sorry to say that it was one of the [[meanest]] films I've ever seen. Although visually [[mesmerizing]] (e.[[gram]]. the [[utilise]] of [[staining]] was absolutely [[astounding]]), it was pretty boring and [[disconcerting]] ([[seeing]] the father/son incest).

What's more, music is totally absent, and if you [[ideas]] of those [[sumptuous]] soundtracks by Michael Nyman (who [[written]] the soundtracks for most of Greenaway's [[movie]]) then you can [[reckon]] what a [[discrepancy]] it makes.

--------------------------------------------- Result 5914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Well I too had [[heard]] read all the [[breathless]] reviews and comments about how this movie might deserve the Best Picture Oscar so I went to see it today. What a [[major]] [[disappointment]]! 1) [[If]] you read the other reviews you will learn from members of the U.S. military who served in [[Iraq]] how [[unlikely]] the events of this movie are. They mirrored my own [[thoughts]]; as the movie played I - a complete [[civilian]] - kept thinking to myself, "say WHAT? there's no way that would happen like that.." 2) There's very little that actually happens in terms of plot. A new bomb disposal guy shows up to replace one who was killed (a death that isn't really clearly explained). The new guy gets an adrenaline rush from his work. His attitude puts others at risk. THAT'S IT! 3) This movie is [[nowhere]] near as suspenseful as claimed. If you [[want]] suspense [[try]] one of the [[Bourne]] movies. If you want to see a [[war]] movie that's emotionally powerful, try [[renting]] Go Tell The Spartans, which is about the Vietnam War, and stars Burt Lancaster (who told me PERSONALLY in a serendipitous supermarket encounter that it was a film he was immensely proud of and one he viewed as some of his finest work, and which he was still upset had been largely ignored in the wake of the over-hyped Apocalypse Now), or an old WWII black and white classic Sink The Bismark, which, especially for an English film, is [[unbelievably]] heart-wrenching. DON'T WASTE [[YOUR]] [[TIME]] ON Hurt Locker. Well I too had [[overheard]] read all the [[stunning]] reviews and comments about how this movie might deserve the Best Picture Oscar so I went to see it today. What a [[grands]] [[displeasure]]! 1) [[Unless]] you read the other reviews you will learn from members of the U.S. military who served in [[Bagdad]] how [[improbable]] the events of this movie are. They mirrored my own [[reflections]]; as the movie played I - a complete [[civil]] - kept thinking to myself, "say WHAT? there's no way that would happen like that.." 2) There's very little that actually happens in terms of plot. A new bomb disposal guy shows up to replace one who was killed (a death that isn't really clearly explained). The new guy gets an adrenaline rush from his work. His attitude puts others at risk. THAT'S IT! 3) This movie is [[everywhere]] near as suspenseful as claimed. If you [[wanna]] suspense [[tried]] one of the [[Bourn]] movies. If you want to see a [[wars]] movie that's emotionally powerful, try [[rented]] Go Tell The Spartans, which is about the Vietnam War, and stars Burt Lancaster (who told me PERSONALLY in a serendipitous supermarket encounter that it was a film he was immensely proud of and one he viewed as some of his finest work, and which he was still upset had been largely ignored in the wake of the over-hyped Apocalypse Now), or an old WWII black and white classic Sink The Bismark, which, especially for an English film, is [[unimaginably]] heart-wrenching. DON'T WASTE [[UOUR]] [[TIMES]] ON Hurt Locker. --------------------------------------------- Result 5915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my favorite scenes is at the beginning when guests on a private yacht decide to take an impromptu swim - in their underwear! Rather risqué for 1931! --------------------------------------------- Result 5916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Bloodsuckers has the potential to be a somewhat decent [[movie]], the [[concept]] of [[military]] types [[tracking]] down and battling vampires in space is one with some potential in the cheesier realm of things. Even the [[idea]] of the universe being full of various different [[breeds]] of vampire, all with different attributes, many of which the [[characters]] have yet to find out about, is [[kind]] of cool as well. As to how most of the life in the galaxy outside of [[earth]] is vampire, I'm not sure how the [[makers]] [[meant]] for that to work, given the nature of vampires. Who the hell they are meant to be feeding on if almost everyone is a vampire I don't know. As it is the movie comes across a low budget mix of Firefly/Serenity and vampires movies with a dash of Aliens.

The action parts of the movie are pretty average and derivative (Particularly of Serenity) but passable- they are reasonably well executed and there is enough gore for a vampire flick, including some of the comical blood-spurting variety. There is a lot of character stuff, most of which is [[tedious]], coming from conflicts between characters who mostly seem like whiny, immature arseholes- primarily cowboy dude and Asian woman. There are a few character scenes that actually kind of work and the actors don't play it too badly but it mostly slows things down. A nice try at fleshing the characters out but people don't watch a movie called Bloodsuckers for character development and drama. The acting is actually okay. Michael Ironside hams it up and is as fun to watch as ever and at least of a couple of the women are hot. The space SFX aren't too bad for what is clearly a low budget work. The story is again pretty average and [[derivative]] but as I said the world created has a little bit of potential. The way things are set up Bloodsuckers really does seem like the pilot for a TV series- character dynamics introduced, the world introduced but not explored, etc.

The film does have a some highlights and head scratching moments- the kind of stuff that actually makes these [[dodgy]] productions watchable. -The scene where our heroes interrogate a talking sock puppet chestburster type creature. Hilarious. - The "sex scene." WTF indeed. -The credit "And Michael Ironside as Muco." The most [[annoying]] aspect of it all though is the really awful and usually inappropriate pop music they have playing very loud over half the scenes of the movie. It is painful to listen to and only detracts from what is only average at best.

Basically an okay watch is you're up for something cheesy, even if it is just for the "chestburster" scene. Bloodsuckers has the potential to be a somewhat decent [[cinema]], the [[conceptions]] of [[serviceman]] types [[flagging]] down and battling vampires in space is one with some potential in the cheesier realm of things. Even the [[brainchild]] of the universe being full of various different [[begets]] of vampire, all with different attributes, many of which the [[trait]] have yet to find out about, is [[types]] of cool as well. As to how most of the life in the galaxy outside of [[terra]] is vampire, I'm not sure how the [[industrialists]] [[intended]] for that to work, given the nature of vampires. Who the hell they are meant to be feeding on if almost everyone is a vampire I don't know. As it is the movie comes across a low budget mix of Firefly/Serenity and vampires movies with a dash of Aliens.

The action parts of the movie are pretty average and derivative (Particularly of Serenity) but passable- they are reasonably well executed and there is enough gore for a vampire flick, including some of the comical blood-spurting variety. There is a lot of character stuff, most of which is [[tiresome]], coming from conflicts between characters who mostly seem like whiny, immature arseholes- primarily cowboy dude and Asian woman. There are a few character scenes that actually kind of work and the actors don't play it too badly but it mostly slows things down. A nice try at fleshing the characters out but people don't watch a movie called Bloodsuckers for character development and drama. The acting is actually okay. Michael Ironside hams it up and is as fun to watch as ever and at least of a couple of the women are hot. The space SFX aren't too bad for what is clearly a low budget work. The story is again pretty average and [[derived]] but as I said the world created has a little bit of potential. The way things are set up Bloodsuckers really does seem like the pilot for a TV series- character dynamics introduced, the world introduced but not explored, etc.

The film does have a some highlights and head scratching moments- the kind of stuff that actually makes these [[murky]] productions watchable. -The scene where our heroes interrogate a talking sock puppet chestburster type creature. Hilarious. - The "sex scene." WTF indeed. -The credit "And Michael Ironside as Muco." The most [[irksome]] aspect of it all though is the really awful and usually inappropriate pop music they have playing very loud over half the scenes of the movie. It is painful to listen to and only detracts from what is only average at best.

Basically an okay watch is you're up for something cheesy, even if it is just for the "chestburster" scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 5917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Another [[classic]] study of the effects of wealth on a southern family is [[masterfully]] depicted in [[Written]] on the Wind.

Kyle Hadley has it all. [[Wealth]], a [[plane]], you name it. Kyle's best [[friend]], Mitch, has [[always]] [[gotten]] him out of difficulty. Mitch finished [[college]], Kyle got thrown out. Mitch is not from a [[wealthy]] home. Kyle's [[family]], with Hadley Oil, [[controls]] most of everything in the [[town]].

[[While]] in N.Y., Kyle meets the girl of his [[dreams]], [[nicely]] played by Lauren Bacall. After a [[whirlwind]] romance, he marries her and [[brings]] her home. There she meets her father-in-law who [[warns]] her how [[difficult]] Kyle can be. Kyle sleeps with a gun under his [[pillow]]. The Bacall character meets Kyle's sister, [[Mary]] Lee, a [[tramp]] if ever there were, [[played]] to the [[fullest]] by Dorothy Malone, who was voted [[best]] [[supporting]] actress.

Rock Hudson plays Mitch, the faithful [[friend]].

A year of wedded [[bliss]] for Kyle and his [[bride]] ends when Kyle is [[told]] by the [[doctor]] that he can't have children. It is when his [[wife]] reveals to him that she is [[indeed]] pregnant, Kyle, thinking that the child is Mitch's, goes on a [[drunken]] [[frenzy]] and is accidentally shot dead in a [[memorable]] scene.

Mary Lee, who has [[always]] [[loved]] Mitch, tries but is [[unsuccessful]] in blaming Mitch for Kyle's death. In a [[memorable]] courtroom scene, Malone [[pulled]] out all the stops in [[finally]] admitting that Kyle's death was an [[unfortunate]] [[accident]]. Her Oscar was well deserved.

Surprisingly, [[Robert]] Stack, [[brilliant]] as Kyle Hadley, was [[nominated]] for [[best]] supporting actor and lost in an [[upset]] victory by Anthony Quinn, as [[Paul]] Gauguin, in Lust for [[Life]].

Douglas Sirk was the master of soap opera films of the 1950s. [[Written]] on the Wind is no [[exception]]. ***1/2. Another [[classical]] study of the effects of wealth on a southern family is [[artfully]] depicted in [[Handwritten]] on the Wind.

Kyle Hadley has it all. [[Riches]], a [[airplanes]], you name it. Kyle's best [[boyfriend]], Mitch, has [[continuously]] [[become]] him out of difficulty. Mitch finished [[universities]], Kyle got thrown out. Mitch is not from a [[prosperous]] home. Kyle's [[families]], with Hadley Oil, [[monitoring]] most of everything in the [[municipality]].

[[Although]] in N.Y., Kyle meets the girl of his [[dream]], [[kindly]] played by Lauren Bacall. After a [[cyclone]] romance, he marries her and [[bring]] her home. There she meets her father-in-law who [[cautionary]] her how [[hard]] Kyle can be. Kyle sleeps with a gun under his [[mattress]]. The Bacall character meets Kyle's sister, [[Marie]] Lee, a [[hobo]] if ever there were, [[served]] to the [[full]] by Dorothy Malone, who was voted [[bestest]] [[helps]] actress.

Rock Hudson plays Mitch, the faithful [[boyfriend]].

A year of wedded [[ecstasy]] for Kyle and his [[fiancee]] ends when Kyle is [[tells]] by the [[doctors]] that he can't have children. It is when his [[woman]] reveals to him that she is [[actually]] pregnant, Kyle, thinking that the child is Mitch's, goes on a [[drunk]] [[hysteria]] and is accidentally shot dead in a [[landmark]] scene.

Mary Lee, who has [[permanently]] [[worshipped]] Mitch, tries but is [[vain]] in blaming Mitch for Kyle's death. In a [[eventful]] courtroom scene, Malone [[pull]] out all the stops in [[eventually]] admitting that Kyle's death was an [[pathetic]] [[accidents]]. Her Oscar was well deserved.

Surprisingly, [[Roberto]] Stack, [[glowing]] as Kyle Hadley, was [[designated]] for [[better]] supporting actor and lost in an [[annoyed]] victory by Anthony Quinn, as [[Paulo]] Gauguin, in Lust for [[Lifetime]].

Douglas Sirk was the master of soap opera films of the 1950s. [[Typed]] on the Wind is no [[exemptions]]. ***1/2. --------------------------------------------- Result 5918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a writer I find films this bad making it into production a complete slap in the face. Talk about insulting. I was writing better stories than this in 8th grade. Bad acting, bad writing, bad directing and when added all together the result is complete and total failure.

The only thing this movie manages to accomplish is tricking the unsuspecting consumer into wasting their time. Who would green light something so poorly written? It's not artistic, clever, smart, suspenseful, mysterious, scary, dramatic-NOTHING.

The characters are flat and boring with no development. The plot is as recycled as an aluminum can. They somehow managed to cast a few very familiar actors who all must be pretty desperate for work or hoping one of these low budget independent movies will turn out to be the next "Pulp Fiction". This script should have been used to line a bird cage, not a movie.

Oh and last but not least, a 5'2 105 lb woman of course has the strength to kill men and women twice her size without a struggle and in a single blow.

Avoid this bomb like it will infect you with an STD. --------------------------------------------- Result 5919 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] It was [[obvious]] that this [[movie]] is [[designed]] to [[appeal]] to the Chick [[Flick]] audience, to which i have sat through [[quite]] a few and [[enjoyed]] most. [[However]], this was a very [[irritating]] [[attempt]] by Heather Graham to [[become]] the [[next]] Meg [[Ryan]] ( who became annoying as hell in her own right ). Her acting was [[overdone]] and it appeared that she was overanxious compared to her [[colleagues]] who were relaxed in their roles. This [[film]] might have been more, as there was [[suitable]] budget for settings, actors and a [[decent]] [[story]] line. My [[wife]] and I both agreed that this was 'Muck' at the end, as the film ended on a painful embarrassing high! Better luck next time, hope Miss Graham sticks to the type of films that she [[belongs]] in like From Hell. It was [[noticeable]] that this [[filmmaking]] is [[design]] to [[appealed]] to the Chick [[Gesture]] audience, to which i have sat through [[pretty]] a few and [[appreciated]] most. [[Nevertheless]], this was a very [[exasperating]] [[endeavor]] by Heather Graham to [[becoming]] the [[future]] Meg [[Laing]] ( who became annoying as hell in her own right ). Her acting was [[overkill]] and it appeared that she was overanxious compared to her [[coworkers]] who were relaxed in their roles. This [[filmmaking]] might have been more, as there was [[proper]] budget for settings, actors and a [[dignified]] [[storytelling]] line. My [[mujer]] and I both agreed that this was 'Muck' at the end, as the film ended on a painful embarrassing high! Better luck next time, hope Miss Graham sticks to the type of films that she [[belonging]] in like From Hell. --------------------------------------------- Result 5920 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a boring film! To sum it all up, its was basically just Nana Patekar beating up his daughter-in-law Karisma Kapoor, while she tried to flee from the village, with her son. Can someone say BORING??? The concept wasn't too bad, but it was poorly executed. The Canadian locales, and some of the village scenes were nicely shot. However, overall the cinematography came up short. The story could have been great, but the movie just seemed to drag on. There is only so much stupidity a person can take, let alone three bloody hours of it.

The best part of the whole movie was the song "Ishq Kamina", and that was only five minutes long. Other than that, this movie was a piece of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 5921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Columbo [[movies]] have been going downhill for [[years]], this year it may have [[reached]] the bottom. Peter Falk [[gives]] the same [[uninspired]] performance and [[comes]] over as creepy in this [[movie]]. As is usual in this series, crime scene [[protocols]] are unheard of so plausibility is always [[lacking]]. Brenda Vaccaro chews the scenery and pulls pantomime faces and [[Andrew]] [[Stephens]] is a pretty unconvincing lady's man. (His faint, though, was a hoot!)The [[script]] was by the [[numbers]] and its delivery [[patronising]]. They should never have brought [[Columbo]] into the nineties, just left us all with one or two happy memories of clever plots, better scripts and sharp characterisations. Columbo [[movie]] have been going downhill for [[yr]], this year it may have [[totaled]] the bottom. Peter Falk [[furnishes]] the same [[unimaginative]] performance and [[happens]] over as creepy in this [[filmmaking]]. As is usual in this series, crime scene [[protocol]] are unheard of so plausibility is always [[missing]]. Brenda Vaccaro chews the scenery and pulls pantomime faces and [[Andreu]] [[Steve]] is a pretty unconvincing lady's man. (His faint, though, was a hoot!)The [[hyphen]] was by the [[figures]] and its delivery [[condescending]]. They should never have brought [[Colombo]] into the nineties, just left us all with one or two happy memories of clever plots, better scripts and sharp characterisations. --------------------------------------------- Result 5922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I've been [[largely]] convinced to write this review for a number of [[reasons]]:

1) This is, without doubt, the [[worst]] film i've ever seen 2) Unless it gets more [[reviews]] it will not be listed in the all time [[worst]] [[films]] list - which it deserves to be 3) I was kinda lucky - i [[paid]] five pound for it. i've seen it in [[shops]] for 15 pound. DON NOT [[PAY]] THAT [[MUCH]] [[FOR]] THIS [[FILM]]! You will be very [[angry]] 4) There are a lot of [[films]] out there in the horror [[genre]] that are not given a fair rating (in my opinion) and giving this [[film]] a [[higher]] rating than them is criminal

The plot [[summary]]: a guy with no [[friends]] meets a tramp who [[promises]] the [[world]] - well, the magic [[ability]] to [[appear]] to everybody [[else]] like somebody [[else]]. Our [[hero]] cunningly turns into a [[teenage]] [[girl]] and joins their gang - sitting on swings, baby-sitting. He [[kills]] them one by one until he is tracked and [[found]] by the police.

Why is it so [[bad]]? To [[begin]] with the acting is VERY [[VERY]] [[bad]]. [[Someone]] [[else]] compared it to a school production. No, this is worse than any acting i've [[seen]] on a [[school]] [[stage]].

I've [[bought]] a number of these [[previously]] banned [[films]] from the DVD [[company]] vipco and not been as disappointed as i was at this. [[okay]], the acting is [[bad]] but the [[film]] fails to [[deliver]] in every other sense. What was the point in making this [[film]] when there isn't [[even]] any gore! [[okay]], no gore. What [[else]] can a [[film]] like this [[offer]]? Breats? No, not even any titillation!

it's [[true]] this [[film]] may have a certain [[charm]] in its [[unique]] naffness but any potential [[buyer]]/[[watcher]] of this [[film]] should be fairly [[advised]] that this [[film]] is, at best, worth only one out of ten. I've been [[widely]] convinced to write this review for a number of [[motifs]]:

1) This is, without doubt, the [[meanest]] film i've ever seen 2) Unless it gets more [[examination]] it will not be listed in the all time [[meanest]] [[kino]] list - which it deserves to be 3) I was kinda lucky - i [[pay]] five pound for it. i've seen it in [[stores]] for 15 pound. DON NOT [[PAYROLLS]] THAT [[VERY]] [[ONTO]] THIS [[FILMMAKING]]! You will be very [[enraged]] 4) There are a lot of [[movie]] out there in the horror [[genres]] that are not given a fair rating (in my opinion) and giving this [[movie]] a [[highest]] rating than them is criminal

The plot [[summarized]]: a guy with no [[friendships]] meets a tramp who [[commitment]] the [[monde]] - well, the magic [[proficiency]] to [[appears]] to everybody [[otherwise]] like somebody [[otherwise]]. Our [[superhero]] cunningly turns into a [[teen]] [[girls]] and joins their gang - sitting on swings, baby-sitting. He [[murder]] them one by one until he is tracked and [[finds]] by the police.

Why is it so [[negative]]? To [[initiated]] with the acting is VERY [[QUITE]] [[negative]]. [[Everybody]] [[otherwise]] compared it to a school production. No, this is worse than any acting i've [[noticed]] on a [[teaching]] [[stages]].

I've [[acquiring]] a number of these [[formerly]] banned [[film]] from the DVD [[societies]] vipco and not been as disappointed as i was at this. [[ok]], the acting is [[negative]] but the [[filmmaking]] fails to [[provide]] in every other sense. What was the point in making this [[filmmaking]] when there isn't [[yet]] any gore! [[alright]], no gore. What [[elsewhere]] can a [[flick]] like this [[delivers]]? Breats? No, not even any titillation!

it's [[veritable]] this [[cinematographic]] may have a certain [[glamour]] in its [[exclusive]] naffness but any potential [[buyers]]/[[observers]] of this [[cinema]] should be fairly [[reported]] that this [[filmmaking]] is, at best, worth only one out of ten. --------------------------------------------- Result 5923 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] Noni Hazlehurst's tour-de-force performance (which won her an AFI [[award]]) is at [[least]] on par with her effort in FRAN [[three]] [[years]] [[later]]. Colin Friels is [[also]] good, and, for those who are interested, Alice Garner appears as Noni's [[child]], and Michael Caton ([[best]] known for THE [[CASTLE]]) is a bearded [[painter]]. (Also [[interestingly]], Hazlehurst is [[currently]] the [[host]] of lifestyle [[program]] BETTER [[HOMES]] [[AND]] [[GARDENS]], and Caton is the [[host]] of property-type [[programs]] [[including]] [[HOT]] PROPERTY, [[HOT]] AUCTION, etc...) This [[film]] reaffirms the popularly-held belief that Noni was arguably Australia's top female actor during the early-to-mid 1980s. Rating: 79/100. Noni Hazlehurst's tour-de-force performance (which won her an AFI [[awarding]]) is at [[fewest]] on par with her effort in FRAN [[tre]] [[olds]] [[then]]. Colin Friels is [[apart]] good, and, for those who are interested, Alice Garner appears as Noni's [[kiddies]], and Michael Caton ([[nicest]] known for THE [[CASTILLO]]) is a bearded [[painting]]. (Also [[strikingly]], Hazlehurst is [[now]] the [[receiving]] of lifestyle [[agendas]] BETTER [[HOME]] [[UND]] [[ORCHARDS]], and Caton is the [[receiving]] of property-type [[agenda]] [[containing]] [[SEXIER]] PROPERTY, [[SCORCHING]] AUCTION, etc...) This [[cinematography]] reaffirms the popularly-held belief that Noni was arguably Australia's top female actor during the early-to-mid 1980s. Rating: 79/100. --------------------------------------------- Result 5924 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I would [[love]] to [[comment]] on this film. Alas , my search has always endeth in vain. If any good citizen could help a desperate inhabitant of this ailing planet and restore his confidence in humanity by offering the whereabouts of either a UK VHS or loan him a DVD copy of the VHS; he would, without reservation, be eternally grateful.....

Blake wrote "The [[road]] to excess is the path to wisdom", one hopes my weary road of excess will offer the path to fruition .... If not, I will have to replay the excellent Mr Russel's Gothic in the knowledge that those who have seen Haunted Summer (for better or for worse) have enriched their viewing pleasure of the events of July 1816 whilst I, a fellow member of this melodious plot, rests his lonely case in solitude ... I would [[loved]] to [[observational]] on this film. Alas , my search has always endeth in vain. If any good citizen could help a desperate inhabitant of this ailing planet and restore his confidence in humanity by offering the whereabouts of either a UK VHS or loan him a DVD copy of the VHS; he would, without reservation, be eternally grateful.....

Blake wrote "The [[chemin]] to excess is the path to wisdom", one hopes my weary road of excess will offer the path to fruition .... If not, I will have to replay the excellent Mr Russel's Gothic in the knowledge that those who have seen Haunted Summer (for better or for worse) have enriched their viewing pleasure of the events of July 1816 whilst I, a fellow member of this melodious plot, rests his lonely case in solitude ... --------------------------------------------- Result 5925 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably the worst Bollywood film I've seen.

No plot line. Very little character developments.

Full of silly and pointless humor. The whole film was chaotic and direction-less. There was no proper ending to the story. The airport was filmed in a shopping mall.

Same story chewed over and over again until you want to say "please, just move on with it!!" Even the song and dance was pointless and badly choreographed.

The only good thing about this movie is that there were hot bods all around... but then most of the Bollywood movies have that anyways these days.

Btw I'm not from an Indian background

2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5926 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The significance of French title of this [[film]], "La Naissance des Pieuvres" which literally [[means]] "The Birth of the Octopuses", is [[rather]] [[obscure]], so it is [[perhaps]] not [[surprising]] that it has been [[marketed]] in English-speaking [[countries]] as "Water [[Lilies]]". The "[[lilies]]" of the [[English]] title are three teenage girls, [[Marie]], Anne and Floriane, who are [[members]] of a [[synchronised]] swimming team [[based]] in the [[Paris]] [[suburbs]], and the [[film]] is a "coming-of-age" drama about the development of their first sexual [[feelings]].

One [[feature]] of the film, [[perhaps]] [[unusual]] for a [[film]] of this [[type]], is that it [[concentrates]] [[exclusively]] on relationships between the young people themselves. We see nothing of their [[parents]] or their [[teachers]], and very [[little]] of the [[adult]] [[world]] at all. The three [[girls]] are very [[different]] in appearance, and are portrayed as being very different in character. The shy, [[retiring]] [[Marie]] is slim and [[petite]] and appears to be the youngest of the three. Anne is [[something]] of a [[plain]] Jane, Floriane a [[glamorous]] [[blonde]] who is very popular with the [[boys]]. The three, [[together]] with a handsome male [[swimmer]] named [[Francois]], are involved in what might be [[described]] as a love-quadrilateral.

Anne has [[fallen]] in love with [[Francois]], but he is smitten with Floriane, who seems to [[return]] his [[affections]], [[although]] he is by no means her only male admirer. Indeed, not all of Floriane's admirers are male, because Marie has a [[crush]] on her attractive [[friend]]. The [[film]] [[charts]] the [[way]] in which their friendship develops; at first it seems that Floriane is simply using [[Marie]] as a convenient excuse when she is in fact [[going]] out to [[meet]] boys; her [[parents]] [[presumably]] [[object]] to her dating [[boys]], but have no objection to her going out with female [[friends]]. [[Later]], [[however]], we [[realise]] that, despite Floriane's [[image]] as the sexy, popular girl who is [[always]] the [[centre]] of male attention, she [[actually]] reciprocates Marie's feelings. The [[film]] [[reverses]] some [[conventional]] stereotypes about sexuality. Anne, with her [[short]] hair and [[rather]] chunky figure, [[looks]] [[typically]] "[[butch]]", [[yet]] she is the only one of the three main characters who is unambiguously heterosexual, whereas the more [[conventionally]] feminine Marie and the [[glamorous]] Floriane are lesbian, or at least bisexual.

Coming-of-age films are common enough, although most of them tend to avoid the controversial topic of teenage lesbianism. "Water Lilies", however, deals with its subject-matter in a sensitive way, with three very good performances from its three leading actresses, Pauline Acquart, Adele Haenel and Louise Blachere. The relationships between the characters, especially that between Marie and Floriane, are complex, and capable of a number of interpretations. (Is Floriane, for example, simply using Marie for sex, or does she genuinely have romantic feelings for her? Could Floriane's sluttish behaviour with Francois and the other boys be just a device to hide her lesbian feelings from the outside world? Or even to hide them from herself?) This was the first film made by its young director Celine Sciamma (only 27 at the time); on this basis she must be regarded as a highly promising newcomer. 7/10 The significance of French title of this [[cinematography]], "La Naissance des Pieuvres" which literally [[modes]] "The Birth of the Octopuses", is [[quite]] [[murky]], so it is [[potentially]] not [[impressed]] that it has been [[marketplace]] in English-speaking [[country]] as "Water [[Lilacs]]". The "[[lys]]" of the [[Frenchman]] title are three teenage girls, [[Marry]], Anne and Floriane, who are [[member]] of a [[synchronized]] swimming team [[founded]] in the [[Parisien]] [[suburb]], and the [[cinematic]] is a "coming-of-age" drama about the development of their first sexual [[sensations]].

One [[featuring]] of the film, [[possibly]] [[curious]] for a [[films]] of this [[sorts]], is that it [[focussed]] [[merely]] on relationships between the young people themselves. We see nothing of their [[parenting]] or their [[prof]], and very [[tiny]] of the [[mature]] [[monde]] at all. The three [[daughter]] are very [[several]] in appearance, and are portrayed as being very different in character. The shy, [[retirement]] [[Marry]] is slim and [[small]] and appears to be the youngest of the three. Anne is [[anything]] of a [[lowlands]] Jane, Floriane a [[brilliant]] [[redhead]] who is very popular with the [[guys]]. The three, [[jointly]] with a handsome male [[swam]] named [[Francoise]], are involved in what might be [[outlines]] as a love-quadrilateral.

Anne has [[fell]] in love with [[Francoise]], but he is smitten with Floriane, who seems to [[comeback]] his [[feelings]], [[whilst]] he is by no means her only male admirer. Indeed, not all of Floriane's admirers are male, because Marie has a [[trample]] on her attractive [[boyfriend]]. The [[movie]] [[graphic]] the [[routing]] in which their friendship develops; at first it seems that Floriane is simply using [[Marries]] as a convenient excuse when she is in fact [[go]] out to [[cater]] boys; her [[parenting]] [[reportedly]] [[objects]] to her dating [[guy]], but have no objection to her going out with female [[buddies]]. [[Thereafter]], [[still]], we [[recognise]] that, despite Floriane's [[visuals]] as the sexy, popular girl who is [[steadily]] the [[centro]] of male attention, she [[indeed]] reciprocates Marie's feelings. The [[kino]] [[inverted]] some [[classic]] stereotypes about sexuality. Anne, with her [[succinct]] hair and [[somewhat]] chunky figure, [[seem]] [[routinely]] "[[dyke]]", [[still]] she is the only one of the three main characters who is unambiguously heterosexual, whereas the more [[typically]] feminine Marie and the [[excellent]] Floriane are lesbian, or at least bisexual.

Coming-of-age films are common enough, although most of them tend to avoid the controversial topic of teenage lesbianism. "Water Lilies", however, deals with its subject-matter in a sensitive way, with three very good performances from its three leading actresses, Pauline Acquart, Adele Haenel and Louise Blachere. The relationships between the characters, especially that between Marie and Floriane, are complex, and capable of a number of interpretations. (Is Floriane, for example, simply using Marie for sex, or does she genuinely have romantic feelings for her? Could Floriane's sluttish behaviour with Francois and the other boys be just a device to hide her lesbian feelings from the outside world? Or even to hide them from herself?) This was the first film made by its young director Celine Sciamma (only 27 at the time); on this basis she must be regarded as a highly promising newcomer. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Warning Spoilers following. Superb recreation of the base in [[Antarctica]] where the real events of the film took place. Other than that, libelous!, scandalous! Filmed in Canada; presumably by a largely Canadian crew and cast. I caught the last half of this film recently on Global television here in Canada. Nothing much to say other than how thoroughly [[appalled]] I was at what a blatant piece of American historical revisionist [[propaganda]] it is; and [[starring]] Susan Sarandon of all people! I can only assume that Canadian born director Roger Spottiswoode was coerced to make the USAF the heroes of the film when in fact the real rescuers where a small private airline based in Calgary; Kenn Borek Air. Warning Spoilers following. Superb recreation of the base in [[Antarctic]] where the real events of the film took place. Other than that, libelous!, scandalous! Filmed in Canada; presumably by a largely Canadian crew and cast. I caught the last half of this film recently on Global television here in Canada. Nothing much to say other than how thoroughly [[amazed]] I was at what a blatant piece of American historical revisionist [[publicity]] it is; and [[featuring]] Susan Sarandon of all people! I can only assume that Canadian born director Roger Spottiswoode was coerced to make the USAF the heroes of the film when in fact the real rescuers where a small private airline based in Calgary; Kenn Borek Air. --------------------------------------------- Result 5928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (68%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I don't really know whether Cabin Fever is supposed to be a joke or a film... But as far as I know, it's much closer to being a joke than anything else. A few years ago, the community of horror film makers decided to take a new step and make fun of the genre, thus giving birth to the Scream series. A list was given in Scream, of all the stupid things horror film characters will do that are predictable, and the characters in Scream ended up doing exactly the same things, which added a lot of humor and irony to this analysis of the genre, and led to hope that horror films from now on would show a bit different, either full of irony towards the genre, self-derision towards the film itself, or at least different in their dramatic process than all the "old" films that responded to the same tired criteria. In seeing "Cabin Fever", alas, many will see how unoriginal, serious, pretentious, boring and even not scary some supposedly "scary" films are now, even a few years later. First of all, this film lacks originality in a way few others do. It has been said several times, how little imagination horror directors have today, remaking remakes of foreign sequels, but setting the film in a cabin in the woods just doesn't seem to be an "hommage" to anything, it seems to be, simply, a ripoff. Whoever wishes to be surprised by other factors of the film's story won't be: once again, we are dealing with a film whose characters are all in their early twenties, who won't think rationally when placed in front of a problem, will rather argue for hours and pick up fights than try to think and do something about it. Not much excitement there either. For the umpteenth time in a horror film, they are tempted to kiss, make love and just basically have fun, all sorts of things that don't really make them any different than any other horror film victims seen previously. Secondly, this film is unimaginatively serious. Every situation the characters are in, every dialog, every situation in the film is treated with such seriousness that any viewer with a little sense of derision will be relieved when some characters finally end up dying. Nothing in the way the film is directed, written or acted shows any sign of humor or sarcasm, which is quite amazing considering the film is about an invisible-never-heard-of-before-flesh-eating-virus (no laughs please). I won't even bring up the acting, since there are no actors in this film. The cast was most certainly hired for being friends or neighbors with the director. Thirdly, and this will strike whoever has seen a "good" horror film before, the screenplay is absolutely empty. Nothing really happens, some actions are repeated several times ("let's try to get help!"), nothing makes sense, either in the facts, the psychology of the characters, or even the hilariously lame last sequence of the film, which is probably supposed to be funny according to the director and screenwriters. In the end I will only remark that a horror film is supposed to have something scary in it. Gallons of fake blood, whether they are being vomited, squirted from severed limbs or simply dripping from wounds, never were enough to scare an audience. Such major features as screenplay, ideas, and even cruelty are requested for whoever claims to have shot something scary. If I wasn't considering it to be a total failure, I would agree to reckon that the film has one talent: it is filthy disgusting to watch. Yet being grossed-out and being scared are two very different feelings, let it be known.

I would like to encourage anyone a tad curious or interested in seeing this film to check older major horror films first, why not from the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, films made by Wes Craven, Dario Argento, Sam Raimi, Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch, Roger Corman, William Lustig, John Carpenter... it might not only give a good definition of what is scary, or self-derisory horror, but also convince viewers that "new" isn't necessarily "better". A good example related to the film is the few tracks composer Angelo Badalamenti provided for this film, even although they are unmistakably close to his previous compositions, they are below anything he has ever done before. --------------------------------------------- Result 5929 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie was recently released on DVD in the US and I finally got the chance to see this hard-to-find gem. It even came with original theatrical previews of other Italian horror classics like "SPASMO" and "BEYOND THE DARKNESS". [[Unfortunately]], the previews were the best thing about this movie.

"ZOMBI 3" in a bizarre way is actually linked to the infamous Lucio Fulci "ZOMBIE" franchise which began in 1979. Similarly compared to "ZOMBIE", "ZOMBI 3" [[consists]] of a threadbare plot and a handful of extremely bad [[actors]] that [[keeps]] this 'horror' trash barely afloat. The gore is nearly non-existent (unless one is frightened of people running around with green moss on their faces) and the English dubbing is a notch below embarrassing.

The plot this time around involves some sort of covert military operation with a bunch of inept scientists (ie. an idiotic male and his stupid female side-kick) who are developing some sort of chemical called "Death One" that is supposed to re-animate the dead. Unless my ears need to be checked, I don't even recall a REASON for the research of "Death One". It seems to EXIST only to wreak havoc upon the poor souls who made the mistake of choosing to 'star' in this cinematic laugh-fest.

Anyway, "Death One" is experimented on a corpse (whom I swear looked like Yul Brynner), and after it is injected into his system, he sits upright and his head explodes! The sound effects are also quite hilarious - as the corpse's [[face]] bubbles with green slime, the sound of 'paper crumpling' can be [[heard]]. The "[[Death]] One" [[toxin]] is transported [[outside]] and is 'hi-jacked' by a [[group]] of [[thieves]] where one makes off with it, but infects himself after cutting himself on an exposed [[vial]].

Needless to [[say]], the [[guy]] [[turns]] into a zombie, but not before he makes his [[timely]] escape to a [[cheap]] [[motel]], infects a lowly [[porter]] and murders a maid by pushing her [[face]] into a [[bathroom]] mirror(!). The military [[catch]] wind of this and [[immediately]] [[take]] [[action]] before 'eliminating' [[everyone]] who is [[unlucky]] [[enough]] to be [[within]] the 'contamination zone' and turn the [[motel]] upside down. They find the infected thief and burn his body, only to have the smoke infect a flock of birds that are flying over the chimney stack(!).

We cut to the introduction of a group of men who are on leave from the army, listening to 'groovy music' that is coming out of a little dinky boom-box while trailing a trailer-load of slutty girls who are leaning out of the windows and showing off their chests. Can someone say "zombie food"? We also have a sub-plot involving a girl and her boyfriend driving a car who stop to inspect a group of birds lying on the road... the same birds that were infected by the 'zombie' smoke!

The birds attack the boyfriend and the girl drives off to a deserted gas station to seek water. This is one of the most incredibly hilarious moments of the movie. She walks around this old dirty, rusty and obviously abandoned building where she continues to ask aloud, "HELLO? IS THERE ANYONE HERE? PLEASE, I JUST NEED SOME WATER!" She encounters a group of zombies, one of which is chained to a wall (!) and the other is swinging a machete. After a bit of rumbling and tumbling around on the ground, she escapes but not before blowing up the gas station with her lighter.

Meanwhile, the birds attack the trailer-load of whores and one girl gets pecked and infected. They all pull up to the same motel where the original infection took place, and this is where the second most hilarious moment of the film takes place. After a matter of hours (a day at the most), the same motel is now caked in dust, has vines growing throughout it, and looks like it has been sitting derelict for years. Anyway, what better place to take refuge than this particular building? Needless to say, the group begins to break down as several people walk off together to get themselves stuck in an incredibly stupid situation involving a zombie attack.

The third most hilarious moment concerns a man and a woman who explore a deserted village, of which the woman comments, "THIS PLACE IS A DUMP!" She then proceeds to get 'pushed' off a balcony by a zombie into pirahna(?) infested water where she has her legs bitten off and turns into a zombie within seconds! Meanwhile, her friend back at the motel who got pecked and infected HOURS earlier is still TURNING into a zombie!

Unfortunately, there are just too many inconsistencies in this movie that makes this movie just too stupid for words. For example, the time rate concerning infected people being 'zombified' differs greatly. Sometimes it takes seconds, other times it takes hours. Some zombies run, others drag their feet and walk really slow. Some even do kung-fu moves, while others hide under stacks of hay to surprise people. Some of the zombies even talk! The funniest moment of course is the infamous 'zombie head in the fridge' gag which 'elevates' itself in mid-air and 'attacks' a stupid man who goes looking for food. Funnily enough, his girlfriend gets her throat torn out by it's 'headless' counter-part (LMAO!).

The biggest disappointment for me though was the lack of story-lines involving the people who are in fact killed by zombies. We never get to see them come back as zombies, in fact the only ones we do see 'zombified' are the ones pecked by the birds and the one girl who gets her legs bitten off. Other than that, I was at [[least]] [[expecting]] the couple who were killed in the kitchen and/or the guy who was killed on the bridge to come back as zombies. It is also amazing that these zombies only take a 'few bites' and then move on to their next victim.

The most laughable moment was of course the zombie fetus. A pregnant woman who has been infected lies on a bed in a hospital. A woman who seems to have a lot of 'medical knowledge' tries to deliver the baby (!) and has her face pulled off by a zombie, before having her head pushed into the woman's stomach where a hand bursts out and proceeds to rip the rest of her face off. Timeless!

As usual, all the characters are perfect stereotypes of this genre. The megalomaniacal military officer, the pathetic useless squealing women who scream to get killed, the obvious characters who are ABOUT to get killed (ie. watch for the man chasing a chicken!) I guess this movie really is a comedy. There were many laughable scenes, such as the shed that gets blown up with a hand grenade (obviously the scene where the entire budget was spent) and a climatic scene where a man screams, "I'M THIRSTY.... THIRSTY FOR YOUR BLOOD!". The costumes are really bad - the same zombies reappear throughout the course of the film, wearing the same 'Asian-like' clothing that may be found in a Bruce Lee film, and watch out for the blue 60's skirt the girl at the motel is wearing when she and her boyfriend bump into the infected man.

The end of the film leaves open the door as usual for the apocalyptic story-line. A radio DJ who narrates throughout the whole movie turns out to be a zombie himself and warns his listeners about the 'beginning of the end' while the two survivors take off in a helicopter. Hardly "DAWN OF THE DEAD" material if you ask me.

Regardless, this movie does deliver many laughs. The gore is minimal, and what gore there is, it is very unconvincing, let alone unimaginative. The usual mix of black blood, thick green goo oozing out of weeping sores and 'zombie make-up' consisting of green moss. "ZOMBI 3" makes for a good rental for a sleep-over party or a night of beer and popcorn. Other than that, horror fans should stay away.

3 out of 10 This movie was recently released on DVD in the US and I finally got the chance to see this hard-to-find gem. It even came with original theatrical previews of other Italian horror classics like "SPASMO" and "BEYOND THE DARKNESS". [[Regrettably]], the previews were the best thing about this movie.

"ZOMBI 3" in a bizarre way is actually linked to the infamous Lucio Fulci "ZOMBIE" franchise which began in 1979. Similarly compared to "ZOMBIE", "ZOMBI 3" [[encompass]] of a threadbare plot and a handful of extremely bad [[players]] that [[retains]] this 'horror' trash barely afloat. The gore is nearly non-existent (unless one is frightened of people running around with green moss on their faces) and the English dubbing is a notch below embarrassing.

The plot this time around involves some sort of covert military operation with a bunch of inept scientists (ie. an idiotic male and his stupid female side-kick) who are developing some sort of chemical called "Death One" that is supposed to re-animate the dead. Unless my ears need to be checked, I don't even recall a REASON for the research of "Death One". It seems to EXIST only to wreak havoc upon the poor souls who made the mistake of choosing to 'star' in this cinematic laugh-fest.

Anyway, "Death One" is experimented on a corpse (whom I swear looked like Yul Brynner), and after it is injected into his system, he sits upright and his head explodes! The sound effects are also quite hilarious - as the corpse's [[confronts]] bubbles with green slime, the sound of 'paper crumpling' can be [[listened]]. The "[[Fatalities]] One" [[poison]] is transported [[outdoor]] and is 'hi-jacked' by a [[panel]] of [[robbers]] where one makes off with it, but infects himself after cutting himself on an exposed [[bottle]].

Needless to [[says]], the [[boy]] [[revolves]] into a zombie, but not before he makes his [[rapidly]] escape to a [[inexpensive]] [[hotel]], infects a lowly [[gatekeeper]] and murders a maid by pushing her [[confronts]] into a [[toilet]] mirror(!). The military [[captures]] wind of this and [[quickly]] [[taking]] [[actions]] before 'eliminating' [[everybody]] who is [[unhappy]] [[satisfactorily]] to be [[inside]] the 'contamination zone' and turn the [[guesthouse]] upside down. They find the infected thief and burn his body, only to have the smoke infect a flock of birds that are flying over the chimney stack(!).

We cut to the introduction of a group of men who are on leave from the army, listening to 'groovy music' that is coming out of a little dinky boom-box while trailing a trailer-load of slutty girls who are leaning out of the windows and showing off their chests. Can someone say "zombie food"? We also have a sub-plot involving a girl and her boyfriend driving a car who stop to inspect a group of birds lying on the road... the same birds that were infected by the 'zombie' smoke!

The birds attack the boyfriend and the girl drives off to a deserted gas station to seek water. This is one of the most incredibly hilarious moments of the movie. She walks around this old dirty, rusty and obviously abandoned building where she continues to ask aloud, "HELLO? IS THERE ANYONE HERE? PLEASE, I JUST NEED SOME WATER!" She encounters a group of zombies, one of which is chained to a wall (!) and the other is swinging a machete. After a bit of rumbling and tumbling around on the ground, she escapes but not before blowing up the gas station with her lighter.

Meanwhile, the birds attack the trailer-load of whores and one girl gets pecked and infected. They all pull up to the same motel where the original infection took place, and this is where the second most hilarious moment of the film takes place. After a matter of hours (a day at the most), the same motel is now caked in dust, has vines growing throughout it, and looks like it has been sitting derelict for years. Anyway, what better place to take refuge than this particular building? Needless to say, the group begins to break down as several people walk off together to get themselves stuck in an incredibly stupid situation involving a zombie attack.

The third most hilarious moment concerns a man and a woman who explore a deserted village, of which the woman comments, "THIS PLACE IS A DUMP!" She then proceeds to get 'pushed' off a balcony by a zombie into pirahna(?) infested water where she has her legs bitten off and turns into a zombie within seconds! Meanwhile, her friend back at the motel who got pecked and infected HOURS earlier is still TURNING into a zombie!

Unfortunately, there are just too many inconsistencies in this movie that makes this movie just too stupid for words. For example, the time rate concerning infected people being 'zombified' differs greatly. Sometimes it takes seconds, other times it takes hours. Some zombies run, others drag their feet and walk really slow. Some even do kung-fu moves, while others hide under stacks of hay to surprise people. Some of the zombies even talk! The funniest moment of course is the infamous 'zombie head in the fridge' gag which 'elevates' itself in mid-air and 'attacks' a stupid man who goes looking for food. Funnily enough, his girlfriend gets her throat torn out by it's 'headless' counter-part (LMAO!).

The biggest disappointment for me though was the lack of story-lines involving the people who are in fact killed by zombies. We never get to see them come back as zombies, in fact the only ones we do see 'zombified' are the ones pecked by the birds and the one girl who gets her legs bitten off. Other than that, I was at [[fewer]] [[await]] the couple who were killed in the kitchen and/or the guy who was killed on the bridge to come back as zombies. It is also amazing that these zombies only take a 'few bites' and then move on to their next victim.

The most laughable moment was of course the zombie fetus. A pregnant woman who has been infected lies on a bed in a hospital. A woman who seems to have a lot of 'medical knowledge' tries to deliver the baby (!) and has her face pulled off by a zombie, before having her head pushed into the woman's stomach where a hand bursts out and proceeds to rip the rest of her face off. Timeless!

As usual, all the characters are perfect stereotypes of this genre. The megalomaniacal military officer, the pathetic useless squealing women who scream to get killed, the obvious characters who are ABOUT to get killed (ie. watch for the man chasing a chicken!) I guess this movie really is a comedy. There were many laughable scenes, such as the shed that gets blown up with a hand grenade (obviously the scene where the entire budget was spent) and a climatic scene where a man screams, "I'M THIRSTY.... THIRSTY FOR YOUR BLOOD!". The costumes are really bad - the same zombies reappear throughout the course of the film, wearing the same 'Asian-like' clothing that may be found in a Bruce Lee film, and watch out for the blue 60's skirt the girl at the motel is wearing when she and her boyfriend bump into the infected man.

The end of the film leaves open the door as usual for the apocalyptic story-line. A radio DJ who narrates throughout the whole movie turns out to be a zombie himself and warns his listeners about the 'beginning of the end' while the two survivors take off in a helicopter. Hardly "DAWN OF THE DEAD" material if you ask me.

Regardless, this movie does deliver many laughs. The gore is minimal, and what gore there is, it is very unconvincing, let alone unimaginative. The usual mix of black blood, thick green goo oozing out of weeping sores and 'zombie make-up' consisting of green moss. "ZOMBI 3" makes for a good rental for a sleep-over party or a night of beer and popcorn. Other than that, horror fans should stay away.

3 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[enjoyed]] this film [[yet]] hated it because I wanted to [[help]] this [[guy]]! I am in my fifties and have a lot of friends in the music business...who are now still [[trying]] to become adults....no more fans,groupies,money etc...and they are having such a hard time [[adjusting]] to a regular life...as they see the new bands etc getting the spotlight...it is almost like they have to begin anew...this [[film]] is a [[testament]] to what a [[lot]] of the [[old]] rockers from the 70's and 80's are [[going]] through now....and that's where I find the film sad and depressing.[[BUT]] it [[portrays]] the life of an old rock star-abandoned and lost-in a [[believable]] way.The young girl who arrives at his decrepit home reminds me of Hollis maclaren (Outrageous)...and she is one lady in a film you will cheer for. This film is a must have for folks in their 50's who have seen the rise and fall of bands,people who knew the members, and have watched them hurt as age creeps in,and popularity fades.This is an almost perfect movie....sad but in a way positive....because of the whales. A MUST SEE! I [[appreciated]] this film [[still]] hated it because I wanted to [[support]] this [[fella]]! I am in my fifties and have a lot of friends in the music business...who are now still [[seeking]] to become adults....no more fans,groupies,money etc...and they are having such a hard time [[tuning]] to a regular life...as they see the new bands etc getting the spotlight...it is almost like they have to begin anew...this [[kino]] is a [[wills]] to what a [[batch]] of the [[elderly]] rockers from the 70's and 80's are [[go]] through now....and that's where I find the film sad and depressing.[[ALTHOUGH]] it [[exemplifies]] the life of an old rock star-abandoned and lost-in a [[trustworthy]] way.The young girl who arrives at his decrepit home reminds me of Hollis maclaren (Outrageous)...and she is one lady in a film you will cheer for. This film is a must have for folks in their 50's who have seen the rise and fall of bands,people who knew the members, and have watched them hurt as age creeps in,and popularity fades.This is an almost perfect movie....sad but in a way positive....because of the whales. A MUST SEE! --------------------------------------------- Result 5931 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I liked it... just that... i [[liked]] it, not like the animated [[series]]... i [[love]] it!!!. The fact that this [[make]] less appealing is that we all [[try]] to compare and not to appreciate, but this cartoon was [[awesome]], but it really didn't like it that much. There's too much people talking about [[Bruce]] being so [[cold]], but if this is around 5 [[years]] later, anybody in a crime-fighting gang would get this angry and darker attitude, so to me it isn't a [[flaw]]. Batgirl was awesome she really fit there, as there isn't more Dick Grayson as a robin, batman needed a good teammate, not like the new robin, he is just a child and you cant rely that much on a child. But heres what didn't work: The new artwork... it isn't horrible but... to me it does'nt work in a series like batman. This is a dark character, with a maniac killer like the joker, so you cant put this kind of artwork in this cartoon, The joker isn't a bad design but i still like the past joker (but to me the BEST joker ever was the one who appeared in batman beyond:return of the joker) , so this [[joker]] isn't near as good. The good thing about the joker is that it still mark Hamil voice. My favorite character: Harley Quinn (im in [[love]] for her) They put an awesome episode for her: [[Mad]] love (to me the [[best]] episode of this series). Here we [[finally]] know how she turned Harley Quinn, and how the [[joker]] [[twisted]] her [[mind]], and it feel that [[atmosphere]] that you feel in the animated series, darker, no happy ending, [[brutal]] [[fight]] with the [[joker]] (but too [[short]]), this is how it was to be ALL the [[series]]. BUT in [[general]] i didn't like how she [[made]] Harley in this series... in [[almost]] [[every]] episode they put [[funny]] but in a ridiculous [[way]], she get punched, she [[say]] nonsenses, she make [[flaws]]... c'mon she is funny in a [[way]] you can laugh with her, not from her... and here they put ridiculous (like i said the only episode where i don't think that its in mad love and beware of the creeper) So in general its a good series, it has it upsides and downs, the drawn could be better ( MY GOOD!!! KILL THAT CATWOMAN!!!!) nice sound effects, nice music, nice voices and nice episodes: my favorites, Mad love, Jokers millions, Old Wounds, Sins of the father, and Cold comfort. If you enjoyed Batman:TAS you can watch this but don't spec too much, in the other hand if you didn't watched TAS, watch this first and then watch TAS in that way you're really gonna love TAS :D I liked it... just that... i [[enjoyed]] it, not like the animated [[serial]]... i [[loved]] it!!!. The fact that this [[deliver]] less appealing is that we all [[strive]] to compare and not to appreciate, but this cartoon was [[wondrous]], but it really didn't like it that much. There's too much people talking about [[Bros]] being so [[frigid]], but if this is around 5 [[olds]] later, anybody in a crime-fighting gang would get this angry and darker attitude, so to me it isn't a [[failure]]. Batgirl was awesome she really fit there, as there isn't more Dick Grayson as a robin, batman needed a good teammate, not like the new robin, he is just a child and you cant rely that much on a child. But heres what didn't work: The new artwork... it isn't horrible but... to me it does'nt work in a series like batman. This is a dark character, with a maniac killer like the joker, so you cant put this kind of artwork in this cartoon, The joker isn't a bad design but i still like the past joker (but to me the BEST joker ever was the one who appeared in batman beyond:return of the joker) , so this [[bozo]] isn't near as good. The good thing about the joker is that it still mark Hamil voice. My favorite character: Harley Quinn (im in [[loves]] for her) They put an awesome episode for her: [[Madman]] love (to me the [[better]] episode of this series). Here we [[ultimately]] know how she turned Harley Quinn, and how the [[clown]] [[distorted]] her [[intellect]], and it feel that [[atmospheric]] that you feel in the animated series, darker, no happy ending, [[brutish]] [[wrestling]] with the [[clown]] (but too [[succinct]]), this is how it was to be ALL the [[serials]]. BUT in [[overall]] i didn't like how she [[accomplished]] Harley in this series... in [[nearly]] [[any]] episode they put [[fun]] but in a ridiculous [[camino]], she get punched, she [[said]] nonsenses, she make [[defect]]... c'mon she is funny in a [[routes]] you can laugh with her, not from her... and here they put ridiculous (like i said the only episode where i don't think that its in mad love and beware of the creeper) So in general its a good series, it has it upsides and downs, the drawn could be better ( MY GOOD!!! KILL THAT CATWOMAN!!!!) nice sound effects, nice music, nice voices and nice episodes: my favorites, Mad love, Jokers millions, Old Wounds, Sins of the father, and Cold comfort. If you enjoyed Batman:TAS you can watch this but don't spec too much, in the other hand if you didn't watched TAS, watch this first and then watch TAS in that way you're really gonna love TAS :D --------------------------------------------- Result 5932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] What I [[loved]] about the on-screen adaptation of The Stone Angel is that it stayed so [[true]] to the novel! [[Great]] [[film]]! As an avid reader, I find the worst thing about film adaptations is that the book somehow gets lost in translation. You can tell the Stone Angel team was [[careful]] not to let this happen with this film.

Ellen Burstyn was an excellent casting choice for the role of Hagar and she is definitely a movie superstar. However, I think the Canadian actress (Christine Horne) chosen to play Hagar in her younger years also did an incredible job that warrants great praise. I haven't seen any of Horne's previous work but I will definitely seek it out after seeing her Stone Angel performance.

I heard the Canadian theatrical release of The Stone Angel is going to happen in Spring or Summer 2008. I can't wait to see it on the big screen again! What I [[cared]] about the on-screen adaptation of The Stone Angel is that it stayed so [[authentic]] to the novel! [[Wondrous]] [[cinema]]! As an avid reader, I find the worst thing about film adaptations is that the book somehow gets lost in translation. You can tell the Stone Angel team was [[attentive]] not to let this happen with this film.

Ellen Burstyn was an excellent casting choice for the role of Hagar and she is definitely a movie superstar. However, I think the Canadian actress (Christine Horne) chosen to play Hagar in her younger years also did an incredible job that warrants great praise. I haven't seen any of Horne's previous work but I will definitely seek it out after seeing her Stone Angel performance.

I heard the Canadian theatrical release of The Stone Angel is going to happen in Spring or Summer 2008. I can't wait to see it on the big screen again! --------------------------------------------- Result 5933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Slow but beautifully-mounted story of the American revolution. Griffith's story-telling seems a [[lot]] [[less]] heavy-handed than in his earlier historical epics and his tableaux work is [[fully]] [[integrated]] into the action. Lionel Barrymore is an utter swine, Neil Hamilton is poor but dashing and Carol Dempster is.... well, Carol Dempster is most of what is wrong with [[Griffith]] in this [[period]], but she doesn't [[show]] up [[often]] [[enough]] to slow the [[pace]] and drama.

Note that the [[trivia]] for this movie says it came in originally at slightly more than 2 hours when first released, but that no cut exists that runs longer than 90 minutes. However, the dvd release has been presented at a slower fps rate that increases the tension and [[brings]] it back to a bit over two hours.

Far better in terms of story-telling than sound versions, such as THE [[PATRIOT]]. [[While]] not [[quite]] in the league of Griffith's [[best]], such as [[WAY]] DOWN EAST and BROKEN BLOSSOMS, an [[excellent]] [[way]] to [[spend]] a couple of hours. Slow but beautifully-mounted story of the American revolution. Griffith's story-telling seems a [[batches]] [[lowest]] heavy-handed than in his earlier historical epics and his tableaux work is [[entirely]] [[embedded]] into the action. Lionel Barrymore is an utter swine, Neil Hamilton is poor but dashing and Carol Dempster is.... well, Carol Dempster is most of what is wrong with [[Griffiths]] in this [[schedules]], but she doesn't [[demonstrate]] up [[generally]] [[adequately]] to slow the [[tempo]] and drama.

Note that the [[trivialities]] for this movie says it came in originally at slightly more than 2 hours when first released, but that no cut exists that runs longer than 90 minutes. However, the dvd release has been presented at a slower fps rate that increases the tension and [[puts]] it back to a bit over two hours.

Far better in terms of story-telling than sound versions, such as THE [[PATRIOTIC]]. [[Despite]] not [[pretty]] in the league of Griffith's [[bestest]], such as [[PATHWAYS]] DOWN EAST and BROKEN BLOSSOMS, an [[wondrous]] [[manner]] to [[expenditure]] a couple of hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 5934 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the cover of the box makes this movie look really good, don't be fooled. splatter university came out in 1984 which was the last good year for horror, but this movie sucks. the characters are so annoying. only the teacher is cool. there is like no plot to this movie, who the hell would ever produce this waste of a film?

spoilers up ahead

the teacher dies in this, and it was a female, we all know that we must have a female surviver, if you're going to break the rules do it in a good horror flick not this waste --------------------------------------------- Result 5935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This show is so incredibly hilarious that I couldn't stop watching the marathon on Comedy Central tonight (despite the fact that I've seen all the episodes previously). I've always regarded Silverman as a huge talent and this is finally a vehicle for that talent to be enjoyed by a wide audience. I watch this show and I laugh a very large percentage of the time... I can't say that about many TV shows... can you? This show is finally something new and interesting and (most importantly) funny! This is a show I will never miss and it is one I will buy on DVD as soon as it comes out. You owe it to yourself to watch this show... I predict a long run for this series... And just to be clear, the people who are offended by this show just don't get it... perhaps they lack the intelligence to comprehend it... they should stop making fools of themselves by attacking something they don't understand. Anyone who uses the word "bigot" in reference to Silverman, or who claims that she only aims to "shock"... is way off the mark... She's exactly the opposite; just Google her and you'll quickly see that she's a huge proponent of civil rights, etc. If you don't know that she's ironically embracing all of these outrageous viewpoints, you don't get it. And if you don't get it, do the rest of us a favor and be quiet about it so we can all enjoy the hilarity... --------------------------------------------- Result 5936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I read the half dozen other user comments on this board and it [[seems]] as [[though]] the [[opinions]] vary [[greatly]]. I have to agree with those who found this movie to be awful. It pains me to write that since I [[would]] have [[hoped]] this [[would]] have been [[great]], or I wouldn't have bothered to see it the other day. I like supporting indie [[cinema]], [[especially]] if they are gay-themed, but this [[movie]] is almost too much to [[tolerate]]. Those that walked out, as I considered doing after about three minutes, probably didn't [[mind]] [[shelling]] out $11.00, or just figured it was [[going]] nowhere, [[fast]], and not [[going]] to [[improve]]. [[Maybe]] I am [[slightly]] more optimistic than they are..[[either]] that or they didn't pay to get in in the first place.

Logan is bored. He's a klutz. He's [[gay]]. I'm [[okay]] with that. The [[problem]] is that because the main character in a [[movie]] is [[bored]] does not necessarily [[mean]] that the [[movie]] about him has to be boring [[also]]! There are [[ENDLESS]] scenes of this kid just laying around like a [[load]] of laundry, re-establishing everything that you already [[learned]] in the first scene, and the second scene, etc., etc...[[Nothing]] or no one goes [[anywhere]]. [[NO]] ONE says [[anything]] even remotely [[insightful]] or funny or interesting. [[Probably]] most appalling of all is that I didn't feel the [[slightest]] bit of empathy for Logan. That in itself is a [[major]] accomplishment. He didn't [[grow]], he didn't change, he didn't learn (there is no one to teach him [[anything]]), he DIDN'T DO [[ANYTHING]], and [[neither]] did the [[movie]]! Scene after scene of the same [[thing]] do not a movie make.

[[Additionally]], the title makes no sense at all. 1/10. I read the half dozen other user comments on this board and it [[looks]] as [[albeit]] the [[vistas]] vary [[noticeably]]. I have to agree with those who found this movie to be awful. It pains me to write that since I [[should]] have [[waited]] this [[should]] have been [[gorgeous]], or I wouldn't have bothered to see it the other day. I like supporting indie [[cinemas]], [[concretely]] if they are gay-themed, but this [[filmmaking]] is almost too much to [[condone]]. Those that walked out, as I considered doing after about three minutes, probably didn't [[esprit]] [[bombing]] out $11.00, or just figured it was [[gonna]] nowhere, [[quicker]], and not [[gonna]] to [[strengthen]]. [[Possibly]] I am [[mildly]] more optimistic than they are..[[neither]] that or they didn't pay to get in in the first place.

Logan is bored. He's a klutz. He's [[homo]]. I'm [[alright]] with that. The [[difficulties]] is that because the main character in a [[movies]] is [[boring]] does not necessarily [[meaning]] that the [[movies]] about him has to be boring [[apart]]! There are [[UNBOUNDED]] scenes of this kid just laying around like a [[loading]] of laundry, re-establishing everything that you already [[learn]] in the first scene, and the second scene, etc., etc...[[None]] or no one goes [[somewhere]]. [[NOS]] ONE says [[something]] even remotely [[perceptive]] or funny or interesting. [[Maybe]] most appalling of all is that I didn't feel the [[lowest]] bit of empathy for Logan. That in itself is a [[grandes]] accomplishment. He didn't [[grew]], he didn't change, he didn't learn (there is no one to teach him [[something]]), he DIDN'T DO [[SOMETHINGS]], and [[ni]] did the [[filmmaking]]! Scene after scene of the same [[stuff]] do not a movie make.

[[Also]], the title makes no sense at all. 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 5937 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I entered the [[theater]] to [[Sky]] [[Captain]] in 2004 [[expecting]] a good [[film]]. [[Nearly]] [[every]] [[review]] of this [[movie]] had been [[positive]], the [[effects]] [[looked]] enticing, the previews [[convincing]].

Needless to [[say]], [[disappointment]] actually doesn't [[describe]] the [[feeling]] I got from this film. It was [[rage]].

Beyond being boring and poorly [[written]], the [[reason]] this film [[gets]] a 2 out of 10 [[stars]] is because everything in the [[film]] was [[stolen]] from another [[source]]. I [[understand]] the [[difference]] between an [[homage]] and stealing: this was [[stealing]]. More importantly, it seems that the filmmakers didn't [[steal]] to [[progress]] a point or move the plot along. They [[stole]] just to show that they [[could]]. There is literally no point to [[showing]] a clip of The [[Wizard]] of Oz in a [[theater]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] except to set up another scene (that I won't [[elaborate]] on) which steals from the same [[film]]. Needless to say, [[every]] concept in the [[film]] was [[neither]] original nor even a spin on an [[old]] concept: it was literally just a rehash of something I had already seen, from pulp-era robots reminiscent of the [[old]] Superman [[Cartoons]] and the recent film "The Iron [[Giant]]", to the [[silent]] martial [[artist]] minion of the villain that has been [[used]] in [[countless]] [[films]], most [[recognizable]] in [[recent]] years as Darth Maul in "[[Star]] [[Wars]]: The Phantom [[Menace]]".

On the subject of the [[actual]] [[film]], most of the performances were [[completely]] [[wooden]]. [[Perhaps]] this is because the [[entire]] [[movie]] was done on a blue-screen, with [[computer]] [[imagery]] filling in everything [[save]] the [[actors]]. [[Frankly]], this is no [[excuse]] for poor acting. [[If]] a [[person]] was ever a [[child]], they [[understand]] that a [[lack]] of [[visual]] [[reference]] is no [[excuse]] for not [[trying]].

[[Finally]], there is no [[humanity]] in this [[film]]. The [[protagonists]] are the only [[real]] human beings here. [[Nearly]] all the antagonists are robots, and the number of [[friendly]] [[characters]] that are [[shown]] during the [[film]] can be counted on one hand. If [[robots]] are attacking the [[entire]] planet, shouldn't we [[expect]] to [[see]] masses of [[humanity]] [[running]] from them? The sub-par performance of the [[main]] [[characters]] prevents us from [[connecting]] to, [[really]], [[anything]] here.

The [[film]] wasn't the worst [[movie]] out there, which is why I didn't give it a 1. Rather, the film was an example of all that is wrong with modern action films: the filmmakers tried to justify the movie with special effects, but without [[artistic]] vision or originality of any kind, it falls flat. I entered the [[theatre]] to [[Heaven]] [[Commandant]] in 2004 [[awaiting]] a good [[movie]]. [[Almost]] [[each]] [[revisions]] of this [[filmmaking]] had been [[affirmative]], the [[consequences]] [[seemed]] enticing, the previews [[persuade]].

Needless to [[said]], [[disillusion]] actually doesn't [[depict]] the [[sensation]] I got from this film. It was [[anger]].

Beyond being boring and poorly [[typed]], the [[grounds]] this film [[attains]] a 2 out of 10 [[star]] is because everything in the [[filmmaking]] was [[stealing]] from another [[backgrounds]]. I [[understands]] the [[dispute]] between an [[commendation]] and stealing: this was [[stolen]]. More importantly, it seems that the filmmakers didn't [[stolen]] to [[advance]] a point or move the plot along. They [[steal]] just to show that they [[wo]]. There is literally no point to [[show]] a clip of The [[Sorcerer]] of Oz in a [[movies]] at the [[begins]] of the [[filmmaking]] except to set up another scene (that I won't [[elaborated]] on) which steals from the same [[filmmaking]]. Needless to say, [[all]] concept in the [[filmmaking]] was [[either]] original nor even a spin on an [[elderly]] concept: it was literally just a rehash of something I had already seen, from pulp-era robots reminiscent of the [[ancient]] Superman [[Comics]] and the recent film "The Iron [[Monumental]]", to the [[quiet]] martial [[entertainer]] minion of the villain that has been [[using]] in [[endless]] [[movie]], most [[noticeable]] in [[freshly]] years as Darth Maul in "[[Stars]] [[War]]: The Phantom [[Threatens]]".

On the subject of the [[real]] [[filmmaking]], most of the performances were [[entirely]] [[wood]]. [[Maybe]] this is because the [[whole]] [[filmmaking]] was done on a blue-screen, with [[computers]] [[photographs]] filling in everything [[rescued]] the [[actresses]]. [[Honestly]], this is no [[apologise]] for poor acting. [[Though]] a [[individuals]] was ever a [[kid]], they [[understanding]] that a [[absence]] of [[optic]] [[references]] is no [[apologize]] for not [[seeking]].

[[Eventually]], there is no [[humankind]] in this [[kino]]. The [[players]] are the only [[true]] human beings here. [[Roughly]] all the antagonists are robots, and the number of [[cordial]] [[personages]] that are [[illustrated]] during the [[kino]] can be counted on one hand. If [[robot]] are attacking the [[together]] planet, shouldn't we [[expecting]] to [[seeing]] masses of [[humane]] [[run]] from them? The sub-par performance of the [[principal]] [[nature]] prevents us from [[linking]] to, [[truthfully]], [[something]] here.

The [[filmmaking]] wasn't the worst [[cinema]] out there, which is why I didn't give it a 1. Rather, the film was an example of all that is wrong with modern action films: the filmmakers tried to justify the movie with special effects, but without [[artsy]] vision or originality of any kind, it falls flat. --------------------------------------------- Result 5938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film enhanced my opinion of Errol Flynn. While Flynn is of course best known for his savoir-faire and sprezzatura (to throw in a couple of high-falutin' European terms!), this film gives him an opportunity to stretch (albeit only slightly) as an actor, as he plays an unabashed social climber with a big ego and a sense of nerve to match. The supporting cast is excellent; everyone seems well-chosen for their roles.

The story moves briskly and, while not particularly profound (it misses, perhaps intentionally, the opportunity to render social commentary on the massively uneven distribution of income during that time), it certainly entertains and satisfies. From what I know of Jim Corbett, the story is also reasonably faithful to history. I also really liked the great depictions of 1880s San Francisco. All in all, there's little not to like about this film...very well worth the time to watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Salvage: 4 out of 10. Groundhog Day meets a Christian Coalition horror film. Okay maybe it's not that bad. But it is close.

Claire (played by Alicia Silverstonesque Lauren Currie Lewis) is stalked and possibly killed by a serial killer (Chris Ferry who is quite menacing and brutal). I say possibly because she wakes up and it was all a dream….. Or was it? (Cue music)

The basic problem with the film is that these fifteen minutes of plot (Done quite well the first time) is repeated over and over again. And since Claire wakes up every time and every scene is clearly a dream or alternate reality I just stopped caring what happened to Claire and started wondering what lame twist at the end was going to pull this together.

I was rooting for a séance (which honestly would have made more sense) but instead got one of those too obvious by half surprise endings (Think the Village or Below) Yup the film collapses faster than Donnie Darko's directors cut. All the great twist endings in horror movies The Sixth Sense, the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Happy Birthday to Me worked because the audience wasn't expecting a left field explanation. (Heck even the canoe ending in the original Friday the 13th was worth a jolt)

Salvage on the other hand screams twist ending with every scene change. Other nagging faults is the one note piano soundtrack (Though the featured songs were decent) the obvious time padding (Claire doing the dishes, Claire's mother's subplots), the way Claire says "hello is anyone there" every time she thinks there is a serial killer around.

Also some of the secondary acting roles (In particular Claire's mother played by Maureen Olander who resembles a Mary Kay zombie) shows the first time actor low budget roots.

Both too clever by half and not nearly clever enough Salvage keeps your interest if only to see how they are going to fix this mess. Problem is they really don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 5940 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] These days Spielberg's "The Color Purple" is [[mostly]] [[remembered]] for being nominated for eleven Oscars and winning zilch. What's even more [[alarming]] is that Spielberg himself wasn't even [[nominated]] for [[Best]] Director. [[Needless]] to [[say]], the film-makers deserved more acclaim than they were [[accorded]].

The story concerns the [[trials]] and [[tribulations]] of Celie [[Johnson]] (Whoopi [[Goldberg]]), an African-American woman dominated at [[first]] by her incestuous father and then by her [[abusive]] husband. The film spans several years and [[focuses]] [[mainly]] on Celie's relationships with the women [[around]] her. It's [[told]] from a [[decidedly]] female perspective but you needn't fear that it's a saccharine 'chick flick'.

The [[story]] is an interesting one, livened with [[humour]] at times although the central character's struggles are paramount. Some may not appreciate the change in tone towards the film's end but I didn't mind even though similar content in a lesser film would likely have me rolling my eyes.

The film received three Oscar nominations for acting: Whoopi Goldberg (Best Actress), Oprah Winfrey (Best Supporting Actress) and Margaret Avery (Best Supporting Actress). I think that Goldberg and Winfrey were certainly deserving and Danny Glover was unaccountably stiffed.

As already mentioned, Spielberg didn't receive a Best Director nomination for his efforts. Such an omission beggars [[belief]], since Spielberg's direction here is top-notch. I'm not especially crazy about Quincy Jones's score but it's not below average by any means.

In the end, the story is a [[satisfying]] one, well-told by a master film-maker working from Pulitzer Prize-winning material. Give it a try and you'll probably be as baffled as I am about how it could be so poorly treated on Oscar night. These days Spielberg's "The Color Purple" is [[basically]] [[reminds]] for being nominated for eleven Oscars and winning zilch. What's even more [[frightening]] is that Spielberg himself wasn't even [[nominating]] for [[Finest]] Director. [[Vain]] to [[tell]], the film-makers deserved more acclaim than they were [[bestowed]].

The story concerns the [[tryouts]] and [[hardship]] of Celie [[Johnston]] (Whoopi [[Tucker]]), an African-American woman dominated at [[frst]] by her incestuous father and then by her [[offensive]] husband. The film spans several years and [[focused]] [[basically]] on Celie's relationships with the women [[roundabout]] her. It's [[tell]] from a [[definitively]] female perspective but you needn't fear that it's a saccharine 'chick flick'.

The [[history]] is an interesting one, livened with [[comedy]] at times although the central character's struggles are paramount. Some may not appreciate the change in tone towards the film's end but I didn't mind even though similar content in a lesser film would likely have me rolling my eyes.

The film received three Oscar nominations for acting: Whoopi Goldberg (Best Actress), Oprah Winfrey (Best Supporting Actress) and Margaret Avery (Best Supporting Actress). I think that Goldberg and Winfrey were certainly deserving and Danny Glover was unaccountably stiffed.

As already mentioned, Spielberg didn't receive a Best Director nomination for his efforts. Such an omission beggars [[faith]], since Spielberg's direction here is top-notch. I'm not especially crazy about Quincy Jones's score but it's not below average by any means.

In the end, the story is a [[gratifying]] one, well-told by a master film-maker working from Pulitzer Prize-winning material. Give it a try and you'll probably be as baffled as I am about how it could be so poorly treated on Oscar night. --------------------------------------------- Result 5941 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] It really is that [[bad]] of a movie. My [[buddy]] rented it because he, well, is an idiot. But then again, I [[must]] be an idiot too because I [[watched]] the [[whole]] damn thing! The [[actors]] were on par with [[high]] school [[drama]] [[geeks]] who [[think]] that are [[going]] places. The only place they will be going is back to [[waiting]] tables at Luby's. [[All]] I [[could]] [[think]] of while I was watching this "gem" was how it actually [[got]] made. I mean, some "[[screenwriter]]" [[actually]] thought that this [[premise]] was [[fresh]], [[original]] and [[lucrative]]. Then some moron with money believed in the [[script]] so much that he [[decided]] to [[fork]] some [[cash]] over with the [[naive]] misconception that he was [[going]] to [[make]] a [[return]] on it. [[Actors]] were cast, [[locations]] were scouted, make-up [[artists]] were hired, computer animators fresh out of Al Collins graphic [[Design]] [[School]] were [[brought]] in and this [[turd]] started to take form.

There [[obviously]] were a ton of things that I [[hated]] about this [[move]] but the one thing the drove me the craziest was the overuse of music. Every [[single]] minute of this flick was scored. There was not a [[single]] break in music. And at times it was mixed higher than the dialogue, not that it made you miss some [[vital]] plot point or anything.

After it was over, we decided to watch Mystic River. It was like driving a 1980 VW [[Diesel]] [[Rabbit]] then switching to a BMW 740il. You couldn't get two more opposite [[movies]] in terms of quality. It really is that [[unfavourable]] of a movie. My [[boyfriend]] rented it because he, well, is an idiot. But then again, I [[gotta]] be an idiot too because I [[observed]] the [[overall]] damn thing! The [[protagonists]] were on par with [[highest]] school [[dramas]] [[imbeciles]] who [[reckon]] that are [[go]] places. The only place they will be going is back to [[awaiting]] tables at Luby's. [[Every]] I [[did]] [[thought]] of while I was watching this "gem" was how it actually [[gets]] made. I mean, some "[[writer]]" [[genuinely]] thought that this [[supposition]] was [[dulce]], [[upfront]] and [[profitable]]. Then some moron with money believed in the [[hyphen]] so much that he [[decides]] to [[pitchfork]] some [[moneys]] over with the [[unsuspecting]] misconception that he was [[go]] to [[deliver]] a [[reverting]] on it. [[Protagonists]] were cast, [[places]] were scouted, make-up [[performer]] were hired, computer animators fresh out of Al Collins graphic [[Conceive]] [[Schooling]] were [[introduced]] in and this [[poo]] started to take form.

There [[notoriously]] were a ton of things that I [[disliked]] about this [[budge]] but the one thing the drove me the craziest was the overuse of music. Every [[exclusive]] minute of this flick was scored. There was not a [[lonely]] break in music. And at times it was mixed higher than the dialogue, not that it made you miss some [[critical]] plot point or anything.

After it was over, we decided to watch Mystic River. It was like driving a 1980 VW [[Diesels]] [[Bunny]] then switching to a BMW 740il. You couldn't get two more opposite [[filmmaking]] in terms of quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 5942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] C'mon guys some previous reviewers have nearly written a novel commenting on this episode. It's just an old 60's TV show ! This episode of Star Trek is notable because of the most serious babe (Yeoman Barrow's) ever used on Star Trek and the fact that it was filmed in a real [[outdoor]] location. Unlike the TNG and Voyager series which were totally confined to sound stages.

This use of an outdoor location (and babe) gives proper depth and an almost film like quality to a [[quite]] [[ordinary]] episode of this now dated and very familiar show.

Except a few notable exceptions i.[[e]] "The city on the edge of forever" , "assignment Earth" and "Tomorrow is Yesterday" The old series of Star Trek [[needs]] to be seriously moth-balled and put out of it's boring [[misery]]. Half a dozen good episodes from 79 is [[quite]] a poor batting average.

This is typical of the [[boring]] stuff [[Gene]] Roddenberry produced back then actually, contrary to popular belief where some people worshiped the ground he walked on, he actually made a LOT of rubbish! He doesn't deserve to be spoken of in the same breath as Irwin Allen for example.

Just look at the set of the bridge of the Enterprise from a modern point of view. They used wobbly plywood for the floor, cafeteria chairs with plastic backs and cheap cardboard above the instrument panels. You can clearly see the folds in the paper ! Every expense spared or what ! C'mon guys some previous reviewers have nearly written a novel commenting on this episode. It's just an old 60's TV show ! This episode of Star Trek is notable because of the most serious babe (Yeoman Barrow's) ever used on Star Trek and the fact that it was filmed in a real [[outer]] location. Unlike the TNG and Voyager series which were totally confined to sound stages.

This use of an outdoor location (and babe) gives proper depth and an almost film like quality to a [[rather]] [[customary]] episode of this now dated and very familiar show.

Except a few notable exceptions i.[[f]] "The city on the edge of forever" , "assignment Earth" and "Tomorrow is Yesterday" The old series of Star Trek [[required]] to be seriously moth-balled and put out of it's boring [[destitution]]. Half a dozen good episodes from 79 is [[rather]] a poor batting average.

This is typical of the [[monotonous]] stuff [[Genes]] Roddenberry produced back then actually, contrary to popular belief where some people worshiped the ground he walked on, he actually made a LOT of rubbish! He doesn't deserve to be spoken of in the same breath as Irwin Allen for example.

Just look at the set of the bridge of the Enterprise from a modern point of view. They used wobbly plywood for the floor, cafeteria chairs with plastic backs and cheap cardboard above the instrument panels. You can clearly see the folds in the paper ! Every expense spared or what ! --------------------------------------------- Result 5943 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[film]] is [[roughly]] what it sounds [[like]]: a [[futuristic]] version of the Cinderella legend but with songs and (fairly tame) [[sex]] scenes! The [[film]] is not sure what it [[wants]] to be and [[pretty]] much [[ends]] up a [[mess]]. It's more expensive looking than most of director Al Adamson's [[films]] but it's not at the same budget level that [[viewers]] have [[come]] to [[expect]] from sci-fi [[films]]. The actors are pretty [[bad]] and unlike most Adamson films, there are no [[former]] [[big]] namers or B actors. Some of the music is OK but it's easy to see why Cinderella 2000 has been forgotten for so many years. This [[movies]] is [[nearly]] what it sounds [[iike]]: a [[futur]] version of the Cinderella legend but with songs and (fairly tame) [[sexuality]] scenes! The [[cinematographic]] is not sure what it [[want]] to be and [[quite]] much [[end]] up a [[disarray]]. It's more expensive looking than most of director Al Adamson's [[movies]] but it's not at the same budget level that [[onlookers]] have [[arriving]] to [[expects]] from sci-fi [[cinematography]]. The actors are pretty [[unfavourable]] and unlike most Adamson films, there are no [[previous]] [[massive]] namers or B actors. Some of the music is OK but it's easy to see why Cinderella 2000 has been forgotten for so many years. --------------------------------------------- Result 5944 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very refreshing story, the life of a parrot with an intellect higher than an average human's. Shows humans from a bird's point of view. Especially liked the portrayal of different types of characters that the bird spends time with. Not all birds are bird-brained... --------------------------------------------- Result 5945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is another one of those movies that [[could]] have been [[great]]. The basic [[premise]] is good - immortal cat people who kill to live, etc. - sort of a [[variation]] on the [[vampire]] [[concept]].

The thing that makes it all [[fall]] apart is the [[total]] recklessness of the main characters. Even [[sociopaths]] know that you need to keep a low profile if you [[want]] to survive - look how [[long]] it took to [[catch]] the Unibomber, and that was because a family member figured it out.

By contrast, the [[kid]] (and to a [[lesser]] [[extent]], the [[mom]]) behave as [[though]] they're untouchable. The [[kid]] [[kills]] without a [[thought]] for not [[leaving]] [[evidence]] or a [[trail]] or a living witness. How these people [[managed]] to [[stay]] [[alive]] and [[undiscovered]] for a [[month]] is [[unbelievable]], let [[alone]] decades or [[centuries]].

It's really a [[shame]] - this [[could]] have been so [[much]] more if it had been written plausibly, i.e., giving the [[main]] [[characters]] the level of common sense they [[would]] have needed to [[get]] by for so [[long]].

Other than that, not a bad [[showing]]. I loved the bit at the [[end]] where every [[cat]] in [[town]] converges on the [[house]] - every time I put out [[food]] on the [[porch]] and [[see]] our cats suddenly rush in from wherever they were before, I think of that scene. This is another one of those movies that [[did]] have been [[grand]]. The basic [[assumption]] is good - immortal cat people who kill to live, etc. - sort of a [[variations]] on the [[vamp]] [[notions]].

The thing that makes it all [[declined]] apart is the [[whole]] recklessness of the main characters. Even [[psychopaths]] know that you need to keep a low profile if you [[wanting]] to survive - look how [[lang]] it took to [[catching]] the Unibomber, and that was because a family member figured it out.

By contrast, the [[infantile]] (and to a [[lowest]] [[amplitude]], the [[ammi]]) behave as [[while]] they're untouchable. The [[children]] [[killed]] without a [[thoughts]] for not [[exiting]] [[testimony]] or a [[pathway]] or a living witness. How these people [[administer]] to [[sojourn]] [[vibrant]] and [[undetermined]] for a [[months]] is [[fantastic]], let [[lonely]] decades or [[ages]].

It's really a [[pity]] - this [[did]] have been so [[very]] more if it had been written plausibly, i.e., giving the [[primary]] [[trait]] the level of common sense they [[could]] have needed to [[gets]] by for so [[prolonged]].

Other than that, not a bad [[show]]. I loved the bit at the [[ends]] where every [[gato]] in [[ville]] converges on the [[maison]] - every time I put out [[diet]] on the [[verandah]] and [[consults]] our cats suddenly rush in from wherever they were before, I think of that scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 5946 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The film starts in the Long Island Kennel Club where is murdered a dog,later is appeared dead as a case of committing suicide a collector millionaire called Arched,but sleuth debonair Philo Vance(William Powell)to be aware of actually killing.There are many suspects : the secretary(Ralph Morgan),the butler,the Chinese cooker,the contender(Paul Cavanagh) in kennel championship for revenge killing dog ,the nephew(Mary Astor) facing off her tyrant uncle,the Italian man(Jack La Rue),the brother,the attractive neighbour..Stylish Vance tries to find out who murdered tycoon,appearing many clues ,as a book titled:Unsolved murders. The police Inspector(Eugene Palette)and a coroner are helped by Vance to investigate the mysterious death.The sympathetic forensic medic examines boring the continuous body-count .Who's the killer?.The public enjoys immensely about guess the murder.

The picture is an interesting and deliberate whodunit,it's a laborious and intriguing suspense tale.The personages are similar to Agatha Christie stories, all they are various suspects.They are developed on a whole gallery of familiar actors well characterized from the period represented by a glittering casting to choose from their acting range from great to worst. Powell is in his habitual elegant and smart form as Philo.He's protagonist of two famed detectives cinema,this one, and elegant Nick Charles along with Nora(Mirna Loy)make the greatest marriage detectives. Special mention to Mary Astor as the niece enamored of suspect Sir Thomas,she was a noted actress of noir cinema(Maltese falcon). The movie is magnificently directed by Hollywood classic director Michael Curtiz.He directs utilizing modern techniques as the image of dead through a lock-door,a split image while are speaking for phone and curtain-image.The tale is remade as ¨Calling Philo Vance¨(1940).The film is a good production Warner Bros, by Vitagraph Corp. --------------------------------------------- Result 5947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] An [[incredible]] [[little]] English [[film]] for so many [[reasons]]. First it's a [[rare]] [[look]] a Laurence Olivier in a light comedy. While his performance is not up the [[standard]] he [[would]] [[latter]] set as one of the [[greatest]] [[actors]] of the 20th century, he is [[perfectly]] believable as the hoodwinked barrister. Historically this film is of great interest because of both where and when it was shoot. Being English it didn't have the big [[budget]] of the Hollywood films of the same era and it often shows, but more interesting is the fact this movie [[filmed]] just prior to the war and shows an England that would soon be gone. When we watch it today we think in terms of modern [[morality]] and over look the fact that this movie and its [[closest]] American counter part `It Happened One Night' were in their day as risqué as `Fatal Instinct' was in our time. But after watching and [[enjoying]] this movie the first time I can't help but feel [[sadness]] when I watch it [[today]]. With half of film shoot before 1950 gone, saving the remaining films means hard choices, and unfortunately films [[like]] this are often passed over to save movies that we all consider important. The [[color]] shifting, lack of contrast, and generally poor quality of the [[print]] most often seen is heartbreaking. This movie along with `It Happened One Night' are [[perfect]] to curl up with a [[love]] one under a blanket on [[cool]] a [[cool]] evening and watch, or better yet why not a double feature. An [[unthinkable]] [[tiny]] English [[films]] for so many [[justification]]. First it's a [[seldom]] [[glance]] a Laurence Olivier in a light comedy. While his performance is not up the [[standards]] he [[should]] [[lastly]] set as one of the [[higher]] [[players]] of the 20th century, he is [[quite]] believable as the hoodwinked barrister. Historically this film is of great interest because of both where and when it was shoot. Being English it didn't have the big [[budgets]] of the Hollywood films of the same era and it often shows, but more interesting is the fact this movie [[videotaped]] just prior to the war and shows an England that would soon be gone. When we watch it today we think in terms of modern [[ethics]] and over look the fact that this movie and its [[nearer]] American counter part `It Happened One Night' were in their day as risqué as `Fatal Instinct' was in our time. But after watching and [[experience]] this movie the first time I can't help but feel [[grief]] when I watch it [[yesterday]]. With half of film shoot before 1950 gone, saving the remaining films means hard choices, and unfortunately films [[iike]] this are often passed over to save movies that we all consider important. The [[colours]] shifting, lack of contrast, and generally poor quality of the [[printing]] most often seen is heartbreaking. This movie along with `It Happened One Night' are [[faultless]] to curl up with a [[loves]] one under a blanket on [[refrigerate]] a [[refrigerate]] evening and watch, or better yet why not a double feature. --------------------------------------------- Result 5948 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I had never [[seen]] such an [[incredible]] acting job in a motion picture as I did when I [[saw]] Daniel Day-Lewis play [[Christy]] [[Brown]] in My [[Left]] Foot. In fact off the scene his role wasn't even over. He played the role of [[Christy]] Brown or at [[least]] disabled like him all through the filming of the movie and needed surgery because of the [[damage]] his [[superior]] acting had done to his back. To me that is remarkable and through all the pain he put up with to act that role I believe it is [[quite]] true to say he put on the most Oscar [[worthy]] performance in [[history]]. He was so masterful in this [[tough]] a [[part]] that I [[believe]] no one [[could]] have [[done]] it better or with more of an [[impact]] than him. [[Although]] I cannot say it is the [[greatest]] [[movie]] of all [[time]] I can [[say]] that how he [[played]] this impossible a role and then kept on acting it until it wasn't even acting anymore is without a [[doubt]] the [[greatest]] [[feet]] I will ever [[seen]] an [[actor]] do. [[Probably]] a [[man]] too for that matter. I had never [[watched]] such an [[awesome]] acting job in a motion picture as I did when I [[sawthe]] Daniel Day-Lewis play [[Christie]] [[Brownish]] in My [[Gauche]] Foot. In fact off the scene his role wasn't even over. He played the role of [[Christie]] Brown or at [[slightest]] disabled like him all through the filming of the movie and needed surgery because of the [[harm]] his [[upper]] acting had done to his back. To me that is remarkable and through all the pain he put up with to act that role I believe it is [[rather]] true to say he put on the most Oscar [[creditable]] performance in [[story]]. He was so masterful in this [[rigid]] a [[parties]] that I [[reckon]] no one [[did]] have [[effected]] it better or with more of an [[influencing]] than him. [[Despite]] I cannot say it is the [[higher]] [[cinematography]] of all [[times]] I can [[tell]] that how he [[served]] this impossible a role and then kept on acting it until it wasn't even acting anymore is without a [[duda]] the [[biggest]] [[kneecaps]] I will ever [[noticed]] an [[actress]] do. [[Maybe]] a [[guy]] too for that matter. --------------------------------------------- Result 5949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This is a [[gorgeous]] movie visually. The images of the Mexican desert, the old mansion, the characters in their picturesque costumes...all [[amount]] to a [[real]] [[work]] of art.

The story seems a bit loose, but that's because it's not meant to be realistic. It is taken from a book called One Hundred Years of Solitude, and it is supposed to be an evocation of the isolated, otherworldly atmosphere of Latin America "so far from God, and so close to the United States". The tremendous debt that Erendira owes to her grandmother is symbolic of Latin America's international debt burden, although there many layers of meaning.

If you can appreciate a slow-moving, richly-textured movie, this one is for you. This is a [[wondrous]] movie visually. The images of the Mexican desert, the old mansion, the characters in their picturesque costumes...all [[quantity]] to a [[actual]] [[collaborated]] of art.

The story seems a bit loose, but that's because it's not meant to be realistic. It is taken from a book called One Hundred Years of Solitude, and it is supposed to be an evocation of the isolated, otherworldly atmosphere of Latin America "so far from God, and so close to the United States". The tremendous debt that Erendira owes to her grandmother is symbolic of Latin America's international debt burden, although there many layers of meaning.

If you can appreciate a slow-moving, richly-textured movie, this one is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 5950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a total waste of money. The production is poor, the special effects are terrible. In my country they had the courage to put this film on video named as "The Mummy" because of the success of Brendan Fraser`s film. I`m sure that you can find better horror movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 5951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] First off, let me [[start]] with a quote a friend of mine said while watching this [[movie]]: "This [[entire]] [[movie]] had to have been a dare. You know, like, '[[DUDE]], I BET YOU COULDN'T MAKE THE [[WORST]] [[MOVIE]] EVER'". With this [[movie]], they've [[made]] a [[good]] [[effort]] at [[achieving]] that title. The effects are, of course, poor. The plot/dialogue is like a collage of of bits [[stolen]] from [[every]] B horror [[movie]] ever made. The [[actors]], I'm assuming, are supposed to be in [[college]]. [[Yet]] parts of it ([[especially]] at the [[beginning]]) make it [[seem]] like they're supposed to be in [[high]] or [[middle]] school. It makes no sense. The Scarecrow going around [[killing]] people isn't the [[least]] bit [[enjoyable]]. (SPOILER: [[At]] the end, when they [[chant]] Lester's [[name]] and he reappears, the black guy and Scarecrow are both laughing, [[probably]] out of relief they were on their [[last]] scene, and at the cheesy [[dialogue]].) First off, let me [[commencement]] with a quote a friend of mine said while watching this [[filmmaking]]: "This [[whole]] [[movies]] had to have been a dare. You know, like, '[[BRO]], I BET YOU COULDN'T MAKE THE [[LOUSIEST]] [[FILMMAKING]] EVER'". With this [[film]], they've [[effected]] a [[alright]] [[endeavor]] at [[attaining]] that title. The effects are, of course, poor. The plot/dialogue is like a collage of of bits [[stole]] from [[all]] B horror [[flick]] ever made. The [[protagonists]], I'm assuming, are supposed to be in [[university]]. [[Nevertheless]] parts of it ([[mostly]] at the [[starting]]) make it [[looks]] like they're supposed to be in [[highest]] or [[medium]] school. It makes no sense. The Scarecrow going around [[assassinated]] people isn't the [[lowest]] bit [[nice]]. (SPOILER: [[In]] the end, when they [[purity]] Lester's [[denomination]] and he reappears, the black guy and Scarecrow are both laughing, [[undeniably]] out of relief they were on their [[lastly]] scene, and at the cheesy [[discussions]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 5952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After you see Vertigo, then watch Bell, Book and Candle, made within months of each other.

My second favorite Kim Novak film, with Picnic, coming in as third.

All three performances are great, Vertigo, being the best, of all.

They came to my nowhere Kansas Prairie town, near by, at Salina, Kansas in the 50s, to film, Picnic.

Bell, Book and Candle's musical score, I believe is one of Alex North's. Perfect for this bit of comedy.

After Vertigo, Stewart and Novak, did this comedy, how amusing to note the dramatic contrast.

Worth your time, if you like Kim Novak. The Greta Garbo of my youth. --------------------------------------------- Result 5953 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I never quite understood the popularity of Saban's Power Rangers show which was quite [[simply]] a second rate Americanized version of Japan's ultra popular super sentai series of the past three decades! What was cool about the Japanese version [[gets]] [[completely]] [[lost]] in the American version, characterization, special [[effects]], etc.

Of course many kids will say that power rangers are the [[greatest]] but they would be incorrect.

I'm sure if they spoke Japanese, they would learn how much better super sentai is over the American version.

Power Rangers is [[completely]] [[awful]], try Super Sentai instead! Looking for a better show, try Voltron The [[Third]] Dimension instead! I never quite understood the popularity of Saban's Power Rangers show which was quite [[solely]] a second rate Americanized version of Japan's ultra popular super sentai series of the past three decades! What was cool about the Japanese version [[attains]] [[abundantly]] [[outof]] in the American version, characterization, special [[impacts]], etc.

Of course many kids will say that power rangers are the [[bigger]] but they would be incorrect.

I'm sure if they spoke Japanese, they would learn how much better super sentai is over the American version.

Power Rangers is [[absolutely]] [[shocking]], try Super Sentai instead! Looking for a better show, try Voltron The [[Terzi]] Dimension instead! --------------------------------------------- Result 5954 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay guys, we know why we watch film like "The Invisible Maniac" (just look at the cover, man!). T and A all over the place (with a lot more T than A). But...shouldn't there be a story to go with it?

"C'mon," I can hear you say - "this is just girls gettin' naked! Who needs a story??!"

Well, if this were called "The NAKED Maniacs", I wouldn't have a problem. But since these guys are cribbing from "The Invisible Man", they need to have a bit of story hereabouts, you know, to keep your mind busy.

However, all they can muster up is how this crazy doctor creates an invisibility serum and, when he cracks, uses it to spy on naked women and ends up killing a lot of teenagers. And when you see the smarmy-looking teenagers he goes after, you'll be grateful.

One star, for the T and A, but there's a little too much gore for you skin fans, so proceed with caution.

TIDBIT - yes, it's THAT Savannah. --------------------------------------------- Result 5955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The first installment of this [[notorious]] [[horror]] series presents a woman being [[kidnapped]] by a gang of black-clad men who torture her for several days before [[finally]] killing her.She is beaten savagely,spun around in the chair endlessly,has her finger nails pulled,animal guts are thrown at her,hot boiling water is poured on her and finally her eyeball is punctured with a needle([[really]] sick and [[nasty]] scene).The makers of this [[unforgettable]] torture show [[tried]] to make it as real as [[possible]] and for me this one is the closest thing to a snuff [[film]] you can get without committing murder on tape.Of course some of the special effects are rather poor but the idea of making a snuff is pretty gruesome.I have seen also "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" which is more gory and sadistic,but less disturbing.[[Anyway]],this one is a must-see for horror fans! The first installment of this [[proverbial]] [[abomination]] series presents a woman being [[abducting]] by a gang of black-clad men who torture her for several days before [[eventually]] killing her.She is beaten savagely,spun around in the chair endlessly,has her finger nails pulled,animal guts are thrown at her,hot boiling water is poured on her and finally her eyeball is punctured with a needle([[truthfully]] sick and [[squalid]] scene).The makers of this [[memorable]] torture show [[attempting]] to make it as real as [[attainable]] and for me this one is the closest thing to a snuff [[cinematography]] you can get without committing murder on tape.Of course some of the special effects are rather poor but the idea of making a snuff is pretty gruesome.I have seen also "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" which is more gory and sadistic,but less disturbing.[[Anyhoo]],this one is a must-see for horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 5956 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Redundant, everlasting shots, useless shots, useless scenes are what you will find in this film. In other words, it seemed technically poor to me. The musical bits are amateurishly directed (no synchronization in the would-be dancing, badly post-synchronized, bad and obvious improvisation of the actors from time to time, etc).

The film is long and boring. Eventually, it makes few point and even less sense.

There are some good ideas though. Some of the comic elements are actually efficient, especially the opening scene. However, the film gets worse and worse so that it is completely unbearable and impossible to understand by the end.

The trailer I saw was very dynamic, that is not true for the film. That is to say the discrepancy between the trailer and the actual film is something very close to a rip off. --------------------------------------------- Result 5957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Remember when Harrison Ford was the [[biggest]] star in Hollywood because he made [[great]] [[movies]]? Those days are feeling like a more and more distant [[memory]].

While "Hollywood Homicide" is by no means terrible, it is a [[routine]] and surprisingly [[boring]] buddy [[cop]] movie. It's a comedy that's not [[particularly]] [[funny]], and an action movie that's not [[especially]] [[exciting]]. An overabundance of subplots cannot [[mask]] the [[weakest]] of the central storyline.

Ford at least appears to be enjoying himself more than is his last few projects, and he is able to carry the film most of the time. Hartnett is adequate, but he and Ford aren't exactly Newman and Redford as far as chemistry is concerned.

All in all, "Hollywood Homicide" is a reasonably amusing diversion, but just [[barely]]. Take out Ford, and it's not even that. Remember when Harrison Ford was the [[larger]] star in Hollywood because he made [[prodigious]] [[movie]]? Those days are feeling like a more and more distant [[souvenir]].

While "Hollywood Homicide" is by no means terrible, it is a [[normal]] and surprisingly [[dull]] buddy [[policemen]] movie. It's a comedy that's not [[principally]] [[comical]], and an action movie that's not [[mainly]] [[breathtaking]]. An overabundance of subplots cannot [[masking]] the [[lower]] of the central storyline.

Ford at least appears to be enjoying himself more than is his last few projects, and he is able to carry the film most of the time. Hartnett is adequate, but he and Ford aren't exactly Newman and Redford as far as chemistry is concerned.

All in all, "Hollywood Homicide" is a reasonably amusing diversion, but just [[hardly]]. Take out Ford, and it's not even that. --------------------------------------------- Result 5958 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very engaging, intelligent, and well-made film. Liam Neeson and Tim Roth play their roles superbly. The cinematography is outstanding. The fight scenes are amazing. This is a film I will enjoy watching again and again. One of my favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 5959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Squeamish 11-year-old Luke Benward (as Billy "Worm Boy" Forrester) moves to a new town. At his new school, young Benward is picked on by the other boys. They put worms in his thermos. Getting his gag reflex under control, Benward tosses a worm on freckle-faced bully Adam Hicks (as Joe Guire). Benward bets he can eat 10 worms in one day - without regurgitation!

Tall, teased Hallie Kate Eisenberg (as Erika "Erk" Tansy) uses her archery skills to help Benward. Director and former SCTV writer Bob Dolman promises, "No worms were harmed in the making of this movie." In a related note, SCTV star Andrea Martin has one funny scene. "How to Eat Fried Worms" is loosely based on Thomas Rockwell's popular novel. Pre-teen kids into gross-outs should enjoy the film.

**** How to Eat Fried Worms (8/25/06) Bob Dolman ~ Luke Benward, Adam Hicks, Hallie Kate Eisenberg, Alexander Gould --------------------------------------------- Result 5960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] but there are not too many of them. Probably the worst "major release" film I have seen in my life. Definitely the worst for this year. There is no point in commenting on the plot, the cast or the acting. The problem is beyond all that. It lays in the absolute stupidity of the annoying kind (not the funny kind) of everything that takes place on the screen. I don't know why I gave it a 2/10 instead of 1/10. Probably, because of Steven Martini. He really did try. Bottom line - 95 minutes washed down the toilet along with a few brain cells. Avoid at any cost. --------------------------------------------- Result 5961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This picture came out in 1975 and it was the second in the three part [[series]] of the [[life]] of Sheriff Buford Pusser. Bo Svenson takes over the role of Sheriff Buford Pusser, and Luke Askew plays the role of Mobster Pinky Dobson. The last that we saw Sheriff Pusser he was laying in a hospital bed after him and his wife who was killed in ambushed Sunday morning drive. After Pusser recovers he goes after the men that killed his wife. Is Pusser able to complete the revenge that he's after or does the mob try to take him out before he successes. The only thing that [[bother]] me about this picture that this was an actual [[true]] [[story]]. How could you leave in a town with this kind of [[crime]] and yet don't do anything about it. Since there was real no name actress in this picture I can't give it 10 weasel stars but I can give 8 This picture came out in 1975 and it was the second in the three part [[serial]] of the [[vie]] of Sheriff Buford Pusser. Bo Svenson takes over the role of Sheriff Buford Pusser, and Luke Askew plays the role of Mobster Pinky Dobson. The last that we saw Sheriff Pusser he was laying in a hospital bed after him and his wife who was killed in ambushed Sunday morning drive. After Pusser recovers he goes after the men that killed his wife. Is Pusser able to complete the revenge that he's after or does the mob try to take him out before he successes. The only thing that [[irritate]] me about this picture that this was an actual [[real]] [[conte]]. How could you leave in a town with this kind of [[misdemeanour]] and yet don't do anything about it. Since there was real no name actress in this picture I can't give it 10 weasel stars but I can give 8 --------------------------------------------- Result 5962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This is [[blatantly]] a futuristic adaptation of Jules Verne's "Mysterious Island". The sound editing is pretty bad. You hear the dialogue on set and you hear the voices being recorded on a recording booth at the same time! This is an amateur film with actors from Boston and shot around New Hampshire. For those living in New Engalnd and who is reading this comment will be wowed with a capital W. This film is full of [[flaws]]. You get to hear the director's voice giving directions and giving out directions to the actress. "OK now stand up." As for the other characters. There is this guy who talks with his mind instead of his voice and this blue alien. The alien guy talks with a deep voice. When he is yawning or grunting when he is fighting you hear the actor's voice. As for the special effects, man! This was Brett Piper's early work for crying out loud! The creatures are good but the animation is jerky. Really jerky. Sort of like Karl Zeman animation in JOURNEY TO BEGINNING OF TIME (1955). The special effects are imaginative. Thge music is good. Bottom line, this film makes EQUINOX or PLANET OF THE DINOSAURS look like a Ray Harryhausen epic. Did you know MYSTERIOUS PLANET was a home movie and was on a shoes string budget? A must watch for aspiring film makers. This is [[notoriously]] a futuristic adaptation of Jules Verne's "Mysterious Island". The sound editing is pretty bad. You hear the dialogue on set and you hear the voices being recorded on a recording booth at the same time! This is an amateur film with actors from Boston and shot around New Hampshire. For those living in New Engalnd and who is reading this comment will be wowed with a capital W. This film is full of [[demerits]]. You get to hear the director's voice giving directions and giving out directions to the actress. "OK now stand up." As for the other characters. There is this guy who talks with his mind instead of his voice and this blue alien. The alien guy talks with a deep voice. When he is yawning or grunting when he is fighting you hear the actor's voice. As for the special effects, man! This was Brett Piper's early work for crying out loud! The creatures are good but the animation is jerky. Really jerky. Sort of like Karl Zeman animation in JOURNEY TO BEGINNING OF TIME (1955). The special effects are imaginative. Thge music is good. Bottom line, this film makes EQUINOX or PLANET OF THE DINOSAURS look like a Ray Harryhausen epic. Did you know MYSTERIOUS PLANET was a home movie and was on a shoes string budget? A must watch for aspiring film makers. --------------------------------------------- Result 5963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Gayniggers from [[Outer]] Space is [[pretty]] much summed up by its name. [[Running]] only 27 minutes long, it describes a spaceship of gay [[blacks]] that come to [[Earth]] to [[free]] the men from women. [[While]] I see a little [[significance]] to the plot, it also is really [[illogical]]. Granted, its [[meant]] to be a comedy/spoof on society and science fiction. I found myself laughing several times, so it succeeds there.

The special [[effects]] are [[horrible]]. When the spaceship is floating above the Earth, you can see stars zoom by for no apparent reason. The asteroids shown in the beginning look fake, the equipment on the ship is [[illogical]], there are several misspellings in the text, the [[actors]] are unconvincing, the characters are messed up; in general, the whole thing doesn't take itself seriously. [[If]] you get past all the aspects that make it a bad movie, its very accessible and easy to see through to the end. Some parts are hilarious. But overall, the only thing that you are left remembering is that it was one of the most ridiculous concepts ever.

Seeing that its a short film and has some funny aspects, its not the worst thing to see. But its [[illogical]] and [[holds]] [[little]] long-term value. I can't really [[recommend]] it; if you do watch it, do so for the unique concept, not the quality. Gayniggers from [[Outboard]] Space is [[quite]] much summed up by its name. [[Executes]] only 27 minutes long, it describes a spaceship of gay [[darkies]] that come to [[Tierra]] to [[extricate]] the men from women. [[Despite]] I see a little [[importance]] to the plot, it also is really [[senseless]]. Granted, its [[intend]] to be a comedy/spoof on society and science fiction. I found myself laughing several times, so it succeeds there.

The special [[impacts]] are [[frightful]]. When the spaceship is floating above the Earth, you can see stars zoom by for no apparent reason. The asteroids shown in the beginning look fake, the equipment on the ship is [[counterintuitive]], there are several misspellings in the text, the [[protagonists]] are unconvincing, the characters are messed up; in general, the whole thing doesn't take itself seriously. [[Though]] you get past all the aspects that make it a bad movie, its very accessible and easy to see through to the end. Some parts are hilarious. But overall, the only thing that you are left remembering is that it was one of the most ridiculous concepts ever.

Seeing that its a short film and has some funny aspects, its not the worst thing to see. But its [[counterintuitive]] and [[possesses]] [[scant]] long-term value. I can't really [[recommendation]] it; if you do watch it, do so for the unique concept, not the quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 5964 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a superb episode, one of the best of both seasons. Down right horror for a change, with a story that is way way above the average MOH episodes, if there is such a thing. A man's wife is almost burned to death in a tragic car wreck, in which he was driving. His airbag worked, her's didn't. She is burned beyond recognition (great makeup btw), and not given much of a chance to live without a full skin graft. BUT, even in a coma, she keeps dying but brought back by modern technology, and when she does die for a few minutes, her ghost appears as a very vengeful spirit. Carnage of course ensues, and also some extremely gory killings, and also, some extremely sexy scenes. What more could you ask for, you might ask? Well, not much, because this baby has it all, and a very satirical ending, that should leave a smile on most viewers faces. I just loved Rob Schmidt's (Wrong Turn) direction too, he has a great knack for horror. Excellent episode, this is one I'm buying for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 5965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Many things [[become]] clear when watching this [[film]]: 1) the acting is [[terrible]]. Tom Hanks and Wendy Crewson are so-so, but the parent-child [[conflict]] [[borders]] soap opera-ish. The other two boys: an overly pouty [[child]] [[prodigy]] and your stereotypical I'm-a-babe-but-I'm-really-sensitive-inside [[blonde]] dreamboat; 2) the [[film]] as a whole is depressing and disappointing; 3) Robbie's [[dreams]] and episodes are [[disturbing]] ([[acted]] by Tom Hanks); 4) the inclusion of the [[beginning]] love [[ballads]] is an [[odd]] [[choice]] ("we are all [[special]] [[friends]]"); 5) the weird lines and side plots are not made any better by the [[terrible]] acting; and 5) this is a [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]]. [[Expect]] to be disappointed--and [[probably]] [[disturbed]]. Many things [[gotten]] clear when watching this [[movies]]: 1) the acting is [[scary]]. Tom Hanks and Wendy Crewson are so-so, but the parent-child [[dispute]] [[bounds]] soap opera-ish. The other two boys: an overly pouty [[kid]] [[genius]] and your stereotypical I'm-a-babe-but-I'm-really-sensitive-inside [[redhead]] dreamboat; 2) the [[filmmaking]] as a whole is depressing and disappointing; 3) Robbie's [[daydream]] and episodes are [[disconcerting]] ([[reacted]] by Tom Hanks); 4) the inclusion of the [[outset]] love [[songs]] is an [[peculiar]] [[picks]] ("we are all [[extraordinaire]] [[buddies]]"); 5) the weird lines and side plots are not made any better by the [[abysmal]] acting; and 5) this is a [[truly]] [[unfavourable]] [[films]]. [[Expecting]] to be disappointed--and [[perhaps]] [[troubled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A cast of 1980's TV movie and TV series guest stars (Misty Rowe, Pamela Hemsley,Clevon Little, Seymour Cassel among several others)in the story of a photographer who has dreams about killing his models. Of course the models and other people start turning up dead causing all sorts of complications.

Over done not very good thriller has enough nudity and violence to get an R rating but not enough good material to engender any real interest. This is best described as the sort of movie that gave the cable channel Cinemax the alternate name of Skinamax. I really can't see the point of watching this unless you need to see every sleazy thriller out there. (I also have to comment that this film is filled with smoking, to the point that it becomes laughable when anyone lights up) --------------------------------------------- Result 5967 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This movie was [[excellent]]. It details the [[struggle]] between a committed detective against the [[dedicated]] [[ignorance]] of the [[corrupted]] communist [[regime]] in Russia during the 80's. I give this movie [[high]] [[marks]] for it's no-holds-barred [[look]] into the birth and development of forensic investigation in a [[globally]] [[isolated]] (thanks to the "Regime") community. This is a graphic movie. It presents an unsensationalized [[picture]] of violence and it's [[tragic]] remains. [[Nothing]] is "candy-coated" with overdone blood or gore to separate us from the cruel [[reality]] on the screen. This movie is based on Russian serial [[killer]] Andrei Chikatilo. I'm familiar enough with the [[true]] [[story]] to have a very deep [[appreciation]] for how [[real]] they kept the [[film]]. It's not a comedy, but for those who appreciate dry and dark [[humor]], this movie is a must-see. This movie was [[wondrous]]. It details the [[fights]] between a committed detective against the [[devoted]] [[ignorant]] of the [[corrupt]] communist [[regimes]] in Russia during the 80's. I give this movie [[higher]] [[brands]] for it's no-holds-barred [[gaze]] into the birth and development of forensic investigation in a [[internationally]] [[secluded]] (thanks to the "Regime") community. This is a graphic movie. It presents an unsensationalized [[photographing]] of violence and it's [[dire]] remains. [[Nothin]] is "candy-coated" with overdone blood or gore to separate us from the cruel [[realistic]] on the screen. This movie is based on Russian serial [[assassin]] Andrei Chikatilo. I'm familiar enough with the [[authentic]] [[conte]] to have a very deep [[acknowledgment]] for how [[true]] they kept the [[cinematography]]. It's not a comedy, but for those who appreciate dry and dark [[mood]], this movie is a must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 5968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an excellent but hard to find trippy World War I spy thriller in the inimitable 60's Italian style. From the psychedelic graphics of the introductory credits and the great score by Ennio Morricone to the lesbian love scene with Capucine and the elaborately produced apocalyptic no man's land battle scenes with poison gas and German cavalry in full gas proof 'storm trooper' gear, this is a movie that should not be missed. It is a film that captures the horrors and cruelty of war and the ruthlessness of the players on and off the battlefield. Apart from the battle scenes, some of the production and special effects are primitive, apparently because the bulk of the budget for this movie was saved for the battle scenes, but for lovers of 60's cinema it should not be an issue. I first saw this movie on television many years ago and had the foresight to tape it on VHS. I still have the tape and enjoy watching it again from time to time. --------------------------------------------- Result 5969 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] The performances of Fishbourne (who appears strangely [[funny]] somehow) and (short featured)Ed Harris are remarkable, unlike Connery's who doesn't appear to find [[sense]] in his role and ends up in the motorial behaviour of a 80yr old man. In [[fact]] the [[screenplay]] doesn't make sense; imagine a 60 min. happy ending-plot plus a sudden turn appendix without any argumental structure in respect to the characters. It's more an [[accident]] than a [[screenplay]] and may be good for examination purposes at screen-wrights' schools. The more you [[remind]] the details the stronger this [[impression]] gets. The capital punishment is not an issue here, although it is a subject from the beginning; it sort of fades away without further comment. The subject-matter and environment [[could]] have been good. The performances of Fishbourne (who appears strangely [[fun]] somehow) and (short featured)Ed Harris are remarkable, unlike Connery's who doesn't appear to find [[feeling]] in his role and ends up in the motorial behaviour of a 80yr old man. In [[facto]] the [[scenarios]] doesn't make sense; imagine a 60 min. happy ending-plot plus a sudden turn appendix without any argumental structure in respect to the characters. It's more an [[incident]] than a [[scenarios]] and may be good for examination purposes at screen-wrights' schools. The more you [[recall]] the details the stronger this [[printing]] gets. The capital punishment is not an issue here, although it is a subject from the beginning; it sort of fades away without further comment. The subject-matter and environment [[wo]] have been good. --------------------------------------------- Result 5970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] You know what they [[say]] about the 70's..if you can remember them you weren't there. One of the few [[things]] I do remember about the 70's was the very [[first]] hippie and [[hip]] [[social]] [[satire]] as [[seen]] from a [[totally]] 'underground'or counter-culture [[perspective]]..The Groove Tube. If the humor [[seems]] [[faded]] or witless now to some viewers it can only be because a lot has happened in the last 30 years and the comedy isn't 'fresh' anymore..but hey! When this [[movie]] came out it was a first..and some of these skits were being done for the very first [[time]]...at a [[time]] when [[Nixon]] was in office, the Vietnam war was raging, the sexual revolution was in full swing..and J.Edgar Hoover was still in charge of the FBI. This is a film [[made]] before Watergate broke and as such it was one of the first to take a big swipe at the establishment..to make fun of it and the hippies at the same time. And frankly, some skits are still dead funny. [[If]] you liked Cheech and Chong's "Up In Smoke"..you will LOVE this film.

If you want to know what the 70's were really like..check out the Groove Tube.. if you liked the Oscar winning "Network" from about the same year and thought it was right on the mark in its savage look at TV, you will dig the Groove Tube..which [[picks]] up on the theme but plays from the angle of the [[viewers]]...the young [[viewers]] who were turning off the TV in favor of other entertainments.... We had been raised on Ozzie & Harriet "Leave It to Beaver", Father Knows Best, My Three Sons..Happy Days...so imagine our glee when those of us who were experimenting with the new life-styles got to see a send up of the box as seen from our [[perspective]]! The commercials by the Uranus corporation [[alone]] are priceless.."Good things come from Uranus"....and the [[sudden]] [[break]] from straight film into Fritz the Cat-style animation when the hippies [[eat]] the weed is still one of the [[best]] segues in and out of sanity i have ever seen on film.

If you liked the Kentucky Fried Movie, you will LOVE this film. And if you ever wondered why your weird uncle Harold still gets a wicked gleam in his eye when thinking back to his college days..this would be the perfect film to watch.

Take it for what it is..a memento of the times...and a sassy little film that will help all of us who did forget the 70's to remember them anew. You know what they [[tell]] about the 70's..if you can remember them you weren't there. One of the few [[aspects]] I do remember about the 70's was the very [[outset]] hippie and [[hips]] [[societal]] [[sarcasm]] as [[watched]] from a [[completely]] 'underground'or counter-culture [[views]]..The Groove Tube. If the humor [[appears]] [[dissipated]] or witless now to some viewers it can only be because a lot has happened in the last 30 years and the comedy isn't 'fresh' anymore..but hey! When this [[kino]] came out it was a first..and some of these skits were being done for the very first [[moment]]...at a [[times]] when [[Nix]] was in office, the Vietnam war was raging, the sexual revolution was in full swing..and J.Edgar Hoover was still in charge of the FBI. This is a film [[accomplished]] before Watergate broke and as such it was one of the first to take a big swipe at the establishment..to make fun of it and the hippies at the same time. And frankly, some skits are still dead funny. [[Unless]] you liked Cheech and Chong's "Up In Smoke"..you will LOVE this film.

If you want to know what the 70's were really like..check out the Groove Tube.. if you liked the Oscar winning "Network" from about the same year and thought it was right on the mark in its savage look at TV, you will dig the Groove Tube..which [[selection]] up on the theme but plays from the angle of the [[spectators]]...the young [[spectators]] who were turning off the TV in favor of other entertainments.... We had been raised on Ozzie & Harriet "Leave It to Beaver", Father Knows Best, My Three Sons..Happy Days...so imagine our glee when those of us who were experimenting with the new life-styles got to see a send up of the box as seen from our [[views]]! The commercials by the Uranus corporation [[merely]] are priceless.."Good things come from Uranus"....and the [[abrupt]] [[interruption]] from straight film into Fritz the Cat-style animation when the hippies [[comer]] the weed is still one of the [[finest]] segues in and out of sanity i have ever seen on film.

If you liked the Kentucky Fried Movie, you will LOVE this film. And if you ever wondered why your weird uncle Harold still gets a wicked gleam in his eye when thinking back to his college days..this would be the perfect film to watch.

Take it for what it is..a memento of the times...and a sassy little film that will help all of us who did forget the 70's to remember them anew. --------------------------------------------- Result 5971 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Opening the [[film]] with a Bach Toccata is an [[aural]] [[hint]] of what is to unfold in this [[intense]] drama. All the compositional devices Bach perfected to keep his listener (and the performer) intrigued and entertained applies to this film. There isn't a mutual tenderness between the two [[lead]] characters and the lead female in the final scene I feel is justified in stating she was raped even though her victimizer feels she was forewarned that he was a cad. Mamet compellingly [[explores]] the emotional chasm and differences between the genders but I feel he is clueless about how they [[actually]] compliment one another given a [[healthy]] [[sense]] of [[humor]]. If Mamet ever [[developed]] a healthy humorous take on the interaction between the genders I wonder how this work [[would]] have [[ended]]? As it exists it is very somber and mean spirited. Opening the [[kino]] with a Bach Toccata is an [[acoustics]] [[allusion]] of what is to unfold in this [[vehement]] drama. All the compositional devices Bach perfected to keep his listener (and the performer) intrigued and entertained applies to this film. There isn't a mutual tenderness between the two [[culminate]] characters and the lead female in the final scene I feel is justified in stating she was raped even though her victimizer feels she was forewarned that he was a cad. Mamet compellingly [[investigated]] the emotional chasm and differences between the genders but I feel he is clueless about how they [[genuinely]] compliment one another given a [[salubrious]] [[feeling]] of [[mood]]. If Mamet ever [[crafted]] a healthy humorous take on the interaction between the genders I wonder how this work [[ought]] have [[finished]]? As it exists it is very somber and mean spirited. --------------------------------------------- Result 5972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] No wonder that the historian Ian Kershaw, author of the groundbreaking Hitler biography, who [[originally]] was the scientific consultant for this [[TV]] film, dissociated himself from it. The [[film]] is historically just too [[incorrect]]. The mistakes [[start]] right away when Hitler`s father Alois dies at home, while in reality he died in a pub. In the film, Hitler moves from Vienna to Munich in 1914, while in reality he actually moved to Munich in 1913. I could go on [[endlessly]]. Hitler`s childhood and [[youth]] are portrayed way too short, which makes it quite difficult for historically [[uninformed]] people to understand the character of this frustrated neurotic man. [[Important]] persons of the early time of the party, like Hitler`s fatherly friend Dietrich Eckart or the party "philosopher" Alfred Rosenberg are totally [[missing]]. The characterization of Ernst Hanfstaengl is very [[problematic]]. In the film he is portrayed as a noble character who almost [[despises]] Hitler. The script obviously follows Hanfstaengl`s own [[gloss]] over view of himself which he gave in his biography after the war. In fact, Hanfstaengl was an anti-semite and was crazy about his "[[Fuehrer]]". But the biggest [[problem]] of the film is the portrayal of Hitler himself. He is characterized as someone who is constantly unfriendly,has neither charisma nor charm and constantly orders everybody around. After watching the film, one [[wonders]], how such a disgusting person ever was able to get any followers. Since we all know, what an evil criminal Hitler was, naturally every scriptwriter is tempted to portray Hitler as totally disgusting and uncharismatic. But facts is, that in private he could be quite charming and entertaining. His comrades didn`t follow him because he constantly yelled at them, but because they liked this strange man. Beyond all those historical mistakes, the film is well made, the actors are [[first]] class, the [[location]] shots and the production design give a believable impression of the era. No wonder that the historian Ian Kershaw, author of the groundbreaking Hitler biography, who [[initially]] was the scientific consultant for this [[TELEVISION]] film, dissociated himself from it. The [[filmmaking]] is historically just too [[false]]. The mistakes [[startup]] right away when Hitler`s father Alois dies at home, while in reality he died in a pub. In the film, Hitler moves from Vienna to Munich in 1914, while in reality he actually moved to Munich in 1913. I could go on [[permanently]]. Hitler`s childhood and [[adolescence]] are portrayed way too short, which makes it quite difficult for historically [[ignoramus]] people to understand the character of this frustrated neurotic man. [[Pivotal]] persons of the early time of the party, like Hitler`s fatherly friend Dietrich Eckart or the party "philosopher" Alfred Rosenberg are totally [[faded]]. The characterization of Ernst Hanfstaengl is very [[laborious]]. In the film he is portrayed as a noble character who almost [[ignores]] Hitler. The script obviously follows Hanfstaengl`s own [[shine]] over view of himself which he gave in his biography after the war. In fact, Hanfstaengl was an anti-semite and was crazy about his "[[Führer]]". But the biggest [[issues]] of the film is the portrayal of Hitler himself. He is characterized as someone who is constantly unfriendly,has neither charisma nor charm and constantly orders everybody around. After watching the film, one [[beauties]], how such a disgusting person ever was able to get any followers. Since we all know, what an evil criminal Hitler was, naturally every scriptwriter is tempted to portray Hitler as totally disgusting and uncharismatic. But facts is, that in private he could be quite charming and entertaining. His comrades didn`t follow him because he constantly yelled at them, but because they liked this strange man. Beyond all those historical mistakes, the film is well made, the actors are [[outset]] class, the [[locations]] shots and the production design give a believable impression of the era. --------------------------------------------- Result 5973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If I had never read the [[book]], I [[would]] have [[said]] it was a good movie. [[BUT]] I did read the book. Who ever did the screen write [[ruined]] the storyline. There is so [[many]] [[changes]], that it wasn't [[really]] [[worthy]] of the Title. Character changes, plot changes, time line [[changes]]...

[[First]] off who was Henry and the [[investigator]]? They weren't in the story. Henry had Mitch's persona somewhat, but Mitch wasn't a [[cop]]. [[No]] you made it so Roz, helped 'sink ' his body and used that as Zenia's blackmail against Roz. The real so called blackmail was Roz thought Zenia was sleeping with her son and wanted her to get away from him. Her son was also being blackmailed because he was hiding being Gay from his mother. Her son wasn't even really mentioned in the [[story]]. Neither I don't believe was his lover, Roz's secretary.

Tony and West were not [[together]] in the beginning. He was actually with Zenia first while in college. The black painted [[apartment]] was their [[Idea]], [[Tony]] just went to visit. This is where Zenia and [[Tony]] meet, become [[fast]] [[friends]]. [[Tony]] [[hides]] her [[love]] for West. Then Zenia [[left]] west, with cash from Tony, then West and [[Tony]] [[get]] together. [[Eventually]] [[marry]], at some point West leaves [[Tony]] for Zenia again for a short [[time]]. [[Only]] to be heart [[broken]] again. Then [[go]] back to Tony. Zenia's blackmail for Tony was that Tony had [[written]] a test paper for Zenia. Now being a Professor at College she didn't want to let it get out. I will [[say]] the character who played Tony did it wonderfully.

Charis character was a blond, not that it really matters. Zenia didn't trick her about having cancer while Augusta was alive. No she was there when Charis had a lover named billy. Augusta's father, he was a draft dodger in the Vietnam war. Eventually after Charis takes care of Zenia for months for what was actually drug withdrawal. Zenia and Billy have an affair right under Charis's nose while taking care of them both. Then Zenia turns in Billy to the government, and leaves on the ferry with him. Not with Augusta, Charis was pregnant with her tho. Charis also had a split personality, Karen was her real name.

Zenia did not die from being cut up into piece's.... she fell or was possibly pushed (we never really knew) off the balcony and landed in a fountain. She had almost pure grade heroin in her blood and it was likely she took some not knowing and fell off as she OD'd. She was also really dieing of Cancer this time around.

It didn't show any of the childhood memories or anything that endeared the characters to the reader. The Book was striped down to its bare bones. Then re made in someone else's vision. Why couldn't you just write your own story along the lines of what you made the movie. It was different enough, and I'm sure could have been made more so. If I had never read the [[workbook]], I [[should]] have [[avowed]] it was a good movie. [[ALTHOUGH]] I did read the book. Who ever did the screen write [[trashed]] the storyline. There is so [[several]] [[amendment]], that it wasn't [[truly]] [[creditable]] of the Title. Character changes, plot changes, time line [[alter]]...

[[Outset]] off who was Henry and the [[interrogators]]? They weren't in the story. Henry had Mitch's persona somewhat, but Mitch wasn't a [[police]]. [[Nos]] you made it so Roz, helped 'sink ' his body and used that as Zenia's blackmail against Roz. The real so called blackmail was Roz thought Zenia was sleeping with her son and wanted her to get away from him. Her son was also being blackmailed because he was hiding being Gay from his mother. Her son wasn't even really mentioned in the [[history]]. Neither I don't believe was his lover, Roz's secretary.

Tony and West were not [[jointly]] in the beginning. He was actually with Zenia first while in college. The black painted [[condo]] was their [[Ideals]], [[Toni]] just went to visit. This is where Zenia and [[Toni]] meet, become [[rapid]] [[friendships]]. [[Toni]] [[disguising]] her [[loves]] for West. Then Zenia [[exited]] west, with cash from Tony, then West and [[Toni]] [[got]] together. [[Lastly]] [[married]], at some point West leaves [[Toni]] for Zenia again for a short [[times]]. [[Exclusively]] to be heart [[raped]] again. Then [[going]] back to Tony. Zenia's blackmail for Tony was that Tony had [[typed]] a test paper for Zenia. Now being a Professor at College she didn't want to let it get out. I will [[said]] the character who played Tony did it wonderfully.

Charis character was a blond, not that it really matters. Zenia didn't trick her about having cancer while Augusta was alive. No she was there when Charis had a lover named billy. Augusta's father, he was a draft dodger in the Vietnam war. Eventually after Charis takes care of Zenia for months for what was actually drug withdrawal. Zenia and Billy have an affair right under Charis's nose while taking care of them both. Then Zenia turns in Billy to the government, and leaves on the ferry with him. Not with Augusta, Charis was pregnant with her tho. Charis also had a split personality, Karen was her real name.

Zenia did not die from being cut up into piece's.... she fell or was possibly pushed (we never really knew) off the balcony and landed in a fountain. She had almost pure grade heroin in her blood and it was likely she took some not knowing and fell off as she OD'd. She was also really dieing of Cancer this time around.

It didn't show any of the childhood memories or anything that endeared the characters to the reader. The Book was striped down to its bare bones. Then re made in someone else's vision. Why couldn't you just write your own story along the lines of what you made the movie. It was different enough, and I'm sure could have been made more so. --------------------------------------------- Result 5974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When I saw this [[movie]], circa 1979, it became the first [[movie]] that I ever walked out of in the middle. There is [[nothing]] worse than [[comedy]] that just misses being funny, and this misses every time (although I can't [[speak]] for the last 25 minutes of the movie). There was [[nothing]] [[original]] about any of the skits. [[While]] I enjoy racy [[humor]] where appropriate, these skits were needlessly vulgar. What was even more irritating was that this movie was advertised as "Robin William's first movie", capitalizing on his new found fame in the "Mork and Mindy" television series. Yet his role turned out to be so [[minor]] that you cannot even notice him on-screen. When I saw this [[filmmaking]], circa 1979, it became the first [[filmmaking]] that I ever walked out of in the middle. There is [[anything]] worse than [[farce]] that just misses being funny, and this misses every time (although I can't [[talk]] for the last 25 minutes of the movie). There was [[anything]] [[initial]] about any of the skits. [[Though]] I enjoy racy [[mood]] where appropriate, these skits were needlessly vulgar. What was even more irritating was that this movie was advertised as "Robin William's first movie", capitalizing on his new found fame in the "Mork and Mindy" television series. Yet his role turned out to be so [[minimal]] that you cannot even notice him on-screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 5975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I was not [[impressed]] about this film [[especially]] for the fact that I went to the cinema with my family in good faith to see a film which was certificate rated 12A here in the UK. To my dismay, this [[film]] was full of [[embarrassing]] sexual jokes. (Which is not a [[problem]] to me as an adult, but not good for watching with [[children]]). This film at times was very crude at times with fart jokes, getting hit in the groin etc... and for the most part of the [[film]] not very [[funny]].

The premise of the film is that Calvin Sims who is a 2inch midget, gets out of jail and steals a giant sized diamond but is then forced to put it in a womens handbag. So the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] sees him passing himself off as an abandoned baby, getting into this womens house so he can get this diamond back.

Up until now, I have [[enjoyed]] most of the output from the Wayans Brothers - but this film is certainly [[taking]] the [[biscuit]].

A Bit of good advice - wait till it comes on TV or Cable I was not [[surprising]] about this film [[peculiarly]] for the fact that I went to the cinema with my family in good faith to see a film which was certificate rated 12A here in the UK. To my dismay, this [[filmmaking]] was full of [[distracting]] sexual jokes. (Which is not a [[difficulties]] to me as an adult, but not good for watching with [[enfant]]). This film at times was very crude at times with fart jokes, getting hit in the groin etc... and for the most part of the [[flick]] not very [[hilarious]].

The premise of the film is that Calvin Sims who is a 2inch midget, gets out of jail and steals a giant sized diamond but is then forced to put it in a womens handbag. So the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] sees him passing himself off as an abandoned baby, getting into this womens house so he can get this diamond back.

Up until now, I have [[loved]] most of the output from the Wayans Brothers - but this film is certainly [[pick]] the [[cookie]].

A Bit of good advice - wait till it comes on TV or Cable --------------------------------------------- Result 5976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Dragon Hunters has to be the best-looking animated film I've ever [[seen]]. It was jaw-dropping. The film is about a couple rogues in search for some [[cash]], their weird [[furry]] blue dog that pees fire, and a [[girl]] who [[dreams]] about becoming a knight, and they are [[sent]] on a [[quest]] to go to the [[ends]] of the earth to [[kill]] the [[world]] gobbler, an impossibly [[immense]] [[dragon]]. But honestly, it doesn't even matter what the film is about. Because, it is jaw-droppingly [[gorgeous]]. The [[gravity]] in this fantasy world is [[different]], so blocks of architecture and spheres of land float around amidst cathedrals and castles and villages alike, and there are forests of floating lily pads. The world is so [[creative]], so uniquely [[beautiful]], with a sort of muted storybook look to it. The world looks like a set of [[gorgeous]] paintings. The monsters are visually [[stunning]] as well, like a fire dragon comprised of a swarm of evil red bats. Some of the plot isn't too original, like the [[main]] [[protagonists]] [[wanting]] their farm a [[la]] Of Mice and [[Men]] and never seem to be able to make it in the [[world]]; but the [[gorgeous]] graphics, some seriously sinister scenes, and emotion-evoking dialog makes this film [[spectacular]]. Dragon Hunters has to be the best-looking animated film I've ever [[noticed]]. It was jaw-dropping. The film is about a couple rogues in search for some [[money]], their weird [[hairy]] blue dog that pees fire, and a [[chick]] who [[dreaming]] about becoming a knight, and they are [[conveyed]] on a [[searching]] to go to the [[end]] of the earth to [[kiiled]] the [[globe]] gobbler, an impossibly [[gigantic]] [[lung]]. But honestly, it doesn't even matter what the film is about. Because, it is jaw-droppingly [[wondrous]]. The [[severity]] in this fantasy world is [[multiple]], so blocks of architecture and spheres of land float around amidst cathedrals and castles and villages alike, and there are forests of floating lily pads. The world is so [[creativity]], so uniquely [[wonderful]], with a sort of muted storybook look to it. The world looks like a set of [[belle]] paintings. The monsters are visually [[unbelievable]] as well, like a fire dragon comprised of a swarm of evil red bats. Some of the plot isn't too original, like the [[principal]] [[actors]] [[wish]] their farm a [[las]] Of Mice and [[Male]] and never seem to be able to make it in the [[globe]]; but the [[wondrous]] graphics, some seriously sinister scenes, and emotion-evoking dialog makes this film [[phenomenal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5977 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Though]] the pieces are uneven this [[collection]] of 11 short [[films]] is [[truly]] a [[moving]] and human experience. There were some who, in the wake of the emotion on the anniversary of the bombings, took this to be anti-American. I don't think thats the case, even though some parts might be taken that way if you don't look behind the obvious. Ultimately the film is nothing except an attempt by people to express their confusion, sympathy and feelings about what happened. These are stories of people who's [[worlds]] have been shaken up by what happened on a Tuesday in September.

As I said this film will move you, probably to tears. Its not always easy to watch, for example the film from Mexico is little more than a black screen with sound, but its effect is such as to lay even the strongest of people low. If you can be strong you really should see this film. It will comfort you and enlighten you and affect you... [[While]] the pieces are uneven this [[collating]] of 11 short [[kino]] is [[truthfully]] a [[transferring]] and human experience. There were some who, in the wake of the emotion on the anniversary of the bombings, took this to be anti-American. I don't think thats the case, even though some parts might be taken that way if you don't look behind the obvious. Ultimately the film is nothing except an attempt by people to express their confusion, sympathy and feelings about what happened. These are stories of people who's [[mundos]] have been shaken up by what happened on a Tuesday in September.

As I said this film will move you, probably to tears. Its not always easy to watch, for example the film from Mexico is little more than a black screen with sound, but its effect is such as to lay even the strongest of people low. If you can be strong you really should see this film. It will comfort you and enlighten you and affect you... --------------------------------------------- Result 5978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] The [[exploding]] zeppelins crashing down upon 'Sky Captain' [[Jude]] Law's base present an adequate metaphor to [[describe]] how [[truly]] [[terrible]] this movie is. First off, let me state right off the bat that I sincerely doubt that Paramount will ever recover any money from this film. A cult [[hit]] it might become, but only because it is so [[remarkable]] for what it failed to achieve. I can [[see]] the studio pitch now. "Let's combine 1920's German Expressionism and a 1940's globetrotting adventure with a modern action flick and use computer animation to dominate every scene! Wow, won't that be a success! " Skycaptain bludgeons the viewer with its sheer excess. There are too many fake explosions, too many [[unconvincing]] dogfight scenes, and too few real moments where the characters are anything but painfully two-dimensional. After all, why shock and awe with one floating airship when you can have three, or five, or one hundred?! Moreover, what could have been a groundbreaking film, seamlessly combining computer generated imagery and human actors in a stylized and intriguing setting, will instead become a flop in no small part because it fails to meet the most important requirement of any flick using CGI. Quite simply, the graphics are amazingly poor. From the movement of the cars to the physics of the aircraft in the dogfights, everything seems to be just a little off. I'm not being nit-picky here in any way. An infant could notice that a car doesn't glide along the road like a maglev train (unless its a Mercedes S500). And for those of you raising your voices in protest, crying out 'This is a stylized film, it's not supposed to be like reality', let me just say this. Lord of the Rings has set the standard for integrating real-life actors with CGI, Starship Troopers has set the standard for ironic science fiction films, the Rocketeer did a solid job reintroducing the decade of the 1920's back into the Hollywood film portfolio, and Tim Burton's Batman created a unique picture of New York City/Gotham that has yet to be repeated. Sky Captain falls so short of all these films, it is hard for me to mention them in the same sentence. Plus, the acting is so poor, it makes me positively [[ill]]. So there you have it. I spent $9 to see this film and you get my review. I hope it might dissuade you all from making the same mistake that I did. The [[bombing]] zeppelins crashing down upon 'Sky Captain' [[Goode]] Law's base present an adequate metaphor to [[depict]] how [[genuinely]] [[horrific]] this movie is. First off, let me state right off the bat that I sincerely doubt that Paramount will ever recover any money from this film. A cult [[pummeled]] it might become, but only because it is so [[sumptuous]] for what it failed to achieve. I can [[consults]] the studio pitch now. "Let's combine 1920's German Expressionism and a 1940's globetrotting adventure with a modern action flick and use computer animation to dominate every scene! Wow, won't that be a success! " Skycaptain bludgeons the viewer with its sheer excess. There are too many fake explosions, too many [[inconclusive]] dogfight scenes, and too few real moments where the characters are anything but painfully two-dimensional. After all, why shock and awe with one floating airship when you can have three, or five, or one hundred?! Moreover, what could have been a groundbreaking film, seamlessly combining computer generated imagery and human actors in a stylized and intriguing setting, will instead become a flop in no small part because it fails to meet the most important requirement of any flick using CGI. Quite simply, the graphics are amazingly poor. From the movement of the cars to the physics of the aircraft in the dogfights, everything seems to be just a little off. I'm not being nit-picky here in any way. An infant could notice that a car doesn't glide along the road like a maglev train (unless its a Mercedes S500). And for those of you raising your voices in protest, crying out 'This is a stylized film, it's not supposed to be like reality', let me just say this. Lord of the Rings has set the standard for integrating real-life actors with CGI, Starship Troopers has set the standard for ironic science fiction films, the Rocketeer did a solid job reintroducing the decade of the 1920's back into the Hollywood film portfolio, and Tim Burton's Batman created a unique picture of New York City/Gotham that has yet to be repeated. Sky Captain falls so short of all these films, it is hard for me to mention them in the same sentence. Plus, the acting is so poor, it makes me positively [[infirm]]. So there you have it. I spent $9 to see this film and you get my review. I hope it might dissuade you all from making the same mistake that I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 5979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] The [[famous]] international conductor [[Daniel]] Daréus (Michael Nyqvist) has a [[heart]] attack with his [[stressed]] busy professional [[life]] and interrupts his successful career with an [[early]] retirement. He decides to [[return]] to his hometown in the north of Sweden, from where his mother left when he was a seven year-old sensitive boy bullied by Conny and other school mates, to live a low-paced life. He buys an old school and is invited to participate in the church choir by the local Shepherd Stig (Niklas Falk), but the [[reluctant]] and shy Daniel [[refuses]] in the principle. However, he gets involved with the community and feels attracted by [[Lena]] (Frida Hallgren), a local [[woman]] with a past with the local doctor. His [[music]] [[opens]] the hearts of the [[members]] of the choir, affecting their daily life: the slow Tore (André Sjöberg) has the [[chance]] to participate in the [[choir]]; Inger (Ingela Olsson), the [[wife]] of Stig, releases her repressed [[sexuality]]; Gabriella ([[Helen]] Sjöholm) [[takes]] an [[attitude]] against her [[abusive]] and [[violent]] husband; the gossiper and frustrated Siv (Ilva Lööf) opens her heart against [[Lena]]; the fat Holmfrid (Mikael Rahm) [[cries]] enough against the jokes of the businessman Arne (Lennart Jähkel); [[even]] [[Daniel]] starts loving people and [[Lena]] as the love of his life. When they are invited to participate in an important contest in Vienna, Daniel finds his music opening the heart of people [[making]] his dream come true.

"Så Som I Himmelen" is a [[touching]] and [[sensitive]] movie, with a very [[beautiful]] [[story]]. It is impressive how director Kay Pollak and the [[screenplay]] writers have been able to [[develop]] a [[great]] number of [[characters]] in 132 minutes running time. The performances are top-notch, supported by [[magnificent]] music [[score]] and at least two awesome [[moments]]: when Gabrielle sings her song in the concert, and certainly the last concert in Vienna with the audience, jury and everybody participating in the melody, and Daniel making his dream come true. Like in "Teorema", the stranger changes the lives, not of only a family, but of a conservative community. Further, like many European movies, the open conclusion indicates that Daniel actually died, at least in my interpretation, reaching peace with the success of his music. My eyes became wet in these two scenes. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "A Vida no Paraíso" ("The Life In the Paradise") The [[illustrious]] international conductor [[Daniela]] Daréus (Michael Nyqvist) has a [[heartland]] attack with his [[pointed]] busy professional [[lives]] and interrupts his successful career with an [[swift]] retirement. He decides to [[homecoming]] to his hometown in the north of Sweden, from where his mother left when he was a seven year-old sensitive boy bullied by Conny and other school mates, to live a low-paced life. He buys an old school and is invited to participate in the church choir by the local Shepherd Stig (Niklas Falk), but the [[unwilling]] and shy Daniel [[refused]] in the principle. However, he gets involved with the community and feels attracted by [[Corinne]] (Frida Hallgren), a local [[dame]] with a past with the local doctor. His [[musician]] [[opening]] the hearts of the [[member]] of the choir, affecting their daily life: the slow Tore (André Sjöberg) has the [[possibilities]] to participate in the [[chorus]]; Inger (Ingela Olsson), the [[woman]] of Stig, releases her repressed [[sex]]; Gabriella ([[Hackett]] Sjöholm) [[pick]] an [[stance]] against her [[offensive]] and [[fierce]] husband; the gossiper and frustrated Siv (Ilva Lööf) opens her heart against [[Lina]]; the fat Holmfrid (Mikael Rahm) [[yell]] enough against the jokes of the businessman Arne (Lennart Jähkel); [[yet]] [[Danielle]] starts loving people and [[Lina]] as the love of his life. When they are invited to participate in an important contest in Vienna, Daniel finds his music opening the heart of people [[doing]] his dream come true.

"Så Som I Himmelen" is a [[touch]] and [[touchy]] movie, with a very [[magnifique]] [[saga]]. It is impressive how director Kay Pollak and the [[script]] writers have been able to [[developing]] a [[super]] number of [[features]] in 132 minutes running time. The performances are top-notch, supported by [[outstanding]] music [[scoring]] and at least two awesome [[times]]: when Gabrielle sings her song in the concert, and certainly the last concert in Vienna with the audience, jury and everybody participating in the melody, and Daniel making his dream come true. Like in "Teorema", the stranger changes the lives, not of only a family, but of a conservative community. Further, like many European movies, the open conclusion indicates that Daniel actually died, at least in my interpretation, reaching peace with the success of his music. My eyes became wet in these two scenes. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "A Vida no Paraíso" ("The Life In the Paradise") --------------------------------------------- Result 5980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] ... and I actually [[gave]] it a ZERO on my personal 1-10 scale. I have been attending [[movies]] since 1952 and have [[seen]] well over 1000 in the [[theater]] (I don't [[rate]] [[movies]] that I [[see]] only on TV). This is the ONLY [[movie]] I have ever rated ZERO.

My [[wife]] and I [[took]] our four children (then [[aged]] 15, 11, 8 and 6) and even the kids thought it was [[terrible]]. [[In]] fact, it was my [[daughter]] (now 26) who alerted me to this site (amazed that the movie was getting an [[overall]] rating of 4+).

The animation of the dinosaurs looked amateurish at the time (and is [[even]] worse in retrospect), the acting ([[particularly]] by [[Sean]] Young) is [[atrocious]] and the story line is [[simply]] [[silly]].

... and I actually [[provided]] it a ZERO on my personal 1-10 scale. I have been attending [[movie]] since 1952 and have [[noticed]] well over 1000 in the [[theaters]] (I don't [[rates]] [[movie]] that I [[seeing]] only on TV). This is the ONLY [[filmmaking]] I have ever rated ZERO.

My [[femme]] and I [[picked]] our four children (then [[older]] 15, 11, 8 and 6) and even the kids thought it was [[scary]]. [[During]] fact, it was my [[daughters]] (now 26) who alerted me to this site (amazed that the movie was getting an [[general]] rating of 4+).

The animation of the dinosaurs looked amateurish at the time (and is [[yet]] worse in retrospect), the acting ([[especially]] by [[Shawn]] Young) is [[outrageous]] and the story line is [[exclusively]] [[witless]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 5981 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] SPOILERS

Tom and Jerry is a [[classic]] [[cartoon]], with a flawless [[idea]], and [[almost]] every [[single]] short is a gem. [[While]] I must say that this is definitely an inferior short [[compared]] such other [[classic]] Tom and [[Jerry]] [[shorts]], there is not [[way]] you can [[hate]] this [[cartoon]]. Sure, it is [[understandable]] to [[say]] that this is one of the [[worst]] of the [[first]] [[Tom]] and Jerry episodes, and I can [[say]] that I [[agree]], but the fact of the [[matter]] is that all Tom and Jerry [[episodes]] are great, but some are just better than others. Well, this would fit into "others."

Here is the plot of Fraidy Cat. Tom is listening to an [[old]] [[scary]] radio [[broadcast]], and [[becomes]] easily [[frightened]]. Jerry [[observes]] how [[scared]] he is, and [[tries]] to scare him [[even]] more than he already is. He [[creates]] [[scary]] dilemmas for Tom, and Tom becomes [[scared]] out of his [[wits]], and his [[lives]]. Jerry then puts a [[sheet]] over a vacuum cleaner and [[controls]] it, [[thus]] making it look like the [[vacuum]] is a ghost. Tom [[finds]] out that Jerry did all of this, and [[chases]] him. Tom then [[accidentally]] bites the [[house]] maid. [[However]], at the [[end]] Jerry [[ends]] up the one becoming [[scared]] after he [[sees]] his [[reflection]] in a flour [[cup]].

[[Overall]], this is far from the [[best]] [[Tom]] and Jerry short out there, but this is [[still]] a [[fun]] and [[entertaining]] piece of time. It makes me wish that there was more [[cartoons]] like this. The slapstick and gags in this that [[make]] Tom and Jerry [[famous]] are as good as ever in this short, but it [[felt]] like [[something]] was [[missing]] in this. It felt slower than most [[Tom]] and Jerry [[shorts]]. Anyway, this is a good short that does not [[quite]] live up to some other [[Tom]] and [[Jerry]] [[cartoons]], but it is [[still]] nice.

7/10 SPOILERS

Tom and Jerry is a [[typical]] [[caricatures]], with a flawless [[concept]], and [[hardly]] every [[lonely]] short is a gem. [[Although]] I must say that this is definitely an inferior short [[likened]] such other [[typical]] Tom and [[Gerry]] [[pants]], there is not [[routes]] you can [[dislikes]] this [[caricature]]. Sure, it is [[comprehensible]] to [[tell]] that this is one of the [[lousiest]] of the [[frst]] [[Tum]] and Jerry episodes, and I can [[told]] that I [[concur]], but the fact of the [[topic]] is that all Tom and Jerry [[bouts]] are great, but some are just better than others. Well, this would fit into "others."

Here is the plot of Fraidy Cat. Tom is listening to an [[antigua]] [[horrible]] radio [[broadcasts]], and [[becoming]] easily [[terrified]]. Jerry [[note]] how [[terrified]] he is, and [[attempt]] to scare him [[yet]] more than he already is. He [[generates]] [[creepy]] dilemmas for Tom, and Tom becomes [[scare]] out of his [[minds]], and his [[vie]]. Jerry then puts a [[leaf]] over a vacuum cleaner and [[controlling]] it, [[consequently]] making it look like the [[emptiness]] is a ghost. Tom [[discoveries]] out that Jerry did all of this, and [[chasing]] him. Tom then [[mistakenly]] bites the [[houses]] maid. [[Yet]], at the [[terminates]] Jerry [[terminates]] up the one becoming [[spooked]] after he [[believes]] his [[reflections]] in a flour [[copa]].

[[Totals]], this is far from the [[better]] [[Thom]] and Jerry short out there, but this is [[again]] a [[amusing]] and [[amusing]] piece of time. It makes me wish that there was more [[cartoon]] like this. The slapstick and gags in this that [[deliver]] Tom and Jerry [[illustrious]] are as good as ever in this short, but it [[deemed]] like [[anything]] was [[gone]] in this. It felt slower than most [[Thom]] and Jerry [[panties]]. Anyway, this is a good short that does not [[very]] live up to some other [[Thom]] and [[Jiri]] [[comics]], but it is [[yet]] nice.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5982 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This movie was [[like]] "The Disney [[Channel]] after Dark." Take out the "aren't we naughty" [[language]] and themes and you are [[left]] with dialogue and plot [[devices]] that [[insult]] the [[intelligence]] of anyone who doesn't describe "Saved by the Bell" as quality television. The [[dialogue]] so laughably cliched and [[knowingly]] dirty, one might think the [[screenplay]] was the product of [[locking]] [[Aaron]] [[Spelling]] and Joe Eszterhas in a [[room]] with [[orders]] to [[produce]] an [[amalgam]] of every [[bad]] script each had ever had a hand in [[creating]]. [[If]] that was [[Roger]] Kumble's [[intention]], mission accomplished. This movie was [[iike]] "The Disney [[Chanel]] after Dark." Take out the "aren't we naughty" [[parlance]] and themes and you are [[gauche]] with dialogue and plot [[paraphernalia]] that [[affront]] the [[intellect]] of anyone who doesn't describe "Saved by the Bell" as quality television. The [[dialogues]] so laughably cliched and [[wilfully]] dirty, one might think the [[scripts]] was the product of [[blocking]] [[Aron]] [[Satire]] and Joe Eszterhas in a [[salle]] with [[order]] to [[generate]] an [[mixtures]] of every [[negative]] script each had ever had a hand in [[establish]]. [[Though]] that was [[Roget]] Kumble's [[ambition]], mission accomplished. --------------------------------------------- Result 5983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] A female vampire kills young women and paints with their blood. She has an assistant who doesn't want to be a vampire, so he has to do what she orders or be turned into a blood sucker. After a few kills, the assistant gets remorse and falls in love with a homeless girl.

What can I say about this [[movie]] ? That its pacing is over-slow, that it has some strange [[sound]] [[effects]] (never a bite sounded so strange) and ambiance (new jazz here I come) and that lights don't seem to be included on the set. It looks like an "auteur" horror movie with all the self-sufficiency inside.

The plot is completely stupid and as you can guess, it's the female vampire who explains how to kill her even if she doesn't have to do it; of course, crosses, light, garlic and sticks don't work.

It's not [[even]] a funny lousy movie. Perhaps with some friends and a lot of beers, it can't have its funny sides (to be honest, it's funny during 10 - 15 minutes near the end of the movie). Don't be fooled by the Troma sticker, it's one the [[bad]] movie they present. A female vampire kills young women and paints with their blood. She has an assistant who doesn't want to be a vampire, so he has to do what she orders or be turned into a blood sucker. After a few kills, the assistant gets remorse and falls in love with a homeless girl.

What can I say about this [[filmmaking]] ? That its pacing is over-slow, that it has some strange [[audible]] [[repercussions]] (never a bite sounded so strange) and ambiance (new jazz here I come) and that lights don't seem to be included on the set. It looks like an "auteur" horror movie with all the self-sufficiency inside.

The plot is completely stupid and as you can guess, it's the female vampire who explains how to kill her even if she doesn't have to do it; of course, crosses, light, garlic and sticks don't work.

It's not [[yet]] a funny lousy movie. Perhaps with some friends and a lot of beers, it can't have its funny sides (to be honest, it's funny during 10 - 15 minutes near the end of the movie). Don't be fooled by the Troma sticker, it's one the [[unfavourable]] movie they present. --------------------------------------------- Result 5984 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I'll be honest- the reason I rented this movie was because I am a huge fan of Kyle Chandler's (most notably from Early Edition). Since he usually plays the good guy, I wanted to see him as in a different role (out of curiosity). The plot itself also drew me in; a wanna-be hitman (Tony Greco- a.k.a. Mr. Chandler) must kill a person at random before he is trusted with the life- or, rather, the death- of a witness who will testify against someone in "the family". The movies was [[nothing]] like I [[expected]]. It was sick, I hated the end (if you saw it, you'd know why), and there were so many unnecessary parts. Basically- it was filthy, and made [[little]] sense. Yes, it was a mob movie, and yes the guns do go BOOM. But there's more to a movie than that. This film acted as if it didn't have the time to go into detail- just deal with it and understand it. The acting really made up for it- James Belushi was pretty amusing as "The Rose". Sheryl Lee made Angel seem as believable as she could get. She surprised me the most. And Kyle Chandler was equally convincing as an anxious newcomer to "the family". If only the script did justice to the actors. I'll be honest- the reason I rented this movie was because I am a huge fan of Kyle Chandler's (most notably from Early Edition). Since he usually plays the good guy, I wanted to see him as in a different role (out of curiosity). The plot itself also drew me in; a wanna-be hitman (Tony Greco- a.k.a. Mr. Chandler) must kill a person at random before he is trusted with the life- or, rather, the death- of a witness who will testify against someone in "the family". The movies was [[anything]] like I [[prophesied]]. It was sick, I hated the end (if you saw it, you'd know why), and there were so many unnecessary parts. Basically- it was filthy, and made [[scant]] sense. Yes, it was a mob movie, and yes the guns do go BOOM. But there's more to a movie than that. This film acted as if it didn't have the time to go into detail- just deal with it and understand it. The acting really made up for it- James Belushi was pretty amusing as "The Rose". Sheryl Lee made Angel seem as believable as she could get. She surprised me the most. And Kyle Chandler was equally convincing as an anxious newcomer to "the family". If only the script did justice to the actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 5985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] With an absolutely amazing cast and crew, this might have been a classic. [[Instead]] it is a [[repetitive]] [[paraphrasing]] of all the conspiracy theories extant in 1979 about the JFK assassination grafted, rather pointlessly, on to a vaguely [[incoherent]] plot about the murder of fictitious president Kegan in 1960. Many superb character actors are wasted as they are either not given enough to do - Sterling Hayden or Eli Wallach, for instance, or they are [[asked]] to go rather luridly over the top - [[John]] Huston. Jeff Bridges and [[Anthony]] Perkins do manage to [[acquit]] themselves very well, in their very different ways, though.

The photography is gorgeous, but does not justify an hour and a half of your life, or the price of the DVD purchase. With an absolutely amazing cast and crew, this might have been a classic. [[However]] it is a [[recurrent]] [[paraphrase]] of all the conspiracy theories extant in 1979 about the JFK assassination grafted, rather pointlessly, on to a vaguely [[inconsistent]] plot about the murder of fictitious president Kegan in 1960. Many superb character actors are wasted as they are either not given enough to do - Sterling Hayden or Eli Wallach, for instance, or they are [[wondered]] to go rather luridly over the top - [[Jon]] Huston. Jeff Bridges and [[Anton]] Perkins do manage to [[exonerate]] themselves very well, in their very different ways, though.

The photography is gorgeous, but does not justify an hour and a half of your life, or the price of the DVD purchase. --------------------------------------------- Result 5986 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] My [[evaluation]]: 8/10

I like a [[lot]] this [[movie]]. [[Compare]] to [[today]] [[brainless]] movie (just [[action]] and [[special]] effet and [[nothing]] new about ideas), "Soylent Green" ask to something that [[today]] doesn't exist anymore: To Think.

Well it would not a big surprise a day human eat "cookies" which are create with body of human. With all what happen on this planet, and to see how people are so indifferent to all, this kind of [[future]] is possible.

Sure this [[movie]] take some [[age]] but the idea behind the [[movie]] is actual again. [[Rich]] at [[Paradise]], other in the [[hell]]. Well a [[luck]] [[today]] they are [[TV]] and idiocy like "Reality Show".

[[TV]] is a good [[wash]] brain. It's [[pity]] to [[see]] that intelligence of human have not [[progress]] like [[technologies]]. [[Since]] writing all [[stop]].

If you like [[reality]] show this [[movie]] is not for you. If you believe all [[politician]] same too. If you don't like [[ask]] yourself question about now and future well never look this movie. My [[appraise]]: 8/10

I like a [[batches]] this [[movies]]. [[Comparison]] to [[yesterday]] [[jerk]] movie (just [[efforts]] and [[specific]] effet and [[anything]] new about ideas), "Soylent Green" ask to something that [[yesterday]] doesn't exist anymore: To Think.

Well it would not a big surprise a day human eat "cookies" which are create with body of human. With all what happen on this planet, and to see how people are so indifferent to all, this kind of [[impending]] is possible.

Sure this [[kino]] take some [[ageing]] but the idea behind the [[kino]] is actual again. [[Riche]] at [[Paradis]], other in the [[dammit]]. Well a [[likelihood]] [[hoy]] they are [[TELEVISIONS]] and idiocy like "Reality Show".

[[TELEVISION]] is a good [[scrubber]] brain. It's [[shame]] to [[consults]] that intelligence of human have not [[headway]] like [[techs]]. [[Because]] writing all [[discontinue]].

If you like [[actuality]] show this [[movies]] is not for you. If you believe all [[political]] same too. If you don't like [[requests]] yourself question about now and future well never look this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 5987 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] First off... I never [[considered]] myself an Uwe Boll [[Hater]] [[since]] I think I never even saw one of his [[movies]] but after seeing this [[cheap]] [[excuse]] for a movie named "[[Seed]]" (which is the [[name]] of the serial killer this [[movie]] is about) I am close to [[joining]] the [[hate]] club. This [[movie]] makes [[absolutely]] no [[sense]] at all... the plot is a joke and [[although]] Boll clearly tries to get attention by shocking people 90% of this [[movie]] is just [[plain]] boredom. You can [[sum]] up this [[movie]] like this:

1. Hooded killer watches clips of animals getting tortured on TV. This is [[real]] [[life]] footage from pelt farms and the movie [[opens]] with the [[ridiculous]] [[reason]] of "making a statement about [[humanity]]" and giving a Peta [[address]]. Since this [[movie]] has no [[message]] at all and is the [[worst]] piece of torture porn-exploitation you already have a [[reason]] to [[hate]] the [[movie]] from the [[beginning]] onward.

2. [[Death]] by electrocution with a [[pretext]] that gives away what [[happens]] [[later]] in this [[movie]] printed on screen so [[every]] [[retard]] [[gets]] it.

3. [[Cops]] watch [[videos]] of [[animals]], babies and [[women]] starved to [[death]] and [[decomposing]] in [[Seeds]] [[basement]], having [[stupid]] [[nightmares]] and [[crying]] into their [[whiskey]] because [[Seed]] is such an evil [[bad]] mofo. [[Although]] the acting is OK the [[movie]] takes a [[dive]] [[every]] time it tries to [[incorporate]] any [[emotions]]...

4. [[Cops]] bust [[Seed]] in his house, [[act]] stupid and get [[slashed]] in the [[dark]]. This sequence [[reminds]] me of a video game, you barely [[see]] [[anything]] except [[flashlights]]. [[Seed]] is a [[super]] [[killer]] that is everywhere at once and all cops [[act]] stupid enough to be [[killed]]... except for one who busts him.

5. [[Seed]] [[gets]] the [[chair]] and we see his electrocution as lengthy as everything [[else]] in this "[[movie]]"... he won't die and we are [[reminded]] of the opening statement that he [[must]] be set free if he survives 3 [[electric]] jolts. Guess what... they just [[bury]] him [[alive]] to [[solve]] the [[problem]].

6. Seed comes out of his grave, [[kills]] [[everyone]] off in another slashing [[part]] and then [[seeks]] the main [[cop]] to take [[revenge]] on.

7. A [[woman]] gets her head bashed in with a hammer in an endless sequence from one point of view just for the fun and shock value of it.

8. Seed captures the cops family, lures him to his house, threatens to kill his wife and daughter. After killing his wife with a nail gun the cop shoots himself in the head considering thats whats Seed wants (its hard to get into that guys head since he not just wears his mask even in prison but also never utters a word ... the movie has barely any dialog anyway so don't mind).

9. Boll goes for a nihilistic shocker end where Seed locks the daughter in with her dead dad to rot like the persons we saw on video on sequence 3.

This is it... no message, no plot, no reason, no face behind the mask, no background except a stupid story that Seed was burnt as a child.

This movie relies purely on few key scenes and their shock value. I hardly remember a movie this empty of any emotion or message or entertainment. Its like watching August Underground ... thats fine with me, some people will enjoy this brainless snuff. But what is really hard to stand about it is the pseudo-message in the beginning and the fact that the movie is well made considering camera-work, effects and even the acting is too good for this waste of celluloid.

So how does Boll get money to make such "movies" when thousands of talented directors work on shoestring budgets?? "Seed" is not just the essence of ridiculous, its living proof that the free market is flawed ... lucky Uwe that the German taxpayer is paying for a lot of this waste to get deductments. First off... I never [[judged]] myself an Uwe Boll [[Enemy]] [[because]] I think I never even saw one of his [[movie]] but after seeing this [[cheaper]] [[alibis]] for a movie named "[[Seeds]]" (which is the [[denomination]] of the serial killer this [[movies]] is about) I am close to [[joined]] the [[hates]] club. This [[filmmaking]] makes [[totally]] no [[feeling]] at all... the plot is a joke and [[while]] Boll clearly tries to get attention by shocking people 90% of this [[filmmaking]] is just [[lowlands]] boredom. You can [[somme]] up this [[filmmaking]] like this:

1. Hooded killer watches clips of animals getting tortured on TV. This is [[veritable]] [[lives]] footage from pelt farms and the movie [[inaugurated]] with the [[silly]] [[cause]] of "making a statement about [[humanist]]" and giving a Peta [[tackle]]. Since this [[filmmaking]] has no [[messages]] at all and is the [[hardest]] piece of torture porn-exploitation you already have a [[cause]] to [[hates]] the [[filmmaking]] from the [[starting]] onward.

2. [[Dying]] by electrocution with a [[excuse]] that gives away what [[occurs]] [[then]] in this [[filmmaking]] printed on screen so [[each]] [[brainless]] [[got]] it.

3. [[Cop]] watch [[tapes]] of [[zoo]], babies and [[femmes]] starved to [[dies]] and [[rotting]] in [[Seed]] [[cava]], having [[dumb]] [[dreaming]] and [[mourning]] into their [[scotch]] because [[Seeds]] is such an evil [[negative]] mofo. [[Despite]] the acting is OK the [[film]] takes a [[diving]] [[all]] time it tries to [[include]] any [[feelings]]...

4. [[Policemen]] bust [[Seeds]] in his house, [[law]] stupid and get [[reduce]] in the [[blackness]]. This sequence [[remembered]] me of a video game, you barely [[seeing]] [[nothing]] except [[torches]]. [[Seeds]] is a [[marvellous]] [[shooter]] that is everywhere at once and all cops [[ley]] stupid enough to be [[assassinated]]... except for one who busts him.

5. [[Seeds]] [[got]] the [[president]] and we see his electrocution as lengthy as everything [[elsewhere]] in this "[[filmmaking]]"... he won't die and we are [[remembered]] of the opening statement that he [[should]] be set free if he survives 3 [[electrified]] jolts. Guess what... they just [[buried]] him [[vibrant]] to [[resolutions]] the [[difficulty]].

6. Seed comes out of his grave, [[slain]] [[someone]] off in another slashing [[party]] and then [[strive]] the main [[cops]] to take [[reprisals]] on.

7. A [[wife]] gets her head bashed in with a hammer in an endless sequence from one point of view just for the fun and shock value of it.

8. Seed captures the cops family, lures him to his house, threatens to kill his wife and daughter. After killing his wife with a nail gun the cop shoots himself in the head considering thats whats Seed wants (its hard to get into that guys head since he not just wears his mask even in prison but also never utters a word ... the movie has barely any dialog anyway so don't mind).

9. Boll goes for a nihilistic shocker end where Seed locks the daughter in with her dead dad to rot like the persons we saw on video on sequence 3.

This is it... no message, no plot, no reason, no face behind the mask, no background except a stupid story that Seed was burnt as a child.

This movie relies purely on few key scenes and their shock value. I hardly remember a movie this empty of any emotion or message or entertainment. Its like watching August Underground ... thats fine with me, some people will enjoy this brainless snuff. But what is really hard to stand about it is the pseudo-message in the beginning and the fact that the movie is well made considering camera-work, effects and even the acting is too good for this waste of celluloid.

So how does Boll get money to make such "movies" when thousands of talented directors work on shoestring budgets?? "Seed" is not just the essence of ridiculous, its living proof that the free market is flawed ... lucky Uwe that the German taxpayer is paying for a lot of this waste to get deductments. --------------------------------------------- Result 5988 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bettie Page was a icon of the repressed 1950s, when she represented the sexual freedom that was still a decade away, but high in the hopes and dreams of many teenagers and young adults. Gretchen Mol does a superb job of portraying the scandalous Bettie, who was a small town girl with acting ambitions and a great body. Her acting career went nowhere, but her body brought her to the peak of fame in an admittedly fringe field. Photogrsphed in black and white with color interludes when she gets out of the world of exploitation in New York, this made-for-TV (HBO) film has good production values and a very believable supporting cast. The problem is, it's emotionally rather flat. It's difficult to form an attachment to the character, since Bettie is portrayed as someone quite shallow and naive given the business she was in. The self-serving government investigations are given a lot of screen time, which slows down the film towards the end. But it's definitely worth watching for the history of the time, and to see the heavy-handed government repression that was a characteristic of the fifties. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 5989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This movie is so cheap, it's endearing!!! With Ron Liebmann (Major Vaughn) providing the most [[entertaining]] on-screen diatribes in film [[history]]. I own 2 copies of this [[movie]] on [[video]]...on one, [[Ralph]] Macchio is [[caught]] actually cracking up in the background at Major Vaugn while he is ranting at "Hash". Obviously they [[forgot]] to edit this mistake out of the film, but it goes to [[show]] just how [[funny]] the [[movie]] is, when the actors themselves can't keep a [[straight]] face!!! This movie is so cheap, it's endearing!!! With Ron Liebmann (Major Vaughn) providing the most [[amusing]] on-screen diatribes in film [[historian]]. I own 2 copies of this [[cinematography]] on [[videos]]...on one, [[Raph]] Macchio is [[apprehended]] actually cracking up in the background at Major Vaugn while he is ranting at "Hash". Obviously they [[forget]] to edit this mistake out of the film, but it goes to [[spectacle]] just how [[fun]] the [[kino]] is, when the actors themselves can't keep a [[consecutive]] face!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 5990 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] To [[heighten]] the [[drama]] of this sudsy [[maternity]] ward story, it's set in a special ward for "[[difficult]] cases." The main story is Loretta Young's; she's on leave from a [[long]] [[prison]] stretch for [[murder]]. Will the [[doctors]] [[save]] her baby at the [[cost]] of her [[life]], or heed her husband's plea for the [[opposite]]? Melodrama and [[sentiment]] are dominant, and they're not the honest sort, to [[say]] the [[least]]. For example, just to keep [[things]] moving, this hospital has a [[psycho]] ward [[next]] [[door]] to the maternity ward, and [[lets]] a [[woman]] with a hysterical [[pregnancy]] [[wander]] about [[stealing]] [[babies]].

There are just enough [[laughs]] and sarcasm for this to be [[recognizable]] as a Warners [[film]], [[mostly]] from Glenda Farrell, who swigs gin from her hot-water [[bottle]] while she [[waits]] to have [[twins]] that, to her [[chagrin]], she [[finds]] there's now a [[law]] against [[selling]]. An example of her repartee: "[[Be]] careful." Farrell: "It's too late to be careful." Aline MacMahon is of course wonderfully authoritative as the chief [[nurse]], but don't [[expect]] her to be [[given]] a [[dramatic]] moment.

The main theme of the film is that the [[sight]] of a baby turns [[anyone]] to mush. Even [[given]] the [[obvious]] limitations, this [[film]] should have been [[better]] than it is. To [[increased]] the [[opera]] of this sudsy [[motherhood]] ward story, it's set in a special ward for "[[tough]] cases." The main story is Loretta Young's; she's on leave from a [[lengthy]] [[internment]] stretch for [[assassination]]. Will the [[doctor]] [[savings]] her baby at the [[prices]] of her [[living]], or heed her husband's plea for the [[inverse]]? Melodrama and [[feeling]] are dominant, and they're not the honest sort, to [[said]] the [[fewer]]. For example, just to keep [[items]] moving, this hospital has a [[lunatic]] ward [[imminent]] [[wears]] to the maternity ward, and [[allows]] a [[girls]] with a hysterical [[maternity]] [[roam]] about [[stolen]] [[baby]].

There are just enough [[chuckles]] and sarcasm for this to be [[visible]] as a Warners [[cinema]], [[mainly]] from Glenda Farrell, who swigs gin from her hot-water [[bottles]] while she [[expecting]] to have [[binoculars]] that, to her [[dismay]], she [[discovers]] there's now a [[laws]] against [[sold]]. An example of her repartee: "[[Are]] careful." Farrell: "It's too late to be careful." Aline MacMahon is of course wonderfully authoritative as the chief [[nurses]], but don't [[expecting]] her to be [[conferred]] a [[prodigious]] moment.

The main theme of the film is that the [[eyesight]] of a baby turns [[someone]] to mush. Even [[gave]] the [[manifest]] limitations, this [[filmmaking]] should have been [[optimum]] than it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 5991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is a [[quirky]] movie that the Brits do so well. Low budget, cameo type [[roles]], well [[executed]]. The [[story]] is a little weak, a recently widowed Judi Dench [[decides]] to round up the "blonde bombshells' a all (well almost all) girl band who performed during the [[war]] in London. The obligatory son/daughter who thinks she's gone [[potty]]. I did like the [[way]] the [[movie]] lets young people [[see]] that they don't have a monopoly on feelings, love and even lust! That the "[[old]] wrinklies" can have a [[good]] [[laugh]] too. Judi Dench was [[superb]] as [[always]], a [[pity]] we didn't get to [[see]] more of the other "[[blonde]] bombeshells, the end was a [[little]] [[rushed]] I [[thought]]. I kept thinking as I watched that David Jason would have made an even better Patrick than [[Ian]] Holm, although he was quite adequate as the "transvestite" drummer. [[All]] in all a [[cheery]] [[movie]] well worth a night in with the girls :) This is a [[lunatic]] movie that the Brits do so well. Low budget, cameo type [[functions]], well [[implemented]]. The [[histories]] is a little weak, a recently widowed Judi Dench [[decided]] to round up the "blonde bombshells' a all (well almost all) girl band who performed during the [[warfare]] in London. The obligatory son/daughter who thinks she's gone [[freaky]]. I did like the [[camino]] the [[cinema]] lets young people [[seeing]] that they don't have a monopoly on feelings, love and even lust! That the "[[antigua]] wrinklies" can have a [[alright]] [[laughing]] too. Judi Dench was [[magnifique]] as [[invariably]], a [[shame]] we didn't get to [[seeing]] more of the other "[[redhead]] bombeshells, the end was a [[petite]] [[sped]] I [[ideology]]. I kept thinking as I watched that David Jason would have made an even better Patrick than [[Iain]] Holm, although he was quite adequate as the "transvestite" drummer. [[Every]] in all a [[merry]] [[movies]] well worth a night in with the girls :) --------------------------------------------- Result 5992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unless you are mentally ill or the most die hard segal fan you will tire of this horrendous excuse for a film in under 5 minutes.

The Plot - Even for a Seagal film, the plot is just stupid. I mean its not just bad, its barely coherent.

The Acting - Unbelievably wooden. Literally seen better acting in porno's. Ironically this film tries to cash in on this audience which a 'lesbian love scene' which is utterly cringe-worthy.

Special Effects - wouldn't look out of place in a 60's sword and sorcery flick.

Unless you suffer from insomnia and have exhausted all other cures, don't make the same mistake as i did and buy this DVD, as you will be asking for that hour and a half of your life back. --------------------------------------------- Result 5993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] AKA: Mondays In The Sun

I have no idea what I just watched. Three men wander aimlessly and drink, grousing about everything and at everyone in their path. This is supposed to be a drama, but what it is, is a total waste of film, without a single redeeming quality.

I have read reviews touting the performances herein as "wonderful," "beautiful," and "heroic." I'm afraid I cannot agree, unless these men were supposed to come off as the dumbest most ignorant proto-humans who ever walked.

All in all? This was not a movie. It wanders throughout and loses everyone but the audience. I've watched this three times, and cannot for the life of me see what anyone sees in this garbage. There is nothing profound here, whatsoever. It's crap.

It rates a ZERO/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 5994 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] [[While]] the overall [[idea]] of Escape from Atlantis was [[intriguing]], I [[found]] the film to be far [[less]] than what I had hoped for upon reading the plot summery. Perhaps I am too much of a child in the technological age: the movie was made, as it is now 2002, an official five years ago --after viewing fantasy epics such as Lord of the Rings, and science fiction feats like Star Wars, as a whole it could not compare to other movies of similar line such as Dinotopia or Homer's The Odyssey.

My beef, basically, is that I couldn't relate --I am just about the same age of the children (a young adult), and have no trouble putting myself in the place of a middle-aged man if that is the character available. But the picture did not take me to a different mental plain of existence. I didn't find myself saying 'ACK! I would have done the SAME thing!'. It did not open the doors to my imagination. Even without comparing it to high-budget films or other TV movies, standing alone, certain aspects of the feature I found to be cliche: The character development in the children occurred too rapidly for my liking, seeing too much of the stereotypical selfish-teenager-bitter-after-divorce image changing into the we're-a-big-happy-family-let's-never-separate-again feel that can ultimately make or break a picture in the long run. Even the characters themselves [[could]] have undergone improvement: a typical set of one or the other stereotypes. There was the ever-present selfish beauty looking to be rebellious, accompanied by Mr. Perfect image of combining athletics, good looks and intelligence yet a brooding attitude, and lastly the smart-aleck little brother we find to be so common these days. While I know the personalities pushed the story along, I think that adding more individuality as far as nuances and more unique differences would have made it a more enjoyable --and believable (as far as character)-- movie.

I do have to raise my glass to the costume and set design --that made it worth finishing to the end for me. Don't get me wrong: all movies are worth seeing for yourself, and the opinion of one could never account for the opinion of many, but I think that with a little more depth to the script, and a little more (I cannot believe I am saying this) realness I dare say Escape from Atlantis could have been magical. [[Despite]] the overall [[thoughts]] of Escape from Atlantis was [[mesmerizing]], I [[discoveries]] the film to be far [[minimum]] than what I had hoped for upon reading the plot summery. Perhaps I am too much of a child in the technological age: the movie was made, as it is now 2002, an official five years ago --after viewing fantasy epics such as Lord of the Rings, and science fiction feats like Star Wars, as a whole it could not compare to other movies of similar line such as Dinotopia or Homer's The Odyssey.

My beef, basically, is that I couldn't relate --I am just about the same age of the children (a young adult), and have no trouble putting myself in the place of a middle-aged man if that is the character available. But the picture did not take me to a different mental plain of existence. I didn't find myself saying 'ACK! I would have done the SAME thing!'. It did not open the doors to my imagination. Even without comparing it to high-budget films or other TV movies, standing alone, certain aspects of the feature I found to be cliche: The character development in the children occurred too rapidly for my liking, seeing too much of the stereotypical selfish-teenager-bitter-after-divorce image changing into the we're-a-big-happy-family-let's-never-separate-again feel that can ultimately make or break a picture in the long run. Even the characters themselves [[did]] have undergone improvement: a typical set of one or the other stereotypes. There was the ever-present selfish beauty looking to be rebellious, accompanied by Mr. Perfect image of combining athletics, good looks and intelligence yet a brooding attitude, and lastly the smart-aleck little brother we find to be so common these days. While I know the personalities pushed the story along, I think that adding more individuality as far as nuances and more unique differences would have made it a more enjoyable --and believable (as far as character)-- movie.

I do have to raise my glass to the costume and set design --that made it worth finishing to the end for me. Don't get me wrong: all movies are worth seeing for yourself, and the opinion of one could never account for the opinion of many, but I think that with a little more depth to the script, and a little more (I cannot believe I am saying this) realness I dare say Escape from Atlantis could have been magical. --------------------------------------------- Result 5995 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] If you want to watch a real 'quality' movie get hold of The Eden Formula. This [[wondrous]] film [[must]] have cost all of $50 to make. It features a wafer thin script, [[pathetically]] bad sets, lighting and camera work, and a stop motion, paper-mache monster that is utterly laughable (it looks like they sometimes used a guy in a rubber suit and/or a glove puppet for the monster - but all were equally dreadful).

The actors all speak their lines as though they've never seen them before and are reading off a teleprompter. The special effects are way beyond [[lousy]]. And the only sad thing is that they dropped the really nifty original title 'Tyranasaurus Wrecks' which sums up exactly what you get for the full 90 minutes.

This is what happens when you scrape the bottom of the barrel so hard you break through to the crud that lies underneath.

I loved every minute of it. If you want to watch a real 'quality' movie get hold of The Eden Formula. This [[sumptuous]] film [[ought]] have cost all of $50 to make. It features a wafer thin script, [[ridiculously]] bad sets, lighting and camera work, and a stop motion, paper-mache monster that is utterly laughable (it looks like they sometimes used a guy in a rubber suit and/or a glove puppet for the monster - but all were equally dreadful).

The actors all speak their lines as though they've never seen them before and are reading off a teleprompter. The special effects are way beyond [[pathetic]]. And the only sad thing is that they dropped the really nifty original title 'Tyranasaurus Wrecks' which sums up exactly what you get for the full 90 minutes.

This is what happens when you scrape the bottom of the barrel so hard you break through to the crud that lies underneath.

I loved every minute of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 5996 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Lets make a [[movie]] about a [[talk]] [[show]] that already [[exists]] and [[basically]] have everything that [[happens]] on the [[show]]! Well if that idea doesn't intrigue you, which it shouldn't, [[stay]] away from ringmaster. I had the [[displeasure]] of seeing this in the [[theater]] and actually being able to [[sit]] through this mess of a [[movie]]. I guess jerry springer doesn't play himself as it [[shows]] from the cheap [[props]] for his [[show]] (yes it [[looks]] even [[cheaper]] than the real [[jerry]] springer [[show]]) and he is only known as [[jerry]] in the film. The [[plot]] (if you can [[call]] it that) is about a [[daughter]] while living with her [[mother]] decides to [[start]] sleeping with the mother's live in [[boyfriend]]. [[So]] the mother's [[brilliant]] [[idea]] is to [[call]] the jerry springer show as well as [[getting]] it on with her daughter's [[boyfriend]]. (Is it any coincidence they [[live]] in a [[trailer]] park). [[Meanwhile]] [[somewhere]] [[else]] in [[america]] a [[woman]] [[finds]] her cheatin' [[man]] with her [[friend]] in bed together. [[So]] of course call america's [[therapist]] Jerry springer! I'd [[talk]] about the [[rest]] of the [[film]] but [[even]] thinking about the [[film]] now is giving me a headache. [[Jamie]] Pressly who plays the [[daughter]] looks [[totally]] unattractive in the [[movie]]. And [[remember]] [[Michael]] Dudikoff the kick ass [[karate]] [[master]] from the american ninja [[series]]? [[Well]] [[take]] a look at him now as a white [[trash]] [[drunk]]. The thing is he [[really]] [[looks]] too [[horrible]] and out of [[shape]] to [[call]] it "[[getting]] in [[touch]] with his charecter". But if your [[idea]] of fun is [[seeing]] [[Jerry]] Springer [[sing]] a country song about his own [[show]] or [[guys]] hooking up with transvestites...well...[[JUST]] WATCH THE [[SHOW]] [[INSTEAD]]! ... at [[least]] steve was [[smart]] [[enough]] to [[stay]] out of this [[flick]]. Lets make a [[filmmaking]] about a [[conversation]] [[spectacle]] that already [[existed]] and [[fundamentally]] have everything that [[arises]] on the [[demonstrate]]! Well if that idea doesn't intrigue you, which it shouldn't, [[stays]] away from ringmaster. I had the [[antipathy]] of seeing this in the [[drama]] and actually being able to [[seated]] through this mess of a [[movies]]. I guess jerry springer doesn't play himself as it [[exhibit]] from the cheap [[accessories]] for his [[shows]] (yes it [[seem]] even [[cheap]] than the real [[jiri]] springer [[exhibitions]]) and he is only known as [[gerry]] in the film. The [[intrigue]] (if you can [[calling]] it that) is about a [[girl]] while living with her [[mommy]] decides to [[initiated]] sleeping with the mother's live in [[buddy]]. [[Therefore]] the mother's [[sumptuous]] [[ideals]] is to [[calling]] the jerry springer show as well as [[obtaining]] it on with her daughter's [[buddy]]. (Is it any coincidence they [[living]] in a [[trailers]] park). [[Moreover]] [[nowhere]] [[further]] in [[americans]] a [[dame]] [[discovers]] her cheatin' [[dude]] with her [[amigo]] in bed together. [[Consequently]] of course call america's [[psychiatrist]] Jerry springer! I'd [[chatter]] about the [[stays]] of the [[flick]] but [[yet]] thinking about the [[filmmaking]] now is giving me a headache. [[Jaime]] Pressly who plays the [[maid]] looks [[abundantly]] unattractive in the [[flick]]. And [[recalling]] [[Michel]] Dudikoff the kick ass [[kicks]] [[masters]] from the american ninja [[serials]]? [[Good]] [[taking]] a look at him now as a white [[litter]] [[drunken]]. The thing is he [[genuinely]] [[seem]] too [[scary]] and out of [[form]] to [[calls]] it "[[obtaining]] in [[toque]] with his charecter". But if your [[ideals]] of fun is [[witnessing]] [[Jiri]] Springer [[sung]] a country song about his own [[illustrating]] or [[boy]] hooking up with transvestites...well...[[RIGHTEOUS]] WATCH THE [[ILLUSTRATING]] [[CONVERSELY]]! ... at [[lowest]] steve was [[ingenious]] [[satisfactorily]] to [[staying]] out of this [[gesture]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 5997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[thought]] this movie was a lot better than most movie critics are giving it credit for. Though it has its confusing parts of the plot, it doesn't greatly interfere with your understanding of the movie. That being said, If you're not open to more liberal political ideas, then this probably isn't the [[movie]] for you. I thought all the [[actors]] in the movie were [[outstanding]]. Each character has their funny moments and the audience at the Tribeca Film Festival was laughing throughout the whole thing. I thought the [[satire]] was a tad over the top in one particular [[area]], but that's intentionally done. [[John]] Cusack is right in that [[although]] it's set in the [[future]], it [[really]] makes you [[see]] the present. I [[brainchild]] this movie was a lot better than most movie critics are giving it credit for. Though it has its confusing parts of the plot, it doesn't greatly interfere with your understanding of the movie. That being said, If you're not open to more liberal political ideas, then this probably isn't the [[cinematography]] for you. I thought all the [[players]] in the movie were [[wondrous]]. Each character has their funny moments and the audience at the Tribeca Film Festival was laughing throughout the whole thing. I thought the [[sarcasm]] was a tad over the top in one particular [[zona]], but that's intentionally done. [[Johannes]] Cusack is right in that [[while]] it's set in the [[futur]], it [[truthfully]] makes you [[consults]] the present. --------------------------------------------- Result 5998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dreary. Schlocky. Just plain dreadful and awful. Let's be honest, when you sit down to watch something called The Double-D Avenger you aren't expecting great art or even mild mainstream entertainment. You are probably expecting a cult film type and maybe get some good looks at some impressive busts. You don't get really either of these in the video. The story, as it consistent with most of these types, is inane: Kitten Natividad runs a local pub, finds out she has breast cancer, flies down to South America for a fruit that claims to be a panacea for any ills and a super-human abilities giver, returns and fights, dressed as the Double-D Avenger, a group from a local strip club wanting to edge out the competition. As stories go, I have seen a lot worse, but as another reviewer noted the execution is horrendous. The action sequences lack zip, drive, motivation, and are tissue thin. The acting isn't even properly campy and the dialog is the pits. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is funny from the wincing puns to the heavy-handed boob references. All could be forgiven if the girls could make up for it, but they all fall way short. Kitten, Haji, and Raven de la Croix are all quite older(still lovely in their own ways) yet expose nothing and become the antithesis of what they are trying to be: older, campy caricatures of their former selves. Instead, they look so lame and desperate - more because of the vehicle they are "starring" in rather than their own abilities. There are some other lovely ladies, but you really do not see much of anything. PG -13 definitely could be an appropriate rating for this. The material, the actresses, and director are all tired, tiresome, and dated - and again - NOT FUNNY! It was a brutal hour plus sitting through this, and that is a shame as I was expecting something campy and fun. The guy playing Bubba by the way was the only real laugh for me. Not that he was good at all mind you, but every time he opened his mouth I kept thinking how truly awful he was. The lone bright spot here at all is seeing Mr. Sci-fi himself, Forrest J. Ackerman, play the curator of a wax museum and chatting to his wax Frankenstein affectionately called Frankie. Other than that this is a complete bust - now how is that for another tired, dreadful, trite pun! --------------------------------------------- Result 5999 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] A text prologue [[warns]] us that we should not [[allow]] [[evil]] to [[enter]] our house, but I think the more apt word is "entropy." Good [[grief]], what slobs these two [[babes]] are!

George (Seymour Cassell) is alone in his San Francisco office and his monstrously expensive home in Tiburon while his [[wife]] and [[child]] are away in [[San]] Diego. Two [[girls]] (Sondra Locke as Jackson and Colleen Camp as Donna) knock on his [[door]], [[asking]] [[directions]]. Well, it's raining, and they're [[shivering]] like two [[drenched]] [[pitiful]] kittens, and they're not sure of the [[address]] they're looking for, and, what with one thing and another, George invites them to come in and partake of his [[pizza]] by the fire. All three of them wind up in George's [[bath]] tub and there follows about five minutes of mostly undifferentiated nudity in [[double]] exposure, triple exposure, quadruple exposure, and dodekakuple exposure. They spend the night in a threesome and the next morning the girls fix him [[breakfast]]. But something has gotten slightly cockeyed because Georgie's guests gobble everything down with their fingers and pour ketchup and syrup all over the linen and -- "You eat like ANIMALS!", George exclaims and tells them to get out. In his dreams.

Now, don't get me wrong. Sondra Locke is an [[extraordinary]] looking [[young]] blond with cobalt-blue eyes and Colleen Camp bounces around like a superball. You gotta say, they breed 'em mighty cute down there in Shelbyville, Tennessee, where Locke comes from, and they breed 'em with bodacious tushes too, as we can't help but note after the first five or ten minutes.

But when the girls go berserk, so does the [[movie]]. The film is thereafter bathed in a garish green light. The pair put on ghoulish makeup and make gargoyle faces at themselves in the mirrors. They brain a delivery boy and then drown him to make sure. They cuss up a storm and smash windows and furniture. They have one of those scenes in which two people sit across the table from one another, licking food and then jumping each other's bones.

And Georgie? They first [[render]] Georgie [[unconscious]] with mace (which contains nothing that you can't find in that little red bottle of McIlheny's Tabasco sauce in your kitchen cabinet), tie him up, pour flour and milk all over him, subject him to a psychotic trial, put him through one of those Tolstoy-type semi-executions, slap him around, dress up in outlandish costumes, then prance out on him and his virtually destroyed upper-middle-class home, and are dispatched by a delivery van ex machina.

As for the acting, it's as if [[someone]] had told Georgie, "First act polite to these girls, then act panicked after you're tied up." And to the girls: "First act shy, unwilling to impose on anyone, then act crazy." And that's it.

The photography and location work are straight out of a 1970s porn movie. I'm not sure that suggests a total lack of skill. It takes effort and talent to turn San Francisco ugly. The score gives us two Leitmotivs. Georgie's is some pop tune with lyrics about "being free" and "giving in." Jackson and Donna's is a catchy rinky-tink thing called "My Good Old Dad."

I approve of the moral lesson behind the story, though. There are some things you should simply not give in to, even though they might look like a lot of fun at first. All very educational. A text prologue [[alerts]] us that we should not [[permitting]] [[maleficent]] to [[intro]] our house, but I think the more apt word is "entropy." Good [[sadness]], what slobs these two [[infants]] are!

George (Seymour Cassell) is alone in his San Francisco office and his monstrously expensive home in Tiburon while his [[femme]] and [[kid]] are away in [[Saint]] Diego. Two [[daughters]] (Sondra Locke as Jackson and Colleen Camp as Donna) knock on his [[wears]], [[asked]] [[directives]]. Well, it's raining, and they're [[trembling]] like two [[dipped]] [[unlucky]] kittens, and they're not sure of the [[treat]] they're looking for, and, what with one thing and another, George invites them to come in and partake of his [[pie]] by the fire. All three of them wind up in George's [[swim]] tub and there follows about five minutes of mostly undifferentiated nudity in [[twice]] exposure, triple exposure, quadruple exposure, and dodekakuple exposure. They spend the night in a threesome and the next morning the girls fix him [[dinners]]. But something has gotten slightly cockeyed because Georgie's guests gobble everything down with their fingers and pour ketchup and syrup all over the linen and -- "You eat like ANIMALS!", George exclaims and tells them to get out. In his dreams.

Now, don't get me wrong. Sondra Locke is an [[marvelous]] looking [[youthful]] blond with cobalt-blue eyes and Colleen Camp bounces around like a superball. You gotta say, they breed 'em mighty cute down there in Shelbyville, Tennessee, where Locke comes from, and they breed 'em with bodacious tushes too, as we can't help but note after the first five or ten minutes.

But when the girls go berserk, so does the [[flick]]. The film is thereafter bathed in a garish green light. The pair put on ghoulish makeup and make gargoyle faces at themselves in the mirrors. They brain a delivery boy and then drown him to make sure. They cuss up a storm and smash windows and furniture. They have one of those scenes in which two people sit across the table from one another, licking food and then jumping each other's bones.

And Georgie? They first [[lend]] Georgie [[subconscious]] with mace (which contains nothing that you can't find in that little red bottle of McIlheny's Tabasco sauce in your kitchen cabinet), tie him up, pour flour and milk all over him, subject him to a psychotic trial, put him through one of those Tolstoy-type semi-executions, slap him around, dress up in outlandish costumes, then prance out on him and his virtually destroyed upper-middle-class home, and are dispatched by a delivery van ex machina.

As for the acting, it's as if [[anybody]] had told Georgie, "First act polite to these girls, then act panicked after you're tied up." And to the girls: "First act shy, unwilling to impose on anyone, then act crazy." And that's it.

The photography and location work are straight out of a 1970s porn movie. I'm not sure that suggests a total lack of skill. It takes effort and talent to turn San Francisco ugly. The score gives us two Leitmotivs. Georgie's is some pop tune with lyrics about "being free" and "giving in." Jackson and Donna's is a catchy rinky-tink thing called "My Good Old Dad."

I approve of the moral lesson behind the story, though. There are some things you should simply not give in to, even though they might look like a lot of fun at first. All very educational. --------------------------------------------- Result 6000 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Sentimental and naive but [[undeniably]] [[affecting]], [[emotional]] man-helping-man plea, in this case personified as German and French miners forced to be [[closed]] off from each other after the [[Great]] War [[thanks]] to a [[new]] border, leading to disillusionment on the German side, as the French are the bosses. But when a fire [[begins]] on the French side, the common [[decency]] of the German [[men]] lead to [[assistance]], safety and [[even]] [[friendship]]. This was a plea that [[would]] fall on deaf ears [[within]] the decade, as a certain [[man]] from Pabst's own side [[would]] break that [[piece]] and [[turn]] the Great War into merely a prelude. But it is [[obvious]] to me that Pabst really believes or at least wants to hope for this kind of fundamental humanism, as this [[film]] [[radiates]] with this [[optimism]] [[whereas]] his more flippant, cynical [[adaptation]] of The Threepenny Opera lacked the bite [[needed]] to make that [[work]] work. [[Also]] furthering his [[honest]] [[belief]] are the fact that the [[characters]] here are not [[simplistic]] mouthpieces for [[positions]], but [[real]] people, with [[real]] families whose [[home]] lives we are privy to as well. These are [[ordinary]], working-class [[men]] who just happen to believe in the worth of caring and [[treating]] right your fellow man, and in this day of individualist [[opportunism]], I'll take a little [[thinning]] in my plot to get a [[positive]] [[message]] that represents a point of [[view]] that I [[think]] we can all aspire to.

(Note: [[Apparently]] the ending is cut on most [[prints]], where the French [[rebuild]] the mining [[gate]], closing off the [[men]] once again. This is a [[brutal]] [[turn]] of [[events]], and may have [[made]] the [[film]] a better [[overall]] [[film]], but I [[would]] have lamented it souring the positives vibes of the [[final]] sequence, so in [[short]], I'm [[glad]] it was clipped.) {[[Grade]]: 8/10 (B) / #7 (of 11) of 1931} Sentimental and naive but [[doubtless]] [[afflicting]], [[sentimental]] man-helping-man plea, in this case personified as German and French miners forced to be [[closing]] off from each other after the [[Super]] War [[thank]] to a [[nuevo]] border, leading to disillusionment on the German side, as the French are the bosses. But when a fire [[launched]] on the French side, the common [[modesty]] of the German [[man]] lead to [[aid]], safety and [[yet]] [[goodwill]]. This was a plea that [[could]] fall on deaf ears [[inside]] the decade, as a certain [[dude]] from Pabst's own side [[ought]] break that [[slice]] and [[transforming]] the Great War into merely a prelude. But it is [[conspicuous]] to me that Pabst really believes or at least wants to hope for this kind of fundamental humanism, as this [[cinema]] [[emanates]] with this [[optimist]] [[whilst]] his more flippant, cynical [[adjustments]] of The Threepenny Opera lacked the bite [[required]] to make that [[cooperation]] work. [[Further]] furthering his [[truthful]] [[beliefs]] are the fact that the [[character]] here are not [[facile]] mouthpieces for [[posts]], but [[true]] people, with [[actual]] families whose [[dwellings]] lives we are privy to as well. These are [[banal]], working-class [[man]] who just happen to believe in the worth of caring and [[treated]] right your fellow man, and in this day of individualist [[expediency]], I'll take a little [[depletion]] in my plot to get a [[favourable]] [[messages]] that represents a point of [[opinion]] that I [[thought]] we can all aspire to.

(Note: [[Clearly]] the ending is cut on most [[footprint]], where the French [[rebuilding]] the mining [[puerta]], closing off the [[man]] once again. This is a [[brute]] [[converting]] of [[incidents]], and may have [[introduced]] the [[films]] a better [[entire]] [[films]], but I [[ought]] have lamented it souring the positives vibes of the [[ultimate]] sequence, so in [[succinct]], I'm [[pleased]] it was clipped.) {[[Grades]]: 8/10 (B) / #7 (of 11) of 1931} --------------------------------------------- Result 6001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[saw]] it in a posh movie theater where the [[audience]] is [[usually]] white, educated, and urban. The [[showing]] I attended had a [[sprinkling]] of African-Americans, and it made the [[difference]] in audience-reaction between the two groups a [[wonderful]] [[social]] [[commentary]] on the state of [[race]] relations in this [[country]]. Basically, the white folks were [[AFRAID]] to [[laugh]] or [[laughed]] [[nervously]] at the [[funny]] bits --and there are [[many]]! -- because they'd be "laughting at [[Blacks]]", while the [[Blacks]] [[also]] stayed pretty silent because [[many]] couldn't laugh at themselves in front of the [[whites]].

I, on the other hand, being Asian (and [[thus]] [[belonging]] to neither [[group]]), had a [[great]] time viewing this [[satire]] of [[rap]] culture and its egos/trappings/values/pseudo-philosophies. The cast is talented and does at great job becoming the [[characters]] [[portrayed]]. The songs are too funny to be [[believed]].

This film is one of the [[best]] pseudo-documentaries to come along, including "A Mighty Wind" I [[watched]] it in a posh movie theater where the [[viewers]] is [[fluently]] white, educated, and urban. The [[show]] I attended had a [[sprinkler]] of African-Americans, and it made the [[diff]] in audience-reaction between the two groups a [[super]] [[societal]] [[comments]] on the state of [[races]] relations in this [[nation]]. Basically, the white folks were [[SPOOKED]] to [[laughs]] or [[laughs]] [[awkwardly]] at the [[humorous]] bits --and there are [[innumerable]]! -- because they'd be "laughting at [[Nubians]]", while the [[Nubians]] [[apart]] stayed pretty silent because [[multiple]] couldn't laugh at themselves in front of the [[caucasians]].

I, on the other hand, being Asian (and [[so]] [[belonged]] to neither [[panel]]), had a [[wondrous]] time viewing this [[sarcasm]] of [[rapper]] culture and its egos/trappings/values/pseudo-philosophies. The cast is talented and does at great job becoming the [[features]] [[depicted]]. The songs are too funny to be [[felt]].

This film is one of the [[bestest]] pseudo-documentaries to come along, including "A Mighty Wind" --------------------------------------------- Result 6002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is film-making at it's simplest and it's best.

I had my doubts, because even though Freeman is great actor, sometimes he gets involved in bad projects; this is not one of those [[times]].

It's a small [[story]] that runs just over an hour and fifteen, in a time when we are getting [[used]] to having movies become longer and longer, and not necessarily [[better]], the director [[uses]] the short time to his [[advantage]], because the [[characters]] are so well defined from the start (great portrayals by freeman and Vega by the way), that the little bit of background info on them seems real, Morgan is himself even though his name is not mentioned, he has been out of movies for a couple of years now because he was saturated by the business, and developed a fear to commit to a script, and is doing research for a character in a indie movie where he plays a store/supermarket manager. The story begins by him being drop of in a supermarket in a rough neighborhood, where he meets the cashier of the 10 items or less (Vega) and has to take a ride with her cause "the production" forgot to pick him up.

In many [[ways]] it's a road movie, Morgan provides the laughs, and quirks with his unbeatable smile and positive perspective on everything, showing off an accomplished actor who has trained his mind to be able to define everyone he sees into a character he could play, and Paz (by the way, what an extraordinary beautiful woman, even more gorgeous than Penelope Cruz) brings the vulnerability of a 25 years old separated woman who works harder than everyone else without getting any credit in a dead end job at a crappy supermarket.

It's a talkie, there is a lot of dialog, but the balance between light and fun and serious and sad is well [[sustained]], the [[characters]] become so [[lovable]] right away that you spend the last 20 minutes begging for more screen time of this odd [[couple]], but the shortness is in the nature of the story, so it was a good call from the director not to [[give]] in. This is film-making at it's simplest and it's best.

I had my doubts, because even though Freeman is great actor, sometimes he gets involved in bad projects; this is not one of those [[moments]].

It's a small [[history]] that runs just over an hour and fifteen, in a time when we are getting [[using]] to having movies become longer and longer, and not necessarily [[optimum]], the director [[utilised]] the short time to his [[parti]], because the [[hallmarks]] are so well defined from the start (great portrayals by freeman and Vega by the way), that the little bit of background info on them seems real, Morgan is himself even though his name is not mentioned, he has been out of movies for a couple of years now because he was saturated by the business, and developed a fear to commit to a script, and is doing research for a character in a indie movie where he plays a store/supermarket manager. The story begins by him being drop of in a supermarket in a rough neighborhood, where he meets the cashier of the 10 items or less (Vega) and has to take a ride with her cause "the production" forgot to pick him up.

In many [[shapes]] it's a road movie, Morgan provides the laughs, and quirks with his unbeatable smile and positive perspective on everything, showing off an accomplished actor who has trained his mind to be able to define everyone he sees into a character he could play, and Paz (by the way, what an extraordinary beautiful woman, even more gorgeous than Penelope Cruz) brings the vulnerability of a 25 years old separated woman who works harder than everyone else without getting any credit in a dead end job at a crappy supermarket.

It's a talkie, there is a lot of dialog, but the balance between light and fun and serious and sad is well [[continue]], the [[nature]] become so [[cute]] right away that you spend the last 20 minutes begging for more screen time of this odd [[matches]], but the shortness is in the nature of the story, so it was a good call from the director not to [[lend]] in. --------------------------------------------- Result 6003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I don't know...Maybe it's just because it's an impressive tribute to some Muslim [[religious]] action(hajj)but I just [[felt]] the movie is so underrated. I just can't believe that the movie has just been voted by only 223 people so far [[given]] that the movie was produced in 2004 and it has won many awards [[since]] then.About the [[movie]]...it's one of those well-acted [[sweet]] [[movies]].Reda,a French teenager due to sit for Baccalauréat, is asked by his devout elderly father to take him to Mecca.Strange as it may seem(if one doesn't know much about Islam)the father wants his son to drive them from their home in France to Saudia Arabia on a once-in-a-lifetime religious pilgrimage.The generation gap between the father and the son is based on simple enough terms('you may know how to read and write, but you know nothing about life,' the unnamed father to his son)but some sort of bromidic generation gap literature is avoided.Bot of them are affectionate in their frustrations.The father never speaks in French though Reda understands Arabic but can only seem to answer in French. Though they encounter many people on the road: "There's the scary old woman they pick up in the Bosnian border on the way to Belgrade, and the talkative Mustafa(Jacky Nercessian), who helps them out at the border of Turkey,the reticent and shy women wearing burqas on the way to Damascus" the focus is always on the mismatched father and son.There is not much of a conversation in the movie which makes it [[enjoyable]] to your [[eyes]]. You see [[magnificent]] views in [[every]] city they go.The director shows you [[even]] the Blue Mosque and the Hagia Sophia [[even]] [[though]] the movie is not [[relatively]] long.

Generally I don't like movies which don't have enough dialogs and which take their power from camera [[subtleties]] but this one was [[really]] [[great]].Despite some unanswered details(like Reda's unseen French girlfriend)the movie appeals to senses.[[Great]] [[work]] of art and remember this movie is Ismaël Ferroukhi's debut. I don't know...Maybe it's just because it's an impressive tribute to some Muslim [[ecclesiastical]] action(hajj)but I just [[believed]] the movie is so underrated. I just can't believe that the movie has just been voted by only 223 people so far [[yielded]] that the movie was produced in 2004 and it has won many awards [[because]] then.About the [[movies]]...it's one of those well-acted [[sugary]] [[theater]].Reda,a French teenager due to sit for Baccalauréat, is asked by his devout elderly father to take him to Mecca.Strange as it may seem(if one doesn't know much about Islam)the father wants his son to drive them from their home in France to Saudia Arabia on a once-in-a-lifetime religious pilgrimage.The generation gap between the father and the son is based on simple enough terms('you may know how to read and write, but you know nothing about life,' the unnamed father to his son)but some sort of bromidic generation gap literature is avoided.Bot of them are affectionate in their frustrations.The father never speaks in French though Reda understands Arabic but can only seem to answer in French. Though they encounter many people on the road: "There's the scary old woman they pick up in the Bosnian border on the way to Belgrade, and the talkative Mustafa(Jacky Nercessian), who helps them out at the border of Turkey,the reticent and shy women wearing burqas on the way to Damascus" the focus is always on the mismatched father and son.There is not much of a conversation in the movie which makes it [[nice]] to your [[eye]]. You see [[phenomenal]] views in [[any]] city they go.The director shows you [[yet]] the Blue Mosque and the Hagia Sophia [[yet]] [[if]] the movie is not [[fairly]] long.

Generally I don't like movies which don't have enough dialogs and which take their power from camera [[complexities]] but this one was [[genuinely]] [[wondrous]].Despite some unanswered details(like Reda's unseen French girlfriend)the movie appeals to senses.[[Wondrous]] [[jobs]] of art and remember this movie is Ismaël Ferroukhi's debut. --------------------------------------------- Result 6004 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The plot line of No One Sleeps is not a bad [[idea]], and the subject matter is of quite a bit of interest. But, throughout watching this film, we were [[saying]] aloud, "These filmmakers go to the trouble of finding good locations, the lighting is good, makeup and hair are good...why is the sound so bad?" [[Throughout]] the [[film]] the [[sound]] was echoy, garbled and much of the dialog was [[unintelligible]].

There is some good acting in this film, and I think Jim Thalman is really a good actor. This story, with some of the same [[actors]], [[would]] have been worth doing as a high-budget [[film]].

I just can't reiterate enough - if you have a [[limited]] [[budget]], [[dedicate]] more to good [[sound]]. [[Sound]] is as much a [[part]] of a [[film]] as the [[image]], and it's worth doing right. Could've earned a 6. The plot line of No One Sleeps is not a bad [[thoughts]], and the subject matter is of quite a bit of interest. But, throughout watching this film, we were [[telling]] aloud, "These filmmakers go to the trouble of finding good locations, the lighting is good, makeup and hair are good...why is the sound so bad?" [[In]] the [[movies]] the [[audible]] was echoy, garbled and much of the dialog was [[impenetrable]].

There is some good acting in this film, and I think Jim Thalman is really a good actor. This story, with some of the same [[actresses]], [[could]] have been worth doing as a high-budget [[filmmaking]].

I just can't reiterate enough - if you have a [[limiting]] [[budgets]], [[allocate]] more to good [[sounds]]. [[Sounds]] is as much a [[party]] of a [[flick]] as the [[picture]], and it's worth doing right. Could've earned a 6. --------------------------------------------- Result 6005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] **May Contain Spoilers**

A dude in a dopey-looking Kong suit (the same one used in KING KONG VS. GODZILLA in 1962) provides much of the laffs in this much-mocked [[monster]] flick. [[Kong]] is [[resurrected]] on Mondo [[Island]] and [[helps]] out the lunkhead [[hero]] and other [[good]] [[guys]] this [[time]] around. The vampire-like villain is named [[Dr]]. Who–-[[funny]], he doesn't look like [[Peter]] Cushing! [[Kong]] finally dukes it out with Who's pride and joy, a giant robot ape that [[looks]] like a [[bad]] metal [[sculpture]] of Magilla [[Gorilla]]. Like [[many]] of Honda's flicks this may have had some [[merit]] before American audiences diddled around with it and added new footage. The Rankin/Bass animation [[company]] had a hand in this [[mess]]. They should have [[stuck]] to [[superior]] children's [[programs]] like The Little [[Drummer]] Boy. **May Contain Spoilers**

A dude in a dopey-looking Kong suit (the same one used in KING KONG VS. GODZILLA in 1962) provides much of the laffs in this much-mocked [[monsters]] flick. [[Hk]] is [[rekindled]] on Mondo [[Isola]] and [[contributes]] out the lunkhead [[superhero]] and other [[alright]] [[boy]] this [[times]] around. The vampire-like villain is named [[Doktor]]. Who–-[[hilarious]], he doesn't look like [[Peters]] Cushing! [[Hong]] finally dukes it out with Who's pride and joy, a giant robot ape that [[seem]] like a [[rotten]] metal [[carving]] of Magilla [[Enforcer]]. Like [[numerous]] of Honda's flicks this may have had some [[deserves]] before American audiences diddled around with it and added new footage. The Rankin/Bass animation [[societies]] had a hand in this [[chaos]]. They should have [[constipated]] to [[supremo]] children's [[programming]] like The Little [[Drumming]] Boy. --------------------------------------------- Result 6006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Clint [[Eastwood]] would star again as the battle-weary Detective Harry [[Callahan]], but would [[also]] direct the fourth entry in the 'Dirty Harry' series. 'Sudden Impact' again [[like]] the other [[additions]], [[brings]] its own distinguishable [[style]] and tone, but if anything it's [[probably]] the most [[similar]] to the original in it's darker and [[seedy]] moments (and bestowing a classic line "Go ahead. Make my day")… but some of its humor has to been seen to [[believe]]. A bulldog… named [[meathead]] that pisses and farts. Oh [[yeah]]. However an interesting fact this entry was only one in series to not have it set entirely in San Francisco.

The story follows that of detective Callahan trying to put the pieces together of a murder where the victim was shot in the groin and then between the eyes. After getting in some trouble with office superiors and causing a stir which has some crime lord thugs after his blood. He's ordered to take leave, but it falls into a working one where he heads to a coastal town San Paulo, where a murder has occurred similar in vein (bullet to groin and between eyes) to his case. There he begins to dig up dirt, which leads to the idea of someone looking for revenge.

To be honest, I wasn't all that [[crash]] hot on Eastwood's take, but after many repeat viewings it virtually has [[grown]] on me to the point of probably being on par with the first sequel 'Magnum Force'. This well-assembled plot actually gives Eastwood another angle to work upon (even though it feels more like a sophisticated take on the vigilante features running rampant at that time), quite literal with something punishing but luridly damaging. It's like he's experimenting with noir-thriller touches with character-driven traits to help develop the emotionally bubbling and eventual morality framework. His use of images is [[lasting]], due to its slickly foreboding atmospherics. Dark [[tones]], brooding lighting… like the scene [[towards]] the end akin to some western showdown of a silhouette figure (Harry with his new .44 automag handgun) moving its [[way]] [[towards]] the stunned prey on the fishing docks. It's a [[striking]] [[sight]] that builds fear! [[Mixing]] the hauntingly cold with plain brutality and dash of humor. It seemed to come off. A major plus with these films are the dialogues, while I wouldn't call 'Sudden Impact' first-rate, it provides ample biting exchanges and memorably creditable lines… "You're a legend in your own mind". Don't you just love hearing Harry sparking an amusing quip, before pulling out his piece. The beating action when it occurs is excitingly jarring and intense… the only way to go and the pacing flies by with little in the way of flat passages. Lalo Schfrin would return as composer (after 'The Enforcer" had Jerry Fielding scoring) bringing a methodical funky kick, which still breathed those gloomy cues to a texturally breezy score that clicked from the get-go. Bruce Surtees (an Eastwood regular) gets the job behind the camera (where he did a piecing job with 'Dirty Harry') and gives the film plenty of scope by wonderfully framing the backdrops in some impeccable tracking scenes, but also instrument edgy angles within those dramatic moments.

Eastwood as the dinosaur Callahan still packs a punch, going beyond just that steely glare to get the job done and probably showing a little more heart than one would expect from a younger Callahan. This going by the sudden shift in a plot turn of Harry's quest for justice… by the badge even though he doesn't always agree with it. I just found it odd… a real change of heart. Across from him is a stupendous performance by his beau at the time Sondra Locke. Her turn of traumatic torment (being senselessly raped along with her younger sister), is hidden by a glassily quiet intensity. When the anger is released, it's tactically accurate in its outcome. Paul Drake is perfectly menacing and filthy as one of the targeted thugs and Audrie J. Neenan nails down a repellently scummy and big-mouthed performance. These people are truly an ugly bunch of saps. Pat Hingle is sturdy as the Chief of the small coastal town. In smaller parts are Bradford Dillman and the agreeably potent Albert Popwell (a regular in the series 1-4, but under different characters). How can you forget him in 'Dirty Harry'… yes he is bank robber that's at the end of the trademark quote "Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?" Clint [[Nolan]] would star again as the battle-weary Detective Harry [[Callaghan]], but would [[further]] direct the fourth entry in the 'Dirty Harry' series. 'Sudden Impact' again [[iike]] the other [[supplements]], [[poses]] its own distinguishable [[styles]] and tone, but if anything it's [[surely]] the most [[akin]] to the original in it's darker and [[shabby]] moments (and bestowing a classic line "Go ahead. Make my day")… but some of its humor has to been seen to [[reckon]]. A bulldog… named [[meatheads]] that pisses and farts. Oh [[yea]]. However an interesting fact this entry was only one in series to not have it set entirely in San Francisco.

The story follows that of detective Callahan trying to put the pieces together of a murder where the victim was shot in the groin and then between the eyes. After getting in some trouble with office superiors and causing a stir which has some crime lord thugs after his blood. He's ordered to take leave, but it falls into a working one where he heads to a coastal town San Paulo, where a murder has occurred similar in vein (bullet to groin and between eyes) to his case. There he begins to dig up dirt, which leads to the idea of someone looking for revenge.

To be honest, I wasn't all that [[collisions]] hot on Eastwood's take, but after many repeat viewings it virtually has [[cultivated]] on me to the point of probably being on par with the first sequel 'Magnum Force'. This well-assembled plot actually gives Eastwood another angle to work upon (even though it feels more like a sophisticated take on the vigilante features running rampant at that time), quite literal with something punishing but luridly damaging. It's like he's experimenting with noir-thriller touches with character-driven traits to help develop the emotionally bubbling and eventual morality framework. His use of images is [[sustained]], due to its slickly foreboding atmospherics. Dark [[hues]], brooding lighting… like the scene [[toward]] the end akin to some western showdown of a silhouette figure (Harry with his new .44 automag handgun) moving its [[camino]] [[toward]] the stunned prey on the fishing docks. It's a [[phenomenal]] [[eyesight]] that builds fear! [[Blended]] the hauntingly cold with plain brutality and dash of humor. It seemed to come off. A major plus with these films are the dialogues, while I wouldn't call 'Sudden Impact' first-rate, it provides ample biting exchanges and memorably creditable lines… "You're a legend in your own mind". Don't you just love hearing Harry sparking an amusing quip, before pulling out his piece. The beating action when it occurs is excitingly jarring and intense… the only way to go and the pacing flies by with little in the way of flat passages. Lalo Schfrin would return as composer (after 'The Enforcer" had Jerry Fielding scoring) bringing a methodical funky kick, which still breathed those gloomy cues to a texturally breezy score that clicked from the get-go. Bruce Surtees (an Eastwood regular) gets the job behind the camera (where he did a piecing job with 'Dirty Harry') and gives the film plenty of scope by wonderfully framing the backdrops in some impeccable tracking scenes, but also instrument edgy angles within those dramatic moments.

Eastwood as the dinosaur Callahan still packs a punch, going beyond just that steely glare to get the job done and probably showing a little more heart than one would expect from a younger Callahan. This going by the sudden shift in a plot turn of Harry's quest for justice… by the badge even though he doesn't always agree with it. I just found it odd… a real change of heart. Across from him is a stupendous performance by his beau at the time Sondra Locke. Her turn of traumatic torment (being senselessly raped along with her younger sister), is hidden by a glassily quiet intensity. When the anger is released, it's tactically accurate in its outcome. Paul Drake is perfectly menacing and filthy as one of the targeted thugs and Audrie J. Neenan nails down a repellently scummy and big-mouthed performance. These people are truly an ugly bunch of saps. Pat Hingle is sturdy as the Chief of the small coastal town. In smaller parts are Bradford Dillman and the agreeably potent Albert Popwell (a regular in the series 1-4, but under different characters). How can you forget him in 'Dirty Harry'… yes he is bank robber that's at the end of the trademark quote "Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?" --------------------------------------------- Result 6007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Sadly, Marry Harron decided to do a [[fictional]] account of Bettie Page's life to go along with her own issues with men. As typical in all her work, every major male [[character]] is portrayed as weak, bumbling, or twisted. To [[add]] to her fiction, she projects [[ideas]] and [[issues]] that are not true, according to Bettie Page herself. Bettie did not leave the biz because she thought it was morally wrong or had [[religious]] issues (though she became a born-again later in life, through the influence of her 3rd husband- a minister). She left it, because she was in her late 30's, her acting career had gone nowhere and she felt she was losing her looks. The [[hints]] of molestation and rape are unvalidated and denied in Bettie's own words and are the director's [[attempts]] to claim that any woman who did what Bettie did must have been victimized by men. Harron fails to point out that Bettie designed her own clothes in almost all her shoots (not handed to her by "sick" fetishists). Harron [[also]] fails to make a point that Bunny Yeager, who did many famous photo shoots of Bettie, also did many "naughty" [[shoots]] with Bettie and was not the morally upright professional photographer portrayed in the film.

The only saving grace is Gretchen Mol looks very much like Bettie. Otherwise, there are other movies and [[documentaries]] more [[accurate]] and honest to her life and the people in it. Sadly, Marry Harron decided to do a [[imaginary]] account of Bettie Page's life to go along with her own issues with men. As typical in all her work, every major male [[nature]] is portrayed as weak, bumbling, or twisted. To [[inserting]] to her fiction, she projects [[insights]] and [[issue]] that are not true, according to Bettie Page herself. Bettie did not leave the biz because she thought it was morally wrong or had [[ecclesiastical]] issues (though she became a born-again later in life, through the influence of her 3rd husband- a minister). She left it, because she was in her late 30's, her acting career had gone nowhere and she felt she was losing her looks. The [[suggestions]] of molestation and rape are unvalidated and denied in Bettie's own words and are the director's [[try]] to claim that any woman who did what Bettie did must have been victimized by men. Harron fails to point out that Bettie designed her own clothes in almost all her shoots (not handed to her by "sick" fetishists). Harron [[additionally]] fails to make a point that Bunny Yeager, who did many famous photo shoots of Bettie, also did many "naughty" [[flushes]] with Bettie and was not the morally upright professional photographer portrayed in the film.

The only saving grace is Gretchen Mol looks very much like Bettie. Otherwise, there are other movies and [[documentary]] more [[precise]] and honest to her life and the people in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 6008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I first encountered this [[show]] when I was staying in Japan for six months last year. I found it in the internet when I was looking for sub-titled dramas to help me with my Japanese. My [[host]] [[mother]] [[warned]] me to stay away from it because she [[thought]] it was [[weird]], but I found it [[delightful]]! Koyuki [[showed]] such conflicting character traits and Matsujun's spirit made my day [[every]] time I tuned in! I first saw him on "Hana Yori Dango", but I [[liked]] him much better in this!

Although the characters are interesting and well-developed, I was disappointed to find that they didn't [[change]] very much throughout the show. Their relationship grew, but they didn't really. Still, a fun time had by all (Even for Fukushima!). I first encountered this [[display]] when I was staying in Japan for six months last year. I found it in the internet when I was looking for sub-titled dramas to help me with my Japanese. My [[receiving]] [[momma]] [[alerted]] me to stay away from it because she [[ideas]] it was [[curious]], but I found it [[wondrous]]! Koyuki [[shown]] such conflicting character traits and Matsujun's spirit made my day [[any]] time I tuned in! I first saw him on "Hana Yori Dango", but I [[loved]] him much better in this!

Although the characters are interesting and well-developed, I was disappointed to find that they didn't [[amend]] very much throughout the show. Their relationship grew, but they didn't really. Still, a fun time had by all (Even for Fukushima!). --------------------------------------------- Result 6009 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] A [[comedy]] of epically [[funny]] [[proportions]] from the guys that [[brought]] you [[South]] Park, and most of the [[guys]] from Orgazmo. This vulgur, obscence [[movie]] has [[utterly]] [[disgusting]], eggotistical, and [[satirical]] content. It [[portrays]] [[incredibly]] [[cruel]] [[treatment]] of humans and [[animals]]. I [[LOVE]] IT!!!!! This is some funny [[stuff]]. [[Really]] funny. Two loser [[friends]] [[create]] a [[game]] in thier [[driveway]], which [[explodes]] into a national sensation. [[Corruption]] and [[greed]] and blackmail turn the sport sour, and its up ta [[Coop]] ta [[fix]] it. And along the [[way]], you will laugh. Alot. That's all there is. [[Enjoy]]!!!! A [[parody]] of epically [[comical]] [[percentages]] from the guys that [[introduced]] you [[Southerly]] Park, and most of the [[bloke]] from Orgazmo. This vulgur, obscence [[cinematography]] has [[completely]] [[obnoxious]], eggotistical, and [[ironical]] content. It [[describes]] [[impossibly]] [[callous]] [[therapy]] of humans and [[animal]]. I [[LOVED]] IT!!!!! This is some funny [[thing]]. [[Truthfully]] funny. Two loser [[freund]] [[creating]] a [[gaming]] in thier [[passageway]], which [[detonating]] into a national sensation. [[Graft]] and [[avarice]] and blackmail turn the sport sour, and its up ta [[Henhouse]] ta [[remedy]] it. And along the [[manner]], you will laugh. Alot. That's all there is. [[Enjoys]]!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 6010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I'm not a regular viewer of Springer's, but I do watch his [[show]] in glimpses and I think the [[show]] is a [[fine]] guilty pleasure and a [[good]] [[way]] to kill some time. [[So]] [[naturally]], I'm going to watch this [[movie]] [[expecting]] to see "Jerry Springer Uncensored." [[First]] of all, [[Jerry]] appears in approximately twenty minutes of the film's running time. The other hour and twenty minutes is [[spent]] [[building]] up this pseudo-farce about trailer-trash, jealousy, incest and [[deception]]. [[Jaime]] Pressley (who [[looks]] hot as HELLLL) is a trailer-trash slut who sleeps with her stepfather (a very unusual-looking, chain-smoking, drunken [[Michael]] Dudikoff who finally [[strays]] from his [[action]] [[hero]] persona). The [[mom]] [[finds]] out about the [[affair]], they [[get]] into a [[fight]], they [[want]] to [[take]] it to the "[[Jerry]]" show (that's right, no Springer). And then we have a parallel story with an African-American [[couple]]. They take it to the "Jerry" show. The [[characters]] collide. Blah, blah, freakin' blah! [[Trash]] has rarely been this BORRRINGG!!!! I was wondering why the hell Springer has millions of [[fans]], [[yet]] none of them [[checked]] out his [[movie]]. Well, now it's [[TOTALLY]] [[obvious]]!! [[Whether]] you [[love]] him or hate him, you will hate this movie! How can I [[explain]]? It's a [[total]] [[mess]] of a [[motion]] picture (if that's what you [[call]] it). It's so [[badly]] edited, with scenes that just don't connect, and after a [[period]] of [[time]] the plot [[virtually]] disappears and it's [[simply]] all over the map! [[Just]] [[imagine]] a predictable soap [[opera]] [[transformed]] into a [[comic]] [[farce]]. With [[seldom]] [[laughs]].

My only [[positive]] [[note]] is a hot girl-girl scene. That's as risque as it gets. Don't get me wrong, the scene's pretty risque, but if you look at the overall film comparing it to the material on Springer's program--this disastrous farce [[seems]] extremely sanitized.

My score: 3 (out of 10) I'm not a regular viewer of Springer's, but I do watch his [[spectacle]] in glimpses and I think the [[display]] is a [[alright]] guilty pleasure and a [[buena]] [[routes]] to kill some time. [[Accordingly]] [[clearly]], I'm going to watch this [[filmmaking]] [[awaits]] to see "Jerry Springer Uncensored." [[Firstly]] of all, [[Jiri]] appears in approximately twenty minutes of the film's running time. The other hour and twenty minutes is [[expended]] [[build]] up this pseudo-farce about trailer-trash, jealousy, incest and [[trickery]]. [[Aime]] Pressley (who [[seems]] hot as HELLLL) is a trailer-trash slut who sleeps with her stepfather (a very unusual-looking, chain-smoking, drunken [[Micheal]] Dudikoff who finally [[tramps]] from his [[measures]] [[heroin]] persona). The [[mummy]] [[found]] out about the [[fling]], they [[obtain]] into a [[wrestling]], they [[wanted]] to [[taking]] it to the "[[Gerry]]" show (that's right, no Springer). And then we have a parallel story with an African-American [[match]]. They take it to the "Jerry" show. The [[trait]] collide. Blah, blah, freakin' blah! [[Litter]] has rarely been this BORRRINGG!!!! I was wondering why the hell Springer has millions of [[amateurs]], [[still]] none of them [[verified]] out his [[cinematography]]. Well, now it's [[ABSOLUTELY]] [[observable]]!! [[Both]] you [[likes]] him or hate him, you will hate this movie! How can I [[clarify]]? It's a [[unmitigated]] [[jumble]] of a [[motions]] picture (if that's what you [[invitation]] it). It's so [[sorely]] edited, with scenes that just don't connect, and after a [[periods]] of [[period]] the plot [[almost]] disappears and it's [[straightforward]] all over the map! [[Righteous]] [[imagining]] a predictable soap [[oprah]] [[transforms]] into a [[hilarious]] [[giggle]]. With [[rare]] [[chuckles]].

My only [[conducive]] [[notes]] is a hot girl-girl scene. That's as risque as it gets. Don't get me wrong, the scene's pretty risque, but if you look at the overall film comparing it to the material on Springer's program--this disastrous farce [[looks]] extremely sanitized.

My score: 3 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 6011 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best records of Israel's response to the murder of Rabin.Extremely true and natural, it captured the spirit of the nation.Especially important was the response of young people to the trauma of Israel's loss and the feeling that we shall overcome. --------------------------------------------- Result 6012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Contrary to my [[principles]], let me first come up with a [[conclusion]], because I have just [[seen]] this piece of "art", and still am under strong impressions. The reader is asked to excuse my [[stronger]] vocabulary.

Well, this movie is absolutely [[horrible]], and I [[would]] never bother to [[write]] a single word about it, if it were not for the [[fact]] that "44 Minutes" [[made]] me sick to death, which rarely [[happens]] to me. The fact that I [[paid]] for that does not exactly makes me feel better, as well as the fact the movie deserved the high user rating here.

So what is wrong with the movie? It has a fashionable title - "44 Minutes". One first thinks about "15 Minutes", which is by the way a much better movie, but still bad in my book, and indeed the two can be compared to some extent. But, as luck would have it, the things they share are their worst characteristics. They both feature Mr. Oleg Taktarov, who with his strong Russian accent obviously meets the popular expectations and prejudices. His purpose is to appeal to the Cold War mind. Ah, do we miss the good old times. Now, I don't imply that he is a bad actor, I am yet to judge his true performance, but he is simply not a true individual here, he is more like an archetype. How anyone can still indulge in such things is completely beyond my comprehension. We can recognize modern American xenophobia here. The point in the movie when Taktarov explains to his companion that Romanians are not Germans, and that they are in America is truly laughable. Are we to assume that the greatest desire of the wretched duo is to become "true" Americans?

Then, there is the media issue. Yes, it seems that the most of what we learn comes from cameras, interviews and reporters. The director should have made us feel the rhythm of the presumed 44 minutes. Instead he bores us with interviews throughout the movie like in a cheap TV show, trying to reinvent the wheel. In 15 Minutes the issue of media is the central one.The point is presented in a way a teacher addresses an obtuse student, but that deserves a separate comment, we are focusing on 44 Minutes now. So, I have been trying to identify the purpose of this movie. What is it? To provide good time for the audience? To glorify weapons? To glorify police? Portray violence? Oh yes, the officer gives the Bible to the underage delinquent. So it must promote peace and understanding after all? I don't think so, but don't ask me. I only know I didn't enjoy any of this.

Ah, Michael Madsen. I admit, I am a big fan. I hoped he would be a bright point, but I was wrong. It's not his fault though.

As the final note, comparing "firepower" to "willpower" at the end of the movie was one of the worst lines I have ever heard.

To summarize, on the scale 1-10, I give it a pure, unadulterated 1. Contrary to my [[principle]], let me first come up with a [[finding]], because I have just [[noticed]] this piece of "art", and still am under strong impressions. The reader is asked to excuse my [[greater]] vocabulary.

Well, this movie is absolutely [[shocking]], and I [[could]] never bother to [[handwriting]] a single word about it, if it were not for the [[facto]] that "44 Minutes" [[introduced]] me sick to death, which rarely [[comes]] to me. The fact that I [[credited]] for that does not exactly makes me feel better, as well as the fact the movie deserved the high user rating here.

So what is wrong with the movie? It has a fashionable title - "44 Minutes". One first thinks about "15 Minutes", which is by the way a much better movie, but still bad in my book, and indeed the two can be compared to some extent. But, as luck would have it, the things they share are their worst characteristics. They both feature Mr. Oleg Taktarov, who with his strong Russian accent obviously meets the popular expectations and prejudices. His purpose is to appeal to the Cold War mind. Ah, do we miss the good old times. Now, I don't imply that he is a bad actor, I am yet to judge his true performance, but he is simply not a true individual here, he is more like an archetype. How anyone can still indulge in such things is completely beyond my comprehension. We can recognize modern American xenophobia here. The point in the movie when Taktarov explains to his companion that Romanians are not Germans, and that they are in America is truly laughable. Are we to assume that the greatest desire of the wretched duo is to become "true" Americans?

Then, there is the media issue. Yes, it seems that the most of what we learn comes from cameras, interviews and reporters. The director should have made us feel the rhythm of the presumed 44 minutes. Instead he bores us with interviews throughout the movie like in a cheap TV show, trying to reinvent the wheel. In 15 Minutes the issue of media is the central one.The point is presented in a way a teacher addresses an obtuse student, but that deserves a separate comment, we are focusing on 44 Minutes now. So, I have been trying to identify the purpose of this movie. What is it? To provide good time for the audience? To glorify weapons? To glorify police? Portray violence? Oh yes, the officer gives the Bible to the underage delinquent. So it must promote peace and understanding after all? I don't think so, but don't ask me. I only know I didn't enjoy any of this.

Ah, Michael Madsen. I admit, I am a big fan. I hoped he would be a bright point, but I was wrong. It's not his fault though.

As the final note, comparing "firepower" to "willpower" at the end of the movie was one of the worst lines I have ever heard.

To summarize, on the scale 1-10, I give it a pure, unadulterated 1. --------------------------------------------- Result 6013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Too bad, I really like Kristen Cloke and Gary Busey. But the director failed to put this together. There's a lot of action, a lot of promise, but it all comes off hokey. The director didn't do his job. Promising action comes off lame. So much seems contrived in a desperate attempt to save the film. This version of "The Rage" (DirecTV credits it as 1996) simply isn't worth the time to watch it. Another director would have done a better job. --------------------------------------------- Result 6014 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, commitment. Let's say "Fever Pitch" might trick you into believing it's a baseball movie.

But no, you don't have to be a baseball fan to actually enjoy this picture from the Farrelly Brothers. But of course, if you are one, you will enjoy it even more; with all the references (pretty accurate ones, I'd say) to the Boston Red Sox and its bittersweet history; from the Curse of the Bambino and everything attributed to it, including those two words you CANNOT pronounce in front of a Boston fan: Bill Buckner.

Drew Barrymore and Jimmy Fallon portray two people who, usually might have second thoughts of going into a relationship: the successful workaholic who is also affluent meeting a school teacher? Thing is, Fallon's character wins Barrymore's heart by being funny, caring, sweet and downright perfect. But her friends ask her a logical question: if he's such a keeper, why is he still on the market? Enter the Boston Red Sox. He's been so committed to his team ever since his uncle passed his Sox season tickets to him; he has never missed a Red Sox home game at Fenway Park in a long while.

And that delicate balance, how much is the workaholic willing to give up for his guy's obsession; and how much is that baseball-crazed teacher willing to compromise in order to keep the OTHER love of his life, is what this movie is all about.

At first, you might think that the sports-obsession bits of the movie are exaggerated for comic relief. Well, I'm sad to admit, they are not. Myself, as a die-hard Houston Astros fan, can say they are all true. I would try at every way available to see every 'Stros game; listen to them on the radio or follow them on the Internet. I read the Chronicle's sports section every day. And yes, my room looks like The Shed, Minute Maid Park's gift shop; with a closet full of Astros gear, including 5 jerseys, 20 t-shirts and you know the rest. Fallon's character even has the Red Sox MBNA MasterCard.

Fallon was credible enough as the fanatical Red Sox faithful, even though he could pull it off without becoming a cartoon (Thank God Adam Sandler wasn't in it); and the plot revolved around how this couple tried to manage with each other's passions.

I'd say it'll be a classical romantic comedy. Not enough to be among the best movies in history; but certainly breaks a mold into the genre and is appealing enough for men and women alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 6015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Just came out of a sneak preview for this [[film]]. It had me laughing every 30 secs. The ending was so funny that [[tears]] were [[rolling]] down my [[face]] and it had me wishing I hadn't bought that [[large]] coke. There are definitely some lulls, but, [[overall]], [[highly]] [[entertaining]]. The movie [[lets]] Steve Carell have a chance to [[shine]] after stealing the [[spotlight]] from both Jim Carrey in "Bruce Almighty" and Will [[Ferrell]] "Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgendy" in their [[movies]]. [[Paul]] Rudd is hilarious as [[always]]. I [[love]] that he can be so [[funny]] in these [[broad]] comedies and [[continues]] to work in [[indie]] [[dramas]] (like P.S.). I [[think]] that Seth Rogen should be [[getting]] more [[work]], because he so freaking [[talented]] and [[engaging]]. [[Leslie]] Mann also had some [[incredibly]] [[funny]] [[moments]]. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] it for those who just [[want]] to laugh like a [[maniac]]. [[However]], if you're easily [[offended]], don't see this [[movie]]. If you're a [[rabid]] feminist, don't [[see]] this [[movie]]. And, please, not [[matter]] what, even if you [[think]] you're one of those "hip" parents, don't take your [[kids]] to this [[movie]]. [[Sure]], you should [[let]] your [[teens]] go see this [[movie]], just don't watch it with them. It would [[make]] for some incredibly awkward moments. Just came out of a sneak preview for this [[kino]]. It had me laughing every 30 secs. The ending was so funny that [[sobs]] were [[roll]] down my [[confronting]] and it had me wishing I hadn't bought that [[monumental]] coke. There are definitely some lulls, but, [[total]], [[heavily]] [[amusing]]. The movie [[entitles]] Steve Carell have a chance to [[glossy]] after stealing the [[concentrates]] from both Jim Carrey in "Bruce Almighty" and Will [[Farrell]] "Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgendy" in their [[film]]. [[Paulo]] Rudd is hilarious as [[repeatedly]]. I [[amour]] that he can be so [[amusing]] in these [[broader]] comedies and [[continued]] to work in [[andi]] [[opera]] (like P.S.). I [[thought]] that Seth Rogen should be [[obtaining]] more [[jobs]], because he so freaking [[gifted]] and [[participate]]. [[Lesley]] Mann also had some [[terribly]] [[amusing]] [[times]]. I [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] it for those who just [[desiring]] to laugh like a [[madman]]. [[Still]], if you're easily [[insulted]], don't see this [[movies]]. If you're a [[pissed]] feminist, don't [[seeing]] this [[cinema]]. And, please, not [[issue]] what, even if you [[believing]] you're one of those "hip" parents, don't take your [[brats]] to this [[cinematography]]. [[Convinced]], you should [[leaving]] your [[teenagers]] go see this [[cinema]], just don't watch it with them. It would [[deliver]] for some incredibly awkward moments. --------------------------------------------- Result 6016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] [[Fast]] paced and [[funny]] [[satire]] about that original "reality TV", the soap opera. The script by playwright Robert Harling is packed with one liners and ridiculous [[situations]]. The best of them is the climax, a live broadcast that quickly deteriorates into bad improv and a brain transplant. Keven Kline's murdering of his lines, due to not wearing his glasses, is hilarious. "Her brain will laterally explore within the next few houses." The [[brilliant]] cast is on the same page as Kline. Sally Field, Elizabeth Shue, Cathy Moriarty, Robert Downey Jr., Whoopi [[Goldberg]], Teri Hatcher, Garry Marshall, and Kathy Najimy are all [[perfect]]. It is a treat to see a cast click like it does in this movie. This is a classic that has somehow slipped through the cracks.

P.S. The score by Alan Silvestri is an added bonus. It [[fits]] the soap opera with it's flamboyant and melodramatic air. [[Vite]] paced and [[comical]] [[sarcasm]] about that original "reality TV", the soap opera. The script by playwright Robert Harling is packed with one liners and ridiculous [[instances]]. The best of them is the climax, a live broadcast that quickly deteriorates into bad improv and a brain transplant. Keven Kline's murdering of his lines, due to not wearing his glasses, is hilarious. "Her brain will laterally explore within the next few houses." The [[wondrous]] cast is on the same page as Kline. Sally Field, Elizabeth Shue, Cathy Moriarty, Robert Downey Jr., Whoopi [[Tucker]], Teri Hatcher, Garry Marshall, and Kathy Najimy are all [[irreproachable]]. It is a treat to see a cast click like it does in this movie. This is a classic that has somehow slipped through the cracks.

P.S. The score by Alan Silvestri is an added bonus. It [[conforms]] the soap opera with it's flamboyant and melodramatic air. --------------------------------------------- Result 6017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Eddie Murphy's "[[Delirious]]" is completely and totally rude, crude, [[crass]] and lude. This is indeed the only [[way]] to describe this [[appalling]], [[trashy]] piece of stand-up. Eddie Murphy goes for shock [[value]] [[rather]] than [[laughs]] to [[try]] and win his following over. He does [[manage]] to be [[funny]] occasionally, but mostly loses the plot with [[obscene]] language and [[distasteful]] sex jokes.

[[Forget]] it! Unless you [[happen]] to [[enjoy]] Eddie's foul [[style]]. I don't [[think]] I will [[bother]] with "Eddie Murphy Raw". I much prefer Eddie in the [[confines]] of a movie script.

Saturday, January 17, 1998 - [[Video]] Eddie Murphy's "[[Delirium]]" is completely and totally rude, crude, [[vulgar]] and lude. This is indeed the only [[routing]] to describe this [[outrageous]], [[vulgar]] piece of stand-up. Eddie Murphy goes for shock [[values]] [[somewhat]] than [[chuckles]] to [[strive]] and win his following over. He does [[managed]] to be [[comical]] occasionally, but mostly loses the plot with [[pornographic]] language and [[tasteless]] sex jokes.

[[Overlook]] it! Unless you [[emerge]] to [[enjoying]] Eddie's foul [[styling]]. I don't [[thinking]] I will [[disturb]] with "Eddie Murphy Raw". I much prefer Eddie in the [[confine]] of a movie script.

Saturday, January 17, 1998 - [[Videos]] --------------------------------------------- Result 6018 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I'll give this [[movie]] two stars because it teems with beautiful [[photography]]. [[Otherwise]], it teems mainly with clichés and stereotypes: mountain people are [[either]] [[dumb]] white [[trash]] of the fanatically religious or [[ragged]] [[racist]] [[kind]], or [[wise]] white Indians. Indians are [[magical]] people who [[move]] [[around]] without a sound, can [[disappear]] in the [[blink]] of an eye, [[talk]] to [[animals]], and read [[minds]] over large [[distances]]. And so on and so forth.

Throughout the movie I [[kept]] [[wondering]] what the point of the [[film]] was (other than [[showing]] me [[pretty]] [[pictures]] of mountains, [[log]] [[cabins]], woods, an [[assortment]] of animals, free-spirited mountain-dwellers and [[freaky]] people in [[church]]).

The plot touched a [[whole]] [[range]] of issues but [[explored]] [[none]] of them in depth. This was neither a story about [[growing]] up during the depression, nor about about being an orphan, nor about a [[struggle]] for identity. It tried to be all of those things and more, which [[made]] it superficial and unsatisfactory.

Although the [[movie]] was [[supposed]] to be about Little Tree's [[education]], we learn almost [[nothing]] about it. He was [[given]] a [[brief]] [[summary]] of the [[history]] of his people (who were brave and stoic) and a distillery [[demonstration]]; [[tried]] his hand at chopping [[wood]] (at which he failed) and [[whiskey]] [[running]] (literally); [[learned]] how to read (and [[maybe]] to [[write]]) with the help of grandma and her [[dictionary]] - and that was it. Apparently he didn't [[learn]] much during his stint in boarding school because he was locked up in the attic.

However, grandma and grandpa and Graham Greene's character made sure that in the end Little Tree became a very spiritual person whose main goal as an adult - after, and I'm paraphrasing here, "riding with the Navajos" and "getting caught up in a couple of wars" - was to "catch up" with grandma and [[grandpa]] and Graham Greene's [[character]] in [[heaven]] ([[instead]] of, [[say]], dating [[girls]], [[getting]] married, having [[children]] or other such [[nonsense]]).

Last but not least I must say that I found grandpa's trade [[offensive]]. Why of all [[things]] did it have to be a whiskey [[still]]? To counteract the stereotype of the "[[drunken]] Indian"? I'll give this [[cinema]] two stars because it teems with beautiful [[picture]]. [[Else]], it teems mainly with clichés and stereotypes: mountain people are [[neither]] [[daft]] white [[detritus]] of the fanatically religious or [[uneven]] [[racism]] [[genera]], or [[wiser]] white Indians. Indians are [[magic]] people who [[budge]] [[almost]] without a sound, can [[disappeared]] in the [[wink]] of an eye, [[discussions]] to [[wildlife]], and read [[wits]] over large [[journeys]]. And so on and so forth.

Throughout the movie I [[retained]] [[requested]] what the point of the [[filmmaking]] was (other than [[illustrating]] me [[quite]] [[imagery]] of mountains, [[register]] [[huts]], woods, an [[variety]] of animals, free-spirited mountain-dwellers and [[odd]] people in [[churches]]).

The plot touched a [[overall]] [[ranging]] of issues but [[explores]] [[nos]] of them in depth. This was neither a story about [[increasing]] up during the depression, nor about about being an orphan, nor about a [[struggles]] for identity. It tried to be all of those things and more, which [[brought]] it superficial and unsatisfactory.

Although the [[filmmaking]] was [[suspected]] to be about Little Tree's [[teaching]], we learn almost [[anything]] about it. He was [[granted]] a [[anyways]] [[abstract]] of the [[stories]] of his people (who were brave and stoic) and a distillery [[protest]]; [[attempting]] his hand at chopping [[bois]] (at which he failed) and [[whisky]] [[executing]] (literally); [[learnt]] how to read (and [[perhaps]] to [[writing]]) with the help of grandma and her [[vocabulary]] - and that was it. Apparently he didn't [[learnt]] much during his stint in boarding school because he was locked up in the attic.

However, grandma and grandpa and Graham Greene's character made sure that in the end Little Tree became a very spiritual person whose main goal as an adult - after, and I'm paraphrasing here, "riding with the Navajos" and "getting caught up in a couple of wars" - was to "catch up" with grandma and [[gramps]] and Graham Greene's [[nature]] in [[sky]] ([[however]] of, [[said]], dating [[daughters]], [[obtain]] married, having [[childhood]] or other such [[farcical]]).

Last but not least I must say that I found grandpa's trade [[abusive]]. Why of all [[aspects]] did it have to be a whiskey [[yet]]? To counteract the stereotype of the "[[drunkard]] Indian"? --------------------------------------------- Result 6019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I just saw this film on DVD last night, and decided to check out the reviews this morning. It seems that "I, Robot" has polarized the critical viewing community here on IMDb (and given rise to a lot of insults and name-calling, too).

I find this somewhat surprising, as this film is not great (or even good), but neither is it [[terrible]] (or even really bad). What this film really is, is...[[depressing]]. [[Depressing]] that the US film-goer population is so ready to lap up [[insipid]], [[clichéd]] re-heats, and acclaim them as spectacular new works. This film as "retread" written all over it, from the plot line (an uneasy mix of Asimov and modern-day uber-action) to Smith's character (a smart-mouthed cynic with a backbone of titanium), to the special effects (that borrowed from Matrix and a few others).

"I, Robot" is, [[sadly]], quite possibly the perfect action movie for today's audience: superficial plot, insipidly snappy dialog, and lots and lots of adrenaline. Smith is mediocre, but we already knew that (he seems to be Hollywood's latest unsuccessful attempt to create a black Bruce Willis). The story has lots of holes in it, of all sizes, but I don't think most people drawn to this film are critically-minded enough to notice. Perhaps a blockbuster by today's standards, but very B-movie compared to true winners. I just saw this film on DVD last night, and decided to check out the reviews this morning. It seems that "I, Robot" has polarized the critical viewing community here on IMDb (and given rise to a lot of insults and name-calling, too).

I find this somewhat surprising, as this film is not great (or even good), but neither is it [[frightful]] (or even really bad). What this film really is, is...[[demoralizing]]. [[Demoralizing]] that the US film-goer population is so ready to lap up [[tasteless]], [[clichés]] re-heats, and acclaim them as spectacular new works. This film as "retread" written all over it, from the plot line (an uneasy mix of Asimov and modern-day uber-action) to Smith's character (a smart-mouthed cynic with a backbone of titanium), to the special effects (that borrowed from Matrix and a few others).

"I, Robot" is, [[tragically]], quite possibly the perfect action movie for today's audience: superficial plot, insipidly snappy dialog, and lots and lots of adrenaline. Smith is mediocre, but we already knew that (he seems to be Hollywood's latest unsuccessful attempt to create a black Bruce Willis). The story has lots of holes in it, of all sizes, but I don't think most people drawn to this film are critically-minded enough to notice. Perhaps a blockbuster by today's standards, but very B-movie compared to true winners. --------------------------------------------- Result 6020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There is no [[director]] I like more than Mamoru Oshii. But sadly, [[even]] though he directed [[quite]] a few [[films]] that [[gained]] [[huge]] international [[attention]], there are [[still]] a fair few of his [[films]] that have [[slipped]] through the cracks. Tachiguishi is one of them, and [[even]] though I [[loved]] it to bits, it's not hard to [[see]] why distributors in the [[West]] are somewhat reluctant to release it.

[[In]] between his [[big]] and [[serious]] [[films]], Oshii is known to do some smaller and quirkier projects. [[While]] Tachiguishi [[definitely]] [[falls]] into this [[category]], Oshii has really outdone himself with this one, creating [[something]] that is very [[hard]] to [[classify]], even as a freaky Japanese [[flick]]. Go figure.

At its very core lies a documentary not [[quite]] unlike Otaku no [[Video]]. But [[rather]] than [[make]] a fool of an existing subculture, Oshii invents his own and delves into the [[lives]] of culinary heroes, [[scrounging]] away food for free and upholding the Japanese culinary [[level]]. Oshii's approach on the subject has [[close]] [[ties]] with Dai-Nipponjin, as the [[subject]] is [[handled]] with a [[deadly]] [[sense]] of [[gravity]] while the [[images]] on screen [[look]] as ridiculous as can be. Deadpan [[humor]] taken to the [[extreme]].

But that is not all, rather than simply shooting his mockumentary Oshii [[decided]] to [[make]] it [[using]] a [[new]] [[visual]] [[technique]] baptized superlivemation. A [[weird]] [[mix]] of live [[action]], [[photography]], digital animation and puppets on a stick. [[Performed]] and acted out (or posed, if you [[want]]) by the greats of the Japanese [[animation]] [[industry]] no [[less]], as the project was [[supposed]] to be as low-budget as possible.

And if you [[think]] that just about [[covers]] it, know that the [[film]] is [[extremely]] dialogue-heavy, [[making]] it a good [[companion]] [[piece]] for Innocence. The [[influence]] of the grifters is [[analyzed]] from all [[kinds]] of cultural, political and even philosophical [[angles]], fired at the audience through a [[continuous]] [[stream]] of monologues and dialogues. And to make it even worse, the whole film is completely grounded in actual Japanese history and customs, making it even harder for a foreigner to get a good grip on the material. Needless to say, multiple viewings are advised to make the best of all the details tucked away inside the film.

That said, on a conceptual level the film is easy to follow and already pretty hilarious. Various grifters are introduced as were they the most influential historical figures of post-war Japan. The film plays like you'd expect a serious documentary of any other important figure to unfold, but somehow the big and crudely animated cut-out photography limbs of which figures are assembled don't quite make it all that serious. The range of characters introduced is sublime, Shinji Higuchi taking the cake as cow-creature wearing a nose ring while taking on the fast-food chains with his gang of bull/people.

Oshii regular Kenji Kawai provides, besides a pretty comical performance, a score ranging from atmospheric and dark to wacky, strange and comical. A lot of fun is to be had from the exaggerated noises and effects, complementing the animation and totally contradicting the tone of the rest of the film.

Visually the film is very atmospheric, though it must be said that the animation is pretty scarce and while effective, remains toned down, only to burst out in hyperactive weirdness from time to time. Which is not exactly a bad thing, seeing how Tachiguishi is so dialogue-heavy. Despite that, the film is still a visual masterpiece as each frame looks absolutely lush and is tailored to match and improve the general atmosphere of the film.

Beware though, because Tachiguishi does demand a lot from the viewer. If you don't speak Japanese, there is a lot of reading to be done and there are many cultural references that demand some attention. On top of that, the monologues in the film area quite extended and can be hard to follow. The film still lacks English subtitles and even though my French was largely sufficient to get what it was all about, I'm sure I missed many of the finer points of the film.

Tachiguishi is not an easy film to get into, but around halfway through it reaches full steam and it doesn't let off from there on. I still hope to see this one again with English or Dutch subs. A dub would actually be best for a film like this (much like Container), though I guess a quality anime dub is a bit too much to ask for.

With all of that said, I can only congratulate Oshii on another marvelous film. It's rare to find a film that blends and mixes so many styles and influences to create something that is so unique and still works. The film is smart, looks and sounds great and is filled to the brim with creativity. It is immensely funny, even if you can't catch all the details on the first viewing. But be sure to at least get this with decent subs, as the automated English translation that is floating out there is completely worthless and does the film no justice at all.

Tachiguishi caters to a very specific audience and I'm not surprised the French got their release while the rest of Europe (and the rest of the Western world) is still waiting for a sign of this film. But for those that like Oshii, appreciate dry and deadpan humor and crave creative spirits, it is a film that cannot be missed, even though it could just as well misfire. 4.5*/5.0* There is no [[headmaster]] I like more than Mamoru Oshii. But sadly, [[yet]] though he directed [[perfectly]] a few [[film]] that [[acquired]] [[considerable]] international [[beware]], there are [[nonetheless]] a fair few of his [[cinematic]] that have [[crept]] through the cracks. Tachiguishi is one of them, and [[yet]] though I [[enjoyed]] it to bits, it's not hard to [[behold]] why distributors in the [[Western]] are somewhat reluctant to release it.

[[Among]] between his [[major]] and [[gravest]] [[cinematography]], Oshii is known to do some smaller and quirkier projects. [[Though]] Tachiguishi [[surely]] [[drops]] into this [[class]], Oshii has really outdone himself with this one, creating [[anything]] that is very [[difficult]] to [[ranks]], even as a freaky Japanese [[film]]. Go figure.

At its very core lies a documentary not [[rather]] unlike Otaku no [[Videos]]. But [[fairly]] than [[deliver]] a fool of an existing subculture, Oshii invents his own and delves into the [[life]] of culinary heroes, [[scrounge]] away food for free and upholding the Japanese culinary [[grades]]. Oshii's approach on the subject has [[nearer]] [[relationships]] with Dai-Nipponjin, as the [[themes]] is [[processed]] with a [[murderous]] [[sensing]] of [[severity]] while the [[imagery]] on screen [[gaze]] as ridiculous as can be. Deadpan [[mood]] taken to the [[severe]].

But that is not all, rather than simply shooting his mockumentary Oshii [[decides]] to [[deliver]] it [[employs]] a [[novo]] [[optic]] [[technologies]] baptized superlivemation. A [[inquisitive]] [[mixture]] of live [[activities]], [[photos]], digital animation and puppets on a stick. [[Done]] and acted out (or posed, if you [[wanted]]) by the greats of the Japanese [[animate]] [[industries]] no [[fewest]], as the project was [[alleged]] to be as low-budget as possible.

And if you [[ideas]] that just about [[cover]] it, know that the [[movies]] is [[terribly]] dialogue-heavy, [[doing]] it a good [[comrade]] [[slice]] for Innocence. The [[repercussions]] of the grifters is [[analyzing]] from all [[sort]] of cultural, political and even philosophical [[nooks]], fired at the audience through a [[continued]] [[creek]] of monologues and dialogues. And to make it even worse, the whole film is completely grounded in actual Japanese history and customs, making it even harder for a foreigner to get a good grip on the material. Needless to say, multiple viewings are advised to make the best of all the details tucked away inside the film.

That said, on a conceptual level the film is easy to follow and already pretty hilarious. Various grifters are introduced as were they the most influential historical figures of post-war Japan. The film plays like you'd expect a serious documentary of any other important figure to unfold, but somehow the big and crudely animated cut-out photography limbs of which figures are assembled don't quite make it all that serious. The range of characters introduced is sublime, Shinji Higuchi taking the cake as cow-creature wearing a nose ring while taking on the fast-food chains with his gang of bull/people.

Oshii regular Kenji Kawai provides, besides a pretty comical performance, a score ranging from atmospheric and dark to wacky, strange and comical. A lot of fun is to be had from the exaggerated noises and effects, complementing the animation and totally contradicting the tone of the rest of the film.

Visually the film is very atmospheric, though it must be said that the animation is pretty scarce and while effective, remains toned down, only to burst out in hyperactive weirdness from time to time. Which is not exactly a bad thing, seeing how Tachiguishi is so dialogue-heavy. Despite that, the film is still a visual masterpiece as each frame looks absolutely lush and is tailored to match and improve the general atmosphere of the film.

Beware though, because Tachiguishi does demand a lot from the viewer. If you don't speak Japanese, there is a lot of reading to be done and there are many cultural references that demand some attention. On top of that, the monologues in the film area quite extended and can be hard to follow. The film still lacks English subtitles and even though my French was largely sufficient to get what it was all about, I'm sure I missed many of the finer points of the film.

Tachiguishi is not an easy film to get into, but around halfway through it reaches full steam and it doesn't let off from there on. I still hope to see this one again with English or Dutch subs. A dub would actually be best for a film like this (much like Container), though I guess a quality anime dub is a bit too much to ask for.

With all of that said, I can only congratulate Oshii on another marvelous film. It's rare to find a film that blends and mixes so many styles and influences to create something that is so unique and still works. The film is smart, looks and sounds great and is filled to the brim with creativity. It is immensely funny, even if you can't catch all the details on the first viewing. But be sure to at least get this with decent subs, as the automated English translation that is floating out there is completely worthless and does the film no justice at all.

Tachiguishi caters to a very specific audience and I'm not surprised the French got their release while the rest of Europe (and the rest of the Western world) is still waiting for a sign of this film. But for those that like Oshii, appreciate dry and deadpan humor and crave creative spirits, it is a film that cannot be missed, even though it could just as well misfire. 4.5*/5.0* --------------------------------------------- Result 6021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Almost the entire film takes place in a public bathhouse in China. There are no fancy sets, explosion or [[glamorous]] people--only fine writing, acting and direction (Hollywood, take note!).

An estranged son returns home when he believes his father is dying. He is surprised to see that Dad looks fine and is going about running the family business as usual. In fact, he notices that his father and his retarded brother have really forged a close and caring relationship and it soon becomes obvious that he is out of the loop! Dad is very traditional and this visiting son is from the big city and doesn't really see the value of the old bathhouse. How their relationship changes and where the plot goes from there is [[exceptional]] and believable.

I was happy to see that not every Chinese movie is an action picture (such as those starring Jet Li or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), as I don't particularly care for these frenetic films. The Shower as well as Springtime In A Small Town are two [[wonderful]] examples of good Chinese films about PEOPLE! Almost the entire film takes place in a public bathhouse in China. There are no fancy sets, explosion or [[wondrous]] people--only fine writing, acting and direction (Hollywood, take note!).

An estranged son returns home when he believes his father is dying. He is surprised to see that Dad looks fine and is going about running the family business as usual. In fact, he notices that his father and his retarded brother have really forged a close and caring relationship and it soon becomes obvious that he is out of the loop! Dad is very traditional and this visiting son is from the big city and doesn't really see the value of the old bathhouse. How their relationship changes and where the plot goes from there is [[wondrous]] and believable.

I was happy to see that not every Chinese movie is an action picture (such as those starring Jet Li or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), as I don't particularly care for these frenetic films. The Shower as well as Springtime In A Small Town are two [[wondrous]] examples of good Chinese films about PEOPLE! --------------------------------------------- Result 6022 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I am a huge fan of Vonnegut's work and I'm very fond of this [[movie]], but I wouldn't [[say]] that this is a film of the "[[Mother]] Night" that I read. When people [[say]] that Vonnegut is unfilmable, two things [[come]] to my mind. One is that many of his [[themes]] are very near the knuckle or even taboo, [[despite]] the [[accusation]] [[sometimes]] used against him that he chooses relatively "easy" targets for his [[satire]]. This [[means]] [[less]] [[every]] day that passes as far as filmability is concerned. Directors these days appear to revel in breaking taboos and I have high hopes for the version of "Bluebeard" now in production. Amazing to think that an innocent piece like Vonnegut's "Sirens of Titan" would probably have been the equivalent of "R" rated if filmed when it was published back in the 50s, for its violence, language and sexual and thematic content, though it's a tragedy that nobody's come up yet with a filmable script for it. And in the present economic climate, I also hope some director out there is looking closely at "Jailbird", "Galapagos" and "Hocus Pocus".

The other thing is his narrative [[style]], heaping irony upon irony upon irony but [[still]] making it hilariously [[funny]]. It [[seems]] impossible to objectify, and that appears to be the biggest obstacle to making [[great]] [[films]] of his [[great]] novels, because the [[little]] authorial comments that colour our [[response]] as readers are just not [[possible]] in [[movies]] without resorting to too often clumsy techniques like "talkovers". Vonnegut suggested that there was a character missing from filmed versions of his work, himself as author/narrator. To its [[credit]], "Breakfast of Champions" (the movie) tried to keep the comedy and came a bit of a cropper for its pains. As did another turkey made from a Vonnegut novel, "Slapstick" in an [[even]] more [[spectacular]] [[way]].

Still, there's nothing [[wrong]] with a director giving us his [[subjective]] [[interpretation]] of Vonnegut, and "Mother Night" is an [[excellent]] example of how, as another reviewer put it, a good director can add a visual poetry to a source like this. But so much of the humour is lost that though it's the same plot, it's not really from the same novel I read. If it had been, I'd probably have been rolling in the aisles laughing a few times watching it. For a reader of the novel, I think a chuckle even at the end is forgivable. The end of the film, however, is truly poignant, and I think one of the film's successes is that it can genuinely leave you feeling that you've watched someone walk a razor's edge between good and evil, and the jury is still out.

Standing alone and of itself it's well worth a look. Technically there are some minor but glaring errors, notably in continuity, and it too often looks drab and theatrical, but most of the time it hits an acceptable note and occasionally shows considerable imagination and resourcefulness. The acting in general is of a high order, even if maybe the dialogue is by today's standards a little stilted.

It survives quite well watching back to back with "Slaughterhouse-5", and there is actually quite a bit more "good" filmed Vonnegut out there, mostly versions of his short stories - "Harrison Bergeron", "Who Am I This Time?" and some other things like, of course, the misfiring filmed version of his very funny but disposable play, "Happy Birthday Wanda June". Also there was an interesting piece , if it still exists, done in the 70s called "Between Time And Timbuktu" which Vonnegut apparently didn't like much, although he was involved in its production, because he felt it misinterpreted him in its generality. He said it reminded him of the bizarre surgical experiments performed in the HG Wells tale "The Island of Dr. Moreau", but it did for many people serve as an excellent introduction to his work.

But if the films don't make you want to go to the superior source material, they're not doing their job.

As the man said, more or less, the big show is inside your head. I am a huge fan of Vonnegut's work and I'm very fond of this [[filmmaking]], but I wouldn't [[told]] that this is a film of the "[[Mamas]] Night" that I read. When people [[says]] that Vonnegut is unfilmable, two things [[coming]] to my mind. One is that many of his [[subject]] are very near the knuckle or even taboo, [[though]] the [[accuses]] [[sometime]] used against him that he chooses relatively "easy" targets for his [[sarcasm]]. This [[modes]] [[fewest]] [[each]] day that passes as far as filmability is concerned. Directors these days appear to revel in breaking taboos and I have high hopes for the version of "Bluebeard" now in production. Amazing to think that an innocent piece like Vonnegut's "Sirens of Titan" would probably have been the equivalent of "R" rated if filmed when it was published back in the 50s, for its violence, language and sexual and thematic content, though it's a tragedy that nobody's come up yet with a filmable script for it. And in the present economic climate, I also hope some director out there is looking closely at "Jailbird", "Galapagos" and "Hocus Pocus".

The other thing is his narrative [[styles]], heaping irony upon irony upon irony but [[yet]] making it hilariously [[amusing]]. It [[appears]] impossible to objectify, and that appears to be the biggest obstacle to making [[remarkable]] [[kino]] of his [[fantastic]] novels, because the [[petite]] authorial comments that colour our [[answer]] as readers are just not [[achievable]] in [[movie]] without resorting to too often clumsy techniques like "talkovers". Vonnegut suggested that there was a character missing from filmed versions of his work, himself as author/narrator. To its [[credits]], "Breakfast of Champions" (the movie) tried to keep the comedy and came a bit of a cropper for its pains. As did another turkey made from a Vonnegut novel, "Slapstick" in an [[yet]] more [[dramatic]] [[camino]].

Still, there's nothing [[amiss]] with a director giving us his [[subjectively]] [[interpretive]] of Vonnegut, and "Mother Night" is an [[wondrous]] example of how, as another reviewer put it, a good director can add a visual poetry to a source like this. But so much of the humour is lost that though it's the same plot, it's not really from the same novel I read. If it had been, I'd probably have been rolling in the aisles laughing a few times watching it. For a reader of the novel, I think a chuckle even at the end is forgivable. The end of the film, however, is truly poignant, and I think one of the film's successes is that it can genuinely leave you feeling that you've watched someone walk a razor's edge between good and evil, and the jury is still out.

Standing alone and of itself it's well worth a look. Technically there are some minor but glaring errors, notably in continuity, and it too often looks drab and theatrical, but most of the time it hits an acceptable note and occasionally shows considerable imagination and resourcefulness. The acting in general is of a high order, even if maybe the dialogue is by today's standards a little stilted.

It survives quite well watching back to back with "Slaughterhouse-5", and there is actually quite a bit more "good" filmed Vonnegut out there, mostly versions of his short stories - "Harrison Bergeron", "Who Am I This Time?" and some other things like, of course, the misfiring filmed version of his very funny but disposable play, "Happy Birthday Wanda June". Also there was an interesting piece , if it still exists, done in the 70s called "Between Time And Timbuktu" which Vonnegut apparently didn't like much, although he was involved in its production, because he felt it misinterpreted him in its generality. He said it reminded him of the bizarre surgical experiments performed in the HG Wells tale "The Island of Dr. Moreau", but it did for many people serve as an excellent introduction to his work.

But if the films don't make you want to go to the superior source material, they're not doing their job.

As the man said, more or less, the big show is inside your head. --------------------------------------------- Result 6023 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Why is it that everyone who has seen this movie feels it is their responsibility to tell us whether or not they are fencers? That point is completely immaterial to any argument to be made against this [[total]] [[dog]] of a movie.

I think sports movies fall into two categories; well made movies about the human spirit and competitions, and `By the Sword'.

Honestly this movie never could decide what it [[wanted]] to be, a touching drama for trying to be your best in life, an [[indictment]] of competitive [[motivation]] or a martial arts flick. In the end it didn't do any of those convincingly or completely enough to make me give one [[ounce]] of care of any of it.

For the record I also am a fencing instructor (and now I am officially as bad as the rest). But putting bad fencing in a movie doesn't make it bad automatically. I mean look at Star Wars (Episodes 4-6, good movies, bad fencing). I liked those movies. But when you put bad sports into a bad movie for some reason people think that it is only the purists that think it a lame effort.

Don't be fooled by any comments on the smaller issue of fencing. This is just a [[bad]] movie. In the end, this movie has [[nothing]] for the fencing enthusiast or the movie buff or simply anyone with a pulse and three brain [[cells]].

When I see a movie and am forced to think, `Man, I wish I was watching the Mighty Ducks.' I know that it is time to bypass the argument with the theater manager to get my money back and see if there is anyone in the lobby that will somehow give me two hours of my life back. Why is it that everyone who has seen this movie feels it is their responsibility to tell us whether or not they are fencers? That point is completely immaterial to any argument to be made against this [[overall]] [[canine]] of a movie.

I think sports movies fall into two categories; well made movies about the human spirit and competitions, and `By the Sword'.

Honestly this movie never could decide what it [[wanting]] to be, a touching drama for trying to be your best in life, an [[prosecution]] of competitive [[motives]] or a martial arts flick. In the end it didn't do any of those convincingly or completely enough to make me give one [[jot]] of care of any of it.

For the record I also am a fencing instructor (and now I am officially as bad as the rest). But putting bad fencing in a movie doesn't make it bad automatically. I mean look at Star Wars (Episodes 4-6, good movies, bad fencing). I liked those movies. But when you put bad sports into a bad movie for some reason people think that it is only the purists that think it a lame effort.

Don't be fooled by any comments on the smaller issue of fencing. This is just a [[unfavourable]] movie. In the end, this movie has [[none]] for the fencing enthusiast or the movie buff or simply anyone with a pulse and three brain [[cell]].

When I see a movie and am forced to think, `Man, I wish I was watching the Mighty Ducks.' I know that it is time to bypass the argument with the theater manager to get my money back and see if there is anyone in the lobby that will somehow give me two hours of my life back. --------------------------------------------- Result 6024 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Only Kung Fu Epic worth watching. The best training ever. The main character spending a hundred day's on his knees outside the shaolin temple show how desperate he is to learn kung fu to fight the manchu dogs who have taken over china. --------------------------------------------- Result 6025 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I have been learning about the Zodiac for four years now. And I'm not saying I know much more than anyone else...in fact out of most of the people who know and read and learn about Z, I am prolly the one with the least knowledge...But I do know or at least I think I know that most of the stuff in this wouldn't happen...From how he signed his name...to how he killed people...I [[thought]] that Godfather was the [[worst]] film ever...

The [[cinematography]] was that of a five year old...not saying that my films are any better but I am not someone who is making movies for the mass population...

The acting I thought for the most part was pretty good really I did...the lead didn't talk that much on camera or at all I forget and don't know because I stopped watching...his voice overs where good...

But really spend the four dollars and 70 cents on something else...like a large pizza or something...

Until I learn how to write a review, Psycho Phil I have been learning about the Zodiac for four years now. And I'm not saying I know much more than anyone else...in fact out of most of the people who know and read and learn about Z, I am prolly the one with the least knowledge...But I do know or at least I think I know that most of the stuff in this wouldn't happen...From how he signed his name...to how he killed people...I [[think]] that Godfather was the [[gravest]] film ever...

The [[filmmaking]] was that of a five year old...not saying that my films are any better but I am not someone who is making movies for the mass population...

The acting I thought for the most part was pretty good really I did...the lead didn't talk that much on camera or at all I forget and don't know because I stopped watching...his voice overs where good...

But really spend the four dollars and 70 cents on something else...like a large pizza or something...

Until I learn how to write a review, Psycho Phil --------------------------------------------- Result 6026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] As the front cover says "The hamlet of our time, for our time".

I had to study this filmed version of Hamlet directly after watching Keneth Branagh's version and it was truly a [[disappointing]] experience.

This version takes a different approach to several aspects of the play including sexuality; one very VERY homosexual Osric and an interesting interaction between Hamlet and Ophelia. I think for the time (60's) this was a very well done version of Hamlet but cannot compare to Branagh's complete version.

just a note... I found the video at my local video store (in Australia) and I'm actually looking for a Keneth Branagh DVD to buy if such a thing even exists. If anyone knows of one please tell me. As the front cover says "The hamlet of our time, for our time".

I had to study this filmed version of Hamlet directly after watching Keneth Branagh's version and it was truly a [[discouraging]] experience.

This version takes a different approach to several aspects of the play including sexuality; one very VERY homosexual Osric and an interesting interaction between Hamlet and Ophelia. I think for the time (60's) this was a very well done version of Hamlet but cannot compare to Branagh's complete version.

just a note... I found the video at my local video store (in Australia) and I'm actually looking for a Keneth Branagh DVD to buy if such a thing even exists. If anyone knows of one please tell me. --------------------------------------------- Result 6027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Guy Kibbee gives the viewer a lot of [[laughs]]. Like most candidates, he knows almost nothing. Warren William, a very, under rated actor, is [[superb]] in giving instructions to Kibbee; that is, he teaches him to say something which means nothing to the voting public. A campaign based on no comment, "I'll take it under advisement," and "Maybe yes, but then again, maybe no," is the nearly [[perfect]] way to win an election. Succinctly, the dumber the candidate, the greater the chance he or she will win. After all, the public can identify with such a person. With respect to the movie, it makes for a lot of [[comedy]]. Guy Kibbee gives the viewer a lot of [[giggles]]. Like most candidates, he knows almost nothing. Warren William, a very, under rated actor, is [[awesome]] in giving instructions to Kibbee; that is, he teaches him to say something which means nothing to the voting public. A campaign based on no comment, "I'll take it under advisement," and "Maybe yes, but then again, maybe no," is the nearly [[consummate]] way to win an election. Succinctly, the dumber the candidate, the greater the chance he or she will win. After all, the public can identify with such a person. With respect to the movie, it makes for a lot of [[charade]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love Morgan Freeman. Paz Vega is an attractive, appealing and talented actress. I'm sure that this would have been a good movie had anything happened in it. Nothing does. It's short (less than 90 minutes). It was 75 minutes too long. After an hour of frustration, I scanned through the remaining 20-odd minutes. Excruciating.

Freeman plays an actor - who hasn't worked in a while - researching a part that he might play, as a checkout clerk in a supermarket. He visits the supermarket where she works. Nothing happens. She decides to give him a ride home and they go to an Arby's, a Target, a car wash. Nothing happens. They converse about their lives. Nothing happens. Ever.

I don't get it. But I also don't get the Bill Murray flicks "Lost In Translation" and "Broken Flowers". If you like those movies, maybe you'll like this. Lots of people find movies like this whimsical, charming, or - for reasons that escape me - find the dialog fascinating. A common device in movies of this ilk is to have a LONG take of stillness/silence after an actor delivers a line that's supposed to be meaningful. We know it's meaningful because it's followed by two minutes of nothing on the screen. Sorry, I must be a philistine. I don't get it. To me, these kinds of movies aren't funny, or charming, or thought-provoking. They're just boring. Why? Because there's no comedy. No drama. No tension. No laughs. No suspense. No action. Nothing to watch. In short, none of the things I go to the movies for. I can be bored for free. I see oddball/quirky characters in real life. I go to Target, and fast-food restaurants, and car-washes. These elements do not a movie make, even if stars are doing this stuff. I pay to be entertained.

If you're crazy about Morgan Freeman and just like to hear him ramble on about nothing, have fun. If you wanna drool over Paz Vega, you can look and listen to her. But nothing happens, I promise. A total snoozefest. --------------------------------------------- Result 6029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was very impressed with this film. I would have to rate it as one of the better classic-era westerns. I say that for the whole thing: the acting, mature dialog, no- nonsense story and excellent cinematography.

Director Anthony Mann, who did several well-photographed film noirs around this same era, also made some westerns such as this one. It has that same film-noir look. Mann and Jimmy Stewart collaborated on several westerns during this period. . If you like this movie, I recommend the Mann-Stewart film "Bend Of The River."

In a nutshell, the story is about a man, "Lin McAdam," (Stewart) who owns this prestigious Winchester 73 rifle, a weapon he won fair-and-square in a contest. It is then stolen and passed on from villain to villain. All of those villains are interesting characters.

Aiding Stewart act out this interesting tale are Shelley Winters, Dan Duryea, Stephen McNally, Millard Mitchell, Charles Drake, Will Greer and J. C. Flippen. All of them are fun to watch. It was a bit of a stretch, however, to see Rock Hudson playing an Indian ("Young Bull"), but you can't have everything. --------------------------------------------- Result 6030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's nothing new here. All the standard romantic-comedy scenes, even down to the taxi sprinting to the airport to stop the woman flying away. The only thing that saves this is the acting of Alison Eastwood & some of the minor characters (blink and you'll miss Gabrielle Anwar), who obviously had some fun.

Turn it off when the pair are in bliss, and you won't have to go through the inevitable plot pain. --------------------------------------------- Result 6031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had potential, but what makes it really bad is Lindsay Crouse's acting. I've never seen her before in anything else and maybe there are some Crouse fans out there that like her in something else, but her performance in this movie is bad.

Her delivery is robotic. When she delivered her lines it appeared that she was trying to make sure she had the lines right and was simply reading off the list in her head. So, her voice has very little inflection. I can't believe someone that bad at acting was given a lead role in a movie. She has to know somebody in the biz.

Now I hate to be this mean about her, but the comment has to be "this" long and her performance is what sticks out more than anything else.

However, I liked where the story was going so I continued to watch it. The first part of the script has the makings of a good movie. But the end was disappointing as well. Maybe if her acting had been better, I would have liked it. --------------------------------------------- Result 6032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have yet to read Shirley Jackson's [[novel]], [[something]] of which I've been meaning to do for quite sometime. I am sure it has got to be scarier than this [[film]]. I remember jumping once when I watched it the other day, although I cannot recall the scene.

The [[special]] effects are great and I watched this on DVD, but I am sure in the theatre it must have been an [[awesome]] sight. After the first few special effects are done with I was waiting for a story to develop.

I figured this movie at the least has to be loosely based on the classic novel, so a good story should be there, but it wasn't. I was relegated to staring at the gorgeous Catherine Zeta-Jones character throughout the movie basically because there was [[nothing]] much else to watch. Lili Talor was such a [[suck]] character. I did not like her one bit, something about whiny people. Also, the guy in this film reminded me of the cartoonish Dudley DoRight with his voice and face. I could not relate to the characters at all. Quigon, ahem Liam Neeson did an admirable job trying to get through this movie with some type of acting.

Half to three quarters of the way I was just dying to go see a campy Friday the 13th or a Scream Queenish film! At least there is some type of entertainment value. If there is no story there at least they fill it up with gory deaths or attractive females. This had [[nothing]].

I have yet to read Shirley Jackson's [[newer]], [[anything]] of which I've been meaning to do for quite sometime. I am sure it has got to be scarier than this [[filmmaking]]. I remember jumping once when I watched it the other day, although I cannot recall the scene.

The [[peculiar]] effects are great and I watched this on DVD, but I am sure in the theatre it must have been an [[sumptuous]] sight. After the first few special effects are done with I was waiting for a story to develop.

I figured this movie at the least has to be loosely based on the classic novel, so a good story should be there, but it wasn't. I was relegated to staring at the gorgeous Catherine Zeta-Jones character throughout the movie basically because there was [[none]] much else to watch. Lili Talor was such a [[lick]] character. I did not like her one bit, something about whiny people. Also, the guy in this film reminded me of the cartoonish Dudley DoRight with his voice and face. I could not relate to the characters at all. Quigon, ahem Liam Neeson did an admirable job trying to get through this movie with some type of acting.

Half to three quarters of the way I was just dying to go see a campy Friday the 13th or a Scream Queenish film! At least there is some type of entertainment value. If there is no story there at least they fill it up with gory deaths or attractive females. This had [[anything]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 6033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I just saw the [[movie]] in theater. The [[movie]] has very few good points to [[talk]] about. Kareena's beauty and a couple of songs may be. Thats it. The movie is a [[complete]] [[disappointment]] in all areas. Anyone associated with the movie will be disappointed, even [[Mumbai]] Indians too (just now [[Chennai]] has made it to semi-final).

But the [[worst]] I feel about the movie is the [[action]] scenes. Now days Bollywood is trying to copy action scenes from Hollywood. But they forget that Hollywood directors takes a lot effect to make it [[look]] like [[real]]. But unfortunately Bollywood directors do not have that much of [[time]]. They spend their [[time]] on songs and [[publicity]] of the movie. Now such too [[stupid]] action scenes [[may]] [[work]] in [[South]] as the audience just pay to watch their [[favorite]] [[actor]] killing bunch of people. But in Bollywood this is certainly not [[going]] to [[work]]. All the action scenes I wish I [[could]] have [[forwarded]]. [[At]] the end [[even]] some Chinese people [[appear]] from [[nowhere]] to [[beat]] Akshay [[Kumar]]. This is height of [[stupidity]]. Audience is not paying to watch such [[stupidity]]. I think Bollywood now should forget about the action movies. They [[cant]] make it. The [[last]] good action I have seen was from "Ghatak" and "Khiladiyon ka Khialdi". The current scene in Bollywood is really sad for action movie fans like me. Does these people see their movie after completion? Can't they [[figure]] out that the slow [[motion]] [[action]] (which is [[done]] using ropes) is too unrealistic and [[childish]]? [[Better]] not to have action scenes if you [[cant]] handle it. I just want to go back to Amitabh's era where movie like Zanjeer and Deewar were having thrilling action scenes. The sound effect was not very [[effective]] in those days, but visually it is [[much]] better than current era scenes.

This movie now should open the [[eyes]] of the Bollywood [[movie]] directors. [[Please]] don't make any more [[action]] [[movies]], until you [[acquire]] the [[art]] of making it realistic. I just saw the [[filmmaking]] in theater. The [[filmmaking]] has very few good points to [[conversation]] about. Kareena's beauty and a couple of songs may be. Thats it. The movie is a [[finishes]] [[displeasure]] in all areas. Anyone associated with the movie will be disappointed, even [[Bombay]] Indians too (just now [[Bangalore]] has made it to semi-final).

But the [[worse]] I feel about the movie is the [[actions]] scenes. Now days Bollywood is trying to copy action scenes from Hollywood. But they forget that Hollywood directors takes a lot effect to make it [[gaze]] like [[veritable]]. But unfortunately Bollywood directors do not have that much of [[times]]. They spend their [[times]] on songs and [[advocacy]] of the movie. Now such too [[dumb]] action scenes [[maggio]] [[cooperation]] in [[Southern]] as the audience just pay to watch their [[favored]] [[protagonist]] killing bunch of people. But in Bollywood this is certainly not [[go]] to [[cooperation]]. All the action scenes I wish I [[did]] have [[relayed]]. [[For]] the end [[yet]] some Chinese people [[emerge]] from [[everywhere]] to [[overcame]] Akshay [[Sharma]]. This is height of [[madness]]. Audience is not paying to watch such [[madness]]. I think Bollywood now should forget about the action movies. They [[dunno]] make it. The [[latter]] good action I have seen was from "Ghatak" and "Khiladiyon ka Khialdi". The current scene in Bollywood is really sad for action movie fans like me. Does these people see their movie after completion? Can't they [[silhouette]] out that the slow [[petition]] [[activity]] (which is [[completed]] using ropes) is too unrealistic and [[boyish]]? [[Optimum]] not to have action scenes if you [[thats]] handle it. I just want to go back to Amitabh's era where movie like Zanjeer and Deewar were having thrilling action scenes. The sound effect was not very [[efficacious]] in those days, but visually it is [[very]] better than current era scenes.

This movie now should open the [[eye]] of the Bollywood [[filmmaking]] directors. [[Invite]] don't make any more [[measures]] [[cinematographic]], until you [[acquires]] the [[artistry]] of making it realistic. --------------------------------------------- Result 6034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you're a layman interested in quantum theory and string theory, read "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene of Columbia University, and "The Universe in a Nutshell" by Stephen Hawking of Cambridge.

Recipe for #$*!:

3 parts bombastic New Age pontificator, 2 parts pseudoscientist, 2 parts real scientist

Mix together until ingredients are indistinguishable from each other and spread on celluloid thin enough that there is no discernible substance.

Serving suggestion: barf bags. --------------------------------------------- Result 6035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A [[lush]] [[fantasy]] world with [[quirky]] [[characters]] and annoying 80's [[music]]. This epitomizes the 80's [[desire]] to rewrite fairy tales and [[make]] [[fun]] of how they [[work]]. Personally I [[liked]] Greensleeves and the other [[harsher]] [[characters]]. They had some of the more [[amusing]] lines. A [[exuberant]] [[chimera]] world with [[lunatic]] [[attribute]] and annoying 80's [[musica]]. This epitomizes the 80's [[desiring]] to rewrite fairy tales and [[deliver]] [[entertaining]] of how they [[works]]. Personally I [[enjoyed]] Greensleeves and the other [[stiffer]] [[characteristics]]. They had some of the more [[humorous]] lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 6036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[Old]] [[Mill]] Pond is more of a tribute to the African-American entertainers of the '30s than any denigration of the [[entire]] [[race]] (Stepin Fetchit caricature notwithstanding). Besides who I just [[mentioned]], there's [[also]] [[frog]] or fish versions of Cab Calloway, [[Fats]] Waller, Joesphine [[Baker]], [[Bill]] "Bojangles" Robinson, and Louis Armstrong. This Happy [[Harmonies]] [[cartoon]] from [[Hugh]] Harmon and [[Rudolf]] Ising is very [[entertaining]] musically with perfect characterizations all [[around]]. They all [[sound]] so much like the [[real]] thing that half of me [[thinks]] they could [[possibly]] be. [[If]] not, they're [[certainly]] very flattering [[impersonations]]. Even the lazy, shiftless Fetchit characterization [[gets]] an exciting workout here when he [[gets]] chased by a [[tiger]] as "[[Hold]] That [[Tiger]]" plays on the [[score]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]] for fans of '30s [[animation]] and jazz [[music]]. The [[Former]] [[Steelworks]] Pond is more of a tribute to the African-American entertainers of the '30s than any denigration of the [[total]] [[races]] (Stepin Fetchit caricature notwithstanding). Besides who I just [[cite]], there's [[apart]] [[rana]] or fish versions of Cab Calloway, [[Fat]] Waller, Joesphine [[Becker]], [[Billing]] "Bojangles" Robinson, and Louis Armstrong. This Happy [[Melodic]] [[comic]] from [[Albert]] Harmon and [[Rudolph]] Ising is very [[amusing]] musically with perfect characterizations all [[throughout]]. They all [[sounds]] so much like the [[true]] thing that half of me [[think]] they could [[probably]] be. [[Though]] not, they're [[obviously]] very flattering [[imitations]]. Even the lazy, shiftless Fetchit characterization [[got]] an exciting workout here when he [[got]] chased by a [[tigers]] as "[[Held]] That [[Tigers]]" plays on the [[notation]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]] for fans of '30s [[animate]] and jazz [[musicians]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6037 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Fungicide" is quite possibly the most incompetent, embarrassing, pitiful "film" I have ever seen. The acting is criminal, the direction practically non-existent, and the special effects presumably put together by unleashing a monkey with learning difficulties on a defenceless laptop computer.

Far be it from me to stifle creativity, but I actually believe things like this shouldn't be made. I am sure the "film"-makers will say that, yes, the "film" was hampered by a low (as in nothing) budget - but in that case they just really shouldn't have bothered. As it is, they have offered the world something so dire, so execrable, that only imbeciles could get the merest shade of enjoyment from it.

Starting the "movie" it wasn't as though I was expecting "Citizen Kane" or anything. I was expecting a low budget little horror with perhaps a modicum of inventiveness, a hint of fun, and even some energy. What I got was the cinematic equivalent of a used handkerchief.

The plot? Well, our leering antihero scientist, who works in his parents' basement, is seen manically stirring some goo in a cup. Apparently, such high-level science is the end-result of years of research. His parents then send him off to a strange hotel-type place in the countryside to relax. There are some other people there, who are simply too awful to write about. Anyway, the scientist drops his test-tube onto some mushrooms - and soon the mushrooms grow and kill some people. (Wow, I'm getting suicidal just writing the plot summary). Our heroes save the day by detonating a barrel of balsamic vinegar (by attaching a "fuse" - really a piece of string - to it). The barrel unaccountably explodes with the power of a small nuclear weapon, destroying all the mushrooms. The end. (Thank goodness).

That summary is as good as the "film" gets (and actually makes it sound a lot more interesting than it actually is). It really should never have got past this stage of development (by which I mean a plot outline scribbled on the back of an envelope with crayons). Somebody should have really stepped in and given someone a vigorous shake and said "NO."

And those "special" effects. Well, they're "special" all right. This is CGI gone crazy. And done by a person who I can only assume believes the bicycle pump to be the pinnacle of modern technology. And when the mushroom monsters are not in the style of a 1984 home computer graphics package, they are represented by actors shuffling along covered in a sheet (I kid you not).

One of the most inexcusable things about the movie is its laziness. This can be summed up by the scene in which the hero spins his guns (a la Clint Eastwood) and then fails miserably to get them in his pockets. I mean come on, a couple of retakes and he could have pulled it off, but just to leave it as it is - really weak.

I cannot believe money was spent on this camcorder-shot rubbish. The "film"-makers should hang their heads in shame and be banned from going within fifty metres of any movie-making equipment.

I also think it's wrong that friends and family of the makers come onto IMDb and post mendacious reviews and give stupidly high user ratings which give a totally inaccurate picture of the "movie." "Fungicide" is an absolute travesty of film-making. Mr Wascavage is either very, very stupid or very, very cynical. --------------------------------------------- Result 6038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[thought]] that this was an absolutely charming movie [[centering]] [[around]] the [[lives]] of Mary-Kate's and Ashley's [[characters]] [[Sam]] and [[Emma]] Stanton! They are both [[trying]] to make both themselves and their [[parents]] [[happy]] but; [[unfortunately]], it's just not that [[easy]] for them to actually do! I [[thought]] that this was an [[utterly]] charming and sweet [[movie]] and if you are a [[real]] fan of these [[marvelous]] young [[ladies]] then I'm sure that you'll agree with me here! [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] this movie [[yet]] then I say you really missed-out; big [[time]], and that you should [[definitely]] take the [[time]] out to see it now! This [[movie]] is a [[real]] [[winner]]! [[Sincerely]], [[Rick]] Morris I [[figured]] that this was an absolutely charming movie [[centered]] [[roundabout]] the [[iife]] of Mary-Kate's and Ashley's [[character]] [[Sams]] and [[Emmy]] Stanton! They are both [[striving]] to make both themselves and their [[relatives]] [[cheerful]] but; [[alack]], it's just not that [[easier]] for them to actually do! I [[brainchild]] that this was an [[quite]] charming and sweet [[kino]] and if you are a [[reales]] fan of these [[wondrous]] young [[mesdames]] then I'm sure that you'll agree with me here! [[Unless]] you haven't [[watched]] this movie [[nevertheless]] then I say you really missed-out; big [[period]], and that you should [[categorically]] take the [[times]] out to see it now! This [[cinematography]] is a [[reales]] [[finalist]]! [[Truthfully]], [[Ricky]] Morris --------------------------------------------- Result 6039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Unlike many, I don't find the premise or [[theme]] of this show the [[least]] bit [[offensive]]. Its [[execution]], however, is another [[matter]] [[entirely]]. Like so [[many]] B-minus movies, all the decent gags [[appear]] to have been spliced into the trailers. [[For]] most of the 22-or-so [[minutes]] we [[sit]] in waning [[anticipation]] any morsel of [[real]] [[humor]]. Or at [[least]] something to keep one from fidgeting with the remote or counting [[carpet]] fibers. With a couple of exceptions the acting is [[awful]]; the [[comical]] over-emoting and gesticulating of some cast [[members]] might be well [[suited]] to a late-night infomercial, but not a primetime sitcom ([[even]] a Canadian one.) Notwithstanding the admittedly [[original]] cultural angle, I cannot help but [[think]] this is [[mainly]] a misfired shot by the CBC to [[replicate]] the [[success]] of Corner [[Gas]]. Unfortunately, they [[got]] the tone -- and the script -- [[completely]] wrong for the [[prairies]]. The [[final]] insult is that they apparently couldn't [[even]] afford to have the [[location]] [[work]] [[done]] in an [[actual]] [[small]] [[town]] (Why? are they so [[hard]] to [[find]] in [[Saskatchewan]]?) [[Did]] they think the [[audience]] would be fooled by the downtown Regina exteriors? As a proud Canadian I [[hope]] this thing goes away soon, and that the [[rest]] of the world, primed by the CBC's publicists, [[quickly]] [[forgets]] this [[colossal]] embarrassment of a sitcom. Unlike many, I don't find the premise or [[themes]] of this show the [[slightest]] bit [[abusive]]. Its [[implementing]], however, is another [[topic]] [[perfectly]]. Like so [[several]] B-minus movies, all the decent gags [[arise]] to have been spliced into the trailers. [[At]] most of the 22-or-so [[mins]] we [[sitting]] in waning [[expectation]] any morsel of [[true]] [[comedy]]. Or at [[less]] something to keep one from fidgeting with the remote or counting [[carpets]] fibers. With a couple of exceptions the acting is [[horrible]]; the [[hilarious]] over-emoting and gesticulating of some cast [[member]] might be well [[adapted]] to a late-night infomercial, but not a primetime sitcom ([[yet]] a Canadian one.) Notwithstanding the admittedly [[initial]] cultural angle, I cannot help but [[thoughts]] this is [[basically]] a misfired shot by the CBC to [[reproduced]] the [[succeeded]] of Corner [[Petrol]]. Unfortunately, they [[get]] the tone -- and the script -- [[abundantly]] wrong for the [[meadows]]. The [[latter]] insult is that they apparently couldn't [[yet]] afford to have the [[locations]] [[cooperation]] [[doing]] in an [[real]] [[little]] [[municipality]] (Why? are they so [[tough]] to [[unearthed]] in [[Sk]]?) [[Ai]] they think the [[viewers]] would be fooled by the downtown Regina exteriors? As a proud Canadian I [[esperanza]] this thing goes away soon, and that the [[resting]] of the world, primed by the CBC's publicists, [[promptly]] [[ignores]] this [[whopping]] embarrassment of a sitcom. --------------------------------------------- Result 6040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This movie was bizarre, completely [[inexplicable]], and hysterical to watch with friends while drinking in a big empty house. I really love the opening stuff with Lisa wandering about lost in a gorgeous city. I want to be a beautiful stranger lost in some exotic European locale, though maybe not in a low budget horror flick. Definitely get the ending where there are the strangely non-sexual sex scenes that were cut out (in my DVD copy anyway). Don't attempt to understand it, just go along and watch out for the weird bits...which is everything. Don't watch this if you actually want plot or characterization or anything at all to make sense. Pretty beautiful, though you may just give up on this and decide to watch an actual horror movie, like say, Dead Alive. This movie was bizarre, completely [[impenetrable]], and hysterical to watch with friends while drinking in a big empty house. I really love the opening stuff with Lisa wandering about lost in a gorgeous city. I want to be a beautiful stranger lost in some exotic European locale, though maybe not in a low budget horror flick. Definitely get the ending where there are the strangely non-sexual sex scenes that were cut out (in my DVD copy anyway). Don't attempt to understand it, just go along and watch out for the weird bits...which is everything. Don't watch this if you actually want plot or characterization or anything at all to make sense. Pretty beautiful, though you may just give up on this and decide to watch an actual horror movie, like say, Dead Alive. --------------------------------------------- Result 6041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This docu-drama is what you would expect from Richard Attenborough, the man who gave us "Gandhi": beautifully photographed, compellingly casted, well written in the measured, literate manner that Hollywood discarded in the 30's, and scrupulously accurate. It stands out as a genre film, excelling in its portrayal of native American (or, more appropriately for its Canadian setting, "First Nations") culture and standing with "Black Robe" as a wonderfully photographed piece of Canoe Country and its culture (here, circa 1934). This idyllic portrait derives drama from its subject: Archie "Grey Owl" Belaney, a Scot raised in Hastings (England) by maiden aunts who became so obsessed with the "red indian" tales of his childhood that he went to Canada, disappeared into the woods, and became a trapper and adopted son of an Ojibway band. He was a vain man with a habit of marrying and abandoning

Indian brides, none of whom seem to have thought less of him for it, for he was also an extraordinarily charming and picaresque character. One of his wives (one smarter than he, by most accounts) propelled him into fame as a writer and early advocate for protecting the wild country of the North, and this forms the focus of Attenborough's tale. The chemistry between Brosnan and Annie Galipeau (as Grey Owl's wife Pony) is engaging and, if not firey, is nonetheless quite touching. A good film when you need some time from the madding crowd. --------------------------------------------- Result 6042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[think]] that the idea of the plot is [[perfect]] for exploring first of all the emotional experiences of the people involved and second, as someone else wrote in a comment, the implications of this kind of [[relationships]] (incest and lesbianism) in the romanian society.

so... to begin with the second aspect... to make it short, it wasn't [[visible]] at all...

as for the first.. as i said, it had much more potential... i think that those kind of relationships carry much more tension... much more tension... and the potential tension didn't get through...

i think the soundtrack could've been more than those few songs on the background and the theme (wich was nice but not enough and not always in the right moments)... yeah... i could feel the absence of a better soundtrack..

the actors... i think that they were somewhere from 7 to 8/10... not enough sensuality in the key moments...

a total of 7/10.... mostly for the story I [[thinking]] that the idea of the plot is [[consummate]] for exploring first of all the emotional experiences of the people involved and second, as someone else wrote in a comment, the implications of this kind of [[relationship]] (incest and lesbianism) in the romanian society.

so... to begin with the second aspect... to make it short, it wasn't [[perceptible]] at all...

as for the first.. as i said, it had much more potential... i think that those kind of relationships carry much more tension... much more tension... and the potential tension didn't get through...

i think the soundtrack could've been more than those few songs on the background and the theme (wich was nice but not enough and not always in the right moments)... yeah... i could feel the absence of a better soundtrack..

the actors... i think that they were somewhere from 7 to 8/10... not enough sensuality in the key moments...

a total of 7/10.... mostly for the story --------------------------------------------- Result 6043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the most timely and engrossing documentaries, you'll ever watch. While the story takes place in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas, it provides an intimate look into political dynamics, that prevail throughout the western Hemisphere. While essentially another chapter in the story of the "U.S. backed, Latin American coup", this film chronicles in real-time, what can happen when the poorest people, are armed with unity, political savvy, and courage!

The political insights offered by this film are invaluable. One gets clear examples of the private media, as a formidable force for mass deception and propaganda. We see the poor people of Caracas grappling with the brutal realities of "American politics". One gets a clear sense of impending doom, if the people fail to address the blatant tyranny, which has been abruptly, and illegally, thrust upon them by the conspirators. We also see the arrogance and fascism, of the CIA backed, private media, plutocrats, and generals, who've conspired to bring Venezuela back under Washington's domination. Though ably led by President Hugo Chavez, the people of Caracas are forced to act without him, after Chavez was forcibly kidnapped by renegade generals. Their response is the highpoint of the film. If one seeks an excellent portrait of what the U.S. government, Hugo Chavez, and revolutionary Venezuela, are all about, this movie is it! --------------------------------------------- Result 6044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] was [[yet]] another waste of time... Why [[oh]] why do I [[keep]] [[renting]] [[crap]] like this?... [[someone]] please [[tell]] me... *sigh* Oh well. back to the [[movie]] at hand: Cube [[Zero]] is [[probably]] worth it if you [[REALLY]] [[REALLY]] [[enjoyed]] the [[first]] [[movie]], (like I did), and just [[want]] to [[check]] out what's up in the last (hopefully) [[movie]] scraped together just to keep some poor [[actors]] and screenwriters [[employed]], then of course this is the [[movie]] for you. But if you are looking for a good [[movie]] with good acting and a [[fantastic]] plot... *evil grin* then this [[movie]] is definitely for you :-D.... [[OK]] I'm lying... [[At]] [[best]] this [[movie]] sucks. OK, I have to [[admit]] that certain [[elements]] to it was cool.. well.. coolish... and I [[laughed]] [[quite]] a few times, prolly at the wrong things, but [[nevertheless]] I was [[amused]]. :-) But all in all the few [[things]] that [[barely]] makes the "[[ok]]" [[category]] isn't enough to make this [[movie]] worth it at all.. Unless you [[count]] "Manos - Hand of [[Fate]]" one of the [[top]] [[ten]] [[movies]] EVER! This [[filmmaking]] was [[nonetheless]] another waste of time... Why [[oooh]] why do I [[maintaining]] [[leasing]] [[baloney]] like this?... [[person]] please [[telling]] me... *sigh* Oh well. back to the [[cinematographic]] at hand: Cube [[Nought]] is [[unquestionably]] worth it if you [[TRULY]] [[TRULY]] [[appreciated]] the [[frst]] [[kino]], (like I did), and just [[wish]] to [[verify]] out what's up in the last (hopefully) [[movies]] scraped together just to keep some poor [[players]] and screenwriters [[employ]], then of course this is the [[flick]] for you. But if you are looking for a good [[filmmaking]] with good acting and a [[sumptuous]] plot... *evil grin* then this [[movies]] is definitely for you :-D.... [[ALRIGHT]] I'm lying... [[In]] [[finest]] this [[movies]] sucks. OK, I have to [[concede]] that certain [[ingredient]] to it was cool.. well.. coolish... and I [[smiled]] [[perfectly]] a few times, prolly at the wrong things, but [[still]] I was [[tickled]]. :-) But all in all the few [[aspects]] that [[hardly]] makes the "[[okay]]" [[classes]] isn't enough to make this [[filmmaking]] worth it at all.. Unless you [[counting]] "Manos - Hand of [[Destiny]]" one of the [[supreme]] [[dix]] [[movie]] EVER! --------------------------------------------- Result 6045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Many moons [[ago]] when I was seven [[years]] old, I can vaguely remember seeing a trailer for this [[movie]]. It appealed to my naive sense of curiosity and I decided to ask my parents to take me to this [[movie]]. Being the wise adults that they are, they told me "Absolutely not! It's a bunch of trash." Of course, I was very [[disappointed]] that I would not be the first kid on my [[block]] to see the "Incredible Melting [[Man]]."

Little time passed - maybe a couple of days. I forgot about "The Incredible Melting Man" and my [[disappointment]] [[faded]]. Twenty-five [[years]] passed until it re-entered the forefront of my thoughts. While surfing through channels on digital cable, I found this long-lost relic of a movie. My curiosity was piqued and I decided to finally partake in this [[fruit]] forbidden by my parents. I should have [[listened]] to them. The "Incredible Melting Man" is perhaps the [[worst]] movie known to man. It makes movies such as "Def-Con 4, "Metalstorm", and "Freddie Got Fingered" look like Oscar nominees. I feel violated for [[wasting]] almost two hours of my life watching this vile [[filth]]. The [[story]] was [[incoherent]] and the [[effects]] were [[crude]] [[even]] for 1977. [[How]] anyone convinced a [[film]] company to [[produce]] this [[movie]] beyond me.

Don't make the same [[mistake]] that I did. [[Listen]] to your [[parents]] if they forbade you to watch this [[movie]]. They were right. Many moons [[before]] when I was seven [[ages]] old, I can vaguely remember seeing a trailer for this [[films]]. It appealed to my naive sense of curiosity and I decided to ask my parents to take me to this [[film]]. Being the wise adults that they are, they told me "Absolutely not! It's a bunch of trash." Of course, I was very [[frustrating]] that I would not be the first kid on my [[blocks]] to see the "Incredible Melting [[Dude]]."

Little time passed - maybe a couple of days. I forgot about "The Incredible Melting Man" and my [[displeasure]] [[missing]]. Twenty-five [[yr]] passed until it re-entered the forefront of my thoughts. While surfing through channels on digital cable, I found this long-lost relic of a movie. My curiosity was piqued and I decided to finally partake in this [[fruition]] forbidden by my parents. I should have [[hear]] to them. The "Incredible Melting Man" is perhaps the [[gravest]] movie known to man. It makes movies such as "Def-Con 4, "Metalstorm", and "Freddie Got Fingered" look like Oscar nominees. I feel violated for [[losing]] almost two hours of my life watching this vile [[dirt]]. The [[saga]] was [[unconnected]] and the [[repercussions]] were [[rough]] [[yet]] for 1977. [[Mode]] anyone convinced a [[movie]] company to [[producing]] this [[filmmaking]] beyond me.

Don't make the same [[awry]] that I did. [[Listening]] to your [[parent]] if they forbade you to watch this [[filmmaking]]. They were right. --------------------------------------------- Result 6046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] [[Though]] a bit more polished technically than the previous film in the series, BULLDOG DRUMMOND ESCAPES, this is a [[weaker]] escapade in both a [[plot]] that's less [[thrilling]] and a leading man who simply doesn't have the [[charisma]] of Ray Milland.

That said, several actors and characters continue in their roles and manage to keep the flag flying. Also John Barrymore is present, popping up all through the film in a variety of outlandish [[disguises]].

Anyway it's another [[endless]] night for BD as he and his cohorts chase around trying to rescue the poor girl he intends to marry. The clues are stupid but again the supporting actors often make them entertaining. [[If]] a bit more polished technically than the previous film in the series, BULLDOG DRUMMOND ESCAPES, this is a [[lowest]] escapade in both a [[intrigue]] that's less [[enthralling]] and a leading man who simply doesn't have the [[seduction]] of Ray Milland.

That said, several actors and characters continue in their roles and manage to keep the flag flying. Also John Barrymore is present, popping up all through the film in a variety of outlandish [[skins]].

Anyway it's another [[limitless]] night for BD as he and his cohorts chase around trying to rescue the poor girl he intends to marry. The clues are stupid but again the supporting actors often make them entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 6047 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] [[Thought]] at [[first]] this [[film]] would be your typical Western [[film]], [[however]], it turned out to be very interesting and kept me spellbound right to the very [[end]], which turned out very [[unusual]]. Charlton Heston,(Sam Burgade),"Midway",'76, had past experiences with James Coburn,(Zach Provo),"Deadfall",'93, and Zach never forgave Sam and [[would]] stop at [[nothing]] to [[make]] [[sure]] he caught up with him and paid him back. Unfortunately, Barbara Hershey,(Susan Burgade),"The Portrait of a [[Lady]]",'96, [[managed]] to [[get]] [[caught]] up in this situation and [[found]] herself [[among]] [[sex]] [[starved]] [[men]] who never [[seemed]] to leave her [[alone]]. Sam Burgade had to [[make]] some very [[hard]] decisions and and I was [[quite]] [[surprised]] at the [[conclusion]]. This is a very [[entertaining]] film and the acting was [[outstanding]]. [[Ideas]] at [[firstly]] this [[films]] would be your typical Western [[flick]], [[still]], it turned out to be very interesting and kept me spellbound right to the very [[termination]], which turned out very [[odd]]. Charlton Heston,(Sam Burgade),"Midway",'76, had past experiences with James Coburn,(Zach Provo),"Deadfall",'93, and Zach never forgave Sam and [[could]] stop at [[anything]] to [[deliver]] [[persuaded]] he caught up with him and paid him back. Unfortunately, Barbara Hershey,(Susan Burgade),"The Portrait of a [[Dame]]",'96, [[managing]] to [[got]] [[grabbed]] up in this situation and [[discovered]] herself [[between]] [[sexuality]] [[starving]] [[male]] who never [[appeared]] to leave her [[only]]. Sam Burgade had to [[deliver]] some very [[stiff]] decisions and and I was [[very]] [[horrified]] at the [[conclusions]]. This is a very [[amusing]] film and the acting was [[unresolved]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6048 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Wow]] probable the [[worst]] movie i have ever seen!! This person should never make another [[movie]]!!I [[cant]] [[believe]] anyone would have [[produce]] this in [[good]] conscience.YOu have have wasted every cent. No [[concept]] of [[real]] [[life]]. I have wasted 2 [[hours]] of my [[life]] i will never [[get]] back. EVER!!! Everyone who [[worked]] on this [[show]] should be embarrassed!!!!!! I'm embarrassed for them! [[All]] of you should be [[ashamed]]. [[If]] i was gay i [[would]] want to [[tell]] the [[director]] that they have personally set back gay rights [[progress]] by 5 [[years]]. [[Please]] never watch this [[movie]].I have never [[written]] a blogg about a [[film]] before but The [[distaste]] for this [[film]] has [[compelled]] me to do so. [[Woah]] probable the [[meanest]] movie i have ever seen!! This person should never make another [[flick]]!!I [[dont]] [[think]] anyone would have [[generate]] this in [[alright]] conscience.YOu have have wasted every cent. No [[notions]] of [[true]] [[lives]]. I have wasted 2 [[hour]] of my [[lifetime]] i will never [[obtains]] back. EVER!!! Everyone who [[works]] on this [[exhibit]] should be embarrassed!!!!!! I'm embarrassed for them! [[Every]] of you should be [[embarrassed]]. [[Though]] i was gay i [[could]] want to [[say]] the [[superintendent]] that they have personally set back gay rights [[advance]] by 5 [[yr]]. [[Invite]] never watch this [[flick]].I have never [[handwritten]] a blogg about a [[movies]] before but The [[repugnance]] for this [[filmmaking]] has [[oblige]] me to do so. --------------------------------------------- Result 6049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Richard]] Chamberlain is David Burton, a tax [[lawyer]] living in [[Sydney]], Australia who is [[drawn]] into a [[murder]] trial defending five Aboriginal men [[accused]] of [[murdering]] a fellow native in Peter Weir's apocalyptic 1977 thriller The Last [[Wave]]. Taking up where Picnic at [[Hanging]] [[Rock]] left off, the film goes deeper into [[exploring]] the unknown and, in the process, [[shows]] the gulf between two [[cultures]] who [[live]] side by side but lack [[understanding]] of each others [[culture]] and [[traditions]]. Weir [[shows]] how white society considers the native beliefs to be [[primitive]] superstitions and believes that since they are [[living]] in the [[cities]] and have been "domesticated", their tribal [[laws]] and culture no [[longer]] [[apply]].

From the start, Burton is [[drawn]] deeper and deeper into a [[strange]] [[web]] of [[visions]] and symbols where the line between real time and "dream [[time]]" evaporates. Water plays an [[important]] symbolic role in the [[film]] from the [[opening]] [[sequence]] in which a sudden [[thunder]] and hailstorm interrupts a [[peaceful]] [[school]] recess to Burton's [[discovery]] that his [[bathtub]] is overflowing and water is [[pouring]] down his [[steps]]. As violent and [[unusual]] weather continue with [[episodes]] of [[black]] [[rain]] and mud falling from the [[sky]], the [[contrast]] between the facile scientific explanations of the [[phenomenon]] and the intuitive understanding of the natives is made [[clear]]. Burton and his [[wife]] [[Annie]] ([[Olivia]] Hamnet) study [[books]] about the [[Aborigines]] and [[learn]] about the role of [[dreams]] in the [[tribal]] [[traditions]]. When he [[invites]] one of his [[clients]] Chris Lee (David Gulpilil) to his [[home]] for [[dinner]], he is [[disturbed]] to [[find]] that he is the [[subject]] of an [[inquiry]] by Chris and his [[friend]] [[Charlie]] (Nadjiwarra Amagula), an [[enigmatic]] Aborigine [[sorcerer]] [[involved]] with the defendants. As Burton's [[investigation]] [[continues]], his [[clients]] make his work difficult by refusing to [[disclose]] the true events surrounding the [[murder]].

[[After]] Chris [[starts]] to appear in his dreams, Burton is convinced that the Aborigine was killed in a [[tribal]] ritual because "he saw too much", [[though]] [[Chris]] [[refuses]] to acknowledge this in [[court]]. Burton, becoming more and more troubled by a mystery he cannot unravel, says to his stepfather priest, "Why didn't you tell me there were mysteries?" This is a legitimate question but, according to the reverend, the Church answers all mysteries. Burton knows now that he must discover the truth for himself and enters the tribal underground caves. Though we do not know for certain what is real and what is a dream, he comes face to face with his deepest fears in a haunting climax that will leave you pondering its meaning into the wee hours of the morning.

In this period of history in which native Hopi and Mayan prophecies predict the "end of history" and the purification of man leading to the Fifth World, The Last Wave, though 25 years old, is still timely. The Aborigines are portrayed as a vibrant culture, not one completely subjugated by the white man, yet I am troubled by the gnawing feeling that we are looking in but not quite seeing. Weir has opened our eyes to the mystery that lies beyond our consensual view of reality, but he perpetuates the doom-orientation that sees possibility only in terms of fear, showing nature as a dark and uncontrollable power without a hint of the spiritual beauty that lives on both sides of time. [[Richards]] Chamberlain is David Burton, a tax [[avocados]] living in [[Sidney]], Australia who is [[lured]] into a [[assassination]] trial defending five Aboriginal men [[charged]] of [[killing]] a fellow native in Peter Weir's apocalyptic 1977 thriller The Last [[Waves]]. Taking up where Picnic at [[Dangling]] [[Rocks]] left off, the film goes deeper into [[studying]] the unknown and, in the process, [[showing]] the gulf between two [[crop]] who [[living]] side by side but lack [[understood]] of each others [[cultures]] and [[tradition]]. Weir [[show]] how white society considers the native beliefs to be [[primal]] superstitions and believes that since they are [[residing]] in the [[municipalities]] and have been "domesticated", their tribal [[lois]] and culture no [[long]] [[applied]].

From the start, Burton is [[lured]] deeper and deeper into a [[bizarre]] [[internet]] of [[notions]] and symbols where the line between real time and "dream [[period]]" evaporates. Water plays an [[principal]] symbolic role in the [[movie]] from the [[opens]] [[sequencing]] in which a sudden [[lightning]] and hailstorm interrupts a [[pacific]] [[tuition]] recess to Burton's [[detect]] that his [[bathing]] is overflowing and water is [[casting]] down his [[measurements]]. As violent and [[strange]] weather continue with [[spells]] of [[negro]] [[rainfall]] and mud falling from the [[heaven]], the [[contrasts]] between the facile scientific explanations of the [[phenomena]] and the intuitive understanding of the natives is made [[lucid]]. Burton and his [[woman]] [[Annette]] ([[Olivier]] Hamnet) study [[book]] about the [[Natives]] and [[learning]] about the role of [[nightmares]] in the [[tribes]] [[tradition]]. When he [[inviting]] one of his [[customers]] Chris Lee (David Gulpilil) to his [[households]] for [[banquet]], he is [[disrupted]] to [[unearthed]] that he is the [[topic]] of an [[survey]] by Chris and his [[boyfriend]] [[Charley]] (Nadjiwarra Amagula), an [[intriguing]] Aborigine [[magician]] [[implicated]] with the defendants. As Burton's [[investigations]] [[continual]], his [[consumers]] make his work difficult by refusing to [[unveil]] the true events surrounding the [[assassination]].

[[Upon]] Chris [[began]] to appear in his dreams, Burton is convinced that the Aborigine was killed in a [[tribes]] ritual because "he saw too much", [[if]] [[Kris]] [[spurned]] to acknowledge this in [[courthouse]]. Burton, becoming more and more troubled by a mystery he cannot unravel, says to his stepfather priest, "Why didn't you tell me there were mysteries?" This is a legitimate question but, according to the reverend, the Church answers all mysteries. Burton knows now that he must discover the truth for himself and enters the tribal underground caves. Though we do not know for certain what is real and what is a dream, he comes face to face with his deepest fears in a haunting climax that will leave you pondering its meaning into the wee hours of the morning.

In this period of history in which native Hopi and Mayan prophecies predict the "end of history" and the purification of man leading to the Fifth World, The Last Wave, though 25 years old, is still timely. The Aborigines are portrayed as a vibrant culture, not one completely subjugated by the white man, yet I am troubled by the gnawing feeling that we are looking in but not quite seeing. Weir has opened our eyes to the mystery that lies beyond our consensual view of reality, but he perpetuates the doom-orientation that sees possibility only in terms of fear, showing nature as a dark and uncontrollable power without a hint of the spiritual beauty that lives on both sides of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 6050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[love]] Alec Guinness. And that's saying a lot after this film. Actually, he is not bad in it. He just seems to [[stand]] aside, be urbane and his usual delightful self, but invest nada. It is obvious the girl he is matched with is a featherweight, even as an inexperienced young French girl. Sir Alec wouldn't have chosen her when he was young and very obviously isn't too happy about it now.

The interesting character is the brooding [[brother]] of the odd "Suzanne", another [[twit]]. "Donald" aspires to be a French Heathcliffe and I waited in [[vain]] for the source of his mystery. What deep dark secret was he hiding behind that forehead? Was he in love with the father's mistress? Why did he jerk Suzanne's hair when she plotted to bring the [[disparate]] parts of this [[turkey]] together on the [[country]] estate? [[Or]] perhaps he had [[simply]] had [[enough]] of her [[obnoxious]] acting.

The [[film]] would have been [[charming]] with Guiness and the "[[older]] [[woman]]" reminiscing and [[seeing]] Paris together. THAT [[would]] have been a [[great]] [[story]]! Two lovely [[experienced]] people in a [[beautiful]] city after the [[destruction]] of World War [[II]]. Why didn't [[somebody]] [[come]] up with that? I [[suggest]] [[watching]] Alec Guiness in "The [[Card]]", a [[little]] [[known]] but worthwhile film. I [[iove]] Alec Guinness. And that's saying a lot after this film. Actually, he is not bad in it. He just seems to [[stands]] aside, be urbane and his usual delightful self, but invest nada. It is obvious the girl he is matched with is a featherweight, even as an inexperienced young French girl. Sir Alec wouldn't have chosen her when he was young and very obviously isn't too happy about it now.

The interesting character is the brooding [[hermano]] of the odd "Suzanne", another [[knucklehead]]. "Donald" aspires to be a French Heathcliffe and I waited in [[fruitless]] for the source of his mystery. What deep dark secret was he hiding behind that forehead? Was he in love with the father's mistress? Why did he jerk Suzanne's hair when she plotted to bring the [[divergent]] parts of this [[ankara]] together on the [[nations]] estate? [[Ord]] perhaps he had [[purely]] had [[satisfactorily]] of her [[detested]] acting.

The [[filmmaking]] would have been [[handsome]] with Guiness and the "[[oldest]] [[femmes]]" reminiscing and [[see]] Paris together. THAT [[should]] have been a [[whopping]] [[fairytales]]! Two lovely [[endured]] people in a [[sumptuous]] city after the [[demolishing]] of World War [[SECONDLY]]. Why didn't [[whoever]] [[coming]] up with that? I [[insinuate]] [[staring]] Alec Guiness in "The [[Cards]]", a [[scant]] [[familiar]] but worthwhile film. --------------------------------------------- Result 6051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I would like to [[comment]] on the movie April Love. It's one of my all [[time]] favorites because my father, Nelson Malone plays the horse trainer. I [[remember]] distinctly when Hollywood came to Lexington, KY, where we were [[living]] at the time to [[make]] April [[Love]]. My [[Dad]] had been in [[numerous]] plays and was a [[talented]] [[man]]. I talked him into going to [[try]] out for one of the [[bit]] parts [[offered]], and lo and [[behold]] he came home w/the script. [[How]] exciting is that! Also, a number of my classmates were in the crowd scenes -- [[especially]] the ones shown at the amusement park. It's very nostalgic every April when I [[see]] the movie being [[shown]] once again, and the song April [[Love]] by Pat Boone is [[still]] [[played]] on the [[radio]]. [[Timeless]] and reminiscent of a [[time]] [[long]] [[gone]] when you [[see]] the movies they [[make]] [[today]] w/all the sex, [[foul]] [[language]] and violence. It would be [[refreshing]] to [[see]] more [[movies]] [[like]] April [[Love]] [[come]] back into [[focus]]... I would like to [[observing]] on the movie April Love. It's one of my all [[period]] favorites because my father, Nelson Malone plays the horse trainer. I [[remind]] distinctly when Hollywood came to Lexington, KY, where we were [[vie]] at the time to [[deliver]] April [[Loves]]. My [[Papa]] had been in [[multiple]] plays and was a [[gifted]] [[guy]]. I talked him into going to [[tries]] out for one of the [[bite]] parts [[delivering]], and lo and [[see]] he came home w/the script. [[Mode]] exciting is that! Also, a number of my classmates were in the crowd scenes -- [[particularly]] the ones shown at the amusement park. It's very nostalgic every April when I [[consults]] the movie being [[showed]] once again, and the song April [[Likes]] by Pat Boone is [[however]] [[done]] on the [[radios]]. [[Undying]] and reminiscent of a [[moment]] [[longer]] [[disappeared]] when you [[seeing]] the movies they [[deliver]] [[yesterday]] w/all the sex, [[squalid]] [[vocabulary]] and violence. It would be [[refreshed]] to [[behold]] more [[theater]] [[iike]] April [[Likes]] [[coming]] back into [[concentrate]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 6052 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Painful. Painful is the only word to describe this awful rendition of such a fun and interesting Shakespearean play. I gave it a shot but was terribly disappointed and couldn't bare to even finish viewing it. To the person who wrote a novel about how wonderful this twist of Much Ado was, I pity you and your bored brain. May your pretenses about young viewers be lifted without retribution. Please do not even bother with this gut wrenching, disgusting excuse for a performance of an acclaimed Shakespeare drama. You will be forced to induce vomiting and will require a commode close to the television with which you choose to watch this crap because involuntary defecation will take place. --------------------------------------------- Result 6053 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] New York, I [[Love]] You [[finally]] makes it to our [[shores]], but its 10 short stories on [[love]] [[somehow]] didn't find [[reason]] enough to be [[released]] over Valentine's, probably due to the fact that this year's festival also [[falls]] on Lunar New Year, and with that comes the [[usual]] LNY blockbuster films from the likes of [[Jackie]] Chan (no, not The Spy Next Door) and local filmmaker Jack Neo who has traditionally [[released]] his latest film over that period to resounding success. [[So]] why fix a formula that hasn't been broken?

Continuing in concept where [[Paris]], Je T'aime had begun in spawning the City of Love Franchise (Shanghai will be next, so says the end of the closing credits here), the buzz here is [[definitely]] about the intertwining stories set in one of the cities of the world to allow for [[various]] interpretations from filmmakers all over to come up with [[stories]] based on [[love]] as a theme, [[although]] someone [[probably]] forgot to tell Scarlett Johansson some of the finer points in the sandbox ground rules, and her short was unceremoniously dropped from the [[theatrical]] [[edition]] for being unable to fit into everything else (well, it was shot in black and [[white]]), but here's hoping that it would make it to the [[DVD]] at least.

Structurally, this [[series]] is less compartmentalized compared to its predecessor, which if [[memory]] serves me right had individual stories set within its own confines and never really breaking out of its artificial [[borders]] created. Here a little more leeway is given, where characters from various stories interact in short filler segments used to bridge scenes together, and not just solely reliant on pick up shots made up of buildings and landscapes, in hopes of making things [[look]] a little bit more serendipitous with the idea of chance encounters amongst strangers, though one story craftily adopted this [[mindset]] for its own narrative to deliver a surprise, though already seen in Paris.

One of the [[top]] draws for sitting through a film like this one, is [[definitely]] the creative forces behind the [[stories]], from writers, directors and cinematographers from various geographies and backgrounds mirroring the makeup of the cosmopolitan city, coming together for a concept film. And what more the star-studded cast too, with big names amongst the lesser known ones all upping the ante through [[picture]] [[perfect]] performances, be it for the entire length of the short, or as a support to build upon. You can't deny the initial star-gazing in recognizing the notables, from Irrfan Khan to Natalie Portman (who also had writing and directing duties), Rachel Bilson (looking quite like Bardot) to Spielberg's blue eye boy Shia LaBeouf, who surprisingly can act, and shows off more in his few minutes here than his entire filmography to date.

Story wise, like any anthology, you'll find some which will automatically appeal to you, and with others that don't. Some are straightforward in nature, while others have to come up with gimmicky twists that thankfully worked. But these 10 stories plus 1 (because Randall Balsmeyer was given duties to integrate everything together for a more organic feel instead of just plain pick up shots of lesser known areas and established landmarks) somehow lacked the more "anything goes" spirit from its predecessor, with stories more rooted in reality, compared to some fantastical elements in the previous film (Elijah Wood's dalliance with a vampire anyone?), or even less adventurous with its narrative style (Christopher Doyle's, and Tom Tykwer's starring Natalie Portman). Here it seemed that the filmmakers opted very much for safe, with none venturing into that spirit of adventure and experiment.

Minor quibbles aside, I still enjoyed almost all the shorts here, contrary to what many others have felt about it. The short film format is still very much alive, and having them strung together into a feature under the City of Love banner works fine, and left me wondering which other cities are or have been included in its lineup. I am hoping that perhaps the franchise will catch on and spread its influence here. We surely have enough prolific filmmakers to be stringing together a Singapore, I Love You, so here's crossing my fingers that maybe something will materialize down the road. Otherwise there's always the Sawasdee Bangkok route of just making it without any attachments to franchise house rules. New York, I [[Adores]] You [[eventually]] makes it to our [[riverbanks]], but its 10 short stories on [[iike]] [[someplace]] didn't find [[justification]] enough to be [[releasing]] over Valentine's, probably due to the fact that this year's festival also [[dips]] on Lunar New Year, and with that comes the [[ordinary]] LNY blockbuster films from the likes of [[Melanie]] Chan (no, not The Spy Next Door) and local filmmaker Jack Neo who has traditionally [[publicized]] his latest film over that period to resounding success. [[Therefore]] why fix a formula that hasn't been broken?

Continuing in concept where [[Parisien]], Je T'aime had begun in spawning the City of Love Franchise (Shanghai will be next, so says the end of the closing credits here), the buzz here is [[admittedly]] about the intertwining stories set in one of the cities of the world to allow for [[dissimilar]] interpretations from filmmakers all over to come up with [[fairytales]] based on [[loves]] as a theme, [[while]] someone [[assuredly]] forgot to tell Scarlett Johansson some of the finer points in the sandbox ground rules, and her short was unceremoniously dropped from the [[teatro]] [[editing]] for being unable to fit into everything else (well, it was shot in black and [[blanca]]), but here's hoping that it would make it to the [[DVDS]] at least.

Structurally, this [[serials]] is less compartmentalized compared to its predecessor, which if [[souvenir]] serves me right had individual stories set within its own confines and never really breaking out of its artificial [[confines]] created. Here a little more leeway is given, where characters from various stories interact in short filler segments used to bridge scenes together, and not just solely reliant on pick up shots made up of buildings and landscapes, in hopes of making things [[gaze]] a little bit more serendipitous with the idea of chance encounters amongst strangers, though one story craftily adopted this [[mentality]] for its own narrative to deliver a surprise, though already seen in Paris.

One of the [[supreme]] draws for sitting through a film like this one, is [[surely]] the creative forces behind the [[histories]], from writers, directors and cinematographers from various geographies and backgrounds mirroring the makeup of the cosmopolitan city, coming together for a concept film. And what more the star-studded cast too, with big names amongst the lesser known ones all upping the ante through [[visuals]] [[irreproachable]] performances, be it for the entire length of the short, or as a support to build upon. You can't deny the initial star-gazing in recognizing the notables, from Irrfan Khan to Natalie Portman (who also had writing and directing duties), Rachel Bilson (looking quite like Bardot) to Spielberg's blue eye boy Shia LaBeouf, who surprisingly can act, and shows off more in his few minutes here than his entire filmography to date.

Story wise, like any anthology, you'll find some which will automatically appeal to you, and with others that don't. Some are straightforward in nature, while others have to come up with gimmicky twists that thankfully worked. But these 10 stories plus 1 (because Randall Balsmeyer was given duties to integrate everything together for a more organic feel instead of just plain pick up shots of lesser known areas and established landmarks) somehow lacked the more "anything goes" spirit from its predecessor, with stories more rooted in reality, compared to some fantastical elements in the previous film (Elijah Wood's dalliance with a vampire anyone?), or even less adventurous with its narrative style (Christopher Doyle's, and Tom Tykwer's starring Natalie Portman). Here it seemed that the filmmakers opted very much for safe, with none venturing into that spirit of adventure and experiment.

Minor quibbles aside, I still enjoyed almost all the shorts here, contrary to what many others have felt about it. The short film format is still very much alive, and having them strung together into a feature under the City of Love banner works fine, and left me wondering which other cities are or have been included in its lineup. I am hoping that perhaps the franchise will catch on and spread its influence here. We surely have enough prolific filmmakers to be stringing together a Singapore, I Love You, so here's crossing my fingers that maybe something will materialize down the road. Otherwise there's always the Sawasdee Bangkok route of just making it without any attachments to franchise house rules. --------------------------------------------- Result 6054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This [[afternoon]] we [[took]] the [[kids]] to the [[movies]] and [[saw]] Neil Gaimans Stardust and all I can [[say]] is [[Wow]].

It is rare that I am [[completely]] taken aback by [[anything]] but this is [[quite]] [[possibly]] the [[greatest]] [[fantasy]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]], [[maybe]] [[even]] the best movie of any [[kind]] and it is all Neil Gaiman's fault.

Sure, I could have been sucked in by the [[wonderful]] dialog which was [[smart]], flowed [[smoothly]],and made the characters [[completely]] believable.

I [[could]] go on for days about the [[spectacular]] acting, Charlie Cox is perfect as Tristan, [[Claire]] Daines is [[Brilliant]] as Yvaine, and Robert [[Di]] Nero [[almost]] steals the [[movie]] as the [[Deeply]] in the [[Closet]] [[Pirate]] Captian [[Shakespeare]].

The pure joy brought about by the [[humor]] which [[managed]] to be [[Laugh]] our [[Loud]] [[funny]], [[Intelligent]] [[enough]] to make the [[first]] [[Shrek]] [[look]] like an 80's Sitcom, and [[blend]] in [[perfectly]] with the rest of the [[movie]] [[alone]] would have made this a [[great]] [[movie]].

[[Special]] Effects were [[near]] [[perfect]], [[true]] this was no LOTR or [[Star]] Wars SF Extravaganza but where they were [[use]] they were [[exactly]] what was called for, not too much to [[distract]] you from the [[movie]] itself and [[blended]] into the [[story]] [[perfectly]].

Then there is the story? What can I say. How [[often]] do you [[come]] [[across]] a story [[containing]] all of the [[classic]] fairytale formula [[components]] that doesn't just come off as another [[cheap]] Princess [[Bride]] knockoff. It [[manages]] to be Familiar and comfortable and [[yet]] [[completely]] [[new]] and refreshing at the same [[time]].

Any one of those [[things]] [[would]] have made this a good [[movie]], all of them [[combined]] make it a great [[movie]] but they pale in [[comparison]] to the [[rich]] [[enchanting]] world that those elements [[combine]] to bring to life well. Once again Neil Gaiman has [[done]] it, he has [[driven]] another [[dagger]] into my [[heart]] by [[creating]] a world of [[fantasy]] that is so [[beautiful]] and enchanting that I [[would]] do [[almost]] anything to [[live]] in it and only [[given]] me a short glimpse into it. I didn't [[want]] it to [[end]], I [[wanted]] to be sucked through a [[vortex]] to the land of Stormhold and get to [[meet]] Tristan and Yvaine in person, to [[travel]] it's fields and valleys, Stroll through it's marketplaces and meet it's residents both dangerous and friendly and stay there forever. It is a feeling that I have noticed whenever I have read anything by Gaiman, The Sandman, American Gods, Coraline all left me with a deep sense of sadness when I finished reading them because it was over, I could not see anything more into the worlds he had created which seemed to be so much more vibrant and alive than the one I am forced to live in and watching Stardust was no different.

In the end I'm sure that Neil's writing and this movie won't have the same effect on everyone but trust me when I say you will not regret the time or money spent watching this movie, it is easily one of the top 5 movies I have ever seen and I can guarantee that anyone at all with a soul will at least like it. This [[evening]] we [[picked]] the [[enfant]] to the [[movie]] and [[watched]] Neil Gaimans Stardust and all I can [[said]] is [[Whoa]].

It is rare that I am [[totally]] taken aback by [[something]] but this is [[rather]] [[potentially]] the [[biggest]] [[utopia]] [[flick]] I have ever [[saw]], [[potentially]] [[yet]] the best movie of any [[genus]] and it is all Neil Gaiman's fault.

Sure, I could have been sucked in by the [[excellent]] dialog which was [[intelligent]], flowed [[mildly]],and made the characters [[wholly]] believable.

I [[did]] go on for days about the [[dramatic]] acting, Charlie Cox is perfect as Tristan, [[Clair]] Daines is [[Awesome]] as Yvaine, and Robert [[Rai]] Nero [[practically]] steals the [[film]] as the [[Seriously]] in the [[Cupboard]] [[Hacking]] Captian [[Shakespearean]].

The pure joy brought about by the [[comedy]] which [[administered]] to be [[Laughter]] our [[Vocal]] [[fun]], [[Smarter]] [[satisfactorily]] to make the [[frst]] [[Fiona]] [[gaze]] like an 80's Sitcom, and [[mixing]] in [[completely]] with the rest of the [[cinematography]] [[merely]] would have made this a [[excellent]] [[film]].

[[Particular]] Effects were [[vicinity]] [[faultless]], [[authentic]] this was no LOTR or [[Stars]] Wars SF Extravaganza but where they were [[using]] they were [[accurately]] what was called for, not too much to [[entertain]] you from the [[movies]] itself and [[mix]] into the [[conte]] [[entirely]].

Then there is the story? What can I say. How [[routinely]] do you [[coming]] [[throughout]] a story [[consisting]] all of the [[classical]] fairytale formula [[elements]] that doesn't just come off as another [[inexpensive]] Princess [[Fiance]] knockoff. It [[runs]] to be Familiar and comfortable and [[even]] [[fully]] [[novel]] and refreshing at the same [[period]].

Any one of those [[items]] [[should]] have made this a good [[film]], all of them [[combining]] make it a great [[film]] but they pale in [[comparisons]] to the [[wealthy]] [[charmer]] world that those elements [[combining]] to bring to life well. Once again Neil Gaiman has [[doing]] it, he has [[propelled]] another [[sword]] into my [[heartland]] by [[establishing]] a world of [[chimera]] that is so [[wondrous]] and enchanting that I [[could]] do [[hardly]] anything to [[vive]] in it and only [[awarded]] me a short glimpse into it. I didn't [[wanna]] it to [[ending]], I [[desired]] to be sucked through a [[eddy]] to the land of Stormhold and get to [[cater]] Tristan and Yvaine in person, to [[voyage]] it's fields and valleys, Stroll through it's marketplaces and meet it's residents both dangerous and friendly and stay there forever. It is a feeling that I have noticed whenever I have read anything by Gaiman, The Sandman, American Gods, Coraline all left me with a deep sense of sadness when I finished reading them because it was over, I could not see anything more into the worlds he had created which seemed to be so much more vibrant and alive than the one I am forced to live in and watching Stardust was no different.

In the end I'm sure that Neil's writing and this movie won't have the same effect on everyone but trust me when I say you will not regret the time or money spent watching this movie, it is easily one of the top 5 movies I have ever seen and I can guarantee that anyone at all with a soul will at least like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 6055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is bad. I don't just mean 'bad' as in; "Oh the script was bad", or; "The acting in that scene was bad".....I mean bad as in someone should be held criminally accountable for foisting this unmitigated pile of steaming crud onto an unsuspecting public. I won't even dignify it with an explanation of the (Plot??) if I can refer to it as that.I can think of only one other occasion in some 40-odd years of movie watching that I have found need to vent my spleen on a movie. I mean, after all, no one goes out to intentionally make a bad movie, do they? Well, yes. Apparently they do...and the guilty man is writer/director Ulli Lommel. But the worst of it is that Blockbusters is actually renting this to their customers! Be advised. Leave this crap where it belongs. Stuck on the shelf, gathering dust. --------------------------------------------- Result 6056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This movie is ridiculous! That's exactly what I [[like]] about this piece of "[[Guilty]] [[Pleasure]]". It is easy to condemn this movie for not including Pat Priest and Butch Patrick, the original Marilyn and Eddie. But look at the year and do the math. Pat Priest and Butch Patrick had long outgrown their parts! Time does that to young stars. Yvonne De Carlo, who re-prised her role as Lili, was pushing the Big 6-0 (even though she still looked good and was still the perfect "Lili").

It's a shame that Yvonne De Carlo wasn't given a larger part. Still, it was good to see Fred Gwynne and Al Lewis in the roles that made them so famous! During the 2 seasons that THE MUNSTERS was on prime time, it was the Gwynne/Lewis chemistry that made the series such a success. The rest of the cast were supporting cast members, not to say that they weren't needed. They were! The TV series wouldn't had survived as long as it did without them. Given the choice between Butch Patrick or Happy Derman (the original "Eddie"), the choice was too easy. Yvonne De Carlo was also the better choice over Joan Marshall.

Though this movie doesn't measure up to the original TV series, it still measures up nicely and is one of the better "reunuin" TV specials that plagued the boob-tube during the late 1970s/early 1980s.

' This movie is ridiculous! That's exactly what I [[fond]] about this piece of "[[Guilt]] [[Gladness]]". It is easy to condemn this movie for not including Pat Priest and Butch Patrick, the original Marilyn and Eddie. But look at the year and do the math. Pat Priest and Butch Patrick had long outgrown their parts! Time does that to young stars. Yvonne De Carlo, who re-prised her role as Lili, was pushing the Big 6-0 (even though she still looked good and was still the perfect "Lili").

It's a shame that Yvonne De Carlo wasn't given a larger part. Still, it was good to see Fred Gwynne and Al Lewis in the roles that made them so famous! During the 2 seasons that THE MUNSTERS was on prime time, it was the Gwynne/Lewis chemistry that made the series such a success. The rest of the cast were supporting cast members, not to say that they weren't needed. They were! The TV series wouldn't had survived as long as it did without them. Given the choice between Butch Patrick or Happy Derman (the original "Eddie"), the choice was too easy. Yvonne De Carlo was also the better choice over Joan Marshall.

Though this movie doesn't measure up to the original TV series, it still measures up nicely and is one of the better "reunuin" TV specials that plagued the boob-tube during the late 1970s/early 1980s.

' --------------------------------------------- Result 6057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes there are worse movies out there. Most of them made for fun, on a shoe string budget, or as a t.v. movie of the week, but even if this was the 'movie of the week' it would rate no more than two stars. It is a poor movie about a serious subject featuring an abused woman who flees the king of the slime people in to the protective arms of the king of the wussy people. ( If this is an attempt to show that she doesn't need a man to protect her than wuss man is superfluouse to the film and ought not to be in it at all). It has no suspense, no character development, and an heroine that could be outsmarted by a rotton onion. ( I think she flushes her wedding ring on a boat with a self contained tank rather than just dropping it overboard in the ocean (where her body should be anyway) and after the husband finds her, demonstrating that she is a moron, she still makes childish assumptions that lead to almost getting her killed.) I am always amazed when I see the sort of generally high rating a movie like this gets and it makes me realize that Dr. Seuss still has a huge untapped market of people who would be challenged by his work. After I get done laughting at humanity I weep. --------------------------------------------- Result 6058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] is great, mind you - but only in the way it tells a very [[BAD]] story. Stella is so terribly crude, and never learns better. Her husband is incredibly snobby and small-minded. Neither ever learns better. Is this realistic? Somehow, Stella understands that her daughter is ashamed of her gaudy manners & dress, yet cannot understand that she just needs to tone it all down? I don't think so. Stella is a GOOD woman, and a VERY GOOD [[mother]]. Giving up herself, so her daughter can be associated with a bunch of bigoted snobs is [[disgusting]].

Much of what we see might have been [[normal]] for the times - people having a beer or two, enjoying a player piano, dancing - but it is [[made]] out to be some [[sort]] of [[moral]] inferiority. "I can't have our [[child]] living this way!" Spare me.

This [[story]] tells me one thing: that the Unwashed Working Class cannot ever [[hope]] to aspire to the heights of the Upper [[Classes]]. And that is [[simply]] a [[load]] of [[hogwash]]. This [[filmmaking]] is great, mind you - but only in the way it tells a very [[NAUGHTY]] story. Stella is so terribly crude, and never learns better. Her husband is incredibly snobby and small-minded. Neither ever learns better. Is this realistic? Somehow, Stella understands that her daughter is ashamed of her gaudy manners & dress, yet cannot understand that she just needs to tone it all down? I don't think so. Stella is a GOOD woman, and a VERY GOOD [[madre]]. Giving up herself, so her daughter can be associated with a bunch of bigoted snobs is [[appalling]].

Much of what we see might have been [[routine]] for the times - people having a beer or two, enjoying a player piano, dancing - but it is [[introduced]] out to be some [[kinds]] of [[ethical]] inferiority. "I can't have our [[kiddies]] living this way!" Spare me.

This [[conte]] tells me one thing: that the Unwashed Working Class cannot ever [[esperanza]] to aspire to the heights of the Upper [[Categories]]. And that is [[straightforward]] a [[loads]] of [[claptrap]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6059 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved October Sky. The thing I loved most had to be the music. It worked two ways: in the first hour of the film, it gives the viewer a time-frame. This is done by playing songs from the late Fifties. In the second hour, an instrumental score takes over. The music now fits the mood of the film perfectly.

I did not only enjoy the music, I also quite enjoyed the cast. Jake Gyllenhaal as Homer Hickam was especially a surprise for me. He gave off a first-class performance, as did Chris Owen (Quentin) and Chris Cooper (John Hickam).

I've seen this movie about escaping the life already laid out for you twice now, and both times I thoroughly enjoyed myself. --------------------------------------------- Result 6060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House may be the [[best]] Frank Capra/Preston Sturges movie neither man ever made! If you love Bringing Up Baby, The Philadelpia Story, The Thin Man, I Was A Male War Bride or It's a Wonderful Life - movies [[made]] with wit, taste and and the occasional tongue firmly panted in cheek, [[check]] this one out. Post WWII [[life]] is simply and idyllically portrayed.

Grant is at the absolute [[top]] of his form playing the city mouse venturing into the life of a country squire. [[Loy]] is adorable as his pre-NOW wife. The cast of supporting characters compares to You Can't Take It With You and contains an early bit by future Tarzan Lex Barker. Art Direction and Editing are way above par.

The movie never stoops to the low-rent, by-the-numbers venal slapstick of the later adaptation The Money Pit. Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House may be the [[better]] Frank Capra/Preston Sturges movie neither man ever made! If you love Bringing Up Baby, The Philadelpia Story, The Thin Man, I Was A Male War Bride or It's a Wonderful Life - movies [[introduced]] with wit, taste and and the occasional tongue firmly panted in cheek, [[audits]] this one out. Post WWII [[vida]] is simply and idyllically portrayed.

Grant is at the absolute [[superior]] of his form playing the city mouse venturing into the life of a country squire. [[Lui]] is adorable as his pre-NOW wife. The cast of supporting characters compares to You Can't Take It With You and contains an early bit by future Tarzan Lex Barker. Art Direction and Editing are way above par.

The movie never stoops to the low-rent, by-the-numbers venal slapstick of the later adaptation The Money Pit. --------------------------------------------- Result 6061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Considering that this movie had a serious and quite successful launching campaign, I would have expected something to be worth the fuzz...from the opening scene on (in which the two brothers "sensually" caress each other, laying naked in a bed) it goes rapidly downwards...nothing to get the attention, not a mind-catching thing in the whole plot, baaad baad acting (a few minor exceptions, but artificiality is at its best). Incest and lesbianism are promising themes, but the script analyses none of the two in depth ( mind that a possible excuse of the makers, saying that they aimed for a subtle movie would be hilarious, unless subtle and superficial mean the same thing...). The too curious viewers will not get any interesting scene...at this point, that could have saved some of the movie...so you can imagine how bad it is. Many other things could be said...but please watch the movie yourselves...I am an egoist and I would like as many people as possible to waste about 1 1/2h of their lives...like I did :( --------------------------------------------- Result 6062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Ah]], Lucio Fulci, rest in [[peace]]. This infamous [[Italian]] is most

famous for "Zombie," and the [[absolutely]] unwatchable "The

Psychic" and "Manhattan [[Baby]]." [[Well]], [[add]] this to the unwatchable

list.

The plot, as it were, concerns a nekkid [[woman]] who wears a gold

mask and a G-string. She [[wants]] the power of a [[young]] [[dubbed]]

[[stud]] who has a set of [[magic]] [[arrows]] and a bow. They are [[magic]]

because they [[glow]]. Arrow boy teams up with a [[guy]] in a [[bad]] wig,

and they [[spend]] most of the [[movie]] [[rescuing]] each other from [[flat]]

action sequences. [[In]] the [[end]], the nekkid chick is [[defeated]], but not

before taking the mask off and reminding me why I [[broke]] up with

my [[high]] [[school]] girlfriend.

Fulci bathes every shot in an orange [[glow]] and fills the screen with

[[smoke]]. [[Nothing]] like a smoky orange action [[sequence]] to make you

crave Sunny [[Delight]] and a cigarette. The special [[effects]] are

[[laughable]]. In one [[sequence]], our ambiguously gay duo are

attacked by [[dozens]] of arrows that are [[obviously]] pin scratches on

the film itself. The majority of the [[effects]] budget [[must]] have been

spent on the Fulci-licious gore, which consists [[entirely]] of spurting

wounds. Hey, we can all use a good spurting wound once in a

while, but when you get into spurting wound overkill, it gets boring.

I kept having to play with the brightness setting on my TV anyway

just to see what the heck was happening.

There is lots of talk of fulfilling omens and prophecies, so let me

do a little look into the future...if you find this movie and watch it,

you will regret it. The scene on the video box (by Media) does not

appear in the film in any context whatsoever. "Conquest" is a con

job. What MST3K could have done with this!

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, strong gore, female

nudity, brief male nudity, and mild sexual content.

[[Ahh]], Lucio Fulci, rest in [[serene]]. This infamous [[Italia]] is most

famous for "Zombie," and the [[completely]] unwatchable "The

Psychic" and "Manhattan [[Babe]]." [[Good]], [[summing]] this to the unwatchable

list.

The plot, as it were, concerns a nekkid [[femme]] who wears a gold

mask and a G-string. She [[wanna]] the power of a [[youthful]] [[nicknamed]]

[[stallion]] who has a set of [[quadrant]] [[arrow]] and a bow. They are [[magical]]

because they [[shine]]. Arrow boy teams up with a [[buddy]] in a [[naughty]] wig,

and they [[spent]] most of the [[cinematography]] [[saved]] each other from [[apartment]]

action sequences. [[Across]] the [[terminates]], the nekkid chick is [[overpowered]], but not

before taking the mask off and reminding me why I [[cracked]] up with

my [[highest]] [[tuition]] girlfriend.

Fulci bathes every shot in an orange [[shine]] and fills the screen with

[[smoking]]. [[Nothin]] like a smoky orange action [[sequences]] to make you

crave Sunny [[Pleasure]] and a cigarette. The special [[influences]] are

[[ludicrous]]. In one [[sequences]], our ambiguously gay duo are

attacked by [[tens]] of arrows that are [[apparently]] pin scratches on

the film itself. The majority of the [[influence]] budget [[ought]] have been

spent on the Fulci-licious gore, which consists [[absolutely]] of spurting

wounds. Hey, we can all use a good spurting wound once in a

while, but when you get into spurting wound overkill, it gets boring.

I kept having to play with the brightness setting on my TV anyway

just to see what the heck was happening.

There is lots of talk of fulfilling omens and prophecies, so let me

do a little look into the future...if you find this movie and watch it,

you will regret it. The scene on the video box (by Media) does not

appear in the film in any context whatsoever. "Conquest" is a con

job. What MST3K could have done with this!

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, strong gore, female

nudity, brief male nudity, and mild sexual content.

--------------------------------------------- Result 6063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't even know where to begin on this one. "It's all about the family." That has to be the worst line of dialogue ever heard in a "horror" movie, although this couldn't be a horror movie even if it tried!!! Ugh!!! And I know that Owen Wilson is a better actor. He needs to stop playing the token guy who dies in every action movie (Anaconda, Armageddon). After all, the man did co-write "Bottle Rocket" and "Rushmore." He does have some talent. Also, Lily Taylor should stick to indie films. She has no place here. Finally, Catherine Zeta-Jones should become a porn star. There's no room in legitimate acting for her. I'm serious. One of the worst movies I've ever seen, EVER. --------------------------------------------- Result 6064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Sure, the plot isn't Oldboy. It seems the only "great" movies these days are amazingly shocking or high-budget/hyped in some way.

Spin Kick is a [[drama]]/[[comedy]] about a group of people who decide to pour their hearts into tae kwon do. [[Regardless]] of what you expect from this film, you're guaranteed to feel [[moved]] by the work, pain, and expectations that the [[characters]] force themselves to experience. [[Though]] [[comedic]] at times, [[many]] moments and [[characters]] are rendered [[beautifully]]: there's the [[old]] [[guard]] [[character]] who takes [[things]] too seriously, the hoodlum turned good-guy who just [[wants]] a [[second]] [[chance]] at life, the meek team-substitute who would [[die]] [[happy]] if he just won once in his [[life]], and [[many]] other well-rounded [[characters]] with their own problems-- but most importantly, their own their hopes and [[dreams]]. While the plot and the [[goals]] of the [[movie]] are [[simple]], these aspects of the movie merely [[highlight]] the [[development]] of the characters as they overcome their personal and inter-personal struggles.

In short, this film will [[leave]] you feeling fresh, determined, and [[satisfied]]. Sure, the plot isn't Oldboy. It seems the only "great" movies these days are amazingly shocking or high-budget/hyped in some way.

Spin Kick is a [[teatro]]/[[comedian]] about a group of people who decide to pour their hearts into tae kwon do. [[Independently]] of what you expect from this film, you're guaranteed to feel [[shifted]] by the work, pain, and expectations that the [[trait]] force themselves to experience. [[Nevertheless]] [[slapstick]] at times, [[several]] moments and [[attribute]] are rendered [[stunningly]]: there's the [[elderly]] [[guards]] [[nature]] who takes [[items]] too seriously, the hoodlum turned good-guy who just [[want]] a [[secondly]] [[possibilities]] at life, the meek team-substitute who would [[dead]] [[delighted]] if he just won once in his [[lifetime]], and [[multiple]] other well-rounded [[attribute]] with their own problems-- but most importantly, their own their hopes and [[nightmares]]. While the plot and the [[purposes]] of the [[film]] are [[mere]], these aspects of the movie merely [[insisted]] the [[developments]] of the characters as they overcome their personal and inter-personal struggles.

In short, this film will [[walkout]] you feeling fresh, determined, and [[persuaded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6065 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is about as underrated as Police Acadmey Mission to Moscow. This movie is never funny. It's maybe the worst comedy spoof ever made. Very boring,and dumb beyond belief. For those people that think this movie is underrated god help you. I give this movie * out of ****

--------------------------------------------- Result 6066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Honestly,the [[concept]] behind "Masters of [[Horror]]" had something [[going]] for it. Big-time horror directors that are now left aside by the industry being [[given]] a [[chance]] to direct [[horror]] again, I was all for it from the start. That is, until I [[watched]] some episodes... Oh boy, it's really [[bad]] TV. Not only does it seem like the directors are being given very little budgets to direct their skits, but there seems to be guidelines as well, like shooting in HD for example. To make a long story short, it's bad both for artistic and reasons financial reasons. I cannot help but compare to the "Tales From The Crypt", and the M.o.H. episodes really don't stand the comparison. TFTC was good, MOH is bad; according to me here are a few keys to explain it: TFTC was shorter (around 25 minutes for each episode) than MOH (50 minutes per episode), I believe it allowed denser screenplays, with good ideas reoccurring more often, better overview of an episode, less chances to let the plot be confusing or boring. Duration might have been also the reason why the budget was better spent on TFTC: directors got to have [[REAL]] film music composers (composers on MOH are if inexistent, very bad), [[REAL]] actors (whereas on MOH it's nothing but unknown actor after unknown actor!), REAL directors of photography and, it can help sometimes, REAL film cameras (while MOH is shot on HD cameras with very [[wrongly]] chosen lens-pieces), the result of which being that the episodes of TFTC looked and felt "cinematographic" in the sense that there was real actors being casted, ranging from Michael J. Fox to Tim Roth to Kyle McLachlan to Kirk Douglas, but there were also film composers behind it, of the range of Alan Silvestri, great directors of photography like Dean Cundey, high-end screenplay writers, and in that sense each "Tale" was a little movie of its own true kind. Compared to TFTC, the "Masters of Horrors" is quite a lame approach to TV horror. It's very hard to stand looking at it if your standards regarding cinematography are just a little above average, because it looks the same as any ugly TV serial, if not worse. It gets boring and even annoying incredibly fast, within the first 10 minutes usually. The actors are never-heard before wannabes (except for Fairuza Balk, Robert Englund, Angela Bettis and a few, but even there, they are the only famous actors of their episodes). The director base for MoH was good in the beginning, but it's getting worst and worst with every episode: now if even the directors are unknown to the world, what remains? Nothing! And it's funny how they are starting to have complete unknown directors while they haven't even had, say, Stan Winston, Dick Maas, William Lustig, Sam Raimi, Eric Red, Robert Harmon, William Friedkin, Jim Muro, Stuart Gordon, Russell Mulcahy... If even "Masters of Horror" cannot bring dead directors back to life, who will? Maybe a rerun of Tales from the Crypt will. Honestly,the [[conception]] behind "Masters of [[Terror]]" had something [[go]] for it. Big-time horror directors that are now left aside by the industry being [[gave]] a [[chances]] to direct [[terror]] again, I was all for it from the start. That is, until I [[seen]] some episodes... Oh boy, it's really [[unfavourable]] TV. Not only does it seem like the directors are being given very little budgets to direct their skits, but there seems to be guidelines as well, like shooting in HD for example. To make a long story short, it's bad both for artistic and reasons financial reasons. I cannot help but compare to the "Tales From The Crypt", and the M.o.H. episodes really don't stand the comparison. TFTC was good, MOH is bad; according to me here are a few keys to explain it: TFTC was shorter (around 25 minutes for each episode) than MOH (50 minutes per episode), I believe it allowed denser screenplays, with good ideas reoccurring more often, better overview of an episode, less chances to let the plot be confusing or boring. Duration might have been also the reason why the budget was better spent on TFTC: directors got to have [[VERITABLE]] film music composers (composers on MOH are if inexistent, very bad), [[VERITABLE]] actors (whereas on MOH it's nothing but unknown actor after unknown actor!), REAL directors of photography and, it can help sometimes, REAL film cameras (while MOH is shot on HD cameras with very [[wrongfully]] chosen lens-pieces), the result of which being that the episodes of TFTC looked and felt "cinematographic" in the sense that there was real actors being casted, ranging from Michael J. Fox to Tim Roth to Kyle McLachlan to Kirk Douglas, but there were also film composers behind it, of the range of Alan Silvestri, great directors of photography like Dean Cundey, high-end screenplay writers, and in that sense each "Tale" was a little movie of its own true kind. Compared to TFTC, the "Masters of Horrors" is quite a lame approach to TV horror. It's very hard to stand looking at it if your standards regarding cinematography are just a little above average, because it looks the same as any ugly TV serial, if not worse. It gets boring and even annoying incredibly fast, within the first 10 minutes usually. The actors are never-heard before wannabes (except for Fairuza Balk, Robert Englund, Angela Bettis and a few, but even there, they are the only famous actors of their episodes). The director base for MoH was good in the beginning, but it's getting worst and worst with every episode: now if even the directors are unknown to the world, what remains? Nothing! And it's funny how they are starting to have complete unknown directors while they haven't even had, say, Stan Winston, Dick Maas, William Lustig, Sam Raimi, Eric Red, Robert Harmon, William Friedkin, Jim Muro, Stuart Gordon, Russell Mulcahy... If even "Masters of Horror" cannot bring dead directors back to life, who will? Maybe a rerun of Tales from the Crypt will. --------------------------------------------- Result 6067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A warm, sweet and remarkably charming film about two antagonistic workers in the same shop (James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan) who are carrying on a romance via mailbox without either of them knowing it. The key to this film's success is that Ernst Lubitsch keeps any syrupy sentimentality absent and calls on his actors to give low-key, unfussy performances. As a result, you fall in love with virtually all of them.

There's a strong undercurrent of melancholy running through this film which I appreciated. Loneliness is a major theme, most obviously represented in the character of the shop's owner and manager, played wonderfully by Frank Morgan. He discovers that he's being cuckolded by his wife, and realizes that the successful life he's created for himself isn't enough to keep him from feeling lonely when he doesn't have a partner to share it. This makes the timid romance between Stewart and Sullavan all the more poignant, because they're both reaching out to this unseen other, who each thinks of as a soulmate before they've even met. Of course we know everything will turn out right in the end, but the movie doesn't let you forget the dismal feeling either of them would feel if they found that the reality didn't live up to the fantasy.

Lubitsch fills his movie out with a crackerjack cast that has boatloads of chemistry. The little group of shop employees refers to itself throughout the movie as a little family, and that's exactly how it feels to us as well.

This is a wonderful, unsung romance.

Grade: A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 6068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] [[Watching]] this [[stinker]] constitutes cruel and unusal [[punishment]] at the hands of Sandler. Truly a slow and painful death.

'[[Bought]] the DVD in the $5.88 bin at Wal Mart. But the thought that keeps echoing in my head is, "How can I get my money back?"

The most unforgivable thing about the [[movie]] is that the boat JUST DOES NOT SINK!

[[Best]] constructive [[suggestion]]: [[Mystery]] [[Comedy]] [[Theatre]]. You know that show on the SciFi Channel in which some [[guy]] and his muppet-machines spoof the most unwatchable horror flicks (Mystery Science Theatre). IMMEDIATELY, spin off a comedy program and feature this flick. Without a good humorous spoof of this train [[wreck]], I fear that viewers may actually begin following Sandler with ice picks and chainsaws.

[[Staring]] this [[tosser]] constitutes cruel and unusal [[penalties]] at the hands of Sandler. Truly a slow and painful death.

'[[Purchasing]] the DVD in the $5.88 bin at Wal Mart. But the thought that keeps echoing in my head is, "How can I get my money back?"

The most unforgivable thing about the [[filmmaking]] is that the boat JUST DOES NOT SINK!

[[Optimum]] constructive [[recommendations]]: [[Conundrum]] [[Travesty]] [[Cinema]]. You know that show on the SciFi Channel in which some [[mec]] and his muppet-machines spoof the most unwatchable horror flicks (Mystery Science Theatre). IMMEDIATELY, spin off a comedy program and feature this flick. Without a good humorous spoof of this train [[shipwreck]], I fear that viewers may actually begin following Sandler with ice picks and chainsaws.

--------------------------------------------- Result 6069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] STAR [[RATING]]: ***** [[Saturday]] [[Night]] **** [[Friday]] [[Night]] *** Friday Morning ** [[Sunday]] Night * [[Monday]] Morning

McBain ([[played]] by Gary Busey, before the name became synonymous with the [[character]] in The Simpsons) is a (typically) unorthodox cop who [[gets]] [[results]] but winds his superiors up something [[rotten]]. Avoiding the cliché of his [[partner]] being killed at the beginning of the film, the plot [[instead]] takes a different turn and sees him assigned to travel to Mexico where a top secret American super tank with incredible firepower and imaging [[capabilities]] has been [[smuggled]] through, only to be taken hostage, along with the crew, by a gang of terrorists.

This [[cheap]] looking ([[even]] by 80s [[standards]]), [[boring]] little action film was a bizarre career move for Gary Busey after making an [[impression]] as the flame haired villain Mr Joshua in Lethal [[Weapon]]. He just goes through the motions with his cardboard character here, [[edgy]] and [[zany]] as ever (with 'butthorn' being his [[trademark]] put down for the bad guys), but without the material to back him up. Henry Silva has [[presence]] as a screen villain, but he's [[totally]] miscast here as an Arab leader (in a red [[beret]]!) and the [[awful]] [[script]] gives him some really clunky lines of dull [[dialogue]] that make his performance come off as laughably wooden. He's just one of a [[host]] of action film character [[actors]], including L.Q. Jones and Lincoln Kilpatrick, who pop up but fail to add [[anything]] to the mix. After a dull first half without much [[exciting]] [[action]], things do [[pick]] up a [[bit]] at the end, but it's too little too [[late]] and none of it manages the task of being any [[fun]]. * STAR [[RATINGS]]: ***** [[Saturdays]] [[Overnight]] **** [[Fridays]] [[Nightly]] *** Friday Morning ** [[Sundays]] Night * [[Mondays]] Morning

McBain ([[served]] by Gary Busey, before the name became synonymous with the [[characteristics]] in The Simpsons) is a (typically) unorthodox cop who [[got]] [[findings]] but winds his superiors up something [[decadent]]. Avoiding the cliché of his [[partners]] being killed at the beginning of the film, the plot [[conversely]] takes a different turn and sees him assigned to travel to Mexico where a top secret American super tank with incredible firepower and imaging [[competence]] has been [[contraband]] through, only to be taken hostage, along with the crew, by a gang of terrorists.

This [[cheaper]] looking ([[yet]] by 80s [[norms]]), [[dull]] little action film was a bizarre career move for Gary Busey after making an [[feeling]] as the flame haired villain Mr Joshua in Lethal [[Firearm]]. He just goes through the motions with his cardboard character here, [[cranky]] and [[madcap]] as ever (with 'butthorn' being his [[brand]] put down for the bad guys), but without the material to back him up. Henry Silva has [[attendance]] as a screen villain, but he's [[entirely]] miscast here as an Arab leader (in a red [[hat]]!) and the [[gruesome]] [[hyphen]] gives him some really clunky lines of dull [[discussions]] that make his performance come off as laughably wooden. He's just one of a [[reception]] of action film character [[protagonists]], including L.Q. Jones and Lincoln Kilpatrick, who pop up but fail to add [[algo]] to the mix. After a dull first half without much [[exhilarating]] [[actions]], things do [[picks]] up a [[bite]] at the end, but it's too little too [[belated]] and none of it manages the task of being any [[entertaining]]. * --------------------------------------------- Result 6070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not to be confused with the above average supernatural thriller "The Sentinel". The Sentinel was a big bore of a movie for me, not delivering the consistent action, a couple of critics promised on the back. To me it seemed like everyone was Halfassing it, and only there to make some quick cash, because this felt very much like a made for TV film. The Sentinel is a rehash of several better films, like "In The Line Of Fire" this does not have any originality in it, and watching Michael Douglas run around, felt kinda silly in my opinion. The Main problem besides it's unoriginality, had to be the poor pace. I often got distracted while trying to view this movie, while looking how much run time was left, more then once. Not only the miscasting with Eva Longoria, who couldn't convince worth a lick.

Performances. Michael Douglas is usually a dependable actor, here is obviously going through the motions. He does not convince as a man on a run, or a secret agent. His chemistry with Bassinger, was also off. I'm a big fan of Kiefer Sutherland, but here he is only OK, nothing more then that. He tries to come across as a gruff, but managed to be more bland then anything else, and to be honest, he didn't seem that interested. Eva Longoria Parker is pretty mediocre. She does not convince in her role, and was pure eye candy. Kim Basinger is pretty terrible as the 1st lady. She looks bored to tears, and her role is a throw away, more then anything else. Martin Donovan has a big part in the end, but not enough to matter for me.

Bottom line. The Sentinel is yet, another political thriller, that bored me to tears. It's too old, too tired, and most importantly the lack of effort sucked. Not recommended.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 6071 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[annoying]] [[mouse]] and lullaby really got to me and really had nothing to do with the story...It's something I would have done my 1st year in film school. Very sad. [[Additionally]], the story just seemed to drag on for no [[apparent]] reason...there were too many things just thrown in there that had nothing to do with the story, which makes me feel that the [[creative]] team didn't really know what they were doing, or just that it should have been shorter...which [[would]] have been a blessing, not a crime. As I have just watched all of the episodes up to this point over the past week...I'd have to say that this was by far the [[worst]], and I just wanted to warn others not to start with this one. The [[irksome]] [[smile]] and lullaby really got to me and really had nothing to do with the story...It's something I would have done my 1st year in film school. Very sad. [[Similarly]], the story just seemed to drag on for no [[overt]] reason...there were too many things just thrown in there that had nothing to do with the story, which makes me feel that the [[imaginative]] team didn't really know what they were doing, or just that it should have been shorter...which [[could]] have been a blessing, not a crime. As I have just watched all of the episodes up to this point over the past week...I'd have to say that this was by far the [[gravest]], and I just wanted to warn others not to start with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 6072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Story about four teenage girls growing up in California. Jeanie (Jodie Foster) is the most level-headed of the bunch--but wants to move out of her house where she lives with her divorced mother (Sally Kellerman). Annie (Cherie Currie) is addicted to drugs, alcohol and bad boys and is beaten up by her father. Madge (Marilyn Kagan) has overprotective parents. Deirde (Kandice Stroh) thinks she's more mature than the rest of them.

This is nothing new from what we've seen plenty of times before--but this one has one big difference--it's accurate. I graduated from high school in 1980 (when I first saw the film) and I was surprised at how realistic it was. They got the dialogue, clothes and attitudes down completely right. Even the main song of the movie ("On the Radio" by Donna Summer) was a big hit before this came out. This film hit me harder than any other teen film of the time because I could understand and relate to the characters. I knew girls in high school who were just like this! The film is (of course) dated but it captures a time we will never see again.

The acting is good on all counts with Foster giving the best performance. The relationship between her and Kellerman (who was excellent) was realistic and well-done. Even Scott Baio (who has a small role as a friend of the girls) more or less realistically played a teen boy.

A very good movie--essential viewing if you came of age in 1980. The film has a deserved R rating (plenty of drug use and swearing) but should be seen by all teens. I give it a 8. --------------------------------------------- Result 6073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] My 7-year-old [[daughter]] loved it, as [[Disney]] execs crassly [[calculated]] that she [[would]]. That's the [[problem]] with "Air Buddies." It's a strictly by-the-numbers children's film filled with [[carefully]] calculated cuteness, a [[couple]] politically [[correct]] [[morals]], and enough [[potty]] humor to avoid the dreaded G rating. As a parent, or even as a 10-year-old, you've seen it all before, and [[done]] better before. [[Think]] "101 Dalmatians Meets Home Alone" and you get the general idea. I'm of the opinion that a good children's story is a good story, [[period]]. "Air [[Buddies]]," which is about as original as recycled paper, fails to meet that standard. It isn't the [[worst]] [[video]] your child could watch, but there are megatons of better ones. My 7-year-old [[giri]] loved it, as [[Disneyland]] execs crassly [[calculating]] that she [[should]]. That's the [[difficulty]] with "Air Buddies." It's a strictly by-the-numbers children's film filled with [[meticulously]] calculated cuteness, a [[matches]] politically [[rightness]] [[morale]], and enough [[latrine]] humor to avoid the dreaded G rating. As a parent, or even as a 10-year-old, you've seen it all before, and [[played]] better before. [[Believe]] "101 Dalmatians Meets Home Alone" and you get the general idea. I'm of the opinion that a good children's story is a good story, [[timeline]]. "Air [[Pals]]," which is about as original as recycled paper, fails to meet that standard. It isn't the [[meanest]] [[videos]] your child could watch, but there are megatons of better ones. --------------------------------------------- Result 6074 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Every once in a while I will rent an action/adventure film just as a way to relax and [[occupy]] my mind with [[nothing]] [[important]]. This is why I own a [[copy]] of Charlie's Angels (2000) - not a quality film, but it makes me laugh and allows me to unwind for a while. One of these [[days]] I will probably buy [[copies]] of The Princess Bride and a few Monty Python movies for much the same reason.

[[In]] any [[case]], I rented this film because I wanted to be [[entertained]] without being challenged. For the most part, I got what I [[wanted]]. The plot was something along the lines of a poorly [[written]] Xena episode, and the Kathy Long's acting was very community theater (not bad for a professional kick boxer and amateur actress). There were a few high points on the part of the cyborgs. Somehow they managed to get some pretty good actors to play the bad guys - unfortunately, most of them die pretty darned quick.

Like most martial arts films, the further you get into the movie, the more emphasis there is on action, and the plot (which wasn't strong to begin with) deteriorates almost as quickly as the acting. However, the more Kathy Long fights, the more time the director devotes to her backside. By the end of the movie I was seriously considering watching it a second time just to count the number of times Kathy Long's tight red shorts were center screen.

Unfortunately, there just wasn't enough meat to this film to make satisfying curiosity worth seeing the film a second time. If you are a hard core Xena fan in need of something to wile away a few hours - by all means, go to the grocery store and spend the .50 cents on the rental. There are some strong similarities between the show and this movie.

Just don't expect anything more than to be mildly amused for a few hours.

Unless, of course, you happen to like Kathy Long's derrière. THEN you might want to purchase a copy. Every once in a while I will rent an action/adventure film just as a way to relax and [[occupying]] my mind with [[anything]] [[critical]]. This is why I own a [[copied]] of Charlie's Angels (2000) - not a quality film, but it makes me laugh and allows me to unwind for a while. One of these [[jours]] I will probably buy [[copy]] of The Princess Bride and a few Monty Python movies for much the same reason.

[[Across]] any [[lawsuit]], I rented this film because I wanted to be [[distracted]] without being challenged. For the most part, I got what I [[wished]]. The plot was something along the lines of a poorly [[wrote]] Xena episode, and the Kathy Long's acting was very community theater (not bad for a professional kick boxer and amateur actress). There were a few high points on the part of the cyborgs. Somehow they managed to get some pretty good actors to play the bad guys - unfortunately, most of them die pretty darned quick.

Like most martial arts films, the further you get into the movie, the more emphasis there is on action, and the plot (which wasn't strong to begin with) deteriorates almost as quickly as the acting. However, the more Kathy Long fights, the more time the director devotes to her backside. By the end of the movie I was seriously considering watching it a second time just to count the number of times Kathy Long's tight red shorts were center screen.

Unfortunately, there just wasn't enough meat to this film to make satisfying curiosity worth seeing the film a second time. If you are a hard core Xena fan in need of something to wile away a few hours - by all means, go to the grocery store and spend the .50 cents on the rental. There are some strong similarities between the show and this movie.

Just don't expect anything more than to be mildly amused for a few hours.

Unless, of course, you happen to like Kathy Long's derrière. THEN you might want to purchase a copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 6075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I went looking for this movie in typical fan obsession. I just wanted to check it out. I was not expecting much of anything. After all, a musician, an actor and a screenplay writer? Not possible for so much talent to reside in one person. Right??

Wrong!! Obsession aside, it quickly became one of my favorites! The story line and characters are not lost in the typical hyped up Hollywood special effects. The story plucks at your emotions and pulls you along. As the credits roll by, you suddenly realize you were glued until the end.

At times, the acting seems a little over the top. I do, however, believe it's done with comedic intent and very fitting of the character. Otherwise, I wouldn't have expected the level of acting witnessed.

It's worth seeing more than once. I find myself laughing hysterically or gasping unexpectedly over something I either missed or forgot about the first time or two around.

I completely recommend this movie. Feel free to go in with your doubts, but I'm sure it will find a place on your shelf. --------------------------------------------- Result 6076 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Previously, I wrote that I loved "[[Titanic]]", cried at its ending (many times over), and I'm a guy in his 60's. I also wondered about why this [[great]] movie, which won so many awards and was applauded by so many critics, was given only a 7.0 rating by imdb.com users.

Well, I looked at the breakdown of the user ratings. While 29.0% of all votes gave it a 10 rating, 10.7% gave it a 1 rating. These 10.7% of these irrational imdb users, in effect, pulled the overall rating down to 7.0.

In my previous comments, I blamed this very unusual voting pattern (a sudden surge in 1 ratings, with a high 10 rating, dropping only gradually and then suddenly reversing course and jumping at the 1 rating level) on only one thing: hatred for Leonardo DiCaprio. Believe me, I've tuned into enough chat rooms to see the banter by young people (young men, mostly), who defame him left and right. They absolutely hate the man, and they will have no part in giving him any credit in "Titanic". (To answer one other user: I am NOT talking about someone who just really doesn't like the movie that much, and gave it a 5 or a 6, etc. Everyone has, and is entitled to, his/her own taste. But no one can convince me that the imdb rating of only 7.0 overall for "Titanic", pulled to that level by an inordinate number of ridiculous 1 ratings, is a fair reflection of the overall motion picture.)

Let me demonstrate my point by comparing the imdb user voting pattern of "Titanic" to 5 randomly chosen box office and critical "bombs" (there are many more, but these 5 will prove my point). "Heaven's Gate" (1980) was pulled from the theaters quickly after a very poor box office showing, and imdb voters' ratings were: 23.2% 10 ratings and 9.2% 1 ratings (overall rating of 6.1). "Big Top Pee-wee" (1988) got 4.3% 10 ratings and 9.9% 1 ratings (overall rating of 4.5). "Cat People" (1982) got 6.1% 10 ratings and 2.6% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.8). "Blind Date" (1987) got 3.0% 10 ratings and 2.8% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.3). "Jumpin' Jack Flash" (1986) got 4.4% 10 ratings and 3.7% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.2). WHAT DO ALL OF THESE FILMS HAVE IN COMMON WITH "TITANIC"? ALL OF THE PERCENTAGES OF THEIR 1 RATINGS ARE LOWER !!!! THAN "TITANIC", AND NONE OF THESE STINKERS EVER WAS NOMINATED FOR A SINGLE AWARD. Again, "Titanic" got 10.7% 1 ratings! Compare that to the other 5 movies I just mentioned.

Can there be any explanation other than the hatred of Leo factor?

Previously, I wrote that I loved "[[Herculean]]", cried at its ending (many times over), and I'm a guy in his 60's. I also wondered about why this [[wondrous]] movie, which won so many awards and was applauded by so many critics, was given only a 7.0 rating by imdb.com users.

Well, I looked at the breakdown of the user ratings. While 29.0% of all votes gave it a 10 rating, 10.7% gave it a 1 rating. These 10.7% of these irrational imdb users, in effect, pulled the overall rating down to 7.0.

In my previous comments, I blamed this very unusual voting pattern (a sudden surge in 1 ratings, with a high 10 rating, dropping only gradually and then suddenly reversing course and jumping at the 1 rating level) on only one thing: hatred for Leonardo DiCaprio. Believe me, I've tuned into enough chat rooms to see the banter by young people (young men, mostly), who defame him left and right. They absolutely hate the man, and they will have no part in giving him any credit in "Titanic". (To answer one other user: I am NOT talking about someone who just really doesn't like the movie that much, and gave it a 5 or a 6, etc. Everyone has, and is entitled to, his/her own taste. But no one can convince me that the imdb rating of only 7.0 overall for "Titanic", pulled to that level by an inordinate number of ridiculous 1 ratings, is a fair reflection of the overall motion picture.)

Let me demonstrate my point by comparing the imdb user voting pattern of "Titanic" to 5 randomly chosen box office and critical "bombs" (there are many more, but these 5 will prove my point). "Heaven's Gate" (1980) was pulled from the theaters quickly after a very poor box office showing, and imdb voters' ratings were: 23.2% 10 ratings and 9.2% 1 ratings (overall rating of 6.1). "Big Top Pee-wee" (1988) got 4.3% 10 ratings and 9.9% 1 ratings (overall rating of 4.5). "Cat People" (1982) got 6.1% 10 ratings and 2.6% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.8). "Blind Date" (1987) got 3.0% 10 ratings and 2.8% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.3). "Jumpin' Jack Flash" (1986) got 4.4% 10 ratings and 3.7% 1 ratings (overall rating of 5.2). WHAT DO ALL OF THESE FILMS HAVE IN COMMON WITH "TITANIC"? ALL OF THE PERCENTAGES OF THEIR 1 RATINGS ARE LOWER !!!! THAN "TITANIC", AND NONE OF THESE STINKERS EVER WAS NOMINATED FOR A SINGLE AWARD. Again, "Titanic" got 10.7% 1 ratings! Compare that to the other 5 movies I just mentioned.

Can there be any explanation other than the hatred of Leo factor?

--------------------------------------------- Result 6077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] An update of the skits and [[jokes]] you [[would]] have seen on a Burlesque [[stage]] in the [[first]] half of the 20th Century. It's a [[string]] of several jokes [[acted]] out. Some of them you could tell your [[Grandmother]], some of them not, but it's a fairly safe bet she's [[heard]] them all before. For what it [[tries]] to be, it's not too bad. Before you [[rent]] it, remember that it's an older [[style]] of [[entertainment]] and has more [[value]] as history than as [[comedy]] or titillation. [[Robin]] [[Williams]] has a couple of bits, but he's interchangeable with the other players. An update of the skits and [[pleasantries]] you [[should]] have seen on a Burlesque [[phase]] in the [[fiirst]] half of the 20th Century. It's a [[strings]] of several jokes [[worked]] out. Some of them you could tell your [[Grandmom]], some of them not, but it's a fairly safe bet she's [[audition]] them all before. For what it [[attempted]] to be, it's not too bad. Before you [[tenancy]] it, remember that it's an older [[stylistic]] of [[recreational]] and has more [[values]] as history than as [[charade]] or titillation. [[Rubin]] [[William]] has a couple of bits, but he's interchangeable with the other players. --------------------------------------------- Result 6078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen the movie only recently, although it appeared in 2001. I hoped to see an entertaining movie, but let me tell you, Princess Blade is nothing compared to Azumi. The "princess" is not very talkative, as you may have noticed... She reminded me of Jean Claude Van Damme, who only stared to make his point, then beat the crap out of the opponents. During the entire movie, I waited to hear at least a confession about what she liked, why was she fighting, who did she love and trust. I waited in vain. Crappy movie. Crappy dialog. Don't watch it unless you want to be bored out of your minds! It's so bad, that in the end I was wondering how I managed not to scream in frustration 1 and a half hour. Approximately. I give a 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 6079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My daughter, her friends and I have watched this movie literally dozens of times. I bought it twice and some little girlfriends absconded with it. Subsequently, I rented it so very many times. It just never gets old!!! Blockbuster doesn't even have it in their listings anymore and I have tried to buy, find, rent it for over 5 years. Without a doubt, this was and is my most favourite movie of my daughter's childhood...it has it all! We laughed, we cried, we discussed real life and how hard some children have it in the world. There was nothing pretend about this movie. We related to every second and every line Bill! Thanks a million for restoring our faith in human nature. Sincerely, Shelleen and Kailin Vandermey. Craven, Saskatchewan. CANADA,eh!!! :-)

August '07 update:

Who are we to judge if a rich woman falls in love with a poor man; or a man who has love chooses to raise a child who is not his own. It may not be my or your life. It is not only believable, it happens every day. Thank God! Keeps my faith in human nature alive!!! celebrate!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 6080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full marks for the content of this film, as a Brit I was not aware that there was segregation in the US Navy during WWII. A very brave attempt to bring this fact to the world. However, the movie is pathetic, direction is non existent, the acting is wooden and the script is just one cliché after another. I can honestly say that this is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I sat and cringed from the start until the end at the very poor way that this had been put together. This could have been a great movie, the story for many of us outside of the US was new, unique and also interesting. The sad fact of the matter is the way that it was put together. It is unfortunate that a true story like this, which could have changed people's attitudes, has been squandered on a low budget, badly directed movie. I only hope that some time in the future, one of the major studios will take this theme and do it justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 6081 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Just saw this at the 2003 Vancouver International Film Festival and it was [[funny]] as hell and a bit [[surreal]]. Takes place in Toronto, where these two losers live in this run-down house in the middle of a freeway system. David Hewlett (PIN, CUBE, CYPHER) and Andrew Miller (CUBE) are just [[great]] as the two losers who wish the world would just go away. The acting, dialogue and writing are very good, and the whole film looks great for such a low-budget flick. Director/Writer Vincenzo Natali was in [[attendance]] at this screening, and he seemed so [[intelligent]] and down-to-earth. This guy is so [[inventive]] with these [[great]] [[stories]] that [[work]] so well within [[small]] budgets, it [[puts]] [[big]] budget Hollywood crap to [[shame]]! Just saw this at the 2003 Vancouver International Film Festival and it was [[comical]] as hell and a bit [[unreal]]. Takes place in Toronto, where these two losers live in this run-down house in the middle of a freeway system. David Hewlett (PIN, CUBE, CYPHER) and Andrew Miller (CUBE) are just [[wondrous]] as the two losers who wish the world would just go away. The acting, dialogue and writing are very good, and the whole film looks great for such a low-budget flick. Director/Writer Vincenzo Natali was in [[involvement]] at this screening, and he seemed so [[termite]] and down-to-earth. This guy is so [[creative]] with these [[large]] [[histories]] that [[collaborating]] so well within [[petite]] budgets, it [[poses]] [[massive]] budget Hollywood crap to [[shaming]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 6082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I first [[heard]] about this [[film]] about 20 years ago when I was a [[kid]] in grade school(!), it just so happened that I was thumbing through the encyclopedias in the classroom one day, and under the [[entry]] for [[movies]] (or [[cinema]], I don't [[remember]]), were [[several]] stills for [[different]] [[movies]] from mainstream to experimental, and one of them [[shown]] on the page was a [[still]] for OffOn. It [[really]] [[intrigued]] me, [[since]] it stood out the most on the [[page]] (it was a [[still]] from the [[film]] of the scene with the [[eye]] with other [[elements]] superimposed over it).

[[About]] 18 or so years [[later]], the public library here where I [[live]] had available for checkout the [[whole]] 4-DVD set of "Treasures of [[American]] [[Film]] Archives" [[released]] by the National [[Film]] [[Preservation]] Foundation. So when I was reading the [[notes]] on the DVD [[cases]] for the set, I was [[quite]] [[pleasantly]] surprised to [[see]] that OffOn was on one of the [[discs]]. After all these years, I [[could]] [[finally]] [[see]] the [[film]]! After viewing it, it [[slightly]] wasn't was I was [[expecting]] it to be (it [[tended]] to be a more organic-looking [[film]], not that that's a [[bad]] thing, but I was [[expecting]] it to have a more [[electronic]] [[aesthetic]]), but it was [[still]] an [[impressive]] film, IMHO, [[considering]] the [[techniques]] Scott Bartlett used to make the [[film]], [[including]] hand-tinting the film itself, and [[using]] video [[equipment]] for some of the film's scenes (filmed off of a video [[monitor]]), giving it a more distressed, lo-res look.

Don't get me wrong, the [[techniques]] [[used]] in this film were [[quite]] ground-breaking for 1972. That's why it's [[still]] one of my [[favorite]] short/[[experimental]] [[films]], and a creative inspiration for me as well... I first [[overheard]] about this [[movie]] about 20 years ago when I was a [[kiddo]] in grade school(!), it just so happened that I was thumbing through the encyclopedias in the classroom one day, and under the [[entrances]] for [[film]] (or [[films]], I don't [[recollect]]), were [[various]] stills for [[multiple]] [[theater]] from mainstream to experimental, and one of them [[demonstrated]] on the page was a [[again]] for OffOn. It [[genuinely]] [[puzzled]] me, [[because]] it stood out the most on the [[newsweek]] (it was a [[yet]] from the [[kino]] of the scene with the [[ocular]] with other [[components]] superimposed over it).

[[Around]] 18 or so years [[thereafter]], the public library here where I [[iive]] had available for checkout the [[total]] 4-DVD set of "Treasures of [[America]] [[Cinema]] Archives" [[releasing]] by the National [[Films]] [[Maintenance]] Foundation. So when I was reading the [[memo]] on the DVD [[lawsuit]] for the set, I was [[pretty]] [[cheerfully]] surprised to [[behold]] that OffOn was on one of the [[disc]]. After all these years, I [[would]] [[eventually]] [[seeing]] the [[kino]]! After viewing it, it [[marginally]] wasn't was I was [[awaiting]] it to be (it [[tilted]] to be a more organic-looking [[flick]], not that that's a [[naughty]] thing, but I was [[waiting]] it to have a more [[electron]] [[cosmetic]]), but it was [[however]] an [[wondrous]] film, IMHO, [[reviewing]] the [[technique]] Scott Bartlett used to make the [[movie]], [[comprises]] hand-tinting the film itself, and [[utilizing]] video [[machines]] for some of the film's scenes (filmed off of a video [[oversee]]), giving it a more distressed, lo-res look.

Don't get me wrong, the [[methods]] [[using]] in this film were [[pretty]] ground-breaking for 1972. That's why it's [[however]] one of my [[preferred]] short/[[empirical]] [[movie]], and a creative inspiration for me as well... --------------------------------------------- Result 6083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Human Tornado (1976) is in many ways a better film than it's predecessor. The director knew what he had to work with and catered towards Rudy Ray Moore's limitations as an actor. It's a fun movie that's more technically sound and acted. The performers don't take themselves too seriously and it seems that this time around everyone is on the joke and goes with the flow. Rudy Ray Moore seems more relaxed in front of the camera and not as stiff like he was in Dolemite.

I enjoyed the film very much and I highly recommend it. Just like his first film, it's catered towards a certain audience (I highly doubt that Mr. Moore was trying to broaden his audience at this point in his career). Check it out!

Highjly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 6084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] The [[story]] goes something like this: A small-town girl, Katie (Jessica Simpson), decides to visit her boyfriend in the big city. When she arrives she discovers he isn't quite as faithful as he should be. Katie then ends up venturing into the adventure that is [[New]] York. Filling in as bike messenger comedic and charming mishaps ensues. She falls into a hole in the ground and thus meets charismatic good-guy Ben (Luke Wilson). It's not love at first sight, at least for her, but destiny and Ben, won't give up quite that easy. Being "just" a small-town girl AND blonde a couple of evil executives at a building firm decides she's the perfect scapegoat for their cunning plan. Misunderstandings with hilarious and sad consequences follow. However, this is one blonde who won't take it lying down!

People being judgmental of this film will soon enough be proved wrong. The jokes are confident and fitting, and the story well developed. The relationship between Katie and Ben feels so natural that it puts anything Godard has created to shame. The multi-talented Jessica Simpson once again surprises with a strong role only she could pull off. Simpson really is the Marilyn Monroe of our day (there's even one scene honoring her!). She balances perfectly between vulnerable and whimsy. Katie really does show us that you can't judge a book by its cover! Luke Wilson is as charming as ever. Even if he was covered in manure that man would be as appealing as anyone. His light touch, puppy dog eyes and laid back manner makes it difficult to resist. Andy Dick plays the role he was born to play, one of the two diabolical executives. He really cannot be underestimated. The strength of the performance lies in his restraint. It's remarkable, because most actors would just run away with it and play it for cheap laughs. Not this guy!

In conclusion, director Scott Marshall has crafted an intelligent and frequently hilarious comedy that is destined to become a classic alongside masterpieces of cinema like Epic Movie and Norbit. Kudos to everyone involved in this, especially Jessica Simpson. Her sincere smile and whole-hearted laughter would make even the toughest man break out in a big grin. You may be tough, but you're not THAT tough! Warmly recommended to everyone who wants to be swept off their feet and see a romantic comedy that for once, feels honest. Thank you for this film! Oh, and the soundtrack rocks!

Now if you still haven't gotten it. I'm being sarcastic. 1/10 The [[fairytales]] goes something like this: A small-town girl, Katie (Jessica Simpson), decides to visit her boyfriend in the big city. When she arrives she discovers he isn't quite as faithful as he should be. Katie then ends up venturing into the adventure that is [[Newest]] York. Filling in as bike messenger comedic and charming mishaps ensues. She falls into a hole in the ground and thus meets charismatic good-guy Ben (Luke Wilson). It's not love at first sight, at least for her, but destiny and Ben, won't give up quite that easy. Being "just" a small-town girl AND blonde a couple of evil executives at a building firm decides she's the perfect scapegoat for their cunning plan. Misunderstandings with hilarious and sad consequences follow. However, this is one blonde who won't take it lying down!

People being judgmental of this film will soon enough be proved wrong. The jokes are confident and fitting, and the story well developed. The relationship between Katie and Ben feels so natural that it puts anything Godard has created to shame. The multi-talented Jessica Simpson once again surprises with a strong role only she could pull off. Simpson really is the Marilyn Monroe of our day (there's even one scene honoring her!). She balances perfectly between vulnerable and whimsy. Katie really does show us that you can't judge a book by its cover! Luke Wilson is as charming as ever. Even if he was covered in manure that man would be as appealing as anyone. His light touch, puppy dog eyes and laid back manner makes it difficult to resist. Andy Dick plays the role he was born to play, one of the two diabolical executives. He really cannot be underestimated. The strength of the performance lies in his restraint. It's remarkable, because most actors would just run away with it and play it for cheap laughs. Not this guy!

In conclusion, director Scott Marshall has crafted an intelligent and frequently hilarious comedy that is destined to become a classic alongside masterpieces of cinema like Epic Movie and Norbit. Kudos to everyone involved in this, especially Jessica Simpson. Her sincere smile and whole-hearted laughter would make even the toughest man break out in a big grin. You may be tough, but you're not THAT tough! Warmly recommended to everyone who wants to be swept off their feet and see a romantic comedy that for once, feels honest. Thank you for this film! Oh, and the soundtrack rocks!

Now if you still haven't gotten it. I'm being sarcastic. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 6085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I should have never [[watched]] this movie. The [[style]] of [[filming]] may be [[considered]] [[artsy]] to some, but it is considered migraine-inducing to me. I [[think]] it may have had an interesting [[plot]], but since I couldn't watch it for [[long]] stretches at a [[time]] I [[missed]] a lot. The [[flickering]] [[pictures]] and [[stop]] [[motion]] filming [[branded]] my brain. I stopped [[watching]] [[mid]] way through and won't be back for a second [[try]]. I suppose if I were home alone in my own [[lighthouse]] some [[dark]] and stormy evening, this might be just the ticket... PS Not sure if the lighthouse/ film style thing can be considered a [[spoiler]], but I don't want to be blacklisted on my first [[review]] ;) I should have never [[saw]] this movie. The [[styles]] of [[photographing]] may be [[deemed]] [[arty]] to some, but it is considered migraine-inducing to me. I [[thoughts]] it may have had an interesting [[intrigue]], but since I couldn't watch it for [[lang]] stretches at a [[moment]] I [[miss]] a lot. The [[wink]] [[photos]] and [[stopped]] [[petition]] filming [[branding]] my brain. I stopped [[staring]] [[milieu]] way through and won't be back for a second [[seek]]. I suppose if I were home alone in my own [[beacon]] some [[somber]] and stormy evening, this might be just the ticket... PS Not sure if the lighthouse/ film style thing can be considered a [[baffle]], but I don't want to be blacklisted on my first [[revisit]] ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 6086 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Way]] to go ace! You just [[made]] a chilling, [[grossly]] intriguing story of a necrophiliac cannibal into a soft, mellow, drama. Obviously a movie called Dahmer [[would]] be one of two kinds: Horror, or documentary right? This was neither. It wasn't close to any [[detailed]] [[facts]], (in fact it [[barely]] had any [[substance]] at all) It wasn't really morbid or [[scary]] or didn't [[even]] try to be very disturbing.(as if you would've had to [[try]]!!) What the [[hell]] was this writer/[[director]] thinking?? Here's one of the most REAL examples of sick serial killers ever and we get badly shot, poorly [[acted]] gay bar roofie rapes and lengthy droning flashbacks to alone time in his old parent's house. I think Jacobson was actually [[trying]] to present (or invent) 'the soft side' of j.Dahmer. [[Pathway]] to go ace! You just [[effected]] a chilling, [[shamelessly]] intriguing story of a necrophiliac cannibal into a soft, mellow, drama. Obviously a movie called Dahmer [[could]] be one of two kinds: Horror, or documentary right? This was neither. It wasn't close to any [[watchful]] [[truths]], (in fact it [[hardly]] had any [[substances]] at all) It wasn't really morbid or [[awful]] or didn't [[yet]] try to be very disturbing.(as if you would've had to [[seek]]!!) What the [[brothel]] was this writer/[[superintendent]] thinking?? Here's one of the most REAL examples of sick serial killers ever and we get badly shot, poorly [[behaved]] gay bar roofie rapes and lengthy droning flashbacks to alone time in his old parent's house. I think Jacobson was actually [[try]] to present (or invent) 'the soft side' of j.Dahmer. --------------------------------------------- Result 6087 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've barely just made it through one episode ("Crouch End"). The dialog was stilted and down-right cringe worthy. The acting was tragic. Eion Bailey, despite his best attempts to be dramatic, remains mostly expressionless. His eyebrows hint at a recent botox treatment. Claire Forlani could have just as easily been playing the damsel in distress in a silent movie. The characters were cartoons, each playing their stereotypical cog in the plot mostly random, meandering plot. Cheesy special effects can be excused given the TV miniseries budget. But attempts to create suspense and surprise through distracting cinematography added to the unwatchability. I get the feeling that the ending was supposed to be witty and surprising, but it was lame and had little to do with the rest of the story. If I had to compare it's overall quality to something else, I'd put this episode of "Nightmares and Dreamscapes" on par with the NBC's Hercules. --------------------------------------------- Result 6088 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (83%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] When I heard this film was directed by Ang Lee, I made sure to see it. This Taiwanese director burst into fame with "The Wedding Banquet" and "Eat Drink Man Woman" a few years ago and then moved on to "Sense and Sensibility" and "The Ice Storm". Now, he turns his attention to another American icon -- the Civil War.

This story takes place in Missouri, a Union state with Southern sympathies. These never officially joined the Confederate army. Instead, they formed outlaw bands, called "bushwhackers", grew they hair long, and sometimes would confiscated Union uniforms which they wore over their regular clothing.

The movie depicts their moral dilemma, the high drama of the times, and their supposedly heroic missions of killing storekeepers and farmers who aided the Union. There are no stars in this movie, unless you consider "Jewel" the singer, well cast as a young confederate widow as a star.

Tobey Macquire is cast as a young German farm boy who is derided for his heritage because the Germans were supposed Union sympathizers. This young man is an [[excellent]] actor, [[full]] of fresh faced youth whose performance [[encompasses]] his wonder and subtle realizations as he's exposed to the horror of war.

Jeffrey Wright is a freed slave who travels with the bushwhackers because of his loyalty to the young man who bought him his freedom. He gives a [[fine]] and understated performance.

Some of the acting, however, is wooden, especially in the long conversations they have about morality. And their costumes are too new. And the "southern gentleman" theme of manners and hat-tipping and politeness to women comes across as a bit much -- especially since they make it a point to murder all the men who they pull from their women's arms, then burn down the stores and houses.

While I don't think that this will go down as one of Lee Ang's "great" movies, I did find myself fascinated by it, in spite of the slow parts and its excessive length of 140 minutes. I was interested in what was happening next and felt empathy for each of the characters who all came across as real and imperfect human beings caught up in the forces of history.

Not as much action as the usual war movie, but yet still recommended -- especially for Civil War buffs.

When I heard this film was directed by Ang Lee, I made sure to see it. This Taiwanese director burst into fame with "The Wedding Banquet" and "Eat Drink Man Woman" a few years ago and then moved on to "Sense and Sensibility" and "The Ice Storm". Now, he turns his attention to another American icon -- the Civil War.

This story takes place in Missouri, a Union state with Southern sympathies. These never officially joined the Confederate army. Instead, they formed outlaw bands, called "bushwhackers", grew they hair long, and sometimes would confiscated Union uniforms which they wore over their regular clothing.

The movie depicts their moral dilemma, the high drama of the times, and their supposedly heroic missions of killing storekeepers and farmers who aided the Union. There are no stars in this movie, unless you consider "Jewel" the singer, well cast as a young confederate widow as a star.

Tobey Macquire is cast as a young German farm boy who is derided for his heritage because the Germans were supposed Union sympathizers. This young man is an [[wondrous]] actor, [[fullest]] of fresh faced youth whose performance [[embraces]] his wonder and subtle realizations as he's exposed to the horror of war.

Jeffrey Wright is a freed slave who travels with the bushwhackers because of his loyalty to the young man who bought him his freedom. He gives a [[fined]] and understated performance.

Some of the acting, however, is wooden, especially in the long conversations they have about morality. And their costumes are too new. And the "southern gentleman" theme of manners and hat-tipping and politeness to women comes across as a bit much -- especially since they make it a point to murder all the men who they pull from their women's arms, then burn down the stores and houses.

While I don't think that this will go down as one of Lee Ang's "great" movies, I did find myself fascinated by it, in spite of the slow parts and its excessive length of 140 minutes. I was interested in what was happening next and felt empathy for each of the characters who all came across as real and imperfect human beings caught up in the forces of history.

Not as much action as the usual war movie, but yet still recommended -- especially for Civil War buffs.

Number of successful attacks: 4000 Number of failed attacks: 2082 Number of skipped attacks: 6 Original accuracy: 99.9% Accuracy under attack: 34.2% Attack success rate: 65.77% Average perturbed word %: 13.7% Average num. words per input: 236.19 Avg num queries: 511.33